Tech Article._X-ray Inspection_Final Version.pdf - 第3页

The complet e inspecon picture Nordson T EST & INSPECTION designs, develops and manufactures v a rious di erena ted technolog ies which c omplem en t each ot her: these include Acousc, Opcal and Manual X -ra y I…

100%1 / 6
Fig 2. Filament technology comparison
Fundamental to this design is the crystal lament which produces a very ne, ecient
electron beam. This material is able to do this far below its crical temperature meaning
much longer life than with a Tungsten lament. When this beam hits the target material the
X-rays are produced. This design allows the device under test to be placed very close to the
source of the X-rays giving the highest possible magnicaon. Magnicaon being dened by
the rao of the distance from source to object and source to detector.
Inspecon strategy should always be a zero defect strategy
The further into the manufacturing process, the more me and expense has been invested
into a single device. That can start adding up very, very quickly into 10s of 1000s of dollars.
Idenfying defects early is essenal, parcularly as more and more devices are being used in
sensive applicaons such as aerospace, autonomous driving vehicles, medical devices etc.
Failure or breakdown in the real world is simply not an opon. If the entertainment system
breaks in a car, it’s inconvenient, but if the ABS system fails, lives depend on it. In this context,
X-ray has the task to make sure that everyone is safe.
There are a number of ways this can go wrong. If the electronic connecons aren’t strong,
they can become suscepble to early life failures through for example, thermal cycling. Let's
look at how processors are usually used. They get really hot, they get turned o, and then
they're cold, then hot, then cold and so on. Components and bonds can then start cracking
and breaking, if they don’t have a really good connecon or are made of low quality
materials.
The complete inspecon picture
Nordson TEST & INSPECTION designs, develops and manufactures various dierenated
technologies which complement each other: these include Acousc, Opcal and Manual X-ray
Inspecon, Autonomous X-ray Inspecon, X-ray Component Counng, Semiconductor Wafer
Metrology, Semiconductor Metrology Sensors and Nordson X-ray Technologies.
A good example is to use both acousc and X-ray inspecon. Acousc inspecon is very
strong when viewing delaminaon in the silicon wafers themselves, where this is much more
of a challenge for X-ray. If this defect is not viewed from the correct angle the imaging isn’t
able to create a clear contrast between that empty space and the material around it. But
when the sound wave in acousc imaging hits this air gap it cannot pass through, is reected
back and detected giving the strongest signal possible. Conversely, where it is dicult to get
this acousc signal back or detect it transmissively (due to scaering or obstrucon by
another void), X-ray makes inspecon simple.
In a similar way, 2D X-ray imaging is complimented by 3D inspecon allowing users to analyse
in ever greater detail.
This is done using Computed Tomography (or CT) which provides the ability to create 3D
models which can then be virtually dissected over and over again, without the need to
destroy the sample under test. This does require more images to be taken in the rst place
and therefore more me than a single 2D strategy. With the ever present need to improve
cycle mes in producon, oen referred to as units per hour (UPH), 3D may never completely
replace 2D. But the major payo is being able to isolate individual layers of devices,
exponenally increasing the chance of nding any problem areas. Something that can be
really challenging, somemes impossible when inspecng highly complex devices with 2D
imaging.
Each of these dierent perspecves have their own strengths and weaknesses. Combined,
they provide a really strong strategy, revealing any defects. Ulmately, by ulizing mulple
technologies and techniques, a more complete inspecon picture can be built up and deeper
understanding can be gained.
Today’s challenge: 3D stacking and heterogeneous ipchips
One of the hot topics in semiconductor engineering right now is 3D design. While this is being
tackled in a few forms, the need to go 3D is simple – the reducon of distance and with that,
resistance/temperature. This is one of the main factors driving the density (in terms of
number of connecons in a given space) of devices and with that the challenges in inspecon.
Given that, high resoluon imaging is clearly required as well as mulple techniques and
technologies. So is the need to implement these at dierent stages of the design and
producon process (g 3.).
We have already established this also makes sense in terms of the cost of failure by capturing
the defects early, before you have invested too much. It also follows that inspecon at the
early stages is also generally easier. For example, nding void defects in wafer bumps (g. 4)
before any other layers have been added, compared to a fully formed chiplet consisng of
mulple devices, substrates and interconnecon layers (g. 5). This works out well, simple
inspecon can be done with faster, more cost eecve 2D imaging and then each of these
elements are combined when proven good. At the same me, the quality of how these have
been put together can then be inspected with the faster 3D techniques. When any of these
devices are then found to have failed, more me can be jused to gain more detail and this
insight can be fed back to improve process or design.
Fig 3. Inspecon Stages
Fig 4. 100µm bump inspecon
Fig 5. 3D Integrated Die Stack