Application Note 89
AN89-1
A Thermoelectric Cooler Temperature Controllerfor Fiber Optic LasersClimatic Pampering for Temperamental Lasers
Jim Williams
April 2001
, LTC and LT are registered trademarks of Linear Technology Corporation.
INTRODUCTION
Continued demands for increased bandwidth have re-sulted in deployment of fiber optic-based networks. Thefiber optic lines, driven by solid state lasers, are capable ofvery high information density. Highly packed data schemessuch as DWDM (dense wavelength division multiplexing)utilize multiple lasers driving a fiber to obtain large multi-channel data streams. The narrow channel spacing relieson laser wavelength being controlled within 0.1nm (na-nometer). Lasers are capable of this but temperaturevariation influences operation. Figure 1 shows that laseroutput peaks sharply vs wavelength, implying that laserwavelength must be controlled well within 0.1nm to main-tain performance. Figure 2 plots typical laser wavelengthvs temperature. The 0.1nm/°C slope means that althoughtemperature facilitates tuning laser wavelength, it mustnot vary once the laser has been peaked. Typically, tem-perature control of 0.1°C is required to maintain laseroperation well within 0.1nm.
Temperature Controller Requirements
The temperature controller must meet some unusualrequirements. Most notably, because of ambient tempera-ture variation and laser operation uncertainties, the con-troller must be capable of either sourcing or removing heatto maintain control. Peltier-based thermoelectric coolers(TEC) permit this but the controller must be truly bidirec-tional. Its heat flow control must not have dead zone oruntoward dynamics in the “hot-to-cold” transition region.Additionally, the temperature controller must be a preci-sion device capable of maintaining control well inside0.1°C over time and temperature variations.
Laser based systems packaging is compact, necessitatingsmall solution size with efficient operation to avoid exces-sive heat dissipation. Finally, the controller must operatefrom a single, low voltage source and its (presumablyswitched mode) operation must not corrupt the supplywith noise.
WAVELENGTH(1nm/DIV, RESOLUTION = 0.1nm)
RELA
TIVE
INTE
NSIT
Y (1
0dB/
DIV)
AN89 F01
(SOURCE: FUJITSU FLD5F10NP DATA SHEET)
LASER TEMPERATURE (°C)10 20 30 40
WAV
ELEN
GTH
(nm
)
AN89 F02
1555
1554
1553
1552
1551
1550
SLOPE = 0.1nm/°C
(SOURCE: FUJITSU FLD5F10NP DATA SHEET)
Figure 1. Laser Intensity Peak Approaches40dB within a 1nm Window
Figure 2. Laser Wavelength Varies ≈0.1nm/°C.Typical Application Requires Wavelength Stabilitywithin 0.1nm, Mandating Temperature Control
Application Note 89
AN89-2
Temperature Controller Details
Figure 3, a schematic of the thermoelectric cooler (TEC)temperature controller, includes three basic sections. TheDAC and the thermistor form a bridge, the output of whichis amplified by A1. The LTC1923 controller is a pulse widthmodulator which provides appropriately modulated andphased drive to the power output stage. The laser is anelectrically delicate and very expensive load. As such, thecontroller provides a variety of monitoring, limiting andoverload protection capabilities. These include soft-startand overcurrent protection, TEC voltage and current senseand “out-of-bounds” temperature sensing. Aberrant op-eration results in circuit shutdown, preventing laser mod-ule damage. Two other features promote system levelcompatibility. A phase-locked loop based oscillator per-mits reliable clock synchronization of multiple LTC1923sin multilaser systems. Finally, the switched mode powerdelivery to the TEC is efficient but special considerationsare required to ensure that switching related noise is notintroduced (“reflected”) into the host power supply. TheLTC1923 includes edge slew limiting which minimizes
switching related harmonics by slowing down the powerstages’ transition times. This greatly reduces high fre-quency harmonic content, preventing excessive switchingrelated noise from corrupting the power supply or thelaser.1 The switched mode power output stage, an “H-bridge” type, permits efficient bidirectional drive to theTEC, allowing either heating or cooling of the laser. Thethermistor, TEC and laser, packaged at manufacture withinthe laser module, are tightly thermally coupled.
The DAC permits adjusting temperature setpoint to anyindividual laser’s optimum operating point, normally speci-fied for each laser. Controller gain and bandwidth adjust-ments optimize thermal loop response for best temperaturestability.
Thermal Loop Considerations
The key to high performance temperature control is match-ing the controller’s gain bandwidth to the thermal feed-back path. Theoretically, it is a simple matter to do thisusing conventional servo-feedback techniques. Practi-
–
+
TEC
L2
CS/LD
* = SUGGESTED VALUES—SEE TEXT
L1, L2: SUMIDA CDRH8D28-100NC, 10µHQ1, Q2: Si9801DY N-P DUAL
TEC-RTHERMISTOR ARE PART OF LASER MODULE. RTHERMISTOR IS TYPICALLY 10kΩ AT 25°C.
DIN
CLKREFIN
LTC1658
TO 2.5VREF AT LTC1923
A1LTC2053
RTHERMISTOR THERMAL FEEDBACK
10k0.1%
LOOP GAIN1k*
TO 2.5VREF
100kLOOP
BANDWIDTH
10M4.7µF*
TANTALUM
0.1µFFILM
0.1µF
9k
EAIN+
EAOUT
EAIN–
AGND
FAULT
SDSYNC
LTC1923
VREF
RT
CT
2.5VREF5V
H/CVTEC
CS+
CS–
ITECTEC+
TEC–
VTHERM
1µF
5V5V
VDD
NDRVB
PDRVB
PGND
82k
PLLLPF
RSLEW
2.5VREF
1µFCERAMIC
SS
ILIM
VSET
0.1µF
330pF
17.8k
10k
10k
10k
22µF
AN89 F03
1µF
0.1µFFILM
22µF
22µF+
PDRVANDRVA L1
Q1 Q2
2.2µF
0.1Ω
+
Figure 3. Detailed Schematic of TEC Temperature Controller Includes A1 Thermistor Bridge Amplifier, LTC1923 SwitchedMode Controller and Power Output H-Bridge. DAC Establishes Temperature Setpoint. Gain Adjust and CompensationCapacitor Optimize Loop Gain Bandwidth. Various LTC1923 Outputs Permit Monitoring TEC Operating Conditions
Note 1: This technique derives from earlier efforts. See Reference 1 fordetailed discussion and related topics.
Application Note 89
AN89-3
cally, the long time constants and uncertain delays inher-ent in thermal systems present a challenge. The unfortu-nate relationship between servo systems and oscillators isvery apparent in thermal control systems.
The thermal control loop can be very simply modeled as anetwork of resistors and capacitors. The resistors areequivalent to the thermal resistance and the capacitors tothermal capacity. In Figure 4 the TEC, TEC-sensor inter-face and sensor all have RC factors that contribute to alumped delay in the system’s ability to respond. To preventoscillation, gain bandwidth must be limited to account forthis delay. Since high gain bandwidth is desirable for goodcontrol, the delays should be minimized. This is presum-ably addressed by the laser module’s purveyor at manu-facture.
The model also includes insulation between the controlledenvironment and the uncontrolled ambient. The functionof insulation is to keep the loss rate down so the tempera-ture control device can keep up with the losses. For anygiven system, the higher the ratio between the TEC-sensortime constants and the insulation time constants, thebetter the performance of the control loop.2
Temperature Control Loop Optimization
Temperature control loop optimization begins with ther-mal characterization of the laser module. The previoussection emphasized the importance of the ratio betweenthe TEC-sensor and insulation time constants. Determina-tion of this information places realistic bounds on achiev-able controller gain bandwidth. Figure 5 shows resultswhen a typical laser module is subjected to a 40°C stepchange in ambient temperature. The laser module’s inter-nal temperature, monitored by its thermistor, is plotted vstime with the TEC unpowered. An ambient-to-sensor lagmeasured in minutes shows a classic first order response.
The TEC-sensor lumped delay is characterized by operat-ing the laser module in Figure 3’s circuit with gain set atmaximum and no compensation capacitor installed. Fig-ure 6 shows large-signal oscillation due to thermal lagdominating the loop. A great deal of valuable informationis contained in this presentation.3 The frequency, primarilydetermined by TEC-sensor lag, implies limits on howmuch loop bandwidth is achievable. The high ratio of thisfrequency to the laser module’s thermal time constant(Figure 5) means a simple, dominant pole loop compen-
TEC-SENSORINTERFACE
HEAT
HEAT FLOW
UNCONTROLLEDAMBIENT
ENVIRONMENT
INSULATION
AN89 F04
CONTROLLEDENVIRONMENT
COOL
TEC
SENSOR
SERVOAMPLIFIER
TEMPERATURE REFERENCE(CAN BE A RESISTANCE, VOLTAGE OR CURRENT
CORRESPONDING TO TEMPERATURE)
TIME (MINUTES)0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
TEM
PERA
TURE
(°C)
AN89 F05
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
LASER MODULE SETTLEDINSIDE MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY
LASER MODULE SUBJECTEDTO 40°C STEP CHANGE
Figure 4. Simplified TEC Control Loop Model Showing ThermalTerms. Resistors and Capacitors Represent Thermal Resistanceand Capacity, Respectively. Servo Amplifier Gain BandwidthMust Accommodate Lumped Delay Presented by Thermal Termsto Avoid Instability
Figure 5. Ambient-to-Sensor Lag Characteristicfor a Typical Laser Module Is Set by PackageThermal Resistance and Capacity
Note 2: For the sake of text flow, this somewhat academic discussionmust suffer brevity. However, additional thermodynamic gossipappears in Appendix A, “Practical Considerations in ThermoelectricCooler Based Control Loops.”Note 3: When a circuit “doesn’t work” because “it oscillates,” whetherat millihertz or gigahertz, four burning questions should immediatelydominate the pending investigation. What frequency does it oscillateat, what is the amplitude, duty cycle and waveshape? The solutioninvariably resides in the answers to these queries. Just stare thought-fully at the waveform and the truth will bloom.
Application Note 89
AN89-4
sation will be effective. The saturation limited waveshapesuggests excessive gain is driving the loop into full coolingand heating states. Finally, the asymmetric duty cyclereflects the TEC’s differing thermal efficiency in the cool-ing and heating modes.
Controller gain bandwidth reduction from Figure 6’s ex-tremes produced Figure 7’s display. The waveform resultsfrom a small step (≈0.1°C) change in temperature setpoint.Gain bandwidth is still excessively high, producing adamped, ringing response over 2 minutes in duration! Theloop is just marginally stable. Figure 8’s test conditions areidentical but gain bandwidth has been significantly re-duced. Response is still not optimal but settling occurs in
≈4.5 seconds, about 25x faster than the previous case.Figure 9’s response, taken at further reduced gain band-width settings, is nearly critically damped and settlescleanly in about 2 seconds. A laser module optimized inthis fashion will easily attenuate external temperatureshifts by a factor of thousands without overshoots orexcessive lags. Further, although there are substantialthermal differences between various laser modules, somegeneralized guidelines on gain bandwidth values are pos-sible.4 A DC gain of 1000 is sufficient for required tempera-ture control, with bandwidth below 1Hz providing adequateloop stability. Figure 3’s suggested gain and bandwidthvalues reflect these conclusions, although stability testingfor any specific case is mandatory.
Figure 6. Deliberate Excess of Loop Gain BandwidthIntroduces Large-Signal Oscillation. Oscillation FrequencyProvides Guidance for Achievable Closed-Loop Bandwidth.Duty Cycle Reveals Asymmetric Heating-Cooling Mode Gains
HORIZ = 50ms/DIV AN89 F06.tif
VERT
= 0
.5V/
DIV
HORIZ = 12s/DIV AN89 F07.tif
VERT
= 1
0mV/
DIV
Figure 7. Loop Response to Small Step in TemperatureSetpoint. Gain Bandwidth Is Excessively High, Resulting inDamped, Ringing Response Over 2 Minutes in Duration
Figure 8. Same Test Conditions as Figure 7 but at Reduced LoopGain Bandwidth. Loop Response Is Still Not Optimal but SettlingOccurs in 4.5 Seconds—Over 25x Faster than Previous Case
Figure 9. Gain Bandwidth Optimization Results in NearlyCritically Damped Response with Settling in 2 Seconds
HORIZ = 0.5s/DIV AN89 F08.tif
VERT
= 1
0mV/
DIV
HORIZ = 0.5s/DIV AN89 F09.tif
VERT
= 1
0mV/
DIV
Note 4: See Appendix A, “Practical Considerations in ThermoelectricCooler Based Control Loops,” for additional comment.
Application Note 89
AN89-5
Temperature Stability Verification
Once the loop has been optimized, temperature stabilitycan be measured. Stability is verified by monitoring ther-mistor bridge offset with a stable, calibrated differentialamplifier.5 Figure 10 records ±1 millidegree baseline sta-bility over 50 seconds in the cooling mode. A morestringent test measures longer term stability with signifi-cant variations in ambient temperature. Figure 11’s strip-chart recording measures cooling mode stability againstan environment that steps 20°C above ambient every hourover 9 hours.6 The data shows 0.008°C resulting variation,
Figure 10. Short-Term Monitoring in Room EnvironmentIndicates 0.001°C Cooling Mode Baseline Stability
HORIZ = 5s/DIV AN89 F10.tif
VERT
= 0
.001
°C/D
IV
indicating a thermal gain of 2500.7 The 0.0025°C baselinetilt over the 9 hour plot length derives from varyingambient temperature. Figure 12 utilizes identical test con-ditions, except that the controller operates in the heatingmode. The TEC’s higher heating mode efficiency furnishesgreater thermal gain, resulting in a 4x stability improve-ment to about 0.002°C variation. Baseline tilt, just detect-able, shows a similar 4x improvement vs Figure 11.
This level of performance ensures the desired stable lasercharacteristics. Long-term (years) temperature stability isprimarily determined by thermistor aging characteristics.8
Note 5: This measurement monitors thermistor stability. Lasertemperature stability will be somewhat different due to slight thermaldecoupling and variations in laser power dissipation. See Appendix A.Note 6: That’s right, a strip-chart recording. Stubborn, locally basedaberrants persist in their use of such archaic devices, forsaking moremodern alternatives. Technical advantage could account for thischoice, although deeply seated cultural bias may be a factor.Note 7: Thermal gain is temperature control aficionado jargon for theratio of ambient-to-controlled temperature variation.Note 8: See Appendix A for additional information.
Application Note 89
AN89-6
Figu
re 1
1. L
ong-
Term
Coo
ling
Mod
e St
abili
ty M
easu
red
inEn
viro
nmen
t tha
t Ste
ps 2
0 De
gree
s Ab
ove
Ambi
ent E
very
Hour
. Dat
a Sh
ows
Resu
lting
0.0
08°C
Pea
k-to
-Pea
k Va
riatio
n,In
dica
ting
Ther
mal
Gai
n of
250
0. 0
.002
5°C
Base
line
Tilt
Over
Plot
Len
gth
Deriv
es F
rom
Var
ying
Am
bien
t Tem
pera
ture
Application Note 89
AN89-7
Figu
re 1
2. Id
entic
al T
est C
ondi
tions
as
Figu
re 1
1, E
xcep
t in
Heat
ing
Mod
e. T
EC’s
Hig
her H
eatin
g M
ode
Effic
ienc
y Re
sults
in H
ighe
r The
rmal
Gai
n. 0
.002
°C P
eak-
to-P
eak
Varia
tion
Is4x
Sta
bilit
y Im
prov
emen
t. Ba
selin
e Ti
lt, J
ust D
etec
tabl
e,Sh
ows
Sim
ilar 4
x Im
prov
emen
t vs
Figu
re 1
1
Application Note 89
AN89-8
22µF
33µH5V INPUT TO CIRCUIT
AN89 F16
+22µF
+
Figure 13. “Reflected” Noise at 5VDC Input SupplyDue to Switching Regulator Operation with EdgeSlew Rate Limiting in Use. Ripple Is 12mVP-P, HighFrequency Edge Related Harmonic Is Much Lower
HORIZ = 2µs/DIV AN89 F13.tif
VERT
= 0
.01V
/DIV
ON
5V D
C LE
VEL
Figure 14. Time and Amplitude Expansion of Figure 13More Clearly Shows Residual High Frequency Contentwith Slew Limiting Employed
HORIZ = 500ns/DIV AN89 F14.tif
VERT
= 0
.005
V/DI
V AC
COU
PLED
Figure 15. Same Test Conditions as Previous Figure, ExceptSlew Limiting Is Disabled. High Frequency Harmonic ContentRises ≈x10. Leave that Slew Limiting in There!
HORIZ = 500ns/DIV AN89 F15.tif
VERT
= 0
.005
V/DI
V AC
COU
PLED
Reflected Noise Performance
The switched mode power delivery to the TEC providesefficient operation but raises concerns about noise in-jected back into the host system via the power supply. Inparticular, the switching edge’s high frequency harmoniccontent can corrupt the power supply, causing systemlevel problems. Such “reflected” noise can be trouble-some to deal with. The LTC1923 avoids these issues bycontrolling the slew of its switching edges, minimizinghigh frequency harmonic content.9 This slowing down ofswitching transients typically reduces efficiency by only1% to 2%, a small penalty for the greatly improved noiseperformance. Figure 13 shows noise and ripple at the 5Vsupply with slew control in use. Low frequency ripple,
12mV in amplitude, is usually not a concern, as opposedto the high frequency transition related-components, whichare much lower. Figure 14, a time and amplitude expan-sion of Figure 13, more clearly studies high frequencyresidue. High frequency amplitude, measured at centerscreen, is about 1mV. The slew limiting’s effectiveness ismeasured in Figure 15 by disabling it. High frequencycontent jumps to nearly 10mV, almost 10x worse perfor-mance. Leave that slew limiting in there!
Most applications are well served by this level of noisereduction. Some special cases may require even lowerreflected noise. Figure 16’s simple LC filter may be em-ployed in these cases. Combined with the LTC1923’s slewlimiting, it provides vanishingly small reflected ripple and
Figure 16. LC Filter Produces 1mV Reflected Rippleand 500µV High Frequency Harmonic Noise Residue
Note 9: This technique derives from previous work. See Reference 1.
Application Note 89
AN89-9
high frequency harmonics. Figure 17, taken using thisfilter, shows only about 1mV of ripple, with submillivoltlevels of high frequency content. Figure 18 expands thetime scale to examine the high frequency remnants. Am-plitude is 500µV, about 1/3 Figure 14’s reading. As before,
slew limiting effectiveness is measurable by disabling it.This is done in Figure 19, with a resulting 4.4x increase inhigh frequency content to about 2.2mV. As in Figure 15, iflowest reflected noise is required, leave that slew limitingin there!
Figure 17. 5V Supply Reflected Ripple Measures 1mV with Figure 16’s LC Filter in Use, a 10x ReductionOver Figure 13. Switching Edge Related Harmonic Content Is Small Due to Slew Limiting Action
HORIZ = 2µs/DIV AN89 F17.tif
VERT
= 0
.001
V/DI
V AC
COU
PLED
Figure 18. Horizontal Expansion Permits Study of High Frequency Harmonic withSlew Limiting Enabled. Amplitude Is 500µV, About 1/3 Figure 14’s Reading
HORIZ = 500ns/DIV AN89 F18.tif
VERT
= 0
.001
V/DI
V AC
COU
PLED
Figure 19. Same Conditions as Previous Figure, Except Slew Limiting Is Disabled. Harmonic ContentAmplitude Rises to 2.2mV, a 4.4x Degradation. As in Figure 15, Leave that Slew Limiting in There!
HORIZ = 500ns/DIV AN89 F19.tif
VERT
= 0
.001
V/DI
V AC
COU
PLED
Application Note 89
AN89-10
APPENDIX A
PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN THERMOELECTRICCOOLER BASED CONTROL LOOPS
There are a number of practical issues involved in imple-menting thermoelectric cooler (TEC) based control loops.They fall within three loosely defined categories. Theseinclude temperature setpoint, loop compensation andloop gain. Brief commentary on each category is providedbelow.
Temperature Setpoint
It is important to differentiate between temperature accu-racy and stability requirements. The exact temperaturesetpoint is not really important, so long as it is stable. Eachindividual laser’s output maximizes at some temperature(see text Figures 1 and 2). Temperature setpoint is typi-cally incremented until this peak is achieved. After this,only temperature setpoint stability is required. This is whythermistor tolerances on laser module data sheets arerelatively loose (5%). Long-term (years) temperaturesetpoint stability is primarily determined by thermistorstability over time. Thermistor time stability is a functionof operating temperatures, temperature cycling, moisturecontamination and packaging. The laser modules’ rela-tively mild operating conditions are very benign, promot-ing good long-term stability. Typically, assuming goodgrade thermistors are used at module fabrication, ther-mistor stability comfortably inside 0.1°C over years maybe expected.
REFERENCES
1. Williams, J., “A Monolithic Switching Regulator with100µV Output Noise,” Linear Technology Corpora-tion, Application Note 70, October 1997.
2. Williams, J., “Thermal Techniques in Measurementand Control Circuitry,” Linear Technology Corpora-tion, Application Note 5, December 1984.
3. Williams, J., “Temperature Controlling toMicrodegrees,” Massachusetts Institute of Technol-ogy Education Research Center, October 1971.
4. Fulton, S. P., “The Thermal Enzyme Probe,” Thesis,Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1975.
5. Olson, J. V., “A High Stability Temperature ControlledOven,” Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technol-ogy, 1974.
6. Harvey, M. E., “Precision Temperature ControlledWater Bath,” Review of Scientific Instruments,p. 39-1, 1968
7. Williams, J., “Designer’s Guide to Temperature Con-trol,” EDN Magazine, June 20, 1977.
8. Trolander, Harruff and Case, “Reproducibility, Stabil-ity and Linearization of Thermistor Resistance Ther-mometers,” ISA, Fifth International Symposium onTemperature, Washington, D. C., 1971.
Also related to temperature setpoint is that the servo loopcontrols sensor temperature. The laser operates at asomewhat different temperature, although laser tempera-ture stability depends upon the stable loop controlledenvironment. The assumption is that laser dissipationconstant remains fixed, which is largely true.1
Loop Compensation
Figure 3’s “dominant pole” compensation scheme takesadvantage of the long time constant from ambient into thelaser module (see text Figure 5). Loop gain is rolled off ata frequency low enough to accommodate the TEC-ther-mistor lag (see text Figure 6) but high enough to smoothtransients arriving from the outside ambient. The rela-tively high TEC-thermistor to module insulation time con-stant ratio (<1 second to minutes) makes this approachviable. Attempts at improving loop response with moresophisticated compensation schemes encounter difficultydue to laser module thermal term uncertainties. Thermalterms can vary significantly between laser module brands,
Note 1: Academics will be quick to note that this phenomenon alsooccurs in the sensor’s operation. Strictly speaking, the sensor operatesat a slightly elevated temperature from its nominally isothermalenvironment. The assumption is that its dissipation constant remainsfixed, which is essentially the case. Because of this, its temperature isstable.
Note: This Application Note was derived from a manuscript originallyprepared for publication in EDN magazine.
Application Note 89
AN89-11
Note 2: The LTC1923’s “heat-cool” status pin beckons alluringly.Note 3: Yes, this means you should use that messy white goop. A lessobnoxious alternative is the thermally conductive gaskets, which arenearly as good.
rendering tailored compensation schemes impractical oreven deleterious. Note that this restriction still applies,although less severely, even for modules of “identical”manufacture. It is very difficult to maintain tight thermalterm tolerances in production.
The simple dominant pole compensation scheme pro-vides good loop response over a wide range of lasermodule types. It’s the way to go.
Loop Gain
Loop gain is set by both electrical and thermal gain terms.The most unusual aspect of this is different TEC gain inheating and cooling modes. Significantly more gain isavailable in heating mode, accounting for the higherstabilities noted in the text (Figures 11 and 12). This highergain means that loop gain bandwidth limits should be
determined in heating mode to avoid unpleasant sur-prises. Figure 3’s suggested loop gain and compensationvalues reflect this. It is certainly possible to get cute bychanging loop gain bandwidth with mode but perfor-mance improvement is probably not worth the ruckus.2
It is important to remember that the TEC is a heat pump,the efficiency of which depends on the temperature acrossit. Gain varies with efficiency, degrading temperaturestability as efficiency decreases. The laser module shouldbe well coupled to some form of heat sink.3 The smallamount of power involved does not require large sinkcapability but adequate thermal flow must be maintained.Usually, coupling the module to the circuit’s copper groundplane is sufficient, assuming the plane is not alreadythermally biased.
Application Note 89
AN89-12an89f LT/TP 0401 4K • PRINTED IN USA
LINEAR TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION 2001
Linear Technology Corporation1630 McCarthy Blvd., Milpitas, CA 95035-7417(408) 432-1900 FAX: (408) 434-0507 www.linear-tech.com