Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-9q27g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T23:00:49.910Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fast Soldering Reactions on Au Foils

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2011

P.G. Kim  and
K.N. TU
Get access

Abstract

We have studied the wetting behaviors and interfacial reactions of Pb‐containing (63Sn‐37Pb, 95Pb‐5Sn) and Pb‐free solders (pure Sn, 96Sn‐4Ag, 57Bi‐43Sn, 77.2Sn‐20In‐2.8Ag) on Au foils in order to understand the role of Pb in Pb‐based solders. Surface morphology, wetting angle, and interfacial reaction of the solders were studied by Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) and Energy Dispersive X‐ray Analysis (EDX). Pb‐containing and Pb‐free solders (pure Sn, 96Sn‐4Ag, 77.2Sn‐20In‐2.8Ag) showed rough surfaces due to the precipitation of intermetallic compounds on the surface of the solder caps. The eutectic SnBi (57Bi‐43Sn) solder, however, showed a smoother surface. The wetting angle of the eutectic SnPb (63Sn‐37Pb), pure Sn, 96Sn‐4Ag, and 77.2Sn‐20In‐2.8Ag solders decreased significantly with reflow time, while the eutectic SnBi and 95Pb‐5Sn solders showed a much smaller decrease. A large amount of intermetallic compounds was formed throughout the entire region of the solder cap for the eutectic SnPb, 96Sn‐4Ag, 95Pb‐5Sn, and 77.2Sn‐20In‐2.8Ag, mainly due to the high solubility of Au in these solders. Slow intermetallic compound growth was observed for the eutectic SnBi solder.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 445: Electronic Packaging Materials Science IX , 1996 , 131
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Kim, P.G. and Tu, K.N., J. Appi. Phys., 80(7), p. 3822 (1996).Google Scholar
2 Harding, W. B. and Pressly, H. B., (Am. Electroplat. Soc, 50th Annu. Proc. 1963) p. 60.Google Scholar
3 Mulholland, W. A. and Willyard, D. L., Welding J., Res. SuppL, 54(10), p. 466s (1974).Google Scholar
4 Kehrer, H. P. and Wenzel, E. M., Metall., 30(10), p. 1047 (1979).Google Scholar
5 Duckett, R. and Ackroyd, M. L., Electroplat. Met. Finish., 29(5), p. 13 (1976).Google Scholar
6 Jacobson, D. M., and Jumpston, G., Gold. Bull., 22(1), p. 9 (1989).Google Scholar
7 Thwaites, C. J., Electroplat. Met. Finish., 26(8), p. 10 (1973).Google Scholar
8 Thwaites, C. J., Electroplat. Met. Finish., 26(9), p. 21 (1973).Google Scholar
9 Heinzel, H. and Saeger, K. E., Gold Bull., 9(1), p. 7 (1976).Google Scholar
10 Kim, H. K., Liou, H. K., and Tu, K. N., J. Mater. Res., 10(3), p. 497 (1995).Google Scholar
11 Yost, F. G. and Romig, A. D.. Jr., Mat. Res. Soc.Symp. Proc, 108. p. 385 (1988).Google Scholar
12 Metal Handbook, 9th ed. (American Society for Metals, Metal Park, OH, 1985), 9, p. 416.Google Scholar
13 Prince, A., J. Less‐Common Met., 12, p. 107 (1967).Google Scholar
14 Kubiak, R., J. Less‐Common Met., 80(2), p. 53 (1981).Google Scholar
15 Bader, B. G., Welding Journal, 48(120), p. 551‐s (1969).Google Scholar