This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

ADC128S102: Additional information on resistance to single event effects

Part Number: ADC128S102

Dear TI,

We are planning to use this component (ADC128S102WGRQV) in one of our designs for space application. We previously received from you the radiation reports with references SNAA150 and SNA203. In these reports I could not find back any information on MBU, SET or SEFI.

  1. Are these effects relevant for this component?
  2. If so, do you have any more data on this that would allow me to calculate the associated event rates?
  3. Do you have any info on the resistance of this component to SEDR?

Best regards,

Pieter-Jan

  • Hi Pieter-Jan,

    To review: The ADC128S102WGRQV is a micro power ADC with an 8 channel input MUX, but a single channel serial output.

    Multi bit upsets (MBU) and single event transients (SET) are not really applicable for a product like this. They may occur internally but this is not something the application would see. The only single event effects that impact the application are upsets (SEU) of the serialized output resulting in a code error for a conversion. Internal SETs are likely, but MBUs are less likely as this is a larger geometry CMOS process. In either case, the only impact would be that they could possibly manifest in an SEU.

    The part is single event functional interrupt (SEFI) immune. We do not come right out and make that conclusion in the report. The SEFI immunity can be seen in that when tested with a full scale input, there was always an output code on every conversion cycle, indicating that the part never powered down or changed input channels.

    Based on the process and the product type (low power mixed signal part) we would not expect single event dielectric rupture (SEDR) and we saw no evidence of it during our testing. No units were damaged or had the performance compromised during heavy ion testing.

    One update to the SEE report: we reported seeing an anomaly at TAMU that we did not see when testing LBNL where it appeared some events lasted several cycles. At LBNL all events detected were only one cycle. We tried to reproduce that anomaly with pulsed laser testing. With pulsed laser testing all events were only one cycle long as with the testing at LBNL.

    If this answers your questions, please check the verified answer box, or let me know if you have any other questions.
  • Dear Kirby,

    From your answer I conclude that the component is SEFI immune as well and that effects of SEDR, SET and MBU are, in a way, included in the SEU test (either due to lack of destructive events or that the end result of the effect is counted as an SEU).

    Thank you for the fast answer and the clear argumentation.

    Pieter-Jan