A COMPARISON OF EPOXY AND CYANATE ESTER UNDERFILLS FOR FCOB ASSEMBLYAuthors: Paul Morganelli, Ph.D.
Company: Emerson & Cuming
Date Published: 9/26/2004 Conference: SMTA International
The fact that so many different materials have been studied as underfills is indicative of the difficulty that has been encountered meeting a wide range of requirements. To be sure, there is no single underfill that performs optimally against all the requirements of any given application. In product development, as in underfill selection, one must compromise certain needs in order to achieve a balance of properties that best meets the process and reliability of the assembly of interest.
This paper will compare and contrast the performance of epoxy and cyanate ester underfills with emphasis on FCOB requirements. We will look at both processing characteristics as well as reliability, leading to an overall picture of the advantages and disadvantages of each type of material. Process steps, such as dispensing, flow, and cure characteristics of commercial epoxy and cyanate ester will be compared and contrasted, followed by a discussion of flux compatibility and its relationship to defect generation.
Physical property characterization and its correlation to reliability against moisture and mechanical stresses such as thermal shock will also be discussed. Future directions in underfill development for FC assembly will be presented.
Key Words: Underfill, Flip Chip, Cyanate Ester, Reliability.
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.