https://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/Find answers, share knowledge, solve problems with fellow engineers.en-USTelligent Community 13https://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/f/amplifiers-forum/1655668/ina228-q1-ina228-pcb-layout-review/6385247Wed, 17 Jun 2026 00:38:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:79606696-aa00-4007-9c41-7b1bcd4f83d7wujun liHi Mitch, Thank you for your quick response. I made a change to the PCB as follows:https://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/f/amplifiers-forum/1654643/tlc393-failing-in-test-just-a-certain-group/6385138Tue, 16 Jun 2026 22:26:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:92b4b942-46fb-42f2-a351-011076000d7aPaul GroheHi FC, I'm guessing that the new die is not "dying" gracefully like the old die. With the old die, when the inputs were about 1V below V+, the input stage is cut-off, so the output "flops" low. Essentially it "muted" itself. The new die has rail-to-rail inputs, so the output is still paying attention to the levels on the inputs until the POR kicks in when V+ < 2V, and the output goes high. What is the purple trace? What if you increase C1 to 1uF or so to further delay the fall on the 5V line and provide more bypassing in case the output is "chattering" through the supply. Can you get a scope photo of the inputs and output around the area of the glitch? So we can see what is actually happening (are the inputs actually crossing?). Could you use a push-pull output? The TLV1812 has a POR that pulls the output low during POR. Make sure the "B" channel can also support push-pull.https://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/f/amplifiers-forum/1655421/ina1620-how-to-run-simulation-on-ina1620-for-a-single-channel/6384990Tue, 16 Jun 2026 20:31:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:8b195915-727c-4a0e-a57b-37f3c2ff84bdChris FeatherstoneHi Kiara, I have performed the stability analysis as shown below. The phase margin I get is 58.36 degrees which is better than the required threshold of 45 degrees. The circuit is stable. For the input offset voltage Vos I get 53.44 uV which is about average of what the distribution in the datasheet shows. The models are generally reflecting the typical datasheet specifications for room temperature. The Vos in the model is slightly better than the typical but inline with the measured results in the histogram. I have attached my updated simulation for stability. For unused amplifiers, it is a good idea to keep them operating in the linear operating range. For this reason I tied the inputs to ground and am keeping the amplifier in a closed loop configuration such that the output is maintained at mid supply. It is not required for the simulation but best practice in the real world circuit. Tina Simulation for stability: e2e.ti.com/.../INA1620_5F00_Stability.TSC Best Regards, Chris Featherstonehttps://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/f/amplifiers-forum/1655869/ina819-noise-issue-at-low-gains-with-some-ina819-output-stage-popcorn-noise/6384972Tue, 16 Jun 2026 20:23:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:dd8089f0-3672-414b-83e7-7d9b2e118634Robert Clifton56Hi Daniel, Your noise looks a bit higher than what's shown in the datasheet. I do recognize that the time scales are different between our tests. but even the good part producing 5x higher noise is interesting. Where these two separate circuits or did you swap the devices on the same circuit? Is the device properly cleaned of excessive flux? Best Regards, Robert Cliftonhttps://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/f/amplifiers-forum/1654643/tlc393-failing-in-test-just-a-certain-group/6384949Tue, 16 Jun 2026 19:59:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:e60930c0-7d79-47cf-b36d-9b3d75ab6a41FC1Hello Paul. Thank you for your message. It is no problem to share the relevant information. The comparator U2 is supplied by 5 V regulated from +24 V by D2,R1,Q2. The comparator checks +24 V and generates the signal +24VIN_OK. When +24 V is removed (yellow trace), the comparator output (green trace) changes correctly. After some seconds (due to capacitor bank), when +24 V fall under ca. 2 V, the output of the comparator oscillates with the new TLC393. With the old TLC393 the output of the comparator remains low. With the new TLC393, the output oscillation has an impact on other sections of the circuit. Old TLC393ID (OK) Date Code 2427+5 (Mexico), line-marking New TLC393ID (not OK) Date Code 2431+5 (Malaysia), dot-markinghttps://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/f/amplifiers-forum/1655682/lmp7721maevalmf_nopb-lmp7721-evm-wiring-for-0-5v-ion-selective-electrode-single-supply/6384919Tue, 16 Jun 2026 19:32:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:e15ac459-be02-42c9-8c4d-435b889711b3Marek LisIf I understand your description correctly, your "electrode output" is Velectrode where you apply -100mV input - see below. If that's the case, you wiring is correct and for -0.5V < Velectrode < +0.5V output range is 2V < Vout < 3V as shown below. However, the circuit is only marginally stable with a small-signal overshoot of 75% (see below) whereas the maximum recommended is 25%. Adding 20pF feedback caps improves the stability and results in a small-signal overshoot of just 4.5% - see below. Having said that, LMP7721 with maximum IB of 20fA is meant to be used to measure ultra-low currents in a transimpedance application and its use in difference configuration with currents 10,000 times higher (see below: AM1=100uA) is totally unnecessary and costly solution. Thus, to save the cost and improve precision, I would recommend using here OPA392 or OPA397 - see below. e2e.ti.com/.../LMP7721-diff-amp.TSC e2e.ti.com/.../OPA392-diff-amp.TSChttps://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/f/amplifiers-forum/1654517/xtr200-xtr200-in-voltage-mode-with-pull-up-resistor/6384859Tue, 16 Jun 2026 18:41:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:762e64d1-0431-4c6b-87e6-f06416eb65d6Ashley KangHi Tim, Could you clarify on how the pull up circuitry is being implemented? I'm looking to see if there is a way to implement this without changing the output voltage but would like to make sure it is similar to how the customer is using it. What is the value of the load that the XTR200 output is connected to? Regards, Ashleyhttps://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/f/amplifiers-forum/1655403/amc1100-amc1100-random-offset-issue/6384852Tue, 16 Jun 2026 18:34:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:10d739cc-2351-4c86-93b6-99798497f9f6Mr. PSHi Alexendar, We think the noise is coming through the DC bus as common-mode noise. Can we make any changes to the circuit to reduce this common-mode noise, and possibly the differential-mode noise as well?https://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/f/amplifiers-forum/1655507/ths4031-ths4031idgnr/6384843Tue, 16 Jun 2026 18:29:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:574959dc-f9d4-41a8-8468-dbdf2c8013e5Ignacio Vazquez Lam1Hi Dan, Unfortunately, we do not have this option when ordering our devices as we have multiple fabs and assembly sites so the OPN itself does not offer this information. Thank you for providing the schematic. I was hoping you could send a scope shot of the noise difference between the old and new device. I am curious if there is an underlying issue with the switch in the feedback. We often see stability issues with this setup so an image of the signals being seen would be good to get more understanding of what could be happening. Additionally, do you see a noise difference between the old and new device when you set the switch to S2B (gain of 1V/V)? Best Regards, Ignaciohttps://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/f/amplifiers-forum/1655888/lm139aqml-info-regarding-the-material-of-the-primry-package/6384798Tue, 16 Jun 2026 17:59:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:aed69930-a0de-4c9a-a2c9-5e6bd7d94681Paul GroheHello Silvia, I found your order for 5962R9673802VXA. Sorry, but the box is NOT ESD safe. I looked up the box and the spec sheet made no mention of ESD materials or coatings. If it was ESD safe, the inside would be coated in a carbon-black coating (like black ink, but conductive). The above box is a standard cardboard box. Packing Material Information These devices are fairly ESD robust. If handled with proper ESD protection (wrist straps), they should be okay. You could remove the tray and place some ESD protective foam over the devices, then flip the box over so the loose devices land safely on the conductive foam instead of trying to "scoop" the devices out by hand.https://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/f/amplifiers-forum/1655668/ina228-q1-ina228-pcb-layout-review/6384789Tue, 16 Jun 2026 17:53:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:e64264b5-7b6a-4f7a-a68b-b3edfad5b0a7Mitch MHello Wujun, This is likely caused by the VBUS measurement routing. The INA228 datasheet says that the Z_VBUS is present when in "Active Mode": And the layout example uses a separate trace to measure the bus voltage: Your layout has the VBUS measurement coming right off the sense line, which could add error. Also, here is an FAQ that you may be interested that can help debug measurements with our INA228 (or really any of our digital power monitors): https://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/f/amplifiers-forum/1626788/faq-ina228-current-not-reading-as-expected Regards, Mitchhttps://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/f/amplifiers-forum/1654842/opa2187-offset-voltage-varies-non-linearly-with-input-common-mode-voltage-within-the-specification/6384769Tue, 16 Jun 2026 17:34:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:02eee8d6-2910-4400-b3dc-f50e928f1719Chris FeatherstoneHi Shinici, I have seen your additional comments in the private chat. I will look them over. Best Regards, Chris Featherstonehttps://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/f/amplifiers-forum/1655664/ina700-need-better-alternate-with-higher-vol-for-ina700aywfr/6384757Tue, 16 Jun 2026 17:23:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:cb35bf23-9c9e-42e1-985d-925994c9ecd5Mitch MHello Aswin, Most of our newer digital power monitors have the 0.4 V logic low input level. We do have some (like the INA226) that have a higher range, but do not have the same features as the INA700. So, I think the best option would be to use a different I²C repeater. I am not familiar with that portfolio, so I'm forwarding this tread over to the correct team to get a good recommendation for your needs. Regards, Mitchhttps://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/f/amplifiers-forum/1654643/tlc393-failing-in-test-just-a-certain-group/6384756Tue, 16 Jun 2026 17:22:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:c42a70eb-881e-4904-a23d-f0bdc3651a78Paul GroheHello FC, The new die has a POR circuit that will make the output high impedance (high) when the supply voltage is under the minimum supply (about 2.4V). The old die had no control over the output when under voltage. The output would be at the mercy of the supplies and input status (if the inputs are out of range when the supply is collapsing). It sounds like you were relying on a "undocumented behavior". Can you provide a scope photo or schematic? I can contact you at your registered email address if you do not want to share publicly. The "dot" marking change is across all of TI and not specific to the TLC393. Not having to "draw" the pin 1 bar and TI logo "bug" saves laser marking time - which is important when you make 100's of thousands units per day where fractions of a second can add up. https://www.mouser.com/PCN/Texas_Instruments_PCN20211123004_2022022410013610.pdfhttps://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/f/amplifiers-forum/1655703/ina240-technical-clarification-on-ina240-usage-across-hv-lv-isolation-boundary-in-ev-dc-dc-converter/6384753Tue, 16 Jun 2026 17:21:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:1f1dbae9-d220-4348-b929-4bf4741e5a02Levi DVHello Prabhu, No, you cannot use the INA240 as an isolated device like this because our current shunt amplifiers that start with INA- require known (not floating) voltages on the input pins and do not provide galvanic isolation. We list devices that support galvanically isolated current sensing solutions located here: https://www.ti.com/technologies/current-sensing-solutions.html#isolated-technologies And there is a reference design demonstrating how to create an isolated solution with a digital isolator here: https://www.ti.com/tool/TIDA-00313 Let me know if you have any more questions for me, Levi DVhttps://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/f/amplifiers-forum/1655759/lmv324-discrepancies-found-in-the-body-marking-forma-and-x-ray-pattern/6384710Tue, 16 Jun 2026 16:53:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:3bcc564b-bd20-48e4-8f25-d32e36f6713fRon MichallickHello Nurul, welcome to the TI e2e forums. There is a design, process PCN for LMV324MTX/NOPB. As the X-ray shows, the die is smaller. Section 4 of data sheet show the revision J to K changes to data sheet. The PCN is major, performance has changed in a few ways, but not a failure to meet data sheet claims. Please show schematic and waveforms of the perceived failure.https://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/f/amplifiers-forum/1655592/tle2064-tle2064idr-part-marking-pcn-and-part-performance-question/6384702Tue, 16 Jun 2026 16:46:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:a13d24f5-85d9-4ea9-945c-f7b2503947e9CarrieHi Langdon, The revision history in the TLE2064 datasheet helps to describe the changes between the pre-PCN and post-PCN material. The functional failure, also known as an in-circuit test (ICT) failure, could be due to the updated ESD structures inside the op amp. Since the topology of the op amp has changed, the inherent resistance from the diode structure is also different. This can lead to false failures in a system level board test. Most diodes follow the same general IV curve, with a forward bias voltage around 0.7V for silicon diodes. However, all diodes vary and updating the ESD cells can change the IV curve characteristics enough to lead to the false failures you are seeing. Note that while the diode structure of a device can change, there is no change in the functional behavior of the device during normal operation. The protection structures are only triggered during abnormal device operation, such as an ESD event. For more information on ESD Cells in Op amps, please see this application note . Can you provide more details on your test setup and methodology to help determine the root cause of the failure? Best regards, Carriehttps://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/f/amplifiers-forum/1655421/ina1620-how-to-run-simulation-on-ina1620-for-a-single-channel/6384693Tue, 16 Jun 2026 16:38:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:6ace92c9-3f8d-4766-8bb6-83eadf56f8d3Kiara NavarroHi Chris, first, thanks so much for replying to this thread. Sadly, I have been doing more research about how to calculate the stability of the circuit and this topology wont work. Since the circuit is not using any simulation methodology to measure the ROC. I would like to have the phase margin of the circuit in order to determine if it is stable or not. I have been following the steps here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6tP78BLr_A and there are a couple of things that do not resonate well. The first question I have is that, when calculating the node voltages, at Vfb, the voltage is not the input offset value as it is stated on the datasheet, which by the way, its not clear to me which value should I use, I will take the worst value which should be the maximum, 1.2 mV Instead of getting -1.2mV or 1.2mV I obtained another number. Then, if this value is wrong, what would be measured at Vo will be wrong as well since is expected to have the gain multiplied by the input offset voltage. I wanted to replicate the same plots obtained on the datasheet for the open loop gain using this method and Im not able to obtain them. Also, I still dont understand why in the circuit you drawn the second channel must be used. If only a single channel is used, it should only be used that one, but there is no way for me to place a non-connected point in those terminals. Im just trying to reasoning of why did you place a second resistor and cap as the load and create another circuit formed with the internal resistors. There is another question I have, eventually this circuit should use a second stage channel since the maximum current this op amp provides, is not enough to the specific use case. I have been following this idea: https://www.ti.com/lit/ab/sboa352/sboa352.pdf which essentially includes a ballast resistor to share the load current but Im not really sure if the middlebrook method of adding the coil and capacitor should also be included on this part, I tend to believe this is not. Im providing here an image of the circuit I simulate in order to obtain the open loop gain.https://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/f/amplifiers-forum/1650535/ina180-ina180-with-inductor-dcr-current-sensing/6384688Tue, 16 Jun 2026 16:37:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:50d471c2-a855-452c-a3e6-e248946221eaCarolus AndrewsSavit, Understood. I don't know how well this would work, but the INA180 at the end of the day is in essence a differential amplifier, so provided you are within the VCM and supply needs of the device, you may get an answer, I only question how accurately you will be able to measure.https://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers-group/amplifiers/f/amplifiers-forum/1655583/xtr115-pspice-model-that-i-can-use/6384661Tue, 16 Jun 2026 16:23:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:e591509a-b5b5-4c0f-b527-1c6762725e54Ashley KangHi Tom, Welcome to E2E! :) Unfortunately, we do not have a PSpice model for the XTR115. The only model available is an idealized TINA model which I have attached below. It does not include the parameters of the XTR115 but will help in functional behavior. e2e.ti.com/.../6138.XTR115.TSC If you have specific questions about the XTR115, we would be happy to help answer. Thank you! Best regards, Ashley