• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 10 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 31 subscribers
  • Views 1312 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.

TM4C123BH6PGE: Die Revision

Dan Cristy
Intellectual 2615 points
Part Number: TM4C123BH6PGE

Hi Team -

 

We're having an issue with the TM4C123BH6PGEIR, which we believe is due to electrical overstress. It’s already been recommended to look at the TM4C123BH6PGEI7R.

 

We’d like to get a list of errata for the last 3 die revisions, and primarily, what has been done to improve the ESD resistance. Has there been anything done to improve this?

 

We looked at the posted errata, but didn’t see anything related to ESD issues. We’ve also looked at the manufacturing process changes, but didn’t see anything relevant there either.

 

Thanks,

Dan

 

Thanks!

  • 0
    Guru 27665 points
    Why do you believe it's related to electrical stress and why is the electrical stress you've keyed in on ESD?

    The errata notes do contain the errata for Rev 6 and 7. I don't believe there were previous released versions. I think anything previous to that was only released as samples.

    Robert
  • 0
    TI__Guru 72500 points
    Only silicon revisions 6 and 7 are available as qualified devices and the errata document is available on the TM4C123BH6PGE product page.
  • 0
    Guru 117850 points

    Dan Cristy said:
    ... we believe is due to electrical overstress.

    Would not such "belief" - land here w/far more power/persuasion - if it was accompanied by (any) justification/backup?

    Unschooled/novice posters (always) omit such "detail" - it is (bit) surprising to see it omitted by vendor agent...

  • 0 in reply to cb1_mobile
    TI__Intellectual 2615 points
    This conversation has already been moved offline due to the sharing of confidential information.
  • 0 in reply to Dan Cristy
    Guru 117850 points

    Perhaps then - it should (never) have "landed" here...    The requirement to "justify" such "belief" indeed remains - even off-line...

    And - is it not true - than any/all "ESD Precautions" would be of IMMENSE VALUE to "those here" - and their being held "secret" proves (highly) Counter-Productive?

  • 0
    Expert 2355 points

    Hi Dan,

    With 7 different designs, and > 1000 boards delivered, we have seen no "ESD issues".  Nor did have we seen ESD sensitivity on the 4 LM3s designs from the early Cortex-M days.  Cannot resist pointing out that ANY DEVICE, from any manufacturer will exhibit "ESD issues" with a poor circuit/layout design...  Good luck!

    Regards,

    Dave

  • 0 in reply to cb1_mobile
    Guru 27665 points

    cb1_mobile said:
    Perhaps then - it should (never) have "landed" here...    

    Asking the question in a public forum indicates a certain willingness to share information, especially the abundance of non-proprietary information each project has.

    Robert

  • 0 in reply to Robert Adsett
    TI__Guru 72500 points
    Let me explain a little so you don't give Dan too much of a hard time. In the past our field sales engineers would go directly to the experts inside TI to get an answer when trying to help a customer. Doing so would often mean that the answer to a good question never got captured in the forum. Also, that customer, who for whatever reason, chose not to use the forum, did not benefit from the vast pool of wisdom of our user group. So we basically demanded that TI employees must use the forum for at least the initial contact. Sometimes (as in this case) we take the conversation off-line until we figure out what is really going on.

    For the record, there were no changes made to the ESD protection going from revision 6 to revision 7 of the TM4C129.
  • 0 in reply to Bob Crosby
    Guru 117850 points

    Thank you - yet it MUST be noted that "Poster's Self-Award of Resolved" is surely, "Over-Promotion!"

    Restricting vital tech data - useful to ALL your client-users - lands SO VERY FAR from the Forum's spirit...

    Poster Dan warrants a strong, "DIS-LIKE" for his (short-sighted, selfish) restriction of (surely) non-proprietary info...

  • 0 in reply to cb1_mobile
    Guru 27665 points

    cb1_mobile said:
    Restricting vital tech data - useful to ALL your client-users - lands SO VERY FAR from the Forum's spirit...

    Agreed, the quid pro quo for contributing our expertise is that the expertise of others will also be shared. And although Bob did answer the question asked, he did not indicate what the problem was which is of interest to all and highly unlikely to be proprietary, at least in outline, to the original inquirer.

    Robert