Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vvkck Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T18:24:28.850Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Damage Integral Approach to Solder Joint Fatigue

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2011

C.-Y. Li ,
R. Subrahmanyan  and
J. McGroarty
C.-Y. Li
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
R. Subrahmanyan
Affiliation:
PEPL-FMRD, Motorola Inc., Semiconductor Products Sector, Phoenix, AZ 85008
J. McGroarty
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
Get access

Abstract

The application of a damage integral approach which provides numerical accounting of the accumulated fatigue damage in solder joint is reviewed. The instantaneous fatigue damage rate is determined by the solder stress state, temperature and environment using a phenomenological crack growth law. The stress is calculated using state variable constitutive relations for inelastic deformation. The material parameters for the crack growth law are determined from isothermal fatigue data. Representative damage integral calculations are used to illustrate the application of the approach. Finally, the significance of failure criteria on the apparent fatigue life is discussed in terms of the damage integral approach.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 203: Symposium D – Electronic Packaging Materials Science V , 1990 , 395
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1991

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

REFERENCES

1. Agarwala, B. N., IEEE Intl. Rel. Phys. Soc. Proc., 23, Orlando, FL 1985, pp. 198–205.Google Scholar
2. Raman, V. and Reiley, T. C., J. Mat. Sc. Let., 6 (5), 549–551, (1987).Google Scholar
3. Homa, T. R., Proc. 3rd Conf. on Electronic Packaging: Materials Processes and Corrosion in Microelectronics, Minneapolis, MN 1987, pp. 209–216.Google Scholar
4. Subrahmanyan, R., Wilcox, J. R. and Li, C.-Y., IEEE Trans. Comp. Hyb. Manuf. Tech., CHMT–12 (4), 480–491, (1989).Google Scholar
5. Wilcox, J. R., Subrahmanyan, R. and Li, C.-Y., J. Elec. Pack., ASME, 112 (2), pp. 115–122, (1990)Google Scholar
6. Wilcox, J. R., Ph.D. Thesis, Cornell University, NY, 1990.Google Scholar
7. Subrahmanyan, R., Ph.D. Thesis, Cornell University, NY, 1990.Google Scholar
8. Solomon, H. D., Proc. 3rd Conf. on Electronic Packaging: Materials Processes and Corrosion in Microelectronics, Minneapolis, MN 1987, pp. 29–47.Google Scholar
9. Solomon, H. D., GE Tech. Rep. No. 85CRD238, 1985. Also published, in part, in Low Cycle Fatigue, ASTM-STP 942, eds. Solomon, et al. , pp. 342–371. (1985).Google Scholar
10. Sherry, W. M. and Hall, P. M., Proc. 3rd Intl. Conf. on Interconn. Tech. in Elec., Fellbach, West Germany, 1986, pp. 47–81.Google Scholar
11. Wild, R. N., Circuit World, 14 (4), pp. 29–36, (1988).Google Scholar
12. Inoue, H., Kurihara, Y. and Hachino, H., IEEE Trans. Comp. Hyb. Manuf. Tech., CHMT–9 (2), pp. 190–194, (1986).Google Scholar
13. Solomon, H. D., J. Elec. Pack., ASME, III(2), pp.75–82, (1989).Google Scholar