1. SEE Scaling Effects Lloyd Massengill 10 May 2005

2. Institute for Space and Defense ElectronicsVanderbilt Engineering MURI 05 Kickoff 10 May 2005 2 Hierarchical Multi-Scale Analysis of Radiation Effects Materials Device Structure Device Simulation Circuit Response IC Design Energy Deposition Defect Models

3. Institute for Space and Defense ElectronicsVanderbilt Engineering MURI 05 Kickoff 10 May 2005 3 Scaling and SEUs “Unconventional” SEE Mechanisms in Technology Nodes Below 100nm: l Charge Sharing Distributed effects l Secondary (nuclear) Reactions Probabilistic effects l Track Size as Large as the Critical Region Spatial effects l Circuit Speed on the order of Collection Dynamics Temporal effects

4. Institute for Space and Defense ElectronicsVanderbilt Engineering MURI 05 Kickoff 10 May 2005 4 Scaling and SEUs “Unconventional” SEE Mechanisms in Technology Nodes Below 100nm: l Charge Sharing Distributed effects l Secondary (nuclear) Reactions Probabilistic effects l Track Size as Large as the Critical Region Spatial effects l Circuit Speed on the order of Collection Dynamics Temporal effects

5. Institute for Space and Defense ElectronicsVanderbilt Engineering MURI 05 Kickoff 10 May 2005 5 Charge Sharing * Issue: At the 250nm CMOS technology node, we have observed two “unusual” effects l Heavy Ion – Very low LETth l Laser (  2 ) – N-Well Edge NFETs PFETs * McMorrow et al, ”Single-Event Upset in Flip-Chip SRAM Induced by Through- Wafer, Two-Photon Absorption”, accepted to the 2005 NSREC Warren et al., “The Contribution of Nuclear Reactions to Single Event Upset Cross-Section Measurements in a High-Density SEU Hardened SRAM Technology”, accepted to the 2005 NSREC

6. Institute for Space and Defense ElectronicsVanderbilt Engineering MURI 05 Kickoff 10 May 2005 6 Charge Sharing Background * Distributed-storage hardened SRAM cell: l “Single Node” events cannot produce an upset l Charge collection required at nodes on both legs l Event sequence Sufficient charge must be collected on one leg to float the opposite leg The floating leg must then collected enough charge to lose its state HL * Warren et al., “The Contribution of Nuclear Reactions to Single Event Upset Cross-Section Measurements in a High-Density SEU Hardened SRAM Technology”, accepted to the 2005 NSREC

7. Institute for Space and Defense ElectronicsVanderbilt Engineering MURI 05 Kickoff 10 May 2005 7 Charge Sharing Simulations * l Mixed-mode simulations (3-D TCAD + compact model) useful for efficiency l We constructed calibrated base structure for SEE mapping l VAMPIRE simulations: 4G Opteron nodes 550,000 elements, 1.5 wks per TCAD SPICE * Olson et al, “Simultaneous SE Charge Sharing and Parasitic Bipolar Conduction in a Highly-Scaled SRAM Design,“ accepted to NSREC 2005

8. Institute for Space and Defense ElectronicsVanderbilt Engineering MURI 05 Kickoff 10 May 2005 8 Charge Sharing Preliminary Findings * l Functionally disjoint, but physically adjacent nodes share charge l In addition, parasitic conduction affects PFET of opposite rail HL M7 M8 M9 M10 M2 M0 M4 M5 * Olson et al, “Enhanced Single-Event Charge Collection in Submicron CMOS Due to a Diffusion-Triggered Parasitic LPNP” presented at HEART 05

9. Institute for Space and Defense ElectronicsVanderbilt Engineering MURI 05 Kickoff 10 May 2005 9 Scaling and SEUs “Unconventional” SEE Mechanisms in Technology Nodes Below 100nm: l Charge Sharing Distributed effects l Secondary (nuclear) Reactions Probabilistic effects l Track Size as Large as the Critical Region Spatial effects l Circuit Speed on the order of Collection Dynamics Temporal effects

10. Institute for Space and Defense ElectronicsVanderbilt Engineering MURI 05 Kickoff 10 May 2005 10 Secondary (Nuclear) Effects Issue: l Unable to explain upsets at very low LET in TCAD l Upset cross section too small to be intra-cell variation Ultra Low  (follow-on at BNL) Approximate Ion Track Area (intra-cell Limit) TCAD Prediction TCAD with average LET ion does not explain low LET upsets

11. Institute for Space and Defense ElectronicsVanderbilt Engineering MURI 05 Kickoff 10 May 2005 11 Secondary (Nuclear) Effects Hypotheses l Nuclear reaction events can increase the effective LET to +/- 8x the incident LET for this simulation l In scaled technologies, the low probability of occurrence offset by: - high number of sensitive volumes (4 Mbit SRAM) - elimination of lower-LET sensitivity via hardening 523 MeV Neon LET = 1.79 MeV/mg/cm 2

12. Institute for Space and Defense ElectronicsVanderbilt Engineering MURI 05 Kickoff 10 May 2005 12 Secondary (Nuclear) Effects Preliminary Analysis * MRED used for preliminary investigation of potential event sources: l Conceptually simple relative energy deposition experiment l 1x10 8 Monte-Carlo type simulations l Reactions in the interconnect materials result in charge deposition from secondary species in the sensitive volume Oxide OnlyOxide and Metallization W * Warren et al., “The Contribution of Nuclear Reactions to Single Event Upset Cross-Section Measurements in a High-Density SEU Hardened SRAM Technology” accepted to the 2005 NSREC

13. Institute for Space and Defense ElectronicsVanderbilt Engineering MURI 05 Kickoff 10 May 2005 13 Secondary (Nuclear) Effects Preliminary MRED Results l Nuclear Reactions can produce products greater than 8x in energy deposition than the primary LET l Effect is exacerbated with inter-connect materials (tungsten, aluminum, etc…) Primary LET * Nuclear events only (in 1x10 8 simulations ) High Energy Events

14. Institute for Space and Defense ElectronicsVanderbilt Engineering MURI 05 Kickoff 10 May 2005 14 Secondary (Nuclear) Effects On-Going Work l Integration of multiple tools Layout TCAD modules MRED (nuclear) l Accurate spatial relationship between sensitive regions and materials l Interconnect material affects the probability of extreme value events l Events must occur near the sensitive region to upset the cell l A step closer to developing a predictive tool

15. Institute for Space and Defense ElectronicsVanderbilt Engineering MURI 05 Kickoff 10 May 2005 15 Scaling and SEUs “Unconventional” SEE Mechanisms in Technology Nodes Below 100nm: l Charge Sharing Distributed effects l Secondary (nuclear) Reactions Probabilistic effects l Track Size as Large as the Critical Region Spatial effects l Circuit Speed on the order of Collection Dynamics Temporal effects

16. Institute for Space and Defense ElectronicsVanderbilt Engineering MURI 05 Kickoff 10 May 2005 16 Track Size Issue: l Device dimensions becoming smaller than Commonly assumed radial dimensions for SE charge generation tracks Minority carrier diffusion lengths (even in Drain/Source regions) l Device topology has implications for charge deposition (1) M. L. Alles, et. al., “Considerations for Single Event Effects in Non-Planar Multi-Gate SOI FETs”, submitted for presentation at the 2005 IEEE International SOI Conference. (2) R. Chau et. al., “Advanced Depleted-Substrate Transistors: Single-Gate, Double-Gate, Tri-Gate”, 2002 International Conference on Solid State Devices and Materials (SSDM 2002), Nagoya, Japan. (1) (2)

17. Institute for Space and Defense ElectronicsVanderbilt Engineering MURI 05 Kickoff 10 May 2005 17 Track Size Preliminary Simulations: l Simulation of an ion hit using 3D TCAD (Alpha Particle, LET=2.4 MeV/mg-cm 2 ) Normal incidence Three locations (Body, Drain, Source) l Response shows much longer time profile vs. direct collection; Potential profile indicates bipolar action Hit to Channel M. L. Alles, et. al., “Considerations for Single Event Effects in Non-Planar Multi-Gate SOI FETs”, submitted for presentation at the 2005 IEEE International SOI Conference. Simulated Tri-gate device based on: J Choi et. al., IEDM Technical Digest, 647 (2004).

18. Institute for Space and Defense ElectronicsVanderbilt Engineering MURI 05 Kickoff 10 May 2005 18 Track Size Preliminary Findings: l Hits to Drain (and Source) can lead to notable charge collection Implication for sensitive area Drain and source contribution found to depend on contact placement and size l Energy deposition process in such small devices unclear Convention LET concept may break down We will study this with detailed simulations (MRED) Accurate TCAD modeling (FLOODS) M. L. Alles, et. al., “Considerations for Single Event Effects in Non-Planar Multi-Gate SOI FETs”, submitted for presentation at the 2005 IEEE International SOI Conference.

19. Institute for Space and Defense ElectronicsVanderbilt Engineering MURI 05 Kickoff 10 May 2005 19 Scaling and SEUs “Unconventional” SEE Mechanisms in Technology Nodes Below 100nm: l Charge Sharing Distributed effects l Secondary (nuclear) Reactions Probabilistic effects l Track Size as Large as the Critical Region Spatial effects l Circuit Speed on the order of Collection Dynamics Temporal effects

20. Institute for Space and Defense ElectronicsVanderbilt Engineering MURI 05 Kickoff 10 May 2005 20 Circuit Speed Issue: l GHz circuitry have response dynamics on the same order as charge collection transient profiles l In these cases, SE transients are indistinguishable from legitimate signals l Some hardening techniques are ineffective l Dynamic modeling required l Detailed SE charge collection profiles are needed

21. Institute for Space and Defense ElectronicsVanderbilt Engineering MURI 05 Kickoff 10 May 2005 21 Conclusions An understanding of SEE in emerging, scaled technologies (SiGe, ultra-small CMOS and 3-d SOI) constructed with novel materials systems (strained Si, alternative dielectrics, new metallizations) requires : l Improved physical models for ion interaction with materials other than Si l Detailed SE track structure models l Improved understanding of nuclear reaction effects l Improved device physics for mixed-mode modeling l Improved understanding of parasitic charge collection