Information in this section describes general characteristics of the SET response characteristics of the device, and may not be accurate for all use cases or conditions. In-circuit results vary according to application specifics. TI’s customers are responsible for determination of components for their purposes, and validating and testing design implementation to confirm system functionality.

The data suggest the rate at which the INA1H94-SEP exhibits SET events, and the magnitude of those events, is a function of several factors. These include supply voltage, input common-mode voltage (V_CM), differential input voltage (V_DIFF) beam flux, ion energy, and temperature.

Generally, when the INA1H94-SEP experiences an SET, the device output presents sudden spikes and are usually resolved within 10µs of the trigger event. Events where the output shifted by more than ±100mV were recorded by the oscilloscope cards. A small percentage of these captures show measurable undershoot or overshoot behavior after the initial spike as the output settles. Table 5-5 shows notable oscilloscope captures.

Note that the INA1H94-SEP also experiences transient events of less than 100mV. As a result, this study focuses on only events more than 100mV in magnitude. Testing at Texas A&M University has shown that the beam area is an electrically noisy environment, which can lead to false trigger events. As a result, this study focuses on only events more than 100mV in magnitude. Implementing filters on the device to reject noise can lead to reductions in SET count or impact the magnitude of those events.

Device SET1 was evaluated with ion energy in descending order, from 45.9MeV-cm² / mg to 1.33MeV-cm² / mg. This device was evaluated with both positive and negative polarity V_CM and V_DIFF input voltages.

Device SET2 was evaluated at the higher energy level of 45.9MeV-cm² / mg, for verification, providing similar results.

The INA1H94-SEP susceptibility to SET increases as ion energy level increases. In some cases, differences in readings between devices at similar input voltages can be attributed to differences in the oscilloscope cards used, as verified through A↔B site swaps.

Factors such as the time between decap and testing (time the die is exposed to air), annealing time between runs, and simple device-to-device variation can also play a potential role in the differing event counts. Correlating any single factor to the event counts is difficult due to the complexities and practical challenges of the testing.