Skip to main content
Log in

Comparison of failure characteristics of different electronic technologies by using modified physics-of-failure approach

  • Case Study
  • Published:
International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The electronic components are used in several safety and maintenance systems that require accurate reliability prediction for higher availability. The traditional reliability prediction methods that draw on standard handbooks such as MIL-HDBK 217F, Telcordia, CNET etc., are inappropriate to determine the reliability indices of these components due to empirical methods does not comply with operating life cycle and technology advancements. The progressive reliability prediction methodology, the physics-of-failure (PoF), emphasizes the root cause of failure, failure analysis, and failure mechanisms based on the analysis of parameter characteristics. However, there is a limitation: it is sometimes difficult to obtain manufacturer’s details for failure analysis and quality information. Several statistical and probability modeling methods can be performed on the experimental data of these components to measure the time to failure. These experiments can be conducted using the accelerated-testing of dominant stress parameters such as voltage, current, temperature, radiation etc. In this paper, the combination of qualitative data from PoF approach and quantitative data from the statistical analysis is used to create a modified physics-of-failure approach. The critical electronic components used in certain safety systems from different technologies are chosen for reliability prediction: optocoupler, constant fraction discriminator, BJT transistor, voltage comparator, voltage follower and instrumentation amplifier is studied. The failure characteristics of each of the technologies are studied and compared according to operating conditions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ASM International (2004) Microelectronics failure analysis desk reference, 5th edn. Materials Park, Ohio ISBN: 9780871708045

    Google Scholar 

  • Bisschop J (2007) Reliability methods and standards. Microelectron Reliab 47:1330–1335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blischke WR, Murthy DNP (2000) Reliability Modelling, Prediction and Optimization. Wiley, New York ISBN: ISBN-13: 978-0471184508

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bradley N (2007) Response surface methodology, Thesis, Indiana University, [Online], Available at: https://www.iusb.edu/math-compsci/_prior-thesis/NBradley_thesis.pdf. Accessed 24 March 2012

  • Christou A (2006) Reliability of high temperature electronics. Center for risk and reliability, University of Maryland, College Park ISBN: 0-9652669-4-X

    Google Scholar 

  • Condra L (2001) Reliability improvement with design of experiments, 2nd edn. CRC Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucher B, Boulli J, Meslet B, Das D (2002) A review of reliability prediction methods for electronic devices. Microelectron Reliab 42:1155–1162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graeb H, Mueller D, Schlichtmann U (2007) Pareto optimization of analog circuits considering variability. 18th European conference on circuit theory and design, ECCTD, August 27–30, Seville, 28–31

  • Guijie W, Meijer GCM (2000) The temperature characteristics of bipolar transistors fabricated in CMOS technology. Sens Actuator (Elsevier) 87:81–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • JEDEC Publication (2009) Failure mechanisms and models for semiconductor devices, JEP122E, (Revision of JEP122D, October 2008), Originally published as JEP122D.01 [Online], Available at: http://www.sematech.org/docubase/document/3955axfr.pdf. Accessed 31 May 2000

  • Mil-HDBK-217F2 (1995) Reliability prediction of electronic equipment, [Online], Available at: http://www.weibull.com/mil_std/mil_hdbk_217f_2.pdf. Accessed 28 Feb 1995

  • Mil-HDBK-338B1 (2007) Electronic reliability design handbook, [Online], Available at: http://www.weibull.com/mil_std/mil_hdbk_338b_1.pdf. Accessed 29 June 2007

  • Mil-HDBK-781D (1986) Reliability methods and standards, [Online], Available at: http://www.weibull.com/mil_std/mil_std_781d.pdf. Accessed 17 Oct 1986

  • Nelson WB (2004) Accelerated testing: statistical models, test plans, and data analysis (Wiley series in probability and statistics). Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Pecht M, Kang W (1988) A critique of Mil-Hdbk-217E reliability prediction methods. IEEE Trans Reliab 37(5):453–457

  • Perry LM (1999) Electronic failure analysis handbook techniques and applications for electronic and electrical packages, components, and assemblies. McGraw-Hill, New York ISBN: 9780071626347

    Google Scholar 

  • Pham H (2003) Handbook of reliability engineering. Springer, New Jersey ISBN: 978-1-85233-841-1

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pham H (2006) Reliability modeling, analysis and optimization, World Scientific, Singapore ISBN: 978-981-256-388-0

  • Sematech (2000) Semiconductor device reliability failure models, technology transfer # 00053955A-XFR [Online], Available at: http://www.sematech.org/docubase/document/3955axfr.pdf. Accessed 31 May 2000

  • Thaduri A (2013) Physics-of-failure based performance modeling of critical electronic components. (Doctoral thesis). Luleå tekniska universitet . Luleå:198 p

  • Thaduri A, Verma AK, Vinod G, Rajesh MG, Kumar U (2012)a Two-stage design of experiments approach for prediction of reliability of optocouplers. Int J Reliab, Qual Saf Eng 19(2):1250007-1–1250007-24

  • Thaduri A, Verma AK, Vinod G, Rajesh MG, Kumar U (2012)b Degradation modeling of voltage comparator using modified physics-of failure approach. Commun Dependability Qual Manag (CDQM), 15(1):76–87

  • Thaduri A, Verma AK, Vinod G, Rajesh MG, Kumar U (2013)a Stress factor and failure analysis of constant fraction discriminator using design of experiments. Int J Reliab, Qual Saf Eng, 20(3):134003-1–134003-28

  • Thaduri A, Verma AK, Kumar U (2013)b Comparison of reliability prediction methods using life cycle cost analysis. IEEE Proceedings on the 59th annual reliability and maintainability symposium (RAMS 2013), January 28–31, Orlando, Florida, USA, pp. 1–7

  • Thaduri A, Verma AK, Vinod G, Rajesh MG, Kumar U (2013)c Reliability prediction of semiconductor devices using modified physics-of failure approach. Int J Syst Assur Eng Manag, 4(1):33–47

  • Theodore FB, Jeffrey B, Guillerno R (2009) Electronic devices and circuits, Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey ISBN13: 9780131111424

  • Verma AK, Murthy ASR (1987) Reliability modeling of electronic components. Microelectron Reliab 27(1):29–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verma AK, Srividya A, Karanki DR (2010) Reliability and safety engineering. Springer, London ISBN: 978-1-84996-231-5

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • White M, Bernstein JB (2008) Microelectronics reliability: physics-of-failure based modeling and lifetime evaluation. JPL Publication, NASA Technical Report WBS: 939904.01.11.10, 08-5 2/08 [Online], Available at: http://trsnew.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bitstream/2014/40791/1/08-05.pdf. Accessed Feb 2008

  • Witczak SC, Schrimpf RD, Fleetwood DM, Galloway KF, Lacoe RC, Mayer DC, Puhl JM, Pease RL, Suehle JS (1993) Charge separation for bipolar transistors. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 40(6):1276–1285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witczak SC, Schrimpf RD, Fleetwood DM, Galloway KF, Lacoe RC, Mayer DC, Puhl JM, Pease RL, Suehle JS (1997) Hardness assurance testing of bipolar junction transistors at elevated irradiation temperatures. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 44(6):1989–2000

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeghbroeck VB (2011) Principles of electronic devices, University of Colorado [Online], Available at: http://ecee.colorado.edu/~bart/book/book/title.htm. Accessed 4 April 2011

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adithya Thaduri.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Thaduri, A., Verma, A.K. & Kumar, U. Comparison of failure characteristics of different electronic technologies by using modified physics-of-failure approach. Int J Syst Assur Eng Manag 6, 198–205 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-014-0301-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-014-0301-y

Keywords

Navigation