From shott at stanford.edu Thu Sep 1 00:43:39 2016 From: shott at stanford.edu (John Shott) Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 21:43:39 -0700 Subject: [labnetwork] MDA System 16 service In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Michael: While I don't really know of a source that still services these devices, I do have a couple of thoughts: 1. The institution with which I was formerly affiliated took a MDA System 16 out of service in January 2012. Last I knew ... as of late last year ... it was still sitting around in the basement. While it has not been in service since January 2012, it was fully functional at that time. You might want to contact Mary Tang or Carsen Kline at Stanford to see if they would ship all or part of it up the coast to you to see if that would get you over your short term need. Of course, I can't guarantee that they still have it or that they would be willing to part with it ... but it's hard to imagine what plans one would have for such a piece of equipment. It was used for 16 channels of hydride detection. 2. Have you at least checked the main power supplies for ripple with either an oscilloscope or a combination of AC and DC voltmeters? Many "vintage" pieces of equipment with simple, brute-force power supplied develop "bizarre" symptoms as their electolytic capacitors dry out and lose the ability to store a charge. I've brought many pieces of equipment back to life ... even without circuit schematics ... by looking at the ripple on the supposedly DC supplies and replacing two or three electolytic capacitors. I expect that a number of the other members of this community with extensive equipment diagnosis experience ... which sounds better than saying "old timers" ... will agree that they have solved many equipment problems in old equipment by simply replacing the tired, old main electolytic capacitors in the DC power supplies. While you may be well beyond this stage in your own diagnosis, I would at least make sure that your problem could not be solved by replacing $10 worth of electrolytic capacitors. Of course, I should add the appropriate caution (which is not needed in your case) that you need to exercise caution anytime you have the cover off a piece of electronic equipment with 120 VAC exposed ... particularly given the fact that if you are probing the main DC supply your probes will be dangerously close to the live, mains voltage. Note: my guess is that a few 10s of mV is acceptable ripple ... but anything over a volt of ripple is certainly problematic assuming that this piece of equipment used either 24VDC or 15VDC supplies. Good luck, John On 8/30/2016 5:37 PM, Michael Khbeis wrote: > Dear Colleagues > > We are replacing our MDA system 16 in the next 6-8 weeks and are > having reoccurring glitches where the MDA loses track of our hydrides > monitoring module. This of course triggers a fault in our HPM panel. > Does anyone have a point of contact for parts/repair of these legacy > systems? We need to limp along for just a few more weeks. > > 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: From chris at malocsay.com Thu Sep 1 11:14:31 2016 From: chris at malocsay.com (Chris Malocsay) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 08:14:31 -0700 Subject: [labnetwork] MDA System 16 service In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Michael; I agree with John on his point number 2. Even a low 24V power supply can cause electronic malfunctions. They are easily replaceable. Chris Chris Malocsay 510-506-5894 Please Join us at the following upcoming events. Aug 28th- Sept 1st. SPIE Optics + Photonics in San Diego, CA On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 9:43 PM, John Shott wrote: > Michael: > > While I don't really know of a source that still services these devices, I > do have a couple of thoughts: > > 1. The institution with which I was formerly affiliated took a MDA System > 16 out of service in January 2012. Last I knew ... as of late last year > ... it was still sitting around in the basement. While it has not been in > service since January 2012, it was fully functional at that time. You > might want to contact Mary Tang or Carsen Kline at Stanford to see if they > would ship all or part of it up the coast to you to see if that would get > you over your short term need. Of course, I can't guarantee that they > still have it or that they would be willing to part with it ... but it's > hard to imagine what plans one would have for such a piece of equipment. > It was used for 16 channels of hydride detection. > > 2. Have you at least checked the main power supplies for ripple with > either an oscilloscope or a combination of AC and DC voltmeters? Many > "vintage" pieces of equipment with simple, brute-force power supplied > develop "bizarre" symptoms as their electolytic capacitors dry out and lose > the ability to store a charge. I've brought many pieces of equipment back > to life ... even without circuit schematics ... by looking at the ripple on > the supposedly DC supplies and replacing two or three electolytic > capacitors. I expect that a number of the other members of this community > with extensive equipment diagnosis experience ... which sounds better than > saying "old timers" ... will agree that they have solved many equipment > problems in old equipment by simply replacing the tired, old main > electolytic capacitors in the DC power supplies. While you may be well > beyond this stage in your own diagnosis, I would at least make sure that > your problem could not be solved by replacing $10 worth of electrolytic > capacitors. Of course, I should add the appropriate caution (which is not > needed in your case) that you need to exercise caution anytime you have the > cover off a piece of electronic equipment with 120 VAC exposed ... > particularly given the fact that if you are probing the main DC supply your > probes will be dangerously close to the live, mains voltage. Note: my > guess is that a few 10s of mV is acceptable ripple ... but anything over a > volt of ripple is certainly problematic assuming that this piece of > equipment used either 24VDC or 15VDC supplies. > > Good luck, > > John > On 8/30/2016 5:37 PM, Michael Khbeis wrote: > > Dear Colleagues > > We are replacing our MDA system 16 in the next 6-8 weeks and are having > reoccurring glitches where the MDA loses track of our hydrides monitoring > module. This of course triggers a fault in our HPM panel. Does anyone have > a point of contact for parts/repair of these legacy systems? We need to > limp along for just a few more weeks. > > 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 listlabnetwork at mtl.mit.eduhttps://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: From ahryciw at ualberta.ca Tue Sep 6 13:58:25 2016 From: ahryciw at ualberta.ca (Aaron Hryciw) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 11:58:25 -0600 Subject: [labnetwork] LiF in evaporation systems Message-ID: Dear colleagues, We have recently received a request from one of our users to deposit lithium fluoride in our e-beam evaporation system, for OLED applications. This is a non-loadlocked, cryopumped, multi-user system housed outside our cleanroom in our "10k area", typically used to deposit common metals and a few relatively innocuous dielectrics. The large bell jar is periodically cleaned by one of our staff members using power tools (i.e., particle generation), while wearing a respirator. After reviewing MSDSs (two are attached), we've got some concerns about the toxicity of this materials, including the possibility of HF formation (with the potential to be released during a cryopump regen?), as well as the general exposure of this material to staff (and users in the surrounding area) during cleaning. Especially given the multi-user nature of this tool, I am hesitant to allow LiF in it. I would welcome any advice you have regarding whether or not to allow deposition of this material, especially any other safety concerns and special control measures you may recommend. We are also considering the possibility of depositing LiF using a high-temperature thermal evaporation source in our organics evaporator. As a smaller, more dedicated OLED system, it may be possible to use a disposable foil liner, etc., to mitigate exposure to toxic materials and simplify their disposal. Cheers, ? Aaron Aaron Hryciw, PhD, PEng Fabrication Group Manager University of Alberta - nanoFAB W1-060 ECERF Building 9107 - 116 Street Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6G 2V4 Ph: 780-940-7938 www.nanofab.ualberta.ca -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: MSDS - LiF - Kurt J Lesker.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 248600 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: MSDS - LiF - Sigma Aldrich.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 96900 bytes Desc: not available URL: From betemc at rit.edu Wed Sep 7 10:49:00 2016 From: betemc at rit.edu (Bruce Tolleson) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 14:49:00 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Indexer for Gasonics Aura 1000 Message-ID: <9faa847de0394501a7114a2d94fe21ae@ex04mail01d.ad.rit.edu> Dear Labnetwork, I am trying to find a spare indexer for a Gasonics Aura 1000 P/N A94-016-03 Receive Indexer or A94-016-04 Send Indexer. I need a spare everything for this tool but entire systems are hard to affordably come by. I have sent our original out for repair but acquiring a spare would be very good. Thank you, Bruce E. Tolleson Rochester Institute of Technology 82 Lomb Memorial Drive, Bldg 17-2627 Rochester, NY 14623-5604 (585) 478-3836 [http://www.rit.edu/~962www/logos/tiger_walking_rit_color.jpg] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 2550 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: From anthony.b.hmelo at Vanderbilt.Edu Fri Sep 9 09:41:31 2016 From: anthony.b.hmelo at Vanderbilt.Edu (Hmelo, Anthony B) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 13:41:31 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Decommissioning Silane and Phosphene Stainless Gas Delivery Lines Message-ID: All: VINSE is in the process of relocating a PECVD reactor to a new cleanroom facility and I am seeking advice on the industry standards for decommissiong Silane and Phosphene stainless gas delivery lines that run from the respective gas cabinets to the tool in its current location. Beyond thoroughly purging the lines with nitrogen flow through the tool and exhausting the purge gas through the tool exhaust, are there other considerations involved in abandoning the gas delivery lines? For example, are the lines considered to be permanently contaminated and will they require special disposal? Any advice on decommissioning these lines will be deeply appreciated. With thanks, Anthony B Hmelo, PhD Associate Director, VINSE Research Associate Professor of Physics and Astronomy Research Associate Professor of Materials Science and Engineering Vanderbilt University Nashville TN 37235 615-343-7212 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From john_sweeney at harvard.edu Fri Sep 9 12:01:02 2016 From: john_sweeney at harvard.edu (Sweeney, John) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 16:01:02 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Decommissioning Silane and Phosphene Stainless Gas Delivery Lines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi The latest version of "SEMI S12-0298 Guidelines for equipment decontamination" is a great place to start. Have a team of knowledgeable users of the PECVD and an experienced EHS person and a vendor (high haz decon company like clean harbors or triumvirate) perform a hazard review. Who ever does the deconning should use the SEMI S12 0298 guideline though. Good luck John Sweeney CIH Sr. Laboratory Health & Safety Officer Harvard University Environmental Health & Safety & Emergency Management john_sweeney at harvard.edu C 617-680-7594 O 617-495-1290 From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Hmelo, Anthony B Sent: Friday, September 09, 2016 9:42 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Cc: Hmelo, Anthony B Subject: [labnetwork] Decommissioning Silane and Phosphene Stainless Gas Delivery Lines All: VINSE is in the process of relocating a PECVD reactor to a new cleanroom facility and I am seeking advice on the industry standards for decommissiong Silane and Phosphene stainless gas delivery lines that run from the respective gas cabinets to the tool in its current location. Beyond thoroughly purging the lines with nitrogen flow through the tool and exhausting the purge gas through the tool exhaust, are there other considerations involved in abandoning the gas delivery lines? For example, are the lines considered to be permanently contaminated and will they require special disposal? Any advice on decommissioning these lines will be deeply appreciated. With thanks, Anthony B Hmelo, PhD Associate Director, VINSE Research Associate Professor of Physics and Astronomy Research Associate Professor of Materials Science and Engineering Vanderbilt University Nashville TN 37235 615-343-7212 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spaolini at cns.fas.harvard.edu Fri Sep 9 13:46:20 2016 From: spaolini at cns.fas.harvard.edu (Paolini, Steven) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 17:46:20 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Decommissioning Silane and Phosphene Stainless Gas Delivery Lines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Excellent question. I cannot quote industry standards nor am I aware any exist, but the bottom line is many pump and purge cycles are in order. I would use the system for the pumping part of the procedure since it will pump well below what the venturi can provide at the cabinet. I would say that the exact # of cycles is up to you and your available time. If I were challenged with this, I would pump the lines down to the lowest level of vacuum achievable through your system and still allow it to remain there for at least a half hour (or more if your delivery lines are longer than 50 feet) since there are always some stubborn molecules of gas that have to crash into bends and ultimately enter the chamber. I would then run pure N2 through the MFC's at full scale for another half hour before repeating the cycle. I would do this at a minimum of 20 cycles. In regards to disposal, I would treat the Phosphine lines as hazardous waste but the Silane lines should be relatively non-toxic aside from possible deposits of SiO2 (dusting). I hope that other subscribers can correct me if I am wrong about this but my methods have been successful over the years. Best of luck and be careful, Steve Paolini Equipment dood Harvard Center for Nanoscale Systems. From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Hmelo, Anthony B Sent: Friday, September 09, 2016 9:42 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Cc: Hmelo, Anthony B Subject: [labnetwork] Decommissioning Silane and Phosphene Stainless Gas Delivery Lines All: VINSE is in the process of relocating a PECVD reactor to a new cleanroom facility and I am seeking advice on the industry standards for decommissiong Silane and Phosphene stainless gas delivery lines that run from the respective gas cabinets to the tool in its current location. Beyond thoroughly purging the lines with nitrogen flow through the tool and exhausting the purge gas through the tool exhaust, are there other considerations involved in abandoning the gas delivery lines? For example, are the lines considered to be permanently contaminated and will they require special disposal? Any advice on decommissioning these lines will be deeply appreciated. With thanks, Anthony B Hmelo, PhD Associate Director, VINSE Research Associate Professor of Physics and Astronomy Research Associate Professor of Materials Science and Engineering Vanderbilt University Nashville TN 37235 615-343-7212 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bill at eecs.berkeley.edu Fri Sep 9 21:32:13 2016 From: bill at eecs.berkeley.edu (Bill Flounders) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 18:32:13 -0700 Subject: [labnetwork] Decommissioning Silane and Phosphene Stainless Gas Delivery Lines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <57D3629D.1020701@eecs.berkeley.edu> All, I welcome the pump purge recommendations and support we all use our best discretion regarding number of cycles, length of time etc. Document what you did for your own records. I disagree with using the term "hazardous waste" for the phosphine tubing. This sets a precedent in our community that I do not see as justified. It carries an increased disposal cost and handling concerns. If you believe the material is potentially contaminated then I encourage you to propose reasonable and appropriate decontamination procedure. You have everything you need in house to make this safe for pick up. In General: I would pump/purge as recommended to insure safe for disassembly. Disassemble with appropriate PPE if you consider potentially contaminated. Treat with water, solvent, acid or base as appropriate for decontamination and dispose as non hazardous waste. Due to the high volatility of PH3, I would not consider the pumped/purged tubing hazardous. If you wanted additional assurance, rinse with water or alcohol. To verify non hazardous, rinse with water and pH test the liquid. Even for a low volatility acid gas such as BCl3, I wouldn't consider the tubing hazardous waste. But I would document that I gave it a rinse with mild sodium hydroxide solution, rinsed and pH tested prior to disposal. Bill Flounders UC Berkeley Paolini, Steven wrote: > > Excellent question. > > I cannot quote industry standards nor am I aware any exist, but the > bottom line is many pump and purge cycles are in order. I would use > the system for the pumping part of the procedure since it will pump > well below what the venturi can provide at the cabinet. I would say > that the exact # of cycles is up to you and your available time. If I > were challenged with this, I would pump the lines down to the lowest > level of vacuum achievable through your system and still allow it to > remain there for at least a half hour (or more if your delivery lines > are longer than 50 feet) since there are always some stubborn > molecules of gas that have to crash into bends and ultimately enter > the chamber. I would then run pure N2 through the MFC?s at full scale > for another half hour before repeating the cycle. I would do this at a > minimum of 20 cycles. > > In regards to disposal, I would treat the Phosphine lines as hazardous > waste but the Silane lines should be relatively non-toxic aside from > possible deposits of SiO2 (dusting). I hope that other subscribers can > correct me if I am wrong about this but my methods have been > successful over the years. > > Best of luck and be careful, > > Steve Paolini > > Equipment dood > > Harvard Center for Nanoscale Systems. > > *From:*labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu > [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] *On Behalf Of *Hmelo, Anthony B > *Sent:* Friday, September 09, 2016 9:42 AM > *To:* labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > *Cc:* Hmelo, Anthony B > *Subject:* [labnetwork] Decommissioning Silane and Phosphene Stainless > Gas Delivery Lines > > All: > > VINSE is in the process of relocating a PECVD reactor to a new > cleanroom facility and I am seeking advice on the industry standards > for decommissiong Silane and Phosphene stainless gas delivery lines > that run from the respective gas cabinets to the tool in its current > location. Beyond thoroughly purging the lines with nitrogen flow > through the tool and exhausting the purge gas through the tool > exhaust, are there other considerations involved in abandoning the gas > delivery lines? For example, are the lines considered to be > permanently contaminated and will they require special disposal? > > Any advice on decommissioning these lines will be deeply appreciated. > > With thanks, > > Anthony B Hmelo, PhD > > Associate Director, VINSE > > Research Associate Professor of Physics and Astronomy > > Research Associate Professor of Materials Science and Engineering > > Vanderbilt University > > Nashville TN 37235 > > 615-343-7212 > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: From paj1 at email.gwu.edu Tue Sep 13 13:28:19 2016 From: paj1 at email.gwu.edu (Johnson, Patrick) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 13:28:19 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] George Washington University Senior Cleanroom Specialist Job Posting Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, We have a position posting for a Senior Cleanroom Specialist/Researcher. Please share with anyone whom you think might be interested. http://www.gwu.jobs/postings/37604 *Patrick Johnson* *George Washington University* *Nano Fabrication Lab Manager * *Science and Engineering Hall* *800 NW 22nd Street Rm-B2815* *Washington D.C. 20052* *Cell 703 258 2465* *Desk 202 994 2346* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kurt.kupcho at wisc.edu Tue Sep 13 16:12:02 2016 From: kurt.kupcho at wisc.edu (Kurt Kupcho) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 20:12:02 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] calcium gluconate eye drops Message-ID: Hi all - This question is more for the safety community. Our students obviously use HF in our cleanroom, and we have body showers nearby with calcium gluconate gel in case of an accident. My question is about HF in the eyes. We teach a normal eye wash procedure of 15 minutes flush and then seek medical attention. I do see that calcium gluconate eye drops are available for purchase, typically 1% calcium gluconate in saline. I have read conflicting reviews on the product that it is ineffective and flushing for longer with water is better. I assume there are arguments out there that it is useful as well. Do the cleanroom safety personnel out there find this product as being useful/necessary and do you supply it in your cleanroom? Thank you - Kurt --------------------------------------------------- Kurt Kupcho Process Engineer WCAM 1550 Engineering Drive ECB Room 3110 Madison, WI 53706 E: kurt.kupcho at wisc.edu T: 608-262-2982 [http://wcam.engr.wisc.edu/logos/pics/wcam420x80.png] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 23961 bytes Desc: image003.png URL: From sunanda.babu at cense.iisc.ernet.in Mon Sep 19 07:53:08 2016 From: sunanda.babu at cense.iisc.ernet.in (sunanda.babu at cense.iisc.ernet.in) Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 17:23:08 +0530 Subject: [labnetwork] PZT Dry Etch Message-ID: <741d46a04315ef71f69dec97b1037494.squirrel@cense.iisc.ernet.in> Dear all, Can someone share their experience regarding PZT dry etch? Our PZT etch recipe etch is a sputter etch based recipe, can it be mixed up with tools which predominantly run Cl-based processes? Any special maintenance procedures or mechanical cleans or plasma cleans done? thanks and best regards, Sunanda Babu Technology Manager(Dry etch and Thin Films), National Nano Fabrication Centre, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. From mtang at stanford.edu Mon Sep 19 16:18:26 2016 From: mtang at stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 13:18:26 -0700 Subject: [labnetwork] Engineering Position open at the Stanford Nanofabrication Facility Message-ID: <4abd1e08-8515-40e7-25c4-948941c0ffe8@stanford.edu> Dear fellow Labnetworkers: The SNF has an opening for a staff engineer. If you hear of any likely candidates, please pass this information along. Thanks! ****************************************************** * * *Senior Applications Engineer * /School of Engineering, Stanford Nanofabrication Facility/ The Stanford Nanofabrication Facility (SNF) serves researchers from other academic institutions and companies as well as Stanford.We are a service organization providing research tools and know-how to over 400 researchers annually.More about our operation can be found on our website (http://snf.stanford.edu ). We seek an experienced applications engineer who will join the senior staff in managing research operations.The ideal candidate will have experience in electronics fabrication and deep knowledge of the equipment: a jack-or-jill-of-all-trades who is equally comfortable working side-by-side with researchers as well as troubleshooting equipment and facilities problems. The core responsibility of this position is oversight of Direct Patterning and Machining operations, which includes optical and electron-beam lithography, laser-cutting, milling, 3D printing, and supporting or related tools.Specific experience in these capabilities is less important than keen interest in learning and teaching new technologies, as well as a deep understanding and demonstrated ability to apply engineering fundamentals.Responsibilities include participation in the Incident Response Team supporting lab safety and providing local expertise in emergency events. As training is a core function of the SNF, keen interest in teaching as well as excellent written and oral communication skills, are required. For more detail and to apply online: https://stanford.taleo.net/careersection/2/jobdetail.ftl?job=72544&lang=en ****************************************************** -- 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Robert_Vandusen at cunet.carleton.ca Mon Sep 19 18:07:27 2016 From: Robert_Vandusen at cunet.carleton.ca (Robert Vandusen) Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 22:07:27 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] in situ p-doped (boron) polysilicon deposition capability Message-ID: Hi all. There is a client looking for in situ p-doped (boron) polysilicon deposition capability. Our polysilicon system is down at the moment so we are unable to help him at this time. I was just wondering if there were any other labs with this capability where he might be able to help him out. Much appreciated. Robert Vandusen Microfabrication and FANSSI Cleanlab Facility Manager Electronics Department Carleton University Ottawa, Ontario, Canada room: 4184 Mackenzie Building 613-520-2600 ext 5761 rvanduse at doe.carleton.ca -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From James.Vlahakis at tufts.edu Mon Sep 26 10:08:47 2016 From: James.Vlahakis at tufts.edu (Vlahakis, James) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 14:08:47 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] DC sputtering Zr Message-ID: <676C9381B5E6AC4FAE9CD9CFCC40DF1EA20FC25C@SSVMEXDAG01MB03.tufts.ad.tufts.edu> Hi everyone, one of our users here at the Tufts Micro/Nano Fab would like to DC sputter Zirconium. We have two capable instruments - 1. Our "dirty" sputter tool - allowed materials are Cr, Au, Cu, Ti, Ag, Zn, Al, ITO, Ge and various (fully cured) polymers that are popular with our biomedical users 2. Our "clean" sputter tool which has a more restrictive material list and is typically used for reactive and RF sputtering. I'm inclined to allow Zr sputtering in our dirty tool but hope to hear others' experience before making a decision. Are there special considerations? Contamination concerns? Thanks for your help jim -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rmorrison at draper.com Mon Sep 26 14:37:31 2016 From: rmorrison at draper.com (Morrison, Richard H., Jr.) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 18:37:31 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] DC sputtering Zr In-Reply-To: <676C9381B5E6AC4FAE9CD9CFCC40DF1EA20FC25C@SSVMEXDAG01MB03.tufts.ad.tufts.edu> References: <676C9381B5E6AC4FAE9CD9CFCC40DF1EA20FC25C@SSVMEXDAG01MB03.tufts.ad.tufts.edu> Message-ID: Hi, At Draper we have 2 sputter tools for metals, KDF954 (Dc Mag with RF Sputter Clean) and a Lesker Research tool (co-sputter up to 3 targets, DF, RF and Reactive with RF sputter etch). We allow Zirconium in both tools and we used DC mag to sputter the material. Your operation would consider our sputter tool to be 'Dirty" as we deposit most of the materials you listed. When we develop a new material we use the Lesker before investing in a KDF target. We did not see any adverse effects from the sputter of Zirconium. If you are going to use a sputter clean then it is advisable to coat the chamber and platens with the Zirconium so that you do not cross contaminate your film on the wafer. We do that as a standard procedure. 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 Vlahakis, James Sent: Monday, September 26, 2016 10:09 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: [labnetwork] DC sputtering Zr Hi everyone, one of our users here at the Tufts Micro/Nano Fab would like to DC sputter Zirconium. We have two capable instruments - 1. Our "dirty" sputter tool - allowed materials are Cr, Au, Cu, Ti, Ag, Zn, Al, ITO, Ge and various (fully cured) polymers that are popular with our biomedical users 2. Our "clean" sputter tool which has a more restrictive material list and is typically used for reactive and RF sputtering. I'm inclined to allow Zr sputtering in our dirty tool but hope to hear others' experience before making a decision. Are there special considerations? Contamination concerns? Thanks for your help jim ________________________________ 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: From shamus.mcnamara at louisville.edu Tue Sep 27 15:37:55 2016 From: shamus.mcnamara at louisville.edu (shamus.mcnamara at louisville.edu) Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 19:37:55 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] New Equipment Agreement Message-ID: <21E847E89E90D64BA1461B64766388BA01416E13D1@exmbx18> At the University of Louisville, we have an interesting situation where a piece of equipment was located in a shared user facility for many years. The faculty member who was PI on the grant that purchased it has left, one of the co-PIs has asked to move it to his lab, and one department has asked to take possession of it. Needless to say, this creates a lot of unnecessary drama. I would like to avoid this drama in the future by setting up an agreement covering the placement of new equipment in our center. It should contain language that outlines what our responsibilities are (training, maintenance, safety, etc.), what rights the faculty member still has over the equipment (none), and what the benefits of placing the equipment in a shared facility are (many). Does anyone have an agreement that you use for this purpose that you would be willing to share? Shamus Dr. Shamus McNamara Director, Micro/Nano Technology Center Associate Professor Electrical and Computer Engineering Shumaker Research Building #239 University of Louisville Louisville, KY 40292 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michael.hume at ualberta.ca Thu Sep 29 15:30:45 2016 From: michael.hume at ualberta.ca (Michael Hume) Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 13:30:45 -0600 Subject: [labnetwork] After Hours Policies - Wet Processing Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, We are in the process of re-evaluating our after-hours policies, specifically in regards to wet chemical processing (eg. HF/BOE/KOH/TMAH/Piranha cleaning). Historically, we have not allowed these processes after hours, primarily due to safety concerns. That said, as demand within our facility grows, and the competence of our user base increases, the question has been raised as to why these processes can't be performed within a framework of proper procedures to ensure user safety (eg. buddy system, etc..) I am interested in the general approach of other facilities. Does anyone allow these processes? Does anyone forbid them? In either case what is the general reasoning for your decision? If you do allow them, what sort of protocols or policies do you have in place to provide a safe working environment? Any feedback you may have is much appreciated! Regards, -- Michael Hume Operations Manager University of Alberta - nanoFAB W1-060 ECERF Building 9107 - 116 Street Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6G 2V4 www.nanofab.ualberta.ca Ph: 587-879-1519 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nclay at upenn.edu Thu Sep 29 18:12:30 2016 From: nclay at upenn.edu (Noah Clay) Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 18:12:30 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] After Hours Policies - Wet Processing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Michael, We allow working with the chemistries listed below after hours and with a buddy. During staff hours, a buddy is not required. Fortunately, all of the low/high pH work is confined to one bay in our fab and, with HD cameras, enforcing the buddy system is relatively straightforward. The requirement for a buddy is simply that they're a trained user who must be in the fab at all times while work is in process. We do not require that they shadow the person conducting work. Staff hours are posted during orientation and holiday/buddy reminders are broadcast through email and on a flat screen in the gowning area. So, our users are hopefully respecting and aware of when a buddy is required. Best, Noah Noah Clay Director, Quattrone Nanofabrication Facility University of Pennsylvania > On Sep 29, 2016, at 15:30, Michael Hume wrote: > > Dear Colleagues, > > We are in the process of re-evaluating our after-hours policies, specifically in regards to wet chemical processing (eg. HF/BOE/KOH/TMAH/Piranha cleaning). Historically, we have not allowed these processes after hours, primarily due to safety concerns. That said, as demand within our facility grows, and the competence of our user base increases, the question has been raised as to why these processes can't be performed within a framework of proper procedures to ensure user safety (eg. buddy system, etc..) > > I am interested in the general approach of other facilities. Does anyone allow these processes? Does anyone forbid them? In either case what is the general reasoning for your decision? If you do allow them, what sort of protocols or policies do you have in place to provide a safe working environment? > > Any feedback you may have is much appreciated! > > Regards, > > -- > Michael Hume > Operations Manager > University of Alberta - nanoFAB > W1-060 ECERF Building > 9107 - 116 Street > Edmonton, Alberta > Canada T6G 2V4 > www.nanofab.ualberta.ca Ph: 587-879-1519 > _______________________________________________ > 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: From ida.noddeland at ntnu.no Fri Sep 30 03:17:47 2016 From: ida.noddeland at ntnu.no (Ida Noddeland) Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 07:17:47 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] After Hours Policies - Wet Processing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4a72417fb98940038aae8f3a865fec8c@it-ex11.win.ntnu.no> Dear Michael, We have the same rules 24/7 for working with dangerous chemicals: You have to agree with another user that she/he is your buddy. The buddy should be in the same area, but can work with her/his own processes. For HF use the buddy too needs a HF-license, because of the special treatment needed in case of an incident. We do have a camera system, but do not use it for safety during chemistry use. The response would be way too slow. It can be used to see if the buddy rules are respected, though. To ensure that the buddy is alerted if something happens when she/he is not in visual contact with the user, we have a personal alarm on the wall in the wet etch bay. Just pull out the pin to get your buddy?s attention. [http://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/io0AAOSwuAVW08R-/s-l1600.jpg] Best regards Ida Noddeland Head of Laboratory NTNU NanoLab Sem S?lands vei 14, K1-123 7491 Trondheim +47 41288808 www.ntnu.no/nanolab From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Noah Clay Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 12:13 AM To: Michael Hume Cc: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] After Hours Policies - Wet Processing Michael, We allow working with the chemistries listed below after hours and with a buddy. During staff hours, a buddy is not required. Fortunately, all of the low/high pH work is confined to one bay in our fab and, with HD cameras, enforcing the buddy system is relatively straightforward. The requirement for a buddy is simply that they're a trained user who must be in the fab at all times while work is in process. We do not require that they shadow the person conducting work. Staff hours are posted during orientation and holiday/buddy reminders are broadcast through email and on a flat screen in the gowning area. So, our users are hopefully respecting and aware of when a buddy is required. Best, Noah Noah Clay Director, Quattrone Nanofabrication Facility University of Pennsylvania On Sep 29, 2016, at 15:30, Michael Hume > wrote: Dear Colleagues, We are in the process of re-evaluating our after-hours policies, specifically in regards to wet chemical processing (eg. HF/BOE/KOH/TMAH/Piranha cleaning). Historically, we have not allowed these processes after hours, primarily due to safety concerns. That said, as demand within our facility grows, and the competence of our user base increases, the question has been raised as to why these processes can't be performed within a framework of proper procedures to ensure user safety (eg. buddy system, etc..) I am interested in the general approach of other facilities. Does anyone allow these processes? Does anyone forbid them? In either case what is the general reasoning for your decision? If you do allow them, what sort of protocols or policies do you have in place to provide a safe working environment? Any feedback you may have is much appreciated! Regards, -- Michael Hume Operations Manager University of Alberta - nanoFAB W1-060 ECERF Building 9107 - 116 Street Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6G 2V4 www.nanofab.ualberta.ca Ph: 587-879-1519 _______________________________________________ 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: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 8801 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: From mark.walters at duke.edu Fri Sep 30 08:03:23 2016 From: mark.walters at duke.edu (Mark Walters, Ph.D.) Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 12:03:23 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] After Hours Policies - Wet Processing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Our policy is similar to the one Noah has for Univ. Penn. We do allow processing of those chemicals after hours and on weekends as long as a buddy is present in the lab. We also have cameras that monitor each of our wet hoods. In addition, we close our cleanroom at 12 midnight and do not allow anyone to be in the cleanroom between 12 midnight and 7am. Their cards will not open the cleanroom doors during these hours, and the cameras are motion sensitive and will automatically save and email me a video clip if they are triggered between 12am-7am. We?ve found this to be a good compromise between allowing more working hours in the cleanroom to keep up with demand, while still preventing potential safety and misuse issues that could arise from people working in the lab in the middle of the night. Our characterization and imaging labs outside of the cleanroom are available 24/7. Mark D. Walters, Ph.D. Director, Shared Materials Instrumentation Facility (SMIF) Duke University Box 90271 Durham, NC 27708-0271 http://smif.lab.duke.edu Phone: (919) 660-5486 Fax: (919) 660-5491 From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Noah Clay Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 6:13 PM To: Michael Hume Cc: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] After Hours Policies - Wet Processing Michael, We allow working with the chemistries listed below after hours and with a buddy. During staff hours, a buddy is not required. Fortunately, all of the low/high pH work is confined to one bay in our fab and, with HD cameras, enforcing the buddy system is relatively straightforward. The requirement for a buddy is simply that they're a trained user who must be in the fab at all times while work is in process. We do not require that they shadow the person conducting work. Staff hours are posted during orientation and holiday/buddy reminders are broadcast through email and on a flat screen in the gowning area. So, our users are hopefully respecting and aware of when a buddy is required. Best, Noah Noah Clay Director, Quattrone Nanofabrication Facility University of Pennsylvania On Sep 29, 2016, at 15:30, Michael Hume > wrote: Dear Colleagues, We are in the process of re-evaluating our after-hours policies, specifically in regards to wet chemical processing (eg. HF/BOE/KOH/TMAH/Piranha cleaning). Historically, we have not allowed these processes after hours, primarily due to safety concerns. That said, as demand within our facility grows, and the competence of our user base increases, the question has been raised as to why these processes can't be performed within a framework of proper procedures to ensure user safety (eg. buddy system, etc..) I am interested in the general approach of other facilities. Does anyone allow these processes? Does anyone forbid them? In either case what is the general reasoning for your decision? If you do allow them, what sort of protocols or policies do you have in place to provide a safe working environment? Any feedback you may have is much appreciated! Regards, -- Michael Hume Operations Manager University of Alberta - nanoFAB W1-060 ECERF Building 9107 - 116 Street Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6G 2V4 www.nanofab.ualberta.ca Ph: 587-879-1519 _______________________________________________ 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: From mhofheins at unm.edu Fri Sep 30 08:04:04 2016 From: mhofheins at unm.edu (Mark Hofheins) Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 12:04:04 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] After Hours Policies - Wet Processing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: We require a buddy any time Corrosives and acid are in use. All personal with access to the Fab have to go through chemical and other safety training. They are given a power point presentation and a questionnaire. Any questions that are scored wrong are reviewed with the individual. We have a card reader access which is monitored. We have a camera system and recording system. After hours work not available. We will on occasion work with someone if they need to stay a little late. Mark Hofheins mhofheins at unm.edu 505-710-3527 Micro Electronics Technician Manufacturing Engineering University of New Mexico MTTC 800 Bradbury S.E. Suit 235 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87106-4346 ________________________________ From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu on behalf of Michael Hume Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 1:30 PM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: [labnetwork] After Hours Policies - Wet Processing Dear Colleagues, We are in the process of re-evaluating our after-hours policies, specifically in regards to wet chemical processing (eg. HF/BOE/KOH/TMAH/Piranha cleaning). Historically, we have not allowed these processes after hours, primarily due to safety concerns. That said, as demand within our facility grows, and the competence of our user base increases, the question has been raised as to why these processes can't be performed within a framework of proper procedures to ensure user safety (eg. buddy system, etc..) I am interested in the general approach of other facilities. Does anyone allow these processes? Does anyone forbid them? In either case what is the general reasoning for your decision? If you do allow them, what sort of protocols or policies do you have in place to provide a safe working environment? Any feedback you may have is much appreciated! Regards, -- Michael Hume Operations Manager University of Alberta - nanoFAB W1-060 ECERF Building 9107 - 116 Street Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6G 2V4 www.nanofab.ualberta.ca Ph: 587-879-1519 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From duda at uchicago.edu Fri Sep 30 10:06:20 2016 From: duda at uchicago.edu (Peter J Duda III) Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 14:06:20 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] After Hours Policies - Wet Processing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <369CF1861066C244B747413441CCF52908D6D478@xm-mbx-08-prod> Michael Our policy and setup is almost identical (coincidentally) to Noah?s policy. All of the higher hazard chemical processing happens in one bay, and those benches require a buddy after hours. Our cleanroom is also under camera surveillance. We do stipulate that the person performing the work after hours inform the other individual that they will be working in that area to ensure that the ?buddy? will be present in the cleanroom the entire time. This is designed to serve as a ?check in? ?check out? policy so that there is an active awareness of the situation. Thanks Peter J Duda Technical Director, 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 From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Michael Hume Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 2:31 PM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: [labnetwork] After Hours Policies - Wet Processing Dear Colleagues, We are in the process of re-evaluating our after-hours policies, specifically in regards to wet chemical processing (eg. HF/BOE/KOH/TMAH/Piranha cleaning). Historically, we have not allowed these processes after hours, primarily due to safety concerns. That said, as demand within our facility grows, and the competence of our user base increases, the question has been raised as to why these processes can't be performed within a framework of proper procedures to ensure user safety (eg. buddy system, etc..) I am interested in the general approach of other facilities. Does anyone allow these processes? Does anyone forbid them? In either case what is the general reasoning for your decision? If you do allow them, what sort of protocols or policies do you have in place to provide a safe working environment? Any feedback you may have is much appreciated! Regards, -- Michael Hume Operations Manager University of Alberta - nanoFAB W1-060 ECERF Building 9107 - 116 Street Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6G 2V4 www.nanofab.ualberta.ca Ph: 587-879-1519 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sandrine at umich.edu Fri Sep 30 11:15:14 2016 From: sandrine at umich.edu (Sandrine Martin) Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 11:15:14 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] After Hours Policies - Wet Processing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello, The situation is similar at Michigan - wet processing work after-hours requires a buddy. The buddy has to be inside the lab, but not necessarily at the bench, and does not necessarily have to be identified in person (i.e. if there are 7 people in the lab, it's ok to proceed with wet processing). This is emphasized as part of the user training that is required to obtain 24/7 access to the facility. We have light sticks at the end of wet process bays that flash when they are fewer than 3 people in the lab, alerting users that they should check on others before exiting the lab. Our user committee recently put together a shared calendar to facilitate finding a buddy and coordinating schedules during nights and week-ends. And finally, yes, cameras as useful to enforce the rules. As part of the after-hours access protocol, lab users are required to wear a name tag that clips to the back of their cleanroom suit, so identifying people on the cameras is easy/ier. Thanks Sandrine On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 6:12 PM, Noah Clay wrote: > Michael, > > We allow working with the chemistries listed below after hours and with a > buddy. During staff hours, a buddy is not required. Fortunately, all of > the low/high pH work is confined to one bay in our fab and, with HD > cameras, enforcing the buddy system is relatively straightforward. > > The requirement for a buddy is simply that they're a trained user who must > be in the fab at all times while work is in process. We do not require > that they shadow the person conducting work. Staff hours are posted during > orientation and holiday/buddy reminders are broadcast through email and on > a flat screen in the gowning area. So, our users are hopefully respecting > and aware of when a buddy is required. > > Best, > Noah > > Noah Clay > Director, Quattrone Nanofabrication Facility > University of Pennsylvania > > On Sep 29, 2016, at 15:30, Michael Hume wrote: > > Dear Colleagues, > > We are in the process of re-evaluating our after-hours policies, > specifically in regards to wet chemical processing (eg. > HF/BOE/KOH/TMAH/Piranha cleaning). Historically, we have not allowed these > processes after hours, primarily due to safety concerns. That said, as > demand within our facility grows, and the competence of our user base > increases, the question has been raised as to why these processes can't be > performed within a framework of proper procedures to ensure user safety > (eg. buddy system, etc..) > > I am interested in the general approach of other facilities. Does anyone > allow these processes? Does anyone forbid them? In either case what is the > general reasoning for your decision? If you do allow them, what sort of > protocols or policies do you have in place to provide a safe working > environment? > > Any feedback you may have is much appreciated! > > Regards, > > -- > > Michael Hume > > Operations Manager > > University of Alberta - nanoFAB > > W1-060 ECERF Building > > 9107 - 116 Street > > Edmonton, Alberta > > Canada T6G 2V4 > www.nanofab.ualberta.ca Ph: 587-879-1519 > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Vincent.Luciani at nist.gov Fri Sep 30 14:09:52 2016 From: Vincent.Luciani at nist.gov (Luciani, Vincent (Fed)) Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 18:09:52 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] After Hours Policies - permitting more flexibility Message-ID: Hello Michael, It is always interesting to see what others are doing and this is always an interesting topic. Here at CNST our policies are pretty much in alignment with the ?best practices? that are being described; buddy system, CCTV cameras buddy matchmaking etc. We do allow 24/7 use of our external microscopy labs that pose little risk. However, we have recently been discussing options to permit more 24/7 flexibility in a safe and cost effective manner. So, I?ll as the group: Has anyone found a technology solution they like? We have discussed the ?I have fallen and can?t get up? type monitors; CCTV surveillance; phone apps that detect falls etc. At a minimum we am pondering a system where there are 3 categories of activities: 1) Activities where no buddy system is needed. For example: operating a SEM or an AFM. 2) Activities that require an electronic buddy at a minimum: For example: Operating a sputter system or RIE system. 3) Activities that must have a nearby buddy.: Anything that requires manual handling of dangerous liquids. Maybe someone has a better solution? If so I would love to hear about it. Best, Vince Vincent K. Luciani NanoFab Manager Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology National Institute of Standards and Technology 100 Bureau Drive, MS 6201 Gaithersburg, MD 20899-6200 USA +1-301-975-2886 From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Michael Hume Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 3:31 PM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: [labnetwork] After Hours Policies - Wet Processing Dear Colleagues, We are in the process of re-evaluating our after-hours policies, specifically in regards to wet chemical processing (eg. HF/BOE/KOH/TMAH/Piranha cleaning). Historically, we have not allowed these processes after hours, primarily due to safety concerns. That said, as demand within our facility grows, and the competence of our user base increases, the question has been raised as to why these processes can't be performed within a framework of proper procedures to ensure user safety (eg. buddy system, etc..) I am interested in the general approach of other facilities. Does anyone allow these processes? Does anyone forbid them? In either case what is the general reasoning for your decision? If you do allow them, what sort of protocols or policies do you have in place to provide a safe working environment? Any feedback you may have is much appreciated! Regards, -- Michael Hume Operations Manager University of Alberta - nanoFAB W1-060 ECERF Building 9107 - 116 Street Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6G 2V4 www.nanofab.ualberta.ca Ph: 587-879-1519 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vito.logiudice at uwaterloo.ca Fri Sep 30 15:39:33 2016 From: vito.logiudice at uwaterloo.ca (Vito Logiudice) Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 19:39:33 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] After Hours Policies - Wet Processing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Michael, Some great insights have been shared. I?ll add my two cents. We just recently increased our weekday full hours of operation to 10PM via the addition of a Co-op student who works in the facility on various projects from 2PM to 10PM Monday to Friday. The presence of someone directly affiliated with the fab team allows our lab members who fall under the ?Advanced equipment user level? to use the fab?s entire toolset from 8AM to 10PM, Monday to Friday. The Buddy system remains in place for wet hoods with some well-defined exceptions which you can read about here if interested: https://fab.qnc.uwaterloo.ca/data/access/operating/hrs-op-equip-user-levels We?ve found that the extension of full fab hours to 10PM Mon-Fri since this past June seems to have helped; grumblings about hours being too restrictive have subsided. We might add another Co-op student to work during weekend hours should the need arise. We were nervous about allowing broader use of the fab (and in particular its hoods) without the presence of someone from the fab team in the facility. Our first Co-op student worked out very well this past summer and our second one this fall term is proving to be very promising as well. Don?t hesitate if you have any questions. 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 Website: https://fab.qnc.uwaterloo.ca From: > on behalf of Michael Hume > Date: Thursday, September 29, 2016 at 3:30 PM To: "labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu" > Subject: [labnetwork] After Hours Policies - Wet Processing Dear Colleagues, We are in the process of re-evaluating our after-hours policies, specifically in regards to wet chemical processing (eg. HF/BOE/KOH/TMAH/Piranha cleaning). Historically, we have not allowed these processes after hours, primarily due to safety concerns. That said, as demand within our facility grows, and the competence of our user base increases, the question has been raised as to why these processes can't be performed within a framework of proper procedures to ensure user safety (eg. buddy system, etc..) I am interested in the general approach of other facilities. Does anyone allow these processes? Does anyone forbid them? In either case what is the general reasoning for your decision? If you do allow them, what sort of protocols or policies do you have in place to provide a safe working environment? Any feedback you may have is much appreciated! Regards, -- Michael Hume Operations Manager University of Alberta - nanoFAB W1-060 ECERF Building 9107 - 116 Street Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6G 2V4 www.nanofab.ualberta.caPh: 587-879-1519 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michael.hume at ualberta.ca Fri Sep 30 15:53:14 2016 From: michael.hume at ualberta.ca (Michael Hume) Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 13:53:14 -0600 Subject: [labnetwork] After Hours Policies - Wet Processing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks Vito - that's definitely a different approach. How many people are you staffing until 10pm? I can't imagine it's just 1 co-op student.. Thanks to everyone else who's provided feedback on this one. It's greatly appreciated! -Mike. On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 1:39 PM, Vito Logiudice wrote: > Hi Michael, > > Some great insights have been shared. I?ll add my two cents. > > We just recently increased our weekday full hours of operation to 10PM via > the addition of a Co-op student who works in the facility on various > projects from 2PM to 10PM Monday to Friday. The presence of someone > directly affiliated with the fab team allows our lab members who fall under > the ?Advanced equipment user level? to use the fab?s entire toolset from > 8AM to 10PM, Monday to Friday. The Buddy system remains in place for wet > hoods with some well-defined exceptions which you can read about here if > interested: > https://fab.qnc.uwaterloo.ca/data/access/operating/hrs-op- > equip-user-levels > > We?ve found that the extension of full fab hours to 10PM Mon-Fri since > this past June seems to have helped; grumblings about hours being too > restrictive have subsided. We might add another Co-op student to work > during weekend hours should the need arise. We were nervous about allowing > broader use of the fab (and in particular its hoods) without the presence > of someone from the fab team in the facility. Our first Co-op student > worked out very well this past summer and our second one this fall term is > proving to be very promising as well. > > Don?t hesitate if you have any questions. > > 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 > Website: https://fab.qnc.uwaterloo.ca > > > From: on behalf of Michael Hume < > michael.hume at ualberta.ca> > Date: Thursday, September 29, 2016 at 3:30 PM > To: "labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu" > Subject: [labnetwork] After Hours Policies - Wet Processing > > Dear Colleagues, > > We are in the process of re-evaluating our after-hours policies, > specifically in regards to wet chemical processing (eg. > HF/BOE/KOH/TMAH/Piranha cleaning). Historically, we have not allowed these > processes after hours, primarily due to safety concerns. That said, as > demand within our facility grows, and the competence of our user base > increases, the question has been raised as to why these processes can't be > performed within a framework of proper procedures to ensure user safety > (eg. buddy system, etc..) > > I am interested in the general approach of other facilities. Does anyone > allow these processes? Does anyone forbid them? In either case what is the > general reasoning for your decision? If you do allow them, what sort of > protocols or policies do you have in place to provide a safe working > environment? > > Any feedback you may have is much appreciated! > > Regards, > > -- > > Michael Hume > > Operations Manager > > University of Alberta - nanoFAB > > W1-060 ECERF Building > > 9107 - 116 Street > > Edmonton, Alberta > > Canada T6G 2V4 > www.nanofab.ualberta.caPh: 587-879-1519 > -- Michael Hume Operations Manager University of Alberta - nanoFAB W1-060 ECERF Building 9107 - 116 Street Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6G 2V4 www.nanofab.ualberta.ca Ph: 587-879-1519 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vito.logiudice at uwaterloo.ca Fri Sep 30 18:11:08 2016 From: vito.logiudice at uwaterloo.ca (Vito Logiudice) Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 22:11:08 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] After Hours Policies - Wet Processing Message-ID: <20160930221106.6828118.59364.24380@uwaterloo.ca> Mike, We do in fact only have a single co-op student to 10pm. We were comfortable with this since we only allow experienced lab members with an excellent track record to qualify for "Advanced equipment user" status and to thus work in the fab during these extended hours. And of course the Buddy system? is always in place, as are our safety cameras and the ability for the co-op student to reach out to one of us on the fab team for assistance if required. We also monitor lab members who work off hours to make sure only authorized people are in there during those times. People who "challenge" the system are given a warning and repeat offenders are suspended so compliance is generally quite good. It's been a few months now and so far things look good. Best, Vito From: Michael Hume Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 3:53 PM To: Vito Logiudice Cc: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] After Hours Policies - Wet Processing Thanks Vito - that's definitely a different approach. How many people are you staffing until 10pm? I can't imagine it's just 1 co-op student.. Thanks to everyone else who's provided feedback on this one. It's greatly appreciated! -Mike. On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 1:39 PM, Vito Logiudice > wrote: Hi Michael, Some great insights have been shared. I?ll add my two cents. We just recently increased our weekday full hours of operation to 10PM via the addition of a Co-op student who works in the facility on various projects from 2PM to 10PM Monday to Friday. The presence of someone directly affiliated with the fab team allows our lab members who fall under the ?Advanced equipment user level? to use the fab?s entire toolset from 8AM to 10PM, Monday to Friday. The Buddy system remains in place for wet hoods with some well-defined exceptions which you can read about here if interested: https://fab.qnc.uwaterloo.ca/data/access/operating/hrs-op-equip-user-levels We?ve found that the extension of full fab hours to 10PM Mon-Fri since this past June seems to have helped; grumblings about hours being too restrictive have subsided. We might add another Co-op student to work during weekend hours should the need arise. We were nervous about allowing broader use of the fab (and in particular its hoods) without the presence of someone from the fab team in the facility. Our first Co-op student worked out very well this past summer and our second one this fall term is proving to be very promising as well. Don?t hesitate if you have any questions. 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 Website: https://fab.qnc.uwaterloo.ca From: > on behalf of Michael Hume > Date: Thursday, September 29, 2016 at 3:30 PM To: "labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu" > Subject: [labnetwork] After Hours Policies - Wet Processing Dear Colleagues, We are in the process of re-evaluating our after-hours policies, specifically in regards to wet chemical processing (eg. HF/BOE/KOH/TMAH/Piranha cleaning). Historically, we have not allowed these processes after hours, primarily due to safety concerns. That said, as demand within our facility grows, and the competence of our user base increases, the question has been raised as to why these processes can't be performed within a framework of proper procedures to ensure user safety (eg. buddy system, etc..) I am interested in the general approach of other facilities. Does anyone allow these processes? Does anyone forbid them? In either case what is the general reasoning for your decision? If you do allow them, what sort of protocols or policies do you have in place to provide a safe working environment? Any feedback you may have is much appreciated! Regards, -- Michael Hume Operations Manager University of Alberta - nanoFAB W1-060 ECERF Building 9107 - 116 Street Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6G 2V4 www.nanofab.ualberta.caPh: 587-879-1519 -- Michael Hume Operations Manager University of Alberta - nanoFAB W1-060 ECERF Building 9107 - 116 Street Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6G 2V4 www.nanofab.ualberta.ca Ph: 587-879-1519 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: