• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • +1 person also asked this people also asked this
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 6 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 65 subscribers
  • Views 363 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.

TPS25961: TPS25961 - minimum pin gap

chris padbury
Prodigy 70 points
Part Number: TPS25961

Tool/software:

Looking at the datasheet of TPS25961, there isn't a directly dimensioned minimum distance between the pins and the exposed pad. I can work out a minimum distance indirectly by using the dimensions given:

(1.9mm - (1mm + 0.1mm) - 0.3mm - 0.3mm) / 2 = 0.1mm

but that seems unrealistically pessimistic. I calculate the nominal as 0.25mm. For my application, I need the minimum to be at least 0.15mm. Can TI confirm this dimension is at least 0.15mm?

  • 0
    TI__Mastermind 39025 points

    Hi Chris,

    Yes, the calculation looks too pessimistic. As you mentioned nominal calculation is .25mm which will be the case for most devices.

    I am getting a confirmation from product team regarding 0.15mm as minimum dimension. Please give us time till next week. I will get back to you as soon as I get the reply. 

    Best Regards,
    Arush

  • 0
    TI__Prodigy 370 points

    We have checked in model viewer, minimum distance between exposed thermal pad and pins is 0.25mm.

  • 0 in reply to Inemella Sai Bharadwaj
    Prodigy 70 points

    The nominal of the drawing is also 0.25mm, so does the model viewer just represent the nominal. If so I need to know what tolerance should we apply to that?

  • 0 in reply to chris padbury
    TI__Mastermind 39025 points

    Hi Chris,

    We checked char data for this device. This is based on 30 device and this is just a reference.

     Device width x_min = 1.970

    Pin length max = 0.278

    ground pad worst case from above diagram = 1.1

    So new calculation becomes (1.970 - 1.1)/2 - 0.278 = 0.157mm > 0.15mm.

    I hope this helps.

    Best Regards,
    Arush

  • 0 in reply to Arush Gupta
    Prodigy 70 points

    Hi, Thank you for sharing this data which is good news.

    To understand a minimum component count implementation, does TI advise against connecting EN/UVLO directly to VIN, even in applications below 5V? The TPS25961 datasheet shows an implementation for 3.3V and low current (copied below) that uses a 47k resistor pullup rather than a direct connection. Will a direct connection just increase pin leakage of is there any more significant reason to avoid?

  • 0 in reply to chris padbury
    TI__Mastermind 39025 points

    Hi Chris,

    For this device EN can be pulled up directly to the Vin for supply less than 5V. 

    Best regards,
    Arush