Vidic 2:00

L13
DisclaimerThis paper partially fulfills a writing requirement for first year (freshman) engineering students at the
University of Pittsburgh Swanson School of Engineering. This paper is a student, not a professional, paper. This paper is
based on publicly available information and may not provide complete analyses of all relevant data. If this paper is used for
any purpose other than these authors partial fulfillment of a writing requirement for first year (freshman) engineering
students at the University of Pittsburgh Swanson School of Engineering, the user does so at his or her own risk.

DESIGNING COMPUTER CHIPS WITHOUT DESTROYING THE

ENVIRONMENT: THE BEST OF BOTH WORLDS
Sooraj Sharma (sps49@pitt.edu)

SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING:
THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY
The 21st century is described by many as the
Information Age. It is a time where rapid developments in
the preceding Digital Revolution have resulted in
ubiquitous computing devices like personal computers,
laptops, and smartphones that have had a massive impact on
the modern world economically, socially, and scientifically.
The proliferation of computer language based courses at
nearly all levels of education has opened up a whole new job
market that continues to evolve and expand as our
understanding of computer language deepens. Devices like
smartphones and laptops help encourage the growth of social
media applications that have been able to connect millions of
people around the world, and with that, introduce new and
foreign ideas to everyone, broadening our worldview and
increasing our intellectual diversity. Most importantly,
computing devices play a large role in scientific advances
and especially in engineering fields. Programs like CAD
allow engineers to create accurate three dimensional
simulations of future projects, development testing programs
like CFD can perform simulations like wind tunnel testing
virtually, and engineers to share information and design files
through various file sending features.
Since the late 1990s, successive advancements in
processor design have allowed for the shrinking of computer
chips and thus the devices that contain them. The logical
jump one would make about this is that the environmental
impact of manufacturing portable computers would have
gone down. However, this is not necessarily the case. The
processes that design the internal components of computers,
specifically computer chips, have not deviated far from the
methods that were used almost twenty years ago.
Specifically, the current subtractive method of producing
semiconductor wafers, which are the building blocks of
computer chips, end up consuming absurd amounts of
energy and result in a litany of toxic chemicals and unused
raw materials [1].
The solution that is starting to take hold amongst
researchers in the wafer industry as well as environmental
ethicists is to acquire means of additive manufacturing, or
the processes by which specialized machines are used to
University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering 1
Submission Date 11.2.2016

build parts from the ground-up. Probably the best example

of additive manufacturing is 3D printing technology, which
now sees a wide variety of uses ranging from those in
construction to bioengineering. Would it be impossible to
design a 3D printer to create semiconductor wafers, then?
The answer is no. A German company, Nanoscale Systems,
has developed a 3D printer with the level of accuracy to
work at sub-microscopic levels, claiming that once in
widespread use, their device will allow for the streamlining
of semiconductor production through the elimination of
more than two hundred seemingly unnecessary steps in
production, therefore drastically lessening environmental
destruction.
As I was born in the Information Age, computers have
been a persistent part of my life, in and out of school. I use a
smartphone to keep me from missing out on morning
lecture, a laptop to complete homework assignments and
bang out papers at the last minute, and a gaming console as a
means of escapism from the rigors of college life. However,
I enjoy the great outdoors as well: when not glued to a
computer screen you can find me jogging outside in the
urban haze, relaxing in the sun, and exploring Pittsburgh. I
have a great concern for the state of our environment after it
has been subjected to decades of neglect. I find the fact that
the production of something I enjoy so much is causing as
much harm as it does good abhorrent. As an aspiring
chemical engineering looking to work in nanotechnology, I
think that the 3D nanoscale printing of semiconductors is a
definite step in the right direction and even though it is for
the most part experimental, it should only encourage growth
in a new field.

WAFER FABRICATION: HOW MUCH

HAVOC CAN A TINY SLIVER OF METAL
WREAK?
To get a good idea of how large the effect of
semiconductor production has on the environment is, it helps
to have a basic understanding of the production process.
According an article on Texas Instruments website, first, a
metalloid element like silicon is gathered in large deposits of
sand. Once separated, the metal is heated until it reaches a
molten state to remove impurities and is subsequently

Sooraj Sharma
formed into a cylindrical ingot of sorts. Next, the ingot is
subjected to stringent purification processes which use water
and chemicals like sulfuric acid, hydrogen fluoride, and
hydrogen peroxide to give the metal a smooth and reflective
surface. After that, the ingot is sliced into extremely thin
wafers (around 200 to 300 mm across). The next steps of the
process revolve around building a structure on each wafer
that activates the semiconductors conductive properties. A
precisely patterned mask is placed on the wafer to etch out a
design using techniques like photolithography (see figure 1
below) and ion doping. Finally, the wafers are stacked on top
of each other around 10 to 12 times before they are cut into
smaller parts and bonded to a package. The aforementioned
etching process is akin to carving a statue from a block of
marble. Hence, subtractive manufacturing [2].

combination of exposure to hydrofluoric acid fumes and the

proliferation of arsenic dust in the soil [5].
But its not just the waste material thats the problem,
its the resource cost of running the cleanrooms that the
manufacturing takes place in as well. A PDF presentation by
Dartmouth Universitys engineering department makes note
of the fact that the production of a 1.7 gram microchip
requires 1600 grams of petroleum, 72 grams of assorted
chemicals, 32000 grams of water, and 700 grams of
elemental gases. In a days worth of production, a typical
cleanroom uses over 240,000 kilowatts of energy for
extensive ventilation and air conditioning and over 2 million
gallons of water for purification [6]!
The opinion on the use of subtractive manufacturing
techniques in the production of semiconductors held by
engineers is still somewhat favorable, but is slowly
beginning to shift away from it. It is significantly easier and
less time consuming to produce large amounts of wafers
through subtractive techniques as metal is more difficult to
join together as it is to carve or mold. However, the scraps
and shavings left behind from this process have an
undeniable negative effect on the environment, especially
when they are non-reusable. In contrast, additive
manufacturing procedures, while slower, are much more
efficient at tasks involving building multiple layers and
creating complex shapes, which are two of the biggest steps
in wafer fabrication [7].

OVERHAULING WAFER PRODUCTION:

BUILDING VS STRIPPING
FIGURE 1 [3]
A simple diagram of photolithographic etching using a
mask. Notice how the end product results in significantly
less material remaining from what was originally used.

One of the most well recognized types of additive

manufacturing is 3D printing, which layers cross sections of
materials like metal or plastic to create structure drawn in a
modeling software file. It has allowed for the creation of
stronger, more economical parts the design and shape of
which are limited to the creativity of the designer himself.
The 3D printing of electronics has only become capable
recently due to the overall complexity of each component.
Using semiconductor inks to create circuit boards and
similar material to manufacture LEDs opens the possibility
of developing semiconductors through this technology [8].
The two biggest problems that stand in the way of this
route are the risk of contamination and hardware failure due
to the relative fragility of semiconducting surfaces and their
inability to be joined together through conventional 3Dprinting tools, and the extremely small scale upon which the
photolithographic etching and ion doping take place at. To
combat the former issue, a research team at the University of
Chicago under Professor Dimitri Talapin was able to
synthesize a sort of glue made from compounds of
cadmium, lead, and bismuth that, when applied between two
semiconductors, morphs its composition to match each
bonded part. In addition, special molecules were designed to
reduce the risk of contamination through this procedure [9].

As once can infer from the above figure,

photolithography results in (and this is not stated on TIs
website) in significant amounts of raw material being
wasted. To make matters worse, if a compound like Gallium
Arsenide is used in place of Silicon (which it often is), its
leftovers are essentially variants of deadly arsenic poison.
An article by NBC showed how the legacy of old Silicon
Valley has been tainted by the discovery of toxic vapor
plumes springing up near schools, elderly care facilities, and
homes in the area. These occurred over time due to the
dumping of toxic metals in nearby landfills that were able to
seep into the soil and groundwater [4]. A 1981 study
conducted in San Jose, California found high levels of toxins
like Freon and Trichloroethane in samples of drinking water
near living communities in close proximity to wafer
factories. In all of these cases, the harmful effect on innocent
lives has been noteworthy. Several lawsuits were filed
against industry giants like IBM and Fairchild
Semiconductors in the late 90s over a hundred cancerrelated deaths in the families of employees due to a

Sooraj Sharma
As for the tackling the issue of working on such a small
scale, the breakthrough of focused electron beam induced
deposition (FEBID) technology in the current decade has
given researchers the capability to do so. It works by
shooting compressed streams of gas and electrons at a
surface, allowing for the creation of nanostructures within 10
nanometers of accuracy. As most modern chips are around
being designed at the less than 22 nm range, FEBID shows
potential use in creating the pathways on each wafer
typically done through photolithography. As for
incorporating this into 3D printing, researchers at the Oak
Ridge National laboratory were able to successfully develop
a an advanced feedback loop software which enables the
printer to build simple structures through assessing its
progress by checking regularly on a computer generated
model [10].
But the possibility of marrying 3D printing with
nanotechnology has attracted the attention of critics who
view that with future advances in technology, patent
impingement and the eventual collapse of the semiconductor
industry will occur due to a non-professionals ability to
build the wafers with a 3D nanoprinter of their own.. John
Blyer, a writer at Chipestimate.com, refutes this claim. He
states that while commercial nanoprinting may see use in
producing low-end electronics, it will not be able to
completely overtake the market as access to the harmful
chemicals used in production is quite difficult, and that
nanoprinting technology has not yet shown the potential to
keep up with the speed at which current production operates
at [11].
I think now that solutions to the problems facing
semiconductor printing have been offered, the possibility of
replacing the current process with 3D printing has grown. I
agree with Blyers thoughts that commercial production of
wafers using 3D printers will be extremely difficult due to
the scale of production and lack of access to materials, but
disagree with his belief that the technology to do so does not
yet exist. It in fact does, and a German company by the
name of Nanoscale Systems has already developed a
working model to prove it.

body of the wafer is placed in the printer under an electron

beam pen. The pen, which has a diameter of only a couple
nanometers, fires a beam of focused electrons and gaseous
molecules that can be used to create structures that at
maximum operating capacity, can be less than 10
nanometers in size. It is essentially a form of FEBID, but
with a more controlled beam alignment mechanism. As the
beam builds from the bottom-up, there is no waste material
that is produced.
The device also calls for ultra-low power consumption
and high energy efficiency, in contrast to the high energy
costs of ventilation required to remove particulate
contaminants from cleanrooms. All of the manufacturing
takes place in the printer, so there is no need to worry about
foreign contaminants entering the system. This would save
billions of dollars on energy costs. Nanoscale goes further to
say that their product can eliminate an estimated 250
conventional steps used in cleanrooms, further lessening any
negative environmental damage [13].
Although Nanoscales device shows great promise for
radically changing the semiconductor industry, process and
R&D engineers argue that 3D nanoprinting still lacks the
efficiency and speed to produce millions of wafers at the
same rate as current methods. Instead, they argue, 3D
nanoprinting would be more useful for designing high-value
chips at a low volume of production for prototyping
purposes. In addition, the nature of 3D printing allows for
much greater creativity in designing nanostructures, due to
the nature of building something from nothing as to using a
predefined mask or mold to reach an end result. The
implication is that 3D nanoprinting could be a springboard
for new hybrid technologies that utilize stamps to depress a
pattern into the substrate instead of removing it outright
[14].
As Nanoscales printer has not yet achieved
commercial success, I cant make an accurate guess as to
how useful it will be to the wafer industry. Promise is one
thing; results another. However, even if it is a prototype,
nano3DsenseTM has demonstrated to me the viability of using
FEBID technology in 3D printing applied to semiconductor
design. I find the fact that its technology can be used to
develop similar methods more favorable to current
manufacturers that may also have a lesser environmental
impact exciting as it shows that even if 3D nanoprinting is
not completely viable option, it is an incredibly useful one.

OUT WITH THE OLD AND IN WITH THE

NEW: HOW 3D PRINTERS WILL ONE DAY
DESIGN COMPUTER CHIPS
According to the CEO of Nanoscale, Dr. Alexander
Kaya, the current top-down subtractive manufacturing
process that dominated the wafer industry in the last fifty
years is now beginning to show its old age. As advancements
in technology are calling for smaller and smaller chip sizes,
current methods like photolithography are becoming less
able to operate on the increasingly smaller scale that is
demanded each year [12].
Nanoscales nano3DsenseTM printer works as follows:
first, the purified substrate, or material of choice for the

WHY 3D NANOPRINTING IS THE BEST

SOLUTION WEVE GOT
The semiconductor industry plays such a useful and
ubiquitous role in our daily lives that its hard to notice any
negative effects it produces. After decades of using similar
subtractive manufacturing procedures, the harmful
environmental impact the industry has created is horrific. In
addition, the energy costs and consumption of keeping

Sooraj Sharma
cleanrooms running is massive and could be better used
elsewhere. Thus, engineers in the field are approaching
alternative additive manufacturing methods to avail these
problems. The most surefire solution is to incorporate 3D
printing technology with available nanostructure technology
to replace photolithography and other subtractive
mechanisms. This would eliminate the waste material
produced by etching and would condense all of the steps
used in cleanrooms into a single one. It would also remove
the necessity for extremely expensive processing facilities.
Its additional positive benefits would be creating a platform
for wafer prototyping due to the ability to create nearly any
kind of design on the substrate and the ability to work on
much smaller scales as conventional techniques are
becoming unable to do so.
As I have a large appreciation of any form of
computing technology due to the role it plays in my life, a
great concern for environmental destruction due to manmade processes, and a desire to eventually produce research
in nanotechnology with my future degree in Chemical
Engineering, 3D nanoprinting seems to me to be the best
possible answer to a burgeoning computing industry that
seeks to do more good than it does harm.

10.30.2016.
https://engineering.dartmouth.edu/~d30345d/courses/engs17
1/ElectronicsIndustry.pdf
[7]
Additive
or
Subtractive
Manufacturing?
Engineeringclicks. 06.30.2016. Accessed 10.30.2016.
https://www.engineeringclicks.com/additive-or-subtractive/
[8] Additive Manufacturing in the Semiconductor
Industry.
SPILasers.
Accessed
10.30.2016.
http://www.spilasers.com/case-study-printing/additivemanufacturing-in-the-semiconductor-industry/
[9] 3-D printing of semiconductors for new technologies.
3D Printing Progress. 03.02.2015. Accessed 10.30.2016.
http://www.3dprintingprogress.com/articles/7475/3-dprinting-of-semiconductors-for-new-technologies
[10] Nanoscale 3D printing, have we cracked it? 3D
Printing Industry. 08.09.2016. Accessed 10.29.2016.
https://3dprintingindustry.com/news/nanoscale-3d-gettingbetter-91676/
[11] Do 3D Printers Challenge Semiconductor IP and
Fabs? ChipEstimate. 05.04.2013. Accessed 10.30.2016.
https://www.chipestimate.com/blogs/IPInsider/?p=1503
[12] Top-Down vs. Bottom-Up. NanoScale Systems
gmbh. Accessed 10.30.16. http://nanoss.de/top-down-vsbottom-up/
[13] nano3DSense: The First 3D Printer with True
Nanometer
Precision.
Accessed
10.30.2016.
http://nanoss.de/nano3dsense-der-erste-3d-drucker-inkonkurrenzloser-nanometer-praezision/
[14] 3D Printing: What Does It Mean for the
Semiconductor Industry? SEMICO Research & Consulting
Group.
07.21.2016.
Accessed
10.30.2016.
http://www.semico.com/content/3d-printing-what-does-itmean-semiconductor-industry

SOURCES
[1]
Additive
or
Subtractive
Manufacturing?
Engineeringclicks.
06.30.16.
Accessed
10.30.2016.
https://www.engineeringclicks.com/additive-or-subtractive/
[2] Semiconductor Manufacturing: How a Chip is Made.
Texas
Instruments.
Accessed
10.31.2016.
http://www.ti.com/corp/docs/manufacturing/howchipmade.s
html
[3] R., Haider, Hussain M., and Ayman I. "Design,
Fabrication, and Testing of Flexible Antennas."
Advancement in Microstrip Antennas with Recent
Applications.
2013.
Accessed
10.30.2016.
http://www.intechopen.com/books/advancement-inmicrostrip-antennas-with-recent-applications/designfabrication-and-testing-of-flexible-antennas
[4] Toxic Plumes: The Dark Side of Silicon Valley. NBC
Bay
Area.
05.12.2014.
Accessed
10.29.2016.
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/investigations/Toxic-PlumesThe-Dark-Side-of-Silicon-Valley-258942561.html
[5] The Environmental Impact of the Manufacturing of
Semiconductors. Openstax CNX. Accessed 10.29.2016.
http://cnx.org/contents/7238FjUe@3/The-EnvironmentalImpact-of-th
[6] Environmental Issues in the Electronics Industry.
Dartmouth University School of Engineering. Accessed

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank a few helpful people on my floor
for offering helpful tips and suggestions to writing my paper,
my sister for evaluating my rough draft and helping clean up
silly grammatical errors, and several bottles of cherry coke
and Butterfinger bars for keeping me up during the witching
hours.