Compendium Of Current Single Event Effects For Candidate .
1Compendium of Current Single Event Effects for CandidateSpacecraft Electronics for NASAMartha V. O’Bryan, Kenneth A. LaBel, Dakai Chen, Michael J. Campola, Megan C. Casey, Jean Marie Lauenstein,Jonathan A. Pellish, Raymond L. Ladbury, and Melanie D. BergAbstract — We present the results of single event effects (SEE)testing and analysis investigating the effects of radiation onelectronics. This paper is a summary of test results.Index Terms — Single event effects, spacecraft electronics,digital, linear bipolar, and hybrid devicesINTRODUCTIONNASA spacecraft are subjected to a harsh space environmentthat includes exposure to various types of ionizing radiation.The performance of electronic devices in a space radiationenvironment are often limited by their susceptibility to singleevent effects (SEE). Ground-based testing is used to evaluatecandidate spacecraft electronics to determine risk to spaceflightapplications. Interpreting the results of radiation testing ofcomplex devices is challenging. Given the rapidly changingnature of technology, radiation test data are most oftenapplication-specific and adequate understanding of the testconditions is critical [1].Studies discussed herein were undertaken to establish theapplication-specific sensitivities of candidate spacecraft andemerging electronic devices to single-event upset (SEU),single-event latchup (SEL), single-event gate rupture (SEGR),single-event burnout (SEB), and single-event transient (SET).For total ionizing dose (TID) and displacement damage dose(DDD) results, see a companion paper submitted to the 2015Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Nuclearand Space Radiation Effects Conference (NSREC) RadiationEffects Data Workshop (REDW) entitled “Compendium ofCurrent Total Ionizing Dose and Displacement Damage forCandidate Spacecraft Electronics for NASA” by M. Campola,et al. [2].I.II. TEST TECHNIQUES AND SETUPA. Test FacilitiesAll tests were performed between February 2014 andFebruary 2015. Heavy ion experiments were conducted at theLawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) [3] and at theTexas A&M University Cyclotron (TAMU) [4]. Both of thesefacilities are provide a variety of ions over a range of energiesfor testing. Each device under test (DUT) was irradiated withheavy ions having linear energy transfer (LET) ranging from0.6 to 120 MeV cm2/mg. Fluxes ranged from 1x102 to 1x105particles/cm2/s, depending on device sensitivity. Representativeions used are listed in Tables I and II. LETs in addition to thevalues listed were obtained by changing the angle of incidenceof the ion beam with respect to the DUT, thus changing the pathlength of the ion through the DUT and the "effective LET" ofthe ion [5]. Energies and LETs available varied slightly fromone test date to another.Laser SEE tests were performed at the pulsed laser facility atthe Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) [6], [7]. Single photonabsorption method was used with the laser light having awavelength of 590 nm resulting in a skin depth (depth at whichthe light intensity decreased to 1/e – or about 37% – of itsintensity at the surface) of 2 µm. A nominal pulse rate of 1 kHzwas utilized. Pulse width was 1 ps, beam spot size 1.2 μm.TABLE I: LBNL TEST HEAVY IONSIonEnergy(MeV)SurfaceLET in Si(MeV cm2/mg)Range inSi (µm)(Normal 0236584Kr107Ag124XeLBNL 10 MeV per amu tuneThis work was supported in part by the NASA Electronic Parts andPackaging Program (NEPP), NASA Flight Projects, and the Defense ThreatReduction Agency (DTRA).Martha V. O'Bryan, and Melanie D. Berg are with ASRC Federal Space andDefense, Inc. (AS&D, Inc.), 7515 Mission Drive, Suite 200, Seabrook, MD20706, work performed for NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC),emails: martha.v.obryan@nasa.gov and Melanie.D.Berg@nasa.gov.Kenneth A. LaBel, Dakai Chen, Michael J. Campola, Megan C. Casey, JeanMarie Lauenstein, Jonathan A. Pellish, and Raymond L. Ladbury are withNASA/GSFC, Code 561.4, Greenbelt, MD 20771 (USA), emails:kenneth.a.label@nasa.gov, Dakai.Chen-1@nasa.gov, michael.j.campola@nasa.gov, megan.c.casey@nasa.gov, jonathan.a.pellish@nasa.gov, jean.m.lauenstein@nasa.gov, raymond.l.ladbury @nasa.gov.Deliverable to NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) Program to be published on nepp.nasa.gov originally submitted to be published at the Institute ofElectrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Nuclear and Space Radiation Effects Conference (NSREC), Radiation Effects Data Workshop, Boston,Massachusetts, July 15, 2015.
2TABLE III: TAMU TEST HEAVY IONSIonEnergy(MeV)SurfaceLET in Si(MeV cm2/mg)Range inSi (µm)(Normal 93447.3156Au295480.215584Kr109Ag129197TAMU 15 MeV per amu tune84Kr139Xe208119.8332319738.9286TAMU 25 MeV per amu tuneamu atomic mass unitB. Test MethodUnless otherwise noted, all tests were performed at roomtemperature and with nominal power supply voltages. Devicequalification include SEL high-temperature, VCC plus worstcase and for SEU/SET high-temperature, VCC minus worstcase. Unless otherwise noted, SEE testing was performed inaccordance with JESD57 test procedures where applicable [8].1) SEE Testing - Heavy Ion:Depending on the DUT and the test objectives, one or moreof three SEE test approaches were typically used:Dynamic – the DUT was continually exercised while beingexposed to the beam. The events and/or bit errors were counted,generally by comparing the DUT output to an unirradiatedreference device or with an expected output (Golden chip orvirtual Golden chip methods) [9]. In some cases, the effects ofclock speed or device operating modes were investigated.Results of such tests should be applied with caution due to theirapplication-specific nature.Static – the DUT was configured prior to irradiation; datawere retrieved and errors were counted after irradiation.Biased – the DUT was biased and clocked while powerconsumption was monitored for SEL or other destructiveeffects. In most SEL tests, functionality was also monitored.DUTs were monitored for soft errors, such as SEUs, and forhard failures, such as SEGR. Detailed descriptions of the typesof errors observed are noted in the individual test reports [10],[11].SET testing was performed using high-speed oscilloscopescontrolled via LabVIEW . Individual criteria for SETs arespecific to the device and application being tested. Please seethe individual test reports for details [10], [11].Heavy ion SEE sensitivity experiments include measurementof the linear energy transfer threshold (LETth) and cross sectionat the maximum measured LET. The LETth is defined as themaximum LET value at which no effect was observed at aneffective fluence of 1 107 particles/cm2. In the case whereevents are observed at the smallest LET tested, LETth will eitherbe reported as less than the lowest measured LET or determinedapproximately as the LETth parameter from a Weibull fit. In thecase of SEGR experiments, measurements are made of theSEGR threshold Vds (drain-to-source voltage) as a function ofLET and ion energy at a fixed Vgs (gate-to-source voltage).2) SEE Testing - Pulsed LaserThe DUT was mounted on an X-Y-Z stage in front of a 100xlens that produces a spot diameter of approximately 1 μm atfull-width half-maximum (FWHM). The X-Y-Z stage can bemoved in steps of 0.1 μm for accurate determination of SEUsensitive regions in front of the focused beam. An illuminator,together with a charge coupled device (CCD) camera andmonitor, were used to image the area of interest therebyfacilitating accurate positioning of the device in the beam. Thepulse energy was varied in a continuous manner using apolarizer/half-waveplate combination and the energy wasmonitored by splitting off a portion of the beam and directing itat a calibrated energy meter.III. TEST RESULTS OVERVIEWPrincipal investigators are listed in Table III. Abbreviationsand conventions are listed in Table IV. SEE results aresummarized in Table V. Unless otherwise noted all LETs are inMeV cm2/mg and all cross sections are in cm2/device. All SELtests are performed to a fluence of 1 107 particles/cm2 unlessotherwise noted.TABLE III: LIST OF PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORSPrincipal Investigator (PI)Melanie D. BergMegan C. CaseyMichael J. CampolaDakai ChenRaymond L. LadburyJean-Marie LauensteinJonathan A. PellishAbbreviationMBMCCMiCDCRLJMLJPDeliverable to NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) Program to be published on nepp.nasa.gov originally submitted to be published at the Institute ofElectrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Nuclear and Space Radiation Effects Conference (NSREC), Radiation Effects Data Workshop, Boston,Massachusetts, July 15, 2015.
3TABLE IV: ABBREVIATIONS AND CONVENTIONSLET linear energy transfer (MeV cm2/mg)LETth linear energy transfer threshold (the maximum LET value atwhich no effect was observed at an effective fluence of 1x107particles/cm2 – in MeV cm2/mg) SEE observed at lowest tested LET no SEE observed at highest tested LETσ cross section (cm2/device, unless specified as cm2/bit)σmaxm cross section at maximum measured LET (cm2/device, unlessspecified as cm2/bit)ADC analog to digital converterBiCMOS bipolar complementary metal oxide semiconductorCMOS complementary metal oxide semiconductorDUT device under testECC error correcting codeeng samples engineering samplesGPIB general purpose interface busH heavy ion testID# identification numberIdss drain-source leakage currentIout output currentL laser testLBNL Lawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryLDC lot date codemin minimumMLC multiple-level cellMOSFET metal-oxide-semiconductor field-effect transistorNAND Negated AND or NOT ANDNRL Naval Research LaboratoryPCB printed circuit boardPECL positive emitter coupled logicPI principal investigatorPIGS post-irradiation gate stresspkg packagePNP positive-negative-positiveREAG radiation effects and analysis groupSBU single-bit upsetSEB single event burnoutSEE single event effectSEFI single-event functional interruptSEGR single event gate ruptureSEL single event latchupSET single event transientSEU single event upsetSiC silicon carbideSiGe silicon germaniumSMART self-monitoring, analysis and reporting technologySSD solid state driveSSR solid state relayTAMU Texas A&M University Cyclotron FacilityVCC power supply voltageVDMOS vertical double diffused MOSFETVds drain-to-source voltageVgs gate-to-source voltageVNAND vertical-NANDXe XenonManufacturerREAGID#; LDC Device Functionor Wafer #TechnologyParticle:(Facility/Year/Month) P.I.Test Results:LET in MeV cm2/mg,σ in cm2/device, unless otherwise specifiedSample Size(Number Tested)Part NumberSupplyVoltageTABLE V: SUMMARY OF SEE TEST RESULTS2.7 to3.6 V45V43.3V3 atLBNL;1 at NRL 5 V2 (2013):3 (2014)2.5 V43.3V,5V, 6V3 /-15V1Memory Devices:H: (LBNL14May;NonVolatileLBNL14Sep) DCMemoryL: (NRL14Jun) DCRM24Adesto13-082;No LDCCBRAM850 PRO seriesMZ7KE256HMHASamsung14-055,14-056;No LDCSSDVNANDFlashMemoryH: (TAMU14Oct) DCMN101L AM13L-STK2Panasonic13-075;No LDCMicrocontrollerwith EmbeddedResistiveMemoryReRAM,180 nmCMOSH: (LBNL14May) DC;L: (NRL14Mar) DCLM6172Texas H: (TAMU13Dec;TAMU14Apr) MCCAD7984Analog Devices14-053;C60ADCBipolarH: (TAMU14Oct) MiCMAX4595DVBRTexas Instruments14-077;pkg infoSOT-236SBAnalog SwitchCMOSH: (TAMU14Oct) : (TAMU14Oct) MiCH: SEL LETth 83; 10 SEU LETth 20;SEFI LETth 7.3;SEFI σ 5.9x10-7 cm2 at LET 83;SEFIs can be recovered via power cyclein most cases, rewrite was required insome cases. Bit upsets were onlyobserved in write/read mode.L: Laser test identified areas on the die thatare sensitive to SEFI: bandgap reference,voltage regulator, SRAM, and logiccircuits. [12], [13]SEL LETth 40; SEU LETth 1.8SEFI LETth 1.8SEFIs occurred during static and dynamiccycling test modes. Most SEFIs recoverablewith power cycle. Some SEFIs caused datacorruption, and required rewrite. Heavy ioninduced cell upsets were evident fromreallocated sectors via ECC. [14], [15]H: SEL LETth 70;3.1 SEFI LETth 4.4, σ 4 10-5cm2/device at LET of 70.L: Pulsed-laser testing confirmed the SEUtolerance of the resistive memory array,and identified the sense amplifier as asensitive component for SEFIs. [16]Linear/Mixed Signal Devices:SET 0.14 LETth 0.87; σmaxm 1 10-3 cm2.[17]SEL LETth 75.1;SET of 60 µs at LET 28.8 for givenapplication. [18]SEL LETth 85; negative transients wereobserved 2.5 µs long and -750 mV inamplitude; worst transient observed was10 µs long and had negative goingamplitudes of less than 1.5 V at LET 27.8[19]SEL LETth 89 [20]Deliverable to NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) Program to be published on nepp.nasa.gov originally submitted to be published at the Institute ofElectrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Nuclear and Space Radiation Effects Conference (NSREC), Radiation Effects Data Workshop, Boston,Massachusetts, July 15, 2015.
ManufacturerSample Size(Number Tested)Part NumberSupplyVoltage45 V;6V23.3 V25V33.3 V3No destructive SEEs observed at 44 MeVcm2/mg in either LDC. [25]28 V,35 V6H: (LBNL14Sept) JML;MCC966-MeV Xe (LET 65 in SiC): min evaluatedVds 182 V: Failed Idss and PIGS tests; athigher Vds, primary failure mode SEB. [26]0 VGS11SiCVDMOSH: (LBNL14June) JMLContact PI for test results.0 VGS24DiodeSiH: (LBNL14June) MCC100 V3DiodeSiH: (LBNL14June) MCC45 V3DiodeSiH: (LBNL14June) MCC60 V3DiodeSiH: (LBNL14June) MCC45 V380 V345 V445 V4100 V3200 V4REAGID#; LDC Device Functionor Wafer #TechnologyParticle:(Facility/Year/Month) P.I.TLV5618Texas Instruments14-070;0801AADP3330Analog Devices14-074;1238VoltageRegulatorBiCMOSH: (TAMU14Oct) RLLMV7219Texas Instruments14-072;1249ComparatorBiCMOSH: (TAMU14Oct) RLAZ88923Arizona Microtek14-0730146IntegratedCircuitSMHF2812Crane Interpoint14-021;1021,1214DC-DCConverterHybridH: (TAMU14Jul) 20STMicroelectronics14-050;No LDC(engsamples)SiC MOSFETsADCCMOSH: (TAMU14Oct) RLSiGe PECL H: (TAMU15Oct) RLTest Results:LET in MeV cm2/mg,σ in cm /device, unless otherwise specified28.1 SEL LETth 11.4 σmaxm 6 10-5 cm2;SET LETth 1.8, σmaxm 2 10-4 cm2;3.6 SEU LETth 5.5, σmaxm 1.5 10-5 cm2.[21]SEL LETth 53.1;28.8 SET LETth 53.1, σmaxm 1.5 10-5 cm2;packaging precluded testing at angle. [22]SEL LETth 53.1; SET LETth 2.8, σ notsaturated at LET 53.1; LET and crosssection depend on input voltage Vin;transients can last up to severalmicroseconds. [23]SETs with durations up to 10 microsecondswere observed at LET 17.SET LETth 1.8; SET σmaxm 1.1x10-4 cm2. [24]Power Device:Diodes – Pass at 100% of Reverse fer14-040;ON Semiconductor 14-023;No LDC14-025;P350XwaferDiodes – Degradation and Pass at 100% of Reverse Voltage:MBR4045CTMBR2080CTVishayON Semiconductor14-043;NF914waferDiodeSiH: (LBNL14June) MCCNo failures observed at 100% of reversevoltage when irradiated with 1233 MeV Xe(LET 58.8). [27], [28]No failures observed at 100% of reversevoltage when irradiated with 1233 MeV Xe(LET 58.8). [27], [28]No failures observed at 100% of reversevoltage when irradiated with 1233 MeV Xe(LET 58.8). [27], [28]No failures observed at 100% of reversevoltage when irradiated with 1233 MeV Xe(LET 58.8). [27], [28]Degradation observed during beam run whilebiased at 100% of reverse voltage, but allparameters remained within specificationwhen irradiated with 1233 MeV Xe (LET 58.8). [27], [28]Diodes – Degradation and Failure at 100% of Reverse Voltage:MBRF2045CTON Semiconductor14-039;SPB17waferDiodeSiH: (LBNL14June) MCCMBR6045WT14-041;ON Semiconductor NFE04GwaferDiodeSiH: (LBNL14June) MCCDegradation observed during beam run whilebiased at 75% of reverse voltage, but allparameters remained within specificationwhen irradiated with 1233 MeV Xe (LET 58.8). Degradation was also observed duringbeam run when biased at 100% of reversevoltage, but parameters exceededspecification. [27], [28]Degradation observed during beam run whilebiased at 75% of reverse voltage, but allparameters remained within specificationwhen irradiated with 1233 MeV Xe (LET 58.8). Degradation was also observed duringbeam run when biased at 100% of reversevoltage, but parameters exceededspecification. [27], [28]Diodes – Catastrophic Failure at 100% of Reverse Voltage:MBRF20100CTON ctronics14-037;640DNwaferDiodeSiH: (LBNL14June) MCCDiodeSiH: (LBNL14June) MCCNo failures observed at 75% of reversevoltage when irradiated with 1233 MeV Xe(LET 58.8). Catastrophic failure wasobserved at 100% of reverse voltage. [27],[28]No failures observed at 75% of reversevoltage when irradiated with 1233 MeV Xe(LET 58.8). Catastrophic failure wasobserved at 100% of reverse voltage. [27],[28]Deliverable to NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) Program to be published on nepp.nasa.gov originally submitted to be published at the Institute ofElectrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Nuclear and Space Radiation Effects Conference (NSREC), Radiation Effects Data Workshop, Boston,Massachusetts, July 15, 2015.
ManufacturerREAGID#; LDC Device Functionor Wafer #TechnologyParticle:(Facility/Year/Month) erDiodeSiH: (LBNL14June) : (LBNL14June) MCCMBR2060CTON Semiconductor14-042;NF031waferDiodeSiH: (LBNL14June) iodeSiH: (LBNL14June) DiodeSiH: (LBNL14June) MCCMBR20100CTVishay14-026;1411GwaferDiodeSiH: (LBNL14June) MCCMBR60100Vishay14-027;1335SwaferDiodeSiH: (LBNL14June) odeSiH: (LBNL14June) MCCMBR20H200CTVishay14-028;1330SwaferDiodeSiH: (LBNL14June) MCCMBRC20200CTON Semiconductor12-034;CH803691S1WFR#3DiodeSiH: (LBNL14June; erDiodeSiH: (LBNL14June) MCCDiodeSiH: (LBNL14June) MCCTest Results:LET in MeV cm2/mg,σ in cm /device, unless otherwise specified2Degradation observed during beam run whilebiased at 75% of reverse voltage, but allparameters remained within specificationwhen irradiated with 1233 MeV Xe (LET 58.8). Catastrophic failures observed whenbiased at 100% of reverse voltage. [27], [28]Degradation observed during beam run whilebiased at 75% of reverse voltage, but allparameters remained within specificationwhen irradiated with 1233 MeV Xe (LET 58.8). Catastrophic failures observed whenbiased at 100% of reverse voltage. [27], [28]Degradation observed during beam run whilebiased at 75% of reverse voltage, but allparameters remained within specificationwhen irradiated with 1233 MeV Xe (LET 58.8). Catastrophic failures observed whenbiased at 100% of reverse voltage. [27], [28]Degradation observed during beam run whilebiased at 75% of reverse voltage, but allparameters remained within specificationwhen irradiated with 1233 MeV Xe (LET 58.8). Catastrophic failures observed whenbiased at 100% of reverse voltage. [27], [28]Degradation observed during beam run whilebiased at 75% of reverse voltage, but allparameters remained within specificationwhen irradiated with 1233 MeV Xe (LET 58.8). Catastrophic failures observed whenbiased at 100% of reverse voltage. [27], [28]Degradation observed during beam run whilebiased at 75% of reverse voltage, but allparameters remained within specificationwhen irradiated with 1233 MeV Xe (LET 58.8). Catastrophic failures observed whenbiased at 100% of reverse voltage. [27], [28]Degradation observed during beam run whilebiased at 75% of reverse voltage, but allparameters remained within specificationwhen ir
Martha V. O'Bryan, and Melanie D. Berg are with ASRC Federal Space and Defense, Inc. (AS&D, Inc.), 7515 Mission Drive, Suite 200, Seabrook, MD 20706, work performed for NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), emails: martha.v.obryan@nasa.gov and Melanie.D.Berg@nasa.gov.
Event 406 - Windows Server 2019 58 Event 410 58 Event 411 59 Event 412 60 Event 413 60 Event 418 60 Event 420 61 Event 424 61 Event 431 61 Event 512 62 Event 513 62 Event 515 63 Event 516 63 Event 1102 64 Event 1200 64 Event 1201 64 Event 1202 64 Event 1203 64 Event 1204 64
SSRW Research Compendium Introduction 3 About the Compendium This document is a compendium of research on the Sing, Spell, Read & Write program. Included in the compendium are a variety of studies conducted over the last several years. Types of research include: full studies, historical test score analyses, research base
This redline compares the Compendium (Third) released September 29, 2017, and the Compendium (Third) released January 28, 2021. COMPENDIUM OF U.S COPYRIGHT OFFICE PRACTICES, Third Edition Chapter 1500 : 18 01/28/2021 The “best edition” of a work is defined as “the edition, publishe
COMPENDIUM WEBSITE All of the information in this printed version of the Compendium is also available online at www.herbicide-adjuvants.com. Professor of Weed ScienceThe website was established to supplement this printed Compendium. The site allows users to find additional informa
How to Add and update the Published Labs Compendium and the Rads/DI Compendium to the eCW System Compendium Page 5 f. 7. Once found, or a new Lab created, highlight the lab on the list
City of Unley Event Planning Toolkit Event Risk Assessment Template Event Name Event Location Event Start Time Event Finish Time Event Date Expected number of attendees Event Coordinator INSTRUCTIONS Step 1 Read through the list of potential hazards / risks and for
to update a contact event to a morbidity event . Demote: Click . Demote. to update a morbidity event to a contact event. If an event is Demoted to a contact Event, it should be "Submitted to Tracing" (see the . Routing Contactjob aid) Copy to new event. Click to copy the details from current event to a new event for the person. To copy certain
Event Details: o Event Name o Event Type: type of event for reporting purposes Group Details o Group: Department supporting event o Students should select name or club o Phone/Alt. Phone: contact number during event o Email: contact email for event and confirmation Attachments: diagrams, additional event information
