Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Destructive Physical Analysis (DPA)”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2019

Achieving Improved Reliability with Failure Analysis

Reliability is the ability of a product to properly function, within specified performance limits, for a specified period of time, under the life cycle application conditions. Failure analysis is a vital tool in the effort to ensure reliability of electronic products and systems throughout their product lifecycle. Today, organizations involved in activities within the electronics supply chain are facing new challenges, not just from complex assembly styles, harsher lifecycle environments, and sophisticated supply chains, but also from customers who are demanding a quicker turn-around. Unfortunately, root cause failure analysis is often performed incompletely, leading to a poor understanding of failure mechanisms and causes and, customer dissatisfaction due to recurring failures. The PDC (Professional Development Course) starts with an introduction to reliability concepts, physics of failure and an overview of failure mechanisms that affect PCBs (Printed Circuit Boards), PCBAs (Printed Circuit Board Assembly) and components. The PDC then dives into root cause hypothesizing techniques (Pareto, FMEA (Failure Modes and Effects Analysis), fishbone (Cause-And-Effect Diagram), FTA (Fault Tree Analysis)), non-destructive and destructive analysis and, materials characterization will be discussed. Numerous failure analysis case studies will be used to illustrate the techniques and analysis principles to arrive at the root cause(s) of field failures on printed circuit boards, active components, and assemblies. What Attendees will Learn: Topics include: Overview of Reliability Concepts Failure mechanisms of electronic products Root cause analysis Failure analysis techniques -Non-destructive techniques (optical, CSAM (Confocal Scanning Electron Microscopy) etc.) -Destructive analysis (DPA (Destructive Physical Analysis), Decap (Decapsulation), FIB (Focused Ion Beam) etc.) -Materials characterization (XRF (X-Ray Fluorescence) , EDS (Error Detection Sequential), TMA/DSC (Thermal Mechanical Analysis/Differential Scanning Calorimetry) etc.)

PCB quality↗
NASA NTRS1981

Capacitor DPA: Does it do any good?

Methods of destructive physical analysis (DPA) are suggested which might have more usefulness if the procedures followed lines of accelerated testing. A brief presentation of DPA procedures is followed by a discussion of their value.

Porter, D. C.↗
NASA NTRS1984

Development of standardized specifications for screening space level integrated circuits and semiconductors

Standardized methods are established for screening of JAN B microcircuits and JANTXV semiconductor components for space mission or other critical applications when JAN S devices are not available. General specifications are provided which outline the DPA (destructive physical analysis), environmental, electrical, and data requirements for screening of various component technologies. This standard was developed for Air Force Space Division, and is available for use by other DOD agencies, NASA, and space systems contractors for establishing common screening methods for electronic components.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1991

Destructive physical analysis results of Ni/H2 cells cycled in LEO regime

Six 48-Ah individual pressure vessel (IPV) Ni/H2 cells containing 26 and 31 percent KOH electrolyte were life cycle tested in low Earth orbit. All three cells containing 31 percent KOH failed (3729, 4165, and 11,355 cycles), while those with 26 percent KOH were cycled over 14,000 times in the continuing test. Destructive physical analysis (DPA) of the failed cells included visual inspections, measurements of electrode thickness, scanning electron microscopy, chemical analysis, and measurements of nickel electrode capacity in an electrolyte flooded cell. The cycling failure was due to a decrease of nickel electrode capacity. As possible causes of the capacity decrease, researchers observed electrode expansion, rupture, and corrosion of the nickel electrode substrate, active material redistribution, and accumulation of electrochemically undischargeable active material with cycling.

Lim, Hong S.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Report of investigations into charge cadmium reactivity: Nickel-cadmium cell ESD 91-86

In Aug. 1990, a presentation was given at the 25th Ann. IECEC meeting on the results of Destructive Physical Analysis (DPA) on two successive sets of Ni-Cd cells. The cells were of two different separator types, Pellon 2505 and 2536. One cell of each separator type was analyzed on two occasions; the first pair were analyzed to establish baseline data on essentially new cells; the second pair were analyzed after the cells had been on charge-discharge cycling for a year in connection with a satellite simulation study. The gas composition found in the cells, the absence of charged cadmium in the analytical data, and the appearance of dried out portions on the Cd plates in the one year cell S/N 7 which used Pellon 2505 as its separator material, were questions which arose. These concerns are answered and the observational results are clarified.

Lewis, Harlan L.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Destructive physical analysis results of Ni/H2 cells cycled in LEO regime

Six 48-Ah individual pressure vessel (IPV) Ni/H2 cells containing 26 and 31 percent KOH electrolyte were life cycle tested in low earth orbit. All three cells containing 31 percent KOH failed (3729, 4165, and 11,355 cycles), while those with 26 percent KOH were cycled over 14,000 times in the continuing test. Destructive physical analysis (DPA) of the failed cells included visual inspections, measurements of electrode thickness, scanning electron microscopy, chemical analysis, and measurements of nickel electrode capacity in an electrolyte flooded cell. The cycling failure was due to a decrease of nickel electrode capacity. As possible causes of the capacity decrease, researchers observed electrode expansion, rupture, and corrosion of the nickel electrode substrate, active material redistribution, and accumulation of electrochemically undischargeable active material with cycling.

Lim, Hong S.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Special tests and destructive physical analyses as used by the Aerospace Corporation with nickel-hydrogen cells

The destructive physical analysis (DPA) of electrochemical devices is an important part of the overall test. Specific tests were developed to investigate the degradation mode or the failure mechanism that surfaces during the course of a cell being assembled, acceptance tested, and life-cycle tested. The tests that have been developed are peculiar to the cell chemistry under investigation. Tests are often developed by an individual or group of researchers as a result of their particular interest in an unresolved failure mechanism or degradation mode. A series of production, operational, and storage issues that were addressed by the Electrochemistry Group at The Aerospace Corporation are addressed. As a result of these investigations, as well as associated research studies carried out to develop a clearer understanding of the nickel oxyhydroxide electrode, a series of unique and useful specialized tests were developed. Some of these special tests were assembled to describe the methods that were found to be particularly useful in resolving a wide spectrum of manufacturing, operational, and storage issues related to nickel-hydrogen cells. The general methodology of these tests is given here with references listed to provide the reader with a more detailed understanding of the tests. The tests are classified according to the sequencing, starting with the impregnation of the nickel plaque material and culminating with the storage of completed cells. The details of the wet chemical procedures that were found to be useful because of their accuracy and reproducibility are given. The equations used to make the appropriate calculations are listed.

Zimmerman, A. H.↗
NASA NTRS1994

Analysis for nickel (3 and 4) in positive plates from nickel-cadmium cells

The NASA-Goddard procedure for destructive physical analysis (DPA) of nickel-cadmium cells contains a method for analysis of residual charged nickel as NiOOH in the positive plates at complete cell discharge, also known as nickel precharge. In the method, the Ni(III) is treated with an excess of an Fe(II) reducing agent and then back titrated with permanganate. The Ni(III) content is the difference between Fe(II) equivalents and permanganate equivalents. Problems have arisen in analysis at NAVSURFWARCENDIV, Crane because for many types of cells, particularly AA-size and some 'space-qualified' cells, zero or negative Ni(III) contents are recorded for which the manufacturer claims 3-5 percent precharge. Our approach to this problem was to reexamine the procedure for the source of error, and correct it or develop an alternative method.

Lewis, Harlan L.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Destructive Physical Analysis of Flight- and Ground-Tested Sodium-Sulfur Cells

Destructive physical analysis (DPA) was used to study the effects of microgravity on the sulfur electrode in sodium-sulfur cells. The cells examined in this work were provided by the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) from their program on sodium-sulfur technology. The Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) provided electrical characterization of the flight-tested and ground-tested cells.

Wasz, Margot L.↗
NASA NTRS2004

COTS Ceramic Chip Capacitors: An Evaluation of the Parts and Assurance Methodologies

This viewgraph presentation profiles an experiment to evaluate the suitability of commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) ceramic chip capacitors for NASA spaceflight applications. The experiment included: 1) Voltage Conditioning ('Burn-In'); 2) Highly Accelerated Life Test (HALT); 3) Destructive Physical Analysis (DPA); 4) Ultimate Voltage Breakdown Strength. The presentation includes results for each of the capacitors used in the experiment.

Sampson, Michael J.↗
NASA NTRS2004

COTS Ceramic Chip Capacitors: An Evaluation of the Parts and Assurance Methodologies

Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) multilayer ceramic chip capacitors (MLCCs) are continually evolving to reduce physical size and increase volumetric efficiency. Designers of high reliability aerospace and military systems are attracted to these attributes of COTS MLCCs and would like to take advantage of them while maintaining the high standards for long-term reliable operation they are accustomed io when selecting military qualified established reliability (MIL-ER) MLCCs. However, MIL-ER MLCCs are not available in the full range of small chip sizes with high capacitance as found in today's COTS MLCCs. The objectives for this evaluation were to assess the long-term performance of small case size COTS MLCCs and to identify effective, lower-cost product assurance methodologies. Fifteen (15) lots of COTS X7R dielectric MLCCs from four (4) different manufacturers and two (2) MIL-ER BX dielectric MLCCs from two (2) of the same manufacturers were evaluated. Both 0805 and 0402 chip sizes were included. Several voltage ratings were tested ranging from a high of 50 volts to a low of 6.3 volts. The evaluation consisted of a comprehensive screening and qualification test program based upon MIL-PRF-55681 (i.e., voltage conditioning, thermal shock, moisture resistance, 2000-hour life test, etc.). In addition, several lot characterization tests were performed including Destructive Physical Analysis (DPA), Highly Accelerated Life Test (HALT) and Dielectric Voltage Breakdown Strength. The data analysis included a comparison of the 2000-hour life test results (used as a metric for long-term performance) relative to the screening and characterization test results. Results of this analysis indicate that the long-term life performance of COTS MLCCs is variable -- some lots perform well, some lots perform poorly. DPA and HALT were found to be promising lot characterization tests to identify substandard COTS MLCC lots prior to conducting more expensive screening and qualification tests. The results indicate that lot- specific screening and qualification are still recommended for high reliability applications. One significant and concerning observation is that MIL- type voltage conditioning (100 hours at twice rated voltage, 125 C) was not an effective screen in removing infant mortality parts for the particular lots of COTS MLCCs evaluated.

Brusse, Jay A.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Light Weight Design Nickel-Alkaline Cells Using Fiber Electrodes

Using fiber electrode technology, currently produced by Bekaert Corporation (Bekaert), Electro Energy, Inc., (EEI) Mobile Energy Products Group (formerly, Eagle-Picher Technologies, LLC., Power Systems Department) in Colorado Springs, CO has demonstrated that it is feasible to manufacture flight weight nickel-hydrogen cells having about twice the specific energy (80 vs. 40 watt-hr/kg) as state-of-the-art nickel-hydrogen cells that are flown on geosynchronous communications satellites. Although lithium-ion battery technology has made large in-roads to replace the nickel-alkaline technology (nickel-cadmium, nickel-metal hydride), the technology offered here competes with lithium-ion weight and offers alternatives not present in the lithium-ion chemistry such as ability to undergo continuous overcharge, reversal on discharge and sustain rate capability sufficient to start automotive and aircraft engines at subzero temperatures. In development to date seven 50 ampere-hour nickel-hydrogen have been constructed, acceptance tested and briefly tested in a low earth orbit (LEO) cycle regime. The effort was jointly funded by Electro Energy, Inc. and NASA Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, OH. Five of the seven cells have been shipped to NASA GRC for further cycle testing. Two of the cells experienced failure due to internal short circuits during initial cycle testing at EEL Destructive Physical Analysis (DPA) of one of the cells has shown the failure mode to be due to inadequate hydrogen catalyst electrodes that were not capacity balanced with the higher energy density nickel oxide electrodes. In the investigators opinion, rebuild of the cells using proper electrode balance would result in cells that could sustain over 30,000 cycles at moderate depths-of-discharge in a LEO regime or endure over 20 years of geosynchronous orbit (GEO) cycling while realizing a two-fold increase in specific energy for the battery or a 1.1 kg weight savings per 50 ampere-hour cell. Additional information is included in the original extended abstract.

Pickett, David F.↗
NASA NTRS1996

Status of JPL Li-Ion Cell Development Program

None given. This is a series of viewgraphs from a visual presentation to the workshop. From outline: JPL program overview; low temperature studies; cycle life studies; destructive physical analysis (DPA) of cycled cells; prototype cell development; summary of accomplishment.

JPL LI-Ion Program low temperature studies cycle l↗
NASA NTRS2006

Reliability Evaluation of Au/Al Wire Bonds in Commercial Microcircuits

The slide presentation provides an overview of research related to problems in quality evaluation in the mechanisms of wire bond degradation. Case studies presented examine the evaluation of reliability of hermetic and plastic microcircuits with suspected poor wire bonding. The authors conclude that in the cases when destructive physical analysis (DPA) or design evaluation indicate possible problems with wire bonding, a wire bond qualification testing may be required. This test should include high temperature storage (175 degrees C to 200 decrees C) of the parts with periodic measurements of contact resistances followed by internal examination and wire pull or ball sear testing.

Teverovsky, Alexander↗
NASA NTRS2013

Are Soft Short Tests Good Indicators of Internal Li-ion Cell Defects?

The self discharge test at full state of charge, may not be a good one to detect subtle defects since the li-ion chemistry has the highest self discharge at full state of charge. One should characterize self discharge versus storage time for each cell manufacturer/design to differentiate between normal self discharge and that due to a subtle manufacturing defect. The various soft short test methods indicate that if this test is carried out at full discharge (0% SOC) with all capacity removed (by lowering the current load in a stepwise manner to the same end of discharge voltage), then the cells need to be placed in storage for more than 72 hours to get a good analysis on the presence of subtle defects since it takes more than 72 hours to achieve voltage stabilization. If the cells are to be charged up even to a small percentage (ex. 1%), 72 hours are sufficient to determine issues. However, the pass/fail criteria should be based on a valid OCV decline. Less than 10 mV voltage decline is not a good method to detect subtle defects. As mentioned in the first bullet, self discharge is a competing reaction when a charge is introduced and hence a characterization of the self discharge versus storage time is required to fully correlate voltage decline to a failure due to a subtle defect. Soft short test method cannot be relied on for defect detection because cells with and without voltage decline seemed to have similar defects and characteristics. Screening methods such as internal resistance and capacity as well as a 3-sigma range for OCV, mass and dimensions should be used to screen out outliers. A very critical aspect in the understanding of subtle defects is to carry out destructive analysis of cells from every lot to confirm the quality of production and screen all cells and batteries in a stringent manner to have a high quality set of flight cells. Self Discharge Test: Fully charged cells shall be placed in Open circuit stand for 72 hours (OCV measurement twice a day); continue for total of 14 days with 1 reading per day 2. Soft Short Test 1: Fully charge; cells discharged to manufacturer's end of disch. Voltage (EODV) cutoff at C/5 rate; stand for 30 minutes; discharge with C/500 to the same EODV. stand for another 30 minutes; discharge the cells again using C/1000 current to the same EODV. OCV measurements twice a day for 72 hours and then for total of 14 days (data collection same as in 1.) 3. Soft Short Test 2: Fully charge; cells discharged to the manuf. EODV with a C/13 constant current; provide a 10 hour rest, discharge again to the same EODV with a current of C/250, provide a 10 hour rest, discharge again using a C/250 rate, provide a 24 hour rest, charge using C/250 to 3.15 V (for ~12 hours). OCV measurements twice a day for at 72 hours. (data collection same as in 1.) 4. Soft Short Test 3: Fully charge; cells shall be discharged using C/10 current to manuf. EODV. Allow the cell to remain at Open circuit for 10 seconds. Discharge the cell at C/20 rate to the same EODV, hold open circuit for 24 hours. Discharge the cells at C/200 rate to the same end of voltage cutoff and hold open circuit for 24 hours. Discharge the cells one more time at C/200 rate to the same EODV and hold open circuit for 36 hours. Charge at C/200 rate to 3.15 V and hold for 3 days. Record OCV during the open circuit stand periods every 12 hours and at the beginning and end of the 3 day hold (include the 12 hour OCV recording during this time also). Capacity Cycling: Cells with declining voltages - one cell from each manufacturer chosen for cycling Destructive Physical Analysis (DPA): Cells with and without decline chosen from each lot for DPA.

Jeevarajan, J.↗
NASA NTRS2022

Reliability Assurance for COTS Capacitors

Burn-in (BI) and life testing (LT) are the most important reliability related elements of quality assurance for components used in space systems. This presentation discusses the need of transition from the existing approach to BI, LT, and destructive physical analysis (DPA) of COTS capacitors that is based on military specifications to an alternative approach that is based on Physics of Failure and HALT.

reliability↗