Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-5lx2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-28T19:38:26.964Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Substrate Pretreatments and Strength Limiting Factors in Cu-AlN Direct Bonds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 February 2011

Wan-Lan Chiang ,
Victor A. Greenhut ,
Daniel J. Shanefield  and
Lois A. Johnson
Wan-Lan Chiang
Affiliation:
Department of Ceramic Engineering, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ 08855
Victor A. Greenhut
Affiliation:
Department of Ceramic Engineering, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ 08855
Daniel J. Shanefield
Affiliation:
Department of Ceramic Engineering, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ 08855
Lois A. Johnson
Affiliation:
Department of Ceramic Engineering, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ 08855
Get access

Abstract

Cu-AlN direct bonds were made by the gas-metal eutectic method. Two kinds of AlN substrates from different suppliers were used for the research. The AlN surfaces were preoxidized in O2 at three different temperatures. An optional “anneal” in Ar was applied following the oxidation procedure. Two processes were used for the bonding.

The bond strengths and the failure modes were found to depend on the substrate used, the pretreatment of the AlN and bonding conditions. There was an optimum thickness for the Al2O3 layer on the AlN surface. High temperature annealing in Ar was demonstrated to effectively promote bond strength. The highest peel strength measured was 50 N/cm.

A thermal expansion mismatch between Al2O3 and AlN was considered to be the main factor which dominated the ultimate bond strength. This mismatch resulted in a residual stress in the Al2O3 layer. A measurement by XRD indicated a 300 MPa tensile stress existed in the surface Al2O3 after AlN oxidation. This made Al2O3/AlN the weakest interface and limited the bond strength rather than the eutectic bond.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 282: Symposium E – Chemical Perspectives of Microelectronic Materials III , 1992 , 387
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1993

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. Burgess, J. F. and Neugebauer, C. A., J. Electrochem. Soc. 122, 688–690 (1975).Google Scholar
2. Holowczak, J. E., Greenhut, V. A. and Shanefield, D. J., Ceram. Eng. Sci. Proc. 10 [9–101, 1283–1294 (1989).Google Scholar
3. Yoshino, Y., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 72 [8], 1322–1327 (1989).Google Scholar
4. Chiang, W. L., Greenhut, V. A., Shanefield, D. J., Johnson, L. A. and Moore, R. L., submitted to J. Am. Ceram. Soc. (1992)Google Scholar
5. Cusano, D. A., U.S. Patent No. 3, 994, 430 (30 November 1976).Google Scholar
6. Iwase, N., Anzai, K., Shinozaki, K., Hirao, O., Thanh, T. D. and Sugiura, Y., IEEE Trans. on Comp. Hybrids and Manu. Tech. CHMT-8 [2], 253–258 (1985).Google Scholar
7. Chiang, W. L., Greenhut, V. A. and Shanefield, D. J., Salvati, L. and Moore, R. L., Ceram. Eng. Sci. Proc. 12 [9–10], 2105–2114 (1991).Google Scholar
8. Weiss, P. K. and Gobrecht, J., Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 40, 399–404 (1985).Google Scholar
9. Chiang, W. L., Greenhut, V. A., Shanefield, D. J. and Johnson, L. A., submitted to IEEE Trans, on Comp. Hybrids and Manu. Tech. (1992).Google Scholar
10. Eigenmann, B., Scholtes, B. and Macherauch, E., Mater. Sci. and Eng. A 188, 1–17 (1989).Google Scholar
11. Cullity, B. D., “Elements of X-Ray Diffraction”, p. 453.Google Scholar