Review of test methods for zero PPM performance

Author:

Healy Sandra,Wallace Michael,Murphy Eamonn

Abstract

PurposeMarket demands, especially within the automotive sector, are pushing towards increased product complexity and performance with zero ship parts per million (PPM) requirements. To achieve both quality and performance goals very stringent requirements are being placed on the test manufacturing solution. These requirements lead to conflicts between cost, performance and quality. The purpose of this paper is twofold: first, to investigate the conflicts that exist between quality, performance, and cost, and second, to review current practices and techniques being used in tests to minimise ship PPM.Design/methodology/approachIn the paper a test process development flow chart is presented, along with a review of current methods being used for both defect screening and performance testing. The relationship between test coverage and ship PPM is investigated using established yield models. The cost in terms of gross margin degradation of yield loss at final test to extensive screening and aggressive limits is modelled.FindingsThe paper finds that to maintain ship PPM very high levels of test coverage are required – typically test coverage needs to be > 98 per cent. The cost of yield loss to this testing typically matches on a percentage point basis gross margin degradation. Reviewing current test methods shows the need both for extensive defect‐screening techniques for the defective portion of the population, and for optimised guardbanding techniques for performance testing. Weaknesses that exist are the absence of a model to predict outgoing PPM, and the conservative nature of existing guardband techniques for performance testing.Originality/valueThis is a review paper and it serves to highlight both the weaknesses in current practices, and areas where improved models are required.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Strategy and Management,General Business, Management and Accounting

Reference20 articles.

1. Aitken, R.C. (1993), “A comparison of defect models for fault location with IDDQ measurements”, Proceedings of IEEE International Test Conference, Baltimore, MD, 17‐21 October 1993, pp. 1051‐60.

2. Automotive Electronics Council (1996), Fault Simulation and Test Grading, AEC, pp. 100‐7.

3. Automotive Electronics Council (2003), Guidelines for Part Average Testing, AEC, p. 1001.

4. Benware, B., Lu, C., Van Slyke, J., Krishnamurthy, P., Madge, R., Keim, M., Kassab, M. and Rajski, J. (2004), “Affordable and effective screening of delay defects in ASICS using the inline resistance fault model”, Proceedings of IEEE International Test Conference, pp. 1285‐94.

5. Bordignon, S. and Scagliarini, M. (2002), “Statistical analysis of the process of capability indices with measurement error”, Quality and Reliability Engineering International, Vol. 18, pp. 321‐32.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3