TECHNET Archives

March 2001

TechNet@IPC.ORG

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Marsico, James" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum.
Date:
Thu, 29 Mar 2001 07:55:06 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (212 lines)
Could it be that the corner ball is a redundant circuit (or an unused I/O),
also being cracked but not detected in test?
Jim Marsico
Senior Engineer
Production Engineering
AIL/Electronics Systems Group
An EDO Company
[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>

        -----Original Message-----
        From:   <Peter George Duncan> [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
        Sent:   Wednesday, March 28, 2001 7:25 PM
        To:     [log in to unmask]
        Subject:        Re: [TN] BGA crack- major headache

        It is the fact that it's always the 2nd last ball on the top outside
row
        that I find interesting. Is there no damage to the adjacent corner
ball, as
        this is often the first one to go in CTE differences/creep fatigue
        situations? Thinking aloud for possible causes:

           Is the substrate material used for the failing boards different
from the
           other products on which the BGA is used?
           Is it of a substantially different thickness?
           Is the board reaching high temperature in use, or is it subjected
to
           wide temperature varience?
           Is this product subjected to greater levels of vibration and/or
flexing
           in the field than other products?
           Is there a feature on or in the board that is acting as a very
good
           heatsink just under or close to the failing pin? If everything
else is
           heating up and this ball isn't, it's relative lack of expansion
might
           pull the joint apart at its weakest point.
           Is there an inherent weakness in the BGA design or manufacture at
this
           particular ball position? Is there anything different about the
           attachment point of this ball in comparison with the others if
this
           device?
           Have you microsectioned any of the failed boards? Is the form of
the
           solder joint significantly different from the others - shape,
size,
           cleanliness, grain structure, etc?
           Have you tried doing a peel test on a sample board that hasn't
failed?
           Do you suffer from Poltergeists?
           Any combination of the above?

        I can't give you a definitive answer as to what causes the problem,
but do
        you use any underfill material with your BGA's? If not, you could
try using
        a urethane or epoxy underfill to support the solder joints - enough,
maybe,
        to hold the thing together. There are thermally conductive types of
which
        there are types that flow under the component and others that don't
flow
        under the component. I suggest you use a type that flows under the
        component. Although it makes it more difficult to remove the BGA
again
        later, its thermal conduction properties may serve to even out any
        differences in joint expansion and preserve the weak one.

        Hope something here inspires some better ideas for you.

        Regards

        Pete Duncan
        Asst Principal Engineer
        ST Aerospace




                            Rudolph Yu
                            <ylt@EARTHLIN        To:     [log in to unmask]
                            K.NET>               cc:
                            Sent by:             Subject:     [TN] BGA
crack- major headache
                            TechNet
                            <[log in to unmask]
                            ORG>


                            03/29/01
                            12:48 AM
                            Please
                            respond to
                            "TechNet
                            E-Mail
                            Forum.";
                            Please
                            respond to
                            Rudolph Yu






        Here are the facts:

        PBGA-272 balls
        FR4 with HASL finishes 8 layers

        The failure point always happens at the same I/O which is the 2nd
last ball
        of the top outmost row of the package. It is not located near the
edge of
        the board or any breakaway point.

        Failure mode
        Micro fracture found near the intermetallic layer between the BGA
package
        and the solder ball attached to it.

        Around 0.001% of the products we built failed in the field because
of this.
        None of these were caught during the ICT or Functional test.

        The same ASIC is also used on several other Products and have never
seen an
        issue like this.  Somehow this failure mode with this ASIC only
occurs in
        one particular product /design.


        The ASIC / fab lot-related , ICT pin interference, stress by the
breakaway
        tab, and stencil cleanliness assumptions had already ruled out after
a
        controlled lot was built few weeks back.  All boards passed the
tests.  But
        now some boards started failing in the field.

        Why the crack always happen to one single location(ball) with the
same
        product we built??


        We have run out all the possibilities that we can think of. I hope
all the
        experts in TechNet can share their opinions on this.  Customer kept
asking
        for the root cause analysis. Right now we just cannot came up with a
        reasonable one.

        Thanks
        Rudolph Yu


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----

        Technet Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV
1.8d
        To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following
text in
        the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
        To temporarily halt delivery of Technet send the following message:
SET
        Technet NOMAIL
        Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources &
Databases >
        E-mail Archives
        Please visit IPC web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for
        additional
        information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or
847-509-9700
        ext.5315

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
        Technet Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV
1.8d
        To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following
text in
        the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
        To temporarily halt delivery of Technet send the following message:
SET Technet NOMAIL
        Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources &
Databases > E-mail Archives
        Please visit IPC web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for
additional
        information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or
847-509-9700 ext.5315

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt delivery of Technet send the following message: SET Technet NOMAIL
Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases > E-mail Archives
Please visit IPC web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for additional
information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ATOM RSS1 RSS2