• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Microcontroller Tips

Microcontroller engineering resources, new microcontroller products and electronics engineering news

  • Products
    • 8-bit
    • 16-bit
    • 32-bit
    • 64-bit
  • Applications
    • 5G
    • Automotive
    • Connectivity
    • Consumer Electronics
    • EV Engineering
    • Industrial
    • IoT
    • Medical
    • Security
    • Telecommunications
    • Wearables
    • Wireless
  • Learn
    • eBooks / Tech Tips
    • EE Training Days
    • FAQs
    • Learning Center
    • Tech Toolboxes
    • Webinars/Digital Events
  • Resources
    • Design Guide Library
    • DesignFast
    • LEAP Awards
    • Podcasts
    • White Papers
  • Videos
    • EE Videos & Interviews
    • Teardown Videos
  • EE Forums
    • EDABoard.com
    • Electro-Tech-Online.com
  • Engineering Training Days
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe

Specifying MCUs for satellites and spacecraft

January 5, 2022 By Jeff Shepard 1 Comment

There is not a single group of standards but a continuum of qualification criteria for the components and systems used in satellites and spacecraft (Figure 1). With the growth of low earth orbit (LEO) satellites where the environment is less demanding and where some satellites are expected to be replaced regularly with upgraded designs, the use of fully space-qualified components is often not necessary or cost-effective. Enhanced Product (EP) devices can provide higher quality and reliability than standard commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) components in those applications. These EP devices are typically plastic-encapsulated, compared with fully space-rated devices’ more rugged and more expensive hermetic packaging. Designers must understand the (physical and business) environment where the satellite will operate and specify components accordingly. Overspecification will be costly, but under specification can result in low reliability and shortened lifetimes.

Figure 1: Over specifying MCUs and other components for satellites and spacecraft can be costly, underspecification can be tragic. (Image: Analog Devices)

EP devices can be certified to Government Electronics and Information Technology Association (GEIA)-STD-0002-1 for Aerospace Qualified Electronic Component (AQEC). They can also meet the qualification and processing requirements of MIL-PRF 38535 for QML Class N (non-hermetic) components. Several things can be involved in converting a COTS device into an EP device:

  • COTS devices are often produced in multiple facilities; the related EP devices may all be produced in a single facility with a controlled process flow and the same test and material sets, reducing device variability.
  • COTS devices typically are specified for operation from 0°C to 70°C or -40° to 85°C. EP devices operate from -55°C to 125°C. In addition, EP devices may experience temperature cycling from -65°C to 150°C for 500 cycles during qualification.
  • EP devices typically use gold bond wires, while COTS devices have less expensive and less reliable copper bond wires.
  • Depending on the packaging design, EP devices use tin-silver-copper solder or nickel-palladium-gold for improved reliability compared with COTs and AEC Q100 components.
  • Highly accelerated stress testing (HAST) to evaluate moisture sensitivity and capability for long-term storage for EP devices can last 250 hours compared with 196 hours for AEC Q100 and 96 hours for COTS devices.

Sometimes EP devices are not rugged enough for the needs of a specific application, and to use devices fully qualified to MIL-STD-883 is overkill. That’s when the use of EP+ (also called Space EP) devices can be beneficial. Moving from EP devices to EP+ devices incurs a significantly higher cost, but not as high as fully-space rated devices. EP+ devices undergo more comprehensive parametric testing at temperature extremes, more comprehensive lot testing, including wafer lot acceptance using MIL-PRF-38535 QML when required, and various levels of radiation tolerance testing.

Rad tolerant vs. hard MCUs

Radiation-tolerant (rad-tolerant) EP+ components are specified as reliable up to some limit below 100-kilo radiation (krad) absorbed doses, while radiation-hard (rad-hard) components are tested to much higher levels. One rad is defined as a dose of 100 ergs of energy per gram of the given material. Internationally, the rad has been replaced by the gray (Gy), equal to 100 rads, in the International System of Units (SI), only the U.S. still refers to rads of radiation. Radiation tolerant components are appropriate for lower altitude systems that will receive lower doses of radiation. This also helps satisfy the drive for lower-cost military and aerospace systems. Rad-tolerant devices are used in cost-sensitive designs such as CubeSats and satellites that are expected to be replaced every five years with upgraded designs.

Like most semiconductor devices, MCUs are susceptible to radiation damage. Rad-tolerant and rad-hard MCUs are often based on their non-hardened counterparts, with design and manufacturing changes that reduce susceptibility to radiation damage (Figure 2). Rad-hard devices are tested to so-called resultant-effects tests such as total ionizing dose (TID), enhanced low dose rate effects (ELDRS), neutron and proton displacement damage, and single event effects (SEEs).

Figure 2: Space-qualified radiation-tolerant Ethernet transceivers and embedded MCUs are available based on widely deployed COTS and EP devices. (Image: Microchip)

There are a variety of forms of radiation, from fairly innocuous alpha particles to high-energy gamma rays and neutrons (Figure 3). So-called galactic cosmic rays consist of electrons, protons, and neutrons that originate outside the solar system. Solar radiation occurs in a broad spectrum from visible light to the ionizing radiation released during solar flares such as x-rays and gamma rays. The Van Allen radiation belt is a zone of energetic charged particles, most of which originate from the solar wind, captured by and held by the Earth’s magnetosphere. Rad-hard MCUs and other electronics have extremely low failure rates even after years of operation in harsh radioactive environments.

Figure 3: types of radiation. (Image: Tempo Automation)

Making chips rad-hard

Rad-hard chips are often fabricated on insulating substrates such as silicon-on-insulator (SOI) and silicon-on-sapphire (SOS). Compared with COTS devices that can handle between 50 and 100 Gy (5 and 10 krad in the U.S.), SOI and SOS chips can survive 1000 to 3000 Gy (100 to 300 krad). SOI processes eliminate latch-up events but are not guaranteed to improve TID and SEE hardness. A shielding layer of depleted boron can be added to improve rad hardness. But that is usually not enough, and system design changes are needed.

For example, error correcting code (ECC) memory includes redundant bits to check for corrupted data. Radiation can damage memory content even when the memory is inactive. ECC memory designs include a circuit that continuously sweeps the RAM, reads out the data, checks the redundant bits for errors, and then writes back any corrections. Various forms of redundancy are common in rad-hard systems.

At the circuit level, a single bit can be replaced with three bits and “voting” logic for each bit to determine its result continuously. This increases the size of the system but results in “fail-safe” operation. Whether or not a single-bit failure is caused by radiation, the voting logic will continue to produce correct results.

At a higher level, voting can be extended to multiple MCUs. Redundant MCUs can be implemented with three separate circuit boards that independently compute a result and compare answers. Any board that does not produce a matching result will recalculate. If a specific board consistently has non-matching results, it will be shut down to save system resources.

General criteria for space qualification

Space qualification extends beyond radiation hardening and includes extreme temperature operation. Even getting into orbit is fraught with dangers in the form of very high levels of acoustic noise, vibrations, and acceleration forces during launch. Some of the main space-grade certifications include:

  • MIL-STD-883 sets uniform methods, controls, and procedures for testing microelectronic devices
  • MIL-PRF-38534 for hybrid microcircuits
  • MIL-PRF-38535 for single die microcircuits such as MCUs
  • AS9100 is the standardized quality management system for the aerospace industry.
  • JESD22 establishes the physical, electrical, mechanical, and environmental conditions and a series of uniform methods and procedures for evaluating the reliability of packaged solid-state devices.

Those are just the main certifications; there are many more, some regionally promogulated, including:

  • ESCC 9000 European standard for ceramic, hermetically sealed microcircuits for space applications.
  • QML-V A quality standard for hermetically sealed microcircuits.
  • QML-Q DLA class for hermetically sealed devices for military aeronautic applications.
  • QML-Y DLA class for non-hermetic ceramic devices for space applications.
  • NASA Levels A NASA quality standard for Plastic Encapsulated Microcircuits (PEM).
  • ECSS Class A class standard from the European Cooperation for Space Standardization.

One thing all of these standards have in common is extensive testing requirements. Examples include:

Burn-in is performed at the extreme thermal, electrical, and environmental operating specifications of components over a period of time.

Non-Destructive Bond Pull, for example, as defined in MIL-STD-883, is performed to identify faulty wire bonds without affecting any acceptable wire bonds.

Temperature Cycling specifications include MIL-STD-202, Method 107, Thermal Shock; MIL-STD-810, Method 503, Temperature Shock; MIL-STD-883, Method 1010, Temperature Cycling and; JESD22-A104D, Temperature Cycling.

Mechanical Shock and Vibration tests simulate the application of sudden force or abrupt change in motion, such as occur during a rocket launch.

Constant Acceleration testing can use a centrifuge to identity mechanical and structural weaknesses not necessarily detected in mechanical shock and vibration testing. MIL-883 acceleration testing specifically applies to microelectronic devices. Electrodynamic shakers can also be used for dynamic load testing and rocket launch simulations.

System Testing and James Webb – putting it all together

The James Webb telescope is a recent example of the extended systems testing required to prove flight worthiness. NASA worked with its international partners to match Webb’s testing environment precisely to what would be experienced both on launch day and when operating in orbit. For example, the compete flight hardware had to pass a simulated launch environment performed in two stages for “acoustic” and “sine-vibration” testing (Figure 4).

Figure 4: It’s not just individual components such as MCUs subjected to stress testing. The fully assembled James Webb Space Telescope is being prepared for transport to nearby acoustic and sine-vibration testing facilities in this picture. (Image: NASA)

In the first test, the flight hardware was exposed to sound pressure levels above 140 decibels, with a spectrum tuned to the specific signature of the Ariane 5 rocket it would ride to space. During the tests, nearly 600 individual channels of motion data were carefully observed and recorded. Typical acoustic and vibration tests measure about 100 channels of data, but the unusually complex size and shape of the observatory required more measurements.

Next, Webb was taken to a second facility where it was placed on a purpose-built shaker table capable of precise vertical and horizontal acceleration. The initial acoustic testing simulated the high-frequency launch dynamics, and the vibration testing on the shaker table covered the lower frequencies.

Summary

Specifying MCUs for satellites and spacecraft is a complex process. There’s a continuum of qualification standards beyond COTS, including EP, EP+, and MIL-STD-883, before arriving at full space-rated MCUs. In addition, designers need to consider if radiation-tolerant performance is adequate or if a fully rad-hard device is required. Depending on the necessary level of performance, there is a wide range of qualification testing for components and full systems before they can be launched into space.

References

Challenges for Electronic Circuits in Space Applications, Analog Devices
Developing Radiation Hardened Electronics for Space Environments, Tempo Automation
MIL-STD-883 Microcircuits Compliance Testing, Keystone Compliance
NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope Completes Environmental Testing, NASA
Radiation hardening, Wikipedia
Radiation Tolerant Cortex M3 MCU, Microchip
Understanding Quality Levels for HiRel-rated Components, Texas Instruments

You may also like:


  • Quantifying embedded MCU energy consumption

  • How does embedded software work?

  • What’s special about embedded microcontrollers?

  • 8-, 16- and 32-bit MCUs…are more bits better?
  • solar superstorm
    What happens to an MCU if there’s an EMP or…

Filed Under: Aerospace and Defense, Applications, FAQ, Featured, microcontroller Tagged With: FAQ

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. five nights at freddy's says

    May 5, 2022 at 4:37 am

    This is the first time I visit your blog. I got interesting information here. Thanks.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

Featured Contributions

Five challenges for developing next-generation ADAS and autonomous vehicles

Securing IoT devices against quantum computing risks

RISC-V implementation strategies for certification of safety-critical systems

What’s new with Matter: how Matter 1.4 is reshaping interoperability and energy management

Edge AI: Revolutionizing real-time data processing and automation

More Featured Contributions

EE TECH TOOLBOX

“ee
Tech Toolbox: Internet of Things
Explore practical strategies for minimizing attack surfaces, managing memory efficiently, and securing firmware. Download now to ensure your IoT implementations remain secure, efficient, and future-ready.

EE Learning Center

EE Learning Center

EE ENGINEERING TRAINING DAYS

engineering
“bills
“microcontroller
EXPAND YOUR KNOWLEDGE AND STAY CONNECTED
Get the latest info on technologies, tools and strategies for EE professionals.

RSS Current EDABoard.com discussions

  • How to calculate Gate Driver's propagation delay time?
  • Bidirectional data bus
  • Editing posts
  • avoiding mixer compression when acting as a phase detector
  • Crude Powerline FSK comms literally shorts the power bus at a certain frequency?

RSS Current Electro-Tech-Online.com Discussions

  • RS485 bus: common ground wire needed or not?
  • Kawai KDP 80 Electronic Piano Dead
  • Good Eats
  • What part is this marked .AC ?
  • Photo interrupter Connections

DesignFast

Design Fast Logo
Component Selection Made Simple.

Try it Today
design fast globle

Footer

Microcontroller Tips

EE World Online Network

  • 5G Technology World
  • EE World Online
  • Engineers Garage
  • Analog IC Tips
  • Battery Power Tips
  • Connector Tips
  • DesignFast
  • EDA Board Forums
  • Electro Tech Online Forums
  • EV Engineering
  • Power Electronic Tips
  • Sensor Tips
  • Test and Measurement Tips

Microcontroller Tips

  • Subscribe to our newsletter
  • Advertise with us
  • Contact us
  • About us

Copyright © 2025 · WTWH Media LLC and its licensors. All rights reserved.
The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of WTWH Media.

Privacy Policy