Automation and services to help guide safety-critical project teams through the entire lifecycle.
When determining whether an IC is safe from random hardware faults, applying safety metrics such as PMHF, SPFM, and LFM, engineers must analyze both transient and permanent faults. This paper highlights the fundamental differences between permanent and transient faults on digital circuits, and why this distinction is important in the context of the ISO 26262:2018 functional safety standard.
What are they and where do they come from?
Are you trying to decide if your design is safe from random hardware faults and trying to figure out safety metrics such as the single point fault metric (SPFM), latent fault metric (LFM), and probabilistic metric for hardware failure (PMHF)? If so, you are undoubtedly weighing both transient and permanent faults. The reality is that they both need to be analyzed, upon which we discover that there is quite a bit of difference between them. The objective of this paper is to highlight the fundamental differences between permanent and transient faults on digital circuits, and why this distinction is important in the context of the ISO 26262:2018 functional safety standard.
In an integrated circuit, sources of faults come from a variety of sources: electro-magnetic interference (EMI), radiation, electro migration, shocks, vibrations, and more. In some cases, it is important to know the specific sources so targeted measures can be taken. When this is the case, it is usually reasonable to abstract them to bit flips (transients) and stuck-at faults (permanents). Importantly, this abstraction is allowed by ISO 26262.
To read more, click here.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Leave a Reply