• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 2 replies
  • Subscribers 35 subscribers
  • Views 1527 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.

PCA9306: May I have some question regarding PCA9306?

TAlex Wu
Expert 1200 points

Part Number: PCA9306
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: PCA9517, , , TCA9517

Dear SIR:

May I have some question regarding as below:

(1)What's different application between PCA9306 and PCA9517 ?(Would you have sample example for reference)

     change another word"What's condition muse select PCA9306 and What's must condition select PCA9517 ?"

(2)Could we use PCA9517 to replace PCA9306 or use PCA9306 to replace PCA9517?

(3)PCA9306 and PCA9306-Q1 have any different ?(Change another word ,What's meaning the "-Q1" ?) 

(4)PCA9306 and PCA9517 have any EOL or phase out information (or any will EOL or phase out plan in the future)? 

     (If yes,Have any advice part for replace PCA9306 and PCA9517 ) 

Thanks

  • 0
    TI__Guru* 81641 points
    Hey TAlex,

    I would like to suggest you use the TCA9517 device (if you plan on using this over the PCA9306) rather than the PCA as the TCA family fixes some bug and increases the acceptable Vcc ranges.

    "What's different application between PCA9306 and PCA9517 ?"
    -PCA9306 is a level translator only whereas PCA9517 is a buffer that supports level translating.

    "What's condition muse select PCA9306 and What's must condition select PCA9517 ?"
    The TCA9517 (TCA is better than PCA9517) is a buffer so it will separate the capacitance from A side and B side. I2C standard states the most capacitance you can have on a bus for a 100kHz clock and a 400kHz clock is 400pF. If you have a heavily loaded I2C bus which may be close or go over 400pF then you would need to use the TCA9517.

    If all you need is level translation and the bus capacitance is low enough (you do not need to buffer capacitance) then you would use the PCA9306.

    "(2)Could we use PCA9517 to replace PCA9306 or use PCA9306 to replace PCA9517?"
    -In a sense, you can use TCA9517 as a level translator as well but note we recommend that TCA9517 VccB should be a minimum of 2.7V whereas PCA9306 will support 2.5V on Vref2.

    -PCA9306 cannot replace TCA9517 because it does not buffer capacitance.

    "PCA9306 and PCA9306-Q1 have any different ?(Change another word ,What's meaning the "-Q1" ?) "
    -Q1 means it is automotive qualified and may support a wider temperature range. Other than that, the datasheet specifications should be similar.

    "PCA9306 and PCA9517 have any EOL or phase out information (or any will EOL or phase out plan in the future)? "
    -I do not have information on this but can probably speak with my manager on this (he is currently out of office though). What I can tell (this is MY OPINION) is PCA9306 will likely stay for a long time and PCA9517 could be phased out by TCA9517 (I suspect this will also be here to stay for a long time).

    Thanks,
    -Bobby
  • 0
    TI__Expert 6955 points
    TAlex Wu,

    1). The pinouts are different between the devices. The TCA9517 has higher ESD ratings

    2). No. They cannot be used interchangeably because the pinouts are different.

    3). Q-1 means the part is automotive qualified.

    4). The PCA9517 is not recommended for new designs. Please use the TCA9517 instead. The PCA9306 is still active will be supported should you choose to use this device .

    -Lucas