Solder Joint Fatigue Studies Subjected to Board-
level Random Vibration for Automotive Applications
Valeriy Khaldarov Andy Zhang
ASONIKA, LLC Texas Instruments
Tempe, AZ Dallas, TX
val@asonika-llc.com azhang@ti.com
Xue SHI Romuald Roucou
Bosch Automotive Products NXP Semiconductors
Suzhou P.R.China Nijmegen, The Netherlands
xue.shi@cn.bosch.com romuald.roucou@nxp.com
Abstract—In this paper, a simplified methodology is presented
for the evaluation of test-to-failure board-level random
vibrations using a combination of experimental and finite
element modeling techniques in calculating equivalent stresses
for SAC305 solder joints experiencing high- and ultra-high-cycle
fatigue usually found in the emerging automotive robo-taxi
industry. Some partial results that were obtained during this
study allow for an investigation of the effects of a printed circuit
board geometry on possible failure modes of Pb-free solder
joints. These results seem to confirm the findings that have been
reported previously by some researchers on the migration of a
failure mode from the ductile fracture in the bulk solder to the
brittle fracture of the intermetallic compound (IMC) layer due to
the positive correlation between the tensile strength of the solder
joint and the strain rate which may have occurred from high
level of vibration and shock during the test. The generated data
points were then compared to the existing S-N (stress-life) fatigue
curves for the SAC305 solder joints in order to assess whether
these curves can provide adequate results for the test vehicles
fatigue life calculations. These preliminary results show that
more work is needed in both verifying the effect of a failure mode
migration in the solder joints as well as developing additional
data points for S-N curve generation. This research is a
continuation of the study initiated by the JEDEC JESD22
working group.
Keywords—JEDEC, random vibration, printed circuit board
assembly, SAC305 solder joints, high- and ultra-high-cycle fatigue,
reusable electronics, S-N fatigue curves.
I. INTRODUCTION
The emergence of new technologies provide ever more
challenges to assure the reliability of electronic products. In
the automotive industry, in particular, electronic hardware
reliability is gaining more attention due to the development of
the autonomous vehicles, especially robo-taxis. Compared
with traditional vehicles, robo-taxis have different use cases
that include longer daily operation hours and mileage making
existing industry standards ill-suited for their qualification.
Because these self-driving cars use sensing and computing
technologies, their subsystems require strong computing
capability and heavy xPU (CPU, GPU, FPGA etc.) usage.
Due to massive computing requirements thermal loading is
considered to be the major cause of electronic component
failures. Because of this, most of the published research work
Dongji Xie Jeffrey Lee
Nvidia Corporation iST-Integrated Service Technology
Santa Clara, CA Hsinchu, Taiwan, R.O.C.
dongjix@nvidia.com jeffrey_lee@istgroup.com
Sushil Doranga Alexander Shalumov
Lamar University ASONIKA, LLC
Beaumont, TX Tempe, AZ
sdoranga@lamar.edu alex@asonika-llc.com
has focused on the failure mechanisms and fatigue life
prediction models under thermal loading, while relatively
limited work has been allocated to high- and (more
importantly) ultra-high-cycle fatigue under vibration loading.
However, some preliminary indication for the need for
vibration fatigue test in the gigacycle range and above for the
automotive applications has been reported in [1]. For the case
of the robo-taxis, in particular, due to high cost of the bill of
material (BOM) parts and very short life expectancy of the
vehicle (about 3 to 4 years) [2] [3], there exists a significant
opportunity to reduce the total cost of ownership when the old
printed circuit board assemblies (PCBAs) from the
autonomous driving system computer can be reused for the
new vehicles. This, in turn, raises significantly the
requirement for the number of cycles to failure from random
vibration loading. For this type of loading, solder joints are
amongst the most likely sites of occurrence of failure in case
of thermo-mechanical and mechanical stresses, where the
source of vibrations will come mainly from the rough surfaces
over which the vehicles are used. As the failure of a solder
interconnect can result in an open circuit, the failure of a
single solder joint can result in drastic failure of the whole
component and the electronic system leading to sudden
downtime.
The JEDEC JESD22 working group is in the process of
updating the current vibration standard [4] placing an
emphasis on board-level vibration for RoHS compliant Pb-
free SAC305 solder joints. The present investigation is a
continuation of the study initiated by the working group and
its previous results can be reviewed in [5].
Second order solder interconnect stress investigation under
dynamic loads has largely relied on finite element (FE) based
simulations. For example, global models have been
investigated using equivalent layers models in [6] and using
smeared property models in [7] and [8].
A large portion of research exists for high-cycle fatigue
when predicting fatigue life of electronic components exposed
to sinusoidal vibration. For example, Chen et al. [9] combined
the vibration failure test, finite element analysis (FEA), and
theoretical formulation for the calculation of the electronic
component’s fatigue life under sinusoidal vibration loading;
while Perkins and Sitaraman [10] used linear sweep vibration

Figure 1: Details of a test vehicle
Figure 2: Experiment set-up of vibration tests.
test to characterize the fatigue failure for ceramic column grid
array (CCGA).
For typical random vibration simulations, Segalman-Reese
algorithm [11] [12] is used, which makes it possible to obtain
root mean square (RMS) values for the equivalent stress
corresponding to the Von Mises hypothesis. The stress values
generated from this algorithm obey widely used 3-sigma rule
[13]. However, since the sigma level stresses are statistical
quantities, the Segalman-Reese algorithm together with the
Steinberg’s 3-sigma rule provides only a rough estimate for
fatigue life calculation, as shown in [14]. For example, Yu et
al. [15] obtained the volume-average stress response power
spectral density (PSD) to estimate the cumulative damage of
the solder joint. The major drawback of such an approach is
that it requires an analyst to define an arbitrarily thin volume
on the solder ball (which can be very subjective) in order to
estimate the stress in the solder joint. In addition, the use of
the Segalman-Reese algorithm is not so straight forward as
demonstrated in [16].
In contrast to the previous research, a simplified
assessment methodology based on vibration tests and FEA to
predict high- and ultra-high-cycle fatigue life of electronic
components under random vibration loading is used in this
study based on the concept of a critical plane [17]. The
advantage of this method is that the resulting equivalent stress
will have a normal distribution with a mathematical expected
mean equal to zero, which makes it possible to use the
Rayleigh distribution for local amplitudes (extrema).
II. VIBRATION TESTS AND ANALYSIS
Two test vehicles with one specially designed ball grid
array (BGA) package and built-in daisy chain circuit
assembled on two PCBs with different geometries are used in
the vibration tests. The PCBA with its BGA package are
shown in Figure 1. The BGA component, 24.5!! ×
24.5!! , is mounted with 0.4!! diameter 769 lead-free
solder balls in 0.65!! pitch. The PCB for test vehicle 1
(TV1) is made of FR4 with 77!! square board geometry and
1.0!! thickness. The PCB for test vehicle 2 (TV2) is also
made of FR4 with 140!! square board geometry and
1.6!! thickness. Lead-free solder 96.5Sn-3.0Ag-0.5Cu
(SAC305) were used in both test vehicles. This paper presents
a simplified fatigue life prediction procedure of SAC305
solder balls taking into account the strain rate responsible for
the failure mode migration from the ductile fracture in the
bulk solder to the brittle fracture of the IMC layer.
To perform vibration tests, the PCBA is mounted on the
shaker with metal standoffs screwed to four corner screw
holes, as shown in Figure 2. An event detector was used to
monitor the resistance of the daisy chain circuits continuously
throughout the test and to record the failure time. It is
assumed that an electrical discontinuity occurs when the
resistance threshold exceeds 1000"#$!% in a daisy-chain for
a period of 1"&% or more when there is a crack or cracks in a
solder joint detaching fully the interconnection path.
Random vibration was performed both numerically and
experimentally. The excitation given as input is a white noise
(flat profile) with input PSD of 0.01976"' ( /)* over the
frequency range of 10")* to 2000")* with the root mean
square (RMS) acceleration of 6.27"+,-3. The excitation is
given at the four support locations on the bottom side of the
board and it is applied in vertical (z-direction) in all
experiments and vibrations are measured in this direction.
The reported time to failure hours for TV1 were 3.2, 3.9 and
11.8; while the time to failure hours for TV2 were 13, 15.2,
15.5, 35.3 and 55. The WeibullR package in version 0.99.902
of RStudio [18], using R programming language was used to
generate time to failure Weibull plots for TV1 and TV2. The
combined plots for the two test vehicles are shown in Figure 3.
This figure shows that the Weibull shape parameter, 8 , is
 (a) (b)
Figure 4: Top side (a) and bottom side (b) of PCBA, TV1.

TABLE 1: Rainflow cycle counting output example for TV1

ACC1 location.
Range (g) Cycle Counts Ave Amp (g)
Figure 3: Test-to-failure results (in hours) for TV1 (purple) and
TV2 (red). 0 to 7.3387 1082 1.245
7.3387 to 14.6775 376 5.422
about 1.5 and 1.9 for TV1 and TV2 respectively. These
values are not very far from the special case in which 8 = 2,
14.6775 to 29.355 398 10.52
where the Weibull distribution reduces to the Rayleigh
29.355 to 44.0325 187 17.74
distribution. This is an important case, because Rayleigh is 44.0325 to 58.71 117 25.39
the distribution of peaks or ranges in a stationary narrow-band 58.71 to 88.065 221.5 37.28
Gaussian process that has an RMS value calculated from the 88.065 to 117.42 228.5 50.89
Von Mises equivalent stress. Meanwhile, the scale parameter,
: , is approximately 7.1 and 29.5 for TV1 and TV2 117.42 to 146.775 184.5 65.33
respectively. The following relation can be used to estimate 146.775 to 176.13 102 79.73
the mean time to failure, &, for Rayleigh distribution for a 176.13 to 205.485 39 95.25
given scale parameter, ::
;<
205.485 to 234.84 14.5 108.4
&= :
2
234.84 to 264.195 3 122.5
giving about 6.3 hours for TV1 and 26.1 hours for TV2. As 264.195 to 293.55 1 140
demonstrated in Finite Element Analysis For Vibration Test
section, the FE models for two test vehicles show that the Rainflow cycle counting algorithm has been applied on a
maximum equivalent stress of a solder ball located at the 2-second long time series data by performing calculations
corner of the package is lower for TV1 than TV2. In the using an open-source code [21] for locations ACC1 and ACC2
proposed hypothesis, the reason why TV1 has lower mean for two accelerometers located on the top side of the PCBA as
time to failure than TV2 despite having lower maximum well as locations SG1 (top side), SG3 and SG4 (bottom side)
equivalent stress in the corner joint is due to failure mode for 3 strain gages installed on TV1 as shown in Figure 4. An
migration from the ductile fracture in the bulk solder joint to example of an output for ACC1 location is shown in TABLE
the brittle fracture of IMC layer due to the positive correlation 1. The table has three labeled columns: range, cycle counts
between the tensile strength of the solder joint and the strain and average amplitude. When calculating the total number of
cycles within the 2-second interval is required, summing all
the numbers under the cycle counts column will give 2>954.
rate from high level of vibration and shock experienced by
TV2 during the test. Confirmation for such phenomenon for
Pb-free solder joints in general and SAC305 in particular can Figure 7 (a) and (b) show time history and histogram plots,
be found in [19] and [20]. Additionally, from the figure it is respectively, for ACC1 location. This histogram plot shows
possible observe an overlap between the upper confidence that the bins located to the right of the vertical line
interval line for TV1 (purple) and the lower confidence approximately follow the shape of Rayleigh distribution.
interval line for TV2 (red). One possible physical description Meanwhile, the bins located to left (the first four values) do
of points that belong to this region may be an existence of a not exhibit that shape. Therefore, in order to find the net
mixed failure category where failure partly occurs in the bulk number of cycles within the 2-second time interval, the sum is
solder and partly in the IMC layer simultaneously. As can be applied only to the bins located to the right of the vertical line
seen in the figure, the presented case has only one failure while the bins located to the left of the vertical line are filtered
out and are treated as noise. For ACC1 location, the net
number of cycles within the 2-second interval is 911 .
point, which belongs to TV2 at 55 hours, that is located in this
region.
Applying the same methodology for locations ACC2, SG1,

Figure 5: Amplitude-frequency response plot for TV1 with sine-
sweep 1g input.
Figure 6: Amplitude-frequency response plot for TV2 with
random ST D UTTT"VWXYZ, RMS S. [\ base excitation input.
SG3 and SG4 whose histograms are shown in Figure 7 (d), (f),
(h) and (j) respectively, the obtained values for the net number
of cycles are similar to what was calculated for ACC1
location. Namely, the gross number of cycles within the 2-
second time interval is 4>754 versus the net number of 1>046
for ACC2; 12>7?9 versus 873 cycles for SG1; 14>977 versus
866 cycles for SG3; and 7>@97 versus 891 for SG4. Taking
the average of net cycle counts for all five locations, the final
result is obtained of about 917 cycles in 2 seconds which
corresponds to around 460")ABC* . This number is also
compared to the first natural frequency of about 462")ABC*
shown in Figure 5 from the amplitude-frequency response plot
for TV1 with sine-sweep 1g input obtained from modal
vibration test that used laser Doppler vibrometer (LDV)
equipment. Taking into account the mean time to failure for
TV1 which was calculated earlier to be 6.3 hours, it is possible
to estimate the total number of cycles to failure for TV1,
which comes out to be around 10.3 million cycles.
Similar analysis was performed for TV2 where the average
of net cycle counts for all six locations was estimated to be
around 1,571 cycles in 0.92 seconds corresponding to around
1>705")ABC*. Figure 6 shows amplitude-frequency response
plot for TV2 with random 10 D 2000")ABC* , RMS 1.4+
excitation input which was also obtained with the same LDV
equipment. From the figure, it is possible to conclude that the
estimated apparent frequency for TV2 is closest to its fourth
natural frequency of 1>@@1")ABC*.
The overall average amplitude for TV1 was calculated
using the following formula:
M/(
E = FGHIJ × EJ K( L
J TV1. The two nodes shown in the figure represent ACC1 and
where NO is average amplitude for each specified range;
Q
PO = R O is weighted average for each specified range; and QO
O QO
is the number of cycle counts for each specified range.
Substituting the numbers for the average amplitude shown
in TABLE 1 the overall average amplitude for TV1 ACC1
location of about 2?+ is obtained. Applying the same
methodology for locations ACC2, SG1, SG3 and SG4 the
values obtained are around 14+ , 2@&A , @&A , and 41&A
respectively.
For TV2, the overall average amplitude for ACC1 and
ACC2 locations are 24+ and 12+ while for SG1, SG2, SG3,
and SG4 locations the obtained values are around 42&, 56&A,
27&A and 59&A.
III. FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS FOR VIBRATION TEST
Since the solder balls cannot be measured directly due to
small geometry, FEA was used to obtain the stresses for the
fatigue estimation of the BGA component. In this study, the
1/4 FEA model as presented in Figure 9 was constructed with
the commercial software ASONIKA-M3D.
In the previous study, the Nelder-Mead algorithm was
applied on modal tests for the non-JEDEC BGA component
and PCB to obtain material parameters (such as modulus of
elasticity, Poisson’s ratio, and damping coefficients) necessary
for FEA simulations. Figure 10 shows a comparison plot of
maximum acceleration response values for ACC1 location
when different levels of vibrations were applied to TV1. The
applied vibrations on the test vehicle included two sine-
sweeps (one at 0.5+ and another at 20+) and three random
vibrations with a flat (white noise) profile of 3.1, 6.27 and
10"+,-3. The regression equation for the actual vibration
experiments (blue color) shows a zero-offset value of around
3.9 which is low enough to consider the accelerometer at
ACC1 location to be reasonably well calibrated. Meanwhile,
the red line shows FEA simulation results. The overall
comparison between the two lines shows adequate correlation
between actual test results and the FEA.
For TV2, the two regression equations in Figure 11 show
that the slopes for the blue and red lines have similar values of
about 29. On the other hand, it can also be seen that the blue
line has some significant negative zero-offset of about 74.
One interpretation can be that the accelerometer at ACC1
location may need to be recalibrated in order to make the
intercept value closer to zero. However, the similarities in
slopes for the two lines show that both the actual vibration test
results and the FE model are reasonably well correlated with
each other.
Figure 8 (a) shows equivalent acceleration response values
from 6.27+,-3 flat profile (white noise) random vibration
input for nodes 907 and 12906 of the ¼ FE model representing
ACC2 locations respectively.
 (a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 8: Simulated acceleration response values from 6.27+,-3
flat profile (white noise) random vibration for ¼ FE model
representing TV1 (a) and TV2 (b).

(c) (d)

Figure 9: ¼ 3D finite element model of a PCBA.

(e) (f)

Figure 10: Comparison plot for ACC1 location for TV1.

(g) (h)

(i) (j)
Figure 7: Time history and histogram plots for TV1 ACC1, Figure 11: Comparison plot for ACC1 location for TV2.
ACC2, SG1, SG3 and SG4 locations where the top number
The figure shows that at the ACC1 location the calculated
equivalent acceleration response is around 24+ while at the
represents number of estimated cycles before the filter is applied;
while the bottom number represents the number of estimated cycles
after the filter. ACC2 location this value is around 14+. Meanwhile, for TV2
 respective first natural frequencies with amplitude of 10+ at
room temperature. The blue line (ref. [15]) was obtained by
subjecting the test vehicle with two daisy chained,
symmetrically placed BGA packages to four separate
harmonic vibration levels of 5+, 7+, @.5+, and 10+ over the
first natural frequency band of the PCBA. This figure shows
that the two curves are diverging from each other in the high-
cycle fatigue region. Test to failure comparison results from
(a) (b) random vibration for the two test vehicles shows a closer
6

match to the blue line; however, the stress amplitudes for the
5

two data points do not exhibit a decreasing trend when the

number of cycles to failure increase. The data points marked
as x and o have Young’s modulus of 51'`a(a standard value
4
Stress (MPa)

for SAC305 alloys reported in the literature) for TV1 and TV2
respectively. The third point, labeled bc in the figure shows
Vibration test
2
FEA

that an increase of Young’s modulus for TV2 to 95.5'`a,

1

0
SG1 SG2 SG3 SG4 sb corner
will increase its stress amplitude from 5.1-`a to 5.6-`a.
(c) (d)
Figure 12: Comparison between vibration test strain values
converted to overall average amplitude stresses (blue line) and Von
Mises stress values obtained from the FEA model (red line) for TV1
(a) and TV2 (c). Location of the corner solder ball’s highest Von
Mises stress value in the FEA model for TV1 (b) and TV2 (d) when
j. Uk\lmn white noise (flat profile) is applied.

in Figure 8 (b) the calculated equivalent acceleration response

at the ACC1 location is around 20+ and at the ACC2 location
is around 15+. These values correspond closely to the overall
Figure 13: Stress-based fatigue comparison of TV1 and TV2 to two
S-N curves for SAC305 material (the red line was taken from ref.
average amplitude values calculated in the previous section for [22] and the blue line is from [15]).
ACC1 and ACC2 locations.
For the SG1, SG3 and SG4 locations the ¼ FE model
representing TV1 has predicted the following strain values:
?5&A, 5&A, and 50&A respectively. For TV2, the predicted
values for SG1, SG2, SG3 and SG4 locations are 4@&A, 4@&A,
11&A, and 69&A respectively. The following relation is used
to convert existing overall average amplitude strain, ] ,
measured and calculated in the previous section to stress, ^:
^ =]×_
where _ is modulus of elasticity and the value of 14.44"'`a
is used for the PCB. The comparison plot between vibration
test strain values for locations SG1, SG3 and SG4 that were
converted to overall average amplitude stresses (blue line) and
equivalent stress values obtained from the FEA model (red
line) when 6.27+,-3 white noise excitation is applied is
shown in Figure 12 (a) for TV1 and Figure 12 (c) for TV2. Figure 14: Strain-based fatigue comparison of TV1 and TV2 to
These plots show that the red line adequately approximates the one E-N curve (green line taken from ref. [23]) and two normalized
S-N curves.
blue line at the SG locations especially with respect to the
maximum equivalent stress calculated in the FEA model of
around 4.4-`a for TV1 in Figure 12 (b) and 5.1-`a for
In Figure 14, the two stress-based S-N curves (red an blue
lines) as well as two data points for TV1 and TV2 (labeled as
TV2 in Figure 12 (d). x and o respectively) were normalized by Young’s modulus
value of dSefg, while the third data point for modified TV2
(labeled as hc) having Young’s modulus value of id. defg
IV. FATIGUE ANALYSIS
Figure 13 shows stress-based fatigue comparison of TV1 shows a decreasing trend which is parallel to the blue line.
and TV2 to two S-N fatigue curves for SAC305 which were The green line is a strain-based E-N fatigue curve from ref.
found in the existing literature. The red line (ref. [22]) was [23]. The one order of magnitude difference between the
obtained by subjecting three PCBAs with different package strain-based E-N fatigue curve and the two normalized stress-
configurations to harmonic vibration dwelling at their

Figure 15: Survival function for TV1
Figure 16: Survival function for TV2
based S-N curves may be indicative of the fact that the
assumed Young’s modulus for SAC305 alloys used to derive
strain values from stress is too high.
The following equation is used to calculate strain rate
1
values for two test vehicles:
]o = × ^o
_ TV2. In addition, at the appropriate level of magnification it
where ^o = 2< × ^ × pq is stress rate and pq is dominant or
apparent frequency. The applicability of this formula depends
on the assumption that Young’s modulus will change
relatively early and then stay mostly constant during the
vibration fatigue test.
TABLE 2: Summary of estimated parameters for two test
vehicles
TABLE 2 presents a summary of estimated parameters for
two test vehicles. The last line of the table shows estimated
strain rate for TV2 to be 1.07"% rM when Young’s modulus is
51"'`a and decreases to 0.6?"% rM when Young’s modulus is
increased to 95.5"'`a .
These strain rate values are
significantly higher than the estimated strain rate value for
TV1 of around 0.25"% rM . One physical explanation of the
significance of a high strain rate value (close to or greater than
1"% rM ) versus a low strain value (having value less than 1"% rM )
is the previously observed migration of a failure mode from
the ductile fracture in the bulk solder (low strain rate value) to
the brittle fracture of the IMC layer (high strain rate value).
The model can be simplified to help estimate mean time
to failure of a test vehicle subjected to random vibration. The
derivation of the following relation can be found in ref. [24]
y"z{| z}~••
Mu w
r vw "
sHCK = t1 D A (u x
where sHCK is probability density function (survival function)
with respect to time C, ^€ is allowable stress, ^ is maximum
stress value in the solder joint, and pq is the dominant
frequency.
In order to be able to obtain adequate results, this equation
requires an analyst to provide a value for allowable stress, ^€ .
From previous experience this value should come from the
ultimate tensile strength of the material when the strain rate
value is above 1"% rM ; meanwhile, if the strain value is less
then 1"% rM tensile yield strength should be used for allowable
stress, ^€ . Therefore, allowable stress of 25.7"-`a (typical
value for SAC305 tensile yield) is applied to generate survival
function for TV1 (Figure 15); and apply allowable stress of
29.7"-`a (typical value for SAC305 tensile strength) to
generate survival function for TV2 (Figure 16). The
calculated mean time to failure from the simplified model are
19.5 hours for TV1 and 34.4 hours for TV2.
V. FUTURE WORK
The JESD22 vibration tasks group is currently in the
process of conducting failure analysis (FA) on the two test
vehicles. The goal of the FA will be to find the evidence on
the migration of a failure mode from the ductile fracture in the
bulk solder in TV1 to the brittle fracture of the IMC layer in
should be possible to observe the decrease in grain size of the
cracked SAC305 solder alloy with the grain size in TV1
greater than in TV2. Other work includes conducting test to
failure harmonic vibration tests in order to generate
appropriate S-N and E-N fatigue curves.
VI. CONCLUSIONS
In this work, a simplified methodology is presented in an
analysis of microelectronics subjected to random vibration at
the board level using a combination of experimental and finite
element techniques. This proposed method will help
overcome the challenge of providing consistent results when
assessing the durability of Pb-free solder joints experiencing
high- and ultra-high-cycle fatigue found in the emerging
automotive robo-taxi industry. The effectiveness of the
proposed methodology was investigated by comparing
preliminary simulation results with initial test to failure results
for the two test vehicles.
 ACKNOWLEDMENTS
The authors would like to thank Keith Newman and
Mihaela Tanesescu (AMD), Reza Ghaffarian (NASA), and
Gerhard Hubner (Infineon) for sharing resources, results and
their thoughts on board-level random vibration.
REFERENCES
[1] D. Xie, J. Hai, Z. Wu, J. Huang and M. Economou,
"Road Test and Reliability Analysis of Automotive
Electronic Modules," in 2017 IEEE 67th Electronic
Components and Technology Conference (ECTC), 2017.
[2] H. Shi, H. Talisse, S. Khau and M. Marroquín,
"Hardware reliability in robo-taxi," in 2021 IEEE 71st
Electronic Components and Technology Conference
(ECTC), 2021.
[3] F. Chen, "Hardware Reliability Qualification Of Robo-
Taxi: Environmental Stress And Failure Modes For
Autonomous Vehicle Modules/Components," IEEE.tv,
12 08 2021. [Online]. Available:
https://ieeetv.ieee.org/video/reliability-qualification-of-
robo-taxi. [Accessed 21 09 2021].
[4] JEDEC SOLID STATE TECHNOLOGY
ASSOCIATION, "JEDEC Standard JESD22-B103B:
Vibration, Variable Frequency," June 2006. [Online].
Available: www.jedec.org. [Accessed 07 05 2019].
[5] V. Khaldarov, D. Xie, J. Lee and V. Shalumov, "New
Methodologies for Evaluating Microelectronics Subject
to Board-level Vibrations," in 2021 IEEE 71st Electronic
Components and Technology Conference (ECTC), 2021.
[6] J. Gu, C. T. Lim and A. A. O. Tay, "Simulation of
mechanical response of solder joints under drop impact
using equivalent layer models," in Proceedings
Electronic Components and Technology, 2005, 2005.
[7] J. P. Clech, "Solder Reliability Solutions: A PC-Based
Design-for-Reliability Tool," in Proceedings of Surface
Mount International, San Jose, CA, 1996.
[8] P. Lall, D. Panchagade, Y. Liu, W. Johnson and J.
Suhling, "Models for Reliability Prediction of Fine-Pitch
BGAs and CSPs in Shock and Drop-Impact," in 2004
Proceedings. 54th Electronic Components and
Technology Conference, 2004.
[9] Y. Chen, C. Wang and Y. Yang, "Combining vibration
test with finite element analysis for the fatigue life,"
Microelectronics Reliability, vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 638-644,
2008.
[10] A. Perkins and S. Sitaraman, "Vibration-induced solder
joint failure of a Ceramic Column Grid Array (CCGA)
package," in 2004 Proceedings. 54th Electronic
Components and Technology Conference, 2004.
[11] D. J. Segalman, G. M. Reese, C. Fulcher and R. Field,
"An Efficient Method for Calculating RMS von Mises
Stress in a Random Vibration Environment," 1998.
[12] G. Reese, R. Field and D. Segalman, "A Tutorial on
Design Analysis Using von Mises Stress in Random
Vibration Environments," The Shock and Vibration
Digest, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 466-474, 2000.
[13] D. Steinberg, Vibration analysis for electronic equipment,
New York: Wiley, 1988.
[14] A. Al-Yafawi, S. Patil, D. Yu, S. Park and J. Pitarresi,
"Random vibration test for electronic assemblies," in
Proc ITHERM, Las Vegas, 2010.
[15] D. Yu, A. Al-Yafawi, T. T. Nguyen, S. Park and S.
Chung, "High-cycle fatigue life prediction for Pb-free
BGA under random vibration loading," Microelectronics
Reliability, vol. 51, pp. 649-656, 2011.
[16] A. Grishin, "Estimating Structural Response to Random
Vibration: Reaction Forces," Phoenix Analysis & Design
Techologies, 22 11 2017. [Online]. Available:
https://www.padtinc.com/blog/wp-
content/uploads/2017/11/PADT-ANSYS-Random-Vib-
Reaction-Forces-2017_11_22-1.pdf. [Accessed 08 02
2022].
[17] A. Niesłony and E. Macha, Spectral method in multiaxial
random fatigue, Berlin: Springer, 2007.
[18] RStudio, "RStudio | Open source & professional software
for data science teams," RStudio, 2021. [Online].
Available: https://www.rstudio.com/. [Accessed 20
October 2021].
[19] T. An and F. Qin, "Effects of the intermetallic compound
microstructure on the tensile behavior of
Sn3.0Ag0.5Cu/Cu solder joint under various strain rates,"
Microelectronics Reliability, vol. 54, pp. 932-938, 2014.
[20] P. Lall, S. Shantaram, J. Suhling and D. Locker, "Effect
of high strain-rate on mechanical properties of SAC105
and SAC305 leadfree alloys," in 2012 IEEE 62nd
Electronic Components and Technology Conference,
2012.
[21] T. Irvine, "Rainflow Fatigue Cycle Counting,"
Vibrationdata, 31 October 2012. [Online]. Available:
https://vibrationdata.wordpress.com/2012/10/31/rainflow
-fatigue-cycle-counting/. [Accessed 2 September 2021].
[22] G. Limaye, High Temperature Vibration Fatigue Life
Prediction and High Strain Rate Material
Characterization of Lead-Free Solders, Auburn: Auburn
University, 2013.
[23] Y. Zhou and A. Dasgupta, "Vibration Durability
Assessment of Sn3.0Ag0.5Cu and Sn37Pb Solders Under
Harmonic Excitation," in Proceedings of the ASME 2007
International Mechanical Engineering Congress and
Exposition. Volume 5: Electronics and Photonics, Seattle,
2007.
[24] ASONIKA, SRI, Subsystem ASONIKA-M-3D, 2021.