Issue 15

P. F 68 For par To eac me Fur ana mic Fin (e.g eva Th to- . Fuchs et alii, F the BLDT ameter. Anal compare the h other and thod compar thermore, to lysis was pe roscope. It w ally, as it is a . [8, 9]) , We luation. erefore, a fict failure in the rattura ed Integ , the numbe ogous, for th BLDT with a Pearson’s ison is shown Fig check the c rformed. M as tested if t dvantageous ibull-paramet itious time-to BLCBT. A c rità Strutturale, r of drops u e BLCBT th Figure 6 the BLCBT r factor [7] w in Fig. 7. ure 7 : Schema orrelation of icrosections he same failu to use the W ers were det -failure had onversion fa 15 (2011) 64-7 ntil the first e number of : The test set- the method as calculate tic representat the failures of the expe re modes oc eibull distribu ermined to a to be calcula ctor was intro 3; DOI: 10.3221 failure, det cycles until fa up of the boar average resul d to rate the ion of the com types introdu cted failure cur despite th tion in reliab llow for a co ted for all BL duced by div /IGF-ESIS.15.07 ected by the ilure was me d level cyclic b ts for the dif linear corre parison of BL ced by the d locations w e different lo ility and life mparison o DT results to iding the av event detec asured. end test. ferent PCB b lation. A sch DT and BLC ifferent testi ere prepared ading condit data analysis f the method have a corr erage time-to tor, was tak uild-ups wer ematic repre BT. ng methods, and analyz ions. , similar to th s on the bas elating param -failure of all en as evalua e plotted aga sentation of a failure pat ed with a l e BLDT anal is of a statis eter to the ti build-ups in tion inst the tern ight ysis tical me- the