Searching for appropriate humidity accelerated migration reliability tests methods

Lifetime estimation is one of today's frequently used reliability testing tool. There are standardized test methods, mathematical apparatus and failure acceleration models for predicting failure rate of electronic components, circuit modules or equipment. Do the widespread used models give a pr...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Microelectronics and reliability 2002-08, Vol.42 (8), p.1213-1218
Hauptverfasser: Bojta, P, Németh, P, Harsányi, G
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1218
container_issue 8
container_start_page 1213
container_title Microelectronics and reliability
container_volume 42
creator Bojta, P
Németh, P
Harsányi, G
description Lifetime estimation is one of today's frequently used reliability testing tool. There are standardized test methods, mathematical apparatus and failure acceleration models for predicting failure rate of electronic components, circuit modules or equipment. Do the widespread used models give a precise description for all kind of failure mechanisms? Can they define the acceleration factor of any test, and the accelerated lifetime of any test vehicles? In connection with open surface migration tests (when the test circuit samples are not covered by any protective or packaging material) two climatic test methods (Thermal Humidity Bias––THB test methods with different parameter settings) have been compared: 40 °C/95%RH suggested by “a well known IEC standard” and 85 °C/85%RH required by the newer JEDEC standard. The novelty of the paper is the comparison between the two climatic test methods. The main conclusion is a suggestion to keep on with the old method in the mentioned particular case, which may be shocking for people who prefer the new standards. All conclusions are strengthened both with theoretical and experimental test results.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/S0026-2714(02)00083-5
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_27722602</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0026271402000835</els_id><sourcerecordid>27722602</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c338t-9829b409e1fe168f0f9bd68f8ee27be25e1356fc9a8e439f4cee4af0fe0ee21c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkFtLAzEQhYMoWKs_QciT6MPqJHtLnkSKNygIVsG3kM1O2shearIr9N-btuKrT2cYvjmcOYScM7hmwIqbBQAvEl6y7BL4FQCINMkPyISJkicyYx-HZPKHHJOTED4jVAJjE_K6QO3NynVLantP9Xrt-7V3ekC6GltXu2FDtTHYoI-7mrZuGQfXd9Rj43Tlmi0xYBgCbXFY9XU4JUdWNwHPfnVK3h_u32ZPyfzl8Xl2N09MmoohkYLLKgOJzCIrhAUrqzqqQORlhTxHluaFNVILzFJpM4OY6YghRIKZdEou9r4x8tcYE6jWhZi00R32Y1C8LDkvgEcw34PG9yF4tCp-2Gq_UQzUtkG1a1Bt61HA1a5Blce72_0dxi--HXoVjMPOYO08mkHVvfvH4QesUHq0</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>27722602</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Searching for appropriate humidity accelerated migration reliability tests methods</title><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Bojta, P ; Németh, P ; Harsányi, G</creator><creatorcontrib>Bojta, P ; Németh, P ; Harsányi, G</creatorcontrib><description>Lifetime estimation is one of today's frequently used reliability testing tool. There are standardized test methods, mathematical apparatus and failure acceleration models for predicting failure rate of electronic components, circuit modules or equipment. Do the widespread used models give a precise description for all kind of failure mechanisms? Can they define the acceleration factor of any test, and the accelerated lifetime of any test vehicles? In connection with open surface migration tests (when the test circuit samples are not covered by any protective or packaging material) two climatic test methods (Thermal Humidity Bias––THB test methods with different parameter settings) have been compared: 40 °C/95%RH suggested by “a well known IEC standard” and 85 °C/85%RH required by the newer JEDEC standard. The novelty of the paper is the comparison between the two climatic test methods. The main conclusion is a suggestion to keep on with the old method in the mentioned particular case, which may be shocking for people who prefer the new standards. All conclusions are strengthened both with theoretical and experimental test results.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0026-2714</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-941X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/S0026-2714(02)00083-5</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Elsevier Ltd</publisher><ispartof>Microelectronics and reliability, 2002-08, Vol.42 (8), p.1213-1218</ispartof><rights>2002 Elsevier Science Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c338t-9829b409e1fe168f0f9bd68f8ee27be25e1356fc9a8e439f4cee4af0fe0ee21c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c338t-9829b409e1fe168f0f9bd68f8ee27be25e1356fc9a8e439f4cee4af0fe0ee21c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0026-2714(02)00083-5$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,782,786,3552,27931,27932,46002</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bojta, P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Németh, P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harsányi, G</creatorcontrib><title>Searching for appropriate humidity accelerated migration reliability tests methods</title><title>Microelectronics and reliability</title><description>Lifetime estimation is one of today's frequently used reliability testing tool. There are standardized test methods, mathematical apparatus and failure acceleration models for predicting failure rate of electronic components, circuit modules or equipment. Do the widespread used models give a precise description for all kind of failure mechanisms? Can they define the acceleration factor of any test, and the accelerated lifetime of any test vehicles? In connection with open surface migration tests (when the test circuit samples are not covered by any protective or packaging material) two climatic test methods (Thermal Humidity Bias––THB test methods with different parameter settings) have been compared: 40 °C/95%RH suggested by “a well known IEC standard” and 85 °C/85%RH required by the newer JEDEC standard. The novelty of the paper is the comparison between the two climatic test methods. The main conclusion is a suggestion to keep on with the old method in the mentioned particular case, which may be shocking for people who prefer the new standards. All conclusions are strengthened both with theoretical and experimental test results.</description><issn>0026-2714</issn><issn>1872-941X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2002</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkFtLAzEQhYMoWKs_QciT6MPqJHtLnkSKNygIVsG3kM1O2shearIr9N-btuKrT2cYvjmcOYScM7hmwIqbBQAvEl6y7BL4FQCINMkPyISJkicyYx-HZPKHHJOTED4jVAJjE_K6QO3NynVLantP9Xrt-7V3ekC6GltXu2FDtTHYoI-7mrZuGQfXd9Rj43Tlmi0xYBgCbXFY9XU4JUdWNwHPfnVK3h_u32ZPyfzl8Xl2N09MmoohkYLLKgOJzCIrhAUrqzqqQORlhTxHluaFNVILzFJpM4OY6YghRIKZdEou9r4x8tcYE6jWhZi00R32Y1C8LDkvgEcw34PG9yF4tCp-2Gq_UQzUtkG1a1Bt61HA1a5Blce72_0dxi--HXoVjMPOYO08mkHVvfvH4QesUHq0</recordid><startdate>20020801</startdate><enddate>20020801</enddate><creator>Bojta, P</creator><creator>Németh, P</creator><creator>Harsányi, G</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SP</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>L7M</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20020801</creationdate><title>Searching for appropriate humidity accelerated migration reliability tests methods</title><author>Bojta, P ; Németh, P ; Harsányi, G</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c338t-9829b409e1fe168f0f9bd68f8ee27be25e1356fc9a8e439f4cee4af0fe0ee21c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2002</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bojta, P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Németh, P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harsányi, G</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Electronics &amp; Communications Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><jtitle>Microelectronics and reliability</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bojta, P</au><au>Németh, P</au><au>Harsányi, G</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Searching for appropriate humidity accelerated migration reliability tests methods</atitle><jtitle>Microelectronics and reliability</jtitle><date>2002-08-01</date><risdate>2002</risdate><volume>42</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>1213</spage><epage>1218</epage><pages>1213-1218</pages><issn>0026-2714</issn><eissn>1872-941X</eissn><abstract>Lifetime estimation is one of today's frequently used reliability testing tool. There are standardized test methods, mathematical apparatus and failure acceleration models for predicting failure rate of electronic components, circuit modules or equipment. Do the widespread used models give a precise description for all kind of failure mechanisms? Can they define the acceleration factor of any test, and the accelerated lifetime of any test vehicles? In connection with open surface migration tests (when the test circuit samples are not covered by any protective or packaging material) two climatic test methods (Thermal Humidity Bias––THB test methods with different parameter settings) have been compared: 40 °C/95%RH suggested by “a well known IEC standard” and 85 °C/85%RH required by the newer JEDEC standard. The novelty of the paper is the comparison between the two climatic test methods. The main conclusion is a suggestion to keep on with the old method in the mentioned particular case, which may be shocking for people who prefer the new standards. All conclusions are strengthened both with theoretical and experimental test results.</abstract><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/S0026-2714(02)00083-5</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0026-2714
ispartof Microelectronics and reliability, 2002-08, Vol.42 (8), p.1213-1218
issn 0026-2714
1872-941X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_27722602
source Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
title Searching for appropriate humidity accelerated migration reliability tests methods
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-03T20%3A48%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Searching%20for%20appropriate%20humidity%20accelerated%20migration%20reliability%20tests%20methods&rft.jtitle=Microelectronics%20and%20reliability&rft.au=Bojta,%20P&rft.date=2002-08-01&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=1213&rft.epage=1218&rft.pages=1213-1218&rft.issn=0026-2714&rft.eissn=1872-941X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/S0026-2714(02)00083-5&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E27722602%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=27722602&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0026271402000835&rfr_iscdi=true