UNIVERSITI TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN

Semiconductor
Technologies
Quality Control

Dr. Lim Soo King

1/20/2012
Chapter 10 Quality Control ...............................................................1
10.0 Introduction .............................................................................................. 1
10.1 In-Process Quality Control and Incoming Quality Control ................ 1
10.2 Statistical Process Control....................................................................... 2
10.2.1 Establishing Statistical Control Chart for Process Mean .............................. 4
10.2.2 Establishing Statistical Control Chart for Process Standard Deviation ....... 6
10.2.3 Establishing Statistical Control Chart for X and R Charts ........................... 8
10.2.4 Special Charts ..................................................................................................... 8
10.3 Process Capability Ratio and Process Capability Index .................... 14
10.3.1 Process Capability Ratio Cp ............................................................................ 14
10.3.2 Process Capability Index Cpk .......................................................................... 16
10.3.3 Taguchi Process Capability Index Cpm .......................................................... 18
10.3.4 Ppk Index ............................................................................................................ 19
10.4 Reliability ................................................................................................ 21
10.4.1 Failure Rate ...................................................................................................... 22
10.4.2 Mathematics of Failure and Reliability Functions........................................ 23
10.4.3 Distribution Function of Failure Rate ............................................................ 25
10.4.4 Accelerated Testing .......................................................................................... 27
Exercises .......................................................................................................... 30
Answers of Exercises ...................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Bibliography ................................................................................................... 32

- ii -
Figure 10.1: Data collected for the hermetic lid length at incoming store room.................... 5
Figure 10.2: Statistical control chart of the data shown in Fig. 10.1 using X and R as
estimate .............................................................................................................. 5
Figure 10.3: Statistical control chart of the data shown in Fig. 10.1 using X and s as
estimate .............................................................................................................. 6
Figure 10.4: A pre-control chart ............................................................................................. 9
Figure 10.5: Data for D-NOM chart ..................................................................................... 10
Figure 10.6: Data for standardized X and R charts ............................................................. 12
Figure 10.7: Control chart of standardized mean X ............................................................ 13
Figure 10.8: Control chart of standardized range R ............................................................. 13
Figure 10.9: Processes with same Cpk but different Cpm indices .......................................... 19
Figure 10.10: Failure rate versus time for a typical integrated circuit ................................... 25

- iii -
 Chapter 10

Quality Control
_____________________________________________
10.0 Introduction
In integrated circuit manufacturing involves design, fabrication, assembly, and
test processes. To ensure that each process step conforms to specifications, it is
necessary to implement quality control scheme. Quality control
monitoring/checking has become an important process and is normally imposed
at the end of certain critical process steps. Besides the quality control at in
process step, quality control procedure is also required to be implemented at the
incoming material inspection stage.

With the quality control in place at critical process steps and at incoming
material acceptance stage, it is also necessary to monitor the process
stability/reliability and process capability of the machine/equipment used to
process the device.

In this section, student will learn how in process quality control and
incoming control are performed. The concepts of how to establish statistical
process control charts and at the same time learn how use the collect data to
determine the process capability ratio CP and process capability index CPK of the
machine/equipment used for the manufacturing processes. At the last of
learning, the concepts and methods used to determine the reliability of
integrated circuit are studied.

10.1 In-Process Quality Control and Incoming Quality

Control
In-process quality monitoring/inspection always helps to check and balance if
the device is manufactured according to the specifications and if the operator
processes the device according to the operational procedure. Normally the
samples according to a specific sampling plan (usually 0.025 AQL sampling
plan) are pull from a process lot/batch at the end of critical process step such as
die attach, wire bonding, initial/final tests at temperature. If there is any failure
detected, non-conformance notice is normally issued to manufacturing line
manager for taking necessary collective actions. After the corrective action has

-1-
10 Quality Control

been taken, quality control personnel will take new samples to check for
conformance to specifications. When conformance is achieved, the particular
process is then released to manufacturing for further processing of device. The
failed sample lot is either re-processed or declared as total reject.

Let’s take a critical process step, which is wire bonding. After wire
bonding process, the quality control personnel will pull the samples according
to specific quality sampling plan to check the wire loop height and wire bond
strength according to specifications. Besides, he/she also checks if there is
missing wire, bond crack, wrong bonding etc. If there is any non-conformance
detected, stop process notice is issued. The process will only be allowed after
collective action has been taken and the subsequent samples pass the quality
control check/test.

In test operating, the quality control personnel would pick the sample
according to the quality sampling plan to test to see if all selected samples pass
the electrical test specifications. If selected samples fail the sampling plan, the
tested lot is normally re-tested and re-submitted for sampling test.

At incoming inspection, the quality control personnel will pull samples

from the incoming materials like the hermetic package lid to check if the
dimensions, strength of the material etc. meeting the specifications. If the
samples fail the sampling plan, the batch of hermetic lids is return to vendor.

10.2 Statistical Process Control

In the aspects to monitor the process stability, it is necessary to set-up statistical
process control chart SPC to monitor the repeatability and reproducibility of the
process to monitor if there is variation due to machine, time factor, operator
factor, environmental factor etc. Let’s take the case wire bonding operation, the
bond strength in gram-force and height of wire loop in mm can be plotted on
control charts at specified interval to the check the trends of the bond strength
and height of wire loop. If there is abnormal deviation from the targeted values
as well as their distribution variation over a period of the time, analysis can be
done. Since the data is taken real time in the manufacturing line, any deviation
from the pre-specified control limits would immediately alert the operator to
find the underlying causes and correct the problem before large amount non-
conformance or defective devices are produced. Comparison of SPC charts can
also be done to check for variations between machines particularly this case the
wire bonding machines.

-2-
 10 Quality Control

Any conformance manufacturing process, over a period of time process

data has mean µ0 value and variance σ02 value. Thus, one can say these data
values are in control since the process is a conformance process. It is important
and desires that the mean µ and variance σ2 of the subsequent process
distribution throughout the entire duration of the process remains equal to µ0
and σ 02 irrespective of time and duration. To continuous ensuring µ = µ0
and σ 2 = σ 02 , it requires continuous monitoring by an easier mean of establishing
the statistical control chart SPC. Statistical speaking, it is the testing of
hypothesis that is the null hypothesis H0: µ = µ0 and H0: σ = σ 0 versus the
alternative hypothesis, which is H1: µ ≠ µ0 and H1: σ ≠ σ 0 . If both null
hypotheses are true, one says that the process is in control. If either one or both
are not true then the process is out of control.

When setting up a hypothesis testing for the mean µ, one considers the null
hypothesis µ = µ0 versus the alternative hypothesis µ ≠ µ0, selecting an unbiased
statistic with minimum variance as possible, which means x = µ , specify
probability of Type I error, which is α = P[Rejecting H0, when it is true], and
using α and distribution of x to set-up acceptance region for x that is accept the
null hypothesis H0 if µ 0 − Z α / 2 σ 0 / n < x < µ 0 + Zα / 2 σ 0 / n and reject the null
hypothesis H0 if x < µ 0 − Z α / 2 σ 0 / n or x > µ 0 + Zα / 2 σ 0 / n .

The statistical control chart has three lines, which are upper control limit
line UCL, center line CL, and lower control limit line LCL. These lines are
established based on the data collected over a period of time from a normal
conformance process and in the control acceptance region mentioned in the
above paragraphs. Thus, the upper control limit UCL line is defined as

UCL = µ 0 + Zα / 2 σ 0 / n (10.1)

The lower control limit LCL line is

LCL = µ 0 − Z α / 2 σ 0 / n (10.2)

The center line CL is

CL = µ0 (10.3)

-3-
10 Quality Control

where n is equal to number of sample. α is probability of accepting the null

hypothesis when it is actually not true. The value of α is taken as 0.0026, which
means that the 99.74% of the distribution is in the acceptable region. Zα/2 is z-
score for the two-tailed standard normal distribution function, which has a value
3.00 for α = 0.0026. Based on these statistical values, equation (10.1) and (10.2)
will become

UCL = µ 0 + 3σ 0 / n (10.4)

The lower control limit LCL line is

LCL = µ 0 − 3σ 0 / n (10.5)

The type II error will not be discussed here, where it defines β equals to the
probability of the accepting the null hypothesis when actually it is not true.

Once the control chart is established and in used. If the trend of chart has
any of the following stated abnormality, collective action must be taken for the
specific process. The rules

• Seven points in a row on one side of the center line.

• Seven points in a row consistently going up or coming down.
• Substantially more than 2/3 of the points close to the center line.
• Substantially less than 2/3 of the points close to the center line.

10.2.1 Establishing Statistical Control Chart for Process Mean

Presented in this section are two ways to established the statistical control chart
SPC for process mean X using X , R /d2, and s /c4.

10.2.1.1 Estimating µ0 by X and σ0 by R /d2

Let’s use the data shown in Fig. 10.1 to illustrate how µ0 and σ0 can be
estimated by the mean X of the sample at defined interval and the range R of the
sample to estimate the value of σ0.

-4-
 10 Quality Control

Batch # Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample Sample Range Standard

x1 x2 3 Mean X R Deviation σ or s
x3
1 4.5 4.6 4.5 4.53 0.1 0.06
2 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.50 0.2 0.10
3 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.50 0.2 0.10
4 4.4 4.6 4.4 4.47 0.1 0.12
5 4.3 4.5 4.4 4.40 0.1 0.10
Average X = 4.48 R = 0.18 σ or s = 0.095
µ0 = 4.48 and σ0 = 0.094

Figure 10.1: Data collected for the hermetic lid length at incoming store room

Let X be the grand average of the mean X for five batches of hermetic lid
length and R be the grand average of the range R for five batches of hermetic
lid length. The mean µ0 can then be estimated by X and the standard deviation
(σ0) is estimated by R /d2, whereby the value of d2 can be obtained from the
constant table (refer to Appendix B) used for estimation and construction of
control chart. For the sample size of n = 3, d2 value is 1.6929. Thus, the
established lines of the control chart are: UCL = X + 3R /(d 2 n ) =
4.48 + 3x 0.18 /(1.6929 3 ) = 4.66, LCL = X − 3R /(d 2 n ) = 4.48 − 3x 0.18 /(1.6929 3 ) =
4.29, and CL = 4.48.

The plot of the established statistical control chart is shown in Fig. 10.2.

Figure 10.2: Statistical control chart of the data shown in Fig. 10.1 using X and R as
estimate
-5-
10 Quality Control

10.2.1.2 Estimating µ0 by X and σ0 by s /c4

Let σ or s be the grand average of the standard deviation σ then the standard
deviation σ0 is estimated by σ /c4, whereby the value of c4 can be obtained from
the constant table used for estimation and construction of control chart. For the
sample size of n = 3, c4 value is 0.9213. Thus, the established lines of the
control chart are: UCL = X + 3σ /(c 4 n ) = 4.48 + 3x 0.095 /(0.9213 3 ) = 4.65, LCL =
X − 3σ /(c 4 n ) = 4.48 − 3x 0.095 /(0.9213 3 ) = 4.30, and CL = 4.48.

The plot of the established statistical control chart is shown in Fig. 10.3.

Figure 10.3: Statistical control chart of the data shown in Fig. 10.1 using X and s as
estimate

10.2.2 Establishing Statistical Control Chart for Process Standard

Deviation

Presented in this section are two ways to established the statistical control chart
SPC for process standard deviation s using R /d2, and s /c4 statistics. The lengthy
discussion of how to establish the statistical control chart using these two
statistics will not be described.

10.2.2.1 Using R /d2 Statistics

-6-
 10 Quality Control

The formulae for the lines of the control chart for process standard deviation
established using R /d2 statistics are
LCL = (1 − 3d 3 / d 2 )R = D 3 R (10.6)

UCL = (1 + 3d 3 / d 2 )R = D 4 R (10.7)

CL = R (10.8)

The values of d2, d3, D3, and D4 can be obtained from the constant table (refer to
appendices) used for estimation and construction of control chart. For the
sample size of n = 3, d2 = 1.6929, d3 = 0.8884, D3 = 0, and D4 = 2.5743. One
may ask; why D3 is equal 0 instead of -0.5743. The reason being the standard
deviation cannot be a smaller than 0. Using data shown in Fig. 2.19, the lines of
the control chart are: LCL = (1 − 3d 3 / d 2 )R = 0, UCL = (1 + 3d 3 / d 2 )R = 0.4639, and
CL = R = 0.18.

10.2.2.2 Using s /c4 Statistics

The formulae for the lines of the control chart for process standard device
established using s /c4 statistics are

 3 1 − c4 
LCL = 1 − s = B3 s

(10.10)
 c4 

 3 1− c4 
UCL = 1 + s = B 4 s

(10.11)
 c4 

CL = s (10.12)

The values of c4, B3, and B4 can be obtained from the constant table used for
estimation and construction of control chart. For the sample size of n = 3, c4 =
0.8862, B3 = 0, and B4 = 2.5684. One may ask why B3 is equal 0 instead of -
0.14198. The reason being the standard deviation cannot be a smaller than 0.
Using data shown in Fig. 10.1, the lines of the control chart are: LCL =
 3 1 − c4   3 1− c4 
1 − s = B3 s = 0, UCL = 1 + s = B 4 s = 0.244, and CL = s = 0.095.
 c4   c4 
   

-7-
10 Quality Control

10.2.3 Establishing Statistical Control Chart for X and R Charts

X chart is meant for individual measurement and R chart is meant for moving
range. The sample taken at designated interval is one not like the earlier case
that has more than one. The acceptable control limits of the process mean X is
µ 0 ± 3σ 0 / n = µ 0 ± 3R / (d 2 n ) taking α is equal to 0.0026. Since for individual
measurement n = 1, then the for formulae for the lines of control chart are

LCL = X − 3R / d 2 (10.13)

CL = X (10.14)

UCL = X + 3R / d 2 (10.15)

Since moving range is calculated from two successive data, thus, d2 is equal to
1.128 taken from the constant table used for estimation and construction of
control chart. The formulae for the lines of control charts are:
LCL = X − 3R / d 2 = X − 2.66R , CL = X , and UCL = X + 3R / d 2 = X + 2.66R .

The formulae for the statistical control chart for moving range R chart with
assumption that α is equal to 0.0026 are

LCL = D 3 R (10.16)

CL = R (10.17)

UCL = D 4 R (10.18)

From the constant table used for estimation and construction of control chart, D3
= 0 and D4 = 3.2672. Thus, the formulae for the moving range R control charts
are; LCL = 0 , CL = R , and UCL = 3.267R .

10.2.4 Special Charts

There are situations where it may be difficult to take a sample of size greater
than one or when only one measurement is meaningful each time. Some
examples of these situation are the production rate is very slow or the batch size
is very small or a continuous process such as chemical process, measurement on
-8-
 10 Quality Control

some quality characteristics, such as viscosity of paint or thickness of insulation

on a cable, varies only a little between successive observations. Based on these
examples, it is difficult to establish SPC charts like those discussed earlier. Let’s
discuss a few methods to overcome these situations.

10.2.4.1 Pre-Control Chart

Individual measurement is plotted on this chart. This is suitable for situation

where the size of a batch is small. The control limits are established based on
the specification limits. As an example, let the specification limits for a quality
characteristic be 0.5±0.002, which means LSL = 0.498 and USL = 0.502. The
center line of the chart is located at the nominal size of 0.500. Horizontal lines
are drawn at the upper specification limit of 0.502) and the lower specification
limit of 0.498. In addition, horizontal lines are also drawn at nominal size ±1/4
× (USL – LSL).

In this example, these lines are at 0.5 – 1/4x(0.502 – 0.498) = 0.499 and 0.5
+ 1/4x(0.502 – 0.498) = 0.501. The regions above the USL and below the LSL
are called the red zone, the interval between nominal size – 1/4 x total tolerance
and nominal size + 1/4 x total tolerance is called the green zone, and the regions
between the red and green zones are called the yellow zone. The control chart is
shown in Fig. 10.4.

Figure 10.4: A pre-control chart

The following rules are used while setting up the process:

1. Collect the measurements and plot them on the chart until five
consecutive values fall in the green zone.
-9-
10 Quality Control

2. If a measurement data falls in the yellow zone, restart the count to obtain
five consecutive pieces in the green zone. Do not adjust the process.
3. If two consecutive data fall in the yellow zone or one value falls in the
red zone then adjust the process.
4. When five consecutive measurement data fall in the green zone, approves
the setup as in-control process and starts regular manufacturing.
During regular manufacturing, sample two consecutive components every h
interval such as 10 minutes and follow these rules:

1. If the first data falls in the green zone, do not plot the second value and
continue the process.
2. If the first data falls in the red zone, stop the process and investigate.
3. If the first data falls in the yellow zone, then plot the second value. If it
falls in the green zone then continue the process, otherwise, stop the
process and investigate.

This chart is simple to maintain, which is very important. One main

disadvantage is that the information presented by the chart regarding the
variability of the process is incomplete.

10.2.4.2 D-NOM Charts

In these charts, the deviations of the characteristics from their respective

nominal values are used as the observations. The calculations of the control
limits are done in the same manner as in the regular X and R charts. Let’s use
the data shown in Fig. 10.5 to establish D-NOM charts. The nominal values of
two parts are 30.0 and 20.0 respectively were produced using an equipment.

Dev. of Dev. of Dev. of

Obs 1 Obs 2 Obs 3 Test Test
Batch Part Obs 1 Obs 2 Obs 3 xi from xi from xi from Statistics Statistics
nominal nominal nominal x R
value value value
1 A 30 31 32 0 1 2 1.00 2
2 A 29 30 31 -1 0 1 0.00 2
3 A 28 29 32 -2 -1 2 -0.33 4
4 B 20 22 21 0 2 1 -0.67 2
5 B 20 22 19 0 2 -1 0.33 2
6 B 22 21 18 2 1 -2 0.33 4
7 B 20 19 18 0 -1 -2 -1.00 2
8 B 19 20 20 -1 0 0 -0.33 1
X = 0.084

R = 2.375
Figure 10.5: Data for D-NOM chart
- 10 -
 10 Quality Control

D-NOM charts are established based on the assumptions that the process
standard deviation is the same for all parts and sample size is constant. The
control limits of the established are X and R charts are as follows:

X chart

UCL = X + A 2 R (10.19)

LCL = X − A 2 R (10.20)

CL = X (10.21)

From Appendix B, A2 is equal to 1.0231 for sample size n = 3.

R chart

UCL = D 4 R (10.22)

LCL = D 3 R = 0 (10.23)

CL = R (10.24)

From Appendix B, D3 is equal to 0 and D4 is equal to 2.575 for n = 3.

10.2.4.3 Standardized X and R Charts

These charts are used if the assumption that the standard deviation is not the For
the part type j test statistic, let X0j be the target value for part type j and R j be
the average range of part type j then

(
X chart test statistics = x j − X 0j / R j = ) (10.25)

where (x j − X 0j ) is equal to ∑ (x − X 0j ) / n and n is the sample size. The X chart

n

ij
i =1

test statistics is also equal to (x ij )/ R j if X0j is equal to zero. The control limits of
standardized X shall be

LCL = -A2 (10.26)

- 11 -
10 Quality Control

UCL = A2 (10.27)

CL = 0.0 (10.28)

The R chart test statistic is equal to R = R ij / R j and the control limits are

LCL = D3 (10.29)

UCL = D4 (10.30)

CL = 1.0 (10.31)

Let’s now use the data shown in Fig. 10.5 to establish standardized X and R
charts.
Dev. of Dev. of Dev. of Test Test
Batch Part Obs 1 Obs 2 Obs 3 xj Rj Statistics Statistics
xi xi xi x R
1 A 0 1 2 1.00 2 1/2.67 = 0.375 2/2.67 = 0.75
2 A -1 0 1 0.00 2 0.00 2/2.67 = 0.75
-0.33/2.67
3 A -2 -1 2 -0.33 4 4/2.67 = 1.50
= -0.124
R = 2.67
4 B 0 2 1 0.67 2 0.67/2.2 = 0.305 2/2.2 = 0.909
5 B 0 2 -1 0.33 2 0.33/2.2 = 0.15 2/2.2 = 0.909
6 B 2 1 -2 0.33 4 0.33/2.2 = 0.15 4/2.2 = 1.818
7 B 0 -1 -2 -1.00 2 1.00/2.2 = -0.455 2/2.2 = 0.909
8 B -1 0 0 -0.33 1 -0.33/2.2 = -0.15 1/2,2 = 0.455
R = 2.2

Figure 10.6: Data for standardized X and R charts

The control limits of standardized X and R charts are:

Standardized X ; LCL = -1.023 for n = 3, UCL = 1.023, and CL = 0.0.

R chart; LCL = 0, UCL = 2.575 for n = 3, and CL = 1.00.

The control charts are respectively shown in Fig. 10.7 and 10.8.

- 12 -
 10 Quality Control

Standardized Mean Chart

1.5

0.5
Mean
LCL
0
CL
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
UCL
-0.5

-1

-1.5
Observation

Figure 10.7: Control chart of standardized mean X

Standardized R Chart

2.5

R
LCL
1.5
CL
UCL
1

0.5

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Observation

Figure 10.8: Control chart of standardized range R

- 13 -
10 Quality Control

10.3 Process Capability Ratio and Process Capability

Index
Process capability ratio CP or capability index Cpk allows process engineer and
quality control engineer to determine ability of the machine/equipment
performing certain process. Using the example for the case of wire bonding, if
the specification of bond strength is 50g±5g, which shall mean the lower
specification limit LSL is 45g and upper specification limit USL is 55g. If the
average measurement for the samples taken from a specific wire bonder is 53g,
we would like to say this wire bond has poor capability index Cpk. Likewise, the
average measurement for the second wire bonder is 50.3g, we say this wire
bonder has better process capability index Cpk then the previous wire bonder.
Let’s go through the process of establishing process capability ratio Cp, process
capability index Cpk, and Taguchi process capability index Cpm for the
machine/equipment.

10.3.1 Process Capability Ratio Cp

Process capability is simply the range that contains all possible values of a
specified quality characteristics generated by a process under a given set of
conditions. For a normal distribution with α = 0.0026, the range shall contain
99.74% of the values, which is equal to six standard deviation (σ). Thus, the
process capability is

Process capability = 6σ (10.32)

The recent trend for the process capability is looking at eight standard
deviations, which is 99.9937% or 12 standard deviations, which is
99.9999998% of the values covering in the range.

Process capability ratio Cp compares the specification limits of the

characteristics of the device with the process capability. Thus, process
capability ratio Cp is defined as

Cp =
(USL − LSL ) (10.33)
6σ

where LSL is the lower specification limit and USL is the upper specification
limit. For the VLSI device process, it normally demands the process capability
ratio of more than 2, which means Cp ≥ 2.

- 14 -
 10 Quality Control

The portion of out of specification device produced is P[X < LSL] + P[X >
USL], which either equal to 2xP[X < LSL] or 2xP[X > USL]. If the mean µ of
the device produced is µ = (USL+LSL)/2, then the probability of defective
device is 2P z <
(LSL − µ ) = 
2P z <
LSL − ( USL + LSL) / 2 
or 2P z >
(USL − µ ) =
 σ    σ 
  σ 
 USL − ( USL + LSL) / 2 
2P z >  , where z = (X-µ)/σ that has standard normal
 σ
distribution with mean equals to 0 and standard deviation equals to 1. After
substituting σ from equation (10.20), the portion of defective device is equal to

[ ] [
2P z < −3C p or 2P z > 3C p ] (10.34)

For the case whereby there only one specification limit, which is either LSL or
USL, the process capability ratio are respectively equal to

(µ − LSL)
Cp = for the larger the better characteristic (10.35)
3σ

( USL − µ)
Cp = for the smaller the better characteristic (10.36)
3σ

The portion of out of specification device produced is P[X < LSL] or P[X >
USL], which are also equal to P z <
(LSL − µ ) or 
P z >
(USL − µ ) . After
 σ 
  σ 
substituting µ equation (10.35) and (10.36), the out of specification device
portions are respectively equal to

[ ]
P z < −3C p for the larger the better characteristic (10.37)

[ ]
P z > 3C p for the smaller the better characteristic (10.38)

For the process case whereby the process mean is not equal to µ = (USL-
LSL)/2, which shall mean that µ can either closed to LSL or USL, the portion of
the defective device produced is equal to


P z <
(LSL − µ ) + P z > (USL − µ ) (10.39)
 σ   σ 

Let’s take an example to illustrate how equation (10.39) works. In test

operation, three testers are used to measure the leakage current for a batch of
- 15 -
10 Quality Control

devices. The specification of the leakage test is ±30.0nA. The means obtained
from three testers are 20nA, 10nA, -15nA, while the standard deviations
obtained from three testers are 5.0nA, 6.0nA and 4.0nA respectively. Find the
portion of defective devices produced by the three testers. With known z-score,
use the standard normal cumulate probability table to obtain the cumulative
probability of reject.

The LSL is -30nA, while the USL is 30nA. The portion of defective device
produced by tester 1 is

P z <
(LSL − µ ) + P z > (USL − µ ) = P z < (− 30 − 20) + P z > (30 − 20) = P[z < -10]
 σ   σ   5   5 
+ P[z > 2] = 1- 0.9772 = 0.0228.

The portion of defective device produced by tester 2 is


P z <
(LSL − µ ) + P z > (USL − µ ) = P z < (− 30 − 10) + P z > (30 − 10 )
 σ   σ   6   6 
= P[z<-6.67]+P[z>3.33] = 1- 0.9995 = 0.0005.

The portion of defective device produced by tester 3 is


P z <
(LSL − µ ) + P z > (USL − µ ) = P z < (− 30 + 15) + P z > (30 + 15)
 σ   σ   4   4 
= P[z<-3.75]+P[z>11.25] = 1- 0.9999 = 0.00001.

Based on the example shown above, one can see that tester 3 is the most capable
tester. One can also see that the deviation of the mean from the nominal value
(in this case is 0nA) has greatly affect the portion of the defective device
produced by the testers. This effect is not capture by the process capability ratio
(Cp) because this ratio always assumes that the mean of the process is always
equal to (USL+LSL)/2. We shall discuss a different way that is to calculate the
process capability index Cpk to identify the effect.

10.3.2 Process Capability Index Cpk

Process capability index Cpk is introduced to resolve the limitation of process

capability ratio Cp. From the example shown above, the mean of tester 1 is
closer to the LSL, which means (USL - µ) < (µ - LSL). The mean of tester 2 is
closer to USL, which means (USL - µ) < (µ - LSL). The mean of tester 3 is
closer to LSL, which means (µ - LSL) < (USL - µ). Thus, there are two testers
have their means closed to LSL. The question is between the two testers, which
one has a better capability index?

- 16 -
 10 Quality Control

Based on the above example, this shall mean that the process capability
ratio Cp shall be taken from the value closer to either the LSL or USL divided
by a divisor, which should be 3σ instead of 6σ because it does not cover the
entire range of the specifications. Thus, the process capability index Cpk is
defined in equation (10.40) the device characteristics that have both LSL and
USL limits.

 (µ − LSL ) (USL − µ ) 
C pk = Min  ,  (10.40)
 3σ 3σ

The process capability index Cpk for VLSI device process demands the index
value of at least 1.5. i.e. Cpk ≥ 1.5.

For the device characteristic that has either LSL or USL, the process
capability index Cpk is defined as

(µ − LSL)
Cpk = for the larger the better characteristic (10.41)
3σ

( USL − µ)
Cpk = for the smaller the better characteristic (10.42)
3σ

Let’s use the earlier example to calculate the process capability indices of the
 (µ − LSL ) (USL − µ ) 
three tester s. The Cpk of tester 1 is C pk = Min  ,  =
 3σ 3σ
(USL − µ ) = (30 − 20 ) = 0.6666. The Cpk of tester 2 is
3σ 3x 5
 (µ − LSL ) (USL − µ )  (USL − µ ) (30 − 10 )
C pk = Min  ,  = = = 1.1111. The Cpk of tester 3
 3σ 3σ 3σ 3x 6

is C pk = Min 
(µ − LSL ) , (USL − µ ) = (µ − LSL ) = (30 − 10) = 1.6666. Based on the
 3σ 3σ  3σ 3x 4
results, one can clearly see that tester 3 has a better process capability index
then two other two testers and tester 1 has the least process capability index.
These results concur with portion of defective device produced by the testers
using Cp method.

The portion of out of specification device produced is P[X < LSL] + P[X >
USL] = P z <
(LSL − µ ) + P z > (USL − µ ) . If the mean µ is closed to LSL then
 σ     σ  

P z <
(LSL − µ ) > P z > (USL − µ ) and C = (µ − LSL) , this shall mean that
 σ   σ  pk
3σ
- 17 -
10 Quality Control

portion of the defective device can be approximately as 2 times


P z <
(LSL − µ ) i.e. 2P z < (LSL − µ ) . Replacing the mean µ using equation
 σ   σ 
(10.41), the portion of the defective device is equal to


2P z <
(LSL − µ ) = 2P z < −3C
[ ] (10.43)
 σ  pk

Similarly, if the mean µ is closed to USL, then P z <

(LSL − µ ) < P z > (USL − µ )
 σ    σ 
( USL − µ)
and Cpk = . This shall mean that portion of the defective device can be
3σ
approximately as 2 times P z <
(LSL − µ ) i.e. 2P z < (LSL − µ ) . Replacing the
 σ   σ 
mean µ using equation (10.42), the portion of the defective device is equal to


2P z >
(USL − µ ) = 2P z > 3C
[ ] (10.44)
 σ  pk

The main limitation of the Cpk index is due to the normality assumption of the
characteristics. Also, for the nominal-the-better type of characteristics, the Cpk
index yields only an upper bound for the total proportion of defectives.

10.3.3 Taguchi Process Capability Index Cpm

Taguchi process capability index Cpm takes into the consideration of loss due to
variation from the targeted value by replacing the standard deviation σ of the
process capability index Cp with the Taguchi’s loss function σ2 + (µ − X 0 )2 ,
where X0 is the targeted value. It is useful to identify processes that have same
Cpk. The Cpm index is calculated using equation (10.45).

Cpm =
(USL − LSL ) (10.45)
6 σ2 + (µ − X 0 )
2

Let’s use the example shown in Fig. 10.9 as the illustration. The targeted value
of the process is 1.00. The two processes have same Cpk values but different Cpm
indices theoretically saying that process B has a better process capability. In
practice, it may not be true since the variance of process B is higher means
expected more dissatisfaction from end user. The Cp values of process A and B
are respectively equal to 1.389 and 0.833, while the Cpk values are both equal to
- 18 -
 10 Quality Control

0.833. Although process A has lower standard deviation, its mean is further
away from target value. This resulted same Cpk value like the process B
whereby it has wider spread with mean closes to target value.

Figure 10.9: Processes with same Cpk but different Cpm indices

The calculated Cpm for the processes are 0.712 for process A and 0.833 for
process B.

10.3.4 Ppk Index

Wrong estimation of mean and standard deviation was shown as one source of
error in measuring the process capability. Let’s take an example. 50
observations collected over a period of 60 minutes. These observations were
collected in 10 sample batches of size 5 each. The time interval between
successive batches was 10 minutes. The following estimates of the process
standard deviation were obtained.

1. Average value of standard deviations of the 10 sample batches is

0.000738.
2. Standard deviation of the entire 50 observations taken as one sample
batch is 0.001329.

It was pointed out that the estimate given by 0.000738 contains the variation
within each sample batch of size 10 (short-term variability) only, whereas the
estimate of 0.001329 contains the variation within the batches as well as the
long-term variation in the process over a period of 60 minutes. Assuming that
the process was not stopped and adjusted during the interval of 60 i.e. the
- 19 -
10 Quality Control

process control technique used to monitor the process allowed the observed
deviation in the mean. The true estimate of the total variability in the
characteristic is 0.001329. Usually the estimate of the variation within each
batch size of 10 is used in calculating of Cp and Cpk indices. As this estimate is
smaller than the estimate of the total variation including the long-term
variability, these indices over estimate the process capability and hence under
estimate the proportion of defectives. In order to address this problem, the Ppk
index was introduced.

The Ppk index is calculated using the same formulae for calculating the Cpk
index. For nominal-the-better type of formula is

 (µ − LSL ) (USL − µ ) 
Ppk = Min  ,  (10.46)
 3σ 3σ

For the device characteristic that has either LSL or USL, the process capability
index Cpk is defined as

(µ − LSL)
Ppk = for the larger the better characteristic (10.47)
3σ

( USL − µ)
Ppk = for the smaller the better characteristic (10.48)
3σ

The above formulae shown the standard deviation σ is estimated by long-term

standard deviation. The proportion of defectives is estimated in the same
manner like Cpk index, which is


2P z <
(LSL − µ ) = 2P z > (USL − µ )
 σ   σ 
[ ] [
= 2P z < −3Ppk = 2P z > 3Ppk ] (10.49)

For nominal-the-best type of characteristics and

[ ] [
2P z < −3Ppk or 2P z > 3Ppk ] (10.50)

For smaller the better and larger the better types characteristics. As in the case
of the Cpk index, the distribution of the characteristic must be normal in order
for equation (10.49) and (10.50) to be valid.

- 20 -
 10 Quality Control

Let’s take an example to calculate the Ppk index for the data that has USL
0.995, USL 1.005, batch average standard deviation 0.000738, long-term
standard deviation 0.001329, batch average mean 1.001, long-term batch mean
1.0005 and estimate the proportion of defectives using the Ppk index.

The Ppk index is calculated using equation

 (µ − LSL ) (USL − µ )   (1.0005 − 0.995) (1.005 − 1.0005) 
Ppk = Min  ,  = Min  3x 0.001329 , 3x 0.001329 
 3σ 3σ
= Min[1.379, 1.128] = 1.128.

The Cpk index is calculated using equation

 (µ − LSL ) (USL − µ )   (1.001 − 0.995) (1.005 − 1.001) 
C pk = Min  ,  = Min  , = Min[2.71, 1.806]
 3σ 3σ   3x 0.000738 3x 0.000738 
= 1.806.

The portion of reject using Ppk is 2P[z > 3Ppk ] = 2P[z > 3x1.128] = 2x[1-0.9996]
= 0.0008 = 800ppm.

The portion of reject using Cpk is 2P[z > 3C pk ] = 2P[z > 3x1.86] = 2x1.21x10-8 =
2.42x10-8 = 0.0008 = 0.0242ppm.

From the results, one can see that Ppk gives a more realistic result than Cpk.

The limitations of the Ppk index are the same as those of the Cpk index
discussed earlier. In short, these are the normality assumption required for the
expressions to be valid, the upper bound on the proportion of defectives, and the
masking of the deviation of the mean from the target value by the standard
deviation.

10.4 Reliability
Reliability is a study of probability that a component such as integrated circuit,
equipment, or system will satisfactorily perform the intended function under
given circumstances, such as environmental conditions, limitations as to
operating time, and frequency, and thoroughness of maintenance, for a specified
period of time. Thus, an integrated circuit designed for the operation in the
space for a period of 15 years and if this integrated circuit can live up with the
intended period then one can say that this integrated circuit is reliable.

- 21 -
10 Quality Control

In this topic, student will learn the definition of failure rate, the statistical
distribution models used to calculate the reliability function, the failure rate, and
the cumulative fail function of the device/system. The student will also learn the
failure rate for the lifetime of the device and the accelerated test methods used
to wipe-out unreliable device earlier instead of waiting for a long time before
failure is shown up under normal operation conditions.

10.4.1 Failure Rate

A system such as a calculator that made of many semiconductor devices is put
in operation for the purpose of calculation, would have a certain failure rate (λ),
which means it may fail after certain number of operating hour. Thus, a
calculator (system) has failure rate with respect to operating time. The question
is if such failure is acceptable to end-user. Let’s take another example. A certain
failure rate of the system in a commercial aircraft is it acceptable to air-
travelling passengers?

The failure rate (λ) of a semiconductor device implemented in the system is

defined as

1 Failure
λ< (10.51)
No of transistor x period of operation

If a system contains 100,000 transistors then the failure rate (λ) from one month
1 Failure 1 Failure
operation is equal to λ < = ,
No of transistor x period of operation 1.0x105 x 720 hrs
which is equal to 14x10-9 Failure/Device-hour. If the unit of failure is defined to
be 1 Failure Unit = 1 FIT = 1 Failure/109 Device-hour then the example shown
has failure rate λ<14 FIT.

If one now considers a system that has 225 integrated circuits and the
failure rate of integrated circuit is 100 FIT. One can calculate the mean time to a
1 Failure
failure using equation (10.51). Thus, Period of operation <
No of transistor x λ
1 Failure
= -9
= 4.44x104hrs, which is equal to 5.13 years. The percentage of
225 x 100x10
failure per month shall be 100x10-9x225x720x100% = 1.62%.

- 22 -
 10 Quality Control

10.4.2 Mathematics of Failure and Reliability Functions

Based on the above discussed example, one would see that it is time consuming
before a failure is shown out. We cannot be waiting for 5.13 years to see a
failure is shown out to calculate the failure rate of a system. One ought to have a
developed method by sample testing to predict the failure rate of the system. In
this section, it discusses the methods to quantitatively measure and predict
device failure rate, and to identify and eliminate the failure mechanism.

If a device or system is operating at time t = 0. The probability that the

device will fail at or before time t is given by the function F(t). This is a
cumulative distribution function (cdf) with the following properties.

F(t) = 0 t <0
0≤ F(t) ≤ F(t’) 0 ≤ t ≤ t’ (10.52)
F(t) →1 t →∞

The reliability function R(t) is a probability that the device will survive to time t
without failure. Thus, the reliability function R(t) is related to fail function by
equation (10.52).

R(t) = 1- F(t) (10.52)

The derivative of fail function F(t) with respect to time is known as the
probability density function (pdf) and is represented by f(t). Thus, the pdf is
related to the cdf by

d
f (t) = F( t ) (10.53)
dt

or the cumulative function

t
F( t ) = ∫ f ( x )dx (10.54)
0

Similarly the reliability function,

∞
R ( t ) = ∫ f ( x )dx (10.55)
t

and
- 23 -
10 Quality Control

d
f (t) = − R (t) (10.56)
dt

In most applications, the most concern is the hazard rate, which is referring to
instantaneous failure rate. Thus, the term failure rate is always referred as
instantaneous failure rate not average failure rate.

The fraction of devices that are good at time t and that fails by time t+∆t
is given by

F(t+∆t) –F(t) = R(t) – R(t+∆t) (10.57)

The average failure rate during the time interval ∆ is given by

1 R ( t ) − R ( t + ∆t )
Average failure rate = (10.58)
∆ R (t)

In the limit as ∆ approaches zero, this becomes the instantaneous failure rate
λ(t), which is given by

1 dR ( t )
λ( t ) = − (1059)
R ( t ) dt

Integrating equation (10.55), it becomes

t

∫ λ(x )dt = − ln[R (t )]

0
(10.60)

Thus, the reliability function R(t) is given by

 t 
R ( t ) = exp − ∫ λ( x )dt  (10.61)
 0 

A common measure of reliability is the mean time to failure (MTTF) of the

device or system, which is defined as
∞
MTTF = ∫ tf ( t )dt (10.62)
0

- 24 -
 10 Quality Control

MTTF is the device’s average age at failure for a population whose reliability
function is R(t) with probability density function f(t).

10.4.3 Distribution Function of Failure Rate

It is desired to have a distribution that represents the failure rate of device over
its entire life. The failure of rate of an integrated circuit generally varies as a
function of time following the manner shown in Fig10.10.

Figure 10.10: Failure rate versus time for a typical integrated circuit

During the early life of the device, the failure rate is high but it decreases as
time passed. The failure during this period is called infant mortality failure. The
causes of the early failure are generally fabrication and assembly related defects
such as wire problem, micro-crack, over etch, photoresist residue,
contamination, electrostatic defect etc. The defects can be wiped out by
accelerated life test and followed by a final test to segregate them.

The steady useful life period, the failure rate is normally low and the rate of
failure is also fairly constant. Device failure in this period is a result of a large
number of fabrication and assembly unrelated causes such as mishandling,
applying wrong stimulant etc. The wear out period is the old age period,
whereby the device has reached the end of its life.

The simplest distribution for the failure rate is the exponential function,
which is characterized by a constant failure rate over the entire life time of the
device. This is the function of the steady useful life period, whereby all early
infant mortality failure and wear out mechanism have been eliminated. Thus,
- 25 -
10 Quality Control

the steady useful life failure rate function is λ(t) = λ0 = constant. From equation
(10.61), the reliability function R(t) is equal to R ( t ) = e − λ t . The cumulative
0

distribution function is F(t) = 1 − e − λ t , and probability density function is equal

0

to f(t) = λ 0 e − λ t , and the mean time to failure (MTTF) is equal to

0

∞
1
MTTF = ∫ tλ 0 e −λ0 t dt = .
0
λ0

Let’s look at another failure rate function, which is the Weibull distribution
function. The Weilbull states the failure rate varies as power of the age of the
device. The failure rate is represented by

β β−1
λ( t ) = t (10.63)
α

where α and β are parameters of infant mortality failure distribution and λ0 is

the steady useful-life failure rate. For β<1 the failure rate decreases with time,
and Weibull distribution may be used to represent the early infant mortality
failure. For β>1 the failure rate increases with time that can be used to represent
the wear out period of the device. If β=1 then the failure rate is constant. The
reliability function, fail function, probability distribution function, and mean
 1   1 
time to failure are R ( t ) = exp− t β  , F( t ) = 1 − exp− t β  ,
 α   α 
β β−1  1 
f (t) = t exp− t β  , and MTTF = α1/ β Γ(1 + 1 / β) respectively.
α  α 

In some applications of Weibull distribution function, a better fit to the

experimental failure rate is by replacing the time t by (t-γ), γ represents that the
portion of the life of the device has been used up during device manufacturing,
device burn-in, or device testing.

Log-normal distribution function is another common distribution used to

describe the failure rate of the device. It has been quite successfully used to
describe the failure rate of semiconductor device over long periods of time.
Depending on the values of the parameters of the distribution, this function can
represent any one of the three periods of the life of device as shown in Fig.
10.10. The probability distribution function of the log-normal distribution is
given by

1  1  ln t − µ  2 
f (t) = exp −    (10.64)
σt 2π  2  σ  
- 26 -
 10 Quality Control

1  1  t 2 
= exp −  ln   (10.65)
σt 2π  2  t 50  

where the median time to failure t50, which is the time when 50% of the devices
have failed is given by

t50 = eµ (10.66)

The cumulative distribution function F(t) is given by

1
t
dx  1  ln t − µ  2 
σt 2π ∫0 x
F( t ) = exp −    (2.26)
 2  σ  

and the failure rate λ(t) is equal to

f (t)
λ( t ) = (10.67)
1 − F( t )

10.4.4 Accelerated Testing

In the previous section, we mentioned that a system operated in normal

operating condition with 225 integrated circuits having failure rate 100 FIT
requires 5.13 years to have first failure shown up. It is clearly impractical to
study the failure characteristics of the device under the normal operating
condition. Some means must be utilized to accelerate the mechanism that causes
the unreliable device to fail earlier. The standards for accelerated tests of
integrated circuit are mainly covered in various Test Methods of Mil-Std-883
specifications. For an example the burn-in test is covered by Method 1015.9,
while Method 1010.8 is used for temperature cycle test.

There are six common stress tests used to accelerate device failure. They
are temperature, voltage, current, humidity, temperature cycling, and burn-in.
Temperature cycle is used to accelerate mechanical failure of die and assembled
package. This process is normally required for high reliable device such as the
military graded device. The progress is done before gross and fine leak test in
assembly process steps.

- 27 -
10 Quality Control

10.4.4.1 Temperature Cycle

The temperature cycle determines the ability of parts to resist extremely low and
extremely high temperature, as well as its ability to withstand cyclical exposure
to these temperature extreme. The devices are subjected to two extreme
temperatures normally between -650C and 1750C for minimum of 10 cycles.
Each cycle takes approximately 21 minutes. The dwell time in each temperature
is 10 minutes and the transfer time of the device between two temperature
chambers is 1 minute. Another failure can be sorted out by fine/gross leakage
test and test operation.

10.4.4.2 Temperature Acceleration

Many of the mechanism are due to chemical or physical processes that can be
accelerated by temperature. The reaction rate (R) at which these processes
proceed is governed, in most of the time, by Arrhenius equation.

R = R0exp(-Ea/kT) (10.68)

where Ea is the activation energy, k is the Boltzmann constant, and T is the

temperature. As mention earlier, the increase of reaction rate with increase of
temperature shall mean that the time to show a failure is shorter. Thus, the
reaction rate R is inversely proportional to time t, which is also mean the Rt is a
constant for a particular reaction type. Thus combining with equation (10.68),
the ratio of the times to failure is given by

t1 R 2 E  1 1 
= = exp  a  −  (10.69)
t 2 R1 k  T1 T2 

where temperature T1>T2 and time t1< t2. The ratio time to failure t1/t2 is also
termed as acceleration factor.
10.4.4.3 Voltage and Current Acceleration

Voltage and current are effective accelerating stresses for many of the common
failure mechanisms observed in integrated circuit. Voltage causes acceleration
of failure caused by dielectric breakdown, interface charge accumulation,
charge injection, and corrosion.

- 28 -
 10 Quality Control

Most studies indicate that the reaction rate of the failure mechanism is
proportional to the power of the applied voltage. The power is usually a
function temperature, which is

R (T , V ) = R 0 ( T ) V γ ( T ) (10.70)

where γ(T) has a value between 1 to 4.5.

In the case of dielectric breakdown, a different type of acceleration occurs.

For given applied electric field a certain fraction of the devices fail in a very
short time. Very few additional failures occur as the field is maintained. If the
applied field is then increased further, an additional fraction of failures occur,
again in a relatively short time.

Device operation at increased current level is used primary to accelerate the

failure due to electro-migration of metallic interconnect particular the aluminum
interconnect. The reaction rate (R) of electro-migration is a function of
temperature and current density (J), which follows equation (10.71).

R (T , V ) = R 0 (T ) J γ ( T ) (10.71)

where γ(T) has a value between 1 to 4.0.

It is usually not possible to independently vary the current in the device

because the current in the device is determined by the circuit design. In normal
case study like the electro-migration study, a special test structure is used. This
structure is used to determine the maximum allowable current density for which
the failure rate of conductor will be accepted. This maximum value is then used
as the design guideline in the layout of the integrated circuit.
10.4.4.4 Humidity-Temperature Acceleration

For a high reliability application integrated circuit device, it is usually packed in

hermetic package that allowing evaluation and initial studies to be carried out
under optimum conditions like the temperature cycle test for mechanical feature
of the package, wire bonding strength, die and package material thermal
coefficient expansion etc.

Humidity-temperature acceleration test allows the acceleration of wafer

vapor penetrating through the package especially the plastic package into the die
with cracked passivation layer that would start the rapid electro-chemical
- 29 -
10 Quality Control

corrosion process and subsequent showing up as device failure. Water vapor

normally contains contaminant like sodium metallic ion and it can penetrate
through crack and corrode the aluminum that would result in metal interconnect
failure.

For high reliable product, the leads of package especially the solder dipped
and tin plated leads are subject to high humidity salt atmosphere condition for
some time to check the corrosion level of the leads.
10.4.4.5 Burn-In

Burn-in is a process used basically to wipe out infant mortality failure of the
device so that the remaining devices can live from its steady useful life state to
wear out end of life state. As already mentioned earlier, the causes of the early
failure are generally fabrication and assembly related defects, through burn-in,
time to failure due to these defects would usually show up in less than 168
hours.

In integrated circuit assembly/test manufacturing, there are two schemes of

burn-in done either in compliance with military or industrial specifications. The
military devices are normally burn-in at temperature 1500C for 80 hours or
temperature 1250C for 168 hours with both static and dynamic signals
connected to the devices. Upon completion of burn-in, the devices are tested at
temperature 250C, 1250C, and -550C to wipe failure due to fabrication and
assembly processes.

The industrial compliance devices are normally burn-in at temperature

0
85 C for 72 hours with static signals connected to the devices. Upon completion
of burn-in, the devices are tested at temperature 250C, 850C, and -400C to wipe
failure due to fabrication process like contaminant and assembly process like
crack, ESD failure. Normally these types of process faults are shown up as
leakage test failure in final test.

For the commercial compliance devices, no burn-in is done unless, it is a

specially customer requirements.

Exercises
10.1. What is the purpose of in-process quality control monitoring?

10.2. Name one rule to check if the SPC chart is normal.

- 30 -
 10 Quality Control

10.3. The data in the table are obtained from an operation in fabrication. Derive
the values of SPC control lines for xi and R charts.

Observation Observation xi Moving Range

R
1 10.42 -
2 10.59 0.17
3 10.39 0.20
4 9.91 0.48
5 10.21 0.30
6 10.02 0.19
Mean x = 10.256 R = 0.268

10.4. Plot a SPC X chart and R chart of the control lines established in question
10.3.

10.5. The data in the table shown below are the current drain of eight integrated
circuits measured by a piece of equipment in test operation. The
specification limit of current drain is 10mA. Calculate the process
capability index of this equipment and defective part per million
produced by this equipment.

Observation Observation xi
1 9.0
2 9.2
3 9.9
4 9.0
5 9.5
6 9.8
7 8.9
8 9.8
Mean x = 9.39
Standard Deviation s = 0.41

10.6. A particular system contains 200,000 transistors has failure rate 75 FIT,
calculate the repair cost per month if each field engineer visit causes the
company RM2,000.

- 31 -
10 Quality Control

10.7. Calculate the mean time between failures of the system that has data
stated in question 10.6.

10.8. State how acceleration test method can be used to accelerate physical and
chemical processes failure in shorten time.

10.9. State two acceleration stress tests that used to accelerate failure due to
processes.

10.10. The VDD voltage for the voltage acceleration stress test for a device is set
at 7.0V instead of its normal operating voltage of 4.5V. If the time to fail
at normal operation voltage is 15 years, calculate the time to fail for the
device if voltage acceleration stress test is applied. You may use γ = 4 for
your calculation.

Bibliography
1. M Jeya Chandra, “Statistical Quality Control”, CRC Press LLC, 2001.
2. S.M. Sze, “VLSI Technology”, New York, McGraw Hill, 2002.
3. Jan M. Rabaey, Anantha Chandrakasan and Borivoje Nikolic “Digital
Integrated Circuit – A Design Perspective”, 2nd edition, Prentice Hall,
2003.
4. C.Y. Chang and S.M. Sze, “ULSI Technology”, New York, McGraw Hill,
1996.

- 32 -
 10 Quality Control

Appendix A

- 33 -
10 Quality Control

- 34 -
 10 Quality Control

Appendix B

- 35 -

A
Alternative hypothesis ..............................3
Arrhenius equation ..................................28
B Process capability ................................... 14
Burn-in ....................................................30
C
Center line .................................................3
Cumulative distribution function ............23
P
Ppk index .................................................. 19
Pre-control chart ....................................... 9
Probability density function.................... 23
Process capability index ............. 14, 16, 18
Process capability ratio ........................... 14
Q
Quality control .......................................... 1

D R
Distribution function of failure rate ........25 R chart ....................................................... 8
D-NOM Charts........................................10 Reaction rate ........................................... 29
Reliability ............................................... 21
E Reliability function ................................. 24
Electrostatic defect ..................................25 S
F Statistical process control chart ................ 2
Failure rate ..............................................22 T
Failure Unit .............................................22
Taguchi process capability index............ 18
H Temperature cycle .................................. 28
Hermetic package......................................2 U
Humidity-temperature acceleration ........29
Upper control limit ................................... 3
L Upper specification limit ........................ 14
Lower control limit line ............................3 V
Lower specification limit ........................14
Voltage and current acceleration ............ 28
M
W
Mean time to failure ................................24
Weibull distribution ................................ 26
N
X
Null hypothesis .........................................3
X chart ...................................................... 8

- 36 -