Notifications
Mark all as read
Q&A

Usage of modern active building blocks [closed]

+1
−2

closed as too generic by Olin Lathrop‭ on Oct 23, 2020 at 15:12

This post contains multiple questions or has many possible indistinguishable correct answers or requires extraordinary long answers.

This question was closed; new answers can no longer be added. Users with the reopen privilege may vote to reopen this question if it has been improved or closed incorrectly.

In the past, a large number of new active building blocks have been proposed and published by many researchers all over the world. In most cases, these new building blocks were used for realizing novel filter and/or oscillator circuits.

In addition to the well known amplifier types

Operational Amplifier (opamp), Current Feedback Operational Amplifier (CFOA), Operational Transconductance Amplifier (OTA),

here are some of these new active blocks:

Multiple Output OTA (MO-OTA),

Current Follower (CF),

Current Feedback Differential Difference Amplifier (CFDDA)

Current Conveyor: first, second and third generation (CCI, CCII, CCIII),

Differencing Voltage Current Conveyor (DVCC) ,

Operational Transresistance Amp (OTRA),

Differential Difference Amplifier (DDA),

Current Differencing Buffered Amplifier (CDBA),

Current Differencing Transconductance Amplifier (CDTA),

Current Follower Transconductance Amplifier (CFTA),

Current Conveyor Transconductance Amplifier (CCTA),

Current Backward Transconductance Amplifier (CBTA)

Current-Controlled Multiple Output Current Conveyor (CC-MOCC)

Differencing Voltage Transconductance Amplifier (DVTA),

Voltage Differencing Inverting Buffered Amplifier (VD-IBA).


Since I have not been actively involved in industrial research and development for several years, I have the following question:

Does one (or more) of the mentioned novel amplifier units have a certain application in industrial practice?

Why should this post be closed?

9 comments

This question is too broad, and the answers will be vague at best since "significance" is very subjective. In addition, the circuits you ask about need to be defined, preferably with schematic. These names aren't standard, or at least not in common use. It could be OK to have each circuit in a separate question, with schematic or definition, and ask what practical real-world applications it might have or has been used for. Olin Lathrop‭ about 1 month ago

I am aware that most of the names are not very well known - and that's why I ask. I am sure that someone will only answer if he has a positive example for a professional application. Of course, I cannot and do not want to present any circuit diagrams or even explanations here. It is something like a general survey. Is that not allowed? I have replaced "significance" by "application". LvW‭ about 1 month ago

I support the question and this kind of questions. I think that, in addition to specific questions, there should also be general questions. CoDidact will only benefit from this. Circuit fantasist‭ about 1 month ago

@LvW: So you're really asking if anyone recognizes the names or abbreviations. They may have used a circuit like that, but be unaware of what you call it. However, that's not how your question reads. It's written implying we are all supposed to know what those names mean. Olin Lathrop‭ about 1 month ago

@Olin Lathrop. Could be that I was not able to express myself clear enough (English is not my mother tongue!). I am only interested to learn if one (or more) of these novel active building blocks has more than a theoretical meaning only. That is all! For example: The AD844 is an integrated circuit that can be used as a CCII. Of course,I do not assume that "all are supposed to know what those names mean". The same to me: I do not know the secific properties of most devices. LvW‭ about 1 month ago

Show 4 more comments

0 answers