Comparison approach on strain behavior of PBGA assembly by considering different thermal‐mechanical compound loading modes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide a systematic method to perform analysis and test for vibration‐thermal strain behavior of plastic ball grid array (PBGA) assembly by considering thermal and vibration loading mode. Also to investigate the dynamic behavior of PBGA assembly by considering loading modes for design and reliability evaluation of PBGA packaging. Design/methodology/approach A PBGA assembly prototype with different structure and material parameters is designed and manufactured. Based on investigation of the structural and physical parameters of PBGA sample, the vibration‐thermal strain test is developed to measure the strain distribution at the surface of the BT (bismaleimide triazine) substrates and PCB (printed circuit board) surface under vibration‐thermal cycling loading such as random vibration and the temperature is changed from 0°C to 100°C. Findings The test results show that the loading modes have different impact on PCB, EMC and substrate, respectively. In the meantime, it is shown that the characteristics of the compound mode is not the linear accumulative result by single vibration mode and single thermal loading mode as forecasted. The nonlinear mechanism for these modes application is the future work for progress. Research limitations/implications It is very difficult to set up a numerical approach to illustrate the validity of the testing approach because the complex loading modes and the complex structure of PBGA assembly. The research on an accurate mathematical model of the PBGA assembly prototype is a future work. Practical implications It implies a potential design characteristic for future application of PBGA assembly. It also builds a basis for future work for design and reliability evaluation of BGA package. Originality/value This paper fulfils useful information about the thermal‐vibration coupling dynamic behavior of PBGA assembly with different structure characteristics, materials parameters.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".