Mechanism for Fault Models focuses on stuck-at / transition / bridge coverage, untestable fault ratio. The goal is to convert metric movement into mechanism, owner, and release decision.
Fault models define what manufacturing defects ATPG targets; model mix drives pattern count, runtime, and outgoing quality. Think of DFT as a quality pipeline where setup quality determines what silicon evidence means.
Identify where controllability/observability is introduced.
Identify legal constraints and mode assumptions.
Identify failure class: architecture, constraints, physical, or silicon.
DFT CLOSURE FLOW - Fault Models
scan/test architecture
|
v
ATPG constraints + fault models
|
v
pattern generation + compression
|
v
timing/power/physical validation
|
v
silicon diagnosis and release signoff
Debug rule: always state metric, run tags, and owning team with any claim.fault model ladder
1) stuck-at
2) transition
3) bridge/path-delay/cell-aware
Each rung improves quality and increases runtime/pattern cost.DFT OWNERSHIP LAYERS - Fault Models
layer owns failure mode
---------------- -------------------------- -------------------------
rtl/architecture scanability hooks uncontrollable logic
atpg/constraints legal pattern intent aborts, low coverage
physical/clocking chain route + test clocks shift hold/timing escapes
tester/program pattern apply integrity false binning / bad fails
quality signoff release criteria escapes or schedule slipATPG quality comes from fault model choice plus legal constraints, not raw pattern volume alone.
ATPG FLOW
fault model -> constraints -> generation -> simulation -> coverage closure -> signoffCOVERAGE GAP
target coverage
^
| o before closure
| o after fixes
+---------------------> iterationfault model coverage
untestable class report
constraint legality errors
pattern signoff memo
Transition coverage stalled due to clock constraints mismatch; updated at-speed capture definitions recovered target.
Classify untestable faults
Diff ATPG constraints each run
Pair coverage with pattern budget
Ask: what evidence proves this DFT decision is safe for production?
State metric, lot/corner context, and pattern tag with every claim.
Treat timing, power, and quality as one signoff problem.
Chasing coverage without legality checks.
Ignoring test-power side effects of pattern changes.
Debugging silicon without reproducible tags.
Fault models define what manufacturing defects ATPG targets; model mix drives pattern count, runtime, and outgoing quality.
This content block can't be displayed here.
Block type: unknown