Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Meptec 2009 Test And Reliability Rev.B

555

Published on

Address Design and Test issues for MEMS

Address Design and Test issues for MEMS

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
555
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. BARRIERS TO THE SUCCESSFUL COMMERCIALIZATION OF MEMS:AN INDUSTRY REPORT CARD FOCUSING ON THE ISSUES OF DESIGN FOR MANUFACTURING AND TEST MEPTEC MEMS TEST AND RELIABILITY WORKSHOP San Jose, California October 21, 2009 Roger H. Grace President, Roger Grace Associates [email_address] www.rgrace.com
  • 2. ROGER GRACE ASSOCIATES
    • Founded in 1982
    • Offices in Naples, Florida and San Francisco, California
    • Over 25 Years Experience in the MEMS/Nano industry…an industry pioneer
    • International clientele of companies, laboratories and governments
    • Specializing in sensors, semiconductors, MEMS/MST, Nanotechnology, capital equipment
    • Focus on:
      • custom market research
      • strategic marketing
      • due diligence analysis
      • company and product positioning, branding, and promotion
      • business development
      • distribution channel development
    • For more information…www.rgrace.com; rgrace@rgrace.com
  • 3. BARRIERS TO COMMERCIALIZATION
      • Lack of high-volume (killer) applications
      • Lack of well defined direction from roadmaps, industry standards, industry associations
      • Multidisciplinary knowledge is required
      • Packaging and testing costs typically at 70% of total value
      • Lack of focus on customer needs…technology centric suppliers
      • Technology push versus market pull strategy
      • Lack of capital formation opportunities, risk averse investors; low IPO opportunity because of small sales volume levels of companies
      • Successive “bubble busts” i.e. biomems, optical telecom…wary investors
      • Very fragmented market, many small companies, few large players
      • Limited “success stories” of MEMS/MST companies
      • However…new market opportunities for large volume applications emerging in automotive e.g. gyros, pressure ;consumer e.g. oscillators, microphones, gyros, accelerometers, and displays; and mil/aero in gyros and accelerometers
  • 4. MEMS/MST Commercialization Timetable Product Discovery Product Evolution Cost Reduction Full Commer- cialization Elapsed Time years Pressure Sensors 1954-1960 1960-1975 1975-1990 1990 36 Accelerometers 1974-1985 1985-1990 1990-1998 1998 24 Gas Sensors 1986-1994 1994-1998 1998-2005 2005 29 Valves 1980-1988 1988-1996 1996-2002 2002 22 Nozzles 1972-1984 1984-1990 1990-2002 2002 24 Photonics/Displays 1980-1986 1986-1998 1998-2005 2005 25 Bio/Chemical Sensors 1980-1994 1994-2000 2000-2010 2010 28 Radio Frequency (R.F.) 1994-1998 1998-2001 2001-2008 2008 13 Rate Sensors 1982-1990 1990-1996 1996-2006 2006 22 Micro Relays 1977-1993 1993-1998 1998-2008 2008 28 Oscillators 1965-1980 1980-1995 1995-2009 2009 44 Median 27
  • 5. MARKETS & APPLICATIONS
    • Pressure Sensors
      • Automotive
      • Mobile Phones
      • Health Care
      • Energy Management
    • Inertial Sensors
      • Portable Electronics (MP3, Cameras,GPS, Mobile Phones,Computer)
      • Gaming
      • Automotive
      • Military
    • Bio Sensors
      • Patient Monitoring / Personal Diagnostics
    • Chemical Sensors
      • Automotive
      • Environmental / Building Monitoring
    • Displays / Photonics
      • Pico Projectors
    • Microphones
      • Mobile Phones
      • Audio Systems
      • Computers
    • Oscillators
      • Automotive
      • Consumer /Portable Electronics
    • RF MEMS
      • Mobile Phones
      • Military Communications/Radar
  • 6. APPLICATION OPPORTUNITIES
    • Even in the economic downturn, many application opportunities exist and new and emerging ones to surface
    • Design for manufacturing and test principles will help differentiate the solutions
    • New opportunities include:
      • Magnetic sensors for navigation/compass, switching and impact detectors
      • RF MEMS for switching and circuit tuning
      • Integrated inertial measurement units (IMUs)
  • 7.  
  • 8. DESIGN FOR MANUFACTURING/TEST
    • 1998 Grade= C+, 2007 Grade= B, 2008 Grade=B+
    • The way it was…
    • little to no concern for packaging and testing in initial design…purely an afterthought
    • small number of “killer apps”…about 8
    • packaging and testing not considered a major product differentiator
    • packaging and testing 60-70% of cost of manufacture
    • The way it is…
    • packaging and test integral in the design of virtually all high volume applications
    • new and innovative e.g. wafer scale technology being adopted by high as well as lower volume applications but remain limited
    • packaging and testing now being considered as differentiators
    • new approaches changing the paradigm of cost structure e.g. Invensense gyros, Freescale chip- stacking accelerometer, SiTime stacking ASIC/resonators, Ziptronix stacking chips in general
  • 9. ESTABLISHED INFRASTRUCTURE
    • 1998 Grade= C+, 2007 Grade= A, 2008 Grade= A-
    • The way it was…
    • little design software support…companies just beginning to enter market with limited software packages
    • manufacturing tools as a “home brew” approach
    • high volume testing company just beginning e.g. ETEC
    • packaging foundries begging to formulate
    • The way it is…
    • software development and companies prolific e.g. Coventor, SoftMEMS
    • manufacturing tools designed specific for MEMS e.g. Suss, EVG,
    • several MEMS- specific packaging companies in place e.g. Amkor, ASE.
    • MEMS- specific merchant market test companies still limited e.g.MST Technology Systems (spinout of ETEC
    • establishment of MEM Unity…www.memunity.org
  • 10. MARKETING
    • 1998 Grade =C-, 2007 Grade=C , 2008 Grade=C
    • The way it was:
    • Companies were technology driven and driven by technology people
    • Little to no market research to understand the unfulfilled needs of the customer, unique advantages and the competitive environment
    • Little to no promotion to communicate advantages, effectively create positioning
    • The way it is:
    • Minor improvement from 1998 grade 10 years later
    • Termination of Micro Nano Newsletter, print version of Small Times
  • 11. MANUFACTURING /PACKAGING/TEST CHALLENGES
    • Focus has been on MEMS device design which demands extensive resources
    • Design team needs to consider calibration/test strategies early on in the design process…and make provisions for their judicious integration
    • Final test cost between 5-30% of total product cost depending on many variables
    • MEMS suppliers forces to create their own test systems because of the custom nature of their products…no true play MEMS “test foundries” available…unlike the huge availability of wafer foundries
    • Limited number of suppliers available to provide integration/assembly/packaging and test function up to small scale production levels e.g. Infotonics, Bennington Microtechnology Center
    • Availability of test systems developers/integrators…bring in early in the design process
    • Evolve the solution from breadboard to manufacturing…
    • non-scalability of test systems from Lab View
    • Who owns the IP?
    • Need to create physical, optical and other “non-electrical” excitation to measure output…major difference from IC testing
  • 12.
    • Wafer Level Packaging/Through Silicon VIAs are becoming the technology of choice for MEMS
    • Offers significant challenges to test strategy
      • Wafer probing in a step-and-repeat fashion
      • Growing but small infrastructure in place for test systems
      • Ability to measure pressure, acceleration, gyro, mirrors, switches well understood and mature
      • Major complexity due to requirement of non-electrical excitation to conduct test necessary in a chip-by-chip condition
    WAFER LEVEL PACKAGING
  • 13. “ THINK OUTSIDE THE CHIP”
    • Most MEMS designs are device centric and do not consider the various other “solution” components
      • Signal conditioning…amplification, A/D, temp.comp.,linearization
      • Energy management…harvesting, storage
      • Networking…wireless or wired
      • Packaging and interconnects
      • Testing
    • The majority of the cost of a MEMS solution is the packaging and test…approximately 60-75% of the total cost based on the specific design
    • Design considerations for manufacturing/assembly and testing needs to happen on day one of the design process
    • The need to consider the “systems solutions” approach will result in
      • Lower cost
      • Faster time to market
      • Optimum design for reliability and large scale production
  • 14. SELECTING A PACKAGING AND TEST SUPPLIER
    • Need to have established track record with customers having similar assembly and test complexities
    • Supplier throughput requirements need to match customers’ needs…you do not want to be the largest or smallest customer
    • Typically customers test systems become resident in suppliers factory…need to be compatible with suppliers space requirements
    • Compatibility of customers process needed with established infrastructure of supplier
      • Quality standards
    • Needs to be viewed as long term relationship/partnership
    • Need to have compatible
      • Business models
      • Timetables
      • Expectations
  • 15. PACKAGING CAVEATS
    • Need to have large volumes to necessitate non-standard packages
    • Use standard test equipment
      • Custom/dedicated equipment expensive…long lead time
      • Custom/dedicated tooling expensive …long lead time
  • 16. CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS
    • The “S” in MEMS stands for “SYSTEMS”…”think outside the chip”
    • Adoption of “co-design” principles
    • Efficient process transfer from breadboard to production
    • Pay attention to customers’ needs
    • Adopt more resources from the semi industry
      • People
      • Packages
      • Process standardization
  • 17. MEMUNITY
    • Open international community of people representing companies and institutes
    • Provides an information and communications platform
    • Goal is to help drive the commercialization of MEMS through wafer level testing using non-electrical stimulus and detection techniques
    • Conducts regular workshops
    • Founding members include
      • Delta
      • IZM/Fraunhofer
      • Polytec
      • Suss Micro Tec
    • www.memunity.com
  • 18. CALL TO ACTION/RECOMMENDATION
      • Create significant awareness as to the unique solution benefits of MEMS based system solutions…”think outside the chip”
      • Understand customer/market needs vis-à-vis rigorous market research
      • Define and establish defensible product differentiation
      • marketing pull vs. technology push
      • Continue to develop manufacturing/packaging solutions that can help differentiate the product from a price/feature/performance perspective…packaging and testing will continue to be “king”
      • “ Those who forget the past are condemned to relive it”…George Santayana…The Age of Reason…1908-1910
  • 19. SUMMARY
    • The overall grade downgraded from “B” in 2007 to “B-” in 2008 with changes amongst the individual grades…marketing, creation of wealth and VC attraction continue in the “C’s” with established infrastructure and R&D continuing in the “A’s”
    • MEMS still has a long way to go to meet the challenges of commercialization especially in the marketing, management and capital formation areas…Nano is far…far behind
    • Many opportunities for Nano to learn from its “big brother” i.e. MEMS/MST to help its commercialization acceleration into the market
    • Numerous “lessons learned” to date from the semiconductor industry
    • Companies need to think “”outside the chip” and be more responsive to customer needs…provide “solutions”
    • Commodization of MEMS vis-à-vis auto and consumer applications has “raised the bar” for design for manufacturing and test concepts in order to survive in constantly demanding cost pressure environment
  • 20. LESSONS TO BE LEARNED BY NANOTECHNOLOGY
      • Continued support of “design for manufacturing” programs by government funding e.g. National Science Foundation
      • Creation of manufacturing tool, packaging and metrology companies
      • Continued support of R&D programs by federal governments
      • Development of industry standards by SEMI and ASME?
      • Creation of an industry roadmap
      • Focus on customer needs…technology for technology sake won’t work
      • Provide defensible product differentiation…carbon nanotubes?
      • Continuation of support of micro/nano clusters worldwide via regional and federal funding
      • Create early success stories and hit “home runs” to encourage private investment
      • Maximize value added by enhanced functionality/packaging/interfacing
  • 21. .
    • THANK YOU/ DANKE/MERCI/HSIEH HSIEH/SHOKRUN/GRAZIE
  • 22. FOR MORE INFORMATION
    • Copies of the presentation will be available on www.rgrace.com/MEPTEC2O09.html in approximately one week.
    • Any questions…please contact me at rgrace@rgrace.com

×