Product Connector Technology

  • Karl J. Puttlitz
  • Lewis S. Goldmann


The use of product connectors has mainly involved high-end applications. Electronic modules normally represent a function, and one or more multichip modules typically are combined on a card or board. It is important that some or all the individual modules be easily separable to permit testing, diagnositcs and field repair, and that the separable connections not functionally degrade the electrical signals [1]. The intent is to preserve the value of a board and its attached components while having the capability to make repairs or upgrades through component exchanges throughout the lifetime of a part. Several early area-array “compression connection” concepts were reported in the mid 1980s/early 1990s that recognized that a disassembly design must also be capable of high I/O density to accommodate ever increasing I/O counts (i.e., extendible to decreasing pitches).


Solder Joint Contact Force Contact Resistance Solder Ball Solder Bump 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    D. G. Grabbe, “Multichip Modules Need Separable Connections,” Proc. NEPCON East, (Boston, MA), pp. 293–294, June 1991.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. D. Knight and P. E. Winkler, “Surface Soldered Pinless Module Connector,” Proc. 35th Electronic Components Conf. (Washington, DC), pp. 122–126, May 1985.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Kirkman, “A Land Grid Array Socket Utilizing PAI (TM) Contact Technology to Interconnect Intel’s New 386 (tm) SL Microprocessor,” Proc. NEPCON EAST (Boston, MA), pp. 247–251, June 1991.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    D. Nayak, L. T. Hwang, and I. Turlik, “Simulation and Design of Lossy Transmission Lines in a Thin Film Multichip Package,” IEEE Trans. on Components, Hybrids, and Manufacturing Technol., CHMT-13 (2): pp. 294–302, June 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    N. G. Koopman, “I/O Options for MCNC Multichip Package,” Proc. 41st Elec. Comp. Technol. Conf. (Atlanta, GA), pp. 234–244, May 1991.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. H. Graham, M. J. Pike-Biegunski, and S.W. Updegraff, “Evaluation of Palladium Substitutes for Gold,” AES Symp on Economic Use of and Substitution for Precious Metals in the Electronics Industry (Danvers, MA), Oct. 1982.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    S. W. Updegraff and A. H. Graham, “Palladium-Nickel as an Alternative to Gold in Connector Applications,” Proc. National Electronic Pkg. and Prod. Conf. (Anaheim, CA), pp. 702–713, Mar. 1983.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. S. Tetelman and A. J. McEvily, “The Mechanics of Fracture,”Fracture of Structural Materials, New York: Wiley, 1967.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. N. Humenik and J. E. Ritter, “Stress Corrosion of Alumina Substrates,” J. Mater. Sci., 14 (5): pp. 626–632, 1979.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    K. J. Puttlitz, T. Caulfield, and M. Cole, “Effect of Material Properties on the Fatigue Life of Dual Solder Ceramic Ball Grid Array (CBGA) Solder Joints,” Proc. 45th Electronic Components and Technology Conference, pp. 1005–1010 (Las Vegas, NV) 1995.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    S. F. Williams and J. I. Tustaniwski, “Stress Analysis of a Land Grid Array,” Advances in Electronic Packaging, ASME EEP-10 (1): pp. 403–408, 1995.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    P. J. Brofman, K. J. Puttlitz, and R. N. Master, “Hard Ball Grid Array for Pluggable BGA Connector,” Proc. Internat. Symp. on Microelectronics (ISHM), (Los Angeles, CA), pp. 1–6, Oct. 1995.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    B. Ghosal, “Socketable Bump Grid Array Shaped Solder or Copper Spheres,” U.S. Patent 5,868,304,1999.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    R. Smolley, “Button Board-A New Tech 27. nology Interconnect,” Proc. 4th Internat. Electronics Packaging Conf. (Baltimore, Maryland), pp. 75–91, Oct. 1984.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    R. R. Marker, “Button Board Contacts,” Connection Technology, Libertyville, IL: IHS Pub 28. lishing Group, Feb. 1992.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    P. R. Hurt, “Advanced High-Speed Packaging and Interconnect Developments,” Proc. Internat. Electronics Packaging Conf. (San Diego, CA), pp. 774–780, Sept. 1991.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    E. Almquist, “Button Contacts for Liquid Nitrogen Applications,” Proc. 39th Electronic Components Conf. (Houston, TX), pp. 88–91, May 1989.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    R. J. Kuntz, “Multichip Module Connector Evaluation at Unisys,” Proc. 42nd Electronic Components and Technology Conf. (San Diego, CA), pp. 252–257, May 1992.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    E. J. Guarin and K. E. Longenbach, “Contact Resistance Degradation in Z-Axis Con- 31. nectors Operated at Burn-In Temperatures,” Proc. 43rd Electronics Components and Technology Conf. (Orlando, FL.), pp. 88–92, June 1993.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    R. R. Marker, “CIN: APSE-A High Speed Interconnect,” Proc. NEPCON East (Boston, MA), pp. 590–597, June 1991.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    S. Mac Corquodale, “Button Connectors- 33. Solderless, Low-Thermal Rise Interconnect for High-Speed Signal Transmission,” Connector Technology, Libertyville, IL: Lake Publishing Corp., Jan. 1990.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    F. J. Guarin and A. A. Katsetos, “Solderless High Density Interconnectors for Burn-In Applications,” Proc. 42nd Electronics Components Conf. (San Diego), pp. 263–267, May 1992.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    D. Bender and S. P. Zarlingo, “Spring Materials for Terminals and Connectors in Harsh Environments,” Proc. 42nd Electronic Components and Technology Conf. (San Diego, CA), pp. 298–305, May 1992.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    T. D. Hann and S. P. Zarlingo, “Spring Designers Data Package, East Alton: Olin Brass, 1985.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    C151 Engineering Guide, East Alton: Olin Brass, 1989.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    S. P. Zarlingo, “Understanding Stress Relaxation in Copper Alloys,” presented at Connector Symposium (Philadelphia, PA), Nov. 1, 1982.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    S. P. Zarlingo, “New Insights for the Specification of Copper Alloy Strip Metals and Connectors,” Proc. 46th Electronic Components and Technology Conf. (Orlando, FL), pp. 471–475, May 1996.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    M. Zifcak and S. Simpson, “Pinless Grid Array Connector,” Proc. 6th Internat. Electronics Packaging Conf. pp. 453–464 (San Diego, CA), Nov. 1986.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    R. D. Pendse, “Low Relaxation Elastomeric Pressure Contact System for High Density Interconnect,” Proc. Internat. Electronics Packaging Conf. (San Diego, CA), pp. 750–758, Sept. 1991.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    J. A. Fulton et al., “Electrical and Mechanical Properties of a Metal-Filled Polymer Composite for Interconnection and Testing Applications,” Proc. 39th Electronic Components Conf. (Houston, TX), pp. 71–77, May 1989.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    L. H. Spierling, S. L. Cooper, and A. V. Tobolsky, “Elastomeric and Mechanical Properties of Poly-m-Carboranylenesloxanes,” J. of Applied Polymer Sci.,10: pp. 1725–17, 1966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    D-Y Shih, et al., “New Ball Grid Array Module Test Sockets,” Proc. 46th Electronic Components and Technology Conf. (Orlando, FL), pp. 467–469, May 1996.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    B. Beaman, D-Y Shih, and G. Walker, “A New Direction for Elastomeric Connectors,” Proc. 43rd Electronic Components and Technology Conf. (Orlando, FL), pp. 436–440, June 1993.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    F. W. Chapin, J. J. Kershaw, and A. D. Knight, “High Density Area Array Module Connector,” Proc. 43rd Electronics Components and Technology Conf. (Orlando, FL), pp. 441–445, June 1993.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    B. Chan and P. Singh, “BGA Sockets—A Dendritic Solution,” Proc. 46th Electronic Components and Technology Conf. (Orlando, FL), pp. 460–466, May 1996.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Karl J. Puttlitz
  • Lewis S. Goldmann
    • 1
  1. 1.IBM MicroelectronicsUSA

Personalised recommendations