MIL- STD-883F 2004 TEST METHOD STANDARD MICROCIRCUITS - 第644页

MIL-STD-883F METHOD 5009.1 25 August 1983 2 3.2 DPA repor t . A DPA r eport s hall be prepar ed for eac h ins pecti on lot tes ted and s ubmitted t o the acqui ring or qualif ying acti vity. The report shall consi st of …

MIL-STD-883F

METHOD 5009.1

25 August 1983

METHOD 5009.1

DESTRUCTIVE PHYSICAL ANALYSIS

1. PURPOSE

. The purpose of this test is to describe requirements for performance of destructive physical analysis

(DPA) for the applicable device class, for sampling, preparation, procedures, accept/reject criteria, disposition of rejected

lots and documentation. While this test method may be used by a microcircuit manufacturer, it is intended that these

procedures be actually performed by the contractor, subcontractor, or independent testing lab.

1.1 Definitions

a. Defects. Any nonconformance from specified requirements for form, fit, function, or workmanship.

b. Destructive physical analysis. The process of disassembling, testing, and inspecting a device for the purpose of

determining conformance with applicable design and process requirements.

c. Lot related defect. A defect, attributable to a variance in design or the manufacturing, test or inspection process,

that may be repetitive (e.g., mask defects, metallization thickness, bond strength insulation resistance and

separation between metallization runs, wires or wires and die edge).

d. Screenable defects. A defect for which an effective nondestructive screening test or inspection is available or can

be developed.

2. APPARATUS

. The apparatus shall consist of suitable equipment to perform each specified DPA test.

3. PROCEDURE

. The organization (contractor, subcontractor, or independent test lab) conducting the DPA test should

contact the manufacturer of the product and supply a list of test methods that are to be used during the DPA test. The

manufacturer can then advice the DPA test organization if there are any significant changes to those test methods that are

allowed as modification options within MIL-STD-883, MIL-PRF-38535 or under the manufacturer’s approved program plan.

3.1 Sample selection

. A random sample shall be selected from the inspection lot in accordance with table I, unless

otherwise specified.

TABLE I. Sample selection.

Monolithic microcircuits

Two devices or 1 percent of the

inspection lot, whichever is

greater, to a maximum of 5 total

devices, unless otherwise specified,

(see 3.1.1 and 4a).

Hybrid or multichip Two devices or 1 percent of the

microcircuits inspection lot, whichever is

greater, to a maximum of 5 total

devices, unless otherwise specified,

(see 3.1.1 and 4a).

3.1.1 Combining sample

. Where an inspection lot is comprised of more than one device type covered by a single device

specification or drawing, the sample selected shall be proportionately divided from the device types in order to assure a

representative sampling, and not less than one, of each device type in the DPA sample.

MIL-STD-883F

METHOD 5009.1

25 August 1983

3.2 DPA report. A DPA report shall be prepared for each inspection lot tested and submitted to the acquiring or qualifying

activity. The report shall consist of the following:

a. DPA summary sheet.

b. DPA checklist.

c. DPA test data sheet.

d. Photographs.

e. Other data or analysis supporting findings.

3.2.1 DPA checklist

. A checklist shall be used to record all attribute data from the applicable test.

3.2.2 DPA test data sheet

. A test data sheet shall be used to record the variable data from the applicable test and any

electrical test specified.

NOTE: No provisions have been included herein for electrical testing since all devices shall have already passed the

specified electrical tests; however, electrical tests may be required for follow-up analysis of a physical discrepancy.

3.2.3 DPA summary sheet

. A summary sheet shall be used to summarize the DPA test results, analysis supporting

findings, provide other essential data and indicate disposition of lot.

3.3 General requirements

3.3.1 DPA evaluation

. The results of all tests and examinations performed on DPA sample items shall be analyzed by

qualified technical personnel to determine disposition and corrective action, as applicable, of the lot from which the samples

were taken.

3.3.2 Photographs

. Photographs shall be made at sufficient magnification and with enough views to clearly document

significant details of the parts construction. When SEM or optical microscopes are used to evaluate a device, photographs

shall be made to document discrepant or worst case features.

3.3.2.1 Photograph requirements

. A minimum of two photographs will normally be required to document baseline

characteristics of an opened part prior to performance of any destructive tests. These shall be supplemented with other

photographs as required to record observed defects or anomalies. Microscopy techniques such as color, dark field, phase

contrast, interference contrast, etc., shall be used as necessary to enhance image clarity. When SEM examination is

performed the DPA report shall include, as a minimum, view(s) of significant features of the die, a photograph of the worst

case oxide step and a photograph of the worst case metallization. Each photograph shall be labeled or otherwise identified

with the DPA report number, and, if applicable, the part number, serial number, lot date code, and the magnification (and

viewing angle for SEM photographs) used.

3.3.3 Retention of DPA reports

. The original copy of all DPA reports shall be retained by the performing organization and

a copy submitted to the acquiring or qualifying activity.

3.3.4 Sectioned samples

. When performed techniques similar to those used to prepare sectioned metallurgical and

mineralogical specimens for optical examination are generally applicable to the preparation of DPA samples. The device to

be examined is first potted in a suitable plastic (or mounting by other suitable means). It is then cut or rough ground to the

desired section plane. This is followed by fine grinding, polish and sometimes an etch to bring out the necessary detail.

Care shall be taken to ensure that damage is not introduced during any of these operations (in particular, during potting

cure, cutting, and rough grinding).

MIL-STD-883F

METHOD 5009.1

25 August 1983

3.3.5 SEM samples. The microcircuits shall be prepared for SEM examination in accordance with method 2018 of

MIL-STD-883, "Notes on SEM examination of Microelectronic Parts". Other types of parts shall be prepared for SEM by

using standard laboratory techniques for mounting and coating, taking care that anomalies are not introduced by the coating.

3.3.6 Baseline design documentation

. Each DPA procedure should be referenced to a baseline photograph, sketch, or

drawing showing the general configurations of the device to be examined, which includes critical dimensions, location of

constituent parts and details of any pertinent materials or processes. The baseline documentation shall be current so as to

show any approved changes in the configuration.

3.4 Microcircuits (monolithic) procedure

. The purpose is to verify external and internal physical configuration and that the

devices were not damaged during sealing or any other processing step(s). To verify that the devices have met the

requirements for radiography, seal, external visual, internal water vapor analysis, internal visual, baseline, bond strength,

and contamination control.

3.4.1 External visual

. Record identification marking. Examine parts, at 10X minimum magnification for configuration and

defects in seal, plating, or glass feed through in accordance with method 2009 of MIL-STD-883.

3.4.2 Radiography

. When specified, radiography shall be in accordance with MIL-STD-883, method 2012. Radiograph

shall be required before delidding to examine cavity devices for loose particles, die attach, and to determine internal

clearances. It is also useful as an aid in locating delidding and sectioning cuts and to nondestructively investigate suspected

defects.

3.4.3 Seal

. A fine and gross leak seal test shall be performed on all DPA samples in accordance with MIL-STD-883,

method 1014. Record both fine and gross leak rates.

3.4.4 Internal water vapor analysis

. When specified, internal water vapor analysis shall be performed in accordance with

method 1018.

3.4.5 Internal visual

. De-cap all samples using appropriate method (see 3.6) taking care not to introduce contamination

during the de-cap process. Examine all devices in accordance with MIL-STD-883, method 2010, test condition A or B or

appendix A of method 5004 (alternate 2) as applicable, and methods 2013 and 2014.

3.4.6 Baseline configuration

. During external and internal visual all devices shall be evaluated for conformance with the

baseline design documentation (see 3.3.6) and other specified requirements. Variance from requirements shall be reported

as defects.

3.4.7 Bond strength

. Perform bond strength tests in accordance with MIL-STD-883, method 2011, test condition D. Pull

all wires on at least two devices. Record the force at which the wire breaks or bond lifts and the location of the break.

3.4.8 SEM

. Prepare the samples for SEM evaluation and conduct this inspection in accordance with MIL-STD-883,

method 2018. If any of the wire bonds lifted during the bond strength tests, these shall be included in the SEM inspection to

determine the nature of the bond to chip interface at the point of rupture.

3.4.9 Die shear

. Die shear tests shall be performed on at least two samples in accordance with MIL-STD-883, method

2019. Record the die force required to separate the die from substrate and the interface appearance in terms of areas

affected in the break.

3.4.10 Evaluation criteria

. The inspection lot shall be considered suspect if devices exhibit any defects when inspected or

tested to the criteria listed below. Each defect shall be photographed (when applicable), measured, and described in the

DPA report. In the absence of defects or based on a decision by the responsible parts authority that any observed

anomalies do not constitute rejectable defects, the lot may be considered acceptable for use (see 3.7.1 for disposition of

suspect lots).