Following on the custom microled device idea. One company I have heard of recently is Hong Kong Beida Jade Bird Display. They still don't have a selling product, and the last time I saw them on an industry event, they were still pitching people around https://www.jb-display.com/projects
Maybe they will be open to the idea of a custom device. 435nm is achievable with GaN with which they already work. 435nm is not great, but still better than i-line
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 12:43 PM David Lanzendörfer leviathan@libresilicon.com wrote:
Hi So as Staf pointed out, EUV exposure has to be performed at a very very low pressure, which is inconvenient to handle. So I'd prefer DUV or normal UV light. However, it would be of course fantastic, if we could reach feature sizes of 50nm or so. It occured to me, that we will have an e-beam exposure unit available anyway, at the lab, and that we can deposit all of the materials I've come across so far, commonly used to build UV LEDs. Do we wanna design our own (D)UV microLED matrix, maybe? We have the manufacturing equipment anyway, and it might be a cool selling point. And it's probably easier to manufacture than MEMs.
As kind of a side quest :-)
-lev
You can't produce EUV with anything made of solid matter. Even DUV and Fluorine lasers (157nm) get absorbed way too enthusiastically. This is why Fluorine litho sank on arrival, and the industry stayed on 193nm. Switching to 157nm was requiring a change of material technology comparable to EUV, but long term gains were not in 157nm's favour.
Both 157nm and EUV can make 25nm feature sizes, but that's only a small increment over 30-35 nm what a typical DUV system can do with immersion. The industry still went EUV because tech transition with it would ease future transition to Xray litho, which would also rely on similar resist chemistry and vacuum.