Validation and Testing of Design Hardening for Single Event Effects Using the 8051 Microcontroller Abstract

With the dearth of dedicated radiation hardened foundries, new and novel techniques are being developed for hardening designs using non-dedicated foundry services. In this paper, we will discuss the implications of validating these methods for the single event effects (SEE) in the space environment. Topics include the types of tests that are required and the design coverage (i.e., design libraries: do they need validating for each application?). Finally, an 8051 microcontroller core from NASA Institute of Advanced Microelectronics (IAμE) CMOS Ultra Low Power Radiation Tolerant

(CULPRiT) design is evaluated for SEE mitigative techniques against two commercial 8051 devices.

Index Terms

Single Event Effects, Hardened-By-Design, microcontroller, radiation effects. I. INTRODUCTION

NASA constantly strives to provide the best capture of science while operating in a space radiation environment using a minimum of resources [1,2]. With a relatively limited selection of radiation-hardened microelectronic devices that are often two or more generations of performance behind commercial state-ofthe-art technologies, NASA’s performance of this task is quite challenging. One method of alleviating this is by the use of commercial foundry alternatives with no or minimally invasive design techniques for hardening. This is often called hardened-by-design (HBD).Building custom-type HBD devices using design libraries and automated design tools may provide NASA the solution it needs to meet stringent science performance specifications in a timely, cost-effective, and reliable manner.

However, one question still exists: traditional radiation-hardened devices have lot and/or wafer radiation qualification tests performed; what types of tests are required for HBD validation?

II. TESTING HBD DEVICES CONSIDERATIONS

Test methodologies in the United States exist to qualify individual devices through standards and organizations such as ASTM, JEDEC, and MIL-STD- 883. Typically, TID (Co-60) and SEE (heavy ion and/or proton) are required for device validation. So what is unique to HBD devices?

As opposed to a “regular” commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) device or application specific integrated circuit (ASIC) where no hardening has been performed, one needs to determine how validated is the design library as opposed to determining the device hardness. That is, by using test chips, can we “qualify” a future device using the same library?

Consider if Vendor A has designed a new HBD library portable to foundries B and C.

A test chip is designed, tested, and deemed acceptable. Nine months later a NASA flight project enters the mix by designing a new device using Vendor A’s library. Does this device require complete radiation qualification testing? To answer this, other