Wire tension (pull on bond) f = F/2sinα

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
October 2006 Mark Whitley Mid term Review 1 Mark Whitley LHCb VELO Backend Bonding at The University of Liverpool.
Advertisements

CMS Week, CERN, June Jun 2004CMS Week - Bonding WGSalvatore Costa - Catania Documentation of the loop of the to-be-pull-tested bonds placed.
Biochemistry Chemical reactions in living things..
July 19, 2010 Gale Lockwood Key elements to successful wire bonding at Birck Theory Bonding Machines Metallization Metals Substrates Process.
April 20, 2007Workshop on Silicon Detectors Systems for the CBM experiment 1 Wire-bonding interconnections Our experiences at the ASIC-Lab Heidelberg.
Materials Engineering – Day 2
Biology 107 Water September 2, Water Student Objectives:As a result of this lecture and the assigned reading, you should understand the following:
Bridge Design part 1 By Alan Pennington, materials taken from and adapted West Point Bridge Design.
Biology 107 Water September 1, Water Student Objectives:As a result of this lecture and the assigned reading, you should understand the following:
Tension Elastic Force Gravity Normal Force Friction Drag.
S Pyatt Cicorel optimised welding parameters. S Pyatt 30 degree loop parameters.
Chip Carrier Package as an Alternative for Known Good Die
L Berkley Davis Copyright 2009 MER301: Engineering Reliability Lecture 13 1 MER301: Engineering Reliability LECTURE 13 Chapter 6: Multiple Linear.
CMS Tracker Week, CERN, July July 2003Tracker Week - Module ProductionSalvatore Costa - Catania Executive summary from Bonding WG Meeting.
Earthquakes Chapter 19.
Friction Formulate at least 4 important facts about friction Objective 2 vocabulary: friction resistancemagnitude staticsliding frictionstatic friction.
Statics Activities. Stress  Force per unit area (  ) Typical engineering units – psi (lb f /in 2 ) – N/m 2 Stress = Force/Area – Applied by external.
STRUCTURES Outcome 3 Gary Plimer 2008 MUSSELBURGH GRAMMAR SCHOOL.
Chapter 10 Quality Control.
Chapter 19.  Most Earthquakes are the result of movement in the Earth’s crust at the tectonic plates.  Rocks in the crust resist movement and build.
3 Objectives Student Name: Ajao Hazzan ID: Kuala Lumpur Infrastructure University 1 Introductions.
N. Dixon PH / DT CERN 12 July Straw Material, weld line latest news and plans.
Warm-Up (10/26)  What factors play into the severity of an Earthquake at any given location? Explain in complete sentences.
Mechanical Properties & Reactivity. Review BCC → Body-Centered-Cubic 3 most common type of Crystalline Structures FCC → Face-Centered-Cubic HCP → Hexagonal-Close-Packed.
Report from Florence Bonding of Modules L12p Mirko Brianzi 20 April 2004.
Mechanical Concepts. Basic terms and concepts Force - a push or pull has magnitude, direction, and point application Weight - gravitational force exerted.
Pull testing procedure. F ff ѲѲ 2f sin Ѳ = F If sin Ѳ = 30° then f = F If the angle of the 1 st and 2 nd bonds is 30° then the force we measure equals.
Chapter Five: Force  5.1 Forces  5.2 Friction  5.3 Forces and Equilibrium.
Conductive glue tests. J.Wickens 12/7/04 Used small pieces of HV kapton cut from redundant (old) stock, glued to silicon test structures from Karlsruhe.
Section 5.6—Intermolecular Forces & Properties. IMF’s and Properties IMF’s are Intermolecular Forces  London Dispersion Forces  Dipole interactions.
CMS Tracker Week, CERN, April Apr 2005CMS Tracker Week - Bonding WGSalvatore Costa - Catania Salvatore Costa Bonding in CATANIA Università.
Precision Technology. WHY TEST AT HIGH SPEED? Typical manufacturing and end use failures.
 Spend minutes completing the activity regarding friction.
Hooke’s Law. Hooke’s law, elastic limit, experimental investigations. F = kΔL Tensile strain and tensile stress. Elastic strain energy, breaking stress.
Why House Bolting Needed?
Life’s Chemical Basis Chapter 2.
S.Movchan Straw manufacturing and QC
Bonding study of wrapping part of PA1/2
Nanoindentation.
SVD Ladder assembly at IPMU
Earthquakes Chapter 19.
Characteristics of Life: Properties of Water (Part 3)
Lesson 13 - Cleaning Data Lesson 14 - Creating Summary Tables
Statistical inference: distribution, hypothesis testing
Properties of Water Essential Standard
Normal force The force that keeps one object from invading another object is called the normal force “Normal” means “perpendicular” You can determine.
Water Properties (2.2) Part 1
UCSB Hybrid Bonding & Testing
Unit 5, Lesson 5 Torque.
Water Properties (2.2) Part 1
Intermolecular Forces & Properties
Earthquakes.
Water Properties (2.2) Part 1
RM 2 7 +RM 2 4 RM 7 3 +RM 1 6 RM 5 2 +RM 2 4 RM 1 3 +RM5 2.
Introduction When you see a sailboat out on the water, you know the wind is causing the boat to move, but how? The interaction between many variables:
STATISTICS Topic 1 IB Biology Miss Werba.
Biochemistry: The Chemical Basis of Life
Water Properties (6.5) Part 1
Structure & Properties of Water
Structure & Properties of Water
Mechanics Force.
Lesson 13 - Cleaning Data Lesson 14 - Creating Summary Tables
UNH Graduate Research Conference 2016
Water 6.3.
Mechanics Force.
Structure & Properties of Water
Structure & Properties of Water
Water Properties (2.2) Part 1


Presentation transcript:

Wire tension (pull on bond) f = F/2sinα Possible destructive test outcomes: lift off 1 heel break 1 wire break heel break 2 lift off 2 b1 b2 destructive test measure max force F α f Wire tension (pull on bond) f = F/2sinα

CERN PH-EP-Tech-Note-2011-002 In general, an acceptable quality in a standard bond pull test for a high reliability physics experiment application would be: no failure to make bonds during the bonding of the test wires (or less than 1% if 100 or more wires are made) 2) mean pull strength of >8 g and and RMS of <1 g 3) at least 75% heel breaks or mid-span breaks Note that a “typical” good quality bonding surface would result in no failures in bonding (<<1%), a mean pull strength of 10-12 g, an RMS of < 0.5 g, and > 95 % heel or mid-span breaks.

Oxford bus tape test Pull Test Results •Measured pull tests on samples with and without plasma cleaning. •All tests good, i.e. break at heel. •Much better than recommended QC by wire bonding group: Mean –5 sigma > 2.5 g • No significant difference with plasma cleaning (differences less than 2 sigma). With Without Plasma clean Number of pulls 37 44 Mean (g) 10.02 10.35 RMS (g) 0.88 1.03 Mean-5 sigma (g) 5.64 5.20

Doesn’t bond at best settings for CICOREL ELGOLINE   Bonder Parameters Pull Test Lot Time Power Force Sum Par Mean Std 2 35 100 20 155 4.17 1.56 3 10 145 10.98 0.55 4 16 151 6.49 1.37 5 24 159 3.5 0.84 6 25 80 129 10.55 0.78 7 121 11.28 0.58 8 131 11.33 0.28 9 85 136 7.62 1.33 95 154 4.1 1.08 11 144 5.99 1.01 12 134 9.5 13 126 11.85 0.85 14 130 10.38 0.96 15 90 135 9.21 1.28 140 7.87 1.58 17 30 6.09 2.21 18 7.43 2.34 19 10.1 1.54   Lot No. Time Power Force b1 Force b2 Sum Par Mean Std Mean scaled 2 30 90 16 18 137 7.8 1.09 6.32 3 95 142 6.22 2.06 5.04 4 100 147 3.92 0.65 3.18 5 105 152 4.68 1.51 3.79 6 110 157 3.75 0.71 3.04 7 85 132 8.94 1.95 7.24 8 35 7.36 2.75 5.96 9 40 8.19 1.89 6.63 10 50 7.68 1.4 11 60 162 7.72 1.99 6.25 12 65 167 6.82 2.86 5.52 Doesn’t bond at best settings for CICOREL Mostly lift off 2 Mostly heel break 1

cicorel Mean force vs. Bond parameters: Cicorel: low wire deformation  larger force Elgoline: not much correlation  fail because of lift off (doesn’t depend on wire deformation) cicorel

Cicorel Elgoline