The discussion revolves around the use of conventional current, specifically the flow of positive charge, and its benefits or implications in various applications, particularly in semiconductor technology. Participants explore the historical context, practical advantages, and the impact of established conventions on current understanding and usage.
Participants express differing views on the advantages of conventional current and the performance of PNP versus NPN transistors. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing perspectives presented.
Some claims about the performance of PNP and NPN devices depend on specific contexts and applications, which are not fully explored in the discussion. Additionally, the historical reasoning behind the convention may not be universally accepted.
matt_crouch said:why do we still continue to use conventional current
Phrak said:PNP bioloar transitors are more common than NPN. Somehow, it's easier to grasp PNP's with positive current.
Other than convenience, does it matter what the sign of the current is?
In Addition: PNP bipolar transitors preform better than NPN's, in general. The same is true of P channel FETS. With PNP bipolars and P channel FETS dominant, a convention of a single ended positive supply with a common ground is advantagous. These semiconductors are used extensively in digital integrated circuits, and so, the advantage persists. By far, the analysis is far simpler than it would be if the positive voltage souce were referenced as common ground and the negative source referenced as -5V.
We have Ben Franklin, to thank for this fortuitous arrangement.
cabraham said:I'm not quite sure where you read that pnp bjts & p-channel FETs are "better". The npn bjt & n-channel FET is the preferred polarity. N-channel semiconductor material is inherently better than the p-type counterpart. The IGBT is and has been since the '80's, an n-type device. The offering of p-channel IGBTs has been very limited.
Claude