naming conventions

[Info]

hi all,
there is anybody that can help me to find a pdf manual on naming
conventions...
example 74hct instead 74hc
or 29c020 instead 29f040
thanks

 

[Ken Taylor]

hi all,
there is anybody that can help me to find a pdf manual on naming
conventions...
example 74hct instead 74hc
or 29c020 instead 29f040
thanks

Google on a search term like '+7400 +logic +families'

Ken

 

[Rene Tschaggelar]

hi all,
there is anybody that can help me to find a pdf manual on naming
conventions...
example 74hct instead 74hc
or 29c020 instead 29f040

Hi Info,
74HCT00 and 74HC00 are different families.
29C020 and 29F020 are also likely different families.
Ask the respective manufacturers.

Rene

 

[Info]

Google on a search term like '+7400 +logic +families'

Ken

thanks I've tried,
I'm looking for an extended naming devices document because there is an
international standard for builders,
I've found something at http://www.philipslogic.com/products/naming/ but it
isn't the international standard for naming (like ISO, etc).
other ideas?

 

[Watson A.Name - Watt Sun]

thanks I've tried,
I'm looking for an extended naming devices document because there is an
international standard for builders,
I've found something at http://www.philipslogic.com/products/naming/ but it
isn't the international standard for naming (like ISO, etc).
other ideas?

If you want an EIA or ISO standards document, you have to pay for it.
They aren't cheap.

--
@@F@r@o@m@@O@r@a@n@g@e@@C@o@u@n@t@y@,@@C@a@l@,@@w@h@e@r@e@@
###Got a Question about ELECTRONICS? Check HERE First:###
http://users.pandora.be/educypedia/electronics/databank.htm
My email address is whitelisted. *All* email sent to it
goes directly to the trash unless you add NOSPAM in the
Subject: line with other stuff. alondra101 <at> hotmail.com
Don't be ripped off by the big book dealers. Go to the URL
that will give you a choice and save you money(up to half).
http://www.everybookstore.com You'll be glad you did!
Just when you thought you had all this figured out, the gov't
changed it: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html
@@t@h@e@@a@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@m@e@e@t@@t@h@e@@E@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@

 

[-=Punkrat=-]

thanks I've tried,
I'm looking for an extended naming devices document because there is an
international standard for builders,
I've found something at http://www.philipslogic.com/products/naming/ but it
isn't the international standard for naming (like ISO, etc).
other ideas?

I don't believe that a standard exists for naming
logic & memory. (suchas the JEDEC standard for discretes 1N 2N 3N
and 4N type devices).

In the case of logic nomenclature companies like TI National
Fairchild Philips and others improved the basic 7400 series and
included part number designators to
define the improvements or the choices availables.

7400 std TTL
74S00 Schottky
74LS00 low power Schottky
74ALS00 Advanced low power Schottky
74AS00 Advanced Schottky
74AC00 Advanced CMOS
74ACT00 Advanced CMOS TTL compatible
74F00 Fast

etc etc The commonalities in the part numbers among the main
manufacturers are a sales technique to promote market share and
increase new designs for the manufacturer.

To the best of my knowledge a standards committe doesn't exist to
define functionality and part numbering on either family. That's the
choice of the manufacturer who invents it and the other manufacturers
who cross license the production rights.

PR

 

[Ben Bradley]

In
alt.electronics,sci.electronics,sci.electronics.components,sci.electronics.design,

thanks I've tried,
I'm looking for an extended naming devices document because there is an
international standard for builders,
I've found something at http://www.philipslogic.com/products/naming/ but it
isn't the international standard for naming (like ISO, etc).
other ideas?

There's no "international standard." When a manufacturer came out
with a new family, the manufacturer gave it a new name, and often
other manufacturers followed with their line of (semi)compatible parts
with the same name. It's usually a mnemonic or abbreviation of the
family name. HC is high-speed CMOS, HCT is high-speed CMOS with TTL
I/O voltage levels.
29c020 is surely a CMOS part, and ISTR 29f040 is a Flash part. But
these two are not TTL or considered part of any 'ttl family' so any
'rules' that might apply to 'TTL' type families may not apply here.
Fairchild made 74Fxx where the F is for FAST, some acronym that starts
with Fairchild, and that's a different use of F than in the 29F040.
This was actually an improvement over previous numbering
conventions. The original TTL series started at 7400, the original
CMOS was the 4000 series, there were different ranges of numbers (I
actually forget, which is probably a good thing) for RTL and ECL.
Another possible websearch string might be history of ttl.

 

[Watson A.Name - Watt Sun]

I don't believe that a standard exists for naming
logic & memory. (suchas the JEDEC standard for discretes 1N 2N 3N
and 4N type devices).

In the case of logic nomenclature companies like TI National
Fairchild Philips and others improved the basic 7400 series and
included part number designators to
define the improvements or the choices availables.

7400 std TTL

7400 Is the commercial temperature range. 5400 is the Military
temperature range.

74S00 Schottky
74LS00 low power Schottky
74ALS00 Advanced low power Schottky
74AS00 Advanced Schottky
74AC00 Advanced CMOS
74ACT00 Advanced CMOS TTL compatible
74F00 Fast

I believe all the early 7400 chips were made by TI and were labeled
SN7400, etc. In order to convince govermnents and companies to buy
the chips, a company would have to allow another company to 'second
source' the chips. So National had the DM7400, etc. Perhaps this is
why the 7400 series and its later successors retained and modified
this 'industry standard' naming convention. Sort of a consensus.

etc etc The commonalities in the part numbers among the main
manufacturers are a sales technique to promote market share and
increase new designs for the manufacturer.

To the best of my knowledge a standards committe doesn't exist to
define functionality and part numbering on either family. That's the
choice of the manufacturer who invents it and the other manufacturers
who cross license the production rights.

PR

--
@@F@r@o@m@@O@r@a@n@g@e@@C@o@u@n@t@y@,@@C@a@l@,@@w@h@e@r@e@@
###Got a Question about ELECTRONICS? Check HERE First:###
http://users.pandora.be/educypedia/electronics/databank.htm
My email address is whitelisted. *All* email sent to it
goes directly to the trash unless you add NOSPAM in the
Subject: line with other stuff. alondra101 <at> hotmail.com
Don't be ripped off by the big book dealers. Go to the URL
that will give you a choice and save you money(up to half).
http://www.everybookstore.com You'll be glad you did!
Just when you thought you had all this figured out, the gov't
changed it: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html
@@t@h@e@@a@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@m@e@e@t@@t@h@e@@E@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@

 

[Roy J. Tellason]

In
alt.electronics,sci.electronics,sci.electronics.components,sci.electronics.design,


There's no "international standard." When a manufacturer came out
with a new family, the manufacturer gave it a new name, and often
other manufacturers followed with their line of (semi)compatible parts
with the same name. It's usually a mnemonic or abbreviation of the
family name. HC is high-speed CMOS, HCT is high-speed CMOS with TTL
I/O voltage levels.
29c020 is surely a CMOS part, and ISTR 29f040 is a Flash part. But
these two are not TTL or considered part of any 'ttl family' so any
'rules' that might apply to 'TTL' type families may not apply here.
Fairchild made 74Fxx where the F is for FAST, some acronym that starts
with Fairchild, and that's a different use of F than in the 29F040.
This was actually an improvement over previous numbering
conventions. The original TTL series started at 7400, the original
CMOS was the 4000 series, there were different ranges of numbers (I
actually forget, which is probably a good thing) for RTL and ECL.
Another possible websearch string might be history of ttl.

RTL was 9xx from what I can remember (and no doubt other numbers as well).
And then there's early Motorola TTL, which was 3xxx and 4xxx numbers, just
to keep us good and confused!

And you're forgetting about DTL entirely!

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

RTL was 9xx from what I can remember (and no doubt other numbers as well).
And then there's early Motorola TTL, which was 3xxx and 4xxx numbers, just
to keep us good and confused!

And you're forgetting about DTL entirely!

Motorola's RTL was their 7XX, 8XX, and 9XX series.

 

[Roy J. Tellason]

:

Motorola's RTL was their 7XX, 8XX, and 9XX series.

Really? I never got a hold of any databooks where RTL was concerned (that
was a much harder thing to do back then). Nor DTL, for that matter. Most
of the RTL I ran across was construction articles in hobby-type magazines
that put a "uL" prefix in front of such parts as the 914 -- which is
Fairchild if I'm not mistaken. Also built a couple of kits that used those
parts, though I can't recall what the company (in NYC) was that sold 'em.
They're no doubt gone now, in any case...

 

[Rich Grise]

I remember some Motorola chips that were either RTL or DTL;
I can't remember which; and the numbers were like
M?3??. They ran on 3.6V, I think. But this was a very,
very long time ago. Seems like only a few years after
they had announced the invention of the transistor.

I also STR that RCA came out with some transistor arrays
very early on, with numbers in the 30?? range, but don't
know if anybody still makes the things.

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Keith R. Williams]

Really? I never got a hold of any databooks where RTL was concerned (that
was a much harder thing to do back then).

RTL databooks weren't hard to get. I got them when I was in high
school. THe stuff was a PITA to use though.

Nor DTL, for that matter.

Well, 74LS, 74ALS, and all of that genra are really DTL. ;-)

Most
of the RTL I ran across was construction articles in hobby-type magazines
that put a "uL" prefix in front of such parts as the 914 -- which is
Fairchild if I'm not mistaken.

Yes, uL (logic) or uA (analog) would have been Fairchild.

Also built a couple of kits that used those
parts, though I can't recall what the company (in NYC) was that sold 'em.

I worked for a small company called HAL Electronics (PO box in
Champaign Illinois; Urbana's USPS office didn't have boxes up to 2001
;-). They made HAM equipment (automatic keyers, test equipment, and
such) and used a lot of RTL logic.

They're no doubt gone now, in any case...

All but the (Schottky) DTL. ;-)

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

Really? I never got a hold of any databooks where RTL was concerned (that
was a much harder thing to do back then). Nor DTL, for that matter. Most
of the RTL I ran across was construction articles in hobby-type magazines
that put a "uL" prefix in front of such parts as the 914 -- which is
Fairchild if I'm not mistaken. Also built a couple of kits that used those
parts, though I can't recall what the company (in NYC) was that sold 'em.
They're no doubt gone now, in any case...

Polypaks sold a lot of surplus and reject RTL and DTL chips in the
'70s.

Motorola had the:
MC700 series, rated for +15 to + 55° C for consumer electronics.
MC800 series, rated for 0 to + 75° C for industrial electronics.
MC900 series, rated for -55 to + 125° C for military electronics.

The 1970 Motorola Semiconductor Databook lists 26 different chips,
with most available in all three familes.