Case ID: M07-045P^

Published: 2020-02-26 11:14:19

Last Updated: 1661889246


Inventor(s)

Lawrence Clark
Karl Mohr
Keith Holbert

Technology categories

Physical ScienceSemiconductor Devices

Licensing Contacts

Shen Yan
Director of Intellectual Property - PS
[email protected]

Reverse Body Bias for Improved Integrated Circuit Total Ionizing Dose Response

It is possible to fabricate radiation-hardened circuits
using commercially available, state-of-the-art CMOS manufacturing processes via
novel applications of Radiation Hardening by Design (RHBD) techniques. RHBD
techniques allow users to mitigate total ionizing dose (TID) effects caused by
layout techniques while being able to handle single event effects (SEE) via a
combination of layout and circuit design; however, contemporary RHBD techniques
have their limits. For example, while dual interlocked storage cells (DICE)
latches can mitigate the effects of single event upsets (SEU), these latches can
be vulnerable to single event transients (SET). Temporal latches, on the other
hand, are capable of mitigating both SEU and SET effects but only at the cost of
increased circuit area, circuit setup time, and power consumption. Meanwhile,
using annular logic gates can worsen Energy Delay Product (EDP) somewhere
between 35%-350%.

Researchers at Arizona State University have developed a new
design technique for RHBD designs that addresses shortcomings of current RHBD
techniques. Reverse Body Bias is a technique that introduces an alternative path
for leakage to follow rather than leaving it to disrupt any logic. The new
design technique utilizes proven hardening techniques while offering lower power
consumption and smaller circuits. The novel design technique focuses on
mitigating the effects of SEEs while also maintaining hardness against radiation
effects in general.

Potential Applications


  • Satellites
  • Space Exploration
  • Nuclear Environments
  • Defense

Benefits and Advantages


  • Circuit Area ? over 25% reduction compared to traditional
    methods

  • Energy Delay Product ? comparable to traditional methods
    and 35%-350% better than ?annular? methods

  • Leakage ? allows less chip-level leakage
  • Manufacturability ? relies on available standard CMOS
    fabrication processes