跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.231.230.177) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/08/04 01:20
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:龔宜成
研究生(外文):Yi-ChengKung
論文名稱:同時針對單向量及雙向量測試之多種錯誤模型測試資料生成技術
論文名稱(外文):Generating Single- and Double-Pattern Tests for Multiple CMOS Fault Models in One ATPG Run
指導教授:李昆忠李昆忠引用關係
指導教授(外文):Kuen-Jong Lee
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立成功大學
系所名稱:電機工程學系
學門:工程學門
學類:電資工程學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2019
畢業學年度:107
語文別:英文
論文頁數:59
中文關鍵詞:單向量測試雙向量測試自動測試向量生成測試壓縮
外文關鍵詞:Single-pattern testDouble-pattern testATPGTest compaction
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:39
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
在本論文中,我們提出了一個可同時針對多種錯誤模型同時產生測試向量的方法。所考慮的錯誤模型包含定值錯誤、靜態橋接錯誤、延遲錯誤及電晶體無法導通錯誤。所有目標錯誤皆會被轉換為具有特定限制的定值錯誤,並配合我們提出之具有兩個時間框架的電路模型,使得所需測試資料可以一次性的被自動向量生成軟體產生。此方法突破了目前商用測試向量生成軟體中無法同時產生單向量及雙向量測試所需之測試資料的限制。此外所生成的測試向量能被多種錯誤模型共用,故測試資料量及測試資料輸入時間能被大幅降低。本方法可支援生成LOC或LOS測試向量格式,此兩者為最常被使用於雙向量測試之格式。最後本論文中所使用之具有兩個時間框架的電路模型僅用於測試資料生成,故無須在實際設計中額外增加任何電路。在ISCAS’89、IWLS’05及ITC’99的實驗結果顯示在使用LOC測試向量格式下與最高效率的傳統方法相比,我們的方法可以分別降低14.02%、12.12%及12.97%的測試資料量,同時也分別縮短21.54%、15.03%及16.3%的測試資料輸入時間。在生成LOS測試向量格式及N次偵測之測試向量的實驗結果中也顯示同時考慮多種錯誤模型生成測試資料的方法與傳統方法相比能節省更多測試成本。
In this thesis, a novel test pattern generation method for multiple DC and AC faults is presented. The fault models considered include stuck-at faults, bridging faults, transition faults and transistor stuck-open faults. All faults are transformed into stuck-at faults with some constraints in a proposed two-timeframe circuit model such that all considered faults can be represented utilizing the user-defined fault model which is supported by most commercial ATPG tools. This makes it possible to generate all required patterns for both DC and AC faults in one ATPG run with no need to modify the ATPG tool. A highly compact pattern set can thus be obtained which requires smaller test data volume and shorter test application time. Traditional two-vector test schemes such as LOC and LOS are both supported. The proposed two-timeframe circuit model is needed only for ATPG tools to generate test patterns. Hence no logic is added to the real circuits. Experiments on ISCAS’89, IWLS’05 and ITC’99 benchmark circuits show that, compared to the most efficient conventional methods, on average our method can reduce test pattern counts by 14.02%, 12.12% and 12.97% and test application time by 21.54%, 15.03% and 16.3%, respectively, when the LOC test scheme is employed. Experimental results based on the LOS test scheme and the N-detect test method also show higher compaction by the proposed method over previous methods.
CHAPTER 1 Introduction 1
CHAPTER 2 Two-timeframe Circuit Model & Faults Considered 5
CHAPTER 3 Stuck-at Fault Transformation 8
CHAPTER 4 Bridging Fault Transformation 11
CHAPTER 5 Transition Fault Transformation 14
CHAPTER 6 Transistor Stuck-open Fault Transformation 15
CHAPTER 7 Compact Pattern Classification for Testapplication 17
CHAPTER 8 Overview of Proposed Test Generation Flow 19
8.1 Proposed Test Generation Flow for Stuck-at faults and Transition Faults 19
8.2 Proposed Test Generation Flow for Stuck-at faults, Bridging Faults and Transition Faults 21
8.3 Proposed Test Generation Flow for Stuck-at Faults, Bridging faults, Transition Faults and Transistor Stuck-open Faults 23
CHAPTER 9 Experimental Results 25
9.1 Compact Test Generation for Stuck-at faults and Transition Faults 25
9.1.1 Conventional Methods 25
9.1.2 Comparison Results with Conventional Methods 27
9.2 Compact Test Generation for Stuck-at faults, Bridging Faults and Transition Faults 36
9.2.1 Conventional Methods 36
9.2.2 Comparison Results with Conventional Methods 39
9.3 Compact Test Generation for Stuck-at Faults, Bridging faults, Transition Faults and Transistor Stuck-open Faults 46
9.3.1 Conventional Methods 46
9.3.2 Comparison Results with Conventional Methods 49
CHAPTER 10 Conclusions 56
References 57
[1]L.T. Wang, C.W. Wu, and X. Wen, VLSI Test Principles and Architectures: Design for Testability, Morgan Kaufmann, 2006.
[2]J. Savir and S. Patil, Scan-based transition test, IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, vol. 12, no. 8, pp. 1232-1241, 1993.
[3]J. Savir and S. Patil, Broad-side delay test, in IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, vol. 13, no. 8, pp. 1057-1064, 1994.
[4]I. Park and E. J. McCluskey, Launch-on-Shift-Capture Transition Tests, in Proc. International Test Conference (ITC), pp. 1-9, 2008.
[5]I. Pomeranz, “On Test Compaction of Broadside and Skewed Load Test Cubes, IEEE Transactions on Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI) Systems, vol. 21, no. 9, pp. 1705-1714, 2013.
[6]S. Hillebrecht, I. Polian, P. Engelke, B. Becker, M. Keim, and W.-T. Cheng, “Extraction, Simulation and Test Generation for Interconnect Open Defects Based on Enhanced Aggressor-Victim Model, in Proc. International Test Conference (ITC), pp. 1–10, 2008.
[7]Dominik Erb, K. Scheibler, M. Sauer, and B. Becker, “Efficient SMT-based ATPG for interconnect open defects, in Proc. Design, Automation & Test in Europe Conference & Exhibition (DATE), pp. 1-6, 2014.
[8]S. Chakravarty, S. Mandava, S. Kundu, “On Detecting Bridges Causing Timing Failures, in Proc. International Conference on Computer Design (ICCD), pp. 400-406, 1999.
[9]S. Zhong, S. Khursheed, B. Al-Hashimi, S. Reddy, and K. Chakrabarty, “Analysis of resistive bridge defect delay behavior in the presence of process variation, in Proc. Asian Test Symposium (ATS), pp. 389–394, 2011.
[10] S. Zhong, S. Khursheed and B.M. Al-Hashimi, “Impact of PVT Variation on Delay Test of Resistive Open and Resistive Bridge Defects, in proc. Defect and Fault Tolerance in VLSI and Nanotechnology Systems (DFTS), pp. 230-235, 2013.
[11]N. Devtaprasanna, A. Gunda, P. Krishnamurthy, S.M. Reddy and I. Pomeranz, “A Unified Method to Detect Transistor Stuck-Open Faults and Transition Delay Faults, in Proc. European Test Symposium (ETS), pp. 185-192, 2006.
[12]Y. Higami et al., “Increasing Defect Coverage by Generating Test Vectors for Stuck-Open Faults, in Proc. Asian Test Symposium (ATS), pp. 97-102, 2008.
[13]X. Lin, S. M. Reddy, and J. Rajski, “Using Boolean Tests to Improve Detection of Transistor Stuck-Open Faults in CMOS Digital Logic Circuits, in Proc. International Conference on VLSI Design (VLSID), pp. 399-404, 2015.
[14]S. Goel and R. A. Parekhji, “Choosing the Right Mix of At-Speed Structural Test Patterns: Comparisons in Pattern Volume Reduction and Fault Detection Efficiency, in Proc. Asian Test Symposium (ATS), pp.330-336, 2005.
[15]S. Alampally, R. T. Venkatesh, P. Shanmugasundaram, R. A. Parekhji, and V. D. Agrawal, “An Efficient Test Data Reduction Technique Through Dynamic Pattern Mixing Across Multiple Fault Models, in Proc. VLSI Test Symposium (VTS), pp. 285–290.1, 2011.
[16]G. Chen, S. Reddy, I. Pomeranz, J. Rajski, P. Engelke, and B. Becker, “A Unified Fault Model and Test Generation Procedure for Interconnect Opens and Bridges, in Proc. European Test Symposium (ETS), pp. 22- 27, 2005.
[17]R. D. Blanton, Kumar N. Dwarakanath, and Rao Desineni, “Defect Modeling Using Fault Tuples, IEEE Trans. Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, vol. 25, No. 11, pp. 2450-2464, 2006.
[18]C. H. Wu and K. J. Lee, Transformation of Multiple Fault Models to a Unified Model for ATPG Efficiency Enhancement, in Proc., International Test Conference (ITC), pp. 1-10, 2016.
[19]Mentor, Inc., Tessent ATPG User Guide, Version J-2015.02.
[20]Cadence, Inc., Modus ATPG User Guide, Version 17.20.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top