A fast verification method for bonding equipment consistency

Abstract

The present invention provides a fast verification method for the consistency of a bonding device, comprising the following steps: obtaining the bonding parameters of the bonding device, and setting an arithmetic difference threshold of the ultrasonic compensation value of the bonding device, performing a standard test on the bonding sample of the current bonding device based on the arithmetic difference threshold to obtain the best ultrasonic compensation value of the current bonding device; performing a standard test on the bonding sample of another bonding device based on the arithmetic difference threshold to obtain the ultrasonic compensation value closest to the best ultrasonic compensation value; using a double sample method to compare the best ultrasonic compensation value with the closest ultrasonic compensation value, if the comparison result meets the consistency requirement, adjusting the corresponding device according to the closest ultrasonic compensation value. The present invention has the beneficial effects of being able to quickly and accurately perform consistency verification and adjustment on different bonding devices, thereby improving work efficiency.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The invention belongs to the field of equipment debugging, and in particular relates to a fast verification method for bonding equipment consistency. Background Art

[0002] When aluminum wire, aluminum clad copper wire, aluminum strip and other consumables are used to connect circuits on chips, DBCs, power terminals and signal terminals, bonding devices are required to connect the circuits. In the prior art, multiple bonding devices work simultaneously to increase production and reduce working hours. At this time, the consistency of the product needs to meet the requirements. Manual adjustments are often used, but manual adjustments are time-consuming and laborious, and when there are too many bonding devices, errors are prone to occur, resulting in consistency problems. Therefore, a fast and accurate consistency verification method is needed. Summary of the invention

[0003] In view of this, the present invention aims to provide a fast verification method for bonding equipment consistency, in order to solve at least one of the above-mentioned technical problems.

[0004] To achieve the above object, the technical solution of the present invention is achieved as follows:

[0005] A fast verification method for bonding equipment consistency includes the following steps:

[0006] Acquire bonding parameters of the bonding device, set an arithmetic difference threshold of the ultrasonic compensation value of the bonding device, perform a standard test on the bonding sample of the current bonding device based on the arithmetic difference threshold, and obtain the optimal ultrasonic compensation value of the current bonding device;

[0007] Performing a standard test on a bonding sample of another bonding device based on the arithmetic difference threshold to obtain an ultrasonic compensation value closest to the optimal ultrasonic compensation value;

[0008] The double-sample method is used to compare the best ultrasonic compensation value with the closest ultrasonic compensation value. If the comparison result meets the consistency requirement, the corresponding equipment is adjusted according to the closest ultrasonic compensation value.

[0009] Furthermore, the setting method of the arithmetic difference threshold is:

[0010] According to business needs and bonding equipment accuracy, a value range is set for the ultrasonic compensation value, and a difference is selected for the threshold to obtain a set of arithmetic progressions within the value range, and the value of the arithmetic progression is used as the arithmetic threshold.

[0011] Furthermore, the process of performing standard testing based on arithmetic difference thresholds includes:

[0012] The ultrasonic compensation of the bonding equipment is adjusted according to the arithmetic difference threshold, and standard tests are performed on various bonding samples under different ultrasonic compensations. The test results that meet the standard requirements are selected, and the ultrasonic compensation values ​​of the corresponding bonding samples are used as the optimal ultrasonic compensation values.

[0013] Furthermore, the standard requirements include:

[0014] The minimum thrust under the shear force test is not less than 1500g; the aluminum wire residue is greater than 75%; and the CPK is greater than 1.67, which is the automotive industry standard.

[0015] Furthermore, the consistency requirement is specifically: the comparison result is greater than 0.05.

[0016] Furthermore, the process of the standard test includes CPK analysis, and the process of the CPK analysis is as follows:

[0017] Obtain sample data of the bonding sample under the arithmetic difference threshold, and verify whether the sample data conforms to the normal distribution. If not, adjust the sample data until the sample data conforms to the normal distribution;

[0018] CPK analysis is performed using sample data that conforms to the normal distribution. The specific formula for CPK analysis is: :

[0019] Among them, USL is the upper limit specification of the sample data, and LSL is the lower limit specification of the sample data. is the mean value of the sample data, is the standard deviation of the sample data.

[0020] Furthermore, when the sample data does not conform to the normal distribution, the process of adjusting the sample data includes:

[0021] The original sample data is adjusted to a normal distribution through the power parameter, specifically:

[0022] ;

[0023] Among them, y(λ) is the converted data value, x is the original data value x is greater than 0, and λ is the conversion parameter calculated by the maximum likelihood estimation method.

[0024] Furthermore, the calculation process of the maximum likelihood estimation method is specifically as follows:

[0025] Substitute different λ values ​​into the calculation to obtain λ values ​​close to normal distribution, wherein the different λ values ​​include: positive values ​​are power conversion, negative values ​​are reciprocal conversion, zero is logarithmic conversion, and decimals are square root conversion.

[0026] Furthermore, when the sample data does not conform to the normal distribution, the following processing methods are also included:

[0027] If the sample data cannot be adjusted, or the sample data still does not satisfy the normal distribution after adjustment, the quantile method is used to process the sample data, and the processed sample data is used to replace the CPK analysis with the PPK analysis, wherein the standard requires that the PPK is greater than 1.

[0028] Furthermore, the process of processing sample data using the quantile method includes:

[0029] Arrange all sample data in ascending order and calculate the position of the quantiles:

[0030] ; Where Lp is the position of the pth quantile, n is the total number of data, and p is the required quantile;

[0031] Calculate the upper process capability index: ;

[0032] Calculate the lower process capability index: ;

[0033] Calculate the overall process capability index: .

[0034] Compared with the prior art, the fast verification method for bonding device consistency described in the present invention has the following beneficial effects:

[0035] Under the condition of the same bonding parameters, the ultrasonic compensation value of the equipment can be calibrated at the same time, so that multiple devices can achieve product consistency. The consistency calibration and adjustment of different bonding equipment can be carried out quickly and accurately, which improves work efficiency and accuracy. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0036] The accompanying drawings constituting a part of the present invention are used to provide a further understanding of the present invention. The exemplary embodiments of the present invention and their descriptions are used to explain the present invention and do not constitute an improper limitation of the present invention. In the accompanying drawings:

[0037] Figure 1 A schematic diagram of the workflow of a method for quickly verifying the consistency of a bonding device according to an embodiment of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0038] It should be noted that, in the absence of conflict, the embodiments of the present invention and the features in the embodiments may be combined with each other.

[0039] In the description of the present invention, it should be understood that the terms "center", "longitudinal", "lateral", "up", "down", "front", "back", "left", "right", "vertical", "horizontal", "top", "bottom", "inside", "outside" and the like indicate positions or positional relationships based on the positions or positional relationships shown in the accompanying drawings, and are only for the convenience of describing the present invention and simplifying the description, rather than indicating or implying that the device or element referred to must have a specific orientation, be constructed and operated in a specific orientation, and therefore cannot be understood as limiting the present invention. In addition, the terms "first", "second", and the like are only used for descriptive purposes, and cannot be understood as indicating or implying relative importance or implicitly indicating the number of technical features indicated. Thus, features defined as "first", "second", and the like may explicitly or implicitly include one or more of the features. In the description of the present invention, unless otherwise specified, "multiple" means two or more.

[0040] In the description of the present invention, it should be noted that, unless otherwise clearly specified and limited, the terms "installed", "connected", and "connected" should be understood in a broad sense, for example, it can be a fixed connection, a detachable connection, or an integral connection; it can be a mechanical connection or an electrical connection; it can be a direct connection, or it can be indirectly connected through an intermediate medium, or it can be the internal communication of two components. For ordinary technicians in this field, the specific meanings of the above terms in the present invention can be understood by specific circumstances.

[0041] The present invention will be described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and in conjunction with embodiments.

[0042] like Figure 1 As shown: A method for quickly checking the consistency of a bonding device, comprising the following steps:

[0043] S1. Acquire bonding parameters of a bonding device, set an arithmetic difference threshold of an ultrasonic compensation value of the bonding device, perform a standard test on a bonding sample of the current bonding device based on the arithmetic difference threshold, and obtain an optimal ultrasonic compensation value of the current bonding device.

[0044] The setting method of the arithmetic difference threshold in step S1 is: according to business needs and bonding equipment accuracy, a value range is set for the ultrasonic compensation value, and a difference is selected for the threshold to obtain a set of arithmetic progressions within the value range, and the value of the arithmetic progression is used as the arithmetic difference threshold.

[0045] S2. Performing a standard test on a bonding sample of another bonding device based on the arithmetic difference threshold value to obtain an ultrasonic compensation value that is closest to the optimal ultrasonic compensation value.

[0046] The process of performing standard testing based on the arithmetic difference threshold in steps S1 and S2 includes: adjusting the ultrasonic compensation of the bonding equipment according to the arithmetic difference threshold, and performing standard tests on each bonding sample under different ultrasonic compensations, selecting the test results that meet the standard requirements, and using the ultrasonic compensation value of the corresponding bonding sample as the optimal ultrasonic compensation value; wherein the standard requirements include: the minimum thrust under the shear force test is not less than 1500g; the aluminum wire residue is greater than 75%; and the CPK is greater than 1.67, which is the automotive industry standard.

[0047] S3. Use the double sample method to compare the best ultrasonic compensation value with the closest ultrasonic compensation value. If the comparison result meets the consistency requirement, adjust the corresponding device according to the closest ultrasonic compensation value; wherein the consistency requirement is specifically: the comparison result is greater than 0.05.

[0048] Cpk analysis (process capability index analysis) is a statistical tool used to evaluate whether a manufacturing process can meet product specification requirements. The specific calculation process is as follows:

[0049] Obtain sample data of the bonding sample under the arithmetic difference threshold, and verify whether the sample data conforms to the normal distribution. Statistical methods such as normal probability plot and Kolmogorov-Smirnov test can be used for testing; if the data does not conform to the normal distribution, adjust the sample data until the sample data conforms to the normal distribution;

[0050] Calculate the mean value (representing the center position of the process) and standard deviation (reflecting the degree of variation of the process) of the sample data, set the upper and lower limit specifications of the sample data, and use the mean value, standard deviation, upper and lower limit specifications of the sample data for CPK analysis. The specific formula is: ;

[0051] Among them, USL is the upper limit specification of the sample data, and LSL is the lower limit specification of the sample data. is the mean value of the sample data, is the standard deviation of the sample data.

[0052] When the sample data does not conform to the normal distribution, the process of adjusting the sample data includes:

[0053] The original sample data is adjusted to a normal distribution through the power parameter, specifically: ; Where y(λ) is the converted data value, x is the original data value x is greater than 0, and λ is the conversion parameter calculated by the maximum likelihood estimation method.

[0054] The calculation process of the above maximum likelihood estimation method is as follows:

[0055] Substitute different λ values ​​into the calculation to obtain λ values ​​close to normal distribution, wherein the different λ values ​​include: positive values ​​are power conversion, negative values ​​are reciprocal conversion, zero is logarithmic conversion, and decimals are square root conversion.

[0056] When the sample data does not conform to the normal distribution, the following processing methods are also included:

[0057] If the sample data cannot be adjusted, or the sample data still does not satisfy the normal distribution after adjustment, the quantile method is used to process the sample data, and the processed sample data is used to replace the CPK analysis with the PPK analysis, wherein the standard requires that the PPK is greater than 1.

[0058] The process of processing sample data by the quantile method includes:

[0059] Arrange all sample data in ascending order and calculate the position of the quantiles:

[0060] ; Where Lp is the position of the pth quantile, n is the total number of data, and p is the required quantile;

[0061] Calculate the upper process capability index: ;

[0062] Calculate the lower process capability index: ;

[0063] Calculate the overall process capability index: .

[0064] Finally, it should be noted that the above embodiments are only used to illustrate the technical solutions of the present invention, rather than to limit it. Although the present invention has been described in detail with reference to the aforementioned embodiments, those skilled in the art should understand that they can still modify the technical solutions described in the aforementioned embodiments, or replace some or all of the technical features therein by equivalents. These modifications or replacements do not deviate the essence of the corresponding technical solutions from the scope of the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention, and they should all be included in the scope of the claims and specification of the present invention.

[0065] The above description is only a preferred embodiment of the present invention and is not intended to limit the present invention. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, improvements, etc. made within the spirit and principle of the present invention should be included in the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A fast verification method for bonding equipment consistency, characterized in that: The steps include: Acquire bonding parameters of the bonding device, set an arithmetic difference threshold of the ultrasonic compensation value of the bonding device, perform a standard test on the bonding sample of the current bonding device based on the arithmetic difference threshold, and obtain the optimal ultrasonic compensation value of the current bonding device; Performing a standard test on a bonding sample of another bonding device based on the arithmetic difference threshold to obtain an ultrasonic compensation value closest to the optimal ultrasonic compensation value; The best ultrasonic compensation value is compared with the closest ultrasonic compensation value using the double sample method. If the comparison result meets the consistency requirement, the corresponding equipment is adjusted according to the closest ultrasonic compensation value. The setting method of the arithmetic difference threshold is: According to business needs and bonding equipment accuracy, a value range is set for the ultrasonic compensation value, and a difference value is selected for the threshold value to obtain a set of arithmetic progressions within the value range, and the value of the arithmetic progression is used as the arithmetic threshold value; The process of standard testing based on arithmetic thresholds includes: Adjust the ultrasonic compensation of the bonding equipment according to the arithmetic difference threshold, perform standard tests on each bonding sample under different ultrasonic compensations, select the test results that meet the standard requirements, and use the ultrasonic compensation value of the corresponding bonding sample as the optimal ultrasonic compensation value; The process of the standard test includes CPK analysis, and the process of the CPK analysis is as follows: Obtain sample data of the bonding sample under the arithmetic difference threshold, and verify whether the sample data conforms to the normal distribution. If not, adjust the sample data until the sample data conforms to the normal distribution; CPK analysis is performed using sample data that conforms to the normal distribution. The specific formula for CPK analysis is: ； Among them, USL is the upper limit specification of the sample data, and LSL is the lower limit specification of the sample data. is the mean value of the sample data, is the standard deviation of the sample data; When the sample data does not conform to the normal distribution, the process of adjusting the sample data includes: The original sample data is adjusted to a normal distribution through the power parameter, specifically: ； Among them, y(λ) is the converted data value, x is the original data value x is greater than 0, and λ is the conversion parameter calculated by the maximum likelihood estimation method.

2. A fast bonding device consistency verification method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The standard requirements include: The minimum thrust under the shear force test is not less than 1500g; the aluminum wire residue is greater than 75%; and the CPK is greater than 1.67, which is the automotive industry standard.

3. A fast bonding device consistency verification method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The consistency requirement is specifically: the comparison result is greater than 0.

05.

4. A fast bonding equipment consistency verification method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The calculation process of the maximum likelihood estimation method is specifically as follows: Substitute different λ values ​​into the calculation to obtain λ values ​​close to normal distribution, wherein the different λ values ​​include: positive values ​​are power conversion, negative values ​​are reciprocal conversion, zero is logarithmic conversion, and decimals are square root conversion.

5. A fast bonding equipment consistency verification method according to claim 1, characterized in that: When the sample data does not conform to the normal distribution, the following processing methods are also included: If the sample data cannot be adjusted, or the sample data still does not satisfy the normal distribution after adjustment, the quantile method is used to process the sample data, and the processed sample data is used to replace the CPK analysis with the PPK analysis, wherein the standard requires that the PPK is greater than 1.

6. A fast bonding equipment consistency verification method according to claim 5, characterized in that: The process of processing sample data by the quantile method includes: Arrange all sample data in ascending order and calculate the position of the quantiles: ; Where Lp is the position of the pth quantile, n is the total number of data, and p is the required quantile; Calculate the upper process capability index: ; Calculate the lower process capability index: ; Calculate the overall process capability index: .

Images