Challenges of Megapixel Camera Module Assembly and Test

Asif Chowdhury1, Robert Darveaux1, Jay Tome1, Ron Schoonejongen1, Mitch Reifel1, Archie De Guzman1, Sung Soon Park2 ,
Yong Woo Kim2, Hyung Wook Kim2,
1
Amkor Technology, Inc.
1900 S. Price Rd.
Chandler, AZ 85236
achow@amkor.com
480-821-2408 x5949
2
Amkor Technology Korea
Korea

Abstract
Driven by the market growth of mobile phones with
camera, production of image sensor devices has increased
dramatically in recent years. From 2004 an increasing
number of these mobile phones contain megapixel cameras.
The packaging of an image sensor in a camera module
presents several unique engineering challenges. Megapixel
camera module assembly poses further challenges due to
more stringent particle control criteria. For particle control,
special attention has to be given on facilities control,
equipment and material selection, process flow, discipline
among line personnel and continuous particle reduction
effort. Other material, process and equipment selection
criteria for megapixel module are also discussed. Test for
megapixel camera module also has its own challenges. This
paper discusses these challenges and methods to meet them. Figure 1. Examples of megapixel camera module
Introduction
Image sensor devices are used in various applications
Megapixel image sensors are defined as image sensors
such as surveillance, digital still cameras, PC cameras,
with more than a million individual sensors or pixels. Table
medical instruments, bar code readers, PDAs, Toys,
1 shows different image sensor display formats. SXGA and
automotive and mobile phones. Megapixel image sensors
UXGA are examples of megapixel sensors. Some examples
are primarily used in digital still cameras but becoming
of megapixel camera modules are shown in Figure 1.
widely adopted in mobile phones as well. Today digital still
cameras primarily uses image sensors with 3 megapixel or
greater. For mobile phones the most common format today

Designat Name Pixel Array Number of Pixels

or
CIF Common Intermediate Format 352 x 288 101,376
VGA Video Graphics Array 640 x 480 307,200
SVGA Super Video Graphics Array 800 x 600 480,000
XGA Extended Graphics Array 1024 x 768 786,432
SXGA Super Extended Graphics Array 1280 x 1024 1,310,720
(or 1.3 Mega Pixel)
C UXGA Ultra Extended Graphics Array 1600 x 1200 1,920,000
(or 2 Mega Pixel)

Table 1. Common display formats

0-7803-8906-9/05/$20.00 ©2005 IEEE 1390 2005 Electronic Components and Technology Conference
is 1.3 megapixel cameras. Table 2 shows the forecasted Lens Barrel
growth of mobile phones and mobile phones with camera
modules. It is forecasted that by 2007 over 90% of all
mobile phones with camera will have megapixel camera Lens 1
modules. Figure 2 shows the growth of megapixel camera
module. Lens 2
Mount
Lens 3
Total Mobile Mobile Phones
Mobile Phones with with Megapixel
Phones, Camera, Camera, IR Filter
M units M units M units Image Sensor
2002 502 38 -
2003 614 82 2 Substrate
2004 665 190 68
2005 761 281 200 Signal Processor
2006 797 398 358
2007 876 508 483
2008 969 629 616

Table 2. Forecast of mobile phones and mobile phones with

camera modules and megapixel camera modules (Source: Solder Joints Flex Circuit
Amkor Technology)

700 Figure 3. Cross-section of a typical megapixel camera

module.
600

500
in Millions

400
3,500,000
Pixel Size (um) 2.8 3.4 4.0 4.5 5.6 6.0
300
3,000,000
200
Resolution (pixels)

2,500,000
100

0 2,000,000
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
1,500,000

1,000,000
Figure 2. Forecasted growth of megapixel camera module.
500,000
Mobile Phone Camera Module Trend
-
Cross-section of a typical fixed focus megapixel camera 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
1/7 1/5 1/3 1/2
module design is shown in Figure 3. It shows a stacked die 1/6 1/4 Optical Format
version where the image sensor is on top of a signal
processing die. There is a flexible circuit with passive Figure 4. Relationship between pixel size, resolution (pixel
components attached to the bottom of the laminate count), and optical format.
substrate. The module design that a particular manufacturer
might choose depends on several factors such as cost, size, eliminate longer wavelength radiation, which would create
available technology, and personal preference. CSP noise in the sensor.
versions of camera modules are also available. One Shown in Figure 4 is the relationship between pixel
example is the Shellcase CSP [1] where the die is encased size, resolution, and optical format. For mobile phone
in glass as part of wafer level processing. While CSP applications, the trends are to increase resolution and
solution may require less stringent particle criteria, it has its reduce optical format. It is clear from Figure 4 that a
own challenges which are beyond the scope of this paper. reduction in pixel size is needed to satisfy these two
Detailed description of other possible camera module opposing requirements.
design is described in an earlier paper published in 2004
SMTA International conference [2]. The Challenge of Particle Control
A typical fixed focus lens system for megapixel is In camera module assembly, particles are usually the
comprised of a mount, lens barrel, IR filter, and 3 or more primary cause of yield loss. Figure 5 shows a pareto of
lens elements. The number of lens elements will vary with assembly related defect for a 1.3 megapixel module. It is
the optical design requirement. The IR filter is used to observed that over 90% of the defects are related to
particle.
1391 2005 Electronic Components and Technology Conference
 To keep device sizes relatively small, the pixel sizes are
smaller for megapixel sensors as shown in Figure 4.
Currently most megapixel CMOS image sensors have pixel
sizes ranging from 3.0 micron to 3.5 micron while
megapixel CCD sensors have pixel sizes in the
neighborhood of 2.8 microns. The maximum allowable
particle size on a die is typically equal to one pixel.
Hence, for megapixel camera module assembly, particle
control strategies must improve.
90
80
70
60
50
%
Facilities Control
Table 3 shows clean room requirement by assembly process
step. The portion of the assembly process where the die is
exposed is most sensitive to particle. Until the module is
encased with the lens system, assembly is typically done in
class 100 environment. Focus and barrel lock is
recommended to be done in class 1000 environment while
remainder of the assembly process can be done in class
100K. The actual clean room particle count must be
checked on a regular interval and at strategic places within
the clean room. For example particle detector should be
placed close to the die attach and wire bond process area
where the die is exposed to the environment. This will
provide data on actual particle control level at those critical
process areas. Figure 7 shows a class 100 clean room with
various particle check point strategically selected based on
process location. Table 4 shows the actual particle count in

40
those locations.
30

20 Process Clean Room Class

10 Wafer / Glass Mount
0 Wafer De-tape
Wafer / Glass Saw
Particle on die Particle on glass Others
Die Attach
Figure 5. Defect pareto of a 1.3 megapixel camera module. Die Attach Cure
Wire Bond 100
There are numerous sources for particles in the Glass Attach
assembly line. Particles can be generated due to poor Glass Attach Cure
facilities control, from material selected for assembly, from Mount Attach
equipment, inadequate cleaning steps during process flow, Mount Attach Cure
too many people in the line, etc. Figure 6 shows some Barrel Insert
examples of particle on image sensor die. Continuous Backgrind 1,000
particle reduction must become a standard practice by Focus
assembly engineers. The next few sections discuss each of Barrel Lock 10,000
these in detail from the viewpoint of particle reduction Image Test
effort. They also cover additional criteria for each section Screen Print
which are required for megapixel camera module assembly. Pick and Place
Reflow 100,000
Laser Mark
Singulation
Flex Attach

Table 3. Typical facilities requirement

The environment inside all equipment should be

Figure 6. Examples of particle defects on image sensor die.
monitored and steps should be taken for particle reduction.
It is possible that while the clean room particle count is
well under control, the particles inside some of these
equipment are outside the spec of class 100 clean room.
Proper airflow inside the equipment is key in reducing
particles. Keeping covers of the equipment open or taking
them off completely can help reduce particle level inside
the machines. Figure 8 shows a picture of assembly
equipment in operation with the cover open.
Assembly line layout is also another area where special
attention should be given. Smooth laminar airflow inside
the clean room is important in reducing particle count. For
example adequate space between equipments, workbenches

1392 2005 Electronic Components and Technology Conference

 Air shower
#6 #5 #4
Pass Box

Mount attach
Air lock
#7

Wafer saw Die attach Wire Bond

#1 #2 #3

# Particle check points

Figure 7. Example of strategic locations for particle check point inside class 100 clean room

Over
0.30.3
umum Criteria
Over0.5
0.5um
um
(Reference) (0.5um base)
P oint 1 4 3
P oint 2 0 0
P oint 3 11 8
P oint 4 9 2 100 class
P oint 5 22 16
P oint 6 4 3
P oint 7 0 0

Table 4. Actual particle count data at each of the particle check points shown in Figure 7.

a) All moving parts should be away from the actual

exposed die area so that particle generated does
not land on die surface.
b) Equipments with its own de-ionized airflow
system will help reduce particle.
c) Incoming air should come through a filtration
system ensure clean air coming in.
d) Substrate strip indexing should be done on rollers
instead of on rails to reduce friction which
generates particle.

Figure 8. Equipment shown with cover open to allow
improved airflow.
and shelves must be allowed. A camera module assembly
floor equipment layout will look sparse compared to that of
a standard packaging assembly floor. All workbenches and
shelves should have adequate ventilation in the form of
perforation to allow airflow.
Equipment Selection
Equipment material and design can inherently generate
particles during operation. All handling area and moving
parts of the equipment should be made such that particle
generation due to friction is reduced both from a design and
material selection view point. Examples are given below.
In the last two years, a few of the well known assembly
equipment suppliers have come up with equipment
specifically for image sensor assembly. These equipment
inherently generate lesser particle by.
Megapixel module assembly may require equipment
with tighter process control specifications. For example,
megapixel modules require a tighter optical center to sensor
center alignment. The current requirement is +/-50 microns
to +/-75 microns for VGA designs. The requirement for
megapixel design is +/-25 micron to +/-50 microns, which
requires advanced assembly equipment as well as tighter
process control.

1393 2005 Electronic Components and Technology Conference

 Item Unit Test A B C D E
Method

Cure Conditions 125°C UV 150 °C UV 100°C

1 hr 5 – 7 secs 2 min 5 – 7 secs 60 min

Outgassing % TGA 0.28 N/A 6.85 1.23 N/A

Table 5. Comparisons of adhesive materials in terms of cure conditions and out-gassing properties.

Polycarbonate /
Liquid
Acrylonitrile
Crystal Polyphenelyene Polyphenylene
Item Unit Test Method Butadiene
Polymer Sulfide (PPS) Oxide (PPO)
Styrene
(LCP)
(PC/ABS)
310C, 1
Melt Viscosity Pa-s 600 400 N/A N/A
in/sec
Temperature of
Deflection under C ASTM D648 271 270 130 135
Load (1.82MPa)
Table 6. Mount and lens barrel material properties.

Mount 1st image test 2nd image test(after shaking)

Mat'l
TTL Particle % TTL Particle %

PPS 179 1 0.56% 178 3 1.69%

LCP 179 0 0.00% 187 0 0.00%

Table 7. LCP mount-barrel shows zero particles compared to PPS mount-barrel.

Acrylic Polyolefin Glass

Item Unit Polycarbonate Arton F Optores Topaz
(PMMA) (Zeonex) D263T

Processability Excellent Difficult Good Good TBD Good Difficult

Maximum service
C 90 120 123 171 95 125 529
Temp

Table 8. Potential candidates of lens material.

1394 2005 Electronic Components and Technology Conference

Materials Selection
Several of the packaging materials used in camera
modules are standard. Among the standard materials are
silicon die, gold wire, laminate substrate, ceramic substrate,
flex circuit, passive components, and connectors.
However, there are several materials which are somewhat
unique to camera modules when compared to other IC
adhesives, mount, lens barrel, lens elements, and IR glass
filter. The detail material properties and selection criteria
have been discussed in the earlier paper published in
SMTA [2]. A general discussion is provided below on
some of the unique material selection criteria especially
with respect the issue of particle contamination.
In case of adhesives, out-gassing properties are
important in terms of potential cause of contamination.
Adhesives with higher out-gassing may contaminate the
sensor surface or the IR glass during the cure process.
Table 5 shows comparisons of adhesives materials for lens
barrel, mount and lens attach in terms of their cure
conditions and out gassing properties.
For the mount and the lens barrel, the common plastic
materials used are Liquid Crystal Polymer (LCP),
Polyphenelyene Sulfide (PPS), Polyphenelyene Oxide
(PPO) and Polycarbonate/Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene
(PC/ABS). Part of the process is to screw the lens barrel
into the mount. For fixed focus modules the lens barrel is
screwed or unscrewed during the focus test depending on
the test methodology. Choosing the right material
combination between the mount and the lens barrel will
reduce particle generation during this barrel insertion and
focus test process. Another key criteria for selecting the
right material for mount and lens barrel is its ability to
withstand the adhesive cure temperature. Temperature
under deflection under a certain load for each of these
materials is shown in Table 6. It is seen that LCP and PPS
have relatively higher temperature of deflection compared
to that of PPO and PC/ABS. For this reason, LCP and PPS
are being widely used for mount and lens barrel. A test was
done on mount and barrel each made of LCP and PPS
material. Simulated focus operation was performed on each
of these mounts and barrels and then the IR glass was
checked for particles. It was observed that LCP material
produced no particle on the IR glass while PPS produced a
small percentage of particles. Table 7 and Figure 9
summarize the results.
Similar tests should be done before choosing lens
element material as well. Examples of lens element
candidates with their processability and maximum service
temperature are shown in Table 8. Among the plastic
materials, Zeonex is being widely used for its good
workability and relatively high service temperature.
In the case of IR filter, particles can be generated from
the IR coat material. Depending on the coat material and
process, it may produce flakes during process conditions
and also during reliability test conditions. IR filter from
each supplier should be tested under the conditions
corresponding to the actual process and reliability test
conditions to ensure integrity of the coat material.
1395
Figure 9. Particle related performance for PPS (left picture)
and LCP (right) as materials for mount and barrel.
Assembly Process
The assembly process flow for a camera module is
shown in Figure 10. The process is broken into 5 separate
flows for wafer, substrate, mount, flex circuit, and module.
Details of camera module process flow have been described
in the paper published in 2004 SMTA [2]. For fixed focus
megapixel camera module the process flow is no different.
For auto focus modules the focus and lock is obviously not
required.
Careful consideration must be given to cleaning and
inspection steps within the process flow. All jigs, fixtures,
carrier frames, and trays must be cleaned prior to use in the
class 100 clean room environment. Use of ultrasonic wet
cleaning process is common. Among the 5 separate flows
shown in figure 10, flows for wafer, substrate and mount
are most critical from a particle related defect stand point.
This is due the fact that the sensor die is exposed during
these process steps. These sub-processes are also done in
class 100 clean room environment except for the mark and
singulation process.
For the wafer flow, particles can be generated during
backgrinding process from the backgrinding tape that is
attached on the top surface of the die. Standard
backgrinding tape can be used if the wafer goes through a
wet cleaning process before die attach. The standard wet
cleaning during the saw process is adequate. Si particles
can be a major source of particle contamination during the
wafer saw process. The standard wet cleaning during the
saw process may not be adequate for removing Si dust.
Two steps can be taken to reduce Si partcile contamination
from the saw process. First, the saw process must be
optimized to reduce Si dust accumulation on the wafer. For
example it has been observed that a two pass saw shows
less Si dust related contamination vs. standard one pass saw
process. Secondly, a separate wet cleaning process after
wafer saw can further reduce any Si particle contamination.
Sawn wafers should be inspected to ensure cleanliness
before die attach process.
As mentioned in the material section, use of laminate
substrate for camera module is increasing. These substrates
must be cleaned using a wet ultrasonic cleaning process
2005 Electronic Components and Technology Conference
 Wafer Flow flow, the IR glass saw process should use a similar cleaning
Wafer Mount process as the wafer saw process. After the IR glass is
Backgrind attached to the mount, the mount sub-assembly is attached
De-tape
to the substrate sub-assembly which has the sensor die
attached and wirebonded. Before the mount attach, the
Wafer Mount
mount should also be cleaned and inspected. Wet cleaning
Wafer Saw Substrate Flow after wirebond and before mount attach can significantly
Wafer Clean Substrate Clean Mount Flow reduce particle and improve yield.
Inspection Die Attach Glass Mount The remainder of the module flow and flex attach flow is
done in class 100K room. At this point the camera module
Cure Glass Saw
is much less susceptible to particle defect as sensor die and
Dry/wet Clean Dry/wet Clean the IR filter are already encased.
Wire Bond Glass Attach Cleaning frequency and methodology of equipment in
Dry/wet Clean Cure clean room should be optimized. For example if adhesive
cure ovens are not cleaned regularly, they can be a large
Inspection Dry/wet Clean
source of particle contamination.
Mount Attach Inspection Process flow shown in Figure 10 has many inspection steps
Clean to ensure module cleanliness. As process conditions are
Inspection improved (proven by higher assembly yield), some of the
inspection steps can be eliminated or reduced to a sampling
Cure
basis.
Barrel Insert The listed processes all have specific requirements that
Laser Mark impact the size and / or optical performance of the camera
Singulate module. Some of these requirements exceed current
manufacturer’s standard capability. Hence, advanced
Flex Circuit Flow Module Flow
development with latest state-of-the-art equipment is
required. Some of the critical process capability
Flex Circuit Flow Image Test
requirements are shown in Table 9.
Screen Print Functional Test
Pick & Place Focus Process Attribute Requirement
Reflow Barrel Lock
wafer thickness 150µm
Singulate Flex Attach total thickness
O/S Test Backgrind < 10µm
variation
Pack / Ship damage to microlens
zero
on die
Figure 10. Typical process flow x,y placement +/- 25µm
Die
Attach die tilt +/- 0.2 degrees
before die attach. After die attach process the units should
outgassing zero
be cleaned again. Dry cleaning can be done with ionized
Wire
air-blow and vacuum pull on each sensor attached to min die / mount space 300µm
Bond
substrate. This should be done with the substrate inverted
(die down configuration) so that particles will fall off easily. x,y placement +/- 50µm
Fig 11 shows a semi-auto dry cleaning equipment used Mount
after die attach process. Attach overall optical tilt +/- 0.5 degrees
Wet cleaning is usually done in an inert environment outgassing zero
using ultrasonics. Similar cleaning processing should be Flex
Max lens temperature 85C
repeated after the wirebond process as well. On the mount Attach
Table 9. Typical process capability.

Tilt control is critical for megapixel modules. Most of

the digital still cameras and digital SLR cameras have room
for self-alignment and tilt adjusting capability. Camera
modules in cell phones do not have the room to do this.
Whereas VGA modules require about <+/-0.7o of
maximum tilt, 1.3 to 2 megapixel modules may require <+/-
0.5o of maximum tilt. This means that tighter control will
Figure 11. Semi-auto dry cleaning equipment using be required for die attach and lens holder attach process.
deionized airblow and vacuum. Lens barrel tilt will also need to be controlled. One way to
1396 2005 Electronic Components and Technology Conference
reduce tilt is by changing material from paste type to film
type. Tape has better inherent tilt performance compared to
that of paste. Table 10 lists comparison data of a 8mm x
8mm die tilt for film and paste die attach materials. It
shows a magnitude of tilt improvement for film adhesive
material. However tilt performance using paste die attach is
well within the spec limit of <+/-0.5 o. As pixel sizes
increases and goes beyond 3 megapixel, film die attach can
be used if tighter tilt control is required.
Die Tilt (degrees)
Film Die Attach Paste Die Attach
Min 0.00 0.05
Max 0.03 0.18
Avg 0.01 0.09
SD 0.01 0.04
Sample size 20 20
Table 10. Die tilt comparison for film and paste die attach
material.
Discipline In Assembly Line
Discipline of line engineers and operators is another key
factor for reducing particle related defects. For example,
other than the standard practice of wearing appropriate
clean room attire and using air-shower, the number of
people on the line at any given time should be strictly
controlled. Humans are organic particle generators and
fewer people in the line and less direct handling of the
device is best. Continuous particle reduction effort is also a
part of the discipline of line engineers as well as operators.
At a basic level, this discipline is no more than a total
awareness of the required line cleanliness and its
continuous improvement.
Continuous Particle Reduction Effort
Continuous particle reduction has to be an integral part
of the assembly process. To improve yield, the particle
related failure analysis must be performed on a regular
basis. Particles should be analyzed using EDX or similar
methodology and equipment with the objective of finding
the source of each particle. Once the source is identified,
steps must be taken to reduce the particle related failure.
For image sensor modules, it is imperative that failure
analysis lab is an integral part of the assembly line.
Example of this continuous particle reduction methodology
is described in the section below.
Example Of Particle Reduction Methodology
Lower yield was observed during a production ramp
phase. First pass analysis showed particle related defect. A
detailed failure analysis was done. Objective was to
identify the particles, find the sources of the particles and
take action to eliminate or reduce them to improve overall
production yield.
1397
Figure 12. Examples of particle found on die surface.
EDX Result Particle Q'ty
%
Contribution
Substrate 15 45%
IR Filter Related 5 15%
Sticky Tape 5 15%
Si Dust 4 12%
Not Identified 2 6%
Wafer Related 1 3%
Environmental Related 1 3%
Total 33 100%
Table 11. EDX analysis result summary for particle related
defect.
Figure 12 shows examples of particle found on the die
surface. EDX analysis was done to identify the type of
particles and their sources. Table 11 shows the summary of
the findings. It can be seen that 87% of the particle
generated came from laminate substrate, IR filter, sticky
tape (used for wafer saw), and Si dust. Out of these 75% is
from substrate, IR filter and sticky tape. These are shown in
red in Table 11. The steps taken to reduce particles from
these 3 sources are described below.
Fibers generated from the routing process of the
laminate substrate were the main cause of the substrate
related particle. Figure 13 shows the routing areas on a
laminate substrate. Ultrasonic cleaning of substrate was
introduced before die attach. Figure 14 shows a ultrasonic
cleaning equipment. Additionally, the orientation of the
magazines that hold the substrates was changed. Originally,
the magazines was handled vertically and the substrates
were stacked one on top of the other separated by rails. In
this configuration the susceptibility of particle falling on a
device from the substrate above was higher. So the
magazine handling was changed from vertical to horizontal.
This is illustrated in Figure 15.
Particles related to IR glass were found to be generated
during the IR glass pick and place process. The IR glasses
typically come in rectangular or square sheets. The glass
2005 Electronic Components and Technology Conference
 Before

IR Filter IR Filter
Tape.

Ejector Pin.
After

Figure 13. Routing area of laminate substrate can IR Filter IR Filter

potentially generate particles. Tape.

Ejector Pin.
Figure 16a. Tape is stretched to ensure gap between IR
filters.

Around 2.5mil

Figure 14. Ultrasonic cleaning equipment for laminate

substrates. Figure 16b. Resultant gap of 2.5 mils between adjacent IR
glass after tape stretch.

Figure 15. Magazine handling was changed from vertical to

horizontal for improving particle on die.

sheets are mounted on to saw tape and then sawn into

individual sizes. Then the sawn IR filters are attached into
the mount or lens holder. It was observed that even though
the glass piece parts were completely sawn, they were
still touching the adjacent IR glass piece parts and were
generating particles during the pick-up operation. The
corrective action was to expand the tape after the saw
operation to ensure gap between adjacent IR glass filters.
This is illustrated in Figures 16a and 16b. A second step
taken was to reverse the IR glass attach (on mount)
sequence as shown in figure 17. The purpose is to ensure
that no particle falls on the IR glass that is already attached.

Figure 17. IR glass attach sequence was reversed to reduce

the potential of particle on die.
To reduce particle caused by sticky tape, 2 steps were
taken as follows.
1398 2005 Electronic Components and Technology Conference
 a) spin-rinse-dry process was implemented before
wafer backgrind.
b) wafer cleaning process was optimized.
To see the effectiveness of implementing these changes,
similar particle analysis was done again. The contribution
of particle related to substrate was reduced from 45% to
14%. The contribution of particle due to IR glass attach
process went down from 15% to 7%. The overall assembly
yield was significantly increased.
Similar methodology must be applied on a continuous
basis to reduce particle related defects for megapxiel image
sensor assembly.
Optics Selection For Megapixel
A detailed discussion on optical criteria and
requirements that drives the selection of multi element
hybrid lens system for megapixel camera module is beyond
the scope of this paper. However, a brief discussion on
optics for megapixel is in order.
Megapixel camera modules require a higher
performance lens system which translates to a higher
number of lens elements. To keep the module cost low,
plastic lens elements are widely used. However, some of
the megapixel lens performance requirements push the
system to a hybrid of plastic and glass elements. 3 plastic
element lens and 1 glass/2 plastic hybrid lens systems are
common for 1.3 and 2.0 megapixel module respectively.
Figure 18 shows a cross section of a 3 plastic lens system.
The number of elements will increase further for above 2
megapixel module.
Figure 18. Cross-section of a 3 plastic element lens system.
Geometry is key factor on designing a lens system for a
particular camera module. Limited space in the shrinking
mobile phones dictates the height of the module. The latest
lens systems for the 1.3 and 2 megapixel modules are being
constantly pushed for reduced height which greatly impacts
the optical performance. There is a trade off between the
height of the lens system and the optical performance.
Within given constraints the performance of the lens system
depends on the design and manufacturing capability of lens
manufacturer.
Beyond 2 megapixel camera module, auto focus and
zoom function will be required to deliver the true capability
of these image sensors. Several technologies to obtain auto
focus and zoom are now available in the market. There is
research going on for new technology solutions as well.
1399
Example of a auto focus and zoom lens is shown in Figure
19.
Test
The majority of megapixel camera modules in mobile
phones today are fixed focus. The lenses are in a fixed
position with respect to the image sensor. In the focus test
operation, the lens barrel assembly is set to the proper
position above the image sensor surface. The goal is to
achieve the “optimum” focus for the module. This
optimum position can be defined in several ways, and is
generally a compromise between seeing the best image at
close range versus far away.
Zoom Zoom
In Out
Drive Gear
Worm Screw
Actuator
Motor Control
Circuit
Glass Lens
Three Plastic
Lenses
Figure 19. Example of a 3 element zoom lens system.
Source: Prismark
As mentioned in the previous section, for camera
module resolution of 2 mega pixel and above, fixed focus
lens will no longer provide an adequate image. Auto focus
kens system will be required. In this case, the focus test
will be a dynamic test.
For megapixel modules, the challenge on test comes
due to two primary factors. First, the test time is longer due
to more data processing requirement. Table 12 shows an
estimation of test time for 1.3 and 2.0 megapixel compared
to a VGA. For this comparison, it is assumed that the test
algorithm and CPU speed of tester is equal for all three
resolutions. It can be seen that 1.3 and 2.0 megapixel image
sensor test can take 4 to 7 times longer respectively
compared to that of VGA. Higher data transmission rate
2005 Electronic Components and Technology Conference
and processing speed will be necessary to keep the test time summarizes the passing criteria and test results showing
short, especially for very high megapixel that all samples passed the reliability requirements.

Total number Test Time Reliability SampleS

Resolution Pixel Array
of pixels Factor Condition Result
VGA 640x480 307200 1 item ize
1.3 megapixel 1280x1024 1310720 4 -40℃ -> 85℃( each
2.0 megapixel 1600x1200 1920000 6 Temp Cycle 45 ea PASS
30 min, 24 cycles)
Table 12. Test time factors for 1.3 and 2.0 megapixel
compared to VGA camera modules. High Temp. &
Humidity 80 ℃ / 80% / 72 Hr 45 ea PASS
modules. Secondly, due to the smaller pixel size and higher Storage
number of pixels, the test pass-fail criteria is more stringent. Low Temp. & -40 ℃ / 96 Hr
This issue goes back to the particle control criteria. The test Humidity (natural dry, for 3 45 ea PASS
yield can be improved by tighter control of particle. Storage hours)
There is no industry standard for focus and test method. 1.5m drop, 1 X 6
Drop Test 5 ea PASS
Details of the basics of focus and test methodology has plane
been described in the paper published in 2004 SMTA 20 ~ 2000 Hz, 3 axis
conference [2]. Vibration 5 ea PASS
(X,Y,Z)
Reliability FPC & PCB
There are no industry standards for reliability test Adhesive Peeling Test: 0.8 Kg 5 ea PASS
requirements for camera module in general. The passing Strength
criteria is also defined by each image sensor manufacturer. Holder
These are discussed in detail in the SMTA conference
Adhesive 3 Kg 5 ea PASS
paper [2].
Strength
Lens Torque 0.4 Kg 5 ea PASS
Items Materail Description
Table 14. Reliability test conditions, passing criteria and
Substrate Laminate PCB results.
Flexible Circuit Propriteary
Die attach Conclusions
Ablstik 2035SC 1) Cross-section of a typical megapixel camera module
adhesive
Glass attach & with 3 element lens was shown. The design can vary
depending on types of modules required by end market.
mount attach Ablstik 8387B
2) The need for improved particle control for megapixel
adhesive
camera module was identified.
UV adhesive Loctite 190024 (3106) 3) It is critical to monitor and control actual cleanliness of
Mount and lens class 100 clean room. The layout of the clean room is
LCP also important. Inside of equipment must also be kept
barrel
IR glass Propriteary clean and methods for doing this were described.
4) Equipment design and selection is key for improved
Wire 1.0 MIL(25.40UM) GOLD WIRE
particle control.
Solder paste F10 SN63-90M4 (TYPE 4) 5) Material selection criteria to reduce particle generation
Capacitor 4 pieces were discussed.
6) Need for wet and dry cleaning and inspection during
Flux CHEMICAL, RMA 615 PEN FLUX the assembly process was described.
Connector Propriteary 7) Engineering discipline is a key element to maintain and
control low particle in the clean room.
8) Continuous particle reduction effort must be an integral
Table 13. Material description for 1.3 megapixel camera
part of the assembly process.
module.
9) Example of a methodology of particle source
identification, and process modification to reduce these
A reliability test was done to qualify a 1.3 megapixel
defects was shown.
camera module. The camera module shown in Figure 3 was
10) Optical selection for megapixel module was briefly
manufactured (but one die was used instead of 2 die) using
discussed.
the process shown in Figure 10. The module was a 32 pin
11) Test for megapixel module may follow similar
8mm x 8mm package. Materials for the 1.3 megapixel
methodology as that of VGA module but test time can
camera module are listed in Table 13. Table 14
1400 2005 Electronic Components and Technology Conference
 be longer. Pass/fail criteria is also more stringent for
megapixel image sensors.
12) There is no industry standard for reliability
requirements for megapixel camera module.
13) Reliability results of a 1.3 megapixel camera module
were provided.
Acknowlegement
The authors would like to acknowledge all the members
of the Amkor Technology Korea and Amkor Technology
Taiwan teams for contributing to this paper.
References
[1] Shellcase, IC Packaging Technology Expo, January,
2003.
[2] Robert Darveaux, et al , “Camera Module Packaging
Technology”, Proceedings of 2004 SMTA International
Conference, pp. 27-38.

1401 2005 Electronic Components and Technology Conference