Advertisement

Fracture Behavior of IMCs at Cu/Pb-Free Solder Interface

  • Qingke ZhangEmail author
Chapter
First Online:
  • 575 Downloads
Part of the Springer Theses book series (Springer Theses)

Abstract

Since the adhesive properties of the Pb-free solder joints are significantly affected by the Cu–Sn intermetallic compounds (IMC) at the joint interface, fracture behavior of the IMCs induced by different factors were investigated. The indentation test on the Cu–Sn grains reveal that they fracture in a cleavage mode when the shear loading increases to a certain value, the fracture location depends on the shape and size of the Cu–Sn grain, and the shear strength is about 670 MPa. Serious stress and strain concentration occurs around the joint interface under tensile loadings, makes the shear stress applied on the protrudent Cu–Sn about 300–400 MPa, therefore fracture of the long-term reflowed joint interface usually occurs in the interfacial IMC layer. Due to the dislocation pile-up at the Cu/IMC interface, the IMC layers at the Cu/lead-free solder interface fracture shortly after yielding of the Cu substrate, resulting in cracking vertical to the joint interface. Yield of the Cu substrates can be regarded as the sufficient condition for fracture of the IMC layer, and the yield strength of the Cu substrate has dominative influence on the fracture behaviors.

Keywords

Solder Joint Fracture Behavior Slip Band Solder Alloy Indentation Test 
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Chan YC, Yang D. Failure mechanisms of solder interconnects under current stressing in advanced electronic packages. Prog Mater Sci. 2010;55:428–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Prakash KH, Sritharan T. Interface reaction between copper and molten tin-lead solders. Acta Mater. 2001;49:2481–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Laurila T, Vuorinen V, Kivilahti JK. Interfacial reactions between lead-free solders and common base materials. Mater Sci Eng R. 2005;49:1–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dao M, Chollacoop N, Van Vliet KJ, Venkatesh TA, Suresh S. Computational modeling of the forward and reverse problems in instrumented sharp indentation. Acta Mater. 2001;49:3899–918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Deng X, Chawla N, Chawla KK, Koopman M. Deformation behavior of (Cu, Ag)–Sn intermetallics by nanoindentation. Acta Mater. 2004;52:4291–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    He M, Chen Z, Qi GJ. Solid state interfacial reaction of Sn–37Pb and Sn–3.5Ag solders with Ni–P under bump metallization. Acta Mater. 2004;52:2047–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chromik RR, Vinci RP, Allen SL, Notis MR. Nanoindentation measurements on Cu–Sn and Ag–Sn intermetallics formed in Pb-free solder joints. J Mater Res. 2003;18:2251–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ghosh G. Elastic properties, hardness, and indentation fracture toughness of intermetallics relevant to electronic packaging. J Mater Res. 2004;19:1439–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jang GY, Lee JW, Duh JG. The nanoindentation characteristics of Cu6Sn5, Cu3Sn, and Ni3Sn4 intermetallic compounds in the solder bump. J Electron Mater. 2004;33:1103–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yang PF, Lai YS, Jian SR, Chen J, Chen RS. Nanoindentation identifications of mechanical properties of Cu6Sn5, Cu3Sn, and Ni3Sn4 intermetallic compounds derived by diffusion couples. Mater Sci Eng A. 2008;485:305–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jiang L, Chawla N. Mechanical properties of Cu6Sn5 intermetallic by micropillar compression testing. Script Mater. 2010;63:480–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kikuchi S, Nishimura M, Suetsugu K, Ikari T, Matsushige K. Strength of bonding interface in lead-free Sn alloy solders. Mater Sci Eng A. 2001;319–321:475–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee HT, Chen MH, Jao HM, Liao TL. Influence of interfacial intermetallic compound on fracture behavior of solder joints. Mater Sci Eng A. 2003;358:134–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kima KS, Huh SH, Suganuma K. E ffects of intermetallic compounds on properties of Sn–Ag–Cu lead-free soldered joints. J Alloys Compd. 2003;352:226–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zou HF, Zhang ZF. Ductile-to-brittle transition induced by increasing strain rate in Sn–3Cu/Cu joints. J Mater Res. 2008;23:1614–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hu GJ, Goh KY, Judy L. Micromechanical analysis of copper trace in printed circuit boards. Microelectron Reliab. 2011;51:416–424.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sinkovics B, Krammer O. Board level investigation of BGA solder joint deformation strength. Microelectron Reliab. 2009;49:573–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zhang QK, Tan J, Zhang ZF. Fracture behaviors and strength of Cu6Sn5 intermetallic compounds by indentation testing. J Appl Phys. 2011;110:014502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhang QK, Zhang ZF. Influences of reflow time and strain rate on interfacial fracture behaviors of Sn–4Ag/Cu solder joints. J Appl Phys. 2012;112:064508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zhang QK, Zhang ZF. In-situ observations on fracture behaviors of Cu–Sn IMC layers induced by deformation of Cu substrates. Mater Sci Eng A. 2011;530:452–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yoon JW, Kim SW, Jung SB. Interfacial reaction and mechanical properties of eutectic Sn–0.7Cu/Ni BGA solder joints during isothermal long-term aging. J Alloys Compd. 2005;391:82–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kim SW, Yoon JW, Jung SB. Interfacial reactions and shear strengths between Sn–Ag–based Pb-Free Solder Balls and Au/EN/Cu Metallization. J Electron Mater. 2004;33:1182–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kerr M, Chawla N. Creep deformation behavior of Sn–3.5Ag solder/Cu couple at small length scales. Acta Mater. 2004;52:4527–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shang PJ, Liu ZQ, Pang XY, Li DX, Shang JK. Growth mechanisms of Cu3Sn on polycrystalline and single crystalline Cu substrates. Acta Mater. 2009;57:4697–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zou HF, Yang HJ, Zhang ZF. Morphologies, orientation relationships and evolution of Cu6Sn5 grains formed between molten Sn and Cu single crystals. Acta Mater. 2008;56:2649–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zhang QK, Zhang ZF. Fracture mechanism and strength-influencing factors of Cu/Sn–4Ag solder joints aged for different times. J Alloy Compd. 2009;485:853–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lang F, Tanaka H, Munegata O, Taguchi T, Narita T. The effect of strain rate and temperature on the tensile properties of Sn–3.5Ag solder. Mater Charact. 2005;54:223–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bai N, Chen X, Fang Z. Effect of strain rate and temperature on the tensile properties of tin-based lead-free solder alloys. J Electron Mater. 2008;37:1012–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Date M, Shoji T, Fujiyoshi M, Sato K, Tu KN. Ductile-to-brittle transition in Sn–Zn solder joints measured by impact test. Script Mater. 2004;51:641–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zhu QS, Zhang ZF, Shang JK, Wang ZG. Fatigue damage mechanisms of copper single crystal/Sn–Ag–Cu interfaces. Mater Sci Eng A. 2006;435–436:588–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yao P, Liu P, Liu J. Effects of multiple reflows on intermetallic morphology and shear strength of SnAgCu–xNi composite solder joints on electrolytic Ni/Au metallized substrate. J Alloys Compd. 2008;462:73–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Zhang ZF, Wang ZG. Grain boundary effects on cyclic deformation and fatigue damage. Prog Mater Sci. 2008;53:1025–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kumar KS, Van Swygenhoven H, Suresh S. Mechanical behavior of nanocrystalline metals and alloys. Acta Mater. 2003;51:5743–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Zhang ZF, Wang ZG. Dependence of intergranular fatigue cracking on the interactions of persistent slip bands with grain boundaries. Acta Mater. 2003;51:347–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Meyers MA, Mishra A, Benson DJ. Mechanical properties of nanocrystalline materials. Prog Mater Sci. 2006;51:427–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Head AK. Dislocation group-dynamics. 6. Release of a pile-up. Philos Mag. 1973;27:531–539.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Larsson AK, Stenberg L, Lidin S. The superstructure of domain-twinned eta’—Cu6Sn5. Acta Crystall B. 1994;50:636–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kao C. Microstructures developed in solid-liquid reactions: using Cu–Sn reaction, Ni–Bi reaction, and Cu–In reaction as examples. Mater Sci Eng A. 1997;238:196–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Cottrell AH. Dislocations and plastic flow in crystals. London: Oxford University Press; 1953.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Armstrong R, Codd I, Douthwaite RM, Petch NJ. The plastic deformation of polycrystalline aggregates. Philos Mag. 1962;7:45–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Zeng K, Tu KN. Six cases of reliability study of Pb-free solder joints in electronic packaging technology. Mater Sci Eng R. 2002;38:55–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Metal ResearchChinese Academy of SciencesShenyangChina
  2. 2.Zhengzhou Research Institute of Mechanical EngineeringZhengzhouChina

Personalised recommendations

Cite chapter

Buy options