But, when presented as a 4 to 1 improvement in meantime between failure, this creates a different impression in a designer’s mind without adding any real advantage to the long-term reliability of the part. As an example, a meantime between failure (MTBF) rate of 130,000 years for MEMS-based devices versus 30,000 years for quartz-based solutions should not be a major concern for any designer. Once you begin to look into these areas, however, the data sometimes fails to present real world conditions. There are many claims about improved vibration sensitivity, lower manufacturing costs, and improved reliability when using a MEMS resonator. More than a dozen companies have started the development of MEMS resonators over the years and only one company has successfully survived as a major supplier during this period. For almost 20 years, MEMS resonator-based oscillators have existed amidst promises of being a viable, disruptive replacement for quartz-based oscillators. We often get this question from customers and it’s worth looking into. Product Change Notifications (PCN) Search.Renesas Ready Partner Network (Software).Communication & Computing Infrastructure.Multi-Channel Power Management ICs (PMICs).Jitter Attenuators with Frequency Translation.R-Car Automotive System-On-Chips (SoCs).RX 32-bit Performance / Efficiency MCUs.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |