Research Papers

Comparative Study of Phenolic-Based and Amine-Based Underfill Materials in Flip Chip Plastic Ball Grid Array Package

[+] Author and Article Information
Z. Kornain, R. Rasid, S. Abdullah

Microelectronics Packaging and Materials Laboratory (MIPAC), Institute of Microengineering and Nanoelectronics (IMEN), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), Bangi, Selangor 43600, Malaysia

A. Jalar

Microelectronics Packaging and Materials Laboratory (MIPAC), Institute of Microengineering and Nanoelectronics (IMEN), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), Bangi, Selangor 43600, Malaysiaazmanjalar@gmail.com

J. Electron. Packag 132(4), 041012 (Dec 08, 2010) (6 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4002741 History: Received August 06, 2009; Revised July 21, 2010; Published December 08, 2010; Online December 08, 2010

Phenolic and amine epoxy systems are widely used as hardeners in underfill materials for flip chip packaging. A comparison was made between these two systems in order to evaluate the reliability performance of a flip chip plastic ball grid array (FC-PBGA). The coefficient of thermal expansion, glass transition temperature (Tg), Young’s modulus (E), and fracture toughness were revealed by using a thermal mechanical analyzer, a dynamic mechanical analyzer, and a single-edge notch three-point bending test, while moisture absorption study was performed using an 85°C/85% relative humidity chamber. The adhesion strength with different conditions of temperature and humidity was performed using a die shear test. The series of standard reliability tests such as accelerated temperature cycle test, pressure cooker test, thermal humidity storage test, and high temperature storage test were executed upon the FC-PBGA, which was filled by phenolic and amine epoxy systems of underfill materials. It was found that the adhesion strength of phenolic-based underfills is better than that of amine-based underfills in almost all test conditions. Phenolic-based underfills also demonstrated better reliability compared with amine-based underfills.

Copyright © 2010 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Schematic of (a) test vehicle preparation and (b) die shear test experimental setup

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Top view image of FC-PBGA package with underfill after being cured

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

The average of shear strength over temperature of underfill and failure mode category

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

A top view of die shear test result based on different failure modes

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Effect of thermal and humidity aging to shear strength

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Top view image of FC-PBGA using C-SAM: (a) no delamination and voids after MSL-3 or package filled by UFA and (b) large delamination found in package filled by UFB (unit 3) after MSL-3

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

(a) C-SAM images for FC-PBGA filled by UFB (unit 5) after ATC, where the dashed line indicates the position of cross section and the circle shows the location of failure. (b) Cross section result shows die edge crack failure in unit 5 due to effect of thermal stress after ATC. (c) The enlarged image of (c) shows crack propagated into ILD layer near Cu pad of solder bump.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

SEM images obtained for solder fatigue crack found in two outermost bumps of the package filled with UFB (unit 6) after 1000 cycles of ATC

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

C-SAM image shows severe delamination due to hygroswelling for the package filled with UFB (unit 2) after PCT



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