Single-event effect testing of the PNI RM3100 magnetometer  for space applications

Moldwin, Mark B.; Wilcox, Edward; Zesta, Eftyhia; Bonalsky, Todd M.

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-11-219-2022

Articles | Volume 11, issue 1

https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-11-219-2022

© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-11-219-2022

© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 11, issue 1

Research article

|

22 Jun 2022

Research article |

| 22 Jun 2022

Single-event effect testing of the PNI RM3100 magnetometer for space applications

Mark B. Moldwin, Edward Wilcox, Eftyhia Zesta, and Todd M. Bonalsky

Download

Final revised paper (published on 22 Jun 2022)
Preprint (discussion started on 22 Mar 2022)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

RC1:
'Comment on gi-2022-5', Anonymous Referee #1, 31 Mar 2022

In "Single Event Effect Testing of the PNI RM3100 Magnetometer for Space Applications", by Mark Moldwin and others, the authors present results of radiation testing of the PNI RM3100 magnetometer sensor, taken to destruction, looking for evidence of single event effects. They conclude that "the PNI RM3100 is appropriate for use on missions in a variety of space environments (LEO polar, MEO, HEO, GEO, and deep space)."

The paper is concise, and very well written, addressing a range of single event failure modes, all presented in suitable contexts.

As space science evolves towards increasing use of small, and by inference lower cost scientific spacecraft, there is a clear need for the considered uses of COTS components. This paper contributes in a significant way towards those ends.

This reader has only one question, not really a comment of the paper: Going forward is there a middle ground for such testing of the PNI RM3100, that is not destructive, but could still be beneficial in increasing the space-worthiness/reliability of this device?

This reader recommends publishing as is.

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-2022-5-RC1
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Mark Moldwin, 06 Apr 2022
  
  Referee Question: "Going forward is there a middle ground for such testing of the PNI RM3100, that is not destructive, but could still be beneficial in increasing the space-worthiness/reliability of this device?"
  The standard practice and guidance is that “Microcircuits under test must be delidded [decapsulated].” This is to ensure knowledge of the LET through the circuitry as the cover of the IC could degrade the energy of the beam before reaching the circuitry.
  
  JEDEC, "Test procedure for the management of single-event effects in semiconductor devices from heavy ion irradiation," JESD57A, Nov 2017
  
  https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4638609
  
  "The experimenter should know within reasonable accuracy the LET through the device sensitive volume. The test facility typically reports the initial LET and surface LET as the ion exits the source. However, the experimenter should take care to understand beam degradation through air and other mediums before the sensitive volume. Overburden layers can be significant in some high-density modern ICs. Also, some device types have deep structures that require a long ion range to penetrate the sensitive volume, in order to trigger some destructive effects. So, it is always beneficial to have information on the device dimensions, or be conservative in the beam energy and ion range."
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-2022-5-AC1
RC2:
'Comment on gi-2022-5', David Miles, 05 Apr 2022

The authors present the results of single event testing of the COTS PNI RM3100 magnetometer as a significant step towards the qualification of the device for future space missions. The tested devices did not experience any destructive events and experienced only rare functional interrupts that could be recovered by power cycling.

The manuscript is concise, well written, and generally compelling. I suggest the authors consider two minor revisions listed below; however, the manuscript is suitable for publication in Geoscientific Instrumentation, Methods and Data Systems.

1) The authors note that single event functional interrupts (SEFIs) were observed but rare. Could you quantify how frequently these occur?

2) The authors note, quite reasonably, that the magnetic readings inside the cyclotron facility are inherently noise and unlikely to be meaningful. Was any attempt made to assess if there was any residual damage from the SEFI events from the testing? For example, did the two tested units perform within manufacturer specifications after testing?

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-2022-5-RC2
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Mark Moldwin, 02 Jun 2022
  
  Thanks for the careful reading and review.
  1) The authors note that single event functional interrupts (SEFIs) were observed but rare. Could you quantify how frequently these occur?
  Only very limited SEFI (single-event functional interrupt) testing was done by operating the part in a continuous measurement mode and counting fluence-to-failure, where failure would be a sudden offset in reading, a frozen axis, change of scale, or lack of communications. This test visit did not have the time and the events were not recorded to investigate the small number of events or their cause (likely upset bits in control registers), but the number observed were very small.
  
  2) The authors note, quite reasonably, that the magnetic readings inside the cyclotron facility are inherently noise and unlikely to be meaningful. Was any attempt made to assess if there was any residual damage from the SEFI events from the testing? For example, did the two tested units perform within manufacturer specifications after testing?
  No performance testing was done on the chips after their decapsulation, only functional testing prior, during and after the beam SEE testing.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-2022-5-AC2

Peer review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision | EF: Editorial file upload

AR by Mark Moldwin on behalf of the Authors (02 Jun 2022) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (05 Jun 2022) by Valery Korepanov

AR by Mark Moldwin on behalf of the Authors (07 Jun 2022)

Short summary

The commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) PNI RM3100 magnetometer was tested for single-event latchup (SEL) at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory's heavy-ion beam and did not experience any single-event effects at a linear energy transfer >75 MeV cm² mg⁻¹. Coupled with previous total ionizing dose (TID) testing at the University of Michigan and NASA Goddard Space Flight Center that showed no degradation in performance up to 150 kRad(SI), the COTS PNI RM3100 is extremely radiation tolerant.