New Methods for Quantifying PCB Design Weaknesses and Manufacturing Challenges


Reading time ( words)

Nolan Johnson recently spoke with Summit Interconnect’s Gerry Partida about disruptive new methods for analyzing and quantifying potential manufacturing challenges in designs while still in the design phase.

Nolan Johnson: Gerry, what’s the background for the new methods we’re about to discuss?

Gerry Partida: The industry is at a new point in evolving how we look at building boards. Our industry has historically built boards and then tried to find a test for them. Then, when they found a test for it, they figured out that it needed to be analyzed before they built the board. We did this with electrical test. We built boards and down the road, as people started asking, “Why am I buying bad boards? We should electrically test them,” electrical test was introduced, reluctantly, into the test part of manufacturing printed circuit boards by suppliers or fabricators. Then they embraced it. But when we started testing boards, we did comparison tests. We would build a bunch of boards, put the first one on a tester, tell it to self-learn, and compare all the boards to the first board. If they all matched, they all shipped as matched boards, but if they had the same defect, they all shipped with the same defect. This did happen.

It wasn’t for another 10 or 15 years that we took extracted netlist from the CAD software and compared it to the Gerber data that would be used to fabricate the board, to find out whether everything was corrected before we started manufacturing. We would find that there was a problem, and we would fix it or get new data. Then when we knew we had a match, we started to manufacture the boards and downloaded the program to the tester. But this was an evolution of about 15 to 25 years. It depends on what point of view you take from it.

We’ve done the same thing with microvias. We’ve been building microvias. There are datasheets that talk about the modulus and the CTE expansion after reflow, before Tg, and after Tg, but no one really would do any math or science behind it. The PCB fabricator would just build the boards and ship them. Sometimes there are assembly problems, and the industry says, “There’s something going on with microvias. Three-stack and four-stack are not as safe as a single microvia and staggering them.” Everybody is trying to find out how strong or how weak they are. Most people were finding out at assembly because the standard IPC-6012 performance specs in the evaluation couldn’t identify a weak microvia very well. So, we came up with the OM tester, which is using the IPC-TM 650 2.6.27 test method, which actually takes a coupon with the same structures that are in the board and simulates reflow on the coupon before we ship the boards.

If that structure, which is in the board that we’re trying to ship, can survive reflow in a tester, then we know that the boards are more than likely going to pass and survive reflow and assembly. This works great. It will tell fabricators that if we process everything right, the board is going to be reliable through reflow. However, after a couple years of having the tester, we discovered we did everything right, but occasionally it wasn’t working. They were failing 6X reflow. Utilizing our extensive experience in microvia fabrication, our portfolio of reliability testing data, materials expertise and software tools, we can simulate the stack-up; you can actually input the microvia structure and the data output will tell you if it can survive six reflows or not.

To read this entire conversation, which appeared in the November 2021 issue of PCB007 Magazine, click here.

Share

Print


Suggested Items

I-Connect007 Editor’s Choice: Five Must-Reads for the Week

12/03/2021 | Andy Shaughnessy, I-Connect007
It hardly feels like the end of 2021, but here we are, looking at a new year and IPC APEX EXPO and AltiumLive coming up in less than two months. If you don’t count days lost during the holidays, it’s more like one month before showtime. Hey, at least we have some live events to attend now. This week, we have some association and trade show news, as well as articles on data management and the diminished role of U.S. chip makers in the global electronics supply chain. We’re almost behind the eight-ball here, folks, and we can’t build chip factories overnight. Let’s get a move on!

Alex Stepinski: A Philosophical View

11/30/2021 | I-Connect007 Editorial Team
"My philosophy is to rely more on sensors throughout the process to measure things non-destructively, then build a model for how you’re going to perform, and just validate against the model," said Alex Stepinski. "It’s the next step slowly happening worldwide. For instance, we’ve had 2D AOI for many years. Sometimes, this is complemented with electrical tests. Now, you start to see more 3D AOI happening. You see them putting more sensors on the AOI equipment for direct measurement. Then, you also have the traditional signal integrity testing."

I-Connect007 Editor’s Choice: Five Must-Reads for the Week

11/26/2021 | Nolan Johnson, I-Connect007
If you’re in the United States like I am, and if you celebrated with a traditional Thanksgiving dinner, like my family did, then you just might have fallen asleep sitting up in a chair (or in my case, stretched out on the couch) and missed some of the highlights in the news this week. Never fear, I woke up early to bring the top five news items you should know for this week. We have industry bookings and sales news from IPC, some news from the flex sector, an explanation of induction lamination from Happy Holden, and two different takes on “sustainability.”



Copyright © 2021 I-Connect007. All rights reserved.