Electronics Design does it Again!
in [Design]
|
Prev: Which type of volatile RAM has the least duration of data remanence when power-offed?
Next: USB3.0 FD Design
From: Oppie on 14 May 2010 08:56 "John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message news:g6bou5ttcqiiugir7eq8gbimd6mjcslrc1(a)4ax.com... > There are two silly articles in the latest ED, the level shifter and a > nearly-as-silly Pease Porridge. > > John So, now ED stands for Electronic Dysfunction?
From: John Larkin on 14 May 2010 09:38 On Fri, 14 May 2010 08:48:58 -0400, "Oppie" <Oppie(a)saynotospam.com> wrote: >"John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message >news:t38ou5lhrikpleklddpca6b255nhbt67ui(a)4ax.com... >> >> Yes, lots of rusty VWs on his lawn and on the street. >> > >Got an address so we can check it out on Google Earth? I don't think I should do that. His habit of collecting rusty VWs is something he's written about in his columns, so that's already public. His address, and anything I know about him locally, is a private matter. John
From: John Larkin on 14 May 2010 09:45 On Thu, 13 May 2010 11:46:25 -0700 (PDT), George Herold <gherold(a)teachspin.com> wrote: >On May 13, 1:12�pm, John O'Flaherty <quias...(a)yeeha.com> wrote: >> On Thu, 13 May 2010 09:45:57 -0700, John Larkin >> >> <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >On Thu, 13 May 2010 11:02:58 -0500, John O'Flaherty >> ><quias...(a)yeeha.com> wrote: >> >> >>I see attenuation of 1/2 at the input, gain of 4 (3+1), and >> >>attenuation of 1/2 at the output. LTSpice agrees, unless I made a >> >>mistake. >> >> >You did. You left out the pot and the cap. >> >> Here's the version with pot and cap, working about as described: > >Yup, I slapped it onto a white proto-board to see if I was doing >something silly. I works fine! As long as you don't care about gain accuracy or frequency response, and as long as you don't use more than about a third of the pot rotation. But everybody here has missed his real blunder: using a Maxim opamp. John
From: John Larkin on 14 May 2010 09:47 On Thu, 13 May 2010 12:12:51 -0500, John O'Flaherty <quiasmox(a)yeeha.com> wrote: >On Thu, 13 May 2010 09:45:57 -0700, John Larkin ><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >>On Thu, 13 May 2010 11:02:58 -0500, John O'Flaherty >><quiasmox(a)yeeha.com> wrote: >> >>>I see attenuation of 1/2 at the input, gain of 4 (3+1), and >>>attenuation of 1/2 at the output. LTSpice agrees, unless I made a >>>mistake. >> >> >>You did. You left out the pot and the cap. > >Here's the version with pot and cap, working about as described: You didn't model the pot as a pot. Turn the pot all the way to 5 volts and replot the output. John
From: Spehro Pefhany on 14 May 2010 10:07
On Fri, 14 May 2010 06:45:58 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >On Thu, 13 May 2010 11:46:25 -0700 (PDT), George Herold ><gherold(a)teachspin.com> wrote: > >>On May 13, 1:12�pm, John O'Flaherty <quias...(a)yeeha.com> wrote: >>> On Thu, 13 May 2010 09:45:57 -0700, John Larkin >>> >>> <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>> >On Thu, 13 May 2010 11:02:58 -0500, John O'Flaherty >>> ><quias...(a)yeeha.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>I see attenuation of 1/2 at the input, gain of 4 (3+1), and >>> >>attenuation of 1/2 at the output. LTSpice agrees, unless I made a >>> >>mistake. >>> >>> >You did. You left out the pot and the cap. >>> >>> Here's the version with pot and cap, working about as described: >> >>Yup, I slapped it onto a white proto-board to see if I was doing >>something silly. I works fine! > >As long as you don't care about gain accuracy or frequency response, >and as long as you don't use more than about a third of the pot >rotation. > >But everybody here has missed his real blunder: using a Maxim opamp. > >John > Seeing as his summer job is with Maxim, I'd call it a politically astute move. |