Chip with simple program for Toy

On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 12:03:22 -0600, "Stacy" <stacy@123.com> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:1nb9q0pcsajomc41481ubirig7k6qjhs1s@4ax.com...
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 09:16:05 -0600, "Stacy" <stacy@123.com> wrote:

I have built a circuit based on. It uses a Triac and a Optoisolator 3031
to
turn power on.
http://www.uoguelph.ca/~antoon/gadgets/relays/relays.html Solid State
Relay
by Tony Van Roon

I hope that someone can answer a few questions ( If you could be simple
on
your explanation as anything involved with get me lost)

1. The circuit I thought is suppose to be a Latching circuit. That is,
from
my understanding, you apply the 5vDC for a second and the 120 light will
turn on. When you remove the 5v DC the 120 Volt light stays on. This does
not work for me. The 120 Volt light stays on only when I keep the 5 v DC
applied. When I remove it the light goes out.

---
That's the way it's supposed to work. When you remove the 5V you are
no longer supplying current to the LED in the opto, which disconnects
the TRIAC's gate from its trigger source, the mains.
---

2. The circuit does not work when I have the .01uf capacitor connected
as
shown in the schematic. That is, the light simply comes on and stays on.
This is regardless of the 5 v DC.

---
Make sure you have the capacitor connected to the junction of R3 and
R4 _only_, and that the gate of the TRIAC is _only_ connected to R5
and IC1-4. The "hump" in the wire connecting C1 to R3 and R4 means
that it jumps the wire it's crossing, not that it's connected to it.
---

Can anyone help me to understand. Or perhaps if the circuit is wired up
as
described its suppose to exibit these symptoms ?

It frustrates me as Im trying to learn that I think I have done all the
right things, but then it doesnt work.

---
Not to worry; we (me, anyway) all learn by trial and error. :)

--
John Fields

Thanks John, I'm glad it works sorta the way it is suppose to. I think I
have read about 5 or 10 of similar circuits and some of them they call them
latching. I must have had that confused.

Yes the "hump" is NOT connected. -thanks.

When you say
Make sure you have the capacitor connected to the junction of R3 and
R4 _only_, and that the gate of the TRIAC is _only_ connected to R5
and IC1-4.

I do have the Cap between R3 and R4. From there the cap is connected to a
common line that has the R5 / MT1 and load connected up to it. (bread
board).


4-------Gate
|
.01u R5 MT1
|______|_____|______(Load)__

---
For your circuit, if the load is an incandescent lamp there's no need
for the 2.2k or the 10k resistors or the capacitor, since what you
have is what's called a "static switch" and you have no need for phase
control.

I think van Roon was confused and wanted to use the 2.2k and the 0.1ľF
as a snubber. Take a look at

http://www.littelfuse.com/data/en/Application_Notes/AN1007.pdf

for some circuits that work.

--
John Fields
 
Subject: Re: Resonance
From: Steve Evans smevans@jif-lemon.co.mars
Date: 24/11/2004 21:11 GMT Standard Time
Message-id: <hit9q01bgfojpldn7tfvtmr47f5oljg5tv@4ax.com

On 23 Nov 2004 22:04:16 -0600, The Phantom <phantom@aol.com> wrote:

The detail Rich is missing is that if you plot the energy in L and
C separately, you will see that the energy vs. time plot is a *double*
frequency function, compared to the voltage or current. This is
because the energy involves the *square* of the voltage or current
(for C or L), which is always positive regardless of whether the
voltage (or current) is in the positive or negative direction.

Maybe you can assist me with one small thing. wherever I see a plot of
current v. frequency for capacitors and coils, one is always pretty
mcuh a straight line whereas the ohter looks like exponential. Give
that the formlulas are XC=1/wC and XL=wL and there's no square in
either, where does the exponential character of one of the curve come
from?
--

Fat, sugar, salt, beer: the four essentials for a healthy diet.
Draw the line y=1/x and all will be revealed.
 
Okay, thnx, guys.
well that explains the mathematics. Now on to the physics. I'd always
tought of caps and coils as like mirror-images of each other in the
way they act WRT signals applied. In every ohter respect AFAIA, this
is true. Why then, is the response of one linear and the other
hyperbolic?? I'm not asking for a re-iteration of the math here;
what's the pysical processes going on that account for it?
--

Fat, sugar, salt, beer: the four essentials for a healthy diet.
 
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 19:10:10 -0500, "Paul" <movsw@mail.ru> wrote:

My 2.1 speaker system "PC Works" by Cambridge Soundworks is picking up quite
a bit of RFI. It's manifested in audible whispering radio station
broadcasts. When I moved in here, RFI was very audible. So I was suggested
to put ferrite chokes around audio and power cable. I did that, and it
worked for quite a while. Recently, I've been getting loud RFIs yet again.
Now I don't know whether those ferrite chokes did anything, and not mere
rearrangement of the cables. I took them off and there seems to be no
change. RFIs come in at varying volume rates lately to the point that I
turn the amplifier off over the night as in complete silence it's quite
audible. By process of elimination I ruled out several possible causes. At
first I thought it was the computer's sound card (had that happen before
too!). I plugged headphones directly into the Lineout, silence, no RFIs.
I rearranged the audio cable but that didnt do much. I pulled the audio
cable out the amplifier. RFI is still there. So i've come to conclusion
that the amplifier is not well shielded and causes that. However, why does
intensity of RFI fluctuate? Is there anything I can do besides getting
another speaker/amp system? Ironically, I have a set of cheap speakers in
the same room on another coputer that dont have this problem! I looked
inside them, and there seems to be no shielding on them at all.
Err, is it possible that the cheap speakers also don't have
built-in amplifiers? The RFI you are getting is most likely
coming from the amp input stages. There are several
things to look for here. Are the cable shileds grounded
to the PC case, and is the case properly grounded to the
power line ground? Even if you have a 3-prong plug,
the outlet may not be properly grounded. Or the PC
may be grounded, but the jacks may not be. Ungrounded
cables may be acting like antennas to bring the RF
into the amps. Good amp designs shouldn't be
susceptible to RF, but not all designs are good ones.
If you don't mind a little surgery on the amps, you may
be able to put RF filters the input stages, but from
looking at the innards of a few of these I'd guess that's not
gonna be a fun job.

Best regards,




Bob Masta
dqatechATdaqartaDOTcom

D A Q A R T A
Data AcQuisition And Real-Time Analysis
www.daqarta.com
 
Subject: Re: Resonance
From: Steve Evans smevans@jif-lemon.co.mars
Date: 25/11/2004 11:15 GMT Standard Time
Message-id: <hiebq0h1veivm6adr40kpndhbaqp5sep32@4ax.com


Okay, thnx, guys.
well that explains the mathematics. Now on to the physics. I'd always
tought of caps and coils as like mirror-images of each other in the
way they act WRT signals applied. In every ohter respect AFAIA, this
is true. Why then, is the response of one linear and the other
hyperbolic?? I'm not asking for a re-iteration of the math here;
what's the pysical processes going on that account for it?
--
They ARE both linear.
 
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 09:17:29 -0500, John Popelish <jpopelish@rica.net>
wrote:

Plot their impedances on log linear paper (logarithmic frequency or
period) and their inverse relationship is obvious. It is the linear
frequency scale that is distorting the ratiometric relationship.
well I wonder why they don't mention that rather important little fact
in the text books!!! :-(

--

Fat, sugar, salt, beer: the four essentials for a healthy diet.
 
automatic shut down's have to be reset via yanking the
AC power for a bit to clear the fault.


R.Spinks wrote:

My father asked me a question recently for which I had no good answer. Here
was the problem he described:

"we had a thunderstorm and before I got to my computer to shut it down a
lightening bolt killed my electricity for just a second. Everything came
back on except the monitor on my computer. I have tried to restart it
several times a day since then but it always remained totally dead, no
power, nothing. Today it magically came on! Everything is back to normal
after four and a half days!"

I can not think of anything that would have lasted that long. My best guess
would have been blown fuse -- made invalid by fact that it works again by
itself -- or temporary condition caused by an overtemp (ie. blown diode or
cap -- wouldn't have resolved itself in days --- hours at best if
resolvable). Anyone have a possible explanation. I live in a different state
so I can't do any actual analysis -- just at a loss for possibilities.
Thanks.
 
Stacy,

You are seeing what happens when a circuit is built with trial and error or
leaving out the most important parameter such as gate current sensitivity
range for the triac. Also there are many thousands of folks that dabble in
electronics that are successful in building one circuit that works. It is
quite another answer for a circuit that is described in enough detail to be
mass produced or copied with the expectation of working.
The above issues are the difference between the digital designs and analog
designs.

Ray




"Stacy" <stacy@123.com> wrote in message
news:O-GdnXki6ebwnTjcRVn-jQ@rogers.com...
"Robert Monsen" <rcsurname@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:8d6pd.455963$D%.181033@attbi_s51...
Stacy wrote:
"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:1nb9q0pcsajomc41481ubirig7k6qjhs1s@4ax.com...

On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 09:16:05 -0600, "Stacy" <stacy@123.com> wrote:


I have built a circuit based on. It uses a Triac and a Optoisolator
3031

to

turn power on.
http://www.uoguelph.ca/~antoon/gadgets/relays/relays.html Solid
State

Relay

by Tony Van Roon

I hope that someone can answer a few questions ( If you could be
simple

on

your explanation as anything involved with get me lost)

1. The circuit I thought is suppose to be a Latching circuit. That
is,

from

my understanding, you apply the 5vDC for a second and the 120 light
will
turn on. When you remove the 5v DC the 120 Volt light stays on. This
does
not work for me. The 120 Volt light stays on only when I keep the 5 v
DC
applied. When I remove it the light goes out.

---
That's the way it's supposed to work. When you remove the 5V you are
no longer supplying current to the LED in the opto, which disconnects
the TRIAC's gate from its trigger source, the mains.
---


2. The circuit does not work when I have the .01uf capacitor
connected

as

shown in the schematic. That is, the light simply comes on and stays
on.
This is regardless of the 5 v DC.

---
Make sure you have the capacitor connected to the junction of R3 and
R4 _only_, and that the gate of the TRIAC is _only_ connected to R5
and IC1-4. The "hump" in the wire connecting C1 to R3 and R4 means
that it jumps the wire it's crossing, not that it's connected to it.
---


Can anyone help me to understand. Or perhaps if the circuit is wired
up

as

described its suppose to exibit these symptoms ?

It frustrates me as Im trying to learn that I think I have done all
the
right things, but then it doesnt work.

---
Not to worry; we (me, anyway) all learn by trial and error. :)

--
John Fields


Thanks John, I'm glad it works sorta the way it is suppose to. I think
I
have read about 5 or 10 of similar circuits and some of them they call
them
latching. I must have had that confused.

Yes the "hump" is NOT connected. -thanks.

When you say

Make sure you have the capacitor connected to the junction of R3 and
R4 _only_, and that the gate of the TRIAC is _only_ connected to R5
and IC1-4.


I do have the Cap between R3 and R4. From there the cap is connected
to
a
common line that has the R5 / MT1 and load connected up to it. (bread
board).


4-------Gate
|
.01u R5 MT1
|______|_____|______(Load)__



Look at the datasheet for the MOC3010. There is a sample circuit which
could be better for powering a lamp.

http://www.fairchildsemi.com/ds/MO/MOC3010-M.pdf

See Figure 6.

--
Regards,
Robert Monsen

"Your Highness, I have no need of this hypothesis."
- Pierre Laplace (1749-1827), to Napoleon,
on why his works on celestial mechanics make no mention of God.

Thanks for that. I did actually do some other circuits like the one you
indicated. Although I used a 3031 (as I recall) The reading I did seemed
to
indicate that the 3031 does the Zero thing which minimized RF if there are
TV's/ Radio etc around. At least that seem to be what I understood. I
kinda
wish that people would actually tell us the parts they used and then give
us
the theory as to how to arrive at the right part. This would help me
anyway.
If I can see exactly what they used. This way I can figure out their math
and test mine and hopefully come to the same conclusions. When I finish a
little project I write the my observations, and what chips I used that
worked so Next time I dont have to expriment all over again.

Regards
 
On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 11:38:45 -0500, "rayjking"
<rayjking@bellsouth.net> wrote:

Stacy,

You are seeing what happens when a circuit is built with trial and error or
leaving out the most important parameter such as gate current sensitivity
range for the triac. Also there are many thousands of folks that dabble in
electronics that are successful in building one circuit that works. It is
quite another answer for a circuit that is described in enough detail to be
mass produced or copied with the expectation of working.
The above issues are the difference between the digital designs and analog
designs.
---
They are???

In what respect?

--
John Fields
 
catfarm wrote:
I have built a small power distribution unit. Im looking for some wire to
use for the output leads. Hopefully someone can tip me off to a source for
flexible, dual lead wire similar to what you see coming off your average
wall wart.

Part # from mouser or digikey would be great.
TY.
Look for twin lead speaker wire.
http://rocky.digikey.com/WebLib/Daburn/Web%20Data/2754.pdf
http://dkc3.digikey.com/PDF/T043/1191.pdf
--
John Popelish
 
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 01:05:51 GMT, "catfarm" <anonymous@catfarm.com>
wrote:

I have built a small power distribution unit. Im looking for some wire to
use for the output leads. Hopefully someone can tip me off to a source for
flexible, dual lead wire similar to what you see coming off your average
wall wart.
---
Home Depot.

--
John Fields
 
R.Spinks was not found:

I can not think of anything that would have lasted that long. My best guess
would have been blown fuse -- made invalid by fact that it works again by
itself -- or temporary condition caused by an overtemp (ie. blown diode or
cap -- wouldn't have resolved itself in days --- hours at best if
resolvable). Anyone have a possible explanation. I live in a different state
so I can't do any actual analysis -- just at a loss for possibilities.
Thanks.
Maybe the monitor "CPU" (which controls things like the on-screen menus
or digital adjustments) went "locked" and was reset when the monitor was
left turned off for a while?

[]s
--
Chaos MasterŽ, posting from somewhere near Porto Alegre, Brazil.
"... one either has a shit, or not. Do you have yours?"
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
http://marreka.blogspot.com --> news, hotter than high-power transistors!

To reply remove "DEADTOTHESPAMMER" from address.

NP in foobar2000: Nightwish - [Century Child #03] Dead To The World
[4:19]
 
Subject: Re: snubber resistor power rating?
From: Pooh Bear rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com
Date: 28/11/2004 03:04 GMT Standard Time
Message-id: <41A94044.31DE2352@hotmail.com


Neil Preston wrote:

How might I ascertain the optimum power rating of the resistor in a triac
snubber with an inductive load?

You've decided on a value ?

Try a few and check temperature rise. Probably wise to err on the generous
side.

Pulse ratings vary a lot on vendor for power film types.


Graham
A typical snubber (0.1uf + 100r) on a triac at 60hz produces a very small
amount of power in the resistor. A half watt carbon resistor is more than
adequate.
 
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 21:11:40 GMT, Steve Evans
<smevans@jif-lemon.co.mars> wrote:

On 23 Nov 2004 22:04:16 -0600, The Phantom <phantom@aol.com> wrote:

The detail Rich is missing is that if you plot the energy in L and
C separately, you will see that the energy vs. time plot is a *double*
frequency function, compared to the voltage or current. This is
because the energy involves the *square* of the voltage or current
(for C or L), which is always positive regardless of whether the
voltage (or current) is in the positive or negative direction.

Maybe you can assist me with one small thing. wherever I see a plot of
current v. frequency for capacitors and coils, one is always pretty
mcuh a straight line whereas the ohter looks like exponential. Give
that the formlulas are XC=1/wC and XL=wL and there's no square in
either, where does the exponential character of one of the curve come
from?
It's not exponential (though it does look somewhat like it), it's
hyperbolic; it's because the reactance of capacitors vary as 1/wC and
inductors as wL. The current in a cap is v/(1/wC) which is v*wC; the
current in an inductor is v/(wL) which will plot as a hyperbola. If
you plot y=1/x you will see a curve like you're describing.
 
"Steve Evans" <smevans@jif-lemon.co.mars> wrote in message
news:hit9q01bgfojpldn7tfvtmr47f5oljg5tv@4ax.com...
On 23 Nov 2004 22:04:16 -0600, The Phantom <phantom@aol.com> wrote:

The detail Rich is missing is that if you plot the energy in L and
C separately, you will see that the energy vs. time plot is a *double*
frequency function, compared to the voltage or current. This is
because the energy involves the *square* of the voltage or current
(for C or L), which is always positive regardless of whether the
voltage (or current) is in the positive or negative direction.

Maybe you can assist me with one small thing. wherever I see a plot of
current v. frequency for capacitors and coils, one is always pretty
mcuh a straight line whereas the ohter looks like exponential. Give
that the formlulas are XC=1/wC and XL=wL and there's no square in
either, where does the exponential character of one of the curve come
from?
Plot 1/x vs x -it is an inverse function, not an exponential. Also
plotexp^-x
exp^-x will be 1 at x=0 while 1/x will be infinite at x=0. The curves are
quite different.
--
Don Kelly
dhky@peeshaw.ca
remove the urine to answer
--

Fat, sugar, salt, beer: the four essentials for a healthy diet.
 
billycute@tiscali.co.uk (Andy) wrote:

I am trying to simulate a buzzer circuit with
LT Spice. The circuit is supposed to be astable,
but the simulator doesn't get oscillating. I think
I need an initial condition, how do I add one ?
I include the circuit, perhaps someone can go over
it and see if it should oscillate. The 8 ohms R is
the speaker. This is the .asc file:
<snip>

I think the reason is because you didn't choose specific transistor
models. I specified non-generic models and it ran OK with no initial
conditions in both CircuitMaker and in LT Spice:
http://www.terrypin.dial.pipex.com/Images/BuzzerCM.gif
http://www.terrypin.dial.pipex.com/Images/BuzzerLT.gif

In fact LT Spice did the better job, as CM seemed to need a while to
get going.

--
Terry Pinnell
Hobbyist, West Sussex, UK
 
Robert Monsen <rcsurname@comcast.net> wrote:


BTW, How do you get the output to print out in 4 places?
Is that one for me, Robert? If so, can you clarify please.

--
Terry Pinnell
Hobbyist, West Sussex, UK
 
< snip>

I think it's a function of step size. Using 200ns step size and max
step, it starts immediately.
It didn't for me, when I changed the transistors as terry suggested
it worked, but not for the generic ones. If you did manage it, kindly
post the .asc file

BTW, How do you get the output to print out in 4 places?
In LTSpice you just click on any node you want to monitor.
Also, when the simulation begins you get to choose the nodes.
 
Robert Monsen <rcsurname@comcast.net> wrote:

Terry Pinnell wrote:
Robert Monsen <rcsurname@comcast.net> wrote:



BTW, How do you get the output to print out in 4 places?


Is that one for me, Robert? If so, can you clarify please.


Your waveform diagrams have 4 significant digits. I can't get CM to do
more than 3.
Ah - DECIMAL places! (I was thinking 'locations'.) You mean numbers
like '4.000 V', '15.00ms' shown in
http://www.terrypin.dial.pipex.com/Images/BuzzerCM.gif ?
Can only see 2 there. Maybe you mean examples in other threads, like
http://www.terrypin.dial.pipex.com/Images/CM-StepTimePuzzle1.gif
where I do see 4 sig digits on the X-axis.

That's just the way it displays in CM 2000 here when you zoom in on a
section. Are you saying that for you it never goes beyond 3?

Anyway, given the variation/inconsistency due to other factors, 4
represents spurious accuracy IMO!

--
Terry Pinnell
Hobbyist, West Sussex, UK
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top