EFEM Robot Auto-Teaching for Position Shift Recalibration

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Re-programming EFEM robots after positional changes due to maintenance or crashes is time-consuming and prone to human error, leading to potential substrate damage.

Innovation Solution

An automatic teaching element determines positional parameters to generate new movement commands for EFEM robots, adjusting paths to account for changes without manual intervention, thereby reducing time and risk of substrate damage.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If manual re-programming is performed after EFEM robot positional changes, then the robot can be re-calibrated to new positions, but the process is time-consuming and prone to human error

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprogramming accuracyVSAvoidre-programming time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs self-calibration by automatically detecting positional changes through sensors and generating updated movement commands without human intervention. The EFEM robot system monitors its own position deviations and self-corrects the movement paths, eliminating the need for manual re-programming while ensuring accurate recalibration.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces manual mechanical re-programming operations with an automated sensing and computing system. Sensors detect positional changes, a processor calculates the deviations, and the system automatically generates corrected movement commands, substituting human operators with an automated control system that is both faster and more reliable.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

2Reliability

If manual re-programming is performed after EFEM robot positional changes, then the robot can be re-calibrated, but human error may cause substrate damage

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesubstrate safetyVSAvoidre-programming complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The system protects substrates by performing self-calibration that eliminates human error risks. The automated system detects positional changes, calculates corrections, and updates movement commands without human intervention, ensuring substrate safety while simplifying the re-programming process from a complex manual task to an automated self-service function.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces an automated control system as an intermediary between positional changes and robot operation. This intermediary system processes sensor data, calculates positional deviations, and generates corrected movement commands, acting as a protective layer that prevents substrate damage by eliminating direct human intervention in the critical re-programming process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Productivity

If automated re-programming is implemented, then time and human error are reduced, but system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvere-programming efficiencyVSAvoidautomation system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces complex manual re-programming procedures with an automated sensing and control system. While this introduces automated components, it eliminates the need for skilled operators and manual procedures, trading mechanical/human complexity for automated system complexity that is more consistent and reliable.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements feedback by continuously monitoring EFEM robot position through sensors, comparing detected positions with expected positions, and automatically generating corrective movement commands. This closed-loop feedback mechanism automates the re-programming process, improving productivity while managing complexity through systematic error detection and correction.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS12412760B2EFEM robot auto teaching methodology
Publication Date: 2025.09.09 TAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING CO LTD
  • US12412760B2 patent drawing
  • US12412760B2 patent drawing
  • US12412760B2 patent drawing

AI summary

The present disclosure relates to a method of programming an EFEM. The method includes placing an automatic teaching element within an EFEM chamber at a first time. The automatic teaching element is operated at a second time to measure one or more parameters corresponding to an initial position of an EFEM robot within the EFEM chamber. The automatic teaching element is removed from the EFEM chamber at a third time and then placed within the EFEM chamber at a fourth time. The automatic teaching element is operated at a fifth time to determine positional parameters describing a difference between the initial position and a new position of the EFEM robot. A second plurality of steps are determined based upon the positional parameters. The EFEM robot is configured to move along the second plurality of steps that extend along a path between first and second positions.