J Mater Sci: Mater Electron (2008) 19:281–288
DOI 10.1007/s10854-007-9312-7
Effects of bonding frequency on Au wedge wire bondability
Yu Hin Chan Æ Jang-Kyo Kim Æ Deming Liu Æ
Peter C. K. Liu Æ Yiu Ming Cheung Æ Ming Wai Ng
Received: 16 March 2007 / Accepted: 4 May 2007 / Published online: 31 May 2007
Ó Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007
Abstract This paper studies the effect of bonding
frequency on bondability of Au wire on a PCB bond pad.
The wire bonding was performed at two different fre-
quencies, 62 kHz and 138 kHz, and at varying bond pad
temperatures between 60 and 110 °C. It is shown that the
bond strengths of the wires bonded at a high frequency
were generally higher than those bonded at a low frequency
for all temperatures studied. Two distinct wire failure
modes were observed for the wires bonded at the high
frequency: the wires with high pull strengths failed at the
bond neck, while those with low pull strengths failed
mainly within the bonded wire body. This resulted in a
large pull strength data scatter, which was explained by the
high Q factor of the high frequency transducer. The bon-
dability obtained for the high bond power end was much
higher for the high frequency, giving rise to a wider process
window in terms of bond power for the high frequency
bonding. The wire bonding performance was compared
between the ‘‘open’’ and ‘‘closed’’ loop bonding systems.
The minimum bond powers required for successful bonds
in the closed loop system were significantly lower than
those required in the open loop system (e.g. 20–40 mW vs.
110–135 mW at 90 °C). The closed loop system was able
to correct the resonance frequency shift, thus maintaining
an almost constant bond power during bonding. In the open
loop system, in contrast, a high bond power needs to be
Y. H. Chan
J.-K. Kim (&)
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Hong Kong University
of Science & Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon,
Hong Kong
e-mail: mejkkim@ust.hk
D. Liu
P. C. K. Liu
Y. M. Cheung
M. W. Ng
ASM Assembly Automation, Ltd. 4/F, Watson Centre, 16 Kung
Yip Street, Kwai Chung, Hong Kong
continuously supplied because of the power drop. This
causes an excessive energy to be transmitted to the bonded
wire, resulting in weakened wire due to excessive defor-
mation.
1 Introduction
Vast majority of electronic packages are still intercon-
nected based on the thermosonic wire bonding technology.
With advantages of high reliability, good electrical
performance and corrosion resistance, Au wire bonding has
been widely used in high end applications [1, 2]. Typical
issues on wire bond quality are bond peel-off and no-bond.
These failures can be reduced by increasing major bonding
parameters, such as bond power, force, time and bond pad
temperature, but all these measures have undesirable
drawbacks [3]. Increasing the bond power provides suffi-
cient ultrasonic energy, but it also causes large wire
deformation. Increasing bond force may cause bond pad
cratering and tend to produce highly deformed wires. A
long bond time may damage the wire, while reducing the
product yield. Increasing the bond pad temperature can be
beneficial, but the maximum bonding temperature is
severely limited by the glass transition temperature, Tg, of
the organic printed circuit boards (PCBs). The bonding
temperature must be carefully adjusted to ensure the supply
of sufficient thermal energy, while avoiding softening of
the substrate material [1].
A potential solution to the above drawbacks is to
increase the wire bonding frequency. A conventional wire
bonding process operates at a low frequency of 60 kHz.
Doubling the transducer frequency to 120 kHz will provide
123
282
an additional energy needed to overcome the activation
energy of bonding [4, 5]. At even a higher bonding
frequency of 138 kHz, the bonding temperature can be
further reduced [6]. The high frequency ultrasonic vibra-
tion increases wire-to-pad friction energy by increasing the
number of scrubbing per bond [3], which in turn acceler-
ates solid state welding in a shorter period of time and at a
lower vibration amplitude [7, 8]. The shorter bond time,
lower bond pad temperature and lower wire deformation
are all beneficial in terms of higher product yield, higher
reliability and higher pull strength.
The characteristics of high frequency wire bonding
make it suitable for ultra fine pitch applications. As the size
of semiconductor devices continuously shrinks and the
input/output (I/O) density increases, the demands for
smaller and more closely spaced bond pads are ever
growing [9, 10]. Unlike the Au ball bonds, the wedge
bonds are long and narrow. Benefited from the much lower
wire loops than ball bonds, the wedge bonds are ideal for
low profile and ultra high pitch applications. Therefore, the
high frequency thermosonic Au wedge bonding is the
subject of the current study. As a continuation of our pre-
vious work [11, 12] on bondability of thermosonic Au wire
bond, the present study aims to evaluate the effect of
bonding frequency on wire bondability. Attention is also
placed on the comparison of bonding performances using
the ‘‘open’’ and ‘‘closed’’ loop systems. The process
windows are established to identify the combinations of
important parameters, such as wire bond power and bond
pad temperature, which could produce successful wire
bonds.
2 Experiments
2.1 Materials and samples
The metallizations applied onto the bond pad of PCB were
basically the same as those used in our previous studies
[11, 12]. The PCB substrates used were made from 0.8 mm
thick FR-4 type glass fabric reinforced epoxy laminates
with a Tg of about 120 °C (supplied by Universal Printed
Circuit Co. Ltd, Hong Kong) with a copper clad. The bond
pad consisted of Cu, Ni and Au layers, whose plating
methods and thicknesses are given in Table 1. On top of
the 25.4 lm thick Cu layer, Ni was electroplated using a
Table 1 Metallization scheme
Substrate Plating method Thickness (lm)
Ni Au Ni Au
FR-4 Electrolytic Electrolytic 4–8 0.11–0.25
123
J Mater Sci: Mater Electron (2008) 19:281–288
Table 2 Plasma cleaning process
Gas Flow rate Time (s) Power Pressure
(SCCM) (W) (mTorr)
Argon 5 Initial 60 & Next 100 120
60
Oxygen 5 Initial 60 100 120
nickel sulfate (NiSO4) solution. A Au layer was plated
electrolytically on top of the Ni layer.
The bond pads were cleaned using plasma to remove
any contaminations on the surface before wire bonding.
The optimized plasma process conditions chosen after
preliminary tests, including the cleaning power and time,
are summarized in Table 2. The gas pressure was
120 mTorr and the gas flow rate was 5 sccm. A mixture of
Ar and O2 gases was used initially for either 1 min or
5 min, followed by an Ar gas treatment for another 1 min.
2.2 Wire pull test and construction of process windows
Thermosonic wire bonding was performed using two
identical automatic wedge bonders (ASM model
AB559 A), equipped with different transducers of 62 kHz
and 138 kHz. The same software was used to control the
bonding parameters in the two bonders and all other setups
were identical: only the bonding frequencies were differ-
ent. The wedge tools of both bonders were made of tita-
nium carbide. The mode of operation could be shifted from
the ‘‘open’’ to ‘‘closed’’ loop system.
The Au wire of 25.4 lm in diameter had an elongation
of 0.5–3% and a tensile strength of 12–17 gf. No die was
mounted on the PCB substrates and both the 1st and 2nd
bonds were made directly on the PCBs. The locations of
bonds were controlled by the automatic wedge bonder so
that the distance between the 1st and the 2nd bonds were
made consistent. The nominal distance between the bonds
was 1.5 mm and the average loop height was 0.328 mm.
The bond force and bond time were 20 gf and 20 ms,
respectively, while the bond power was varied between 0
and 300 mW. The bond pads were pre-heated on the wire
bonder heater work chuck to the desire temperature before
wire bonding. The bond pad temperature was monitored
using a non-contact infrared thermometer. Twenty wires
were bonded for each set of conditions.
A modified wire pull test was used to evaluate the
bondability by measuring the wire pull strength. The test-
ing hook was placed close to the 2nd bond, 0.33 mm away
from the 2nd bond as schematically shown in Fig. 1.
Because the distribution of force on each bond and the
resultant wire pull strength were significantly affected by
the position of the hook, the hook was located consistently
in the same position by automatically placing the hook at
J Mater Sci: Mater Electron (2008) 19:281–288 283

Hook

1st bond 2nd bond

Glass\epoxy Laminate 0.33mm

Fig. 1 Wire pull test configuration

the edge of bond pad. Three failure modes were observed

after wire pull test, as illustrated in Fig. 2. They were i)
wire break with the fracture point close to the hook’s
position within the wire loop; ii) 2nd bond neck break at
the heel of bond point; and iii) 2nd bond lift or peel off.
The first and second failure modes were the result from
successful bond, and the bond peel off was regarded as
poor bondability. The overriding criteria for a successful
bond were: i) no 2nd bond peel off for all 20 wires tested
for the same condition; and ii) the average wire pull
strength being greater than the industry minimum of 5 gf.
In addition to wire pull strength, the widths of deformed
wire, W, were also measured using a profile projector. The
wire deformation ratio was calculated from the known
original diameter of the wire, D (Fig. 3):

Deformation ratio ¼ WD ð1Þ

The deformation ratio reflects the energy consumed

during wire bonding: a high deformation ratio implies that
the bonding power was too high or most of the energy was Fig. 2 Wire failure modes: (a) wire break, (b) 2nd bond neck break,
consumed to deform the wire. Process windows were and (c) 2nd bond lift or peel off
plotted as a function of bonding temperature and bond
power for a given bond frequency. The process windows
thereby established indicate the combination of bond fre-
quency, bond power and bonding temperature that can
satisfy the successful bond criteria.

2.3 Open loop and closed loop systems

In the conventional open loop wire bonding system, the

real time bond power is allowed to drift away from the
preset condition during bonding because of the shift in
resonance frequency. When micro-weld starts to form
Fig. 3 Measurement of deformation ratio, W/D
between the wire and bond pad, the impedance of the
transducer increases, causing the bond power to decrease
from the preset peak value. In the closed loop system, in to maintain a constant bond power. No matter how the
contrast, the real time bond power can be better resonance frequency shifts and impedance changes, the
maintained. The wire bonder monitors the resonance fre- bond power does not decrease with time and is maintained
quency shift and the impedance changes during bonding. close to its initial value. The different behaviors with
Therefore, it adjusts the supply current throughout bonding respect to the change in bond power between the open and

123
284
Power
Closed loop
Open loop
Time
Fig. 4 Variations of bond power with time in the open and closed
loop bonding systems
closed loop systems are schematically shown in Fig. 4. In
the present study, two fixed resonance frequencies were
used, namely 62 kHz and 138 kHz, as the principle oper-
ating frequencies of the transducers. The open loop system
was studied at a typical temperature (90 °C) here to iden-
tify any changes in bondability arising from the resonance
frequency drift.
3 Results and discussion
3.1 Open loop high frequency wire bonding
The wire bonding performance, in terms of wire pull
strength and wire deformation, is compared between the
low and high frequencies for a given bonding tempera-
ture of 90 °C while all other conditions were kept
unchanged, as shown in Fig. 5. The wire pull strengths
decreased while the deformation ratio increased system-
atically with increasing bond power when a low
frequency of 62 kHz was used. When the bonding fre-
quency was increased to 138 kHz, the wire pull strengths
improved by as much as 3–4 gf depending on the bond
power used, and the corresponding deformation ratio was
reduced to only about 1.2 at the threshold or the lowest
bond power. The higher pull strengths and smaller wire
deformation ratios obtained at a higher frequency are a
direct reflection of smaller plastic deformation of the
wires, which is probably associated with the reduced
wedge tool vibration amplitude at the high frequency
bonding [7, 8]. The higher the frequency, the greater the
number of scrubbing per bond, which can increase the
frictional heat generated at the contact interface [13].
The higher energy supplied and less wire damage due to
wedge-wire interfacial motion [9] allowed more complete
bonding and stronger wire necks, resulting in higher
bond strengths than in the low frequency bonding.
123
J Mater Sci: Mater Electron (2008) 19:281–288
(a) 14
12 62kHz
138kHz
10
Pull strength (gf)
8
6
4
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260
Bond power (mW)
(b) 2.4
2.2
62kHz
Deformation ratio
2.0 138kHz
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260
Bond power (mW)
Fig. 5 Wire pull strength and deformation ratio as a function of bond
power obtained in the open loop system (at 90 °C)
It was also noted that there were larger bond strength
data scatters for the high frequency bonding, in particular
in the closed-loop system (see Fig. 6). The high Q factor of
the transducer used and the sensitive wedge tip motion at
the high frequency bonding were mainly responsible for
the large data scatters. Q factor is defined as the ratio of the
energy supplied to the energy dissipated per cycle, and
measures the mechanical loss of supplied energy. The Q
factors of high and low frequency transducers were 700–
800 and 400–600, respectively. The bonding system con-
sisting of a transducer with a high Q factor is very sensitive
to bond pad characteristics, such as surface hardness,
roughness and cleanliness, and slight changes in these
conditions cause a sharp drop of energy transmission effi-
ciency [14].
Figure 5 also suggests that a high frequency bonding
requires a higher bond power to make successful bonds. At
a low frequency, successful bonds were made at the lowest
bond power of 110 mW, which is 30 mW lower than the
corresponding bond power for the high frequency bond.
This does not necessarily imply the bondability of the low
frequency bonding was better than the high frequency
bonding. It appears that the bonding conditions used in this
J Mater Sci: Mater Electron (2008) 19:281–288 285

(a) 14 optimal bond force required for successful bonds can be

62kHz reduced while all other bonding conditions are kept the
12
138kHz
same. In deed, the nanoindentation test carried out on the
10
cross sections of deformed wires confirmed that the hard-
Pull strength (gf)

8 ness of the wire measured at an indentation depth of 2 lm

6
was higher for the high (138 kHz) frequency than the low
one (62 kHz) (i.e.0.60 ± 0.05 GPa and 0.54 ± 0.05 GPa,
4
respectively).
2

0
3.2 Closed loop high frequency wire bonding
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260
Bond power (mW) To correct the discrepancy associated with the shift in
resonance frequency, wire bonding was carried out using
(b) 14
62kHz the closed loop system. Wire bonding was performed at
12
138kHz two different frequencies and three different bonding
10 temperatures. The wire pull strengths measured at different
Pull strength (gf)

8 temperatures are plotted as a function of bond power in

Fig. 6. For all bonding temperatures, the average pull
6
Pull Strength < 5gf strengths of the wires obtained at a high frequency were
4
consistently higher than those obtained at a low frequency
2 for a given bond power. The difference in bond strength
0
was especially large at a low bonding temperature.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 The general trends of wire pull strength with bond
Bond power (mW) power were different for the two frequencies. As seen in
(c) 14 Fig. 6, the pull strength decreased almost linearly with
12
62kHz increasing bond power when the low frequency was used.
138kHz In particular, the low frequency wirebonding presented a
10
Pull strength (gf)

remarkably high wire pull strength performance at bond

8
6 Pull Strength < 5gf
4 not been reported previously, which may have significant
2
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260
Bond power (mW)
Fig. 6 Wire pull strength as a function of bond power at different
temperatures obtained in the closed loop system: (a) 60 °C, (b) 90 °C
and (c) 110 °C
study, i.e. a bond force of 20 gf for a bond time of 20 ms,
were not fully optimized for the high frequency bonding
because a low bond force is generally preferred for the high
frequency bonding. It was reported previously [10] that the
use of a low initial bond force of 21 gf, instead of 26 gf,
was able to make a good bond at a frequency of the wedge
tool on top of the wire makes a rubbing action against the
bond pad during bonding, and the softening was more
serious when a low frequency was used. If the wire remains
sufficiently hard, as in the high frequency bonding, the
shear action would have a less negative effect on devel-
oping a sufficiently high frictional energy for the formation
of a successful bond than in the low frequency bonding.
This means that when the high frequency is used, the
powers as low as about 10 mW when the temperature was
moderately high (i.e. 90 and 110 °C). This observation has
implications for the optimization of process conditions in
practical wirebonding. The pull strength data were further
supported by the corresponding deformation ratios that
increased with increasing bond power before saturation at
about 2.0, Fig. 7. In contrast, the reduction in pull strength
with bond power was rather insignificant in the high fre-
quency bonding. The average pull strengths were almost
constant regardless of the bond power used although the
data scatter was very large, especially when the bond pad
temperatures were 60 and 110 °C (Figs 6 (a) and (c)).
Contrary to the wire pull strength data, the deformation
ratios increased consistently with increasing bond power
even at the high frequency.
It should be mentioned here that the bond power used in
this study was the electrical power of the transducer, which
is different from the mechanical power delivered to the
wire; and the transducers used in the high and low fre-
quency wire bonding were different, and so were the effi-
ciencies of the transducers.
Typical SEM micrographs taken after the pull test of the
wires bonded at 138 kHz are shown in Fig. 8. It was noted
that the different pull strengths corresponded to different

123
286 J Mater Sci: Mater Electron (2008) 19:281–288

(a) 2.4 fracture modes, as schematically depicted in Fig. 9. For the

2.2 62kHz
wires with high pull strengths, fracture occurred at the neck
138kHz
(Fig. 9(a)), whereas the wires with low pull strengths, the
2.0
Deformation ratio

fracture occurred mainly within the bonded wire near the

1.8
groove (Fig. 9(b)). The difference in fracture mode was
1.6 consistent with the large data scatter in pull strength, which
1.4 was attributed to the high Q factor of the transducer used in
1.2
the high frequency bonding.
The dependence of wire bond strength on transducer
1.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 frequency was sensitive to the bond pad temperature. At a
Bond power (mW) low temperature of 60 °C, the wire could be bonded
strongly at much higher bond power using the high fre-
(b) 2.4
62kHz
quency transducer. However, the benefits of high frequency
2.2 became diminished when the bond pad temperature was
138kHz
2.0 elevated to 90 and 110 °C. The bond strengths of the wires
Deformation ratio

bonded at bond powers higher than about 120 mW at these

1.8
high temperatures were equally bad for both the low and
1.6
high frequency bonding. This is partly confirmed by the
1.4

1.2

1.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260
Bond power (mW)
(a)
(c) 2.4
62kHz
2.2 138kHz

2.0
Defo rm ation ratio

Wire bonded with low bond power After wire pull test
1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2 (b)
1.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260
Bond power (mW)
Wire bonded with high bond power After wire pull test
Fig. 7 Wire deformation ratio as a function of bond power at
different temperatures obtained in the closed loop system: (a) 60 °C, Fig. 9 Schematic diagrams of wire bonded and after pull test with
(b) 90 °C and (c) 110 °C (a) high bond power and (b) low bond power

Fig. 8 SEM micrographs of

wires bonded at 138 kHz after
pull test with (a) high and (b)
low pull strengths. (138 kHz,
60 °C, 138 mW)

123
J Mater Sci: Mater Electron (2008) 19:281–288
deformation ratios of the samples bonded at these
temperatures, which were significantly higher than those
obtained at 60 °C, especially at high bond powers. Nev-
ertheless, the average bond strengths for the bond power at
or below 120 mW were still higher for the wires bonded at
a high frequency than at a low frequency.
At a given temperature (90 °C), the minimum bond
powers required for successful bonds in the closed loop
system were significantly lower than those required in the
open loop system at both frequencies (20–40 mW in
Fig. 6(b) vs. 110–135 mW in Fig. 5(a)). In the closed loop
system, a power as low as 13 mW was sufficient to produce
a successful bond at 110 °C. This observation is a reflec-
tion of the ability of the closed loop system to correct the
resonance frequency shift. Because the bond power can be
maintained almost constant during bonding, a much lower
initial bond power is required to initiate bonds. In the
open loop system, however, the bond power needs to be
continuously supplied even after a bond is formed. This
causes an excessive energy to be transmitted to the bonded
wire, resulting in further deformation of the wire.
3.3 Process window
Process windows for the closed system are constructed as a
function of bond temperature and bond power, as shown in
Fig. 10. A low bond pad temperature in general required a
high bond power to make a successful bond because a high
power was needed to compensate for the reduced thermal
energy. At a low frequency, wire could be bonded at a
marginally lower bond power than at a high frequency,
especially at low temperatures. In contrast, the bondability
measured for the high bond power end was much higher for
the high frequency than for the low frequency because the
Fig. 10 Process windows for high and low frequency closed loop
wire bonding
287
wire pull strengths corresponding to the low frequency
were generally low (lower than the criterion of 5 gf). This
resulted in a generally wider process window for the high
frequency bonding. The above observations are in general
valid if the hook position is changed in the wire pull test, as
supported by the wire deformation ratios and the failure
mechanisms.
4 Concluding remarks
The wire bondability at low and high frequencies was
studied in this paper. The relative bonding performance of
the open and closed loop systems was also studied. The
following results can be highlighted from the study.
1. In both the open and closed loop systems, the use of
high frequency resulted in higher bond strength and
lower wire deformation at a given bond power. The
low wire deformation facilitates the high frequency
wire bonding suitable for ultra fine pitch applications.
2. The pull strength data showed a large scatter when the
high frequency transducer was used. This was caused
by the high Q factor and large wedge nodal shift at a
high frequency, which in turn affected the wedge
amplitude during bonding. A high frequency trans-
ducer with a low Q factor may favorably produce
consistently strong bonds.
3. The high frequency bonding resulted in a generally
wider process window in terms of bond power than the
low frequency bonding due to the ability to produce
strong bonds at high bond powers.
4. The bond power required for successful bonding was
much lower in the closed loop system than in the open
loop system.
Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank the Innovation and
Technology Commission (ITC), Hong Kong SAR Government for the
continuous support of this project through the Innovation and Tech-
nology Fund (UIT/32). Assistance with experiments provided by the
Materials Characterization and Preparation Facilities (MCPF) and
EPack Lab. at HKUST is also gratefully appreciated.
References
1. J.K. Kim, B.P.L. Au, J. Electron. Mater. 30, 1001 (2001)
2. H.K. Charles Jr., K.J. Mch, S.J. Lehtonen, A.S. Francomacaro,
D.S. Deboy, R.L. Edwards, in Proceedings of the IEEE 52nd
ECTC, 881 (2002)
3. W.K. Shu, in Proceedings of the IEEE 46th ECTC, 219 (1996)
4. H.M. Ho, C.K. Yeo, S.L. Chan, N. Wong, C.C. Ng, C.S.
Ramanujan, K. Li, in Proceedings of the 2nd Electronics Pack-
aging Technology Conference, 190 (1998)
5. Y. Shirai, K. Otsuka, T. Araki, I. Seki, K. Kikuchi, N. Fujita, T.
Miwa, in Proceedings of the ICEMM, 366 (1993)
123
288
6. Y.M. Cheung, S.W. Or, S. Ching, in Proceedings of the 24th
IEEE IEMT Symposium, 196 (1999)
7. J. Tsujino, K. Hasegawa, Y. Sone, K. Nozaki, in Proceedings of
the IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium, 1021 (1996)
8. T.H. Ramsey, C. Alfaro, Semicon Int, 93 (1997)
9. L. Parrini, IEEE Trans. Comp. Packag. Tech., 25, 486 (2002)
10. B. Gonzalez, S. Knecht, H. Handy, J. Ramirez, in Proceedings of
the 46th ECTC, 1078 (1996)
123
J Mater Sci: Mater Electron (2008) 19:281–288
11. Y.H. Chan, J.K. Kim, D. Liu, P.C.K. Liu, Y.M. Cheung, M.W.
Ng, J. Electron. Mater. 33, 146 (2004)
12. Y.H. Chan, J.K. Kim, D. Liu, P.C.K. Liu, Y.M. Cheung, M.W.
Ng, IEEE Trans. CPMT Part B: Adv. Packag. 28, 674 (2005)
13. Y. Ding, J.K. Kim, P. Tong, Microelectr. Rel. 46, 1101 (2006)
14. S.W. Or, H.L.W. Chan, Y.M. Cheng, Ceram. Eng. Sci. Proc. 22,
579 (2001)