|
How are IC's Labeled?
I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for
several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. Thanks |
How are IC's Labeled?
On Fri, 5 Dec 2008 19:33:40 -0500, "gore" wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. Thanks There probably _is_ a standard, but it was probably devised by some committee of cretins sitting for the IEEE, so it's generally ignored. The schematic representation doesn't matter anyway. What matters is how the "template" for the part is seen by the simulator, for instance... Schematic Simulator U1 X_U1 A1 X_A1 etc... ("parts" are either devices, Q, R, L, C, M, D... or subcircuits, X...) ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine Sometimes I even put it in the food |
How are IC's Labeled?
"gore" I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. ** Like many things in the wide world of electronics, there are common conventions that apply but no universal standard exists. So folk in different places and in various companies do what seems logical to them. ...... Phil |
How are IC's Labeled?
"gore" wrote in message
... I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. U is quite common for ICs. X ought to be a crystal, typically. IC1 is probably from some smaller design house where they're making up their own standard as they go along (they probably also use, e.g., LED1...). There is no universal standard, although growing companies often decide at some point to go out and review some documented choices, such as what the IPC recommends. |
How are IC's Labeled?
On Fri, 5 Dec 2008 19:33:40 -0500, "gore"
wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. Thanks U = IC Q = transistor D = diode (CR is archaic) T = transformer L = inductor A = assembly R = resistor (all kinds) C = capacitor (ditto) P, J are connectors B = battery F = fuse K = relay S = switch V = tube IC, CON, HDR, TR, VR, CHO, RN, RV, RLY, SW, LED and such are all amateur inventions. John |
How are IC's Labeled?
On Fri, 5 Dec 2008 19:33:40 -0500, "gore"
wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. Thanks The standard reference designator for integrated circuits is "U" - anything else is wrong! ( IMHO :-) ) -- Peter Bennett, VE7CEI peterbb4 (at) interchange.ubc.ca GPS and NMEA info: http://vancouver-webpages.com/peter Vancouver Power Squadron: http://vancouver.powersquadron.ca |
How are IC's Labeled?
"John Larkin" wrote in message IC, CON, HDR, TR, VR, CHO, RN, RV, RLY, SW, LED and such are all amateur inventions. CR is still common. Is that supposed to be "controlled rectifier" (like in SCR)? Speaking of which, what do you use for SCR's and triacs? -- Reply in group, but if emailing add one more zero, and remove the last word. |
How are IC's Labeled?
On Fri, 5 Dec 2008 22:11:43 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso"
wrote: "John Larkin" wrote in message IC, CON, HDR, TR, VR, CHO, RN, RV, RLY, SW, LED and such are all amateur inventions. CR is still common. Is that supposed to be "controlled rectifier" (like in SCR)? It was "crystal rectifier", and D was "dynamotor". You don't see many surface-mount dynamotors [1] any more, so lots of people have swiped D for diodes. These designators are the classic military ones. Speaking of which, what do you use for SCR's and triacs? Q. John [1] a dynamotor is a rotating dc-dc converter. |
How are IC's Labeled?
gore wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. X should be a crystal. A would be an amplifier (I haven't ever seen that btw) IC is self-explanatory and is widely used in Europe U is some weird US practice. U for what ? Rumour has it that it meant 'unknown'. Graham |
How are IC's Labeled?
John Larkin wrote: On Fri, 5 Dec 2008 19:33:40 -0500, "gore" wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. Thanks U (IC) = IC Q (TR) = transistor D = diode (CR is archaic) (well at least we can agree on that. Why not U and Q too whilst at it ?) T (or TR or TX ) = transformer L = inductor A = assembly R = resistor (all kinds) RN = resistor network. C = capacitor (ditto) P, J (CN, CON, CONN, sometime J) are connectors I prefer J for user selectable 'jumpers/headers' that take shorting links. B = battery F = fuse K (RL, RLY) = relay S (SW) = switch V (V for valve) = tube IC, CON, HDR, TR, VR, CHO, RN, RV, RLY, SW, LED and such are all amateur inventions. No they make vastly more sense. How can you justify the use of Q for a transistor for example ? A quansistor ? I also use CD = decoupling capacitor to distinguish from a capacitor 'in circuit'. Also RT = thermistor. Graham |
How are IC's Labeled?
Peter Bennett wrote: "gore" wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. The standard reference designator for integrated circuits is "U" - anything else is wrong! ( IMHO :-) ) And what does U stand for ? Probably the stupidest choice ever aside from Q. Graham |
How are IC's Labeled?
Tom Del Rosso wrote: "John Larkin" wrote in IC, CON, HDR, TR, VR, CHO, RN, RV, RLY, SW, LED and such are all amateur inventions. CR is still common. Is that supposed to be "controlled rectifier" (like in SCR)? Speaking of which, what do you use for SCR's and triacs? SCR. Since a Triac is bilateral SCR, you could presumably use that too. I also forgot LD or LED = light emitting diode. Graham |
How are IC's Labeled?
John Larkin wrote: "Tom Del Rosso" wrote: "John Larkin" wrote IC, CON, HDR, TR, VR, CHO, RN, RV, RLY, SW, LED and such are all amateur inventions. CR is still common. Is that supposed to be "controlled rectifier" (like in SCR)? It was "crystal rectifier", and D was "dynamotor". You don't see many surface-mount dynamotors [1] any more, so lots of people have swiped D for diodes. These designators are the classic military ones. In the USA ! Graham |
How are IC's Labeled?
Eeyore wrote: John Larkin wrote: "Tom Del Rosso" wrote: "John Larkin" wrote IC, CON, HDR, TR, VR, CHO, RN, RV, RLY, SW, LED and such are all amateur inventions. CR is still common. Is that supposed to be "controlled rectifier" (like in SCR)? It was "crystal rectifier", and D was "dynamotor". You don't see many surface-mount dynamotors [1] any more, so lots of people have swiped D for diodes. These designators are the classic military ones. In the USA ! Of course in the USA. America has built most of the military electronics that have been used, since the start of WW-II. We can't leave a task like that to amateurs, and idiots. -- http://improve-usenet.org/index.html aioe.org, Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white listed, or I will not see your messages. If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm There are two kinds of people on this earth: The crazy, and the insane. The first sign of insanity is denying that you're crazy. |
How are IC's Labeled?
Eeyore wrote: Tom Del Rosso wrote: "John Larkin" wrote in IC, CON, HDR, TR, VR, CHO, RN, RV, RLY, SW, LED and such are all amateur inventions. CR is still common. Is that supposed to be "controlled rectifier" (like in SCR)? Speaking of which, what do you use for SCR's and triacs? SCR. Since a Triac is bilateral SCR, you could presumably use that too. I also forgot LD or LED = light emitting diode. No, LED = Lie Emmiting Donkey. :) -- http://improve-usenet.org/index.html aioe.org, Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white listed, or I will not see your messages. If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm There are two kinds of people on this earth: The crazy, and the insane. The first sign of insanity is denying that you're crazy. |
How are IC's Labeled?
Eeyore wrote: John Larkin wrote: On Fri, 5 Dec 2008 19:33:40 -0500, "gore" wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. Thanks U (IC) = IC Q (TR) = transistor D = diode (CR is archaic) (well at least we can agree on that. Why not U and Q too whilst at it ?) T (or TR or TX ) = transformer L = inductor A = assembly R = resistor (all kinds) RN = resistor network. C = capacitor (ditto) P, J (CN, CON, CONN, sometime J) are connectors I prefer J for user selectable 'jumpers/headers' that take shorting links. B = battery F = fuse K (RL, RLY) = relay S (SW) = switch V (V for valve) = tube IC, CON, HDR, TR, VR, CHO, RN, RV, RLY, SW, LED and such are all amateur inventions. No they make vastly more sense. How can you justify the use of Q for a transistor for example ? A quansistor ? It was justified by the fact that it was available. It doesn't need any more justification for people who know what they are doing. I also use CD = decoupling capacitor to distinguish from a capacitor 'in circuit'. Also RT = thermistor. Graham -- http://improve-usenet.org/index.html aioe.org, Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white listed, or I will not see your messages. If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm There are two kinds of people on this earth: The crazy, and the insane. The first sign of insanity is denying that you're crazy. |
How are IC's Labeled?
Eeyore wrote: Peter Bennett wrote: "gore" wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. The standard reference designator for integrated circuits is "U" - anything else is wrong! ( IMHO :-) ) And what does U stand for ? Probably the stupidest choice ever aside from Q. Sigh. Do ANY of your neurons work? It was another available letter, and used to identify the 'Unique' integrated circuits. -- http://improve-usenet.org/index.html aioe.org, Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white listed, or I will not see your messages. If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm There are two kinds of people on this earth: The crazy, and the insane. The first sign of insanity is denying that you're crazy. |
How are IC's Labeled?
Eeyore wrote: gore wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. X should be a crystal. A would be an amplifier (I haven't ever seen that btw) IC is self-explanatory and is widely used in Europe U is some weird US practice. U for what ? Rumour has it that it meant 'unknown'. Only outside the USA, by know nothing 'experts'. -- http://improve-usenet.org/index.html aioe.org, Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white listed, or I will not see your messages. If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm There are two kinds of people on this earth: The crazy, and the insane. The first sign of insanity is denying that you're crazy. |
How are IC's Labeled?
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote: Eeyore wrote: John Larkin wrote: "Tom Del Rosso" wrote: "John Larkin" wrote IC, CON, HDR, TR, VR, CHO, RN, RV, RLY, SW, LED and such are all amateur inventions. CR is still common. Is that supposed to be "controlled rectifier" (like in SCR)? It was "crystal rectifier", and D was "dynamotor". You don't see many surface-mount dynamotors [1] any more, so lots of people have swiped D for diodes. These designators are the classic military ones. In the USA ! Of course in the USA. America has built most of the military electronics that have been used, since the start of WW-II. We can't leave a task like that to amateurs, and idiots. Actually, you simply copied many British designs. Graham |
How are IC's Labeled?
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote: Eeyore wrote: John Larkin wrote: "gore" wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. Thanks U (IC) = IC Q (TR) = transistor D = diode (CR is archaic) (well at least we can agree on that. Why not U and Q too whilst at it ?) T (or TR or TX ) = transformer L = inductor A = assembly R = resistor (all kinds) RN = resistor network. C = capacitor (ditto) P, J (CN, CON, CONN, sometime J) are connectors I prefer J for user selectable 'jumpers/headers' that take shorting links. B = battery F = fuse K (RL, RLY) = relay S (SW) = switch V (V for valve) = tube IC, CON, HDR, TR, VR, CHO, RN, RV, RLY, SW, LED and such are all amateur inventions. No they make vastly more sense. How can you justify the use of Q for a transistor for example ? A quansistor ? It was justified by the fact that it was available. It doesn't need any more justification for people who know what they are doing. What a particularly STUPID response. Why not E, H, N, P, W for example ? Or Z ? Graham |
How are IC's Labeled?
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote: Eeyore wrote: Peter Bennett wrote: "gore" wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. The standard reference designator for integrated circuits is "U" - anything else is wrong! ( IMHO :-) ) And what does U stand for ? Probably the stupidest choice ever aside from Q. Sigh. Do ANY of your neurons work? It was another available letter, and used to identify the 'Unique' integrated circuits. Again, what a stupid answer. Graham |
How are IC's Labeled?
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote: Eeyore wrote: gore wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. X should be a crystal. A would be an amplifier (I haven't ever seen that btw) IC is self-explanatory and is widely used in Europe U is some weird US practice. U for what ? Rumour has it that it meant 'unknown'. Only outside the USA, by know nothing 'experts'. The USA represents 5% of the world population. Graham |
How are IC's Labeled?
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 08:17:33 +0000, Eeyore
wrote: gore wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. X should be a crystal. --- No, a crystal is designated with a 'Y'. What you're probably thinking about is the abbreviation for 'crystal', 'XTAL'. --- A would be an amplifier (I haven't ever seen that btw) --- Then how would you know? Anyway, it's not for 'amplifier, it's for 'assembly'. --- IC is self-explanatory and is widely used in Europe U is some weird US practice. U for what ? --- Unit. JF |
How are IC's Labeled?
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 08:27:06 +0000, Eeyore
wrote: Peter Bennett wrote: "gore" wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. The standard reference designator for integrated circuits is "U" - anything else is wrong! ( IMHO :-) ) And what does U stand for ? --- Unit. --- Probably the stupidest choice ever aside from Q. --- No doubt the likes of you would have used 'T'. JF |
How are IC's Labeled?
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 08:29:53 +0000, Eeyore
wrote: John Larkin wrote: "Tom Del Rosso" wrote: "John Larkin" wrote IC, CON, HDR, TR, VR, CHO, RN, RV, RLY, SW, LED and such are all amateur inventions. CR is still common. Is that supposed to be "controlled rectifier" (like in SCR)? It was "crystal rectifier", and D was "dynamotor". You don't see many surface-mount dynamotors [1] any more, so lots of people have swiped D for diodes. These designators are the classic military ones. In the USA ! --- Well, no ****, Sherlock? JF |
How are IC's Labeled?
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 08:27:06 +0000, Eeyore
wrote: Peter Bennett wrote: "gore" wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. The standard reference designator for integrated circuits is "U" - anything else is wrong! ( IMHO :-) ) And what does U stand for ? Probably the stupidest choice ever aside from Q. Graham Perhaps U = Unit? -- Peter Bennett, VE7CEI peterbb4 (at) interchange.ubc.ca GPS and NMEA info: http://vancouver-webpages.com/peter Vancouver Power Squadron: http://vancouver.powersquadron.ca |
How are IC's Labeled?
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 11:09:39 -0600, John Fields wrote: On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 08:17:33 +0000, Eeyore wrote: gore wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. X should be a crystal. --- No, a crystal is designated with a 'Y'. What you're probably thinking about is the abbreviation for 'crystal', 'XTAL'. --- A would be an amplifier (I haven't ever seen that btw) --- Then how would you know? Anyway, it's not for 'amplifier, it's for 'assembly'. --- IC is self-explanatory and is widely used in Europe U is some weird US practice. U for what ? --- Unit. JF HB: Hierarchical Block ;-) ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine Sometimes I even put it in the food |
How are IC's Labeled?
John Fields wrote: Eeyore wrote: gore wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. X should be a crystal. --- No, a crystal is designated with a 'Y'. What you're probably thinking about is the abbreviation for 'crystal', 'XTAL'. You won't see any Y crystals in Europe IME. A would be an amplifier (I haven't ever seen that btw) --- Then how would you know? Anyway, it's not for 'amplifier, it's for 'assembly'. Which is hardly a pcb component is it ? IC is self-explanatory and is widely used in Europe U is some weird US practice. U for what ? --- Unit. Terrell disagrees. I have now heard explanations of Unknown, Unique and Unit ! IC otoh is 100% unambiguous. Graham |
How are IC's Labeled?
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 16:02:24 +0000, Eeyore
wrote: "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: Eeyore wrote: John Larkin wrote: "gore" wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. Thanks U (IC) = IC Q (TR) = transistor D = diode (CR is archaic) (well at least we can agree on that. Why not U and Q too whilst at it ?) T (or TR or TX ) = transformer L = inductor A = assembly R = resistor (all kinds) RN = resistor network. C = capacitor (ditto) P, J (CN, CON, CONN, sometime J) are connectors I prefer J for user selectable 'jumpers/headers' that take shorting links. B = battery F = fuse K (RL, RLY) = relay S (SW) = switch V (V for valve) = tube IC, CON, HDR, TR, VR, CHO, RN, RV, RLY, SW, LED and such are all amateur inventions. No they make vastly more sense. How can you justify the use of Q for a transistor for example ? A quansistor ? It was justified by the fact that it was available. It doesn't need any more justification for people who know what they are doing. What a particularly STUPID response. Why not E, H, N, P, W for example ? Or Z ? --- 'E' was being used for test points, 'P' for male (plug) connectors with either male or female contacts, 'W' for wire harnesses or cables, and 'Z' for filters. So out of 'H', 'N', and 'Q', 'Q' was chosen. What gives you heartburn about that? That it wasn't you who got to choose? JF |
How are IC's Labeled?
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 04:19:03 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote: Eeyore wrote: John Larkin wrote: On Fri, 5 Dec 2008 19:33:40 -0500, "gore" wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. Thanks U (IC) = IC Q (TR) = transistor D = diode (CR is archaic) (well at least we can agree on that. Why not U and Q too whilst at it ?) T (or TR or TX ) = transformer L = inductor A = assembly R = resistor (all kinds) RN = resistor network. C = capacitor (ditto) P, J (CN, CON, CONN, sometime J) are connectors I prefer J for user selectable 'jumpers/headers' that take shorting links. B = battery F = fuse K (RL, RLY) = relay S (SW) = switch V (V for valve) = tube IC, CON, HDR, TR, VR, CHO, RN, RV, RLY, SW, LED and such are all amateur inventions. No they make vastly more sense. How can you justify the use of Q for a transistor for example ? A quansistor ? It was justified by the fact that it was available. It doesn't need any more justification for people who know what they are doing. I also use CD = decoupling capacitor to distinguish from a capacitor 'in circuit'. Also RT = thermistor. Graham I justify my use of mil-std reference designators by the fact that using arbitrary junk would convince my scientific and aerospace customers that I'm an amateur who is ignorant of industry standards. I really wouldn't want that to happen. You may as well scatter parts around on a layout at odd arbitrary angles, or use florid gothic script on orange front panels. Or invent your own revision and ECO standards. Mount heatsinks with duct tape. Send any messages you like. John |
How are IC's Labeled?
John Fields wrote: Eeyore wrote: Peter Bennett wrote: "gore" wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. The standard reference designator for integrated circuits is "U" - anything else is wrong! ( IMHO :-) ) And what does U stand for ? --- Unit. --- Probably the stupidest choice ever aside from Q. --- No doubt the likes of you would have used 'T'. TR for TRansistor. He's the famous Quad 405 amplifier. The 'current dumper'. http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTri...ad405cirb.html Graham |
How are IC's Labeled?
On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 18:48:53 -0800, Peter Bennett
wrote: On Fri, 5 Dec 2008 19:33:40 -0500, "gore" wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. Thanks The standard reference designator for integrated circuits is "U" - anything else is wrong! ( IMHO :-) ) It's certainly non-standard. I suppose you could make up your own letters to represent the elements in a chemistry reaction, on the theory that things like Sn and Pb are illogical. But it would be tricky to get that published. John |
How are IC's Labeled?
Peter Bennett wrote: Eeyore wrote: Peter Bennett wrote: "gore" wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. The standard reference designator for integrated circuits is "U" - anything else is wrong! ( IMHO :-) ) And what does U stand for ? Probably the stupidest choice ever aside from Q. Perhaps U = Unit? That's 2 votes for Unit and one for Unique so far in this thread. I have also heard Unknown mentioned. Graham |
How are IC's Labeled?
"Eeyore" wrote in message John Fields wrote: Eeyore wrote: A would be an amplifier (I haven't ever seen that btw) --- Then how would you know? Anyway, it's not for 'amplifier, it's for 'assembly'. Which is hardly a pcb component is it ? Sure, it could be a smaller board. IC is self-explanatory and is widely used in Europe U is some weird US practice. U for what ? --- Unit. Terrell disagrees. I have now heard explanations of Unknown, Unique and Unit ! IC otoh is 100% unambiguous. U is 100% unambiguous too. It means IC. -- Reply in group, but if emailing add one more zero, and remove the last word. |
How are IC's Labeled?
John Fields wrote: Eeyore wrote: U is some weird US practice. U for what ? --- Unit. And if it's quad part ? QU ? Dual DU ? Graham |
How are IC's Labeled?
Because I was already taken for an (I)ncandescent Lamp, and I was used
because L (Lamp) had been assigned to Inductor a great long time ago. Similarly, T for Transistor was taken when Joseph Henry wound the first (T)ransformer. These two little rascals came along relatively late in the electronics game and there weren't a lot of letters left. It is left as an exercise for the student to list those letters that are not assigned to any individual component (i.e. those still available for assignment). Jim -- "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." --Aristotle " And what does U stand for ? Probably the stupidest choice ever aside from Q. Graham |
How are IC's Labeled?
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 09:16:03 -0800, Peter Bennett
wrote: On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 08:27:06 +0000, Eeyore wrote: Peter Bennett wrote: "gore" wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. The standard reference designator for integrated circuits is "U" - anything else is wrong! ( IMHO :-) ) And what does U stand for ? Probably the stupidest choice ever aside from Q. Graham Perhaps U = Unit? I think that was the origin. That's distinct from A, Assembly, which has its own BOM. A Unit can not be disassembled. Formal military systems often used nested designators: A3A6R41 uniquely located a resistor in a radar system. Some of the older HP schematics used this convention, too. John |
How are IC's Labeled?
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 17:41:51 +0000, Eeyore wrote: John Fields wrote: Eeyore wrote: U is some weird US practice. U for what ? --- Unit. And if it's quad part ? QU ? Dual DU ? Graham U1A, U1B... U1F is how a hex inverter is labeled. ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine Sometimes I even put it in the food |
How are IC's Labeled?
On Sat, 6 Dec 2008 09:45:19 -0800, "RST Engineering \(jw\)"
wrote: Because I was already taken for an (I)ncandescent Lamp, and I was used because L (Lamp) had been assigned to Inductor a great long time ago. I recall lamps being DS. John |
How are IC's Labeled?
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 16:04:16 +0000, Eeyore
wrote: "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: Eeyore wrote: gore wrote: I work at an electronics contract manufacturimg facility. We do work for several companies and I wonder why they use different labels on the schematics and pcb's to refer to IC's. Some of them have a U1, an A1, and X1, or an IC1. Why do they do this? Is there a standard used to label IC's in a schematic? Just curious why this is. X should be a crystal. A would be an amplifier (I haven't ever seen that btw) IC is self-explanatory and is widely used in Europe U is some weird US practice. U for what ? Rumour has it that it meant 'unknown'. Only outside the USA, by know nothing 'experts'. The USA represents 5% of the world population. --- Yes, and never have so many owed so much to so few. JF |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:13 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter