Search

The Variable Depth Bragg Peak method has been investigated for single event latchup testing by comparing latchup cross sections for heavy ions at low and high energies and by pulse height analysis. Results show that, unlike for an SOI device previously tested, where the charge collection depth is very small (70 nm), the comparison is not straightforward for latchup because of the large charge collection volumes involved. The variation in LET with depth for lower-energy ions greatly affects the comparison, but, if a charge collection depth of 50~\mu\m is assumed and the LET is averaged over that distance, the comparison improves significantly. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Pulsed laser test results for NAND flash memories are compared with broad beam heavy ion results and also with heavy ion results obtained with the collimated Milli-Beam™ source. The pulsed laser measurements reported here, with smaller focused spot sizes and as a function of the incident pulse energy, serve to reconcile the previously reported inconsistencies. The Milli-Beam™ and pulsed laser results appear to be consistent, and differences from the broad beam heavy ion results can be explained. The results suggest that the high current SEFIs reported by us and others arise from multiple ion (or multiple photon) interactions, and are not associated with single ion strikes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The concept of charge efficacy is introduced as a measure of the effectiveness of incident charge for producing single-event upsets. Efficacy is a measure of the single-event upset (SEU) sensitivity within a cell. It is illustrated how the efficacy curve can be determined from standard heavy-ion or pulsed laser SEU crosssection data, and discussed how it can be calculated from combined charge collection and circuit analysis. Upset rates can be determined using the figure of merit approach, and values determined from the laser cross-sections or from the mixed-mode simulations. The standard integral rectangular parallel-piped (IRPP) method for upset rate calculation is re-examined assuming that the probability of upset depends on the location of the hit on the surface. It is concluded that it is unnecessary to reformulate the IRPP approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]