Who Are The X-Men?

It seems like most people want to X-Ray their BGAs. We're going to start doing a lot more of them and need to consider X-ray, too.
Q: Do most people/companies X-ray everyBGA or do they just do SPC?
Q: Can you get away with spending 25K? 30K? How much will it cost?
Q: Who are the major players in the X-ray arena? (It's OK for vendors to send me e-mails.
Thanks,
smd

reply »

| It seems like most people want to X-Ray their BGAs. We're going to start doing a lot more of them and need to consider X-ray, too.
| Q: Do most people/companies X-ray everyBGA or do they just do SPC?
| Q: Can you get away with spending 25K? 30K? How much will it cost?
| Q: Who are the major players in the X-ray arena? (It's OK for vendors to send me e-mails.
| Thanks,
| smd

| | How many times must we go through this. I apprecaiate the problems and issues. Use an outside x-ray capability (high resolution black and white capability non-destructive test [NDT]). Get ugly images of voiding. Wait 3 years for IPC to announce 20% the right number (based on failure analysis), and go for it.

Other issues are of concern as amount of voids, void location, void size, etc.. Then, run HAST and/or HALT testing and analysis after X-sectioning, SEM/EDX, (determine what's inside voids causing problems) and all the other. How simple can it be?

Oh yes, what about wetting, solderability, and other issues relating to solder joint formation at what temperature and time factors. Plus, advancing requirements for surface coatings, VOC, and lead free stuff.

Clearly, there is a correlation between voiding and solder joint failure/reliability. There is no conclusive evidence about these factors and initial solder joint quality.

Keep pushing the envelope before it pushes us,

Earl Moon

reply »

| | It seems like most people want to X-Ray their BGAs. We're going to start doing a lot more of them and need to consider X-ray, too. | | Q: Do most people/companies X-ray everyBGA or do they just do SPC?
| | Q: Can you get away with spending 25K? 30K? How much will it cost?
| | Q: Who are the major players in the X-ray arena? (It's OK for vendors to send me e-mails.
| | Thanks,
| | smd

| | | | | How many times must we go through this. I apprecaiate the problems and issues. Use an outside x-ray capability (high resolution black and white capability non-destructive test [NDT]). Get ugly images of voiding. Wait 3 years for IPC to announce 20% the right number (based on failure analysis), and go for it. | | Other issues are of concern as amount of voids, void location, void size, etc.. Then, run HAST and/or HALT testing and analysis after X-sectioning, SEM/EDX, (determine what's inside voids causing problems) and all the other. How simple can it be? | | Oh yes, what about wetting, solderability, and other issues relating to solder joint formation at what temperature and time factors. Plus, advancing requirements for surface coatings, VOC, and lead free stuff. | | Clearly, there is a correlation between voiding and solder joint failure/reliability. There is no conclusive evidence about these factors and initial solder joint quality. | | Keep pushing the envelope before it pushes us, | | Earl Moon | Geez Earl, Give the guy a break. I work in a prototype environment. That's pretty much all I build. Very little production product. I use x-ray frequently to verify my process when BGA's are involved. A while back, Phil Zarrow wrote and article entitled, "BGA, What's the BFD?" He hit it right on the head. BGA's are not hard to work into production. They are a bear to rework, I don't care who's equipment you bought. It's time consuming. So you want to make sure your process is in tact before building an entire lot of defective product. I am an advocate of x-ray as far as first piece inspection and even for SPC. It's a good way for me to make my customers feel comfortable. It's also another level of assurance. If I building a prototype, odds are, I don't have any type of MDA / ICT or Functional test developed. X-ray is just another tier of reassurance that all is ok. It is especially helpful when a prototype doesn't fire up the first time. At least you can eliminate manufacturing problems on the BGA. Glenbrook Technologies is a decent low cost x-ray system provider. I got a pretty nice system for around 32k. Not bad at all. They sell an even cheaper portable doodad, too. Nicolet has what they call the "Glenbrook Killer" which is their low cost solution. I believe Micro Focus Image or something like that has a low cost system as well. I'm not sure about Fein Focus. They may be supporting on big dollar solutions. I think HP and 4-Pi are the same way.

give me a buzz if you want to discuss it.

Sincerely, Justin Medernach 978 392 3218

reply »

| | | It seems like most people want to X-Ray their BGAs. We're going to start doing a lot more of them and need to consider X-ray, too. | | | Q: Do most people/companies X-ray everyBGA or do they just do SPC?
| | | Q: Can you get away with spending 25K? 30K? How much will it cost?
| | | Q: Who are the major players in the X-ray arena? (It's OK for vendors to send me e-mails.
| | | Thanks,
| | | smd

| | | | | | | | How many times must we go through this. I apprecaiate the problems and issues. Use an outside x-ray capability (high resolution black and white capability non-destructive test [NDT]). Get ugly images of voiding. Wait 3 years for IPC to announce 20% the right number (based on failure analysis), and go for it. | | | | Other issues are of concern as amount of voids, void location, void size, etc.. Then, run HAST and/or HALT testing and analysis after X-sectioning, SEM/EDX, (determine what's inside voids causing problems) and all the other. How simple can it be? | | | | Oh yes, what about wetting, solderability, and other issues relating to solder joint formation at what temperature and time factors. Plus, advancing requirements for surface coatings, VOC, and lead free stuff. | | | | Clearly, there is a correlation between voiding and solder joint failure/reliability. There is no conclusive evidence about these factors and initial solder joint quality. | | | | Keep pushing the envelope before it pushes us, | | | | Earl Moon | | | Geez Earl, | Give the guy a break. I work in a prototype environment. That's pretty much all I build. Very little production product. I use x-ray frequently to verify my process when BGA's are involved. A while back, Phil Zarrow wrote and article entitled, "BGA, What's the BFD?" He hit it right on the head. BGA's are not hard to work into production. They are a bear to rework, I don't care who's equipment you bought. It's time consuming. So you want to make sure your process is in tact before building an entire lot of defective product. I am an advocate of x-ray as far as first piece inspection and even for SPC. It's a good way for me to make my customers feel comfortable. It's also another level of assurance. If I building a prototype, odds are, I don't have any type of MDA / ICT or Functional test developed. X-ray is just another tier of reassurance that all is ok. It is especially helpful when a prototype doesn't fire up the first time. At least you can eliminate manufacturing problems on the BGA. Glenbrook Technologies is a decent low cost x-ray system provider. I got a pretty nice system for around 32k. Not bad at all. They sell an even cheaper portable doodad, too. Nicolet has what they call the "Glenbrook Killer" which is their low cost solution. I believe Micro Focus Image or something like that has a low cost system as well. I'm not sure about Fein Focus. They may be supporting on big dollar solutions. I think HP and 4-Pi are the same way. | | give me a buzz if you want to discuss it. | | Sincerely, | Justin Medernach | 978 392 3218 | Geez Justin, I'm on your side. Sure, we need to know to characterize our processes. I'm just saying do it the cheapest, easiest, and most cost effective way possible. That way is not spending $200k on in line, super high resolution, grey scale equipment. I totally agree that buying a good stand alone unit is a great way to go, but it can be done outside in very short time with the right service, and you can build your statistical evidence from there.

Hey man, I'm on your side. We must X-Ray to get the ball rolling. I'm for the easiest way.

Earl Moon

reply »

| | | | It seems like most people want to X-Ray their BGAs. We're going to start doing a lot more of them and need to consider X-ray, too. | | | | Q: Do most people/companies X-ray everyBGA or do they just do SPC?
| | | | Q: Can you get away with spending 25K? 30K? How much will it cost?
| | | | Q: Who are the major players in the X-ray arena? (It's OK for vendors to send me e-mails.
| | | | Thanks,
| | | | smd

| | | | | | | | | | | How many times must we go through this. I apprecaiate the problems and issues. Use an outside x-ray capability (high resolution black and white capability non-destructive test [NDT]). Get ugly images of voiding. Wait 3 years for IPC to announce 20% the right number (based on failure analysis), and go for it. | | | | | | Other issues are of concern as amount of voids, void location, void size, etc.. Then, run HAST and/or HALT testing and analysis after X-sectioning, SEM/EDX, (determine what's inside voids causing problems) and all the other. How simple can it be? | | | | | | Oh yes, what about wetting, solderability, and other issues relating to solder joint formation at what temperature and time factors. Plus, advancing requirements for surface coatings, VOC, and lead free stuff. | | | | | | Clearly, there is a correlation between voiding and solder joint failure/reliability. There is no conclusive evidence about these factors and initial solder joint quality. | | | | | | Keep pushing the envelope before it pushes us, | | | | | | Earl Moon | | | | | Geez Earl, | | Give the guy a break. I work in a prototype environment. That's pretty much all I build. Very little production product. I use x-ray frequently to verify my process when BGA's are involved. A while back, Phil Zarrow wrote and article entitled, "BGA, What's the BFD?" He hit it right on the head. BGA's are not hard to work into production. They are a bear to rework, I don't care who's equipment you bought. It's time consuming. So you want to make sure your process is in tact before building an entire lot of defective product. I am an advocate of x-ray as far as first piece inspection and even for SPC. It's a good way for me to make my customers feel comfortable. It's also another level of assurance. If I building a prototype, odds are, I don't have any type of MDA / ICT or Functional test developed. X-ray is just another tier of reassurance that all is ok. It is especially helpful when a prototype doesn't fire up the first time. At least you can eliminate manufacturing problems on the BGA. Glenbrook Technologies is a decent low cost x-ray system provider. I got a pretty nice system for around 32k. Not bad at all. They sell an even cheaper portable doodad, too. Nicolet has what they call the "Glenbrook Killer" which is their low cost solution. I believe Micro Focus Image or something like that has a low cost system as well. I'm not sure about Fein Focus. They may be supporting on big dollar solutions. I think HP and 4-Pi are the same way. | | | | give me a buzz if you want to discuss it. | | | | Sincerely, | | Justin Medernach | | 978 392 3218 | | | Geez Justin, I'm on your side. Sure, we need to know to characterize our processes. I'm just saying do it the cheapest, easiest, and most cost effective way possible. That way is not spending $200k on in line, super high resolution, grey scale equipment. I totally agree that buying a good stand alone unit is a great way to go, but it can be done outside in very short time with the right service, and you can build your statistical evidence from there. | | Hey man, I'm on your side. We must X-Ray to get the ball rolling. I'm for the easiest way. | | Earl Moon | Earl, Sorry, I misunderstood. I should have known better, Master Yoda. I went to a Red Sox / Yankees game this summer and almost got into a fight with another Red Sox fan. Turned out both of us were yelling about the same crap and mistook on another for Yankees fans. I got two free beers out of it anyway.

Justin Medernach |

reply »

| | | | | It seems like most people want to X-Ray their BGAs. We're going to start doing a lot more of them and need to consider X-ray, too. | | | | | Q: Do most people/companies X-ray everyBGA or do they just do SPC? | | | | | Q: Can you get away with spending 25K? 30K? How much will it cost? | | | | | Q: Who are the major players in the X-ray arena? (It's OK for vendors to send me e-mails. | | | | | Thanks, | | | | | smd | | | | | | | | | | | | | | How many times must we go through this. I apprecaiate the problems and issues. Use an outside x-ray capability (high resolution black and white capability non-destructive test [NDT]). Get ugly images of voiding. Wait 3 years for IPC to announce 20% the right number (based on failure analysis), and go for it. | | | | | | | | Other issues are of concern as amount of voids, void location, void size, etc.. Then, run HAST and/or HALT testing and analysis after X-sectioning, SEM/EDX, (determine what's inside voids causing problems) and all the other. How simple can it be? | | | | | | | | Oh yes, what about wetting, solderability, and other issues relating to solder joint formation at what temperature and time factors. Plus, advancing requirements for surface coatings, VOC, and lead free stuff. | | | | | | | | Clearly, there is a correlation between voiding and solder joint failure/reliability. There is no conclusive evidence about these factors and initial solder joint quality. | | | | | | | | Keep pushing the envelope before it pushes us, | | | | | | | | Earl Moon | | | | | | | Geez Earl, | | | Give the guy a break. I work in a prototype environment. That's pretty much all I build. Very little production product. I use x-ray frequently to verify my process when BGA's are involved. A while back, Phil Zarrow wrote and article entitled, "BGA, What's the BFD?" He hit it right on the head. BGA's are not hard to work into production. They are a bear to rework, I don't care who's equipment you bought. It's time consuming. So you want to make sure your process is in tact before building an entire lot of defective product. I am an advocate of x-ray as far as first piece inspection and even for SPC. It's a good way for me to make my customers feel comfortable. It's also another level of assurance. If I building a prototype, odds are, I don't have any type of MDA / ICT or Functional test developed. X-ray is just another tier of reassurance that all is ok. It is especially helpful when a prototype doesn't fire up the first time. At least you can eliminate manufacturing problems on the BGA. Glenbrook Technologies is a decent low cost x-ray system provider. I got a pretty nice system for around 32k. Not bad at all. They sell an even cheaper portable doodad, too. Nicolet has what they call the "Glenbrook Killer" which is their low cost solution. I believe Micro Focus Image or something like that has a low cost system as well. I'm not sure about Fein Focus. They may be supporting on big dollar solutions. I think HP and 4-Pi are the same way. | | | | | | give me a buzz if you want to discuss it. | | | | | | Sincerely, | | | Justin Medernach | | | 978 392 3218 | | | | | Geez Justin, I'm on your side. Sure, we need to know to characterize our processes. I'm just saying do it the cheapest, easiest, and most cost effective way possible. That way is not spending $200k on in line, super high resolution, grey scale equipment. I totally agree that buying a good stand alone unit is a great way to go, but it can be done outside in very short time with the right service, and you can build your statistical evidence from there. | | | | Hey man, I'm on your side. We must X-Ray to get the ball rolling. I'm for the easiest way. | | | | Earl Moon | | | Earl, | Sorry, I misunderstood. I should have known better, Master Yoda. I went to a Red Sox / Yankees game this summer and almost got into a fight with another Red Sox fan. Turned out both of us were yelling about the same crap and mistook on another for Yankees fans. I got two free beers out of it anyway. | | Justin Medernach | | | | Earl and Justin: Thank you for your responses. Perhaps it would have helped if I gave you more info. Or perhaps not. Please keep in mind that I don't spend as much time here as you do and just wanted to ask a few questions.
Some of our PCI boards use a Motorola Power Quicc processor, which comes to us in a cute little BGA. However, we will be using a monster 42.5MM2 BGA in the near future and I need some way to ensure that we're doing our job.
We have ICT fixtures for most of our boards but I'm under the impression that SPC would be the way to go. Am I wrong? Anyone doing just 1st piece inspection? What kind of yield do you get?
Where in their process do people put the X-ray doodad?
Last really important question: which features/options are invaluable? Which are wasteful?

Justin's Rework Comment:

We have an Air-Vac DRS rework station and it's sort of a pain to use but it is a major pain to clean. It might be worth 30K just to not have to clean that thing ever again. Maybe I use too much flux? I've only used it a few times.

BTW: My fav beer is Sam Adams and Rohrbach's (local) Sam Patch. Yum!

SMD

reply »

Sorry folks. I'm just a naysayer here. Let's look at this BGA thing......

We've all been successfully processing down to 16 mil FP stuff for years, now--some of us down to 11 mil. Once the printing process was stabilized, paste rheologies were matured, and folks were trained.....voila!

We've all been placing PLCC packages since the mid to late 70's with no issues. Once the packaging specs were standardized, Leadframe materials were matured, and people were trained.....no prob!

Can we SEE every aspect of every joint on a QFP, TAB, or PLCC device? NOT.

Do we X-Ray for these joints? NOT.

All the folks I spoke with when I first got my feet wet in BGA's were buddies inside Mot and AT&T and Compaq. They were all doing volume BGA early on...... NONE of them recommended purchasing X-Ray. They all did purchase it, but told me not to sweat it, and not to expend the capital. Said that if the Balls were good on the BGA's, the pad geometries were good on the board, the paste deposition was good, and the reflow was solid......you are done.

BTW, after initial process development for voids using one of these beasties, I'd like to see the X-Ray machine which will indicate COLD joints.

Here's my take, for what it's worth:

Work the vendor side first--HARD. Get good incoming components. With Good Ball geometries. Place them on boards with good pad geometries. Reflow them in good ovens, utilizing good profiles. Develop the process using an outside service who X-Rays, if you want.....but don't buy one! It will become a dusty bookshelf in less than a year. Placing a darn ball on a pad with paste at these spacings is no where near as challenging as 11 mil TAB stuff. So, let's quit making it sound like voodoo. BGA is NOT hard. DONE.

Flame proof underwear donned......

Scott

| It seems like most people want to X-Ray their BGAs. We're going to start doing a lot more of them and need to consider X-ray, too. | Q: Do most people/companies X-ray everyBGA or do they just do SPC?
| Q: Can you get away with spending 25K? 30K? How much will it cost?
| Q: Who are the major players in the X-ray arena? (It's OK for vendors to send me e-mails.
| Thanks,
| smd

| |

reply »

| | | | | | It seems like most people want to X-Ray their BGAs. We're going to start doing a lot more of them and need to consider X-ray, too. | | | | | | Q: Do most people/companies X-ray everyBGA or do they just do SPC? | | | | | | Q: Can you get away with spending 25K? 30K? How much will it cost? | | | | | | Q: Who are the major players in the X-ray arena? (It's OK for vendors to send me e-mails. | | | | | | Thanks, | | | | | | smd | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | How many times must we go through this. I apprecaiate the problems and issues. Use an outside x-ray capability (high resolution black and white capability non-destructive test [NDT]). Get ugly images of voiding. Wait 3 years for IPC to announce 20% the right number (based on failure analysis), and go for it. | | | | | | | | | | Other issues are of concern as amount of voids, void location, void size, etc.. Then, run HAST and/or HALT testing and analysis after X-sectioning, SEM/EDX, (determine what's inside voids causing problems) and all the other. How simple can it be? | | | | | | | | | | Oh yes, what about wetting, solderability, and other issues relating to solder joint formation at what temperature and time factors. Plus, advancing requirements for surface coatings, VOC, and lead free stuff. | | | | | | | | | | Clearly, there is a correlation between voiding and solder joint failure/reliability. There is no conclusive evidence about these factors and initial solder joint quality. | | | | | | | | | | Keep pushing the envelope before it pushes us, | | | | | | | | | | Earl Moon | | | | | | | | | Geez Earl, | | | | Give the guy a break. I work in a prototype environment. That's pretty much all I build. Very little production product. I use x-ray frequently to verify my process when BGA's are involved. A while back, Phil Zarrow wrote and article entitled, "BGA, What's the BFD?" He hit it right on the head. BGA's are not hard to work into production. They are a bear to rework, I don't care who's equipment you bought. It's time consuming. So you want to make sure your process is in tact before building an entire lot of defective product. I am an advocate of x-ray as far as first piece inspection and even for SPC. It's a good way for me to make my customers feel comfortable. It's also another level of assurance. If I building a prototype, odds are, I don't have any type of MDA / ICT or Functional test developed. X-ray is just another tier of reassurance that all is ok. It is especially helpful when a prototype doesn't fire up the first time. At least you can eliminate manufacturing problems on the BGA. Glenbrook Technologies is a decent low cost x-ray system provider. I got a pretty nice system for around 32k. Not bad at all. They sell an even cheaper portable doodad, too. Nicolet has what they call the "Glenbrook Killer" which is their low cost solution. I believe Micro Focus Image or something like that has a low cost system as well. I'm not sure about Fein Focus. They may be supporting on big dollar solutions. I think HP and 4-Pi are the same way. | | | | | | | | give me a buzz if you want to discuss it. | | | | | | | | Sincerely, | | | | Justin Medernach | | | | 978 392 3218 | | | | | | | Geez Justin, I'm on your side. Sure, we need to know to characterize our processes. I'm just saying do it the cheapest, easiest, and most cost effective way possible. That way is not spending $200k on in line, super high resolution, grey scale equipment. I totally agree that buying a good stand alone unit is a great way to go, but it can be done outside in very short time with the right service, and you can build your statistical evidence from there. | | | | | | Hey man, I'm on your side. We must X-Ray to get the ball rolling. I'm for the easiest way. | | | | | | Earl Moon | | | | | Earl, | | Sorry, I misunderstood. I should have known better, Master Yoda. I went to a Red Sox / Yankees game this summer and almost got into a fight with another Red Sox fan. Turned out both of us were yelling about the same crap and mistook on another for Yankees fans. I got two free beers out of it anyway. | | | | Justin Medernach | | | | | | | | Earl and Justin: | Thank you for your responses. Perhaps it would have helped if I gave you more info. Or perhaps not. Please keep in mind that I don't spend as much time here as you do and just wanted to ask a few questions.
| Some of our PCI boards use a Motorola Power Quicc processor, which comes to us in a cute little BGA. However, we will be using a monster 42.5MM2 BGA in the near future and I need some way to ensure that we're doing our job.
| We have ICT fixtures for most of our boards but I'm under the impression that SPC would be the way to go. Am I wrong? Anyone doing just 1st piece inspection? What kind of yield do you get?
| Where in their process do people put the X-ray doodad?
| Last really important question: which features/options are invaluable? Which are wasteful? |

Justin's Rework Comment:

| We have an Air-Vac DRS rework station and it's sort of a pain to use but it is a major pain to clean. It might be worth 30K just to not have to clean that thing ever again. Maybe I use too much flux? I've only used it a few times. | | BTW: My fav beer is Sam Adams and Rohrbach's (local) Sam Patch. Yum! | | SMD

what type of carrier media is the "monster bga" made out of. ie. PBGA, SBGA, CBGA, etc. A.) Watch out for moisture incursion on the larger PBGAs. they tend to cause the overall package to warp and you'll get opens at the corners if your temp is too hot in reflow. B.) If your machine is a mess, you're not using too much flux. You're just not cleaning it up after. C.)Good x-ray features include the ability to zoom, adjust power, gain, and a digital micrometer is pretty cool too. D.) I don't advocate in-line inspection nor do I advocate x-raying prior to reflow (too much handling) It's a good idea to check alignment by just looking at the profile of the part and checking to make sure the ball is aligned with the paste deposition before sending it into the oven. E.) My first piece yields are very high. I don't want to jinx myself but it's a pretty reliable process. F.) I love Sam Adams too but Sam Smith definitely has my number (and my wallet unfortunately)

Brs, Justin | | | |

reply »

| | | | | | | It seems like most people want to X-Ray their BGAs. We're going to start doing a lot more of them and need to consider X-ray, too. | | | | | | | Q: Do most people/companies X-ray everyBGA or do they just do SPC? | | | | | | | Q: Can you get away with spending 25K? 30K? How much will it cost? | | | | | | | Q: Who are the major players in the X-ray arena? (It's OK for vendors to send me e-mails. | | | | | | | Thanks, | | | | | | | smd | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | How many times must we go through this. I apprecaiate the problems and issues. Use an outside x-ray capability (high resolution black and white capability non-destructive test [NDT]). Get ugly images of voiding. Wait 3 years for IPC to announce 20% the right number (based on failure analysis), and go for it. | | | | | | | | | | | | Other issues are of concern as amount of voids, void location, void size, etc.. Then, run HAST and/or HALT testing and analysis after X-sectioning, SEM/EDX, (determine what's inside voids causing problems) and all the other. How simple can it be? | | | | | | | | | | | | Oh yes, what about wetting, solderability, and other issues relating to solder joint formation at what temperature and time factors. Plus, advancing requirements for surface coatings, VOC, and lead free stuff. | | | | | | | | | | | | Clearly, there is a correlation between voiding and solder joint failure/reliability. There is no conclusive evidence about these factors and initial solder joint quality. | | | | | | | | | | | | Keep pushing the envelope before it pushes us, | | | | | | | | | | | | Earl Moon | | | | | | | | | | | Geez Earl, | | | | | Give the guy a break. I work in a prototype environment. That's pretty much all I build. Very little production product. I use x-ray frequently to verify my process when BGA's are involved. A while back, Phil Zarrow wrote and article entitled, "BGA, What's the BFD?" He hit it right on the head. BGA's are not hard to work into production. They are a bear to rework, I don't care who's equipment you bought. It's time consuming. So you want to make sure your process is in tact before building an entire lot of defective product. I am an advocate of x-ray as far as first piece inspection and even for SPC. It's a good way for me to make my customers feel comfortable. It's also another level of assurance. If I building a prototype, odds are, I don't have any type of MDA / ICT or Functional test developed. X-ray is just another tier of reassurance that all is ok. It is especially helpful when a prototype doesn't fire up the first time. At least you can eliminate manufacturing problems on the BGA. Glenbrook Technologies is a decent low cost x-ray system provider. I got a pretty nice system for around 32k. Not bad at all. They sell an even cheaper portable doodad, too. Nicolet has what they call the "Glenbrook Killer" which is their low cost solution. I believe Micro Focus Image or something like that has a low cost system as well. I'm not sure about Fein Focus. They may be supporting on big dollar solutions. I think HP and 4-Pi are the same way. | | | | | | | | | | give me a buzz if you want to discuss it. | | | | | | | | | | Sincerely, | | | | | Justin Medernach | | | | | 978 392 3218 | | | | | | | | | Geez Justin, I'm on your side. Sure, we need to know to characterize our processes. I'm just saying do it the cheapest, easiest, and most cost effective way possible. That way is not spending $200k on in line, super high resolution, grey scale equipment. I totally agree that buying a good stand alone unit is a great way to go, but it can be done outside in very short time with the right service, and you can build your statistical evidence from there. | | | | | | | | Hey man, I'm on your side. We must X-Ray to get the ball rolling. I'm for the easiest way. | | | | | | | | Earl Moon | | | | | | | Earl, | | | Sorry, I misunderstood. I should have known better, Master Yoda. I went to a Red Sox / Yankees game this summer and almost got into a fight with another Red Sox fan. Turned out both of us were yelling about the same crap and mistook on another for Yankees fans. I got two free beers out of it anyway. | | | | | | Justin Medernach | | | | | | | | | | | | Earl and Justin: | | Thank you for your responses. Perhaps it would have helped if I gave you more info. Or perhaps not. Please keep in mind that I don't spend as much time here as you do and just wanted to ask a few questions. | | Some of our PCI boards use a Motorola Power Quicc processor, which comes to us in a cute little BGA. However, we will be using a monster 42.5MM2 BGA in the near future and I need some way to ensure that we're doing our job. | | We have ICT fixtures for most of our boards but I'm under the impression that SPC would be the way to go. Am I wrong? Anyone doing just 1st piece inspection? What kind of yield do you get? | | Where in their process do people put the X-ray doodad? | | Last really important question: which features/options are invaluable? Which are wasteful? | | Justin's Rework Comment: | | We have an Air-Vac DRS rework station and it's sort of a pain to use but it is a major pain to clean. It might be worth 30K just to not have to clean that thing ever again. Maybe I use too much flux? I've only used it a few times. | | | | BTW: My fav beer is Sam Adams and Rohrbach's (local) Sam Patch. Yum! | | | | SMD | | what type of carrier media is the "monster bga" made out of. ie. PBGA, SBGA, CBGA, etc. A.) Watch out for moisture incursion on the larger PBGAs. they tend to cause the overall package to warp and you'll get opens at the corners if your temp is too hot in reflow. B.) If your machine is a mess, you're not using too much flux. You're just not cleaning it up after. C.)Good x-ray features include the ability to zoom, adjust power, gain, and a digital micrometer is pretty cool too. D.) I don't advocate in-line inspection nor do I advocate x-raying prior to reflow (too much handling) It's a good idea to check alignment by just looking at the profile of the part and checking to make sure the ball is aligned with the paste deposition before sending it into the oven. E.) My first piece yields are very high. I don't want to jinx myself but it's a pretty reliable process. F.) I love Sam Adams too but Sam Smith definitely has my number (and my wallet unfortunately) | | Brs, | Justin | | | | | | | | | | Justin: The "monster" is a 42.5MM2 PBGA. It will be placed by our GSM and will go through an Omniflo 7 oven (199"). The boards are .062" but I'm not sure how our design team will handle the panel issue. Are there any special concerns that pop out at you? What kind of profile would be best?
So you would train a QC person as an operator of X-ray equipment? We currently do 1st piece and then full inspection of boards after reflow. I'm hoping that our new line will change some of this.
I clean the rework station when I use it and so does everyone else. But it just seems like there's a lot of yellow icky stuff that I have to scrub off. I try to use a fairly decent amount so as to not damage the board or BGA.
Well, thanks again for your comments.
SMD

reply »

| Sorry folks. I'm just a naysayer here. Let's look at this BGA thing...... | | We've all been successfully processing down to 16 mil FP stuff for years, now--some of us down to 11 mil. Once the printing process was stabilized, paste rheologies were matured, and folks were trained.....voila! | | We've all been placing PLCC packages since the mid to late 70's with no issues. Once the packaging specs were standardized, Leadframe materials were matured, and people were trained.....no prob! | | Can we SEE every aspect of every joint on a QFP, TAB, or PLCC device? NOT. | | Do we X-Ray for these joints? NOT. | | All the folks I spoke with when I first got my feet wet in BGA's were buddies inside Mot and AT&T and Compaq. They were all doing volume BGA early on...... | NONE of them recommended purchasing X-Ray. | They all did purchase it, but told me not to sweat it, and not to expend the capital. | Said that if the Balls were good on the BGA's, the pad geometries were good on the board, the paste deposition was good, and the reflow was solid......you are done. | | BTW, after initial process development for voids using one of these beasties, I'd like to see the X-Ray machine which will indicate COLD joints. | | Here's my take, for what it's worth: | | Work the vendor side first--HARD. Get good incoming components. With Good Ball geometries. Place them on boards with good pad geometries. Reflow them in good ovens, utilizing good profiles. | Develop the process using an outside service who X-Rays, if you want.....but don't buy one! It will become a dusty bookshelf in less than a year. Placing a darn ball on a pad with paste at these spacings is no where near as challenging as 11 mil TAB stuff. So, let's quit making it sound like voodoo. BGA is NOT hard. | DONE. | | Flame proof underwear donned...... | | Scott | Scott: But if X-ray doesn't give you the full picture on joints then that is bad news. I suspect that the X-ray sales people aren't going to tell everything their machines can't do so what are the issues with lookin' at joints with X-ray Specs?
How do you recommend we inspect the incoming BGAs? Our GSM will inspect balls but I'd like to reject parts in Receiving and not on the floor.

Any other ideas? Anyone?

SMD | | It seems like most people want to X-Ray their BGAs. We're going to start doing a lot more of them and need to consider X-ray, too. | | Q: Do most people/companies X-ray everyBGA or do they just do SPC? | | Q: Can you get away with spending 25K? 30K? How much will it cost? | | Q: Who are the major players in the X-ray arena? (It's OK for vendors to send me e-mails. | | Thanks, | | smd | | | | | |

reply »

>

Out of interest, are you using an 84V? 84VZ? a 60V? 60VZ? With SBIP or the Yamaha vision system (VICS 1000)? Do you have the old tray sequencer?

<>

WRONG!!!! Why do folks still live in this mindset? I'm not slamming you personally. But this is prevalent in our industry. More opinion: Make REWORK a nasty, dirty word. Work for the ROOT cause of a process problem. DO NOT ACCEPT rework as part of your process. FORCE Mgmt (with good backup data and facts) to procure the best equipment they can afford in today's technologies.

<>

Then what's ICT for? A good, leading edge ICT platform is a wonderful, FAST troubleshooting tool. I'm not discussing a MDA here; I'm discussing Real ICT, with parametric measurments of the circuits / components. Not an opens and shorts tester.

My only point is that I do not believe that X-Ray is a required capital expenditure for today's electronics factory if you are doing BGA's. If you need it for another application, my comments aren't pertinent.

Develop a solid process, using solid equipment and logic. Work towards zero rework. Work the root cause of all process issues. Work your vendor base. Don't accept inferior quality materials. Big project? Yes, in some facilities. But I'd recommend getting your hands around what I call "the total cost" of ownership.....

I.E. Say your buyer drives 2 bucks out of a bare board by going to a "less than desireable" boardhouse. Then you receive the product, bring it into your facility, and begin building with it. Solderability problems, masking issues, outgassing, improperly cured layers / mask, etc.....all hit. You rework. You lose valuable manufacturing time and resources. But is anybody capturing the COSTS of this rework (in TIME and MATERIALS)? Your buyer's 2 buck savings probably goes into about 1 or 2 bucks EXTRA cost........see what I mean? If you can set up a study, gather this data, present it to your management.....they cannot refute the facts. Even the beancounters can't. In fact, they are usually the ones who get on board first.....

<>>

I concede here that removing a BGA is not the way to go. But if you have a good circuit, good incoming parts, and good connections.......root causes.......

<>>

Use an outside service to convince yourself you have a solid process.

<< How do you recommend we inspect the incoming BGAs? Our GSM will inspect balls but I'd like to reject parts in Receiving and not on the floor.>>

How about requiring a C of C from the vendor, and doing a statistical sampling with an optical comparator or AOI equipment? If you don't own this equipment, I'd simply require a C of C from the vendor--for both mechanical and electrical specs.

I'm a bit confused here. You mentioned a CSM at the beginning, now we've moved to a GSM. I don't believe that the version you own of CSM's vision will do an adequate job of inspecting balls.

a coplanarity laser system would do nicely here......

Scott

reply »

| | | | | | | | It seems like most people want to X-Ray their BGAs. We're going to start doing a lot more of them and need to consider X-ray, too. | | | | | | | | Q: Do most people/companies X-ray everyBGA or do they just do SPC? | | | | | | | | Q: Can you get away with spending 25K? 30K? How much will it cost? | | | | | | | | Q: Who are the major players in the X-ray arena? (It's OK for vendors to send me e-mails. | | | | | | | | Thanks, | | | | | | | | smd | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | How many times must we go through this. I apprecaiate the problems and issues. Use an outside x-ray capability (high resolution black and white capability non-destructive test [NDT]). Get ugly images of voiding. Wait 3 years for IPC to announce 20% the right number (based on failure analysis), and go for it. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Other issues are of concern as amount of voids, void location, void size, etc.. Then, run HAST and/or HALT testing and analysis after X-sectioning, SEM/EDX, (determine what's inside voids causing problems) and all the other. How simple can it be? | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Oh yes, what about wetting, solderability, and other issues relating to solder joint formation at what temperature and time factors. Plus, advancing requirements for surface coatings, VOC, and lead free stuff. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Clearly, there is a correlation between voiding and solder joint failure/reliability. There is no conclusive evidence about these factors and initial solder joint quality. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Keep pushing the envelope before it pushes us, | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Earl Moon | | | | | | | | | | | | | Geez Earl, | | | | | | Give the guy a break. I work in a prototype environment. That's pretty much all I build. Very little production product. I use x-ray frequently to verify my process when BGA's are involved. A while back, Phil Zarrow wrote and article entitled, "BGA, What's the BFD?" He hit it right on the head. BGA's are not hard to work into production. They are a bear to rework, I don't care who's equipment you bought. It's time consuming. So you want to make sure your process is in tact before building an entire lot of defective product. I am an advocate of x-ray as far as first piece inspection and even for SPC. It's a good way for me to make my customers feel comfortable. It's also another level of assurance. If I building a prototype, odds are, I don't have any type of MDA / ICT or Functional test developed. X-ray is just another tier of reassurance that all is ok. It is especially helpful when a prototype doesn't fire up the first time. At least you can eliminate manufacturing problems on the BGA. Glenbrook Technologies is a decent low cost x-ray system provider. I got a pretty nice system for around 32k. Not bad at all. They sell an even cheaper portable doodad, too. Nicolet has what they call the "Glenbrook Killer" which is their low cost solution. I believe Micro Focus Image or something like that has a low cost system as well. I'm not sure about Fein Focus. They may be supporting on big dollar solutions. I think HP and 4-Pi are the same way. | | | | | | | | | | | | give me a buzz if you want to discuss it. | | | | | | | | | | | | Sincerely, | | | | | | Justin Medernach | | | | | | 978 392 3218 | | | | | | | | | | | Geez Justin, I'm on your side. Sure, we need to know to characterize our processes. I'm just saying do it the cheapest, easiest, and most cost effective way possible. That way is not spending $200k on in line, super high resolution, grey scale equipment. I totally agree that buying a good stand alone unit is a great way to go, but it can be done outside in very short time with the right service, and you can build your statistical evidence from there. | | | | | | | | | | Hey man, I'm on your side. We must X-Ray to get the ball rolling. I'm for the easiest way. | | | | | | | | | | Earl Moon | | | | | | | | | Earl, | | | | Sorry, I misunderstood. I should have known better, Master Yoda. I went to a Red Sox / Yankees game this summer and almost got into a fight with another Red Sox fan. Turned out both of us were yelling about the same crap and mistook on another for Yankees fans. I got two free beers out of it anyway. | | | | | | | | Justin Medernach | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Earl and Justin: | | | Thank you for your responses. Perhaps it would have helped if I gave you more info. Or perhaps not. Please keep in mind that I don't spend as much time here as you do and just wanted to ask a few questions. | | | Some of our PCI boards use a Motorola Power Quicc processor, which comes to us in a cute little BGA. However, we will be using a monster 42.5MM2 BGA in the near future and I need some way to ensure that we're doing our job. | | | We have ICT fixtures for most of our boards but I'm under the impression that SPC would be the way to go. Am I wrong? Anyone doing just 1st piece inspection? What kind of yield do you get? | | | Where in their process do people put the X-ray doodad? | | | Last really important question: which features/options are invaluable? Which are wasteful? | | | Justin's Rework Comment: | | | We have an Air-Vac DRS rework station and it's sort of a pain to use but it is a major pain to clean. It might be worth 30K just to not have to clean that thing ever again. Maybe I use too much flux? I've only used it a few times. | | | | | | BTW: My fav beer is Sam Adams and Rohrbach's (local) Sam Patch. Yum! | | | | | | SMD | | | | what type of carrier media is the "monster bga" made out of. ie. PBGA, SBGA, CBGA, etc. A.) Watch out for moisture incursion on the larger PBGAs. they tend to cause the overall package to warp and you'll get opens at the corners if your temp is too hot in reflow. B.) If your machine is a mess, you're not using too much flux. You're just not cleaning it up after. C.)Good x-ray features include the ability to zoom, adjust power, gain, and a digital micrometer is pretty cool too. D.) I don't advocate in-line inspection nor do I advocate x-raying prior to reflow (too much handling) It's a good idea to check alignment by just looking at the profile of the part and checking to make sure the ball is aligned with the paste deposition before sending it into the oven. E.) My first piece yields are very high. I don't want to jinx myself but it's a pretty reliable process. F.) I love Sam Adams too but Sam Smith definitely has my number (and my wallet unfortunately) | | | | Brs, | | Justin | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Justin: | The "monster" is a 42.5MM2 PBGA. It will be placed by our GSM and will go through an Omniflo 7 oven (199"). The boards are .062" but I'm not sure how our design team will handle the panel issue. Are there any special concerns that pop out at you? What kind of profile would be best?
| So you would train a QC person as an operator of X-ray equipment? We currently do 1st piece and then full inspection of boards after reflow. I'm hoping that our new line will change some of this.
| I clean the rework station when I use it and so does everyone else. But it just seems like there's a lot of yellow icky stuff that I have to scrub off. I try to use a fairly decent amount so as to not damage the board or BGA.
| Well, thanks again for your comments.
| SMD | SMD, Is the device overmolded or a glob top. Watch the glob tops. Check the corners of this device. You'll have opens in these locations if you're getting the package too hot. Mechanical failures will occur at the balls located in the corners of the DIE itself, NOT THE PACKAGE. The corner of the Die is where the CTE mismatch is most prevelant. A couple of tips for PBGAs: a.) The larger the die, the more stable. b.) Overmolded packages are definitely more stable than glob top. c.) Watch for delamination of overmold from BT substrate. d.) KEEP THESE THINGS DRY!! I CAN'T STRESS THIS ENOUGH. e.) The more layers in the component substrate, the more stability you will have. Many are 2 layer carriers (ball frames / lead frames?). I've dealt with 4 layer carriers. I'm sure there are some custom jobs out there with even more. f.) Your profile will be no different from an assembly without a BGA. The profile is PASTE DICTATED, NOT COMPONENT. The only time a component is going to dictate a profile is when a component is temperature sensitive. Generally, 220 C is the cutoff point for glob topped PBGAs. Otherwise, you can go to 225C - 230 C.

Hope this helps a little

Regards, Justin Medernach

reply »

Addressing your interest: We've got a CSM84V (84 feeders W. vision and no Z) and a GSM coming in two weeks. No tray feeder. But we've got the Universal PTF coming.

The rework racket:

I think you know the issue here. It's not like I'm saying we need to rework everything.
Rework is a horrible word, right up there with "reject" and "DMR."

ICT:

Well we have "real ICT" but sometimes all we know is that there a problem keepin' this particular device from working. Could it be the part? The process? The vendor blames us for poor placement. Could it be the board? There is no board house that can do it right. Or so it would seem. With this kind of uncertainty we end up having to remove the BGA to see what's what. The trouble is that we get bum parts and bum boards.

Total Cost of Ownership: What terrors await potential X-ray owners? I haven't called Glenbrook yet.

Going To Management:

What you suggest is a great idea, BUT.... I can probably figure out what it costs to rework like we do. I can divide it by the number of boards and even categorize it by vendor. I could compare which is the worst. Then what? I'd have to know what it would cost to have it done right. I'd have to have the same board made by a competitor and then build several in secret on our line. Maybe it can be done but, but, I still need a good house to start with.

Summary:

• I agree with you that rework isn't a good thing. Doing it once is enough and extra effort should be avioded.
• Proving to certain Directors that xxx house and xxx process (W. less rework the end goal) is a great idea, though a real challenge.
• I need to learn more about introducing X-ray into the process.

Thanks.

| Out of interest, are you using an 84V? 84VZ? a 60V? 60VZ? With SBIP or the Yamaha vision system (VICS 1000)? Do you have the old tray sequencer? | | <> | | WRONG!!!! | Why do folks still live in this mindset? I'm not slamming you personally. But this is prevalent in our industry. | More opinion: | Make REWORK a nasty, dirty word. Work for the ROOT cause of a process problem. DO NOT ACCEPT rework as part of your process. FORCE Mgmt (with good backup data and facts) to procure the best equipment they can afford in today's technologies. | | <> | | Then what's ICT for? A good, leading edge ICT platform is a wonderful, FAST troubleshooting tool. I'm not discussing a MDA here; I'm discussing Real ICT, with parametric measurments of the circuits / components. Not an opens and shorts tester. | | My only point is that I do not believe that X-Ray is a required capital expenditure for today's electronics factory if you are doing BGA's. If you need it for another application, my comments aren't pertinent. | | Develop a solid process, using solid equipment and logic. Work towards zero rework. Work the root cause of all process issues. Work your vendor base. Don't accept inferior quality materials. Big project? Yes, in some facilities. But I'd recommend getting your hands around what I call "the total cost" of ownership..... | | I.E. Say your buyer drives 2 bucks out of a bare board by going to a "less than desireable" boardhouse. Then you receive the product, bring it into your facility, and begin building with it. Solderability problems, masking issues, outgassing, improperly cured layers / mask, etc.....all hit. You rework. You lose valuable manufacturing time and resources. But is anybody capturing the COSTS of this rework (in TIME and MATERIALS)? Your buyer's 2 buck savings probably goes into about 1 or 2 bucks EXTRA cost........see what I mean? If you can set up a study, gather this data, present it to your management.....they cannot refute the facts. Even the beancounters can't. In fact, they are usually the ones who get on board first..... | | <>> | | I concede here that removing a BGA is not the way to go. But if you have a good circuit, good incoming parts, and good connections.......root causes....... | | <>> | | Use an outside service to convince yourself you have a solid process. | | << How do you recommend we inspect the incoming BGAs? Our GSM will inspect balls but I'd like to reject parts in Receiving and not on the floor.>> | | How about requiring a C of C from the vendor, and doing a statistical sampling with an optical comparator or AOI equipment? | If you don't own this equipment, I'd simply require a C of C from the vendor--for both mechanical and electrical specs. | | I'm a bit confused here. You mentioned a CSM at the beginning, now we've moved to a GSM. I don't believe that the version you own of CSM's vision will do an adequate job of inspecting balls. | | a coplanarity laser system would do nicely here...... | | Scott | |

reply »

Nicolet Imaging systems in San Diego has everything from Manual Systems to inline, Automated systems for low mix high volume applications. Your eyes get tired after 4,000 cell phone inspections.

reply »