Warpage Modeling Present
Warpage Modeling Present
Modelling Methodologies
Phase 4 (2016-2017)
•Continue
establishing
Phase 3 (2015-2016) technology package
•Continue dynamic warpage of
establishing new package
Phase 2 (2013-2014) technology package technology (all
•Establish current dynamic warpage kinds)
technology package (all kind) •Leverage previous
Phase 1 (2011-13) dynamic warpage •Dynamic warpage effort to study the
•Literature survey (POP, PBGA, measurement impact of Low
•Establish metrology FCBGA) metrology Temperature Solder
iNEMI Technology
correlation between •Measurement assessment. on dynamic warpage
Roadmap 2013 requirement
sites and increase protocol (effect of •(Performing)
•Identify package awareness “As Is”, “Bake” and •Collaborate with
warpage as key •Reaching out to Moisture Exposure simulation software
challenge industry for Time (MET)) and to derive modeling
component donation sample size needed. approach in better
•(Forming & •(Norming) predict the dynamic
Storming) warpage
Project Scopes in Phase 4 SOW
• To assess the impact of lower temperature solder on package warpage for those packages
collected in Phase 2 and 3.
• To establish the risk level based on package technology with respect to warpage only.
• Establish modeling optimization approach and tools requirement to enable higher accuracy
prediction technique
• Compare modeling with experiment data and identify potential gaps for further development in FEA
technique
3
Content
• Introduction
• Implementation details
• Results and discussions
• Conclusions
Disclaimer: The work here covers some feasibility study which collaborated
with iNEMI and we are not endorsing any software in particular.
4
Introduction: Multi-physics in Assembly
Process
Incoming Materials Electronic Package SMT Assembly
Assembly
Chip Attach Encapsulation Lid Attach (if Ball Attach Test and Final
& Molding applicable) Inspection
Predicting electronic package warpage and managing dynamic warpage still remain as a heavy
lifting effort and difficult for industrial.
A practical warpage prediction model is critical to drive more advance package design and risk
management.
Introduction: Current Modeling Approach is it
Adequate?
Apply linear and
Create FEA visco-elasticity Compute the
Geometry, model from the Post processing to
material
Meshing and apply initial stress free extract predicted
constitutive
constraint condition package warpage
properties and
boundaries for risk assessment
include different How to account
condition with account for
processing steps of for the individual process, material
and include how materials are residual stresses of and incoming
incoming added to the the components variation.
variations construction of the during assembly
package
• There are a lot of work done in different scope and assumption and with different level of
success.
• Focus here include the study of the impact of
• visco-elastic constitutive property
• with time-temperature superposition (TTS) were included with a two steps shift
factor model of Arrhenius and WLF functions.
• include the chemical shrinkage (Pressure Volume Temperature Cure PVTC)
implementation. PVTC function is not widely included in general FEA tools. Some
researches found out that the pressure-volume-temperature-cure (PVTC) can
influence the amount of warpage of the package.
6
Bi-material model: Modeling implementation
approach
• An arbitrary bi-material model evaluation was conducted to compare the material
model of linear elastic, visco-elastic, time-temperature superposition shift factor and
chemical shrinkage.
• Commercially available modeling software considered here were based on the
Moldex3D R17 and a general FEA tool called FEA-A.
• Stress analysis was computed for post mold cure induced shrinkage and followed by
time dependent thermal exposure loading to capture the evolution of warpage or
deformation.
• PVTC model is engaged to approximate the dynamic shrinkage based on transient
molding condition to predict the package behavior.
Mesh
1000um global size
2 elements across thickness
Total 1600 elements
7
Stress-strain constitutive properties
8
Visco-elastic constitutive behavior
1.2E+11 1.2E+11
t = 0.1 s
T = 30 ℃
1.0E+11 1.0E+11 t=1s
T = 60 ℃
t = 10 s
T = 150 ℃ 8.1E+10
8.1E+10
6.1E+10 6.1E+10
4.1E+10
4.1E+10
2.1E+10
2.1E+10
6.0E+08
6.0E+08 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200
1.0E-10 1.0E-02 1.0E+06 1.0E+14 1.0E+22
Temperature (℃)
Time (s)
Visco-elastic TTS
WLF
1.0E+06
H T 1 1
Arrhenius type equation aT = ( ( - )) T Tref
Shift Factor aT
User Subroutine
1.0E+02
R T T0
1.0E-02
C1=17.44, C2=51.6
1.0E-06
10
Curing Kinetics Mold Material Properties
Conversion rate
d
dt
( )
= k1 + k 2 m (1 − )
n
E
k1 = A1 exp − 1
RT
E
k 2 = A2 exp − 2
RT
A1, A2, E1, E2, m, n are model parameters
11
Modeling for chemical shrinkage without
curing percentage effect
Pseudo-CTE shrinkage
approach
Equivalent curing
shrinkage CTE Tan, Lin, et al. "Study of viscoelastic effect of EMC on FBGA block warpage by FEA simulation." 2013
14th International Conference on Electronic Packaging Technology. IEEE, 2013.
PVTC - Pressure Volume Hong, Li-Ching, and Sheng-Jye Hwang. "Study of warpage due to PVTC relation of EMC in IC
packaging." IEEE Transactions on Components and Packaging Technologies 27.2 (2004): 291-295.
Temperature Cure
approaches Two domain modified Tait model
13
Chemical Shrinkage through PVTC with
curing percentage effect
• The two domain modified Tait model is used to formulate the
specified volume of resin as below (Moldex3D implementation):
Conversion rate
1 1 1
= (1 − ) +
V Vuncured Vcured
p
Vcured / uncured = V0 1 − C ln 1 +
B
b1S + b2 S T , if T Tt
V0 =
b1L + b2 LT , if T Tt
b3S exp(− b4 S T ) , if T Tt
B=
b3L exp(− b4 LT ), if T Tt
Tt = b5 + b6 P
T = T − b5 , C = 0.0894
Boundary conditions & steps
-50
-100
-150
0 50 100 150 200
Time (s)
• At lower temperature, the model deformed into concave shape because of the higher
contraction of the mold.
• For visco-elastic material model without the TTS, the z-displacement reduced significantly
compared to linear elastic.
• The difference is due to the modulus relaxation and stress relaxation which counters the
thermal strain.
16
Bi-material: Visco-elastic with/without TTS – no
chemical shrinkage considered
Z displacement on top center node
80
Visco-elastic with TTS
Moldex3D VE-no TTS
Visco elastic
60 (VE) without
FEA-A VE-no TTS TTS
40 Moldex3D VE-TTS
Visco elastic
Z displacement (μm)
FEA-A VE-TTS
20
(VE) with TTS
0
-20
-40
-60
-80
-100
0 50 100 150 200
Time (s)
20 Temperature (K)
520
0
Conversion % 100
-20 470
Z displacement (μm)
Temperature (K)
Conversion (%)
-40 VE-TTS
420 90
-60
-140 270 70
0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 200
Time (s) Time (s)
• Including chemical shrinkage (1% or 2%) increase the bi-material z displacement during
the cool down.
• During the first 100 second, no significant difference in the z-displacement due to the
conversion rate only increased by 1%.
• The heating cycle speeds up the chemical reactions to reach the 100% conversion rate.
18
Conclusions
19
Two additional chemical shrinkage
values of 1% and 2%
0.555
0.540
△V (2.0%), 260oC
0.535
0.530
0.525
△V (1.0%),
260oC
0.520
0.515
25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300
Temperature (∘C)