Abstract Reliability investigations and product qualifications are typically built on a set of “standard” aging methods which are designed to extract degradation that can be statistically analyzed in order to predict lifetimes. This study is intended to reveal information about what actually happens to devices during use by the customer as determined by failure analysis. This information is provided as an account of experiences with supplier–customer relationships It is intended to describe expectations (from the supplier viewpoint) and to guide aging and qualification methodologies towards meeting those expectations. Comparisons to accelerated aging results are discussed. This work was initiated to provide a modern update to a similar paper entitled: “GaAs IC Reliability Returns: A Story of Abuse”. The original data was presented at the 1992 GaAs REL Workshop on October 4, 1992 in Miami Beach, Florida [Roesch Bill, Rubalcava AL, Winters RA. GaAs IC reliability returns: a story of abuse. In: GaAs REL Workshop, October 4, 1992, Miami Beach, Florida. p. 30–4. [1] ].
[1]
Nien-Tsu Shen.
Perfect Quality for Free
,
2006
.
[2]
William J. Roesch,et al.
Outstanding Issues in Compound Semiconductor Reliability
,
2005
.
[3]
W. J. Roesch.
Volume and quality impacts on reliability: a new game for GaAs
,
2000,
2000 GaAs Reliability Workshop. Proceedings (IEEE Cat. No.00TH8513).
[4]
W. Roesch,et al.
Thermal acceleration of compound semiconductors in humidity
,
2005,
[Reliability of Compound Semiconductors] ROCS Workshop, 2005..
[5]
W.J. Roesch.
Reliability of compound semiconductor workshop historical review
,
2005,
[Reliability of Compound Semiconductors] ROCS Workshop, 2005..