A reevaluation of worst-case postirradiation response for hardened mos transistors

IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science

Volumn 34, Issue 6, 1987, Pages 1178-1183

  Fleetwood, D M ^a   Dressendorfer, P V ^a   Turpin, D C ^a  

^a SANDIA NATIONAL LABORATORIES   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0041302432     PISSN: 00189499     EISSN: 15581578     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1109/TNS.1987.4337449     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Field oxide parasitic leakage can be equal to, or greater than, that of gate oxide transistors for many (especially commercial) technologies. In this paper we focus on the gate-oxide response, keeping in mind that field oxides require separate attention (see, for example, H. E. Boesch, Jr. and F. B. McLean, IEEE Trans. Nuc. Sci. NS-32, 3940 (1985); and R. Pease, D. Emily, and H. E. Boesch, Jr. Ibid., 3946.)
2. H. H. Sander and B. L. Gregory, IEEE Trans. Nuc. Sci. NS-22, 2157 (1975).
3. H. E. Boesch, Jr. and J. M. McGarrity, IEEE Trans. Nuc. Sci. NS-23, 1520 (1976).
4. C. M. Dozier and D. B. Brown, IEEE Trans. Nuc. Sci. NS-28, 4137 (1981).
5. P. V. Dressendorfer, J. M. Soden, J. J. Harrington, and T. V. Nordstrom, IEEE Trans. Nuc. Sci. NS-28, 4281 (1981).
6. P. M. Lenahan and P. V. Dressendorfer, Appl. Phys. Lett. 41, 542 (1982).
7. P. S. Winokur, K. G. Kerris, and L. Harper, IEEE Trans. Nuc. Sci. NS-30, 4326 (1983).
8. T. R. Oldham and J. M. McGarrity, IEEE Trans. Nuc. Sci. NS-30, 4377 (1983).
9. J. R. Schwank, P. S. Winokur, P. J. McWhorter, F. W. Sexton, P. V. Dressendorfer, and D. C. Turpin, IEEE Trans. Nuc. Sci. NS-31, 1434 (1984).
10. T. Stanley, D. Neamen, P. Dressendorfer, J. Schwank, P. Winokur, M. Ackermann, K. Jungling, C. Hawkins, and W. Grannemann, IEEE Trans. Nuc. Sci. NS-32, 3982 (1985).
11. D. M. Fleetwood, P. S. Winokur, R. W. Beegle, P. V. Dressendorfer, and B. L. Draper, IEEE Trans. Nuc. Sci. NS-32, 4369 (1985).
12. H. E. Boesch, Jr., F. B. McLean, J. M. Benedetto, J. M. McGarrity, IEEE Trans. Nuc. Sci. NS-33, 1191 (1986). NS-33.
13. P. S. Winokur, F. W. Sexton, J. R. Schwank, D. M. Fleetwood, P. V. Dressendorfer, T. F. Wrobel, and D. C. Turpin, IEEE Trans. Nuc. Sci. NS-33, 1343 (1986)
14. P. S. Winokur, F. W. Sexton, G. L. Hash, and D. C. Turpin, “Total-Dose Failure Mechanisms of Integrated Circuits in Laboratory and Space Environments,” this issue.
15. K. Aubuchon, IEEE Trans. Nuc.Sci. NS-18, 117 (1971)
16. J. R. Srour, O. L. Curtis, Jr., and K. Y. Chiu, NS-21, 73 (1974);
17. G. F. Derbenwick and B. L. Gregory, NS-22, 2151 (1975).
18. P. S. Winokur, E. B. Errett, D. M. Fleetwood, P. V. Dressendorfer, and D. C. Turpin, IEEE Trans. Nuc. Sci. NS-32, 3954 (1985).
19. A. H. Johnston, IEEE Trans. Nuc. Sci. NS-31, 1427 (1984).
20. H. E. Boesch, Jr., IEEE Trans. Nuc. Sci. NS-33, 1337 (1986).
21. For devices in other technologies, or these devices at higher doses, different radiation bias may lead to worst-case response. Still, positive anneal bias should produce the greatest rebound.
22. T.V. Nordstrom, F. W. Sexton, and R. W. Light, Proc. 5th IEEE Custom Integ. Ckt. Conf. (May 1983), p. 43.
23. In this study, source and drain biases were chosen to match MOS transistor response under typical digital logic conditions (Ref. 5). Devices irradiated with the source and drain tied to the gate (positive bias) show greater Vth shifts during irradiation (Ref. 5) than for the case discussed in the text (source and drain grounded), but their postirradiation response is similar to that of devices irradiated with 0 V gate bias, and annealed with positive bias (at least at doses of system interest). The value of the drain voltage during irradiation was found not to affect the response of transistors irradiated with 0 V on the gate (Ref. 5).
24. P. S. Winokur, J. R. Schwank, P. J. McWhorter, P. V. Dressendorfer, and D. C. Turpin, IEEE Trans. Nuc. Sci. NS-31, 1453 (1984); P. J. McWhorter and P. S. Winokur, Appl. Phys. Lett. 48, 133 (1986).
25. This dependence of ΔVth on dose has been observed previously (e.g. Refs. 5, 11), but the implications of this point are not generally appreciated, as discussed in Section IV.
26. See, for example, F. W. Sexton and J. R. Schwank, IEEE Trans. Nuc. Sci. NS-32, 3975 (1985).
27. The differences in response among the devices of Fig. 3 are mainly due to differences in trapped-hole hole annealing rates between the 0 V and 6 V irradiation cases. Similar interface-state buildup is observed after anneal in all cases. However, the data of Figs. 2a and 2b are more likely to be applicable in terms of mechanisms of trapped-hole and interface-state buildup and annealing for dose and damage levels of system interest (i.e. where the parts will work!).
28. T. A. Oldham, A. J. Lelis, and F. B. McLean, IEEE Trans. Nuc. Sci. NS-33, 1203 (1986).
29. D. M. Fleetwood and P. V. Dressendorfer, “The Effect of Elevated Temperature on Irradiated Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor (MOS) Devices,” accepted for publication in the Proceedings of the Fourth Symposium on Space Nuclear Power Systems, edited by M. S. El-Genk and M. D. Hoover (Institute for Space Nuclear Power Studies, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, 1987), held in Albuquerque, NM, January 1987.
30. S. K. Lai, J. Appl. Phys. 54, 2540 (1983).
31. S. M. Sze, Physics of Semiconductor Devices (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1981), p. 397.
32. C. M. Dozier and D. B. Brown, IEEE Trans. Nuc. Sci. NS-27, 1694 (1980).
33. N. S. Saks, M. G. Ancona, and J. A. Modolo, IEEE Trans. Nuc. Sci. NS-31, 1249 (1984);
34. NS-33, 1185 (1986)
35. J. M. Benedetto, H. E. Boesch, Jr., F. B. McLean, and J. P. Mize, NS-32, 3916 (1985).
36. See, for example, D. L. Griscom, J. Appl. Phys. 58, 2524 (1985), and references therein.
37. The suggestion that ΔVit immediately after irradiation could be used to accurately predict device rebound, made by Schwank and co-workers in Ref. 9, was based on irradiations to very large total damage levels. Some buildup of ΔVit postirradiation is reported in Ref. 9. However, since those devices exhibited much larger values of ΔVit, an increase of 0.5 V (seen in Ref. 9) did not amount to a significant fractional increase in ΔVit for the devices they studied. Unless provision is made in design to enable circuits to function with the enormous rebound voltages noted in Ref. 9, though, the behavior at damage levels investigated here are more likely to be relevant to system applications.
38. D. M. Fleetwood and P. V. Dressendorfer, “A Simple Method to Identify Radiation and Annealing Biases that Lead to Worst-Case MOS Static RAM Postirradiation Response,” this issue.