MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7011387550

Mechanical and Tribological Aspects of Microelectronic Wire Bonding

2010· dissertation· en· W7011387550 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2010
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectronic Packaging and Soldering Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of CanadaOntario Centres of Excellence
KeywordsWeldingBall (mathematics)Deformation (meteorology)LimitingWeldability
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this thesis is on improving the understanding of mechanical and tribological mechanisms in microelectronic wire bonding. In particular, it focusses on the development and application of quantitative models of ultrasonic (US) friction and interfacial wear in wire bonding. Another objective of the thesis is to develop a low-stress Cu ball bonding process that minimizes damage to the microchip. These are accomplished through experimental measurements of in situ US tangential force by piezoresistive microsensors integrated next to the bonding zone using standard complementary metal oxide semiconductor (CMOS) technology. The processes investigated are thermosonic (TS) Au ball bonding on Al pads (Au-Al process), TS Cu ball bonding on Al pads (Cu-Al process), and US Al wedge-wedge bonding on Al pads (Al-Al process).
\n
\nTS ball bonding processes are optimized with one Au and two Cu wire types, obtaining average shear strength (SS) of more than 120 MPa. Ball bonds made with Cu wire show at least 15% higher SS than those made with Au wire. However, 30% higher US force induced to the bonding pad is measured for the Cu process using the microsensor, which increases the risk of underpad damage. The US force can be reduced by: (i) using a Cu wire type that produces softer deformed ball results in a measured US force reduction of 5%; and (ii) reducing the US level to 0.9 times the conventionally optimized level, the US force can be reduced by 9%. It is shown that using a softer Cu deformed ball and a reduced US level reduces the extra stress observed with Cu wire compared to Au wire by 42%. 
\n
\nTo study the combined effect of bond force (BF) and US in Cu ball bonding, the US parameter is optimized for eight levels of BF. For ball bonds made with conventionally optimized BF and US settings, the SS is ≈ 140 MPa. The amount of Al pad splash extruding out of bonded ball interface (for conventionally optimized BF and US settings) is between 10–12 µm. It can be reduced to 3–7 µm if accepting a SS reduction to 50–70 MPa. For excessive US settings, elliptical shaped Cu bonded balls are observed, with the major axis perpendicular to the US direction. By using a lower value of BF combined with a reduced US level, the US force can be reduced by 30% while achieving an average SS of at least 120 MPa. These process settings also aid in reducing the amount of splash by 4.3 µm.
\n
\nThe US force measurement is like a signature of the bond as it allows for detailed insight into the tribological mechanisms during the bonding process. The relative amount of the third harmonic of US force in the Cu-Al process is found to be five times smaller than in the Au-Al process. In contrast, in the Al-Al process, a large second harmonic content is observed, describing a non-symmetric deviation of the force signal waveform from the sinusoidal shape. This deviation might be due to the reduced geometrical symmetry of the wedge tool. The analysis of harmonics of the US force indicates that although slightly different from each other, stick-slip friction is an important mechanism in all these wire bonding variants.
\n
\nA friction power theory is used to derive the US friction power during Au-Al, Cu-Al, and Al-Al processes. Auxiliary measurements include the current delivered to the US transducer, the vibration amplitude of the bonding tool tip in free-air, and the US tangential force acting on the bonding pad. For bonds made with typical process parameters, several characteristic values used in the friction power model such as the ultrasonic compliance of the bonding system and the profile of the relative interfacial sliding amplitude are determined. The maximum interfacial friction power during Al-Al process is at least 11.5 mW (3.9 W/mm²), which is only about 4.8% of the total electrical power delivered to the US transducer. The total sliding friction energy delivered to the Al-Al wedge bond is 60.4 mJ (20.4 J/mm²).
\n
\nFor the Au-Al and Cu-Al processes, the US friction power is derived with an improved, more accurate method to derive the US compliance. The method uses a multi-step bonding process. In the first two steps, the US current is set to levels that are low enough to prevent sliding. Sliding and bonding take place during the third step, when the current is ramped up to the optimum value. The US compliance values are derived from the first two steps. The average maximum interfacial friction power is 10.3 mW (10.8 W/mm²) and 16.9 mW (18.7 W/mm²) for the Au-Al and Cu-Al processes, respectively. The total sliding friction energy delivered to the bond is 48.5 mJ (50.3 J/mm²) and 49.4 mJ (54.8 J/mm²) for the Au-Al and Cu-Al processes, respectively.
\n
\nFinally, the sliding wear theory is used to derive the amount of interfacial wear during Au-Al and Cu-Al processes. The method uses the US force and the derived interfacial sliding amplitude as the main inputs. The estimated total average depth of interfacial wear in Au-Al and Cu-Al processes is 416 nm and 895 nm, respectively. However, the error of estimation of wear in both the Au-Al and the Cu-Al processes is ≈ 50%, making this method less accurate than the friction power and energy results. Given the error in the determination of compliance in the Al-Al process, the error in the estimation of wear in the Al-Al process might have been even larger; hence the wear results pertaining to the Al-Al process are not discussed in this study.

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 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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.961

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 integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Same topicElectronic Packaging and Soldering TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207