Fascinating discussion...

In the last 2 decades, I've seen certain mnf devices, for example
motorola's zener diodes, far exceed the specifications from their own
datasheets. National semi's cmos eproms are another example.

As far as downhole temperature devices are concerned, there is a
almost a "cult following" in this regard, including a listing of
devices which also, in some cases, far exceed their original
specifications in actual testing. I find it fascinating that at least
some members of the msp430 families, can endure downhole
temperatures... perhaps these can be used next to engine blocks and
so on??

Up here in canada, one of the important specs is low temperature. We
used to test devices, rather than rely on the mnf specifications. In
many cases, we found that the mnf specs were what was tested only,
and NOT what these devices would withstand in reality.

Oh yes... way back in time, we found that RCA Cmos 4000 devices were
extremely noise resistant across their power rails, compared to other
mnf's. The 1802 silicon on saphyre chips were another story... these
made it into the voyager space probes even. I still joke that star
trek's VGer movie tekkie side would have included 1802 assembly
code !! :) (Another story here...)

Back to the topic at hand, it doesn't surprise me that the msp430
family might have some very interesting qualities not documented...
however i'd be very wary of other "second sources", if/where these
exist, from other mnf's.
These would need to be tested also etc.

Later,
JP
> Thanks for sharing the info, Joseph. I guess the operating
> temperature in the field shouldn't exceed the 85 degress C of the
> datasheet, for being working all this time. Or maybe your board
> doesn't work all the time...
>
> And what about the mechanical vibration? Are there layout rules to
> diminish its effects? Are they the same recommendations to avoid
> EMI?
> Just curious about it.
>
> Regards,
> Adriano.
>
> Joseph A. Vrba wrote:
>
> > I thought I'd continue this thread to answer everyone else...
> >
> > In this application, we started with the MSP430F149 and used is
> > successfully in around 100 units spanning a period of over two
> > years.
> > Recently we've switched to the MSP430FG4617 for increased memory
> > capacity (and chip availability). That board has just completed
> > all of its formal stress testing as is currently being used in
> > field trials.
> > (We added quite a few more sensors as part of the new design.)
> >
> > There's no extra cooling on the chip. Although we don't typically
> > see temperatures that high in normal downhole runs, the 150
> > degree C requirement comes from our customer. The formal testing
> > for both high temp operation, temperature cycling and vibration
> > is performed by an independent subsidiary of our customer.
> >
> > --------------------------------- Start a New Thread

Thanks for sharing your experience, JP. I think that you should have a
very well structured testing scheme to guarantee that a device
supercedes the manufacturer's specifications. For example, repetitive
testing, duration of testing, operating temperature and expected
time-life. I'm used to trust the datasheet specs, even because we do not
use MSPs in their operating limits.

Regards,
Adriano.

jplagasse wrote:

> Fascinating discussion...
>
> In the last 2 decades, I've seen certain mnf devices, for example
> motorola's zener diodes, far exceed the specifications from their own
> datasheets. National semi's cmos eproms are another example.
>
> As far as downhole temperature devices are concerned, there is a
> almost a "cult following" in this regard, including a listing of
> devices which also, in some cases, far exceed their original
> specifications in actual testing. I find it fascinating that at least
> some members of the msp430 families, can endure downhole
> temperatures... perhaps these can be used next to engine blocks and
> so on??
>
> Up here in canada, one of the important specs is low temperature. We
> used to test devices, rather than rely on the mnf specifications. In
> many cases, we found that the mnf specs were what was tested only,
> and NOT what these devices would withstand in reality.
>
> Oh yes... way back in time, we found that RCA Cmos 4000 devices were
> extremely noise resistant across their power rails, compared to other
> mnf's. The 1802 silicon on saphyre chips were another story... these
> made it into the voyager space probes even. I still joke that star
> trek's VGer movie tekkie side would have included 1802 assembly
> code !! :) (Another story here...)
>
> Back to the topic at hand, it doesn't surprise me that the msp430
> family might have some very interesting qualities not documented...
> however i'd be very wary of other "second sources", if/where these
> exist, from other mnf's.
> These would need to be tested also etc.
>
> Later,
> JP
>
> >
> >
> > Thanks for sharing the info, Joseph. I guess the operating
> > temperature in the field shouldn't exceed the 85 degress C of the
> > datasheet, for being working all this time. Or maybe your board
> > doesn't work all the time...
> >
> > And what about the mechanical vibration? Are there layout rules to
> > diminish its effects? Are they the same recommendations to avoid
> > EMI?
> > Just curious about it.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Adriano.
> >
> > Joseph A. Vrba wrote:
> >
> > > I thought I'd continue this thread to answer everyone else...
> > >
> > > In this application, we started with the MSP430F149 and used is
> > > successfully in around 100 units spanning a period of over two
> > > years.
> > > Recently we've switched to the MSP430FG4617 for increased memory
> > > capacity (and chip availability). That board has just completed
> > > all of its formal stress testing as is currently being used in
> > > field trials.
> > > (We added quite a few more sensors as part of the new design.)
> > >
> > > There's no extra cooling on the chip. Although we don't typically
> > > see temperatures that high in normal downhole runs, the 150
> > > degree C requirement comes from our customer. The formal testing
> > > for both high temp operation, temperature cycling and vibration
> > > is performed by an independent subsidiary of our customer.
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> --
> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo sistema de antivus e
> acredita-se estar livre de perigo.
--
Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo sistema de antivus e
acredita-se estar livre de perigo. Start a New Thread

JP wrote :

> made it into the voyager space probes even. I still joke that star
> trek's VGer movie tekkie side would have included 1802 assembly
> code !! :) (Another story here...)

Well why not ? First Terminator had - what looked like - 6502 ASM listings
in the view of the Arnie T1... :-)

Best Regards,
Kris Start a New Thread

Hi all,

Thanks Adriano for comments !!

I certainly share your inclination towards trusting mnf's data specs,
however there is commercial politics & marketing sometimes involved
with the specifications we get.

In my present understanding, it depends on the fab processes &
materials etc. involved... on the actual specifications devices will
withstand.
My original choice of words "almost a cult following"
regarding "downhole electronics" was carefully chosen !!

Do a web-search on "downhole electronics" for a small insight into
this !! :)

In my experience, guys with absolutely no appreciation nor knowledge
of mnf's data have produced successful lines of equipment using chips
& devices which did not measure up, spec wise, to the environment
they were used in. Despite my first thoughts or advice on this...
However, i could also quote this both ways, in that sometimes these
types of designed crashed & burned big time. So to speak.

The "downhole guys" seem to be a different breed though, as some have
done & published the types of statistical testing on particular
devices, which a decent engineer or tech might accept.

Thanks Joseph for your original heads up on this... seems to warrant
further testing and so on.

Kindest regards,
JP

>
> Thanks for sharing your experience, JP. I think that you should
> have a very well structured testing scheme to guarantee that a
> device supercedes the manufacturer's specifications. For example,
> repetitive testing, duration of testing, operating temperature and
> expected time-life. I'm used to trust the datasheet specs, even
> because we do not use MSPs in their operating limits.
>
> Regards,
> Adriano.
>
> jplagasse wrote:
>
> > Fascinating discussion...
> >
> > In the last 2 decades, I've seen certain mnf devices, for example
> > motorola's zener diodes, far exceed the specifications from their
own
> > datasheets. National semi's cmos eproms are another example.
> >
> > As far as downhole temperature devices are concerned, there is a
> > almost a "cult following" in this regard, including a listing of
> > devices which also, in some cases, far exceed their original
> > specifications in actual testing. I find it fascinating that at
least
> > some members of the msp430 families, can endure downhole
> > temperatures... perhaps these can be used next to engine blocks
and
> > so on??
> >
> > Up here in canada, one of the important specs is low temperature.
We
> > used to test devices, rather than rely on the mnf specifications.
In
> > many cases, we found that the mnf specs were what was tested only,
> > and NOT what these devices would withstand in reality.
> >
> > Oh yes... way back in time, we found that RCA Cmos 4000 devices
were
> > extremely noise resistant across their power rails, compared to
other
> > mnf's. The 1802 silicon on saphyre chips were another story...
these
> > made it into the voyager space probes even. I still joke that star
> > trek's VGer movie tekkie side would have included 1802 assembly
> > code !! :) (Another story here...)
> >
> > Back to the topic at hand, it doesn't surprise me that the msp430
> > family might have some very interesting qualities not
documented...
> > however i'd be very wary of other "second sources", if/where these
> > exist, from other mnf's.
> > These would need to be tested also etc.
> >
> > Later,
> > JP
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks for sharing the info, Joseph. I guess the operating
> > > temperature in the field shouldn't exceed the 85 degress C of
the
> > > datasheet, for being working all this time. Or maybe your board
> > > doesn't work all the time...
> > >
> > > And what about the mechanical vibration? Are there layout rules
to
> > > diminish its effects? Are they the same recommendations to avoid
> > > EMI?
> > > Just curious about it.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Adriano.
> > >
> > > Joseph A. Vrba wrote:
> > >
> > > > I thought I'd continue this thread to answer everyone else...
> > > >
> > > > In this application, we started with the MSP430F149 and used
is
> > > > successfully in around 100 units spanning a period of over two
> > > > years.
> > > > Recently we've switched to the MSP430FG4617 for increased
memory
> > > > capacity (and chip availability). That board has just
completed
> > > > all of its formal stress testing as is currently being used in
> > > > field trials.
> > > > (We added quite a few more sensors as part of the new design.)
> > > >
> > > > There's no extra cooling on the chip. Although we don't
typically
> > > > see temperatures that high in normal downhole runs, the 150
> > > > degree C requirement comes from our customer. The formal
testing
> > > > for both high temp operation, temperature cycling and
vibration
> > > > is performed by an independent subsidiary of our customer.
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------
> >
> > Start a New Thread

You're welcome, JP. I didn't find many things about downhole electronics
on the web, mainly some products requesting patent, but it's an
interesting subject. Anyway, you have opened my eyes about the datasheet
specifications.

Best regards,
Adriano.

jplagasse wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Thanks Adriano for comments !!
>
> I certainly share your inclination towards trusting mnf's data specs,
> however there is commercial politics & marketing sometimes involved
> with the specifications we get.
>
> In my present understanding, it depends on the fab processes &
> materials etc. involved... on the actual specifications devices will
> withstand.
> My original choice of words "almost a cult following"
> regarding "downhole electronics" was carefully chosen !!
>
> Do a web-search on "downhole electronics" for a small insight into
> this !! :)
>
> In my experience, guys with absolutely no appreciation nor knowledge
> of mnf's data have produced successful lines of equipment using chips
> & devices which did not measure up, spec wise, to the environment
> they were used in. Despite my first thoughts or advice on this...
> However, i could also quote this both ways, in that sometimes these
> types of designed crashed & burned big time. So to speak.
>
> The "downhole guys" seem to be a different breed though, as some have
> done & published the types of statistical testing on particular
> devices, which a decent engineer or tech might accept.
>
> Thanks Joseph for your original heads up on this... seems to warrant
> further testing and so on.
>
> Kindest regards,
> JP
>
> >
> > Thanks for sharing your experience, JP. I think that you should
> > have a very well structured testing scheme to guarantee that a
> > device supercedes the manufacturer's specifications. For example,
> > repetitive testing, duration of testing, operating temperature and
> > expected time-life. I'm used to trust the datasheet specs, even
> > because we do not use MSPs in their operating limits.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Adriano.
> >
> > jplagasse wrote:
> >
> > > Fascinating discussion...
> > >
> > > In the last 2 decades, I've seen certain mnf devices, for example
> > > motorola's zener diodes, far exceed the specifications from their
> own
> > > datasheets. National semi's cmos eproms are another example.
> > >
> > > As far as downhole temperature devices are concerned, there is a
> > > almost a "cult following" in this regard, including a listing of
> > > devices which also, in some cases, far exceed their original
> > > specifications in actual testing. I find it fascinating that at
> least
> > > some members of the msp430 families, can endure downhole
> > > temperatures... perhaps these can be used next to engine blocks
> and
> > > so on??
> > >
> > > Up here in canada, one of the important specs is low temperature.
> We
> > > used to test devices, rather than rely on the mnf specifications.
> In
> > > many cases, we found that the mnf specs were what was tested only,
> > > and NOT what these devices would withstand in reality.
> > >
> > > Oh yes... way back in time, we found that RCA Cmos 4000 devices
> were
> > > extremely noise resistant across their power rails, compared to
> other
> > > mnf's. The 1802 silicon on saphyre chips were another story...
> these
> > > made it into the voyager space probes even. I still joke that star
> > > trek's VGer movie tekkie side would have included 1802 assembly
> > > code !! :) (Another story here...)
> > >
> > > Back to the topic at hand, it doesn't surprise me that the msp430
> > > family might have some very interesting qualities not
> documented...
> > > however i'd be very wary of other "second sources", if/where these
> > > exist, from other mnf's.
> > > These would need to be tested also etc.
> > >
> > > Later,
> > > JP
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for sharing the info, Joseph. I guess the operating
> > > > temperature in the field shouldn't exceed the 85 degress C of
> the
> > > > datasheet, for being working all this time. Or maybe your board
> > > > doesn't work all the time...
> > > >
> > > > And what about the mechanical vibration? Are there layout rules
> to
> > > > diminish its effects? Are they the same recommendations to avoid
> > > > EMI?
> > > > Just curious about it.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Adriano.
> > > >
> > > > Joseph A. Vrba wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I thought I'd continue this thread to answer everyone else...
> > > > >
> > > > > In this application, we started with the MSP430F149 and used
> is
> > > > > successfully in around 100 units spanning a period of over two
> > > > > years.
> > > > > Recently we've switched to the MSP430FG4617 for increased
> memory
> > > > > capacity (and chip availability). That board has just
> completed
> > > > > all of its formal stress testing as is currently being used in
> > > > > field trials.
> > > > > (We added quite a few more sensors as part of the new design.)
> > > > >
> > > > > There's no extra cooling on the chip. Although we don't
> typically
> > > > > see temperatures that high in normal downhole runs, the 150
> > > > > degree C requirement comes from our customer. The formal
> testing
> > > > > for both high temp operation, temperature cycling and
> vibration
> > > > > is performed by an independent subsidiary of our customer.
> > > > >
> > > > > ---------------------------------
> > >
> > >
> --
> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo sistema de antivus e
> acredita-se estar livre de perigo.
--
Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo sistema de antivus e
acredita-se estar livre de perigo. Start a New Thread