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.

BQ769x0 - BQ78350 ALERT pin pull-down requirements

Other Parts Discussed in Thread: BQ76940, BQ78350

BQ76940 EVM has 499k // 470pF on ALERT pin.

I though bq78350 would drive a 0 and that a PD was useless.

I am wrong since our design needs something even stronger than 499k ( somewhere under 150k) to work properly.

We have added a few components on the line as shown on the picture attached.  From my point of view, these should not have any significant impact on  the pull-down value unless more than 5uA leaks out from that buffer (uC drives low).  This is quite unlikely if I refer to the buffer's datasheet.  So the bq78350 must have some significant leakage.

I can't find out any leakage current in the bq78350 datasheet to be able to size properly that pull-down resistor against the input characteristics found in bq769x0 datasheet.

High value resistor is the best for energy savings but I need some numbers to size it properly for our operating range.

Can you help on this?


Regards,

  • The bq769x0 drives ALERT low with a weak pull down, see RALERT_PD in the datasheet ALERT PIN characteristics.

    The bq78350 shows the pin as an I/O, but uses it as an input.  The leakage current would be ILKG in the table at 8.6, 1 uA.

    I checked the voltage on a sample EVM and the low voltage is <1mV with the standard pull down and the meter load.

    I'd suggest the standard debug methods of checking for contamination on all connections, try another board if available, then lift each connection until the unexpected current is found.

    A lower pull down resistor value should be OK within the drive capability of ALERT, but will obviously increase the pack current consumption.

  • That was a contamination issue.