slope determined from a linear fit to our data, the activation
energy was found to be 0.87 eV/atom. Also plotted in Fig. 4
are values of k2 determined from previous, classical meas-
urements2 of interdiffusion in bulk Cu/Cu6Sn5 diffusion
couples at higher temperatures. Good agreement is found
between these two different measurements; the activation en-
ergy determined from Onishi’s work2 was 0.82 eV/atom. A
linear fit to the combined data sets for the bulk Cu/Cu6Sn5
diffusion couples and for our thin-film Cu/Cu6Sn5 diffusion
couples is included in Fig. 4, which has a slope correspond-
ing to an activation energy of 0.79 eV/atom. We can also
compare these results to a previous measurement5 of the ac-
tivation energy of 0.99 eV/atom made by Rutherford back-
˜
scattering on thin films. We calculate values of D from our
measured values of k2 using the equilibrium values1 of ⌬C,
2
˜
and G . We find from our DSC data D(cm /s)
ϭD0 exp(ϪE/kbT), where D0ϭ3.2ϫ10Ϫ2 cm2/s, and
Eϭ0.87 eV/atom, consistent with previous results.1–3
Differential scanning calorimetry studies of interdiffu-
sion in Cu/Cu6Sn5 diffusion couples have shown that the
driving force for interdiffusion is similar for both thin-film
and bulk diffusion couples. We have seen that the nucleation
of Cu3Sn begins at temperatures near 360 K, but that the
nucleation and initial growth of Cu3Sn is not a well-defined
Arrhenius process in these diffusion couples. At later times
we observed diffusion-limited growth of Cu3Sn at rates con-
sistent with those observed previously in classical diffusion
experiments.
FIG. 4. A plot of the logarithm of the reaction parameter, k2, vs the inverse
temperature multiplied times one thousand. ͑᭺͒ Values of k2 were calculated
from plots of the square of the integrated heat flow vs temperature. The heat
flow was measured by differential scanning calorimetry for 92 nm bilayer
composites similar to those of Fig. 1. The data of Fig. 3 were analyzed, as
were that of similar samples annealed at lower temperatures. ͑᭝͒ Values of
k2 obtained from Ref. 2, a previous study of diffusion in bulk samples.
We gratefully acknowledge discussions with James
Clum and the support of the National Science Foundation,
DMR-9202595, and DUE-9452604.
interface controlled growth kinetics,7 in which case the rate
would be constant as a function of time. However, these
observations are consistent with a continuing formation of
the Cu3Sn phase along the Cu/Cu6Sn5 interface.
1 Z. Mei, A. J. Sunwoo, and J. W. Morris, Metall. Trans. A 23, 857 ͑1992͒.
2 M. Onishi and H. Fujibuchi, Trans. JIM 16, 539 ͑1975͒.
3 P. T. Vianco, K. L. Erickson, and P. L. Hopkins, J. Electron. Mater. 23, 721
͑1994͒.
At long times during isothermal anneals the heat flow is
observed to decrease with time, consistent with diffusion-
limited growth kinetics.7–12 Integration of Eq. ͑3͒ with re-
spect to time indicates that x2ϭk2t. Using Eq. ͑2͒, we deter-
mine values of x2 from our measurement of the square of the
integrated heat flow, H2. Plots of H2 as a function of time
reveal straight line region corresponding to the portion of the
DSC curves where the magnitude of the heat flow signal is
decreasing ͑e.g., Fig. 3͒. From linear fits to these regions we
determined values of k2. In Fig. 4 we plot the logarithm of
values of k2 as a function of inverse temperature. Over the
temperature range of our data we observe a linear variation
of the logarithm of k2 with inverse temperature, consistent
with thermally activated ͑Arrhenius͒ interdiffusion. From the
4 A. K. Bandyopadhyay and S. K. Sen, J. Appl. Phys. 67, 3681 ͑1990͒.
5 K. N. Tu and R. D. Thompson, Acta Metall. 30, 947 ͑1982͒.
6 The Mechanics of Solder Alloy Interconnects, edited by D. R. Frear, S. N.
Burchett, H. S. Morgan, and J. H. Lau ͑Van Nostrand Reinhold, New
York, 1994͒.
7
¨
U. Gosele and K. N. Tu, J. Appl. Phys. 53, 3252 ͑1982͒.
8 D. Grosman and E. J. Cotts, Phys. Rev. B 48, 5579 ͑1993͒.
9 E. J. Cotts, in Thermal Analysis in Metallurgy, edited by R. D. Shull and
A. Joshi ͑Minerals, Metals, and Mining Society, Warrendale, PA, 1992͒,
pp. 299–328.
10 B. E. White, M. E. Patt, and E. J. Cotts, Phys. Rev. B 42, 11017 ͑1990͒.
11 E. Ma, L. A. Clevenger, and C. V. Thompson, J. Mater. Sci. 7, 1350
͑1992͒.
12 R. J. Highmore, R. E. Somekh, J. E. Evetts, and A. L. Greer, J. Less-
Common Met. 140, 353 ͑1988͒.
13 O. Kubaschewski and J. A. Catterall, Thermochemical Data of Alloys
͑Pergammon, New York, 1956͒.
Appl. Phys. Lett., Vol. 67, No. 19, 6 November 1995
Dreyer et al.
2797