J
John Larkin
Guest
https://semiaccurate.com/
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
P
Phil Hobbs
Guest
On 2020-08-27 19:12, John Larkin wrote:
They used to make all their content available after a blackout period,
which was a lot more useful. They want $1k per year for a subscription.
The free stuff is also interesting.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com
https://semiaccurate.com/
They used to make all their content available after a blackout period,
which was a lot more useful. They want $1k per year for a subscription.
The free stuff is also interesting.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com
S
server
Guest
On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 12:56:20 -0400, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
Moore observed that transistor density grows exponentially. He didn\'t
note that the difficulty grows exponentially too.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
On 2020-08-27 19:12, John Larkin wrote:
https://semiaccurate.com/
They used to make all their content available after a blackout period,
which was a lot more useful. They want $1k per year for a subscription.
The free stuff is also interesting.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
Moore observed that transistor density grows exponentially. He didn\'t
note that the difficulty grows exponentially too.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
P
Phil Hobbs
Guest
On 2020-08-28 13:49, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
It didn\'t, for a really long time. Classical Mead-Conway scaling worked
for many generations, so that the industry was basically
lithography-driven, from crayons down to sub-100 nm. Transistor
performance peaked at about 65 nm--they\'ve been getting slower, leakier,
and much more numerous since then. Analogue performance peaks at around
300 nm.
For a legal case a year or two back, I got to look at quite a lot of
engineering drawings for 14-nm-class wafer scan tools. The amount of
automatic tweaking and calibration in those things is unbelievable.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com
On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 12:56:20 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
On 2020-08-27 19:12, John Larkin wrote:
https://semiaccurate.com/
They used to make all their content available after a blackout period,
which was a lot more useful. They want $1k per year for a subscription.
The free stuff is also interesting.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
Moore observed that transistor density grows exponentially. He didn\'t
note that the difficulty grows exponentially too.
It didn\'t, for a really long time. Classical Mead-Conway scaling worked
for many generations, so that the industry was basically
lithography-driven, from crayons down to sub-100 nm. Transistor
performance peaked at about 65 nm--they\'ve been getting slower, leakier,
and much more numerous since then. Analogue performance peaks at around
300 nm.
For a legal case a year or two back, I got to look at quite a lot of
engineering drawings for 14-nm-class wafer scan tools. The amount of
automatic tweaking and calibration in those things is unbelievable.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com
J
John Larkin
Guest
On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 13:56:34 -0400, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
Was that DUV immersion? Maybe it used my laser controller!
One EUV scanner now costs $150 million. One big fab can cost $10
billion. The complexity is boggling. Each scanner must come with a
team of support people to keep them running. Where are they going to
find them?
And lots of spares!
It bogs my mind that steppers have become scanners. Both the reticle
and the wafer are in motion during the exposure, with nanometer
repeatability.
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
On 2020-08-28 13:49, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 12:56:20 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
On 2020-08-27 19:12, John Larkin wrote:
https://semiaccurate.com/
They used to make all their content available after a blackout period,
which was a lot more useful. They want $1k per year for a subscription.
The free stuff is also interesting.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
Moore observed that transistor density grows exponentially. He didn\'t
note that the difficulty grows exponentially too.
It didn\'t, for a really long time. Classical Mead-Conway scaling worked
for many generations, so that the industry was basically
lithography-driven, from crayons down to sub-100 nm. Transistor
performance peaked at about 65 nm--they\'ve been getting slower, leakier,
and much more numerous since then. Analogue performance peaks at around
300 nm.
For a legal case a year or two back, I got to look at quite a lot of
engineering drawings for 14-nm-class wafer scan tools. The amount of
automatic tweaking and calibration in those things is unbelievable.
Was that DUV immersion? Maybe it used my laser controller!
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
One EUV scanner now costs $150 million. One big fab can cost $10
billion. The complexity is boggling. Each scanner must come with a
team of support people to keep them running. Where are they going to
find them?
And lots of spares!
It bogs my mind that steppers have become scanners. Both the reticle
and the wafer are in motion during the exposure, with nanometer
repeatability.
B
Bill Sloman
Guest
On Saturday, August 29, 2020 at 4:26:48 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
<snip>
The shaped beam electron beam microfabricator that I was working on around 1985 was going to be \"write on the fly\".
We were using a laser interferometer to keep track of where the stage was with nanometer accurcy, and we could move the electron beam around equally precisely (and a good deal faster) - albeit over much smaller distances. We could pick up little squares of gold put on the wafer surface as position references - the electron beam worked just as well as an electron microscope probe for imaging as it did as a writing tool. Stopping the wafer while we wrote on it would have been a waste of time.
I\'m not all that surprised John Larkin\'s mind gets boggled by 35-year-old technology - he\'s not exactly the best informed person around here.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 13:56:34 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
On 2020-08-28 13:49, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 12:56:20 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
On 2020-08-27 19:12, John Larkin wrote:
<snip>
For a legal case a year or two back, I got to look at quite a lot of
engineering drawings for 14-nm-class wafer scan tools. The amount of
automatic tweaking and calibration in those things is unbelievable.
Was that DUV immersion? Maybe it used my laser controller!
One EUV scanner now costs $150 million. One big fab can cost $10
billion. The complexity is boggling. Each scanner must come with a
team of support people to keep them running. Where are they going to
find them?
And lots of spares!
It bogs my mind that steppers have become scanners. Both the reticle
and the wafer are in motion during the exposure, with nanometer
repeatability.
The shaped beam electron beam microfabricator that I was working on around 1985 was going to be \"write on the fly\".
We were using a laser interferometer to keep track of where the stage was with nanometer accurcy, and we could move the electron beam around equally precisely (and a good deal faster) - albeit over much smaller distances. We could pick up little squares of gold put on the wafer surface as position references - the electron beam worked just as well as an electron microscope probe for imaging as it did as a writing tool. Stopping the wafer while we wrote on it would have been a waste of time.
I\'m not all that surprised John Larkin\'s mind gets boggled by 35-year-old technology - he\'s not exactly the best informed person around here.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
P
Phil Hobbs
Guest
On 2020-08-28 14:26, John Larkin wrote:
The case was ASML v. Nikon in the International Trade Commission. I was
mostly looking at Nikon\'s stuff.
That\'s a good deal easier than maintaining sub-nanometre geometric
accuracy over a large field in a staring system, especially at a
wavelength where you can\'t use lenses.
Using 1-D scanning you can take out most of the aberrations using
dynamic adjustment of focus and tilt.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com
On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 13:56:34 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
On 2020-08-28 13:49, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 12:56:20 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
On 2020-08-27 19:12, John Larkin wrote:
https://semiaccurate.com/
They used to make all their content available after a blackout period,
which was a lot more useful. They want $1k per year for a subscription.
The free stuff is also interesting.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
Moore observed that transistor density grows exponentially. He didn\'t
note that the difficulty grows exponentially too.
It didn\'t, for a really long time. Classical Mead-Conway scaling worked
for many generations, so that the industry was basically
lithography-driven, from crayons down to sub-100 nm. Transistor
performance peaked at about 65 nm--they\'ve been getting slower, leakier,
and much more numerous since then. Analogue performance peaks at around
300 nm.
For a legal case a year or two back, I got to look at quite a lot of
engineering drawings for 14-nm-class wafer scan tools. The amount of
automatic tweaking and calibration in those things is unbelievable.
Was that DUV immersion? Maybe it used my laser controller!
The case was ASML v. Nikon in the International Trade Commission. I was
mostly looking at Nikon\'s stuff.
One EUV scanner now costs $150 million. One big fab can cost $10
billion. The complexity is boggling. Each scanner must come with a
team of support people to keep them running. Where are they going to
find them?
And lots of spares!
It bogs my mind that steppers have become scanners. Both the reticle
and the wafer are in motion during the exposure, with nanometer
repeatability.
That\'s a good deal easier than maintaining sub-nanometre geometric
accuracy over a large field in a staring system, especially at a
wavelength where you can\'t use lenses.
Using 1-D scanning you can take out most of the aberrations using
dynamic adjustment of focus and tilt.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com