摘要
比较了现行国军标中氦质谱检漏固定法与灵活法标准判据,在相同条件下,2种方法的判据有数量级上的差别。相同内腔体积的半导体分立器件、电子及电气元件和微电子器件,由于器件种类不同,封装、工艺等不同,细检漏的判据仍然存在较大差别。分析了美军标中氦质谱检漏标准判据,指出国军标和美军标氦质谱检漏标准判据存在一定的不适用性,建议元器件氦质谱检漏的标准判据应进一步改进。
Comparing the failure fixed methods and flexible methods in current national military standard, under the same condition, the magnitude difference of two methods results the confusion in actual applications. For the semiconductor discrete devices, electronic and electrical components and microelectronic devices which share the same volume cavity, there still exist bigger differences among their criteria of fine leak because of different styles, packages and processes. The standard criteria for fine leak in American military standard are analyzed. It is pointed out that there is still something not applicable in two standards. The standard criteria for helium mass spectrometer leak detection should be further improved.
出处
《太赫兹科学与电子信息学报》
2016年第3期481-485,共5页
Journal of Terahertz Science and Electronic Information Technology
关键词
氦质谱检漏
固定法
灵活法
漏率
封装
helium leak test
fixed methods
flexible methods
leak rate
package
