• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 6 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 64 subscribers
  • Views 257 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.

BQ76PL455A: Possible latch condition of BQ76PL455A

mark prosser
Prodigy 165 points
Part Number: BQ76PL455A

Good Morning,

Currently supporting a client with 16 cell module solution ( currently 12 stacks up to 660V ) , I had an issue where the last device in the stack (top) suddenly stopped (unable to restart via shutdown/wake command of main controller).

Upon investigation , the BQ seemed idle with no VIO/VP present.

Upon removal of PCB ( disconnected cells from device ) , I reconnected PCB to recheck supplies and all was OK.

Question is - is their an intentional Latch function of this device where only removal of battery/cells will release?

Also is there a more direct point of contact for technical assistance regarding this series of devices?

Best Regards

Mark

  • 0
    TI__Mastermind 19795 points

    Hi Mark,

    Thanks for your question!

    There are no such latch functions in the device. Would you be able to provide further details on your issue, and a schematic for us to review?

    Regards,

    Vince Toledo

  • 0 in reply to Vince
    Prodigy 165 points

    Hi Vince

    Many thanks for responding , would you have a direct email address that I can forward detail to you?

  • 0 in reply to mark prosser
    TI__Mastermind 19795 points

    Hi  Mark,

    Please add me as a friend through e2e, and at that point you will be able to send the details to me through a direct message.

    In the meantime, here are a few things I'd like to check to rule out any potential issues:

    -Did you get any fault summary information from the stack leading up to the issue? Please provide if so.

    -Is there any point in the code in which the COMM lines are changed (disabling/enabling COMMH/L+/-)?

    -Is there any point in the code in which the device is sent into shutdown?

    Thanks,

    Vince Toledo

  • 0 in reply to Vince
    Prodigy 165 points

    Hi Vince

    Thanks for that , I have sent a request....

    Did you get any fault summary information from the stack leading up to the issue? Please provide if so.

    We are not using the fault indication side at this time (BQ** anyway).

    -Is there any point in the code in which the COMM lines are changed (disabling/enabling COMMH/L+/-)?

    We use a BQ as Communications bridge , for stack shutdown the COMMH/L+/- are simply stopped.

    -Is there any point in the code in which the device is sent into shutdown?

    We have a sequence during Power ON condition where we tell device to shutdown and then wake up (but I do not think associated with latch issue??).

  • 0 in reply to mark prosser
    TI__Mastermind 19795 points

    Hi Mark,

    Thanks for sending the request, I have accepted! Please send any additional information that you can (code, schematics, device conditions during failure etc.)!

    My responses and additional questions are below:

    We are not using the fault indication side at this time (BQ** anyway).

    +If possible, check to see if the faults are still readable from the devices through register reads of fault registers (FAULT_SUM=0x52 to 0x53, other fault registers are 0x54 to 0x63). If you have any data of the fault status of the device after it was woken up, it would be highly helpful!

    We have a sequence during Power ON condition where we tell device to shutdown and then wake up (but I do not think associated with latch issue??).

    +This sequence will work correctly, I would like to confirm that there were no shutdowns issued to the top device by itself during the middle of communications.

     

    Additional questions (can be responded to via direct message or here):

    +Quantity of devices produced and number in which the failure was noted.

    +Stage in which the device failed (production, development, test, etc.)

    Thanks!

    Vince

  • 0 in reply to Vince
    TI__Genius 10785 points

    HI Mark and Vince,

    I am going to close this thread now.

    Please open it again if needed.

    thanks

    Roger