Driver to drive?

[Ian Stirling]

boki <bokiteam@ms21.hinet.net> wrote:

Dear All,
There is a voltage drop be detected by USB host controller,
we can recongnize this signal to know a new device, but, anybody know
hos is the function or API or ..... in windows programming? ( VC/VB )

It's not a voltage drop.
What do you want to do?
Your question is probably more appropriate on a VC/VB group.

 

[Fred Bloggs]

Tom Seim wrote:

Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<415B7A97.5090006@nospam.com>...

Tom Seim wrote:

OK, Fred, you are so degree-conscious, what degree(s) do you have?

What degrees do you have, Battelle boy?


You first.

I don't need to you to answer- I know Battelle.

 

[ChrisGibboGibson]

"bruce varley" wrote:

It's a well known challenge given to students. Apparently most of the
classical design techniques end up with 5 gates, whereas it can be done with
4. I think the following is it:

NOR 1 - 4, all 2 i/p.

A input to 1, 2.
B input to 1, 3.
1 output to 2, 3.
2 output to 4.
3 output to 4.

4 output is XOR (A, B).

Isn't that an exclusive NOR ?

Gibbo

 

[Keith Williams]

In article <bvAj9TDMp9WBFw$H@jmwa.demon.co.uk>,
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk says...

I read in sci.electronics.design that Rich Grise <null@example.net
wrote (in <spQ6d.4562$8H1.385@trnddc08&gt about 'OT: Cheney and Disarming
American Defense- THE Facts', on Thu, 30 Sep 2004:
On Wednesday 29 September 2004 08:16 pm, Fred Bloggs did deign to grace us
with the following:



Tom Seim wrote:
OK, Fred, you are so degree-conscious, what degree(s) do you have?

What degrees do you have, Battelle boy?

IOW, 0.

Nah, 97.6.

Ah, one degree short of human.

--
Keith

 

[colin]

Further looking at it revealed C5 wrong way round,lower gate drive circuits
could be a lot simpler with just 2 transistors each, top ones cld be done
with 3 or posibly 2, overcurent should have some sort of hystereseis/time
latch on it, otherwise the transistors could be switched on and off very
rapidly under overcurent conditions for wich the slow antiparalel diodes
used would cuase serious problems. im not sure about the wiseness of
paraleling such a lot of the circuitry for more power.

As a note, reverse and forward seem to be negative logic inputs, and it
might be preferable to force an all off/fualt condition if both are active.

> Colin =^.^=

 

[Guy Macon]

Rich Grise <null@example.net> says...

Jeroen did deign to grace us with the following:

"Guy Macon" <http://www.guymacon.com> wrote...

That's not bizarre. The Atmel T48C893 is *bizarre*

Bizarre because it's optimized for a high(er) level language other then C?

I'm still wondering what a "64-byte address space" is. Doesn't sound
like a heck of a lot! ;-)

It's a proceesor that runs Forth as it's assembly language.
Why would anyone want to store anything in a cruddy old address
space when they have a modern efficient stack to store things on?

 

[Paul Burridge]

On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 00:06:08 -0700, "john jardine"
<john@jjdesigns.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:

Yes indeed!. I'm smirking even now thinking about that trench warfare bit.
regards

It was Monty Python, actually, I believe. The skit went on to explain
that a team of translators were working on a German version of the
Joke to use as a weapon against them in WW2. No individual translator
could handle more than a few words of it without risking death.
--

"What is now proved was once only imagin'd." - William Blake, 1793.

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Tom Seim <soar2morrow@yahoo.com>
wrote (in <6c71b322.0409300512.2e581f80@posting.google.com&gt about
'[OT]: The not-so-democratic Democrats', on Thu, 30 Sep 2004:

Fred, which planet were you on in 1991?

The same one he is now.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote (in <7c584d27.0409300534.6f689463@posting.google.com&gt about
'[OT]: The not-so-democratic Democrats', on Thu, 30 Sep 2004:

so I'm expecting
royalties .....

Would you settle for the Earl and Countess of Wessex?
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote
(in <Xns9574642815B83jyanikkuanet@204.117.192.21&gt about '[OT]: The not-
so-democratic Democrats', on Thu, 30 Sep 2004:

He even attended a meeting discussing assassination of US gov't
officials.

Can't be all bad, then. (;-)
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[David]

"oparr" <oparr@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:43650b7.0409300548.29353ded@posting.google.com...

I notice that even when X/Y offset is set to 0/0 in the CAM Processor
there seems to be an arbitrary offset in the file X/Y coordinates when
compared to coordinates in the editor. It also seems to vary from
board to board. For example, a drill placed at 0,0 in the editor
(.001" grid) ends up at 135,135 (1/1000" units) in the file. One has
to use a -.135"/-.135" offset in order to get a 1:1 correlation. Why
is this?

the board bottom left hand corner of the board is not at (0,0), and the cam
processor is set to output positive coords, which are based upon the actual
board shape, so the (0 0) location is arbitrary.

regards

David

 

[Rolavine]

From: "Frithiof Andreas Jensen"

"Rolavine" <rolavine@aol.com> wrote

The *real politics* is thus once again left to evolve in the factory
cafeteria and the bier-stuben; the places where herr Schickelgruber
discovered his talent.

That's a hell of a point, and something I never thought about before!

If your right we are doomed.

Nah - Rome fell; The Italian People survived.

Yeah, doomed was a overdramatic, but I was tempted to reply 'Yeah, that's
exactly what I meant' in order to show you I wasn't stuck with your 'moral high
ground' (tm).

Rocky

 

[John Larkin]

On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:12:42 +0100, John Woodgate
<jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote:

I read in sci.electronics.design that Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org
wrote (in <7c584d27.0409300534.6f689463@posting.google.com&gt about
'[OT]: The not-so-democratic Democrats', on Thu, 30 Sep 2004:
so I'm expecting
royalties .....

Would you settle for the Earl and Countess of Wessex?

A nobel offer indeed!

John

 

[Rolavine]

From: Fred Bloggs

snips
worked so well because "nobody here wants anything that anybody else
has."


Like, f'rinstance, common sense?


Right, since each came to the meeting with a full set.


A better analogy would be the agenda of a neighborhood watch meeting as
compared to that of the local criminal gang planning their next act of
mayhem, revenge, and vandalism.

I laughed till my sides hurt, bravo!

Rocky

 

[Terry Pinnell]

Hal Leemux <Hal_leemuxNOSPAMMMPLEASE@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

Hi,

Can anybody tell me a simple way to tweak a simple latch circuit to
change state when the button is pressed in quick succession (say within
1 second). Exactly like a double click on a computer.

The schematic I've been working off is second circuit down at,

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Bill_Bowden/page9.htm

Would really appreciate any advice,

Here's an alternative implementation of John's design.

http://www.terrypin.dial.pipex.com/Images/KnockKnock1.gif

Let me know if you have queries, or want to see simulated waveforms.

I'll also post a copy of this in a.b.s.e.

--
Terry Pinnell
Hobbyist, West Sussex, UK

 

[Rolavine]

From: Jim Yanik jyanik@abuse.gov

BTW,the FBI has a file on Kerry's anti-American activities while in the
VVAW.He even attended a meeting discussing assassination of US gov't
officials

I was involved in the anti war movement in the late 60's early 70's and I got
to tell you joking about killing US gov't officals was common. However, we
didn't actually do it, it was kind of a 'well that's one way to change their
minds'. This wasn't so strange remember that the govt killed some of us? Again,
in case you missed the point of VN, the protestors were right and the Govt was
wrong, cause that war was a super turkey that we could never win, just like
this current fiasco in Iraq.

Rocky

 

[Rolavine]

soar2morrow@yahoo.com

Boy, are you ever uninformed! Sadam was within months of having an
nuclear weapon when we attacked in '91. There is plenty of
documentation of this fact. You guys are so concerned about facts, go
look that one up.

I tired, can't find it!
I find plenty to the contrary. Tom are you OK, I know we disagree but you have
never said anything this deranged before?

BBC
"The head of Iraq's nuclear programme under Saddam Hussein has said Iraq
destroyed its nuclear weapons programme in 1991 and never restarted it.

Jafar Dhia Jafar told the BBC sanctions and inspections worked in stopping the
reconstitution of the programme.

He also said Iraq's chemical and biological weapons programmes were destroyed
after the first Gulf War and never reactivated."

That report is consistent with what the US military has found while sweeping
the country.

Rocky

 

[Rolavine]

From: Guy Macon http://www.guymacon.com

You might wish to peruse them. They are the documents that the
Founding Fathers wrote so that future generations would know
their intent.

http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/

I haven't looked at these for years and went to see what they had to say about
the commander and cheif power granted the President.

However I got amused by Hamilton's language while I searched and wanted to
share this bit of it.

"It has indeed been brought forward in the most vague and general form,
supported only by bold assertions, without the appearance of argument; without
even the sanction of theoretical opinions; in contradiction to the practice of
other free nations, and to the general sense of America, as expressed in most
of the existing constitutions. The proprietory of this remark will appear, the
moment it is recollected that the objection under consideration turns upon a
supposed necessity of restraining the LEGISLATIVE authority of the nation, in
the article of military establishments; a principle unheard of, except in one
or two of our State constitutions, and rejected in all the rest."

What a hoot, one wonders if Burr shot him just to shut him up.

Rocky

 

[Rene Tschaggelar]

donburo wrote:

Hello everybody..

I'm trying to built a simple transimpedence amplifier for a Plastic
Optical Fibre (POF) photodiode (E05 EM PIN ST 001). I'm using an
OPA2277 operational amplifier (+15 -15 as power supply) and a 1Mohm
resistance as feedback. This should give me a transimpendence of app.
1V/uA.
The diode is biased at 7.5V and is connected between ground and the
non-inverting op. amp node.
The source power I'm trying to detect is very small (nWatt app.) and
the diode sensitivity should be around 0.5A/W.
I should see something like some mV at the output (too small signal).
Any Idea to make things run better????

Your nW indeed equal some mV after your transimpedance amp.
Just in case the setup is controllable, you could modulate
the light and use AC amplifiers to recover the signal.
This technique is called lock-in. The point is to have
a narrow bandwidth filter around the modulation frequency,
which gets rid of the noise.
Google for 'lock-in'

Rene
--
Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar - http://www.ibrtses.com
& commercial newsgroups - http://www.talkto.net

 

[Winfield Hill]

colin wrote...

Further looking at it revealed ...

There's more, much more.


--
Thanks,
- Win

(email: use hill_at_rowland-dotties-org for now)