TMAG Meeting #1 Minutes
Wyndham Hotel, San Jose, CA
Also by WebEx connection
December 10, 2007 9:00 AM – 11:30 AM
NOTE: The following is the work product of the Testability Management Action Group (TMAG) and its content is shared with professionals interested in promoting the goals and activities of TMAG.
Copyright and Trademark Laws protect the content of this document. Copyright 2007, Testability Management Action Group (TMAG). No permission is given to utilize the information for commercial purposes other than those provided by written consent of TMAG.
Planned agenda items are shown in red and italicized. Items added later are in green italics.
9:00 AMWelcome to those present Personally and Remotely.
The following individuals were present personally at the Wyndham Hotel
Louis Y. Ungar of A.T.E. Solutions, Inc.
Scott Davidson of Sun Microsystems
Jack George of BAE Systems
Brian Erickson of JTAG Technologies
Paul Berton of Apple Computers
Dieter Bergman of IPC
Jack Fisher of Interconnect Technology Analysis, Inc.
The WebEx had 14 connections on line at different times. They included:
Duane Lowenstein of Agilent Technologies Inc.
Heiko Ehrenberg of Goepel Electronics
Carl Nielsen of Intellitech
Ruben Lebron of the US Navy
Larry Knecht of the US Navy
Russell Shannon of the US Navy
Rick Aberley
Peter Collins of Aster Technologies
Larry Kirkland of WesTest
Ron Press of Mentor Graphics
Craig DePaul of DSI
John Eaton of Hewlett Packard
Others who joined and not listed will be added later
Louis Ungar opened the meeting and explained that the organization is being formed as a follow on to two panels at AutoTestCon 2006 and 2007 where panelists and the audience believed that while technical solutions exist to improve Design for Testability (DFT) there needs to be a way to communicate potential benefits of DFT to Management in terms they value, such as Return on Investment.
Gratitude was expressed to those who helped to bring about this meeting. Specifically, to IPC that provided the meeting facilities in conjunction with its Test & Inspection Conference, to Agilent Technologies Inc. and Duane Lowenstein who made the WebEx connection possible and helped pay the cost of the phone and internet connections at the Wyndham Hotel, and to Goepel Electronics and Heiko Ehrenberg who helped pay the cost of the phone and internet connections at the Wyndham Hotel.
9:15 AMFirst order of business: What are we and what do we want to be called? We will formulate a Mission Statement that will govern our activities.
There were some discussions about the name. There was a motion by Louis Ungar that the group be called Testability Management Action Group (TMAG). Scott Davidson seconded it. No one opposed. Resolved that the group will be called “Testability Management Action Group (TMAG).”
The mission statement in the TMAG Plan was read as follows and entered for discussion:
“The Testability Management Action Group (TMAG) is a grass roots organization made up of test professionals who believe that success for Testability in general, and Design for Testability (DFT) in particular, requires the involvement of management at all levels.”
Discussion that followed included the inclusion of the words “involvement and support (of management)” and the goals being to “provide information.” In the interest of time, the matter was tabled and Louis Ungar took the action item to prepare a new mission statement that would include these additions. The mission statement would be brought for further discussion at that time.
9:25 AMCreate an Organization with temporary positions held through March 31, 2008 at which time elections will take place.
Nominations were opened for Acting Officers performing the following tasks
Acting Treasurer – Ensure funding is available for meetings, promotion, etc.
Dr. Scott Davidson was nominated. Was seconded. No one else volunteered or nominated. Dr. Scott Davidson accepted the position. Resolved that Dr. Scott Davidson will be Acting Treasurer
Acting Secretary – Taking minutes. Establishing a legal Non-Profit Entity
Dr. John Sheppard was nominated. Louis Ungar explained that he had not been able to contact Dr. Sheppard to see if he would accept. No one else volunteered or nominated. Nomination was seconded. Louis Ungar took the action item to inform Dr. Sheppard and hopefully get his acceptance.
Acting Administrative Vice President – In charge of making meetings happen
Duane Lowenstein was nominated. No one else volunteered or nominated. Nomination was seconded. Duane Lowenstein accepted the position. Resolved that Duane Lowenstein will be Acting Administrative Vice President.
Acting Technical Vice President – In charge of getting technical information
Dr. Russell Shannon was nominated. No one else volunteered or nominated. Nomination was seconded. Dr. Russell Shannon accepted the position. Resolved that Dr. Russell Shannon will be Acting Technical Vice President.
Acting President
Louis Ungar was nominated. Brian Erickson volunteered. Louis Ungar’s nomination was seconded. Brian Erickson’s nomination was seconded. Louis Ungar suggested that rather than a vote, he and Brian Erickson serve as Acting Co-Presidents. Brian Erickson agreed and seconded the motion. Resolved that Louis Ungar and Brian Erickson will be Acting Co-Presidents.
There were discussions on the Organizational Entity the group should take on. Everyone seemed to agree that it should be a not for profit organization, but we did not go into greater detail. With the Acting Officers in place, there will be an attempt to establish the organization by March 31, 2007 at which time officers will be dully elected.
There were also discussions regarding the form of financing the organization will adopt. A suggestion for a $50 per year individual membership was considered by some to be too high for many potential members. It was discussed that financial help from businesses would be needed in any event and individual membership fees could be lowered or even eliminated. The discussion was tabled until we could determine the Organizational Entity that we could become because there are legal restrictions involved with each.
It was also recommended that until the Organizational Entity is established, we do not accept any funds from anyone.
Louis Ungar suggested that when the Acting Secretary, Dr. John Sheppard accepts his nomination, we can look at the various options available. So this matter was tabled pending Dr. Sheppard’s acceptance as Acting Secretary.
9:40 AMReview the TMAG Plan Document at . Suggest a more comprehensive outline of what else should be included. Establish the outline of topics, sub topics and sub-sub topics that should be included. (The goal is to improve the document, but not necessarily to finalize it. Further suggestions should be emailed for discussion in the next meeting.)
The Scope section of the TMAG Plan, containing an outline of the items that TMAG will address, underwent a great deal of discussion. Each section is shown below, including changes and recommendations. No resolutions were made regarding changes. We will incorporate the recommended changes and bring it up in subsequent meetings.
- Why DFT in general is needed?
Lots of discussion on this topic – no actionable items
- What benefits does DFT provide for
- More Comprehensive Design Verification Test
- More Comprehensive Environmental Test
- More Comprehensive Production Test
- Lowering Test Costs, (including lower cost test equipment)
- Improving Reliability
- Delivering Higher Quality Products
- Improving Time to Market
- Lowering Cost of Built-In Self Test
- Lowering Cost of Diagnoses
- Lowering Cost of Prognosis and Health Management
- Improving Product Support
- Lowering of Life Cycle Costs
Suggestions were made to include additional items under this section:
Improving use of Embedded Systems
Lowering cost of Code Development through the use of JTAG port entry
Improving Code Debug through the use of JTAG port entry.
Louis Ungar accepted the action item to add these to Item 2 of the Scope. No resolutions were made.
- Costs involved with DFT such as
- Added Design Activity
- Added Cost of Design Reviews and Testability Reviews
- Added Design Time
- Added Parts or Higher Cost Parts
- Added Software
- Added DFT Analysis and Implementation Tools
Suggestions were made to add other cost factors that are caused by the addition of DFT:
The potential that incorporating DFT could hurt performance
Compromising reliability due to added parts
Compromising supportability (in some way?)
Louis Ungar accepted the action item to add these to Item 3 of the Scope. No resolutions were made.
- Return-on-investment calculations for various trade-offs
- Test strategy alternatives
- Fault coverage alternatives
- Test program development cost alternatives
- BIST vs. ATE alternatives
- ATE acquisition alternatives
- DFT at various levels – IC, board, system
Discussions about this point included the following:
Test reuse
Ranges of costs and benefits rather than exact cost figures
Simplification of testers resulting in tester suppliers savings
Louis Ungar accepted the action item to add these to Item 4 of the Scope. No resolutions were made.
- Management involvement in DFT
- Assigning DFT Analysis Personnel
- Conceptual Design DFT Analysis
- Block Diagram Level DFT Analysis
- Built-In Self Test (BIST) Specification
- Parts Procurement towards DFT Requirements
- Circuit Design DFT Analysis
- Test Strategy Development
- System Level DFT Analysis
- Support Level DFT Analysis
- Selling DFT and BIST to Customer
Additional topics proposed to be added were:
Selling DFT and BIST to Vendors (?)
Integrating DFT into the product specification
Define the Organizational Process necessary to make DFT work in a company.
Louis Ungar accepted the action item to add these to Item 2 of the Scope. No resolutions were made.
It was also recommended that two additional items be added to the scope:
- Trace Benefits and Costs to Specific DFT Techniques
- Education
10:10 AMForm Committees and Subcommittees. Each participant should sign up for one or more committee and each committee will elect its own committee chair, define its mission, solicit additional members and prepare to report to all. Those attending the meeting should comment on the committees in the following list.
- Membership Committee – Help decide how to handle membership, individual and corporate.
It was suggested that “fund raising” should be made a task of this committee. Volunteers for this committee were:
Brian Erickson, JTAG Technologies
Louis Ungar, A.T.E. Solutions, Inc.
- Liaison Committee – Assist in finding and interacting with professional organizations that can support our goals and group.
It was suggested that “advertising and promotion” be made a task of this committee. Volunteers for this committee were:
Scott Davidson, Sun Microsystems
Ron Press, Mentor Graphics
Larry Kirkland, WesTest Engineering
Paul Berton, Apple Computers
Tony Ambler, University of Texas
3. Tools Committee – Assist in compiling a list of testability tools that are available in industry and can be evaluated in its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to make DFT profitable
Volunteers for this committee were:
Heiko Ehrenberg, Goepel Electronics
Carl Nielsen, Intellitech Corp.
Duane Lowenstein, Agilent Technologies
Scott Davidson, Sun Microsystems
Ron Press, Mentor Graphics
Craig DePaul, DSI International
4. Economics Assessment Committee – Assist in providing economic analyses on DFT techniques and tools
Volunteers for this committee were:
Russell Shannon, US Navy
Tony Ambler, University of Texas
Scott Davidson, Sun Microsystems
Louis Ungar, A.T.E. Solutions, Inc.
Jack George, BAE Systems
5. DFT Management Committee – Assist in creating management procedures necessary to manage, evaluate and oversee the process of DFT in companies and organizations
Volunteers for this committee were:
Ruben Lebron, US Navy
Louis Ungar, A.T.E. Solutions, Inc.
Jack George, BAE Systems
Mukund Modi, US Navy
Dennis Hecht, The Boeing Company
Tony Ambler, University of Texas
6. DFT Methodology Committee – Assist in compiling information on methodologies used in creating testable designs. The methodologies could be further broken down as Analog, Digital, Mixed Signal, RF… and they could be broken down as IC-level, Board-Level, System-Level, Field-Support.
Volunteers for this committee were:
Rick Aberley
John Knecht, US Navy
John Quiter, US Navy
Peter Collins, ASTER Technologies
Brian Erickson, JTAG Technologies
Carl Nielsen, Intellitech Corp
7. Beyond DFT Committee – With DFT as the basic requirement, this committee will identify other technologies and benefits stemming from DFT, such as Built-In Self Test, Prognosis, Built-In Self Repair, Design for Reliability, Design for Manufacturability, DFX…
Volunteers for this committee were:
Steve Pateras, LogicVision
Louis Ungar, A.T.E. Solutions, Inc.
Russell Shannon, US Navy
Duane Lowenstein, Agilent Technolgies
Jim Lauffer, DSI International
Bruce Bardell, BAE Systems
Carl Nielsen, Intellitech Corp
Tony Ambler, University of Texas
Other committees: Attendees should make recommendations… and volunteer
It was recommended that a Fund Raising committee be formed.
Committees will meet once a month.
There was a general consensus to accept this as a viable goal
10:45 AMFree discussions about TMAG. Now that we have been exposed to some of the requirements and activities we are planning, let’s have an open and frank discussion to see if we are heading to the right place the right way.
There were some lively discussions. At one point, Scott Davidson (IC Testability background) and Craig DePaul (System Level Testability background) were discussing Scott’s belief that at the IC level DFT is pretty much solved and why. Craig offered his views on why some of these could not be applied at the system level.
Other discussions centered around Return On Investment and how traditional ROI concepts do not readily lend themselves to something like DFT where all the costs are up front and the benefits are realized much later.
11:00 AMPlanning the next meeting(s)
When: We will have a Panel at AutoTestCon 2008 in September 2008 in Salt Lake City, Utah, but we would like to have a meeting before then. One possibility is APEX in Las Vegas on March 31, 2008. If possible, we should schedule at least one meeting before that date as well. Suggestions?
What will be covered?
Reports from each committee
Report from officers
Revisit the plan and documentation
New Business
Suggestions?
There were questions about what APEX is and it was explained that it is a manufacturer’s conference well attended by ATE manufacturers. A is Assembly, P is Packaging and EX is Expo.
Louis Ungar explained that AutoTestCon 2008 Technical Chair Larry Kirkland of WesTest is a “member” of TMAG and has assured him that a session will be devoted to a Panel at AutoTestCon.
Scott Davidson told everyone that he and Tony Ambler are active with the International Test Conference (ITC) and are pretty confident that we can incorporate our activities in their forum.
Brian Erickson of JTAG Technologies said he would check with his company’s home office in The Netherlands to see if we could have a European meeting.
Louis Ungar suggested that committees can meet outside of regularly scheduled meetings and it was agreed that committee meetings via email, phone or other means would take place at least once each month. Committees would submit their contributions to fill in the details of the Scope outline prior to general meetings. During the general meetings all can see and comment on these contributions.
11:15 AMFree discussions. Summary. Conclusions
The meeting ended as scheduled with a general satisfaction and excitement about the capabilities of this group.