Objective:
To provide the evaluating team with guidelines to ensure 
that the vendor's ASIC technology can handle the design complexity, 
radiation hardness, and testability requirements of a speace ASIC 
program.
Many requirements drive selecting a 
process technology.  Variables 
include maturity, stability, 
radiation hardness, power consumption, transistor switching speed, 
and minimum transistor size.  In reviewing process technology, we 
suggest that the evaluating team look carefully at the ASIC 
requirements compared to the vendor's process capabilities to 
determine if a process is adequate for an ASIC program.
The guidelines set forth in this chapter call for the evaluating team to 
clearly understand the designer's requirements that are essential to 
the successful completion of the project.  Only then can they 
adequately review the vendor's offerings for process technology and 
match it carefully with the design requirements.  Because of the 
complexity of selecting process technology, we advise the evaluating 
team to keep the design team well informed on all meetings through 
each step of the process.
The success of first pass silicon depends, among other factors, upon 
the right technology selection, and using certified design libraries. 
This chapter discusses three major considerations:
-  choosing the ASIC technology
 -  ASIC design trade-offs
 -  verifying that the chosen technology can handle the design 
complexity
 
Selecting a vendor whose technology closely matches the design 
requirements helps the designers meet their design goals.  The 
project normally determines the type of process technology, such as 
Silicon or GaAs, and the type of transistor implementation, such as 
complementary metal-oxide semiconductor (CMOS), emitter-coupled 
logic (ECL), or transistor-transistor logic (TTL).  Within a particular 
type of technology, the vendor may offer different transistor sizes 
such as 1.0 um technology or 1.5 um technology, with different speed 
and electrical characteristics.  Some vendors offer special processes, 
such as silicon-on-insulator (SOI) or silicon-on-sapphire (SOS) to 
eliminate or reduce the possibilities of latchup due to radiation.  The 
project details the ASIC operating conditions or ASIC specific 
technology requirements.  The vendor should provide all the 
necessary data to review the process maturity, stability, and 
radiation hardness.  If the potential vendors are government qualified, then the data are also available through the qualifying agencies.
"The success of first pass silicon depends, among other 
factors, upon selecting the right technology and using certified design 
libraries."
Most vendors offer both gate array and 
standard cell for their ASICs.  In standard cells the vendor has 
customized each cell to give the maximum throughput, whereas in 
gate arrays the transistors occupy fixed slots and wire routing 
provides the required function.  Therefore standard cells can offer 
better performance over gate arrays.  For high volumes, standard 
cells are cheaper than gate arrays.  For low volumes and fast turn-
around time, gate arrays are more suitable.  The non-recurring 
engineering (NRE) cost for gate array ASICs is less than standard cell 
ASICs.
Since ASICs can be developed as standard cells or gate arrays, we 
recommend that you base technology selection on design trade-offs.  
Table 2.3.1 illustrates the design trade-offs among these two 
categories.
 
 
Table 2.3.1 Gate Array vs. Standard Cell 
A standard cell design requires a complete new set of masks for each 
design.  A gate array starts with a base wafer that has already has 
several mask layers completed.
To make a design trade-off between gate array and standard cell 
ASIC, obtain the following information from the manufacturer:
-  total gate count
 -  maximum usable gate count
 -  available I/O count
 -  available package size
 -  configuration of gates : Channel arrays or Sea of Gates
 -  percentage of process steps complete in base wafers
 
-  maximum die size and the approximate number of gate counts in 
each die size
 -  available I/O count
 -  available package size
 -  available macro cells
 
GATE ARRAY AND STANDARD CELL
-  NRE costs
 -  design turn-around time
 -  list of design macros
 
Compare the vendor's offering of the packaging to the design and 
project requirements.  The different types of packages normally used 
are pin grid array (PGA) and surface mount with ceramic materials.  
Design requirements include the pin count and size of package.  
Review the thermal and electrical properties of packaging materials 
according to speed, noise, and reliability considerations.
Radiation effects cause three major problems with ASIC 
microelectronics:
-  charged particle induced single-event latchup (SEL)
 -  charged particle induced single-event upset (SEU)
 -  performance and parametric degradation through total ionizing 
radiation dose (TID)
 
The following suggestions will help avoid major problems:
Because latchup destroys most circuits, a vendor should offer a 
technology with "no-latchup."  Hardening the storage 
elements of the design can obtain SEU immunity, or, the vendor can 
supply SEU hardened storage elements.  A designer can utilize 
techniques, such as triple-modular redundancy (TMR) that to further 
increase the SEU hardness of a design, but this requires a significant 
increase in gates.
TID radiation can cause circuit performance degradation.  Therefore, 
the vendor's design tool kit and cell library should support designing 
for the necessary radiation tolerance.  A manufacturer should 
provide the timing margins for radiation in the cell library; the 
designer is responsible for designing his circuit within the margins.  
Section Three: Chapter 4 gives a 
detailed discussion of design for radiation tolerance.  Appendix Three discusses the 
underlying physics of radiation effects on ICs.
The evaluation team must gather information from the vendor about 
the costs of their supported design for radiation tolerance.  The 
vendors should supply information concerning:
-  ratio of hardened to unhardened circuit sizes for circuits similar 
to your ASICs
 -  increased power consumption for hardened circuits
 -  decreased performance when using supported radiation 
hardening techniques
 -  special design rules for radiation hardening (fan-out limitations, 
etc.)
 -  packaging considerations
 
The manufacturer should offer a test methodology that allows a 
designer to economically satisfy project test requirements.  A typical 
test requirement is 99 percent stuck-at fault coverage.  Several 
design-for-test techniques help achieve this level of stuck-at fault 
test coverage.  These techniques include full scan design, partial scan 
design, level sensitive scan design (LSSD), and 
boundary scan design. 
 Section Three: Chapter 3 details these tests.
All parties must agree upon a test methodology from the start.  
Choosing a test approach in the middle of design may cause design 
delays due to learning new tools; it may even require redesign to 
satisfy the test approach.  Vendors that can supply tools for the 
automatic generation of tests offer a clear advantage for 
economically producing a test.
The evaluation team must gather information from the vendor on the 
costs of these test approaches.  Make sure the vendor and the 
designer understand the overhead associated with these test 
techniques.  The vendors should supply information on the following:
-  additional chip area or gate count required when using supported 
design for test (DFT) techniques in circuits 
similar to your ASICs
 -  decreased performance when using supported DFT techniques
 -  special design rules for supported DFT approaches (synchronous 
design, static design, no latches, etc.)
 -  support of test standards, such as IEEE 1149.1 Boundary Scan, etc.
 -  package/pin count overhead for test I/O, etc.
 
Throughout the process technology evaluation, the evaluating team 
must differentiate between designer preferences and the process 
technology essential to the project.  Keep the designer and vendor 
informed on the outcomes of all meetings.  Clear communication 
among all parties during process technology selection definitely 
saves design time at the end.
Summary
-  The evaluating team must look carefully at the ASIC 
requirements compared to the vendor's process capabilities to 
determine if a process is adequate for an ASIC program.
 -  The evaluating team needs to keep the design team well 
informed on all meetings through each step of the process.
 -  Selecting a vendor whose technology closely matches the design 
requirements helps the designers meet their design goals.
 -  For high volumes, standard cells are cheaper than gate arrays.  
For low volumes and fast turn-around time, gate arrays are more 
suitable.
 -  If any radiation environment is anticipated for an ASIC, a vendor 
should offer a technology with "no-latchup" and with 
proven TID performance to the level your device will experience.
 -  The manufacturer should offer a test methodology that can 
satisfy project test requirements.
 -  The vendor must supply overhead information for both design 
for radiation tolerance and design for testability.
 
Now you may jump to: