Looking for a cost effective part that is better then the classic 4052 switch. Requirements: Rugged part that can handle being used by hobbyists. Dip package preferred for customer replacement. +/- 12 to 15V rails. TTL Control +/- 5V signal, DC to 3 KHz waveforms. Steve
Good Replacement for 4052 Analog Mux.
Started by ●January 11, 2015
Reply by ●January 11, 20152015-01-11
Better in what way? I can't think of anything that will meet your requirements ("improved" CD4052 but not a CD4052). If not for that last restriction, I would suggest a CD4052. It does exactly what you're asking... Solder some diodes onto the pins to improve ESD? Beats the hell out of me. Sure, there'll be lower resistance, much faster, possibly more ESD resistant devices out there, of similar layout, but they won't be "cost effective". You're looking for a fourth side on a triangle... Tim -- Seven Transistor Labs Electrical Engineering Consultation Website: http://seventransistorlabs.com <sroberts6328@gmail.com> wrote in message news:d3dee0b4-0317-461b-a589-eb0aacc848c1@googlegroups.com...> Looking for a cost effective part that is better then the classic 4052 > switch. > > Requirements: > > Rugged part that can handle being used by hobbyists. > Dip package preferred for customer replacement. > +/- 12 to 15V rails. > TTL Control > +/- 5V signal, DC to 3 KHz waveforms. > > Steve
Reply by ●January 11, 20152015-01-11
On Sun, 11 Jan 2015 18:54:28 -0800 (PST), sroberts6328@gmail.com wrote:>Looking for a cost effective part that is better then the classic 4052 switch. > >Requirements: > >Rugged part that can handle being used by hobbyists. >Dip package preferred for customer replacement. >+/- 12 to 15V rails. >TTL Control >+/- 5V signal, DC to 3 KHz waveforms. > >SteveDG409 -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc picosecond timing laser drivers and controllers jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Reply by ●January 12, 20152015-01-12
On Mon, 12 Jan 2015 12:54:28 +1000, <sroberts6328@gmail.com> wrote:> Looking for a cost effective part that is better then the classic 4052 > switch. > > Requirements: > > Rugged part that can handle being used by hobbyists. > Dip package preferred for customer replacement. > +/- 12 to 15V rails. > TTL Control > +/- 5V signal, DC to 3 KHz waveforms. > > Steve2 x 4052 in parallel?
Reply by ●January 12, 20152015-01-12
4052 is rather mismatched to the original circuit. A previous engineer switched to 4052 and its not doing well. Hence the request for alternatives. Steve
Reply by ●January 12, 20152015-01-12
Could you provide some specs about the circuit itself? Tim -- Seven Transistor Labs Electrical Engineering Consultation Website: http://seventransistorlabs.com <sroberts6328@gmail.com> wrote in message news:74593fcb-2be8-430b-9b57-767445f90939@googlegroups.com...> 4052 is rather mismatched to the original circuit. A previous engineer > switched to 4052 and its not doing well. Hence the request for > alternatives. > > Steve
Reply by ●January 13, 20152015-01-13
On Monday, January 12, 2015 at 11:05:24 PM UTC, srober...@gmail.com wrote:> 4052 is rather mismatched to the original circuit. A previous engineer switched to 4052 and its not doing well. Hence the request for alternatives. > > Steveagain give us a clue as to what way its mismatched
Reply by ●January 23, 20152015-01-23