What is the impact of a 1 second reduction in the test time of a device? The answer involves the consideration of many factors; and by making some general assumptions about test times and costs, we can create a realistic, meaningful response.

For example:

• 360-day year

• 18 hours of uptime per 24-hour day

• Average test time = 3.5 seconds

• Average Handler Index Time = 1.2 seconds

• Test Head Utilization Cost = $200 per hour

Test Time		Index Time		Cycle Time
3.5 sec (Normal)	+	1.2 sec	=	4.7 sec
2.5 sec (Reduced)	+	1.2 sec	=	3.7 sec

 

Item		Normal Cycle Time				Reduced Cycle Time
Units per minute		60 sec ÷ 4.7 sec	=	12.77 UPM		60 sec ÷ 3.7 sec	=	16.22 UPM
Units per hour		12.77 UPM x 60 min	=	766.2 UPH		16.22 UPM x 60 min	=	973.2 UPH
Units per day		766.2 UPH x 18 hrs	=	13,792 UPD		973.2 UPH x 18 hrs	=	17,518 UPD

 

Delta		17,518 UPD - 13,792 UP UPD	=	+ 3,726 UPD
Additional Units per Year		3,726 UPD x 360 days	=	1,341,360 UPY
Additional Test Head Utilization per Year		1,341,360 UPY ÷ 13,792 UPD	=	97.26 days additional test time
		97.26 days x 18 hrs	=	1,750 hours additional test time

1,750 hours x $200 per hour = $350,000 per year savings
Per Head!

Can the PE3000 Reduce Test Time Only 1 Second?

A common response to this analysis is, "What we have just seen is very positive, but our average test times are more like 6 or 7 seconds. A one second reduction with our test time mix would not yield the same result."

This is absolutely true...however, the PE3000 is capable of reducing test time much more than 1 second! What we are really talking about is a percentage of test time reduction. In the example above, the 1 second test time decrease represents a 28.6% reduction.

In our example, because of the test time reduction, the loaded test throughput¹ was increased by 27% [(17,518 UPD - 13,792 UPD) ÷ 13,792 UPD]. We can confidently predict that the PE3000 can maintain, at least, this increase in loaded test throughput over the CP80. That is to say, your result should be as good or better, on average, across all of your test programs.

It’s very easy for us to make this prediction, because performance history attests to a realized 41% loaded test throughput improvement with PE3000s over the CP80s they replaced. As you can see, although the benefits of the loaded throughput increase illustrated in our example are significant. Historically, the PE3000 has increased average loaded throughput even more than we have demonstrated here!

What does this added capacity really mean?

When considering the effect of efficient testers, the purchase price of the testers (even expensive testers) is often a minor factor when determining savings. We will discuss some of these other factors to illustrate.

Less Floor Space

With the added capacity and small footprint that the PE3000 will provide, considerable floor space is freed. This means more room for new testers that you will undoubtedly be moving on to your test floor, systematically, over time; without increasing the size of your test floor, or adding more test floors. See graphic labeled "Floor Space Comparison."

Less Personnel (the most costly operating expense)

As additional testers are installed on your test floor, demands increase for personnel (Operators, Technicians, Engineers, Managers). Since the efficiency of the PE3000 decreases the personnel requirements for your LTX77/90 systems, you may draw from this current personnel resource to operate and maintain other than LTX77/90 testers. See graphic labeled "Personnel."

Less Handlers / Probers

As additional testers are installed on your test floor, demands increase for handlers and probers. If the handler/prober requirements for your LTX77/90 systems are diminished due to increased productivity, the surplus handlers/probers will be available to run on new testers, averting the expense to acquire new ones. See graphic labeled "Handlers."

¹"loaded test throughput" means that allowances have been made for factors such as index time, downtime, setup time, etc.