|
|
Hi Sheila Yesterday (4/23) SKB released the BMT document. I reviewed it and found some reliability test spec is more tough than your spec. I'm transmitting and will send to you. |
|
|
Hi Sheila I update the SKB's criteria of some reliability test. please see and review below the table. SKB_Reliability_criteria.gif (34,816 bytes) |
|
|
Hi Sheila. please update your comment of SKB_Reliability_criteria. |
|
|
Hi SB, we select the materials based on not only requirement spec but also test conditions when we start to develop the product at the first stage. According to SKB criteria that you provided on 4/24, we've discussed with our current vendors which we're using on Eagle. I'm sorry that I have to say we have to change a lot of materials to meet these requirements. If SKB insists on these items, it will quite impact the whole cost and schedule because we have to re-select / re-verify the materials, and also we already prepare the current materials for MP. Could you help to discuss with SKB based on our above comments? Thank you. |
|
|
Hi Sheila. your comment is not detaily. Mr. Philip and I said you to classify SKB's criteria. 1. you can test but more tough 2. you cannot test SKB's test items are six. please update comment about each test case. |
|
|
Hi SB, I think you didn't get our point. All the items could be tested if we select the materials which are able to meet SKB test criteria. The problem is they didn't mention at first, and we already selected the materials based on the current test criteria. It's not related to which items that FXN cannot proceed with it based on the limitation or whatever, it's related to the schedule and cost. |
|
|
Hi Sheila. I understood your Foxconn's situation. SKB release their reliabilit criteria very lately, and the didn't review the Foxconn's criteria. but SKB do not understand our situation. If they may push their criteria without our situation, we should find the another solution. before we find another solution. I will discuss and explain to SKB for schedule and cost up situation but, your comment of mantis is not detaily. SKB request to test six items. please update why test each test item is difficult. and I reviewed and compared to your and SKB's criteria. the test "Chassis Static Load" is absent your side. can you test this item? |
|
|
Here is the detail that you need No 1. This item could be tested if we select the materials which are able to meet SKB test criteria. However, we already selected the materials based on the current test criteria. If SKB doesn't have any concern on cost-up and schedule postpone, FXN is able to re-select the material which is able to meet SKB new requirement and make an additional sample build to verify the design. No 2. This item could be tested if we select the materials which are able to meet SKB test criteria. However, we already selected the materials based on the current test criteria. If SKB doesn't have any concern on cost-up and schedule postpone, FXN is able to re-select the material which is able to meet SKB new requirement and make an additional sample build to verify the design. No 3. This item could be tested if we select the materials which are able to meet SKB test criteria. However, we already selected the materials based on the current test criteria. If SKB doesn't have any concern on cost-up and schedule postpone, FXN is able to re-select the material which is able to meet SKB new requirement and make an additional sample build to verify the design. No 4. This item could be tested if we select the materials which are able to meet SKB test criteria. However, we already selected the materials based on the current test criteria. If SKB doesn't have any concern on cost-up and schedule postpone, FXN is able to re-select the material which is able to meet SKB new requirement and make an additional sample build to verify the design. No 5. This item could be tested if we select the materials which are able to meet SKB test criteria. However, we already selected the materials based on the current test criteria. If SKB doesn't have any concern on cost-up and schedule postpone, FXN is able to re-select the material which is able to meet SKB new requirement and make an additional sample build to verify the design. No 6. This item could be tested if we select the materials which are able to meet SKB test criteria. However, we already selected the materials based on the current test criteria. If SKB doesn't have any concern on cost-up and schedule postpone, FXN is able to re-select the material which is able to meet SKB new requirement and make an additional sample build to verify the design. |
|
|
ok. I discuss SKB to your same copy paste comment. If SKB disagree, find plan b and solution. I never have an ability of persuade to them |
|
|
thank you very much for copy and paste. it is very helpful thank you thank you |
|
|
Hi SB, if SKB insists on it based on they understand the risk, FXN doesn't have any concern on the specification change. The point is whether SKB accepts cost-up and schedule postpone. |
|
|
Hi Sean Please update the reliability test schedule. this information should be added at BMT document |
|
|
Hi SB, Please find reliability test status and schedule as attached. |
|
|
Hi Sean. thank you so much. |
|
|
Hi SB, Update reliability test status and schedule as attached. There are only remain HALT and MTBF demonstration test are not finish. The thermal test was failed but the result seems has something wrong (The temperature of housing outside is higher than inside for both top and bottom). We are checking with HWQA team to clarify the root cause. Will update you our finding asap. |
|
|
Hi Sean according to your reliability test plan, 1. there is no chassis static load test. This test is SKB's mandatory test item. please add this test item and update the test result 2. the fail items are not only thermal but also Abrasion Resistance of Label Test, Salt fog. 3. there is no update of test report |
|
|
Hi SB, Sorry that there is a wrong update on 6/11. There should only remain HALT and Operational Temp. Range are under testing. Please check attached for my update. For the salt fog test, we have verified again by changing the placement from vertical to horizontal, then the test result was passed. The original test condition for placeing the DUT as vertical position are incorrect since user doesn't set the DUT to be vertical but horizontal. |
|
|
Hi Sean. 1. there is no chassis static load test. This test is SKB's mandatory test item. please add this test item and update the test result 2. please explain to abrasion resistance of label 3. there is no update of test report |
|
|
Hi Sean according to your test plan "BFX-AT100 Reliability test plan v5.0_20190613.xlsx", there is no schedule and status of packaged test plan. please add these tests and update test report. packagedtestplan.gif (50,721 bytes) |
|
|
Hi SB, The package reliability test report already finished by beginning of June. The result is passed. Hi Sheila, Please update the package reliability test report on mantis. Thanks. |
|
|
Hi SB, please find the attached file for the package reliability test. Thank you. |
|
|
Hi Sean. 1. according to Package test report, the model name is still T99X171. please change T99X171 to BFX-AT100 |
|
|
Hi SB, For reliability test item, Operational temp. Range test, there are some issues to cause not able to test. We need your help to change another test condition. The issue currently are as below: 1. Youtube may be stopped by itself when ethernet speed is too low to play 4kp60 video. The 4kp60 video needs to high speed ethernet to play video. The Youtube App will happen circle screen to wait buffer. Sometimes it may stop Youtube App and go back to UI. Our HWQA cannot test continually and also cannot maintain high speed ethernet network. Please see attached pictures. 2. We cannot expect google do something for youtube and system when ethernet is connect to WWW. Google may update something such as Youtube app or else. So long term time testing may be broken playing 4kp60 video and the test will not be go on well. We may need to discuss about change test condition as play local 4kp60 video and iperf 50Mpbs throughput. According to our compare power consumption, play local 4kp60 video and iperf 50Mbps on DVT board, is 2.111W. The BTV FW to play Youtube 4kp60 video under Giga ethernet on DVT board is 2.25W. So we think the power consumption is 0.15W difference. DVT board=BTV FW+Youtube play 4kp60 video=2.25W DVT board=k000a_T3+local play 4kp60 video+iperf 50Mbps=2.11W Difference=0.15W Thank you. no frame drop.jpg (165,177 bytes) low ethernet speed.jpg (146,339 bytes) |
|
|
Hi Fu chiang please explain local 4k60hz detaily. and if you add update test setup picture, I understand easily |
|
|
Hi SB, Please see the picture that local 4kp60 video file is pushed in eMMC and using VLC to play it. At the same time the iperf is keeping to go throughput with 50Mbps. |
|
|
Hi SB, Please see the picture that local 4kp60 video file is pushed in eMMC and using VLC to play it. At the same time the iperf is keeping to go throughput with 50Mbps. The purpose is to simulate as play 4kp60 video as playing Youtube and with its throughput. Thank you. play local 4kp60_iperf3.png (73,553 bytes) |
|
|
Hi Fu chiang 1. the video file go to laptop => AP => DUT => VLC, Iperf also come and go laptop <=> ap <=> DUT 2. Firt the video file is saved in EMMC of DUT. the video file go to EMMC => AMLOGIC => VLC. Iperf also come and go laptop <=> ap <=> DUT. what is your test method ? no1 or no2? |
|
|
Hi SB, the reliability test report is made by FXN QA, the purpose of this report is to confirm that our RD design is qualify to production. After we finish the whole items, this report also will be recorded into our system. Any project member can find this report by FXN model name, T99X171.00 via the system if there is any market claims in the furture. If you need SKB model name on this report, I will suggest that we put SKB model name on the page.1 only because not everyone FXN members, such as MFG, QA, even RD, could recognise this customer model name. I attached the picture for your reference first. If you think it's fine to you, I'll ask our QA team to add this mapping to their report. 2019-6-20 下午 01-26-50.jpg (211,102 bytes) |
|
|
That is good idea. please add costomer's model name |
|
|
Hi SB, thank you for understanding. I attached the revision for your reference. |
|
|
Hi SB, It is no2. Thank you. |
|
|
Hi Fu chiang No.2 is not full load condition. please conduct test no.1 |
|
|
Hi SB, Update "Chassis Static Load" test as attached. It's passed SKB's requirement. |
|
|
Hi Fu Chiang, Sean please conduct operational temperature range test with no2 method ( Firt the video file is saved in EMMC of DUT. the video file go to EMMC => AMLOGIC => VLC. Iperf also come and go laptop <=> ap <=> DUT. ) |
|
|
Hi SB, Got it. We are conducting operational temperature range test with no2 method at our HWQA Lab now. The test can be finished by this Wed. Will update the result to you once complete the test. |
- yk.jung ( (ALTech) Younkwang Jung ) developer
