Presented at:
IMAPS 3^rd Advanced Technology Workshop
on
Integrated Passives Technology
Denver, CO
April 17-18, 1998

Revision 2

INTRODUCTION

Passive components (resistors, capacitors and inductors) are used widely in electronic circuits for:

• Energy storage
• Biasing
• Decoupling
• Terminating
• Networks (filters, antennas, etc.)
• Tuning (matching networks)
• Other functions…

and are designed into a circuit as a function of:

• Frequency (analog (RF) and digital)
• Power

based on:

• Values
• Tolerance
• Size
• Volume
• Level of knowledge and experience of product design team

Historically, the vast majority of passive functions have been discrete components mounted with leads into holes or surface mounted to a circuit board or substrate.

Recently, there has been a lot of interest in integrating these functions into or onto electronic structures. These integrated passive functions can be constructed in various ways, such as:

• On-chip
• Multiple value discrete passive components (arrays) mounted onto boards or substrates
• Built into the board or substrate structure
• Built into the active device package
• Combinations of the above

The central questions are:

What are the overall "life cycle" economics for these various "integrated" passive structures?

and

Who, in the supplier "food chain", is best suited to provide these structures:

• Active device manufacturer
• Device package manufacturer and/or package assembler
• "Traditional" passive component supplier
• Circuit board/substrate fabrication shops

for which applications:

• Low speed digital (< 100 MHz)
• High speed digital (>> 100 MHz)
• Low frequency RF (< 1000 MHz)
• High frequency RF (>> 1000 MHz)

This Life Cycle Cost Analysis attempts to take ALL cost factors into account, not just the materials and manufacturing costs so often used in cost analysis.

These Life Cycle Cost Factors include:

• Market Place Opportunity Costs
• Design/Development Costs
• Materials Costs
• Manufacturing Costs
• Overhead Costs
• Field Repair (Warranty) Costs
• Product Liability Costs
• End-of-Life Costs

There are as many different technologies and materials for accomplishing integrated passive structures, as there are people and companies looking at doing it. Therefore, this presentation will NOT attempt to evaluate each of them, but rather provide some guidelines for evaluating which technologies are best suited for which applications and why.

The overall economics analysis depends if you are the component supplier, the assembly house or the OEM.

 A STARTING THOUGHT

 Years ago, the famous Statesman, Thomas "Tip" O’Neil was quoted as saying:

"All politics is local"

Speaker of the House, Representative Thomas "Tip" O’Neil, Dem., Massachusetts

by analogy…

"All technology cost analysis is local"

(the NOT famous) Don Brown

The point is, before a new technology is considered to be economically viable, it must be evaluated taking into account ALL of the engineering, infrastructure, experiential and available knowledge factors, at that point in time, by that particular design/manufacturing management team for a particular product or series of products.

A LOOK BACK AT THE "GOOD OLD DAYS" OF SURFACE MOUNT TECHNOLOGY

In the early 80’s when surface mount technology was starting to take deep root in our industry, what was it that created such interest in widely adopting it? For sure, it wasn't component cost. In fact, in those days, surface mount components were many times more expensive than through-hole components and new surface mount assembly equipment costs were off the charts.

In the early days, the author sat in on and presented countless papers on why surface mount technology was so important to consider.

There were two main reasons:

1. The obvious reason – Smaller Size -- Physical size of a surface mount assembly was ½ to 2/3’s the size of it’s through hole equivalent – hence it created new markets and new products not possible before. (Smaller size often meant fewer boards and fewer board-to-board interconnect costs and reliability)
2. The not so obvious reason – Lower Overhead Costs -- Companies were able to build more units in the same or less factory floor space – hence allowing companies to increase production levels without adding more expensive "brick & mortar".

Some important secondary reasons:

1. It provided better electrical performance, because of shorter conductor paths.
2. In theory, it was a more reliable solder joint. (All of the data had not yet been collected at that time.)
3. In theory, it would provide improved overall yields. (Among other things, NO bent leads.)

As time went on, the cost of the components, assembly equipment and all of the other infrastructure came down, where today, in most cases, it is less expensive to build a surface mount assembly than a through hole assembly.

That whole "infrastructure build-out" process took more than 10-15 years.

 By analogy -- what are the reasons that will make integrated passives become a commercial success in the short term and the long term?

Below, we will look at each of the Life Cycle Cost factors to see where the "killer opportunities" may be hiding, and we will look at the economic comparisons of 2 very specific examples.

LIFE CYCLE COST FACTORS