That has certainly been true regarding the effect of equipotential bonding. Some of my research findings and the conclusions I have drawn from them have been controversial because they conflicted with the “established wisdom” at that time in the semiconductor and electrostatic control industries. After seventeen years, this has led to the understanding of the subject that I present in this Spotlight. On leaving ASML and moving to Microtome, I was able to spend more time investigating the concerns I had about the methods being adopted. Unfortunately, at the Sematech meeting where the new static dissipative SMIF pod was “unveiled,” Larry Levit presented data showing that the new pod was not quite as protective as it had been hoped it would be. I was responsible for helping to drive forward the development of static dissipative standard mechanical interface (SMIF) pods because at the time, ASML was the only company using single-reticle SMIF pods, and making them dissipative was considered by ESD experts to be the best way to reduce the problems that ASML’s customers were facing. While I was working at ASML, the research into reticle ESD damage at International Sematech was underway, and I started attending their public meetings. One of the priority issues that I was asked to address was the damage being caused to reticles by electrostatic discharges (ESD). My involvement with reticles started when I joined ASM Lithography in 1997 as a product manager for Material Handling and Factory Integration. I have spent a long time studying this subject, and I feel that the detailed understanding of it that I have developed through many years of study is important to the semiconductor industry. Stefan Preble (Rochester Institute of Technology) Semiconductor, Nanotechnology, and Quantum Technology Sohail Dianat (Rochester Institute of Technology)ĭaniel Gray (Gray Optics)Matthew Jungwirth (CyberOptics Corp.)
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |