2008 Ieee Autotestcon 2008
DOI: 10.1109/autest.2008.4662678
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Unraveling the Cannot Duplicate and Retest OK problems by utilizing physics in testing and diagnoses

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There is clear distinction between Cannot Duplicate (CND) and Retest OK (RTOK). CND occurs at the same level of maintenance where the fault was reported and RTOK occurs at subsequent levels of maintenance [41]. This leads to the conclusions that RTOK is a 'true' term which can be used for NFF.…”
Section: Organizational Procedures and Administrationmentioning
confidence: 91%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…There is clear distinction between Cannot Duplicate (CND) and Retest OK (RTOK). CND occurs at the same level of maintenance where the fault was reported and RTOK occurs at subsequent levels of maintenance [41]. This leads to the conclusions that RTOK is a 'true' term which can be used for NFF.…”
Section: Organizational Procedures and Administrationmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…Depending upon the accuracy of the diagnosis at this level, ideally only one SRU is called out; less precise diagnostics might call out two, three or more SRUs. The components are then sent back to the depot/workshop for functional testing using Automatic Test Equipment (ATE), where it will be concluded if the component was healthy or falsely replaced, or it is definitely faulty and the diagnostic testing is inadequate [41]. [42] investigated various NFF situations while focusing on developing practical guidance for designers and project managers to facilitate better understanding of the unknown failures and procedural improvements.…”
Section: Fill In Technical Logbookmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As more sophistication is added to electronic systems, the ability to maintain them is becoming ever more difficult and costly. Standard testing using Automatic Test Equipment (ATE) usually includes features such as timing, signal strength, duplicating the operating environment, loading, fanout and properly interconnecting the Unit Under Test (UUT) [60,79,80,81,82]. The idea of ATE is to force the UUT to fail without actually injecting faults.…”
Section: Improvements In Test Abilitiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When it is suspected that NFF occurs due to a lack of fault coverage by the ATE (or BITE), there comes the requirement to use additional tools which are capable of identifying the root cause of the problem. Ungar and Kirkland (2003) [79] argue that to achieve this, an understanding of the Physics-of-Failures (PoF) 15 within the operating environment is needed. Once this is known, appropriate test equipment can be selected to support the ATE which through interpretation of the physics, for example, of circuits under the test environment to be used as fault locators; a capability often beyond that of standard ATE.…”
Section: Detecting Blind Spotsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The global interest on the topic of hidden failures is evident from the increasing number of recent publications within the area (Söderholm, 2007;James et al, 2003;Ungar and Kirkland, 2008;Hockley and Phillips, 2012). Since the key enabler for their resolution is the availability of competent technicians, engineers and senior management, educational institutions have a responsibility to develop relevant high-quality modules and training material to support further progress in the field.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%