Take a look at this two page "Cheat Sheet" aide memoire from TI: http://www.ti.com/lit/an/slva958/slva958.pdf?&ts=1589892966337 ISO 9xxx whatever plus forcing the customer to interact with marketing early, makes sense to me. SLVA450 ? SNVA364 ? Yet many, many years later I can still remember to search for "The Taming of the Slew" from Jim Williams. Or "XYZs of Oscilloscopes" from Tek. Don't get me started on AD's recent email asking me to search the support forum on an AD633 question. Barrie Gilbert passed on, so I guess they had no one to ask... Steve
why do they do this?
Started by ●May 18, 2020
Reply by ●May 19, 20202020-05-19
Reply by ●May 19, 20202020-05-19
On Tue, 19 May 2020 12:50:44 +0530, Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:>On 5/19/2020 9:31 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >> On Mon, 18 May 2020 17:57:06 -0700 (PDT), >> bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote: >> >>> On Monday, May 18, 2020 at 7:41:34 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote: >>>> 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 ? >>> >>> 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 greater than Vout + 1.5V. >> >> 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. >> >>> The GND current at no load of 35uA, sucks , as does that 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 getting 800mA out of it with any kind voltage headroom without using a liquid nitrogen drip. >>> >> >> 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. >> > >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.Is it stable with low ESR caps? We use polymers or ceramics mostly. We need so many goofy voltages that we usually buy adjustable regulators for stock. The board that I'm doing now has a 24-channel analog mux to BIST the power supplies, using the dreadful Xilinx 1-volt XADC that's inside their FPGAs. Free and worth it.> >> You sure are in a bad mood lately. >> >I've noticed that lately with some regulars here, including a few >who normally exhibit decent manners.Well, some never show any sign of manners. They are repulsive but you've got to feel sorry for them, stuck being around themselves all day. There's a basically perfect -1 correlation between being obnoxious and designing electronics. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc Science teaches us to doubt. Claude Bernard
Reply by ●May 19, 20202020-05-19
On 2020-05-19 09:50, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:> On Tue, 19 May 2020 12:50:44 +0530, Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: > >> On 5/19/2020 9:31 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >>> On Mon, 18 May 2020 17:57:06 -0700 (PDT), >>> bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>>> On Monday, May 18, 2020 at 7:41:34 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote: >>>>> 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 ? >>>> >>>> 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 greater than Vout + 1.5V. >>> >>> 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. >>> >>>> The GND current at no load of 35uA, sucks , as does that 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 getting 800mA out of it with any kind voltage headroom without using a liquid nitrogen drip. >>>> >>> >>> 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. >>> >> >> 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. > > Is it stable with low ESR caps? We use polymers or ceramics mostly. > > We need so many goofy voltages that we usually buy adjustable > regulators for stock. The board that I'm doing now has a 24-channel > analog mux to BIST the power supplies, using the dreadful Xilinx > 1-volt XADC that's inside their FPGAs. Free and worth it. > >> >>> You sure are in a bad mood lately. >>> >> I've noticed that lately with some regulars here, including a few >> who normally exhibit decent manners. > > Well, some never show any sign of manners. They are repulsive but > you've got to feel sorry for them, stuck being around themselves all > day. > > There's a basically perfect -1 correlation between being obnoxious and > designing electronics.Well, now that Jim Thompson is apparently no longer with us. :( He was a bit of a statistical outlier. 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 by ●May 19, 20202020-05-19
On Tue, 19 May 2020 06:46:21 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:>Michael Terrell <terrell.michael.a@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Monday, May 18, 2020 at 7:41:34 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote: >>> 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 ? >> >> >> To track revisions. > >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 > >http://www.ti.com/document-viewer/OPA1622/datasheet > >If you want to save the PDF, you get this really cool file name by default > >opa1622.pdfopa1622_revA.pdf would be even better. We have a nice file name convention for docs and PCBs and software, including working edits and formal revs.> >wow, how did they do it?Just when they were doing so well, they assign silly random number file names to app notes and eval board docs.> >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.I love data sheets like LM9999final.pdf They can never change that! Analog Devices is famous for issuing preliminary data sheets, full of mistakes, and leaving them that way for years. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc Science teaches us to doubt. Claude Bernard
Reply by ●May 19, 20202020-05-19
On Tue, 19 May 2020 00:18:10 -0700 (PDT), Michael Terrell <terrell.michael.a@gmail.com> wrote:>On Tuesday, May 19, 2020 at 2:46:25 AM UTC-4, Cydrome Leader wrote: wrote: >> >> > On Monday, May 18, 2020 at 7:41:34 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote: >> >> 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 ? >> > >> > >> > To track revisions. >> >> 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 >> >> http://www.ti.com/document-viewer/OPA1622/datasheet >> >> 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. > > So, it's better to have all the datasheets by part number? Try keeping multiple versions from one vendor, plus second sources, all with the same file name. Some jellybean parts have dozens of versions of a datasheet.Easy. LM9999_revA.pdf. I rename the meaningless data sheets.> > The head of Engineering at Microdyne was pushing for a new inventory system. 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 1K resistors, and other components had a value of 1002. He wasn't there very long before they fired him.We had a series of very intense/interesting meetings about this. We settled on a telephone-number format, 123-4567 for all parts. We have a document SACRED.TXT that explains all the rules.> > All of our documentation had form numbers, unrelated to the product model numbers. They were filed by model number, but under ISO9001 we had to have traceability for all revisions. One board had 14 versions, and 14 test procedures. 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 datasheets, 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 specified datasheet for the version being tested. It reduced both the test time, and 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 equipment. I am adding the actual document numbers to the file names, not just '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 every Electronics manual I come across.I know of one big company that assigns a 12-digit number to anything. Parts. Products. Drawings. Trucks. Buildings. Employees. I've worked for companies that just assigned the next sequential number to anything. If you know the PCB number, you had to look in the log book to find the schematic. The numbers were totally unrelated. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc Science teaches us to doubt. Claude Bernard
Reply by ●May 19, 20202020-05-19
On Tue, 19 May 2020 14:59:25 +0530, Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:>On 5/19/2020 1:46 PM, Martin Brown wrote: >> On 19/05/2020 02:51, Michael Terrell wrote: >>> On Monday, May 18, 2020 at 7:41:34 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote: >>>> 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 ? >>> >>> To track revisions. >> >> 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.<partno>-01.pdf >> >> And give it a new part number if they overflow the revision level. >> > >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.I have a few of the old databooks that are great. The old TI TTL book, a couple of National and Motorola books, and some discrete data books, with *graphs*. IC data sheets used to include internal schematics. Now you have to test or guess or ask on a forum, so someone else can guess for you. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc Science teaches us to doubt. Claude Bernard
Reply by ●May 19, 20202020-05-19
On Tue, 19 May 2020 06:47:24 -0400, Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:>On 2020-05-19 04:16, Martin Brown wrote: >> On 19/05/2020 02:51, Michael Terrell wrote: >>> On Monday, May 18, 2020 at 7:41:34 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote: >>>> 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 ? >>> >>> To track revisions. >> >> 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.<partno>-01.pdf >> >> And give it a new part number if they overflow the revision level. >> > >I normally rename them to things like > >OPA192_2192_4192_10MHzRRIO_CMOS_Trimmed_LowDriftBuckFifty.pdf > >Cheers > >Phil HobbsWe have a PDATA folder for every part in our inventory system. It gets data sheets, readme files, photos, links, test results, anything we want to remember. Files like DONT_USE.TXT or BAD_BAD.doc -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc Science teaches us to doubt. Claude Bernard
Reply by ●May 19, 20202020-05-19
On Mon, 18 May 2020 23:03:17 -0700, Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:>John Larkin wrote: >> >> 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 ? >> > 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.AMP/Tyco was famous for messing with your head. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc Science teaches us to doubt. Claude Bernard
Reply by ●May 19, 20202020-05-19
On Tue, 19 May 2020 06:11:49 -0700 (PDT), sroberts6328@gmail.com wrote:>Take a look at this two page "Cheat Sheet" aide memoire from TI: > >http://www.ti.com/lit/an/slva958/slva958.pdf?&ts=1589892966337 > >ISO 9xxx whatever plus forcing the customer to interact with marketing early, makes sense to me. SLVA450 ? SNVA364 ? > >Yet many, many years later I can still remember to search for "The Taming of the Slew" from Jim Williams. Or "XYZs of Oscilloscopes" from Tek. > >Don't get me started on AD's recent email asking me to search the support forum on an AD633 question. Barrie Gilbert passed on, so I guess they had no one to ask... > >SteveTI used to divert you to some goofy server to get a data sheet. Now you just click! If you are big enough to deserve the attention of a product support person, they will post your question to a forum for you. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc Science teaches us to doubt. Claude Bernard
Reply by ●May 19, 20202020-05-19
On 5/19/2020 7:20 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:> On Tue, 19 May 2020 12:50:44 +0530, Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: > >> >> 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. > > Is it stable with low ESR caps? We use polymers or ceramics mostly. > > We need so many goofy voltages that we usually buy adjustable > regulators for stock. The board that I'm doing now has a 24-channel > analog mux to BIST the power supplies, using the dreadful Xilinx > 1-volt XADC that's inside their FPGAs. Free and worth it. >I've used them with 1-10uF MLCCs at input and output. No problem so far. https://www.holtek.com/documents/10179/116711/HT75xx-1v250.pdf You may also want to look at their full range of LDOs here https://www.holtek.com/producthome/-/pid/415/460/618
