lif REPORT SSD-TR-9O-42 00 OITI FILE COPY N N Latest Trends in Parts SEP Susceptibility from Heavy Ions D TI L Prepared by ELECTE g D. K. NICHOLS, L. S. SMITH, and G. A. SOLI Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 and R. KOGA and W A. KOLASINSKI Space Sciences Laboratory Laboratory Operations The Aerospace Corporation El Segundo, CA 90245 30 September 1990 Prepared for SPACE SYSTEMS DIVISION AIR FORCE SYSTEMS COMMAND Los Angeles Air Force Base P0. Box 92960 Los Angeles, CA 90009-2960 APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE; DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED
Transcript
lif REPORT SSD-TR-9O-42
00 OITI FILE COPYNN
Latest Trends in Parts SEP Susceptibilityfrom Heavy Ions
D TI L Prepared by
ELECTE g D. K. NICHOLS, L. S. SMITH, and G. A. SOLIJet Propulsion Laboratory
Pasadena, CA 91109
and
R. KOGA and W A. KOLASINSKISpace Sciences Laboratory
Laboratory OperationsThe Aerospace Corporation
El Segundo, CA 90245
30 September 1990
Prepared for
SPACE SYSTEMS DIVISIONAIR FORCE SYSTEMS COMMAND
Los Angeles Air Force BaseP0. Box 92960
Los Angeles, CA 90009-2960
APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE;DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED
This report was submitted by The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA 90245,under Contract No. F04701-88-C-0089 with the Space Systems Division, P.O. Box 92960, LosAngeles, CA 90009-2960. It was reviewed and approved for The Aerospace Corporation byA. B. Christensen, Director, Space Sciences Laboratory. Capt Mullany was the projectofficer for the Mission-Oriented Investigation and Experimentation (MOlE) Program.
This report has been reviewed by the Public Affairs Office (PAS) and is releasable tothe National Technical Information Service (NTIS). At NTIS, it will be available to thegeneral public, including foreign nationals.
This technical report has been reviewed and is approved for publication. Publicationof this report does not constitute Air Force approval of the report's findings or conclusions.It is published only for the exchange and stimulation of ideas.
ROBERT D. MULLANY, Capt, US. _ JONATHAN M. EMMES, Maj, USAFMOIE Project Officer MOIE Program ManagerSSD/CNBS AFSTC/WCO OL-AB
6a. NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 6b. OFFICE SYMBOL 7a. NAME OF MONITORING ORGANIZATIONThe Aerospace Corporation (If applicable)
Laboratory Operations Space Systems Division
6c. ADDRESS (Ciy State, and ZIP Code) 7b. ADDRESS (City State, and ZIP Code)
El Segundo, CA 90245-4691 Los Angeles Air Force BaseLos Angeles, CA 90009-2960
8a. NAME OF FUNDING/SPONSORING 8b. OFFICE SYMBOL 9. PROCUREMENT INSTRUMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBERORGANIZATION (ff applicable)F04701-88-C-0089
8c. ADDRESS (Cit, State, and ZIP Code) 10. SOURCE OF FUNDING NUMBERSPROGRAM PROJECT TASK WORK UNITELEMENT NO. NO. NO. ACCESSION NO.
11. TITLE (Include Security Classification)
Latest Trends in Parts SEP Susceptibility from Heavy Ions
12. PERSONAL AUTHOR(S) Nichols, D. K., Smith, L. S., and Soli, G. A. (Jet Propulsion Laboratory); and Koga, R. andKolasinski, W A. (The Aerospace Corporation)
13a. TYPE OF REPORT 13b. TIME COVERED 14. DATE OF REPORT (Year Month, Day) 15. PAGE COUNTFROM TO 1990 September 30 21
'16. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTATION
17. COSATI CODES 18. SUBJECT TERMS (Continue on reverse it necessary and ioentify by block number)
FIELD GROUP SUB-GROUP LatchupSingle event upset
19. ABSTRACT (Continue on reverse if necessary and identify by block number)
JPL and Aerospace have collected a third set of heavy ion single event phenomena (SEP) test data.since theirlast joint IEEE publications in December 1985 and December 1987. ,Trends in SEP susceptibility (e.g., softerrors and latchup) for state-of-the-art parts are presented. -
20. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY OF ABSTRACT 24 .ABSTRACT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
[ UNCLASSIFIED&INLMIIEW ' SAME AS RPT. ] DTIC USERS Unclassified22a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL 22b. TELEPHONE (Include Area Code) 22c. OFFICE SYMBOL
DD FORM 1473, 84 MAR 83 APR edition may be used until exhausted. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGEAll other editions are obsolete UNCLASSIFIED
PREFACE
The authors at Jet Propulsion Laboratory thank Jim Coss, single-event upset group leader;William Price, Mark Huebner, Carl Malone, Harvey Schwartz, Kevin Watson, Peter Wang. MikeHavener, and Mike O'Connor.
The Aerospace authors are grateful to Bob Walter, Kirk Crawford, Brad Johnson, JonOsborn, John Elder, and Sam imamoto for their invaluable assistance in operating theexperimental hardware through the long night hours.
Special thanks are extended by all to the members of the 88-in. cyclotron staff for providingtheir excellent support.
.,-
~b~lc T:. Lb
By .... _J !! . . .. .t
Av;Ih4oNIy Codes
st i dsol iao
11
CONTENTS
P R E FA C E ................................................................... 1
I. INTRO D U CTIO N ....................................................... 5
II. TESTING APPROACHES ................................................ 7
III. ORGANIZATION AND SCOPE OF DATA ................................ 9
IV. T R E N D S ................................................................ 17
V CO N CLU SIO N S ......................................................... 19
R E FE R E N C ES ............................................................... 21
1. SEU Data (MOS and CMOS Devices) - 1987 & 1988 ......................... 10-15
2. SEU Data (Bipolar Devices) - 1987 & 1988 .................................. 16
3
I. INTRODUCTION
An ongoing single-event phenomena (SEP) test program at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory(JPL) and The Aerospace Corporatioiis continuing, in order to assess specific parts performancefor interplanetary and satellite environments and to establish trends in single-event upset (SEU)response of an ever-increasing body of device data.....
In 1985, Nichols et al. 1 published the first nearly comprehensive listing of SEP test data for186 parts. This presentation was updated in 19872 with the publication of data for 83 additionalparts. In this report, we extend the data base for 154 new parts. As before, the data are collectedaccording to technology, function, and manufacturer in order to permit trends, generalizations,and data gaps to be identified. -- .
5
II. TESTING APPROACHES
The experimental procedures used by JPL and Aerospace are evolutionary and are describedin detail elsewhere. 3,4 All data reported here use high energy accelerators-not isotope or othersimulation sources. A heavy ion beam of suitable uniformity is directed into a vacuum chamber,where a movable test board and testing interface are mounted. Dosimetry is usually provided bythe test group, but the Battelle Northwest Laboratories (BNL) facility now offers this service fortheir dedicated SEP line Teqt interfaces are unique to each part, although some attempts havebeen made to design "universal interfaces." Tests of complex parts, st.¢h as large-scale integration(LSI) random access memories (RAMs) and microprocessors, require special care and usually donot entail a test of every element for every code configuration. Microprocessor tests, for example,might be chosen to yield worst-case linear energy transfer (LET) data (equivalent to the LETthreshold for the whole device) and not to yield the overall device cross section.
Tests for transient effects-defined as those disturbances that last for a finite time-areoccasionally implemented at the same time as tests for their "infinite" lived cousins-the SEU.Transient effects are not often reported, probably because test procedures are often not set up tomeasure them-not because of a general scarcity of this phenomenon. Transients are also moreelusive than SEUs: they depend upon on-chip design, layout geometries, and other configurationaspects that may mask or augment their detection.
Both transients and "soft" upsets should be of concern to the system designer. Catastrophiceffects like latchup, transistor burnout, and other permanent effects require a separate systemevaluation.
7
III. ORGANIZATION AND SCOPE OF DATA
This repoi. summarizes soft error and latchup experimental test data from JPL and TheAerospace Corporation during the 2-year period from January 1987 through December 1988. Ina6dition, data from the Combined Release and Radiation Effects Satellite (CRRES) program,stored at JPL for the last several years, is released for the first time-except for proprietarydevelopmental data on GaAs devices. Not included are data generated by Defense NuclearAgency (DNA) subcontractors who used JPL hardware, nor the new, fairly extensive data set onpower metal-oxide semiconductor field-effect transistor (MOSFET) burnout obtained by othersubcontractors. Much smaller SEP data sets have been generated by other U.S. and foreignresearchers. 5 The SEP data presented here and in two previous reports1,2 represent a substantialmajority of all test data obtained on SEP throughout the world.
The data from JPL and Aerospace are combined in this report, but there are minordifferences in the data from each organization. JPL defines the threshold LET as that value ofLET where soft errors are first counted at fluences of 106 ions/cm 2. Aerospace has redefined theirLET threshold as occurring at that point where the measured upset cross section is 1% of themeasured maximum cross section. These two values may be quite different.* To obtain accurateSEU rates for a prescribed radiation environment, one requires a plot of cross section vs LET,which may be available from the parent test organization.**
The data are conveniently divided into two tables: Table 1 for metal-oxide semiconductor(MOS) devices and Table 2 for bipolar devices. All data listed are substantially abbreviated andignore statistical features altogether. SEP tests are measured with a dynamic nominal bias;latchup tests are performed at the maximum value of the nominal bias range in order to enhancethe possibility of latchup. Cross sections are given for Kr ions at normal incidence, correspondingto LET = 37 MeV/mg/cm 2. The label "no upset" also refers to the situation at LET = 37. Fordevices having a low LET threshold, the tabulated cross section may be equal to the maximumsaturation cross section; but at higher LETs, the maximum cross section will be larger than thetabulated value (and may or may not have been found). Unreported transients and higher testtemperature measurements exist for some parts. Hence, a system designer interested in a specificpart is again urged to contact the appropriate test organization for further information.
* The use of a LET threshold defined as a stated percentage of a maximum (saturated) cross sectionattempts to establish a practical lower bound for the purpose of estimating upset rates. The discrepancybetween this definition and JPLs definition becomes academic when a complete cross section is used inrate calculations.
** At JPL, more detailed data are available in Reference 6 or in the RADATA computer bank.
9
Table I SEU Dam (MOS A CmOS Devm). 191 m a1918
EffectiveLEF. Deic Crowd Qm am
TM mha1 Sca (CAi3 Per Bit Fauyor&- Nveio Fwc Tchnology Mfr sits (MeVhoA&cmf) (to's -Ai3 laid (T.n Dais
A ZI4COO MsicroP 0405 ZIL -. 81-M. Lu'dmwpuasLET.-25,(8crat m od us - 2-5 1 103 cm:
j SA3300 16-Bit C3405,ulk SN!. - 0:t6 -N CCU. 0dS32016(Aug, 0" 1988)Mzcr.,p No rmaz M&~ Tatop Dar Availabie
I SA3300 16-Bit CM05Abulk SNI. >. 12D No Upa -- NL ClawofNS3216 cn, i 9F .Miro P Withg reii RAO Tav DWAg Avaiab~e
I SA3304 Tum~g CMOskbulk SN!. -- 60 B.- N!. LkcNS3201 (Oct. 1918'Cotrol Unit Term Well(Peripheal)
I SA3294 Ocal CNMbflk S N! >-12D Noupw BK N! Like S4LS373 (Cc%, 198 9D-LAIChu TwtztWell
I SA3295 3 by8 CSfta~ SPa. >120 No~ *-m BN Like S4LS 138 (Ocit.198 8'.Decoder TwinWell
j SA32r7 Octal B64 CMOSbrLlk SN. >. 12D No upact *. L Lkt 54LS74S (Oct. 1988)Tritriscever Twin Well
A HS8OSRM &-bit 0dO~dp SNIAiAR 93 35(svbiuJ 1 .4 18-M. Two pam an iemmolSA300X) Mutcro P EO(l0Vbmls NoqUpe (Mar, 1917)
1 HS8005MR a-bit COs/c)Sqp SNLRIAR 93 50(5Vmm] No upm *- NL Two pans ant idmnm;SA303) Nficm~ p7510Vbma] No p (Jun. 1913)
RA 80C86 16-bit 0 4 Os/ep MAR 40 3 6 x 10,2 10.000 Mi-n. Devlopmial Pau Se NichoisAESA N~cro P ESA Sa1.EMNS (flue 99 (Aug,
OcL 1987 ADoc 1988)
i HSIX-37ARH DMA Control- 0405 MAR -5917 9 SI 15~ .4 BNL Dynoric Too Modc 344 b:.sIar(80C86 Junione (eittap.) Uned (May& Dec. 199S'Peniphical) Isoaion
ESA T414 32-bi CMOSAulk DINM I S(RAM) 3 0.2 200RM *- Latchuiq (I1918)&lieeo P
ESA T414 32-bit 04OStop ff0 16K(RAM) 3 0.2 MOCAM *-k No lamu (191)Micro P
1 80386 32-bit i4OSAp~ INT _4000 - - 11-in. No)Ladwp at LET- 40Micro P ICHNOS m) (toned) (MuY, 1988)
IBM 80316 32-bit Oi4OSAip INT -3623 7 too BN0 3M LI.&uaPMicro P fIMOS IV
IN 90116 16-bit POC" MT -30000 0.4 510 e 3M!. (1918)Miao P
A 8095AM 8-big ?-MS w)4 -- 3, it 10'3 M-i-n. (1917)Micro P
0- IF!. A - Aercpoce. 131 - 131 Lepe Cinp.. 3M -Jab Hopho Uivuioo. ESA a Evaoom Spoo. Agey, mod MM - 3M (mammm. Val.
-LET-*LnaEimry Tianaa Come lawapplied. Waf&m*6Cmu Secti (yUpaaa/Ruaic) am pvui for 120-360 MaY Ki at nmal iniene hau, an LET - 37 VAm. No upe .1. ,do. w LET . 33.
-*BNtL - B*dmokhi'a National L~boryw~ Van do Chuff, Mwia - U.C. BD~a*h cycltl. Onoma Lommi do Phyaqu Nuclemin (cycim mw dluaim).
10
T"M I -SEU Dan CSM A 0405 Dvxm) 19V7 A I (Conmud)
EfecuvoLETOZI* Dow= ,ma cm sm
TMMMM Sin (ais Pf u n FeaLhjyOrs Do, FRWs Timalp Mfr. Dis (Mwhnafo) (1O-1 =s) * ~ Ranasa (Ton Dais)
i 4HCOO LOW. TDC D (5)I S4HCO2 LAW. HEM TIX .- *NL (5)I 54HCCA LOW p. TDC SNL~ (5)i 54HCOB LOW. Ho" TD( B NL (5)1 54HCI I LOp. Hlix TD(BL (5)1 54HC2D LOW. ICSCM -. BNL (5)1 54HC32 LOWp. 40 TD( -- NL m5I5 S4HC74 LOW. mcix TD1 L (5)
i 4HCIS LAWp. H TICBN (5)i 5HCS6 LOW. Hlix *.( - N) (5)
Some trends in the recent data are offered here. (1) Two 8-bit microprocessors-the SandiaSA3000 and its equivalent, the Harris HS8OC85RH-were tested and found to be hard.***However, 16-bit and 32-bit microprocessors were much softer. (2) The tested microprocessorperipherals were invariably harder than the parent microprocessor. (3) Parts operated at a higherbias were more resistant to soft errors. (4) None of the STM (France) and TI 54HCxxx logicdevice families could be made to latch up, even when tested at a slightly elevated temperature(600 C). The data here include a retest of the TI 54HC161 and 54HC165, both of which exhibitedlatchup in previous tests.2 The previous two parts and most of the present parts arecomplementary metal-oxide semiconductor (HCMOS) p-well/bulk devices, but some of the earlierdata were also for twin-well technology parts. (5) Our intuition that 54HCTxxx devices will behavesimilarly to 54HCxxx devices is supported by a very limited data set of the former devices. (6)Test data for the 54AC373 and 54ACT373 latches suggest that this technology is susceptible tolatchup. (7) Miscellaneous new data were taken for analog switches, bilateral switches, gatearrays, and programmable read-only memories (PROMS). (8) Several analog-to-digital (A/D)converters were tested to try to establish their LET thresholds. Anomalous device-to-device andtest-to-test disparities remain to be resolved.**** However, two bipolar digital-to-analogconverters (DACs) had a respectably high LET threshold of 15 MeV/mg/cm 2. (9) CMOS RAMscontinued to exhibit a wide range of SEU response. The Marconi MA6116 and HoneywellHC6167R 16K RAMs, using CMOS/silicon-oxide semiconductor (SOS) and feedback resistors,respectively, proved to be very hard. (10) NMOS technology, whether as high density dynamicrandom access memory (DRAM) or 4K RAMs, had a very low LET threshold. (11) Many newtests were made at higher temperatures-not usually indicated in the tables. When this was done,the parts tested at higher temperatures were always more susceptible to soft errors or latchup.
In this context, the term "hard" refers to a part that does not upset with 150 to 350 MeV Kr at nor-
mal incidence.
**** Inconsistencies in repeat test data for the ADCs are seen. JPL believes that special test techniquesmay be required to understand SEUs' effects on ADCs.
17
V. CONCLUSIONS
The new data presented here can be combined with data given in References 1 and 2 toprovide certain generalizations useful for protecting flight electronics from SEP. Hard technologiesand unacceptably soft technologies can be flagged. In some instances, specific tested parts can betaken as candidates for key microprocessors or memories. As always with radiation test data,specific test data for qualified flight parts are recommended for critical applications. Calculationsof accurate SEP rates will require the assistance of a computer code, a well-defined environment(in terms of flux vs LET), and a complete device characterization (cross section vs LET at theappropriate temperature.)
19
REFERENCES
1. D. K. Nichols, W E. Price, W A. Kolasinski, R. Koga, J. C. Pickel, J. T Blanford, and A. E.Waskiewicz, "Trends in Parts Susceptibility to Single Event Upset from Heavy Ions," IEEETrans. on Nuc. Sci., NS-32, No. 6, 4189 (Dec. 1985).
2. D. K. Nichols, L. S. Smith, W E. Price, R. Koga, and W A. Kolasinski. "Recent Trends in PartsSEU Susceptibility from Heavy Ions," IEEE Trans on Nuc. Sci., NS-34, No. 6, 1332 (Dec. 1987).
3. R. Koga, W, A. Kolasinski, J. V. Osborn, J. H. Elder, and R. Chitty, "SEU Test Techniques," IEEETrans. on Nuc. Sci., NS-35, No. 6, 1638 (Dec. 1988).
4. D. K. Nichols, J. R. Coss, L. S. Smith, B. Rax, M. Huebner, and K. Watson. "Full TemperatureSEU Characterization of Two Microprocessor Technologies," ibid, p. 1619 (Dec. 1988).
5. R. L. Harboe-Sorensen, L. Adams. and T K. Sanderson, 'A Summary of SEU Test Results UsingCalifornium-252," IEEE Trans. on Nuc. Sci., NS-35, No. 6, 1622 (Dec. 1988).
6. D. K. Nichols, M. A. Huebner, W E. Price, L. S. Smith, and J. R. Coss, JPL Publication 88-17,Heavy Ion Induced SEP Data for Semiconductor Devices from Engineering Testing (July 1988).
21
APPENDIXMANUFACTURER ABBREVIATIONS
ADI Analog Devices, Inc.
ALT Alpha Industries, Semiconductor Division
AMD Advanced Microdevices Corporation
CYP Cypress CoJrporation
EDI EDI Corporation
FSC Fairchild Corporation, Semiconductor Division
HAR Harris Corporation, Harris Semiconductor Division
HIT Hitachi Ltd.
HON Honeywell, Inc.
IDT Integrated Devices Technology, Inc.
INM INMOS Corporation
INT Intel Corporation
LED Lockheed Corporation
LSI LSI Logic Corporation
MED Marconi Electronic Devices
MIC Micron Technologies
MMI Monolithic Memories, Inc.
MNC Micro Networks
MTA Mattra Harris Semiconductor
NSC National Semiconductor Corporation
OWl Omni-Wave, Inc.
PFS Performance Semiconductor Corporation
SGN Signetics Corporation
SIL Siliconix, Inc.
SNL Sandia National Laboratories
SNY Sony Corporation
SRT Saratoga Semiconductor, Inc.
23
STM STM (France)
STX Supertex, Inc.
TIX Texas Instruments, Inc.
TRW TRW, Inc.
VTC VTC, Inc.
VTN Vectron Corporation
ZIL Zilog
24
LABORATORY OPERATIONS
The Aerospace Corporation functions as an "architect-engineer" for national securityprojects, specializing in advanced military space systems. Providing research support, thecorporation's Laboratory Operations conducts experimental and theoretical investigations thatfocus on the application of scientific and technical advances to such systems. Vital to the successof these investigations is the technical staff's wide-ranging expertise and its ability to stay currentwith new developments. This expertise is enhanced by a research program aimed at dealing withthe many problems associated with rapidly evolving space systems. Contributing their capabilitiesto the research effort are these individual laboratories:
Aerophysics Laboratory: Launch vehicle and reentry fluid mechanics, heat transferand flight dynamics; chemical and electric propulsion, propellant chemistry, chemicaldynamics, environmental chemistry, trace detection; spacecraft structural mechanics,contamination, thermal and structural control; high temperature thermomechanics, gaskinetics and radiation; cw and pulsed chemical and excimer laser development,including chemical kinetics, spectroscopy, optical resonators, beam control, atmos-pheric propagation, laser effects and countermeasures.
Chemistry and Physics Laboratory: Atmospheric chemical reactions, atmosphericoptics, light scattering, state-specific chemical reactions and radiative signatures ofmissile plumes, sensor out-of-field-of-view rejection, applied laser spectroscopy. laserchemistry, laser optoelectronics, solar cell physics, battery electrochemistry, spacevacuum and radiation effects on materials, lubrication and surface phenomena,thermionic emission, photosensitive materials and detectors, atomic frequency stand-ards, and environmental chemistry.
Electronics Research Laboratory: Microelectronics, solid-state device physics,compound semiconductors, radiation hardening; electro-optics, quantum electronics,solid-state lasers, optical propagation and communications; microwave semiconductordevices, microwave/millimeter wave measurements, diagnostics and radiometry, micro-wave/millimeter wave thermionic devices; atomic time and. frequency standards;antennas, rf systems, electromagnetic propagation phenomena, space communicationsystems.
Materials Sciences Laboratory: Development of new materials: metals, alloys,ceramics, polymers and their composites, and new forms of carbon; nondestructiveevaluation, component failure analysis and reliability; fracture mechanics and stresscorrosion; analysis and evaluation of materials at cryogenic and elevated temperaturesas well as in space and enemy-induced environments.
Space Sciences Laboratory: Magnetospheric, auroral and cosmic ray physics,wave-particle interactions, magnetospheric plasma waves; atmospheric and ionosphericphysics, density and composition of the upper atmosphere, remote sensing usingatmospheric radiation; solar physics, infrared astronomy, infrared signature analysis;effects of solar activity, magnetic storms and nuclear explosions on the earth'satmosphere, ionosphere and magnetosphere; effects of electromagnetic and particulateradiations on space systems; space instrumentation.
