0
Research Papers

UCPD Model for Pb-Free Solder

[+] Author and Article Information
Michael K. Neilsen

Mem. ASME
Sandia National Laboratories,
P.O. Box 5800, MS0346,
Albuquerque, NM 87185
e-mail: mkneils@sandia.gov

Paul T. Vianco

Sandia National Laboratories,
P.O. Box 5800, MS0889,
Albuquerque, NM 87185
e-mail: ptvianc@sandia.govl

Contributed by the Electronic and Photonic Packaging Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ELECTRONIC PACKAGING. Manuscript received September 9, 2013; final manuscript received February 6, 2014; published online September 19, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Satish Chaparala.

J. Electron. Packag 136(4), 041006 (Sep 19, 2014) (8 pages) Paper No: EP-13-1101; doi: 10.1115/1.4026851 History: Received September 09, 2013; Revised February 06, 2014

A unified creep plasticity damage (UCPD) model for eutectic Sn-Pb and Pb-free solders was developed and implemented into finite element analysis codes. The new model will be described along with the relationship between the model's damage evolution equation and an empirical Coffin–Manson relationship for solder fatigue. Next, developments needed to model crack initiation and growth in solder joints will be described. Finally, experimentally observed cracks in typical solder joints subjected to thermal mechanical fatigue are compared with model predictions. Finite element based modeling is particularly suited for predicting solder joint fatigue of advanced electronics packaging, e.g. package-on-package (PoP), because it allows for evaluation of a variety of package materials and geometries.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Coffin–Manson fatigue life curves for SAC solder

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Comparison of uniaxial compression test UCPD model predictions (solid lines) with experimental data (symbols) for SAC396. Numbers in figure are test temperature and nominal engineering strain rates.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Local model predictions for cycles needed to initiate and grow cracks to failure (electrical open) are mesh dependent

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Inelastic strain rate history at points A, B, and C (see Fig. 7(a) for Point locations) in the solder joint

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Temperature history used for simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Finite element model of one-fourth of a small 0603 resistor on 1.5748 mm thick FR-4 printed wiring board

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Contour plots of damage in the solder joint after 1200 thermal cycles

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Damage predicted at three different locations in solder joint with acceleration factors of 1, 50, and 600. Locations of Points A, B, and C are shown in Fig. 7(a).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Element size dependent model (Eq. (21)) predicted cycles to initiate and grow cracks to failure (electrical open)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

CLCC-20 model and contour plots of solder life showing crack extent at 350 and electrical open at 1,150 cycles. Arrow shows end of crack extent.

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