X‐ray Inspection of Flip Chip Attach Using Digital Tomosynthesis

Abstract

To accommodate increasing levels of device integration at the chip level, circuit line densities in electronic packages are continually increasing. Greater circuit line density, in turn, necessitates a corresponding increase in package‐to‐board interconnection density, with I/O counts expected to reach over 600 by 1995. In conjunction with the upward trend in I/O counts are a complementary upward trend in clock speed and an opposing downward trend in package sizes driven by the need to provide more functionality in less space, particularly in notebooks and PCMCIA cards. To satisfy the requirements of increased I/O counts and clock speed, and reduced package sizes, various package‐to‐board interconnection technologies are being developed, such as flip chip attach (FCA) using C4 joints. However, FCA interconnections have a disadvantage of being very difficult, if not impossible, to visually inspect. Though automatic test equipment (ATE) can determine whether the package is functional, it cannot determine the quality and reliability of FCA interconnections. Of the possible inspection techniques available to assess the quality of FCA interconnections — differential laser thermal analysis, acoustic microscopy and cross‐sectional X‐ray radiography — only cross‐sectional X‐ray radiography is capable of accurate, automated inspection of production volumes. This paper will first examine the requirements for inspecting FCA joints and will then describe the various inspection alternatives, outlining their advantages and disadvantages. Having described the potential advantage of one particular cross‐sectional X‐ray technique, digital tomosynthesis, the paper will conclude with some cross‐sectional images of FCA and SMT joints taken by a digital tomosynthesis system being developed for the inspection of FCA joints.

Citation

Rooks, S. and Sack, T. (1995), "X‐ray Inspection of Flip Chip Attach Using Digital Tomosynthesis", Circuit World, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 51-55. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb044036