SN65HVD230/233 Question

John Knieriemen

Other Parts Discussed in Thread: SN65HVD233, SN65HVD230, SN65HVD234

We are using the SN65HVD23x series of CAN transceivers. We switched from the 230 to the 233 because of the increased bus-pin fault protection rating (+/- 36v). We are using the same footprint/signal to each pin. When we use an SN65HVD230 we measure the CANH signal at 3V (high) and 1.9V (low) and the CANL at 1.9V and 1V. A differential of 2V. These values fall into the specs and our system works. When we use an SN65HVD233 we measure the CANH signal at 2.3V and 1.8V and the CANL at 1.8V and 1.2V. A differential of 1.1V. These values are out of spec and our system fails because of can bus node dropouts. We hook them up the same. Pin 5 is left unconnected and pin 8 is grounded Any reason for this difference in behavior with identical setups? Have there been any bad batches of these ICs?

over 14 years ago

0 John Knieriemen over 14 years ago

TI__Prodigy 410 points

Any response on this??

0 Clark Kinnaird over 14 years ago

TI__Expert 3875 points

John, As we discussed on the phone, it turns out the customer is not using SN65HVD233 transceivers. So that explains why they don't meet the SN65HVD233 datasheet. I hope you can hook them up with some real HVD233s.

0 Roman Ermakov over 14 years ago in reply to Clark Kinnaird

Expert 1150 points

Hello, Clark.

I have same problem with SN65HVD234. THe ICs marked "VP234 8CM 26L 04" and "VP234 8C 26L 04".

With "VP234 8BM A2 2N" all works fine. What is the reason?

0 Clark Kinnaird over 14 years ago in reply to Roman Ermakov

TI__Expert 3875 points

Roman,

Can you check those part markings again? The SN65HVD234 should be marked with a top row of "VP234", then a 3-digit date code, then a 4-digit lot-trace code, and then possibly "G4" as the environmental category. This is also documented on the product folder where it says "Top Side Marking".