0
Research Papers

Cracking of the Intermetallic Compound Layer in Solder Joints Under Drop Impact Loading

[+] Author and Article Information
Tong An

College of Mechanical Engineering and Applied Electronics Technology,  Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100124, P R China

Fei Qin

College of Mechanical Engineering and Applied Electronics Technology,  Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100124, P R Chinaqfei@bjut.edu.cn

J. Electron. Packag 133(3), 031004 (Sep 14, 2011) (7 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4004870 History: Received February 05, 2011; Revised June 22, 2011; Published September 14, 2011; Online September 14, 2011

The significant difference between failure modes of lead-containing and lead-free solder joints under drop impact loading remains to be not well understood. In this paper, we propose a feasible finite element approach to model the cracking behavior of solder joints under drop impact loading. In the approach, the intermetallic compound layer/solder bulk interface is modeled by the cohesive zone model, and the crack driving force in the intermetallic compound layer is evaluated by computing the energy release rate. The numerical simulation of a board level package under drop impact loading shows that, for the lead-containing Sn37Pb solder joint, the damage in the vicinity of the intermetallic compound layer initiates earlier and is much greater than that in the lead-free Sn3.5Ag solder joint. This damage relieves the stress in the intermetallic compound layer and reduces the crack driving force in it and consequently alleviates the risk of the intermetallic compound layer fracturing.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2011 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Distribution of the G/Gf in the Cu6 Sn5 layers at different time: (a) Sn3.5Ag and (b) Sn37Pb

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Schematic structure of a solder joint and its failure modes

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Typical traction–separation relationship of the cohesive zone model

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

(a) Sliced finite element model of a board level package; (b) detailed finite element model of a solder joint, including the Cu6 Sn5 layer and cohesive elements

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Damage distribution of the cohesive zone elements in the Sn3.5Ag solder joint: (a) time = 0.68 ms; (b) time = 0.72 ms

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Damage distribution of the cohesive zone elements in the Sn37Pb solder joint: (a) time = 0.66 ms; (b) time = 0.70 ms

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Numbers of elements damaged during the drop impact

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Damage histories of the cohesive zone elements in the Sn3.5Ag and Sn37Pb solder joints

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Histories of the maximum G/Gf in the Cu6 Sn5 layers of the Sn3.5Ag and Sn37Pb solder joint

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Distribution of G/Gf in the Cu6 Sn5 layer of the Sn3.5Ag solder joint: (a) time = 0.64 ms; (b) time = 0.72 ms

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Distribution of G/Gf in the Cu6 Sn5 layer of the Sn37Pb solder joint: (a) time = 0.62 ms; (b) time = 0.68 ms

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