• State
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 1 reply
  • Subscribers 31 subscribers
  • Views 763 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Similar topics

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

FDC2114: Using the FDC2114 for level sensing...

Mathew Maher49
Expert 2085 points
Part Number: FDC2114
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: FDC1004, , FDC2214

I have an application which needs to monitor oil levels within an EMI-dirty environment. After having a brief play with the FDC1004, it looks like it'll work, but I'm curious about whether I can get any gains from moving to the FDC2### devices? The liquid is non-conductive, and no humans will be anywhere near it: EMI and EMC will be harsh, however.

Obviously my first port of call was the level sensing application note, based on the FDC1004. Was this chip selected as it is better at the level sensing application, or was it selected as being the only part available at the time of writing? If, for example, you were to re-write the technical note now, would the FDC1004 still be device of choice, or assuming FDC2114 was chosen, is there a better sensor layout possible with the differential channels?

Mat

  • 0
    TI__Intellectual 2725 points
    Hi Mathew,

    The FDC1004 is based on the conventional switched-capacitor architecture. The FDC2214 is based on the narrow band LC-resonance architecture. The FDC2214 devices will perform better in EMI- EMC dirty environments and can drive large series capacitance and can measure much smaller PPM capacitance changes.

    But unlike the FDC1004 the FDC2214 devices do not have a shield driver. You will have to do an in system evaluation on how EMI robust your system needs to be.

    Regards,

    Varn.