From simon.fleming at sydney.edu.au Mon Aug 1 01:18:44 2022 From: simon.fleming at sydney.edu.au (Simon Fleming) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2022 05:18:44 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Technical Director Position in Sydney, Australia Message-ID: We are recruiting a Technical Director for the University of Sydney's micro- and nano-fabrication user facility (RPF). This is a rare opportunity to lead such a facility at a top university. The RPF was established about five years ago in purpose-built, state-of-the-art cleanrooms and labs, followed by significant investment to acquire a suite of excellent equipment and recruit a team of excellent staff. This role is a great opportunity to take this facility forward as we strengthen our support for a wide range of exciting and world-leading research across multiple disciplines. https://www.seek.com.au/job/57794345?type=standout Regards, Simon. Professor Simon Fleming Academic Director | Research & Prototype Foundry Core Research Facilities | Research Portfolio THE UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY Rm 4021, Sydney Nanoscience Hub A31 | The University of Sydney | NSW | 2006 T +61 411 239 659 | E simon.fleming at sydney.edu.au | W Research & Prototype Foundry Part of the NSW Node of the Australian National Fabrication Facility CRICOS 00026A This email plus any attachments to it are confidential. Any unauthorised use is strictly prohibited. If you receive this email in error, please delete it and any attachments. Please think of our environment and only print this e-mail if necessary -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kckeenan at seas.upenn.edu Mon Aug 1 10:43:38 2022 From: kckeenan at seas.upenn.edu (Kyle Keenan) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2022 10:43:38 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] opinions on Polos SPIN150i spinners Message-ID: Hello, Does anyone out there have any experience with Polos SPIN150i spinners? If so, please let me know pros/cons of these units. I'm told they are very similar to those made by Laurell, which seem pretty robust. Thanks for your time. -- Kyle Keenan Laboratory Manager Quattrone Nanofabrication Facility University of Pennsylvania P: 215-898-7560 F: 215-573-4925 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mmargosi at umn.edu Mon Aug 1 16:38:36 2022 From: mmargosi at umn.edu (Mark Margosian) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2022 15:38:36 -0500 Subject: [labnetwork] March PX-1000 Message-ID: Hi, Everyone, I'm looking for any supporting documents, anyone may have, on a March instruments PX-1000 Asher. I have a display board that is malfunctioning. thank you! Mark Margosian Maintenance Engineer Physics Nano-Technology, Rm 140 115 Union Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455 Cell: 612-401-0439 mmargosi at umn.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julia.aebersold at louisville.edu Mon Aug 1 18:11:36 2022 From: julia.aebersold at louisville.edu (Aebersold,Julia W.) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2022 22:11:36 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] CHIPS Act - Update In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Now that the CHIPS Act has passed both the Senate and House and being sent to be signed into law, has there been any communication with our network of cleanrooms, the ASA-Semi Initiative, or the NNCI? Or is it still too soon and talks won't begin until after the act has been signed by the President? Cheers! Julia Aebersold, Ph.D. Manager, Micro/Nano Technology Center University of Louisville Shumaker Research Building, Room 233 2210 South Brook Street Louisville, KY 40292 (502) 852-1572 http://louisville.edu/micronano/ From: labnetwork On Behalf Of Aebersold,Julia W. Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 12:32 PM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] CHIPS Act - Update CAUTION: This email originated from outside of our organization. Do not click links, open attachments, or respond unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the contents are safe. Looks like the Senate could potentially taking up the CHIPS Act very soon for a vote. https://www.cbsnews.com/video/senate-looks-to-hold-vote-on-chips-act/#x Cheers! Julia Aebersold, Ph.D. Manager, Micro/Nano Technology Center University of Louisville Shumaker Research Building, Room 233 2210 South Brook Street Louisville, KY 40292 (502) 852-1572 http://louisville.edu/micronano/ From: labnetwork > On Behalf Of Aebersold,Julia W. Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2022 12:00 PM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] CHIPS Act - Update CAUTION: This email originated from outside of our organization. Do not click links, open attachments, or respond unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the contents are safe. Hello everyone. Just a few tidbits to update about the CHIPS Act. The semiconductor industry and the Dept of Commerce are putting pressure on Congress to come to pass the legislation before they recess in August. https://fortune.com/2022/06/28/globalwafers-intel-tsmc-congress-semiconductor-plants-chips-act-funding/ It appears that the American Semiconductor Academy is one of the initiatives driving workforce development and has published a white paper. Executive Committee of the ASA Planning Team: * Prof. Tsu-Jae King Liu (Chair), University of California, Berkeley * Prof. John Dallesasse, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign * Prof. Stephen Goodnick, Arizona State University * Prof. Quanxi Jia, State University of New York at Buffalo * Prof. Mark Lundstrom, Purdue University * Prof. Kang Wang, University of California, Los Angeles https://www.semi.org/en/workforce-development/ASA https://www.semi.org/sites/semi.org/files/2022-02/ASA%20whitepaper-01feb2022.pdf Cheers! Julia Aebersold, Ph.D. Manager, Micro/Nano Technology Center University of Louisville Shumaker Research Building, Room 233 2210 South Brook Street Louisville, KY 40292 (502) 852-1572 http://louisville.edu/micronano/ From: Aebersold,Julia W. Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2022 10:40 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: CHIPS Act A quick question for everyone regarding the CHIPS Act that has yet to pass in both the House and Senate. I believe a lot of us feel this will directly impact our facilities due to workforce development needed to support this initiative and there is also real fear of talent poaching. Last week at the UGIM conference we started to have initial discussions about the CHIPS ACT, but no formal discussions. The Labnetwork community and the NNCI network are positioned to be instrumental with this effort (I think), but wanted to ask the following for I'm kind of wondering what is going on. Another thought is that it's just too early at this time since CHIPS has not been approved by Congress yet. 1. Have you been following the CHIPS Act? 2. Has anyone from your institution or state began conversations with NIST or industry regarding this effort? 3. Do you feel you have adequate programs and training in place to help cultivate the future demand needed for semiconductor engineers? Any other nuggets of info would be appreciated. Cheers! Julia Aebersold, Ph.D. Manager, Micro/Nano Technology Center University of Louisville 2210 South Brook Street Shumaker Research Building, Room 233 Louisville, KY 40292 (502) 852-1572 http://louisville.edu/micronano/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sb86922 at usc.edu Tue Aug 2 18:26:21 2022 From: sb86922 at usc.edu (Shivakumar Bhaskaran) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2022 22:26:21 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Job Opening - Nanofabrication Equipment Engineer at University of Southern California Message-ID: Dear LabNetwork members, The USC Viterbi School of Engineering in Los Angeles is looking for Nanofabrication Equipment Engineer to work at our cleanroom, John O Brien Nanofabrication Laboratory. Please forward to anyone interested. Job Description: We are looking for a highly motivated Nanofabrication Lab Technician. Reporting to the Cleanroom Manager, this individual will do repair, maintenance of cleanroom equipment and facilities, maintain inventory/procurement of equipment related parts and materials, support the cleanroom users with training, developing nanofabrication process and collaborate with facility staff and research users to identify tool operation issues and address those issues promptly with proper maintenance, repair, and troubleshooting. The ideal candidate should be customer service oriented and contribute towards improving the operation of the facility. https://usccareers.usc.edu/job/los-angeles/nanofabrication-equipment-engineer/1209/33364663216 Thanks, Shiva Shivakumar Bhaskaran, Ph.D., Associate Director, John D. O'Brien Nanofabrication Laboratory Michelson Hall, 1002 Childs Way, MCB LL121, Los Angeles, California 90089, 213 821 2374 [Sign] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 2931 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: From sostrow at stanford.edu Wed Aug 3 17:28:49 2022 From: sostrow at stanford.edu (Sara Ostrowski) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2022 21:28:49 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Register Now: "Microelectronics/Semiconductor Research Community Virtual Workshop" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello Everyone, I wanted to let you know about an exciting workshop coming up in early September. A prestigious group of speakers and panelists will be discussing the latest and greatest in semiconductor R&D and manufacturing. The workshop will focus on how we can address the Chips Act and also includes sessions on workforce development and academic infrastructure. Please find more information below and attached, along with a link for registration. Best Regards, Sara Sara G. Ostrowski Ph.D. Associate Director nano at stanford | Stanford University 140D Paul G. Allen Building 330 Jane Stanford Way, Stanford CA 94305 Email: sostrow.stanford.edu Phone: +1.xxx.xxx.xxxx (TBA) Website: nano at stanford ================================================================================ [Text Description automatically generated with low confidence] A National Nanotechnology Coordinate Infrastructure (NNCI) Two-Day Workshop: Microelectronics/Semiconductor Research Community Virtual Workshop September 8 and 9, 2022 / 12pm - 3:30pm Eastern Time To register, please visit: https://stanforduniversity.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_3xUNmR8l3ECLyaa More information: https://nnci.net/sites/default/files/inline-files/Microelectronics%20Workshop%202022_2.pdf Overview: Please join to discuss ideas surrounding semiconductor workforce development and academic infrastructure and to hear the speakers' perspectives about trends in semiconductor R&D and advanced manufacturing. The workshop aims to examine how the National Nanotechnology Coordinated Infrastructure can interact with the various components of the CHIPS Act of 2022. The workshop content will be used to create a report that could inform CHIPS funding as it relates to USICA, NSTC, NAMP, the Microelectronics Commons, NSF Engines, and FuSe. More details about the workshop can be found in the attachment. Workshop Speakers and Panelists: [Jack Kavalieros] [Vijay Narayanan] [Nirmal Ramaswamy] [Michael Chudzik] Jack Kavalieros Intel Fellow Intel Corporation Vijay Narayanan Fellow, Senior Manager and Strategist IBM Nirmal Ramaswamy VP of Advanced DRAM and Emerging Memory Micron Technology Michael Chudzik VP of Process Development, Device Integration, & Program Management Applied Materials [A picture containing person, person, work-clothing Description automatically generated] [Prith Banerjee] [Tsu-Jae Liu] [cid:image028.jpg at 01D8A372.8B833260] Victor Moroz Synopsys Fellow Synopsys Prith Banerjee Chief Technology Officer ANSYS Inc Tsu-Jae Liu Dean and Roy W. Carlson Professor of Engineering University of California, Berkeley Gabriela Cruz Thomas Director of University Research and Collaboration Intel Corporation [Peter Bermel] [Emmanuel Giannelis] [Oliver Brand] [cid:image032.jpg at 01D8A372.8B833260] Peter Bermel Associate Professor Purdue University Emmanuel Giannelis Vice President for Research and Innovation Cornell University Oliver Brand Executive Director at Georgia Tech and NNCI Director Rick McCormick Principal Scientist Sandia National Labs [JesusdelAlamo] [Raj-Jammy] [Lawrence?S.?Goldberg portrait] [cid:image036.png at 01D8A372.8B833260] Jes?s del Alamo Director of Microsystems Technology Laboratories MIT Raj Jammy Chief Technology Officer Mitre Engenuity Larry Goldberg Senior Advisor NSF Jim Plummer John M Fluke Professor of Electrical Engineering Stanford Organizers: [Sanjay Banerjee] [cid:image038.jpg at 01D8A372.8B833260] [Shyam Aravamudhan] [Trevor Thornton] Sanjay Banerjee Director of Microelectronics Research Center University of Texas, Austin H.S. Philip Wong Director of SNF Stanford Shyam Aravamudhan Director of Core Facilities at Joint School of Nanoscience & Nanoengineering North Carolina A&T State University Trevor Thornton Professor of Electrical, Computer, & Energy Engineering Arizona State University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 111897 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image005.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 11191 bytes Desc: image005.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image022.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 15408 bytes Desc: image022.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image023.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 9991 bytes Desc: image023.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image024.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 10717 bytes Desc: image024.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image026.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 7312 bytes Desc: image026.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image027.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 9649 bytes Desc: image027.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image028.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 6693 bytes Desc: image028.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image029.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 8891 bytes Desc: image029.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image030.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 12826 bytes Desc: image030.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image031.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 10174 bytes Desc: image031.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image032.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 4513 bytes Desc: image032.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image033.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 42968 bytes Desc: image033.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image034.png Type: image/png Size: 100291 bytes Desc: image034.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image035.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 34770 bytes Desc: image035.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image036.png Type: image/png Size: 484238 bytes Desc: image036.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image037.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 7329 bytes Desc: image037.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image038.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 7216 bytes Desc: image038.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image039.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 11521 bytes Desc: image039.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image040.png Type: image/png Size: 81220 bytes Desc: image040.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 49309 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Microelectronics_Semiconductor_Research_Community_Workshop_Announcement.v2.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 568407 bytes Desc: Microelectronics_Semiconductor_Research_Community_Workshop_Announcement.v2.pdf URL: From kmcpeak at lsu.edu Fri Aug 5 13:30:15 2022 From: kmcpeak at lsu.edu (Kevin M McPeak) Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2022 17:30:15 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] TEM Specialist Job Opening at LSU Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, The LSU shared instrumentation facility has an open position for a TEM microscopy specialist with demonstrated expertise in STEM, EELS, EDS, FIB/SEM, microscopy, diffraction, materials science, and data analysis to oversee analytical instruments & perform advanced materials characterization. The successful candidate will be responsible for training internal users on a new state-of-the-art Thermo Fisher Spectra300 scanning transmission electron microscope (STEM) instrument. If you or someone you know is interested learn more and apply here: https://lsu.wd1.myworkdayjobs.com/LSU/job/0121-Chemistry--Materials-Building/Scanning-Transmission-Electron-Microscopy-Specialist_R00068621 Regards, Kevin From mallison at cnf.cornell.edu Fri Aug 5 15:17:58 2022 From: mallison at cnf.cornell.edu (Melanie-Claire Mallison) Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2022 15:17:58 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] Invitation to the CNF 45th Anniversary Celebration, October 18th Message-ID: <86ea3dbd-849e-4ed5-5e96-73f3d53d96b0@cnf.cornell.edu> Dear Colleagues: 2022 is the 45th anniversary year of the Cornell NanoScale Facility (CNF)! We are planning an extra special in-person annual meeting and celebration on Tuesday, October 18th. Many of our invited speakers have confirmed and are now listed online -- https://cnf.cornell.edu/events/annual_meeting/2022 -- and the day will conclude with a panel discussion of selected speakers and finally, the always popular Poster Session & Corporate Soiree. Please keep an eye on the site for more developments as we firm up our schedule and activities. Registration is now open online! Everyone is welcome and invited to attend this special day of presentations, panel discussions, posters galore, and of course, excellent food and even better company. Please join us in celebrating forty-five years of very small stuff..... Sincerely, Melanie-Claire -- :: Ms. Melanie-Claire Mallison Cornell NanoScale Facility (CNF) CNF Public Relations & Publications Associate CNF REU Program Coordinator Email: mallison at cnf.cornell.edu URL: http://www.cnf.cornell.edu/ Four ways to follow the CNF! https://cnf.cornell.edu/highlights/socialmedia -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From colwib2 at rpi.edu Mon Aug 15 11:00:52 2022 From: colwib2 at rpi.edu (Colwill, Bryant C.) Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2022 11:00:52 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] Equipment Expected Lifetime Message-ID: <831b223d-f7bc-e4d4-b3b8-65c539d574eb@rpi.edu> Hello All, Long time stalker, first time talker. As the title suggests, I'd like to hear some collective thoughts and experiences on expected equipment lifetimes. Obviously very dependent on what it is, what it does, who made it, who uses it, etc., etc. but in a very general sense when is the average piece of equipment (if there is such a thing) on borrowed time?? I'm sure we all have some decades old machines and that replacing them solely for modernization's sake would be considered financial malfeasance.? However, under a more manufacturing mindset a strategy for planned obsolescence is not a bad idea. To hopefully facilitate some replies/debate/conversation, here's my two cents: Metrology Equipment --> 5-10 years Processing Equipment --> 12-17 years Also took a quick age survey of our ~50 pieces of equipment and found the following distribution: If the pie chart graphic isn't visible:? 0 tools < 5years, 15 tools between 5 and 10 years, 17 tools between 5 and 10 years, 18 tools < 20 years Be well, Bryant Bryant Colwill RPI Cleanroom General Manager Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 110 8th Street, CII 6015 Troy, NY 12180 Ph: 518-276-3946 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: chZGgHhVnKp6eILE.png Type: image/png Size: 69099 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mmoneck at andrew.cmu.edu Tue Aug 16 15:06:40 2022 From: mmoneck at andrew.cmu.edu (Matthew Moneck) Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 15:06:40 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] Stainless Steel Tubing Message-ID: Hi All, We are having a very difficult time sourcing ?? stainless steel tubing for high purity process applications. We are looking for electropolished 316L stainless with an RA of 10 microinch or better. Many vendors do not have stock. Apparently a lot of vendors have been sourcing this material from South Korea, but they have reached their import limit for 2022. As a result, some vendors are stating tubing will not be available until 2023. Others are saying December or some time in Q4. Does anyone know of a potential vendor who may have stock? Best Regards, Matt -- *Matthew T. Moneck, Ph.D* Executive Director, Claire & John Bertucci Nanotechnology Laboratory Electrical & Computer Engineering | Carnegie Mellon University 5000 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890 Phone: 412-268-5430 ece.cmu.edu nanofab.ece.cmu.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From muhammadsajeerp32 at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 07:17:51 2022 From: muhammadsajeerp32 at gmail.com (Muhammad Sajeer p) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 16:47:51 +0530 Subject: [labnetwork] Suggestions for TEM 5mm Sample holder Message-ID: Hi, We are from the centre of nanoscience and engineering at the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore. We are looking for TEM sample holders that can accommodate 5mm samples which is compatible with TEM Titan themis. May I know if anyone have any suggestions for vendors or products who can supply the same? Sincerely, Muhammad Sajeer P PhD, CeNSE IISc Bangalore. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kovalev at magnet.fsu.edu Wed Aug 17 11:34:06 2022 From: kovalev at magnet.fsu.edu (Alexey Kovalev) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 11:34:06 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation Message-ID: <1923548185.734446.1660750446167.JavaMail.zimbra@magnet.fsu.edu> Hello All, We are thinking about e-beam evaporation of Lanthanum.Kurt Lesker recommends either tungsten or tantalum liner and I am wondering what could be the difference in this case. I also found out that Thermionics thinks that alumina liner will work as well. Could anybody please give a comment, either on evaporation of the lantanum, or on the liner material? Thank you very much Alexey -- Alexey Kovalev Assistant in Research A302 NHMFL FSU 1800 E. Paul Dirac Dr. Tallahassee , FL 32310-3706 kovalev at magnet.fsu.edu TEL:850-644-0861 FAX:850-644-5038 5161 706C 6127 From dbouillez at plasmaprocessgroup.com Wed Aug 17 17:26:14 2022 From: dbouillez at plasmaprocessgroup.com (dbouillez plasmaprocessgroup.com) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 21:26:14 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation In-Reply-To: <1923548185.734446.1660750446167.JavaMail.zimbra@magnet.fsu.edu> References: <1923548185.734446.1660750446167.JavaMail.zimbra@magnet.fsu.edu> Message-ID: Hello Alexey, I have several questions if you don't mind me asking: What gas environment do you intend to use for evaporation? What is the end product you are looking to produce with the use of this material? Are you looking for liners that allow for best adhesion of over spray? Or, looking at concerns with contamination from secondary deposition? I can't say that I have a background on this material, but I would be interested in knowing the use for this material if it can be disclosed. Thanks, Dan Dan Bouillez Plasma Process Group Sales dbouillez at plasmaprocessgroup.com PH? 970-663-6988 Cell 970-415-7259 PPG business hours Mon-Thurs 7 am to 5:30pm Mountain time -----Original Message----- From: labnetwork On Behalf Of Alexey Kovalev Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 9:34 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation Hello All, We are thinking about e-beam evaporation of Lanthanum.Kurt Lesker recommends either tungsten or tantalum liner and I am wondering what could be the difference in this case. I also found out that Thermionics thinks that alumina liner will work as well. Could anybody please give a comment, either on evaporation of the lantanum, or on the liner material? Thank you very much Alexey -- Alexey Kovalev Assistant in Research A302 NHMFL FSU 1800 E. Paul Dirac Dr. Tallahassee , FL 32310-3706 kovalev at magnet.fsu.edu TEL:850-644-0861 FAX:850-644-5038 5161 706C 6127 _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork From yakimom at sunypoly.edu Thu Aug 18 18:08:55 2022 From: yakimom at sunypoly.edu (Michael Yakimov) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2022 22:08:55 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation In-Reply-To: References: <1923548185.734446.1660750446167.JavaMail.zimbra@magnet.fsu.edu> Message-ID: From the general perspective... La is an active metal, it slowly oxidizes in the air. It is very feasible that it may react with carbon and form carbide, if melted in carbon crucible. So the way I read that crucible selection is "do not use carbon! Use something else". Yellow layer of Aluminum Carboide can become a problem with carbon crucible as well, so at least this is a feasible assumption. As an active metal, again, it will wet most other crucibles - I don't think that can be avoided. Density of Liquid La is somewhat below solid, but not too much - so I suspect it may be breaking crucibles like Al, so beware of ceramic ones. Otherwise, I would be looking at crucible price - those materials must be steep. If you have to justify the use of metal in evaporator, compare La with Al. It seem to be on the same page from e-beam deposition perspective. Thanks mike -----Original Message----- From: labnetwork On Behalf Of dbouillez plasmaprocessgroup.com Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 17:26 To: Alexey Kovalev ; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation Hello Alexey, I have several questions if you don't mind me asking: What gas environment do you intend to use for evaporation? What is the end product you are looking to produce with the use of this material? Are you looking for liners that allow for best adhesion of over spray? Or, looking at concerns with contamination from secondary deposition? I can't say that I have a background on this material, but I would be interested in knowing the use for this material if it can be disclosed. Thanks, Dan Dan Bouillez Plasma Process Group Sales dbouillez at plasmaprocessgroup.com PH? 970-663-6988 Cell 970-415-7259 PPG business hours Mon-Thurs 7 am to 5:30pm Mountain time -----Original Message----- From: labnetwork On Behalf Of Alexey Kovalev Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 9:34 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation Hello All, We are thinking about e-beam evaporation of Lanthanum.Kurt Lesker recommends either tungsten or tantalum liner and I am wondering what could be the difference in this case. I also found out that Thermionics thinks that alumina liner will work as well. Could anybody please give a comment, either on evaporation of the lantanum, or on the liner material? Thank you very much Alexey -- Alexey Kovalev Assistant in Research A302 NHMFL FSU 1800 E. Paul Dirac Dr. Tallahassee , FL 32310-3706 kovalev at magnet.fsu.edu TEL:850-644-0861 FAX:850-644-5038 5161 706C 6127 _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork From twangens at mail.usf.edu Fri Aug 19 09:09:28 2022 From: twangens at mail.usf.edu (Ted Wangensteen) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2022 08:09:28 -0500 Subject: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation In-Reply-To: References: <1923548185.734446.1660750446167.JavaMail.zimbra@magnet.fsu.edu> Message-ID: If C is a concern, you may consider SiC. I have no experience with that, but you could research that type. BR, Ted Wangensteen On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 7:19 PM Michael Yakimov wrote: > From the general perspective... > > La is an active metal, it slowly oxidizes in the air. It is very feasible > that it may react with carbon and form carbide, if melted in carbon > crucible. So the way I read that crucible selection is "do not use carbon! > Use something else". Yellow layer of Aluminum Carboide can become a problem > with carbon crucible as well, so at least this is a feasible assumption. > As an active metal, again, it will wet most other crucibles - I don't > think that can be avoided. Density of Liquid La is somewhat below solid, > but not too much - so I suspect it may be breaking crucibles like Al, so > beware of ceramic ones. Otherwise, I would be looking at crucible price - > those materials must be steep. > > If you have to justify the use of metal in evaporator, compare La with Al. > It seem to be on the same page from e-beam deposition perspective. > > Thanks > > mike > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: labnetwork On Behalf Of dbouillez > plasmaprocessgroup.com > Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 17:26 > To: Alexey Kovalev ; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation > > Hello Alexey, > > I have several questions if you don't mind me asking: > > What gas environment do you intend to use for evaporation? > What is the end product you are looking to produce with the use of this > material? > Are you looking for liners that allow for best adhesion of over spray? Or, > looking at concerns with contamination from secondary deposition? > > I can't say that I have a background on this material, but I would be > interested in knowing the use for this material if it can be disclosed. > > Thanks, > > Dan > > Dan Bouillez > Plasma Process Group > Sales > dbouillez at plasmaprocessgroup.com > PH 970-663-6988 > Cell 970-415-7259 > PPG business hours Mon-Thurs 7 am to 5:30pm Mountain time > > -----Original Message----- > From: labnetwork On Behalf Of Alexey > Kovalev > Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 9:34 AM > To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > Subject: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation > > Hello All, > We are thinking about e-beam evaporation of Lanthanum.Kurt Lesker > recommends either tungsten or tantalum liner and I am wondering what could > be the difference in this case. I also found out that Thermionics thinks > that alumina liner will work as well. > Could anybody please give a comment, either on evaporation of the > lantanum, or on the liner material? > Thank you very much > Alexey > > -- > Alexey Kovalev > Assistant in Research > A302 > NHMFL FSU > 1800 E. Paul Dirac Dr. > Tallahassee , FL 32310-3706 > kovalev at magnet.fsu.edu > TEL:850-644-0861 > FAX:850-644-5038 > > 5161 706C 6127 > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From yakimom at sunypoly.edu Fri Aug 19 09:59:29 2022 From: yakimom at sunypoly.edu (Michael Yakimov) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2022 13:59:29 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation In-Reply-To: References: <1923548185.734446.1660750446167.JavaMail.zimbra@magnet.fsu.edu> Message-ID: Are there commercially available SiC crucibles for e-beam? Never heard of those, and nothing at my usual suspects (Kamis, Lesker, Thermionics) nor on the first page of Google. And there is certainly carbide formation in Al+SiC system at temperatures used for evaporation. Iseki, T., Kameda, T. & Maruyama, T. Interfacial reactions between SiC and aluminium during joining. J Mater Sci 19, 1692?1698 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00563067 ________________________________ From: Ted Wangensteen Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 9:09:28 AM To: Michael Yakimov Cc: Alexey Kovalev ; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation If C is a concern, you may consider SiC. I have no experience with that, but you could research that type. BR, Ted Wangensteen On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 7:19 PM Michael Yakimov > wrote: From the general perspective... La is an active metal, it slowly oxidizes in the air. It is very feasible that it may react with carbon and form carbide, if melted in carbon crucible. So the way I read that crucible selection is "do not use carbon! Use something else". Yellow layer of Aluminum Carboide can become a problem with carbon crucible as well, so at least this is a feasible assumption. As an active metal, again, it will wet most other crucibles - I don't think that can be avoided. Density of Liquid La is somewhat below solid, but not too much - so I suspect it may be breaking crucibles like Al, so beware of ceramic ones. Otherwise, I would be looking at crucible price - those materials must be steep. If you have to justify the use of metal in evaporator, compare La with Al. It seem to be on the same page from e-beam deposition perspective. Thanks mike -----Original Message----- From: labnetwork > On Behalf Of dbouillez plasmaprocessgroup.com Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 17:26 To: Alexey Kovalev >; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation Hello Alexey, I have several questions if you don't mind me asking: What gas environment do you intend to use for evaporation? What is the end product you are looking to produce with the use of this material? Are you looking for liners that allow for best adhesion of over spray? Or, looking at concerns with contamination from secondary deposition? I can't say that I have a background on this material, but I would be interested in knowing the use for this material if it can be disclosed. Thanks, Dan Dan Bouillez Plasma Process Group Sales dbouillez at plasmaprocessgroup.com PH 970-663-6988 Cell 970-415-7259 PPG business hours Mon-Thurs 7 am to 5:30pm Mountain time -----Original Message----- From: labnetwork > On Behalf Of Alexey Kovalev Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 9:34 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation Hello All, We are thinking about e-beam evaporation of Lanthanum.Kurt Lesker recommends either tungsten or tantalum liner and I am wondering what could be the difference in this case. I also found out that Thermionics thinks that alumina liner will work as well. Could anybody please give a comment, either on evaporation of the lantanum, or on the liner material? Thank you very much Alexey -- Alexey Kovalev Assistant in Research A302 NHMFL FSU 1800 E. Paul Dirac Dr. Tallahassee , FL 32310-3706 kovalev at magnet.fsu.edu TEL:850-644-0861 FAX:850-644-5038 5161 706C 6127 _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From twangens at mail.usf.edu Fri Aug 19 10:06:20 2022 From: twangens at mail.usf.edu (Ted Wangensteen) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2022 09:06:20 -0500 Subject: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation In-Reply-To: References: <1923548185.734446.1660750446167.JavaMail.zimbra@magnet.fsu.edu> Message-ID: Again, I have no experience with the chemistry, and perhaps usual places do not carry SiC. However, I found this vendor - Perhaps something close to your size, or they can custom make something for your tool. https://www.lmine.com/silicon-carbide-sic-crucibles-c-1_2_98/#:~:text=Silicon%20Carbide%20(SiC)%20Crucibles%20are,base%20metals%2C%20and%20other%20products . Hope this might be helpful. BR, Ted On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 8:59 AM Michael Yakimov wrote: > Are there commercially available SiC crucibles for e-beam? Never heard of > those, and nothing at my usual suspects (Kamis, Lesker, Thermionics) nor on > the first page of Google. > > And there is certainly carbide formation in Al+SiC system at temperatures > used for evaporation. > > Iseki, T., Kameda, T. & Maruyama, T. Interfacial reactions between SiC and > aluminium during joining. *J Mater Sci* *19*, 1692?1698 (1984). > https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00563067 > > > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Ted Wangensteen > *Sent:* Friday, August 19, 2022 9:09:28 AM > *To:* Michael Yakimov > *Cc:* Alexey Kovalev ; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu < > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu> > *Subject:* Re: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation > > > > If C is a concern, you may consider SiC. > > I have no experience with that, but you could research that type. > > BR, > > Ted Wangensteen > > > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 7:19 PM Michael Yakimov > wrote: > > From the general perspective... > > La is an active metal, it slowly oxidizes in the air. It is very feasible > that it may react with carbon and form carbide, if melted in carbon > crucible. So the way I read that crucible selection is "do not use carbon! > Use something else". Yellow layer of Aluminum Carboide can become a problem > with carbon crucible as well, so at least this is a feasible assumption. > As an active metal, again, it will wet most other crucibles - I don't > think that can be avoided. Density of Liquid La is somewhat below solid, > but not too much - so I suspect it may be breaking crucibles like Al, so > beware of ceramic ones. Otherwise, I would be looking at crucible price - > those materials must be steep. > > If you have to justify the use of metal in evaporator, compare La with Al. > It seem to be on the same page from e-beam deposition perspective. > > Thanks > > mike > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: labnetwork On Behalf Of dbouillez > plasmaprocessgroup.com > Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 17:26 > To: Alexey Kovalev ; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation > > Hello Alexey, > > I have several questions if you don't mind me asking: > > What gas environment do you intend to use for evaporation? > What is the end product you are looking to produce with the use of this > material? > Are you looking for liners that allow for best adhesion of over spray? Or, > looking at concerns with contamination from secondary deposition? > > I can't say that I have a background on this material, but I would be > interested in knowing the use for this material if it can be disclosed. > > Thanks, > > Dan > > Dan Bouillez > Plasma Process Group > Sales > dbouillez at plasmaprocessgroup.com > PH 970-663-6988 > Cell 970-415-7259 > PPG business hours Mon-Thurs 7 am to 5:30pm Mountain time > > -----Original Message----- > From: labnetwork On Behalf Of Alexey > Kovalev > Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 9:34 AM > To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > Subject: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation > > Hello All, > We are thinking about e-beam evaporation of Lanthanum.Kurt Lesker > recommends either tungsten or tantalum liner and I am wondering what could > be the difference in this case. I also found out that Thermionics thinks > that alumina liner will work as well. > Could anybody please give a comment, either on evaporation of the > lantanum, or on the liner material? > Thank you very much > Alexey > > -- > Alexey Kovalev > Assistant in Research > A302 > NHMFL FSU > 1800 E. Paul Dirac Dr. > Tallahassee , FL 32310-3706 > kovalev at magnet.fsu.edu > TEL:850-644-0861 > FAX:850-644-5038 > > 5161 706C 6127 > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From yakimom at sunypoly.edu Fri Aug 19 10:26:16 2022 From: yakimom at sunypoly.edu (Michael Yakimov) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2022 14:26:16 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation In-Reply-To: References: <1923548185.734446.1660750446167.JavaMail.zimbra@magnet.fsu.edu> Message-ID: You may confuse the topic a bit. Those are general purpose crucibles. Once e-beam evaporation is mentioned, it is a pretty specific ? and different - product type. While ?crucible? is a common term used for those, ?hearth liners? is a more precise one if confusion has to be avoided. Frankly speaking, even original question from Alexey used the term ?liner?; my fault in switching to lab slang. For example: https://thermionics.com/product-category/e-guns/crucible-liners/ And those have to be machined to a pretty precise dimension and surface finish, unlike regular furnace crucibles.. From: Ted Wangensteen Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 10:06 To: Michael Yakimov Cc: Alexey Kovalev ; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation Again, I have no experience with the chemistry, and perhaps usual places do not carry SiC. However, I found this vendor - Perhaps something close to your size, or they can custom make something for your tool. https://www.lmine.com/silicon-carbide-sic-crucibles-c-1_2_98/#:~:text=Silicon%20Carbide%20(SiC)%20Crucibles%20are,base%20metals%2C%20and%20other%20products. Hope this might be helpful. BR, Ted On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 8:59 AM Michael Yakimov > wrote: Are there commercially available SiC crucibles for e-beam? Never heard of those, and nothing at my usual suspects (Kamis, Lesker, Thermionics) nor on the first page of Google. And there is certainly carbide formation in Al+SiC system at temperatures used for evaporation. Iseki, T., Kameda, T. & Maruyama, T. Interfacial reactions between SiC and aluminium during joining. J Mater Sci 19, 1692?1698 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00563067 ________________________________ From: Ted Wangensteen > Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 9:09:28 AM To: Michael Yakimov > Cc: Alexey Kovalev >; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation If C is a concern, you may consider SiC. I have no experience with that, but you could research that type. BR, Ted Wangensteen On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 7:19 PM Michael Yakimov > wrote: From the general perspective... La is an active metal, it slowly oxidizes in the air. It is very feasible that it may react with carbon and form carbide, if melted in carbon crucible. So the way I read that crucible selection is "do not use carbon! Use something else". Yellow layer of Aluminum Carboide can become a problem with carbon crucible as well, so at least this is a feasible assumption. As an active metal, again, it will wet most other crucibles - I don't think that can be avoided. Density of Liquid La is somewhat below solid, but not too much - so I suspect it may be breaking crucibles like Al, so beware of ceramic ones. Otherwise, I would be looking at crucible price - those materials must be steep. If you have to justify the use of metal in evaporator, compare La with Al. It seem to be on the same page from e-beam deposition perspective. Thanks mike -----Original Message----- From: labnetwork > On Behalf Of dbouillez plasmaprocessgroup.com Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 17:26 To: Alexey Kovalev >; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation Hello Alexey, I have several questions if you don't mind me asking: What gas environment do you intend to use for evaporation? What is the end product you are looking to produce with the use of this material? Are you looking for liners that allow for best adhesion of over spray? Or, looking at concerns with contamination from secondary deposition? I can't say that I have a background on this material, but I would be interested in knowing the use for this material if it can be disclosed. Thanks, Dan Dan Bouillez Plasma Process Group Sales dbouillez at plasmaprocessgroup.com PH 970-663-6988 Cell 970-415-7259 PPG business hours Mon-Thurs 7 am to 5:30pm Mountain time -----Original Message----- From: labnetwork > On Behalf Of Alexey Kovalev Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 9:34 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation Hello All, We are thinking about e-beam evaporation of Lanthanum.Kurt Lesker recommends either tungsten or tantalum liner and I am wondering what could be the difference in this case. I also found out that Thermionics thinks that alumina liner will work as well. Could anybody please give a comment, either on evaporation of the lantanum, or on the liner material? Thank you very much Alexey -- Alexey Kovalev Assistant in Research A302 NHMFL FSU 1800 E. Paul Dirac Dr. Tallahassee , FL 32310-3706 kovalev at magnet.fsu.edu TEL:850-644-0861 FAX:850-644-5038 5161 706C 6127 _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From twangens at mail.usf.edu Fri Aug 19 11:31:26 2022 From: twangens at mail.usf.edu (Ted Wangensteen) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2022 10:31:26 -0500 Subject: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation In-Reply-To: References: <1923548185.734446.1660750446167.JavaMail.zimbra@magnet.fsu.edu> Message-ID: OK, guess the product doesn't exist yet. Perhaps Lesker or other will up their game. BR, Ted On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 9:26 AM Michael Yakimov wrote: > You may confuse the topic a bit. Those are general purpose crucibles. Once > e-beam evaporation is mentioned, it is a pretty specific ? and different - > product type. While ?crucible? is a common term used for those, ?hearth > liners? is a more precise one if confusion has to be avoided. Frankly > speaking, even original question from Alexey used the term ?liner?; my > fault in switching to lab slang. > > For example: > https://thermionics.com/product-category/e-guns/crucible-liners/ > > And those have to be machined to a pretty precise dimension and surface > finish, unlike regular furnace crucibles.. > > > > *From:* Ted Wangensteen > *Sent:* Friday, August 19, 2022 10:06 > *To:* Michael Yakimov > *Cc:* Alexey Kovalev ; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > *Subject:* Re: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation > > > > Again, I have no experience with the chemistry, and perhaps usual places > do not carry SiC. > > > > However, I found this vendor - Perhaps something close to your size, or > they can custom make something for your tool. > > > > > https://www.lmine.com/silicon-carbide-sic-crucibles-c-1_2_98/#:~:text=Silicon%20Carbide%20(SiC)%20Crucibles%20are,base%20metals%2C%20and%20other%20products > . > > > > Hope this might be helpful. > > BR, > > Ted > > > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 8:59 AM Michael Yakimov > wrote: > > Are there commercially available SiC crucibles for e-beam? Never heard of > those, and nothing at my usual suspects (Kamis, Lesker, Thermionics) nor on > the first page of Google. > > And there is certainly carbide formation in Al+SiC system at temperatures > used for evaporation. > > Iseki, T., Kameda, T. & Maruyama, T. Interfacial reactions between SiC and > aluminium during joining. *J Mater Sci* *19*, 1692?1698 (1984). > https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00563067 > > > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Ted Wangensteen > *Sent:* Friday, August 19, 2022 9:09:28 AM > *To:* Michael Yakimov > *Cc:* Alexey Kovalev ; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu < > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu> > *Subject:* Re: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation > > > > If C is a concern, you may consider SiC. > > I have no experience with that, but you could research that type. > > BR, > > Ted Wangensteen > > > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 7:19 PM Michael Yakimov > wrote: > > From the general perspective... > > La is an active metal, it slowly oxidizes in the air. It is very feasible > that it may react with carbon and form carbide, if melted in carbon > crucible. So the way I read that crucible selection is "do not use carbon! > Use something else". Yellow layer of Aluminum Carboide can become a problem > with carbon crucible as well, so at least this is a feasible assumption. > As an active metal, again, it will wet most other crucibles - I don't > think that can be avoided. Density of Liquid La is somewhat below solid, > but not too much - so I suspect it may be breaking crucibles like Al, so > beware of ceramic ones. Otherwise, I would be looking at crucible price - > those materials must be steep. > > If you have to justify the use of metal in evaporator, compare La with Al. > It seem to be on the same page from e-beam deposition perspective. > > Thanks > > mike > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: labnetwork On Behalf Of dbouillez > plasmaprocessgroup.com > Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 17:26 > To: Alexey Kovalev ; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation > > Hello Alexey, > > I have several questions if you don't mind me asking: > > What gas environment do you intend to use for evaporation? > What is the end product you are looking to produce with the use of this > material? > Are you looking for liners that allow for best adhesion of over spray? Or, > looking at concerns with contamination from secondary deposition? > > I can't say that I have a background on this material, but I would be > interested in knowing the use for this material if it can be disclosed. > > Thanks, > > Dan > > Dan Bouillez > Plasma Process Group > Sales > dbouillez at plasmaprocessgroup.com > PH 970-663-6988 > Cell 970-415-7259 > PPG business hours Mon-Thurs 7 am to 5:30pm Mountain time > > -----Original Message----- > From: labnetwork On Behalf Of Alexey > Kovalev > Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 9:34 AM > To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > Subject: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation > > Hello All, > We are thinking about e-beam evaporation of Lanthanum.Kurt Lesker > recommends either tungsten or tantalum liner and I am wondering what could > be the difference in this case. I also found out that Thermionics thinks > that alumina liner will work as well. > Could anybody please give a comment, either on evaporation of the > lantanum, or on the liner material? > Thank you very much > Alexey > > -- > Alexey Kovalev > Assistant in Research > A302 > NHMFL FSU > 1800 E. Paul Dirac Dr. > Tallahassee , FL 32310-3706 > kovalev at magnet.fsu.edu > TEL:850-644-0861 > FAX:850-644-5038 > > 5161 706C 6127 > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From joseph.losby at ucalgary.ca Fri Aug 19 12:18:17 2022 From: joseph.losby at ucalgary.ca (Joseph Losby) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2022 16:18:17 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Equipment Expected Lifetime In-Reply-To: <831b223d-f7bc-e4d4-b3b8-65c539d574eb@rpi.edu> References: <831b223d-f7bc-e4d4-b3b8-65c539d574eb@rpi.edu> Message-ID: Hi Bryant, this is very helpful, especially to those like me starting out in the field. In my opinion, it would be quite informative to get expected lifetimes of specific tools (perhaps even including models) as well. How long does a plasma etcher, or electron beam lithography tool, generally last (for example)? Cheers, Joe ________________________________ From: labnetwork on behalf of Colwill, Bryant C. Sent: August 15, 2022 9:00 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: [labnetwork] Equipment Expected Lifetime [?EXTERNAL] Hello All, Long time stalker, first time talker. As the title suggests, I'd like to hear some collective thoughts and experiences on expected equipment lifetimes. Obviously very dependent on what it is, what it does, who made it, who uses it, etc., etc. but in a very general sense when is the average piece of equipment (if there is such a thing) on borrowed time? I'm sure we all have some decades old machines and that replacing them solely for modernization's sake would be considered financial malfeasance. However, under a more manufacturing mindset a strategy for planned obsolescence is not a bad idea. To hopefully facilitate some replies/debate/conversation, here's my two cents: Metrology Equipment --> 5-10 years Processing Equipment --> 12-17 years Also took a quick age survey of our ~50 pieces of equipment and found the following distribution: [cid:part1.ZHud0TOf.NGkXVVJ4 at rpi.edu] If the pie chart graphic isn't visible: 0 tools < 5years, 15 tools between 5 and 10 years, 17 tools between 5 and 10 years, 18 tools < 20 years Be well, Bryant Bryant Colwill RPI Cleanroom General Manager Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 110 8th Street, CII 6015 Troy, NY 12180 Ph: 518-276-3946 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: chZGgHhVnKp6eILE.png Type: image/png Size: 69099 bytes Desc: chZGgHhVnKp6eILE.png URL: From bgila at ufl.edu Fri Aug 19 13:00:11 2022 From: bgila at ufl.edu (Gila,Brent P) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2022 13:00:11 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation In-Reply-To: References: <1923548185.734446.1660750446167.JavaMail.zimbra@magnet.fsu.edu> Message-ID: <27812d8b-8131-0efc-b059-07d992d5d2bb@ufl.edu> We have had great success with Sage. https://www.sage4sales.com/products/crucible-liners? They are very helpful/knowledgeable and they also supply crucible shims so you can get more heat out of your system at lower e-gun powers.? A plus for some materials. Best Regards, Brent On 8/19/2022 11:31 AM, Ted Wangensteen wrote: > *[External Email]* > > OK, guess the product doesn't exist yet. > > Perhaps Lesker or other will up their game. > > BR, > Ted > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 9:26 AM Michael Yakimov > wrote: > > You may confuse the topic a bit. Those are general purpose > crucibles. Once e-beam evaporation is mentioned, it is a pretty > specific ? and different - product type. While ?crucible? is a > common term used for those, ?hearth liners? ?is a more precise one > if confusion has to be avoided. ??Frankly speaking, even original > question from Alexey used the term ?liner?; my fault in switching > to lab slang. > > For example: > https://thermionics.com/product-category/e-guns/crucible-liners/ > > > And those have to be machined to a pretty precise dimension and > surface finish, unlike regular furnace crucibles.. > > *From:* Ted Wangensteen > *Sent:* Friday, August 19, 2022 10:06 > *To:* Michael Yakimov > *Cc:* Alexey Kovalev ; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > *Subject:* Re: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation > > Again, I have no experience with the chemistry, and perhaps usual > places do not carry SiC. > > However, I found this vendor - Perhaps something?close to your > size, or they can custom make something for your tool. > > https://www.lmine.com/silicon-carbide-sic-crucibles-c-1_2_98/#:~:text=Silicon%20Carbide%20(SiC)%20Crucibles%20are,base%20metals%2C%20and%20other%20products > . > > Hope this might be helpful. > > BR, > > Ted > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 8:59 AM Michael Yakimov > wrote: > > Are there commercially available SiC crucibles for e-beam? > Never heard of those, and nothing at my usual suspects (Kamis, > Lesker, Thermionics) nor on the first page of Google. > > And there is certainly carbide formation in Al+SiC system at > temperatures used for evaporation. > > Iseki, T., Kameda, T. & Maruyama, T. Interfacial reactions > between SiC and aluminium during joining. /J Mater Sci/ *19*, > 1692?1698 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00563067 > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:*Ted Wangensteen > *Sent:* Friday, August 19, 2022 9:09:28 AM > *To:* Michael Yakimov > *Cc:* Alexey Kovalev ; > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > *Subject:* Re: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation > > If C is a concern, you may consider SiC. > > I have no experience with that, but you could research that type. > > BR, > > Ted Wangensteen > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 7:19 PM Michael Yakimov > wrote: > > From the general perspective... > > La is an active metal, it slowly oxidizes in the air. It > is very feasible that it may react with carbon and form > carbide, if melted in carbon crucible. So the way I read > that crucible selection is "do not use carbon! Use > something else". Yellow layer of Aluminum Carboide can > become a problem with carbon crucible as well, so at least > this is a feasible assumption. > As an active metal, again, it will wet most other > crucibles - I don't think that can be avoided. Density of > Liquid La is somewhat? below solid, but not too much - so > I suspect it may be breaking crucibles like Al, so beware > of ceramic ones. Otherwise, I would be looking at crucible > price - those materials must be steep. > > If you have to justify the use of metal in evaporator, > compare La with Al. It seem to be on the same page from > e-beam deposition perspective. > > Thanks > > mike > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: labnetwork On > Behalf Of dbouillez plasmaprocessgroup.com > > Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 17:26 > To: Alexey Kovalev ; > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation > > Hello Alexey, > > I have several questions if you don't mind me asking: > > What gas environment do you intend to use for evaporation? > What is the end product you are looking to produce with > the use of this material? > Are you looking for liners that allow for best adhesion of > over spray? Or, looking at concerns with contamination > from secondary deposition? > > I can't say that I have a background on this material, but > I would be interested in knowing the use for this material > if it can be disclosed. > > Thanks, > > Dan > > Dan Bouillez > Plasma Process Group > Sales > dbouillez at plasmaprocessgroup.com > PH? 970-663-6988 > Cell 970-415-7259 > PPG business hours Mon-Thurs 7 am to 5:30pm Mountain time > > -----Original Message----- > From: labnetwork On > Behalf Of Alexey Kovalev > Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 9:34 AM > To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > Subject: [labnetwork] Lantanum evaporation > > Hello All, > We are thinking about e-beam evaporation of Lanthanum.Kurt > Lesker recommends either tungsten or tantalum liner and I > am wondering what could be the difference in this case. I > also found out that Thermionics thinks that alumina liner > will work as well. > Could anybody please? give a comment, either on > evaporation of the lantanum, or on the liner material? > Thank you very much > Alexey > > -- > Alexey Kovalev > Assistant in Research > A302 > NHMFL FSU > 1800 E. Paul Dirac Dr. > Tallahassee , FL 32310-3706 > kovalev at magnet.fsu.edu > TEL:850-644-0861 > FAX:850-644-5038 > > 5161 706C 6127 > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > > > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bill_flounders at berkeley.edu Fri Aug 19 16:45:49 2022 From: bill_flounders at berkeley.edu (Albert William (Bill) Flounders) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2022 13:45:49 -0700 Subject: [labnetwork] Equipment Expected Lifetime In-Reply-To: References: <831b223d-f7bc-e4d4-b3b8-65c539d574eb@rpi.edu> Message-ID: All, I don't want to discourage this conversation but will state what I suspect many are thinking. Our facilities are seldom able to follow guidelines or lifetime expectancy models. We keep these tools running as long as we can, then we rebuild them. Or we offer them to our colleagues on the network, who usually snap them up regardless of age. I look forward to making our own equipment age pie chart, but I don't commit to sharing it. I'll end with anecdote - we have a bell jar thermal evaporator with a 1962 property sticker on it. The diffusion pump was replaced with a good new cryo (several times), the power supply upgraded to a digital controller, a new QCM installed, foreline has been rebuilt many times. It's a workhorse and is used several times a week. When we celebrated the tool's 50th birthday in 2012, I asked the retired Dean to say a few words and he told us, "Well the first thing I can tell you about that tool is, We bought it used!" Regards to all, Bill Flounders UC Berkeley On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 9:24 AM Joseph Losby wrote: > Hi Bryant, this is very helpful, especially to those like me starting out > in the field. In my opinion, it would be quite informative to get expected > lifetimes of specific tools (perhaps even including models) as well. How > long does a plasma etcher, or electron beam lithography tool, generally > last (for example)? > > Cheers, > Joe > ------------------------------ > *From:* labnetwork on behalf of Colwill, > Bryant C. > *Sent:* August 15, 2022 9:00 AM > *To:* labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > *Subject:* [labnetwork] Equipment Expected Lifetime > > [?EXTERNAL] > > Hello All, > > Long time stalker, first time talker. > As the title suggests, I'd like to hear some collective thoughts and > experiences on expected equipment lifetimes. > Obviously very dependent on what it is, what it does, who made it, who > uses it, etc., etc. but in a very general sense when is the average piece > of equipment (if there is such a thing) on borrowed time? I'm sure we all > have some decades old machines and that replacing them solely for > modernization's sake would be considered financial malfeasance. However, > under a more manufacturing mindset a strategy for planned obsolescence is > not a bad idea. > > To hopefully facilitate some replies/debate/conversation, here's my two > cents: > > Metrology Equipment --> 5-10 years > Processing Equipment --> 12-17 years > > Also took a quick age survey of our ~50 pieces of equipment and found the > following distribution: > > > > If the pie chart graphic isn't visible: 0 tools < 5years, 15 tools > between 5 and 10 years, 17 tools between 5 and 10 years, 18 tools < 20 years > > Be well, > Bryant > > Bryant Colwill > RPI Cleanroom General Manager > Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute > 110 8th Street, CII 6015 > Troy, NY 12180 > Ph: 518-276-3946 > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: chZGgHhVnKp6eILE.png Type: image/png Size: 69099 bytes Desc: not available URL: From shimonel at savion.huji.ac.il Sat Aug 20 03:14:38 2022 From: shimonel at savion.huji.ac.il (Shimon Eliav) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2022 07:14:38 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Equipment Expected Lifetime In-Reply-To: References: <831b223d-f7bc-e4d4-b3b8-65c539d574eb@rpi.edu> Message-ID: Hi Bill and all Labnetwork, Your reply was just what I was thinking: it is possible to going on with a system indefinitely if you have spare parts. In the case of that veteran evaporator, in fact it is just a "skeleton" you can connect any parts you want, but more complex machines with specific parts (electronic boards, PLCs and even some mechanical parts) once spare parts are not available anymore, the machine?s fate is sealed. In the best scenario it will be cannibalized. I must say a word about equipment manufacturers: it is important to purchase, if possible, from solid companies with a big number of machines installed all over the world. It expands the possibility of finding spare parts, even after many years of use. I have an anecdote of my own, not so good as Bill?s, but it goes like this: we have an optical profiler from Bruker, originally Veeco, running for 11 years already. The motorized translation stage failed. We ordered a replacement, but once it arrived, it was not compatible with the old hardware. After a huge effort from many people around the world, Bruker sent us an old, refurbished stage. We immediately installed it, but the happiness was short: it also failed after some days of use. Without any other options, I disabled both stages and combined the parts to make one that worked. After this I started the purchase process of a new optical profiler: it is just a matter of time till the next repair crisis for that profiler. Our facility is not so old, we are running for only 15 years. This is our situation: * Hoods and workbenches * They are ?eternal?, if you have people to maintain them. * Hot plates, spinners and other parts must be replaced or refurbished every ten years. * Thin film process machines * Evaporators and Sputtering - after 15 years of use, we keep they running with spare parts in house to minimize downtime. Their manufacturer is an Israeli company, what facilitates their maintenance. We already replaced almost everything: power supply, computer, moving parts, deposition controller, cry pump, etc. * ICP/RIE and PECVD Systems - periodical preventive maintenance and in house spare parts keep they running. Oxford already declared there is not PLC spare parts for these machines. So, we are planning to replace them in the next years. We have spare turbo and rough pumps. * Others (RTA, ALD, Furnaces, Plasmas Ashers) - less than 15 years of use and still running, while we have spare parts. * Lithography Systems * E-beam System - the first machine runned for 12 years. It could be kept it running, but it was technologically outdated. We have a new one for the last three years with outstanding results. * Laser Writer - after 11 years of use we refurbished the original system, gaining resolution, speed, and repeatability in the process. Again, it is only possible, if the manufacturer is alive and running. * Mask Aligner - well, this machine has a lot of delicate mechanical parts, that only the manufacturer can supply for astronomical prices. After 15 years of use and several repairs, we are planning to purchase a new one in the next years. * Characterization Systems * In general the manufacturer must keep spare parts for at least 7 years. After this, it is a matter of luck. Again, the number of installed machines is important. * We have an old stylus profiler, Veeco DekTak 150. Once we received the announcement from Bruker that they discontinued this model and there were no more spare parts were available, we ordered a new DekTak XT. So far both machines are running and I already did some ?creative? maintenance on the DekTak 150 to keep it going. * Microsoft Windows version is a problem for this kind of systems and sometimes determine their lifetimes. * My general approach for these systems is to keep them going as much as possible and when they are obsolete or without spare parts, to order another one to work in parallel, if you have enough space for both. That is my ?two cents? on this matter. Regards, Shimon Dr. Shimon Eliav The Hebrew University of Jerusalem The Unit for Nano Fabrication Campus Givat Ram - Jerusalem - Israel ________________________________ From: labnetwork on behalf of Albert William (Bill) Flounders Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 11:45:49 PM To: Joseph Losby Cc: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Equipment Expected Lifetime All, I don't want to discourage this conversation but will state what I suspect many are thinking. Our facilities are seldom able to follow guidelines or lifetime expectancy models. We keep these tools running as long as we can, then we rebuild them. Or we offer them to our colleagues on the network, who usually snap them up regardless of age. I look forward to making our own equipment age pie chart, but I don't commit to sharing it. I'll end with anecdote - we have a bell jar thermal evaporator with a 1962 property sticker on it. The diffusion pump was replaced with a good new cryo (several times), the power supply upgraded to a digital controller, a new QCM installed, foreline has been rebuilt many times. It's a workhorse and is used several times a week. When we celebrated the tool's 50th birthday in 2012, I asked the retired Dean to say a few words and he told us, "Well the first thing I can tell you about that tool is, We bought it used!" Regards to all, Bill Flounders UC Berkeley On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 9:24 AM Joseph Losby > wrote: Hi Bryant, this is very helpful, especially to those like me starting out in the field. In my opinion, it would be quite informative to get expected lifetimes of specific tools (perhaps even including models) as well. How long does a plasma etcher, or electron beam lithography tool, generally last (for example)? Cheers, Joe ________________________________ From: labnetwork > on behalf of Colwill, Bryant C. > Sent: August 15, 2022 9:00 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > Subject: [labnetwork] Equipment Expected Lifetime [?EXTERNAL] Hello All, Long time stalker, first time talker. As the title suggests, I'd like to hear some collective thoughts and experiences on expected equipment lifetimes. Obviously very dependent on what it is, what it does, who made it, who uses it, etc., etc. but in a very general sense when is the average piece of equipment (if there is such a thing) on borrowed time? I'm sure we all have some decades old machines and that replacing them solely for modernization's sake would be considered financial malfeasance. However, under a more manufacturing mindset a strategy for planned obsolescence is not a bad idea. To hopefully facilitate some replies/debate/conversation, here's my two cents: Metrology Equipment --> 5-10 years Processing Equipment --> 12-17 years Also took a quick age survey of our ~50 pieces of equipment and found the following distribution: [cid:182b7cd73642faf1c1c1] If the pie chart graphic isn't visible: 0 tools < 5years, 15 tools between 5 and 10 years, 17 tools between 5 and 10 years, 18 tools < 20 years Be well, Bryant Bryant Colwill RPI Cleanroom General Manager Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 110 8th Street, CII 6015 Troy, NY 12180 Ph: 518-276-3946 _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: chZGgHhVnKp6eILE.png Type: image/png Size: 69099 bytes Desc: chZGgHhVnKp6eILE.png URL: From yakimom at sunypoly.edu Sat Aug 20 10:09:49 2022 From: yakimom at sunypoly.edu (Michael Yakimov) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2022 14:09:49 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Equipment Expected Lifetime In-Reply-To: References: <831b223d-f7bc-e4d4-b3b8-65c539d574eb@rpi.edu> Message-ID: Pretty much agree with Shimon. The simpler and more modular system may have an infinite lifetime (although ship of theseus comes to mind). Something more delicate and automated&computerized may be more difficult to deal with. Life limiting issues from my perspective: 1. Computers. You may have a perfectly functional machine with computer which used to run software on MS-DOS 6.2 ? and now hard drive failed, no replacement or backup (MAKE SURE EVERYTHING IS BACKED UP!); ISA cards cannot go into any newer pc, AT power supplies all have dry capacitors since the newest one was made in 1997. If you are lucky, the vendor is willing to a refurbish to a newest generation of PC and software for just 5x your annual budget. Can also be as simple as a battery in PLC real time clock as well; it has 8 years design life ? and you run for 10 already?. 2. Vendor support. Many vendors are reluctant to support older equipment. Some simple things you may fix from general experience. E-beam litho is 100% dependent on vendor. There are no circuit diagrams supplied anymore, so if some electronics fails ? and _that_ guy at vendor is retired, you?re SOL, even if they are willing to work with you. Agilent/Keysight used to require expensive support contract for anything and everything, even if the fix was one line of text, like ?restart with switch 1 set to ON?. Newer things tend to be even worse in that respect. 3. An obsolete component with no replacement option may ruin things. Pretty unpredictable situation all over. We had a chance to get a donation of a certain machine; vendor advised there are 3 irreplaceable components in those. Once any of them fails ? it?s a full stop. Well, thank you, we?re not taking it, we know why original owner went for an upgrade. I know auto industry requires 10 year support commitment for parts vendors, and that is a huge thing. Equipment components support may not last that long. 4. Those are hard stops. There are softer stops, which are still harsh. 1. Seals. Elastomer, such as Viton seals, do age. At some point vacuum starts leaking randomly. An overhaul with total replacement may be quite an effort. IF this is a seal between two major parts, you may have to talk crane lift and full realignment. 2. Pumps - as one of most expensive replaceable components. Usually more or less interchangeable, unless comms are involved. Failed pump is an expensive problem, and you may have to take a choice of significant investment into an old machine vs write off. + Thanks mike From: labnetwork On Behalf Of Joseph Losby Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 12:18 To: Colwill, Bryant C. ; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Equipment Expected Lifetime Hi Bryant, this is very helpful, especially to those like me starting out in the field. In my opinion, it would be quite informative to get expected lifetimes of specific tools (perhaps even including models) as well. How long does a plasma etcher, or electron beam lithography tool, generally last (for example)? Cheers, Joe ________________________________ From: labnetwork > on behalf of Colwill, Bryant C. > Sent: August 15, 2022 9:00 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > Subject: [labnetwork] Equipment Expected Lifetime [?EXTERNAL] Hello All, Long time stalker, first time talker. As the title suggests, I'd like to hear some collective thoughts and experiences on expected equipment lifetimes. Obviously very dependent on what it is, what it does, who made it, who uses it, etc., etc. but in a very general sense when is the average piece of equipment (if there is such a thing) on borrowed time? I'm sure we all have some decades old machines and that replacing them solely for modernization's sake would be considered financial malfeasance. However, under a more manufacturing mindset a strategy for planned obsolescence is not a bad idea. To hopefully facilitate some replies/debate/conversation, here's my two cents: Metrology Equipment --> 5-10 years Processing Equipment --> 12-17 years Also took a quick age survey of our ~50 pieces of equipment and found the following distribution: [cid:image001.png at 01D8B3C7.1DF8AD50] If the pie chart graphic isn't visible: 0 tools < 5years, 15 tools between 5 and 10 years, 17 tools between 5 and 10 years, 18 tools < 20 years Be well, Bryant Bryant Colwill RPI Cleanroom General Manager Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 110 8th Street, CII 6015 Troy, NY 12180 Ph: 518-276-3946 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 69099 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: From david.harris at plasmatherm.com Mon Aug 22 14:36:58 2022 From: david.harris at plasmatherm.com (Harris, David (Plasma-Therm LLC)) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 18:36:58 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] FW: Equipment Expected Lifetime In-Reply-To: References: <831b223d-f7bc-e4d4-b3b8-65c539d574eb@rpi.edu> Message-ID: In response to obsolete control electronics and software, Plasma-Therm has developed field upgrades for more than 15 product lines, with hundreds of systems upgraded globally*. Upgrades are available for Plasma-Therm brands and acquired products from as far back as the early 1990s. Upgrades include the Cortex control system, which Plasma-Therm supplies on all new systems. Cortex is a modern control system with a SEMI-standard, intuitive user interface. It provides process control, intelligent automation, error avoidance, alarm recovery, and in-program help. It runs on the latest Windows operating system on field-proven Industrial PCs. After upgrading, equipment from even the early 1990s can gain potentially decades of useful productivity. * Product lines include Apex, Vision, 790, SLR, 7000, LAPECVD, Corial, Kayen, Odyssey HDRF, QuaZar, Kobus F.A.S.T., Mask Etcher, Singulator 100, Singulator 300, Shuttleline, Tegal RIE, Versaline, Versalock) Regards, David Harris Business Development Manager - Universities and R&D [cid:image001.png at 01D8B62A.3291B080] phone +1.215.321.1037 mobile +1.727.370.3947 David.Harris at plasmatherm.com | www.plasmatherm.com 10050 16th St. North | St. Petersburg, FL 33716 USA [Text Description automatically generated] From: labnetwork > On Behalf Of Michael Yakimov Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2022 10:10 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Equipment Expected Lifetime CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Pretty much agree with Shimon. The simpler and more modular system may have an infinite lifetime (although ship of theseus comes to mind). Something more delicate and automated&computerized may be more difficult to deal with. Life limiting issues from my perspective: 1. Computers. You may have a perfectly functional machine with computer which used to run software on MS-DOS 6.2 - and now hard drive failed, no replacement or backup (MAKE SURE EVERYTHING IS BACKED UP!); ISA cards cannot go into any newer pc, AT power supplies all have dry capacitors since the newest one was made in 1997. If you are lucky, the vendor is willing to a refurbish to a newest generation of PC and software for just 5x your annual budget. Can also be as simple as a battery in PLC real time clock as well; it has 8 years design life - and you run for 10 already?. 2. Vendor support. Many vendors are reluctant to support older equipment. Some simple things you may fix from general experience. E-beam litho is 100% dependent on vendor. There are no circuit diagrams supplied anymore, so if some electronics fails - and _that_ guy at vendor is retired, you?re SOL, even if they are willing to work with you. Agilent/Keysight used to require expensive support contract for anything and everything, even if the fix was one line of text, like ?restart with switch 1 set to ON?. Newer things tend to be even worse in that respect. 3. An obsolete component with no replacement option may ruin things. Pretty unpredictable situation all over. We had a chance to get a donation of a certain machine; vendor advised there are 3 irreplaceable components in those. Once any of them fails - it?s a full stop. Well, thank you, we?re not taking it, we know why original owner went for an upgrade. I know auto industry requires 10 year support commitment for parts vendors, and that is a huge thing. Equipment components support may not last that long. 4. Those are hard stops. There are softer stops, which are still harsh. 1. Seals. Elastomer, such as Viton seals, do age. At some point vacuum starts leaking randomly. An overhaul with total replacement may be quite an effort. IF this is a seal between two major parts, you may have to talk crane lift and full realignment. 2. Pumps - as one of most expensive replaceable components. Usually more or less interchangeable, unless comms are involved. Failed pump is an expensive problem, and you may have to take a choice of significant investment into an old machine vs write off. + Thanks mike From: labnetwork > On Behalf Of Joseph Losby Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 12:18 To: Colwill, Bryant C. >; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Equipment Expected Lifetime Hi Bryant, this is very helpful, especially to those like me starting out in the field. In my opinion, it would be quite informative to get expected lifetimes of specific tools (perhaps even including models) as well. How long does a plasma etcher, or electron beam lithography tool, generally last (for example)? Cheers, Joe ________________________________ From: labnetwork > on behalf of Colwill, Bryant C. > Sent: August 15, 2022 9:00 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > Subject: [labnetwork] Equipment Expected Lifetime [?EXTERNAL] Hello All, Long time stalker, first time talker. As the title suggests, I'd like to hear some collective thoughts and experiences on expected equipment lifetimes. Obviously very dependent on what it is, what it does, who made it, who uses it, etc., etc. but in a very general sense when is the average piece of equipment (if there is such a thing) on borrowed time? I'm sure we all have some decades old machines and that replacing them solely for modernization's sake would be considered financial malfeasance. However, under a more manufacturing mindset a strategy for planned obsolescence is not a bad idea. To hopefully facilitate some replies/debate/conversation, here's my two cents: Metrology Equipment --> 5-10 years Processing Equipment --> 12-17 years Also took a quick age survey of our ~50 pieces of equipment and found the following distribution: [cid:image001.png at 01D8B3C7.1DF8AD50] If the pie chart graphic isn't visible: 0 tools < 5years, 15 tools between 5 and 10 years, 17 tools between 5 and 10 years, 18 tools < 20 years Be well, Bryant Bryant Colwill RPI Cleanroom General Manager Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 110 8th Street, CII 6015 Troy, NY 12180 Ph: 518-276-3946 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 4851 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 55044 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: From pete at creatvmicrotech.com Tue Aug 23 13:43:47 2022 From: pete at creatvmicrotech.com (Pete Amstutz) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2022 17:43:47 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Surplus vacuum equipment available Message-ID: I am a '67 EE graduate. My company has some surplus vacuum equipment: a vacuum chamber, vacuum pump, and some instrumentation. It's at least 20 years old and has not been used during that time. A friend recently told me that this network would be a way to find someone who could use this kind of thing. Pete Amstutz, VP Creatv MicroTech, Inc. 11609 Lake Potomac Drive Potomac, MD 20854 Tel 301-983-2553 Cell 240-441-3411 If you are not the intended recipient, please notify sender by return e-mail and delete this message from your system. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From olms0025 at umn.edu Tue Aug 23 14:28:29 2022 From: olms0025 at umn.edu (Brian K. Olmsted) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2022 13:28:29 -0500 Subject: [labnetwork] postdoctoral research opportunity at Minnesota Nano Center Message-ID: Hi, The Minnesota Nano Center has an opening for a postdoctoral researcher and I'm distributing this here in the hopes someone on distribution may know of candidates who may be interested in this position. Our open requisition posting is included, below: ________________________________________ The Minnesota Nano Center (cse.umn.edu/mnc), in coordination with the Koester NanoDevice Research Lab (http://people.ece.umn.edu/users/skoester), is seeking a postdoctoral candidate in the area of quantum device processing and fabrication. The position would involve two main roles. The first role is to develop processes using a newly acquired AJA ultra-high-vacuum deposition system, with a key focus on superconducting materials and qubits. The second role is to develop processes for assembly of high-purity 2D material heterostructures for use in quantum device research. A candidate with a Ph.D. and strong background in nanofabrication, solid-state physics and quantum physics is desirable. The salary will be commensurate with qualifications and experience. The preferred start date is January, 2023 and could be sooner. The duration is two years, with a possibility of extending to a third year depending on funding and performance. How to apply: candidates should send a curriculum vitae, list of publications, and short description of research interests to both Steven Koester (skoester at umn.edu) and Brian Olmsted (olms0025 at umn.edu). ________________________________________ Thanks to everyone for your help, Brian K. Olmsted Associate Director of Laboratory Operations University of Minnesota | MNC cse.umn.edu/mnc 612.626.3287 olms0025 at umn.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jaransom at uark.edu Fri Aug 26 10:44:59 2022 From: jaransom at uark.edu (John Ransom) Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 14:44:59 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Job Openings - MultiUser SiC Fab at U of Arkansas Message-ID: I will be posting 3 positions for SiC Fab staff members at the University of Arkansas - a brief summary of the positions is as follows. 1)Facilities and Maintenance Technician/Engineer Within the next 3 months this person will help build the phase 1 Multi-User SiC fabrication facility (MUSiC) Ongoing responsibilities will be related to all aspect of the facility - DI water plant, Gas delivery, Safety, Cleanroom, HVAC, etc. Position is dependent on education and experience (Technician vs. Engineer) 2)Equipment Maintenance Engineer Within next 3 months this person will help build the Phase 1 fab and be responsible with the Facilities position, to install all incoming equipment. Tools begin to arrive in December (All of the tools for a SiC fab) - steppers, spin coat tracks, clean lines, furnaces, PECVD, LPCVD, Metal dep, plasma etchers, metrology tools, etc.) 3)Process Engineer Beginning in January 2023 Process engineer will help the rest of the staff install the toolset and then write the initial recipes for all tools and be primarily responsible for initial (an ongoing) tool qualifications. The process engineer with the Fab Director will have primary responsibility to set up an initial SiC CMOS process flow, understand and establish capabilities, and help create the initial skeleton PDK for the fab. As stated above, this is a very short summary of the positions with full job descriptions being posted on the University of Arkansas job posting website. If you have interest contact me at the email listed and then I will direct you to the posting. John Ransom Program Manager - MUSiC Facility Multi-User SiC Fabrication Facility University of Arkansas jaransom at uark.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cschnitzer at stonehill.edu Sat Aug 27 15:39:10 2022 From: cschnitzer at stonehill.edu (Schnitzer, Cheryl) Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2022 19:39:10 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Needed: Photonics Lab Manager Message-ID: Needed: Photonics Lab Manager, Full-Time, Stonehill College, Easton, MA This position offers an opportunity to work in a brand new, state-of-the-art Lab for Education and Application Prototypes (LEAP) photonics lab with faculty, students, staff, and industry partners. This LEAP focuses on photonics materials testing and characterization and high-speed testing for photonics devices and systems, complementing the other LEAPs in Massachusetts at MIT, WPI/QCC, BSU, and WNE/STCC. The LEAP network is funded by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to support AIM Photonics. For more information, visit https://jobs.chronicle.com/job/37289618/photonics-lab-manager/. Thank you for helping spread the word! _________________________________ Cheryl Schnitzer, Ph.D. (she/her/hers) * Professor, Department of Chemistry, Stonehill College * Director, Photonics Certificate Program * Chair, Environmental Stewardship Council Good chemistry requires all of our elements. The Department of Chemistry and the Biochemistry Program value the perspectives, experiences, and identities of each and every individual. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sah77 at cornell.edu Mon Aug 29 00:47:13 2022 From: sah77 at cornell.edu (Steven Hickman) Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2022 21:47:13 -0700 Subject: [labnetwork] Lithography Engineer position at Meta Message-ID: The Reality Labs Research organization at Meta is looking for an experienced lithography engineer to lead all lithographic technologies in their cleanroom. Given the breadth of experience desired in the ideal candidate, I think that people in the LabNetwork community are ideally placed to be or know such an individual. The Job posting is here ? if you are or know a good candidate, please let me know. https://www.metacareers.com/jobs/421178806816021/ *Steve Hickman* Process Integration Engineer | Reality Labs Research 9845 Willows Road, Redmond, WA, 98052 shickman at meta.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From chandanachar95 at gmail.com Mon Aug 29 02:04:14 2022 From: chandanachar95 at gmail.com (Chandan H B) Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 11:34:14 +0530 Subject: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation Message-ID: Dear Lab network community, We are currently facing an issue in the deposition of Aluminium in one of our Electron beam evaporation tools, we tried intermetallic, fab mate, copper, glassy coated graphite, and graphite crucibles for the evaporation. It seems that none of them are working out. We see crucible gets broken at the initial deposition quite often. Are we missing out on any parameters unchecked? Kindly recommend us a few parameters or solutions for the same. Any suggestions/Inputs are highly appreciated. Thanks in advance! Regards, CHANDAN H B THIN FILM ENGINEER P.S: Here are a few parameters that are provided to the tool. Power: 10KW Voltage: 10KV constant Current: Variable Rise1 & Soak1: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min Rise1 Power: 4% (for intermetallic crucible) Rise2 & Soak2: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min Rise2 Power: 8% (for intermetallic crucible) Ramp down: 5min Rate of deposition: 0.1nm/sec Beam Pattern: Spot Beam at the center of the crucible Crucible Volume: 20cc Material fill %: As recommended 67-75% -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steffen.8 at osu.edu Mon Aug 29 09:00:46 2022 From: steffen.8 at osu.edu (Steffen, Paul) Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 13:00:46 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Chandan, Don?t bother with the crucible liner. Just melt a big chunk of aluminum directly in the pocket. It will not adhere to the walls so you will be able to remove it if you need to swap materials. -Paul From: labnetwork On Behalf Of Chandan H B Sent: Monday, August 29, 2022 2:04 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation Dear Lab network community, We are currently facing an issue in the deposition of Aluminium in one of our Electron beam evaporation tools, we tried intermetallic, fab mate, copper, glassy coated graphite, and graphite crucibles for the evaporation.? Dear Lab network community, We are currently facing an issue in the deposition of Aluminium in one of our Electron beam evaporation tools, we tried intermetallic, fab mate, copper, glassy coated graphite, and graphite crucibles for the evaporation. It seems that none of them are working out. We see crucible gets broken at the initial deposition quite often. Are we missing out on any parameters unchecked? Kindly recommend us a few parameters or solutions for the same. Any suggestions/Inputs are highly appreciated. Thanks in advance! Regards, CHANDAN H B THIN FILM ENGINEER P.S: Here are a few parameters that are provided to the tool. Power: 10KW Voltage: 10KV constant Current: Variable Rise1 & Soak1: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min Rise1 Power: 4% (for intermetallic crucible) Rise2 & Soak2: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min Rise2 Power: 8% (for intermetallic crucible) Ramp down: 5min Rate of deposition: 0.1nm/sec Beam Pattern: Spot Beam at the center of the crucible Crucible Volume: 20cc Material fill %: As recommended 67-75% -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Howard.Northfield at uottawa.ca Mon Aug 29 09:58:34 2022 From: Howard.Northfield at uottawa.ca (Howard Northfield) Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 13:58:34 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Don't use a spot beam, use a pattern beam. Howard Northfield Research Associate Advanced Research Complex (ARC) University of Ottawa ________________________________ From: labnetwork on behalf of Chandan H B Sent: Monday, August 29, 2022 2:04 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation Attention : courriel externe | external email Dear Lab network community, We are currently facing an issue in the deposition of Aluminium in one of our Electron beam evaporation tools, we tried intermetallic, fab mate, copper, glassy coated graphite, and graphite crucibles for the evaporation. It seems that none of them are working out. We see crucible gets broken at the initial deposition quite often. Are we missing out on any parameters unchecked? Kindly recommend us a few parameters or solutions for the same. Any suggestions/Inputs are highly appreciated. Thanks in advance! Regards, CHANDAN H B THIN FILM ENGINEER P.S: Here are a few parameters that are provided to the tool. Power: 10KW Voltage: 10KV constant Current: Variable Rise1 & Soak1: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min Rise1 Power: 4% (for intermetallic crucible) Rise2 & Soak2: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min Rise2 Power: 8% (for intermetallic crucible) Ramp down: 5min Rate of deposition: 0.1nm/sec Beam Pattern: Spot Beam at the center of the crucible Crucible Volume: 20cc Material fill %: As recommended 67-75% -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cg70 at rice.edu Mon Aug 29 10:25:58 2022 From: cg70 at rice.edu (Carlos Gramajo) Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 09:25:58 -0500 Subject: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Chandan, I have discussed these procedures with my colleagues here at Rice. We do not have much problems with e-beam evaporation of Al. What we have concluded is that you might need to sweep your beam and ramp down much slower. We are using the glassy coated graphite and it is about the same volume. You might have to increase power a little bit due to the sweeping, but this will give a more uniform heat distribution on your source material. I hope this helps, Carlos On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 7:12 AM Chandan H B wrote: > Dear Lab network community, > > We are currently facing an issue in the deposition of Aluminium in one of > our Electron beam evaporation tools, we tried intermetallic, fab mate, > copper, glassy coated graphite, and graphite crucibles for the evaporation. > It seems that none of them are working out. > We see crucible gets broken at the initial deposition quite often. > > Are we missing out on any parameters unchecked? > Kindly recommend us a few parameters or solutions for the same. > > Any suggestions/Inputs are highly appreciated. > Thanks in advance! > > Regards, > CHANDAN H B > THIN FILM ENGINEER > > P.S: Here are a few parameters that are provided to the tool. > Power: 10KW > Voltage: 10KV constant > Current: Variable > Rise1 & Soak1: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min > Rise1 Power: 4% (for intermetallic crucible) > Rise2 & Soak2: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min > Rise2 Power: 8% (for intermetallic crucible) > Ramp down: 5min > Rate of deposition: 0.1nm/sec > Beam Pattern: Spot Beam at the center of the crucible > Crucible Volume: 20cc > Material fill %: As recommended 67-75% > > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork__;!!BuQPrrmRaQ!kYgHSKVXXQAm5LkeW7ZzWecdvsMMFV6CDQ0KoIQfEoDolpnIxcrOZW7W5frEQSwE5IO1AaI5DpKybTpmckfbRu7kixQV5F8$ > > -- Carlos Gramajo Cleanroom Research Scientist Shared Equipment Authority (SEA), Rice University Cell: 713-743-8115; Office: 713-348-8243; cg70 at rice.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zhichaow at udel.edu Mon Aug 29 12:14:17 2022 From: zhichaow at udel.edu (Zhichao Wang) Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 12:14:17 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Chandan, We use a pattern beam with the pattern sweeping/rotating constantly during the deposition, and a fabmate crucible. The rest of the parameters are pretty similar. The highest deposition rate we've tried is 15 Angstrom/s. -- Chao On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 8:07 AM Chandan H B wrote: > Dear Lab network community, > > We are currently facing an issue in the deposition of Aluminium in one of > our Electron beam evaporation tools, we tried intermetallic, fab mate, > copper, glassy coated graphite, and graphite crucibles for the evaporation. > It seems that none of them are working out. > We see crucible gets broken at the initial deposition quite often. > > Are we missing out on any parameters unchecked? > Kindly recommend us a few parameters or solutions for the same. > > Any suggestions/Inputs are highly appreciated. > Thanks in advance! > > Regards, > CHANDAN H B > THIN FILM ENGINEER > > P.S: Here are a few parameters that are provided to the tool. > Power: 10KW > Voltage: 10KV constant > Current: Variable > Rise1 & Soak1: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min > Rise1 Power: 4% (for intermetallic crucible) > Rise2 & Soak2: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min > Rise2 Power: 8% (for intermetallic crucible) > Ramp down: 5min > Rate of deposition: 0.1nm/sec > Beam Pattern: Spot Beam at the center of the crucible > Crucible Volume: 20cc > Material fill %: As recommended 67-75% > > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bill_flounders at berkeley.edu Mon Aug 29 12:52:57 2022 From: bill_flounders at berkeley.edu (Albert William (Bill) Flounders) Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 09:52:57 -0700 Subject: [labnetwork] Lab Manager position in Singapore Message-ID: Forwarding an announcement from a colleague in Singapore Lab manager position in Singapore at the Cambridge University-run research center. Their work is mostly in chemical engineering, reaction engineering, electrochemistry and combustion science. The position is listed here: https://talent.sage.hr/jobs/29fdcde1-a59c-419a-84e4-c57cb541d59b -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From odc1n08 at soton.ac.uk Mon Aug 29 14:48:48 2022 From: odc1n08 at soton.ac.uk (Owain Clark) Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 18:48:48 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Doesn?t always work we find, eventually some enterprising user will find a way to melt an Al ingot onto a cooled hearth which should in theory not happen. But I do agree if this is not an issue and you can dedicate a pocket then this is the best method. Some electron beam gun cooling channel design and water flows will get you a lot farther then others in this respect. In the last year I spent some time personally trying to improve our standard long throw Al evaporation process. We use 40cc pockets and there is no choice but to use a crucible because multiple materials use the pockets and ultimately it makes multi user/project operation easier. Al is cheap to refill, and the odd crucible is just noise in the tool budget too. What I found ultimately was that alumina was the best. Power to deposit was significantly lower than any other crucible for a given rate because due to the thermally insulating properties of Al2O3 the entire Al crucible load melts and becomes totally molten, this gives a very easy to control deposition with a large vapour emitting area and even with a 1m+ throw distance rates of 2-5A/s at the wafer were no trouble for ~1kW of input power. The downside is that Al2O3 always cracks, no matter now gentle you are with preconditioning. But considering the overall budget of tool operation a new crucible every few months is not significant. The crucible outer wall stays cold and any Al that moves through the cracks cools and does not transmit further ? this gives the cracked crucible physical stability. Eventually after several months and many um of Al you see the power for a given deposition rate slowly start to increase. This is the cue that Al moving through cracks has begun thermal contact with the pocket and is a sign to prepare to swap the crucible for a new one. Al in this crucible stays perfectly shiny following deposition for its entire lifetime. For graphite, coated graphite or fabmate the crucible will eventually crack, and the Al will react with the liner. The liners I tested like this gave a yellow-ish hue to the Al after only a few depositions which I presume is C contamination (although I have not yet tested it via elemental analysis). The colour change is obvious by eye. Power vs Al2O3 is approximately double for a given rate due to increased thermal conduction through the crucible, and you cannot melt the entire Al contents. Using metallic crucibles such as W the Al will creep eventually ruining the deposition by demanding significantly more power required for a given rate as it goes over the top of the crucible, only a small spot can be melted, and the power required is 2-3x more than Al2O3. Crucibles are physically unreactive and Al stays pure but it does not take long before creep renders them useless. So all in, if you must use a crucible for Al I would recommend Al2O3 or a similar thermally insulating unreactive material. And I would always take any material vendor suggestions with a pinch of salt and just a starting point. Tool vendors I listen more closely too but seeing is always believing. Try the options yourself and draw your own conclusions based on expected theory. Al2O3 has been our standard crucible for over a year now and both research and enterprise users of the tool are happy. Keep a pre melted 2nd crucible ready to go as needed and all is fine. Owain. From: labnetwork On Behalf Of Steffen, Paul Sent: 29 August 2022 14:01 To: 'Chandan H B' ; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation CAUTION: This e-mail originated outside the University of Southampton. Chandan, Don?t bother with the crucible liner. Just melt a big chunk of aluminum directly in the pocket. It will not adhere to the walls so you will be able to remove it if you need to swap materials. -Paul From: labnetwork > On Behalf Of Chandan H B Sent: Monday, August 29, 2022 2:04 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation Dear Lab network community, We are currently facing an issue in the deposition of Aluminium in one of our Electron beam evaporation tools, we tried intermetallic, fab mate, copper, glassy coated graphite, and graphite crucibles for the evaporation.? Dear Lab network community, We are currently facing an issue in the deposition of Aluminium in one of our Electron beam evaporation tools, we tried intermetallic, fab mate, copper, glassy coated graphite, and graphite crucibles for the evaporation. It seems that none of them are working out. We see crucible gets broken at the initial deposition quite often. Are we missing out on any parameters unchecked? Kindly recommend us a few parameters or solutions for the same. Any suggestions/Inputs are highly appreciated. Thanks in advance! Regards, CHANDAN H B THIN FILM ENGINEER P.S: Here are a few parameters that are provided to the tool. Power: 10KW Voltage: 10KV constant Current: Variable Rise1 & Soak1: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min Rise1 Power: 4% (for intermetallic crucible) Rise2 & Soak2: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min Rise2 Power: 8% (for intermetallic crucible) Ramp down: 5min Rate of deposition: 0.1nm/sec Beam Pattern: Spot Beam at the center of the crucible Crucible Volume: 20cc Material fill %: As recommended 67-75% -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From yb2471 at columbia.edu Mon Aug 29 14:55:20 2022 From: yb2471 at columbia.edu (Youry Borisenkov) Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 14:55:20 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Chandan, Here at Columbia we use a Fabmate crucible for Al e-beam depositions. We suggest using e-beam to our users only when they tried the thermal evaporation and if didn't work for their needs. The crucible does break often (I would assume every 3-5 depositions) and the only thing that looks helpful so far is ramping up and down slowly (you mentioned 5 min, this is what we do for both up and down ramps). It would be helpful to get a summary of your findings :) Thanks, Youry On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 8:12 AM Chandan H B wrote: > Dear Lab network community, > > We are currently facing an issue in the deposition of Aluminium in one of > our Electron beam evaporation tools, we tried intermetallic, fab mate, > copper, glassy coated graphite, and graphite crucibles for the evaporation. > It seems that none of them are working out. > We see crucible gets broken at the initial deposition quite often. > > Are we missing out on any parameters unchecked? > Kindly recommend us a few parameters or solutions for the same. > > Any suggestions/Inputs are highly appreciated. > Thanks in advance! > > Regards, > CHANDAN H B > THIN FILM ENGINEER > > P.S: Here are a few parameters that are provided to the tool. > Power: 10KW > Voltage: 10KV constant > Current: Variable > Rise1 & Soak1: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min > Rise1 Power: 4% (for intermetallic crucible) > Rise2 & Soak2: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min > Rise2 Power: 8% (for intermetallic crucible) > Ramp down: 5min > Rate of deposition: 0.1nm/sec > Beam Pattern: Spot Beam at the center of the crucible > Crucible Volume: 20cc > Material fill %: As recommended 67-75% > > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mtl.mit.edu_mailman_listinfo.cgi_labnetwork&d=DwICAg&c=009klHSCxuh5AI1vNQzSO0KGjl4nbi2Q0M1QLJX9BeE&r=-s6JocV5E0wqGBIx8T7r2r5AeZ7Q3e53LV38GalxD2Y&m=aQwcGmt0_urp7RDhNMOEuY0d9YGSPAEzS5xAEcrltEfcPc9mJbagWZ-atwt8m6SD&s=i22peDdbqIIv0AdKsS5Sv09mYNeEylBECw2f8MKvieM&e= > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Howard.Northfield at uottawa.ca Mon Aug 29 15:00:08 2022 From: Howard.Northfield at uottawa.ca (Howard Northfield) Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 19:00:08 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No crucible ... that is interesting. ________________________________ From: labnetwork on behalf of Steffen, Paul Sent: Monday, August 29, 2022 9:00 AM To: 'Chandan H B' ; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation Attention : courriel externe | external email Chandan, Don?t bother with the crucible liner. Just melt a big chunk of aluminum directly in the pocket. It will not adhere to the walls so you will be able to remove it if you need to swap materials. -Paul From: labnetwork On Behalf Of Chandan H B Sent: Monday, August 29, 2022 2:04 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation Dear Lab network community, We are currently facing an issue in the deposition of Aluminium in one of our Electron beam evaporation tools, we tried intermetallic, fab mate, copper, glassy coated graphite, and graphite crucibles for the evaporation.? Dear Lab network community, We are currently facing an issue in the deposition of Aluminium in one of our Electron beam evaporation tools, we tried intermetallic, fab mate, copper, glassy coated graphite, and graphite crucibles for the evaporation. It seems that none of them are working out. We see crucible gets broken at the initial deposition quite often. Are we missing out on any parameters unchecked? Kindly recommend us a few parameters or solutions for the same. Any suggestions/Inputs are highly appreciated. Thanks in advance! Regards, CHANDAN H B THIN FILM ENGINEER P.S: Here are a few parameters that are provided to the tool. Power: 10KW Voltage: 10KV constant Current: Variable Rise1 & Soak1: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min Rise1 Power: 4% (for intermetallic crucible) Rise2 & Soak2: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min Rise2 Power: 8% (for intermetallic crucible) Ramp down: 5min Rate of deposition: 0.1nm/sec Beam Pattern: Spot Beam at the center of the crucible Crucible Volume: 20cc Material fill %: As recommended 67-75% -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From patricns at uw.edu Mon Aug 29 15:56:17 2022 From: patricns at uw.edu (N Shane Patrick) Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 12:56:17 -0700 Subject: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3110C587-C7CD-4A53-9954-3A00231BDCE5@uw.edu> We also don?t use a crucible - for either Al or Cr actually. N. Shane Patrick Manager, Lab Operations and Safety Electron Beam Lithography Washington Nanofabrication Facility (WNF) National Nanotechnology Coordinated Infrastructure (NNCI) University of Washington - NanoES Fluke Hall 129, Box 352143 (206) 221-1045 patricns at uw.edu http://www.wnf.washington.edu/ > On Aug 29, 2022, at 9:14 AM, Zhichao Wang wrote: > > Chandan, > > We use a pattern beam with the pattern sweeping/rotating constantly during the deposition, and a fabmate crucible. The rest of the parameters are pretty similar. The highest deposition rate we've tried is 15 Angstrom/s. > > -- > Chao > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 8:07 AM Chandan H B > wrote: > Dear Lab network community, > > We are currently facing an issue in the deposition of Aluminium in one of our Electron beam evaporation tools, we tried intermetallic, fab mate, copper, glassy coated graphite, and graphite crucibles for the evaporation. It seems that none of them are working out. > We see crucible gets broken at the initial deposition quite often. > > Are we missing out on any parameters unchecked? > Kindly recommend us a few parameters or solutions for the same. > > Any suggestions/Inputs are highly appreciated. > Thanks in advance! > > Regards, > CHANDAN H B > THIN FILM ENGINEER > > P.S: Here are a few parameters that are provided to the tool. > Power: 10KW > Voltage: 10KV constant > Current: Variable > Rise1 & Soak1: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min > Rise1 Power: 4% (for intermetallic crucible) > Rise2 & Soak2: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min > Rise2 Power: 8% (for intermetallic crucible) > Ramp down: 5min > Rate of deposition: 0.1nm/sec > Beam Pattern: Spot Beam at the center of the crucible > Crucible Volume: 20cc > Material fill %: As recommended 67-75% > > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From yakimom at sunypoly.edu Mon Aug 29 16:00:24 2022 From: yakimom at sunypoly.edu (Michael Yakimov) Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 20:00:24 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: One of things which may hinder Al deposition from carbon crucible is Aluminum carbide formation on the surface. It will show up as yellow stuff on the surface after venting, eventually decomposing in the air. It is a part of tribal knowledge for me; I couldn't find a good reference in 5 minutes. there is mention of the effect here: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00792405 [https://media.springernature.com/w200/springer-static/cover/journal/11106.jpg] Industrial operation of vacuum aluminum evaporators made in refractory compound alloys - SpringerLink Vaporizing elements of various types and sizes are being produced from a TiB2-TiC alloy in the Special Design and Technology Department of the Institute of Materials Science, Academy of Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR, and widely used in vacuum deposition plants for the application of aluminum coatings to glass, plastics, fabrics, paper, metals, and film and other coiling materials. The ... link.springer.com ________________________________ From: labnetwork on behalf of Zhichao Wang Sent: Monday, August 29, 2022 12:14 PM To: Chandan H B Cc: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation Chandan, We use a pattern beam with the pattern sweeping/rotating constantly during the deposition, and a fabmate crucible. The rest of the parameters are pretty similar. The highest deposition rate we've tried is 15 Angstrom/s. -- Chao On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 8:07 AM Chandan H B > wrote: Dear Lab network community, We are currently facing an issue in the deposition of Aluminium in one of our Electron beam evaporation tools, we tried intermetallic, fab mate, copper, glassy coated graphite, and graphite crucibles for the evaporation. It seems that none of them are working out. We see crucible gets broken at the initial deposition quite often. Are we missing out on any parameters unchecked? Kindly recommend us a few parameters or solutions for the same. Any suggestions/Inputs are highly appreciated. Thanks in advance! Regards, CHANDAN H B THIN FILM ENGINEER P.S: Here are a few parameters that are provided to the tool. Power: 10KW Voltage: 10KV constant Current: Variable Rise1 & Soak1: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min Rise1 Power: 4% (for intermetallic crucible) Rise2 & Soak2: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min Rise2 Power: 8% (for intermetallic crucible) Ramp down: 5min Rate of deposition: 0.1nm/sec Beam Pattern: Spot Beam at the center of the crucible Crucible Volume: 20cc Material fill %: As recommended 67-75% _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lopezg at seas.upenn.edu Mon Aug 29 20:06:01 2022 From: lopezg at seas.upenn.edu (Gerald Lopez) Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 20:06:01 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] Last Call: MAEBL Registration Reminder Message-ID: Dear UGIM/LabNetwork Colleagues: The 6th Meeting for Advanced Electron Beam Lithography (MAEBL) will be held on September 14-15, 2022 (https://maebl.eventbrite.com ). *This is the last week to register if you want to attend in person at Caltech. *All EBL tool owners, student users, and industry professionals are encouraged to attend. Registration is the same ($165) if you attend online or in person, but in-person attendance is encouraged! *MAEBL 2022 **Program* is available for download. Sincerely, Gerald -- Gerald G. Lopez, Ph.D. (he/him/his) Director of Operations and Business Development & Center Associate Director University of Pennsylvania, Singh Center for Nanotechnology -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rrivers at berkeley.edu Mon Aug 29 21:45:00 2022 From: rrivers at berkeley.edu (Ryan Rivers) Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 18:45:00 -0700 Subject: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The best way around the aluminum crucible shattering problem is to use a FABMATE crucible, but also to use a carbon spacer under your liner. A 1/8" thick carbon disk works in a pinch, you can get fancier with some machine shop time. We use them in all our ebeam tools the Marvell NanoLab and I've only seen a handful of crucible liners shatter from thermal load in the last decade. Primary cause of crucible liner breaks are incomplete thermal contact on one side of the crucible. When you're pouring too much heat in to make up for that contact, one side goes red hot, the other never gets there. Thermal expansion drives the rest. The spacer prevents your liner from cooling through the sides and only cools at the bottom. You heat with less joules in, so less shock. Lets your entire crucible heat more evenly and more readily stabilize through the problematic regions of melt formation. -Ryan On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 4:47 PM Michael Yakimov wrote: > One of things which may hinder Al deposition from carbon crucible is > Aluminum carbide formation on the surface. It will show up as yellow stuff > on the surface after venting, eventually decomposing in the air. > It is a part of tribal knowledge for me; I couldn't find a good reference > in 5 minutes. there is mention of the effect here: > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00792405 > > Industrial operation of vacuum aluminum evaporators made in refractory > compound alloys - SpringerLink > > Vaporizing elements of various types and sizes are being produced from a > TiB2-TiC alloy in the Special Design and Technology Department of the > Institute of Materials Science, Academy of Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR, > and widely used in vacuum deposition plants for the application of aluminum > coatings to glass, plastics, fabrics, paper, metals, and film and other > coiling materials. The ... > link.springer.com > > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* labnetwork on behalf of Zhichao > Wang > *Sent:* Monday, August 29, 2022 12:14 PM > *To:* Chandan H B > *Cc:* labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > *Subject:* Re: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation > > Chandan, > > We use a pattern beam with the pattern sweeping/rotating constantly during > the deposition, and a fabmate crucible. The rest of the parameters are > pretty similar. The highest deposition rate we've tried is 15 Angstrom/s. > > -- > Chao > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 8:07 AM Chandan H B > wrote: > > Dear Lab network community, > > We are currently facing an issue in the deposition of Aluminium in one of > our Electron beam evaporation tools, we tried intermetallic, fab mate, > copper, glassy coated graphite, and graphite crucibles for the evaporation. > It seems that none of them are working out. > We see crucible gets broken at the initial deposition quite often. > > Are we missing out on any parameters unchecked? > Kindly recommend us a few parameters or solutions for the same. > > Any suggestions/Inputs are highly appreciated. > Thanks in advance! > > Regards, > CHANDAN H B > THIN FILM ENGINEER > > P.S: Here are a few parameters that are provided to the tool. > Power: 10KW > Voltage: 10KV constant > Current: Variable > Rise1 & Soak1: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min > Rise1 Power: 4% (for intermetallic crucible) > Rise2 & Soak2: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min > Rise2 Power: 8% (for intermetallic crucible) > Ramp down: 5min > Rate of deposition: 0.1nm/sec > Beam Pattern: Spot Beam at the center of the crucible > Crucible Volume: 20cc > Material fill %: As recommended 67-75% > > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From twangens at mail.usf.edu Tue Aug 30 09:05:27 2022 From: twangens at mail.usf.edu (Ted Wangensteen) Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2022 09:05:27 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ryan has hit on the key thermal explanation, and the best way to help this is the Carbon spacer he mentioned. We used this on Lesker tools. Kurt Lesker sells the spacer, but I'm not sure what tool you are using. -Ted Wangensteen On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 8:07 AM Ryan Rivers wrote: > The best way around the aluminum crucible shattering problem is to use a > FABMATE crucible, but also to use a carbon spacer under your liner. A 1/8" > thick carbon disk works in a pinch, you can get fancier with some machine > shop time. We use them in all our ebeam tools the Marvell NanoLab and I've > only seen a handful of crucible liners shatter from thermal load in the > last decade. > > Primary cause of crucible liner breaks are incomplete thermal contact on > one side of the crucible. When you're pouring too much heat in to make up > for that contact, one side goes red hot, the other never gets there. > Thermal expansion drives the rest. The spacer prevents your liner from > cooling through the sides and only cools at the bottom. You heat with less > joules in, so less shock. Lets your entire crucible heat more evenly and > more readily stabilize through the problematic regions of melt formation. > > -Ryan > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 4:47 PM Michael Yakimov > wrote: > >> One of things which may hinder Al deposition from carbon crucible is >> Aluminum carbide formation on the surface. It will show up as yellow stuff >> on the surface after venting, eventually decomposing in the air. >> It is a part of tribal knowledge for me; I couldn't find a good reference >> in 5 minutes. there is mention of the effect here: >> https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00792405 >> >> Industrial operation of vacuum aluminum evaporators made in refractory >> compound alloys - SpringerLink >> >> Vaporizing elements of various types and sizes are being produced from a >> TiB2-TiC alloy in the Special Design and Technology Department of the >> Institute of Materials Science, Academy of Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR, >> and widely used in vacuum deposition plants for the application of aluminum >> coatings to glass, plastics, fabrics, paper, metals, and film and other >> coiling materials. The ... >> link.springer.com >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> *From:* labnetwork on behalf of Zhichao >> Wang >> *Sent:* Monday, August 29, 2022 12:14 PM >> *To:* Chandan H B >> *Cc:* labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu >> *Subject:* Re: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation >> >> Chandan, >> >> We use a pattern beam with the pattern sweeping/rotating constantly >> during the deposition, and a fabmate crucible. The rest of the parameters >> are pretty similar. The highest deposition rate we've tried is 15 >> Angstrom/s. >> >> -- >> Chao >> >> On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 8:07 AM Chandan H B >> wrote: >> >> Dear Lab network community, >> >> We are currently facing an issue in the deposition of Aluminium in one of >> our Electron beam evaporation tools, we tried intermetallic, fab mate, >> copper, glassy coated graphite, and graphite crucibles for the evaporation. >> It seems that none of them are working out. >> We see crucible gets broken at the initial deposition quite often. >> >> Are we missing out on any parameters unchecked? >> Kindly recommend us a few parameters or solutions for the same. >> >> Any suggestions/Inputs are highly appreciated. >> Thanks in advance! >> >> Regards, >> CHANDAN H B >> THIN FILM ENGINEER >> >> P.S: Here are a few parameters that are provided to the tool. >> Power: 10KW >> Voltage: 10KV constant >> Current: Variable >> Rise1 & Soak1: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min >> Rise1 Power: 4% (for intermetallic crucible) >> Rise2 & Soak2: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min >> Rise2 Power: 8% (for intermetallic crucible) >> Ramp down: 5min >> Rate of deposition: 0.1nm/sec >> Beam Pattern: Spot Beam at the center of the crucible >> Crucible Volume: 20cc >> Material fill %: As recommended 67-75% >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> labnetwork mailing list >> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu >> https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork >> >> _______________________________________________ >> labnetwork mailing list >> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu >> https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork >> > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bgila at ufl.edu Tue Aug 30 09:14:08 2022 From: bgila at ufl.edu (Gila,Brent P) Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2022 09:14:08 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Agreed, carbon spacer under the crucible for Al is the way to go. Brent On 8/29/2022 9:45 PM, Ryan Rivers wrote: > *[External Email]* > > The best way around the aluminum crucible shattering problem is to use > a FABMATE crucible, but also to use a carbon spacer under your liner. > A 1/8" thick carbon disk works in a pinch,?you can get fancier with > some machine shop time. We use them in all our ebeam tools the Marvell > NanoLab and I've only seen a handful of crucible liners shatter from > thermal load in the last decade. > > Primary cause of crucible liner breaks are incomplete thermal contact > on one side of the crucible. When you're pouring too much heat in to > make up for that contact, one side goes red hot, the other never gets > there. Thermal expansion drives the rest. The spacer prevents your > liner from cooling through the sides and only cools at the bottom. You > heat with less joules in, so less shock. Lets your entire crucible > heat more evenly and more readily stabilize through the problematic > regions of melt formation. > > -Ryan > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 4:47 PM Michael Yakimov > wrote: > > One of things which may hinder Al deposition from carbon crucible > is Aluminum carbide formation on the surface. It will show up as > yellow stuff on the surface after venting, eventually decomposing > in the air. > It is a part of tribal knowledge for me; I couldn't find a good > reference in 5 minutes.? there is mention of the effect here: > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00792405 > > > > Industrial operation of vacuum aluminum evaporators made in > refractory compound alloys - SpringerLink > > Vaporizing elements of various types and sizes are being produced > from a TiB2-TiC alloy in the Special Design and Technology > Department of the Institute of Materials Science, Academy of > Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR, and widely used in vacuum > deposition plants for the application of aluminum coatings to > glass, plastics, fabrics, paper, metals, and film and other > coiling materials. The ... > link.springer.com > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* labnetwork on behalf of > Zhichao Wang > *Sent:* Monday, August 29, 2022 12:14 PM > *To:* Chandan H B > *Cc:* labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > *Subject:* Re: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation > Chandan, > > We use a pattern beam with the pattern sweeping/rotating > constantly during the deposition, and a fabmate crucible. The rest > of the parameters are pretty similar. The highest deposition rate > we've tried is 15 Angstrom/s. > > -- > Chao > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 8:07 AM Chandan H B > wrote: > > Dear Lab network community, > > We are currently facing an issue in the deposition of > Aluminium in one of our Electron beam evaporation tools, we > tried intermetallic, fab mate, copper, glassy coated > graphite,?and graphite crucibles for the evaporation. It seems > that none of them are working out. > We see crucible gets broken at the initial deposition quite often. > > Are we missing out on any parameters unchecked? > Kindly recommend us a few parameters or solutions for the same. > > Any suggestions/Inputs are?highly appreciated. > Thanks in advance! > > Regards, > CHANDAN H B > THIN FILM ENGINEER > > P.S: Here are a few parameters that are provided to the tool. > Power: 10KW > Voltage: 10KV constant > Current: Variable > Rise1 & Soak1: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min > Rise1 Power: 4% (for intermetallic crucible) > Rise2 & Soak2: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min > Rise2 Power: 8% (for intermetallic crucible) > Ramp down: 5min > Rate of deposition: 0.1nm/sec > Beam Pattern: Spot Beam at the center of the crucible > Crucible Volume: 20cc > Material fill %: As recommended 67-75% > > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > > > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From slundt at quantumdev.com Tue Aug 30 13:46:03 2022 From: slundt at quantumdev.com (Samantha Lundt) Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2022 12:46:03 -0500 Subject: [labnetwork] Spare Canon Mask Aligner Parts Message-ID: Good Afternoon, Our cleanroom is still using a Canon PLA-501F mask aligner. We are in desperate need of a rubber shield ring for the seal beneath the gapping unit. The part number is BD0-1605-020, and a picture of the part is attached. The supplier who had provided them to us has told us that he does not have any left and that this part is no longer being made. Ideally, it would be great if we could track down at least 2 of these seals while we work on bringing online a new mask aligner. Does anyone have any spares that they'd be willing to part with? Or does anyone have any leads for tracking some down or having some made? Thank you for your assistance. Samantha Lundt Manufacturing Process Engineer Quantum Devices, Inc. (608) 924-3000; slundt at quantumdev.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: InkedIMG952667.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 172186 bytes Desc: not available URL: From steffen.8 at osu.edu Tue Aug 30 14:36:35 2022 From: steffen.8 at osu.edu (Steffen, Paul) Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2022 18:36:35 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Diffusion ZnO on InAs in forming gas Message-ID: Lab Network Community, We have a request to diffuse ZnO on InAs in forming gas at 450 C for 1 hour in a horizontal furnace tube. Does anyone have experience with these materials in forming gas? Would the forming gas react with either material leading to decomposition and contamination of the furnace tube with Zn or As? Thanks. -Paul [The Ohio State University] Paul Steffen Lab Manager Institute for Materials Research Nanotech West Lab 100 Science Village, 1381 Kinnear Road, Columbus, OH 43212 614-688-3546 Office / 614-688-3379 Fax steffen.8 at osu.edu nanotech.osu.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 3605 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: From jmaduzi2 at illinois.edu Tue Aug 30 16:09:40 2022 From: jmaduzi2 at illinois.edu (Maduzia, Joseph Walter) Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2022 20:09:40 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello, We struggled for a while getting Al to work well in e-beam evaporator. It works very well with a slow heat and cool using a tungsten crucible liner. The Al doesn?t wet over the liner, and the liner doesn?t crack. You can still burn through it with the e-beam if you aren?t paying attention to fill level though. Thank You, JOE MADUZIA Senior Research Engineer, Grainger College of Engineering, MechSE, Univ of IL 2239 LuMEB | (P) 217.244.6302 | https://cleanroom.mechse.illinois.edu/ From: labnetwork On Behalf Of Ted Wangensteen Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2022 8:05 AM To: Ryan Rivers Cc: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu; Michael Yakimov Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation Ryan has hit on the key thermal explanation, and the best way to help this is the Carbon spacer he mentioned. We used this on Lesker tools. Kurt Lesker sells the spacer, but I'm not sure what tool you are using. -Ted Wangensteen On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 8:07 AM Ryan Rivers > wrote: The best way around the aluminum crucible shattering problem is to use a FABMATE crucible, but also to use a carbon spacer under your liner. A 1/8" thick carbon disk works in a pinch, you can get fancier with some machine shop time. We use them in all our ebeam tools the Marvell NanoLab and I've only seen a handful of crucible liners shatter from thermal load in the last decade. Primary cause of crucible liner breaks are incomplete thermal contact on one side of the crucible. When you're pouring too much heat in to make up for that contact, one side goes red hot, the other never gets there. Thermal expansion drives the rest. The spacer prevents your liner from cooling through the sides and only cools at the bottom. You heat with less joules in, so less shock. Lets your entire crucible heat more evenly and more readily stabilize through the problematic regions of melt formation. -Ryan On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 4:47 PM Michael Yakimov > wrote: One of things which may hinder Al deposition from carbon crucible is Aluminum carbide formation on the surface. It will show up as yellow stuff on the surface after venting, eventually decomposing in the air. It is a part of tribal knowledge for me; I couldn't find a good reference in 5 minutes. there is mention of the effect here: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00792405 [https://media.springernature.com/w200/springer-static/cover/journal/11106.jpg] Industrial operation of vacuum aluminum evaporators made in refractory compound alloys - SpringerLink Vaporizing elements of various types and sizes are being produced from a TiB2-TiC alloy in the Special Design and Technology Department of the Institute of Materials Science, Academy of Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR, and widely used in vacuum deposition plants for the application of aluminum coatings to glass, plastics, fabrics, paper, metals, and film and other coiling materials. The ... link.springer.com ________________________________ From: labnetwork > on behalf of Zhichao Wang > Sent: Monday, August 29, 2022 12:14 PM To: Chandan H B > Cc: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation Chandan, We use a pattern beam with the pattern sweeping/rotating constantly during the deposition, and a fabmate crucible. The rest of the parameters are pretty similar. The highest deposition rate we've tried is 15 Angstrom/s. -- Chao On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 8:07 AM Chandan H B > wrote: Dear Lab network community, We are currently facing an issue in the deposition of Aluminium in one of our Electron beam evaporation tools, we tried intermetallic, fab mate, copper, glassy coated graphite, and graphite crucibles for the evaporation. It seems that none of them are working out. We see crucible gets broken at the initial deposition quite often. Are we missing out on any parameters unchecked? Kindly recommend us a few parameters or solutions for the same. Any suggestions/Inputs are highly appreciated. Thanks in advance! Regards, CHANDAN H B THIN FILM ENGINEER P.S: Here are a few parameters that are provided to the tool. Power: 10KW Voltage: 10KV constant Current: Variable Rise1 & Soak1: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min Rise1 Power: 4% (for intermetallic crucible) Rise2 & Soak2: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min Rise2 Power: 8% (for intermetallic crucible) Ramp down: 5min Rate of deposition: 0.1nm/sec Beam Pattern: Spot Beam at the center of the crucible Crucible Volume: 20cc Material fill %: As recommended 67-75% _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From olms0025 at umn.edu Tue Aug 30 17:13:08 2022 From: olms0025 at umn.edu (Brian K. Olmsted) Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2022 16:13:08 -0500 Subject: [labnetwork] Diffusion ZnO on InAs in forming gas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Paul, Others may want to add to this with their experiences, but I have used ZnO in a retort furnace using a forming gas environment and the net result was Zn contamination so bad and persistent that the furnace was decommissioned and could not be used anymore. Thanks, Brian On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 2:36 PM Steffen, Paul wrote: > Lab Network Community, > > > > We have a request to diffuse ZnO on InAs in forming gas at 450 C for 1 > hour in a horizontal furnace tube. Does anyone have experience with these > materials in forming gas? Would the forming gas react with either material > leading to decomposition and contamination of the furnace tube with Zn or > As? > > > > Thanks. > > > > -Paul > > > > > > [image: The Ohio State University] > *Paul Steffen* > Lab Manager > Institute for Materials Research Nanotech West Lab > 100 Science Village, 1381 Kinnear Road, Columbus, OH 43212 > 614-688-3546 Office / 614-688-3379 Fax > steffen.8 at osu.edu nanotech.osu.edu > > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://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.png Type: image/png Size: 3605 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Howard.Northfield at uottawa.ca Tue Aug 30 18:26:15 2022 From: Howard.Northfield at uottawa.ca (Howard Northfield) Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2022 22:26:15 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Spare Canon Mask Aligner Parts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Try: ----------------------- Gina Gallaty Operations Manager Ace Seal, LLC 23 Las Colinas Lane Suite 112 San Jose, CA 95119 Phone: (408) 513-1070 Fax: (408) 513-1075 Email: gina at aceseal.com ------------------------------ Howard Northfield Research Associate Advanced Research Complex (ARC) University of Ottawa ________________________________ From: labnetwork on behalf of Samantha Lundt Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2022 1:46 PM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: [labnetwork] Spare Canon Mask Aligner Parts Attention : courriel externe | external email Good Afternoon, Our cleanroom is still using a Canon PLA-501F mask aligner. We are in desperate need of a rubber shield ring for the seal beneath the gapping unit. The part number is BD0-1605-020, and a picture of the part is attached. The supplier who had provided them to us has told us that he does not have any left and that this part is no longer being made. Ideally, it would be great if we could track down at least 2 of these seals while we work on bringing online a new mask aligner. Does anyone have any spares that they'd be willing to part with? Or does anyone have any leads for tracking some down or having some made? Thank you for your assistance. Samantha Lundt Manufacturing Process Engineer Quantum Devices, Inc. (608) 924-3000; slundt at quantumdev.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From beaudoin at physics.ubc.ca Tue Aug 30 19:22:12 2022 From: beaudoin at physics.ubc.ca (Beaudoin, Mario) Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2022 16:22:12 -0700 Subject: [labnetwork] Diffusion ZnO on InAs in forming gas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I never allow Zn containing materials to be deposited in any of my chambers.? Exactly for that reason. Mario On 2022-08-30 2:13 p.m., Brian K. Olmsted wrote: > [*CAUTION:* Non-UBC Email] > > Hi Paul, > > Others may want to add to this with their experiences, but I have used > ZnO in a retort furnace using a forming gas environment and the net > result was Zn contamination so bad and persistent that the furnace was > decommissioned and could not be used anymore. > > Thanks, > > Brian > > On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 2:36 PM Steffen, Paul wrote: > > Lab Network Community, > > We have a request to diffuse ZnO on InAs in forming gas at 450 C > for 1 hour in a horizontal furnace tube. Does anyone have > experience with these materials in forming gas? Would the forming > gas react with either material leading to decomposition and > contamination of the furnace tube with Zn or As? > > Thanks. > > -Paul > > The Ohio State University > *Paul Steffen* > Lab Manager > Institute for Materials ResearchNanotech West Lab > 100 Science Village, 1381 Kinnear Road, Columbus, OH 43212 > 614-688-3546 Office / 614-688-3379 Fax > steffen.8 at osu.edu nanotech.osu.edu > > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://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.png Type: image/png Size: 3605 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Mario%20Beaudoin%20SBQMI%20sig%202.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 21446 bytes Desc: not available URL: From yakimom at sunypoly.edu Tue Aug 30 19:33:50 2022 From: yakimom at sunypoly.edu (Michael Yakimov) Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2022 23:33:50 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Diffusion ZnO on InAs in forming gas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: GaAs starts losing Arsenic at around 400C, InAs is probably the same thing. It may not be a huge loss, but furnace will not be MOS clean ever. I wonder what kind of ZnO source you are talking. Pure ZnO may be a problem. Spin on glass with Zn dopant may be a better idea both for Zn escape and As containment, especially if wafwr backside is taken care of as well. Get Outlook for Android ________________________________ From: labnetwork on behalf of Brian K. Olmsted Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2022 5:13:08 PM To: Steffen, Paul Cc: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Diffusion ZnO on InAs in forming gas Hi Paul, Others may want to add to this with their experiences, but I have used ZnO in a retort furnace using a forming gas environment and the net result was Zn contamination so bad and persistent that the furnace was decommissioned and could not be used anymore. Thanks, Brian On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 2:36 PM Steffen, Paul > wrote: Lab Network Community, We have a request to diffuse ZnO on InAs in forming gas at 450 C for 1 hour in a horizontal furnace tube. Does anyone have experience with these materials in forming gas? Would the forming gas react with either material leading to decomposition and contamination of the furnace tube with Zn or As? Thanks. -Paul [The Ohio State University] Paul Steffen Lab Manager Institute for Materials Research Nanotech West Lab 100 Science Village, 1381 Kinnear Road, Columbus, OH 43212 614-688-3546 Office / 614-688-3379 Fax steffen.8 at osu.edu nanotech.osu.edu _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://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.png Type: image/png Size: 3605 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: From steffen.8 at osu.edu Wed Aug 31 07:33:47 2022 From: steffen.8 at osu.edu (Steffen, Paul) Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 11:33:47 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Diffusion ZnO on InAs in forming gas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Michael, It's ZnO films deposited with ALD. -Paul Get Outlook for Android ________________________________ From: labnetwork on behalf of Beaudoin, Mario Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2022 7:22:12 PM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Diffusion ZnO on InAs in forming gas I never allow Zn containing materials to be deposited in any of my chambers.? Exactly for that reason. Mario On 2022-08-30 2:?13 p.?m.?, Brian K. Olmsted wrote: ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? I never allow Zn containing materials to be deposited in any of my chambers. Exactly for that reason. Mario On 2022-08-30 2:13 p.m., Brian K. Olmsted wrote: [CAUTION: Non-UBC Email] Hi Paul, Others may want to add to this with their experiences, but I have used ZnO in a retort furnace using a forming gas environment and the net result was Zn contamination so bad and persistent that the furnace was decommissioned and could not be used anymore. Thanks, Brian On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 2:36 PM Steffen, Paul > wrote: Lab Network Community, We have a request to diffuse ZnO on InAs in forming gas at 450 C for 1 hour in a horizontal furnace tube. Does anyone have experience with these materials in forming gas? Would the forming gas react with either material leading to decomposition and contamination of the furnace tube with Zn or As? Thanks. -Paul [The Ohio State University] Paul Steffen Lab Manager Institute for Materials Research Nanotech West Lab 100 Science Village, 1381 Kinnear Road, Columbus, OH 43212 614-688-3546 Office / 614-688-3379 Fax steffen.8 at osu.edu nanotech.osu.edu _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork -- [cid:part2.202xrLaG.PcQhbGh8 at physics.ubc.ca] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 3605 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Mario%20Beaudoin%20SBQMI%20sig%202.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 21446 bytes Desc: Mario%20Beaudoin%20SBQMI%20sig%202.jpg URL: From shimonel at savion.huji.ac.il Wed Aug 31 10:01:37 2022 From: shimonel at savion.huji.ac.il (Shimon Eliav) Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 14:01:37 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Chandan, Here is my two cents to this nice discussion. I agree with Ryan, Brent and Ted: the simple spacer does the job. After some trials, here at Hebrew University we use intermetallic crucibles with an special format manufactured by Angstrom Engineering that mimics the spacer effect. Here is the description: [cid:image001.png at 01D8BD5A.F32F9DC0] It is quite expensive, 245$ each, but lasts for many evaporations. We also have slow heat up and cooling down ramps. Once I saw at Princeton a simple thermal evaporator using a Graphite boat, also from Angstrom. The trick they use there is to consume all the Al in the boat in the end of the evaporation. Seems to work nicely. Please find attached the summary of all answers. Regards, Shimon Hebrew University of Jerusalem From: labnetwork On Behalf Of Chandan H B Sent: Monday, 29 August 2022 9:04 To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation Dear Lab network community, We are currently facing an issue in the deposition of Aluminium in one of our Electron beam evaporation tools, we tried intermetallic, fab mate, copper, glassy coated graphite, and graphite crucibles for the evaporation. It seems that none of them are working out. We see crucible gets broken at the initial deposition quite often. Are we missing out on any parameters unchecked? Kindly recommend us a few parameters or solutions for the same. Any suggestions/Inputs are highly appreciated. Thanks in advance! Regards, CHANDAN H B THIN FILM ENGINEER P.S: Here are a few parameters that are provided to the tool. Power: 10KW Voltage: 10KV constant Current: Variable Rise1 & Soak1: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min Rise1 Power: 4% (for intermetallic crucible) Rise2 & Soak2: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min Rise2 Power: 8% (for intermetallic crucible) Ramp down: 5min Rate of deposition: 0.1nm/sec Beam Pattern: Spot Beam at the center of the crucible Crucible Volume: 20cc Material fill %: As recommended 67-75% -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 12461 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Ebeam Deposition of Al_Summary.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 34625 bytes Desc: Ebeam Deposition of Al_Summary.docx URL: From aandreib at gmail.com Wed Aug 31 10:14:37 2022 From: aandreib at gmail.com (Andrei Alamariu) Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 10:14:37 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] Diffusion ZnO on InAs in forming gas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9633F92D-9264-4DFF-9039-7F47C10ED1FD@gmail.com> The all furnace Quartzware will be contaminated with Zn and other 3-5 related materials. The Zn makes a mess, indeed. You can cap the ZnO layer with a thin SiO2 layer; easy to remove with 10:1 HF solution and allows the Hydrogen/FG through diffusion. One issue is that the Si is a dopant too: however the dominant dopant is the ZnO at 450C. That will avoid the messy Quartzware condition, as the SiO2 is not a barrier to Zn diffusion: and SiO2 should be deposited at low temperatures. The main problem is where to deposit SiO2 on ZnO/ InAs without contaminating that system itself? I am thinking of in situ Reactive sputtering of Zn in O2 followed by the SiO2 one. Thanks, Bernard Sent from my iPad > On Aug 30, 2022, at 8:20 PM, Michael Yakimov wrote: > > ? > GaAs starts losing Arsenic at around 400C, InAs is probably the same thing. It may not be a huge loss, but furnace will not be MOS clean ever. > I wonder what kind of ZnO source you are talking. Pure ZnO may be a problem. Spin on glass with Zn dopant may be a better idea both for Zn escape and As containment, especially if wafwr backside is taken care of as well. > > Get Outlook for Android > From: labnetwork on behalf of Brian K. Olmsted > Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2022 5:13:08 PM > To: Steffen, Paul > Cc: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Diffusion ZnO on InAs in forming gas > > Hi Paul, > > Others may want to add to this with their experiences, but I have used ZnO in a retort furnace using a forming gas environment and the net result was Zn contamination so bad and persistent that the furnace was decommissioned and could not be used anymore. > > Thanks, > > Brian > > On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 2:36 PM Steffen, Paul wrote: > Lab Network Community, > > > > We have a request to diffuse ZnO on InAs in forming gas at 450 C for 1 hour in a horizontal furnace tube. Does anyone have experience with these materials in forming gas? Would the forming gas react with either material leading to decomposition and contamination of the furnace tube with Zn or As? > > > > Thanks. > > > > -Paul > > > > > > > Paul Steffen > Lab Manager > Institute for Materials Research Nanotech West Lab > 100 Science Village, 1381 Kinnear Road, Columbus, OH 43212 > 614-688-3546 Office / 614-688-3379 Fax > steffen.8 at osu.edu nanotech.osu.edu > > > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://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.png Type: image/png Size: 3605 bytes Desc: not available URL: From yakimom at sunypoly.edu Wed Aug 31 10:32:08 2022 From: yakimom at sunypoly.edu (Michael Yakimov) Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 14:32:08 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Diffusion ZnO on InAs in forming gas In-Reply-To: <9633F92D-9264-4DFF-9039-7F47C10ED1FD@gmail.com> References: <9633F92D-9264-4DFF-9039-7F47C10ED1FD@gmail.com> Message-ID: This may be the cleanest option for Zn deposition: http://desertsilicon.com/spin-on-glass/?fwp_doplant_spin=zinc Prices are a bit eye watering (and shelf life is another hurting point, if I remember correctly), but that is a different story. I am not sure if there are other suppliers, this is the only reasonable one Google had on the first page. From: Andrei Alamariu Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2022 10:15 To: Michael Yakimov Cc: Brian K. Olmsted ; Steffen, Paul ; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Diffusion ZnO on InAs in forming gas The all furnace Quartzware will be contaminated with Zn and other 3-5 related materials. The Zn makes a mess, indeed. You can cap the ZnO layer with a thin SiO2 layer; easy to remove with 10:1 HF solution and allows the Hydrogen/FG through diffusion. One issue is that the Si is a dopant too: however the dominant dopant is the ZnO at 450C. That will avoid the messy Quartzware condition, as the SiO2 is not a barrier to Zn diffusion: and SiO2 should be deposited at low temperatures. The main problem is where to deposit SiO2 on ZnO/ InAs without contaminating that system itself? I am thinking of in situ Reactive sputtering of Zn in O2 followed by the SiO2 one. Thanks, Bernard Sent from my iPad On Aug 30, 2022, at 8:20 PM, Michael Yakimov > wrote: ? GaAs starts losing Arsenic at around 400C, InAs is probably the same thing. It may not be a huge loss, but furnace will not be MOS clean ever. I wonder what kind of ZnO source you are talking. Pure ZnO may be a problem. Spin on glass with Zn dopant may be a better idea both for Zn escape and As containment, especially if wafwr backside is taken care of as well. Get Outlook for Android ________________________________ From: labnetwork > on behalf of Brian K. Olmsted > Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2022 5:13:08 PM To: Steffen, Paul > Cc: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Diffusion ZnO on InAs in forming gas Hi Paul, Others may want to add to this with their experiences, but I have used ZnO in a retort furnace using a forming gas environment and the net result was Zn contamination so bad and persistent that the furnace was decommissioned and could not be used anymore. Thanks, Brian On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 2:36 PM Steffen, Paul > wrote: Lab Network Community, We have a request to diffuse ZnO on InAs in forming gas at 450 C for 1 hour in a horizontal furnace tube. Does anyone have experience with these materials in forming gas? Would the forming gas react with either material leading to decomposition and contamination of the furnace tube with Zn or As? Thanks. -Paul [image001.png] Paul Steffen Lab Manager Institute for Materials Research Nanotech West Lab 100 Science Village, 1381 Kinnear Road, Columbus, OH 43212 614-688-3546 Office / 614-688-3379 Fax steffen.8 at osu.edu nanotech.osu.edu _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://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.png Type: image/png Size: 3605 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: From bgila at ufl.edu Wed Aug 31 13:55:22 2022 From: bgila at ufl.edu (Gila,Brent P) Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 13:55:22 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: E-beam deposition and best practices should be a round table discussion at the next UGIM. On 8/31/2022 10:01 AM, Shimon Eliav wrote: > *[External Email]* > > Hi Chandan, > > Here is my two cents to this nice discussion. > > I agree with Ryan, Brent and Ted: the simple spacer does the job. > After some trials, here at Hebrew University we use intermetallic > crucibles with an special format manufactured by Angstrom Engineering > that mimics the spacer effect. Here is the description: > > It is quite expensive, 245$ each, but lasts for many evaporations. We > also have slow heat up and cooling down ramps. > > Once I saw at Princeton a simple thermal evaporator using a Graphite > boat, also from Angstrom. The trick they use there is to consume all > the Al in the boat in the end of the evaporation. Seems to work nicely. > > Please find attached the summary of all answers. > > Regards, > > Shimon > > Hebrew University of Jerusalem > > *From:*labnetwork *On Behalf Of > *Chandan H B > *Sent:* Monday, 29 August 2022 9:04 > *To:* labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > *Subject:* [labnetwork] Regarding : Aluminium E-Beam Evaporation > > Dear Lab network community, > > We are currently facing an issue in the deposition of Aluminium in one > of our Electron beam evaporation tools, we tried intermetallic, fab > mate, copper, glassy coated graphite,?and graphite crucibles for the > evaporation. It seems that none of them are working out. > > We see crucible gets broken at the initial deposition quite often. > > Are we missing out on any parameters unchecked? > > Kindly recommend us a few parameters or solutions for the same. > > Any suggestions/Inputs are?highly appreciated. > > Thanks in advance! > > Regards, > > CHANDAN H B > > THIN FILM ENGINEER > > P.S: Here are a few parameters that are provided to the tool. > > Power: 10KW > > Voltage: 10KV constant > > Current: Variable > > Rise1 & Soak1: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min > > Rise1 Power: 4% (for intermetallic crucible) > > Rise2 & Soak2: 5min & 1min /8min & 2min > > Rise2 Power: 8% (for intermetallic crucible) > > Ramp down: 5min > > Rate of deposition: 0.1nm/sec > > Beam Pattern: Spot Beam at the center of the crucible > > Crucible Volume: 20cc > > Material fill %: As recommended 67-75% > > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://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.png Type: image/png Size: 12461 bytes Desc: not available URL: From cschnitzer at stonehill.edu Wed Aug 31 14:48:44 2022 From: cschnitzer at stonehill.edu (Schnitzer, Cheryl) Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 18:48:44 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] Needed: Instructors for photonics. optics, electronics, and advanced manufacturing courses Message-ID: The Photonics Certificate Program at Stonehill College (Easton, MA) is looking to hire instructors for in-person photonics, optics, electronics, and advanced manufacturing evening courses. Please contact Dr. Cheryl Schnitzer, cschnitzer at stonehill.edu, 508-565-1298, Director of the Photonics Certificate Program, at your earliest convenience about teaching one of more of the following courses: 150 - Tools and Testing 154 - Statistical Process Control 160 - Optics 162 - Fiber Optics 164 - Integrated Optics [cid:image001.png at 01D8BD48.C4038690] _________________________________ Cheryl Schnitzer, Ph.D. (she/her/hers) * Professor, Department of Chemistry, Stonehill College * Director, Photonics Certificate Program * Chair, Environmental Stewardship Council Good chemistry requires all of our elements. The Department of Chemistry and the Biochemistry Program value the perspectives, experiences, and identities of each and every individual. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 164695 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: From kchow10 at gmail.com Wed Aug 31 16:08:14 2022 From: kchow10 at gmail.com (Edmond Chow) Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 15:08:14 -0500 Subject: [labnetwork] wirebonder for shared academic facility Message-ID: We are looking to purchase a new wire bonder for our multi-user facility. We currently have one old K&S 4524AD ball bonder. However, it has been difficult to maintain as the tool is prone to be messed up by inexperienced users, whom we have encountered often in our lab. We are seeking advice for a more user-friendly wire bonder, which can better tolerate some operator error without messing up the machine too badly. Thank you in advance. -- Edmond Chow *Nick Holonyak, Jr. Micro and Nanotechnology Lab (HMNTL)* *University of Illinois* Rm 2300, MC-249 208 North Wright St. Urbana, IL 61801 Email: echow at illinois.edu Web: http://mntl.illinois.edu/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: