Page 20

EETE FEB 2014

3d tsv summit Manufacturers’ top tips to cost-effective 3D IC production By Julien Happich Under the moto “Application Ready”, this year’s 3D TSV Summit was very much focused on how to make 3D IC design an attractive proposition not only for very demanding niche applications, but a cost-efficient one for chips in everyday consumer electronics. Hence the debates on Grenoble’s Minatec campus were all about figuring out ways to slash manufacturing costs in what turns out to be quite a processintensive approach to miniaturization. Stacking multiple dies together or connecting them via an interposer, the so-called more-than-moore approach to higher performance devices, relies heavily on Through Silicon Vias (TSV) interconnects. These involves extra material deposition steps for the vias to be etched and filled (the hot topic of last year’s 3D TSV Summit), wafer handling and thinning and then revealing the TSVs through selective etching. A final Chemical Mechanical Planarization (CMP) step will open up the isolated vias and prepare the wafer to receive micro-bumps on top of the TSVs, so that another prepared wafer can be stacked on top of it (full wafer-to-wafer stacking) or alternatively, only knowgood dies. “The choice between the reconstituted wafer approach (assembled of know-good dies only) and the full wafer-to-wafer approach will very much depend on the final die size and the associated costs of managing yield” told me one of the exhibitors. Usually the smaller the die and the higher the yield, the more cost-efficient it becomes to perform full wafer-to-wafer stacking, effectively skipping a few process steps. All these processes and assembly steps come on top of the normal IC manufacture, hence the cost-benefits are not always clear, especially in the consumer market where you want a thinner Cea-Leti’s stacked known-good-dies on a wafer. tablet year-on-year but you’re not really fussed about having “3D IC inside”. You just want it cheaper, or get more performance out of the same price. Among the keynote speakers, there were many IC manufacturers and process equipment vendors, all here to demonstrate their readiness for the next killer app, or rather, trying to convince device makers that all the industry would benefit from pushing 3D TSV technology straight into the mass market. Yet, the killer app that would really pull 3D TSVs globally was not clearly identified, maybe integrated MEMS sensors in wearable electronics or those taking part in tantalizing IoT market projections, hinted Mark Stromberg, principal analyst at Gartner. What can we learn from MEMS? The debates started with MEMS, with fairly relaxed design rules and where TSVs are comparatively easy to integrate. Because often MEMS sensors need to physically interact with their environment, the packaging has a direct impact on performance, it must be specific to each MEMS application (hermetically vacuum sealed at die level, or with a damping gas, sometimes with a diaphragm or an opening, sometimes requiring an optical window). In this context, TSVs are an enabler explained Dr. Eric Mounier, Co-founder of market research company Yole Développement. Currently, the packaging is often large even if the MEMS die is small, Mounier noted, and the MEMS packaging assembly, test and calibration accounts for nearly 35% to 60% of a MEMS module’s total cost. In that case, TSVs can not only drive package standardization to decrease overall costs, they enable compact arrays, for example by removing wire-bonds or taking connections to the back of the die. “If you need a wellcontrolled atmosphere with a round gasket between the MEMS active part and the cap, then TSVs provide back-side access and eliminate leakage issues”, said Stephane Renard, CTO and co-founder of Tronics. “TSVs can simplify the MEMS’ reliability and architecture for better protection” he added. “TSVs are not for everyone”, commented Ian Rutherford, MEMS Product Marketing & Business Line Manager at X-Fab. “We need to have a toolbox ready, but it will not make or break for all businesses. Not all TSV processes are cheap, so you need to have the right trade-off between TSV use and deviceshrink”, Rutherford added. Rutherford also noted that biomedical applications could drive more TSVs in 3D IC packaging, with hermetically sealed CMOS devices used in implantable electronics, package biocompatibility is key. “Often, people focus on the mechanical sensor structure, with a lot of processes inside the cap for the insulation, the hermeticity. But using TSVs, you can replace some of the processes, sometimes, overall manufacture is simplified and there will be some economy made”, Renard clarified. As for testing the 3D IC MEMS devices, technology manager at STMicroelectronics, Marco Ferrera said that right now, TSVs are not adding complexity. “You just add series resistance to capacitors” he said. Christophe Zinck, Application Engineering Manager at ASE Group, an Outsourced Semiconductor Assembly and Test (OSAT) service provider, observed that packaging alone accounts for 20 to 60% of the MEMS/ Sensor device BOM, but it is also a key part of the MEMS function and design as it can create additional value. “To reduce packaging costs, we need to manage the applica- On ASE’s roadmap: thin film MEMS capping, wafer-to-wafer metal bonding and sealing, C2W and 3D WLP ToolBox “standardization”. 20 Electronic Engineering Times Europe February 2014 www.electronics-eetimes.com


EETE FEB 2014
To see the actual publication please follow the link above