• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 3 replies
  • Subscribers 15 subscribers
  • Views 218 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Similar topics

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.

ISO1500: Cable invert function or Auto polarity correction function

Nam, Dino
Expert 5775 points
Part Number: ISO1500
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: ISO7731, , SN65HVD1794

Dear team, 

Currently, the isolated RS 485 system of customer consists of ISO7731+SN65HVD1794. but the customer are trying to change Isolated RS485 device like ISO1500 due to application size. 

And the customer are using cable invert function. But there is no function on ISO1500. 

Is there the Isolated RS485 transceiver with cable invert function or Auto polarity correction function? 

Thank you. 

  • +1
    TI__Mastermind 49445 points

    Hi Dino,

    Thanks for reaching out. We currently do not have isolated RS-485 devices that support auto polarity correction function. The best way to meet this requirement is to use the two chip solution of isolator and transceiver that you have already pointed out.

    Let me know if you have any other questions, thanks.


    Regards,
    Koteshwar Rao

  • 0 in reply to Koteshwar Rao
    TI__Expert 5775 points

    Hello Koteshwar, 

    As mentioned before, current solution is ISO7731DWR + SN65HVD1794DR. 

    The customer are trying to reduce application solution with INV function or auto polarity correction function.

    Please let me know your opinion to reduce solution size. 

    Thank you. 

  • +1 in reply to Nam, Dino
    TI__Mastermind 49445 points

    Hi Dino,

    As mentioned earlier, the existing isolated RS-485 devices do not support auto polarity correction and hence, I do not have any devices to propose as a replacement for the two chip solution. This function cannot be achieved without adding additional devices which I believe defeats the purpose of reducing solution size.

    Sorry that I do not have solution for your right now. I will go ahead and close this E2E thread, thanks.


    Regards,
    Koteshwar Rao