• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 3 replies
  • Answers 2 answers
  • Subscribers 79 subscribers
  • Views 370 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.

MSP430F5309IZXHR

Jonathan Laflamme
Prodigy 10 points

Other Parts Discussed in Thread: TMS320VC5509A

Dear Support, 
I have to work on a PCB design change which consists of passing from the MSP430F5309IZQER to the MSP430F5309IZXHR.
As my understanding, the big difference between both MSP is the "Package" specification that pass from MicroStar junior BGA (80) for the ZQE to nFBGA (80) for the ZHX. 
I read on another TI forum the following information that was found on a similar issue topic for an other chip (TMS320VC5509A): 

The differences between the microstar and nfbga packages for the products are primarily mechanical (specifically a minor height difference).  The key parameters for the two packages are the same. The paths for the nfbga package substrate was designed to enable the parts to be considered datasheet equivalent (share the same datasheet; and power, ground and signal pins are all in the same X-Y locations). 

Board Layout Considerations:

The nFBGA package provides the same X and Y dimensions as MicroStar BGA, and provides pin-to-pin and footprint compatibility. Minor adjustments in pick and place machine programming may be needed because of slight package and tray differences. The nfBGA package can solder to the Microstar BGA land pattern. However, there have been improved nFBGA PCB land pattern and stencil recommendations to achieve better soldering results after extensive testing and evaluation since the microstar package was developed. Please refer to the latest TI packaging drawing found in the latest TI device datasheet and datasheet addendum to review the package dimensions and latest PCB land pattern and stencil recommendation. For more details, check out this nFBGA application note*

 (Source: https://e2e.ti.com/support/processors-group/processors/f/processors-forum/921049/tms320vc5509a-microstar-bga-and-nfbga-differences)

*Note: I looked into the nFBGA packaging application report and did not find anything on the 5 x 5 mm x 0.5mm pitch package which is not helping me... (https://www.ti.com/lit/an/spraa99c/spraa99c.pdf?ts=1666997354717&ref_url=https%253A%252F%252Fe2e.ti.com%252F)
 
Is it possible to have some kind of similar analysis performed by a TI specialist for the MSP430F5309IZXHR vs the MSP430F5309IZQER? 
 
Thank you very much for your help. 
 
Best regards
  • 0
    TI__Guru 56685 points

    Hello Jonathan,

    The same language used for the TMS320 part applies to the package change from MicroStar BGA to nFBGA on MSP430 devices as well. They are functionally and electrically equivalent, and use the same physical layout dimensions. In some cases, the height ( Z dimension) of the nFBGA package is slightly shorter. 

  • 0 in reply to Jace H
    Prodigy 10 points

    Thanks for the answer Jace H. 

    This fullyfill the "hardware" and functionnality of the device. What about the nFBGA packaging application report that did not includes any testing on a 5 X 5mm x 0.5mm Pitch? Does the conclusion from other chip size / pitch can be assumed the same and rework on the PCB land pattern and stencil will be recommended?

  • 0 in reply to Jonathan Laflamme
    TI__Guru 56685 points

    Jonathan,

    No re-work of PCBs are needed. The X and Y dimensions are the same and so is the pitch. The packages are completely interchangeable in this regard. 

**Attention** This is a public forum