Environmental Stress Screening Approach Based on MIL-HDBK-

344A Military Standard

H. Esat. Acar, ASELSAN Inc.
N. Can Yilmaz, ASELSAN Inc.
I. Feriha Kilic, ASELSAN Inc.

Key Words: Environmental Stress Screening, Failure Rate, MTBF, Random Vibration, Temperature Cycling

ABSTRACT Assembly : A number of parts joined together to perform a

This paper proposes to use MIL-HDBK-344A for
Environmental Stress Screening instead of MIL-HDBK-2164.
When determining ESS parameters which are related to random
vibration (duration in minutes and level in GRMS) and to
temperature cycling (number of cycles and temperature rate of
change in ºC/min.) for various complex systems/equipments
based on MIL-HBDK-344A military standard, the outcome
reveals as many latent defects as possible in the factory, and
consumes less product useful life. This methodology is
described by steps with some theoritical assumptions. The study
is intended to be used as a guide to make MIL-HDBK-344A
easier to implement in practice for electronic systems /
equipments.
1 INTRODUCTION
This section outlines the procedure for determining random
vibration and temperature cycling parameters to conduct an
efficient factory ESS program for electronic equipments. The
procedure steps are prepared in accordance with MIL-HDBK-
344 A and the approach behind the whole document reflects the
procedures in MIL-HDBK-344 A.
Random vibration parameters which are calculated in
accordance with the following procedure steps are Acceleration
Level in GRMS and Duration in minutes. Temperature cycling
parameters which are calculated in accordance with the
following procedure steps are Number of cycles and
Temperature rate of change of chamber in ºC/min.
2 DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS
2.1 Definitions
Environmental Stress Screening (ESS) : ESS is a process
or series of processes in which environmental stimuli, such as
rapid thermal cycling and random vibration, are applied to
electronic items in order to precipitate latent defects to early
failure. An equally important an inseparable aspect of the
screening process is the testing which is done as part of the
screen, so as to detect and properly identify the defects which
have been precipitated to failure. ESS is the vehicle by which
latent defects are accelerated to early failure in the factory.
specific function and capable of disassembly, for example a
printed circuit board.
Baseline Stress : Factory ESS stress levels consistent with
R&M 2000 guidelines.
Chamber : Enclosure in which system / equipment is
placed in order to apply stress to it.
Defect Density (D) : Average number of latent defects per
item.
Detection Efficiency (DE) : A measure of the capability of
detecting a patent defect.
     The number of failures experienced or
expected for a device divided by the total equipment operating
time. For constant failure rate items, i.e. exponentially
distributed failures, the failure rate is the numerical inverse of
the mean time between failures (MTBF).
Latent Defect : An inherent or induced weakness, not
detectable by ordinary means, which will either be precipitated
to early failure under environmental stress screening conditions
or eventually fail in the intended use environment.
Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF) : The mean time
expected between failures, typically measured in hours. MTBF
is a statistical value and is meant to be the mean over a long
period of time and large number of units. For constant failure
rate systems, MTBF is the inverse of the failure rate. If failure
rate is in failures/million hours, then MTBF = 1,000,000 /
Failure Rate for components with exponential distributions.
Technically MTBF should be used only in reference to
repairable items.
Part : Any identifiable item within the product which can
be removed or repaired (e.g., discrete semiconductor, resistor,
IC, solder joint, connector).
Patent Defect : An inherent or induced weakness which
can be detected by inspection, functional test, or other defined
means.
Precipitation : The process of transforming a latent defect
into a patent defect through the application of stress screens.
Precipitation Efficiency (PE) : A measure of the capability
of a screen to precipitate latent defects to failure.
Screen Parameters : Parameters which relate to screening
strength (e.g., vibration G-levels, temperature rate of change

       

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Canberra. Downloaded on October 05,2020 at 10:04:05 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
and time duration). determine DREMAINING follows.
Screening Strength (SS) : The probability that a specific DFIELD (t )
screen will precipitate a latent defect to failure and detect it by FRLATENT (2.2)
t
test, given that a latent defect susceptible to the screen is
present. It is the product of precipitation efficiency and where t is the period over which MTBF is to be measured and
detection efficiency. DFIELD is the number of field failures due to latent defects
Stress Adjustment Factor (SAF) : The ratio of the incoming occuring during the interval t.
defect density at the anticipated field stress level to the DFIELD (t ) DREMAINING u SS FIELD (t ) (2.3)
incoming defect density at the baseline stress level.
where SSFIELD (t) is the equivalent screening strength of the field
Stress Screening : The process of applying mechanical,
environment for a period t.
electical and/or thermal stresses to an equipment item for the
purpose of precipitating latent part and workmanship defects to SS FIELD (t ) 1  e  k ˜t (2.4)
early failure. where k is the field precipitation rate (If the field application
System / Equipment : A group of units interconnected or stresses are not known, a suitable average value can be used.
assembled to perform some overall electronic function. Typical values are 1/500 to 1/2000).
2.2 Acronyms Substituting (2.3) and (2.4) into (2.2) gives :

D Defect Density (1  e  k ˜t )
FRLATENT DREMAINING ˜ (2.5)
DE Detection Efficiency t
DI Damage Index Solving for DREMAINING yields :
ESS Environmental Stress Screening
FRLATENT ˜ t
FR Failure Rate DREMAINING (2.6)
IC Integrated Circuit (1  e  k ˜t )
k Stress Constant In this expression DREMAINING (the number of defects
MTBF Mean Time Between Failures remaining after factory screening), t and k are all defined with
PE Precipitation Efficiency respect to the field stress. It is thus necessary to modify this
PPM Parts Per Million expression by the stress adjustment factor (SAF) to determine
PWA Printed Wiring Assembly the remaining defects at factory stress.
RMS Root Mean Square
FRLATENT ˜ t
RV Random Vibration DREMAINING (2.7)
SAF Stress Adjustment Factor SAF ˜ (1  e  k ˜t )
SM Safety Margin This expression is applicable to both RV and TC sensitive
SS Screening Strength defect populations. Solving for FRLATENT yields :
t Stress Duration
TC Temperature Cycling DREMAINING ˜ SAF ˜ (1  e  k ˜t )
FRLATENT (2.8)
t
3 METHODOLOGY
Substituting (2.8) into (2.1) and solving for DREMAINING gives :
The field reliability is determined by the latent defects § · § 1 ·
1 1
remaining at the time of shipment and the existence of non- t ˜¨  ¸¸ ˜ ¨ ¸
¨ MTBF
screenable defects that result in a constant failure rate. The DREMAINING d © REQUIRED MTBFINHERENT ¹ © SM ¹ (2.9)
SAF ˜ (1  e  k ˜t )
objective is to optimize the cost of reducing the latent defect
population to an acceptable level defined as that which achieves Having determined the maximum allowable remaining
the required field reliability. defects, the required factory screening strength (SSESS) is
The first step is to determine the maximum allowable determined from the estimated defects by solving the equation:
remaining latent defects that allow the required reliability to be DREMOVED
achieved. Given the required MTBF and inherent MTBF of the SS ESS (2.10)
DIN
equipment by reliability prediction and using a suitable design
safety margin (SM) to allow for estimation errors (typically 1.5 where
to 2.0), the permissible failure rate (FR) due to latent defects is DREMOVED = DIN – DREMAINING (2.11)
calculated using the following expression : Substituting (2.11) into (2.10) gives :
§ · 1
FRLATENT d ¨
1

1
¸¸ ˜ (2.1) DIN  DREMAINING
¨ MTBF MTBFINHERENT SS ESS (2.12)
© REQUIRED ¹ SM DIN
To determine the maximum number of defects permissible
Knowing the required factory screening strength (SSESS),
at the time of shipment, it is necessary to determine the
the next step is to optimize the screen selection and placement.
relationship between failure rate and remaining defects
The screening strength is characterized by a precipitation term
DREMAINING. The derivation of the equation to be used to

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Canberra. Downloaded on October 05,2020 at 10:04:05 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
and a detection term and determines the fraction of existing s 0.0046 ˜ G1.71 (2.18)
flaws that are removed by ESS. The precipitation and detection where G = Acceleration Level in GRMS .
terms are estimated separately and it is their product that Substituting (2.17) into (2.16) gives the precipitation
determines the screening strength. That is : efficiency for the latent defects (PETC) sensitive to temperature
SS ESS PE ˜ DE (2.13) cycling :
0.6 3
where PE stands for “precipitation efficiency” and DE stands 0.0017 ˜ 'T  0.6 ˜ ª¬ln RATE  2.718 º¼ ˜t
PETC 1 e (2.19)
for “detection efficiency”.
Precipitation is defined as the conversion of flaws with where t = Number of cycles .
some residual strength (latent defect) into a flaw with no Substituting (2.18) into (2.16) gives the precipitation
strength (patent defect) – for example the propagation of a crack efficiency for the latent defects (PERV) sensitive to random
through a wire until the wire is broken. The application of stress vibration :
precipitates a certain fraction of the existing flaws. This .
 = 1   , . . (2.20)
fraction is assumed to be constant for a specified stress level
where t = Duration in minutes .
and duration.
The final step is to solve the righthand side of the inequality
Precipitation by itself does not ensure that flaws can be
in (2.15) and to choose from various temperature cycling pairs
detected. In many instances a concurrent stress may be required
(RATE and t) and random vibration pairs (G and t) providing
to detect and isolate the failure. For example, a broken wire
the inequality in (2.15). After choosing the pairs, the inequality
may make intermittent contact at low, ambient stresses. Also,
in (2.15) is resolved by using the pairs selected to validate that
depending upon the function affected, the defect may only
ESS profile chosen is adequate to meet the field reliability
cause degraded performance. Either condition could require
requirement.
extended testing and may require concurrent stress. The
After optimizing the screen selection and placement
capability of detecting a patent defect is measured by the
(selecting temperature rate of change of chamber in ºC/min
detection efficiency.
(RATE) and number of cycles (t) for temperature cycling and
The removal of a potential defect or flaw requires the flaw
acceleration Level in GRMS and duration in minutes (t) for
to be precipitated and subsequently detected and removed. The
random vibration), it is necessary to ensure that the ESS is not
detection efficiency is defined as the capability of detecting,
too stressful and does not consume too much of the useful life.
isolating and removing the defect once it has precipitated. It is
This is determined by calculating the damage index (DI) from
the product of the following factors and considerations :
the equation :
x Probability of observing functional and parametric defects
x Necessity for concurrent stress DI N ˜SB (2.21)
x Probability of isolating and then removing the defect where N = Stress duration, S = Stress level, B = Fatigue
without creating an additional defect(s) exponent.
x Substituting (2.13) into (2.12) and solving for DREMAINING The damage index should be calculated for both ESS and
gives: useful life.
DREMAINING DIN ˜ (1  PE ˜ DE ) (2.14) For Temperature Cycling (TC) :
N = number of cycles
Substituting (2.14) into (2.9) and solving for PE gives :
S = temperature range in ºC
§ § 1 1 · § 1 · ·¸
¨ t ˜¨  ¸˜¨ ¸ B = 2.5 (thermal fatigue exponent for solder)
¨ ¨ MTBF MTBF ¸ © SM ¹¸
˜ ¨1  © ¹
1 REQUIRED INHERENT For Random Vibration (RV) :
PE t ¸ (2.15)
DE ¨ SAF ˜ (1  e  k ˜t ) ˜ DIN ¸ N = duration of vibration in minutes
¨¨ ¸¸ S = GRMS vibration level
© ¹
B = 6.4 (vibration fatigue exponent for solder)
Precipitation efficiency (PE) is expressed as a function of
stress duration and stress constant. DI ESS
% of useful life consumed by ESS = (2.22)
DI LIFE
PE 1  e  s ˜t (2.16)
where t is the stress duration in minutes, cycles, etc. and s is a 3.1 A Practical Example of ESS Profiles for an IC:
stress constant determined for each type of stress according to STEP 1 : Estimating Incoming Defect Density (DIN)
the following formulae : The initial number of defects at baseline stress (DIN) was
For Temperature Cycling (TC) : taken from Table 5.1 of MIL-HDBK-344A.
0.6 3
s 0.0017 ˜ 'T  0.6 ˜ ª¬ ln RATE  2.718 º¼ (2.17) DIN = 209,7 PPM (For Quality Level B)
MAX - TMIN in ºC (Operating temperature range of STEP 2 : Determining Stress Adjustment Factor (SAF)
the system / equipment), RATE = Temperature rate of change Airborne Rotary Winged (ARW) was considered as the
of chamber in ºC/min . anticipated operating environment and THE field stress defect
For Random Vibration (RV) : density vector was taken from Table 5.2 of MIL-HDBK-344A.

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Canberra. Downloaded on October 05,2020 at 10:04:05 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 DFIELD = 96,4 PPM (For Quality Level B) Table 1 – IC ESS Parameters
DFIELD 209.7
SAF 2,175 Initial Defect (DIN) (PPM)
DIN
Required MTBF (Hours) 1000000
STEP 3 : Determining The Detection Efficiency (DE)
Inherent MTBF (Hours) 1008000
Three factors and their respective values for estimating the
detection efficiency (DE) : Detection Efficiency (DE) 1
x Functional and Parametric Testing: 1.0 Safety Margin (SM) 1.75
x Testing Performed Concurrently with Stress: 1.0 Precipitation Efficiency (PE) 0.8
x The Ability to Observe and Isolate the Defect And the
Probability of Successfully Removing the Defect without STEP 5 : Validating ESS (RV and TC) Parameters
Introducing Another: 1.0 0.0017 ˜ 'T  0.6
0.6 3
˜ ¬ªln RATE  2.718 ¼º ˜t
DE 1.0 ˜1.0 ˜1.0 PETC 1 e (2.19)
DE = 1 (This value indicates that all latent defects are  !"#$ ! min and t = 5, PETC = 0.88
detectable)  
STEP 4 : Calculating ESS (RV and TC) Parameters 1.71

The values which were used to calculate the righthand side PERV 1  e 0.0046˜G ˜t
(2.20)
of the inequality in (2.15) : For : G = 6 GRMS and t = 21 minutes, PERV = 0.87  
x DE from STEP 3 STEP 6 : Life Calculations
x DIN from STEP 1 For Temperature Cycling :
x SAF from STEP 2
x t = 19847 hours (For newly designed systems, the maturity DI LIFE N ˜SB (2.21)
of the production process takes approximately 2 years. where N = 4000 (=8000 FH / 2 FH) (8000 FH : Useful life
During this period, the field MTBF should be measured in assumption, 2 FH : This is the mean flight time assumption.)
order to optimize the ESS levels.) S = 95 ºC (This is the temperature range assumption to which
x k = 0.00125 (The mean value of the typical range) the equipment is exposed for each flight.)
x SM = 1.75 (The mean value of the typical range) DI LIFE 4000 ˜ 952.5 351859275.8476
x MTBFREQUIRED : 10^6 hours (Failure rate was aasumed to
DI ESS N ˜SB (2.21)
be 1 Fpmh for the IC)
x MTBFINHERENT : 1008000 hours (Obtained from IC N=5, B=2.5, S=95 DI ESS 439824.0948
Reliability Prediction Analysis).
If the PE is equal to zero or a negative value, it means that % of useful life consumed by ESS = DI ESS (2.22)
DI LIFE
no ESS is required which is unrealistic. On the other hand, if
the PE is equal to or greater than 1, it means that over ESS is DI ESS 439824.0948
0.125%
required which is also unrealistic. So, theoretically the proper DI LIFE 351859275.8476036
range for the PE is between 0 and 1. But for some inherent and For Random Vibration :
required MTBF pairs, the PE can become less than zero or
greater than one which is theoretically impossible. We also DI LIFE N ˜SB (2.21)
limited the PE value between 0.3 and 0.95, since we wanted the where N = 480000 (=8000 FH x 60 min.) (8000 FH : Useful
equipment to expose good amount of ESS even if the PE is life assumption.) S = 2 GRMS (This value is calculated using the
between 0 and 0.3. Also we did not want the equipment to vibration spectrum graph in MIL-STD-810G Figure 514.6D-3
expose over ESS which consumes the considerable portion of Category 14 – Helicopter Vibration Exposure – Instrument
the useful life when the PE is between 0.95 and 1. Panel.)
§ § 1 1 · § 1 ··
¨ t ˜ ¨¨  ˜
¸¸ ¨ ¸¸ (2.15) DI LIFE 480000 ˜ 26.4 40535283.01894333
PE t
1 ¨
˜ 1 © MTBFREQUIRED MTBFINHERENT ¹ © SM ¹¸
DE ¨¨ SAF ˜ (1  e  k ˜t ) ˜ DIN ¸
¸ DI LIFE N ˜SB (2.21)
¨ ¸
© ¹
N=21, B=6.4, S=6 DI ESS 2006260.382
 
% of useful life consumed by ESS = DI ESS (2.22)
Table 1 summarizes the ESS parameters. We tried to DI LIFE
choose the temperature cycling and random vibration pairs
DI ESS 2006260.382
taking into account that % of equipment life consumed by ESS 5%
DI LIFE 40535283.01894333
is less than 10% as a common practice. We did not choose the
pairs which meet the PE values but may result in insufficient CONCLUSION
ESS.
In this paper, the procedure for determining random
vibration and thermal cycling paremeters is described under the

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Canberra. Downloaded on October 05,2020 at 10:04:05 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
guidance of the MIL-HDBK-344A military standard to perform
an effective factory ESS program for electronic systems /
equipments. In the classical ESS approach (MIL-HDBK-2164)
the same type of profile is applied to all the systems /
equipments, but through this approach different ESS profiles
can be applied to different systems / equipments based on the
complexity of the equipment. ESS parameters determined by
the method in this paper can be used at the begining of the
factory ESS tests, but should be revised as required based on
test results and field reliability data.
REFERENCES
1. Department of Defence, USA, (1993), Military Handbook,
MIL-HDBK-344A, Environmental Stress Screening (ESS)
of Electronic Equipment.
2. Department of Defence, USA, (1995), Military Handbook,
MIL-HDBK-217F Notice 2, Reliability Prediction of
Electronic Equipment.
BIOGRAPHIES
Hasan Esat ACAR
Flight Safety Engineering Department - Avionic Systems
Design Directorate
ASELSAN Inc., Microelectronics, Guidance and Electro-
Optics Business Sector
Balikhisar Mahallesi Koca Seyit Onbasi Caddesi No:1 Akyurt /
ANKARA / TURKEY
e-mail: heacar@aselsan.com.tr
H. Esat ACAR graduated from Bogazici University, Istanbul in
1998 with a degree in Electrical and Electronics Engineering.
He has worked for Quality Department for two years and has
been working for Flight Safety Engineering Department since
2002 as a Reliability and Maintainability (R&M) Lead
Engineer in ASELSAN Inc.
'*+;<!*>?JZ$[
Flight Safety Engineering Department - Avionic Systems
Design Directorate
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Canberra. Downloaded on October 05,2020 at 10:04:05 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
ASELSAN Inc., Microelectronics, Guidance and Electro-
Optics Business Sector
Balikhisar Mahallesi Koca Seyit Onbasi Caddesi No:1 Akyurt /
ANKARA / TURKEY
e-mail: ncyilmaz@aselsan.com.tr
'!*>?JZ$[ received her \]_`{|}+|~>€~€€
of Technology Electrical and Electronics Engineering
Department in 2017. Currently she is doing her master degree
in Electronics and Communication Engineering Department at
Istanbul ‚>~‚*; ƒ>~„~€†" }€*>‡;  Also, Z ?JZ$[
has been working in ASELSAN Inc, Flight Safety Engineering
Department as a System Reliability Engineer since 2017. She
is performing Reliability, Maintainability, Testability,
Availability, and FMEA Analysis according to military
standards. Besides, she carries out technical duties for the
Avionics and Electro-Optic projects in her company.
Ipek Feriha KILIC
Flight Safety Engineering Department - Avionic Systems
Design Directorate
ASELSAN Inc., Microelectronics, Guidance and Electro-
Optics Business Sector
Balikhisar Mahallesi Koca Seyit Onbasi Caddesi No:1 Akyurt /
ANKARA / TURKEY
e-mail: ifkilic@aselsan.com.tr
I. Feriha KILIC graduated from TOBB University of
Economics and Technology in 2016 with a degree in
Electrical&Electronical Engineering Department. Ms. KILIC
has been working for the ASELSAN INC in Flight Safety
Engineering Department as a Reliability and Maintainability,
Testability (RMT) Engineer since 2016. She is performing
Reliability, Maintainability, Testability, Availability, and
FMEA analysis according to military standards. Besides, she
carries out technical duties for the Avionics and Electro-Optic
projects in her company. Her main research and work area is
RMT engineering activities within the Systems Engineering
process.