Practice Objectives - 2.3.2 | Lab Module 10: ASIC Design Flow - Floorplanning, Placement, and Routing (Conceptual/Tool Demonstration) | VLSI Design Lab
K12 Students

Academics

AI-Powered learning for Grades 8–12, aligned with major Indian and international curricula.

Professionals

Professional Courses

Industry-relevant training in Business, Technology, and Design to help professionals and graduates upskill for real-world careers.

Games

Interactive Games

Fun, engaging games to boost memory, math fluency, typing speed, and English skills—perfect for learners of all ages.

2.3.2 - Objectives

Learning

Practice Questions

Test your understanding with targeted questions related to the topic.

Question 1

Easy

Define ASIC.

💡 Hint: Think about circuits designed for particular purposes.

Question 2

Easy

What is the purpose of floorplanning?

💡 Hint: Consider the layout design process similar to architectural planning.

Practice 4 more questions and get performance evaluation

Interactive Quizzes

Engage in quick quizzes to reinforce what you've learned and check your comprehension.

Question 1

What is an ASIC?

  • General-purpose IC
  • Application-specific chip
  • A type of microcontroller

💡 Hint: Recall the definition of ASIC.

Question 2

Is floorplanning vital for the physical design process?

  • True
  • False

💡 Hint: Think about the importance of a blueprint.

Solve 2 more questions and get performance evaluation

Challenge Problems

Push your limits with challenges.

Question 1

In a complex ASIC design, a critical path requires that signals travel between two standard cells. Describe the impact of placing them too far apart. What design changes might you propose?

💡 Hint: What consequences arise from increasing travel distances in circuitry?

Question 2

You've completed routing on an ASIC design. However, timing analysis shows violations. What procedure would you follow to address this issue?

💡 Hint: Think about where one could make adjustments to enhance performance.

Challenge and get performance evaluation