🚀 go-pugleaf

/* Written 11:57 am  Nov 29, 1989 by henry@utzoo.uucp in m.cs.uiuc.edu:sci.electronics */
In article <24473@cup.portal.com> ISW@cup.portal.com (Isaac S Wingfield) writes:
>>...we concluded that germanium diode specs
>>were all kind of loose, and it was possible to duplicate (or even better)
>>all specs *except* FCD using silicon, and that's what nearly everybody
>>was doing! The ITT devices came in at 0.3V, and everything was fine.

>I was sort of curious about this, and ran some tests on the 1N34s I've
>got in my parts box at home.  They are from Rockwell, I think -- at least
>the tiny symbol on the side looks like the Rockwell logo!  I *think* these
>are germanium; the current-vs-voltage curve does start to break at 0.3V.
>What startled me a bit was how gradual the rise was after that; within
>the limits of my simple measuring setup, it looked like a near-linear rise
>at about 1mA/100mV, whereas the one for a 1N4148 is nearly vertical at
>circa 0.6V.  Is this normal for germanium, or have I got something funny
>like silicon pretending to be germanium?
-- 
>That's not a joke, that's      |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
>NASA.  -Nick Szabo             | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
/* End of text from m.cs.uiuc.edu:sci.electronics */

Henry, your tests looks ok to me, the last time I checked, a 1N34 was
germanium and a 1N4148 was silicon. I have used both types through
the years in various projects.

Al Irwin
Univ of Illinois
Dept of Comp Sci
Urbana, IL
irwin@m.cs.uiuc.edu