I have taken a closer look at the LTZ1000A die attach and some other similar die attach materials:
LTZ1000:
https://www.richis-lab.de/REF03.htmLTZ1000A:
https://www.richis-lab.de/REF44.htmADR1000:
https://www.richis-lab.de/REF19.htmADR1001 Engineering Sample:
https://www.richis-lab.de/REF29.htmADR1001:
https://www.richis-lab.de/REF45.htmLT1088:
https://www.richis-lab.de/LT1088.htmAs we have seen the beads in the LTZ1000A have quite different diameters.
The PCN shows that the new beads are solid glass. We don´t know much about the old material we see in this LTZ1000A.
Now let´s take a look at the specifications and the different die attach materials.
The LTZ1000 is specified with a thermal resistance of 80K/W. In the LTZ1000A, it was possible to increase the thermal resistance to 400K/W. The mass used here as the attachment must therefore have an additional thermal resistance of 320K/W. With the known dimensions and the estimated thickness of the die attach material, it can be calculated that the thermal conductivity of the die attach must not be higher than 0,08W/Km.
The table below shows the thermal conductivities of various materials. Epoxy is in the range of 0,14W/Km. There are epoxy mixtures that offer a higher value, but it is not easy to reduce the thermal conductivity. This explains why the ADR1000 has a slightly lower thermal resistance. The newer versions of the LTZ1000A contain solid glass beads from Cospheric. This type of glass has a thermal conductivity of 1,46W/Km. Even though these are spheres and not a solid block, the conductivity is initially far too high to achieve the thermal resistance of 400K/W.
Air conducts heat very poorly. This explains how the high thermal resistance of the LT1088 could be achieved. Assuming that the thermal resistance of the package is similar to that of the LTZ1000, the additional measure must have a thermal conductivity of 0,08W/Km to 0,22W/Km. The foam shown in the LT1088 can represent this value. Hollow glass spheres, such as those produced by 3M, are another way of achieving such low thermal conductivity.
As we have seen at the edge there is a hole in the die attach material.
Removing the die reveals that the special material was only applied to the outer areas. This means that the necessary thermal resistance can also be achieved with solid glass spheres. A large part of the area is insulated by the air cushion.
The cavity probably also explains the opening on the left edge. It enables gas exchange, which could be necessary during production. In addition, a sealed gas volume under the die could be problematic in the event of temperature changes. Mechanical stresses caused by pressure differences can have a noticeable effect on such an accurate reference stress source.
A few glass spheres are broken open and expose a cavity. In this picture there is such a sphere at the top left.
There is a glass sphere under the die, where it is clearly visible that hollow spheres were used. This is surprising. The aforementioned PCN describes a conversion to solid glass spheres, but does not indicate that the previous material contained hollow spheres. Even if the material is only applied to the edge area, it can be assumed that the thermal conductivity does change somewhat.
When using hollow spheres, it should be possible to apply the material over the entire area. This would reduce the risk of undefined contact surfaces leading to mechanical stresses in the die. Such stresses, which may be temperature-dependent, can have a problematic effect on a high-precision reference. In general, the question must be asked whether the advantage of the higher thermal resistance compensates for the potential disadvantages of a somewhat undefined mounting of the die. Just my two cents...
https://www.richis-lab.de/REF44.htm