Page 47 - ChipScale_Mar-Apr_2021-digital
P. 47

is according to the industry standards   The TC-J cycling condition
        JEDEC TC-J condition [12], and IPC-  applies a uniform temperature
        9701A [13]. The thermal chamber used   distribution across the entire
        for the assessment is a Thermotron SE-  package on board assembly,
        600-10-10, single-zone chamber. Target   and therefore only requires a
        failure criteria is a 100 ohm shift from   mechanical model to complete
        time zero set points for greater than 50%   the analysis. A total of six TC-J
        of the hardware.                   thermal cycles (0°C to 100°C)
                                           are run in the model to achieve
        Modeling methodology               stability in the plastic strain/
          The simulation in this study aims to   plastic work accumulated per
        analyze and compare BGA reliability in   cycle. For the field application
        two different thermal cycling conditions.   m o d e l , t h e t e m p e r a t u r e s
        The first case is the JEDEC standard   w it h i n t h e p a ck a ge a r e a
        TC-J thermal cycle, which is uniform   result of Joule heating inside
        temperature cycling. Within this case, we   the  logic die and HBM. The
        have two configurations: one  with and one   temperature distribution is
        without a heat sink. The second case is a   also nonuniform  because of
        representative field-like cycle. We call it a   the different dimensions and
        field-like cycle because the actual cycling   thermal properties of the package
        conditions usually depend on the customer   components. Therefore, a steady
        application. In this case, we analyze only   state thermal model is solved
        the configuration with a heat sink. This   first to evaluate the temperature
        condition is nonuniform temperature   distribution across the entire
        cycling and therefore it involves both   assembly. These temperature  Figure 3: TC-J cycle Weibull failure rate plot.
        thermal and mechanical models.     values are then input into the
          3D FEM models are generated using   mechanical model as thermal loads. The
        ANSYS Mechanical software (Figure 2).   temperatures evaluated in this model
        The model consists of a fully-assembled   correspond to the ON state of the module.
        lidless 2.5D package with a stiffener ring,   For the OFF state, a uniform temperature
        printed circuit board (PCB), backing   of 25°C c or r e s p ond i ng t o r o om
        plate (when a heat sink is used) and a full   temperature is assigned. The thermal
        array of BGAs. The heat sink/pressure   model is run only once for a given set of
        plate component of the assembly itself is   boundary conditions. Once the model is
        not modeled and is instead replaced with   completed, the same temperature values
        an effective pressure or convection heat   stored in the results file are read into
        transfer coefficient. In order to model   the structural model for each field cycle.
                                           Three different Tj max  (maximum junction   Figure 4: Die and pry test showing failed BGAs
                                           temperature) conditions of 100°C,   at corners.
                                           115°C, and 160°C are analyzed. These
                                           correspond to different use conditions   for assemblies with heat sinks is seen to
                                           of the product in the field. A cycle time   be nearly half the characteristic life for
                                           of 24 hours with 11 hours dwell at ON,   the assemblies with no heat sinks. Using
                                           OFF states and 1 hour transition times is   the 540-pin connector to isolate fails
                                           considered. Similar to the TC-J cycling   and further leveraging the dye and pry
                                           model, a total of six field cycles are run   technique to characterize failures, the
                                           to achieve stability in the plastic strain/  presence of BGA fails was observed at the
                                           plastic work accumulated per cycle.  corners of the module (Figure 4). Using
        Figure 2: Global FEM model of a 2.5D package on a                     this analysis, several corner failing BGAs
        PCB with a backing plate.          Results and discussion             were detected with pad rupture observed
                                             The following sections discuss results   on surviving solder balls. Additionally,
        the BGAs to a higher degree of accuracy   obtained from TC-J reliability testing,   100% failure was observed for the heat
        without being computationally expensive,   TC-J cycling simulations, and field   sink mounted hardware. There were no
        a global-local modeling approach is   cycling simulation.             signs of electrical or physical failures in
        utilized [9,10]. The material properties   TC-J reliability test. The normalized   the interposer or chip shadow regions of
        in the global and local model are all   Weibull failure rate plot for the two   the laminate.
        temperature-dependent elastic properties   configurations is shown in Figure 3. A   TC-J thermal cycling simulations.
        except BGA solder. Anand’s viscoplastic   clear difference is noted in the time to   Equivalent plastic strain is used as a metric
        relation is used to define the constitutive   failure between the two configurations.   to track the damage in solder. The location
        behavior of solder.                The 63.2% Weibull characteristic life (η)   of the critical BGA is determined using


                                                                                                             45
                                                             Chip Scale Review   March  •  April  •  2021   [ChipScaleReview.com]  45
   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52