Transcript “8D” The 8 Discipline Methodology An example 1D- Define the team Description Name Job Title Team Leader Mr.

“8D”
The 8 Discipline Methodology
An example
1D- Define the team
Description
Name
Job Title
Team Leader
Mr. Z
R&D Engineering
Sponsor
Mr. J
Dir, Quality
Team member
Ms. K
Customer Quality Engineer
Team member
Mr. V
Mgr, Hivac Process Engineering
Team Member
Ms. S
Hivac Process Engineer
Team Member
Mr. H
Dir, Process Engineering
Team Member
Mr. P
Dir, R&D
Team Member
Mr. C.
Customer Acct Mgr
2D- Problem Description
Problem Description
WHAT
Two Device #1382 MN7UA qualification lots were scrapped
due to an incorrect implant recipe which resulted in lower
than expected breakdown voltages.
WHERE
Issue found at customer site
WHEN
3/10/2011
WHO
Customer
MAGNITUDE
Process release delayed as qualification lots will need to be
reprocessed through factory.
3D – Containment
Containment Action
Yes
No
N/A
Planned
Comp
Date
Actual
Comp
Date
Owner
Remarks
1 Impacted lots scrapped?
Yes
3/10/11
3/10/11
Mr. Z
Lot 1234 was scrapped at the
customer site where issue was
detected
2
Impacted lots that need to be recalled
from customer?
No
3 Verified other lots that may be affected?
Yes
3/10/11
3/10/11
Mr Z
The second impacted lot, 1235,
was scrapped at TowerJazz. Lot
J23084.1 was not impacted by
this issue.
4 Replacement lots needed?
Yes
3/10/11
3/10/11
Mr. C
Replacement lot 1236 has been
started. Second replacement lot
will be started in one week to
prevent lots from running through
the line at the same time.
LOTS
EQUIPMENT
1 Stop tool / Process?
No
2
Yes
Verify other implant recipes?
Recipe issue was found and
corrected on all implanters
3/10/11
3/10/11
Ms. S
All implant recipes were validated
on all tools
4
D4 - Root Cause Analysis – 5 Why
 Why were two of the Device 333 qualification lots scrapped?
– The lots were impacted by an issue which caused lower than expected
breakdown voltages at customer test.
 Why did the lots have a lower than expected breakdown voltage?
– The lots received the incorrect implant dose.
 Why was the implant dose incorrect?
– A change to the implant was received on 1/27. The change was
implemented on all implanters but one tool, which was accidentally
missed.
 Why was the one tool missed?
– Oversight. Only one hivac engineer was on site the day the change was
implemented. Typically a second engineer would validate the changes,
but in this case there was no one present to double check the
implementation and one tool was missed.
5
D4 - Escape Root Cause Analysis – 5 Why
 Why was the recipe error not detected by the system?
‒ SUPPLIER has an automated system that validates implant recipes on the
equipment against the defined recipe in the implant work instruction. In this
instance the implant recipe was not listed in the implant work instruction so
there the validation did not occur.
‒ Why was the implant recipe not listed in the implant work instruction?
‒ The process is still in development phase. Recipes are typically transferred to the
implant work instruction when the process moves from development to
prototype phase.
6
5D / 6D - Permanent Corrective
Action and Verification – Root Cause
1
Corrective Action
Verification
(Yield results,
related monitors,
DOE results, tool
performance,
etc…)
Potential Risk due
to Corrective
Action
Implementation –
Enter N/A if no
associated risks
Related
Spec/
FMEA
Owner
Planned
Comp
Date
Actual Comp
Date/
Status
Add staffing to enable
verification of all
recipe/sequence
changes through
process control
technician
Sequence/Recipe
Verification
Checklist
Delayed Availability
of Recipes after
Changes
FCD-1448
MR. D.
4/30/2011
Hiring has begun
and will
completed along
with necessary
training by
4/30/11
7
5D / 6D - Permanent Corrective Action
and Verification – Escape Root Cause
1
Corrective Action
Verification
(Yield results,
related monitors,
DOE results, tool
performance,
etc…)
Potential Risk
due to Corrective
Action
Implementation –
Enter N/A if no
associated risks
Related
Spec/
FMEA
Owner
Planned
Comp
Date
Add DEFINED recipes
to implant work
instruction
QSI work
instruction updated
and released
None
NPB WI-0502
MR. S.
4/15/2011
Actual Comp
Date/
Status
8
7D Preventive Action
•
Multiple recipe changes are made in the factory on a daily basis. Most are
fairly small in nature and result from changes in the tools over the process
kit lifetimes (CMP pad life, Novellus dep time between wet cleans, metal
dep changes over the life of the target, etc). Historically TowerJazz has
required a double check validation for all recipe changes, with much
success, though on rare instances we continue to experience mistakes. To
make the system more robust SUPPLIER is adding one process technician
to each shift to manage all recipe modifications throughout the factory
(implant, diffusion, wet, thin films, etch, photo, cmp). The technicians will
validate recipe changes utilizing sequence/recipe verification checklists
developed by process engineering. The system will be more robust in that:
– Recipe changes will be the primary responsibility of the technicians. Their job
function will be to ensure the recipe changes are correct.
– The technicians will carry a master log listing all the changes made on their shift.
These logs will be available for review by process engineering management each
day, allowing another level of validation for the changes made.
8D
Thank the
Team
10