1999
DOI: 10.1016/s0026-2714(99)00155-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Localization of defects in die-attach assembly by continuous wavelet transform using scanning acoustic microscopy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2006
2006

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…5(a)]. The one that propagates in the transparent layer interacts with the probe optical beam: While propagating, the acoustic strain induces a modulation of the optical refractive index through the photoelastic effect [see (2)]. Due to the difference between light and sound wave velocities (3e8 ms −1 versus typically thousands of meters per second), the medium is considered quasi-static for the probe light.…”
Section: Passivation Influence On the Signalmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…5(a)]. The one that propagates in the transparent layer interacts with the probe optical beam: While propagating, the acoustic strain induces a modulation of the optical refractive index through the photoelastic effect [see (2)]. Due to the difference between light and sound wave velocities (3e8 ms −1 versus typically thousands of meters per second), the medium is considered quasi-static for the probe light.…”
Section: Passivation Influence On the Signalmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, due to multiple reflections and scattering of the ultrasonic beam in multilayer samples, ultrasonic images can often appear very confused to be correctly interpreted and the nature of defects difficult to Manuscript be pointed out. Furthermore, for a good understanding of the images revealed by these techniques, signal processing methods are required [2]. Moreover, SAM resolution is limited by the acoustic frequency (tens of megahertz) to a few micrometers.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…After an original signal was decomposed by 5 levels, an approximate coefficient and five detailed coefficients were produced, each of them represent different scale of frequency information embedded in the original signal. The noise signals mainly distributed on the high frequency coefficient level, such as d1 and d2 [12][13][14][15][16], and defect echo appeared on comparatively low frequency coefficient level, d3-d5. Comparing different levels of each flaw signal, it can be find that waveform differences on d5 scale is more obvious than that on the other two high frequency scales, d3 and d4.…”
Section: Ultrasonic Testing and Signal Processingmentioning
confidence: 99%