Skip to Main Content
Three underfill options compatible with lead-free assembly have been evaluated: capillary underfill, fluxing underfill, and corner bond underfill. Chip scale packages (CSPs) with eutectic Sn/Pb solder were used for control samples. Without underfill, lead-free and Sn/Pb eutectic drop test results were comparable. Capillary flow underfills, dispensed and cured after reflow, are commonly used in CSP assembly with eutectic Sn/Pb solder. With capillary flow underfill, the drop test results were significantly better with lead-free solder assembly than with Sn/Pb eutectic. Fluxing underfill is dispensed at the CSP site prior to CSP placement. No solder paste is printed at the site. The CSP is placed and reflowed in a standard reflow cycle. A new fluxing underfill developed for compatibility with the higher lead-free solder reflow profiles was investigated. The fluxing underfill with lead-free solder yielded the best drop test results. Corner bond underfill is dispensed as four dots corresponding to the four corners of the CSP after solder paste print, but before CSP placement. The corner bond material cures during the reflow cycle. It is a simpler process compared to capillary or fluxing underfill. The drop test results with corner bond were intermediate between no underfill and capillary underfill and similar for both lead-free and Sn/Pb eutectic solder assembly. The effect of aging on the drop test results with lead-free solder and either no underfill or corner bond underfill was studied. Tin/lead solder with no underfill was used for control. This test was to simulate drop performance after the product has been placed in service for some period of time. There was degradation in the drop test results in all cases after 100 and 250 h of storage at 125°C prior to the drop test. The worst degradation occurred with the lead-free solder with no underfill.