Can I substitute a (2) CES388 Diodes for a RB480K

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rshusko
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Diodes
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the substitution of CES388 diodes for RB480K diodes in a sensitive display circuit. The user reports that the display is not functioning after installing the CES388 diodes, despite their similar properties. Experts suggest that differences in capacitance and forward voltage drop could affect performance, although they note that these differences are minimal. It is recommended to use the specified RB480K diodes to ensure proper functionality, as they have slightly higher current and capacitance ratings. The user acknowledges the advice and plans to obtain the correct diodes for testing.
Rshusko
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi All,

I am trying to wire up a fairly sensitive display that calls out for 2 RB480K diodes to be connected in series as a reference (GND C A C A). I was given CES388 diodes as a substitution but since I have installed them the display has not worked. To me, I'm a mechanical engineer, the properties seem fairly similar but I could be missing something as I am not used to doing electrical work. Any help is appreciated. if it helps the display is a US micro products P21301 in SPI mode. Thanks!
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
show/tell us more about your circuit and where these diodes need to be placed
a schematic would be helpful

it could be that the capacitance and or forward voltage drop differences between the 2 devices is what is making the circuit not work

Dave
 
  • Like
Likes Rshusko
Yes. The diodes are used for a voltage reference.

I would go with the right part. I doubt it makes a difference because they are nearly identical, but why worry?

BTW, the Rohm diodes (RB480K) have a slightly higher current and capacitance. That means they will have a slightly lower forward bias voltage for a given current. But the value will be in the mV range. Since the spec calls for that diode pair or a similar one, this is likely not the problem. Still, it could be. So until you get it working, go with the Rohm. Just don't expect that to fix the problem.
 
  • Like
Likes Rshusko
Jeff Rosenbury said:
Yes. The diodes are used for a voltage reference.

I would go with the right part. I doubt it makes a difference because they are nearly identical, but why worry?

BTW, the Rohm diodes (RB480K) have a slightly higher current and capacitance. That means they will have a slightly lower forward bias voltage for a given current. But the value will be in the mV range. Since the spec calls for that diode pair or a similar one, this is likely not the problem. Still, it could be. So until you get it working, go with the Rohm. Just don't expect that to fix the problem.

Thanks for the answer! I believe this is the case. I must have messed something else when I put in the diodes. I'll get the correct diodes in as well just to be safe.
 
Thread 'Weird near-field phenomenon I get in my EM simulation'
I recently made a basic simulation of wire antennas and I am not sure if the near field in my simulation is modeled correctly. One of the things that worry me is the fact that sometimes I see in my simulation "movements" in the near field that seems to be faster than the speed of wave propagation I defined (the speed of light in the simulation). Specifically I see "nodes" of low amplitude in the E field that are quickly "emitted" from the antenna and then slow down as they approach the far...
Hello dear reader, a brief introduction: Some 4 years ago someone started developing health related issues, apparently due to exposure to RF & ELF related frequencies and/or fields (Magnetic). This is currently becoming known as EHS. (Electromagnetic hypersensitivity is a claimed sensitivity to electromagnetic fields, to which adverse symptoms are attributed.) She experiences a deep burning sensation throughout her entire body, leaving her in pain and exhausted after a pulse has occurred...
Back
Top