Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- mcmaster:start [2020/04/12 01:26] – [Commissioning] mcmaster
+++ mcmaster:start [2023/02/16 10:17] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1
@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 All of my images are released under CC BY unless otherwise noted.
+Enjoy this work? Consider [[https://www.patreon.com/mtvre|supporting me on Patreon!]]
 [[mcmaster:wafer|Wafers]]
 Images:
-{{topic>collection_jm}}
 {{topic>collection_mcmaster}}
@@ Line 36: / Line 37: @@
 I got a lot of requests to image stuff, so here's my official policy.
-TLDR: for a typical chip, I suggest $25-200 donation to get it decapped and imaged for public use
+TLDR: for a typical chip, I suggest $25-200 donation to get it decapped and imaged for public use. Delayering is extra
-  * [[https://twitter.com/johndmcmaster|DM me on Twitter]]
+  * e-mail me (hobby/public): JohnDMcMaster @@@ gmail.com
-  * e-mail me (hobby): JohnDMcMaster @@@ gmail.com
   * e-mail me (consulting): john @@@ mcmaster.tech Note consulting rates are not the same as hobby rates
+  * [[https://twitter.com/johndmcmaster|DM me on Twitter]]
 Please provide the following information for each chip:
@@ Line 46: / Line 47: @@
     * Decapping involves harsh chemicals, direct expenses, high NRE, and time so contributions are greatly appreciated
   * Any potential legal issues associated with the chip?
-    * Ex: DRM, crypto
+    * If so, it will be evaluated on a case by case basis
+    * Ex: DRM, crypto can be problematic
     * Ex: a typical sound chip or microcontroller is not an issue
+    * I will not work on: satellite, cable TV
   * Clearly identify the chips, especially if you are sending more than one
     * Ex: specify "344S0061-A" instead of"SWIM", since that's what's printed on it
@@ Line 70: / Line 73: @@
 In general I want to focus on R&D / labwork and not hand digitization.  I do have some limited semi-automatic digitization capabilities for planarized chips though that I'd like to develop (ex: works on PS1 chipset).
-Most of this is targeted towards small chips up to the mid 90's.  If the die is obnoxiously large (ex: 486 CPU) it will be difficult for me to photograph and stitch the entire thing.  Similarly most of my equipment is targeted towards larger processes (say 180+nm), although I do have a small SEM if required. See [[https://siliconpr0n.org/map/xilinx/xc2c32a/lap4-04_mit20x/|XC2C32A]] for an example 180 nm chip taken with a relatively low power objective, noting in theory I can get about 11x the detail (NA 0.42 => 1.4).
+Most of this is targeted towards small chips up to the mid 90's.  If the die is obnoxiously large (ex: 486 CPU) it will be difficult for me to photograph and stitch the entire thing.  Similarly most of my equipment is targeted towards larger processes (say 180+nm), although I do have a small SEM if required. See [[https://siliconpr0n.org/map/xilinx/xc2c32a/mcmaster_lap4-04_mit20x/|XC2C32A]] for an example 180 nm chip taken with a relatively low power objective, noting in theory I can get about 11x the detail (NA 0.42 => 1.4).
 Other: most of the work is in decapping, not actual imaging. If you happen to already have a bare, clean die and would be satisfied with a quick / lower quality scan, feel free to send me a few dies. This also can work out well since most of the NRE cost is in the microscope, not the decapping supplies.
+Chips are non-returnable. If you need something back, please make an explicit agreement before sending.
+====== Scales ======
+mit20x vs mit20x2:
+  * mit20x: BH2 microscope, MU800 camera, 0.5x relay lens, Mitutoyo M Plan Apo lens
+  * mit20x2: BH2 microscope, USB3 camera, 0.75x relay lens?, Mitutoyo M Plan Apo lens
+    * Select medium resolution 2736 x 1824
+    * 20x
+      * 0.42 @ 800 nm => 952 nm R objective resolution
+      * 0.42 @ 532 nm => 633 nm G objective resolution
+      * 0.42 @ 400 nm => 476 nm B objective resolution
+      * About 820 um wide field of view
+      * 820 / 2736 = 300 nm / pix raw
+        * Cut image by half to sample RGB correctly => 600 nm / pix
+      * 820 / 2736 / 0.5 = 599 nm / pix ultimate image resolution
+    * vc60x => 1.4 NA
+      * 1.4 @ 400 nm => 143 nm objective resolution
+      * About 820 / (60/20) => 273 um FOV
+      * 273 um / 2736 pix / 0.5 pix/pix => 200 nm / pix ultimate image resolution
+    * Conclusion: possibly losing slight resolution in blue, but probably good enough
+TODO: link github calibration files
+^ Scope      ^ Objective  ^ NA  ^ Resolving power (nm)  ^ Camera  ^ nm / pix  ^ Notes               ^
+| pr0nscope  | mit2x      |     | 5000                  | MU800   | 3550      |                     |
+| pr0nscope  | mit5x      |     | 2000                  | MU800   | 1420      |                     |
+| pr0nscope  | mit10x     |     | 1000                  | MU800   | 710       |                     |
+| pr0nscope  | mit20x     |     | 700                   | MU800   | 355       |                     |
+|            | mit20x2    |     |                       | 20MP    |           | New camera setup    |
+| pr0nscope  | ns50xu     |     |                       | MU800   | 142?      |                     |
+| pr0nscope  | nd50x      |     |                       | MU800   | 142?      |                     |
+| pr0nscope  | mit50xn    |     | 700                   | MU800   | 142       |                     |
+| pr0nscope  | mit100x    |     | 400                   | MU800   | 71        | FIXME: correct NA?  |
+====== Die archive ======
+Chips that were decapped for imaging, but stalled out for one reason or another
+Includes
+  * Konami 054539
+    * Embargoed image data to be released 2022-12-13
+  * Konami 053246
+  * Konami 053247
 ====== References ======