Talk:Electronic component

Introductory section

It seems to me that this excellent article should have a brief introductory paragraph explaining what an electronic component is - in a general sense. I shall add one, but if anyone here disagrees you can obviously edit it or remove it again. Chris Jefferies 21:44, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Requested move

I have requested a move, electronic components → electronic component, in accordance with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (plurals). I can't do it myself because Electronic component used to redirect somewhere else. —Caesura^(t) 16:16, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Voting

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~

Discussion

I'm not sure where to write this, or if anyone will even see, or reply to this...but here's a situation i need resolved...one power source, two DC motors, one drive shaft...the input to the main motor is variable current, and the secondary motor free spins with no current going through it, i want the secondary motor to be switched on when, and only when the main motor is near or at its max operation and act as a 'turbo' for the drive shaft, and then at maximum current, have both motors running at max, and when the current is reduced, the secondary motor turns off and the main motor runs alone once again...and i need the value of the 'turbo activation' to be adjustable...power source is 4 AAA batteries, or one 9v 15:02, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Result

Moved. WhiteNight ^{T | @ | C} 02:43, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Root page conflict

In trying to apply root page principles using templates, I find this page not only has too many branches, but it conflicts with Passive component and Active component which already exist. I suggest assigning components to the latter roots, perhaps with further ones, and losing this page. --Lindosland 01:22, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Root page conflict

I support Lindosland's proposal to get rid of this page and merge what can be merged into existing pages without creating conflict. (I'd not have found this discussion had it not been for coming across the term "thermionic valve" which is a term rarely heard outside a textbook - another reason to lose the page, though that term should certainly be kept as a redirect...)

Fernblatt 01:07, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

quiero saber mas mas electricidad y fundamentos esenciales y conceptos mas profundos de electonicas y sus comiensos

Standard infobox for electronic components.

I propose to add infobox to all electronic components articles. The infobox should include:

• Component name
• Active/passive
• Common designator (for example R for resistor)
• Units of measurements (if any)
• Symbol
• Photograph of the component
• List of major formulae associated with the component (V=IR etc)
• Additional parameters (if needed)

What do you think?Michagal 12:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Electrical versus electronic

Electrical component.

What exactly is the difference between an electrical component and an electronic component? Please explain or merge. --RichardVeryard 08:28, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

No difference. Electronic components use electricity e.g. a valve. But an electrical element is a physics model the same way that chemistry is a physics model.
Sleigh 16:50, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

There is difference, Electrical component do not include electronic components only electrical components. So I agree with User:RichardVeryardm explain or merge. --NERIUM (talk) 07:33, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

History of electronic components

I can't find anything on the history of electronic technologies.
Sleigh 16:23, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

who Aanand12345 (talk) 14:37, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

merge

I suggest merging the list at electronic component#Standard abbreviations with the list at circuit diagram#European and Australian codes.

Both lists seem to include the sort of "abbreviation" used as component designators and printed on PCBs, such as "U" for integrated circuit. It seems redundant to maintain two copies. --68.0.124.33 (talk) 02:41, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

NO - because the circuit diagram article explains the philosphy of diagrams, i.e. that they abstractly represent the eventual physical result. Instead, just take out the codes bit and link it. Please don't remove the article, I link to it from Abstract polytope. SteveWoolf (talk) 19:48, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

OK, let's do that -- keep the circuit diagram article, take the codes out of the circuit diagram article and move them to reference designator, leaving behind a link to that article. OK? --68.0.124.33 (talk) 05:51, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

IEC 61346-2 2000

We just purchased the above standard and found that some of the codes listed in this page are incorrect.

Suggest that the reference to IEC standard be properly emphasized. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.228.58.127 (talk) 02:29, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

resistor

how can we find out capacity of resistor? Aanand12345 (talk) 14:36, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Is the diode a passive component or an active component ?

I think it is not a new question, but I do not find a discussion, may be because there is not a consensus...

The Diodes appears in the chapter : 2 Active components / 2.1 Semiconductors / 2.1.1 Diodes, so it means the diode is an Active components. But the TVS is also listed in the chapter 4.5 Protection devices that are described as Passive components. On the page dedicated for the TVS, it is also presented as a Passive component. The Schottky diode is presented as a Passive component on its page. The Zener diode is presented as an Active component on it s page.

Sylvain

I don't agree that diodes are active. To me an active component is one that generally requires a power source in addition to the signal being processed. Diodes don't to that; transistors do. Jeh (talk) 21:50, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

It's a bit of a historical hangover. While I would agree with you for modern parts, in the past, vacuum tube diodes did require a power source for the filament (or heater) in order to operate and would have been treated as active parts. 86.162.136.151 (talk) 13:53, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Article Identity Problem

This article claims to be separate from the idea of Electrical Elements, which to me implies that anything listed should be tangible, like a carbon-film resistor or fuse and not something that falls more into the realm of "idea" like RC and LC networks, which are both listed under Networks in Passive Components or Waveguides in Other. At the same time, I do see value in these being referenced from this article.

Similarly, this article has a scope problem, most notably in integrated circuits. I think it would be a disservice not to mention opamps, 555's, and maybe 74 series logic for the sake of making it clear that Integrated Circuits as a category covers so many components that can now be seen as fundamental that it is impractical to list them all.

While I may be wrong, I suspect this article serves three uses:

1. A place to find wish-list components for budding EE's - "I need a component that does X"
2. A place to find out of date and cutting edge technology - "What came before the MOSFET, What will replace it?"
3. A place to find gaps in knowledge - "I know this field well, but I have never head of Field Programmable Analog Arrays"

Serving those three uses in full would make this article too large, as doing 1. would mean giving everything a description, 2. would mean including extreme esoteria (which may already be the case with some existing entries in this list, such as FEFET and CNTFET which I added) and the all three would, to some extent, necessitate aforementioned list of ICs.

With this in mind, I think the best way to better this article would be

• Clean up the references to "ideas" by putting them under the section headers in the brief context blurb
• Bring in both cutting edge and historical content (Core memory and 3D X point, for example), adding historical and 'recent' or 'under development' headings as fitting. This might require table-izing some of the current list, so that things such as 'year invented' or 'in active production' can be added
• Adding categories of ICs. This, I suspect, would be the most controversial change as a timer (like the 555) isn't a fundamental electronic component so much as an idea, bringing this back to the point I started with.

I'm planning to go ahead and move forward with these changes as I have time over the next week or so unless anyone has any objections

VegaDW (talk) 17:09, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

I have long questioned the usefullness of this page myself. If a comprehensive list is wanted then we need to empty out the RS or Farnell catalogue into the article making a long and sprawling useless article and WP:SALAT says we shouldn't create those Lists that are too general or too broad in scope have little value.... There is no corresponding Mechanical component page. I doubt anybody uses this page to find suitable components for their project. That's just not what this site is for (or any good at). This would be a much better encyclopaedia article if it was more prosed based and gave a history of the evolution of components. Computer hardware does a much better job. SpinningSpark 13:12, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

You want to do the VfD? I'd do it, but I'm not sure if the issue would get fair treatment then. I'd support a VfD. But we love lists like this on WP because if you don't look closely at them, they resemble articles just like a real encyclopedia has. --Wtshymanski (talk) 03:25, 11 August 2021 (UTC)