• TI Thinks Resolved

INA169-Q1: Do we have part to compete against MPQ8113A?

Intellectual 2145 points

Replies: 3

Views: 45

Part Number: INA169-Q1

Hi team,

Do we have a part could compete against MPQ8113AGQ?(Not pin to pin is okay)

Please check the datasheet as as below, thanks.

  • There are two automotive 60 V current sensors with adjustable gain:
    www.ti.com/amplifier-circuit/current-sense/analog-output/products.html#p726max=60;120&p773=Adjustable&p1498=Automotive

    The INA169-Q1 has a bandwidth of 440 kHz, the INA168-Q1, 800 kHz.

  • James,

    Clemens is correct here. The only devices we have in the automotive portfolio with adjustable gain are the variants he has listed below. As these are older devices, a caveat here is that these devices do not go down to a common mode of 0V (ours go to 2.7V instead).

    For the 50V/V part, you might also have the customer look at INA293.-Q1.

    I've also invited our product marketing group to this thread to see if there is anything new coming up that can be shared here. 

    Best Regards,

    Carolus Andrews, Analog Applications, Current and Hall Effect Sensors

    Getting Started with Current Sensing Video Training Series

    TI makes no warranties and assumes no liability for applications assistance or customer product design. You are fully responsible for all design decisions and engineering with regard to your products, including decisions relating to application of TI products. By providing technical information, TI does not intend to offer or provide engineering services or advice concerning your designs.

  • In reply to Carolus Andrews:

    James,

    A couple of comments here:

    1) What is the common mode range you need to support?  The MPS part goes up to 60V which is rather odd for most automotive applications.  12V systems usually need to have up to 40V for survivable common mode range.  The new 48V rail must pass a test with a 76V spike, and so the minimum most customers want is 90V of survivable common mode range.  So the 60V is kind of odd.  The only place we tend to see a range like that is in 24V commercial vehicle systems, but higher (like the 48V rail) is just fine there as well.

    2) I assume you are measuring high-side since the MPS part says it is high-side only even though it includes 0V in its usable common mode range.

    3) Do you have a separate low voltage supply available.  The MPS part supports a supply range up to 60V like the common mode range.  While we have some parts (like the INA293-Q1 mentioned by Carolus) that have supply range up to 20V, we really have just the options listed by Clemens that support a 60V supply voltage.

    4) The MPS parts accuracy looks to be rather limited with a 1% full-scale error number shown in the features - I assume that is the typical number for the fixed gain device as the external gain resistor for the variable gain device would most likely be a major contributing factor to the accuracy there.  Also with 300uV typical offset, that most likely means the max value is over 1mV which will severely impact your ability to measure low currents.  For more on accuracy, i would highly recommend our TI Precision Labs Current sensing Series.  This level of accuracy would most likely be on-par or slightly better than the INA168-Q1 or INA169-Q1 in the variable gain options.  the INA293-Q1 would offer significantly more accuracy.

    So as to what we would recommend, it really depends on your overall system level requirements.  Answering these questions can help narrow down the solution.  

    What are you measuring current and/or power for - how will the information be used in the system?
    Will you measure on the high side or low side sensing? Assuming th high-side, what is the common-mode voltage?
    What are the maximum & minimum current to be read?
    What is the accuracy target at minimum and maximum load current?
    What is current signal frequency?
    Where does the output go - what is next in the signal chain?
    Is a current or power value expected to be read or just a trip for protection?
    Any package limitations or needs?

    If you want to take this offline, feel free to reach out to me at dharmon@ti.com 

    Regards, Dan