1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

OT - 40 years of 5 volt TTL logic

Discussion in 'Embedded' started by Jim Stewart, Oct 12, 2011.

  1. Jim Stewart

    Jim Stewart Guest

    It occurred to me that it's been 40 years to
    the month since I wired together my first
    TTL circuit. Hard to believe its still around.
     
    Jim Stewart, Oct 12, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Jim Stewart

    Don Y Guest

    Hi Jim,

    On 10/12/2011 10:12 AM, Jim Stewart wrote:
    > It occurred to me that it's been 40 years to
    > the month since I wired together my first
    > TTL circuit. Hard to believe its still around.


    <grin> I get annoyed at how much "tarnish"
    accumulates on the pins over the years...

    ("Time to go polish the TTL...")
     
    Don Y, Oct 12, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Jim Stewart

    Jon Kirwan Guest

    On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:12:04 -0700, Jim Stewart
    <> wrote:

    >It occurred to me that it's been 40 years to
    >the month since I wired together my first
    >TTL circuit. Hard to believe its still around.


    That would be about right for me, too! I think that was the
    year, 1971, when I got my TI databook on the 7400/5400
    series.

    And yes, TTL in the form of LS, S, AS, ALS, and F still
    survives. Does anyone still use/provide the original?

    not to mention ... AC, ACT, HC, HCT, AHCT ...

    Jon
     
    Jon Kirwan, Oct 12, 2011
    #3
  4. Jim Stewart

    Tim Wescott Guest

    On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:12:04 -0700, Jim Stewart wrote:

    > It occurred to me that it's been 40 years to the month since I wired
    > together my first TTL circuit. Hard to believe its still around.


    It occurs to me that I just used a knife to cut a frayed end off of a
    belt that I'm resizing.

    Some technologies do persist, TTL logic has a way to go before it 'edges'
    out blades.

    --
    www.wescottdesign.com
     
    Tim Wescott, Oct 12, 2011
    #4
  5. Jim Stewart

    Jon Kirwan Guest

    On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:18:24 -0700, Don Y <>
    wrote:

    >Hi Jim,
    >
    >On 10/12/2011 10:12 AM, Jim Stewart wrote:
    >> It occurred to me that it's been 40 years to
    >> the month since I wired together my first
    >> TTL circuit. Hard to believe its still around.

    >
    ><grin> I get annoyed at how much "tarnish"
    >accumulates on the pins over the years...
    >
    >("Time to go polish the TTL...")


    Now that is funny and so true!

    Jon
     
    Jon Kirwan, Oct 12, 2011
    #5
  6. Jon Kirwan <> writes:

    > On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:12:04 -0700, Jim Stewart
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>It occurred to me that it's been 40 years to
    >>the month since I wired together my first
    >>TTL circuit. Hard to believe its still around.

    >
    > That would be about right for me, too! I think that was the
    > year, 1971, when I got my TI databook on the 7400/5400
    > series.
    >
    > And yes, TTL in the form of LS, S, AS, ALS, and F still
    > survives. Does anyone still use/provide the original?


    Seems to be still widely available - and in use too by the look of it!

    <http://www.findchips.com/avail?part=sn7400>

    > not to mention ... AC, ACT, HC, HCT, AHCT ...


    HC is still very useful. I still design it into new products. 74HC595
    and 74HC165 are unbeatable as low cost "I/O expanders", converting 3
    microcontroller pins into an unlimited number of switched I/Os at
    negligible cost.

    The Tinylogic style single gates are useful as "non-logic" components
    too, especially in the newer families like LVC, AUP. I use them for gate
    drivers, oscillators, PWM circuits etc.

    --

    John Devereux
     
    John Devereux, Oct 12, 2011
    #6
  7. On Oct 13, 6:12 am, Jim Stewart <> wrote:
    > It occurred to me that it's been 40 years to
    > the month since I wired together my first
    > TTL circuit.  Hard to believe its still around.


    - and 5V is making something of a come back too :)
    Wide supply is now common to see, not just in Logic, but also in
    Microcontrollers and RAM.

    Of course, you can also grumble about how LITTLE TTL/CMOS series
    devices have changed, and how generic standards lock us into generic
    parts.

    As an example, I was looking for a simple, selectable divider
    recently.
    Sadly, because the original 4020/40/60 designer did not think of
    adding a Mux, no one has done so since...

    -jg
     
    Jim Granville, Oct 12, 2011
    #7
  8. Jim Stewart

    Mel Guest

    John Devereux wrote:
    > Jon Kirwan <> writes:
    >> And yes, TTL in the form of LS, S, AS, ALS, and F still
    >> survives. Does anyone still use/provide the original?

    >
    > Seems to be still widely available - and in use too by the look of it!
    >
    > <http://www.findchips.com/avail?part=sn7400>
    >
    >> not to mention ... AC, ACT, HC, HCT, AHCT ...


    It's the latest thing with the kids:
    <http://dangerousprototypes.com/category/7400-contest/>

    Mel.
     
    Mel, Oct 12, 2011
    #8
  9. Jim Stewart wrote:

    > It occurred to me that it's been 40 years to
    > the month since I wired together my first
    > TTL circuit. Hard to believe its still around.


    It made a nicer, more compact product than the Mullard Norbit I was using
    before moving over to TTL (probably around the same time as yourself).
    Before Norbit we had discrete RTL circuits. Aahhhhh; Memories!!!!

    --
    ********************************************************************
    Paul E. Bennett...............<email://>
    Forth based HIDECS Consultancy
    Mob: +44 (0)7811-639972
    Tel: +44 (0)1235-510979
    Going Forth Safely ..... EBA. www.electric-boat-association.org.uk..
    ********************************************************************
     
    Paul E. Bennett, Oct 12, 2011
    #9
  10. Jim Stewart

    Don McKenzie Guest

    On 13-Oct-11 4:12 AM, Jim Stewart wrote:
    > It occurred to me that it's been 40 years to
    > the month since I wired together my first
    > TTL circuit. Hard to believe its still around.


    I remember when we got a device in 1974, and it was marked with batch YearYear/WeekWeek, you could end up with for
    example, a 7406 marked 7406 twice because of the naming and batch convention.

    many a wrong IC was selected by newbies who didn't understand.

    Cheers Don...

    ===============


    --
    Don McKenzie

    Dontronics Site Map: http://www.dontronics.com/sitemap
    E-Mail Contact Page: http://www.dontronics.com/email
    Web Camera Page: http://www.dontronics.com/webcam
    No More Damn Spam: http://www.dontronics.com/spam

    New MMBasic Computer http://www.TheMaximiteComputer.com

    These products will reduce in price by 5% every month:
    http://www.dontronics-shop.com/minus-5-every-month.html
    http://www.dontronics-shop.com/ics.html

    Bare Proto PCB for PIC or AVR projects?
    "I'd buy that for a Dollar!".
    http://www.dontronics-shop.com/simmstick-fifteen-years-on.html
     
    Don McKenzie, Oct 12, 2011
    #10
  11. Jim Stewart

    Jim Stewart Guest

    Don McKenzie wrote:
    > On 13-Oct-11 4:12 AM, Jim Stewart wrote:
    >> It occurred to me that it's been 40 years to
    >> the month since I wired together my first
    >> TTL circuit. Hard to believe its still around.

    >
    > I remember when we got a device in 1974, and it was marked with batch
    > YearYear/WeekWeek, you could end up with for example, a 7406 marked 7406
    > twice because of the naming and batch convention.
    >
    > many a wrong IC was selected by newbies who didn't understand.


    I remember those dark times....

    > Cheers Don...
    >
    > ===============
    >
    >
     
    Jim Stewart, Oct 12, 2011
    #11
  12. Jim Stewart

    dp Guest

    On Oct 13, 1:07 am, Don McKenzie <5...@2.5A> wrote:
    > On 13-Oct-11 4:12 AM, Jim Stewart wrote:
    >
    > > It occurred to me that it's been 40 years to
    > > the month since I wired together my first
    > > TTL circuit. Hard to believe its still around.

    >
    > I remember when we got a device in 1974, and it was marked with batch YearYear/WeekWeek, you could end up with for
    > example, a 7406 marked 7406 twice because of the naming and batch convention.


    Perhaps 5-6 years later when I got to use these things - and Bulgaria
    being under the then Soviet block it was often easier to get Soviet
    equivalents.
    Their naming conventions were Cyrillic, of course - which made things
    look funny, somehow too native (Cyrillic is the Bulgarian alphabet)
    where it did not belong or sort of.
    But on top of that what a taste for unpronounceable, ugly sounding
    character combinations did they have ...
    Yet they used to work reasonably well, OK, failed more than the "true"
    parts but at an acceptable rate.

    Dimiter

    ------------------------------------------------------
    Dimiter Popoff Transgalactic Instruments

    http://www.tgi-sci.com
    ------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/didi_tgi/sets/72157600228621276/
     
    dp, Oct 13, 2011
    #12
  13. Jim Stewart

    Paul Guest

    In article <>, says...
    >
    > Jon Kirwan <> writes:
    >
    > > On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:12:04 -0700, Jim Stewart
    > > <> wrote:
    > >
    > >>It occurred to me that it's been 40 years to
    > >>the month since I wired together my first
    > >>TTL circuit. Hard to believe its still around.

    > >
    > > That would be about right for me, too! I think that was the
    > > year, 1971, when I got my TI databook on the 7400/5400
    > > series.
    > >
    > > And yes, TTL in the form of LS, S, AS, ALS, and F still
    > > survives. Does anyone still use/provide the original?

    >
    > Seems to be still widely available - and in use too by the look of it!
    >
    > <http://www.findchips.com/avail?part=sn7400>
    >
    > > not to mention ... AC, ACT, HC, HCT, AHCT ...

    >
    > HC is still very useful. I still design it into new products. 74HC595
    > and 74HC165 are unbeatable as low cost "I/O expanders", converting 3
    > microcontroller pins into an unlimited number of switched I/Os at
    > negligible cost.


    Likewise *245 and *574 for buffers to oustide world or voltage domains
    rather blow a cheap TTL than the FPGA.

    AHC594 for simple cascadable SPI driven n-bit port, with latched o/p.

    Just done a new designs with AHC138 and some FETs for banks of relay
    decode. Only logic on the cards.

    > The Tinylogic style single gates are useful as "non-logic" components
    > too, especially in the newer families like LVC, AUP. I use them for gate
    > drivers, oscillators, PWM circuits etc.


    All over the place likewise for similar reasons. One case used an
    inverter between two relays for creating changeover configuration
    to cope with mechanical and other constraints of relays.


    --
    Paul Carpenter |
    <http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/> PC Services
    <http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/fonts/> Timing Diagram Font
    <http://www.gnuh8.org.uk/> GNU H8 - compiler & Renesas H8/H8S/H8 Tiny
    <http://www.badweb.org.uk/> For those web sites you hate
     
    Paul, Oct 13, 2011
    #13
  14. Jim Stewart

    Ivan Shmakov Guest

    >>>>> dp <> writes:
    >>>>> On Oct 13, 1:07 am, Don McKenzie <5...@2.5A> wrote:
    >>>>> On 13-Oct-11 4:12 AM, Jim Stewart wrote:


    >>> It occurred to me that it's been 40 years to the month since I
    >>> wired together my first TTL circuit. Hard to believe its still
    >>> around.


    >> I remember when we got a device in 1974, and it was marked with
    >> batch YearYear/WeekWeek, you could end up with for example, a 7406
    >> marked 7406 twice because of the naming and batch convention.


    > Perhaps 5-6 years later when I got to use these things - and Bulgaria
    > being under the then Soviet block it was often easier to get Soviet
    > equivalents.


    > Their naming conventions were Cyrillic, of course - which made things
    > look funny, somehow too native (Cyrillic is the Bulgarian alphabet)
    > where it did not belong or sort of.


    > But on top of that what a taste for unpronounceable, ugly sounding
    > character combinations did they have ...


    Huh? Any specific example, please?

    I know that the conventions have changed at least (and probably
    exactly) once since these times (and I guess that I've never
    seen an IC marked the old way), but I've never seen a part with
    a mark that I could describe as “ugly.†(Unpronounceable — yes,
    but I don't think that HC or LS is any better.)

    > Yet they used to work reasonably well, OK, failed more than the
    > "true" parts but at an acceptable rate.


    --
    FSF associate member #7257
     
    Ivan Shmakov, Oct 14, 2011
    #14
  15. Ivan Shmakov wrote:

    >>>>>>dp <> writes:


    > > Their naming conventions were Cyrillic, of course - which made things
    > > look funny, somehow too native (Cyrillic is the Bulgarian alphabet)
    > > where it did not belong or sort of.

    >
    > > But on top of that what a taste for unpronounceable, ugly sounding
    > > character combinations did they have ...

    >
    > Huh? Any specific example, please?


    K2ЖÐ242
    КРЕÐ5A
    K1111XЛ1


    > I know that the conventions have changed at least (and probably
    > exactly) once since these times (and I guess that I've never
    > seen an IC marked the old way), but I've never seen a part with
    > a mark that I could describe as “ugly.†(Unpronounceable — yes,
    > but I don't think that HC or LS is any better.)


    One good thing about soviet part naming system was that parts of similar
    classes had similar alphanumeric indexes. In the West, each company has
    part numbering system of their own.

    > > Yet they used to work reasonably well, OK, failed more than the
    > > "true" parts but at an acceptable rate.


    The quality was very dependent on particular manufacturing plant. Moscow
    and Minsk were good, Abovyan - sucks, others - watch for the
    manufacturing date. Made in Bulgaria or East Germany were good also. You
    can open a device for repair and immediately tell which parts failed
    just by watching factory marks on ICs.


    Vladimir Vassilevsky
    DSP and Mixed Signal Design Consultant
    http://www.abvolt.com
     
    Vladimir Vassilevsky, Oct 18, 2011
    #15
  16. Jim Stewart

    Ivan Shmakov Guest

    >>>>> Vladimir Vassilevsky <> writes:
    >>>>> Ivan Shmakov wrote:
    >>>>> dp <> writes:


    >>> Their naming conventions were Cyrillic, of course - which made
    >>> things look funny, somehow too native (Cyrillic is the Bulgarian
    >>> alphabet) where it did not belong or sort of.


    >>> But on top of that what a taste for unpronounceable, ugly sounding
    >>> character combinations did they have ...


    >> Huh? Any specific example, please?


    > K2ЖÐ242


    Indeed, this one predates ГОСТ 18682-73. It'd be К224Ð¥Ð2 under
    the latter instead.

    > КРЕÐ5A


    That was just the lack of space to provide the full marking
    (which is КР142ЕÐ5Ð; cf., e. g., 74HC-series IC's in SOIC or
    TSSOP cases), wasn't it? Besides, КРЕРis perfectly
    pronounceable.

    > K1111XЛ1


    Nice.

    >> I know that the conventions have changed at least (and probably
    >> exactly) once since these times (and I guess that I've never seen an
    >> IC marked the old way), but I've never seen a part with a mark that
    >> I could describe as “ugly.†(Unpronounceable — yes, but I don't
    >> think that HC or LS is any better.)


    > One good thing about soviet part naming system was that parts of
    > similar classes had similar alphanumeric indexes. In the West, each
    > company has part numbering system of their own.


    Well, yes, the general purpose (such as, e. g.,: generator,
    amplifier, logic, etc.) marking (a two-letter code, reasonably
    easy to remember) is prescribed by the standard.

    […]

    --
    FSF associate member #7257
     
    Ivan Shmakov, Oct 18, 2011
    #16
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Parts & Stuff
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    319
    Parts & Stuff
    Dec 12, 2003
  2. Parts & Stuff
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    373
  3. Parts & More
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    499
    Parts & More
    Feb 16, 2004
  4. Spehro Pefhany
    Replies:
    26
    Views:
    1,738
  5. Michael Grigoni
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    441
    Michael Grigoni
    May 25, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page