Reliability Prediction from Burn-In Data Fit to Reliability Models
3/5
()
About this ebook
- The ability to include reliability calculations and test results in their product design
- The ability to use reliability data provided to them by their suppliers to make meaningful reliability predictions
- Have accurate failure rate calculations for calculating warrantee period replacement costs
Joseph Bernstein
Joseph B. Bernstein is Professor of Electrical Engineering at Ariel University, Ariel, Israel. He received his PhD from MIT, Cambridge, MA, USA, and has previously worked as a Professor at Bar Ilan University, Israel, and at the University of Maryland and the MIT Lincoln Laboratory. He has co-authored two books.
Related to Reliability Prediction from Burn-In Data Fit to Reliability Models
Related ebooks
Reliability Analysis of Dynamic Systems: Efficient Probabilistic Methods and Aerospace Applications Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsModern Approaches to Discrete, Integrated Component and System Reliability Engineering: Reliability Engineering Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsReliability, Maintainability and Risk: Practical Methods for Engineers Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Fault Diagnosis and Prognosis Techniques for Complex Engineering Systems Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsReliability of High-Power Mechatronic Systems 2: Aerospace and Automotive Applications: Issues,Testing and Analysis Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsDynamic Estimation and Control of Power Systems Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsIntelligent Data-Analytics for Condition Monitoring: Smart Grid Applications Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsStatistical Process Monitoring Using Advanced Data-Driven and Deep Learning Approaches: Theory and Practical Applications Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsMechanical Vibrations and Condition Monitoring Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5New Trends in System Reliability Evaluation Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsReliability Analysis and Prediction: A Methodology Oriented Treatment Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsReliability Theory and Practice Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Reliability Fundamentals Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Hermeticity of Electronic Packages Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsPractical Reliability Engineering Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Random Vibrations: Analysis of Structural and Mechanical Systems Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsGas and Oil Reliability Engineering: Modeling and Analysis Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Reliability Modelling and Analysis in Discrete Time Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsBasic Reliability Engineering Analysis: Butterworths Basic Series Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5System Reliability Theory: Models and Statistical Methods Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsAn Elementary Guide to Reliability Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsBasic Reliability Management Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsIntelligent Fault Diagnosis and Remaining Useful Life Prediction of Rotating Machinery Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Human Reliability: With Human Factors Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsCondition-based maintenance Complete Self-Assessment Guide Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsStructures, Signals and Systems Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsUsing the Weibull Distribution: Reliability, Modeling, and Inference Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsMachine Vision for Inspection and Measurement Rating: 1 out of 5 stars1/5Reliability and Failure of Electronic Materials and Devices Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratings
Technology & Engineering For You
The Art of War Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/580/20 Principle: The Secret to Working Less and Making More Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Smart Phone Dumb Phone: Free Yourself from Digital Addiction Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe ChatGPT Millionaire Handbook: Make Money Online With the Power of AI Technology Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsElectrical Engineering 101: Everything You Should Have Learned in School...but Probably Didn't Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5The Big Book of Hacks: 264 Amazing DIY Tech Projects Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5My Inventions: The Autobiography of Nikola Tesla Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Logic Pro X For Dummies Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Insider's Guide to Technical Writing Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe 48 Laws of Power in Practice: The 3 Most Powerful Laws & The 4 Indispensable Power Principles Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Ultralearning: Master Hard Skills, Outsmart the Competition, and Accelerate Your Career Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The CIA Lockpicking Manual Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5The Systems Thinker: Essential Thinking Skills For Solving Problems, Managing Chaos, Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Big Book of Maker Skills: Tools & Techniques for Building Great Tech Projects Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5U.S. Marine Close Combat Fighting Handbook Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Artificial Intelligence: A Guide for Thinking Humans Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Ghost Rider: Travels on the Healing Road Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5How to Disappear and Live Off the Grid: A CIA Insider's Guide Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Total Motorcycling Manual: 291 Essential Skills Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Broken Money: Why Our Financial System is Failing Us and How We Can Make it Better Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Official Highway Code: DVSA Safe Driving for Life Series Rating: 3 out of 5 stars3/5The Complete Titanic Chronicles: A Night to Remember and The Night Lives On Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Fast Track to Your Technician Class Ham Radio License: For Exams July 1, 2022 - June 30, 2026 Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5The Art of War Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Wuhan Cover-Up: And the Terrifying Bioweapons Arms Race Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratings
Reviews for Reliability Prediction from Burn-In Data Fit to Reliability Models
2 ratings0 reviews
Book preview
Reliability Prediction from Burn-In Data Fit to Reliability Models - Joseph Bernstein
www.bqr.com.
Chapter 1
Shortcut to Accurate Reliability Prediction
This chapter outlines the method of combining physics of failure models, either from the foundry or from the publications, as a theoretical input to a matrix, which is then solved against accelerated test data where the relative significance of each mechanism is determined by solving the matrix.
Keywords
M-HTOL; Matrix; FIT; Accelerated Test
The traditional high-temperature operating life (HTOL) test is based on the outdated JEDEC standard that has not been supported or updated for many years. The major drawback of this method is that it is not based on a model that predicts failures in the field. Nonetheless, the electronics industry continues to provide data from tests of fewer than 100 parts, subjected to their maximum allowed voltages and temperatures for as many as 1000 h. The result based on zero, or a maximum of 1, failure out of the number of parts tested does not actually predict. This null result is then fit into an average acceleration factor (AF), which is the product of a thermal factor and a voltage factor. The result is a reported failure rate as described by the standard failure in time (FIT, also called Failure unIT) model, which is the number of expected failures per billion part hours of operation. FIT is still an important metric for failure rate in today’s technology; however, it does not account for the fact that multiple failure mechanisms simply cannot be averaged for either thermal or voltage AFs.
One of the major limitations of advanced electronic systems qualification, including advanced microchips and components, is providing reliability specifications that match the variety of user applications. The standard HTOL qualification that is based on a single high-voltage and high-temperature burn-in does not reflect actual failure mechanisms that would lead to a failure in the field. Rather, the manufacturer is expected to meet the system’s reliability criteria without any real knowledge of the possible failure causes or the relative importance of any individual mechanism. More than this, as a consequence of the nonlinear nature of individual mechanisms, it is impossible for the dominant mechanism at HTOL test to reflect the expected dominant mechanism at operating conditions, essentially sweeping the potential cause of failure under the rug while generating an overly optimistic picture for the actual reliability.
Two problems exist with the current HTOL approach, as recognized by JEDEC in publication JEP122G: (1) multiple failure mechanisms actually compete for dominance in our modern electronic devices and (2) each mechanism has a vastly different voltage and temperature AFs depending on the device operation. This more recent JEDEC publication recommends explicitly that multiple mechanisms should be addressed in a sum-of-failure-rates approach. We agree that a single point HTOL test with zero failures can, by no means, account for a multiplicity of competing mechanisms.
In order to address this fundamental limitation, we developed a special multiple-mechanism qualification approach that allows companies to tailor specifications to a variety of customers’ needs. This approach will work with nearly any circuit to design a custom multiple HTOL (M-HTOL) test at multiple conditions and match the results with the foundrys’ reliability models to make accurate FIT calculations based on specific customers’ environments including voltage, temperature, and