Chip with simple program for Toy

On Sunday, September 9, 2007 7:46:02 PM UTC-7, Claude Desjardins wrote:
hillpc@emailaccount.com wrote:
I'm on my second electronic variable speed control inside my Dremel
model 395 tool. This one just crapped out with the same temperamental
symptoms as the last...
Click to expand...

What symptoms?

Just take it apart, I'm pretty sure it's just a "potentiometer"
(variable resistor) so it would only have 3 leads
Click to expand...

No, of course that won't work! What it has, is an SCR/triac light-dimmer
type phase control circuit, followed up by a bridge rectifier into the
DC motor. So, you'd want to ignore the potentiometer
entirely, and wire from the SCR/triac MT1 terminal to the MT2 terminal.

But, those hardly ever go bad; have you cleaned and checked out the brushes, which
DO wear and become intermittent, and have you inspected the
commutator?
 
On 11/9/2014 3:11 PM, whit3rd wrote:
On Sunday, September 9, 2007 7:46:02 PM UTC-7, Claude Desjardins wrote:
hillpc@emailaccount.com wrote:
I'm on my second electronic variable speed control inside my Dremel
model 395 tool. This one just crapped out with the same temperamental
symptoms as the last...

What symptoms?

Just take it apart, I'm pretty sure it's just a "potentiometer"
(variable resistor) so it would only have 3 leads

No, of course that won't work! What it has, is an SCR/triac light-dimmer
type phase control circuit, followed up by a bridge rectifier into the
DC motor. So, you'd want to ignore the potentiometer
entirely, and wire from the SCR/triac MT1 terminal to the MT2 terminal.

But, those hardly ever go bad; have you cleaned and checked out the brushes, which
DO wear and become intermittent, and have you inspected the
commutator?
Click to expand...
I had to replace the variable assembly on mine a few years ago. comes
as one assembly including pot and semiconductors.
I ran the one I owned before that on a variac to control the speed.
Mikek

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
 
On Sun, 09 Nov 2014 13:11:23 -0800, whit3rd wrote:

On Sunday, September 9, 2007 7:46:02 PM UTC-7, Claude Desjardins wrote:
hillpc@emailaccount.com wrote:
I'm on my second electronic variable speed control inside my Dremel
model 395 tool. This one just crapped out with the same
temperamental symptoms as the last...

What symptoms?

Just take it apart, I'm pretty sure it's just a "potentiometer"
(variable resistor) so it would only have 3 leads

No, of course that won't work! What it has, is an SCR/triac
light-dimmer type phase control circuit, followed up by a bridge
rectifier into the DC motor. So, you'd want to ignore the
potentiometer entirely, and wire from the SCR/triac MT1 terminal to the
MT2 terminal.

But, those hardly ever go bad; have you cleaned and checked out the
brushes, which DO wear and become intermittent, and have you inspected
the commutator?
Click to expand...

Why are we paying attention to a post that's over 7 years old?

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com
 
On 11/9/2014 6:24 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
On Sun, 09 Nov 2014 13:11:23 -0800, whit3rd wrote:

On Sunday, September 9, 2007 7:46:02 PM UTC-7, Claude Desjardins wrote:
hillpc@emailaccount.com wrote:
I'm on my second electronic variable speed control inside my Dremel
model 395 tool. This one just crapped out with the same
temperamental symptoms as the last...

What symptoms?

Just take it apart, I'm pretty sure it's just a "potentiometer"
(variable resistor) so it would only have 3 leads

No, of course that won't work! What it has, is an SCR/triac
light-dimmer type phase control circuit, followed up by a bridge
rectifier into the DC motor. So, you'd want to ignore the
potentiometer entirely, and wire from the SCR/triac MT1 terminal to the
MT2 terminal.

But, those hardly ever go bad; have you cleaned and checked out the
brushes, which DO wear and become intermittent, and have you inspected
the commutator?

Why are we paying attention to a post that's over 7 years old?
Click to expand...

I don't know, I responded to the one at 3:11pm.
It does interest me how these are revived, I don't see the OP on my
reader.
How did it get attention again?
Mikek
 
On Sun, 09 Nov 2014 19:29:15 -0600, amdx wrote:

On 11/9/2014 6:24 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
On Sun, 09 Nov 2014 13:11:23 -0800, whit3rd wrote:

On Sunday, September 9, 2007 7:46:02 PM UTC-7, Claude Desjardins
wrote:
hillpc@emailaccount.com wrote:
I'm on my second electronic variable speed control inside my Dremel
model 395 tool. This one just crapped out with the same
temperamental symptoms as the last...

What symptoms?

Just take it apart, I'm pretty sure it's just a "potentiometer"
(variable resistor) so it would only have 3 leads

No, of course that won't work! What it has, is an SCR/triac
light-dimmer type phase control circuit, followed up by a bridge
rectifier into the DC motor. So, you'd want to ignore the
potentiometer entirely, and wire from the SCR/triac MT1 terminal to
the MT2 terminal.

But, those hardly ever go bad; have you cleaned and checked out the
brushes, which DO wear and become intermittent, and have you inspected
the commutator?

Why are we paying attention to a post that's over 7 years old?


I don't know, I responded to the one at 3:11pm.
It does interest me how these are revived, I don't see the OP on my
reader.
How did it get attention again?
Mikek
Click to expand...

Google Groups, AFAIK.



--
www.wescottdesign.com
 
On 11/9/2014 11:40 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
On Sun, 09 Nov 2014 19:29:15 -0600, amdx wrote:

On 11/9/2014 6:24 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
On Sun, 09 Nov 2014 13:11:23 -0800, whit3rd wrote:

On Sunday, September 9, 2007 7:46:02 PM UTC-7, Claude Desjardins
wrote:
hillpc@emailaccount.com wrote:
I'm on my second electronic variable speed control inside my Dremel
model 395 tool. This one just crapped out with the same
temperamental symptoms as the last...

What symptoms?

Just take it apart, I'm pretty sure it's just a "potentiometer"
(variable resistor) so it would only have 3 leads

No, of course that won't work! What it has, is an SCR/triac
light-dimmer type phase control circuit, followed up by a bridge
rectifier into the DC motor. So, you'd want to ignore the
potentiometer entirely, and wire from the SCR/triac MT1 terminal to
the MT2 terminal.

But, those hardly ever go bad; have you cleaned and checked out the
brushes, which DO wear and become intermittent, and have you inspected
the commutator?

Why are we paying attention to a post that's over 7 years old?


I don't know, I responded to the one at 3:11pm.
It does interest me how these are revived, I don't see the OP on my
reader.
How did it get attention again?
Mikek

Google Groups, AFAIK.

Sometimes the resurrected threads are interesting. Not this one so much.
Click to expand...

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net
 
On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 07:44:44 -0500, Phil Hobbs wrote:

On 11/9/2014 11:40 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
On Sun, 09 Nov 2014 19:29:15 -0600, amdx wrote:

On 11/9/2014 6:24 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
On Sun, 09 Nov 2014 13:11:23 -0800, whit3rd wrote:

On Sunday, September 9, 2007 7:46:02 PM UTC-7, Claude Desjardins
wrote:
hillpc@emailaccount.com wrote:
I'm on my second electronic variable speed control inside my
Dremel model 395 tool. This one just crapped out with the same
temperamental symptoms as the last...

What symptoms?

Just take it apart, I'm pretty sure it's just a "potentiometer"
(variable resistor) so it would only have 3 leads

No, of course that won't work! What it has, is an SCR/triac
light-dimmer type phase control circuit, followed up by a bridge
rectifier into the DC motor. So, you'd want to ignore the
potentiometer entirely, and wire from the SCR/triac MT1 terminal to
the MT2 terminal.

But, those hardly ever go bad; have you cleaned and checked out the
brushes, which DO wear and become intermittent, and have you
inspected the commutator?

Why are we paying attention to a post that's over 7 years old?


I don't know, I responded to the one at 3:11pm.
It does interest me how these are revived, I don't see the OP on my
reader.
How did it get attention again?
Mikek

Google Groups, AFAIK.

Sometimes the resurrected threads are interesting. Not this one so
much.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs
Click to expand...

Oddly enough, I don't complain when an interesting thread is resurrected.

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com
 
On 11/10/2014 02:19 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 07:44:44 -0500, Phil Hobbs wrote:

On 11/9/2014 11:40 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
On Sun, 09 Nov 2014 19:29:15 -0600, amdx wrote:

On 11/9/2014 6:24 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
On Sun, 09 Nov 2014 13:11:23 -0800, whit3rd wrote:

On Sunday, September 9, 2007 7:46:02 PM UTC-7, Claude Desjardins
wrote:
hillpc@emailaccount.com wrote:
I'm on my second electronic variable speed control inside my
Dremel model 395 tool. This one just crapped out with the same
temperamental symptoms as the last...

What symptoms?

Just take it apart, I'm pretty sure it's just a "potentiometer"
(variable resistor) so it would only have 3 leads

No, of course that won't work! What it has, is an SCR/triac
light-dimmer type phase control circuit, followed up by a bridge
rectifier into the DC motor. So, you'd want to ignore the
potentiometer entirely, and wire from the SCR/triac MT1 terminal to
the MT2 terminal.

But, those hardly ever go bad; have you cleaned and checked out the
brushes, which DO wear and become intermittent, and have you
inspected the commutator?

Why are we paying attention to a post that's over 7 years old?


I don't know, I responded to the one at 3:11pm.
It does interest me how these are revived, I don't see the OP on my
reader.
How did it get attention again?
Mikek

Google Groups, AFAIK.

Sometimes the resurrected threads are interesting. Not this one so
much.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Oddly enough, I don't complain when an interesting thread is resurrected.

Gee, that is odd. ;)
Click to expand...

Cheers

Phil Hobbs
 
In article <Pd2dnd9HZaNLmP3JnZ2dnUU7-W2dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
seemywebsite@myfooter.really says...
On Sun, 09 Nov 2014 13:11:23 -0800, whit3rd wrote:

On Sunday, September 9, 2007 7:46:02 PM UTC-7, Claude Desjardins wrote:
hillpc@emailaccount.com wrote:
I'm on my second electronic variable speed control inside my Dremel
model 395 tool. This one just crapped out with the same
temperamental symptoms as the last...

What symptoms?

Just take it apart, I'm pretty sure it's just a "potentiometer"
(variable resistor) so it would only have 3 leads

No, of course that won't work! What it has, is an SCR/triac
light-dimmer type phase control circuit, followed up by a bridge
rectifier into the DC motor. So, you'd want to ignore the
potentiometer entirely, and wire from the SCR/triac MT1 terminal to the
MT2 terminal.

But, those hardly ever go bad; have you cleaned and checked out the
brushes, which DO wear and become intermittent, and have you inspected
the commutator?

Why are we paying attention to a post that's over 7 years old?
Click to expand...

Details details!

Jamie
 
On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 17:16:59 -0800, Bill Bowden wrote:

"Tim Wescott" <tim@seemywebsite.com> wrote in message
news:V6ydnVCCRutV1vvJnZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@giganews.com...
On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 17:44:33 -0800, Bill Bowden wrote:

If e=(1+1/n)^n = 2.71828, does that mean e = 1 raised to the power of
infinity is also 2.71828?

1^infinity = 1.

The hypothesis e = (1 + 1/n)^n is untrue for any finite n.

The _limit_ of (1 + 1/n)^n, as n goes to infinity, is e -- but that's a
different story than just e = (1 + 1/n)^n.

--
www.wescottdesign.com

In a RC circuit of 1 volt, 1 ohm, 1 farad, and 1 second, the voltage
across the resistor will be 1/e at the end of 1 time constant (R*C).
This is confusing since it seems there should be some exact value of
voltage. I have trouble with irrational numbers, but I guess it's the
same problem as working out the square root of 2?
Click to expand...

If you have an RC circuit with exactly one ohm, exactly one farad, that
starts with exactly one volt on the cap and runs for exactly one second
until you can make an exact voltage measurement, then you have somehow
exited the real universe and are inhabiting the Land of the Platonic
Ideal. In that case, you will probably have no problem with
instinctively and intuiting the value of 'e', and everything about it.

Put more realistically: you can't achieve an exact one-ohm resistor, or
an exact one-farad cap. Even if you could, you couldn't start with
exactly one volt on the cap, you couldn't time off exactly one second,
and at the end of your exact one-second interval, you couldn't exactly
measure the voltage on the cap.

If you just buy off the shelf parts and do the experiment, ending up with
a voltage that's within 10mV of 0.368V will be doing well.

--
www.wescottdesign.com
 
In article <QOidnYvBe-DNfu3JnZ2dnUU7-cWdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
tim@seemywebsite.com says...
On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 17:16:59 -0800, Bill Bowden wrote:

"Tim Wescott" <tim@seemywebsite.com> wrote in message
news:V6ydnVCCRutV1vvJnZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@giganews.com...
On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 17:44:33 -0800, Bill Bowden wrote:

If e=(1+1/n)^n = 2.71828, does that mean e = 1 raised to the power of
infinity is also 2.71828?

1^infinity = 1.

The hypothesis e = (1 + 1/n)^n is untrue for any finite n.

The _limit_ of (1 + 1/n)^n, as n goes to infinity, is e -- but that's a
different story than just e = (1 + 1/n)^n.

--
www.wescottdesign.com

In a RC circuit of 1 volt, 1 ohm, 1 farad, and 1 second, the voltage
across the resistor will be 1/e at the end of 1 time constant (R*C).
This is confusing since it seems there should be some exact value of
voltage. I have trouble with irrational numbers, but I guess it's the
same problem as working out the square root of 2?

If you have an RC circuit with exactly one ohm, exactly one farad, that
starts with exactly one volt on the cap and runs for exactly one second
until you can make an exact voltage measurement, then you have somehow
exited the real universe and are inhabiting the Land of the Platonic
Ideal. In that case, you will probably have no problem with
instinctively and intuiting the value of 'e', and everything about it.

Put more realistically: you can't achieve an exact one-ohm resistor, or
an exact one-farad cap. Even if you could, you couldn't start with
exactly one volt on the cap, you couldn't time off exactly one second,
and at the end of your exact one-second interval, you couldn't exactly
measure the voltage on the cap.

If you just buy off the shelf parts and do the experiment, ending up with
a voltage that's within 10mV of 0.368V will be doing well.
Click to expand...

That is, if you have a Volt meter that reads exactly!

Jamie
 
On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 19:33:00 -0500, Maynard A. Philbrook Jr. wrote:

In article <QOidnYvBe-DNfu3JnZ2dnUU7-cWdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
tim@seemywebsite.com says...

On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 17:16:59 -0800, Bill Bowden wrote:

"Tim Wescott" <tim@seemywebsite.com> wrote in message
news:V6ydnVCCRutV1vvJnZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@giganews.com...
On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 17:44:33 -0800, Bill Bowden wrote:

If e=(1+1/n)^n = 2.71828, does that mean e = 1 raised to the power
of infinity is also 2.71828?

1^infinity = 1.

The hypothesis e = (1 + 1/n)^n is untrue for any finite n.

The _limit_ of (1 + 1/n)^n, as n goes to infinity, is e -- but
that's a different story than just e = (1 + 1/n)^n.

--
www.wescottdesign.com

In a RC circuit of 1 volt, 1 ohm, 1 farad, and 1 second, the voltage
across the resistor will be 1/e at the end of 1 time constant (R*C).
This is confusing since it seems there should be some exact value of
voltage. I have trouble with irrational numbers, but I guess it's the
same problem as working out the square root of 2?

If you have an RC circuit with exactly one ohm, exactly one farad, that
starts with exactly one volt on the cap and runs for exactly one second
until you can make an exact voltage measurement, then you have somehow
exited the real universe and are inhabiting the Land of the Platonic
Ideal. In that case, you will probably have no problem with
instinctively and intuiting the value of 'e', and everything about it.

Put more realistically: you can't achieve an exact one-ohm resistor, or
an exact one-farad cap. Even if you could, you couldn't start with
exactly one volt on the cap, you couldn't time off exactly one second,
and at the end of your exact one-second interval, you couldn't exactly
measure the voltage on the cap.

If you just buy off the shelf parts and do the experiment, ending up
with a voltage that's within 10mV of 0.368V will be doing well.

That is, if you have a Volt meter that reads exactly!

Jamie
Click to expand...

Picky picky.

Voltage reading -- how's that. And no cheating with masking tape and a
felt pen, either.

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com
 
Two things.

that reminded me of that pilot who saved a planeful of people by landong in the wate outside NY a few years ago. The plane apparently hit a flockl of geese (code for compressor stalls) as it was taking off and the only way was to abort, into the drink. He pulled it off and had his fifteen minutes of fame, did Oprah, Leno, whatever. Can't think of his name but he was an older guy, obviously knew how to fly. Of couse autpomation and dumbing down are symbiotically related. As automation creates the need for itself.

and then we have a modern marvel of technology, the tabl saw. You know they got a real jimdandy one somewhere's now that won't cut yer figners off. Finges even. Damndest thaing y'ever did see, touch the blde whilst it is a running and it stops in like microseconds putting on brakes apparently mosre suited to an eighteen wheelar, just so you can be stupid and still have ten fingers.

What I am wondering is what happens when people get used to that saw and then run across the old fashioned kind like mine that'll cut anything. And I mean anything.

I cannot stand automatic shit. when I start a car, I WILL DECIDE if I want the doors locked. I think it is great that the courtesy lights come on when you open the door, like a fridge. Wonderful. Now turn the fuck off when I close it AND STAY OFF. I don't need lit up when starting the car, shutting the car of, farting or getting a blowjob. In fact daytime running lights are for the birds. WHAT IF I DO NOT WANT TO BE SEEN ?

Seriously, I am not a super spy or anything, but I have the fucking decency to turn off the headlights when pulling into a driveway at night. Not with DRLs. And even though I am not a super spy, I know someone who was for a little while. Oh yeah, his job was working for thisd rich guy going through a nasty divorce. His olady started this child molestation shit and everything, and all the time the cunt was cheating on him. My buddy's job was to get pictures of this, and he did. He also put tacking devices on her cars. He's run around with a laptop in his car and a camera. I hope they put the cunt away but that is beside the point, in that situation you want the lights off when you say off.

We called him "Agent 6 3/8".

And then those automatic seatbelts Fords had for a while. Gimme a fuckinghacksaw. One of them things hit me in the head once. Lucky I didn't have my gun. Son of a bitch HuRT !

Oh, so I buy a HDTV tuner card for the PC. OK, I expect it should scan for whatever channels I can get, right ? WRONG. Fucking thing downloads the list of channels in my area off the internet, and if it can get outher ones tough shit, and if it can't get the ones it thinks it should get, tough shit.

Automatic seats in cars. Know what I want to do ? Find a guy like six feet ten, get his personalised key for his car and set the seat to go all the way forward and crush the motherfucker for not pulling the fuse for that piece of shit.

And air bags. The first thingk I do to a car is disconect that motherfucker.. you know, if I smash my car, the last thing I need is a big bag in front of me. And then some of them probably won't run after the goddamn thing "deploys".

Deplots, sounds like a bomb or something. OH DEAR I BENT THE FENDER, SO LET'S JuST THROW THE WHOLE CAR AWAY AND BUY A NEW ONE.

Of course that's what they want. And that is why there is "software". Software is killing you $100,000 Tektronix scope. WTF do you need software for ? Show the fucking trace. Get an amp, sampler, read it out so the CRT can display it and ba-dah-bing, ba-da-boom, DONE.

But no, you need a fuicking virus scanner and a firewall.

I have come to the conclusion that by the time I die, I won't know a goddamn thing anymore. And I will be eternally grateful.

Rant over, back to your Sunday morning cartoons, or football. Kinda the same thing.
 
"I didn't have time to read the WSJ article, so I fed it to my
computerized document analysis program, which analyzed the content ..."
Click to expand...

Where do you get one of those ? I've been looking all over the place, even eBay.
 
"but they couldn't troubleshoot a five tube
table radio"
Click to expand...

That really sounds like one of those sayings like "Couldn't hit the broad side of a barn" but unfortunately it is not "a saying" at all.

You probably remember longhand square roots. What would they do today if they ran out of batteries ?

I remember a thread here like a year ago in which some of these guys ante new grads to work as interns. Not even apprentices. Pretty bad when you don't even want to pay somebody...
 
On Monday, November 24, 2014 7:44:32 AM UTC-8, Jim Thompson wrote:
I had a full scholarship, so I only had to work for books and
eating out.
I would expect that a recipient and beneficiary of social welfare would be more compassionate. It must be a form of self-loathing.
Click to expand...
 
"Please retract your claim and assign yourself 20 hours of Hyper-
Sensitivity Awareness Training. There's a lot of hyper-sensitivity going
around these days, and you clearly need to be more aware of it. <grin!


Frank McKenney "
Click to expand...

Probaably win the gold in Women's gymnastics before that happens.
 
Maybe Orthodox Jews have a point. Get back to simple traditional stuff once a week for a reality check.

(I don't know anything about religions so you might want to take this one with a few cubic miles of salt.)

For example, I was thinking about a high tech bicycle security device. Instead of locks the bike would have wifi and handlebar cams to upload the perp's face to the internet.

Motorists riding in self driving cars would have face recognition software so the car would sideswipe the thief just gently enough to not damage the bicycle.

The bicycle is then locked to a utility pole and the victim -- the real owner of the bike -- notified.
 
"Tim Wescott" <tim@seemywebsite.com> wrote in message
news:QOidnYvBe-DNfu3JnZ2dnUU7-cWdnZ2d@giganews.com...
On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 17:16:59 -0800, Bill Bowden wrote:

In a RC circuit of 1 volt, 1 ohm, 1 farad, and 1 second, the voltage
across the resistor will be 1/e at the end of 1 time constant (R*C).
This is confusing since it seems there should be some exact value of
voltage. I have trouble with irrational numbers, but I guess it's the
same problem as working out the square root of 2?

If you have an RC circuit with exactly one ohm, exactly one farad, that
starts with exactly one volt on the cap and runs for exactly one second
until you can make an exact voltage measurement, then you have somehow
exited the real universe and are inhabiting the Land of the Platonic
Ideal. In that case, you will probably have no problem with
instinctively and intuiting the value of 'e', and everything about it.

Put more realistically: you can't achieve an exact one-ohm resistor, or
an exact one-farad cap. Even if you could, you couldn't start with
exactly one volt on the cap, you couldn't time off exactly one second,
and at the end of your exact one-second interval, you couldn't exactly
measure the voltage on the cap.

If you just buy off the shelf parts and do the experiment, ending up with
a voltage that's within 10mV of 0.368V will be doing well.

--
www.wescottdesign.com
Click to expand...

I recently read something about Graham's number being the longest known
number having an exact value ending in 262464195387. Graham's number is
longer than the number of atoms in the earth. Or, as wiki says, the
observable universe is far too small to contain an ordinary digital
representation of Graham's number, assuming that each digit occupies one
Planck volume.

Seems like e should be something shorter than that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham%27s_number

-Bill



--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
 
On Sun, 07 Dec 2014 21:17:49 -0800, jsscshaw88 wrote:

Hi,

Questions 1 :

How can you use K-Map for 3 to 8 line decoder? The truth table is as
folllows

a b c o1 o2 o3 o4 o5 o6 o7 o8 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

I know that I can make the boolean equation from the Truth table and can
make the decoder circuit using 8 an gates and some inverters? But how
can do this using K map. Is it possible to do a K map? Because there are
8 out puts not one!


Question 2: If you are allowed to use just one NAND gate then, how many
ways can you come up with an inverter?

I know atleast two ways to solve this problem. I can tie the two inouts
of the NAND gate together or tie one input to ground permanently.

But my problem is that how can use K map to solve this problem.

If I use K map then I come up with the followng equation

A' + B' = Y

Can I solve this problem using K map?

jess
Click to expand...

Will the answer still be valuable after finals week?

--
www.wescottdesign.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top