Tag Archives: Small Times Magazine

November 5, 2009 –  FEI Co. says it has sold its Phenom desktop scanning electron microscope line to Phenom-World, a majority-owned subsidiary of NTS Group BV of Eindhoven, The Netherlands, a manufacturing partner which was "closely involved" with development of the tool and will continue marketing/sales/distribution/service.

FEI will retain a minority stake in Phenom-World as well as certain unspecified IP; financial terms were not disclosed, though FEI says it expects to result in "minimal impact" on 4Q09 earnings and "modest positive impact" in 2010.

The deal further narrows FEI’s scope to systems targeting specific vertical markets, e.g. "natural resources," noted Paul Scagnetti, VP/GM of FEI’s industry market division, in a statement (another unique application: gunshot analysis). He noted, though, that FEI may purchase Phenoms from its partner in the future "when it is appropriate for our customer needs."

November 5, 2009 –  Nanocomp Technologies says the US Army Natick (MA) Soldier Systems Center has extended a contract to develop carbon nanotube (CNT) materials for incorporation into body armor.

Earlier this year Nanocomp tested CNT composite panels several mm thick, which successfully stopped 9MM bullets in controlled ballistics tests; the extended funding will be used to build on those results to further develop and refine the CNT products.

The end goal, according to Nanocomp president/CEO Peter Antoinette, is "lighter weight, advanced body armor solutions for U.S. servicemen and women," and ultimately also lightweight armor for vehicles and aircraft.

November 5, 2009 – Hewlett-Packard says it has developed a new inertial sensing technology that can be used for digital MEMS accelerometers that are up to 1000× more sensitive than other high-volume products, leading to more effective sensor networks for applications such as infrastructure/geophysical mapping and monitoring.

MEMS accelerometers are used to measure vibration, shock, or change in velocity. HP says its improved sensor technology (noise density down to a range of sub-100 nano-g/square root Hz, with single or multiple axes per chip), combined with its other offerings in data collection/evaluation/analysis, form the basis for a complete "Central Nervous System for the Earth," encompassing numerous sensor types, networks, storage, computation and software.

"With a trillion sensors embedded in the environment — all connected by computing systems, software and services — it will be possible to hear the heartbeat of the Earth, impacting human interaction with the globe as profoundly as the Internet has revolutionized communication," proclaimed Peter Hartwell, senior researcher, HP Labs, in a statement.

by Tony McKie, memsstar

Dry-etch process technology enables yield growth on advanced devices to create a fundamentally low cost base for MEMS development and production. Failure to address yield and production flexibility issues while expanding throughput to satisfy increasing MEMS demand will not allow MEMS industry participants to realize the full market potential of increasingly sophisticated MEMS devices.

Introduction: Opportunities and challenges

The MEMS industry has identified tremendous opportunities in applications such as mobile phones, game consoles, automobiles, and many other consumer products. Already, MEMS devices such as tiny surface-mount accelerometers and gyroscopes are enabling innovative features such as automatic screen-orientation detection for camera-phone handsets and motion-sensitive game controllers offering unprecedented interactivity. Other advances made possible by MEMS include ultra-miniature silicon microphones combining tiny dimensions with high dynamic performance for use in cell phones, headsets, and similar space-constrained applications.

To fulfill these major high-volume opportunities for MEMS manufacturers and realize the expected growth potential, device producers must be able to manufacture in high volume, achieve competitive prices compatible with consumer applications, and deliver more advanced and high-performing MEMS products in the future.

This combination of objectives presents a significant challenge. An intuitive response is to increase production — for example, by using batch-processing techniques — to deliver high volumes while at the same time realizing economies of scale. However, batch processing does not provide the ability to produce more advanced structures. In practice, it will also not deliver the anticipated improvements in throughput and cost, when all of its associated limitations are taken into account. Instead, MEMS manufacturers must seek improvements on a more fundamental level.

Prior experience

Some valuable pointers can be gained by considering the way semiconductor wafer-processing practices have advanced, since MEMS wafer processing has much in common with CMOS fabrication. Early semiconductor processes such as etching relied on wet chemistry, similar to first-generation MEMS release processing. However, wet chemistry has given way to dry processing, in the semiconductor industry, as shrinking process geometries have enabled progressively smaller circuit dimensions.

This transition is now evident in the MEMS industry as device manufacturers adopt a process such as vapor-phase release etching to achieve process enhancements that will enable smaller and more complex MEMS structures. Already, a number of process and equipment developers are offering dry etch to their customers, and several such advanced processes are now active worldwide.

Click to Enlarge
Figure 1. Poly-bridge with aluminum contacts/HF etch.

Evolving MEMS processes

Release etching is the final stage of fabrication for surface micro-machined MEMS devices. This process releases the structure from the surrounding sacrificial material. As a replacement for release etching with acid, vapor-phase release processing, using anhydrous HF or XeF2 as the release agent, improves process control and increases selectivity. In addition, since the anhydrous release agent does not attack materials such as metals (Figure 1), vapor-phase release also provides greater freedom for device designers to build structures using materials that would not be compatible with a wet-chemical process.

The enhanced flexibility and control of vapor-phase release etching also allows fine tuning to deliver the best results for a given combination of process, device architecture, and structural and sacrificial materials, such as shown in Figure 2. For example, successful oxide release using anhydrous HF is achieved through accurate control of H2O vapor, as the catalyst for the reaction between the anhydrous HF and the oxide material, to maintain the desired etch rate. The memsstar vapor-phase release-etching processes permit the etch rate to be reduced or increased to achieve the best possible throughput, without compromising factors affecting yield, such as selectivity.

Click to Enlarge
Figure 2. RF-MEMS variable capacitor. Courtesy of NXP Semiconductor.

Following the semiconductor industry’s lead in moving to vapor-phase processing delivers several advantages for MEMS manufacturers. These include helping to increase yields and improve device performance and reliability and by acting as an enabler for innovative new structures.

Volume-production techniques

As new markets and applications for MEMS emerge, and demand continues to grow for higher volumes and new types of products, device manufacturers can draw many more lessons from the semiconductor industry. Batch processing, for example, has recently been proposed to help speed up MEMS manufacturing and reduce unit costs. Some MEMS manufacturing equipment now on the market is capable of processing up to 25 wafers simultaneously.

However, although semiconductor manufacturing has successfully adopted vapor-phase processes, batch techniques have been tried and — in most cases — discarded. The majority of today’s semiconductor wafer-processing lines are set up to process only one wafer in a chamber at a time. Advantages include increased repeatability and faster cycle times for each process. MEMS process engineers can learn from this trend.

When a batch of several wafers is loaded into a process such as vapor-phase etching, the time to complete the process is actually significantly longer compared to single-wafer etching. Release etching for a batch of 25 MEMS wafers, for example, can require a total cycle time measured in hours. In contrast, the process can be completed within a few minutes when applied to a single wafer.

Click to Enlarge
MEMS wafer.

In addition, batch processing is known to result in significant wafer-to-wafer variability, leading to relatively large numbers of rejected components. As MEMS device structures evolve toward finer dimensions, the tolerances associated with key parameters such as dimension control and film thickness are becoming significantly finer. Indeed, some of the latest MEMS designs now entering production cannot be produced satisfactorily using batch processing because wafer-to-wafer variability falls outside acceptable statistical limits. This is manifested as unpredictable yield, which prevents cost-effective manufacture.

In practice there are also loading effects associated with batch processing. This means that process performance will vary depending on whether all the wafer locations are filled, or whether a smaller number of wafers are presented for processing. If only 10 wafers are loaded into a process characterized for 25 units, the properties of the wafers emerging will differ from the expected results. Appreciable loading effects more or less force manufacturers to process only complete batches, which can slow down the production flow. Even then, the results can display noticeable variation, as already discussed. It is also extremely difficult to perform custom tasks on individual wafers, if required, in the context of a batch process.
 
The high wafer-to-wafer variability experienced with a batch process also effectively increases overheads such as materials consumption and the costs associated with testing. Rather than enabling manufacturers to benefit from economies of scale, therefore, batch processes having relatively poor process control incur extra costs to build and test large numbers of devices that will ultimately be scrapped.

Another factor to take into account when evaluating batch processing is the high cumulative value of the work in progress at any one time. This not only represents a significant investment in inventory, passing through the factory at a slow speed, but also exposes a relatively large number of wafers — each containing many individual components — to risk of damage. If a process is set up incorrectly, or is impaired by an event such as power outage or temporary loss of process control, a large number of wafers may become scrap simultaneously. Also, if a number of wafers are held up (e.g., waiting for other wafers to arrive to make up a full batch), these are at risk of damage or contamination that also may require one or more wafers to be scrapped.

Historically, batch processes have proved difficult and time consuming to qualify. There are many locations within the 3D space inside a multi-wafer processing chamber that must be characterized before the process can claim to be fully developed. Inaccuracy will compromise process performance, and hence will impair the yield from every batch. However, process developers cannot afford to spend excessive time characterizing their processes, and device manufacturers cannot afford to wait for a protracted period before a satisfactory process is ready to go live. In general, developing a satisfactory batch process demands considerable time and effort. Because a single wafer can be processed to a high standard, it does not necessarily follow that this can be scaled, reliably, to enable multiple wafers to be processed on a batch basis.

Single-wafer processing

Single-wafer processing overcomes the limitations of batch processing, and meets the current demands of MEMS device producers. Additionally, single-wafer processing not only enhances process control but also allows businesses to respond more quickly to market opportunities (Figure 3).

Click to Enlarge
Figure 3. An example of a successfully released MEMS structure.

Relatively small numbers of devices can be produced cost effectively, and on a fast-turnaround basis, for research and development purposes, or for small production runs. At the current stage of development of MEMS technology, time to market is critical. Indeed, given the rapid pace of change, the high costs and long delays associated with setting up a batch process may exceed the total market opportunity of a given device.

Because single-wafer processing has been almost universally adopted within the semiconductor industry, complex and essential equipment such as wafer-handling stations are proven, reliable, and readily available. In contrast, batch handling equipment for MEMS is today highly bespoke. It is therefore relatively expensive and likely to remain so given the effectiveness of current single-wafer processes. In addition, the bespoke nature of the batch equipment effectively requires the MEMS manufacturer to enter into an equipment-development partnership with the vendor; a euphemism for accepting poor process performance for the foreseeable future.

In addition to the relatively high cost of the equipment, size can also be a disadvantage since batch equipment is inherently larger than an equivalent setup for single-wafer processing. This can be an important consideration for facilities in locations where real-estate prices are high.

The way forward

In the immediate term, as dry-etch technology continues to mature, process development for MEMS fabrication must focus on achieving further improvement in cost. Increasing yield is the best way to establish a fundamentally low cost base for MEMS fabrication, which is necessary for economical production at low unit cost in very high volumes. If this crucial groundwork is not done, batch processing will merely increase production of bad units, and therefore deliver only limited cost savings.

Recent market analysis from experts such as Yole Développement, suggests relatively flat demand for MEMS capacity in the coming months. This presents an opportunity for MEMS producers to focus on driving up yields during this period, and hence create the environment for low-cost, high-volume production in the longer term.

Conclusion

The performance of the semiconductor industry shows how maximizing yield holds the key to realizing full market potential. As semiconductor device designers pursued Moore’s Law to increase performance and integration, improvements in process capabilities have enabled a higher proportion of good die per wafer. This has made a valuable contribution to reducing the cost of each unit produced.

MEMS producers must make the most of opportunities to learn from the semiconductor industry’s prior experience. One of the most important lessons for today’s process innovators is to understand why, after alternatives have been tried and discarded, single-wafer processing remains the technique of choice for high-throughput, high-yield fabrication.

Acknowledgment

The company name memsstar is a registered trademark.

Biography

Tony McKie received his Honours degree in physics from Paisley Technology College in 1987 and is general manager and co-founder at memsstar, Starlaw Park, Starlaw Road, Livingston, West Lothian, Scotland EH54 8SF; ph.: +44 1506 409163; e-mail [email protected].

November 3, 2009 – Carbon Design Innovations Inc. (CDI) has received a technology patent (US #7,601,650) for a variety of methods and techniques for fabricating carbon nanotube (CNT) devices, notably atomic force microscopy (AFM) probes.

The process for making the CNTs — formed on a substrate using thermal CVD, covered via another CVD with a protective layer (e.g. SiO2, and then etched (e.g. using ion beam, reactive ion, and wet etc) to expose to a desired length — "allows us to reliably produce longer CNTAFM probes than has been previously possible," said company CEO Vance J. Nau, in a statement.

The AFM probes with these CNTs are stronger, stiffer, and more durable, and less likely to "crash" during a scan, the company claims. The longer lifetime also means more consistent scan-to-scan images, less time spent changing and aligning AFM tips, or normalizing results between scans resulting from probe changes.

CDI currently offers two CNT AFM probe types: a standard carbon core high-aspect ratio (CCHAR, samples 1- >3μ z-range) and carbon core high-resolution (CCHR).

 

Click to Enlarge  Click to Enlarge
Click to Enlarge  Click to Enlarge

Top row: CCHAR product schematic and image. Bottom row: CCHR product schematic and image. (Source: Carbon Design Innovations)

November 2, 2009 – Integrated Sensing Systems Inc. (ISSYS ) is expanding its production capacity in the Ann Arbor, MI region, possibly including moving to a new facility and adding 40-50 workers over the next two years, according to a local report. The proposal comes as a result of a new $18.5M financing, led by Swiss sensor supplier Endress+Hauser Flowtec AG and New York-based manufacturer Greatbatch Inc.

The company plans to invest primarily in manufacturing capacity and product development, according to founder/CEO Nader Najafi, quoted by the paper; this would include either expanding its current facility in Ypsilati Township or possibly uprooting to bigger facilities, perhaps one in Ann Arbor’s research park formerly occupied by Tecumseh. Either way, "we need more capacity," Najafi told the paper. "We’re definitely going to use the capital within the next two, two-and-a-half years," he said, adding that the company expects to add 70-80 workers by 2012.

by Dirk Ortloff, Process Relations

The modern semiconductor process development cycle often involves diverse teams of engineers spread across the globe and working within many different companies. Working together means there is a need for communication to share plans and experimental results. While email is still the main way to achieve this communication, it has proven to be inadequate in many cases. It is too cluttered and represents informal knowledge that is unstructured and difficult to retrieve. Normally, the knowledge gained becomes inaccessible as soon as the project has ended and a new email folder is created. There are also cultural aspects to consider, both between companies and countries. Many different ways of documenting and storing development data are used and there are also differences in the ways of communicating. The recent trend for outsourcing can make this process even more difficult.

Product development challenges

The main challenges in product engineering for micro- and nanodevices emerge from the structure of the industry. The relatively young age of the MNT-sector can be the reason for its unique structure, which differs from more traditional industries. Besides the relatively few large micro- and nano electronics enterprises, the MNT-sector consists of an increasing number of small- and medium-scale enterprises (SME). The many SMEs cannot and do not offer the complete development of an MNT-product like the larger companies. Rather, they offer products, services and knowledge for a specific area, such as special fabrication techniques or design services. A customer can contract the companies for the development of a specific part of the product. This scenario is particular widespread in the development and fabrication of microelectromechanical systems (MEMS), but becomes increasingly widespread when more-than-Moore technologies are applied in the semiconductor industry.

Often the development of a product is undertaken by different companies with different areas of expertise in the supply-chain. This collaboration is littered with pitfalls due to the distribution of tasks, data, information and knowledge. In such a development scenario, communication becomes a key to success. The demand for a short time-to-market requires intense interaction between the customer, supplier(s), and the development partners. For the companies in such a development scenario, cooperation is necessary to create and produce a competitive product in a short time.

Click to Enlarge
Figure 1. Multidisciplinary teamwork is essential for successful process development. This image illustrates the various stages of the development cycle.

As a consequence of the distributed, multi-site/company development of the product, no central control instance exists. Multidisciplinary teamwork is essential to the integrated and concurrent development of a product and its manufacturing processes (Figure 1). The right people at the right place at the right time are required to make timely decisions. Team decisions should be based on the combined input of the entire team (e.g., engineering, manufacturing, test, logistics, financial management, contracting personnel) and include customers and suppliers. Each team member needs to understand his/her role and support the role of the other members, as well as understand the constraints under which other team members operate. Channels of communication within teams and between teams should be open, and team success should be rewarded to encourage further interaction.

For this reason, it is essential for a smooth development that each team adheres to the same processes when it comes to centralizing development data results and gaining information and knowledge. A common platform provides every development team and its members with a better chance to unify these communications. In many cases, this is something that currently does not happen because tools to enable this often address just one area of the development cycle. A classic best-of-breed approach for selecting development support tools is difficult to achieve because the integration of the tools, especially in this multi-partner scenario, can be rather challenging. There is a need for a complete solution to help organizations leverage their existing knowledge, optimize their R&D workflow and develop their manufacturing processes to achieve profitability faster and at lower cost.

The advantages to development teams of such a solution are clear. Different teams, especially those from different organizations, can share the information so that the output of one team becomes the input of another. With the collaboration platform positioned in the middle of the development team structure, teams do not need to wait for the final results of experiments from another team. With the visibility of the results achieved so far, information and conclusions for their own work can be obtained earlier which will minimize time to market. Additionally, it enables knowledge to remain in-house by auto-documenting the development cycle and experiments, to allow teams to revisit knowledge even if engineers leave the company. It will also enable new engineers to be brought up to speed more quickly, with a clear structure and a historical repository of knowledge accessible from diverse perspectives. More junior members of the team will be able to access this system to retrieve the information they need rather than having to interrupt more senior engineers with questions.

In addition, tools such as a consistency checker or simulators for new process flows can be integrated into such a framework. The tools profit from the gained knowledge and become better with each development cycle. Senior engineers capture their knowledge in a formalized manner and share it with other team members — even if they are on vacation or retired. As a result, fewer mistakes will be made due to a virtual pre-assessment of the manufacturability of the process under development.

Click to Enlarge
Figure 2. A device being logged using the XperiDesk software program enabling knowledge transfer between dispersed teams. SOURCE: Process Relations.

In the world of development collaboration, the transfer of data and knowledge are critical, interdependent factors that can either accelerate or decelerate a development process. Technology development becomes more of an interactive and multi-organization effort. XperiDesk, a solution from Process Relations, overcomes this as it becomes the central hub for all information and communication (Figure 2). It takes into account IP protection, as well as the issues discussed previously in this article. The XperiShare module of XperiDesk has functionality that focuses on achieving acceleration of the development process. XperiShare is the data-sharing component of the XperiDesk software suite that provides for the mechanized exchange of development data between different partners. Selective export and import features enable the bundling of discrete and related data, e.g., IP packages, process recipes with simulation and experimental verification results, and any other combinations of data to enhance the focus and efficiency of collaboration.

Conclusion

To overcome the difficulties of process development using a number of dispersed teams, a centralized information hub is essential. Overwhelmingly, the benefit to this is faster and more cost-effective development, the importance of which in the current economic climate cannot be underestimated.

Biography

Dirk Ortloff received his degree in computer science from the U. of Dortmund and a PhD from the U. of Siegen and is chief technology officer at Process Relations, Emil-Figge Strasse, 76-80 44227 Dortmund, Germany; ph.: +49-231-9742-5970; email: [email protected].

October 29, 2009 – Students from Japan’s Kyoto University have created a system that mimics the wah-wah tones of the armchair rock star’s shredding weapon of choice: the air guitar.

The system — which uses sensors to create guitar sounds based on moving hands as if playing the instrument — took top honors at a domestic MEMS competition ahead of the IEEE-NEMS event in China in January, where it will compete against teams from the US, China, Germany, Singapore, Taiwan, and Hong Kong, notes the Nikkei daily.

Two other teams from Japan are going as well — another Kyoto group that built a toy displaying different LED light patterns depending on its rotational speed, and a group from Shinshu U. with a device that lights up when sensing fluctuations in sounds and music, the paper notes.

October 26, 2009 – Microstaq, a developer of silicon MEMS-based fluid control technology, has qualified its Ventilum MEMS-based chip at Chinese foundry Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp (SMIC).

Microstaq says its "silicon expansion valve" (SEV) using the Ventilum chip tech allows for fluid movement measured in liters (vs. nanoliters as with most MEMS devices), and uses less energy than traditional valves. Combined with sensing and controls it can reduce energy consumption in air conditioning systems by up to 25%. "We have received die and run internal testing against our performance specification," noted Mark Luckevich, VP of engineering, in a statement.

For SMIC, the qualification further supports its MEMS foundry offerings, which it launched in 2Q08 and now runs the gamut from optical MEMS to microphones, accelerometers, RF MEMS, and microdisplays. "We are now working with technical partners on monolithic CMOS-MEMS integration, as well as wafer-level packaging," stated Daniel Fu, SMIC associate VP of MEMS technology development, adding that the foundry also is coordinating with "several China universities and institutes to develop MEMS platform process."

October 23, 2009 – HRL Laboratories says it has fabricated and demonstrated graphene-on-silicon field-effect transistors (FET) at full wafer scale, under a government-sponsored program to use graphene in electronic components for imaging, radar, and communications applications.

Click to EnlargeGraphene offers promise for electronic devices due to its excellent properties of high current-carrying capacity, thermal conductivity, low-voltage operation, and integration with silicon CMOS — and combining all that into system-on-chip devices could generate "game-changing enhancements" in cost, resolution, and power dissipation for military systems such as imaging and communications, according to HRL.

"Silicon-compatible graphene technology would open the potential to a much more efficient, higher power, lower cost graphene technology, as well as the possibility of co-integrating graphene FETs and silicon-CMOS FETs," noted Sun-Moon, principal investigator for the CERA program and senior scientist in HRL’s microelectronics laboratory, in a statement.

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s (DARPA) "Carbon Electronics for RF Applications" (CERA) program, launched in July 2008 with HRL and others in academia, industry, and military sectors, seeks to develop graphene-based RF circuits for ultrahigh-speed and ultralow-power applications. CERA’s ultimate goal (before ending in Sept. 2012) is to demonstrate a high-performance (>10,000 cm2/Vs Hall mobility) W-band (>90GHz) low-noise amplifier using graphene transistors, and on 200mm wafers with >90% yields to make them cost-effective.

A CERA milestone was reached in Dec. 2008 with development of a graphene transistor (150nm gate length) with RF-range (26GHz) cutoff frequency. In May the technology was demonstrated on 2-in. wafer-scale using graphene on silicon carbide, showing mobility of ~6000 cm2/Vs, 6×-8× higher than current silicon n-MOSFETs.