MEMS reliability? 171 page report by D M. Tanner et al, SAND2000-0091, January 2000es MEMS Reliability: Infrastructure, Test Structures, Experiments and Failure Mode SN3388- bottom impact Micromotor test device 40,000G impact test Failure by rubbing contact Comb-drive actuator Ceramic package destroyed Wear on silicon surface Flexural contact to gears MEMS Survives() Submicron particles generated Conclusions (1) Properly designed MEMs devices are remarkably shock resistant (2) Flexural failures due to fatigue were not apparent (3)Rubbing wear (& resulting debris)was their primary failure mechanism Sandia national laboratories Intelligent Micromachine Initiative www.sandia.govMEMS reliability? Conclusions: (1) Properly designed MEMS devices are remarkably shock resistant (2) Flexural failures due to fatigue were not apparent (3) Rubbing wear (& resulting debris) was their primary failure mechanism 40,000G impact test Ceramic package destroyed MEMS survives (!) Micromotor test device Comb-drive actuator Flexural contact to gears Failure by rubbing contact Wear on silicon surface Submicron particles generated “MEMS Reliability: Infrastructure, Test Structures, Experiments and Failure Modes” 171 page report by D. M. Tanner et al, SAND2000-0091, January 2000. www.sandia.gov