Taiwan Semiconductor

Manufacturing
Company
Team B
Megan OBrien, Lin Yue, Yijiang Xu, Jie Zhao, Ashay
Bandivadekar

Is the emergency order and increase

production volume good for the
company or bad?

Neither emergency order nor increasing production volume is bad for the companyincrease utilization and digest the excess capacity.
In this part, it means reduce cost.
But some tool that involved in N65 node process, referred as CuECP, has already served
with 100% Utilization
If adding emergency order and increasing production simultaneously, the company will
surpass the capacity of certain tool. Thus, other production plan will be affected.

The original tool utilization of N65 and N90 within 30 days

Adding
Emergency
Number
of
repeats
of
N65
changed
from
6
to
The
utilization
of
equipment
function
CuECP
reached

Order
6.36
104%

Increasing
Production
Demand
loading
of
N65
changed
from
33,000
to
34,7000
The
utilization
of
equipment
function
CuECP
reached
103%

Adding
The
The
The

Emergency
utilization
of
utilization
of
utilization
of

Order
equipment
equipment
equipment

and
function
function
function

Increasing
CuECP
reached
CuCMP
reached
Coating
reached

Production
108%
101%
101%

What are the key scheduling assumptions that have been made? As you
look at the job shop organization of Fab 12, can you outline some of the
simplifying assumptions or heuristics that are used to manage the
complexity? What do the managers of Fab 12 optimize?

Key Assumptions
No other customers will require additional product
In order to calculate tool utilization a few assumptions were
made
Each tool operates at 90% efficiency (slack for exchanges)
Tools available 95% of the time (tool maintenance)
98% yield

Simplifying assumptions to manage complexity

They coupled steps into blocks - layer

Managers optimize
Utilization time

Look at the BEOL box in Exhibit 4 for the N65 and N90 process flows, and the
corresponding process times shown in Exhibit 5. What are the implications of a different
number of repeats for the Via Layer/ Inter-Metal Layer?
N6
5

N9
0

Look at the BEOL box in Exhibit 4 for the N65 and N90
process flows, and the corresponding process times
shown in Exhibit 5. What are the implications of a
different number of repeats for the Via Layer/ Inter-Metal
Layer?
The demand for one unit will directly affect capacity to
handle producing the other unit.
N65 demand will have a greater influence since it ties
up the shared equipment for a greater amount of time.
Proces
sing
Time
by
Layer

N65

N90

Via

5.8
minutes
/ 4.2
minutes

5.9
minutes/
3.8
minutes

InterMetal

18.9
minutes
/ 15.9

17.6
minutes/
15.5

Total time/ on shared

equipment

Are there advantages as well as adverse

implications of the two process flow
sharing a majority of their equipment?
Advantages

Less equipment needed; less capital required for production

equipment.

Disadvantages

Splitting orders into smaller batches to fill square capacity of

equipment will lead to increased overhead.
More use of the equipment will lead to faster depreciation.
The N65 process requires more time on the shared equipment.
120.6 minutes (N65) vs 96.5 (N90).
Because N65 requires more time, less N90 cycles can take
place.
The demand for one process will directly impact the capacity
available for the other process.

Exhibit 6 shows the tool utilization based on demand loading, using the process
times from Exhibit 5. If you wanted to add capacity to either N90 or N65, what
you think is the least expensive way to do it? Use the Excel spreadsheet model
that is provided to experiment with changing tool quantities or with changing the
demand loading (green and magenta highlighted box respectively).

Changing the demand loading

As long as the
profit from
When changing the demand by 1000 units for N65
1000 N90
Cu ECP unit utilization dropped 100% 98% Short-term solution
units is less
When changing the demand by 1000 units for N90
than the cost
for 1 new Cu
Cu ECP unit and Photo-248 unit utilization dropped 100%98%
ECP unit and 1
Long-term solutionnew PhotoChanging the tool quantities
248 unit, this
When adding 1 new Cu ECP unit
would be the
Utilization dropped 100% 91%
cheapest fix.
When adding 1 new Photo-248 unit
Although, 2
new units has
Utilization dropped 100% 91%
much more of
an impact.

Does this suggest that certain types of emergency orders

are easier to accommodate than others? Do you think
some types of emergency orders will be more costly to
fulfill?
Adjusting the number of repeats

Greatest
effect size for
Having 1 less repeat for N65
changing
Cu ECP utilization dropped 100% 89%
number of
Having 1 less repeat for N90
Cu ECP and Photo-248 utilization dropped 100% 94% and 80% repeats this
emergency
Buying new equipment
would be the
When adding 1 new Cu ECP unit
most difficult
Utilization dropped 100% 91%
to
When adding 1 new Photo-248 unit
accommodate.
Utilization dropped 100% 91%
Demand
loading
Changing the demand loading
emergency
When changing the demand by 1000 units for N65
changing has
Cu ECP unit utilization dropped 100% 98%
the lowest
When changing the demand by 1000 units for N90
Cu ECP unit and Photo-248 unit utilization dropped 100%98% effect size,
would be the
easiest to

What should LC try to optimize as

he accommodates the emergency
order?
Demand loading adjustments had
SMALLEST impact on utilization
rate.
Focus on Capacity
Pull-forward

Effect of bringing in 1 new Cu ECP unit

and 1 new Photo-248 drops utilization
from 100%91%
Already budgeted for equipment
Already planning to bring it in.

Buy more equipment

Same effect as pull-forward for utilization

rates.
Additional expenditure
Space availability for units? Capacity of
warehouse may be limited.

Effect of capacity exchange: Does not change the

issues with Cu ECP and Photo-248 being at maximum
capacity!

Are there recommendations you might

make to senior management?
Because the equipment purchases were already
planned, to us it makes the most sense to pull forward
those equipment purchases to accommodate the rush
order.