• TI Analog Design Journal

    From sci.electronics.design@21:1/5 to All on Mon Sep 18 14:26:59 2023
    With an archive dating back to 1999, the Analog Design Journal brings decades of deep, technical expertise, where you're sure to find an answer to your latest (or oldest) design question. Search the full archive of these quality technical articles.

    https://www.ti.com/design-development/analog-design-journal.html

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to All on Mon Sep 18 21:36:36 2023
    On Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 7:27:05 AM UTC+10, sci.electronics.design wrote:
    With an archive dating back to 1999, the Analog Design Journal brings decades of deep, technical expertise, where you're sure to find an answer to your latest (or oldest) design question. Search the full archive of these quality technical articles.

    https://www.ti.com/design-development/analog-design-journal.html

    They'd be more valuable if the TI Marketing department hadn't been quite so enthusiastic about leaving out important facts that might discourage people from buying TI parts.
    I got bitten early on, and tried to avoid them. They did introduce some nice parts, and at least in one case I got bitten again by the crucial information they'd left out of the data sheet.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Larkin@21:1/5 to bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com on Tue Sep 19 08:44:04 2023
    On Mon, 18 Sep 2023 14:26:59 -0700 (PDT), "sci.electronics.design" <bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

    With an archive dating back to 1999, the Analog Design Journal brings decades of deep, technical expertise, where you're sure to find an answer to your latest (or oldest) design question. Search the full archive of these quality technical articles.

    https://www.ti.com/design-development/analog-design-journal.html

    Thanks. There are a few cool things there.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Rid@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Tue Sep 19 14:34:48 2023
    John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> Wrote in message:r
    On Mon, 18 Sep 2023 14:26:59 -0700 (PDT), "sci.electronics.design"<bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:>With an archive dating back to 1999, the Analog Design Journal brings decades of deep, technical expertise, where you're sure to find an answer
    to your latest (or oldest) design question. Search the full archive of these quality technical articles.>>https://www.ti.com/design-development/analog-design-journal.htmlThanks. There are a few cool things there.

    The active clamp, that looks like the idea floated here some years
    ago by Genome
    He disappeared shortly after.

    Cheers
    --


    ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Fred Bloggs@21:1/5 to Anthony William Sloman on Tue Sep 19 15:26:45 2023
    On Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 12:36:40 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 7:27:05 AM UTC+10, sci.electronics.design wrote:
    With an archive dating back to 1999, the Analog Design Journal brings decades of deep, technical expertise, where you're sure to find an answer to your latest (or oldest) design question. Search the full archive of these quality technical articles.

    https://www.ti.com/design-development/analog-design-journal.html
    They'd be more valuable if the TI Marketing department hadn't been quite so enthusiastic about leaving out important facts that might discourage people from buying TI parts.
    I got bitten early on, and tried to avoid them. They did introduce some nice parts, and at least in one case I got bitten again by the crucial information they'd left out of the data sheet.

    Looks like they spent a lot of effort producing low cost alternatives of parts they duplicated from the originating semi- house. Dunno why they bought Burr-Brown after they duplicated their whole line.


    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Fred Bloggs on Tue Sep 19 21:39:25 2023
    On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 8:26:49 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
    On Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 12:36:40 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 7:27:05 AM UTC+10, sci.electronics.design wrote:
    With an archive dating back to 1999, the Analog Design Journal brings decades of deep, technical expertise, where you're sure to find an answer to your latest (or oldest) design question. Search the full archive of these quality technical articles.

    https://www.ti.com/design-development/analog-design-journal.html
    They'd be more valuable if the TI Marketing department hadn't been quite so enthusiastic about leaving out important facts that might discourage people from buying TI parts.
    I got bitten early on, and tried to avoid them. They did introduce some nice parts, and at least in one case I got bitten again by the crucial information they'd left out of the data sheet.

    Looks like they spent a lot of effort producing low cost alternatives of parts they duplicated from the originating semi- house. Dunno why they bought Burr-Brown after they duplicated their whole line.

    As part of my first industrial job I had to write company standard data sheets so we could buy low end op amps from different manufacturers.

    I end up freezing out TI for some parts because their data sheets failed to guarantee crucial performance parameters. Their parts mostly worked, but they clearly didn't test them, and we would have had no comeback if some of them hadn't worked. A cheap
    part stops being cheap if you have to rip it out and replace it to get the performance that you promised.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Fred Bloggs@21:1/5 to Anthony William Sloman on Wed Sep 20 09:29:05 2023
    On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 12:39:30 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 8:26:49 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
    On Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 12:36:40 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 7:27:05 AM UTC+10, sci.electronics.design wrote:
    With an archive dating back to 1999, the Analog Design Journal brings decades of deep, technical expertise, where you're sure to find an answer to your latest (or oldest) design question. Search the full archive of these quality technical
    articles.

    https://www.ti.com/design-development/analog-design-journal.html
    They'd be more valuable if the TI Marketing department hadn't been quite so enthusiastic about leaving out important facts that might discourage people from buying TI parts.
    I got bitten early on, and tried to avoid them. They did introduce some nice parts, and at least in one case I got bitten again by the crucial information they'd left out of the data sheet.

    Looks like they spent a lot of effort producing low cost alternatives of parts they duplicated from the originating semi- house. Dunno why they bought Burr-Brown after they duplicated their whole line.
    As part of my first industrial job I had to write company standard data sheets so we could buy low end op amps from different manufacturers.

    I end up freezing out TI for some parts because their data sheets failed to guarantee crucial performance parameters. Their parts mostly worked, but they clearly didn't test them, and we would have had no comeback if some of them hadn't worked. A cheap
    part stops being cheap if you have to rip it out and replace it to get the performance that you promised.

    Isn't it standard practice for electronic systems OEM's to have a test systems division to test every bit of their incoming components?



    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Fred Bloggs on Thu Sep 21 00:07:09 2023
    On Thursday, September 21, 2023 at 2:29:12 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
    On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 12:39:30 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 8:26:49 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
    On Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 12:36:40 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 7:27:05 AM UTC+10, sci.electronics.design wrote:
    With an archive dating back to 1999, the Analog Design Journal brings decades of deep, technical expertise, where you're sure to find an answer to your latest (or oldest) design question. Search the full archive of these quality technical
    articles.

    https://www.ti.com/design-development/analog-design-journal.html
    They'd be more valuable if the TI Marketing department hadn't been quite so enthusiastic about leaving out important facts that might discourage people from buying TI parts.
    I got bitten early on, and tried to avoid them. They did introduce some nice parts, and at least in one case I got bitten again by the crucial information they'd left out of the data sheet.

    Looks like they spent a lot of effort producing low cost alternatives of parts they duplicated from the originating semi- house. Dunno why they bought Burr-Brown after they duplicated their whole line.
    As part of my first industrial job I had to write company standard data sheets so we could buy low end op amps from different manufacturers.

    I end up freezing out TI for some parts because their data sheets failed to guarantee crucial performance parameters. Their parts mostly worked, but they clearly didn't test them, and we would have had no comeback if some of them hadn't worked. A
    cheap part stops being cheap if you have to rip it out and replace it to get the performance that you promised.

    Isn't it standard practice for electronic systems OEM's to have a test systems division to test every bit of their incoming components?

    It wasn't back then. Test gear costs money, and high-throughput test gear is even more expensive.

    Even Linear Technology had items on their data sheets marked "guaranteed by design - not tested".

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Larkin@21:1/5 to bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com on Thu Sep 21 07:06:33 2023
    On Wed, 20 Sep 2023 09:29:05 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs <bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 12:39:30?AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 8:26:49?AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
    On Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 12:36:40?AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 7:27:05?AM UTC+10, sci.electronics.design wrote:
    With an archive dating back to 1999, the Analog Design Journal brings decades of deep, technical expertise, where you're sure to find an answer to your latest (or oldest) design question. Search the full archive of these quality technical
    articles.

    https://www.ti.com/design-development/analog-design-journal.html
    They'd be more valuable if the TI Marketing department hadn't been quite so enthusiastic about leaving out important facts that might discourage people from buying TI parts.
    I got bitten early on, and tried to avoid them. They did introduce some nice parts, and at least in one case I got bitten again by the crucial information they'd left out of the data sheet.

    Looks like they spent a lot of effort producing low cost alternatives of parts they duplicated from the originating semi- house. Dunno why they bought Burr-Brown after they duplicated their whole line.
    As part of my first industrial job I had to write company standard data sheets so we could buy low end op amps from different manufacturers.

    I end up freezing out TI for some parts because their data sheets failed to guarantee crucial performance parameters. Their parts mostly worked, but they clearly didn't test them, and we would have had no comeback if some of them hadn't worked. A
    cheap part stops being cheap if you have to rip it out and replace it to get the performance that you promised.

    Isn't it standard practice for electronic systems OEM's to have a test systems division to test every bit of their incoming components?



    No. That would be incredibly difficult and expensive.

    Parts are amazingly good nowadays, if you buy them from dependable
    suppliers, like TI.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Larkin@21:1/5 to All on Thu Sep 21 07:54:32 2023
    On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 07:06:33 -0700, John Larkin <jl@997arbor.com>
    wrote:

    On Wed, 20 Sep 2023 09:29:05 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs ><bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 12:39:30?AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 8:26:49?AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: >>> > On Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 12:36:40?AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 7:27:05?AM UTC+10, sci.electronics.design wrote:
    With an archive dating back to 1999, the Analog Design Journal brings decades of deep, technical expertise, where you're sure to find an answer to your latest (or oldest) design question. Search the full archive of these quality technical
    articles.

    https://www.ti.com/design-development/analog-design-journal.html
    They'd be more valuable if the TI Marketing department hadn't been quite so enthusiastic about leaving out important facts that might discourage people from buying TI parts.
    I got bitten early on, and tried to avoid them. They did introduce some nice parts, and at least in one case I got bitten again by the crucial information they'd left out of the data sheet.

    Looks like they spent a lot of effort producing low cost alternatives of parts they duplicated from the originating semi- house. Dunno why they bought Burr-Brown after they duplicated their whole line.
    As part of my first industrial job I had to write company standard data sheets so we could buy low end op amps from different manufacturers.

    I end up freezing out TI for some parts because their data sheets failed to guarantee crucial performance parameters. Their parts mostly worked, but they clearly didn't test them, and we would have had no comeback if some of them hadn't worked. A
    cheap part stops being cheap if you have to rip it out and replace it to get the performance that you promised.

    Isn't it standard practice for electronic systems OEM's to have a test systems division to test every bit of their incoming components?



    No. That would be incredibly difficult and expensive.

    Parts are amazingly good nowadays, if you buy them from dependable
    suppliers, like TI.

    Actually, we recently had some products fail in final test because
    some SSRs had unexpected off leakage. Only a per cent or so of SSRs
    had the high leakage... definitely two categories, pA or nA leakages.

    We had to de-reel the parts and test them by hand, and keep a bin full
    of tested parts around. When a channel fails automated test, we
    replace all the SSRs in that channel.

    We could have built boards from all tested parts, but we'd have to
    de-reel, test, and re-reel the parts, which could be done if the
    failure rate were higher.

    Possibly the pick-and-place could pick up loose tested parts from a
    tray so we wouldn't have to re-reel.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From boB@21:1/5 to All on Thu Sep 21 11:19:18 2023
    On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 07:54:32 -0700, John Larkin <jl@997arbor.com>
    wrote:

    On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 07:06:33 -0700, John Larkin <jl@997arbor.com>
    wrote:

    On Wed, 20 Sep 2023 09:29:05 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs >><bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 12:39:30?AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 8:26:49?AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: >>>> > On Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 12:36:40?AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 7:27:05?AM UTC+10, sci.electronics.design wrote:
    With an archive dating back to 1999, the Analog Design Journal brings decades of deep, technical expertise, where you're sure to find an answer to your latest (or oldest) design question. Search the full archive of these quality technical
    articles.

    https://www.ti.com/design-development/analog-design-journal.html >>>> > > They'd be more valuable if the TI Marketing department hadn't been quite so enthusiastic about leaving out important facts that might discourage people from buying TI parts.
    I got bitten early on, and tried to avoid them. They did introduce some nice parts, and at least in one case I got bitten again by the crucial information they'd left out of the data sheet.

    Looks like they spent a lot of effort producing low cost alternatives of parts they duplicated from the originating semi- house. Dunno why they bought Burr-Brown after they duplicated their whole line.
    As part of my first industrial job I had to write company standard data sheets so we could buy low end op amps from different manufacturers.

    I end up freezing out TI for some parts because their data sheets failed to guarantee crucial performance parameters. Their parts mostly worked, but they clearly didn't test them, and we would have had no comeback if some of them hadn't worked. A
    cheap part stops being cheap if you have to rip it out and replace it to get the performance that you promised.

    Isn't it standard practice for electronic systems OEM's to have a test systems division to test every bit of their incoming components?



    No. That would be incredibly difficult and expensive.

    Parts are amazingly good nowadays, if you buy them from dependable >>suppliers, like TI.

    Actually, we recently had some products fail in final test because
    some SSRs had unexpected off leakage. Only a per cent or so of SSRs
    had the high leakage... definitely two categories, pA or nA leakages.

    We had to de-reel the parts and test them by hand, and keep a bin full
    of tested parts around. When a channel fails automated test, we
    replace all the SSRs in that channel.

    We could have built boards from all tested parts, but we'd have to
    de-reel, test, and re-reel the parts, which could be done if the
    failure rate were higher.

    Possibly the pick-and-place could pick up loose tested parts from a
    tray so we wouldn't have to re-reel.


    Even TI has their problem parts now and then

    boB

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Larkin@21:1/5 to boB on Thu Sep 21 11:24:34 2023
    On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 11:19:18 -0700, boB <boB@K7IQ.com> wrote:

    On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 07:54:32 -0700, John Larkin <jl@997arbor.com>
    wrote:

    On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 07:06:33 -0700, John Larkin <jl@997arbor.com>
    wrote:

    On Wed, 20 Sep 2023 09:29:05 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs >>><bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 12:39:30?AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 8:26:49?AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: >>>>> > On Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 12:36:40?AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 7:27:05?AM UTC+10, sci.electronics.design wrote:
    With an archive dating back to 1999, the Analog Design Journal brings decades of deep, technical expertise, where you're sure to find an answer to your latest (or oldest) design question. Search the full archive of these quality technical
    articles.

    https://www.ti.com/design-development/analog-design-journal.html >>>>> > > They'd be more valuable if the TI Marketing department hadn't been quite so enthusiastic about leaving out important facts that might discourage people from buying TI parts.
    I got bitten early on, and tried to avoid them. They did introduce some nice parts, and at least in one case I got bitten again by the crucial information they'd left out of the data sheet.

    Looks like they spent a lot of effort producing low cost alternatives of parts they duplicated from the originating semi- house. Dunno why they bought Burr-Brown after they duplicated their whole line.
    As part of my first industrial job I had to write company standard data sheets so we could buy low end op amps from different manufacturers.

    I end up freezing out TI for some parts because their data sheets failed to guarantee crucial performance parameters. Their parts mostly worked, but they clearly didn't test them, and we would have had no comeback if some of them hadn't worked. A
    cheap part stops being cheap if you have to rip it out and replace it to get the performance that you promised.

    Isn't it standard practice for electronic systems OEM's to have a test systems division to test every bit of their incoming components?



    No. That would be incredibly difficult and expensive.

    Parts are amazingly good nowadays, if you buy them from dependable >>>suppliers, like TI.

    Actually, we recently had some products fail in final test because
    some SSRs had unexpected off leakage. Only a per cent or so of SSRs
    had the high leakage... definitely two categories, pA or nA leakages.

    We had to de-reel the parts and test them by hand, and keep a bin full
    of tested parts around. When a channel fails automated test, we
    replace all the SSRs in that channel.

    We could have built boards from all tested parts, but we'd have to
    de-reel, test, and re-reel the parts, which could be done if the
    failure rate were higher.

    Possibly the pick-and-place could pick up loose tested parts from a
    tray so we wouldn't have to re-reel.


    Even TI has their problem parts now and then

    boB

    Sure. I should start a web site, icbugs.com. But it would be tough to
    get advertisers.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)