Accelerating Sustainable Manufacturing

Copyright ©2010 

Advanced Materials Research Center, AMRC, International SEMATECH Manufacturing Initiative, and ISMI are servicemarks of SEMATECH, and the SEMATECH logo are registered servicemarks of 

SEMATECH, Inc. All other servicemarks and trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

Additions & Corrections: 

ISMI/SIA Alternative to RecipeSpecific Testing of 17 Nov 2011

Laurie Beu

Consultant to ISMI

Michael Haslam

Predictum, Consultant to ISMI

February 1, 2012
Contents

• This slides set contains 

– One new slide.

– Corrections to the slides in the 17 Nov 2011 

presentation.

2
Added slides – 18 Jan 2012

• With and without gas error on the three factor model is 

added to the current slide on “Etch Error Comparison 

Across Models – Industry Level” and a new slide is 

created.

3
Etch Error Comparison Across Models 

- Industry Level – with and without 

error on 3 Factor Model

4

• The ISMI Refined 2 factor model achieves substantially better precision 

for etch than the earlier IPCC Tier 2b and EPA Tier 2c methods and is 

better than the ISMI Refined 3 factor model.

Notes: Upper and lower % error are vs. etch total F-gas.

ISMI Refined uses full set of single- and multi-gas byproduct data.

Calculated, not published, emission factors.
Corrections to slides – 18 Jan 

2012

• Several corrections were made to the calculations, resulting in changes to the tables and 

data in slides 10, 11, 22, 23, 29, 30, 31, and 32. The corrected or updated slides are 

attached below and annotated with the respective slide numbers All relevant slides from 

the original 17 Nov 2011 presentation are replaced here. Some changes in the numbers 

in the various tables will be noted. The major change is gas usage, 300mm, 2010, 2 

factor model. There are no changes in text or conclusions.

– Originally, C3F8 was not carried through the calculations, both for etch emissions and other 

emissions. It is now included.

– Lower and upper emission factors were calculated using 1.92 * standard error. This is corrected 

to 1.96 * standard error.

– The 2010 300 mm gas usage data input source for the 2 factor model had a formatting error, 

causing incorrect gas usage input values. The original data had missing gas usage. This has 

been corrected.

– There were two typos in the use of the byproduct emission factors for Wafer cleaning and CVD. 

These have been corrected. The total FGas use went up with these corrections. This means 

that the % that is etch and etch byproducts went down.

5
Calculated Emission Factor 

Tables – 2 Parameter (partial 

view)

January 24, 2012 6

Replacement for Slide 11 in the 11/17/2011 Presentation
Calculated Emission Factor 

Tables – 3 Parameter (partial view)

January 24, 2012 7

Replacement for Slide 12 in the 11/17/2011 Presentation
Etch Error Comparison Across 

Models - Industry Level

January 24, 2012 8

• The ISMI Refined 2 factor model achieves substantially better precision 

for etch than the earlier IPCC Tier 2b and EPA Tier 2c methods and is 

better than the ISMI Refined 3 factor model.

Notes: Upper and lower % error are vs. etch total F-gas.

ISMI Refined uses full set of single- and multi-gas byproduct data.

Calculated, not published, emission factors.

Replacement for Slide 23 in the 11/17/2011 Presentation
Etch Error Comparison Across 

Models – EF Data Level (partial)

January 24, 2012 9

• Gas usage at a facility level used to determine error based on std dev of the 

individual emission factors. 

Note: ISMI Refined uses full set of single- and multi-gas byproduct data.

Replacement for Slide 24 in the 11/17/2011 Presentation
Comparison of Emissions by 

Etch Model: Industry Level

January 24, 2012 10

• 300mm F-gas emissions are substantially reduced compared to 

200mm because lower F-gas emission chamber cleans have been 

implemented at 300mm.

– Etch emissions are a higher percent of all F-gas emissions at 300 mm.

Note: ISMI Refined uses full set including single- and multi-gas byproduct data.

Replacement for Slide 30 in the 11/17/2011 Presentation
Comparison of Emissions for 

Tier 3 Facilities Only

January 24, 2012 11

• For the 200mm fab, the ISMI 2 factor model is closest to the Tier 3 result.

• For the 300mm fabs, all four methods are similar in comparison to Tier 3.

• ISMI 2-factor model has the best precision of the methods presented here.

Notes: Only facilities with Tier 3 data are used here as proxy for EPA Tier 2d.

200 mm: 1 facility

300 mm: 2 facilities

ISMI Refined uses full set including single- and multi-gas byproduct data.

Emissions are reported in MTCO2e.

Replacement for Slide 31 in the 11/17/2011 Presentation
Etch Error Comparison Across 

Models: Tier 3 Facilities

January 24, 2012 12

• Tier 3 variability is driven by gas apportioning.

• The additional error introduced by apportioning offsets any gain in 

precision from the use of 3-factor, Subpart I Tier 2d, and IPCC Tier 3.

Notes: Only facilities with Tier 3 data are used here as proxy for EPA Tier 2d.

200 mm: 1 facility

300 mm: 2 facilities

ISMI Refined uses full set including single- and multi-gas byproduct data.

Emissions are reported in MTCO2e.

Replacement for Slide 32 in the 11/17/2011 Presentation
Byproduct Methodology 

Comparisons – ISMI 2 Factor

January 24, 2012 13

• ISMI 2 factor includes single- and multi-gas byproducts data.

• For comparison: 

– New byproduct emissions factors are calculated using only single-gas 

byproduct data (multi-gas data excluded).

– Byproduct emissions are calculated.

Replacement for Slide 33 in the 11/17/2011 Presentation