인문학
사회과학
자연과학
공학
의약학
농수해양학
예술체육학
복합학
DBpia AI
AI 에이전트
AI 아이디어
AI 리더
AI 뷰어
Citeasy
크롬 서지관리 다운로드
지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
피인용 0
초록·키워드
Purpose: This study examines whether the derating parameter framework of NAVSEA SD-18 adequately captures the temperature-dependent behavior of active electronic components in military weapon systems. Based on this, we propose a new derating process that takes into account the characteristics of active components.
Methods: A total of 53 active components from an air-to-ground guided weapon system were classified according to D-FMEA. Using eight representative temperature points derived from MIL-STD-810H, the SD-18 fixed-ratio criteria were quantitatively compared against datasheet characteristic curves for each component group. Discrepancies were classified as Type A (non-conservative: SD-18 permits stress beyond datasheet limits) or Type B (over-conservative: SD-18 restricts design beyond practical necessity).
Results: The SD-18 framework does not capture key temperature-dependent parameters for MOSFETs and optocouplers. Furthermore, Type A errors were identified in MOSFETs, TVS diodes, and LEDs, where SD-18 criteria become non-conservative at elevated temperatures. Type B errors were found across microcircuit groups (Digital, Linear, MCU, and DSP).
Conclusion: Based on these findings, a dual-criteria derating framework is proposed in which the SD-18 baseline is supplemented by datasheet-based criteria at the criteria-setting stage. For Type A components, datasheet curves should be applied above the identified crossover temperatures. For Type B components, thermal design verification may justify re-evaluation of allowable stress levels using datasheet junction temperature limits.
Methods: A total of 53 active components from an air-to-ground guided weapon system were classified according to D-FMEA. Using eight representative temperature points derived from MIL-STD-810H, the SD-18 fixed-ratio criteria were quantitatively compared against datasheet characteristic curves for each component group. Discrepancies were classified as Type A (non-conservative: SD-18 permits stress beyond datasheet limits) or Type B (over-conservative: SD-18 restricts design beyond practical necessity).
Results: The SD-18 framework does not capture key temperature-dependent parameters for MOSFETs and optocouplers. Furthermore, Type A errors were identified in MOSFETs, TVS diodes, and LEDs, where SD-18 criteria become non-conservative at elevated temperatures. Type B errors were found across microcircuit groups (Digital, Linear, MCU, and DSP).
Conclusion: Based on these findings, a dual-criteria derating framework is proposed in which the SD-18 baseline is supplemented by datasheet-based criteria at the criteria-setting stage. For Type A components, datasheet curves should be applied above the identified crossover temperatures. For Type B components, thermal design verification may justify re-evaluation of allowable stress levels using datasheet junction temperature limits.
본문·목차
인공지능 문자 인식 모델을 통해 추출된 텍스트로, 일부 오타나 오류가 포함될 수 있으나 지속적으로 개선 중입니다.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
최근 본 자료 전체보기
UCI(KEPA) : I410-151-26-02-096825422
