Reliability Metrology

  • Johan Liu
  • Olli Salmela
  • Jussi Särkkä
  • James E. Morris
  • Per-Erik Tegehall
  • Cristina Andersson


In this chapter, first, reliability is defined. Then, different ways of modeling reliability are discussed. Empirical models are based on field data and are easy to use. Physical models address a certain failure mechanism and are used to predict wearout. Physical models may be either analytical or they may be run by computer simulations. Other useful information on reliability may be obtained by testing either test vehicles or entire products. Comparing the test results with the test results obtained, when testing similar items with field data, gives a quite good idea on which kind of field reliability performance should be anticipated. Interconnection reliability must also be taken into account when checking the reliability of a component. Many times, the actual component may not represent a large risk, whereas solder interconnection may create risks that need to be mitigated. In the end of this chapter, some statistical distributions are discussed. Especially, practical advice on how to use Weibull distribution is revealed.


Solder Joint Hazard Rate Failure Criterion Bathtub Curve Anisotropic Conductive Adhesive 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    F. Jensen, “Electronic Component Reliability, Fundamentals, Modeling, Evaluation, and Assurance”, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1995.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Military Standard MIL-STD-721C, Definitions for Terms for Reliability and Maintainability, June, 1981.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    International Standard, Information technology – Software product quality, Part 1: Quality Model, ISO/IEC FDIS 9126-1, ISO/IEC 2000.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    MIL-HDBK-217, Reliability Prediction of Electronic Equipment, Version E, October, 1986, 166.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    S. Arrhenius, “On the Reaction Velocity of the Inversion of Cane Sugar by Acids,” Zeitschrift für Physikalische Chemie 4, 1889, 226ff.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    D. L. Crook, “Evolution of VLSI Reliability Engineering”, Proc. Int. Reliability Physics Symposium, 1990, 2–11.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    W. Perry, “Specifications and Standard – A New Way of Doing Business”, US Department of Defense Policy Memorandum, June, 1994.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    TS-TSY-000332, Reliability Prediction Procedure for Electronic Equipment, Issue 2, Bellcore, July, 1988.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Standard Reliability Table for Semiconductor Devices, Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corporation, March, 1985.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Handbook of Reliability Data for Components Used in Telecommunications Systems, Issue 4, British Telecom, January, 1987.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Recuiel De Donnes De Fiabilite Du CNET (Collection of Reliability Data from CNET), Centre National D’Etudes des Telecommunications (National Center for Telecommunication Studies), 1983.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    SN29500, Reliability and Quality Specification Failure Rates of Components, Siemens Standard, 1986.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. B. Bowles, “A Survey of Reliability-Prediction Procedures for Microelectronic Devices”, IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 41, 1992, 2–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
    N. Kelkar, A. Fowler, M. Pecht and M. Cooper, “Phenomenological Reliability Modeling of Plastic Encapsulated Microcircuits”, International Journal of Microcircuits and Electronic Packaging, 19(1), 1996, 167.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    T. Stadterman, B. Hum, D. Barker and A. Dasgupta, “A Physics-of-Failure Approach to Accelerated Life Testing of Electronic Equipment”, Proc. for the Test Technology Symposium ’96, US Army Test and Evaluation Command, John Hopkins University/Applied Physics Laboratory, 4–6, June, 1996.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    J. R. Black, “Physics of Electromigration”, Proc. International Reliability Physics Symposium, 1974, 142–164.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J. Liu, L. Cao, M. Xie, T. N. Goh and Y. Tang, “A General Weibull Model for Reliability Analysis Under Different Failure Criteria – Application on Anisotropic Conductive Adhesive Joining Technology”, IEEE Component Packaging and Manufacturing Technology, 28(4), October 2005, 322–327.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    J. P. Clech, “Solder Reliability Solutions, A PC-Based Design-For-Reliability Tool”, Proc. of Surface Mount International, SMTA, San Jose, CA, 1996.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    A. Syed, “Predicting Solder Joint Reliability for Thermal, Power and Bend Cycle within 26% Accuracy”, Proc. of the 51st Electronics Components and Technology Conference, Orlando, 2001, 255–263.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    J. Galloway, L. Li, R. Dunne and H. Tsubaki, “Analysis of Acceleration Factors Used to Predict BGA Solder Joint Field Life”, Proc. SMTA International, Chicago, 2001, 357–363.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    M. S. Moosa and K. F. Poole, “Simulating IC Reliability with Emphasis on Process-Flaw Related Early Failures”, IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 44, 1995, 556–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    E. Demko, “Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS): A Challenge to Military Equipment Reliability”, Proc. Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, Las Vegas, NV, 1996, 7–12.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    T. Ejim, “High Reliability Telecommunications Equipment: A Tall Order for Chip-Scale Packages”, Chip Scale Review, 5, 1998, 44–48.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    R. Tummala, “Fundamentals of Microsystems Packaging”, McGraw-Hill Professional, New York, 2001.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    M. Ohring, “The Mathematics of Failure and Reliability” in “Reliability and Failure of Electronic Materials and Devices”, Academic Press, San Diego, CA, 1998, 200–201, Chapter 4.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Johan Liu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Olli Salmela
    • 3
  • Jussi Särkkä
    • 4
  • James E. Morris
    • 5
  • Per-Erik Tegehall
    • 6
  • Cristina Andersson
    • 7
  1. 1.SMIT Center and Bionano Systems Laboratory Department of Microtechnology and NanoscienceChalmers University of TechnologyGöteborgSweden
  2. 2.Key Laboratory of New Displays and System Integration SMIT Center and School of Mechatronics and Mechanical EngineeringShanghai UniversityShanghaiChina
  3. 3.Nokia Siemens NetworksEspooFinland
  4. 4.Nokia Siemens NetworksOuluFinland
  5. 5.Department of Electrical & Computer EngineeringPortland State UniversityPortlandUSA
  6. 6.Swerea IVFMölndalSweden
  7. 7.Department of Microtechnology and NanoscienceChalmers University of TechnologyGöteborgSweden

Personalised recommendations