Abstract Preview

Here is the abstract you requested from the IMAPS_2008f technical program page. This is the original abstract submitted by the author. Any changes to the technical content of the final manuscript published by IMAPS or the presentation that is given during the event is done by the author, not IMAPS.

Wire Bond Comparison of Different Aluminum Alloys and Thicknesses
Keywords: Aluminum, Wirebonding, Comparisom
As the manufacturing of automotive electronic componets continues to relocate throughout the world, it is not unusual to find that material specifications from different continents specify different metals or alloys for the same type of application. This paper is planned as a comparison of the bondability of aluminum wire to two aluminum alloys that are commonly selected as the inlay material used during the manufacturing process of wire bondable leadframe material systems in hybrid appications. The aluminum alloys being compared are A91145, which is the U.S. standard, and AlSi1, the European standard, and both alloys have been used extremely successfully in high volume for years as bonding pads on automotive leadframes. Different aluminum inlay thicknesses of these alloys combined with different leadframe base metal variations will be wire bonded using industry standard machine settings and a range of wire diameters. These wire bonded samples will be subjected to standard pull testing, shear testing and visual inspection. The purpose of this work is to evaluate whether differences in aluminum chemistry, hardness, thickness or leadframe base metals have any appreciable effect on wire bond quality.
Barry Njoes, Sr. Applications Engineer
Technical Materials Inc.
Lincoln, RI

  • Amkor
  • ASE
  • Canon
  • Corning
  • EMD Performance Materials
  • Honeywell
  • Indium
  • Kester
  • Kyocera America
  • Master Bond
  • Micro Systems Technologies
  • MRSI
  • Palomar
  • Promex
  • Qualcomm
  • Quik-Pak
  • Raytheon
  • Specialty Coating Systems
  • Technic