Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nmvwc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-23T23:54:51.915Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of substrate metallizations on solder/underbump metallization interfacial reactions in flip-chip packages during thermal aging

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

F. Zhang ,
M. Li ,
C. C. Chum  and
C-H. Tung
F. Zhang
Affiliation:
Institute of Materials Research and Engineering, 3 Research Link, Singapore 117602
M. Li*
Affiliation:
Institute of Materials Research and Engineering, 3 Research Link, Singapore 117602
C. C. Chum
Affiliation:
Institute of Materials Research and Engineering, 3 Research Link, Singapore 117602
C-H. Tung
Affiliation:
Institute of Microelectronics, 11 Science Park Road, Singapore 117685
*
a)Address all correspondence to this author. Present address: The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong. e-mail: mli@ee.cuhk.edu.hk
Get access

Abstract

Effects of Ni and Au from Ni/Au substrate metallizations on the interfacial reactions of solder joints in flip-chip packages during long-term thermal aging were systematically investigated. It was found that both Au and Ni influenced the solid-state interfacial reactions, underbump metallization (UBM), and intermetallic compound (IMC) evolution. Because large amounts of Ni could incorporate into IMC to form a multicomponent (Cu, Ni)6Sn5 phase during assembly reflow, while Au could only affect the reaction during thermal aging through the reconfiguration of AuSn4 phase, Ni had stronger effects on solid-solution type Ni–V UBM consumption than Au. It was found that the UBM consumption process was faster in the eutectic SnPb solder system than that in the SnAgCu solder system during aging. A porous structure was formed in the UBM layer after Ni in UBM was consumed. Electrical resistance of flip-chip packages increased significantly after the porous structure reached certain extents. The results showed that the diffusion process of Ni from UBM and Sn from solder in the presence of (Cu, Ni)6Sn5 or (Ni, Cu)3Sn4 phase at solder joint interfaces could be much faster than that in the case of binary Cu6Sn5 or Ni3Sn4 IMC.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Materials Research , Volume 18 , Issue 6 , June 2003 , pp. 1333 - 1341
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2003

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.Liu, C.Y., Tu, K.N., Sheng, T.T., Tung, C.H., Frear, D.R., and Elenius, P., J. Appl. Phys. 87, 750 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Teo, P.S., Huang, Y.W., Tung, C.H., Marks, M.R., and Lim, T.B., in Proceedings of the 50th Electronic Components & Technology Conference, May 21–24, 2000, Las Vegas, NV (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, 2000), p. 33.Google Scholar
3.Li, M., Zhang, F., Chen, W.T., Tu, K.N., Zeng, K., Balkan, H., Elenius, P., J. Mater. Res. 17, 1612 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Balkan, H., Sanchez, J., Burgess, G., Johnson, M., Carlson, C., Rooney, B., Stepniak, F., Wood, J., Patterson, D., and Elenius, P., in Flip Chip Technology Workshop (IMAPS, Reston, VA, 2001), p. 426.Google Scholar
5.Ghosh, G., J. Appl. Phys. 88, 6887 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Zhang, F., Li, M., Balakrisnan, B., and Chen, W.T., J. Electron. Mater. 31, 1256 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Mei, Z., Kaufmann, M., Eslambolchi, A., and Johnson, P., Proceedings of the 48th Electronic Components & Technology Conference (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, 1998), p. 952.Google Scholar
8.Minor, A.M. and Morris, J.W., Jr., Metall. Mater. Trans. A 31A, 798 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Ho, C.E., Zheng, R.. Luo, G.L., Lin, A.H., and Kao, C.R., J. Electron. Mater. 29, 1175 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Minor, A.M. and Morris, J.W., Jr., J. Electron. Mater. 29, 1170 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Ho, C.E., Chen, W.T., and Kao, C.R., J. Electron. Mater. 30, 379 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Song, H.G., Ahn, J.P., Minor, A.M., and Morris, J.W., Jr., J. Electron. Mater. 30, 409 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Stepniak, F., Microelectron. Reliab. 41, 735 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Zhang, F., Li, M., and Chum, C.C., Proc. 52nd ECTC, San Diego, CA (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, 2002), pp. 726–731.Google Scholar
15.Zhang, F., Li, M., Chum, C.C., and Tu, K.N., J. Mater. Res. 17, 2757 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Zeng, K., Vuorinen, V., and Kivilahti, J.K., Proceedings of the 51st Electronic Components & Technology Conference (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, 2001) p. 693.Google Scholar
17.Zribi, A., Clark, A., Zavalij, L., Borgesen, P., and Cotts, E.J., J. Electron. Mater. 30, 1157 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Chen, W.T., Ho, C.E., and Kao, C.R., J. Mater. Res. 17, 263 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Huang, K.C., Chan, Y.C., Tang, C.W., and Ong, H.C., J. Mater. Res. 15, 2534 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20.Jang, J.W., Kim, P.G., Tu, K.N., Frear, D.R., and Thompson, P., J. Appl. Phys. 85, 8456 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar