Connect with us

Replacement CIC parts

Discussion in 'Electronic Components' started by Steve, Jun 1, 2007.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. Steve

    Steve Guest

    I'm trying to find some replacement op-amps for an old 810T
    oscillator, made by California Instruments Co.

    The original part numbers are
    CIC 200-1, CIC 200-2, & CIC 200-5

    MFG stated they haven't been sold in 20 years, no info or replacements

    The circuit itself is just a low frequency stable amplitude oscillator
    that outputs 400Hz at 5.000VRMS, so no RF or HF signals to worry

    The supply rails for the amplifiers are +15 & -15VDC.

    The ICs for the most part seem to have the standard pinout of an 8 pin
    op-amp, pin 4 is V-, pin 7 is V+, pin 6 is output, pins 2 is inverting
    input, pin 3 is non-inverting input. The other pins are what are
    unknown to me.

    On all of the ic's, they have a resistor and capacitor in series
    between pins 1 & 8, and a capacitor between 5 & 6. All resistors in
    this chain are 1.5k, the capacitors change for each circuit. In the
    theory section, it states these are for high-frequency roll-off to
    stabilize the ic.

    The CIC 200-1 is for the Wien Bridge Oscillator. The CIC 200-2 is
    used for the Mosfet Modulator (uses a depletion mode Mosfet to reduce
    signal and keep amplitude stable), Bandpass Filter, Output amplifier,
    and Error Integrator. The CIC 200-5 is used for the AC/DC converter.

    The MFG only stated that these components were "selected", so I don't
    know what the different part numbers pertain to.

    So, I'm trying to find a generic IC that should work for this unit.

    All thoughts appreciated, and I can give more info if needed.

    Steve Kamego
  2. Piotr Piatek

    Piotr Piatek Guest

    They look like the external components used to frequency comensate the
    uA709 operational amplifier.

  3. Brian

    Brian Guest

    FEDLOG (DOD Parts database) lists the CIC200-2 as a MC1709G (709 Op
    amp), selected for 10uV drift per degree Celcius. The other two
    aren't listed.

  4. Steve

    Steve Guest

    Thanks to both of you, I'll try to put a 709 in on Monday. I doubt
    the other two are too different.

    Thanks again,
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