Abstract
The interface layer plays an important role in stress transfer in composite structures. However, many interface layer properties such as the modulus, thickness, and uniformity are difficult to determine. The model developed in this article links the influence of the interface layer on the normal stress distribution along the layer thickness with the layer surface morphology before bonding. By doing so, a new method of determining the interfacial parameter(s) is suggested. The effects of the layer thickness and the surface roughness before bonding on the normal stress distribution and its depth profile are also discussed. For ideal interface case with no interfacial shear stress, the normal stress distribution pattern can only be monotonically decreased from the interface. Due to the presence of interfacial shear stress, the normal stress distribution is much more complex, and varies dramatically with changes in the properties of the interface layer, or the dimensions of the bonding layers. The consequence of this dramatic stress field change, such as the shift of the maximum stress from the interface is also addressed. The size-dependent stress distribution in the thickness direction due to the interface layer effect is presented. When the interfacial shear stress is reduced to zero, the model presented in this article is also demonstrated to have the same normal stress distribution as obtained by the previous model, which does not consider the interface layer effect.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Pipes RB, Pagano NJ (1970) J Compos Mater 4:538
Pipes RB, Moiré IM (1971) J Compos Mater 5:255
Pagano NJ (1978) Int J Solids Struct 14:385
Pagano NJ (1978) Int J Solids Struct 14:401
Wang SS, Choi I (1982) J Appl Mech 49:541
Wang SS, Choi I (1982) J Appl Mech 49:549
Hu SM (1979) J Appl Phys 50:4661
Hu SM (1991) J Appl Phys 70:R53
Chen WT, Nelson CW (1979) IBM J Res Develop 23:179
Suhir E (1986) J Appl Mech 53:657
Suhir E (1989) J Appl Mech 56:595
Timoshenko S (1925) J Opt Soc Am 11:233
Ru CQ (2002) J Electron Packag 124:141
Noyan IC, Murray CE, Chey JS, Goldsmith CC (2004) Appl Phys Lett 85:724
Murray CE, Noyan IC (2002) Philos Mag A 82:3087
Maszara WP, Jiang BL, Yamada A, Rozgonyi GA, Baumgart H, de Kock AJR (1990) J Appl Phys 69:257
Stengl R, Mitani K, Lehmann V, Gösele U (1989) Proc. 1989 IEEE SOS/SOI Tech. Conf., Stateline, Nevada, October 3–5, 1989, IEEE Catalog number 89CH2796–1(1989) 123
Tong QY, Gösele U (1995) J Electrochem Soc 142:3975
Yu HH, Suo Z (1998) J Mech Phys Solids 46:829
Kendall K (2001) Molecular adhesion and its application: the sticky universe. Kluwer Academic /Plenum Publishers, NY, p 28
Gui C, Elwenspoek M, Tas N, Gardeniers JGE (1999) J Appl Phys 85:7448
Liau ZL (1997) Phys Rev B 55:12899
Lee WG, Woo SI (1997) J Mater Sci 32:815
Chen KN, Fan A, Reif R (2002) J Mater Sci 37:3441
Freund LB, Suresh S (2003) Thin film materials: stress, defect formation and surface evolution. Cambridge University Press, UK
Zhang Y (2007) J Phy D Appl Phy 40:1118
Pinard K, Jain SC, Willander M, Atkinson A, Maes HE, Van Overstraeten R (1998) J Appl Phys 84:2507
Maszara WP, Goetz G, Caviglia A, McKitterick JB (1988) J Appl Phys 64:4943
Acknowledgements
The author is thankful for the financial support of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC, Grant No. 10502050) and the Scientific Research Foundation for the Returned Overseas Chinese Scholars, State Education Ministry.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
In the boundary conditions as given by Eqs. 7 and 8, the fourth and eighth are equivalent to the following two:
We arrange them in the last two rows of the following matrix form:
With m ij s given as: \(m_{11}=-2ke^{\sqrt{2}kt_1},\) \(m_{12}=k(2\sqrt{2}-2kt_1-2\sqrt{2}\nu _1)e^{\sqrt{2}kt_1},\) \(m_{13}=-2ke^{-\sqrt{2}kt_1},\) \(m_{14}=k(-2\sqrt{2}-2kt_1+2\sqrt{2}\nu _1)e^{-\sqrt{2}kt_1}\) \(m_{21}=2\sqrt{2}ke^{\sqrt{2}kt_1},\) \(m_{22}=k(-2+4\nu _1+2\sqrt{2}kt_1)e^{\sqrt{2}kt_1},\) \(m_{23}=-2\sqrt{2}ke^{-\sqrt{2}kt_1},\) \(m_{24}=k(-2+4\nu _1-2\sqrt{2}kt_1)e^{-\sqrt{2}kt_1}\) \(m_{31}=-\sqrt{2},\) m 32 = 3−4ν1, \(m_{33}=\sqrt{2},\) m 34 = 3−4ν1 \(m_{45}=-2ke^{-\sqrt{2}kt_2},\) \(m_{46}=k(2\sqrt{2}+2kt_2-2 \sqrt{2}\nu _2)e^{-\sqrt{2}kt_2},\) \(m_{47}=-2ke^{\sqrt{2}kt_2},\) \(m_{48}=k(-2\sqrt{2}+2kt_2+2\sqrt{2}\nu _2)e^{\sqrt{2}kt_2}\) \(m_{55}=2\sqrt{2}ke^{-\sqrt{2}kt_2},\) \(m_{56}=k(-2+4\nu _2-2\sqrt{2}kt_2)e^{-\sqrt{2}kt_2},\) \(m_{57}=-2\sqrt{2}ke^{\sqrt{2}kt_2},\) \(m_{58}=k(-2+4\nu _2+2\sqrt{2}kt_2)e^{\sqrt{2}kt_2}\) \(m_{65}=-\sqrt{2},\) m 66 = 3−4ν2, \(m_{67}=\sqrt{2},\) m 68 = 3−4ν2, \(m_{71}=\sqrt{2}\frac{E_1(1+\nu _2)}{E_2 (1+\nu _1)},\) \(m_{72}=(-1+2\nu _1)\frac{E_1(1+\nu _2)}{E_2(1+\nu _1)},\) \(m_{73}=-\sqrt{2}\frac{E_1(1+\nu _2)}{E_2(1+\nu _1)},\) \(m_{74}=(-1+2\nu _1)\frac{E_1(1+\nu _2)}{E_2(1+\nu _1)},\) \(m_{75}=-\sqrt{2},\) m 76 = 1−2ν2, \(m_{77}=\sqrt{2},\) m 78 = 1−2ν2 \(m_{81}=\frac{\sqrt{2}E_1k}{1+\nu _1}-\frac{2G_i}{\eta }e^{\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}kt_1},\) \(m_{82}=\frac{E_1k(-1+2\nu _1)}{1+\nu _1}-\frac{{G_i}kt_1}{\eta }e^{\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}kt_1},\) \(m_{83}=\frac{-\sqrt{2}E_1{k}}{1+\nu _1 }-\frac{2G_i } {\eta }e^{\frac{-\sqrt{2}}{2}kt_1 },\) \(m_{84}=\frac{E_1k(-1+2\nu _1)}{1+\nu _1}-\frac{G_i kt_1}{\eta}e^{\frac{-\sqrt{2}}{2}kt_1},\) \(m_{85}=\frac{\sqrt{2}E_2 k}{1+\nu _2}+\frac{2G_i}{\eta}e^{\frac{-\sqrt{2}}{2}kt_2},\) \(m_{86}=\frac{{E_2}k(-1+2\nu _2)}{1+\nu _2}-\frac{G_i kt_2}{\eta}e^{\frac{-\sqrt{2}}{2}kt_2},\) \(m_{87}=\frac{-\sqrt{2}E_2 k}{1+\nu _2}+\frac{2G_i}{\eta}e^{\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}kt_2},\) \(m_{88}=\frac{E_2 k(-1+2\nu _2)}{1+\nu _2}-\frac{G_i kt_2}{\eta}e^{\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}kt_2}\)
The strategy of solving Eq. 13 is to express a 1, a 2, a 3 via a 4 and a 5, a 6, a 7 via a 8 first, and then substitute them into the last two equations of Eq. 13 to solve a 4 and a 8. Therefore, we have
and
here D, V 1, V 2, and V 3 are defined as
And k 1, k 2, and k 3 are k 1 = −m 14(m 22 m 33−m 23 m 32) + m 24(m 12 m 33−m 13 m 32)−m 34(m 12 m 23−m 13 m 22), k 2 = m 14(m 21 m 33−m 23 m 31)−m 24(m 11 m 33−m 13 m 31) + m 34(m 11 m 23−m 13 m 21), k 3 = m 14(m 22 m 31−m 21 m 32)−m 24(m 12 m 31−m 11 m 32) + m 34(m 12 m 21−m 11 m 22).
a5, a6, and a7 are:
and
with J, V5, V6 and V7 defined as
l1, l2, and l3 are l1 = −m48(m56m67−m57m66) + m58(m46m67−m47m66)−m68(m46m57−m47m56), l2 = m48(m55m67−m57m65)−m58(m45m67−m47m65) + m68(m45m57−m47m55).
And l 3 = m 48(m 56 m 65−m 55 m 66)−m 58(m 46 m 65−m 45 m 66) + m 68(m 46 m 55−m 45 m 56).
Substitution of the expressions of a 1, a 2, a 3in Eqs. 14, 15, 16 and a 5, a 6, a 7 in Eqs.17, 18, 19 into the last two equations of Eq. 13 gives following equations of a 4 and a 8:
with M ij s defined as \(M_{11}=\frac{m_{71}k_1+m_{72}k_2+m_{73}k_3}{D}+m_{74},\,M_{12}=\frac{m_{75}l_1+m_{76}l_2+m_{77}l_3}{J}+m_{78},\) and \(M_{21}=\frac{m_{81}k_1+m_{82}k_2+m_{83}k_3}{D}+\,m_{84},\,M_{22}=\frac{m_{85}l_1+m_{86}l_2+m_{87}l_3}{J}+m_{88}.\)
And α1 and α2 are defined as
and
γ1 and γ2 are
and
a 4 and a 8 are solved as
with A i and B i (i = 1, 2) given as
and
Substitute the above solution of a 8 and a 4 into Eqs. 14, 15, and 16, and 17, 18, and 19, we have
with
and
Equations 9 and 10 result in the following two equations:
Here r is defined as
with
Therefore, H 1 and H 2 are solved as follows
Substitution of the above solution of H 1 and H 2 into Eqs. 21 and 22 gives the solutions of all a i s.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zhang, Y. Interface layer effect on the stress distribution of a wafer-bonded bilayer structure. J Mater Sci 43, 88–97 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-007-2136-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-007-2136-2