Warning: parse_ini_file() has been disabled for security reasons in /services/http/users/b/bamlab/wiki/inc/StyleUtils.php on line 100

User Tools

Site Tools


mla150

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
mla150 [2021/07/13 21:59]
dteal
mla150 [2021/11/30 17:36] (current)
dteal
Line 15: Line 15:
 | 16 Jun 2021 | Daniel | Heidelberg field service engineer tuned up tool. Now: optical autofocus is best at focus -2, pneumatic autofocus is best at focus +4, top side alignment accuracy within 300nm (spec 500nm), bottom side accuracy within 850nm (spec 1um), and required exposure dose should be 50% to 75% higher than previous recorded values. | | 16 Jun 2021 | Daniel | Heidelberg field service engineer tuned up tool. Now: optical autofocus is best at focus -2, pneumatic autofocus is best at focus +4, top side alignment accuracy within 300nm (spec 500nm), bottom side accuracy within 850nm (spec 1um), and required exposure dose should be 50% to 75% higher than previous recorded values. |
 | 12 Jul 2021 | Daniel | Spun standard 2um MiR701 on picotrack after a primeoven recipe 2 on a fused silica wafer. Using pneumatic autofocus, a dose of 210mJ/cm2 and focus +4 exposed the pattern fairly well, +/- 0.2um, but did not do full dosage test. | | 12 Jul 2021 | Daniel | Spun standard 2um MiR701 on picotrack after a primeoven recipe 2 on a fused silica wafer. Using pneumatic autofocus, a dose of 210mJ/cm2 and focus +4 exposed the pattern fairly well, +/- 0.2um, but did not do full dosage test. |
 +| 10 Oct 2021 | Daniel | Ran exposure test for AZ P4620. Use primeoven recipe 2 for HMDS, then spin 12um AZ P4620 with standard picotrack recipe (optionally no TEBR). Ideal exposure was at 800mJ/cm2, 0 defocus. Higher exposures will make large nitrogen bubbles in the resist (this is probably a result of heating, so it could be solved by exposing more slowly or in multiple shorter exposures, but that isn't an option on mla150); lower exposures will not completely develop. Can run through standard picotrack2 develop recipe twice for better effect (not all exposed PR is completely removed the first time; thick resists are tricky). Any further descum or hardbake will reflow the photoresist; I don't have a way around this yet. | 
 +| 11 Oct 2021 | Daniel | Exposed AZ P4620 with < 20% ambient humidity in NanoLab (there's a humidity meter display on the wall by svgcoat3). The resist failed to develop! Apparently DNQ-based photoresists need water in the resist, delivered via ambient humidity, to expose properly. This is why the resist is supposed to sit for ~30 minutes in ambient air after spinning before exposure. Solution: wait for a time when NanoLab humidity is sufficiently high (e.g., > 40% is probably good) (it's not actively controlled because it's almost always > 40% anyway), or put wafer into humidity box near zeiss-sem. |
mla150.txt · Last modified: 2021/11/30 17:36 by dteal