Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="John Roberts" data-source="post: 88730" data-attributes="member: 126">Re: A&amp;H QU info leaked a day earlyNot sure what you mean by load dump (input caps?), but yes, all modern ICs have serious input/output pin protection for ESD, while careful handling is still best practices. THAT engineers have written one or more AES papers about the &quot;extra&quot; input protection circuitry requirements for large phantom voltage DC blocking input caps charged to 50V and shorted to ground. The amps of transient current are beyond what internal IC clamps can handle. I&#039;ve watched this closely for as long as there was a digital console industry. The technology available today is far better and cheaper than it was. They are still consoles so design execution and details matter. JRPS: I had a conversation with one of the THAT chip design engineers about a different IC of theirs that I was asking about a semi-custom slightly different version. The simpler IC had more silicon dedicated to pin protection than to the actual working circuitry. Customers don&#039;t understand chips failing just because they were handled.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="John Roberts, post: 88730, member: 126"] Re: A&H QU info leaked a day early Not sure what you mean by load dump (input caps?), but yes, all modern ICs have serious input/output pin protection for ESD, while careful handling is still best practices. THAT engineers have written one or more AES papers about the "extra" input protection circuitry requirements for large phantom voltage DC blocking input caps charged to 50V and shorted to ground. The amps of transient current are beyond what internal IC clamps can handle. I've watched this closely for as long as there was a digital console industry. The technology available today is far better and cheaper than it was. They are still consoles so design execution and details matter. JR PS: I had a conversation with one of the THAT chip design engineers about a different IC of theirs that I was asking about a semi-custom slightly different version. The simpler IC had more silicon dedicated to pin protection than to the actual working circuitry. Customers don't understand chips failing just because they were handled. [/QUOTE]

Verification