J Fail. Anal and Preven.(2008)8: 524-532 Fig 5(a)Location of the failure blind via(type 2) e of the via 4.5 Morphologies by 3D and OM e) and(d) Cracking 40×and60 Fig. 6 SEM-EDS results of the failure blind via(a SEM micrograph of blind via. (b) Morphology of the cracking. (e)EDS analysis of the element in the crack At s Tota1100100 (c)2004006.0080010.00120014.00160018.00 deduced that the S impurity in the crack has a deleterious of plating. Electroless plating solutions generally contain effect on the blind via and lowers the bonding force among copper sulfate, complex agent, reducing agent, pH condi- different layers. tioning agent, and additives with s and N, and so forth. a From the process viewpoint, the blind vias are plated layer of copper is deposited on the wall of the blind via with several layers of copper after the drilling and desmear through a self-catalyzed oxidation-reduction reaction procedures to produce electrical conductivity on the sur- During electroless plating, complex copper ions(Cu2+- face of fiberglass and resins. As a result, the reliability of C)obtain electrons that are directly provided by reducin the vias may also be influenced by the process and quality agent and then turn into Cu 2 Springerdeduced that the S impurity in the crack has a deleterious effect on the blind via and lowers the bonding force among different layers. From the process viewpoint, the blind vias are plated with several layers of copper after the drilling and desmear procedures to produce electrical conductivity on the sur￾face of fiberglass and resins. As a result, the reliability of the vias may also be influenced by the process and quality of plating. Electroless plating solutions generally contain copper sulfate, complex agent, reducing agent, pH condi￾tioning agent, and additives with S and N, and so forth. A layer of copper is deposited on the wall of the blind via through a self-catalyzed oxidation-reduction reaction. During electroless plating, complex copper ions (Cu2?- C) obtain electrons that are directly provided by reducing agent and then turn into Cu. Fig. 6 SEM-EDS results of the failure blind via. (a) SEM micrograph of blind via. (b) Morphology of the cracking. (c) EDS analysis of the element compositions in the crack Fig. 5 (a) Location of the failure blind via (type 2). (b) Appearance of the via 4.59. (c) and (d) Cracking morphologies by 3D and OM. 409 and 609 528 J Fail. Anal. and Preven. (2008) 8:524–532 123