Single Event Effects on Commercial SRAMs and Power MOSFETS ... · v Upsets mapped to the proton belts. v 98% of the upsets occurred in regions where the dipole shell parameter (L)

Work supported by USAF/Space Division, DSWA & NASA/HQ

Single Event Effects on CommercialSRAMs and Power MOSFETS:

Final Results of the CRUX FlightExperiment on APEX

Janet L. BarthNASA/Goddard Space Flight Center

John W. AdolphsenUNISYS, Inc.

and

George B. GeeSGT, Inc.


The CRUX* Experiment

u Single Event Effects Experiment: Flight test of commercial devices» 1 Mbit & 256 Kbit SRAMs» 100 volt & 200 volt Power MOSFETs» Objective: Validate and/or improve prediction models

u Flew on Air Force APEX** satellite, August 1994 to May 1996(Solar Minimum)

u Inclination: 70º, Altitude: 362 x 2,544 kmu Environment was measured by CREDO Instrument [Ref. 1]

» Total dose at 10 locations in the experiment» LET of particles in different channels up to 30 MeV/(mg-cm2)

u 3-D model of APEX satellite and CRUX box was used to evaluate theradiation exposure at each Device Under Test (DUT) location

u Previously published papers reported preliminary results [Ref. 2, 3, & 4]

* Cosmic Ray Upset Experiment** Advanced Photovoltaic and Electronics Experiment


Devices Flown on CRUX

Part Type Manufacturer Technology Chip Size # ofDevices

Total Bits

MT5C1008-CW25 MICRON NMOS/CMOS 128K x 8 23 24,117,248

88130L45PC EDI NMOS/CMOS 128K x 8 9 9,437,184

ZQ04054628128 HITACHI/ELMO NMOS/CMOS 128K x 8 16 16,777,216

MT5C2568-CW25 MICRON CMOS 32K x 8 40 10,485,760

8832C12C1 EDI CMOS 32K x 8 18 4,718,592

71256L100DB IDT NMOS/CMOS 32K x 8 19 4,980,736

Part Type Manufacturer Technology MaximumVoltage D-S

# ofDevices

2N6796 Harris N-channel 100 12

2N6796 IR N-channel 100 12

2N6798 Harris N-channel 200 12

2N6798 IR N-channel 200 12

Power MOSFET Devices on CRUX

SRAM Devices on CRUX


Summary of Previous Results:First 262 Days of Mission

u 1 Mbit & 256 Kbit SRAMs (See Ref. 2 & Ref. 3)» During quiet magnetospheric and solar conditions, protons dominated the single event upset

(SEU) rates.v Upsets mapped to the proton belts.v 98% of the upsets occurred in regions where the dipole shell parameter (L) < 3 even though APEX spent

only 38% of its time there.

» Use of non-flight lot test data can lead to large errors in predicting upset rates.» EDI 256K and MICRON 1M devices showed very large variations in the upset rate when

comparing individual DUTs.» MICRON 1M devices showed extreme upset sensitivity to programmed logic state.» 35 multiple bit upsets were observed on the HITACHI/ELMO 1M devices and one multiple was

observed on a MICRON 256K device.» Stuck bit errors were observed on all part types except the MICRON 1M.

u 100 volt & 200 volt Power MOSFETs (See Ref. 4)» 3 Single Event Burn-outs (SEBs) were observed on the 100 volt Power MOSFETs.» 205 SEBs were observed on the 200 volt Power MOSFETs.» SEBs on the 200 volt Power MOSFETs were dominated by trapped protons.» Rate of SEBs increases with increase in the drain-to-source voltage.» There are threshold voltages below which SEBs do not occur.» For protons, predicted SEB rates based on ground tests showed excellent agreement with

observed flight rates. (See Ref. 5)


Final CRUX Results: 20 Months of Data

u 11 Months of data were added to theCRUX data set.

» Improved statistics on the single eventeffects rates, especially multiple bitupsets (MBUs) and single hard errors(“stuck bits”).

» Improved coverage of the radiationbelts.

u The figure at right shows theprecession of the latitude of perigee ofthe orbit as a function of days fromlaunch.

u The vertical line on figure marks theend of data coverage for the firstanalysis.

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Time (Mission days)

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

Per

igee

Lat

itude

(deg

)

Variation in Latitude of PerigeeAPEX Orbit: I=70 deg, H=362/2544 km, Period = 115 min.

Spacecraft in Safehold

Day Data Only

Maximum proton fluence exposure occurs whenlatitude of perigee is at the magnetic equator.


Upset Rates: Altitude = 650-750 km

u Upset data were binned in altitude.u These plots show upset rates for a low

earth orbit.u Most upsets occur in the South Atlantic

Anomaly (SAA).u Upsets at higher inclinations are

induced by cosmic ray heavy ions.

-180 -150 -120 -90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90 1 2 0 1 5 0 180

Long i tude

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

Latit

ude

M ic ron 256k :A l t i t ude :650km - 750km

1.0E-7 to 5 .0E-75 .0E-7 to 1 .0E-61 .0E-6 to 5 .0E-65 .0E-6 to 1 .0E-51 .0E-5 to 5 .0E-55 .0E-5 to 1 .0E-41 .0E-4 to 5 .0E-45 .0E-4 to 1 .0E-31 .0E-3 to 5 .0E-3

Upsets /B i t /Day

-180 -150 -120 -90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90 120 150 180

Long i tude

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

Latit

ude

Hi tach i 1M:A l t i t ude :650km - 750km


Upsets /B i t /Day

-180 -150 -120 -90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90 120 150 180

Longitude

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

Latit

ude

M icron 1M:Al t i tude:650km - 750km

1.0E-7 to 5.0E-75.0E-7 to 1.0E-61.0E-6 to 5.0E-65.0E-6 to 1.0E-51.0E-5 to 5.0E-55.0E-5 to 1.0E-41.0E-4 to 5.0E-45.0E-4 to 1.0E-31.0E-3 to 5.0E-3

Upsets/Bit /Day



u Increasing the altitude by 600 kmincreased the upset rate 8 to 11 times.

u The increased rate is due to theincrease in the size of the SAA and,also, the increase in the levels of highenergy protons.

u At this altitude, the higher upset rate onthe MICRON 256K devices is evident.

-180 -150 -120 -90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90 120 150 180

Longitude

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

Latit

ude

M icron 256k:Alt i tude:1250km - 1350km


Upsets/Bit/Day

- 1 8 0 - 1 5 0 - 1 2 0 - 9 0 - 6 0 - 3 0 0 3 0 60 9 0 1 2 0 1 5 0 1 8 0

L o n g i t u d e

- 9 0

- 7 5

- 6 0

- 4 5

- 3 0

- 1 5

0

1 5

3 0

4 5

6 0

7 5

9 0

Latit

ude

H i tach i 1M : A l t i t u d e : 1 2 5 0 k m - 1 3 5 0 k m

1 . 0 E - 7 t o 5 . 0 E - 75 . 0 E - 7 t o 1 . 0 E - 61 . 0 E - 6 t o 5 . 0 E - 65 . 0 E - 6 t o 1 . 0 E - 51 . 0 E - 5 t o 5 . 0 E - 55 . 0 E - 5 t o 1 . 0 E - 41 . 0 E - 4 t o 5 . 0 E - 45 . 0 E - 4 t o 1 . 0 E - 31 . 0 E - 3 t o 5 . 0 E - 3

U p s e t s / B i t / D a y

-180 -150 -120 -90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90 120 150 180

Longitude

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

Latit

ude

Micron 1M:Alt i tude:1250km - 1350km


Upsets/Bit/Day



u At this altitude, the belt structure ofthe trapped proton regions is clearlyseen.

u The upset rates have increased bya factor of 20 to 30 from the 700 kmorbit.

-180 -150 -120 -90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90 120 150 180

Longitude

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

Latit

ude

M icron 256k:Alt i tude:1750km - 1850km


Upsets/Bit/Day

- 1 8 0 - 1 5 0 - 1 2 0 - 9 0 - 6 0 - 3 0 0 3 0 6 0 9 0 1 2 0 1 5 0 1 8 0

L o n g i t u d e

- 9 0

- 7 5

- 6 0

- 4 5

- 3 0

- 1 5

0

1 5

3 0

4 5

6 0

7 5

9 0

Latit

ude

H i t a c h i 1 M :A l t i t u d e : 1 7 5 0 k m - 1 8 5 0 k m



-180 -150 -120 -90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90 120 150 180

Longitude

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

Latit

ude

Micron 1M:Alt i tude:1750km - 1850km


Upsets/Bit/Day



u 2500 km is near the peak of the highenergy protons regions (3000 km).

u At this altitude, the relative insensitivityof the HITACHI/ELMO 1M devices toheavy ion induced upsets is evident.

-180 -150 -120 -90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90 1 2 0 1 5 0 180

Long i tude

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

Latit

ude

M ic ron 256k :A l t i t ude :2450km - 2550km


Upsets /B i t /Day

- 1 8 0 - 1 5 0 - 1 2 0 - 9 0 - 6 0 - 3 0 0 3 0 6 0 9 0 1 2 0 1 5 0 1 8 0

L o n g i tude

- 9 0

- 7 5

- 6 0

- 4 5

- 3 0

- 1 5

0

1 5

3 0

4 5

6 0

7 5

9 0

Latit

ude

H i t a c h i 1 M : A l t i t u d e : 2 4 5 0 k m - 2 5 5 0 k m



-180 -150 -120 -90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90 120 150 180

Longi tude

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

Latit

ude

M icron 1M:Al t i tude:2450km - 2550km

1.0E-7 to 5 .0E-75.0E-7 to 1 .0E-61.0E-6 to 5 .0E-65.0E-6 to 1 .0E-51.0E-5 to 5 .0E-55.0E-5 to 1 .0E-41.0E-4 to 5 .0E-45.0E-4 to 1 .0E-31.0E-3 to 5 .0E-3

Upsets/Bi t /Day


Variation in Number of Upsets per DUT

u Variation within electronics box enclosure» Percentage difference from average was computed for each DUT.» Distribution of the number of upsets on individual DUTs was compared to

a Normal Distribution. The fit to a normal distribution was measured withShapiro-Wilkes parameter. A value close to .99 indicates a good fit tonormal.

u Correlation between the DUT exposure to the environment and thenumber of upsets» A 3-D Model of the APEX satellite & CRUX box was used to estimate

proton exposure at each DUT location.» The correlation between the exposure and the number of upsets on each

DUT was measured with Linear Regression fits.v r = regression coefficientv P(N,r) = probability of r being from an uncorrelated population where N is the

number of degrees of freedom


MICRON 1M - 23 DUTs

5 6 7 8 9 10

Average Daily > 50 MeV Proton Fluence x 108

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

Tota

l Num

ber o

f Ups

ets

Linear Regression Fit - # of Upsets vs Device Exposure

u Total # of Upsets = 146,270u Mean = 6359, Maximum:Minimum = 10:1u Std. Dev./Mean = 52%u Fit to Normal Distribution = .941u Regression Coefficient (r) = -.08u Probability (N,r) = .70u Parameters indicate a large range in DUT

response within the flight lot.

Variation in Upset Rates per DUT in the CRUX Electronics BoxDUTs Ordered by Increasing Exposure to the Environment

b4c10

b4c9

b3c10

b3c4

b3c15

b3c8

b3c1

b4c12

b3c9

b4c14

b3c11

b3c3b3c13

b3c0b3c12

b3c6

b3c7

b3c2

b3c14b4c15

b3c5

b4c8

b4c13

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

Per

cent

Diff

eren

ce fr

om th

e A

vera

ge

b=board #c=chip #

Distribution of DUT Upset Sensitivity

Total Number of Upsets on DUT

Num

ber o

f Ups

ets

in R

ange

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000

ExpectedNormal


EDI 1M - 9 DUTs

5 6 7 8 9 10


6400

6800

7200

7600

8000

8400

8800

9200

9600

Tota

l Num

ber o

f Ups

ets


u Total # of Upsets = 74,154u Mean = 8239, Maximum:Minimum = 7:5u Std. Dev./Mean = 11%u Fit to Normal Distribution = .940u Regression Coefficient (r) = .35u P(N,r) = .35u Range in DUT response was small. Conclusions

about the fit to a Normal Distribution and correlationto exposure were is limited by the small samplesize.


b4c3

b4c4

b4c1b4c11

b4c7 b4c0

b4c2

b4c5

b4c6

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

Per

cent

Diff

eren

ce fr

om th

e A

vera

ge

b=board #c=chip #



Num

ber o

f DU

Ts in

Ran

ge

0

1

2

3

6000 6500 7000 7500 8000 8500 9000 9500

ExpectedNormal


HITACHI/ELMO 1M - 16 DUTs

5 6 7 8 9 10


4200

4400

4600

4800

5000

5200

5400

5600

5800

6000

6200

6400

6600

Tota

l Num

ber o

f Ups

ets


u Total # of Upsets = 83,049u Mean = 5191, Maximum:Minimum = 7:5u Std. Dev./Mean = 9%u Fit to Normal Distribution = .964u Regression Coefficient (r) = .35u Probability (N,r) = .18u Parameters indicate small DUT to DUT variation &

moderate correlation of upset rate to DUTexposure.


b2c10 b2c9

b2c3 b2c8

b2c14

b2c4b2c1

b2c12b2c7

b2c15

b2c13 b2c11

b2c2

b2c6b2c0 b2c5

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

Per

cent

Diff

eren

ce fr

om th

e A

vera

ge

b=board #c=chip #



Num

ber o

f DU

Ts in

Ran

ge

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500

ExpectedNormal


MICRON 256K - 40 DUTs

5 6 7 8 9 10


6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

11000

12000

13000

Tota

l Num

ber o

f Ups

ets


u Total # of Upsets = 370,632u Mean = 9265, Maximum:Minimum = 9:5u Std. Dev./Mean = 12%u Fit to Normal Distribution = .981u Regression Coefficient (r) = .61u Probability (N,r) < .001u Parameters indicate small DUT to DUT variation,

good fit to normal distribution, and strongcorrelation of upset rate to DUT exposure.


b8c1

0b8

c8b5

c12

b6c1

4b5

c13

b1c9

b7c2

b5c7

b5c1

4b6

c15

b1c4

b8c1

b6c1

2b6

c6b5

c11

b1c8

b1c1

5b6

c13

b7c3 b1

c10

b1c1

1b8

c4b6

c7b1

c1b6

c11

b1c1

3b1

c3b1

c14

b5c1

5b1

c2 b6c5

b8c0

b1c0

b1c1

2b5

c6 b5c5 b1

c7b1

c6b1

c5

b8c9

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

Per

cent

Diff

eren

ce fr

om th

e A

vera

ge

b=board #c=chip #



Num

ber o

f DU

Ts in

Ran

ge

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 11000 12000 13000

ExpectedNormal


EDI 256K - 18 DUTs

5 6 7 8 9 10


0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

Tota

l Num

ber o

f Ups

ets

Linear Regression Fit - # of Upsets vs Deice Exposure

u Total # of Upsets = 11,065u Mean = 615, Maximum:Minimum = 9:1u Std. Dev./Mean = 81%u Fit to Normal Distribution = .772u Regression Coefficient (r) = .-.39u Probability (N,r) = .107u Parameters indicate large DUT to DUT variation,

trimodal distribution, and poor correlation of upset rate toexposure.

u EDI uses parts from different foundries, therefore, widevariation in DUT response is expected.


b6c10

b5c3b6c1

b6c4

b7c15

b8c3

b7c7

b7c12

b7c13

b7c11

b7c14 b5c2b8c2

b7c6b6c0

b7c5

b6c8b6c9

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

Per

cent

Diff

eren

ce fr

om th

e A

vera

ge

b=board #c=chip #



Num

ber o

f DU

Ts in

Ran

ge

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

ExpectedNormal


IDT 256K - 19 DUTs

5 6 7 8 9 10

Average Daily > 50 MeV Proton Fluence

3400

3600

3800

4000

4200

4400

4600

4800

5000

5200

5400

Tota

l Num

ber o

f Ups

ets



b7c10b7c8 b7c9

b7c4b6c2

b6c3 b5c4

b8c12 b5c1 b8c11 b7c1

b8c14b7c0

b8c6 b8c15

b8c13

b8c7 b5c0

b8c5

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

Per

cent

Diff

eren

ce fr

om th

e A

vera

geu Total # of Upsets = 79,513u Mean = 4185, Maximum:Minimum = 3:2u Std. Dev./Mean = 12%u Fit to Normal Distribution = .937u Regression Coefficient (r) = .67u Probability (N,r) < .001u Parameters indicate small DUT to DUT variation

and excellent correlation of upset rate to exposure. b=board #c=chip #



Num

ber o

f DU

Ts in

Ran

ge

0

1

2

3

4

5

3400 3600 3800 4000 4200 4400 4600 4800 5000 5200 5400

ExpectedNormal


Sensitivity to Programmed Logic State

u CRUX flight data verify laboratory tests showing that many SRAMs havedifferences in upset sensitivity depending on their programmed logic state.

u DUTs were reprogrammed to opposite logic state about every 21 hours.u Some DUTs were programmed to a checkerboard pattern.

Part Type % of 1s to 0sUpsets

% of 0s to 1sUpsets

MICRON 1M 98 2

EDI 1M 54 46

HITACHI/ELMO 1M 72 28

MICRON 256K 80 20

EDI 256K 68 32

IDT 256K 82 18

SRAM Sensitivity to Programmed Logic State


Multiple Bit Upsets & Stuck Bit Errorsu Multiple Bit Upsets (MBUs) were observed on all part types.

» HITACHI/ELMO 1M DUTs showed highest incidence of MBUs.» For MICRON 256K, heavy ions were more likely to induce MBUs than SEUs (43% vs 3% of

total).» MBUs increased toward the end the mission.

u Stuck Bit Errors were observed on all part types.» Highest incidence was on EDI 1M and IDT 256K parts.» For IDT 256K, heavy ions were more likely to induce stuck bits than SEUs (50% vs 3% of

total).» Stuck bits on 20 DUTs coincided with with an October 1995 solar event (Mission Day 444).

Part Type MBUs/bit-20 months Stuck Bits/bit-20 months

MICRON 1M 1.2 x 10-7 1.7 x 10 –7

EDI 1M 2.1 x 10 –7 6.1 x 10-6

HITACHI/ELMO 1M 8.9 x 10-6 1.8 x 10-7

MICRON 256K 2.6 x 10-6 1.0 x 10-6

EDI 256K 1.7 x 10-6 6.4 x 10-7

IDT 256K 8.0 x 10-7 6.2 x 10-6

MBU & Stuck Bit Rates on CRUX SRAMs


Multiple Bit UpsetsMultiple Bit Upsets on CRUX SRAMs vs Dipole Shell Parameter

1

10

100

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Number of Days from Launch

Dip

ole

She

ll P

aram

eter

- L

MICRON 1MEDI 1MHITACHI/ELMO 1MMICRON 256KEDI 256KIDT 256KL = 3Solar Event


Stuck Bit ErrorsStuck Bit Errors vs Dipole Shell Parameter

1

10

100

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Number of Days from Launch

Dip

ole

She

ll P

aram

eter

- L

MICRON 1MEDI 1MHITACHI/ELMO 1MMICRON 256KEDI 256KIDT 256KL = 3Solar Event


Upset Rates per Device Type

u Upset rates calculated for the entire 20 month mission were 2X higher thanthose calculated for the first 262 days.

u Environment exposure increased during the CRUX mission due to twofactors:

» Orbit precession into more intense Van Allen belt regions resulted in a 30%increase in high energy proton fluence.

» Proton and heavier ion levels increased by an estimated 40% from 1994 to 1996due to solar cycle variations, i.e., levels increase as solar cycle goes into solarminimum.

u Device Degradation Due to Dose?» Dose on DUTs is estimated to be within 7 krads to 10 krads depending on the

location in box.v CRUX dosimeters measured the dose for only the first 90 days of the mission due to

power cutoff during a spacecraft safehold.v Dosimeter data were extrapolated to cover the entire mission.

» Upset rates increased by the same factor of 2 on all part types.

u Conclusion: Upset rate increase was most likely due to increases in theenvironment, and not to SEU/total dose synergism.


Upset Rates per Part Type

Daily Upset Rates per Part TypeAPEX: I=70 deg, H=362/2544 km, Entire Mission

0.0E+00

1.0E-04

2.0E-04

3.0E-04

4.0E-04

5.0E-04

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3

Dipole Shell Parameter - L

Ups

et R

ate

(#/(b

it-da

y)

MICRON 256KIDT 256KEDI 1MMICRON 1MHITACHI 1MEDI 256K


V D-S L-Shell Lon.(deg)

Lat.(deg)

Alt.(km)

178 4.4 -93 -69 2,518154 5.8 -7 62 1.983130 3.6 10 58 1.228130 7.0 -74 55 1,285148 5.9 -141 -69 1,040172 17.1 -41 68 2,527196 6.4 133 70 2,487

V D-S L-Shell Lon.(deg)

Lat.(deg)

Alt.(km)

68 3.4 66 61 43183 8.5 -177 -63 2,51368 9.6 -48 61 2,52089 1.3 161 15 2,26755 8.9 -164 70 2,05780 8.7 -172 -67 1,02080 1.4 -123 -4 2,288

SEBs on 100 Volt DUTs

SEBs on 200 Volt DUTs at L > 3

SEBs on Power MOSFETs

- 1 8 0 - 1 2 0 - 6 0 0 6 0 1 2 0 1 8 0

L o n g i t ude

- 9 0

- 6 0

- 3 0

0

3 0

6 0

9 0

Latit

ude

1000

1000

10000

2 0 0 V o lt B o a r d S E B s1 5 0 0 - 1 9 9 9 k m

P r o t o n F l u x C o n t o u r s f o r E n e r g y > 5 0 M e V ( A P 8 - M I N )

L = 3

L = 3

160 166 172 178 184 190 196

Voltage Drain-to-Source (Volts)

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

Num

ber o

f SE

Bs

SEBs As Function of Voltage Drain-to-Source For L < 3(August 11, 1994 to May 17, 1996)

Results For 200 Volt Boards


Summaryu SRAMs

» SEU rates on these commercial SRAMs are strongly dependent on proton fluence levels.» Large differences in the distribution of the # of SEUs on individual DUTs were observed

between part types.» Not all differences in the # of SEUs on DUTs can be attributed due to exposure differences.

Device to device variation within a flight lot also plays a major role.» The variation of DUT SEU performance within the box enclosure on the HITACHI/ELMO 1M,

IDT 256K, and EDI 1M DUTs were within ~20% of the average. For the MICRON 256K, thespread was within ~30% of the average. The MICRON 1M and EDI 256K DUTs had verybroad distributions in device performance, indicating that DUTs may not have come from thesame run lot.

» SEU and MBU rates increased with mission time corresponding to the solar cycle increase inproton and heavier ion levels .

» A small solar event in October 1995 may have caused stuck bit errors on 10 DUTs. The stuckbit errors occurred at altitude 495 km, but outside of the SAA.

u Power MOSFETs» SEBs on the 100 volt Power MOSFETs did not occur below 55 V D-S .» SEBs on the 200 volt Power MOSFETs did not occur below 130 V D-S. The voltage threshold

was higher for trapped proton induced SEBs than for heavy ion induced SEBs.» The SEB rate is strongly dependent on voltage threshold.


References & Acknowledgements

[1] C.S. Dyer, C.J. Watson, C.L. Peerless, A.J. Sims, and J.L. Barth, “Measurements of theRadiation Environment from CREDO-II on STRV and APEX,” IEEE Trans. on NS, Vol.43, No. 6, December 1996.

[2] J.W. Adolphsen, J.L. Barth, E. G. Stassinopoulos, T. Gruner, M. Wennersten, K.A.LaBel, C. M. Seidleck, “Single Event Upset Rates on 1 Mbit and 256 Kbit Memories:CRUX Experiment on APEX,” IEEE Trans. on N.S., Vol. 42, No. 6, December 1995.

[3] J.W. Adolphsen, J.L. Barth, E. G. Stassinopoulos, T. Gruner, M. Wennersten, K.A.LaBel, C. M. Seidleck, “SEE Data from the APEX Cosmic Ray Upset Experiment:Predicting the Performance of Commercial Devices in Space,” IEEE Trans. on N.S.,Vol. 43, No. 3, June 1996.

[4] J. W. Adolphsen, J.L. Barth, and G.B. Gee, “First Observation of Proton Induced PowerMOSFET Burnout on Space: The CRUX Experiment on APEX,” IEEE Trans. on N.S.,Vol. 43, No. 6, December 1996.

[5] D. Oberg, J. L. Wert, E, Normand, P. P. Majewski, and S. A. Wender, “First Obsevationof Power MOSFET Burnout with High Energy Neutrons,” IEEE Trans. On N.S., Vol. 43,No. 6, December 1996.

We are indebted to the US Air Force/Space Division for the flight opportunity on the APEXmission. NASA/HQ and Defense Special Weapons Agency supported the data analysis.

Documents

Single Event Effects on Commercial SRAMs and Power MOSFETS ... · v Upsets mapped to the proton belts. v 98% of the upsets occurred in regions where the dipole shell parameter (L)