Searching \ for '[EE] few question regarding to embedded space elec' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=few+question+regarding
Search entire site for: 'few question regarding to embedded space elec'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[EE] few question regarding to embedded space elec'
2007\04\16@203626 by Gökhan SEVER

picon face
Hi,

Just wondering,

How do micro machines function in that harsh environment?

Even Jupiter has very strong magnetic field Voyager I and II passed beyond
of it many years ago.
As much as I recall, they are still operating further the solar system at
minus 200C degrees.

What made that possible? (Special shielding?, unique manufacturing
technique?, rare pcb designs?)

Besides, I remember that one or two year ago a PIC18F family MCU was used in
a satellite, any news about the

satellite and the MCU?

Thanks,

Gökhan SEVER.

PS: In fact, I should have asked these questions to a NASA specialist, but I
don't know anybody from the NASA. Maybe we have someone here :)

2007\04\16@210155 by Gökhan SEVER

picon face
Just after posting this e-mail I have seen an ad in EETimes magazine that is
very closely related the subject:

"Our circuits function consistently in vehicles that operate in extreme
temperatures (referring the Cassini space vehicle)

Zero defects - NASA demands it so do you. Maxim's products meet this
challenge. After traveling through outer space, Maxim's high speed ADC
operates without fail in the rugged atmosphere of Saturn."


On 4/16/07, Gökhan SEVER <spam_OUTgstr2005TakeThisOuTspamgmail.com> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

> I don't know anybody from the NASA. Maybe we have someone here :)

2007\04\16@214420 by Jesse Lackey

flavicon
face
Did they mention that the Cassini launch was delayed because Maxim had a
12-week lead time on that ADC and none in stock?

J









(p.s. I'm kidding.)

Gökhan SEVER wrote:
{Quote hidden}

2007\04\17@043437 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
> Even Jupiter has very strong magnetic field Voyager I and II passed beyond
> of it many years ago.
> As much as I recall, they are still operating further the solar system at
> minus 200C degrees.
>
> What made that possible? (Special shielding?, unique manufacturing
> technique?, rare pcb designs?)

Each instrument on the spacecraft has a survival heater to keep it
within -50 to +25C while powered off. When we do our temperature cycle
testing we are required to do a power on at the two operating temperature
extremes. The non-operating survival temperature is often a further 10-15C
outside the operating extremes.

The instrument itself will often have enough heat dissipation to keep within
the operating temperature limits without any help from other heaters. In any
cases it is necessary to have active cooling, e.g. for sensors in cameras.
Although the space environment is "cold" this does not keep the sensors
cold, so there tend to be two operational temperatures used, 70k (liquid
nitrogen) or <4k (liquid helium) depending on the sensor type and what the
sensor is being used for.

> Besides, I remember that one or two year ago a PIC18F family MCU was used
> in a satellite, any news about the

That was in a Russian space suit that was launched from the space station.
The batteries in it powering the electronics lasted only about 3-4 days. I
doubt the PIC would have lasted much longer as I believe there was no
shielding from the low earth orbit radiation, and the PIC was not tested for
radiation resistance AIUI.

Typically satellites in low earth orbit require parts that are radiation
resistant to 100k or 300k rads, depending on the exact orbit, instrument
use, and lifetime requirements. COTS parts can often be used, but this
typically requires giving at least one other part from the same production
batch a radiation dosage test, and may also require a shield to be glued to
the part that is flown. Such a shield is generally 1mm tantalum glued to the
top of the chip, and another piece glued to the underside of the PCB. We
always do this when fitting EPROMS in processor cards.

The aluminium case of the instrument also aids the shielding, and in some
cases may provide enough shielding dependant on the position of the chip
inside the instrument, and the orientation of the instrument on the
spacecraft.

Interestingly the instrument I am currently working on will be taking its
own Fe55 radiation source to the moon to calibrate its own sensors. Fe55 is
a low energy radiation source which happens to work well for this purpose on
this instrument. Because the instrument will be operating outside the low
earth orbit radiation fields, we will be using a number of COTS parts. One
PCB being supplied by another organisation, for our instrument, will be
using commercial ICs throughout, and I don't think there is any special
shielding on any of them.

2007\04\17@052120 by Vasile Surducan

face picon face
On 4/17/07, Alan B. Pearce <.....A.B.PearceKILLspamspam@spam@rl.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> > Besides, I remember that one or two year ago a PIC18F family MCU was used
> > in a satellite, any news about the
>
> That was in a Russian space suit that was launched from the space station.
> The batteries in it powering the electronics lasted only about 3-4 days.

Unbelievable. AFIK the batteries providing water, current and oxigen
on the international space station are based on russian technology...
Why should use different batteries that ones proven to work ?

2007\04\17@063209 by Tamas Rudnai

face picon face
...and you do not want to know what you are drinking when you are up there
<grin>

I remember when Nasa was trying to figure out how to use pen without
gravity, it took them several month and lots of money to finish that project
- Russian used pencil :-)

Tamas


On 4/17/07, Vasile Surducan <piclist9spamKILLspamgmail.com> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

> -

2007\04\17@064706 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>I remember when Nasa was trying to figure out how to use pen
>without gravity, it took them several month and lots of money
>to finish that project - Russian used pencil :-)

I am not sure that this is not an "urban myth". Would like some firm
information to confirm it either way.

2007\04\17@070824 by Tamas Rudnai

face picon face
Well, I've just search over net for it and it seems that it's just a legend,
funny but not true.

http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.asp

Tamas


On 4/17/07, Alan B. Pearce <EraseMEA.B.Pearcespam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTrl.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> >I remember when Nasa was trying to figure out how to use pen
> >without gravity, it took them several month and lots of money
> >to finish that project - Russian used pencil :-)
>
> I am not sure that this is not an "urban myth". Would like some firm
> information to confirm it either way.
>
> -

2007\04\17@085223 by Walter Banks

picon face
A piece of trivia the Voyager space craft used the RCA 1802. It was quite radiation resistant because of the rather large track sizes on the silicon. Radiation would ionize a local part of the processor generally without enough charge to change the logic
state. The 1802 was laid out on mylar like an old time PC board and photo reduced then etched on silicon. Times have changed.

w..


Gökhan SEVER wrote:

> How do micro machines function in that harsh environment?
>
> Even Jupiter has very strong magnetic field Voyager I and II passed beyond
> of it many years ago.

2007\04\17@104509 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>A piece of trivia the Voyager space craft used the RCA 1802.
>It was quite radiation resistant because of the rather
>large track sizes on the silicon.

The tracks were not on silicon. These were SOS (Silicon on Sapphire) devices
which are inherently radiation resistant as there is no bulk silicon
underneath the silicon tracks, so you don't get the problem of ions being
trapped in the bulk silicon and causing triac type problems shorting power
supplies through the substrate.

2007\04\17@114544 by wouter van ooijen

face picon face
> A piece of trivia the Voyager space craft used the RCA 1802.
> It was quite radiation resistant because of the rather large
> track sizes on the silicon. Radiation would ionize a local
> part of the processor generally without enough charge to
> change the logic state. The 1802 was laid out on mylar like
> an old time PC board and photo reduced then etched on
> silicon.

IIRC the 1802 was one of the few chips that were made in SoS (Silicon On
Saphire) process, which made it very radiation-hard.

Space stuff often uses 'old' designs, simply because those were made
with larger geometries that current designs. Large geometry == more
radiation resistant.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu



2007\04\17@114811 by wouter van ooijen

face picon face
> A piece of trivia the Voyager space craft used the RCA 1802.
> It was quite radiation resistant because of the rather large
> track sizes on the silicon. Radiation would ionize a local
> part of the processor generally without enough charge to
> change the logic state. The 1802 was laid out on mylar like
> an old time PC board and photo reduced then etched on
> silicon.

IIRC the 1802 was one of the few chips that were made in SoS (Silicon On
Saphire) process, which made it very radiation-hard.

Space stuff often uses 'old' designs, simply because those were made
with larger geometries that current designs. Large geometry == more
radiation resistant.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu



2007\04\17@115056 by wouter van ooijen

face picon face
> A piece of trivia the Voyager space craft used the RCA 1802.
> It was quite radiation resistant because of the rather large
> track sizes on the silicon. Radiation would ionize a local
> part of the processor generally without enough charge to
> change the logic state. The 1802 was laid out on mylar like
> an old time PC board and photo reduced then etched on
> silicon.

IIRC the 1802 was one of the few chips that were made in SoS (Silicon On
Saphire) process, which made it very radiation-hard.

Space stuff often uses 'old' designs, simply because those were made
with larger geometries that current designs. Large geometry == more
radiation resistant.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu



2007\04\17@121039 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>IIRC the 1802 was one of the few chips that were made in SoS (Silicon
>On Saphire) process, which made it very radiation-hard.

Yeah, it was also fast and expensive. They also did CMOS RAM chips, and I
suspect the CMOS ROM chips as well.

>Space stuff often uses 'old' designs, simply because those were
>made with larger geometries that current designs. Large
>geometry == more radiation resistant.

That is one factor, but also the costs involved in getting new parts
certified as radiation hardened.

Still using OP400 op-amps and other analogue parts from the same families.
Many of the digital parts come under ITARS regulations when attempting to
source US made parts, so that becomes another hassle ...

2007\04\17@125701 by David VanHorn

picon face
\
> Still using OP400 op-amps and other analogue parts from the same families.
> Many of the digital parts come under ITARS regulations when attempting to
> source US made parts, so that becomes another hassle ...

The good news is that they've eliminated the need for rocket boosters.
You can reach NEO simply by climbing up the stack of paperwork!

:)

2007\04\17@130810 by wouter van ooijen

face picon face
> A piece of trivia the Voyager space craft used the RCA 1802.
> It was quite radiation resistant because of the rather large
> track sizes on the silicon. Radiation would ionize a local
> part of the processor generally without enough charge to
> change the logic state. The 1802 was laid out on mylar like
> an old time PC board and photo reduced then etched on
> silicon.

IIRC the 1802 was one of the few chips that were made in SoS (Silicon On
Saphire) process, which made it very radiation-hard.

Space stuff often uses 'old' designs, simply because those were made
with larger geometries that current designs. Large geometry == more
radiation resistant.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu



2007\04\17@130833 by wouter van ooijen

face picon face
> A piece of trivia the Voyager space craft used the RCA 1802.
> It was quite radiation resistant because of the rather large
> track sizes on the silicon. Radiation would ionize a local
> part of the processor generally without enough charge to
> change the logic state. The 1802 was laid out on mylar like
> an old time PC board and photo reduced then etched on
> silicon.

IIRC the 1802 was one of the few chips that were made in SoS (Silicon On
Saphire) process, which made it very radiation-hard.

Space stuff often uses 'old' designs, simply because those were made
with larger geometries that current designs. Large geometry == more
radiation resistant.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu



2007\04\17@131425 by Vasile Surducan

face picon face
On 4/17/07, Tamas Rudnai <tamas.rudnaispamspam_OUTgmail.com> wrote:
> ...and you do not want to know what you are drinking when you are up there
> <grin>

Have you heard about Reverse Osmosys, right ?
It's so old than every child knows what is drinking when  turning on the tap...
:)

{Quote hidden}

2007\04\17@131643 by wouter van ooijen

face picon face
> A piece of trivia the Voyager space craft used the RCA 1802.
> It was quite radiation resistant because of the rather large
> track sizes on the silicon. Radiation would ionize a local
> part of the processor generally without enough charge to
> change the logic state. The 1802 was laid out on mylar like
> an old time PC board and photo reduced then etched on
> silicon.

IIRC the 1802 was one of the few chips that were made in SoS (Silicon On
Saphire) process, which made it very radiation-hard.

Space stuff often uses 'old' designs, simply because those were made
with larger geometries that current designs. Large geometry == more
radiation resistant.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu



2007\04\17@132119 by wouter van ooijen

face picon face
> A piece of trivia the Voyager space craft used the RCA 1802.
> It was quite radiation resistant because of the rather large
> track sizes on the silicon. Radiation would ionize a local
> part of the processor generally without enough charge to
> change the logic state. The 1802 was laid out on mylar like
> an old time PC board and photo reduced then etched on
> silicon.

IIRC the 1802 was one of the few chips that were made in SoS (Silicon On
Saphire) process, which made it very radiation-hard.

Space stuff often uses 'old' designs, simply because those were made
with larger geometries that current designs. Large geometry == more
radiation resistant.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu



2007\04\17@132727 by wouter van ooijen

face picon face
> A piece of trivia the Voyager space craft used the RCA 1802.
> It was quite radiation resistant because of the rather large
> track sizes on the silicon. Radiation would ionize a local
> part of the processor generally without enough charge to
> change the logic state. The 1802 was laid out on mylar like
> an old time PC board and photo reduced then etched on
> silicon.

IIRC the 1802 was one of the few chips that were made in SoS (Silicon On
Saphire) process, which made it very radiation-hard.

Space stuff often uses 'old' designs, simply because those were made
with larger geometries that current designs. Large geometry == more
radiation resistant.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu



2007\04\17@132915 by Walter Banks

picon face
1802 was manufactured in SOS I don't think all.  I don't know for sure if SOS versions were used on the Voyager's. Someone might know for sure.

Harris bought the old RCA plant in NJ where the 1802 was manufactured. We wrote a C compiler for one of the Harris parts and at one time I was introduced to the guy that taped out the 1802 part. He was coming to work for few months after his retirement
date so he would be available if needed to troubleshoot possible problems when the last voyager made its last major planet encounter.

Nothing like having a team waiting.

w..



wouter van ooijen wrote:

{Quote hidden}

> -

2007\04\17@135459 by wouter van ooijen

face picon face
> 1802 was manufactured in SOS I don't think all.

not? http://www.microprocessor.sscc.ru/great/s2.html

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu



2007\04\17@164748 by Jinx

face picon face
> IIRC the 1802 was one of the few chips that were made in SoS
> (Silicon On Saphire) process, which made it very radiation-hard.

Wouter - something wrong at your end ? I saw at least 8 identical
replies from you in 1h20m

2007\04\17@175110 by wouter van ooijen

face picon face
> > IIRC the 1802 was one of the few chips that were made in
> SoS (Silicon
> > On Saphire) process, which made it very radiation-hard.
>
> Wouter - something wrong at your end ? I saw at least 8
> identical replies from you in 1h20m

Got a fight with Outlook. Each send/receive failed, and did not remove
the 'out' messages from the outbox. But apparently it did sent them each
time :( After a PC restart and deleting some 4k spam from the 'deleted
items' folder everything seems back to normal.

Sorry for the repeated posts...

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu



2007\04\17@182845 by Jinx

face picon face


> Got a fight with Outlook...apparently it did sent them

> Sorry for the repeated posts...

's OK. I hate it when it does that - "Cannot delete message...
but I'll send it anyway, even if you didn't want to"

2007\04\19@154403 by Sean Breheny

face picon face
Given that you work on space stuff, I'm sure you are correct, Alan,
but I had always heard the opposite: that SMALLER geometry made you
more radiation resistant (since smaller area meant that any one device
would receive a far smaller dose). There are two kinds of events, I
think: single-particle events and multi-particle (cumulative) effects.
A smaller geometry device will be more susceptible to the first (as
less energy is needed in the single particles to influence the
devices) but less susceptible to the cumulative effects (smaller
area=lower dose per time).

Sean

On 4/17/07, Alan B. Pearce <RemoveMEA.B.PearceTakeThisOuTspamrl.ac.uk> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

> -

2007\04\19@194321 by Jinx

face picon face
British scientists are planning to see whether a Star Trek-style
deflector shield could be built to protect astronauts from radiation

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6567709.stm

2007\04\20@054202 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>Given that you work on space stuff, I'm sure you are correct, Alan,
>but I had always heard the opposite: that SMALLER geometry made you
>more radiation resistant (since smaller area meant that any one device
>would receive a far smaller dose).

Yes, but I am at the "user end", i.e. building devices into instruments. My
understanding is that devices with geometries of (IIRC) 0.25um and smaller
are inherently radiation resistant. It would appear that the reason is the
geometry is too small to trap a passing particle, and so the device does not
get upset. A larger feature will trap a particle and this produces a change
in the device characteristics that upsets operation.

>There are two kinds of events, I think: single-particle events and
>multi-particle (cumulative) effects. A smaller geometry device will
>be more susceptible to the first (as less energy is needed in the
>single particles to influence the devices) but less susceptible
>to the cumulative effects (smaller area=lower dose per time).

single particle events are known as an SEU (Single Event Upset) and this can
have several bad effects, the worst being that the parasitic devices that
exist between the desired features and the substrate get activated, causing
an SCR type action that typically causes very high current draw. An
electronic fuse arrangement is often provided to turn off the power to the
device(s) when this occurs to protect both the device and the power supply.
This type of action is similar to that being done to PIC chips when people
make the protection diodes conduct under normal operation, causing injection
of electrons and holes into parasitic devices that are normally
non-operational as they are reverse biased, and producing unwanted side
effects.

The other long term radiation exposure produces degradation in device
characteristics, being particularly bad in opto devices like opto-isolators
and fibre optics, but also affecting FET devices, so part of the analysis
requires "end of life" analysis to ensure that degraded parameters will
still allow correct operation on the circuit. We have needed to do
accelerated radiation testing on devices at times when there is no history
of use. It is the expense of this sort of testing that means older devices
are still made for radiation hardened use, and new devices are not available
as no-one has committed to the time and expense of testing them, so the
market keeps on using the old devices.

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2007 , 2008 only
- Today
- New search...