Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T23:12:14.627Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Adhesion and Subcritical Debonding of Polymer Interfaces for Microelectronic Packaging

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2011

J. M. Snodgrass ,
G. Hotchkiss  and
R. H. Dauskardt
J. M. Snodgrass
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science & Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
G. Hotchkiss
Affiliation:
DSPS Packaging Development, Texas Instruments Inc., Dallas, TX 75265
R. H. Dauskardt
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science & Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
Get access

Abstract

Techniques are discussed for evaluating both critical interface adhesion values as well as the sub-critical debond behavior of polymer/silicon and polymer/polymer interfaces. Sub-critical debonding behavior is expected to be most relevant in predicting the in-service lifetime of microelectronic packages. Our research characterizes the debonding of a benzocyclobutene overlayer, as well as a technologically relevant epoxy underfill/polyimide/silicon interface system. Adhesion values are measured in a double cantilevered beam (DCB) and four-point bend fracture mechanics geometries by driving a stable debond along the relevant interfaces. The effect of temperature on subcritical debonding in an underfill/polyimide interface is described. Issues of crack path selection involving the selection of microstructurally weak paths in the layered system are considered.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 515: Symposium J – Electronic Packaging Materials Science X , 1998 , 37
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Kook, S.-Y., Kirtikar, A. and Dauskardt, R.H., “Reliability of Interfaces in Microelectronic Packages: Adhesion and Progressive Debonding,” J. Mater. Sci., 13 (1998). In review.Google Scholar
2. Suo, Z. and Hutchinson, J. W., “Sandwich Test Specimens for Measuring Interface Crack Toughness,” Mat. Sci. Eng., A107 (1989), 135–143.Google Scholar
3. Lane, M., Dauskardt, R. H., Ware, R., Ma, Q. and Fujimoto, H., “Progressive Debonding of Multi-Layer Interconnect Structures,” in Materials Reliability in Microelectronics VII, (Mater. Res. Soc. Proc. 473, Pittsburgh, PA, 1997) pp 21–26.Google Scholar
4. Wiederhorn, S. M., “Influence of Water Vapor on Crack Propagation in Soda-Lima Glass,” J. of Amer. Cer. Soc. 59 (1967) 407.Google Scholar
5. Williams, J.G., Marshall, G. P., Proc. R. Soc. A342 (1975) 55.Google Scholar
6. Tonyali, K., Brown, H.R., “On the Applicability of Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics to Environmental Stress Cracking of Low Density Polyethylene,” J. Mater. Sci. 21 (1986) 3116.Google Scholar
7. Chan, M.K.V., Williams, J. G. Polymer 24 (1983) 234.Google Scholar
8. Charalambides, P.G., Lund, J., Evans, A. G., McMeeking, R. M., “A Test Specimen for Determining the Fracture Resistance of Bimaterial Interfaces,” J. Appl. Mech. 111 (1989) 77.Google Scholar
9. Kanninen, M.F., “An Augmented Double Cantilever Beam Model for Studying Crack Propagation and Arrest,” Int. J. Fract. 9 (1973) 83.Google Scholar
10. Evans, A.G., “A Simple Method for Evaluating Slow Crack Growth in Brittle Materials,” Int. J. Fract. 9 (1973) 267.Google Scholar