1、_SAE Technical Standards Board Rules provide that: “This report is published by SAE to advance the state of technical and engineering sciences. The use of this report is entirely voluntary, and its applicability and suitability for any particular use, including any patent infringement arising theref
2、rom, is the sole responsibility of the user.”SAE reviews each technical report at least every five years at which time it may be revised, reaffirmed, stabilized, or cancelled. SAE invites your written comments andsuggestions.Copyright 2016 SAE InternationalAll rights reserved. No part of this public
3、ation may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE.TO PLACE A DOCUMENT ORDER: Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada)Tel: +1 724-776-4970 (outs
4、ide USA)Fax: 724-776-0790Email: CustomerServicesae.orgSAE WEB ADDRESS: http:/www.sae.orgSAE values your input. To provide feedback on thisTechnical Report, please visithttp:/standards.sae.org/AS6171/6AEROSPACESTANDARDAS6171/6Issued 2016-10Techniques for Suspect/Counterfeit EEE Parts Detection by Aco
5、ustic Microscopy (AM) Test MethodsRATIONALEThis document provides guidance and requirements on the Acoustic Microscopy (AM) test procedures to be employed by the Test Laboratory (Lab) for the non-destructive AM testing of parts for suspect counterfeit (SC) part detection. The level of testing shall
6、be derived by the User Organization working in conjunction with the Test Lab, taking into consideration the risk level as defined in the SC part detection flow specified herein. It shall be the responsibility of the Test Lab to conduct the AM test following the sequence of inspections for a given ri
7、sk level specified herein. The creation of this document is a step in addressing the ever-increasing global problem of electronic parts counterfeiting.INTRODUCTIONBecause many methods of counterfeiting of electronics involve a change of material from the original part, AM can provide a method of ins
8、pection of parts and detecting differences in their material composition. The method has been used extensively to detect non-conforming parts in electronics and in many other product areas. The implementation of Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS) requirements of the European Union and simila
9、r laws in other countries, resulted in wide spread use of AM techniques to confirm that electronic parts are not damaged while subjected to a surface mount to a PCB process. This document provides techniques based on those practices to detect Suspect counterfeit parts.The part photographs contained
10、herein are provided to illustrate the application of detection methods identified in the document, and are by no means intended to imply that a manufacturer identified in a photograph is involved with the suspect product.TABLE OF CONTENTS1. SCOPE . 31.1 Purpose 32. REFERENCES . 32.1 Applicable Docum
11、ents . 32.1.1 SAE Publications 32.2 Related Publications 32.3 Terms and Definitions 42.4 Acronyms . 43. DESCRIPTION OF METHODOLOGY/PROCEDURE . 43.1 Material Control/ESD Handling 43.2 Additional Considerations 43.2.1 Microfocus Radiology versus AM . 43.2.2 Infrared versus AM . 43.3 General Considerat
12、ions . 43.3.1 How AM Works 4SAE INTERNATIONAL AS6171/6 Page 2 of 293.4 AM Procedure for PEMS and BGAs 73.4.1 General Considerations . 73.4.2 Exterior AM Inspection (Near Surface AM Imaging) 73.4.3 Interior AM Inspections 93.4.4 Percentage Delamination Calculations (Figure 3) . 104. TEST EQUIPMENT AN
13、D CALIBRATION 114.1 Controls and Calibration . 115. REQUIREMENT . 115.1 Sampling 115.2 Categories of Testing/Risk Levels . 115.3 Testing Requirements and Minimum Risk Level . 115.4 Counterfeit Detection Test Sequence 115.5 Test Plan 125.6 Analysis and Interpretation of Results . 125.7 Test Report 12
14、5.8 Certification and Training . 135.8.1 Personnel . 135.8.2 Laboratory/Test Facility 155.8.3 Proficiency 155.9 Data Retention Requirements 165.9.1 Report Retention 166. NOTES . 166.1 Revision Indicator . 16APPENDIX A ACOUSTIC MICROSCOPY IMAGES 17FIGURE 1 DIAGRAM OF REFLECTIVE MODE ACOUSTIC MICROSCO
15、PY 5FIGURE 2 DIAGRAM OF TRANSMISSION MODE ACOUSTIC MICROSCOPY 5FIGURE 3 EXAMPLE OF PERCENTAGE DELAMINATION CALCULATIONS . 10TABLE 1 AM TEST REQUIREMENTS BASED ON RISK LEVEL 11SAE INTERNATIONAL AS6171/6 Page 3 of 291. SCOPEThrough the use of ultra-high frequency ultrasound, typically above 10 MHz, Ac
16、oustic Microscopy (AM) non-destructively finds and characterizes physical features and latent defects (visualization of interior features in a layer by layer process) -such as material continuity and discontinuities, sub-surface flaws, cracks, voids, delaminations and porosity. AM observed features
17、and defects can be indicators that the components were improperly handled, stored, altered or previously used.If AS6171/6 is invoked in the contract, the base document, AS6171 General Requirements shall also apply.1.1 Purpose The purpose of this document is to provide recommended techniques and guid
18、elines for the use of Acoustic Microscopy for detection of counterfeit electronic components.2. REFERENCES2.1 Applicable DocumentsThe following publications form a part of this document to the extent specified herein. The latest issue of SAE publications shall apply. The applicable issue of other pu
19、blications shall be the issue in effect on the date of the purchase order. In the event of conflict between the text of this document and references cited herein, the text of this document takes precedence. Nothing in this document, however, supersedes applicable laws and regulations unless a specif
20、ic exemption has been obtained.2.1.1 SAE PublicationsAvailable from SAE International, 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001, Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada) or +1 724-776-4970 (outside USA), www.sae.org.AS6171 Test Methods Standard; General Requirements, Suspect/Counterfeit, E
21、lectrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical Parts2.2 Related PublicationsThe following publications are provided for information purposes only and are not a required part of this SAE Aerospace Technical Report.MIL-STD-883, Method 2030 Ultrasonic Inspection of Die AttachNASA PEM-INST-001 Instruction
22、s for Plastic Encapsulated Microcircuit (PEM) Selection, Screening, and QualificationJ-STD-020 Moisture/Reflow Sensitivity Classification for Nonhermetic Solid State Surface Mount DevicesJ-STD-035 Acoustic Microscopy for Nonhermetic Encapsulated Electronic ComponentsMIL-STD-1580 Destructive Physical
23、 Analysis for Electronic, Electromagnetic, and Electromechanical PartsESA/SCC No. 25200 Application of Scanning Acoustic Microscopy to Plastic Encapsulated DevicesGEIA-STD-006 Requirements for Using Solder Dip to Replace the Finish on Electronic Piece PartsSAE INTERNATIONAL AS6171/6 Page 4 of 292.3
24、Terms and DefinitionsSee section 2.2 of AS6171 General Requirements.2.4 AcronymsSee section 2.3 of AS6171 General Requirements.3. DESCRIPTION OF METHODOLOGY/PROCEDURE3.1 Material Control/ESD Handling3.1.1 Parts subjected to handling during AM testing can be damaged by ESD. Therefore, the ESD control
25、 requirementsof section 3.9.5 of AS6171 General Requirements shall be followed.3.2 Additional Considerations3.2.1 Microfocus Radiology versus AMAM and microfocus radiology are complementary techniques that are frequently found in the same laboratories and they can reveal different features. Radiolog
26、y relies on differential attenuation of the X-ray energy. AM relies on material change. The practical result is that AM is orders of magnitude more sensitive for detecting air space type defects such as voids, delaminations and cracks.3.2.2 Infrared versus AM Infrared is an inspection technique that
27、 is based on how the infrared energy transmits through a material. Since air space type defects do not transmit the infrared energy as well as continuous material, this technique is sometimes used to inspect for voids and delaminations. Although this technique can produce a picture very quickly, it
28、is highly limited by the materials under inspection and the details achievable. AM on the other hand, takes a little longer to generate an image but the practical result is that the images are of much higher detail. Plus, AM is not limited by the materials under inspection.3.3 General Considerations
29、3.3.1 How AM Works3.3.1.1 Reflection Mode (Figure 1) - As per J-STD-035Acoustic Microscopy for Nonhermetic Encapsulated Electronic Components, AM has the ability to create images by generating a pulse of ultrasound, which is focused to a pinpoint spot. The pulse is directed into a sample and reflect
30、ed at interfaces. The frequency of the pulses and design of the lens are chosen to optimize spot size (resolution) and depth penetration for each application. In the reflection mode of operation, the same transducer is used to send and receive the ultrasonic pulse. Return echoes arrive at different
31、times based upon the depth of the reflecting feature and the velocity of sound in the materials. The operator positions an electronic gate to capture the depth of interest. The amount of ultrasound reflected at the interface is based on differences in the acoustic impedances of the materials at the
32、interface. Greater differences in the acoustic impedances of the materials at the interface produce higher amplitudes of reflected ultrasound. The order of the acoustic impedances, going from one material to the other, will change the polarity/phase of the reflected ultrasound, too. In general, goin
33、g from a lower to higher acoustic impedance will have a stronger positive reflection and going from a higher to lower will have a stronger negative reflection. In addition, changes in the reflectedsignal can provide evidence of changes in material properties. This data is often the key to determinin
34、g variations in materials used and manufacturing processes.SAE INTERNATIONAL AS6171/6 Page 5 of 29Figure 1 - Diagram of reflective mode acoustic microscopy3.3.1.2 Transmission Mode (Figure 2) - As per J-STD-035Acoustic Microscopy for Nonhermetic Encapsulated Electronic Components, AM also has the ab
35、ility to create images based on how the ultrasound transmits through the entire sample thickness. Since air space defects such as voids, delaminations, cracks and porosity cannot transmit ultrasound, the loss of transmitted signal indicates the presence of these types of defects. In addition, change
36、s in the transmitted signal can provide evidence of changes in material properties. This data is often the key to determining variations in materials used and manufacturing processes.Figure 2 - Diagram of transmission mode acoustic microscopySAE INTERNATIONAL AS6171/6 Page 6 of 293.3.1.3 AM Microele
37、ctronic Product Applications Relative to Counterfeit Detection1. Plastic Encapsulated Microcircuits (PEMs)2. Plastic Ball Grid Arrays (BGAs)3. Ceramic Chip Capacitors4. Die Attach5. Chip Scale Packages (CSPs)6. Flip Chips7. Stacked Dies8. Ceramic Ball Grid Arrays (CBGAs)9. Tape Automated Bond (TAB)1
38、0. Hybrids, MCMs, SIPs11. Flex Circuits12. Printed Circuit Boards (PCBs)13. Smart Cards14. Bonded Wafers15. Thermo Electric Coolers (TECs)16. Power Modules3.3.1.4 Materials AM Technology is Effective for Relative to Counterfeit Detection1. Glass2. Ceramics3. Plastics4. Adhesives5. Metals6. Fiberglas
39、s7. Polymers8. Graphite9. Metal Matrix10. CompositesSAE INTERNATIONAL AS6171/6 Page 7 of 293.4 AM Procedure for PEMS and BGAs3.4.1 General ConsiderationsThe following shall be considered prior to and after obtaining the AM image; refer to the equipment manufacturersinstructions for optimum equipment
40、 settings.1. Transducer selectiona. Frequency (MHz)b. Focal Length (FL) in water c. F# (FL/Diameter of Piezoelectric Element)d. Reflection and/or Transmission Mode imaginge. Parallelism of transducer scan plane and surface of part being scanned2. Focal Depth(s) desired within the sample3. Are there
41、any AM “Reference“ images of known good parts available from the manufacturer or other reliable source?4. Examine image for anomalies (refer to 3.4.2 and 3.4.3)5. Calculate percentage of defects per critical interfaces (refer to 3.4.4)6. Record all information required in the Test Report (refer to 5
42、.7)3.4.2 Exterior AM Inspection (Near Surface AM Imaging) 3.4.2.1 Metal Lead Frame Based PackagesThis section defines the potential exterior defects which may indicate that a device is counterfeit. These defects do not necessarily mean the devices are counterfeit and should be used with other availa
43、ble data to determine whether a device is counterfeit. In some cases, additional visual or other testing (electrical, DDPA, etc.) may need to be done to conclusively determine if a device is a counterfeit.There are several indicators that a device may be counterfeit. These indicators are listed in 3
44、.4.2.1.1 through 3.4.2.1.8.For each of these indicators, the evidence which could be obtained from an acoustic image is identified. Wherever possible, a visual example of this type of defect using AM is referenced in Appendix A. 3.4.2.1.1 Evidence of Mishandling1. Voids2. Pits (see Appendix A, Figur
45、e A11)3. Scratches (see Appendix A, Figure A12)4. Pry Marks3.4.2.1.2 Evidence of Ghost Marking (see Appendix A, Figure A13)SAE INTERNATIONAL AS6171/6 Page 8 of 293.4.2.1.3 Evidence of Sanding 1. Sanding marks seen through blacktop layer (see Appendix A, Figure A1)2. Inconsistent edge shape distortio
46、ns seen at a corner(s) (see Appendix A, Figure A2)3. Partial removal of Pin-One dimple3.4.2.1.4 Evidence of Blacktop Coating1. Uneven blotchy surface image (see Appendix A, Figure A14)2. Overspray in Pin-One cavity (see Appendix A, Figure A15)3. Significant, measurable contrast (gray scale gain) bet
47、ween front and back component scans (see Appendix A, Figure A16)4. Foreign particles encapsulated within the coating3.4.2.1.5 Evidence of Microblasting1. Polished glass beads exposed in surface image2. Significant color/gray scale contrast between front and back component scans3.4.2.1.6 Evidence of
48、Chemical Etch1. Polished glass beads exposed in surface image2. Significant color/gray scale contrast between front and back component scans3. Signs of chemical reaction/indications of fluid ingression or gaps where leads enter package3.4.2.1.7 Evidence of Original Marking 1. Original paint markings
49、 seen through blacktop layer (see Appendix A, Figure A13)2. Partial etch marking (ghost image) left after removal by sanding (see Appendix A, Figure A3)3.4.2.1.8 Acoustic Impedance Measurement (AIM)NOTE: Can be performed on suspect counterfeit part itself, front versus back surface, or in comparison to known good part.1. AIM value compared to known authentic AIM of same component 2. AIM front surface value compared to back surface value
