Dell_Notebook_Durability_Test

December 2005 • info@Dell: Notebook Durability StudyTest report prepared under contract from Dell Inc.Executive summaryDell Inc. commissioned VeriTest, a service of Lionbridge Technologies Inc., to conduct a competitive notebook durability study. VeriTest conducted a series of tests to exercise the durability of the followingnotebook computers: • Acer TravelMate 4652 • Dell Latitude D610 • HP Compaq nc6220 • Lenovo ThinkPad T43 Our testing consisted of conducting a series of durability tests of two units each of the four notebook models under test.After a set of preconditioning activities, we conducted a set of durability test runs on the four pairsof notebooks under test. We performed the durability study bysubjecting the notebooks to the following tests:A. Operational Free Fall DropTest - The objective of theOperational Free Fall DropTest was to measure thelevel o f damage sustainedwhile the notebook systemswere dropped from a set ofspecific predefined heights.B. Operational Shock Test -The objective of theOperational Shock Test wasto measure the level of damage sustained while the notebook systems wereaccelerated to specific levels.C. Spill Test - The objective of the Spill Test was to measure the effects of notebook systems when liquid is spilled on the notebook keyboard.D. Dust Test - The objective of the Dust Test was to measure the effects of notebook systems when exposed to fibrous dust particles over an extended period.Key findings q In our 14-inch drop testing, the two Dell Latitude D610 notebooks were the only systems that had no bad sectors. One Lenovo notebook was unable to boot, and required a replacement hard drive to continue testing. q In our 29-inch drop testing, one Dell notebook reported only one bad sector, and the other notebook reported no bad sectors. Three of the other six notebooks (one Acer, one HP, and one Lenovo) were unable to boot, and the Acer motherboard was permanently damaged during the test. q In the 162G operational shock test, the two Dell notebooks passed all PC-Doctor tests and one successfully completed the WinBench 99 final run test. One HP and one Acer notebook were unable to complete the 162G operational shock test. q In all cases, default settings were used; Lenovo ThinkPad T43’s Active Protection System was defaulted “on”. q All notebooks in our test successfully passed the spill and dust tests.Please refer to the Test Methodology section of this report for complete details of how we conducted these tests. All units were tested using default factory settings, including the enablement of Lenovo’s Active Protection System.In our drop testing, the two Dell Latitude D610 notebooks were the only pair of notebooks that had no bad sectors after the 14-inch operational free fall drop test. We found only one bad sector on one of the Dell Latitude D610 notebooks after the subsequent 29-inch drop test. Although some of the other notebooks were able to boot after the 14-inch free fall test, none of the other notebook pairs were able to successfully boot after the subsequent 29-inch drop tests.In our shock testing, all of the notebooks passed the 142G operational shock test, except for one of the HP Compaq nc6220 notebooks. After the Bottom oriented shock test on this notebook, PC-Doctor found one bad sector. After subsequent shock tests, PC-Doctor was able to run to completion with no bad sectors on this notebook.At the 162G operational shock level, the two Dell notebooks passed all PC-Doctor tests and successfully completed the WinBench 99 final run test on one of the notebooks. One HP notebook booted successfully, but was unable to run PC-Doctor after the bottom oriented shock test and could not complete the test. One Acer notebook was unable to boot after the bottom oriented shock test, while the other unable to complete this test as damage had occurred in earlier tests. Both Lenovo systems passed the 162G operational shock test.All notebooks in our test successfully passed the spill test and dust tests.Test ResultsDell Inc. commissioned VeriTest, a service of Lionbridge Technologies Inc., to conduct a competitive notebook durability study. VeriTest conducted a series of tests to exercise the durability of the following notebook systems:•Acer TravelMate 4652•Dell Latitude D610•HP Compaq nc6220•Lenovo ThinkPad T43Our testing consisted of conducting a series of durability tests of two units each of the four notebook models under test. We conducted all preconditioning, drop, shock, and spill testing on the premises of Dell Inc. in Austin, TX. We conducted the dust test on the premises of Professional Testing Inc (PTI), an independent, NVLAP accredited laboratory () based in Round Rock, TX. All units were tested using factory settings.After a series of preconditioning activities on the notebooks under test, we performed the durability study by subjecting the eight notebook systems in this testbed to the following test types:A. Operational Free Fall Drop Test - The o bjective of the Operational Free Fall Drop Test was tomeasure the level of damage sustained while the notebook systems were dropped from a set ofspecific predefined heights.B. Operational Shock Test - The objective of the Operational Shock Test was to measure the level ofdamage sustained while the notebook systems were accelerated to specific levels.C. Spill Test - The objective of the Spill Test was to measure the effects on notebook systems whenliquid is spilled on the notebook keyboard.D. Dust Test - The objective of the Dust Test was to measure the effects on notebook systems whenexposed to fibrous dust particles over an extended period.For complete details on the test methodology, see the Test Methodology section.We tested two identical notebooks from each notebook manufacturer. We appended the digits 01 and 02 to the notebook name. For example, the two Acer notebooks were labeled Acer-01 and Acer-02.Operational Free Fall Drop TestWe dropped each notebook from a height of 14 inches and from 29 inches, in that order. Prior to running the test, we examined the hard drive within each notebook using PC-Doctor. After each drop test, we reexamined the notebook as described in the test methodology section to measure the total number of bad sectors. The table in Figure 1 illustrates the sector and notebook condition after each drop test.Acer-01 4 Bad SectorsAcer-02 No Bad SectorDell-01 No Bad SectorDell-02 No Bad SectorHP-01 10 Bad SectorsHP-02 No Bad SectorsLenovo-01 11 Bad SectorsLenovo-02 Unable to BootFigure 1. Operational 14-Inch Free Fall Drop Test ResultsAs shown in Figure 1, we observed no bad sectors on either Dell Latitude D610 notebook after the 14-inch drop tests. Acer-01, HP-01 and Lenovo-01 exhibited bad sectors. Lenovo-02 failed to boot after the 14-inch drop test, requiring a replacement hard drive in order to continue testing.Acer-01 3 Bad SectorsAcer-02 Unable to Boot from hard drive or from CD. Unable to complete testingDell-01 No Bad SectorDell-02 1 Bad SectorHP-01 Unable to BootHP-02 142 Bad SectorsLenovo-01 15 Bad SectorsLenovo-02 (Replaced HD before drop) Unable to bootFigure 2. Operational 29-Inch Free Fall Drop Test ResultsAs shown in Figure 2, we observed no bad sectors on the Dell -01 system and only one bad sector on the Dell-02 notebook after the 29-inch free fall drop test. Acer-01, HP-02 and Lenovo-01 exhibited bad sectors. Furthermore, Acer-02, HP-01, and Lenovo-02, were unable to boot after the 29-inch drop. The Acer-02 was unable to boot after a replacement hard drive and unable to boot from CD. As a result of the 29-inch drop test, we found the Acer-02 motherboard to have sustained damage that prevented us from performing additional tests with this notebook.Operational Shock TestWe performed an operational shock test as described in the test methodology section. We performed testing at both 142G and 162G shock levels.Figure 3 illustrates the results that we observed when performing the 142G shock testing. Each column with the Bottom, Right, Left, Front, and Back labels describes the outcome of shock testing in these different orientations. The last column, WinBench 99, describes the outcome of the full WinBench 99 test run that we conducted at the end of the five shock subtests.Acer-01 Passed Passed Passed Passed Passed Successful Acer-02 NA NA NA NA NA NADell-01 Passed Passed Passed Passed Passed Successful Dell-02 Passed Passed Passed Passed Passed Successful HP-01 1 Bad Sector Passed Passed Passed Passed Successful HP-02 Passed Passed Passed Passed Passed Successful Lenovo-01 Passed Passed Passed Passed Passed Successful Lenovo-02 Passed Passed Passed Passed Passed SuccessfulFigure 3. Operational Shock Drop Test at 142 G Test Res ultsAs shown in Figure 3, all of the notebooks passed the subsequent PC-Doctor test and the WinBench 99 final run test, except for the HP-01. After the Bottom oriented shock test on the HP-01 notebook, PC-Doctor found one bad sector. After subsequent shock tests, PC-Doctor was able to run to completion with no bad sectors on the HP-01 notebook. One Acer unit (Acer-02) was not able to complete this test as damage had occurred in earlier tests.Figure 4 illustrates the results that we observed when performing the 162G shock testing. Each column with the Bottom, Right, Left, Front, and Back labels describes the outcome of shock testing in these different orientations. The last column, WinBench 99, describes the outcome of the full WinBench 99 test run that we conducted at the end of the five shock subtests.BNA NA NA NA NA Acer-01 Unable toBootAcer-02 NA NA NA NA NA NADell-01 Passed Passed Passed Passed Passed Failed Dell-02 Passed Passed Passed Passed Passed SuccessfulPassed Passed Passed Passed Failed HP-01 3 ( 1 frompreviousshock + 2more found)bad sectorsNA NA NA NA NA HP-02 BootedSuccessfully,but unable torun PC-DoctorLenovo -01 Passed Passed Passed Passed Passed Successful Lenovo -02 Passed Passed Passed Passed Passed Successful Figure 4. Operational Shock Drop Test at 162G Test ResultsAs shown in Figure 4, the Lenovo notebook pair was the only pair of matching notebooks that passed all subsequent PC-Doctor tests and the WinBench 99 final run tests. The Dell notebook pair passed all PC-Doctor tests and successfully completed the WinBench 99 final run test on one of the notebooks. The Acer unit was unable to boot or run PC-Doctor successfully. The other Acer unit was not able to complete this testas damage had occurred in earlier tests. On HP unit was unable to run PC Doctor after the first shock subtest, and the other unit passed all tests except the WinBench 99 final run.Spill TestWe performed a Spill Test to measure the effects on the notebook when liquid was spilled on the notebook keyboard. As shown in Figure 5, all of the notebooks under test successfully passed the final WinBench 99 test run at the end of the spill test.Acer-01 SuccessfulDell-01 SuccessfulHP-01 SuccessfulLenovo-01 SuccessfulFigure 5. Spill Test ResultsDust TestWe performed one pass of the Dust Test to measure the effects on notebook systems when exposed to dust particles over an extended period.As shown in Figure 6, all of the notebooks under test successfully passed the final WinBench 99 test run at the end of the dust test.Acer-01 SuccessfulDell-01 SuccessfulHP-01 SuccessfulLenovo-01 SuccessfulFigure 6. Dust Test ResultsTest MethodologyDell Inc. commissioned VeriTest, a service of Lionbridge Technologies Inc., to conduct a competitive notebook durability study. VeriTest conducted a series of tests to exercise the durability of the following notebook systems:•Dell Latitude D610•Lenovo ThinkPad T43•HP Compaq nc6220•Acer TravelMate 4652Our testing consisted of conducting a series of durability tests on two units each of the four notebook models under test. We conducted a ll preconditioning, drop, shock, and spill testing on the premises of Dell Inc. in Austin, TX. We conducted the dust test on the premises of Professional Testing Inc (PTI), an independent, NVLAP accredited laboratory () in Round Rock, TX.To ensure the repeatability and consistency of the test results, we conducted this study using two notebook systems from each vendor. Dell supplied VeriTest with all eight notebook systems in the test environment. Before testing began, VeriTest verified that all eight notebook systems were bought from authorized retail stores from respective vendors. We opened all packaging and manufacturer seals. Before conducting any durability test, VeriTest installed PC Magazine’s WinBench 99 and verified that all notebooks under testsuccessfully completed all benchmark tests to ensure the health of the notebooks. Other than the addition of WinBench 99 and PC-Doctor, all units were tested using the default settings as shipped. In particular, the Lenovo ThinkPad T43 systems had Active Protection System defaulted “on.”For more details regarding the PC Magazine WinBench 99 benchmark, go to/benchmarks/winbench/default.asp .For more details regarding PC-Doctor, go to / .TestsWe performed the durability study by subjecting the eight notebook systems in this testbed to the following test types:A. Operational Free Fall Drop Test - The o bjective of the Operational Free Fall Drop Test was tomeasure the level of damage sustained while the notebook systems were dropped from a set ofspecific predefined heights.B. Operational Shock Test - The objective of the Operational Shock Test was to measure the level ofdamage sustained while the notebook systems were accelerated to specific levels.C. Spill Test - The objective of the Spill Test was to measure the effects of notebook systems when aDiet Coke is spilled on the notebook keyboard.D. Dust Test - The objective of the Dust Test was to measure the effects of notebook systems whenexposed to fibrous dust particles over an extended period.Preconditioning ActivitiesPrior to the start of testing, we conducted preconditioning activities to the notebooks under test. These activities were designed to simulate aging of the system through environmental and fatigue runs. The preconditioning activities included the following types of activity:A. Thermal Shock PreconditioningB. Humidity PreconditioningC. Hinge Cycling PreconditioningD. Screen Marking PreconditioningFull preconditioning procedures and observations are included Appendix A.Thermal Shock PreconditioningNotebooks were placed in a thermal shock chamber in non operational mode and subjected to 50 cycles of 30 minutes at -40°C and 30 minutes at 65°C.Humidity PreconditioningNotebooks were place in a thermal chamber and subjected to 39°C and 50% relative humidity for 24 hours. Hinge Cycling PreconditioningNotebooks were subjected to 20,000 iterations of hinge cycling from 10° to 170° hinge positions.Screen Marking PreconditioningNotebooks were subjected to weight on the back of the display while in the closed position and vibrated on a vibration table for 30 minutes.Test ProcedureA. Operational Free Fall Drop Test - The o bjective of the Operational Free Fall Drop Test was to measurethe level of damage sustained while the notebook systems were dropped from a set of specific predefined heights.For the operation free fall test, we conducted two drops. The first drop was from a height of 14 inches. The second drop was from a height of 29 inches.As explained earlier in the test methodology, we tested two notebooks of each type. For the 29-inch drop test, we dropped the first notebook in each pair at a slight angle to ensure that the collision with the ground was not square. We dropped the second notebook in each pair so that the notebook landed square with the ground upon contact. For the 14-inch drop, both drops were executed with a square landing.During the drop sequence, we ensured that the notebooks were fully charged and kept at room temperature.The drop area included commercial office grade carpeting with no padding over concrete surface.Before each drop, we ran PC-Doctor to completion to baseline the number of bad sectors the notebook contained prior to the test.We then placed the notebook on the plate of the drop tester with its base sitting flat on the plate and the screen facing forward. The display was opened at a 90° angle, relative to the keyboard plane (See Figure 6).During the drop, the notebook was powered on, running on battery power, with a full (85% or greater) battery charge. The notebook was running PC-Doctor and scanning the outside 5% of the hard drive sectors.To ensure that the hard drive head was in approximately the same location for all tests, we used an X-Ray image of the disk during the scan to ensure that PC-Doctor was running on the outside 5% of sectors.Figure 6. Operational Free Fall Drop TestWe then released the plate and allowed the notebook to free fall until it came to rest.After the test, we rebooted each notebook and reran PC-Doctor to measure the new number of bad sectors on the hard drive..B. Operational Shock Test - The objective of the Operational Shock Test was to measure the level ofdamage sustained while the notebook systems were accelerated to specific levels.We conducted all testing at normal ambient condition of approximately 25°C (77°F) and 40% to 50% relative humidity. The operational shock test levels were 142 G (60 in/sec)and 162G (80 in/sec).We set the Pulse shape to be half-sine wave and two-millisecond duration measured at 10% acceleration from zero. The filter was set to 10 kHz. The notebooks were run from battery power. The notebook was fixed to the shock table such that it was not allowed to decouple from the table or deform from the fixture.The notebooks were tested on five sides:1. Bottom side of notebook against table, LCD display opened at a 90-degree angle (see Figure 7).2. Right side of notebook against table, LCD display opened at a 90-degree angle (see Figure 8).3. Left side of notebook against table, LCD display opened at a 90-degree angle (see Figure 9).4. Front side of notebook against table, LCD display opened at a 180-degree angle (see Figure 10).5. Back side of notebook against table, LCD display opened at a 90-degree angle (see Figure 11).Unit Bottom1) Power on notebook.2) Place the notebook as shown in Figure 7.3) Start PC-Doctor to scan the outer 5% of the hard drive.4) Shock the notebook.5) Run PC-Doctor from 1% to 10% scan of the hard drive.Figure 7. Operational Shock Test on Unit BottomUnit Right1) Power on notebook.2) Place the notebook as shown in Figure 8.3) Start PC-Doctor to scan the outer 5% of the hard drive.4) Shock the notebook.5) Run PC-Doctor from 1% to 10% scan of the hard drive.Figure 8. Operational Shock Test on Unit RightUnit Left1) Power on notebook.2) Place the notebook as shown in Figure 9.3) Start PC-Doctor to scan the outer 5% of the hard drive.4) Shock the notebook.5) Run PC-Doctor from 1% to 10% scan of the hard drive.Figure 9. Operational Shock Test on Unit LeftUnit Front1) Power on notebook.2) Place the notebook as shown in Figure 10.3) Start PC-Doctor to scan the outer 5% of the hard drive.4) Shock the notebook.5) Run PC-Doctor from 1% to 10% scan of the hard drive.Figure 10. Operational Shock Test on Unit FrontUnit Back1) Power on notebook.2) Place the notebook as shown in Figure 11.3) Start PC-Doctor to scan the outer 5% of the hard drive.4) Shock the notebook.5) Run PC-Doctor from 1% to 10% scan of the hard drive.Figure 11. Operational Shock Test on Unit B ackPost TestRun WinBench 99 and full scan of notebook using PC-Doctor.C. Spill Test - The objective of the Spill Test was to measure the effects of notebook systems when liquid isspilled on the notebook keyboard.1. Set notebook on base with screen in vertical position oriented 90° to base.2. Run the test with the notebook plugged in and the battery charged.3. Power notebook on and run Business WinBench 99 for 2 minutes before starting the next steps.4. While the machine is running Business WinBench 99, use a syringe to pour 20cc of Diet Coke™ onthree evenly spaced spots on the keyboard between the A and S, G and H L and ;. The total liquid poured will be 60cc.5. Tilt the notebook towards its left side in an attempt to remove the liquid from the system, taking careto limit the motion to only one axis.6. Wipe down surfaces of system with paper towels for 45 seconds to remove as much visible moistureas possible.7. Shut down system.8. Leave the notebook on it left side, on three stacked, unfolded paper towels to enhance drainage.9. Wait for four hours and then power up the notebook.10. Launch Microsoft Word and type on all keys and buttons. Use the TouchPad and pointing device toverify functionality.D. Dust Test - The objective of the Dust Test was to measure the effects of notebook systems when exposed to fibrous dust particles over an extended period of time. This dust test was conducted at an independent test facility, Professional Testing (PTI), a NVLAP-accredited laboratory.1. Set notebook on base with screen in vertical position oriented 90° to base.2. Run the test with the notebook plugged in and the battery charged.3. Set up notebook on dust environment turntable.4. Ensure the temperature of the dust environment is 24°C.5. Load fibrous dust media.6. For a period of 16 hours, allow dust to occupy room and settle onto the open notebook/7. After each hour during the test, a technician cleaned the dust from the notebook keyboard andchassis.8. At the end of 16 hours, ramp up the chamber temperature to 35°C and hold constant for 30 minutes(without dust loading).9. Clean the notebook with the blower.10. Reboot notebook and run Business WinBench 99.AppendicesAppendix A. Preconditioning ProceduresThermal Shock PreconditioningTo conduct the thermal shock preconditioning, we performed the following actions on each of the notebooks under test:1. Examine hard drive using WinBench 992. Ensure the thermal shock chamber is set to room temperature (25°C).3. Ensure systems are powered off and insert them into the chamber with the lids closed.4. Place the notebook in the thermal shock chamber.5. Decrease the temperature to -40°C.6. Minimum temperature ramp rate for thermal shock is ± 40°C per minute.7. Maintain the temperature for 30 minutes.8. Increase the temperature to 65°C.9. Maintain the temperature for 30 minutes.10. Repeat steps 3 through 6 a total of 50 times.11. After completing 50 cycles, return to 65°C for a minimum of 4 hours to evaporate anyaccumulated moisture.12. Return to room temperature (25°C) before removing the notebook from the chamber.13. Examine system for physical or operational damage.After we completed the thermal shock testing procedure, we observed bowed PCMCIA slots on the Acer and bowed optical drive bays on the Lenovo notebooks.Humidity PreconditioningWe performed humidity testing on each notebook in the testbed. To conduct the humidity preconditioning, we performed the following actions on each of the notebooks under test:1. Examine hard drive using WinBench 99.2. Ensure the thermal chamber is set to 25°C and 50% Relative Humidity (RH).3. Ensure systems are powered off and insert them into the chamber with the lids closed.4. Change the conditions to 39°C/50% RH.5. Maximum temperature transition rate is 15°C/hr and maximum humidity transition rate is20%/hr.6. Change the conditions to 39°C/95% RH.7. Maintain 39°C/95%RH for 24 hours.8. Change the conditions to 39°C/50% RH.9. Change the conditions to 25ºC/50% RH.10. Examine notebook for physical or operational damageAfter we completed the humidity testing procedure, all notebooks appeared to be in the same physical and operational order as prior to test.Hinge Cycling PreconditioningTo conduct the hinge cycling preconditioning, we performed the following actions on each of the notebooks under test:1. Using the automated hinge testing device, begin hinge cycling the notebook from approximately 10°(or nearly closed) to 170°. The notebook is manipulated to transition from a 10° hinge position to 170° position in approximately three seconds. At 10° and 170°, the notebook hinge movement is pausedwithout movement for three seconds.2. Allow the notebook to undergo 20,000 iterations of hinge cycling as described above.3. Inspect notebook for damage.After we completed the hinge cycling procedure, we noted that both Acer units exhibited three to four white spots on middle / right part of screen. One Dell notebook (Dell-01) exhibited a white faded area. One HP notebook (HP-01) exhibited black waves commonly known as “curtain effect.”Screen Marking PreconditioningTo conduct the screen marking preconditioning, we performed the following actions on each of the notebooks under test:1. Place a notebook bag on the vibration table with rods around the bag to prevent the bag from fallingoff the table during test.2. Place the notebook under test in the bag.3. Place the rectangular plate with circular weights attached on top of the display cover; adjust the plateto be at the center of the notebook display cover.4. Use Velcro straps to secure the notebook and weights; if needed, use additional tape to preventmotion of the plate on the notebook.5. Vibrate the bag for 30minutes using a random profile.6. Inspect notebook for damage to the screen.After we completed the screen marking procedure, we observed screen marks on seven out of eight systems. One Dell notebook (Dell-01) exhibited no marks, and the second Dell unit exhibited marks in a 54x15mm area. Both Acer units exhibited marks in an area of 153x85mm which required cleaner to remove. One HP notebook exhibited marks in an area of 18x2mm, while the other exhibited marks in a 126x77mm area. One Lenovo system exhibited marks in a 154x51mm area, and one Lenovo system exhibited marks in a154x105mm area.Appendix B. Test Equipment ListDrop Tower Lansmont PDT-56E Not Required NA Figure B1. Drop Test Equipment ListShaker Ling V830-335T Not Required NA Accelerometer PCB 353B33 6/1/2005 6/1/2006 Signal Conditioner PCB 482A16 5/17/2005 5/17/2006 Vibration Controller Dactron Dual DSP 6/1/2005 6/1/2006 Lap Top Bag N9158 Not Required NA Marking Plat e NA NA 22 lb. weight, NA Figure B2. Screen Marking Test Equipment ListShock Tower Lansmont 6581 Not Required NAData Acquisition Lansmont TP3 Software Version3.4.1 NAAccelerometer PCB 353B18 12/28/2004 12/28/2005 Power Supply Lansmont Test Partner 7/22/2005 7/22/2006 Figure B3. Operational Shock Test Equipment ListThermal ShockChamber Thermotron ATS-900-V-25-25-AC Not Required NATemperatureController Thermotron 7825 5/10/2005 5/10/2006 Figure B4. Thermal Shock Test Equipment ListTemperatureHumidity Chamber Thermotron SM 32 7800 Not Required NA TemperatureHumidity Controller Thermotron 7800 5/9/2005 5/9/2006 Figure B5. Humidity Test Equipment List。