By Topic

Correlation Between Laboratory Test & Field Part Failure Rates

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$33 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

1 Author(s)
Joji Yasuda ; Senior Assistant to General Manager of Reliability and Quality Control Division; Nippon Electric Co., Ltd.: Tokyo, Japan.

In Japan, failure rates for non high-reliability electronic parts, obtained from laboratory tests, are generally about ten times those obtained in the field. The reasons for this difference have been analysed by using part failure-rate data collected from major part suppliers, equipment manufacturers, and public users in Japan. This paper numerically analyses transistor data. The two main causes of the difference between laboratory and field failure rates are 1) the difference in failure criteria between them and 2) unreasonable use of the constant failure rate without actually determining the real failure rate. By using the conversion factors, it is possible to predict electronic equipment MTBF by using laboratory failure rates with appropriate application factors pertaining to whether the units are in use on a ship board, airborne, etc. basis. Failure rates for the electronic parts with unsatisfactorily long burn-in time lapse must be treated as carefully as the rate data published in the AIST data.

Published in:

IEEE Transactions on Reliability  (Volume:R-26 ,  Issue: 2 )