semi合集-English.pdf - 第3968页

SEMI F41-0699 © SEMI 1999 5 level s of fluo rid e whic h ma y be a c once rn fo r so me qualification processes. 9.2 Specialty C hemicals  Certai n CV D chemicals have hi gh le vels o f orga nics which r ai se conc ern …

SEMI F41-0699 © SEMI 1999 4

8.2 Particle Qualification  For most accurate results,

particle levels should be measured on-line with a

optical particle counter capable of measuring the size of

particle that is included in the guaranteed specification.

Batch samples may be taken and measured for particles

in a lab, but special care is needed to prequalify

containers used for this sampling, and data integrity

may be compromised for the smallest sized particles

due to various contamination sources. An example of a

protocol generally followed to measure particle on-line

includes:

8.2.1 Remove all UPW in the BCDS and distribution

piping.

8.2.2 Remove UPW filters or replace incompatible

chemical filters if present.

8.2.3 Install specified filter element per the BCDS and

filter manufacture's specifications.

8.2.4 Commission the BCDS and distribution piping

with the process chemical.

8.2.5 Recirculate chemical through the BCDS and

through all POU to drain.

8.2.6 Drain all chemicals from the BCDS and

distribution piping.

8.2.7 Refill entire system with chemical and begin

circulation through filters and out to POU to drain.

8.2.8 Begin sampling to a liquid par ticle counter

downstream of the filters either at the outlet of the

BCDS, the POU, or both. Follow a prescribed particle

counting sampling procedure.

8.2.9 The number of particle samples and sample

duration time should be calculated based on the total

volume of chemical desired to be examined by the

particle counter. A "sufficient" volume of chemical

should be examined by the particle counter during the

qualification period. As an example, the particle

concentration could be measured over at least a five-

hour period with thirty consecutive ten-minute samples

taken. In this example, the average of the last

consecutive 30 samples would be calculated and

compared to the specification.

8.2.10 The particle concentration is considered

acceptable if the average is less than the specification.

8.3 Metallic Qualification  Metallic impurities are

generally specified both in terms of level of impurity by

element and total amount of impurities. The customer's

specification generally lists each element to be included

in the analysis or may refer to the list of elements

published by SEMI for each chemical at different purity

grades. The maximum impurity levels may be

described as an absolute value (e.g. 1ppb maximum

impurity), or in terms of the quantity of impurities that

may be added by the BCDS including the distribution

piping. This amount of "total adders" is determined by

measuring the impurity levels of the incoming chemical

from the storage or supply vessel compared to the

purity level of the chemical at the end point sample

station or POU. The number of samples and location of

samples vary depending on the type of specification.

When qualifying to a “metallic impurities added”

specification, a sample must be taken from the

incoming chemical supply drums for an incoming

baseline. The testing protocols includes:

8.3.1 Precondition all sampling bottles before use and

follow appropriate sampling protocol.

8.3.2 Send samples to a lab for trace metal analysis

specifying the level of testing required and the number

of elements to be tested. The level of testing required

depends on the agreed upon specification. As a rule of

thumb, the detection limits of the analysis should be at

least 10X's lower than the impurity level to be achieved

for each element. In addition, the lab should follow

high standards of quality control for trace metal

analysis including analysis in duplicate, duplicate

blanks, use of internal standards, instrument calibration

using primary standards, and QC checks.

8.3.3 Review the data that is reported and compare it

to the customer requirement.

8.3.4 If the system does not meet the specification

then repeat the procedure until the system is qualified.

8.3.5 Where maximum levels of impurities are

specified, a sample of the incoming chemical should

either be measured as part of the qualification process,

or retained, to ensure that the incoming chemical is not

a significant source of contamination.

8.3.6 For purposes of metallic qualification, soak

periods similar to those referenced in Section 7.2 are

recommended.

9 Other Considerations

9.1 Accelerated Qualification Techniques 

Although process chemicals such as hydrofluoric and

hydrochloric acid may reach acceptable levels of purity

after a few weeks in the BCDS, other chemicals such as

sulfuric acid and ammonium hydroxide extract

impurities much more slowly and significant levels of

impurities are observed even after several months. The

BCDS conditioning process described above is one

approach to preleaching impurities from the BCDS.

Other variations include combinations of static and

dynamic rinses and emphasis on the use of dilute HF as

the aqueous preclean chemical that is particularly

effective for iron removal, however, it contributes high

SEMI F41-0699 © SEMI 19995

levels of fluoride which may be a concern for some

qualification processes.

9.2 Specialty Chemicals  Certain CVD chemicals

have high levels of organics which raise concerns about

chemical decomposition, residues and particulate

formation. These concerns may require customized

approaches to the design of a BCDS qualification. For

example, reservoir replacement for these types of

chemicals with vapor pressure from 1-5 Torr and above

may require the use of vacuum less than the vapor

pressure of the chemical whereas low vapor pressure

chemicals with vapor pressures from 1-5 Torr, and

viscous materials, may require a solvent purge. In

addition, purging and pickling of he BCDS and

chemical delivery lines should be performed per

Sections 7.1 and 7.2. CAUTION: UPW introduced into

the lines frequently interacts with the CVD chemicals

causing decomposition.

NOTICE: These standards do not purport to address

safety issues, if any, associated with their use. It is the

responsibility of the user of these standards to establish

appropriate safety and health practices and determine

the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SEMI makes no warranties or representations as to the

suitability of the standards set forth herein for any

particular application. The determination of the

suitability of the standard is solely the responsibility of

the user. Users are cautioned to refer to manufacturer’s

instructions, product labels, product data sheets, and

other relevant literature respecting any materials

mentioned herein. These standards are subject to

change without notice.

The user’s attention is called to the possibility that

compliance with this standard may require use of

copyrighted material or of an invention covered by

patent rights. By publication of this standard, SEMI

takes no position respecting the validity of any patent

rights or copyrights asserted in connection with any

item mentioned in this standard. Users of this standard

are expressly advised that determination of any such

patent rights or copyrights, and the risk of infringement

of such rights, are entirely their own responsibility.

International), 3081 Zanker Road, San Jose, CA 95134. Reproduction o

the contents in whole or in part is forbidden without express written

consent of SEMI.

SEMI F42-0600 © SEMI 1999, 20001

SEMI F42-0600

TEST METHOD FOR SEMICONDUCTOR PROCESSING EQUIPMENT

VOLTAGE SAG IMMUNITY

This test method was technically approved by the Global Facilities Committee and is the direct responsibility

of the North American Facilities Committee. Current edition approved by the North American Regional

Standards Committee on March 2 and April 10, 2000. Initially available on www.semi.org May 2000; to be

published June 2000. Originally published June 1999.

1 Purpose

1.1 The purpose of this document is to define the test

method used to characterize the susceptibility of

semiconductor processing, metrology, and automated

test equipment to voltage sags.

2 Scope

2.1 This document defines the testing procedures and

test equipment required to characterize the suscepti-

bility of equipment to voltage sags by showing voltage

sag duration and magnitude performance data for the

equipment.

NOTE 1: Characterizing equipment voltage sag immunity

allows for the identification of tolerances, if any, that may

exist between the actual equipment immunity and any one or

more voltage sag performance specifications.

2.2 This test method is intended for, but not limited to,

the following equipment types:

• Etch equipment (Dry & Wet)

• Film deposition equipment (CVD & PVD)

• Thermal equipment

• Surface prep and clean

• Photolithography equipment (Stepper & Tracks)

• Chemical Mechanical Polishing equipment

• Ion Implant equipment

• Metrology equipment

• Automated test equipment

2.3 This standard does not purport to address safety

issues, if any, associated with its use. It is the

responsibility of the users of this standard to establish

appropriate safety and health practices and determine

the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

3 Limitations

3.1 This standard does not address testing for over-

voltage conditions.

3.2 International, national and local codes, regulations

and laws should be consulted to ensure that the

equipment and procedures meets regulatory require-

ments in each location.

4 Referenced Standards

4.1 SEMI Standard

SEMI S2 — Safety Guidelines for Semiconductor

Manufacturing Equipment

4.2 IEEE Standard

IEEE 1250 — Guide for Service to Equipment

Sensitive to Momentary Voltage Disturbances

NOTE 2: As listed or revised, all documents cited shall be the

latest publications of adopted standards.

5 Terminology

5.1 Definitions

5.1.1 device under test (DUT) — the semiconductor

process, metrology, or automated test equipment

intended to be tested, including the equipment

mainframe and all subsystems whose electrical power is

directly affected by the operation of the equipment’s

EMO system.

5.1.2 emergency off circuit (EMO) — a control circuit

which when de-activated, places the equipment into a

safe shut down condition and will restrict all hazardous

potentials to the main power enclosure. This is a state in

which all hazardous voltage has been removed from the

equipment, all hazardous production materials flow has

been stopped, any radiation sources de-energized or

totally contained, any capacitors grounded, all moving

parts stopped, internal and external heat sources shut

off, and the equipment presents minimum hazard to

personnel or the facility. [SEMI S2]

5.1.3 point of connection (POC) — the point where

the facility utility connects to the exterior of the

equipment.

5.1.4 ride-through capability — the ability of equip-

ment to withstand momentary interruptions or sags

[IEEE 1250]. Also known as voltage sag immunity.

1 The Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, Inc., 345 East

47th Street, New York, NY 10017-2394, USA