• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 7 replies
  • Subscribers 35 subscribers
  • Views 505 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

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.

TL16C552: (TL16C552FN or TL16C55AFN) Spec Clarification

Jewel Holt
Prodigy 60 points

Part Number: TL16C552

Hello: We are planning on using TL16C552FN or TL16C552AFN but have several questions:
1.) Is there an option for TL16C552IFN? (We want to use TL16C552FN as a drop in for ST16C552IJ68 but would like an industrial rating)
2.) The TI spec calls out -40 to 85C for TL16C552AFN. Shouldn't it be 0 to 70C? Should TL16C552AIFN be -40 to 85? (Due to the -I suffix)

3.) The power rating for TL16C552AFN is 865mW @70C derated 19mW/C after 25C. Is my understanding correct in that it calculates to around 577mW at 85C?
     Regarding TL16C552FN, it is rated at 500mW @70C. Why are these different, or are they the same but the spec was written differently? What is the derating for TL16C552FN? Additionally, would be the derating for       
     TL16C552IFN if that part is available?


4.) Would these power ratings change depending on how fast you were clocking the part? For instance, we use the TL16C552FN @ 1.843 MHz so should we expect a quarter of the max amp draw given its max frequency is 8 MHz?


5.) Regarding Tjamx, RthetaJA, and RthetaJC, are these values the same for both TL16C552AFN and TL16C552FN?
6.) TL16C552FN has 4 levels of prioritization for interrupts. Does TL16C552AFN have the same?
7.) The RESET line for TL16C552FN is specified to be low for 1uS after Power Up. Is TL16C552AFN the same?
8.) The RESET conditions between the parts are the same with exception that the interrupt lines are cleared for TL16C552FN but are low for TL16C552AFN. Is this a spec wording issue or are they different?

  • 0
    TI__Guru 57728 points

    Hi Jewel,

    Let me get back to you with a response by 5pm CST tomorrow. 

    Regards,

    Tyler

  • +1
    TI__Guru 57728 points

    Hi Jewel,

    Jewel Holt said:
    1.) Is there an option for TL16C552IFN? (We want to use TL16C552FN as a drop in for ST16C552IJ68 but would like an industrial rating)

    If you are looking for an industrial rated device, you can look at TL16C552A. This is the same device but with wider temperature range with OPN, TL16C552AIFN. 

    Jewel Holt said:
    2.) The TI spec calls out -40 to 85C for TL16C552AFN. Shouldn't it be 0 to 70C? Should TL16C552AIFN be -40 to 85? (Due to the -I suffix)

    TL16C552 non-A version is rated from 0C to 70C.

    TL16C552A (A-version) is rated wider, -40C to 85C, ranging even to -55C to 125C for certain orderables. 

    Yes, TL16C552AIFN should be listed as -40C to 85C. I am not sure why it is not listed on addendum page 1 of the datasheet. This might be a datasheet error, and probably wasn't caught due to how old the device is. 

    Jewel Holt said:
    3.) The power rating for TL16C552AFN is 865mW @70C derated 19mW/C after 25C. Is my understanding correct in that it calculates to around 577mW at 85C?
         Regarding TL16C552FN, it is rated at 500mW @70C. Why are these different, or are they the same but the spec was written differently? What is the derating for TL16C552FN? Additionally, would be the derating for       
         TL16C552IFN if that part is available?

    You would be correct. 1730mW - (19.2mW/C * (85C - 25C)) = ~577mW at Ta = 85C. 

    Considering 500mW @70C for TL16C552FN, this might be because of the device changes from the non-A and A-version of the device. I don't think this was spec'ed differently. 

    Finding out the derating factor for TL16C552FN might be tedious given the date of when this device was made. It might take a few weeks to find more information through the packaging or design team. 

    We do not sell industrial for non-A variant. There is no opn TL16C552IFN. 

    Jewel Holt said:
    4.) Would these power ratings change depending on how fast you were clocking the part? For instance, we use the TL16C552FN @ 1.843 MHz so should we expect a quarter of the max amp draw given its max frequency is 8 MHz?

    In general, I would believe that increasing the speed of the clock would effect current consumption, but I do not know how linear this is. What I can guarantee is what is listed in the datasheet for both non-A and A devices. 

    non-A: max of 50mA at 8MHz

    A-version: max of 50mA at 8MHz (however, clock can go up to 16MHz)

    Jewel Holt said:
    5.) Regarding Tjamx, RthetaJA, and RthetaJC, are these values the same for both TL16C552AFN and TL16C552FN?

    I doubt these are exactly the same given the wider temperature range of the A-version. I wouldn't be able to guarantee any specific value to you for the non-A version. 

    Jewel Holt said:
    6.) TL16C552FN has 4 levels of prioritization for interrupts. Does TL16C552AFN have the same?

    The 4 levels of interrupt prioritization is the same based off information in the interrupt identification register (IIR). 

    Jewel Holt said:
    7.) The RESET line for TL16C552FN is specified to be low for 1uS after Power Up. Is TL16C552AFN the same?

    Yes. This is specified on 28 of the A-version datasheet.

    Jewel Holt said:
    8.) The RESET conditions between the parts are the same with exception that the interrupt lines are cleared for TL16C552FN but are low for TL16C552AFN. Is this a spec wording issue or are they different?

    This is just a wording technicality. Cleared is same as LOW, whereas a triggered interrupt is generally a HIGH. 

    Regards,

    Tyler

  • 0 in reply to Tyler Townsend
    Prodigy 60 points

    I truly appreciate the depth of your response; we will be moving forward with the TL16C552AIFN based off the response given here. If I may ask a bonus question for extra clarity, what is the difference then between TL16C552AIFN & TL16C552AFN? One almost seems redundant just from comparing the datasheet.

  • +1 in reply to Jewel Holt
    TI__Guru 57728 points

    Hi Jewel,

    It is probably the case that one device has been qualified as industrial grade while the other opn was not tested/spec'ed for that specific grade but can still withstand the same temperatures as industrial grade. 

    One opn shows more confidence that we were able to qualify the device as industrial, but it still operates the same as the non- "I" suffix. 

    Regards,

    Tyler

  • 0 in reply to Tyler Townsend
    Prodigy 60 points

    Understood. Thanks Tyler.

    Best Regards,

    Jewel

  • 0 in reply to Tyler Townsend
    Prodigy 60 points

    HI Tyler,

    After going over your response a little more, it becomes a little unclear as to what we are getting with the -AFN part. Is there a list of things that were not tested, and that can be referenced? What degree of confidence is lacking with the -AFN? For liability concerns we would like to have some sort of formal statement that we can use to assure our customers that -AFN runs the same the industrial grade, as the latest response introduces a sort of gray area.

    Thanks in advance.

  • +1 in reply to Jewel Holt
    TI__Mastermind 26836 points

    Hi Jewel,

    While Tyler is out on holiday I'll fill in here. The die for the two TL16C552A devices (TL16C552AFN vs. TL16C552AIFN) is the same, along with the package. It looks like the difference between the two is related to pack material (i.e. desiccant used in the packing process). Given modern quality processes this difference has become irrelevant.

    There are multiple instances of older devices with an OPN variant that is no longer discernible, as is likely the case here. TI generally makes a practice of continuing to support the OPNs in this case rather than retiring them, as keeping consistent OPN tags is more helpful for long-term customers.

    Best,

    Danny