why do they do this?

:
:

e:

rote:

ux Vbias

a mosfet.

ds with their fake dropout specs while conveniently omitting the fact that Vbias must be greater than Vout + 1.5V.

e millivolts

r an opamp

down to

showy 80dB PSRR at 100 Hz. Battery operation usually doesn't care a whole lot about PSRR. And the thermal impedance specs are so bad, you just try ge tting 800mA out of it with any kind voltage headroom without using a liquid nitrogen drip.

es 800 mA

at much

x-1

25mV
12V

he

ve used

mostly.

le

-channel

ilinx

g a few

ve but

elves all

noxious and

:(

, and

brave at

r,

FBI on

of times

on) as

guess he was close to not being with us any more

we like it

took over at that point

simulate the design, and then had another designer lay out the chip

ior are

crete component designs.

high frequencies, the fact that the connections are lot shorter (and less inductive) makes a big difference. Bob Widlar and Barry Gilbert were famous ly good at exploiting the advantages these sorts of difference offer.

you

re

ance

tly

e

's a

ad

ed

ps

oard

in

e to

d.

they

e

Filotex coaxial cable (about 1.1 mm OD IIRR). The other thing that messed u p the board was Gigabit Logic's failure to put the input capacitance of the ir logic on the data sheet - on rev b every last clock input had it's own p rivate driver.

ong 100k ECL synchronous counter at 200MHz, which would have been doable wi th careful design - as I had spelled out in the specification. The guy who did the detailed design of the board was entirely capable of managing that, but was also smart enough to know that the machine was never going to get into production - it didn't - and didn't bother.

ted circuit layout I might well have caught it, but our idiot project manag er didn't want to slow down the process by the day that would have taken.

k much longer to find (but was much easier to cope with when it did get not iced).

three years work when the machine was working - to take away three years w orth of weekly reports. About fifteen years later I got around to scanning them.

Semi-manual. We never got enough boards made that the people who loaded the m would have automated the placement. I got fairly close to that - these we re the first surface mount boards used a Cambridge Instruments - and Iened up being responsible for getting the tools we needed - which was mainly a G roatmoor hot air reworking tool, which I'd seen at every service mount shop that I'd visited.

s

No. We bought our supplies off the shelf, and they were perfectly conventio nal switching power supplies, if reasonably quiet.

No idea.

e

Delivering information to a human observer can take advantage of the relati ve slowness of the human comprehension system where it's taking up complica ted information.

l

When we wanted speed we went for ECL and GaAs. Most of the rest of the mach ine was upgraded - as little and as cheaply as possible - from original Lin tech electron beam tester. We did go for the AMD Taxichip links for high vo lume data transfer - and put minimal galvanic isolation into the links to m inimise ground loop problems.

t

f
n

s

It was an up-market board house, and they didn't have any trouble with the layout design rules. In fact they probably prescribed them.

Printed circuit layout was done by specialist draftsmen and some of our was done by a specialist sub-contractor, but the engineers got to sit with the draft's person to sort out the more demanding bits of the boards. Given th e chance, I would have reviewed every last board layout before we sent it o ff to get etched, but our idiot project manager didn't want to delay the pr ocess by delaying sending it out for that.

d

Quite a lot easier. Most of the logic could have been squeezed into program mable logic parts. I did a detailed design on a similar sort of system at N ijmegen University around 1997, and the programmable parts we could buy the n still weren't fast enough for the fastest bits but did allow us to squeez ed down the data handling area quite a lot.

We used a lot of 22V10 programmable parts in 1989, and even then we could h ave done better, but it would have meant chucking out existing designs.

The ICT Place ICT7024 was a drop-in replacement for the 22V10 but a good de al more powerful, but I didn't get use one until 1991 when I was wording fo r another company.

s

The AMD Taxichip was a long step along the road to USB, and we were really very happy to have something that could run a serial link at 125MHz. USB-C would have put us in the seventh heaven.

Motorola were starting to push ECLinPS back in 1990 (and one of their chips does get mentioned in one of my later weekly reports) but you couldn't buy them then.

By the time I'd got to Niimegen - at the end of 1993 - ECLinPS was stocked by major distributors , and I used some of the parts to upgrade an old elec tron spin resonance machine, and was planning to use quite a few more in th e new version that got designed but never built.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman
Loading thread data ...

e:

ote:

Vbias

osfet.

with their fake dropout specs while conveniently omitting the fact that Vbi as must be greater than Vout + 1.5V.

illivolts

n opamp

n to

owy 80dB PSRR at 100 Hz. Battery operation usually doesn't care a whole lot about PSRR. And the thermal impedance specs are so bad, you just try getti ng 800mA out of it with any kind voltage headroom without using a liquid ni trogen drip.

800 mA

much

V

used

stly.

annel

nx

few

but

es all

ious and

nd

ve at

on

times

as

ss he was close to not being with us any more

like it

ok over at that point

mulate the design, and then had another designer lay out the chip

are

d RF

locks. When you team up with a fab, they supply all datasheets and simulati on models for standard blocks. So, opamps, comparators, digital blocks, vol tage references, PWM circuits and individual transistors

100% spot on. The tools are very expensive, but they model the chip to ever y detail. Thus, experienced ASIC designers never need to do new revisions.

n do proof of concept in discrete design

ait a loooooong time from design to the first chips comes in

p

Dual-emitter transistor. You've got two contacts on the emitter region of o ne transistor on top of a shared base layer feeding into a share collector.

You used to be able to buy it as a four lead device, a long time ago. In 19

87 I had to redesign the electronics in the weighing head of the Cambridge Instruments/Metals Research GaAs single-crystal pulling machine because we couldn't buy any more of them.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

you'll get similar behaviour, speed may differ some.

The '00 and 'S00 have a dual emitter transistors - unobtanium, but you can fake one just parallel two regular transistors but seperate the emitters.

The 'S00 and 'LS00 make extensitve use of Schottky transistors these are just regular transistors with Schottky diodes from base to collector.

--
  Jasen.
Reply to
Jasen Betts

The 74LS00 is not using a multi-emitter transistor. It is not even TTL, but DTL instead. They just call it 'Schottky-TTL'.

--

-TV
Reply to
Tauno Voipio

e:

ote:

Vbias

osfet.

with their fake dropout specs while conveniently omitting the fact that Vbi as must be greater than Vout + 1.5V.

illivolts

n opamp

n to

owy 80dB PSRR at 100 Hz. Battery operation usually doesn't care a whole lot about PSRR. And the thermal impedance specs are so bad, you just try getti ng 800mA out of it with any kind voltage headroom without using a liquid ni trogen drip.

800 mA

much

V

used

stly.

annel

nx

few

but

es all

ious and

nd

ve at

I on

f times

) as

ess he was close to not being with us any more

like it

ook over at that point

imulate the design, and then had another designer lay out the chip

or are

and RF

ou

blocks. When you team up with a fab, they supply all datasheets and simula tion models for standard blocks. So, opamps, comparators, digital blocks, v oltage references, PWM circuits and individual transistors

s 100% spot on. The tools are very expensive, but they model the chip to ev ery detail. Thus, experienced ASIC designers never need to do new revisions .

can do proof of concept in discrete design

wait a loooooong time from design to the first chips comes in

tml

an

drop

ven

of one transistor on top of a shared base layer feeding into a share collec tor.

n 1987 I had to redesign the electronics in the weighing head of the Cambri dge Instruments/Metals Research GaAs single-crystal pulling machine because we couldn't buy any more of them.

It's rather a pointless distinction. DTL has diodes and a single transisto r, so it was exceedingly slow. The LS design uses four transistors to spee d up the transitions very significantly compared to a pull up resistor.

The diodes vs. a dual emitter transistor don't make much of a difference.

--

  Rick C. 

  - Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
  - Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Reply to
Ricketty C

Yes, see:

Were used as low-offset switches in chopper amps circa early-mid 1960s, long since obsoleted by fet switches.

piglet

Reply to
piglet

In my experience, for example on 0.35um BiCMOS, circuits that you could construct with discrete parts will work much the same on a chip, but with about 50x the bandwidth that one could get out of the discrete version.

There are a lot of other things that work much better than what would be usual to build on a discrete board, e.g. you can expect typically

Reply to
Chris Jones

I found this book very informative:

formatting link

Reply to
klaus.kragelund

A very odd device. Are there other weird semiconductors like that?

Reply to
Cydrome Leader

Ha. The part numbers are a riot- like 3N62. It's nice when part numbers follow standards that convey useful information.

Reply to
Cydrome Leader

of one transistor on top of a shared base layer feeding into a share colle ctor.

In 1987 I had to redesign the electronics in the weighing head of the Cambr idge Instruments/Metals Research GaAs single-crystal pulling machine becaus e we couldn't buy any more of them.

3N was the JEDIC prefix for FETs, so it was a standard that was widely i gnored..
Reply to
Michael Terrell

I used to use 3N201 dual-gate MOSFETs for slowish samplers. Their charge injection was really really low.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs 
Principal Consultant 
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics 
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics 
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 

http://electrooptical.net 
http://hobbs-eo.com
Reply to
Phil Hobbs

You can make one by using a monolithically matched pair such as half of a MAT-14 and connecting them base-to-base and collector-to-collector.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs 
Principal Consultant 
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics 
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics 
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 

http://electrooptical.net 
http://hobbs-eo.com
Reply to
Phil Hobbs

on of one transistor on top of a shared base layer feeding into a share col lector.

. In 1987 I had to redesign the electronics in the weighing head of the Cam bridge Instruments/Metals Research GaAs single-crystal pulling machine beca use we couldn't buy any more of them.

s,

s

ely ignored..

The 3N128 was popular in Amateur Radio projects in the '70s along with RCA' s 40673 that was used in TV tuners and garage door openers. They used to co st me 36 cents, from the Linear corporation that built the openers. I bough t them 25 at a time, and often ran out before more were available. These we re very sensitive receivers, and with careful alignment many would operate a door from three blocks away. That was handy for fire stations. They could start the doors to open and have them open enough that they didn't have to wait to pull off the road when they returned after a fire run. the 406743 turn up in small batches from time to time, but they aren't worth $20 each.

Reply to
Michael Terrell

There's a nice radio museum finder, some of you might have already visited. I suspect there could be a lot of contributors from this group.

formatting link
finder_Museumsliste.html

I was more into CMOS logic when it first came out but using it for analog a pplications such as buffered inverters with feedback. But my favourite lit tle CMOS design back then was a converting a 10MHz OCXO into a Sawtooth wit h bipolars then and using the analog transmission gates as a S&H mixer usin g a telemetry subcarrier signal derived from a similar OCXO flying in a Bla ck Brandt VI. The received signal was limited and I took the derivative to trigger the S&H CMOS switching 10MHz Sawtooth to get a low-cost Doppler ra nging system, to replace the costly TRACS system up in Churchill, Mb. This was a rocket research station operated by NRC and used by researchers arou nd the world including NASA and my 1st job at Bristol Aerospace Ltd in Winn ipeg. (now Magellan)

Reply to
Anthony Stewart

You can do the equivalent with a built-up cascode anyway.

My very favourite dual-gate part was the Motorola MRF966 GaAs FET. You just connected gate 2 to the source, and, presto, an almost perfectly unilateral amplifier. I used to get > 70 dB isolation up to above 100 MHz with one stage.

I used to use them connected directly to coax as cheapo FET probes--the pointy leads of the Macro-X package were perfect for that.

I still have a couple of dozen, but haven't used one in ages.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs 
Principal Consultant 
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics 
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics 
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 

http://electrooptical.net 
http://hobbs-eo.com
Reply to
Phil Hobbs

Unijunctions, point-contact diodes and transistors, some strange

4-layer things that played a part in Silicon Valley history, germanium jfets, tunnel diodes, electrolytic transistors, alloy-junction transistors, surface-barrier transistors, Schottky transistors, drift step-recovery diodes, dual-gate fets, reference zeners, silicon varistors, mesfets (almost gone), all kinds of weird stuff.
--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

Science teaches us to doubt. 

  Claude Bernard
Reply to
jlarkin

RCA's 40673 that was used in TV tuners and garage door openers. They used t o cost me 36 cents, from the Linear corporation that built the openers. I b ought them 25 at a time, and often ran out before more were available. Thes e were very sensitive receivers, and with careful alignment many would oper ate a door from three blocks away. That was handy for fire stations. They c ould start the doors to open and have them open enough that they didn't hav e to wait to pull off the road when they returned after a fire run. the 406

743 turn up in small batches from time to time, but they aren't worth $20 e ach.

Back then, I only had a branch of Pioneer to buy parts from. It was called SREPCO, and it carried TV repair parts. Pioneer had an industrial branch in Dayton, Ohio but they only sold to corporations listed on Dunn and Bradstr eet. SREPCO was a very early distributor in Electronics 'Standard Radio and Electronic Parts Company'. Those stores were closed, decades ago.

Reply to
Michael Terrell

Try to find a Stabistor these days. HP used them in the Harrison Labs desig ned power supplies as a reference. If it fails, all the outputs are wrong. I have several HP6236B supplies with bad Stabistors. I had to resort to bu ying a couple of the less popular 6237B model, for parts.

Reply to
Michael Terrell

In Vancouver things were a bit looser--you just needed to make up a company name. A pal of mine called his "Enematronics" and nobody batted an eyelash.

Canadian Electronics Limited (CEL) and Armaco were the leading places, but besides them and Rat Shack there was a ham shop within easy bicycling distance, called "Rendell-Paret Electronics", run by the estimable Hedley Rendell. (Not Hedy.)

It was one of those grease-and-nicotine-encrusted places with old gear piled right up to the ceiling, barrels of surplus parts, the works. Hedley was always chain-smoking behind the counter. If there had been an earthquake, nobody would have gotten out alive.

Some while later, when I was building satcom stuff for a couple of years, I remember phoning up J. W. Miller, looking for some coil or other.

"Hi, Phil Hobbs calling. Could you tell me who your rep is in Vancouver?"

"Sure, It's Rendell..."

" No! You're kidding!"

Good times.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs 
Principal Consultant 
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics 
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics 
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 

http://electrooptical.net 
http://hobbs-eo.com
Reply to
Phil Hobbs

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.