Lowering Cost of Ownership for Lithography Equipment

Abstract

The commoditization of semiconductor chips is shrinking profit margins and forcing integrated circuit (IC) companies to reduce manufacturing costs to keep up. Consequently, keeping pace with Moore's Law is growing more costly for equipment vendors, who have to supply increasingly complex equipment with shorter research and development (R&D) and manufacturing cycles. Since these decreased cycles leave little opportunity for manufacturers to gain long-term operational cost savings before having to acquire new and better equipment, manufacturers have to look elsewhere for cost reduction. Manufacturing equipment Cost of Operation (COO) is one area that promises significant reduction in manufacturing costs. In order to achieve COO reduction, engineers must understand and appropriately react to the parameters that affect consumable parts, optimizing consumable replacements without reducing production uptime. Some consumable parts are subjected to more arduous processes than others. However, litho suppliers usually indicate the same lifetime for consumable parts. This is due in part to insufficient knowledge of the specific process parameters for which the machine is used. Also, since the lifetime estimates of consumable parts are part of the negotiated specs, suppliers must incorporate the worst case process scenario when publishing lifetimes. However, more lenient processes afford longer lifetimes for the same part than more arduous ones. Determining real-world lifetimes for specific consumable parts is how performance-based COO plays a vital role in reducing costs by optimizing consumable replacements. Performance-based COO looks at the actual performance of specific parts, monitoring and addressing each machine as required, rather than employing a strict lifetime schedule. This strategy allows prudent companies to gain more time from each part without jeopardizing performance or risking down time This paper will focus on COO improvements achieved by Nikon post machine delivery. We will discuss factors influencing true cost of operation, such as the process, ambient environment, quality of parts, etc. Next, we will explore the norm for many companies and the advantages and disadvantages of retaining the standard approach of time- or pulse-based parts replacement. We will then examine how Nikon has embraced a paradigm shift away from time-based parts replacement and toward a performance-based approach. We will also show real life examples that highlight the effectiveness of our recommended approach. In conclusion, we show the need to analyze and incorporate an effective model to address consumables COO.