1. Electronic Module Extraction Tool Final Review University of Delaware December 12, 2003 Team 7: Allison Bruton, John Fitzgibbons Rich Herseim, & Greg Spalding Sponsors: John Dean & Ann Rickle

2. Outline   Project Background   Benchmarking Summary   Project Scope   Preliminary Concepts   Design Recommendations   Extraction Tool   Testing and Analysis   Project Management   Transition Plan   Questions

3. Project Background   Northrop Grumman   Worldwide leader in global defense electronic systems   No handheld tools exist for extraction of electronic modules in horizontal configuration   Purpose of tool   Extract electronic modules within tight tolerance for repair Electronic Module Cap Board Ceramic Base ** Module size relative to half dollar Ring Frame

4. Critical Issues  Tight Spacing  Fragile Parts  Module is composed of metallic & non- metallic layers Cap Board: Non-Metallic Ring Frame: Metallic Ceramic Base: Non-Metallic Side View of Electronic Module

5. Constraints   Minimize damage to cap board & module   Maintain tight position tolerance   Meet OSHA regulations

6. Mission Statement To design a handheld extraction tool for electronic modules “To design a handheld extraction tool for electronic modules”

7. Lessons Learned from Benchmarking  Phase One Variety of Integrated Circuit (IC) extractor devices on the market Advanced Tweezer Extractor Dual In-Line Package IC Extractor Tool Self-Contained Vacuum Pickup Tool Basic IC Extractor

8. Lessons Learned from Benchmarking (continued)   Phase Two Gained greater understanding of: Material properties of each layer within electronic module Electromagnets Magnetic analysis   Phase Three Gained greater understanding of: Ergonomic design - OSHA Magnet pull force Plate analysis Rare Earth Magnet Electromagnet

9. Customers, Wants & Metrics Metrics Wants Extraction force (lb) >3.6 Stress on ring frame (psi) <50,000 Bending force on pins/tubes (lb) <0.17 Tolerance fit check Yes Target Value

10. Project Scope Operation Manual Repair System Repair Operation ErgonomicsExtract Module Extractor Interface Force Application Simple Superstructure Design recommendations for new electronic module

11. 4 Preliminary Concepts Hook DeviceHook Device  Analysis predicted tool interface would deform Clamping DeviceClamping Device  Physical testing proved required extraction force (3.6 lbs) was not met Suction DeviceSuction Device  Interaction between suction & cap board could damage module Magnetic DeviceMagnetic Device  Needed further investigation  After further development…… 2 Concept Finalists

12. Design recommendations for electronic module Ceramic Base Ring Frame Cap Board Ceramic Board Two chamfered corners Allows pin placement Capboard Cutouts Accommodates magnetic interface Capacitors and Fuses Realignment Optimizes capboard cutouts Revised Electronic Module Capacitors & Fuses

13. Extraction Tool – Prototype Force Application Force Application –Human powered –Push rod and knob Superstructure Superstructure –Linear ball bearing –Linear guides –Support pins Magnetic Interface Magnetic Interface –Rare earth magnets 10” 3.5”

14. Extraction Tool - Operation 3 Simple Steps 1)Obtain proper extraction position 2) Compress knob until contact is made with the exposed ring frame 3)Pull knob up extracting the module

15. Extraction Tool - Operation

16. Testing and Analysis Magnetic Interface Test Magnetic Interface Test Finite Element Analysis on Ring Frame Finite Element Analysis on Ring Frame Bending Analysis Bending Analysis Tolerance Fit Check Tolerance Fit Check

17. Magnetic Interface Test Tested Magnet Sample.25” Dia x.75” Load Cell Ring Frame Magnet Holder Test Fixture Purpose: – –Prove that the magnetic interface can withstand the required extraction force F

18. Magnetic Interface Test Metric & Target Value Satisfied Extraction force > 3.6 lbs Conclusion: –Extraction force of 5.4 lbs achieved –Safety factor of 1.5 provided ~ 5.4 lbs Required 3.6 lbs

19. FEA – Ring Frame Magnet Locations Stress Distribution Metric & Target Value Satisfied Max stress in the ring frame < 50,000 psi Purpose: Purpose: –Prove that the maximum stress in the ring frame is below its yield strength Conclusion: Conclusion: –Maximum stress present in the ring frame ~14,000 psi –Safety Factor of 3.57 provided

20. Bending Analysis Purpose: Purpose: –Prove that the ceramic base deflection will not plastically yield the module pins Metric & Target Value Satisfied Force on pins < 0.17 lbs Conclusion: Conclusion: –Worst ceramic deflection ~1.82 E-4 in. Resultant force on pins ~0.00025 lbs Resultant force on pins ~0.00025 lbs –Provides a safety factor >>10

21. Tolerance Fit Check Rapid Prototype Module Tool Fit Check Support Pins Purpose: Purpose: – Prove that the support pins of the extraction tool fit in the four corners of the rapid prototype module Conclusion: Conclusion:  Passed tolerance fit check

22. Device Ergonomics Knob  2.0” diameter fell within acceptable diameter range for power grip use Met OSHA regulations Tool Design Proper neutral wrist position Horizontal work surface  Appropriately designed hand tool so wrist can remain straight Met OSHA recommendations 2.0”

23. Project Completed in a Team Effort Development Analysis Testing & Prototyping

24. Project Management – Cost Summary QuantityDescription Total Price ($) 2 Push Rods 12 20 Neodymium Magnets 66 1 Linear Ball Bearing 43 2 Miniature Guide Block 110 2 Rail for Mini Guide Block 42 58 Screws & Washers 16 2Knob6 8 Support Pins 23 2Handles6 10 parts Northrop Grumman Machining 5,000 Actual Cost 5,324 800 hrs Team 7 Labor Costs @ $20/hr 16,000 Theoretical Cost 21,324

25. Transition Plan Operation Manual Ergonomic issues – –Improved handle design Tool Alterations – –Improved support pins – –Reduced tool weight – –Limited linear motion Module Recommendations – –Ceramic chamfers – –Cap board redesign Ceramic Base Ring Frame Cap Board Capacitors & Fuses

26. Summary   Reviewed Project Background   Explored Benchmarking   Presented Project Scope   Explored Preliminary Concepts   Provided Design Recommendations   Discussed Extraction Tool   Demonstrated Analysis & Testing   Discussed Project Management   Presented Transition Plan

27. Acknowledgements Northrop Grumman Sponsors – –John Dean & Ann Rickle Advisor – Dr. Wilkins Senior Design Staff – –Dr. Glancey – –Dr. Keefe – –Mr. Cloud Steve Beard Roger Stahl

28. Questions???

29. Extraction Force Calculation Connector Type Total # Required Extraction Force (lbs) Total Required Extraction Force (lbs) RF50.52.5 Pin100.111.10 Total----3.6 Extraction Force ~0.11 lbs

30. Temperature Consideration Maximum required operating temperature of extraction tool: Maximum required operating temperature of extraction tool: Neodymium Iron Boron rare earth magnets maximum operating temperature: Neodymium Iron Boron rare earth magnets maximum operating temperature: 80 o C ≤ 60 o C

31. Extraction Tool – Fabricated Parts Before After Push Rod Magnet Holder Coupler Top Bottom Side

32. Clamping Interface Test Max Extraction Force = 3.5 lbs < 3.6 lbs Required 3.6lbs

33. FEA – Clamping Force Compressive Forces on Ring Frame Stress Distribution Max stress ~4000 psi << 50000 psi (ring frame)

34. Ring Frame Used in Clamping Test Actual Ring Frame Tested Ring Frame

35. Extraction vs. Insertion Insertion is considered a small hand operation Insertion is considered a small hand operation Easier to insert correctly than extract Easier to insert correctly than extract Northrop Grumman main focus is extraction Northrop Grumman main focus is extraction

36. Magnet Interface Testing ~ 1.6 lbs ¼ the Required Extraction Force

37. Tolerance Analysis Purpose: Purpose: – Prove that the support pins of the extraction tool fit in the four corners of the 0.017 in 2 area tolerance Support Pin Tolerances Metric & Target Value Satisfied Tool support pins fit in the 0.017 in2 area tolerance

38. Linear Motion Test Purpose: – –Ensure magnets move in a linear fashion Results: – –Max deflection at magnet holder 0.0035” Conclusion: – –Tool will extract in a linear fashion Dial Indicator Test Set Up Magnet Holder

39. Cost Perspective

40. Basic Design Features Grip/Handle-User Interface Extraction Structure Module-Tool Interface

41. Extraction Tool - Prototype Handle Magnets Knob Linear Bearing 10” 3.5”