This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
| decap:epoxy [2020/02/27 21:02] – [McMaster live 2019-11-10] mcmaster | decap:epoxy [2023/09/04 07:42] (current) – mcmaster | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 177: | Line 177: | ||
| ====== Laser ====== | ====== Laser ====== | ||
| - | General results | + | [[decap:laser]] |
| - | * Some settings work decent | + | |
| - | * Possibly COB epoxy is easier to laser than package epoxy | + | |
| - | * Risk of melting bond wires and/or die | + | |
| - | * Use lower power and/or pulsed? | + | |
| - | * Practice on samples before trying something you care about | + | |
| - | * Puts off nasty fumes. Make sure to have good ventilation | + | |
| - | From Sam Wagner: | ||
| - | * "We use a yterrbium fiberlaser. What you are doing is trying to cause the plastic compound to explosively eject the silicon beads. So a pulsed laser is critical. | ||
| - | * " | ||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | ===== jamiecraig ===== | ||
| - | |||
| - | {{: | ||
| - | |||
| - | Above: laser decap from below ([[https:// | ||
| - | |||
| - | https:// | ||
| - | * Seemed to work okay | ||
| - | * What would it look like if touched up with WFNA? | ||
| - | |||
| - | ===== EMSL 6502 test ===== | ||
| - | |||
| - | {{: | ||
| - | |||
| - | Above: poor results. Maybe from CO2 laser (source: photo by mcmaster from EMSL test) | ||
| - | |||
| - | ===== Silicon Exposed ===== | ||
| - | |||
| - | {{: | ||
| - | |||
| - | Above: [[http:// | ||
| - | |||
| - | http:// | ||
| - | * Poor results | ||
| - | * Cranberry glass | ||
| - | |||
| - | ===== Laser Decap Pro ===== | ||
| - | |||
| - | {{: | ||
| - | |||
| - | https:// | ||
| - | * Gold backing block | ||
| - | * Good leadframe exposure | ||
| - | * Die unclear how well exposed | ||
| - | * Scanned entire chip (including die area) up until the end | ||
| - | * Raster scan is horizontal, vertical, and diagonal | ||
| - | |||
| - | ===== Sesame 1000 ===== | ||
| - | |||
| - | {{: | ||
| - | |||
| - | {{: | ||
| - | |||
| - | https:// | ||
| - | * Cavity into pic | ||
| - | * Gives a close up at the end | ||
| - | |||
| - | ===== CLC ControlLaser FALIT ===== | ||
| - | |||
| - | {{: | ||
| - | {{: | ||
| - | {{: | ||
| - | {{: | ||
| - | |||
| - | https:// | ||
| - | * Laser Decapsulation FALIT System Software | Image Templates | ||
| - | * Pro system demo | ||
| - | * Has nice features like overlaying x-ray, CSAM, or other guiding image | ||
| - | * Laser scan was horizontal, vertical mix | ||
| - | |||
| - | ===== Light Ray ===== | ||
| - | |||
| - | {{: | ||
| - | |||
| - | https:// | ||
| - | * They do the whole chip but avoid die area | ||
| - | * Light Ray - IC Decapsulation | ||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | ===== mcmaster ezlaze ===== | ||
| - | |||
| - | TODO: add pictures, estimate material removal rate | ||
| - | |||
| - | Basically this was too slow to be practical except for very small samples. That said, it did work very well. A quicklase or other higher throughput Nd:YAG system would likely work well | ||
| ====== Sandblast ====== | ====== Sandblast ====== | ||