Although plenty of part numbers go through our shop which are classified and their end use is unclear, it is still quite possible to recognize the end users and the importance of performing quality work.  Products, processes, and chains are only as strong as their weakest link; and narrowing our focus too far on one spot in the product development cycle can have catastrophic consequences.  Our company, Cirexx International, does a fair bit of work within the defense industry.  For this reason, I will use the following hypothetical example as a reference.

“Although PN xxxxxxx is a simple 6 layer rigid-flex, it plays a critical role within a hand-held communications device our warfighters in Iraq rely on and expect to be functioning regardless of extreme conditions.  It’s failure, delamination, improper design could mean life or death for a whole troop.  And we all know who our military serves… us.”

If we focus on and remember who our end user is, the technical nature of our boards, our workplace morale, and our general business practices will all be affected.

Technical
If we were to keep in mind the big picture of who we serve with our products, many technical aspects of our products would be affected.  Most notable, I believe quality and quality assurance would improve.  Technicians, managers, suppliers, etc would all hold themselves to a high moral standard above and beyond their ISO or corporate quality mandate.  Responsiveness to issues and concerns on the part of the customer would increase.  Recognizing that each delay in the product life-cycle keeps a potentially life-saving product out of production and out of the hands of our soldier, nurse, pilot, etc for a greater period of time.  Paperwork and voicemails will have less likelihood of being put off until the afternoon, the end of the week, etc.  And lastly, collaboration will improve.  Although it is not necessarily the job of the lamination technician to determine proper materials for use in the final product, they may have some knowledge of past performance that the designers did not.  Whether it’s that they heard from a colleague that a particular thickness of laminate has been having issues in extreme temperatures, or in humidity.  Knowing that the board will be in a product in use in the rain forest may happen to be a huge help.

Workplace Morale
Not only will the technical integrity of your boards increase, but also workplace morale and spirit.  Employee sense of ownership and duty will grow when their understanding of the big picture increases and the tunnelvision we often fall susceptible to is countered.  This will lead to increased attention to detail, greater job satisfaction, and a greater sense of community within your organization and between organizations.

Business Practices
Lastly, recognition of the true impact your company’s product has will lead to changes in how your business operates.  Customer service and support will take greater precedence.  Also, capital improvements and research/development will take greater priority.  Recognition of the ways we need to remain competitive, and provide the most cutting edge products to our customers will occur when we step back and think about the importance we play in the lives of so many people.

Who are your customers?  Your real customers… probably people who have never and will never hear of you.  Yet it is them who you serve, it is for them that we work day and night, providing the highest quality products with the best customer support and responsive attitudes possible.

What other improvements do you feel would occur if we were to all continually remind ourselves of these things?  Feel free to comment below.

Here we go…

Industry Staples
Electrical/Electronics and Computer Development Engineers Group (2,789  April ‘09- 5,796 Members Now)
This is the largest technical group I was a part of last  year.  It is a dynamic group, and very active.  However, the content tends to be a little bit more generic, and lacks the technical specificity found within the smaller groups formed for topical discussions.  That being said, I really appreciate that there is always something new whenever you visit, and there is a large, diverse audience to whom you can field discussion questions, share news articles, and work on your networking skills.

EMS Insider (Electronics Manufacturing Services (2,663 April ‘09- 5,815 Members Now)
EMS Insider falls into the same category of LinkedIn group as the EECDE group above.  More general discussion on larger, less specific, and often marketing/manufacturing oriented topics.  This is a great group to be a part of so that you have messaging rights to people within the industry.

PCB Forum (1,133 Members Now)
The PCB Forum group is a mid sized group and falls right in the middle of everything.  Decent membership, good conversation, relevant news, etc.  If you’re not a part of this group, you ought to be.

Printed  Circuit Board Technologies and Solutions (330 Members April ‘09- 930 Members Now)
Same thoughts as the PCB Forum above.

PCB Designers and PCB Designers Group (423 Members and 378 Members respectively)
These two groups cater to the PCB Designer, as is clear by their titles.  PCB Designers is the more robust and put together group, although PCB Designers Group still has provided some valuable activity for me in the news section whenever I have posted a link.  There is a discussion thread about combining the two groups… and whether that happened or not, I am not sure.  I would speculate that a majority of the members are overlapping members.  However, these are my two favorite groups!!…. be sure to check them out and join.  I see them growing tremendously in the next year.

VLSI (2,337 Members April ‘09- 4,233 Now)
This group has grown a lot, but still has that feel of being subsidized by a few key contributors rather than it being a lively, dynamic community.

IPC – Association Connecting Electronics Industries
The IPC group is a great resource for the PCB Professional.  Although it is not updated or contributed to as often as many other groups, it is relatively free of junk postings and distractions.  I really appreciate the IPC and their efforts to provide resources; and supporting their LinkedIn group is a great way to show some support.

Rising Stars
These groups have great potential and I see them growing tremendously in the near future… however, that’s up to all of you.  With a little love and involvement, I see these topic/technology specific groups growing into very informative communities.  Some have very few members, and great content, while others have a good number of members, but need more applicable content.

Flex Circuit (42 Members April ‘09- 172 Members Now)

PCB/BGA Rework and Repair (103 Members Now)

Unexplainable PCB Quality Issues (151 Members Now)

PCB HDI – Next Generation (124 Members Now)

Signal Integrity Engineering (1,184 Members Now)

RF/Analog/Mixed signal circuit design & product/test engineering (883 Members Now)

RFID/AIDC Technology (1,818 Members Now)

Homepage logo taken from this site.

I see a variety of similarities between Tin whiskers… and my own: Elusive, thin, short, and never helpful.  And there is always the random single hair that frustrates you to no end.

Unfortunately, the costs associated with tin whiskers in the electronics, defense, health, and aerospace industries are astronomical compared to my need to shave once every two weeks.  Failure of products due to tin whisker growth can undermine an entire mission, scrap a program, or take a life.  I think about electronic pacemakers, our men and women traveling to space, or our servicemen and women flying at Mach speeds thousands of feet above the ground.

There has yet to be a definitive ruling made concerning the cause/prevention of whiskers, although pure tin components and plating seem to exhibit the highest likelihood of developing them.  Best practices at this time are to use a tin/lead mix with no greater than 97% tin.  However, RoHS regulations are throwing a wrench into this with its demands for lead-free products.  Some RoHS frequently asked questions are answered here.

This issue received significant attention at the IPC Technology Interchange this last December.  Also, the Center for Advanced Life Cycle Engineering at the University of Maryland (CALCE) and The Institute of Scientific and Industrial Research at Osaka University (ISIR) are putting on another International Symposium on Tin Whiskers this June.  The call for papers is still out.  Read more about this at PCB007. Proceedings from past Symposiums can be found here.

For a great overview of tin whiskers, be sure to check out the resources provided by NASA.  The pictures in this article have all been sourced from NASA.

Have you dealt with tin whiskers in your products/designs? What types of damage have they caused?  What are some of the things you have done to diminish the likelihood of them?

Homepage Image Original found here

Blackjack II

As the keys begin to stick on my Samsung Blackjack II, and I think about how the navigation wheel used to spin freely, I remember the days of my Siemens M56.  That little phone was built like a tiny brick, and it withstood the harshest abuse.  Whether we were swimming in saltwater or it was falling off the top of my moving car, my little phone never complained, remained tough, and always worked.  It was a sad day when, after three and a half years, I had to “upgrade” to a Motorola Razr.

M56

While the M56 was tough, it was never tested or designed as a “rugged” device.  I was very fortunate it survived, but for those whose lives rely upon the dependability of their electronics, chance does not satisfy.  Many manufacturers have recognized the need for electronics able to withstand the harshest of environments, and have designed “rugged” products for use in situations as diverse as the battle field to deep freezers.

But how rugged is the “rugged” classification?  Please comment below if you feel that I am far off…

What I have found has not surprised me.  It seems that just as I can tell you I am really strong; unless you ask me how much I can bench-press, you really have no idea how true my claims of strength are.  And even if I tell you how much I can lift, you are not sure if I am telling the truth.  The same seems true for the classification of “rugged” within the electronics industry.  Many have self-certified their products as rugged, or have developed internal testing procedures under which they qualify their products.  So how do you know what you are getting, and how do you know which rugged product to buy?  Let’s dig further.

The very first step you should complete is to determine exactly in what environment your product will be operating.  Some of the various standards/tests include: low pressure altitude testing, high and low temperatures, rain (freezing and penetrating), various forms of shock (both while in operation and while off), humidity, growths (fungus, algae, rust), sand and dust, accelerations, explosions, and various types of vibration.  As you can imagine, every product will meet different standard within each of these categories.  And while phone A may be “rugged” when it relates to salt-water, phone B may be “rugged” as it relates to extreme temperatures.

Fortunately there are various standards in place for the testing of products as it relates to rugged use.  The MIL-STD-810 (Department of Defense Test Method Standard for Environmental Engineering Considerations and Laboratory Tests) is a 500+ page document
(open at your own risk, it’s big) outlining the chamber test methods necessary to use when certifying a product to be rugged in a particular application for military use.  This standard can be tailored for commercial use, and many products advertise that they meet MIL-STD-810 standards in various settings.  For example, you will notice that the Olympus Stylus-Tough 8000 is MIL-STD-810 certified to certain levels as it relates to shock and temperature.  But just because it’s rated as rugged does not mean you should take it onto the water slide (although in this case you can… see the video on this page).

Some companies certify themselves to the MIL-STD-810 standards, while others use outside auditing organizations to confirm their claims.  If it were me, I would always require an external auditing organization to confirm the claims made (especially if the product is protecting the life of someone).  Some companies have developed and branded their own systems of rugged classification.  For instance, Sonim cell phones adhere to the “Rugged Performance Standards” set in place by Sonim.  Take a look at the video.  It is pretty neat. Though again, always make sure that an outside agency has substantiated the claims made by the manufacturer.

So just as I will tell you that I am very strong, and you would ask me to qualify my statements; so too should you always seek to qualify the statements made in regards to the rugged nature of various electronics.  What do you need it to withstand?  What standards does it claim to adhere to?  Have those claims been substantiated by an outside agent?

Enjoy!