• State Resolved
  • Replies 3 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 34 subscribers
  • Views 86 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

TCAN1462-Q1: EMC violation

Shoo Saga
Expert 3151 points

Part Number: TCAN1462-Q1
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: TCAN844-Q1, TCAN1472-Q1, TCAN1042G-Q1

Hi team,

The MW band (0.53 to 1.8 MHz) is violated in the conduction current test.
Measurement conditions: CISPR25 Ed.4
Measurement point: Can single wire

TCAN1462VDRQ1
=> current product, SiC compatible. Approximately 10 dB over specification
TCAN1044AVDRQ1
=> Substitute candidate, SiC not supported. Approximately 1 dB over specification
competitor(NXP?)
No SiC support. Approximately 5 dB more margin than the standard value is secured.

in MW bandwidth, How about the EMC performance of  TCAN844-Q1 , TCAN1472-Q1 and TCAN1042G-Q1 ? better than TCAN1044/1462AVDRQ1?

Best,

Shoo

  • +1
    TI__Guru 63227 points

    Hi Shoo,

    Unfortunately, we do not perform CISPR25 and unable to confirm for you. Would recommend referencing all our available EMC test reports, here.

    However, the dominant contributors for MW bands are typically common mode current injection, the recessive bias network behavior, edge symmetry, interaction with harness impedance in single wire measurements etc. Hence based on your observations, would recommend the older TCAN1042 device with more conservative classic CAN biasing. Please help confirm as this should show lower internal CM drive strength with less aggressive edge control and should align more with the competitor's (I suspect, also an older alternative), thanks.

    Best Regards,

    Michael.

  • 0 in reply to Michael Ikwuyum
    TI__Expert 3151 points

    Hi Micheal,

    How about TCAN844-q1 which has lower datarate than TCAN1044A? would not have steep rise/fall edge like old TCAN1042?

    TCAN1042 increased the price a bit. Newer device would be better in terms of the supply side as well.

    BTW, the datarate is 2Mbps and 500kbps. I will look into the EMC report.

    Best,

    Shoo

  • 0 in reply to Shoo Saga
    TI__Guru 63227 points

    Hi Shoo,

    No, I do not believe so. 844 may be cheaper but it is also a new device . As you have already mentioned, your observations are for 2 Mbps and not at their respective max speeds. I.e., lower supported data rate should not automatically imply slower edges or better conducted emissions.

    And as observed, the 1044 is already marginal (1 dB) and may further consider optimizing for external improvements if cost is a limitation (optimizing the grounding, short stubs, minimal bus loading, adding / optimizing CMC with around 100 to 300 ohms per line impedance targeted around 1 MHz per the 1 dB concern, checking TVS choice - low cap, matched dual line placed near the connector / any leakage paths, tightening return path / connector placement / split termination cap from 4.7 nF to 10 to 22 nF for example, etc),  thanks. 

    Best Regards,

    Michael.