audio recording on IC -help wanted

[Peter A Forbes]

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 13:12:18 -0800, DaveC <me@privacy.net> wrote:

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:46:42 -0800, harrogate2 wrote
(in article <S0gFd.971$l66.443@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net&gt:

Either way they are part of the charge sense or charging circuit. If
the battery has three contacts, then you have +ve out, -ve out, and
charge probably common to -ve. The diodes ensure polarity, the
resistors control the charge current, simple as that.

So the diode specs aren't really important (as long as they handle the
forward charge current, that is)?

But why 2 diodes and 2 resistors, if the designers weren't trying to get the
v. drop precise?

And why are there 2 resistors rather than 1 360-ohm one?

They are probably using the diodes as a crude temp sensor.

Peter

--
Peter & Rita Forbes
Email Address:
diesel@easynet.co.uk
Web Pages for Engine Preservation:
http://www.oldengine.org/members/diesel

 

[john]

Problem solved.

thanks to all that have responded! =)


"john" <u0205440_spammfree@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:crg4qu$l3c$1@nobel.pacific.net.sg...

I've tried to realise the following circuit:

http://www.elecdesign.com/Files/29/3168/Figure_01.gif

from this article:
http://www.elecdesign.com/Articles/Index.cfm?AD=1&ArticleID=3168

to demod a QPSK signal. I've tried using an AD8347 (Evaluation Board),
but
i'm not able to retrieve the "terms at twice the rate of the oscillator".
All I can get from the outputs are the difference between the RF and LO,
both I and Q.

I'm using an (tunable) RF at 1.44GHz and LO at the same frequency. The LO
is
generated by ADF411xEB1. Even when I try to tune the RF as close to the
LO,
the "terms at twice the rate of the oscillator" never appears.

Is this becaues the range of AD8347 is 0.8-2.7GHz? So the doubler term,
2.88GHz, can never appear?

Has anyone tried any other components to realise this circuit?

Thanx in advance!
kw

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On 26 Jan 2005 18:52:51 GMT, the renowned Ian Stirling
<root@mauve.demon.co.uk> wrote:

In sci.electronics.design Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogdotyou.knowwhat> wrote:
Hi,

Any info on reliability and ruggedness of 0.025" pitch flat cable and
associated IDC connectors (0.05 x 0.05") compared to 2.0mm x 2.0mm
(with 1.0mm pitch flat cable)?

Well, at 133Mhz, infinitely better.

How so? The specs don't look that much different to me (other than the
fact the unbalanced Z is a bit high for my circuit on the some of the
2mm stuff (and perhaps more variable between suppliers), and Z right
on or a bit low is much better).

Z0, C/ft, L/ft, and propagation delay are all within 10-20% of each
other under the same conditions.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[Ian Stirling]

In sci.electronics.design Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogdotyou.knowwhat> wrote:

On 26 Jan 2005 18:52:51 GMT, the renowned Ian Stirling
root@mauve.demon.co.uk> wrote:

In sci.electronics.design Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogdotyou.knowwhat> wrote:
Hi,

Any info on reliability and ruggedness of 0.025" pitch flat cable and
associated IDC connectors (0.05 x 0.05") compared to 2.0mm x 2.0mm
(with 1.0mm pitch flat cable)?

Well, at 133Mhz, infinitely better.

How so? The specs don't look that much different to me (other than the
fact the unbalanced Z is a bit high for my circuit on the some of the
2mm stuff (and perhaps more variable between suppliers), and Z right
on or a bit low is much better).

Oh dear.
Please ignore me.
I was having a particularly stupid moment, and misread IDC for IDE, and
somehow further on the difference between 80 and 40 conductor cables.
I blame the drink.
Well, I'd like to, if I'd had any.

 

[PeteS]

At voltages such as this, Qg (and Ciss, Coss) are more important than
Rds(on) although obviously it has to be reasonably low. The reason is
the large voltage swing of the source when the Switch turns on. It will
go from Vout to Vin, and capacitively couple that delta to other parts
of the SMPS with possibly harrowing results. At the load level you
suggest, a device in the hundreds of milliohm range would probably be
suitable (but check the SOA curve).

Most FETs at this breakdown are normally specified at 10V Vgs. If 9V is
not sufficient, you can always make a simple capacitive charge pump to
run the boost driver (Linear tech has excellent app notes on this sort
of thing).

For a typical device list, see this page
http://ec.irf.com/v6/en/US/adirect/ir?cmd=catNavigateFrame&punchInID=54
which lists the excellent range of IR HexFets(tm). Similar devices and
capabilities are also available from Vishay-Siliconix and Fairchild
(although the selection from fairchild is more limited).

As for footprints, many high voltage devices come in D-PAK or D2-PAK
surface mount footprints, to name the more common ones.

Cheers

PeteS

Mike Deblis wrote:

Hi,

I'm looking for a 200 - 250V FET with low Qg, low RDSon (only needs
maybe 3A
peak Ids, but low RDSon for efficiency) and LOGIC LEVEL GATE for use
in an
SMPS that only has a 9V supply - the SMPS is in boost configuration
to give
180V @ 20mA out, probably going to use the LTC1872 if I can.

Any ideas would be appreciated - I've not had a lot of luck so far -
I know
its a tall order. An SMD footprint would also be good.

Thanks

Mike

 

[Mike Deblis]

"Fritz Schlunder" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:35s6nvF4se566U1@individual.net...

Hi there. Unfortunately the pickings for 200V or more logic level MOSFETs
is exceedingly slim. For the most part your only potentially feasible
choices I'm aware of are the IRL620, IRL630, IRL640 (TO-220 devices) and
the
D2Pak versions of those same parts: IRL620S, IRL630S, IRL640S. Here is
the
datasheet for the IRL630S which is a 200V 0.4 ohm Rds(on) D2Pak part.
....
I would strongly recommend using something much closer to 20kHz as your
switching frequency. Make sure to use discontinuous conduction mode since
the control loop gain gets really large (IE: impossible to make stable)
for
large step up ratios (which 9V to 180V certainly qualifies) in continuous
conduction mode. With a 20kHz switching frequency and 9V input an
inductor
value of vaguely around 150uH would seem to be reasonable.

Hi Fritz,

Thanks for the reply. Normally, I use a MAX1771 which runs at 50kHz and
gives me about 87% efficiency in this configuration - really a very nice
chip.

However, getting the MAX chips in Europe and elsewhere is often a pain, and
I was looking at emulating its performance using LTspice when an LT FAE
mentioned their devices, which are emulated for you in LTspice, and he
suggested I look at those as well, hence this investigation.

I agree with everything you say about the LT chip - it is a very nice device
in a very small package, but the maximum efficiency I've been able to get is
in the order of 65%.... Also, unlike the MAX1771, the LT device can only
handle up to 9.8V in, which really means logic level FETs - if I was going
at add a charge pump or whatever for the gate drive, I might as well use the
MAX device which is more forgiving anyway...

Ho, hum... just a thought...

Thanks

Mike

 

[Genome]

"Fred Bloggs" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:41F8ED17.3080900@nospam.com...

Genome wrote:
"Mike Deblis" <mdeblis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:35ru47F4mkh6eU1@individual.net...

Hi,

I'm looking for a 200 - 250V FET with low Qg, low RDSon (only needs
maybe

3A

peak Ids, but low RDSon for efficiency) and LOGIC LEVEL GATE for use in
an
SMPS that only has a 9V supply - the SMPS is in boost configuration to

give

180V @ 20mA out, probably going to use the LTC1872 if I can.

Any ideas would be appreciated - I've not had a lot of luck so far - I

know

its a tall order. An SMD footprint would also be good.

Thanks

Mike




Use a voltage boosted boost converter. You tap the inductor so that the
FET
sees a fraction of the output voltage.


----nnnnnnnnnnnn----->|-----
|
|
|--
|<-
|--
|
|
-------------------------------


DNA



Although diode sees a multiple of reverse output voltage,

Yes, that's the caveat.

DNA

the duty D can

be significantly reduced from the 95% required of single inductor 20:1
multiplication of 9V->180V. Good idea.

 

[John Popelish]

mike wrote:

Genome wrote:
"Mike Deblis" <mdeblis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:35ru47F4mkh6eU1@individual.net...

Hi,

I'm looking for a 200 - 250V FET with low Qg, low RDSon (only needs maybe

3A

peak Ids, but low RDSon for efficiency) and LOGIC LEVEL GATE for use in an
SMPS that only has a 9V supply - the SMPS is in boost configuration to

give

180V @ 20mA out, probably going to use the LTC1872 if I can.

Any ideas would be appreciated - I've not had a lot of luck so far - I

know

its a tall order. An SMD footprint would also be good.

Thanks

Mike




Use a voltage boosted boost converter. You tap the inductor so that the FET
sees a fraction of the output voltage.


----nnnnnnnnnnnn----->|-----
|
|
|--
|<-
|--
|
|
-------------------------------


DNA



Once you've decided to tap the inductor, is there any practical
difference between that and a transformer. Probably still want
different size wire in the two sections anyway.
mike

I agree. Once you have decided to spring for a custom magnetic part,
you have all sorts of choices that trade cost and complexity in one
place for cost, efficiency and simplicity in others. I would consider
a 3 winding transformer, with the primary rectified and both
secondaries separately rectified, and all 3 stacked in series, so that
the transistor would see only about 60 volts and schottky rectifiers
could be used all 3 places. 100 volt fets are more common than 200
volt units in SMT low gate voltage versions.
--
John Popelish

 

[Genome]

"mike" <spamme0@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:41F99A4F.2090500@netscape.net...

Genome wrote:
"Mike Deblis" <mdeblis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:35ru47F4mkh6eU1@individual.net...

Hi,

I'm looking for a 200 - 250V FET with low Qg, low RDSon (only needs
maybe

3A

peak Ids, but low RDSon for efficiency) and LOGIC LEVEL GATE for use in
an
SMPS that only has a 9V supply - the SMPS is in boost configuration to

give

180V @ 20mA out, probably going to use the LTC1872 if I can.

Any ideas would be appreciated - I've not had a lot of luck so far - I

know

its a tall order. An SMD footprint would also be good.

Thanks

Mike




Use a voltage boosted boost converter. You tap the inductor so that the
FET
sees a fraction of the output voltage.


----nnnnnnnnnnnn----->|-----
|
|
|--
|<-
|--
|
|
-------------------------------


DNA



Once you've decided to tap the inductor, is there any practical
difference between that and a transformer.

A) With one bit of wire. Start pin A wind 10, tap pin B wind 90 finish pin
C.

One wire, three terminations. One setup.

{5}

B) With one bit of wire. Start pin A wind 10, terminate pin B.
With next bit of wire. Start pin C wind 90 finish pin D.

Two wires, four terminations. Two setups.

{8}

Probably still want different size wire in the two sections anyway.
mike

If you want to be a purist..... but..... does the cost function work in your
favour? Materials/Labour/Error.

Is it your Mother or some Chinese bit of shit doing the winding for you?

I know we've just celebrated fucking off 6 million and a bit Jews, and the
idiots still let Woody Allens parents get away!!!!!, but your Mum versus an
odd Billion Chinkies could be a powerful persuader.

DNA

 

[john jardine]

"Winfield Hill" <hill_a@t_rowland-dotties-harvard-dot.s-edu> wrote in
message news:ctdb4j01nfl@drn.newsguy.com...

john jardine wrote...

Mike Deblis wrote:

I'm looking for a 200 - 250V FET with low Qg, low RDSon (only
needs maybe 3A peak Ids, but low RDSon for efficiency) and
LOGIC LEVEL GATE for use in an SMPS that only has a 9V supply ...

The 2SK2350 is 200V, 0.26ohms, with 4V gate drive.

It appears the 0.26ohm rating is with 10V drive.
That's a boring part. Nothing special. Yawn.


--
Thanks,
- Win

Yes but only on a casual reading.
Look at the graphs. This fet has very nearly the same Ron at a 5V gate. This
is in sharp contrast to many Fets advertised as being 'logic-level' when in
actual fact they are barely starting to move, hence incapable of doing any
real work at this drive level.

Go on then, suggest a logic level fet, easily available at a reasonable
price, that should be preferred for this switching job. An insulated case
type would be nice. .
regards
john

 

[Rich Grise]

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 16:59:48 +0000, john jardine wrote:

"Winfield Hill" <hill_a@t_rowland-dotties-harvard-dot.s-edu> wrote in
john jardine wrote...
Mike Deblis wrote:

I'm looking for a 200 - 250V FET with low Qg, low RDSon (only
needs maybe 3A peak Ids, but low RDSon for efficiency) and
LOGIC LEVEL GATE for use in an SMPS that only has a 9V supply ...

The 2SK2350 is 200V, 0.26ohms, with 4V gate drive.

It appears the 0.26ohm rating is with 10V drive.
That's a boring part. Nothing special. Yawn.

Yes but only on a casual reading.
Look at the graphs. This fet has very nearly the same Ron at a 5V gate. This
is in sharp contrast to many Fets advertised as being 'logic-level' when in
actual fact they are barely starting to move, hence incapable of doing any
real work at this drive level.

Go on then, suggest a logic level fet, easily available at a reasonable
price, that should be preferred for this switching job. An insulated case
type would be nice. .

Have Jim Thompson design one for you. ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Rich Grise]

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 18:25:47 +0000, legg wrote:

On 28 Jan 2005 04:24:20 -0800, Winfield Hill
hill_a@t_rowland-dotties-harvard-dot.s-edu> wrote:

legg wrote...

Fritz Schlunder wrote:
legg wrote...
Mike Deblis wrote:

I'm looking for a 200 - 250V FET with low Qg, low RDSon (only needs
maybe 3A peak Ids, but low RDSon for efficiency) and LOGIC LEVEL
GATE for use in an SMPS that only has a 9V supply ...

Siliconix Si4490DY Nchannel 200V 0R09 in SO8, is characterized with
6Vds. http://www.vishay.com/doc?71341

Hey now that is an interesting part. I wonder how much it costs...

Never inquired about Si4490. The 150V parts were 0R05 or less.

It's a boring part. Yawn.

Reality is such a bore!

Shall I peel you a grape?

Silly me! I thought he was talking about his role. ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

 

urjant@mail.com wrote:

nope..

i dunno ..
have no clue.

help!





On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:16:51 GMT, urjant@mail.com wrote:



I left one out (step 3) ..sorry.


1. jumper pin 3
to pin 2
2 jumper pin 1
to pin 5
3. jumper pin 8
to pin 2

apply input power A to ( pin 1or 5 ) and input power B to pin 7
load is powered by {(switched) pin 4} and {input power B}

how'd i do? guessed right or not?
if not please correct me.






On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:06:03 GMT, urjant@mail.com wrote:



1. jumper pin 3
to pin 2
2 jumper pin 1 to
pin 5

apply input power A to ( pin 1or 5 ) and input power B to pin 7
load is powered by {(switched) pin 4} and {input power B}

how'd i do? guessed right or not?
if not please correct me.





Diagram 6 is not what you want. The 658-44 has switches

on it to set the timing for both on and off - diagram
6 uses two separate relays to accomplish that.
Look at the diagram below.

The relay coil is connected to pins 2 and 7. You
apply a voltage to those pins to energize the relay.
You connect your load to pins 1 and 3. Alternatively,
you could connect your load to pins 6 and 8.

You set the switches on the relay to conrol the
cycle time.


Diagram: (N is the notch, you are looking at the
pins - each number corresponds to a pin)

...5...4
..6.(.).3
..7..N..2
...8...1

Ed

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message
news:YwyKd.17555$wZ2.12343@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...

Hello John,

Look at the graphs. This fet has very nearly the same Ron at a 5V
gate. This
is in sharp contrast to many Fets advertised as being 'logic-level'
when in
actual fact they are barely starting to move, hence incapable of
doing any
real work at this drive level.



If you look at the Vgs versus Vds graph in the middle of page 3 there
is
less than a volt of head room at 5V gate drive before Vds shoots up
and
potentially turns the device into a pile of ash. Too close for comfort
to me.

Go on then, suggest a logic level fet, easily available at a
reasonable
price, that should be preferred for this switching job. An insulated
case
type would be nice. .



That's just the problem, not much out there. It is an issue I run into
a
lot and often end up with bipolar transistors. What really drives me
up
the wall is a glitzy ad for some new FET, saying it is guaranteed 3V
or
something and then in the fine print I find that was for 1mA and
Vds=1V.
At least one can then crumple the data sheet, form a ball and smack it
into the bin across the room. Or use it to light the wood stove.

Somehow I see the contrast between high tech electronics and heating
with a wood stove as just too great.

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

 

[keith]

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:53:04 -0800, Winfield Hill wrote:

Rich Grise wrote...

Have Jim Thompson design one for you. ;-)

Jim's an IC guy (yes, a great one), not a discrete power-device guy.

Storytime. Once upon a time many moons ago we had a contactor-driver that
was making a mess of customer's offices. It seems it was breaking down on
the turn-off cycle and letting the magic smoke out of a few $M of hardware
every so often (bad for executives' ulcers). After researching the
problem it was found that only one manufacturer of the part had the
problem[*]. It was a logic IC manufacturer (one that I think Jim may have
worked for;-). The power device manufacturer's part never failed. I
couldn't force it into the failure mode (secondary breakdown) without it
avalanching first. It seems manufacturer 'A' had IC designers design a
power device, while manufacturer 'B' had power device designers design an
IC. Power devices aren't just biger transistors.

[*] To be fair, the design of the circuit was at fault. Had it been right
both parts would have worked fine, but one device was far more robust than
the other.

--
Keith

 

[Fritz Schlunder]

"Winfield Hill" <hill_a@t_rowland-dotties-harvard-dot.s-edu> wrote in
message news:ctdatk01mre@drn.newsguy.com...

Siliconix Si4490DY Nchannel 200V 0R09 in SO8, is characterized with
6Vds. http://www.vishay.com/doc?71341

Hey now that is an interesting part. I wonder how much it costs...

Never inquired about Si4490. The 150V parts were 0R05 or less.

It's a boring part. Yawn.

Blaa... Blaaa... Blasphemy! That is blasphemy to my ears friend.

There are a number of features that make the Si4490DY interesting. That
part is a trench MOSFET. That by itself is interesting to me, I wasn't
aware anyone was making medium voltage trench MOSFETs. Upon looking at
Vishay's MOSFET lineup I now see they have quite a selection of modest
voltage trench products up to 250V.

The MOSFET has very impressively low 80milliOhm on resistance for a 200V
part in a SO8 package. That alone is pretty special. That might be an
industry record by itself. The part also has substantially lower gate
charge than might be expected at only 42nC at 10V. That is very good
considering that something like the IRF640N has 67nC gate charge but a much
higher 0.15 Ohm on resistance. The Si4490DY also features an extremely good
body diode reverse recovery time rating (70ns typical, 100ns max.).
Unfortunately the datasheet is really skimpy and missing allot of details
(such as diode reverse recovery charge), but for a 200V rated part this is
clearly superior to pretty much all of its competition. Mouser sells them
for $1.95 in single unit quantity. That isn't anything too special to write
home about, but at least it is available if your application calls for it.
Although trench MOSFETs usually have inferior avalanche ruggedness compared
to their planar counterparts, the Si4490DY is still avalanche rated and is
still fairly robust in that category as well. The on resistance versus
temperature graph may also be ever so slightly superior to many of it's
potential competitors.

Overall it is certainly noteworthy, even if it only makes evolutionary
improvements on other previous and current parts.

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 12:17:51 -0500, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:53:04 -0800, Winfield Hill wrote:

Rich Grise wrote...

Have Jim Thompson design one for you. ;-)

Jim's an IC guy (yes, a great one), not a discrete power-device guy.

Storytime. Once upon a time many moons ago we had a contactor-driver that
was making a mess of customer's offices. It seems it was breaking down on
the turn-off cycle and letting the magic smoke out of a few $M of hardware
every so often (bad for executives' ulcers). After researching the
problem it was found that only one manufacturer of the part had the
problem[*]. It was a logic IC manufacturer (one that I think Jim may have
worked for;-). The power device manufacturer's part never failed. I
couldn't force it into the failure mode (secondary breakdown) without it
avalanching first. It seems manufacturer 'A' had IC designers design a
power device, while manufacturer 'B' had power device designers design an
IC. Power devices aren't just biger transistors.

[*] To be fair, the design of the circuit was at fault. Had it been right
both parts would have worked fine, but one device was far more robust than
the other.

Circuit designers don't design power semiconductors. It's usually
done by artists who specialize in such things. Usually they don't
have a clue about real circuits until a customer complains, or
failures are high.

I worked for Motorola Semiconductor in the '60's and have consulted to
various Motorola and ON Semiconductor divisions since then.

I haven't done any hardware design using off-the-shelf components
since 1987, though I now am often retained to design an I/C which must
interface to discrete power devices.

And I've designed many an off-line switcher BEFORE there were
application-specific I/Cs available for the task.

And I put the first hex-FET into space... fixing the Shuttle power
supply redundancy problem that guaranteed domino-style power supply
failure ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[Joerg]

Hi Watson,

At least one can then crumple the data sheet, form a ball and smack it
into the bin across the room. Or use it to light the wood stove.



Somehow I see the contrast between high tech electronics and heating
with a wood stove as just too great.

Not really. Newer wood stoves are pretty nifty devices, blue flames, no
smoke. No stuffed nose from forced-air heating. Lots of exercise without
gym membership fees. But best of all, when the wood stove runs the
exorbitant cost from propane usage drops to zilch. It's pretty power
outage proof, too.

Cooking out here is sometimes equally rustic. Right now a turkey is
slowly getting ready in the Weber charcoal grill. With mesquite chips,
marinade injection and the whole nine yards. We always make sure to have
at least 100 pounds of charcoal before the winter begins and stores run
out. If that ain't enough, guess what, we scavenge some from the wood
stove. Talking about multi-tasking... ;-)

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 17:14:56 +0000, the renowned Terry Pinnell
<terrypinDELETE@THESEdial.pipex.com> wrote:

"MikeMandaville" <MikeMandaville@aol.com> wrote:


HomeLab wrote:
I just noticed that Elektor Electronics magazine have silently
uploaded a new website. I've not seeen all of it yet but it looks as
if they've finally managed to put their (occasionally brilliant)
articles online just as EPE have been doing over the past years. Not
sure how far back in time, though. Articles are available
individally,
however, not the entire isuue as opposed to EPE. There's also a forum
and a bring & buy section. Still very few postings over there, I
guess
that'll change when they properly announce the new site in the next
issue (I have the Feb 2005 edition).
There's also what looks like a rudimentary online shop.

url: www.elektor-electronics.co.uk (automatically links to a numbered
url)

ta
Richard

Excellent. Lots of good reading here.

At a steep price. First article I viewed, arbitrary choice, 'LED
bedside lamp', gave me a list of components and a link to the
(presumably full) PDF, for 1.00UKP (1.85USD)

Silicon Chip wants GBP 3.71 (about USD 7.00) to access one issue
online. I got a whole year of Circuit Cellar (PDFs delivered by
e-mail) for not much more than that.

Elektor wants (free) registration and agreement to get their
newsletter just to read news. Maybe someone will add their log-in to
bugmenot.com?


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

"Spehro Pefhany" <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote in message
news:q6rp01pf97n7u2n5hpn8qh83vje57494pm@4ax.com...

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 17:14:56 +0000, the renowned Terry Pinnell
terrypinDELETE@THESEdial.pipex.com> wrote:

"MikeMandaville" <MikeMandaville@aol.com> wrote:


HomeLab wrote:
I just noticed that Elektor Electronics magazine have silently
uploaded a new website. I've not seeen all of it yet but it looks
as
if they've finally managed to put their (occasionally brilliant)
articles online just as EPE have been doing over the past years.
Not
sure how far back in time, though. Articles are available
individally,
however, not the entire isuue as opposed to EPE. There's also a
forum
and a bring & buy section. Still very few postings over there, I
guess
that'll change when they properly announce the new site in the
next
issue (I have the Feb 2005 edition).
There's also what looks like a rudimentary online shop.

url: www.elektor-electronics.co.uk (automatically links to a
numbered
url)

ta
Richard

Excellent. Lots of good reading here.

At a steep price. First article I viewed, arbitrary choice, 'LED
bedside lamp', gave me a list of components and a link to the
(presumably full) PDF, for 1.00UKP (1.85USD)

Silicon Chip wants GBP 3.71 (about USD 7.00) to access one issue
online. I got a whole year of Circuit Cellar (PDFs delivered by
e-mail) for not much more than that.

Elektor wants (free) registration and agreement to get their
newsletter just to read news. Maybe someone will add their log-in to
bugmenot.com?

Why don't you add it? Something like username Bugmenot with PW of
bugmenot.

Me? I had a yr's subscription to Elektor USA and I didn't like the mag.
I'm glad it went tits up.

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--