MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2286134463 · doi:10.4071/isom-2013-tp42

Stitch Bond Process of Pd-Coated Cu Wire: Experimental and Numerical Studies of Process Parameters and Materials

2013· article· en· W2286134463 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIMAPSource Proceedings · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectronic Packaging and Soldering Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLead frameWire bondingMaterials scienceProcess windowPlating (geology)Capillary actionSurface finishQuad Flat No-leads packageComposite materialProcess (computing)Surface roughnessMetallurgyAdhesiveOptoelectronicsLayer (electronics)Computer scienceEngineeringElectrical engineeringSemiconductor device

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cost reduction is the main driver in the recent transition to Cu wire bonding from predominate Au wire bonding. Other cost reduction in packaging comes from new developments in substrates and lead frames, for example, Pre-Plated Frames (PPF) and uPPF for QFP and QFN reduce the plating and material cost. However, 2nd bonds (stitch bonds) can be more challenging on some of the new leadframe types due to the rough surface finish and thin plating thickness. Pd-coated Cu (PCC) wire has been recently introduced to improve the wire bonding process with bare Cu wire, mainly to improve reliability and enhance the stitch bond process. More fundamental studies are required to understand the influences of bonding parameters and bonding tools to improve stitch bondability. The stitch bond process of 0.7 mil diameter PCC wire on Au/Ni/Pd-plated quad flat-no lead (QFN) PPF substrate is investigated in this study. Two capillaries with the same geometry but different surface finishes are used to investigate the effect of capillary surface finish on the stitch bond process. The two capillary types are a polished finish type which is commonly used for Au wire bonding, and a granular finish capillary that has a much rougher surface finish. Process window between no stick on lead (NSOL) and short tail is compared. The effect of process parameters including bond force and table scrub amplitude is studied. The process window test results revealed that the granular capillary has larger process window and a lower chance of short tail occurrence. It has been shown that a higher scrub amplitude increases the chance of successful stitch bond formation. To further compare the capillary surface finishes, 3 sets of parameter settings with different bond force and scrub amplitude are tested. For all three parameter sets tested, the granular capillary showed better quality in bond strength. The granular capillary resulted in higher stitch pull strength compared to the polished type. A finite element model (FEM) of the process was developed to better understand the experimental observations. The amount of surface expansion (plastic deformation) of the wire at the wire and substrate interface was extracted from the model and attributed to the degree of adhesion (bonding). The model was used to confirm the experimental observation of adhesion (bonding) with different surface finish.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.788

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it