0% found this document useful (0 votes)
177 views33 pages

Fault Models PDF

Uploaded by

Shweta sinha
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
177 views33 pages

Fault Models PDF

Uploaded by

Shweta sinha
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 33

l Single Stuck-At Fault Model

l Other Fault Models


l Redundancy and Untestable Faults
l Fault Equivalence and Fault Dominance
l Method of Boolean Difference

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 1 University of Illinois


Modeling the effects of physical defects on the logic function
and timing
l Physical Defects l Electrical Effects
¨ Silicon defects
¨ Shorts (0 resistance)
¨ Photolithographic defects
¨ Opens ( resistance)

8
¨ Mask contamination
¨ Transistor stuck-on,
¨ Process variations stuck-open
¨ Defective oxide ¨ Resistive shorts and
opens
¨ Change in threshold
l Logical Effects voltage
¨ Logic s-a-0 or 1
¨ Slower transition (delay faults)
¨ AND-bridging, OR-bridging

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 2 University of Illinois


lPhysical Defect lElectrical
A B

VDD X
B
X
A Z
X
GND X X

lLogical
S-A-0
A
B X Z

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 3 University of Illinois


l Manufacture
¨ Mask contamination, dust particles
¨ Fabrication area contamination
l Aging Effects
¨ Metal migration
¨ Oxide degradation due to trapped charge
l Handling
¨ Electrostatic discharge

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 4 University of Illinois


l Why Use Single Stuck-At Fault (SSF) Model?
¨ Complexity is greatly reduced. Many different
physical defects may be modeled by the same
logical stuck-at fault.
¨ SSF is technology independent
s Has been successfully used on TTL, ECL, CMOS,
etc.
¨ Single stuck-at tests cover a large percentage of
multiple stuck-at faults.
¨ Single stuck-at tests cover a large percentage of
unmodeled physical defects.

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 5 University of Illinois


l Irredundant two-level circuit
¨ Complete test for SSF also detects all MSF [Kohavi and
Kohavi, 1972]
l Fanout-free circuit
¨ Any complete test for SSF detects all double and triple
faults [Hayes, 1971]
l Internal fanout-free circuit (fanout > 1 on primary
inputs only)
¨ Any complete test for SSF detects greater than 98% of
MSF with 5 or fewer faults [Agarwal and Fung, 1981]

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 6 University of Illinois


V DD

B Faulty
F Good
Break

l The break in the gate input to transistor T causes it to


remain open

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 7 University of Illinois


A B Fgood Ffaulty
0 0 1 1
0 1 0 0
1 0 0 previous F
(floating F)
1 1 0 0

Test Sequence for T stuck-open: A,B = 0, 0 then 1, 0

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 8 University of Illinois


l Transistor T1 is always l Observations:
conducting – Correct logic function, but
degraded logic levels
V – Higher signal transition times,
DD
results in a Delay Fault.
Break
A T1 – When A=1, and B=0,
T2
transistors T1, T2, and T3 are
B all conducting resulting in an
F
T4
IDDQ Fault
T3 – If the open is resistive, IDDQ
fault will not happen, but
Delay Fault is very likely

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 9 University of Illinois


DDQ

l A path that draws current from Vdd to ground

Path from VDD


to GND

A=0
Stuck On
B=0

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 10 University of Illinois


DDQ
l Advantages
¨ Covers most bridge faults
¨ Covers some open faults
¨ Higher defect coverage than stuck-at tests
l Disadvantages
¨ Circuit must be designed with low IDDQ
¨ Test application slow
¨ Some open faults escape IDDQ tests
¨ Some timing faults escape IDDQ tests
¨ Current threshold has to be empirically established

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 11 University of Illinois


Path from VDD
to GND
A=0
Bridge
D=1
B=0

C=1
E=0
l Simplified Models
n Wired-AND, Wired-OR
l More Realistic Models:
n Bridge resistance
n Vth of successor gates
ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 12 University of Illinois
l Slow-to-rise (0 to 1) transition l Slow-to-fall (1 to 0) transition

l Requires a two-pattern l Requires a two-pattern


sequence <V1, V2> for a sequence <V1, V2> for a
slow-to-rise fault on line k: slow-to-fall fault on line k:
¨ V1 sets line k to 0 ¨ V1 sets line k to 0
¨ V2 tests fault k stuck-at-0 ¨ V2 tests fault k stuck-at-0

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 13 University of Illinois


l Model defects that affect the circuit timing (resistive shorts
and opens)
l Transition faults and Gate Delay faults
¨ Models slow-to-rise or slow-to-fall transition on logic gate
l Path Delay Faults (robust and non-robust testing):
¨ Models slow-to-rise or slow-to-fall transition on some
path(s) from primary input to primary outputs
s Advantage: covers transition and gate delay faults

s Disadvantages: test application in non-scan sequential


circuits cannot be done at-speed. Number of paths may be
(exponentially) large

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 14 University of Illinois


l UNSTRUCTURED: functional vectors, ATPG vectors
¨ Takes time to get high fault coverage, especially for sequential
designs.
¨ Hard as today’s ASIC designs use embedded logic blocks,
memories etc
s “I did not design the whole chip”

s “With automated synthesis I do not know the details of my logic”

l STRUCTURED: DFT, BIST


¨ Adds additional hardware (increases area)
¨ Trade-off between area and test time

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 15 University of Illinois


l Sensitized line for vector t: a line whose logic value is
not correct for vector t in presence of a fault
l Sensitized path for t: a path of sensitized lines

A fault is detectable (testable) if vector t that:


E
l

¨ Excites the fault: produces complemented to correct


(faulty) logic value at fault location
AND
¨ Propagates the faulty effect: it produces a sensitized
path to some primary output from faulty location

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 16 University of Illinois


A G/1
D X
F I
B
C H
E

l Fault Excitation: Applying a logic value


opposite to the stuck-at value at the fault site.
l Error Propagation: Applying appropriate logic
values in the circuit to make the error visible at
the primary outputs.
l ABC = 00x is a test vector for G/1 (G s-a-1).
ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 17 University of Illinois
line sensitized
to f

Primary X
Inputs f fault
Primary
Outputs

l Sometimes a fault f on line l cannot be excited or cannot be


propagated or both.
l Then the fault f is termed untestable.
l If the fault f is untestable, then the fault f is redundant, i.e.,
the line l or the associated gate can be removed from the
circuit without changing the logic function.
ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 18 University of Illinois
l If a fault f on line l is untestable, then either
the line or the gate can be removed without
changing the function.
s-a-1 1

s-a-0 0 0

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 19 University of Illinois


l Unintentional redundancies l Intentional Redundancies
occur due to poorly – Duplicated logic for increase in
optimized designs. This can drive, speed (carry logic)
happen for hand designed or
synthesized circuits – Duplicated logic for error
detection
l Interconnect of synthesized
individually non-redundant – Additional terms for hazard
logic blocks can create global removal
redundancies – Use of over-designed library
cells, e.g., for a 3-to-1 mux, use
a
c
4-to-1 mux
F
a
b 0 MUX 0 MUX
1 1
b 2 2
c 3 3

e.g. F = ac + ab + bc Vdd
ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 20 University of Illinois
s-a -0 1/0 (a) Unobservable
x
1/Z (b) Uncontrollable
1 b
1/? a x
0 x x
Z

TriState Untestable
S-a-0
D
x

D
Sequentially Redundant
Clk

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 21 University of Illinois


l A fault 'a' is equivalent l Fault ‘a’ s-a-0 is
to fault 'b' in the logic equivalent to faults ‘b’
circuit F, if the logic s-a-0 and c s-a-0
function F(a) realized l Equivalence is useful
in the presence of fault in reducing the size of
'a' is identical to the a fault list
logic function F(b) in
presence of fault 'b'. a c
b

For n-input gates, need only to consider n+2 faults.

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 22 University of Illinois


l Introduce fault f in the network N and reduce
the structure to S(Nf).
l Similarly obtain the structure S(Ng).
l If S(Nf) = S(Ng) then clearly function Nf = Ng
and therefore f and g are equivalent faults.
l Structural equivalence implies functional
equivalence.

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 23 University of Illinois


equivalent equivalent
s-a-1 s-a-0 s-a-0 not equivalent
X X X s-a-0
s-a-0 s-a-1 X s-a-0
X
equivalent s-a-0
s-a-0 X
s-a-1 equivalent
X
X s-a-0 s-a-0
X
X s-a-1 X X
s-a-1
s-a-1 s-a-1
equivalent
equivalent
l Equivalence classes obtained may not be maximal,
but they are obtained quickly.
ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 24 University of Illinois
l Fault collapsing is the process of retaining only one fault
from each group of equivalent faults
l In the 2-input multiplexer there are 18 single fault sites
l The collapsed list has 10 faults:
– {A1, B1, C0, C1, E1, F1, G0, H0, I0, I1}

A
F
G
I
D E
C
B H
ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 25 University of Illinois
ALGORITHM:

¨ Insert all possible s-a-0 and s-a-1 faults on


every line in the circuit
¨ Traverse circuit gates and collapse faults
¨ Easy way: depth=1. Can do for higher depth
(but it can become exponential)

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 26 University of Illinois


l Let TA be the set of all test vectors for fault A
and TB be the set of all test vectors for fault B.
É
l Then fault A dominates fault B (written B A)
iff fA = fB for all vectors in TB.
É
l It follows that TB TA
¨ A test for B is a test for A. TB TA
¨ If B is tested, then A is tested.
¨ A can be removed.
É
l If TB TA then it does not always mean that
the boolean functions fA = fB for vectors in TB.
ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 27 University of Illinois
{a/0, b/0, c/0, d/0}
a
b d Ta/1 = {011} Tb/1 = {101} Tc/1 = {110}
c
Td/1 = {0xx, x0x, xx0}
d/1 dominates a/1, b/1, and c/1

l No fault equivalence or dominance


relationship exists between a stem and its
fanout branches.
l Dominance does not hold in sequential
circuits.
ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 28 University of Illinois
Fault-Free
A I = AC + BC
B
C
(AC + BC)
Faulty
A = (A+C)(B+C)
G/1
B
1 = AB + AC + BC
C
ABC ABC
All test 00X 000
vectors: 0X0 001
X01 010
101
ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 29 University of Illinois
l Definition: Given a function Z(x1, x2, ... xn), the
Boolean Difference of Z with respect to xi is
defined as Z(x1, x2, ... xn)x = 0 Å Z(x1, x2, ... xn)
i xi = 1
l
DZ
It is often written dx
i
x2
x3
x1
Z = x1(x2+x3) + x1x4
x4
DZ = Z
dx4 x4 = 0 Å Z x4 = 1 = [x1(x2+x3)] Å [x1(x2+x3) + x1)] = x1

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 30 University of Illinois


l Now consider x4 stuck-at-0. Any test vector
for x4/0 must satisfy Zx4=0 ¹ Zx4=1
l In addition, the test must satisfy x4 = 1.
l Therefore, all test vectors satisfy
DZ x = 1 x1x4 = 1
dx4 4
(x1, x2, x3, x4) = (0,-,-,1)

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 31 University of Illinois


x2
x3
x1

x4 X
f
l Consider the fault f.
¨ Rewrite Z by cutting the wire at f as a 5-variable
function
s Z(x1, x2, x3, x4, f) = x1(x2+x3) + f

¨
DZ must be 1 for f to propagate to the output
df
¨ Also express f = F(x1, x2, x3, x4) = x1x4
¨ If f is stuck-at-0, the excitation requirement is
F(x1, x2, x3, x4) = 1
ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 32 University of Illinois
¨ If f is stuck-at-1 then F(x1, x2, x3, x4) = 0.
¨ Therefore, all test vectors are expressed by the
equation
DZ
s
df f = 1 for f stuck-at-0
s DZ f = 1 for f stuck-at-1
df
DZ
¨ df = x1(x2+x3) Å 1 = x1 + x2x3
¨ Tests for f stuck-at-0 are
s x1x4 [x1+x2x3)] = x1x4

ECE 443 © Copyright 1998 Elizabeth M. Rudnick 33 University of Illinois

You might also like