International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 109 (2016) 74–86

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijmactool

A predictive model of grinding force in silicon wafer self-rotating

grinding
Jinglong Sun, Fei Qin n, Pei Chen n, Tong An
Beijing Key Laboratory of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, College of Mechanical Engineering and Applied Electronics Technology, Beijing University of
Technology, Beijing 100124, PR China

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Silicon wafer thinning is mostly performed by the method of self-rotating grinding. In grinding, the
Received 11 May 2016 grinding force is a crucial factor of affecting the grinding performance, form accuracy and surface/sub-
Received in revised form surface thinning quality. To control the thinning quality of ground wafer, grinding force is the most
21 July 2016
essential factor need to be controlled. However, no theoretical model is developed to correlate grinding
Accepted 26 July 2016
parameters to grinding force yet. In this article, a theoretical model is established based on the removal
Available online 27 July 2016
behavior of silicon, including cutting and sliding. For the first time, the effects of processing parameters,
Keywords: wafer radial distance and crystal orientation on grinding force are quantitatively described in a theo-
Silicon wafer retical model. Excess grinding force causes local damage of wafer in the form of subsurface cracks, as a
Grinding force
determinant factor on the quality of wafer. Therefore, nine sets of self-rotating grinding experiments
Thinning process
with variable processing parameters are performed, and the depth of subsurface cracks h are measured
Process parameters
Subsurface crack to evaluate the damage of ground wafer. Based on the scratching theory of single abrasive grain, the
Optimized process relationship between h and the normal grinding force Fnt is found, which is also validated by the ex-
perimental results. Finally, an optimized two-stage process is proposed to control subsurface cracks and
improve material removal rate simultaneously, according to the predictive model of grinding force.
& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction damages by controlling the grinding process parameters. The in-

fluences of the grinding parameters on the damages have been
Mono-crystalline silicon wafer is the predominant substrate investigated by many researchers [6,7]. The wheel rotational
material in Integrated Circuit (IC) manufacturing [1]. With in- speed, wafer rotational speed and feedrate were recognized as the
creasing high density and miniaturization of electronic devices, main effective parameters on wafer quality during grinding [8,9].
the demand for thin or ultra-thin wafers has been growing in re- Parametric studies are helpful to cognize and optimize the wafer
cent years [2]. For example, three-dimensional (3D) packaging or grinding condition. However, to understand the mechanism of
CMOS image sensors typically require the wafers with thickness of wafer grinding, grinding force is perceived as the most essential
less than 50 mm. The thickness of commercial wafer is several contributing factor on the grinding quality [10,11]. Based on clas-
hundred micrometers, such as the thickness of 12 in. silicon wafer sical fracture mechanics, the initialization and propagation of
is more than 700 μm, thus the wafer need to be thinned. Currently, subsurface cracks is directly controlled by the applied normal
the mechanical backside grinding based on wafer self-rotating is force, which is a component of grinding force. The grinding force,
especially the normal force, will cause the deformation of silicon
the most widely used method to remove the excessive silicon from
wafer and grinding wheel. Then the form accuracy, as an indicator
wafer backside [3,4]. During grinding process, the interaction be-
of ground wafer qualify, will also be affected. Grinding heat, as
tween the abrasive grains and wafer surface leads to unavoidable
another concern of grinding quality, is generated from the cutting
damages [5], like cracks, stacking fault, dislocations of silicon etc.
and sliding during grinding, and strongly influenced by the tan-
The damages may cause breakage or warpage of the wafer. The
gential grinding force. Overall, a thorough understanding on
damages need to be fully eliminated by subsequent polish process,
grinding force of wafer self-rotating grinding is a prerequisite to
which has extremely low manufacturing efficiency comparing
control the grinding quality.
with grinding. Therefore, a lot of effort was made to reduce the Numerous researchers made theoretical and experimental ap-
proaches to understand the grinding force for conventional cy-
n
Corresponding authors. lindrical or surface grinding. In early stage, the grinding force is
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (F. Qin), [email protected] (P. Chen). interrelated with processing parameters by empirical equations

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2016.07.009
0890-6955/& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 109 (2016) 74–86 75

Nomenclature f /Ns material removal thickness

k chip thickness coefficient
A average cutting area of single abrasive grain L circumference of the diamond segment
A
dS(r) material removal volume of single abrasive grain N number of effective cutting grains
B cross-sectional area Nw wafer rotation speed
dV instantaneous material removal volume Ns wheel rotation speed
dS(r) length of grinding trajectory at location r Qi undeformed chip cross-section area
dr infinitesimal increment of radial distance r wafer radial distance
da average grinding depth Rs wheel radius
E* equivalent elastic modulus Re equivalent radius of grain
E1, E2 Young's modulus of the wafer and diamond abrasive Re  Zw maximum grinding depth
grain S(r) length of the grinding trajectory
F total grinding force W width of diamond segment
Fn normal grinding force α rotation angle of the wheel
Ft tangential grinding force β shadowing factor
Fns normal sliding force γ grain volume ratio
Fnc normal cutting force 2πrNw/Ns material removal width
Fts tangential sliding force L, W, γ geometry parameters of the wheel
Ftc tangential cutting force υ1, υ2 Poisson's ratio for the wafer and diamond abrasive
Fnt total normal grinding force grain
Ftt total tangential grinding force m friction coefficient
f wheel feed rate ϕ ratio of tangential force to normal force

[12]. In grinding, the force is actually generated from two me- workpiece feed speed and grinding depth, respectively. In addi-
chanisms, the formation of chip and the sliding between work- tion, the regression analysis method based on experimental data
piece and grinding wheel. Werner [13] derived a grinding force was still used to establish the empirical model of grinding force
equation with two structural coefficients, which could be adjusted [19]. These approaches give very comprehensive understanding of
to interpret chip formation related force and sliding related force. the mechanism of grinding force.
However, Werner believed the two mechanisms cannot be dis- However, few study was carried on grinding force of silicon
tinguished clearly. Based on Werner's model, Li et al. [14] extended wafer self-rotating grinding. During wafer grinding, the grinding
Werner's model by separating the effects of cutting and sliding, wheel and wafer are both self-rotating, and the grinding wheel
and determined equations to express the cutting and sliding forces continuously engages the surface of wafer, as shown in Fig. 1(a).
respectively. Similarly, Younis et al. [15] proposed a grinding force The wheel plunges into a wafer from edge to center, and then
model composed of sliding force, cutting force and ploughing moves away from center to edge, finally leave the wafer. The grain
force. Based on Werner's and Li's theory, Tang et al. [16] developed trajectory follows hypocycloidal curve on the wafer surface. The
a grinding force model for the cylindrical grinding, which con- grinding depth keeps changing during grinding [7], because the
sidered the influences of wheel speed, workpiece feed speed and materials remove rate and relative cutting speed is inconstant
grinding depth. On the foundation of Younis’ theory, Durguma- from time to time. Therefore, the grinding force may not be a
hanti et al. [17] and Wang et al. [18] developed the grinding force constant during grinding. Accordingly, the grinding mechanism is
models for the cylindrical grinding, which also illustrated the re- different from conventional cylindrical grinding, which possess
lationship between the grinding force and the wheel speed, constant grinding depth and grinding force during grinding. The

Fig. 1. Schematic of self-rotating grinding mechanism. (a) Top view of the rotating wafer and wheel; (b) Cross-sectional view of wafer and wheel; (c) Components of grinding
force.
76 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 109 (2016) 74–86

grinding force model of cylindrical grinding cannot be directly force Ftc, as expressed in Eq. (3) [14].
applied to wafer self-rotating grinding, and further study of → → →
grinding force of silicon wafer self-rotating grinding needs to be Fn = Fns + Fnc (2)
performed.
→ → →
To acquire the grinding force in wafer grinding, some experi-
Ft = Fts + Ftc (3)
mental monitorings of the grinding force were carried out. Couey
et al. [10] monitored the normal grinding force during silicon During grinding process, the grinding force is fully dependent
wafer grinding by integrating the capacitive displacement sensor on the grinding depth [24,25]. Hence, a new model of grinding
into the work spindle. The spindle sensor only gave average force, depth, taking the grain trajectory into account, is derived based on
which cannot reflect the local force during material removal. Young's [26] and Zhou's [27] researches. On the basis of the model
Pahler et al. [11] integrate the piezoelectric sensor into the wheel of grinding depth, combining with the grinding theory, the pre-
segment to investigate the influence of the wafer radial distance dictive model of grinding forces including sliding force and cutting
on the grinding force during grinding. The single crystal silicon force is established.
wafer is an anisotropic material, and the crystal orientation may
be a factor influencing the grinding force [20]. The various 2.1. Grinding depth in silicon wafer grinding
grinding force caused by crystal orientation cannot be detected
experimently. The experimental measurement could supply im- For a random distribution of abrasive grains on wheel surface,
portant information, while it has some limitations, like time- the protrusion height of abrasive grains is random, the abrasive
consuming, the limited number of mounted sensors, vibration of grains with bigger size produce deeper cut, and the abrasive grains
shaft etc. The finite element method was an effective approach to with smaller size produce finer cut. Since the random distributed
analyse the grinding process [21], however, no related researches grains overlap and interact with each other, an average grinding
of wafer self-rotating grinding were found yet. The reason could be depth seems to be reasonable to characterize the grinding process
limited understanding of grinding force mechanisms of self-ro- [26]. Sharp et al. [28] developed a model of the average grinding
tating grinding. Therefore, based on the research achievements on depth for cylindrical grinding. The basic idea of Sharp's model is
conventional grinding mechanism and experimental study, a the volume of material removal can be calculated from two dif-
theoretical model will be helpful to systematically understand the ferent approaches, which will be equal to each other. One ap-
grinding force. proach is computing the removed volume cutting by a single
In this article, a predictive model of grinding force for self-ro- abrasive grain, by multiplying estimated number of effective cut-
tating grinding is developed by dividing the grinding force into ting grain, then the total volume can be obtained. The average
two components: the sliding force and cutting force. The model grinding depth da is included in the computation. The other ap-
considers the influences of the processing parameters, wafer radial proach is calculating the volume from grinding parameters. The
distance and crystal orientations on the grinding force. To opti- two approaches make a connection between grinding depth and
mize the processing parameters, experimental measurements of grinding parameters, and then a model of grinding depth is
the subsurface crack were conducted. The relationship between established.
the normal grinding force and the subsurface crack depth was Based on Sharp's model, Young et al. [26] and Zhou et al. [27]
investigated. On the basis of the predictive model of grinding force introduced the wafer grinding parameters and wafer radial dis-
and experimental results, an optimization method of damage tance to the model, as used for silicon wafer self-rotating grinding.
control is proposed. However, the model didn't include the effect of grain trajectory on
the mechanism of material removal. The volume cutting by a
single grain is determined by multiplying the cutting area of the
2. Modeling of grinding force grain with the length of trajectory. The aforementioned model
oversimplified the trajectory as a straight line from edge to center,
In order to model the grinding force, the material remove be- as the same as the radius. Actually, the trajectory of a single grain
havior needs to be studied firstly. Fig. 1 illustrates the set-up of is part of a hypocycloidal curve [29]. The grinding marks left after
silicon wafer self-rotating grinding and the grinding mechanism. grinding is exactly illustrated the trajectory of a grain. By con-
Fig. 1(a) shows the top view of self-rotating wheel and wafer, sidering a single grain, Chidambraram et al. [30] developed a
which are rotating clockwise and anti-clockwise respectively. Fig. 1 predictive model of grinding trajectory by introducing two co-
(b) is a cross-sectional view of wheel and wafer. The randomly ordinate systems, for rotating wheel and wafer separately, to de-
distributed abrasive grains on the wheel interact with wafer sur- scribe the relative motion. The model is important to simulate the
face. As shown in Fig. 1(c), by considering a single abrasive grain, grinding trajectory, while it is relatively complicated to apply in
the grinding force is composed of the normal grinding force Fn and developing force model. In this article, the grinding trajectory is
tangential grinding force Ft, which are main contributors to the simplified as arcsine curve whose curvature is approximately
total force, as expressed in Eq. (1). The lateral force Fl is neglected, equal to that of contact curve between the wheel and wafer sur-
since it is much less than normal and tangential grinding forces, face. The assumption of this simplification is only considering the
and it contributes less to the total force [22]. The grinding process rotation of the wheel in one coordinate system, since the wheel
composes sliding of abrasive grain on wafer and cutting of wafer. rotation speed is much greater than wafer rotation. To obtain the
The effect of ploughing is trivial, and it is neglected [23]. length of the grinding trajectory, the rotation angle α of the wheel
→ → → is calculated based on the geometrical relationship as shown in
F = Fn + Ft (1) Fig. 2(a), which can be expressed as Eq. (4).
where F is the total grinding force, Fn is the normal grinding force ⎛ r ⎞
and Ft is the tangential grinding force. Considering the effects of α = 2arcsin⎜ ⎟
⎝ 2R s ⎠ (4)
sliding and cutting, the normal grinding force can be divided into
the normal sliding force Fns and normal cutting force Fnc, as ex- where r is the wafer radial distance, Rs is the wheel radius. Then,
pressed in Eq. (2). Similarly, the tangential grinding force can be the length of the grinding trajectory, S(r), can be obtained by the
divided into the tangential sliding force Fts and tangential cutting product of α and Rs, as shown in Eq. (5).
 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 109 (2016) 74–86 77

Fig. 2. Expression of material removal behavior: (a) Material removal of a single abrasive grain along grinding mark; (b)Grinding mark produced by Eq. (5); (c) Illustration of
average cutting area; (d) Material removal along radial direction related to processing parameters.

⎛ r ⎞ material removal volume of single abrasive grain, as shown in

S( r ) = Rs⋅α = 2Rs⋅arcsin⎜ ⎟, 0 ≤ r ≤ R w Fig. 2(c), N is the number of effective cutting grains and β is the
⎝ 2R s ⎠ (5)
shadowing factor, which is estimated as 0.66 for wafer rotating
where Rw is the wafer radius. Based on Eq. (5), Fig. 2(b) is a grinding [26].
schematic of grinding trajectories on the silicon wafer. The shape dS(r) can be obtained by differentiating Eq. (5), as expressed in
of the grinding trajectory is determined by the arc length of the Eq. (7)
wheel, and the distance between two neighboring trajectories is −1/2
⎛ r2 ⎞ ⎛ r2 ⎞
determined by the 2πRw(Nw/Ns) [30]. dS(r ) = ⎜⎜ 1 − ⎟ dr ≅ ⎜⎜ 1 + ⎟⎟dr
2 ⎟
At certain radial distance r, the instantaneous material removal ⎝ 4R s ⎠ ⎝ 8Rs2 ⎠ (7)
volume dV can be obtained from Eq. (6).
where dr is the infinitesimal increment of radial distance.
dV = A⋅dS(r )⋅N⋅β (6) To determine the average cutting area A and the number of
effective cutting grains N, the abrasive grains need to be ap-
where dS(r) is the length of grinding trajectory at location r, A is
proximated as spherical [31], as shown in Fig. 3. In Fig. 3, W is the
the average cutting area of single abrasive grain, A
dS(r) is the
width of diamond segment, Z¼0 is the wheel working surface and
Z¼Zw is the mean position of wafer surface. For a continuous
grinding in this study, the abrasive grains whose centers posi-
tioned at (Re  Zw) rZr0 will remove the wafer surface mate-
rial, otherwise the abrasive grains are not be able to cut the wafer
surface. Thus, the number of the effective cutting grains is given by
Eq. (8) [28].
3L⋅W ⋅γ
N= ( Re − Z w )
4π⋅Re3 (8)

where L is the circumference of the diamond segment on the

wheel, W is the width of diamond segment, γ is the grain volume
ratio, which can be approximated as 0.375 [27], Re is the equiva-
lent radius of grain and Re Zw ¼ dmax, which is the maximum
Fig. 3. Simplified geometry for abrasive grains grinding (not to scale). grinding depth.
78 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 109 (2016) 74–86

For a random distribution of cutting grains, the area A is eval- ⎛ ⎞0.4

uated by taking the average over all cutting depths from zero to ⎜ ⎟
r⋅f ⋅Nw
Re  Zw. At a fixed value of Zw in Fig. 3, the following geometric Re − Z w = 4.88Re⋅⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎛ r2 ⎞ ⎟
relations are obtained ⎜ L⋅W ⋅γ⋅Ns2⋅⎜ 1 + ⎟⎟
⎝ ⎝ 8Rs2 ⎠ ⎠ (19)
Z = R e( 1 − cos θ ) + Zw , 0 ≤ θ ≤ θmax, Re = dmax + Zw, d
For random distributed grains, the grinding depth d conforms
Z /dθ = Resin θ , A( Z ) = R e2( θ − sin θ cos θ ) (9) to uniform distribution in the range of zero to Re  Zw, the average
grinding depth da is half of the maximum grinding depth Re  Zw,
The value of A can be evaluated
thus Eq. (19) can be written as
1 Zmax
A=
R e − Zw
∫Z A( Z )dZ ⎛ ⎞0.4
w
⎜ ⎟
r⋅f ⋅Nw
1 θmax
R e2( θ − sin θ cos θ )⋅R e sin θ da = 2.44Re⋅⎜ ⎟
=
R e − Zw
∫0 ⎜ ⎛
⎜ L⋅W ⋅γ⋅Ns2⎜ 1 +
r2 ⎞ ⎟
⎟⎟
⎝ ⎝ 8Rs2 ⎠ ⎠ (20)
R e3 ⎛ sin3θmax ⎞
dθ = ⎜⎜ sin θmax − θmax cos θmax − ⎟⎟
R e − Zw ⎝ 3 ⎠ Eq. (20) describes the grinding depth da with very compre-
(10)
hensive information, as the processing parameters f, Nw, Ns, geo-
where the angle θmax can be calculated by metry parameters of the wheel L, W, γ. The term of 1 + r 2/8Rs2
R − Zw reflects the consideration of grain trajectory. When the processing
cos θmax =1− e parameters and wheel geometry parameters are constant, da will
Re (11)
be a function of r, in another word, da keeps unchanged at the
Expanding the sine and cosine terms in Eq. (10), we have same distance from the wafer center.
sin3θmax
sin θmax − θmax cos θmax −
3 2.2. Sliding force of an abrasive grain in wafer rotating grinding
2 5 11 7 2 5
= θmax − θmax +⋯≅ θmax
15 315 15 (12) The normal sliding force Fns for a single abrasive grain is found
to be expressed as a function of da, based on Hertzian elastic
θmax R − Zw contact theory, as shown in Eq. (21) [18].
cos θmax ≅ 1 − =1− e
2 Re
2
⎛ 2R − 2Z ⎞1/2 16da3⋅Re⋅E*
θmax =⎜ e w
⎟ Fns =
⎝ Re ⎠ 9 (21)
(13)
where E* is the equivalent elastic modulus, given by
Substituting Eqs. (9), (11), (12) and (13) into Eq. (10) gives
1/E* = (1 − υ12) /E1 + (1 − υ22) /E2, υ1 and υ2 are the Poisson's ratio for
2R e3 ⎛ 2( R − Z ) ⎞2.5 the wafer and diamond abrasive grain, respectively. E1 and E2 are
e w
A= ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
15( R e − Z w) ⎝ Re the Young’s modulus of the wafer and diamond abrasive grain,
⎠ (14)
respectively.
Substituting Eqs. (7), (8) and (14) into Eq. (6) gives Substituting Eq. (20) into Eq. (21) gives

LWγ ⎛ 2R e − 2Z w ⎞ ⎛ r2 ⎞
2.5
5.08Re2 (r⋅f ⋅Nw)0.6
d V = β⋅ ⋅⎜ ⎟ ⋅⎜⎜ 1 + ⎟⎟dr Fns =
1 − υ12 1 − υ 22
⋅
10π ⎝ Re ⎠ ⎝ 8Rs2 ⎠ (15) + ⎛ r2 ⎞0.6
E1 E2 (L⋅W ⋅γ )0.6⋅Ns1.2⋅⎜ 1 + ⎟
⎝ 8Rs2 ⎠ (22)
On the other approach, instantaneous material removal volume
dV at certain radial distance r can also be calculated by multiplying The tangential sliding force Fts, as a frictional force generated
the cross-sectional area B by the infinitesimal increment dr, as from normal sliding force, can be obtained by multiplying Fns by
shown in Fig. 2(d), which is expressed in Eq. (16). the frictional coefficient m, as expressed in Eq. (23).
2πr⋅Nw f Fts = μFns (23)
dV = B⋅dr = ⋅ dr
Ns Ns (16)
where m is the friction coefficient, for (100) plane m ¼0.08 and for
where f is the wheel feed rate, Nw is the wafer rotation speed and (110) plane m ¼0.12 [32].
Ns is the wheel rotation speed. At certain radial distance r, the
removed cross-sectional area B per wheel revolution can be ob- Table 1
tained by multiplying the material removal width 2πrNw/Ns by the Grinding conditions.

material removal thickness f/Ns. Hence, the cross-sectional area B Conditions Feed rate f (μm/ Wheel speed Ns(r/ Wafer speed Nw(r/
in Eq. (16) is written as min) min) min)

2πr⋅Nw f (a) 120 5000 200

B= ⋅
Ns Ns (17) (b) 96 5000 200
(c) 72 5000 200
dV in Eqs. (15) and (16) is identical, then results in (d) 48 5000 200
(e) 24 5000 200
LWγ ⎛ 2R e − 2Zw ⎞ ⎛ r2 ⎞
2.5
2πr⋅Nw f (f) 48 4000 200
β⋅ ⋅⎜ ⎟ ⋅⎜⎜ 1 + ⎟⎟dr = ⋅ dr (g) 48 4500 200
10π ⎝ Re ⎠ ⎝ 8Rs2 ⎠ Ns Ns (18) (h) 48 5000 150
(i) 48 5000 250
Eq. (18) can be arranged as
 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 109 (2016) 74–86 79

approximately by Ref. [33], k ¼55,331 N/mm2 for (100) plane and

k¼ 55,493 N/mm2 for (110) plane. Since silicon is a brittle material,
the deformation of the chip is trival, thus Qi approximately equals
to the average cutting area A, the Eq. (24) can be rewritten as
Fnc = k⋅A (25)

Combining Eqs. (14) and (19), the expression of A can be ob-

tained as

(r⋅f ⋅Nw)0.6
A = 8.08Re2⋅ 0.6
⎛ r2 ⎞
(L⋅W ⋅γ )0.6⋅Ns1.2⋅⎜ 1 + ⎟
⎝ 8Rs2 ⎠ (26)

By substituting Eq. (26) into Eq. (25) results in

(r⋅f ⋅Nw)0.6
Fnc = 8.08k⋅Re2⋅
Fig. 4. Grinding depth vs wafer radial distance under various grinding conditions. ⎛ r2 ⎞0.6
(L⋅W ⋅γ )0.6⋅Ns1.2⋅⎜ 1 + ⎟
⎝ 8Rs2 ⎠ (27)
2.3. Cutting force of an abrasive grain in wafer rotating grinding
In cutting process, the ratio of tangential force to normal force
To develop the equation of cutting force, the cutting mechan- is a constant ϕ [15], hence the tangential cutting force Ftc can be
ism of single abrasive grain is assumed to be the same as that of expressed as
single point turning. Both methods engage to the workpiece by Ftc = ϕFnc (28)
point contact, and remove materials continuously, to form chips
with constant cross-sectional area. For single point turning, the where ϕ ¼0.58 for (100) plane and ϕ ¼ 0.62 for (110) plane [33].
normal cutting force Fnc can be determined by a function of the In addition to crystal plane, the cutting direction continually
undeformed chip cross-section area, Qi [15], which can be applied changes, the cutting direction is expected to be an influential
to wafer self-rotating grinding, as below factor on the tangential cutting force Ftc [34]. In this model, tan-
gential cutting force Ftc is determined by normal cutting force Fnc
Fnc = k⋅Q i (24)
multiplying a constant ϕ, as mentioned in Eq. (28). Basically, no
where k is the chip thickness coefficient which is related to the matter the crystal plane or cutting direction, they both affect the
material property. For mono-crystalline silicon, it is calculated cutting force by varying ϕ for different plane or direction. The

Fig. 5. SEM images of wafer surface under various grinding conditions (radial distance of 90 mm).
80 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 109 (2016) 74–86

Table 2
Total normal grinding force under different grinding conditions (N).

Conditions (110) (100)

Radial distance Radial distance

10 mm 30 mm 50 mm 70 mm 90 mm 10 mm 30 mm 50 mm 70 mm 90 mm

(a) 13.00 38.44 63.14 84.69 106.40 12.11 35.88 58.89 77.63 99.18
(b) 10.39 30.90 50.48 68.68 85.06 9.68 28.80 47.05 64.02 79.31
(c) 7.79 23.17 37.85 51.53 67.54 7.26 20.12 35.29 48.03 62.98
(d) 5.19 15.44 25.24 34.34 42.54 4.83 14.39 23.53 32.01 39.63
(e) 2.60 7.72 12.62 17.18 22.49 2.42 7.19 11.76 16.00 20.93
(f) 8.13 24.14 39.43 53.65 70.37 7.57 22.50 36.76 50.01 65.59
(g) 6.41 19.07 31.18 42.41 55.62 5.97 17.78 29.06 39.53 51.79
(h) 3.90 11.58 22.52 30.61 31.92 3.64 10.80 20.99 28.53 29.75
(i) 6.49 19.30 31.56 42.83 53.21 6.05 17.99 29.42 40.03 49.59

Table 3
Total tangential grinding force under different grinding conditions (N).

Conditions (110) (100)

Radial distance Radial distance

10 mm 30 mm 50 mm 70 mm 90 mm 10 mm 30 mm 50 mm 70 mm 90 mm

(a) 3.96 11.72 19.26 25.83 32.45 3.74 11.09 18.19 23.98 30.65
(b) 3.17 9.42 15.40 20.95 25.94 2.99 8.89 14.54 19.78 24.51
(c) 2.38 7.07 11.54 15.72 20.60 2.24 6.12 10.90 14.84 19.46
(d) 1.58 4.71 7.70 10.47 12.97 1.49 4.44 7.27 9.89 12.24
(e) 0.79 2.35 3.85 5.24 6.86 0.74 2.22 3.63 4.94 6.47
(f) 2.48 7.36 12.03 16.36 21.46 2.34 6.95 11.36 15.45 20.27
(g) 1.96 5.82 9.51 12.94 16.96 1.84 5.49 8.98 12.21 16.00
(h) 1.19 3.53 6.87 9.34 9.74 1.12 3.34 6.49 8.81 9.19
(i) 1.98 5.89 9.63 13.09 16.23 1.87 5.56 9.09 12.37 13.16

cutting direction varies between (110) and (100) directions on ⎧ ⎛ ⎞ ⎫

(100) wafer surface. As mentioned before in Ref. [33], the relative ⎪ ⎜ 5.08R e2 ⎟ ⎪
⎨
Ft = Fts + Ftc = μ⎜ 2 ⎟
+ 8.08ϕkR e ⎬
2
error of ϕ between these two directions is only 3.3%, which means 2
⎪ ⎜ 1 − υ1 + 1 − υ 2 ⎟ ⎪
the cutting direction only plays a minor role on tangential cutting ⎩ ⎝ E1 E2 ⎠ ⎭
force, and this factor could be neglected. Yan et al. [35] and Zhang (r⋅f ⋅Nw)0.6
⋅
et al. [36] investigated the effects of cutting direction on the cut- ⎛ r2 ⎞0.6
ting force for single crystal silicon and copper. The findings im- (L⋅W ⋅γ )0.6⋅Ns1.2⋅⎜ 1 + ⎟
⎝ 8Rs2 ⎠ (30)
plied that, at specific cutting plane, the effect of cutting direction
on the cutting force is not significant. Overall, the effect of cutting Eqs. (29) and (30) is the expression of grinding forces of a single
direction on cutting force is neglected.
abrasive grain in normal and tangential directions. Actually, mul-
tiple numbers of abrasive grains participate in the grinding process
2.4. Total grinding force in wafer rotating grinding at any moment. The total grinding force should be a sum of the
forces contributed from every single grain in the same direction.
Fns, Fts, Fnc and Ftc, which are shown in Eqs. (22), (23), (27) and And the numbers of participating abrasive grain has already be
(28), are the four components as mentioned in Eqs. (2) and (3), discussed in Section 2.2, as mentioned as the number of effective
shown in Fig. 1. Therefore, for a single abrasive grain, the normal abrasive grains N, which is determined by Eq. (8). Therefore, the
grinding force Fn of single abrasive grain can be obtained by sub- total normal grinding force Fnt can be expressed as Eq. (31).
stituting normal cutting force and normal sliding force from Eqs.
(22) and (27) into Eq. (2), as expressed in Eq. (29). ⎛ ⎞
N
⎜ 5.08Re2 ⎟
⎛ ⎞ Fnt = ∑ Fn=N⋅⎜ 2
+ 8.08k⋅Re2⎟
⎜ 5.08Re2 ⎟ ⎜ 1 − υ1 + 1 − υ 22 ⎟
2 1
Fn = Fns + Fnc = ⎜ 2 2
+ 8.08k⋅Re ⎟ ⎝ E1 E2 ⎠
⎜ 1 − υ1 1 − υ 2 ⎟
⎝ E1 + E2 ⎠ (r⋅f ⋅Nw)0.6
⋅ 0.6
(r⋅f ⋅Nw)0.6 ⎛ r2 ⎞
⋅ (L⋅W ⋅γ )0.6⋅Ns1.2⋅⎜ 1 + ⎟
⎛ 0.6 ⎝ 8Rs2 ⎠ (31)
r2 ⎞
(L⋅W ⋅γ )0.6⋅Ns1.2⋅⎜ 1 + ⎟
⎝ 8Rs2⎠
(29)
Similarly, the total tangential grinding force Ftt is expressed as
Similarly, substituting Eqs. (23) and (28) into Eq. (3), the tan- Eq. (32)
gential grinding force Ft of a single abrasive grain is obtained, as
expressed in Eq. (30).
 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 109 (2016) 74–86 81

Fig. 6. Relationship between the normal grinding force and wafer radial distance
(a) (110) plane; (b) (100) plane. Fig. 7. Relationship between the tangential grinding force and wafer radial dis-
tance (a) (110) plane; (b) (100) plane.

N speed, since the increasing material removal efficiency. The

Ftt = ∑ Ft = N ( μFns + ϕFnc) grinding depths decrease with the increase of wheel speed, since
1 the decreasing material removal efficiency.
⎧ ⎛ ⎞ ⎫ It can be also observed that, the grinding depth increase with
⎪ ⎜ 5.08R e2 ⎟ ⎪ the increasing of wafer radial distance. The reason can be that, for
= ⎨ Nμ⎜ 2 2 ⎟
+ 8.08NϕkR e ⎬
2
⎪ ⎜ 1 − υ1 + 1 − υ 2 ⎟ ⎪ the region with same area, the density of grinding trajectories
⎩ ⎝ E1 E2 ⎠ ⎭ decreases from wafer center to edge [30], also as shown in Fig. 2
(r⋅f ⋅Nw)0.6 (b). Since less grains pass the same area, to keep the same removal
⋅ thickness, each abrasive grain needs to remove more materials at
⎛ r2 ⎞0.6
(L⋅W ⋅γ )0.6⋅Ns1.2⋅⎜ 1 + ⎟ the edge, which means the grinding depth has to increase.
⎝ 8Rs2 ⎠ (32)
Besides the above mentioned grinding parameters, when the
abrasive particle size varies, such as an increase in particle size, the
amount of effective cutting grains per unit area decreases [18,25].
Under the same grinding condition, the material remove efficiency
3. Discussion of the model is constant, and less grains participating grinding means average
cutting area of each grain will be greater, so the grains need to
3.1. Parametric analysis engage into the silicon deeper and vice versa.
As shown in Fig. 4, only condition (a) induced a grinding depths
3.1.1. Grinding depth slightly larger than 100 nm at the radical distance of 90 mm. Yan
The Eq. (20) comprehensively described the effect of processing et al. [37] stated that the silicon machined at a depth of cut of
parameters, wafer radial distance, grain size and the geometry 100 nm tends to behave in a ductile manner. Shibata et al. [38]
parameters of wheel on the grinding depth. To calculate the indicated that the silicon machined at a depth of cut of 100 nm has
grinding depth, nine commonly used processing conditions are a good surface quality with regular machining grooves. The depth
listed in Table 1, which include varied feed rate, wheel speed and of cut in this study is mostly less than 100 nm, which is a proof
wafer speed. Geometry parameters of the grinding wheel are set that ductile grinding is dominated. The SEM images of various
as L¼600 mm, W ¼4 mm, Re ¼30 mm, which are commonly used wafer surface, shown in Fig. 5, are another evidence for the
in CECT JB-802 wafer grinding machine. domination of ductile cutting. In Fig. 5, continuous grinding
Based on Eq. (20), the grinding depths under various processing grooves are clearly represented, which is formed with chip. Small
parameters are shown in Fig. 4. It can be found that, the grinding amount of fracture debris and pits of conditions (a), (b), (c) (f) and
depth increase with the increase of wheel feed rate and wafer (i) is an illustration of brittle cutting. Based on the above, the
82 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 109 (2016) 74–86

Fig. 10. Relationship between grinding force and crack depth with different radial
distance.

and the geometry parameters of wheel and wafer on grinding

force. Since the geometry parameters are not flexible to adjust, the
most interested parameters will be the processing parameters.
And silicon wafer possesses different materials properties in dif-
ferent crystal orientations, the effect of crystal orientation on
Fig. 8. Relationship between the maximum grinding force and grinding para- grinding force will also be discussed.
meters, crystal orientations (a) Relationship between the maximum grinding force Processing conditions are listed in Table 1, based on Eqs. (31)
and wheel feed rate, crystal orientations. (b) Relationship between the maximum and (32), the total normal and tangential grinding forces under
grinding force and wheel rotation speed, wafer rotation speed, crystal orientations.
various processing parameters are listed in Tables 2 and 3, re-
spectively. It can be found that, the total normal and tangential
grinding force increase with the increasing of radial distance, and
the total normal and tangential grinding forces along (110) plane
are slightly larger than that along (100) plane.
Fig. 6 illustrates the relationship between the total normal
grinding force and wafer radial distance, along (110) plane (Fig. 6
(a)), and along (100) plane (Fig. 6(b)). In Fig. 6(a), nine processing
conditions are arranged in three groups, as shown in the three

Table 4
Maximum subsurface crack depth under different grinding conditions at radial
distance of 90 mm (mm).

Conditions (110) (100)

Crack depth Crack depth

(a) 13.44 11.20

Fig. 9. Comparisons of the monitored and predicted grinding forces. (b) 12.57 10.86
(c) 12.05 10.60
(d) 10.81 10.20
cutting force contributing to a chip formation was dominate. (e) 9.82 9.67
(f) 12.57 11.07
3.1.2. Grinding force (g) 12.11 10.76
(h) 11.29 10.42
The Eqs. (31) and (32) comprehensively considered the effect of
(i) 12.47 10.65
processing parameters, materials properties of wheel and wafer
 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 109 (2016) 74–86 83

Fig. 12. Linear regression between Fnt2/3 at radial distance of 90 mm and subsurface
crack depth h.

Table 5
f ⋅Nw/Ns2 and predictive subsurface crack depth corresponding to different grinding
conditions.

Conditions f ⋅ Nw
(10  4) (mm) Predictive subsurface crack depth of (110)
Ns2 (mm)

(a) 9.60 13.57

(b) 7.68 12.88
(c) 5.76 12.26
(d) 3.84 11.28
(e) 1.92 10.34
(f) 6.00 12.37
(g) 4.74 11.82
(h) 2.88 10.81
(i) 4.80 11.72

resistance along (110) plane. Similar phenomenon has been re-

ported in Chavoshi's simulation investigation [33].
The above confirms that the total grinding force is greater at
wafer edge than that at wafer center. Therefore, to study the re-
lationship between the grinding force and processing parameters,
the grinding forces corresponding to wafer radial distance of
90 mm are adopted to represent the maximum grinding force in
Fig. 11. Relationship between grinding force (radial distance of 90 mm) and crack
Fig. 8. In Fig. 8(a), under constant rotating speed of the wheel and
depth under different grinding parameters (a) Wheel feed rate; (b) Wheel rotation wafer, as 5000 and 200 r/min respectively, the effect of wheel feed
speed; (c) Wafer rotation speed. rate, crystal orientations on grinding force is illustrated. As shown
in Fig. 8(a), the maximum normal grinding force, as shown in
Region 1, is significantly greater than the maximum tangential
inner figures. It can be seen that, under the same processing
force, as shown in Region 2, under same processing condition. The
condition, the total normal grinding force increases with the in-
normal and tangential grinding force increase when the wheel
creasing of radial distance.
feed rate varies from 24 to 120 mm/min. This is as expected since
Fig. 7 shows the similar trend for the total tangential force
the grinding depth increases with the increasing of feed rate. Be-
along (110) plane, and the force is slightly greater than that along
sides, the grinding force along (110) plane is slightly greater than
(100) plane. Taking the grinding condition (a) as an example, when
that of (100) plane due to the difference in material's properties
the radial distance varies from 10 to 90 mm, the total normal along different crystal plane. Fig. 8(b) plots that the effects of
grinding force increases from 12.21 to 99.18 N along (100) plane, wheel rotation speed, wafer rotation speed on maximum grinding
and increases from 13.00 to 106.40 N along (110) plane. The total force, when the wheel feed rate are kept at 120 mm/min. It is
tangential grinding force increase from 3.96 to 32.45 N along (110) clearly found that with the wheel rotation speed increasing, the
plane, and increase from 3.74 to 30.65 N along (100) plane. The maximum grinding force decreases. This is because that, with the
above illustrates that the total grinding force increases with the increase of wheel rotation speed, the grinding depth and the
increase of wafer radial distance. The reason can be explained by number of effective abrasive grains participating in cutting de-
the increase of grinding depth and the number of effective abra- crease, resulting in lower grinding force. However, wheel speed is
sive grains participating in cutting. Besides, the grinding force limited by the capability of the motor and shaft, also high speed
along (110) plane is slightly greater than that of (100) plane. This is always comes with high vibration, which may bring bad surface
due to the higher sliding force and higher chip formation quality or even break the wafer. 4500–5500 r/min is already a
84 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 109 (2016) 74–86

Fig. 13. Optimized grinding process.

higher speed compared with Pei's work in the range of 1500– are 10.12, 29.97, 45.68, 66.66 and 82.62 N. The average deviation is
3400 r/min [9]. With the wafer rotation speed decreasing, the about 10.45%. The tangential grinding force monitored in Pahler's
maximum grinding force decreases. Although decreasing Nw is work are about 3.81, 7.58, 11.71, 14.44 and 18.21 N corresponding
another efficient way to lower grinding force, there still exists to wafer radial distance of 10, 30, 50, 70 and 90 mm. Corre-
some limitations, and Nw cannot decrease infinitely close to 0. spondingly, the predicted tangential grinding force along (110)
Decreasing Nw means less repeating cutting of the wafer surface, plane are 3.30, 9.81, 14.94, 21.82 and 27.03 N, the predicted tan-
therefore the form accuracy and surface roughness may be af- gential grinding force along (100) plane are 3.21, 9.52, 14.51, 21.18
fected negatively, which is harmful for the following IC manu- and 26.25 N. The average deviation is about 11.92%. Therefore,
facturing processes. with the same trend and relatively small deviation, the grinding
force model is applicable to Pahler's work.
3.2. Model validation

To verify the applicability of the model, the grinding conditions

4. Experimental results and discussion
in Pahler's experimental investigation [11] are applied to this
model, to compare the predicted grinding force with the experi-
4.1. Experimental procedure
mental results obtained by Pahler. In Pahler's work, area related
grinding forces of 200 mm ground (100) wafer were monitored by
To study the wafer damage from the aspect of grinding force,
integrating a piezoelectric force sensor into the diamond segment
wafer self-rotating grinding tests on CETC JB-802 wafer grinding
of cup-type wheel. The width of diamond segment is 3 mm, the
machine are conducted under nine processing conditions, and the
equivalent radius of abrasive grains Re is 50 mm. The wheel feed
processing parameters are as the same as discussed in Section 3.1,
rete is 70 mm/min, wheel rotation speed is about 4500 r/min and
wafer rotation speed is 50 r/min. By adopting Eqs. (31) and (32), as shownin Table 1. For each condition, three tests are performed
the predictive normal and tangential grinding forces are calculated to conform the repeatability. Since subsurface cracks are the
and expressed in Fig. 9. The acquired experimental data from dominate form of damage, the depth of subsurface cracks is ex-
Pahler's article is in the form of area related force. Then the perimentally studied as below.
monitored grinding forces were obtained by multiplying the area Rectangular samples, with dimension of 10 mm  8 mm, were
related forces by the area of diamond segment, and summarized in cut at the location of radical distance of 10, 50 and 90 mm, along
Fig. 9. (110) and (100) planes, respectively. Cross-section microscopy was
Fig. 9 illustrates the comparisons of the predicted and mon- utilized to observe the subsurface cracks. First, the cross-sections
itored grinding forces. In Fig. 9, the normal and tangential grinding of samples were ground with 2000#, 5000# silicon carbide papers
force are both increased as the increasing of wafer radial distance, and polished using 0.25 mm diamond polishing compounds. Then,
same for predicted and monitored results. The normal grinding the polished cross-sections were cleaned by an ultrasonic bath and
force monitored in Pahler's work are about 18.49, 36.60, 52.61, etched using “Young” solution [39] (H2O: HF49%: Cr2O3 ¼ 500 ml:
63.03 and 68.90 N corresponding to wafer radial distance of 10, 30, 500 ml: 75 g) to make the subsurface cracks discernable. Finally,
50, 70 and 90 mm. Correspondingly, the predicted normal grind- the etched cross-sections were observed by a FEI Quanta 650
ing forces along (110) plane are 10.84, 32.20, 49.10, 71.53 and Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) and the greatest depth of
88.68 N, the predicted normal grinding forces along (100) plane crack, d, was measured.
 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 109 (2016) 74–86 85

4.2. Relationship between the normal grinding force and the sub- coefficient and KIc is the fracture toughness.
surface crack depth At radial distance of 90 mm, the grinding force and crack depth
of (110) plane is relatively greater than others, which needs to be
Deeper the subsurface cracks are, and more materials need to minimized by process optimization. A linear relationship is es-
be removed by subsequent fine grinding and polishing, which has tablished between 2/3 power of total normal grinding force Fnt2/3,
much lower efficiency. During grinding, the normal grinding force which is represented by that at radial distance of 90mm, and the
play a crucial role in the mechanism of material removal and subsurface crack depth h is shownin Fig. 12. The value of the
subsurface crack depth [40], which will be explained in Section 4.3 coefficient of determination R2, 0.817, indicates a significant linear
in detail. Hence, controlling the grinding force is an essential ap- correlation between Fnt2/3 and h. This illustrates that the predicted
proach to control the subsurface crack depth. grinding force can be used to predict the subsurface crack depth.
Fig. 10 illustrates the predicted normal grinding force versus
radial distance, and the subsurface crack depth versus radial dis-
tance in the same figure, under the processing conditions (a) and 5. Grinding process optimization
(d) in Table 1. Obviously, the normal grinding force increases when
the radial distance increases from 10 to 90 mm. Similar to the During grinding, a good surface quality finished at high effi-
increasing tendency of the normal grinding force, the crack depth ciency is the optimal condition. Since h can be estimated for any
of processing condition (a) increases from 9.37 to 13.44 mm along given processing condition from Fig. 12. The efficiency of material
(110) plane, and increases from 7.30 to 11.20 mm along (100) plane. removal can be determined by the volume of removed material
The crack depth of processing condition (d) increases from 6.21 to per grain under unit time, v. From Eq. (16), v is proportional to
10.81 mm along (110) plane, and increases from 5.32 to 10.20 mm f ⋅Nw/Ns2, as expressed in Eq. (34)
along (100) plane.
Since the grinding force and crack depth of radial distance 90 v ∝ f ⋅Nw/Ns2 (34)
mm is the severest from other locations, only the wafer crack
All of the values of f ⋅Nw/Ns2,
and the predictive subsurface crack
depths of radial distance 90 mm are presented in Table 4. Max-
depths are listed in Table 5. With no doubt, the maximum effi-
imum subsurface crack depth is an indicator of subsurface damage,
ciency and maximum damage is both reached by condition (a),
and is widely adopted by researchers, as reported by Ref. [6].
and minimum efficiency and minimum damage is both reached by
Fig. 11(a)–(c) present the trends of normal grinding force,
condition (e). Some of the conditions with high level of damage
which is also represented by that at the radial distance of 90 mm,
but low efficiency should be avoided during grinding, such as
and the subsurface crack depth, when the wheel feed rate, wheel
condition (g).
rotation speed and wafer rotation speed vary, from the processing
In view of the above, two stages of grinding processes should
conditions in Table 1. Fig. 11(a) shows that, the subsurface crack
be helpful to meet the demand of low damage and high efficiency,
depth increases as the increasing normal grinding force when the
via fast materials removing at first stage and damage controlling at
wheel feed rate increases from 24 to 120 mm/min. It can be seen
second stage. A proposed two-stage grinding process is presented
from Fig. 11(b), as the decreasing normal grinding force when the
in Fig. 13. In the first stage, condition (a) is adopted to reach the
wheel rotation speed increases from 4000 to 5000 r/min, the
maximum efficiency. The subsurface crack depth is predicted as
subsurface crack depth decreases from 12.57 to 10.81 mm along
13.57 mm, therefore more than 13.57 mm of material need to be
(110) plane, and decreases from 11.07 to 10.20 mm along (100)
saved above target thickness. Under conservative consideration,
plane.
20 mm of material thickness is reserved for removal in the second
Fig. 11(c) illustrates the effect of wafer rotation speed, which
stage. For the second stage, the processing condition (e) is adopted
varies from 150 to 250 r/min on the normal grinding force and the
to grind the wafer to the target thickness with minimal damage.
subsurface crack depth. It can be seen that the total normal
grinding force and the crack depth increases, when the wafer ro-
tation speed increases from 150 to 250 r/min. While, at the wafer
rotation speed of 150 r/min, a singularity of crack depth raises. 6. Conclusions
There could be another influencing factors which is neglected in
current model, such as the vibration of wafer rotator [7]. The A theoretical grinding force model was firstly established for
discussion of vibration is beyond the scope of this article, which silicon wafer self-rotating grinding. Average grinding depth da of
may be studied as a separated topic in the future. an abrasive grain is deducted from the cutting and sliding beha-
viors of abrasive grains. Then sliding and cutting forces under
normal and tangential directions are obtained. The model corre-
4.3. Mechanism of subsurface crack formation
lates processing parameters, radial distance and crystal orientation
The positive correlation between subsurface crack depth and to grinding force, thus gives systematical understanding of the
grinding force is conformed under different processing conditions, impact factors on grinding force. Based on the equations of total
and the influence of processing parameters on grinding force normal/tangential grinding forces, with feed rate increasing, or
agrees with that on subsurface crack depth. The reasons for the wheel rotation speed decreasing, or wafer rotation speed in-
positive correlation can be explained by the scratching theory, as creasing, the grinding force increases. The total grinding force is
the grinding process can be thought as the repeated scratching greater at wafer edge than that at wafer center, and that along
process [41]. For a scratching process, the relationship between (110) plane is slightly greater than that along (100) plane, ac-
the normal load P and the subsurface crack depth his explained in cording to the model.
Ref. [42], as described in Eq. (33), h is directly proportional to P2/3. Subsurface crack depth, as an indicator of grinding damage,
was measured for different processing conditions experimentally.
2/3
⎛ 2 2 ⎞ Based on scratching theory, a relationship between total normal
(
⎜ χ 1 + λ P⎟
h=⎜
) grinding force Fnt and subsurface crack depth h is established and
⎟
⎜ KIc ⎟ validated. By utilizing the grinding force model, h can be predicted
⎝ ⎠ (33)
from processing parameters directly. Two-stage grinding process
where χ is the growth constant (unit less), λ is the friction is proposed to optimize the grinding condition. First stage, with
86 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 109 (2016) 74–86

fast materials removing, will leave a thickness close but not Adv. Manuf. Technol. 70 (9-12) (2014) 2111–2123.
reaching the target thickness yet. Second stage, with minimal [19] Q. Liu, X. Chen, Y. Wang, N. Gindy, Empirical modeling of grinding force based
on multivariate analysis, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 203 (1–3) (2008) 420–430.
damage, will grind the left thickness. The two-stage method meets [20] H.F. Chen, Y.F. Dai, Z.W. Zheng, H. Gao, X.P. Li, Effect of crystallographic or-
the demand of high efficiency and low damage. ientation on cutting forces and surface finish in ductile cutting of KDP crystals,
Mach. Sci. Technol. 15 (2) (2011) 231–242.
[21] D.A. Doman, A. Warkentin, R. Bauer, Finite element modelling approaches in
grinding, Int. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 49 (2) (2009) 109–116.
Acknowledgments [22] T.-H. Fang, C.-I. Weng, J.-G. Chang, Molecular dynamics simulation of nano-
lithography process using atomic force microscopy, Surf. Sci. 501 (1–2) (2002)
138–147.
The authors would like to deeply appreciate the financial [23] S. Malkin, Grinding Technology: Theory and Applications of Machining with
support from the National Natural Science Foundation of China Abrasives, Mcgraw-Hill 2008, pp. 1–375.
(Grant no. 11502005) and National Science and Technology Major [24] R.L. Hecker, S.Y. Liang, X.J. Wu, P. Xia, D.G.W. Jin, Grinding force and power
modeling based on chip thickness analysis, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 33 (5–
Project (Grant no. 2014ZX02504-001-005). 6) (2007) 449–459.
[25] S. Agarwal, P. Venkateswara Rao, Predictive modeling of force and power
based on a new analytical undeformed chip thickness model in ceramic
grinding, Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 65 (2013) 68–78.
References
[26] H.T. Young, H.-T. Liao, H.-Y. Huang, Novel method to investigate the critical
depth of cut of ground silicon wafer, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 182 (1–3)
[1] P. Van-Zant, Microchip Fabrication, McGraw-Hill Professional, America, 2004. (2007) 157–162.
[2] V. Kripesh, S.W. Yoon, V.P. Ganesh, N. Khan, M.D. Rotaru, W. Fang, M.K. Iyer, [27] L. Zhou, Y.B. Tian, H. Huang, H. Sato, J. Shimizu, A study on the diamond
Three dimensional system in package using stacked silicon platform tech- grinding of ultra-thin silicon wafers, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part B J. Eng. Manuf.
nology, IEEE Trans. Adv. Packag. 28 (3) (2005) 377–386. 226 (1) (2012) 66–75.
[3] Z.J. Pei, G.R. Fisher, J. Liu, Grinding of silicon wafers: a review from historical [28] K.W. Sharp, M.H. Miller, R.O. Scattergood, Analysis of the grinding depth in
perspectives, Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 48 (12–13) (2008) 1297–1307. plunge grinding, Precis. Eng. 24 (3) (2000) 220–230.
[4] E. Ahearne, G. Byrne, Ultraprecision grinding technologies in silicon semi- [29] P.-L. Tso, C.-C. Teng, A study of the total thickness variation in the grinding of
conductor processing, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part B J. Eng. Manuf. 218 (3) ultra-precision substrates, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 116 (2–3) (2001)
(2004) 253–267. 182–188.
[5] Y. Yang, K. De Munck, R.C. Teixeira, B. Swinnen, B. Verlinden, I. De Wolf, Pro- [30] S. Chidambraram, Z.J. Pei, S. Kassir, Fine grinding of silicon wafers: a mathe-
cess induced sub-surface damage in mechanically ground silicon wafers, matical model for grinding marks, Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 43 (15) (2003)
Semicond. Sci. Technol. 23 (7) (2008) 1–10. 1595–1602.
[6] Z.J. Pei, S.R. Billingsley, S. Miura, Grinding induced subsurface cracks in silicon [31] M.C. Shaw, Fundamentals of the grinding process, in: Proceedings of Inter-
wafers, Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 39 (7) (1999) 1103–1116. national Grinding Conference: New Developments in Grinding, Pittsburgh, PA,
[7] H.T. Young, H.-T. Liao, H.-Y. Huang, Surface integrity of silicon wafers in ultra 1972, pp. 221–258.
precision machining, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 29 (3–4) (2006) 372–378. [32] H.H. Gatzen, M. Beck, Investigations on the friction force anisotropy of the
[8] Z.J. Pei, A. Strasbaugh, Fine grinding of silicon wafers: designed experiments, silicon lattice, Wear 254 (11–12) (2003) 1122–1126.
Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 42 (3) (2002) 395–404. [33] S.Z. Chavoshi, X.C. Luo, An atomistic simulation investigation on chip related
[9] Z.J. Pei, A study on surface grinding of 300 mm silicon wafers, Int. J. Mach. phenomenain nanometric cutting of single crystal silicon at elevated tem-
Tools Manuf. 42 (3) (2002) 385–393. peratures, Comput. Mater. Sci. 113 (2016) 1–10.
[10] J.A. Couey, B.R. Knapp, R.R. Vallance, In-process force monitoring for precision [34] S. Goel, A. Stukowski, X. Luo, Anisotropy of single-crystal 3C-SiC during na-
grinding semiconductor silicon wafers, Int. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 7 (5–6) nometric cutting, Modell. Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 21 (6) (2013) 1–20.
(2005) 430–440. [35] J. Yan, T. Asami, H. Harada, T. Kuriyagawa, Crystallographic effect on subsurface
[11] D. Pahler, F. Klocke, L. Beegen, M, Herben, A, Jakob, In-process monitoring of damage formation in silicon microcutting, CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 61 (1)
contact zone forces during rotational grinding of silicon wafers, in: Proceed- (2012) 131–134.
ings of the 6th International Conference European Society for Precision En- [36] J.J. Zhang, T. Sun, Y.D. Yan, Y.C. Liang, S. Dong, Molecular dynamics study of
gineering and Nanotechnology, EUSPEN, vol. 2, 2006, pp. 68–71. groove fabrication process using AFM-based nanometric cutting technique,
[12] K. Ono, Analysis of the grinding force, Bull. Jpn. Soc. Grind. Eng. 1 (1961) Appl. Phys. A 94 (3) (2009) 593–600.
19–22. [37] J. Yan, H. Zhao, T. Kuriyagawa, Effects of tool edge radius on ductile machining
[13] G. Werner, Influence of work material on grinding forces, Ann. CIRP 27 (1) of silicon: an investigation by FEM, Semicond. Sci. Technol. 24 (7) (2009) 1–11.
(1978) 243–248. [38] T. Shibata, S. Fujii, E. Makino, I. Masayuki, Ductile-regime turning mechanism
[14] L.C. Li, J.Z. Fu, J. Peklenik, A study of grinding force mathematical model, Ann. of single-crystal silicon, Precis. Eng. 18 (2) (1996) 129–137.
CIRP 29 (1) (1980) 245–249. [39] K.H. Yang, An etch for delineation of defects in silicon, J. Electrochem. Soc. 131
[15] M. Younis, M.M. Sadek, T. EI-Wardani, A new approach to development of a (5) (1984) 1140–1145.
grinding force model, J. Eng. Ind. Trans. ASME 109 (4) (1987) 306–313. [40] B.R. Lawn, M.V. Swain, Microfracture beneath point indentations in brittle
[16] J.Y. Tang, J. Du, Y.P. Chen, Modeling and experimental study of grinding forces solids, J. Mater. Sci. 10 (1) (1975) 113–122.
in surface grinding, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 209 (6) (2009) 2847–2854. [41] T. Suratwala, L. Wong, P. Miller, M.D. Feit, J. Menapace, R. Steele, P. Davis,
[17] U.S. Durgumahanti Patnaik, V. Singh, P. Venkateswara Rao, A new model for D. Walmer, Subsurface mechanical damage distributions during grinding of
grinding force prediction and analysis, Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 50 (3) (2010) fused silica, J. Non-Cryst. Solids 352 (52–54) (2006) 5601–5617.
231–240. [42] B.R. Lawn, Partial cone crack formation in a brittle material loaded with a
[18] D.X. Wang, P.Q. Ge, W.B. Bi, J.L. Jiang, Grain trajectory and grain workpiece sliding spherical indenter, Proc. R. Soc. A Math. Phys. 299 (1458) (1967)
contact analyses for modeling of grinding force and energy partition, Int. J. 307–316.