caLogo

Features Articles

Don’t get caught with your bath down.

The topic of hot air solder leveling (HASL) has come up a handful of times recently and so the motivation for this column. An OEM currently using HASL but with advances in board designs had observed last month that the ball grid array patterns were not covering properly. They also experienced instances when component placement was off due to the uneven nature of the HASL deposit. They requested some information on “alternate finishes.”

The call came about 10 to 15 years later than I expected. A few days later, I visited a North American plating shop that finishes the majority of its products with various electrolytic and electroless nickel/gold plating. A “good percentage” of its product remains HASL, and they asked when HASL would go away. The process is not a favorite among the operators.

When I came to MacDermid 15 years ago, the industry was investigating alternate surface finishing. The term “alternate” referred to anything that was not HASL. The buzzword was planar; there was a need for a flat surface finish to accommodate new designs with miniature components. As a result of components getting smaller and, specifically, the use of BGAs, HASL was becoming difficult to use. The uneven surface could not ensure proper component alignment or connectivity. In addition, substrates were getting thinner, and the laminates could not withstand submersion into molten solder. For many, the need to switch from HASL was imminent.

My first business trip in the industry was to the coast of England to install an immersion silver process. I was fresh out of college and had been convinced that immersion silver was the next-best surface finish and that it would replace this thing called HASL that was a hassle to run.

So the chemistry was installed and I left for lunch while the bath heated up. When I got back from lunch, production was running. The line engineers were overjoyed that the silver covered on the first pass, so they did not feel we needed to run any test parts or analysis before production. (Hopefully my boss is not reading this.) I spent about two weeks in England training the customer and the local teams on how to run this process. I spent hours walking the line, but adjacent to the immersion silver line was a vertical leaded hot air solder level machine. The line was down every third day, and each time the line was shut down, an operator had to physically wedge himself into the unit for maintenance. I could not believe it. I had spent the past six months using a solder pot and a benchtop wave soldering machine, which I grew to respect out of necessity very quickly. I would never shove myself into a machine that runs at such temperatures. HASL requires an exorbitant amount of equipment maintenance compared to other surface finishes and to what benefit?

People will continuously say that there is no one surface finish for every application, and I believe that to be true. Overall, the benefits and weaknesses of each surface finish are pretty obvious. Where we get into trouble is when we stop using the surface finish as a solderability preservative and leave the metal areas unsoldered. With that, the issues of shelf life and environmental resistance become much more important. For this there are two camps: One will say that HASL is the better surface finish choice because it is a thick deposit that will prevent underlying copper from corroding. The other camp will remind the first that HASL has a lot of surface ionic associated with it from flux residue that will promote more surface corrosion. I personally agree with the latter, but also have seen when HASL has not covered pad edges, leaving copper exposed. I have also witnessed small features that did not cover properly on the first pass; the need for a second caused solder mask fracturing and a lot more exposed copper for further corrosion.

So few companies still use HASL that it is probably facing extinction. I know someone just threw the military/medical card. Make sure you are not looking for a last-minute alternative because the fabricator just said they are getting rid of the HASL line to make more room for ENEPIG.

Lenora Toscano is final finish product manager at MacDermid (macdermid.com); ltoscano@macdermid.com.

To avoid extra paste, temper the ball depth.

Figure 1 shows the base of a package-on-package device covered in dip paste. Clearly the package has been dipped to an excessive depth in the paste dip unit. This will be due to incorrect setup of the unit. The bottom of the dip unit, the dip plate, should define the depth of the paste on the balls, and normally should be set to achieve 40% to 50% of the ball depth. There should be suitable process control checks on the dipping unit during production, and the depth of the paste should be measured manually or automatically.

  • Other possible causes for excess paste include:
  • Component not parallel with dip plate.
  • Movement of the component on pickup nozzle during dipping.
  • Incorrect depth of paste in dipping unit.
  • Package warpage.
  • Dipping plate not parallel with component balls.
  • Uneven or excess paste in dipping unit.

These are typical defects shown in the National Physical Laboratory’s interactive assembly and soldering defects database. The database (http://defectsdatabase.npl.co.uk), available to all this publication’s readers, allows engineers to search and view countless defects and solutions, or to submit defects online. To complement the defect of the month, NPL features the “Defect Video of the Month,” presented online by Bob Willis. This describes over 20 different failure modes, many with video examples of the defect occurring in real time.

Chris Hunt is with the National Physical Laboratory Industry and Innovation division (npl.co.uk); chris.hunt@npl.co.uk. His column appears monthly.

Susan Mucha

To get useful results, make surveys actionable – and quick.

Read more ...

Peter Bigelow

Let’s not be quick to dismiss the latest “fashions.”

Read more ...

Mike Buetow

In the end, will the naysayers be proved right?

Read more ...

Multek in July announced it would open a major tech center in the Silicon Valley, performing critical research on everything from new materials and manufacturing processes to signal integrity. Multek president Franck Lize and CTO Dr. Bill Beckenbaugh discussed the Innovation Technology Center with PCD&F editor in chief Mike Buetow via phone.

MB: Has the ITC been in the works internally for some time?
FL: So the new center is very interesting. We spent the past four months with customers to understand what their requirements were for the next-generation products. With the telecom market, with the 4G and 5G, and even the consumer business with flexible products like wearables and the flexible phones that we hear about in the news, there’s a change (coming) in the PCB industry because there are different requirements for those PCBs.

Our customers need many more solutions now than ever in the past 20 years. Multek wants to be a pioneer here. The ITC is part of the solution that Multek is putting together.

MB: Is it a standalone entity?
FL: It’s part of a full system. We are co-located next to the big NPI center that Flextronics has in the Bay Area. We needed a place for knowledge and engineering, and we wanted to be in the best location in the world for electronics. But the ITC is much more than that. We are leveraging on our network of field applications engineers, which we have all over the world. Thanks to this extended network, our customers have direct access to this great capital of PCB and flexible circuit knowledge, no matter where in the world they are. It fits into the full Multek solution. Whether it’s a field application engineer or our top engineers in the Silicon Valley, we are working to provide early engagement for new materials, signal integrity issues, and new flexible designs. For any new challenges that our customers have, Multek helps them make the bridge between concept and actual manufacturing.

MB: We are seeing companies such as Agilent and IBM change their paradigms so that their design kickoff meetings involve everyone from the SI engineer to the hardware engineer, the firmware guy, the fabricator and the assembly process engineer. The DfM rules are hard-coded at that time, so that there are no changes down the line. What are you seeing insofar as this, and did it play into your decision about the ITC?
BB: This is the trend we are seeing over the past several years, and it’s why we wanted to move past our internal paradigm and turn it around so that the requirements and cost of the functions are designed in early, because if we don’t participate in it, we won’t be able to help the customer do a better job, but also because they might be doing something using an older technology than they need to, one that might cost them money or be less efficient.

We wanted to make it customer-focused and not limited, an open-ended ability to create a team and bring the right people with the right answers to the right problem set. It also helps us define our future capacity and technology requirements better.

MB: To what degree will ITC be involved in blue sky research outside of what’s directly needed by customers?
BB: Blue sky for us is defined for something that’s been coming, but traditionally we have put it in terms of the optimum solution for copper-based interconnects. At some point we will move to other ways to move to signal propagation. The future will be very different.

This industry has only gone through two or three revolutions in the past 25 years. We feel the next one is coming in the next few years. I don’t want to give too much about that because of the proprietary nature of it, but it is something we are working on.

MB: Bill, what are you seeing in terms of 3D packaging?
BB: Being located with the Product Innovation Center, we are able to provide the interconnect part to accelerate our Flextronics corporate roadmap, and provide a Multek interconnect solution for MEMs packaging. We are in mass production on product with package-driven interconnect pitches and component densities and assembly requirements. We see sensor integration and integration of MEMS devices is a key driver of the next generation of interconnect solutions. I’ve been in advanced packaging as part of my career and am very sensitive to it driving the next generation of electronics and PCB boards. It’s the key to the future of electronics growth.

MB: From the assembly viewpoint, we see issues where the tolerances for SMT assembly require bare board yields in the 98%, 99% range, and not just by visual inspection, or there are problems with printing. These problems will be even more severe with smaller components such as metric 0201s.
BB:
You’re touching on the area that is exactly why we are co-located with our Flextronics Assembly Engineering Lab. Regardless of whether it’s a module, or a chip on a package, all require flawless assembly. From a Six Sigma standpoint, it’s necessary to fully control all the aspects of the process.

Ed.: For the full interview, visit http://bit.ly/14kfJOA.

Page 141 of 149

Don't have an account yet? Register Now!

Sign in to your account