Resetting two CD4017 counters simultaneously, only one resetsHow to use Counters ONLY to construct a School Bell circuit?Using a diode to ensure current flows in only one direction, without causing a voltage dropHaving an issue of implementing an 8 bit counter from two 4 bit countersHaving an issue connecting two 4-bit Synchronous Up Down countersWiring two LDOs in parallel with only one diode betweenCan this circuit validate AT89Cx051 micro if best valued components are used?Deriving two independently stoppable clocks from one clockResetting CD4017 Counter when power source is OFFProblem with adding two counters in series on an FPGATwo source one output

Indicating multiple different modes of speech (fantasy language or telepathy)

Left multiplication is homeomorphism of topological groups

Is there a problem with hiding "forgot password" until it's needed?

Is it possible to have a strip of cold climate in the middle of a planet?

Adding empty element to declared container without declaring type of element

Can I use my Chinese passport to enter China after I acquired another citizenship?

Would it be legal for a US State to ban exports of a natural resource?

node command while defining a coordinate in TikZ

Pronouncing Homer as in modern Greek

word describing multiple paths to the same abstract outcome

How will losing mobility of one hand affect my career as a programmer?

In Star Trek IV, why did the Bounty go back to a time when whales were already rare?

Hostile work environment after whistle-blowing on coworker and our boss. What do I do?

Giant Toughroad SLR 2 for 200 miles in two days, will it make it?

Simulating a probability of 1 of 2^N with less than N random bits

What is the term when two people sing in harmony, but they aren't singing the same notes?

How to be able to process a large JSON response?

The most efficient algorithm to find all possible integer pairs which sum to a given integer

Teaching indefinite integrals that require special-casing

Superhero words!

Latex for-and in equation

QGIS Geometry Generator Line Type

Organic chemistry Iodoform Reaction

Can I Retrieve Email Addresses from BCC?



Resetting two CD4017 counters simultaneously, only one resets


How to use Counters ONLY to construct a School Bell circuit?Using a diode to ensure current flows in only one direction, without causing a voltage dropHaving an issue of implementing an 8 bit counter from two 4 bit countersHaving an issue connecting two 4-bit Synchronous Up Down countersWiring two LDOs in parallel with only one diode betweenCan this circuit validate AT89Cx051 micro if best valued components are used?Deriving two independently stoppable clocks from one clockResetting CD4017 Counter when power source is OFFProblem with adding two counters in series on an FPGATwo source one output













3












$begingroup$


I am working on a simple 24-hour clock based on the CD4017. To reset when the clock reaches the 24th hour, two diodes are used to produce an "and" logic when the 2 digit and 4 digit LEDs receive a high output from the CD4017. The output from these diodes are connected to the reset pins of both CD4017 chips.



What I have found happens in practice is that the U-H10 chip resets as expected, but the U-H01 chip does not. I imagine this could be due to a delay in the signal due to differences in trace lengths (maybe 10-20mm) and or placements somehow creating a tiny RC effect. (One has more vias than the other.) I tried adding a small cap, shorting resistors R138 and R6, as well as removing R18 (on an etched PCB, not a breadboard.) I also checked the reset (pin 15) of U-H01 and it does not APPEAR to be shorted to ground.



Has anyone else faced a similar problem? Ideas?



24-hour LEDs controlled by two CD4017 chips



traces in PCB design



CD4017 chips real PCB










share|improve this question







New contributor




Harrito is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$
















    3












    $begingroup$


    I am working on a simple 24-hour clock based on the CD4017. To reset when the clock reaches the 24th hour, two diodes are used to produce an "and" logic when the 2 digit and 4 digit LEDs receive a high output from the CD4017. The output from these diodes are connected to the reset pins of both CD4017 chips.



    What I have found happens in practice is that the U-H10 chip resets as expected, but the U-H01 chip does not. I imagine this could be due to a delay in the signal due to differences in trace lengths (maybe 10-20mm) and or placements somehow creating a tiny RC effect. (One has more vias than the other.) I tried adding a small cap, shorting resistors R138 and R6, as well as removing R18 (on an etched PCB, not a breadboard.) I also checked the reset (pin 15) of U-H01 and it does not APPEAR to be shorted to ground.



    Has anyone else faced a similar problem? Ideas?



    24-hour LEDs controlled by two CD4017 chips



    traces in PCB design



    CD4017 chips real PCB










    share|improve this question







    New contributor




    Harrito is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.







    $endgroup$














      3












      3








      3





      $begingroup$


      I am working on a simple 24-hour clock based on the CD4017. To reset when the clock reaches the 24th hour, two diodes are used to produce an "and" logic when the 2 digit and 4 digit LEDs receive a high output from the CD4017. The output from these diodes are connected to the reset pins of both CD4017 chips.



      What I have found happens in practice is that the U-H10 chip resets as expected, but the U-H01 chip does not. I imagine this could be due to a delay in the signal due to differences in trace lengths (maybe 10-20mm) and or placements somehow creating a tiny RC effect. (One has more vias than the other.) I tried adding a small cap, shorting resistors R138 and R6, as well as removing R18 (on an etched PCB, not a breadboard.) I also checked the reset (pin 15) of U-H01 and it does not APPEAR to be shorted to ground.



      Has anyone else faced a similar problem? Ideas?



      24-hour LEDs controlled by two CD4017 chips



      traces in PCB design



      CD4017 chips real PCB










      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      Harrito is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.







      $endgroup$




      I am working on a simple 24-hour clock based on the CD4017. To reset when the clock reaches the 24th hour, two diodes are used to produce an "and" logic when the 2 digit and 4 digit LEDs receive a high output from the CD4017. The output from these diodes are connected to the reset pins of both CD4017 chips.



      What I have found happens in practice is that the U-H10 chip resets as expected, but the U-H01 chip does not. I imagine this could be due to a delay in the signal due to differences in trace lengths (maybe 10-20mm) and or placements somehow creating a tiny RC effect. (One has more vias than the other.) I tried adding a small cap, shorting resistors R138 and R6, as well as removing R18 (on an etched PCB, not a breadboard.) I also checked the reset (pin 15) of U-H01 and it does not APPEAR to be shorted to ground.



      Has anyone else faced a similar problem? Ideas?



      24-hour LEDs controlled by two CD4017 chips



      traces in PCB design



      CD4017 chips real PCB







      diodes clock counter reset cd4017






      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      Harrito is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      Harrito is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question






      New contributor




      Harrito is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      asked 2 hours ago









      HarritoHarrito

      162




      162




      New contributor




      Harrito is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      Harrito is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      Harrito is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.




















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          4












          $begingroup$

          You're using a "glitch" to reset your counters. In other words, when the reset pulse starts, it immediately removes the conditions for its own creation, so it's only as wide as the propagation delay through one of the counters.



          Clearly, one of those counters is faster than the other, so it resets successfully, while the other does not. This is why this is considered poor design practice, and why synchronous counting was invented — it only works under certain conditions.



          The fix is to use the glitch to trigger a monostable timer (e.g., half of a 4098) that will guarantee the minimum reset pulse width for both counters. The reset won't occur until the timer is successfully triggered, by which time, it doesn't matter if the glitch goes away.




          I see that you have removed R18's connection to ground, but I don't see any other provision to pull that node high. If that node is just floating, then you're just getting capacitive coupling and/or leakage current through the diodes for your reset pulse, compounding the problem.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            thank you. You are right on many counts. For those unfamiliar with the CD4017, the reset is high, not low. From the TI datasheet "A high RESET signal clears the counter to its zero count." As you can imagine, R18 was removed for trouble shooting to ensure that traces were as designed and the circuit had been implemented as drawn (even if incorrect.) Due to my limited access to parts, I'll likely try using a 555 timer or a couple of 2N2222 transistors. I image this case is where a reset supervisor chip (ADM803) would come in handy.
            $endgroup$
            – Harrito
            49 mins ago



















          0












          $begingroup$

          R18 should go to Vdd, not ground. Otherwise the RESET line will never go high (the diodes can only pull it low).



          Edit: Depending on the logic family you are using, there may be enough diode and stray capacitance in the diodes to cause false resets. Assume HC logic you can shunt R18 with about 20pF. And make sure R18 connects to Vdd (+5V).






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Obviously, if ONE of the counters is resetting, then something is working. We have to assume that the schematic is wrong in that detail. Note the rework on R18 (lower left corner) in the PCB photo.
            $endgroup$
            – Dave Tweed
            1 hour ago







          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Capacitive kick through the diodes?
            $endgroup$
            – Transistor
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            @Transistor Could be. Shunt R18 with ~20pF and make sure it's connected to Vdd. Don't add too much capacitance or other problems may crop up.
            $endgroup$
            – Spehro Pefhany
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            Even with the suggested capacitance, this is still not a reliable solution. Now you're counting on the fact that the two counters have exactly the same logic threshold on their reset inputs.
            $endgroup$
            – Dave Tweed
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            @DaveTweed Yes, it's probably not a great solution. Your suggestion of a one-shot is much better. If OP does try the above, they should also reduce the resistance of R18 to 2K or so (HC logic) to give the propogation delay a chance to make up for the any difference in logic thresholds (which would tend to reset the slower one only, and the problem is magnified by the slow rise time vs. fast fall time of the diode AND). We used to do ugly things with diodes and capacitors but a one-shot or at least a Schmitt trigger + RC is much more elegant.
            $endgroup$
            – Spehro Pefhany
            1 hour ago











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
          );
          );
          , "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
          return StackExchange.using("schematics", function ()
          StackExchange.schematics.init();
          );
          , "cicuitlab");

          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "135"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );






          Harrito is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2felectronics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f429021%2fresetting-two-cd4017-counters-simultaneously-only-one-resets%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes








          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          4












          $begingroup$

          You're using a "glitch" to reset your counters. In other words, when the reset pulse starts, it immediately removes the conditions for its own creation, so it's only as wide as the propagation delay through one of the counters.



          Clearly, one of those counters is faster than the other, so it resets successfully, while the other does not. This is why this is considered poor design practice, and why synchronous counting was invented — it only works under certain conditions.



          The fix is to use the glitch to trigger a monostable timer (e.g., half of a 4098) that will guarantee the minimum reset pulse width for both counters. The reset won't occur until the timer is successfully triggered, by which time, it doesn't matter if the glitch goes away.




          I see that you have removed R18's connection to ground, but I don't see any other provision to pull that node high. If that node is just floating, then you're just getting capacitive coupling and/or leakage current through the diodes for your reset pulse, compounding the problem.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            thank you. You are right on many counts. For those unfamiliar with the CD4017, the reset is high, not low. From the TI datasheet "A high RESET signal clears the counter to its zero count." As you can imagine, R18 was removed for trouble shooting to ensure that traces were as designed and the circuit had been implemented as drawn (even if incorrect.) Due to my limited access to parts, I'll likely try using a 555 timer or a couple of 2N2222 transistors. I image this case is where a reset supervisor chip (ADM803) would come in handy.
            $endgroup$
            – Harrito
            49 mins ago
















          4












          $begingroup$

          You're using a "glitch" to reset your counters. In other words, when the reset pulse starts, it immediately removes the conditions for its own creation, so it's only as wide as the propagation delay through one of the counters.



          Clearly, one of those counters is faster than the other, so it resets successfully, while the other does not. This is why this is considered poor design practice, and why synchronous counting was invented — it only works under certain conditions.



          The fix is to use the glitch to trigger a monostable timer (e.g., half of a 4098) that will guarantee the minimum reset pulse width for both counters. The reset won't occur until the timer is successfully triggered, by which time, it doesn't matter if the glitch goes away.




          I see that you have removed R18's connection to ground, but I don't see any other provision to pull that node high. If that node is just floating, then you're just getting capacitive coupling and/or leakage current through the diodes for your reset pulse, compounding the problem.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            thank you. You are right on many counts. For those unfamiliar with the CD4017, the reset is high, not low. From the TI datasheet "A high RESET signal clears the counter to its zero count." As you can imagine, R18 was removed for trouble shooting to ensure that traces were as designed and the circuit had been implemented as drawn (even if incorrect.) Due to my limited access to parts, I'll likely try using a 555 timer or a couple of 2N2222 transistors. I image this case is where a reset supervisor chip (ADM803) would come in handy.
            $endgroup$
            – Harrito
            49 mins ago














          4












          4








          4





          $begingroup$

          You're using a "glitch" to reset your counters. In other words, when the reset pulse starts, it immediately removes the conditions for its own creation, so it's only as wide as the propagation delay through one of the counters.



          Clearly, one of those counters is faster than the other, so it resets successfully, while the other does not. This is why this is considered poor design practice, and why synchronous counting was invented — it only works under certain conditions.



          The fix is to use the glitch to trigger a monostable timer (e.g., half of a 4098) that will guarantee the minimum reset pulse width for both counters. The reset won't occur until the timer is successfully triggered, by which time, it doesn't matter if the glitch goes away.




          I see that you have removed R18's connection to ground, but I don't see any other provision to pull that node high. If that node is just floating, then you're just getting capacitive coupling and/or leakage current through the diodes for your reset pulse, compounding the problem.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          You're using a "glitch" to reset your counters. In other words, when the reset pulse starts, it immediately removes the conditions for its own creation, so it's only as wide as the propagation delay through one of the counters.



          Clearly, one of those counters is faster than the other, so it resets successfully, while the other does not. This is why this is considered poor design practice, and why synchronous counting was invented — it only works under certain conditions.



          The fix is to use the glitch to trigger a monostable timer (e.g., half of a 4098) that will guarantee the minimum reset pulse width for both counters. The reset won't occur until the timer is successfully triggered, by which time, it doesn't matter if the glitch goes away.




          I see that you have removed R18's connection to ground, but I don't see any other provision to pull that node high. If that node is just floating, then you're just getting capacitive coupling and/or leakage current through the diodes for your reset pulse, compounding the problem.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 1 hour ago

























          answered 2 hours ago









          Dave TweedDave Tweed

          122k9152264




          122k9152264











          • $begingroup$
            thank you. You are right on many counts. For those unfamiliar with the CD4017, the reset is high, not low. From the TI datasheet "A high RESET signal clears the counter to its zero count." As you can imagine, R18 was removed for trouble shooting to ensure that traces were as designed and the circuit had been implemented as drawn (even if incorrect.) Due to my limited access to parts, I'll likely try using a 555 timer or a couple of 2N2222 transistors. I image this case is where a reset supervisor chip (ADM803) would come in handy.
            $endgroup$
            – Harrito
            49 mins ago

















          • $begingroup$
            thank you. You are right on many counts. For those unfamiliar with the CD4017, the reset is high, not low. From the TI datasheet "A high RESET signal clears the counter to its zero count." As you can imagine, R18 was removed for trouble shooting to ensure that traces were as designed and the circuit had been implemented as drawn (even if incorrect.) Due to my limited access to parts, I'll likely try using a 555 timer or a couple of 2N2222 transistors. I image this case is where a reset supervisor chip (ADM803) would come in handy.
            $endgroup$
            – Harrito
            49 mins ago
















          $begingroup$
          thank you. You are right on many counts. For those unfamiliar with the CD4017, the reset is high, not low. From the TI datasheet "A high RESET signal clears the counter to its zero count." As you can imagine, R18 was removed for trouble shooting to ensure that traces were as designed and the circuit had been implemented as drawn (even if incorrect.) Due to my limited access to parts, I'll likely try using a 555 timer or a couple of 2N2222 transistors. I image this case is where a reset supervisor chip (ADM803) would come in handy.
          $endgroup$
          – Harrito
          49 mins ago





          $begingroup$
          thank you. You are right on many counts. For those unfamiliar with the CD4017, the reset is high, not low. From the TI datasheet "A high RESET signal clears the counter to its zero count." As you can imagine, R18 was removed for trouble shooting to ensure that traces were as designed and the circuit had been implemented as drawn (even if incorrect.) Due to my limited access to parts, I'll likely try using a 555 timer or a couple of 2N2222 transistors. I image this case is where a reset supervisor chip (ADM803) would come in handy.
          $endgroup$
          – Harrito
          49 mins ago














          0












          $begingroup$

          R18 should go to Vdd, not ground. Otherwise the RESET line will never go high (the diodes can only pull it low).



          Edit: Depending on the logic family you are using, there may be enough diode and stray capacitance in the diodes to cause false resets. Assume HC logic you can shunt R18 with about 20pF. And make sure R18 connects to Vdd (+5V).






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Obviously, if ONE of the counters is resetting, then something is working. We have to assume that the schematic is wrong in that detail. Note the rework on R18 (lower left corner) in the PCB photo.
            $endgroup$
            – Dave Tweed
            1 hour ago







          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Capacitive kick through the diodes?
            $endgroup$
            – Transistor
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            @Transistor Could be. Shunt R18 with ~20pF and make sure it's connected to Vdd. Don't add too much capacitance or other problems may crop up.
            $endgroup$
            – Spehro Pefhany
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            Even with the suggested capacitance, this is still not a reliable solution. Now you're counting on the fact that the two counters have exactly the same logic threshold on their reset inputs.
            $endgroup$
            – Dave Tweed
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            @DaveTweed Yes, it's probably not a great solution. Your suggestion of a one-shot is much better. If OP does try the above, they should also reduce the resistance of R18 to 2K or so (HC logic) to give the propogation delay a chance to make up for the any difference in logic thresholds (which would tend to reset the slower one only, and the problem is magnified by the slow rise time vs. fast fall time of the diode AND). We used to do ugly things with diodes and capacitors but a one-shot or at least a Schmitt trigger + RC is much more elegant.
            $endgroup$
            – Spehro Pefhany
            1 hour ago
















          0












          $begingroup$

          R18 should go to Vdd, not ground. Otherwise the RESET line will never go high (the diodes can only pull it low).



          Edit: Depending on the logic family you are using, there may be enough diode and stray capacitance in the diodes to cause false resets. Assume HC logic you can shunt R18 with about 20pF. And make sure R18 connects to Vdd (+5V).






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Obviously, if ONE of the counters is resetting, then something is working. We have to assume that the schematic is wrong in that detail. Note the rework on R18 (lower left corner) in the PCB photo.
            $endgroup$
            – Dave Tweed
            1 hour ago







          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Capacitive kick through the diodes?
            $endgroup$
            – Transistor
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            @Transistor Could be. Shunt R18 with ~20pF and make sure it's connected to Vdd. Don't add too much capacitance or other problems may crop up.
            $endgroup$
            – Spehro Pefhany
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            Even with the suggested capacitance, this is still not a reliable solution. Now you're counting on the fact that the two counters have exactly the same logic threshold on their reset inputs.
            $endgroup$
            – Dave Tweed
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            @DaveTweed Yes, it's probably not a great solution. Your suggestion of a one-shot is much better. If OP does try the above, they should also reduce the resistance of R18 to 2K or so (HC logic) to give the propogation delay a chance to make up for the any difference in logic thresholds (which would tend to reset the slower one only, and the problem is magnified by the slow rise time vs. fast fall time of the diode AND). We used to do ugly things with diodes and capacitors but a one-shot or at least a Schmitt trigger + RC is much more elegant.
            $endgroup$
            – Spehro Pefhany
            1 hour ago














          0












          0








          0





          $begingroup$

          R18 should go to Vdd, not ground. Otherwise the RESET line will never go high (the diodes can only pull it low).



          Edit: Depending on the logic family you are using, there may be enough diode and stray capacitance in the diodes to cause false resets. Assume HC logic you can shunt R18 with about 20pF. And make sure R18 connects to Vdd (+5V).






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          R18 should go to Vdd, not ground. Otherwise the RESET line will never go high (the diodes can only pull it low).



          Edit: Depending on the logic family you are using, there may be enough diode and stray capacitance in the diodes to cause false resets. Assume HC logic you can shunt R18 with about 20pF. And make sure R18 connects to Vdd (+5V).







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 1 hour ago

























          answered 2 hours ago









          Spehro PefhanySpehro Pefhany

          211k5162426




          211k5162426







          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Obviously, if ONE of the counters is resetting, then something is working. We have to assume that the schematic is wrong in that detail. Note the rework on R18 (lower left corner) in the PCB photo.
            $endgroup$
            – Dave Tweed
            1 hour ago







          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Capacitive kick through the diodes?
            $endgroup$
            – Transistor
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            @Transistor Could be. Shunt R18 with ~20pF and make sure it's connected to Vdd. Don't add too much capacitance or other problems may crop up.
            $endgroup$
            – Spehro Pefhany
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            Even with the suggested capacitance, this is still not a reliable solution. Now you're counting on the fact that the two counters have exactly the same logic threshold on their reset inputs.
            $endgroup$
            – Dave Tweed
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            @DaveTweed Yes, it's probably not a great solution. Your suggestion of a one-shot is much better. If OP does try the above, they should also reduce the resistance of R18 to 2K or so (HC logic) to give the propogation delay a chance to make up for the any difference in logic thresholds (which would tend to reset the slower one only, and the problem is magnified by the slow rise time vs. fast fall time of the diode AND). We used to do ugly things with diodes and capacitors but a one-shot or at least a Schmitt trigger + RC is much more elegant.
            $endgroup$
            – Spehro Pefhany
            1 hour ago













          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Obviously, if ONE of the counters is resetting, then something is working. We have to assume that the schematic is wrong in that detail. Note the rework on R18 (lower left corner) in the PCB photo.
            $endgroup$
            – Dave Tweed
            1 hour ago







          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Capacitive kick through the diodes?
            $endgroup$
            – Transistor
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            @Transistor Could be. Shunt R18 with ~20pF and make sure it's connected to Vdd. Don't add too much capacitance or other problems may crop up.
            $endgroup$
            – Spehro Pefhany
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            Even with the suggested capacitance, this is still not a reliable solution. Now you're counting on the fact that the two counters have exactly the same logic threshold on their reset inputs.
            $endgroup$
            – Dave Tweed
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            @DaveTweed Yes, it's probably not a great solution. Your suggestion of a one-shot is much better. If OP does try the above, they should also reduce the resistance of R18 to 2K or so (HC logic) to give the propogation delay a chance to make up for the any difference in logic thresholds (which would tend to reset the slower one only, and the problem is magnified by the slow rise time vs. fast fall time of the diode AND). We used to do ugly things with diodes and capacitors but a one-shot or at least a Schmitt trigger + RC is much more elegant.
            $endgroup$
            – Spehro Pefhany
            1 hour ago








          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          Obviously, if ONE of the counters is resetting, then something is working. We have to assume that the schematic is wrong in that detail. Note the rework on R18 (lower left corner) in the PCB photo.
          $endgroup$
          – Dave Tweed
          1 hour ago





          $begingroup$
          Obviously, if ONE of the counters is resetting, then something is working. We have to assume that the schematic is wrong in that detail. Note the rework on R18 (lower left corner) in the PCB photo.
          $endgroup$
          – Dave Tweed
          1 hour ago





          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          Capacitive kick through the diodes?
          $endgroup$
          – Transistor
          1 hour ago




          $begingroup$
          Capacitive kick through the diodes?
          $endgroup$
          – Transistor
          1 hour ago












          $begingroup$
          @Transistor Could be. Shunt R18 with ~20pF and make sure it's connected to Vdd. Don't add too much capacitance or other problems may crop up.
          $endgroup$
          – Spehro Pefhany
          1 hour ago




          $begingroup$
          @Transistor Could be. Shunt R18 with ~20pF and make sure it's connected to Vdd. Don't add too much capacitance or other problems may crop up.
          $endgroup$
          – Spehro Pefhany
          1 hour ago












          $begingroup$
          Even with the suggested capacitance, this is still not a reliable solution. Now you're counting on the fact that the two counters have exactly the same logic threshold on their reset inputs.
          $endgroup$
          – Dave Tweed
          1 hour ago




          $begingroup$
          Even with the suggested capacitance, this is still not a reliable solution. Now you're counting on the fact that the two counters have exactly the same logic threshold on their reset inputs.
          $endgroup$
          – Dave Tweed
          1 hour ago












          $begingroup$
          @DaveTweed Yes, it's probably not a great solution. Your suggestion of a one-shot is much better. If OP does try the above, they should also reduce the resistance of R18 to 2K or so (HC logic) to give the propogation delay a chance to make up for the any difference in logic thresholds (which would tend to reset the slower one only, and the problem is magnified by the slow rise time vs. fast fall time of the diode AND). We used to do ugly things with diodes and capacitors but a one-shot or at least a Schmitt trigger + RC is much more elegant.
          $endgroup$
          – Spehro Pefhany
          1 hour ago





          $begingroup$
          @DaveTweed Yes, it's probably not a great solution. Your suggestion of a one-shot is much better. If OP does try the above, they should also reduce the resistance of R18 to 2K or so (HC logic) to give the propogation delay a chance to make up for the any difference in logic thresholds (which would tend to reset the slower one only, and the problem is magnified by the slow rise time vs. fast fall time of the diode AND). We used to do ugly things with diodes and capacitors but a one-shot or at least a Schmitt trigger + RC is much more elegant.
          $endgroup$
          – Spehro Pefhany
          1 hour ago











          Harrito is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          Harrito is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












          Harrito is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











          Harrito is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














          Thanks for contributing an answer to Electrical Engineering Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2felectronics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f429021%2fresetting-two-cd4017-counters-simultaneously-only-one-resets%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          acmart: Multiple authors: all with same affiliation, one author an additional affiliationHow to Write Names of Multiple Authors with Shared Affiliation in ACM 2017 Template?Multiple authors with different primary affiliation, but same additional affiliationSame affiliation for all authors without extra packagesIOS-Book-Article.cls: one author with multiple affiliationacmart: Shared Author AffiliationMultiple authors with different primary affiliation, but same additional affiliationAuthor affiliation with only 1 authorAdding Multiple Authors with Different Affiliation in LaTeX ArticleLaTeX: Multiple authors stays on same lineHow to Label Multiple Authors with Same DescriptionHow to make two authors use the same affiliationTwo authors with same affiliation on finished front page

          How to write “ä” and other umlauts and accented letters in bibliography?Accents in BibTeXSorting references with special characters alphabeticallyUse ae ligature in bibliographyEastern European nameInverted circumflex in BibTexBibTex, non-ascii initials and nameptr fproblems with accent in LatexHow to add a Ø to my bibliography from Jabref?References without accentsTroubles when trying to cite St“omer-Verlet in ”title" field of a bib entryComprehensive list of accented charactersHow to type the letter “i” with two dots (diaeresis) in math mode?Problem with glossary text and accented lettersSpecial character in bibliographyAccented letters, Unicode and LaTeX accentsHow to stop natbib from modifying bibliography styleCitation of a paper with non-standard characters by BibtexWrite accented characters to file using writeHow to group the bibliography alphabetically, if some surnames start with “accented” characters?How can I automatically capitalize significant words in my bibliography?

          Problem using RevTeX4-1 with “! Undefined control sequence. @bibitemShut”