From mark.chiappa at ntnu.no  Wed Jun  1 02:54:48 2016
From: mark.chiappa at ntnu.no (Mark Giulio Chiappa)
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 06:54:48 +0000
Subject: [labnetwork] ZEP-520A7 e-beam resist
In-Reply-To: <574DF012.4040600@yale.edu>
References: <ME1PR01MB0850CA1B4EFD2083C43AC9DEB2430@ME1PR01MB0850.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <879AEF5002D70747B136D02BC86A9C98665815@ait-pex02mbx05.win.dtu.dk>
 <369CF1861066C244B747413441CCF52908D194C9@xm-mbx-08-prod>
 <CAAyE23DDv9mE1mHSzg+uV+_g4t2gm7m9GhhYtDG1CRZRc00h4Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <574DF012.4040600@yale.edu>
Message-ID: <8b123242d93445ba8a317a94eacb770e@it-ex11.win.ntnu.no>

Hi,

The company Leif mentioned for CSAR as a ZEP replacement also sell Electra a conductive coating http://www.allresist.com/ar-pc-5090-5091-electra-92/ it's not cheap but it is way cheaper than E spacer.  It also has a shelf life of over 12 months. I assume they'll ship to the US.

Best regards
Mark



From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Michael Rooks
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 10:12 PM
To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
Subject: Re: [labnetwork] ZEP-520A7 e-beam resist

For pmma and zep we simply sputter 20nm Au on top, then later remove it with KI/I gold etch (from Transene).

For HSQ on insulators we use our own mixture of PSS, a water soluble polymer, with gold on top. You can find the details here<http://nano.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/pssa.pdf>. It's very cheap.

--------------------------------
Michael Rooks
Yale Institute of Nanoscience and Quantum Engineering
nano.yale.edu<http://nano.yale.edu>


On 05/31/2016 12:38 PM, Edmond Chow wrote:
Hi,

I have a related question about ebeam resist. I have been using AquaSAVE as anticharging layer for ebeam lithography.
However, I can't seem to find the distributor which will sell AquaSAVE in US

Do you have any information about how to get AquaSAVE from US or any replacement for AquaSAVE?

Thanks in advance.

Edmond

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 9:01 AM, Peter J Duda III <duda at uchicago.edu<mailto:duda at uchicago.edu>> wrote:
Linda, Leif et al
FYI
GL-2000 has been discontinued recently and is no longer available through Gluon Lab.  They claim to be working on other high-performance resists, but give no specifics at this time.

Thanks
Peter J Duda
Technical Manager, Pritzker Nanofabrication Facility
Institute for Molecular Engineering
University of Chicago
5640 South Ellis Avenue
ERC LL178
Chicago, IL  60637
Office: 773-702-8903<tel:773-702-8903>
Pager/Text:  773-652-0480<tel:773-652-0480>
duda at uchicago.edu<mailto:duda at uchicago.edu>
ime.uchicago.edu<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__ime.uchicago.edu&d=AwMFaQ&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=apnDUg1OD9ejswcjrIvVgS28NpQ7-FGy7Sl7_YPlupc&m=xhKoiJKzGjZ4PAyPKU31jYluvUVbH-hwaqX_vwXIYwE&s=txauFZDRNt39sv6hSAlCenH1wfF7k-cTqV80LnAh-lg&e=>

From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu> [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu>] On Behalf Of Leif Johansen
Sent: Monday, May 30, 2016 3:52 AM
To: 'Linda Macks' <linda.macks at unsw.edu.au<mailto:linda.macks at unsw.edu.au>>; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: [labnetwork] ZEP-520A7 e-beam resist

Hello Linda,

Last time we purchased ZEP-520 was back in May 2014. We got it from Marubeni The MTL Mail Server has detected a possible fraud attempt from "urldefense.proofpoint.com" claiming to be http://www.marubeni.com/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.marubeni.com_&d=AwMFaQ&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=apnDUg1OD9ejswcjrIvVgS28NpQ7-FGy7Sl7_YPlupc&m=xhKoiJKzGjZ4PAyPKU31jYluvUVbH-hwaqX_vwXIYwE&s=EtvHsu62p-Fb3Flqssz76lbw0w8FOd4Nphxsppe_X1c&e=>
We have actually stopped using ZEP-520 due to the very high price. Instead, we have switched to AR-P C-6200 from Allresist GmbH The MTL Mail Server has detected a possible fraud attempt from "urldefense.proofpoint.com" claiming to be http://www.allresist.com/csar-62-ar-p-6200/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.allresist.com_csar-2D62-2Dar-2Dp-2D6200_&d=AwMFaQ&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=apnDUg1OD9ejswcjrIvVgS28NpQ7-FGy7Sl7_YPlupc&m=xhKoiJKzGjZ4PAyPKU31jYluvUVbH-hwaqX_vwXIYwE&s=V3R48he1i7j8wgR2Ongk8aobIDJeprgB8ZUFRRlBblE&e=>. If you are interested, we can provide you with more process details about this resist.
Another alternative would be the gL-2000 from Gluon Lab, which we purchased through Fine Material System Inc in Japan. We have tested this resist once, but we are not using it routinely in the lab.

Best regards,
Leif

Leif S. Johansen

Head of Operations

DTU Danchip



Technical University of Denmark

[http://www.dtu.dk/images/DTU_email_logo_01.gif]

Danchip

?rsteds Plads, Byg. 347

2800  Lyngby

Direct +45 45255713<tel:%2B45%2045255713>
Mobile +45 25348992<tel:%2B45%2025348992>

lesjo at danchip.dtu.dk<mailto:lesjo at danchip.dtu.dk>

The MTL Mail Server has detected a possible fraud attempt from "urldefense.proofpoint.com" claiming to be www.danchip.dtu.dk/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.danchip.dtu.dk_&d=AwMFaQ&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=apnDUg1OD9ejswcjrIvVgS28NpQ7-FGy7Sl7_YPlupc&m=xhKoiJKzGjZ4PAyPKU31jYluvUVbH-hwaqX_vwXIYwE&s=bad6otKPG_IPaLUNRy_wPwTwiOheGoHbLQS8KTbnNz4&e=>








From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu> [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Linda Macks
Sent: 28. maj 2016 02:15
To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu>
Subject: [labnetwork] ZEP-520A7 e-beam resist


Hello labnetworkers,



We are having trouble sourcing ZEP-520A7 e-beam resist - if anyone knows of a supplier who can deliver to Australia, I would appreciate contact details.



Many thanks,



Linda




Dr Linda Macks
Facility Manager, ANFF-NSW
Australian National Fabrication Facility

School of Electrical Engineering & Telecommunications
University of New South Wales
UNSW Sydney NSW 2052
Australia

Phone: +61 (2) 9385 7845<tel:%2B61%20%282%29%209385%207845>
Fax: +61(2) 9385 5114<tel:%2B61%282%29%209385%205114>
Email: linda.macks at unsw.edu.au<mailto:linda.macks at unsw.edu.au>


_______________________________________________
labnetwork mailing list
labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu>
The MTL Mail Server has detected a possible fraud attempt from "urldefense.proofpoint.com" claiming to be https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www-2Dmtl.mit.edu_mailman_listinfo.cgi_labnetwork&d=AwMFaQ&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=apnDUg1OD9ejswcjrIvVgS28NpQ7-FGy7Sl7_YPlupc&m=xhKoiJKzGjZ4PAyPKU31jYluvUVbH-hwaqX_vwXIYwE&s=RRU0020tPG8y8qIquWl4_iFITzIBEKKmUgXezsk4jMs&e=>



--
Edmond Chow




_______________________________________________

labnetwork mailing list

labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu>

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www-2Dmtl.mit.edu_mailman_listinfo.cgi_labnetwork&d=AwICAg&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=apnDUg1OD9ejswcjrIvVgS28NpQ7-FGy7Sl7_YPlupc&m=xhKoiJKzGjZ4PAyPKU31jYluvUVbH-hwaqX_vwXIYwE&s=RRU0020tPG8y8qIquWl4_iFITzIBEKKmUgXezsk4jMs&e=

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160601/8474ae62/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1055 bytes
Desc: image001.gif
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160601/8474ae62/attachment.gif>

From kchow10 at gmail.com  Wed Jun  1 10:02:47 2016
From: kchow10 at gmail.com (Edmond Chow)
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 09:02:47 -0500
Subject: [labnetwork] ZEP-520A7 e-beam resist
In-Reply-To: <09e401d1bbb2$5c97a570$15c6f050$@andrew.cmu.edu>
References: <ME1PR01MB0850CA1B4EFD2083C43AC9DEB2430@ME1PR01MB0850.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <879AEF5002D70747B136D02BC86A9C98665815@ait-pex02mbx05.win.dtu.dk>
 <369CF1861066C244B747413441CCF52908D194C9@xm-mbx-08-prod>
 <CAAyE23DDv9mE1mHSzg+uV+_g4t2gm7m9GhhYtDG1CRZRc00h4Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <574DF012.4040600@yale.edu> <09e401d1bbb2$5c97a570$15c6f050$@andrew.cmu.edu>
Message-ID: <CAAyE23Ai1ZjC3+vqnpafGNoPe0EF0XjvpE8W-QpQD25cvJ11cw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

Thank you so much for your suggestions.

I worry that the charged particles generated during sputtering will expose
the resist and reduce the contrast of the ebeam resist. Have you seen
problems with exposure with sputter Al or Au, especially for ZEP as ZEP is
more sensitive resist than PMMA with lower clearing dose.

Thanks again for your help.

Edmond


On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 10:04 PM, Matt Moneck <mmoneck at andrew.cmu.edu>
wrote:

> Hi Edmond,
>
>
>
> To add to Michael?s comment, we have used a similar approach with 10nm of
> sputtered Al on PMMA.  After exposure, we remove the Al with standard
> potassium hydroxide or TMAH based developers, such as AZ400k or MF-CD26.
> The PMMA can then be developed in MIBK/IPA without issue.
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
>
>
> Matt
>
>
>
> --
> *Matthew T. Moneck, Ph.D.*
> Executive Manager, Carnegie Mellon Nanofabrication Facility
> Electrical and Computer Engineering | Carnegie Mellon University
> 5000 Forbes Ave., Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890
> T: 412.268.5430
> F: 412.268.3497
> www.ece.cmu.edu
> nanofab.ece.cmu.edu
>
>
>
> *From:* labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:
> labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] *On Behalf Of *Michael Rooks
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 31, 2016 4:12 PM
> *To:* labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
>
> *Subject:* Re: [labnetwork] ZEP-520A7 e-beam resist
>
>
>
> For pmma and zep we simply sputter 20nm Au on top, then later remove it
> with KI/I gold etch (from Transene).
>
> For HSQ on insulators we use our own mixture of PSS, a water soluble
> polymer, with gold on top. You can find the details here
> <http://nano.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/pssa.pdf>. It's very
> cheap.
>
>
> --------------------------------
> Michael Rooks
> Yale Institute of Nanoscience and Quantum Engineering
> nano.yale.edu
>
>
> On 05/31/2016 12:38 PM, Edmond Chow wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I have a related question about ebeam resist. I have been using AquaSAVE
> as anticharging layer for ebeam lithography.
>
> However, I can't seem to find the distributor which will sell AquaSAVE in
> US
>
>
>
> Do you have any information about how to get AquaSAVE from US or any
> replacement for AquaSAVE?
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
>
>
> Edmond
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 9:01 AM, Peter J Duda III <duda at uchicago.edu>
> wrote:
>
> Linda, Leif et al
>
> FYI
>
> GL-2000 has been discontinued recently and is no longer available through
> Gluon Lab.  They claim to be working on other high-performance resists, but
> give no specifics at this time.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Peter J Duda
>
> Technical Manager, Pritzker Nanofabrication Facility
>
> Institute for Molecular Engineering
>
> University of Chicago
>
> 5640 South Ellis Avenue
>
> ERC LL178
>
> Chicago, IL  60637
>
> Office: 773-702-8903
> Pager/Text:  773-652-0480
>
> duda at uchicago.edu
>
> ime.uchicago.edu
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__ime.uchicago.edu&d=AwMFaQ&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=apnDUg1OD9ejswcjrIvVgS28NpQ7-FGy7Sl7_YPlupc&m=xhKoiJKzGjZ4PAyPKU31jYluvUVbH-hwaqX_vwXIYwE&s=txauFZDRNt39sv6hSAlCenH1wfF7k-cTqV80LnAh-lg&e=>
>
>
>
> *From:* labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:
> labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] *On Behalf Of *Leif Johansen
> *Sent:* Monday, May 30, 2016 3:52 AM
> *To:* 'Linda Macks' <linda.macks at unsw.edu.au>; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
> *Subject:* Re: [labnetwork] ZEP-520A7 e-beam resist
>
>
>
> Hello Linda,
>
>
>
> Last time we purchased ZEP-520 was back in May 2014. We got it from
> Marubeni *The MTL Mail Server has detected a possible fraud attempt from
> "urldefense.proofpoint.com" claiming to be* http://www.marubeni.com/
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.marubeni.com_&d=AwMFaQ&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=apnDUg1OD9ejswcjrIvVgS28NpQ7-FGy7Sl7_YPlupc&m=xhKoiJKzGjZ4PAyPKU31jYluvUVbH-hwaqX_vwXIYwE&s=EtvHsu62p-Fb3Flqssz76lbw0w8FOd4Nphxsppe_X1c&e=>
>
> We have actually stopped using ZEP-520 due to the very high price.
> Instead, we have switched to AR-P C-6200 from Allresist GmbH *The MTL
> Mail Server has detected a possible fraud attempt from
> "urldefense.proofpoint.com" claiming to be*
> http://www.allresist.com/csar-62-ar-p-6200/
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.allresist.com_csar-2D62-2Dar-2Dp-2D6200_&d=AwMFaQ&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=apnDUg1OD9ejswcjrIvVgS28NpQ7-FGy7Sl7_YPlupc&m=xhKoiJKzGjZ4PAyPKU31jYluvUVbH-hwaqX_vwXIYwE&s=V3R48he1i7j8wgR2Ongk8aobIDJeprgB8ZUFRRlBblE&e=>.
> If you are interested, we can provide you with more process details about
> this resist.
>
> Another alternative would be the gL-2000 from Gluon Lab, which we
> purchased through Fine Material System Inc in Japan. We have tested this
> resist once, but we are not using it routinely in the lab.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Leif
>
>
>
> *Leif S. Johansen *
>
> Head of Operations
>
> DTU Danchip
>
>
>
> *Technical University of Denmark*
>
> [image: http://www.dtu.dk/images/DTU_email_logo_01.gif]
>
> Danchip
>
> ?rsteds Plads, Byg. 347
>
> 2800  Lyngby
>
> Direct +45 45255713
>
> Mobile +45 25348992
>
> lesjo at danchip.dtu.dk
>
> *The MTL Mail Server has detected a possible fraud attempt from
> "urldefense.proofpoint.com" claiming to be* www.danchip.dtu.dk/
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.danchip.dtu.dk_&d=AwMFaQ&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=apnDUg1OD9ejswcjrIvVgS28NpQ7-FGy7Sl7_YPlupc&m=xhKoiJKzGjZ4PAyPKU31jYluvUVbH-hwaqX_vwXIYwE&s=bad6otKPG_IPaLUNRy_wPwTwiOheGoHbLQS8KTbnNz4&e=>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [
> mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu <labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu>] *On
> Behalf Of *Linda Macks
> *Sent:* 28. maj 2016 02:15
> *To:* labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
> *Subject:* [labnetwork] ZEP-520A7 e-beam resist
>
>
>
> Hello labnetworkers,
>
>
>
> We are having trouble sourcing ZEP-520A7 e-beam resist - if anyone knows
> of a supplier who can deliver to Australia, I would appreciate contact
> details.
>
>
>
> Many thanks,
>
>
>
> Linda
>
>
>
>
>
> *Dr Linda Macks*
>
> Facility Manager, ANFF-NSW
>
> Australian National Fabrication Facility
>
>
>
> School of Electrical Engineering & Telecommunications
>
> University of New South Wales
>
> UNSW Sydney NSW 2052
>
> Australia
>
>
>
> Phone: +61 (2) 9385 7845
>
> Fax: +61(2) 9385 5114
>
> Email: linda.macks at unsw.edu.au
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> labnetwork mailing list
> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
> *The MTL Mail Server has detected a possible fraud attempt from
> "urldefense.proofpoint.com" claiming to be*
> https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www-2Dmtl.mit.edu_mailman_listinfo.cgi_labnetwork&d=AwMFaQ&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=apnDUg1OD9ejswcjrIvVgS28NpQ7-FGy7Sl7_YPlupc&m=xhKoiJKzGjZ4PAyPKU31jYluvUVbH-hwaqX_vwXIYwE&s=RRU0020tPG8y8qIquWl4_iFITzIBEKKmUgXezsk4jMs&e=>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Edmond Chow
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> labnetwork mailing list
>
> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www-2Dmtl.mit.edu_mailman_listinfo.cgi_labnetwork&d=AwICAg&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=apnDUg1OD9ejswcjrIvVgS28NpQ7-FGy7Sl7_YPlupc&m=xhKoiJKzGjZ4PAyPKU31jYluvUVbH-hwaqX_vwXIYwE&s=RRU0020tPG8y8qIquWl4_iFITzIBEKKmUgXezsk4jMs&e=
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> labnetwork mailing list
> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
> https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
>
>


-- 
Edmond Chow
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160601/33b3897d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1055 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160601/33b3897d/attachment.gif>

From bfuchs at chtm.unm.edu  Wed Jun  1 11:37:17 2016
From: bfuchs at chtm.unm.edu (Beth Fuchs)
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2016 09:37:17 -0600
Subject: [labnetwork] Aluminimum source crucible suggestions
In-Reply-To: <SN1PR0801MB1614F56F33E2C2798D9A524EAB460@SN1PR0801MB1614.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
References: <SN1PR02MB1663A62762808793FD33E573B5460@SN1PR02MB1663.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
 <SN1PR0801MB1614F56F33E2C2798D9A524EAB460@SN1PR0801MB1614.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <574F012D.4010708@chtm.unm.edu>

I was just going to mention that using an intermetallic crucible has 
been good for us as well.
Beth

On 5/31/2016 3:56 PM, Yusha A Bey wrote:
> Hi Cliff,
>
>
> We had the same issue with Al in graphite crucibles.
>
>
> Al deposition in intermetallic crucibles has been working perfectly for us.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Yusha
>
>
> Yusha Bey, Ph.D.
>
> Senior Development Engineer
>
> Center for Nano-Micromanufacturing (CNM2)
>
> University of California Davis
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu <labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu>
> on behalf of Clifford F Knollenberg <cknollen at stanford.edu>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 31, 2016 10:11:33 AM
> *To:* labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
> *Subject:* [labnetwork] Aluminimum source crucible suggestions
>
> Hi All,
>
>
> We've been having crucible cracking issues with out Al
> e-beam evaporation source.  In short it cracks its crucible after just a
> few uses.  This wasn't so bad when it happened ever 4-5 months, but not
> its happening about every week or two.  I've tried a variety of
> crucibles, had the most luck with carbon crucible.  Is there anything
> else out there we should be trying?
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> Cliff
>
>
> Clifford Knollenberg
>
> Science & Engineering Associate
>
> Stanford Nano Shared Facilities (SNSF)
>
> Email: cknollen at stanford.edu
>
> Tel: 650-723-1675
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> labnetwork mailing list
> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
> https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
>

-- 
Beth Fuchs
Sr. Engineering Lab Coordinator
Chemical Safety Officer
Center for High Tech Materials
1313 Goddard SE
Albuquerque, NM 87106-4343
bfuchs at unm.edu

Please note that the chtm.unm.edu email domain is going away.
Use bfuchs at unm.edu for all correspondence.





From mmorgan3 at uw.edu  Wed Jun  1 14:00:24 2016
From: mmorgan3 at uw.edu (Mark Morgan)
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 11:00:24 -0700
Subject: [labnetwork] cleaning sulfur from DRIE coldtrap
Message-ID: <E01C1055-5BF3-49C3-96B0-2B4BD94347B4@uw.edu>

Greetings all - 

is there a preferred procedure for cleaning sulfur deposits from a DRIE cold trap and unheated length of roughing line? i am reticent to apply a ?brute-force? method when a more elegant solution is available (and perhaps using the word ?elegant? regarding sulfur cleaning is mis-guided?)  but even still, i am open to suggestions.

thank you so much

best regards

Mark





Mark D. Morgan
Research Engineer, Washington Nanofabrication Facility (WNF)
National Nanotechnology Coordinated Infrastructure (NNCI)
University of Washington
Fluke Hall 132, Box 352143
(206) 221-6349
mmorgan3 at uw.edu <mailto:mmorgan3 at uw.edu>
http://www.wnf.washington.edu/ <http://www.wnf.washington.edu/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160601/6da8d2fd/attachment.html>

From james.beall at nist.gov  Thu Jun  2 12:30:22 2016
From: james.beall at nist.gov (Beall, James A. (Fed))
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 16:30:22 +0000
Subject: [labnetwork] cleaning sulfur from DRIE coldtrap
In-Reply-To: <E01C1055-5BF3-49C3-96B0-2B4BD94347B4@uw.edu>
References: <E01C1055-5BF3-49C3-96B0-2B4BD94347B4@uw.edu>
Message-ID: <9FFBA483-2468-4B53-9B58-458679ADF159@nist.gov>

Hi Mark,

I have used the brute force method and it is unpleasant. A field service engineer once told me he had heard you could freeze the gunked up parts in LN2 and then it would crack off but I have not tried that yet.

I am curious what you use as a cold trap as I would like to do more to keep that stuff out of our dry pumps.

Thank you,

  - Jim



On Jun 1, 2016, at 12:00 PM, Mark Morgan <mmorgan3 at uw.edu<mailto:mmorgan3 at uw.edu>> wrote:

Greetings all -

is there a preferred procedure for cleaning sulfur deposits from a DRIE cold trap and unheated length of roughing line? i am reticent to apply a ?brute-force? method when a more elegant solution is available (and perhaps using the word ?elegant? regarding sulfur cleaning is mis-guided?)  but even still, i am open to suggestions.

thank you so much

best regards

Mark





Mark D. Morgan
Research Engineer, Washington Nanofabrication Facility (WNF)
National Nanotechnology Coordinated Infrastructure (NNCI)
University of Washington
Fluke Hall 132, Box 352143
(206) 221-6349
mmorgan3 at uw.edu<mailto:mmorgan3 at uw.edu>
http://www.wnf.washington.edu/

_______________________________________________
labnetwork mailing list
labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu>
https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160602/0e1746c2/attachment.html>

From Ben at mtpv.com  Mon Jun  6 12:14:18 2016
From: Ben at mtpv.com (Bin Zhang)
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2016 16:14:18 +0000
Subject: [labnetwork] Request- Anti-reflection coating service company
	recommendation
Message-ID: <DM3PR17MB08099102175A9B404F8D4FE2C35C0@DM3PR17MB0809.namprd17.prod.outlook.com>

We are looking for a local anti-reflection coating service company local at Boston could do quick order turn over. We just need simple SiO2 and SiN coating.

Any recommendation and suggestion are highly appreciated.

Thanks


Bin Zhang | Near field semiconductor engineer
MTPV Power Corporation
400 Riverside Ave, suite 3, Medford, MA 02155
Direct: (781)-874-9596-404| Fax: 781-874-9597
E-mail: ben at mtpv.com
Web: www.mtpv.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160606/bd6ede94/attachment.html>

From bob at eecs.berkeley.edu  Thu Jun  9 17:42:45 2016
From: bob at eecs.berkeley.edu (Robert M. HAMILTON)
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 14:42:45 -0700
Subject: [labnetwork] Specification for clean dry air (CDA)
Message-ID: <CAK9WbAejpPiako3FKS0=GhSy0E+N6dRahCr4SYrt5Fgs6D-cZQ@mail.gmail.com>

Labnetwork Colleagues,

I recently contacted Dennis Grimard eho is helping design and build MIT's
new lab to learn their specification for their compressed dry air (CDA).
Dennis is terrific with numbers and engineering data. Dennis suggested it
might be useful to broaden my query to the labnetwork. This begs the
questions, how do other facilities specify their CDA and who supports their
systems?

At the outset I?ll comment many university labs use their campus
engineering maintenance support to service utilities and specs may not be
at one?s finger tips. And, some universities have central plants for
utilities which serve a broad number of facilities. In the case of the
Marvell NanoLab we have virtually all our utilities contained within our
sub-fab and we have chosen to maintain most utilities e.g. our acid waste
neutralization system, air handlers CDA, DI water, LN and process cooling
water system because we are so dependent on them.

My question is what are reasonable specifications for CDA? I realize this
is a difficult question to answer because CDA usage will be based on an
equipment load.  Perhaps adding a labs square footage helps to scale an
answer?

The UC Berkeley Marvell NanoFabrication lab?s CDA is derived from two Atlas
Copco 117 cfm (3,32M^3/min) screw compressors operating in a lead/lag
configuration which deliver to a 200 gallon storage vessel, then to an
Air-Tak brand dryer and Zander particle filters before delivery to the lab.
Our CDA delivery specification is 90 psi at a dewpoint of -70F (~16 ppm
H2O). We began with a dewpoint spec of -90F; however, we relaxed this spec.
to reduce the work of the air dryer with wearable, moving parts. As backup,
to facilitate the orderly shutdown of equipment and for brief periods to do
CDA system maintenance our delivery is configured to automatically cross
over to the lab?s cryogenically derived process N2 when the pressure falls
below 70 psi. Such a crossover can support the lab for several hours using
N2; however, the associated LN vessel vaporizers do not have sufficient
capacity to run on cryogenically-derived N2 for extended periods of time ?
they ice over.

As has been previously noted, a few years ago we substituted CDA for N2
purging on a select number of dry pumps to reduce our N2 costs. The pumps
switched to CDA were pumps which service equipment that does not pump
acid-gases, flammables or pyrophorics. This has been a great success. The
downside; however, is we are now peaking our CDA demands to greater than a
single compressor can sustain. This makes us vulnerable should we lose a
compressor.

Comparing how various research fabs spec CDA has value.

Regards,
Bob Hamilton


Robert Hamilton
University of CA, Berkeley
Marvell NanoLab Equipment Manager
Rm 520 Sutardja Dai Hall, MC 1754
Berkeley, CA 94720
Phone 510-809-8618 (desk - preferred)
Mobile 510-325-7557 (my personal mobile)
E-mail preferred: bob at eecs.berkeley.edu
http://nanolab.berkeley.edu/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160609/cb7c344d/attachment.html>

From kuhn1 at purdue.edu  Fri Jun 10 08:36:11 2016
From: kuhn1 at purdue.edu (Kuhn, Jeffrey G)
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 12:36:11 +0000
Subject: [labnetwork] Specification for clean dry air (CDA)
In-Reply-To: <CAK9WbAejpPiako3FKS0=GhSy0E+N6dRahCr4SYrt5Fgs6D-cZQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAK9WbAejpPiako3FKS0=GhSy0E+N6dRahCr4SYrt5Fgs6D-cZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c775f96855f441f2b08cbdeb9e84da22@wppexc07.purdue.lcl>

Hello Bob,

At the Birck Nanotechnology Center, the CDA design spec is 100 psi with a -80F dewpoint, but in reality we supply 120 psi. When this facility was built, the CDA system was purchased from a nearby photomask shop that was being closed, so it was not spec?d specifically for Birck. That system included one Kobelco oil-free compressor rated for 173 cfm @ 150 psi, the receiver tank, an Airtek twin tower desiccant dryer, and the filtration system. The system is oversized for this facility, so as a result we see a dewpoint of less than ? 140F. At first I didn?t believe it was accurate, but several tests and calibrations proved that it is real. We supply CDA to approximately 21,000 sq. ft. of lab space and to our 24,000 sq. ft. ISO 3 to ISO 5 cleanroom. Not all labs or cleanroom bays use CDA so we have considerable future capacity.

A few years ago, we purchased a second identical Kobelco compressor so we could run them in lead/lag mode and reduce the impact of a compressor failure. They swap duty on a weekly basis, and each compressor is easily capable of supporting this facility. I estimate that the lead unit is loaded no more than 35% of the time. Part of that may be because we run our compressor at well under its maximum rated pressure, and also because the supply pressure is high compared to what the users actually need. Our highest pressure demand is around 90 psi and the cfm use there is quite low. There are some laser lithography tools that require relatively high CDA pressures, so that?s an important consideration when choosing a compressor system. Such was the case in the photomask facility from who we purchased the initial compressor, which is why it is rated to 150 psi.

Like you, we are converting as many N2 users as practical over to CDA in order to reduce N2 costs. This is an ongoing process and we continue to monitor the CDA demand, but so far the increased load on the compressors has been negligible.

I am responsible for the overall care and feeding of the CDA system but the trades do much of the actual work, especially the annual preventative maintenance. We had the local Kobelco service folks do the first few PM?s with the trades in attendance for training purposes, then the trades took over. If we have a component failure that we can?t repair ourselves I will call in the local service rep, but using our in-house folks for PM saves us quite a bit of money. Fortunately, component failures have been fairly rare.

I imagine you are already aware of this, but I would avoid being lured into using oil flooded compressors to save money. I?m sure your facility is sensitive to hydrocarbons like we are, and to me the risk of possible contamination outweighs the additional cost of buying an oil-free unit. If oil somehow gets into your distribution loop, the loop will likely have to be replaced since I know of no way to adequately clean it after contamination occurs. Besides, purchasing all of the filtration and hydrocarbon monitoring equipment needed to keep your processes and infrastructure safe offsets a lot of the higher cost of the oil-free compressor.

Lastly, ISO 8573.1 provides the specifications for the various grades of CDA in case you are interested in meeting a particular ISO spec.

I hope this information was helpful. Feel free to email me directly if you have any questions and best of luck with your new facility.

Regards,

Jeff Kuhn
Facility Engineer
Birck Nanotechnology Center
Purdue University
1205 West State St.
West Lafayette, IN 47906
Ph: 765-496-8329
kuhn1 at purdue.edu<mailto:kuhn1 at purdue.edu>


From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Robert M. HAMILTON
Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2016 5:43 PM
To: Labnetwork <labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu>
Subject: [labnetwork] Specification for clean dry air (CDA)

Labnetwork Colleagues,

I recently contacted Dennis Grimard eho is helping design and build MIT's new lab to learn their specification for their compressed dry air (CDA). Dennis is terrific with numbers and engineering data. Dennis suggested it might be useful to broaden my query to the labnetwork. This begs the questions, how do other facilities specify their CDA and who supports their systems?

At the outset I?ll comment many university labs use their campus engineering maintenance support to service utilities and specs may not be at one?s finger tips. And, some universities have central plants for utilities which serve a broad number of facilities. In the case of the Marvell NanoLab we have virtually all our utilities contained within our sub-fab and we have chosen to maintain most utilities e.g. our acid waste neutralization system, air handlers CDA, DI water, LN and process cooling water system because we are so dependent on them.

My question is what are reasonable specifications for CDA? I realize this is a difficult question to answer because CDA usage will be based on an equipment load.  Perhaps adding a labs square footage helps to scale an answer?

The UC Berkeley Marvell NanoFabrication lab?s CDA is derived from two Atlas Copco 117 cfm (3,32M^3/min) screw compressors operating in a lead/lag configuration which deliver to a 200 gallon storage vessel, then to an Air-Tak brand dryer and Zander particle filters before delivery to the lab. Our CDA delivery specification is 90 psi at a dewpoint of -70F (~16 ppm H2O). We began with a dewpoint spec of -90F; however, we relaxed this spec. to reduce the work of the air dryer with wearable, moving parts. As backup, to facilitate the orderly shutdown of equipment and for brief periods to do CDA system maintenance our delivery is configured to automatically cross over to the lab?s cryogenically derived process N2 when the pressure falls below 70 psi. Such a crossover can support the lab for several hours using N2; however, the associated LN vessel vaporizers do not have sufficient capacity to run on cryogenically-derived N2 for extended periods of time ? they ice over.

As has been previously noted, a few years ago we substituted CDA for N2 purging on a select number of dry pumps to reduce our N2 costs. The pumps switched to CDA were pumps which service equipment that does not pump acid-gases, flammables or pyrophorics. This has been a great success. The downside; however, is we are now peaking our CDA demands to greater than a single compressor can sustain. This makes us vulnerable should we lose a compressor.

Comparing how various research fabs spec CDA has value.

Regards,
Bob Hamilton


Robert Hamilton
University of CA, Berkeley
Marvell NanoLab Equipment Manager
Rm 520 Sutardja Dai Hall, MC 1754
Berkeley, CA 94720
Phone 510-809-8618 (desk - preferred)
Mobile 510-325-7557 (my personal mobile)
E-mail preferred: bob at eecs.berkeley.edu<mailto:bob at eecs.berkeley.edu>
http://nanolab.berkeley.edu/


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160610/0646114d/attachment.html>

From cibuzar at umn.edu  Fri Jun 10 11:57:22 2016
From: cibuzar at umn.edu (Gregory Cibuzar)
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 10:57:22 -0500
Subject: [labnetwork] Specification for clean dry air (CDA)
In-Reply-To: <CAK9WbAejpPiako3FKS0=GhSy0E+N6dRahCr4SYrt5Fgs6D-cZQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAK9WbAejpPiako3FKS0=GhSy0E+N6dRahCr4SYrt5Fgs6D-cZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAE86DOmWcsczg33ZrHXJiLFqVqLr5jWG_5zDhS+dM4XUegPTkA@mail.gmail.com>

Bob,
At Minnesota we rely on the campus compressed air plant to provide the
"raw" CA.  We have desiccant dryers on the feeds to our two cleanrooms.
The dewpoint settings for the dryers are different (-70F/-30F), pressure is
generally 90 psi.  The flow is around 50 cfm for each.  Our campus
facilities people maintain the central plant and our dryers.  This works
provided for us, but we do closely monitor our CA parameters and call for
service when needed.

Regards,
Greg

Greg Cibuzar
Manager, Minnesota Nano Center
www.mnc.umn.edu
University of Minnesota
612-625-8079

On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Robert M. HAMILTON <bob at eecs.berkeley.edu>
wrote:

> Labnetwork Colleagues,
>
> I recently contacted Dennis Grimard eho is helping design and build MIT's
> new lab to learn their specification for their compressed dry air (CDA).
> Dennis is terrific with numbers and engineering data. Dennis suggested it
> might be useful to broaden my query to the labnetwork. This begs the
> questions, how do other facilities specify their CDA and who supports their
> systems?
>
> At the outset I?ll comment many university labs use their campus
> engineering maintenance support to service utilities and specs may not be
> at one?s finger tips. And, some universities have central plants for
> utilities which serve a broad number of facilities. In the case of the
> Marvell NanoLab we have virtually all our utilities contained within our
> sub-fab and we have chosen to maintain most utilities e.g. our acid waste
> neutralization system, air handlers CDA, DI water, LN and process cooling
> water system because we are so dependent on them.
>
> My question is what are reasonable specifications for CDA? I realize this
> is a difficult question to answer because CDA usage will be based on an
> equipment load.  Perhaps adding a labs square footage helps to scale an
> answer?
>
> The UC Berkeley Marvell NanoFabrication lab?s CDA is derived from two
> Atlas Copco 117 cfm (3,32M^3/min) screw compressors operating in a lead/lag
> configuration which deliver to a 200 gallon storage vessel, then to an
> Air-Tak brand dryer and Zander particle filters before delivery to the lab.
> Our CDA delivery specification is 90 psi at a dewpoint of -70F (~16 ppm
> H2O). We began with a dewpoint spec of -90F; however, we relaxed this spec.
> to reduce the work of the air dryer with wearable, moving parts. As backup,
> to facilitate the orderly shutdown of equipment and for brief periods to do
> CDA system maintenance our delivery is configured to automatically cross
> over to the lab?s cryogenically derived process N2 when the pressure falls
> below 70 psi. Such a crossover can support the lab for several hours using
> N2; however, the associated LN vessel vaporizers do not have sufficient
> capacity to run on cryogenically-derived N2 for extended periods of time ?
> they ice over.
>
> As has been previously noted, a few years ago we substituted CDA for N2
> purging on a select number of dry pumps to reduce our N2 costs. The pumps
> switched to CDA were pumps which service equipment that does not pump
> acid-gases, flammables or pyrophorics. This has been a great success. The
> downside; however, is we are now peaking our CDA demands to greater than a
> single compressor can sustain. This makes us vulnerable should we lose a
> compressor.
>
> Comparing how various research fabs spec CDA has value.
>
> Regards,
> Bob Hamilton
>
>
> Robert Hamilton
> University of CA, Berkeley
> Marvell NanoLab Equipment Manager
> Rm 520 Sutardja Dai Hall, MC 1754
> Berkeley, CA 94720
> Phone 510-809-8618 (desk - preferred)
> Mobile 510-325-7557 (my personal mobile)
> E-mail preferred: bob at eecs.berkeley.edu
> http://nanolab.berkeley.edu/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> labnetwork mailing list
> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
> https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160610/acddc9e4/attachment.html>

From vito.logiudice at uwaterloo.ca  Fri Jun 10 14:52:03 2016
From: vito.logiudice at uwaterloo.ca (Vito Logiudice)
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 18:52:03 +0000
Subject: [labnetwork] Specification for clean dry air (CDA)
In-Reply-To: <CAK9WbAejpPiako3FKS0=GhSy0E+N6dRahCr4SYrt5Fgs6D-cZQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAK9WbAejpPiako3FKS0=GhSy0E+N6dRahCr4SYrt5Fgs6D-cZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0DC520E7-AF11-4774-A414-53CCC4FE853D@connect.uwaterloo.ca>

Hi Bob,

For the most part we use cryo N2 throughout the fab for our tool pneumatics and pump purges whereas we use CDA for gas cabinet panel pneumatics. The CDA compressors serve the entire building (280,000sq.ft with a good chunk of that being lab space) in addition to the fab. The compressor setup is maintained by the university?s Plant Operations group with which we made it a point to build an excellent relationship with early on during the building?s construction phase. We?ve also made it a point of maintaining that relationship so they are generally very good about maintaining all systems outside of my team?s direct control but on which we are extremely dependent.

If it can help I?ve appended the design specs for our CDA system. I know I?m going to regret putting this in writing but we have had no CDA failures that I can recall in the four years since we took occupancy of the building.

Best,
Vito
University of Waterloo

2.8 Clean Dry Air System

.1 System :

  1.  .1  duplex compressor arrangement,

  2.  .2  skid mounted,

  3.  .3  factory assembled and tested, with:

     *   (a)  desiccant air dryer,

     *   (b)  coalescing pre-filters,

     *   (c)  after-filters c/w gauge,

     *   (d)  bacteria retention filters,

     *   (e)  filter/pressure regulator,

     *   (f)  control panel,

     *   (g)  air compressors.

.2 Clean Dry Air COmpressors

  1.  .1  Two stage, water cooled, oilless rotary tooth, electric driven compressors c/w intercooler:

  2.  .2  duplex arrangement with two compressors, one to run and one standby

  3.  .3  fitted with discharge temperature sensors mounted on each compressor and wired to shut down compressor and initiate high discharge temperature alarm if temperature rises above normal.

  4.  .4  capacity and horsepower for each unit as follows;

     *   (a)  SCFM @ 130 psig 204 with 14.7 psig, 68?F inlet temp and 36%RH.

     *   (b)  Power input 37.3kw (50HP)

     *   (c)  Compressor model Atlas-Copco model # ZR55VSD (2 required)

  5.  .5  after-cooler and discharge air water separator with water drain trap on each compressor.

Standard of Acceptance

Class I

(a) with capacity 450 L (120 usgal)],
(b) constructed of carbon steel as an unfired pressure vessel in accordance with to

CSB51,
(c) cylindrical tank with dished ends and supporting legs for vertical mounting, (d) designed for 1030 kPa (150 psig) working pressure,
(e) fitted with;

  *   !  inlet air connection

  *   !  outlet air connection

  *   !  pressure relief valve

  *   !  pressure gauge and

  *   !  bottom drain with automatic drain valve.

.3 Air dryer system: Desiccant air dryer:

  1.  .1  Type:

     *   (a)  Factory assembled and tested, skid mounted package.

     *   (b)  two column heatless regeneration type with automatic switching between beds,

     *   (c)  columns, heads and casings of dryer body manufactured from stainless steel,

     *   (d)  design pressure: 1030 kPa (150 psig) pressure rating,

     *   (e)  ball valves at inlet and outlet of dryer,

     *   (f)  pre-filters, after-filters and bacteria retention filters in duplex arrangement with ball

valves for shut-off on inlet and outlet of each filter housing.

  2.  .2  Desiccant dryer control panel:

     *   (a)  120 volt/1 phase/60 Hz control panel,

     *   (b)  panel face mounted pressure gauges, pre-wired alarm and operating sensors, relays,

switches, pilot lights and terminal strip for external alarm connections.

     *   (c)  pressure gauge and pressure sensor with DISS, check valve, and nipple on outlet piping

from dryer package, on downstream side of after-filters and bacteria retention filters, to

detect "Dryer Pressure Drop High" alarm,

     *   (d)  moisture sensors, timers and switching valves and solenoid valves to control switching

and regeneration,

     *   (e)  internal self diagnostic circuitry and alarm contacts for "Dryer Switching Failure" alarm,

     *   (f)  pressure gauges between prefilter and dryer inlet, between dryer outlet and after-filters

and between after-filters and bacteria retention filters.

Standard of Acceptance

N Class I Inc. Model # MG400X1
N Pneumatic Products Canada (PPC) N Aimark- Travers (Hankinson)

.3 Performance:

Parameter


Rating


Rating


Desicant per bed, minimum


4.5 kg


(100 lb)


Flowrate


11328 litres/min


( 400 scfm)


Inlet pressure


1030 kPa


(150 psig)


Dewpoint temperature


-40?C


(-40?F)



.4

Filter / Pressure Regulator System: .1 two pre-filters,



Dewpoint temperature


-40?C


(-40?F)


.5

  1.  .2  two after-filters rated 0.01 micron filtration with an efficiency exceeding 99.9999% D.O.P.,

  2.  .3  two activated charcoal filters,

  3.  .4  filter element change indicators ,

  4.  .5  automatic drain valves except on charcoal filters, and

  5.  .6  dual line pressure regulating assembly consisting of two pressure regulators, outlet pressure gauges, inlet and outlet isolation ball valves and pressure relief valves, located downstream of charcoal filters, arranged so that isolation of one filter / regulator will not affect operation of second filter / regulator.

Standard of Acceptance

N Norgren - Excelon

Pre-filters:

  1.  .1  high efficiency coalescing type, rated 0.01 micron filtration with an efficiency exceeding

99.9999% D.O.P.,

  2.  .2  initial (dry and clean) pressure drop of not more than 6 Kpa (0.9 psig) (1030 Kpa (150 psig) pressure rating,

  3.  .3  epoxy coated glass fibre media,

  4.  .4  NPT 1 connections, and

  5.  .5  external automatic drain

Standard of Acceptance .
N Hankison 3100 Series-T100-08F -48
N PPC MCD-1-100-1G16 housing with POS-1001SU element

Prefilter automatic drain:

  1.  .1  adjustable time cycled automatic drain,

  2.  .2  timer, adjustable for both interval and duration,

  3.  .3  direct acting, normally closed solenoid valve rated at 1030 Kpa (150 psig),

  4.  .4  NPT 1/4 or 1?2 connections, and

  5.  .5  EMAC 4 construction with adapter for 13 mm (1?2 in) conduit.

Standard of Acceptance

N Class 1 Model MG400-PF N Hankison Model 532
N PPC Model PDV 100

  1.  .6  liquid sensor,

  2.  .7  direct acting, normally closed solenoid valve rated at 1030 kPa (150 psig),

  3.  .8  NPT 1/4 or 1?2 connections, and

  4.  .9  EMAC 4 construction with adapter for 13 mm (1?2 in) conduit.

Standard of Acceptance

Hankison Model 541 PPC Model IDV 2000

.7 After-filters:

  1.  .1  "absolute" particulate removal type (0.9 um),

  2.  .2  rated 0.01 micron filtration with an efficiency exceeding 99.9999% D.O.P.,

  1.  .3  initial (dry and clean) pressure drop of not more than 2 kPa (0.3 psig (1030 kPa (150 psig) pressure rating,

  2.  .4  cellulose media,

  3.  .5  stainless steel housing, and

  4.  .6  NPT 1 connections.

Standard of Acceptance

N Class 1 Model MG 400-AF
N Hankison 3100 Series-T100-08F-48
N PPC MCD-1-100-1G16 housing with PCS-1001AF element

.8 Bacteria retention filters:

  1.  .1  "absolute" particulate removal type (0.2 um),

  2.  .2  initial (dry and clean) pressure drop of not more than 2 kPa (0.3 psig (1030 kPa (150 psig) pressure rating,

  3.  .3  hydrophobically treated media,

  4.  .4  stainless steel housing, and

  5.  .5  NPT 1 connections.

Standard of Acceptance

N PPC Ultipor SDL-2-AR16

  1.  .9  Air intakes:

     *   .1  Mufflers and filters to be mounted on each pump or compressor inlet.

     *   .2  Intake filter housing to have quick release fasteners and to be rated for air flow capacity of pump or compressor with efficiency greater than 98% when challenged with 6 micron particles.

  2.  .10  Clean Dry Air Control System:

     *   .1  mounted in NEM1 enclosure,

     *   .2  programmable logic module,

     *   .3  main disconnect switch,

     *   .4  three variable frequency drives with bypass contactors and circuit protection for each compressor, for future.

     *   .5  manual-auto-off selector switches for each compressor, for future.

     *   .6  control transformers with primary and secondary circuit protection.

     *   .7  two dryer auto/off selector switches,

     *   .8  one continuous/controlled dryer purge selector switch,

     *   .9  internal pressure sensors and pressure switches for controlling stop/start operation of compressors,

     *   .10  duplex compressor package for future control through Allen-Bradley Series SLC 500 Programable logic controller with alternating strategy to equalize compressor run time, and coordinate automatic back-up from stand-by unit.

.12

visual and audible alarms and BAS output contacts for;

        *   (a)  electrical overload,

        *   (b)  com pressor high disch arge tem perature

        *   (c)  primary control transformer failure

        *   (d)  lag/failure alarm

        *   (e)  dryer switching failure

        *   (f)  dryer low discharge pressure, and

        *   (g)  high dew point,

Automatic controls sequences;


        *   (a)  start lead compressor when pressure falls to 675 kPa (98 psig)

        *   (b)  stops lead compressor when pressure reaches 703 kPa (102 psig)

        *   (c)  start lag compressor, when system pressure falls to 648 kPa (94 psig)

        *   (d)  stops lag compressor, if provided, when pressure reaches 665 kPa (95 psig)

        *   (e)  alternate assignment of compressors between lead, lag, and standby.

        *   (f)  runs compressors together under peak demand condition with adjustable time delay (0-

20 seconds) between start of lead and lag unit.

        *   (g)  adjustable minimum run timer on each compressor



--
Vito Logiudice  P.Eng.
Director of Operations, Quantum NanoFab
University of Waterloo
Lazaridis QNC 1207
200 University Avenue West
Waterloo, ON           Canada N2L 3G1
Tel.: (519) 888-4567  ext. 38703
Email: vito.logiudice at uwaterloo.ca<mailto:vito.logiudice at uwaterloo.ca>
Website: https://fab.qnc.uwaterloo.ca


From: <labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu>> on behalf of "Robert M. HAMILTON" <bob at eecs.berkeley.edu<mailto:bob at eecs.berkeley.edu>>
Reply-To: "bob at eecs.berkeley.edu<mailto:bob at eecs.berkeley.edu>" <bob at eecs.berkeley.edu<mailto:bob at eecs.berkeley.edu>>
Date: Thursday, June 9, 2016 at 5:42 PM
To: Labnetwork <labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu>>
Subject: [labnetwork] Specification for clean dry air (CDA)

Labnetwork Colleagues,

I recently contacted Dennis Grimard eho is helping design and build MIT's new lab to learn their specification for their compressed dry air (CDA). Dennis is terrific with numbers and engineering data. Dennis suggested it might be useful to broaden my query to the labnetwork. This begs the questions, how do other facilities specify their CDA and who supports their systems?

At the outset I?ll comment many university labs use their campus engineering maintenance support to service utilities and specs may not be at one?s finger tips. And, some universities have central plants for utilities which serve a broad number of facilities. In the case of the Marvell NanoLab we have virtually all our utilities contained within our sub-fab and we have chosen to maintain most utilities e.g. our acid waste neutralization system, air handlers CDA, DI water, LN and process cooling water system because we are so dependent on them.

My question is what are reasonable specifications for CDA? I realize this is a difficult question to answer because CDA usage will be based on an equipment load.  Perhaps adding a labs square footage helps to scale an answer?

The UC Berkeley Marvell NanoFabrication lab?s CDA is derived from two Atlas Copco 117 cfm (3,32M^3/min) screw compressors operating in a lead/lag configuration which deliver to a 200 gallon storage vessel, then to an Air-Tak brand dryer and Zander particle filters before delivery to the lab. Our CDA delivery specification is 90 psi at a dewpoint of -70F (~16 ppm H2O). We began with a dewpoint spec of -90F; however, we relaxed this spec. to reduce the work of the air dryer with wearable, moving parts. As backup, to facilitate the orderly shutdown of equipment and for brief periods to do CDA system maintenance our delivery is configured to automatically cross over to the lab?s cryogenically derived process N2 when the pressure falls below 70 psi. Such a crossover can support the lab for several hours using N2; however, the associated LN vessel vaporizers do not have sufficient capacity to run on cryogenically-derived N2 for extended periods of time ? they ice over.

As has been previously noted, a few years ago we substituted CDA for N2 purging on a select number of dry pumps to reduce our N2 costs. The pumps switched to CDA were pumps which service equipment that does not pump acid-gases, flammables or pyrophorics. This has been a great success. The downside; however, is we are now peaking our CDA demands to greater than a single compressor can sustain. This makes us vulnerable should we lose a compressor.

Comparing how various research fabs spec CDA has value.

Regards,
Bob Hamilton


Robert Hamilton
University of CA, Berkeley
Marvell NanoLab Equipment Manager
Rm 520 Sutardja Dai Hall, MC 1754
Berkeley, CA 94720
Phone 510-809-8618 (desk - preferred)
Mobile 510-325-7557 (my personal mobile)
E-mail preferred: bob at eecs.berkeley.edu<mailto:bob at eecs.berkeley.edu>
http://nanolab.berkeley.edu/


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160610/aed8029e/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: D0A75B25-D839-4B13-A19F-1BAF8647C1D6.png
Type: image/png
Size: 129 bytes
Desc: D0A75B25-D839-4B13-A19F-1BAF8647C1D6.png
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160610/aed8029e/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 812A2017-2152-4135-A2D5-D3CDDEF835FE.png
Type: image/png
Size: 129 bytes
Desc: 812A2017-2152-4135-A2D5-D3CDDEF835FE.png
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160610/aed8029e/attachment-0001.png>

From sbhas at uchicago.edu  Fri Jun 10 16:25:21 2016
From: sbhas at uchicago.edu (Shivakumar Bhaskaran)
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 20:25:21 +0000
Subject: [labnetwork] Cleanroom Manager position available at University of
	Chicago
Message-ID: <A71ECB2B7F230841A953EFA3D299504A288BE11C@xm-mbx-08-prod>

Dear Colleagues,

The University of Chicago is looking for Searle Cleanroom Manager.

Job Summary: The Searle Cleanroom is a shared user facility open to all members of the UChicago research community. It houses a variety of lithography, deposition, and device characterization tools in a Class 100/1000 environment. Adjacent to the cleanroom are laboratories for preparing and characterizing biological samples and for soft lithography.
The Manager leads day-to-day technical operations of the facility. Responsibilities include assisting clean room users (faculty, staff, students and postdocs) by providing training as well as planning, process, and technical support for research projects; developing plans for maintaining the facility's responsiveness to scientific and educational needs; and ensuring that the facility remains fully operational and in compliance with University standards for safety and general operations.

For a complete description of responsibilities and qualifications, as well as to apply for the position, please visit https://jobopportunities.uchicago.edu and search for requisition 100695.
The University of Chicago offers a competitive salary and a generous benefits package, which can be found here -http://humanresources.uchicago.edu/benefits/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160610/4c189e42/attachment.html>

From dlafleur at cns.fas.harvard.edu  Mon Jun 13 14:03:03 2016
From: dlafleur at cns.fas.harvard.edu (LaFleur, David W)
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 18:03:03 +0000
Subject: [labnetwork] Pegasus - Rapier Esc question
Message-ID: <D3846D95.B11E%dlafleur@cns.fas.harvard.edu>

To Engineers who maintain Pegasus - Rapier Systems with Esc

Where do  you set your 15 Torr leak up rate pass/fail limit for the Esc. Does anyone have success in achieving the factory spec of 50mt/min on a 150mm chuck for 15 torr @15degC ?
What is your max flow you like to see for 15 Torr?
Thanks in advance.

David LaFleur
Equipment Engineer
Harvard University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160613/048248fd/attachment.html>

From kjvowen at lnf.umich.edu  Mon Jun 13 16:16:43 2016
From: kjvowen at lnf.umich.edu (Kevin Owen)
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 16:16:43 -0400
Subject: [labnetwork] Pegasus - Rapier Esc question
In-Reply-To: <D3846D95.B11E%dlafleur@cns.fas.harvard.edu>
References: <D3846D95.B11E%dlafleur@cns.fas.harvard.edu>
Message-ID: <CANLyxV0Ww7P5DY9ZB3Ja4n_bUCVxytqP3M1e-ANFB4ASnz0_aA@mail.gmail.com>

We have 2 Pegasus systems, one 4" and one 6", and a 6" APS, all with 6kV
esc's. Assuming the same software and recipe format, it's in the "leak
check" step defined for each recipe. There should be a warning level and a
fault level. Ours is set for 125 mTorr/min warning, 150 mTorr/min fault. On
the APS, it's higher (200 mTorr/min fault), since that chuck is older and
more worn and we don't get as good leak checks on it. It doesn't really
affect process as long as the chuck and wafer are clean so you are getting
consistent results wafer-to-wafer.

We typically run 10 Torr backside pressure, most recipes are either 10C or
20C (although temperature doesn't really seem to matter for this). With
brand new, shiny ESCs, we've seen anywhere from 10-40 mTorr/min. Leak rates
then slowly increase over time as the chucks wear. With proper care, they
seem to last a few years before it gets uncomfortably high (to me,
uncomfortable is ~150 mTorr/min) and we replace them. Currently, both
Pegasus tools are somewhere in the 40-70 mTorr/min range, and the APS is at
100-120.

I'd say the biggest factor that will affect this is the cleanliness of the
back of the wafer. Many years ago, when our tools were still new, we would
have very regular (probably once per day) leak check failures due to
particulate on the back of their samples. What sort of leak rates are you
seeing? What's your chamber leak rate?

-Kevin

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 2:03 PM, LaFleur, David W <
dlafleur at cns.fas.harvard.edu> wrote:

> To Engineers who maintain Pegasus ? Rapier Systems with Esc
>
> Where do  you set your 15 Torr leak up rate pass/fail limit for the Esc.
> Does anyone have success in achieving the factory spec of 50mt/min on a
> 150mm chuck for 15 torr @15degC ?
> What is your max flow you like to see for 15 Torr?
> Thanks in advance.
>
> David LaFleur
> Equipment Engineer
> Harvard University
>
> _______________________________________________
> labnetwork mailing list
> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
> https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
>
>


-- 
Kevin Owen
Senior Engineer in Research
Operations Group, Lurie Nanofabrication Facility
University of Michigan
(734) 545-4014
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160613/e34a3a85/attachment.html>

From dlafleur at cns.fas.harvard.edu  Mon Jun 13 16:45:18 2016
From: dlafleur at cns.fas.harvard.edu (LaFleur, David W)
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 20:45:18 +0000
Subject: [labnetwork] Pegasus - Rapier Esc question
In-Reply-To: <CANLyxV0Ww7P5DY9ZB3Ja4n_bUCVxytqP3M1e-ANFB4ASnz0_aA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <D3846D95.B11E%dlafleur@cns.fas.harvard.edu>,
 <CANLyxV0Ww7P5DY9ZB3Ja4n_bUCVxytqP3M1e-ANFB4ASnz0_aA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <79ACA92D-BC27-48A9-A891-E6924B542D3B@cns.fas.harvard.edu>

Hi Kevin,

Thanks for the reply. Our system is 3 years old and uses 6 inch wafers. We set our lur spec at 170 for 15 torr and 100 for 10 torr. I keep an eye on the flow at 15 torr and I like to see less than 9 sccm of helium. You are consistent with what I observe. Our lur are higher than when the system was new but this is to be expected. We do not see any burned resist and our etches are consistent. I Was asked by a fellow engineer in another lab and wanted to hear of other observations from people using esc's to confirm I wasn't giving bad information. Thanks for your reply.
Dave

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 13, 2016, at 4:17 PM, Kevin Owen <kjvowen at lnf.umich.edu<mailto:kjvowen at lnf.umich.edu>> wrote:

We have 2 Pegasus systems, one 4" and one 6", and a 6" APS, all with 6kV esc's. Assuming the same software and recipe format, it's in the "leak check" step defined for each recipe. There should be a warning level and a fault level. Ours is set for 125 mTorr/min warning, 150 mTorr/min fault. On the APS, it's higher (200 mTorr/min fault), since that chuck is older and more worn and we don't get as good leak checks on it. It doesn't really affect process as long as the chuck and wafer are clean so you are getting consistent results wafer-to-wafer.

We typically run 10 Torr backside pressure, most recipes are either 10C or 20C (although temperature doesn't really seem to matter for this). With brand new, shiny ESCs, we've seen anywhere from 10-40 mTorr/min. Leak rates then slowly increase over time as the chucks wear. With proper care, they seem to last a few years before it gets uncomfortably high (to me, uncomfortable is ~150 mTorr/min) and we replace them. Currently, both Pegasus tools are somewhere in the 40-70 mTorr/min range, and the APS is at 100-120.

I'd say the biggest factor that will affect this is the cleanliness of the back of the wafer. Many years ago, when our tools were still new, we would have very regular (probably once per day) leak check failures due to particulate on the back of their samples. What sort of leak rates are you seeing? What's your chamber leak rate?

-Kevin

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 2:03 PM, LaFleur, David W <dlafleur at cns.fas.harvard.edu<mailto:dlafleur at cns.fas.harvard.edu>> wrote:
To Engineers who maintain Pegasus - Rapier Systems with Esc

Where do  you set your 15 Torr leak up rate pass/fail limit for the Esc. Does anyone have success in achieving the factory spec of 50mt/min on a 150mm chuck for 15 torr @15degC ?
What is your max flow you like to see for 15 Torr?
Thanks in advance.

David LaFleur
Equipment Engineer
Harvard University

_______________________________________________
labnetwork mailing list
labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu>
https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www-2Dmtl.mit.edu_mailman_listinfo.cgi_labnetwork&d=CwMFaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=6eLRBFWstHA_77uCRuGQiAtV9vZWeQjYS4oSMBfEHZE&m=098yfwLpJf6UPqbDciuqLNOmpnUdkfb6BZ29gLZuSsc&s=5e8tLMB3K9Ayee8HxBCndE_5XA4YJx48J1UL2zRTxME&e=>




--
Kevin Owen
Senior Engineer in Research
Operations Group, Lurie Nanofabrication Facility
University of Michigan
(734) 545-4014
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160613/a197d54e/attachment.html>

From rmorrison at draper.com  Tue Jun 14 07:51:15 2016
From: rmorrison at draper.com (Morrison, Richard H., Jr.)
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 11:51:15 +0000
Subject: [labnetwork] Pegasus - Rapier Esc question
In-Reply-To: <CANLyxV0Ww7P5DY9ZB3Ja4n_bUCVxytqP3M1e-ANFB4ASnz0_aA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <D3846D95.B11E%dlafleur@cns.fas.harvard.edu>
 <CANLyxV0Ww7P5DY9ZB3Ja4n_bUCVxytqP3M1e-ANFB4ASnz0_aA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D3862732F46DEB4B93B4A7A80614D288A4CFBF25@mbx2.draper.com>

Draper installed a new Rapier last summer. This our current process control on the ESC chuck:

3-6 sccm flow at 10 Torr
We clean the chamber with O2 plasma when the flow rate gets to  8- 10sccm at 10Torr pressure.
If He flow does not reduce, we open chamber and clean the ESC chuck manually.

We have very tight specs on cleaning the wafer backside to remove particles. Our tool is setup for either 100mm or 150mm wafer size.

Rick


Draper
Principal  Member of the Technical Staff
555 Technology Square
Cambridge Ma, 02139-3563

www.draper.com
rmorrison at draper.com
W 617-258-3420
C 508-930-3461



From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Kevin Owen
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 4:17 PM
To: LaFleur, David W <dlafleur at cns.fas.harvard.edu>
Cc: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Pegasus - Rapier Esc question

We have 2 Pegasus systems, one 4" and one 6", and a 6" APS, all with 6kV esc's. Assuming the same software and recipe format, it's in the "leak check" step defined for each recipe. There should be a warning level and a fault level. Ours is set for 125 mTorr/min warning, 150 mTorr/min fault. On the APS, it's higher (200 mTorr/min fault), since that chuck is older and more worn and we don't get as good leak checks on it. It doesn't really affect process as long as the chuck and wafer are clean so you are getting consistent results wafer-to-wafer.

We typically run 10 Torr backside pressure, most recipes are either 10C or 20C (although temperature doesn't really seem to matter for this). With brand new, shiny ESCs, we've seen anywhere from 10-40 mTorr/min. Leak rates then slowly increase over time as the chucks wear. With proper care, they seem to last a few years before it gets uncomfortably high (to me, uncomfortable is ~150 mTorr/min) and we replace them. Currently, both Pegasus tools are somewhere in the 40-70 mTorr/min range, and the APS is at 100-120.

I'd say the biggest factor that will affect this is the cleanliness of the back of the wafer. Many years ago, when our tools were still new, we would have very regular (probably once per day) leak check failures due to particulate on the back of their samples. What sort of leak rates are you seeing? What's your chamber leak rate?

-Kevin

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 2:03 PM, LaFleur, David W <dlafleur at cns.fas.harvard.edu<mailto:dlafleur at cns.fas.harvard.edu>> wrote:
To Engineers who maintain Pegasus ? Rapier Systems with Esc

Where do  you set your 15 Torr leak up rate pass/fail limit for the Esc. Does anyone have success in achieving the factory spec of 50mt/min on a 150mm chuck for 15 torr @15degC ?
What is your max flow you like to see for 15 Torr?
Thanks in advance.

David LaFleur
Equipment Engineer
Harvard University

_______________________________________________
labnetwork mailing list
labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu>
https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork



--
Kevin Owen
Senior Engineer in Research
Operations Group, Lurie Nanofabrication Facility
University of Michigan
(734) 545-4014
________________________________
Notice: This email and any attachments may contain proprietary (Draper non-public) and/or export-controlled information of Draper. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, please immediately notify the sender by replying to this email and immediately destroy all copies of this email.
________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160614/bbbbbc56/attachment.html>

From james.beall at nist.gov  Tue Jun 14 14:15:42 2016
From: james.beall at nist.gov (Beall, James A. (Fed))
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 18:15:42 +0000
Subject: [labnetwork] Pegasus - Rapier Esc question
In-Reply-To: <D3846D95.B11E%dlafleur@cns.fas.harvard.edu>
References: <D3846D95.B11E%dlafleur@cns.fas.harvard.edu>
Message-ID: <F8AD3827-237B-4296-98F0-2E6A5D928967@nist.gov>

David,

Our 2009 Pegasus with 150 mm TDESC typically runs 40-100 mT/min leak up at 10 Torr, 10.5-12 sccm He.
Our warning is at 125 and alarm is at 150.

  - Jim
NIST Boulder Microfabrication Facility


On Jun 13, 2016, at 12:03 PM, LaFleur, David W <dlafleur at cns.fas.harvard.edu<mailto:dlafleur at cns.fas.harvard.edu>> wrote:

To Engineers who maintain Pegasus ? Rapier Systems with Esc

Where do  you set your 15 Torr leak up rate pass/fail limit for the Esc. Does anyone have success in achieving the factory spec of 50mt/min on a 150mm chuck for 15 torr @15degC ?
What is your max flow you like to see for 15 Torr?
Thanks in advance.

David LaFleur
Equipment Engineer
Harvard University
_______________________________________________
labnetwork mailing list
labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu>
https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160614/a8ba30fb/attachment.html>

From mdwyer87 at gmail.com  Thu Jun 16 13:21:55 2016
From: mdwyer87 at gmail.com (Matt Dwyer)
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 12:21:55 -0500
Subject: [labnetwork] Susceptor for RTA
Message-ID: <054601d1c7f3$94d08950$be719bf0$@gmail.com>

Hi all,

 

I recently acquired a graphite/SiC susceptor for 3? wafers from Allwin21 for
annealing GaAs samples in our Heatpulse 610 RTA and would like to solicit
advise on proper use. Due to the expense and leadtime of a new susceptor, I
would like to take every precaution as we develop this process.

 

Anneal temperatures will be on the order of 400 to 450C, holding for up to
60s. I will be annealing small pieces (4x8 mm^2), ? 3? wafers and very
rarely 3? wafers.

 

I have been reading through RTA SOPs that mention susceptor usage.

 

KU <https://wiki.nbi.ku.dk/cleanroom/AccuThermo_RTA>  recommends a ramp not
exceeding 15C/s, and to not heat the susceptor without a sample inside.

Louisville
<https://louisville.edu/micronano/files/documents/standard-operating-procedu
res/RTPSOP.pdf>  recommends inserting the TC 1cm into the susceptor chamber.

IITB <http://www.cen.iitb.ac.in/slotbooking/SOP/164_SOP.pdf>  has an
appendix on susceptor usage. They say to never submerge the susceptor in
liquid, but suggest certain chemicals for cleaning (with wipes?).
Additionally, they suggest changing the wafer type to susceptor in the
recipe.

Allwin <https://www3.nd.edu/~ndnf/facilities/manuals/Allwin%20manual.pdf>
manual gives instructions on susceptor calibration and recipe creation.

 

Our tool runs Allwin21 RTA-610 V7.85C, for reference.

 

Questions

1.       Is it necessary to run a lamp/chamber calibration for the
susceptor, or can one get away with the existing wafer cal?

a.       Assuming a recipe with 60s ramp (<7C/s) and 60s/400-450C hold.

b.      Is there any risk with running a conservative recipe (above) and
looking to see if wafer-cal undershoot is manageable?

c.       Is it ok to have the cal be at low powers (i.e. <10%) since the
process temp is so low, to prevent potential damage/wear?

2.       Can the susceptor be empty during calibration and/or when running a
recipe?

a.       I assume calibrating empty would lead to minor undershoot with a
sample due to increased thermal mass w.r.t. the calibration.

b.      Any idea why KU warns against running without a sample?

3.       Should a ramp down be specified to control cooling?

4.       Can the TC be touching the backside of the susceptor as is done
with a silicon wafer?

a.       I don?t think I can set up the TC any other way as this would
affect other users of the tool.

b.      I am happy to reduce the ramp rate further if necessary.

5.       Is O2 plasma safe/sufficient for cleaning?

a.       I?d prefer to avoid wet cleaning as the increased handling
increases risk of accidental damage.

b.      The susceptor will be used by a single user for GaAs MMICs.

 

Any other advice on susceptor usage would also be greatly appreciated!

 

Thanks in advance,

Matt

PhD student

UW-Madison

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160616/ef7f7c7e/attachment.html>

From julia.aebersold at louisville.edu  Fri Jun 17 18:21:37 2016
From: julia.aebersold at louisville.edu (julia.aebersold at louisville.edu)
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 22:21:37 +0000
Subject: [labnetwork] PDMS in sputtering tool
Message-ID: <D84411B2FA8CBA42BC4868D5382CA1BB0155810F21@exmbx17>

Greetings everyone!  I had a great time at UGIM and enjoyed seeing old friends and making new acquaintances.  The University of Utah hospitality was fantastic.  I do have some questions.

1.  We have had an aluminum adhesion issue with bubbling under the deposited film.  We have had a user put their PDMS devices into our sputtering tool and have been told that outgasing PDMS could be the source of our bubbling underneath aluminum.  We do not see this behavior with other metal depositions.  Do you ban PDMS from your processing chambers?  Also, we will go ahead with decontamination using sand blasting and solvent wipe downs, but do you recommend other processes (i.e. chemical dips for parts that can be removed)?

2.  My second question revolves around organizational structure.  We currently have a Faculty Director, Cleanroom Manager (me), 3 Engineers and 1 Admin.  Structures and the number of people in facilties vary immensely due to size of the facility, but I wanted to know how many split their cleanroom manager position into a technical manager and business operations manager.  The business operations manager would primarily handle administrative tasks and rarely step foot into the cleanroom.


Cheers!


Julia Aebersold, Ph.D.

MNTC Cleanroom Manager

University of Louisville

2210 South Brook Street

Shumaker Research Building, Room 233

Louisville, KY  40292



(502) 852-1572

http://louisville.edu/micronano/<http://louisville.edu/micronano>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160617/9f3e2ecb/attachment.html>

From mmoneck at andrew.cmu.edu  Sat Jun 18 00:10:10 2016
From: mmoneck at andrew.cmu.edu (Matt Moneck)
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 00:10:10 -0400
Subject: [labnetwork] PDMS in sputtering tool
In-Reply-To: <D84411B2FA8CBA42BC4868D5382CA1BB0155810F21@exmbx17>
References: <D84411B2FA8CBA42BC4868D5382CA1BB0155810F21@exmbx17>
Message-ID: <099f01d1c917$4f119c40$ed34d4c0$@andrew.cmu.edu>

Hi Julia,

 

I would like to echo your comments regarding UGIM.  As a first time
attendee, it was great to meet everyone.  The University of Utah team really
did an outstanding job hosting everyone.  I also want to thank you and the
rest of the Steering Committee for your fantastic efforts.

 

In regards to your issue with PDMS, we do allow it in some of our vacuum
tools, but not others.   We tend to keep it out of tools that have sensitive
processes/materials or chambers that are harder to clean (this is a
precaution in the event outgassing and contamination does occur despite have
procedures in place to avoid it).  However, the real key in my opinion is to
minimize the chance for uncured PDMS or high temperatures to cause
outgassing.  Before a user is allowed to put PDMS in a tool, we request
information about PDMS mixing ratio and curing procedures.  Our main concern
is that improper mixing and/or curing will result in residual uncured PDMS
that will outgas into the chamber.  Typically we see mixing ratios of 10:1
(PDMS : curing agent).  If the mixing ratio is too high (say 20:1), there is
a greater chance uncured PDMS will cause problems.  We also prefer that
users cure the PDMS with heat (80-120C) rather than relying on room
temperature curing.  Once approved, we also limit and monitor the sputtering
recipes, allowing only low power DC magnetron depositions to minimize the
heat generated during sputtering.  With these procedures in place, we have
had good success with deposition of Al, Au, and several other metals.   

 

I believe the answer to your second question really depends on the size and
structure of the fab.  A little over one year ago our structure changed to
now include a Faculty Director, Executive Manager (me), Equipment Manager, 2
Process Engineers, and 2 Technicians. We have approximately 180 users
(internal and external) per year, and the vast majority of our users come
into the fab and perform their own work.   Given our user base, I feel that
our current structure works well.  From various conversations and sessions
at UGIM, I understand that your fab has been moving more towards
fee-for-service work.  As that work grows, I could see where it may become
more important to have a business manager that handles contracts, outreach,
invoicing, billing, etc., while a technical manager ensures the fab can
produce and sustain the processes that make the fee-for-service work,
research, and cleanroom a success.  Just my 2 cents.  

 

Best Regards,

 

Matt

 

-- 
Matthew T. Moneck, Ph.D.
Executive Manager, Carnegie Mellon Nanofabrication Facility
Electrical and Computer Engineering | Carnegie Mellon University
5000 Forbes Ave., Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890
T: 412.268.5430
F: 412.268.3497
 <http://www.ece.cmu.edu> www.ece.cmu.edu
nanofab.ece.cmu.edu

 

From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu]
On Behalf Of julia.aebersold at louisville.edu
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2016 6:22 PM
To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
Subject: [labnetwork] PDMS in sputtering tool

 

Greetings everyone!  I had a great time at UGIM and enjoyed seeing old
friends and making new acquaintances.  The University of Utah hospitality
was fantastic.  I do have some questions. 

 

1.  We have had an aluminum adhesion issue with bubbling under the deposited
film.  We have had a user put their PDMS devices into our sputtering tool
and have been told that outgasing PDMS could be the source of our bubbling
underneath aluminum.  We do not see this behavior with other metal
depositions.  Do you ban PDMS from your processing chambers?  Also, we will
go ahead with decontamination using sand blasting and solvent wipe downs,
but do you recommend other processes (i.e. chemical dips for parts that can
be removed)?

 

2.  My second question revolves around organizational structure.  We
currently have a Faculty Director, Cleanroom Manager (me), 3 Engineers and 1
Admin.  Structures and the number of people in facilties vary immensely due
to size of the facility, but I wanted to know how many split their cleanroom
manager position into a technical manager and business operations manager.
The business operations manager would primarily handle administrative tasks
and rarely step foot into the cleanroom.

 

Cheers!

 

Julia Aebersold, Ph.D.

MNTC Cleanroom Manager

University of Louisville

2210 South Brook Street

Shumaker Research Building, Room 233

Louisville, KY  40292

 

(502) 852-1572

http://louisville.edu/micronano/ <http://louisville.edu/micronano> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160618/a4647878/attachment.html>

From mtang at stanford.edu  Sat Jun 18 10:55:36 2016
From: mtang at stanford.edu (Mary Tang)
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 07:55:36 -0700
Subject: [labnetwork] PDMS in sputtering tool
In-Reply-To: <D84411B2FA8CBA42BC4868D5382CA1BB0155810F21@exmbx17>
References: <D84411B2FA8CBA42BC4868D5382CA1BB0155810F21@exmbx17>
Message-ID: <cb23a372-ff29-6771-6bbd-d5ef10e0a11a@stanford.edu>

Hi Julia!

Great catching up with you at UGIM!

Just a few, quite possibly unrelated, comments about PDMS (which is one 
of my favorite materials...)  Most people use Sylgard 184. This is what 
is used in most literature references and it is handy because it 
self-cures.  At SNF, we recommend using Sylgard 182 because this does 
not self-cure (well, actually it eventually does, if you leave it long 
enough.)  There are several advantages:

1.  Spin coating.  Because it self-cures, the viscosity of 184 is said 
to double about every hour or so (to my recollection.)  The 
non-self-curing 182 allows for a more consistent/longer working time, if 
thickness control is an issue for your experiment.

2.  Even if you bake Sylgard 184 for the recommended time, it will 
continue curing.  For researchers who are doing microcontact printing or 
have other applications where small changes in elasticity, surface 
energy, etc. will matter, this could be very important.  I haven't 
experienced this myself, but was told by one of our research groups that 
their experimental results experienced a drift over the course of a 
month when they used 184, but that they had day-to-day consistency when 
using 182.

3.  The Sylgard 182 components come in jars.  I can use disposable 
syringes to extract and meter out exactly what I want, whereas the last 
time I purchased Sylgard 184, it came in a wacky, dual-syringe dispenser.

One other caveat about the Sylgard products:  these are potting agents, 
not precision-engineered materials.  There's a lot of batch to batch 
variability and limited shelf life -- and the main issue is variability 
in curing.  Even really old, out of date stuff will work great if all 
you want to do is to cast a structure.  But researchers requiring a 
higher degree of consistency should be aware that they will need to 
control for or account for this variability.

But getting back to your question about PDMS...  Whether 182 or 184 is 
used, it would be best to make sure it is thoroughly baked/cured before 
metal deposition.  It would also be good to make sure your researchers 
use fresh/non-expired material, or bake the living heck out of it if it 
is expired (though at $80/kg, there should be almost no excuse for 
keeping old stuff). Both 182 an 184 also have a high thermal expansion 
coefficient, so keeping deposition temperatures low is important to 
prevent buckling of the films.

Mary


-- 
Mary X. Tang, Ph.D.
Stanford Nanofabrication Facility
Paul G. Allen Bldg 141, Mail Code 4070
Stanford, CA  94305
(650)723-9980
mtang at stanford.edu
http://snf.stanford.edu



On 6/17/2016 3:21 PM, julia.aebersold at louisville.edu wrote:
> Greetings everyone!  I had a great time at UGIM and enjoyed seeing old 
> friends and making new acquaintances.  The University of Utah 
> hospitality was fantastic.  I do have some questions.
>
> 1.  We have had an aluminum adhesion issue with bubbling under the 
> deposited film.  We have had a user put their PDMS devices into our 
> sputtering tool and have been told that outgasing PDMS could be the 
> source of our bubbling underneath aluminum.  We do not see this 
> behavior with other metal depositions.  Do you ban PDMS from your 
> processing chambers?  Also, we will go ahead with decontamination 
> using sand blasting and solvent wipe downs, but do you recommend other 
> processes (i.e. chemical dips for parts that can be removed)?
>
> 2.  My second question revolves around organizational structure.  We 
> currently have a Faculty Director, Cleanroom Manager (me), 3 Engineers 
> and 1 Admin.  Structures and the number of people in facilties vary 
> immensely due to size of the facility, but I wanted to know how many 
> split their cleanroom manager position into a technical manager and 
> business operations manager.  The business operations manager would 
> primarily handle administrative tasks and rarely step foot into the 
> cleanroom.
>
> Cheers!
>
>
> Julia Aebersold, Ph.D.
>
> MNTC Cleanroom Manager
>
> University of Louisville
>
> 2210 South Brook Street
>
> Shumaker Research Building, Room 233
>
> Louisville, KY  40292
>
> (502) 852-1572
>
> http://louisville.edu/micronano/ <http://louisville.edu/micronano>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> labnetwork mailing list
> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
> https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160618/110e29d6/attachment.html>

From sandrine at umich.edu  Sat Jun 18 15:18:54 2016
From: sandrine at umich.edu (Sandrine Martin)
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 15:18:54 -0400
Subject: [labnetwork] PDMS in sputtering tool
In-Reply-To: <D84411B2FA8CBA42BC4868D5382CA1BB0155810F21@exmbx17>
References: <D84411B2FA8CBA42BC4868D5382CA1BB0155810F21@exmbx17>
Message-ID: <CAMJO2NAChiKdQU0AM35mCU90cBW5i4QPqcrNOLiKyT8rEc=6fw@mail.gmail.com>

Hello Julia,

Regarding your 2nd question, I think that yes it depends on the size of the
facility (and user community / external organizations), but also the amount
of (or lack of) administrative/financial services that may be provided by
your university/college/department. If the facility staff have to take care
of all admin tasks (budgeting, inventory tracking, billing/invoicing
including sometimes acting as a collection agency, and general
admin/clerical support), then it will make more sense to have a
admin/business manager than if many of these tasks are taken care of by
other people.
Here at the Univ of Michigan, there is a single managing director (me) but
I get some admin/financial support by leveraging a % of effort from several
admin/financial staff members.

It was nice to meet you in person at UGIM!

Thanks
Sandrine

On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 6:21 PM, <julia.aebersold at louisville.edu> wrote:

> Greetings everyone!  I had a great time at UGIM and enjoyed seeing old
> friends and making new acquaintances.  The University of Utah hospitality
> was fantastic.  I do have some questions.
>
> 1.  We have had an aluminum adhesion issue with bubbling under the
> deposited film.  We have had a user put their PDMS devices into our
> sputtering tool and have been told that outgasing PDMS could be the source
> of our bubbling underneath aluminum.  We do not see this behavior with
> other metal depositions.  Do you ban PDMS from your processing chambers?
> Also, we will go ahead with decontamination using sand blasting and solvent
> wipe downs, but do you recommend other processes (i.e. chemical dips for
> parts that can be removed)?
>
> 2.  My second question revolves around organizational structure.  We
> currently have a Faculty Director, Cleanroom Manager (me), 3 Engineers and
> 1 Admin.  Structures and the number of people in facilties vary immensely
> due to size of the facility, but I wanted to know how many split their
> cleanroom manager position into a technical manager and business operations
> manager.  The business operations manager would primarily handle
> administrative tasks and rarely step foot into the cleanroom.
>
> Cheers!
>
>
> Julia Aebersold, Ph.D.
>
> MNTC Cleanroom Manager
>
> University of Louisville
>
> 2210 South Brook Street
>
> Shumaker Research Building, Room 233
>
> Louisville, KY  40292
>
>
>
> (502) 852-1572
>
> http://louisville.edu/micronano/
>
> _______________________________________________
> labnetwork mailing list
> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
> https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
>
>


-- 

Sandrine Martin, Ph.D.

University of Michigan

LNF Managing Director

1246D EECS, 1301 Beal Ave

Ann Arbor, MI 48109

Cell 734-277-2365

Fax 734-647-1781

www.LNF.umich.edu <http://www.lnf.umich.edu/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160618/edb18656/attachment.html>

From khbeis at uw.edu  Sun Jun 19 00:39:36 2016
From: khbeis at uw.edu (Michael Khbeis)
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 21:39:36 -0700
Subject: [labnetwork] NiFe 81-19 Sputtering Request
Message-ID: <034F919B-8332-4D0A-803B-C9FC089F1274@uw.edu>

Dear Colleagues

We have an issue sputtering NiFe in our Lesker PVD75. The target runs fine for burn-in and a few runs but then can't maintain a plasma (DC 800W). 

Does anyone have an idea what causes relatively rapid failure in maintaining plasma with this specific material? I doubt the target is worn that fast. 

Also, we have a client that urgently needs some depositions. Is there a site willing to take on the task while we troubleshoot our system?

Gratefully,

Dr. Michael Khbeis
Washington Nanofab Facility
University of Washington
Fluke Hall, Box 352143
(O) 206.543.5101
(C) 443.254.5192
khbeis at uw.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160618/67912d9e/attachment.html>

From halromans at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 19 12:14:03 2016
From: halromans at yahoo.com (Hal Romans)
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2016 16:14:03 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [labnetwork] NiFe 81-19 Sputtering Request
In-Reply-To: <034F919B-8332-4D0A-803B-C9FC089F1274@uw.edu>
References: <034F919B-8332-4D0A-803B-C9FC089F1274@uw.edu>
Message-ID: <227562788.6077278.1466352843385.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>

Hi Michael -Are you sure your gun is correctly setup to sputter magnetic materials? This usually requires removing or changing the polarity of a permanent magnet(s). With our PVD 75 at the University of Illinois, we only RF sputtered oxides so I never had to worry about this there and couldn't tell you exactly what needs to be done.
Also, I've found the Lesker shield (outer, ground electrode) to be very flimsy and susceptible to distortion due to heating - especially the ring on top that sets the gap between the outer electrode and the target hold down ring. I would purchase some of these to have on hand anyway.

Also check to make sure everything is very clean. One critical point is the top ring mentioned above. The other being where the outer electrode attaches to the gun at the bottom. These screws not only set the gap between the two electrodes but complete the ground path. ? ??? ??Also make sure there are no high spots on the pan head screws that hold down the target. The flat tip screwdriver slot is easy to get buggered up. Buy some spares of these also.?
Also make sure there are no high spots on your target (from arcing, etc.).
Finally, I would sometimes have to "cheat" to increase the gap between the two electrodes. When installing the outer electrode, don't allow the slot in the can to fully fall onto the attachment screw. Just make sure this is done evenly on all slots so the gap between the electrodes is uniform. You may want to try this early in your troubleshooting to confirm the problem is a spacing issue between electrodes. If it is the problem, you may decide to complete your urgent deposition before fixing the underlying problem.?
Good luck,
J. Hal Romans?Senior Equipment Engineer?University of California San Diegohromans at ucsd.edu

      From: Michael Khbeis <khbeis at uw.edu>
 To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu 
 Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2016 9:39 PM
 Subject: [labnetwork] NiFe 81-19 Sputtering Request
   
Dear Colleagues
We have an issue sputtering NiFe in our Lesker PVD75. The target runs fine for burn-in and a few runs but then can't maintain a plasma (DC 800W).?
Does anyone have an idea what causes relatively rapid failure in maintaining plasma with this specific material? I doubt the target is worn that fast.?
Also, we have a client that urgently needs some depositions. Is there a site willing to take on the task while we troubleshoot our system?
Gratefully,

Dr. Michael KhbeisWashington Nanofab Facility
University of Washington
Fluke Hall, Box 352143
(O)?206.543.5101
(C)?443.254.5192
khbeis at uw.edu
_______________________________________________
labnetwork mailing list
labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork


  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160619/461ea70f/attachment.html>

From mmoneck at andrew.cmu.edu  Sun Jun 19 13:03:25 2016
From: mmoneck at andrew.cmu.edu (Matt Moneck)
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2016 13:03:25 -0400
Subject: [labnetwork] NiFe 81-19 Sputtering Request
In-Reply-To: <034F919B-8332-4D0A-803B-C9FC089F1274@uw.edu>
References: <034F919B-8332-4D0A-803B-C9FC089F1274@uw.edu>
Message-ID: <0aed01d1ca4c$7ef9cb40$7ced61c0$@andrew.cmu.edu>

Hi Michael,

 

It was great meeting you at UGIM.  We?ve had our fair share of issues sputtering NiFe in the past.  With NiFe being such a high permeability material, the issues we typically see revolve around low pass through flux (i.e. too much shunting of magnetic field through the target) as a result of the NiFe target being too thick and/or cathode magnets being too weak (we typically use NdFeB).  We have even gone as far as to cut an erosion groove in one of our NiFe targets (it was too thick when ordered) to increase the pass through flux enough to trap electrons at the target.  However, in the above scenarios, we would have a situation where the plasma would only ignite at high pressure or not ignite at all.  In those cases, we either need to run RF (typically results in high reflected power) or make a change to the target and/or cathode.  

 

Your case is obviously a bit different as it seems that you can run the plasma for a few runs before it fails.  We have seen similar failure mechanisms, but they can be caused by many factors.  Are your burn-in runs done at a different pressure and DC power than the 800 W runs that are failing?  Also, are the failed runs always right after a conditioning run or burn-in run?  Furthermore, have you had a chance to inspect the target and shields for buildup of material (we have seen intermittent shorts that only occur after sputtering for some time)? More recently, we even had a magnetic target (CoFeB) crack and subsequently display the type of behavior you are seeing.

 

If you need a run for your client, we are set up to do NiFe and can handle wafers up to 6? diameter.  We would only need to know what type of substrate as well as the requirements for film properties (thickness, stress, coercivity, need for easy axis, etc.).  My only concern is that it may take several days to get a contract in place.  I will forward the agreement to you in a separate email if you are interested in pursuing this further.  

 

Best Regards,

 

Matt

 

-- 
Matthew T. Moneck, Ph.D.
Executive Manager, Carnegie Mellon Nanofabrication Facility
Electrical and Computer Engineering | Carnegie Mellon University
5000 Forbes Ave., Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890
T: 412.268.5430
F: 412.268.3497
www.ece.cmu.edu <http://www.ece.cmu.edu> 
nanofab.ece.cmu.edu

 

From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Michael Khbeis
Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2016 12:40 AM
To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
Subject: [labnetwork] NiFe 81-19 Sputtering Request

 

Dear Colleagues

 

We have an issue sputtering NiFe in our Lesker PVD75. The target runs fine for burn-in and a few runs but then can't maintain a plasma (DC 800W). 

 

Does anyone have an idea what causes relatively rapid failure in maintaining plasma with this specific material? I doubt the target is worn that fast. 

 

Also, we have a client that urgently needs some depositions. Is there a site willing to take on the task while we troubleshoot our system?

 

Gratefully,

Dr. Michael Khbeis

Washington Nanofab Facility
University of Washington
Fluke Hall, Box 352143
(O) 206.543.5101 <tel:206.543.5101> 
(C) 443.254.5192 <tel:443.254.5192> 
khbeis at uw.edu <mailto:khbeis at uw.edu> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160619/a590e972/attachment.html>

From hromans at eng.ucsd.edu  Sun Jun 19 16:15:42 2016
From: hromans at eng.ucsd.edu (J Romans)
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2016 13:15:42 -0700
Subject: [labnetwork] NiFe 81-19 Sputtering Request
In-Reply-To: <0aed01d1ca4c$7ef9cb40$7ced61c0$@andrew.cmu.edu>
References: <034F919B-8332-4D0A-803B-C9FC089F1274@uw.edu>
 <0aed01d1ca4c$7ef9cb40$7ced61c0$@andrew.cmu.edu>
Message-ID: <CAD74n=nkSpJ_N57ZmhttKvBjGrS7Mynnr3OOh8M0oaGjR7+uaA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Michael -
Are you sure your gun is correctly setup to sputter magnetic materials?
This usually requires removing or changing the polarity of a permanent
magnet(s). With our PVD 75 at the University of Illinois, we only RF
sputtered oxides so I never had to worry about this there and couldn't tell
you exactly what needs to be done.

Also, I've found the Lesker shield (outer, ground electrode) to be very
flimsy and susceptible to distortion due to heating - especially the ring
on top that sets the gap between the outer electrode and the target hold
down ring. I would purchase some of these to have on hand anyway.

Also check to make sure everything is very clean. One critical point is the
top ring mentioned above. The other being where the outer electrode
attaches to the gun at the bottom. These screws not only set the gap
between the two electrodes but complete the ground path.

Also make sure there are no high spots on the pan head screws that hold
down the target. The flat tip screwdriver slot is easy to get buggered up.
Buy some spares of these also.

Also make sure there are no high spots on your target (from arcing, etc.).

Finally, I would sometimes have to "cheat" to increase the gap between the
two electrodes. When installing the outer electrode, don't allow the slot
in the can to fully fall onto the attachment screw. Just make sure this is
done evenly on all slots so the gap between the electrodes is uniform. You
may want to try this early in your troubleshooting to confirm the problem
is a spacing issue between electrodes. If it is the problem, you may decide
to complete your urgent deposition before fixing the underlying problem.

Good luck,

J. Hal Romans
Senior Equipment Engineer
University of California San Diego
hromans at ucsd.edu


On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 10:03 AM, Matt Moneck <mmoneck at andrew.cmu.edu>
wrote:

> Hi Michael,
>
>
>
> It was great meeting you at UGIM.  We?ve had our fair share of issues
> sputtering NiFe in the past.  With NiFe being such a high permeability
> material, the issues we typically see revolve around low pass through flux
> (i.e. too much shunting of magnetic field through the target) as a result
> of the NiFe target being too thick and/or cathode magnets being too weak
> (we typically use NdFeB).  We have even gone as far as to cut an erosion
> groove in one of our NiFe targets (it was too thick when ordered) to
> increase the pass through flux enough to trap electrons at the target.
> However, in the above scenarios, we would have a situation where the plasma
> would only ignite at high pressure or not ignite at all.  In those cases,
> we either need to run RF (typically results in high reflected power) or
> make a change to the target and/or cathode.
>
>
>
> Your case is obviously a bit different as it seems that you can run the
> plasma for a few runs before it fails.  We have seen similar failure
> mechanisms, but they can be caused by many factors.  Are your burn-in runs
> done at a different pressure and DC power than the 800 W runs that are
> failing?  Also, are the failed runs always right after a conditioning run
> or burn-in run?  Furthermore, have you had a chance to inspect the target
> and shields for buildup of material (we have seen intermittent shorts that
> only occur after sputtering for some time)? More recently, we even had a
> magnetic target (CoFeB) crack and subsequently display the type of behavior
> you are seeing.
>
>
>
> If you need a run for your client, we are set up to do NiFe and can handle
> wafers up to 6? diameter.  We would only need to know what type of
> substrate as well as the requirements for film properties (thickness,
> stress, coercivity, need for easy axis, etc.).  My only concern is that it
> may take several days to get a contract in place.  I will forward the
> agreement to you in a separate email if you are interested in pursuing this
> further.
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
>
>
> Matt
>
>
>
> --
> *Matthew T. Moneck, Ph.D.*
> Executive Manager, Carnegie Mellon Nanofabrication Facility
> Electrical and Computer Engineering | Carnegie Mellon University
> 5000 Forbes Ave., Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890
> T: 412.268.5430
> F: 412.268.3497
> www.ece.cmu.edu
> nanofab.ece.cmu.edu
>
>
>
> *From:* labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:
> labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] *On Behalf Of *Michael Khbeis
> *Sent:* Sunday, June 19, 2016 12:40 AM
> *To:* labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
> *Subject:* [labnetwork] NiFe 81-19 Sputtering Request
>
>
>
> Dear Colleagues
>
>
>
> We have an issue sputtering NiFe in our Lesker PVD75. The target runs fine
> for burn-in and a few runs but then can't maintain a plasma (DC 800W).
>
>
>
> Does anyone have an idea what causes relatively rapid failure in
> maintaining plasma with this specific material? I doubt the target is worn
> that fast.
>
>
>
> Also, we have a client that urgently needs some depositions. Is there a
> site willing to take on the task while we troubleshoot our system?
>
>
>
> Gratefully,
>
> Dr. Michael Khbeis
>
> Washington Nanofab Facility
> University of Washington
> Fluke Hall, Box 352143
> (O) 206.543.5101
> (C) 443.254.5192
> khbeis at uw.edu
>
> _______________________________________________
> labnetwork mailing list
> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
> https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160619/31ed3ffc/attachment.html>

From dcchrist at wisc.edu  Mon Jun 20 09:58:06 2016
From: dcchrist at wisc.edu (Daniel Christensen)
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 13:58:06 +0000
Subject: [labnetwork] PDMS in sputtering tool
In-Reply-To: <D84411B2FA8CBA42BC4868D5382CA1BB0155810F21@exmbx17>
References: <D84411B2FA8CBA42BC4868D5382CA1BB0155810F21@exmbx17>
Message-ID: <CY1PR0601MB19124D64759DD9806648192CBE2A0@CY1PR0601MB1912.namprd06.prod.outlook.com>

Julia,

Univ of WI-Madison org structure:
Staff Director (1): directs all College of Eng. Core facilities of which we are 1 of 3 (full time FTE, not a faculty member)
Lab Manager (1): technical manager and business manager and equipment repair engineer and some admin
Staff Engineers (3.5): tool training, tool repair, some admin, and some I.T.


Daniel C. Christensen
WCAM, University of Wisconsin-Madison
1550 Engineering Dr
Madison, WI 53706




From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of julia.aebersold at louisville.edu
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2016 5:22 PM
To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
Subject: [labnetwork] PDMS in sputtering tool

Greetings everyone!  I had a great time at UGIM and enjoyed seeing old friends and making new acquaintances.  The University of Utah hospitality was fantastic.  I do have some questions.

1.  We have had an aluminum adhesion issue with bubbling under the deposited film.  We have had a user put their PDMS devices into our sputtering tool and have been told that outgasing PDMS could be the source of our bubbling underneath aluminum.  We do not see this behavior with other metal depositions.  Do you ban PDMS from your processing chambers?  Also, we will go ahead with decontamination using sand blasting and solvent wipe downs, but do you recommend other processes (i.e. chemical dips for parts that can be removed)?

2.  My second question revolves around organizational structure.  We currently have a Faculty Director, Cleanroom Manager (me), 3 Engineers and 1 Admin.  Structures and the number of people in facilties vary immensely due to size of the facility, but I wanted to know how many split their cleanroom manager position into a technical manager and business operations manager.  The business operations manager would primarily handle administrative tasks and rarely step foot into the cleanroom.


Cheers!



Julia Aebersold, Ph.D.

MNTC Cleanroom Manager

University of Louisville

2210 South Brook Street

Shumaker Research Building, Room 233

Louisville, KY  40292



(502) 852-1572

http://louisville.edu/micronano/<http://louisville.edu/micronano>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160620/7a7f5c5c/attachment.html>

From vito.logiudice at uwaterloo.ca  Mon Jun 20 11:37:19 2016
From: vito.logiudice at uwaterloo.ca (Vito Logiudice)
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 15:37:19 +0000
Subject: [labnetwork] TEOS for PECVD deposition of SiO2
Message-ID: <1FCDF7A9-8EB7-4256-A871-702D6D5F926C@connect.uwaterloo.ca>

Dear Colleagues,

It was great to meet many of you last week. I will echo the comments made by several on here already: hats off to our friends in Utah for having done a great job of hosting UGIM 2016.

I?d like to pick the community?s brains in regards to TEOS solutions used for SiO2 deposition in a PECVD system. Our Oxford System 100 PECVD makes use of an Air Products canister (formerly made by Schumacher) which holds 0.8kg of solution (canister photo attached). For those of you who use TEOS I?d appreciate it if you could please share your thoughts on the following two questions:

1. Do you use a supplier other than Air Products for the TEOS solution itself? If yes, can you please share the company name and your degree of satisfaction with this alternate supplier and the quality of the solution provided? I seem to recall someone mentioning ?Gelest? on this forum some time ago but my search turned up empty.

2. Do you refill your own canisters yourself and if yes, can you please describe your procedure? Given how quickly TEOS hydrolizes with the moisture in the air I assume that the fill process should best be performed in a glovebox under an inert atmosphere but I?d appreciate hearing from those of you with experience.

We only have a single canister available and it typically takes 2-3 months to send it out to get refilled so I?m hoping to cut the lead time by exploring alternate options. Thanks very much.

Best,
Vito
--
Vito Logiudice  P.Eng.
Director of Operations, Quantum NanoFab
University of Waterloo
Lazaridis QNC 1207
200 University Avenue West
Waterloo, ON           Canada N2L 3G1
Tel.: (519) 888-4567  ext. 38703
Email: vito.logiudice at uwaterloo.ca<mailto:vito.logiudice at uwaterloo.ca>
Website: https://fab.qnc.uwaterloo.ca

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160620/996a5f45/attachment.html>

From lino.eugene at mcgill.ca  Mon Jun 20 15:50:40 2016
From: lino.eugene at mcgill.ca (Lino Eugene, Dr)
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 19:50:40 +0000
Subject: [labnetwork] Cleaning of cold trap from DRIE system
Message-ID: <BY2PR0301MB20228664A8E1F28F11AD53DCE52A0@BY2PR0301MB2022.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>

Dear colleagues,

I would to know if someone has experience with cleaning of cold trap used in DRIE system.

I am thinking of burning the coating in an oven but I don't have the setup here. Any name of company doing that is welcome.

Thanks in advance,
_______________________________________________________________________________
Lino EUGENE, Ph.D., Jr. Eng.
Research assistant
McGill Nanotools - Microfab

Mcgill University
Rutherford Physics Building - Room 016
3600 University Street
Montreal (Quebec) Canada
H3A 2T8

Phone : 514 398 7329
Fax : 514 398 8434
E-mail : lino.eugene at mcgill.ca<mailto:lino.eugene at mcgill.ca>
Website : www.mcgill.ca/microfab/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160620/a2dee802/attachment.html>

From codreanu at udel.edu  Mon Jun 20 17:39:01 2016
From: codreanu at udel.edu (Iulian Codreanu)
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:39:01 -0400
Subject: [labnetwork] Combo facilities
Message-ID: <43f0521a-ccc5-f363-ee3e-9ecaba4d19d6@udel.edu>

Dear Colleagues,

I too would like to congratulate Ian, Amy, Kayla, Ryan and the rest of 
the Utah team for organizing a high quality conference.

I am very interested in the organization of "combo" facilities, i.e. 
facilities that combine fabrication, microscopy, materials 
characterization, etc. If you are part of such a facility, I would very 
much appreciate your input on how your facility is structured. So far I 
am familiar with the Harvard, DTU, Wisconsin, Penn State, and Penn models.

Thank you very much,

Iulian

-- 
iulian Codreanu, Ph.D.
Director of Operations, UD NanoFab
163 ISE Lab
221 Academy Street
Newark, DE 19716
302-831-2784
http://udnf.udel.edu




From James_Goodman at uml.edu  Tue Jun 21 09:55:13 2016
From: James_Goodman at uml.edu (Goodman, James R)
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 13:55:13 +0000
Subject: [labnetwork] Cleaning of cold trap from DRIE system
In-Reply-To: <BY2PR0301MB20228664A8E1F28F11AD53DCE52A0@BY2PR0301MB2022.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <BY2PR0301MB20228664A8E1F28F11AD53DCE52A0@BY2PR0301MB2022.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <D91E26628B4D6A49879DEB4815149C65A7DD80F8@LEXUS.fs.uml.edu>

Lino,

In my far distant past we cleaned cold traps with DI water. Most of the residues are water soluble and if you soak it long enough most everything comes out. Not knowing your process this may not be applicable to your system.

Jay.

James Goodman
Equipment Manager, Saab/ETIC Nanofabrication Laboratory
University of Massachusetts, Lowell
40 University Ave.
Room 121
Lowell, MA -01854
Office (978) 934-3469
Cell (603) 235-1496
[cid:image001.png at 01D1CBA3.00EEE8E0]

From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Lino Eugene, Dr
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2016 3:51 PM
To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
Subject: [labnetwork] Cleaning of cold trap from DRIE system

Dear colleagues,

I would to know if someone has experience with cleaning of cold trap used in DRIE system.

I am thinking of burning the coating in an oven but I don't have the setup here. Any name of company doing that is welcome.

Thanks in advance,
_______________________________________________________________________________
Lino EUGENE, Ph.D., Jr. Eng.
Research assistant
McGill Nanotools - Microfab

Mcgill University
Rutherford Physics Building - Room 016
3600 University Street
Montreal (Quebec) Canada
H3A 2T8

Phone : 514 398 7329
Fax : 514 398 8434
E-mail : lino.eugene at mcgill.ca<mailto:lino.eugene at mcgill.ca>
Website : www.mcgill.ca/microfab/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.mcgill.ca_microfab_&d=CwMFAg&c=lqHimbpwJeF7VTDNof4ddl8H-RbXeAdbMI2MFE1TXqA&r=eAMk9Z3RNXQ6ywUOsU2ajGmD47SXvUGAeNkzp7h1VC8&m=5KccaDSo66_DkEkocUByLu1sVF7NxZ40ECc4n32NjCM&s=lJr-ppKOY0c9Jjuf0mh_FrXsSoKH3UssNqaevP5zFy4&e=>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160621/b490c822/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 58061 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160621/b490c822/attachment.png>

From diadiuk at mit.edu  Tue Jun 21 10:54:40 2016
From: diadiuk at mit.edu (Vicky Diadiuk)
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 10:54:40 -0400
Subject: [labnetwork] Sr. EHS Coordinator job opening
Message-ID: <A78087A7-8317-44DA-9816-865682BDAAB2@mit.edu>

HI,
 We have a Sr. EHS Coordinator job opening at MTL, effective immediately.
It's been posted in the MIT HR site w/job # 13698:
http://careers.peopleclick.com/careerscp/client_mit/external/jobDetails.do?functionName=getJobDetail&jobPostId=7860&localeCode=en-us

The job description is attached.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: EHS_Coord'16-FINAL.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 82432 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160621/e49049b2/attachment.doc>
-------------- next part --------------


Pls circulate the posting among your colleagues who might be interested :)
Thx,
 Vicky


From vozguz at sabanciuniv.edu  Tue Jun 21 11:14:11 2016
From: vozguz at sabanciuniv.edu (Volkan Ozguz)
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 18:14:11 +0300
Subject: [labnetwork] Combo facilities
In-Reply-To: <43f0521a-ccc5-f363-ee3e-9ecaba4d19d6@udel.edu>
References: <43f0521a-ccc5-f363-ee3e-9ecaba4d19d6@udel.edu>
Message-ID: <CAJPPPrSEP32LvffY3L__T_420DEFEDEuJ+3R5qt8KGetXbyZ5g@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Julian
We are operating a combo facility : central lab, dedicated/thematic
multiuser labs. You can find more info below. We also have a hybrid
management. The director is both an academic  director and technical
 administrator for the entire operation. The specific responsibilities
(tools etc) are managed by a triumvirate (concept borrowed from Birch
Center) consisting of a faculty member (resident expert in the area), a
super-user (post-doc generally) and a representative of the center
management.
Regards
Volkan


Volkan ?zg?z

Director,
Sabanc? University  Nanotechnology Research and Application Center - SUNUM
Orhanl?, Tuzla, ?stanbul 34956

Office: 90 216 483 9834
Fax: 90 216 483 9885
Email: vozguz at sabanciuniv.edu
Web: http://sunum.sabanciuniv.edu







On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 12:39 AM, Iulian Codreanu <codreanu at udel.edu> wrote:

> Dear Colleagues,
>
> I too would like to congratulate Ian, Amy, Kayla, Ryan and the rest of the
> Utah team for organizing a high quality conference.
>
> I am very interested in the organization of "combo" facilities, i.e.
> facilities that combine fabrication, microscopy, materials
> characterization, etc. If you are part of such a facility, I would very
> much appreciate your input on how your facility is structured. So far I am
> familiar with the Harvard, DTU, Wisconsin, Penn State, and Penn models.
>
> Thank you very much,
>
> Iulian
>
> --
> iulian Codreanu, Ph.D.
> Director of Operations, UD NanoFab
> 163 ISE Lab
> 221 Academy Street
> Newark, DE 19716
> 302-831-2784
> http://udnf.udel.edu
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> labnetwork mailing list
> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
> https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160621/0962ef1a/attachment.html>

From spritchett at eng.utah.edu  Tue Jun 21 11:19:15 2016
From: spritchett at eng.utah.edu (Steve Pritchett)
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:19:15 -0600
Subject: [labnetwork] Cleaning of cold trap from DRIE system
Message-ID: <D38EB4E7.116951%spritchett@eng.utah.edu>

Hi Lino,
I have used the LN2 method to clean out a bellows on a DRIE system. It did
cause the deposits to flake off with ends capped and shaking. Per safety
instruction we did this in a fume hood and disposed of deposits as hazardous
waste due to toxic S2F10 etch byproducts. In hind sight if my time is worth
anything it was not very cost effective. I just didn't have a spare bellows
on-hand and time was a consideration.
Good luck,
Steve Pritchett
Sr Process Eng.
Utah nanofab
Ph: 801-587-0684

From:  "Lino Eugene, Dr" <lino.eugene at mcgill.ca>
Date:  Monday, June 20, 2016 1:50 PM
To:  "labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu" <labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu>
Subject:  [labnetwork] Cleaning of cold trap from DRIE system

Dear colleagues,
 
I would to know if someone has experience with cleaning of cold trap used in
DRIE system. 
 
I am thinking of burning the coating in an oven but I don?t have the setup
here. Any name of company doing that is welcome.
 
Thanks in advance,
____________________________________________________________________________
___
Lino EUGENE, Ph.D., Jr. Eng.
Research assistant
McGill Nanotools - Microfab
 
Mcgill University
Rutherford Physics Building - Room 016
3600 University Street
Montreal (Quebec) Canada
H3A 2T8
 
Phone : 514 398 7329
Fax : 514 398 8434
E-mail : lino.eugene at mcgill.ca <mailto:lino.eugene at mcgill.ca>
Website : www.mcgill.ca/microfab/ <www.mcgill.ca/microfab/>
 
_______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list
labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160621/6f8cb1ae/attachment.html>

From Tzumin.Ou at Colorado.EDU  Tue Jun 21 14:09:38 2016
From: Tzumin.Ou at Colorado.EDU (Tzu-Min Ou)
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 12:09:38 -0600
Subject: [labnetwork] Turbo pump failure
Message-ID: <CAG_jOFAt6br-s32ZPRdpOkKX+xE5gHREanrgZ3N6U0B7GW7sJQ@mail.gmail.com>

Good day,

Just wanted to thank Utah Nanofab's hospitality and all the participants'
selfless sharing. The UGIM in U. of Utah was a wonderful experience for
a first-time attendee.

Back to reality, the turbo pump (Leybold Turbovac 361 C with mechanical
rotor suspension) on our RIE system was making a loud high-pitched sound,
and the controller showed a "failure" status. This turbo pump has been on
all the time for the past 2-3 years, except for few unexpected power
outage. I am curious if anyone had this kind of turbo pump failure before?
What would be the possible causes of the failure?

In addition to that, I am seeking some professional suggestions on how to
fix it. Would you recommend to replace the bearing by the professionals, or
can this be done by myself (only watched youtube video and it looked quite
complicated)? I will deeply appreciate if anyone can share the names
of reliable inexpensive repairers and/or the vendors of the repair kit.

Thank you,

Tzu-Min

-- 
Tzu-Min Ou, Ph.D.
Lab Manager
Colorado Nanofabrication Laboratory
Department of Electrical, Computer, and Energy Engineering
University of Colorado at Boulder
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160621/2fde6ec6/attachment.html>

From kjvowen at lnf.umich.edu  Tue Jun 21 18:25:37 2016
From: kjvowen at lnf.umich.edu (Kevin Owen)
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 18:25:37 -0400
Subject: [labnetwork] Turbo pump failure
In-Reply-To: <CAG_jOFAt6br-s32ZPRdpOkKX+xE5gHREanrgZ3N6U0B7GW7sJQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG_jOFAt6br-s32ZPRdpOkKX+xE5gHREanrgZ3N6U0B7GW7sJQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CANLyxV2jxgc07By1s-umtTVR-7QotXV9S9H6dXQ=R33XHcXnfg@mail.gmail.com>

Which turbotronik controller do you have? If it has the set of ~10 "load"
LEDs, usually one will be flashing which indicates the failure mode (table
is in the turbotronik manual). Either way, we have almost all of our pump
work done by outside vendors. For turbos, I have had good results with Trotec
Solutions <http://www.trotecsolutions.com/>, although there are plenty of
other repair companies. I believe Leybold actually does repairs as well,
although I've not gone through them. On the other side of things, I have
had bad luck with A&J Vacuum. They offer *very* competitive pricing and
lead times, but pretty much every pump we've had repaired or bought
refurbished has died in like a year. May just be our luck, though.

-Kevin

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 2:09 PM, Tzu-Min Ou <Tzumin.Ou at colorado.edu> wrote:

> Good day,
>
> Just wanted to thank Utah Nanofab's hospitality and all the participants'
> selfless sharing. The UGIM in U. of Utah was a wonderful experience for
> a first-time attendee.
>
> Back to reality, the turbo pump (Leybold Turbovac 361 C with mechanical
> rotor suspension) on our RIE system was making a loud high-pitched sound,
> and the controller showed a "failure" status. This turbo pump has been on
> all the time for the past 2-3 years, except for few unexpected power
> outage. I am curious if anyone had this kind of turbo pump failure before?
> What would be the possible causes of the failure?
>
> In addition to that, I am seeking some professional suggestions on how to
> fix it. Would you recommend to replace the bearing by the professionals, or
> can this be done by myself (only watched youtube video and it looked quite
> complicated)? I will deeply appreciate if anyone can share the names
> of reliable inexpensive repairers and/or the vendors of the repair kit.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Tzu-Min
>
> --
> Tzu-Min Ou, Ph.D.
> Lab Manager
> Colorado Nanofabrication Laboratory
> Department of Electrical, Computer, and Energy Engineering
> University of Colorado at Boulder
>
> _______________________________________________
> labnetwork mailing list
> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
> https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
>
>


-- 
Kevin Owen
Senior Engineer in Research
Operations Group, Lurie Nanofabrication Facility
University of Michigan
(734) 545-4014
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160621/8d28b133/attachment.html>

From chris at malocsay.com  Wed Jun 22 09:56:03 2016
From: chris at malocsay.com (Chris Malocsay)
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 06:56:03 -0700
Subject: [labnetwork] Turbo pump failure
In-Reply-To: <CANLyxV2jxgc07By1s-umtTVR-7QotXV9S9H6dXQ=R33XHcXnfg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG_jOFAt6br-s32ZPRdpOkKX+xE5gHREanrgZ3N6U0B7GW7sJQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANLyxV2jxgc07By1s-umtTVR-7QotXV9S9H6dXQ=R33XHcXnfg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAAqDzFNj2AAXuZR1-LgBf=QoJrTanhg1M41HZEEq5AG6WiqDgw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Tzu-Min; there are a lot of repair houses.  Rebuilding a turbo pump
takes special equipment and some skill so I don't recommend you trying it
alone.  Here is my 3 favorite repair houses.
PTB Sales
Sertec
Provac
I recommend sending the turbo and controller to ensure the everything is
attended to.
Chris





Chris Malocsay
510-506-5894

Please Join us at the following upcoming events.


*July 12 - 14th San Francisco California*
SEMICON WEST <http://www.semiconwest.org/>

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Kevin Owen <kjvowen at lnf.umich.edu> wrote:

> Which turbotronik controller do you have? If it has the set of ~10 "load"
> LEDs, usually one will be flashing which indicates the failure mode (table
> is in the turbotronik manual). Either way, we have almost all of our pump
> work done by outside vendors. For turbos, I have had good results with Trotec
> Solutions <http://www.trotecsolutions.com/>, although there are plenty of
> other repair companies. I believe Leybold actually does repairs as well,
> although I've not gone through them. On the other side of things, I have
> had bad luck with A&J Vacuum. They offer *very* competitive pricing and
> lead times, but pretty much every pump we've had repaired or bought
> refurbished has died in like a year. May just be our luck, though.
>
> -Kevin
>
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 2:09 PM, Tzu-Min Ou <Tzumin.Ou at colorado.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> Good day,
>>
>> Just wanted to thank Utah Nanofab's hospitality and all the participants'
>> selfless sharing. The UGIM in U. of Utah was a wonderful experience for
>> a first-time attendee.
>>
>> Back to reality, the turbo pump (Leybold Turbovac 361 C with mechanical
>> rotor suspension) on our RIE system was making a loud high-pitched sound,
>> and the controller showed a "failure" status. This turbo pump has been on
>> all the time for the past 2-3 years, except for few unexpected power
>> outage. I am curious if anyone had this kind of turbo pump failure before?
>> What would be the possible causes of the failure?
>>
>> In addition to that, I am seeking some professional suggestions on how to
>> fix it. Would you recommend to replace the bearing by the professionals, or
>> can this be done by myself (only watched youtube video and it looked quite
>> complicated)? I will deeply appreciate if anyone can share the names
>> of reliable inexpensive repairers and/or the vendors of the repair kit.
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Tzu-Min
>>
>> --
>> Tzu-Min Ou, Ph.D.
>> Lab Manager
>> Colorado Nanofabrication Laboratory
>> Department of Electrical, Computer, and Energy Engineering
>> University of Colorado at Boulder
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> labnetwork mailing list
>> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
>> https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Kevin Owen
> Senior Engineer in Research
> Operations Group, Lurie Nanofabrication Facility
> University of Michigan
> (734) 545-4014
>
> _______________________________________________
> labnetwork mailing list
> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
> https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160622/ad64ddcc/attachment.html>

From shott at stanford.edu  Wed Jun 22 12:55:27 2016
From: shott at stanford.edu (John D Shott)
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 16:55:27 +0000
Subject: [labnetwork] Turbo pump failure
In-Reply-To: <CAG_jOFAt6br-s32ZPRdpOkKX+xE5gHREanrgZ3N6U0B7GW7sJQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG_jOFAt6br-s32ZPRdpOkKX+xE5gHREanrgZ3N6U0B7GW7sJQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <9515624C-AE11-41D6-AA8A-1FC1D10614FF@stanford.edu>

Tzu-Min:

You didn't mention: Is this turbo heated? Or can it be?

In most etch applications, I believe that most agree that a heated pump increases pump lifetime by reducing deposition on the turbines.   If this pump is already heated, I apologize for mentioning this.

But I agree with others: a turbo rebuilt is not a do it yourself project.

Good luck,

John

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 21, 2016, at 3:02 PM, "Tzu-Min Ou" <Tzumin.Ou at Colorado.EDU<mailto:Tzumin.Ou at Colorado.EDU>> wrote:

Good day,

Just wanted to thank Utah Nanofab's hospitality and all the participants' selfless sharing. The UGIM in U. of Utah was a wonderful experience for a first-time attendee.

Back to reality, the turbo pump (Leybold Turbovac 361 C with mechanical rotor suspension) on our RIE system was making a loud high-pitched sound, and the controller showed a "failure" status. This turbo pump has been on all the time for the past 2-3 years, except for few unexpected power outage. I am curious if anyone had this kind of turbo pump failure before? What would be the possible causes of the failure?

In addition to that, I am seeking some professional suggestions on how to fix it. Would you recommend to replace the bearing by the professionals, or can this be done by myself (only watched youtube video and it looked quite complicated)? I will deeply appreciate if anyone can share the names of reliable inexpensive repairers and/or the vendors of the repair kit.

Thank you,

Tzu-Min

--
Tzu-Min Ou, Ph.D.
Lab Manager
Colorado Nanofabrication Laboratory
Department of Electrical, Computer, and Energy Engineering
University of Colorado at Boulder
_______________________________________________
labnetwork mailing list
labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu>
https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160622/3859459d/attachment.html>

From dlafleur at cns.fas.harvard.edu  Wed Jun 22 13:32:31 2016
From: dlafleur at cns.fas.harvard.edu (LaFleur, David W)
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 17:32:31 +0000
Subject: [labnetwork] Turbo pump failure
In-Reply-To: <CAG_jOFAt6br-s32ZPRdpOkKX+xE5gHREanrgZ3N6U0B7GW7sJQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG_jOFAt6br-s32ZPRdpOkKX+xE5gHREanrgZ3N6U0B7GW7sJQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D390421F.B2AA%dlafleur@cns.fas.harvard.edu>

Hi Tzu-Min,

I agree that turbo rebuilding is best left to people who are set up and have the experience in doing these repairs. I use TurboVac  in Orlando Fl. I've been using them for many years and have never been disappointed with their work or their prices. That goes for new turbo pumps too. Their price has never been beat when asking for multiple quotes from different vendors.

Best,

David LaFleur
RIE Equipment Engineer
Harvard University


From: "labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu>" <labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu>> on behalf of Tzu-Min Ou <Tzumin.Ou at Colorado.EDU<mailto:Tzumin.Ou at Colorado.EDU>>
Reply-To: "Tzumin.Ou at Colorado.EDU<mailto:Tzumin.Ou at Colorado.EDU>" <Tzumin.Ou at Colorado.EDU<mailto:Tzumin.Ou at Colorado.EDU>>
Date: Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 2:09 PM
To: Labnetwork Mailing List <labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu>>
Subject: [labnetwork] Turbo pump failure

Good day,

Just wanted to thank Utah Nanofab's hospitality and all the participants' selfless sharing. The UGIM in U. of Utah was a wonderful experience for a first-time attendee.

Back to reality, the turbo pump (Leybold Turbovac 361 C with mechanical rotor suspension) on our RIE system was making a loud high-pitched sound, and the controller showed a "failure" status. This turbo pump has been on all the time for the past 2-3 years, except for few unexpected power outage. I am curious if anyone had this kind of turbo pump failure before? What would be the possible causes of the failure?

In addition to that, I am seeking some professional suggestions on how to fix it. Would you recommend to replace the bearing by the professionals, or can this be done by myself (only watched youtube video and it looked quite complicated)? I will deeply appreciate if anyone can share the names of reliable inexpensive repairers and/or the vendors of the repair kit.

Thank you,

Tzu-Min

--
Tzu-Min Ou, Ph.D.
Lab Manager
Colorado Nanofabrication Laboratory
Department of Electrical, Computer, and Energy Engineering
University of Colorado at Boulder
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160622/fafbb249/attachment.html>

From fnewman at uw.edu  Wed Jun 22 16:02:23 2016
From: fnewman at uw.edu (Fred Newman)
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 13:02:23 -0700
Subject: [labnetwork] seeking X-ray reflectometry capability
Message-ID: <CAHwjARO-zAtVK1w1ub8u4Q+St2hv_feUnWm4MQZOPqNBr4fcFQ@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Colleagues,

I am looking for an X-ray reflectometry (XRR) capability for the
characterization of thin metallic films (<100 nm) on Si and SiO2 surfaces.
By any chance does anyone on this mailing list have access to such a
measurement technique, or a use a laboratory that performs these
measurements?

Many thanks!
Fred


-- 
Fred Newman
Research Engineer
Washington Nanofabrication Facility (WNF)
University of Washington
Fluke Hall 132, Box 352143
office 206 616 3534
mobile 505 450 4447
fnewman at uw.edu
https://www.wnf.washington.edu/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160622/7319bb9f/attachment.html>

From jprovine at stanford.edu  Wed Jun 22 21:03:34 2016
From: jprovine at stanford.edu (J Provine)
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 18:03:34 -0700
Subject: [labnetwork] seeking X-ray reflectometry capability
In-Reply-To: <CAHwjARO-zAtVK1w1ub8u4Q+St2hv_feUnWm4MQZOPqNBr4fcFQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHwjARO-zAtVK1w1ub8u4Q+St2hv_feUnWm4MQZOPqNBr4fcFQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAOKRUam3Oa+MqBA14TMsZjZ61du5tBBGiSmjnPWvnjxj_XGyhg@mail.gmail.com>

This is available at Stanford and is available to outside users. The tool
is part of the Stanford nano shared facilities. If you would like more
information please let me know.
J

On Wednesday, June 22, 2016, Fred Newman <fnewman at uw.edu> wrote:

> Dear Colleagues,
>
> I am looking for an X-ray reflectometry (XRR) capability for the
> characterization of thin metallic films (<100 nm) on Si and SiO2 surfaces.
> By any chance does anyone on this mailing list have access to such a
> measurement technique, or a use a laboratory that performs these
> measurements?
>
> Many thanks!
> Fred
>
>
> --
> Fred Newman
> Research Engineer
> Washington Nanofabrication Facility (WNF)
> University of Washington
> Fluke Hall 132, Box 352143
> office 206 616 3534
> mobile 505 450 4447
> fnewman at uw.edu <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','fnewman at uw.edu');>
> https://www.wnf.washington.edu/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160622/ad4dcfcd/attachment.html>

From shott at stanford.edu  Wed Jun 22 21:28:18 2016
From: shott at stanford.edu (John D Shott)
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:28:18 +0000
Subject: [labnetwork] seeking X-ray reflectometry capability
In-Reply-To: <CAHwjARO-zAtVK1w1ub8u4Q+St2hv_feUnWm4MQZOPqNBr4fcFQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHwjARO-zAtVK1w1ub8u4Q+St2hv_feUnWm4MQZOPqNBr4fcFQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <87C917D8-FAE1-4AD3-8D1E-48D6420BC95D@stanford.edu>

Fred:

While I personally know nothing about X-ray Reflectivity, the Stanford Nanocharacterization Lab has a couple of diffractimeters that have a reflectivity package on them.

Here is the link

http://web.stanford.edu/group/glam/xlab/Main.htm

On that page there is contact information for Arturas Vaillonis who is the expert on those tools and should be able to tell you if he can help you with your measurements.

Good luck,

John

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 22, 2016, at 5:41 PM, "Fred Newman" <fnewman at uw.edu<mailto:fnewman at uw.edu>> wrote:

Dear Colleagues,

I am looking for an X-ray reflectometry (XRR) capability for the characterization of thin metallic films (<100 nm) on Si and SiO2 surfaces.  By any chance does anyone on this mailing list have access to such a measurement technique, or a use a laboratory that performs these measurements?

Many thanks!
Fred


--
Fred Newman
Research Engineer
Washington Nanofabrication Facility (WNF)
University of Washington
Fluke Hall 132, Box 352143
office 206 616 3534
mobile 505 450 4447
fnewman at uw.edu<mailto:fnewman at uw.edu>
https://www.wnf.washington.edu/
_______________________________________________
labnetwork mailing list
labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu>
https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160623/830d475c/attachment.html>

From rmorrison at draper.com  Thu Jun 23 08:38:07 2016
From: rmorrison at draper.com (Morrison, Richard H., Jr.)
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 12:38:07 +0000
Subject: [labnetwork] seeking X-ray reflectometry capability
In-Reply-To: <CAHwjARO-zAtVK1w1ub8u4Q+St2hv_feUnWm4MQZOPqNBr4fcFQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHwjARO-zAtVK1w1ub8u4Q+St2hv_feUnWm4MQZOPqNBr4fcFQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D3862732F46DEB4B93B4A7A80614D288A4CFF761@mbx2.draper.com>

Hi Fred,

Draper has a Fisherscope XDV-u  XRF tool, our spot size can go down to 30um.  We have the ability for outside work to be done in our fab, if you are interested contact me.

Rick

Draper
Principal  Member of the Technical Staff
555 Technology Square
Cambridge Ma, 02139-3563

www.draper.com
rmorrison at draper.com
W 617-258-3420
C 508-930-3461



From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Fred Newman
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 4:02 PM
To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
Subject: [labnetwork] seeking X-ray reflectometry capability

Dear Colleagues,

I am looking for an X-ray reflectometry (XRR) capability for the characterization of thin metallic films (<100 nm) on Si and SiO2 surfaces.  By any chance does anyone on this mailing list have access to such a measurement technique, or a use a laboratory that performs these measurements?

Many thanks!
Fred


--
Fred Newman
Research Engineer
Washington Nanofabrication Facility (WNF)
University of Washington
Fluke Hall 132, Box 352143
office 206 616 3534
mobile 505 450 4447
fnewman at uw.edu<mailto:fnewman at uw.edu>
https://www.wnf.washington.edu/
________________________________
Notice: This email and any attachments may contain proprietary (Draper non-public) and/or export-controlled information of Draper. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, please immediately notify the sender by replying to this email and immediately destroy all copies of this email.
________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160623/c5e26dce/attachment.html>

From hathaway at cns.fas.harvard.edu  Thu Jun 23 09:07:06 2016
From: hathaway at cns.fas.harvard.edu (Mac Hathaway)
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 09:07:06 -0400
Subject: [labnetwork] seeking X-ray reflectometry capability
In-Reply-To: <CAHwjARO-zAtVK1w1ub8u4Q+St2hv_feUnWm4MQZOPqNBr4fcFQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHwjARO-zAtVK1w1ub8u4Q+St2hv_feUnWm4MQZOPqNBr4fcFQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <576BDEFA.9010009@cns.fas.harvard.edu>

Hi Fred,

This is Mac, at Harvard CNS.  We don't have this capability at CNS, but 
there is another XRD center across the street that is available.  I 
don't know if they do remote work (i.e. I think you have to be there in 
person).

However, I'm pretty sure most XRD (X-Ray Diffraction) systems are able 
to XRR as well, so you might check around your campus/area for one of 
those...


Mac


Mac Hathaway

Senior Process and Systems Engineer

Harvard Center for Nanoscale Systems

11 Oxford St.

Cambridge, MA02138

617-495-9012


On 6/22/2016 4:02 PM, Fred Newman wrote:
> Dear Colleagues,
>
> I am looking for an X-ray reflectometry (XRR) capability for the 
> characterization of thin metallic films (<100 nm) on Si and SiO2 
> surfaces.  By any chance does anyone on this mailing list have access 
> to such a measurement technique, or a use a laboratory that performs 
> these measurements?
>
> Many thanks!
> Fred
>
>
> -- 
> Fred Newman
> Research Engineer
> Washington Nanofabrication Facility (WNF)
> University of Washington
> Fluke Hall 132, Box 352143
> office 206 616 3534
> mobile 505 450 4447
> fnewman at uw.edu <mailto:fnewman at uw.edu>
> https://www.wnf.washington.edu/ 
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.wnf.washington.edu_&d=CwMFaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=TEMLD8-VsxCGtcVzmvpT5GFNSczskEKHzW6aYlttmIY&m=dM1T3CVZHraFxxGgjH6AWF1PXPzU6zD1O7j3NVxK6R8&s=Vj-Qq4C7gm-dqaPduzorlzcirrHZzHdppfWy_fGuHcY&e=>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> labnetwork mailing list
> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
> https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160623/355d695b/attachment.html>

From sgupta at eng.ua.edu  Thu Jun 23 09:47:49 2016
From: sgupta at eng.ua.edu (Gupta, Su)
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 13:47:49 +0000
Subject: [labnetwork] seeking X-ray reflectometry capability
In-Reply-To: <CAOKRUam3Oa+MqBA14TMsZjZ61du5tBBGiSmjnPWvnjxj_XGyhg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHwjARO-zAtVK1w1ub8u4Q+St2hv_feUnWm4MQZOPqNBr4fcFQ@mail.gmail.com>,
 <CAOKRUam3Oa+MqBA14TMsZjZ61du5tBBGiSmjnPWvnjxj_XGyhg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7C950A0523CDD047B990B0628532BF36268657F6@EX10MBN01.ua-net.ua.edu>

We have the capability and expertise at the MINT Center in Alabama, and my graduate student can do the work for you at the rate of $5 per hour.

Best regards,
Su Gupta
________________________________
From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] on behalf of J Provine [jprovine at stanford.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 8:03 PM
To: Fred Newman
Cc: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
Subject: Re: [labnetwork] seeking X-ray reflectometry capability

This is available at Stanford and is available to outside users. The tool is part of the Stanford nano shared facilities. If you would like more information please let me know.
J

On Wednesday, June 22, 2016, Fred Newman <fnewman at uw.edu<mailto:fnewman at uw.edu>> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,

I am looking for an X-ray reflectometry (XRR) capability for the characterization of thin metallic films (<100 nm) on Si and SiO2 surfaces.  By any chance does anyone on this mailing list have access to such a measurement technique, or a use a laboratory that performs these measurements?

Many thanks!
Fred


--
Fred Newman
Research Engineer
Washington Nanofabrication Facility (WNF)
University of Washington
Fluke Hall 132, Box 352143
office 206 616 3534
mobile 505 450 4447
fnewman at uw.edu<UrlBlockedError.aspx>
https://www.wnf.washington.edu/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160623/412ae94c/attachment.html>

From neil.peters at sjsu.edu  Thu Jun 30 12:59:03 2016
From: neil.peters at sjsu.edu (Neil Peters)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 09:59:03 -0700
Subject: [labnetwork] Silane Cylinder
Message-ID: <CAMcJBR0p9kQrqzB_+=HsySw9_2RBdobG4eUPgnf_i1TZ8fEDnA@mail.gmail.com>

We have a brand new unopened cylinder of Silane, 500 grams.  We cannot
afford the controls necessary to use the Silane in house, so we would like
to find it a home if possible.  If you are interested, please contact me
directly.  We can cover transportation costs.


Neil Peters
San Jose State University
408-924-3967
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160630/418695dd/attachment.html>

From myoung6 at nd.edu  Thu Jun 30 16:33:49 2016
From: myoung6 at nd.edu (Michael Young)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 16:33:49 -0400
Subject: [labnetwork] Silane Cylinder
In-Reply-To: <CAMcJBR0p9kQrqzB_+=HsySw9_2RBdobG4eUPgnf_i1TZ8fEDnA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMcJBR0p9kQrqzB_+=HsySw9_2RBdobG4eUPgnf_i1TZ8fEDnA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <062b91e2-17ce-3ae3-3b91-af2ba4cdd6cd@nd.edu>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20160630/8e09bdd7/attachment.html>