[Libre-silicon-devel] Maskless lithography

[Pavel Nikulin]

No contact with them. When I meant that they haven't sold anything, I
meant them not having a customer. I saw them showing working samples.

Making LEDs for short wavelengths is very far from trivial, even in
the case of the most plain types. I supposed custom DMDs are even
harder.

On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 3:15 PM David Lanzendörfer
<leviathan at libresilicon.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Pavel
> Do you have a contact or so, of those guys?
> I've just moved to Portugal and enjoy this beautiful place with its very very
> nice view everywhere :-)
> (I'd go into the details now about all those beautiful ladies, but this
> mailing list is public xD)
> Maybe you can get us into touch by sending an email to both of us,
> in case you got a mingpian from the folks or so?
> But considering, that they haven't managed to manufacture a working
> prototype, they might not be able to produce anything better, then
> what we could manufacture at INL (The new lab in Portugal) anyway.
> We maybe have to hack something together with a less expensive
> DMD display operated outside the specified ranges...
> There are some micro mirror devices which materials which can also
> reflect UV light, I believe.
> In addition, it would solve the issue with addressing and homogenity
> of the UV light source.
>
> Cheers
> -lev
>
> Am Tuesday, March 10, 2020, 11:45:09 PM WET schrieb Pavel Nikulin:
> > 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 at 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.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Libresilicon-developers mailing list
> > Libresilicon-developers at list.libresilicon.com
> > https://list.libresilicon.com/mailman/listinfo/libresilicon-developers
>