ADXL321 replacement

Thank you for posting this question.  Long term support is an important part of our brand, so we take this very seriously and are sorry that this is presenting an inconvenience for you.  We make every effort possible to avoid obsoleting a product and when we are forced to do so (process manufacturing is often a key limit), we try to offer transitional solutions that are as convenient as possible. Pin for pin, package compatible, "drop in replacements" are  clearly the most convenient,  but sometimes that is not possible, so we offer the next best thing.  In this particular case, we are sorry that a drop-in replacement is not available for you and will take this feedback into consideration as we continuously work to provide the best value (given today's technology) while also planning for long-term sustainability (which often does not support best value). 

With respect to the ADXL203, I don't normally support these devices but I do know that the status effects all devices under the ADXL203 family.  We are not ready to announce succession plans yet, but are actively considering a number of options for longer-term support.  Despite being on the market for many years, these devices are actively used by many customers in many different markets, so this is being studied very carefully. Do you presently use these devices?  If so, what type of lifetime do you hope to plan for?  

Thank you for sharing this information.

Hi Brad,

Thank you for the follow-up.  Is this for a new design or is this for support of a design that you are already producing? 

Mark

Hi Brad,

We can't always respond this quickly but I am glad that I had a moment when you asked your question.  We have done quite a bit on this topic, but I am not sure what we can share in public yet, so I have asked a colleague for guidance on this topic.  This might take another day or two.

Mark

Hello Mark,

In your comments to Roman regarding the ADXL203 status "Not Recommended for New Designs" you mentioned that ADI was studying this carefully to determine what will be done to continue supporting the ADI customers who use this MEMS device. Your statement was made on Dec 2015. Now that 7 months have passed, do you have any new information about ADI's decision?

The ADXL203 and 103 offer a performance that is not matched by other ADI MEMS devices. Who would I discuss this topic with if I wanted to ask additional questions?

Thank you,

Brad

Hi Mark,

Wow. Appreciate the fast response.

This is a new design, but it's a follow on of an existing design that used the ADXL203 and ADXL103 combination. The 2.5k BW and 110ug/sqrtHz parameters are what set this product apart from the rest.

Brad:  I have been given permission to disclose that in one week, we will be releasing a 3-axis accelerometer, which has >4x better noise and numerous other advantages, when compared to the ADXL203 and ADXL321 products.

Analog output = ADXL354

SPI output = ADXL355

In one week, go to www.analog.com and search "ADXL355" or this hot link may work as well: www.analog.com/ADXL355

Also, copying my colleagues, who may be in a better position to determine the future of the ADXL203 and ADXL321 for you.

STallur

Anthony.DeSimone

Mark,

I appreciate the scoop!

4x lower noise is going to be fabulous.

I look forward to reviewing the datasheet. I'll keep checking back over the next couple of weeks to see what ADI publishes.

Thank you,

Brad

minor delay?  I'm not seeing it anywhere except for a couple random mentions:

http://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/technical-articles/What-You-Need-to-Know-About-MEMS-Accelerometer…
http://www.analog.com/media/en/news-marketing-collateral/solutions-bulletins-brochures/Ultralow-Power-Power-Management-S…

...looking forward to the release...