iNEMI Connector Reliability Test Recommendations Project

Presenter: Vince Pascucci, TE Connectivity

December 18, 2019

Agenda

• Background

• Introduction

• Phase 1 Review

• Phase 2 Review

• Project Current State

• Potential Benefits of the Proposed Framework

• Summary of Gaps

• Conclusions

2

Background

• One of the issues identified by the 2013 iNEMI connector survey

was that test methods for socket reliability (such as temperature

cycling, shock and failure analysis) are different across

socket/connector manufacturers

• Another issue was the associated criterion for 'passing' is not

consistent.

• An interest identified by the survey was Standard Reliability

Qualification, the need to drive standard reliability test conditions

and equipment capabilities across the industry

Background

Two phases of work have been completed to begin the

process of addressing these issues

Phase 1 and 2 Participants

(Phase 2) (Phase 1) (Phase 2) (Phase 1, 2)

(Phase 2) (Phase 1) (Phase 1) (Phase 1, 2) (Phase 1)

(Phase 2) (Phase 1) (Phase 1, 2) (Phase 2)

Introduction

• The increasing number of system interconnections and increasingly

diverse range of applications and use conditions present challenges for

aligning connector reliability requirements between Connector Suppliers

and Original Equipment Manufacturers.

5

1985 Corvette fuel injection

wiring harness

More than one connector

Since Late 20th

Century

• More Connectors in

Existing Devices

• More Devices

• Higher Densities ►

Smaller Size ►

Lower Force1980 Corvette carburetor

wiring “harness”

One connector

Increased Accuracy of Reliability Estimates is Necessary to:

• Ensure connectors are still reliable

• Avoid cost of excessive reliability

Introduction

The existing connector reliability testing standards do not

address the full range of connector applications nor have the

necessary detailed, defined test conditions and sequences.

6

E.g. It is estimated 1 watt out of every 50 watts produced

globally is used in data information centers

Large amounts of

airflow to remove

waste heat

Locations often

have high pollutant

gas and dust levels

Phase 1

7

Company Name* Member Role

IEEC Binghamton Univ. Benson Chan Team Member

Dell Phil Conde Team Member

Rosenberger Christian Dandl Team Member

Intel Ife Hsu Team Member

Lotes Bob Martinson Team Member

TE Connectivity Vince Pascucci Chair

Lucent-Alcatel / Nokia Anne Ryan Team Member

Phase 1 Overview

The iNEMI Phase I project1

• Surveyed connector manufacturers’ and users’

reliability concerns

• Proposed a standardized connector reliability test

protocol

• Proposed a standard listing of Levels of Interconnect

• Proposed the use of the test protocol and levels of

interconnect in combination as a framework for

developing standardized reliability tests

8

1 SMTAI 2016, pp 518-528.

A recommended testing protocol was developed through review of existing

industry standards

Basis of Review

• Use of defined application classes

• Use of specified test conditions in a defined test sequence

• Physics-of-failure approach for Reliability- Subjecting individual test groups to multiple stresses allowing interaction of potential degradation mechanismswhich cause contact resistance failures

• Guidance on performance data evaluation and lifetime simulated

9

Specification / Standard

Criteria EIA 364F 1 EAI 364-1000 2 ISO/TR 29016 3 IEC 61586-TS 4

Application Classes Y Y Y N

Specified Test Conditions Y Y N N

Physics-of-Failure Approach for Reliability

N Y N Y

Guidance on Performance Data Interpretation

N N N Y

Phase 1 – Standardized Test Protocol

1. EIA 364F: Electrical Connector/Socket Test Procedures Including Environmental Classifications

2. EIA 364-1000: Environmental test methodology for assessing the performance of electrical

connectors and sockets in controlled environments

3. ISO/IEC TR 29106: Introduction to MICE environmental classification

4. IEC 61586-TS: Estimation of the reliability of electrical connectors

Standardize List Adopted

• Tier 1: On-Chip

• Tier 2: Chip-to-Package

• Tier 3: Package-to-Board/PCB

Mount

• Tier 4: Board-to-Board*

• Tier 5: Input-Output / Chassis-to-

Chassis

• Tier 6: Intersystem Cabling

• Tier 7: Long Haul

Telecom/Datacom

Phase 1 – Standardized Levels of Interconnect

*Tier 4 modified to Board-to-Board, Board-to-Subassembly, Subassembly-Subassembly in

Phase 2

In General: Interconnect level defines stress types and reliability requirements

In General: As Level ▲, required reliability ▼, but Range of Stresses ▲

Industry Survey: Used to create a standardized levels of interconnect list

Framework Objective: Define test protocols specific to connector relevant levels

Phase 1 - Proposed Framework Basis

11

Connector Tier

Degradation Mechanism/Stress

Stress

Level

Test Conditions Reference

Standard(s)

1 Low Temp/ duration x

2 Med Temp/duration y

3 High Temp/ duration z

Stress Level Use Conditions Use Case Descriptor

1 Controlled Indoor

2 Uncontrolled Indoor

3 Outdoor

Increasing

severity

Ln

K

1/Temperature

Phase 2

12

Company Name* Member Role

Amphenol ICC Jeffrey Toran, Bob Druckenmiller Team Members

Dell Phil Conde, Vasu Vasudevan Team Members

DOW Michael Lipschutz Team Member

Keysight Jyoti Gupta Co-Chair

Keysight Yen-Han Oon Team Member

Nokia Holly-Dee Rubin Co-Chair

TE Connectivity Vince Pascucci Team Member

Wistron Cindy Han, Seven Cheng Team Members

Keysight Shane Kirkbride Former Chair

CALCE Carlos Morillo Former Co-Chair

Keysight Li-Siah Tai Former team member

*company with which member was associated at

time of participation

Phase 2 Overiew

The iNEMI Phase II project2

• Focused on Tier 4 (Board-to-Board / Board-Subassembly / Subassembly-

to-Subassembly) applications

• Populated the Phase 1 test framework with defined stress levels and

associated test conditions to evaluate the expected degradation of Tier 4

connectors in a defined set of application classes.

• Test sequences are based on EIA 364-1000B “Environmental test

methodology for assessing the performance of electrical connectors and

sockets in controlled environments”

• Expanded range of environments in 364-1000B and proposed additional

stresses such as dust exposure

13

2 IEEE/Holm 2019, pp 324-334

Test Sequence Recommendations

Recommended additions are highlighted

Test Order

Tests Required for All Connectors

Tests for Connectors

w/Noble Metal Finish

Tests for Connectors with

Tin Plate (optional for

<0.38 um Gold plate)

Tests for Connectors with surface

treatment or short wipe length (<0.127mm)

Tests for Connectors with more than 50

mate/unmate cycles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1Contact Resistance Contact Resistance Contact Resistance Contact Resistance

Contact Resistance Contact Resistance

Dielectric Withstanding Voltage

2

Mate/Unmate Cycles (preconditioning)

Mate/Unmate Cycles (preconditioning)

Mate/Unmate Cycles (preconditioning)

Mate/Unmate Cycles (preconditioning)

Mate/Unmate Cycles (preconditioning)

Mate/Unmate Cycles (preconditioning) Contact Resistance

3

Temperature LifeDust (preconditioning)

Temperature Life (preconditioning)

Thermal Shock (preconditioning)

Thermal Shock (preconditioning) Dust Mate/Unmate Cycles

4Contact Resistance Thermal Shock

Dust (preconditioning)

Temperature Life (preconditioning)

Temperature Life (preconditioning) Contact Resistance Contact Resistance

5 Reseating (mate/unmate) Contact Resistance Vibration Contact Resistance

Contact Resistance

Thermal Cycling (disturbance)

Dielectric Withstanding Voltage

6Contact Resistance

Temp/Humidity Cycling Mechanical Shock Mixed Flowing Gas Thermal Cycling Contact Resistance

7Contact Resistance Contact Resistance Contact Resistance

Contact Resistance

Reseating (mate/unmate)

8Reseating (mate/unmate)

Thermal Cycling (disturbance)

Reseating (mate/unmate) Contact Resistance

9Contact Resistance Contact Resistance

Contact Resistance

10Reseating (mate/unmate)

11 Contact Resistance14

E.g. Thermal Shock (pg 1 of 2)

Stress Levels: Stress levels 1, 2 and 3 are ranges expected inclusive of

shipping and normal operation. See next slide for associated recommended

test levels

Recommended Tests: Duration at temperature according to specimen

mass per EIA 364-32

Stress

LevelTemperatures Use Case

1 -55 °C to +85 °CPortable equipment; equipment mounted in

weather protected & movable enclosure;

Equipment mounted near a door/window or

other that when opened, would expose the

equipment to air of significantly different

temperature. Equipment mounted in non-

weather protected environment.

2 -65 °C to +105 °C

3 -65 °C to +125 °C

4

More severe environments requiring harsher

testing than those

above.

15

E.g. Thermal Shock (pg 2 of 2)

Recommended Test conditions (Testing per requirements of EIA 364-32)

i. Recommended test conditions for Test Group 2 reflecting shipping,

storage and normal operation temperature extremes

If thermal shock is expected to occur during operation:

• Appropriate test condition recommendations still need to be developed,

most likely with reduced ΔT but increased number of cycles

• In the interim, recommend test conditions in ii below

ii. Recommended test conditions for Test Groups 4 and 5 (preconditioning

intended to reflect shipping and storage only)

Stress

Level

Test

conditionComment

1 I -55 °C to + 85 °C temperature range, minimum 5 cycles

2 II -65 °C to +105 °C temperature range, minimum 5 cycles

3 III -65 °C to + 125 °C temperature range, minimum 5 cycles

4 To be defined in the referenced connector specification,

customer specification or industry association specification

16

17

Level

Op.

Temp.

Application

Type

Operating hrs

≤8,760

Operating hrs

>8,760 to 87,600

1 ≤ 30 oC

Typical

61 hrs, 60 oC 115 hr, 60 oCCritical

2

31 oC

to

55 oC

Typical

220 hrs, 70 oC

51 hrs, 80 oC

421 hrs, 70 oC

96 hrs, 80 oC

Critical

787 hrs, 70 oC

177 hrs, 80 oC

1527 hrs, 70 oC

337 hrs, 80 oC

3

56 oC

to

80 oC

Typical

577 hrs, 90 oC

142 hrs, 100 oC

1115 hrs, 90 oC

269 hrs, 100 oC

Critical

1920 hrs, 90 oC

456 hrs, 100 oC

3767 hrs, 90 oC

879 hrs, 100 oC

4

81 oC

to

105 oC

Typical

687 hrs, 115 oC

352 hrs, 120 oC

1331 hrs, 115 oC

676 hrs, 120 oC

Critical

2117 hrs, 115 oC

1069 hrs, 120 oC

4159 hrs, 115 oC

2082 hrs, 120 oC

E.g. Temperature Life / Heat Age

• Stress relaxation accelerated by elevated temp.

• Reduction in normal force and contact stability

• Issue: Product temperature ratings limit test

temperatures resulting in long test times to

replicate stress relaxation for lifetimes beyond

5 years

Most relaxation occurs early

Recommendations:

• 2 Life Classes• ≤ 8,760 (1 yr.) Operating Hours

• > 8,760 Op. Hr. – Basis: 17,520

Op. Hr. (2 yr. continuous) life

• Two Application Classes• Typical: Max Op. Temp. at 67th

percentile of range

• Critical: Op. at Max. of Range

Project Current State

18

Potential Benefits of the Proposed Framework

19

The Framework can Provide • A standard set of application classes with standard test

conditions for each application class

• A standard set of test sequences which better replicate the

performance of connectors subjected to multiple potentially

interacting stresses

This may then allow:• Connector manufactures can select application classes to which

they will qualify a specific product and test to industry standard

conditions for those classes

• Connector users will be better able to assess the applicability of

a given connector to their specific application conditions and

performance requirements

Summary of Gaps

• Proposed Framework/Methodology proof-of-concept

• Temperature Life recommendations for other contact alloys

• Fine dust particle effects

• Corrosive dust guidance

• Operational thermal shock test conditions and guidance

• Guidance for use of in-situ low-level contact resistance measurements during thermal shock

• Guidance/comments re consideration of Temperature Coefficient ofResistance when defining the resistance requirement/failure criteria

• Review/Update Mixed Flowing Gas test conditions & test times, acceleration factors, and test parameter control

• Recommendations for performing specialty tests

• Test conditions for other connector tiers

20

Conclusions

• With some modifications, the test sequences and report elements

recommended in EIA 364-1000:

• Can be extended for connectors intended for use in a broader

range of applications including uncontrolled environments

• Can provide a framework to standardize connector performance

evaluation within defined classes use conditions thus allowing a

more efficient and effective industry approach to connector

testing and selection

• In many cases, use condition stress levels and associated test

conditions can be based on existing test standards.

• There are gaps to address, especially in uncontrolled environments,

which should guide additional activities.

21

For further information contact:

Grace O’Malleyemail: gomalley@inemi.org

22

Join us at APEX 2020

iNEMI Sessions

@ the Intersection of International Electronics Manufacturing

Wednesday, February 5,

1.30-5.00pm

Technology Forum on PCB Challenges and Needs

for Emerging Applications

1.30 – 3.00pm: Panel + Q&A: Application Driving Needs

3.30 – 5.00pm: Panel + Q&A: Technology Challenges

Input from OEMs, EMS, Material Suppliers, Fabricators

23