Gate-Mania
Tbag
Posts: 31
Hey folks,
I am an avid SX user but I have a design I want to implement in this case without the SX. I have a 12bit binary counter from ON semiconductor running at 40 KHz. I want to tap the binary numbers decimal equivalent to 125, 126, 127 (1111101, 1111110, 1111111 respectively) to a gate so that when those numbers occur, it will output a HI signal. My rudimentary approach will be to cascade each bit into logic gates but that creates a lot of gates! For example 1111111 would require 7 gates (about). Before i know it I need about 20 or so gates. Does anyone know a more efficient design? My TTL cookbook wasn;t very helpful for this.
Mr. T
I am an avid SX user but I have a design I want to implement in this case without the SX. I have a 12bit binary counter from ON semiconductor running at 40 KHz. I want to tap the binary numbers decimal equivalent to 125, 126, 127 (1111101, 1111110, 1111111 respectively) to a gate so that when those numbers occur, it will output a HI signal. My rudimentary approach will be to cascade each bit into logic gates but that creates a lot of gates! For example 1111111 would require 7 gates (about). Before i know it I need about 20 or so gates. Does anyone know a more efficient design? My TTL cookbook wasn;t very helpful for this.
Mr. T
Comments
http://www.jameco.com/wcsstore/Jameco/Products/ProdDS/46113.pdf
·
Sure, use an SX........... only requires one (gate) package.
Cheers,
Peter (pjv)
PJV...hmmm...doing video with the SX are we?
Sorry, I hope you did not take me too sarcastically, as I had not intended it that way, and I apologize if I offended you.
The point I was trying to make was: if you don't like the solution that uses multiple chips, then why on earth would you NOT use an SX, especially if you are an "avid SX user".
I just don't understand why you would not go for what appears to me to be the absolute optimum solution..........perhaps if you had explained we would not be so mistified.
If it's the coding (and I doubt thats the case) I'd be happy to help you; this task is VERY simple.
Cheers,
Peter (pjv)
Thoughts Peter?
Mr. Tbag
Post Edited (Tbag) : 1/18/2006 5:01:34 AM GMT
Well, there's no point feeling guilty about underutilizing the SX if other issues such as size, convenience, external component count, cost etc. are best served by its use. After all, should we feel guilty while an idle processor sits in a loop, effectively doing NOP's?.............. I mean all those wasted cycles! But the good thing is it's got an un-ending supply of them so the word "waste" is really not meaningful.
OK, so much for philosophizing, now to work!
So if the task is to repeatedly activate (presumably power) the transducer for 3 counts out of a 12 bit counter, this is simple for an SX, and possiby all that is required is a transistor to gate the transducer "on", or possibly to apply power to the transducer for that period.
If you could give some further details about how the transducer needs to be powered/activated I'm sure we can help, or better yet, guide you in how to accomplish this.
Also could you specify the stability and current requirement of the power supply; the SX can possibly also handle the regulation of the 9 Volts for you.
As far as programming commercial quantities goes, it's no different than for prototyping unless you have thousands to do.
Cheers,
Peter (pjv)
1. Build AND gates using Resistor Diode Logic or Resistor Transistor Logic.
2. PAL or GAL - cost is similar to SX and you need to have someone program it.
3. Use an EPROM with the outputs of the counter as the input to the address lines - cost is similar to SX.
I have used all these options at one time or another. These days I use a microcontroller for almost everything. Even as a 555 replacement.