BC184L transistor component

Am 24.07.2016 um 12:04 schrieb Andy Betts:

I'm taking my first baby steps into circuit design, with the intention of making guitar effect pedals that are as close to the original vintage spec as possible... Here's my issue.

 

I'm laying out the schematic for the circuit, and went to the library to pull out a BC184L transistor and there wasn't one. The closest to it I could find was a BC109, however I would really like the 184L as that's the correct one for the circuit. can I just create a new one in the library from an existing component that's virtually the same, or is there a resource for obtaining the correct library file, or am I missing something blatantly obvious as a newbie.

 

 

Thanks for your patience in advance...

 

Andy

 

--

To view any images and attachments in this post, visit:

https://www.element14.com/community/message/202196

 

The manufacturing companies use  a lot  of different characters behind

the actual number, sometimes half the alphabet

So you should check the internet for BC184 and BC184L data sheets and

compare them.

For your layout it is important that the case /pins are the same

position as for the Transistor you want to use, for your schematics the

name is not important. If the BC109 suits you, you can NAME it BC184L

because in the schematics it a symbol only while the layout will become

the real thing.

If you insist to have a BC184L in a library then you should/must make

your own libraries, because if you add your new device to a system

library, be aware that your work will be lost on  the next update.

You should also know that no layout program has all the devices ready

which are available on the market, so it is a good practise to create

your own devices (in your own libraries). Only then you can be certain

that the footprint is correct.

--

Mit freundlichen Grüßen / With best regards

Joern Paschedag

On 24/07/16 12:24, Joern Paschedag wrote:

 

For your layout it is important that the case /pins are the same

position as for the Transistor you want to use, for your schematics the

name is not important. If the BC109 suits you, you can NAME it BC184L

because in the schematics it a symbol only while the layout will become

the real thing.

If you're doing that, you should use a BC337 rather than a BC109,

because the 337 is the same package as the 184 - although check pin-outs

because the BC184L may differ from the BC184 without a suffix. Or you

could use one of the generic "TO-92-EBC" type devices but beware because

at least one of them is wrong.

Am 24.07.2016 um 14:12 schrieb Rob Pearce:

On 24/07/16 12:24, Joern Paschedag wrote:

 

For your layout it is important that the case /pins are the same

position as for the Transistor you want to use, for your schematics the

name is not important. If the BC109 suits you, you can NAME it BC184L

because in the schematics it a symbol only while the layout will become

the real thing.

 

If you're doing that, you should use a BC337 rather than a BC109,

because the 337 is the same package as the 184 - although check pin-outs

because the BC184L may differ from the BC184 without a suffix. Or you

could use one of the generic "TO-92-EBC" type devices but beware because

at least one of them is wrong.

 

Hi Rob,

since you mention the TO-92-ECB.

This was imo the worst bullshit produced.

In the eagle libraries always the pads are numbered  while the pins have

the name.

In the connect dialog of the devices the pin names are  connected to the

corresponding pad numbers.

So there is no need for ECB etc. at all.

AFAIR someone else brought up this problem and the hope that cadsoft

will clean up this.

But that is a lot of work to check all the devices with a TO-92 body.

--

Mit freundlichen Grüßen / With best regards

Joern Paschedag

Hi guys.

Thank you all for your help, and comments. I've checked the schematic and that says that the 3 trannies in the circuit are BC169C, BC184C & BC109. However, I'm also working from an original photograph of the circuit and the trannies are ALL BC184L so I'll be going with that. The pin outs are the same on all those transistors I believe so i'll use the 109 from the library and rename it... Simples!! :-)

For your interest, I'm recreating a Colorsound Power Boost version 2. The board will be the same, with board mounted pots, I just need to lay the circuit out in eagle and get the design as close to the trace as possible. I could manually trace the layout from the photo below, but it's a bit messy, and using Eagle to re-draw the circuit and create the board will ensure I don't make any ***-ups along the way as regards the circuit. I'm also sourcing (where practical) original components, so I've just received a delivery of NOS Mullard tropical fish caps the same as in the photo. all resistors are the same, I have however had to compromise with the axial electrolytic caps... I've gone with Vishay caps, a good brand and the same as what's used in the current power boost reissues.

The photos below show a version 1 power boost, which had an extra 10k resistor which the version 2 didn't have. Apart from that they were identical.

.

Andy Betts wrote:

Thank you all for your help, and comments. I've checked the schematic

and that says that the 3 trannies in the circuit are BC169C, BC184C &

BC109. However, I'm also working from an original photograph of the

circuit and the trannies are ALL BC184L so I'll be going with that.

The pin outs are the same on all those transistors I believe so i'll

use the 109 from the library and rename it... Simples!!

BC184C and L differ in pin mapping only. If you are creating a new

layout anyway, I'd go with the version the makes for the easier

routing.

--

Lorenz

Groovy! Boost that power, man!

Made in London, too.

What does it do to the sound? It looks like it's a just preamp and a tone control. Do the bass and treble cut as well, or is it just boost? Nice colour and love the graphics.

[In the time I took to write this you've added the schematic and answered my question.]

The BC184L has the base at one end, the BC109 in the middle. I vaguely seem to remember that there was a non-L version with a different pinout (it's the kind of thing that causes no end of confusion because it's inevitable that eventually somebody doing the buying will get offered a great deal on the wrong part).

Also, the pins of the BC184 are in-line, whereas those of the BC109 were in a triangular shape. It was quite normal to bend the centre pin out to form the triangle shape when you had an in-line part. We were producing industrial equipment, so we used small plastic formers that the parts sat on and that guided and supported the legs, but this is the cheap and cheerful end of the market and you can see they've just stuffed the transistors in any old how.

Do the BC184s have a letter at the end? Either BC184LB or BC184LC? The manufacturers grade transistors and offer them in a narrower range of gains than you'd get if you just had them from the end of the production line. If it has C parts, you probably want to match it - that was the higher gain bucket and they wouldn't have paid the extra if they didn't need them for the circuit operation.

The guy that owns that particular power boost has told me that ALL the transistors are BC184L's.

Also the axial caps are 22uf (The big ones), however the actual powerboost has different smaller axial caps than the schematic... the owner has listed the caps as follows:

"the small blue caps are 6.4µF, the small green one is probably a 4.7µF and the large green one is a 22µF." However the schematic lists them as 220pf & 10uf......

As regards the sound. it is a pre-amp, with a treble and bass boost... It's only when you get to about 3/4 on the volume knob does it start to break up into an overdrive. Used extensively by David Gilmour throughout the 70's with a fuzz box, he used the power boost and a big muff fuzz for the classic comfortably numb solo. he also used it on the Animals album and on the solos in Shine on.

Any help with identifying caps and stuff would be greatly appreciated.

here's more pics

Ok, so after a bit of digging I've found that Eagle has a package that is virtually identical to my BC184L that I want to use. However the pin outs are different so I thought probably the best thing to do would be to create my own library, and copy it into my library and edit it. I'll also learn more about using eagle at the same time :-)

So the package I've copied over is a BC338, however it needs editing as I said because of the pin order. That is where I get lost, and I have a few questions:

• How do I rename everything in that package from BC338 to BC184L?
• there is a small window with "technologies" and "attributes" what is it, and how do I change it?

Cheers in advance

Andy

Andy Betts wrote on Thu, 28 July 2016 13:20

Ok, so after a bit of digging I've found that Eagle has a package that

is virtually identical to my BC184L that I want to use. However the pin

outs are different so I thought probably the best thing to do would be to

create my own library, and copy it into my library and edit it. I'll also

learn more about using eagle at the same time

Wow, you'll spare no expense to save a penny!

If you had simply sat down and made the device when you first needed it,

you'd have been done a long long time ago.  Then you would also:

Have learned how to make symbols, packages, and devices in a library.

You'll be surprised to find that this won't be the last time you can't find

a device someone else has already made for you.

Not have to vet something you "found on the internet somewhere".  Properly

vetting a device can be more trouble than just making it the way you want

in the first place.

Have it adhere to whatever you standards and conventions are.  You can up

front make sure the minimum silkscreen line width is adhered to, NAME and

possibly VALUE appear in the silkscreen in the size text all your other

parts use, the right data ends up the dDocu and related layers for the

assembly drawing, etc.  Again, it's easier to just do these things right up

front than to take something that might be right and check everything.

--

Web access to CadSoft support forums at www.eaglecentral.ca.  Where the CadSoft EAGLE community meets.

Thanks for your words of wisdom... I've sorted it now. And to be honest it's probably quicker to copy an existing component and alter it, and rename it than it is to create my own.

I've not built the project yet as I'm still waiting for components to arrive, I'm also having trouble tracking down some of the components for this build as they're now obsolete.

I want to get the board etched in the next few days, hence why I want to get the schematic drawn and the board designed in Eagle