My understanding has always been that any CMOS I/O pin needs external ESD protection - since the on-chip protection diodes are only there to guard against ESD events during manufacture handling.

However, I've taken apart a fair few devices over the years which directly connect CMOS and NMOS I/O pins to the outside world via DIN or D-sub connectors - with no protection at all. This is not just hobbyist gear - I've seen it routinely in high-priced commercial gear (£1000+). This is especially true of older equipment (the late 80s to late 90s).

So, am I going overboard with trying to protect every I/O pin with external components? Or could it be that these commercial designs are actually seriously flawed? Could it be that output-only pins are less vulnerable to ESD than I/O or input pins? (although I have seen inputs exposed in this fashion too)

More specifically, I'm embarking on a project where I will need to connect eight MCU I/O pins to a D-sub connector - without any series resistance. I considered using eight TVS diodes for protection, but this appears to be inadequate - even if the TVS clamps at 6 volts, that's still one volt higher than the power supply. A heavy current will therefore flow through the ESD diodes in the MCU. This could destroy the I/O pin, or latch the chip up.

My fallback position is to use 16 external Schottky diodes to clamp to the power rails, but that's a lot of parts on a small board. It's my understanding that it will completely guard against latch-up - an external Schottky can have a much lower voltage drop at several amps.

I considered the use of a 74S1053 Schottky diode array since that can clamp 16 lines. But unfortunately, the device is designed for bus termination rather than ESD protection. It has a rather high forward voltage drop at significant currents. Assuming an ESD event could see currents in the order of several amps, the voltage across the diode will rise to a couple of volts. This would force current to flow through the MCU's internal protection diodes, with all the ill effects this could cause. But is there something I'm overlooking here? Could the 74S1053 be a viable option?

Like a lot of CMOS chips, the MCU datasheet specifies that the inputs should not deviate outside the supply rails by more than 0.3 volts. The clamping diode current is limited to 20mA. I've seen first-hand a CMOS chip latching up and crowbarring the supply due to the current flowing through the protection diodes - so I'm very keen to avoid this happening.

What are the "best practices" in a situation like this? Would adding an RFI filter component to the I/O help? I've heard it said that series resistance sometimes guards against ESD since it creates a lowpass filter with the I/O pin capacitance - but I can't really afford any extra series resistance. I'd also like to guard against a 5V input being applied while the device is powered-down - so it looks like I'll need diodes to Vcc at the very least. But the device only draws a few mA so it could probably survive being powered through the internal diodes. But there could be a current spike when first connected, while the decoupling capacitor charges up.

  • \$\begingroup\$ You are not saying which level of ESD you are planning to protect against, There are several, Human Body Model (HBM), Machine Model (MM), Charged Device Model (CDM), and IEC 61000-4-2, with several levels defined. The solution will depend on it. \$\endgroup\$ – Ale..chenski Feb 5 '18 at 1:52
  • \$\begingroup\$ Also, the max rail rating of 0.3 V above Vcc is DC requirement, not for a 50 ns spike. \$\endgroup\$ – Ale..chenski Feb 5 '18 at 2:06
  • \$\begingroup\$ I would think Human Body Model is my main concern - I'm not so worried about protecting the device during assembly. But the charged device model might come into play if the entire board has an ESD potential and is then plugged into something grounded. That's a very important point about the 0.3V rating being for DC. Do you know how long a spike is necessary to cause the chip to latch up? \$\endgroup\$ – Foxie Feb 5 '18 at 2:20
  • \$\begingroup\$ You really need to start by reading test procedures for these type of testing (latchup, ESD, etc) and understand the differences. A good start would be here, ti.com/lit/an/slya014a/slya014a.pdf \$\endgroup\$ – Ale..chenski Feb 5 '18 at 2:28
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thanks for the reference. It indicates that the parasitic SCR has a low frequency response. However, they mention something about injected charge from an ESD event decaying slowly and causing latchup - even although the pulse is brief. \$\endgroup\$ – Foxie Feb 5 '18 at 19:02

Do you know how long a pulse will trigger latchup?

Depends on the layout of the silicon around the ESD structure.

Latchup typically requires a bipolar-snapback, or a 4-layer-diode SCR behavior. The bandwidth of these structures depends on vertical or horizontal feedback, thus the "time to latchup" is not predictable.

ICs are tested for latchup, prior to getting permission to proceed to high volumn production.

Clamping diodes will add capacitance, and slow down the signals. Are some series resistors not acceptable? 10pF and 100 ohms is 1 nanosecond risetime.

  • \$\begingroup\$ It's a relatively low speed design (around 1MHz) so I'm not worried about capacitance - the cable the pins are connected to could be 500pF. I wondered whether the MCU would be OK driving 500pF, but the datasheet does not specify an absolute max capacitance. My main problem is the device I'm driving has 1k pull-up resistors - the MCU delivers a logic low of 0.6V. Any series resistance would need to be 33 ohms or less to meet TTL level. I considered resistors between a 74S1053 and the MCU - but the voltage drop of the 1053 is nearly 2V. 2V/33R = 60mA, too much for the MCU clamp diodes. \$\endgroup\$ – Foxie Feb 5 '18 at 19:24
  • \$\begingroup\$ I'm not sure how bad an ESD event I can expect, but I'm worried for two reasons. The pins of the D-sub connector can be touched, so I need to survive Human Body Model at perhaps 30kV. Secondly my device may be powered by an un-earthed switching supply. Mating the D-sub connector with an earthed device could cause the Y capacitor to discharge 100V+ through a low impedance directly into an I/O pin unless I can guarantee the grounded shell makes contact first (and I'm not sure D-sub connectors provide any such guarantee). \$\endgroup\$ – Foxie Feb 5 '18 at 19:24

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.