we buy good boards! ( improve yield from design to production )
DESCRIPTION
We buy good boards! ( Improve yield from design to production ). Christophe LOTZ [email protected] ASTER Technologies. BTW2009. IEEE 8 th International Board Test Workshop. Content. Introduction Yield improvements Defect prevention vs. Defect detection - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
We buy good boards!(Improve yield from design to production)
Christophe [email protected]
ASTER Technologies
IEEE 8th InternationalBoard Test Workshop
2
Content• Introduction• Yield improvements• Defect prevention vs. Defect detection• Test Coverage vs. Test Efficiency• Production model• Technologies convergence
• Coverage Analysis• + Traceability & Quality tools• = Test Innovation
• Conclusion
3
The world changes• Electronic design and production changes:
Functional complexity of electronic boards. Staggering board density. Outsourcing of board production.
Block 1 Block 2
Block 3
Non-functional channels
We buy good boards
SMD, fine pitch, BGA, buried via
4
Yield improvements
Defect Prevention
Defect Detection
• For a lot of people, Quality is costly. However, Non-Quality can be fatal.
• When it is impossible to reduce the task, it is always possible to reuse the results for other purpose: i.e. Test for Designability, Production line optimization, Repair Cycle, Product life…
• Combine Design Re-Use with Test Re-Use…
5
Defect prevention• Design Flow
• Electrical DfT rules checking from schematic.• Probe optimization from schematic.• Probe placement – Mechanical DfT rules.• DfM – Design for Manufacturing.• Coverage estimation
–Inspection: AOI, AXI–Structural test: ICT,FPT,MDA,BST–Functional test: In-System test, Emulation…
• Lack of automation/understanding between design and production center (The WALL)!
6
• Manufacturing flow• Assembly machine
–Feeder control/supply chain management,–Passive measurement during placement.
• Traceability tools–Work In Process,–Box Building.
• Repair station–CAD data,–Fault ticket,–Diagnosis.–Defect occurrence/re-occurrence
Defect Prevention
Quality System mustbe able to report
the amount of defects by partnumber
7
Defect Detection
• Insufficient• Excess• Cold Solder
• Marginal Joints
• Voids
• Polarity (PCAP)• Missing• Gross Shorts• Lifted Leads• Bent Leads
• Extra Part• Bridging• Tombstone• Misaligned
• Polarity
• Shorts• Open
• Inverted• Wrong Part
• Dead Part
• Bad Part
• In-System Programming
• Functionally Bad
• Short/Open on PCB
AOI
In-Circuit
X-RaySolderMaterial
Placement
• At-speed memory tests
• At-speed interconnect
• Fault Insertion• Gate level
diagnosis
JTAG
(unpowered)
(unpowered)
8
Defect Detection
MPS PPVS PCOLA/SOQ PCOLA/SOQ/FAIM
Material Value Correct Correct
Live Live
Placement Presence Correct Correct
Live Live
Polarity Orientation Orientation
Solder Solder Short Short
Open Open
Quality Quality
Function Function Feature
At-Speed
In Parallel
Measurements
9
• One coin/two sides: Defect Coverage• Drill-down on flows for more defect categories
Defect Detection
FunctionManufactureDesign
SolderingPlacecomponents
Buy Materials(Supply chain)
OrientationPresence
MPS, PTC, PPVS, PCOLA/SOQPCOLA/SOQ/FAIM…
10
• Demonstration using an absurd example • Board - 4 components: 3 resistors, 1 BGA.• The 3 resistors are measured with very high accuracy.• No test on the BGA.
• Is the board test score really 75%?3 resistors / 4 components
• We need something to weight the coverage… It must be credible, easy to update to reflect growing electronics complexity.
Test Coverage
11
Test Efficiency• For each category (MPS) of defects (D), we
associate the corresponding coverage (C).
• The test efficiency is based on a coverage balanced by the defects opportunities.
DfCf
DM + DP + DS
DM CM + DP CP + DS CS
We need a better coverage where there are
more defect opportunities!
Effectiveness =
12
• Coverage• Material=0%, Placement=100%, Solder=100%
• Massive production:• Material=2PPM, Placement=10PPM, Solder=10PPM• Test efficiency=90.9%
• High mix:• Material=15PPM, Placement=10PPM,
Solder=15PPM• Test efficiency=60.5%
Test Efficiency
Everything is relative.
13
DPMOEscape rate
IPC
• How to know your defect universe?• Average number: It is better than nothing as it make possible to differentiate a resistor from an IC.
–www.ppm-monitoring.com–www.inemi.org
• DPMO collected from the real production line–Placement defects and
soldering defects by package.
–Material defects by partnumber.
Defect universe
14
Production model• Summarize the coverage in a limited set of numbers
that will guide the test strategy choice.
• The “Escape” is an effective way to measure the manufacturing quality.
Test
First PassYield
Fall-OffRate
Pass
Fail
Good
Bad
Good
Bad
Escape
False reject
Productsshipped
Productsrepaired
Yield
15
• Design re-use is widely accepted throughout the electronics industry.
• Design | test specification | test development | quality management are isolated in separated silos. Limited data exchange between silos.
• It is time for test-reuse and technologies convergence.
• It increases the test value.• It decreases the test cost.
Technologies convergence
16
• Functional coverage could be managed as described in BTW06 paper.
• By Declaration
Functional test
Schematic and layout viewers used to simplify
coverage declaration.
17
• By Inheritance
Functional test
Recognition of pre-analyzed modules
with corresponding coverage
Derivation and accumulation for the new design.
18
• For a complex board, it represents 3 to 5 days work to analyze the functional coverage if nothing has been prepared from design flow.
• Benefits:• Get the overall coverage
(inspection + structural + functional),• Identify overlapping (potential optimization),• Identify lack of coverage (Failure Mode and Effects
Analysis).
Functional test
Tested?
19
• Functional test• Functional Test coverage tool used as functional
test specification tool.–Define test strategy early in the design flow.–Identify unique test contribution.–Avoid un-required overlapping.
• Functional Blocks recognition make possible to develop an Automatic Functional Test Generator.
–Automate test development and coverage analysis in high-hierarchical design flow.
–Integrate Designer knowledge for repair purpose.
Test Innovation
20
• Test line• Test coverage results re-used in functional test
repair station.–The Pass tests tell us which defects are not on
the board.–The Fail tests tell us which defects could be on
the board.• Combined with historical data in order to guide
diagnosis to the most probable source of defect.
Test Innovation
Repair
Traceability Quality
Tester interface
CADData
Testers
DatabaseViewer
/ Advisor
Data processing/ Exploitation
Parsing /Recording Coverage
Database
21
• Dynamic test program optimization driven by Quality management tool.
• When the test is the bottleneck of the production:
• The Quality Management system is collecting DMPO in real time.
• Defect profile is used to tune the assembly line.• According to the defect profile, the test program is
dynamically optimized.
Test Innovation
No need to maintain test on defect thatno longer occurs !
22
Conclusion• From design, during production and in a more
general way, through the whole product life cycle, coverage estimation permits the test process to be optimized.
• By deploying various testers in the best order, at the best time, with controlled levels of redundancy, costs can be reduced and quality levels raised.
• The economic challenges are critical: the tools to meet them are available.