NIST-SS24-CHIPS-0026_SourcesSought_ecolumn_v06.docx

NIST-SS24-CHIPS-0026

6640 / 334516 – PSC/NAICS (AMD)

Primary POC: Brandon Butler (Brandon.Butler@nist.gov) Secondary POC: Tracy Retterer (Tracy.Retterer@nist.gov)

Title: Scanning Electron Microscope for X-ray Tomography

BACKGROUND

NIST is seeking information from sources that may be capable of providing a solution that meets or exceeds the following draft minimum specifications and evaluation criteria. The required item is a scanning electron microscope (SEM), which will be used as part of a novel x-ray tomography instrument. In this tomography instrument, the SEM column will be focused onto a metal target, which will create a nanoscale x-ray generation volume used as the source for x-ray tomography. The size, flux, and positional stability of this x-ray spot directly influence instrument performance, and thus set the evaluation criteria for SEM performance. The high vacuum (HV) chamber shall have the necessary ports and chamber volume to permit NIST-owned x-ray detectors to mate to the chamber and custom NIST-owned sample stage components inside the HV chamber. It is desirable for a vendor to work alongside NIST to customize chamber flanges and other system parameters to ensure compatibility with NIST-owned equipment. High cleanliness of the system is also required, and the system shall include a solution for system cleaning or be compatible with 3rd party cleaning solutions. A solution providing only an electron column, rather than a full SEM system, will also be considered, provided the column meets the required specifications and evaluation criteria.

1. Overall System Requirements

1.1. Vacuum requirement

1.1.1. The SEM or electron column shall be high vacuum (HV) compatible.

1.2. Column orientation

1.2.1. The envisioned instrument geometry favors a horizontal, rather than a vertical, electron column. Vertical electron columns or SEM systems with a vertical column will be considered, but a horizontal column is preferred.

1.3. Cleanliness, i.e., lack of carbonacoues contamination depostion

1.3.1. Technical evaluation factor: Plasma cleaner compatibility. The vendor shall state in the offer if the system includes a low-energy plasma cleaner or other chamber and sample cleaning solution in the base configuration, or if such a plasma cleaner or cleaning solution is offered as an option, or if the system is compatible with the addition of such a cleaning solution from a 3rd party vendor without modification. The vendor shall state what limitations may apply to repeated cleanings, if any. Plasma cleaning-related susceptibility to performance degradation of detectors, lubricants, and insulators in the electron optical column and the sample chamber.

1.3.2. Technical evaluation factor: System cleanliness. The system should be clean, so that when a sample is exposed to the electron beam under vacuum the amount of carbonaceous contamination left on the sample is reduced to non-detecable level based on the evaluation process below.

1.3.3. Evaluation method for cleanliness: Potential vendors will be provided with a pre-cleaned sample, a Si chip with amorphous Si patterns from NIST, which shall be exposed to the electron beam continuously for 1 hour with an electron beam landing energy of 30 keV, approximately 10 nA electron beam current, measured by a Farady cup, and a 20 mm working distance (WD). The exposure shall consist of rastering the electron beam over a rectangular field of view approximately 1 micrometer horizontal fieldwidth (HFW) and approximately 750 nm high with an individual raster frame time of approximately 30 seconds, and at least 512 pixels in the HFW. Electron images of the exposed region shall be acquired using the Everhart-Thornley detector before and after the 1 hour exposure, with an electron beam landing energy of 3 keV, a beam current of ~10 nA, a WD of 20 mm, a HFW or no less than 3 micrometers and no more than 6 micrometers, an aspect ratio of ~4:3, and no less than 512 pixels across the HFW. The exact imaging conditions used in these exposures shall be stated and the image(s) sent to NIST. 2 micrometer HFW images shall also be acquired at the end of this test. The technical evaluation panel will determine the overall system cleanliness based on the surface contamination from these images. The pre-cleaned sample shall also be sent back to NIST, and further imaging will be performed at NIST by the technical evaluation panel to evaluate surface contamination.

1.4. Compatibility with custom components

1.4.1. Technical evaluation factor: x-ray detector compatibility. The vendor shall state in the offer the location, size, and center take off angle from 20 mm WD of all ports on the HV chamber. The chamber shall be compatible with standard commercial EDS systems and NIST-owned x-ray detectors.

1.4.2. Evaluation method for x-ray detector compatibility: HV port sizes and locations will be compared, and the technical evaluation team will determine which configuration allows for the highest solid angle of collection for NIST-owned detectors. NIST x-ray detectors are not required to share vacuum with the HV chamber.

1.4.3. The system shall allow for the use of a custom-designed stage and sample holder, with room in the chamber to hold a stage of size 175 mm radius and 300 mm height without colliding with other components in the HV chamber.

2. Electron Column Characteristics

2.1. Minimum and maximum accelerating voltage requirements

2.1.1. Minimum: 3 kV

2.1.1.1. A lower minimum voltage than 3 kV is acceptable, but the minimum achievable accelerating voltage shall be no higher than 3 kV

2.1.2. Maximum: 30 kV or higher.

2.1.2.1. A column capable of accelerating voltages higher than 30 kV is welcome, but when the column is set to its highest accelerating voltage, that voltage shall be at least 30 kV.

2.2. Spot size, beam current, positional stability, and focus stability

2.2.1. Technical evaluation factor: Electron column performance. The desired application requires maximizing the achievable beam current in a given spot size, with good stability of the focus, electron beam spot size, and the beam position over time. To evaluate the performance of different electron beam systems, the following evaluation approach is proposed.

2.2.2. Evaluation method for electron colum performance: Vendors will be supplied with a sample of known feature size and shape. It is recommended to secure this sample to the vacuum chamber, rather than mounting on a sample manipulation stage, to decouple the positional stability of the electron beam from positional stability of the stage. The sample shall be imaged at two beam current conditions: (1) approximately 20 nA, and (2) approximately 100 nA. Both conditions shall be at 30 keV and a working distance of 20 mm and FOV of 20 micrometers HFW with at least 1024 pixels across that HFW. Electron images will be acquired using the Everhart-Thornley detector from a pre-specified region, and they shall be taken every 5 minutes over an hour time frame (12 images forming a time-lapse for each beam current condition), and .tif files of each image shall be sent to NIST for further analysis. The SEM operator shall not re-center the images, re-focus the microscope, or change Z position of the sample during the hour when the 12 images are being acquired. The image sharpness and location of imaged features over time will be quantified by the technical evaluation panel and used as a proxy for evaluating the beam size and stability of the electron source at the two beam currents. If there are more than 1 secondary and 1 backscattered electron detectors, provide the same images acquired with all electron detectors.

2.2.3. Evaluation approach for electron column performance: Simulations of the beam current distribution at 10, 20, and 30 keV and 15, 30, and 50 nA of beam current shall be provided to estimate the relationship between current distribution and operating parameters. The results of these simulations do not need to be verified experimentally.

2.2.4. Technical evaluation factor: Beam positional repeatability. The desired application also requires the ability to repeatedly move the electron beam to a desired location, at 0 FOV. To assess the accuracy and repeatability of electron beam motion, the following evaluation criteria is proposed.

2.2.5. Evaluation method for beam positional repeatability: Vendors will be supplied with a NIST sample containing a nanoscale metal feature. The SEM shall be operated at 30 keV, approximately 20 nA, and a 20 mm working distance. The electron beam shall be directed and held at the center of the metal feature for 30 seconds, while collecting EDS data of the fluorescence from the metal feature. After 30 seconds, the beam should be directed off of the metal feature and held away from the feature for 10 seconds such that no part of the beam is incident on the metal feature. The beam shall then be directed back to the center of the feature, and the on/off 30/10 second process shall be repeated a total of 50 times. EDS data shall be collected during the measurement and provided to NIST, and will be used to assess that the positional repeatability and stability of the electron beam.

2.2.6. The ability to blank the electron beam must be provided.

2.2.7. Secondary electron and backscattered electron detectors are required. In-column detectors are preferred, but not required.

2.2.8. The ability to measure the electron beam current is required.

3. Operation and Software

3.1. External control of electron column parameters and beam position is required. This should include but is not limited to control of the beam position, focus, beam blanking, and current measurements.

3.1.1. Technical evaluation factor: External control via python is preferable, but not required.

3.2. The system shall include a PC for operation of any instrument software.

4. Documentation and Delivery

4.1. Full technical documentation and user manuals in English must be included as pdf files and in printed format.

4.2. CAD files of all items delivered shall be provided.

4.3. The vendor agrees to assist with the delivery and setup of the instrument at NIST Boulder.

4.4. Delivery shall be completed no more than 10 months after receipt of order.

4.4.1. Delivery will be to:

DOC/NIST/PML

Daniel Swetz 325 Broadway St

MS: 687.12

Boulder CO 80305

5. Acceptance Testing

5.1. The selected vendor will allow a NIST representative to visit the vendor site in-person for acceptance testing prior to instrument shipping to NIST. Acceptance testing will be a repeat of the evaluation approach testing detailed in this document. Acceptance testing will then be repeated at NIST Boulder after shipping and startup of the instrument.

HOW TO RESPOND TO THIS NOTICE

In responding to this notice, please DO NOT PROVIDE PROPRIETARY INFORRMATION. Please include only the following information, readable in either Microsoft Word 365, Microsoft Excel 365, or .pdf format, in the response: Submit the response by email to the Primary Point of Contact and, if specified, to the Secondary Point of Contact specialist listed at the top of this notice as soon as possible, and preferably before the closing date and time of this notice.

· Provide the complete name of your company, address, name of contact for follow-up questions, their email, their phone number and, if your company has an active registration in https://sam.gov, your company’s Unique Entity ID (UEI).

· Identify laboratory equipment that your company sells that is of the nature addressed in the BACKGROUND section of this notice. Include brand name, make, model, and/or other distinguishing information.

· State if your company is the manufacturer of the identified equipment or is a retailer or wholesaler that normally sells the identified equipment. If the latter, indicate whether the manufacturer authorized in writing for your company to sell the identified equipment on behalf of the manufacturer.

· Describe performance capabilities and relevant or beneficial physical and functional features for any equipment you identified to satisfy the NIST-identified minimum specifications described in this notice.

· Identify any aspects of the NIST market research notice, including instructions, and draft minimum specifications in the BACKGROUND section above that could be viewed as unduly restrictive or contain unnecessary barriers that adversely affect your ability to fully participate and indicate why. In such a scenario, please offer suggestions for how the market research notice and draft minimum specifications could be made more inclusive and competitive.

· Discuss whether the equipment that your company sells and which you describe in your response to this notice may be customized to specifications and indicate any limits to customization.

· For the NAICS code listed in this notice:

· Indicate whether your company is (a) a small business or (b) other than small business. See the Table of Small Business Size Standards and the associated .pdf download file for small business size standards and additional information.

· If you believe the NAICS code listed in this notice is not the best NAICS code for the type of product addressed in this notice, identify an alternative NAICS code that you believe would be more appropriate for the planned procurement.

· Describe services that are available with the purchase of the aforementioned equipment from your company such as installation, training, and equipment maintenance.

· Describe standard terms and conditions of sale offered by your company for the aforementioned equipment such as: delivery time after your company accepts the order; FOB shipping terms: manufacturer warranty (including details regarding nature and duration); if available, description(s) of available extended warranty; equipment setup and test; operator and service instruction manual(s); cleanup after installation; and if applicable, other offered services. Provide a copy of manufacturer standard terms and conditions that typically relate to the sale of the specified equipment, if available.

· State whether your company offers facility renovation services related to installation of the aforementioned equipment at its delivery destination, if required per the NIST-identified minimum specifications, and provide description of services. Indicate if your company performs the facility renovation services or typically subcontracts the work to another company. Indicate if your company would be interested inspecting the intended installation site during the market research phase.

· State published price, discount or rebate arrangements for aforementioned equipment and/or provide link to access company’s published prices for equipment and services.

· State whether the aforementioned equipment is manufactured in the United States and, if not, state the name of the country where the equipment is manufactured.

· Identify any plans/possibilities for changes in manufacturing location of the aforementioned equipment and provide relevant details.

· If the aforementioned equipment and related services are available for purchase on any existing Federal Supply Schedule contract(s) or other contracts against which NIST may be able place orders, identify the contract number(s) and other relevant information.

· Identify any customers in the public or private sectors in which you provided the aforementioned or similar equipment. Include customer(s) information: company name, phone number, point of contact, email address.

· Provide any other information that you believe would be valuable for NIST to know as part of its market research for this requirement.

· State if you require NIST to provide additional information to improve your understanding of the government’s requirement and/or would like to meet with NIST representatives to discuss the requirement and the capabilities of the identified equipment.

QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS NOTICE

Questions regarding this notice may be submitted via email to the Primary Point of Contact and the Secondary Point of Contact listed in this notice. Questions should be submitted so that they are received by 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time on March 18, 2024. Questions will be anonymized and answered via sources sought notice amendment following the question submission deadline.

IMPORTANT NOTES

The information received in response to this notice will be reviewed and considered so that NIST may appropriately solicit for its requirements in the near future.

This notice should not be construed as a commitment by NIST to issue a solicitation or ultimately award a contract.

Responses will not be considered as proposals or quotations.

No award will be made as a result of this notice.

NIST is not responsible for any costs incurred by the respondents to this notice.

NIST reserves the right to use information provided by respondents for any purpose deemed necessary and appropriate.

Thank you for taking the time to submit a response to this request!