Driver to drive?

[John Devereux]

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> writes:

On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 07:40:51 +0000, John Devereux
john@devereux.me.uk> wrote:

[...]

I don't see how there could be. It just has to comply with its *own*
datasheet, it is surely up to you to compare the datasheets of the
various manufacturers.

Things like 1N4148 are JEDEC numbers.

Cool, I did not know that.

I was wondering if compliance is
entirely voluntary, and if anyone here knew how the JEDEC standards
thing works.



I have just now been trying to spot the difference between two LT1013
opamps, TI and (the original, presumably) LTC,

http://cds.linear.com/docs/Datasheet/10134fd.pdf
www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/lt1013.pdf

The LTC one is 3 times the cost. It seems to have a couple of guaranteed
limits that the TI one does not.

[...]

ICs could be a different situation from generic diodes, I suppose there
is more likelihood the actual design is licensed there. Jim and miso
would know.

Under US law, a part number can't be copyrighted. Absent patent
protection, nothing stops anyone from making and selling LT1013's.

Excellent!

If anyone wants a good deal on LT1013CP I have a large quantity for
sale.

Don't worry about the funny markings - "LM358" is just our stock code.


--

John Devereux

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 10:57:00 -0800, Bart!
<B@rt_The_Sheriff_Is_A_Nig***!.org> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:47:40 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

I don't know either.


The first time you have spoken the truth in this group in quite some
time.

How could I know how your flashlight works?

You could find out and tell us. That could be interesting, especially
the non-invasive ways. There could be all sorts of interesting
tangents. Really.

Go for it.


--

John Larkin, President
Highland Technology, Inc

jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME thermocouple, LVDT, synchro acquisition and simulation

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 17:04:17 -0500, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

John Larkin wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 10:57:00 -0800, Bart!
B@rt_The_Sheriff_Is_A_Nig***!.org> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:47:40 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

I don't know either.


The first time you have spoken the truth in this group in quite some
time.

He should tell us how his flashlight regulates
current.

I would, but only if it is MY desire, you pathetic, cringing little
milksop.

Or, if he doesn't know (which he doesn't)


Back to the lying horseshit behavior already, I see. There was a time
when a man would simply drop you where you stand for pathetic, uncivil
behavior like that. That is where the Colt motto came from.

Which Colt motto? There seem to be a number of them.

I assume "It works every time!" (*)

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

(*)
http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2009/06/warning_it_works_every_time_colt_45_ads_now_come_with_disclaimer.php

Hey, Phil,

Suppose Nimmie is right, and his LED flashlight has a 555 or
equivalent, and it - for some reason - modulates the LEDs all the
time. Or maybe it has a switcher or equivalent. Now the light from
millions of flashlights, all over the world, is modulated. Possibly
detectable from satellites, certainly from drones. Implications.

When I was a kid, I had a cardboard tube with a lens and a PMT, and I
used to listen to light. Mostly I got 120 Hz and the occasional
lightning bolt. Things would be much more interesting nowadays. Add a
sampling downconverter to get the supersonics, maybe.


--

John Larkin, President
Highland Technology, Inc

jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME thermocouple, LVDT, synchro acquisition and simulation

 

[legg]

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 15:22:14 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

<snip>

I remember the classic 2N3055 fiasco, when people started selling tiny
epitaxial parts in aluminum cans as "2N3055", and they tended to blow
up.

It was a little more subtle than that. The original 2N3055 used a

single diffused mesa 'hometaxial' process that produced a large and
rugged but leaky part - needing extra guarding/sealing at edges to
prevent leakage. The parts produced by this process were also heavily
evaluated for avionics and space applications.

As Epitaxial triple diffused processes advanced, parts were fabricated
with roughly the same book ratings in the reduced wafer size that the
new process permitted, due to reduced edge guarding. They were cheaper
to make using the new process, and could be easily adapted to plastic
packaging.

The new parts were not as rugged as the old, due to increased Rthjc,
reduced forward biased safe operating area and secondary breakdown
characteristics - but they eventually obsoleted the old parts for the
reasons previously mentioned. This was not true immediately of all the
original mesa part type numbers - just the ones with cut-throat
consumer application/demand.

During the changeover, the older technology was sometimes identified
by a part number suffix and eventually became associated with
'unprogressive' wafer fabs. The last 2N3055H mesa parts I was ever
forced to purchase in volume were made in Yugoslavia, at a small
fraction of North American book prices. This was probably a result of
distortions in currency and iron curtain exchange, but it prevented
justifying the adoption of more easily processed modern plastic parts
in a new design's bottom line. No doubt reality set in at some later
date....

RL

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 13:24:31 -0500, legg <legg@nospam.magma.ca> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 15:22:14 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

snip
I remember the classic 2N3055 fiasco, when people started selling tiny
epitaxial parts in aluminum cans as "2N3055", and they tended to blow
up.

It was a little more subtle than that. The original 2N3055 used a
single diffused mesa 'hometaxial' process that produced a large and
rugged but leaky part - needing extra guarding/sealing at edges to
prevent leakage. The parts produced by this process were also heavily
evaluated for avionics and space applications.

As Epitaxial triple diffused processes advanced, parts were fabricated
with roughly the same book ratings in the reduced wafer size that the
new process permitted, due to reduced edge guarding. They were cheaper
to make using the new process, and could be easily adapted to plastic
packaging.

The new parts were not as rugged as the old, due to increased Rthjc,
reduced forward biased safe operating area and secondary breakdown
characteristics - but they eventually obsoleted the old parts for the
reasons previously mentioned. This was not true immediately of all the
original mesa part type numbers - just the ones with cut-throat
consumer application/demand.

During the changeover, the older technology was sometimes identified
by a part number suffix and eventually became associated with
'unprogressive' wafer fabs. The last 2N3055H mesa parts I was ever
forced to purchase in volume were made in Yugoslavia, at a small
fraction of North American book prices. This was probably a result of
distortions in currency and iron curtain exchange, but it prevented
justifying the adoption of more easily processed modern plastic parts
in a new design's bottom line. No doubt reality set in at some later
date....

RL

My experience was going from RCA to Fairchild 2N3055's. The Fairchilds
were much faster, much lighter, had maybe 1/4 the chip area, and blew
up a lot.


--

John Larkin, President
Highland Technology, Inc

jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME thermocouple, LVDT, synchro acquisition and simulation

 

[John Fields]

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 17:00:08 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 17:56:08 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 13:28:58 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

It must be hell to be manic depressive.

---
Heaven or Hell, as I understand it.

Which part are we being subjected to ?

---
Both, I think; the euphoric state being
--
JF

 

[John Fields]

On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 07:21:07 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 07:40:51 +0000, John Devereux
john@devereux.me.uk> wrote:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> writes:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 17:56:08 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 13:28:58 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:38:32 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 10:24:56 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

---
If the axis was correctly annotated, would that not be more accurate
than if it were annotated incorrectly?

The y-axis on that fig 5 graph is obviously volts, and the "m" is
obviously a typo. Given that, there's no accuracy problem.

---
Of course there is, since "obvious" is relative and the annotation is
incorrect and requires disambiguation from the reader before the
proper value can be discerned.

Do you talk like that in real life?

I didn't even notice the [mv] typo. It was obvious from the numbers
that the value was volts.


---

My job is to design stuff, not freeze in my tracks at the slightest excuse.

---
If you enjoy designing stuff, then that's what you should do, instead
of freezing in your tracks any time you're corrected and feel forced
by your insecurities to mount an offensive defense.

Well, that hasn't happened in this thread.


---

If you look at a smattering of 1N4148 data sheets, there's a huge
spread of I-V curves.

---
I think that devices which are advertised as 1N4148's have to adhere
to the limits of the JEDEC spec for 1N4148's, so if one stays within
the recommended limits, then the spec's for devices which claim to be
1N4148's will be equivalent.

But what does "have to" mean? Is there any enforcement?

I don't see how there could be. It just has to comply with its *own*
datasheet, it is surely up to you to compare the datasheets of the
various manufacturers.

Things like 1N4148 are JEDEC numbers. I was wondering if compliance is
entirely voluntary, and if anyone here knew how the JEDEC standards
thing works.

---
Here's a start:

http://www.jedec.org/standards-documents/type-registration-data-sheets
--
JF

 

[whit3rd]

On Sunday, January 29, 2012 9:47:03 AM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:

[about cheap LED flashlights, resistor-less]

If the LEDs are purchased in quantity, all from the same wafers, they
will share current pretty well without added resistance. Thermal
runaway is not an issue once they get into their ohmic ranges, which
most LEDs do at their design operating current.

The idea that you can't parallel diodes is silly. Motorola sold high
current paralleled-diode rectifier arrays decades ago.

But, Motorola's rectifier app notes clearly indicate that series chokes
as ballast elements were the preferred way to parallel high current
rectifiers. The flashlights work because the internal resistance of
the (usually 3 AAA) cells is part of the circuit: you can burn this type
of flashlight out by using a low-Z cell (AA, or AAA NiCd, for instance).

The flashlights that DO use DC/DC conversion (white LED out, single
AA cell for power) haven't got any voltage reference, they just impedance-
transform. A true current-regulated switchmode supply is considered too
expensive for this market.

 

On Feb 5, 5:39 pm, Jim Thompson wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 14:08:18 -0800, John Larkin wrote:
On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 13:28:58 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

So far, life has been a huge amount of fun. But what does that have to
do with diodes?

The same as talking amps of current in a 1N4148.

http://www.nxp.com/documents/data_sheet/1N4148_1N4448.pdf

Looks effectively ohmic above 50mA (Fig. 3).

--
Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 07:21:07 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

Things like 1N4148 are JEDEC numbers. I was wondering if compliance is
entirely voluntary, and if anyone here knew how the JEDEC standards
thing works.

It was part of the mil spec, and since COTS, is not valid or implemented
any more.

 

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 07:21:07 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

Under US law, a part number can't be copyrighted. Absent patent
protection, nothing stops anyone from making and selling LT1013's.

Unless they claim like operation or tout it as a replacement.

 

On Feb 6, 1:03 pm, John Larkin <jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 10:57:00 -0800, Bart!

B@rt_The_Sheriff_Is_A_Nig***!.org> wrote:
On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:47:40 -0800, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

I don't know either.

The first time you have spoken the truth in this group in quite some
time.

How could I know how your flashlight works?

You could find out and tell us. That could be interesting, especially
the non-invasive ways. There could be all sorts of interesting
tangents. Really.

Go for it.

Okay, Nym's had his shot.

There are several LED flashlight schemes. The crudest connect 3
series cells to the LEDs, relying on the cells' series resistance and
the LEDs resistance. Some add series resistors. If you parallel
enough LEDs they can handle 3xAAA in series, but as soon as one LED
fails, the rest rapidly die.

Boost converter schemes apply either constant voltage, constant
voltage from a current mode boost, or current mode boost, in order of
sophistication.

More sophisticated schemes modulate the converter, for multiple power
settings.

None use 555s AFAIK.

--
Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[josephkk]

On Thu, 02 Feb 2012 05:22:23 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Thu, 02 Feb 2012 11:55:35 +0000, Pomegranate Bastard <pommyB@dsl.pipex.com
wrote:

On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 19:07:25 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 18:17:26 -0800, MassiveProng
MassiveProng@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:

On 31 Jan 2012 15:52:23 GMT, John Doe <jdoe@usenetlove.invalid> wrote:

Nobody forces anybody else to do anything on UseNet. Your mother
should have taught you self-control.

Nobody forces you to make absolutely retarded, meaningless posts, yet
you insist on doing so. The word is Usenet, idiot.

Your RETARDED, CRIMINAL mother should be jailed for failing to flush
you, the moment the stupid slut shat you.

You keep repeating that image. That's sick in so many way

This is Nymbecile's favourite insult.

It's yet another demonstration of what a sad, useless life this
imbecile leads.

Yet other imbeciles persist in feeding the troll, ensuring his position at the
podium. If everyone shunned him, he'd become invisible... and cease being
annoying.

...Jim Thompson

Larkin's narcissism is such that he thinks he can rescue even such as
NymNoNuts.

?-)

 

[legg]

On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 11:08:23 -0800, John Larkin
<jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 13:24:31 -0500, legg <legg@nospam.magma.ca> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 15:22:14 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

snip
I remember the classic 2N3055 fiasco, when people started selling tiny
epitaxial parts in aluminum cans as "2N3055", and they tended to blow
up.

It was a little more subtle than that. The original 2N3055 used a
single diffused mesa 'hometaxial' process that produced a large and
rugged but leaky part - needing extra guarding/sealing at edges to
prevent leakage. The parts produced by this process were also heavily
evaluated for avionics and space applications.

As Epitaxial triple diffused processes advanced, parts were fabricated
with roughly the same book ratings in the reduced wafer size that the
new process permitted, due to reduced edge guarding. They were cheaper
to make using the new process, and could be easily adapted to plastic
packaging.

The new parts were not as rugged as the old, due to increased Rthjc,
reduced forward biased safe operating area and secondary breakdown
characteristics - but they eventually obsoleted the old parts for the
reasons previously mentioned. This was not true immediately of all the
original mesa part type numbers - just the ones with cut-throat
consumer application/demand.

During the changeover, the older technology was sometimes identified
by a part number suffix and eventually became associated with
'unprogressive' wafer fabs. The last 2N3055H mesa parts I was ever
forced to purchase in volume were made in Yugoslavia, at a small
fraction of North American book prices. This was probably a result of
distortions in currency and iron curtain exchange, but it prevented
justifying the adoption of more easily processed modern plastic parts
in a new design's bottom line. No doubt reality set in at some later
date....

RL

My experience was going from RCA to Fairchild 2N3055's. The Fairchilds
were much faster, much lighter, had maybe 1/4 the chip area, and blew
up a lot.

Yeah. RCA made some of the earliest mesa parts. Fairchild never made
them, but pioneered epitaxy.

RL

 

[josephkk]

On Thu, 02 Feb 2012 07:20:52 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Thu, 02 Feb 2012 11:55:35 +0000, Pomegranate Bastard
pommyB@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:

On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 19:07:25 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 18:17:26 -0800, MassiveProng
MassiveProng@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:

On 31 Jan 2012 15:52:23 GMT, John Doe <jdoe@usenetlove.invalid> wrote:

Nobody forces anybody else to do anything on UseNet. Your mother
should have taught you self-control.

Nobody forces you to make absolutely retarded, meaningless posts, yet
you insist on doing so. The word is Usenet, idiot.

Your RETARDED, CRIMINAL mother should be jailed for failing to flush
you, the moment the stupid slut shat you.

You keep repeating that image. That's sick in so many way

This is Nymbecile's favourite insult.

It's yet another demonstration of what a sad, useless life this
imbecile leads.

Beyond sad. Really, really sick.

So why do you keep responding to AlwaysWrong?

?-(

 

[John Doe]

josephkk <joseph_barrett sbcglobal.net> wrote:

On Thu, 02 Feb 2012 07:20:52 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Thu, 02 Feb 2012 11:55:35 +0000, Pomegranate Bastard
pommyB dsl.pipex.com> wrote:

On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 19:07:25 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 18:17:26 -0800, MassiveProng
MassiveProng thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:

On 31 Jan 2012 15:52:23 GMT, John Doe <jdoe usenetlove.invalid
wrote:

Nobody forces anybody else to do anything on UseNet. Your mother
should have taught you self-control.

Nobody forces you to make absolutely retarded, meaningless posts,
yet
you insist on doing so. The word is Usenet, idiot.

Your RETARDED, CRIMINAL mother should be jailed for failing to
flush
you, the moment the stupid slut shat you.

You keep repeating that image. That's sick in so many way

This is Nymbecile's favourite insult.

It's yet another demonstration of what a sad, useless life this
imbecile leads.

Beyond sad. Really, really sick.

So why do you keep responding to AlwaysWrong?

The post was four days ago. Are you still trolling this thread?

--

?-(



Path: news.astraweb.com!border6.newsrouter.astraweb.com!not-for-mail
From: josephkk <joseph_barrett sbcglobal.net
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Re: John Doe defines his stupidity level for all to see
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2012 21:14:51 -0800
Message-ID: <voc1j7ts8j8085cqd7ev7si5jn0ssqgq6g 4ax.com
References: <4f236128$0$32059$c3e8da3$40d4fd75 news.astraweb.com> <jg83f3$vde$1 speranza.aioe.org> <4f27a313$0$27035$c3e8da3$fdf4f6af news.astraweb.com> <jg8apv$anh$1 dont-email.me> <4f280e37$0$2076$c3e8da3$a9097924 news.astraweb.com> <f18hi75oqj3kbnq0g39m11cmh1vtc3sqor 4ax.com> <k2bhi7ha5n0nvpq082g8vek0dmnmfvos1h 4ax.com> <m5uki7tjt2ibrtbj50gpsftjb450elrm3l 4ax.com> <ddali79cud1l6t3br6sdde54m1gaae3ghq 4ax.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 38
Organization: Unlimited download news at news.astraweb.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: f3247f54.news.astraweb.com
X-Trace: DXC=6dJ49<R_fS2SG6fD[7G;H=L?0kYOcDh :m]aCQX?:M72>3<:Wm\C]Q?U <j_i<C 0<fO_l6mMBgY<FG5Vj5nF=a8N6cZAYT>]k;5IV^_GFD7U;

 

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 20:58:54 -0800, josephkk
<joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

Larkin's narcissism is such that he thinks he can rescue even such as
NymNoNuts.

?-)

Rescuing me from the total retards in this group would require more
than Larkin, since he is one of them.

You? You are too stupid to even pay any attention to.

 

[JW]

On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 10:10:51 -0800 John Larkin
<jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote in Message id:
<5i50j7dppopsm5ha1to21cb8o77d8vio5c@4ax.com>:

Suppose Nimmie is right

*Guffaw!*

 

[John Larkin]

On Tue, 07 Feb 2012 11:01:37 -0500, JW <none@dev.null> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 10:10:51 -0800 John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote in Message id:
5i50j7dppopsm5ha1to21cb8o77d8vio5c@4ax.com>:

Suppose Nimmie is right

*Guffaw!*

oh. good point.


--

John Larkin, President Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 19:06:23 -0800, The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra
<GeorgeTirebiter@drmemory.org> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 07:21:07 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

Under US law, a part number can't be copyrighted. Absent patent
protection, nothing stops anyone from making and selling LT1013's.

Unless they claim like operation or tout it as a replacement.

Then what stops them?


--

John Larkin, President
Highland Technology, Inc

jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME thermocouple, LVDT, synchro acquisition and simulation