Method for evaluating cumulative ionizing total dose damage of electronic devices

Abstract

The application discloses an evaluation and calculation method for cumulative damage of ionized total dose of electronic devices, and relates to the field of radiation damage evaluation of electronic devices; core data of the device is collected and data preprocessing is performed; a dynamic iteration damage calculation model, a multi-stress coupling correction system and a five-level quantitative grading mechanism are constructed; a basic damage amount is calculated iteratively in a time domain; a real damage value is obtained by combining temperature, electric stress and other parameters; damage grades are quantitatively determined; meanwhile, iteration updating, trend fitting and life prediction processes are additionally added; a global time symbol is unified; and a full-closed-loop evaluation system is formed; the above-mentioned evaluation and calculation method for cumulative damage of ionized total dose of electronic devices greatly improves the accuracy and practicability of damage evaluation.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of radiation damage assessment for electronic devices, and in particular to a method for assessing and calculating the cumulative damage from total ionizing dose to electronic devices. Background Technology

[0002] In complex environments such as space radiation, nuclear radiation, and industrial irradiation, electronic devices are continuously subjected to ionizing radiation, resulting in cumulative total ionizing dose (TID) damage. This leads to drift in electrical parameters, performance degradation, and even functional failure, severely impacting the reliability and lifespan of electronic equipment. Existing methods for assessing TID damage have several technical shortcomings: First, most methods employ static, fixed-threshold calculation models, assessing damage based solely on the single parameter of total radiation dose, neglecting the real-time impact of dynamic variables such as radiation dose rate, ambient temperature, and device operating status on damage accumulation, resulting in significant discrepancies between the calculated results and actual operating conditions. Second, they fail to consider the coupled damage superposition effect of multiple environments and multiple electrical stresses, making single-factor assessment models unsuitable for the damage accumulation characteristics under complex and combined operating conditions. Third, damage assessment results are mostly qualitative (minor, moderate, severe damage), lacking a refined and quantitative damage severity classification system, and thus failing to provide accurate data support for device lifespan prediction, redundancy design, and replacement threshold setting.

[0003] In summary, existing assessment methods suffer from problems such as static models, single factors, and ambiguous results, making it difficult to meet the requirements of high-precision and high-reliability radiation damage assessment for electronic devices. Therefore, there is an urgent need to design a multi-factor coupled, dynamic iterative, and quantitatively graded method for calculating the cumulative damage assessment of total ionizing dose. Summary of the Invention

[0004] The purpose of this invention is to provide a method for assessing and calculating the cumulative damage from total ionizing dose to electronic devices. This method aims to solve the technical problems of low static modeling accuracy, missing coupling factors, and inability to quantify and classify assessment results in existing methods for assessing the cumulative damage from total ionizing dose to electronic devices. The invention provides a method for assessing and calculating the cumulative damage from total ionizing dose to electronic devices with clear steps, rigorous logic, and adaptability to complex operating conditions. This method enables dynamic and accurate calculation of radiation damage to electronic devices, multi-factor coupling correction, and quantitative classification assessment, significantly improving the accuracy and practicality of damage assessment.

[0005] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention provides a method for assessing and calculating the cumulative damage of total ionizing dose to electronic devices, comprising the following steps: S1. For the electronic device to be evaluated, collect three types of core data: device inherent parameters, radiation environment parameters, and operating condition parameters, and perform data preprocessing. S2. Based on the radiation environment parameters of S1, a dynamic basic damage calculation model is established, and the basic damage amount of each time domain unit is solved iteratively in time division to dynamically calculate the cumulative basic damage amount over the entire cycle. S3. Based on the basic cumulative damage amount of S2, a coupling correction coefficient of the three major working conditions stresses of temperature, working voltage and load current is introduced to establish a multi-factor coupled damage correction model, and the actual cumulative damage amount under real working conditions is obtained by fitting. S4. Based on the actual cumulative damage amount in S3, combined with the device's ultimate saturation damage amount, a dimensionless damage quantification index is constructed to adaptively classify damage levels and match corresponding operation and maintenance strategies. S5. Based on the real-time collected operating conditions and radiation data, the damage quantification index and damage level are iteratively updated according to the S1-S4 cycle. At the same time, combined with the historical damage accumulation rate, the remaining service life of the device is fitted, and the device radiation damage trend curve and life prediction report are output.

[0006] Preferably, the inherent parameters of S1 include: device model, rated operating voltage, rated operating current, ultimate failure total dose, and initial electrical parameters; Radiation environment parameters include: real-time ionizing radiation dose rate, cumulative total radiation dose, and time-series data of ambient temperature within the monitoring time domain; Operating parameters include: real-time operating voltage of the device, real-time load current, and continuous operating time.

[0007] Preferably, the specific content of data preprocessing in S1 is as follows: Abnormal and sudden data were removed, missing time series data were filled in, and all parameters were unified into a dimensionless standardized form to eliminate the interference of dimensional differences on the calculation results. At the same time, the time series data were divided into time-series slices according to a fixed time step, and the entire evaluation period was divided into several independent calculation time domain units.

[0008] Preferably, the specific content of S2 is as follows: S21. Define the formula for the instantaneous damage rate within a single time-domain unit: ; in, For the first Damage rate per time-domain unit; The inherent radiation damage coefficient of the device is obtained from the device material and process parameters. For the first Real-time radiation dose rate per time-domain unit, The dose rate damage index is determined by fitting the device irradiation test results; This represents the cumulative damage amount of the previous time-domain unit. This represents the device's limit saturation damage, corresponding to the critical damage value at which the device completely fails. S22. Calculate the basic cumulative damage over the entire cycle through iterative integration, using the following formula: ; in, This represents the cumulative damage from the uncorrected base total ionization dose. The time step of a single time-domain unit; This represents the total number of time-domain units throughout the entire evaluation period.

[0009] Preferably, the specific content of S3 is as follows: S31. Single-factor correction coefficients were obtained by fitting data through orthogonal irradiation tests and working condition stress tests: temperature correction coefficient. Voltage correction factor Current correction factor ; S32. Considering the multi-factor interaction and coupling effect, introduce a coupling interaction factor. Construct a multi-stress comprehensive correction coefficient : ; S33. Calculate the cumulative damage of the actual total ionizing dose after coupling correction: ; in, The actual cumulative damage amount after multi-stress coupling correction is determined experimentally according to different device types.

[0010] Preferably, the specific content of S4 is as follows: S41. Construct a dimensionless damage quantification index, the specific formula of which is as follows: ; S42. Combining device safety margin and failure threshold, five levels of damage are adaptively classified. The specific classification criteria and corresponding strategies are as follows: Level 1 intact condition: The device shows no obvious damage, the electrical parameters do not drift, and it can work stably for a long time without maintenance intervention. Level 2 minor injury: The device has slight cumulative damage, and the electrical parameters have drifted slightly. However, there is no performance degradation, and it can work normally. Regular monitoring is sufficient. Grade III moderate injury: The device has accumulated significant damage, electrical parameters have drifted significantly, and performance has slightly degraded. It is necessary to increase the frequency of monitoring and predict the damage development trend. Grade IV severe injury: The device is severely damaged, its performance is greatly degraded, and its working stability is reduced. It is necessary to prepare spare parts and formulate a device replacement plan. Level 5 failure threshold: The device is close to its failure threshold and there is a risk of functional failure. It needs to be shut down and replaced immediately.

[0011] Preferably, the specific content of S5 is as follows: S51. A fixed evaluation iteration cycle is preset. After each iteration cycle, the latest time-domain radiation dose rate, ambient temperature, operating voltage, and load current operating data are automatically collected. Steps S1 to S4 are repeated to refresh the real-time cumulative damage of the device. Damage Quantification Index and the corresponding damage level; S52. Retrieve the device's full-cycle historical damage data, including the damage quantification index at each iteration. The cumulative damage rate is obtained by nonlinear fitting of time-series damage data using the least squares method, constructing a damage evolution trend function of total ionization dose of the device, accurately characterizing the damage growth rate law and saturation evolution trend of the device under multi-stress coupling conditions, identifying damage acceleration mutation nodes, and predicting the subsequent damage development trend. S53. Based on the damage evolution trend function obtained by fitting S52, the 80% damage quantification index corresponding to the fifth level of device damage is used as the boundary for life termination judgment. Combined with the current real-time damage status and real-time damage accumulation rate, the remaining stable working time (i.e. remaining service life) of the device is quantitatively calculated. At the same time, the historical operating condition fluctuation correction factor is introduced to avoid the life prediction deviation caused by constant rate calculation. S54 integrates four core data categories: real-time damage level, damage evolution trend curve, remaining service life, and risk warning level, to generate standardized device radiation damage assessment results and life prediction reports. The assessment results are used as the initial damage benchmark data for the next iteration cycle and are continuously updated iteratively.

[0012] Preferably, the iterative update formula for the baseline in S51 is as follows: ; in, This represents the total cumulative damage in real time during the current iteration cycle. This represents the cumulative damage amount after correction in the previous iteration cycle; The iteration period; The newly added coupling correction damage amount in the current iteration cycle is obtained from the coupling condition correction coefficient of the single-cycle basic damage amount, and the calculation formula is as follows: .

[0013] Preferably, the damage evolution trend fitting function in S52 is as follows: ; in, for The dynamic damage quantification index at any given time; , , The fitting coefficients are obtained from historical time-series damage data using the least squares method. The formula represents the cumulative operating time of the device and can accurately characterize the evolution of damage as it approaches saturation over time.

[0014] Preferably, the formula for calculating the remaining useful life of S53 is as follows: ; in, The remaining stable service life of the device; To preset the failure critical quantization index threshold and ; This is the current real-time damage quantification index; This represents the recent average rate of damage accumulation. This is a correction factor for operating condition fluctuations.

[0015] Therefore, the method for assessing and calculating the cumulative damage of total ionizing dose to electronic devices described above has the following advantages compared with the prior art: 1. This application constructs a dose rate-adaptive dynamic cumulative damage iterative calculation model, which breaks through the limitations of traditional static threshold calculation, abandons the traditional fixed total dose damage judgment mode, introduces radiation dose rate time series variables, and combines device damage hysteresis effect and cumulative saturation characteristics to establish a time-domain dynamic iterative calculation equation. It can adapt to the dynamic fluctuation of radiation dose in real time, accurately characterize the cumulative rate and saturation trend of damage under different radiation rates, and solve the problem that static models cannot adapt to dynamic radiation environments and have large calculation deviations. 2. Establish a multi-stress coupling damage correction coefficient system to achieve accurate compensation under complex working conditions. For the first time, it integrates four core influencing factors: ionizing radiation dose, ambient temperature, device operating voltage, and load current. Through orthogonal experimental fitting, multi-dimensional coupling correction coefficients are obtained, eliminating the one-sidedness of single dose assessment. It accurately characterizes the damage superposition, acceleration, and inhibition effects under the coupling of multiple physical fields and multiple electrical stresses, and is suitable for damage assessment needs in complex complex working conditions such as aerospace and nuclear industry. 3. Design an adaptive judgment mechanism for damage quantification and grading thresholds to achieve refined implementation of assessment results. Based on the inherent parameters of the device and the dynamic damage calculation results, establish a dimensionless damage quantification index. Combine the device failure threshold and safety margin to adaptively divide the damage into five levels, breaking through the ambiguity of traditional qualitative assessment. It can directly output quantitative damage values ​​and corresponding operating condition handling strategies, providing accurate data support for device life prediction, operation and maintenance decisions, and reliability design.

[0016] The technical solution of the present invention will be further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments. Attached Figure Description

[0017] Figure 1 This is an overall flowchart of the method for evaluating and calculating the cumulative damage of total ionizing dose to electronic devices according to the present invention; Figure 2 This is a comparison curve of the damage assessment results of the calculation method for the cumulative damage of total ionization dose to electronic devices according to the present invention; Figure 3 This is a comparison chart of instantaneous damage rates under different dose rates for the evaluation and calculation method of cumulative damage from total ionizing dose to electronic devices according to the present invention. Figure 4 This invention presents a bar chart showing the influence of the multi-stress comprehensive correction coefficient on the amount of new damage in an assessment and calculation method for the cumulative damage from total ionization dose to electronic devices. Detailed Implementation

[0018] In the description of this invention, it should be noted that the terms "upper," "lower," "inner," "outer," etc., indicate the orientation or positional relationship based on the orientation or positional relationship shown in the accompanying drawings, or the orientation or positional relationship in which the product of this invention is usually placed when in use. They are only for the convenience of describing this invention and simplifying the description, and do not indicate or imply that the device or element referred to must have a specific orientation, or be constructed and operated in a specific orientation. Therefore, they should not be construed as limiting this invention.

[0019] Example like Figures 1-4 As shown, the present invention provides a method for assessing and calculating the cumulative damage of total ionizing dose to electronic devices, comprising the following steps: S1. For the electronic device to be evaluated, collect three types of core data: device inherent parameters, radiation environment parameters, and operating condition parameters, and perform data preprocessing. The inherent parameters of S1 include: device model, rated operating voltage, rated operating current, total ultimate failure dose, and initial electrical parameters (initial threshold voltage, initial leakage current, and initial gain coefficient). Radiation environment parameters include: real-time ionizing radiation dose rate, cumulative total radiation dose, and time-series data of ambient temperature within the monitoring time domain; Operating parameters include: real-time operating voltage of the device, real-time load current, and continuous operating time; The specific details of data preprocessing for S1 are as follows: Abnormal mutation data was removed, missing time series data was filled in, all parameters were unified into a dimensionless standardized form to eliminate the interference of dimensional differences on the calculation results, and the time series data was divided into time-sliced ​​according to a fixed time step to divide the entire evaluation period into several independent calculation time domain units. S2. Based on the radiation environment parameters of S1, a dynamic basic damage calculation model is established, and the basic damage amount of each time domain unit is solved iteratively in time division to dynamically calculate the cumulative basic damage amount over the entire cycle. The specific content of S2 is as follows: S21. Define the formula for the instantaneous damage rate within a single time-domain unit: ; in, For the first Damage rate per time-domain unit; The inherent radiation damage coefficient of the device is obtained from the device material and process parameters. For the first Real-time radiation dose rate per time-domain unit, The dose-rate injury index has a range of values. The value was determined by fitting the device irradiation test results. This represents the cumulative damage amount of the previous time-domain unit. This represents the device's limit saturation damage, corresponding to the critical damage value at which the device completely fails. S22. Calculate the basic cumulative damage over the entire cycle through iterative integration, using the following formula: ; in, This represents the cumulative damage from the uncorrected base total ionization dose. The time step of a single time-domain unit; This represents the total number of time-domain units throughout the entire evaluation period; By introducing dynamic dose rate variables and damage saturation inhibition factors, dynamic iterative calculation of damage accumulation is realized, accurately simulating the entire process of gradual accumulation, slowing growth, and saturation stabilization of device damage during radiation dose fluctuations, thus solving the accuracy deficiency of traditional static models that rely solely on total dose setpoints for assessment. S3. Based on the basic cumulative damage amount of S2, the coupling correction coefficients of the three major working conditions of temperature, working voltage and load current are introduced to establish a multi-factor coupled damage correction model, eliminate the one-sidedness of single radiation dose assessment, and fit to obtain the actual cumulative damage amount under real working conditions. The specific details of S3 are as follows: S31. Single-factor correction coefficients were obtained by fitting data through orthogonal irradiation tests and working condition stress tests: temperature correction coefficient. Voltage correction factor Current correction factor ; Temperature, operating voltage, and load current were selected as three influencing factors, with 3 to 5 levels set for each factor, using L9(3) 4 ) or L25(56 An orthogonal array is used to arrange test combinations. Under each set of conditions, the device is subjected to irradiation tests, and the cumulative damage is measured. By fixing other factors as baseline conditions (such as room temperature, rated voltage, and rated current), and changing the level of a single factor, the ratio of the damage amount at different levels of the factor to the baseline damage amount is obtained, which is used as the correction coefficient for the factor. The least squares method is used to perform a quadratic polynomial fitting on the discrete points to obtain a continuous function of the correction coefficient as a function of the factor. The temperature correction coefficient is then used as an example. For example, the calculation is as follows: ; in, , , The fitting coefficients are then substituted into the actual operating temperature. That will give you the time at that moment. The value is obtained similarly. , ; S32. Considering the multi-factor interaction and coupling effect, introduce a coupling interaction factor. Construct a multi-stress comprehensive correction coefficient : ; By performing range analysis or variance analysis of orthogonal experiments, it is determined whether there are significant interaction effects among the factors. If so, a complete regression model containing pairwise interaction terms is established using the response surface methodology, and the model is fitted to obtain the desired result. The value makes the overall correction coefficient closer to the actual coupling damage effect; S33. Calculate the cumulative damage of the actual total ionizing dose after coupling correction: ; in, The actual cumulative damage after multi-stress coupling correction is determined experimentally based on different device types, with a range of values. It is used to characterize the damage acceleration or inhibition effect caused by the superposition of multiple stresses; S4. Based on the actual cumulative damage amount in S3, combined with the device's ultimate saturation damage amount, a dimensionless damage quantification index is constructed to adaptively classify damage levels, achieve accurate quantitative grading of damage degree, and match corresponding operation and maintenance strategies. The specific details of S4 are as follows: S41. Construct a dimensionless damage quantification index, the specific formula of which is as follows: ; S42. Combining device safety margin and failure threshold, five levels of damage are adaptively classified. The specific classification criteria and corresponding strategies are as follows: Level 1 intact condition: The device shows no obvious damage, the electrical parameters do not drift, and it can work stably for a long time without maintenance intervention. Level 2 minor injury: The device has slight cumulative damage, and the electrical parameters have drifted slightly. However, there is no performance degradation, and it can work normally. Regular monitoring is sufficient. Grade III moderate injury: The device has accumulated significant damage, electrical parameters have drifted significantly, and performance has slightly degraded. It is necessary to increase the frequency of monitoring and predict the damage development trend. Grade IV severe injury: The device is severely damaged, its performance is greatly degraded, and its working stability is reduced. It is necessary to prepare spare parts and formulate a device replacement plan. Level 5 failure threshold: The device is close to its failure threshold and is at risk of functional failure, so it needs to be shut down and replaced immediately. The triggering conditions and corresponding adjustment rules for adaptive damage classification are as follows: New calibration based on batch irradiation tests of devices Alternatively, the slope of the degradation curve can be used to remap the absolute damage values ​​corresponding to 20%, 40%, 60%, and 80%. If mission reliability requirements change (e.g., from commercial grade to aerospace grade), the overall threshold is multiplied by a safety factor. Historical data shows that this type of device degrades faster under certain operating conditions, so the corresponding threshold is automatically reduced (e.g., level three from 60% to 55%). If the temperature / voltage stress exceeds the rated range for an extended period, a stress weighting factor will be dynamically introduced to trigger a higher stress level earlier. S5. Based on the real-time collected operating conditions and radiation data, the damage quantification index and damage level are iteratively updated according to the S1-S4 cycle. At the same time, combined with the historical damage accumulation rate, the remaining service life of the device is fitted, and the device radiation damage trend curve and life prediction report are output to realize the dynamic closed-loop management of damage assessment. The specific details of S5 are as follows: S51. A fixed evaluation iteration cycle is preset, which can be calibrated as needed according to the device application scenario. The preferred cycle is 1~24h for aerospace conditions and 24~72h for industrial irradiation conditions. After each iteration cycle is completed, the latest time-domain radiation dose rate, ambient temperature, operating voltage, and load current data are automatically collected, and steps S1~S4 are repeated to update the real-time cumulative damage of the device. Damage Quantification Index And the corresponding damage level, to achieve dynamic and synchronous updates of the damage status, avoiding the problem that a single static assessment cannot adapt to long-term operating condition fluctuations; The formula for iteratively updating the baseline in S51 is as follows: ; in, This represents the total cumulative damage in real time during the current iteration cycle. This represents the cumulative damage amount after correction in the previous iteration cycle; The iteration period; The newly added coupling correction damage amount in the current iteration cycle is obtained from the coupling condition correction coefficient of the single-cycle basic damage amount, and the calculation formula is as follows: ; S52. Retrieve the device's full-cycle historical damage data, including the damage quantification index at each iteration. The cumulative damage rate is determined by nonlinear fitting of time-series damage data using the least squares method, which constructs a damage evolution trend function of total ionization dose of the device. This accurately characterizes the damage growth rate and saturation evolution trend of the device under multi-stress coupling conditions, identifies damage acceleration mutation nodes, and predicts the subsequent damage development trend, thus solving the shortcomings of traditional methods that can only perform single-point assessments and cannot predict trends. The damage evolution trend fitting function in S52 is as follows: ; in, for The dynamic damage quantification index at any given time; , , The fitting coefficients are obtained from historical time-series damage data using the least squares method. This formula, representing the cumulative operating time of the device, can accurately characterize the evolution of damage as it approaches saturation over time. S53. Based on the damage evolution trend function obtained by fitting S52, the 80% damage quantification index (failure critical threshold) corresponding to the five-level damage level of the device is used as the boundary for determining the end of life. Combining the current real-time damage status and the real-time damage accumulation rate, the remaining stable working time (i.e. the remaining service life) of the device is quantitatively calculated. At the same time, the historical operating condition fluctuation correction factor is introduced to avoid the life prediction deviation caused by constant rate calculation and improve the accuracy of life prediction. The formula for calculating the remaining useful life of S53 is as follows: ; in, The remaining stable service life of the device; To preset the failure critical quantization index threshold and ; This is the current real-time damage quantification index; This represents the recent average rate of damage accumulation. This is the operating condition fluctuation correction factor, with a value range of [value range missing]. This is used to compensate for life calculation errors caused by temperature and electrical stress fluctuations; it also limits the physical constraints of the entire formula system: all time and damage parameters are non-negative; the damage saturation inhibition factor satisfies... Avoid non-physical negative damage rates to ensure the computational model is effective across the entire domain; S54 integrates four core data categories: real-time damage level, damage evolution trend curve, remaining service life, and risk warning level, to generate standardized device radiation damage assessment results and life prediction reports. The assessment results are used as the initial damage benchmark data for the next iteration cycle, and are continuously iterated and updated to achieve dynamic monitoring, accurate assessment, and intelligent operation and maintenance guidance of the cumulative damage of total ionizing dose throughout the device's life cycle.

[0020] In the specific implementation process, a certain aerospace-grade MOSFET electronic device was selected as the evaluation object. This device has a rated operating voltage of 5V, a rated operating current of 1A, a total limiting failure dose of 100 krad, and a limiting saturation damage dose. Collect timing data of the device during 30 days of on-orbit operation and set the time step. The assessment period is divided into 720 time-domain units, and damage assessment calculations are performed according to the method of this application.

[0021] Data acquisition and preprocessing: Cleaning and removing on-orbit radiation anomalies, standardizing the time series parameters of temperature, voltage, current, and dose rate to form 720 sets of valid evaluation data.

[0022] Dynamic basic damage calculation: calibrating the inherent damage coefficient of the device Dose-rate injury index Substituting into the dynamic iterative formula, the basic cumulative damage amount is calculated. .

[0023] Multi-stress coupling correction: Temperature correction coefficients were obtained through experimental fitting. Voltage correction factor Current correction factor Coupling interaction factors Calculate the overall correction factor Finally, the actual cumulative damage amount is obtained. .

[0024] Quantitative grading determination: Calculation of damage quantification index This corresponds to a level 3 moderate damage, indicating a slight degradation in device performance, requiring increased monitoring frequency.

[0025] Iterative prediction: By fitting historical damage rates, the remaining stable operating time of the device is predicted to be approximately 180 days, and a complete damage assessment and lifetime prediction report is output.

[0026] Verified under actual on-orbit conditions, the evaluation results of this invention are highly consistent with the actual parameter decay state of the device. Compared with the traditional static dose evaluation method, the error is reduced by more than 35%, which verifies the accuracy and feasibility of the method of this invention.

[0027] Therefore, this invention adopts the above-mentioned method for assessing and calculating the cumulative damage of total ionizing dose to electronic devices, aiming to solve the technical problems of low static modeling accuracy, missing coupling factors, and inability to quantify and classify assessment results in existing methods for assessing the cumulative damage of total ionizing dose to electronic devices. It provides a method for assessing and calculating the cumulative damage of total ionizing dose to electronic devices with clear steps, rigorous logic, and adaptability to complex operating conditions, realizing dynamic and accurate calculation of radiation damage to electronic devices, multi-factor coupling correction, and quantitative classification assessment, thus significantly improving the accuracy and practicality of damage assessment.

[0028] Finally, it should be noted that the above embodiments are only used to illustrate the technical solutions of the present invention and not to limit them. Although the present invention has been described in detail with reference to preferred embodiments, those skilled in the art should understand that modifications or equivalent substitutions can still be made to the technical solutions of the present invention, and these modifications or equivalent substitutions cannot cause the modified technical solutions to deviate from the spirit and scope of the technical solutions of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for assessing and calculating the cumulative damage from total ionizing dose to electronic devices, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: S1. For the electronic device to be evaluated, collect three types of core data: device inherent parameters, radiation environment parameters, and operating condition parameters, and perform data preprocessing. S2. Based on the radiation environment parameters of S1, a dynamic basic damage calculation model is established, and the basic damage amount of each time domain unit is solved iteratively in time division to dynamically calculate the cumulative basic damage amount over the entire cycle. S3. Based on the basic cumulative damage amount of S2, a coupling correction coefficient of the three major working conditions stresses of temperature, working voltage and load current is introduced to establish a multi-factor coupled damage correction model, and the actual cumulative damage amount under real working conditions is obtained by fitting. S4. Based on the actual cumulative damage amount in S3, combined with the device's ultimate saturation damage amount, a dimensionless damage quantification index is constructed to adaptively classify damage levels and match corresponding operation and maintenance strategies. S5. Based on the real-time collected operating conditions and radiation data, the damage quantification index and damage level are iteratively updated according to the S1-S4 cycle. At the same time, combined with the historical damage accumulation rate, the remaining service life of the device is fitted, and the device radiation damage trend curve and life prediction report are output.

2. The method for assessing and calculating the cumulative damage of total ionizing dose to electronic devices according to claim 1, characterized in that: The inherent parameters of S1 include: device model, rated operating voltage, rated operating current, ultimate failure total dose, and initial electrical parameters; Radiation environment parameters include: real-time ionizing radiation dose rate, cumulative total radiation dose, and time-series data of ambient temperature within the monitoring time domain; Operating parameters include: real-time operating voltage of the device, real-time load current, and continuous operating time.

3. The method for assessing and calculating the cumulative damage of total ionizing dose to electronic devices according to claim 2, characterized in that: The specific details of data preprocessing for S1 are as follows: Abnormal and sudden data were removed, missing time series data were filled in, and all parameters were unified into a dimensionless standardized form to eliminate the interference of dimensional differences on the calculation results. At the same time, the time series data were divided into time-series slices according to a fixed time step, and the entire evaluation period was divided into several independent calculation time domain units.

4. The method for assessing and calculating the cumulative damage of total ionizing dose to electronic devices according to claim 3, characterized in that: The specific content of S2 is as follows: S21. Define the formula for the instantaneous damage rate within a single time-domain unit: ； in, For the first Damage rate per time-domain unit; The inherent radiation damage coefficient of the device is obtained from the device material and process parameters. For the first Real-time radiation dose rate per time-domain unit, The dose rate damage index is determined by fitting the device irradiation test results; This represents the cumulative damage amount of the previous time-domain unit. This represents the device's limit saturation damage, corresponding to the critical damage value at which the device completely fails. S22. Calculate the basic cumulative damage over the entire cycle through iterative integration, using the following formula: ； in, This represents the cumulative damage from the uncorrected base total ionization dose. The time step of a single time-domain unit; This represents the total number of time-domain units throughout the entire evaluation period.

5. The method for assessing and calculating the cumulative damage of total ionizing dose to electronic devices according to claim 4, characterized in that: The specific details of S3 are as follows: S31. Single-factor correction coefficients were obtained by fitting data through orthogonal irradiation tests and working condition stress tests: temperature correction coefficient. Voltage correction factor Current correction factor ; S32. Considering the multi-factor interaction and coupling effect, introduce a coupling interaction factor. Construct a multi-stress comprehensive correction coefficient : ； S33. Calculate the cumulative damage of the actual total ionizing dose after coupling correction: ； in, The actual cumulative damage amount after multi-stress coupling correction is determined experimentally according to different device types.

6. The method for assessing and calculating the cumulative damage of total ionizing dose to electronic devices according to claim 5, characterized in that: The specific content of S4 is as follows: S41. Construct a dimensionless damage quantification index, the specific formula of which is as follows: ； S42. Combining device safety margin and failure threshold, five levels of damage are adaptively classified. The specific classification criteria and corresponding strategies are as follows: Level 1 intact condition: The device shows no obvious damage, the electrical parameters do not drift, and it can work stably for a long time without maintenance intervention. Level 2 minor injury: The device has slight cumulative damage, and the electrical parameters have drifted slightly. However, there is no performance degradation, and it can work normally. Regular monitoring is sufficient. Grade III moderate injury: The device has accumulated significant damage, electrical parameters have drifted significantly, and performance has slightly degraded. It is necessary to increase the frequency of monitoring and predict the damage development trend. Grade IV severe injury: The device is severely damaged, its performance is greatly degraded, and its working stability is reduced. It is necessary to prepare spare parts and formulate a device replacement plan. Level 5 failure threshold: The device is close to its failure threshold and there is a risk of functional failure. It needs to be shut down and replaced immediately.

7. The method for assessing and calculating the cumulative damage of total ionizing dose to electronic devices according to claim 6, characterized in that: The specific details of S5 are as follows: S51. A fixed evaluation iteration cycle is preset. After each iteration cycle, the latest time-domain radiation dose rate, ambient temperature, operating voltage, and load current operating data are automatically collected. Steps S1 to S4 are repeated to refresh the real-time cumulative damage of the device. Damage Quantification Index and the corresponding damage level; S52. Retrieve the device's full-cycle historical damage data, including the damage quantification index at each iteration. The cumulative damage rate is obtained by nonlinear fitting of time-series damage data using the least squares method, constructing a damage evolution trend function of total ionization dose of the device, accurately characterizing the damage growth rate law and saturation evolution trend of the device under multi-stress coupling conditions, identifying damage acceleration mutation nodes, and predicting the subsequent damage development trend. S53. Based on the damage evolution trend function obtained by fitting S52, the 80% damage quantification index corresponding to the fifth level of device damage is used as the boundary for life termination judgment. Combined with the current real-time damage status and real-time damage accumulation rate, the remaining stable working time (i.e. remaining service life) of the device is quantitatively calculated. At the same time, the historical operating condition fluctuation correction factor is introduced to avoid the life prediction deviation caused by constant rate calculation. S54 integrates four core data categories: real-time damage level, damage evolution trend curve, remaining service life, and risk warning level, to generate standardized device radiation damage assessment results and life prediction reports. The assessment results are used as the initial damage benchmark data for the next iteration cycle and are continuously updated iteratively.

8. The method for assessing and calculating the cumulative damage of total ionizing dose to electronic devices according to claim 7, characterized in that: The formula for iteratively updating the baseline in S51 is as follows: ； in, This represents the total cumulative damage in real time during the current iteration cycle. This represents the cumulative damage amount after correction in the previous iteration cycle; The iteration period; The newly added coupling correction damage amount in the current iteration cycle is obtained from the coupling condition correction coefficient of the single-cycle basic damage amount, and the calculation formula is as follows: 。 9. The method for assessing and calculating the cumulative damage of total ionizing dose to electronic devices according to claim 8, characterized in that: The damage evolution trend fitting function in S52 is as follows: ； in, for The dynamic damage quantification index at any given time; , , The fitting coefficients are obtained from historical time-series damage data using the least squares method. The formula represents the cumulative operating time of the device and can accurately characterize the evolution of damage as it approaches saturation over time.

10. The method for assessing and calculating the cumulative damage of total ionizing dose to electronic devices according to claim 9, characterized in that: The formula for calculating the remaining useful life of S53 is as follows: ； in, The remaining stable service life of the device; To preset the failure critical quantization index threshold and ; This is the current real-time damage quantification index; This represents the recent average rate of damage accumulation. This is a correction factor for operating condition fluctuations.

Images