Fault Models is central to ATPG & Pattern Generation. Fault models define what manufacturing defects ATPG targets; model mix drives pattern count, runtime, and outgoing quality. Senior DFT engineers tie metric movement to architecture assumptions, constraints, and silicon evidence rather than isolated tool output.
Fault models define what manufacturing defects ATPG targets; model mix drives pattern count, runtime, and outgoing quality.
Primary metric: stuck-at / transition / bridge coverage, untestable fault ratio
Primary artifact: fault coverage report, fault class breakdown, untestable list
Owners: ATPG owner, DFT architect, quality owner
Controllability and observability must be explicit
Production-quality requires reproducible pattern and tester tags
At release, Fault Models issues can create coverage escapes, unstable production bins, or long debug loops. ATPG is a model-driven search constrained by legal test behavior.
fault model ladder
1) stuck-at
2) transition
3) bridge/path-delay/cell-aware
Each rung improves quality and increases runtime/pattern cost.Name failing metric and scenario context (mode, lot/corner, program).
Open stuck-at / transition / bridge coverage, untestable fault ratio trend and isolate dominant failing bucket.
Trace architecture assumptions and legality constraints.
Check compression, clocking, and unknown handling dependencies.
Collect fault coverage report, fault class breakdown, untestable list and confirm run tags.
Classify issue: model/constraint, physical/test setup, or real defect signal.
Propose minimal fix and list timing/power/quality regression checks.
Coverage percent alone proves release readiness.
More compression always means better outcome.
Silicon mismatch can be debugged without pattern/tester traceability.
Shift timing and test power can be signed independently.
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.
ATPG is a model-driven search constrained by legal test behavior.
This content block can't be displayed here.
Block type: unknown