Page 23 - Chip Scale Review_January February_2023-digital
P. 23

Measuring bump height uniformity to improve yield


        using 3D inspection

        By Tim Skunes  [Nordson Test & Inspection]

        C         h i p - s c a l e   w a f e r- l e v e l   When design rules change and yield   Conventional bump height




                  packaging  (WLP)  offers
                  i m p o r t a n t   b e n ef i t s —  d rops,  it  becomes  appa rent  t hat   measurement
                                           reducing inspection does not save
                                                                                Pillar bumps consist of three layers:
        small  package  size  and  the  ability   time in the long run. The best way to   a copper pillar, a nickel barrier layer,
        to process hundreds or thousands   improve  yield,  especially  for  a  new   and a tin/silver/copper (SAC) solder
        of dies i n parallel. A var iet y of   process, is to identify defects early.   bump.  Bump  height  measurements
        bump  configurations  are  possible,   That often requires 100% inspection   are typically taken after the final
        depending on the application, as   across each wafer in every batch.   photoresist stripping step, as shown in
        shown in Figure 1 [1]. One challenge   Stringent inspection protocols help   Figure 2. This occurs after all three
        with WLP is maintaining uniformity   identify the root cause of defects   layers of the bump have been deposited.
        of  solder  bumps  or  copper  pillars   and reduce the need to rework or     Conventional  noncontact  bump
        across  a  300mm  wafer.  Metrology   scrap wafers.                   height  measurement  relies  on  line
        a nd i nspect ion a re necessa r y to   Existing bump height measurement   scan triangulation. An incident beam
        ensure device reliability. Shrinking   methods have two drawbacks: speed   of laser or white light def lects off
        b u m p   h e i g h t s  a nd   s p a c i n g   a nd   and  placement  in  the  process  f low.   the object being measured. With line
        high  aspect  ratios,  however,  make   They slow down production and often   scan triangulation, the light source
        wafer-level  bump  height  inspection   do not catch defects early enough in   projects  a  line  onto  the  object.  A
        especially challenging. It is also   the process. While 100% inspection   detector with an array of photosensors
        increasingly  critical  because  minor   is  com monpla ce  du r i ng  pro ce ss   captures the reflection and calculates
        variations  in  bump  height  across   development,  it  is  often  abandoned   the distance. Scanning across a wafer
        a wafer can reduce overall yield.   for high-volume production because   produces a map of bump height data.
        Defects related to bumping can affect   of the time required for testing. Fast,   Li ne  scan  t r iang ulat ion  has  t wo
        both  thermal  and  electrical  device   accurate  metrology  and  inspection   primary drawbacks. One of these is
        performance [2].                   are the key to success. This article   speed.  A  300mm  wafer  can  contain
          It can be tempting to cut down on   explains the  benefits of 3D fringe   hundreds of millions of copper micro
        the  number  of  inspection  steps  or   projection  tech nolog y  to  inspect   bumps  [3],  and  100%  inspection  is
        only test a sample of wafers coming   solder  bu mps  and  copper  pillars   not economical.
        through the line. Doing so can speed   at  the  wafer  level,  comparing  it  to   The other drawback to line scan
        up production. For legacy processes   conventional  approaches  for  bump   triangulation is that it happens too
        where  the  yield  is  high,  a  partial   height measurement.        late  in  the  manufacturing  process.
        inspection may be the best approach.                                  Inconsistent copper plating is often























        Figure 1: Evolution of bump size and pitch. Image courtesy of T. Tick and S. Vahanen [1]

                                                                                                             21
                                                          Chip Scale Review   January  •  February  •  2023   [ChipScaleReview.com]  21
   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28