semi合集-English.pdf - 第4556页
SEMI D27-1000 © SEM I 2000 3 optional GEM capabilities for effective FPD automation. 8.1.3 The im ple mentation of SEMI E 3 0, o r lack there of, i s usua lly a poi nt of muc h ne gotia tio n be twee n equipmen t suppli …
SEMI D27-1000 © SEMI 2000 2
instead to describe the equipment and host
communication interface.
5.1.2 SECS-I Compliant — This term is used to
identify a system that complies completely with SEMI
E4.
5.1.3 SECS-II Compliant — This term is used to
identify a system that complies completely with SEMI
E5.
5.1.4 HSMS Compliant — This term is used to
describe systems which comply with SEMI E37
(HSMS) and either SEMI E37.1 (HSMS-SS) or SEMI
E37.2 (HSMS-GS) or both. However, it is more
appropriate to identify the system as either “HSMS-SS
Compliant” or “HSMS-GS Compliant”, since they both
imply compliance with SEMI E37, and the user must
know exactly which of the two is supported. The term
“HSMS Compliant” is ambiguous, but commonly used.
5.1.5 HSMS-SS Compliant — This term is used to
identify a system that complies completely with SEMI
E37 and SEMI E37.1. This protocol has been adopted
for use in FPD.
5.1.6 HSMS-GS Compliant — This term is used to
identify a system that complies completely with SEMI
E37 and SEMI E37.2.
5.1.7 GEM — Generic Equipment Model as defined in
SEMI E30.
5.1.8 GEM Compliant — This term is defined in
SEMI E30.
5.1.9 Fully GEM Capable — This term is defined in
SEMI E30.
5.1.10 System — Either manufacturing equipment or
factory host.
6 Data Transfer
6.1 For optimum compatibility, systems supporting the
automation capabilities described herein should support
all requirements defined for at least one of the
following SEMI protocol standards:
6.1.1 SEMI E4 (SECS-I)
6.1.2 SEMI E37.1 (HSMS-SS). Note that this requires
implementation of SEMI E37.
6.1.2.1 HSMS-SS compliant interfaces are preferred
for FPD manufacturing because of its performance and
logistical advantages, and because it allows other
protocols to operate on the same connection
simultaneously.
6.1.2.2 However, SECS-I interfaces are acceptable in
systems where the performance of a serial interface is
sufficient. Since many off-the-shelf component
software implementations support both protocols, it is
relatively easy to design systems which can be
configured to support either.
7 Data Format
7.1 The system should support all minimum
requirements of SEMI E5 (SECS-II). Although more
modern data communication specifications are
available (e.g. HTML), SECS-II has unique aspects
which are valuable in microelectronics manufacturing.
Also, there are many available “off-the-shelf” software
packages which provide the SECS-II feature set.
7.2 Furthermore, for maximum co mpatibility and
reliability, the implementation of any optional SEMI E5
objects (data items, variable items, messages, etc.) on
the system should meet the requirements of SEMI E5.
For example, if an FPD system implements the S7,F3
message, it must do so in compliance with SEMI E5 to
be considered “SECS-II Compliant”. It is possible to
implement “user-defined” SECS-II messages, and it is
allowed by SEMI E5.
7.3 However, it is usually unnecessary to use such
custom SECS-II messages. Complicated scenarios such
as production sequence control, inline production,
consumable management, and material handling can all
be implemented using standard SECS-II messages.
Many SECS-II messages are designed to be very
generic and very flexible such as the Remote Command
message (S2F41 or S2F49) which can contain any
number of parameters of any type in any format. Many
of the basic SECS-II data items such as variables can
also take on any type of value in any format.
7.4 User-defined data items and messages are more
difficult to integrate into FPD factory automation
systems and should be avoided.
8 GEM and SEM
8.1 Generic Equipment Model (GEM)
8.1.1 Any reference to the term “GEM” (Generic
Equipment Model) with respect to FPD manufacturing
equipment will be construed as a reference to SEMI
E30. The system provider should ensure that this term
is used only for those systems which rigidly adhere to
SEMI E30. End-users will make certain assumptions
about the capabilities of “GEM” systems based on the
requirements of SEMI E30.
8.1.2 SEMI E30 is applicable to FPD manufacturing
equipment. FPD equipment suppliers may choose to
implement GEM. In order for FPD equipment to be
“GEM Compliant” or “Fully GEM Capable”, it must
meet the requirements of SEMI E30 without exception.
However, it may not be necessary to implement certain
SEMI D27-1000 © SEMI 20003
optional GEM capabilities for effective FPD
automation.
8.1.3 The implementation of SEMI E30, or lack
thereof, is usually a point of much negotiation between
equipment supplier and end-user. SEMI E30 provides a
useful template for identifying which capabilities are to
be provided and which are not. The “GEM Compliance
Statement” document should be provided by the
equipment supplier to describe the capabilities of the
interface, whether or not the system is GEM Compliant.
8.1.4 GEM is not applicable to host systems, but host
systems must implement a compatible set of features to
work effectively with GEM equipment.
8.2 Specific Equipment Model (SEM)
8.2.1 The concept of a Specific Equipment Model,
which requires compliance with SEMI E30 (GEM),
could be applied to FPD equipment as well. This
document does not address SEMs. The user may wish
to review the published SEM standards and determine
their applicability in an FPD implementation.
9 Interfaces to Material Tran sfer Systems
9.1 Carrier Transfer Parallel I/O Interfaces
9.1.1 Material handling systems are critical for many
FPD manufacturing operations. But, not all equipment
support the automated transfer of material to and from
the equipment. This section only applies to systems,
which support automated carrier transfer.
9.1.2 For compatibility with many automated material
handling systems on the factory floor, FPD equipment
should support all requirements for at least one of the
following SEMI carrier transfer parallel I/O standards:
9.1.2.1 SEMI E23 (Cassette Transfer Parallel I/O
Interface) — Note that the diagram in SEMI E23
showing placement of the photo-coupled I/O interface
with respect to the carrier stage (CS) shows specific CS
size measurements. However, this is just an example
and not a requirement of SEMI E23. The requirement is
that the photo sensor must be on the front edge of the
CS and its center aligned with the center of the CS. This
applies to a CS of any size.
9.1.2.2 SEMI E84 (Enhanced Carrier Handoff
Parallel I/O Interface) — Note that SEMI E84
references SEMI E1.9, SEMI E15, SEMI E15.1, SEMI
E47.1, and SEMI E64 which are semiconductor specific
standards and not applicable to FPD. However, none of
the requirements in these documents are prerequisites
for implementing SEMI E84. SEMI E84 is applicable
to FPD and can be implemented independently.
NOTICE: SEMI makes no warranties or
representations as to the suitability of the standard 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.
Copyright by SEMI® (Semiconductor Equipment and Materials
International), 3081 Zanker Road, San Jose, CA 95134. Reproduction o
f
the contents in whole or in part is forbidden without express written
consent of SEMI.
SEMI D28-1101 © SEMI 20011
SEMI D28-1101
SPECIFICATION FOR MECHANICAL INTERFACE BETWEEN FLAT
PANEL DISPLAY MATERIAL HANDLING EQUIPMENT AND TOOL
PORT, USING AUTOMATED GUIDED VEHICLE (AGV), RAIL GUIDED
VEHICLE (RGV), AND MANUAL GUIDED VEHICLE (MGV)
This specification was technically approved by the Global Flat Panel Display Material Handling Committee
and is the direct responsibility of the Japanese Flat Panel Display Material Handling Committee. Current
edition approved by the Japanese Regional Standards Committee on August 3, 2001. Initially available at
www.semi.org September 2001; to be published November 2001.
1 Purpose
1.1 This specification defines a common set of feature
requirements on and about tool ports of process tools
used in manufacturing of flat panel displays. These
standardized feature requirements are intended to
facilitate the interfacing of AGV, RGV, and MGV
equipment to the process tool. Such standards are
intended to promote cost-effective interfacing while
preserving freedom of choice in material handling
equipment, using AGV, RGV, and MGV.
2 Scope
2.1 This specification defines mechanical features on
or about the tool port, and in front of or on the tool face.
Although these features are intended for specific
functions of AGV, RGV, and MGV, the interface
requirements are meant to avoid the promotion of any
particular form of transport.
2.2 This standard does not purport to address safety
issues, if any, associated with its 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.
3 Limitations
3.1 Current display manufacturing utilizes several
substrate sizes, many of them “non-standard.” This
specification includes dimensions for the substrate sizes
of 550 × 650 mm, 600 × 720 mm, 680 × 880 mm, 730 ×
920 mm, and 800 × 950 mm and anticipates the
establishment of standard dimensions in future substrate
sizes.
4 Referenced Standards
4.1 None.
5 Ordering Information
5.1 Since this document is not a product specification
but an interface specification, ordering information is
not applicable.
6 Terminology
6.1 Definitions
6.1.1 cassette loading position — center point at
under-surface of a cassette after loading by transport
equipment.
6.1.2 facial datum plane — a plane that is parallel to
the tool face and vertical to both vertical and horizontal
datum planes at the cassette loading position.
6.1.3 horizontal datum plane — a plane that is parallel
to the floor surface at the cassette loading position.
6.1.4 vertical datum plane — a plane that is vertical to
both facial and horizontal datum planes at the cassette
loading position.
6.2 Dimensional Functions
6.2.1 X1 — width of the exclusion zone above the
horizontal datum plane, which is needed by the
transport equipment in loading cassettes.
6.2.2 X2 — width of the exclusion fork zone below the
horizontal datum plane, which is needed by the
transport equipment in loading cassettes.
6.2.3 X3 — width of the exclusion zone required for
MGV cart alignment equipment.
6.2.4 Y1 — dimension between the facial datum plane
and the front of the tool port.
6.2.5 Y2 — dimension between the facial datum plane
and the tool face, which is the exclusion zone needed
by the transport equipment in loading cassettes.
6.2.6 Y3 — depth of exclusion zone required for MGV
cart alignment equipment.
6.2.7 Z1 — height between the horizontal datum plane
and the floor surface.
6.2.8 Z2 — height of exclusion zone above the
horizontal datum plane, which is needed by the
transport equipment in loading cassettes.