Technical Briefs

A Creep Model for Solder Alloys

[+] Author and Article Information
Yongchang Lee

Electronic Packaging Laboratory, Department of Civil, Structural, and Environmental Engineering,  State University of New York at Buffalo,Buffalo, NY 14260; Nanotechnology Research Laboratory,University of Tabuk, Tabuk, Dhiba, 71421, Saudi Arabiayl83@buffalo.edu

Cemal Basaran

Electronic Packaging Laboratory, State University of New York at Buffalo

J. Electron. Packag 133(4), 044501 (Nov 17, 2011) (6 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4005288 History: Received December 01, 2009; Revised July 12, 2011; Published November 17, 2011; Online November 17, 2011

Demand for long-term reliability of electronic packaging has lead to a large number of studies on viscoplastic behavior of solder alloys. Various creep models for solder alloys have been proposed. They range from purely empirical to mechanism based models where dislocation motion and diffusion processes are taken into account. In this study, most commonly used creep models are compared with the test data and implemented in ABAQUS to compare their performance in cycling loading. Finally, a new creep model is proposed that combines best features of many models. It is also shown that, while two creep models may describe the same material stress–strain rate curves equally well, they may yield very different results when utilized for cycling loading. One interesting observation of this study is that the stress exponent, n., also depends on the grain size.

Copyright © 2011 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Topics: Creep , Alloys , Solders
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Creep-time curve for 63Sn/37Pb solder alloy, after Shi [14]

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Nabarro and Herring creep model

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Coble creep model

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Representation of the experimental data for each model; (a) creep models G and H and (b) creep model I

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Creep model G for different grain sizes; (a) model G on grain size = 9.7 μm and (b) model G on grain size = 28.4 μm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Creep model H for different grain sizes; (a) model H on grain size = 9.7 μm and (b) model H on grain size = 28.4 μm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Comparison between models G, H, and I for two complete cycles; (a) shear stress versus time and (b) shear stress versus temperature

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Creep model I for different grain sizes; (a) model I on grain size = 9.7 μm and (b) model I on grain size = 28.4 μm



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