Where Does VDD+0.3V Input Limit Come From on IC chips?Atmel Xmega ADC input voltage range - Can the ADC be damaged by exceeding it's reference voltage, if the input is still less then VCC?What are the failure mechanisms in an integrated circuit?Transistors absolute maximum valuesWhen is it okay to exceed the absolute maximum rating on a part?AT32UC3C Negative ADC Input Voltagestm32f4 vdd and interfacing input pinsAbsolute maximum ratings interpretationWhy would a Intel 8080 chip be destroyed if +12 V is connected before -5 V?

Why NASA publish all the results/data it gets?

What can a pilot do if an air traffic controller is incapacitated?

How to make interviewee comfortable interviewing in lounge chairs

As a discovery writer, how do I complete an unfinished novel (which has highly diverged from the original plot ) after a time-gap?

The 100 soldier problem

Do liquid propellant rocket engines experience thrust oscillation?

Algorithm that spans orthogonal vectors: Python

Manager encourages me to take day of sick leave instead of PTO, what's in it for him?

Why there so many pitch control surfaces on the Piaggio P180 Avanti?

Leaving a job that I just took based on false promise of a raise. What do I tell future interviewers?

Should the pagination be reset when changing the order?

I feel like most of my characters are the same, what can I do?

What is a Heptagon Number™?

How do I extract code from an arduino?

Is it really necessary to have 4 hours meeting in Sprint planning?

Aligning two sets of equations with alignat?

Does a familiar stay the same after being true polymorphed and then dismissed and resummoned?

How to create a grid following points in QGIS?

Social leper versus social leopard

C# Fastest way to do Array Table Lookup with Integer Index

Can someone explain to me the parameters of a lognormal distribution?

Pseudo Game of Cups in Python

Did Apollo carry and use WD40?

What are the end bytes of *.docx file format



Where Does VDD+0.3V Input Limit Come From on IC chips?


Atmel Xmega ADC input voltage range - Can the ADC be damaged by exceeding it's reference voltage, if the input is still less then VCC?What are the failure mechanisms in an integrated circuit?Transistors absolute maximum valuesWhen is it okay to exceed the absolute maximum rating on a part?AT32UC3C Negative ADC Input Voltagestm32f4 vdd and interfacing input pinsAbsolute maximum ratings interpretationWhy would a Intel 8080 chip be destroyed if +12 V is connected before -5 V?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








5












$begingroup$


There are a variety of integrated circuits that specify that their input voltage can span a fairly wide (absolute maximum) range, e.g. -0.3V to 6.0V (ref, pdf page 4), and then have a "Input Voltage at any pin" constrain that depends on the input voltage, e.g. -0.3V to VDD + 0.3V.



That, in effect, makes the chip not be I/O tolerant to voltages that exceed the input voltage by more than 0.3V but are within the absolute maximum specs of what the input voltage allow, and forces me to apply some kind of external level shifting circuit to those inputs.



So what is the practical reason for this kind of limitation in the specifications for integrated circuit I/O pins?










share|improve this question









$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    if the input protection diodes are standard PN junctions, and have "large areas" with many contacts into anode and into cathode regions, then I suggest you plan on: 10mA at 0.7v, 1mA at 0.64v, 0.1mA at 0.58v, 0.01mA at 0.52v, 0.001ma (1uA) at 0.46v, 0.1uA at 0.40v, 0.001uA at 0.34 volt. Is ONE NANO_AMP low enough, to not cause errors? note; these numbers can easily be off by 10:1 in current
    $endgroup$
    – analogsystemsrf
    9 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    The "Absolute Maximum" ratings are just that - you don't want to operate the part near those ratings. There is usually a note below the "Absolute Maximum" ratings table that says something like "Operation at or beyond these ratings may damage the part". Beginners often fail to read that note.
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Bennett
    9 hours ago

















5












$begingroup$


There are a variety of integrated circuits that specify that their input voltage can span a fairly wide (absolute maximum) range, e.g. -0.3V to 6.0V (ref, pdf page 4), and then have a "Input Voltage at any pin" constrain that depends on the input voltage, e.g. -0.3V to VDD + 0.3V.



That, in effect, makes the chip not be I/O tolerant to voltages that exceed the input voltage by more than 0.3V but are within the absolute maximum specs of what the input voltage allow, and forces me to apply some kind of external level shifting circuit to those inputs.



So what is the practical reason for this kind of limitation in the specifications for integrated circuit I/O pins?










share|improve this question









$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    if the input protection diodes are standard PN junctions, and have "large areas" with many contacts into anode and into cathode regions, then I suggest you plan on: 10mA at 0.7v, 1mA at 0.64v, 0.1mA at 0.58v, 0.01mA at 0.52v, 0.001ma (1uA) at 0.46v, 0.1uA at 0.40v, 0.001uA at 0.34 volt. Is ONE NANO_AMP low enough, to not cause errors? note; these numbers can easily be off by 10:1 in current
    $endgroup$
    – analogsystemsrf
    9 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    The "Absolute Maximum" ratings are just that - you don't want to operate the part near those ratings. There is usually a note below the "Absolute Maximum" ratings table that says something like "Operation at or beyond these ratings may damage the part". Beginners often fail to read that note.
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Bennett
    9 hours ago













5












5








5





$begingroup$


There are a variety of integrated circuits that specify that their input voltage can span a fairly wide (absolute maximum) range, e.g. -0.3V to 6.0V (ref, pdf page 4), and then have a "Input Voltage at any pin" constrain that depends on the input voltage, e.g. -0.3V to VDD + 0.3V.



That, in effect, makes the chip not be I/O tolerant to voltages that exceed the input voltage by more than 0.3V but are within the absolute maximum specs of what the input voltage allow, and forces me to apply some kind of external level shifting circuit to those inputs.



So what is the practical reason for this kind of limitation in the specifications for integrated circuit I/O pins?










share|improve this question









$endgroup$




There are a variety of integrated circuits that specify that their input voltage can span a fairly wide (absolute maximum) range, e.g. -0.3V to 6.0V (ref, pdf page 4), and then have a "Input Voltage at any pin" constrain that depends on the input voltage, e.g. -0.3V to VDD + 0.3V.



That, in effect, makes the chip not be I/O tolerant to voltages that exceed the input voltage by more than 0.3V but are within the absolute maximum specs of what the input voltage allow, and forces me to apply some kind of external level shifting circuit to those inputs.



So what is the practical reason for this kind of limitation in the specifications for integrated circuit I/O pins?







integrated-circuit input maximum-ratings






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked 9 hours ago









vicatcuvicatcu

16.6k8 gold badges63 silver badges134 bronze badges




16.6k8 gold badges63 silver badges134 bronze badges










  • 1




    $begingroup$
    if the input protection diodes are standard PN junctions, and have "large areas" with many contacts into anode and into cathode regions, then I suggest you plan on: 10mA at 0.7v, 1mA at 0.64v, 0.1mA at 0.58v, 0.01mA at 0.52v, 0.001ma (1uA) at 0.46v, 0.1uA at 0.40v, 0.001uA at 0.34 volt. Is ONE NANO_AMP low enough, to not cause errors? note; these numbers can easily be off by 10:1 in current
    $endgroup$
    – analogsystemsrf
    9 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    The "Absolute Maximum" ratings are just that - you don't want to operate the part near those ratings. There is usually a note below the "Absolute Maximum" ratings table that says something like "Operation at or beyond these ratings may damage the part". Beginners often fail to read that note.
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Bennett
    9 hours ago












  • 1




    $begingroup$
    if the input protection diodes are standard PN junctions, and have "large areas" with many contacts into anode and into cathode regions, then I suggest you plan on: 10mA at 0.7v, 1mA at 0.64v, 0.1mA at 0.58v, 0.01mA at 0.52v, 0.001ma (1uA) at 0.46v, 0.1uA at 0.40v, 0.001uA at 0.34 volt. Is ONE NANO_AMP low enough, to not cause errors? note; these numbers can easily be off by 10:1 in current
    $endgroup$
    – analogsystemsrf
    9 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    The "Absolute Maximum" ratings are just that - you don't want to operate the part near those ratings. There is usually a note below the "Absolute Maximum" ratings table that says something like "Operation at or beyond these ratings may damage the part". Beginners often fail to read that note.
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Bennett
    9 hours ago







1




1




$begingroup$
if the input protection diodes are standard PN junctions, and have "large areas" with many contacts into anode and into cathode regions, then I suggest you plan on: 10mA at 0.7v, 1mA at 0.64v, 0.1mA at 0.58v, 0.01mA at 0.52v, 0.001ma (1uA) at 0.46v, 0.1uA at 0.40v, 0.001uA at 0.34 volt. Is ONE NANO_AMP low enough, to not cause errors? note; these numbers can easily be off by 10:1 in current
$endgroup$
– analogsystemsrf
9 hours ago




$begingroup$
if the input protection diodes are standard PN junctions, and have "large areas" with many contacts into anode and into cathode regions, then I suggest you plan on: 10mA at 0.7v, 1mA at 0.64v, 0.1mA at 0.58v, 0.01mA at 0.52v, 0.001ma (1uA) at 0.46v, 0.1uA at 0.40v, 0.001uA at 0.34 volt. Is ONE NANO_AMP low enough, to not cause errors? note; these numbers can easily be off by 10:1 in current
$endgroup$
– analogsystemsrf
9 hours ago












$begingroup$
The "Absolute Maximum" ratings are just that - you don't want to operate the part near those ratings. There is usually a note below the "Absolute Maximum" ratings table that says something like "Operation at or beyond these ratings may damage the part". Beginners often fail to read that note.
$endgroup$
– Peter Bennett
9 hours ago




$begingroup$
The "Absolute Maximum" ratings are just that - you don't want to operate the part near those ratings. There is usually a note below the "Absolute Maximum" ratings table that says something like "Operation at or beyond these ratings may damage the part". Beginners often fail to read that note.
$endgroup$
– Peter Bennett
9 hours ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















5














$begingroup$

Most likely there is an ESD protection diode connected between the input pin and the VDD net on the chip, in such a way that it is normally reverse biased (A schematic showing the configuration is given in Peter Smith's answer). The idea is that when there is a positive ESD event, current will flow into the lower-impedance VDD net where it will do less damage than if it's all dumped on the one poor CMOS gate that's attached to the input pin.



Because the limit is VDD + 0.3 V it's likely in your device the diode is a Schottky type instead of a PN junction. With a PN junction, you'll usually see a limit of VDD + 0.6 V or so.



If you were to apply an input voltage above VDD (by more than 0.3 or 0.4 V) to this device, you'd forward bias this diode, and draw a high current from your source. This might damage your source or, if the source can supply enough current, heat up the chip to the point of damage.



If you use a resistor to limit the current into the input pin under these conditions, you might find the circuit works fine. Or, particularly if the chip is a very low power one, you might find the whole chip (and maybe other things connected to the same VDD) are powered up through the input pin, which often leads to unintended behavior.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$














  • $begingroup$
    I think this is probably the best answer, and I appreciate that it recommends it offers the possibility that current limiting resistors might mitigate the ESD protection diodes failing in a sustained condition. It would benefit from a representative schematic, similar to what @PeterSmith provided.
    $endgroup$
    – vicatcu
    9 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @vicatcu, I have edited to address your concern.
    $endgroup$
    – The Photon
    8 hours ago


















7














$begingroup$

This is due to the input protection diodes.



A typical input looks like this (CMOS inverter shown):





schematic





simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab



The diodes in newer parts are schottky devices. These diodes are for short, low energy transient events and cannot handle much current (a few mA generally).






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$






















    7














    $begingroup$

    The 0.3V drop comes from the Schottky clamping diodes used to protect the pins of the chip. These diodes typically connect between each pin and the two power rails. If they are forward biased by more than 0.3V, arbitrarily large currents can flow.



    The diodes are designed to absorb transient currents produced by ESD, which represent limited amounts of energy that they can handle, protecting the sensitive MOSFET gates from overvoltage. But if you drive them with a low-impedance source, you'll quickly dump more energy into them than they can handle.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$














    • $begingroup$
      "Arbitrarily large currents" sound like the might be pretty detrimental to the chip. In that case how can those be said to be offering protection? Only in a very limited band of 0.3V around the range GND to VDD? Also your answer might be improved, for less experienced readers, by including a little representative schematic of what the pin logically might look like at the perimeter of the chip.
      $endgroup$
      – vicatcu
      9 hours ago













    Your Answer






    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
    return StackExchange.using("schematics", function ()
    StackExchange.schematics.init();
    );
    , "cicuitlab");

    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "135"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );














    draft saved

    draft discarded
















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2felectronics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f459110%2fwhere-does-vdd0-3v-input-limit-come-from-on-ic-chips%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    5














    $begingroup$

    Most likely there is an ESD protection diode connected between the input pin and the VDD net on the chip, in such a way that it is normally reverse biased (A schematic showing the configuration is given in Peter Smith's answer). The idea is that when there is a positive ESD event, current will flow into the lower-impedance VDD net where it will do less damage than if it's all dumped on the one poor CMOS gate that's attached to the input pin.



    Because the limit is VDD + 0.3 V it's likely in your device the diode is a Schottky type instead of a PN junction. With a PN junction, you'll usually see a limit of VDD + 0.6 V or so.



    If you were to apply an input voltage above VDD (by more than 0.3 or 0.4 V) to this device, you'd forward bias this diode, and draw a high current from your source. This might damage your source or, if the source can supply enough current, heat up the chip to the point of damage.



    If you use a resistor to limit the current into the input pin under these conditions, you might find the circuit works fine. Or, particularly if the chip is a very low power one, you might find the whole chip (and maybe other things connected to the same VDD) are powered up through the input pin, which often leads to unintended behavior.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$














    • $begingroup$
      I think this is probably the best answer, and I appreciate that it recommends it offers the possibility that current limiting resistors might mitigate the ESD protection diodes failing in a sustained condition. It would benefit from a representative schematic, similar to what @PeterSmith provided.
      $endgroup$
      – vicatcu
      9 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @vicatcu, I have edited to address your concern.
      $endgroup$
      – The Photon
      8 hours ago















    5














    $begingroup$

    Most likely there is an ESD protection diode connected between the input pin and the VDD net on the chip, in such a way that it is normally reverse biased (A schematic showing the configuration is given in Peter Smith's answer). The idea is that when there is a positive ESD event, current will flow into the lower-impedance VDD net where it will do less damage than if it's all dumped on the one poor CMOS gate that's attached to the input pin.



    Because the limit is VDD + 0.3 V it's likely in your device the diode is a Schottky type instead of a PN junction. With a PN junction, you'll usually see a limit of VDD + 0.6 V or so.



    If you were to apply an input voltage above VDD (by more than 0.3 or 0.4 V) to this device, you'd forward bias this diode, and draw a high current from your source. This might damage your source or, if the source can supply enough current, heat up the chip to the point of damage.



    If you use a resistor to limit the current into the input pin under these conditions, you might find the circuit works fine. Or, particularly if the chip is a very low power one, you might find the whole chip (and maybe other things connected to the same VDD) are powered up through the input pin, which often leads to unintended behavior.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$














    • $begingroup$
      I think this is probably the best answer, and I appreciate that it recommends it offers the possibility that current limiting resistors might mitigate the ESD protection diodes failing in a sustained condition. It would benefit from a representative schematic, similar to what @PeterSmith provided.
      $endgroup$
      – vicatcu
      9 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @vicatcu, I have edited to address your concern.
      $endgroup$
      – The Photon
      8 hours ago













    5














    5










    5







    $begingroup$

    Most likely there is an ESD protection diode connected between the input pin and the VDD net on the chip, in such a way that it is normally reverse biased (A schematic showing the configuration is given in Peter Smith's answer). The idea is that when there is a positive ESD event, current will flow into the lower-impedance VDD net where it will do less damage than if it's all dumped on the one poor CMOS gate that's attached to the input pin.



    Because the limit is VDD + 0.3 V it's likely in your device the diode is a Schottky type instead of a PN junction. With a PN junction, you'll usually see a limit of VDD + 0.6 V or so.



    If you were to apply an input voltage above VDD (by more than 0.3 or 0.4 V) to this device, you'd forward bias this diode, and draw a high current from your source. This might damage your source or, if the source can supply enough current, heat up the chip to the point of damage.



    If you use a resistor to limit the current into the input pin under these conditions, you might find the circuit works fine. Or, particularly if the chip is a very low power one, you might find the whole chip (and maybe other things connected to the same VDD) are powered up through the input pin, which often leads to unintended behavior.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$



    Most likely there is an ESD protection diode connected between the input pin and the VDD net on the chip, in such a way that it is normally reverse biased (A schematic showing the configuration is given in Peter Smith's answer). The idea is that when there is a positive ESD event, current will flow into the lower-impedance VDD net where it will do less damage than if it's all dumped on the one poor CMOS gate that's attached to the input pin.



    Because the limit is VDD + 0.3 V it's likely in your device the diode is a Schottky type instead of a PN junction. With a PN junction, you'll usually see a limit of VDD + 0.6 V or so.



    If you were to apply an input voltage above VDD (by more than 0.3 or 0.4 V) to this device, you'd forward bias this diode, and draw a high current from your source. This might damage your source or, if the source can supply enough current, heat up the chip to the point of damage.



    If you use a resistor to limit the current into the input pin under these conditions, you might find the circuit works fine. Or, particularly if the chip is a very low power one, you might find the whole chip (and maybe other things connected to the same VDD) are powered up through the input pin, which often leads to unintended behavior.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 8 hours ago

























    answered 9 hours ago









    The PhotonThe Photon

    93.6k3 gold badges113 silver badges220 bronze badges




    93.6k3 gold badges113 silver badges220 bronze badges














    • $begingroup$
      I think this is probably the best answer, and I appreciate that it recommends it offers the possibility that current limiting resistors might mitigate the ESD protection diodes failing in a sustained condition. It would benefit from a representative schematic, similar to what @PeterSmith provided.
      $endgroup$
      – vicatcu
      9 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @vicatcu, I have edited to address your concern.
      $endgroup$
      – The Photon
      8 hours ago
















    • $begingroup$
      I think this is probably the best answer, and I appreciate that it recommends it offers the possibility that current limiting resistors might mitigate the ESD protection diodes failing in a sustained condition. It would benefit from a representative schematic, similar to what @PeterSmith provided.
      $endgroup$
      – vicatcu
      9 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @vicatcu, I have edited to address your concern.
      $endgroup$
      – The Photon
      8 hours ago















    $begingroup$
    I think this is probably the best answer, and I appreciate that it recommends it offers the possibility that current limiting resistors might mitigate the ESD protection diodes failing in a sustained condition. It would benefit from a representative schematic, similar to what @PeterSmith provided.
    $endgroup$
    – vicatcu
    9 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    I think this is probably the best answer, and I appreciate that it recommends it offers the possibility that current limiting resistors might mitigate the ESD protection diodes failing in a sustained condition. It would benefit from a representative schematic, similar to what @PeterSmith provided.
    $endgroup$
    – vicatcu
    9 hours ago












    $begingroup$
    @vicatcu, I have edited to address your concern.
    $endgroup$
    – The Photon
    8 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    @vicatcu, I have edited to address your concern.
    $endgroup$
    – The Photon
    8 hours ago













    7














    $begingroup$

    This is due to the input protection diodes.



    A typical input looks like this (CMOS inverter shown):





    schematic





    simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab



    The diodes in newer parts are schottky devices. These diodes are for short, low energy transient events and cannot handle much current (a few mA generally).






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



















      7














      $begingroup$

      This is due to the input protection diodes.



      A typical input looks like this (CMOS inverter shown):





      schematic





      simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab



      The diodes in newer parts are schottky devices. These diodes are for short, low energy transient events and cannot handle much current (a few mA generally).






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$

















        7














        7










        7







        $begingroup$

        This is due to the input protection diodes.



        A typical input looks like this (CMOS inverter shown):





        schematic





        simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab



        The diodes in newer parts are schottky devices. These diodes are for short, low energy transient events and cannot handle much current (a few mA generally).






        share|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        This is due to the input protection diodes.



        A typical input looks like this (CMOS inverter shown):





        schematic





        simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab



        The diodes in newer parts are schottky devices. These diodes are for short, low energy transient events and cannot handle much current (a few mA generally).







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 9 hours ago









        Peter SmithPeter Smith

        16.6k1 gold badge15 silver badges43 bronze badges




        16.6k1 gold badge15 silver badges43 bronze badges
























            7














            $begingroup$

            The 0.3V drop comes from the Schottky clamping diodes used to protect the pins of the chip. These diodes typically connect between each pin and the two power rails. If they are forward biased by more than 0.3V, arbitrarily large currents can flow.



            The diodes are designed to absorb transient currents produced by ESD, which represent limited amounts of energy that they can handle, protecting the sensitive MOSFET gates from overvoltage. But if you drive them with a low-impedance source, you'll quickly dump more energy into them than they can handle.






            share|improve this answer











            $endgroup$














            • $begingroup$
              "Arbitrarily large currents" sound like the might be pretty detrimental to the chip. In that case how can those be said to be offering protection? Only in a very limited band of 0.3V around the range GND to VDD? Also your answer might be improved, for less experienced readers, by including a little representative schematic of what the pin logically might look like at the perimeter of the chip.
              $endgroup$
              – vicatcu
              9 hours ago















            7














            $begingroup$

            The 0.3V drop comes from the Schottky clamping diodes used to protect the pins of the chip. These diodes typically connect between each pin and the two power rails. If they are forward biased by more than 0.3V, arbitrarily large currents can flow.



            The diodes are designed to absorb transient currents produced by ESD, which represent limited amounts of energy that they can handle, protecting the sensitive MOSFET gates from overvoltage. But if you drive them with a low-impedance source, you'll quickly dump more energy into them than they can handle.






            share|improve this answer











            $endgroup$














            • $begingroup$
              "Arbitrarily large currents" sound like the might be pretty detrimental to the chip. In that case how can those be said to be offering protection? Only in a very limited band of 0.3V around the range GND to VDD? Also your answer might be improved, for less experienced readers, by including a little representative schematic of what the pin logically might look like at the perimeter of the chip.
              $endgroup$
              – vicatcu
              9 hours ago













            7














            7










            7







            $begingroup$

            The 0.3V drop comes from the Schottky clamping diodes used to protect the pins of the chip. These diodes typically connect between each pin and the two power rails. If they are forward biased by more than 0.3V, arbitrarily large currents can flow.



            The diodes are designed to absorb transient currents produced by ESD, which represent limited amounts of energy that they can handle, protecting the sensitive MOSFET gates from overvoltage. But if you drive them with a low-impedance source, you'll quickly dump more energy into them than they can handle.






            share|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            The 0.3V drop comes from the Schottky clamping diodes used to protect the pins of the chip. These diodes typically connect between each pin and the two power rails. If they are forward biased by more than 0.3V, arbitrarily large currents can flow.



            The diodes are designed to absorb transient currents produced by ESD, which represent limited amounts of energy that they can handle, protecting the sensitive MOSFET gates from overvoltage. But if you drive them with a low-impedance source, you'll quickly dump more energy into them than they can handle.







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited 9 hours ago

























            answered 9 hours ago









            Dave TweedDave Tweed

            136k11 gold badges173 silver badges296 bronze badges




            136k11 gold badges173 silver badges296 bronze badges














            • $begingroup$
              "Arbitrarily large currents" sound like the might be pretty detrimental to the chip. In that case how can those be said to be offering protection? Only in a very limited band of 0.3V around the range GND to VDD? Also your answer might be improved, for less experienced readers, by including a little representative schematic of what the pin logically might look like at the perimeter of the chip.
              $endgroup$
              – vicatcu
              9 hours ago
















            • $begingroup$
              "Arbitrarily large currents" sound like the might be pretty detrimental to the chip. In that case how can those be said to be offering protection? Only in a very limited band of 0.3V around the range GND to VDD? Also your answer might be improved, for less experienced readers, by including a little representative schematic of what the pin logically might look like at the perimeter of the chip.
              $endgroup$
              – vicatcu
              9 hours ago















            $begingroup$
            "Arbitrarily large currents" sound like the might be pretty detrimental to the chip. In that case how can those be said to be offering protection? Only in a very limited band of 0.3V around the range GND to VDD? Also your answer might be improved, for less experienced readers, by including a little representative schematic of what the pin logically might look like at the perimeter of the chip.
            $endgroup$
            – vicatcu
            9 hours ago




            $begingroup$
            "Arbitrarily large currents" sound like the might be pretty detrimental to the chip. In that case how can those be said to be offering protection? Only in a very limited band of 0.3V around the range GND to VDD? Also your answer might be improved, for less experienced readers, by including a little representative schematic of what the pin logically might look like at the perimeter of the chip.
            $endgroup$
            – vicatcu
            9 hours ago


















            draft saved

            draft discarded















































            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.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2felectronics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f459110%2fwhere-does-vdd0-3v-input-limit-come-from-on-ic-chips%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            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







            Popular posts from this blog

            Canceling a color specificationRandomly assigning color to Graphics3D objects?Default color for Filling in Mathematica 9Coloring specific elements of sets with a prime modified order in an array plotHow to pick a color differing significantly from the colors already in a given color list?Detection of the text colorColor numbers based on their valueCan color schemes for use with ColorData include opacity specification?My dynamic color schemes

            Invision Community Contents History See also References External links Navigation menuProprietaryinvisioncommunity.comIPS Community ForumsIPS Community Forumsthis blog entry"License Changes, IP.Board 3.4, and the Future""Interview -- Matt Mecham of Ibforums""CEO Invision Power Board, Matt Mecham Is a Liar, Thief!"IPB License Explanation 1.3, 1.3.1, 2.0, and 2.1ArchivedSecurity Fixes, Updates And Enhancements For IPB 1.3.1Archived"New Demo Accounts - Invision Power Services"the original"New Default Skin"the original"Invision Power Board 3.0.0 and Applications Released"the original"Archived copy"the original"Perpetual licenses being done away with""Release Notes - Invision Power Services""Introducing: IPS Community Suite 4!"Invision Community Release Notes

            199年 目錄 大件事 到箇年出世嗰人 到箇年死嗰人 節慶、風俗習慣 導覽選單