[labnetwork] Equipment Expected Lifetime

Sat Aug 20 03:14:38 EDT 2022

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 <labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu> on behalf of Albert William (Bill) Flounders <bill_flounders at berkeley.edu>
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 11:45:49 PM
To: Joseph Losby <joseph.losby at ucalgary.ca>
Cc: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu <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 <joseph.losby at ucalgary.ca<mailto:joseph.losby at ucalgary.ca>> 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 <labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu>> on behalf of Colwill, Bryant C. <colwib2 at rpi.edu<mailto:colwib2 at rpi.edu>>
Sent: August 15, 2022 9:00 AM
To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu> <labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu<mailto: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<tel:518-276-3946>
_______________________________________________
labnetwork mailing list
labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu>
https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20220820/b3cdc074/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: chZGgHhVnKp6eILE.png
Type: image/png
Size: 69099 bytes
Desc: chZGgHhVnKp6eILE.png
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20220820/b3cdc074/attachment.png>