Issue link: https://iconnect007.uberflip.com/i/844209
28 SMT Magazine • July 2017 COUNTERFEIT ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS IDENTIFICATION: A CASE STUDY Electrical Test Engaging an outside source for electrical test provided an independent assessment of the part performance. The outside source identified mul- tiple configurations of die from the electrical test- ing, however, few parts failed retest. Test require- ment specifications should have triggered some concern in acceptance at Receiving Inspection. However , since parts received met MIL spec. re- quirements as evidenced by a certificate of com- pliance, and the internal procurement criteria called out only MIL spec. for parts purchased out of the distribution chain, they were accepted. Discussions with OCM After contacting the OCM to make some determinations about the discrepancies, Bro- ker part number CV7C1049CV and lot num- ber 06039 did not match with the OCM data- base. The OCM stated that parts with the larger die size would have a different part number CY- 7C1049BV33 showing the revision of the part. The two types of die seen in the broker parts were manufactured by the OCM in 1999 and 2001 respectively. The OCM suggested reten- tion of original labels on the reel and containers for authentication check. The distributor gener- ally removes these and re-labels with new dis- tributor or customer part numbers. The broker however retained the numbers and therefore these numbers could be used to track against the OCM database. Summary and Conclusions After the analysis was performed, it was de- termined by the internal failure review board (FRB) that all parts from the broker were not suspect and therefore, small lot testing may not catch counterfeit parts. It was not clear if sus- pect packages were harvested or re-packaged since there was evidence that both were possible through previous versions of devices as well as suspected blacktopping of the package surface. Clearly, counterfeit identification by inspec- tion and testing is very difficult unless resourc- es are committed to evaluate virtually 100% of parts being supplied. Records tracking were dif- ficult because the distributor did not keep the labels and paperwork from the original manu- facturer, although they could be found through diligence before re-labeling occurred. Since the SRAMs were used for high reliability applica- Figure 7: FTIR spectroscopy graph. Blue identifies mold compound spectra as received from distributor, red and purple from broker.