REVERSE COSTING® – STRUCTURAL, PROCESS & COST REPORT Wafer Bonding Comparison Permanent Bonding – Physical analysis and Cost Overview MEMS, Imaging, LED, Packaging report by Audrey LAHRACH November 2018 – Sample 22 bd Benoni Goullin 44200 NANTES - FRANCE +33 2 40 18 09 16
[email protected] www.systemplus.fr ©2018 by System Plus Consulting | Wafer to Wafer Permanent Bonding Comparison 2018 1 Table of Contents Overview / Introduction 5 o Thermo-compression Bonding o Executive Summary o MEMS RF o Reverse Costing Methodology o MEMS Inertial Sensor Permanent Wafer Bonding Technology 9 Physical Comparison 140 Permanent Wafer Bonding Definition and Process Description 13 o Without intermediate layer Cost Comparison 164 o Fusion Bonding o CMOS Image Sensor Feedbacks 168 o MEMS Inertial Sensor SystemPlus Consulting services 170 o Cu-Cu/Oxide Hybrid Bonding o CMOS Image Sensor o Anodic Bonding o MEMS Pressure Sensor o With intermediate layer o Glass Frit o MEMS Pressure Sensor o MEMS Inertial Sensor o Adhesive Bonding o MEMS Micro-mirror o Eutectic Bonding o MEMS Inertial Sensor o Microbolometer o LED ©2018 by System Plus Consulting | Wafer to Wafer Permanent Bonding Comparison 2018 2 Executive Summary Overview / Introduction o Executive Summary This comparative review has been conducted to provide insights into the structures, processes and costs of the main o Reverse Costing Methodology permanent wafer bonding technologies. o Glossary Wafer Bonding Technology Among these technologies, we have identified two main groups. One, bonding wafers without intermediate layers, includes Wafer Bonding Definition and fusion, copper-copper hybrid and anodic bonding approaches. The second group involves bonding wafers with intermediate Process Description layers using an insulator like a glass frit, or a metal in eutectic and thermocompression approaches.