36,756
edits
SKA6516: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
(Forgot to add axes annotations. I also appear to have been incorrect in a multitude of stances. I apologize.) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
[[User:Zenwizard|Zenwizard Studios]] found thirteen of these in a [[475]] and showed that thirteen of those tested as "having a parasitic reverse diode junction" on a cheap component tester. | [[User:Zenwizard|Zenwizard Studios]] found thirteen of these in a [[475]] and showed that thirteen of those tested as "having a parasitic reverse diode junction" on a cheap component tester. | ||
''There is no such diode, parasitic or not'' – the cheap tester displays this symbol when the DUT has a low reverse breakdown voltage as seen in the traces below. | :''There is no such diode, parasitic or not'' – the cheap tester displays this symbol when the DUT has a low reverse breakdown voltage as seen in the traces below. See the thread at https://groups.io/g/TekScopes/topic/101335545#201002. | ||
See the thread at https://groups.io/g/TekScopes/topic/101335545#201002 | : Since reverse breakdown can damage the DUT, small-signal RF transistors should not be tested on component testers that may trigger that breakdown. They should be checked only on a curve tracer. | ||
Since reverse breakdown can damage the DUT, small-signal RF transistors should not be tested on component testers that may trigger that breakdown. They should be checked only on a curve tracer. | |||
'''Suitable Modern Replacement''' | '''Suitable Modern Replacement''' | ||