4.4 Article

Impact of Microstructure Evolution on the Long-Term Reliability of Wafer-Level Chip-Scale Package Sn-Ag-Cu Solder Interconnects

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TCPMT.2020.3016870

关键词

Pb-free solder; polarized image; thermal fatigue; wafer-level chip-scale package (WLCSP)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The interaction between the continuous microstructure evolution during thermal cycling and the long-term reliability of wafer-level chip-scale packages (WLCSPs) with Sn-1.0Ag-0.5Cu (wt%) (SAC105), Sn-3.0Ag-0.5Cu (wt%) (SAC305), and Sn-3.9Ag-0.6Cu (wt%) (SAC396) solder ball interconnects were investigated. Three different body-sized WLCSP with three different solder alloys on three different board thickness were thermally cycled from 0 degrees C to 100 degrees C with 10 min of dwell time, and the microstructure evolution and their impact to the life cycle numbers were identified. Based on both experimental and calculated data, higher Ag contained solder alloys perform better in thermal cycling. However, the comparison between the calculated life cycle and the experimental results revealed mismatch, which is due to the localized recrystallization areal fraction differences. Smaller die WLCSP with 4 x 4 mm(2) and 3.2 x 3.2 mm(2) exhibited a large difference in expected life cycle numbers. The calculated life cycles expected a lower cycle number with thicker boards for both SAC105 and SAC396 WLCSPs, but the experimental data revealed an increase with SAC105 and a similar level of life cycle time with SAC396, for thicker boards. A widely distributed areal fraction of damage accumulation through the solder rows were observed in SAC105 compared with higher Ag solder alloy joints, which show localized damage accumulation at corner joints. The difference of areal recrystallization distribution explains the difference between SAC105 and SAC305/396 thermal cycling behavior between the calculated and experimental thermal cycling results.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据