Board Level Drop Tests Comparing Lead-Free and Eutectic Solder Interconnects on a BGA Package for Mobile ICT Applications

There is considerable reported evidence that a large percentage of failures which afflict portable electronic products are due to impact or shock during use. Failures of the external housing, internal electronic components, package-to-board interconnects, and liquid crystal display panels may occur as the result of accidental drops. Moreover, the introduction of lead-free solder to the electronics industry will bring additional design implications for future generations of mobile information and communication technology (ICT) applications. In this paper, drop tests performed on printed circuit boards (PCBs) populated with ball grid arrays (BGAs) are reported. During testing, measurements from strain gages were recorded using a high-speed data acquisition system. Electrical continuity through each package was monitored during the impact event in order to detect failure of package-to-board interconnects. Life distributions were established for both lead-free and eutectic solders for various drop heights. Microsections of the failed interconnects were obtained to determine the failure mechanisms for a range of drop heights. The life test data presented in this paper suggests that for board level drop testing different failure mechanisms can occur at different stress levels and that there is a considerable difference between lead-free solder characteristic life and tin-lead (SAC) solder characteristic life.Copyright © 2004 by ASME

[1]  Suresh Goyal,et al.  Shock Protection of Portable Electronic Products: Shock Response Spectrum, Damage Boundary Approach, and Beyond , 1997 .

[2]  Ephraim Suhir.  Could shock tests adequately mimic drop test conditions? , 2002, 52nd Electronic Components and Technology Conference 2002. (Cat. No.02CH37345).

[3]  Z. Zhong,et al.  Board level drop test and simulation of TFBGA packages for telecommunication applications , 2003, 53rd Electronic Components and Technology Conference, 2003. Proceedings..

[4]  Jeff Punch,et al.  Analysis of Experimental Shock and Impact Response Data of a Printed Wire Board , 2003 .

[5]  Zhaowei Zhong,et al.  Design for enhanced solder joint reliability of integrated passives device under board level drop test and thermal cycling test , 2003, Proceedings of the 5th Electronics Packaging Technology Conference (EPTC 2003).

[6]  Ephraim Suhir,et al.  Nonlinear dynamic response of a flexible printed circuit board to a shock load applied to its support contour , 1991, 1991 Proceedings 41st Electronic Components & Technology Conference.

[7]  Pierre Vandergheynst,et al.  Modeling and simulation of an impact test using wavelets, analytical solutions and finite elements , 2001 .

[8]  E. Suhir.  Is the maximum acceleration an adequate criterion of the dynamic strength of a structural element in an electronic product , 1997 .

[9]  Stephen P. Timoshenko,et al.  Vibration problems in engineering , 1928 .

[10]  J. Wu,et al.  Drop/impact simulation and test validation of telecommunication products , 1998, ITherm'98. Sixth Intersociety Conference on Thermal and Thermomechanical Phenomena in Electronic Systems (Cat. No.98CH36208).

[11]  Imre Pázsit,et al.  Diagnostics of detector tube impacting with wavelet techniques , 1998 .

[12]  E. Suhir,et al.  Dynamic response of a rectangular plate to a shock load, with application to portable electronic products , 1994 .

[13]  Kian Meng Lim,et al.  Drop impact test - mechanics & physics of failure , 2002, 4th Electronics Packaging Technology Conference, 2002..

[14]  Paul S. Addison,et al.  The Illustrated Wavelet Transform Handbook , 2002 .

[15]  Jim Papadopoulos,et al.  The Dynamics of Clattering I: Equation of Motion and Examples , 1998 .

[16]  Zhaowei Zhong,et al.  Modal analysis and dynamic responses of board level drop test , 2003, Proceedings of the 5th Electronics Packaging Technology Conference (EPTC 2003).