Новини світу мікро- та наноелектроніки

A new software combines connectivity, scalability and data-driven artificial intelligence (AI) capabilities to push the boundaries of the IC verification process and make chip design teams more productive. Questa One aims to address the verification productivity gap for large, complex designs spanning IP to IC to systems.

The steadily increasing complexity of 3DICs, chiplet-based designs, and software-defined architectures is further compounded by a critical talent shortage and growing demands for enhanced security and lower power consumption. “Questa One uses new technical advances to deliver the fastest functional, fault, and formal verification engines available,” said Abhi Kolpekwar, VP and GM of digital verification technologies at Siemens EDA.

Figure 1 Questa One strives to redefine IC verification from a reactive process into an intelligent, self-optimizing system. Source: Siemens EDA

A recent Wilson Research Group survey suggests that one in seven IC projects achieves first-time silicon success. Chris Giles, director of product management for static and formal at Siemens EDA, calls this a jaw-dropping and staggering drop. “Our approach is to enable engineers to do more with less, with not just faster engines but also faster engineers with fewer workloads,” he said.

Figure 2 Here is a view of the decline in first-time silicon success and the increase in FPGA bugs. Source: Wilson Research Group

Giles spoke with EDN to explain the technology fundamentals of this new verification tool.

Quest One’s three tenets

Giles said that Questa One has been developed around three core principles:

1. Scalable verification: It allows engineers to speed verification closure. Giles noted that the semiconductor industry is struggling to tackle large designs. “That’s why we see a decline in first-time silicon success,” he added. “Chip designs are getting so large that it’s difficult to verify them in one piece.” Questa One verification aims to allow engineers to work on large chip designs.
2. Data-driven verification: It leverages data for AI-powered analytics to bring new insights and to improve verification productivity. “It collects datasets that allow verification tools to either make recommendations or directly decide what to do next and do it productively,” said Giles.
3. Connected verification: Questa One connects EDA tools and verification IP to form a cohesive ecosystem for robust verification, validation, and test operations. In other words, it uses a broad set of technologies and analyses to provide insights and raw verification power.

Figure 3: Questa One offerings are shown with three main value propositions summed up at the bottom. Source: Siemens EDA

Quest One’s four components

Questa One has the following focus areas:

1. Questa One simulator: This simulator engine is built from the ground up. It performs functional and fault simulation for RTL, GLS, and DFT applications with parallel processing and profiling add-ons.
2. Questa One SFV: The stimulus-free verification (SFV) solution delivers user productivity through synergistic combinations of static and formal analyses, AI, automation, and parallelization. “The current static and formal technology is very fragmented, challenging high productivity,” Giles said. “SFV integrates static and formal analyses, AI, and parallelization to address this challenge.”
3. Questa One verification IQ: It’s a coverage solution that utilizes generative, analytic, and prescriptive AI to drive verification closure faster with fewer workloads. “It features an intelligent interface that provides insight into the entire verification ecosystem,” Giles added.
4. Questa One Avery VIP: The solution, based on Avery’s high-quality VIP and high-coverage compliance test suites (CTS), offers protocol-aware debug and coverage analytics to help increase productivity. It supports 3DIC and chiplet verification from IP to system-on-chip (SoC) design.

Figure 4 Four main components of Questa One include a simulator, a static and formal verification solution, a verification intelligence coverage analysis solution, and an Avery identifier. Siemens EDA

Questa One in works

Semiconductor IP supplier Rambus acknowledged an improved verification experience in managing data center workloads like generative AI while implementing IPs for PCIe, CXL, and HBM interfaces. Rambus particularly mentioned Questa One’s simulation, static and formal analysis, and verification IP technologies.

Then there is Arm, which used Questa One simulator to reduce regression time in its latest AArch64 architecture. “The Questa One verification solution has improved our verification productivity across traditional on-premises and cloud deployments,” said Karima Dridi, head of productivity engineering at Arm.

MediaTek, another early user of Questa One, has utilized its formal verification and simulation technologies. “Questa One Property Assist utilizes generative AI to save us weeks of engineering time, and Questa One Regression Navigator predicts which simulation tests are most likely to fail, runs them first, and saves days of regression and debugging time,” said Chienlin Huang, senior technical manager of Connectivity Technology Department at MediaTek.

Questa One claims to yield step-function gains in smart regression, smart analysis, smart engine, and smart debug domains. Design testimonials from Arm, MediaTek, and Rambus are a good start.

Related Content

• How Do You Verify IC Performance?
• Integrate tools for effective verification
• The profile of a data-driven IC design verification tool
• Why verification matters in network-on-chip (NoC) design
• IC design: A short primer on the formal methods-based verification

The post IC verification tool addresses design complexity, productivity gap appeared first on EDN.

In April 2012, EDN published a circuit by John Fattaruso that lets you quickly measure the drain-source saturation current and the pinch-off voltage of both an N-JFET and a P-JFET. The pinch-off voltage (Vp) is measured by inserting a very large resistance between the source and the ground. The drain-source saturation current (IDSS) is measured by inserting a small resistance between the source and the ground. Then, the voltage across this resistor is measured, and both Vp and IDSS can be calculated using Ohm’s law. 

There is a catch with this circuit: Since IDSS is measured across a non-zero resistor, there is a deviation from the real IDSS, see Figure 1. This circuit does not really measure point A, but actually measures point B slightly before this. For JFETs with lower Vp voltages and/or higher IDSS currents, there can be a deviation between the measured and real IDSS value of 5% or more.

Figure 1 A standard N-JFET drain-source current vs gate-source voltage curve.

Wow the engineering world with your unique design: Design Ideas Submission Guide

Circuit idea

The accuracy of the circuit can be drastically increased by making a couple of minor changes. Figure 2 shows the basic circuit. 

Figure 2 A basic, improved circuit for the JFET IDSS and Vp measurement.

An astute reader will immediately see the two circuits’ similarities and differences. Switch 1 is, again, used to select between N-channel JFETs and their less common sibling: P-channel JFETs.

Switch 2 is used to select between Vp and IDSS measurement. In the position as drawn, IDSS is measured. In this position, A1 is set up as a transimpedance amplifier. 

With the op-amp’s non-inverting input connected to ground, A1 will keep the inverting input, and hence the source, to ground as well. This guarantees that the true IDSS is measured. Resistor R3 then converts the current to a voltage that can be measured at the output of A1. 

When Switch 2 is flipped to the other position, A1 is set up as a simple voltage follower. The pinch-off voltage that develops across R1 is then buffered and available at the output of A1.

Full implementation

Now that we have seen the basic circuit, we can look at a full implementation (Figure 3). Resistor R2 limits the current that can flow in case a JFET is inserted incorrectly. In pinch-off measurement mode, the impedances around Q1, R1 and A1 are all pretty high. To limit the influence of noise, capacitor C1 is added. It is best to keep these wires short and/or to build the circuit in a shielded box. 

Figure 3 First implementation of the practical circuit used to measure  IDSS and Vp.

Most operational amplifiers can only source or sink a small amount of current. The drain-source saturation current can easily be in the tens of milliamperes. To boost the current output capabilities of A1, a complementary bipolar transistor output stage is added. Please note that the output is not short-circuit proof. If preferred, a simple 1 kΩ to 10 kΩ resistor can be added in series with the output. 

With the current resistor values in the circuit, a pinch-off voltage of ±10 V can be measured and a saturation current of ~ ±100 mA. 

Although there are JFETs with large saturation currents (think J109 with IDSS > 40 mA and J108 with IDSS > 80 mA!), this is simply not needed for most JFETs. So, a variation on this circuit was developed. The pinch-off voltage remained the same, but the saturation current was returned to 25 mA, covering almost all JFET types. A further requirement was that the output voltage range for both measurements needed to be the same: 0 … ±5 V. This was so that a moving coil meter readout could be used with a single range.

See Figure 4 for the implementation.

Figure 4 A circuit with the tailored measurement range that is suited for most JFETs.

Read-out

A read-out needs to be added to make this a complete measurement instrument. Since I have a large stock of moving coil meters, I decided to use one of these for the read-out. To some, they may look antiquated, but they are a joy to use and a marvel of mechanical engineering! The output can be positive or negative depending on whether you are measuring Vp or IDSS, and whether an N-type JFET or a P-type JFET is being tested. So, this is something that needs to be dealt with. Also, it would be nice if there were some kind of polarity indication. See Figure 5 for the read-out circuit.

Figure 5 The readout circuit with sensitive polarity indication. 

The 1-mA moving coil meter is included in the feedback loop around the op-amp. D3-D6 form a common rectifier bridge so that, independent of the polarity of the input voltage, the meter is always fed a positive current. 

Transistors Q1 and Q2 serve as a polarity indication. Positive voltages will turn on Q1 and LED D9. LED D10 will indicate negative voltages. 

D7,8 are not needed for the rectification. Because of these diodes, the A1 output voltage must be above/below ±1.8 V before any significant current will flow through the meter. This, in turn, guarantees that transistors Q1 and Q2 will already turn on at very low input voltages, giving a good polarity indication across the whole input range.

Test socket

Over the years, manufacturers have created JFETs with almost every possible pin-out, so making a single universal test socket is not so trivial. With three leads, there are 3! = 6 possible combinations as shown in Table 1.

#	Pin-out
1	G	D	S
2	G	S	D
3	D	G	S
4	D	S	G
5	S	G	D
6	S	D	G

Table 1 The six possible pin-out combinations that can be used for an off-the-shelf JFET.

Of course, a JFET with a pin-out of S-D-G (#6) can be tested in a socket with pin-out G-D-S (#1), simply by inserting it reverse in the socket. This effectively eliminates half of the possible combinations. So we are left with the following three, as shown in Table 2. 

#	Pin-out
1	G	D	S
2	G	S	D
3	D	G	S
4	= #2 reverse
5	= #3 reverse
6	= #1 reverse

Table 2 A reduction in the number of pin-out combinations by simply reversing the component within the test socket.

After a bit of doodling, we can create a single five-pin test socket that can accommodate every possible JFET pin-out as shown in Table 3.

#	Pin-out
	D	S	G	D	S

Table 3 A singular 5-pin test socket to accommodate all possible JFET pin-outs. 

There are two different variants possible; this is left as an exercise to the reader. The same logic can be applied to create universal test sockets for bipolar transistors, of course.

Figure 6 The final PCB implementation of the practical JFET circuit used to measure IDSS and Vp, showing the test socket. 

In closing

Thanks to John Fattaruso for his excellent design idea, which sprouted this idea! We all stand on the shoulders of the giants that came before us.

Cor van Rij blew his first fuse at 10 under the close supervision of his father, who promptly forbade him from ever working on the house mains again. He built his first regenerative receiver at the age of 12, and as a boy, his bedroom was decorated with all sorts of antennas, and a huge collection of disassembled radios took up every horizontal surface. He studied electronics and graduated cum laude.

He worked as a data design engineer and engineering manager in the telecom industry. And has worked for almost 20 years as a principal electrical design engineer, specializing in analog and RF electronics and embedded firmware. Every day is a new discovery!

Related Content

• Simple circuit lets you characterize JFETs
• A Conversation with Mike Engelhardt on QSPICE
• Your friend, the JFET.
• Building a JFET voltage-tuned Wien bridge oscillator

The post A simple circuit to let you characterize JFETs more accurately appeared first on EDN.

Molecular beam epitaxy (MBE) system maker Riber S.A. of Bezons, France has received an order for a research MBE 412 cluster platform with an automatic wafer transfer system from a leading Australian research laboratory in order to advance its research in infrared (IR) technologies and to support the development of sovereign IR sensor capabilities in Australia...

NUBURU Inc of Centennial, CO, USA — which was founded in 2015 and develops and manufactures high-power industrial blue lasers — has filed with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) a Form S-3 Registration statement for $100m. This strategic move is designed to provide the firm with the necessary capital to facilitate the ongoing acquisition plan and relaunch its Blue Laser technology business unit...

Infineon Technologies AG is introducing the CoolGaN Bidirectional Switch 650 V G5, a gallium nitride (GaN) switch capable of actively blocking voltage and current in both directions. Featuring a common-drain design and a double-gate structure, it leverages Infineon’s robust gate injection transistor technology to deliver a monolithic bidirectional switch, enabled by Infineon’s CoolGaN technology. The device serves as a highly efficient replacement for traditional back-to-back configurations commonly used in converters.

The bidirectional CoolGaN switch offers several key advantages for power conversion systems. By integrating two switches in a single device, it simplifies the design of cycloconverter topologies, enabling single-stage power conversion, eliminating the need for multiple conversion stages. This leads to improved efficiency, increased reliability, and a more compact design. BDS-based microinverters also benefit from higher power density and reduced component count, which simplifies manufacturing and reduces costs. Additionally, the device supports advanced grid functions such as reactive power compensation and bidirectional operation.

As a result, this solution holds significant potential across a wide range of applications, including:

Microinverters: The CoolGaN bidirectional switch enables simpler and more efficient microinverter designs, reducing both size and cost. This makes microinverters more attractive for residential and commercial solar installations.

Energy Storage Systems (ESS): In ESS applications such as battery chargers and dischargers, the switch allows for more efficient and reliable energy storage and release.

Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging: In EV charging systems, the BDS switch supports faster, more efficient charging while also enabling vehicle-to-grid functionality, where energy stored in the vehicle battery can be fed back into the grid.

Motor control: The CoolGaN BDS is ideal for use in Current Source Inverters for industrial motor drives. Compared to traditional Voltage Source Inverters, CSIs offer benefits such as:

• Producing a sinusoidal output voltage, which supports longer cable runs, reduced losses, and improved fault tolerance.
• Replacing the DC-link capacitor with an inductor, improving high-temperature performance and short-circuit protection.
• Higher efficiency at partial loads, lower EMI, inherent buck-boost capability for voltage variation, and scalability for parallel operation.

These features make CSIs a more robust and efficient alternative for industrial motor applications.

AI data centers: In AI server power supplies, bidirectional switches like CoolGaN support higher switching frequencies and power density in architectures such as Vienna rectifiers and H4 PFCs. A single CoolGaN BDS can replace two conventional switches, reducing component count, cost, size, and overall power losses.

The post Infineon introduces CoolGaN Bidirectional Switch 650 V G5 for enhanced efficiency and reliability in power systems appeared first on ELE Times.

Random Access Memory (RAM) is an essential part of any computing system, its speed and efficiency depending on it. India’s RAM market has seen strong growth over the past few years due to growing demand for high-end computing, gaming and enterprise applications. The Indian RAM market has both local and foreign players, providing a variety of RAM modules such as DDR3, DDR4, and DDR5 technologies. In India, there are quite a few brands that provide top-notch RAM modules for various purposes. Here’s a glimpse at the top 10 RAM brands in India, their origin and specifications.

1. Corsair

Corsair is one of the first memory module makers based in the United States that primarily serves as a supplier for gamers, business users and PC enthusiasts, Its RAM is designed with aggressive cooling systems, customizable RGB color, and optimum speed for overlocking.

2. Kingston

Kingston, an American company, specializes in the manufacturing of top-class memory solutions. It provides dependable RAM modules under various categories such as DDR3, DDR4, and DDR5, along with its HyperX line that caters to gamers and high-end users.

3. Samsung

Samsung, headquartered in South Korea, is a world leader in semiconductor technology and producers top-notch RAM modules. Their memory solutions offer superior speed and efficiency and are in great demand for use in laptops, desktops and workstations. The company manufactures memory solutions over a range of generations, such as DDR3, DDR4 and DDR5, which find applications in various devices, from laptops and desktops to enterprise servers.

4. G. SKILL

Based in Taiwan, G. SKILL is a leader in gaming memory solutions, offering ultra-high -speed frequencies and leading cooling technology. Their Trident Z series RAM modules are especially well-linked among gaming enthusiasts searching for extreme overlocking capabilities.

5. Crucial

A Micron subsidiary, Crucial is U.S. based and offers reliable and cost-effective RAM solutions. Its Ballistix series popularized, Crucial RAM has widespread use for general computing while being both performant and price -effective.

6. ADATA

Taiwanese by origin, ADATA produces high-speed RAM modules featuring innovative designs. ADATA produces DDR4 and DDR5 memory solutions, with the XPG gaming series being specifically designed for gamers looking for top-class performance and longevity.

7. Transcend

Another Taiwanese company, Transcend is known for making industrial-grade memory modules. RAM solutions by Transcend are designed for long-lasting durability and can be used in commercial and consumer applications.

8. SK Hynix

Headquartered in South Korea, SK Hynix is an expert in enterprise-level memory solutions. Their RAM products guarantee high-speed performance, reliability and peak efficiency, serving professional and industrial computing purposes.

9. Patriot

Patriot, an American company, specializes in providing high-performance RAM solutions with superior heat dissipation technology. Their Viper gaming line is designed for gaming systems that need fast and stable memory.

10. TeamGroup

Located in Taiwan, TeamGroup specializes in manufacturing stylish and high-performance RAM modules. Their T-Force gaming line offers a blend of appearance and superior cooling technology, and hence it is a top pick for users who are into performance.

Brand Name	Example Model	Key Specifications
Corsair	Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro	DDR4, DDR5, RGB options, High-speed modules
Kingston	Kingston Fury Beast	DDR3, DDR4, DDR5, Value and HyperX series
G. SKILL	G. SKILL Trident Z RGB	DDR4, DDR5, High-frequency modules, RGB lighting
Crucial	Crucial Ballistix	DDR3, DDR4, DDR5, Low-cost alternatives
ADATA	ADATA XPG Spectrix D60G	DDR3, DDR4. DDR5, XPG Gaming series
Transcend	Transcend Jet Ram	DDR3, DDR4, DDR5, Industrial-grade memory
Samsung	Samsung DDR4-3200	DDR3, DDR4, DDR5, High-capacity modules
Hynix	SK Hynix Gold P31	DDR3, DDR4, DDR5, Enterprise-grade memory
Patriot	Patriot Viper Steel	DDR4, DDR5, Viper gaming series
TeamGroup	TeamGroup T-Force Delta	RGB, DDR4, DDR5, T-Force gaming series

 

There is competition among brands in the varied Indian RAM market to offer dependable, fast memory solutions for a range of computing requirements. While Transcend, ADATA, and Crucial provide good mid-range options, Corsair, Kingston, and G. SKILL stand out as premium options for gaming and high-performance applications. With their commitment to quality and innovation, Samsung and Hynix remain formidable competitors in the semiconductor sector.

The post Top 10 RAM Brands in India appeared first on ELE Times.

Infineon Technologies AG, the leading provider of automotive semiconductors, and Visteon Corporation, a global leader in automotive cockpit electronics, announced the companies have signed a Memorandum of Understanding to advance the development of next-generation electric vehicle powertrains.

In this joint effort, Infineon and Visteon will collaborate and integrate power conversion devices based on Infineon semiconductors, with particular emphasis on wideband gap device technologies, which provide significant advantages in power conversion applications compared to silicon-based semiconductors. These devices include greater power density, efficiency and thermal performance, which contribute to improved efficiency and reduced system costs for next-generation power conversion modules for the automotive sector.

Future Visteon EV powertrain applications incorporating Infineon CoolGaN (Gallium Nitride) and CoolSiC (Silicon Carbide) devices may include battery junction boxes, DC-DC converters and on-board chargers. The resulting powertrain systems will conform to the highest efficiency, robustness and reliability.

“Working with Infineon allows us to integrate cutting-edge semiconductor technologies that are essential in improving power conversion efficiency and overall system capability of next generation electric vehicles,” said Dr. Tao Wang, Head of the Electrification Product Line of Visteon Corporation. “This collaboration will advance technologies that accelerate the transition to a more sustainable and efficient mobility ecosystem.”

“Visteon is a recognized innovator and an early adopter of new technologies, making them an ideal partner for us,” said Peter Schaefer, Chief Sales Officer Automotive, Infineon Technologies AG. “Together, we will push the boundaries of electric vehicle technology and provide superior solutions to the global automotive industry.”

The post Infineon and Visteon Collaborate on Advanced Power Conversion Systems for Next-Generation Electric Vehicles appeared first on ELE Times.

Here's a new interesting addition to my collection of Soviet equipment - the G2-57 hardware true RNG. Didn't expect it to be so packed inside, but I guess you need a lot of circuitry to provide basically anything you'd want from an RNG. This device outputs: 1. Binary random signal with adjustable amplitude and bit width, with ability to generate endless random signal or repeating random patterns of up to 21 bits. 2. Analog random signal with gaussian distribution and adjustable frequency range. 3. Analog random signal with continuous uniform distribution and adjustable frequency range. submitted by /u/AltCtrlGraphene [link] [comments]

Infineon Technologies AG of Munich, Germany is introducing the CoolGaN bidirectional switch (BDS) 650V G5, a gallium nitride (GaN) switch capable of actively blocking voltage and current in both directions. Featuring a common-drain design and a double-gate structure, it leverages Infineon's robust gate injection transistor (GIT) technology to deliver a monolithic bidirectional switch, enabled by Infineon’s CoolGaN technology. The device serves as a highly efficient replacement for traditional back-to-back configurations commonly used in converters...

Weakening demand in the automotive and industrial sectors slowed shipment growth for silicon carbide (SiC) substrates in 2024, notes market research firm TrendForce. At the same time, intensifying market competition and sharp price declines have pushed global revenue for N-type SiC substrates down 9% year-on-year to US$1.04bn...

Followed this link: https://www.circuits-diy.com/simple-flashing-led-using-transistors-led-flasher/ The size of a small pencil. Can be carried anywhere. No IC, just TTL. Making 3D printed case for it too. submitted by /u/SignificantManner197 [link] [comments]

Earlier this year, within the concluding post of a multi-part series that explored a not-as-advertised portable power generator, its already-broken-on-delivery bundled solar panel:

and the second solar panel I’d also bought for the setup (and subsequently also returned):

I discussed the primary options (serial and parallel) for merging the outputs of multiple solar panels, the respective strengths and shortcomings of the two approaches and, in the parallel-connection case, the extra circuitry that (unless already built into the panels themselves) would likely be necessary to prevent reverse-current hotspots in situations where one or both panels were in dim light-to-darkness.

Since both panels I’d bought, plus the portable power generator they were intended to “feed”, were all based on Anderson Powerpole PP15-45 connectors:

the parallel combiner I’d also bought from (and subsequently also returned to) Amazon had Anderson Powerpole connectors on both input ends, plus the output:

What if anything was inside it beyond just two pairs of input wire, with like-polarity cables soldered together and to an output strand, all within an intermediary watertight compartment? And if more, why? Here’s what I wrote back then:

Assume first that the combiner cable simply merges the panels’ respective positive and negative feeds, with no added intermediary electronics between them and the electrons’ intended destination. What happens, first, if all the parallel-connected panels are in shade (or to my earlier “dark” wording surrogate, it’s nighttime)? If the generator is already charged up, its battery pack’s voltage potential will be higher than that of the panels themselves, resulting in possible reverse current flow from the generator to the panels. Further, what happens if there’s an illumination discrepancy between the panels? Here again there’ll be a voltage potential differential, this time between them. And so, in this case, even if they’re still charging up the generator’s batteries as intended, there’ll also be charging-rate-inefficient (not to mention potentially damaging; keep reading) current flow from one panel to the other.

The result, described in this crowded diagram from the same combiner-cable listing on Amazon:

is what’s commonly referred to as a “hotspot” on one or all panels. Whether or not it negatively impacts panel operating lifetime is, judging from the online discussions I’ve auditioned, a topic of no shortage of debate, although I suspect that at least some folks who are skeptical are also naïve…which leads to my next point: how do you prevent (or at least minimize) reverse current flow back to one or both panels? With high power-tolerant diodes, I’ll postulate.

Those folks who think you can direct-connect multiple panels in parallel with nothing but wire? What I suspect they don’t realize is that there are probably reverse current-suppressing diodes already in the panels, minimally one per but often also multiple (since each panel, particularly for large-area models, is comprised of multiple sub-panels stitched together within the common frame). The perhaps-already-obvious downside of this approach is that there’s a forward-bias voltage drop across each diode, which runs counter to the aspiration of pushing as much charge power as possible to the destination battery pack…

If you look closely at the earlier “crowded diagram” you can see a blurry image of what the combiner cable’s circuitry supposedly looks like inside:

And I closed with this:

Prior to starting this writeup, I returned the original combiner cable I bought, since due to my in-parallel return of the Duracell and Energizer devices, I no longer needed the cable, either. But I’ve just re-bought one, to satisfy my own “what’s inside” research-induced curiosity, which I’ll share with you in a teardown to come.

That time is now. Since I strongly suspected my teardown would be destructive, I picked up the cheapest combiner I could find on Amazon. This one, to be precise, from the same supplier I’d chosen before (therefore presumably with the same “guts” in between the output and inputs):

In this particular case, the combiner was intended for use with Jackery portable power stations (historically based on, as I’ve noted before, either a DC7909 or DC8020 connector depending on the model), so it included native-plus-adapter support for both plug standards. Today’s patient was “Amazon Warehouse”-sourced, therefore $3.20 cheaper than the $15.99 list price. And again, I assumed it wouldn’t live past my dissection of it, anyway. Speaking of which, here it is:

Now freed, along with its associated output adapter, from clear-plastic captivity and as usual accompanied by a 0.75″ (19.1 mm) diameter U.S. penny for size comparison purposes:

Input(s) end:

Middle thirds, top and bottom:

And output end, both “bare” and adapter-augmented:

Back to the middle third for a side view. Look, it’s an ultrasonic welded seam all the way around!

I’m glad to see that at least some of you enjoyed my attempted (successfully, so, albeit not cleanly) breach of an ultrasonic-welded wall wart case at the beginning of last month.

To the Hackaday crowd: No, it wasn’t intended as an April Fools’ joke. I had no idea what day Aalyia was going to publish it, although in retrospect, excellent choice, my esteemed colleague!

This time I decided to downscale my “implements of destruction” somewhat, downgrading from a 2.5 lb. sledge to a more modest ball-peen hammer,  and to a more diminutive but no less sharp (unfortunately, this time absent a “hammer end”) paint scraper:

I’d also like to introduce you to my equally diminutive, recently acquired vise, the surrogate for the Black & Decker Workmate I used last time. Isn’t it dainty (albeit surprisingly sturdy)?

It took a few more whacks than I would have preferred (or maybe I was just being cautious after last time’s results), but eventually I got inside, and cleanly so this time, if I do say so myself:

The other side…not so much, although still not bad (and yes, to several readers’ suggestions, I also own a hacksaw, which I’ve used before in similar situations; I was just angling for variety):

All that was left was a flat-head screwdriver acting as a lever arm to pry the two halves apart:

And we’re in:

This initial perspective is of the bottom of the device:

Note the thick PCB traces and their routings. Keep this in mind when we flip it to the other side:

Speaking of which, let’s next remove those two screws:

And the PCB’s now free:

Here’s the bottom side of the PCB again, now absent the case half that previously surrounded it:

And here’s the now-exposed top half, blurrily glimpsed earlier in one of the “stock photos”, that we all really care about:

Zooming in a bit:

And now even closer, courtesy of my crude, inexpensive loupe-as-supplemental-lens setup:

Those are indeed “high power-tolerant diodes”! Specifically, they’re multi-sourced (does anyone there know if the first line “LGE” mark refers to LG Electronics?) MBRD1045 Schottky devices, variously referred to both “diodes” and “rectifiers”, the latter because their Schottky-derived low forward voltage loss makes them amenable to use in (among other things) full-wave rectifier circuits like the one seen in last month’s “wall wart”. In actuality, the two terms refer to the same thing, as a discussion forum thread I came across in my research made clear. This memorable phrase in one of the thread’s posts cracked me up (no, I won’t reveal if I agree!):

EEs are not known for consistency and precise language.

Admittedly, a circuit diagram I found in several suppliers’ datasheets gave me initial pause:

Two anode pins? Were the same-polarity outputs of both solar cells combined ahead of the diode? And if so, why were there four diodes in the design, instead of just two?

Eventually, even before doing the math and calculating that the spec’d 10 A of peak per-diode forward current would barely-at-best enable free flow of even one solar panel’s electron output (thereby, I suspect, being the primary cause, vs the slight forward voltage drop across the diodes, of my previously mentioned inefficiency results noted by some combiner users), far from two panels’ aggregate load, I’d also realized that such a setup would only achieve one of the two desired combiner objectives. It would indeed prevent this scenario:

What happens, first, if all the parallel-connected panels are in shade (or to my earlier “dark” wording surrogate, it’s nighttime)? If the generator is already charged up, its battery pack’s voltage potential will be higher than that of the panels themselves, resulting in possible reverse current flow from the generator to the panels.

But it would do nothing to current flow-correct this other key potential “hotspot” scenario:

What happens if there’s an illumination discrepancy between the panels? Here again there’ll be a voltage potential differential, this time between them. And so, in this case, even if they’re still charging up the generator’s batteries as intended, there’ll also be charging-rate-inefficient (not to mention potentially damaging; keep reading) current flow from one panel to the other.

So, four diodes total it is, two for each panel (one for the output and the other for the return), with both anode connections of each diode leveraged for a common input, and the two panels’ respective positive and negative pairs combined after the multi-diode structure. This “digital guy” may yet evolve embryonic-at-least analog and power electronics expertise…nah. C’mon let’s get real. Delusions are inexhaustible, don’cha know. Regardless, did I get the analysis right, or have I missed something obvious? Sound off with your thoughts in the comments!

—Brian Dipert is the Editor-in-Chief of the Edge AI and Vision Alliance, and a Senior Analyst at BDTI and Editor-in-Chief of InsideDSP, the company’s online newsletter.

 Related Content

• Energizer’s PowerSource Pro Battery Generator: Not bad, but you can do better
• The Energizer 200W portable solar panel: A solid offering, save for a connector too fragile

The post Cutting into a multi-solar panel parallel combiner appeared first on EDN.

India’s BrahMos missile is a milestone in new age technology and an icon of Indo-Russian defense cooperation Introduced through a joint collaboration between India’s Defense Research and Development Organisation and Russia’s NPO Mashinostroyenia in 1998, the name of the missile Brahmos is derived from the names of rivers Brahmaputra (India) and Moskva (Russia). It represents the integration of both countries technological strengths.

Land-launched and ship- launched Brahmos entered service in November 2005. Subsequently, an air-launched version was completed for the Su-30MKI fighter, which emerged in 2012 and became officially operational in 2019. The BrahMos is derived from the Russian P-800 Oniks cruise missile but has been indigenously upgraded and adapted to Indian Armed Forces specifications. It is the fastest supersonic cruise missile in active service worldwide, with the ability to cruise at speeds of Mach 2.8 to 3.0. Its speed makes it nearly impossible to detect and intercept, providing it with a decisive advantage over ordinary subsonic missiles.

Design:

Technically, Brahmos is a two-stage missile. Its first stage is a solid-fuel booster that takes it to supersonic speed, and the second stage is a liquid-fueled ramjet engine that maintains its cruise speed. The missile is stealth-designed to reduce radar detection and has the capability of low-altitude flying, particularly in sea-skimming mode. It adheres to a fire and forget policy with no further instructions after being fired, and it employs sophisticated inertial navigation supplemented with GPS/GLONASS technology for accuracies within a circular error probable (CEP) of less than a meter.

BrahMos has the capability to carry conventional warheads ranging from 200 to 300 kilograms and has a maximum range of 450 kilometers, with an extended-range division that can fly more than 800 kilometers under development. BrahMos is deployable from land-based platforms, submarines, surface ships, and fighter jets like Sukhoi Su-30MKI.

Variants:

A number of variants have been created to be compatible with various divisions of the military. These include Brahmos-A to be launched from air, BrahMos-ER for longer-range strikes and the BrahMos-NG (Next Generation) lighter and small variant being developed to be used by lighter planes and smaller launch platforms. A next-generation hypersonic version, BrahMos -II, is also on the cards, which plans to travel faster than Mach7.

Features:

Type: Supersonic cruise missile

Speed: Mach 2.8 to Mach 3.0 ( approximate 3,700 km/h)

Range: Up to 450 Km (Extended Range variant over 800 km)

Length: Approximately 8.4 meters

Diameter: Around 0.67 meters

Propulsion: Two stage-solid fuel booster and liquid-fueled ramjet

Launch Platforms: Land launchers, ships, submarines, aircraft

Guidance system: Inertial navigation system with GPS/GLONASS support

Conclusion:

In the recent India-Pakistan conflict, BrahMos missile was instrumental in the military campaign of India under ‘Operation Sindoor’. The Indian Defence Forces employed BrahMos missiles to carry out targeted attacks, having a deep impact on Pakistan’s defence setup.

India utilized BrahMos missiles along with other precision-guided weaponry such as HAMMER and SCALP missiles. BrahMos’s high speed (Mach 2.8- 3.0), precision accuracy, and fire and forget nature enabled India to target deep, the extended range (up to 800 km) of the missile granted strategic deterrence. The BrahMos missile is a symbol of India’s technological drive and strategic independence.

The post Why the World Fears BrahMos: India’s Game-Changing Missile Explained appeared first on ELE Times.

In booth 1447 at SID Display Week 2025 in San Jose, CA, USA (11–16 May), micro-LED technology firm VueReal Inc of Waterloo, ON, Canada is unveiling its latest micro-LED advances, highlighting scalable solutions for next-generation lighting, displays and transparent electronics across automotive, consumer and emerging tech applications...

Wolfspeed Inc of Durham, NC, USA — which makes silicon carbide (SiC) materials and power semiconductor devices — has appointed Paul Walsh and Mark Jensen to its board of directors. Both will serve as members of the Audit Committee...

Sweden-based AlixLabs AB (which was spun off from Lund University in 2019) says that the US Patent and Trademark Office has issued the notice of allowance for its latest patent application, US20250087487A1 ‘Formation of an array of nanostructures’...

Credifin Limited announced the launch of its new product EV Startup Loans. This product will promote entrepreneurship through EV business and deployment of active vehicles throughout the country. The EV Startup Loans will be available to any individual or company that wants to start a dealership or electric vehicle related business.

Under the EV StartUp Loans product, Credifin will provide the EV Entrepreneur loans up to Rs. Fifty Lakhs to begin with. On a need and case to case basis the loan amount can be increased going forward. With presence in over 200 locations in 13 states and expanding rapidly, Credifin is targeting 1000 EV Entrepreneurs in the next 2-3 years

Credifin has over 100 existing OEM partnerships across E-Rickshaw, L5 and EV 2 Wheeler Segment and will help the entrepreneur lendee with not just the financing but also facilitate tie ups with reputed manufacturers for setting up of the new dealership, at no cost. In addition, under the scheme, Credifin will also provide trade advance for the dealership to acquire the vehicles to be sold by them. Credifin will also offer financing of the vehicles to the end customer.

Credifin will help create EV entrepreneurs by creating an ecosystem where Credifin team will provide an end-to-end solution to the Entrepreneur. Whether it is setting up of the business, dealership, getting business leads, partnerships or help with local authorities for registration of the vehicles, Credifin’s team can assist the entrepreneurs and hand-hold them all the way.

“We at Credifin are committed to Building Bharat and what better way to do this than to make sure that our entrepreneurs have an enabling environment. Our EV StartUp Loan is a product that makes sure that setting up a business is made as easy as possible and that we are with them all through, ensuring that they not just survive but thrive. We have today, one of the biggest EV networks and we believe that the time is ripe to use this network to help individuals realize their dreams of building successful businesses in a sustainable manner”, says Shalya Gupta, CEO, Credifin Limited.

The post Credifin Limited announces a new product: EV StartUp Loans appeared first on ELE Times.

South Korea-based LED maker Seoul Semiconductor Co Ltd says that it has narrowed the market share gap with global number-2 player ams OSRAM to just one percentage point, according to the ‘2024 Global LED Market Share Rankings’ issued by market research firm Omdia. Seoul Semiconductor was the only company among the global top three to sustain both revenue and market share, while industry leaders Nichia and ams OSRAM experienced significant revenue declines amid the slowdown in the LED market...

Bluetooth channel sounding—a new protocol stack designed to enable secure and precise distance measurement between two Bluetooth Low Energy (LE) devices—is propelling Bluetooth technology into a new era of location awareness. It offers true distance awareness while enhancing Bluetooth devices’ ranging capabilities.

Bluetooth channel sounding’s use spans from helping locate devices such as phones or tablets to digital security enhancements like geofencing. It can also be used in smart locks, pet trackers, vehicle keyless entry, and access control applications.

Hardware and software solutions are starting to emerge to fulfill the potential of Bluetooth channel sounding and provide sub-meter accuracy for Bluetooth-empowered devices. These solutions include reference boards, development kits, and software stacks.

Below are two design case studies demonstrating the potential of Bluetooth channel sounding technology.

Radio board and antenna hardware

Silicon Labs’ xG24 radio board—designed to work with Pro Kit—aims to help developers create and prototype products using Bluetooth channel sounding for precise distance estimation. Pro Kit includes a BRD4198A EFR32xG24 2.4 GHz +10-dBm radio board, a dipole antenna, and reference designs. It works with either a coprocessor with an external MCU or a wireless system-on-chip (SoC) with an integrated MCU.

Another xG24 Dev Kit features a dual-antenna PCB design and a channel sounding visualizer tool to allow developers to view distance measurements in real time. Single-antenna hardware offered in the Pro Kit has fewer antenna paths and limited multipath information, which makes it more suitable for basic Bluetooth channel sounding applications.

Figure 1 USB or coin cell powered development platform with a dual-antenna design and up to +10 dBm output power. Source: Silicon Labs

On the other hand, dual-antenna hardware offers higher accuracy, better spatial performance, and enhanced multipath resolution, making it suitable for advanced applications such as key fobs and tags that demand precise distance estimation (Figure 1). Its antenna diversity also bolsters signal quality and robustness.

Software stack

Bluetooth channel sounding technology uses phase-based ranging (PBR), round trip time (RTT), or both to accurately measure the distance between two Bluetooth LE-connected devices. PBR utilizes the principle of phase rotation in RF signals to determine precise distance between two devices. On the other hand, RTT, a communication channel, refers to the duration a signal takes to travel from the initiator to the reflector and back again.

The above solution from Silicon Labs uses both, employing RTT to verify and cross-check the PBR measurements. However, Metirionic, a German supplier of wireless ranging and positioning technologies, offers an alternative to both PBR and RTT by leveraging the channel impulse response (CIR) technique for highly accurate and reliable distance estimation.

Figure 2 The channel sound evaluation kit is built around Nordic Semiconductor’s nRF54L15 wireless MCU. Source: Metirionic

Its Bluetooth channel sounding evaluation kit—Metirionic Advanced Ranging Stack (MARS)—is a low-power signal-processing upper-layer software (Figure 2). It can run on Nordic’s nRF54L15 embedded MCU, on an external MCU or processor, or on a host PC to ensure precise, reliable and real-time ranging and location accuracy for industrial, Internet of Things (IoT), real-time location services (RTLS), logistics, and secure access applications.

Related Content

• A short design tutorial on Bluetooth Channel Sounding
• How Bluetooth Channel Sounding Compares to Other Location Tech
• Bluetooth Channel Sounding Improves Distance Estimation Accuracy
• New wireless MCUs feature software radio and Bluetooth channel sounding
• Rohde & Schwarz to show measurements on novel Bluetooth Channel Sounding signals

The post Two design solutions for Bluetooth channel sounding appeared first on EDN.