Norris–Landzberg Acceleration Factors and Goldmann Constants for SAC305 Lead-Free Electronics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Goldmann constants and Norris–Landzberg acceleration factors for SAC305 lead-free solders have been developed based on principal component regression models (PCR) for reliability prediction and part selection of area-array packaging architectures under thermo-mechanical loads. Models have been developed in conjunction with stepwise regression methods for identification of the main effects. Package architectures studied include ball-grid array (BGA) packages mounted on copper-core and no-core printed circuit assemblies in harsh environments. The models have been developed based on thermomechanical reliability data acquired on copper-core and no-core assemblies in four different thermal cycling conditions. Packages with Sn3Ag0.5Cu solder alloy interconnects have been examined. The models have been developed based on perturbation of accelerated test thermomechanical failure data. Data have been gathered on nine different thermal cycle conditions with SAC305 alloys. The thermal cycle conditions differ in temperature range, dwell times, maximum temperature, and minimum temperature to enable development of constants needed for the life prediction and assessment of acceleration factors. Goldmann constants and the Norris–Landzberg acceleration factors have been benchmarked against previously published values. In addition, model predictions have been validated against validation datasets which have not been used for model development. Convergence of statistical models with experimental data has been demonstrated using a single factor design of experimental study for individual factors including temperature cycle magnitude, relative coefficient of thermal expansion, and diagonal length of the chip. The predicted and measured acceleration factors have also been computed and correlated. Good correlations have been achieved for parameters examined. Previously, the feasibility of using multiple linear regression models for reliability prediction has been demonstrated for flex-substrate BGA packages (Lall et al., 2004, “Thermal Reliability Considerations for Deployment of Area Array Packages in Harsh Environments,” Proceedings of the ITherm 2004, 9th Intersociety Conference on Thermal and Thermo-mechanical Phenomena, Las Vegas, Nevada, Jun. 1–4, pp. 259–267, Lall et al., 2005, “Thermal Reliability Considerations for Deployment of Area Array Packages in Harsh Environments,” IEEE Trans. Compon. Packag. Technol., 28(3), pp. 457–466., flip-chip packages (Lall et al., 2005, “Decision-Support Models for Thermo-Mechanical Reliability of Leadfree Flip-Chip Electronics in Extreme Environments,” Proceedings of the 55th IEEE Electronic Components and Technology Conference, Orlando, FL, Jun. 1–3, pp. 127–136) and ceramic BGA packages (Lall et al., 2007, “Thermo-Mechanical Reliability Based Part Selection Models for Addressing Part Obsolescence in CBGA, CCGA, FLEXBGA, and Flip-Chip Packages,” ASME InterPACK Conference, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, Jul. 8–12, Paper No. IPACK2007-33832, pp. 1–18). The presented methodology is valuable in the development of fatigue damage constants for the application specific accelerated test datasets and provides a method to develop institutional learning based on prior accelerated test data.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".