Electronics Assembly Knowledge, Vision & Wisdom
Ask the Experts
Estimating Failure Rate During Rework
Is there a way to estimate the potential failure rate introduced by hand rework of one SMT part that involves de-soldering and soldering a new part?
Ask the Experts

View the Expert comments below.
,{url:'http://www.circuitinsight.com/videos/experts_final.mp4'}], clip:{autoBuffering:true, autoPlay:true, scaling:'scale' } }).ipad();

Arranged via association with Circuitnet..
See the Expert Panel | Submit A Questions | Join the Panel
Ask the Experts Question
Ask the Experts
Estimating Failure Rate During Rework
Is there a way to estimate the potential failure rate introduced by hand rework of one SMT part. The process involves de-soldering and soldering a new part using soldering iron/tweezers. We're trying to understand the benefit of the rework versus the potential defects induced.
A.F.
Expert's Panel Responses
As a general rule of thumb, there is a 10X jump in defect creation between each assembly process.

SMT Reflow will, on average, have a 50 DPMO level. Wave will, on average, have a 500 DPMO level. Hand or Rework will, on average, have a 5000 DPMO level.

Even when you go to best in class, the 10X rule still tends to apply SMT Reflow best in class can be 2 to 10 DPMO. Wave best in class can be  20 to 100 DPMO.  Best in class will avoid rework at all costs
image
Dr. Craig D. Hillman
CEO & Managing Partner
DfR Solutions
Dr. Hillman's specialties include best practices in Design for Reliability, strategies for transitioning to Pb-free, supplier qualification, passive component technology and printed board failure mechanisms.
One alternative is to examine your rework area and answer the following questions:
  1. Total rework time. (min)
  2. Cost of rework (labor rate) - $
  3. Cost of part - $
  4. Potential damage to nearby components (assign a value, 0-5)
  5. Potential for scrap (assign a value, 0-5) 
With the information you can create a small chart like a "DFMEA" to give you a better view of your rework operation.
image
Edithel Marietti
Senior Manufacturing Engineer
Northrop Grumman
Edithel is a chemical engineer with 20 year experience in manufacturing & process development for electronic contract manufacturers in US as well as some major OEM's. Involved in SMT, Reflow, Wave and other assembly operations entailing conformal coating and robotics.
I'm not sure anyone can answer this question with the information provided. Test failures were typically balanced between process defects and product defects, so to try to determine the failure rate of a component removal and replacement would required knowing the MBTF failure rate of the particular component.  

Secondly this also depends upon the type of component being replaced and why it is being replaced. For example, was the component removed to fix a board condition beneath the component and the component was going to be reused, or is a new component going to be installed. I would not suggest using the hot tweezers to replace the component if it is a chip type component such as a capacitor or resistor as the heat is applied to close to the component itself and can damage the component.  

There are lots of issues to address but if the operator is well trained I would say the odds are just as good as the first time the component was installed onto the product.
image
Leo Lambert
Vice President, Technical Director
EPTAC Corporation
At EPTAC Corporation, Mr. Lambert oversees content of course offerings, IPC Certification programs and provides customers with expert consultation in electronics manufacturing, including RoHS/WEEE and lead free issues. Leo is also the IPC General Chairman for the Assembly/Joining Process Committee.
Reworking a solder joint typically increases the thickness of the intermetallic layer. Thickening the intermetallic layer can translate to a more brittle solder connection.  
In extreme situations, the intermetallic can become so thick that the solder will actually dewet and not want to "stick" to the pad.  

It should also be noted that successive rework cycles can reduce the thickness of the pad metallization. This can be especially problematic with the "knee" of a through hole where a substantial amount of the metallization may have already "washed away" during wave soldering.
image
Kay Parker
Technical Support Engineer
Indium Corporation
Kay Parker is a Technical Support Engineer based at Indium Corporation's headquarters in Clinton, N.Y. In this role she provides guidance and recommendations to customers related to process steps, equipment, techniques, and materials. She is also responsible for servicing the company's existing accounts and retaining new business.
Reader Comment
How about putting on the right part in the first place?
James M. Fournier
Submit A Comment

Comments are reviewed prior to posting. Please avoid discussion of pricing or recommendations for specific products. You must include your full name to have your comments posted. We will not post your email address.

Your Name


Company


E-mail


Country


Comments


Authentication

Please type the number displayed into the box. If you receive an error, you may need to refresh the page and resubmit the information.



Related Programs
bullet Customer Approval for Repairs
bullet Estimating Failure Rate During Rework
bullet Is Customer Approval Required for Class 3 Repair?
bullet Automating the Rework Process
bullet New Placement Technology for Rework
bullet Process Control and Reliability of Reworked BGAs
bullet Consensus for Baking Prior to Rework?
bullet Rework Challenges for Leading Edge Components BGA, QFN and LED
bullet Rework of High I/O Column Grid Arrays
bullet Advanced Rework Technology for Large Area Arrays
More Related Programs