Probe station with low noise characteristics

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 7138810
  • Patent Number
    7,138,810
  • Date Filed
    Friday, November 12, 2004
    20 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, November 21, 2006
    18 years ago
Abstract
A cable includes an inner conductor, an inner dielectric, and a guard conductor, where the inner dielectric is between the inner conductor and the guard conductor. The cable also includes an outer dielectric, and a shield conductor, where the outer dielectric is between the guard conductor and the shield conductor. The cable further includes an additional layer of material between the outer dielectric and the shield conductor of suitable composition for reducing triboelectric current generation between the outer dielectric and the shield conductor to less than that which would occur were the outer dielectric and the shield conductor to directly adjoin each other.
Description
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to probe stations which are used for probing test devices, such as integrated circuits on a wafer, and, in particular, to probe stations that are suitable for use in measuring ultra-low currents.


Probe stations are designed to measure the characteristics of electrical devices such as silicon wafers. Probe stations typically include a chuck that supports the electrical device while it is being probed by needles or contacts on a membrane situated above the chuck. In order to provide a controlled environment to probe the electrical device, many of today's probe stations surround the chuck with an environmental enclosure so that temperature, humidity, etc. may be held within predetermined limits during testing. Environmental enclosures protect the device from spurious air currents that would otherwise affect measurements, and also facilitate thermal testing of electrical devices at other-than-ambient environmental conditions. Environmental conditions within the enclosure are principally controlled by a dry air ventilation system as well as a temperature element, usually located below the chuck, that heats or cools the electrical device being tested through thermal conduction.


Many probe stations also incorporate guarding and electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding structures within or around the environmental enclosures in order to provide an electrically quiet environment, often essential during low noise or current testing where electrical noise from external electromagnetic sources can hinder accurate measurement of the electrical device's characteristics. Guarding and EMI shielding structures are well known and discussed extensively in technical literature. See, for example, an article by William Knauer entitled “Fixturing for Low Current/Low Voltage Parametric Testing” appearing in Evaluation Engineering, November, 1990, pages 150–153.


Probe stations incorporating EMI shielding structures will usually at least partially surround the test signal with a guard signal that closely approximates the test signal, thus inhibiting electromagnetic current leakage from the test signal path to its immediately surrounding environment. Similarly, EMI shielding structures may include interconnecting a shield potential to the environmental enclosure surrounding much of the perimeter of the probe station. The environmental enclosure is typically connected to earth ground, instrumentation ground, or some other desired potential.


To provide guarding and shielding for systems of the type just described, existing probe stations may include a multistage chuck upon which the electrical device rests when being tested. The top stage of the chuck, which supports the electrical device, typically comprises a solid, electrically conductive metal plate through which the test signal may be routed. A middle stage and a bottom stage of the chuck similarly comprise solid electrically conductive plates through which a guard signal and a shield signal may be routed, respectively. In this fashion, an electrical device resting on such a multistage chuck may be both guarded and shielded from below.



FIG. 1 shows a generalized schematic of an existing probe station. A probe station 10 includes a chuck 12 that supports an electrical device 14 to be probed by a probe apparatus 16 supported by a platen 18 located above the chuck 12. The chuck is fixedly and/or rigidly interconnected with a tub enclosure 20. The enclosure 20 may be conductive and electrically connected to a guard signal, shield signal, ground signal, or floating. The tub enclosure 20 at least partially surrounds the chuck 12, and hence the electrical device 14.


Multiple electrical devices contained on a silicon wafer may be successively positioned below the probe apparatus 16 for testing by moving the combination of the tub enclosure 20 and chuck 12 laterally. A positioner 22, typically located below the tub enclosure 20, may provide vertical, lateral and/or angular adjustments of the chuck 12. Because the chuck 12 does not move laterally with respect to the tub enclosure 20, the size of the tub enclosure 20 may closely surround the chuck 12, facilitating efficient control of the environment immediately surrounding the chuck 12.



FIG. 2 shows a generalized schematic of another probe station 11. Referring to FIG. 2, where numerals common with FIG. 1 represent similar elements that perform similar functions, the probe station 11 includes the chuck 12 that supports the electrical device 14 to be probed by the probe apparatus 16 that extends through an opening in the platen 18. Rather than enclosing the chuck 12 in the tub enclosure 20, an outer shield box 24 provides sufficient space for the chuck 12 to be moved laterally by the positioner 22. Because the chuck 12 may freely move within the outer shield box 24, a suspended member 26 electrically interconnected to a guard potential may be readily positioned above the chuck 12. The suspended guard member 26 defines an opening that is aligned with the opening defined by the platen 18 so that the probe apparatus 16 may extend through the guard member 26 to probe the electrical device 14. When connected to a guard signal substantially identical to the test signal provided to the probe apparatus 16, the suspended guard member 26 provides additional guarding for low noise tests. Such a design is exemplified by EP 0 505 981 B1, incorporated by reference herein. In addition, multiple boxes insulated from one another for a single probe station have been used to attempt to reduce the noise, with the inner box connected to instrument ground and the outer box connected to earth ground.


To provide a substantially closed environment, the outer shield box 24 includes a sliding plate assembly 28 that defines a portion of the lower perimeter of the shield box 24. The sliding plate assembly 28 comprises a number of overlapping plate members. Each plate member defines a central opening 30 through which the positioner 22 may extend. Each successively higher plate member is smaller in size and also defines a smaller opening 30 through which the positioner 22 extends. As shown in FIG. 2, the sliding plate assembly 28 is included to permit lateral movement of the positioner 22, and hence the chuck 12, while maintaining a substantially closed lower perimeter for the shield box 24.


A probe card for probing the device under test of the probe station typically includes a dielectric board as a base. A plurality of probing devices are mounted in radial arrangement about an opening in the board so that the probing elements of these devices, which may, for example, comprise slender conductive needles, terminate below the opening in a pattern suitable for probing the contact sites of the test device. The probing devices are individually connected to the respective channels of a test instrument by a plurality of interconnecting lines, where the portion of each line that extends between the corresponding probing device and the outer edge of the dielectric board may comprise an interconnecting cable or a conductive trace pattern formed directly on the board. In one conventional type of setup where the test devices are integrated circuits formed on a semiconductive wafer, the probe card is mounted by means of a supporting rig or test head above the wafer, and a support beneath the wafer moves the wafer so that each device thereon is consecutively brought into contact with the needles or probing elements of the probe card.


With particular regard to probe cards that are specially adapted for use in measuring ultra-low currents (down to the femtoamp region or lower), probe card designers have been concerned with developing techniques for eliminating or at least reducing the effects of leakage currents, which are unwanted currents that can flow into a particular cable or channel from surrounding cables or channels so as to distort the current measured in that particular cable or channel. For a given potential difference between two spaced apart conductors, the amount of leakage current that will flow between them will vary depending upon the volume resistivity of the insulating material that separates the conductors, that is, if a relatively lower-resistance insulator is used, this will result in a relatively higher leakage current. Thus, a designer of low-current probe cards will normally avoid the use of rubber-insulated single-core wires on a glass-epoxy board since rubber and glass-epoxy materials are known to be relatively low-resistance insulators through which relatively large leakage currents can flow.


One technique that has been used for suppressing interchannel leakage currents is surrounding the inner core of each lead-in wire with a cylindrical “guard” conductor, which is maintained at nearly the same potential as the inner core by a feedback circuit in the output channel of the test instrument. Because the voltage potentials of the outer guard conductor and the inner conductive core are made to substantially track each other, negligible leakage current will flow across the inner dielectric that separates these conductors regardless of whether the inner dielectric is made of a low- or high-resistivity material. Although leakage current can still flow between the guard conductors of the respective cables, this is typically not a problem because these guard conductors are connected to a low impedance path to ground. By using this guarding technique, significant improvement may be realized in the low-level current measuring capability of certain probe card designs.


To further improve low-current measurement capability, probe cards have been constructed so as to minimize leakage currents between the individual probing devices which mount the probing needles or other elements. With respect to these devices, higher-resistance insulating materials have been substituted for lower-resistance materials and additional conductive surfaces have been arranged about each device in order to perform a guarding function in relation thereto. In one type of assembly, for example, each probing device is constructed using a thin blade of ceramic material, which is a material known to have a relatively high volume resistivity. An elongate conductive trace is provided on one side of the blade to form the signal line and a backplane conductive surface is provided on the other side of the blade for guarding purposes. The probing element of this device is formed by a slender conductive needle, such as of tungsten, which extends in a cantilevered manner away from the signal trace. Such devices are commercially available, for example, from Cerprobe Corporation based in Tempe, Ariz. During assembly of the probe card, the ceramic blades are edge-mounted in radial arrangement about the opening in the card so that the needles terminate within the opening in a pattern suitable for probing the test device. The conductive backplane on each blade is connected to the guard conductor of the corresponding cable and also to corresponding conductive pad or “land” adjacent the opening in the probe card. In this manner each conductive path is guarded by the backplane conductor on the opposite side of the blade and by the conductive land beneath it.


It has been found, however, that even with the use of guarded cables and ceramic probing devices of the type just described, the level of undesired background current is still not sufficiently reduced as to match the capabilities of the latest generation of commercially available test instruments, which instruments are able to monitor currents down to one femtoamp or less.


In the latest generation of probe cards, efforts have been directed toward systematically eliminating low-resistance leakage paths within the probe card and toward designing extensive and elaborate guarding structures to surround the conductors along the signal path. For example, in one newer design, the entire glass-epoxy main board is replaced with a board of ceramic material, which material, as noted above, presents a relatively high resistance to leakage currents. In this same design, the lead-in wires are replaced by conductive signal traces formed directly on the main board, which traces extend from an outer edge of the main board to respective conductive pads that surround the board opening. Each pad, in turn, is connected to the signal path of a corresponding ceramic blade. In addition, a pair of guard traces are formed on either side of each signal trace so as to further isolate each trace against leakage currents.


In yet another of these newer designs, a main board of ceramic material is used having three-active layers to provide three dimensional guarding. Above this main board and connected thereto is a four-quadrant interface board that includes further guard structures. Between these two board assemblies is a third unit including a “pogo carousel.” This pogo carousel uses pogo pins to form a plurality of signal lines that interconnect the interface board and the lower main board. It will be recognized that in respect to these pogo pins, the effort to replace lower resistance insulators with higher resistance insulators has been taken to its practical limit, that is, the insulator that would normally surround the inner conductor has been removed altogether.


From the foregoing examples, it will be seen that a basic concern in the art has been the suppression of inter-channel leakage currents. Using these newer designs, it is possible to measure currents down to nearly the femtoamp level. However, the ceramic material used in these newer designs is relatively more expensive than the glass-epoxy material it replaces. Another problem with ceramic materials is that they are relatively susceptible to the absorption of surface contaminants such as can be deposited by the skin during handling of the probe card. These contaminants can decrease the surface resistivity of the ceramic material to a sufficient extent as to produce a substantial increase in leakage current levels. In addition, the more extensive and elaborate guarding structures that are used in these newer designs has contributed to a large increase in design and assembly costs. Based on these developments it may be anticipated that only gradual improvements in the low-current measurement capability of the cards is likely to come about, which improvements, for example, will result from increasingly more elaborate guarding systems or from further research in the area of high resistance insulative materials.


In addition to suppressing leakage currents that flow between the different signal channels, low noise cables that reduce the triboelectric effect have been used on a probe card. In a guarded coaxial cable, triboelectric currents can arise between the guard conductor and the inner dielectric due to friction there between which causes free electrons to rub off the conductor and creates a charge buildup resulting in current flow.


It should also be noted that there are other factors unrelated to design that can influence whether or not the potential of a particular probe card for measuring low-level currents will be fully realized. For example, unless special care is taken in assembling the probe card, it is possible for surface contaminants, such as oils and salts from the skin or residues left by solder flux, to contaminate the surface of the card and to degrade its performance (due to their ionic character, such contaminants can produce undesirable electrochemical effects). Furthermore, even assuming that the card is designed and assembled properly, the card may not be suitably connected to the test instrument or the instrument may not be properly calibrated so as to completely null out, for example, the effects of voltage and current offsets. In addition, the probe card or the interconnecting lines, can serve as pickup sites for ac (alternating current) fields, which ac fields can be rectified by the input circuit of the test instrument so as to cause errors in the indicated dc values. Thus, it is necessary to employ proper shielding procedures in respect to the probe card, the interconnecting lines and the test instrument in order to shield out these field disturbances. Due to these factors and others, when a new probe card design is being tested, it can be extremely difficult to isolate the causes of undesirable background current in the new design due to the numerous and possibly interacting factors that may be responsible.


A chuck typically includes an upper conductive surface in contact with the device under test. One or more additional layers are typically included below the upper conductive surface while being electrically isolated from one another. In this manner, the upper conductive surface may be electrically connected to the signal path, while the remaining layers may be electrically connected to the guard potential and shield potential, if desired. In addition, the chuck may be surrounded laterally with a conductive ring that may likewise be electrically connected to a guard or shield potential. In this manner, the device under test is guarded from below and to the side in order to reduce the electrical noise and leakage current that exists in the measurement of devices. Also, a plate may be suspended above the chuck (normally with an opening therein) and electrically interconnected to a guard or shield potential.


While such guarding and shielding reduces the amount of noise in the signal path, designers of such chucks must consider numerous other factors that influence the measurement. For example, thermal chucks (i.e., chucks that provide a range of temperatures) typically include heater circuits which emanate electrical signals into the region of the device under test, and hence the signal path. In addition, thermal chucks may include fluid paths, such as tubular cavities, within the chuck that carry hot or cold fluids that likewise result in noise in the signal path. Furthermore, thermal chucks are constructed of a variety of different materials, such as different conductive materials and different dielectric materials, all of which expand and contract at different rates further exasperating the potential of undesired noise in the test signal. Moreover, different temperatures change the relative humidity in the probe station, which in turn, change the amount of moisture absorbed by the dielectric materials, which in turn, change the impedance of the materials therein, and thus may result in variable leakage currents in the test signal.


With respect to thermal and non-thermal chucks there may be ground currents from the chuck to the test instrument that impact the sensed current in the signal path. During the probing of different parts of the device under test, the capacitive coupling (and magnetic coupling) of different portions of the chuck, and the capacitive coupling (and magnetic coupling) of the chuck relative to the enclosure changes, thereby inducing voltage changes. Furthermore, vibrations of the probe station itself, and thus the chuck located therein, as a result of testing, as a result of the external environment, and as a result of the air flowing within the probe station likewise induces undesirable leakage currents and noise in the signal path.


As it may be observed, due to these and other factors, when a new chuck design is being tested, it can be extremely difficult to isolate the causes of undesirable background current in the new design due to the numerous and possibly interacting factors that may be responsible.


To interconnect the chuck to the test instrumentation a service loop is normally used. The service loop is a flexible support that maintains all the hoses, the power cables, the signal cables, the instrumentation cables, and the sensor wiring, in a compact manner adjacent to one another while the chuck moves within the enclosure. The vibrations of the probe station, the vibrations from air blowing across the cables, the vibrations of the cables after moving the chuck, the vibrations from stepper motors connected to the chuck, the vibrations from flowing coolant in the hoses of the service loops, etc., all potentially results in undesirable currents in the signal path. In addition, magnetic and capacitive coupling between the power and ground conductors to the signal conductor likewise results in undesirable currents in the signal path. Further, the service loop itself is normally constructed of metal or otherwise includes metal bands, which likewise radiates electromagnetic signals that may result in undesirable currents in the signal path. All of these design considerations are in addition to considerations regarding the selection of construction materials and assembly considerations similar to those of probe cards.


As it may be observed, due to these factors, when a service loop design is being tested, it can be extremely difficult to isolate the causes of undesirable background current in the new design due to the numerous and possibly interacting factors that may be responsible.


The enclosure for the chuck, the service loop, the probe card, and the device under test likewise also includes potential sources of undesirable currents in the signal path. As an initial matter, the lid of the enclosure may have vibrational mechanical motion which results in a change in capacitance between the lid and the chuck, and a probe supported by the lid and the chuck, thus causing some undesirable currents in the signal path, in accordance with movement of the lid. In addition, there may be electrical surface charges on interior surfaces of the probe station, and other components contained therein, which also result in potentially undesirable currents in the signal path. Other structures within the enclosure can likewise result in undesirable currents in the signal path, such as for example, sliding plates below the chuck, conductive coated baffles below the chuck, air flow within the enclosure, motors for moving the chuck, position sensors, sensor wires, and dew meters. Furthermore, during testing of the device under test the probes themselves introduce external radiating signals into the probing environment in the vicinity of the device under test. All of these design considerations are in addition to considerations regarding the selection of construction materials and assembly considerations similar to those of probe cards.


In addition to those items contained within the enclosure of the probe station, there are additional sources of potential noise in the signal path located near the enclosure. The stage motors may be located adjacent the enclosure, power supplies may be adjacent the enclosure, stepper motor drivers may be located adjacent to the enclosure, personal computers may be located adjacent to the enclosure, computer monitors may be located adjacent to the enclosure, 60 hertz power sources may be located adjacent to the enclosure, etc., all of which may result in undesirable noise.


As it may be observed, due to these and other factors, when a probe station itself is being tested, it can be extremely difficult to isolate the causes of undesirable background current in the new design due to the numerous and possibly interacting factors that may be responsible.


As it may be observed, due to interrelated factors related to the chuck, the probing device, the probe card, the service loop, and other aspects of the probe station, when the entire probe station itself is being tested, it can be extremely difficult to isolate the causes of undesirable background current in the new design due to the numerous and possibly interacting factors that may be responsible. Accordingly, with each design and with increasingly lower noise requirements, it is exceedingly difficult to determine the primary source of the noise in the signal path.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS


FIG. 1 illustrates an existing probe station



FIG. 2 illustrates another existing probe station



FIG. 3 illustrates a test instrument and associated buffers for a cable.



FIG. 4 illustrates a tri-axial cable.



FIG. 5 illustrates the tri-axial cable of FIG. 4.



FIG. 6 illustrates another tri-axial cable.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT

During the assembly process of probe stations many different aspects related to noise levels of the signals are measured. One of the tests that is performed on the tri-axial cabling is to measure the bulk resistance layer to layer, such as signal to guard and guard to shield. Another test that is performed on the tri-axial cabling is to provide a known voltage, such as 0 volts to 10 volts, and measure any current variations between the signal conductor (force path) and the guard conductor.


Referring to FIG. 3, the test instrumentation normally includes a signal buffer to drive the signal line. A guard unity gain amplifier connected to the output of the signal buffer provides a high impedance path between the signal and the guard together with imposing a signal on the guard conductor that tracks the signal on the signal conductor. While having the potential on the guard conductor exactly track the potential on the signal conductor is ideal, in actual test instrumentation there is a small delta voltage potential between the signal and guard while performing measurements. The potential on the guard conductor increases the effective leakage resistance between the signal conductor and shield conductor. For example, if the delta voltage was 0.10% difference then the leakage resistance between the signal conductor and the shield conductor would be approximately 1,000 times greater than it otherwise would have been. In effect the leakage resistance between signal and shield is increased 1,000 times, thus decreasing leakage currents. Similarly, the capacitance between the signal and shield is decreased by 1,000 times in comparison to not having a guard conductor.


When testing indicates leakage current problems with any particular tri-axial cable normally the connector to the cable was improperly connected or contaminants in the assembly process occurred. In addition, over time it is believed that the tri-axial cables deteriorate from contaminants from the insulation wrapped around the conductors, including for example, flux and tinning (tin oxide flaking).


Normally the shield material, which it is speculated by the present inventors may result in tinning, is a braided mesh material constructed of thin wires. To reduce the likelihood of tinning the present inventors considered the coverage provided by the shield and determined that a 10–15% gap exists between the wires. After consideration of this previously unconsidered gap in the shield material, the present inventors thought that by reducing the aperture between the wires that this would decrease the likelihood that electromagnetic waves exterior to the cable itself would be able to penetrate between the wires to the guard layer underneath. In addition, the mesh of small long wires tend to have a significant resistance, such as 1 ohm or more. To reduce the resistance of the braid the present inventors further considered using thicker gage wires, which would likely result in large openings that is counter to the goal of decreasing the opening side, or otherwise using one or more large wires to act as low resistance paths, while would likely result in a significantly more expensive cable. In addition, the present inventors considered increasing the distance between the guard and shield conductors to decrease any potential capacitive coupling. To reduce the likelihood that signals will pass through the openings in the mesh, the present inventors added an additional layer of conductive material between the shield material and the adjacent dielectric layer which covers in excess of 95% of the dielectric layer, and covers substantially 100% in combination with the shield material, in profile.


To test the new cable design, the present inventors put the cable in a metal cylinder and imposed a strong radio frequency signal onto the conductive cylinder while measuring any induced noise on the signal conductor. The measurement of the noise levels involves connecting the cable to the test instrumentation and positioning the cable in a desirable location. It would be expected that the noise level would decrease significantly as a result of the additional conductive material, but in utter surprise to the present inventors the noise level in fact did not noticeably change, apart from a decrease in the capacitive coupling because of the increased distance between the shield conductor and the signal conductor. Accordingly, it was initially considered that modification of the cable to include an additional conductive layer adjacent the shield to reduce the potential for electromagnetic signals to pass through was of no perceived value.


While conducting such noise tests the present inventors observed a phenomena not commonly associated with such measurement characteristics, namely, that the settling time of the current signals within the modified cables were reduced in comparison to non-modified cables. In addition, the settling time of the cables is not normally a characterized parameter of the cable so accordingly noticing the difference required an astute, and generally overlooked, observation on the part of the present inventors. Based upon these realizations, the present inventors constructed a further test that involved comparing whether the modified cables were less sensitive to table (surface) vibrations than non-modified cables. The present inventors were surprised to determine that in fact the noise level in the modified cables when laid on the table outside of the conductive tubular member were in fact less than the non-modified cables. After coming to this rather unexpected realization, the present inventors then reconsidered the structure of the modified cables and came to the realization that the vibrational motion of the table, albeit rather small, was a source of the noise levels observed in the cables. With this realization of vibrational motion in the tri-axial cables being identified as a principal source of noise, the present inventors then realized that non-negligible triboelectric currents were in fact being generated between the shield conductive layer and the adjacent dielectric layer, and thereafter impacting signal integrity within the signal conductor.


This unlikely source of noise generation came as an utter astonishment to the present inventors because the guard buffer amplifier within the test instrumentation is driving the potential of the guard conductor to that of the signal conductor, and thus presumably counteracting any external influences. However, apparently the guard amplifier in the test instrumentation has non-ideal characteristics such that small external changes are not effectively eliminated, or otherwise the guard conductor does not have ideal characteristics. In any event, even in a shielded environment it was determined that a significant source of noise is charge that builds up on the layers between the guard conductor and the shield conductor, principally as a result of relative movement of these layers. The capacitive charge buildup, typically referred to as triboelectric currents, couples from the layer or layers external to the guard conductor to the signal conductor, and are observed as noise.


For example, a test of the decay of such triboelectric currents for the non-modified cables illustrates a decay time of approximately 15–30 seconds to 10% of its initial value. In contrast, a test of the decay of such triboelectric currents for the modified cables exhibits a decay time of approximately 1–5 seconds to 10% of its initial value. One way, albeit not the only way or a necessary characteristic, to characterize the difference is that the modified cable has a settling time of at least three times as fast as the non-modified cable.


The low-noise cables include conductive and dielectric layers in coaxial arrangement with each other and further include at least one layer of material between the guard and the shield within each cable adapted for suppressing the triboelectric effect so as to minimize any undesirable currents that would otherwise be generated internally in each cable due to this effect. This layer of material together with certain other structures included in the probe station enables probing using ultra-low currents of less than one femtoamp.



FIG. 4 shows a transverse sectional view through an exemplary cable 30. This portion, which is of tri-axial construction, includes an inner conductor or core 50, an inner dielectric 52, an inner layer 54, a guard conductor 56, an outer dielectric 58, an outer layer 60, a shield conductor 62, and an insulative jacket 64. The inner layer 54, and outer layer 60 are of suitable composition for reducing triboelectric current generation between the inner dielectric 52 and the guard conductor 56, and the outer dielectric 58, and the shield conductor 62, respectively, to less than that which would occur were the inner dielectric 52 and the guard conductor 56, and the outer dielectric 58, and the shield conductor 62, respectively, to directly adjoin each other. The inner layer 54 and outer layer 60 should have physical properties similar to that of the inner dielectric 52 so that it does not rub excessively against the inner dielectric 52 and outer dielectric 58, respectively, despite cable flexing or temperature changes. At the same time, the inner layer 54 and outer layer 60 should have sufficient conductive properties to dissipate any charge imbalances that may arise due to any free electrons that have rubbed off the guard conductor 56 or shield conductor 62, respectively. A suitable material for this purpose is a fluoropolymer such as TEFLON (TM) or other insulative material such as polyvinylchloride or polyethylene in combination with graphite or other sufficiently conductive additive. In addition, a sputtering technique may be used to apply a suitable triboelectric noise reducing layer. Also, the shield and guard conductors may be impregnated in some manner with triboelectric reducing material.


An exemplary cable is illustrated in FIG. 5. It is to be understood that additional layers may likewise be included with the cable. Another exemplary cable is illustrated in FIG. 6, that includes additional layers of triboelectric reducing materials, where any one or more of the triboelectric reducing layers may be included.


It is to be understood that the inner layer 54 may be omitted, if desired. In addition it is to be understood that the cable described herein, with the outer layer, or the combination of the outer layer and the inner layer, may be used for other applications apart from probe stations. For example, such cables may be suitable for medical devices.


In accordance with the previous discussion, the present inventors have discovered that the primary problem, at least at some stage in the design, is not how best to suppress the leakage currents that flow between the different signal channels but rather how best to suppress those currents that internally arise in each cable or signal channel as a result of the triboelectric effect. In a tri-axial cable, triboelectric currents can arise between the shield conductor and the outer dielectric due to friction there between which causes free electrons to rub off the conductor and creates a charge imbalance that causes current to flow. Such triboelectric currents are likewise generated at other interfaces. Once the inventor recognized that this triboelectric effect might be the critical problem, he proceeded to test this insight by testing such “low-noise” cables. It will be noted that the present inventors do not claim to have discovered a new solution to the problem of the triboelectric effect. A relatively straightforward solution to this problem can be found in the field of cable technology wherein it is known how to construct a “low-noise” cable by using an additional layer of material between a guard conductor and an inner dielectric, which material is of suitable composition for suppressing the triboelectric effect. This layer, in particular, includes a nonmetallic portion that is physically compatible with the inner dielectric so as to be prevented from rubbing excessively against this dielectric and, on the other hand, includes a portion that is sufficiently conductive that it will immediately dissipate any charge imbalance that may be created by free electrons that have rubbed off the outer conductor. It is not claimed by the present inventors that this particular solution to the triboelectric effect problem is his invention. Rather it is the recognition that this specific problem is a major source of performance degradation in the field of low-current design and the recognition of the interfaces where such currents may originate.


In retrospect, one can speculate as to why the significance of the triboelectric effect was not recognized sooner by investigators in the art of probe station design. One possible reason is that verifying the importance of this effect is not merely a matter of replacing cables with low-noise cables. Because of the non-design related factors specified in the background section, one of ordinary skill who assembled and then tested a probe station that included tri-axial low-noise cables would not necessarily detect the superior capability of this cable for low current measurements. For example, surface contaminants deposited during assembly might raise the background level of current to a sufficient extent that the effect of the low-noise cables is concealed. To this it may be added that the direction taken in the art of probe station design, where the focus has been on the problem of suppressing inter-channel leakage currents.


The terms and expressions which have been employed in the foregoing specification are used therein as terms of description and not of limitation, and there is no intention, in the use of such terms and expressions, of excluding equivalents of the features shown and described or portions thereof, it being recognized that the scope of the invention is defined and limited only by the claims which follow.

Claims
  • 1. A probe station for probing a device under test comprising: (a) a probing device for testing said device under test;(b) a cable connecting said probing device to a test instrument, said cable including: (i) a first conductor, a first dielectric, and a second conductor, where said first dielectric is between said first conductor and said second conductor;(ii) a second dielectric, and a third conductor, where said second dielectric is between said second conductor and said third conductor;(iii) further including a first layer of material between said second dielectric and said third conductor of suitable composition for reducing triboelectric current generation between said second dielectric and said third conductor to less than that which would occur were said second dielectric and said third conductor to directly adjoin each other.
  • 2. The probe station of claim 1 further comprising a second layer of material between said first dielectric and said second conductor of suitable composition for reducing triboelectric current generation between said first dielectric and said second conductor to less than that which would occur were said first dielectric and said second conductor to directly adjoin each other.
  • 3. A probe station for probing a device under test comprising: (a) a probing device for testing said device under test;(b) a cable connecting said probing device to a test instrument, said cable including: (i) a first conductor, a first dielectric, and a second conductor, where said first dielectric is between said first conductor and said second conductor;(ii) a second dielectric, and a third conductor, where said second dielectric is between said second conductor and said third conductor;(iii) further including a first layer of material between said second dielectric and said second conductor of suitable composition for reducing triboelectric current generation between said second dielectric and said second conductor to less than that which would occur were said second dielectric and said second conductor to directly adjoin each other.
  • 4. The probe station of claim 3 further comprising a second layer of material between said first dielectric and said second conductor of suitable composition for reducing triboelectric current generation between said first dielectric and said second conductor to less than that which would occur were said first dielectric and said second conductor to directly adjoin each other.
  • 5. A probe station for probing a device under test comprising: (a) a probing device for testing a device under test;(b) a cable connecting said probing device to a test instrument, said cable including: (i) a triaxial cable;(ii) further including a first layer of material between a dielectric and a conductor of said cable of suitable composition for reducing triboelectric current generation between said dielectric and said conductor to less than that which would occur were said dielectric and said conductor to directly adjoin each other.
  • 6. A cable comprising (a) a first central conductor, a first dielectric, a second conductor, a second dielectric, a third conductor, where said first dielectric is between said first conductor and said second conductor and where said second dielectric is between said second conductor and said third conductor, and where at least two of said first, second, and third conductors are coaxial; and(b) further including a layer of material between said second dielectric and said third conductor of suitable composition for reducing triboelectric current generation between said second dielectric and said third conductor to less than that which would occur were said second dielectric and said third conductor to directly adjoin each other.
  • 7. The cable of claim 6 further comprising a second layer of material between said first dielectric and said second conductor of suitable composition for reducing triboelectric current generation between said first dielectric and said second conductor to less than that which would occur were said first dielectric and said second conductor to directly adjoin each other.
  • 8. A cable comprising: (a) a first central conductor, a first dielectric, a second conductor, a second dielectric, a third conductor, where said first dielectric is between said first conductor and said second conductor and where said second dielectric is between said second conductor and said third conductor, and where at least two of said first, second, and third conductors are coaxial; and(b) further including a first layer of material between said first dielectric and one of said first and second conductors of suitable composition for reducing triboelectric current generation between said first dielectric and said one of first and second conductors to less than that which would occur were said first dielectric and said one of first and second conductors to directly adjoin each other.
  • 9. The probe station of claim 8 further comprising a second layer of material between said first dielectric and said second conductor of suitable composition for reducing triboelectric current generation between said first dielectric and said second conductor to less than that which would occur were said first dielectric and said second conductor to directly adjoin each other.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/666,219, filed Sep. 18, 2003 now U.S. Pat. No. 6,847,219, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/424,986, filed Nov. 8, 2002.

US Referenced Citations (464)
Number Name Date Kind
1337866 Whitaker Apr 1920 A
2142625 Zoethout Jan 1939 A
2197081 Piron Apr 1940 A
2376101 Tyzzer May 1945 A
2389668 Johnson Nov 1945 A
2471897 Rappl May 1949 A
2812502 Doherty Nov 1957 A
3176091 Hanson et al. Mar 1965 A
3185927 Margulis et al. May 1965 A
3192844 Szasz et al. Jul 1965 A
3193712 Harris Jul 1965 A
3201721 Voelcker Aug 1965 A
3230299 Radziejowski Jan 1966 A
3256484 Terry Jun 1966 A
3265969 Catu Aug 1966 A
3289046 Carr Nov 1966 A
3333274 Forcier Jul 1967 A
3405361 Kattner et al. Oct 1968 A
3408565 Frick et al. Oct 1968 A
3435185 Gerard Mar 1969 A
3484679 Hodgson et al. Dec 1969 A
3596228 Reed, Jr. et al. Jul 1971 A
3602845 Agrios et al. Aug 1971 A
3609539 Gunthert Sep 1971 A
3648169 Wiesler Mar 1972 A
3654573 Graham Apr 1972 A
3662318 Decuyper May 1972 A
3710251 Hagge et al. Jan 1973 A
3714572 Ham et al. Jan 1973 A
3775644 Cotner et al. Nov 1973 A
3777260 Davies et al. Dec 1973 A
3810017 Wiesler et al. May 1974 A
3814888 Bowers et al. Jun 1974 A
3829076 Sofy Aug 1974 A
3863181 Glance et al. Jan 1975 A
3866093 Kusters et al. Feb 1975 A
3930809 Evans Jan 1976 A
3936743 Roch Feb 1976 A
3970934 Aksu Jul 1976 A
3996517 Fergason et al. Dec 1976 A
4001685 Roch Jan 1977 A
4008900 Khoshaba Feb 1977 A
4009456 Hopfer Feb 1977 A
4027253 Chiron et al. May 1977 A
4035723 Kvaternik Jul 1977 A
4038894 Knibbe et al. Aug 1977 A
4042119 Hassan et al. Aug 1977 A
4049252 Bell Sep 1977 A
4066943 Roch Jan 1978 A
4093988 Scott Jun 1978 A
4099120 Aksu Jul 1978 A
4115735 Stanford Sep 1978 A
4115736 Tracy Sep 1978 A
4116523 Coberly et al. Sep 1978 A
4151465 Lenz Apr 1979 A
4161692 Tarzwell Jul 1979 A
4172993 Leach Oct 1979 A
4186338 Fichtenbaum Jan 1980 A
4275446 Blaess Jun 1981 A
4280112 Eisenhart Jul 1981 A
4284033 delRio Aug 1981 A
4284682 Frosch et al. Aug 1981 A
4287473 Sawyer Sep 1981 A
4342958 Russell Aug 1982 A
4346355 Tsukii Aug 1982 A
4352061 Matrone Sep 1982 A
4357575 Uren et al. Nov 1982 A
4365109 O'Loughlin Dec 1982 A
4365195 Stegens Dec 1982 A
4371742 Manly Feb 1983 A
4376920 Smith Mar 1983 A
4383178 Shibata et al. May 1983 A
4414638 Talambiras Nov 1983 A
4419626 Cedrone et al. Dec 1983 A
4425395 Negishi et al. Jan 1984 A
4426619 Demand Jan 1984 A
4473798 Cedrone et al. Sep 1984 A
4479690 Inouye et al. Oct 1984 A
4480223 Aigo Oct 1984 A
4487996 Rabinowitz et al. Dec 1984 A
4491173 Demand Jan 1985 A
4503335 Takahashi Mar 1985 A
4507602 Aguirre Mar 1985 A
4528504 Thornton, Jr. et al. Jul 1985 A
4531474 Inuta Jul 1985 A
4532423 Tojo et al. Jul 1985 A
4557599 Zimring Dec 1985 A
4566184 Higgins et al. Jan 1986 A
4567321 Harayama Jan 1986 A
4567908 Bolsterli Feb 1986 A
4575676 Palkuti Mar 1986 A
4588970 Donecker et al. May 1986 A
4621169 Petinelli et al. Nov 1986 A
4626618 Takaoka et al. Dec 1986 A
4642417 Ruthrol et al. Feb 1987 A
4646005 Ryan Feb 1987 A
4665360 Phillips May 1987 A
4673839 Veenendaal Jun 1987 A
4675600 Gergin Jun 1987 A
4680538 Dalman et al. Jul 1987 A
4684883 Ackerman et al. Aug 1987 A
4691831 Suzuki et al. Sep 1987 A
4694245 Frommes Sep 1987 A
4695794 Bargett et al. Sep 1987 A
4697143 Lockwood et al. Sep 1987 A
4703433 Sharrit Oct 1987 A
4711563 Lass Dec 1987 A
4712370 MacGee Dec 1987 A
4727637 Buckwitz et al. Mar 1988 A
4730158 Kasai et al. Mar 1988 A
4731577 Logan Mar 1988 A
4734872 Eager et al. Mar 1988 A
4739259 Hadwin et al. Apr 1988 A
4744041 Strunk et al. May 1988 A
4755746 Mallory et al. Jul 1988 A
4755874 Esrig et al. Jul 1988 A
4757255 Margozzi Jul 1988 A
4758785 Rath Jul 1988 A
4759712 Demand Jul 1988 A
4771234 Cook et al. Sep 1988 A
4772846 Reeds Sep 1988 A
4777434 Miller et al. Oct 1988 A
4783625 Harry et al. Nov 1988 A
4784213 Eager et al. Nov 1988 A
4786867 Yamatsu Nov 1988 A
4787752 Fraser et al. Nov 1988 A
4791363 Logan Dec 1988 A
4810981 Herstein Mar 1989 A
4812754 Tracy et al. Mar 1989 A
4816767 Cannon et al. Mar 1989 A
4818169 Schram et al. Apr 1989 A
4827211 Strid et al. May 1989 A
4838802 Soar Jun 1989 A
4839587 Flatley et al. Jun 1989 A
4845426 Nolan et al. Jul 1989 A
4849689 Gleason Jul 1989 A
4853613 Sequeira et al. Aug 1989 A
4856426 Wirz Aug 1989 A
4856904 Akagawa Aug 1989 A
4858160 Strid et al. Aug 1989 A
4859989 McPherson Aug 1989 A
4871883 Guiol Oct 1989 A
4871965 Elbert et al. Oct 1989 A
4884026 Hayakawa et al. Nov 1989 A
4884206 Mate Nov 1989 A
4888550 Reid Dec 1989 A
4893914 Hancock et al. Jan 1990 A
4894612 Drake et al. Jan 1990 A
4896109 Rauscher Jan 1990 A
4899998 Teramachi Feb 1990 A
4904933 Snyder et al. Feb 1990 A
4904935 Calma et al. Feb 1990 A
4906920 Huff et al. Mar 1990 A
4916398 Rath Apr 1990 A
4918279 Babel et al. Apr 1990 A
4918374 Stewart et al. Apr 1990 A
4923407 Rice et al. May 1990 A
4926118 O'Connor et al. May 1990 A
4933634 Cuzin et al. Jun 1990 A
4968931 Littlebury et al. Nov 1990 A
4978907 Smith Dec 1990 A
4978914 Akimoto et al. Dec 1990 A
4982153 Collins et al. Jan 1991 A
4994737 Carlton et al. Feb 1991 A
5001423 Abrami et al. Mar 1991 A
5006796 Burton et al. Apr 1991 A
5010296 Okada et al. Apr 1991 A
5019692 Nbedi et al. May 1991 A
5030907 Yih et al. Jul 1991 A
5034688 Moulene et al. Jul 1991 A
5041782 Marzan Aug 1991 A
5045781 Gleason et al. Sep 1991 A
5061823 Carroll Oct 1991 A
5065089 Rich Nov 1991 A
5065092 Sigler Nov 1991 A
5066357 Smyth, Jr. et al. Nov 1991 A
5070297 Kwon et al. Dec 1991 A
5077523 Blanz Dec 1991 A
5084671 Miyata et al. Jan 1992 A
5089774 Nakano Feb 1992 A
5091691 Kamieniecki et al. Feb 1992 A
5095891 Reitter Mar 1992 A
5097207 Blanz Mar 1992 A
5101149 Adams et al. Mar 1992 A
5101453 Rumbaugh Mar 1992 A
5103169 Heaton et al. Apr 1992 A
5105148 Lee Apr 1992 A
5105181 Ross Apr 1992 A
5107076 Bullock et al. Apr 1992 A
5142224 Smith et al. Aug 1992 A
5144228 Sorna et al. Sep 1992 A
5159752 Mahant-Shetti et al. Nov 1992 A
5160883 Blanz Nov 1992 A
5164661 Jones Nov 1992 A
5166606 Blanz Nov 1992 A
5172049 Kiyokawa et al. Dec 1992 A
5198752 Miyata et al. Mar 1993 A
5198753 Hamburgen Mar 1993 A
5198756 Jenkins et al. Mar 1993 A
5198758 Iknaian et al. Mar 1993 A
5202558 Barker Apr 1993 A
5209088 Vaks May 1993 A
5210485 Kreiger et al. May 1993 A
5214243 Johnson May 1993 A
5214374 St. Onge May 1993 A
5218185 Gross Jun 1993 A
5220277 Reitinger Jun 1993 A
5221905 Bhangu et al. Jun 1993 A
5225037 Elder et al. Jul 1993 A
5225796 Williams et al. Jul 1993 A
5237267 Harwood et al. Aug 1993 A
5266889 Harwood et al. Nov 1993 A
5278494 Obigane Jan 1994 A
5280156 Niori et al. Jan 1994 A
5303938 Miller et al. Apr 1994 A
5315237 Iwakura et al. May 1994 A
5321352 Takebuchi Jun 1994 A
5325052 Yamashita Jun 1994 A
5334931 Clarke et al. Aug 1994 A
5336989 Hofer Aug 1994 A
5345170 Schwindt et al. Sep 1994 A
5369370 Stratmann et al. Nov 1994 A
5371457 Lipp Dec 1994 A
5373231 Boll et al. Dec 1994 A
5382898 Subramanian Jan 1995 A
5397855 Ferlier Mar 1995 A
5404111 Mori et al. Apr 1995 A
5408189 Swart et al. Apr 1995 A
5410259 Fujihara et al. Apr 1995 A
5422574 Kister Jun 1995 A
5434512 Schwindt et al. Jul 1995 A
5451884 Sauerland Sep 1995 A
5457398 Schwindt et al. Oct 1995 A
5461328 Devereaux et al. Oct 1995 A
5469324 Henderson et al. Nov 1995 A
5475316 Hurley et al. Dec 1995 A
5477011 Singles et al. Dec 1995 A
5479108 Cheng Dec 1995 A
5479109 Lau et al. Dec 1995 A
5481936 Yanagisawa Jan 1996 A
5486975 Shamouilian et al. Jan 1996 A
5488954 Sleva et al. Feb 1996 A
5491426 Small Feb 1996 A
5493070 Habu Feb 1996 A
5493236 Ishii et al. Feb 1996 A
5500606 Holmes Mar 1996 A
5506515 Godshalk et al. Apr 1996 A
5508631 Manku et al. Apr 1996 A
5510792 Ono et al. Apr 1996 A
5511010 Burns Apr 1996 A
5515167 Ledger et al. May 1996 A
5517111 Shelor May 1996 A
5521522 Abe et al. May 1996 A
5523694 Cole, Jr. Jun 1996 A
5530371 Perry et al. Jun 1996 A
5530372 Lee et al. Jun 1996 A
5532609 Harwood et al. Jul 1996 A
5539323 Davis, Jr. Jul 1996 A
5546012 Perry et al. Aug 1996 A
5550480 Nelson et al. Aug 1996 A
5550482 Sano Aug 1996 A
5552716 Takahashi et al. Sep 1996 A
5561377 Strid et al. Oct 1996 A
5561585 Bames et al. Oct 1996 A
5565788 Burr et al. Oct 1996 A
5571324 Sago et al. Nov 1996 A
5572398 Federlin et al. Nov 1996 A
5583445 Mullen Dec 1996 A
5594358 Ishikawa et al. Jan 1997 A
5604444 Harwood et al. Feb 1997 A
5610529 Schwindt Mar 1997 A
5611946 Leong et al. Mar 1997 A
5617035 Swapp Apr 1997 A
5629631 Perry et al. May 1997 A
5631571 Spaziani et al. May 1997 A
5640101 Kuji et al. Jun 1997 A
5646538 Lide et al. Jul 1997 A
5657394 Schwartz et al. Aug 1997 A
5659255 Strid et al. Aug 1997 A
5663653 Schwindt et al. Sep 1997 A
5666063 Abercrombie et al. Sep 1997 A
5668470 Shelor Sep 1997 A
5669316 Faz et al. Sep 1997 A
5670888 Cheng Sep 1997 A
5675499 Lee et al. Oct 1997 A
5675932 Mauney Oct 1997 A
5676360 Boucher et al. Oct 1997 A
5680039 Mochizuki et al. Oct 1997 A
5682337 El-Fishawy et al. Oct 1997 A
5685232 Inoue Nov 1997 A
5712571 O'Donoghue Jan 1998 A
5729150 Schwindt Mar 1998 A
5731708 Sobhami Mar 1998 A
5773951 Markowski et al. Jun 1998 A
5777485 Tanaka et al. Jul 1998 A
5798652 Taraci Aug 1998 A
5804982 Lo et al. Sep 1998 A
5804983 Nakajima et al. Sep 1998 A
5807107 Bright et al. Sep 1998 A
5811751 Leong et al. Sep 1998 A
5828225 Obikane et al. Oct 1998 A
5831442 Heigl Nov 1998 A
5835997 Yassine Nov 1998 A
5838161 Akram et al. Nov 1998 A
5847569 Ho et al. Dec 1998 A
5848500 Kirk Dec 1998 A
5861743 Pye et al. Jan 1999 A
5869975 Strid et al. Feb 1999 A
5874361 Collins et al. Feb 1999 A
5879289 Yarush et al. Mar 1999 A
5883522 O'Boyle Mar 1999 A
5883523 Ferland et al. Mar 1999 A
5892539 Colvin Apr 1999 A
5900737 Graham et al. May 1999 A
5903143 Mochizuki et al. May 1999 A
5910727 Fujihara et al. Jun 1999 A
5916689 Collins et al. Jun 1999 A
5923177 Wardwell Jul 1999 A
5942907 Chiang Aug 1999 A
5945836 Sayre et al. Aug 1999 A
5949579 Baker Sep 1999 A
5952842 Fujimoto Sep 1999 A
5959461 Brown et al. Sep 1999 A
5960411 Hartman et al. Sep 1999 A
5963027 Peters Oct 1999 A
5963364 Leong et al. Oct 1999 A
5973505 Strid et al. Oct 1999 A
5982166 Mautz Nov 1999 A
5995914 Cabot Nov 1999 A
5998768 Hunter et al. Dec 1999 A
5999268 Yonezawa et al. Dec 1999 A
6001760 Katsuda et al. Dec 1999 A
6002263 Peters et al. Dec 1999 A
6002426 Back et al. Dec 1999 A
6013586 McGhee et al. Jan 2000 A
6023209 Faulkner et al. Feb 2000 A
6028435 Nikawa Feb 2000 A
6029141 Bezos et al. Feb 2000 A
6031383 Streib et al. Feb 2000 A
6034533 Tervo et al. Mar 2000 A
6037785 Higgins Mar 2000 A
6037793 Miyazawa et al. Mar 2000 A
6043667 Cadwallader et al. Mar 2000 A
6049216 Yang et al. Apr 2000 A
6052653 Mazur et al. Apr 2000 A
6054869 Hutton et al. Apr 2000 A
6060888 Blackham et al. May 2000 A
6060891 Hembree et al. May 2000 A
6078183 Cole, Jr. Jun 2000 A
6091236 Piety et al. Jul 2000 A
6091255 Godfrey Jul 2000 A
6096567 Kaplan et al. Aug 2000 A
6104203 Costello et al. Aug 2000 A
6111419 Lefever et al. Aug 2000 A
6114865 Lagowski et al. Sep 2000 A
6118894 Schwartz et al. Sep 2000 A
6121783 Horner et al. Sep 2000 A
6124723 Costello Sep 2000 A
6124725 Sato Sep 2000 A
6127831 Khoury et al. Oct 2000 A
6130544 Strid et al. Oct 2000 A
6137302 Schwindt Oct 2000 A
6137303 Deckert et al. Oct 2000 A
6144212 Mizuta Nov 2000 A
6147851 Anderson Nov 2000 A
6160407 Nikawa Dec 2000 A
6194907 Kanao et al. Feb 2001 B1
6198299 Hollman Mar 2001 B1
6211663 Moulthrop et al. Apr 2001 B1
6222970 Wach et al. Apr 2001 B1
6232787 Lo et al. May 2001 B1
6232788 Schwindt et al. May 2001 B1
6232789 Schwindt May 2001 B1
6232790 Bryan et al. May 2001 B1
6236975 Boe et al. May 2001 B1
6236977 Verba et al. May 2001 B1
6245692 Pearce et al. Jun 2001 B1
6252392 Peters Jun 2001 B1
6257319 Kainuma et al. Jul 2001 B1
6259261 Engelking et al. Jul 2001 B1
6271673 Furuta et al. Aug 2001 B1
6284971 Atalar et al. Sep 2001 B1
6288557 Peters et al. Sep 2001 B1
6292760 Burns Sep 2001 B1
6300775 Peach et al. Oct 2001 B1
6310755 Kholodenko et al. Oct 2001 B1
6313649 Harwood et al. Nov 2001 B1
6320372 Keller Nov 2001 B1
6320396 Nikawa Nov 2001 B1
6335628 Schwindt et al. Jan 2002 B1
6362636 Peters et al. Mar 2002 B1
6380751 Harwood et al. Apr 2002 B1
6396296 Tarter et al. May 2002 B1
6424141 Hollman et al. Jul 2002 B1
6445202 Cowan et al. Sep 2002 B1
6480013 Nayler et al. Nov 2002 B1
6483327 Bruce et al. Nov 2002 B1
6483336 Harris et al. Nov 2002 B1
6486687 Harwood et al. Nov 2002 B1
6488405 Eppes et al. Dec 2002 B1
6489789 Peters et al. Dec 2002 B1
6492822 Schwindt et al. Dec 2002 B1
6501289 Takekoshi Dec 2002 B1
6549022 Cole, Jr. et al. Apr 2003 B1
6549106 Martin Apr 2003 B1
6573702 Marcuse et al. Jun 2003 B1
6605951 Cowan Aug 2003 B1
6605955 Costello et al. Aug 2003 B1
6608494 Bruce et al. Aug 2003 B1
6608496 Strid et al. Aug 2003 B1
6617862 Bruce Sep 2003 B1
6621082 Morita et al. Sep 2003 B1
6624891 Marcus et al. Sep 2003 B1
6633174 Satya et al. Oct 2003 B1
6636059 Harwood et al. Oct 2003 B1
6639415 Peters et al. Oct 2003 B1
6642732 Cowan et al. Nov 2003 B1
6643597 Dunsmore Nov 2003 B1
6686753 Kitahata Feb 2004 B1
6701265 Hill et al. Mar 2004 B1
6710798 Hershel et al. Mar 2004 B1
6720782 Schwindt et al. Apr 2004 B1
6724205 Hayden et al. Apr 2004 B1
6724928 Davis Apr 2004 B1
6734687 Ishitani et al. May 2004 B1
6744268 Hollman Jun 2004 B1
6771090 Harris et al. Aug 2004 B1
6771806 Satya et al. Aug 2004 B1
6774651 Hembree Aug 2004 B1
6777964 Navratil et al. Aug 2004 B1
6788093 Aitren et al. Sep 2004 B1
6791344 Cook et al. Sep 2004 B1
6801047 Harwood et al. Oct 2004 B1
6806724 Hayden et al. Oct 2004 B1
6836135 Harris et al. Dec 2004 B1
6838885 Kamitani Jan 2005 B1
6842024 Peters et al. Jan 2005 B1
6843024 Nozaki et al. Jan 2005 B1
6847219 Lesher et al. Jan 2005 B1
6856129 Thomas et al. Feb 2005 B1
6861856 Dunklee et al. Mar 2005 B1
6873167 Goto et al. Mar 2005 B1
6885197 Harris et al. Apr 2005 B1
6927079 Fyfield Aug 2005 B1
20010009377 Schwindt et al. Jul 2001 A1
20010010468 Gleason et al. Aug 2001 A1
20010020283 Sakaguchi Sep 2001 A1
20010030549 Gleason et al. Oct 2001 A1
20020118009 Hollman et al. Aug 2002 A1
20030057513 Leedy Mar 2003 A1
20030062915 Arnold et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030071631 Alexander Apr 2003 A1
20030141891 Navratil et al. Jul 2003 A1
20040061514 Schwindt et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040095145 Boudiaf et al. May 2004 A1
20040100276 Fanton May 2004 A1
20040113639 Dunklee et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040162689 Jamneala et al. Aug 2004 A1
20040193382 Adamian et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040199350 Blackham et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040207424 Hollman Oct 2004 A1
20040251922 Martens et al. Dec 2004 A1
20050024069 Hayden et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050099192 Dunklee et al. May 2005 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (51)
Number Date Country
31 14 466 Mar 1982 DE
31 25 552 Nov 1982 DE
288 234 Mar 1991 DE
41 09 908 Oct 1992 DE
43 16 111 Nov 1994 DE
195 41 334 Sep 1996 DE
196 16 212 Oct 1996 DE
196 18 717 Jan 1998 DE
0 087 497 Sep 1983 EP
0 201 205 Dec 1986 EP
0 314 481 May 1989 EP
0 333 521 Sep 1989 EP
0 460 911 Dec 1991 EP
0505981 Mar 1992 EP
0 574 149 Dec 1993 EP
0 573 183 Jan 1999 EP
2 197 081 May 1988 GB
53-052354 May 1978 JP
56-007439 Jan 1981 JP
62-011243 Jan 1987 JP
63-143814 Jun 1988 JP
63-160355 Jul 1988 JP
1-165968 Jun 1989 JP
1-178872 Jul 1989 JP
1-209380 Aug 1989 JP
1-214038 Aug 1989 JP
1-219575 Sep 1989 JP
1-296167 Nov 1989 JP
2-22837 Jan 1990 JP
2-22873 Jan 1990 JP
2-220453 Sep 1990 JP
3-67187 Mar 1991 JP
3-175367 Jul 1991 JP
5-157790 Jun 1993 JP
5-166893 Jul 1993 JP
60-71425 Mar 1994 JP
7-5197 Jan 1995 JP
7005078 Jan 1995 JP
7-273509 Oct 1995 JP
10-116866 May 1998 JP
10-339743 Dec 1998 JP
11-031724 Feb 1999 JP
2001-189285 Jul 2001 JP
2001-189378 Jul 2001 JP
2002033374 Jan 2002 JP
2002-164396 Jun 2002 JP
WO 8000101 Jan 1980 WO
WO 8607493 Dec 1986 WO
WO 8904001 May 1989 WO
WO 0169656 Sep 2001 WO
WO 2004049395 Jun 2004 WO
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20050104610 A1 May 2005 US
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
60424986 Nov 2002 US
Continuations (1)
Number Date Country
Parent 10666219 Sep 2003 US
Child 10986639 US