I am following ANSI/ESD S20.20-2021 to establish an ESD control program for device/ module products assemblies in my company.
First at all, I am requiring several device/ module products managers to provide ESD susceptibility (HBM and CDM). I got many HBM, CDM results that tested via different test standards such as ISO-10605, AEC-Q101-001, and AEC Q101-005 from them. They are different from table.5 ESD Susceptibility Test References for Devices of ANSI/ESD S20.20-2021 ANNEX B - ESD sensitivity testing. If the the standards listed in table.5 are the only acceptable standards for HBM, CDM identification for ESD control program establish?
My products managers ask me the reason of above standards (ISO-10605, AEC-Q101-001, and AEC Q101-005) are not acceptable for ESD control program.
The AEC documents have been updated to AEC-Q100-002 Rev E and AEC-Q100-011 Rev D. These two standards are based on ANSI/ESD/JEDEC 001 and ANSI/ESD/JEDEC 002 are are equivalent. The standards listed for discrete semicondutor devices are also based on the ANSI/ESD/JEDEC. The classifications should be similar. The difference is genrally in how many pulses are done.
The ISO standard uses a different waveform that is based on IEC 61000-4-2. This has been shown to be non reproducable from test to test. This was dirived from a system level test, not a device test.
If that means AEC-Q101-001 Rev-A is based on ANSI/ESD/JEDEC JS-001 as well in terms of HBM testing?
I am not sure about this because of I did not find the link between AEC-Q101-001 Rev-A and ANSI/ESD/JEDEC JS-001 in the notice of AEC-Q101-001 Rev-A.
The standards that are referenced AEC-Q101-001, are the ESDA STM 5.1 and the EIA/JESD022-A114 were mergered in ANSI/ESDA/JEDEC 001. There have been changes since these standards that may cause a device to be misclassified. It would not be appropriate to use this standard.
If you receive information about the classification, it would be close but in the future insist on the current standards.
