1. ITRS Factory Integation TWG
2018/9/17
2003 ITRS Factory Integration Chapter Factory Operations Backup Section
Details and Assumptions for Technology Requirements and Potential Solutions
2018/9/17
ITRS Factory Integration TWG
FITWG 2000

2. Factory Operations Backup Outline
Scope of the Section
Contributors
How Metrics were Selected
SEMATECH and ITRS Metrics Alignment
X-Factor Details
High Mix Potential Solutions
Other Potential Solutions
Factory Operations Research Center (FORCe)
Suggested University and Industry Research for 2004+
2018/9/17
ITRS Factory Integration TWG

3. Contributors to Factory Operations
Don Martin (IBM)
Mani Janakiram (Intel)
Martin Haller (Infineon)
John Fowler (ASU)
Donald Hicks (UT-Dallas)
Mike Schwartz (ISMT)
Shantha Mohan (Consultant)
Raja Sunkara (National)
Eric Christensen (AMD)
John Plummer (Consultant)
Abol Taghizadeh (Tefen)
Hiromi Yajima (Toshiba)
Ashwin Ghatalia (Phillips)
Dev Pillai (Intel)
Arieh Greenberg (Infineon)
Arnie Steinman (ION Systems)
Court Skinner (Consultant)
Eric Englhardt (AMAT)
Shige Kobayashi (Renesas)
Jeff Pettinato (Intel)
Junji Iwasaki (Renesas)
Michio Honma (NEC Electronics)
2018/9/17
ITRS Factory Integration TWG

4. How Metrics were selected
Almost every metric is a best in class or close to best in class
Sources are: Rob Leachman’s published 200mm benchmarking data, Individual IC maker feedback, and I300I Factory Guidelines for 300mm tool productivity
It is likely a factory will not achieve all the metrics outlined in the roadmap concurrently
Individual business models will dictate which metric is more important than others
It is likely certain metrics may be sacrificed (periodically) for attaining other metrics (Example: OEE/Utilization versus Cycle time)
The Factory Integration metrics are not as tightly tied to technology nodes as in other chapters such as Lithography
However, nodes offer convenient interception points to bring in new capability, tools, software and other operational potential solutions
Inclusion of each metric is dependent on consensus agreement
We think the metrics provide a good summary of stretch goals for
most companies in today’s challenging environment.
2018/9/17
ITRS Factory Integration TWG

5. Manufacturing Strategy Evolution
ITRS Factory Integation TWG
2018/9/17
Manufacturing Strategy Evolution
Throughput
center-minded
Speed and environment center-minded
Specific Tech. Level
TR (Eq., AMHS, FICS)
Effort
Effort
Specific Tech.
Potential Solution
(Eq., AMHS, FICS)
Factory Operation
Requirement
* Manufacturing strategy requires different perspectives to understand requirements, needs, and solutions depending upon which level of the manufacturing hierarchy you look at.
* At the Enterprise level, the requirement is to deliver product to the customer from factories starting at design through delivery which is an end to end delivery concept. Cycle time means something very specific at this level and the systems to support it cast a wider net across the entire enterprise including mulitple factories, design and integration, etc.
At the technology level, we are concerned with products and equipment at the factory floor which support the high level requirements of the enterprise and which enable the enterprise to deliver. So run rate of process equipment and delivery time of AMHS is important
All of this must be integrated to ensure that the enterprise, factory, and equipment/product levels work together and efficiently
Enterprise Level
Requirement
Current values
Next generation Values
Wider coverage needed
FITWG 2000

6. International SEMATECH Metrics Alignment
Rev 1
09/06/03

7. ITRS/ISMT Metrics Alignment Objective & Status
ITRS Factory Integation TWG
2018/9/17
ITRS/ISMT Metrics Alignment Objective & Status
Align 300mm metrics definitions that are collected for ISMT with those for the ITRS for consistency
Status: Done and Agreed for 37 metrics by ISMT. ITRS sync on production equipment in progress. Expect to complete the alignment by the end of the 2003 ITRS roadmap year in September
Long term objective (2004+) is to develop a process where best in class metrics can be collected globally by SIA or an independent equivalent and used for ITRS synchronization
Industry Best in Class (BIC) Data sharing proposal will not occur in 2003 and will be contingent on number of global 300mm Fabs for 2004
JEITA (Japan) is ok with the concept, however, since there is only 1 300mm Fab (Renesas/Trecenti), all of their values will be lined to that fab. Timing is key for them
Taiwan TSIA has agreed to discuss, but FtF has been pushed to August due to SARS
Need to close on SIA willingness to manage cross regional data – AR for Jeff to close by September FtF
FITWG 2000

8. 300mm Metrics Sync Agreement with ITRS Summary of Approvals from MMC/PAG/Council FtF Meetings
ISMT has agreed to definitions for 36 combined operations, production equipment and AMHS metrics (see slide xx for summary)
ISMT will use three process technology nodes for 300mm Fabs:
1) >130nm, 2) =130nm and 3) < 130nm
ITRS defines current node as 90nm and this will be the focus for future BIC calculations
Use minimum printed image on a process recipe to define technology nodes
Example: Use minimum printed image on Poly, Contacts or Isolation (DRAM) layers
ITRS defines 130nm node as having 24 layers
Please direct any questions or comments to
Mike Schwartz -> (512) ;
Jeff Pettinato -> (480) ;

9. ISMT and ITRS Metrics Synchronization
Equipment Metrics
Operational Metrics
AMHS Metrics
Total Litho Aligns / Day
DUV 248nm Scanner Aligns / Day
193 Scanner Aligns / Day
PVD Metal Dep Outs / Day
Metal etch Outs / Day
Implant (HC) Outs / Day
Implant (MC) Outs / Day
Implant (HE) Outs / Day
CMP Oxide Outs / Day
CMP W Outs / Day
CMP Cu Outs / Day
Copper plating Outs / Day
CVD ILD Outs / Day
CVD Low K Outs / Day k<2.8
Spin On Low K Outs / Day
Cu barrier seed Outs / Day
Availability – E10 (Litho, ILD Etch, Cu CMP, Cu Plating, Cu Barrier/Seed, CVD Dialectric)
Utilization (Litho, ILD Etch, Cu CMP, Cu Plating, Cu Barrier/Seed, CVD Dialectric)
Production Cycle Time
Hot Lot Cycle Time
Direct H/C (Aligns / Day)
Indirect H/C (Aligns / Day
Non Product Wafer Starts Usage
Gas/Chemical cost / litho align
Space Effectiveness (layers-wspm / mfg area)
Non-Product Wafer Starts Usage (# non-revenue generating starts / total wafer starts)
Non-Product Wafer Starts Usage (# non-revenue wafers processed / total wafers processed)
Supplier Focused
Storage MTTR
Interbay Transport MTTR
Intrabay Transport MTTR
# Storage Cycles between Failure
# Interbay Transport Cycles between Failure
# Intrabay Transport Cycles between Failure
Interbay Throughput Design (Moves / Hour)
Design Capable vs. actuals
Intrabay Throughput (Moves / Hour)
General Factory
# Intrabay Transport Cycles between Failure [Total System]
Avg. Fab Wide Carrier Delivery Time

10. Production Lot Cycle Time
Average Cycle Time Per Layer for all Production Lots
Average duration, expressed in fractional working days, consumed only by production lots of wafers from time of release into the fab until time of exit from the fab: Exit includes final parametric test and wafer processes after final parametric test up to die probe/sort, divided by the number of photo wafer layers in the process flow.
Notes:
Note capacity loading percentage on data entry template
Weighted average by volume
Number of photo layers is a volume weighted average

11. Hot Lot Cycle Time Average Cycle Time Per Layer for Hot Lots
Average duration, expressed in fractional working days, consumed only by fastest class of full flow priority lots of wafers from time of release into the fab until time of exit from the fab: Exit includes final parametric test and wafer processes after final parametric test up to die probe/sort, divided by the number of photo wafer layers in the process flow.
Notes:
Hot Lot = Top 5% of lots in the Fab from a priority perspective
Note capacity loading percentage on data entry template
Weighted average by volume
Number of photo layers is a volume weighted average
Does not include partial flow lots (i.e. wafers released from mid-flow wafer banks or engineering experiments)

12. Direct H/C Productivity (Aligns / Day)
Photo Alignments Completed Per Non-exempt Hour
Total number of photo alignments completed, divided by hours worked by:
Operators (ALL operators in wafer fab including final parametric test)
Maintenance Techs (internal/external)
Process Technicians
Sustaining Supplier Technicians ( including on call)
Notes:
Include temporary/contract employees
Rework not included
Include production wafers, engineering wafers (optional), but no monitor wafers

13. Indirect H/C Productivity (Aligns / Day)
Photo Alignments Completed Per Total Exempt Headcount Per Day
Total number of photo alignments completed, divided by total exempt fab headcount. Total exempt headcount includes all personnel and only personnel from the following groups:
Operations Managers/Supervisors
Process Engineers/Managers
Equipment Engineers/Managers
Dedicated Engineering Support from Equipment Suppliers
Notes:
Do not include Probe Test,Yield analysis, CIM/IS, development, production control etc.)
Rework not included
Include production wafers, engineering wafers – (optional)
No monitor wafers
Exempt H/C should include central or support group personnel working in the factory for the areas listed above

14. Floor Space Effectiveness
Weighted average number of mask layers x WSPM
Floor space area
Includes the following items:
Traditional clean room areas (bay/chase, ballroom areas, and other clean areas)
Additional areas where equipment is installed including clean tool interface areas and non-clean space for the physical tool footprint (including associated maintenance spaces)
Does not include the following items:
Sub-fab areas where equipment is not installed
Notes:
WSPM = actual production starts per month- not FAB capacity
Proposed as a yearly benchmark

15. A. Non Product Wafer Starts Usage
Overall factory non-product wafer starts usage
Notes:
Non-Revenue wafers include controls, monitor, and engineering wafers not sold
Do not count new technology development node wafers (e.g. 90nm or 65nm TD) processed in either numerator or denominator
# non-revenue generating wafers started
Total number of wafers started

16. B. Non Product Wafer Activity Usage
Overall factory non-product wafer activity usage
Notes:
Non-Revenue wafers include controls, monitor, and engineering wafers not sold
Do not count new technology development node wafers (e.g. 90nm or 65nm TD) processed in either numerator or denominator
# non-revenue wafers processed through equipment
Total number of wafers processed through equipment

17. Process Equipment Availability
Availability defined as 100% - (scheduled + unscheduled downtime) as per SEMI E10
Calculate as a yearly benchmark for following tools:
193nm Scanner
248nm Scanner
Damascene ILD etch
Cu CMP
Cu Plating
Cu barrier/seed
Intermetal level dielectric (CVD)
Notes:
Measure availability for cluster tools at the chamber level
How to calculate chamber aggregate level?

18. Process Equipment Utilization
Utilization defined as Operational Efficiency as per SEMI E10, which is defined as
(Production Time) / (Available Time)
Calculate as a yearly benchmark for following tools:
193nm Scanner
248nm Scanner
Damascene ILD etch
Cu CMP
Cu Plating
Cu barrier/seed
Intermetal level dielectric (CVD)
Notes:
Measure utilization for cluster tools at the chamber level
How to calculate chamber aggregate level?

19. Yield Metric Definitions
Final Parametric Test
Probe/Sort or Die Testing
Ship
Fabrication
Wafer
Start
Finished
wafer
Scribe Line Test or Test Chip Testing
Does wafer meet specs?
Chip Function Test
Does each chip
meet specs?
Parametric
Yield
Line Yield
Wafers out of Tester
Wafers into Tester C A B
Wafers out of Tester
Wafers into Tester
LY20 = LY (20/ML)
Wafer Fab Accumulated Yield= A X B
Total Accumulated Yield = A X B X C
Yld_Met_Def.ppt/MSCHWARTZ/

20. X-Factor Background & Definitions
Rev 1
09/06/03

32. Discussed at 12 July 2003 FtF Meeting at SEMICON West
ITRS Factory Integration Integrated Potential Solutions for High Mix Production
Discussed at 12 July 2003 FtF Meeting at SEMICON West

33. Definition of High Mix Production
2001 Definition in Factory Operations:
High mix is at least 5 large volume products (product flows) with no one product has >50% of production volume
Extended 2003 Definition:
Running > 3 technology generation concurrently in the same Fab
Running > 10 process flows within the same technology generation
Running > 50 products concurrently through the manufacturing line
Many of small lots of 1 to 10 wafers in size
Running an average of < 50 wafers between Reticle changes for each litho expose equipment
At 5000 wafers out per week per scanner, you will have a minimum of 100 reticle changes per week!!
Lot starts are based on customer orders. There is a daily variation in the number of lots you start with different products and process flows
This drives a large inventory of masks

34. High Mix Production Business Drivers and Implications
Customers want new and volume products delivered quickly
Manufacturers need to have low wafer cost and do not want to sacrifice factory efficiency to achieve speed
Low volumes do not allow enough information turns to optimize product yields, resulting in lower yields and more wafers
Highly specialized parts often result [risk here?] in manufacturing inventory scrap due to customer cancellations or design changes
Customer may order 100 wafers for delivery over 6 months, but may cancel or change the order at any time resulting in scrap
There are large non-reoccurring engineering and non-consumable costs [reticles] associated with multiple product
Process to product integration, new reticles, new test vehicles, engineering time
Complicated manufacturing staging and scheduling of products through the line driven by varying product mix and volumes
Ex: Running standard ASIC design through transistor level and then staging these parts until final order is made before finishing interconnect and integration
Large number of smaller lots driving higher demand and rate of transaction for AMHS storage, AMHS transportation, and MES [metrology, facilities…]

35. High Mix Factory‘s Requirement and Implication Image
Products
High End to Low End
Abundant Products
S/W
(Follow-Up)
Visualization
Tech&Quality
Small
Speed
High Mix
Factory
Businesses
Customers
Stable Profit&Vision
Cost
Time
Capricious Orders
Full
Utilized
Total
Optimization
Flexibility
H/W (Monitoring)
Metrics
(Driver)
Agile Systems
Production Resources

36. Current Metrics Driving High Mix Production
Hot and Normal Lot Cycle Time [Customer]
Reticle Cycle Time [Customer]
U/A Efficiency without sacrificing Throughput Time. TPT [Cost]
High Mix Capacity Degradation [Cost]
Efficiently processing multiple lots per carrier [Flexibility -> Cost]
Node to Node change-over [Flexibility -> Cost]
Average # of wafers between reticle changes [Flexibility -> Cost]
% of AMHS Tool to Tool Direct Transport Moves [Customer]
AMHS Delivery Time [Customer]
New NPW’s used and NPW Transactions [Cost]
Metrics Not Captured In Today’s Roadmap Version
On Time Product Delivery to the Customer [Customer]
Cost of Wafer Starts per Square Meter [Cost]
Direct Wafer Cost Targets [Cost] - Anti-Trust Issues
[How are we tracking quality] – No line yield, die yield numbers…

37. Factors to Mitigate High Mix Issues
Use of Field Programmability vs. ASIC
Reduces the amount of separate and distinct products that are required by leveraging programmable vs. hard coded logic
Use of System in a Package (SIP) vs. System on a Chip (SOC) to reduce cycle time, improve yield, lower cost
Customer may not get exactly what they want with SIP since this implies use of standard parts in the package and possible performance loss, but they will get lower cost and cycle times…

38. High Mix Areas that Must be Worked
Layout optimization for speed is encumbered by differences required for each different process flow
Increasing complexity of process specific support system directly related to the number of process technology generations and potentially products
The explosion in the number of transactions due to product mix and volume demands will exceed vehicle based bandwidth capabilities

39. High Mix Production Potential Solutions (1)
Driver
What We Want
Potential Solution
Domains
Super Fast Hot Lot Cycle Times
Reducing Normal Lot Cycle Times
On time delivery
Shortest time from source to destination
Conveyor Systems
Direct Transport OHV
Integrate planning, schedule & dispatch systems with floor execution
AMHS, FICS
Reducing Set-up Time (Factory)
Zero wait from Factory systems (set-up, etc.)
Automated configuration of factory systems for New Products
FICS
Reducing Product Set-up Time (Equipment)
Rapid and efficient introduction of new products to manufacturing
Buffering of multiple Job set-ups before runs start
Equipment Designed for Rapid Set-up changes for New Lots
Central Recipe Management System
Rapid recipe creation system
Equipment, FICS
Reducing Mask Shop Cycle Time
Low Rework
Use of Scheduling and Dispatching
Node to Node Change out for new products
Rapid conversion to new process technologies and new products
Layouts designed for large numbers of equipment changes
No AMHS Limitations

40. High Mix Production Potential Solutions (2)
Driver
What We Want
Potential Solution
Domains
On Time Product Delivery to the Customer
Fast and efficient supply chain management
Integration of planning and execution
Improved algorithms for factory planning and scheduling
Pervasive use of RosettaNet B2B standards for rapid connectivity
FICS
Overall factory design for Fab, Sort, Packaging, Test to get speed and low cost
Co-location of Fab, Sort, Packaging, and Test
Create smaller modular factories that are focused on specific process generations
Facilities
AMHS
(Also Cost)
Predictable delivery using planning systems and comprehending known factory deficiencies
Customer delivery is not impacted by line or die yield
Accurate factory planning using actual factory data
100% full content recipe downloads
100% recipe storage & tracking
100% Fault Detection and Classification (FDC)
Operations
Equipment

41. High Mix Production Potential Solutions (3)
Driver
What We Want
Potential Solution
Domains
Cost Reduction
Reduce the cost of large factories
Segregated functional areas (ex. CMP, C4, Sort, E-Test) to alternate areas on the site and place these in low cost environments
Reuse of existing facilities
Facility
Reduce the cost of the factory to manageable levels
Create smaller modular factories that are focused on specific process generations

42. Anatomy of a High Mix 300mm Fab Industry Standards + Current and Future Capabilities
Data standards and Systems for Rapid Mask Set Creation
Use of Scheduling & Dispatching
Pervasive FDC Implemented to get 100% LY
Wafer Data Standard
For Packaging
100% Intrabay and Carrier ID
Equipment Designed for Rapid Set-up changes for New Lots
Conveyor Systems
Direct Transport OHV
Process & Control Job Standards
To support High Mix Job Processing
(SEMI E40, E90, E94)
100% full content recipe downloads
100% recipe storage and tracking
Full Content Recipe and Parameter Downloads to equipment for 100% LY
Manufacturing
Execution Systems
Equipment Engineering Capabilities (EEC)
Equipment
Control Systems
Rapid
Process
Matching
APC
FDC
SPC
Recipes
Factory Scheduler
And Material Control
Yield
PCS
E-Diag
EPT
Equipment
Data
Equipment Data Acquisition (EDA) to support FDC and APC needs
Integrate planning, schedule & dispatch systems with floor execution
Execution Control Systems that Support Direct Transport AMHS
RosettaNet B2B standards for rapid connectivity
Partner, Customer
Or Supplier

43. Other Potential Solutions
ITRS Factory Integation TWG
2018/9/17
Other Potential Solutions
FITWG 2000

44. What’s driving the Requirements Table for Factory Operations?
Cycle Time/Operational Flexibility:
Multiple lots per carrier and/or fewer wafers per carrier. Get new products to customer much faster.
Cycle Time Reduction &
Operational flexibility
Output per tool must increase:
Find breakthrough solutions that result
in significant increases in good wafer out and increased OEE (eg: APC, e-Diag)
More good wafers out
per tool
The 300mm factory is much more automated and must be designed to transport hot-lots and hand-carry’s.
Highly automated factory
Reduce time to $$$/Cycle-time reduction:
What are stretch goals for cycle time
from ground-breaking to first full loop
wafer out. How to achieve quicker shrink?
Reduce Time to Money
Increased floor space effectiveness:
Don’t want each new generation to
drive big increase in cleanroom size,
esp. since fab is segregated Cu/non-Cu
and new metal layers added at each node.
Factory size is becoming
an issue

45. Translating Factory Operations metrics to Reality
Potential Solution it is driving
Hot-Lot and regular lot cycle time per mask layer
Direct transport systems integrated with Scheduler for tool to tool moves
Multiple lots per carrier
Embedded controller stds for wafer level tracking/control, scheduling sys
Wafer layers/day/head count
Reduced Test wafer usage, minimize Interrupts and MTTR, eliminate Load/Unload tasks, optimized cross-training for Operators and Technicians
Groundbreaking to first tool move in
Reduce construction time, plan more parallel tasks, reduce PO to dock date durations, planning/collaboration tools
First tool move-in to first full loop out
Significantly reduced Install/Qual duration via EES, APC, e-Diagnostics
Floor space effectiveness (don’t grow tool footprint in the fab or sub-fab)
New tools delivered with ~ 4% increase in run-rate/year with optimized embedded controller and APC.

46. Integrated FICS to Improve Equipment Performance
GOAL: No Equipment Idle Time (“starvation”) if Material is available
Improves output (w/ priority on “super hot lot”) through more effective equipment utilization
Requires integrated equipment, scheduling/dispatching, AMHS, and factory operations, PM 
OHV
OHV
1a. Load port event signals carrier leaving OR
1b. Equipment event indicates that processing is nearly finished
PM schedule checked to verify no PM is due
Dispatcher selects highest priority lot for processing
AMHS routes carrier to process equipment
Next lot delivered to equipment before it starves UI UI
Process
Chamber a
Process
Equipment b
Stocker
Processing
nearly
complete
SECS/GEM   
Equipment
Controllers
Scheduling &
Dispatching System
Equipment
Tracking
System
AMHS Control
System
Information Bus

47. Predictive PM to Improve Equipment Performance
GOAL: Predict future PM time to have technician/consumables ready. Intelligently determine when to run PM based on lot priority & tool/downstream impact.
Improve equip perf by optimizing Preventative Maintenance (PM) timing and avoiding unscheduled or last minute scheduled down time
Requires integrated equipment, scheduling/dispatching, AMHS, and factory operations
1. Equipment data indicates need for future Preventative Maintenance (PM)
Scheduler determines when to PM the equipment
PM is automatically scheduled in Equipment Tracking system
Prior to PM time, Scheduler validates need (based on lot priority, tool impact, downstream impact)
Technicians notified via page that specific PM is required
Equipment finishes processing and is taken offline for PM
OHV  UI
Process
Chamber
Process
Equipment  
Equipment data   
Equipment
Controllers
Scheduling &
Dispatching System
Equipment
Tracking
System
Paging System
Information Bus

48. Factory Operations Research Center (FORCe)
Rev 1
09/06/03

49. FORCe Background and Deliverables
Background/History:
FORCe is a program integrating the efforts of International Sematech (ISMT) and Semiconductor Research Corporation (SRC) factory systems into a unified strategy for factory science research.
Member companies (MC) set the priorities for research efforts and determine how/where the ~$800K/yr for 3 years ( ) should be utilized.
International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors (ITRS) provided overall direction for prioritization. Focus is on Fab productivity improvement
Deliverables to Member Companies:
Tools (S/W, Algorithms, Methods)
Qualified students for MC hire (MS/PhD) (50+ students)
Research results for MC implementation/adoption

50. Member company prioritized focus areas (2000)
Scheduling policies, and wafer release rules *
Fab cycle time reduction techniques, modeling cycle time reduction methods *
Factory labor modeling methods
Statistical operational control of cycle time and equipment utilization *
Intelligent preventive maintenance techniques *
Demand planning/modeling *
Goal driven modeling methods *
Financial/cost attributes in modeling
* Focus areas addressed by FORCe projects

51. FORCe Projects Summary
A total of 5 Projects have been funded from Q1’01:
New approaches to simulation of wafer fabrication – ASU/ UC Berkeley
Preventive maintenance scheduling in semiconductor manufacturing fabs - Univ. of Maryland/ Univ. of Cincinnati
Demand data mining and planning in semiconductor manufacturing – NTU, Taiwan
Scheduling of semiconductor wafer fabrication facilities – ASU/Univ. of Arkansas/ Univ. of Wurzburg, Univ. of Ilmenau & Fraunhofer institute of production & Automation, all from Germany
Demand Forecasting (IBM custom funding) - Cornell
All Projects are 3 years duration:
1st year focus is on understanding problem & benchmarking
2nd year focus is to develop algorithms & solutions
3rd year focus is on solution implementation (commercialization via software suppliers)

52. Suppliers/ Other Companies
FORCe Interactions
Member Companies
Suppliers/ Other Companies
NIST
SRC/
Universities
Sematech
Student hires/
Research results
Tools
Priorities/ $$/ Mentoring
Relationships
Collaboration
Feedback
ITRS FI Focus Areas
Factory Operations
Production Equipment
Matl. Handling Sys.
Factory Info/Control Sys
Facilities
Testing
Modeling/Simulation
Direct benefit to member companies:
Tools (s/w, Algo, methods)
Qualified students for hire
Research results, recommendations
Needs

53. FORCe Participating Companies, Universities & Suppliers
Companies & Organizations
Intel
Lucent
Motorola TI
IBM
Conexant HP
AMD
LSI Logic
Compaq
Eastman Kodak
NSI
Northtrop
PDF Solutions
NIST
NSF
UMC
Intersil
Hyundai
Infineon
Phillips
STM
TSMC
ISMT & SRC
ISMT only
SRC only
Universities
UC Berkeley
ASU
Univ. of Maryland
Univ. of Arkansas
Univ. of Cincinnati
Cornell Univ.
National Taiwan Univ.
Univ. of Wurzburg, Germany
Fraunhofer Institute, Germany
Univ. of Ilmenau, Germany
Potential Suppliers
Brooks
IBEX
i2 Technologies
Adexa
Wright Williams & Kelly
Applied Materials
Not a complete list
Research Focus Areas
(based on ITRS & MC needs)
Scheduling policies, and wafer release rules.
Fab cycle time reduction techniques, modeling cycle time reduction methods.
Factory labor modeling methods.
Statistical operational control of cycle time and equip utilization.
Intelligent preventive maint techniques
Demand planning/modeling.
Goal driven modeling methods.
Financial/cost attributes in modeling

54. FORCe Project Statistics
Notes:
Table needs updating
FORCe related publications in INFORMS is ~15
Funding/year does not show IBM custom funds

55. Research Opportunities
ITRS Factory Integation TWG
2018/9/17
Research Opportunities
FITWG 2000

56. Research Summary Page Title Objective Area
FORCe II Program (SRC, ISMT, NSF)
Conduct university research, directed by SRC/ISMT MC in order to address factory operations challenges as indicted in ITRS FI
Various: High Mix, Planning, Scheduling, Modeling, PM, Data analytics, etc.
FORCe Commercialization (ISMT)
Work with suppliers in order to harden the code and release it to member companies
Resource Driven Modeling and PM scheduling

57. Proposed Research Details
Title: FORCe II
Objective and Industry Benefit: Conduct university research, directed by SRC/ISMT MC in order to address factory operations challenges as indicted in ITRS FI
Key Deliverables: Solutions in the form of software tools, algorithm, commercialization and qualified students for hire
Timeline: 3 years, starting from 2004
Resources and Funding Needed: $1M per year for 3 years
Potential Funding Sources: NSF, SRC and ISMT will be funding this equally

58. FORCe II – Research Topics
1.Performance improvements for simulation models for full factory with and without AMHS (inter-bay, intra-bay, and future direct transport systems) for both wafer and reticle delivery in fabs
2.Factory labor modeling tools appropriate for alternative labor deployment strategies under various automation conditions of: 1) No AMHS, 2) Interbay AMHS, 3) Interbay & intrabay AMHS
3.Operational control of equipment and fab output and cycle time variability. Including scheduling and preventative maintenance (PM).
4.Supply Chain, specific focus areas to include sourcing models, demand planning and modeling
5.Improving equipment efficiency for high mix factories
6.Backend solutions including - final wafer operations or bond, assembly, test of chips
7.Future factor design, including plug-and-play design and single wafer processing
8.Improving AMHS system throughput for interbay and intrabay
9.Financial/cost attributes in modeling (various business models, wafer cost, mask cost, etc.)
10.Factory of the future (breakthrough/disruptive technologies, single wafer processing, direct transport, etc.)
11.Innovative factory data analysis techniques including, consideration of high data volume, data analysis and data mining of factory data
12. High risk/exploratory projects in the area of factory operations addressing all the key areas (beyond 2007 needs)