Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “doping sites”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

57 records · Page 4

Cryogenic Quenching Process for Electronic Part Screening

The use of electronic parts at cryogenic temperatures (less than 100 C) for extreme environments is not well controlled or developed from a product quality and reliability point of view. This is in contrast to the very rigorous and well-documented procedures to qualify electronic parts for mission use in the 55 to 125 C temperature range. A similarly rigorous methodology for screening and evaluating electronic parts needs to be developed so that mission planners can expect the same level of high reliability performance for parts operated at cryogenic temperatures. A formal methodology for screening and qualifying electronic parts at cryogenic temperatures has been proposed. The methodology focuses on the base physics of failure of the devices at cryogenic temperatures. All electronic part reliability is based on the bathtub curve, high amounts of initial failures (infant mortals), a long period of normal use (random failures), and then an increasing number of failures (end of life). Unique to this is the development of custom screening procedures to eliminate early failures at cold temperatures. The ability to screen out defects will specifically impact reliability at cold temperatures. Cryogenic reliability is limited by electron trap creation in the oxide and defect sites at conductor interfaces. Non-uniform conduction processes due to process marginalities will be magnified at cryogenic temperatures. Carrier mobilities change by orders of magnitude at cryogenic temperatures, significantly enhancing the effects of electric field. Marginal contacts, impurities in oxides, and defects in conductor/conductor interfaces can all be magnified at low temperatures. The novelty is the use of an ultra-low temperature, short-duration quenching process for defect screening. The quenching process is designed to identify those defects that will precisely (and negatively) affect long-term, cryogenic part operation. This quenching process occurs at a temperature that is at least 25 C colder than the coldest expected operating temperature. This quenching process is the opposite of the standard burn-in procedure. Normal burn-in raises the temperature (and voltage) to activate quickly any possible manufacturing defects remaining in the device that were not already rejected at a functional test step. The proposed inverse burn-in or quenching process is custom-tailored to the electronic device being used. The doping profiles, materials, minimum dimensions, interfaces, and thermal expansion coefficients are all taken into account in determining the ramp rate, dwell time, and temperature.

Sheldon, Douglas J.↗

Containerless Processing of a Lithium Disilicate Glass

Glasses of Li2O.2SiO2 (LS2) and LS2 doped with 0.001 wt% platinum (LS2 + 0.001 wt% Pt) compositions were melted, cooled and re-heated at controlled rates while levitated (containerless) inside an Electrostatic Levitator (ESL) furnace at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center. The experiments were conducted in vacuum using spherical 2.5 - 3.0 mm diameter glass samples. The measured critical cooling rate for glass formation, Rc, for the LS2 and LS2 + 0.001 wt% Pt glasses processed at ESL were 14 plus or minus 2 C/min and 130 plus or minus 5 C/min, respectively. The values of Rc for the same LS2 and LS2 + 0.001 wt% Pt glasses processed in a container were 62 plus or minus 3 C/min and 162 plus or minus 5 C/min, respectively. The effective activation energy for crystallization, E, for the LS2 glass processed without a container at ESL was higher than that for an identical glass processed in a container. These results suggest that the glass formation tendency for a containerless LS2 melt is significantly increased compared to an identical melt in contact with a container. The absence of heterogeneous nucleation sites that are inherently present in all melts held in containers is believed to be the reason for the increased glass forming tendency of this containerless melt.

Ranasinghe, K. S.↗

Containerless Processing of a Lithium Disilicate Glass

Glasses of Li2O.2SiO2 (LS2), and LS2 doped with 0.001wt% platinum (LS2 + 0.001 wt% Pt) compositions were melted, cooled and reheated at controlled rates while levitated (containerless) inside an Electrostatic Levitator (ESL) furnace at the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL. The experiments were conducted in vacuum (approximately 10(exp -5) Pa) using spherical, 2.5 to 3 millimeter diameter, glass samples. The measured critical cooling rate for glass formation, R(sub c), for the LS2 and LS2+0.001 wt% Pt glasses processed at ESL were 14 plus or minus 2 Celsius per minute and 130 plus or minus 5 Celsius per minute, respectively. The values of R(sub c), for the same LS2 and LS2 + 0.001 wt% Pt glasses processed in a container were 62 plus or minus 3 Celsius per minute and 162 plus or minus 5 Celsius per minute, respectively. The effective activation energy for crystallization, E, for this LS2 glass processed without a container at ESL, 392 plus or minus 15 kiloJoules per mole, was higher than that, 270 plus or minus 15 kiloJoules per mole, for an identical glass processed in a container. These results suggest that the glass formation tendency for a containerless LS2 melt is significantly increased compared to an identical melt in contact with a container. The absence of heterogeneous nucleation sites that are inherently present in all melts held in containers, and or a change in the surface composition due to evaporation of Li2O during processing at ESL are likely reasons for the increased glass forming tendency of this containerless LS2 melt.

Ranasinghe, Kisa↗