Metrics for 300 mm Automated Material Handling Systems (AMHS) and Production Equipment Interfaces: Revision 1.0

Transcription

1 Metrics for 300 mm Automated Material Handling Systems (AMHS) and Production Equipment Interfaces: Revision 1.0

2 SEMATECH and the SEMATECH logo are registered service marks of SEMATECH, Inc. and the logo are registered service marks of, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of SEMATECH, Inc. Product names and company names used in this publication are for identification purposes only and may be trademarks or service marks of their respective companies 1998, Inc.

3 Metrics for 300 mm Automated Material Handling Systems (AMHS) and Production Equipment Interfaces: Revision 1.0 December 15, 1998 Abstract: This document represents the expectations that the International 300 mm Initiative (I300I) member companies have for the performance of 300 mm automated material handling equipment and production equipment interfaces in These metrics will be used as targets for I300I material handling equipment and production equipment interface demonstrations in They were developed and agreed upon in consensus by the I300I Factory Integration Working Groups (FIWGs) during international meetings held in This version of the document includes metrics for wafer sorters and FOUP cleaners that were not available when A-TR was published. Keywords: 300 mm Wafers, Equipment Performance, Wafer Size Conversion, Standards, Automated Materials Handling Authors: Eddy Bass, Paul Jai Approvals: Maria Nunez, AMHS Project Leader Carol Davis, AMHS Manager Ashwin Ghatalia, Director of Productivity & Infrastructure Laurie Modrey, Technical Information Transfer Team Leader

4

5 iii Table of Contents 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Scope Purpose Metrics Development Process GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Applicable SEMI Standards Equipment Goals EQUIPMENT PERFORMANCE METRICS... 4 Component 1.1 Interbay Overhead Transport System... 5 Component 1.3 Personal Guided Vehicle (PGV)... 8 Component 1.4 Intrabay Overhead Hoist Transport System Component 2.1 Stocker Component 2.6 E15.1 Load Port and Door Opener Component wafer Front Opening Unified Pod (FOUP) Component 5.2 Wafer Sorter Component 5.3 FOUP Cleaner I300I CONTACTS... 24

6

7 1 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 Scope An automated material handling system (AMHS) consists of material handling equipment and a material control system. The material handling system sustains the material flow; the control system sustains the information flow. In the wafer industry, the functions performed by these systems are listed below. The AMHS equipment supports the following functions: transport transfer storage The AMHS control system performs the following functions: transport control carrier tracking interface to Manufacturing Execution System (MES) In this metrics list, the primary focus is on the AMHS transport/storage and production equipment interface. The control system will not be considered. AMHS transport/storage and production equipment interface functions are performed as follows: transport (and transfer) functions are performed by an intrabay overhead monorail and vehicle (hoist) an interbay overhead monorail and vehicle a person guided vehicle (PGV) storage (and transfer) functions are performed by a stocker an equipment internal buffer equipment interface functions are performed by an equipment load port (fixed buffer) 1.2 Purpose These metrics represent the expectations of the I300I member companies for 300 mm automated material handling equipment and production equipment interfaces in The equipment configuration should adhere to the I300I Factory Guidelines (e.g., the minienvironment is an integral part of the production equipment). Also, this equipment should be able to operate with the front opening unified pod (FOUP) and standard equipment load ports. Cost performance trade-offs are expected as suppliers differentiate their products for competitive advantage. In managing combinations of performance for the various parameters to meet cost objectives, it is important to keep the fundamental criteria balanced. For instance, even if expectations in footprint are exceeded, the equipment must demonstrate manufacturing-worthy reliability and maintain throughput compensation over 200 mm like equipment.

8 2 As always, customers will buy the best equipment available; therefore, these equipment metrics are a starting point for continuous improvement toward mature performance. The parameters and values listed for each equipment will be used in demonstrations in the I300I Program in 1998, and the metrics will be updated as more understanding is achieved. Ultimately, this document is a part of the cooperative effort among international IC manufacturers, working with global suppliers, to drive and track progress in the capability to implement automated handling of and manufacturing on 300 mm wafers. 1.3 Metrics Development Process The original I300I Program planned that material handling metrics be developed in 1997, with demonstrations to begin before the end of 1997 and continue into Since that time, the availability of material handling and production equipment with automated interfaces has not been adequate to complete evaluations in Also, since SEMI standards and I300I consensus guidelines have been in development throughout the year, equipment designs could not mature in time to make equipment available for assessment. As delays continued, I300I Factory Integration Working Group (FIWG) members were forced to prioritize material handling and equipment interface components for evaluation. Hence, the components included in this document represent those items that need to be evaluated first, i.e., early The I300I Metrics for 300 mm Automated Material Handling Systems (AMHS) and Production Equipment Interfaces: Revision 1.0 development process consisted of the following steps: 1. Develop a generic list of material handling equipment, production equipment interface components, and wafer carrier types. 2. Complete the first round of components list prioritization based on member company interest. 3. Prepare a revision 0 proposal of equipment metrics items for the first and second priority components. Review these metrics items with the relative component suppliers for feedback. Also, review them with the I300I FIWG advisors for feedback and development of metrics values. 4. Consolidate the results of the first review into conceptually outlined metrics, and prepare a member company survey. 5. Review the second survey results at the June and August 1997 FIWG meetings. Develop second round consensus metrics. Revise the prioritization of components based on the most important to demonstrate first. 6. Revise the second round consensus metrics based on the new prioritization and present for approval at November 1997 FIWG meeting. 7. Consolidate inputs and publish prioritized list of components metrics in December Demonstrate material handling components, production equipment interfaces, and wafer carriers against metrics Q , based on availability of equipment and prioritized components list.

9 3 2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 2.1 Applicable SEMI Standards The following SEMI standards have been endorsed by I300I member companies and are a subset of 1998 Equipment Performance Metrics. Baseline standards for general compliance S2 Safety Guidelines S8 Ergonomic Guidelines E5 SECS-II E6 Facilities Interface Specification E10 Equipment Reliability, Availability, and Maintainability E23 Cassette Transfer Parallel I/O E30 Generic Equipment Model E37 High Speed Messaging E49 Guide for Performance of Distribution Systems within Equipment (gas, liquid chemical and solvents) E51 Guide for Typical Facilities Services and Termination E58 Automated Reliability, Availability, Maintainability Standard E70 Guide for Tool Accommodation Process Doc Guide for Gas Components Interfaces Doc Guide for Modular Gas System Components Standards for 300 mm equipment compliance E1.9 Transport Cassette E15.1 Equipment Load Port E47.1 Pods and Boxes E57 Kinematic Coupling E62 Front-opening Interface E63 BOLTS (Box Opener/Loader to Tool Standard) E64 Cart Docking Interface PR1 (2708) Equipment Footprint, Height, and Weight PR2 (2776) Guide for Equipment Points of Connections Doc Specification for Dry Pumps Doc Specification for Turbomolecular Pumps Other relevant standards: M1.15, M28, and T7 Silicon Wafer Specifications (Prime and Development) and waferback surface marking 2.2 Equipment Goals The following are expectations of I300I member companies for all equipment; they should be considered goals for suppliers: Wafer loss should be < 1 in 20,000 (which equals % equipment process yield). 3 mm edge exclusion is the initial target of I300I equipment demonstrations. Equipment should add < 0.3 particles/cm µm to the wafer backside.

10 4 3 EQUIPMENT PERFORMANCE METRICS * Metrics for these components will be developed by I300I, as needed. Component No. Title Transport Systems 1.1 Interbay Overhead Transport System 1.3 Person Guided Vehicle (PGV) 1.4 Intrabay Overhead Hoist Transport System Storage and Redirection Equipment 2.1 Stocker *2.4 Internal Equipment Buffer 2.6 E15.1 Load Port and Door Opener Controls *3.1 Interbay Material Control System (MCS) *3.2 Intrabay MCS Carriers wafer Front Opening Unified Pod (FOUP) * wafer FOUP *4.4 Shipping Box Other 5.2 Wafer Sorter 5.3 FOUP Cleaner Note: Component numbers are the same as the original components list developed with suppliers in January, They are not necessarily in priority order.

11 5 Component 1.1 Interbay Overhead Transport System Compliance to Standards 1. Interoperability per I300I Factory guidelines 2. E23 Interface: Monorail to stocker communications 100% compliant Tests to be defined by I300I 100% compliant 3. CE marking 100% compliant Supplier verified/identified 4. SECS II, GEM, HSMS standards compliance 100% compliant Tested via emulation Compliance to ESH Guidelines 1. S2 Compliance 100% compliant Third-party verified 2. S8 Ergonomics Guideline Compliance 100% compliant 3. EU Machinery, EMI/ESD, and Low Voltage dir. 4. Seismic Stability for UBC Zone 4 Area and S2 5. Protection Against Flammability/Fire Recommended compliance 100% compliant EU/CE, E33 verified 100% compliant Third-party verified Consider using Factory Mutual FM 4910 document as guideline Cost of Ownership 1. Relative CoO (total interbay system) 1.3X 200 mm Relative for same wafer starts per month (WSPM) Overall Performance 1. Relative Throughput of system per WSPM. (Note: 13-wafer carrier system will require significantly higher throughput for the same wafer starts per week). 2. Vehicle Mean Time Between Incident (MTBIp) > 1.25X 200 mm To account for increase in # of mask layers for 300 mm > 500 hours per vehicle 3. Vehicle Availability (SEMI E10) 99.92% per vehicle 4. Vehicle Mean Time to Repair (MTTR) 30 minutes per vehicle 5. Relative Preventive Maintenance (PM) per WSPM 1X 200 mm Relative for same WSPM 6. Relative Consumable per WSPM 1X 200 mm Relative for same WSPM 7. Relative Footprint per WSPM 1X 200 mm Relative for same WSPM

12 6 Component 1.1 Interbay Overhead Transport System (continued) System Cleanliness 1. Airborne Cleanliness (Dynamic testing) Class 10 at 0.2 µm Using Fed. Std. 209E and ISO Mechanical Performance 1. Impact on payload (included vibration, shock, acceleration, vector orientation) 0.1 G avg, 0.25 G peak Using tri-axial accelerometer placed inside FOUP 2. Payload Weight Carried by Vehicle 10 kgs One full capacity 25-wafer FOUP Electrostatic Performance 1. Resistance to ground of nest for payload at rest 1 Ω Data to be Collected 1. Alarm conditions and GEM messages 2. Vehicle speeds (empty, full and at curves) 3. How vehicle to vehicle collision is prevented 4. How accidental FOUP drop is prevented 5. Overall track weight with loaded vehicle kgs/meter (lbs/feet) 6. Collect data on how many tracks (loops) can be stacked on top of each other, and the max. point load on each hanger rod for each instance. 7. Charge buildup on carrier. Need to determine the max allowed time for the charge build-up to dissipate to the nominal allowed value. 8. Documentation of the # of different monorail curve and other component configurations possible, its dimensions and layout constraints and hanger locations 9. Compliance to use of cleanroom compatible materials 10. Location of EMO, Power ON, and Power OFF switches kgs per rod Hanger pitch = foot/hanger < 50 V (dissipation rate to be determined) radius (mm) materials location Data to be collected to refine target

13 7 Component 1.1 Interbay Overhead Transport System (continued) 11. Determine the FOUP delivery time for the supplier test line. Delivery time is defined as the transportation time from one stocker shelf to the destination stocker shelf in the test line Mean and Peak (i.e., mean + 2X std. dev.) in minutes Use this as simulation input data to drive the determination of system throughput for large systems. 12. Interoperability Test Demonstrate use of different suppliers FOUPs (13- or 25-wafer) which meet SEMI Standards

14 8 Component 1.3 Personal Guided Vehicle (PGV) Compliance to Standards 1. Interoperability per I300I FIWG guidelines 100% compliant Tests to be defined by I300I 2. CE marking 100% compliant Supplier verified/identified 3. E64 Cart Docking Standard 100% compliant Optional on cart if stability, safety, and all other requirements can be met Compliance to ESH Guidelines 1. S2 compliance 100% compliant Third-party verified 2. S8 Ergonomics guideline compliance 100% compliant 3. EU Machinery, EMI/ESD, and Low voltage dir. 100% compliant EU/CE, E33 verified 4. Protection against Flammability/Fire Recommended compliance Cost of Ownership 1. Relative CoO per wafer starts per month (WSPM) Overall Performance 1.3X 200 mm Consider using Factory Mutual FM 4910 document as guideline Relative for same WSPM compared to 200 mm cart. 1. Load + unload cycle time 40 secs 20 secs to load + 20 secs to unload 2. Maximum cart capacity Two FOUPS 25-wafer capacity FOUPs 3. Max sustained cart push force on ergo handles 6.8 kgs (15 lbs) 4. Max size of cart (length x width) for two FOUP carrying cart 1016 mm x 649 mm (40 x 24 ) 983 mm x 406 mm (39 x 16 ) Cart w/mechanical load/unload Cart without loader-metro cart 5. Maximum cart height while in motion 1270 mm (50 ) Height includes FOUP on cart 6. Cart Mean Time Between Incident (MTBIp) > 4000 hours 7. Cart Availability (SEMI E10) > TBD 8. Cart Time to Repair (MTTR) < 30 minutes 9. Relative Preventive Maintenance (PM) per WSPM 1X 200 mm Relative for same WSPM 10. Relative Consumable per WSPM 1X 200 mm Relative for same WSPM

15 9 Component 1.3 Personal Guided Vehicle (PGV) (continued) System Cleanliness 1. Airborne Cleanliness (Dynamic testing) Compatible with Class 0.5 µm particle size Mechanical Performance 1. Impact on payload (included vibration, shock, acceleration, vector orientation) 2. Payload weight carried by mechanical arm Electrostatic Performance 1. Resistance to ground of nest for payload at rest Data to be Collected 1. Min. turning radius 2. Docking path for cart and operator (working envelope during docking and load/unload operations) 0.1 G avg G peak 10 kgs 1 Ω Using Fed. Std. 209E and ISO Using tri-axial accelerometer placed inside FOUP. For all functions of cart (docking, pick and place, etc.) One full capacity 25-wafer FOUP Clearances on three sides of the cart when approaching for docking 3. Location of operator during transfer (front versus side) 4. Max. forces for each operation performed Third-party by operator to transfer FOUP 5. Positive feedback to operator that carrier is engaged with end-effector 6. Charge buildup on carrier. Need to determine the max allowed time for the charge build-up to dissipate to the nominal allowed value. (yes, no) 50 V (dissipation rate to be determined) FOUP on the cart before/after docking 7. Interoperability Test Demonstrate use of different suppliers FOUPs and load ports which meet SEMI Standards 8. How are FOUP drops prevented?

16 10 Component 1.4 Intrabay Overhead Hoist Transport System Compliance to Standards 1. Interoperability per I300I Factory guidelines 2. E23 Interface: Hoist vehicle to equipment communications 100% compliant Test to be interoperable with different loadports and FOUPs (standard) 100% compliant 3. CE marking 100% compliant Supplier verified 4. SECS II, GEM, HSMS standards compliance 100% compliant Tested via emulation Compliance to ESH Guidelines 1. S2 compliance 100% compliant Third-party verified 2. S8 Ergonomics guideline compliance 100% compliant 3. EU Machinery, EMI/ESD and Low voltage dir. 4. Seismic Stability for UBC Zone 4 Area and S2 5. Protection against Flammability/Fire Recommended compliance Cost of Ownership 1. Relative CoO (Total Intrabay system) 1.3X 200 mm per wafer starts per month. Overall Performance 1. Relative Throughout of System per WSPM. (Note: 13-wafer carrier system will require significantly higher throughput for the same wafer starts/month). 100% compliant EU/CE, E33 verified 100% compliant Third-party verified Consider using Factory Mutual FM 4910 document as guideline Relative for same WSPM > 1.25X 200 mm To account for increase in # of mask layers for 300 mm. 2. Mean Delivery Time Intrabay X minutes (TBD) Layout dependent (See Data to be Collected section) 3. Peak (Mean + 2X std. dev.) Delivery Time Intrabay 4. Vehicle Mean Time Between Incident (MTBIp) Y minutes (TBD) > 500 hours per vehicle 5. Vehicle Availability (SEMI E10) 99.92% per vehicle 6. Vehicle Mean Time to Repair (MTTR) 30 minutes Layout dependent (See Data to be Collected section) per vehicle

17 11 Component 1.4 Intrabay Overhead Hoist Transport System (continued) 7. Relative Preventive Maintenance (PM) per WSPM 1X 200 mm Relative for same WSPM 8. Relative Consumable per WSPM 1X 200 mm Relative for same WSPM 9. Relative Footprint per WSPM 1X 200 mm Relative for same WSPM System Cleanliness 1. Airborne Cleanliness (Dynamic testing) Mechanical Performance 1. Impact on payload (included vibration, shock, acceleration, vector orientation) Compatible with Class 0.2 µm particle size 0.1 G avg G peak Using Fed. Std. 209E and ISO Using tri-axial accelerometer placed inside FOUP 2. Payload weight carried by vehicle 10 kgs One full capacity 25-wafer FOUP Electrostatic Performance 1. Resistance to ground of nest for payload at rest Data to be Collected 1. Alarm conditions and GEM messages 2. Vehicle speeds (empty, full and at curves) 3. Vehicle point to point delivery time (empty, full and at curves) 4. How vehicle to vehicle collision is prevented 5. How accidental FOUP drop is prevented 6. Overall track weight with loaded vehicle 7. Load/Unload time, Precision 8. Charge buildup on carrier. Need to determine the max allowed time for the charge build-up to dissipate to the nominal allowed value. 9. Documentation of the # of different monorail curve and other component configurations possible, its dimensions and layout constraints and hanger locations 1 Ω seconds kgs/feet (lbs/feet) < 50 V (dissipation rate to be determined) Include velocity profiles

18 12 Component 1.4 Intrabay Overhead Hoist Transport System (continued) 10. Compliance to use of cleanroom compatible materials 11. Location of EMO, Power ON, and Power OFF switches 12. Determine the FOUP delivery time for the supplier test line. Delivery time is defined as the transportation time from bay stocker shelf to the destination Equipment Loadport in the test line Use this as simulation input data to drive the determination of system throughput for large systems. 13. Interoperability Test Use different suppliers FOUPs and load ports that meet SEMI Standards 14. Demonstrate vehicle preventative maintenance and/or repair strategy for minimizing impact to other vehicle traffic.

19 13 Component 2.1 Stocker Compliance to Standards 1. Interoperability per I300I FIWG guidelines 2. E23 Parallel I/O Interface 100% compliant 100% compliant Tests to be defined by I300I 3. CE marking 100% compliant Supplier Verified/Identified 4. SECS II, GEM, HSMS standards compliance 5. E15.1 loadport (Manual ports and Intrabay ports) 100% compliant Tested via emulation 100% compliant Compliance to ESH Guidelines 1. S2 compliance 100% compliant Third-party verified 2. S8 Ergonomics guideline compliance 100% compliant 3. EU Machinery, EMI/ESD, and Low voltage dir. 4. Seismic Stability for UBC Zone 4 area and S2 5. Protection against Flammability/Fire Recommended compliance 100% compliant EU/CE, E33 verified 100% compliant Third-party verified Consider using Factory Mutual FM 4910 document as guideline Cost of Ownership 1. Relative CoO (Total Interbay system) 1.3X 200 mm Relative for same WSPM. Note that the CoO is for the total Interbay system, and not just stockers. Overall Performance 1. Relative Throughput of System per wafer starts per month. 2. Mean Stocker Cycle time for 25-wafer capacity FOUPs (Note: 13-wafer stockers will require much lower cycle time for the same wafer starts per month) 3. Peak (Mean+2X std. dev.) Stocker Cycle time (Note: 13-wafer Stockers will require lower number.) > 1.25X 200 mm To account for increase in # of mask layers for 300 mm. 15 secs 18 secs For a Stocker capable of storing 150 of the 25-wafer FOUPs. Cycle time includes communications overhead. For a Stocker capable of storing 150 of the 25-wafer FOUPs. Cycle time includes communications overhead.

20 14 Component 2.1 Stocker (continued) 4. Stocker Mean Time Between Incident (MTBIp) > 500 hours Use E10 methodology 5. Stocker Availability (SEMI E10) 99.92% Use E10 methodology 6. Stocker Mean Time to Repair (MTTR) 30 minutes Use E10 methodology 7. Relative Preventive Maintenance per WSPM 1X 200 mm Relative for same WSPM 8. Relative Consumable per WSPM 1X 200 mm Relative for same WSPM 9. Relative Footprint per WSPM 1X 200 mm Relative for same WSPM System Cleanliness 1. Airborne Cleanliness (Dynamic testing) Class 10 at 0.2 µ Using Fed. Std. 209E and ISO Mechanical Performance 1. Impact on payload (included vibration, shock, acceleration, vector orientation) 0.1 G avg G peak Using tri-axial accelerometer placed inside FOUP 2. Payload weight carried by robot 10 kgs One full capacity 25-wafer FOUP Electrostatic Performance 1. Resistance to ground of nest for payload at rest 1 Ω Data to be Collected 1. Stocker Alarm conditions and GEM messages 2. How FOUP drop is prevented 3. Stocker footprint and height dimension 4. Overall loaded weight of stocker kgs/feet (lbs/feet) Max loading on each foot 5. Stocker shelf storage capacity 6. Air handling/contamination control features 7. Fire prevention system design and material used 8. Charge buildup on carrier. Need to determine the max allowed time for the charge build-up to dissipate to the nominal allowed value. 9. Manual and Intrabay I/O portsconfigurations, location, and cycle times < 50 V (dissipation rate to be determined)

21 15 Component 2.1 Stocker (continued) 10. Integration of FOUP ID tracking system (BCR, ID tags, etc.) with Stocker 11. Documentation of the # of different Stocker configurations possible, its dimensions and storage capacities 12. Compliance to use of cleanroom compatible materials 13. Location of EMO, Power ON, and Power OFF switches 14. Stocker reliability computation using ARAMS definitions and E10 states. 15. Interoperability Test Demonstrate use of different suppliers FOUPs which meet SEMI Standards

22 16 Component 2.6 E15.1 Load Port and Door Opener Compliance to Standards 1. Interoperability per I300I Factory guidelines 2. E23 Parallel I/O Interface 100% compliant 100% compliant Tests to be defined by I300I 3. CE marking 100% compliant Supplier verified/identify 4. E64 : Cart Docking Interface 100% compliant Include no tripping hazard 5. E15.1: Load Port 100% compliant Including D, D1, H, C1, C2 6. Carrier ID Reader per I300I Factory guidelines Compliance to ESH Guidelines 100% compliant Standards TBD 1. S2 compliance 100% compliant Third-party verified 2. S8 Ergonomics guideline compliance 100% compliant 3. EU Machinery, EMI/ESD, and Low voltage dir. 4. Seismic Stability for UBC Zone 4 area and S2 5. Protection against Flammability/Fire Recommended compliance 100% compliant EU/CE, E33 verified 100% compliant Third-party verified Consider using Factory Mutual FM 4910 document as guideline Cost of Ownership 1. Relative CoO per WPPH 1.3X 200 mm Relative for same wafers processed per hour (WPPH) Overall Performance > 1.25X 200 mm To account for increase in # of mask layers for 300 mm 1. Relative Throughput of System per wafers processed per hour compared to 200 mm like equipment 2. Cycle time for pod opening and closing 3. Mean Cycle Between Incident (MCBIp) 15 secs cycle time Time is for combined opening and closing of pod door (= one cycle) > 100K cycles Use E10 methodology + DTM 4. Availability (SEMI E10) 99.92% Use E10 methodology 5. Mean Time to Repair (MTTR) 15 minutes Use E10 methodology 6. Preventive Maintenance 15 minutes per quarter For each loadport

23 17 Component 2.6 E15.1 Load Port and Door Opener (continued) System Cleanliness 1. External Area (where wafers are in the FOUP) Airborne Cleanliness (Dynamic testing) 2. PWP of load-port only (This is attributed to the door opening and closing actions only, and does not include the particle contribution by the pod and the door interactions). Compatible with Class 0.5 µm particle size I300I ~2.5% of PWP particle budget for the worst metrology equipment, with particles measured at 0.13 µm Using Fed. Std. 209E and ISO Assume the total particles due to Door Opener/Closer + the FOUP/Door combination is ~5% of the process equipment PWP budget Mechanical Performance 1. Impact on payload (included vibration, shock, acceleration, 0.1 G avg G peak Using tri-axial accelerometer placed inside FOUP vector orientation) 2. Payload weight 10 kgs One full capacity 25-wafer FOUP Electrostatic Performance 1. Resistance of path to ground of payload at rest Data to be Collected 1. Charge buildup on Carrier. Need to determine the max allowed time for the charge build-up to dissipate to the nominal allowed value. 2. Integration of FOUP ID tracking system (BCR, ID tags, etc.) 3. Integration of optional interoperable purge capability 4. Compliance to use of cleanroom compatible materials 5. Location of EMO, Power ON, and Power OFF switches 6. Reliability computation using ARAMS definitions and E10 states. 1 Ω < 50 V (dissipation rate to be determined) Integration and location (per standard to be determined) Integration and connection location (per standard to be determined)

24 18 Component 2.6 E15.1 Load Port and Door Opener (continued) 7. Location and functionality of load presence and load placement OK indicator lights (LEDs) at the load port area 8. Interoperability Test Use different suppliers FOUPs and transport systems which meet SEMI Standards (note: later discussion)

25 19 Component wafer Front Opening Unified Pod (FOUP) Compliance to Standards 1. Interchangeable and interoperable per I300I Factory Guidelines 2. SEMI E47.1 POD and Boxes (and E1.9 for internal requirements) Also reference E15.1, E57, and E62 100% compliant Test to be interchangeable and interoperable with different standard loadports and FIMS devices 100% compliant 3. CE marking 100% compliant Supplier verified Compliance to ESH Guidelines 1. S2 compliance 100% compliant Third-party verified 2. S8 Ergonomics guideline compliance 100% compliant 3. ESD 100% compliant TBD 4. Protection against Flammability/Fire Recommended compliance Consider using Factory Mutual FM 4910 document as guideline Cost of Ownership 1. Relative CoO 1.3X 200 mm Relative for same WSPM (WSPM = wafer starts per month) Overall Performance 1. The FOUP must be operable with door opener full door open or close cycle time compatible with door opener metric Time start at beginning of unlatching to door removed 2. Door Key Life time > 100K cycles 1 cycle is latch open and latch close 3. Automation flange reliability > 100K lift cycles with full load 1 cycle is lifting off of the load port 2 meter 4. Availability > 99% per FOUP. Preliminary estimate, final number may be much higher 5. Relative Consumable per WSPM 1X 200 mm pod Relative for same WSPM 6. Presence of pads C and D for FEOL and BEOL FOUP demarcation SEMI E47.1

26 20 Component wafer Front Opening Unified Pod (FOUP) (continued) System Cleanliness 1. PWP of Pod/Door combination (This is attributed to the pod and door interactions, and does not include door opening and closing by the E15 ports). Mechanical Performance 1. Maximum weight (25 Wafers + FOUP + ID TAG) Electrostatic Performance 1. Path to ground from wafer slots to kinematic coupling and automation handling flange. 2. Path to ground from shell and door to kinematic coupling and automation handling flange. Data to be Collected 1. Maximum static charge build-up on the FOUP, measured a) on the shell, b) the door, and wafers 2. Maximum wafer temperature that can be placed inside a closed FOUP, and it will still operate without problems, and the wafer retention mechanisms don t deform, etc. 3. Integration of FOUP tracking ID and optional interoperable purge capability 4. Automatic FOUP cleaning and drying (both the pod and the door) verified 5. Demonstrated POD and Door traceability markings 6. Maximum measured deflection at the top of the FOUP where the automation flange is attached, encountered during loaded pod pickup action. I300I PWP particle budget for the worst metrology equipment, with particles measured at 0.13 µm < 9 kgs 25 kω/square to 10 8 Ω/square 25 kω/square to 10 8 Ω/square 50 V (dissipation rate to be determined) C Yes/No Yes/No mm Assume the total particles due to Door Opener/Closer + the FOUP/ Door combination is based on I300I PWP budget. (EOS/ESD Association Standard, S ) (EOS/ESD Association Standard, S ) All measured X(TBD) secs after it is placed on a grounded E15.1 loadport Integration and location (per standard to be determined) ID location and details required Static state while being suspended by hoist

27 21 Component wafer Front Opening Unified Pod (FOUP) (continued) 7. Ability of carrier to filter UV light such that there is no UV reading below 470 nm that measures above 1.00E-08 W/cm 2. Yes/No 8. Wafer movement restriction No wafer movement (degree of rotation and lateral) Passive retention is minimum requirement 9. Interchangeablity Test Test to be interchangeable and interoperable with different standard load ports and FIMS devices

28 22 Component 5.2 Wafer Sorter Category Attribute Metric/Unitss Comments Equipment Automated Yes/No Parameters Compatible 25-wafer FOUP/ OPC/13-wafer FOUP T7 ID Reader Aligner Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Standards/Guideline S2 Compliance 100% compliant Third-party verified Process Defect - PWP S8 Compliance 100% compliant Third-party verified SEM/GEM Compliance 100% compliant Tested via Emulation On bare 0.09 µm #/wafer < 0.73 (0.001/cm 2 ) Backside on 0.20 µm #/wafer TBD Cost/Perform Throughput wafer/hour Target Tool capital cost $M MTBF hour Use E10 Methodology MWBA wafer Use E10 Methodology MTTR hours Use E10 Methodology Preventive maintenance Consumables hour/week $/wafer pass Area per tool m 2 Support area per tool m 2 CoO Target CoO objective $/wafer pass Note : All load port requirement apply to Sorter load ports

29 23 Component 5.3 FOUP Cleaner Category Attribute Metric/Units Comments Equipment Automated Yes/No Parameters Capability/OPC/13-wafer FOUP/25-wafer FOUP Yes/No Standards/Guideline S2 Compliance 100% compliant Third-party verified S8 Compliance 100% compliant Third-party verified SEM/GEM Compliance 100% compliant Tested via Emulation Process Emissions Supplier verified Characteristics Humidity after dry Water, usage Chemical usage liters/wafer liters/wafer Defect PWP Particles removal #/wafer Method Q3,LPC Surfactant/residue Cost/Perform Throughput wafer/hour Target Tool capital cost $M MTBF hour Use E10 Methodology MWBA carriers Use E10 Methodology MTTR hour Use E10 Methodology Preventive maintenance Consumables hour/week $/wafer pass Area per tool m 2 Support area per tool m 2 CoO Target CoO objective $/wafer pass

30 24 4 I300I CONTACTS If you have questions concerning the Metrics for 300 mm Automated Material Handling Systems (AMHS) and Production Equipment Interfaces: Revision 1.0 or their application in I300I demonstrations, please contact the appropriate person from the list below. Productivity and Infrastructure Program Contacts Program Name Manager/Leader Phone AMHS Carol Davis (512) carol.davis@intl.sematech.org Factory Integration Eddy Bass (512) eddy.bass@intl.sematech.org CIM Karl Gartland (512) karl.gartland@intl.sematech.org P & I Department Directors Director Ashwin Ghatalia (512) ashwin.ghatalia@intl.sematech.org Associate Director Randy Goodall (512) randy.goodall@intl.sematech.org If you have comments and suggestions about this document, please contact the persons above. The general phone number for the Technology Departments at I300I is (512) The general FAX number for I300I is (512)

31

32 SEMATECH Technology Transfer 2706 Montopolis Drive Austin, TX