The coupling effects of thermal cycling and high current density on Sn58Bi solder joints
Source abstract
Abstract
Currently, one of the serious challenges in microelectronic devices is the miniaturization trend of packaging. As the decrease of joint dimension, electromigration (EM) and thermomechanical fatigue become critical issues for fine pitch packaging. The independent mechanisms of EM and thermomechanical fatigue are widely investigated and understood. However, the coupling effect of both conditions needs further exploration. The current study established the correlation between resistance and microstructure evolution of solder joint under the combination effect of thermal cycling and high current density and illustrated the different contributions of these two factors to the reliability of the joint through the comparison monopoly tests. The results revealed that cracks had more impact on resistance increase than phase segregation. The resistance evolution could be divided into three stages. First, the resistance mitigated due to the phase coarsening. Second, Joule heating effect made the resistance increase slowly. Third, EM led to the resistance increase rapidly. The high current density can help to improve the reliability of the solder joint under the coupling effect of thermal cycling and EM at the initial stage, but harmful to the consequence process.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Electronic Packaging and Soldering Technologies · 3D IC and TSV technologies · Advanced Welding Techniques Analysis
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (20)
Show source-provided references
1. Plumbridge WJ (1996) J Mater Sci 31(10):2501. doi: 10.1007/BF0068727510.1007/BF00687275 ↗
2. Lee JG, Subramanian KN (2003) J Electron Mater 32(6):52310.1007/s11664-003-0137-8 ↗
3. Liu J, Salmela O, Sarkka J, Morris JE, Tegehall PE, Andersson C (2011) Reliability of microtechnology: interconnects, devices and systems. Springer, New York10.1007/978-1-4419-5760-3 ↗
4. Miao HW, Duh JG, Chiou BS (2000) J Mater Sci 11(8):609. doi: 10.1023/A:1008928729212
5. Pang HLJ, Tan KH, Shi XQ, Wang ZP (2001) Mater Sci Eng A Struct 307(1–2):4210.1016/S0921-5093(00)01958-4 ↗
6. Pang JHL, Low TH, Xiong BS, Luhua X, Neo CC (2004) Thin Solid Films 462:37010.1016/j.tsf.2004.05.092 ↗
7. Chen C, Tong HM, Tu KN (2010) Annu Rev Mater Res 40(1):53110.1146/annurev.matsci.38.060407.130253 ↗
8. Ma LM, Xu GC, Sun J, Guo F, Wang XT (2011) J Mater Sci 46(14):4896. doi: 10.1007/s10853-011-5401-310.1007/s10853-011-5401-3 ↗
9. Lee A, Liu W, Ho CE, Subramanian KN (2007) J Appl Phys 102(5):05350710.1063/1.2777122 ↗
10. Ho CE, Lee A, Subramanian KN, Liu W (2007) Appl Phys Lett 91(2):02190610.1063/1.2756292 ↗
11. Chen C, Liang SW (2007) J Mater Sci 18(1–3):259. doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-48433-4_17
12. Ma LM, Guo F, Xu GC, Wang XT, He HW, Zhao HY (2012) J Electron Mater 41(2):42510.1007/s11664-011-1837-0 ↗
13. Zhou W, Liu L, Li B, Wu P (2010) Thin Solid Films 518(20):587510.1016/j.tsf.2010.05.090 ↗
14. He HW, Xu GC, Guo F (2010) J Mater Sci 45(4):929. doi: 10.1007/s10853-009-4022-610.1007/s10853-009-4022-6 ↗
15. Liu HY, Zhu QS, Wang ZG, Shang JK (2011) Mater Sci Eng Struct 528(3):146710.1016/j.msea.2010.10.100 ↗
16. Choi WJ, Yeh ECC, Tu KN (2003) J Appl Phys 94(9):566510.1063/1.1616993 ↗
17. Cook B, Anderson I, Harringa J, Kang S (2003) J Electron Mater 32(12):138410.1007/s11664-003-0105-3 ↗
18. Sun J, Xu GC, Guo F (2011) J Mater Sci 46(10):3544. doi: 10.1007/s10853-011-5265-610.1007/s10853-011-5265-6 ↗
19. He HW, Xu GC, Guo F (2010) J Mater Sci 45(2):334. doi: 10.1007/s10853-009-3939-010.1007/s10853-009-3939-0 ↗
20. Agarwal R, Ou SE, Tu KN (2006) J Appl Phys 100(2):02490910.1063/1.2216487 ↗