• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 9 replies
  • Answers 4 answers
  • Subscribers 34 subscribers
  • Views 464 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.

TCAN1044A-Q1: Equivalent for AMIS-30660

Marvn Arcangel
Genius 15170 points

Part Number: TCAN1044A-Q1
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: TCAN1057A-Q1,

Hi Team,

The component reference tool suggests TCAN1044A-Q1 and TCAN1057A-Q1 as an alternative for AMIS-30660 from ONSEMI.

I would like to know if there will be issues if there are minor differences between the 2 parameters below.

For AMIS-30660:

VCANH: -45V  +45V

VCANL: -45V  +45V

 And. If the logic level is a little bit different?

I am hoping for your response.

Regards,

Marvin

  • 0
    TI__Guru 53535 points

    Hi Marvin,

    This appears to be the absolute maximum rating for the CAN pins on The ONSEMI device. This means that +-45V may be applied to the CAN pins without the device experiencing any permanent damage. For comparison, TCAN1044A and TCAN1057A have a absolute maximum rating of +-58V.

    Both of these devices define the output characteristics of the CAN pins to be in compliance with the ISO 11898-2 CAN standard (Vod of 1.5V minimum), so there is no concern about interoperability of these device from the output on a CAN level.

    Let me know if you have any more questions. 

    Regards, 
    Eric Schott 

  • 0 in reply to Eric Schott1
    TI__Genius 15170 points

    Hi Eric,

    Another question.

    About the logic, the ONSEMI device the logic level of VOH and VOL for the receiver data output ( pin Rxd) is a little bit different between TCAN1044A and TCAN1057A devices. will minor difference cause performance issues or not?

    When Vcc: 5V,

    VOH: 0.75 * VCC Vccnom=3.75V typ

    VOL: 0.25V typ 

    Thanks again,

    Regards,

    Marvin

  • 0 in reply to Marvn Arcangel
    TI__Guru 74302 points

    Marvin,

    Since TCAN1044A-Q1 is higher in the VOH case, and lower in the VOL case, the customer will be fine using our device in place of the ONSEMI device.

    Regards,

    Eric Hackett 

  • 0 in reply to Eric Hackett
    TI__Genius 15170 points

    Hi Eric,

    Another point.

    The Transmitter Data input (Pin Txd), the Ci ( input capacitance ) max value = 10pf, as shown below, this Ci value is somewhat a little bit different compared to the TCAN1044A and TCAN1057A.

    I do not think this minor difference will affect the performance, can you confirm?

  • 0 in reply to Marvn Arcangel
    TI__Guru 53535 points

    Hi Marvin,

    The TXD is a digital input pin that will be driven by the CAN controller output. The capacitance here will impact the signal in the digital domain coming from the controller's output pin. For the data rates where CAN operates (<=5Mbps), this capacitance should not cause an issue for typical IO drivers for most MCUs. This should only be an issue for very high speed digital signals (outside of CAN), when there is significant added capacitance on the signal trace, or if the signal driver is particularly weak. 

    This should not be an issue when switching from ONSEMI to TI. 

    Regards,
    Eric Schott

  • 0 in reply to Eric Schott1
    TI__Genius 15170 points

    Hi Eric,

    The difference between the Max propagation delay wont be a problem too correct?

  • 0 in reply to Marvn Arcangel
    TI__Guru 53535 points

    Hi Marvin,

    No, the additional capacitor will not have any meaningful impact on the propagation delay of the signal. Only a very small percentage of the propagation delay is attributed to the actual digital signal pin input. The majority of this delay will be attributed to the CAN bus, driver, and receiver.

    Regards, 
    Eric Schott 

  • 0 in reply to Eric Schott1
    TI__Genius 15170 points

    Hi Eric,

    Thank you.

    Just to confirm, There would be no issue with the difference of the propagation delay correct? For example, the AMIS-30660 has 245nsec. Will the TCAN1044A and TCAN1057A offer better performance against the  AMIS-30660  in considering the CAN bus? or the propagation delay value does not matter?

  • 0 in reply to Marvn Arcangel
    TI__Guru 53535 points

    Hi Marvin,

    Correct, the difference in propagation delay time here will not cause any issue when switching from AMIS-30660 to TCAN1044A or TCAN1057A. The lower loop delays of these devices would technically offer slightly better performance for faster arbitration rates, but this is likely not significant enough to change any data rate configurations in the system. This should primarily be viewed as a pin-to-pin replacement that may slightly benefit reliability - but most importantly have no negative impacts on the system. 

    Regards,
    Eric Schott