• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 9 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 30 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.

LDC1314: Difference to LDC1314QRGHRQ1

Benedict Zwarnig
Prodigy 10 points
Part Number: LDC1314

Tool/software:

Hello,

Waht is the difference between:

LDC1314QRGHRQ1

and

LDC1314RGHRQ1

Please help to check if there is a difference or not.

Thank you!

  • 0
    TI__Mastermind 40295 points

    Benedict,

    Thanks for your inquiry about the LDC1314.

    Where did you find the second PN, LDC1314RGHRQ1?

    Regards,
    John

  • 0 in reply to John Miller - Sensing
    Prodigy 10 points

    Thank you for your reaction John!

    Maybe I need to adress my problem once again.

    Actually we have the problem that 2 datsheets are only for the LDC1314:

    LDC1314-Q1 (datasheet revision April 2016)

    and

    LDC1314 (datasheet revision March 2018)

    Could you explain what are the differences between those part numbers? 

  • +1 in reply to Benedict Zwarnig
    TI__Mastermind 40295 points

    Benedict,

    The LDC1314-Q1 is qualified for automotive applications, while the LDC1314 is not.
    You can usually see comments on automotive qualifications on the front page of the data sheet under the Features list (image below).
    The list of Applications will usually suggest uses in automotive end equipment.


    Regards,
    John

  • 0 in reply to John Miller - Sensing
    Prodigy 10 points

    Thank you very much for the conformation that there are no technical differences present!

  • 0 in reply to Benedict Zwarnig
    TI__Mastermind 40295 points

    Benedict,

    You are very welcome!
    Please let me know if you have any questions.

    Regards,
    John

  • 0 in reply to John Miller - Sensing
    Prodigy 10 points

    John,

    Thank you so much! I want to grab the opportunity to do so.

    To be honest we are currently struggeling with this IC.

    If you could say how the parts are getting trimmed to adjust the internal oscillator frequency?

    At the moment we have big issues with parts out of spec linked to the readable sensor values which are directly linked to the internal oscillator frequency [fintclk= 35    43,5   55] [MHz].

    Could you check min. max Values of shipped lots of the last year?

    Is there a possibility that we may have received bad µC lots wich are trimmed out of spec?
    Is there a possibility to retrimm the parts on customer side? 

  • 0 in reply to Benedict Zwarnig
    TI__Mastermind 40295 points

    Benedict,

    What are you seeing that makes you think the problem lies with the reference clock?
    If you use an external reference clock, does the behavior you are seeing change?

    Regards,
    John

  • 0 in reply to John Miller - Sensing
    Prodigy 10 points

    HI John!

    Sorry for my late response!

    I try to sum up the situation what we found out so far:

    We have IC´s where the output data is very low at all single channels.
    If we apply an external CLK of 40MHz the output data is in the same range compared with an OK IC. We only assuming of the internal CLK is the root cause of the different Output data.

    Additional:

    If we are applying external 10Mhz at an OK IC (internal CLK is around 40MHz but is divided by 4 and it is processed with 10Mhz) the output data is ~3800MHz --> means OK.

    Checking the formular of the datasheet we need to have 12MHz where we are applying 10MHz??

    Why do we see so big differences within this formular?

    Maybe you have the chance to check the QEM-CCR-2502-00230 where we sent two IC´s for analysis. (One good (OK) IC and on bad (NOK IC).

    Thank you very much in advance! 

  • 0 in reply to Benedict Zwarnig
    TI__Mastermind 40295 points

    Benedict,

    Would it be possible to look at the sensor waveforms using a oscope and high impedance probe?

    I'm proposing this because for troubleshooting, its usually good to start at the inputs.

    If you can do this, please try to get some images of the INxA and INxB pins for the active channels for a "good" and "bad" device. 
    We have found that it often helps minimize loading (and distortion) of the sensor waveform to put a 1k leaded resistor between the probe tip and the PCB test point.

    If this isn't possible, please let me know and we will try to find awork-around.

    Regards,
    John