Driver to drive?

On 3/18/2017 9:34 PM, tabbypurr@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 19 March 2017 00:51:19 UTC, rickman wrote:


I'm not sure it is very
relevant that someone could be found innocent after spending 20 years in
prison if that is such a heinous punishment.

Why don't you ask the people released after 20 years whether it's relevant.

Know any?

--

Rick C
 
On 3/18/2017 9:27 PM, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 18/03/17 13:31, rickman wrote:
On 3/17/2017 8:10 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 10:32:58 +1100, Clifford Heath
no.spam@please.net> wrote:

On 18/03/17 06:21, John Larkin wrote:
Resonating an AM antenna needs a giant variable cap, or a varicap and
some sort of tracking voltage source for that.

They don't make big enough varicaps for that, but those Superjunction
FETs discussed here recently would work.

A friend designed a specialised hand-held pickup head that had
to tune 1-5MHz, and used 480(!) small varicaps. It was measuring
micro-ohms of dynamic impedance using transformer coupling
(about 8mm square) across a small air gap. The DUT had dozens
of resonances with Q of 1000-5000 across the band.

I suggested using the Superjunction FETs, but the device is finished.

Clifford Heath.

You can get varicaps up to about 100 pF. To resonate in the AM band,
having a ferrite core would help get enough inductance.

Try 500+ pF. They make varactors specifically to tune AM radios. I
just ordered a few.

Bit difficult to use FET switching with those to make a 25:1
capacitance ratio however.

Not sure what you are saying. 25:1 capacitance ratio is hard to get
with *any* means. I suppose you could literally switch caps in and out.
Why can't you do that with the varactors?


It seems that my friend could have used 10x switched capacitors
and just a few varactors for fine tuning, but I never saw the
design parameters. Even the Litz wire pickup coil took a large
design effort.

How did small varactors do any better? Were they switched in and out?

Actually, looking at the data sheets for some of these devices they spec
a capacitance range more than 15:1 over less than the full range.
I think you could either work with a wider voltage range (within the max
spec of course) or switch a single fixed cap in and out. Does the
tuning need to be continuous?

--

Rick C
 
On 3/16/2017 9:57 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 15:39:52 -0500, amdx <nojunk@knology.net> wrote:

On 3/16/2017 3:06 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 12:12:14 -0700 (PDT), Bill Beaty
billb@eskimo.com> wrote:

Which one would capture the most signal at the AM Broadcast frequencies

Is your real question , how do we optimize electrically-small 500KHz loop antennas?

:)


Start by defining optimum.


He did, as did the op, (capture the most signal)

The most power? That implies a conjugate load, which will kill
selectivity.
OK, I did the experiment.
EDIT; I reread the OPs post, he didn't say 6" dia he said 6" length,

so, my experiment was a bit of a waste and doesn't answer his question.

But here's the info from my experiment.

First, I don't know if the OP was tuning or not, I could not measure
any signal without tuning. So, I tuned.

Two 6.75" diameter coils using 660/46 litz, both approximately close
wound on a styrene pipe coupler.
Coils tuned with a high quality cap and a 20pf fine tune trim cap.
The air core coil has 33 turns and measures 236uh
The core with ferrite has 30 turns and 232uh. without the rod, the coil
measures 195uh. The rod is 3/8" diameter x 8" long. Not a large
inductance change to put a small ferrite rod in a large air core coil.
To center the rod in the coil, I cut two, 1/2' styrofoam circles to fit
the inside of the coupler and put a hole in the center for the rod.
To measure the signal I have high input impedance amp with a gain of 1.
I used the amp to drive a scope (ch 2) set at 50mV/div. I took the
channel 2 output from the back of the scope to drive a Boonton 92BD RF
millivolt meter. I used the scope to compare the visual to audio from a
portable radio to know where I was tuned.
I have three local stations 590kHz, 1290kHz, and 1430kHz.
I did two separate tests, but they were so close it didn't matter.
Modulation made the signal vary, but the Boonton has an analog meter to
help peak the signal.
I did try a second larger diameter poorer quality rod 1/2" diameter
x 7.25 long. It may have out did the air core on the low end with a
few more turns to bring the inductance up to match the others, but it
failed on the upper end.


Best Ferrite Poorer ferrite
236uh 232uh 216uh
33 turn 30 turn 30 turn
Air core coil Ferrite Coil Ferrite Coil

590kHz 59 mv 43 mv 59 mv

1290kHz 15.5 mv 6.7 mv 7.1 mv

1430kHz 10.5 mv 4.2mv 3.2 mv

Mikek





---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
 
On 19/03/17 13:11, pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote:
I've used them in instruments but never in receivers. Gilbert cells are _not_ strong mixers
--they have many fine qualities, but good IMD performance is not one of
them.

Interesting. Please educate me - when you say "strong" do you mean
"involving sharp switching"? Is is Miller effect and LO feedthrough
that limits the "strength"? Does HFA3101 not qualify as "strong"?

A strong mixer is one with really good IMD performance. Antennas pick up everything at some level, so the amount of stuff that your poor little RX front end has to cope with is pretty appalling.

A diode bridge with 2 or 3 series-connected Schottky diodes in each arm and a +17 dBm LO is one decent approach, and you can get one from Mini Circuits in one day if you like.

A bridge made from a fast CMOS mux is another good approach, though it takes more manual work.

These techniques use square wave switching (or nearly), which greatly reduces the proportion of the time when the switching devices are in their 'linear' range.

In order to make an order-1 change in the behaviour of a Level 17 mixer or a FET MUX, an interfering signal has to be pretty big, i.e. a volt or two.

To do the same to a Gilbert cell requires about e/kT, i.e. ~26 mV. So on a simplistic analysis, a Gilbert cell becomes nonlinear at levels a good 40 dB lower than a strong mixer.

Thank you. I didn't realize they used series Schottky strings.

Could the need be somewhat averted with back bias instead?
 
"Kevin Aylward" wrote in message
news:kfudnRgqWLyQIlDFnZ2dnUU7-XvNnZ2d@giganews.com...

"bitrex" wrote in message news:9DdzA.62942$mb5.42260@fx19.iad...

I'm a liberal and yet, in some circumstances I do support the death
penalty.

I don't see that there can be much more of a cold-bloodied, calculated
murder, than having 12 people calmly sit on seats debating the merits of
killing someone over several days, with a state sponsored judge exposing
all sorts of "rational" arguments as to how it is ethically justifiable to
execute said person being debated. Said person is then dragged to a room
with gawking onlookers watching the deliberate injection of chemicals to
terminate said life. This is no less barbaric than at a Roman gladiator ring
where the emperor points his thump up or down.

What is even more grotesque, is that large numbers of those barbarians
supporting state sponsored murder are alleged Christians, despite their role
model, Jesus, emphatically instructing them that "thou shall not kill".
More, stunningly the xtians claim that it is they that there the morally
righteous ones.



-- Kevin Aylward
http://www.anasoft.co.uk - SuperSpice
http://www.kevinaylward.co.uk/ee/index.html
 
On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 16:04:00 +0000, Cursitor Doom wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCJUEvFYaGc

But there you go. That's entertainment!

Now *that's* what I call a "procedure" LOL., I hope Jim's is far less
dramatic! :-D
 
On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 16:15:05 -0700, tabbypurr wrote:

And yet it fails anyway. The ways in which people come to believe
nonfacts are legion.
Can't agree. In cases of the very worst crimes, where the identity and
culpability of the defendant are beyond any doubt at all, the death
penalty should at least be available.
 
On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 20:03:50 -0400, krw wrote:

> That's impossible, which is the whole "reasonable" thing.

Nothing whatsoever impossible about it!
 
On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 23:13:15 +0000, Kevin Aylward wrote:

"bitrex" wrote in message news:9DdzA.62942$mb5.42260@fx19.iad...


I'm a liberal and yet, in some circumstances I do support the death
penalty.

I am 100% against state executions, for several reasons.

One is that it is absolutely *impossible* to prove guilt to 100%.

No it isn't, Kev. And where it *is* possible, and the identity and
culpability of the defendant is beyond question, the death penalty should
be available for the most heinous crimes.
 
On Sunday, 19 March 2017 14:21:57 UTC, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 16:15:05 -0700, tabbypurr wrote:

And yet it fails anyway. The ways in which people come to believe
nonfacts are legion.

Can't agree. In cases of the very worst crimes, where the identity and
culpability of the defendant are beyond any doubt at all, the death
penalty should at least be available.

People make a mockery of reason too often. Maybe you should spend some time watching groups of people making such decisions.


NT
 
On Sunday, 19 March 2017 15:52:04 UTC, Kevin Aylward wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Cursitor Doom
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2017 2:22 PM Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Re: "Procedure" tomorrow

On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 23:13:15 +0000, Kevin Aylward wrote:

"bitrex" wrote in message news:9DdzA.62942$mb5.42260@fx19.iad...


I'm a liberal and yet, in some circumstances I do support the death
penalty.

I am 100% against state executions, for several reasons.

One is that it is absolutely *impossible* to prove guilt to 100%.

No it isn't, Kev. And where it *is* possible, and the identity and
culpability of the defendant is beyond question, the death penalty should
be available for the most heinous crimes.

I guess you missed the other bits about being on a par to the thumbs
up/thump down at the roman gladiator meet, or cold blood murder is the only
rational way to analyse the calculated way the jury, judge and executioner
carry out their daily business.

State sponsored murder is wrong on so many levels, its pretty stunning
anyone can attempt to justify it by going, hey, yes it _IS_ 100% possible to
determine guilt, in an ideal case, if its not raining on a Tuesday.

Murder is murder. Under the guise of the "law", doesn't change a thing.

I guess you are not familiar with the problems of state sponsored executions
in general. In Iran, after the revolution, it was something like 100,000.

I guess we just have different moral compasses.


Kevin Aylward
http://www.anasoft.co.uk - SuperSpice
http://www.kevinaylward.co.uk/ee/index.html

Naivete about the mechanics of 'justice' is not unusual.
 
"Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> writes:

"Kevin Aylward" wrote in message
news:kfudnRgqWLyQIlDFnZ2dnUU7-XvNnZ2d@giganews.com...

"bitrex" wrote in message news:9DdzA.62942$mb5.42260@fx19.iad...


I'm a liberal and yet, in some circumstances I do support the death
penalty.

I don't see that there can be much more of a cold-bloodied, calculated
murder, than having 12 people calmly sit on seats debating the merits
of killing someone over several days, with a state sponsored judge
exposing all sorts of "rational" arguments as to how it is ethically
justifiable to execute said person being debated. Said person is then
dragged to a room with gawking onlookers watching the deliberate
injection of chemicals to terminate said life. This is no less
barbaric than at a Roman gladiator ring where the emperor points his
thump up or down.

What is even more grotesque, is that large numbers of those barbarians
supporting state sponsored murder are alleged Christians, despite
their role model, Jesus, emphatically instructing them that "thou
shall not kill". More, stunningly the xtians claim that it is they
that there the morally righteous ones.

World leaders: China, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, USA.

Look at that map:

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_by_country#/media/File:Capital_punishment_in_the_world.svg>

Says it all really...




--

John Devereux
 
On 3/14/2017 11:18 PM, billbowden wrote:
Which is a better design. Suppose you have a 6 inch length of PVC pipe with
numerous turns of wire that has an inductance of say 200uH. Now suppose you
use the same (6 inch) piece of PVC with a ferrite rod in the core with
considerably fewer turns of wire. Which one would capture the most signal
at the AM Broadcast frequencies (500K to 2 Megs) and produce the greatest
signal output? Would it be more ferrite, or more wire?

I'll run the experiment.

Do you want it tuned?

If not, I have no way to measure the signals of my local stations.
I need the resonance peaking to see the signal.

What diameter PVC?

I have 1/2" OD polystyrene that will allow a little closer coupling
between the ferrite and the wire. 400 turns #28 = 203uh air core.

I have 1/2" CPVC. actual OD. 0.615"
290 turns #28 = 200uh air core


I have 1/2 PVC, actual OD. 0.832. 175 turns #28 = 205uh air core.

Pick one.

I'll also wind one with less turns and use my best Q rod that is 8" long
x 0.375" diameter.

I will check three frequencies, 590Khz, 1290kHz and 1430Khz.

I made a post last night of the wrong experiment (6"dia not 6" long)
It has not shown up this morning, so I'll repeat my measurement method.

To measure the signal I have a very high input impedance amp with a
gain of 1.
I use the amp to drive a scope (ch 2) set at 50mV/div. I took the
channel 2 output from the back of the scope to drive a Boonton 92BD RF
millivolt meter. I use the scope to compare the visual to audio from a
portable radio to know where I am tuned.
Modulation causes a bit of amplitude bounce, but I do a visual average.

Let me know what you want.
Mikek


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
 
On Sun, 19 Mar 2017 09:07:05 -0700, tabbypurr wrote:

People make a mockery of reason too often. Maybe you should spend some
time watching groups of people making such decisions.

I don't agree with you and probably never will, but - in what must be a
Usenet first - I can at least see where you're coming from here.
 
On Sun, 19 Mar 2017 15:51:55 +0000, Kevin Aylward wrote:

I guess you missed the other bits about being on a par to the thumbs
up/thump down at the roman gladiator

No I didn't, Kev. How the hell is the whim of one emperor comparable to
the evidentially-based reasoning of 12 impartial individuals under the
guidance of a senior judge well-versed in dealing with murder cases??
 
On Sun, 19 Mar 2017 09:08:54 -0700, tabbypurr wrote:

> Naivete about the mechanics of 'justice' is not unusual.

You won't find such in me, Tabitha. And I'm the keenest observer of human
nature you will ever encounter.
 
"Clifford Heath" <no.spam@please.net> wrote in message
news:58cddea6$0$42047$c3e8da3$3a1a2348@news.astraweb.com...
Bit difficult to use FET switching with those to make a 25:1
capacitance ratio however.

It seems that my friend could have used 10x switched capacitors
and just a few varactors for fine tuning, but I never saw the
design parameters. Even the Litz wire pickup coil took a large
design effort.

My monitor does both. It has switched capacitors (S-correction, the amount
of "S" required depending on sweep rate), and Litz in the deflection coil,
so there. :p

(Obviously, the "large signal" (100V?) regime makes it quite effective to
use individual power MOSFETs to switch capacitors into the circuit. It's
still an okay method in the small signal < 0.3V range too, but in that
inbetweeny range, err... :) )

Tim

--
Seven Transistor Labs, LLC
Electrical Engineering Consultation and Contract Design
Website: http://seventransistorlabs.com
 
On 19.3.17 04:11, pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote:
I've used them in instruments but never in receivers. Gilbert cells are _not_ strong mixers
--they have many fine qualities, but good IMD performance is not one of
them.

Interesting. Please educate me - when you say "strong" do you mean
"involving sharp switching"? Is is Miller effect and LO feedthrough
that limits the "strength"? Does HFA3101 not qualify as "strong"?

A strong mixer is one with really good IMD performance. Antennas pick up everything at some level, so the amount of stuff that your poor little RX front end has to cope with is pretty appalling.

A diode bridge with 2 or 3 series-connected Schottky diodes in each arm and a +17 dBm LO is one decent approach, and you can get one from Mini Circuits in one day if you like.

A bridge made from a fast CMOS mux is another good approach, though it takes more manual work.

These techniques use square wave switching (or nearly), which greatly reduces the proportion of the time when the switching devices are in their 'linear' range.

In order to make an order-1 change in the behaviour of a Level 17 mixer or a FET MUX, an interfering signal has to be pretty big, i.e. a volt or two.

To do the same to a Gilbert cell requires about e/kT, i.e. ~26 mV. So on a simplistic analysis, a Gilbert cell becomes nonlinear at levels a good 40 dB lower than a strong mixer.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Maybe the best mixers can be built with CMOS analog switches.
Google for 'Tayloe mixer'.

--

-TV
 
"Clifford Heath" <no.spam@please.net> wrote in message
news:58cddfce$0$39518$b1db1813$7968482@news.astraweb.com...
On 18/03/17 20:08, Tim Williams wrote:
"Clifford Heath" <no.spam@please.net> wrote in message
news:58cc722c$0$51765$c3e8da3$f6268168@news.astraweb.com...
A friend designed a specialised hand-held pickup head that had
to tune 1-5MHz, and used 480(!) small varicaps. It was measuring
micro-ohms of dynamic impedance using transformer coupling
(about 8mm square) across a small air gap. The DUT had dozens
of resonances with Q of 1000-5000 across the band.

Sounds like a horrible case of poorly matched transformer design.
(Unusually badly matched: Q's in the thousands imply impedance off by at
least as much!)

Impossible to say for sure without a winding stackup, though. *shrug*

No. The resonators were micromachined aluminium bars, 52 in series,
tuned a third of a semitone apart, vacuum sealed inside a 1mm^3
chip, and had to be pinged and read at LN2 temperatures. At room
temp, the Q's exceeded 1000; at LN2, some would pass 5000. Fun stuff.

Wait, "dynamic impedance" == mechanical resonance? Oh...

In other words, he made an ear. ;) Or, a log periodic, or...

Tim

--
Seven Transistor Labs, LLC
Electrical Engineering Consultation and Contract Design
Website: http://seventransistorlabs.com
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Cursitor Doom
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2017 2:22 PM Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Re: "Procedure" tomorrow

On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 23:13:15 +0000, Kevin Aylward wrote:

"bitrex" wrote in message news:9DdzA.62942$mb5.42260@fx19.iad...


I'm a liberal and yet, in some circumstances I do support the death
penalty.

I am 100% against state executions, for several reasons.

One is that it is absolutely *impossible* to prove guilt to 100%.

No it isn't, Kev. And where it *is* possible, and the identity and
culpability of the defendant is beyond question, the death penalty should
be available for the most heinous crimes.

I guess you missed the other bits about being on a par to the thumbs
up/thump down at the roman gladiator meet, or cold blood murder is the only
rational way to analyse the calculated way the jury, judge and executioner
carry out their daily business.

State sponsored murder is wrong on so many levels, its pretty stunning
anyone can attempt to justify it by going, hey, yes it _IS_ 100% possible to
determine guilt, in an ideal case, if its not raining on a Tuesday.

Murder is murder. Under the guise of the "law", doesn't change a thing.

I guess you are not familiar with the problems of state sponsored executions
in general. In Iran, after the revolution, it was something like 100,000.

I guess we just have different moral compasses.


Kevin Aylward
http://www.anasoft.co.uk - SuperSpice
http://www.kevinaylward.co.uk/ee/index.html
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top