Driver to drive?

[Bill Sloman]

On 30/12/2013 4:28 AM, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:

On Saturday, December 28, 2013 6:23:59 PM UTC-5, Bill Sloman wrote:
On 29/12/2013 2:22 AM, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Friday, December 27, 2013 10:38:32 PM UTC-5, Bill Sloman wrote:
On 28/12/2013 5:55 AM, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:

snip

I think it's more basic. #1, they don't understand it, #2, they're afraid.

Think about that--under Barack Obama, and all his promises of openness and
big, friendly Big Borg Brother--we now live in a country where the people
are afraid of their government. Indeed, our friends across the world are
afraid of it too. And probably should be.

People across the world have been afraid of the US for quite some time
now. "Banana republics" preceded the CIA-orchestrated replacement of
Mossadeq in Iran - by the Shah, who was a bit too far towards your side
of the political spectrum to last - as was Pinochet in Chile, ditto.

McCarthy is the poster-child for far-right-thinking people of your
description, and anybody not afraid of his reincarnation in the US
hasn't been paying enough attention to Tea Party propaganda.

A magnificent display.

So, if Barack "You can keep your plan" Obama spies on Merkel--and
defends it in court[1]--it's the Tea Party's fault. Or Joe McCarthy.

[1] http://www.politico.com/story/2013/12/nsa-phone-surveillance-ruling-101569.html

The court defense was of meta-data collection, rather than the
collecting of the details of the actual telephone calls, which was what
Dubbya initiated on Merkel.

Gawd, what a troll. Obama spied on Merkel, period. Obama's
first defense was "everybody does it."

And everybody has been doing it for a few years now. Australia is in
trouble with Indonesia because the Australian secret service has been
listening in on the private cell phone calls of Indonesia's president
and his wife for a few years now. Obama may be guilty of failing to get
the US secret service to change it's evil ways, but he had a lot of
other things to deal with at the same time, and Guantanamo Bay is still
in business too.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-18/australia-spied-on-indonesian-president-leaked-documents-reveal/5098860

The US decline into far-right paranoia hasn't got much to do with Obama,
and has got a lot to do with the kind of shoddy right-wing selective
thinking that you regularly exhibit here.

You blamed Obama's spying on the Tea Party because you're a
delusional partisan hack. Next, you declare everyone else paranoid
for blaming Obama's spying on Obama. It's pure, deranged idiocy.
Gobbletygook.

I'm obviously not blaming Obama's spying on the Tea Party, but on the
previous Republican administration - in so far as they had any control
over the antics of the US secret service. Dubbya's administration had
it's problems but it wasn't Tea Party dominated. The pure deranged
idiocy is all yours, and you do sound exactly like a delusional party hack.

If you'd spend more time thinking and less time testifying about
your dim appraisals of other people's intelligence, you'd
understand more. But you'd lose the comfort of magical, emotional
thinking, which is so much easier anyhow, isn't it?

You might know, if you'd ever had the opportunity to compare it with any
other mode of thought. I'm certainly unlikely to share your
"understanding" of the state of the world, which is based on magical
confidence in the US constitution and far-right non-thinking.

I've got no complaints about your intelligence, but your selective and
idiosyncratic use of the information you work with means that it is
entirely wasted in imposing a superficial veneer of rationality onto a
nonsensical world-view. US phone spying on Angela Merkel goes back to
2002, which makes it difficult to pin it exclusively on Obama.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24690055

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On 30/12/2013 4:44 AM, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:

On Sunday, December 29, 2013 7:59:39 AM UTC-5, Bill Sloman wrote:
On 29/12/2013 2:44 AM, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Friday, December 27, 2013 10:50:40 PM UTC-5, bloggs.fred...@gmail.com wrote:
People were saying the same thing about the first peace time federal income tax, and PPACA is not nearly as earth shattering. Get used to it, it's here to stay.

The PPACA is the theory that the government can make the People
do anything. Not just regulate what citizens do, but compel them
to actively do things, contract private parties against their will,
etc. And, by lying to them to pass it if necessary.

That would parallel conscription - compelling citizens to join the army
and get them to march off and fight - and die - in foreign wars. Vietnam
comes to mind. Did you protest against that? Many did.

It's a far bigger deal than mere income tax.

But scarcely novel or unique.

It *is* unique and novel in America.

It's less extreme than the conscription powers, but because you are a
right-wing nitwit, you ignore that particular precedent as irrelevant.

It changes America from a nation of and by the People, into
one with an all-powerful central authority that decides
every person's most private particulars, and the power to
punish any diversity.

As - say - McCarthy did.

And it codifies the federal government's right to collect,
archive, and share all of every citizen's personal papers,
affairs, transactions and effects.

As the IRS does. And J. Edgar Hoover did - in his successful project to
be able to get enough dirt on the rest of the country to make sure that
nobody could ever afford to out him as gay.

> In short, it makes Americans subjects.

As if they were ever anything else.

It's likely to kill fewer people than
conscription and the language you use is a little over-blown.

You've got no basis for that, and even if you did it's an
irrelevant, callous standard. Is anything that kills fewer
people than war, then, permissible?

You failed to perceive the ironic content of the message. Obamacare, by
extending health care insurance cover, is more likely to save lives than
it is to kill people, despite your rabid delusions. US health care
scores low in the international rankings - lower than any other advanced
industrial country - and the fact that it not universal is the usual
explanation of it's poor performance when measured over the population
as a whole.

You've managed to persuade yourself that the "unique" US ethnic mix is a
better explanation, but other - less biased - observers think differently.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:

On Saturday, December 28, 2013 10:14:31 PM UTC-5, mrob...@att.net wrote:

A patent makes it even easier... People's Shining Switching Power
Supply Factories 1 through 37 can start working on it as soon as they
can get a copy of the patent!

True, but you can sue.

Let me know how that lawsuit against People's Shining Switching Power
Supply Factories 1 through 37 works out. Step 1: Figure out whom to sue
and which court to do it in...

That's all a patent really boils down to-- the right to sue someone
for copying your <gadget>.

Yeah, I understand why the money people like patents. To me it just
seems like a road to spending a lot of money on activities that do not
tend to make cool new things appear in the world, which seems like a
moderately silly road to take.

Matt Roberds

 

[Greegor]

JA > The picture showed a line-operated
JA > "plug," which suggests they've
JA > got galvanic isolation.

They're taking PRE-ORDERS on their website..
This 65W laptop adapter is to be out in mid 2014.
At CES 2014 in Las Vegas Jan 7-10
Venetian Level 1 Booth #74113
Anybody here going to CES?

FINsix is supposedly based in Menlo Park, CA
ASIC work is to be at: 27 Drydock Avenue, Boston, MA 02210
Venture capital backed.

http://www.finsix.com/products/adapter.html

http://www.finsix.com/company/team.html

(Impressive)

Their other product:

http://www.finsix.com/products/led.html

LED Driver (In Development)

I just hope it's not another vaporware..

 

[Greegor]

I like the ones in Colorado who've told the legislature to pound sand (re: enforcing the absurd new gun laws).

Sheriff Paul Babeu is like that as well. He sticks it right in the nose of the Feds.
Of course they bounce right back with an ad hominem
attack outing Babeu as gay. Such a country we've come to :-(

krw > The left is homophobic? Lefties are bigots? Who wudda thunk.

I know of one who blogs very much gay friendly
yet at the drop of a hat she will call any
heterosexual opponent gay as a slur.

Leftists contradict themselves a lot.

ACLU was in on this case right?

But ACLU refused to help that PhD
attorney Richard I Fine who did
18 months with no charge, because
he raised a fuss about how Judges
throughout Cali were getting TWO
sets of paychecks routinely and
for the same work. It was illegal
yet not one of those Judges pointed
out that their "double dipping"
arrangement was illegal in California.

Fine irked them off by pointing it out.
California had to pass an ex-post-facto
law making it legal retroactively.

He EMBARASSED the system big time so
they went DIRTY to get him.

The USSC even refused to help even
though he was held with no hearing
and no charge. So much for ACLU
and the USSC defending basic
Constitutional Rights!

Have you ever heard of the legal
fraternity where the cops, lawyers,
judges and others all get together
and bond over good poker games and such?

International Footprint Association.

If anybody dragged into court ever
felt like the Judges and attorneys
were more interested in their social
standing than in providing them
a "vigorous defense", it seems that
in addition to schmoozing at the
courthouse and at state convestions,
or at the local cop bar, this is
yet another reason for the
"country club effect".

Legally, testimony from a cop is NOT
supposed to carry any more weight in
court than any other citizen, but in
reality cops, judges and even defense
attorneys all see each other as partners.

 

[Greegor]

On Wednesday, December 25, 2013 8:40:10 PM UTC-6, Robert Macy wrote:

On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 21:19:00 -0700, miso <miso@sushi.com> wrote:



http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2013/12/joe_arpaio_loses_new_times_co-.php

The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors this afternoon voted
unanimously to approve a $3.75 million settlement for New Times'
co-founders, whose false arrests in 2007 were orchestrated by Sheriff
Joe Arpaio.

Robert Macy > Who was the plaintiffs' attorney?

Was ACLU involved?

I'm sure they hate Arpaio for political reasons.

How is it that Arpaio is guilty of all
of that and no Judge or court administrator
took action or bears any responsibility?

Miraculous!

 

[Peter]

mroberds@att.net wrote

Yeah, I understand why the money people like patents. To me it just
seems like a road to spending a lot of money on activities that do not
tend to make cool new things appear in the world, which seems like a
moderately silly road to take.

You need to file patents to get VC funding.

The patents can be bogus (prior art, etc) - doesn't matter. Most
patents are worthless. VCs can't tell the difference.

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Mon, 30 Dec 2013 00:31:05 -0800 (PST)) it happened Greegor
<greegor47@gmail.com> wrote in
<b539eee1-5cc9-4fbf-b489-9b89c1a10e6e@googlegroups.com>:

JA > The picture showed a line-operated
JA > "plug," which suggests they've
JA > got galvanic isolation.

They're taking PRE-ORDERS on their website..
This 65W laptop adapter is to be out in mid 2014.
At CES 2014 in Las Vegas Jan 7-10
Venetian Level 1 Booth #74113
Anybody here going to CES?

FINsix is supposedly based in Menlo Park, CA
ASIC work is to be at: 27 Drydock Avenue, Boston, MA 02210
Venture capital backed.

http://www.finsix.com/products/adapter.html

http://www.finsix.com/company/team.html

(Impressive)

Their other product:

http://www.finsix.com/products/led.html

LED Driver (In Development)

I just hope it's not another vaporware..

So it seems to be resonant after all...:
http://www.finsix.com/technology/advantages.html

And no efficiencey numbers given, must be really bad.
Only advantage small size?
Only 110 V?
How about RF interference at VHF? with DTV, cellphones?
Normal switchers are already bad enough, I have one radiating 250 kHz.

And to say, here:
http://www.finsix.com/products/led.html
"
Highest Performance
Blinking, instability, noise and LED lamps that just refuse to turn on are history."

Well that is almost like saying:
"Our cars start every time, unlike noisy other ones that just refuse to start..."

Gimme a break.

 

[Don Kuenz]

dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:

However annoying patents are, these things are always patented, and
have to be. These guys filed in 2009. Without patents it wouldn't
make sense to do all that work--make all that investment--only
to have it ripped off the nanosecond you ship.

There's two schools of thought regarding patents with my energy
extraction clients. One school believes that patents are better than
nothing to protect a new gadget. The other school believes that patents
only reveal the inner workings of a new gadget to pirates. What one
believes seems to hinge on what happened to one's father.

In the former case, the father-in-law of one my clients invented a new
gadget and did not patent it. The inner workings of the gadget got
ripped off soon after it hit the oil field.

In the latter case, the father of one of my clients got ripped off by
pirates who used the father's patent as a blueprint. So the son did not
file a patent on a new invention. Instead the son housed his new gadget
in a virtual vault made of steel.

Black box virtual vaults (that are not always painted black) are common
in the oil field. One client suspected that a black box rented by him
contained little more than a PC. But the "if we detect that you opened
our black box you own it" clause in the rental contract along with a
sky high sticker price kept the enigma intact.

RCA profited mightily from its guerrilla hold on radio patents. So
"General" Sarnoff reckoned that RCA was entitled to own all of the
newfangled television patents too. But an unknown named Philo Farnsworth
invented television first.

That set up a "David versus Goliath" struggle, but instead of a sword
the Goliath named RCA wielded a bunch of off-the-wall patents.
Apparently the "General" thought that, "If you can't dazzle them with
brilliance, baffle them with BS!" Unfortunately this time around Goliath
used its legal might to win by dragging things out in court until
Farnsworth's patents expired.

--
__
__/ \
/ \__/
\__/ Don Kuenz
/ \__
\__/ \
\__/

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 12/30/2013 02:24 AM, mroberds@att.net wrote:

dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
On Saturday, December 28, 2013 10:14:31 PM UTC-5, mrob...@att.net wrote:

A patent makes it even easier... People's Shining Switching Power
Supply Factories 1 through 37 can start working on it as soon as they
can get a copy of the patent!

True, but you can sue.

Let me know how that lawsuit against People's Shining Switching Power
Supply Factories 1 through 37 works out. Step 1: Figure out whom to sue
and which court to do it in...

That's all a patent really boils down to-- the right to sue someone
for copying your <gadget>.

Yeah, I understand why the money people like patents. To me it just
seems like a road to spending a lot of money on activities that do not
tend to make cool new things appear in the world, which seems like a
moderately silly road to take.

Matt Roberds

The money people aren't wrong about it. If you want to be able to keep
making cool new things appear, you have to make a profit at it sometime
or other, and preventing people from eating your lunch is a good start.

And you aren't necessarily entirely on your own. At least in the US,
it's possible to sue before the International Trade Commission, which
has the power to direct Customs to prevent the importing of infringing
goods. (See e.g.
http://www.usitc.gov/intellectual_property/index.htm .)

ITC cases have been described as "like a district court on <dangerous
illegal stimulant of the week>." They go less than a year from start to
finish, are a whole lot of work, and AFAICT almost always wind up going
to trial. I had to turn one down in the fall, because I had too much
other stuff going on, but it would have been interesting in some ways.
It was some guy living in a flat over a shop, suing half of the Japanese
and Korean electronics industries, apparently with the benefit of some
outside money.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 12/30/2013 03:52 AM, Peter wrote:

mroberds@att.net wrote

Yeah, I understand why the money people like patents. To me it just
seems like a road to spending a lot of money on activities that do not
tend to make cool new things appear in the world, which seems like a
moderately silly road to take.

You need to file patents to get VC funding.

The patents can be bogus (prior art, etc) - doesn't matter. Most
patents are worthless. VCs can't tell the difference.

I read a lot of crappy patents, it's true. And if a worthless patent is
just one that doesn't repay what you spend on it, I agree. But there's
usually some non-obvious wrinkle in there somewhere, and it doesn't have
to be very big to make the patent valid, if not necessarily lucrative.

Patents also have value apart from their actual content. These days it
costs real money to get a patent thrown out, even by the USPTO.
(Reexamination used to be more of an administrative matter, but now it's
more like litigation.)

There's a strong presumption in law that an issued patent is valid, so
challenging it is an uphill argument. 'Tisn't at all impossible, but
just showing up with what is apparently prior art doesn't always do it,
not by a long shot.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net

 

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 20:25:06 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 20:13:00 -0800, josephkk
joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

On Fri, 27 Dec 2013 08:42:46 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:


Oh I see lots of problems, this cap switcher, when in series with the buck,
may charge smoothly, but then putting those caps in parallel
on the next step, would require precise equal caps (so they were charged to the same voltage),
else you get big spikes (at that 1MHz) in the switching FETS to equalize the cap voltages,

Agreed--any cap mismatch produces dV(c), making spikey spikes when
switching from series to parallel configuration, same as a
conventional charge-pump.

If on chip caps then they could be equal, in any case what would aging do with external caps?

I haven't bothered with any numbers, but I rather doubt they could
use on-chip caps. The capacitances and voltages needed are too high.
So says my gut, anyhow.

Let's see...if we wanted 60w (input) worth of charge packets at
1MHz at 170VDC input,
c=60W/(.5*v^2*1Mhz)= 4nF for the series string, or 12nF each for
a string of 3, at 57 volts each.

That would be quite a chip.

I would hope to shout. Dang, that would be massive caps on chip. Mebbe
one of our IC design capable persons could enlighten us on the kind of
area needed. These would have to be relatively good quality (for on chip)
caps as well.

?-)

Realistically, the max easily obtainable is about 1pF/um^2

At 57V? Isolated? Realistically? ;-)

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 12:42:42 -0500, krw@attt.bizz wrote:

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 20:25:06 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 20:13:00 -0800, josephkk
joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

On Fri, 27 Dec 2013 08:42:46 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:


Oh I see lots of problems, this cap switcher, when in series with the buck,
may charge smoothly, but then putting those caps in parallel
on the next step, would require precise equal caps (so they were charged to the same voltage),
else you get big spikes (at that 1MHz) in the switching FETS to equalize the cap voltages,

Agreed--any cap mismatch produces dV(c), making spikey spikes when
switching from series to parallel configuration, same as a
conventional charge-pump.

If on chip caps then they could be equal, in any case what would aging do with external caps?

I haven't bothered with any numbers, but I rather doubt they could
use on-chip caps. The capacitances and voltages needed are too high.
So says my gut, anyhow.

Let's see...if we wanted 60w (input) worth of charge packets at
1MHz at 170VDC input,
c=60W/(.5*v^2*1Mhz)= 4nF for the series string, or 12nF each for
a string of 3, at 57 volts each.

That would be quite a chip.

I would hope to shout. Dang, that would be massive caps on chip. Mebbe
one of our IC design capable persons could enlighten us on the kind of
area needed. These would have to be relatively good quality (for on chip)
caps as well.

?-)

Realistically, the max easily obtainable is about 1pF/um^2

At 57V? Isolated? Realistically? ;-)

57V is right on the edge of processes I'm familiar with, but 1pF/um^2
is a good number. And there are other passivation layers under
experimentation that have both HV _and_ high pF/um^2.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

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

 

On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 10:57:53 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 12:42:42 -0500, krw@attt.bizz wrote:

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 20:25:06 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 20:13:00 -0800, josephkk
joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

On Fri, 27 Dec 2013 08:42:46 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:


Oh I see lots of problems, this cap switcher, when in series with the buck,
may charge smoothly, but then putting those caps in parallel
on the next step, would require precise equal caps (so they were charged to the same voltage),
else you get big spikes (at that 1MHz) in the switching FETS to equalize the cap voltages,

Agreed--any cap mismatch produces dV(c), making spikey spikes when
switching from series to parallel configuration, same as a
conventional charge-pump.

If on chip caps then they could be equal, in any case what would aging do with external caps?

I haven't bothered with any numbers, but I rather doubt they could
use on-chip caps. The capacitances and voltages needed are too high.
So says my gut, anyhow.

Let's see...if we wanted 60w (input) worth of charge packets at
1MHz at 170VDC input,
c=60W/(.5*v^2*1Mhz)= 4nF for the series string, or 12nF each for
a string of 3, at 57 volts each.

That would be quite a chip.

I would hope to shout. Dang, that would be massive caps on chip. Mebbe
one of our IC design capable persons could enlighten us on the kind of
area needed. These would have to be relatively good quality (for on chip)
caps as well.

?-)

Realistically, the max easily obtainable is about 1pF/um^2

At 57V? Isolated? Realistically? ;-)

57V is right on the edge of processes I'm familiar with, but 1pF/um^2
is a good number. And there are other passivation layers under
experimentation that have both HV _and_ high pF/um^2.

So you can really stack them to 170V at 1pF/um^2?

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 13:26:19 -0500, krw@attt.bizz wrote:

On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 10:57:53 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 12:42:42 -0500, krw@attt.bizz wrote:

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 20:25:06 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 20:13:00 -0800, josephkk
joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

On Fri, 27 Dec 2013 08:42:46 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:


Oh I see lots of problems, this cap switcher, when in series with the buck,
may charge smoothly, but then putting those caps in parallel
on the next step, would require precise equal caps (so they were charged to the same voltage),
else you get big spikes (at that 1MHz) in the switching FETS to equalize the cap voltages,

Agreed--any cap mismatch produces dV(c), making spikey spikes when
switching from series to parallel configuration, same as a
conventional charge-pump.

If on chip caps then they could be equal, in any case what would aging do with external caps?

I haven't bothered with any numbers, but I rather doubt they could
use on-chip caps. The capacitances and voltages needed are too high.
So says my gut, anyhow.

Let's see...if we wanted 60w (input) worth of charge packets at
1MHz at 170VDC input,
c=60W/(.5*v^2*1Mhz)= 4nF for the series string, or 12nF each for
a string of 3, at 57 volts each.

That would be quite a chip.

I would hope to shout. Dang, that would be massive caps on chip. Mebbe
one of our IC design capable persons could enlighten us on the kind of
area needed. These would have to be relatively good quality (for on chip)
caps as well.

?-)

Realistically, the max easily obtainable is about 1pF/um^2

At 57V? Isolated? Realistically? ;-)

57V is right on the edge of processes I'm familiar with, but 1pF/um^2
is a good number. And there are other passivation layers under
experimentation that have both HV _and_ high pF/um^2.

So you can really stack them to 170V at 1pF/um^2?

I have no idea what the concept requires, but I regularly work with as
many as 5-layers of metalization on-chip. Perhaps they're using
Silicon Nitride as the dielectric? And XFAB's XDM10 process has 350V
devices.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

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

 

[Greegor]

How could Arpaio hold somebody in jail
that long without a Judge sharing any blame?

 

On Sunday, December 29, 2013 1:54:05 PM UTC-5, John S wrote:
<snip>

Thanks,

John S

Like I told your other fake alias: drop dead.

 

[Artem]

On Monday, December 30, 2013 8:57:13 PM UTC+2, Jim Thompson wrote:

I have no idea what the concept requires, but I regularly work with as

many as 5-layers of metalization on-chip. Perhaps they're using

Silicon Nitride as the dielectric? And XFAB's XDM10 process has 350V

devices.

The IRF has 1200V Gate drivers.IR22141 But I'm not sure that it can work at 300Mhz.

 

[WangoTango]

In article <l9d6qi$sjt$1@speranza.aioe.org>, this@isnotme.com says...

Hi Martin,

On 12/24/2013 11:53 AM, Martin Riddle wrote:
On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 11:28:01 -0700, Don Y<this@isnotme.com> wrote:

Are there any tools (interactive or batch) that will
accept a high resolution scan (this shouldn't matter!)
and produce a "normalized" Gerber photoplot format
(that I can subsequently post-process) from existing
films or an actual (bare) board?

Ether import a bitmap into Eagle, or import a DXF file.
You can convert a pdf to a DWG file, then export a DXF out of Autocad.
Or just import the Bitmap into Eagle, fix the layers and create
Gerbers.

frown> I think that's just fiddling with graphics.

What I want is to get to valid gerbers and, from there,
rebuild the connectivity map (netlist) and, eventually,
schematic.

See...
http://www.eevblog.com/forum/eda/re-laying-out-a-board-from-a-pdf/

I could give it a shot if you like. I just need a good scan.

Thanks, but I'm looking more for a toolset than a "one-off".

Happy Holidays!
--don

Don,
I use FAB3000 from Numerical Innovations for my Gerber editor/verifier
and it has a lot of options that are geared towards reverse engineering
and netlist extraction. I haven't played around with all those goodies,
but I do know it will import scans/JPGs and so on. I think they do a
full featured 30 day trial and the newer versions have a lot more
functionality than the old version I'm running. They also have
EXCELLENT phone support and I'm sure if you gave them a call and went
over what you were trying to do they would let you know if the software
was up to the task.
http://www.numericalinnovations.com/
Jim

 

[josephkk]

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 09:02:25 -0700, RobertMacy <robert.a.macy@gmail.com>
wrote:

On Sat, 28 Dec 2013 14:35:14 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@on-my-web-site.com> wrote:

...snip....

To hold someone more than a few hours take a warrant. Sheriffs don't
issue warrants, Judges do. Detaining someone for questioning, then
quickly releasing doesn't count as false arrest.
..snip...
Interestingly, I've lived right here in Arizona (always in the Phoenix
area) for 51 years... and I don't recall the case even making the
news... TV or newspapers (I don't count New Times as a newspaper).

...snip...

I've seen paperwork from the Sheriff's Dept [Arizona] NOT get through the
system to the judge for 9+ months due to an 'oversight' on someone's part.
Albeit, a person could be detained that long without a judge even being
involved.

I wouldn't count on the relevance of 'making the news' here. Examples,
glancing through local coverage trying to obtain news, all I saw were
people doing stupid crimes, justifications for harsh police actions, a lot
of interviews of bystanders and neighbors stating their 'feelings' about
some incident, a box of puppies [yes, a box of puppies], a whole segment
on 'how to shop'; with the best/worst of all,...all the newspeople were
dancing and chattering at the same time with the image turned upside down
demonstrating what I have no idea and further don't care. It's all crap.

In defense, the absolutely BEST news coverage I've ever seen locally was
when the events were unfolding and there was no time to sanitize, nor
homogenize, the news into standard blather. However, when the unfolding
did slow down enough for the station to get ahead, they actually rescinded
some statments [which from viewing the footage were correct so why
rescind?] and then came the 'sound/video bites' justifying the brutal
actions, followed by, you guessed it, almost a box of warm puppies.

Hot damn, your local news is so much better than the last i have watched.

?;-)