Connect with us

CA3096 transistor array?

Discussion in 'Electronic Design' started by Chris Carlen, Jun 22, 2006.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. Chris Carlen

    Chris Carlen Guest


    I have a bunch of Intersil CA3096AE left in my drawer in DIP packages.
    I need the same thing in SOIC. I'd like to build an adaptive trigger
    such as the one Linear Technology likes to put in many of their
    comparator datasheets:


    Does one need matched transistors for this, or is their choice of the
    CA3096 just a convenience of packaging, and I could get away with two
    each of 2n3094/2n3096 ?

    Thanks for input.

    Good day!

    Christopher R. Carlen
    Principal Laser&Electronics Technologist
    Sandia National Laboratories CA USA

    NOTE, delete texts: "RemoveThis" and
    "BOGUS" from email address to reply.
  2. Chris Carlen

    Chris Carlen Guest

    Forgot to mention that this part is discontinued.

    Good day!

    Christopher R. Carlen
    Principal Laser&Electronics Technologist
    Sandia National Laboratories CA USA

    NOTE, delete texts: "RemoveThis" and
    "BOGUS" from email address to reply.
  3. Tim Wescott

    Tim Wescott Guest

    I suspect you could use diodes for Q1 and Q3, and any old NPN and PNP
    for Q2 and Q4 -- but Zetex makes matched pairs, which Digi-Key sells.


    Tim Wescott
    Wescott Design Services

    Posting from Google? See

    "Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" came out in April.
    See details at
  4. Tim Wescott wrote...
    This circuit (figure 18), which is said to operate to 45MHz, looks
    like it could well benefit from fast low-capacitance transistors
    for the bipolar peak-follower function. Sadly Intersil no longer
    offers the ca3096, but they do offer the hfa3096, which is a high-
    speed RF-transistor array replacement, featuring three matched
    8GHz NPNs and two matched 5.5GHz PNPs, in a 16-pin soic package,
    available from DigiKey, at $3.18 each. While I do agree with Tim
    that these transistors don't have to be well matched, it certainly
    can't hurt, and will likely extend low-signal-voltage operation.
  5. CC

    CC Guest

    Yeah, I saw those UUHF arrays.

    So the point is, there is nothing *bad* about using the excessively fast

    I guess I was worried about the possibility that such transistors can
    become oscillators in frequency ranges where I wouldn't even be able to
    measure with my lowly 500MHz scope, yet the occurence could manifest as
    peculiar and undesired behavior/malfunction.

    Can one simply add a few pF of collector to base capacitance to make the
    transistors effectively slower if such silliness is suspected?

    I don't know if I really need that adaptive trigger.

    I actually used a much slower version of it once before in a free space
    optical transmission from an engine piston, where the brightness of the
    data was varying with the piston location. It worked quite well.

    I have a simpler application now, just position sensing of a wheel where
    the sensors are in fixed positions. I can tune the gain and align the
    optics to make it work just right. But something about things that have
    to be tuned just right makes me feel unsatisfied.

    Thanks for the input.

    Good day!
  6. CC wrote...
    Well, they're fragile, and subject to ESD damage during handling.

    BTW, they give the spec for a maximum high current, the transistors
    are slower at ordinary currents, for example 5.5 and 2GHz at 1mA.
    Some added base-emitter capacitance, say 1.0pF, might be safer.
    Or you could run them at 100uA (Jim had to bias the old ca3096
    at 2mA to get 45MHz). A well-placed feritte bead usually works.

    I stock and use the attractive Panasonic smd PNP and NPN pairs,
    xn4401 and xn4501. These come in 6-lead 0.95mm sc-74 packages.
    They contain separate 2sb709 or 2sd601 transistors (50V, 50mA,
    80MHz and 150MHz, 3pF), which are not explicitly matched,
    although they probably come from the same wafer.
    Maybe these parts would be a better choice for your application.
  7. Mike Monett

    Mike Monett Guest

    Definitely would not do this, Win. Most parastic oscillators are running as
    a Colpitts using stray capacity and interelectrode capacity as the divider,
    and lead length in the base as the inductor.

    The best bet is to minimize the length of wires connected to the device,
    especially the base. Then always add a 10 to 47 ohm series resistor at the
    base. This will kill bandwidth and risetime, but it's better than a
    parasitic that may come and go with changes in supply voltage, temperature,
    stray hand capacitive effects, etc.

    JL recently mentioned having to add these resistors to a fabricated pcb.
    This can be a pain, so put them in the initial design.


    Mike Monett
  8. Jim Thompson

    Jim Thompson Guest

    On 23 Jun 2006 04:39:17 -0700, Winfield Hill


    Wasn't it the 3046 I used in that example?

    The 3046 is on an absolutely ancient process with emitter sizes of 20u
    X 30u.

    ...Jim Thompson
  9. Jim Thompson wrote...
    Sorry, Jim, I as referring to Jim (Williams, that is).
    His circuit required two each NPN and PNP transistors
    which he specified as in a ca3096 array.
    Yes. What about the ca3096, same story?
  10. CC

    CC Guest

    Ok, thanks for the Panasonic part #s.
  11. Jim Thompson

    Jim Thompson Guest

    I thought you were referring to my video amplifier example.

    ...Jim Thompson
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day