Skip to content
DenseChip
Learn
PracticeCode labInterview

DenseChip

Navigate

Menu

LearnPracticeCode labInterview

Tools

All toolsSV editorCode repoResume
DenseChip

Practice, courses, and chip-design tools in one focused workspace.

LearnPracticeCode labInterviewToolsLearning paths

© 2026 DenseChip

AboutContactPrivacyTerms
Skip to lesson

Course contents

  • How to Use This Course
  • DFT Metrics Reference
  • DFT Glossary
  • Reading Path
  • Scan Fundamentals61
  • Compression & Diagnosis61
  • ATPG & Pattern Generation61
    • Fault Models
      • Fault Models: Mechanism
      • Fault Models: Inputs & Outputs
      • Fault Models: Reports & Metrics
      • Fault Models: Debug Playbook
      • Fault Models: Worked Example
      • Fault Models: Pitfalls & Red Flags
      • Fault Models: Interview Drills
      • Fault Models: Review Checklist
      • Fault Models: Theory Deep Dive
      • Fault Models: Design Space
      • Fault Models: Expanded Case Study
      • Fault Models: Step-by-Step Walkthrough
      • Fault Models: Comparison Matrix
      • Fault Models: Software / Programmer View
      • Fault Models: Silicon PPA Impact
    • ATPG Constraints
    • Pattern Signoff
    • Coverage Closure
    • ATPG & Pattern Generation: Tricky Q&A
  • MBIST & LBIST61
  • Boundary Scan & JTAG61
  • Test Timing & Power61
  • DFT Physical Integration61
  • DFT Interview Prep61
  • DFT / ATPG Cheatsheet
Loading lesson

‹Fault Models
  1. Topics
  2. Design for Test
  3. ATPG & Pattern Generation
  4. Fault Models
  5. Fault Models: Worked Example

DFT / ATPG · All levels

Fault Models: Worked Example

Worked Example for Fault Models.

On this page

    Worked example

    Worked Example 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.

    A release review shows regression on stuck-at / transition / bridge coverage, untestable fault ratio. The strongest first move is to freeze evidence, isolate one failing bucket, and prove mechanism before changing flow knobs.

    Sequence under inspection

    Diagram
    DFT FLOW - Fault Models
    
    scan insertion -> chain stitch -> compression map -> ATPG -> tester apply -> diagnosis
          |                |                |            |             |
     controllability   shift balance    channel use   coverage     silicon correlation
    
    Primary metric: stuck-at / transition / bridge coverage, untestable fault ratio

    Fault model stack

    Diagram
    fault model ladder
    1) stuck-at
    2) transition
    3) bridge/path-delay/cell-aware
    
    Each rung improves quality and increases runtime/pattern cost.
    1. Capture failing report and exact run tags.

    2. Tag scenario (mode, lot/corner, pattern class).

    3. Trace first dependency that changed.

    4. Compare against fault coverage report, fault class breakdown, untestable list.

    5. Choose one reversible fix and predefine regression checks.

    Did the fix work?

    Diagram
    BEFORE / AFTER - Fault Models
    
    metric quality
      ^
      |                    --- release target
      |      o regressed
      |           o baseline
      |                o after fix
      +-------------------------------> closure iteration
    
    Prove quality, timing, and test-power all moved safely.

    DFT deep dive

    ATPG quality comes from fault model choice plus legal constraints, not raw pattern volume alone.

    Concept diagram

    Diagram
    ATPG FLOW
    
    fault model -> constraints -> generation -> simulation -> coverage closure -> signoff

    Metric graph

    Diagram
    COVERAGE GAP
    
    target coverage
      ^
      |      o before closure
      |          o after fixes
      +---------------------> iteration

    Reports and artifacts

    • fault model coverage

    • untestable class report

    • constraint legality errors

    • pattern signoff memo

    Mini case study

    Transition coverage stalled due to clock constraints mismatch; updated at-speed capture definitions recovered target.

    Debug branches

    • Classify untestable faults

    • Diff ATPG constraints each run

    • Pair coverage with pattern budget

    Senior review question

    Ask: what evidence proves this DFT decision is safe for production?

    Key takeaways

    • State metric, lot/corner context, and pattern tag with every claim.

    • Treat timing, power, and quality as one signoff problem.

    Common pitfalls

    • Chasing coverage without legality checks.

    • Ignoring test-power side effects of pattern changes.

    • Debugging silicon without reproducible tags.

    Principal DFT review addendum

    Fault models define what manufacturing defects ATPG targets; model mix drives pattern count, runtime, and outgoing quality.

    Metric: stuck-at / transition / bridge coverage, untestable fault ratio

    This content block can't be displayed here.

    Block type: unknown

    This content block can't be displayed here.

    Block type: unknown

    This content block can't be displayed here.

    Block type: unknown

    Previous

    131 / 493

    Next: Fault Models: Pitfalls & Red Flags

    Up next

    Up nextFault Models: Pitfalls & Red Flags

    Sign in to save progress

    Practice this lessonReport an error

    See also

    • Fault Models: Mechanism
    • Fault Models: Inputs & Outputs
    • Fault Models: Reports & Metrics