A workflow for comprehensive micro-characterization of active optical devices is outlined. It contains structural as well as functional investigations by means of CT, LM and SEM. The method is demonstrated for a white LED which can be still be operated during characterization.
In failure analysis, device characterization and reverse engineering of light emitting diodes (LEDs), and similar electronic components of micro-characterization, plays an important role. Commonly, different techniques like X-ray computed tomography (CT), light microscopy (LM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) are used separately. Similarly, the results have to be treated for each technique independently. Here a comprehensive study is shown which demonstrates the potentials leveraged by linking CT, LM and SEM. In depth characterization is performed on a white emitting LED, which can be operated throughout all characterization steps. Major advantages are: planned preparation of defined cross sections, correlation of optical properties to structural and compositional information, as well as reliable identification of different functional regions. This results from the breadth of information available from identical regions of interest (ROIs): polarization contrast, bright and dark-field LM images, as well as optical images of the LED cross section in operation. This is supplemented by SEM imaging techniques and micro-analysis using energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy.
This article demonstrates the potential and advantages of a combination of X-ray computed tomography (CT) with correlative light and electron microscopy (CLEM) for the exemplary in depth characterization of light emitting diodes (LED). With this technique it is possible to plan the micro preparation of the LED in such a fashion that while a cross section can be imaged microscopically the electrical functionality is preserved in the remainder of the specimen. The procedure has several unique features: firstly, the planned micro preparation by aid of the rendered volume of the entire sample obtained by CT; secondly, the observation of the LED by light microscopy (LM) with the complete variety of imaging techniques available (bright and dark field, polarization contrast, etc.); thirdly, observation of the LED in operation by LM; fourthly, observation of identical regions with the full variety of electron microscopy imaging techniques comprising secondary electron (SE) and back scatter electron (BSE) imaging, as well as energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy (EDX).
LEDs for illumination applications are designed to emit white light, although in certain applications color variability may be favorable. This broad emission cannot be achieved by emission from one compound semiconductor, since LEDs emit radiation in a narrow spectral band (circa 30 nm full width half maximum (FWHM)). Therefore white LED light is commonly generated by the combination a blue LED with phosphors which convert the short-wavelength radiation into broad emission over a large spectral range1. Color variable LED solutions usually make use of at least three primaries, which generally results in higher market prices.2
The use of either CT, LM or SEM is of course well established (e.g., in failure analysis for LEDs3–15), however the comprehensive and purposeful combination of all three techniques described here may offer new insights and will enable faster tracks towards meaningful characterization results.
From 3D microstructural analysis of the packaged device in CT the regions of interest (ROIs) can be identified and selected. With this non-destructive method, electrical connections can also be identified and considered for further preparation. The precise preparation of a 2D cross section allows investigations of the device in operation despite the destructive nature of this method. The cross section can now be characterized by CLEM16,17 which enables a very efficient and flexible characterization of identical ROIs with LM as well as SEM. By this approach, the advantages of both microscopy techniques can be combined. For example, a fast identification of ROIs in the LM is followed by high-resolution imaging in the SEM. But furthermore, the correlation of information from the LM (e.g., color, optical properties, particle distribution) with the visualization and analysis techniques of the SEM (e.g., particle size, surface morphology, element distribution) allows a deeper understanding of functional behavior and microstructure within a white LED.
1. Sample Preparation for X-ray Computed Tomography (CT)
2. CT Measurement Setup
3. Performance of CT Scan
NOTE: X-ray intensities may vary during the measurement. To compensate for these eventual fluctuations, a region of interest (ROI) window is placed where the X-rays will not interfere with the sample. This region is not affected by X-ray absorption through the sample, it is therefore the region with the highest measured intensity.
4. Reconstruction of Volume Information, Planning of Micro Preparation
5. Micro Preparation
6. LM Measurement Setup
7. LM Characterization
8. Sputter Coating
9. SEM Measurement Setup
10. SEM Analysis
11. Image Processing
The characterized LED is shown in Figure 1. It is a white emitting LED with a Chip size of 1 x 1 mm2 and a partially ceramic luminescent color converter. Gluing the LED in a slightly slanted position onto a carbon fiber bar avoids CT artifacts caused by sample symmetry (Figure 2). Results of the CT measurement allow for planning the position of the cross section of the sample, and ensure electrical operability after partial abrasion (Figure 3 and Figure 4). The rendered volume allows for the localization of functional structures, especially the electrical contacts that are easily distinguishable due to the high atomic numbers of the corresponding metals (Au, Cu, Sn), which lead to high contrast in the underlying X-ray images. If the basic architecture of the LED package is known, the volumes occupied by the active region (i.e., light emitting chip), phosphors, Zener diode and over-molded optics are easily identified. For further preparation, the sample is embedded in epoxy resin (Figure 5). Electrical contacts are provided to allow operation of the LED. Subsequently, the sample surface is removed and the cross section is polished according to the planning by CT. The cross section is imaged in the LM. Simultaneous brightfield illumination and LED emission (Figure 6) allow for the visualization of the blue emission from the LED chip and different phosphor materials, together with the structural setup of this device. Here the light spreading in the different functional layers, as well as the conversion of blue to red and yellow photons can be localized visually. The overlay of the brightfield contrast shows the position of Au contacts and packaging materials like Si.
After sputter coating of the sample surface and transferring the CLEM sample holder to SEM, the ROI is imaged with BSE contrast (Figure 7). Electron microscopy in correlation with LM allows the following deductions: The red emitting phosphor (high contrast) is embedded in a matrix (low contrast, probably silicone), which also functions as adhesive for the ceramic yellow emitting conversion layer on top. Particle sizes and morphologies in the conversion layers can easily be recognized, and the homogeneity of the distribution of the red emitting material can also be assessed. This analysis additionally gives an estimate of the relative quantities of the two phosphors.
Correlating the information of both methods (Figure 8) links the functional behavior to the microstructure of the device in an additional ROI. Here, finally, the deductions made in the previous steps as related to the nature of the materials identified can be confirmed. By quantitative EDS measurements, the exact constituents of this LED package can easily be identified: viz. InGaN active region, CaAlSiN3:Eu red emitting phosphor and Y3Al5O12:Ce yellow emitting ceramic phosphor.
Figure 1. LED. LED used for characterization. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 2. Specimen prepared for CT. LED mounted on carbon fiber bar in slanted position. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 3. Rendered volume. Rendered volume as result of CT measurement. Scales may be estimated from the square ceramic phosphor platelet covering the light emitting chip, which is 1 mm x 1 mm in size. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 4. Planned cross section. Virtual planning of cross sections ensures electrical operability. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 5. Embedded sample. Sample embedded in epoxy resin with electrical contact wires. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 6. LM image of cross section. Cross section of lit up LED imaged with simultaneous bright field illumination. Scale bar is 20 µm. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 7. SEM image of cross section. BSE image of the same ROI as in Figure 6. Scale bar is 20 µm. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 8. CLEM image of cross section. Overlay of LM and SEM images (from left to right): brightfield contrast in LM, Overlay of luminescence contrast (LM) and backscattered electrons (SEM) energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence mapping in SEM (Y light yellow, Al green, Ca red, Si turquoise, Ga blue, Au yellow, Ni pink, Cu brown). Scale bar is 10 µm. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
The advantages of this multimodal approach consist in the location-dependent correlation of the acquired data. The multimodal approach described here should be contrasted in subsequent analyses with each technique separately. For example, luminescence properties visible in LM can be linked to compositions as detected using SEM/EDS. The volume information obtained by CT can be extended with in depth analyses of cross-sections prepared in a targeted fashion. CT data also enable fast location of possible areas of interest in the subsequent microscopic investigations. The method described here is finally one of the few techniques which enable the linkage of optical properties to the microstructure and even to sub micrometer structural details. Optical defects or inhomogeneities can definitively and traceably be linked to structural or electrical defects of the devices.
The method proposed here relies on excellent and reliable data obtained by each of the imaging techniques used. This is critical especially in view of the CT results which must be precise enough to obtain clear structural information in an area as small as 1 mm3 and well below. If the uncertainties are too large successful planning for the location of planes suited for cross sections leaving the device electronically intact will be impossible. However, not only does the correct placement of the cross section ensures electrical operability, but, in addition, during the grinding and polishing processes care has to be taken in order to avoid short-circuiting the device by mechanical stress or unwanted particles (e.g., from grinding media) introduced into the sample surface.
If the LED proves to be short circuited despite correct placement of the cutting plane and careful preparation, it may be useful to re-inspect the surface for particles which cause this electrical failure. Careful polishing of the sample surface is recommended for troubleshooting in such cases, usually operability of the device can be established by this measure. Further improvement of the sample surface is possible by the use of ion milling techniques. Thereby the area observed microscopically will be optimally smooth and defect free. Once cross sections have successfully been prepared the handling of the CLEM sample holder has to be carried out with utmost diligence. Small movements of the sample relative to the holder will make overlays imprecise and undermine the advantages of the technique due to the fact that in those cases ROIs will again have to be found manually.
This workflow is limited to samples which allow for sufficient contrast differences in CT imaging (X-ray absorption may neither be too high nor too low). Samples with small form factors are preferred. The aspect ratio of the sample has to be such that not too small amounts need to be removed for cross section preparation. In this example 1.2 mm were removed, if this distance is much smaller more precise grinding or polishing techniques need to be applied, e.g., ion milling. The diffraction limit of light microscopy resolution can partially be overcome for different types of contrast by subsequent SEM imaging of the ROI.
This technique may prove extremely useful in micro-characterization, failure analysis or reverse engineering of micro electronic devices. Due to the possibility to virtually plan the destructive parts of the sample analysis, more precise and planned preparations can be carried out reducing analysis time and failures.
In the future the extension of this technique towards laser diodes and further semiconductor light sources is planned. The CLEM technique would also allow for the implementation of fluorescence microscopy, which can enable in depth analysis of the light emitting materials present (e.g., excitation and emission spectra or luminescence lifetimes). Focused Ion Beam (FIB) instruments could be used to speed up sample preparation, in this case samples would be prepared using FIB and the CLEM workflow (position calibration) would start in the FIB. Another way of working using FIB would be to destructively determine the sample's 3D structure in a FIB-SEM.
The results shown here are of an exemplary nature illustrating the technique as such. It is obviously possible to use each of the mentioned techniques in a far more sophisticated fashion, therefore we also expect further insights from future experiments.
The authors have nothing to disclose.
The authors kindly acknowledge financial support from the "Akademische Gesellschaft Lippstadt" as well as from the "Ministerium für Innovation, Wissenschaft und Forschung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen". Photographs in Figures 1, 2 and 5 courtesy to Markus Horstmann, Hamm-Lippstadt University of Applied Sciences.
X-Ray Computer Tomograph | General Electric | not applicable | type: nanotom s research edition |
acquisition software | General Electric | not applicable | phoenix Datos| x2 acquisition and corresponding manual |
reconstruction software | General Electric | not applicable | phoenix Datos| x2 acquisition and corresponding manual |
rendering software | Volume Graphics | not applicable | VGStudio Max 2.2 and corresponding manual |
grinder (manual) | Struers | 5296327 | Labopol 21 |
sample holder | Struers | 4886102 | UniForce |
grinder (automated) | Struers | 6026127 | Tegramin 25 |
epoxy resin/hardener | Struers | 40200030/40200031 | Epoxy fix resin / Epoxy fix hardener |
Ethanol | Struers | 950301 | Kleenol |
Light Microscope | Zeiss | not applicable | Axio Imager M2m |
Electron Microscope | Zeiss | not applicable | Sigma |
CLEM software | Zeiss | not applicable | Axio Vision SE64 Rel.4.9 and corresponding manual |
CLEM sample holder | Zeiss | 432335-9101-000 | Specimen holder CorrMic MAT Universal B |
SEM Adapter for CLEM sample holder | Zeiss | 432335-9151-000 | SEM Adapter for Specimen holder CorrMic MAT Universal B |
sputter coater | Quorum | not applicable | Q150TES |
EDS detector | Röntec | not applicable | X-Flash 1106 |
solder | Stannol | 535251 | type: HS10 |
LED | Lumileds | not applicable | LUXEON Rebel warm white, research sample |