UNDERFILL ADHESIVE CHOICES FOR CHIP AND PACKAGE APPLICATIONSAuthors: David R. Gagnon, Ph.D. et al.
Company: 3M Company
Date Published: 9/22/2002 Conference: SMTA International
These materials are applied in a capillary dispensing process, requiring extra steps for the board assembly process. Although new no-flow type underfills (pre-applied fluxing underfill adhesives) reduce the number of process steps and may potentially reduce processing time and cost, they are currently unfilled and have a relatively high CTE.
For CSP and BGA package reliability enhancement, the default solution has also been to use capillary adhesives. The solder balls of these packages are often larger and solder fatigue is generally less of an issue. Mechanical shock is typically the primary mode of failure. Despite current research efforts, it has not yet been determined whether it is the high Tg/low CTE combination or high adhesion and flexibility that provide the best performance.
Much of this choice is dependent upon the environmental challenges the final device will face. For mechanical reliability, the use of an unfilled capillary or no-flow underfill adhesives may be the preferred choice. The objective of this paper is to review the benefits and trade-offs of a wide array of underfill types in chip and package underfill applications.
Key words: underfill, CSP, BGA, no-flow, adhesive.
Members download articles for free:
Not a member yet?
What else do you get when you join SMTA? Read about all of the benefits that go along with membership.
Notice: Sharing of articles is restricted to just your immediate work group. Downloaded papers should not be stored on an external network or shared on the internet.