Soft Error Rate
Soft error rate (SER) is the rate at which a device or system encounters or is predicted to encounter soft errors. It is typically expressed as either number of failures-in-time (FIT), or mean time between failures (MTBF). The unit adopted for quantifying failures in time is called FIT, equivalent to 1 error per billion hours of device operation. MTBF is usually given in years of device operation. To put it in perspective, 1 year MTBF is equal to approximately 114,077 FIT (approximately ).
While many electronic systems have an MTBF that exceeds the expected lifetime of the circuit, the SER may still be unacceptable to the manufacturer or customer. For instance, many failures per million circuits due to soft errors can be expected in the field if the system does not have adequate soft error protection. The failure of even a few products in the field, particularly if catastrophic, can tarnish the reputation of the product and company that designed it. Also, in safety- or cost-critical applications where the cost of system failure far outweighs the cost of the system itself, a 1% chance of soft error failure per lifetime may be too high to be acceptable to the customer. Therefore, it is advantageous to design for low SER when manufacturing a system in high-volume or requiring extremely high reliability.
Read more about this topic: Soft Error
Famous quotes containing the words soft, error and/or rate:
“The soft complaining FLUTE
In dying Notes discovers
The Woes of hopeless Lovers,
Whose Dirge is whisper’d by the warbling LUTE.”
—John Dryden (1631–1700)
“The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error.”
—John Stuart Mill (1806–1873)
“This is the essential distinction—even opposition—between the painting and the film: the painting is composed subjectively, the film objectively. However highly we rate the function of the scenario writer—in actual practice it is rated very low—we must recognize that the film is not transposed directly and freely from the mind by means of a docile medium like paint, but must be cut piece-meal out of the lumbering material of the actual visible world.”
—Sir Herbert Read (1893–1968)