Three-dimensional simulation of underfill process in flip-chip encapsulation

Wang, Hui; Zhou, Huamin; Zhang, Yun; Li, Dequn; Xu, Kai

doi:10.1016/j.compfluid.2010.12.030

Cited by 21 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 42 publications

(81 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Apart from the well-known FEM and FVM as well as the emerging LBM, there are few underfill flow simulations that are based on novel numerical codes developed by respective researchers and are not bounded to any commercial software, for instance, finite different method (FDM) with pseudocompressibility approach and continuum surface force model [72], Petrov-Galerkin coupled with piecewise linear interface calculation-flow analysis network methods and level-set method [73]. Despite these new simulation approaches which gave reasonable prediction for underfill fluid, there is no future underfill work that is based on these methods, largely due to the lack of technical support for being noncommercial available simulation software.…”

Section: Numerical Simulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Underfill Flow in Flip-Chip Encapsulation Process: A Review

Abas

2021

Journal of Electronic Packaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The scope of review of this paper focused on the pre-curing underfilling flow stage of encapsulation process. A total of 80 related works has been reviewed and being classified into process type, method employed, and objective attained. Statistically showed that the conventional capillary is the most studied underfill process, while the numerical simulation was mainly adopted. Generally, the analyses on the flow dynamic and distribution of underfill fluids in the bump array aimed for the filling time determination as well as the predictions of void occurrence. Parametric design optimization was subsequently conducted to resolve the productivity issue of long filling time and reliability issue of void occurrence. The bump pitch was found to the most investigated parameter, consistent to the miniaturization demand. To enrich the design versatility and flow visualization aspects, experimental test vehicle was innovated using imitated chip and replacement fluid, or even being scaled-up. Nonetheless, the analytical filling time models became more accurate and sophiscasted over the years, despite still being scarce in number. With the technological advancement on analysis tools and further development of analytic skills, it was believed that the future researches on underfill flow will become more comprehensive, thereby leading to the production of better packages in terms of manufacturing feasibility, performances, and reliability. Lastly, few potential future works were recommended, for instance, microscopic analysis on the bump-fluid interaction, consideration of filler particles and incorporation of artificial intelligence.

show abstract

Section: Numerical Simulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Underfill Flow in Flip-Chip Encapsulation Process: A Review

Abas

2021

Journal of Electronic Packaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For decades, underfill materials have been transferred into chip-to-substrate standoffs using capillary-driven flow [ [1] , [2] , [3] , [4] , [5] , [6] ]. Conventional underfill materials used in capillary-driven flow are composed of thermoset epoxy polymers with silica filler particles [ 7 , 8 ], generally demonstrating a slow flow rate owing to their high viscosity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electric field and viscous fluid polarity effects on capillary-driven flow dynamics between parallel plates

Hassan

Khalil

Khan

et al. 2023

Heliyon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The high cost and difficulties involved in experimental analysis can be handled by numerical simulation, which has become an essential method for resolving difficulties in experimental works. Apart from the FEM [10,18], other methods have been used to solve various flip chip underfill problems, including the finite difference method [19], characteristic-based split method in conjunction with FEM [20], finite volume method (FVM) [21], and Petrov-Galerkin methods [22].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%