Tag Archives: letter-pulse-top

The car is not a simple mode of transportation anymore. In addition to security and autonomous driving features, car manufacturers are considering more and more functionalities to propose vehicles as custom and fashion item.

During the last few years, electronic, optoelectronic, software and various digital technologies along with societal changes are increasingly pressuring the automotive players in transforming offerings and business models faster than ever before. Under this context, automotive OEM firms remain focused on core competencies and also develop new ones. Lighting technologies are part of them.
The lighting market for automotive applications should reach a 23.7% compound annual growth rate (CAGR) 2015-2121 reaching a US$27.7 billion market in 2021, announces Yole Développement (Yole) in its latest LED report entitled “Automotive Lighting: Technology, Industry and Market trends”. The increasing role of design and the introduction of new functionalities including ambient light, rear light, turn signal, parking & day ruing lights, fog light, low/high beam light and more are the reasons of this success. But what are the companies behind this impressive growth? What will be the impact on the supply chain? LED, OLED – which technologies are today able to answer to the market needs? The market research and strategy consulting offers today its vision of this industry.

With this new technology & market analysis, the “More than Moore” company, Yole investigates the attractive world of lighting solutions for automotive applications. The automotive lighting report from Yole analyzes the status of the market and its applications. It reviews the structure of the automotive lighting industry and details the market and technology trends. Under this new analysis, Yole’s experts present the main lighting technologies developed for automotive applications and propose valuable roadmaps until 2021. They cover the whole supply chain from devices to systems and give market insights between 2013 and 2021.

With the recent integration of LED technology, lighting has evolved from a basic, functional feature to a distinctive feature with high-value potential in automotive. Indeed, LED technology has given manufacturers the opportunity for strong differentiation via lighting design and additional functionalities. This is particularly true for exterior lighting, but it is also spreading to interior lighting. These changes are heavily impacting the supply chain, with new suppliers and a new value chain emerging.

In 2015, the automotive lighting market totaled nearly US$22.4 billion, up 5.4% from 2014. “This growth was driven by increased lighting system content per vehicle and a more favorable product mix driven by strong adoption of LED-based front lighting systems,” says Pars Mukish, Business Manager, LED, OLED and sapphire activities at Yole. Indeed, headlamp and DRL systems represented 43% and 28% of total 2015 revenue, respectively. Other lighting systems including rear combination light/center high-mounted signal light, interior light, and side turn-signal light comprised the remaining 29% of 2015 revenue. According to Yole’s analysts, the automotive lighting market will continue growing, reaching a market size of almost US$27.7 billion by 2021 – +23.7% compared to 2015, and driven by different growth areas:
• Short-term: increased LED technology penetration rate into different automotive lighting applications/systems, and increased lighting content per vehicle.
• Middle/long-term: potential integration of new lighting technologies like OLED and laser, development of AFLS and other security functions, and incredible developments employing lighting as a new design feature.

automotive lighting industry

“From a geographic point of view, Asia is the largest market for automotive lighting systems, reflecting the trends in term of vehicle production location but with higher share of revenue from Europe due to more favorable product mix in this area,” explains Pierric Boulay, Technology & Market Analyst at Yole. However European and Japanese companies dominate and supply together 81% of the market:
• Koito, Stanley and Ichikoh capture 40% of the revenue
• From an European side, Yole’s analysts announce 13-14% market share for each key European players: Magneti Marelli, Hella and Valeo.

Yole’s report presents all automotive lighting applications and the associated market revenue for the period 2013 – 2021, with details concerning drivers and challenges, integration status of different lighting technologies and systems, recent trends, and market size per application

For the first time, scientists at IBM Research have demonstrated reliably storing 3 bits of data per cell using a relatively new memory technology known as phase-change memory (PCM).

The current memory landscape spans from venerable DRAM to hard disk drives to ubiquitous flash. But in the last several years PCM has attracted the industry’s attention as a potential universal memory technology based on its combination of read/write speed, endurance, non-volatility and density. For example, PCM doesn’t lose data when powered off, unlike DRAM, and the technology can endure at least 10 million write cycles, compared to an average flash USB stick, which tops out at 3,000 write cycles.

This research breakthrough provides fast and easy storage to capture the exponential growth of data from mobile devices and the Internet of Things.

For the first time, scientists at IBM Research have demonstrated reliably storing 3 bits of data per cell using a relatively new memory technology known as phase-change memory (PCM). This research breakthrough provides fast and easy storage to capture the exponential growth of data from mobile devices and the Internet of Things. In this photo, IBM scientist , Nikolaos Papandreou holds the PCM chip under a magnifying lens in his lab. (Credit: IBM Research)

For the first time, scientists at IBM Research have demonstrated reliably storing 3 bits of data per cell using a relatively new memory technology known as phase-change memory (PCM). This research breakthrough provides fast and easy storage to capture the exponential growth of data from mobile devices and the Internet of Things. In this photo, IBM scientist , Nikolaos Papandreou holds the PCM chip under a magnifying lens in his lab. (Credit: IBM Research)

Applications 

IBM scientists envision standalone PCM as well as hybrid applications, which combine PCM and flash storage together, with PCM as an extremely fast cache. For example, a mobile phone’s operating system could be stored in PCM, enabling the phone to launch in a few seconds. In the enterprise space, entire databases could be stored in PCM for blazing fast query processing for time-critical online applications, such as financial transactions.

Machine learning algorithms using large datasets will also see a speed boost by reducing the latency overhead when reading the data between iterations.

How PCM Works 

PCM materials exhibit two stable states, the amorphous (without a clearly defined structure) and crystalline (with structure) phases, of low and high electrical conductivity, respectively.

For the first time, scientists at IBM Research have demonstrated reliably storing 3 bits of data per cell using a relatively new memory technology known as phase-change memory (PCM). In this photo, the experimental multi-bit PCM chip used by IBM scientists is connected to a standard integrated circuit board. The chip consists of a 2 × 2 Mcell array with a 4- bank interleaved architecture. The memory array size is 2 × 1000 μm × 800 μm. The PCM cells are based on doped-chalcogenide alloy and were integrated into the prototype chip serving as a characterization vehicle in 90nm CMOS baseline technology. (Credit: IBM Research)

For the first time, scientists at IBM Research have demonstrated reliably storing 3 bits of data per cell using a relatively new memory technology known as phase-change memory (PCM). In this photo, the experimental multi-bit PCM chip used by IBM scientists is connected to a standard integrated circuit board. The chip consists of a 2 × 2 Mcell array with a 4- bank interleaved architecture. The memory array size is 2 × 1000 μm × 800 μm. The PCM cells are based on doped-chalcogenide alloy and were integrated into the prototype chip serving as a characterization vehicle in 90nm CMOS baseline technology. (Credit: IBM Research)

To store a ‘0’ or a ‘1’, known as bits, on a PCM cell, a high or medium electrical current is applied to the material. A ‘0’ can be programmed to be written in the amorphous phase or a ‘1’ in the crystalline phase, or vice versa. Then to read the bit back, a low voltage is applied. This is how re-writable Blue-ray Discs* store videos.

Previously scientists at IBM and other institutes have successfully demonstrated the ability to store 1 bit per cell in PCM, but today at the IEEE International Memory Workshop in Paris, IBM scientists are presenting, for the first time, successfully storing 3 bits per cell in a 64k-cell array at elevated temperatures and after 1 million endurance cycles.

“Phase change memory is the first instantiation of a universal memory with properties of both DRAM and flash, thus answering one of the grand challenges of our industry,” said Dr. Haris Pozidis, an author of the paper and the manager of non-volatile memory research at IBM Research – Zurich. “Reaching 3 bits per cell is a significant milestone because at this density the cost of PCM will be significantly less than DRAM and closer to flash.”

To achieve multi-bit storage IBM scientists have developed two innovative enabling technologies: a set of drift-immune cell-state metrics and drift-tolerant coding and detection schemes.

More specifically, the new cell-state metrics measure a physical property of the PCM cell that remains stable over time, and are thus insensitive to drift, which affects the stability of the cell’s electrical conductivity with time. To provide additional robustness of the stored data in a cell over ambient temperature fluctuations a novel coding and detection scheme is employed. This scheme adaptively modifies the level thresholds that are used to detect the cell’s stored data so that they follow variations due to temperature change. As a result, the cell state can be read reliably over long time periods after the memory is programmed, thus offering non-volatility.

“Combined these advancements address the key challenges of multi-bit PCM, including drift, variability, temperature sensitivity and endurance cycling,” said Dr. Evangelos Eleftheriou, IBM Fellow.

The experimental multi-bit PCM chip used by IBM scientists is connected to a standard integrated circuit board. The chip consists of a 2 × 2 Mcell array with a 4- bank interleaved architecture. The memory array size is 2 × 1000 μm × 800 μm. The PCM cells are based on doped-chalcogenide alloy and were integrated into the prototype chip serving as a characterization vehicle in 90 nm CMOS baseline technology.

OpenPOWER 

At the 2016 OpenPOWER Summit in San Jose, CA, last month, IBM scientists demonstrated, for the first time, phase-change memory attached to POWER8-based servers (made by IBM and TYAN® Computer Corp.) via the CAPI (Coherent Accelerator Processor Interface) protocol. This technology leverages the low latency and small access granularity of PCM, the efficiency of the OpenPOWER architecture and the CAPI protocol. In the demonstration the scientists measured very low and consistent latency for 128-byte read/writes between the PCM chips and the POWER8 processor.

For more information on today’s announcement watch this video: https://youtu.be/q3dIw3uAyE8. Continue the conversation at @IBMResearch #3bitPCM.

By Jonathan Davis, global VP, Industry Advocacy, SEMI

The 27th annual SEMI Advanced Semiconductor Manufacturing Conference (ASMC 2016), opened today (May 17) in Saratoga Springs, New York.  A record-setting 340-plus conference attendees joined this year’s event which focuses on key issues and trends in the manufacture of semiconductors.

Don O’Toole, IBM

Opening keynoter Don O’Toole of IBM’s Watson IoT Alliances & Ecosystem Business Development group highlighted the economic implications of the emerging Internet of Things and discussed how cognitive IoT is driving new business models.  He pointed to significant macroeconomic impacts as well as disruption and necessary change at the micro/strategic level within all enterprises.

In his talk on the “Economics of Things” he said that high-tech firms are challenged to continuously transform their business models and partner ecosystems to keep pace with the quickly evolving nature of business technology. Across industries, companies are turning their focus from traditional business equipment to a new generation of devices that will transform not just the electronics industry but many others.

O’Toole said that companies are moving beyond merely selling connected, intelligent products and services to using cognitive IoT to deliver greatly enhanced customer experiences over the life of their products. He described fundamental change or “liquidification” in the markets for physical goods.

Just as the internet created liquid markets with the digitization of music, news, maps, weather and traffic, the Internet of Things will eliminate physical constraints, structure information and create liquid markets in real estate, manufacturing, agriculture, retail and transportation. A radical repricing of credit and risk will improve financing and reduce “moral hazard,” which, in economic terms, is an information asymmetry that influences risk-taking to leverage lack of transparency.

The primary vectors of IoT to produce both opportunity and disruption will be the creation of new asset marketplaces, improved risk management and greater efficiency.  Fuller visibility and predictability will change market analysis and decision making with significant economic impact.  This characteristic will be apparent in widely varied industries including two that O’Toole profiled as examples: agriculture and real estate.

U.S. commercial real estate is a highly inefficient market in which lack of information transparency and predictability constrains utilization.  O’Toole said there is 12 billion square feet of commercial office space, however, only 67 percent is utilized.  IoT solutions that include sensor technology and user analytics potentially shift profit pools (as some actors benefit from the lack of information transparency), but can produce a $128 billion net economic benefit due to price efficiency and the elimination of shadow markets.

Similarly, agriculture faces high degrees of variability.  Despite significant scientific advancements, crop yields can fluctuate 39% between years, lending the moniker of “legalized gambling” to the farming industry. Employing IoT technologies that leverage sensors, monitoring, drones, cloud-based information systems and data analytics will reduce uncertainties, improve decision making and lead to better deployment of capital assets.  O’Toole estimates that this will produce a 6% decline in farm prices and raise GPD 2%. He cited California wine-maker E.J. Gallo’s ability to decrease water use by 20% as an example of the beneficial impact of cognitive IoT technologies.

While the economic benefits will accrue to multiple industries, high tech and electronics are to be among the greatest beneficiaries of the application of cognitive IoT functions in manufacturing. New ecosystems of customers and partners will develop.  Design and development will necessisarily change to be more agile, with faster prototyping and shorter product lifecycles.  O’Toole sees new value creation with machine-learned cognitive capabilities and natural language interfaces.

O’Toole expects to see far more information sharing between industries. He said that the permutations of ecosystems and industries that devices have to support are making interoperability the biggest challenge in the Internet of Things.

To win in the cognitive IoT era, O’Toole says companies must focus on experience. He offered the following advice:

·         Move from discrete, fixed engineering to continuous engineering

·         Future-proof designs with software-driven feature updates

·         Consider higher value business models that can shift capital expenses to operating expenses

·         Lead product development teams to use design thinking to better understand end-user personas

·         Build stronger relationships with end users by applying cognitive learning technologies to improve product services and experiences.

Other ASMC opening day sessions include contamination free manufacturing, advanced metrology, defect inspection, factory optimization, as well as 37 poster sessions on critical technological topics from representatives from global IC makers, equipment companies and materials providers.

By Debra Vogler, SEMI

The semiconductor industry is nothing if not persistent — it’s been working away at developing extreme ultraviolet lithography (EUVL) for many years. Though its production insertion target has slipped over the years, some say that the industry is getting closer to its introduction at the 5nm node. But it’s also true that some may be hedging their bets.

Whatever camp you fall into, the discussion is sure to be lively as a team of experts tackles the status of advanced lithography options that can get the industry from node 10 to node 5 (session “Lithography: Charting a Path, or Paths, between Nodes 10 and 5”, part of the Advanced Manufacturing Forum) at SEMICON West 2016 (July 12, 10:30am-12:30pm). Confirmed speakers for this event include Robert Aitken (ARM), Stephen Renwick (Nikon Research Corporation of America), Ben Rathsack (TEL), Mike Lercel (ASML), Mark Slezak (JSR Micro, Inc.), and Harry Levinson (GLOBALFOUNDRIES). The session will be moderated by Lithoguru’s Chris Mack. SEMI interviewed some of the session speakers to get a preview of the issues most likely to be addressed.

Equipment status

Mike Lercel, director of product marketing at ASML, told SEMI that his company is very confident that EUVL will be ready for next-generation nodes, having demonstrated progress on the NXE:3350B, which is intended for volume production: achieving 1,368 wafers per day at the ASML factory, and excellent imaging and overlay performance at >80W. He further noted that the company’s logic customers will take EUV into production in 2018-2019, so it needs to ship in volume a year before — likewise for DRAM. “We believe that EUV is cost-competitive around 1,500 good wafers per day, but the crossover point may be lower depending on the customer and the application.”

Having already achieved the productivity milestone of 1,368 wafers per day makes EUVL cost-competitive or break-even for many applications, said Lercel, primarily because multiple patterning is becoming too difficult and EUV is needed to reduce this complexity. “Additionally, we’ve exposed more than 300,000 wafers on multiple NXE:3300 scanners at customer sites and that has accelerated our rates of learning. A 125W EUV source setting has been qualified and is ready for field rollout, and we demonstrated 200W source power at ASML.” He also noted that the company has a robust EUVL product roadmap, including a high-NA EUV scanner, which will take it into the next decade and beyond. “As long as the industry continues to scale and we are not close to reaching devices’ physical limits, there will be a need for EUV.”

Lercel acknowledged that EUVL productivity must continue to be improved and throughput is closely connected to source power and tool reliability. “We’ve derived new understandings from plasma modeling and computational lithography that have enabled us to significantly increase our conversion efficiency,” said Lercel. “This was a key contributing factor in our latest 200W achievement and builds confidence in our ability to reach 250W by the end of the year, which is the source power required for 1,500 wafers per day.”

Materials and infrastructure for EUVL

There are still a number of challenges remaining for the infrastructure needed to support EUVL. Among them are actinic inspections for blanks and resists. “Deposition tools and post-pellicle mask inspection must catch up to support EUVL,” said Lercel, who told SEMI that notable progress has already been made on E-beam mask inspection high-volume manufacturing (HVM) tools and on an actinic blank inspection tool development program led by the EUVL Infrastructure Development Center (EIDEC).

In other developments reported by Lercel, Zeiss is working on an AIMS tool for defect disposition; and at imec’s EUV Resist Manufacturing & Qualification Center (EUV RMQC), the industry-wide manufacturing infrastructure and quality control capabilities needed to take EUVL into HVM are being finalized. Other R&D efforts are continuing to improve EUV blank quality process and yield — defects are now reaching single digits said Lercel. ASML is also in the process of commercializing a pellicle. Significant gaps still exist with respect to a blank multi-layer deposition tool that needs to have improved defect results. “Multiple deposition techniques are being evaluated to define the HVM tool approach,” said Lercel. “And post-pellicle mask inspection (APMI) is not on timeline for insertion,” so the industry needs other options.

Regarding EUVL resists, Mark Slezak, executive vice-president, at JSR Micro, Inc., told SEMI that short-term, the materials industry is continuing to evolve and improve chemically amplified systems that are allowing technical requirements to be met at 7nm (see Figure 1 for examples of recent performance data). “Longer term, the industry is focused on new alternative approaches to chemically amplified systems with a variety of techniques, including molecular resists, nano-particles, and advanced sensitizers,” said Slezak, who will also present at SEMICON West 2016. “Additionally, in the case of both 193i and EUV, the material industry is working on post-development solutions, such as chemical shrink, pattern collapse mitigation, and combinations with DSA (directed self-assembly) that enable further imaging extensions.”

Figure 1: Examples of recent progress in patterning materials. Source: ASML, PSI, and imec

Figure 1: Examples of recent progress in patterning materials.
Source: ASML, PSI, and imec

As a company, JSR Micro is preparing to provide scaled-up EUV materials in a HVM setting, including advanced quality control, as early as the end of 2016, Slezak told SEMI. “However, we see that the most likely insertion point for significant volumes is in the 2018 time period.”

Overall outlook

Chris Mack summed up the industry’s current dilemma with respect to EUVL and getting from node 10 to node 5. “The whole idea of continuing on the Moore’s Law progression is to reduce the cost of a transistor by shrinking it,” Mack told SEMI. “We’ve seen a flattening of the cost/transistor trends over time lately, and I think there are some serious questions as to whether or not any specific new technology node from 10nm on will actually result in a lower cost/transistor — and if it doesn’t, there won’t be much motivation for designs to migrate to these nodes.”

Mack further observed that the cost of lithography already accounts for more than 50% of the cost of making a chip, and possibly even as high as 70% depending on the design. “As those costs escalate with each node, we worry that the cost savings won’t be enough to compensate for the higher design costs.” Citing conventional wisdom, Mack noted that the rule-of-thumb with respect to the break-even point for deciding to use EUVL is that it has to be able to cost-effectively replace three 193nm immersion steps (or masks). While there are a lot of assumptions that go into the cost-of-ownership models, Mack explained that if throughput levels can get to around 60-90wph, that would make one EUV layer cost-competitive with three 193nm immersion exposures. “I think most people agree that EUV would then be worthwhile to do. The hope is to be able to do that at the 5nm node.”

Aside from the actual technical challenges that remain to be solved before EUVL can be inserted into HVM, the major hurdle is time. “People are planning the 7nm logic node right now,” said Mack, “and no one is willing to commit to EUV for 7nm because it’s not ready.” He further explained that TSMC has said publicly it plans to exercise EUV in parallel with 193i manufacturing for the 7nm node and then implement EUV in manufacturing at the 5nm node. That would place it at around the 2020 time frame. “If EUV hits its schedule between now and 2018/2019, then we may see TSMC commit to using EUV at 5nm.” Conversely, if the EUV schedule slips and is still too risky to implement, then when 2019 comes around, it could very well be that EUVL will be pushed out even further. “Because foundries have to accept design rules about two years before manufacturing begins, and because the design rules for multiple-patterning 193 immersion are very different from single-patterning EUV, TSMC and other foundries will have to make their call about two years from now.”

For DRAM, Mack says there is still a desire for EUV to be successful, but the window is rapidly disappearing. “We might see more chip stacking as a solution going forward for DRAM,” said Mack, but “then we could see 193nm immersion SADP (single immersion double-patterning) for 20nm DRAM.” Below 20nm DRAM, If EUV isn’t ready, Mack says that chip stacking would be the solution, which leaves EUV for logic, primarily at 5nm.

“Here’s where an interesting phenomenon happens,” Mack told SEMI. “The classic view of Moore’s Law — a doubling of the number of components on a chip every two years — has been carrying on for over 50 years. Current trends are redefining the meaning of Moore’s Law (see Figure 2).”

The industry is seeing a slow-down in, i.e., 3-year cycles instead of 2-year cycles. “If that trend continues and EUV is late, that would give some breathing room for EUV to catch up. So it might be ready in time for the 5nm node.”

Figure 2: Moore’s Law trend. Courtesy: Chris Mack

Figure 2: Moore’s Law trend. Courtesy: Chris Mack

These speakers and more will present at SEMICON West 2016 (July 12-14) in San Francisco, Calif. The new SEMICON West offers eight forums: Extended Supply Chain, Advanced Manufacturing Chain Forum, Advanced Packaging Forum, Test Forum, Sustainable Manufacturing Forum, Silicon Innovation Forum, Flexible Hybrid Electronics Forum, and World of IoT Forum. Register before June 3 and save $50.

A combination of device releases, price reductions, and company rationalizations marked the first quarter of 2016 (1Q16) in the worldwide wearables market. According to data from International Data Corporation, (IDC) Worldwide Quarterly Wearable Device Tracker, total shipment volumes reached 19.7 million units in 1Q16, an increase of 67.2% from the 11.8 million units shipped in 1Q15.

The first quarter saw its fair share of significant events to entice customers, with multiple fitness trackers and smartwatches introduced at the major technology shows; post-holiday price reductions on multiple wearables, including Apple’s Sport Watch; and greater participation within emerging wearables categories, particularly clothing and footwear. Conversely, several start-ups announced headcount reduction or shut down entirely, underscoring how competitive the wearables market has become.

“The good news is that the wearables market continues to mature and expand,” noted Ramon Llamas, research manager for IDC’s Wearables team. “The wearables that we see today are several steps ahead of what we saw when this market began, increasingly taking their cues from form, function, and fashion. That keeps them relevant. The downside is that it is becoming a crowded market, and not everyone is guaranteed success.”

Still, there are two areas where the market shows continued growth: smart watches and basic wearables (devices which do not run third party applications).

“There’s a clear bifurcation and growth within the wearables market,” said Jitesh Ubrani senior research analyst for IDC’s Mobile Device Trackers. “Smart watches attempt to offer holistic experiences by being everything to everyone, while basic wearables like fitness bands, connected clothing, or hearables have a focused approach and often offer specialized use cases.”

Ubrani continued, “It’s shortsighted to think that basic wearables and smart watches are in competition with each other. Right now, we see both as essential to expand the overall market. The unique feature sets combined with substantial differences in price and performance sets each category apart, and leaves plenty of room for both to grow over the next few years.”

Top Five Wearables Vendors

Fitbit began 2016 the same way it finished 2015: as the undisputed leader in the wearables market. The launch of its new Alta and Blaze devices resulted in million unit shipment volumes for each, pointing to a new chapter of fashion-oriented fitness trackers. It also points to significant declines for its previously successful Surge, Charge, Charge HR, and Flex product lines. Still, with a well-segmented portfolio, pricing strategy, and a strong brand, Fitbit’s position is well-established.

Xiaomi supplanted Apple in 1Q16 and captured the number 2 position. The company expanded its line of inexpensive fitness trackers to include heartrate monitoring and also recently launched a kids’ watch to help parents track their children. It should be pointed out that its success is solely based on China, and expanding beyond its home turf will continue to be its largest hurdle.

According to Apple CEO Tim Cook, the Watch has met the company’s expectations. Its total volumes and revenue trailed far behind its iPhone, iPad, and Mac product lines, and did little to stem their declines. Until the next version of the Watch comes out, it would appear that Apple will continuously update its watch bands to keep the product relevant.

Garmin finished slightly ahead of Samsung on the strength of its wristbands and watches appealing to a wide range of athletes, most especially golfers, runners, and fitness tracker enthusiasts. While the company added two fitness trackers with the vivoactive HR and the vivofit 3, Garmin launched its first eyeworn device, the Varia Vision In-Sight Display, for cyclists.

Samsung landed in the number 5 position on the success of its Gear S2 and Gear S2 Classic smartwatch. What sets the Gear S2 apart from most other smartwatches is that it is among the very few with a cellular connectivity version, forgoing the need to be constantly tethered to a smartphone. It is also compatible with Android smartphones beyond Samsung’s own, broadening its reach. However, its application selection trails behind what is available for Android Wear and watchOS.

BBK tied* with Samsung for fifth place worldwide. This is the second time that BBK finished among the top five vendors worldwide, having debuted in 3Q15 with its Y01 phone watch for children. The company returns with another phone watch for children, the Y02 with improved water resistance and durability.

Top Five Wearables Vendors, Shipments, Market Share and Year-Over-Year Growth, Q1 2016 (Units in Millions)
Vendor

1Q16 Unit
Shipments

1Q16 Market
Share

1Q15 Unit
Shipments

1Q15 Market
Share

Year-Over-
Year Growth
1. Fitbit 4.8 24.5 % 3.8 32.6 % 25.4 %
2. Xiaomi 3.7 19.0 % 2.6 22.4 % 41.8 %
3. Apple 1.5 7.5 % N/A 0.0 % N/A
4. Garmin 0.9 4.6 % 0.7 6.1 % 27.8 %
5. Samsung* 0.7 3.6 % 0.7 5.8 % 4.5 %
5. BBK* 0.7 3.6 % N/A 0.0 % N/A
Others 7.3 37.2 % 3.9 33.1 % 87.9 %
Total 19.7 100.0 % 11.8 100.0 % 67.2 %
Source: IDC Worldwide Quarterly Wearables Tracker, May 16, 2016

* IDC declares a statistical tie in the worldwide wearables market when there is less than one tenth of one percent (0.1%) difference in the unit shipment share of two or more vendors.

Top Five Basic Wearables Vendors, Shipments, Market Share and Year-Over-Year Growth, Q1 2016 (Units in Millions)
Vendor

1Q16 Unit
Shipments

1Q16 Market
Share

1Q15 Unit
Shipments

1Q15 Market
Share

Year-Over-
Year Growth
1. Fitbit 4.8 29.4 % 3.8 38.7 % 25.4 %
2. Xiaomi 3.7 22.8 % 2.6 26.6 % 41.8 %
3. Garmin 0.8 5.0 % 0.6 6.0 % 36.5 %
4. XTC 0.7 4.3 % N/A 0.0 % N/A
5. Lifesense 0.7 4.1 % N/A 0.0 % N/A
Others 5.7 34.5 % 2.9 28.7 % 98.2 %
Total 16.4 100.0 % 9.9 100.0 % 65.1 %
Source: IDC Worldwide Quarterly Wearables Tracker, May 16, 2016
Top Five Smartwatch Vendors, Shipments, Market Share and Year-Over-Year Growth, Q1 2016 (Units in Millions)
Vendor

1Q16 Unit
Shipments

1Q16 Market
Share

1Q15 Unit
Shipments

1Q15 Market
Share

Year-Over-
Year Growth
1. Apple 1.5 46.0 % N/A 0.0 % N/A
2. Samsung 0.7 20.9 % 0.5 29.8 % 40.5 %
3. Motorola 0.4 10.9 % 0.2 11.0 % 98.2 %
4. Huawei 0.2 4.7 % N/A 0.0 % N/A
5. Garmin 0.1 3.0 % 0.1 7.2 % -17.3 %
Others 0.5 14.5 % 0.8 52.0 % -44.2 %
Total 3.2 100.0 % 1.6 100.0 % 100.2 %
Source: IDC Worldwide Quarterly Wearables Tracker, May 16, 2016

Table Notes:

  • Data is preliminary and subject to change.
  • Vendor shipments are branded device shipments and exclude OEM sales for all vendors.
  • The “Vendor” represents the current parent company (or holding company) for all brands owned and operated as a subsidiary.
  • The table labeled “Top Five Wearables Vendors…” represents the sum of both basic and smart wearables equaling the total wearable market size.
  • The table labeled “Top Five Basic Wearables Vendors…” represents the total basic wearable market size.
  • The table labeled “Top Five Smartwatch Vendors…” does not equal total smart wearable market size as certain form factors (i.e. eyewear, wristbands) are excluded.

In addition to the tables above, an interactive graphic showing worldwide market share by device type over the previous five quarters is available here. The chart is intended for public use in online news articles and social media. Instructions on how to embed this graphic can be found by viewing this press release on IDC.com.

IC Insights will release its May Update to the 2016 McClean Report later this month.  This Update includes a discussion of the 1Q16 semiconductor industry market results, an update of the capital spending forecast by company, a review of the IC market by electronic system type, and a look at the top-25 1Q16 semiconductor suppliers (the top 20 1Q16 semiconductor suppliers are covered in this research bulletin).

The top-20 worldwide semiconductor (IC and O S D—optoelectronic, sensor, and discrete) sales ranking for 1Q16 is shown in Figure 1.  It includes eight suppliers headquartered in the U.S., three in Japan, three in Taiwan, three in Europe, two in South Korea, and one in Singapore, a relatively broad representation of geographic regions.

The top-20 ranking includes three pure-play foundries (TSMC, GlobalFoundries, and UMC) and six fabless companies. If the three pure-play foundries were excluded from the top-20 ranking, U.S.-based IDM ON Semiconductor ($817 million), China-based fabless supplier HiSilicon ($810 million), and Japan-based IDM Sharp ($800 million) would have been ranked in the 18th, 19th, and 20th positions, respectively.

IC Insights includes foundries in the top-20 semiconductor supplier ranking since it has always viewed the ranking as a top supplier list, not a marketshare ranking, and realizes that in some cases the semiconductor sales are double counted.  With many of our clients being vendors to the semiconductor industry (supplying equipment, chemicals, gases, etc.), excluding large IC manufacturers like the foundries would leave significant “holes” in the list of top semiconductor suppliers.  As shown in the listing, the foundries and fabless companies are identified.  In the April Update to The McClean Report, marketshare rankings of IC suppliers by product type were presented and foundries were excluded from these listings.

Overall, the top-20 list shown in Figure 1 is provided as a guideline to identify which companies are the leading semiconductor suppliers, whether they are IDMs, fabless companies, or foundries.

Figure 1

Figure 1

In total, the top-20 semiconductor companies’ sales declined by 6% in 1Q16/1Q15, one point less than the total worldwide semiconductor industry decline of 7%.  Although, in total, the top-20 1Q16 semiconductor companies registered a moderate 6% drop, there were seven companies that displayed a double-digit 1Q16/1Q15 decline and three that registered a ≥25% fall (with memory giants Micron and SK Hynix posting the worst results).  Half of the top-20 companies had sales of at least $2.0 billion in 1Q16.  As shown, it took $832 million in quarterly sales just to make it into the 1Q16 top-20 semiconductor supplier list.

There was one new entrant into the top-20 ranking in 1Q16—U.S.-based fabless supplier AMD.  AMD had a particularly rough 1Q16 and saw its sales drop 19% year-over-year to $832 million, which was about half the $1,589 million in sales the company logged just over two years ago in 4Q13.  Although AMD did not have a good 1Q16, Japan-based Sharp, the only company that fell from the top-20 ranking, faired even worse with its 1Q16/1Q15 sales plunging by 30%!

In order to allow for more useful year-over-year comparisons, acquired/merged semiconductor company sales results were combined for both 1Q15 and 1Q16, regardless of when the acquisition or merger occurred.  For example, although Intel’s acquisition of Altera did not close until late December of 2015, Altera’s 1Q15 sales ($435 million) were added to Intel’s 1Q15 sales ($11,632 million) to come up with the $12,067 million shown in Figure 1 for Intel’s 1Q15 sales.  The same method was used to calculate the 1Q15 sales for Broadcom Ltd. (Avago/Broadcom), NXP (NXP/Freescale), and GlobalFoundries (GlobalFoundries/IBM).

Apple is an anomaly in the top-20 ranking with regards to major semiconductor suppliers. The company designs and uses its processors only in its own products—there are no sales of the company’s MPUs to other system makers. Apple’s custom ARM-based SoC processors had a “sales value” of $1,390 million in 1Q16, up 10% from $1,260 million in 1Q15.  Apple’s MPUs have been used in 13 iPhone handset designs since 2007 and a dozen iPad tablet models since 2010 as well as in iPod portable media players, smartwatches, and Apple TV units.  Apple’s custom processors—such as the 64-bit A9 used in iPhone 6s and 6s Plus handsets introduced in September 2015 and the new iPhone 6SE launched in March 2016—are made by pure-play foundry TSMC and IDM foundry Samsung.

Intel remained firmly in control of the number one spot in 1Q16.  In fact, it increased its lead over Samsung’s semiconductor sales from 29% in 1Q15 to 40% in 1Q16.  The biggest moves in the ranking were made by the new Broadcom Ltd. (Avago/Broadcom) and Nvidia, each of which jumped up three positions in 1Q16 as compared to 1Q15.

As would be expected, given the possible acquisitions and mergers that could/will occur this year (e.g., Microchip/Atmel), as well as any new ones that may develop, the top-20 semiconductor ranking is likely to undergo a significant amount of upheaval over the next few years as the semiconductor industry continues along its path to maturity.

FlexTech, a SEMI Strategic Association Partner, today announced the formal completion of three flexible hybrid electronics (FHE) R&D projects under its U.S. Army Research Laboratory  (ARL) technology investment agreement.  The completed projects are with ENrG for a flexible ceramic substrate; nScrypt and NovaCentrix for a next-generation three-dimensional (3D) printing tool for creating complex and functional objects; and PARC, a Xerox company, for a flexible sensor platform. Projects ranged from 12-18 months and were managed by a member of the FlexTech Technical Council, which is a team of experts in flexible, hybrid and printed electronics technologies.

  • ENrG, located in Buffalo, New York, completed a 15 month project to develop a high-yield process to create a 20 micron thick, flexible ceramic substrate capable of retaining its integrity when drilled, cut, rolled and processed at high temperatures. During the project, ENrG developed processes to print thin-film lithium batteries, circuits, application of copper cladding and other metallization with excellent performance characteristics. The project, valued at $570,000 total, was 56% cost shared by the company.
  • nScrypt, based in Orlando, Florida, in partnership with NovaCentrix of Austin, Texas, developed a 3D printer for rapid prototyping of new electronic devices. The total award of $1,291,000 was cost-shared by nScrpyt, NovaCentrix and FlexTech and it was completed over a 16-month period. The new tool additively builds integrated hybrid circuits on 3D surfaces, as well as devices on flexible, low temperature, and rigid planar substrates. It integrates processing of three previously-separate tools. The first tool has been installed at ARL. Commercial tools are available from nScrypt.
  • PARC, a Xerox Company, Palo Alto, California, developed a passively powered, digitally-fabricated, communication-enabled, flexible sensor platform that is easily customizable to multiple sensor types. The project addressed the availability of an end-to-end system design that can be manufactured in large quantities with digital printing for smart tag or wearable applications. In its final report, the PARC researchers noted several key areas where additional development would be helpful, including components designed specifically to be compatible with flexible, printed sensor systems. Total cost was $409,000 and shared equally between PARC and FlexTech.

“Each of these projects, chosen and supported by the Technical Council, moves the needle on learning how to fabricate electronics on flexible substrates,” stated Michael Ciesinski, president of FlexTech. “Especially impressive is the teaming on the projects, which helps build out the FHE supply chain.”

FlexTech, a SEMI Strategic Association Partner, is focused on growth, profitability, and success throughout the manufacturing and distribution chain of flexible hybrid electronics, by developing solutions for advancing these technologies from R&D to commercialization. Learn more at www.nscrypt.com, www.novacentrix.com, www.enrg-inc.com, www.parc.com

For more information, visit www.semi.org

Standard solutions and devices are compared to a 60 V MOSFET with monolithic Schottky diode as evaluated in SMPS and motor control environments.

BY FILIPPO SCRIMIZZI and FILADELFO FUSILLO, STMicroelectronics, Stradale Primosole 50, Catania, Italy

On synchronous rectification and in bridge configuration, RDSon and Qg are not the only requirements for power MOSFETs. In fact, the dynamic behavior of intrinsic body-drain diode also plays an important role in the overall MOSFET performances. The forward voltage drop (VF,diode) of a body-drain diode impacts the device losses during freewheeling periods (when the device is in off-state and the current flows from source to drain through the intrinsic diode); the reverse recovery charge (Qrr) affects not only the device losses during the reverse recovery process but also the switching behavior, as the voltage spike across the MOSFET increases with Qrr. So, low VFD and Qrr diodes, like Schottky, can improve overall device performance, especially when mounted in bridge topologies or used as synchronous rectifiers—especially at high switching frequency and for long diode conduction times. In this article, we compare standard solutions and devices to a 60 V MOSFET with monolithic Schottky diode as evaluated in SMPS and motor control environments.

Intrinsic MOSFET body-drain diode and Schottky features

In FIGURE 1, the typical symbol for an N-channel Power MOSFET is depicted. The intrinsic body-drain diode is formed by the p-body and n–drift regions and is shown in parallel to the MOSFET channel.

Screen Shot 2016-05-11 at 12.08.52 PM

 

Once a Power MOSFET is selected, the integral body diode is fixed by silicon characteristic and device design. As the intrinsic body diode is paralleled to the device channel, it is important to analyze its static and dynamic behavior, especially in applications where the body diode conducts. So, maximum blocking voltage and forward current have to be considered in reverse and forward bias, while, when the diode turns-off after conducting, it is important to investigate the reverse recovery process (FIGURE 2). When the diode goes from forward to reverse bias, the current doesn’t reduce to zero immediately, as the charge stored during on-state has to be removed. So, at t = t0, the diode commutation process starts, and the current reduces with a constant and slope (-a), fixed only by the external inductances and the supply voltage. The diode is forward biased until t1, while from t1 to t2, the voltage drop across the diode increases, reaching the supply voltage with the maximum reverse current at t=t2. The time interval (t3-t0) is defined as reverse recovery time (trr) while the area between negative current and zero line is the reverse recovery charge (Qrr).The current slope during tB is linked mainly to device design and silicon characteristics.

Screen Shot 2016-05-11 at 12.08.59 PM

The classification of soft and snap recovery is based on the softness factor: Screen Shot 2016-05-11 at 12.09.58 PMthis parameter can be important in many applications. The higher the softness factor, the softer the recovery. In fact, if tB region is very short, the effect of quick current change with the circuit intrinsic inductances can produce undesired voltage overshoot and ringing. This voltage spike could exceed the device breakdown voltage: moreover, EMI performances worsen. As shown in Fig. 2, during diode recovery, high currents and reverse voltage can produce instantaneous power dissipation, reducing the system efficiency. Moreover, in bridge topologies, the maximum reverse recovery current of a Low Side device adds to the High Side current, increasing its power dissipation up to maximum ratings. In switching applications, like bridge topologies, buck converters, or synchronous rectification, body diodes are used as freewheeling elements. In these cases, reverse recovery charge (Qrr) reduction can help maximize system efficiency and limit possible voltage spike and switching noise at turn-off. One strategy to reach this target to integrate a Schottky diode in the MOSFET structure. A Schottky diode is realized by an electrical contact between a thin film of metal and a semiconductor region. As the current is mainly due to majority carriers, Schottky diode has lower stored charge, and consequently, it can be switched from forward to reverse bias faster than a silicon device. An additional advantage is its lower forward voltage drop (≈0.3 V) than Si diodes, meaning that a Schottky diode has lower losses during the on state.

Embedding the Schottky diode in a 60V power MOSFET is the right device choice when Qrr and VF,diode have to be optimized to enhance the overall system performance. In FIGURE 3, the main electrical parameters of standard and integrated Schottky devices (same BVDSS and die size) are reported.

Screen Shot 2016-05-11 at 12.09.06 PM

Benefits of Mono Schottky in a power management environment

In a synchronous buck converter (FIGURE 4), a power MOSFET with integrated Schottky diode can be mounted as a Low Side device (S2) to enhance the overall converter performance.

Screen Shot 2016-05-11 at 12.09.13 PM

In fact, Low Side body diode conduction losses (Pdiode,cond) and reverse recovery losses (PQrr) are strictly related to the diode forward voltage drop (VF,diode) and its reverse recovery charge (Qrr):

Screen Shot 2016-05-11 at 12.09.20 PM

As shown in (1) and (2), these losses increase with the switching frequency, the converter input voltage, and the output current. Moreover, the dead time, when both FETs are off and the current flows in the Low Side body diode, seriously affects the diode conduction losses: with long dead times, a low diode forward voltage drop helps to minimize its conduction losses, therefore increasing the efficiency. In FIGURE 5, the efficiency in a 60W, 48V – 12V, 250 kHz synchronous buck converter is depicted.

Screen Shot 2016-05-11 at 12.09.26 PM

Now, considering isolated power converters’ environment, when the output power increases and the dead time values are high, the right secondary side synchronous rectifier should have not only RDSon as low as possible to reduce conduction losses, but also optimized body diode behavior (in terms of Qrr and VF,diode) in order to reduce diode losses (as reported in (1) and (2)) and to minimize possible voltage spikes during turn-off transient. The 60V standard MOSFET and one with Schottky integrated devices are compared in a 500W digital power supply, formed by two power stages: power factor corrector and an LLC with synchronous rectification. The maximum output current is 42 A, while the switching frequency at full load is 80 kHz, and the dead time is 1μs. The efficiency curves are compared in FIGURE 6.

Screen Shot 2016-05-11 at 12.09.32 PM

In both topologies, the 60 V plus Schottky device shows higher efficiency in the entire current range, an improvement in overall system performance.

Switching behavior improvement in bridge topologies

In bridge topologies, reverse recovery process occurs at the end of the freewheeling period of the Low Side device (Q2 in FIGURE 7), before the High Side (Q1 in Fig. 7) starts conducting. The resulting recovery current adds to the High Side current (as previously explained). Together with the extra-current on the High Side device, the Low Side reverse recovery and its commutation from Vds ≈ 0 V to Vdc can produce spurious bouncing on the Low Side gate- source voltage, due to induced charging of Low Side Ciss (input capacitance) via Crss (Miller capacitance).

Screen Shot 2016-05-11 at 12.09.38 PM

As a consequence, the induced voltage on Q2 gate could turn-on the device, worsening system robustness and efficiency. A Low Side device, in bridge configuration, should have soft commutation, without dangerous voltage spikes and high frequency ringing across drain and source. This switching behavior can be achieved using power MOSFETs with integrated Schottky diode as Low Side devices. In fact, the lower reverse recovery charge (Qrr) has a direct impact on the overshoot value. In fact, the higher the Qrr, the higher the overshoot. Lower values for Vds overshoot and ringing reduce the spurious voltage bouncing on the Low Side gate, limiting the potential risk for a shoot-through event. Furthermore, soft recovery enhances overall EMI performances, as the switching noise is reduced. In FIGURE 8 are shown the High Side turn-on waveforms for standard and embedded Schottky devices; purple trace (left graph) and green trace (right graph) are Low Side gate-source voltages. The device with Schottky diode shows a strong reduction of Low Side spurious bouncing.

Screen Shot 2016-05-11 at 12.09.47 PM

Summary

In many applications (synchronous rectification for indus- trial and telecom SMPS, DC-AC inverter, motor drives), choosing the right MOSFET means not only considering RDSon and Qg but also evaluating the static and dynamic behavior of the intrinsic body-drain diode. A 60V “F7” power MOSFET with integrated Schottky diode ensures optimized performances in efficiency and commutation when a soft reverse recovery with low Qrr is required. Furthermore, the low VF,diode value achieves higher efficiency when long freewheeling periods or dead-times are present in the application.

References

1. “Fundamental of Power Semiconductor Devices”, B.J.Baliga – 2008, Springer Science

Worldwide semiconductor capital spending is projected to decline 2 percent in 2016, to $62.8 billion, according to Gartner, Inc. (see Table 1). This is up from the estimated 4.7 percent decline in Gartner’s previous quarterly forecast.

“While the first quarter 2016 forecast has improved from a projected decline of 4.7 percent in the previous quarter’s forecast, the 2 percent decline in the market for 2016 is still bleak,” said David Christensen, senior research analyst at Gartner. “Excess inventory and weak demand for PCs, tablets, and mobile products continue to plague the semiconductor industry, resulting in a slow growth rate that began in late 2015 and is continuing into 2016.”

Table 1

Worldwide Semiconductor Capital Spending and Equipment Spending Forecast, 2015-2018 (Millions of Dollars)

2015

2016

2017

2018

Semiconductor Capital Spending ($M)

64,062.9

62,795.3

65,528.5

70,009.5

Growth (%)

-0.8

-2.0

4.4

6.8

Wafer-Level Manufacturing Equipment ($M)

33,248.1

32,642.0

34,897.6

37,641.1

Growth (%)

-1.1

-1.8

6.9

7.9

Wafer Fab Equipment ($M)

31,485.4

30,841.9

32,930.3

35,443.4

Growth (%)

-1.3

-2.0

6.8

7.6

Wafer-Level Packaging and Assembly Equipment ($M)

1,762.7

1,800.2

1,967.3

2,197.7

Growth (%)

4.1

2.1

9.3

11.7

Source: Gartner (May 2016)

“The slowdown in the devices market has driven semiconductor producers to be conservative with their capital spending plans,” said Mr. Christensen. “This year, leading semiconductor manufacturers are responding to anticipated weak demand from semiconductors and preparing for new growth in leading-edge technologies in 2017.”

In addition, the aggressive pursuit of semiconductor manufacturing capability by the Chinese government is an issue that cannot be ignored by the semiconductor manufacturing industry. In the last year, there has been consolidation and merger and acquisition (M&A) activity with specific offers from various Chinese-based entities, indicating the aggressiveness of the Chinese. This will dramatically affect the competitive landscape of global semiconductor manufacturing in the next few years, as China is now a major market for semiconductor usage and manufacturing.

Looking forward, the market is expected to return to growth in 2017. Increased demand for 10 nanometer (nm) and 3D NAND process development in memory and logic/foundry will drive overall spending to grow 4.4 percent in 2017.

This research is produced by Gartner’s Semiconductor Manufacturing program. This research program, which is part of the overall semiconductor research group, provides a comprehensive view of the entire semiconductor industry, from manufacturing to device and application market trends. Additional analysis on the outlook for the semiconductor market can be found at “Forecast Analysis: Capital Spending and Semiconductor Manufacturing Equipment, Worldwide, 1Q16.”

With discussion increasingly focused on autonomous vehicles and vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) and vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) communication, demand is rising for electronic systems to support new, intelligent cars. Meanwhile, older, existing technology on high-end vehicles continues to migrate down to mid-range and low-end cars and technology-based aftermarket products are gaining momentum.

Given all the new electronic systems that have been added to automobiles in recent years, one might reason that this segment accounts for a large share of the total global electronic system sales. That’s simply not the case. On a worldwide basis, automotive electronics represented only 8.9% of the $1.42 trillion total 2015 worldwide electronic systems market, a slight increase from 8.6% in 2014. Automotive’s share of global electronic system production has increased only incrementally and is forecast to show only slight gains through 2019, when automotive electronics are forecast to account for 9.4% of global electronic systems sales. Despite the many new electronics systems that are being added in new vehicles, IC Insights believes pricing pressures on automotive ICs and electronic systems will prevent the automotive end-use application from accounting for much more than its current share of total electronic systems sales through 2019.

Figure 1 shows the quarterly market trends for the three largest automotive IC markets—Analog, MCU, and special-purpose logic. As shown, falling average selling prices in these three segments have largely offset unit growth over the past few years. In 2015, falling ASPs led to a 3% decline in the automotive IC market to $20.5 billion. Based on IC Insights’ forecast, the automotive IC market will return to growth in 2016, increasing 4.9% to $21.5 billion, as currency exchange rates stabilize and additional electronic systems (such as backup cameras) become mandatory equipment on new cars sold in the U.S. The automotive IC market is now forecast to reach $28.0 billion in 2019, which represents average annual growth of 5.8% from $21.1 billion in 2014. Based on IC Insights’ forecast, the 2019 automotive IC market will be 2.6x the size it was in 2009 when the market was only $10.6 billion—its low-point during the great recession.

Figure 1

Figure 1

Analog ICs and MCUs together accounted for 74% of the estimated $20.5 billion automotive IC market in 2015. Demand for automotive MCUs continues to expand as more vehicles are designed with embedded computer systems to address safety and efficiency issues demanded from legislators and consumers. As cars get smarter and more connected, demand is growing for memory and storage to support a wide array of applications, particularly those that require quick boot up times as soon as the driver turns the ignition key. DRAM and flash memory, which receive considerable attention in computing, consumer, and communication applications, are currently much less visible in the automotive IC market but memory ICs are expected to account for 12.0% of the 2019 automotive IC market, an increase from 7.8% in 2015.