WG 19.0 – High Reliability ESD Control Processes

The WG adjudicated TAS comments on ESD TR19.0-01. Additional work will be done on the document between meeting series.

The working group continued adjudicating TAS comments on ESD TR19.0-01.

The meeting started with the working Group Chair explaining how the revival of WG-19 came about after discussions with an associate from NASA/JPL at the 2023 ESDA Symposium.  Their discussion was focused on solutions for improving high-reliability manufacturing and monitoring as well as any specific items that could assist in a document.  These discussions resulted in consideration of a standard practice (SP) document for high-reliability that would put the TR-19 suggestions into standard practices. This could potentially serve as the foundation for a high-reliability facility certification. However, the task for the working group is only the development of the Standard Practice document. 

Comments were provided for support for this effort and brought up how important high-reliability manufacturing is for DoD efforts due to the critical nature of manufacturing in DoD systems.  Concerns were voiced about how a new certification like this could potentially hurt the supplier base to which the response was that the goal of this effort is not to create a checklist that suppliers must meet all requirements for certification, but something more in-line with a tiered classification of a supplier based on how many of the best practices are being implemented.  This provides value to the industry because although suppliers may not implement all of the best practices provided in the document, it does give customers insight to what practices are and aren’t being used allowing them to fine tune any oversight efforts saving both sides time and effort.  When the question arose as to why a SP vs the current TR (technical report) The group chair explained that this was based on the actionability of the TR vs a SP which could be explained as the TR has things to consider while the SP would have things to do.  There was also a question on why not use a certifying body outside of ESDA in this effort and it was explained that this is because they typically need a technical standard that contains shall statements.

The group discussed the original S20.21 effort several years back and why or how this effort is different which circled back to the explanation that we were not looking to develop a new standard.  There was then discussion on what remained of the original process that led from the S20.21 to the TR-19 including any of the original drafts or meeting notes.

We work together to review progress of the Form 3 that must be submitted to develop the SP and edits were made throughout.  There was some confusion since much of the document discussed developing a standard test method as opposed to a standard practice, but it was decided that we would focus on the scope and purpose section which would be derived from the TR-19 scope and purpose. 

Next, we decided to plan monthly Microsoft Teams meetings after sending out a poll to find the best day for those meetings.

Group chair then recommended that we develop guiding principles for developing the best practice and from there the group brainstormed additional considerations, result as follows:

1. Risk mitigation
2. Redundancy for prevention and protection
3. Full analysis of failures
4. Error/mistake proofing
5. Increased margin of safety
6. Data proven practices
7. Verification and periodicity of verification (include data traceability)
8. Other mitigation strategies
9. Identifying most sensitive element by voltage threshold
10. ESD Program based on process assessment
11. Practices considered out-of-scope of S20.20
12. Packaging (in-house, interim, and out-of-house)
13. Effective training of ESD program manager/coordinator

-Before closing the meeting the group chair stated there was a need to begin consideration of practices to be included in the SP and Co-Chair explained that the NASA Implementation Standard for Workmanship recently added ESD control requirements/processes that supplement S20.20 for work on NASA mission hardware which could be brought to the group as a starting point (Action to Co-Chair).

Action Items:

• Chair – update the Statement of Work (Form 3) to be consistent with what the working group is intending to do in the SP document. Be ready to discuss the Form 3 at the next virtual meeting.
• Co-Chair – send out a doodle poll to find the optimum time to set up the recurring monthly meeting. Chair will set up the Teams meeting.

-Meeting adjourned.

The work group reviewed the approved Work Statement (Form 3) and began defining standard practices for inclusion in the new standard. An action item was established to outline and deliver the best practices to the working group before the next online meeting. Additionally, there was a decision to schedule monthly online meetings.

Synopsis: The working group meeting was spent going through ANSI/ESD S20.20 and noting what might be added in SP19 as guidance for high-reliability control programs. This discussion will be distilled into an initial draft document.

Discussion:

• The initial part of the meeting was spent reviewing the SP19 outline presentation that Alvin Boutte sent out earlier with the proposed high reliability program tenets. In this presentation, risk mitigation methods were outlined:
  • Utilizing safety margins in ESD control processes and systems.
  • Implementing redundancy in ESD control systems.
  • Rapid detection of failures in ESD control systems and items.
  • Understanding root cause of and dispositioning failures in ESD control systems and items.
• There were also 4 steps identified where SP19 would need to go beyond ANSI/ESD S20.20. These are mainly having to do with qualify management of the process. These steps are:
  • Evaluate your process elements
  • Perform process risk assessment
  • Traceability of continuous compliance
  • Dispositioning of failures or defects

• Following the review of these program tenets, the rest of the meeting was spent reviewing the sections in ANSI/ESD S20.20 and noting (at a high level) what should be added into SP19.

• It was also noted that with each of the recommendation in the SP document, a data-driven rationale needs to be supplied as to why this recommendation is made.

• The SP document will include basic guidance as to why the various recommendations are given. However, during the discussion, it became clear that ultimately a handbook type document will need to be written to provide additional implementation guidance for the SP document recommendations. This will be a separate document to be written after the SP document has been released.

  Online Meeting Schedule:

  There is no firm online meeting schedule currently. Meetings will be scheduled after the first draft of the SP document has been sent out

  Action:

  • Kevin and Alvin will work on a first draft of the document. The schedule for this draft to be completed is November 1.

The current updated document was reviewed and updated. The document will be sent to TAS before the June meeting series.

Summary of meeting activities: 

The working group began reviewing TAS comments on ESD TR19.0-01.

Summary of meeting activities:

The working group continued revisions to the new technical report being developed.  The document will be submitted for TAS review once the working group reviews the full document.

Summary of meeting activities:

The working group reviewed new edits by the writing team to the new technical report being developed.  The document will be submitted for TAS review once the working group reviews the full document.

Summary of meeting activities:

The working group continued the development of ESD TR19.0-01.

Summary of meeting activities:

Changes to the draft technical report were reviewed and discussion was held on other changes needed. Further work will take place between meetings for review at the next meeting.

Summary of meeting activities:

Changes to the draft technical report were reviewed and further work will take place between meetings for review at the next meeting.

Summary of meeting activities:

A decision was made to designate the new document in development a technical report as it is a repository of best practices for the low-risk manufacturing of high reliability items. Changes will also be made to the scope of the document to clarify the focus of the document on mitigating risk in the manufacturing and processing of high reliability parts.

Summary of meeting activities:

The committee discussed feedback and proposed changes on EPA requirements, training requirements, and packaging and yandling systems. The document will be distributed to members between meeting series for further review.

Summary of meeting activities:

The working group continued reviewing the working draft of ESD WIP19.1. More work will continue at the September face-to-face meeting series.

Summary of meeting activities:

The working group continued reviewing the working draft of ESD WIP19.1. More work will continue at the June virtual meeting series.

Summary of meeting activities:

The working group provided a summary of the group’s activities for those not familiar with WG 19. There was a discussion on several edits; with particular focus on differentiating between high reliability parts that were within the ANSI/ESD S20.20 limits and those that were below these limits. Recommendations for additional edits will be further discussed at the April meeting series. There will also be a change of leadership with a new WG chair being appointed at the April meeting series.

Summary of meeting activities:

The working group continued discussing a new document for high reliability ESD control programs. The document will describe how to set up a high reliability program instead of providing a one size fits all proscriptive program.

Summary of meeting activities:

The working group reviewed changes to the current document based on discussions at the April face-to-face meeting. Several additional changes were suggested including removing table 2, including verbiage about conductive and dissipative worksurfaces, and clarification on isolated conductors. The document is expected to be submitted for TAS review before the September meeting series.

Summary of meeting activities:

The working group continued discussing a new document on high reliability. A discussion was held on the use of humidity control to assist in ESD control. This discussion remains in the document but there are no limits listed even as suggestions in the body of the document.  Changes were made based on a discussion about dissipative and conductive work surfaces.

Summary of meeting activities:

The working group reviewed sections of ESD WIP19.1, High Reliability. Attendees of the meeting will supply examples of compliance verification interval periods to support the addition of a chart that shows what is “typical” for companies that work with high reliability components.

Summary of meeting activities:

The committee discussed the need and purpose for a document on high reliability ESD control processes.

Summary of meeting activities:

A draft of the new standard practice document currently in development was presented. The committee began revisions to the document and will continue to review and revise during the September meeting.

Summary of meeting activities:

This working group has been renamed WG19 High-Reliability ESD Control Processes. The committee will be building on the work done on ESD TR19.1 to develop a document addressing the need for a “best practices” document for high-reliability ESD control processes. This need is broader than just the aerospace industry and thus this document will define and discuss the industry practices related to high-reliability ESD process control. The document is expected to give some additional guidance and recommendations above those listed in ANSI/ESD S20.20 to reduce risk in the manufacture and handling of parts that require an increased level of reliability. 

Summary of meeting activities:

The committee adjudicated comments and a clean version of the document will be sent to the committee for another review.