安全生产_世界半导体生产机台安全设计验收标准英文版

Global Semiconductor Safety Services, LLCSEMI S2-93A Product Safety AssessmentFinal Report世界半导体生产机台安全设计验收标准Applied MaterialsChemical Mechanical Polishing System Model: Mirra TrakCMP工艺应用材料June 19, 1998Prepared for:Applied Materials3111 Coronado DriveSanta Clara, CA 95054Prepared by:Global Semiconductor Safety Services, LLC1313 Geneva DriveSunnyvale, CA 94089GS3 Job No. GS3 Document No. F2我们总羡慕别人的幸福，却常常忽略自己生活中的美好。其实，幸福很平凡也很简单，它就藏在看似琐碎的生活中。幸福的人，并非拿到了世界上最好的东西，而是珍惜了生命中的点点滴滴，用感恩的心态看待生活，用乐观的态度闯过磨难。Client - Confidential 保密合约The information used to prepare this report was based on interviews with Applied Materials engineers. The information was also based on inspections of the Chemical Mechanical Polishing System, Model: Mirra Trak. This information was gathered over the period between February 2, 1998 and February 4, 1998, and during a re-inspection of the system on June 3, 1998. A preliminary assessment of the system was also performed on September 25, 1996 through September 26, 1996 and the results of this evaluation were also used. All observations and recommendations are based on conditions and descriptions of the Chemical Mechanical Polishing System, Model: Mirra Trak, during the time of data collection and upon information made available to Global Semiconductor Safety Services. This reports significance is subject to the adequacy and representative characteristics of the Chemical Mechanical Polishing System, Model: Mirra Trak, and to the comprehensiveness of the tests, examinations and/or surveys made.Reference to Global Semiconductor Safety Services, including reproduction of Global Semiconductor Safety Services service mark, in promotional materials, is permitted only with Global Semiconductor Safety Services express written consent.The service performed has been conducted in accordance with the standards currently accepted in our profession, and at the high level of skill and care exercised by Global Semiconductor Safety Services staff.Lastly, this report has been prepared as a Client-Confidential document, intended for the exclusive use of Applied Materials and for the purpose of documentation to SEMI S2-93A. Therefore, no outside distribution will occur unless written authorization is provided by the client.TABLE OF CONTENTS目录Section Page No.Section 1.0 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY(管理摘要)Section 2.0 SCOPE(范围)Section 3.0 SYSTEM DESCRIPTION(系统描述)Section 4.0 ASSESSMENT & TESTING METHODOLOGIES(试验方法)Section 5.0 SAFETY ASSESSMENT(安全评估)5.1 PURPOSE(目的)5.2 SCOPE(适用范围)5.3 SAFETY PHILOSOPHY(安全体系)5.4 GENERAL GUIDELINES(指导方针)5.5 SAFETY-RELATED INTERLOCKS(安全互锁)5.6 CHEMICALS(化学品)5.7 IONIZING RADIATION5.8 NON-IONIZING RADIATION5.9 NOISE(噪音)5.10 VENTILATION AND EXHAUST(通风与排凤)5.11 ELECTRICAL5.12 EMERGENCY SHUTDOWN(紧急停机)5.13 HEATED CHEMICAL BATHS5.14 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING5.15 ROBOTIC AUTOMATION5.16 HAZARD WARNING(危险警告)5.17 EARTHQUAKE PROTECTION(地震警告)5.18 DOCUMENTATION(文件)5.19 FIRE PROTECTION(消防保护)5.20 ENVIRONMENTAL GUIDELINES(环境方针)Section 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONSSection 7.0 - ILLUSTRATIONSILLUSTRATION 1 - Mirra Trak System LayoutATTACHMENT ONE - SURFACE LEAKAGE CURRENT TEST(泄漏测试)ATTACHMENT TWO - GROUNDING RESISTANCE TEST (接地电阻测试)ATTACHMENT THREE - VERIFICATION OF EMO(紧急按钮确认)ATTACHMENT FOUR - SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL SURVEY(声压测试)ATTACHMENT FIVE - ERGONOMIC CHECKLIST(人体功力检查表)ATTACHMENT SIX - MANUAL HANDLING LIFT ANALYSIS(手动操作分析)ATTACHMENT SEVEN - 揥HAT-IF?” HAZARD ANALYSIS(危险分析)ATTACHMENT EIGHT - SEMI S10-1296 RISK ASSESSMENT GUIDELINE METHODOLOGYCONCLUSION Section 1.0 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY A follow-up safety assessment of the Applied Materials Chemical Mechanical Polishing System, Model: Mirra Trak (hereafter referred to as the Mirra Trak), was performed from February 2, 1998 through February 4, 1998. A further re-inspection of the system was performed on June 3, 1998. A preliminary evaluation of the system was also performed on September 25, 1996 through September 26, 1996, and the results of this evaluation were also utilized in this report. Note that this report covers only the concerns raised by integrating three separate systems, the Applied Materials FABS and Mirra CMP, and the OnTrak Synergy Integra, which together form the Mirra Trak system. For further information concerning the individual components, reference the individual SEMI S2-93A reports for these units. (GS3 Report No. TF, dated January 30, 1998 for the FABS system; GS3 Report No. 7-0100, dated September 2, 1997 for the Mirra CMP system; and GS3 Report No. F, for the OnTrak Synergy Integra.) This review was performed using the criteria established by the Semiconductor Equipment and Materials International Safety Guidelines for Semiconductor Manufacturing Equipment (SEMI S2-93A Guidelines).GS3 has used the SEMI S10-1296 Guideline Methodology to perform a Risk Assessment of any Issues remaining after the review of the information provided by Applied Materials. Note that the severity was ranked by GS3; the Likelihood (expected rate of occurrence) was provided by Applied Materials. Items which were ranked only as a 揕ow” or 揝light” risk assessment category may be considered as acceptable without corrective action, based upon criteria in the SEMI S10-1296 Guidelines. During the safety assessment of Mirra Trak, GS3 identified several positive engineering designs, as well as several issues that will need to be addressed in order to achieve full compliance with SEMI S2-93A Guidelines. This description of both positive engineering design and non-conformance issues are comprehensively described in Section 5.0 of this report. Reference Section 6.0 for a summary of the outstanding items.Section 2.0 SCOPEGS3 was contracted by Applied Materials to conduct a SEMI S2-93A Product Safety Assessment of the Mirra Trak. Note that this report covers only the additional concerns raised by integrating the Applied Materials FABS and Mirra CMP and the OnTrak Synergy Integra together to form the Mirra Trak system. For further information concerning the individual components, reference the individual SEMI S2-93A reports for these units. (GS3 Report No. T3F, dated January 30, 1998 for the FABS; GS3 Report No. 7-0100, dated September 2, 1997 for the Mirra CMP; and GS3 Report No. F for the OnTrak Synergy Integra).GS3 is a joint venture partnership between Intertek Testing Services, N.A., (ITS) and Environmental and Occupational Risk Management, Inc. (EORM). GS3 is focused on providing risk management-based equipment safety consulting and testing services to support a broad range of safety needs specific to semiconductor manufacturing equipment and device manufacturers.The Mirra Trak was evaluated for compliance with the applicable codes and requirements of the United States.The re-inspection assessment was performed by Mr. Andrew Kiley and Mr. Michael Varga of GS3 and reviewed by Mr. Pavol Breder and Mr. Andrew McIntyre, CIH, also of GS3. The safety assessment was based on an in-plant inspection of the Mirra Trak, discussions with Ms. Lisa Powell of Applied Materials, as well as a review of the systems manuals.2.1 STANDARDS USEDThe assessment was conducted in accordance with the applicable portions of the following codes and standards:A)SEMI S2-93A, Safety Guidelines For Semiconductor Manufacturing Equipment (1996 Edition)B)ANSI S1.13-1971, Methods for the Measurement of Sound Pressure Levels (1986 Edition)C)ANSI/UL 1262, Safety Standard for Laboratory Equipment (Third Edition)D)ANSI/NFPA 79, Electrical Standard for Industrial Machinery (1994 Edition)E)ANSI/NFPA 70, National Electrical Code (1996 Edition)F)UL 50, Safety Standard for Enclosures for Electrical Equipment (Tenth Edition)G)SEMI Doc. S8-95, Safety Guideline for Ergonomics/Human Factors Engineering of Semiconductor Manufacturing Equipment. (1995 Edition)H)SEMI S1-90, Safety Guideline for Visual Hazard Alerts (1993 Edition)I)ANSI/UL 73, Safety Standard for Motor-Operated Appliances (Eighth Edition)J)ANSI/S1.4-1984, Specifications for Acoustical CalibratorsK)21 CFR, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1000 to 1050. L)ANSI/UL 3101-1, Safety Standard for Electrical Equipment for Laboratory Use (First Edition)M)SEMI S10-1296, Safety Guidelines for Risk Assessment (1996 Edition)2.2 TESTS PERFORMEDIn order to verify compliance with SEMI S2-93A Guidelines and the other applicable standards, the following tests were performed:A)Surface Leakage Current TestB)Grounding Resistance TestC)Verification of EMOsD) Sound Pressure Level SurveyNote that only the tests noted above were repeated, as the testing of the individual assemblies (FABS, Mirra, and OnTrak Synergy Integra) was performed as a part of the individual evaluations for each. Reference the individual reports for each for test results.Section 3.0 SYSTEM DESCRIPTIONThe Mirra Trak consists of a FABS wafer handling module, a Mirra Chemical Mechanical Polisher (CMP), and an OnTrak Synergy Integra. An operator can load up to four 8” wafer cassettes at the front of the FABS module at one time. Cassettes may be moved into position for handling by the FABS using an optional ergoloader or by manual rotation of the cassette. The FABS robot then picks up the wafers from the cassettes, places them in an alignment tool, and then passes the wafers to the CMP抯 extended robot wafer handling module for conveyance to the CMP. The CMP system is modular and consists of a wafer handling module (which moves between the FABS, Synergy Integra, and CMP), a polishing module, a slurry delivery module, and a control system module. The system uses de-ionized water, clean dry air (CDA), nitrogen, vacuum, and slurry. The slurry is provided by the end-user to the system through a bulk head facility connection. The CMP is designed for oxide etching and metal etching and is intended for use with a variety of slurry chemistries, including basic and acidic slurries, but this system was designed only for the use of a potassium hydroxide (KOH) slurry, even though other chemistries could be used. The wafer handling module is an external robotic tool that manipulates the wafer cassettes for delivery to the polishing module. The polishing module consists of three polishing heads arranged on a mechanical positioner called a carrousel. A polishing head picks up a wafer and delivers it to a polishing pad where it is polished. As the wafer is polished, the slurry delivery module disperses a measured flow of slurry. When all polishing steps are complete, the carousel transfers the wafer back to the external CMP robot where it is delivered to the OnTrak Synergy Integra.The OnTrak Synergy Integra is a double sided wafer cleaner using options for a variety of chemical processes which operate in conjunction with the mechanical processes. The Synergy Integra uses CDA, nitrogen, or argon. It also uses D.I. water and ammonium hydroxide (NH4OH) at a 2% or 29% concentration. While the Synergy Integra is able to use hydrofluoric acid (HF) in one of its processes, the current Mirra Trak configuration is not designed to use HF and was not evaluated for its use. The Synergy Integra consists of an input station, two brush stations, a spin station, an unload handler, and an output station which passes the wafers back to the FABS which returns the wafers to their original cassettes where they are unloaded by the operator.Facilities Requirements:Electrical Power: 208 VAC, 200A, 3 phase, 60 Hz.External Fluids: Clean dry air: 90 - 110 psi, 1.2 cfmNitrogen:90 - 110 psi, 1 cfmVacuum:25 inch. HgDI water:75 psi, 6 gpmSlurry :0 - 5 psi, 0.25 lpmSection 4.0 ASSESSMENT & TESTING METHODOLOGIESThe criteria for this evaluation was based upon the Semiconductor Equipment and Materials International SEMI S2-93A Guidelines. SEMI S2-93A Guidelines are performance-based guidelines designed to identify potential hazards during the operation and maintenance of equipment, so that the effectiveness of the engineering controls and fail-safe systems can be maximized. The guidelines address the following aspects:APPLICABLE SECTIONSNON-APPLICABLE SECTIONSSafety-Related InterlocksIonizing RadiationChemicalsNon-Ionizing Radiation Audio NoiseHeated Chemical BathsVentilation and ExhaustRobotics and AutomationElectricalEmergency ShutdownErgonomics/Human FactorsHazard WarningEarthquake ProtectionDocumentationFire ProtectionEnvironmentalThe non-applicable sections are supported by engineering rationale provided within this report.To verify compliance with the applicable guidelines and standards, the following tests were performed. The test data sheets are included in the attachments to this report.Surface Leakage Current Test (Section 11.3.3 of S2-93A and Section 6.7 of UL 1262) - Surface leakage current measurements were made between all accessible metal parts and ground, to verify compliance with the maximum acceptable surface leakage current of 3.5 milliamperes. (Attachment One)Grounding Resistance Test (Section 11.3.3 of S2-93A and Section 6.4.2 of UL 1262) - Grounding resistance measurements were made between all accessible metal parts and ground, to verify compliance with the maximum acceptable ground path resistance of 0.1 ohm. (Attachment Two)Verification of EMO/Interlocks (Sections 5.6 and 12.1) - With the system running at maximum normal load, the emergency off buttons were activated to verify proper operation. (Attachment Three)Sound Pressure Level Survey (Section 9.1) - Sound pressure levels were measured per ANSI S1.13-1971 (R1986), Methods for the Measurement of Sound Pressure Levels. Sound pressure levels were recorded with the system running at maximum normal load to verify compliance with the maximum acceptable noise level of 80 dB(A). (Attachment Four)Note that only the tests noted above were repeated as the testing of the individual assemblies (FABS, Mirra and OnTrak Synergy Integra) was performed as a part of the individual evaluations for each. Reference the individual reports for each for test results.Section 5.0 SAFETY ASSESSMENTAn assessment of the Mirra Trak was performed in accordance with the SEMI S2-93A Guidelines and other applicable standards noted in Section 2.0 (Scope).EXPLANATION OF REPORT FORMATUnless otherwise specified, all referenced sections below refer to the Safety Guidelines for Semiconductor Manufacturing Equipment (SEMI S2-93A Guidelines). The report structure is modeled after the documentation requirements of SEMI S2-93A Guidelines.Each paragraph of the SEMI S2-93A Guidelines is either presented verbatim or paraphrased in a box on the left of the page. The paragraphs from the SEMI S2-93A Guidelines are presented with their corresponding numbers from the Guidelines, with the exception that these numbers are proceeded by a 5. Directly to the right of this box is a second box which is used to indicate the status of the equipment with respect to the given requirement of the Guidelines.SEMI S2-93A Paragraph No. (preceded by 5.)Statement of the requirement.MEETS ISSUE INFO REQUIRED RESPONDED N/A ADD REF Below these boxes, an explanation is given which explains why that particular status box was checked. This explanation takes one of the following nine forms which correspond to the nine status boxes above.MEETS A section marked MEETS with respect to a given paragraph of the Guidelines signifies the construction features critical to compliance with the SEMI S2-93A criteria were directly observed by the engineer during the evaluation. These critical features are identified and described. ISSUESIf a construction feature does not meet the specified paragraph, the way in which it deviates from the Guidelines criteria is described. ISSUES were ranked using a risk assessment methodology based upon SEMI S10-1296. Each item was assigned an overall risk ranking based upon a determination of the severity of the hazard posed by the Issue and the likelihood that the hazard would occur resulting in a hazardous consequence (i.e., injury, equipment damage or environmental hazard). Issues with 揕ow” or 揝light” risk assessment categories may be considered as acceptable without corrective action, based upon criteria in the SEMI S10-1296 Guideline. A summary of the risk assessment methodology used for this evaluation is included in Attachment Eight of this report. INFORMATION REQUIRED (INFO REQUIRED)If inadequate information is available to determine compliance or non-compliance, then INFORMATION REQUIRED is marked. The additional information which is needed to evaluate the system is also identified.RESPONDEDIf the original evaluation revealed that the system does not meet a particular requirement of the Guidelines and the manufacturer has committed to making suitable changes which will bring the system into compliance, then this particular requirement of the Guidelines is marked RESPONDED. The RESPONDED designation requires that the manufacturers corrective action adequately address the issues raised in the original evaluation. Also, the manufacturer must commit to an action date by which the construction changes will be fully implemented. All RESPONDED sections will describe the original issues raised, the construction changes proposed by the equipment manufacturer, and the date by which those changes will be implemented.NON-AP