(19) United States
`(12) Patent Application Publication (10) Pub. No.: US 2002/0116083 A1
`(43) Pub. Date:
`Aug. 22, 2002
`Schulze
`
`US 2002O116083A1
`
`(54) SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AUTOMATED
`MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT OF
`FABRICATION FACILITY
`(76) Inventor: Bradley D. Schulze, Phoenix, AZ (US)
`Correspondence Address:
`PERMAN & GREEN
`425 POST ROAD
`FAIRFIELD, CT 06430 (US)
`(21) Appl. No.:
`09/978,500
`(22) Filed:
`Oct. 16, 2001
`Related U.S. Application Data
`(60) Provisional application No. 60/241,343, filed on Oct.
`17, 2000.
`
`Publication Classification
`
`(51) Int. Cl. .................................................. G06F 19/00
`
`(52) U.S. Cl. ........................... 700/108; 700/117; 700/121
`
`(57)
`
`ABSTRACT
`
`A method for monitoring and assessing operation of a
`Semiconductor fabrication facility comprises the Steps of
`connecting a monitoring and assessment System to a System
`buS which is connected directly or indirectly to a manufac
`turing execution System and a plurality of Semiconductor
`fabrication tools. Through a user interface, the State models
`can be configured for the Semiconductor fabrication tools
`where each State model is based upon a set of defined
`triggerS for each tool. During monitoring various messages
`are transmitted on the System bus between the Semiconduc
`tor fabrication tools and the manufacturing execution System
`and the monitoring and assessment System, and appropriate
`triggers are generated based upon the messages where the
`triggers are Selected from a set of defined triggers. During
`operation, the State models are updated for each tool affected
`by one of the triggerS and transitions within the State models
`are recorded in a tracking database.
`
`A-1,
`autu
`saw is bo
`
`
`
`Avtom-1
`rs
`bp). A-
`ASS.S. M1
`SYStza
`
`o
`
`9).
`Corsoup.
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 1
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002. Sheet 1 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`yo !
`
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 2
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002. Sheet 2 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`
`
`7 : Q 12
`
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 3
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002. Sheet 3 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`t
`
`wa
`
`A
`
`Ng is S
`is S3
`Š
`
`so
`&
`
`Y
`
`9. r
`
`g
`
`&
`
`
`
`S.
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 4
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002. Sheet 4 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`@
`
`orth
`
`6th
`
`
`
`Sng vù? LSKs
`
`
`
`TO?I VRHOO
`
`5 gh
`
`Loh
`
`9 1
`
`5th
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 5
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002. Sheet 5 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`;
`
`1 g
`
`-
`
`t
`
`
`
`2.
`c
`Je.
`e
`s
`1.
`'s
`-
`d
`t
`
`VY
`
`&O
`se
`V
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 6
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002. Sheet 6 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`
`
`\ G. (e
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 7
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002. Sheet 7 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`
`
`To
`
`ssilver
`Recieves a
`Trigger to
`process
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`log
`
`
`
`aS
`
`Perform Trigger
`logic to set any
`external states
`
`Perform Trigger
`logic to lock or
`unlock too state
`
`No
`
`is State Mode
`configured
`for this trigger?
`
`
`
`No
`
`is the State Mode
`locked?
`
`Too
`
`19
`
`is the State
`configured for PPD
`Cassification based
`responses
`
`
`
`Yes
`
`Transition based
`on PPD
`Classification
`
`
`
`
`
`is the State
`configured for
`Exterial state based
`responses
`
`Transition based
`of External States
`
`Transition State
`
`based on trigger 1 129
`
`
`
`
`
`Record pertinent
`information in the
`tracting
`database
`
`35 -
`
`
`
`is the new state
`configured for sub
`state linkage?
`
`
`
`Yes
`
`
`
`Repeat process for
`each inked tool.
`
`No
`
`( so D
`
`38
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 8
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002. Sheet 8 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`8 , 92 /
`
`
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 9
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002 Sheet 9 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`
`
`w s
`s
`s
`a
`
`s
`3.
`R
`
`CO
`
`- Productive 4- 93
`S --- PRD
`s -
`...
`-- PRD/Regular production
`2--PRDNWork for third parties
`--- PRD/ReWork
`2--PRD/Engineering runs
`-
`- PRD/Reserved
`PRD/Reserved
`PRD/Reserved
`PRD/Reserved
`--- PRD/Reserved
`2-- Standby 4- 46
`S-- SBY
`-- SBY/No Operator
`3-- SBY/No Product
`---. SBYINo Support Tool
`S
`SBY|Associated Cluster Module Down
`SBY/Reserved
`-- SBYIReserved
`--- SBY/Reserved
`-- SBYIReserved
`
`A5
`Egg-7
`Engineering
`E
`5-- Scheduled Downtime
`8-i - Unscheduled Downtime
`E-- UDT
`
`UDTISPC violation
`E
`-- UDTIParticle issue
`
`2C.
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 10
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002 Sheet 10 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`• • • • • •
`
`- - -
`
`--
`
`
`
`|
`
`(2), o/
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 11
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002 Sheet 11 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 12
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002. Sheet 12 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 13
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002. Sheet 13 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 14
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002 Sheet 14 of 32 US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(0.5
`
`If 622.
`
`// /O
`
`Symptom 122: Robot Automation Alarms
`
`Lock Tool State
`Unlock Tool State
`
`Interrupt classification when transitioning to UDT fl. 2 o
`O Assist
`6Failure
`---
`(e) Chargeable
`O Non-Chargeable ONon-Relevant
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`O Return to Previous ARAMS State
`
`-- 7 / /35
`
`2.
`e Select Destination State
`a ENG/Engineering
`6 SDT/Scheduled Downtime
`Fe UDT/Unscheduled Downtime
`Bes UDT/User Maintenance Delay
`;
`:
`".
`UDT/SEMY SMC Abort
`UDT/Equipment. Automation Robotics
`a UDT/Broken Wafer
`UDT/Out of calibration
`MO-
`UDT/Pump Failure
`g5SEgéléirisis
`st
`UDT/User maintenance delay
`UDT/Supplier maintenance
`UDT/Repair
`UDTIOut-of-spec input material
`
`
`
`F.G. 1
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 15
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002 Sheet 15 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`ympton Configuration
`
`FailiChargeable
`
`None
`FailChargeable
`Fai/Non-Charge
`
`ls
`
`se
`
`3&aii
`-PRDRegular Production
`ProRegular Production
`ENGIEngineeringTests
`UOTEquiptinent Problem
`SDTEquipment qual
`None
`SY
`
`-
`
`-
`
`PPD Class: Production
`PPto Class: Engineering
`PPto Class: Supplier Maint.
`PPlo Class: Factory Maint
`Step Change
`Process End
`Clean1. Unavailable
`S8YNo Support Tool - Wet Bench
`Clean2. Unavailabe
`N
`Clean3. Unavailable
`Cleans. Unavailable ........... --SA 2.--
`SBY/No Operator
`SBYNo Product
`UDTISMC issue
`UDIOut of Spec Gas
`
`ics
`
`2d
`
`- -
`
`-
`
`-
`
`None
`--
`-
`Robotics issue
`UDPowerfall
`
`- -
`
`-
`
`
`
`a ENG/Engineering
`Eta SDT/Scheduled Downtime
`Ethe UDTUnscheduled Downtime
`as UDTUser Maintenance Delay
`Elsa
`UDT/Equipment Automation Robotics
`Gia
`UDT/Broken Wafer
`UDTIOut of calibration
`a UDTPump Failure
`UDTLeak in system
`a UDTUser maintenance delay
`UDTSupplier maintenance
`UDT/Repair
`UDTIOut-of-spec input material
`UDT/Change of consumables
`
`2.
`s
`
`s
`
`s
`-
`
`-
`
`F\G. TA
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 16
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002 Sheet 16 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`
`
`Sympton Proporties
`
`No Support Tool
`SMCFail APCFC
`SPC Fai
`Out of Consumables
`Process Model Failure
`
`F.C. 3 C,
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 17
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002 Sheet 17 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`
`
`SEARAS Add External State Response
`
`No Operator
`No Product
`Clean 1. Unavailable
`Clean2. Unavailabe
`Cleans Unavailable
`Clean4. Unavailable
`SMC Fat
`SPC Violation
`Out of Consumables
`
`aifs.
`Aligner Failed
`Left loadlock Turbo Pump failed
`Right Loadlock Turbo Pump Failed
`Left toadlock Failed
`Right Loadlock Failed
`PMA Turbo Pump Failed
`PMBTurbo Pump Failed
`PMC Turbo Pump Failed
`
`3.
`ToolSSS, Trigger 8: Robotics Problem
`Note
`None
`None
`None
`
`ToolxYZ, Trigger9: User Abort
`TootXYZ, Trigger9: User Abort
`None
`TootXYZ, Triggera: Chamber Pressure Proble
`Too!XYZ, Triggers: Gas problem
`TooxYZ, TriggerS: Gas problem.
`ToofPDQ, TriggerS: Gas problem
`TookYZ, Triggers: Gas problem
`
`. .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`2
`
`O
`
`Gas Channel02 F
`Gas ChannelO3 F
`Gas Channel04 F
`
`A 12
`
`fyds. 5A
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 18
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002 Sheet 18 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`
`
`. .
`
`. . SelectSympton Triggerto Map
`
`Process Start
`Process End
`Step Change
`Chamber Pressure Problem
`Gas Problem
`Power Problem
`Plasma Arcing
`Loadlock Pressure Problem
`Robotics Problem
`User Abort
`
`O
`
`f2 G 53
`
`
`
`Create New AD
`
`f G. 160
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 19
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002 Sheet 19 of 32 US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`
`
`Type: Numeric Description: Process State
`
`... SWED 1 0023
`-
`Changed From Walue (0- Idle)
`-e Changed to Value (1 - Processing)
`- E
`Changed to value (4- Loading)
`Changed From Value (1 - Processing)
`Changed From Value (2 - Pre Clean)
`S- Changed From Value ( - Wildcard)
`-- SVID 10024
`Type: Numeric Description: Loadlock State
`S
`SVD 3200102
`Type: ASCII
`Description: PM State
`
`Tool ABC, Trigger - 23: Process Start
`Tool XYZ, Trigger - 75: Loading Start
`
`A 5 of
`
`f) G. 52
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 20
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002 Sheet 20 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`SWD Editor
`
`de
`
`Processing
`Pre Clean
`
`Post Clean
`
`Loading
`Unloading
`
`Process Error
`
`Af6, ASA
`
`
`
`Add SVD Walue to Mapping
`
`N de
`n
`Processing
`st Pre-clean
`Post Clean
`Loading
`Unloading
`Process Error
`Auto Calibration Check
`
`ises
`
`2-6, /5A
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 21
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002 Sheet 21 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`
`
`rigger Data Mapping tility
`
`Lot id 17
`Lot id 18
`lot id 18
`Lot id 19
`Lot id 20
`Lot id 21
`Lot id 22
`Lot id 23
`Lot id 24
`Lot id 25
`Wafer id
`Batch D
`Actual Units
`3 PPD
`: PPID Classification
`Text field 1:Device D
`assissitassassi:...si:::::
`Text field 3
`Text field 4
`Text field 5
`Text field 6
`Text field 7
`Text field 8
`ext field 9
`Text field 10
`Float field 1: Sot D
`
`A/6. (2
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 22
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002 Sheet 22 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`N
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 23
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002. Sheet 23 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 24
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002. Sheet 24 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`F, G - ACA
`
`
`
`foolchanberSpecific Constants
`
`f6
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 25
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002 Sheet 25 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`
`
`Tool Chamber Specific Constants
`
`e
`
`Process 23
`Process POC
`Process 22?
`Process"
`quip Check1 :
`Equip Check2
`Equip Check Particles
`Equip "
`
`Device D
`Layer
`Step Number
`Water Nurnber
`Numbers
`Number8
`Number 7
`Number8
`Number
`Number 10
`ext1
`Texa
`
`Z.
`
`
`
`Tool Chamber Specific Constants
`it is
`
`Process ABC
`Process ABC
`Process XYZ
`Process 123
`
`fault
`
`":
`
`f
`
`0.18; 0.15 ... --
`O
`- -
`-
`-
`0.21
`3: 0.24; 0.21
`25
`0.2
`0.45 : 0.49
`
`0.05
`0.11
`0.08
`0.12
`
`- 0.23
`0.23
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 26
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002 Sheet 26 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`Toolchamberspecific constants
`
`
`
`Process 123
`Process 22?
`
`Equip check2
`Equip Check Particles
`
`ProcessABC
`G
`Process)KY
`e
`Z
`G ProcesszZZ
`
`ProcessPDO
`S.
`& ENG.
`Supplier
`Maintenance
`Customer Maintenance
`& Equip??
`& Particle Qual
`
`it:
`
`u.
`
`
`
`Too Chamber Specific Constants
`
`SS:
`default Transition
`
`5"
`2r
`5. " " -
`
`...
`2
`
`.
`
`. .
`
`.
`Paramam
`Don't Caddon't Care
`T Toof
`
`. .
`
`- - - -
`
`- -
`
`- - -
`
`----------. User or Tool
`
`Don't Causer or Host
`
`To Productive
`To Standby
`Fault in Productive
`Productive Fault cleared
`Fault in Standby
`Standby Fault Ceared
`To Scheduled Downtime
`User initiated Transition - - ---
`Standby to Standby
`Productive to Productive
`Fault in Engineering
`Engineering Fault cleared
`
`------------ .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 27
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002 Sheet 27 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 28
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication
`
`Aug. 22, 2002 Sheet 28 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`
`
`v.
`() O §3
`
`0 0 0 0 0
`
`§§
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 29
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002 Sheet 29 of 32 US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`23 d
`
`
`
`232
`
`2 3
`11
`7 8 9
`13 14 15 1s 7 18 19
`20 21 22 23 24 25 2S 3
`27 28 23
`
`11 12
`g 9
`13 14 15 16 17 18 13
`20 21 22 23 24 25 2S is
`27 28 23
`
`35 is
`
`gigs:S
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 30
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002 Sheet 30 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`2AD
`
`Report Time
`
`F \s. 24
`
`Report Properties
`
`Properties
`
`
`
`Tool Selection
`
`Plot Parameter
`e) Frequency
`O Time
`State
`Symptom? Trigger
`ALID
`Alan Text
`CEID
`Event Text
`PPD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Pareto Properties
`Frequency Property
`Transition Based
`Time Property
`DAverage Time
`Scale:
`Seleast areer
`ass.
`
`
`
`Days
`Months
`Hours
`Minutes
`
`
`
`
`
`3-(none)
`State Name
`Oosime
`State Mumber
`Data Magnitude
`
`.
`
`Color Preferences
`Background
`Axis/Gridlines
`
`
`
`E10 Colors
`Resolution: sheart-vel 4
`
`
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 31
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Aug. 22, 2002 Sheet 31 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`
`
`File
`
`Preferences
`Report Start Time: 12/01/1999
`
`Report End Time: 12/30/1999
`Transition Count
`
`PRDRegular Production Toolabco?
`PRD, internal Transport Time Toolabc}l
`PRD leak Check Tire Toolabco
`PRStabilization Tirne Tolabco
`PRD/Value Add Steps Toolabcol
`PRDRework Toolabco
`PRDEngineering Runs Toolabcol
`
`SDT/Preventive Maintenance Tooach
`SDTAProduction test Toolabco
`UDTSupplier Maintenance Delay Toolabcoi
`UDT/Repair Toolabco
`UDT/Equipment Robotics ToolabcQL
`OTfbroken Wafer Tootaco
`iTOut of calibration Toolabco
`UDTressure Problem Toolabco
`UDT/Pump Failure Toolabcol
`UdTileak in systern (A) Toolabcot
`UDTTemperature problem (i) Toolabcot
`UDT?emperature Problem (A) Toolabcof
`
`0
`9
`8
`Transition Court
`
`1
`
`2 3 4 5 6 17
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 32
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication
`
`Aug. 22, 2002. Sheet 32 of 32
`
`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 33
`
`

`

`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`Aug. 22, 2002
`
`SYSTEMAND METHOD FOR AUTOMATED
`MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT OF
`FABRICATION FACILITY
`
`CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED
`APPLICATION(S)
`0001) This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provi
`sional Patent Application 60/241,343, filed Oct. 17, 2000,
`which is incorporated by reference herein in its entirety.
`
`BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
`0002) 1. Field of the Invention
`0003. The field of the present invention relates to systems
`and methods for monitoring and assessing the performance
`and operation of fabrication facilities, Such as Semiconduc
`tor fabrication facilities.
`0004 2. Brief Description of Related Developments
`0005 The manufacture of microelectronic circuits and/or
`components on Semiconductor wafers can be a complex and
`involved process, requiring numerous tools and machines
`operating in a production Sequence according to a Specified
`Set of instructions (e.g., a “recipe”). Examples of fabrication
`processes typically performed in the manufacture of a Semi
`conductor wafer include etching, deposition, diffusion, and
`cleaning.
`0006 Large semiconductor fabrication facilities can have
`dozens or even hundreds of tools, each of which is called
`upon periodically to perform part of a process as dictated by
`the Selected recipe(s). Some fabrication tools are used for
`processing Semiconductor wafers, while others, known as
`metrology tools, are generally used for measuring the output
`of a processing tool. Fabrication tools are often employed in
`an assembly-line fashion, with each applicable tool having
`a role in the Step-by-step fabrication of a Semiconductor
`wafer. However, due to the nature of the step-by-step
`manufacturing processes, at least Some tools will be idle at
`any given time, waiting for the output of an upstream tool.
`Fabrication tools can also be idle for other reasons, Such as
`When needing maintenance, repair or re-programming, or
`re-configuration with respect to other tools in the plant. The
`amount of time fabrication tools are idle bears a correlation,
`directly or indirectly, to the overall efficiency of a Semicon
`ductor fabrication facility, and hence a correlation to the
`profitability of the facility. A challenge for each fabrication
`facility is thus to reduce idle time of fabrication tools to the
`maximum extent possible, therefore maximizing production
`time, yield and profitability.
`0007 Moreover, many processing tools and metrology
`tools are quite expensive, and the collective array of tools
`brought together at a Semiconductor fabrication facility
`represent a Substantial investment. To the extent tools are
`idle, the investment in these tools is wasted. The floor Space
`at Semiconductor fabrication facilities is also enormously
`expensive, due to extreme requirements of cleanliness,
`among other reasons, and So even inexpensive tools which
`are idle can be costly in terms of wasted floor Space that is
`being underutilized. Furthermore, large Semiconductor fab
`rication facilities often will have many duplicate tools for
`performing processes in parallel. If facility engineers can
`determine that certain duplicate tools are idle for long
`periods, then Some of the duplicate tools can potentially be
`
`eliminated, saving both the cost of the tools and the floor
`Space that they take up. Alternatively, if all of a certain type
`of tool is operating at maximum efficiency yet still are the
`cause of a bottleneck in the manufacturing process, produc
`tion engineers may determine that more tools need to be
`purchased. Therefore, a tremendous need exists to identify
`which fabrication tools are active and which idle, and for
`what reasons. For example, if a fabrication tool was idle for
`a long period because the upstream proceSS Step takes a long
`time, a production engineer may come to a different con
`clusion about how to adjust facility resources than if the idle
`period was due to the fact that the upstream fabrication tool
`was broken and needed to be repaired. Thus, the reason for
`tool idleneSS can be important information for engineers
`controlling Semiconductor manufacturing processes.
`0008 To assist production engineers in assessing semi
`conductor manufacturing efficiency, a variety of informa
`tional reporting Standards have been promulgated. One of
`the earliest Such standards is known as the E10-0699 Stan
`dard for Definition and Measurement of Equipment Reli
`ability, Availability and Maintainability (RAM) (hereinafter
`the “E10 Standard”), hereby incorporated by reference as if
`set forth fully herein. This standard, originally put forward
`around 1986 by Semiconductor Equipment and Materials
`International (SEMI), defines six basic equipment States into
`which all equipment conditions and periods of time (either
`productive or idle time) must fall. Total time for each tool is
`divided into Operations Time and Non-Scheduled Time.
`Operations Time is divided into five different categories
`(Unscheduled Downtime, Scheduled Downtime, Engineer
`ing Time, Standby Time, and Productive Time) which,
`together with Non-Scheduled Time, comprise the six basic
`equipment States. Equipment Downtime for a given tool is
`divided into Unscheduled Downtime and Schedule Down
`time. Likewise, Equipment Uptime for a given tool is
`divided into Engineering Time, Standby Time and Produc
`tive Time. Of these three Equipment Uptime states, Produc
`tive Time and Standby Time collectively represent the
`Manufacturing Time for a given tool.
`0009. The E10 Standard also defines a number of reli
`ability, availability and maintainability measurements relat
`ing to equipment performance. Such measurements include,
`for example, mean (productive) time between interrupts
`(MTBI), mean (productive) time between failures (MTBF),
`mean (productive) time between assists (MTBA), mean
`cycles between interrupts (MCBI), mean cycles between
`failures (MCBF), and mean cycles between assists (MCBA).
`Mean (productive) time between interrupts (MTBI) indi
`cates the average time that the tool or equipment performed
`its intended function between interrupts, and is calculated as
`the productive time divided by the number of interrupts
`during that time. Mean (productive) time between failures
`(MTBF) indicates the average time the tool or equipment
`performed its intended function between failures, and is
`calculated as the productive time divided by the number of
`failures during that time. Mean (productive) time between
`assists (MTBA) indicates the average time the tool or
`equipment performed its intended function between assists,
`and is calculated as the productive time divided by the
`number of assists during that time. Mean cycles between
`interrupts (MCBI), mean cycles between failures (MCBF),
`and mean cycles between assists (MCBA) are similar, but
`relate the number of tool or equipment cycles to the number
`of interrupts, failures and assists, rather than the productive
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 34
`
`

`

`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`Aug. 22, 2002
`
`time. The E10 Standard also provides guidelines for calcu
`lating equipment dependent uptime, Supplier dependent
`uptime, operational uptime, mean time to repair (average
`time to correct a failure or an interrupt), mean time off-line
`(average time to maintain the tool or equipment or return it
`to a condition in which it can perform its intended function),
`equipment dependent Scheduled downtime, Supplier depen
`dent Scheduled downtime, operational utilization, and total
`utilization. The E10 Standard provides for calculation of two
`important metrics in particular: Overall Equipment Effec
`tiveness (OEE), and Overall Fabrication Effectiveness
`(OFE). Traditionally, most of the information used to cal
`culate the metrics in the E10 Standard has been gathered
`manually-a slow, tedious proceSS prone to potential errors.
`0.010 Since its inception, the E10 Standard has been
`refined and improved upon. In recent years, at least two new
`standards have been proposed or adopted by SEMI, the same
`entity that originally proposed the E10 Standard. The first of
`these new standards is known as the E58-0697 Automated
`Reliability, Availability and Maintainability Standard
`(ARAMS) (hereinafter the “E58 Standard”), and the second
`is known as the E79 Standard for Definition and Measure
`ment of Equipment Productivity (hereinafter the “E79 Stan
`dard”). The E58 Standard was proposed around 1997 in an
`attempt to integrate automated machine processes into the
`E10 Standard. Accordingly, the E58 Standard specifies trig
`gers for state transitions described in the E10 Standard, with
`the intent of encouraging tool or equipment manufacturers to
`Store and make available trigger information at each tool. AS
`the E58 Standard was apparently envisioned, tool and equip
`ment manufacturers would include Special Software with
`their tools and equipment, allowing controllers or monitor
`ing equipment to read information about trigger events that
`could be gathered and used in the calculations of tool
`availability, reliability and maintainability. However, very
`few tool and equipment manufacturers have actually written
`Such special Software for their tools and equipment. One
`possible reason for the reluctance to include Such Software
`is that, if productivity information were available to their
`customers, tool and equipment manufacturers might be
`required to extend warranty periods for their tools and
`equipment for periods of time in which the equipment was
`not up and running. Therefore, tool and equipment manu
`facturers have an incentive not to provide Software that
`meets the guidelines of the E58 Standard.
`0.011) More recently, the E79 standard has been proposed.
`The E79 Standard builds upon the E10 and E58 Standards,
`and Specifies, among other things, a set of metrics for
`calculating certain reporting items. Two Such metrics are
`referred to as the Overall Equipment Efficiency (OEE)
`metric and Overall Fabrication Efficiency (OFE) metric. The
`E79 Standard also specifies metrics for determining, for
`example, Availability Efficiency, Performance Efficiency,
`Operational Efficiency, Rate Efficiency, Theoretical Produc
`tion Time, and Quality Efficiency, among others.
`0012 While the E10, E58 and E79 Standards all provide
`guidelines for assessing equipment availability, reliability
`and maintainability, they do not describe how to gather and
`process the necessary information. These tasks can be quite
`challenging. For example, different platforms are used in
`different Semiconductor fabrication facilities for communi
`cating between Supervisory equipment and various proceSS
`ing and measurement tools. Therefore, a single information
`
`gathering technique might not be possible for all fabrication
`facilities. Furthermore, despite the existence of the E58
`Standard, few tools actually Store the trigger and event
`information that facilitates the calculation of various per
`formance and efficiency metrics covered by the Standards.
`Thus, obtaining the necessary data can be difficult. In
`addition, multi-chamber tools (also known as cluster tools)
`pose a problem, because they involve equipment with mul
`tiple Subsidiary tools treated as a single unit. The Standards
`indicate a preference that information concerning the indi
`vidual Subsidiary tools be available, as opposed to merely
`information about the cluster tool as a whole.
`0013 While having an automated way of gathering and
`processing information useful for monitoring and assessing
`tool and equipment performance according to the various
`available Standards would be highly beneficial, actual imple
`mentations of Systems for performing these activities may be
`undesirable if they require modifications to existing control
`Systems which are deployed in Semiconductor fabrication
`facilities. Owners of such facilities may be very reluctant to
`make changes that would impact their existing control
`Systems, because of the potential for introducing “bugs” or
`errors into the System, or causing other unforeseen conse
`quences. Moreover, actual implementations of Systems for
`monitoring or assessing tool and equipment performance
`according to the various Standards may also be undesirable
`if they require modifications to the existing processing or
`metrology tools. Tool manufacturers may be quite reluctant
`to make changes that might impact the performance of their
`tools, Such as changing the message driver of the tools, or
`that might lead to incompatibilities with existing versions of
`tools, interface equipment, or control Systems. Moreover,
`tool manufacturers may simply want to avoid the expense of
`re-designing their tools to provide the functionality that may
`be required for monitoring or assessing tool and equipment
`performance.
`0014.
`It would therefore be advantageous to provide a
`non-intrusive, reliable and comprehensive System or method
`for monitoring, assessing and reporting the operation and
`performance of Semiconductor or other types of fabrication
`facilities. It would further be advantageous to provide Such
`a System or method that requires a minimum of modifica
`tions to existing control Systems, tools or equipment.
`
`SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
`0015. In accordance with a first embodiment of the
`invention, a method for monitoring and assessing operation
`of a Semiconductor fabrication facility comprises the Steps
`of connecting a monitoring and assessment System to a
`System bus which is connected directly or indirectly to a
`manufacturing execution System and a plurality of Semicon
`ductor fabrication tools. Through a user interface, the State
`models for each fabrication tool can be configured where
`each State model is based upon a Set of defined triggerS for
`each tool. During monitoring various messages are trans
`mitted on the system bus between the semiconductor fabri
`cation tools and the manufacturing execution System and the
`monitoring and assessment System, and appropriate triggers
`are generated based upon the messages where the triggers
`are Selected from a Set of defined triggers. During operation,
`the State models are updated for each tool affected by one of
`the triggerS and transitions within the State models are
`recorded in a tracking database.
`
`Petitioner STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Ex. 1007, IPR2022-00681, Pg. 35
`
`

`

`US 2002/0116083 A1
`
`Aug. 22, 2002
`
`0016. In another embodiment of the invention, a system
`for monitoring and assessing operation of a Semiconductor
`fabrication facility for assessing overall equipment effec
`tiveness and overall fabrication effectiveness comprises a
`monitoring and assessment System for receiving messages
`having equipment information therein for tracking operation
`States of a plurality of Semiconductor fabrication tools. A
`manufacturing execution System for controlling the manu
`facture of Semiconductor waferS or other products according
`to a programmed recipe Sends commands to the Semicon
`ductor fabrication tools, monitors their activity and sends
`messages to the monitoring and assessment System. These
`messages are transmitted over a System bus that is connected
`directly or indirectly to the manufacturing execution System
`and the monitoring and assessment System. A user interface
`can monitor the messages transmitted on the System bus
`between the Semiconductor fabrication tools and the manu
`facturing execution System and the monitoring and assess
`ment System. A user may configure State models for the
`Semiconductor fabrication tools in which the State models
`are based upon a set of defined triggerS for each tool. Base
`on the trigger information and other events, the State tran
`Sitions are maintained in a tracking database for recording
`State transitions within the State models.
`0.017. As a further embodiment of the present invention,
`a monitoring and assessment System for monitoring and
`assessing operation of a Semiconductor fabrication facility
`assesses overall equipment and overall fabrication effective
`neSS. The monitoring and assessment System comprises a
`trigger/event interface for receiving messages having fabri
`cation tool information therein for tracking operation States
`of a plurality of Semiconductor fabrication tools. A State
`model logic receives the tracking operation information for
`each fabrication tool having defined States and a State
`transition logic defining triggering events and the State
`transitions related to the triggering event. If the fabrication
`tool has a State change, a State change transition logger
`inputs this information into a tracking database for recording
`transition information. A report generator with metric cal
`culation logic therein may generate performance metrics for
`the fabrication tools which is used for assessing overall
`equipment effectiveness and overall fabrication effective
`neSS of the fabrication tools. A user interface may monitor
`and configure State models for