300mm Prime Guidelines

Phase 1
Version 1.05
June 2007

JEITA-JSIA
Japan Electronics and Information Technology Industry
Association-Japan Semiconductor Association

300mm Prime Task Force0

Contents
1.

2.

Next Generation Fab Image Intended by J300P Guidelines............................................ 3
1.1.

Introduction .............................................................................................................. 3

1.2.

Background............................................................................................................... 3

1.3.

Implementation Timings .......................................................................................... 4

Basic Guidelines .............................................................................................................. 5
Manufacturing Management and Control in Wafer Point of View (Explanation) ............. 5

3.

2.1.

Manufacturing Management and Control in Wafer Point of View .......................... 6

2.2.

Quality Assurance Across Business Boundary ........................................................ 8

2.3.

Hierarchical Assurance of equipment’s process execution performance............... 10

Equipment Engineering Data/Model Definition ........................................................... 11
Proactive visualization of production equipment quality................................................. 11
3.1.

Proactive visualization of production equipment quality....................................... 11

3.2.

Reinforcement of production equipment quality assurance ................................... 12

3.3.

Focus on basic equipment capability visualization ................................................ 13

3.4.

Critical values provision of equipment performance healthiness determination ... 14

3.5.

Collaboration between device makers and equipment suppliers............................ 15

3.6.

Improved efficiency in equipment engineering data collection and data utilization
16

Equipment engineering data definition ............................................................................ 17

4.

3.7.

Equipment engineering data utilization areas of interest ....................................... 17

3.8.

Structure of Equipment Engineering Data ............................................................. 19

3.9.

Equipment Engineering Data Quality .................................................................... 20

Individual Wafer Equipment Control ............................................................................ 21
4.1.

Graceful Shutdown of Production Equipment (EEC Guidelines) .......................... 21

4.2

Equipment capability performance adjustment and control (Phase 2) ................... 22

4.3

Wafer Level Intermediate Metrology Control (Phase 2)........................................ 22

4.4

Wafer Level Quality Control (Phase 2).................................................................. 22

1

5

4.5

Productivity of Metrology Tools (Phase2) ............................................................. 22

4.6

Minimization of Equipment Throughput Variation (Phase 2) ............................... 22

4.7

Continuous Wafer Feed and Pick-Up (Phase 2)..................................................... 22

4.8

Manipulation of Wafer Processing Queue (Phase 2).............................................. 22

Production Equipment Productivity Improvement........................................................ 23
Definition of Dandori ....................................................................................................... 23

6

5.1

Dandori visualization.............................................................................................. 23

5.2

Dandori Loss Reduction (Phase 2) ......................................................................... 25

5.3

Intended Stable Wafer Processing.......................................................................... 26

5.4

Continuous Wafer Processing Across Lot Boundaries........................................... 27

New Factory-Production Equipment Control Interface ................................................ 28
6.1

Addition of Wafer Level Management Interface ................................................... 28

6.2

Addition of Wafer Level Control Interface (Phase 2) ............................................ 29

7

Guideline Phasing.......................................................................................................... 30

8Contacts ......................................................................................................................... 30

9Revision Record ............................................................................................................ 30

Figures:Figure 1: Paradigm shift for the next generation semiconductor factory
Figure 2: Cycle time visualization concept from wafer point of view
Figure 3: Counter measure examples for productivity losses induced by Dandori operations2

1. Next Generation Fab Image Intended by J300P Guidelines
1.1. Introduction
This guideline booklet was developed by 300mm Prime Task Force affiliated withJEITA-JSIA (Japan Electronics Information Technology Association Japan-Japan
Semiconductor Industry Association) Technology Committee, hereafter J300P Task Force.
The area of the guideline requirements is limited to production equipment and related
peripheral capabilities per the agreement made among the JEITA-JSIA member companies.
This set of guidelines is expansion of the existing global guidelines (GJG300: Global Joint
Guidance for 300mm Semiconductor Factory CIM and EEC: Equipment Engineering
Capabilities Guidelines) to capture the requirements in the next generation semiconductor
fabs as reduction in production cycle time, more stable and elaborate process outcome
controllability, and, reinforced productivity in the production equipment. J300P Task Forcereviewed the existing guidelines of both GJG300 and EEC. J300Ptask Force found they are
all reusable except for new additional requirements.
Phase 1 guidelines focus on wafer point of view visualization of factory and equipment
activities, and phase 2 guidelines will focus on equipment controllability.

1.2. Background
300mm factories have been designed for factory automation and build worldwide basis.
There are following problems in terms of productivity and a paradigm shift in the
manufacturing methodology now being sought.
(1) Wafer level process outcome control capability in response to process nodeadvancement(2) Productivity and cycle time improvement in response to rapidly changing business
requirement
Figure 1 shows the image of above mentioned paradigm shift in semiconductor factory andits manufacturing methodology. This figure was created by STRJ and presented in 2005
winter ITRS meeting.

3Operation
Operation
ForFor
HM/SL&
HM/SL &
Advanced
Advanceddevicedevicegeometrygeometry
e-Mfg
Agile
ECM
EES
PV

450mm
450mm
Commonality is important

300mm
300mmPrime
Prime
2006
2009
Pilot

Simplified
Operation

2011
First
FirstGeneration
Generation300mm
300mm

1997
GJGStandard
Spec

Lot base managementfor quality and delivery

2005

Mass Production
PV: Proactive Visualization,
HM/SL：High Mix/Small Lot Size

Source STRJ 2005

Figure 1: Paradigm shift for the next generation semiconductor factory

STRJ disclosed following manufacturing concepts in the past 5 years; e-Manufacturing,
Agile-Manufacturing, Engineering Chain management, Equipment Engineering System,
Proactive Visualization, Hierarchical Strategic Quality Assurance. J300P Task Forceformulated requirements as guidelines out of these manufacturing concepts with a focus on
productivity and cycle time improvement.

1.3. Implementation Timings
Followings are implementation timings of the capabilities required in this guidelines.
2008
Completion of equipment engineering data contents and data provision readiness that are
asked in the base guidelines
2009
Implementation of wafer traceability information from wafer point of view that is asked in
the base guidelines
Completion of standardization for equipment capability and relevant data models
Standardization of information definition for Dandori visualization
Implementation of graceful shut down of equipment that are asked in the individual wafer
equipment control guidelineStandardization of wafer management information at the interface between production
equipment and factory for wafer

4

2010
Standardization and implementation of those wafer level control capabilities required inPhase 2

2. Basic Guidelines
Manufacturing Management and Control in Wafer Point of View
(Explanation)
Wafer processing operations are graphically represented in Figure 2. A lot has been defined
as a carrier containing 25 wafers and most of the production information has been defined
based on this lot definition, and manufacturing is controlled and executed based on this lot
basis and the information has been gathered.
For the further improvement of the cycle time and productivity it will become important toutilize individual wafer’s movement information that describe all experienced states in thecourse of fabrication at individual wafers internal and external to the equipment together
with equipment operation log data. The scope of the basic guidelines is that equipment
productivity and equipment process control activities are to be analyzed at individual wafer
level so as to visualize individual wafer activities as well as productivity losses that havenot been explored before and the process outcome control and related peripheral activity
control are to be done at the wafer level as well to improve the productivity in acomprehensive manner.
Phase 1 basic guidelines present the requirements for factory activity visualization from theviewpoint of individual wafers and from the other viewpoints as well. Phase 2 basic
guidelines are scheduled to present requirements for the process outcome control andrelated activities at individual wafer-level.

Figure 2: Cycle time visualization concept from wafer point of view5

2.1. Manufacturing Management and Control in Wafer Point of View
Manufacturing management and control information shall be designed to allow elaborated
wafer view utilization both in the factory and equipment systems.
Who to implement this guideline: Equipment suppliers and device makers
Who to use this guideline: Equipment suppliers and device makers
Background and purposes:
For the consistent improvement both in the cycle time and productivity it will become
important to utilize factory information comprising of individual wafer’s movement
information that describe all experienced states in the course of fabrication internal andexternal to the equipment in conjunction with hierarchically structurised relevant
equipment activity log data. Wafer view factory information such as cycle time and waitingtime information has been defined by individual device makers. The equipment activity
information from the wafer viewpoint such as wafer movement upon load; port transfer andequipment internal transfer events are provided by equipment suppliers in their specificmanner. Wafer view information utilization will play an even more important role in thecontext of more complex and finer geometry fabrication.

Standards:
1. Wafer view cycle time related data such as individual wafers’ waiting time, process timeneed clear definitions. Wafer view cycle time related data are to be defined to have ahierarchical structure in the standard.
2. The wafer level traceability data shall be defined to have finer granularity in comparison
to the lot based traceability data. Particularly event data upon equipment’s state changes
shall be defined with high granularity for standardization.
Examples of data definitions that require standardization:
Time duration of equipment internal fabrication or fabrication related operations fromthe viewpoint of individual wafers
Graphical representation methods of equipment internal paralleled operations on
multiple wafers,
Discrete waiting time segments for individual wafer that comprise overhead time ofindividual wafers (know as B values):
Across the factory-equipment boundary;Time of “paper work” of wafer carrier acceptancePhysical transfer time and some wait time
External to equipment;
Wait time for a carrier to be transported
Wait time in a queue•
Internal to equipment;

6

Time segments that can not be hidden by parallelism of equipment internal
processes that add up to the total lot cycle time
Production time discontinuity between consecutive 2 lots with different
recipesTime needed for batch formation
Cleaning and seasoning time, time used for particle check
Wait to time for manual operation, wait time for quality judgment, etc.
Wafer traceability information element examples:
Process sequences log data for individual wafers, Wafer rotation at relevant wafer
positions, equipment group, equipment, equipment modules that individual
wafers went through, carriers in which that wafer was contained
Examples of event data that support above mentioned wafer view data utilization;
Event of equipment status changes, its contents, and, event data definition interms of engineering specifications and structural definition that contains relevant
context information.
Remarks:None

7

2.2. Quality Assurance Across Business Boundary
Production equipment quality shall be visualized, traced, and maintained across theequipment supplier-device maker business boundary.
Who to implement this guideline: Equipment suppliers and device makers
Who to use this guideline: Equipment suppliers and device makers
Background and Purposes:
Production equipment quality is built into the equipment in the manufacturing process. Thisequipment quality will be succeeded and used at device maker’s production line. It is
important that quality maintenance and improvement activities at the equipment supplierand those at the device maker are mutually interrelated so as to improve the quality andefficiency of equipment engineering operations at both parties.
Standards:
Standard requirements will be described in the dependent lower level guidelines. For
the implementation of this guideline following standardization efforts are required inplural industry domains.

Consortia campaign:
Business model study of Enhanced Equipment Quality Assurance
For EEQA see http://jeita-smtc.elisasp.net/
Implementation encouragement by consortia: Following publications
Establishment of EEQA’s technical procedure as a common knowledge
Format of EEQA contents sheet
EEQA contents standardization of well-known equipment capabilities
Standardization of EEQA equipment engineering data and data specifications
EEQA equipment engineering data reutilization

Remarks:
Business model study as an industry is required for implementation of this guideline.
Industry organizations from both equipment suppliers and device makers should
conduct mutual and open investigation. For effective and proactive visualization ofequipment quality each party should prepare to propose the equipment quality
visualization contents. Device makers’ active support of equipment suppliers’

8reutilizing the EEQA data for the further equipment quality improvement should
become a common practice.

9

2.3. Hierarchical Assurance of equipment’s process execution performance
Equipment’s process execution performance quality (such as low failure rate, short equipment
state validation time, low process outcome quality fluctuation, reduced machine-to-machine orchamber-to-chamber difference, shall be assured in accordance to equipment’s hierarchicallogical structure model. This quality validation shall be performed prior to equipment’s
acceptance to the production line by the equipment supplier. This quality assurance should be
performed at needed frequency after the acceptance. The EEQA data shall be able to beshared between the equipment supplier and the device maker.
Who to implement this guideline: Equipment suppliers
Who to use this guideline: Equipment suppliers, device makers, and third parties
Background and purposes:
Selected equipment engineering data sharing is required between the equipment supplier andthe device maker for sufficient information support to maintain the equipment at the specified
performance. Data selection shall be decided by collaboration between the equipment makerand the device maker.
Standard:
Hierarchical equipment logical structure (equipment level capability layer, equipment module
level capability layer, part level capability layer) should be standardized.
Remarks:
Equipment reliability improvement is important to semiconductor manufacturing where
inherent feature shrinkage continues. Scientific approach to the more stable equipment
performance is eagerly expected with hierarchical quality traceability being in place fromlow component level to the whole equipment level.

103. Equipment Engineering Data/Model Definition
Proactive visualization of production equipment quality
3.1. Proactive visualization of production equipment quality
Production equipment quality shall be visualized with sharable healthiness and productivity
evaluation methods and evidence data, and that visualized information shall be able to bereutilized.
Who to implement this guideline: equipment suppliers, device makers
Who to use this guideline: Equipment suppliers, device makers
Background and purposes
Production equipment is the most important factory resource and its quality influences
semiconductor product quality, cost, delivery time. Therefore the equipment quality
validation at the time of acceptance to the production line and the equipment quality
maintenance and tracking are very important equipment engineering operations. They
needs to be consequentially reinforced with scientific equipment engineering data.
Standard:
Equipment quality validation procedure shall be standardized.
Equipment engineering data for equipment quality description and evidence shall bestandardized.
Remarks:11

3.2. Reinforcement of production equipment quality assurance
Production equipment quality visualization, assurance, validation, and, trace shall be
reinforced with using steadily available equipment engineering data from the production
equipment.
Who to implement this guideline: Equipment suppliers
Who to use this guideline: Equipment suppliers, device makers
Background and purposes:
Currently available on-line equipment data is not utilized in a positive manner for
production equipment quality assurance. Equipment capabilities shall be tuned, validated
for performance with using steadily available equipment engineering data for the purposeof enhancing equipment quality assurance. Production equipment performance
visualization and maintenance should use this steadily available equipment engineering
data so as to succeed the initial equipment performance validation by using the same data.
Standard:
None
Remarks;
See guideline 2.6 for production equipment quality reinforcement.

123.3. Focus on basic equipment capability visualization
Visualization of individual equipment capabilities and equipment control capability shall beprioritized in conducting production equipment quality validation, trace, and maintenance
operations.
Who to implement this guideline: Equipment suppliers and device makers
Who to use this guideline: Equipment suppliers and device makers
Background and purposes:
An process tool is, for example, consist of process generation means such as reaction
condition generation (pressure and reactant concentrations, etc..), wafer temperatureadjustment means, wafer transportation means, and such. It is a basic and very first step toexamine if individual equipment capabilities are functioning in accordance to their
specifications or to what design intended.
Standard:
Validation procedures and the relevant data shall be standardized at least for the principal
equipment capabilities.
Remarks;
There are several well-known equipment capabilities in production equipment. These
capability performances shall be expressed as logical capability components and to bevalidated for their performances per these logical definitions. Accumulation of these logicalcomponents should validate the whole equipment performance so that that equipment
quality is described.
Examples of equipment capability performance focus;(1) Famous capabilities with well-known high trouble potential such as mass flow
controllers, automatic pressure controllers, …
(2) Machine-to-machine and/or chamber-to-chamber difference(3) Repeatability of in-equipment process execution sequence13

3.4. Critical values provision of equipment performance healthinessdetermination
Equipment supplier shall provide both sets of critical value sets to determine the healthinessof equipment capability performances and/or behaviors for the initial validation at the timeof production line acceptance and for the continuous operation in production.
Who to implement this guideline: Equipment suppliers
Who to use this guideline: Equipment suppliers and device makers

Back ground/purposes:
Currently the critical values to determine the healthiness of an equipment capability
performance for the initial validation at the time of production line acceptance and thecritical value for the continuous operation in production that is the expectation of theperformance stability are not well distinguished, and, hence, equipment suppliers have very
often no such pairing design values. This ends up with poor traceability of equipment
quality, and examination of particular equipment capability’s healthiness is difficult
without the provision of critical values for performance stability.
It is expected that the equipment supplier is most knowledgeable about the healthiness
definition or designed criteria. Device maker engineers are also knowledgeable enough to
set reasonable critical values for healthiness determination from his/her experiences, but
not necessarily know all the equipment capabilities and because of their large number it is
impossible to cover wide good portion of the capabilities.

Standard:
Behavior models and healthy operation models of principal equipment capabilities shall bestandardized.
Remarks:
Equipment supplies are expected to continuously collect field data and proactive equipment
quality visualization data to accumulate knowledge so as to elaborate visualization contentssuch as equipment capability healthiness determination criteria. Equipment suppliers are
expected to improve their traceability capability with statistical analysis of equipment
quality proactive visualization data from a large number of shipped tools, a large number ofprocess chambers, or large number of individual logical equipment capability components

143.5. Collaboration between device makers and equipment suppliers
Device makers and equipment suppliers are to investigate and improve the contents of proactive equipment quality visualization
collaboratively.

Who to implement this guideline: Equipment suppliers and device makers
Who to use this guideline: Equipment suppliers and device makers
Background and purposes:

Device makers are expected to propose the better contents of proactive equipment quality
visualization from their experiences in running the production tool in mass production
environment. The equipment quality data obtained for equipment capability validation at
the time of production equipment acceptance to the production line shall be used by theequipment suppliers for improvement of equipment quality and services.
Standard:
Typical proactive equipment quality visualization shall be standardized.
Typical measurement methods of productivity and equipment capability performances shallbe standardized including important trigger data.
Visualization items of productivity and equipment capability performances shall be
distinctly sorted from the viewpoints of factory operation, production equipment, and,product wafers.
Remarks: none

15

3.6. Improved efficiency in equipment engineering data collection and datautilization
Equipment engineering data collection and data utilization shall be systemized with being
embedded in the current workflows.
Who to implement this guideline: Equipment suppliers and device makers
Who to use this guideline: Equipment suppliers, device makers
Background and purposes:

If data gathering and analysis take too long for equipment quality improvement andmaintenance, equipment quality visualization with enough coverage and depth can not be
achieved. The data gathering shall be done on-line as much as possible. Furthermore thenecessary data extraction, information abstraction, data sorting and accumulation per
individual equipment capabilities, statistical determination of individual equipment
capability healthiness shall be automated and systemized so that data reliability andhealthiness determination reliability are to be improved. This also contributes to establish
equipment quality improvement cycles.
While equipment data collection systems have been implemented for years at device
makers for process condition data retrieval, equipment suppliers shall implement equipment
engineering data collection and utilization system at their own manufacturing sites forproactive equipment quality visualization or enhanced equipment quality assurance withequipment capability level granularity.
Standard:
Data utilization for proactive equipment quality visualization shall be standardized in terms of thedata and its data retrieval capabilities with individual equipment capability granularity and in orderto promote efficient equipment engineering data utilization.

Remarks: None

16

Equipment engineering data definition
3.7. Equipment engineering data utilization areas of interest
Production equipment shall provide elemental data for the information used in the various
equipment engineering operation areas.
Above-mentioned equipment engineering operation areas should include followings;
1.

Management and control operations of host view equipment behavior (GEM300)

2.

Productivity management and improvement operations in terms of OEE , cycle timefrom host view, equipment view, and, product wafer view.

3.

Energy consumption management and reduction and consumables management andreduction operations

4.

Process condition management, monitor, fault detection, and advanced process control
operations where process parametric information is mainly used

5.

Equipment engineering operations such as process tool healthiness monitoring,equipment capability performance validation, malfunction identification, maintenancemanagement where equipment capability activity information is mainly used.

Who to implement this guideline: Equipment suppliers
Who to use this guideline: Equipment suppliers, device makers
Background and purposes:
The history has been that the equipment data is superimposed onto the SECS
communication, and that the main data utilization purpose was to monitor the process
conditions. Production equipment is the most precious resource in the factory, andconsequently it is involved in many aspects of equipment engineering operations. The
equipment engineering data shall be reexamined from above mentioned many aspects ofrelevant data usage.
Standards:
Equipment engineering data items, data types, and, relevant context data shall bestandardized for each of the equipment engineering operations of interest.
Remarks:
It is note worthy to mention that equipment does not necessarily provide readily usable
information for 5 operation areas. Since there are many data that are used commonly inthe 5 equipment engineering operation areas, information extraction from the equipment
17

engineering data shall be done external to the equipment in accordance with targeted
operation areas of interest.

18

3.8. Structure of Equipment Engineering Data
The definition of equipment engineering data is designed in accordance with the logicalmodular structure per equipment’s control capability logical structure.
Who to implement this guideline: Equipment suppliers and device makers
Who to use this guideline: Equipment suppliers and device makers
Background and purposes:
Equipment engineering data should be designed so that it is used both by the equipment
suppliers and device makers for the purposes of equipment quality maintenance andimprovement. Although the process parametric monitoring has been historically the centerof interest at device makers, equipment data that more directly describes equipment
capability activities is required from the viewpoint of equipment supplier.
The process performance of a production tool is hard to be described in terms of the process
results since it is considerably dependent on process parameter settings and the wafer itself.
Equipment quality should be visualized by visualizing individual capability performances.
It should be understood that a production equipment is described as a logical combinationof many individual equipment capabilities, and that some of these capabilities are common
to other production equipment; i.e., an rf power application means is used in plasma CVD,
PVD, dry etching tools. Design and utilization of equipment engineering data will be madeefficient by standardized modeling of these basic capabilities.
Standards:
Equipment capabilities shall be described in a standardized hierarchical logical structure.
Basic equipment capabilities should be standardized for their behavior models comprisingof data definition and healthiness model.
Remarks:
It is required that equipment engineering data is used per each of data utilization purposeswith high efficiency. Information extraction from equipment engineering data should bewell defined for automation without much labor. This means that equipment suppliers areable to gather data from the all process chambers delivered to users as needed and toevaluate the necessary part of the data with ease. If these are done by hand or with lots ofmouse clicks, systematic and continuous equipment quality improvement will bejeopardized.

193.9. Equipment Engineering Data Quality
Equipment engineering data shall be designed to suffice its data specification in accordancewith individual data usage purposes. More concretely following 4 data qualities shall beconsidered;(1) Data items and their precisions defined after healthiness models of individual
equipment capabilities(2) Sufficiency of context for equipment internal activity description endorsed withequipment activity event data
(3) Sufficiency in time stamping that allows correct interpretation of series of equipment
activity accompanied by control sequential structure information(4) Provision of context data from the viewpoint of equipment control sequence that helps
a cluster of data be allocated in the right timing of equipment’s control sequence data wherethat cluster of data is obtained external to the equipment control. Such “external data”
gathering examples are data collection of supplemental equipment such as slurry supply
units or fast trace data collection by dedicated data collector hardware such as an etchingend point detector.
Who to implement this guideline: Equipment suppliers
Who to use this guideline: Equipment suppliers and device makers
Background and Purposes:
Although the specification of equipment engineering data can not determined uniformly
since there are many different data utilizations and different tool types, equipment
engineering data should be provided with the quality that assures correct data interpretation.
This data quality corresponds to context data provision. Context data should enable data
extraction of particular focused area with the right logical state of equipment andrecognition of start and end of a certain control sequence. Some equipment sequence
context may be deduced from combination of plural equipment activity event data. Plural
data sets with different time stamps with different clocks can be correctly interpreted byprovision of adequate sequence context data. In other words very high time stamping
accuracy would be required with less adequate context information (equipment activity
event data) to read the data in some cases.
Standards:
Data quality standard development is required whose scope includes interpretation ofequipment engineering data with using the combination of time stamping and equipment
control consequence information from the viewpoint of data utilization procedure.
Remarks: None20

4. Individual Wafer Equipment Control
4.1. Graceful Shutdown of Production Equipment (EEC Guidelines)
While production tools are designed to have the maximized effective production time a
production equipment shall cease processing wafers safely when malfunctions in safety orbase equipment capabilities are detected with the minimum granularity unit such asindividual wafers or individual chambers. The consecutive sequence from the decision
making of ceasing processing to actual shut down shall be reported.
(Ref.: EEC Guidelines 2002)
Who to implement this guideline: Equipment suppliers
Who to use this guideline: Equipment suppliers and device makers
Background and Purposes:

The granularity of production tool’s process ceasing action has not been standardized. It is
important that the number of scrap wafers is minimized by designing production tools withminimum number of granularity of ceasing action.
Standards: The process ceasing actions are to be standardized with considering the equipment
types and variety of process status.
Remarks:
The malfunction of the equipment should be detected within the process time of therelevant chamber in multi-chamber tool. Processed wafers and unprocessed wafers areclearly recognized so. Process ceasing method should be selected per information available
from and out of the tool, depending on tool/process configuration such as series orparalleled sequence in multi-chamber tools.

21

4.2

Equipment capability performance adjustment and control (Phase 2)

4.3

Wafer Level Intermediate Metrology Control (Phase 2)

4.4

Wafer Level Quality Control (Phase 2)

4.5

Productivity of Metrology Tools (Phase2)

4.6

Minimization of Equipment Throughput Variation (Phase 2)

4.7

Continuous Wafer Feed and Pick-Up (Phase 2)

4.8

Manipulation of Wafer Processing Queue (Phase 2)

22

5 Production Equipment Productivity Improvement
Definition of Dandori
Dandori operations are peripheral operations to the throughput-constraint main thread
operations. Dandori operations include preparatory operations before the processing, postprocess operations, wafer transportation, wafer identification operation.
Dandori operations may be categorized per operation responsibility owners;
Class 1 Dandori operations: where Dandori operations are all delegated to the equipment
and designed by equipment suppliers to be executed within that production equipment.
Class 2 Dandori operations: where Dandori operations reside across the boundary of factory
and the production equipment, and they are very often related the information transfer.
Class 3 Dandori operations: where Dandori operations are controlled by the factory

5.1

Dandori visualization

Dandori operations shall be categorized for the ease of solutions development by device
maker and the equipment supplier. The categorized Dandori operations shall be definedwith provision of the state triggers. Dandori data shall be designed so that the device makerand equipment supplier can share.
Who to implement this guideline: Equipment suppliers
Who to use this guideline: Equipment suppliers and device makers
Background and purposes:
Dandori operation elimination or its time reduction, paralleling Dandori operation with theother operations, evaluation of effectiveness and related effects of each Dandori operation
are important to plan to improve equipment cycle time and OEE. Relevant Dandori
operations are required to be categorized as described in Dandori definition and analyzed indetail.
Dandori operations have not been categorized and defined per logical locations, i.e.,equipment side, factory side, and their boundary.
Standards:
Dandori operations should be defined and categorized in standard.
Remarks: it is important to eliminate productivity losses by deploying effective measures ofwhich examples are listed in Figure 3 that are possible with sharing Dandori information
between the different control layers

23

CategoryClass 1

Improvement in Specific Technology• Reduce seasoning and/or cleaning time

Improvement in Control Technology•

Optimize tool internal wafer transfer
scheduling•

Optimize tact balance between equipment
side and factory side

• Reduce WIP identification time

Class 2

Class 3•

Reduce process instruction information
time•

Parallel such operations as seasoning andcleaning with other operations•

Reduce WIP identification time•

Preset the process instruction•

Reduce carrier identification time•

Optimize the wafer process order•

Reduce NPW preparation time•

Reduce carrier dispatchingtime•

Pre-create of NPW process jobs•

Synchronization of job
exchange and dispatching•

Parallel product quality
confirmation operations andother operations•

Reduce time used forequipment process
performance stability•

Reduce time used for productquality confirmation
Figure 3: Counter measure examples for productivity losses induced by Dandori operations

24

5.2

Dandori Loss Reduction (Phase 2)

25

5.3

Intended Stable Wafer Processing

A single-wafer processing tool shall control execution of identical processing to individual
wafers within a lot or across adjacent lots
Who to implement this guideline: Equipment suppliers and device makers
Who to use this guideline: Equipment suppliers and device makers
Background and purposes:
There are many factors beside what is written in a recipe that determine the process
condition in process tools. A good example is the condition between the process steps in a
multi-chamber configuration tools. It is important to understand the process conditions
between chambers such as time between steps, environment the wafers are immerged,
temperature changes, etc..
Process tools are expected to provide identical process execution to all wafers within a lot,or even for wafers in different lots with the same processing conditions in accordance to theequipment design concept.
Standards:
None
Remarks:
Some process tools are designed to use plural process chambers in parallel
Chamber-to-chamber differences are to be sufficiently reduced by proactive equipment
quality visualization.
Equipment control for identical wafer processing is to be visualized and can be validate as
required.

26

5.4

Continuous Wafer Processing Across Lot Boundaries

A single wafer processing tool shall be able to process wafers continuously across lot
boundaries when that tool is fed with multiple different process lots except for a
discontinuity of that the equipment’s process resources for the following lot become
available
Who to implement this guideline: Equipment suppliers
Who to use this guideline: Equipment suppliers and device makers
Background and purposes:
There are often observed discontinuity in production time between lots with different recipe
contents.
Equipment in some cases needs to wait for a tool internal processing resource will become
available to the wafers in the following lot in such cases as bake temperature setting beingchanged from one value to another across the lot boundary.
This guideline intends to require that the wafer in the subsequent lot will be processed
without excessive delay so as to minimize the discontinuity in the production time.
Standards:
Standards for single carrier multi-lot capabilities need to be reinvestigated
Remarks:
Production discontinuity can arise where continuous wafer supply from the load ports is notpossible. The requirements for such cases will be deployed in Phase 2 publication.

27

6 New Factory-Production Equipment Control Interface
6.1

Addition of Wafer Level Management Interface

Following information shall be defined across the interface where individual wafers aretransferred to process part of the production equipment. This information shall be sharedwith the system external to the equipment.
The information handled is as follows
Wafer identification information, wafer traceability information with its elements such asprocess sequences log data for individual wafers, Wafer rotation at relevant wafer positions,equipment group, equipment, equipment modules that individual wafers went through,carriers in which that wafer was contained, processing instruction information such as therecipe, Variable Parameters, target process positions.

Who to implement this guideline: Equipment suppliers
Who to use this guideline: Equipment suppliers and device makers
Background and purposes:
In hi-mix production various process/chamber configuration and operations are possiblyused. Therefore process management requires the granularity of individual wafers andindividual processes encountered. Although the unicasette operation has been implemented
for many years where carrier integrity and slot integrity are well managed at hardware level,such integrities will possibly subjected to change in response to the wafer level control of
the next generation fab. Such elaborate management will eventually lead to optimization ofwafer feed to individual process parts of the production equipment in terms of stableprocess and productivity control including cycle time reduction. This guideline is a basic
prerequisite requirement to individual wafer level manufacturing control.

28

6.2

Addition of Wafer Level Control Interface (Phase 2)29

7 Guideline Phasing
The guideline items marked as Phase 2 in the contents will be developed after July 2007
and revision 2 J300P guidelines will be published

8 Contacts
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Hiroyuki Ito
Selete/Sharp
ito.hiroyuki@selete.co.jp
Toshihiko Osada
Fujitsuosada.toshihiko@jp.fujitsu.com
Shigeru Kobayashi Renesas Technology kobayashi.shigeru2@renesas.com
Makoto Hiura Sony Semiconductor Kyusyu
Makoto.Hiura@jp.sony.com
MichioHonma
NECElectronics/Selete
michio.honma@necel.com
Kazutaka Mishima Sony Semiconductor Kyusyu
Kazutaka.Mishima@jp.sony.com
AkiraMitsui
Panasonic
mitsui.akira@jp.panasonic.com
Hisakazu Miyatake
Sharp
miyatake.hisakazu@sharp.co.jp
Hiromi Yajima Toshiba
hiromi.yajima@toshiba.co.jp
Takayuki Wakabayashi Renesas Technology
wakabayashi.takayuki@renesas.com

9 Revision Record

30