Optimum laboratory radiation source for hardness assurance testing
Optimum laboratory radiation source for hardness assurance testing
复制标题
用于硬度保证测试的最佳实验室辐射源
DOI：
10.1109/23.983188
复制
发表时间：
2001
影响因子：
1.8
通讯作者：
F. Sexton
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Schwank;M. Shaneyfelt;P. Paillet;D. Beutler;V. Ferlet;B. Draper;R. A. Loemaker;P. Dodd;F. Sexton
使用X射线、Co-60伽马和质子辐射源辐照绝缘体上硅（SOI）和体硅晶体管。Co-60伽马辐照在SOI掩埋氧化物和寄生场氧化物中产生比X射线或质子辐照更大的辐射诱导阈值电压偏移（通过两倍）。对于检查的所有设备，由X射线照射产生的辐射诱导的阈值电压漂移是相等的，在实验的不确定性，由质子照射产生的辐射诱导的阈值电压漂移。不同辐射源的阈值电压偏移的差异归因于阻止本领的差异，从而导致电荷产率的差异。结果表明，对于模拟富含质子的空间环境，X射线实验室辐射源比Co-60伽马辐射源更适合于硬度保证测试。使用Co-60伽马源进行硬度保证测试将导致对器械失效水平的更保守估计。因此，我们的研究结果并不排除使用钴-60伽马辐射源进行富质子环境的硬度保证测试。对于富含电子的空间环境，Co-60伽马辐射源可能更适合于硬度保证测试。
Silicon-on-insulator (SOI) and bulk-silicon transistors were irradiated using X-ray, Co-60 gamma, and proton radiation sources. Co-60 gamma irradiation generates larger radiation-induced threshold voltage shifts (by a factor of two) in SOI buried oxides and in parasitic field oxides under low-field conditions than X-ray or proton irradiation. For all devices examined, the radiation-induced threshold voltage shifts generated by X-ray irradiation were equal to, within experimental uncertainty, the radiation-induced threshold voltage shifts generated by proton irradiation. The differences in threshold voltage shifts for the different radiation sources are attributed to differences in stopping power and consequently charge yield. The results suggest that for simulating proton-rich space environments, X-ray laboratory radiation sources are better suited for hardness assurance testing than Co-60 gamma radiation sources. Using Co-60 gamma sources for hardness assurance testing will result in more conservative estimates of device failure levels. Thus, our results do not preclude the use of Co-60 gamma radiation sources for hardness assurance testing for proton-rich environments. For electron-rich space environments, Co-60 gamma radiation sources may be better suited for hardness assurance testing.