• State
  • Replies 5 replies
  • Subscribers 83 subscribers
  • Views 90 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

TMS320F28027F-Q1: Electrical: Functional Issue,

Wilfredo Dominguez
Prodigy 10 points
Part Number: TMS320F28027F-Q1

Tool/software:

Several defects are discovered on the Post controller project around of 3.3 units per week are being disposed as scrap by internal issues on the microcontroller U627 (17052086-01) The microcontroller is being used to drive a 3-phase fan and in an electrical charger control module. The issue is discovered during functional test specifically during the Fan tests. It has been taken three suspected units, and then we tried to connect the microcontroller (MCU) to our application software and through Blackhawk Debug Probe. The communication failed with the MCU with part number: 17052086-01. The three suspected units present the same communication failure.

The reported communication issue could not be verified on bench or ATE from Texas Instrument.

  • 0
    TI__Genius 10265 points

    Hello,

    Does the issue only happen while the application is operating? Are you able to connect to the device after encountering the issue by putting the device in wait boot (no possible application interference). 

    I'm unable to open the pptx you shared, can you try uploading again?

    Best,

    Matt

  • 0 in reply to Matt Kukucka
    TI__Genius 15171 points

    Hi Wilfredo, I'll look into the CPR/QEM tomorrow.  If you can provide the CPR or QEM to me it'll speed things up.  In the meantime a couple questions:

    1. Is there anything about the functional failure in the line that could help isolate the device issue, e.g. PWM, ADC, etc.

    2. Are you using CSM?

    3. Can you describe the flow, for example device mounted to PCB then flash programmed and verified then fan test or are there additional steps

    4. Have you tried connecting to the device with a different debug probe (e.g. XDS100 or XDS110) or have you tried slowing the XDS200 clock rate?

    Regards,

    Joe

  • 0 in reply to Joe Prushing
    TI__Genius 15171 points

    Hi Wilfredo, I found your case and will discuss with the returns team tomorrow.  That said, I would still appreciate answers to the above questions.

    Thank you.

  • 0 in reply to Joe Prushing
    TI__Genius 15171 points

    Hi Wilfredo, one more question:

    5. it appears INTOSC is used as the system clock as opposed to XTAL?.  Does the application use INTOSC compensation as described in the Oscillator Compensation Guide?

  • 0 in reply to Joe Prushing
    TI__Genius 15171 points

    Hi Wilfredo, I met with the returns team.  Currently the units are in Dallas, but I have requested they be sent to our site for further analysis.  Since the initial assessment at TI did not find an issue and they were able to connect to the devices with XDS110 it will be helpful to get any more details about the fail as seen in the line or bench.  Further it is important for us to understand the maturity of the design (HW/SW) so we determine the best next steps to resolve.  For that reason, I am consolidating the questions I asked and adding some more:

    1. Is there anything about the functional failure in the line that could help isolate the device issue, e.g. PWM, ADC, etc.

    2. Are you using CSM?

    3. Can you describe the flow, for example device mounted to PCB then flash programmed and verified then fan test or are there additional steps

    4. Have you tried connecting to the device with a different debug probe (e.g. XDS100 or XDS110) or have you tried slowing the XDS200 clock rate?

    5. it appears INTOSC is used as the system clock as opposed to XTAL?.  Does the application use INTOSC compensation as described in the Oscillator Compensation Guide?

    6. How long has this design been running in production?  Roughly what volume?  

    7. Have there been any HW or SW updates recently?

    I sent a friend request through E2E in case some of the above needs to be shared privately.