Part Number: DAC60004 Dear Technical support team,
I am considering how to operate two DAC60004 in parallel. Is it possible to use the following without using Daisy Chain Mode?
-Connect individual SYNC_B control signals to two DACs. -Prepare one pin…
Part Number: DAC60004 Hello,
I plan to use some DAC6004 in one of my design.
I will have 4 DACs. All of them will be using the same 2.5V-reference. This reference will be shared with ADCs (for these parts, the accuracy of the reference is extremely…
Part Number: DAC60004 Dear Technical Support Team,
I'd like to change device from AD5024 to DAC60004.
These are similar timing chart of SPI and command and electric characterization.
Is it easy to change?
If you have some advice , please let me…
Part Number: DAC60004
Dear Technical Support Team,
I'd like to replace from AD5024 to DAC60004.
I have been facing the command hung issue with AD5024. AD5024 doesn't accpept the command trough SPI on the system.Output level of AD5024 keeps the last…
Part Number: DAC60004 Dear Technical Support Team,
I'd like to replace from AD5024 to DAC60004.
I have been facing the command hung issue with AD5024. AD5024 doesn't accpept the command trough SPI on the system.Output level of AD5024 keeps the last…
Part Number: DAC60004
Dear Team
I'm following the design SLAA869 using DAC60004. I have a total of 4 Op Amps to create a uni-polar to bi-polar pulse.
As you see the schematic, initially, I have installed a 180nF capacitor connected to the REF pin…
Part Number: DAC60004 Other Parts Discussed in Thread: DAC8830 , DAC8871 , DAC81001 Could you clarify the overall update rate across all four DACs? Section 7.2 of the datasheet suggests successive DAC updates of 2.4 us, but it isn't clear what this means…
Part Number: DAC60004 Other Parts Discussed in Thread: DAC80004 /can youAm I correct in that we do not have an IBIS model for the digital interface on this device? If I'm correct, is there a device with a model similar enough that we can use instead?…
Hi Uttam,
Thanks for the reply. The scale on the graph was accidentally made 50V per division. But I was checking the average value of the corresponding channel on the scope which was reading as few mV only. I changed the scale and took results again…