Strange VIH and VIL specification of MIC4451
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
In MIC4451's datasheet, it shows:
The $V_{IH}$ min. is 2.4V, then where the smaller typical value 1.3V come from? The same is $V_{IL}$, why it has a typical value larger than the max. value?
mic4451
asked Nov 23 at 14:18
diverger
3,8302151
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
In MIC4451's datasheet, it shows:
The $V_{IH}$ min. is 2.4V, then where the smaller typical value 1.3V come from? The same is $V_{IL}$, why it has a typical value larger than the max. value?
mic4451
asked Nov 23 at 14:18
diverger
3,8302151
Janka nailed it... This is how these are almost always specified. It becomes 2nd nature over time.
– MadHatter
Nov 23 at 16:11
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
In MIC4451's datasheet, it shows:
The $V_{IH}$ min. is 2.4V, then where the smaller typical value 1.3V come from? The same is $V_{IL}$, why it has a typical value larger than the max. value?
mic4451
asked Nov 23 at 14:18
diverger
3,8302151
In MIC4451's datasheet, it shows:
The $V_{IH}$ min. is 2.4V, then where the smaller typical value 1.3V come from? The same is $V_{IL}$, why it has a typical value larger than the max. value?
mic4451
mic4451
asked Nov 23 at 14:18
diverger
3,8302151
asked Nov 23 at 14:18
diverger
3,8302151
asked Nov 23 at 14:18
diverger
3,8302151
asked Nov 23 at 14:18
diverger
3,8302151
asked Nov 23 at 14:18
diverger
3,8302151
3,8302151
Janka nailed it... This is how these are almost always specified. It becomes 2nd nature over time.
– MadHatter
Nov 23 at 16:11
add a comment |
Janka nailed it... This is how these are almost always specified. It becomes 2nd nature over time.
– MadHatter
Nov 23 at 16:11
Janka nailed it... This is how these are almost always specified. It becomes 2nd nature over time.
– MadHatter
Nov 23 at 16:11
Janka nailed it... This is how these are almost always specified. It becomes 2nd nature over time.
– MadHatter
Nov 23 at 16:11
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
5
down vote
accepted
This is a TTL compatible input.
- 2.4V and above is guaranteed to be understood as logic 1, but typical 1.3V or above is sufficient.
- 0.8V and below is guaranteed to be understood as logic 0, but typical 1.1V or below is sufficient.
answered Nov 23 at 14:27
Janka
8,1591820
add a comment |
up vote
9
down vote
This is, in my opinion, a confusing usage of the terms max and min. What they're saying is that the minimum voltage you should apply to an input that you want to drive high is 2.4V, but a typical device will read anything down to 1.3V as high--it's just not guaranteed.
Likewise, the maximum voltage you should apply when driving a signal low is 0.8V, but typical devices will interpret up to 1.1V as low.
It does feel backwards to me, too; you're not alone in that.
answered Nov 23 at 14:36
Hearth
3,395931
Are they promising 0.2 volts of hysteresis?
– analogsystemsrf
Nov 23 at 14:49
@analogsystemsrf No, I don't think there's any hysteresis in this. The region between 1.1 and 1.3 volts I would assume has undefined behavior. The device is fundamentally a high-current, fast logic buffer, so I'm guessing it would have a region where it outputs something between its output high and output low voltages, and they're just saying that this region is typically no more than 0.2 volts wide. This is, however, all a guess. Undocumented behavior shouldn't be used in an actual design, of course!
– Hearth
Nov 23 at 15:11
I would describe 2.4 as a max, since it's the highest value Vih could take on an acceptable part — but the concept of maximum minimums tends to confuse people, who would read the datasheet and decide that they shouldn't apply a voltage above 2.4V. Sometimes there's no winning.
– hobbs
Nov 23 at 20:26
@hobbs Even in the most precise technical fields, language is sometimes hard.
– Hearth
Nov 23 at 20:31
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
5
down vote
accepted
This is a TTL compatible input.
- 2.4V and above is guaranteed to be understood as logic 1, but typical 1.3V or above is sufficient.
- 0.8V and below is guaranteed to be understood as logic 0, but typical 1.1V or below is sufficient.
answered Nov 23 at 14:27
Janka
8,1591820
add a comment |
up vote
5
down vote
accepted
This is a TTL compatible input.
- 2.4V and above is guaranteed to be understood as logic 1, but typical 1.3V or above is sufficient.
- 0.8V and below is guaranteed to be understood as logic 0, but typical 1.1V or below is sufficient.
answered Nov 23 at 14:27
Janka
8,1591820
add a comment |
up vote
5
down vote
accepted
up vote
5
down vote
accepted
This is a TTL compatible input.
- 2.4V and above is guaranteed to be understood as logic 1, but typical 1.3V or above is sufficient.
- 0.8V and below is guaranteed to be understood as logic 0, but typical 1.1V or below is sufficient.
answered Nov 23 at 14:27
Janka
8,1591820
This is a TTL compatible input.
- 2.4V and above is guaranteed to be understood as logic 1, but typical 1.3V or above is sufficient.
- 0.8V and below is guaranteed to be understood as logic 0, but typical 1.1V or below is sufficient.
answered Nov 23 at 14:27
Janka
8,1591820
answered Nov 23 at 14:27
Janka
8,1591820
answered Nov 23 at 14:27
Janka
8,1591820
answered Nov 23 at 14:27
Janka
8,1591820
8,1591820
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
9
down vote
This is, in my opinion, a confusing usage of the terms max and min. What they're saying is that the minimum voltage you should apply to an input that you want to drive high is 2.4V, but a typical device will read anything down to 1.3V as high--it's just not guaranteed.
Likewise, the maximum voltage you should apply when driving a signal low is 0.8V, but typical devices will interpret up to 1.1V as low.
It does feel backwards to me, too; you're not alone in that.
answered Nov 23 at 14:36
Hearth
3,395931
Are they promising 0.2 volts of hysteresis?
– analogsystemsrf
Nov 23 at 14:49
@analogsystemsrf No, I don't think there's any hysteresis in this. The region between 1.1 and 1.3 volts I would assume has undefined behavior. The device is fundamentally a high-current, fast logic buffer, so I'm guessing it would have a region where it outputs something between its output high and output low voltages, and they're just saying that this region is typically no more than 0.2 volts wide. This is, however, all a guess. Undocumented behavior shouldn't be used in an actual design, of course!
– Hearth
Nov 23 at 15:11
I would describe 2.4 as a max, since it's the highest value Vih could take on an acceptable part — but the concept of maximum minimums tends to confuse people, who would read the datasheet and decide that they shouldn't apply a voltage above 2.4V. Sometimes there's no winning.
– hobbs
Nov 23 at 20:26
@hobbs Even in the most precise technical fields, language is sometimes hard.
– Hearth
Nov 23 at 20:31
add a comment |
up vote
9
down vote
This is, in my opinion, a confusing usage of the terms max and min. What they're saying is that the minimum voltage you should apply to an input that you want to drive high is 2.4V, but a typical device will read anything down to 1.3V as high--it's just not guaranteed.
Likewise, the maximum voltage you should apply when driving a signal low is 0.8V, but typical devices will interpret up to 1.1V as low.
It does feel backwards to me, too; you're not alone in that.
answered Nov 23 at 14:36
Hearth
3,395931
Are they promising 0.2 volts of hysteresis?
– analogsystemsrf
Nov 23 at 14:49
@analogsystemsrf No, I don't think there's any hysteresis in this. The region between 1.1 and 1.3 volts I would assume has undefined behavior. The device is fundamentally a high-current, fast logic buffer, so I'm guessing it would have a region where it outputs something between its output high and output low voltages, and they're just saying that this region is typically no more than 0.2 volts wide. This is, however, all a guess. Undocumented behavior shouldn't be used in an actual design, of course!
– Hearth
Nov 23 at 15:11
I would describe 2.4 as a max, since it's the highest value Vih could take on an acceptable part — but the concept of maximum minimums tends to confuse people, who would read the datasheet and decide that they shouldn't apply a voltage above 2.4V. Sometimes there's no winning.
– hobbs
Nov 23 at 20:26
@hobbs Even in the most precise technical fields, language is sometimes hard.
– Hearth
Nov 23 at 20:31
add a comment |
up vote
9
down vote
up vote
9
down vote
This is, in my opinion, a confusing usage of the terms max and min. What they're saying is that the minimum voltage you should apply to an input that you want to drive high is 2.4V, but a typical device will read anything down to 1.3V as high--it's just not guaranteed.
Likewise, the maximum voltage you should apply when driving a signal low is 0.8V, but typical devices will interpret up to 1.1V as low.
It does feel backwards to me, too; you're not alone in that.
answered Nov 23 at 14:36
Hearth
3,395931
This is, in my opinion, a confusing usage of the terms max and min. What they're saying is that the minimum voltage you should apply to an input that you want to drive high is 2.4V, but a typical device will read anything down to 1.3V as high--it's just not guaranteed.
Likewise, the maximum voltage you should apply when driving a signal low is 0.8V, but typical devices will interpret up to 1.1V as low.
It does feel backwards to me, too; you're not alone in that.
answered Nov 23 at 14:36
Hearth
3,395931
answered Nov 23 at 14:36
Hearth
3,395931
answered Nov 23 at 14:36
Hearth
3,395931
answered Nov 23 at 14:36
Hearth
3,395931
3,395931
Are they promising 0.2 volts of hysteresis?
– analogsystemsrf
Nov 23 at 14:49
@analogsystemsrf No, I don't think there's any hysteresis in this. The region between 1.1 and 1.3 volts I would assume has undefined behavior. The device is fundamentally a high-current, fast logic buffer, so I'm guessing it would have a region where it outputs something between its output high and output low voltages, and they're just saying that this region is typically no more than 0.2 volts wide. This is, however, all a guess. Undocumented behavior shouldn't be used in an actual design, of course!
– Hearth
Nov 23 at 15:11
I would describe 2.4 as a max, since it's the highest value Vih could take on an acceptable part — but the concept of maximum minimums tends to confuse people, who would read the datasheet and decide that they shouldn't apply a voltage above 2.4V. Sometimes there's no winning.
– hobbs
Nov 23 at 20:26
@hobbs Even in the most precise technical fields, language is sometimes hard.
– Hearth
Nov 23 at 20:31
add a comment |
Are they promising 0.2 volts of hysteresis?
– analogsystemsrf
Nov 23 at 14:49
@analogsystemsrf No, I don't think there's any hysteresis in this. The region between 1.1 and 1.3 volts I would assume has undefined behavior. The device is fundamentally a high-current, fast logic buffer, so I'm guessing it would have a region where it outputs something between its output high and output low voltages, and they're just saying that this region is typically no more than 0.2 volts wide. This is, however, all a guess. Undocumented behavior shouldn't be used in an actual design, of course!
– Hearth
Nov 23 at 15:11
I would describe 2.4 as a max, since it's the highest value Vih could take on an acceptable part — but the concept of maximum minimums tends to confuse people, who would read the datasheet and decide that they shouldn't apply a voltage above 2.4V. Sometimes there's no winning.
– hobbs
Nov 23 at 20:26
@hobbs Even in the most precise technical fields, language is sometimes hard.
– Hearth
Nov 23 at 20:31
Are they promising 0.2 volts of hysteresis?
– analogsystemsrf
Nov 23 at 14:49
Are they promising 0.2 volts of hysteresis?
– analogsystemsrf
Nov 23 at 14:49
@analogsystemsrf No, I don't think there's any hysteresis in this. The region between 1.1 and 1.3 volts I would assume has undefined behavior. The device is fundamentally a high-current, fast logic buffer, so I'm guessing it would have a region where it outputs something between its output high and output low voltages, and they're just saying that this region is typically no more than 0.2 volts wide. This is, however, all a guess. Undocumented behavior shouldn't be used in an actual design, of course!
– Hearth
Nov 23 at 15:11
@analogsystemsrf No, I don't think there's any hysteresis in this. The region between 1.1 and 1.3 volts I would assume has undefined behavior. The device is fundamentally a high-current, fast logic buffer, so I'm guessing it would have a region where it outputs something between its output high and output low voltages, and they're just saying that this region is typically no more than 0.2 volts wide. This is, however, all a guess. Undocumented behavior shouldn't be used in an actual design, of course!
– Hearth
Nov 23 at 15:11
I would describe 2.4 as a max, since it's the highest value Vih could take on an acceptable part — but the concept of maximum minimums tends to confuse people, who would read the datasheet and decide that they shouldn't apply a voltage above 2.4V. Sometimes there's no winning.
– hobbs
Nov 23 at 20:26
I would describe 2.4 as a max, since it's the highest value Vih could take on an acceptable part — but the concept of maximum minimums tends to confuse people, who would read the datasheet and decide that they shouldn't apply a voltage above 2.4V. Sometimes there's no winning.
– hobbs
Nov 23 at 20:26
@hobbs Even in the most precise technical fields, language is sometimes hard.
– Hearth
Nov 23 at 20:31
@hobbs Even in the most precise technical fields, language is sometimes hard.
– Hearth
Nov 23 at 20:31
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Electrical Engineering Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2felectronics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f408454%2fstrange-vih-and-vil-specification-of-mic4451%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Janka nailed it... This is how these are almost always specified. It becomes 2nd nature over time.
– MadHatter
Nov 23 at 16:11