Space-RHA
Tools / Dose and damage / ELDRS

ELDRS: low dose rate enhancement factors for bipolar parts

Many bipolar linear circuits degrade more when a total dose arrives slowly, as it does in orbit, than when it arrives in minutes, as it does in a standard test. This page estimates the low dose rate response from a high dose rate test with a factor chosen to cover a stated share of the part types in the published record, lists the tests that answer the question directly, and shows the mechanism in a 3D model.

v1.0 · Sep 2026ratios for 201 part types in 60 published studiesfactors at 50 to 95 percent coverageruns in your browserELDRS on the priors page
EstimateRecommended factorsDirect testsHow ELDRS worksMethodData

The part

The factor for a class is the value that bounded the worst recorded low dose rate response of that share of the part types in the published set (see recommended factors).

The high dose rate result

The change of one parameter from its value before irradiation, at each total dose, at 50 to 300 rad(Si)/s and room temperature (the mean, or a bound over the parts, as your analysis needs). Use a change that grows with the damage and enter its magnitude: input bias or offset current, Delta(1/gain), a reference or output voltage shift. The values filled in are an example, not a real part.
Total dose, krad(Si)Change
Share of the part types (number of part types in brackets) in the published set whose largest low dose rate change, over every parameter and total dose recorded, stayed within F times the high dose rate change at the same dose (Kaplan-Meier estimate, lower bounds treated as censored). The dashed line is the chosen coverage; the marker is the factor used above. A factor of 1.5, the TM1019 threshold for calling a part ELDRS sensitive [1], bounds few PNP-input part types.

Recommended enhancement factors, by part class

The enhancement factor is the change of a sensitive parameter at low dose rate divided by its change at high dose rate at the same total dose. MIL-STD-883 Test Method 1019 calls a part ELDRS sensitive when that ratio exceeds 1.5 for any sensitive parameter; its high dose rate condition A runs at 50 to 300 rad(Si)/s and its low dose rate condition D at 10 mrad(Si)/s or less, to 1.5 times the specification dose [1]. Orbit rates are lower still: the MPTB flight experiment averaged about 0.00038 rad(Si)/s over its orbit [2]. A factor applied to a high dose rate result stands in for a test that would take months: at 10 mrad(Si)/s, qualifying a part to 100 krad(Si) under condition D takes about six months of irradiation [1], [3].

To choose such a factor, every low to high dose rate comparison recorded in the reading notes of 60 published papers and compendia was tabulated (630 usable ratios, after the exclusions in the method): low rate at 20 mrad(Si)/s or less, high rate at 20 rad(Si)/s or more, both at room temperature. For each part type in each study the largest ratio over every parameter, total dose and bias condition recorded was kept, so a factor that bounds a part type bounds all of its recorded parameters. The factor at a coverage level is the value that bounds that share of the part types.

Part classPart types (studies)50 percent75 percent90 percent (90 percent interval)95 percentA factor of 2 coversA factor of 3 covers
Op amps and comparators with a lateral or substrate PNP input stage69 (37)101423 (17 to 31)3112%20%
Other bipolar and BiCMOS linear ICs72 (24)3.65.911 (7.7 to 24)2431%49%
Discrete bipolar transistors and test transistors24 (16)36.911 (8 to 31)1238%54%
All classes together165 (57)4.71119 (14 to 24)3024%38%

Ratio of changes at equal total dose (low dose rate change over high dose rate change), largest over the parameters, doses and bias conditions recorded for each part type in each study. Coverage is the Kaplan-Meier estimate with lower bounds censored; the interval is the 5th to 95th percentile over 2000 bootstrap resamplings of the part types.

The 90 percent factor is the recommendation this page makes when a high dose rate result is all there is: about 23 for op amps and comparators with a lateral or substrate PNP input stage, about 11 for other bipolar linear ICs and about 11 for discrete transistors. The interval beside it is the spread of that estimate over 2000 resamplings of the part types; for the smaller classes it is wide, and the 95 percent factors rest on the few largest values in each class. Factors of 2 and 3, the design margins the 1997 methodology attached to a low dose rate test and to an elevated temperature test [4], bound only 12 and 20 percent of the PNP-input part types when applied to a high dose rate result instead.

Ratios of failure doses (the dose at which a part failed at high rate divided by the dose at which it failed at low rate) are fewer and more often censored: for 35 percent of the part types the high rate parts had not yet failed when the test stopped, so the ratio is only a lower bound. The table gives the Kaplan-Meier estimate and, in brackets, the range from treating every lower bound as exact to treating it as unbounded. For the PNP-input class the estimate stops at about 82 percent: the remaining part types had not reached the criterion by the end of the high rate test, so the published failure dose ratios give no 90 percent factor for that class.

Part classPart types (lower bounds)50 percent75 percent90 percentA factor of 3 coversA factor of 10 covers
Op amps and comparators with a lateral or substrate PNP input stage34 (14)1117not reached3% (3 to 3%)45% (38 to 65%)
Other bipolar and BiCMOS linear ICs42 (14)3.6181839% (38 to 45%)72% (64 to 98%)
Discrete bipolar transistors and test transistors5 (0)too fewtoo fewtoo few60% (60 to 60%)80% (80 to 80%)
All classes together81 (28)8.414not reached25% (25 to 28%)61% (54 to 83%)

Ratio of failure doses (high dose rate failure dose over low dose rate failure dose), largest per part type in each study, Kaplan-Meier with lower bounds censored. The range in brackets treats every lower bound as unbounded, then as exact. "Not reached": the estimate stops below that coverage because the largest ratios are lower bounds.

The published set leans toward parts that showed ELDRS: compendia collect enhanced parts, and papers report the parts that behaved badly. The test records behind the total dose priors page are a less selected sample. Among 97 part types in those records with results at both rates (public reports and anonymized internal ones), the ratio of failure doses was 2 or less for about 57 percent, against about 15 percent in the published failure dose ratios. Their 90 percent value is nonetheless 30 (90 percent interval 15 to 40), because a tail of high rate tests never reached the failure criterion. Those ratios are coarser than the published ones: they use the test steps at which a part first failed, count elevated temperature tests as low rate and tests of unstated rate as high rate [5]. For a part drawn at random the factors above are therefore generally conservative; for a part known or suspected to be ELDRS sensitive they describe the population they came from, and at 90 percent they still leave one part type in ten above the factor.

When a factor is not the answer

A factor from a population says little about the part in hand. It does not apply, or needs a low dose rate test behind it, in these cases:

  • The high dose rate change is within the measurement uncertainty. A ratio over a change near zero is a bound, not a measurement, and multiplying a noise-level change by any factor gives a noise-level estimate. Published ratios that the reading notes flag as over a near-zero or unreadable change were left out of the factors for this reason; ratios over a small but resolved change were kept, with their larger uncertainty.
  • The mission rate is well below 10 mrad(Si)/s and the part may still be getting worse there. Eight part types in the 2009 review showed a continued increase below 10 mrad(Si)/s, most by less than a factor of two [1]. In a study down to 0.5 mrad(Si)/s, parts sold as ELDRS-free and qualified at 10 mrad(Si)/s degraded about 1.8 times more at 1 and 0.5 mrad(Si)/s than at 10 mrad(Si)/s, and for a commercial regulator whose first failures moved from 60 krad(Si) at 10 mrad(Si)/s to 10 krad(Si) at 0.5 mrad(Si)/s the authors wrote that "a radiation design margin of less than x6 will not bound the degradations at 0.5 mrad(Si)/s" [6].
  • A hardness rating was earned at high dose rate. A radiation hardened QML LM139, guaranteed to 100 krad(Si), showed ratios of about 65 to 72 at 20 to 30 krad(Si) when irradiated unbiased, read from the paper's figure over a high rate change of only about 10 nA [7]; the 2008 compendium lists 60 for the same data [8]. The part types marked radiation hardened or QML in the set are not lower than the rest.
  • The lot or the package differs from the one tested. ELDRS "can vary from fabrication lot to lot" for the same part type and manufacturer [4]; hydrogen sealed in a package cavity changes both the damage and the ratio [9], [10].

The tests that answer the question directly, and what the papers found about each:

  • Low dose rate test, TM1019 condition D: at 10 mrad(Si)/s or less, to 1.5 times the specification dose. Of the part types that kept degrading below 10 mrad(Si)/s, most by less than a factor of two, the 2009 review expected that "many of these parts will be covered by the overtest factor of 1.5" [1]. The methodology proposed in 1997 paired a 10 mrad(Si)/s test with a design margin of 2, noting that "these margin factors should be regarded as somewhat preliminary" [4]. For parts that may keep degrading below 10 mrad(Si)/s, "the most reliable method is to test at the required mission dose rate" [6].
  • Elevated temperature irradiation: the 1997 methodology offered 10 rad(Si)/s at 100 °C with a design margin of 3 [4]. On the MPTB flight experiment the elevated temperature screen under-predicted the flight response by a factor of 3 and the 10 mrad(Si)/s ground response by a factor of 6, and "the elevated temperature tests may not always bound the ELDRS response using a design margin of 3x" [2]. The optimum irradiation temperature varies from technology to technology and the test "does not always bound the low-dose-rate response" [11]; combining it with an overtest "may only make matters worse because of the additional time required for the irradiation" [1].
  • High dose rate in hydrogen: for the five circuits of one study, soaking in 100 percent hydrogen and irradiating at 1 rad/s or less were "reasonable values" for a bounding test; the AD590 needed the rate lowered to 1 rad/s to be bounded, and a nitride passivation has to be removed first [3]. Another 2009 study concluded that "it is unlikely that hydrogen exposure can be used a priori as an accelerated hardness assurance test" [12].
  • Switched dose rate: after a high dose rate step, parts degrade at the low dose rate slope [13]; the method shortens the irradiation and was demonstrated on four part types for input bias current and supply current [1], with "a small underestimation of the degradation" in some cases [13].
  • Overtesting in dose at high rate: "a factor of three overtest in total-dose level is sufficient to bound the low-dose-rate response for the NPN transistors" of one study, but "this approach does not work for some integrated circuits" [14]; and "in many cases the larger saturation level is more important than the higher damage rate," which makes overtesting at high dose rate difficult [15].

Understanding the mechanism

How ELDRS works: the same dose, delivered fast and slow

Ionizing dose makes electron-hole pairs in the thick oxide that covers the base of a bipolar transistor. In the weak field there most pairs recombine where they were made; the holes that escape move slowly toward the silicon and free protons from hydrogen held at oxide defects; protons that reach the interface leave traps that raise the base current and lower the gain [16], [3]. At high dose rate the dense charge in the oxide cuts the traps each rad makes. In the space charge models, slowly transporting holes lower the charge yield [17] and turn protons back from the interface [18]; in the more recent models, electrons held in the oxide by the positive charge recombine with holes, and fewer protons are released [1], [19]. Hydrogen in the package, the passivation over the die and the temperature change how much damage each rate does and where the transition falls [10], [20], [21], [18].

01

Pairs, and the few holes that escape

Each rad makes the same pairs at either rate. In the weak field of a base oxide few holes escape recombination: about 6 percent at room temperature in the low field Onsager estimate of [22]. They hop slowly toward the silicon.

02

Crowded oxide at high dose rate

Above a transition dose rate, near 0.1 rad/s for a p-glass passivated test transistor in air [10], charge builds up faster than it leaves: holes turn protons back [18], and electrons held in the oxide recombine with holes before they free protons [1].

03

Interface traps and base current

At low dose rate the protons reach the interface and leave traps that raise the excess base current; in the older bipolar linear technologies that show ELDRS, the lateral and substrate PNP transistors "usually dominate the degradation at low dose rate" [3].

The model is the bipolar part of the total dose teaching model on the priors page, run twice at the same total dose. Its low and high rate damage levels, the transition dose rate and their dependence on hydrogen are fitted to a p-glass passivated gated lateral PNP at 30 krad [10], with about one decade of transition dose rate per decade of hydrogen [23]; passivation follows split-lot studies [24], [20], [25]; heating follows [21] and [26]; the time-dependent part follows [27] and [28]; the charge yield follows [22]; the gain loss of the three structures follows [29]; bias follows [30]. Every other constant is illustrative. It shows directions and rough sizes; the measured factors above, not the model, are the basis of the recommendations. The explanations under the model name their sources, which are in the reference list: among them [6], [7] and [31].

How the factors are computed

Source rows. Every enhancement factor recorded in the reading notes written from the full papers of the site's ELDRS library was tabulated, one row per part, parameter, total dose, pair of dose rates, bias condition and source, as the paper states it, as computed from values it states, or as read from its figures. Of 2,042 rows, those kept compare room temperature irradiations at a low rate of 20 mrad(Si)/s or less (0.021 rad/s, to keep papers that quote 20 mrad(SiO2)/s) with a high rate of 20 rad(Si)/s or more.

Rows left out: 727 that compare something other than room temperature irradiations of the same part at a low and a high rate (elevated temperature, switched rate, flight, hydrogen, models, defect densities); 406 with rates outside the window and 135 with a rate not stated; 26 without a numeric value; 28 that are ratios of absolute values rather than changes, or over changes the notes call near zero, noise or unreadable, or of opposite sign; 6 values another paper only cites; 4 read from a web page; 47 copies of other rows (28 marked as such in the notes, 7 where a later paper repeats a figure, 12 compendium entries whose original study is in the set); 4 first readings of a figure that a later reading superseded; 2 general statements that name no part; and 27 near-duplicates (same part, parameter, dose, rates and bias, value within 5 percent). A ratio of absolute values is not the TM1019 ratio of changes, and a ratio over a high dose rate change near zero, within reading error, or of opposite sign is not an enhancement (a small but resolved change was kept); values that another paper only cites, or that were read from a web page rather than the full text, could not be checked; copies of the same data in a later paper, a review or a compendium were counted once, under the original study, where that study is in the set; a first figure reading that a later reading of the same figure superseded was replaced by it.

Part classes. Op amps and comparators whose input stage uses lateral or substrate PNP transistors, as stated in the paper or known for the part family (LM124, LM158, LM324, LM2902, LM139, LM193, LM339, LM2901, LM111, LM311 [32], LM833 as described in its note), form the first class. Every other IC, including op amps and comparators whose input stage the paper does not state, forms the second; the calculator uses the first class when the input stage is not known. Discrete transistors and test transistors form the third. The dielectrically isolated HS139RH, with vertical PNP transistors [33], is in the second class.

Unit of analysis. One part type in one study: the ratios of all its parameters, total doses and bias conditions are reduced to the largest. Studies of the same part family by different groups, with different lots and manufacturers, count separately; taking the largest over all studies of a family instead gives 90 percent factors of 31, 11 and 12 for the three classes, from 77 families.

Coverage. The share of part types with a largest ratio at or below F is the Kaplan-Meier estimate, with lower bounds ("more than") treated as right censored and upper bounds taken at face value. The factor at a coverage level is the smallest recorded value at which the estimate reaches it. Its interval is the 5th to 95th percentile of the same factor over 2000 bootstrap resamplings of the part types (fixed seed). With 24 part types in the transistor class, its 95 percent factor rests on the one or two largest values.

Checks. The 90 percent factor for the PNP-input class stays between 21 and 31 across these subsets: without the two compendia, input and base current parameters only, biased or unbiased irradiations only, exact or figure-read values only, and low rates below or above 9 mrad(Si)/s. By total dose, it is 21 from ratios at 60 krad or less and 30 above.

The calculator. With a curve of changes, the low dose rate estimate at each dose is F times the high dose rate change there; the estimate at the mission dose is interpolated on log-log axes between the doses entered (below the first dose the change is taken as proportional to dose; nothing is extrapolated beyond the last); the estimated low dose rate failure dose is where the scaled curve reaches the allowed change. With a failure dose, the low dose rate failure dose is the high dose rate failure dose divided by the failure dose ratio of the class at the chosen coverage. The factors are properties of the published set, not of your part.

The data: every part type and study, with its largest ratio

One row per part type in a study: the largest ratio of changes at equal dose (DEG) and the largest ratio of failure doses (FAIL) recorded for it, with the parameter, total dose and dose rates of the largest. "more than" marks a lower bound; "about" a value read from a figure or stated approximately. Dose rates in rad(Si)/s unless the source quoted rad(SiO2)/s.

ClassPartStudyLargest DEGWhereLargest FAILWhere
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM139 (NSC 5962R8873901VDA, radiation hardened SMD)Bogorad 2008 [34]93VOFF; 100 krad; 0.02 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM139 5962R8773901VDA (RH SMD, die from Analog Devices; Table III...Bogorad 2008 [34]93VOFF; 100 krad; 0.02 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM139 (NSC RM139AJRQMLV, DC HID0205A, space level QML radiation...Yui 2002 [7]about 72+Ib (mean delta input bias current); 30 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/smore than 40+Ib to 100 nA (NSC MNLM139A-X-RH spec limit, read as 100 nA); 5 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM124 quad op amp, standard COTS (National, DC9524)Titus 1999 [2]about 31delta I_IB; 50 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/smore than 7.4I_IB = 50 nA ("Max. Spec. Limit" as read on the figure); 10.2 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM124A (NSC M38510/11005SCA, DC 0714, non-radiation hardened...Bogorad 2008 [34]31IOS; 100 krad; 0.02 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM124A M38510/11005SCA (National, non-RH)Bogorad 2008 [34]31IOS (input offset current); 100 krad; 0.02 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM193J/883 (date code 0608)Harris 2008 [35]about 30+I_B (delta); 15.5 krad; 0.002 against 25 rad/smore than 14+I_B, -100 nA spec; 6 krad; 0.002 against 25 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM339Carriere 2000 [32]30input bias current (Ib); 0.008 against 28 rad/smore than 5.9input bias current (Ib); 17 krad; 0.008 against 28 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorCOTS LM124A (National DC9524, Greenock UK)Turflinger 2003 [36]about 23delta IIB; 40 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM193 (as purchased, nitride intact)Pease 2008b [10]about 23delta I_B; 30 krad; 0.005 against 25 rad/smore than 8delta I_B, 100 nA criterion chosen by note author; 6 krad; 0.002 against 25 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM139 (NSC, CERDIP)Pease 1996a [26]about 21dIB (average base current change); 19 krad; 0.0008 against 100 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorTI LM139 (nitride passivation)Pease 2007 [9]about 21delta I_IB; 100 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/smore than 21delta I_IB, 100 nA spec line; 14 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM193 commercial (TI/NSC, LDC 9950G)Bozovich 2017 [37]about 19Delta(+IB); 30 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/sabout 12Delta(+IB) iso-damage (dose to reach equal delta); 16.7 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM324 (Motorola)Johnston 1995 [15]about 17delta Vos; 28 krad; 0.002 against 50 rad/smore than 3.7delta Vos = -5 mV (reader-assumed criterion); 19 krad; 0.002 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM139 (National 9548)Pease 1998b [38]17Ib+ (Table 2, EF = delta p(test)/delta p(BL)); 30 krad; 0.001 against 100 rad/s11Ios / 25 nA (printed "Vos/25nA"; Fig. 13 is Ios) (Table 3, EF = dose to reach the stated change at BL / dose at the test rate); 0.001 against 100...
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM193Yui 2002 [7]about 16input bias current (delta Ib); 30 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/sabout 11input bias current, -100 nA spec; 6 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM111 (National B61AD)Pease 1998b [38]16Ios (Table 2, EF = delta p(test)/delta p(BL)); 10 krad; 0.001 against 50 rad/s5.5Vos / 2 mV (Table 3, EF = dose to reach the stated change at BL / dose at the test rate); 0.001 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM193Pease 2008a [8]15IB+; 10 krad; 0.002 against 25 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM311Carriere 2000 [32]14input bias current (Ib); 0.008 against 28 rad/smore than 10input bias current (Ib), 500 nA limit; 10 krad; 0.008 against 28 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM324 (Motorola)Pease 1997 [4]about 14delta VOS; 24 krad; 0.002 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM139 NSC 9342 [DNA/NSWC]Pease 1996b [39]about 14initial degradation rate delta IB/dose (nA/krad, 10 to 20 krad); 20 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM111 MOT 9417 [JPL]Pease 1996b [39]about 13IB; 25.4 krad; 0.005 against 50 rad/sabout 10IB; 7.8-60 krad; 0.005 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM111 after PETS 175 C 300 hPease 2009 [1]about 13Delta +Ib; 50 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM124 NSC 9430 [DNA/NSWC]Pease 1996b [39]about 13initial degradation rate delta IB/dose (nA/krad, 10 to 20 krad); 17.3-20 krad; 0.01 against 150 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM111 (after 175 C, 1000 hr PETS)Shaneyfelt 2000 [40]about 12delta I_B+; 50 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM139Pease 2001 [41]12IB; 50 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/smore than 5IB; 10 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM139J (National DC9530, Greenock UK)Turflinger 2003 [36]about 11delta IIB; 40 krad; 0.001 against 100 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM139 (p-glass)Shaneyfelt 2004 [11]about 11delta I_B+; 30 krad; 0.01 against 211 rad/sabout 13delta I_B+ = 92 nA; 7.8 krad; 0.01 against 211 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM124Pease 2008a [8]11IB+; 20 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/sabout 10IB+; 5 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM124 (p-glass passivation)Shaneyfelt 2002 [24]about 11delta I_B+; 20 krad; 0.01 against 193 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM139 (p-glass 2.5% P passivation)Shaneyfelt 2002 [24]about 11delta I_B+; 53 krad; 0.01 against 211 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM193 (nitride stripped by plasma etch)Adell 2009b [3]about 11delta Ib; 10 krad; 0.01 against 25 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM139J (EH112AB)Boch 2003 [42]about 10Delta input current; 15.5 krad; 0.0027 against 175 rad/sabout 6.6input current = 100 nA (reader-chosen criterion); 3.8 krad; 0.0027 against 175 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM111 (National, 1994 date code; Vendor C)Johnston 1995 [15]about 10delta IIB; 25 krad; 0.005 against 50 rad/sabout 10delta IIB = 100 nA (spec limit); 4 krad; 0.005 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM111 (National, 1994 date code)Pease 1997 [4]about 10IB (saturated); 0.005 against 50 rad/sabout 8.4IB = 100 nA (spec limit); 4.3 krad; 0.005 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM124 (substrate PNP input)Johnston 2006 [43]about 10input bias current; 10 krad; 0.002 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorNational Semiconductor comparator (1994 date code, substrate pnp...Johnston 2000 [44]about 10Input bias current at saturation; 0.005 against 100 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM139 (DC9530)Pease 2009 [1]about 9.9Delta Ib (MPTB comparison); 50 krad; 0.001 against 100 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM111Pease 2001 [41]9IB; 50 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/sless than 17IB; 3 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM124 (National)Pease 1997 [4]about 9excess IB; 40 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/smore than 13excess IB about 100 nA (spec dose 15 krad); 15 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM158 (National)Johnston 1996 [45]about 8.7delta IIB; 10 krad; 0.001 against 25 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM124 (National 9512)Pease 1998b [38]8.7Ib+ (Table 2, EF = delta p(test)/delta p(BL)); 10 krad; 0.001 against 100 rad/s15Vos / -4 mV (Table 3, EF = dose to reach the stated change at BL / dose at the test rate); 0.001 against 100 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM139 quad comparator (National, DC9630)Titus 1999 [2]about 7.8delta I_IB; 76.5 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/smore than 9.8I_IB = 100 nA; 7.7 krad; 0.001 against 100 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM324 (Table 3: National 9309 at 50 rad/s and 9538 at 0.005 rad/s)...Pease 1996b [39]about 7.8initial degradation rate delta IB/dose (nA/krad, 10 to 20 krad); 15 krad; 0.005 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM139Pease 2008a [8]7.7IB+; 20 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/smore than 20IB+; 5 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorNSC LM833 op amp (PNP input)Li 2019 [46]about 7.7input bias current (delta IB); 15 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM124Pease 2001 [41]7.3IB; 50 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/sabout 3IB; 10 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM311Pease 2008a [8]6.9IB+; 30 krad; 0.008 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM324Carriere 2000 [32]6.7input bias current (Ib); 0.008 against 28 rad/smore than 10input bias current (Ib); 10 krad; 0.008 against 28 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM324 (NS)Carriere 2000 [32]6.7input bias current design margin (max over 0 to 100 krad); 0.008 against 28 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM111 (NSC)Johnston 1994 [31]about 6.3Delta Iib; 8 krad; 0.005 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM324 (Motorola)Johnston 1994 [31]about 5.9Delta Iib; 15 krad; 0.005 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM124J (HH012AF)Boch 2003 [42]about 5.5excess Ib = (Ib post - Ib pre)/Ib pre; 34 krad; 0.0027 against 175 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM111 (oxide/nitride passivation intact)Shaneyfelt 2002 [24]about 4.6delta I_B+; 50 krad; 0.01 against 83.3 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM158AxRLQMLV (TI dual op amp)Myers 2017 [47]4.6PSRR, Amp 1; 100 krad; 0.01 against 32 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM124Boch 2009 [48]about 3.6slew rate (delta SR); 20 krad; 0.0085 against 115 rad/sabout 4.3slew rate, 0.10 V/us criterion chosen by note author; 9.5 krad; 0.0085 against 115 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM111HJohnston 2011 [49]about 3.3input bias current (delta Ib), initial; 8.5 krad; 0.005 against 10000 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM158Pease 2008a [8]3.1IB+; 30 krad; 0.02 against 149 rad/sabout 6IB+; 5 krad; 0.02 against 149 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM111J-8 (JH16AB)Boch 2003 [42]about 3excess Ib = (Ib post - Ib pre)/Ib pre; 10 krad; 0.0027 against 175 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM124Boch 2011 [50]about 2.9slew rate, biased inverter gain 10; 20 krad; 0.0085 against 115 rad/sabout 6slew rate, biased (dose equivalence, overlap method, HDR dose 150 krad); 0.0085 against 115 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM124JTapero 2015 [51]2.8Delta IB (input bias current); 10 krad; 0.001 against 50 rad/sabout 3.6Delta IB criterion 17.8 nA (dose to criterion); 10 krad; 0.001 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM124 (TEOS/SiC passivation, ELDRS-sensitive control)Shaneyfelt 2006 [25]about 2.7delta V_os; 100 krad; 0.01 against 160 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM158 (Motorola)Zheng 2013 [52]about 2.1Delta +Ibs (input bias current); 100 krad; 0.013 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM139 (USG undoped oxide, 800 nm)Shaneyfelt 2003 [20]2.1I_B+; 100 krad; 0.01 against 187 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM124 (NSC)Zheng 2013 [52]about 1.9Delta +Ibs (input bias current); 100 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorTI LM339 comparator (PNP input)Li 2019 [46]about 1.9input bias current (delta IB); 50 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM139Anashin 2015 [53]1.8input current; 10 krad; 0.001 against 23.6 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM139AxRLQMLV ch 1Kruckmeyer 2008 [54]1.3differential input current (note: 'differential input voltage [current, nA]'); 100 krad; 0.01 against 41 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM193AxRLQMLV ch 1Kruckmeyer 2008 [54]1.3output saturation voltage; 100 krad; 0.01 against 41 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM124AxRLQMLV ch 4Kruckmeyer 2008 [54]1rise time; 100 krad; 0.01 against 41 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM139AxRLQMLV (TI/NSC, JM051X21, rad-hardened bipolar)Bozovich 2017 [37]less than 1all parameters; 100 krad; 0.01 against 45 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM124 (LTO passivation, Greenock U.K. 6-inch line)Shaneyfelt 2003 [20]about 0.65delta I_B+; 100 krad; 0.01 against 167 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM111 (NSC/TI, lot B61AD, CRANE 2000, Table III row citing ref [63])Bozovich 2017 [37]more than 7.7Input bias current failure (Delta 100 nA at 6.5 krad); 6.5 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM139 (RH QML)Yui 2002 [7]more than 40input bias current, about -95 nA spec; 5 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM311 (NSC)Pease 2001 [41]about 4IB; 5 krad; 0.0083 against 28 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM324 (NSC 9806)Pease 2001 [41]about 20IB; 5 krad; 0.0083 against 28 rad/s
PNP-input op amp or comparatorLM339 (NSC 9830)Pease 2001 [41]about 10IB; 5 krad; 0.0083 against 28 rad/s
Other linear ICAD590Pease 2008a [8]52Iout (pre-rad 302 uA); 20 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/smore than 4Iout; 12 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/s
Other linear ICISL72991RHPease 2008a [8]more than 35VDO (0.2 V at 100 mA); 80 krad; 0.01 against 120 rad/s
Other linear ICAD590 temperature transducerHarris 2010 [55]about 27temperature error; 50 krad; 0.01 against 25 rad/s3.8temperature error (failure dose); 20 krad; 0.01 against 25 rad/s
Other linear ICAD590Pease 2001 [41]24Ambient temperature error; 50 krad; 0.005 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICLM113 (NSC, commercial lot 64AB)Kenna 2009 [56]about 17Delta dynamic impedance at 1 mA (ohm); 75 krad; 0.01 against 25 rad/smore than 2parametric failure dose (Table 1); 50 krad; 0.01 against 25 rad/s
Other linear ICLM117Pease 2001 [41]12Vout (mV); 50 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/smore than 10Vout; 10 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICLM108A (National, super-beta npn input)Johnston 1996 [45]about 11delta IIB; 26 krad; 0.002 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICLT1078Pease 2008a [8]9.3GBW (gain bandwidth; spec 200 kHz typ, pre-rad 250); 12 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/sabout 6GBW; 2.5 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICLM3940Pease 2008a [8]8.7Vout at 1 A (mV); 15 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICSG1846 PWM (Microsemi)Bogorad 2008 [34]8.4Err Amp VOH; 100 krad; 0.02 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICAD667 (ADI, lot 0438)Kenna 2009 [56]about 7.9Delta unipolar zero error (LSB); 50 krad; 0.01 against 25 rad/smore than 10Unipolar zero error -2 LSB limit (dose to failure, averages); 10 krad; 0.01 against 25 rad/s
Other linear ICSG1825 PWM (Microsemi)Bogorad 2008 [34]7.7VOL A OUT; 100 krad; 0.02 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICLT1580Pease 2001 [41]7.7Vref; 0.01 against 59 rad/s
Other linear ICLM101A 5962R9951501VHA (National, RH)Bogorad 2008 [34]7.5VOS; 100 krad; 0.02 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICOP07 (Texas Instruments)Zheng 2013 [52]about 6.5Delta +Ibs (input bias current); 100 krad; 0.013 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICLT1006APease 2008a [8]6.4IB+; 15 krad; 0.01 against 25 rad/s
Other linear ICLT1019-2.5Yui 2002 [7]about 5.9Vout; 30 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s2.9Vout and line regulation; 17 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICLM185BY-2.5 referenceAbare 2002 [57]about 5.8Vout; 15 krad; 0.008 against 138 rad/sabout 1.8Vout, +/-1.5% (+/-38 mV) spec; 8.3 krad; 0.008 against 138 rad/s
Other linear ICOP42Pease 2001 [41]more than 5.7Vos; 50 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICAD534 multiplier (ADI)Bogorad 2008 [34]5.6IOS,x; 100 krad; 0.02 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICREF02Pease 2001 [41]5Vout; 10 krad; 0.005 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICAD667 12-bit ADCHarris 2010 [55]about 4.7integral nonlinearity (INL); 75 krad; 0.01 against 25 rad/s
Other linear ICLM4050Anashin 2015 [53]4.2reference voltage; 10 krad; 0.001 against 23.6 rad/sabout 3.1Delta V_ref criterion 17 mV (HDR shift at 100 krad); dose to criterion; 32 krad; 0.012 against 23.6 rad/s
Other linear ICLM101A (National B58AD)Pease 1998b [38]4.1Ib- (Table 2, EF = delta p(test)/delta p(BL)); 30 krad; 0.001 against 50 rad/s3.9Ios / 10 nA (Table 3, EF = dose to reach the stated change at BL / dose at the test rate); 0.001 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICAD590 flatpack (temperature transducer)Adell 2009b [3]about 4temperature error; 12 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/smore than 2.7temperature error, -3 C criterion; 11 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICLM101APease 2001 [41]4IB; 50 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICLM101AJ (HH09AB)Boch 2003 [42]about 4excess Ib = (Ib post - Ib pre)/Ib pre; 35 krad; 0.0027 against 175 rad/s
Other linear ICLT1019Adell 2009b [3]about 3.9delta Vref; 30 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICAD652 V/F converterHarris 2010 [55]about 3.8reference voltage; 100 krad; 0.01 against 25 rad/s
Other linear ICHS139RHPease 2001 [41]3.8IB; 50 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICOP15Pease 2001 [41]3.8Vos; 50 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICOP484 (OP484AMQMLR)Bowles-Martinez 2011 [58]about 3.8Input offset voltage; 22 krad; 0.01 against 25 rad/s
Other linear ICHS139RH quad comparator (Intersil RSG dielectrically isolated...Krieg 1999 [33]about 3.7input bias current, delta ratio; 50 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICLM108 (NSC)Zheng 2013 [52]about 3.6Delta +Ibs (input bias current); 100 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/s
Other linear ICLM136Pease 2008a [8]3.6Del Vref (mV); 30 krad; 0.015 against 75 rad/sabout 3Del Vref; 20 krad; 0.015 against 75 rad/s
Other linear ICPM156Pease 2001 [41]more than 3.3Vos (input offset voltage); 50 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear IC"29372" 750 mA low-dropout adjustable positive regulator...Pease 1998a [59]about 3Io(max) (maximum output drive current); 15 krad; 0.01 against 42 rad/sabout 4.9Io(max) < 750 mA (minimum specified drive current); 2.2 krad; 0.01 against 42 rad/s
Other linear ICLM108Pease 2001 [41]3IB; 50 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICMAX473Pease 2001 [41]3Vos; 20 krad; 0.005 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICOP27 Lin Tech 9303/9309 [JPL]Pease 1996b [39]about 3IB; 20-30 krad; 0.005 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICLM101A NSC B49AB [DNA/NSWC]Pease 1996b [39]2.8IB; 50 krad; 0.0083 against 100 rad/s
Other linear ICLM108 (National H63AB, super-beta)Pease 1998b [38]2.6Ib+ (Table 2, EF = delta p(test)/delta p(BL)); 30 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICMC29372Pease 2001 [41]2.6Io(max) (max output current); 20 krad; 0.01 against 42 rad/s
Other linear ICLM194 NSC 9508 [JPL]Pease 1996b [39]about 2.5delta(1/hFE) at 100 uA; 15 krad; 0.005 against 50 rad/smore than 4Icbo; 10 krad; 0.005 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICHCPL-268K optocoupler (Agilent)Bogorad 2008 [34]2.4CTR 2 B; 100 krad; 0.02 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICLM101Johnston 1994 [31]about 2.2relative damage (EF vs dose rate); 0.02 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICAD652Anashin 2015 [53]2.2not named in note; 10 krad; 0.001 against 23.6 rad/s
Other linear ICLM101 (NSC)Zheng 2013 [52]about 2.2Delta +Ibs (input bias current); 100 krad; 0.013 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICAD537 (ADI, lot 0719A/B)Kenna 2009 [56]about 2.1Delta input bias current (nA); 50 krad; 0.01 against 25 rad/smore than 3Op amp input bias current (parametric failure dose); 10 krad; 0.01 against 25 rad/s
Other linear ICOP27 (PMI, Analog Devices)Johnston 1995 [15]about 2delta IB; 30 krad; 0.005 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICAD537 V/F converterHarris 2010 [55]about 1.9input bias current; 100 krad; 0.01 against 25 rad/s
Other linear ICLT1963Pease 2008a [8]1.9VDO (dropout voltage, mV); 5 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICOP249Pease 2001 [41]1.9Vos; 50 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICLM4050WG2.5RLQV (LM4050 2.5 V reference)Kruckmeyer 2010 [60]1.8reference voltage at IL = 60 uA; 100 krad; 0.01 against 152 rad/s
Other linear ICSMP11 ADI/PMI 9449 [JPL]Pease 1996b [39]1.7droop rate (V/s); 30 krad; 0.005 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICLM2941J LDO regulatorAbare 2002 [57]about 1.6Vout; 20 krad; 0.008 against 138 rad/sabout 1.4Vout, +/-3% spec, 60 and 300 mA loads; 25 krad; 0.008 against 138 rad/s
Other linear ICLT1763Pease 2001 [41]1.6Io(max); 0.01 against 40 rad/s
Other linear ICOP400 (OP400A, Analog Devices, DC 0502)Irom 2014 [61]more than 1.4Input bias current; 50 krad; 0.01 against 25 rad/sabout 1.3Input bias current -50 nA criterion (dose to reach); 47 krad; 0.01 against 25 rad/s
Other linear ICL4913Pease 2008a [8]1.3Iout(max); 50 krad; 0.01 against 62 rad/s
Other linear ICAD648 (Analog Devices, DC 0629, Bi-FET)Irom 2014 [61]about 1.2Input bias current; 30 krad; 0.01 against 25 rad/s
Other linear ICBrokaw bandgap reference in IBM 9HP (SiGe HBTs plus 90 nm FETs)Fleetwood 2014 [62]about 1Supply current change; 100 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICLT6233 (LT6233IS6)Bowles-Martinez 2011 [58]about 1Open-loop gain, RL = 1 k; 22 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICOP400Pease 2001 [41]1IB; 50 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICRH119 (text) / RH119W (Table III, Linear Technology, LDC 0429A)Bozovich 2017 [37]about 1IB, IOS; 15 krad; 0.005 against 25 rad/s
Other linear ICLF411Anashin 2015 [53]0.87not named in note; 100 krad; 0.012 against 23.6 rad/s
Other linear ICOP484Anashin 2015 [53]0.86not named in note; 100 krad; 0.012 against 23.6 rad/s
Other linear ICOP27Anashin 2015 [53]0.81not named in note; 100 krad; 0.012 against 23.6 rad/s
Other linear ICLM317Anashin 2015 [53]0.78not named in note; 100 krad; 0.012 against 23.6 rad/s
Other linear ICMAX4508Anashin 2015 [53]0.63not named in note; 100 krad; 0.012 against 23.6 rad/s
Other linear ICDAC121Anashin 2015 [53]0.31not named in note; 100 krad; 0.012 against 23.6 rad/s
Other linear ICOP15Carriere 2000 [32]0.28input bias current (Ib); 0.008 against 28 rad/s
Other linear ICOP15Carriere 2000 [32]0.28input bias current design margin (max over 0 to 100 krad); 0.008 against 28 rad/s
Other linear ICOP470Carriere 2000 [32]0.27input bias current (Ib); 0.008 against 28 rad/s
Other linear ICOP470Carriere 2000 [32]0.27input bias current design margin (max over 0 to 100 krad); 0.008 against 28 rad/s
Other linear IC54F10 (National)Jenkins 1992 [63]about 1I_IH above 20 uA (failure criterion); 7.7 krad; 0.0001 against 100 rad/s
Other linear ICAD590 (5962R8757104VKA)Bowles-Martinez 2011 [58]2functional failure dose (Table 1); 50 krad; 0.01 against 25 rad/s
Other linear ICAD606 log amplifierHarris 2010 [55]more than 6.7log conformance (failure dose, extreme failure); 150 krad; 0.01 against 25 rad/s
Other linear ICAD652 (AD652SQ883B)Kenna 2009 [56]2parametric failure dose (Table 1); 5 krad; 0.01 against 25 rad/s
Other linear ICAD670 (AD5670-JNZ)Kenna 2009 [56]about 2.5functional failure dose (Table 1); 0.01 against 25 rad/s
Other linear ICLF147 (Linear Technology, DC 9803, JFET op amp)Irom 2014 [61]less than 0.5dose for significant degradation; 10 krad; 0.004 against 20 rad/s
Other linear ICLM117 (National H65AB)Pease 1998b [38]18Vout / 100 mV (Table 3, EF = dose to reach the stated change at BL / dose at the test rate); 0.001 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICLM134-HYui 2002 [7]about 3.1set error and temperature error; 16 krad; 0.02 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICLM1577K (step-up regulator)Bowles-Martinez 2011 [58]1.7parametric failure dose (text); 1.5 krad; 0.005 against 25 rad/s
Other linear ICLM185-1.2Yui 2002 [7]more than 10reference voltage; 10 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICLM185-1.2 (NSC *0205)Pease 2008a [8]more than 10Vref; 10 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICLP2985 (NSC fixed-output LDO)Zebrev 2013 [64]1.6Output voltage failure dose (parametric margin about 5.05 and 4.95 V); 45 krad; 0.014 against 51.7 rad/s
Other linear ICLT1019 (Lin Tech *0040)Pease 2008a [8]about 4Vref; 10 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICLT1175 (LT1175IS8-5)Bowles-Martinez 2011 [58]about 2.9parametric failure dose (text); 7.5 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICLT1185 (Lin Tech 9249)Pease 2001 [41]more than 5Io(max); 20 krad; 0.01 against 40 rad/s
Other linear ICLT1185 (Linear Technology negative LDO, DC 9249)McClure 2000 [65]more than 6Shutdown function failure; 10 krad; 0.01 against 40 rad/s
Other linear ICLT1763 (Linear Technology LDO, DC 9918)McClure 2000 [65]more than 10Output voltage (unusable at about 10 krad); 10 krad; 0.01 against 40 rad/s
Other linear ICLT1963 (LT1963ES8)Bowles-Martinez 2011 [58]3.1parametric failure dose (text); 7 krad; 0.01 against 25 rad/s
Other linear ICLX7730 telemetry controller (Microsemi, dual-die MCM)Sureau 2017 [66]about 2Settling time (50% increase); 50 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICOP15 (ADI/PMI)Pease 1998b [38]2.8Vos / 5 mV (Table 3, EF = dose to reach the stated change at BL / dose at the test rate); 0.001 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICOP249 (ADI/PMI)Pease 1998b [38]2.2Vos / -4 mV (Table 3, EF = dose to reach the stated change at BL / dose at the test rate); 0.001 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICOP249 ADI/PMI 9501 [JPL]Pease 1996b [39]about 10Vos (mV); 5-26 krad; 0.005 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICOP42 (ADI/PMI)Pease 1998b [38]3.6Vos / -5 mV (Table 3, EF = dose to reach the stated change at BL / dose at the test rate); 0.001 against 50 rad/s
Other linear ICOP42 (PMI)Johnston 1995 [15]more than 5delta Vos = 5 mV (reader-assumed criterion; the paper gives none); 19.5 krad; 0.005 against 100 rad/s
Other linear ICPM156 (ADI/PMI)Pease 1998b [38]3.5Vos / 5 mV (Table 3, EF = dose to reach the stated change at BL / dose at the test rate); 0.001 against 50 rad/s
TransistorRF25 lateral PNPWitczak 1998 [67]about 31delta IB (measured at VBE = 0.5 V); 20 krad; 0.001 against 294 rad/s
TransistorRF25 lateral pnp (ADI)Witczak 1998 [67]about 31excess base current (Delta IB); 20 krad; 0.001 against 294 rad/s
Transistorlateral PNP transistor (Witczak 1997 data)Witczak 1997 [68]about 12delta IB; 20 krad; 0.01 against 294 rad/s
TransistorGLPNP (12 um base, 1.22 um base oxide, p-glass only 'ELDRS' split)Nowlin 2005 [69]about 11delta IB (PNP); 20 krad; 0.0023 against 100 rad/sabout 14delta IB = 130 nA criterion (PNP); 21 krad; 0.0023 against 100 rad/s
TransistorPNP transistor (device not stated; data from Witczak 1996 [28])Hjalmarson 2003 [70]about 11excess base current; 0.001 against 400 rad/s
Transistorradiation-hardened poly-Si emitter vertical npn (Analog Devices...Witczak 1997 [68]about 8excess IB at VBE = 0.6 V; 10 krad; 0.01 against 294 rad/sabout 2excess IB at VBE = 0.6 V; 40 krad; 0.01 against 294 rad/s
TransistorGLPNP (p-glass only)Pease 2007 [9]more than 7peak delta I_B; 24 krad; 0.0128 against 50 rad/s
TransistorGLPNP (p-glass)Pease 2008b [10]about 6.9delta I_B (Vbe = 0.5 V, VG = 0); 30 krad; 0.02 against 100 rad/s
TransistorGLPNP (p-glass split)Pease 2004 [28]about 6.5delta I_b, Vbe = 0.5 V; 30 krad; 0.02 against 39 rad/sabout 4.3delta I_b = 17 nA criterion; 6.9 krad; 0.02 against 39 rad/s
TransistorNPN (NSC ELDRS test chip 2)Nowlin 2005 [69]6delta IB (NPN); 50 krad; 0.0023 against 100 rad/sabout 2.9delta IB, criterion not itemized in note; 0.0023 against 100 rad/s
Transistor2N2222ABoch 2002 [71]about 5.9Excess Ib ((Ib_post - Ib_pre)/Ib_pre); 32 krad; 0.0015 against 300 rad/s
Transistor3CG111 PNP transistor (made in China)Li 2019 [46]about 3.5delta(1/beta), normalized gain; 20 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/s
TransistorADRF development-process lateral pnp (LPNP), 600 nm base oxideSchrimpf 1995a [72]about 3excess base current delta IB at VEB = 0.7 V; 10 krad; 0.01 against 167 rad/s
TransistorXFCB crystalline-emitter npn (1.5 x 1.5 um emitter, 545 nm oxide...Nowlin 1994 [73]about 3excess base current Delta I_B/I_B0 at VBE=0.6 V; 100 krad; 0.01 against 1760 rad/sabout 2base current doubled (Delta I_B/I_B0 = 1); 40 krad; 0.01 against 1760 rad/s
TransistorPNP transistor (unspecified)Zebrev 2013 [64]about 2.8Delta(1/h21); 100 krad; 0.015 against 50 rad/s
TransistorIBM 9HP SiGe HBT (4th gen, 90 nm)Fleetwood 2014 [62]about 2.7Average base current increase at V_BE = 0.6 V, V_CB = 0 (percent); 50 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Transistor2N2907APease 2001 [41]2hFE at 1 mA (Del IB); 50 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/s
TransistorGLPNP (NSC ELDRS test chip, p-glass only)Fleetwood 2008 [19]about 2excess base current; 10 krad; 0.02 against 40 rad/s
Transistor2N2907 (Semicoa, lot 0932)Campola 2015 [74]1.8Delta hFE^-1; 100 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Transistor2N2222APease 2001 [41]1.6hFE at 1 mA (as Del IB); 50 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/s
TransistorNPN transistor (unspecified)Zebrev 2013 [64]about 1.5Delta(1/h21); 100 krad; 0.015 against 50 rad/s
TransistorIBM 5AM SiGe HBT (1st gen, 500 nm)Fleetwood 2014 [62]about 1.2Average base current increase at V_BE = 0.6 V, V_CB = 0 (percent); 80 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Transistor2N3501Pease 2001 [41]1.2hFE at 1 mA (Del IB); 50 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/s
Transistor2N3019Pease 2001 [41]1.1hFE at 1 mA (Del IB); 50 krad; 0.01 against 100 rad/s
TransistorIBM 8HP SiGe HBT (3rd gen, 130 nm)Fleetwood 2014 [62]about 0.49Average base current increase at V_BE = 0.6 V, V_CB = 0 (percent); 50 krad; 0.01 against 50 rad/s
Data and provenance

All ratios are from published sources: IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, the IEEE Radiation Effects Data Workshop records, RADECS proceedings and NASA and JPL compendia, read in full for the site's ELDRS library in September 2026; each value carries its page, table or figure in the site's working files. The site's own test records enter only the comparison in the recommendations section, as counts and quantiles; internal records are anonymized and none is identified. No part number from an internal report appears on this page.

Disclaimer

This tool is provided for preliminary analysis and educational purposes only. The factors describe a published population, not the part in hand; the 3D model has illustrative numbers. Users are solely responsible for verifying all outputs against their own analysis, test data and applicable standards before making any design, test, or mission decisions. Space RHA LLC makes no warranties regarding accuracy or fitness for purpose.

References
  1. R. L. Pease, R. D. Schrimpf, and D. M. Fleetwood, "ELDRS in Bipolar Linear Circuits: A Review," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 1894-1908, Aug. 2009.
  2. J. L. Titus, D. Emily, J. F. Krieg, T. Turflinger, R. L. Pease, and A. Campbell, "Enhanced Low Dose Rate Sensitivity (ELDRS) of Linear Circuits in a Space Environment," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 46, no. 6, p. 1608, Dec. 1999.
  3. P. C. Adell, R. L. Pease, H. J. Barnaby, B. Rax, X. J. Chen, and S. S. McClure, "Irradiation With Molecular Hydrogen as an Accelerated Total Dose Hardness Assurance Test Method for Bipolar Linear Circuits," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 56, no. 6, p. 3326, Dec. 2009.
  4. R. L. Pease, L. M. Cohn, D. M. Fleetwood, M. A. Gehlhausen, T. L. Turflinger, D. B. Brown, and A. H. Johnston, "A Proposed Hardness Assurance Test Methodology for Bipolar Linear Circuits and Devices in a Space Ionizing Radiation Environment," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 44, no. 6, p. 1981, Dec. 1997.
  5. Space RHA, "Total Dose Hardness Priors," tid-priors-tool.html: enhancement factors from test records with results at both dose rates, public reports and internal ones (the internal ones anonymized), reduced to the doses at which parts first failed; see the ELDRS section of that page.
  6. D. Chen, R. Pease, K. Kruckmeyer, J. Forney, A. Phan, M. Carts, S. Cox, S. Burns, R. Albarian, B. Holcombe, B. Little, J. Salzman, G. Chaumont, H. Duperray, A. Ouellet, S. Buchner, and K. LaBel, "Enhanced Low Dose Rate Sensitivity at Ultra-Low Dose Rates," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 58, no. 6, pp. 2983-2990, Dec. 2011.
  7. C. C. Yui, S. S. McClure, B. G. Rax, J. M. Lehman, T. D. Minto, and M. D. Wiedeman, "Total Dose Bias Dependency and ELDRS Effects in Bipolar Linear Devices," in 2002 IEEE Radiation Effects Data Workshop Record, pp. 131-137, 2002.
  8. R. L. Pease, "2008 Update to the ELDRS Bipolar Linear Circuit Data Compendium," in RADECS 2008 Book of Proceedings, paper PA2, pp. 75-78, 2008.
  9. R. L. Pease, D. G. Platteter, G. W. Dunham, J. E. Seiler, P. C. Adell, H. J. Barnaby, and J. Chen, "The Effects of Hydrogen in Hermetically Sealed Packages on the Total Dose and Dose Rate Response of Bipolar Linear Circuits," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 54, no. 6, p. 2168, Dec. 2007.
  10. R. L. Pease, P. C. Adell, B. G. Rax, X. J. Chen, H. J. Barnaby, K. E. Holbert, and H. P. Hjalmarson, "The Effects of Hydrogen on the Enhanced Low Dose Rate Sensitivity (ELDRS) of Bipolar Linear Circuits," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 55, no. 6, p. 3169, Dec. 2008.
  11. M. R. Shaneyfelt, J. R. Schwank, D. M. Fleetwood, R. L. Pease, J. A. Felix, P. E. Dodd, and M. C. Maher, "Annealing Behavior of Linear Bipolar Devices With Enhanced Low-Dose-Rate Sensitivity," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 3172-3177, Dec. 2004.
  12. D. R. Hughart, R. D. Schrimpf, D. M. Fleetwood, X. J. Chen, H. J. Barnaby, K. E. Holbert, R. L. Pease, D. G. Platteter, B. R. Tuttle, and S. T. Pantelides, "The Effects of Aging and Hydrogen on the Radiation Response of Gated Lateral PNP Bipolar Transistors," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 56, no. 6, p. 3361, Dec. 2009.
  13. J. Boch, F. Saigné, R. D. Schrimpf, J.-R. Vaillé, L. Dusseau, S. Ducret, M. Bernard, E. Lorfèvre, and C. Chatry, "Estimation of Low-Dose-Rate Degradation on Bipolar Linear Integrated Circuits Using Switching Experiments," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 52, no. 6, pp. 2616-2621, Dec. 2005.
  14. R. D. Schrimpf, "Recent Advances in Understanding Total-Dose Effects in Bipolar Transistors," in Proc. Third European Conf. on Radiation and its Effects on Components and Systems (RADECS 95), pp. 9-18, 1995.
  15. A. H. Johnston, B. G. Rax, and C. I. Lee, "Enhanced Damage in Linear Bipolar Integrated Circuits at Low Dose Rate," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 42, no. 6, p. 1650, Dec. 1995.
  16. X. J. Chen, H. J. Barnaby, B. Vermeire, K. Holbert, D. Wright, R. L. Pease, G. Dunham, D. G. Platteter, J. Seiler, S. McClure, and P. Adell, "Mechanisms of Enhanced Radiation-Induced Degradation Due to Excess Molecular Hydrogen in Bipolar Oxides," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 54, no. 6, p. 1913, Dec. 2007.
  17. D. M. Fleetwood, S. L. Kosier, R. N. Nowlin, R. D. Schrimpf, R. A. Reber, Jr., M. DeLaus, P. S. Winokur, A. Wei, W. E. Combs, and R. L. Pease, "Physical Mechanisms Contributing to Enhanced Bipolar Gain Degradation at Low Dose Rates," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 41, no. 6, p. 1871, Dec. 1994.
  18. S. N. Rashkeev, C. R. Cirba, D. M. Fleetwood, R. D. Schrimpf, S. C. Witczak, A. Michez, and S. T. Pantelides, "Physical Model for Enhanced Interface-Trap Formation at Low Dose Rates," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 49, no. 6, p. 2650, Dec. 2002.
  19. D. M. Fleetwood, R. D. Schrimpf, S. T. Pantelides, R. L. Pease, and G. W. Dunham, "Electron Capture, Hydrogen Release, and Enhanced Gain Degradation in Linear Bipolar Devices," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 55, no. 6, p. 2986, Dec. 2008.
  20. M. R. Shaneyfelt, R. L. Pease, M. C. Maher, J. R. Schwank, S. Gupta, P. E. Dodd, and L. C. Riewe, "Passivation Layers for Reduced Total Dose Effects and ELDRS in Linear Bipolar Devices," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 50, no. 6, p. 1784, Dec. 2003.
  21. D. R. Hughart, R. D. Schrimpf, D. M. Fleetwood, B. R. Tuttle, and S. T. Pantelides, "Mechanisms of Interface Trap Buildup and Annealing During Elevated Temperature Irradiation," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 58, no. 6, p. 2930, Dec. 2011.
  22. A. H. Johnston, R. T. Swimm, and D. O. Thorbourn, "Charge Yield at Low Electric Fields: Considerations for Bipolar Integrated Circuits," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 60, no. 6, p. 4488, Dec. 2013.
  23. P. C. Adell, B. Rax, I. S. Esqueda, and H. J. Barnaby, "Hydrogen Limits for Total Dose and Dose Rate Response in Linear Bipolar Circuits," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 62, no. 6, p. 2476, Dec. 2015.
  24. M. R. Shaneyfelt, R. L. Pease, J. R. Schwank, M. C. Maher, G. L. Hash, D. M. Fleetwood, P. E. Dodd, C. A. Reber, S. C. Witczak, L. C. Riewe, H. P. Hjalmarson, J. C. Banks, B. L. Doyle, and J. A. Knapp, "Impact of Passivation Layers on Enhanced Low-Dose-Rate Sensitivity and Pre-Irradiation Elevated-Temperature Stress Effects in Bipolar Linear ICs," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 49, no. 6, p. 3171, Dec. 2002.
  25. M. R. Shaneyfelt, M. C. Maher, R. C. Camilletti, J. R. Schwank, R. L. Pease, B. A. Russell, and P. E. Dodd, "Elimination of Enhanced Low-Dose-Rate Sensitivity in Linear Bipolar Devices Using Silicon-Carbide Passivation," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 2027-2032, Aug. 2006.
  26. R. L. Pease and M. Gehlhausen, "Elevated Temperature Irradiation of Bipolar Linear Microcircuits," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 43, no. 6, p. 3161, Dec. 1996.
  27. N. L. Rowsey, M. E. Law, R. D. Schrimpf, D. M. Fleetwood, B. R. Tuttle, and S. T. Pantelides, "Mechanisms Separating Time-Dependent and True Dose-Rate Effects in Irradiated Bipolar Oxides," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 59, no. 6, p. 3069, Dec. 2012.
  28. R. L. Pease, D. G. Platteter, G. W. Dunham, J. E. Seiler, H. J. Barnaby, R. D. Schrimpf, M. R. Shaneyfelt, M. C. Maher, and R. N. Nowlin, "Characterization of Enhanced Low Dose Rate Sensitivity (ELDRS) Effects Using Gated Lateral PNP Transistor Structures," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 3773-3780, Dec. 2004.
  29. D. M. Schmidt, D. M. Fleetwood, R. D. Schrimpf, R. L. Pease, R. J. Graves, G. H. Johnson, K. F. Galloway, and W. E. Combs, "Comparison of Ionizing-Radiation-Induced Gain Degradation in Lateral, Substrate, and Vertical PNP BJTs," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 42, no. 6, p. 1541, Dec. 1995.
  30. R. N. Nowlin, E. W. Enlow, R. D. Schrimpf, and W. E. Combs, "Trends in the Total-Dose Response of Modern Bipolar Transistors," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 39, no. 6, p. 2026, Dec. 1992.
  31. A. H. Johnston, G. M. Swift, and B. G. Rax, "Total Dose Effects in Conventional Bipolar Transistors and Linear Integrated Circuits," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 2427-2436, Dec. 1994.
  32. T. Carrière, R. Ecoffet, and P. Poirot, "Evaluation of Accelerated Total Dose Testing of Linear Bipolar Circuits," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 47, no. 6, pp. 2350-2357, Dec. 2000.
  33. J. F. Krieg, J. L. Titus, D. Emily, M. Gehlhausen, J. Swonger, and D. Platteter, "Enhanced Low Dose Rate Sensitivity (ELDRS) in a Voltage Comparator Which Only Utilizes Complementary Vertical NPN and PNP Transistors," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 46, no. 6, p. 1616, Dec. 1999.
  34. A. L. Bogorad, J. J. Likar, S. K. Moyer, A. J. Ditzler, G. P. Doorley, and R. Herschitz, "Total Ionizing Dose and Dose Rate Effects in Candidate Spacecraft Electronic Devices," in 2008 IEEE Radiation Effects Data Workshop, pp. 124-130.
  35. R. D. Harris, S. S. McClure, B. G. Rax, R. W. Evans, and I. Jun, "Comparison of TID Effects in Space-Like Variable Dose Rates and Constant Dose Rates," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 55, no. 6, p. 3088, Dec. 2008.
  36. T. L. Turflinger, A. B. Campbell, W. M. Schmeichel, R. J. Walters, J. F. Krieg, J. L. Titus, M. Reeves, P. W. Marshall, and R. L. Pease, "ELDRS in Space: An Updated and Expanded Analysis of the Bipolar ELDRS Experiment on MPTB," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 50, no. 6, p. 2328, Dec. 2003.
  37. A. N. Bozovich and F. Irom, "Compendium of Single Event Transient (SET) and Total Ionizing Dose (TID) Test Results for Commonly Used Voltage Comparators," in 2017 IEEE Radiation Effects Data Workshop (978-1-5090-4647-8/17).
  38. R. L. Pease, M. Gehlhausen, J. Krieg, J. Titus, T. Turflinger, D. Emily, and L. Cohn, "Evaluation of Proposed Hardness Assurance Method for Bipolar Linear Circuits with Enhanced Low Dose Rate Sensitivity (ELDRS)," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 45, no. 6, p. 2665, Dec. 1998.
  39. R. L. Pease, W. E. Combs, A. Johnston, T. Carriere, C. Poivey, A. Gach, and S. McClure, "A Compendium of Recent Total Dose Data on Bipolar Linear Microcircuits," in 1996 IEEE Radiation Effects Data Workshop Record, pp. 28-37.
  40. M. R. Shaneyfelt, J. R. Schwank, S. C. Witczak, D. M. Fleetwood, R. L. Pease, P. S. Winokur, L. C. Riewe, and G. L. Hash, "Thermal-Stress Effects and Enhanced Low Dose Rate Sensitivity in Linear Bipolar ICs," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 47, no. 6, p. 2539, Dec. 2000.
  41. R. L. Pease, S. McClure, A. H. Johnston, J. Gorelick, T. L. Turflinger, M. Gehlhausen, J. Krieg, T. Carriere, and M. Shaneyfelt, "An Updated Data Compendium of Enhanced Low Dose Rate Sensitive (ELDRS) Bipolar Linear Circuits," in 2001 IEEE Radiation Effects Data Workshop Record, pp. 127-133, 2001.
  42. J. Boch, F. Saigne, R. D. Schrimpf, D. M. Fleetwood, S. Ducret, L. Dusseau, J. P. David, J. Fesquet, J. Gasiot, and R. Ecoffet, "Effect of Switching from High to Low Dose Rate on Linear Bipolar Technology Radiation Response," in Proc. RADECS 2003: Radiation and its Effects on Components and Systems, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 15-19 Sep. 2003 (ESA SP-536), p. 537.
  43. A. H. Johnston and B. G. Rax, "Testing and Qualifying Linear Integrated Circuits for Radiation Degradation in Space," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 1779-1786, Aug. 2006.
  44. Johnston and Guertin, "The Effects of Space Radiation on Linear Integrated Circuits," IEEE Aerospace Conference 2000.
  45. A. H. Johnston, C. I. Lee, and B. G. Rax, "Enhanced Damage in Bipolar Devices at Low Dose Rates: Effects at Very Low Dose Rates," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 3049-3059, Dec. 1996.
  46. X. Li, W. Lu, Q. Guo, D. M. Fleetwood, C. He, X. Wang, X. Yu, J. Sun, M. Liu, and S. Yao, "Temperature-Switching During Irradiation as a Test for ELDRS in Linear Bipolar Devices," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 199-206, Jan. 2019.
  47. B. Myers, K. Kruckmeyer, and T. Trinh, "ELDRS Characterization up to 100 krad of Texas Instruments' Dual Amplifier LM158," in IEEE Radiation Effects Data Workshop 2017 (978-1-5090-4647-8/17).
  48. J. Boch, Y. Gonzalez Velo, F. Saigné, N. J.-H. Roche, R. D. Schrimpf, J.-R. Vaillé, L. Dusseau, C. Chatry, E. Lorfèvre, R. Ecoffet, and A. D. Touboul, "The Use of a Dose-Rate Switching Technique to Characterize Bipolar Devices," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 56, no. 6, p. 3347, Dec. 2009.
  49. A. Johnston, R. Swimm, R. D. Harris, and D. Thorbourn, "Dose Rate Effects in Linear Bipolar Transistors," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 58, no. 6, p. 2816, Dec. 2011.
  50. J. Boch, Y. Gonzalez Velo, F. Saigné, N. J.-H. Roche, S. Perez, R. D. Schrimpf, E. Lorfèvre, J.-R. Vaillé, R. Ecoffet, L. Dusseau, and J. Mekki, "ELDRS: Optimization Tools for the Switched Dose Rate Technique," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 58, no. 6, p. 2998, Dec. 2011.
  51. K. I. Tapero, A. S. Petrov, V. N. Ulimov, P. A. Chubunov, and V. S. Anashin, "Comparison of Irradiation at Low Dose Rate and Irradiation at Elevated Temperature to Reveal ELDRS in Bipolar Linear Circuits," in Proc. RADECS 2015 (IEEE 978-1-5090-0232-0/15).
  52. Zheng Yuzhan, Lu Wu, Ren Diyuan, and Guo Qi, "A New Accelerated Method for Evaluating the ELDRS of Bipolar Operational Amplifiers: Temperature Switching Approach," in Proc. RADECS 2013, paper PJ-2, pp. 1-4, 2013.
  53. V. S. Anashin, V. S. Pershenkov, A. S. Bakerenkov, P. A. Chubunov, A. V. Solomatin, A. S. Rodin, and V. A. Felitsyn, "Experimental Technique for Determination of ELDRS-free Devices," in Proc. RADECS 2015 (IEEE 978-1-5090-0232-0/15).
  54. K. Kruckmeyer, L. McGee, B. Brown, and D. Hughart, "Low Dose Rate Test Results of National Semiconductor's ELDRS-free Bipolar Amplifier LM124 and Comparators LM139 and LM193," in 2008 IEEE Radiation Effects Data Workshop, pp. 110-117.
  55. R. D. Harris, S. S. McClure, B. G. Rax, D. O. Thorbourn, A. J. Kenna, K. B. Clark, and T.-Y. Yan, "ELDRS Characterization for a Very High Dose Mission," in 2010 IEEE Radiation Effects Data Workshop (978-1-4244-8404-1/10).
  56. A. J. Kenna, B. G. Rax, D. O. Thorbourn, R. D. Harris, and S. S. McClure, "Compendium of Recent Total Ionizing Dose Test Results Conducted by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory from 2003 through 2009," in 2009 IEEE Radiation Effects Data Workshop, pp. 32-38, 2009.
  57. W. Abare, F. Brueggeman, R. Pease, J. Krieg, and M. Simons, "Comparative Analysis of Low Dose-Rate, Accelerated, and Standard Cobalt-60 Radiation Response Data for a Low-Dropout Voltage Regulator and a Voltage Reference," in 2002 IEEE Radiation Effects Data Workshop Record, p. 177, 2002.
  58. J. N. Bowles-Martinez, D. O. Thorbourn, B. G. Rax, A. J. Kenna, R. D. Harris, L. Z. Scheick, G. R. Allen, and S. S. McClure, "Compendium of Recent Total Ionizing Dose Test Results Conducted by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory from 2009-2011," in 2011 IEEE Radiation Effects Data Workshop (978-1-4577-1283-8/11).
  59. R. L. Pease, S. McClure, J. Gorelick, and S. C. Witczak, "Enhanced Low-Dose-Rate Sensitivity of a Low-Dropout Voltage Regulator," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 45, no. 6, p. 2571, Dec. 1998.
  60. K. Kruckmeyer, E. Morozumi, R. Eddy, T. Trinh, T. Santiago, and P. Maillard, "Single Event Transient and ELDRS Characterization Test Results for LM4050QML 2.5V Precision Reference," in 2010 IEEE Radiation Effects Data Workshop (978-1-4244-8404-1/10).
  61. F. Irom, S. G. Agarwal, and M. Amrbar, "Compendium of Single-Event Latchup and Total Ionizing Dose Test Results of Commercial and Radiation Tolerant Operational Amplifiers," in 2014 IEEE Radiation Effects Data Workshop (978-1-4799-5884-9/14).
  62. Z. E. Fleetwood, A. S. Cardoso, I. Song, E. Wilcox, N. E. Lourenco, S. D. Phillips, R. Arora, P. Paki-Amouzou, and J. D. Cressler, "Evaluation of Enhanced Low Dose Rate Sensitivity in Fourth-Generation SiGe HBTs," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 61, no. 6, pp. 2915-2922, Dec. 2014.
  63. William C. Jenkins, "Dose-Rate-Independent Total Dose Failure in 54F10 Bipolar Logic Circuits," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 39, no. 6, p. 1899, Dec. 1992.
  64. G. I. Zebrev, A. S. Petrov, R. G. Useinov, R. S. Ikhsanov, V. N. Ulimov, V. S. Anashin, and I. V. Elushov, "Simulation of Bipolar Transistors Degradation at Various Dose Rates and Electrical Modes for High Dose Conditions," in Proc. RADECS 2013, paper PG-5, pp. 1-5, 2013.
  65. McClure, Gorelick, Pease, and Johnston, "Dose Rate and Bias Dependency of Total Dose Sensitivity of Low Dropout Voltage Regulators," in IEEE REDW 2000, pp. 100-105.
  66. M. Sureau, R. Stevens, M. Leuenberger, N. Rezzak, and D. Johnson, "TID, ELDRS and SEE Hardening and Testing on Mixed Signal Telemetry LX7730 Controller," in IEEE Radiation Effects Data Workshop 2017 (978-1-5090-4647-8/17).
  67. Witczak, Schrimpf, Barnaby, Lacoe, Mayer, Galloway, Pease, and Fleetwood, "Moderated Degradation Enhancement of Lateral pnp Transistors Due to Measurement Bias," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 45, no. 6, pp. 2644-2648, Dec. 1998.
  68. S. C. Witczak, R. D. Schrimpf, D. M. Fleetwood, K. F. Galloway, R. C. Lacoe, D. C. Mayer, J. M. Puhl, R. L. Pease, and J. S. Suehle, "Hardness Assurance Testing of Bipolar Junction Transistors at Elevated Irradiation Temperatures," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 44, no. 6, p. 1989, Dec. 1997.
  69. R. N. Nowlin, R. L. Pease, D. G. Platteter, G. W. Dunham, and J. E. Seiler, "Evaluating TM1019.6 ELDRS Screening Methods Using Gated Lateral PNP Transistors," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 52, no. 6, pp. 2609-2615, Dec. 2005.
  70. H. P. Hjalmarson, R. L. Pease, S. C. Witczak, M. R. Shaneyfelt, J. R. Schwank, A. H. Edwards, C. E. Hembree, and T. R. Mattsson, "Mechanisms for Radiation Dose-Rate Sensitivity of Bipolar Transistors," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 50, no. 6, p. 1901, Dec. 2003.
  71. J. Boch, F. Saigné, T. Maurel, F. Giustino, L. Dusseau, R. D. Schrimpf, K. F. Galloway, J. P. David, R. Ecoffet, J. Fesquet, and J. Gasiot, "Dose and Dose-Rate Effects on NPN Bipolar Junction Transistors Irradiated at High Temperature," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 49, no. 3, p. 1474, Jun. 2002.
  72. R. D. Schrimpf, R. J. Graves, D. M. Schmidt, D. M. Fleetwood, R. L. Pease, W. E. Combs, and M. DeLaus, "Hardness-Assurance Issues for Lateral PNP Bipolar Junction Transistors," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 42, no. 6, p. 1641, Dec. 1995.
  73. R. N. Nowlin, D. M. Fleetwood, and R. D. Schrimpf, "Saturation of the Dose-Rate Response of Bipolar Transistors Below 10 rad(SiO2)/s: Implications for Hardness Assurance," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 2637-2641, Dec. 1994.
  74. Campola et al., "Compendium of Total Ionizing Dose and Displacement Damage Results from NASA Goddard Space Flight Center," IEEE REDW 2015 (NTRS 20160009071).
For preliminary analysis and education; verify every output against your own analysis before a design, test or mission decision. The total dose priors page gives failure dose distributions by device family and the share of part types flagged ELDRS sensitive.Open the priors page