Module 09
Teradyne Machines & Automated Test (ATE)
Your shop's Teradyne testers are the gatekeepers: they decide what's "failed" and hand you tickets. Understanding how the machine tests tells you how to read its tickets — including when to believe them and when the machine itself is the problem. The ICT fixture diagram and guarding illustration are in visuals/03-test-equipment.html.
1. The two main flavors of board test
In-Circuit Test (ICT) — "test the parts"
Teradyne's TestStation family (descended from the GenRad testers) is the classic ICT platform. The board sits on a bed-of-nails fixture: hundreds–thousands of spring-loaded probes ("pogo pins") press against test pads and vias on the board's underside (vacuum or mechanical press pulls the board down). The tester then measures each component individually:
- Shorts/opens test first — every net checked against every other for unintended connections, and expected connections verified. Runs before anything else; a shorts failure usually aborts the rest.
- Analog in-circuit: measures each R, C, L, diode, transistor junction in place. The trick that makes this possible is guarding: when measuring R1, the tester drives the surrounding nodes to 0V through other pins so current can't sneak through parallel paths — electronically "isolating" the component without lifting a leg. (The same problem you solve by hand with a DMM — see 04 — DMM Mastery §2 — the tester solves with math and extra pins.)
- Digital/vector tests: powered, the tester drives input patterns into ICs and checks output responses against truth tables — catches dead gates, stuck pins, missing/wrong/backwards chips.
- Boundary scan (IEEE 1149.1 / JTAG): for BGAs and dense parts with no probe access, the tester commands the ICs themselves to wiggle and sense their own pins, verifying every solder ball connection electrically.
- Vectorless/capacitive opens test (e.g., FrameScan-type techniques): a sensor plate over an IC detects whether each pin is actually soldered, without powering the part — catches lifted leads on fine-pitch parts.
What ICT is great at: missing, wrong, backwards, shorted, open — assembly defects, located to the component. What it can't see: marginal timing, parametric drift under real operating conditions, anything functional.
Functional Test (FT) — "test the behavior"
The board is powered and exercised as it would be in the aircraft: real stimuli in, real responses measured, often through the edge connector only. Teradyne and in-house functional testers run these. A functional failure ticket names a failed test step and a measured behavior ("Output 3 voltage 2.31V, limits 4.75–5.25") — localizing that to a component is your job, using the test spec, the schematic, and modules 06 — Troubleshooting Methodology–08 — Analog Board Troubleshooting.
(You may also meet flying probe testers — ICT without a fixture, a few robotic probes flying point to point; slower, fixture-free, common for low volumes.)
2. Reading a failure ticket like a repair tech
A typical ICT analog failure line gives you: designator, test name, measured value, nominal, limits, and the nets/pins involved. Example:
R147 RES Measured: 14.82k Nominal: 10.0k Limits: 9.0k–11.0k FAIL
Your interpretation tree — in rough order of real-world likelihood:
- Joint/trace open or cracked at R147 or its test pads (measured high = something in the guarded path is open — same logic as the in-circuit DMM rules: low readings have innocent explanations, high readings are real opens somewhere)
- Fixture problem — dirty/bent/worn pogo pin, debris on the test pad, board not seated. Especially suspect when: the same test fails on many boards suddenly, a retest passes ("re-seat and re-run" is legitimate ONCE as a fixture check, never as a repair strategy), or the failing pad looks unmarked while neighbors show witness dimples.
- Wrong part installed (14.82k ≈ a 15k part — value-adjacent readings are a strong wrong-part hint)
- The actual component drifted/failed
A shorts-test failure names two nets: get the schematic/CAD viewer, see where those nets run adjacent — solder bridge (check rework areas first), dendrite, cracked MLCC between them, crushed FOD.
A digital/vector failure names a device and pins: rails to the device, joints on those pins (vectorless opens result if available), then the upstream logic feeding it, then the device.
Golden rule: the ticket is a starting coordinate, not a verdict. Verify at the bench with the DMM before any iron touches the board. Boards that bounce between "fails at ICT, can't duplicate at bench" are telling you: intermittent joint (the fixture press flexes the board!) or fixture trouble. Fixture-press flex reproducing a failure is actually a gift — it tells you the fault is mechanical; go flex the board gently at the bench under continuity and watch.
3. Working with the test platform
- Learn to re-run the specific failing test, not just the whole program — fast iteration while diagnosing.
- Use the datalog/history: the same unit's previous results, and the failure Pareto across the fleet of this assembly. A defect that's #1 on the Pareto has a known cause and probably a known fix — ask the senior techs and the test engineers; every shop has tribal knowledge wrapped around each test program.
- Befriend the test engineers. When you find a ticket that systematically lies (bad guard, marginal limit, fixture wear), reporting it improves everyone's life. Repair techs are the feedback loop of a test floor.
- Fixture care is part of accuracy: pins wear and gunk up; if you're authorized, learn the shop's fixture-maintenance and verification routine (self-test/verification boards).
- ESD and handling rules apply at the tester too — boards ride in and out of fixtures on the same wrist-strap-and-tote discipline as the bench (10 — Aerospace Standards, ESD, and Workmanship).
4. The bench ↔ machine workflow (your daily loop)
- Ticket arrives with the board.
- Read full ticket + history. Pull schematic/BOM/assembly drawing.
- Bench: visual inspection → verify the ticketed measurement manually (DMM at the actual component, both polarities, golden-board comparison if available).
- Diagnose to root cause (06 — Troubleshooting Methodology) — component vs joint vs trace vs fixture.
- Repair per IPC-7711/7721, document.
- Back to the machine: re-run the failed test, then the full program (your repair must not create new failures — heat near an MLCC can crack it; a slipped probe can nick a trace).
- Close the paperwork with cause/action/verification.
5. Vocabulary you'll hear day one
| Term | Meaning |
|---|---|
| UUT / DUT | Unit / Device Under Test — the board |
| Fixture, bed-of-nails | The pogo-pin interface plate, unique per assembly |
| Pogo/spring pin, wire-wrap pin | The probes and their wiring underneath |
| Guarding | Driving neighbor nodes to 0V to isolate a component measurement |
| Vector | One step of a digital stimulus/response pattern |
| Boundary scan / JTAG / 1149.1 | In-chip pin test infrastructure |
| Vectorless opens | Capacitive-plate solder-joint test, unpowered |
| Shorts & opens / continuity test | The first-pass net-vs-net check |
| Datalog | The recorded measurements of every test, pass or fail |
| Pareto | Ranked failure-frequency chart for an assembly |
| First-pass yield | % of boards passing with no repair |
| NTF / CND / RTOK | No Trouble Found / Cannot Duplicate / Re-Test OK — the outcomes to be suspicious of |
| Golden board | A known-good unit used for comparison |
| Test spec / ATP | The acceptance test procedure defining pass criteria |
6. Self-check
- Why can ICT measure a resistor accurately without lifting a leg, when your DMM can't? Guarding — neighbor nodes driven to 0V kill parallel-path current
- The same test fails on five consecutive different boards this morning. First suspect? The fixture/tester — bent or dirty pin, not five identical component failures
- ICT says a BGA pin is open. What technology checked it, and what's your bench reality? Boundary scan; the joint is invisible — verify environment, suspect cracked ball; X-ray/reflow decision per shop process
- A board fails at ICT, passes at your bench, repeatedly. Best hypothesis and next action? Fixture press flexes the board → intermittent cracked joint/via; flex it gently at the bench under continuity/scope until it confesses
- Why re-run the FULL program after a repair, not just the failed step? Rework can create new defects — adjacent joints, cracked ceramics, nicked traces