标签: flip

智能手表（Smart Watch）、智能眼镜商机应用势头正快速崛起，智能可穿戴产品毫无疑问已成为最热门的电子产品之一。可穿戴技术推进了人类生活的智能化、特别是移动健康、移动医疗技术的发展，与之相对应的各类元器件的设计也越来越微型化、结合FPC主板生产组装与整机装联应用，更成为电子制造业的热点与难点。 日前在NEPCON China 2015展“智能可穿戴论坛”上，关注焦点就定格在了智能可穿戴设备的制造挑战与应对趋势上。对于智能可穿戴产品的新特点，众多与会专家表示，内部元器件的微小型化、高集成度特点增加了电子制造的难度。中兴通讯股份有限公司物流体系工艺研究部总工刘哲表示：“智能可穿戴产品的出现使产品组装面临高密度、微型化的新挑战。其中包括裸晶圆（‘Naked’dies）、元器件堆叠（3D封装/PoP）、集成埋入式元件、更小的元件间隙、更好的构造以实现基板更小等特点，使元器件的微小型化和高密度组装受到工程师们的广泛重视。我们可以看到目前诸如01005微型元器件已大量使用在新型的智能手机和可穿戴产品中，而03015也已实验应用，相信不久就会出现在具体产品中。WLCSP等微型器件的大量应用、FC与PoP技术的应用、以及趋势性的埋入式技术的应用都对产品组装难度，工艺难点提出新要求。”  针对微型元器件的组装工艺与技术趋势，刘总工谈到了01005组装工艺技术、WLCSP组装工艺技术、FC组装工艺技术及埋入式技术，对智能可穿戴产品制造的影响及具体技术实现。“无源器件的尺寸变小已是绝对趋势，新型的极限尺寸将会达到0402、03015、0201（公制），目前公制03015元件正在评估做应用导入。”刘哲认为对于01005元件的成功组装，最优化设计及DFM的主要因素可包括：PCB或FPC的拼板尺寸、焊盘尺寸及形状、基准识别点、阻焊膜工艺及厚度；元件的料带精度，焊锡膏型号（Type4或Type4.5）及品质；钢网的制作及开孔工艺，载板治具的设计和制作精度，搞好FAICPK的管控；在机器设备方面，印刷机、贴片机精度（+/-0.05mm）、吸嘴的保养及Feeder，制程能力（CPK）应不低于B级（1.33CPK=1.0）等诸多方面。 （详见演讲资料下载，仅供学习参考） 针对WLCSP封装，刘哲认为：“WLCSP封装是穿戴设备的核心组件，其设计和组装要充分考虑可靠性要求，需要情况采用Underfill以提高组件的长期可靠性。  FC（Flip Chip 倒装芯片）是裸芯片封装技术之一，对于FC的组装工艺技术，刘哲表示，“FC是芯片互连技术，也是理想的芯片粘接技术。FC向制造者提出了一系列严峻挑战，为这项复杂的技术提供封装、组装及测试的可靠支持。超声热压焊可适用在金凸点与镀金焊盘的组合，可缩短加工处理时间，也会面临可靠性的缺陷。”  埋嵌式技术是智能可穿戴产品发展趋势性技术，主要包括埋嵌电阻、电容、电感及裸芯片等四类技术。据刘哲介绍：“埋嵌无源和有源器件集成PCB可以实现元器件的三维布局设计，在同面积布置更高密度的元器件，具有更高集成密度、提高可靠性、符合整机系统低成本、微小型化的要求。需要考虑设计、组装、加工的整合统一。” （详见演讲资料下载，仅供学习参考） 对于参与或是想要参与可穿戴产品设计制造的工程师们，刘哲最后给出建议：“可穿戴产品的引入是一个结合点，是封装技术、PCB加工技术、SMT等相关技术的结合，使工程师们的专业界限变得模糊，我们需要成为整合PCB、SMT和封装各类技术支持的工程师。只有这样才能在可穿戴产品的制造过程中更游刃有余。”  

FLIP CHIP焊点失效机理     FLIP CHIP 所谓倒装芯片字面意思为“将芯片翻转过来”，针对以往的引线接合结构（芯片面向上，用引线连接，其引线连接到引线框的结构称为Face-up结构），倒装芯片的结构则是将功能面  ，与基板直接用焊料凸点（solder bump）接合的结构。倒装芯片技术可大大缩小封装体积，在高密度和低成本上有一定的优势。     倒装芯片可靠性要求 倒装芯片组装品曝露的环境跨度很大，其中包含有：机械性冲击及振动、制造过程中受化学性／温度环境的影响、使用环境下的环境应力等。 由环境诱导的热膨胀和机械应力分散在所有的焊料接合处，而且焊料接合处的形状因工艺的差异、最终组装品强度的不同而成为决定性因素。     为提高倒装芯片组装品的可靠性，可在芯片底部填充树脂填料（under fill）。适当的底部填料可以分散因热膨胀系数不同引起的应力，其结果可以缓和互连部分应力，延长寿命。底部填料除了可用于更严酷的环境下，更适用于大型芯片，但是并不能说所有的组装品都需要。如果材料和生产工艺控制不当，采用底部填料有时也会诱发其它失效模式。     失效机理 影响软钎焊可靠性的主要失效机理是由于可诱发蠕变和疲劳等热-机械性工艺造成的损伤蓄积引起的。此外还有造成短路和开路的电子迁移、热迁移而产生故障。与热-机械性故障同时发生的电气故障则是由于存在产生化学反应或造成腐蚀的特定物质，存在加速迁移的金属离子等参与的结果。     热疲劳和蠕变的相互作用 焊料接合处在温度循环过程中会产生很大的剪切应力，剪切应力是由于裸芯片与衬底间热膨胀率不匹配而产生的，周期性温度变化引起焊料接合处周期性应力变化。从这种意义来讲，在焊料接合处产生了热疲劳。 蠕变是指材料在长时间的恒温、恒应力（即使应力小于该温度下的屈服强度）作用下缓慢产生塑性变形，这种变形最终会导致断裂。当约比温度大于0.4时最容易发生蠕变（约比温度＝T/Tm ，T：环境温度；Tm：焊料熔点，均为绝对温度）。器件的温度循环通常在0.4Tm～0.8Tm之间，当被施加载荷时，蠕变变形通过位错滑移、晶界滑动及空位扩散等方式进行。 器件在实际使用过程中热疲劳和蠕变同时发生相互作用，共同对产品可靠性产生影响。     剪切应力 剪切应力对焊料接合处影响是显著的。剪切应力和焊料接合处的形状密切相关，剪切应力与接合高度成反比。最理想的是瘦长形焊料柱将应力分散在焊料接合处内部，可延长疲劳寿命。矮胖形且有近似凹型under fill凸点合金（UBM）的接合，其寿命较短。     加速寿命试验 要对实际使用状态下的器件做寿命试验，则需要与设计寿命相当的时间。所以封装品要通过加速温度循环来试验，即扩大温度范围、缩短各自高低温的曝露时间。通过扩大温度范围，焊料接合处曝露于因不同材料间热膨胀率不匹配产生的剪切应力中。扩大温度范围，虽然焊料接合处蓄积的损伤会增加，但如果有充足时间焊料接合处应力就会缓和，如果温度上升/下降时间或曝露时间小于应力缓和所需的时间，那就是真正典型的加速试验了，也就是说试验中的应力累积不会使接合处的应力完全达到缓和状态。但是我们也要认识到大大超过实际使用温度的试验会产生多种在实际使用过程中不可能发生的失效模式。

The demise of the Flip video camera reads like the opening of a great murder mysteryor at least a decent Law and Order episode. Someone (or in this case, something) has been killed, there are a few suspects, but very few clues. Or, more accurately, we know who done it: Cisco Systems Inc., the Silicon Valley networking gear giant that set its sights on the consumer video market and forked over $590 million to acquire Pure Digital Inc., the inventor of the Flip, in 2009. What we don't have, and what very few people appear to have even sound theories on, is motive. Clearly, Cisco wanted out of a consumer business that it never really understood and that offered pitiful margins compared with Cisco's big ticket networking gear. (As evidence, several analysts cite the flop of Cisco's Umi video conferencing devices, which carried a price tag$600 plus $25 per month for servicethat many felt was untenable.) But the company's decision to pull the plug on the Flip businessrather than sell it offhas many people scratching their heads. The Flip, which first hit the market under that name in 2007, is currently the No. 1 selling camcorder on Amazon.comthe black Flip UltraHD, that is. A total of four Flip models are among the top 10 selling camcorders on Amazon. According to the New York Times, a total of 7 million Flip camcorders have been sold to date and Cisco itself claimed that Flip represented 35 percent of the camcorder market. "At the end of the day, they were selling quite a few of these things," said Michael Gartenberg, an analyst at market research firm Gartner Inc. But despite this impressive positioning, it's pretty clear that nobody would have paid Cisco anywhere near $590 million to acquire the Flip businessand here is where our chief suspect, smartphone convergence, comes in. The market for camcorders, especially small, mobile camcorders like the Flip, is on the wane. In fact, according to market research firm IHS iSuppli, overall camcorder shipments have been relatively stagnant since at least 2003the firm projects that in 2012 about 17.2 million camcorders will ship worldwide, compared to about 17.3 million in 2003. Analysts have long warned that gadgets that specialize in one thing would be threatened by the convergence of devices that can do several things. Smartphones are the biggest thug, growing enormously in popularity andin a competition for marketshare among each otherrapidly adding new functionality. The fact of the matter is that nearly everyone who packs a smartphone todayand even more so a year or two from nowis already lugging around a pocket-sized device that shoots video of comparable or better quality than the Flip. Even so, someone would have paid something for the Flip business, which would have included a market-leading product, a lauded brand and a creative team of designers who shocked the world once and, who knows, could do it again. What accountants have to say Sources said Cisco had signaled its desire to exit the consumer market and was advised to seek a buyer for the Flip business. It is not known if Cisco engaged in discussions with any other company about a possible sale. A spokesperson for Cisco did not immediately respond to a request for an interview. "Sometimes it comes down to what the accountants have to say," Gartenberg said. According to Gartenberg, it seems likely that Cisco calculated that it would be easier and ultimately less costly to simply shutter the unit and write it off, rather than going to the time and trouble of finding a buyer and selling Flip at a considerable loss. "Someone at Cisco ran the numbers and decided that this was the way to go," Gartenberg said. New York Times columnist David Pogue last week theorized that the most plausible reason Cisco choose to kill the Flip business rather than sell it is because Cisco wants to hold onto the Flip technology , presumably to apply to other areas. But it's not clear what about the Flip technology would be applicable to Cisco's other businesses, though the company said in its statement last week that video remains one of its five key company priorities. (Pogue also reported that Cisco was supposed to release a new Flip model last week, FlipLive, capable of live video broadcasting to the Internet). Jordan Selburn, a consumer electronics analyst at market research firm IHS iSuppli, said that despite Flip's position in the marketplace, the Flip unit may have simply been unprofitable. "Cisco may have simply decided that they don't have consumer DNA," Selburn said. "Part of the problem with Flip was once you bought one, you never had a reason to buy another one," Gartenberg said, adding that Cisco "lacked an understanding of the marketplace." "This is a sad thing for the whole industry," said Rick Doherty, co-founder and director at the Envisioneering Group. Doherty said the Flip design team made a serious impact on the consumer electronics world and predicted that its members would resurface and "spread their wings." "Camcorders are still a good business for many people," Doherty said. "There will be more innovation there, and great things will probably be coming. It's just a shame that Cisco took this route of not heeding industry trends and not, it seems, even respecting the company that they acquired." So it would seem that we can't make a case against convergence alone in the killing of the Flip. But clearly its fingerprints were among those found at the scene of the crime. According to Selburn, the "dedicated single-tasker"a gadget with only one applicationis under fire in all areas of consumer electronics, thanks in large part to the threat posed by multiple-application devices like the smartphone and media tablet. "That doesn't mean that they are all going away or doing badly," Sulburn said. Let's take a look at some of the other heretofore populareven belovedconsumer electronics devices that face threat from this menace at large. MP3 player/iPod Yep. Even the Babe Ruth of consumer electronics gadgets (they both changed forever their respective games) faces pressure from the convergence of applications in smartphones, most specifically by its dastardly younger brother, the iPhone. Apple reported selling 19.45 million iPods in the first quarter of this yearbrisk business to be sure, but the lowest first quarter total for the iPod since 2006. Okay, so the iPod isn't going to disappear in the next few years or, probably, in the next few decades. But there is a clear trend line. According to Gartner's Gartenburg, standalone, single-application devices such as music players can continue to command a significant marketalbeit a declining oneas long as over time they get less expensive and continue to evolve. "If business wasn't a good business, Apple would be out of it," Gartenburg said. "They are still very much in it, refreshing that product every year, even though they have other products like the iPhone that function as a music player." According to IHS, after peaking at more than 197 million units in 2007, the market for all digital music players is projected to decline from 180.1 million units in 2010 to 160.6 million units next year. "The market isn't going away," Selburn said. "But for a market that was pushing 200 million units a few years ago, we are looking at about a 40 percent decline between 2008 and 2016." Selburn says the biggest remaining advantage for single-taskers overall, and perhaps for the music player in particular, is that the apps-packed smartphones and media tablets also carry monthly data fees. For a 10- or 11-year-old kidor anyone for that matterwho just wants to listen to some music but doesn't care to check email, tweet or update his/her facebook status, the iPod and its like are still the way to go, Selburn pointed out. Digital music players "won't go away unless the data plan costs go away," Selburn said. "And that seems to be headed in the other direction." Interestingly, though sales of the iPod and other music players are in decline, there has been a shift in sales toward higher-end music players, rather than the low-end, according to Selburn.

The death of the Flip video camera is like the opening of a great murder mystery—or at least a decent Law and Order episode. Someone (or in this case, something) has been killed, there are a few suspects, but very few clues.     Or, more accurately, we know who done it: Cisco Systems Inc., the Silicon Valley networking gear giant that set its sights on the consumer video market and forked over $590 million to acquire Pure Digital Inc., the inventor of the Flip, in 2009. What we don't have, and what very few people appear to have even sound theories on, is motive.   Clearly, Cisco wanted out of a consumer business that it never really understood and that offered pitiful margins compared with Cisco's big ticket networking gear. (As evidence, several analysts cite the flop of Cisco's Umi video conferencing devices, which carried a price tag—$600 plus $25 per month for service—that many felt was untenable.) But the company's decision to pull the plug on the Flip business—rather than sell it off—has many people scratching their heads.   The Flip, which first hit the market under that name in 2007, is currently the No. 1 selling camcorder on Amazon.com—the black Flip UltraHD, that is. A total of four Flip models are among the top 10 selling camcorders on Amazon. According to the New York Times, a total of 7 million Flip camcorders have been sold to date and Cisco itself claimed that Flip represented 35 percent of the camcorder market.   "At the end of the day, they were selling quite a few of these things," said Michael Gartenberg, an analyst at market research firm Gartner Inc.   But despite this impressive positioning, it's pretty clear that nobody would have paid Cisco anywhere near $590 million to acquire the Flip business—and here is where our chief suspect, smartphone convergence, comes in. The market for camcorders, especially small, mobile camcorders like the Flip, is on the wane. In fact, according to market research firm IHS iSuppli, overall camcorder shipments have been relatively stagnant since at least 2003—the firm projects that in 2012 about 17.2 million camcorders will ship worldwide, compared to about 17.3 million in 2003.   Analysts have long warned that gadgets that specialize in one thing would be threatened by the convergence of devices that can do several things. Smartphones are the biggest thug, growing enormously in popularity and—in a competition for marketshare among each other—rapidly adding new functionality. The fact of the matter is that nearly everyone who packs a smartphone today—and even more so a year or two from now—is already lugging around a pocket-sized device that shoots video of comparable or better quality than the Flip.   Even so, someone would have paid something for the Flip business, which would have included a market-leading product, a lauded brand and a creative team of designers who shocked the world once and, who knows, could do it again.   What accountants have to say Sources said Cisco had signaled its desire to exit the consumer market and was advised to seek a buyer for the Flip business. It is not known if Cisco engaged in discussions with any other company about a possible sale. A spokesperson for Cisco did not immediately respond to a request for an interview.   "Sometimes it comes down to what the accountants have to say," Gartenberg said. According to Gartenberg, it seems likely that Cisco calculated that it would be easier and ultimately less costly to simply shutter the unit and write it off, rather than going to the time and trouble of finding a buyer and selling Flip at a considerable loss. "Someone at Cisco ran the numbers and decided that this was the way to go," Gartenberg said.   New York Times columnist David Pogue last week theorized that the most plausible reason Cisco choose to kill the Flip business rather than sell it is because Cisco wants to hold onto the Flip technology , presumably to apply to other areas. But it's not clear what about the Flip technology would be applicable to Cisco's other businesses, though the company said in its statement last week that video remains one of its five key company priorities. (Pogue also reported that Cisco was supposed to release a new Flip model last week, FlipLive, capable of live video broadcasting to the Internet).   Jordan Selburn, a consumer electronics analyst at market research firm IHS iSuppli, said that despite Flip's position in the marketplace, the Flip unit may have simply been unprofitable. "Cisco may have simply decided that they don't have consumer DNA," Selburn said.   "Part of the problem with Flip was once you bought one, you never had a reason to buy another one," Gartenberg said, adding that Cisco "lacked an understanding of the marketplace."   "This is a sad thing for the whole industry," said Rick Doherty, co-founder and director at the Envisioneering Group. Doherty said the Flip design team made a serious impact on the consumer electronics world and predicted that its members would resurface and "spread their wings."   "Camcorders are still a good business for many people," Doherty said. "There will be more innovation there, and great things will probably be coming. It's just a shame that Cisco took this route of not heeding industry trends and not, it seems, even respecting the company that they acquired."     So it would seem that we can't make a case against convergence alone in the killing of the Flip. But clearly its fingerprints were among those found at the scene of the crime. According to Selburn, the "dedicated single-tasker"—a gadget with only one application—is under fire in all areas of consumer electronics, thanks in large part to the threat posed by multiple-application devices like the smartphone and media tablet. "That doesn't mean that they are all going away or doing badly," Sulburn said.   Let's take a look at some of the other heretofore popular—even beloved—consumer electronics devices that face threat from this menace at large.   MP3 player/iPod         Yep. Even the Babe Ruth of consumer electronics gadgets (they both changed forever their respective games) faces pressure from the convergence of applications in smartphones, most specifically by its dastardly younger brother, the iPhone.   Apple reported selling 19.45 million iPods in the first quarter of this year—brisk business to be sure, but the lowest first quarter total for the iPod since 2006. Okay, so the iPod isn't going to disappear in the next few years or, probably, in the next few decades. But there is a clear trend line.   According to Gartner's Gartenburg, standalone, single-application devices such as music players can continue to command a significant market—albeit a declining one—as long as over time they get less expensive and continue to evolve.   "If business wasn't a good business, Apple would be out of it," Gartenburg said. "They are still very much in it, refreshing that product every year, even though they have other products like the iPhone that function as a music player."   According to IHS, after peaking at more than 197 million units in 2007, the market for all digital music players is projected to decline from 180.1 million units in 2010 to 160.6 million units next year.   "The market isn't going away," Selburn said. "But for a market that was pushing 200 million units a few years ago, we are looking at about a 40 percent decline between 2008 and 2016."   Selburn says the biggest remaining advantage for single-taskers overall, and perhaps for the music player in particular, is that the apps-packed smartphones and media tablets also carry monthly data fees. For a 10- or 11-year-old kid—or anyone for that matter—who just wants to listen to some music but doesn't care to check email, tweet or update his/her facebook status, the iPod and its like are still the way to go, Selburn pointed out.   Digital music players "won't go away unless the data plan costs go away," Selburn said. "And that seems to be headed in the other direction."   Interestingly, though sales of the iPod and other music players are in decline, there has been a shift in sales toward higher-end music players, rather than the low-end, according to Selburn.