Electronic Packaging: Solder Mounting Technologies

Vianco, Paul T.; Feng, Yi

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-803581-8.10099-2

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…But, due to the higher cost of drilling as the holes are very small of about 0.1 inches, thus the interest in SMT has increased briskly. The increase in SMT evolution is caused by its versatility of soldering and cost-effectiveness which increase the level of performance for the smallscale or large-scale manufacturing processes [2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigation of Nano-Reinforced Lead-Free Solder During Reflow Soldering-A Molecular Dynamic Approach

Sahrudin

Abdullah

Aziz

et al. 2020

CFDL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The reinforcement of nanoparticles into the lead-free solder is proved to give good increment in the result of the importance solder properties which includes wetting properties and mechanical properties. This study proposed the new simulation method for the nano-reinforced solder to investigate the complexity and atomic behaviour briefly. The objective of this study is to clearly show the movement of the reinforced nanoparticles in the solder during the reflow soldering process via molecular dynamics (MD) simulation. In this work, Nickel (Ni) nanoparticles will be added into the pure Tin (Sn) lead-free solder. The MD simulation of Ni-reinforced solder at the temperature of 250 OC (reflow phase) was conducted via Large-scale Atomic/Molecular Massively Parallel Simulator (LAMMPS) software. This simulation model able to track the nanoparticles movement in the solder during the reflow soldering process. The experimental procedure of 0.01 wt.% Ni nanoparticle reinforcement in Sn100C was also carried out to validate the simulation result. The synchrotron micro-XRF mapping showed the Ni element was agglomerated and thus validated the simulation result. The measured area of agglomerated Ni A in the simulation and experimental results are 1.1708 Å2 and 0.9996 Å2, respectively. Meanwhile, the result obtained for area B is 0.7696 Å2 and 0.6796 Å2, respectively. Therefore, the percentage error of simulation and experimental results for both areas of A and B is 10.82% and 13.24%, respectively.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%