.3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

29
1 Manufacturability and Reliability of 0.3mm Pitch Chip Scale Packages and QFNs December 6, 2011 Greg Caswell

description

Information on CSP and LFCSP reliability

Transcript of .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

Page 1: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

1

Manufacturability and

Reliability of 0.3mm Pitch Chip

Scale Packages and QFNs

December 6, 2011Greg Caswell

Page 2: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

2

Tech Insertion

Design

Supply Chain

Test

Warranty

Focus on Quality/Reliability/Durability of Electronics

All levels

of the supply chain

Page 3: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

33

Reliability and Next Generation Technologies

o One of the most common drivers for failure is inappropriate adoption of new technologieso The path from consumer (high volume, short lifetime) to high rel is

not always clear

o Obtaining relevant information can be difficulto Information is often segmented

o Focus on opportunity, not risks

o Can be especially true for component packagingo Fine pitch CSP (Chip Scale Packages)

Page 4: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

44

Solder Wearout

o Design change: More silicon, less plastic

o Increases mismatch in coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE)

BOARD LEVEL ASSEMBLY AND RELIABILITY

CONSIDERATIONS FOR LNCSP TYPE

PACKAGES, Ahmer Syed and WonJoon Kang,

Amkor Technology.

Page 5: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

55

Solder Wearout (cont.)

o Hotter devices

o Increases change in temperature (∆T)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

0 50 100 150 200

Change in Temperature (oC)

Ch

ara

cte

risti

c L

ife (

Cyc

les t

o F

ail

ure

)

tf = ∆∆∆∆Tn

n = 2 (SnPb)

n = 2.3 (SnNiCu)

n = 2.7 (SnAgCu)

Page 6: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

66

.3 mm CSP: Why Not?

o .3 mm CSP is a ‘next generation’ technology for non-consumer electronic OEMs due to concerns with

o Manufacturability

o Compatibility with other OEM processes

o Reliability

o Acceptance of this package, especially in long-life, severe environment, high-reliability applications, is currently limited as a result

Page 7: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

7

Chip Scale Packages

Wafer Level CSP

Lead Frame Chip Scale Package

Page 8: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

8

o Board Fabricatorso A first step in adapting to .3 mm pitch(12 mil)

o 2 mil traces and spaceso Why? Bond pad will be .15mm

o 2 mil trace is only size that will fit betweeno Most likely use via in pad

o Copper Thicknesso Board fabricators introducing a reduction in copper foil thickness

to work with these smaller componentso Going down to .25 ounce copper – good for lateral etching,

trace width control, uniform trace width.

ISSUE IS REDUCED RELIABILITY DUE TO POTENTIAL FOR TRACE CRACKING

Design and Fab Thoughts?

Page 9: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

99

Fine Pitch CSP Manufacturability: Bond Pads

o Non Solder Mask Defined Pads Preferred (NSMD)o Copper etch process has tighter process control than solder mask processo Makes for more consistent, strong solder joints since solder bonds to both tops and sides of pads

o Use solder mask defined pads (SMD) with careo Can be used to avoid bridging between pads, especially between thermal and signal pads. o Pads can significantly grow in size based on PCB manufacturer capabilities

NSMD

Images courtesy of Screaming Circuits

Page 10: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

10

o Continued reduction in apertures and bond pad dimensions are driving toward Types 5 or 6 shown in the chart to facilitate .3mm pitch components

o While changes in the solder paste is expected – this move toward “nanosolder” - the increasing ratio of surface area to volume in these small particle systems may start to influence coalescence behavior and storage times as well.

Solder Paste

Page 11: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

11

o The actual minimum area ratio tends to change for different solder paste types.

o For standard Type 3, the number tends to be 0.66, while pastes with even smaller powder have minimum area ratios closer to 0.5. Regardless, for a 0.15 mm (6 mil) bond pad, maintaining either of these ratios would require stencil thicknesses of less than 4 mil.

o These stencil requirements can be problematic for larger or non-fine pitch components, which can potentially experience solder starvation or solder bridging or solder balls (if the stencil aperture is widened to introduce more paste on pad).

o All of these challenges are, of course, before attempting to select the type of stencil technology (electroformed or laser cut) or the process parameters (pressure, speed, etc.).

Stencils

Page 12: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

1212

Manufacturability: Stencil Design

Datasheet says solder paste coverage should be 40-80%

Drawing supplied in same datasheet is for 26% coverage

Page 13: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

13

o As usual, reliability is often the last issue to be considered.

o While minimum modeling or testing has been performed, the relatively small volume of solder and the non-uniformity of the interconnect geometry (0.15 mm bond pads on board and 0.075 mm bond pads on package) could create unique scenarios in regards to solder joint response to the application of stresses.

o This is in addition to the increasing introduction of mixed mode (shear and tensile stresses) that are greatly accelerating creep and fatigue damage accumulation.

Reliability

Page 14: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

14

o While the move to 0.3 mm pitch CSPs will be challenging, there is significant opportunity for leveraging the experiences of other portions of the supply chain.

o Examples include wafer-level bumping, which has been stencil printing 0.15mm pitch solder bumps for some time period,

o BGA substrates, which has been using 2 mil width and spacing on advanced packages, and

o 01005s, which have bond pads only 7 mil wide.

Success will be ensured through adopting the information gained from these other processes, being aware of the potential gaps in this knowledge, and implementing industry best practices and physics of failure to understand margins and interconnect robustness.

.3mm CSP Reliability Conclusions

Page 15: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

1515

LFCSP Manufacturability: Bond Pads

o Can lose solder volume and standoff height through vias in thermal padso May need to tent, plug, or cap vias to keep sufficient paste volumeo Reduced standoff height reduces cleanability and pathways for flux outgassing

o Increased potential for contamination related failureso Tenting and plugging vias is often not well controlled and can lead to placement

and chemical entrapment issues o Exercise care with devices placed on opposing side of LFCSPo Can create placement issues if solder “bumps” are created in viaso Can create solder short conditions on the opposing deviceo Capping is a more robust, more expensive process that eliminates these concerns

Images courtesy of Screaming Circuits

Thermal

vias capped

with solder

mask

Page 16: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

1616

Bond Pads

o Extend bond pad 0.2 – 0.3 mm beyond package footprint

o May or may not solder to cut edge

o Allows for better visual inspection

o Need X-ray for best results

o Allows for verification of bridging, adequate solder coverage and void percentage

o Cannot detect head in pillow or fractures

o Note: Lack of good criteria for acceptable voiding of the thermal pad. Depends upon thermal needs.

Page 17: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

1717

Manufacturability: Reflow & Moisture

o LFCSP solder joints are more susceptible to dimensional changes

o Case Study: Military supplier experienced solder separation under LFCSP

o LFCSP supplier admitted that the package was more susceptible to moisture absorption that initially expectedo Resulted in transient swelling during reflow soldering

o Induced vertical lift, causing solder separation

o Was not popcorningo No evidence of cracking or delamination in component package

Page 18: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

1818

Corrective Actions: Manufacturing

• Verify good MSL (moisture sensitivity level) handling and procedure procedures

• Reflow Profile: Specify and confirm

• Room temperature to preheat: maximum 2-3oC/sec

• Preheat to at least 150oC

• Preheat to maximum temperature: maximum 4-5oC/sec

• Cooling: maximum 2-3oC/sec

• In conflict with profile from J-STD-020C which allows up to 6oC/sec

• Make sure assembly is less than 60oC before any cleaning processes

Page 19: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

1919

Manufacturability: LFCSP Joint Inspection

Goal is 2-3 mils of post-reflow solder thickness

Page 20: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

2020

Manufacturability: LFCSP Joint Inspection

Convex or absence of fillet highly likely

•Etching of leadframe can prevent

pad from reaching edge of package

•Edge of bond pad is not plated for

solderability

Page 21: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

2121

Manufacturability: Board Flexure

o Area array devices are known to have board flexure limitations

o In circuit testing (ICT), board depanelization, connector insertion, manual assembly operations, shock and vibration, etc. are common causes.

o For SAC attachment, maximum microstrain can be as low as 500 υε

o Use IPC-JEDEC 9701 and 9704 specifications

o .3mm CSPs and LFCSPs have an even lower level of compliance

o Limited quantifiable knowledge in this area

o Must be conservative during board build

o IPC is working on a specification similar to BGAs

Page 22: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

222222

Pad Cratering

o Drivers

o Finer pitch components

o More brittle laminates

o Stiffer solders (SAC vs. SnPb)

o Presence of a large heat sink

o Difficult to detect using standard procedures

o X-ray, dye-n-pry, ball shear, and ball pull

Intel (2006)

Page 23: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

232323

Solutions to Pad Cratering

o Board Redesigno Solder mask defined vs. non-solder mask defined

o Limitations on board flexureo 750 to 500 microstrain, Component dependent

o More compliant soldero SAC305 is relatively rigid, SAC105 and SNC are possible

alternatives

o New acceptance criteria for laminate materialso Intel-led industry efforto Attempting to characterize laminate material using high-speed

ball pull and shear testing, Results inconclusive to-date

o Alternative approacho Require reporting of fracture toughness and elastic modulus

Page 24: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

2424

Reliability: Thermal Cycling

o Order of magnitude reduction in time to

failure from QFP

o 3X reduction from BGA

o Driven by die / package ratio

o 40% die; tf = 8K cycles (-40 / 125C)

o 75% die; tf = 800 cycles (-40 / 125C)

o Driven by size and I/O#

o 44 I/O; tf = 1500 cycles (-40 / 125C)

o 56 I/O; tf = 1000 cycles (-40 / 125C)

o Very dependent upon solder bond with

thermal pad

BGA: 3,000 to 8,000

LFCSP: 1,000 to 3,000

QFP: >10,000

Page 25: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

2525

Reliability: Bend Cycling

o Low degree of compliance and large footprint can also result in issues during cyclic flexure events

o Example: IR tested a 5 x 6mm LFCSP to JEDEC JESD22-B113

o Very low beta (~1)

o Suggests brittle fracture, possible along the interface

Page 26: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

262626

Electro-Chemical Migration: Details

o Insidious failure mechanism

o Self-healing: leads to large number of no-trouble-found (NTF)

o Can occur at nominal voltages (5 V) and room conditions (25C, 60%RH)

o Due to the presence of contaminants on the surface of the board

o Strongest drivers are halides (chlorides and bromides)

o Weak organic acids (WOAs) and polyglycols can also lead to drops in the surface insulation resistance

o Primarily controlled through controls on cleanliness

o Minimal differentiation between existing Pb-free solders, SAC and SnCu, and SnPb

o Other Pb-free alloys may be more susceptible (e.g., SnZn)

elapsed time 12 sec.

Page 27: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

2727

Reliability: Dendritic Growth / Electrochemical Migration

o Large area, multi-I/O and low standoff can trap flux under the LFCSP

o Processes using no-clean flux should be requalified

o Particular configuration could result in weak organic acid concentrations above maximum (150 – 200 ug/in2)

o Aqueous Cleaning processes will likely experience dendritic growth without modifications like:

o Increase in water temperature

o Additions of saponifiers or solvents

o Changes to number and angle of impingement jets

Page 28: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

28

Cleanliness Controls: Ion Chromatographyo Contamination tends to be controlled through industrial specifications (IPC-

6012, J-STD-001)

o Primarily based on original military specification

o 10 µg/in2 of NaCl ‘equivalent’

o Calculated to result in 2 megaohm surface insulation resistance (SIR)

o Not necessarily best practice

o Best practice is contamination controlled through ion chromatography (IC) testing

o IPC-TM-650, Method 2.3.28A

*Based on R/O/I testing

PaulsGeneral Electric

NDCEE DoD* IPC* ACI

Chloride (µµµµg/in2) 2 3.5 4.5 6.1 6.1 10

Bromide (µµµµg/in2) 20 10 15 7.8 7.8 15

Page 29: .3mm CSP and LFCSP Reliability

29

Thank you!Any Questions?Contact me:[email protected]