pc engineer training by lestercaldwell

VIEWS: 303 PAGES: 136


                                ESTEC – MAY 2003


 1        Introduction                                              6
 1.1      What is Component Engineering?                            6
 1.2      High Reliability Components                               6
 1.2.1    Hi-Rel Parts, High Reliability Components                 7
 1.3      The BathTub Curve                                         7
 1.4      Operating Environment for Space Components                9
 1.5      Hi-Rel vs. COTS                                          10
 1.6      Design Approval                                          10
 2.0      Component Procurement Systems – ESA/SCC                  11
 2.1      Detailed Test and Inspection (ESA/SCC) Requirements      11
 2.1.1    Purposes of Different Groups of Tests                    13
 2.1.2    Special in Process Controls                              13
 2.1.3    Final Production Tests                                   13
 2.1.4    Burn-in and Electrical Measurements                      24
 2.2      Descriptions of Individual Tests and Inspections         24
 2.2.1    Scanning Electron Microscope Inspection                  26
 2.2.2    Internal Visual Inspection                               27
 2.2.3    External Visual Inspection                               27
 2.2.4    Electrical screening Tests (Specific to Type)            27
 2.2.5    High Temperature Stabilisation Bake                      27
 2.2.6    Temperature Cycling and Thermal shock                    27
 2.2.7    Constant Acceleration                                    28
 2.2.8    Particle Impact Noise Detection                          28
 2.2.9    Test, Fine and Gross                                     28
 2.2.10   Burn-in                                                  28
 2.2.11   Radiographic Inspection                                  28
 2.2.12   Permanence of Marking                                    29
 2.2.13   High Temperature Storage                                 29
 2.2.14   Bond Pull Test                                           29
 2.2.15   Die Shear Test                                           29
 2.2.16   Mechanical Shock Test                                    29
 2.2.17   Vibration Testing                                        29
 2.2.18   Thermal Shock                                            30
 2.2.19   Moisture Resistance                                      30
 2.2.20   Solderability                                            30
 2.2.21   Terminal Strength                                        30
 2.2.22   Operating Life                                           31
 2.3      Summary of Generic Chart Changes                         31
 ``                       Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc     1 of 136

2.4        Lot Acceptance Tests                                        32
3.0        Other Component Procurement Systems                         34
3.1        CECC system                                                 34
3.1.1      The Product                                                 34
3.1.2      What is CECC Approval?                                      34
3.1.3      System Organisation                                         35
3.1.4      Structure of the CECC Specification System                  35
3.1.5      Manufacturer Approval                                       36
3.1.6      CECC Screening Processes                                    38
3.2        National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)        41
3.2.1      Main NASA Sites                                             41
3.2.2      NHB 5300.4 – Parts requirements for NASA Programmes         41
3.2.3      Programme Management                                        41
3.2.4      Component Requirements                                      41
3.2.5      GSFC Preferred Parts list                                   42
3.3.1      MIL-STD-883                                                 42    Objective                                                   43    Detailed Specification                                      43    Screening Flows                                             43    Destructive Physical Analysis                               46    Class B                                                     46    Class S                                                     46    Qualification and Quality Conformance Testing               46    Group A Inspection                                          46    Group B Inspection                                          46   Group C Inspection                                          50   Group D Inspection                                          50   Group E Inspection                                          50   Qualification                                               50   Wafer Lot Acceptance                                        50   VSLI Screening Techniques                                   50   Applicability of Test Methods                               50   Failure Analysis Test Methods                               52   Summary                                                     52
3.3.2      MIL-M-38510 Standardisation Programme                       52    Introduction                                                52    Programme Background                                        52    Programme Organisation                                      53    Requirement for Obtaining and Maintaining QPL Listings      53    Line Certification                                          53    Device Qualification                                        54    Qualification by Extension                                  55    Processing of JAN Devices                                   56    Non Destructive Bond Pull Testing                           56   Burn-in and Electrical Testing                              56   Alternative Test Circuits                                   56   Test Equipment Verification                                 56   Inspection Lot Formation                                    56   Wafer Lot Acceptance                                        57   Traceablility                                               57   Quality Conformance Inspection                              57   Additional Data Regarding QPL Listing                       58   Part Numbering Part Marking                                 58   Summary                                                     59
3.3.3      MIL-I-38535                                                 59
3.3.4      QPL-QML Differences                                         59
3.3.5      MIL-S-19500                                                 59    Introduction                                                59    Programme Background                                        59    Purpose and Structure                                       60

``                          Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc       2 of 136
                      COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE    Qualification                                          60    Product Assurance Programme                            60    Line Certification                                     61    Device Qualification                                   65    Re-Qualification                                       65    One Hundred Percent Processing for JAN Devices         65   Quality Conformance Testing                            69   Group A Testing                                        69   Group B Testing                                        69   Group C Testing                                        69   Group D Testing                                        70   Other MIL-S-19500 Constraints                          70   Non-Standard Discrete Specifications                   70   Summary                                                70
3.3.6      MIL-STD-202                                            70    Scope                                                  70    Numbering system                                       71    General Requirements                                   72
3.4         Specification Writing                                 74
3.5        Obtaining Specifications                               75
4.0        Component Procurement                                  76
4.1        Pre-Procurement Phase                                  76
4.1.1      Objective                                              76
4.1.2      Parts list Review                                      76
4.1.3      Component Selection                                    77
4.1.4      Preferred Parts List                                   77
4.1.5      Component Type Reduction                               81
4.1.6      Component Evaluation and Approval Testing              81
4.1.7      Design and Application Assessment                      81
4.1.8      Constructional Analysis                                82
4.1.9      Manufacturer Assessment                                82
4.1.10     Evaluation Testing                                     82
4.1.11     Evaluation Report                                      84
4.1.12     Parts Approval Documents (PAD)                         84
4.1.13     Declared Components List (DCL)                         84
4.2        Procurement Phase                                      88
4.2.1      Manufacturers Quotations                               88
4.2.2      Unit Costs                                             88
4.2.3      Lot Charges                                            88
4.2.4      Long Lead Times                                        88
4.2.5      Order Placement                                        88
4.2.6      Attrition                                              89
4.2.7      Obsolescence                                           89
4.3        Post Procurement Phase                                 90
4.3.1      Preparation for Delivery                               90
4.3.2      Delivery                                               90
4.3.3      Incoming/Receiving Inspection                          90
4.3.4      Incoming Test Procedure                                91
4.3.5      Records                                                91
4.3.6      Non-Conformance                                        91
4.3.7      Destructive Physical Analysis                          94    Component Types Subject to DPA                         94    DPA Procedures                                         95    DPA Failure                                            95
4.3.8      Delivery to Users                                      95
4.3.9      User Acceptance                                        96
4.3.10     Failure Analysis                                       96
4.4        Non Conformance Reports                                97
4.4.1      ESA/SCC Non-Conformance Procedure                      97
4.4.2      Non-Conformance                                        98

``                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc   3 of 136

4.4.3     Initiation of the ESA/SCC Non-Conformance System                              99
4.4.4     The Manufacturer’s Chief inspector                                           100
4.4.5     The ESA/SCC System Users                                                     100
4.4.6     The Non-Conformance Control Sheets (NCCS)                                    101
4.4.7     NCCS Initiation                                                              101
4.4.8     Identification Selection                                                     101
4.4.9     Description Section                                                          105
4.4.10    Continuation Sheets                                                          105
4.4.11    Identification of Non-Conformance Control Sheets                             105
4.4.12    Non-Conformance Control Sheets Classification                                106
4.4.13    Notification of ESA/SCC                                                      107
4.4.14    Problems Related to the ESA/SCC MRB                                          107
4.4.15    MRB Decisions                                                                109
4.4.16    MRB Dispositions                                                             109
4.4.17    NCCS Close-outs                                                              109
4.4.18    Resolution section                                                           109
4.4.19    Close-out Section                                                            109
4.4.20    Distribution of the Non-Conformance Control Sheet                            110
4.4.21    Non-Conformance Summary                                                      110
4.4.22    Document Change Request                                                      110
4.5       Approach to Inspections                                                      111
4.5.1     General                                                                      111
4.5.2     Planning of Inspections                                                      112
4.5.3     Performance of an Inspection                                                 113   Point of Contact                                                             113   Documentary Order of Precedence                                              114   Sample Inspection                                                            114   Sampling Techniques Appropriate to the Procurer’s Inspector                  115   Examples of the Type of sample inspection Invoked by the ESA/SCC System      120   Inspection requirement Summary                                               122
4.6       ESA Alert System                                                             123
4.7       Electrostatic Discharge (ESD)                                                123
4.7.1     Introduction                                                                 123
4.7.2     Effects of Electrostatic Discharge on Electronic Devices                     123
4.7.3     How Devices are Damaged                                                      125
4.7.4     Failure Mechanisms                                                           128
4.7.5     Protective Measurers                                                         128
4.7.6     Handling Procedure for Electronic Components with a High ESD Sensitivity     129
4.7.7     Work Areas protected against ESD                                             130
4.7.8     Safety Precautions during Incoming Inspection                                131
4.7.9     Precautions During Storage and Transport                                     131
4.8.1     Tin Whiskers                                                                 133
4.8.2     COTS and PEMs                                                                134
4.8.3     Component Relife Testing                                                     135

``                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                         4 of 136

Tables and Figures

Figure 1    The Bath Tub Curve                                                   9
Figure 2    Typical Chart IV from a Generic Specification                       33
Figure 3    Types of CECC Approval                                              37
Figure 4    Structure of the CECC System                                        37
Figure 5    CECC Screening Procedures                                           38
Figure 6    Typical EEE Parts Procurement Phases and Time Scales                78
Figure 7    EEE Parts Procurement, Pre-Procurement Phase                        80
Figure 8A   Example PPL Part 1 Entry                                            82
Figure 8B   Example PPL Part 2 Entry                                            83
Figure 9A   Example PAD Sheet                                                   86
Figure 9B   Example PAD Sheet (Cont.)                                           87
Figure 10   Example incoming Inspection Report                                  93
Figure 11   Non Conformance Control Sheet                                      102
Figure 12   Non Conformance Control Continuation Sheet                         103
Figure 13   Flow Diagram for Non Conformance Procedure                         104
Figure 14   Common Telex or Telefax Form                                       108
Figure 15   Non Conformance Summary                                            110
Figure 16   Activity Flow                                                      112
Figure 17   Sample Size Code Letters                                           115
Figure 18   Single Sample Plans for Normal Inspection (Master Table)           116
Figure 19   LTPD Sampling Plan for Lot Sizes Greater than 200                  117
Figure 20   LTPD Sampling Plan for Lot Sizes Less than 200                     118
Figure 21   Electrical Field Surrounding a Statically Charged Person           126

Table 1A    Chart II: Final Production Tests                                   14-17
Table 1B    Chart II: Burn-in and Electrical Measurements                      18-22
Table 2     Special in Process Controls Included in Generic Specifications       23
Table 3     Some of the Tests and Inspections Included in the ESA/SCC System     26
Table 4     CECC Inspection Group and Test Conditions                            40
Table 5     MIL-STD-883 Test Methods                                           44-46
Table 6     MIL-STD-883 100% Screening Requirements                              48
Table 7     Numerical Index of MIL-STD-750                                     62-65
Table 8     MIL-S-19500 Screening Requirements                                   67
Table 9     Numerical Index of Test Methods                                      73
Table 10    Incoming Inspection Operations                                       90
Table 11    Reported ESD Minimum Susceptibility Values                          124
Table 12    Typical Electrostatic Voltages                                      126
Table 13    Typical Charge Sources                                              126
Table 14    Part Constituents Susceptible to ESD                                129

``                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                    5 of 136


The objective of this training manual and associated training course is to provide the delegate with
an overview of the areas of expertise that is demanded of a component engineer. The course is
primarily intended for European component users and as a result greater emphasis is given to
quality requirements of the European Space Agency.


Component engineering is not so much a specialisation as an accumulation of a range of skills and
knowledge that in itself yields value to the industry. Component Engineers have a breadth of
knowledge and experience that covers the fundamental understanding of devices through the
electronic principals and their materials, construction and manufacture. They must also have a
comprehensive knowledge of component specifications, derating, screening requirements that are
called upon in high reliability specifications.
The unusual demands of the space industry necessitate the unusual combination of both the breath
of a component engineer’s knowledge as well as the very specific skills and experience of high
reliability field.


A component is by definition “The smallest sub-division of a system which cannot be further sub-
divided without destroying its function”.

EEE stands for E - Electrical, E - Electromechanical, E - Electronic components.

-           Electrical components include:

            -   Resistors
            -   Capacitors
            -   Connectors

-           Electromechanical components include:

            -   Relays
            -   Switches
            -   Actuators

-           Electronic components include:

            -   Integrated Circuits
            -   Transistors
            -   Diodes

The Europeans tend to use the word component, the Americans the word part; therefore you may
accept that EEE part and EEE component are synonymous.

In recent years Multichip/Multicomponent devices have been included within the classification of
EEE components which is to some degree causing a re-think of the definition.

``                            Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                            6 of 136


Once again identifying the difference in US and European terminology, the Americans tend to use the
term Hi-Rel Part, the Europeans High Reliability Components.

Over the years the terms have been intermixed and you will now find reports, papers etc. which use
both Hi-Rel, High Reliability parts and components, you will probably find the same mixture in this
manual, but what do we mean by high reliability?

High Reliability components are those in which a very high degree of confidence can be placed, that
they have stable characteristics and a working life in excess of the anticipated mission time. This
definition is of course badly flawed in that the component manufacturers have no idea how long a
mission is supposed to last. A decade ago mission times were identified in terms of three to five
years, today the Space Station COLUMBUS has a design life of thirty years.

The US Military user market has led the field in specifying reliability standards. In the mid 1960's the
various government agencies responsible for semiconductor reliability saw that screenable defects
were resulting in an in-equipment failure rate of about 1% per thousand hours. In-depth failure
analysis allowed them to determine what the predominant failure mechanisms were. The Solid State
Applications Branch of the Air Force's Rome Air Development Centre (RADC) was assigned the task
of developing a screening procedure which would remove the infant mortality failures which had led to
the high failure rate previously encountered. Working closely with other semiconductor reliability
experts, the RADC staff developed MIL-STD-883, which was first issued in 1968.


Practical results obtained over the years, together with theoretical modelling, have shown that a plot of
failure rate against time for a typical component lot has the form shown in Figure 1. This is called the
“Bathtub” curve, and can be divided into three phases.

-     Phase 1, Infant Mortality Phase

Failures occurring as a result of poor assembly and test are called infant mortalities. The objective of the
inspections and tests imposed upon high reliability components is to remove these failures before the
components are assembled into hardware, and, if the level of failures is too high to scrap the entire lot.

-     Phase 2, Working Life

The essential feature of high reliability components is that the “Working Life” of the “Bathtub” curve is
constantly as long and low as possible.

-     Phase 3, Wear Out

Wear out or end of useful life occurs when parameters start to drift to that extent that the hardware
operation is affected.

Taking all of the above into account, it is probably better to use the term component confidence. That
is the user has sufficient confidence in the components to be used in his hardware, that failure will not
occur as a result of manufacturing defects or wear out mechanisms.

The need for components that are free of Infant Mortality, have a demonstrable working life in
excess of mission requirements, and whose early wear out is not foreseen as a result of an
identifiable failure mechanism, should be self evident for non-maintainable spacecraft missions, or
indeed for manned missions where human life might be jeopardised. However the very fact that
mission duration, operating environment and mission criticality vary widely could, as has happened
in the past, lead to component control and procurement requirements being developed to suit the
needs of a single programme, with no attempt at achieving standardisation, ultimately leading to a
complete lack of control of component costs, lead times, quality and reliability.
``                             Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                7 of 136

One of the most significant lessons learnt from the past is that it is essential to set a minimum
requirements baseline which can be used by component manufacturers and the user industry alike
as the basic standard to which components are to be manufactured.

These minimum requirements will inevitably change as technologies become more advanced, as
the processing of components becomes more complex and as this processing becomes more
automated and results in higher quality and component reliability.

This manual identifies those requirements that have been developed to provide the current baseline,
and also identifies where new ideas and concepts are leading to significant changes in the approach
to the provision of components for space hardware.

``                           Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                            8 of 136

                                FIGURE 1 - BATHTUB CURVE


                                      Time in operation

                                                                Phase III
          Phase I                       Phase II
          Infant                        Working Life
                      Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                     9 of 136


The operating environment for components built into hardware can be both extremely severe or
benign. Temperature extremes from -40 °C to +125 °C can be experienced by components open to
the space environment. However the vast majority of EEE components are to be found inside the
spacecraft’s electronic sub-assemblies, protected from the environment of space, particularly in a
revolving spacecraft where temperatures tend to even out. Here the components operate under very
moderate temperature conditions, comfortability within their manufacturer guaranteed operating
temperature extremes.

The same is true when assessing the impacts of space radiation on EEE components. Here,
however, it is not simply the position that a component occupies within a spacecraft, but careful
consideration must also be given to the Spacecraft’s orbit and mission duration on one side and the
component technology on the other.

With the increased drive towards the use of commercially available components, and with
spacecraft hardware design engineers wanting to use advanced technologies to improve
performance whilst reducing mass, it is important that component engineers have a thorough
understanding of the effect of radiation on spacecraft electronics and therefore the subject is dealt
within in some detail both in this manual and during the training course.

Mechanical stress is not generally a major problem for EEE components. The mechanical and
acceleration stresses induced during launch are generally well within the components capability to
withstand, unless these are enhanced by latent stresses either built into the components, or induced
during the hardware manufacturing operations e.g. poor control of lead bending resulting in latent
stress in glass feed through seals.

In the early years of space hardware development, the effects of operating in a vacuum were
underestimated and many component failures occurred as a result of loss of hermeticity in some
component types. The lessons were quickly learnt and certain component types were either
prohibited e.g. hollow core metal film resistors, or required stringent testing e.g. Wet film tantalum
capacitors, before being accepted. With the growing acceptance that plastic encapsulated, non-
hermetic devices will be required to be flown in space hardware, great care must be taken to ensure
that history is not repeated.

As with any good design practice, control over the electrical stress within the various component
types is maintained by the use of derating. That is, ensuring that all components are operated, even
under worst case conditions, well within the manufacturers guaranteed electrical performance

As stated above, the majority of EEE components assembled into spacecraft hardware, are
operating in a benign environment, and are more than capable of coping with the electrical and
environmental stresses that they are likely to be subjected to.

Why is it then that EEE components are required to undergo such rigorous test and inspection
routines? The answer is as stated earlier. To ensure that the infant mortality is identified and
removed, and that the flight lot has, and is operating in, a working life where there is reasonable
expectation that the mission life will be met or exceeded prior to the onset of component wear out.

                          Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                 10 of 136


The satellite industry is following the industrial trends and increasing their emphasis on the use of
new technology and employing the ‘sensible’ use of commercial parts in military and space systems
and the transition from prescriptive ‘MIL specs’ to ‘performance specifications’.

Whilst ‘Custom-Off-The-Shelf’ components (COTS) may be the only parts available they inevitably
carry with them concerns about their reliability. To gain greater confidence in COTS devices they
can be ‘upscreened’. Upscreening involves subjecting the devices to electrical operation at high
temperature with a view to removing those devices that would account for the infant mortality stage
of the bath-tub curve. Upscreening should be carried out in parallel with a constructional analysis to
assess the components suitability for use in a high reliability application.

NASA EEE Part Assurance Group (NEPAG) has conducted a number of studies into the cost
effectiveness of choosing to upscreening COTS devices rather than buy quality parts at the outset.
The results of their study indicated that whilst the initial cost of the component would be very low,
the cost of all the subsequent screening would push the price up to at least as high as the price of
the space qualified parts.

The major issue with semiconductor COTS is the lack of traceability of the die they contain. Analysis
of several samples from the same procurement lot often yields die that originate from several
different sources and as a result any subsequent lot related testing is meaningless.

Another issue that raises quality concerns is that precap inspections cannot be performed
retrospectively and therefore the competence and trust of the manufacturer’s inspectors must be
relied upon.

When dealing with plastic parts we must consider some altogether new failure mechanisms and
introduce test and screening methods accordingly. For example the delamination of various
interfaces to the plastic requires careful screening using scanning acoustic microscopy.

A concern that surfaced as a result of the NEPAG studies is the lower than expected transition to
glass (Tg) of some of the encapsulating plastics. Thermal analysis conducted on a range of
commercial components from several manufacturers yielded some Tg values of <120°C. This has
caused real concern in the space community since space parts are expected to operate above this
temperature and most screening flows require high temperature testing at 125°C. Routine analysis
of samples for glass transition temperature may become a requirement.

It should be clear from the above considerations that confidence in the reliability of COTS devices
can never reach the same level as components with ‘built-in’ space.


Much time and money can be saved if the component engineers are involved early in the design
phase of a project. The component engineer should help steer the design engineers towards the
use of suitable components that have qualification or pedigree through use in other space projects.
In reality, designers often carry out the design phase in isolation producing parts lists which may
require much additional upscreening with associated costs and possibly necessitate a redesign
when reviewed by the component procurers.

                          Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                 11 of 136




This Section covers the various tests and inspections which form part of the ESA/SCC Specification
System for high reliability components.

The descriptions of the tests and inspections and their associated accept and reject criteria are
intended to provide an overview and initial guidance only.

As identified earlier of this manual, practical results obtained over the years, together with theoretical
modelling, have shown that a plot of failure rate against time for a typical component lot has the form
of a “bathtub” curve.

The essential feature of high reliability components is that “the working life” part of the “bathtub” curve
is consistently as long and low as possible.

By careful design of the component, choice of the materials used in it, and selection and control of the
manufacturing processes, the manufacturer attempts to meet the requirements for a high reliability
device. Experience has shown, however, that this alone is not sufficient to ensure the consistent
production of high quality and reliability components. The manufacturer can make mistakes in the
design, choice of materials, or process selection and control, which means that any components that
are produced will never have high reliability. It is also possible that unexpected inter-reactions
between design, materials and processes will have the same effect. Even if none of these problems
arise, and high reliability components can be produced, it is still possible for random defects in the
materials or faults in the processing to result in the production of unreliable components.

It is for these reasons that test and inspection points form an essential part of any system for
specifying high reliability components. The correct selection and use of tests and inspections can
confirm that the combination of design, materials and processes which has been used is capable of
producing components of the required quality and reliability. Other tests and inspections can screen
out from each production lot the infant mortalities and defective components caused by faults in the
materials or processing. Finally, there are tests and inspections which can provide confidence that
the components which have passed the screening in any production lot actually do meet the specified
quality and reliability requirements.

In the ESA/SCC System these inspections and tests can be divided into five groups:-

-    Special In-process Controls,

-    Final Production Tests,

-    Burn-in and Electrical Measurements,

-    Qualification Tests,

-    Lot Acceptance Tests.

To give an indication of the types of tests and inspections which are included in each of these groups,
Table 1A and 1B, Final Production and Screening test Matrix for ESA/SCC components, has been
included to provide an overview. It will be seen that there are variations in test and inspection
requirements between component types but the purpose of each group of tests and inspections
remains the same.

                             Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                   12 of 136


The different groups of tests and inspections identified within Table 1 all have specific purposes.
These are described in more detail here. It is important that a Procurer’s Inspector is aware of the
purpose of each group of tests and inspections in order to fully understand the significance of each
individual test and inspection within that group.


These are special tests and inspections which are carried out during manufacturing, with the intention
of checking specific processing steps or sub-components of the final device. These processing steps
or sub-components are ones which have been shown to be critical in producing high reliability
components, and which cannot be tested or inspected at the end of production. They are normally
highly specific to the device type, and for some devices are only described in the Detail specification.
Special in-process controls which are described in ESA/SCC Generic Specifications are listed in Table

The performance of these special in-process controls must be fully documented by the manufacturer
and a procurer’s Inspector may be required to review this documentation, or witness the controls.


The final step in the manufacture of most types of components is the final sealing of the component
package. The Final Production Tests are a series of tests and inspections carried out just before and
just after the components are sealed. Their purpose is to look for any anomalies in the production lot,
resulting either from random defects in the materials or faults in the processing during manufacture.
Some of the tests and inspections are non-destructive and can therefore be used as a 100% screen to
detect and reject anomalous components. Other tests or test sequences are generally considered
destructive and can therefore only be used to test a sample of the components. The importance of
detecting anomalous components, and then rejecting either them or the complete lot, is that the
presence of such components in a lot would give a high failure rate which could not be screened out
by burn in.

                          Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                   13 of 136
                                        COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE

                                      TABLE 1A - CHART II: FINAL PRODUCTION TESTS
                                             3001          3002        3003         3004          3005         3006           3007
                                           Capacitors   Capacitors   Capacitors   Capacitors    Capacitors   Capacitors    Capacitors
                                           (Ceramic)      (Solid       (Non        (Glass)     (Aluminium    (Met/Plas)      (Mica)
                                                          Tant)        Solid)                  )

                                            B     C      B     C      B     C      B     C      B      C      B      C     B      C

Internal (Pre-encapsulation) Visual         X     X      X     X                   X     X                    X      X     X      X
100% Visual Inspection                      X     X
Pre Burn-in (168 hours Steady State
High Temp. Stabilisation Bake
Temperature Cycling
Thermal Shock                                            X     X                                                           X      X
Rapid Change in Temperature                 X     X                                                           X      X

High Voltage Stabilisation                                                         X     X
Constant Acceleration
Bond Strength Test
Die Shear Test

Fine/Gross Leak (Seal Test)
Seal Test                                                4     4      X     X      X     X                   5, 7   5, 7
Electrical Measurements @ AMB               X     X      X     X      X     X      X     X      X      X      X      X     X      X
Electrical Measurements @ HOT, @            X     X                                                           X      X
Centre Contact Capability/Forces
Contact Retainer Test
Magnetism Level
Female Contact Capability/Forces

Coupling Proof Torque

Marking                                     X     X      X     X      X     X      X     X      X      X      X      X     X      X
Serialisation                               X            X                         X                          X            X
External Visual Inspection                  X     X      X     X      X     X      X     X      X      X      X      X     X      X
Dimension Check                             X     X      X     X      X     X      X     X      X      X      X      X     X      X

Check for Lot Failure

                                          Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                           14 of 136
                                        COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE

                                      TABLE 1A - CHART II: FINAL PRODUCTION TESTS
                                             3008          3009         3010         3011         3012       3201         3401
                                           Capacitors    Capacitors   Capacitors   Capacitors    (Caps,     RF Coils   Connectors
                                          Feed through   (Chip Cer)   (Variable)   (ChipTant)   Tant,SMT)   (Fixed)    (Circ Rect)

                                           B      C       B     C     B      C     B      C     B     C     B     C     B      C

Internal (Pre-encapsulation) Visual        X      X                   X      X                              X     X
100% Visual Inspection                                    X     X                               X     X
Pre Burn-in (168 hours Steady State
High Temp. Stabilisation Bake
Temperature Cycling
Thermal Shock                                                                                               X     X

Rapid Change of Temperature                X      X                   X      X     X      X     X     X
High Voltage Stabilisation
Vibration                                  X      X

Constant Acceleration
Bond Strength Test
Die Shear Test

Fine/Gross Leak (Seal Test)               1, 4   1, 4
Seal Test                                                                                                              17
Electrical Measurements @ AMB              X      X       X     X     X      X     X      X     X     X     X     X    14

Electrical Measurements @ HOT, @           1      1                                             1     1
Mating Verification                                                                                                     X
Contact Retainer Test                                                                                                   X
Contact Capability                                                                                                      X
Centre Contact Capability/Forces
Contact Retainer Test                                                                                                  14
Magnetism Level                                                                                                        11,14

Female Contact Capability/Forces                                                                                        X      X

Coupling Proof Torque

Marking                                    X      X       X     X     X            X            X     X     X     X     7
Serialisation                              X                          X            X            X           X
External Visual Inspection                 X      X                   X      X     X      X     X     X     X     X     X
Dimension Check                            X      X       X     X     X      X     X      X     X     X     X     X    16

Check for Lot Failure                                                                                                   X

                                          Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                        15 of 136
                                      COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE

                                TABLE 1A - CHART II: FINAL PRODUCTION TESTS (cont.)
                                           4001        4002        4003          4004       4005         4006         4008
                                        Resistors     Resistors   Resistors    Resistors   Resistors    Resistors   Resistors
                                       (Fixed Film)    (Wire      (Power)     (Variable)    (N/W       Thermistor    (Fuses)
                                                      Wound)                                Thick)

                                        B      C      B      C    B      C     B      C    B      C     B     C     B      C

Internal (Pre-encapsulation) Visual                                                        X      X     X     X
Pre Burn-in (168 hours Steady State
High Temp. Stabilisation Bake

Temperature Cycling
Thermal Shock                                                                              X      X     X     X
Rapid Change in Temperature
High Voltage Stabilisation

Constant Acceleration
PIND                                                                                       2      2
Bond Strength Test
Die Shear Test
Fine/Gross Leak (Seal Test)                                                                1      1

Seal Test                                                                                                           X      X
Electrical Measurements @ AMB           X      X      X      X    X      X                 X      X     X     X     X      X
Electrical Measurements @ HOT, @
Centre Contact Capability/Forces
Contact Retainer Test
Magnetism Level
Female Contact Capability/Forces
Coupling Proof Torque

Coating/Sleeving                                                                                                    X      X

Radiographic                                                                                                        7      7
Overload                                X      X      X      X    X      X                 X      X
Marking                                 X      X      X      X    X      X                 X      X     X     X
Serialisation                                         X           X                        X            X
External Visual Inspection                            X      X    X      X                 X      X     X     X     X      X
Dimension Check                         X      X      X      X    X      X                 X      X     X     X     X      X
Check for Lot Failure                                                                                               X      X

                                       Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                       16 of 136
                                      COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE

                              TABLE 1A - CHART II: FINAL PRODUCTION TESTS (CONT.)

                                          3901        3902        4009        5000         5010         9000
                                          Wires       Wires     Resistors   Transistor    Discrete   Integrated
                                        (600V LF)   (Coax RF)   (Heaters)   s/Diodes     Microwave     Circuits

                                        B     C     B     C     B      C    B      C     B     C     B      C

Internal (Pre-encapsulation) Visual                                         X      X     X     X     X      X
Pre Burn-in (168 hours Steady State                                                      2      2
High Temp. Stabilisation Bake                                               X      X     X     X     X      X
Temperature Cycling                                                                                  X      X
Thermal Shock                                                               X      X     X     X

Rapid Change in Temperature                                     X      X
High Voltage Stabilisation
Vibration                                                                                2      2

Constant Acceleration                                                       X      X     X     X     X      X
PIND                                                                        9            9           X
Bond Strength Test                                                          2      2     X     X     X      X

Die Shear Test                                                              2      2     X     X     X      X
Fine/Gross Leak (Seal Test)                                                 1      1     X     X     1      1
Seal Test
Electrical Measurements @ AMB           X     X     X     X     X      X    X      X     X     X     X      X

Electrical Measurements @ HOT, @                                            1      1     1      1    1      1
Centre Contact Capability/Forces
Contact Retainer Test
Magnetism Level

Female Contact Capability/Forces
Coupling Proof Torque
Weight                                  X     X     X     X
Stripping/Adhesion                      X     X     X     X

Coating/Sleeving                        X     X     X     X
Solderability                           X     X     X     X
Overload                                                        X      X
Marking                                 X     X     X     X     X      X    X      X     X     X     X      X
Serialisation                                                   X           X            X           X
External Visual Inspection              X     X     X     X     X      X    X      X     X     X     X      X

Dimension Check                         X     X     X     X     X      X    X      X     X     X     X      X
Check for Lot Failure

                                       Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                     17 of 136
                                       COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE


                                           3001         3002          3003         3004           3005        3006          3007
                                         Capacitors   Capacitors    Capacitors   Capacitors    Capacitors   Capacitors   Capacitors
                                         (Ceramic)      (Solid        (Non        (Glass)     (Aluminium)   (Met/Plas)     (Mica)
                                                        Tant)         Solid)
                                          B     C      B      C      B     C      B     C      B      C      B      C     B     C

Parameter Drift Value (Initial)           X            X             X            X            X             X            X
High Temp. Reverse Bias Burn-in
Parameter Drift Value (Intermediate)
Power Burn-in 168 hours                   X     X

Power Burn-in 240 hours
Burn-in          96 hours                                                                                    X      X
Burn-in          168 hours                             X      X      X     X      X     X      X      X                   X     X

Burn-in          240 hours
Parameter Drift Value (Final)             X            X             X            X            X             X            X
Electrical Measurements @ AMB             X     X      X      X      X     X      X     X      X      X      X      X     X     X
Electrical Measurements @ HOT, @          X     X      X      X      X     X      X     X      X      X      X      X     X     X
Mechanical Measurements @ AMB
Detailed Dimensional Check
Radiographic Inspection                  7, 8

X-Ray Inspection                                      7, 8   7, 8                                           7, 8         7, 8
Fine/Gross Leak (Seal Test)                                          X     X                                 X      X
Seal Test
Sleeving                                                                                                     X      X

Contact Retention
Insertion and Withdrawal Forces
Internal Moisture

Mechanical Run-in
Serialisation                                                        X                         X
External Visual Inspection                X     X      X      X      X     X      X     X      X      X      X      X     X     X
Check for Lot failure                     X     X      X      X      X     X      X     X      X      X      X      X     X     X

                                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                          18 of 136
                                       COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE


                                           3008            3009         3010         3011         3012          3201        3401
                                         Capacitors      Capacitors   Capacitors   Capacitors   Capacitors    RF Coils   Connectors
                                        Feedthrough      (Chip Cer)   (Variable)     (Chip                     (Fixed)   (Circ Rect)
                                          B        C      B     C      B     C      B     C     B      C      B      C      N/A

Parameter Drift Value (Initial)           X               X            X            X           X             X
High Temp. Reverse Bias Burn-in
Parameter Drift Value (Intermediate)
Power Burn-in 168 hours                                                                         X      X

Power Burn-in 240 hours
Burn-in          96 hours                                                                       X
Burn-in          168 hours                X        X      X     X      X     X      X     X     X      X      X      X

Burn-in          240 hours                                                                      X      X
Parameter Drift Value (Final)             X               X            X            X                         X
Electrical Measurements @ AMB             X        X      X     X      X     X      X     X     X      X      X      X
Electrical Measurements @ HOT, @          X        X      X     X      X     X      X     X                   X      X
Mechanical Measurements @ AMB
Detailed Dimensional Check
Radiographic Inspection                7, 8, 11                                                 7,8          7, 8,

X-Ray Inspection
Fine/Gross Leak (Seal Test)              8, 4     8, 4
Seal Test
Contact Retention
Insertion and Withdrawal Forces
Internal Moisture

Mechanical Run-in
Serialisation                                             X                                                   X
External Visual Inspection                X        X      X     X      X     X      X     X     X      X      X      X

Check for Lot failure                     X        X      X     X      X     X      X     X     X      X      X      X

                                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                            19 of 136
                                       COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE


                                           3402          3009         3010          3011          3201        3401
                                         Connectors   Attenuators   Capacitors    Capacitors    RF Coils   Connectors
                                         (RF Coax)      & loads     (Variable)      (Chip        (Fixed)   (Circ Rect)
                                            N/A        B      C      B     C       B        C   B     C     B      C

Parameter Drift Value (Initial)                        X      X      X     X       X
High Temp. Reverse Bias Burn-in
Parameter Drift Value (Intermediate)
Power Burn-in 168 hours

Power Burn-in 240 hours
Burn-in          96 hours
Burn-in          168 hours                             X      X      X     X                X
Burn-in          240 hours                                                         X

Parameter Drift Value (Final)                          X      X      X     X       X
Electrical Measurements @ AMB                          X      X      X     X       X        X   X     X     X       X
Electrical Measurements @ HOT, @                       X      X      X     X       X        X   X     X     X       X
Mechanical Measurements @ AMB

Detailed Dimensional Check
Vibration                                                                                       X     X
Radiographic Inspection                                                          7, 8, 11

X-Ray Inspection
Fine/Gross Leak (Seal Test)
Seal Test                                                                                       X     X
Contact Retention                                                    X     X
Insertion and Withdrawal Forces                        X      X
Internal Moisture                                                                               X     X
Mechanical Run-in                                                                                           X       X

External Visual Inspection                             X      X      X     X       X        X   X     X     X       X
Check for Lot failure                                  X      X      X     X       X        X   X     X     X       X

                                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                         20 of 136
                                       COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE


                                           4001          4002           4003          4004          4005               4006          4008
                                         Resistors      Resistors      Resistors    Resistors      Resistors         Resistors     Resistors
                                          (Fixed         (Wire         (Power)      (Variable)      (N/W            (Termistors)    (Fuses)
                                           Film)        Wound)                                      Thick)

                                          B       C     B        C     B        C   B      C        B        C        B        C      N/A

Parameter Drift Value (Initial)           X             X              X                            X                 X
High Temp. Reverse Bias Burn-in
Parameter Drift Value (Intermediate)

Power Burn-in 168 hours
Power Burn-in 240 hours
Burn-in          96 hours
Burn-in          168 hours                X       X     X        X     X        X                   X        X        X        X

Burn-in          240 hours
Parameter Drift Value (Final)             X             X              X                            X                 X
Electrical Measurements @ AMB             X       X     X        X     X        X                   X        X        X        X
Electrical Measurements @ HOT, @          X             X        X     X        X                   X        X        X        X
Mechanical Measurements @ AMB
Detailed Dimensional Check
Radiographic Inspection                               7, 8, 11       7, 8, 11                    7, 8, 11           7, 8, 11

X-Ray Inspection
Fine/Gross Leak (Seal Test)                                                                       8, 11     8, 11

Seal Test                                 4       4
Contact Retention
Insertion and Withdrawal Forces
Internal Moisture
Mechanical Run-in

Serialisation                             X
External Visual Inspection                X       X     X        X     X        X                   X        X        X        X
Check for Lot failure                     X       X     X        X     X        X                   X        X        X        X

                                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                                      21 of 136
                                       COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE


                                          3901      3902         4009           5000           5010           9000
                                          Wires     Wires      Resistors      Transistor      Discrete     Integrated
                                          (600V   (Coax RF)    (Heaters)      s/Diodes       Microwave       Circuits

                                           N/A       N/A        B        C      B       C     B        C   B       C

Parameter Drift Value (Initial)                                 X               3             X            X
High Temp. Reverse Bias Burn-in                                                 2       2     X        X   2       2
Parameter Drift Value (Intermediate)                                            X            15            3

Power Burn-in 168 hours                                                                                            X
Power Burn-in 240 hours                                                                                    X
Burn-in          96 hours
Burn-in          168 hours                                      X        X      X       X    15

Burn-in          240 hours
Parameter Drift Value (Final)                                   X               X             X            X
Electrical Measurements @ AMB                                   X        X      X       X     X        X   X       X
Electrical Measurements @ HOT, @                                X        X      X       X     X        X   X       X
Mechanical Measurements @ AMB
Detailed Dimensional Check
Radiographic Inspection                                       7, 8, 11       7, 8, 10       7, 8, 10       7, 8

X-Ray Inspection
Fine/Gross Leak (Seal Test)                                                     8       8      8       8   8       8
Seal Test
Contact Retention
Insertion and Withdrawal Forces
Internal Moisture
Mechanical Run-in

External Visual Inspection                                      X        X      X       X     X        X   X       X
Check for Lot failure                                           X        X      X       X     X        X   X       X

                                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                          22 of 136


1.    The performance of these tests is left to manufacturer’s discretion.

2.    If specified in the detail specification.

3.    Only when HTRB Burn-in is specified.

4.    Hermetically sealed devices.

5.    Sleeved capacitors: sealing shall take place before sleeving.

6.    The measurements of parameters for the calculation of drift value need not be repeated for
      electrical measurements at room temperature (this applies to almost all generics)

7.    Radiographic Inspection/X-Ray/Seal/Marking/Serialisation may be performed at any point          in
      the test sequence shown in this chart.

8.    Radiographic/X-Ray/Visual Inspection and Seal test rejects not to be counted for lot failure.

9.    All cavity devices of Testing Level B except diodes with transparent packages.

10.   Except for diodes with transparent packages.

11.   Unless otherwise specified in the detail specification.

12.   For devices containing wire bonds only.

13.   For components containing female RF coax connectors only.

14.   Not to be run if performed during production. To be counted for PDA

15.   Process carried out twice during testing.

16.   Not to be run if performed during production. Not to be counted for PDA

17.   Hermetic connectors only.

                           Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                23 of 136


                         COMPONENT TYPE                      SPECIAL IN-PROCESS CONTROLS
                Capacitors, fixed ceramic dielectric,     Microsection Examination.
                Types I and II                            Lead Pull Test.
                Capacitors, fixed, chips, ceramic         Microsection Examination.
                dielectric, Types I and II.
                Connectors, electrical, circular and      Visual Inspection before assembly.
                Connectors, RF coaxial.                   Contact insertion and withdrawal forces.
                                                          Plating adherence.
                                                          External Visual Inspection.
                                                          Dimension Check.
                Wires and cables, electrical, 600V, low   Insulation flaws (spark test).
                frequency.                                Microsectioning of strands.
                Cables, coaxial radio frequency,          Insulation flaws (spark test).
                Integrated circuits, monolithic.          Scanning Electron Microscope Inspection.
                                                          Rebonding prohibited.

                       Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                               24 of 136


One purpose of Burn-in and Electrical Measurements is to take the components past the early part of
their life in which infant mortalities occur. Components which fail or are degraded are then detected
and removed, leaving the remaining components at the beginning of Phase II, their working life. A
second purpose of these tests is to check that the percentage of failures occurring in the lot does not
exceed the Percent Defective Allowable (PDA). If the PDA is exceeded, it indicates a problem with
the initial quality of the lot, and there can be little confidence that the remaining components have
reached a part of their lifetime which has a low and stable failure rate. The lot must therefore be


The descriptions of the different groups of tests and inspections can now be extended to briefly cover
how the individual tests and inspections are carried out and what they are intended to achieve. The
descriptions are, therefore, restricted to the more common tests and inspections, and these are listed
in Table 3.

Some of the tests in Table 3 can be applied to components without affecting the subsequent
acceptability for flight use of those parts which pass the test. These tests are commonly referred to as
“non-destructive tests”. Other tests damage or degrade all the components subjected to them in such
a way as to make them unacceptable for high reliability use. These tests are commonly referred to as
“destructive tests”. Finally, there are tests which, although not themselves destructive to good
devices, are generally performed as part of a sequence of tests which might have a cumulative effect
on the remaining lifetime of the parts. These tests are also commonly referred to as “destructive

Some of the tests are complete in themselves, but others are normally followed by end point tests to
determine whether any damage or degradation has occurred. The end point tests are typically
electrical tests, leak tests and external visual inspection.

The following are brief descriptions of the tests and inspections listed in Table 3. Where reference is
made to “appropriate specifications”, this means the specification containing the actual test method
description. Each test or inspection required is identified in the appropriate Generic Specification in
Charts II to V inclusive. These in turn reference a paragraph in the Generic specification in which the
test method, for example a method documented in an ESA/SCC Basic specification or a method from
MIL-STD-883, is referenced. The Detail specification then needs to be consulted to check for any
deviations to the Generic which affect the test method in question. Finally, the test method called up
should be used at the latest issue unless otherwise stated in the ESA/SCC specifications.

                          Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                   25 of 136
                                COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE


Test                                           Category of Test (See Note 1)      Probable Procurer’s Inspector
                                                                                  Involvement (See Note 2)
SEM Inspection                                 Destructive                        Reviews report
Internal Visual Inspection                     Non-destructive                    Performs test
External Visual Inspection                     Non-destructive                    Performs test
Electrical Screening Tests                     Non-destructive                    Unlikely
High Temperature Stabilisation Bake            Non-destructive                    Unlikely
Temperature Cycling                            Non-destructive                    Unlikely
Thermal Shock (in Air)                         Non-destructive                    Unlikely
Constant Acceleration                          Non-destructive                    Unlikely
Particle Impact Noise Detection (PIND)         Non-destructive                    Witnesses test
Seal Test                                      Non-destructive                    Unlikely
Burn-in                                        Non-destructive                    Unlikely
Radiography                                    Non-destructive                    Review report
Permanence of Marking                          Non-destructive                    Unlikely
High Temperature Storage                       Non-destructive                    Unlikely
Bond Pull                                      Destructive                        Witnesses test
Die shear                                      Destructive                        Witnesses test
Mechanical Shock Test                          Destructive Sequence               Unlikely
Vibration                                      Destructive Sequence               Unlikely
Thermal Shock                                  Destructive Sequence               Unlikely
Moisture Resistance                            Destructive Sequence               Unlikely
Solderability                                  Destructive Sequence               Witnesses test and/or inspects devices
Terminal Strength                              Destructive Sequence               Unlikely
Operating Life                                 Destructive Sequence               Unlikely


       None Destructive test    Any test to which components are subjected without affecting the
                                subsequent acceptability for flight use of the parts which pass
       Destructive Tests        Any tests which damage or degrade all components subjected to them in
                                such a way as to make them subsequently unacceptable for high reliability
                                use. (These tests are performed on a sample basis)
       Destructive              Any test which, although not destructive to good devices is generally
       sequence                 performed as part of a sequence of tests which is described as destructive
                                because of it’s possible cumulative effect on the remaining lifetime of the
                                tested parts (these tests are performed on a sample basis)

                The assignment of the tests in this table to different categories is not absolute, but is based on
                an assessment of the more common ways in which the tests are used. If a Component
                Engineer requires to know whether any components are rendered unacceptable for flight use
                because of tests to which they have been subjected, then the Detail and Generic
                specifications for that part should first be consulted.

       2.       This table does not give an exhaustive list of all the ways in which a Procurer’s Inspector may
                become involved with the tests listed. It only shows those combinations of tests and
                Procurers Inspector involvement which are more likely to occur.

                                  Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                     26 of 136


This test is performed on sample semiconductor dice which are selected from sample wafers taken
from each production lot. As it is intended to study the metallisation on the dice, they must either be
taken before any layers are deposited over the metallisation, or any layers must be etched away. The
sample dice are placed in an electron microscope where the metallisation is inspected at specified
magnifications and viewing angles. The inspection must be carried out in an electron microscope
because the maximum magnification and depth of focus available with an optical microscope are
insufficient to resolve the necessary detail. The purpose of the test is to ensure that, particularly on
devices with very small geometries, there are no lot related metallisation defects which could affect
the quality and reliability of the completed components. Examples of defects which can be present
are voids, cracks, or thinning of the metallisation, especially over oxide steps and in contact windows.
These defects can result in the metallisation becoming open circuit after a period of electrical or
thermal stressing and are therefore unacceptable in wafer lots intended for high reliability components.
Detailed requirements of what must be inspected on the dice and what is acceptable are given in
ESA/SCC Basic Specification No. 21400 which covers SEM Inspection of semiconductor devices.


This is intended principally as a screening test to detect processing and assembly faults in
components, and to allow removal of those components before final package sealing. Details of the
magnifications to be used, the areas inspected, and the faults to be looked for can vary very much
from one component type to another, but the necessary information will always be given in the
appropriate specifications.


This is performed mainly as an end point test after components have been subjected to a specific
stress or series of stresses. The intention is to see whether the components have suffered any visible
damage or degradation as a result of the stress or any mishandling. The details of what should be
inspected and what should be considered an unacceptable defect are given in the appropriate


These are electrical measurements carried out to confirm that the components do meet the electrical
requirements specified for them and to remove from the lot any which do not. It is also to check for
any electrical degradation which has occurred in components as a result of any stress tests. The tests
can be a full set of parameter measurements at room temperature, or at high and low temperature or
just a measurement of certain critical parameters to look for changes. The details of which
measurements must be carried out at any point and what results are acceptable are given in the Detail
specification for each component type.


Experience has shown that many components initially display variations in some of their electrical
parameters, but these parameters become stable after a short time at high temperature. The effect is
often caused by mobile ions or defects in the active material of the component which can affect its
properties. When the component is heated in a hot air chamber, the mobility of the ion or the defect
increases, and then it moves rapidly until it reaches a site where it is trapped. Once it is trapped, it
can no longer cause any variations in the electrical properties and the component becomes more


These two tests are very similar, in that the components are cycled between a high temperature air
circulating chamber and a low temperature one. The main difference is that with Thermal Shock, the

                          Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                   27 of 136

change over between the two temperature extremes is far more rapid. The reason for this test is that
in most components it is possible for there to be mechanical weaknesses present, which are not
severe enough to be considered defects, but which could later develop into defects and cause failures.
Weaknesses of this type are typically associated with the die or wire bonding in semiconductor
devices, or with thermal mismatch between different materials and poor package seals in various
device types. Temperature Cycling and Thermal Shock are intended to make these weaknesses
develop into actual defects which are then detectable during subsequent testing. Details of the
temperature extremes, number of cycles etc. for different components are given in the appropriate


This test is carried out by mounting the components in a high speed centrifuge which is then used to
subject them to a high acceleration. Its purpose is similar to that of Temperature Cycling and Thermal
Shock in that it is intended to stress any mechanical weaknesses in the components and make them
develop into actual defects, which are then detectable during subsequent testing. The principle areas
which are stressed during this testing are any dice or crystals which are mounted in the package, and
wire bonds and the package seals.


In this test, each component is mounted on a vibrator which subjects it to a specified sequence of
shocks and vibration. Any loose particles inside the package are detected by the sound of them
impacting the inside of the package. The purpose of the test is to detect loose particles which may
have escaped the internal visual inspection, entered the package after the visual inspection, or been
produced by the Thermal Cycling or Acceleration. Components containing loose particles must be
detected and rejected because of the danger of conductive particles causing short circuits. The test
will also detect semiconductor dice which have become detached during Thermal Cycling or


This test is carried out in two parts, a fine leak test and a gross leak test; because no one test method
is sufficiently sensitive over the full range of leak rates which can be observed. The fine leak test is
carried out using a tracer gas, normally helium, which can be detected in very small amounts as it
leaks through a defective hermetic seal. The gross leak test normally depends on visually detecting
bubbles leaking from the package when it is immersed in a liquid. Leak testing has two uses, as a
screening test to detect and remove components with defective hermetic seals which might allow
contaminants to enter and degrade the component, and as an end point test to detect degradation
which has occurred as a result of stress testing.

2.2.10 BURN-IN

In this test, the components are electrically stressed while simultaneously subjected to a high
temperature. The purpose of this is to take the components past the early part of their life in which
infant mortalities can be expected to occur. This is to prevent the infant mortalities from occurring
when the components are being used. Components which become defective or degraded during the
burn in are detected by subsequent electrical testing and removed from the lot.


This inspection is carried out using equipment capable of providing a magnified X-Ray image of the
interior of the component. Its purpose is to detect a number of internal defects which may have
escaped previous detection by other methods, principally foreign particles, faulty assembly and
defective package sealing.

                          Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                    28 of 136


This test is performed by immersing sample components in specified solvents and then brushing the
markings with a small brush. If the markings remain legible then they are acceptable. The purpose of
this test is to ensure that the identifying marking on a component will not be lost during normal
handling or solvent cleaning.


This test is similar in procedure, but of longer duration than High Temperature Stabilisation Bake. The
test is performed by placing the components in a high temperature chamber for the specified time at a
specified temperature. Its purpose is to determine whether the components are degraded by a period
of time at their maximum rated storage temperature. After completion of the storage test, any
degradation of the components is detected by using appropriate end point measurements such as
leak testing, electrical testing and visual inspection.


In this test, a small hook is placed under the centre of each bond wire and it is pulled vertically
upwards until the wire breaks or a bond lifts. The force at which this occurs is recorded and checked
against the minimum force specified for the appropriate component types, wire material and wire
diameter. If any of the measured forces are below the specified minimum then the bond, the
component and the complete lot fail, and must be rejected. The purpose of the test is to detect lots
with poor quality wire bonds which could fail when the components are subjected to mechanical or
thermal stresses. Poor quality bonding can result from incorrect setting and control of the bonding
machines parameters or from contamination on the bond pads, and is usually undetectable by visual
inspection. The outcome of this test is a series of figures for bond strength which must be checked
against the specified limits to see if they are acceptable.


This test is performed by using special die shear equipment to apply an increasing sideways force to
one side of the die. The force at which the die breaks or separates from the package is measured and
compared with the specified minimum force appropriate to the die area and separation mode. If it is
below the specified minimum then the component and the lot from which it was taken are rejected.
The purpose of the test is to detect component lots in which poor control of the die mounting process
has resulted in low quality die mounting. Such lots must be detected and rejected because of the risk
of the die separating from the package during mechanical or thermal stressing. The outcome of this
test is simply a figure for die shear force which must be checked against the specified limit.


To perform this test, the components are mounted on a shock machine which subjects them to a
series of mechanical shocks. The number and direction of shocks, and their amplitude and duration
are given in the appropriate specifications. The purpose of this test is to check the mechanical
integrity of the package, particularly the die mounting, wire bonding and package sealing. In addition,
components with the potential for generating internal particles can be detected. Except for packages
which suffer catastrophic mechanical failure, the outcome of the test can only be determined by
performing end point measurements to determine any degradation which has occurred. Typical end
point measurements are leak testing, electrical measurements and external visual inspection.


This test is similar to the Mechanical Shock Test, in that the components are mounted on a special
machine which subjects them to mechanical stressing. The main difference is that instead of a series
of individual shocks, the components are subjected to a period of continuous vibration at a lower
intensity. The reason for using this test in addition to the shock test is that certain potential failure
mechanisms are more susceptible to degradation by vibration than shock. Apart from catastrophic

                          Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                    29 of 136

failures of the package during vibration, end point measurements are necessary to determine if any
failures or degradation have occurred.


To perform this test, the components are alternately immersed in liquids at high temperature and at
low temperature. The number of cycles, the immersion and transfer times, the liquids to be used and
the temperatures to be used are given in the appropriate specifications. The purpose of the test is to
subject the components to severe thermal stressing to reveal any mechanical weaknesses. The test
is similar to temperature cycling but is more severe. As with temperature cycling the stressing is
intended to test the packaging integrity, but is better at revealing weaknesses related to mismatching
of the coefficients of thermal expansion between different parts of the component. In semiconductor
devices, certain types of crystal defects in the die are also sensitive to rapid temperature changes.
Any degradation caused by this test is usually detected by subsequent end point measurements such
as leak testing, electrical measurements or external visual inspection.


This test is performed by subjecting the components to a number of cycles of combined high
temperature and humidity in an appropriate chamber. Before the test starts, it is normal to condition
the components by subjecting the leads to a specified bending stress, and during the test it is normal
to apply a specified voltage to the components. One purpose of this test is to determine the ability of
the external parts of the package to resist deterioration or corrosion in conditions of high temperature
and humidity. The other purpose of the test is to determine the resistance of the packages to moisture
ingress. The conditioning of the leads is intended to help reveal any potential weaknesses where the
leads enter the package and which could result in moisture ingress. The applied voltage is to
accelerate any corrosion of the component if moisture does enter the package and therefore make it
easier to detect. If the temperature and humidity do degrade the package or cause moisture to enter
it, then this would normally be detected by external visual inspection or electrical testing carried out as
end point measurements.


The components selected for this test first have their leads artificially aged above boiling distilled
water, this being intended to simulate a long period of storage before use. The component leads are
then fluxed and dipped into molten solder, the detailed procedures being given in the appropriate
specification. After removal from the solder bath and cleaning away of any flux residues, the leads are
visually inspected for the quality of the solder coating. The purpose of this test is to confirm that the
leads on the components can be adequately soldered even after a long period of storage. This test
necessitates a visual inspection of the leads to the specified criteria in order to make an assessment of
the acceptability of the components.


There are a number of different test methods used for this test, depending on the type of component
package and terminals, and the type of stress which has been selected. Generally, the test is carried
out by clamping the component under test in a suitable holder, and then applying the selected stress
to all the terminals or a sample of them. The stresses normally applied to the terminals are tension
along the axis of the terminal, torque around the axis of the terminal and bending of the terminal.
Wherever this test is specified, the correct test procedure and conditions can be found from the
specification. The purpose of the test is to ensure that the strengths of the terminals are adequate for
them to suffer no damage during normal handling, mounting and possible dismounting of the
component. To determine whether the terminals are satisfactory they must be visually inspected after
this test for any damage which fails the criteria given in the appropriate specification.

                           Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                    30 of 136


For this test, the components are electrically stressed while simultaneously subjected to a high
temperature. The effect of this is that their normal ageing during operational life is accelerated. At
intervals during this test, the components are electrically measured to detect any failures or
degradation. The purpose of this test is to simulate the normally required operating life of this
component in a much shorter time, and thereby allow confirmation that in normal usage the
components will survive for the required time. In addition to the electrical measurements during and
after the life test, leak testing and external visual inspection are also carried out to detect any physical


Following a SCAHC recommendation produced after consultation with the space industry, ESCC
Specifications are being phased in to replace the ESA/SCC specifications.

The ESA/SCC Generic Specifications contain five charts which are:-

Chart I         Testing Levels
Chart II        Final Production Tests
Chart III       Burn-in and Electrical Measurements
Chart IV        Qualification Tests
Chart V         Lot Acceptance Tests

In ESCC Generic specifications, these will be replaced by:-

Chart F1        General Flow
Chart F2        Screening Tests
Chart F3        Qualification and Periodic Tests


1. Various tests/measurements have been moved from ESA/SCC Section 9 (Test Methods and
Procedures) to ESCC section 5 (Production Control for Procurement and Qualification).

2. Chart F1 gives an outline of the flow differences between qualified and unqualified component

3. Chart F2 combines some aspects of ESA/SCC Charts II and III, to produce screening tests.
(for some passive devices the measurements are no longer performed after burn-in)

4. Chart F3 combines some aspects of ESA/SCC Charts IV and V, with the major difference being
that LAT is no longer compulsory for qualified components but may be included by the orderer who
will need to state his specific requirements on the P.O.
For non-qualified components, it will always be necessary for the order to specify some types of
testing derived from Chart F3.

5. ESA/SCC Chart V was also designated for use for the Extension of Qualification, but in ESCC,
the manufacturer will be required to perform the Periodic Tests now specified in Chart F3 to
maintain his qualification.

Certain Generic Specifications will be combined. For instance the ESA/SCC specifications for
tantalum capacitors: ESA/SCC 3002 (Basic), 3011 (chip capacitors) and 3012 (surface mount) will
all be incorporated in ESCC 3002.

The ESCC detailed specifications are to be rewritten in the same standard format with few
fundamental changes to the ESA/SCC except to the burn-in of passives which in some cases will be
reduced and some case removed completely.

                           Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                     31 of 136


Full ESA qualified parts undergo Lot Acceptance Testing (LAT) on samples from the production lot.
This yields greater reliability assurance with respect to environmental, mechanical assembly and
endurance of the devices. Within the ESA/SCC system the Lot Acceptance Tests are specified in
Chart V of the appropriate Generic Specification (an example of which is shown in Figure 2) and
indicate which tests are performed, how many parts are required for each test and how many
failures are permitted for each of the tests.

In practise there are many instances where products are unavailable with full ESA qualification.
Devices and procurement agents may then have to approach the manufactures of none qualified
products. In this instance a specification will have to be written and reductions in lot acceptance
tests may be requested such as reduced sample quantities, the removal of certain tests or
advocating single LAT tests to cover similar products. With any specification for a non-qualified
device there must be full agreement between the manufacturer, the procurement agent and all the
end users.

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                               32 of 136


                                            100 components

         Environmental/                           Assembly/
      Mechanical Subgroups                        Capability                  Endurance Subgroup
         I                        II                   III                     IV                      V

     15                    15                    15                         15                 15
  components            components            components                 components         components

     Shock              Temperature                                      Operating             High
      Test                Cycling             Solderability                Life             Temperature

                                             Permanence of               Electrical           Electrical
    Vibration             Thermal               Marking               Measurements         Measurements
                           Shock                                     during Endurance     during Endurance
                                                                          Testing              Testing

   Constant               Moisture                 Terminal                 Seal                   Seal
  Acceleration           Resistance                Strength                 Test                   Test

      Seal                   Seal            External Visual
      Test                   Test              Inspection

   Electrical            Electrical          Internal Visual
Measurements at       Measurements at          Inspection
 Room Temp.            Room Temp.

    External              External                       (1)             External             External
Visual Inspection     Visual Inspection      Bond Strength           Visual Inspection    Visual Inspection


         2                        2                    1                       1                       1

                              2                                                                    1


Total allowable number of failed components: 3.

Notes: (1) No failures allowed for these tests.

                          Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                   33 of 136



The CENELEC Electronic Components Committee (CECC) System for electronic components of
assessed quality became operational in 1973 following discussions which were instituted in 1970. Its
object is to facilitate international trade by the harmonisation of the specifications and quality
assessment procedure for electronic components and by the grant of an internationally recognised
Mark, and/or Certificate of Conformity. The components produced under the CECC System are
accepted by all member countries without further testing.

This object is achieved through two separate but closely associated organisations:

-    the CECC, being a committee of the Förderverein für Elektrotechnische Normung (FEN) e.V.*
-    the ECQAC (Electronic Components Quality Assurance Committee).

There are currently 15 countries participating in the CECC System, Namely:

-       AUSTRIA                           -        BELGIUM
-       DENMARK                           -        FINLAND
-       FRANCE                            -        GERMANY
-       IRELAND                           -        ITALY
-       NETHERLANDS                       -        NORWAY
-       PORTUGAL                          -        SPAIN
-       SWEDEN                            -        SWITZERLAND


All electronic components supplied with a registered Mark of Certificate of Conformity have been
subject to rigid inspection for quality and conformance and a comprehensive schedule of tests and
acceptance requirements, under the surveillance of an independent inspectorate.


CECC specifications provide the necessary foundation for the different types of approval which are
available in the CECC System, Manufacturers, specialist contractors, distributors and independent test
laboratories can each be approved for their particular capability, (see Fig 2). Each approval carries the
award of a certificate. The approvals explained below are an important assurance that, throughout the
chain or supply of components, customer requirements will be met in full compliance with CECC

"Organisation Approval", which is applicable to all categories of organisation, is the first and
obligatory level of approval. It exceeds the relevant requirements of the ISO 9000 (EN 29000) series
and EN 45001. Certificates gained by appropriate 3rd party certification bodies may be taken into
account in any assessment for CECC approval (see CECC 00114:Part 1).

A manufacturer, having achieved Organisation Approval, may apply for product certification through
one or more of the following methods:

"Qualification Approval", which is applicable to an electronic component or range of components
which meet the requirements of CECC specifications. (See CECC 00 114:Part II). This approval can

                          Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                    34 of 136

be upgraded by an "Enhanced Assessment of Quality" to satisfy military or space requirements. (See
CECC 00 114:Part IV).

"Capability Approval", which defined a Manufacturer's capability in respect of his manufacturing
processes and quality control methods, which may include, design, covering a specific component
technology within a CECC generic specification. Any component produced within the scope of this
approval is recognised as CECC approved. (See CECC 00 114:Part III).

"Technology Approval", which focuses on process control and the continuous improvement of a
manufacturing technology. The manufacturer has to demonstrate his quality management system
through the application of TQM using SPC methods as appropriate for the manufacture of components
in defined families (See CECC 00 1114:Part VI).

A specialist contractor, having achieved Organisation Approval, may proceed to:

"Process Approval", which is available to firms in the electronic components industry who intend to
act as subcontractors to manufacturers approved under the CECC System. Examples of such
subcontracted processes are ceramic package manufacture, printed board or integrated circuit design,
electroplating etc. (See CECC 00 114:Part V).

In association with Organisation Approval, the following provisions apply to distributors and
independent test laboratories:

"Distributor Approval" is available to distributors of components acting independently of any
manufacturer's production department and intending to stock and distribute CECC approved
components under the authorisation of an approved manufacturer. (See CECC 00 114: Part 1).

"Test Laboratory Approval" is available to independent test laboratories intending to carry out tests
on components within the CECC System. The approval covers the type of tests to be carried out, the
component ranges to be tested and the facilities available. (See CECC 00 114: Part 1).


The CECC System is governed by a Management Committee (CD), which is constituted of
representatives of the National Authorised Institutions (ONH) and of Users' Advisory Group and is
regulated by Rules of Procedure administered through national bodies by the General Secretariat in

Implementation of the System's rules is the responsibility of member countries, each represented by an

Inspection and surveillance is undertaken by the relevant National Supervising Inspectorate (ONS).


The CECC specification system, which was heavily patterned after BS9000, is multi-tiered, as shown in
Figure 4. The controlling specification is CECC 00107, which applies to all electronic component types.
This document defines the basic rules for the approval of a manufacturer's manufacturing and test
facilities, outside test houses that he might employ, distributors, and the like. It also establishes the two
types of component qualification that are available. The first of these is qualification approval, which
allows a manufacturer to provide a specific device type to a specific specification. The second is
capability approval, which allows a manufacturer to provide within clearly defined limits, a group of
products to custom or semi-custom device specifications. US IC users will see in this an approach
similar to the MIL-M-38510 qualification of monolithic ICs by device type, and the facility certification of
hybrid IC manufacturers in accordance with MIL-STD-1772.

                           Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                      35 of 136

CECC 00107 also defines the conditions under which a manufacturer may subcontract a limited portion
of the manufacturing process to unapproved facilities outside the CECC area. This process is known
as "Route 2". Another portion of CECC 00107 establishes the conditions under which a manufacturer
located within the CECC area may obtain "Geographic Extension of Limits" that allow his use of a
facility outside that area which he owns and over which he can exercise quality control.

The next tier of specifications consists of general specifications for generic component categories. For
example, CECC 90000 (Generic Specification: Monolithic Integrated Circuits) defines the approval and
assessment procedures and test methods for all monolithic integrated circuits.

The next descending level of specifications contains product category specifications, such as CECC
90100, which defines the test methods for digital ICs.

At the next level, there are two types of specifications employed. Product lines containing large
numbers of devices with common performance characteristics are covered by family specifications. An
example of this category would be CECC 90103, which provides all of the component characteristics
and inspection requirements that are common to all 54LS low power schottky devices. The
characteristics which relate only to specific device types (such as function, pin identification and
switching speeds) are then provided in detail specifications, such as 90103-001, the specification for a
54LS00 quad two-input NAND gate.

This approach obviously would not work for product areas where the performance characteristics vary
significantly from device-to-device. For such devices, the "family" specification is instead a set of rules
for the preparation of detail specifications, defining what characteristic must be specified and how the
devices are to be inspected. An example of this type of specification would be CECC 90201, the
specification for voltage regulators. Detail specifications to this type of document would also be
numbered -XXX, jut as the detail specifications for families of devices.


A manufacturer who wishes to become part of the CECC system must begin by demonstrating to the
ONS for his country that he has both suitable equipment and appropriate controls to produce a product
that consistently meets CECC quality and reliability goals. He must also show that his quality
department has sufficient staff, equipment and authority to provide the assessment and control that the
CECC system requires.

The next step in his approval cycle is the generation of a detail specification. Although detail
specifications are normally prepared by the manufacturer of the particular device, there are provisions
which allow common specifications to be prepared by a group of manufacturers and potential users.
This was the case, for example, for the specifications developed for the 54HC high speed CMOS
family. Before each specification can be published, it must be approved by the National Standards
Organisation of the country within which it was prepared. Once it is published, it may be used by any
manufacturer in any CECC country.

                           Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                    36 of 136
                                 COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE

                                  FIGURE 3 - TYPES OF CECC APPROVAL

Organisation                 Process              Technology                   Product

  (Part I)
                                                                                (Part II)

                                                                                (Part III)

                                                   Technology Approval
                                                        (Part VI)

Specialist Contractor
                                          Process Approval
      (Part I)

      (Part I)

  Test Laboratory
      (Part I)


                                          CECC 00107
                                   CONTROLLING SPECIFICATION

                                           CECC 90000
                 OTHER                      GENERAL                     OTHER
               COMPONENTS               SPECIFICATION FOR             COMPONENTS
                                         MONOLITHIC IC’s

                    OTHER                   CECC90100                    OTHER IC’s
                     IC’s                   DIGITAL IC

               OTHER DIGITAL                CECC 90103                OTHER DIGITAL
                  FAMILY                  5-4LS DEVICES                  FAMILY

                   90103 - 001
                    5-4LS00                 90103 - 002                  90103 - 003

                                  Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                           37 of 136

To qualify the device in question, the manufacturer must build three lots and test them in accordance
with the specification. There are provisions that allow testing to be performed on one device to be used
to reduce the amount of testing required for other structurally similar devices. Qualification to provide a
particular class of material allows a manufacturer to provide all less stringent classes of material.


CECC 90000 defines six screening classes that are applicable to monolithic ICs. (Other categories of
electronic components may have different numbers of classes depending upon what experts in those
product categories feel might be appropriate). The IC classes are:

        *        Class H

        *        Class B

        *        Class C

        *        Class D

        *        Class E (moulded device screening, without burn-in).

        *        Class F (moulded device screening, with burn-in).

The screening flows are shown in Figure 5.

CECC Specifications also require Quality Assurance tests, which are performed on a sample basis. For
ICs, these are divided into four groups:

        *        Group A (electrical characteristics, every lot)

        *        Group B (mechanical and burn-in, every lot)

        *        Group C (mechanical and 2000 hour life, every three months)

        *        Group D (8000 hour life).

Group B, C and D test results can be used to satisfy the Quality Assurance Assessment requirements
for devices with structural similarity. Devices may be shipped once the Group B tests have been

The quality conformance tests are shown in Table 1.

When the CECC system was originally established, it defined four levels of quality assessment (R, S,
T and V) and the applicability of individual tests within any Group or Sub-Group, and the associated
sampling plan, was determined by the level required. These four levels were recently replaced with
three new levels (Y, P and L). Class B qualifications were previously done to level R but are now done
to level Y.

                           Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                    38 of 136
                                                                           COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE

                                                                           FIGURE 5 - CECC SCREENING PROCEDURES

   Screening Class H                      Screening Class B                       Screening Class C              Screening Class D                 Screening Class E                 Screening Class F

 1      Internal           visual        1     Internal           visual      1       Internal    visual
        examination                            examination                            examination
 2      Storage   at        high         2     Storage   at        high       2       Storage at     high
        temperature                            temperature                            temperature
 3      Change                 of        3     Change                 of      3       Change           of                                    3       Change           of         3       Change           of
        temperature                            temperature                            temperature                                                    temperature                         temperature
 4      Acceleration steady              4     Acceleration steady            4       Acceleration
        state                                  state                                  steady state
 5      External      visual             5     External      visual           5       External     visual
        examination                            examination                            examination
        (optional)                             (optional)                             (optional)
 6      Sealing (1)                      6     Sealing (1)                    6       Sealing (1)                                            6       Sealing (1)            6         Sealing (1)
 7      Particle impact noise                                                                                                                15      Electrical tests at    15        Electrical tests at
        detection                                                                                                                                    maximum                          maximum
                                                                                                                                                     operating                        operating
                                                                                                                                                     temperature (2)                  temperature (2)
 8      Serialisation
 9      Electrical tests                 9     Electrical tests                                              9       Electrical tests                                       9         Electrical tests
        (Pre-burn-in)                          (Pre-burn-in)                                                         (Pre-burn-in)                                                    (Pre-burn-in)
10.1    Burn-in                         10.2   Burn-in                                                       10.2    Burn-in                                                10.2      Burn-in
 11     Electrical tests                 11    Electrical tests                                              11      Electrical tests                                       11        Electrical tests
        (Post burn-in)                         (Post burn-in)                                                        (Post burn-in)                                                   (Post burn-in)
 12     Reverse bias burn-in
 11     Electrical tests
        (Post burn-in)
 6      Sealing (1)
13.1    Final electrical tests          13.1   Final electrical tests         13.2    Final     electrical   13.2    Final      electrical   13.     Final     electrical   13.2      Final      electrical
                                                                                      tests                          tests                   2       tests                            tests
 14     Radiography
 16     External           visual       16     External           visual      16      External    visual     16      External    visual      16      External    visual     16        External    visual
        examination                            examination                            examination                    examination                     examination                      examination

                                                  Groups A, B, C inspection (on sample basis) followed by external visual examination of the used samples

(1) :   Applies only for cavity devices (ceramic
(2) :   Applies only for non-cavity devices (plastic package)

                                    Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                                                                                                         39 of 136


     Examination or test             DND (1)              Inspection requirements

           GROUP A                                                  Assessment levels
         INSPECTION                                                        R
                                                               IL                  AQL
Sub-Group A1
                                        ND                     I                   0.04
Visual examination
Sub-Group A2
                                        ND                     II                  0.04
Verification of the function
Sub-Group A3
                                        ND                     II                  0.04
Static characteristics at 25ºC
Sub-Group 4Aa
                                        ND                     II                  0.04
Static characteristics at
maximum operating
Sub-Group A4b
                                        ND                 S-4                      1.0
Static characteristics at
minimum operating temperature
Sub-Group A5
                                        ND                     II                  0.065
Dynamic Characteristic at 25ºC

           GROUP B                                                  Assessment levels
         INSPECTION                                                        R
                                                           IL                      AQL
Sub-Group B1
                                       ND                  S-4                      1.0
Sub-Group B2
                                        D                  S-3                      2.5
Sub-Group B3
                                       ND                      II                   1.0
Sealing test
Sub-Group B4
Change of temperature                  ND                  S-4                      2.5
Followed by:
1) For cavity packages:
   Fine and gross leak test            ND
2) For non-cavity packages:
   Damp heat accelerated
End point tests:
Electrical tests as for Sub-
Groups A2 and A3
Sub-Group B5
                                       ND                  S-4                      1.5
Electrical endurance 168hrs
End point tests:
Electrical tests as for Sub-
Groups A2 and A3

Note: 1) D = Destructive test
       ND = Non destructive test
For more detailed information see CECC 90-100 issue 2 specs.

                       Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                   40 of 136


NASA was formally established in 1958 to plan and execute the US civil space programme. It comprises
eight principal offices and about a dozen major centres and facilities employing 24,000 civil servants.
The main space centres of note are:


Goddard Space Flight Center.

Established in 1959, It is the only US national facility that can develop, fabricate, test, launch and
analyse data from its own space science missions.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL).

JPL is a government owned facility operated by the Californian Institute of Technology under NASA
contract. JPL is responsible for most of NASA's deep space missions.

Kennedy Space Center (KSC).

Kennedy was originally built to support the Apollo lunar landing programme of the 1960's. KSC is now
NASA's site for processing and launching the Space Shuttle and its payloads.

Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC).

Marshall is one of the largest of NASA's nine field centres. MSFC is the principal propulsion
development centre. Marshall was established in 1960.


NASA programmes are controlled through the imposition of a top level handbook (NHB 5300.4) on all of
its sites and subcontractors. This handbook details the requirements for developing and implementing
component requirements to be used in the control, selection, procurement, testing, and application of
electrical, electronic, and electromechanical components for use in NASA flight and mission essential
ground equipment.


One of the major sections of the handbook discusses programme management and procurement. In
addition, information is required to allow NASA component data in an electronic form, to allow
dissemination to other NASA sites.


The other major section discusses a number of topics directly relating to components, namely:

-   selection and specification.
-   screening.
-   parts lists.
-   critical parts.
-   derating.
-   traceability.

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                   41 of 136

-    handling, packaging and storage.
-    qualification and quality conformance tests.
-    receiving inspection.
-    manufacturer surveillance.


This parts list is worthy of mention within this guide for several reasons, the main reason being that the
parts group within GSFC is very active compared to other sites. As such, the PPL presents an extremely
useful source of US component data and availability.

The document contains a preferred parts list, part derating guidelines, and part screening procedures to
be used in the selection, procurement, and application of EEE parts for GSFC space systems and
mission critical ground support equipment.

As with most US PPLs the quality levels specified are two different levels, namely grade 1 parts for
higher quality, critical applications and Grade 2 parts which are high quality but which can be used in
less demanding applications where mission reliability goals are less stringent.


The US government, together with the Army, Navy and Air Force identified a need to introduce a number
of documents in an attempt to standardise screening flows. Standardisation by the Department of
Defence (DoD) can be traced back to vacuum tubes in the 1950s. Through the 1960s to the present day
their ideas to promote standardisation to achieve a number of benefits to the procurement of electronic
components have been fine tuned. Their objectives are still:

-    Total product interchangeability.

-    Configuration Control.

-    The efficiencies of volume production.

-    Effectiveness in Spares Management.

-    Maximum number of Approved Sources.

Through the introduction of a number of standardisation programmes the DoD achieved their aims. The
following sections describe each of the main US MIL standards for components in some detail.

3.3.1 MIL-STD-883

During the early 1960's in America growing concern was expressed with regard to the volume of
defective components. The reasons for the problem at this time was that various manufacturers had
dissimilar screening methods, unable to weed out effectively infant mortalities.

These arose from Die defects, such as passivation and diffusion faults, metallization defects and internal
visual defects; Internal Construction, such as die attach, lead bonding and loose particle; Finished
Package, such as package seal, radiography and lead integrity.

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                    42 of 136

In the mid 1960s the various government agencies responsible for semiconductor reliability saw that
screenable defects were resulting in an in equipment failure rate of about 1% per thousand hours. In
depth failure analysis allowed them to determine what the predominant failure mechanisms were. The
Solid State Applications Branch of the Air Force's Rome Air Development Center (RADC) was assigned
the task of developing a screening procedure which would remove the infant mortality failures which had
led to the high failure rate previously encountered. Working closely with other semiconductor reliability
experts, the RADC staff developed MIL-STD-883, which was first issued in 1968. OBJECTIVE

The objective of MIL-STD-883 was to create an economically feasible, standardised integrated circuit
screening flow which would achieve an in equipment failure rate of 0.08% per thousand hours for Class
B (Military quality level) and 0.004% per thousand hours for Class S (Space quality level). DETAILED SPECIFICATIONS

MIL-STD-883 is a collection of environmental, mechanical, and electrical test methods. These methods
define tests which enable manufacturers and users to screen for specific reliability concerns as
previously described. The tests covered include moisture resistance, high temperature storage, neutron
radiation, shock and acceleration tests, and dimensional tests, to mention only a few. In the electrical test
section there are tests to examine the load conditions, power supplies, short circuit currents and other
tests. Each of these tests is designed to look at specific reliability and quality concerns that effect
semiconductor products. SCREENING FLOWS

The overall reliability requirements for a system depend upon a number of factors, including cost-
effectiveness. For example, a deep space probe, where component replacement is impossible once the
system is launched, requires very high reliability, despite the inherent costs of complete screening. On
the other hand, a ground-based radio unit can use a less stringent reliability testing sequence, since a
failed component can be easily replaced at moderate cost. In line with this range of needs, MIL-STD-883
originally established three distinct product assurance levels to provide grades of reliability tailored to the
needs of different military applications. These three were Class A (intended for critical non-repairable
applications, such as space vehicles), Class B (intended for applications where reliability was important,
but where repair and maintenance was available), and Class C (intended for non-critical ground
applications). Because Class C devices could be upgraded to Class B through burn-in and other
additional testing, there were many who erroneously believed that Class A was an upgraded version of
Class B. In order to end that confusion, Class A was superseded by Class S, in 1977. In addition, so few
applications were viewed as non-critical that Class C saw relatively little usage. As a result, it was
eliminated in 1984 when Revision C was issued.

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                         43 of 136

           TABLE 5 - MIL-STD-883 TEST METHODS

METHOD                                          TITLE

 1001      Barometric pressure (reduced altitude operation)
 1002      Immersion
 1003      Insulation resistance
 1004      Moisture resistance
 1005      Steady state life
 1006      Intermittent life
 1007      Agree life
 1008      High-temperature storage
 1009      Self atmosphere (corrosion)
 1010      Temperature cycling
 1011      Thermal shock
 1012      Thermal characteristics
 1013      Dew point
 1014      Seal
 1015      Burn-in test
 1016      Life/Reliability characterisation tests
 1017      Neutron irradiation
 1018      Internal water-vapour content
 1019      Steady state total close irradiation procedure
 1020      Radiation-induced latch-up test procedure
 1021      Dose rate threshold for upset of digital microcircuits
 1022      MOSFET threshold voltage
 1023      Dose rate of response of linear microcircuits
 1030      Pre-seal burn-in
 1031      Thin film corrosion
 1032      Soft error test procedure

         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                          44 of 136


Method                                      Title

 2001       Constant acceleration
 2002       Mechanical shock
 2003       Solderability
 2004       Lead integrity
 2005       Vibration fatigue
 2006       Vibration noise
 2007       Vibration, variable frequency
 2008       Visual and mechanical (obsolete 15 Nov 74 and superseded by 2014, 2015
            and 2016).
 2009       External visual
 2010       Internal visual (monolithic)
 2011       Bond strength
 2012       Radiography
 2013       Internal visual
 2014       Internal visual and mechanical
 2015       Resistance to solvents
 2016       Physical dimensions
 2017       Internal visual (hybrid)
 2018       Scanning electron microscope (SEM) inspection of metallisation
 2019       Die shear strength
 2020       Particle impact noise detection test
 2021       Glassivation layer integrity
 2022       Meniscograph solderability
 2023       Non-destructive bond pull
 2024       Lid tongue for glass-fit seal packages
 2025       Adhesion of lead finish
 2026       Random vibration
 2027       Substrate attach strength

         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                              45 of 136

                     TABLE 5 - MIL-STD-883 TEST METHODS (CONT.)

  Method                                                        Title

                   ELECTRICAL TESTS (Digital)
     3001          Drive source, dynamic
     3002          Load conditions
     3003          Delay measurements
     3004          Transition time measurements
     3005          Power supply current
     3006          High level output voltage
     3007          Low level output voltage
     3008          Breakdown voltage, input our output
     3009          Input current, low level
     3010          Input current, high level
     3011          Output short circuit current
     3012          Terminal capacitance
     3013          Noise margin measurements for digital microelectronic devices
     3014          Functional testing
     3015          Electrostatic discharge sensitivity classification
     3016          Activation time verification
----------------   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------ELECTRICAL
                   TEST (LINEAR)
    4001           Input offset voltage and current and bias
    4002           Phase margin and slew rate measurements
    4003           Common mode input voltage range
                   Common mode rejection ratio
                   Supply voltage rejection ratio
     4004          Open loop performance
     4005          Output performance
     4006          Power gain and noise figure
     4007          Automatic gain control range
----------------   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------TEST
    5001           Parameter mean value control
    5002           Parameter distribution control
    5003           Failure analysis procedures for microcircuits
    5004           Screening procedures
    5005           Qualification and quality conformance procedures
    5006           Limit testing
    5007           Wafer lot acceptance
    5008           Test procedures for hybrid and multi-chip microcircuits
    5009           Destructive physical analysis
    5010           Test procedures for custom monolithic microcircuits

                       Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                                    46 of 136

With Notice 3 of 883B, Method 5009 was added to describe the requirements for destructive physical
analysis (DPA) performed for the purpose of confirming device designs, confirming lot acceptance, or for
the disposition of rejected lots or lot documentation. Although not formally imposed as a screening or
quality conformance test, DPA is widely used (particularly by users of Class S semiconductors) as a lot
acceptance technique. CLASS B

Every Class B device requires Internal Visual inspection, extensive environmental testing, a 160 hour
burn-in, and testing of DC and AC electrical parameters at 25oC and of DC parameters at its maximum
and minimum rated operating temperatures (which Revision C has defined as -55oC and + 125oC for a
fully compliant device). CLASS S

The Class S flow requires more tests, conditions that are typically more stringent and tighter LTPDs.
The additional tests include wafer lot acceptance, particle impact noise detection (PIND), non-destructive
bond pull testing, additional mandatory electrical steps, radiographic (x-ray) inspection and different
qualification and quality conformance procedures. Some of the test conditions for Class S are more
stringent. Internal visual examination is performed to condition A (which is tighter than condition B
criteria specified for other classes), burn in times are longer, and more than one burn-in step may be
required. These additional tests are more stringent in conditions and are included in the Class S flow to
insure that all potential failures are removed from lots intended for space/critical applications. QUALIFICATION AND QUALITY CONFORMANCE TESTING

Each of the processing flows requires qualification and quality conformance testing. Quality
conformance testing is divided into Groups A, B, C, D and E. The quality conformance test frequency is
as defined in MIL-M-38510 for JAN product and in Paragraph 1.2 of MIL-STD-883 for non-JAN product. Group A Inspection

Group A involves sample electrical testing on randomly selected devices from the inspection lot or sublot
after the successful completion of all the specified screening detailed in Table 6. Group A (which is
performed to insure that there were no escapes during 100% screening consists of static, dynamic,
functional, and switching tests performed at ambient and minimum and maximum rated operating
temperature. The sample sizes and the specific groups of tests depend upon the product class. Group B Inspection.

Group B for Class B devices, consists of construction testing to ensure that no assembly related flaws
have gone undetected. This sample test sequence includes physical dimensions, resistance to solvents,
internal visual and mechanical, bond strength and solderability testing. For Class S products, Group B
has been expanded to include die shear, steady state life testing and an additional subgroup of
environmental testing.

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                     47 of 136
                                COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE

                    TABLE 6 - MIL-STD-883 100% SCREENING REQUIREMENTS

                                  Class S                                  Class B
                                  Method                     Requirement   Method                 Requirement

1. Wafer Lot Acceptance           5007                       All Lots                             _______

2. Non-destructive                2023                       100%                                 _______
  Bond Pull (Note 14)

3. Internal Visual (Note 1)       2010, Condition A          100%          2010, Condition B      100%

4. Stabilisation Bake             1008, Condition C, Min     100%          1008, Condition C      100%
  (Note 16)                       24 hrs. Min.                             min, 24 hrs. Min.

5. Temp. Cycling (Note 2)         1010, Condition C          100%          1010 Condition C       100%

6. Constant Acceleration          2001, Condition E (Min)    100%          2001, Condition E      100%
                                  Y1 Orientation Only                      (Min) Y1 Orientation

7. Visual Inspection (Note 3)                                100%                                 100%

8. Particle Impact Noise          2010, Condition A (Note    100%                                 _______
  Detection (PIND)                4)

9. Serialisation                  Note 5                     100%                                 -------

10. Interim (Per Burn-In)         Per applicable Device      100%          Per applicable         _______
  Electrical Parameters           Specification (Note 13)                  Device Specification
                                                                           (Note 6)

11. Burn-in Test                  1015                       100%          1015                   100%
                                               o                                        o
                                  240 hrs @ 125 C                          160 hrs @ 125 C
                                  Min (Cond F not allowed)                 Min

12. Interim (Post-Burn-In)        Per Applicable             100%
  Electrical                      Device Specification
                                  (Note 13)

13. Reverse Bias Burn-In          1015; Test Condition       100%
  (Note 7)                        A,C,
                                  72 ins. @ 150oC
                                  Min. (Cond F not

14. Interim (Post-Burn-In)        Per Applicable Device      100%          Per Applicable         100%
  Electrical                      Specification (Note 13)                  Device

15. PDA Calculation               5% Parametric (Note 14)    All lots      5% Parametric (Note    All lots
                                  3% Functional                            14)

                              Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                    48 of 136
                                     COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE

                      TABLE 6 - MIL-STD-883 100% SCREENING REQUIREMENTS (CONT.)

                                        Class S                                  Class B
                                        Method                   Requirement     Method                Requirem’t

         16. Final Electrical Test      Per applicable Device                    Per applicable
           (Note 15)                                                             Device                100%
           (a) Static Tests                                                      Specification
         1) 25oC (Subgroup 1)
             Table 1, 5005)
          2) Max and Min                                         100%                                  100%
               Rated Operating
               Temp (Subgroups
               2,3 Table 1,5005)
            (b) Dynamic Tests or
               Functional Tests
             1) 25oC (Subgroups 4                                100%                                  100%
               or 7)
             2) Max and Min                                                                            100%
               Rated Operating
               Temp (Subgroups 5
               and 6 or 8,
               Table 1,5005)
            (c) Switching Tests
                  o                                              100%
               25 C (Subgroup 9                                                                        100%
               Table 1,5005)

         17. Seal Fine, Gross           1014                     100%            1014                  100%
                                                                 (Note 8)                              (Note 9)

         18. Radiographic               2012 Two Views (Note     100%            _______               _______
           (Note 10)                    15)

         19. Qualification or           (Note 11)                Samp.           (Note 11)             Samp.
         Quality Conformance
           Inspection Test Sample

         20. External Visual            2009                     100%                                  100%
           (Note 12)

NOTE 1     Unless otherwise specified, at the manufacturer's option, test samples for Group B, bond strength
           (Method 5005) may be randomly selected prior to or following internal visual (Method 5004), prior to
           sealing provided all other specification requirements are satisfied (e.g.: bond strength requirements
           shall apply to each inspection lot, bond failures shall be counted even if the bond would have failed
           internal visual.

NOTE 2     For Class B devices, the test may be replaced with thermal shock method 1011, test condition A,

NOTE 3     At the manufacturer's option, visual inspection for catastrophic failure may be conducted after each of
           the thermal/mechanical screens, after the sequence or after seal test. Catastrophic failures are defined
           as defined as missing leads, broken packages or lids off.

                                     Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                  49 of 136
                                   COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE

NOTE 4    The PIND test may be performed in any sequence after step 6 and prior to step 16. See MIL-M-38510,
          para 4.6.3.

NOTE 5    Class S devices shall be serialised prior to interim electrical parameter measurements.
NOTE 6    When specified, all devices shall be tested for those parameters requiring delta calculations.

NOTE 7    Reverse bias burn-in is a requirement only when specified in the applicable device specification. The
          order of performing burn-in and reverse bias burn-in may be inverted.

NOTE 8    For Class S devices, the seal test may be performed in any sequence between step 16 and step 19,
          but it shall be performed after all shearing and forming operations on the terminals.

NOTE 9    For Class B devices, the fine and gross seal test shall be performed separate or together in any
          sequence and order between step 6 and step 20 except that they shall be performed after all shearing
          and forming operations on the terminals. When 100% seal screen cannot be performed after shearing
          and forming (e.g.: flatpacks and chip carriers) the seal screen shall be done 100% prior to those
          operations and a sample test (LTPD = 5) shall be performed on each inspection lot following these
          operations. If the sample fails, 100% rescreening shall be required.

NOTE 10   The radiographic screen may be performed in any sequence after step 9.

NOTE 11   Samples shall be selected for testing in accordance with specific device class and lot requirements of
          Method 5005.

NOTE 12   External visual shall be performed on the lot any time after step 19 and prior to shipment.

NOTE 13   Read and record is required as steps 10 and 12 only for those parameters for which post burn-in delta
          measurements are specified. All parameters shall be read and recorded at step 14.

NOTE 14   The PDA shall apply to subgroup 1 parameters at 25oC and all delta parameters.

NOTE 15   Only one view is required for flat packages and leadless chip carriers with leads on all four sides.

NOTE 16   May be performed at any time prior to step 10.

                                  Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                        50 of 136
                          COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE Group C Inspection.

Group C is performed on Class B product and is primarily a test of the reliability. The sample test
sequence includes operating life, temperature cycling, constant acceleration, hermeticity, visual
examination and end-point electrical. Group C inspection is not required for Class S product because
the tests called out in Group C have already been performed in the Class S Group B. Group D Inspection.

Group D testing is primarily package related testing. The Group D tests include physical dimensions,
lead integrity, hermeticity, thermal shock, temperature cycling, moisture resistance, mechanical shock,
vibration variable frequency, constant acceleration, salt atmosphere, visual examination, and end-point
electrical. Group E Inspection.

Group E testing is performed only on those devices for which a radiation hardness requirement has been
defined. It contains provisions for both neutron testing and total dose testing. QUALIFICATION.

Some tests within the Group B through E tables show different requirements for qualification and quality
conformance testing. It should be noted that the qualification tests are required for the first lot of a non-
JAN device being produced to MIL-STD-883 in order to determine its suitability. WAFER LOT ACCEPTANCE

To ensure that Class S material is assembled from wafers that demonstrate a high probability of
reliability, Method 5007 was added to define wafer lot acceptance requirements for wafer runs which will
be used to assemble Class S devices. VLSI SCREENING TECHNIQUES

Because their limited volume does not lend itself to the establishment of a reliability history, many
have felt that custom ICs should require different testing from that shown in Method 5004. Custom
devices also tend to be more complex and to contain larger dice. Implementation of complete quality
conformance testing in accordance with Method 5005, has often been used for custom devices which
are frequently expensive making it important that dice be pre-screened to ensure that only good dice
are assembled into packages. To address these concerns, Method 5010, was incorporated into
Revision C to provide procedures more suitable for the screening and quality conformance for
complex custom integrated circuits and for the pre-assembly testing of dice. APPLICABILITY OF THE TEST METHODS.

Although the primary purpose of MIL-STD-883 is to provide screening techniques for determining the
probable reliability of microelectronic devices, it does serve other purposes as well. A comparison of the
methods list with the 100% screening and Group A, B, C, D and E tables would reveal that the majority
of the 10000 and 20000 methods are directed to screening, but there are methods such as 1016, 5001
and 5002, which have been developed primarily as analytical techniques for the reliability engineer to
use in product reliability analysis. The 3000 and 4000 series are intended to provide general parametric
testing guidelines although 3015 is employed in qualification and quality conformance testing. These
methods do not cover all conceivable electrical tests, nor do they exclude other methods of test. Some
methods, such as 1001, 1002, and others, are included to provide standards in those rate instances

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                       51 of 136

where a system may have to function under an environment constraint that is not covered by the
methods mandated in 5004 and 5005. FAILURE ANALYSIS TEST METHODS

One important method that deserves further discussion is Method 5003, Failure Analysis. Many of the
screening techniques currently found in MIL-STD-883 grew out of data generated by extensive failure
analysis. It is impossible to adequately screen for specific failure modes without first fully understanding
the failure mode. Failure analysis is the tool which provides that understanding. Method 5003 provides
for several levels of failure analysis. SUMMARY

MIL-STD-883, by developing a formal structure for evaluating the various reliability concerns discussed,
provides a valuable tool to the Military/Aerospace semiconductor user. However, MIL-STD-883 does not
provide the specific device electrical requirements that are essential to full reliability standardisation.
This was accomplished by MIL-M-38510, which will be discussed in the next section.


The previous section addressed the standardised testing which the U.S. government has developed in
MIL-STD-883 for both 100% screening and quality conformance testing of semiconductor devices. This
section will address the government MIL-M-38510 Standardisation Programme (otherwise known as the
JAN IC Programme) which was formulated in response to those user reliability concerns. MIL-M-38510
requires that all suppliers of qualified devices conduct specific tests and implement manufacturing
controls and procedures to insure that failures due to die, assembly and packaging concerns are
minimised. This standardisation programme utilises the testing procedures of MIL-STD-883. Thus the
users of high reliability devices can purchase uniform parts from any qualified supplier. PROGRAMME BACKGROUND

Since the invention of semiconductors, users could never be sure that a device purchased from one
manufacturer would be an exact replacement for the same device obtained from another supplier. Major
differences in device processing and electrical testing existed among the suppliers. Recognising the
importance of semiconductor devices to military programmes, the government introduced standardised
methods of testing high reliability devices and developed a standard screening flow in 1968 through the
publication of MIL-STD-883. Concurrent with the development of MIL-STD-883, the government
developed MIL-M-38510 to enable users to procure standardised integrated circuits, controlled by listing
qualified suppliers on a government approval list called a Qualified Parts List (QPL).

The drive toward standardisation had two primary purposes. First, it eliminated screening variances
between semiconductor manufacturers.         Secondly, early semiconductor reliability specifications
developed independently by various organisations within the Army, Navy, and Air Force, also differed in
their details. Experience on the MIL-S-19500 programme (which will be discussed in section 12) had
shown that a specification common to all branches could lead to volume efficiencies that proved cost
effective. In fact, the term JAN (Joint Army Navy) was developed both as an indicator that a part was
purchased to a government controlled specification and as an indicator that the specification was
approved for procurement for the electronics programmes of all services. To insure that the needs of
each branch are met, each standardisation specification must be co-ordinated with all affected branches
prior to its release.

MIL-M-38510, which was first issued by the Solid State Applications Branch of Rome Air Development
Centre (RADC), describes the detail requirements of this programme. It establishes the procedures

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                      52 of 136

which a manufacturer must follow to have his products listed on the Qualified Parts List (QPL). One
major problem facing semiconductor users was non-interchangeability caused by the proliferation of
non-standard electrical specifications, The 38510 program resolved this problem by publishing a set of
detailed specifications (called slash sheets) which defined the performance parameters and electrical
screens which a device must meet to be listed on the QPL. RADC initially drafted slash sheets for those
devices which were in most demand among high reliability semiconductor users. Although RADC
initially wrote and continues to control the requirements contained in 38510 and its associated slash
sheets, the responsibility for administering the 38510 programme was assigned to the Defence
Electronics Supply Centre (DESC). DESC's responsibility includes co-ordinating, preparing, dating, and
issuing the various documents pertaining to the programme; certifying the fabrication, assembly and test
facilities of potential suppliers; approving suppliers' qualification data for particular devices; and listing
suppliers' devices on the QPL. DESC is also responsible for co-ordinating each specification with all
branches of the Armed Services prior to issue, although some slash sheets are initially issued for USAF
use only, with full co-ordination occurring later.

MIL-STD-883 originally established three product assurance levels - Class A (which was superseded by
Class S in 1977), Class B and Class C (which was obsolete when Revision C was issued). Class S
devices are intended for space flight application while Class B devices are used primarily for aircraft,
naval and ground systems.

One point should be made clear relative to the relationship between Class B and Class S. Strategic
missiles and spacecraft must operate for prolonged periods in hostile environments in which repair and
maintenance is impossible. The reliability of components used in these types of equipment must be
exceptionally high. Although some Class S procedures and requirements appear to parallel those of
Class B, Class S devices should not be viewed as "upgraded" Class B devices, Class S devices are
totally unique, and, as shall be shown later in this section, must be handled and processed differently
from wafer fabrication onward. PROGRAMME ORGANISATION

MIL-M-38510 defines the requirements a manufacturer must meet to qualify his products (i.e. to be listed
on the QPL for a particular device) and to maintain that qualification. The 38510 program requires that a
supplier meet many other requirements, including implementation of a product assurance programme
meeting MIL-M-38510 specifications, maintenance of detailed configuration control for critical processing
steps and assessment of device construction and design criteria (such as metallisation and current
density) to establish that they meet specific minimum requirements. A supplier is also required to
maintain sufficient control over his suppliers to ensure that all materials and services used in the
production of MIL-M-38510 devices are compatible with the level of quality and reliability at which the
programme is aimed. MIL-M-38510 references the test methods of MIL-STD-883 for initial device
qualification, 100% screening and quality conformance testing. Where MIL-STD-883 refers to the
"applicable procurement documents," these would be the combination of MIL-M-38510 and its applicable

A manufacturer must meet a broad spectrum of requirements before his device can be listed on the

The first of these requirements is that the facilities used to manufacture those devices must be certified
by the government. Specific requirements for line certification are defined in MIL-STD-976. These
requirements cover such items as process control, facility cleanliness, documentation and equipment
calibration. The three major processing areas requiring certification are wafer fabrication (fab),
assembly, and the testing area. When a manufacturer assembles products from a number of fab lines in

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                        53 of 136

a single assembly area and tests them in a single test area, the extension of the test area certification to
additional product lines does not typically require as extensive an audit. Any additional assembly or test
facilities and each independent fabrication line must be individually certified. Where more than one
fabrication process is used (even though the equipment may be common) the line must be certified for
each process.

The certification audits may be performed concurrently. Separate line certifications are required for
Class B and Class S. Class S certification requirements are significantly more stringent than those for
Class B.

All of the facilities used in the fabrication, assembly and test of JAN (38510 QPL) microcircuits must be
located within the United States and its territories. Where international agreements exist which establish
reciprocal and equivalent government quality control systems and procedures, microcircuits
manufactured in other countries to either MIL-M-38510 or equivalent national specifications may be
reciprocally listed on the MIL-M-38510 QPL, but not as JAN devices.

They may use U.S. or other national part numbers (depending upon the degree to which their
compliance to MIL-M-38510 has been verified), and they may also be marked with the symbols
established by other participating countries for the control and marking of devices produced under the
national rules and requirements of those countries. The procedures for obtaining the QPL listing (which
would be on Part III of the QPL) are defined in Appendix I of MIL-M-38510.

The certification procedure begins with a formal request from the manufacturer to DESC for a
certification audit. DESC administers the certification for both Class B and Class S. The audit for Class
B is conducted by DESC personnel, while an audit for Class S is jointly performed by representatives
from the U.S. Air Force Space Division (SD), the U.S. Air Force Ballistic Missile Organisation (BMO), the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and DESC. Once the audit has been
completed, the manufacturer will receive a letter from DESC, indicating what corrective actions (if any)
are needed in order to bring the line into full compliance with MIL-M-38510 requirements. After the
required changes have been implemented, the manufacturer will be reaudited and will receive approval
for the facility.

This facility certification must be renewed on a periodic basis. DESC typically requires a reaudit of each
certified facility every two years. Additionally, a manufacturer must either qualify a device for Class B or
initiate qualification testing for a Class S device within one year after certification, or the certification may
be revoked. If a manufacturer subsequently decided to qualify devices manufactured in a facility which
has lost its certification, he must show that all of the requirements are still being met, in order to have his
certification reactivated by DESC.

Material other than Class S product may be manufactured on a Class S certified line provided all of the
necessary controls remain in place to ensure that Class S product is not adversely impacted. DEVICE QUALIFICATION

There are two levels of QPL listing - Part II and Part I. The qualification testing required for a Part II
listing is not as extensive as that required for a Part I listing. Part II was established by the government
to expedite the listing of manufacturers on the QPL. All line certifications must be complete and
significant electrical test data and device design and construction data must be submitted before DESC
will grant the Part II QPL listing. Since the additional testing required for Part I qualification requires
substantial time, suppliers listed on Part II are thus able to provide standardised devices for users while
they are completing their Part I qualification. Devices furnished against a Part II or Part I listing are
identical in screening and performance.

For Class B devices, a manufacturer may remain on Part II for two years or until 90 days after another
supplier receives Part I qualification for the same device, package, and lead finish combination. For
Class S devices he is allowed one year after another manufacturer receives a Part I QPL. During the

                          Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                          54 of 136

90-day or one year grace period, a supplier may accept orders, which he may complete and ship no
matter how long that requires. He may accept no orders after the expiration of the grace period until he
achieves Part I qualification.

Distributors may ship JAN devices which were purchased before the manufacturer lost his QPL listing
provided the manufacturer was not removed for cause (that is, removed for failure to comply with MIL-M-
38510 requirements).

A supplier will retain his QPL I listing as long as he continues to manufacture the device, maintains
appropriate facility approvals, and submits all required reports and information to DESC within stipulated
time limits. Violation of these requirements may be cause for removal from QPL.

Since the requirements for Class S qualification are more stringent than those for Class B, a supplier
who successfully completes Class S qualification will automatically received a Class B qualification for
that case outline and lead finish. QUALIFICATION BY EXTENSION

Once a manufacturer has qualified a device to MIL-M-38510, he may use more simplified procedures to
qualify other device/package combinations which appear on the same detail specification with the
qualified device. This can be accomplished in one of three ways. It should be noted that, although the
information provided here relative to those three ways is typical of the testing required for qualification,
DESC may, on occasion, modify these requirements as a result of mitigating circumstances.

The first of these methods is die related testing. To extend a qualification to another die type in a
package identical to the one used for the qualified device, a manufacturer must perform all Group A
subgroups required by the detail specification (including those electrical subgroups added to Group C by
the detail specification) and must perform either Group B (for Class S devices) or Group C (for Class B
devices). The die which is qualified in this manner need not be on the same detail specification, but
must be from the same certified line. Thus a manufacturer could use this method to extend qualification
from a CMOS gate to a CMOS flip-flop, but could not extend that qualification to a 54LS gate.

The second method is called die extension. Once either full qualification or die related testing has been
successfully performed on a device, only Group A testing (again including those subgroups added to
Group C) is required to extend that qualification to a device which uses a different metal mask from the
qualified device, but which otherwise uses the same mask set, or to a device with the same metal mask
but either a slower switching speed or lower power requirement. This could, for example, be used to
extend a 54L30 qualification to a 54L00 or 54L20 if the dice were identical except for metal mask, or to
extend the qualification for a 100 ns memory to the same memory with a 125 ns access time.

The third possibility is package extension. When a die has been qualified in one package, that die
qualification may be extended to the same die in other packages. No additional testing is required if the
same package with the same lead finish has already been qualified containing a larger die. If the die to
which qualification is to be extended is larger, then either subgroup B-6 (for Class S) or subgroup C-2
(for Class B) must be performed. For extension to a package type and lead finish which has not
previously been qualified, subgroups 2, 3, 4, 5 and 7 of Group B and all subgroups of Group D must be
performed for Class B product. Class S products require subgroups 2 and 3 of Group B in addition to
Group D testing.

In addition, qualification may be extended to a different lead finish by submitting a single device type in a
previously qualified package using that lead finish to subgroup 3 of Group B (Class B) and subgroups 1,
3, 5 and 7 of Group D. If this testing is successful, the qualification may be extended to other devices
using the same package and lead finish with no additional testing. If the qualification is for Class B, Part
I, it may also be extended to Class S, Part I, with no additional testing.

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                       55 of 136

All QPL devices a manufacturer ships must receive the 100% processing defined in Method 5004 of
MIL-STD-883 for the applicable class. NON-DESTRUCTIVE BOND PULL TESTING

A 100% non-destructive bond pull test is included in the screening flow for Class S devices. Assembly
lots which have been subjected to this test and have failed the Percentage Defective Allowable (PDA)
cannot be shipped as JAN Class B devices. BURN-IN AND ELECTRICAL TESTING

All Class S and Class B devices are subjected to burn-in as required by the Method 5004 screening flow
and are then electrically tested to the parametric requirements of the applicable detail specification. The
25oC DC portion of this electrical testing must be completed within 96 hours after the completion of burn-
in (although many CMOS specifications require that drift limits be assessed if this testing is not
completed within 24 hours). In addition, the 25oC DC testing is subject to a PDA of 5% for parametric
failures for both Class B and Class S and 3% for functional failures for Class S only. Class S CMOS
devices are subjected to three burn-ins, two static burn-ins of 24 hours each (one for the P-channel, one
for the N-channel) with a combined PDA of 5%, and a 240-hour dynamic burn-in with a separate 5%
PDA. If a PDA is exceeded, the rejected lot may be resubmitted one time to burn-in, provided the
number of rejects does not exceed twice the specified PDA or 20%, whichever is greater. Resubmitted
lots must be kept separate from new lots and must pass a PDA one level tighter than the PDA that was

Since many manufacturers already have test and burn-in circuits in place prior to the issuance of a detail
specification, provisions have been made to allow the use of alternative test circuits. These circuits must
be compatible with the intent of the detail specification (for example, static burn-in circuits would not be
acceptable as substitutes for dynamic circuits) and must be reviewed and approved by DESC. In
addition, these provisions allow MIL-M-38510 to accommodate the wide range of test equipment

Since the accuracy of testing is critical, MIL-M-38510 also requires that manufacturers maintain
comprehensive procedures for test equipment verification. Most of these systems utilise correlation
samples. These procedures, as well as the calibration schedules and procedures, are confirmed during
the certification audit. INSPECTION LOT FORMATION

Each inspection lot of Class B devices must consist of microcircuits of a single device type, in a single
package type and lead finish, or may consist of inspection sublots of several different types, in a single
package type and lead finish, defined by a single detail specification. Each inspection lot or sublot must
be manufactured on the same production line through final seal by the same production techniques, and

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                      56 of 136

to the same device design rules, using the same materials, sealed within the same period (which may
not exceed six weeks) submitted to Quality Conformance Inspection at the same time.

For Class S devices, an inspection lost must consist of microcircuits of a single device type in a single
package type and lead finish. The inspection lost may contain a number of sub-lots, provided each
sublot contains no more than 600 units at serialisation, no more than four wafers runs are used in
forming the inspection lot, and all devices in the inspection lot are sealed within the same period (which
shall not exceed six weeks) and all sublots are submitted to Quality Conformance Inspection at the same

Each inspection sublot must contain dice from a single wafer run, and each shall be uniquely identified in
order to maintain traceability.

Where the size of the wafer run permits, an inspection lost (with no sublots) may be formed from a single
wafer run without being held to the 600 piece size limitation. It must meet all other requirements. WAFER LOT ACCEPTANCE

All dice used in the manufacture of Class S devices must come from wafer runs which have successfully
passed all of the requirements of the Wafer Lot Acceptance testing defined in Method 5007 of

Each Class B device must be traceable to an inspection lot, to a certified wafer fabrication line, to the
Qualify Conformance Test Data (Group A, B, C, D and E testing) applicable to that lot. The traceability
procedures for hybrids, which usually employ several different dice in the same device, are somewhat
looser than those required in monolithic devices, and are defined in Appendix G of MIL-M-38510.

Each Class S device must be traceable to both an inspection lot and a wafer lot. This traceability will
allow all material from a given wafer run to be isolated in the event than any wafer fabrication related
defects are uncovered during the course of screening. QUALITY CONFORMANCE INSPECTION

All JAN QPL devices must successfully pass the quality conformance inspection of Method 5005 of MIL-
STD-883. Quality conformance tests are performed on a sampling basis and must be conducted as

Group A          -       Each inspection lot and sublot.
Group B          -       Each inspection lot.
Group C          -       For Class B devices only.

Performed on one inspection lot from each microcircuit group within which a manufacturer has qualified
device types. Group C must be performed on one device type or one inspection lot from each three
month period of production for each certified wafer fab line. Group C testing is independent of package
type, thus making Group C testing on one package type valid for all package types used for devices
within the same microcircuit group.

Group D          -       Performed on each package type (irrespective of microcircuit grouping) every 6
                         months of production.

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                      57 of 136

Group E          -        Performed on each wafer lot (if done prior to assembly) or each inspection lot
                          (if performed at QCI).

The manufacturer must periodically report to DESC all quality conformance test results and must retain
all data on file for five years.

MIL-M-38510 also provides information regarding which of the quality conformance tests are considered
destructive (that is, are sufficiently severe that test samples subjected to those tests should not be used
in any actual applications) and which are non-destructive (that is, those which do not impact the useful
life of the test samples sufficiently to make use of those samples in system production questionable).
Test methods that are not included in either of these lists are considered destructive until the
manufacturer can provide data to RADC and DESC proving that the test is non-destructive.

MIL-M-38510 also defines the procedures to be followed should a lot of material fail quality conformance
testing. In some cases, a failed lot need not be scrapped, but may be rescreened and resubmitted to
quality conformance testing. ADDITIONAL DATA REGARDING QPL LISTING

A user can determine which devices are covered by a slash sheet specification by referring to
supplement one (1) of MIL-M-38510. This document, which contains a listing of the slash sheet
specifications and a cross reference to the generic part types, is updated as new slash sheets are

MIL-M-38510 requires that each device be marked with an index point to designate pin 1 (which may be
accomplished mechanically through the package configuration), the MIL-M-38510 part number, the
inspection lot identification code (or date code), the manufacturer's identification and identifying symbol,
the country of origin, the JAN certification mark (which is usually shortened to just the J) and a serial
number (where applicable).          MIL-M-38510 also specifies special marking codes to indicate
beryllium-oxide packages, the electrostatic discharge sensitivity of the device, and the radiation
hardness of the device, where these are applicable.

MIL-M-38510 devices have a unique part numbering system, an example is presented below:



J = The JAN Prefix (only applied to fully compliant product).

M38510 = MIL-M-38510

/ = For radiation hardened components, the slash is replaced by the hardness assurance letter.

AAA = The slash sheet number

BB = The component number on the slash sheet.

C = The screening level S, B or C.

D = The component package type.

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                      58 of 136

E = The lead finish.

As an example, JM38510/10107SGC would indicate device 07 (the LM118) from slash sheet 101
(operational amplifiers) screened to Class S in an 8-pin TO-99 package with gold lead finish. SUMMARY

Standardisation is indeed the key to long term cost effective satisfaction of military/space component
needs. MIL-M-38510 has satisfied this need up to recent times. However, to achieve greater cost
effectiveness and greater availability, especially for VLSI components a new approach was needed. This
new approach is achieved through a new document, MIL-I-38535, which is discussed in the next section.

3.3.3 MIL-I-38535

During the last 10 years the component standards have not been able to keep pace with the
development of new technologies such as ASIC's, gate arrays and VLSI components.

Specifications such as MIL-M-38510 which proved very successful for simpler components were not
addressing the needs of complex components. As a result joint discussions between the Defence
Electronics Supply Center and Industry resulted in the publication of MIL-I-38535 and hence a Qualified
Manufacturers List (QML) system was developed.


The older QPL approach was to qualify on a component by component basis, with qualification of the
component type requiring destruction of a large number to achieve QPL listing. With higher integration
components, hence high cost, this presented commercial problems for the component producer. As a
result there were/are very few high integration microcircuits listed on the QPL.

The QML approach is to qualify the manufacturer rather than the component. To expand, the
manufacturer adopts a total quality management (TQM) approach to his business, from the design stage
through to customer feedback, with the object of obtaining continuous improvement by Statistical
Process Control (SPC). As a result qualification can be achieved at a much lower cost, with the best
commercial practice being incorporated into military and space applications.


The earlier sections of this guide have addressed reliability concerns and processing flows primarily as
they relate to integrated circuits. Most reliability concerns are the same for discrete products such as
FETs, bipolar transistors, diodes, rectifiers and thyristors. This section will discuss discrete product
reliability. Standardisation of discrete screening is every bit as important as standardisation of integrated
circuit screening, since most Military/Aerospace systems will use a large number of discrete devices.
Standardisation of the semiconductor is achieved through MIL-S-19500 PROGRAMME BACKGROUND

When diodes, the first true semiconductors were produced, MIL-E-1, the Navy generated vacuum tube
was amended to add a diode section. As additional semiconductor products became available, the
Navy saw that amendments to MIL-E-1 were an awkward approach. To more meaningfully address the
requirements for new semiconductor devices, the United States Navy Bureau of Ships in 1959 created

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                       59 of 136

MIL-S-19500 (which performs the same basic control and standardisation functions for discrete products
that MIL-M-38510 provides for ICs) to generate a standardised specification to control the reliability and
product assurance of semiconductor products.

To some extent, MIL-S-19500 was tailored to work within the JEDEC standardisation system that had
begun several years earlier.

Because of the diversity of electrical specifications and package types available using the same basic
die, JEDEC developed a registration for discrete devices. However, the JEDEC registration system
lacked the formal administrative control that a government QPL could offer. Although the registration
system established specific parametric limits, there was no mechanism for prohibiting a manufacturer
from selling a part that did not meet those limits. In developing MIL-S-19500, the Navy retained the
parametric limits associated with each JEDEC part number (tightening some where necessary) and
even tied part marking to the JEDEC numbering system rather than to the detail specification number
(as was later done in MIL-M-38150). The JEDEC numbering system was fairly simple, a three or four
digit number preceded by an XN, where X was one less than the number of active element terminations
on the device. For example, most diodes ended up with 1N numbers, most transistors with 2N. Dual
transistors were given 2N numbers even though their six pins dictated 5N numbers. Additional
information was provided by suffixes (such as M for matched devices, R for reverse polarity and L for
long-leaded devices).

Today, MIL-S-19500 is co-ordinated, written and enforced by the Defence Electronic Supply Centre
(DESC). DESC takes inputs from all services (Army, Navy and Air Force) as well as such space
agencies as USAF/SD, USAF/IBMO and NASA, but the primary authority remains the Naval Electronics
Systems Command (NESC or NAVALEX).

MIL-S-19500 was originally released as a self-contained specification for semiconductor products. In
1963, the Navy decided that it would be better to have a separate specification for detail testing
methods. In 1964, MIL-STD-750 was published to provide the "how to" test methods for MIL-S-19500,
much as MIL-STD-883 provides the "how to" test methods for MIL-M-38510. PURPOSE AND STRUCTURE

MIL-S-19500 establishes the general requirements for semiconductor devices. Detailed requirements
and characteristics are specified in detail specifications. Four levels of product assurance requirements
are provided, differentiated by the prefixed JAN, JANTX, JANTXV and JANS. These prefixes may be
abbreviated J, JX, JV and JS, respectively. The differences in reliability levels for various types of
systems, and are divided into five basic areas: qualification, lot definition, traceability requirements,
screening and quality conformance requirements.

In MIL-S-19500, one will find references to JANSM, JANTXVD and other classes not listed above.
These are references to JANS and JANTXV devices which have been tested to specific radiation
hardness assurance levels. QUALIFICATION

Before a supplier can ship any level of JAN semiconductor products, he must go through a qualification
cycle. This qualification cycle is much like that of MIL-M-38510 and requires several items. PRODUCT ASSURANCE PROGRAMME

The programme plan must assure that the design, processing assembly and inspection, and testing of
semiconductors comply with MIL-S-19500 and its applicable detail specifications.

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                     60 of 136

The fabrication, assembly and testing lines used for JAN transistors must be officially certified for MIL-S-
19500 use. Specific items addressed include process control, facility cleanliness, documentation and
equipment calibration. Each area used in the fabrication assembly and testing of QPL devices must be
certified. The first step is the formal request for a certification audit from DESC. Once the audit has
been completed, the manufacturer will be sent a letter outlining the corrective actions (if any) that are
required. After the manufacturer has demonstrated that the required changes have been made, he will
be reaudited and given a facility approval. The requirements for JANS are much more detailed, as an
examination of Appendix D of MIL-S-19500 will quickly show.

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                      61 of 136

                 TABLE 7 - NUMERICAL INDEX OF MIL-STD-750

Method                                               Title
 1001    Barometric pressure (reduced)
 1011    Immersion
 1016    Insulation resistance
 1021    Moisture resistance
 1022    Resistance to solvents
 1026    Steady-state operation life
 1027    Steady-state operation life (LTPD)
 1031    High-temperature (nonoperating) life
 1032    High-temperature (nonoperating) life (LTPD)
 1036    Intermittent operation life
 1037    Intermittent operation life (LTPD)
 1038    Burn-in (for diodes and rectifiers)
 1039    Burn-in (for transistors)
 1041    Burn-in (for thyristors, controlled rectifiers)
 1041    Salt atmosphere (corrosion)
 1046    Salt spray (corrosion)
 1051    Thermal shock (temperature cycling)
 1056    Thermal shock (glass strain)
 1061    Temperature measurement, case and stud
 1066    Dew point
 1071    Hermetic seal

 2005    Axial lead tensile test
 2006    Constant acceleration
 2016    Shock
 2026    Solderability
 2031    Soldering heat
 2036    Terminal strength
 2037    Bond strength
 2046    Vibration fatigue
 2051    Vibration Noise
 2052    Particle impact noise
 2056    Vibration, variable frequency
 2057    Vibration, variable frequency (monitored)
 2066    Physical dimensions
 2071    Visual and mechanical examination
 2072    Internal visual (pre-cap) inspection
 2073    Visual inspection for die (semiconductor diodes)
 2074    Internal visual inspection (discrete semiconductor diodes)
 2076    Radiographic inspection
 2081    Forward instability, shock (FIST)
 2082    Backward instability, vibration (BIST)

 3001    SERIES)
 3005    Breakdown voltage, collector to base

                  Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                       62 of 136

Method                                               Title
 3011    Burnout by pulsing
 3015    Breakdown voltage, collector to emitter
 3020    Drift
 3026    Floating potential
 3030    Breakdown voltage, emitter to base
 3036    Collector to emitter voltage
 3041    Collector to base cutoff current
 3051    Collector to emitter cutoff current
 3052    Safe operating area (continuous DC)
 3053    Safe operating area (pulsed)
 3061    Safe operating area (switching)
 3066    Emitter to base cutoff current
 3071    Base emitter voltage (saturated or non-saturated)
 3076    Saturation voltage and resistance
 3086    Forward-current transfer ratio
 3092    Static input resistance
         Static transductance

 3131    Thermal resistance (collector-cutoff-current method)
 3132    Thermal resistance (forward voltage drop, emitter to base, diode method)
 3136    Thermal resistance (DC voltage drop, emitter base, continuous method)
 3141    Thermal resistance (forward voltage drop, collector base, diode method)
 3146    Thermal response time
 3151    Thermal time constant
         Thermal resistance, general

 3201    Small-signal short-circuit input impedance
 3206    Small-signal short-circuit forward-current transfer ratio
 3211    Small-signal open-circuit reverse voltage transfer ratio
 3216    Small-signal open-circuit output admittance
 3221    Small-signal short-circuit input admittance
 3231    Small-signal short-circuit output admittance
 3236    Open circuit output capabilities
 3240    Input capacitance (output open-circuited or short-circuited)
 3241    Direct intermittent capacitance
 3246    Noise figure
 3251    Pulse response
 3255    Large-signal power gain
 3256    Small-signal power gain
 3261    Extrapolated unity gain frequency
 3266    Real part of small-signal short circuited input impedance

 3301    Small signal short-circuit forward-current transfer ratio cutoff frequency
 3306    Small-signal short-circuit forward-current transfer ratio
 3311    Maximum frequency of oscillation

 3401    Breakdown voltage, gate to source
         Gate to source voltage or current

                  Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                   63 of 136

Method                                             Title
 3403    Drain to source "on"-state-voltage
 3405    Breakdown voltage, drain to source
 3406    Gate reverse current
 3407    Drain current
 3413    Drain reverse current
 3415    Static drain to source "on"-state resistance
 3421    Small-signal drain to source "on"-state resistance
 3423    Small-signal common source, short-circuit, input capacitance
 3431    Small-signal common-source, short-circuit, reverse-transfer capacitance
 3433    Small-signal common-source, short-circuit, output admittance
 3453    Small-signal common-source, short-circuit, forward transfer admittance
 3455    Small-signal common-source, short-circuit, reverse transfer admittance
 3457    Pulse response (FET)
 3459    Small-signal, common source, short-circuit, input admittance

 4001    Capacitance
 4011    Forward voltage
 4016    Reverse current and reverse voltage
 4021    Breakdown voltage (diodes)
 4022    Breakdown voltage (voltage regulators and voltage reference diodes)
 4026    Forward recovery voltage and time
 4031    Reverse recovery time
 4036    "Q" for variable capacitance diodes
 4041    Rectification efficiency
 4046    Reverse current, average
 4051    Small-signal breakdown impedance
 4056    Small-signal forward impedance
 4061    Stored charge
 4066    Surge current
 4071    Temperature coefficient of breakdown voltage
 4076    Saturation current
 4081    Thermal resistance for signal diodes, rectifier diodes, and thyristors

 4101    Conversion loss
 4102    Microwave diode capacitance
 4106    Detector power efficiency
 4111    Figure of merit (current sensitivity)
 4116    Intermediate frequency (IF) impedance
 4121    Output noise ratio
 4126    Overall noise figure and noise figure of the IF amplifier
 4131    Video resistance
 4136    Standing wave ratio
 4141    Burnout by repetitive pulsing
 4146    Burnout by single pulse
 4151    Rectified microwave diode current

 4201    Holding current
 4206    Forward blocking current
 4211    Reverse blocking current
 4216    Pulse response

                 Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                 64 of 136

   Method                                                  Title
    4219        Reverse gate current
    4221        Gate-trigger voltage or gate-trigger current
    4223        Gate-controlled turn-on time
    4225        Circuit-commutated turn-off time
    4226        Gate-controlled turn-off time
    4231        Forward "on" voltage
                Exponential rate of voltage rise

    4301        Junction capacitance
    4306        Static characteristics of tunnel diodes
    4316        Series inductance
    4321        Negative resistance
    4326        Series resistance
    4331        Switching time DEVICE QUALIFICATION

Once a manufacturer has certified fabrication, assembly and testing areas, he will manufacture a lot of
devices for his qualification testing. The qualification testing sequence includes 100% screening and
Groups A, B, C and (when applicable) D performed on a randomly selected sample from the lot. When
the required test reports showing satisfactory completion of the tests and inspections specified are
submitted to DESC, the manufacturer will be listed in QPL-19500. To retain the QPL listing, each year
thereafter the manufacturer must submit a summary of the quality conformance testing that he has run.
This summary must show that quality conformance testing has been run on each device for which he
has a QPL listing for a new lot of that device or a structurally identical qualified device type every three
years. JANS retention requirements are more detailed than those for other classes. RE-QUALIFICATION

All qualified manufacturers must notify DESC of any change in their products or their product assurance
plans that might affect performance, quality, appearance, reliability or interchangeability. After receipt of
the change notification, DESC will then inform the manufacturer what steps (if any) need to be taken to
retain qualification. These steps may include a full qualification test sequence but they are normally held
to a minimum. DESC will then review the new data and allow the changed product to be listed on the

The processing requirements for the four classes cover a spectrum of device reliability testing that
ranges from the unscreened JAN to the space/critical highly tested JANS. JAN is not processed 100%.
Successful completion of a quality conformance test sequence run on a randomly selected sample of
product from the inspection lot qualifies the entire lot, JANTX, JANTXV and JANS do require 100%
processing on a lot-by-lot basis. JANS and JANTXV require on-shore assembly and pre-cap, while
JANTX and JAN which do not require pre-cap, allow off-shore assembly. (Most manufacturers,
however, perform a self-imposed internal visual inspection on JAN and JANTX). JANS also require
wafer lot inspection and traceability, particle impact noise detection (PIND), serialisation, radiography
and external visual inspection. The specific processing requirements and electrical test requirements
are detailed in each individual slash sheet.

In many cases, these flows will be modified by the individual slash sheets because of the unique
characteristics of some device types. However, most of the screening is the same that was previously

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                       65 of 136

outlined for ICs; internal visual, stabilisation bake, thermal shock, constant acceleration, hermeticity
testing and burn-in (the standard Class B screens required by MIL-STD-883) are all required. It should
be noted that burn-in is done at 25oC.

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                    66 of 136
                               COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE

                            TABLE 8 - MIL-S-19500 SCREENING REQUIREMENTS

                               MIL STD                                     JAN         JAN          JAN
        Screen                   750               Condition                S          TXV           TX
                               Method                                     Reqmt       Reqmt        Reqmt
    1. Internal Visual           2072            For Transistors          100%        100%         ____
   (Precap) Inspection           2073      For diodes when specified
                                 2074              For diodes
   2. High Temp Life             1032       24 hrs min at max rated       100%        100%         100%
        (LTPD)                                    storage temp
   (Stabilisation Bake)
   3. Thermal Shock              1051     No dwell is required at 25oC    100%        100%         100%
 (temp cycling) (Note 6)                  Test condition C, 20 cycles
                                           t(extremes) > 10 minutes
4. Constant acceleration         2006     Y1 direction at 20,000G min     100%        100%         100%
     (not required for                     (10,000G min for devices
    double plug diodes)                    with power rating of > 10
                                              watts at TC = 25 C).
5. Particle Impact Noise         2052             Condition A             100%        ____         _____
     detection (for all
      devices with an
      internal cavity)
6.(a) Forward instability        2081                                     100%        _____        _____
          shock test
       (FIST) (Note 5)
 (b) Backward instability
          shock test             2082                                     100%
       (BIST) (Note 5)
    7. Hermetic Seal             1071        (a) Test condition G or      Option    100% (Note   100% (Note
          (a) Fine                               H1 max leak rate =           al        8)           8)
      (not required for                          5 X 10 - atm cc/s        if done
    double plug diodes)                           for devices with            at
                                                  internal cavity >       step 14
                                                       0.3 cc)
        (b) Gross                               (b) Test condition
                                                    A, C, E or F          Option
    8. Serialisation                                                       100%        -----        -----
  9. Interim electrical                           As specified             100%       _____       ______
       parameters                                                          (Read
 10. High temp reverse                    48 hrs min at TA = 150oV min
  bias (HTRB) (Note 7)                     and min applied voltage as
                                          Transistor-Cond A, 80% min
        Burn-In (for             1039      of rated VCB (bipolar), VGS    100%        100%         100%
      transistors)                            (FET), as applicable

                                          Diodes (except Zeners) and
                                          rectifiers rated < 10 amps at
   Burn-In (for diodes           1038     TC > 100 C-80% min of rated     100%        100%         100%
    and rectifiers)                               VR-Condition A

                               Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                  67 of 136
                                 COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE

                         TABLE 8 - MIL-S-19500 SCREENING REQUIREMENTS (CONT.)

                                 MIL STD                                JAN              JAN             JAN
           Screen                  750           Condition               S               TXV              TX
                                 Method                                Reqmt            Reqmt           Reqmt
  11. Interim electrical and                  As specified but           100%         100% (Read      100% (Read
      delta parameters                       including all delta      (Read and        and record      and record
                                              parameters as a        record delta         delta           delta
                                               min. Leakage          parameters       parameters      parameters
                                              current shall be      within 16 hrs     within 24 hrs   within 24 hrs
                                             measured on each      after removal of        after           after
                                             device before any     applied voltage     removal of      removal of
                                             other test is made        in HTRB)          applied         applied
                                                                                        voltage in      voltage in
                                                                                         HTRB)           HTRB)
  12 Power burn-in (Note 4)                     As specified           100%               100%            100%
Burn in (for transistors) Burn     1039      Transistors-Cond B      240hrs min        160hrsmin       160hrsmin
in (for diodes and rectifiers)     1038       Diodes (including      240hrs min        96hrs min       96hrs min
                                               Zeners) and all
    Burn in (for thyristors                   rectifiers Cond B
    controlled rectifiers)         1040          Thryistors          240hrs min        96hrs min       96hrs min

   13. Final electrical test                    As specified            100%             100%            100%
     (a) Interim electrical                    All parameter           Interim          Interim         Interim
             and delta                      measurements must         electrical       electrical      electrical
          parameters for                    be completed within       and delta        and delta       and delta
        PDA. PDA when                       96 hrs after removal     parameters       parameters      parameters
        applicable is 10%                       from burn in         (Read and        (Read and       (Read and
            maximum                               condition           Record)          Record)         Record)
                                                                      Group A
       (b) Other electrical                                          subgroups         Group A         Group A
            parameters                                                 2 and 3        subgroup 2      subgroup 2
      14. Hermetic seal            1071      (same as 7 above)          100%           Optional        Optional
        (a) Fine (except                         (Note 3)                              (Note 8)        (Note 8)
     double plug diodes)

           (b) Gross
      15. Radiography              2076           (Note 3)              100%             _____          ______
     16. External visual           2071       To be performed           100%             _____          ______
         examination                           after complete

       NOTE 1 During shock, the forward DC voltage shall be monitored continuously on a oscilloscope or
              with a "latch and hold" interrupt detection circuit of appropriate sensitivity. Any indication of
              discontinuity shall be cause for rejection.

       NOTE 2 During vibration, the reverse characteristics to the maximum rated power shall be displayed
              on an oscilloscope swept at 60Hz and any discontinuity, flutter, drift or shift in oscilloscope
              trace or any dynamic instabilities shall be cause for rejection.

       NOTE 3 The radiographic and seal screens for JANS may be performed in any order following final
              electrical test. Glass diodes shall not be painted until after seal tests.

                                 Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                     68 of 136

NOTE 4 Reverse blocking tests shall replace power burn-in for power rectifiers at > 10 amp rating at
       TC > 100oC and all thyristors.

NOTE 5 Omit BIST and FIST tests for metallurgically bonded double plug or stud mounted diodes.
       Omit FIST test for temperature compensated references diodes.

NOTE 6 For axial lead glass body diodes, 10 cycles of thermal shock (glass strain) in accordance with
       MIL-STD-750, Method 1056, test Condition A, over the temperature range OoC to + 100oC
       shall be submitted for this test.

NOTE 7 For JANS only, Zener diodes shall be subjected to high temperature reverse bias at 80% of
       nominal Vz to Vz > 10V (Not required for Zener diodes with Vz < 10V).

NOTE 8 Fine and gross seal leak test for JANTX and JANTXV shall be performed at either step 7 or

All four product classes required quality conformance testing per the following schedule:

Group A each inspection lot.
Group B each inspection lot.
Group C every six months on at least one device type from each structurally identical device grouping in
which the manufacturer has qualified device types. Examples of structurally identical device types are
as follows:

A. Rectifiers, diodes or thyristors grouped into different voltage ratings.
B. Transistors grouped for gain limits and voltage ratings.

Group D on each lot as required by the applicable specification. Group A Testing.

Group A is a mechanical and electrical test sequence performed on a randomly selected sample pulled
from each inspection lot. The Group A requirements are different for JANS than for JAN, JANTX, or
JANTXV. Group B Testing.

Group B is a die and package stress test sequence, performed on a randomly selected sample from
each inspection lot. As with Group A, JANS has its own distinct Group B requirements. Group C Testing.

Group C is a package integrity test sequence that is run on a randomly selected sample and is identical
for all four product classes.

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                   69 of 136
                         COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE Group D Testing.

Group D Testing is testing for radiation hardness assurance levels, and is applicable only to JANS
and JANTXV devices for which a radiation tolerance level has been specified. Group D testing must
be performed on each wafer diffusion lot of devices which are to be certified as RHA devices. Lots
failing Group D at the specified radiation level may not be certified as RHA devices at that level but
may be sold as lower level RHA devices (if they meet the requirements for that level) or as non-RHA

As the discussion of integrated circuits indicated, many of the user reliability concerns discussed in the
earlier sections cannot be resolved through screening but require instead additional processing and
design constraints. Many of these constraints were derived from MIL-M-38510, and, as was the case
with the ICs, many of them are applicable only to JANS or are tighter for JANS. JANS devices, for
example, may not contain desiccants, must have a minimum of 8000 Å of metal on the die, and must
use bondwire that is at least 0.001 inch in width. Although bimetallic metal systems are not expressly
prohibited for JANS, other constraints make monometallic interfaces nearly mandatory. JANS die are
also required to have a minimum clearance of 0.002 inch between areas of unglassivated metal (except
where device functional parametric characteristics require tighter spacing). Failure analysis is
mandatory on JANS catastrophic rejects and the process controls and government source inspection
requirements are more extensive for JANS than other classes.

For all classes, MIL-S-19500 imposes restrictions on current density and on allowable rework (which is
more severely limited for JANS). Procedures for re-submission of lots failing qualification or quality
conformance testing are provided, and manufacturers are required to re-screen electrically any lots held
in inventory at their factory or in distribution for more than 24 months. NON-STANDARD DISCRETE SPECIFICATIONS

Despite the wide number of electrical selections available through MIL-S-19500, some users find that
key applications within their systems require electrical performance not offered by any JAN devices. In
such cases, non-standard specifications must be prepared. These specifications are typically more
effective when they utilise the MIL-S-19500 screening flows and the MIL-STD-750 test methods. The
easiest method for obtaining a non-standard device is to select from available JAN material. This will,
however, normally require a remark, since MIL-S-19500, like MIL-M-38510, does not allow the JAN
designator to be used on a device which has had either more or less screening than is required by the
specification. The restriction against extra screening was included to ensure that during system
maintenance replacement parts will meet all the performance characteristics of the original components.
In many cases, it will be more cost effective for a user to buy JAN devices that are electrically tighter
than he requires than to go through the expense of selection.

There are no requirements in MIL-STD-750 or MIL-S-19500 equivalent to those given in Paragraph 1.2
of MIL-STD-883. This is due to the fact that there are almost no devices other than MIL-S-19500 devices
procured to standard electrical specifications. SUMMARY

MIL-S-19500 and MIL-STD-750, through their initial standardisation of requirements and through their
refinement over time, have provided an extremely cost effective method for obtaining highly reliable
discrete semiconductors. MIL-M-38510 has also dramatically demonstrated the value of standardisation.

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                     70 of 136

3.3.6 MIL-STD 202 SCOPE

This standard establishes uniform methods for testing electronic and electrical component parts
including basic environmental tests to determine resistance to deleterious effects of natural elements
and conditions surrounding military operations, and physical and electrical tests. For the purpose of
this standard, the term “component parts” includes such items as capacitors, resistors, switches,
relays, transformers and jacks. This standard is intended to apply only to small parts, such as
transformers and inductors, weighing up to 300 pounds or having a root mean square test voltage up
to 50,000 volts unless otherwise specifically invoked. The test methods described herein have been
prepared to serve several purposes.

a) To specify suitable conditions obtainable in the laboratory which give test results equivalent to the
   actual service conditions existing in the field, and to obtain reproducibility of the results of tests.
   The tests described herein are not to be interpreted as an exact and conclusive representation of
   actual service operation in any one geographic location, since it is known that the only true test for
   operation in a specific location is an actual service test at this point..

b) To describe in one standard 1) all of the test methods of a similar character which appeared in the
   various joint or single-service electronic and electrical component parts specifications, (2) those
   newly developed test methods which are feasible for use in several specifications, and (3), the
   recognised extreme environments, particularly temperatures, barometric pressures, etc., at which
   component parts will be tested under some of the presently standardised testing procedures. By
   so consolidating, these methods may be kept uniform and thus result in conservation of
   equipment, man-hours, and testing facilities. In achieving these objectives, it is necessary to
   make each of the general tests adaptable to a broad range of electronic and electrical component

c) The test methods described herein for environmental, physical, and electrical and electronic parts
   shall also apply, when applicable, to parts not covered by an approved military specification,
   military sheet form standard, specification sheet or drawing. NUMBERING SYSTEM

The test methods are designated by numbers assigned in accordance with the following system:

Class of tests. The tests are divided into three classes: Test methods numbered 101 to 199
inclusive, cover environmental tests; those number 201 to 299 inclusive, cover physical
characteristics tests; and those numbered 301 to 399 inclusive, cover electrical characteristics tests.
Within each class, test methods are serially numbered in the order in which they are introduced into
this standard.

Revision of test methods. Revisions of test methods are indicated by a letter following the method
number. For example, the original number assigned to the salt spray (corrosion) test method is 101;
the first revision of the method is 101A, the second revision, 101B, etc. The margins of this standard
are marked with asterisks to indicate where changes from the previous issue were made.

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                     71 of 136

Test requirements. The requirements must be met by the component parts subjected to the test
methods described herein are specified in the individual specifications, as applicable, and the tests
shall be applied as specified therein. Whenever this standard conflicts with the individual
specification, the latter shall govern.

Test conditions.     Unless otherwise specified herein, or in the individual specification, all
measurements and tests shall be made at temperatures of 15°C and 35°C (59°F and 95°F) at air
pressure of 650 to 800 millimetres of mercury and relative humidity of 45 percent to 75 percent.
Whenever these conditions must be closely controlled in order to obtain reproducible results; for
referee purposes, temperature, relative humidity, and atmospheric pressure conditions of 25° +0°/-
2°C (77.0° to +0°/-3.6°F), 50 percent ±2 percentage, and 650 to 800 millimetres of mercury, shall be

Permissible temperature variation in environmental chambers.            When chambers are used,
specimens under test shall be located only within the working area defined as follows:

a) Temperature variation within working area: The controls for the chambers shall be capable of
   maintaining the temperature of any single reference point within the working area within ±2°C

b) Space variation within working area: Chambers shall be so constructed that, at any given time,
   the temperature of any point within the working area shall not deviate more than 3°C (5.4°F) from
   the reference point, except for the immediate vicinity of specimens generating heat.

Reference conditions. Reference conditions as a base for calculations shall be 25°C (77.0°F) for
temperature, or an alternate temperature of 20°C (68.0°F), 760 millimetres of mercury for air
pressure and the relative humidity of 50%.

Sequence of tests (not mandatory). The sequence of tests which follows is for guidance to new
specification writers who may not know of the philosophy that parts should ideally be mechanically
and terminally stressed prior to being subjected to a moisture resistance test. Within any of the three
groups and subgroups which follow, the order is preferred but not mandatory. It is recommended
that this sequence be followed in all new specifications and when feasible, in revisions of existing
specifications. In the case of hermetically sealed parts, when a moisture resistance test is not
required a high sensitivity seal test may be used in lieu of the moisture resistance test.

Group I (all of the samples)
        Visual inspection
        Mechanical inspection
        Electrical measurements
        Hermetic seal test (if applicable)

Group II a (part of sample)                              Group II b (balance of sample)
        Shock                                                    Resistance to soldering heat
        Acceleration                                             Terminal strength
        Vibration                                                Terminal shock

Group III (all units which have passed group II tests)
        Moisture resistance or seal test on hermetically sealed parts.

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                   72 of 136

Method Number   Date                  Title

                                      Environmental tests 9100 class)

101D            16 April 1973          Salt spray corrosion
102A            Cancel effective 31 December 1973. (See note on method 102)
103B            12 September 1963      humidity (steady state)
104A            24 October 1956        Immersion
105C            12 September 1963      Barometric pressure (reduced)
106F            8 June 1990            Moisture resistance
107G            28 March 1984          Terminal shock
108A            12 September 1963      Life (at elevated ambient temperature)
109B            16 April 1973          Explosion
110A            16 April 1973          Sand and dust
111A            16 April 1973          Flammability (external flame)
112E            11 October 1988        Seal

                                      Physical-Characteristics tests (200 class)

201A            24 October 1956         Vibration
202D            16 April 1973           Shock (specimens weighting not more than 4 pounds
                                        (superseded by method 213)
203B            16 April 1973           Random drop
204D            1 April 1980            Vibration, high frequency
205E            16 April 1973           Shock, medium impact (superseded by method 213)
206             13 September 1963       Life rotational
207A            13 September 1963       High-impact shock
208G            1 June 1992             Solderability
209             18 May 1962             Radiographic inspection
210C            12 July 1993            Resistance to soldering heat
211A            14 April 1973           Terminal strength
212A            16 April 1973           Acceleration
213B            16 April 1973           Shock (specified pulse)
214A            28 March 1984           Random vibration
215J            12 July 1993            Resistance to solvents
216             Cancel effective 16 April 1973 (See note on method 216)
217             1 April 1980            Particle impact noise detection (PIND)

                                      Electrical-characteristics tests (300 class)

301             6 February 1956       Dielectric withstanding voltage
302             6 February 1956       Insulation resistance
303             6 February 1956       DC resistance
304             24 October 1956       Resistance-temperature characteristic
305             24 October 1956       Capacitance
306             24 October 1956       Quality factor (Q)
307             24 October 1956       Contact resistance
308             29 November 1961      Current-noise test for fixed resistors
309             27 may 1965           Voltage coefficient of resistance              determination
310             20 January 1967       Contract-chatter monitoring
311             14 April 1973         Life, low level switching
312             16 April 1973         Intermediate current switching

                   Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                     73 of 136


Maximum use should always be made of existing specs from recognised sources such as the
specification systems already identified, ESA/SCC, CECC, US-MIL etc., however, projects sometimes
require parts for which there is no existing specification because his customer has either imposed
additional requirements, over and above those contained within an existing system, or the users
considers that the existing system requirements are excessive for his project purposes. If the parts have
previously only been made to a lower reliability level the specification may need to define a full
qualification by LAT, group testing etc.

If required parts fall outside of existing qualification limits (e.g. resistors with a value less than that
covered by an existing specification) they can be covered by extension and a cover sheet is all that is

Specifications are prepared around the manufacturers datasheet and sent to the manufacturer see
whether the requirements are possible and to the customer for agreement on the details. This cycle
of negotiation continues until full agreement is reached (sometimes known as integration of the

Specifications are usually written in the same format as some existing specification such as those
from MIL or ESA. It is necessary to establish which type of format is most desirable to the customer.
Most customers will have a bias towards certain formats for instance in Spur’s experience the Indian
Space Research Organisation have typically requested specifications for their ICs to be derived from
ESA/SCC Basic Specification No. 9000. The choice of specification format may also depend on the
specific testing requirements of the customer.

The numbering of the specification can be very important particularly with the larger manufacturers
since it is necessary when ‘kitting’ to have a clear traceability between part type and specification for
example an Astrium specification might be 80-LC0018. The 80 classifies the component by type, the
LC indicates that it is a purchase specification and the 0018 numerically determines it place on a
database. A good specification numbering system will also give full traceability to the program and
historical data.

Manufacturers, whilst they are prepared to accept orders to the full requirements of a system such as
ESA/SCC also offer a “commercial” space specification. An example of such a specification offered by
SGS-Thomson is identified below:-


1.   Screening Specification: MIL-STD-883 Class B=, rev D
                              Pind Test Condition A.

2.   Electrical Specification:   ESA/SCC Table II (when applicable) or
                                 SGS-Thomson Data Book.

3.   Sourcing:                   SCC Qualified Assembly line of Rennes Factory
                                 SCC Qualified Assembly Materials
                                 SCC Qualified Assembly Silicon Dices
                                 SCC Qualified Assembly Generic Quality Rules

     Traceability: Each Lot identified with a data code with tracking file which is permanently stored in
     factory. It would not contain wafer tracking data but will grant that utilised wafer are from SCC
     qualified radhard process.

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                      74 of 136

4.   Radiation: Guaranteed by Design but not tested:
     Heavy Ions LU and SEU:       LU Free
                                  SEU figure available
     CMOS 4000B Total Dose: 100KRad
     54HC Total Dose:       50KRad (100Krd upon request)
     Bias:                  Worst case
                            Floating Output (Tri-State)
     Dose Rate:             25 Rad per Hour
     Tested                 (Idd1, Idd2:     Limit 10/40µA
     Parameters:            (Vth, Delta Vth: as SCC Spec
                            (Rebound, functionality: as SCC Spec

5.   Certificate of Conformity and RVT Reports:
     They are not delivered, Parts conformity to present
     Quality level being granted by Marking.

6.   Packages:
     • DIL Ceramic Side Braze (SCC Qualified),
       metallic Sn-Au soldered lid (Stock items)
     Upon Request
     • FLAT Ceramic Side Braze (SCC Qualified),
     • LCC Ceramic (SCC Qualified)


Most space specifications are available free of charge through the internet.
The following sites may prove useful:

ESA Specifications                 http://www.escies.org
US Military Specifications         http://www..dscc.dla.mil/programs/milspec/default.asp
Military and others (J-STD, IEC

Membership to organisations like ‘Hatrics’ can help solve the problem of specification availability for a
small annual fee Hatrics are able to lend to members many specifications that either are not easily
available or might cost a lot to purchase.

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                     75 of 136


The procurement cycle for any component procurement can be loosely separated into three phases:

a)   Pre-Procurement
     Those activities necessary to be completed before a purchase order can be placed upon the

b)   Procurement
     The actual manufacture, test and inspections necessary to meet the purchase order requirements.

c)   Post Procurement
     Those activities required to provide confidence that the requirements have been met and to
     prepare the components for installation.

It can be seen from Figure 6 that when procuring components for space hardware these phases
overlap each other considerably. The reasons are quite simple, in that it is not possible to receive all
user parts lists at the same time, and even if it were the lists contain a very wide range of components
of varying levels of qualification and different delivery times, making phase overlap inevitable.


The objective of this phase is to complete those activities necessary to be ready to place purchase
orders for the supply of parts which the purchaser is confident will meet all of the quality and reliability
requirements of the programme and for which the price and delivery times have been negotiated and


The parts list supplied by the customer must be reviewed to assess:

     -   Which manufacturers make the parts

     -   Availability of qualified parts.

     -   Lead times to component delivery.

     -   Part costs and minimum order quantities (MOQ).

     -   Part type reductions

     -   Number of DPAs

     -   Radiation testing

     -   LAT levels necessary

     -   Constructional analyses requirement

     -   Evaluation plans (life test etc.)

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                      76 of 136

Often the pre-procurement activity is not conducted properly because by the time the definition of part
types and quantities are established sufficiently to proceed, the procurement schedule is already
slipping. The areas that are generally improperly conducted are:

-    Part type reduction.

-    Evaluation.

-    Specification writing/integration/modification.

The impacts resulting from the poor performance of these tasks is not identifiable until later in the
procurement, when major cost overruns, misunderstood requirements and repeated lot failures can
cause major programme impacts.

It is therefore essential that the Pre-Procurement Phase requirements are well defined, and that careful
management attention is applied to ensure that the requirements are fulfilled.


The end users of the EEE components are obviously responsible for the selection of those components
required to fulfil their hardware design requirements. However it is essential that they receive help and
guidance in this activity so as to ensure that standardisation and commonality are maximised and that
the selection of new untried, non-qualified components is minimised.


The principle tool to be provided to the users to help them achieve these goals is the Preferred Parts
List (PPL). Within ECSS-Q-60A a Preferred Parts List ECSS-Q-60-XX is identified. At the time of
compiling this manual this PPL was not available. Therefore the DASA COLUMBUS PPL is used
within this manual to demonstrate a typical PPL layout.

Current General PPL policy is to develop a two part document, where Part 1 listed components are
accepted as fully approved for use, without further justification and Part 2 listed components are
accepted for use, but further evaluation or project approval may be required to be carried out or proof is
provided that the testing has been successfully completed.

Typically Part 1 includes fully qualified components extracted from existing qualified and preferred lists

-    ESA/SCC Qualified Components List (QPL).


-    Parts qualified for other European Space programmes with similar requirements.

-    US Military PPL MIL-STL-9759 (mainly for passive component selection).

Part 2 components also include components from the above, but which may require further proof of
qualification or additional testing before they are fully acceptable. Also included are EEE components
identified as New Technology devices, which are potential candidates for further evaluation. After
successful part type approval or qualification these components will be included within Part 1 of the
PPL. Figure 8A and 8B provide examples of PPL Part 1 and 2 entries, extracted from the DASA

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                    77 of 136

The PPL is distributed to all users, however, the level to which it is used depends upon one very
important requirement, that is, that the use of the PPL be contractually enforced, such that users not
selecting from the PPL will be required to bear the full cost of evaluation and qualification of non-PPL
components. This has proven to be reasonably effective in some European procurements, however
there is a major responsibility placed upon the PPL developer in that they must ensure that the types
chosen to be included have been found to:

-   Be capable of satisfying a wide range of design applications.

-   Be mature in their technology and be suitable for flight hardware.

-   Have a significant utilisation predicted for present and future programmes.

-   Have a sufficient test or usage history.

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                    78 of 136



                              PROCUREMENT PHASE

                − PLACE ORDERS           − MANUFACTURE PARTS
                − TEST AND SCREEN        − QUALIFICATION OR LAT
                − PACKAGE AND SHIP

                                                      POST PROCUREMENT PHASE
                                                      − RECEIVING INSPECTION AND TEST
                                                      − DESTRUCTIVE PHYSICAL ANALYSIS
                                                      − KIT MARSHAL

            6                  12              18                  24                    30

                  Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                          79 of 136
                                        COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE

                                                                                                         INFORM USERS

     PARTS                   NON-QUALIFIED               POSSIBLE?

                                                  NO                  YES

                                      EVALUATION REQUIRED

                        IDENTIFY ADDITIONAL
                                                                                 REPLACE WITH
INTEGRATE SPECS            QUAL. TESTING             NO         YES
                                                                                 QUALIFIED PART

OBTAIN QUOTES                                  SELECT MANUFACTURER(S)
                                                       & AUDIT

                                      ACCEPTABLE                 UNACCEPTABLE                     USER MUST REPLACE

                                               CONSTRUCTIONAL ANALYSIS AND                    FAIL           REJECT
                                               ANY FURTHER EVALUATION TESTS
                QUALIFICATION TEST

                                                PREPARE SPECIFICATION AGREE
                                                   WITH USERS/CUSTOMER

                                             Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                    80 of 136

-      Be available from approved manufacturers.


-      That known single user applications for special developments have been considered.

-      New technology developments are included for evaluation wherever feasible.

-      The PPL is maintained and updated throughout the design phase of the programme.


It is essential that an effective type reduction review is carried out to minimise the procurement of
components with similar functions.

Lack of standardisation results in significant increases in components cost and component
interchangeability, very important when schedules are tight and component deliveries have to be made
on the basis of users with the greatest need.

User component lists are reviewed in detail by the procurement management team. PPL items are
generally automatically accepted and a more thorough review is made of the non PPL items where
justification for usage has to be supplied. The CPP component engineers will compare the data
supplied with PPL items and those non-PPL items already accepted. Should an alternative be
discovered the user will be requested to change.


As defined within ECSS-Q-60A 4.2.d. “If valid and acceptable qualification of a component type
cannot be demonstrated, a component evaluation and approval testing programme shall be
implemented.” In general this programme will be required to cover the following elements:

-      Design and application assessment.
-      Constructional analysis.
-      Manufacturer assessment.
-      Evaluation testing.

Reduction or omission of any of the above elements may be approved by the customer on the basis
of documentary evidence provided to substantiate the reduction or omission.


A Design and Application Assessment shall be performed to:-
1.     Identify those electrical parameters essential for the intended application.
       (a) This assessment shall be supported by the practical results obtained from
           evaluation samples to demonstrate that the component type is suitable for the

       (b) These tests shall take into account the applicable derating requirements and any
           special electrical, mechanical, or environmental conditions not normally tested or
           checked but that are necessary for the intended application (such as temperature,
           radiation effect, etc.).

                             Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                              81 of 136

2.   Justify why a fully qualified component cannot be used, including a comparison also to
     other partially or non-qualified alternatives and the reasons for the selection of this particular
     component type.
The design and Application Assessment Report shall be included in the Evaluation Report.


Constructional analysis shall be carried out on representative components. The primary aim of
constructional analysis is to provide an early indication of a component’s probability of meeting the
evaluation requirements and the operational goals of the concerned programme.

This analysis shall demonstrate that:-
1.  The standard of fabrication and assembly is fully assessed to identify any area where
    modifications are required or where specific tests or inspection points should be identified in the
procurement specification or during procurement.

2.   All potential failure modes are identified in order to assess the need for additional tests.

3.   Assurance is obtained that no materials or processes have been employed that are likely to
     deteriorate over time and that may result in a malfunction.

The findings of the analysis shall be contained within a Constructional Analysis Report and shall be
included in the Evaluation Report.


The purpose of the evaluation of a manufacturer is to assess his capability, to ensure the adequacy
of his organisation plant and facilities, and to ascertain his fitness to supply components to the
appropriate specifications for space application.
This evaluation shall be performed against the appropriate ESA/SCC checklist and shall include, but
not necessarily be limited to, an audit of:-

1.   The overall manufacturing facility and its organisation and management.

2.   The manufacturer’s system for inspection and manufacturing control including all relevant
     specifications, procedures, and internal documents.

3.   The production line used for the component.

The complete manufacturer evaluation shall be included in the Evaluation Report.


On completion of the design assessment, constructional analysis, and manufacturer evaluation or
the submission of documentary evidence for substitution of any of these evaluation requirements,
evaluation testing shall be carried out.
This assessment shall determine which inspections or tests are required to provide the confidence
that the component type under evaluation will, when assembled and tested in accordance with the
procurement specification, successfully meet the mission requirements.

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                      82 of 136

                       FIGURE 8A - EXAMPLE PPL PART 1 ENTRY

  COLUMBUS PPL PART - I            Issue: 03         Revision:               Date: 08 Apr 91

Family: CAPACITOR                       Group: CERAMIC

Similar To Style : CCR05                                         Code : 01-01-001
Detail Spec : 3001/018                          Man/C : VTMG. KEMU.
Approval Status : SCC/MIL                       Certificate Number : 157 / 20-108

Preferred Variants :    01 ; 1-9.1pF/200V/± 0.1pF ; 10-330pF/200V/± 1% ;
                        360-1800pF/100V/± 2% ; 2200-3300pF/50V/± 5%
Component No. : 300101801B (+electrical chairs and ratings)
Total Dose Sensitivity : NO                    SEU Sens : N/A            LU Sens : N/A
Remarks : -
Change Record : C (S= No Change, C= Change, N= New)

                             Select Action                        ESC to Quit

 Characteristics         Outline                Derating/SOA                Tag
 Radiation               Tag for PAL            Exit to Top Menu            Help

                            FIGURE 8B - EXAMPLE PPLE PART 2

  COLUMBUS PPL PART-II             Issue: 03      Revision:             Date: 08 Apr 91


Component          :      26LS31
Code               :      08-10-022                              Detail Spec :
Manufacturer       :      MOTFT Motorola
Function           :      RS 422 Line Driver/Line Receiver
Remarks            :

                             Select Action                    ESC to Quit
     Tag for PAL           Exit to Top Menu              Help

                       Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                  83 of 136

Sufficient data shall be available on completion of the evaluation programme to demonstrate
component stability.
In addition, evaluation testing will be required where any of the previous stages have identified any
anomaly reflecting a design, material, or process weakness that could shorten the active life of the
concerned component and that could not be identified during the final production testing or screening
tests included the procurement specifications. Because of the wide range of possible anomalies or
weaknesses that would require evaluation testing, it is not possible to define the precise test
programme to be followed; however, the types of testing to be considered should include:

-    Electrical stress, such as accelerated life testing, high temperature reverse bias, or endurance
     testing, normally used to assess stability.
-    Mechanical stress, including shock, vibration, and centrifuge, to evaluate the robustness of   the
-    Environmental stress, such as thermal shock or cycling, high- or low-temperature storage,
     and seal tests, etc., to evaluate packaging integrity or a particular facet of the design
     expected to be susceptible to temperature extremes.
-    Assembly capability testing.
-    Radiation testing, for total dose and single event effects sensitivity.

For evaluation testing the supplier shall document in the Part Approval Document (PAD) for that
1.   The test programme.
2.   The test methods.
3.   The sample size.

This shall be approved by the customer prior to test implementation.
After completion of the evaluation testing, a final review of the proposed procurement specification
shall be carried out to determine if the obtained results will have an impact on the content of the
procurement specification.


The full details of the evaluation testing, the results achieved, and an overall assessment of the
complete evaluation programme shall be included within the Evaluation Report, which, once
completed, shall be submitted to the customer for approval.


Once the Pre-procurement technical activities are complete it is of great value, and for European
Space Agency programmes, mandatory, to summarise the procurement technical baseline in a single
document, particularly if customer approval is required.

The Part Approval Document or PAD is required by ECSS-Q-60A to be completed for each part type to
be procured. An example of the resultant PAD completed for the COLUMBUS project can be found as
Figures 9A and 9B.


The Declared Components List summarises the basic technical details from approved PADs, thus
providing a complete listing of all components to be used, procurement specification and manufacturer.

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                  84 of 136

When the PAD is available in electronic form the DCL is simply another management report extract
and requires no additional effort to make it available. The minimum requirements related to the DCL as
identified by ECSS-Q-60A are identified below.

The supplier shall issue a Declared Component List identifying all component types needed and this list
shall be kept under configuration control.
The Declared Component List shall be issued as a minimum at PDR and CDR (as designed) as well as
at flight hardware delivery (as built).
The following information shall be included as a minimum:-
a)   Generic designation.
b)   Component type, package, and value range (including voltage, tolerance, etc.).
c)   Manufacturer (name, plant).
d)   Specification reference (generic / detail, including issue).
e)   Equipment name(s).
f)   Procurement: Self-procured(S), In-house-manufactured (I), Agent (A).
g)   PPL reference.
h)   PAD sheet references.

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                  85 of 136

                                  FIGURE 9A - EXAMPLE PAD SHEET

    Columbus CPP Database System                                  Part Approval Document (PAD)

Part Approval Document No. :                   Iss :               Rev :           Date :


Part Name…………….:
Part Type……………..:                                                              Line Item No. :
Component No……….:
Component Marking…:


Value…………...:                     Voltage………….:                  Tolerance……..:
Q-Factor/PPM…:      -             Power Rating…..: -              Failure Rate…..: -


Variant (Package Style):                                 Lead Finish….: -

Part Identification Remarks

Project PPL Part : Y


Generic……:                                                      Iss :                   Rev :
Detail………:                                                      Iss :                   Rev :
Amendment: ---------                                            Iss : --

Back-up Mfg…..:
Self Procured…:
Procured By…..:


Applicable………..:                    Data Available…..:
Data Reference….:


SCC Qualification….:                                     Valid Until :
QPL Listing…………:
Other Approval……..:


Part Quality/Test Level.:                                                                 LAT Level :
DPA - Applicable……..:                                                      DPA Sample Size - for CPP :
                                                                                           - for ESA :
Pre-Cap Inspection….:                                                        Buy-Off Acceptance Test..:
Radiation Test Per Lot                                                       - Applicable……:
                       - Procedure No.:

Procurement Remarks

                              Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                           86 of 136

                           FIGURE 9B - EXAMPLE PAD SHEET (CONTINUED)

                                                              Part Approval Document (PAD)

Part Approval Document No. :                    Iss :        Rev :        Date :

Further Evaluation Required :                           Evaluation Programme No. :

Design Assessment…....:                                       Screening………………..:
Manufacturer Survey…..:                                       Environmental Testing…:
Constructional Analysis..:                                    Endurance Testing……..:
Electrical Testing…….…:                                       Radiation Testing……….:
                                                              E. S. D. Testing…………:
Rationale For Any ‘NO’ in the above options

Evaluation Remarks
                    Name                      Date
Responsible Agent :
CMT               :
ERNO PA           :
ERNO CPP          :
ESA               :

     APPLICABLE LINs (List of parts covered by PAD)

       Part Type       :                                        LIN:
       Value           :               Voltage      :             Tolerance :
       Q-Factor        :               Power Rating : -           Failure Rate:
       Variant         :                                          Lead Finish :

       Part Type       :                                        LIN:
       Value           :               Voltage      :             Tolerance :
       Q-Factor        :               Power Rating : -           Failure Rate:
       Variant         :                                          Lead Finish :

                             Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                               87 of 136



Once the technical baseline has been agreed, the specification integrated with the manufacturer and
quantities known or anticipated quantities estimated, the manufacturer can be approached for price and
delivery information. Often during or following the specification integration the manufacturer will supply
price and delivery information by quantity break points i.e. 0-100, 100-1000, 1000-5000 etc. Even if this
information is available it is still advisable to confirm the quotation once more accurate quantity data is
available. The quotation will in many cases consist of recurring and non-recurring costs, where the unit
cost is recurring and lot charges are non-recurring.


The unit cost is the cost for each component, always check that the total number of units quoted for
includes total users needs plus manufacturing attrition and spares, plus any additional samples
required for destructive tests e.g. Lot acceptance testing levels 1 and 2 or Destructive Physical Analysis

It may also be the case that the manufacturer will quote a Minimum Order Quantity (MOQ) or minimum
price. In the case of the MOQ there is little the orderer can do except to attempt to increase the use of
the component, however, when a minimum price is offered, very often the manufacturer will assemble
and test a minimum quantity in excess of the orderer’s requirement, which the orderer is entitled to


Lot charges, the non-recurring portion of a manufacturer’s quotation are imposed to carry out any test
or inspection procedure which is either non standard or lot unique. For example the test costs to
perform Lot Acceptance testing would normally be included within the lot charges. The manufacturer
should be requested to identify individual elements of a quoted lot charge.


As already identified within Section 5.3, the length of time (lead time) that it takes to procure
components varies considerably from one component type to another. As procurement experience
grows it becomes easier to quickly identify potential long lead items. Obviously it is essential to place
orders for these items as soon as possible, however long lead items tend to be the most complex
technically, with the least history of use and very often have ill defined quantity requirements.

The temptation is to get orders placed but always evaluate the risk, particularly if an evaluation
programme is still in progress. Do not assume that the area of schedule concern is limited to integrated
circuits, almost every component family particularly electromechanical devices contain long lead items.


When placing an order for components ensure that all pertinent data is contained within the purchase
order, including:

-       Component type and variant

-       Procurement specification issue and revision.

-       Quantity required.

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                      88 of 136

Any inspections or tests to be carried out or witnessed by the orderer.

-       Lot acceptance requirements.

-       Unit costs, lot charges and total price.

-       Any additions to the procurement specification requirements.

Manufacturers quoted delivery

-       Acceptance and payment conditions.

If there is any doubt that the manufacturer has the required procurement specification then supply a
copy with the order.


Attrition is defined as, those components potentially or actually damaged such that they are considered
to constitute a risk to equipment reliability, if they are assembled into flight hardware.

Allowance must be made for accidental damage and the following excerpt from a component
procurement plan provides a typical policy:

Those parts to be procured by the centrally and distributed to the individual users, would typically, be
supplied with manufacturing attrition as identified below:

                     Total User Need                  Manufacturing Attrition

                           1-2                                   1
                           3-5                                   2
                          5 - 500                  10% or 3 whichever is greater
                           500+                                 50

The users will be required to maintain close control over the usage of the delivered parts and may be
required to return all unused parts once the warranty period for the user assembled hardware has


In this age of fast changing technology, component obsolescence is of concern to the commercial
world let alone the more steady evolution of designs used in space applications.

We are all too aware of how our computers and mobile telephones quickly become out of date and
lacking the “must have” features, which are only available due to the availability of new components.

How can we minimise the affects of obsolescence?

    - This must start at the design stage, by producing a stable design, maybe with future proof
      features and by the selection of components which have the maximum predictable life span.

    - Procurement of sufficient components to meet not only the needs of the intended project, but
      also those of any envisaged “follow-on” programmes is also a wise move.

    - Monitoring the availability of the components used within the design, will give an early warning
      of pending problems, and allow the implementation of a “last time buy”

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                    89 of 136

     - Joining and Obsolescence Group such as COG, also allows early indications of diminishing
       manufacturing sources, and a chance to discuss work around solutions with engineers who
       use those same components within their design.

     - There are manufacturers that specialise in buying the production facilities and die stock from
       major suppliers who are phasing out product types, and thus providing a continued supply.

     - Assembly and Test Houses who can package and screen product, if die are available.



During the specification negotiations with the manufacturer, the procurement agency or the Parts
Procurement manager will obtain samples of the manufacturers intended packaging for the parts he is
supplying, and will ensure that this packaging is suitable for the purpose of shipping parts by air freight.
This procedure will ensure that any packaging problems are identified at an early stage in sufficient
time to obtain a resolution before shipment takes place.

Agreement will also be reached at this point as to the package marking. The outer package will
contain: “The name and address of the Addressee with a warning label identifying the contents as
Spacecraft electronic parts, and clear identification that the package may only be opened by the
Addressee and in the presence of authorised PA personnel”. The inner package will identify the part
fully, the programme opening instructions, and any hazardous material warning required.


Component lots are delivered to the procurement agency, who will carry out full Receiving Inspection
prior to onward shipment to the users. The shipment will include; the components, a full set of
documentation as required by the procurement specification and a Certificate of Conformance (COC).
In some cases, generally to meet an urgent user need, partial shipments may be allowed, that is
shipments where the total component quantity is incomplete. It is however required that a complete
datapack be supplied for this partial shipment including COC.


The purpose of Incoming Inspection is to give sufficient confidence that the quality requirements of the
procurement specification have been met. Incoming Inspection is performed on all lots delivered. The
level to which it is performed is determined by lot sizes and the confidence in the component or

The operations to be carried out by Incoming Inspection are shown in Table 7 together with the
supporting documents required, the sampling level and inspection condition. The primary aims of the
inspection are to ensure that:-

a)       The components correspond in all respects to the components ordered.

b)       The components are functional and externally undamaged.

c)       The documentation refers to the specific devices under inspection.

d)      The components are all of the same lot indicated in the accompanying traveller supplied by the
vendor and in the documentation.

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                       90 of 136
                                COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE

                          TABLE 10 - INCOMING INSPECTION OPERATIONS

Operation                                 Supporting          Sampling        Inspection Conditions
                                          Documents            Level
1.        Compliance with
          Detail Specifications
a.        Dimensions                 Procurement              3 pieces    To be performed on DPA
                                     Specification                        samples for lots submitted to
b.        Marking                                             )           DPA
c.        Materials                                           )
d.        Lead Identification                                 ) 100%
e.        Construction               Incoming Test            )
f.        Package Integrity          Procedure                )
2.        Lot Homogeneity                                     100%
3.        External Visual            ESA/SCC          Basic   AQL 0.65    No failure allowed for
          Inspection                 Specification 20500                  serialised parts in any
                                     and           relevant               sample size.
                                     specification                        (Reject No. = 1)
                                                                          8-40. In case of failure 100%
4. Electrical                        ESA/SCC       Generic    100%        Read and record for
Measurements                         Specification                        serialised part GO-NO-GO
                                                                          for non-serialised parts.
                                                              AQL 1.0
                                                                          Resistors RCR05, RCR07,
5.        Documentation Check        ESA/SCC       Generic    100%        Check if the documentation
                                     Specification                        is complete and refers to
                                                                          devices under inspection.
6.        Solderability              ESA/SCC       Generic    3 pieces    Solderable leads (tinned).
                                     Specification                        The test may be omitted if
                                                                          external visual inspection
                                                                          shows good lead conditions
                                                                          with no indication of solder

                                                                          Solderability test to be
                                                                          performed on DPA samples,
                                                                          if required.

                                                                          Not to be performed on
                                                                          ESA/SCC parts with LAT 3
7.        Destructive Physical       PSS-01-60                3 pieces
          Analysis (DPA)

     1)             As defined in the relevant ESA/SCC detail and generic specifications

                                Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                   91 of 136


For parts not previously procured, an incoming test procedure must be generated by Parts
Engineering and a copy sent to Incoming Inspection before delivery of the parts.

Existing Incoming Test Procedures should be checked against the procurement specifications and
amended, if required.

The electrical tests to be carried out by Incoming Inspection on a given device type must always follow
the incoming test procedure.

Incoming test procedures must always reflect the procurement specifications and should, in general,
correspond to the requirement of the Detail Specification. The Incoming Test Procedure may add to
or reduce the number of tests listed in the table, but as a minimum, all those parameters must be
measured whose drift values have been recorded by the manufacturer after burn-in.

All incoming test procedures shall detail each step which is to be performed during incoming test.

The documentation is next checked for technical accuracy.

The following major points should be evaluated.

a)      Have all the tests been performed in accordance with the specifications?

b)      Are the results within the specification limits?

c)      Were there any major losses in any of the screening tests?

d)      Did the parts complete Lot Acceptance/Qualification Tests, and were the results acceptable?


Incoming Inspection generates an Incoming Inspection Report (Figure 10) which is sent to the
procurer's QA or the customer for review together with the following:-

-       Documentation Review-Summary Report

-       All documentation received from the vendor

-       Any non-conformance reports.

Incoming inspection and test records must be maintained and made available upon request for
inspection by the customer. The incoming inspection records must comprise as a minimum the results
of any inspection and data review performed.


Any non-conformance found by Incoming Inspection is reported by means of a Non conformance
Report. This document must also contain the line item number of the parts under inspection.

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                    92 of 136


                      INCOMING INSPECTION                                                      Date:
                      REPORT NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

             FOR PROJECT:

Inspector:                                                        Department:

             Purchase Order No.             :
             Line Item                      :
             Part Number                    :
             SN-Range                       :                                       Date Code:
             Manufacturer                   :
             Vendor                         :
             Received quantity              :              pcs.

Test Procedure    :
Test Equipment :

Test Results:
           Inspected quantity               :              pcs.
           Accepted quantity                :              pcs.
           Rejected quantity                :              pcs.
                                            Failure Report No . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Signature of inspector:



                            Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                                 93 of 136


The primary objective of DPA is to provide information for an engineering evaluation of a device lot
based upon testing and upon visual inspection of the internal construction quality and condition of
samples from the same lot.

The sample, normally three randomly selected pieces, is not intended to be statistically relevant, rather
the intent is to take a “snapshot” of the quality of construction of the lot as a final check that the
requirements set by the procurement documentation have resulted in a component lot capable of use
in Spacecraft hardware.

DPA results therefore should be assessed against pass or fail criteria. However, should the analyst
responsible for the DPA identify some anomaly which in his opinion renders the lot as potentially unfit
for flight use, then this concern must be clearly identified within the DPA report findings. Any such
statement naturally reflects upon the adequacy of the procurement documentation and should
therefore be supported by proposed corrective actions. COMPONENT TYPES SUBJECT TO DPA

DPA is required to be performed on samples from each delivered date code of the types listed below:-

-       Discrete Semiconductors

-       Integrated Circuits

-       Filters

-       Variable Capacitors/Resistors

-       Ceramic Capacitors

-       Tantalum Capacitors

-       Relays and Switches

-       Crystals

-       Hybrids

-       High Voltage Components

-       High Frequency Components

-       Opto-electronic Components

New technologies not contained in the above component categories are assessed on a case by case
basis. For certain families of components, DPA can be carried out on representative samples of the
family rather than on each variant.

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                      94 of 136

DPA procedures are prepared for each category of component type and are intended to provide a
means of inspecting the materials, design, construction and workmanship of the component. The
following example illustrates a typical DPA flow for an integrated circuit and the specified method for
each test/inspection step:-

    External Visual Inspection                   MIL-STD-883, 2009.7
    External Measurement                         Detail specification, Table 2
    Mechanical Parameters                        Detail specification, Figure 2
    Fine Leak                                    MIL-STD-883, 1014.7 Cond. A1
    Gross Leak                                   MIL-STD-883, 1014.7 Cond. C
    PIND                                         MIL-STD-883, 2020
    Marking Permanence                           ESA/SCC 24800
    Lead Integrity                               MIL-STD-883 2004.5 Cond. B2
    Solderability                                MIL-STD-883 2003.4
    Lid Torque (non-destruct)                    MIL-STD-883 2024.2
    Internal Visual Inspection                   MIL-STD-883 2010.8 Cond. A
    Wire Bond Strength                           MIL-STD-883 2011.5 Cond. D
    SEM Inspection                               MIL-STD-883 2018.3
    Die Shear Strength                           MIL-STD-883, 2019.4

It will be noted that MIL-STD-883 test methods and conditions have generally been quoted instead of
the IEC test methods identified previously as preferred by the European Space Agency. There are
numerous IEC test methods for some of the tests and inspections identified above although they are
not as complete as the US MIL-STDs, which not only cover virtually all tests and inspections but in
addition MIL-STD-883 also has a method, 5009.1 for carrying out DPA which can be used as a model. DPA FAILURE

DPA failure will result in the lot being placed in quarantine, a non-conformance report being forwarded
to a Materials Review Board (MRB) for disposition. Dispositions would include: use as is, accept with
rework, or reject and return to vendor.


On successful completion of all receiving inspection and DPA activity the components can be delivered
directly to the users in accordance with the allocation list requirements. Components may not be
delivered before these inspections are complete so as to avoid assembling potentially unreliable
components into flight standard hardware. The agent provides the users with:-

-       The required quantity of components inclusive of manufacturing spares and attrition.

-       Data summary.

-       DPA report (when applicable).

-       Receiving Inspection Report (RIR).

-       Manufacturers CoC.

The master data pack, plus the master DPA report and RIR are delivered to the CPP manager, for
reference should any post procurement problem develop.

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                      95 of 136


The requirement for user acceptance will be clearly identified within the user Statement of Work
identified earlier in this manual. Generally, the users are required to notify acceptance or rejection of
the components by datafax within 30 days of receipt of the delivery. Failure to notify within this time
frame will automatically be taken as acceptance.

Rejection of any lot by a user requires to be notified to the CPP manager and the procurement agency
by datafax, clearly outlining the reasons for rejection so as to allow the CPP manager to determine a
course of action.


However well the procurement has been managed, failures will occur. It is simply not possible to
ensure that every part delivered will function properly, nor is it possible to guarantee the life of the
components built into hardware. When failures do occur it is imperative that a full investigation takes
place and this requires the full facts to be documented. Many failure investigations have been badly
mislead by incomplete or inaccurate information.

It is essential that any failure investigation be reported accurately and in detail and that each step is
carefully considered before being carried out. There is no standard format for a failure investigation,
however there are a number of ground rules which, if applied, can assist in bringing about a successful

(i)     Background research. Obtain as much background information as possible before any work is
        carried out on the components. If possible, examine the component in-situ and question those
        who identified the problem very carefully. Remember nobody likes to admit to a mistake,
        particularly if it can have career impacts, therefore don't be too aggressive when obtaining
        background knowledge.

Check also the test equipment used, make sure for example that it is properly grounded and in

Check also the delivered datapack for that particular lot of components to determine if the failed
component is truly representative of the lot or if there are any anomalous results which might have
indicated premature failure.

Whenever possible, review previous history files for similar problems related either to the component or
the equipment, and finally, be ready to identify the problem to the manufacturer so as to gain access to
any information he can provide.

(ii)    When removing components from a board or module, be extremely careful that further damage
        is not introduced by demounting. Avoid cropping leads to remove component and when de-
        soldering do not apply heat for long periods of time.

(iii)   Whenever you handle components make sure that you are properly earthed, that your tools
        and work area are clean and that the components are protected from you, by gloves or finger

(iv)    Never de-lid a component until you are completely sure that you have completed all external
        tests and inspections and have correctly recorded the results.
(v)     When de-lidding take extreme care, there are many ways of opening components, e.g.
        diamond saw, depotting, grinding etc., none is perfect and damage or debris often result.

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                     96 of 136

(vi)     Do not jump to conclusions, what may look like an obvious cause can often be the result of
         another underlying problem. Always complete the analysis and only when you are certain that
         you can have the primary cause should you consider the investigation stage to be terminated.

(vii)    Write up and complete the failure investigation report as soon as possible after the termination
         of the analysis. Make sure the report is complete in its detail, that no bias is attached to the
         results. Clearly identify cause and effect, and of equal importance, identify any anomalous
         results and inconsistencies.

(viii)   Always give serious consideration to your conclusions and particularly your recommendations.
         The result of a failure investigation can have far reaching effects on a Space programme and
         must not therefore be made in haste.

(ix)     The front sheet of the finished failure report should provide the MRB and programme
         management with an overview of the problem, its cause and effect, conclusions and

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                     97 of 136


The European Space Agency has a very precise way of dealing with non conforming product which
is given in the proceeding paragraphs. However, many companies consider this to be too rigid and
adopt a more relaxed approach. Typically, an NCR is raised as soon as the non conformance is
discovered with all the necessary details including which part of the procurement specification the
non conformity applies to. The report is then sent to the customer and negotiation between customer
and supplier is entered into. The NCR is closed out once a decision is reached to whether they are to
accept the components. For the component supplier it is important that all NCRs are assigned
unique numbers and kept in a log along with any written agreements between the supplier and the
customer. Copies of the NCRs must then accompany the components to the customer.


The purpose of this Section is to describe in detail the ESA/SCC Non-Conformance Control System as
it is intended to be applied. The ESA/SCC Basic specification No. 22800 “ESA/SCC Non-
Conformance Control System” Issue 1 July 1980 is the document upon which the system is based.
However, it must be clearly understood that experience gained in the implementation of the ESA/SCC
System over the past decade has led to a number of modifications being made to the implementation
of the ESA/SCC non-conformance procedure. These modifications are not yet incorporated within
ESA/SCC 22800.


The purpose of the ESA/SCC Non-Conformance System is to provide a defined framework within
which to deal with any discrepancy found to an ESA/SCC requirement. Its applicability is restricted to
non-conformances of qualified components or those in the qualification testing phase of an ESA/SCC
qualification (i.e. the procedure is applicable after a successful evaluation phase and once the
qualification testing phase is initiated). The purpose is also to permit any user of the ESA/SCC System
to report a non-conformance, and by so doing, to set the procedure in motion. The procedure, as
defined in ESA/SCC 22800, then ensures that:-

a)      The non-conformance is identified and actions are taken accordingly,
b)      Decisions on the disposition of non-conforming components, or component lots, are properly
        taken and documented,
c)      Non-conformance reports are processed according to an established system,
d)      Investigations and analyses of non-conforming materials are made to assess failure modes,
        mechanisms and effects, and that subsequent corrective action is devised and implemented,
e)      The frequency and history of non-conformances are reviewed systematically and, when
        necessary, preventive action is initiated,
f)      Any action to correct a non-conformance and to prevent its recurrence is carried through to its
g)      Components not conforming to the requirements of the applicable specifications or other
        requirements are identified as such, segregated and held for review.


Within ESA/SCC 22800, a Non-Conformance is defined as: The departure of a characteristic from the
requirements specified within the detail/generic/basic specifications.

This definition is accurate in defining a non-conformance, however not all non-conformances require to
be reported via the ESA/SCC 22800 procedure. For example, rejects identified by the manufacturer's
Inspectors during Internal Visual Inspection are identified within the Internal Visual Inspection report

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                    98 of 136

and do not require further non-conformance action. This Section will provide guidelines in the
application of the ESA/SCC Non-Conformance Control System.

The following may serve as general guidelines:-

-      The Non-Conformance System may be invoked by any person having detected a non-
       conformance, i.e. a discrepancy to an ESA/SCC requirement.
-      The manufacturer's Chief Inspector is responsible for the initiation of the Non-Conformance
       System in any case of non-conformance,
-      The manufacturer's Chief Inspector is responsible for the initiation of the non-conformance
       system whenever Lot failure, as defined within section 4.3.1 of the Generic Specification, occurs,
-      An Inspector representing the customer, and in particular an Inspector acting on behalf of the
       QSA, is responsible for invoking the Non-Conformance System, when a problem is identified
       which could lead to lot rejection, but which has not been previously identified by the component


Within the paragraph above, some general ground rules have been stated to assist users of the
ESA/SCC System through the decision-making process of when or when not to initiate a non-
conformance report.

This Paragraph provides a more detailed series of ground rules to assist the user of the ESA/SCC
specification system in defining those situations when it is required to utilise the ESA/SCC non-
conformance reporting system.

This Paragraph also includes some occasions when the non-conformance procedure need not be used
since there are either controls existing within the system to adequately address the situation, or the
system simply does not require that the situation be reported.

There are two distinct categories of initiators of the ESA/SCC Non-Conformance System:-

(i)     The Chief Inspectors of the ESA/SCC qualified manufacturers, termed the initiator,

(ii)    The users of the ESA/SCC Specification System, termed the invoker.

The former (Chief Inspector) is not only required to initiate the Non-Conformance System when
established rules require such action, but also to take responsibility for the initiation of the system for
any non-conformance brought to their attention from any source. Failure on their part to carry out their
responsibility could lead to the disqualification of that manufacturer and deletion from the ESA/SCC

The latter user also have a major responsibility toward the system, in that they are users of the
ESA/SCC System.

In order for a system to be effective, feedback is essential. Much of this feedback comes from non-
conformance reporting, and it is the responsibility of all users of the system, whether they are acting on
behalf of the ESA/SCC in an official capacity, or simply using the ESA/SCC specification system to
ensure that the ESA/SCC Non-Conformance System is properly and completely used.

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                      99 of 136


There are clearly defined occasions when the manufacturer's Chief Inspector must initiate the non-
conformance procedure, that is whenever Lot failure as defined with section 4.3.1 of the Generic
Specification occurs. Specifically, this means that if Lot failure occurs:-

-        During final production tests (semiconductor devices only),
-        As a result of a PDA failure,
-        As a result of Qualification failure,
-        As a result of LAT failure.

The Chief Inspector must then initiate the Non-Conformance System. A review of final production
testing, as it presently exists, identifies that the only occasion upon which lot failure can occur is:-

1.       Semiconductors - bond pull or die shear tests (or PIND testing - Level B)
2.       Ceramic chip capacitors - delamination test.


The requirements of the ESA/SCC System are directed at the manufacturer. It sets out the procedures
and specifications that must be fulfilled by the manufacturer in order to obtain and maintain an
ESA/SCC qualification.
Contained within this set of requirements are the inspections and tests, which ESA require to be
completed successfully before components are accepted for use within Space flight hardware.
There are requirements placed upon ESA or the National Space Agencies, however, these are
relatively few, and it may therefore be difficult for an Inspector to know when he should invoke the
ESA/SCC non-conformance procedure. Therefore, the following should be used when in doubt:-
(i)     Any person in attendance at an ESA/SCC qualified manufacturer's premises, for the express
        purpose of conducting or witnessing a test or inspection on ESA/SCC qualified component lots,
        which are intended to be marked in accordance with the ESA/SCC requirements, must invoke
        the ESA/SCC Non-Conformance System when a non-conformance, as defined below, is
(ii)    Any serious breach of quality or safety procedures which could endanger life or cause damage
        to the lot(s) being produced to the ESA/SCC requirements constitutes a non-conformance.
        Examples of the above would include unguarded equipment, lack of ESD controls (when
        required) etc. If in doubt, request an interview with the Chief Inspector, and if concern still exists,
        then invoke the ESA/SCC Non-Conformance System.
(iii)   In the event that clear evidence exists that the Process Identification Document (PID), has been
        modified without ESA/SCC approval, then the non-conformance procedure shall be invoked. An
        example of this would include
        change of die bond materials, different packages etc.

                          Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                       100 of 136

        Although parts of the PID are considered confidential by the manufacturers, users of the
        ESA/SCC System have the right to request basic information related to the ESA/SCC qualified
        types, such as die sizes, bond material, package suppliers, and so on. Failure by a
        manufacturer to comply with such a request would automatically result in the initiation of the
        Non-Conformance System.

(iv)    Evidence that the lot submitted for inspection does not originate from the master lot identified
        within the manufacturer's Lot traveller is a non-conformance.

(v)     When witnessing or re-inspecting components, any defects found are rejected to the
        manufacturer for scrap or rework. Should the manufacturer refuse to accept the rejection and
        not be able to convince the Inspector of the acceptability of the component(s), then the Inspector
        shall initiate the Non-Conformance System.

(vi)    During any data review activity, if the data to be reviewed is incomplete, inaccurate, or if the
        review results in rejection of the data, then the Non-Conformance System shall be initiated.

(vii)   Once components have been delivered by the component manufacturer to the orderer, the
        ESA/SCC Non-Conformance System, as defined within ESA/SCC 22800, shall continue to be
        applied, even when such delivered components are intended for use within ESA programmes,
        and the Non-Conformance Control System, as defined within ESA specification PSS-01-20, is
        required, then the ESA/SCC Non-Conformance System shall be applied in addition.

It is clear from the above that situations will arise when the Inspector will be required to utilise common
sense and engineering judgement when deciding whether or not to initiate the ESA/SCC Non-
Conformance System. However, the rules set out above should provide a reasonable basis for this
decision-making process.


All non-conformances to the ESA/SCC specification system shall be reported by means of a Non-
Conformance Control Sheet to a Materials Review Board. An NCCS with its attendant continuation
sheet can be found at Appendix III and Appendix IV of ESA/SCC 22800 and as Figures 11 and 12
herein. A flow diagram of the non-conformance procedure can be found as Figure 12.


When raising an NCCS, the person invoking the system is required to supply information within the
boxes marked Identification and Description, and to sign and date the Initiator box.

(Note that while the text of 22800 distinguishes between the invoker and the initiator, where the latter is
the Chief Inspector, the NCCS form uses initiator for the invoker. In practice, the person invoking the
system, i.e. reporting the non-conformance, fills in as much information as possible. The Chief
Inspector is then responsible to ensure there are no omissions when he assigns the number and sets
the level).


Section 1, “Identification”, shall comprise the following information:-

-        details of the component family, type and relevant ESA/SCC specifications,

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                    101 of 136
                                    COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE

                               FIGURE 11 - NON-CONFORMANCE CONTROL SHEET

                                      Non Conformance Control Sheet

                                                                                                      Date:             Page(s) 1/
       I   Component                                                              ESA/SCC Generic              Issue:
       e   Family                                                                 Spec. No.:
(1)    I
           ESA/SCC Comp.                   Purchase Order No.:                    ESA/SCC Detail                              Issue:
       c   Type No.                        Order placed by                        spec. No.
       t   Manufacturer Name                                              Plant Location
       n   Lot No.                         Date Code                              Serial No. or Range
           NC detected at:                 Qualification                  Procurement                          Receiving Inspection
           (other stage)
           Manufacturing           In-process              Precap                   Final Prod.         Burn-in or            Lot Accept.
                                   Inspection              Visual Insp.             Tests               Screening
           Non-conformance Description:
           (a) Observed non-conformance

(2)    p

           (b) Suspected cause

           Initiator:                      Chief Inspector:                                   NSA Inspector:                    Level   1
           Date:                           Date:                                              Date:                                     2
           Place of MRB:           MRB Members (Name and Signature)                                                       DCR
           Date:                                                                                                          As Waiver
       R                                                                                                                                no
       o   Actual cause of non-conformance
 (3)   u

           MRB Decision and Actions (inc. Individual(s) responsible for Action(s) and due Date(s)):

       l   MRB decision              Name: (Chief Insp.):                                     Signature and Date:
 (4)   s   implemented
       o   Certification NSA         Name:                                                    Signature and Date:
       t   Inspector

                                   Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                                           102 of 136


                            Non Conformance Control Sheet

                                        Continuation Sheet   Date:   Page
to point ……………….. of non-conformance report

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                  103 of 136
                                                 COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE

                               FIGURE 13 - FLOW DIAGRAM OF NON-CONFORMANCE PROCEDURE


       1                LEVEL               2             Telex Notification
                    DETERMINATION                           to ESA/SCC

                                                                                                                    Lot rejection
                             ESA/SCC MRB
LOCAL MRB                       Decision:                       ESA/SCC
  Decision              - reject from lot                 documentation affected   Initiate DCR
                        - rework
                        - use “as is” (waiver)

Corrective                                                                             DCR              NO
 Action                      Distribution                                           Decision by

    Distribution                Corrective Actions

                                                                                                     Review of
     NC closed                      NC closed

                           File in Qualification Report

                                                                                                                             ESA/SCC QPL

                       Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                                                                   104 of 136

-       full ESA/SCC component marking, including the required testing level, variants, lot number,
        date code, serial number or, if applicable, range of serial numbers.

The NCCS shall be allocated a number by the manufacturer's Chief Inspector who shall control NCCS
identification by means of a non-conformance summary. In the case of procurement, details of the
purchase order and the Orderer shall be included.


Section 2, “Description”, shall be completed in full by the person who identified the non-conformance,
i.e. the person invoking the Non-Conformance System. He shall indicate the occasion during which the
non-conformance occurred and list any relevant reference documents such as process instructions,
test procedures, etc. In this section, the symptoms of the observed non-conformance shall be
characterised as accurately as possible. In particular , the following points shall be listed:-

-     the manufacturing or testing procedure at which the non-conformance occurred;

-     the measured versus specified values, including tolerances, and precise details of the document
      and paragraph numbers against which the non-conformance has been noted.

The text shall include any other information deemed necessary and a description of the suspected
cause of failure to provide for full comprehension of the non-conformance.

The person invoking the Non-Conformance System shall complete the last line of this section by
entering his name and the date in the initiator box. When the Chief Inspector of the manufacturer is not
the person invoking the system, he shall countersign to certify the correctness of the entry. In addition,
the Chief Inspector shall indicate to which level the NCCS has to be classified.

In the case where the NSA Inspector has witnessed the identification of the non-conformance and
agrees with the classification, he shall sign the corresponding box. Otherwise the Chief Inspector must
send the NCCS to the NSA Inspector requesting his signature.

In the event that there is a disagreement over classification, the NCCS shall automatically be classified
as a Level 2 Non-Conformance, and be dispositioned by an ESA/SCC Material Review Board as
described below.

4.4.10 CONTINUATION SHEET(S) (See Figure 12)

If the space available for any entry in the Non-Conformance Control Sheet is insufficient, one or more
continuation sheets shall be used. The person completing such sheets shall specify to which section of
the NCCS each additional sheet refers and place his signature thereon. Reference to any continuation
sheet(s) shall be clearly made on the NCCS itself.


Each NCCS shall be identified by a number to be allocated by the manufacturers' Chief Inspector
according to the following system:-

Level of MRB (Level 1 or 2)                       :       1 numerical digit
NSA - Code                                        :       1 letter
Manufacturers Code                                :       3 letters
Identification (Last numeral of current year)     :       0 to 9
Serial Number                                    :        01 to 99
Note that the serial number starts from 01 each year.

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                   105 of 136


As stated above, the manufacturer's Chief Inspector shall classify the NCCS as Level 1 or Level 2.

The definition of a Level 1 NCCS as stated within ESA/SCC 22800 is as follows:-

Any departure of a characteristic from the specified requirements, which can be remedied by a
corrective action and does not contravene the applicable ESA/SCC documentation is deemed to be a
MINOR Non-conformance and is dealt with at a Level 1 Materials Review Board. All other deviations
are deemed MAJOR Non-conformances and are dealt with by a Level 2 Materials Review Board.

The above statement would appear to be incomplete since it only provides for Level 1 MRBs to allow
remedial action, and would therefore not allow a reject decision to be made. This is obviously not
intended, and within ESA/SCC 22800 section 7.1.3 Disposition, there is the possibility to reject from the
inspection Lot. However, complete Lot rejection is not a possibility. Therefore, if rework fails and a
potential Lot rejection situation arises, then the NCCS should be referred to a Level 2 MRB.

ESA/SCC 22800 cites SEM Inspection as an example where materials could be rejected from the Lot.
This case can only apply when an Inspector representing ESA/SCC, the National Space Agency or the
Orderer rejects the SEM photographs he is required to review prior to his review of the manufacturer's
internal visual inspection results. The manufacturer's personnel have no reason or requirement to raise
a NCCS during the SEM Inspection activity. In reality, there are few circumstances under which the
manufacturer's inspection personnel would be required to initiate a level 1 NCCS. Examples are
incorrect marking of a device (which would be remedied by remarking) and a missed electrical test
which is not sequence dependent (which could be remedied by being performed later in the
manufacturing and testing sequence).

It can therefore be seen that although the ESA/SCC Non-Conformance System is primarily a
manufacturer orientated system, it provides in the Level 1 NCCS, where lot rejection is not involved, a
useful tool for the Inspector reviewing the manufacturer's activities, to ensure that his concerns are
properly addressed by the manufacturer, and that the remedial actions necessary are properly
recorded and carried out.

Level 1 - Local MRB

The Level 1 or Local MRB shall be composed, as a minimum, of the following persons:-

-       Chief Inspector of the manufacturer (Chairman)
-       National Space Agency Inspector
-       Responsible engineer of the manufacturer
-       representative of the Orderer (in the case of procurement)

Members of the MRB may call in specialists as required, but these shall have no voting rights.

In determining the disposition and corrective action to be taken, the Board shall:-

-       take all necessary action to investigate the cause(s) of non-conformance;
-       review the records of previous actions applicable to similar or identical cases;
-       consider the recommendations of specialists acting in an advisory capacity;
-       initiate failure analysis of failed items, if appropriate;
-       consider and record the effects of the non-conformance on contractual requirements.

Level 2 - ESA/SCC MRB

The Level 2 MRB shall be composed, as a minimum, of the following persons:-

-       National Space Agency Inspector (Chairman)
-       Chief Inspector of the manufacturer

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                   106 of 136

-       Qualification Manager of the manufacturer
-       ESA/SCC Representative having acceptance authority
-       Representative of the Orderer (if applicable)

Members of the ESA/SCC MRB may call in specialists as required, but these shall have no voting


On the occurrence of a Level 2 non-conformance, ESA/SCC shall be notified by the Chief Inspector
within two working days. For this purpose, the use of a standard telex or telefax message form is
recommended. Prior to arranging a Materials Review Board meeting in respect of Level 2 non-
conformances, the Supervising Space Agency Inspector shall notify ESA of the date and location
planned for the meeting as well as the names of the MRB Members, and request the appointment of
the ESA/SCC representative. For notification of any Level 2 non-conformances, the format for the telex
or telefax form shall be as shown in Figure 14.


It is here at the MRB stage that two of the major problems related to the full utilisation of the ESA/SCC
Non-Conformance System occur.

The first occurs when an Inspector carrying out an official inspection on behalf of ESA or a National
Space Agency raises an NCCS. If the Inspector, on other occasions, acts on behalf of the National
Space Agency, then he has to be able to differentiate between his differing responsibilities.

As the initiator of the NCCS, he has the responsibility to provide his rationale for raising the NCCS,
often in contradiction with the manufacturer's representative, whereas as the representative of ESA or
the National Space Agency, he has a responsibility to listen to all of the information presented and to
make a balanced judgement, impartially. Therefore, those Inspectors, likely to be put in this difficult
position, must always be aware of their responsibilities.

The second, and from a general usage standpoint, the more important problem, relates to the
identification of a non-conformance when the Inspector is not acting on behalf of ESA or a National
Space Agency.

When a project, ESA or non-ESA, requires the use of the ESA/SCC specification system to procure
ESA/SCC Qualified components from a QPL listed supplier, then it accepts the responsibility to use the
complete system. This includes the Non-Conformance System. The project may have its own non-
conformance reporting system, which its Inspectors are required to utilise. However, in the event that a
non-conformance is identified by that project's Inspector, then he must also raise an ESA/SCC NCCS
and require that the manufacturer's Chief Inspector classifies it and convenes the appropriate MRB. It
may be that project and the ESA/SCC MRB arrive at differing conclusions, however, such differences
need to be resolved and in no way detracts from the responsibility of the Inspector trained in the
requirements of the ESA/SCC System, to fulfil his obligations.

There are many areas which require to be resolved in making the ESA/SCC Non-Conformance
System operate smoothly and effectively, but it is essential that those trained in the ESA/SCC System
use their best endeavours to operate the system.

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                   107 of 136

                       FIGURE 14 - COMMON TELEX OR TELEFAX FORM

To                 :       ESA/SCCG Secretary and MRB Members

From               :       Chief Inspector (Name, Company)

Subject            :       Non-conformance level 2, ESA/SCC components

1.        Identification

          NC: ………………… (the non-conformance number)

          Manufacturer: ………………………………….(Name)

          component Family: ………………………………..; Generic Specification No.. ……………..

          Full Component Marking:. ………………………….; Detail Specification No. …………………

          Lot No: ……………………………..

          Serial No: . ………………………………….. (if applicable)

2.        Non-Conformance Description

          Identified during: ………………………….(e.g. procurement, qualification, testing etc.)

          Location: ……………………………………….(e.g. precap, end-measurement Chart IV,
                                     Subgroup 3)

          Ref. Document: …………………………..(e.g. manufacturing procedure document No.)

          Date: ……………………………………….

          Description: ……………………………….

          Suspected Clause: …………………………………..(if applicable)

          Recommended Actions: ……………………………….

          Date of MRB: …………………….(planned date)

                           Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                         108 of 136


At both Level 1 and 2, MRB decisions are required to be unanimous by all voting members. In the
event that such a decision cannot be reached by a Level 1 MRB, then the NCCS must be elevated to a
Level 2 NCCS requiring an ESA/SCC MRB. Inability to reach a decision by a Level 2 MRB is not
currently considered by ESA/SCC 22800 since it is assumed that it would be in the interest of all
involved parties to ultimately reach a unanimous decision.


Level 1 MRBs can disposition non-conforming material as follows:-

a)      rejection from the inspection Lot,
b)      return for completion of operations, rework or screening,
c)      submit to Level 2 MRB.

Level 2 MRBs can disposition non-conforming material as follows:-

a)      use as is - without rework,
b)      use as is - but relevant documentation is to be modified,
c)      reject all or part of the Lot,
d)      remove the ESA/SCC marking from the non-conforming components.

Note the above Level 2 MRB dispositions are in addition to the dispositions stated for the Level 1 MRB.


The results of the MRB Level 1 or 2 are to be entered into the resolution and close-out sections of the


Section 3, "Resolution", is to be completed by the MRB and documents the cause of the non-
conformance, all decisions taken and actions to be implemented, the name(s) of the person(s)
responsible for such actions, and the dates on which they were or will be performed. Actions decided
upon shall include, but not be limited to:-

-       disposition for corrective action,

-       disposition of the actual product that is the subject of the non-conformance (e.g. whether or not
        it can be of further use),

-       any preventive measures taken.

Decisions of the MRB shall be unanimous and the NCCS shall be signed by all Members. The
signatures of MRB Members and the date and place of the meeting shall be shown in the appropriate


This section is to be signed by the person responsible for the implementation of the MRB decisions to
confirm that they have been fully complied with. The Inspector of the National Space Agency
concerned shall certify that, as a result of repair work and/or any other necessary corrective actions
(e.g. the modification of applicable documents), all remedial actions have been taken in respect of the

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                   109 of 136


For both non-conformance levels, copies of the Non-Conformance Control Sheet shall be sent to the
Members of the relevant MRB immediately upon completion of the "Identification" and "Description"
sections by the Chief Inspector. In case of urgency, the use of telecopy equipment is recommended.
After close-out by the MRB, the National Space Agency Inspector shall be responsible for definition of
the distribution list and distribution itself.

For both non-conformance levels, the standard distribution list shall include as a minimum:-

-       the Chief Inspector of the Manufacturer,

-       the Qualification Manager of the manufacturer,

-       the National Space Agency Inspector concerned,

-       ESA/SCC (level 1, for information only),

-       the National Space Agency concerned for incorporation in the qualification report (but only after

-       the Orderer (in case of procurement),

-       other persons concerned.


All Non-Conformance Control Sheets shall be listed in a non-conformance summary (see Figure 15).
The consecutive numbering of Non-Conformance Control Sheets shall be controlled by means of this
summary. The number, date of occurrence and a brief description of the non-conformance shall be
entered in this summary together with the progress made during its resolution. Thus, the Non-
Conformance Summary will serve as an overall situation report for the progress and follow-up of
remedial actions. The Non-Conformance Summary shall be kept by the manufacturer's Chief
Inspector. A copy of it shall be sent quarterly to the National Space Agency concerned and to
ESA/SCC for inclusion in the qualification maintenance document.


In the case where the outcome of a MRB investigation indicates that a change in an ESA/SCC
specification is necessary or desirable, a proposal should be submitted in the form of a Documentation
Change Request (DCR). Any user of the ESA/SCC System may complete a DCR. The DCR should
then be submitted to the National Space Agency.

NOTE: The NCCS may not be closed until the DCR is approved.

        (See Section 2 for DCR format).

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                      110 of 136

                      FIGURE 15 - NON-CONFORMANCE SUMMARY

                        NON CONFORMANCE SUMMARY                           Page 1 of ..

                                                     MRB level   Cause         actions
NCCS-No.         Short Description           Date                eliminated?   carried out?

Name of     Manufacturer’s name Plant   Issue:
Chief       Location
Inspector                               Date:

                      Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                             111 of 136



As previously stated, there are occasions when either as a project requirement or company policy, it
is necessary for Customer Source Inspections to be carried out. The subject of Inspection and
Auditing is handled in detail in a separate training programme. However, it is important that
Component Engineers have a good understanding of how such inspections are carried out and the
approach required to be taken. This section is therefore intended to provide such an insight.


Prior to carrying out an inspection, it is important that the Procurer’s Inspector is fully familiar with the
task to be performed. It is not sufficient that the Procurer’s Inspector simply arrives at the
manufacturer's facility, and expects to carry out his inspection with no prior preparation. The activity
flow (Figure 16) shows the sequence of events to be followed by the Procurer’s Inspector to fulfil that
task. The following ground rules should be applied in preparing for an inspection:-

(i)     Ensure that your contact at the manufacturer knows that you are coming and that he is aware
        of the exact purpose of your inspection. This notification should be made some two weeks in
        advance of the visit.

(ii)    Check that all essential documents are available.         Obviously the complete set of
        documentation must be available at the manufacturers, however, before you leave to carry out
        the inspection, ensure that you have sufficient documentation to know exactly what you are
        required to do.

(iii)   If previous history files are available to you, check any previous problems found, and how they
        were dealt with. It is important to be as knowledgeable as possible before the event.

                         Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                      112 of 136


          Planning of Inspection

      Confirmation by Manufacturer

           Review of all relevant
         inspection requirements

        Performance of Inspection

      Documentation of Inspection


      Preparation and Distribution of
            Inspection Report

Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc       113 of 136


In operating any total system such as that of the ESA/SCC it is vital to have authoritative points of
contact with clearly defined responsibilities. An important individual is the Chief Inspector who is
nominated by the manufacturer by name and function and formally declared acceptable by ESA/SCC.
This requirement is put during the evaluation of the manufacturer and becomes part of the Quality
Assurance manual and is eventually incorporated in the PID, for an ESA/SCC Qualified component.

It may well happen that for a particular inspection or test the Chief Inspector, whilst maintaining
responsibility for the outcome of the inspection, may delegate the responsibility for ensuring that
everything is in place for the inspection to be made. In these instances, know in advance who will have
the delegated responsibility, so as to ensure that an authoritative person is available to deal with any

To undertake any inspection, the Procurer’s Inspector should use the following documentation. Whilst
undertaking an inspection it is possible that conflicts between documents could occur. In such
circumstances an Procurer’s Inspector shall take the Documentary order of Precedence as indicated

1.      Purchase order or contract

2.      ESA/SCC Detail Specification

3.      ESA/SCC Generic Specification

4.      ESA/SCC Basic Specification

5.      Other Reference Documents. SAMPLE INSPECTION

Within the ESA/SCC System, sample inspection is performed for certain tests on the manufactured lot.
Three approaches may be found:-

-       Fixed sample size irrespective of lot size (e.g. Die Shear Test).

-       Sample size dependent on lot size and used to assess the lot based on an AQL (e.g. External
        Visual using AQL of 1% and Inspection Level II in ESA/SCC 9000).

-       Sample size dependent on lot size and used to assess the lot based on an LTPD (e.g.
        Electrical Measurements at room temperature using LTPD of 7% in ESA/SCC 9201/063).

The use of sampling approaches is of limited statistical significance due mainly to the largely
discontinuous nature of the manufacture of Space lots. The important point is that samples should be
selected by the manufacturer at random unless a specified method of selection (e.g. in SEM) is defined
in the pertinent ESA/SCC specifications.

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                  114 of 136

The Procurer’s Inspector must understand how to use the sampling tables called up by the pertinent
specifications so that he can verify their correct application by the manufacturer. References within the
ESA/SCC specifications will be found to IEC 410, MIL-STD-105 and to MIL-STD-414. Additionally,
LTPD tables are reproduced as annexes to Generic specifications 5000 and 9000, derived from MIL-
STD-38510. Figures 17 to 20 reproduce the relevant tables and examples of their use are covered the

The Procurer’s Inspector will verify that the manufacturer has performed the required inspections and
tests correctly. During an authorised inspection, the Procurer’s Inspector may be faced with a time
constraint which prevents his inspection of 100% of the items presented by the manufacturer. When
this is the case, the Procurer’s Inspector should select a sample. The components comprising this
sample should be selected at random. The sample should either be fixed or related to the lot size. For
the latter, and since the Procurer’s Inspector is representing the user, it is appropriate to assess the
quality level on the basis of “user's risk”, thus indicating that an LTPD should be specified.

Irrespective of whether a fixed sample or a sample for an LTPD is selected, two rules must be

-       The Procurer’s Inspector must accept on zero, reject on one. (This is because his inspection is
        of 100% previously inspected items accepted by the manufacturer's QA organisation).

-       Any defective item found must either be removed from the lot or the defect(s) corrected by the
        manufacturer (if the ESA/SCC System permits such correction), with the subsequent raising of
        a Non-Conformance report. Thus no defective item may be knowingly delivered.

For guidance, it is recommended that for lot sizes less than 200, the Procurer’s Inspector should select
a sample of at least 50 components. (This results in an LTPD of 3.9% or less). However, for lot sizes
greater than 200, an LTPD of 7% or less would normally be recommended. However, considering the
accept on zero rule identified above, this would result in a maximum sample size of 32 components.
Therefore, a fixed sample size of 50 components is recommended irrespective of lot size.

                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                   115 of 136

                           FIGURE 17 - SAMPLE SIZE CODE LETTERS

                                   INSPECTION BY AQL VALUES

                                                       General inspection levels
         Lot size
                                                 I                 II                III

2        to         8                            A                 A                  B

9        to         15                           A                 B                  C

16       to         25                           B                 C                  D

26       to         50                           C                 D                  E

51       to         90                           C                 E                  F

91       to         150                          D                 F                  G

151      to         280                          E                 G                  H

281      to         500                          F                 H                  J

501      to         1200                         G                 J                  K

1201     to         3200                         H                 K                  L

3201     to         10000                        J                 L                  M

10001    to         35000                        K                 M                  N

3501     to         150000                       L                 N                  P

15001    to         500000                       M                 P                  Q

500001   and        Over                         N                 Q                  R

                          Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                        116 of 136
                                                                                      COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE

                                                   FIGURE 18 - SINGLE SAMPLING PLANS FOR NORMAL INSPECTION (MASTER TABLE)
Sample                                                                                                         Acceptable Quality levels (normal inspection)
  size    Sample   0.010   0.015   0.025   0.040    0.065   0.10    0.15      0.25     0.40     0.65         1.0           1.5           2.5           4.0           6.5           10           15           25           40           65        100      150      250      400     650     1000
 code      Size
 letter            Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re Ac Re

   A        2                                                                                                                                                    0         1                             1        2   2        3   3        4   5    6   7    8   10   11 14 15 21     22 30   31

   B        3                                                                                                                                      0         1                              1        2   2        3   3        4   5        6   7    8   10   11 14 15 21      22 30   31 44   45

  C         5                                                                                                                        0         1                               1        2   2        3   3        4   5        6   7        8   10   11 14 15 21       22 30   31 44   45

  D         8                                                                                                          0         1                               1         2   2        3   3        4   5        6   7        8   10   11 14 15 21           22 30    31 44   45

   E       13                                                                                            0         1                               1         2   2         3   3        4   5        6   7        8   10   11 14 15 21               22 30    31 44    45

   F       20                                                                                  0    1                                1         2   2         3   3         4   5        6   7        8   10   11 14 15 21               22

  G         32                                                                         0   1                           1         2   2         3   3         4   5         6   7        8   10   11 14 15 21               22

  H        50                                                                0    1                      1         2   2         3   3         4   5         6   7         8   10   11 14 15 21               22

   J        80                                                      0    1                     1    2    2         3   3         4   5         6   7         8   10    11 14 15 21               22

   K       125                                              0   1                      1   2   2    3    3         4   5         6   7         8   10    11 14 15 21                22

   L       200                                      0   1                    1    2    2   3   3    4    5         6   7         8   10    11 14 15 21                 22

  M        315                             0   1                    1    2   2    3    3   4   5    6    7         8   10    11 14 15 21                 22

  N        500                     0   1                    1   2   2    3   3    4    5   6   7    8    10    11 14 15 21                 22

   P       800             0   1                    1   2   2   3   3    4   5    6    7   8   10   11 14 15 21              22

  Q        1250    0   1                   1   2    2   3   3   4   5    6   7    8   10   11 14 15 21         22

  R        2000                    1   2   2   3    3   4   5   6   7    8   10   11 14 15 21       22

           = Use First sampling plan below arrow. If sample size equals, or exceeds, lot or batch size, do 100% inspection                                                              Ac = Acceptance number.

           = Use First sampling plan above arrow.                                                                                                                                       Re = Rejection number.

                                                                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                                                                                                  117 of 136
                                                   COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE


                                    Extracted from ESA/SCC Generic Specification 9000
  Minimum size of sample to be tested to assure with a 90% confidence that a lot whose percent defective equals
                              the specified LTPD is not accepted (single sample).

Max. Percent    50       30       20       15       10        7        5         3        2        1.5        1       0.7      0.5      0.3     0.2     0.15     0.1
(LTPD) or λ
Acceptance                                                                  MINIMUM SAMPLE Sizes
Number (C)                                                    (For device-hours required for life test, multiply by 1000)
     0            5        8       11       15       22       32       45       76       116       153      231       328       461     767    1152    1534    2303
               (1.03)   (0.64)   (0.46)   (0.34)   (0.23)   (0.16)   (0.11)   (0.07)    (0.04)    (0.03)   (0.02)    (0.02)    (0.01) (0.007) (0.005) (0.003) (0.002)
     1            8       12       18       25       38       55       77      129       195       258      390       555       778    1296    1946    2592    3891
                (4.4)    (2.7)    (2.0)    (1.4)   (0.94)   (0.65)   (0.45)   (0.28)    (0.18)    (0.14)   (0.09)    (0.06)   (0.045) (0.027) (0.018) (0.013) (0.009)
     2           11      18       25        34      52       75        105     176       266       354      533        759      1065   1773    2662    3547    5323
                (7.4)   (4.5)    (3.4)    (2.24)   (1.6)    (1.1)    (0.78)   (0.47)    (0.31)    (0.23)   (0.15)    (0.11)   (0.080) (0.045) (0.031) (0.022) (0.015)
     3           13      22       32        43      65       94        132     221       333       444      668        953      1337   2226    3341    4452    6681
               (10.5)   (6.2)    (4.4)     (3.2)   (2.1)    (1.5)     (1.0)   (0.62)    (0.41)    (0.31)   (0.20)    (0.14)    (0.10) (0.062) (0.041) (0.031) (0.018)
     4           16      27       38        52      78       113       158     265       398       531      798       1140      1599   2663    3997    5327    7994
               (12.3)   (7.3)    (5.3)     (1.6)   (2.6)    (1.8)     (1.3)   (0.75)    (0.50)    (0.37)   (0.25)    (0.17)    (0.12) (0.074) (0.049) (0.037) (0.025)
     5           19       31      45       60       91       131      184       308      462       617       927      1323      1855   2090    4638    6181    9275
               (13.8)    (8.4)   (6.0)    (4.4)    (2.9)    (2.0)    (1.4)    (0.85)    (0.57)    (0.42)   (0.28)    (0.20)    (0.14) (0.085) (0.056) (0.042) (0.028)
     6           21       35      51       68       104      149      209       349      528       700      1054      1503      2107   3509    5267    7019 10533
               (15.6)    (9.4)   (6.6)    (4.9)    (3.2)    (2.2)    (1.6)    (0.94)    (0.62)    (0.47)   (0.31)    (0.22)   (0.155) (0.093) (0.062) (0.047) (0.031)
     7           24       39      57       77       116      166      234       390      589       783      1178      1680      2355   3922    5886    7845 11771
               (16.6)   (10.2)   (7.2)    (5.9)    (3.5)    (2.4)    (1.7)     (1.0)    (0.67)    (0.51)   (0.34)    (0.24)    (0.17) (0.101) (0.068) (0.051) (0.034)
     8           5        8        11       15       22       32       45       76       116       153      231       328      461       767    1152    1534    2303
               (1.03)   (0.64)   (0.46)   (0.34)   (0.23)   (0.16)   (0.11)   (0.07)    (0.04)    (0.03)   (0.02)    (0.02)   (0.01)   (0.007) (0.005) (0.003) (0.002)
     9           8       12       18        25       38       55       77      129       195       258      390       555       778    1296    1946    2592    3891
               (4.4)    (2.7)    (2.0)     (1.4)   (0.94)   (0.65)   (0.45)   (0.28)    (0.18)    (0.14)   (0.09)    (0.06)   (0.045) (0.027) (0.018) (0.013) (0.009)
    10          11       18       25        34       52       75      105      176       266       354      533       759      1065    1773    2662    3547    5323
               (7.4)    (4.5)    (3.4)    (2.24)    (1.6)    (1.1)   (0.78)   (0.47)    (0.31)    (0.23)   (0.15)    (0.11)   (0.080) (0.045) (0.031) (0.022) (0.015)
    11           13      22       32       43       65       94       132      221       333       444      668       953      1337     2226    3341    4452    6681
               (10.5)   (6.2)    (4.4)    (3.2)    (2.1)    (1.5)    (1.0)    (0.62)    (0.41)    (0.31)   (0.20)    (0.14)   (0.10)   (0.062) (0.041) (0.031) (0.018)
    12           16      27       38       52       78       113      158      265       398       531      798       1140     1599     2663    3997    5327    7994
               (12.3)   (7.3)    (5.3)    (1.6)    (2.6)    (1.8)    (1.3)    (0.75)    (0.50)    (0.37)   (0.25)    (0.17)   (0.12)   (0.074) (0.049) (0.037) (0.025)
    13           19      31       45       60       91       131      184      308       462       617      927       1323     1855     2090    4638    6181    9275
               (13.8)   (8.4)    (6.0)    (4.4)    (2.9)    (2.0)    (1.4)    (0.85)    (0.57)    (0.42)   (0.28)    (0.20)   (0.14)   (0.085) (0.056) (0.042) (0.028)
    14           21      35       51       68       104      149      209      349       528       700      1054      1503     2107    3509    5267    7019 10533
               (15.6)   (9.4)    (6.6)    (4.9)    (3.2)    (2.2)    (1.6)    (0.94)    (0.62)    (0.47)   (0.31)    (0.22)   (0.155) (0.093) (0.062) (0.047) (0.031)
    15           24       39       57       77       116      166      234      390       589      783      1178      1680   2355    3922    5886    7845 11771
               (16.6)   (10.2)    (7.2)    (5.9)    (3.5)    (2.4)    (1.7)    (1.0)    (0.67)    (0.51)   (0.34)    (0.24) (0.17) (0.101) (0.068) (0.051) (0.034)
    16           45       74       112      150      225      321      450      750      1124      1499     2249      3212   4497    7496 11244 14992 22487
               (24.1)   (14.6)    (9.7)    (7.2)    (4.8)   (3.37)   (2.41)   (1.44)    (0.96)    (0.72)   (0.48)   (0.337) (0.241) (0.144) (0.096) (0.072) (0.048)
    17           47       79       118      158      236      338      473      788      1182      1576     2364      3377   4728    7880 11819 15759 23639
               (24.7)   (14.7)   (9.86)   (7.36)   (4.93)   (3.44)   (2.46)   (1.46)    (0.98)    (0.74)   (0.49)   (0.344) (0.246) (0.148) (0.098) (0.074) (0.049)
    18           50       83       124      165      248     354      496      826       1239      1652     2478     3540    4956    8260 12390 16520 24780
               (24.9)   (15.0)   (10.0)   (7.54)   (5.02)   (3.51)   (2.51)   (1.51)     (1.0)    (0.75)   (0.50)   (0.351) (0.251) (0.151) (0.100) (0.075) (0.080)
    19           45       74       112      150      225     321      450      750       1124      1499     2249     3212    4497    7496 11244 14992 22487
               (24.1)   (14.6)    (9.7)    (7.2)    (4.8)   (3.37)   (2.41)   (1.44)    (0.96)    (0.72)   (0.48)   (0.337) (0.241) (0.144) (0.096) (0.072) (0.048)
    20           47       79       118      158      236     338      473      788       1182      1576     2364     3377    4728    7880 11819 15759 23639
               (24.7)   (14.7)   (9.86)   (7.36)   (4.93)   (3.44)   (2.46)   (1.46)    (0.98)    (0.74)   (0.49)   (0.344) (0.246) (0.148) (0.098) (0.074) (0.049)
    21           50       83      124      165      248      354      496      826      1239       1652     2478     3540    4956    8260 12390 16520 24780
               (24.9)   (15.0)   (10.0)   (7.54)   (5.02)   (3.51)   (2.51)   (1.51)    (1.0)     (0.75)   (0.50)   (0.351) (0.251) (0.151) (0.100) (0.075) (0.080)

         1. Sample sizes are based upon the Poisson exponential binomial limit.
         2. The minimum quality (approximate AQL) required to accept (on the average) 19 of 20 lots is shown in
            parentheses for information only.

                                                              Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                                       118 of 136
                                                  COMPONENT ENGINEERING TRAINING COURSE

                                            TO 200


 N           10             20             30             40             50             60             80             100             120             150             160          200

 n     AQL    LTPD    AQL    LTPD    AQL    LTPD    AQL    LTPD    AQL    LTPD    AQL    LTPD    AQL    LTPD    AQL     LTPD    AQL     LTPD    AQL     LTPD    AQL     LTPD AQL LTPD

2     2.2     65     2.5     66     2.5     67     2.5     67     2.5     67     2.5     68     2.5     68     2.5     68      2.5     68      2.5     68      2.5     68    2.5    68
4     1.2     36     1.2     40     1.2     4.2    1.2     42     1.3     42     1.3     43     1.3     43     1.3     43      1.3     43      1.3     43      1.3     44    1.3    44
5     1.0     29     1.0     33     1.0     34     1.0     35     1.0     35     1.0     35     1.0     36     1.0     36      1.0     37      1.0     37      1.0     37    1.0    37
8     0.5     15     0.6     20     0.6     20     0.6     22     0.6     23     0.6     23     0.6     24     0.7     24      0.7     24      0.7     24      0.7     24    0.7    25
10                   0.4     15     0.5     17     0.5     19     0.5     19     0.5     19     0.5     20     0.5     20      0.5     20      0.5     20      0.5     20    0.5    20
16                   0.2     6.9    0.25    10     0.25    11     0.3     12     0.3     12     0.3     13     0.3     13      0.3     13      0.3     13      0.3     13    0.3    13
20                                  0.2     6.8    0.2     8.0    0.25    8.7    0.25    9.0    0.25    9.4    0.25    10      0.25    10      0.25    10      0.25    10    0.25   10
25                                  0.15    4.3    0.15    5.7    0.2     6.4    0.2     6.9    0.2     7.4    0.2     7.5     0.2     7.6     0.2     7.7     0.2     7.8   0.2    7.9
32                                                 0.1     3.7    0.1     4.4    0.1     5.0    0.1     5.5    0.1     5.9     0.15    6.0     0.15    6.2     0.15    6.3   0.15   6.3
40                                                                0.1     3.0    0.1     3.4    0.1     4.0    0.1     4.5     0.1     4.6     0.1     4.9     0.1     5.0   0.1    5.0
50                                                                               0.1     2.3    0.1     2.9    0.1     3.3     0.1     3.5     0.1     3.7     0.1     3.7   0.1    3.9
64                                                                                              0.08    1.7    0.08    2.2     0.08    2.5     0.08    2.7     0.08    2.7   0.08   2.9
80                                                                                                             0.07    1.5     0.07    1.7     0.07    2.0     0.07    2.1   0.07   2.2
100                                                                                                                            0.05    1.1     0.05    1.5     0.05    1.5   0.05   1.7
125                                                                                                                                            0.04    0.8     0.04    0.9   0.04   1.2
128                                                                                                                                            0.04    0.8     0.04    0.9   0.04   1.1
160                                                                                                                                                                          0.03   0.7


 N           10             20             30             40             50             60             80             100             120             150             160          200

 n     AQL    LTPD    AQL    LTPD    AQL    LTPD    AQL    LTPD    AQL    LTPD    AQL    LTPD    AQL    LTPD    AQL     LTPD    AQL     LTPD    AQL     LTPD    AQL     LTPD AQL LTPD

2     27      95     24      95     24      95     23      95     23      95     23      95     23      95     23      95      23      95      22      95      22      95    22     95
4     15      62     12      66     12      66     11      67     11      67     10      67     10      67     10      67      10      67      9.8     67      9.7     67    9.7    68
5     13      51     10      55     8.8     56     8.5     57     8.4     57     8.1     58     7.9     58     7.6     58      7.5     58      7.5     58      7.5     58    7.5    58
8     11      28     7.2     35     6.2     38     5.8     38     5.4     39     5.0     39     4.7     39     4.5     39      4.3     39      4.3     40      4.2     40    4.2    40
10                   6.2     30     5.0     30     4.6     31     4.2     32     4.2     32     4.2     32     3.9     33      3.5     33      3.3     33      3.3     33    3.3    33
16                   5.6     15     4.2     18     3.8     18     3.4     20     3.0     20     2.9     21     2.6     21      2.5     21      2.3     21      2.3     22    2.2    22
20                                  4.0     13     3.2     15     2.8     16     2.5     16     2.4     18     2.3     16      2.1     17      2.0     17      2.0     17    2.0    18
25                                  3.8     9.2    3.1     11     2.5     12     2.2     13     2.0     13     1.8     13      1.7     13      1.6     14      1.6     14    1.6    14
32                                                 3.1     7.4    2.4     8.2    2.1     9.0    1.8     9.9    1.8     10      1.5     10.5    1.4     11      1.3     11    1.3    11
40                                                                2.4     5.9    2.1     6.8    1.6     7.6    1.4     7.8     1.3     8.2     1.2     8.3     1.2     8.4   1.1    8.6
50                                                                               1.7     4.6    1.4     5.6    1.2     6.1     1.2     6.4     1.0     6.5     0.9     6.7   0.9    6.7
64                                                                                              1.3     3.8    1.1     4.4     1.0     4.7     0.8     5.0     0.8     5.0   0.7    5.2
80                                                                                                             1.1     3.0     1.0     3.4     0.8     3.7     0.7     3.8   0.6    4.0
100                                                                                                                            0.9     2.5     0.7     2.8     0.7     2.8   0.6    3.0
125                                                                                                                                            0.7     1.9     0.7     2.0   0.5    2.2
158                                                                                                                                            0.7     1.7     0.7     1.9   0.5    2.2
160                                                                                                                                                                          0.5    1.5


 N           10             20             30             40             50             60             80             100             120             150             160          200

 n     AQL    LTPD    AQL    LTPD    AQL    LTPD    AQL    LTPD    AQL    LTPD    AQL    LTPD    AQL    LTPD    AQL     LTPD    AQL     LTPD    AQL     LTPD    AQL     LTPD AQL LTPD

4     33      82     28      83     27      84     27      85     27      85     26      85     26      85     26      86      26      86      25      86      25      86    25     86
5     27      69     23      73     21      74     20      74     20      74     20      75     20      75     19      75      19      73      19      75      19      75    19     75
8     22      42     15      49     14      49     13      52     13      52     13      52     12      53     12      53      12      53      11      53      11      53    11     53
10                   13      39     11      42     11      42     10      43     10      43     9.6     43     9.2     44      9.1     44      8.9     44      8.9     44    8.7    44
16                   11      22     8.6     25     6.9     27     6.8     27     6.4     27     6.0     28     6.0     29      5.9     29      5.9     29      5.7     29    5.5    30
20                                  7.7     19     6.2     21     5.9     22     5.6     22     5.1     23     4.8     23      4.8     23      4.6     23      4.5     24    4.5    24
25                                  7.4     13     6.0     16     4.9     17     4.5     17     4.3     18     4.1     18      3.9     18      3.7     18      3.7     19    3.7    19
32                                                 5.5     11     4.8     12     4.3     13     3.6     14     3.4     14      3.2     14      3.0     14.5    3.0     15    2.9    15
40                                                                4.6     5.9    3.9     9.8    3.1     11     2.8     12      2.6     16      2.4     12      2.4     12    2.3    12
50                                                                               3.5     6.9    2.8     8.1    2.4     8.4     2.3     8.6     2.1     9.0     2.1     9.3   2.0    9.5
64                                                                                              2.6     5.7    2.2     6.2     2.0     6.6     1.8     7.1     1.7     7.1   1.6    7.4
80                                                                                                             2.1     4.5     1.8     4.9     1.6     5.4     1.5     5.4   1.4    5.6
100                                                                                                                            1.8     3.5     1.4     3.9     1.4     4.0   1.2    4.4
125                                                                                                                                            1.4     2.8     1.3     2.9   1.1    3.3
128                                                                                                                                            1.4     2.6     1.3     2.9   1.1    3.2
160                                                                                                                                                                          1.1    2.3

           This table gives the AQL and LTPD values associated with certain single sampling plans
           (acceptance number 'C', sample size 'n' and lot size 'N'). The table has the following features:

           (a) Calculations are based upon the hyper geometric distribution (exact theory) for lot sizes 200 or

                                                               Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                                             119 of 136

(b) The AQL of a sampling plan is defined as the interpolated percent defective for which there is a
    0.95 probability of acceptance under the plan. The AQL so defined need not be a realisable lot
    percent defective for the lot size involved (e.g., 12 percent is not a realisable percent defective for
    a lot size of 20).
(c) The LTPD sampling plan is defined as the interpolated percent defective for which there is a 0.10
    probability of lot acceptance under the plan. The LTPD so defined need not be a realisable lot
    percent defective for the lot size involved.
(d) The sequence of sample sizes and lot sizes are generated by taking products of preceding
    numbers in the respective sequences and the numbers 2 and 5.

                                  Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                             120 of 136

Example of Inspection by AQL value, MIL-STD-105

Electrical Measurements at High Temperature Inspection required for 450 off type 1N5814 Diodes to
Testing Level 'C'. This inspection is performed by the manufacturer and may be reviewed or verified by
the Procurers Inspector.

The applicable generic specification is ESA/SCC 5000

The applicable detail specification is ESA/SCC 5101/011

ESA/SCC Detail Specification 5101/011 specifies for electrical measurements at high temperature.
“Tests performed on a sample basis, Inspection Level II, Table II-A, AQL=1.0 of MIL-STD-105. A
minimum of 10% of parts shall be measured.”

Lot size                    = 450
AQL                         = 1.0
Inspection Level = II

Using MIL-STD-105, for a Lot size of 450 and inspection Level II, Figure 17 specifies a sample size
letter code of H. Referring now to Figure 18, and cross-referencing between an AQL of 1.0 and sample
size code H, we can see that 1 failure is allowable whereas 2 failures would be rejected. Figure 18
also specifies a sample of 50, however the detail specification requires a minimum of 10% or in this
case a sample of 45, therefore this criteria is already met.


Lot size                            = 450
Sample size code Letter = H
Sample size                         = 50
Acceptance number                   = 1
Rejection number                    = 2

Example of Inspection Using an LTPD Value

Electrical Measurements at Room Temperature Inspection is required for 450 off type 2N6033 High
Power NPN transistors.

The applicable Detail specification is ESA/SCC 5203/026.

The applicable Generic specification is ESA/SCC 5000.

The detail specification specifies for Electrical Measurements at Room Temperature - a.c. Parameters
“Measurements performed on a sample basis, LTPD 7 or less”.

                 Lot Size                   = 450
                 LTPD                       = 7 or less

Using Annex 1 (see Figure 19) of the generic specification “LTPD Sampling Plan” for lot sizes greater
than 200 specifies, below the LTPD value equal to 7, an acceptance number of 0 for a sample size of
32, or following down the column an acceptance number of 1 for a sample size of 55. The
manufacturer may choose what he considers to be a reasonable sample size for the lot under

                                    Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                      121 of 136

Thus using Annex 1 (Figure 19), a possible sample size might be:-

                   LTPD                     = 7
                   Sample size              = 113
                   Acceptance No.           = 4
                   Rejection No.            = 5 INSPECTION REQUIREMENT SUMMARY

Summary comments on the approach to be taken to inspection are identified below:-

(i)      Inspect strictly in accordance with the requirements set out within the procurement specification.

(ii)     Under no circumstances allow personal feelings, lack of time or previous history affect your

(iii)    Report your findings in reasonable detail so as to be able to clearly recall the inspection, should
         it be necessary, some months after the event.

(iv)     Never try to correct a discrepancy to the system. Raise a non-conformance report and insist that
         the Chief Inspector takes action.

(v)      When required to verify the adequacy of an inspection previously made by the manufacturer,
         always report the exact sampling plan used, if not stipulated.

(vi)     Always insist that the manufacturer's Chief Inspector or his authorised representative signs your
         inspection report as accepted and agreed. If there is any disagreement, you must insist that the
         manufacturer provides you with written comments to your report.

(vii)    Never lose your temper or do anything to bring your company into disrepute.

(viii)   If you are responsible for any damage to the components under inspection, test/inspection
         equipment or manufacturer's personnel or facilities, report it immediately to the Chief Inspector
         and provide a detailed report to your superiors.

                                    Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                           122 of 136


For many years attempts were made to produce a European version of the American Government
Industry Data Exchange Programme (GIDEP), particularly in relation to quickly identify problems
which could impact a number of industrial users of the subject of the problem notification. After
resolving a number of practical and contractual problems the ESA Alert System was launched in
December 1995.

This system is aimed at providing awareness of failures and problems experienced in space projects,
in order to eliminate or minimise their impacts and prevent their recurrence in current and future
projects. Its impact on component engineering is to a significant degree, reduced by the existence of
the ESA/SCC Non-conformance Control System, which with its two tier MRB System already covers
most of the functions of the Alert System. However the Alert System is available for use for
components not covered by the ESA/SCC NCCS i.e. any component which is not ESA/SCC
qualified, and for instances where raising a Non-conformance is inappropriate, but where a potential
problem might have serious implications e.g. major interruption of supply for extended periods.

The ESA Alert System and its implementation procedure is fully described within Q/EAS/PROC/1,



No formal requirement exists within the ESA/SCC System for precautions to be taken to prevent
problems due to ESD or other handling procedures.

ESD damage is a major cause of premature failure of electronic components, and is generally due to
lack of adequate care in handling.

The Procurer’s Inspector should ensure that he, and the organisations with which he is concerned,
employs safe working practices to eliminate problems caused by ESD, wherever and whenever the
handling of ESD sensitive components is involved.

Some recommendations are made within this section for procedures to be followed to prevent
Electrostatic Discharge damage to components.


Static electricity is an electrical charge at rest. The electrical charge is due to the transfer of electrons
within a body (polarisation) or from one body to another (conductive charging). The transfer occurs due
to interaction of charged bodies on uncharged bodies. The magnitude of the charge is primarily
dependent on the size, shape, composition and electrical properties of the substances which make up
the bodies.

Some substances readily give up electrons while others tend to accumulate excess electrons. A body
having an excess of electrons is charged negatively. A body having an electron deficit is charged

Electrostatic discharge can cause direct, indirect or latent failures in electronic devices. A direct failure
results from physical destruction or degradation and can be classified as a hard failure since it is
irreversible. Indirect failures are defined as soft errors, since the circuit can be reset to its proper state.

                                   Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                               123 of 136

Latent failures show no initial degradation under test, but a hard failure occurs with time or with
subsequent discharges.

During the past few years there have been significant advances in semiconductor technology. The
resulting higher speed, higher density and less power consuming devices have shown a definite trend
towards increased static sensitivity. Accordingly, the specification of special handling techniques and
the extensive use of static protective packaging materials have become essential. The extent of this
problem is evident when one looks at the static susceptibility of devices representative of the range of
semiconductor technologies in use today. Table 11 is a summary of the voltage levels, reported by
various semiconductor users and manufacturers, at which a person can damage the device by merely
touching it. The presence of even one of these very static sensitive devices on a PC board requires
that the entire assembly be handled with special static protective precautions.

Quite often the responsibility for establishing and certifying this static protective environment is placed
squarely on the shoulders of the quality control personnel. It is therefore vital that a Procurer’s
Inspector has a working understanding of the static problem in the electronics industry and more
importantly, can apply solutions to this problem.


                      Device Type                                     ESD Susceptibility
                                                                       Voltage Values
     VMOS                                                                    30
     MOSFET                                                                  100
     GaAsFET                                                                 100
     EPROM                                                                   100
     JFET                                                                    140
     SAW                                                                     150
     OP-AMP                                                                  190
     CMOS                                                                    250
     SCHOTTKY DIODES                                                         300
     FILM RESISTORS (THICK, THIN)                                            300
     BIPOLAR TRANSISTORS                                                     380
     ECL                                                                     500
     SCR                                                                     680
     SCHOTTKY TTL                                                           1,000

                                  Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                            124 of 136


All semiconductors suffer damage when they are suddenly exposed to electrostatic discharges of
several kV. While the phenomenon of catastrophic damage in parts containing MOS capacitors or
transistors is well known, this also applies to bipolar integrated circuits and many other electronic
components, where electrostatic discharges change the electrical properties and degrade the reliability.
None of the standard protective circuits function sufficiently quickly to prevent all damage. This applies
especially to some MOS components and CCDs, where the technical requirements prohibit the
incorporation of protective circuits. The component failure is not always immediately catastrophic.
Often the part is only degraded and may fail at a later time. An electrostatic discharge sensitive
component is referred to as an ESDS component for brevity.

Devices are degraded or destroyed by static charge in two ways:-

1.      By contact with a charged body and the resultant transferral of electrons from one to the

2.      By exposure to a high electric field.

For example, if a static charged person approaches a work bench, his body is surrounded by an
electric field which can be represented by dotted lines as shown in Figure 21. If he is charged to 5,000
volts, the inner most dotted line might represent a voltage shell of 4,000 volts, the next 3,000 volts and
so on. A voltage sensitive device may be damaged by exposure to the extremely high field intensity
represented by the crowding of these lines between the person's hand at 5,000 volts and the bench
top. If he actually touches the device, the resulting currents can also destroy the current sensitive parts
of the circuitry.

                                  Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                            125 of 136


                  Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc      126 of 136


     Means of Static Generation          Electrostatic Voltages

                                         10% to 20% Relative Humidity        65% to 90% Relative Humidity
Worker at bench                                     6,000                                100
Vinyl envelopes for work instructions               7,000                                600
Walking over Vinyl floor                           12,000                                250
Work chair padded with polyurethane                18,000                               1,500
Common poly bag picked up from                        20,000                             1,200
Walking across Carpet                                 35,000                             1,500

                            TABLE 13 - TYPICAL CHARGE SOURCES

   Object or Process                                        Material or Activity

     Work Surfaces                               Waxed, painted or varnished surfaces
                                                     Common vinyl or plastics

         Floors                                           Sealed concrete
                                                        Waxed, finished wood
                                                     Common vinyl tiles or sheeting

        Clothes                                     Common clean room smocks
                                                 Common synthetic personal garments
                                                      Non-conductive shoes
                                                      Virgin cotton (Note 1)

        Chairs                                                 Finished wood

Packaging and Handling                       Common plastic - bags, wraps, envelopes
                                                    Common bubble pack, foam
                                        Common plastic trays, plastic tote boxes, vials, parts bins
Assembly, Cleaning, Test                                     Spray cleaners
   and Repair Areas                                 Common plastic solder suckers
                                                   Solder irons with ungrounded tips
                                                   Solvent brushes (synthetic bristles)
                                                Cleaning or drying by fluid or evaporation
                                                        Temperature chambers
                                                            Cryogenic sprays
                                                        Heat guns and blowers
                                                          Electrostatic copiers

  NOTE: 1. Virgin cotton can be a static source at low relative humidities such as below 30%.

                                  Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                              127 of 136


The following failure mechanisms can occur with electrostatic discharge or electrical overstress (see
ESA/SCC Basic Specification No. 23800):-

(a)       Thermal Secondary Breakdown or Junction Overstress

(b)       Metallisation Melt

(c)       Dielectric Breakdown

(d)       Gaseous Arc Breakdown

(e)       Surface Breakdown

(f)       Bulk Breakdown

The failure mechanisms (c), (d), and (e) are voltage-dependent; the others are power or energy
dependent. The failure mechanisms depend on weaknesses in design, see Table 14.

Various models exist which attempt to duplicate the type of discharge that can occur during actual
handling and operational conditions. Each of the models represents a different situation in which
electronic devices can be damaged by static electricity. The most widely used ESD susceptibility
testing model is the human body model.


Protective measures against ESD include the following:-

-     Handling and storage of ESD sensitive devices at a relative humidity between 45 and 55% or in
      ionised air.

- Grounding of devices, equipment and tools

-     Avoidance of insulators subject to charge accumulation, particularly plastics and including

- Conducting work surfaces, floors and storage cabinets

- Use of containers and packing materials with ESD protection

- Grounding of personnel by wrist straps and/or heel straps

Three categories of surface resistance characterise most ESD-combative materials:-

- Conductive                     0                        - 105   Ohms/sq.

- Static-dissipative             105                      - 1010 Ohms/sq.

- Anti-static                    1010                     - 1012 Ohms/sq.

                                     Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                    128 of 136

 Part Constituent      Part Type                              Failure Mechanism                  Failure Indicator

MOS Structures         MOS FET (Discretes)                    Dielectric breakdown from        Short (high leakage)
                                                              excess voltage and
                       MOS ICs                                subsequent high current

                       Semiconductors with metallisation
                       Digital ICS
                       (Bipolar and MOS)
                       Linear ICS
                       (Bipolar and MOS)

                       MOS Capacitors
                       Linear ICS
Semiconductor          Diodes (PN, Pin, Schottky)             Microdiffusion from micro-
Junctions              Transistors, Bipolar                   plasma-secondary
                       Junction Field Effect Transistors      breakdown from excess
                       Thyristors                             energy or heat
                       Bipolar ICs, Digital and Linear
                       Input Protection Circuits on:          Current filament growth by
                                Discrete MOS FETs             silicon and aluminium
                       MOS ICs                                diffusion (electromigration)
Film Resistors         Hybrid ICs:                            Dielectric breakdown,              Resistance shift
                                Thick Film Resistors          voltage dependent-creation
                                Thin Film Resistors           of new current paths

                       Monolithic IC-Thin Film Resistors      Joule heating-energy
                                                              dependent-destruction of
                       Encapsulated Film Resistors            minute current paths
Metallisation strips   Hybrid ICs:                            Joule heating-energy                    Open
                                                              dependent metallisation
                       Monolithic IC                          burnout

                       Multiple Finger Overlay Transistors
Field         Effect   LSI and Memory ICs employing           Surface inversion or gate       Operational degradation
Structures      and    nonconductive quartz or ceramic        threshold voltage shifts from
Nonconductive          package lids especially ultra-violet   ions deposited on surface
Lids                   EPROMS                                 from ESD
Piezoelectric          Crystal Oscillators                    Crystal fracture from           Operational degradation
Crystals                                                      mechanical forces when
                  Surface Acoustic Wave Devices               excessive voltage is applied
Closely    Spaced Surface Acoustic Wave Devices               Arc discharge melting and       Operational degradation
Electrodes                                                    fusing of electrode metal
                  Thin metal unpassivated,
                  unprotected semiconductors and

  Conductive materials are quickest at bleeding charge, the anti-static materials are slowest. In general,
  use of static dissipative materials is preferred, because charge dissipation occurs at a safe rate, neither
  too fast or too slow.

                                        Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                                129 of 136


Typical charge sources commonly encountered in a manufacturing facility are listed in Table 13. These
sources are essentially insulators and are typically synthetic materials. Electrostatic voltage levels
generated with these insulators can be extremely high since they are not readily distributed over the
entire surface of the substance or conducted to another contacting substance.

The conductivity of some insulating materials is increased by the absorption of moisture under high
humidity conditions on to the otherwise insulating surface. This creates a slightly conductive humid
layer which tends to distribute static charges over the material surface, thus somewhat reducing the
risk of ESD.

The generation of 15,000 Volts from common plastics in a typical manufacturing facility is usual.

The maximum useable humidity for the reduction of electrostatic charge levels is limited by two
principal factors:-

1) Operator comfort,

2) Avoidance of undesirable effects on components (such as corrosion).

Both equipment and operators can cause electrostatic voltages in excess of 10kV at low humidity.
Strict measures must be taken to prevent or reduce electrostatic charging. The following rules should,
therefore, be observed.


All ESD sensitive components should be handled at a relative humidity between 45 and 55%. If this is
not feasible, ionised air should be directed across the work area in order to prevent the accumulation of
electrostatic charge.

All work surfaces must be static dissipative, i.e. materials with a surface resistivity of 105 to 1010 Ohms
should be used. Bulk conductors are more constant than hygroscopic surface layers which depend on
the humidity of the air.

All ohmic objects, surfaces etc. must be connected to a common ground by means of a 1 Megohm

All personnel working in the area should also be connected to ground. This may be achieved most
effectively by means of an ohmic wrist strap touching the skin directly. For personnel safety reasons
the connection should be made by means of a 1 Megohm series resistor to limit current flow and to
slow the rate of discharge. Everybody is required to wear the wrist strap on arrival at the ESD
protected work area, in order to avoid electrostatic charge accumulations. A regular visual inspection
and electrical test is required to ensure that all wrist straps and connections are functioning correctly
prior to use.

All insulators in the work area must be replaced by ohmic conductors. This applies to work trays and
containers, bags, supports and all other materials for handling packaging and dispatch. Benches and
seats must also be conducting and grounded to prevent electrostatic charges, which are produced by
sliding on insulated benches or seats. Even if the operator is grounded, insulating objects may carry
sufficient charge to damage components by induction. If insulating objects must be used, ionising air
must be applied continuously over the work areas so as to neutralise the electrostatic charges.
Ionising equipment must be checked and cleaned at regular intervals.

                                  Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                            130 of 136

All tools and equipment within the protected work area must be grounded, including soldering irons and
tools to straighten the leads of components. Such tools should not possess insulated handles.

All plastic objects and foils generate static charges and must be kept out of the work area. This also
applies to adhesive tapes and similar products. The stripping of such tapes from the spool may
produce sufficient charge to damage components.

All rooms in which electronic components are handled, must possess a conducting floor or floormat. In
order to make maximum use of the effectiveness of such a floor, all users should wear conducting
shoes or heel straps in order to ensure good electrical contact with the floor. Heel straps must be
replaced every day. The use of non-antistatic floor polish and similar materials on the floor or
equipment is not recommended. Floors should be cleaned using damp cloths. Acrylic floors generate
especially high electrostatic charges.

All work areas should be monitored with a floating electrostatic voltmeter in order to identify regions
with high electrostatic charges. Certain types of conducting floors, containers and other materials
suffer from reduced conductivity due to surface wear and friction. The conductivity must be measured
at regular intervals.

Laboratory coats and other clothing made with nylon and other synthetic materials must not be worn.
Untreated cotton is a satisfactory choice. Crease proof clothing is also prohibited. The clothing should
not touch the parts. This applies to ties which can generate charges up to 3kV. Laboratory coats must
be cleaned and tested regularly.


Electrostatically sensitive components which have not been supplied in prescribed antistatic packaging
should be rejected without additional checks.

The components should be taken out of their package only when absolutely necessary, and then only
by a well grounded operator in an ESD protected work area.

The components should be touched only when necessary and only by the metal or ceramic case
before touching single leads with a grounded pair of tweezers or other grounded tool.

It is good practice to adopt a policy that all EEE components are potentially ESD sensitive. In this way,
rules are put in place within the manufacturing environment that remove possible incorrect handling
procedures due to operator error.

Prominent signs should be displayed in relevant areas around the manufacturer's facility to promote
awareness of ESD damage.

The repackaging of the components in their containers must be carried out in the same manner, in
which they were dispatched originally. The precautions described below must be strictly adhered to.


ESD sensitive components must be stored and transported in electrostatically secure containers, when
they are not in a work area protected against ESD. Such a container must have the following

a) Shielding against external electrical fields produced by electrostatically charged objects. The shield
is produced by means of an external conducting layer which encloses the contents completely. The
lower the resistance, the better the shield.

                                 Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                           131 of 136

b) The packaging material is conductive and cannot generate electrostatic charges. It is important that
this should also apply to the inner surface of the package.

The external leads of the components must all be shorted together by conducting material, so that
friction cannot generate electrostatic charges.

The store personnel must be instructed about problems with destructive electrostatic charges.

The most effective electrostatically secure containers are fabricated from metal layers and from plastic
materials impregnated with carbon. Antistatic plastic materials provide very limited and unreliable

All packages containing ESD sensitive parts must also be provided with a warning. Double packages
must show a warning label on the external surface of both packages.

Electrostatically secure containers must be packed using materials which are conductive or which are
treated with antistatic solutions.

All metal shelves, cabinets and lockers must be grounded.

                                 Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                           132 of 136


Due to legislative pressures in recent years, the electronics industry is being pushed into eliminating
lead from their products and manufacturing processes. As a result many manufacturers are now
moving towards pure tin electroplates and these can cause potentially damaging growths known as
tin whiskers.

Although tin whiskers have been known about for several decades, the move away from the use of
lead has recently increased the incidence of failure from tin whiskers and caused great concern
throughout the defence and aerospace industry.

Why are tin whiskers a cause for concern?

Electrical Short Circuits:
    • Permanent (if current < 10s of mA)
    • Intermittent (if current > 10s of mA)

Metal Vapour Arc in Vacuum:
   • Atmospheric pressure < ~150 torr, V> ~18V and I>10s of Amps, then whisker can vapourize
       into highly conductive plasma of tin ions.
   • Plasma can form arcs capable of carrying hundreds of Amps.
   • The arc is sustained by tin evaporated from the surrounding area

   • Interfere with sensitive optics
   • Cause shorts in areas remote from whisker origins

What can be done?

Reduction of Stress
       • Hot oil reflow / hot solder dip (preferably Sn/Pb solder)
       • High temperature anneal substrate and tin finish
       • Underplate with diffusion resistant barrier may delay onset.

Use of Physical Barriers to Insulate against Potential Shorts
        • Conformal coat or other insulating barriers
        • Increased spacing of surfaces of opposite polarity > 0.5 inches

Avoid pure tin if possible
It is apparent that supplier’s certification of part finishes and the prohibiting of lead free solders within
procurement specifications are no guarantee against receiving tin plated items.

For further Information:

NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Centre runs the
‘Tin Whisker Home Page’:


                                  Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                              133 of 136


Space projects are increasingly interested in using PEMs.
There are a number of reliability related issues with using COTS PEMs for space including:

Lot Conformance
Change Control
Radiation Hardness

There are a number of tests that can be performed to increase confidence in device reliability.
Some procurement agents believe that minimal screening is necessary and that over and above the
usual electrical testing requirements it is necessary to perform little more than radiographic
inspection and scanning acoustic microscopy (CSAM)
But there are other failure mechanisms and potential concerns.
If you need confidence approaching that which you might have from space qualified parts you’ll need
to look at performing:

DPA including Tg (Sample)
1st Electrical Test (100%)
Temperature Cycling (Sample)
Radiographic (100%)
CSAM (100%)
Electrical Test (100%)
Dynamic Burn-In (100%)
Electrical Test (100%)
Dynamic Life Test (Sample)
End Point Electrical Test(100%)
HAST (Sample)
Post HAST electrical Test (Sample)
Vibration (Sample)

Following an extensive cost/benefit analysis carried out by the NASA EEE Parts Assurance Group
(NEPAG) it can be asserted that whilst COTS devices can be procured very cheaply, the ultimate
cost of ‘upgrading’ commercial parts to establish confidence approaching that which you might have
from space qualified parts is greater that the cost of buying inherently space level parts.

Further information is available on the NEPAG Website:


An excellent paper giving details of NEPAG cost model is ‘An Evolving Approach to Maximizing
Space Parts Assurance Resources’ by Mike Sampson. This was presented at ESCCON 2002 and is
available to ESCIES registered users at:


                                Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                        134 of 136


If an EEE component has exceeded its shelf life a relifing procedure can be used validate an
extension to life.

Relifeing Procedure:
A set of tests performed in order to verify that the initial quality and reliability levels have not been
affected by time.

Relifing is not usually systematically applied to shelf life components when they reach expiry date. It
is initiated whenever an intended supply arises from a batch in question at a post expiry date.

The shelf life and the time that a EEE component can be used after relifing is detailed in a number of
‘Relifing Rules’ published by a number of organisations in the space industry such as:

ESA – PSS 01 60
Astrium – CDSP-FD012-PRE
CNES – QFT-IN-0110MM-5210-02

None of these documents are backed up their figures and rules with consistent approach and

Astrium under contract from CNES and ESA have updated the ESA rules taking into account field-
return and failure mechanism analysis and have established a new storage and de-storage
procedure that is to be included in ECSS format.

The number of samples required for relifing is usually defined in the specification and in is usually
100% or by AQL sample according to test and component type.

Specifications and methods used during relifing should be the same as those implemented at the
initial procurement, except the most recent update issues should be applied.

Required test vary from between specifications and component type but typically they might be:

Electrical Parameters
External Visual Inspection

The Astrium Study

In addition to examining historical relife test data held by Astrium, batches of stored devices were
subjected to life 3000hr life test in order to understand some potential effects of long term storage
(10 years) on reliability.

Part types tested:
Resistors: Metal Film and Power Wire-wound
Capacitors: Ceramic and Solid Tantalum
Transistors: Signal and Power Bipolar
Diodes: Zener
Relays: Non-Latching

None of these parts exhibited any clear reliability concern.

                                 Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                           135 of 136

Astrium summarized their finding as follows:

1) No reliability issue is to be feared on relifed parts when proper storage conditions are in place. No
clear effect of storage duration was found on a relifed test yield.

2) Recommendation to allow a longer period of time before it becomes necessary to relife. This
period of time is a function of the device type and storage class.

3) Relifeing tests are considered necessary to sort out the low percentage of potentially weak parts.

The results form the basis for a new ESCC specification that is currently in preparation. This will
allow an extended period of storage time. This will give users a better economical output keeping all
reliability guaranties for these parts. Statistical data and reliability data back up this documentation.

Further information is available for ESCIES registered users at:


                                 Document No: 141.001/32640611.doc                           136 of 136

To top