0
RESEARCH PAPERS

Test Methods for Silicon Die Strength

[+] Author and Article Information
M. Y. Tsai1

Department of Mechanical Engineering,  Chang Gung University, Kwei-Shan, Tao-Yuan, Taiwan 333, Republic of Chinamytsai@mail.cgu.edu.tw

C. H. Chen, C. S. Lin

Department of Mechanical Engineering,  Chang Gung University, Kwei-Shan, Tao-Yuan, Taiwan 333, Republic of China

1

Corresponding author.

J. Electron. Packag 128(4), 419-426 (Feb 06, 2006) (8 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2351907 History: Received August 30, 2005; Revised February 06, 2006

Recently, the 3D or stacked-die packages become increasingly popular for packaging ICs into a system or subsystem to satisfy the needs of low cost, small form factor, and high performance. For the applications of these packages, IC silicon wafers have to be ground to be relatively thin through the wafer-thinning processes (such as grinding, polishing, and plasma etching). The strength of dies has to be determined for the design requirement and reliability assurance of the packages. From the published data, there still exist some issues, including a large scatter existed in die strength data and difficulties in differentiating the causes of the low strength between from the wafer grinding and from wafer sawing by either the three-point bending or four-point bending test. The purposes of this study are to develop new, reliable, and simple test methods for determination of die strength, in order to improve the data scatter, and to provide a solution for differentiating the factors that affect the variability of die strength for finding out the causes of the weakness of the die strength. In this study, two new test methods, point-loaded circular plate with simple supports test (PLT-I) and point-loaded plate on elastic foundation test (PLT-II), are proposed and then evaluated by testing two groups of silicon dies with different surface conditions. The surface conditions (roughness) of the specimens are determined by atomic force microscopy and correlated to failure strength. The failure forces from both tests have to be modified by using maximum stress obtained from theories or finite element analyses to obtain the failure strength. The test results are compared to each other and further with a widely used four-point bending test. The results suggest that, unlike the four-point bending test suffering the chipping effect, both methods provide very consistent data with a small scatter for each group of specimens and can be used for identifying the effect of surface grinding (roughness) on the die strength. It is also shown that the die strength is highly dependent on the surface roughness. Accordingly, these two methods can provide not only a (biaxial) stress field similar to temperature-loaded die in the packages, but also simple, feasible, reliable, and chipping-free tests for silicon dies of dummy or real IC chips, without strict geometrical limitation, such as beam-type geometry for the three-point or four-point bending test.

Copyright © 2006 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Schematics of (a) point-load test I, (b) point-load test II, and (c) four-point bending test

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Fixtures of (a) point-load test II and (b) four-point bending test

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Typical force P versus deflection δ curves for (a) point-load test I and II, and (b) four-point bending test

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Pin contact radius c versus maximum deflection for a loading pin with a radius of 0.35mm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Maximum forces and deflections for the die specimens with tensile-loaded untreated surfaces under point-load test I

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Maximum forces and deflections for the die specimens with tensile-loaded ground surfaces under point-load test I

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Maximum forces and deflections for the die specimens with tensile-loaded untreated surfaces under point-load test II

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Maximum forces and deflections for the die specimens with tensile-loaded ground surfaces under point-load test II

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Typical failure modes for (a) under point-load test I and (b) under point-load test II

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

The relationship between pin contact radius c and maximum die stress for the die specimen loaded with P=1N, under point-load test I, obtained from theory and finite element analysis

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

The relationship between pin contact radius c and maximum die stress for the die specimen loaded with P=1N, under point-load test II, obtained from theory and finite element analysis

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Tensile axial stress (σx) distributions along the bottom line of the die specimen under point-load tests I and II for P=1N and c=0.2mm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Die strength of test specimens with tensile-loaded (a) untreated surfaces and (b) ground surfaces with various grinding angle, under the four-point bending test

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Die strength data for the die specimens with tensile-loaded untreated and ground surfaces under point-load tests I and II, and the four-point bending test

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Wafer-sawing (cutting) direction and die-chipping occurrence

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Topography (roughness) for untreated and ground surfaces of die specimens measured by AFM

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In