AT&S SMTA

1,144 views
1,047 views

Published on

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,144
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
21
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

AT&S SMTA

  1. 1. APPLICATION OF SOLDER PASTE IN PCB CAVITIES*) Markus Leitgeb, Christopher Michael Ryder Austria Technologie & Systemtechnik AG Leoben, AustriaABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONTwo major drivers in the electronics industry are electrical The use of cavities in the PCB industry is nothing all tooand mechanical miniaturization. Whereas lines and spaces new. Local depth reduction (through various methods andhave been getting smaller over the years (current HDI technologies) has long been applied to achieve a numberstandard is 50/50µm), mechanical miniaturization has thus of design and/or application linked results. With newfar been mostly limited to decreasing layer-count and technologies available allowing for component terminalsmaterial thickness. in the cavity itself (pads, etc.), the challenge of soldering these components is becoming a stronger focal point.One further solution is local height reduction through theintroduction of recessed cavities on the PCB. These Component placement itself is not the biggest challenge incavities can be used assembling components and/or device the assembly process. It is well known that the assemblyelements to reduce overall PCBA z-axis dimension. of the components can be easily altered by adjusting the z- Axis in the placement programming. However, oneThe cavity forming method referred to in this paper allows challenge remains largely open: “How do I get a solderfor unlimited flexibility in shape and depth of these paste into the cavity in an effective and process-efficientcavities, thereby enabling greater freedom in material manner?”selection and PCB design rules. Solderable surfaces andsoldermask patterns can also be applied on the cavity Of course, there are well known methodologies in thelayer. market like jet printing and nozzle dispensers, which can fulfill these requirements, but there are as yet stillAs much as this provides a solution for z-axis limitations in terms of throughput, application volumes,miniaturization, the challenge of assembling components etc… As stencil printing is still the most widely used andwith standard and even advanced surface mount currently the most cost effective solution in the market fortechnologies remains a critical aspect of successful volume production of standard PCBAs, it would makeimplementation of these technologies. sense to have a cavity solution which is compatible with standard stencil/paste SMT.This paper aims to demonstrate initial trials to address thechallenge of component assembly within recessed cavities AT&S (PCB manufacturer) has started together withon the PCB using various stencil configurations. Two Christian Koenen GmbH (stencil manufacturer) a projectmajor proponents of the trials presented here are AT&S to identify the any current limits of using stencil printingwith its 2.5D® Technology and Christian Koenen GmbH, for solder paste application in cavities of varying depthsa stencil manufacturer. on a single test vehicle.The ultimate target of these trials and this paper is not a The next logical step after this investigation would, offinal and universal solution, but rather attempts to clarify course, be to identify any other applicable paste printingthe initial challenge scope and explore existing or further methods and possible variations in terms of componentpossible solutions. soldering and reliability performance when comparing to standard (cavity-free) surface mounted components.KEYWORDSPCB, Cavities, Solder paste in cavity, Step stencil *) Originally distributed at the International Conference on Soldering and Reliability” 1 Toronto, Ontario, Canada; May 4-6, 2011
  2. 2. TEST MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT test) (see figure 2). Minimum distance from the test pattern to the cavity wall for the experiment was 2mm.Test VehicleAs there is no standard test vehicle for the testing ofsolder paste printing in cavities available, an attempt wasmade to create a vehicle based as much as possible on astencil printing manufacturer`s design. The vehiclecreated contains a number of typical componentfootprints: 0603, 0402, 0,5mm and 0,4mm fine pitch pads,and µBGAs with 0,5 mm 0,3 mm pitch (see Figure 1). Figure 2. Test board with cavity areas The build for the 2,1mm thick PCB was a 12 layer multi- layer with Panasonic R1650M material (halogenated epoxy resin based prepreg). This stack up and production method enables the removal of 5 layers at varying depths on a single card. The specific depth is achieved by the application of a paste on the release layer with subsequent relamination of the entire board. A laser cutting processFigure 1. Test pattern then trims and cuts at the predetermined shape to separate the relaminated layers from the release layer. The finalThe exact copper feature dimensions can be found in step is then “cap removal” and paste stripping (see FigureTable 1 and 2 below. 3). What remains is the solder footprint pattern. DiverseTable 1. Copper features surface finishes and also application of solder mask may be employed in the cavities, but for the sake of this Pad Dimensions experiment solder mask was only used on the outer layer Footprint x [mm] y [mm] P [mm] (0µm cavity). Entek HT (Organic surface protection) was 0603 0,66 1,06 1,50 used as a surface finish for all solderable surfaces. 0402 0,46 0,66 1,00 Fine Pitch 0,5mm 0,31 1,66 0,50 Fine Pitch 0,4mm 0,26 1,66 0,40 µBGA 0,5mm d = 0,33 0,50 µBGA 0,3mm d = 0,20 0,30 Figure 3. Schematic process flow of cavity formation.Table 2. Stencil apertures The unused copper on all inner layers was “hatched”, Stencil Aperture which means they were not full copper surfaces. This is Footprint x [mm] y [mm] standard practice in PCB design to achieve warpage 0603 0,60 1,00 control and enhance thermal reliability performance. 0402 0,40 0,60 Fine Pitch 0,5mm 0,25 1,60 Fiducials for SMT registration and cavity printing were Fine Pitch 0,4mm 0,20 1,60 µBGA 0,5mm 0,33 0,33 located on outer layer to enable printing the solder paste µBGA 0,3mm 0,20 0,20 in a one step process. Therefore the only influence for registration is the layer shift caused by the several relamination steps. However, this shift is by any meansThis footprint pattern was placed on the test vehicle on compatible with current HDI manufacturing standards.recessed areas of 0µm (no cavity), 50µ, 250µm, 500µmand 750µm (The 100µm cavity was not employed for this Testing Material and Equipment*) Originally distributed at the International Conference on Soldering and Reliability” 2Toronto, Ontario, Canada; May 4-6, 2011
  3. 3. To distinguish whether solder paste type (ball size) plays a Figure 5. Squeegee blade with moveable partsrole in cavity printing performance, two different types ofsolder pastes were used for the printing trials: The sloped edges of the step openings ensure that excess paste is removed from the stencil during printing (see • Manufacturer A (Type 3) Figure 6). • Manufacturer B (Type 4)Both solder pastes are widely used lead-free pastes forvolume stencil printing process.The solder paste printing system used in this trial is a twopart system consisting of a step stencil and a customizedsqueegee. The stencil was a laser cut stainless steel stencilglued in polyester mesh and tensioned in an aluminumframe. The dimensions of the stencil were (736 x 736 x 40mm³). Stencil base thickness was 1mm. Stencil thicknessin the print area was 80µm. The depth of the stencil is Figure 6. Cross section of Step stencil with sloped edgeadjusted for each individual cavity and is furthermorerecessed on the top side of the stencil to achieve a The printer used was an Ersa Versaprint. The parametersconsistent aspect ratio throughout the print (i.e. the stencil employed are shown in Table 3.thickness 80µm is constant for all areas despite cavitydepth) (see Figure 4). Table 3. Printing parameters Parameter Value Unit Speed F/B 50/ 50 mm/s Squeegee pressure F/B 25/ 25 N Snap off speed 50,0 mm/s Snap off distance 2,0 mm A Koh Young KY-3020T tabletop full automatic system was used for the inspection of the volume and printed surface coverage of solder paste. A Cyberscan CT300 was used for profiling the solderFigure 4. Overview Step Stencil on PCB paste and 3D image evaluation after printing.The customized steel squeegee is 150mm in length and is TEST METHODOLGYdesigned with movable sections to account for variabledepth. Therefore the multi-depth top side contour of the The first step in the trial methodology included the depthstencil is accounted for through the varying pressure of inspection and verification of the cavity depths on the testthe movable squeegee sections (Figure 5). vehicle (nominal depths: 0µm, 50µm, 250µm, 500µm, 750µm). Measurements points were soldermask surface on the outer layer (outermost point of solder stencil contact) to copper surface in each cavity. Depth tolerance should be understood as the accumulation of the single layer thickness tolerances (i.e. +-10% for dielectric thickness). All test vehicles were verified for as within tolerance for the given depths. The stencil and customized squeegee were subsequently installed and registered. The squeegee must be aligned to the specific cavities for which the movable parts are designed. This was done manually using the alignment of arrow markings on both stencil and squeegee (Figure 7).*) Originally distributed at the International Conference on Soldering and Reliability” 3Toronto, Ontario, Canada; May 4-6, 2011
  4. 4. Figure 7. Alignment marking on Squeegee and stencil Figure 9. 3D paste print verification with CT300 (750µm cavity)The type 3 solder paste was mixed accordingly andapplied to the step stencil surface. Using the print The first paste used for testing was the lead free type 3parameters described above in Testing Material and from manufacturer A. Ten test vehicles were then printed.Equipment, several test prints were then carried out to Subsequently the 10 PCBs were analyzed for pasteverify effectiveness and accuracy. volume and surface coverage (2D evaluation of print coverage versus aperture opening) with the Koh Young.The test prints were first inspected manually with an The results will be discussed in the “evaluation” section ofoptical microscope to inspect general print status in terms this paper.of accuracy and application. Considerations were made toevaluate any obvious differences between the cavities, the The next step after ultrasonic cleaning of the step stencilcomponent footprints and/or solder paste types (type 3 was to print the type 4 solder paste onto 10 further testand 4 were used, as mentioned above) (Figure 8). vehicles. The test vehicles were subsequently analyzed in the Koh Young AOI device. The complete results, as stated above will be discussed at a later point. Due to obvious and somewhat expected paste voids with the type 3 solder paste (see Figure 10), it was decided to proceed only with type 4 as it was deemed more suitable for further analysis.Figure 8. Alignment check with optical microscope(750µm cavity)During manual inspection some slight misregistration wasobserved, whereupon the stencil was realigned to the PCBtest vehicle. New prints were carried out, inspected andregistration was verified.The test prints were then measured with the solder paste Figure 10. Comparison type 3 and 4 solder balls in fineprint AOI device (Koh Young) in order to assess transfer pitch areaefficiency (paste volume V) and surface coverage (SC) A further 10 cards were paste printed with type 4.measurement capability for varying focal points (i.e. Furthermore the element of stencil cleaning was addedvarying cavity depths). The device was able to with this run, whereas the stencil was cleaned with asuccessfully scan the single test vehicle despite the depth solution after every 2nd print. The cards were subsequentlyvariations. The results were verified using the CT300 analyzed with the AOI device.(Figure 9).*) Originally distributed at the International Conference on Soldering and Reliability” 4Toronto, Ontario, Canada; May 4-6, 2011
  5. 5. To summarize, a total of 30 test vehicles were printed as Excluding the 0µm surface coverage values, a mean valuesuch: of 95,1% was found over all footprints and depths. • 10 PCBs with type 3 • 10 PCBs with type 4 • 10 PCBs with type 4 (with stencil cleaning)TEST EVALUATIONAfter AOI measurement and evaluation was carried outthe data was entered into Minitab and Excel to exploreinteractions, deviations and trends.The first trial with type 3 paste revealed the followingresults. Broken down into component footprint, pastevolume analysis revealed a clear and reproducible trend.The paste volume at 0µm (i.e. no cavity) was on average113,9%. Highest value was 147,9% on the 0402 footprintand lowest value was 57,9% on the 0,3mm µBGA. Figure 12. Type 3 – Surface coverage per footprint andThe overall higher values on the 0µm footprints are linked cavity depthto the presence of solder mask and in particular the 25µm The second trial with type 4 paste revealed the followingdelta between copper and solder mask height (Figure 11). results. Broken down into component footprint, pasteThe exceptionally low value of 57,9% on the 0,3mm volume analysis revealed similar results with someµBGA can be traced to the presence of solder paste voids variation to those of the type 3 paste. Excluding the 0µmdue to the nature of the type 3 solder ball size (as paste volume values, a mean value of 93,7% was foundillustrated above in Figure 10). Otherwise a general trend over all footprints and depths. Compared to the 62,9%of decreasing paste volume was observed as cavity depth mean paste volume value found with the type 3 paste, aincreased (with few exceptions). Excluding the 0µm paste clear indication of improved performance is recognizablevolume values, a mean value of 62,9% was found over all (Figure 13).footprints and depths. Figure 13. Type 4 – Paste Volume per footprint and cavity depthFigure 11. Type 3 – Paste Volume per footprint andcavity depth In terms of surface coverage a similar trend was noticeable, whereas the deviation between type 3 and typeIn terms surface coverage (SC) a similar trend was of 4 was not as pronounced. The mean value of 102,7% overcourse noticeable (Figure 12). Highest value was for 0402 all footprints and depths (excluding the 0µm depth)footprint with 116,7% at 0µm and lowest value was compared to the 95,1% from type 3 is indicative of the 2D0,3mm µBGA footprint with 57,1% at 750µm. Reasons nature of the testing (Figure 14).for this variation are similar to those described above.Otherwise a general trend of decreasing surface coveragewas observed as cavity depth increased (with fewexceptions).*) Originally distributed at the International Conference on Soldering and Reliability” 5Toronto, Ontario, Canada; May 4-6, 2011
  6. 6. Figure 14. Type 4 – Surface coverage per footprint and Figure 16. Type 4 / with cleaning – Surface coverage percavity depth footprint and cavityThe third trial employed type 4 paste with manual stencil The interaction plots between the individual test elementscleaning after each second print. The following results (paste type, footprint, cavity depth and cleaning y/n)were found. The mean paste volume value for all revealed some clear indications.footprints on the 0µm depth was 89,4%. The mean pastevolume value for all remaining footprints and depths was First we will investigate the interaction plot for paste70,7%. Here we see a lower overall volume when volume (Figure 17). The interaction between paste andcompared to the type 4 paste without cleaning results component footprint demonstrates a slight overall(Figure 15). However, the standard deviation for the type superiority of the type 4 paste versus type 3. However, the4 with cleaning is 4% lower than without cleaning performance indicators run relatively parallel (i.e. better(respectively 10% and 14%). The greatest observable performance on larger component footprint compared todifference in standard deviation was seen in 0,3mm smaller).µBGA: without cleaning 35,9% and with cleaning 19,1%.Figure 15. Type 4 / with cleaning – Paste Volume per Figure 17. Interaction plot for paste volumefootprint and cavity depth The interaction between paste type and cavity depthThe data for surface coverage with type 4 and stencil demonstrates somewhat better overall performance withcleaning after every second print presented a more the type 4 paste. However, performance in the cavitieshomogenous pattern than the other trials, especially regardless of depth can be viewed as consistent. Theconsidering the 0µm footprint performance with the visible difference on the 0µm cavity depth is, once again,cavity depth performance (Figure 16). Similar to the linked to the presence of solder mask and therefore asituation described above with paste volume, surface higher contact plane for the stencil.coverage overall is less with the type 4 cleaning trialscompared to the type 4 without cleaning trials. However, The interaction between footprint and cavity depthonce again we see a lower standard deviation with the demonstrates consistent patterns with exception of thetype 4 with cleaning trials (with cleaning 6,9% and 0,3mm µBGA. In general, the larger component footprintswithout cleaning 10,7%). fared better as did the smaller depths. The 0,3mm µBGA showed a consistently low performance regardless of cavity depths.*) Originally distributed at the International Conference on Soldering and Reliability” 6Toronto, Ontario, Canada; May 4-6, 2011
  7. 7. The interaction between paste and cleaning is moot as the coverage. The biggest variations in performance can becleaning trials were carried out only with the type 4. accounted for with the solder mask height delta over copper on the 0µm cavity depth and the 0,3mm µBGA.The interaction between component footprint and cleaningprovides conflicting results. The 0,3mm and 0,5mm pitch Regarding the solder mask we would suggest this is aBGAs as well as the 0603 demonstrated slightly improved common a phenomenon on standard non cavity PCBs. Inperformance in terms of volume when cleaned, the future trials, there would be the possibility of applyingremaining footprints, however, demonstrate slightly less solder mask in the cavities as well to aid in more directvolume when cleaned. comparison.The plot for cavity depth and cleaning demonstrates the The somewhat inferior performance of the 0,3mm µBGA,largest interaction at 0µm cavity depth. Here we see the we would also suggest, is demonstrative of generallargest reduction of volume on the type 4 with cleaning limitations of the stencil printing method on this pitch andcompared to no cleaning. Otherwise, no major interaction not related necessarily to cavity depth.can be extrapolated. It would appear after these initial trials that with someNow we will examine the interaction plot for surface further optimization in terms of both material and processcoverage (Figure 18). The interactions for paste/ footprint, improvements could be made to increase transferpaste/ cavity, footprint/ cavity and footprint/ cleaning can efficiency and surface coverage. Such optimizationsbe considered in line with the paste volume interaction would also have to consider the specific PCB design andanalysis described above. component footprint (design rules).The plot for cavity depth and cleaning revealed a Considerations will be made on our part to examine thesomewhat more pronounced interaction for the larger manufacturing and reliability performance of the pastecavity depths. These depths demonstrated an increased printed cavity PCBs as a next step. Additional and/orsurface coverage after cleaning. alternative printing and soldering processes and materials may be drawn into the further trials.Figure 18. Interaction plot for surface coverageSUMMARYThe initial task at hand was to evaluate the feasibility andeffectiveness of using a standard method of paste printingto print on to PCBs with varying cavity depths. The trialsemployed, however, a non-standard stencil and squeegeesolution.Despite the usage of non-standard materials (i.e.stencil/squeegee system and multi-cavity depths PCB), theprinting process as such did not deviate from generalvolume manufacturing practices.In general, the trials demonstrated successful solder pasteprinting results in terms of paste volume and surface*) Originally distributed at the International Conference on Soldering and Reliability” 7Toronto, Ontario, Canada; May 4-6, 2011

×