For - NASAspearman's rank correlation coefficient for order of "parameter" versus order of fa1 lure percent change in hfe with time at room temperature (25 * 3oc) after gamma dose

ER 8623

COMPONENTS IRRADIATION TEST NO. 19

GAMMA IRRADIATION

OF

2N914, 2N918, S2N930, 2N2192

AND 2N2369 TRANSISTORS

October 1966

Prepared For:

GEORGE C. MARSHALL SPACE FLIGHT CENTER

Prepared By:

LOCKHEED GEORGIA NUCLEAR LABORATORY

L O C K H E E D G E O R G I A N U C L E A R L A B O R A T O R Y Lockheed-Georgia Company - A Division of Lockheed Aircraft Corporation

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19670009216 2020-03-20T16:51:48+00:00Z

I f this document i s supplied under the requirements of a United States Government contract, the following legend shall apply unless the letter U appears in the coding box.

This data i s furnished under a United States Government contract and only those portions hereof which are marked (for example, by circling, underscoring or otherwise) and indicated as being subject to this legend shall not be released outside the Government (except to foreign gov- ernments, subject to these same limitations), nor be disclosed, used, or duplicated, for procurement or man- ufacturing purposes, except as otherwise authorized by contract, without the permission of Lockheed-Georgia Company, A Division of Lockheed Aircraft Corporation, Marietta, Georgia. This legend shall be marked on any reproduction hereon in whole or in part.

The "otherwise marking" and "indicated portions" as used above shall mean this statement and include al l details or manufacture contained herein respectively.

D I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

m

I

1

I I I E 1

FOREWORD

This report i s submitted to the Astrionics Laboratory of the George C.

Marshal I Space Flight Center, National Aeronautics and Space Admin-

istration, Huntsville, Alabama, in accordance with the requirements

of Task Order No. ASTR-LGC-330f Contract NAS 8-5332. The re-

port i s one of a series describing radiation effects on various electronic

components. This particular report concerns gamma irradiation and an-

nealing of types 2N914, 2N918, S2N930, 2N2192 and 2N2369 tran-

sistors.

The test was performed by the Lockheed Georgia Nuclear Laboratory,

Lockheed-Georgia Company.

I TABLE OF C O N T E N T S

Page

FOREWORD

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

1 .o

2.0

3.0

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.3.1

3.3.2

3.3.3

3.4

3.4.1

3.4.2

3.4.3

4.0

5.0

5.1

5.2

SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

TEST PROCEDURE

TEST SPECIMENS

TEST MEASUREMENTS

INSTRUMENTATION

h Measurement Circuit FE Measurement Circuit 'EBO

T Measurement Circuit

TEST ENVIRONMENT

Pressure

X

Tempe ra tu re

Gamma

METHOD OF DATA ANALYSIS

TEST DATA AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

ANNEALING AS A FUNCTION OF TIME AFTER

SMALL DOSES OF GAMMA RADIATION

RECOVERY OF hFE BY ANNEALING AT HIGH

TEMPERATURE

i

I l l ...

V

1

3

5

7

8

8

8

9

9

9

9

9

10

1 1

13

14

14

... I l l

I

5.3

5.4

5.5

5.6

5.7

5.8

5.9

TABLE OF C O N T E N T S (Continued)

A COMPARISON OF RADIATION TOLERANCES

DURING FIRST AND SECOND IRRADIATIONS

CORRELATIO N BETWEEN PRE- I RRADl ATlO N

PARAMETERS AND RADIATION TOLERANCE

RELATIVE DEGRADATION OF hFE AT LOW GAMMA

DOSES

CONCLUSIONS

RECOMMENDED METHOD FOR PRE-SELECT1 NG NPN

SILICON TRANSISTORS FOR USE IN A GAMMA

RAD1 AT10 N E NVI RO NME NT

RECOMMENDED METHOD FOR ESTIMATING

MINIMUM GAMMA RADIATION LIFETIME OF

NPN SILICON TRANSISTORS

RECOMMENDED FOLLOW-ON INVESTIGATIONS

REFERENCES

Page

15

16

18

19

20

21

23

25

I V

1 1 I 1 3 I I 1 I I I I

I 1 1 1 I

a

I 'I i I r I I

Tables

TABLE 1

TABLE 2

TABLE 3

TABLE 4

TABLE 5

TABLE 6

TABLE 7

TABLE 8

TABLE 9

L I S T OF TABLES A N D F I G U R E S

TEST SPECIMENS AND TEST CONDITIONS

MANUFACTURERS' SPECIFICATIONS FOR

TEST SPECIMENS

SPEARMAN'S RANK CORRELATION COEFFICIENT

FOR ORDER OF "PARAMETER" VERSUS ORDER OF

FA1 LURE

PERCENT CHANGE IN hFE WITH TIME AT ROOM

TEMPERATURE (25 * 3OC) AFTER GAMMA DOSE OF 3 . 1 5 ~ 10 r


TEMPERATURE (25 * 3OC) AFTER GAMMA DOSE OF 3 . 1 5 ~ 10 r


TEMPERATURE (25 3OC) AFTER GAMMA DOSE

OF 9 . 6 7 ~ 10 r

5

5

5

2N914, FA1 RCHl LD, MOTOROLA, TEXAS I NSTRU-

MENTS AND GENERAL ELECTRIC, (Ic = 5 mA),

hFE DEGRADATION, ANNEALING AND FAILURE

DATA

2N914, FAIRCHILD, MOTOROLA, TEXAS INSTRU-



DATA



hFE DEGRADATION, ANNEAL1 NG AND FA1 LURE

DATA

Page

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

V

Tables

TABLE 10

TABLE 1 1

TABLE 12

TABLE 13

TABLE 14

TABLE 15

TABLE 16

L I S T OF TABLES A N D F I G U R E S (Continued)



hFE DEGRADATION, ANNEAL1 NG AND FA1 LURE

DATA

2N2369, FAIRCHILD, MOTOROLA, TEXAS I NSTRU-


hFE DEGRADATION, ANNEALING A N D FAILURE

DATA




DATA




DATA




DATA

2N914 AND 2N2192, FAIRCHILD, MOTOROLA,

TEXAS INSTRUMENTS AND GENERAL ELECTRIC,


DATA

2N2369 AND 2N918, FA1 RCHl LD, MOTOROLA,

TEXAS INSTRUMENTS AND GENERAL ELECTRIC,


DATA

Page

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

v i

Tables

TABLE 17

TABLE 18

TABLE 19

TABLE 20

TABLE 21

TABLE 22

TABLE 23

TABLE 24

TABLE 25

TABLE 26

TABLE 27

L IST OF TABLES A N D F I G U R E S (Continued)

S2N930, FAIRCHILD (Ic = 2 mA), hFE DEGRADATION,

ANNEALING AND FAILURE DATA







S2N930, TEXAS INSTRUMENTS (Ic = 2 mA), hFE DEGRA-

DATION, ANNEALING AND FAILURE DATA

S2N930, TEXAS INSTRUMENTS (Ic = 10 mA), hFE DEG-

RADATION, ANNEAL1 NG AND FAILURE DATA

2N914, FAIRCHILD, MOTOROLA, TEXAS I NSTRU-

MENTS AND GENERAL ELECTRIC, Te , lEBO AND h DATA 0 0

FEO

h~~

2N2192 FAIRCHILD, MOTOROLA, TEXAS INSTRU-

MENTS AND GENERAL ELECTRIC, Te , lEBO AND

2N3369, FA1 RCHILD, MOTOROLA, TEXAS I NSTRU-

MENTS AND GENERAL ELECTRIC, Te , lEBO AND


MENTS AND GENERAL ELECTRIC, T , IEBo_ AND

0 0 DATA

0 0 DATA h~~

e-

Page

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

h DATA F E,

U U 52

2NF192, COMPUTED VALUES OF RADIATION DAM-

AGE CONSTANT (K) AND COEFFICIENTS OF

VARIATION (S/E)

v i i

53

Tables

TABLE 28

TABLE 29

TABLE 30

TABLE 31

TABLE 32

TABLE 33

Figures

FIGURE 1

FIGURE 2

GURE 3

GURE 4

GURE 5

L I S T OF TABLES A N D F I G U R E S (Continued)

Page

I I

I 1 1 I II I I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I

m

v i i i

SPEARMAN'S RANK CORRELATION COEFFICIENT

FOR ORDER OF h T VERSUS ORDER OF

FAILURE AT IC = 5 rnA

G A I N REAL1 ZED BY SELECT1 NG OUT SPECIMENS

WITH PERCENT DEGRADATION GREATER THAN

MEDIAN VALUE AT GAMMA DOSE EQUAL TO 5%

OF MEDIAN FAILURE DOSE

G A I N REALIZED BY SELECT1 NG OUT SPECIMENS

WITH PERCENT DEGRADATION GREATER THAN

MEDIAN VALUE AT GAMMA DOSE EQUAL TO 5%

OF MEDIAN FAILURE DOSE

RATIO OF MINIMUM RADIATION LIFETIME OF

FEo eo

PRE-SELECTED SPECIMENS TO SCREEN1 NG DOSE

MEDIAN PERCENT DEGRADATION VALUES AT

SCREENING DOSES (5% OF MEDIAN FAILURE

DOSES)

2N914, COMPARISON OF ESTIMATED AND ACTUAL

FAILURE DOSES FOR IC = 5 mA

SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM OF GAMMA IRRADIATION

TEST RIG

hFE MEASUREMENT CIRCUIT

MEASUREMENT CIRCUIT 'EBO

TYPICAL CURVES OF 1o5/hFE VERSUS GAMMA

TRANSIT TIME MEASUREMENT CIRCUIT

DOSE FOR TYPE 2N914

54

55

56

57

58

59

61

62

63

64

65

Figures

FIGURE 6

FIGURE 7

GURE 8

GURE 9

FIGURE 10

FIGURE 11

GURE 12

GURE 13

FIGURE 14

FIGURE 15

FIGURE 16

FIGURE 17

FIGURE 18

L I S T OF TABLES A N D F I G U R E S (Con ti nued)

2N914, FA1 RCHILD, 27OC, PERCENT FAILED

VERSUS GAMMA DOSE

2N914, MOTOROLA, 27OC, PERCENT FA1 LED

VERSUS GAMMA DOSE

2N914, TEXAS INSTRUMENTS, 27OC, PERCENT

FAILED VERSUS GAMMA DOSE

2N914, GENERAL ELECTRIC, 27OC, PERCENT


2N914, 27OC, PERCENT FAILED VERSUS GAMMA

DOSE, COMPARISON OF MANUFACTURERS

2N2192, FAIRCHILD, 27OC, PERCENT FAILED

VERSUS GAMMA DOSE

2N2192, MOTOROLA, 27OC, PERCENT FAILED

VERSUS GAMMA DOSE





2N2192, 27OC, PERCENT FAILED VERSUS GAMMA



VERSUS GAMMA DOSE

2N2369, MOTOROLA, 27OC, PERCENT FAILED

VERSUS GAMMA DOSE



I X

Page

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

Figures

FIGURE 9

FIGURE 20

FIGURE 21

FIGURE 22

FIGURE 23

FIGURE 24

FIGURE 25

FIGURE 26

FIGURE 27

FIGURE 28

FIGURE 29

L IST OF TABLES A N D F I G U R E S (Con t i nu ed)

2N2369, GENERAL ELECTRIC, 270Cf PERCENT


2N2369, 270Cf PERCENT FAILED VERSUS GAMMA



VERSUS GAMMA DOSE

2N918, MOTOROLAf 27OC, PERCENT FA1 LED

VERSUS GAMMA DOSE





2N918, 270Cf PERCENT FA1 LED VERSUS GAMMA


2N914, 27OC, PERCENT DEGRADATION OF hFE

AT 1.80 x lo6 r (5% OF MEDIAN FAILURE DOSE) VERSUS GAMMA DOSE AT FAILURE FOR IC = 5 rnA

2N914, 270Cf PERCENT DEGRADATION OF hFE

AT 3.22 x lo6 r (5% OF MEDIAN FAILURE DOSE) VERSUS GAMMA DOSE AT FAILURE FOR IC = 30 rnA

2N2192, 270Cf PERCENT DEGRADATION OF hFE

AT 3.05 x lo5 r (5% OF MEDIAN FAILURE DOSE) VERSUS GAMMA DOSE AT FAILURE FOR I C = 5 mA 2N2192, 270Cf PERCENT DEGRADATION OF hFE

AT 4.52 x lo5 r (5% OF MEDIAN FAILURE DOSE) VERSUS GAMMA DOSE AT FAILURE FOR IC = 30 mA

X

Page

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

I

Figures

FIGURE 30

FIGURE 31

FIGURE 32

FIGURE 33

FIGURE 34

FIGURE 35

FIGURE 36

L I S T OF TABLES A N D F I G U R E S (Con t i nu ed)

Page


AT 2. i o io6 r (5% OF MEDIAN FAILURE DOSE) VERSUS GAMMA DOSE AT FAILURE FOR IC = 5 mA





2N918, 27OC, PERCENT DEGRADATION OF hFE AT

4.45 x io6 r (5% OF MEDIAN FAILURE DOSE) VERSUS GAMMA DOSE AT FAILURE FOR IC = 30 mA

NPN SILICON PLANAR EPITAXIAL TRANSISTORS

(16 TYPE 2N914, 16TYPE 2N2192, 16 TYPE 2N918,

16 TYPE 2N2369), 27OC, PERCENT DEGRADATION OF

hFE AT 1.88 x lo6 r (5% OF MEDIAN FAILURE DOSE) VERSUS GAMMA DOSE AT FAILURE FOR IC = 5 mA 94

NPN SILICON PLANAR EPITAXIAL TRANSISTORS

( 1 6 TYPE 2N914, 16 TYPE 2N2192, 12 TYPE 2N918,

16 TYPE 2N2369), 27OC, PERCENT DEGRADATION OF

hFE AT 3.05 x lo6 r (5% OF MEDIAN FAILURE DOSE) VERSUS GAMMA DOSE AT FAILURE FOR IC = 30 mA 95

FIRST FAILURE POINT FOR UNSCREENED SPECIMENS

VERSUS FIRST FA1 LURE POINT FOR PRE-SELECTED

SPECIMENS 96

xi

90

91

92

93

8 1 . O S U M M A R Y

NPN silicon planar epitaxial transistors of the types 2N914, 2N2192, 2N2369 and

2N918 were subjected to gamma irradiation and failure points (gamma dose when

50% degradation of h

perature annealed and gamma irradiated a second time to failure along with type

S2N930 specimens from a previous test.

occurred) were determined. The specimens were then tem- FE

investigations were made on possible correlations between pre-irradiation values

h ~ ~ ’ e EBO covery of radiation induced degradation o f h

of gamma irradiation was investigated, and comparison was made between failure

points shown during the first irradiation and those shown during the second irradia-

tion. The ultimate objective of the test was the development of a method to pre-

select transistors for use in a radiation environment.

T and I and radiation tolerance exhibited during the first irradiation. Re-

at mom temperature after small doses FE

Test results indicated that NPN silicon transistors can be pre-selected for use i n a

gamma radiation environment by subjecting the devices to comparatively smal I doses

o f gamma radiation and computing percentage losses of h

vices w i l l have a minimum radiation lifetime about one order of magnitude, or more,

greater than the screening dose.

The pre-selected de- FE *

1

The experiment described in this report i s the nineteenth irradiation of electronic

components and i s the twenty-fourth in a series of radiation effects tests on electron-

i c equipment, circuits and components contemplated for use on a nuclear space ve-

h ic le . Since the use of equipment on this vehic le i s contingent upon its abi l i ty to

withstand the nuclear environment, the Astrionics Laboratory o f the Marshall Space

Flight Center has undertaken to assure that Government furnished or specified equip-

ment w i l l survive this environment. The equipment i s to be subjected to the expected

nuclear environment as simulated at the Lockheed Georgia Nuclear Laboratory. Mea-

surements made on the specimens during the irradiation w i l l describe their radiation

tolerance.

8 I I 1 I

I

1 I

The subjects of this test are the 2N914, 2N918, S2N930, 2N2192 and 2N2369 tran-

sistors. This experiment i s an extension o f the work performed during Components

Irradiation Test No. 18. The purpose of the extended work was to verify correlations

established by the Test No. 18 data, i .e ., the correlation between percentage loss of hFE at comparatively low gamma doses and gamma dose at failure, and the corre-

lation between h x T

o f these correlations would enable pre-selection of transistors for use in radiation en-

vironments. During the experiment, recovery of lost h (annealing) as a function

o f time after small doses of irradiation was also investigated, and comparison of ra-

diation tolerances during in i t ia l irradiation was made with radiation tolerances ex-

hibited during a second irradiation conducted after the specimens had been annealed

at high temperatures.

and dose at failure. Verification of one or both 'IEBO, FEO eo

FE

3

I 3 . 0 T E S T PROCEDURE

The test specimens, except the S2N930 type, were procured "off-the-shelf" from an

electronics supply vendor. The S2N930 specimens had been supplied by the Astrionics

Laboratory of the Marshall Space Flight Center for Components Irradiation Test No. 18.

from each of four manufacturers: Fairchild, Motorola, Texas Instruments, and Gen-

eral Electric. The S2N930 specimens consisted of forty-five specimens from Fairchild

and twenty specimens from Texas instruments. These S2N930 specimens, having been

irradiated during the Test No. 18 experiment, were not used for the first irradiation

of this test.

Seven specimens of each of the 2N914, 2N918, 2N2192 and 2N2369 types were

and T were made on a l l specimens of the FE' 'EBO e Pre-irradiation measurements of h

2N914, 2N918, 2N2192 and 2N2369 type - manufacturer groups. After these measurements were completed one specimen of each type - manufacturer group was selected as a control specimen. These control specimens, sixteen in all, were used as checks

on the stability and repeatability of the measurement instrumentation. The remaining

devices were irradiated i n a fixture as shown in Figure 1. Cobalt-60 was used as the

source of the gamma radiation.

4 The irradiation was conducted at a constant gamma dose rate of 1.10 x 10 r/hr unti l

a dose of 5.37 x 10 r had been reached. From that point on, a dose rate of 2.10 x

10 r/hr was used for the remainder of the experiment.

5

5

FE The specimens were removed from the radiation environment for measurement of h

at the following dose accumulation points:

4

4

5

1 . 0 6 ~ 10 r

5 . 3 0 ~ 10 r

1 . 0 2 ~ 10 r

4.40 x

0.27 x

2.70 x

5

5

5

3 . 1 5 ~ 10 r

5 . 3 7 ~ 10 r

9 . 6 7 ~ 1 0 r

o6 r 6

O r 7 0 r (end of first irradiation).

5 At the 5.37 x 10 r dose point the hFE of two specimens of each type - manufacturer group was measured after elapsed periods of three hours, seven hours and sixty-five

hours to detect any annealing at room temperature.

5 At the 9.67 x 10 r dose point two specimens of each type - manufacturer group were removed from the test rig and were not given any additional dose during the first i r -

radiation. This was done to check for annealing at room temperature over a period

of several days, and to investigate the effect of total dose on the degree of anneal-

ing that might be accomplished by subjecting the specimens to high temperatures.

Some of the specimens had not failed (h

terminated at 2.70 x 10 r. The failure points for these specimens were determined

/h FE FEo 5: 0.5) when the first irradiation was 7

by extrapolation of the Q-factor (l/h ) curves. I t i s be l ieved that no errors were FE introduced by this procedure as the Q-factor curves were linear with gamma dose i n

the region of extrapolation.

After post-irradiation measurements of h were made al l specimens except the con-

trol specimens were annealed in an oven. The specimens were left in the oven for a

period of about three hours at the temperatures indicated:

FE

T Y Pe 2N914

2N918

Annealing Temperature

295 i s"C

295 f s"C

TY Pe S2N930

2N2192

2N2369

Ann e a I i ng Tempe rat ure

295 i s"C

295 i s"C

195+ !fC

The annealing temperatures were selected on the basis of the manufacturers' recom-

mended maximum storage temperatures.

After annealing pre-irradiation measurements of h

A l l specimens except the control specimens were then placed i n the test rig and ir- 5 7

radiated at 2.1 x 10 r/hr to a total dose of 5.20 x 10

were made on al I specimens. F E

r.

Measurementsof h

paints:

were made on all devices at the following accumulated dose FE

5

5 1 . 0 5 ~ 10 r

5 . 2 5 ~ 10 r 6 1 . 0 0 ~ 10 r 6

6

7

7

4.38 x 10 r

9 . 3 4 ~ 10 r

2 . 3 0 ~ 10 r

5.20 x 10 r (end o f second irradiation).

The purpose of this second irradiation was to compare failure points experienced prior

to annealing with those experienced after annealing.

3.1 TEST SPECIMENS

The test specimens are l isted i n Table 1 . Manufacturers' specifications are shown in

Table 2.

7

The specimens were irradiated passively and were held for the irradiation by inser-

tion of the device leads into the Styrofoam block shown i n Figure 1 . This arrange-

ment insured that al I specimens were irradiated at the same rate.

3.2 TEST MEASUREMENTS

A complete set of measurements was taken prior to the first irradiation on the 2N914,

FE 2N918, 2N2192 and 2N2369 specimens. These consisted of h for I = 5 mA; h

for I C X E 2N2192 and 2N2369 types; T for IE valuesof 0.33, 0.25, 0.20, 0.167 and 0.125

mA for the 2N918 type; I = 4.0 V for the 2N914, 2N2192 and 2N2369

types; and I

FE C = 30 mA; T for I values of 1 .O, 0.5, 0.33, 0.2 and 0.125 mA for the 2N914,

X

for V E 6 0 EB

for VEB = 2.7 V for the 2N918 type. EBO

Measurementsof h = 30 mA were made at frequent intervals

during the first irradiation. The specimens were removed from the irradiation envi-

ronment to a screened room for these measurements.

for I = 5 mA and I FE C C

Prior to the second irradiation, but after annealing, measurements of h

ues of 5 mA and 30 mA were made on the 2N914, 2N918, 2N2192 and 2N2369 types.

for I val- FE C

At the same time measurements of h

the S2N930 specimens. These same h

for I FE C

FE

values of 2 mA and 10 mA were made on

measurements were taken at frequent intervals

during the second irradiation and after irradiation ceased. The procedure for making

these measurements was the same as that used during the first irradiation.

3.3 INSTRUMENTATION

3.3.1 h Measurement Circuit FE

A pulse measurement system, shown schematically in Figure 2, was used to measure

This circuit l im i ted measurement currents to a time interval of about one millisecond I B *

8

thus minimizing any annealing of radiation damage by the measurement currents.

h~~ The control specimens were used to check on the repeatability of the circuit.

values were calculated from the I measurements. B

3.3.2 lEBO Measurement Circuit

Pre-irradiation measurements of I

shown i n Figure 3.

were made using the circuit scllematica EBO ' Y

3.3.3 T Measurement Circuit X

The circuit shown i n Figure 4 was used to measure transit times for five different val-

ues of I

justing C and R unti l a null was obtained. The use of these values to obtain T i s

Each measurement consisted o f adjusting I to the desired value, then ad- E' E

X X X

explained in Section 4.0.

3.4 TEST ENVl RO NMENT

3.4.1 Pressure

During the test a l l specimens were at atmospheric pressure.

3.4.2 Temperature

0 Al l measurements and the irradiations were conducted at 27 f 2 C.

Annealing Temperatures

Between irradiations the types 2N914, S2N930, 2N2192 and 2N2369 were annealed

for three hours at 295 i 5°C. The 2N918 type was annealed for three hours at 195 * !fC.

9

8 4 I

3.4.3 Gamma

The first irradiation was conducted at a dose rate of 1.10 x 10 r/hr to a dose point 5 5

of 5.37 x 10 r. From that point a dose rate of 2.10 x 10 r/hr was used until 2.70 x 7 5

10 r had been accumulated. The second irradiation was conducted at 2.10 x 10 r/hr

to a total accumulated dose of 5.2 x 10 r. 7

10

4 . 0 M E T H O D OF D A T A A N A L Y S I S

A l l data were recorded manually.

The hFE data were calculated manually from measurements of I

I C ' FE these plots the value of h

FE ure dose for each specimen. (Examples o f typical l/h

in Figure 5.) The data obtained from these plots were used to construct the graphs

discussed i n Section 5.0.

taken at constant B

These data were used to construct plots of l / h versus accumulated dose. From

at any desired dose could be obtained, as could the fail-

versus dose plots are shown FE

Transit time values were calculated from measurements on the bridge shown i n Figure

4. The formula used for calculation of transit t ime was: 1

T = (C R r/(r + R 1). X x x X

where T i s i n nanoseconds, X

C i s i n picofarads,

R i s i n ohms, and

r i s i n ohms.

X

X

The T values were then paired with their corresponding 1/1 values (1 in milliamps)

giving five pairs of values for each specimen. A straight line was then fitted to the

f i v e pairs of values by the least squares method, and the value of T

was calculated from the formula for this line. The value of T for 1/1 = 0 i s T or

base transit t ime.

X E E

for 1/1 = 0

X E e'

X E

Al l of the transit time computations were performed on an IBM 7094 computer.

values were measured directly on a picoammeter and required no calculation. I EBO

11

In order to provide a basis for comparing the correlations obtained between order of

failure and various parameters the parameters were ranked and paired with the order 2 2

= 1 - 6 r D /N(N - l ) , 2 o f failure of the specimens. Spearman's formula , r rank was then used to calculate a rank correlation coefficient. Results are shown in Ta-

ble 3.

Copies of the reduced data are on f i l e in the Lockheed Georgia Nuclear Laboratory,

Lockheed-Georgia Company, Dawsonvil le, Georgia.

12

I 5 . 0 T E S T D A T A A N D D I S C U S S I O N OF R E S U L T S

The test data are presented herein in graphical and tabular form.

The primary objectives of this test were to verify correlations established by the Com-

ponents Irradiation Test No. 18 data, i.e., the correlation between percentage loss

of h at comparatively low gamma doses and gamma dose at failure, and the corre-

lation between h

both of these correlations would enable the development o f a method to pre-se

FE and dose at failure. The establishment o f one or T e i I E B O o FEO

transistors for use i n a gamma radiation environment.

To assist i n the development o f such a method two other objectives were establ

for this test:

ec t

shed

(a) An investigation o f the recovery of lost h

time after small doses of irradiation, and

A comparison of radiation tolerances during in i t ia l irradiation with tol-

erances during a second irradiation conducted after the specimens had

been annealed at high temperatures.

(annealing) as CI function of FE

(b)

These were undertaken because, i f lost h could be regained by annealing without FE adversely affecting subsequent radiation tolerance, that part of a transistor's radia-

tion lifetime lost by subjecting the devices to reasonable doses of gamma radiation

for pre-selection could be recovered.

For purposes of this test failure of a specimen was defined as a 50% decrease in the

value o f h Thus, for the first irradiation failure occurred when h j h first

equaled 0.5, where h

ation; for the second irradiation failure occurred when h /h

FE ' FE FE,, i s defined as the h of a device prior to the first irradi- FE

first equaled 0.5, FEO 1

FE FE-9 i s defined as the h of a device after the first irravdation and after FE where h

FEo2

13

annealing at high temperature but prior to the second irradiation. Since h

not equal to h

ations did not occur at the same absolute values of h

first irradiation are shown in Figures 6 through 25.

was

except in rare cases, failures during the first and second rrradi- FE.2

FEo 1 The failure patterns for the FE'

5.1 ANNEALING AS A FUNCTION OF TIME AFTER SMALL DOSES OF GAMMA RAD1 AT1 0 N

During the first irradiation the radiation was suspended for a period of about seventy-

two hours during which the h of each o f two specimens o f each type - manufacturer group was monitored. Results are shown in Tables 4 and 5. Also during the first i r -

radiation two specimens o f each type -manufacturer group were removed from the

radiation environment after a dose of 9.67 x 10 r had been accumulated. The hFE

o f each of these specimens was measured immediately after removal and again eight

days later.

FE

5

Results are shown in Table 6.

The data i n Tables 4 and 5 show that i n the first three hours after cessation o f irradi-

ation the type 2N914 generally recovers a small percentage of its lost h the type

2N2192 shows essentially no change, and the types 2N2369 and 2N918 generally

continue to lose small percentages of h FE' the 2N914 generally showed smal I percentage gains. It appears the magni tude of the

changes i s sufficiently small and the change pattern i s such that the time interval be-

tween cessation of radiation and measurement of h

are maintained at room temperature.

F E'

After eight days (Table 6) a l l types except

i s not crit ical i f the specimens FE

5.2 RECOVERY OF hFE BY ANNEALING AT HIGH TEhrlPERATURE

Tables 7 through 21

FE tion (h ) to h

the first irradiation FEp 1

contain columns showing the ratio o f h after the first irradia- FE prior to the first irradiation (h

and after annealing at high temperature (h

), and the ratio o f h after

) to hFE prior to FEO I FE

FE- 3 U L

14

the first irradiation (h

through 14 received a total dose of 2.70 x 10

listed i n Tables 15 and 16 received a dose of 9.67 x 10 r, and those l isted i n Tables 6 7 17 through 22 received varying amounts ranging from 3.26 x 10 r to 1.24 x 10 r

(See Tables 6 and 7 i n Components Irradiation Test No. 18 Report).

) for each specimen. The specimens listed i n Tables 7

r during the first irradiation, those FEo 1 7

5

A comparison of corresponding values of h /h and h /h reveals that

i n every case but one (Table 21, specimen T 439) annealing at high temperature causes

an increase in the h

creased to a value greater than the original h The amount of the increase appears

to be more a characteristic o f the type - manufacturer category than a function of the amount of degradation or a function o f the total dose received.

FEY1 FEol FE02 FEO 1

of gamma irradiated transistors. In some cases the h i s in- FE FE

FE'

5.3 A COMPARISON OF RADIATION TOLERANCES DURING FIRST AND SECOND I RRADl AT1 0 N S

Tables 7 through 14 and 17 through 22 contain a column showing the ratio of the dose

at failure during the second irradiation to the dose at failure during the first irradia-

tion for each specimen. The failure points are defined as:

First failure point i s the gamma dose:

/2 ' - 01

h~~ - h~~ when

Second failure point i s the gamma dose:

when hFE = h /2. FEo2

The ratios of second fai l points to first fa i l points are i n most cases greater than one.

However, there are many devices of the types 2N914, 2N2192, and 2N918 whose

15

ratios are less than one. Thus a technique of irradiating to find the failure point and

then annealing would not guarantee that the failure point during a second irradiation

would be as great as, or greater than, the first.

Rank

1

c n

Such a technique may be applicable to certain types o f transistors. The data for the

2N2369 and the S2N930 types suggest that one might be developed.

Relative Value* Of

0 0 0 h~~ 0 0 Te "EBO 0 h~~ Te e 'EBO T

0 0 hFE

! I

1 Large st I Largest ; Smallest Largest Largest

c Smallest

1 1 I ' 1 ' 4 Smallest 1 Largest Smallest + Smallest

5.4 CORRELATION BETWEEN PRE-I RRADl ATlO N PARAMETERS AND RAD1 ATlON TOLERANCE

and combinations (h T FE e I h~~ Te 'IEBO ) 0 0 0 0 0

FE' Te' 'EBO Pre-irradiation values of h

thereof were ranked as follows:

A Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was computed for each category as men-

tioned above in Section 4.0. These coefficients are shown i n Table 3. Only in the

h category for the type 2N914 were the coefficients .60 greater for both val-

ues of I This leads to the conclusion that these electrical parameters cannot be

used to pre-select transistors for use i n a gamma radiation environment when h

measured at constant I

T FEO eo

C' i s

FE Reference 3 suggests the following relationship:

C'

16

8

where K i s a radiation damage constant for silicon transistors which varies

with emitter current density, and

A 5, i s radiation exposure.

This expression has been shown to accurately depict the degradation of transistors i n

the neutron radiation environment; the similarity of degradation characteris i c s be-

yond the in i t ia l non-linearity (surface effects, reference 3) leads to the con ecture

that the relationship may also be valid for gamma radiation.

Using hFE/'hFE = 0.5 as a definition of failure, the above equation becomes: 0

b dr (Failure Dose) = '/hFE Te K 0 0

Hence, the first failure should correlate with the largest h

wi th the next largest h T etc.

T , the second failure FE e 0 0

FE e 0 0

I n the data obtained during this test only the type 2N914 showed any consistent cor-

relation (Table 3) between h T and order o f failure. An attempt to explain why

this may be so was made by computing the values of K for the 2N2192 specimens for FEo e

0.

= 5 mA. The computed values and the coefficients of variation for each type - manufacturer group are shown in Table 27. This table shows that while K i s fairly

consistent within the type - manufacturer groups i t varies widely within the type. Noting this fact, Spearman's rank coefficients o f correlation were computed for the

type - manufacturer groups and for the type - groups. Results are shown i n Table 28. Note that correlation i s excellent for some groups and wholly lacking or even nega-

tive for others. These data point to the conclusion that K varies so widely among

specimens in some type -manufacturer groups that the h

IC

T parameter cannot be FE e 0 0

17

used as a tool for preselecting transistors for use i n a gamma radiation environment.

5.5 RELATIVE DEGRADATION OF hFE AT LOW GAMMA DOSES

Figures 26 through 33 show percent degradation of h

Dose for each of the types 2N914, 2N2192, 2N2369 and 2N918 at each of two val-

ues of I Based on the results o f Components Irradiation Test No.

18, 5% of the median failure dose has been chosen as the best compromised screen-

ing dose between higher doses which give better correlation and lower doses which

give smaller decreases i n the radiation lifetimes of the devices.

at 5% of the Median Failure FE

5 mA and 30 mA. C'

Note in Figure 26 that by selecting out those specimens with percent degradations

o f h

fai l are eliminated.

dose at failure i s not perfect, one "good" specimen i s also eliminated by the select-

ing out process. However, the important point i s that a l l the "worst" specimens are

eliminated.

larger than the median percent degradation value the first seven specimens to FE Since the correlation between percent degradation of h and FE

Application of the "selecting out'' process to the data i n Figures 27 through

similar results,

Figures 34 a d 35 show percent degradation o f h at 5% of median failure

a l l types (2N914, 2N2192, 2N2369 and 2N918) combined for IC values of FE

33 yields

doses for

5 mA and

30 mA respectively. Application o f the "selecting out'' process to the data i n these

figures eliminates the first twenty-one failures i n Figure 34 (I = 5 mA) and the first

nineteen failures i n Figure 35 (I C

= 30 mA). C

Tables 29 and 30 summarize the gains i n increased median failure dose and dose at

first failure for the pre-selected specimens as compared to median failure dose and

dose at first failure for the whole group. These tables show that the gains are quite

18

substantial.

Table 31 shows that a conservative estimate o f the minimum radiation lifetime (gam-

ma dose at first failure) of the pre-selected specimens would be about eleven times

the screening dose.

Median percent degradation values at screening doses are tabulated for each o f the

types i n Table 32. These values may be used as a guide in determining when to end

the irradiation when screening a group of devices whose median failure dose i s not

known.

5.6 CONCLUSIONS

( 1 ) The correlations between the pre-irradiation electrical parameters h , F E,

U , or combinations thereof, and radiation tolerance are not EBO, T and I sufficiently good for use i n the pre-selection o f transistors for use in a

gamma radiation environment,

(2) The recovery of h at room temperature (annealing) after small doses of

gamma radiation between cessation of irradiation and measurement i s not

a problem i n the proposed pre-selection method provided the measure-

ments are made within two or three days.

FE

(3) Annealing o f transistors at high temperatures 200 - 3OO0C does change (increase or decrease) the i r radiation to I e rance characteristics .

(4) The pre-selection o f silicon transistors for use i n a gamma radiation en-

vironment can be accomplished by subjecting them to comparatively small

doses o f gamma radiation. The proposed method increases the minimum

radiation lifetime o f the pre-selected devices as compared to the minimum

19

8 radiation I ifetime of unscreened devices by factors ranging from about

1 .5 to 50, depending on the failure distribution o f the unscreened de-

vices. See Figure 36.

5.7 RECOMMENDED METHOD FOR PRE-SELECTING NPN SILICON TRANSISTORS FOR USE IN A GAMMA RADIATION ENVIRONMENT

Gamma irradiate to failure a sample of the type transistor under consid-

eration sufficiently large to represent the population. (A sample of thir-

ty or more i s recommended.) Measure h

value of I

that the l/hFE curve can be constructed for each dev ice from these mea-

surements.

at the proposed application FE prior to irradiation and at intervals during the irradiation x,

C

From the data obtained from the l/h

transistor type l i k e those shown in Figures 26 through 33. This curve

w i l l be the basis for determining the cut-off point for percent degrada-

tion of h

curves construct a curve for the FE

in the pre-selection technique. FE

The pre-selection technique i s as follows.

Measure h

at I C variation with I

of a l l devices to be screened. Measurement should be made FE

value equal to planned application value since radiation tolerance

i s not the same for a l l specimens. C

Gamma irradiate a l l devices to 5% of median failure dose as determined

from sample irradiated above. Measure h and compute percent degra-

dation of h FE

for each device. FE

Refer to curve constructed i n paragraph (2) above to determine percent

20

degradation of h corresponding to desired minimum failure dose. E l i -

minate al I devices having percentage degradations of h

this value. The remaining specimens w i l l be the pre-selected specimens.

FE larger than FE

5.8 RECOMMENDED METHOD FOR ESTIMATING MINIMUM GAMMA RADIATION LIFETIME OF NPN SILICON TRANSISTORS

Because of the characteristic shape of the l / h

(See Figure 5) i t i s possible to estimate the minimum dose necessary to give any value

of l/hFE once the early portion of the curve is known. Of course, the greater the

known portion of the curve the more accurate the estimate w i l l be.

curve in a radiation environment FE

The estimate can be made by computing the slope o f the right hand end of the known

portion of the curve and extrapolating this slope to the selected value of l/h FE'

The technique can be best illustrated by example. Let us suppose that we need some

2N914 transistors to be used i n an application requiring a minimum radiation lifetime

of 8.0 x 10 r. We have on hand several 2N914 devices. To estimate their radia-

tion lifetimes we proceed as follows:

7

Gamma irradiate a l l devices to 5% of the required minimum dose (5% x

8 x 10 r = 4 x 10 r). 7 6

Measure h

point as h . of each device and compute l /h FE FE' Designate hFE at this

FE1

Continue gamma irradiation of a l l devices to a total o f 10% of the re-

quired minimum dose (10% x 8 x 10 7 6

r = 8 x 10 r).

Measure h of each device and compute l /h Designate h at this FE FE' FE

21

point as h . FE2

(All hFE measurements should be made at planned application I values.) C

(e) Select failure criterion. Let us suppose that i t has been selected for us

as 50% degradation o f h on the Q-fac-

tor curve.

which corresponds to 2/h E2 E2

The slope of the right hand end of the known portion of the l /h

i s now found as follows.

curve FE

6 (f) Slope = (l/hFE - I/h )/(8 x l o6 - 4 x 10 ).

2 FEl

Next we use this slope to extend the curve to the failure point and esti-

mate the failure dose

6 ) (8 x l o6 - 4 x 10 ) (*IhFE 2 - 1’hFE2

1 /h - l /h (9) Estimated failure dose = FE2 FE1

- - l/h - l /h

E2 FEl

Once we have found the estimated failure dose for each device we can

select those which meet our requirements, and relegate those remaining

to applications less rigorous.

Table 33 shows estimated failure doses for the 2N914 devices irradiated

during this test along with corresponding actual failure doses found from

the experimental data. The ratios of estimated to actual failure doses

22

~

confirm that the estimated dose w i l l always be a conservative estimate.

5.9 RECOMMENDED FOLLOW-ON INVESTIGATIONS

I t i s recommended that experiments be performed to determine whether or not the

method i s applicable to failures caused by neutron irradiation, and that the data al-

ready obtained, as well as any future data obtained, be analyzed to determine the

pre-selection method's applicability to other definitions of failure - such as h degradation to an absolute value.

F E

23

I t 8 1 I 8

REFERENCES

1. Ashar, K. G., "Transit Time in High-speed Switching Transistors, I' Solid State

Design, Vol. 5, No. 2, February 1964.

2. Croxton and Cowden, Applied General Statistics, Second Edition, Prentice-

Hall, Inc., Page 478.

3 . Frank, Max, "Exploratory Development of the Q-Factor Technique, I' The Ben-

d i x Co rpo rat ion, Re se a rc h La bo ra to r i e s Division , So ut h f i e I d, Mi c h i ga n, Tech - nica l Report AFWL-TR-65-166.

25

I I I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 8 I I I 1 1

24

TABLE 1 TEST SPECIMENS AND TEST CONDITIONS

- -~ VCE = 5V, IC = 30 rnA

VEB = 4 v

I = 1, .5, .33, .2 & .125mA E

Description

T ransi s to r

2N914

NPN, S i

Planar Epitaxial

*

Transistor

2N918

NPN, S i

Planar Epitaxial

*

Transistor

2N2192

NPN, S i

Planar Epitaxial

*

Transistor

2N2369

NPN, S i

Planar Epitaxial

*

T ran s i s to r

S2N930

NPN, Si, Planar

Fairchild (40)

Tex. lnst. (17)

No.1 Test Conditions

24

VCE = 5V, I C = 5 rnA VCE = 5V, IC = 30 rnA

IE= 1, .5, .33, .2 & .125rnA

I Signal at 600 kc

24 1 IE= .33, .25, .2G, .I67 & .125 rnA

Signal at 600 kc

VCE = 5V, I C = 5 rnA

I Signal at 600 kc VCE = 5V, IC = 5 rnA

VCE = 5V, IC = 30 rnA

24

I = 1, .5, .33, .2 & . I25 rnA E I Signal at 600 kc = 5V, 1 = 2 rnA

=5V, I = 10rnA 'CE C

'CE C

Signal at 600 kc

~~

Pararnete r

hFE

h~~

'EBO

X T

h~~

h~~ I

'EBO

X T

h~ E

h~~

'EBO

X T

h~~

h~ E

I EBO

X T

h~~

FE h

I

'EBO

X T

*Six from each of Fairchild, Motorola, Texas Instruments and General Electric

27

TABLE 2 MANUFACTURERS' SPECIFICATIONS FOR TEST SPECIMENS

Description I 2N914

NPN, Silicon

Double-Diffused

Planar Epitaxial

2N918

NPN, Silicon

Planar Epitaxial

2 N930

NPN, Sil icon

Planar

2N2192

NPN, Silicon

Planar Epitaxial

2N2369

NPN, Silicon

Planar Epitaxial

Conditions

VCE = lV, IC = 10 mA

IC =o, v E B = 4 v

fob

VCE = lV, I C = 3 mA

fob

VCE = 5V, IC = 10 mA

IC =o, v E B = 5 v f Gain-Bandw idth Product T

-

VCE = lOV, IC= 10 mA

IC VEB = 3v

f Gai n-Bandw idth Product T

VCE = lV, I C = 10 mA

fab

Specification

hFE= 30 to 120

'EBO = 0.1 MA max

480 M c

hFE = 20 min

960 M c

hFE = 600 max

= 10 nA max I EBO 30 Mc min

hFE = 75 min

= 50 nA max 'EBO 130 Mc

hFE = 60 to 120

800 M c

1 1 1 1

I I 1 I I I 1 I 1 1 I I I 1

a

W CY

J 3

z LL

0" 2 ce W

0 m v, & W

3

> - - & W I-

? 6 Q e- 0

n

&

LL

CY W

5 e LL I-

W

0

Z V - - LL LL W

0 V Z 0 6 - I- 4 W & &

0 V 2 Z 6

Z

CY m -

2 2 W L m m W -I

7 I-

(u u)

03 9

9 m

3 2

3 %

-t m

u) 0

0. *

0 W L

II

I -

I\ u)

I

(u (u

I

9 0 I

I

I

N * I

2

9 u)

0 W

I-

f N 6

u) II V -

9 0 - t I

- 0

m * 8 I

0. d I

0

0 -

a3 (u

I

N -t I

oo rn - UJ

L

c W W

L 5 0 a

- c 0

I

(u 0 h m

- u)

2 %

m a3 0 0

I

m 7 (u (u

I I

u) 0. h m

u) u) 9 rr)

O0

W T . I- 0 u o

m o w

LL I: 0

W LL L

29

I

9 0.

0 a3

a3 0.

(u 0.

I

c 9

x

Q E 0 m II v -

6 E u) II V -

L

E .- V al Q v,

d 0.

hl

c

Z

30

I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I

I

L

E .- V al Q v,

0 0 00

c m w w LL LL I: I:

31

IT 9)

E .- V al Q v,

V al a v,

0. 9 m N

c\l Z

d 0.

(u

- Z

co 0.

(u

- Z

TABLE 7 2N914, FAIRCHILD, MOTOROLA, TEXAS INSTRUMENTS

AND GENERAL ELECTRIC, (Ic = 5 mA), hFE DEGRADA-

TION, ANNEALING AND FAILURE DATA

1 . 1 1

.88 1.22

.97

.94

Specimen

77 .87

1.8 7.78 2.0 1 .15 2.8 1.75 2.6 2.73

F2 F3 F4 F5

M2 M3 M4 M5

T2 T3 T4 T5

G 2 G 3 G4 G 5

01 h~~

57.5 64.1 80.6 64.1

69.4 63.3 79.4 74.6

~

50. C 50.5 64.1 55.6

62.5 96.2 82.9 59.5

PI h~~

.59

.56

.67

.63

.33

.34

.36

.37

.61

.59

.67

.66

.46

.37

.57 -48

Point

1.21 .52 1.08 I 1: 1 1.61 1.11 .34

- Beta prior to first i r rad ia t ion . - Beta a f t e r f i rs t i r radiat ion to 2.70 x 10 7

01

P I

F E h

r . h~ E

h - Beta a f t e r a n n e a l i n g a n d pr ior to s e c o n d i r rad ia t ion . FEo2

1st Fail Point - Dose w h e n hFE- -hFE /2. 01

2 n d Fail Point - Dose w h e n hFE = h /2. FEo2

33


AND GENERAL ELECTRIC, (Ic = 3C mA), hFE DEGRADA-


2.9 8.0 9.9

10

-7-c Specimen

1 1 .,-: .76

1.82 1.80

F2 55.8 F3 60.0 F4 72.1 F5 61.5

I M2 69.9 M3 60.5 M4 77.7 M5 72.8

T2 T3 T4 T5

G2 G3 G4 G 5

60.5 60.4 84.2 70.3

57.6 83.1 75.6 54.0

.65 1.09

.61 1 .c3

.70 1.09

.67 1.02

---I--- .40 .88 .45 1.17 .40 .91 .41 .89

1 .71 .86 .72 .94 .70 .91 .68 .84

1 s t Fai l Point

2nd Fai l Poini 1 s t Fai l Point

61 48 72 75

.89 1.54

.50 1.07

i

100 146 97

104

1.59 .87

1.21 .85

I 61 1.69

27 I 2.04 82 1 .oo 1.43

68 I - Beta prior to first irradiation. - Beta after first irradiation to 2.70 x 10 - Beta after annealing and prior to second irradiation.

7 01 h~ E

h~ E

FEo2

r.

P l h

1s t Fail Point - Dose when hFE = hFE /2. 01

FE FEo2 2nd Fail Point - Dose when h = h /2;

34

~

1 1 : . 'I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I




1 s t Fail Point

(x lo6 r) 1.8 0.4 1.7 2.7

1.2 0.9 0.2 1.7

30 48 21 28

9.5 32 27 1 1

- Beta prior to first irradiation.

- Beta after first irradiation to 2.70 x 10

- Beta after annealing and prior to second irradiation.

- Dose when h

7 01 h~~

h~~

FEo2

r.

P l h

1 s t Fail Point

2nd Fail Point - Dose when hFE= h /2

01 FE = h~~

/2. FE02

35

2nd Fail Point 1 s t Fai l Point

1.44 4.50 1.82 1.19

.58

.78 1.50

.82

1.30 1.17 1.86 1.46

2.84 1 .oo 1.48 2.91




105.3 169.5 193.4 123.5

163.9 172.4 227.3 104.2

Specimen

.34

.23

.31

.36

.26

.25

.21

.34

F2 F3 F4 F5 4.0

1.7 2.2

.4 7.1

M2 M3 M4 M5

1.20

1.18 .95

2.00 .44

T2 T3 T4 T5

25 35 14 16

G2 G3 G4 G5

1.40 1.43 2.36 2.13

h~~

142.9 137.6 185.2 153.1

140.8 141.4 133.3 142.9

.48

.55

.38

.41

.40

.54

.47

.41

I

1 1 34 24 14

3.00 1 .oo 1.63 2.71

h FE

.91

.95 1.03 1.12

01

1.01 1.04 1.04 1.15

.74

.84

.61

.65

.68 1.01

.79

.67

1 s t Fai l Point

x 10 r

2nd Fai l Point 1 s t Fai l Point

1.04 E:; I 5.20 3.2 1.28

- Beta prior to first irradiation. 01 h~ E 7 - Beta after first irradiation to 2.70 x 10 r. P I

h~ E

h

1st Fail Point - Dose when h = h / 2 .

- Beta after annealing and prior to second irradiation. FE02

FE FEol

2nd Fail Point - Dose when h = h /2. FE FEo2

36

1m I I I I 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I

TABLE 1 1 2N2369, FAIRCHILD, MOTOROLA, TEXAS INSTRUMENTS



.50

.65

.49

.84

.40

.37

.45

.32

.57

.53

.55

.58

.58

.70

.53

.67

I hFE 01 Specimen .74 .77 .71

1.03

.51

.53

.54

.49

.77

.77

.76

.73

.89

.88

.80

.92

F2 I 90.9 F3 F4 F5

94.3 92.6 51 .O

M2 M3 M 4 M5

T2 T3 T4 T5

102.0 74.6

1 1 1 . 1 83.3

68.5 102.0 76.9 53.2

G 2 G3 G 4 G 5

63.3 50.5 64.1 64.9

1 s t Fail Point

6 (x 10 r)

27 80 25

250

5.3 2.6

1.8 14

62 34 51 69

49 110 35

100

!nd Fai l Point 1s t Fai l Point

1.89 1.49 4.00 1 .oo

17.36 33.46 7.86

30.56

1.66 2.21 2.31 3.26

1.49 1.55 2.20 1.51

- Beta prior to first irradiation. 01 h~ E

P l h~ E

7 - Beta after first irradiation to 2.70 x 10 r. h

1 s t Fa i l Point

- Beta after annealing and prior io second irradiation.

- Dose when hFE = FEo2

/2 01 h~ E

2nd Fai l Point - Dose when hFE = h /2. FE02

37

TABLE 12 2N2369, FAIRCHI LD, MOT0 WLA, TEXAS INSTRUMENTS



1 s t Fail Point 2nd Fai l Point

.73

.75

.73

.86

.56

.58

.56

.55

.81

.75

.78

.82

.84

.85

.79

.84

42 4.10 97 1.57 55 2.60

180 1.45

21 4.67 16 9.69 29 3.90 13 1.85

140 2.79 73 2.63

120 2.74 120 2.13

86 1.66 150 1.73 50 2.22

170 1.46

- Beta prior to first irradiation. - Beta after first irradiation to 2.70 x 10 - Beta after annealing and prior to second irradiation.

- Dose when h

7 01 h~~

h~~

FEo2

r.

P l h

1 s t Fai l Point

2nd Fai l Point - Dose when hFE = h

/2 01 FE = h~~

/2. FEo2

38

~ ~~ ~~ ~


2nd Fai l Point 1 s t Fail Point

I

.41 1.54 .57 .55

.86 1.30

.65 1.29

1.22 1.26

.60

.99

A

1.22 4.13

.73 1.45



Specimen

F2 F3 F4 F5

M2 M3 M4 M5

T2 T3 T4 T5

01 h~~

G2 G3 G 4 G 5

- Beta prior to first irradiation. 7 - Beta after first irradiation to 2.70 x 10 r.

P l h~~

h - Beta after annealing and prior to second irradiation. FE02

1 s t Fail Point - Dose when h - /2 2nd Fai l Point - Dose when h = h /2.

01

FE FEo2

FE - h~~

39



TION, ANNEALING, AND FAILURE DATA

62.1 48.4 57.7 50.4

Specimen

.77

.72

.75

.68

F2 F3 F4 F5

71.9 100.0 103.1 100.3

M2 M3 M4 M5

.65

.64 0 59 .59

T2 T3 T4 T5

48.2 48.2 79.8 61.5

68.5 G 2 G3 G 4 G 5

.74

.76

.63

.69

01

hFEo2

hFE 01 1.01 1.02

.99 1.02

.99

.93

.98

.95

.99 1 .oo

.99 1.07

1st Fail Point

(x lo6 r)

300 82

1 50 91

82 85 87 75

150 140 64 93

No Useable Data

2nd Fail Point 1 s t Fail Point

.72 1.96

.83 1.60

1.54 1.79

.78 1.85

1.71 1.71 1.31 1.32

(All Specimens, 9 Including Control Specimens,

58.8 Very Unstable)

1 I I I - Beta prior to first irradiation.

- Beta after first irradiation to 2.70 x 10 7 01 h~ E

h~ E r. P l

h - Beta after annealing and prior to second irradiation. FEo2

1s t Fai l Point - Dose when hFE - - h~~ /2 9 2nd Fai l Point - Dose when h = h /2.

01

FE FEo2

40

41

7-

ambo O O N O

. . . a I

c L ' m u ) c o m - - 0

. . . a

a N h h 0 - m o . . . a

- - I - -

9 b L L L L

N 0.

N

N

- Z

0 0 . .

h a 0.h . .

h 0 ma . .

0 0

a * . . - -

o c a - w n

* ,

- h a 0 . ,

t ",I"" o m a c 90 c o o . . -

NC: h a

L

u) 0

X h a a

0

-

Lc

; - 0 -I- e 0

S 0

O -0 0

-I-

.- -I- .- L L .- c v) L

v- L

c v-

.- al

0 w w L L L L S L II I I

C 0

O -0 0

.- -I- .- L L .-

-0 c ou 2 e h

L 0 .- -0 C 0 0 C

0 W C C 0

W

0

.- -

L

c Lc

W LL L

I I - - N

Q O wo w w L L L L L

S L L

Z cv

a)

0.

cv

c

Z

42

C 0

0 -a 0

, - c

,-

L L 8 -

.I- v) L

.I- ,-

e L 0

C i ,- L

L

ul 0

X h 9 0.

0 W 0 U

0

0

-

Y

In

- + c

e S 0

0

-0

.- c .- 2 L

.I- v) L

Y L

.I- u-

.-

.- W

0 w w L L C L I1 II

C 0

0 U

.-

.I- .- 2

8 x

L .- U S

0

0

c L .- & U S 0 m S

0 W S S 0

W

0

.- -

L

c u-

w u,

5

I1 - - c v

Q O wo w w L L L L L L

L L 5

TABLE 17 S2N930, FAIRCHILD (Ic = 2 mA), hFE DEGRADATION,


Specimen

AF046 AF 508 AF985 AF 1083 AF1213

BF210 BF373 BF1316 BF 1875 BF2173

F047 F052 F055 F066 F114 F160 F197 F217 F229 F263

01 h~~

488 526 400 435 435

385 57 1 426 377 377

435 392 38 5 526 488 385 444 51 3 408 408

P l h~ E

hFE 01 .32 .34 .29 .39 .37

.39

.31

.36

.33

.31 ~

.38

.24

.26

.31

.31

.31

.33

.37

.39

.36

hFE 01 .46 .42 .50 .46 .51

.52

.39

.47

.48

.48 ~

.51

.46

.47

.38

.41

.47

.45

.43

.49

.45

~~

1 s t Fai I Point

6 (x 10 r)

.31

.54

.76

.80

.70

.74

.44

.05 2.40

.33 ~ ~~

.54

.58 1.37 1.50

.51

.45

.22

.80

.86

.61

!nd Fail Point 1 s t Fa i l Point

39.0 27.4 18.3 23.0 21.1

23.6 28.9

324.0 8.8

42.1 ~

23.5 31.7 14.8 19.2 24.3 20.7 63.2 24.5 21.4 31.3


- Beta after first irradiation. 01 h~~

h~ E P I

h

1 s t Fail Point - Dose when hFE = h /2.

2nd Fail Point - Dose when h = h /2.

- Beta after annealing and prior to second irradiation. FE02

FEo 1

FE FEO2

43

TABLE 18 S2N930, FAIRCHILD (Ic = 2 rnA), hFE DEGRADATION,


S pe c i rn en

F 296 F 299 F345 F 399 F446 F475 F 644 F 648 F687 F1174 F1232 F1317 F 1370 F1389 F1511 F 1 605 F 1 665 F 1898 F 1987 F2195

01 h~ E

-

408 455 444 465 370 435 385 465 408 455 51 3 377 408 476 476 3 70 455 476 385 392

P l h~~

h ~ ~ o l

.27

.23

.32

.35

.36

.32

.31

.31

.34

.38

.32

.31

.36

.34

.33

.40

.25

.35

.40

.28

h FEo2

.45

.44

.41

.43

.49

.46

.47

.39

.45

.44

.39

.48

.45

.38

.42

.54

.40

.47

.58

.57

1 s t Fai I Point

6 (x 10 r)

.89

.83

.67

.58 3.25

.40

.89

.89

.64

.59

.44

.33

.61

.38

.31

.86

.94

.59

.76

.24

2nd Fa i l Point 1 s t Fa i l Point

22.8 24.5 13.9 35.0 8.2

34.8 25.8 45.4 25.3 47.1 52.3 53.0 37.7 86.0 65.5 20.4 36.8 27.5 19.5 38.8

- Beta prior to first irradiation, - Beta after first irradiation.

01

P I

h~~

h~ E


1 s t Fa i l Point - Dose when h - /2 01 FE - h~~

2nd Fail Point - Dose when h = h /2. FE FEo2

44



Specimen

AF046 AF508 AF985 AF 1083 AF1213

BF210 BF373 BF1316 BF 1875 BF2173

F047 F052 F055 F066 F114 F160 F197 F217 F229 F263

469 538 405 426 422

43 1 568 459 361 389

~

433 364 392 529 493 3 58 452 472 406 41 3

h~~ P I

hFE 01 .42 .42 .38 .49 .47

.45

.39

.46

.43

.39

.46

.35

.35

.43

.41

.42

.41

.48

.47

.46

hFEo2

01

.76

.77

.73

.78

.79

h~ E

.77

.73

.66

.73

.73

.83

.74

.77

.65

.65

.73

.76

.79

.82

.73

1st Fai I Point

6 (x 10 r)

1.46 1.60 4.20 3.00 2.50

2.00 1 .oo 2.00 5.58

.94

2.30 3.90 4.20 4.90 1.70 1.68 1.38 2.84 2.63 2.40


- Beta after first irradiation. 01 h~ E

h~~ P l

h

1 s t Fail Point

2nd Fail Point - Dose when h = h /2.


- Dose when h FE02

/2 01

FE FEo2

FE = h~~

45

2nd Fail Poini 1 s t Fa i l Point

2.73 1.83 2.30 2.38 2.32

2.81 3.17 5.72 2.42 4.47

1.71 2.55 1.96 2.83 2.72 2.74 2.74 2.04 1.87 3.07



Specimen

F 296 F 299 F 345 F 399 F446 F475 F 644 F 648 F687 F1174 F 1 232 F1317 F 1 370 F 1 389 F1511 F1605 F 1 665 F 1898 F 1 987 F2195

01 h~ E

3 72 437 406 450 368 405 379 44 1 377 472 51 3 364 397 488 465 366 429 444 389 424

P l h~~

hFE,I

.37

.32

.46

.48

.45

.41

.39

.40

.48

.46

.39

.41

.45

.44

.43

.49

.35

.45

.49

.34

h FEo2

.79

.76

.79

.72

.80

.82

.83

.78

.83

.82

.75

.86

.84

.76

.83

.88

.80

.87

.92

.84

1 s t Fai l Point

6 (x 10 r)

3.70 3.28 2.30 2.70 7.00 1.30 3.40 3.88 2.73 2.25

.98 1.40 2.15 1.90 1.50 3.02 3.25 2.24 2.95 3.65

2nd Fail Point 1 s t Fa i l Point

46

1.67 1.98 1.50 2.34 1.42 2.41 1.29 1.86 1.53 1.76 3.60 2.32 1.78 2.45 2.21 1.39 1.69 1.55 1.33 1.20



h~ E P l


1 s t Fai l Point - Dose when h - /2 01

FE FEo2

FE - h~~ 2nd Fai l Point - Dose when h = h /2.

TABLE 21 S2N930, TEXAS INSTRUMENTS (Ic = 2 mA), hFE DEGRA-


Specimen

AT 1 203 AT 1 262 AT 1 263

BT986 BT 1 209 BT1401

T1136 T1144 T1154 T1188 T1216 T1311 T1370 T1397 T 1 406 T1439 T1484

01 h~~

278 3 28 227

244 222 31 2

235 41 7 303 377 263 225 230 263 235 31 7 247

P I h~ E

.57

.43

.54

.52

.36

.41

.39

.32

.54

.37

.37

.61

.67

.44

.53

.67

.43

h FE02

hFE,I .60 .55 .63

.63

.69

.58

.65

.48

.66

.53

.69

.81

.73

.63

.71

.63

.68

1 s t Fai I Point

(x l o6 r)

17.60 8.95

14.20

13.40 2.80

.50

1.90 3.80

15.70 2.00 6.10

20.50 25.50 8.10

13.10 24.10 7.20

2nd Fai l Point 1 s t Fai l Point

~~~ ~~

2.72 2.38 2.75

2.80 6.25

35.80

10.89 5.34 2.39

11.50 3.03 2.36 1.88 3.10 2.16 2.46 3.64



h~ E P I

h

1 s t Fail Point

2nd Fail Point - Dose when hFE = h


- Dose when h FEo2

/2 01 FE = h~~

/2. FE02

47

TABLE 22 S2N930, TEXAS INSTRUMENTS (Ic = 10 mA), hFE DEGRA-


Spe c i me n

AT 1 203 AT 1 262 AT 1 263

BT986 BT 1209 BT 1401

T1136 T1144 T1154 T1188 T1216 T1311 T 1370 T1397 T 1 406 T 1 439 T 1 484

01 FE h

287 332 238

25 1 239 3 22

2 50 433 31 3 380 282 233 242 267 243 344 258

P I h~ E

5 .63 .56 .61

.58

.49

.5t:

.56

.46

.55 0 52 .55 .65 .71 .56 .62 .69 .55

h FEo2

hFE,I .83 .81 .81

.83

.80

.82

.85

.70

.80

.75

.82

.81

.83

.80

.92

.83

.81

1 st Fai I Polnt

(x lo6 r)

22.40 14.90 19.50

17.70 11.20 8.50

17.20 10.10 22.80 13.50 13.70 24.00 29.90 16.40 19.80 26.40 15.40

2nd Fail Point 1 s t Fail Point

1.52 1.34 1.38

1.41 1.82 2.19

2.12 1.90 1.58 1.84 1.79 1.48 1.23 1.53 1.26 1.34 1.68

- Beta prior to first irradiction. - Beta after first irradiation.

01 h~~

h~~ P l


1 s t Fail Point - Dose when h = h /2. FE FEol

2nd Fail Point - Dose when h = h /2 FE FEo2

0.-o TtMhO. I - m . - a3--0.03 o* c o o o m w k - - 9 m m - . . . . . . . .

0 W L I:

m * m m 9-90

9903k m o o k m . . . . . . . 0°*0 L m m *

0 3 0 - m 0 l u ) k C o m o m - 0 . O k C v 109h9 9 9 k k

. . . . . . . .

0 0

P

x I - &

oo m - 0 9 9 u ) m

0 W LL C

. . . . I . . . . . . . . . a m . - - m m h l

- L 3 I W 4 - 0

m - I - v

w 0 : L -

* o c o O . m 9 m 0 . 0-99 m - 0 . - m h l m h l m m m m . . . . . . . .

0 W L

-r

* O h 0 I 0 - m - . . . . 0 3 0 9 m A d d d I " i?.q? *-09 . . . .

V ale z

I - &

m 0 . m o * o - - 0.--hlm **o- 9 k 9 9 9 9 k k . . . . . . . .

> 0 * II m

C :

49

O h 0 0 O o h l h 9 9 h - h hl - c u

o o o m m o m h l

0 7 - m m 9

0 3 0 9 m - m m - W 0 4

u . 5 L

0 w U I

m o o o 0 3 9 0 0 . - - o h m m

m o o o 25%%

O h 0 0 m m o n - m * -

-009 m - o o m h l m h l

0 0 9 h

C 4 c h - h 0 3 - m m

. . . . - -

o m * m . . . . 009hl . . . . 0 w LL I

* O m d h l

0 0 0 0 . . . . hl-l-hl

0 0 0 0 . . . . - m h l -

0 0 0 0 . . . . - - - - . . . .

0 0 0 0

V P)O 4

h . 5 . . . .

hl--hl . . . . c y - -

> 0

* II m w

2

C

E .- u e, a v,

50

1 T - R 1 I 1

I lil

( u m * o 00- - a s s * a 9 -0 r\ d o 0

- L a - . . . . m a *

h m h m - - * N

. . . . . . . . . c

co - ( u 9 m c o d 0 7 m s m -

O h - ( u N N N N

. . . . . . . . c o * s m m m m -

-

o x L L . 5 W

4 < I- n

0 W u- I n Z Q

O0 m W

c1 . 0

aJ I-

u' z U I-

W -4 w -I

oi W

W

< Z (3 0 Z Q

- m m 9 o o * o m o m k . . . . o * m o -ma)-

O h O h I\ocos . . . . L Z Z G 1 ( u m - 0 m a c o m . . . . 0 W u-

I o o m m a m s s - I - - I - N m m m - 9 s m 0 0 - ( u . . . .

0 W - 0 u

LL - -

n

. . . . . . sod h d

co h

0 W n

I - v w 0 : L L - I

m m * n . . . . m m m h - - o m ( u - N -

. . . . s m * m m h d o . . . . - - h - 0 Nh("

m m 9 0 O d N - m 0 . o . m . . . . o s - m m o m m m m - m 0 w

LL x

. . . . ( u * - m O h - a 3

. . . . c o m s m a o h m & 6 4 4 s m s s

cv - h * W 0 0 0 - . . . . (u-l- . . .

m o o 0 (u

O O O ( u o * m m h * -

c o o 0 0 90 h c o -

c9

n V

aJo x I - 5

m - h m m h m o - 0 0 0 . . . . . . . .

C

E

51

0 h aJ 0-

' 0 w o m ' < w v L L - aJ

v) v

I 0 3 0 3 0 3 . . . a m . . h m * o m 0.h hl m

0 W

- * h * 0 . 0 - m h l m c o m m m h o - o m 0 03030.- 9 d m m h 0 0 0 * * h a . . . . . . . . . . . .

LL -r

d 9 I I a h -

0 ( U h

I-- v aJ 0 - w c

L L - x

m o m 0 . . . .

m m m o . . . . 0 w

LL 2

~ ~~~

- - m m * * a m m * m m ohloo 0000 0000

. . . . . . . . . . . . - 0 m - o m 0 0 . . . .

.- V 0 P m

52

v u a cu'

OI

W

03

c7 09

m 9 m ch

0 9 0

0 d -

I-

53

m m * m

m hl hl

0

03 d 9 c

h l r n d l n ln c S

E" 3

S

0 X a I-

L c ln

CI

ln

hl m hl

0

hl

c703om c7mcoco hl-hlhl . . . .

Cd W

2 0

7 II

z z

v, 7 a, - 0

I--

3 wo C d L L < I : W % E

2

co hl W J

I-

co 0.

hl

- Z

0. 9 m hl

N Z

hl 0.

hl

(u

c

Z

d 0.

hl

c

Z

I

W 0 I

0 c

co 0

- 03

0

9 0 I

54

09 0

d 0

- 0 c

- hl

0

hl

0 I

co 0

hl h

0

rn

0

c

m hl

I

o?: W I-

9 cd

(3 Z 0 F: Q n

(3 a

2

5 2

2 2

W

W

W a r I-

W z e(

U W a v,

I- 3 0 (3 Z i= U W A W v,

>- m

N i Q

Z rz (3

a W

W cd

0. hl W -I

2 +

c .- h 08 (3-

L

c (I) w L 5 0 a

w Q x I-

- m

h l m 0 3 9 c

- \ h 00

x x hhl d - 9 m

c c

. .

- \ n 0 0

x x m03 m - m

c c

. . -

.. .. $ 2 a = 0 3

U

> e - v ) .- L O K

U S

LL

64

s a .-

- u7 -

d - 0. Z hl

h( 0.

hl

hl

c

Z

0 m

55

03 - Cr 7 L hl

In c a, E .- V e, 0 V .- L c V 0)

W

0 e, c

- - L

3 In In

w -I

*

% 0 U C 0

V e,

.- c

- 0 2

P

I

a L

-0 e, V c

E L

Ou C w 0)

A

0 II In

E 0, 3 - In .- II I-

* i t

ni W z W

0 m W

I-

h h 0 0

x x 9 - 9 0 .

h h 0 0

x x l n h l h 0

m

c c

.. % B 9)

3

0 LL

C 0 U

L - .-

.- 9

.. L 3

0 LL

- .- c v) L .- LL

2 9) B

u)

h h 0 0

x x 0 . 0 .

0 . m

c c

c -

h h 0 0

x x 2 8 9

.. + 9) B E 3

0 LL

- .- C 0

73 .- 9

1. + 0)

3

0 LL

L

- .- c v) L .-

LL

2 9) B

0 c3

n

56

Q

0 -0

ln

C 0

V Q

.- c

+ c +

57

Z hl

9 0 hl

- L

9 0

X co m m

-

- L

n 0

X 0 hl

03

-

- 0 0

-

L hl v)

TABLE 32 MEDIAN PERCENT DEGRADATION VALUES AT SCREENING

DOSES (5% OF MEDIAN FAILURE DOSES)

d

I = 5 m A IC = 30 mA Type C

I

21 % 2N914 29.5% I

2N2192 21 % 18.5%

2 N2369 28.5% 22 % I

2N918 22 Yo 19.5%

A l l Combined 26 % 22 Yo

* I C = 2 m A IC = 10 mA

S2N930 12.5% 19 Yo I

58

- * - * m m h ( m c c - 9 . . . . m m o m 90-9 h - c v c v om.-*

* d c v d . . . . . . . .

c n l c v c

hhl*hl h h m k c

h h m o . . . . c v d c v 0 0 . . . . m 9 9 m - c v 0 . 0 . * c v d O . . . .

9 Q d O * d d 9

0000 o m - 0 m m m o m m n l m

0000 o n l m o h ( m Q 0 0 mmcvcv

0000 O m - Q m 0 . h c o m e - c v

c v m v m c c z z c v m * m 0000

59

Y V 0 - m E

9 0

2 x c v,

61

t

L e, u, (5)

t- .- L

4

62

C al

V Q, Q m

E .-

63

> > > > 0 0 0. ha . .

I-

w Z

0 m W

C Y 0 hl I v)

? N

V Y

I

I

h

X CY

+ L

5

ux

X CY

I1

I- X

64

u)

0 VI

us 'W

LL -c

0 0 0 0 0 0 9 u) d

0 0 8

0 u)-

X

d

c3

0 0 0 0 h(

0 0 0 0

65

99.99

99.9 99.8

99

98

95

9a

80

-0 70 al

0 u- C

- .- 60 c 50

40

LL 30

20

10

5

2

1

0.5

0.2 0.1

0.05

0.01

I Q,

10" 10' 10" 1

Gamma Dose (r)

FIGURE 6 2N914, FAIRCHILD, 27OC, PERCENT FAILED VERSUS GAMMA DOSE

66

99.99

99.9 99.8

99

98

95

90

80

70 U a,

0 LL

S

- e- 60

+. 50 40

2 30

20

10

5

2

1

0.5

0.2 0.1

0.05

0.01

L

11 7

1 o6 10' Gamma Dose (r)

1

FIGURE 7 2N914, MOTOROLA, 27'C, PERCENT FAILED VERSUS GAMMA DOSE

67

99.99

99.9 99.8

99

98

95

90

80

70

K 60

50 40

2 2 30

20

10

5

2

1

0.5

0.2 0.1 9.95

0.01

-0 e,

0

+

1 0' 10" 10'

Gamma Dose (r)

1 c)

FIGURE 8 2N914, TEXAS INSTRUMENTS, 27OC, PERCENT FAILED VERSUS GAMMA DOSE

6a

99.99

99.9 99.8

-0 a,

U L L

C a, V

a, a

- .- +

L

99

98

95

90

80

70

40 50 40

30

20

10

5

2

1

0.5

0.2 0.1

0.05

0.01

I

I

4-

I

1

f 1 o6 1 0’ 1 o8 10’

Gamma Dose (r)

FIGURE 9 2N914, GENERAL ELECTRIC, 27OC, PERCENT FAILED VERSUS GAMMA DOSE

69

99.99

99.9 99 .s

99

9s

95

90

80

70

._ 40 50 40

2 d 30

20

10

5

2

1

0.5

0.2 0.1 0.05

0.01

-0 a,

0 -

4-

1 o6

FIGURE 18 2N914, 27OC, PERCENT FAILED VERSUS GAMMA DOSE, COMPARISON OF MANUFACTURERS

70

10’

Gamma Dose (r)

0 13’

~ _ _ ~ ~ ~

99.99

99.9 99.8

99

98

95

YO

8 1

70

.- 69 U al

D LL

c V

- r. t3

a, 43 ., +

L

2 3 :

23

13

5

2

1

0.5

0.2 3.1

3.05

0.01

1 o6 Gamma Dose (r)

7

10' 1 o5

FIGURE 1 1 2N2192, FAIRCHILD, 27OC, PERCENT FAILED VERSUS GAMMA DOSE

71

s'9.99

99.9 99.8

99

98

95

90

33

70

.- 60 50

U

0

+

s 40 2 2 30

20

10

5

2

1

0.5

0 .2 0.1

0.05

0.01 1 o3 1 o6 3

Gamma Dose ( r )

FIGURE 12 2N2192, MOTOROLA, 27OC, PERCENT FAILED VERSUS GPMMP DOSE

72

I 1 ’ I 8 I 8 I E 8 I I 8 I I 8 I 8 I 1

99.99

99.9 99.8

99

98

95

90

80

70

“3 60

50 6 40

CL 30

20

10

5

2

1

0.5

0.2 0.1

0.05

0.01

U

.- 0

+

u

1 o6 1 o8 1 Gamma Dose ( r )


73

99.99

99 .Y 99 .

8 I ’ I 1 I 8 1 I 1 I I( I 1 B 8 I t 8 1

99.99

99.9 99.8

99

98

95

90

80

70

60 50 40

30

20

13

5

2

1

0.5

0.2 0.1

0.05

0.01 1 o6

Gamma Dose (r)

10’ 1 o8

FIGURE 15 2N2192, 27’C, PERCENT FAILED VERSUS GAMMA DOSE, COMPARISON OF MANUFACTURERS

75

1 o6 1 o8 1 Gamma Dose ( r )

FIGURE 16 2N2369, FAIRCHILD, 27'C, PERCENT FAILED VERSUS GAMMA DOSE

76

8 8 ’ 8 8 8 8 I 1 I 8 8 8 8 8 B I 8 8 1

99.99

99.9 99.8

99

98

95

90

83

70

69 50 40

30

20

10

5

2

1 0.5

0.2 0.1

0.05

0.01

1 o5 1 o6 1 o8 Gamma Dose (r)

FIGURE 17 2N2369, MOTOROLA, 27’C, PERCENT FAILED VERSUS GAMMA DOSE

77

39.9 33.8

99

5;

95

4'c'

3L

IC

- .- 6C 5c

-0 (u

0

+

2 4c a" 3c Y

2c

1c

F - i 1

6.5

G . i G. 1

c.cc

c.01 1 G6 10' 1 c8

Gamma Dose (r)


78

I I I I 8 I 8 8 8 8 I I 8 8 I 8 8 I 8

99.99

99.9 99.8

99

98

95

90

80

70 -0 a,

0 L L

t

- -- 60 + 50

40 2 2 30

20

10

5

2 1

0.5

0.2 0.1

0.05

0.01

Failure Defined As

-

FIGURE 19 2N2369, GENERAL ELECTRIC,

3 1 O'r

Gamma Dose

27'C, PERCENT FAILED VERSUS GAMMA DOSE

79

99.99

99.9 99.8

99

98

95

90

80

70 -0

0)

0 L

t

- .- 60 50

e, 40 2 ti? 30

20

10

5

2

1

0 .5

0.2 0.1

0.05

0.01

+

Gamma Dose

FIGURE 20 2N2369, 27OC, PERCENT FAILED VERSUS GAMMA DOSE, COMPARISON OF MANUFACTURERS

80

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I

a

I 1 " I 8 8 8 8 8 I I I 1 8 8 I 8 8 I 8

99.99

99.9 99.8

99

98

95

9c

8C

7c

.- 6C c 5c

4c 2

-0 W

0 LI

C

-

2 3c

2c

1c

C w

2

1 0.5

0.2 0.1

0.05

0.01

Failure Defined As

7 10 r 6 10 r

I

9 10 r 8 10 r

Gamma Dose

FIGURE 21 2N918, FAIRCHILD, 27'C, PERCENT FAILED VERSUS GAMMA DOSE

81

99.9s

99.4 99.8

9s

98

9'

9c

8C

7c

6C

c 5c e, 4c 2 2 3c

73 0)

u LL

c

2c

1c

r; i

2

1 0.5

0.2 0.1

0.05

0.01 6 10 r 8 10 r

7 10 r

Gamma Dose

9 10 r

FIGURE 22 2N918, MOTOROLA, 27'C, PERCENT FAVILED VERSUS GAMMA DOSE

02

1

8 8 ' 8 8 I I 8 8 II 8 I I 8 I 8 8 1 8 I

99.99

99.9 99.8

99

98

95

90

80

70

60 50

40

30

20

10'

5

2

1

0.5

0.2 0.1

0.05

0.01 7

10 r 8 10 r 9 10 r

Gamma Dose

FIGURE 23 2N918, TEXAS INSTRUMENTS, 27'C, PERCENT FAILED VERSUS GAMMA DOSE

83

99.99

99.9 99.8

95

9e

92

9c

8C

7(

* - 6(

+ 5( 4(

-73 a,

0 LL

c

-

L

2 3(

2(

1 (

0..

0.: 0.

0.0.

0.0

.

7 10 r 6 10 r

9 10 r 8 10 r

Gamma Dose

FIGURE 24 2N918, GENERAL ELECTRIC, 27OC, PERCENT FAILED VERSUS GAMMA DOSE

84

I 8 1 1 I I I 8 I 8 I 8 8 I 8 8 8 I 1

99.99

99.9 99.8

99

98

95

90

80

70 U W

0 u- c

- -- 60 t 50 a, U 40

2 30

20

10

5

2

1

0.5

0.2 0.1

0.05

0.01

I

1 ( r 1 O'r 1 08r

Gamma Dose

FIGURE 25 2N918, 2 7 O C , PERCENT FAILED VERSUS GAMMA DOSE, COMPARISON OF MANUFACTURERS

85

r

3 *

0 3

0 N

0 -

0

86

1 - 1

I I I 1 I 1 I 1

I 1 I I I I 1 1

a

u

I I X O

v) c C (u

5 L c v)

C - : X 0) I-

I a

87

LL

0

L

9 0

X h( (u

( u *

Q

Q

0 n Q 2 z Q c3

LL

I-

w v,

Ln

v, @i w

3

>

0

h

w v,

n W @i

3 - Q LL

0 0 0 0 0 c3 hl c 0 0 0 9 u) *

0 hl

u) c

0 c

u)

88

1 . I

I I I I I 1 I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I

~~

I I 1 I I I I 8 I I I I I I I I 1 I I 89

> f

7 3

> 3

2 3

0 LL

- .- 0 U

I z 9 o z - 2 X : 6 E

0 0 c? (u 0 0 u) d

I

I I

,I I

I I I

I

I

I

' I I n W

I 0 c

Z 6 n -

- 0 * 7

0 N c

0 0 - 0 00

0 9

0 d

0 (u

0 I

I I I I I I I 1 I I I I i I I I I I B

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 m d m CJ -

91

0 03

0 9

0 *

3 N

3

0 0 0 0 0 0 c

0 hl m 9 d

92

1 1 I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I

7-t- I 4.__ +- I

+-+- 0 0 0 0 0 9 u) d (3 hl

93

3

- t - - - - T ----!----.

I 1

-tt --+* TI- - -- t

0 0 c

0 0 *

0 9 c7

0 hl c7

0 co hl

0 s

8 -0 L

N c

X

u. 0 $ 4 u) W E L O

a - 0 l l

94

0 N ?-,

0 m N

0

3

g 9o L

N - X

0 9 7

0 N -

0 03

0 *

0

0 9 m

0 cu 0

0 co cu

0 d hl

L

8 *o h l -

X

0 9 c

0 N 7

0 03

3 d

LLI 3 3

95

Q Q E € 0 m c ) II II u u - -

0 0

TT

I I

t-t r i I 1

I I I I +!

L 3 0 -

L . 0 c

DL 0

-)L 0

v)

C

E .- V e, Q v)

-0 e, C W e, V

C

L

v)

3

6 L 3

U LL

- .- + v) L .- LL

0 L

L

d E E 0

I I I I

I I

Documents

For - NASAspearman's rank correlation coefficient for order of "parameter" versus order of fa1 lure percent change in hfe with time at room temperature (25 * 3oc) after gamma dose