1 / 12

Actel FPGA (Field Programmable Gate Array) Presentation to NASA and Industry September 22, 2004

Actel FPGA (Field Programmable Gate Array) Presentation to NASA and Industry September 22, 2004. Aerospace Actel Team Team Lead: Larry Harzstark. Problem Statement. Several contractors experienced device failures (approximately 36) after successfully programming the FPGAs

kaemon
Download Presentation

Actel FPGA (Field Programmable Gate Array) Presentation to NASA and Industry September 22, 2004

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Actel FPGA (Field Programmable Gate Array) Presentation to NASA and IndustrySeptember 22, 2004 Aerospace Actel Team Team Lead: Larry Harzstark

  2. Problem Statement • Several contractors experienced device failures (approximately 36) after successfully programming the FPGAs • All failures occurred within first 100 hours of operation • All contractors were operating parts outside of Actel specification • Multiple post-programming failures raised potential latent failure and reliability concerns • Aerospace issued first Aerospace Alert/Advisory in December 2003 • Aerospace hosted three industry meetings - Oct 2003, Feb 2004, Jun 2004 • Industry investigation team formed (headed by Aerospace) to determine root cause, potential hardware exoneration screens, long term reliability.

  3. Boeing MEC FPGA Test Plan Old-Algorithm **4B1=25 MHz, 17 I/Os switching, 12.5% I/O toggle rate; -1V undershoot **4B2=50 MHz, 70 I/O’s switching; 50% toggle rate; -2V undershoot Project 4B1 ** 550 parts Project 7 600 hrs Project 4B2 ** 2000 hrs Project 7 – 31 failures observed thru 600 hours Project 4B1 – 3 failures observed thru 1000 hours Project 4B2 – 2 failures observed thru 1000 hours Projects 4B1 and 4B2 resumed testing 9/20-21

  4. Boeing Project 4 Test Results • Failures consistent with continuation of Project 7 Weibull curve -No evidence that stress (SSU) caused any additional failures

  5. Analysis of Boeing Project 7 Results • 31 failures observed thru 600 hours of test • Weibull FIT Rate developed based on Boeing test results for old algorithm with 90% confidence limits

  6. Failure Predictions Based on Boeing Test Results

  7. Tiger-Team MEC Parts Testing 4B2=50 MHz 4B2 old algo 25 deg C 70 I/Os switching, 50% I/O 4B2 old algo 85 deg C/ Vcca=3 559 parts toggle rate; -2 V undershoot 4B2 new algo 25 deg C Electrical test points at 0, 24, 48, 168, 500, 1000 hours

  8. Tiger Team MEC Parts Testing • Current Status as of Sept 17, 2004 • Old Algorithm • Completed 168 hours 9/17 • 500 hours to be complete 10/4 • 1000 hours to be complete 10/31 • Group A at 25 deg C had 4 failures observed thru 168 hours • Group B at 85 deg C and Vcca=3.0 V had 11 failures observed thru 168 hours • New Algorithm • Completed 168 hours 9/14 • 500 hours to be complete 9/30 • 1000 hours to be complete 10/25 • Group A at 25 deg C had 11 failures observed thru 168 hours • 5 F & X antifuses • 5 I, K & S antifuses • 1 unknown-type antifuse

  9. Tiger Team MEC Test Results * 2 units kept as controls

  10. Tiger Team MEC Test Results • Unexpected failures (5) of new algorithm high current (F & X) antifuses • 2 DPA’s completed at Aerospace on F & X antifuses • One device has evidence of residual photoresist • Potentially affects all other parts in Tiger-Team tests • Parts tested directly into P4B2 environment at 25 deg C show behavior comparable to Boeing P7 tests • No acceleration apparent • Parts tested in 85 deg C, 3 V stress environment does appear to show an increase in the number of failures • Need additional analysis and investigation

  11. Additional Testing Planned • Government working with Actel for formal space qualification of UMC 0.25 um technology • Includes evaluation of physics of failure, development of activation energy and acceleration factors • Aerospace to begin long-term (2-3 year) life test on UMC parts shortly • 120 plastic A54SX32A parts • Design configured to detect functional and timing-shift failures • All programming pulses and waveforms will be recorded for each part and analyzed • Interim data and results will be published and provided to industry

  12. Conclusions • There is significant risk of future failure with the MEC old-algorithm parts • Screening does not appear to be feasible • Tiger-Team tests have not shown sufficient reduction in failure risk to recommend use of MEC new-algorithm parts • Wafer processing defects maybe contributing to failures observed • UMC-parts testing by NASA to begin shortly • All Actel results to date are promising • ASIC alternative is appropriate if program schedules permit

More Related