SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
The presentation will cover a variety of mitigation strategies that were developed for critical applications. An emphasis is placed on strengths and weaknesses per mitigation technique as it pertains to different Field programmable gate array (FPGA) device types.
The presentation will cover a variety of mitigation strategies that were developed for critical applications. An emphasis is placed on strengths and weaknesses per mitigation technique as it pertains to different FPGA device types.
The following are updated or new subjects added to the FPGA SEE Test Guidelines manual: academic versus mission specific device evaluation, single event latch-up (SEL) test and analysis, SEE response visibility enhancement during radiation testing, mitigation evaluation (embedded and user-implemented), unreliable design and its affects to SEE Data, testing flushable architectures versus non-flushable architectures, intellectual property core (IP Core) test and evaluation (addresses embedded and user-inserted), heavy-ion energy and linear energy transfer (LET) selection, proton versus heavy-ion testing, fault injection, mean fluence to failure analysis, and mission specific system-level single event upset (SEU) response prediction. Most sections within the guidelines manual provide information regarding best practices for test structure and test system development. The scope of this manual addresses academic versus mission specific device evaluation and visibility enhancement in IP Core testing.
The following are updated or new subjects added to the FPGA SEE Test Guidelines manual: academic versus mission specific device evaluation, single event latch-up (SEL) test and analysis, SEE response visibility enhancement during radiation testing, mitigation evaluation (embedded and user-implemented), unreliable design and its affects to SEE Data, testing flushable architectures versus non-flushable architectures, intellectual property core (IP Core) test and evaluation (addresses embedded and user-inserted), heavy-ion energy and linear energy transfer (LET) selection, proton versus heavy-ion testing, fault injection, mean fluence to failure analysis, and mission specific system-level single event upset (SEU) response prediction. Most sections within the guidelines manual provide information regarding best practices for test structure and test system development. The scope of this manual addresses academic versus mission specific device evaluation and visibility enhancement in IP Core testing.
The presentation will cover a variety of mitigation strategies that were developed for critical applications. An emphasis is placed on strengths and weaknesses per mitigation technique as it pertains to different FPGA device types.
This is an independent investigation that evaluates the single event destructive and transient susceptibility of the Xilinx Kintex-UltraScale device. Design/Device susceptibility is determined by monitoring the device under test (DUT) for Single Event Transient (SET) and Single Event Upset (SEU) induced faults by exposing the DUT to a heavy ion beam. Potential Single Event Latch-up (SEL) is monitored throughout heavy-ion testing by examining device current. This device does not have embedded mitigation. Hence, user implemented mitigation is investigated using Synopsys mitigation tools.
This slide presentation reviews the single event upset static testing of the Virtex II field programmable gate arrays (FPGA) that were tested in protons and heavy-ions. The test designs and static and dynamic test results are reviewed.
Field programmable gate arrays (FPGA) are used in every space application. Currently, most space flight applications use radiation hardened (RH) FPGAs, which are very expensive. There is a desire to use cheaper, commercial off the shelf reprogrammable FPGAs, which are more susceptible to radiation effects known as single-event effects (SEE). The RH parts have SEE and total ionizing dose (TID) hardened elements pre-integrated into the part. This means that the designer does not need to implement any hardening techniques while configuring the device. The COTS parts on the other hand must be mitigated by design in order to insure any form of mitigation. The design techniques this project examines concern the use of localized triple modular redundancy (LTMR) and distributed triple modular redundancy (DTMR). LTMR triples every flip flop in the device architecture while DTMR triples everything except for the global routes (clocks, resets, and enables). The testing was performed on a ProASIC3E FPGA at the Texas A&M cyclotron facility. Two design architectures were used: shift registers and counters, both with LTMR and DTMR mitigation techniques. The test results prove that DTMR is more effective at reducing SEE than LTMR. We also determined that there was not a significant difference between the use of shift registers and counters for test purposes. More testing is required to obtain additional linear energy transfer values for each architecture and mitigation technique in order to determine the most cost-effective method of SEE mitigation.
Static random access memory (SRAM) upset rates in field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs) from the Xilinx Virtex 2 family have been tested for radiation effects on configuration memory, block RAM and the power-on-reset (POR) and SelectMAP single event functional interrupts (SEFIs). Dynamic testing has shown the effectiveness and value of Triple Module Redundancy (TMR) and partial reconfiguration when used in conjunction. Continuing dynamic testing for more complex designs and other Virtex 2 capabilities (i.e., I/O standards, digital clock managers (DCM), etc.) is scheduled.
A proposed computer architecture would exploit the capabilities of commercially available field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs) to enable computers to detect and recover from bit errors. The main purpose of the proposed architecture is to enable fault-tolerant computing in the presence of single-event upsets (SEUs). [An SEU is a spurious bit flip (also called a soft error) caused by a single impact of ionizing radiation.] The architecture would also enable recovery from some soft errors caused by electrical transients and, to some extent, from intermittent and permanent (hard) errors caused by aging of electronic components. A typical FPGA of the current generation contains one or more complete processor cores, memories, and highspeed serial input/output (I/O) channels, making it possible to shrink a board-level processor node to a single integrated-circuit chip. Custom, highly efficient microcontrollers, general-purpose computers, custom I/O processors, and signal processors can be rapidly and efficiently implemented by use of FPGAs. Unfortunately, FPGAs are susceptible to SEUs. Prior efforts to mitigate the effects of SEUs have yielded solutions that degrade performance of the system and require support from external hardware and software. In comparison with other fault-tolerant- computing architectures (e.g., triple modular redundancy), the proposed architecture could be implemented with less circuitry and lower power demand. Moreover, the fault-tolerant computing functions would require only minimal support from circuitry outside the central processing units (CPUs) of computers, would not require any software support, and would be largely transparent to software and to other computer hardware. There would be two types of modules: a self-checking processor module and a memory system (see figure). The self-checking processor module would be implemented on a single FPGA and would be capable of detecting its own internal errors. It would contain two CPUs executing identical programs in lock step, with comparison of their outputs to detect errors. It would also contain various cache local memory circuits, communication circuits, and configurable special-purpose processors that would use self-checking checkers. (The basic principle of the self-checking checker method is to utilize logic circuitry that generates error signals whenever there is an error in either the checker or the circuit being checked.) The memory system would comprise a main memory and a hardware-controlled check-pointing system (CPS) based on a buffer memory denoted the recovery cache. The main memory would contain random-access memory (RAM) chips and FPGAs that would, in addition to everything else, implement double-error-detecting and single-error-correcting memory functions to enable recovery from single-bit errors.