[labnetwork] litho spin developer

Thu Apr 16 20:27:57 EDT 2026

In agreement with what the others said:

We have both.

The advantages and disadvantages are typical to all automated tools, versus
manual fab.
Automated coat+develop *may* add some Reproducibility across different
users (meaning different users can get the same results)
But often significantly reduces flexibility, because automated handling
needs the wafers to be nearly identical.  Also a limited number of
photoresists/developers can be loaded into the tool.
Automation adds maintenance costs and for only 1-2 piece parts/wafers does
not speed up the process (just as fast to use beakers). The additional
maintenance and programming complexity may even make it slower than manual
processing if you're only running 1-2 parts.
Automation makes a lot of sense when you are doing many repeat processes
(no/little change in chemicals), and all substrates are the same form
factor (eg. 6" wafers only), so the additional set up time and maintenance
for the tool is negligible compared to the higher volume going through.

We have a huge variety of different substrate sizes (few-mm up to 6"
wafers) and a variety of many different developers and photo resist for
many diffferent litho tools.
So manual processing (incl. develop) is much faster for most users,
especially if they are only running two or three pieces at a time, or if
they are changing piece size, etc.

Even our industrial users running 4" wafers almost entirely do manual
develop *instead* of using the available autocoater because the speed isn't
higher, it has more mechanical problems, and the repeatability of manual
develop is actually pretty high, as long as you document+train the methods
well (how you agitate, which glassware/holder etc.).

However, for some of our internal calibration processes, we use the
automated tool for coating + bake + develop since we are running many
identical processes, they are always full wafers - and most importantly, we
want to get through 15-25 wafers so would rather hit "go" and come back
later; the maintenance difficulties are worth the throughput for my staff
here.

-- Demis (contact info <https://wiki.nanotech.ucsb.edu/wiki/Demis_D._John>)
*Reminder*: The NanoFab has a publications policy
<https://wiki.nanotech.ucsb.edu/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions#Publications_acknowledging_the_Nanofab>

On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 4:43 PM Iulian Codreanu <codreanu at udel.edu> wrote:

> Dear colleagues,
>
> When we started the cleanroom at UDel we worked with CEE to develop a
> developing station based on their spinners. It was a lot cheaper than the
> figure Yong mentioned.  It has sat largely unused because the vast majority
> of our users work with small pieces.
>
> iulian Codreanu, Ph.D.
> Director, Nanofabrication Facility
> University of Delaware
> Harker ISE Lab, Room 163
> 221 Academy Street
> Newark, DE 19716
> 302-831-2784https://udnf.udel.edu
>
>
> On 4/15/2026 4:44 PM, Sun, Yong wrote:
>
> Hi Kurt,
>
> I would add a few points here following Garry’s excellent advice:
> (1). CNF had the luxury of acquiring the robust Auto Spin Develop systems,
> which were designed for production. If you don’t have the big budget
> (>>$100k per system), a cheaper auto spin develop system can add a lot more
> maintenance work for the tool manager. This is the common drawback of a
> cheap auto spin develop systems not mentioned in Garry’s post.
> (2). If you have a lot more users working with small chips, the benefit of
> an auto spin develop system is also not obvious, as users have to use a
> carrier wafer every time, which can be painful to prepare.
> (3) The advantages of an auto spin develop system will only shine when
> most of your users do the majority of their fabrication on standard size
> wafers (e.g. 4”, 6” or 8”). Comparing to manual developing procedures, the
> consistency of the auto spin develop system is simply amazing.
>
> For advanced lithography using steppers, it’s also recommended that the
> cleanroom facility should be equipped with some automated systems, such as
> the auto spin develop system, auto spin rinse system, auto spin etch
> system…etc. When throughput, consistency, uniformity are required for your
> applications, such automated systems will deliver the magic.
>
> Best,
> Yong Sun
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* labnetwork <labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu>
> <labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu> on behalf of Garry J. Bordonaro
> <bordonaro at cnf.cornell.edu> <bordonaro at cnf.cornell.edu>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 15, 2026 11:37 AM
> *To:* 'Kurt Kupcho' <kurt.kupcho at wisc.edu> <kurt.kupcho at wisc.edu>;
> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu <labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu> <labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu>
> *Subject:* Re: [labnetwork] litho spin developer
>
>
> Kurt,
>
>
>
> We have been using automated developers for over 20 years.  The advantages
> are **reproducibility**, reduced chemical usage, reduced glassware
> usage.
>
>
>
> The only disadvantage for us is maintenance, although that is generally
> quite low.  You may have issues with chemical disposal depending on your
> local rules and the particular equipment you use.  Piece work can be done
> with some effort and special chucks.
>
>
>
> Users like them as they get better and more consistent results, and do not
> have to deal with pouring chemicals and glassware.
>
>
>
> The tools can be expensive.  We got ours during the 2000 bubble crash
> auctions.
>
>
>
>
>
> Garry J. Bordonaro
>
> Microlithographic Engineer
>
> Cornell NanoScale Facility
>
> 250 Duffield Hall
>
> 343 Campus Road
>
> Ithaca NY 14853-2700
>
> (607) 254-4936
>
> bordonaro at cnf.cornell.edu
>
> http://www.cnf.cornell.edu/
>
>
>
> Please acknowledge CNF in your publications:
>
> "This work was performed in part at the Cornell NanoScale Science &
> Technology Facility (CNF), a member of the National Nanotechnology
> Coordinated Infrastructure (NNCI), which is supported by the National
> Science Foundation (Grant NNCI-2025233)."
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* labnetwork <labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu>
> <labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu> *On Behalf Of *Kurt Kupcho
> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 14, 2026 10:25 AM
> *To:* labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
> *Subject:* [labnetwork] litho spin developer
>
>
>
> Hi all
>
>
>
> I was wondering who out there has litho spin developers vs. doing litho
> development manually with dishes.
>
>
>
> Do you users/students like the spin developer?
>
>
>
> Advantages and disadvantages of the spin developer?
>
>
>
> Any opinions and guidance would be much appreciated!
>
>
>
> Thank you
>
> Kurt
>
>
>
>
>
> Kurt Kupcho
>
> Materials Science Engineer
>
> Nanoscale Fabrication Center (NFC)
>
> University of Wisconsin
>
> 1550 Engineering Dr.
>
> ECB 3110
>
> Madison, WI  53706
>
> E:  kurt.kupcho at wisc.edu
>
> T:  608-262-2982
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> labnetwork mailing listlabnetwork at mtl.mit.eduhttps://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> labnetwork mailing list
> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
> https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20260416/93485df3/attachment.html>