The effects of small lot manufacturing on AMHS operation and equipment front-end design

Zimmerhackl, O.; Rothe, Jan; Schmidt, Kilian; Marshall, Les; Honold, A.

doi:10.1109/issm.2007.4446800

Cited by 12 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Kohn et al (2009) considers future performance prediction using simulation techniques different to discrete event simulation and several optimization approaches and Kondo (2008) discusses how AMHS solutions for SLM should stress more transport capacity and shorter Carrier Exchange Time (CET) rather than shorter delivery time. Zimmerhackl et al (2007) analyzes the effects of SLM on equipment operation and fab performance and describe options for carrier handling and AMHS operation to maximize the productivity benefits of SLM.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methodology to best extend AMHS for site expansion

Gaxiola¹,

Christensen²,

Hammel³

et al. 2012

Proceedings Title: Proceedings of the 2012 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As companies grow their capacity in multiple buildings there are increasing challenges with the automated material handling systems (AMHS) used to transport the wafers between two or more facilities. In some cases, the links used to perform these transports can become a constraint for the entire system. The problem grows more difficult as the expansion plan extends further into the future, making it harder to predict throughput requirements. This study discusses a particular throughput prediction tool as well as different approaches for evaluating designs. The approaches discussed include: integrated vehicle/conveyor model using static tool (Network approach), segregated dynamic models for conveyor/vehicle system, and integrated vehicle/conveyor dynamic model. The pros/cons of these approaches are discussed based on different use cases. The paper finishes by discussing the strategic advantages of factories performing expansion analysis early in the design of the factory and the importance to continue validating and improving these methods. INTRODUCTIONThe first fab on a semiconductor manufacturing site is often not the last fab for the site. As demand for the company increases, it is often advantageous to leverage the existing infrastructure for the additional capacity a new fab can provide. Just as the water mains, electrical power, and transportation needs encompass the long term capacity needs when a site plan is developed, the AMHS design should take into consideration potential expansion requirements for the site. Although it is possible to design new fabs to operate completely independent from the original fab, there are often cost advantages to adding additional factories by leveraging capacity in the already existing fab(s). This approach can create a flow of material back and forth between new and old fab(s) during the ramp up period through full production. To support this flow of material, AMHS designers face several questions that need to be addressed:  How big should interconnects be?  How many and where should they be located?  What are the dimensions of the hallways or bridges that would support them? Also, the designers will need to ensure the delivery systems will meet required inter-fab throughput without disrupting the flow inside the original fab or the new fab. If these questions are not addressed success-978-1-4673-4781-5/12/$31.00 ©2012 IEEE

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methodology to best extend AMHS for site expansion

Gaxiola¹,

Christensen²,

Hammel³

et al. 2012

Proceedings Title: Proceedings of the 2012 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Concerning transport simulation with assumptions on production, Zimmerhackl et al (2007) analyze the effect of small lots on tool operations. The influence of tools are not taken into account.…”

Section: Related Papersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Often, partial model assumptions lead to an inaccurate measure of fab performances. Zimmerhackl et al (2007) write that the fab performance cannot be measured through a single indicator. Thus, there is a need for several accurate indicators.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simulation of a full 300mm semiconductor manufacturing plant with material handling constraints

Kiba¹,

Lamiable²,

Dauzere-Peres³

et al. 2009

Proceedings of the 2009 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Generally, simulation models encountered in the literature in the context of semiconductor manufacturing are obtained with many assumptions (aggregations) and from partial model simulation of the facility (also called fab). The results obtained can be satisfactory for certain types of studies but, when precise results and understanding of the detailed behavior of local or global parts of the fab are needed, these simplifications may no longer be adequate. A more detailed model and a full-scale simulation are then needed. This article presents a detailed simulation model of the production system and Automated Material Handling System for a 300 mm semiconductor plant. Some of the studies performed with this model are discussed.

show abstract

“…In addition, to meet the carrier exchange time 1 (CET) requirements of higher volume tools, local buffering solutions will need to replace the conventional material storage methods that utilize high-capacity fab stockers. It has also been shown [4] that using widely distributed on-tool or near-tool buffers reduces material transport times and transport time variability. Nonstop, deterministic, and high-volume material delivery will be a foundation for a new era of semiconductor manufacturing agility, so novel solutions will be required in this space.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The 25-wafer manufacturing paradigm constrains agility when considered from a material delivery and buffering perspective. AMD's analysis of the problem revealed that it was the SEMI E94 "unicassette" requirement that was a primary constraint [4] because it required replacing wafers in the same carrier and slot after processing. From an operational scenario perspective, this means than an empty carrier had to sit on a load port, blocking access until its wafers had been processed; therefore, SEMI E94 needed to be changed to accommodate smaller lot sizes by allowing empty carriers to be removed from a load port and allowing processed wafers to be redirected to a different carrier.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%