1 / 44

Screening for Counterfeit Electronics Components

Screening for Counterfeit Electronics Components. Glenn Robertson Stephen Schoppe Process Sciences, Inc. Leander, Texas 512.259.7070 www.process-sciences.com. Outline. Introduction Authentication Test Procedures Examples Conclusion. Introduction. Nature and Scope of Problem

JasminFlorian
Download Presentation

Screening for Counterfeit Electronics Components

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Screening for Counterfeit Electronics Components Glenn Robertson Stephen Schoppe Process Sciences, Inc. Leander, Texas 512.259.7070 www.process-sciences.com

  2. Outline • Introduction • Authentication Test Procedures • Examples • Conclusion

  3. Introduction • Nature and Scope of Problem • A growing (and high-profit) industry • Related to - • Globalization • Product Cost • High Demand/Scarcity • Obsolescence • “Spotty” laws and enforcement

  4. Introduction • Nature and Scope of Problem • Includes all types of products, such as: • Pharmaceuticals • Auto parts • Phones/batteries • Golf Clubs • Power Tools • Elevators • Electronic components • And many more…

  5. Introduction • Nature and Scope of Problem • What are counterfeit electronics? • Misrepresented parts • Wrong parts (altered P/N) • Wrong date code • Consumer grade remarked as military grade • Reclaimed parts • Manufacturing defects/surplus production • “Reverse Engineered” copies

  6. Introduction • Risk Reduction by Supply Chain Management • Careful supply chain management will always be the first line of defense • Purchase from franchised distributors • Screening inspection (Authentication) for high-risk components • Parts from “Grey Market” distributors • High Value/Scarce • Obsolete

  7. Introduction • Authentication Procedure(s) Developed for Screening High-Risk Components • Non-Destructive • Destructive

  8. Authentication Procedures

  9. Authentication Procedures • Non-Destructive • Component Database Comparison • Visual Testing • X-ray Inspection • X-ray Fluorescence (Lead Finish, RoHS screen) • Electrical Testing • Destructive • Chemical Decapsulation • Mechanical Delidding

  10. Component Information Database • Information Sources • “Golden” Part • Manufacturers’ Data Sheets • OCMs • Distributors • Other sources (e.g., customer, PSI files) • Date Code histories • Company histories • Chip suppliers • Mergers, name changes, plant closings/relocations • Prior screening history at PSI

  11. Visual Testing • Verify Correct P/N • Verify Date Code Against Database • Compare Font and Symbology Against “Golden” Part if Available

  12. Visual Testing • Inspect package for: • Blacktopping • Sanding Scratches • Discrepancies in Surface Texture

  13. Visual Testing • Marking Permanency Test (MPT) • Mineral Spirits (JEDEC JESD22-B107C) • MEK, Acetone, Alcohol • Degradation of Markings • Change in Surface Texture • Partial Removal of Coating

  14. Visual Testing • Inspect Lead Condition • Surface Appearance • Check Straightness and Coplanarity • Evaluate Solderability

  15. X-ray Inspection • Chip size/count • Wire bond count/pitch • Flip chip bump count/pitch • No need to open package

  16. X-ray Inspection

  17. XRF Testing • Provides rapid semi-quantitative elemental analysis • Typically used for: • RoHS compliance screening • Verify lead finish • Verify Pb presence where required

  18. Electrical Testing • Curve Tracer • Used primarily for discretes • Generates a characteristic curve for DUT • Plots voltage or current response vs. voltage or current stimulus  • Detects shorts, opens, high leakage current

  19. Chemical Decapsulation • Used on epoxy packages • Acid etching most common

  20. Mechanical Delidding • Metal or ceramic packages • Diamond saw or Dremel • Lid pry-off

  21. Verification Examples

  22. Lambda Discrete TO Transistor • 1 “Gold” part, 2 to be tested • Passed visual inspection and MPT • Si Chip Visible by X-ray Inspection • Bond wires not visible

  23. Lambda Discrete TO Transistor • Screening by Curve Tracer • One Faulty Component Quickly Identified Base to Emitter Emitter to Collector

  24. Lambda Discrete TO Transistor • De-lidding Results • No P/N or other markings on chips • Similar surface color and circuit artwork • Conclusion: both samples genuine, with one electrical failure

  25. Altera Ceramic DIP • Two Packages to be tested • Visual Inspection • No evidence of tampering • Markings passed permanency test

  26. Altera Ceramic DIP • Delidding to Examine Silicon Chip • Surface of chips virtually identical • Close inspection shows “WaferScale” on chip 1 vs. “D” on chip 2 • Probably from different fab lines or different revisions Full Chip Chip 1 Close up Chip 2 Close up

  27. Maxim 8-Pin DIP • One package to be tested • Visual Inspection • Markings Passed Permanency Testing • Non-uniform Leads, Evidence of Re-tinning

  28. Maxim 8-Pin DIP • Decapping Results • Manufacturer Logo, Date Code, P/N Identified • chip date code = 1990, and chip ID = “1016” • Corresponds to earlier Linear Tech P/N LT1016 • Component surface has been remarked to a MAX913, which is Maxim’s improved replacement for Linear Tech’s LT1016

  29. Philips 68 Pin PLCC • Two Packages to be Tested • Visual Inspection • Same markings on each component • Surface texture removed by solvent • Parts were black-topped and remarked Component Top As-Received Component Top After SolventResistance Test

  30. Philips 68 Pin PLCC • Decapping Results • Same marking on both chips • Corresponds with portion of external marking • Purpose of remarking possibly to alter date code or P/N variant

  31. Xicor 8-Pin DIP • Two Packages to be Tested • Visual Inspection • All markings removed by MPT • Textured surface also removed Component Top As Received Component Top After MPT Solvent Test

  32. Xicor 8-Pin DIP • Decapping Results • Same marking on both chips • Corresponds with external P/N • Purpose of remarking possibly to alter date code or P/N variant Overall Photo of Chip Chip Markings Close-Up

  33. Samsung 48-pin TSOP • Two Packages to be Tested • 64M x 8 Bit NAND Flash Memory • Visual Inspection • Laser-marked • No Evidence of Tampering Component Top As Received

  34. Samsung 48-pin TSOP • Decapping Results • Same marking on both chips • P/N K9F5608U0A (as marked on chip) corresponds to 32M x 8 Bit NAND flash Memory • Components have been remarked as 64M NAND Chip Markings Close-Up Overall Photo of Chip

  35. Actel Ceramic PGA • One Package to be Tested • Passed MPT, No Signs of Tampering Top component markings Bottom component markings

  36. Actel Ceramic PGA • Alphanumeric and Mfg Logo Located onChip Surface • “21225” on chip matches package marking • Many Actel chips produced by TI in 80s • Actel acquired operations from TI in 1995 • No indication of counterfeit Top Edge Close-Up Upper Right Corner Close-Up Chip Surface

  37. Micro Power Systems 48-pin SOIC • Four Packages to be Tested • Two each of date codes 9812 and 9751 • Passed MPT, No Signs of Tampering Date 9812 Bottom Markings Date 9812 Top Markings Date 9751 Top Markings Date 9751 Bottom Markings

  38. Micro Power Systems 48-pin SOIC • X-ray Inspection Results • Lead frames identical • All bond wires intact X-ray Image - 9751 date code X-ray Image - 9812 date code

  39. Micro Power Systems 48-pin SOIC • Decapping Results • Identical markings on all components Chip Surface – Upper Right Corner Chip Surface– Lower Right Corner

  40. Micro Power Systems 48-pin SOIC • Decapping Results Close-up • Marked with Exar Logo • Date Code 1996 • Exar acquired Micro Power Systems(M Logo) in 1994 • Markings consistent with authentic parts Markings Close-up – Lower Right Corner

  41. Motorola Microwave Transistor • 1 “Gold” part, 2 to be tested • Packages and markings identical

  42. Motorola Microwave Transistor • De-lidded Part Results • Package 3 chip has “MOT” and logo • Packages 1 and 2 are counterfeit Package 1 Package 3 Package 2

  43. Conclusions • Component Verification is Essentialto Supply Chain Management • Many Non-Destructive and Destructive Tests Available • Balance Verification Plan Against Assessment of Risk

  44. Thank You! Glenn Robertson glennr@process-sciences.com Stephen Schoppe sms@process-sciences.com

More Related