Driver to drive?

[Ken Smith]

In article <Xns9589CF5387F74jyanikkuanet@129.250.170.84>,
Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote:
[...]

Except Kerry was opposed to the war BEFORE he went,-after he couldn't get a
student deferment.

Do you have a site for that?

--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On 16 Oct 2004 03:37:44 -0700, the renowned Winfield Hill
<Winfield_member@newsguy.com> wrote:

Spehro Pefhany wrote...

Tam WB2TT wrote:

Don't know anything about the C1815, but I have built wideband amplifiers
and found the 2N2369 to be much superior to the 2N2222 as far as bandwidth
goes; that is, if you can live with the 15 V breakdown. For PNPs, the 2N5771
works well. In any case, you will have to frequency compensate the feedback
loop for good video response. You should be able to find an IC that will do
the job.

Here's the jellybean C1815
http://www.semicon.toshiba.co.jp/td%5Cen%5CTransistors/Bipolar_SmallSignal_Transistors%5Cen_20030328_2SC1815_datasheet.pdf

Hey, Spef, I thought you preferred the Philips pc1815. I do like the
Toshiba data sheet better though. Checking a few distributors, I didn't
find much interest in the 2sc1815, only Farnell had some in stock, at a
high price. Maybe the 2sc1815's jellybean days are over.

Toshiba is the original manufacturer, of course. I don't think the
days are over, it's just not that popular outside Japan and (areas
that use Japanese designs), and it's an old-fashioned through-hole
part.

Mouser recommended the bc546b instead. Hmm, the bc546 family is well
stocked at distributors, as is its nice little bc556 pnp complement.

Have any 2SC parts become popular in the US?


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

 

[ChrisGibboGibson]

(kell) wrote:

I already posted this but can't find it on the board. Apologies if
this is a repeat.

My antique bike has a points plate with fixed timing, no weights or
springs like a modern breaker. You set the timing to 35 degrees
advance (by viewing a mark on the flywheel) and leave it there when
riding, it fires there -- at all rpm. I have already replaced the
points with hall effect sensors (one for each cylinder), magnets and
shutter disc, with igbts to run the coil, in a setup of my own design.
Now I would like to create an advance curve electronically. With the
breaker set to full advance as per usual, the circuit has to delay the
spark (in practical terms this will likely involve simply extending
dwell time) a varying amount depending on engine speed, more delay at
low rpm, with the delay dropping out entirely at 2000 rpm so that the
ignition goes to full advance. So you could say the circuit will
actually have to create a retard curve.

I have built astable and monostable multivibrators of discrete
components and used 555 timers. I have enough experience as a ham,
and knowledge as an engineering school dropout, to build something,
but could use a little jump-start with the design, even if only
conceptual. Suggested topologies, helpful web site links and such are
much appreciated.

You'll need to view this in a fixed width font.

Presumably you can pick up a signal somewhere in your new electronic ignition
system with the following very loosely defined specs.

A positive going spike at each ignition pulse.

It would look something like this.

____________|____________|____________|____________| lo revs signal
(tickover)


____|____|____|____|____|____|____| hi revs signal
(2000rpm)

This signal feeds into a retriggerable monostable so out of that you get...
____ ____ ____
_____| |____| |____| |____ at tickover

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____
but | | | | | | | | at 2000 RPM

The trick here is to make the period of the monostable equal to the period
between pulses at 2000 RPM (60S/2000RPM)/2 = 15mS for a single cylinder 4
stroke

Then invert this signal so you end up with

____ ____ ____
|____| |____| |____ at tickover

and ____|____|____|____|____|____ at 2000 RPM

If you low pass filter this you will end up with a DC signal starting at zero
volts at 2000RPM rising in voltage with decreasing revs. Call this signal "this
one"

Now then.....

Your original signal that drives the monostable, also use it to reset a ramp
generator so you end up with a rising ramp starting at zero volts at each input
pulse from the ignition circuit.......

|____|____|____| signal from ignition circuit

/| /| /|
/ | / | / |
/ | / | / |
/ |/ |/ | resulting ramp (height of ramp will vary depending upon revs
but it's not
important).

Finally use a comparator to compare the DC filered signal called "this one"
with the ramp and you will find you have yet another pulse that starts
immediately the incoming pulse arrives from the ignition system when at 2000RPM
but gets later and later as the revs get lower. You'll be able to adjust this
to your heart's content and make the bike sound broken.

I have never used a 555 in my life but I think I am right in saying that all
the required bits above are inside 2 of them, or probably also in one dual one.

Alternatively you could buy a microproccessor, programmer, software and some
books and fuck about learning that for 6 months by which time you'll have
forgotten why you wanted it in the first place.

Finally, none of the above may work because it's 6.00 AM and I'm very drunk and
logging data by hand.

Gibbo

 

[Mac]

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 22:14:21 +0200, Rene Tschaggelar wrote:

Fox zhou wrote:

I'd like to acquire a programmable delay time (10-50us, under 1ns
accuracy) after a trigger signal. How could I do?

Here is my proposed way: I use a low jitter and accurate clock (eg:
100MHz) and a counter to create the rough delay time and use the delay
line or some other chips to generate the fine delay time. When both of
them are added together, the expected delay time is acquired.

My questions are:

1. What kind of clock generator should I use? I hope that is a
single chip solution with the 100MHz with 10ps RMS jitter.
2. How to synchronize with the trigger signal? The idea situation is
that the trigger edge is same overlap with the counter driver's edge
(the rising of falling edge of the clock). But the trigger signal is
un-controllable. It may arrive at any point of the cycle. That is to
say the max error is a cycle time (10ns). That is not acceptable.
3. Are there any other ways to complete my case?

Any of your suggestions and new ideas is welcome.

Any synchroneous delay is synchroneous to the clock and in your case
this leaves an uncertainity of 5ns average and 10ns worst case.

For a synchroneous solution you'd need a clock of shorter than 1ns,
meaning more than 1GHz. There however a synchroneous counter of
16 bits (for 50000 counts) are definitely an achievement.

Rene

You can combine analog and digital techniques to do better. I posted a
sketch of my idea concerning this elsewhere in the thread.

--Mac

 

[Rich Grise]

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 21:03:14 -0700, Mike wrote:

Joerg <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message news:<8AVdd.17061$nj.15008@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>...
Hi Mike,

Just to throw out an idea: What if you used a transformer that can
supply just a little more than needed for the low power winding, and use
a large capacitor on the DC side to supply the energy for the short
duration where the high power coil needs to be powered?

This way you might not even need an end of travel switch because the
capacitor only has so much energy. Of course you'd have to provide some
means such as a resistor in front of that cap to prevent it from
dominating the power rail.

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

Hi Joerg!

Thanks for your idea. I should have pointed out that the high power
side of the coil will be used in rapid succession. I'm not so sure a
cap would charge fast enough to handle the load? I've been toying
with some ideas all day. I think I'm going to use a regular
transformer stepped down to 50V AC. Unfortunately, most transformers
I've come across do not produce the 50V AC. Everything is 5V, 12V,
etc. - far less than what is needed. Furthermore, the few that I
found all operate at low current levels. I will have to add a circuit
to beef up the current. This sucker is going to run hot. The project
is already too complicated. I'm thinking maybe stepping down the
voltage and current a bit now. The whole thing is a big mess. I'm
going to have to make a bench test this weekend and play around a bit.

If it's as bad as you seem to indicate, I'd stop and take time to take
a good hard look at the mechanical arrangement. There is always a
better way, right? I don't know how much design leeway you have, but it
sounds like you have some relatively massive load (several KG?) that you
need to accelerate quickly, and hold in place. So, what are the trade-
offs? I have "Linear Induction Motor" beating itself against the inside
of my skull here, but that's most likely merely my obsession. I saw one
in operation once - it was intended, at the time, to grab and pull-in
the cards in ATM machines, which were in their embryonic stage at the
time. It had amazing pull, and you didn't have to whap it with thousands
of amps just to get the initial pull - just drag the mag field along the
armature, and induce it to follow - as fast and hard as you choose.

In any case, Good Luck!
Rich

 

[Tom Del Rosso]

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote in
message news:dsr0n0ha51al2cma2j6gme42a8p50ouikl@4ax.com...

I'm working on some stuff to test radars on B-52s. The plan is to keep
them in service until 2044, at which point many of the planes will be
80 years old.

The development program started in '48. We made them from '54 to '63, so 80
years would be the minimum.

 

[Tom Del Rosso]

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote in
message news:dsr0n0ha51al2cma2j6gme42a8p50ouikl@4ax.com...

I'm working on some stuff to test radars on B-52s. The plan is to keep
them in service until 2044, at which point many of the planes will be
80 years old.

Once I saw a beautiful picture in Aviation Week of a B-52 sitting on top of
an all-wood tower platform, for radar profile tests. (I realize that's not
at all what you're doing.)

 

[Ulrich Bangert]

Fox,

if you can get your hands on ALTERA gate arrays you may form a delay line
from "carry" elements. The "carry" elements are extremly fast connections
between the logic elements (much faster then the rest logic on the chip)
that are necessary if one designs fast adders or fast counters, the stuff
that needs a carry.

Between the junctions of the delay line connect the D input of a D-flipflop.
Connect the clock inputs of the flipflops to a single node, triggered by
your pulse. Feed the first carry element with your 100 MHz clock. Now, if
the trigger impulse comes, the flipflops will store the "position" of the
100 MHz clock in the delay line and with some additional glue logic you can
measure the relative distance between the trigger edge and the next clock
edge with a time resolution of the order of the delay in a single carry
element. I used that to get to abt. 110 ps time resolution.

A even more clever arrangement is to connect the last delay element to the
first delay element, making a fast "ring oscillator" out of it. Now the
trigger is usd to store the state of the oscillator. This arrangement allows
to compare the frequency of the ring oscillator with a external supplied
known frequency and to regulate it by means of a pll. The delay in the carry
elements is dependand of the gate array's supply voltage so you can change
then gate array's core voltage to close the loop. Of course you need a gate
array with independend supplies for core and i/o.

Regards
Ulrich Bangert

"Fox zhou" <fox@pub.xaonline.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:c7b545b1.0410210740.1290a159@posting.google.com...

Thank you Ulrich. I am searching in the google. I find lots of devices
on this topic. I need a circuit to complete the meaurement. Could tell
me more information or clue on this problem.



"Ulrich Bangert" <df6jb@ulrich-bangert.de> wrote in message
news:<cl7iv7$7sq$05$1@news.t-online.com>...
What you are looking for is usually called a "sub clock interpolation
scheme". These are very common in high resolution time interval
measurements. If you google for "high resolution time interval counter"
you
will not only find a lot of manufacturers for devices that do so but
also
hundreds of scientific articles covering your question.

Regards
Ulrich Bangert

 

[Rich Grise]

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 02:36:21 +0000, Guy Macon wrote:

Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> says...

"Mistakes were made", move on, rinse but do not repeat. ;-) So long
as it isn't intentional- like that so-and-so we had that deliberately
wrecked stuff to get laid off after the minimum for unemployment had
passed. That makes me mad.

I read about a fellow who decided to do that, but instead of damaging
something important he kicked in the locked door to the executives-only
washroom and vandalized it.

When I worked at Perkin-Elmer, some Pointy-Haired-Boss told the folks
building the new plant to put "the most expensive fixtures available"
in the executive WC. Thet did; stainless steel mirrors, stainless
steel toilets with no lid, TP dispensers built like a battleship,
teflon stall doors/partitions, Tile walls/floor/ceiling, etc.

It looked like a prison.

Hell, by the time you got to "stainless steel toilets" it already
_sounded_ like prison!

Hey, how many of us have ever been incarcerated?

I have - that's one, so far.....

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Jim Yanik]

Robert Monsen <rcsurname@comcast.net> wrote in
news:FI2cd.479138$8_6.450724@attbi_s04:

Julie wrote:
Robert Monsen wrote:

Ah, Cincinatus, the great dictator who saved Rome in 16 days, then
returned to his plow. Hardly. His stupid, arrogant, vanity war in
Iraq has cost far more lives than it could have possibly saved, while
weakening us both internally, in the form of our economy, and
externally, in the form of fear of our military.


Just out of personal curiosity, excluding Bush, US policy, UN policy,
etc. for the moment, what do you think of Saddam and his established
genocidal behavior?

a) Not my problem
b) Not anyone's problem except Iraqi's
c) Someone else's problem
d) Out of sight, out of mind
e) Arab's problem
f) Israel's problem
g) Other (describe: _____)

b) bad guy, but not a threat to anybody outside Iraq. The UN sanctions
were killing far more people in Iraq than he was, by at least 1000x.
He had no weapons,

Then what did he use to kill all those people in Halabja(by poison gas)?.

no plans for weapons,

IIRC,the UN report said otherwise.They said he had plans to restart his
nuclear and biochem programs once the sanctions withered enough.

and was apparently writing
romance novels. UN sanctions would never have been lifted while he or
his boys were in power. We have veto power in the UN.

Actually,Saddam was confident that sanctions were rotting away,becoming
more and more ineffective as time went on.

In other words, he was contained, not a friend to terrorists,

The HELL he wasn't.He harbored many of them,he paid homicide bombers
families,he had ties to Al-Queda.

and
isolated from the world community.

Well,it turned out he was NOT so "isolated" after all.

He had no possible way to hurt the
US. He was actually deterring Iran for us with his silly 'find the
WMD' game.

His WMD materiel was likely transferred to Syria.


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net

 

[Jonathan Kirwan]

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 00:57:52 GMT, Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:

This brings up a thought - did the slaves do anything during that war?
If a southern slave-owner ordered his slaves to go fight for the
Confederacy in his place, would that be a dilemma? Did (m)any of them run
away or just turn collaborator and fight for the Union?

I believe I read (or heard, but this is definitely apocryphal) that the South
didn't involve slaves in the war -- and the wealthy among them considered it
dishonorable to avoid direct battle or to hire someone else in their place. But
I really don't know. I'm no scholar (or even a hobbyist) on the civil war.
That just sticks in my mind for some reason.

Jon

 

[ChrisGibboGibson]

Hey, how many of us have ever been incarcerated?

I have - that's one, so far.....

Two..........

Gibbo

 

[Rich Grise]

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 21:42:28 -0700, Tom Seim wrote:

fredfraud, THE VIETNAM VET FRAUD, is silent - good!!!

So, Mr. Seim, would you be so kind as to explain to those of
us who are slow of understanding, what exactly it is about the
silencing of this "freadfroid" character that gives you such
great joy?

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Jonathan Kirwan]

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 02:22:00 GMT, Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

Not quite true-criminal investigations are being pursued. The Majority
Leader is supposed to set an example- even an admonishment is too much
of a bad example- he should go.

There shouldn't be the least question about it -- our representatives in the
Senate and House should be well above the norm in character and even the
appearances should be enough for them to step down from being a committee chair
or party leader until the issues are well understood and cleared up.

Jon

 

[Wolfgang]

Hello Mike,

The data width is 32 bits, the alignment is 4 bytes (32 bits) and the memory I'm
writing to is specified as ASYNC32.

O.k. I just thought if it had been less you could have played with it to gain more knowledge.

I thought 64-bit stores (STDW) were only available on C64x while I'm on C6713.
There you see I'm not the guru. ;-)

I think SDRAM writes are a bit different, don't know how it applies here.
Yes basically you are right. Your description does not allow a lot.

As you've discribed it, it should work better.
The only possibility I can additionally think of that there is some glue logic from the 67 to
the daughter card. May this slows down performance ?

Yeah, I've been meaning to test DMA writes as well, but haven't gotten around to
it yet.
.... and I don't think that it will lead to better results.

Wolfgang

 

[Terry Pinnell]

"Steve" <aeroman10@yahoo.com> wrote:

Thanks for your reply.
So you are saying that if I use a reversible motor then I wouldnt need
a driver?

I have to check on what kind of output the relay produces. From what I
can see each numbered relay has a single-pole double-throw (SPDT)
switch rated at 125 VAC at 0.5 amps or 24 VDC at 1.0 amps.

Here is a pic of the relay (dont know if this shows or tells you
anything):
http://www.imagesco.com/images/catalog/sri-02.jpg

That's the interface board - no relays on it! The relay kit is shown
to the right as 'SRI-02' in the diagram you linked earlier:
http://www.imagesco.com/catalog/hm2007/SpeechRecognitionKit.html#sri-02

(BTW, it seems to me those pages sometimes carelessly swap 'SR' with
'SRI'.)

So with this type of relay you are saying thats its possible to use a
reversible motor instead of a stepper?

Yes. Where did the ideas of a stepper motor arise?

How would the speed of this motor be controlled?

Ambiguous question. Do you mean you want to vary the speed *during*
each opening/closing? (Maybe to sort of tease the door user?) Or are
you asking how to set a fixed speed for some motor(s) which you've
presumably not tried and haven't described so far?

Also, how would you control when the motor should
stop turning (when the door is fully opened/closed).

As Rich said, use switches to detect the extreme positions. A variety
of circuits are possible, depending on the detailed requirement. An
alternative would be detecting increased current when the motor tries
to take a leg off.

Here's one I used for a Window Opener I made many years ago, using a
surplus 12V windscreen wiper motor:
http://www.terrypin.dial.pipex.com/Images/AutoMotorExtremes.gif

A pair of N/C microswitches (SW1 and SW2) were carefully placed at the
two extreme positions so that they are respectively opened when the
window reached the fully open or closed positions. A SPDT switch (on
left of first diagram), controlled whether I wanted to open or close
it, and also BTW gave visual indication of the current state.

-------

Another approach which I've used recently for my Curtain Controller is
shown here, and uses a bistable approach to control a screwdriver
motor:
http://www.terrypin.dial.pipex.com/Images/CurtainController1.gif
http://www.terrypin.dial.pipex.com/Images/CurtainController2.gif

Note that this one uses two N/O (not N/C) microswitches. And *two*
relays, one for power (on/off), and the other for direction
(forward/reverse). Various N/O push buttons allow either open, close
or (simpler) toggling, from either my wife's side of the bed or mine.
An external dawn/dusk circuit (not shown) allows operation via the
'Ext' inputs.

I haven't got around to detailed notes on this yet. (IOW, the sort of
notes I'll need 5 years from now to understand what the heck I was
trying to do!) But - with some assumptions about your group's skill
level - the relay/motor approach should be possible to understand from
these two schematics.

--
Terry Pinnell
Hobbyist, West Sussex, UK

 

[Frithiof Andreas Jensen]

"Fox zhou" <fox@pub.xaonline.com> wrote in message
news:c7b545b1.0410210729.1c99094c@posting.google.com...

I'd like to acquire a programmable delay time (10-50us, under 1ns
accuracy) after a trigger signal. How could I do?

Analogue Devices sell fixed delay lines with taps - use an FPGA to select
which tap to derive the delay from for the short delays and count several
periods for long delays. An algorithm in a microprocessor can choose the
best combination. Very precise, very flexible and cheap too.

I used that for a Radar once.

 

[Mike]

On 14 Oct 2004 17:03:57 -0700, Steve Kavanagh wrote:

I am contemplating the use of a limiter at the output of a noise
source (to be used for rough noise figure measurement) to create a
noise source which doesn't need calibration, assuming the limiter
characteristics are known. The source would consist of a diode in
reverse breakdown (or whatever) to generate noise, followed by an
amplifier and a limiter. The amplifier would have to have enough gain
so that the majority of the time the limiter is active. The output
would then look (most of the time) like a digital signal with random
rise and fall times.

Can anyone comment on what issues there might be with this approach ?
In particular, the effect of the limiter on the noise spectrum is of
interest.

A good starting point (if not the complete answer) begins in the MIT
Radiation Lab volume titled, "Threshold Signals" (Lawson and Uhlenbeck,
McGraw Hill, 1950). They show that the autocorrelation of clipped noise is
given by (p.58)

R(t) = (2/pi)*arcsin(p(t)),

where p(t) = Rn(t)/Rn(0),
Rn(t) = the autocorrelation of the original noise

Assuming your original noise is white, p(t) = 1 when t = 0, and 0
elsewhere, so

R(t) = 2/pi when t = 0, and 0 elsewhere.

The noise spectrum, S(f) is the Fourier transform of R(t), and in the case
where R(t) is an impulse, S(f) is white noise. I think this is probably the
result you're looking for.

If, on the other hand, the noise entering your limiter is band limited,
things get more complicated. Assuming a single-pole low-pass filter,

p(t) = exp(-at), where a is the filter cutoff frequency.

At that point, the Fourier transform of R(t) is a little more difficult to
find.

-- Mike --

 

[Fred Bloggs]

Tom Seim wrote:

soar2morrow@yahoo.com (Tom Seim) wrote in message news:<6c71b322.0410181256.7cdf67b5@posting.google.com>...

....

I can understand why you won't get into stem cell research because
Bush was the first president in history to fund embrionic stem cell
research. Currently it is $200M per year.

It is not *human* embryonic stem cells that are being developed- and
these are the ones of importance to most of us. But given the character
of most Bush supporters , it is understandable why the focus would be on
murine and porcine stem cell lines.

Of course they are. Check your facts (for once).


Furthermore, under Bush NIH funding has doubled from the Clinton
years, a very good record.

That is a total lie. Overall NIH funding has been reduced by nearly $1B
under Bush.

fredrook, I simply don't know where you come up with this industrial
strenght bullshit. The NIH budget has been growing at 15% per annum
until last year (7%), for an overall doubling in 5 yr:
http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/nih04p.pdf


African AIDS funding has grown even more, many times the Clinton
level.

Ahh- another fraud- although budgeted, the Administration is not funding
the programs by more than 20%- this is another Bush fraud. The
priorities of the Bush administration are clear, it is more important to
overfund a failed missile defense to guard against non-existent threats
from rogue nations Bush is inciting to action by a factor of 20x the
effort to fight a pandemic affecting 50 million people and climbing- but
then none of those people contributes to Republican election campaigns.
Christian my ass!- they are Dollarians.

"HIV/AIDS research is another priority in the budget as part of the
Bush Administration's State of the
Union pledge to dramatically expand the fight against global HIV/AIDS.
The NIH HIV/AIDS R&D
portfolio would expand 4.0 percent in FY 2004 to reach $2.9 billion.
Most of this research would be
funded by NIAID, the lead institute for AIDS research; included in the
FY 2004 budget is $100 million
(the same as FY 2003) to be transferred to the Global Fund to Fight
HIV/AIDS, Malaria, and Tuberculosis ? an international public-private
partnership to provide grants for the prevention, treatment,
and cure of these diseases."


Bush got the very first funding of prescription drugs for seniors -
with the help of Democrats.

That fiasco has already been exposed as a major taxpayer ripoff and
payoff to the pharmaceutical industry with only minimal beneficial
impact for seniors in need. It will be repealed soon and replaced with a
more competitive plan.

The plan is in effect and will expand next year. This plan will
greatly improve conditions for poor Seniors least able to pay for
prescription drugs. And it only passed because Dems supported it.


fredfraud, THE VIETNAM VET FRAUD, is silent - good!!!

Oh- is that your idea of being clever, sissy office wimp and coward?
Your way of life will soon come to an end. As I said before, the days of
criminally treasonous shirkers like yourself are over. No one should be
required to go to war to defend corrupt scum like you and Bush/Cheney-
and they will not. As long as people like you make society a cesspool,
then it's time to make it a total cesspool- the US will implode and the
wimp parasites like you will not last long.

 

[Mike Monett]

Hi Phil,

Phil wrote:

A good limiter produces flat-topped pulses of uniform height, with
slightly sloping sides. This produces a histogram that has two
huge peaks at the positive and negative clip levels, plus a low,
flattish region in between corresponding to the nearly-straight
sloping sides.

- ^ ^
/ \ | | | |
_______/ \_____ vs ______| +--------+ |_______

Not very close at all.

Actually, I'm not sure what you are describing. A limiter has only
two output levels: one and zero. There are no "two huge peaks at the
positive and negative clip levels" and no "low, flattish region in
between".

If you stick the clipped noise through a narrow bandpass filter,
it will get more Gaussian-looking, and (IIRC) it will become
Gaussian as the bandwidth goes to zero.

Every signal is a collection of narrowband noise signals. Getting
the bandwidth to zero is the dream of anyone who tried designing
stable oscillators. The output would be the purest sine wave
imaginable!

Cheers,

Phil Hobbs

Regards,

Mike Monett