Wednesday, April 18, 2012

EuroCIS Platform for European CMOS Imagers

Imec: "The main goal of [EuroCIS] project is the creation of a European supply chain for state-of-the art CMOS imagers. As identified by both ESA and the EC, there is a need for such a supply chain for CMOS imagers for space applications which uses solely European (and hence ITAR-free) sources. This goal will be realized using the proposed consortium as all partners have excellent know-how and track record in the expertise fields required."

The EuroCIS program has started in Nov. 2011 with a budget of 2,840M 2.84M euro, and is scheduled for 36 months. The program members are Imec (Belgium, sensor design), Selex Galileo (Italy, definition and characterization), Exico (France, BSI laser annealing), TNO (Holland, optical film coating).

EuroCIS Gantt (Click to enlarge)

16 comments:

  1. which member in this program is actualy capable of fabricating image sensor?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Imec according to the PDF.

    ReplyDelete
  3. 2.8 billion euro, wow

    ReplyDelete
  4. It's a joke, Vladimir!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sure, joke on your side. And a typo on mine.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Amazing consortium : apparently ESA is willing to support IMEC in its competition against its own spin-offs, being ON Semi (Fillfactory, Cypress), CMOSIS and Caeleste. Strange world we are living in ....

    ReplyDelete
  7. IMEC has Fab and other players have no Fab.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This is an activity funded by Europe (FP7). ESA has no share in this consortium.

    Dirk

    ReplyDelete
  9. Is 2.8M even enough for developing a decent CIS flow? And BSI included? Anyone can share a though how much it took other commercial fab to establish a real "supply chain"?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Does anyone here know if the data presented at the bottom right of the viewgraph 14 have been published somewhere?
    I would be happy to have more information about this radiation test (differences between "standard pixel" and the others, irradiation conditions, pixel type, CVF...).
    Thanks by advance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Same here - I would be interested in their rad-test results, but I have feeling distribution will be limited.

      Delete
    2. I don't see any good reason to limit the diffusion of good radiation hardness results (except if these aren't so good of course).

      Delete
  11. Hi Vincent,
    This data is coming from the old fllfactory days - 2001 time period (now Cypress, ON Semi). Currently we have EOL levels which are 100 times less than what is mentioned on the graff.

    Dirk

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Dirk,
      Thank you very much for your answer. I did not recognize the data from 2000 Jan's paper and I thought it was recent PPD data.
      There are so few published that I was pretty excited about this graph :).
      Anyway, thanks again for the details.

      Delete
  12. I think that this circuit is a zero biased CTIA which is said to reduce drastically the 1/f noise in the detectors.

    -yang ni

    ReplyDelete

All comments are moderated to avoid spam.