SRC Forum - Message Replies

Forum: Reliability & Maintainability Questions and Answers

Topic: Reliability & Maintainability Questions and Answers

Topic Posted by: Reliability & Maintainability Forum (src_forum@alionscience.com )
Organization: System Reliability Center
Date Posted: Mon Aug 31 12:47:36 US/Eastern 1998

Original Message:

Posted by: Michelle Li
Date posted: Fri Nov 15 14:53:07 US/Eastern 2002
Subject: possible missleading of 217 on chip ceramic capacitors
Message:
I am working on reliability prediction for a commercial avionics flight display. I found that surface mount ceramic capacitor failure rate is about 35% of total failure rate of all elelctronic assemblies ( exclude LCD assembly and lamp assembly) by using 217. I actually did not choose 'Chip Ceramic' subcatogory, I chose 'general purpose, ceramic capacitors'. If I used 'chip, ceramic', the total failure rate of chip ceramic capacitor will go to 50%. If I just use PRISM for surface mount ceramic capacitors and still use 217 for other parts, the ratio will drop to 5%. Can someone tell me if surface mount ceramic capacitors cause about 35% of failures in field? It is hard for me to believe so. I guess that they might cause 1% to 5% of failures in field. If someone works on commercial avionics field reliability, I would appreciate if you can give some information about field performance of the surface mount ceramic capacitors. Thank you very much. Michelle Li

Previous reply

Reply:

Subject: Micro Crack On Ceramic Capacitor
Reply Posted by: CY Lim (cy.lim@venture.com.sg )Venture
Date Posted: Mon Aug 2 5:39:09 US/Eastern 2004
Message:
Pls let me know you email so I able to mail you for further discussion. Thanks...