2
\$\begingroup\$

Using only three 2-to-4 decoders with enable and no other additional gates, implement a 3-to-8 decoder with enable. The inputs of the resulting 3-to-8 decoder should be labeled X[2..0] for the code input and E for the enable input. the outputs should be labeled Y[7..0].

Here's my current solution. My question is, is there a better/cleaner way to do this?

Current Solution of 3-to-8 Decoder implementation

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Looks good to me! There are at least 12 combinations like this that will work, but I think this one makes the most sense (X0/X1/X2 can be picked arbitrarily and the outputs renumbered, and also you could tie A1 to 1 and use the other two outputs of the leftmost decoder) \$\endgroup\$ Oct 8, 2014 at 1:30

1 Answer 1

2
\$\begingroup\$

There is no problem with your circuit. although I would suggest that you set pull-down resistors on the outputs. that's because the decoders usually set their outputs to high-impedance (high-Z) when they're not enabled. so the output may remain the same on the output node (because of node capacitance) and the wrong value may be read by the device that is reading the current output. making all the outputs pulled-down to GND will eliminate this problem and it will work correctly. Look at the picture below...

You can use a resistor array which is a nine pin element that has 8 resistor inside with a common pin that will be connected to ground! Easy! ;-)

schematic

simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab

\$\endgroup\$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.