Tradeoffs of INA290-Q1 vs INA293-Q1

Yoonseo Kang

Part Number: INA290-Q1
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: INA293-Q1, , INA293, INA290

Hi TI,

We like the improved quiescent current of INA290-Q1 with only slightly less nominal bandwidth. Is INA290-Q1 recommended for our automotive 48V DC-DC converter application? For this general application, what are the most important trade-offs between the INA290-Q1 and INA293-Q1?

over 2 years ago

0 kai klaas69 over 2 years ago

Guru 140200 points

Hi Yoonseo,

I think the biggest difference is the different common mode input voltage ranges.

Kai

0 Javier Contreras4 over 2 years ago in reply to kai klaas69

TI__Mastermind 26485 points

Hello Yoonseo,

I agree with Kai. One of the reasons for the higher IQ is to be able to go below GND at the input for the INA293.

0 Yoonseo Kang over 2 years ago in reply to Javier Contreras4

Prodigy 125 points

Would you expect the INA290-Q1 to struggle with any edge cases involving common mode voltage collapse during a harsh short-circuit event? Suitability for a SCP application.

0 Javier Contreras4 over 2 years ago in reply to Yoonseo Kang

TI__Mastermind 26485 points

Yoonseo,

The INA290 will not function if the VCM drops below the operating range(see image below from datasheet). They both will survive the same inputs but the INA293 has a larger functional VCM range. Also could you define SCP.

0 Yoonseo Kang over 2 years ago in reply to Javier Contreras4

Prodigy 125 points

By SCP I mean short circuit protection. We want to be sure of the INA290-Q1's edge case performance given the 2.7V cutoff.

0 Yoonseo Kang over 2 years ago

Prodigy 125 points

I've concluded that UVLO and Vbus monitoring + power-path-control solve the high-side limited common mode voltage edge cases. Thank you Kai and Javier for highlighting the common mode range difference.

Amplifiers

Amplifiers forum

Tradeoffs of INA290-Q1 vs INA293-Q1