Electronic components aging

[Spehro Pefhany]

Consider the 9/11 experience, Katrina, etc. and how well we fared.
Interesting to consider how technology could be EFFECTIVELY deployed
in those scenarios.

It's a much different problem to come up with ways to rapidly deploy
high-intensity relief to a limited area compared to dealing with a
lower intensity (but long-term serious) problem covering a wide-spread
area involving millions or tens of millions of people. We have
information on what that looks like (say Iraq in mid-2003) but there
is little first-hand experience of it in North America or most of
Europe. Military-style logistics (and admininstration) would probably
be required. How is grain going to get from storage to 1,000,000
people if several of the intermediate steps are "broken"? Most people
have enough food to last only days or maybe a week or two.

E.g., a group I was affiliated with proposed creating "doctor-in-a-can".
Essentially, a doctor's examination room in one of those full sized
storage containers. Examination table, X-ray, autoclave, generator,
water supply/purification, "supplies", etc. The thinking being you
can put one on a truck and get them to a disaster area within hours
and "ship" the doctor from a third location. More durable than a
"tent" and able to carry the heavy supplies that would be accessories
in a "tent solution" (e.g., large supply of water, propane, etc.)

Sounds interesting. They could be stockpiled in strategic locations
and deployed quickly.

I've mused over how to make phone service available to neighborhoods
while somehow constraining traffic (i.e., a portable cell tower
seems the ideal solution -- except "Gabby" will get on the line
and just yack away as soon as she gets through. Any solution
that silently rations service will result in folks spending hours
just trying to make a call!)

Too bad cell phones don't have a mesh net function!

 

[Don Y]

Hi Spehro,

It's a much different problem to come up with ways to rapidly deploy
high-intensity relief to a limited area compared to dealing with a
lower intensity (but long-term serious) problem covering a wide-spread
area involving millions or tens of millions of people. We have

Yup. But the two tend to go hand in hand -- the short term "acute"
problem followed by the longer term "chronic" problem. *Before*
people realize they're screwed, they grasp for the amenities that
they have become accustomed to (i.e., "why can't I make a phone call?")
Once that initial "event" has been absorbed, then they worry about
survival. Once *that* looks like it is addressed (however well or
poorly), they find themselves bored and wanting some of those
amenities, again ("There's nothing on TV", "My phone doesn't work",
etc.)

information on what that looks like (say Iraq in mid-2003) but there
is little first-hand experience of it in North America or most of

I suspect Iraqis were better able to cope than Americans would be!
Too big a hit to their standard of living coupled with a general
lack of self-reliance.

Europe. Military-style logistics (and admininstration) would probably
be required. How is grain going to get from storage to 1,000,000
people if several of the intermediate steps are "broken"? Most people
have enough food to last only days or maybe a week or two.

I don't think most people can make a full week. And, would probably
be distressed that they couldn't eat *what* they wanted ("Chicken
AGAIN??").

Lots of LDS'ers, here. Presumably, part of their religious practices
includes preparing for the end of days -- stockpiling food, etc.
(I think supposed to have 1 year of food on hand. This is "policed"
to varying degrees, apparently!).

The tongue-in-cheek reply when confronted with the "what would you
do in the event of a prolonged national disaster" is: "find an LDS
family"!

I think the more realistic (and probable!) problem is a short term
disturbance. Say 3 to 7 days in duration. Of course, you wouldn't
necessarily know how long this was going to be at the onset. But, I
see most folks would immediately step to the "evacuate" or "plunder"
response.

(We have BoB's prepared for shelter-in-place, drive-out, and hike-out
scenarios. In the last case, having the bags packed so we can quickly
shed supplies/weight if only one of us is able to carry any load. I'm
sure none of our neighbors have even considered these possibilities!
E.g., CB radio, handhelds, flint, first aid, clothing, maps, radio,
solar/mechanical chargers, inverters, meds, etc.)

Sounds interesting. They could be stockpiled in strategic locations
and deployed quickly.

Exactly. Similar to the way rapid response meds/agents are
stockpiled locally. If *all* you have to do is "say go", its
a lot easier to get this sort of aid to a location than if you
had to round up all the supplies, arrange shipping, find a
contact person on the other end, etc.

("Put this on the truck. Start driving to Feenigs. We'll call
you with the final destination and your contact person before you
get there.")

Too bad cell phones don't have a mesh net function!

The problem with cell phones is people think of them as "theirs".
I suspect people would be unwilling to allow their phone to be used
as a relay -- unless they were actively talking on it! I think this
would be exaggerated in the event that power was in short supply
and folks tried to economize on their battery life!

I originally thought a suitcase into which cheap *wired* phones
(handsets) could be connected. That way, someone could oversee
fair use of the resource. And, allow people to "register"
themselves at a particular "suitcase" so folks could relay messages
back to them at that suitcase (check in tomorrow to see if you
have any messages waiting). Power it off a car battery (*any*
car) while still *in* the car.

The more realistic solution is to allow cell phones to connect to this
suitcase. But, then you need some way of rationing the service so
folks don't just treat it like "normal" telephony.

You would also find yourself inundated with requests for folks
to "charge their cell phone battery". This goes away if *you*
provide the handset...

It's an interesting problem. But, not one that *I* have to address!
<grin>

 

[[email protected]]

Speaking of high reliability... I think that it is often

a somewhat neglected issue, so I start this thread as a

mean to collect *practical* observations for people who

care about long MTBF. In other words, "if I had to build

a device which should last 50 years, I would... what?"



Resistors (if not overloaded): immortal



Ceramic capacitors: as above

Tantalum/nobium caps: ?



Electrolytic caps: disaster area



Transistors, diodes and ICs: the silicon die should not

degrade, but how about the endurance of the resin?

At least some early Polish ICs had problems here:

the thermal coefficient of the casing was not well-matched

and power cycling finally broke the bonding wires.

There were some moisture absorbtion problems, too.

Is it still an issue?



BGA: it can be expected that thermal cycling will

eventually destroy the balls, as there are no "springs"

to absorb thermal stresses. Gull wings are much better here.



FR4: ?



Soldering: the EU has done a lot in order to make

the newer devices not very reliable as a consequence

of the RoHS directive. I see nothing wrong with the

old SnPb joints, the old boards look healthy.



Conformal coating: ?



Wires: ?



Please add your comments.



Best regards, Piotr

I have nothing to add to the list, but this subject remind me of this old "electronics glow"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...0-years-old-Livermore-California-station.html

 

[Greegor]

All of Des Moines Iowa had water shut off in 1993 because
flood water overtook the water treatment facilities.
Emergency broadcasts told people to fill water
containers in the last hour of water service.
Then it was shut off.
Early reports were that it would be undrinkable
for THREE or FOUR months, but Army Corps
of Engineers helped with a process
called shock chlorination.
Megadose of chlorine made the water OK for
flushing toilets and not much else, then
eventually it was suitable for showers and
washing hands, and eventually it was back
to being approved for drinking within only
one month of the flood shutdown.

I assume that gas/electric and some
telephone land lines went down in
areas inundated with water.

In Cedar Rapids Iowa in 2008 the flood
didn't quite shut down the water plant
though they had to shut off some of the
wells and had a reduced capacity.

Before the water came up, the gas company
ran around in the areas projected to
be flooded (500 year flood plain)
removed every gas meter and capped the pipes.

Electrical utility pulled the meters,
shutting off power in those areas also.

Pulling that many power and gas meters must
have been a bizarre job.

Some people were angry about electricity
being shut down since they were running
pumps to pump out their basement.

Ironically, pumping out your basement
backfires disastrously, causing basement
walls to be forced in (collapsed) by
force of water outside in the soil.
Letting the basement fill with water
counteracts the outside water pressure
that collapses basement walls.

Collapsed foundations/basement walls
was the most common thing that
made the difference between a home
being repairable or not, for cost reasons.

 

[Jasen Betts]

All this stuff will die fairly quickly (days) if there is a severe
problem.

BTDT (feb 22 2011)

If that ever happens, those folks affected are going to be in
a world of hurt. Once the water supply fails, the wastewater treatment
won't be far behind because it depends on a continous flow of water.

This might be the real threat of EMP and the weapons (carbon
filaments, smart bombs) that destroy electrical and water treatment
systems- by taking out utilities over a wide area, people will start
to die within weeks and they'll be in no mood to do anything but try
to keep themselves alive.

If the roads are still working water (for drinking etc) can be trucked
in (in tankers) and distributed by hand.

I've never seen an unexpected loss of natural gas or water pressure
(i.e. not due to scheduled repairs or maintenance). I imagine a water
main bursting would result in a loss of pressure to some homes and
businesses. Not paying bills might result in a sudden loss of gas
pressure. ;-)

I've heard of two events close enough to make the news, but never
been effected. no gas here.

The last little bit of phone line is more prone to problems, IME. POTS
must be 100-1000x more reliable than internet based services.

I've had the phone go out 5 times and the ADSL go out three times,
ADSL will still work on a shorted pair.

 

[whit3rd]

Speaking of high reliability... I think that it is often

a somewhat neglected issue, so I start this thread... "if I had to build
a device which should last 50 years, I would... what?"



Resistors (if not overloaded): immortal

Not if you include carbon film or carbon composition; with any HV applied,
the corrosion of C into CO or CO2 is a killer. The screen resistors on
old TVs (had about 2-4 kV on them) were notorious for failing open.
The E-field around the component would attract any ions (like, from ozone).

Electrolytic caps: disaster area

Maybe, maybe not; there are solid-electrolyte electrolytics that have
very good aging (and the old MIL tantalum/silver things have a reliable
chemistry).

Transistors, diodes and ICs: the silicon die should not
degrade, but how about the endurance of the resin?

Alas, breakdown voltage of bipolar transistors goes down (and frequency
of operation goes UP) with age. Some diodes (LEDs) have
surface-related contamination issues, there's lots of complaints
about rotary encoders that result from them going dim with time.

Cosmic rays can kill a MOS oxide, there were also faults due to
natural radioactivity in ceramic RAM packages. Not to mention,
there's ICs using stored charge in little floating capacitors to
trim thresholds, those stored charges WILL leak.

 

[josephkk]

I don't suppose that those systems are still running without having had some
maintenance (board swaps, repairs etc). Would you wish to guarantee thatany
system you design today will still be operating that far in the future.

I don't know where your utilities are based but I am certain that the ones
near me have all upgraded their systems over the years (just to cope with
demands).

Here we get into some of the interesting parts. They do not replace
working gear without a really good reason. Particularly if it involves
major investment in compatible equipment in some way. Face it, rebuilding
refineries and such is very expensive. And generally not done even
piecemeal.

?-)

 

[Don Y]

Hi Joseph,

Here we get into some of the interesting parts. They do not replace
working gear without a really good reason. Particularly if it involves
major investment in compatible equipment in some way. Face it, rebuilding
refineries and such is very expensive. And generally not done even
piecemeal.

You replace preemptively when the cost of a *required* replacement
(i.e., after a failure) exceeds the cost of the preemptive maintenance.

They replaced all the gas lines (*to* each residence as well as
the feeds throughout the subdivision) here in the past year or two.
(i.e., "piecemeal").

The time involved was incredible! A single residence would take
the better part of a day (the crews had to leave the property
looking the same as when they arrived). So, there would be 6 or 8
crews working the neighborhood at a time. And, this went on for
months!

When they (later) came through to replace the mains (and upgrade
them in the process), they first "located" all of the buried
services (phone, CATV, electric, water, sewer) in the roadway.
Then, cut "spy holes" through the asphalt and excavated down
to expose each such service, verify its presence and its depth
below grade.

Then, they used a "horizontal drill" to burrow under the street
while working to avoid each of these services whose path the drill
would cross (from the time the service is exposed to the time it
is reburied, it remains *their* liability). While the drill could
run ~700 ft in a day, all the prep work and followup work made it
more like 50 ft per day, overall -- by the time the spy holes
were all filled in, pipe sleeve shaded, etc.

*Then*, they had to switch all those *new* residential "drops"
over to the new feed and "abandon" the old feeder.

I.e., this was a *huge* investment. Yet, everything was "working"
at the time it was undertaken. Obviously, the concern was that
a natural failure after several decades underground could easily
cost them millions of dollars (if a gas leak followed a pipe into
a residence and started a fire/explosion).

The same is true of other utilities. E.g., the City replaces
water meters continuously (rotating schedule). Failures can
result in leaks. *Or*, billing errors (often in the consumer's
favor!).

It's just a case of expected valuation: is it cheaper to be
proactive or reactive? Do the math...

 

[[email protected]]

Here we get into some of the interesting parts. They do not replace
working gear without a really good reason. Particularly if it involves
major investment in compatible equipment in some way. Face it, rebuilding
refineries and such is very expensive. And generally not done even
piecemeal.

?-)

Did you look at the pictures from the Fukushima nuclear power station
control rooms ? The reactors were built in the early 1970's and based
on those pictures, original equipment was still used at least in the
control room.

The operation license was extended by 10 years, just before the
tsunami, so we can just guess, if the original equipment would have
been used to end of that period or replaced just for the 10 year
extension.

A Canadian nuclear power company just recently tried to hire PDP-11
assembler programmers to keep some auxiliary systems running until
2050.

One reason for using very old systems in heavy industry is the
certification process, which would have to be done for each replaced
system.

In some cases the requirements have become harder, but some old
systems might be accepted with those historical requirements. Thus the
owner tries to keep the old system running as long as possible with
small incremental replacements but still remaining within the original
requirements and certification.

 

[Don Y]

Did you look at the pictures from the Fukushima nuclear power station
control rooms ? The reactors were built in the early 1970's and based
on those pictures, original equipment was still used at least in the
control room.

The operation license was extended by 10 years, just before the
tsunami, so we can just guess, if the original equipment would have
been used to end of that period or replaced just for the 10 year
extension.

A Canadian nuclear power company just recently tried to hire PDP-11
assembler programmers to keep some auxiliary systems running until
2050.

US military is interested in 6502 programmers. 8085 is offered in
a rad-hardened version. etc. This when folks are walking around
with thousands of times the processing power in their phones! :-/

Until recently, I kept a 9-track tape operational, here, to support
some legacy products (can you spell "boat anchor"?)

One reason for using very old systems in heavy industry is the
certification process, which would have to be done for each replaced
system.

It's not just certification but, often, the molasses pace that
acquisition processes move in some industries. E.g., when I
visited the Cheyenne Mountain Complex, they were installing
computers they had ordered 10 *years* earlier! (Um, doesn't
that make them *inherently* obsolete? And, these are what is
protecting us from The Russkies??)

In some cases the requirements have become harder, but some old
systems might be accepted with those historical requirements. Thus the
owner tries to keep the old system running as long as possible with
small incremental replacements but still remaining within the original
requirements and certification.

Witness the exorbitant prices some folks want for ancient hardware.

One firm I worked at was scurrying to find Apple ]['s in order to
keep producing a product senselessly based on that platform. I wonder
if the customers paying $30K+ realized the Apple therein was
acquired at a garage sale, etc. :-(

I worked on a "tester" for *core* memory for a US bomber in the
late 70's. Core? WTF?? (actually, there are good reasons to
use core -- size NOT being one of them!)

<frown>

 

[Tim Williams]

I worked on a "tester" for *core* memory for a US bomber in the
late 70's. Core? WTF?? (actually, there are good reasons to
use core -- size NOT being one of them!)

I have some JAN microminiature tubes of recent production. Good reasons,
yes... just not many! ;-)

Tim

 

[[email protected]]

US military is interested in 6502 programmers. 8085 is offered in
a rad-hardened version. etc. This when folks are walking around
with thousands of times the processing power in their phones! :-/

They are also used in ASIC, simple cores with low Qs. 4000 for 6502. 6000 for 8085. A modern chip like ARM7 needs at least 700,000 transistors. I am looking into a mid range core like BM32, around 200,000 Q, 32 bits C machine.

 

[[email protected]]

They are also used in ASIC, simple cores with low Qs. 4000 for 6502. 6000 for 8085. A modern chip like ARM7 needs at least 700,000 transistors. I am looking into a mid range core like BM32, around 200,000 Q, 32 bits C machine.

Why? Qs are free. Pins are expensive.

 

[[email protected]]

Why? Qs are free. Pins are expensive.

But they are better used elsewhere. Qs also complicates the synthesizer and often runs into tool limits. I don't need VM, pipelines, predictive branchings, etc., just bare bone C machine.

 

[[email protected]]

But they are better used elsewhere. Qs also complicates the synthesizer and often runs into tool limits. I don't need VM, pipelines, predictive branchings, etc., just bare bone C machine.

Synthesizer? Tool limits? Are you trying to reinvent the wheel on a
shoestring? Why would you bother? It's all been done for you and
it's cheap. An M0 goes for about halfa buck, these days.

 

[Don Y]

Hi Edward,

They are also used in ASIC, simple cores with low Qs. 4000 for 6502.
6000 for 8085. A modern chip like ARM7 needs at least 700,000
transistors.

Yup. And *most* applications really don't tax their processor.
Esp if you take advantage of smaller geometries/fabs to increase clock
speeds on those older designs. Having the real estate to devote to
other "non CPU" functionality is usually a bigger win -- esp if it
eliminates another package or three! (and, consequently, cuts power
dissipation by eliminating sets of pad drivers -- or, lets you
move to an even smaller package!)

Aside from address manipulation, think of how often your 32b register
is processing 8 or 16 bit values!

Many small processors could really benefit from larger address
spaces -- bigger TEXT and/or DATA -- esp if these could coexist
on the same die as the processor.

I particularly favor good counter/timer modules. With just a few
"little" features you can enhance a tiny processor's capabilities
far beyond what a larger, "bloated" processor could do (e.g.,
effectively trim interrupt latencies to *0* in certain classes
of problems).

 

[Don Y]

Hi Tim,

I have some JAN microminiature tubes of recent production. Good reasons,
yes... just not many! ;-)

"Newer is always better", right? :-/

I remember the first semiconductor memory boards we used in Nova2's
(or maybe 3's?). Really cool to see all those (identical) chips
in neat rows and columns (I think it was 4K on a 16x16 board?).

[Of course, it had been similarly cool to see that fine "fabric" of
cores on a similarly sized board!]

But, it was *really* disappointing to "discover" (d'uh!) that the
machine no longer could *retain* it's program image in the absence
of power! Every startup now required IPL from secondary storage.
From the user's standpoint: "Gee, that sucks! Now, tell me again,
why is this an IMPROVEMENT??"

 

[John Devereux]

Synthesizer? Tool limits? Are you trying to reinvent the wheel on a
shoestring? Why would you bother? It's all been done for you and
it's cheap. An M0 goes for about halfa buck, these days.

Can you get one as a "soft core" though? One you can integrate as part
of the firmware on a FPGA?

Without paying the million dollar license that is.

 

[[email protected]]

it's cheap. An M0 goes for about halfa buck, these days.

Let say for prototyping, XC6SLX9, since they have a cheap enough startup tool package. However, the LX9 can only implement around 100K Q, not even a bare bond BM32. We can probably strip some instructions such as floating point multiple and division.

We need 32 bits data, perhaps 24 bits address.

Can you get one as a "soft core" though? One you can integrate as part
of the firmware on a FPGA?

Yes, that what we are trying to find. The right soft core on the right FPGA.

For example:

BM32 is a 32 bits CPU with 16 registers. First 9 are general purpose. Others are special registers such as AP, FP, SP, PC, PSW and PCB. I don't think we need the Process Control Block pointer, so we will change it to Port Control Block pointer. Any port I/O should be relative to the PCB pointer.AP & FP could be general pointers as well.

R0-R8:GP R9:FP R10:AP R11SW R12:SP R13CB R14:ISP R15C

Immediate Mode
MOVW &0x12345678,% r2 84 4F 78 56 34 12 42

Deferred Displacement Mode
MOVB *0x30(% r2),% r3 87 D2 30 43

 

[[email protected]]

Can you get one as a "soft core" though? One you can integrate as part
of the firmware on a FPGA?

Not for $.50 worth of FPGA fabric.

Without paying the million dollar license that is.

No.