why do they do this?

ST makes a nice little LDO, super-low dropout with an aux Vbias supply. Saves me from rolling my own with an opamp and a mosfet.

It's an ST1L08.

So why is the data sheet file en.DM00123507.pdf ?

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
John Larkin
Loading thread data ...

Who cares, it's a crappy regulator. And the lying bastards with their fake dropout specs while conveniently omitting the fact that Vbias must be great er than Vout + 1.5V. The GND current at no load of 35uA, sucks , as does th at showy 80dB PSRR at 100 Hz. Battery operation usually doesn't care a whol e lot about PSRR. And the thermal impedance specs are so bad, you just try getting 800mA out of it with any kind voltage headroom without using a liqu id nitrogen drip.

Reply to
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred

To track revisions.

Reply to
Michael Terrell

To make sales and marketing happy, by making them think they actually DO so mething.

If you can't find the data, then THEY feel good when they tell you where to find it. I've seen this many times, HERE is a picture of our beautiful p roduct. Call/Email to get data, we may call you some time next week. Forces customers to talk to marketing and sales so they can justify their existen ce.

When you call them, if they answer their phone, they have a cryptic number on a spread sheet to give you.

No, I'm not kidding...

Steve

Reply to
sroberts6328

Lying? It's all over the data sheet. It's how they get the millivolts of dropout. I do that when I make my own super-LDOs, power an opamp from some higher voltage and over-drive an nfet follower down to milliohms of Rds-on.

I'm dropping a switched 1.8 to 1.5. That's 0.3 volts. Times 800 mA would be 0.24 watts dissipated. Actually, I don't need that much current to run a couple DRAM chips.

You sure are in a bad mood lately.

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

Science teaches us to doubt. 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
jlarkin

It also annoys me when people send me a resume' with file name resume.doc.

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

Science teaches us to doubt. 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
jlarkin

As opposed to TheGreatJohnSmithsWonderfulResumeForYourAdmiration.pdf ?

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Reply to
Phil Hobbs

something.

re to find it. I've seen this many times, HERE is a picture of our beautifu l product. Call/Email to get data, we may call you some time next week. For ces customers to talk to marketing and sales so they can justify their exis tence.

er on a spread sheet to give you.

It seems pretty easy to annoy you. You sure seem in a bad mood lately.

--
  Rick C. 

  -- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Ricketty C

ke dropout specs while conveniently omitting the fact that Vbias must be gr eater than Vout + 1.5V.

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 getting 800mA out of it with any kind voltage headroom without using a liquid nitrogen drip.

He's gradually working out that he's in the one country where Covid-19 is e ventually going to have a good chance at killing him, and that he's in the age group where it's quite likely to succeed.

He can do all the wishful thinking he likes but the realisation that that's what's going to happen is gradually creeping up on him, and he doesn't lik e it at all.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

ST is not the only one with nutty data sheet names; they abound and rebound thru one's skull with free abandon. The clangs created are tuned for maximum confuddleifcation.

Reply to
Robert Baer

Then pass it on to (eh, what's up .DOC) Buggsie.

Reply to
Robert Baer

Not buying that as good reason to obfuscate document names. Part numbers for components are not random numbers only trackable with a database lookup. There's no reason document names have to be completely contextless to be "trackable".

Let's see how a smart company that's been able to adapt over the years and still remain relevant does it.

Texas Instruments has employees with IQs over 43 maintaining their website. I clicked around for a random part, the OPA1622 audio amp.

The URL to the datasheet has a clear meaning, even if you don't click on it

formatting link

If you want to save the PDF, you get this really cool file name by default

opa1622.pdf

wow, how did they do it?

The first link even has a clear revision history list link in case you want to know what happened prior to November 2015. There appear to be a document control number at the top of the PDF too.

So yeah, short story is ST is just stupid.

Reply to
Cydrome Leader

That file naming method has always bothered me.

It's not just ST of course. TI starts their app notes with something like slup1234.pdf

When I save any of these documents, I always rename them to something meaningful to me, usually the part number first and a quick description....

Reply to
boB

s
d

t

So, it's better to have all the datasheets by part number? Try keeping m ultiple versions from one vendor, plus second sources, all with the same fi le name. Some jellybean parts have dozens of versions of a datasheet.

The head of Engineering at Microdyne was pushing for a new inventory sys tem. His concept was that the part number for a 1K resistor would be 1002. He threw a real hissy fit when I pointed out that we stocked 14 different 1 K resistors, and other components had a value of 1002. He wasn't there very long before they fired him.

All of our documentation had form numbers, unrelated to the product mode l numbers. They were filed by model number, but under ISO9001 we had to hav e traceability for all revisions. One board had 14 versions, and 14 test pr ocedures. Every one ended up with over 100 lines that had to be marked N/A. I wrote a new procedure to cover every version of the board. It had 14 dat asheets, one per version with no extra lines, plus a spare to allow for you to add new versions. The first page clearly stated to only use the specifi ed datasheet for the version being tested. It reduced both the test time, a nd the paperwork to be stored. There are reasons to use other than obvious file naming. I am currently going through thousands of PDF files for test e quipment. I am adding the actual document numbers to the file names, not ju st 'HP3325' since the A and B versions are different, but the manuals were revised multiple times. I have 180 GB of files, over 32,000 of them to sort , rename and compare. Some are duplicates, some are incomplete but I save e very Electronics manual I come across.

Reply to
Michael Terrell

Not directly comparable to the ST1L08 but the Holtek HT75xx-1 series is nice. Max Vin 30V, 100mA, 2.5uA ground current, 25mV drop-out. 16 different fixed output voltages from 2.1V to 12V with 3% tolerance. As usual with products originating in the East, the datasheet is rather sparse about details, but I've used them and they do what I want.

I've noticed that lately with some regulars here, including a few who normally exhibit decent manners.

Reply to
Pimpom

More likely because it was stuffed into a crude document management system and it is in English. Try it.DM00123507.pdf or es.* I confess I rename such things to the chipname.

They are not the only vendor guilty of having datasheets filed with random numbers for their filename.

It is a PITA since they could just as easily have used en.-01.pdf

And give it a new part number if they overflow the revision level.

--
Regards, 
Martin Brown
Reply to
Martin Brown

Some 30 years ago, NatSemi sent me their linear data book along with a CD. I dumped the contents of the CD into my hard disk and am still using it. It has an html interface but the search function doesn't work and individual types can be found only via the product tree.

I often want to copy out individual datasheets for quicker access but the file names are all generic. The only way to do it is to go through the product trees in my browser, select a type, click download and save the displayed page.

Reply to
Pimpom

That should be '20 years', not 30.

Reply to
Pimpom

I normally rename them to things like

OPA192_2192_4192_10MHzRRIO_CMOS_Trimmed_LowDriftBuckFifty.pdf

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs 
Principal Consultant 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Phil Hobbs

I'll take a stab at answering this one....

A: Because they hired the same ISO 9001:2015 consultant that we did! :)

Maybe that's a :( ? I'll let you know after the audit.

Reply to
mpm

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.