Dear Brett,
Overall, we agree that having good contamination control is critical to the SNF.
Our group (Khuri-Yakub group) has many users, who will be affected by the policy, so we would like to add some questions and make comments and suggestions to the proposed policy.
- Certified clean tool on campus, but outside of the SNF.
Wafers are processed at a shared facilities on campus such as the Ginzton micro-fabrication facility (Nano Building) and the Stanford Nanocharacterization Lab (Nano building) and users' own labs. How does the policy apply to these facilities on campus? It would be helpful if some of these tools and processes are considered to be clean.
- If there are certified clean labs, the policy should state that a list of clean labs will be maintained on the SNF website. It will be very helpful for many users if the list of the information is posted and updated by staff members.
- The policy stated that "If certification procedures are not deemed sufficient by SNF staff, TXRF requirements and success criteria will apply." Before the implementation of the policy, we would like to see examples of the certification procedure on the SNF website for all users.
- Frequency of the submission of the information (including TXRF).
In the case of an off-campus vendor, in which we regularly process wafers, will we still need to submit TXRF every time? Guidelines for the frequency of submission of data to SNF/CCB Spec Mat should be specified before implementation.
- TXRF source.
Similarly, a list of vendors for TXRF data could be posted on the SNF website.
- Applicable process.
Currently, the policy only directly refers to films deposited outside of SNF but it is assumed all incoming wafers are subject to the policy. This should be clearly stated to include all outside processing.
- Current contamination level of the SNF
As the other user suggested last week, we are also interested in the current status of our machine. It will also be valuable information to the all users in SNF and the SNF/CCB members.
I don't think all the information needs to be included in the policy. However, more detailed information should be posted in SNF website for the users, who do not have significant or any experience with TXRF or more generally processing and contamination.
Our group (Khuri-Yakub group) has many users, who will be affected by the policy, so we would like to add some questions and make comments and suggestions to the proposed policy.
- Certified clean tool on campus, but outside of the SNF.
Wafers are processed at a shared facilities on campus such as the Ginzton micro-fabrication facility (Nano Building) and the Stanford Nanocharacterization Lab (Nano building) and users' own labs. How does the policy apply to these facilities on campus? It would be helpful if some of these tools and processes are considered to be clean.
- If there are certified clean labs, the policy should state that a list of clean labs will be maintained on the SNF website. It will be very helpful for many users if the list of the information is posted and updated by staff members.
- The policy stated that "If certification procedures are not deemed sufficient by SNF staff, TXRF requirements and success criteria will apply." Before the implementation of the policy, we would like to see examples of the certification procedure on the SNF website for all users.
- Frequency of the submission of the information (including TXRF).
In the case of an off-campus vendor, in which we regularly process wafers, will we still need to submit TXRF every time? Guidelines for the frequency of submission of data to SNF/CCB Spec Mat should be specified before implementation.
- TXRF source.
Similarly, a list of vendors for TXRF data could be posted on the SNF website.
- Applicable process.
Currently, the policy only directly refers to films deposited outside of SNF but it is assumed all incoming wafers are subject to the policy. This should be clearly stated to include all outside processing.
- Current contamination level of the SNF
As the other user suggested last week, we are also interested in the current status of our machine. It will also be valuable information to the all users in SNF and the SNF/CCB members.
I don't think all the information needs to be included in the policy. However, more detailed information should be posted in SNF website for the users, who do not have significant or any experience with TXRF or more generally processing and contamination.
Regards,
Kwan-Kyu
__________________________
Kwan-Kyu Park, Ph. D.
Research Associate
E. L. Ginzton Laboratory,
Research Associate
E. L. Ginzton Laboratory,
Center for Nanoscale Science and Engineering
345 Via PeubloStanford University
Stanford, CA 94305
Tel: 650-353-1376
Stanford, CA 94305
Tel: 650-353-1376
email: kwankyup@stanford.edu
On Sep 10, 2012, at 9:06 AM, Brett Huff wrote:
<Incoming Wafer Contamination Policy.doc>Labmembers,The attached policy is being provided for your review. It is open to SNF User feedback for the next two weeks. At that time any accepted modifications will be incorporated and the document will be added to the SNF WIKI for future reference.
No comments:
Post a Comment