Transcript PWB Warpage Analysis and Verification using an AP210

EuroSimE 2004  www.eurosime.com  Brussels, Belgium  May 10-12, 2004
PWB Warpage Analysis and Verification using
an AP210 Standards-Based Engineering
Framework and Shadow Moiré
Dirk Zwemer1, Manas Bajaj2, Russell Peak2, Thomas Thurman3,
Kevin Brady4, Sean McCarron1, Alex Spradling1, Michael Dickerson5,
Lothar Klein6, Giedrius Liutkis6, and John Messina4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
AkroMetrix LLC
Georgia Institute of Technology
Rockwell Collins, Inc.
National Institute of Standards and Technology
InterCAX, LLC
LKSoftWare Gmbh.
AkroMetrix
Web version from http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/conferences/2004-eurosime-zwemer/ as of 2004-10-14
© All Rights Reserved. Permission to reproduce and distribute without changes for non-commercial purposes (including internal corporate usage) is hereby granted provided this notice and a proper citation are included.
Warpage – Impact and Trends
Impact




Low Manufacturing Yield
High Rework of Interconnects
Low Reliability
More Severe with Higher Temperatures, Finer Pitch
Trends
OEMs Enforcing New Warpage
Specifications on Suppliers.


Temperature-Dependent Warpage
Local and Global Warpage
2
Contents

Design-Analysis Interface within a
Multi-Representation Engineering Framework

Experimental Verification using
Temperature-Dependent Shadow Moiré

Initial Results and Future Development
3
Tree Structure of Multi-Representation
Engineering Framework
MPM
Bare PWB
APM
Electrical
APM
Mechanical
CBAM
Warpage
Manufacturing
Product Model
APM
Manufacturability
Analyzable
Product Model
CBAM
PTH Fatigue
Context-Based
Analysis Model
ABB
Layered Shell
Effective Materials Properties
Analysis
Building Blocks
SMM
Finite Element
Solution
Method Model
4
AP210 Standards-based Engineering
Framework for Warpage Simulation
Manufacturing Product Model
(STEP AP210-based)
Analyzable
Product Model
Context-Based Analysis Model
APM
Analysis Building Block
Printed Wiring Assembly (PWA)
Solution Method Model
CBAM
APM
Component
Solder
Joint
ABB
SMM
FABB
Component
Solder Joint
PWB
T0
body1
body4
ABBYSMM
body3
body2
Printed Wiring Board (PWB)
Solution Tools
(ANSYS, …)
5
Manufacturing Product Model (MPM) in an
AP210 Standards-Based Engineering Framework
Traditional
Tools
Electrical
CAD Tools
Systems Engineering
Tools
Eagle
Doors
Mentor
Graphics
Slate
- Eurostep AP233 Demonstrator
- XaiTools AP233
AP210
interface
Manufacturing
Product Model
Components
• STEP AP210
Gap-Filling
Tools
XaiTools
XaiTools
PWA-B
PWA-B
PWB Stackup Tool,
…
pgpdm
Core
PDM Tool
LKSoft,…
…
LKSoft,
STEP-Book AP210,
SDAI-Edit,
STI AP210 Viewer, ...
Instance Browser/Editor
6
AP210-based Manufacturing Product Model (MPM)
cable_db example
2D PCB view and 3D Assembly view
As viewed in LKSoft AP210 STEP-Book
7
Analyzable Product Model (APM)
Warpage Analyzable View of PWB
Footprint occurrence

This comprises of four lands, in this case. The
component sits atop the lands.
2D geometric
structure
Mechanical (Tooling /
Drilling) Hole
via

Orientation of
each layer and
associated
features
Complete
trace curve
not shown
Circuit
Traces
land
PCB outline
Comprised of straight lines and
arcs (primitive level)

Layer thickness
and material
properties
plated through
hole
1 Oz. Cu
3 x 1080
2 Oz. Cu
M150P2P11184
1 Oz. Cu
2 x 2116
M150P1P21184
1 Oz. Cu
2 Oz. Cu
3 x 1080
1 Oz. Cu
8
Setting up context for warpage analysis
APM and ABB Creation
MPM / APM
CBAM
ABB Model
Single Layer View
width
length
…
Top view of “effective” grid
elements in top layer of the PCB
Effective Material
Property
Computation
…
thickness
Side view of the PCB with
“effective” grid elements across
the stratums
Given:
Grid (Sieve) CBAM attributes
Size
• Thermal loading profile
• Boundary Conditions (mostly displacement)
• Idealize PWB stackup as a layered shell
• Thermal loading profile
• Boundary Conditions (mostly displacement)
• Idealize PWB stackup as a layered shell
9
Stage 1: Chopping the bare PWB
Creating the ABB model
In this scenario, the plated through holes and vias are neglected (for simplicity).
Only the mechanical tooling holes are accounted for.
Case 3
Case 1
M rows
…
…
…
Case 2
N columns
Case 1
Board Edge Scenario 1
At the end of stage 1, an M X N grid of shapes (comprised of arcs and
lines at the primitive level) would be available.
Case 2
Board Edge Scenario 2
Operation during this stage is common across all stratums (as it deals
with board outlines and tooling holes only – vias are disregarded)
Case 3
Tooling Hole Scenario 1
10
Stage 2: Computing metallization ratio
Creating the ABB Model
Consider a snapshot of metallization (traces and lands on stratum K)
1 <= I <= M
1 <= J <= N
1 <= K <= P
…
I
…
…
…
Cell IJ on stratum K
has effective material
properties IJK
J
Percentage metallization in the IJ th cell
of stratum K is of interest. Let this
percentage be 
Effective material property IJK for cell IJ on stratum K is then computed as:
(1) IJK = ( / 100 ) * metal + ( 1 -  / 100) * air for copper layers
(2) IJK = dielectric for dielectric layers
air and hence the second term can be neglected in (1) above
For the case of warpage,  is:
-- Co-efficient of thermal expansion
-- Young’s modulus of elasticity
At the end of Stage 2, we have the effective
material properties for each cell (MN cells) in
each stratum (P stratums)
…
thickness
Side view of the PWB with
“effective” grid elements across
the stratums
11
View of Analysis Building Block system
Chopped (e.g. 4X4 grid) PWB
Material properties
12
View of Analysis Building Block system
PWB Stackup Material properties
13
View of Solution Method Model
Layered shell mesh
Geometric constraints
Currently this model is
tool-specific (ANSYS).
Future possibility of
AP209-based
implementation exists.
all 6 degrees of
freedom locked at
midpoint – boundary
condition
14
Contents

Design-Analysis Interface within a
Multi-Representation Engineering Framework
>>  Experimental Verification using
Temperature-Dependent Shadow Moiré

Initial Results and Future Development
15
Principles of Shadow Moiré
Video
Camera
White
Light In
Diffusely Scattered
Light Out
Grating
Shadow Grating
Sample
Example Fringe Intensity Images
16
Shadow Moiré Verification - TherMoiré®
Specifications
• Sample Size: up to 400 x 400 mm
• Vertical Resolution: ± 1 µm
• Lateral Resolution: 640 x 480 pixels
• Temperature Range: -55 C to
300 C (continuous), 350 C peak
• Time per Measurement: 1 second
(data acquisition), 2-10 seconds total
Specifications









17
Shadow Moiré Data
Design 1 High Resolution
Shadow Moiré Phase Image
Design 1 Video Image
18
25 C Absolute Coplanarity = 261 mils
Coplanarity = 25.4 mils
150 C Absolute Coplanarity = 234 mils
150 C relative to 25 C
Coplanarity = 7.4 mils
19
Scale (mils)
25
-50 C
20
15
10
5
0
Model
Exp't
200
Temperature (C)
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
20
Scale (mils)
25
-25 C
20
15
10
5
0
Model Exp't
200
Temperature (C)
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
21
0C
Scale (mils)
25
20
15
10
5
0
Model
Exp't
200
Temperature (C)
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
22
25 C
200
Temperature (C)
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
23
50 C
Scale (mils)
25
20
15
10
5
0
Model
Exp't
200
Temperature (C)
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
24
75 C
Scale (mils)
25
20
15
10
5
0
Model
Exp't
200
Temperature (C)
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
25
100 C
Scale (mils)
25
20
15
10
5
0
Model
Exp't
200
Temperature (C)
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
26
125 C
Scale (mils)
25
20
15
10
5
0
Model
Exp't
200
Temperature (C)
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
27
150 C
Scale (mils)
25
20
15
10
5
0
Model
Exp't
200
Temperature (C)
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
28
Future Developments
Current Status
 Generated Warpage Analysis Model from PWB Design Data using
AP210-based Engineering Framework
 Compared Results with Temperature-Dependent Shadow Moiré
Experiments
Future Developments (Analysis)
 Level of Idealization – Grid Dimensions, Vias,…
 Controlled Meshing (non-tool specific)
 Display Options
Future Developments (Validation)
 Initial Conditions and Panelization
 Boundary Conditions and Reference Plane
 Temperature Uniformity and Sample Variation
29
Acknowledgements

Georgia Institute of Technology
– Robert Fulton
– Injoong Kim
– Miyako Wilson

LKSoftWare Gmbh
– Viktoras Kovaliovas
– Kasparus Rudokas
– Tomas Baltramaitas

Rockwell Collins, Inc.
–
–
–
–
–
Michael J. Benda
David D. Sullivan
William W. Bauer
Mark H. Carlson
Floyd D. Fischer

PDES Inc.Electromechanical
Pilot team
– Greg Smith (Boeing)
– Craig Lanning (Northrup
Grumman)
– Steve Waterbury (NASA)
* Certain commercial equipment, instruments,
or materials are identified in this paper in order
to specify the experimental procedure
adequately Such identification is not intended
to imply recommendation or endorsement by
the National Institute of Standards and
Technology, nor is it intended to imply that the
materials or equipment identified are
necessarily the best available for the purpose.
30