1. A multilayer printed wiring board comprising:
a core substrate;
an interlayer insulation layer formed over the core substrate;
a plurality of conductive layers formed over the core substrate; and
a via hole for providing electrical connection between the conductive layers,
wherein the plurality of conductive layers includes a conductive layer formed on the core substrate, and the conductive layer formed on the core substrate has a side face in a form of rounded taper tapering toward the core substrate.
2. The multilayer printed wiring board according to claim 1, wherein the side face of the conductive layer makes an angle, \u0398, formed by a horizontal face of the core substrate and a straight line connecting a top end and a bottom end of the side face of the conductive layer, and the angle, \u0398, satisfies 2.8<tan \u0398<55.
3. The multilayer printed wiring board according to claim 1, wherein the conductive layer formed on the core substrate has a thickness which is larger than a thickness of one of the conductive layers formed on the interlayer insulation layer.
4. The multilayer printed wiring board according to claim 1, wherein the conductive layer formed on the core substrate has a thickness \u03b11, one of the conductive layers formed on the interlayer insulation layer has a thickness \u03b12, and the thickness \u03b11 and the thickness \u03b12 satisfy a relation of \u03b12<\u03b11\u226640\u03b12.
5. The multilayer printed wiring board according to claim 4, wherein the thickness \u03b11 and the thickness \u03b12 satisfy a relation of 1.2\u03b12\u2266\u03b11\u226640\u03b12.
6. The multilayer printed wiring board according to claim 1, wherein the conductive layer on the core substrate is one of a conductive layer for power source and a conductive layer for grounding.
7. The multilayer printed wiring board according to claim 1, further comprising a capacitor.
The claims below are in addition to those above.
All refrences to claim(s) which appear below refer to the numbering after this setence.
1. A process for calculating a mean-time-to-failure (\u201cMTTF\u201d) metric for a given type of equipment placed into service, the process comprising:
maintaining a central database;
accessing the central database from a remote terminal through an interface;
entering performance information about the given type of equipment into the central database through the interface, wherein the interface restricts the entered performance information into the central database to a controlled group of responses to a series of scripted prompts;
validating the entered performance information against a set of rules; and
analyzing the validated performance information to calculate a mean-time-to-failure (\u201cMTTF\u201d) metric according to the formula:
MTTF=(N\xd7T)F,
where,
N is a selected number of wells in which the given type of equipment is placed into service;
T is a selected time period; and
F is a number of failures; and
displaying the MTTF through the interface for use in improving performance of the given type of equipment.
2. The process of claim 1, wherein the step of validating the entered performance information includes checking the entered performance information for temporal and geographic inconsistencies.
3. A process for calculating an equipment run life (\u201cERL\u201d) metric for a given type of equipment placed into service, the process comprising:
maintaining a central database;
accessing the central database from a remote terminal through an interface;
entering performance information about the given type of equipment into the central database through the interface, wherein the interface restricts the entered performance information into the central database to a controlled group of responses to a series of scripted prompts;
validating the entered performance information against a set of rules; and
analyzing the validated performance information to calculate an equipment run life (\u201cERL\u201d) metric, wherein the ERL is calculated as the average run life, from start to stop times, of a specific group or type of equipment; and
displaying the ERL through the interface for use in improving performance of the given type of equipment.
4. The process of claim 3, wherein the step of validating the entered performance information includes checking the entered performance information for temporal and geographic inconsistencies.
5. A process for calculating a failure distribution (\u201cFD\u201d) metric for a given type of equipment placed into service, the process comprising:
maintaining a central database;
accessing the central database from a remote terminal through an interface;
entering performance information about the given type of equipment into the central database through the interface, wherein the interface restricts the entered performance information into the central database to a controlled group of responses to a series of scripted prompts;
validating the entered performance information against a set of rules, wherein the step of validating the entered performance information includes checking the entered performance information for temporal and geographic inconsistencies;
analyzing the validated performance information to calculate a failure distribution (\u201cFD\u201d) metric, wherein the FD is a histogram of failures for the given type of equipment that occurred during a specified date range; and
displaying the FD though the interface for use in improving performance of the given type of equipment.