https://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/<p style="display:none;">blank</p>en-USTelligent Community 13https://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1680660/tps549d22-request-for-process-node-informationWed, 09 Sep 2026 07:19:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:f51e8b4e-0788-4be4-8600-303fc4f60088Shruthi BalakrishnaPart Number: TPS549D22 Hi Team, Could you please provide the Process node(in nm) for the below part numbers. TPS548D22RVFR TPS549D22RVFR TPS548B22RVFR TPS259804ONRGER TPS259824ONRGER Thank you!!TPS549D22https://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1679171/tps1htc100-q1-need-to-calculate-for-inductive-load-calculation-supported-by-tps1htc100/6477405Wed, 09 Sep 2026 07:18:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:17f393ae-df57-48cb-b67b-d698bbe8a70bAkshay VavukkalHi Filip, Sorry, missed your response. 1. we will be operating at 32V and a continuous load of 0.5A, we are trying to put in the maximum allowed inductive loads supported by the system, was thinking of limiting the size of 4.7k into 0.1W. could you share the maximum inductance value that could be supported so that we can ask our users to limit their (L/R) within this range. 2. the TPS1HTC100 shows in the table that the thermal pad is connected internally to ground and in the layout guidelines it is shown to be connected to ground pin of the system, in our system, we are planning to float the thermal pad as such. Will this cause any issue for the functionality of the TPS1HTC? Does it need to be connected to ground for working of the switch other than thermal dissipation handling? 3. if we are using in this 0.5A range, with 1.2A current limit and 32V supply, is there any calculation for the copper spread required for thermal dissipation. Our operating range is -40 to +85degC. Could you share these details as soon as possible. --- Regards, Akshayhttps://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1680659/bq27441-g1-wrong-battery-charge-informationWed, 09 Sep 2026 07:14:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:af162837-9bdf-4f67-8fd0-36cc493bcd6dAgla&#233; BarrasPart Number: BQ27441-G1 Other Parts Discussed in Thread: BQSTUDIO Hello TI Support, I am following up on our previous support case &quot;CS3549699 – Wrong battery charge information” regarding the inaccurate battery state-of-charge reported by our bq27441-G1A fuel gauges. While investigating this issue, we noticed that the battery chemistry (ChemID) is an important parameter for the fuel gauge configuration. We also found that the bq27441-G1A does not provide the same ChemID selection mechanism in bqStudio as some of the other TI fuel gauges. We would therefore like to clarify the following points: 1. Is there a way to determine the most appropriate ChemID for our battery when using a bq27441-G1A? 2. Can TI determine or characterize the appropriate battery chemistry/profile based on the battery/cell we are using? 3. If such a characterization is possible, could TI perform this analysis if we provide you with battery samples? If so, could you please let us know the procedure, expected lead time, and whether this service is chargeable? 4. Based on the battery characteristics and the information from our previous case, could you confirm whether the bq27441-G1A is appropriate for our battery and whether its default/pre-programmed chemistry profile could explain the inaccurate SOC readings? 5. If the bq27441-G1A is not the appropriate device for our battery chemistry, could you recommend a suitable TI fuel gauge that would allow us to use the appropriate ChemID/profile? For reference, we are attaching the battery manufacturer&#39;s documentation to this case, which contains the technical characteristics of the battery/cell. We are attaching also the wiring schematic for our charger and fuel gauge. During our tests, we observed the following behavior: Each time we launch our program, the SOC and other battery measurements reported by the fuel gauges change significantly after approximately 2 to 10 minutes of operation. When only one battery is connected, both fuel gauges report approximately the same values, even though only one battery is physically connected. Once the charging cycle is complete, one fuel gauge remains at 100%, while the other fuel gauge follows the SOC of the connected battery. When both batteries are connected, after completing a charging cycle, both batteries reach 100%, and their reported SOC values remain very similar, typically within 1–2% of each other. However, if we then disconnect one battery, the value doesn&#39;t drop to 0%. If we replace the first battery with another battery having a different SOC, the corresponding fuel gauge does not reflect the new battery&#39;s actual SOC. Instead, the reported SOC remains approximately at the level of the previously connected battery. This behavior makes us suspect that there may be an issue with the fuel gauge configuration, battery detection/learning, or the way the battery parameters are being handled by the bq27441-G1A. Could you please advise us on the recommended approach to obtain reliable SOC measurements for each battery independently with this configuration? Could you also please confirm that our schematic is correct for this configuration? The GPOUT outputs of both bq27441-G1A devices are connected to the same microcontroller GPIO pin. However, there is no pull-up resistor on this shared line. Could you please confirm whether this configuration is correct and whether the absence of a pull-up resistor on the GPOUT line could cause any issues? Thank you in advance for your support. Best regards, LPYE 401880SD 800mAh Specification.pdf Schematic charger and fuel gauge.pdfBQ27441-G1bqStudioTest &amp; Measurementhttps://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1679012/bq2982-bq298218-power-consumption-issue/6477393Wed, 09 Sep 2026 07:03:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:2438931f-02b4-4a65-8354-3e840a78208dJayden LiHi team, Could you help on this urgent case? Thanks! Jayden Lihttps://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1680560/tps2660-tps2660-iec61508-ccertification/6477389Wed, 09 Sep 2026 06:58:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:81aaf556-fc18-429e-ab50-29fa648605a5Miteshkumar Dalabhai PatelHemanth, What is the next best option with IEC61508? Regards, Miteshhttps://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1668200/lmr38015-q1-question-about-initial-operation-of-lmr38015-q1/6477382Wed, 09 Sep 2026 06:51:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:5bcfb5b3-e194-4ef6-b9d6-c4ce54bca4e4Chase JeongDear Niranjan, Thank you for your support. My customer still test their PCB with changing inductor. the problem did not solved yet. Maybe this problem is caused because customer want to use extremely-small inductor due to PCB size. 1. My customer tested with LQH5BPH100MT0L(10uH, DCR : 0.106+-20%, 2.6A), the device still does not work in the range of 42V~48V. Of course there are some deviations, good inductor is worked better (not working in the range of 45~48V, for example.) but the average is similar. Last time you said about DCR value. The DCR value of this inductor is 0.106ohm +-20%. It means that minimum value is about 0.08ohm and maximum value is about 0.12ohm. 0.12ohm is definitely exceeds your recommendation. Do you think that it can be one of the reason of not working in specific voltage range situation? What would be happen in real operation if I use the inductor which have high DCR value? 2. Also I want you to check again, 10uH is acceptable value for 35V, 0.2A output condition. 3. You said about Isat value last time. My customer should test with 85℃ environment. Then Should I choose the inductor which Isat is over 2.5A at 85℃? or it is just okay to choose the inductor which Isat is over 2.5A just at room temperature? Please check this issue. Thanks. Best regards, Chasehttps://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1680653/tps281c100-ramping-ilim-on-turn-onWed, 09 Sep 2026 06:50:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:6ae906ec-a582-41a8-ac22-79c17ae78016FINN NIELSENPart Number: TPS281C100 Hi Forum, We are looking at TPS281C100 for an application, but has issues with the double inrush current allowed for the first 12mS. Issue is due to the limitation of our source. It has its own current limiting at 1.6A and we want it to be able to supply at least 1A nominal, so the 2A which will be sourced to the capacitive load for 12mS will trigger the source current limitation and it has 1.3 second hick-up mode reulting in a very undesired functionality. We see an option to keep the TPS28C100 in the design if we add the following circuit: Can this be done and will it work and if what is the reference voltage/ILIM pin current, enabling us to calculate the components needed?TPS281C100https://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1667681/tps23754-tps23754-vc-bias-voltage-drop-issue/6477375Wed, 09 Sep 2026 06:45:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:694e1b4e-027d-4cf7-aa1f-ef8dc94aedd0YONGGEUN JEONGHi Zhining, We have already tested and verified adding a Vout dummy load internally. However, we prefer to find an alternative solution if possible. We will test the clamping circuit and feedback loop, then update you with the results. Thanks, YGhttps://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1680650/bq27z561-r2-can-not-learn-the-gauge-for-battery-packs-greater-then-25ahWed, 09 Sep 2026 06:42:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:5e2a481e-cd54-43b8-897a-a9f194a88aa7AivarasPart Number: BQ27Z561-R2 Hello, I successfully trained / learned the gauge for more then 15 different battery packs. However I faced issue I can not solve with high capacity packs. If my battery pack is greater the 25Ah in capacity, learning proces fails. Learning state 05 never goes to next 06 state. Acording specifications gauge should handle battery packs up to 32Ah. The only clue I see is that in successful learning procedure when battery reaches 06 state register LStatus bits CF1 and CF0 are different. Help to diagnose what&#39;s possibly wrong and how can I try to solve this issue. When I got suspicious that all failed learning cycles are with large capacity battery I made experiment where for my 26Ah physical battery I changed design capacity from 26Ah to 25Ah and all related coefficients. In this case learning cycle was successfully. I also have 27 and 30 Ah battery packs that also fail to learn.Industrial AutomationBQ27Z561-R2https://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1680560/tps2660-tps2660-iec61508-ccertification/6477363Wed, 09 Sep 2026 06:37:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:12b4d52b-3d9c-4299-87af-003c938d53f3Bandaru HemanthHi Mitesh, this device is functional safety capable not compliant, product certificate not available for functional safety capable devices. thanks, Hemanthhttps://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1680647/bq79758b-q1-main-and-redundant-overcurrent-detection-mismatch-gpio4-pulled-high-at-0ma-loadWed, 09 Sep 2026 06:35:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:f7fea69d-1690-4fa1-9f10-4232a0801d6cRocky JohnsonPart Number: BQ79758B-Q1 Other Parts Discussed in Thread: BQ79758-Q1 , Hi TI Team, We are currently using the BQ79758-Q1 in our project and testing the Overcurrent (OC) Detection function. However, we are observing an unexpected mismatch behavior during our tests. Below are the details of our test conditions and the issues observed: [Test Conditions &amp; Configuration] Identical values configured for both Main and Redundant registers Device: BQ79758B-Q1 Load Current: 0 mA (No load applied) OC Filter Time: Set to 0 (No filtering/Immediate detection) Discharge OC Threshold: 50 mV Charge OC Threshold: 45 mV [issues Observed] 1. After powering up and running the system for a period of time, a mismatch error between the Main and Redundant Overcurrent Detection is triggered(at this time, the value of FAULT_OC register is 0x03). 2. At the same time, the GPIO4 pin of the LIBIC (BQ79758B-Q1) is pulled HIGH. [Our Questions] 1. What could be the potential root causes for the Main/Redundant overcurrent detection mismatch under the 0mA load condition? 2. Is there any way to avoid the mismatch above ? Thanks and best regards, RockyBQ79758B-Q1BQ79758-Q1https://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1679550/tps7a02-is-tps7a02-safe-to-use-when-not-powered/6477359Wed, 09 Sep 2026 06:34:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:d237b799-1633-4b1f-b5c3-ffe2e2b52ad8Frank RothoffHi Eduardo, Regarding LDO being used, I tried to explain that in the first post. In this particular use-case an external source will power the circuit and not the TPS7A02, this is an optional assembly version. In this specific use-case the TPS7A02 will not be used in it&#39;s entire life. The TPS7A02 is used on a (wireless) module which is mounted on the applications PCB, where the designer has no influence on, however he has access, Vin and Vout pin, Enable is connected to Vin by the way. Thanks for confirming the discharge implementation is controlled by Vin and Enable.https://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1679854/lm74900-q1-dgate-repeatedly-turns-off-and-on/6477357Wed, 09 Sep 2026 06:33:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:edcd9e77-fcc3-4312-a110-3984fe189162Yuta NishieHi Shiven-san, Thank you. I would appreciate it if you could reply via private message. Best Regards, Nishiehttps://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1679341/tps65296-allowable-output-capacitance/6477351Wed, 09 Sep 2026 06:29:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:f655b727-4f02-45d4-a5b5-4ac7ebf018e3Manish GautamHi, If you use higher capacitance, then it will slow down the transient behavior and output will reach to its final value after some delay. But you can go with higher value of capacitance, it won&#39;t affect the load transient behavior. VDDQ is an LDO output, so that&#39;s why we did not recommend any capacitance limit. Regards, Manishhttps://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1680633/lmr51610-lmr51610-invert-buck-boost-schematic-review/6477346Wed, 09 Sep 2026 06:25:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:e3dd9722-edbe-4f88-b43f-3574f363908fSourish NandyHello Jerry, I will get back to you with the comments on the schematic by tomorrow EOD IST. You can use the Pspice model found on the product page to simulate your circuit. But note that you can&#39;t take a simulation model for a buck and use it directly for an IBB. This is because the internal circuits in the model are referenced to a global &quot;ground&quot;, or zero-volt reference node. To simulate using normal IC model, the input supply is boot-strapped across the input and output of the buck converter. In this case you must be careful when monitoring voltages to ensure that you have the correct reference point for the measurement. Use this app note as reference for designing IBB schematic with Buck: Working with Inverting Buck-Boost Converters (Rev. B) Regards, Sourishhttps://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1678751/bq34z100-r2-bq34z100-r2-found-via-i2c-sniffing-hidden-sublclass-ids-set-by-bq-studio-not-listed-in-trm/6477343Wed, 09 Sep 2026 06:25:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:5cbb5c88-a545-4302-99ca-524dba565af3Michelangelo PonchioThank you for your quick answer. So, if I need to fully configure the BQ34Z100-R2 with different chem IDs via my host device (for instance in my case the end product will be fully potted, no physical port available for the EV2500 to connect), I then need to store into my host device an &quot;...df.fs&quot; file for each of my chem IDs configuration. Is that correct? If I can express my opinion about this procedure, I find it limiting for the full potential of the BQ34Z100-R2, to be so dependent on the BQstudio tool. Anyway, thank you for the support!https://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1674910/tps65296-enable-control/6477341Wed, 09 Sep 2026 06:24:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:0a464178-ace2-4f92-a000-39c76c55814eManish GautamHi, In TPS65296 device, there is two buck converter and an LDO 1.5A output will be there. VDD_EN will help to power up the buck converter and VDDQ_EN will help to power up the LDO. Regards, Manishhttps://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1677597/tps65219-custom-factory-programmed-tps65219-parts/6477342Wed, 09 Sep 2026 06:24:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:993c7f2d-89b5-4fda-b569-d5106c0e533eAlexander DaumHi Sarah, Thanks for the reply. I&#39;m with P2L2 (website p2l2.com). We are not yet a registered ti.com customer. Best Regards, Alexanderhttps://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1679185/lm5176-lm5176-48-v-input-to-24-v-6-a-output-does-not-regulate-unless-fb-divider-is-touched/6477339Wed, 09 Sep 2026 06:20:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:81a9bac9-ca2b-436b-adae-b406614ae5feVinayak BhatiyaHi Stefan Schauer, Below I have attached pending Scope plots kindly check DSO Output_09092026https://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1680642/lm53603-q1-the-package-outline-drawing-for-pwpWed, 09 Sep 2026 06:17:00 GMTcb01d8b2-d089-468d-babb-77d1d8683490:ef78fcfd-37af-4dab-9f0d-1d7acd3a6d47R.FukunagaPart Number: LM53603-Q1 Other Parts Discussed in Thread: LM53602-Q1 Hello TI Team, I am looking for the package outline drawing for LM536035QPWPTQ1 (LM53603-Q1, PWP package) . I checked the following documents: LM53603-Q1 (3 A), LM53602-Q1 (2 A) 3.5 V to 36 V Wide-VIN Synchronous 2.1 MHz Step-Down Converters for Automotive Applications datasheet (Rev. B) PWP (R-PDSO-G16) 4073225-3 (Rev. C) However, it appears that the datasheet only provides the overall package size information, and I could not find a detailed mechanical drawing equivalent to the package outline drawing normally used for mechanical design. I also found the image attached below from an E2E thread, but the image quality is too low to accurately read all dimensions and tolerances. LM53603: unable to locate the Package drawing - Power management forum - Power management - TI E2E support forums Could you please clarify the following? Is the PWP (R-PDSO-G16) Package Drawing (4073225 Rev. C) the official and complete source of package dimensions for LM536035QPWPTQ1? Is there a higher-resolution package outline drawing available? If available, could you provide the official package drawing, mechanical drawing, or STEP/3D model containing all package dimensions and tolerances? Best Regards, RyusukeIndustrial AutomationLM53602-Q1LM53603-Q1LM53603