[time-nuts] aging - Re: Re: pulling some crystals

[Jim Lux]

 
I'll bet the accelerated aging was more about the other components than the crystal.  
We do similar tests for space flight applications - blast it with some number of kRad TID, perhaps irradiate it in an accelerator to get heavy ions.  - but that would normally be a "test unit" - that is, why consume "life" on the actual unit. 
But they all get the accelerated aging at high temp, with an assumption of Arrhenius coeffcients. 

There's also an annealing process with radiation damage, so zap it and heat it will sometimes reduce the effect of the does (particularly displacement damage, get it hot and the displaced thing goes back from whence it came).  Of course, these days, with highly doped and tiny, tiny features, that high temperature might actually "un-do" the careful doping. 



On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 17:19:26 -0600, Ben Hall via time-nuts <time-nuts at lists.febo.com> wrote:

On 12/7/2023 3:38 PM, Bob kb8tq via time-nuts wrote:
> Their idea that 3 days at 105 is the same as 1 year is …. errrr …. ummm ….. questionable.

Many moons ago I worked at a test lab that did nuclear plant Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA) certification testing. Prior to the LOCA tests, we had to send the test items out to be irradiated in a hot (radiation) cell, then cooked them in our lab temp chambers at X degrees for Y days that simulated Z years of nuke plant use at ambient temp T per an IEEE document whose number I forget.

Fun stuff. ;)

Wish I could remember the document. I'd trust IEEE to do the temp/time calculations correctly, so I wonder how the Krystaly numbers would compare?

thanks much,
ben

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe send an email to time-nuts-leave at lists.febo.com
Â