RADC Failure Rate Prediction Methodology — Today and Tomorrow

  • Peter F. Manno
Conference paper
Part of the NATO ASI Series book series (volume 3)

Abstract

The failure rate and Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) prediction capabilities are essential in the development and maintenance of reliable electronic equipments/systems. Predictions performed during the design phase yield early estimates of the anticipated equipment reliability which provides a quantitative basis for design trade-off analyses, reliability-growth monitoring, and life-cycle cost studies. The microcircuit reliability prediction techniques, presented in MIL-HDBK-217D, “Reliability Prediction of Electronic Equipment,” are reasonably accurate for a variety of device technologies over the Small Scale Integration (SSI), Medium Scale Integration (MSI), and Large Scale Integration (LSI) complexity range.

Keywords

Fatigue Microwave Production Line Sapphire 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. (1).
    MIL-HDBK-217, “Military Standardization Handbook, Reliability Stress and Failure Rate Data for Electronic Equipment,” 8 August 1962.Google Scholar
  2. (2).
    MIL-HDBK-217A, “Military Standardization Handbook, Reliability Prediction of Electronic Equipment,” 1 December 1965.Google Scholar
  3. (3).
    RADC “Reliability Notebook,” Volume II, September 1967.Google Scholar
  4. (4).
    MIL-HDBK-217B, “Military Standardization Handbook, Reliability Prediction of Electronic Equipment,” 20 September 1974.Google Scholar
  5. (5).
    “Hybrid Microcircuit Failure Rate Prediction,” RADC-TR-78–pril 1978, ADA055756.Google Scholar
  6. (6).
    “LSI/Microprocessor Reliability Prediction Model Development,” RADC-TR-79–97, March 1979, AD A068911.Google Scholar
  7. (7).
    “Failure Rates for Fiber Optic Assemblies,” RADC-TR-80–322, AD A092315.Google Scholar
  8. (8).
    “Traveling Wave Tube Failure Rates,” RADC-TR-80–288, AD A096055.Google Scholar
  9. (9).
    “Reliability Prediction Modeling of New Devices,” RADC-TR-80–237, July 1980, AD A090026.Google Scholar
  10. (10).
    “Improved Reliability Prediction Model for Field-Access Magnetic Bubble Devices,” AFWAL-TR-81–1052.Google Scholar
  11. (11).
    “Revision of Environmental Factors for MIL-HDBK-217B,” RADC-TR-80–299, AD A091837.Google Scholar
  12. (12).
    Rickers/Manno, “Microprocessor and LSI Microcircuit Reliability-Prediction Model,” IEEE Transactions on Reliability, August 1980, Vol. R-29 No. 3.Google Scholar
  13. (13).
    “Correlation of Field Data with Reliability Prediction Models,” RADC-TR-81–329, November 1981.Google Scholar
  14. (14).
    Reliability Analysis Center (RAC) MDR 18.Google Scholar
  15. (15).
    “Microcircuit Package Stress Analysis,” RADC-TR-81–382, Jan 1982, Al 13594.Google Scholar
  16. (16).
    “IC Failure-Rate Calculations Evaluate Components Realistically,” EDN, T. Turner, April 15, 1981.Google Scholar
  17. (17).
    “VLSI Device Reliability Models,” Contract No. F30602–81-C-0242.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter F. Manno
    • 1
  1. 1.Rome Air Development CenterGriffiss AFBUSA

Personalised recommendations