See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/304021987

FOUP purge performance improvement using EFEM flow converter

Conference Paper · May 2016

DOI: 10.1109/ASMC.2016.7491075

CITATIONS READS
4 431

2 authors, including:

Seong Chan Kim

University of Minnesota Twin Cities
35 PUBLICATIONS   877 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Nanofiber filter View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Seong Chan Kim on 25 February 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 FOUP Purge Performance Improvement
Using EFEM Flow Converter
Seong Chan Kim, Greg Schelske
Technology Characterization Laboratory, Microenvironments BU
Entegris, Inc.
Chaska, USA
seongchan.kim@entegris.com
Abstract—Front Opening Unified Pod (FOUP) purging with
nitrogen or clean dry air (CDA) is well known as the most
effective method to protect wafers inside FOUPs from internal as
well as external contaminations, e.g. particles, airborne
molecular contaminants, humidity and oxygen, which can
potentially damage integrated circuits (IC) and significantly
impact manufacturing yields. Entegris, Inc. developed a diffuser
purging concept that has demonstrated exceptional purge
performance over conventional methods under the FOUP door
open purging condition, however some unexpected test results
were reported in field tests because the diffuser purge
performance is significantly affected by Equipment Front End
Module (EFEM) flow patterns. Since the EFEM flow is much
stronger than the purging flow, in some cases the purging flow
cannot overcome the EFEM flow deflected toward the FOUP
opening. Furthermore, most of the EFEM flow patterns cannot
be easily defined due to the variety of the EFEM designs and
operation conditions, which makes it difficult to design a
universal diffuser that works with all EFEMs in the field.
Therefore, a need exists to develop a simple way to mitigate the
effect of the EFEM air flow on the FOUP purging flow. This
research was conducted to investigate the feasibility of the EFEM
flow converter (EFC) concept, which is a screen mesh installed
above the FOUP opening. The test results demonstrated that the
EFC can dramatically improve the diffuser purge performance
by converting non-uniform EFEM flow in front of the FOUP
opening into uniform downward laminar flow that is favorable to
FOUP purging.
Keywords—purging; diffuser; EFC; EFEM; FOUP
I. INTRODUCTION
In most of the IC fabrication steps, in-process wafers are
required to be protected from moisture, oxygen, particles and
airborne molecular contaminants (AMC) in the air. So inert
gas or clean dry air (CDA) purging has been introduced to
keep Front Opening Unified Pods (FOUP) dry and a
contamination free space in door closed steps [1, 2]. However,
as the need for minimizing the exposure to the contaminants
has become more critical, FOUP purging with door-off on an
Equipment Front End Module (EFEM) loadport is required to
keep the FOUP dry and contamination free. Entegris, Inc. has
developed a diffuser purging method to purge out humidity
and oxygen from inside the FOUP when the FOUP door is
open. In previous results, the diffuser purge results showed
exceptional performance improvement over traditional
purging methods by providing uniform laminar flow purging
from the rear of the FOUP [3]. However, this laminar purge
flow can easily be affected by the air flow pattern at the
interface of the FOUP opening and the EFEM. Furthermore,
the air flow pattern can be changed by the various
configurations of the EFEM frame and tools in EFEMs, so it is
required to mitigate the air flow pattern effect on the diffuser
purging flow in order to achieve the maximum purge
performance. Therefore, a simple way to retain the uniform
downward flow in front of the FOUP opening area is required
to improve the diffuser purge performance.
A screen mesh is known as an effective and simple way to
reduce turbulence in an air stream by equalizing the velocity
and pressure across the mesh [4]. Also, the simple design of a
screen mesh has benefits in installation, maintenance and
supports a clean environment in the EFEM. Once a laminar
flow layer is formed in front of the FOUP opening, FOUP
purging can be performed effectively and with lower purge
flowrate, as well as prevent external contaminants from
penetrating into the FOUP.
This study was performed to investigate the feasibility of a
screen mesh EFEM Flow Converter (EFC) to convert the
EFEM air flow deflection into straight downward laminar
flow at the FOUP/EFEM interface and mitigate the effect of
the EFEM air flow on the diffuser purge performance. The
EFC performance was evaluated by measuring RH in the
FOUP and particle deposition with/without the EFC during
diffuser purging.
II. EFEM FLOW CONVERTER (EFC)
A. EFC Concept
The EFEM air flow pattern can be affected by the frame
structure, especially an overhang located above the FOUP
opening in the main structure causing air deflection at the
interface of the FOUP/EFEM. Fig. 1 shows a typical overhang
and the EFEM air flow pattern change between with/without
overhang structure above the FOUP opening. This overhang
structure is very common in EFEMs used in the field and the
overhang dimensions in this test were based on those EFEMs
measured in the field (Height: 70 mm, Depth: 50 mm). To
visualize the air flow in the FOUP, a green laser sheet beam
illuminated the rear of a transparent FOUP (left side of the
picture) and ice crystal particles were generated using
Ultrapure Cleanroom Fogger (MSP Inc., M2001) to trace the
air flow from the top of the EFEM. The visualization images
show the moments of EFEM air deflection into the FOUP
without purging. It is clearly shown that the overhang
structure increases EFEM air flow deflection and this strong
flow deflection causes poor purge performance.

Fig. 2 is a conceptual illustration showing the EFEM flow (a) Without overhang
pattern change by the EFC installed above the FOUP opening,
which is a simple mesh screen acting as a turbulence reducer
and a flow straightener. A uniform downward flow from the
Filter Fan Unit (FFU) deflects toward the FOUP opening at
the edge of the EFEM wall and this flow deflection is the main
contaminant transfer mechanism from the EFEM to wafers
stored in the FOUP. The FOUP purging is designed to prevent
the contaminants from penetrating into the FOUP by
providing nitrogen or CDA from the rear of the FOUP.
However, the flow deflection from the EFEM makes the
FOUP purging difficult since purge gas is relatively weak to
overcome the EFEM flow penetration. Also, increasing the (b) With overhang
purge flow to improve purge performance is not desirable
considering a maintenance cost and a safety issue when using Fig. 2. Conceptual illustration of EFC
nitrogen. By installing the EFC above the FOUP opening, the
B. Computational Simulation
EFEM flow deflection can be mitigated and the EFEM air
flows straight down with uniform and low velocity in front of Fig. 3 shows computational analysis results demonstrating
the FOUP opening, which is beneficial to FOUP purging since the effect of the EFC on the EFEM flow with the overhang,
it can minimize the inward air flow against the purging flow. which was used for the visualization test in Fig. 1. Flo.EFD
software was employed to calculate flow characteristics of air
flowing into the EFEM environment. The EFEM downward
flow was set at a uniform velocity of 0.3m/s and the pressure
at the EFEM outlet was set to the ambient pressure. The mesh
porosity and dimensions of the EFC were decided based on
the preliminary test results. Without the EFC (Fig. 3a), the
uniform downward flow in the top of the EFEM converts into
a vortex at the edge of the overhang and the downward flow
below the overhang deflects toward the FOUP opening which
diminishes the FOUP purging effect. However, with the EFC
(Fig. 3b), the EFEM flow is converted to a uniform downward
flow with lower velocity than the average EFEM flow, which
is very beneficial to FOUP purging.

(a) without overhang (b) with overhang (a) without EFC (b) with EFC
Fig. 1. EFEM frame effect on air flow pattern at FOUP/EFEM interface
Fig. 3. Computational simulation of EFC effect
 III. EFC DOOR OPEN RH TEST
A. RH Test Method
One of the main purposes of FOUP purging is to keep the
inside of the FOUP dry and oxygen free since humidity and
oxygen stimulate Cu corrosion, defect growth, and etch
defects [5]. The RH test was conducted to evaluate the EFC
effect on diffuser purge performance by measuring the RH
change at 12 different locations inside the FOUP using data
loggers (Dickson, TK-550). Data logger casing was removed
to fit them between wafer slots and the data loggers were
placed in four 4 locations (Front, Left, Right, Back) on each
(a) EFC for EFEM without overhang
wafer located in slots 1, 13 and 25 as shown in Fig. 4. Each
data logger measured RH every 10 seconds and the test room
RH was controlled between 40 and 50%, a typical wafer fab
RH cleanroom environment. The test FOUP was Entegris
EBM Spectra with a pair of diffusers at the rear purge ports
and loaded with three instrumented wafers with
aforementioned data loggers and 22 dummy wafers. The test
FOUP is loaded on a purgible loadport and the FOUP door
opened without purging. After 2 minutes of stabilization time,
allowing the FOUP’s internal RH to reach the ambient level,
the purging is initiated and run for 5 minutes followed by 3
minutes of RH recovery time. (b) EFC for EFEM with overhang
Fig. 5. EFEM Flow Converter (EFC)
Fig. 5 shows EFCs tested in this study for the EFEM
without overhang (Fig. 5a) and for the EFEM with overhang
(Fig. 5b). For EFEM without overhang (Fig. 5a), the EFC is B. RH Test Results
installed directly above the FOUP opening. The longer the Fig. 6 shows door open purging test results with/without
horizontal depth (D in the pictures) extends inward toward the the EFC in the EFEM without overhang. Each graph shows
EFEM, the better performance the EFC achieves by RH changes on front, left, right and back side of wafers 1, 13
generating a wider layer of laminar flow. However, the depth and 25 during nitrogen purging cycle (0-120 sec.: purge-off,
(D) in application will require consideration of any 120-420 sec.: purge-on, 420-600 sec.: purge-off). Without the
interference with wafer handling tools in the EFEM. In the EFC, wafer 1 cannot achieve a desired purge performance (~0%
case of the EFEM with overhang (Fig. 5b), the EFC extends RH) with 50 slpm at each of the two rear purge ports (Total
below (H in the picture) the overhang edge so that the flow 100 slpm), especially the front side due to the EFEM flow
does not generate a vortex at the edge. The vertical length also deflection. However, the EFC can improve the purge
improves the EFC performance by eliminating a dead zone performance for all measurement locations with 50 slpm/port
below the overhang. In this evaluation the screen mesh used is of purge flowrate with a benefit of the downward laminar flow
commercially available stainless steel wire mesh and the mesh in front of the FOUP opening.
dimensions were decided empirically.
Fig.7 shows the door open purge test results with/without
the EFC in the EFEM with overhang above the FOUP door
opening, which shows dramatic performance improvement at
the wafer 1 front location with the EFC. Without the EFC, the
average RH level at the wafer 1 front location cannot reach
below 10% even with 80 slpm/port (total 160 slpm) of
nitrogen purging, while the EFC enables the RH level to
approach zero with 40 slpm/port of nitrogen purging.
Back
The RH test results confirm the feasibility of the EFC to
improve the FOUP purge performance in terms of RH and O2
Left Right control but it needs to be investigated with various field
conditions, such as EFEM velocity, frame structures,
Front additional flow obstacles, etc., to find the optimum EFC
location and dimensions.
Fig. 4. FOUP door-open purge test method and RH data loggers
 Wafer 1 Wafer 13 Wafer 25

(a) 50 lpm/port without EFC

EFC

Wafer 1 Wafer 13 Wafer 25

(b) 50 lpm/port with EFC

Fig. 6. Purge performance improvement of EFC (without overhang)

Wafer 1 Wafer 13 Wafer 25

(a) 80 slpm/port without EFC

EFC

Wafer 1 Wafer 13 Wafer 25

(b) 40 slpm/port with EFC

Fig. 7. Purge performance improvement of EFC (with overhang)

 IV. EFC PARTICLE TEST
FOUP purging is also known to prevent particles or AMCs
from infiltrating into the FOUP which can be generated from a
damaged FFU or any moving parts within the EFEM. Fig. 8
shows the test setup to evaluate the EFC effect on the wafer
protection from particle contamination. This test is to evaluate
EFC particle prevention efficiency by measuring particle
adders on wafers with/without EFC/diffuser purging. 100 nm
PSL particles were generated by an atomizer for 30 seconds
during the CDA purging (40 slpm/port). Particle adders on
wafer 1 and 25 were measured by comparing particle counts in
90-120 nm size bin between pre and post scans (KLA-Tencor,
SP1-TBI). Three test conditions were evaluated: (1) diffuser
purging with EFC, (2) diffuser purging only, and (3) no
purging and no EFC.
Table 1 shows the EFC particle test results showing
particle adders and particle prevention efficiency for the three (a) Diffuser + EFC (Test condition 1)
different test conditions. As shown in the result, the EFC can
improve the particle prevention efficiency from 67% (diffuser-
only) to 99% (diffuser + EFC) for wafer 1 and 89% to 97% for
wafer 25.
Fig. 9 shows the pre/post scan maps for each test
configuration and 100 nm PSL particle deposition is clearly
observed in the maps (orange color in the maps, 90-120 nm
size bin). Particle deposition for the diffuser-only
configuration is mostly concentrated at the wafer front
location, while no purging/no EFC configuration shows wafer
front deposition on wafer 1 and wafer back deposition on
wafer 25. This is because without purging, the EFEM air
penetrates into lower slots of the FOUP and exits from back
side of higher slots.

(b) Diffuser only (Test condition 2)

Fig. 8. EFC particle test setup

Table 1. EFC particle test result

Particle adders (Prevention efficiency, %)

Diffuser + EFC Diffuser only No purging/ No EFC

Wafer 1 7 (99%) 234 (67%) 705

Wafer 25 80 (97%) 335 (89%) 3120 (c) No purging/No EFC (Test condition 3)

Fig. 9. EFC particle test result (Wafer scan map)

 V. CONCLUSIONS
This research is a feasibility study of the EFC on the FOUP
purging performance improvement as an attachment on the
EFEM and the FOUP door-open purge test results showed
significant improvements on humidity/particle prevention
performance as well as reducing total purge flowrate.
However, more field tests are required for the optimum design
parameters since the EFEM flow can be affected by various
EFEM conditions.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
We thank Entegris management for supporting this work
and allowing publication. Also, thanks to J. Ohlsen, G.
Gallagher, M. Fuller, P. S. Lee and M. Smith for their
suggestions on the technical content and B. H. Lee for
computational analysis.
View publication stats
REFERENCES
[1] S.C. Hu, T.M. Wu, H.C. Lin and K. Hsu, “Design and evaluation of a
nitrogen purge system for the front opening unified pod (FOUP)”,
Applied Thermal Engineering, Vol. 27, Iss. 8-9, pp. 1386-1393, June
2007.
[2] K. Keyhani, S. Abu-Zaid and H. Zhang, “Purging FOUPs that open to
front-end minienvironments using an inert-gas curtain”, MICRO, pp. 65-
71, August/September 2004.
[3] H. Wang, S.C. Kim and B. Liu, “Advanced FOUP Purge Using
Diffusers for FOUP Door-Off Application”, ASMC 2014, pp. 120-124,
May 2014.
[4] J. Scheiman and J.D. Brooks, “A comparison of experimental and
theoretical turbulence reduction from screens, honeycomb and
honeycomb-screen combinations”, Aerodynamic Testing Conference, pp.
129-137, March 1980.
[5] T. Kamoshima, et al., "Controlling ambient gas in slot-to-slot space
inside FOUP to suppress Cu-loss after dual damascene patterning,"
IEEE Trans. Semicon. Manufact., vol. 21