Abstract
The growing use of miniature electronic products in smartphones and other portable devices requires the assembly of increasingly small components. 01005 passive components and 0.3 mm-pitch CSPs are now among the components required for these compact products. The electronics industry generally considers the stencil printing process responsible for approximately 65% of end-of-line defects. For this reason, developing a precision stencil printing process is essential for supporting miniaturized electronics assembly.
This article summarizes extensive experimental data and process-optimization techniques used to establish a precision SMT printing process. The results show that the commonly accepted industry guideline of maintaining a stencil aperture area ratio above 0.66 is an excellent rule of thumb. However, by optimizing printer settings, including vacuum support, foil-free clamping, and squeegee dams, while also controlling cleanliness and the quality of the squeegee and stencil, acceptable printing results were achieved with Type III solder paste at area ratios as low as 0.5. The work used to achieve these results is discussed in detail.
Introduction
One of the most important methods for characterizing a stencil printing process is to measure variation in transfer efficiency. Even a small amount of solder paste can form a solder joint. However, variation in the amount of paste deposited on adjacent pads inevitably changes the uniformity, shape, and dimensions of neighboring solder joints. Excessive variation in solder paste deposition can result in defects on the assembly line.
The global electronics industry's drive toward higher circuit density has made tooling and process control the primary sources of improvement in solder paste transfer efficiency. These improvements became evident during the transformation of SMT PCB assembly in the 1990s and after 2000. Major technology transitions included fine-pitch and ultra-fine-pitch assembly, no-clean solder paste, BGA assembly, lead-free processing, and 0.5 mm-pitch CSP assembly.
During each transition, new assembly practices improved performance through better tooling and enhanced process control. Successful 0.3 mm-pitch assembly therefore requires innovative DFM approaches for the stencil and squeegee, together with renewed training in process control. As OEM management introduces pad-design changes for new PCB designs, process engineers must evaluate how the tooling and process controls will be challenged by 0.3 mm-pitch layouts.
Assembly management should anticipate the need to modify both tooling and process controls. The transition to 0.3 mm-pitch assembly will require many conventional process-control freedoms to be abandoned. Practical insight and experience will be needed to understand the behavior of the 0.3 mm-pitch process. As products transition to 01005 components and 0.3 mm-pitch devices, the importance of refining stencil printing will increase again.
Methodology for Process Development
This work summarizes the process-development requirements for evaluating precision, ultra-fine-pitch stencil printing. Stencil performance is examined by considering measured results from solder paste printing trials. The measurement data were obtained from application experiments conducted as solder paste customer case studies.
Most case studies consider several variables, but the consistent objective is to achieve a low level of transfer-efficiency variation. At least two solder paste products are normally compared: the product currently used in production and a candidate experimental product. The experimental strategy begins by establishing the transfer-efficiency variation of the current solder paste. Different experimental products are then evaluated systematically until the defined target of low variation is reached.
Data from solder paste printing trials provide a quantitative opportunity to identify factors that affect final assembly yield. Stencil selection is one of these factors. Although miniaturization studies focus on smaller apertures, the test vehicle and data analysis should normally cover a broad range of aperture dimensions and pad designs.
Controlling assembly conditions during a printing trial is a significant challenge. Reporting the results quantitatively is another. The tested combinations may include between six and 40 aperture and pad-design combinations. Data collection, tabulation, analysis, and reporting should include not only transfer-efficiency variation for each combination, but also variation caused by different tooling and process attributes.
Statistical tools are useful for quality planning and analysis. Before preparing any printing-performance report, the first step is to establish measurement assurance so that the measured transfer-efficiency variation is suitable for decision-making. This requires a thorough evaluation of the measurement system.
For the case studies discussed here, automated solder paste inspection equipment was programmed for every test board and every test stencil. The inspection procedure was then evaluated by measuring solder paste on the same printed board 32 times. Statistical results for each stencil aperture and board-pad combination were examined separately to determine the amount of variation present in the solder paste measurement system.
The variation was summarized for different deposited volumes and shapes, while repeatability was observed for every individual aperture-and-pad combination. The relationship between measurement accuracy and solder paste deposition tolerance was expressed as the precision-to-tolerance ratio, or P/T ratio, for each stencil aperture. The measurement system was periodically rechecked to confirm stability over time.
The measurement-system repeatability results were excellent for each shape and dimension. Although this work is labor-intensive, adequate assurance of measurement acceptability provides credibility for subsequent engineering decisions.
Data Collection and Statistical Reporting
Graphical quality-planning and analysis tools are particularly useful because they allow printing data to be understood visually. The data must first be formatted into carefully planned tables. The key control attributes recorded during a printing trial typically include:
- Stencil identification
- Squeegee identification and length
- Board-support configuration
- Printing speed
- Printing pressure
- Separation conditions
- Number of apertures
- Squeegee overhang
- Inspection time and date
- Solder paste identification
- Alloy type
- Powder size
- Metal percentage
- Ambient temperature and relative humidity
- Underside stencil-cleaning settings and frequency
- Solder paste manufacturing date and lot number
- Controlled pauses during the experiment
At the end of a printing trial, the original measurement data should be extracted immediately from the solder paste inspection system. A data table can then be created in statistical software. The table should contain attribute columns that link process conditions to measurement data and distinguish the results for each individual board.
A standardized column format allows transfer-efficiency results to be compared across printing trials. The table should include aperture size and shape, the corresponding area ratio, and a designation describing the pad design. This structure also makes it possible to compare results for different solder pastes, stencils, printing speeds, and board-support conditions.
A secondary objective of visualizing transfer-efficiency variation is to allow other engineers to reproduce the experimental application in production and recreate graphs and analyses from comparable data. The key parameter for quantitatively confirming that a printing process has been reproduced is transfer-efficiency variation. Printing-process precision is judged by how this variation changes for each aperture and pad-design combination.
In production, any printing process becomes inadequate if variation increases and results in more assembly-line defects.
Box Plots and Standard-Deviation Charts
Box plots are used to display transfer-efficiency variation. Several axis configurations are possible, but the transfer-efficiency variation associated with a particular stencil thickness must be clearly understood.
For a 0.5 mm-pitch stencil printing process, the box-plot axis can include specification limits. A transfer efficiency of 100% may be used as the nominal target for each aperture and pad combination. With an upper specification limit of 150% and a lower specification limit of 50%, the axis can be standardized to 0, 25, 50, 75, 100, 125, and 150%. This makes it easy to see how tightly the transfer-efficiency data are grouped around the 100% target.
A standard-deviation chart placed below the box plot provides additional information about transfer-efficiency variation. Good printing performance is commonly associated with a standard deviation below 10%. The standard-deviation axis can therefore be standardized to 0, 10, and 20%. Results consistently below the 10% centerline indicate stable printing quality. Changes in the plotted results indicate changes in printing consistency and show how the process responds to aperture area ratio, pad design, printing speed, or other attributes.
Once the effects of multiple tooling and process variables are understood, a precision stencil printing process can be established. Box plots and standard-deviation charts can then be used to determine whether the specified tooling and process conditions are being followed. Transfer-efficiency variation that differs from earlier trials may indicate that the printing operation is not being controlled precisely.
Using Variance-to-Mean Ratio
Presenting 40 box plots and 40 standard-deviation charts for every trial can become difficult to manage. A more compact method is to calculate the variance-to-mean ratio, or VMR, for the measurement data associated with each aperture and pad-design combination.
The 100% target on the box-plot axis suggests a relationship between transfer-efficiency data and variance. Because standard deviation is the square root of variance, a VMR below 1.0 can be used as an indication of good printing quality in this analysis. Each point on a VMR line represents an aperture and pad-design combination. A complete line below 1.0 indicates that all tested combinations have acceptable printing quality.
Several VMR lines can represent alternative process attributes, such as stencil separation conditions, ambient temperature, or underside stencil wiping. VMR lines that remain close together indicate similar printing quality. A displaced line or an isolated point can reveal a specific difference in the precision of the stencil printing process.
Transfer-efficiency specification limits are not always known. In the example discussed here, a 5 mil stencil was used for a 0.5 mm-pitch process. A transfer efficiency of 75% to 85% on a 305 μm (12 mil) circular aperture may provide sufficient solder paste volume. The actual target may therefore be 75% to 85% with low variation rather than the 100% target suggested by the box plot.
Actual volume, SPC specification limits, and other process information remain important for accurately describing a 0.5 mm-pitch process. Nevertheless, the VMR line-plot technique provides a compact method for comparing precision stencil printing processes and characterizing smaller assembly features.
Test-Vehicle Design and Aperture Selection
The test-vehicle layout and stencil aperture design used for miniaturized assembly can easily provide either too many or too few opportunities for evaluation. If the vehicle is also designed for SIR testing, adhesive-pin testing, wave soldering, or large components that require a stencil thicker than 4 mil, transfer-efficiency variation may become excessive.
Unnecessary printing features can introduce interactions during data collection. The test vehicle should be at least similar in size to the new-product introduction design containing 01005 and 0.3 mm-pitch components. Engineers must identify not only the attributes available on the vehicle, but also those that are missing.
For example, the locations of representative 0.3 mm-pitch apertures and pad dimensions should be identified. Understanding which design opportunities are available and unavailable helps determine how the results should be characterized. Variation measured at nonrepresentative pad locations may differ from variation at other locations because of inherent tooling and process characteristics.
The case studies used customer test vehicles with a range of pad dimensions and pitches. This allowed the process and tooling window to be evaluated across multiple shapes and sizes. Unacceptable variation at larger features or smaller pitches, together with unacceptable variation at smaller features or larger pitches, can help identify an acceptable intermediate range.
When reporting transfer-efficiency variation, aperture ordering should not be arbitrary, random, or alphabetical. The test-vehicle sequence should remain continuous so that changes over time can be observed. Apertures should be arranged in descending area ratio and presented in groups. The first group may contain rectangular apertures, the second square apertures, and the third circular apertures. Within each group, solder-mask-defined pads should be separated from non-solder-mask-defined pads.
The general concept is to begin with apertures that deposit larger volumes and progress toward smaller-volume apertures. A reader can follow the acceptability baseline downward until the smallest aperture feature fails to meet the desired condition.
As solder volume optimization becomes better understood, clear production limits for transfer efficiency can be established. Mathematical models can estimate the solder volume required to form an acceptable joint. In addition, actual transfer-efficiency measurements from solder paste inspection can be used to generate representative Cp, Cpk, and DPMO tables. These tables may initially use 150% as the upper specification limit and 50% as the lower specification limit, then be updated as acceptable process-defect tolerance is established from production yield.
Printing Results and Process Observations
The following results are presented visually. The charts are based on original data collected during solder paste printing trials. The interpretation of each chart focuses on variation within the data. Outliers are often the most useful observations because they represent deposits that may simulate unavoidable assembly defects.
Squeegee Blade Wear and Paste-Roll Control
Printing very small apertures with an extremely thin stencil requires minimum squeegee pressure. Otherwise, the frequency of stencil damage increases. In severe cases, the board pattern can be embossed into the stencil foil.
The best transfer-efficiency performance is obtained when the solder paste bead rolls uniformly across the stencil surface. To minimize variation in bead uniformity, every printing trial should begin with a carefully measured paste volume.
For a 200 mm squeegee length, the maximum solder paste bead diameter should be less than 13.4 mm. This limit is associated with a 15 mm blade face beneath the holder and a squeegee angle of 60°. A 45° blade should be avoided because the paste bead must be smaller, increasing the risk of contact with the holder and requiring more frequent replenishment.
Dams on the squeegee holder help maintain a uniform paste bead as the paste rolls and is consumed. Based on experience, the typical paste weight required to establish the correct bead diameter below 13.4 mm is 130–135 g. A more flexible blade should be used because rigid blades did not produce good performance results.
Squeegee blade wear is difficult to manage. A flexible blade may not appear to wear significantly with use, but the data can show a difference between forward and reverse squeegee strokes once the blade reaches a mature wear condition.
In this trial, the data were not suitable for supporting the printing experiment. Variation appeared to increase as the trial progressed. The blade had to be replaced and the trial repeated. Replacing the worn blade immediately eliminated the apparent difference between the forward and reverse strokes.
The results in this example came from a circular aperture pattern with a diameter of 12 mil. Each test vehicle contained 54 arrays of 15 pins. The minimum pitch was 0.5 mm, and the stencil thickness was 5 mil. The area ratio was 0.60, which typically produced an average transfer efficiency of 85% to 92% with a standard deviation below 10%.
The indicators of blade wear were: (a) variation in transfer efficiency, (b) increasing variation, and (c) a difference between forward and reverse squeegee strokes.
Rectangular Apertures and "Dog-Ear" Outliers
Miniaturized product designs naturally focus attention on the smallest apertures. A common concern is an outlier below 50%, which can produce insufficient solder paste and open defects. However, larger-volume deposits remain part of the same printing process and add complexity to the evaluation.
Outliers can occur with rectangular apertures.The rectangular apertures measured 9 × 50 mil and 8 × 50 mil. Both solder-mask-defined and non-solder-mask-defined pad designs were evaluated.
Outliers above the average transfer efficiency occurred mainly with rectangular apertures perpendicular to the squeegee direction rather than with apertures parallel to the stroke. Non-solder-mask-defined pads also produced a greater number of excessive outliers.
Under a microscope, these excessive deposits are often called "dog ears." The printing trial was conducted to determine whether an alternative solder paste would reduce this problem. The current solder paste was evaluated with several timed printing pauses. For all rectangular apertures, the first print after a pause produced below-average outliers.
The alternative solder paste did not show a significant initial improvement, so the current product was retained. For miniaturized product designs, the results suggest that solder-mask-defined rectangular pads may be worth considering, although the selection should remain dependent on the complete board-support and layout conditions.
The results represented eight combinations of rectangular aperture patterns and pad designs. The apertures measured 9 × 50 mil and 8 × 50 mil. Both solder-mask-defined and non-solder-mask-defined pads were used, and the pad orientation was either parallel or perpendicular to the squeegee stroke.
The standard deviation for non-solder-mask-defined perpendicular apertures appeared unacceptable. In actual production, however, this condition is sometimes tolerated by accepting a higher risk of rework after reflow.
Square Apertures, Printing Speed, and Pauses
Square apertures with the same side length and circular apertures with the same diameter have proportional area ratios. However, the square aperture has a larger volume. Transfer efficiency may be similar, but the square aperture deposits more solder paste.
An 11 mil square aperture is a common pattern for components with 0.4 mm and 0.5 mm pitch. The small spacing between pads often results in non-solder-mask-defined pads. This condition creates an additional challenge when printing pauses occur.
The first three trials used the same paste at different printing speeds. The current paste appeared acceptable at the lower speed. At the higher speed, insufficient outliers appeared. A higher printing speed appeared more likely to produce insufficient deposits, particularly when the number of pauses lasting up to one hour increased.
An experimental solder paste was then evaluated using the same trial procedure, tooling, and settings. The new product appeared to tolerate the timed pauses and may have performed at a higher printing speed as well as the current product performed at a lower speed.
The results were obtained from 11 mil square apertures using a 5 mil stencil. The board pads were non-solder-mask-defined. Reducing the printing speed of the current paste could minimize insufficient outliers, while a higher speed could be used with the new candidate paste.
Squeegee Pressure and Stencil Protection
Squeegee printing pressure is a persistent manufacturing challenge. Pressure is often increased to mask problems caused by routine printer maintenance, incorrect squeegee length, worn blades, inadequate board support, or other process settings.
The original stencil printing setup required minimum squeegee pressure. The experimental results showed that the pressure interaction factor was almost absent when the setup was properly controlled. Maintaining high pressure, however, can damage a thin stencil.
The need to increase area ratio for improved transfer efficiency in miniaturized assembly leads to the use of thinner stencils. As customers experience production losses caused by stencil damage from excessive pressure, controlling minimum squeegee pressure will become increasingly important.
Improved control of production squeegee pressure creates a further challenge for high-speed printing. Higher printing speeds require higher pressure to achieve a clean wipe across the stencil surface. A clean wipe supports uniform solder paste rolling and maximizes transfer efficiency. Precision stencil printing may therefore be limited by this trade-off.
New squeegee designs and improved printer capabilities may provide part of the solution, but the need to minimize squeegee pressure should be expected.
The results from printing trials conducted with four solder paste lots using a 4 mil stencil at 100 mm/s. The printer operator independently determined the pressure during setup for each trial. For the experimental paste, the pressure range for a 200 mm squeegee at 100 mm/s was 3.4–4.0 kg.
The operator selected the minimum pressure by observing whether the wipe was clean and whether the paste rolled properly. The paste bead had to be measured carefully to prevent contact with the squeegee holder. At the beginning of each trial, the operator used 130–135 g of paste. The dams maintained a uniform bead diameter just below 13.4 mm.
The trial results were intended to distinguish performance differences between solder paste lots and determine whether transfer-efficiency variation changed from lot to lot. Nine aperture and pad-design combinations were evaluated. An aperture with an area ratio of 0.56 typically challenged the printing process in all four lots.
The 0.56-area-ratio square aperture also performed better than the comparable circular aperture. This result illustrates why process decisions can be difficult when several aperture geometries are compared.
VMR values were calculated from the data for each aperture and pad-design combination in every trial using the four experimental solder paste lots. A lower VMR indicates better printing performance. The compact format makes it easier to identify precise performance differences between lots.
Lots 2 and 3 performed similarly, while Lots 1 and 4 also showed similar behavior. Additional information about the storage history of each sample would help determine whether storage or handling affected performance.
Solder-Mask-Defined and Non-Solder-Mask-Defined Pads
Industry experts often have strong opinions about the printing performance of solder-mask-defined pads. These opinions can guide stencil aperture modifications, but experts sometimes reach opposite conclusions regarding the advantages of solder-mask-defined and non-solder-mask-defined designs. Data can be found to support both positions.
A common factor in these comparisons is board support and the relative position of the monitored pad within the board layout. For example, a rectangular pad with a large area and favorable aspect ratio may perform better as a non-solder-mask-defined pad when positioned so that it receives maximum support beneath the pad.
In another example, a circular pad with an area ratio below 0.66 may perform better as a solder-mask-defined pad when positioned away from the beginning of the printing stroke and given maximum support beneath the pad. Because each expert relies on case-specific experience, definitive conclusions are difficult to establish.
The result shows circular and square aperture results at solder-mask-defined and non-solder-mask-defined pad locations. The apertures were positioned at widely varying distances from the beginning of the printing stroke. Three squeegee speeds were used, while the other printing attributes were tightly controlled.
The stencil thickness was 5 mil and the area ratio was 0.60. No significant difference was immediately apparent, except that non-solder-mask-defined circular apertures showed more outliers than square apertures. This observation supports a commonly reported trend. In miniaturized assemblies, however, increasing small-pad density will result in a high proportion of non-solder-mask-defined pads. Small-area-ratio apertures will also occur, making insufficient outliers a potentially important yield concern.
Board Support and Clamping
The board-support system can create variation in stencil printing performance. Smaller features impose tighter tolerance requirements on board support. Printing trials showed improved performance when routine maintenance was performed at the beginning and end of each trial.
Dedicated support fixtures were custom-designed for each printing test vehicle. These fixtures provided 100% support coverage beneath the board. Squeegee overhang beyond the board edge was less than 10 mm, providing maximum support as the squeegee passed over each aperture.
The custom support box included a vacuum system to keep the test board flat and hold it in position. Minimum squeegee pressure minimized possible board movement during the printing cycle. No printing gap was allowed between the board surface and the underside of the stencil foil. The printer program did not apply excessive board-thickness compensation, which could press the board into the stencil and deform stencil flatness.
Through diligent maintenance, no solder paste residue was allowed to remain on the conveyor rails. This prevented an unintended printing gap between the board and stencil foil. Conventional board clamps were replaced by a new clamping system. Traditional clamps use stainless-steel foil placed over the board surface to hold the board during the print cycle.
Small apertures located within 20 mm of the clamp were at risk of developing a printing gap. Any printing gap tends to change transfer-efficiency performance because the stencil can move while solder paste rolls into the aperture. At a printing speed of 100 mm/s, this effect was shown to have an adverse impact on transfer efficiency.
Solder Paste Lot Comparison
Three solder paste printing trials were conducted in May, June, and July.
Paste A and Paste C were the same product from different production lots. Paste B was a different product. The results showed a performance difference between Paste A and Paste B at the 10 mil aperture size. The handling and storage history suggested that the paste may have been stored improperly.
The abnormal results at the 10 mil aperture location raised concern that this paste might not achieve the expected performance in production. A decision could therefore be made to avoid using it in product designs containing small 10 mil aperture features.
0.3 mm-Pitch Printing Evaluation
The customer solder paste product was evaluated with three different stencils. The apertures were square.
For a 0.20 mm pad, the square aperture measured 0.20 mm, or less than 8 mil. For a 0.15 mm pad, the square aperture measured 0.15 mm, or less than 6 mil. The three stencils had different thicknesses: 4.0 mil, 3.5 mil, and 3.0 mil.
Pad size 0.20 mm × pad spacing 0.10 mm
Pad size 0.15 mm × pad spacing 0.15 mm
Process Capability and DPMO
The arbitrary solder paste transfer-efficiency limits used in production were an upper specification limit of 150% and a lower specification limit of 50%. These values are difficult to standardize because variation in transfer efficiency, rather than the average deposited volume alone, is a primary cause of line defects.
Nevertheless, data analysis from printing studies helps characterize the stencil printing process. As additional trials are introduced, process attributes can be evaluated to identify opportunities for improvement.
The 230 μm square aperture pattern produced an average transfer efficiency of 65%. For the four printing-speed ranges evaluated, the DPMO against the customer specification limits ranged from 768 to 2,376. This aperture size may have significant potential for the customer's new product design.
Under the existing process, the process capability index for this aperture pattern ranged from 0.94 to 1.06 across the four printing-speed ranges. The process potential index ranged from 1.59 to 1.70. This result significantly increased expectations that the aperture pattern could be improved. Among the attributes still to be evaluated, new stencil manufacturing technology may produce the most significant improvement.
Design Considerations for Future Miniaturization
The combined dimension and spacing measure 0.3 mm. Opportunities for test-vehicle attributes that create variation in stencil printing begin with pad-design limitations.
Mask-design tolerances may not be identical at both ends of the dimensional range. Uniformity in the size, shape, and position of board pads may also become an important consideration.
The distribution of stencil aperture characteristics is often unknown, although it is assumed to remain within tolerance. For a 0.3 mm-pitch array on a typical stencil, uniform aperture dimensions may become one of the most important sources of transfer-efficiency variation in miniaturized electronics assembly.
New challenges may arise from aperture manufacturing tolerances, particularly at different array locations within the actual product layout. Alternative innovative manufacturing technologies are being evaluated for precision printing at new levels of miniaturization.
The method of reporting transfer-efficiency variation may become critical if aperture-size distributions in a 0.3 mm-pitch component array interact with nearby 01005 locations, QFN packages, or large exposed copper pads used for shielding connections.
Refining the stencil printing process also requires improved visualization software. Traditional reports that present data only in conventional measurement units may need to change. Chart axes should have clearly labeled units, but alternative units may communicate transfer-efficiency variation more effectively.
For example, small changes expressed in cubic micrometers may be difficult to interpret, while cubic mils or nanoliters may provide a clearer visual representation. When a precision stencil printing process includes 38 to 40 aperture patterns, it is possible that only one or two patterns will require an alternative solder-deposition method during miniaturized assembly.
Some aperture patterns may be eliminated from the stencil as part of the manufacturing strategy, with the corresponding joints formed using preforms, dispensing, or innovative jet printing. These one or two patterns may normally be suitable for stencil printing, but they may not fit the new product design appropriately.
Alternative solder-deposition processes may also use different preferred measurement units. Alternative units and axis settings on box plots may therefore be useful. A Venn diagram could be used to compare transfer-efficiency results from stencil printing with results from alternative solder-deposition methods.
The objective is to select axis units that communicate transfer-efficiency variation most effectively and then use the information to define a comprehensive manufacturing strategy for all solder-joint requirements in the new product design.
Conclusion
Evaluating solder paste products with a current standard printing process provides a quality assessment of the materials and identifies opportunities to improve tooling and process settings. Statistical analysis provides a quantitative method for benchmarking the current stencil printing process.
This approach provides a way to measure and compare precision stencil printing processes and materials. Such a method will be necessary as electronics assembly products continue to become smaller.
The key variables examined in this work included squeegee blade wear, rectangular aperture orientation, printing speed, solder-mask design, board-clamping method, pad size, and pad spacing. Additional attributes that may create significant transfer-efficiency variation should also be evaluated.
A complete test vehicle must represent the actual product design. If it omits interactions among 0.3 mm-pitch arrays, nearby 01005 components, QFN ground pads, and large exposed copper shielding pads, the resulting printing study may produce misleading conclusions.
Similarly, differences in aperture arrangement and location can change printing results. The evaluation must therefore consider not only pad size, pad pitch, mask design, and aperture-manufacturing technology, but also the complete spatial arrangement of apertures on the stencil.
Precision stencil printing depends on controlled tooling, stable process conditions, reliable measurement assurance, and clear statistical visualization. When these elements are combined, transfer-efficiency variation becomes a practical basis for selecting stencil designs, solder pastes, support methods, and process settings for miniaturized electronics assembly.
References
- Steudel, H. J., and Destuelle, P., "Product Design and Development," Manufacturing in the Nineties, 1992, Van Nostrand Reinhold, pp. 80–84.
- Anglin, C., "Improving Print Performance Using Area Ratio Sensitivity Analysis," Global SMT & Packaging, Vol. 8, No. 5, May 2008, pp. 16–20.
- Juran, J. M., and Gyrna, F. M., Quality Planning and Analysis, 1993, McGraw Hill.
- Speitel, K. F., "Measurement Assurance," Handbook of Industrial Engineering, 1992, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., pp. 2246–2250.
- Juran, J. M., and Gyrna, F. M., Quality Planning and Analysis, 1993, McGraw Hill, pp. 193–194.
- IBM, "CBGA Surface Mount Assembly and Rework," User's Guide, May 23, 2002, p. 17.
- Steudel, H. J., and Desruelle, P., "Problem Identification," Manufacturing in the Nineties, 1992, Van Nostrand Reinhold, pp. 89–92.
- Racz, L., and Szekely, J., "Estimation of Solder Volume," Handbook of Fine Pitch Surface Mount Technology, 1994, Van Nostrand Reinhold, pp. 267–307.
- Yeh, Y.-C., "Concepts of Probability," Handbook of Industrial Engineering, 1992, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., pp. 2401–2406.
