Jeremy A. Walraven

MEMS reliability in shock environments

In order to determine the susceptibility of our MEMS (MicroElectroMechanical Systems) devices to shock, tests were performed using haversine shock pulses with widths of 1 to 0.2 ms in the range from 500 g to 40000 g. We chose a surface-micromachined microengine because it has all the components needed for evaluation: springs that flex, gears that are anchored, and clamps and spring stops to maintain alignment. The microengines, which were unpowered for the tests, performed quite well at most shock levels with a majority functioning after the impact. Debris from the die edges moved at levels greater than 4000 g causing shorts in the actuators and posing reliability concerns. The coupling agent used to prevent stiction in the MEMS release weakened the die-attach bond, which produced failures at 10000 g and above. At 20000 g we began to observe structural damage in some of the thin flexures and 2.5-micron diameter pin joints. We observed electrical failures caused by the movement of debris. Additionally, we observed a new failure mode where stationary comb fingers contact the ground plane resulting in electrical shorts. These new failures were observed in our control group indicating that they were not shock related.

The effect of humidity on the reliability of a surface micromachined microengine

Humidity is shown to be a strong factor in the wear of rubbing surfaces in polysilicon micromachines. We demonstrate that very low humidity can lead to very high wear without a significant change in reliability. We show that the volume of wear debris generated is a function of the humidity in an air environment. As the humidity decreases, the wear debris generated increases. For the higher humidity levels, the formation of surface hydroxides may act as a lubricant. The dominant failure mechanism has been identified as wear. The wear debris has been identified as amorphous oxidized silicon. Large slivers (approximately 1 /spl mu/m in length) of debris observed at the low humidity level were also amorphous oxidized silicon. Using transmission electron microscopy (TEM), we observed that the wear debris forms spherical and rod-like shapes. We compared two surface treatment processes: a fluorinated silane chain (FTS) process and supercritical CO/sub 2/ dried (SCCO/sub 2/) process. The microengines using the SCCO/sub 2/ process were found to be less reliable than those released with the FTS process under two humidity levels.

MEMS Reliability: Infrastructure, Test Structures, Experiments, and Failure Modes

The burgeoning new technology of Micro-Electro-Mechanical Systems (MEMS) shows great promise in the weapons arena. We can now conceive of micro-gyros, micro-surety systems, and micro-navigators that are extremely small and inexpensive. Do we want to use this new technology in critical applications such as nuclear weapons? This question drove us to understand the reliability and failure mechanisms of silicon surface-micromachined MEMS. Development of a testing infrastructure was a crucial step to perform reliability experiments on MEMS devices and will be reported here. In addition, reliability test structures have been designed and characterized. Many experiments were performed to investigate failure modes and specifically those in different environments (humidity, temperature, shock, vibration, and storage). A predictive reliability model for wear of rubbing surfaces in microengines was developed. The root causes of failure for operating and non-operating MEMS are discussed. The major failure mechanism for operating MEMS was wear of the polysilicon rubbing surfaces. Reliability design rules for future MEMS devices are established.

Failure mechanisms in mems

MEMS components by their very nature have different and unique failure mechanisms than their macroscopic counterparts. This paper discusses failure mechanisms observed in various MEMS components and technologies. MEMS devices fabricated using bulk and surface micromachining process technologies are emphasized.

MEMS reliability in a vibration environment

MicroElectroMechanical Systems (MEMS) were subjected to a vibration environment that had a peak acceleration of 120 g and spanned frequencies from 20 to 2000 Hz. The device chosen for this test was a surface-micromachined microengine because it possesses many elements (springs, gears, rubbing surfaces) that may be susceptible to vibration. The microengines were unpowered during the test. We observed 2 vibration-related failures and 3 electrical failures out of 22 microengines tested. Surprisingly, the electrical failures also arose in four microengines in our control group indicating that they were not vibration related. Failure analysis revealed that the electrical failures were due to shorting of stationary comb fingers to the ground plane.

Electrostatic discharge/electrical overstress susceptibility in MEMS: a new failure mode

Electrostatic discharge (ESD) and electrical overstress (EOS) damage of Micro-Electrical-Mechanical Systems (MEMS) has been identified as a new failure mode. This failure mode has not been previously recognized or addressed primarily due to the mechanical nature and functionality of these systems, as well as the physical failure signature that resembles stiction. Because many MEMS devices function by electrostatic actuation, the possibility of these devices not only being susceptible to ESD or EOS damage but also having a high probability of suffering catastrophic failure doe to ESD or EOS is very real. Results from previous experiments have shown stationary comb fingers adhered to the ground plane on MEMS devices tested in shock, vibration, and benign environments [1,2]. Using Sandia polysilicon microengines, we have conducted tests to establish and explain the EDS/EOS failure mechanism of MEMS devices. These devices were electronically and optically inspected prior to and after ESD and EOS testing. This paper will address the issues surrounding MEMS susceptibility to ESD and EOS damage as well as describe the experimental method and results found from EDS and EOS testing. The tests were conducting using conventional IC failure analysis and reliability assessment characterization tools. In this paper we will also present a thermal model to accurately depict the heat exchange between an electrostatic comb finger and the ground plane during an ESD event.

Introduction to applications and industries for microelectromechanical systems (MEMS)

Microelectromechanical Systems (MEMS) have gained acceptance as viable products for many commercial and government applications. MEMS are currently being used as displays for digital projection systems, sensors for airbag deployment systems, inkjet print head systems, and optical routers. This paper will discuss current and future MEMS applications.

Future challenges for mems failure analysis

Abstract MEMS processes and components are rapidly changing in device design, processing, and, most importantly, application. This paper will discuss the future challenges faced by the MEMS failure analysis as the field of MEMS (fabrication, component design, and applications) grows. Specific areas of concern for the failure analyst will also be discussed. 1. Introduction MEMS research is a relatively young field compared to ICs. MEMS design, fabrication, packaging, and reliability testing are still in their infancy and require constant revision and improvements now and over the next several years. MEMS failure analyisis (in this context) is a younger field than MEMS fabrication and design. Although MEMS have been around for a number of years, with failure analysis support for production, packaging, testing, and field operation, the tools and techniques required to properly diagnose the root cause of failure need to be upgraded and designed specifically for MEMS failure mechanisms. MEMS failure mechanisms can be as unique as the devices themselves. In ICs, considerable efforts are taken in handling and testing to properly characterize and assess device performance and compare the performance to device specifications. One major difference between ICs and MEMS testing is the environmental conditions. In many instances, ICs are tested in various environments ranging from various temperature and humidity conditions to vacuum and inert gas. In MEMS technology, similar handling and testing procedures are implemented, but the device is required to work with a given environment [1]. Varying the test environment can dramatically change device sensitivity and functionality. The added complexity of mechanical motion requires added care in handling and testing. Fortunately, MEMS has the advantage of leveraging IC FA tools and techniques for MEMS analysis. However, as the number of devices and applications grow, the MEMS failure analyst must become more diverse and multi-disciplinary in their knowledge base to properly diagnose the root cause of failure. This has become clearly evident in the failure analysis of thermally versus electrostatically driven actuators, microbiological and microfluidic devices, optical and RF components, and the wide array of sensors available for use.

Failure Analysis Issues in Microelectromechanical Systems (MEMS)

Abstract Failure analysis and device characterization of MEMS components are critical steps in understanding the root causes of failure and improving device performance. At the wafer and die level these tasks can be performed with little or no sample preparation. Larger challenges occur after fabrication when the device is packaged, capped, sealed, or otherwise obstructed from view. The challenges and issues of MEMS failure analysis lie in identifying the root cause of failure for these packaged, capped, and sealed devices without perturbing the device or its immediate environment. Novel methods of ainin access to the device or preparing the device for analysis are crucial to accurately determining the root cause of failure. This paper will discuss issues identified in performing root cause failure analysis of packaged MEMS devices, as well as the methods employed to analyze them.

Failure Analysis of Worn Surface Micromachined Microengines

Failure analysis tools have been applied to analyze failing polysilicon microengines. These devices were stressed to failure under accelerated conditions in both oxidizing and non-oxidizing environments. The dominant failure mechanism of these microengines was identified as wear of rubbing surfaces. This often results in either seized microengines or microengines with broken pin joints. Analysis of these failed polysilicon devices found that wear debris was produced in both oxidizing and non-oxidizing environments. By varying the relative percent humidity (%RH), we observed an increase in the amount of wear debris with decreasing humidity. Plan view imaging under scanning electron microscopy revealed build-up of wear debris on the surface of microengines. Focused ion beam (FIB) cross sections revealed the location and build-up of wear debris within the microengine. Seized regions were also observed in the pin joint area using FIB processing. By using transmission electron microscopy in conjunction with energy dispersive x- ray spectroscopy and electron energy loss spectroscopy, we were able to identify wear debris produced in low (1.8% RH, medium and high (39% RH) humidities.