Feb. 12, 2003 — Launching the next MEMS device that duplicates the success of the air bag accelerometer will require a closer bond between makers and sellers, according to a new report.
The MEMS Industry Group’s (MIG) report, “Focus on Fabrication,” details the survey results of 250 MEMS companies and 60 foundries worldwide and examines fabrication issues and their impact on commercialization. It also contains new recommendations for the industry’s continued growth.
The report found that the single largest issue looming in the MEMS industry is standardization. And the lack of standardized materials and processes in making MEMS devices is a major roadblock to accelerating production and manufacturing repeatability.
 |
The surveys cited “disconnects” between developers of MEMS devices and the fabrication facilities, or fabs, that make them. More than half the fabs said they offered standard fabrication processes, but their customers rarely use them due to the custom nature of their products.
The industry group recognizes that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to MEMS fabrication because of the diversity and complexity of the devices. But officials say a balance must be struck between total customization and standardization if the industry wants to replicate the success of a few high-volume devices, such as accelerometers and inkjet micronozzles, which generate the most attention and revenue.
“If the industry is to become a true mature industry … part of the trade-off is you need to have standardization of some of the fabrication processes,” said Ken Gabriel, MIG’s executive director as well as chairman and chief technology officer of Akustica Inc., a Pittsburgh-based developer of MEMS-enabled microphones and speakers.
Although fabs welcome this trend, many said the industry was neither mature nor large enough to push for standards. Still, in the long run, the market would benefit from “semi-standard” processes based on each fab’s specialization. One respondent described it as a “club sandwich approach,” where a customer could choose what it wanted inside the sandwich, but the rest could be standardized to lower costs.
Among the survey respondents was Micralyne Inc., a Canadian fab that has been profitable while many others have struggled or even failed. Bruce Alton, Micralyne’s vice president of marketing and business development, said he sees benefits in a balanced approach for both users and suppliers of fab services, but believes market demand will drive universal standards.
“The volume products … will really influence what the standards will be,” he said. “We have to have a technology that works, but we want to win in the marketplace. It’s a combination of technology push and market pull.”
Jeffrey Niew is vice president and general manager of Emkay Innovative Products, a Knowles Electronics division that recently launched its own MEMS-based microphone. He said the lack of standards also poses a problem to the consumer.
He said Emkay and its primary competitors, Akustica and the Danish firm SonionMEMS, need to cooperate where they can to break into a market currently dominated by other technology.
“If each (of us) comes out with a different device that looks and acts differently, (the customer) is constantly going to be questioning whether or not he should make a decision now or wait — and the easiest thing for an end-customer to do is delay a decision,” he said.
“If we can’t convince people to switch over to MEMS … none of us wins in the long run.”
Respondents also said MEMS designers looking for the “perfect” MEMS wafer are not willing to sacrifice materials, performance or anything else for the sake of the device — even though forsaking those elements could enhance production and applications.
Niew, who would not reveal which fabs put together his company’s product, said Emkay’s first goal is keeping costs low.
“We were willing to give up performance characteristics in order to give up costs, and we’ve been successful in getting product to market,” he said. “You want the perfect MEMS device, you’re not going to get it. We had to prioritize, as opposed to being everything to everyone.”
MIG’s recommendations for developers include working with universities to create MEMS programs that will drive efficient use of manufacturing design guidelines, and creating an expert group to produce an “Optimized MEMS Design” handbook. On the manufacturing side, the industry group suggests creating a catalog that identifies core fab capabilities to help them specialize in certain processes, and a MEMS fabrication handbook to boost interaction and expectations of fabs and customers.
Marlene Bourne, a MEMS analyst for InStat/MDR and author of a 2002 year-in-review article that appeared in the report, said fabrication is an important topic for the industry, despite the divergent views.
“I don’t think the MEMS Industry Group is going to say, “Here are the standards — by decree, standardization is now up and running,'” she said. “There’s no question that the issue is the length of time it takes to go from prototype to manufacturing. … This report is putting steps in place to help ease that process.”