Jun.23,2005  7  US 2005/0136180 Al  then cured at 60° C. for 1 hour, after which they were  allowed to cool to room temperature. The optical constants  were then measured according to the Coating Thickness Test  to obtain a thickness value (Initial Thickness). Next, the  wafer quarters were rinsed for 1 minute with methyl per› fluorobutyl ether after which the optical constants were  measured again to obtain a thickness value (Final Thick› ness). The results are reported in Table 2 (below).  [0097]  Silicon wafers having a 10 centimeter diameter  (p/boron doped, <100> orientation) were cleaned using a  5-minute exposure in a UV/ozone chamber. The UV/ozone  chamber contained an ultraviolet lamp measuring 5 inches  by 5 inches (12.5 cm by 12.5 cm) (obtained under the trade  designation "UV GRID LAMP, model 88-9102-02" from  BHK,  Claremont, Calif.), which was encased in a small  sheet metal box (13 cm wide x 14 cm deep x 15 cm high)  such that the lamp was suspended 8 cm above the bottom of  the box.  A  small lab jack was used to position metal wafer  pieces to be cleaned as close as possible to the ultraviolet  lamp without physically contacting the lamp. The front of  the box was a door, hinged at the top that allowed samples  to be inserted and removed. An oxygen source was attached  to a small hole in one side of the box that provided oxygen  to the box at a rate of approximately 1 to 5 standard liters per  minute. Optical constants were obtained on the cleaned  wafer according to the Coating Thickness Test.  [0098]  The cleaned wafers were then cut into 4 pieces  (quarters) measuring about 50 millimeters along the cut  edges. Three wafer pieces were coated with a 0.1 percent by  weight solution of PFPEl in methyl perfluorobutyl ether  using an automated dip coater that used an immersion  followed by immediate withdrawal at 11 millimeters per  [0101]  Example 7 was repeated with the following modi› fication. A 0.1 N solution of aqueous HNO$_{3 }$ was used as the  acid treatment. Results are reported in Table 3 (below).  [0100]  Example 7 was repeated with the following modi› fications. The withdrawal rate after the silane dip was 15  millimeters/second; the time between the silane dip and the  acid dip treatment was 15 minutes; a 0.1 N solution of  aqueous hydrobromic acid  (HBr)  was used as the acid  treatment; after blowing dry under nitrogen the acid dipped  samples were allowed to cure for 30 minutes at room  temperature prior to rinsing with methyl perfluorobutyl  ether. Results are reported in Table 3.  second (mm/sec). After a period of about 30 to 60 minutes  at room temperature, two of the perfluoropolyether silane› coated wafer pieces were exposed to an acid dip treatment  in an acidic catalyst composition as reported in Table 2.  [0099]  This acid treatment used the same automated dip  coater as above and a withdrawal rate of 11 millimeters/  second. Any excess acid solution was blown dry under a  nitrogen stream. The two acid-treated pieces and the third  fluorinated silane-coated (but not acid-treated) piece were  [0102]  Example 7 was repeated with the following modi› fications. The withdrawal rate in the silane dip-coating step  was 5, 11, or 20 millimeters/second. For Comparative  Examples L-N, no acid dip was used. Results are reported in  Table 4 (below).  Examples 10-12 and Comparative Examples  L-N  Example 9  Example 7 and Comparative Examples J-K  Example 8  TABLE  2  TABLE  3  Initial  Final  Catalyst  pH of Catalyst  Thickness,  Thickness,  Example Composition  Acid Type  Composition  nanometers  nanometers  8  9  0.1  N  aqueous  strong  8.2  7.6  HBr  0.1  N  aqueous  strong  3.8  3.7  HN0$_{3 }$ Example  Example 7  Initial  Final  Catalyst  pH of Catalyst  Thickness,  Thickness,  Composition  Acid Type  Composition  nanometers  nanometers  0.1  N  aqueous  strong  5.4  5.6  HCl,  Comparative 5 percent by  weak  NM  4.9  2.5  Example  J  weight aqueous  acetic acid  Comparative none  NA  NA  7.2  2.2  Example  K 