Author Topic: UC2577 failed in storage?  (Read 2617 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline NiHaoMikeTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9281
  • Country: us
  • "Don't turn it on - Take it apart!"
    • Facebook Page
UC2577 failed in storage?
« on: November 22, 2012, 11:33:59 pm »
I was working on a UC2577 based boost converter and the first time I tried to power it on, it drew a lot of current. After debugging, I found that the chip was internally shorted. After checking my circuit for faults that might have caused the failure, I replaced the chip and same problem. Then I took out a third chip (last one I had) and measured it before I even used it, and it was also bad.

How would three chips in a row go bad from storage? They were all stored in a piece of antistatic foam, so ESD seems unlikely. Moreover, other chips (including some CMOS logic chips) in the same piece of foam work fine.
Cryptocurrency has taught me to love math and at the same time be baffled by it.

Cryptocurrency lesson 0: Altcoins and Bitcoin are not the same thing.
 

Offline notsob

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 706
  • Country: au
Re: UC2577 failed in storage?
« Reply #1 on: November 22, 2012, 11:42:46 pm »
not likely a bad batch, more likely someone wearing nylon undies handled them before they were sent to you.
 

Offline Mechatrommer

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11715
  • Country: my
  • reassessing directives...
Re: UC2577 failed in storage?
« Reply #2 on: November 23, 2012, 04:11:08 am »
more likely someone wearing nylon undies
technically speaking... just by touching or wearing that material wont do much harm. the wearer need a significant amount of "rubbing" with the material before she can build a dangerous voltage that can penetrate antistatic.
Nature: Evolution and the Illusion of Randomness (Stephen L. Talbott): Its now indisputable that... organisms “expertise” contextualizes its genome, and its nonsense to say that these powers are under the control of the genome being contextualized - Barbara McClintock
 

Offline notsob

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 706
  • Country: au
Re: UC2577 failed in storage?
« Reply #3 on: November 23, 2012, 06:22:17 am »
I was just trying to add some humour to the possibility of incorrect handling of the devices upstream.

I once worked for a company that moved from 'casual' component handling, to fully antistatic procedures, (floor mats, table mats, ankle straps, discharge points at every bench, anti static holding bins, you name it), obviously this was quite some time ago, their faulty on manufacture and 'dead' board returns during the first 6 months dropped by an astonishingly unbelievable amount.
So yes antistatic procedure are very important, and depending where you source your parts, there could be problems introduced upstream.
 

Offline SeanB

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16384
  • Country: za
Re: UC2577 failed in storage?
« Reply #4 on: November 23, 2012, 02:42:19 pm »
Could also be a faulty batch, a fake one or a contaminated batch that failed with time.
 

Offline LaurenceW

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 258
  • Country: gb
    • It's Time, Jim, but not as we know it
Re: UC2577 failed in storage?
« Reply #5 on: November 24, 2012, 12:17:08 pm »
If you've measured a brand new part and found it to be short circuit, I would very much doubt that static could cause a low impedance short - if anything, quite the reverse (until you plugged a faulty part in to a current bearing circuit - then it might fail to short).

It does sound to me like you have manufacturer rejects or even fake parts. How do the markings look? Where did you buy them from ? When you say "short", between what pins and what impedance are you seeing? What is your circuit?

I have used these devices myself in the past, and not had any "Dead on Arrival" or subsequent demise problems. They can be unstable if not decoupled as per the spec sheet, however.
If you don't measure, you don't get.
 

Offline NiHaoMikeTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9281
  • Country: us
  • "Don't turn it on - Take it apart!"
    • Facebook Page
Re: UC2577 failed in storage?
« Reply #6 on: November 24, 2012, 02:40:54 pm »
They were TI samples I ordered a few years ago for a self driving model race car. (First year class project.) They went unused because it turns out the control circuit was the bottleneck and boosting the voltage would not do any good.
Cryptocurrency has taught me to love math and at the same time be baffled by it.

Cryptocurrency lesson 0: Altcoins and Bitcoin are not the same thing.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf