Journal of Electronic Testing

, Volume 4, Issue 3, pp 201–214 | Cite as

Testability and test generation for majority voting fault-tolerant circuits

  • Charles E. Stroud
  • Ahmed E. Barbour
Fault-tolerant and Testable Design


The testability of majority voting based fault-tolerant circuits is investigated and sufficient conditions for constructing circuits that are testable for all single and multiple stuck-at faults are established. The testability conditions apply to both combinational and sequential logic circuits and result in testable majority voting based fault-tolerant circuits without additional testability circuitry. Alternatively, the testability conditions facilitate the application of structured design for testability and Built-In Self-Test techniques to fault-tolerant circuits in a systematic manner. The complexity of the fault-tolerant circuit, when compared to the original circuit can significantly increase test pattern generation time when using traditional automatic test pattern generation software. Therefore, two test pattern generation algorithms are developed for detecting all single and multiple stuck-at faults in majority voting based circuits designed to satisfy the testability conditions. The algorithms are based on hierarchical test pattern generation using test patterns for the original, non-fault-tolerant circuit and structural knowledge of the majority voting based design. Efficiency is demonstrated in terms of test pattern generation time and cardinality of the resulting set of test patterns when compared to traditional automatic test pattern generation software.

Key words

Design for testability fault-tolerance majority voting circuits multiple stuck-at faults test pattern generation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    P.K. Lala,Fault Tolerant and Eoult Testable Hardware Design, Prentice-Hall International, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, (1985).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. von Neumann, “Probabilistic logics and the synthesis of reliable organisms from unreliable components,Automata Studies, Ann. of Math. Studies, No. 34, eds. C.E. Shannon and J. McCarthy, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1956, pp. 43–98.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J.A. Abraham and D.P. Siewiorek, “An algorithm for the accurate reliability evaluation of triple modular redundancy networks,”IEEE Trans. on Computers, vol. C-23 pp. 682–692, July 1974.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    D.P. Siewiorek, “Reliability modeling of compensatingmodule failures in majority voted redundancy,”IEEE Trans. on Computers, Vol. C-24, pp. 525–533, May 1975.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    G.A. York, “Triple Modular Redundancy for Yield and Reliability Enhancement in Integrated Circuits,” Ph.D Dissertation, Carnegie-Mellon University, 1985.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    C.E. Stroud, “Majority Voting Fault and Defect Tolerance in Very Large Scale and Wafer Scale Integrated Circuits,” Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Illinois at Chicago, 1991.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    R.E. Battle, W.L. Bryan, R.A. Kisner, and T.L. Wilson, “Reactor preotection system design using application specific integrated circuits,”Proc. Second Annual ISA/EPRI Joint Control and Instrumentation Conf., pp. 44–51, 1992.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    S. Patel, “Testability of Fault-Tolerant Digital Systems,” Master's Thesis, University of Illinois at Chicago, 1988.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    A.E. Barbour and A.S. Wojck, “A general constructive approach to fault-tolerant design using redundancy,”IEEE Trans. on Computers, vol. C-38, pp. 15–29, January 1989.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R. Dandapani, “Derivation of minimal test sets for monotonic logic circuits,”IEEE Trans. on Computers, vol. C-22 pp. 657–661, July 1973.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    C.E. Stroud and A.E. Barbour, “Design for testability and test generation for static redundancy system level fault-tolerant networks,”Proc. IEEE Int. Test Conf., pp. 812–818, 1989.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    S. Devadas and K. Keutzer, “Design of integrated circuits fully testable for delay-faults and multifaults,”Proc. IEEE Int. Test Conf., pp. 284–293, 1990.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    T. Schwederski, T. Buchner, J. Leenstra, G. Roos, and L. Spaanenburg, “Built-in pad test with boundary scan,”Proc. European Test Conf., pp. 385–392, 1991.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    E.B. Eichelberger and T.W. Williams, “A logic design structure for LSI testability,”Proc. ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conf., pp. 462–468, 1978.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    V.D. Agrawal, K.T. Cheng, D.D. Johnson, and T. Lin, “A complete solution to the partial scan problem,”Proc. IEEE Int. Test Conf., pp. 44–51, 1987.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    S. Mallela and S. Wu, “A sequential circuit test generation system,”Proc. IEEE Int. Test Conf., pp. 57–61, 1985.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    A.E. Barbour, “A General Theory of Fault-Tolerant Design for Digital Systems,” Ph.D. Disseration, Illinois Institute of Technology, 1985.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    P. Chao, G. Cyr, T. Hiller, B. King, and R. Wilson, “A VLSI 128 channel data link controller,”Proc. IEEE Int. Solid-State Circuits Conf., pp. 82–83, 1986.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charles E. Stroud
    • 1
  • Ahmed E. Barbour
    • 2
  1. 1.AT&T Bell LaboratoriesNaperville
  2. 2.Dept. of Mathematics & Computer ScienceGeorgia Southern UniversityStatesboro

Personalised recommendations