4.5 Article

Thermosonic bonding of gold wire onto a copper pad with titanium thin-film deposition

期刊

JOURNAL OF ELECTRONIC MATERIALS
卷 33, 期 4, 页码 290-299

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11664-004-0135-5

关键词

thermosonic wire bonding; bondability; chips with copper interconnect; Ti thin film

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A novel thermosonic (TS) bonding process for gold wire bonded onto chips with copper interconnects was successfully developed by depositing a thin, titanium passivation layer on a copper pad. The copper pad oxidizes easily at elevated temperature during TS wire bonding. The bondability and bonding strength of the Au ball onto copper pads are significantly deteriorated if a copper-oxide film exists. To overcome this intrinsic drawback of the copper pad, a titanium thin film was deposited onto the copper pad to improve the bondability and bonding strength. The thickness of the titanium passivation layer is crucial to bondability and bonding strength. An appropriate, titanium film thickness of 3.7 nm is proposed in this work. One hundred percent bondability and high bonding strength was achieved. A thicker titanium film results in poor bondability and lower bonding strength, because the thicker titanium film cannot be removed by an appropriate range of ultrasonic power during TS bonding. The protective mechanism of the titanium passivation layer was interpreted by the results of field-emission Auger electron spectroscopy (FEAES) and electron spectroscopy for chemical analysis (ESCA). Titanium dioxide (TiO2), formed during the die-saw and die-mount processes, plays an important role in preventing the copper pad from oxidizing. Reliability of the high-temperature storage (HTS) test for a gold ball bonded on the copper pad with a 3.7-nm titanium passivation layer was verified. The bonding strength did not degrade after prolonged storage at elevated temperature. This novel process could be applied to chips with copper interconnect packaging in the TS wire-bonding process.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据