Martin Rid <martin_riddle@verison.net> Wrote in message:r
Anyone own the gds-1202b ?Any good?$350 at tequipmentCheers--
----Android NewsGr
up Reader----https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
Spell check error.
Title should be: 'Instek scopes'
Anyone own the gds-1202b ?Any good?$350 at tequipmentCheers-- ----Android NewsGroup Reader----https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
Anyone own the gds-1202b ?
Any good?
$350 at tequipment
Cheers
Martin Rid <martin_riddle@verison.net> Wrote in message:r
Anyone own the gds-1202b ?Any good?$350 at tequipmentCheers-- ----Android NewsGroup Reader----https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
Spell check error.
Title should be: 'Instek scopes'
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a Siglenthttps://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:rproduct/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a Siglenthttps://www.amazon.com/gp/
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350
dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid <martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a Siglenthttps://www.amazon.com/
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350
dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a Siglenthttps://www.amazon.com/
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350
dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope >for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has >all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work
from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that >feels like relic next to those DHOs.
I don't have any relation to Rigol, just have DHO924S as a go-to scope on my >bench and DHO814 for use as an advanced multimeter wherever I need a
portable one. I like them and I can run them in a web browser if needed.
I do have an advanced LeCroy WR640Zi with all options for serious jobs -- it >is 40GS/s 4GHz bandwidth instrument with all features imaginable -- but I >rarely power it up. It makes a noise like a jet at takeoff (Rigol DHO is
very quite) and it is 8-bit so what you get on the screen looks ugly >comparing with 12-bit DHO. DHO924 covers 99% of real world debugging so >LeCroy is mostly gathering dust...
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyngp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a Siglenthttps://www.amazon.com/
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350
dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope >>for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has >>all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work >>from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that >>feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz
DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I don't have any relation to Rigol, just have DHO924S as a go-to scope on my >>bench and DHO814 for use as an advanced multimeter wherever I need a >>portable one. I like them and I can run them in a web browser if needed.
I bought the Siglent as a gift, and I was curious about it.
I do have an advanced LeCroy WR640Zi with all options for serious jobs -- it >>is 40GS/s 4GHz bandwidth instrument with all features imaginable -- but I >>rarely power it up. It makes a noise like a jet at takeoff (Rigol DHO is >>very quite) and it is 8-bit so what you get on the screen looks ugly >>comparing with 12-bit DHO. DHO924 covers 99% of real world debugging so >>LeCroy is mostly gathering dust...
So is ours! It cost $50K. It doesn't make much sense and there is
basically no support. It doesn't make sense to them either.
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a Siglenthttps://www.amazon.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350
dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope >>>for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has >>>all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work >>>from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that >>>feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz
DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :)
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin
Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b
Siglenthttps://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1andAny good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We >>>>>> like the Rigols.I recently acquired a
gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he likes it.It has >>>>>> an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou
out of nightmare states.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350
dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope >>> for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has >>> all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work >>> from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz
DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :)
I don't have any relation to Rigol, just have DHO924S as a go-to scope on my
bench and DHO814 for use as an advanced multimeter wherever I need a
portable one. I like them and I can run them in a web browser if needed.
I bought the Siglent as a gift, and I was curious about it.
I do have an advanced LeCroy WR640Zi with all options for serious jobs -- it
is 40GS/s 4GHz bandwidth instrument with all features imaginable -- but I >>> rarely power it up. It makes a noise like a jet at takeoff (Rigol DHO is >>> very quite) and it is 8-bit so what you get on the screen looks ugly
comparing with 12-bit DHO. DHO924 covers 99% of real world debugging so
LeCroy is mostly gathering dust...
So is ours! It cost $50K. It doesn't make much sense and there is
basically no support. It doesn't make sense to them either.
Yep, all those features are nice but very rarely needed in the real life.
Sergey Kubushyn <ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin
Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b
Siglenthttps://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1andAny good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We >>>>>>> like the Rigols.I recently acquired a
gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he likes it.It has >>>>>>> an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou >>>>>>> out of nightmare states.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350
dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope
for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has
all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work >>>> from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz
DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :)
I don't have any relation to Rigol, just have DHO924S as a go-to scope on myI bought the Siglent as a gift, and I was curious about it.
bench and DHO814 for use as an advanced multimeter wherever I need a
portable one. I like them and I can run them in a web browser if needed. >>>
I do have an advanced LeCroy WR640Zi with all options for serious jobs -- it
is 40GS/s 4GHz bandwidth instrument with all features imaginable -- but I >>>> rarely power it up. It makes a noise like a jet at takeoff (Rigol DHO is >>>> very quite) and it is 8-bit so what you get on the screen looks ugly
comparing with 12-bit DHO. DHO924 covers 99% of real world debugging so >>>> LeCroy is mostly gathering dust...
So is ours! It cost $50K. It doesn't make much sense and there is
basically no support. It doesn't make sense to them either.
Yep, all those features are nice but very rarely needed in the real life.
Next to my bench, I have a couple of TDS 784As, a TDS 694C, an 11801C, and
an 11802 that JL kindly donated when I went out on my own, lo these fifteen >years ago. Also several SD-14s and SD-24s, plus at least one of all the
other heads except the SD-32.
I use them all regularly.
My favorite is the 694C3GHz, 10GSa/s simultaneously on all four channels. >Its 50 ohms only, but I also have the matching 4GHz FET probes.
A 12-bit scope might be useful if the ENOB is anything like that, but I
have doubts, especially in a 250 MHz bandwidth.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:21:00 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any
good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a
Siglenthttps://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he
likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350
dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope >>>>for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has >>>>all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work >>>>from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz
DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :)
At the original purchase price, adjusted for inflation, I must have
half a million dollars worth of sampling heads.
The color grading and jitter measurement is great on the 11801C, but
the old B+W screens photograph better.
I'll miss my 11802 when it eventually dies.
The TDR is great. I'm going to give my new kids a lecture on
transmission lines, and I'll show them some TDR.
It is apparently possible these days to get an EE degree and be
completely ignorant of transmission lines. Or even electricity.
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:21:00 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyncom/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a Siglenthttps://www.amazon.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350
dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope
for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has
all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work >>> >from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz
DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :)
At the original purchase price, adjusted for inflation, I must have
half a million dollars worth of sampling heads.
The color grading and jitter measurement is great on the 11801C, but
the old B+W screens photograph better.
I'll miss my 11802 when it eventually dies.
The TDR is great. I'm going to give my new kids a lecture on
transmission lines, and I'll show them some TDR.
It is apparently possible these days to get an EE degree and be
completely ignorant of transmission lines. Or even electricity.
On a sunny day (Wed, 28 Aug 2024 09:32:58 -0700) it happened john larkin ><jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote in <mtjucjdqe2f91c2jsjp6011k0uvakuimog@4ax.com>:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:21:00 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any
good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a
Siglenthttps://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he
likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350
dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope
for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has
all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work >>>>>from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz
DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :)
At the original purchase price, adjusted for inflation, I must have
half a million dollars worth of sampling heads.
The color grading and jitter measurement is great on the 11801C, but
the old B+W screens photograph better.
I'll miss my 11802 when it eventually dies.
The TDR is great. I'm going to give my new kids a lecture on
transmission lines, and I'll show them some TDR.
It is apparently possible these days to get an EE degree and be
completely ignorant of transmission lines. Or even electricity.
oops!
Then what DO they know?
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 05:46:54 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 28 Aug 2024 09:32:58 -0700) it happened john larkin >><jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote in <mtjucjdqe2f91c2jsjp6011k0uvakuimog@4ax.com>:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:21:00 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any
good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a
Siglenthttps://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he
likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350 >>>>>>>> dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope
for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has
all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work >>>>>>from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz
DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :)
At the original purchase price, adjusted for inflation, I must have
half a million dollars worth of sampling heads.
The color grading and jitter measurement is great on the 11801C, but
the old B+W screens photograph better.
I'll miss my 11802 when it eventually dies.
The TDR is great. I'm going to give my new kids a lecture on
transmission lines, and I'll show them some TDR.
It is apparently possible these days to get an EE degree and be >>>completely ignorant of transmission lines. Or even electricity.
oops!
Then what DO they know?
How to type c++
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 06:55:15 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 05:46:54 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 28 Aug 2024 09:32:58 -0700) it happened john larkin >>> <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote in <mtjucjdqe2f91c2jsjp6011k0uvakuimog@4ax.com>:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:21:00 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any
good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a
Siglenthttps://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he
likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350 >>>>>>>>> dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope
for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has
all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work
from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz >>>>>> DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :)
At the original purchase price, adjusted for inflation, I must have
half a million dollars worth of sampling heads.
The color grading and jitter measurement is great on the 11801C, but
the old B+W screens photograph better.
I'll miss my 11802 when it eventually dies.
The TDR is great. I'm going to give my new kids a lecture on
transmission lines, and I'll show them some TDR.
It is apparently possible these days to get an EE degree and be
completely ignorant of transmission lines. Or even electricity.
oops!
Then what DO they know?
How to type c++
One issue here is that it's cheaper and easier to teach coding, than
it is to teach electronics.
I walked through the Cornell EE school. I saw about 25 computer
screens and one oscilloscope.
On 30/08/2024 12:16 am, john larkin wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 06:55:15 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 05:46:54 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 28 Aug 2024 09:32:58 -0700) it happened john larkin >>>> <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote in <mtjucjdqe2f91c2jsjp6011k0uvakuimog@4ax.com>:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:21:00 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:At the original purchase price, adjusted for inflation, I must have
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any
good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a
Siglenthttps://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he
likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350 >>>>>>>>>> dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope
for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has
all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work
from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz >>>>>>> DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :) >>>>>
half a million dollars worth of sampling heads.
The color grading and jitter measurement is great on the 11801C, but >>>>> the old B+W screens photograph better.
I'll miss my 11802 when it eventually dies.
The TDR is great. I'm going to give my new kids a lecture on
transmission lines, and I'll show them some TDR.
It is apparently possible these days to get an EE degree and be
completely ignorant of transmission lines. Or even electricity.
oops!
Then what DO they know?
How to type c++
One issue here is that it's cheaper and easier to teach coding, than
it is to teach electronics.
I walked through the Cornell EE school. I saw about 25 computer
screens and one oscilloscope.
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to
make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today
than they did in the dark ages.
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 05:46:54 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 28 Aug 2024 09:32:58 -0700) it happened john larkin >><jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote in <mtjucjdqe2f91c2jsjp6011k0uvakuimog@4ax.com>:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:21:00 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any
good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a
Siglenthttps://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one
of my engineers. I'll ask him how he
likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350 >>>>>>>> dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope
for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has
all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work >>>>>>from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz
DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :)
At the original purchase price, adjusted for inflation, I must have
half a million dollars worth of sampling heads.
The color grading and jitter measurement is great on the 11801C, but
the old B+W screens photograph better.
I'll miss my 11802 when it eventually dies.
The TDR is great. I'm going to give my new kids a lecture on
transmission lines, and I'll show them some TDR.
It is apparently possible these days to get an EE degree and be >>>completely ignorant of transmission lines. Or even electricity.
oops!
Then what DO they know?
How to type c++
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to
make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today
than they did in the dark ages.
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 06:55:15 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 05:46:54 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 28 Aug 2024 09:32:58 -0700) it happened john larkin >>><jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote in <mtjucjdqe2f91c2jsjp6011k0uvakuimog@4ax.com>:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:21:00 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn >>>><ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b
good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired aAny
Siglenthttps://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one
of my engineers. I'll ask him how he
likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350 >>>>>>>>> dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope
for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has
all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work >>>>>>>from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz >>>>>> DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :)
At the original purchase price, adjusted for inflation, I must have >>>>half a million dollars worth of sampling heads.
The color grading and jitter measurement is great on the 11801C, but >>>>the old B+W screens photograph better.
I'll miss my 11802 when it eventually dies.
The TDR is great. I'm going to give my new kids a lecture on >>>>transmission lines, and I'll show them some TDR.
It is apparently possible these days to get an EE degree and be >>>>completely ignorant of transmission lines. Or even electricity.
oops!
Then what DO they know?
How to type c++
One issue here is that it's cheaper and easier to teach coding, than
it is to teach electronics.
I walked through the Cornell EE school. I saw about 25 computer
screens and one oscilloscope.
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman ><bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to
make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested. >>
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today
than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
On a sunny day (Thu, 29 Aug 2024 07:16:58 -0700) it happened john larkin ><jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote in <je01dj177m9p0q25en4k2jm8u0bsj07t2j@4ax.com>:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 06:55:15 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 05:46:54 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>>wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 28 Aug 2024 09:32:58 -0700) it happened john larkin >>>><jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote in <mtjucjdqe2f91c2jsjp6011k0uvakuimog@4ax.com>:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:21:00 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn >>>>><ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:At the original purchase price, adjusted for inflation, I must have >>>>>half a million dollars worth of sampling heads.
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b
good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired aAny
Siglenthttps://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one
of my engineers. I'll ask him how he
likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350 >>>>>>>>>> dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope
for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has
all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work
from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz >>>>>>> DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :) >>>>>
The color grading and jitter measurement is great on the 11801C, but >>>>>the old B+W screens photograph better.
I'll miss my 11802 when it eventually dies.
The TDR is great. I'm going to give my new kids a lecture on >>>>>transmission lines, and I'll show them some TDR.
It is apparently possible these days to get an EE degree and be >>>>>completely ignorant of transmission lines. Or even electricity.
oops!
Then what DO they know?
How to type c++
One issue here is that it's cheaper and easier to teach coding, than
it is to teach electronics.
I walked through the Cornell EE school. I saw about 25 computer
screens and one oscilloscope.
In the school where I was we had plenty of scopes and stuff.
Some teachers were very old, from before the transistor age...
The concensus was that 'only true hobbyists make it'
I think we started with 2 classes of 30, we had 6 at the final exams that had passed at the party
I did 2 exams at the same time, one from te gov and one from the school.
I remember one question 'draw a PCB for this transistor circuit'
does that still happen?
I thought it was fun:-)
Computers? There were none..
Calculators yes.
On a sunny day (Thu, 29 Aug 2024 06:55:15 -0700) it happened john larkin ><jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote in <8dv0djhj73b0ejudpkahnojgjk30i9rrbv@4ax.com>:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 05:46:54 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 28 Aug 2024 09:32:58 -0700) it happened john larkin >>><jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote in <mtjucjdqe2f91c2jsjp6011k0uvakuimog@4ax.com>:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:21:00 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn >>>><ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any
good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a
Siglenthttps://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one
of my engineers. I'll ask him how he
likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350 >>>>>>>>> dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope
for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has
all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work >>>>>>>from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz >>>>>> DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :)
At the original purchase price, adjusted for inflation, I must have >>>>half a million dollars worth of sampling heads.
The color grading and jitter measurement is great on the 11801C, but >>>>the old B+W screens photograph better.
I'll miss my 11802 when it eventually dies.
The TDR is great. I'm going to give my new kids a lecture on >>>>transmission lines, and I'll show them some TDR.
It is apparently possible these days to get an EE degree and be >>>>completely ignorant of transmission lines. Or even electricity.
oops!
Then what DO they know?
How to type c++
C plush plush is a crime against humanity in my opinion
C with linked list is all you need.
But bit of asm is also a must, close to the hardware,
to be able to use the on chip facilities the micros have.
As to electrickety, I remember a lunch conversation between us technical people
and one was talking about electrickety flowing from + towards -
I aksked him how he though a radio tube worked...
That guy was later sent far away to look after a small studio...
He would not have coped in the media center were we were..
On 29/08/2024 2:32 am, john larkin wrote:com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:21:00 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a Siglenthttps://www.amazon.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350 >>>>>>> dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope
for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has
all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work >>>> >from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz
DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :)
At the original purchase price, adjusted for inflation, I must have
half a million dollars worth of sampling heads.
The color grading and jitter measurement is great on the 11801C, but
the old B+W screens photograph better.
I'll miss my 11802 when it eventually dies.
The TDR is great. I'm going to give my new kids a lecture on
transmission lines, and I'll show them some TDR.
It is apparently possible these days to get an EE degree and be
completely ignorant of transmission lines. Or even electricity.
Or a least to be able to react to John Larkin's insultingly trivial
questions in a way that leaves him thinking that.
Maybe he didn't understand the answers.
On 8/27/24 08:07, Phil Hobbs wrote:
Martin Rid <martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
Martin Rid <martin_riddle@verison.net> Wrote in message:r
Anyone own the gds-1202b ?Any good?$350 at tequipmentCheers--Spell check error.
----Android NewsGr
up Reader----https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html >>>
Title should be: 'Instek scopes'
I suspect that it was right the first time. ;)
Hmm, how much did you get paid for that ringing endorsement? :-)
Martin Rid <martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
Martin Rid <martin_riddle@verison.net> Wrote in message:r
Anyone own the gds-1202b ?Any good?$350 at tequipmentCheers--Spell check error.
----Android NewsGr
up Reader----https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html >>
Title should be: 'Instek scopes'
I suspect that it was right the first time. ;)
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 16:15:59 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
[...]
Calculators yes.
We weren't alowed to use a calculator on exams because it would give
an unfair advantage to the students that could afford one.
On 2024-08-28 16:05, john larkin wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 17:41:33 -0000 (UTC), Phil HobbsYeah, I have one each of the 20 GHz SD-48 and SD-46, and two of the
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
Sergey Kubushyn <ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:Next to my bench, I have a couple of TDS 784As, a TDS 694C, an 11801C, and >>> an 11802 that JL kindly donated when I went out on my own, lo these fifteen >>> years ago. Also several SD-14s and SD-24s, plus at least one of all the
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin
Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b >>>>>>>>> ?>>Any good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We >>>>>>>>> like the Rigols.I recently acquired a
Siglenthttps://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and
gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he likes it.It has >>>>>>>>> an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou >>>>>>>>> out of nightmare states.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350 >>>>>>>> dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope
for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has
all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work >>>>>> from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz
DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :)
I don't have any relation to Rigol, just have DHO924S as a go-to scope on myI bought the Siglent as a gift, and I was curious about it.
bench and DHO814 for use as an advanced multimeter wherever I need a >>>>>> portable one. I like them and I can run them in a web browser if needed. >>>>>
I do have an advanced LeCroy WR640Zi with all options for serious jobs -- it
is 40GS/s 4GHz bandwidth instrument with all features imaginable -- but I
rarely power it up. It makes a noise like a jet at takeoff (Rigol DHO is >>>>>> very quite) and it is 8-bit so what you get on the screen looks ugly >>>>>> comparing with 12-bit DHO. DHO924 covers 99% of real world debugging so >>>>>> LeCroy is mostly gathering dust...
So is ours! It cost $50K. It doesn't make much sense and there is
basically no support. It doesn't make sense to them either.
Yep, all those features are nice but very rarely needed in the real life. >>>
other heads except the SD-32.
I use them all regularly.
My favorite is the 694C3GHz, 10GSa/s simultaneously on all four channels. >>> Its 50 ohms only, but I also have the matching 4GHz FET probes.
A 12-bit scope might be useful if the ENOB is anything like that, but I
have doubts, especially in a 250 MHz bandwidth.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
The 3 GHz probe sampler, the SD14, is incredible. Its loading is close
to zero and in most cases it doesn't even need a ground clip on the
probe.
I have a couple of the SD32 (50 GHz) heads, if you need to do
something fast.
And one each of the SD42 and SD43 optical-input heads.
slower (6 GHz) SD-42s. They're great except that they're blind north of
900 nm.
I also have an SD-51 trigger head, which is a tunnel diode gizmo that >improves the high-speed triggering, and an SD-20 loop-through head,
which lets you sample the input signal to some gizmo as well as its output.
The 2-meter extender cables are super useful because you can bring the >sampler to the gizmo rather than the other way round.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 17:41:33 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
Sergey Kubushyn <ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:Next to my bench, I have a couple of TDS 784As, a TDS 694C, an 11801C, and >> an 11802 that JL kindly donated when I went out on my own, lo these fifteen >> years ago. Also several SD-14s and SD-24s, plus at least one of all the
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin
Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b >>>>>>>> ?>>Any good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We >>>>>>>> like the Rigols.I recently acquired a
Siglenthttps://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and
gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he likes it.It has >>>>>>>> an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou >>>>>>>> out of nightmare states.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350 >>>>>>> dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope
for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has
all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work >>>>> from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz
DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :)
I don't have any relation to Rigol, just have DHO924S as a go-to scope on myI bought the Siglent as a gift, and I was curious about it.
bench and DHO814 for use as an advanced multimeter wherever I need a >>>>> portable one. I like them and I can run them in a web browser if needed. >>>>
I do have an advanced LeCroy WR640Zi with all options for serious jobs -- it
is 40GS/s 4GHz bandwidth instrument with all features imaginable -- but I >>>>> rarely power it up. It makes a noise like a jet at takeoff (Rigol DHO is >>>>> very quite) and it is 8-bit so what you get on the screen looks ugly >>>>> comparing with 12-bit DHO. DHO924 covers 99% of real world debugging so >>>>> LeCroy is mostly gathering dust...
So is ours! It cost $50K. It doesn't make much sense and there is
basically no support. It doesn't make sense to them either.
Yep, all those features are nice but very rarely needed in the real life. >>
other heads except the SD-32.
I use them all regularly.
My favorite is the 694C—3GHz, 10GSa/s simultaneously on all four channels. >> It’s 50 ohms only, but I also have the matching 4GHz FET probes.
A 12-bit scope might be useful if the ENOB is anything like that, but I
have doubts, especially in a 250 MHz bandwidth.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
The 3 GHz probe sampler, the SD14, is incredible. Its loading is close
to zero and in most cases it doesn't even need a ground clip on the
probe.
I have a couple of the SD32 (50 GHz) heads, if you need to do
something fast.
And one each of the SD42 and SD43 optical-input heads.
On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 30/08/2024 12:16 am, john larkin wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 06:55:15 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 05:46:54 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 28 Aug 2024 09:32:58 -0700) it happened john larkin >>>>> <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote in <mtjucjdqe2f91c2jsjp6011k0uvakuimog@4ax.com>:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:21:00 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:At the original purchase price, adjusted for inflation, I must have >>>>>> half a million dollars worth of sampling heads.
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any
good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a
Siglenthttps://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he
likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350 >>>>>>>>>>> dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope
for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has
all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work
from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz >>>>>>>> DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :) >>>>>>
The color grading and jitter measurement is great on the 11801C, but >>>>>> the old B+W screens photograph better.
I'll miss my 11802 when it eventually dies.
The TDR is great. I'm going to give my new kids a lecture on
transmission lines, and I'll show them some TDR.
It is apparently possible these days to get an EE degree and be
completely ignorant of transmission lines. Or even electricity.
oops!
Then what DO they know?
How to type c++
One issue here is that it's cheaper and easier to teach coding, than
it is to teach electronics.
I walked through the Cornell EE school. I saw about 25 computer
screens and one oscilloscope.
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to
make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested. >>
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today
than they did in the dark ages.
Except that many recent EE grads don't know how to run LTSpice.
I guess you don't meet many young engineers any more.
I do. If they are really smart, I can teach them the basics in about a year.
I've got two cases in my new design center.
Today's lecture will be about transmission lines, starting with the
Pony Express and Morse and the first telegraphs, and the transatlantic
fiasco and Heaviside.
I'll show them an LT Spice transmission line example on our giant new
OLED screen, and a real TDR on my 11802.
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 20:23:19 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
wrote:
On 29/08/2024 2:32 am, john larkin wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:21:00 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a Siglenthttps://www.amazon.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350 >>>>>>>> dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope
for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has
all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work >>>>> >from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz
DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :)
At the original purchase price, adjusted for inflation, I must have
half a million dollars worth of sampling heads.
The color grading and jitter measurement is great on the 11801C, but
the old B+W screens photograph better.
I'll miss my 11802 when it eventually dies.
The TDR is great. I'm going to give my new kids a lecture on
transmission lines, and I'll show them some TDR.
It is apparently possible these days to get an EE degree and be
completely ignorant of transmission lines. Or even electricity.
Or a least to be able to react to John Larkin's insultingly trivial
questions in a way that leaves him thinking that.
Maybe he didn't understand the answers.
You're impossible to talk too. Your only motivation is to insult.
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 16:21:21 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >><bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it >>>is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested. >>>
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
The ISS and moon landings are super-expensive theatre. Neither
accomplishes anything.
Boeing and Microsoft have the same problem, bean counter money-mongers
have taken over from engineers.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
Spice can be very handy. As Mike says, LT Spice's real function is to
train your instincts.
On a sunny day (Thu, 29 Aug 2024 11:47:42 -0700) it happened john larkin ><jl@650pot.com> wrote in <pcg1djt6otqheh6vgi9len892jd21g1sn0@4ax.com>:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 16:21:21 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>><bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it >>>>is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
The ISS and moon landings are super-expensive theatre. Neither
accomplishes anything.
Boeing and Microsoft have the same problem, bean counter money-mongers
have taken over from engineers.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
Spice can be very handy. As Mike says, LT Spice's real function is to
train your instincts.
I dunno, much I learned from working with tubes and transistors was by building small circuits and measuring what happened.
Sure spice is great for math intensive stuff such as filters.. but you still need to know the basics.
These days with chips doing much of the work and limited knowledge what is actually _in_ those chips
it is hard to tell if a real circuit will behave like spice tells you
You will still need real testing.
Maybe boeing just spiced their thrusters :-)
On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 06:47:54 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
On a sunny day (Thu, 29 Aug 2024 11:47:42 -0700) it happened john larkin >><jl@650pot.com> wrote in <pcg1djt6otqheh6vgi9len892jd21g1sn0@4ax.com>:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 16:21:21 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>>wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>><bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it >>>>>is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>>make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>>than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
The ISS and moon landings are super-expensive theatre. Neither >>>accomplishes anything.
Boeing and Microsoft have the same problem, bean counter money-mongers >>>have taken over from engineers.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
Spice can be very handy. As Mike says, LT Spice's real function is to >>>train your instincts.
I dunno, much I learned from working with tubes and transistors was by building small circuits and measuring what happened.
Sure spice is great for math intensive stuff such as filters.. but you still need to know the basics.
These days with chips doing much of the work and limited knowledge what is actually _in_ those chips
it is hard to tell if a real circuit will behave like spice tells you
You will still need real testing.
Sure, but if I wake up at 3AM in Truckee, I can Spice an idea and go
back to bed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6TrbD7-IwU&list=PLlD2eDv5CIe9u7jbKUkZ5xrLLSCrn0z_e
Actually, I have designed useful circuits by randomly fiddling with
Spice, stupid topologies that turn out to work.
Maybe boeing just spiced their thrusters :-)
SpaceX is having trouble with helium leaks too. Helium is the chemical >equivalent of slippery eels. It will leak though almost anything, even
solid metals. If they need an inert gas, why don't they use argon or
neon or nitrogen?
On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 06:47:54 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
On a sunny day (Thu, 29 Aug 2024 11:47:42 -0700) it happened john larkin
<jl@650pot.com> wrote in <pcg1djt6otqheh6vgi9len892jd21g1sn0@4ax.com>:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 16:21:21 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it >>>>> is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>> make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>> than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
The ISS and moon landings are super-expensive theatre. Neither
accomplishes anything.
Boeing and Microsoft have the same problem, bean counter money-mongers
have taken over from engineers.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
Spice can be very handy. As Mike says, LT Spice's real function is to
train your instincts.
I dunno, much I learned from working with tubes and transistors was by building small circuits and measuring what happened.
Sure spice is great for math intensive stuff such as filters.. but you still need to know the basics.
These days with chips doing much of the work and limited knowledge what is actually _in_ those chips
it is hard to tell if a real circuit will behave like spice tells you
You will still need real testing.
Sure, but if I wake up at 3AM in Truckee, I can Spice an idea and go
back to bed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6TrbD7-IwU&list=PLlD2eDv5CIe9u7jbKUkZ5xrLLSCrn0z_e
Actually, I have designed useful circuits by randomly fiddling with
Spice, stupid topologies that turn out to work.
Maybe boeing just spiced their thrusters :-)
SpaceX is having trouble with helium leaks too. Helium is the chemical equivalent of slippery eels. It will leak though almost anything, even
solid metals. If they need an inert gas, why don't they use argon or
neon or nitrogen?
On 30/08/2024 4:59 am, john larkin wrote:amazon.com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 20:23:19 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 29/08/2024 2:32 am, john larkin wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:21:00 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a Siglenthttps://www.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350 >>>>>>>>> dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope
for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has
all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work
from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz >>>>>> DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :)
At the original purchase price, adjusted for inflation, I must have
half a million dollars worth of sampling heads.
The color grading and jitter measurement is great on the 11801C, but
the old B+W screens photograph better.
I'll miss my 11802 when it eventually dies.
The TDR is great. I'm going to give my new kids a lecture on
transmission lines, and I'll show them some TDR.
It is apparently possible these days to get an EE degree and be
completely ignorant of transmission lines. Or even electricity.
Or a least to be able to react to John Larkin's insultingly trivial
questions in a way that leaves him thinking that.
Maybe he didn't understand the answers.
You're impossible to talk too. Your only motivation is to insult.
If your idea of a conversation is one where you get flattered nonstop,
I'm not the ideal conversational partner.
On 31/08/2024 12:13 am, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 06:47:54 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
On a sunny day (Thu, 29 Aug 2024 11:47:42 -0700) it happened john larkin >>> <jl@650pot.com> wrote in <pcg1djt6otqheh6vgi9len892jd21g1sn0@4ax.com>:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 16:21:21 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it >>>>>> is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>>> make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>>> than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
The ISS and moon landings are super-expensive theatre. Neither
accomplishes anything.
Boeing and Microsoft have the same problem, bean counter money-mongers >>>> have taken over from engineers.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
Spice can be very handy. As Mike says, LT Spice's real function is to
train your instincts.
I dunno, much I learned from working with tubes and transistors was by building small circuits and measuring what happened.
Sure spice is great for math intensive stuff such as filters.. but you still need to know the basics.
These days with chips doing much of the work and limited knowledge what is actually _in_ those chips
it is hard to tell if a real circuit will behave like spice tells you
You will still need real testing.
Sure, but if I wake up at 3AM in Truckee, I can Spice an idea and go
back to bed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6TrbD7-IwU&list=PLlD2eDv5CIe9u7jbKUkZ5xrLLSCrn0z_e
Actually, I have designed useful circuits by randomly fiddling with
Spice, stupid topologies that turn out to work.
What a creationist would call intelligent design. The rest of us call it >evolving your circuits, rather than designing them, and you have
described that as insanely inefficient.
On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 06:47:54 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
On a sunny day (Thu, 29 Aug 2024 11:47:42 -0700) it happened john larkin >><jl@650pot.com> wrote in <pcg1djt6otqheh6vgi9len892jd21g1sn0@4ax.com>:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 16:21:21 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>>wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>><bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it >>>>>is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>>make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>>than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
The ISS and moon landings are super-expensive theatre. Neither >>>accomplishes anything.
Boeing and Microsoft have the same problem, bean counter money-mongers >>>have taken over from engineers.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
Spice can be very handy. As Mike says, LT Spice's real function is to >>>train your instincts.
I dunno, much I learned from working with tubes and transistors was by building small circuits and measuring what happened.
Sure spice is great for math intensive stuff such as filters.. but you still need to know the basics.
These days with chips doing much of the work and limited knowledge what is actually _in_ those chips
it is hard to tell if a real circuit will behave like spice tells you
You will still need real testing.
Sure, but if I wake up at 3AM in Truckee, I can Spice an idea and go
back to bed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6TrbD7-IwU&list=PLlD2eDv5CIe9u7jbKUkZ5xrLLSCrn0z_e
Actually, I have designed useful circuits by randomly fiddling with
Spice, stupid topologies that turn out to work.
Maybe boeing just spiced their thrusters :-)
SpaceX is having trouble with helium leaks too. Helium is the chemical >equivalent of slippery eels. It will leak though almost anything, even
solid metals. If they need an inert gas, why don't they use argon or
neon or nitrogen?
On Sat, 31 Aug 2024 01:39:37 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 31/08/2024 12:13 am, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 06:47:54 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
On a sunny day (Thu, 29 Aug 2024 11:47:42 -0700) it happened john larkin >>>> <jl@650pot.com> wrote in <pcg1djt6otqheh6vgi9len892jd21g1sn0@4ax.com>: >>>>
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 16:21:21 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>>>> wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>>>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it >>>>>>> is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>>>> make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>>>> than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
The ISS and moon landings are super-expensive theatre. Neither
accomplishes anything.
Boeing and Microsoft have the same problem, bean counter money-mongers >>>>> have taken over from engineers.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
Spice can be very handy. As Mike says, LT Spice's real function is to >>>>> train your instincts.
I dunno, much I learned from working with tubes and transistors was by building small circuits and measuring what happened.
Sure spice is great for math intensive stuff such as filters.. but you still need to know the basics.
These days with chips doing much of the work and limited knowledge what is actually _in_ those chips
it is hard to tell if a real circuit will behave like spice tells you
You will still need real testing.
Sure, but if I wake up at 3AM in Truckee, I can Spice an idea and go
back to bed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6TrbD7-IwU&list=PLlD2eDv5CIe9u7jbKUkZ5xrLLSCrn0z_e
Actually, I have designed useful circuits by randomly fiddling with
Spice, stupid topologies that turn out to work.
What a creationist would call intelligent design. The rest of us call it
evolving your circuits, rather than designing them, and you have
described that as insanely inefficient.
It's not inefficient if it's done insanely fast, in parallel,
preferably asleep.
It doesn't matter how you describe the process. It works better if you
don't.
On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 07:13:23 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 06:47:54 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
On a sunny day (Thu, 29 Aug 2024 11:47:42 -0700) it happened john larkin >>> <jl@650pot.com> wrote in <pcg1djt6otqheh6vgi9len892jd21g1sn0@4ax.com>:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 16:21:21 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it >>>>>> is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>>> make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>>> than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
The ISS and moon landings are super-expensive theatre. Neither
accomplishes anything.
Boeing and Microsoft have the same problem, bean counter money-mongers >>>> have taken over from engineers.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
Spice can be very handy. As Mike says, LT Spice's real function is to
train your instincts.
I dunno, much I learned from working with tubes and transistors was by building small circuits and measuring what happened.
Sure spice is great for math intensive stuff such as filters.. but you still need to know the basics.
These days with chips doing much of the work and limited knowledge what is actually _in_ those chips
it is hard to tell if a real circuit will behave like spice tells you
You will still need real testing.
Sure, but if I wake up at 3AM in Truckee, I can Spice an idea and go
back to bed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6TrbD7-IwU&list=PLlD2eDv5CIe9u7jbKUkZ5xrLLSCrn0z_e
Actually, I have designed useful circuits by randomly fiddling with
Spice, stupid topologies that turn out to work.
Maybe boeing just spiced their thrusters :-)
SpaceX is having trouble with helium leaks too. Helium is the chemical
equivalent of slippery eels. It will leak though almost anything, even
solid metals. If they need an inert gas, why don't they use argon or
neon or nitrogen?
https://nypost.com/2024/08/30/us-news/boeing-execs-fought-nasa-to-bring-home-stranded-astronauts-in-starliner-sources/
This is a reversal from the Challenger disaster. NASA is being careful
this time, and the contractor is not.
Musk is cool. He annoys a lot of fatheads.
On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 14:17:14 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>amazon.com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
wrote:
On 30/08/2024 4:59 am, john larkin wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 20:23:19 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 29/08/2024 2:32 am, john larkin wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:21:00 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a Siglenthttps://www.
At the original purchase price, adjusted for inflation, I must have
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350 >>>>>>>>>> dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope
for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has
all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work
from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz >>>>>>> DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :) >>>>>
half a million dollars worth of sampling heads.
The color grading and jitter measurement is great on the 11801C, but >>>>> the old B+W screens photograph better.
I'll miss my 11802 when it eventually dies.
The TDR is great. I'm going to give my new kids a lecture on
transmission lines, and I'll show them some TDR.
It is apparently possible these days to get an EE degree and be
completely ignorant of transmission lines. Or even electricity.
Or a least to be able to react to John Larkin's insultingly trivial
questions in a way that leaves him thinking that.
Maybe he didn't understand the answers.
You're impossible to talk too. Your only motivation is to insult.
If your idea of a conversation is one where you get flattered nonstop,
I'm not the ideal conversational partner.
My idea of good conversation is a group of people playing with ideas
and inventing stuff together. "Egoless" is the word, as in "egoless programming."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egoless_programming
I don't think you can do that. Some people are too fragile.
?
Where will it go?
On 31/08/2024 3:14 am, john larkin wrote:amazon.com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 14:17:14 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 30/08/2024 4:59 am, john larkin wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 20:23:19 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>> wrote:
On 29/08/2024 2:32 am, john larkin wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:21:00 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a Siglenthttps://www.
At the original purchase price, adjusted for inflation, I must have >>>>>> half a million dollars worth of sampling heads.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350 >>>>>>>>>>> dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope
for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has
all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work
from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz >>>>>>>> DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :) >>>>>>
The color grading and jitter measurement is great on the 11801C, but >>>>>> the old B+W screens photograph better.
I'll miss my 11802 when it eventually dies.
The TDR is great. I'm going to give my new kids a lecture on
transmission lines, and I'll show them some TDR.
It is apparently possible these days to get an EE degree and be
completely ignorant of transmission lines. Or even electricity.
Or a least to be able to react to John Larkin's insultingly trivial
questions in a way that leaves him thinking that.
Maybe he didn't understand the answers.
You're impossible to talk too. Your only motivation is to insult.
If your idea of a conversation is one where you get flattered nonstop,
I'm not the ideal conversational partner.
My idea of good conversation is a group of people playing with ideas
and inventing stuff together. "Egoless" is the word, as in "egoless
programming."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egoless_programming
I don't think you can do that. Some people are too fragile.
Your opinion is noted. I doubt if the people with whom I have
collaborated would agree.
Sloman A.W., Buggs P., Molloy J., and Stewart D. A
microcontroller-based driver to stabilise the temperature of an optical
stage to 1mK in the range 4C to 38C, using a Peltier heat pump and a >thermistor sensor Measurement Science and Technology, 7 1653-64 (1996)
On 31/08/2024 3:18 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sat, 31 Aug 2024 01:39:37 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 31/08/2024 12:13 am, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 06:47:54 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
On a sunny day (Thu, 29 Aug 2024 11:47:42 -0700) it happened john larkin >>>>> <jl@650pot.com> wrote in <pcg1djt6otqheh6vgi9len892jd21g1sn0@4ax.com>: >>>>>
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 16:21:21 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>>>>> wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>>>>> make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>>>>> than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
The ISS and moon landings are super-expensive theatre. Neither
accomplishes anything.
Boeing and Microsoft have the same problem, bean counter money-mongers >>>>>> have taken over from engineers.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
Spice can be very handy. As Mike says, LT Spice's real function is to >>>>>> train your instincts.
I dunno, much I learned from working with tubes and transistors was by building small circuits and measuring what happened.
Sure spice is great for math intensive stuff such as filters.. but you still need to know the basics.
These days with chips doing much of the work and limited knowledge what is actually _in_ those chips
it is hard to tell if a real circuit will behave like spice tells you >>>>> You will still need real testing.
Sure, but if I wake up at 3AM in Truckee, I can Spice an idea and go
back to bed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6TrbD7-IwU&list=PLlD2eDv5CIe9u7jbKUkZ5xrLLSCrn0z_e
Actually, I have designed useful circuits by randomly fiddling with
Spice, stupid topologies that turn out to work.
What a creationist would call intelligent design. The rest of us call it >>> evolving your circuits, rather than designing them, and you have
described that as insanely inefficient.
It's not inefficient if it's done insanely fast, in parallel,
preferably asleep.
Efficiency is the ratio of how long something actually takes compared
with the time taken by some sort of ideal process. We don't know what
the ideal process might look like, and have no idea how long it would
take, so talking about the "efficiency" of the process is mere
illiterate bullshit.
You brain isn't wildly different from any other human brain and isn't
going to do anything insanely fast, even when you are asleep.
It doesn't matter how you describe the process. It works better if you
don't.
What makes you think that? I suspect the claim reflects the fact that
you aren't good at explaining things and want an excuse to avoid trying
to do so.
john larkin <jl@650pot.com> wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 16:15:59 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
[...]
Calculators yes.
We weren't alowed to use a calculator on exams because it would give
an unfair advantage to the students that could afford one.
We were allowed mechanical calculators (Facits etc.) but there were only >enough for half the candidates. Half of us were locked in a room with a >spare envigilator acting as a guard while the other half sat the exam
then we swapped places and the ones who had taken the exam were locked
in while the second group sat the exam.
Electronic calculators did not exist, but we did learn to program an
analogue computer where 100v = 1 Machine Unit.
On Sat, 31 Aug 2024 15:40:53 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 31/08/2024 3:18 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sat, 31 Aug 2024 01:39:37 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 31/08/2024 12:13 am, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 06:47:54 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>>>> wrote:
On a sunny day (Thu, 29 Aug 2024 11:47:42 -0700) it happened john larkin >>>>>> <jl@650pot.com> wrote in <pcg1djt6otqheh6vgi9len892jd21g1sn0@4ax.com>: >>>>>>
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 16:21:21 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>>>>>> wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>>>>>> make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>>>>>> than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
The ISS and moon landings are super-expensive theatre. Neither
accomplishes anything.
Boeing and Microsoft have the same problem, bean counter money-mongers >>>>>>> have taken over from engineers.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
Spice can be very handy. As Mike says, LT Spice's real function is to >>>>>>> train your instincts.
I dunno, much I learned from working with tubes and transistors was by building small circuits and measuring what happened.
Sure spice is great for math intensive stuff such as filters.. but you still need to know the basics.
These days with chips doing much of the work and limited knowledge what is actually _in_ those chips
it is hard to tell if a real circuit will behave like spice tells you >>>>>> You will still need real testing.
Sure, but if I wake up at 3AM in Truckee, I can Spice an idea and go >>>>> back to bed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6TrbD7-IwU&list=PLlD2eDv5CIe9u7jbKUkZ5xrLLSCrn0z_e
Actually, I have designed useful circuits by randomly fiddling with
Spice, stupid topologies that turn out to work.
What a creationist would call intelligent design. The rest of us call it >>>> evolving your circuits, rather than designing them, and you have
described that as insanely inefficient.
It's not inefficient if it's done insanely fast, in parallel,
preferably asleep.
Efficiency is the ratio of how long something actually takes compared
with the time taken by some sort of ideal process. We don't know what
the ideal process might look like, and have no idea how long it would
take, so talking about the "efficiency" of the process is mere
illiterate bullshit.
You brain isn't wildly different from any other human brain and isn't
going to do anything insanely fast, even when you are asleep.
It doesn't matter how you describe the process. It works better if you
don't.
What makes you think that? I suspect the claim reflects the fact that
you aren't good at explaining things and want an excuse to avoid trying
to do so.
People, especially people with advanced degrees, who can't invent
things, often resent people who do invent things. We just fired one
case.
They should accept that people are different, and pitch in to develop
the new ideas that others invent. Their resentment often stops them
from helping, so they become useless.
I suppose this could be a new idea to you.
On Sat, 31 Aug 2024 16:03:39 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>amazon.com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
wrote:
On 31/08/2024 3:14 am, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 14:17:14 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 30/08/2024 4:59 am, john larkin wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 20:23:19 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>> wrote:
On 29/08/2024 2:32 am, john larkin wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:21:00 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a Siglenthttps://www.
At the original purchase price, adjusted for inflation, I must have >>>>>>> half a million dollars worth of sampling heads.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350 >>>>>>>>>>>> dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope
for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has
all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work
from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz >>>>>>>>> DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :) >>>>>>>
The color grading and jitter measurement is great on the 11801C, but >>>>>>> the old B+W screens photograph better.
I'll miss my 11802 when it eventually dies.
The TDR is great. I'm going to give my new kids a lecture on
transmission lines, and I'll show them some TDR.
It is apparently possible these days to get an EE degree and be
completely ignorant of transmission lines. Or even electricity.
Or a least to be able to react to John Larkin's insultingly trivial >>>>>> questions in a way that leaves him thinking that.
Maybe he didn't understand the answers.
You're impossible to talk too. Your only motivation is to insult.
If your idea of a conversation is one where you get flattered nonstop, >>>> I'm not the ideal conversational partner.
My idea of good conversation is a group of people playing with ideas
and inventing stuff together. "Egoless" is the word, as in "egoless
programming."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egoless_programming
I don't think you can do that. Some people are too fragile.
Your opinion is noted. I doubt if the people with whom I have
collaborated would agree.
Sloman A.W., Buggs P., Molloy J., and Stewart D. “A
microcontroller-based driver to stabilise the temperature of an optical
stage to 1mK in the range 4C to 38C, using a Peltier heat pump and a
thermistor sensor” Measurement Science and Technology, 7 1653-64 (1996)
You did one academic, unremarkable temperature controller, published
in a journal, and have cited it here maybe 50 times now. Do something
new.
Here's my millikelven temperature controller.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/emxfaurnyj35t0y84tvwl/Oven_Cables_pub.jpg?rlkey=jpcnmnt1pcooz9nj7d0j4rah0&raw=1
That's a dual-stage Mach-Zender e/o modulator whose extinction is
much better if the temperature is stable to milllikelvins. The big hogged-aluminum box is heated by six mosfets on the bottom, and there
are four thermistors for feedback. It runs at 30C.
This is part of the modulation system for a big laser.
I really over-did it on the enclosure. It's a lot heavier than it
really needed to be.
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 21:50:19 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@650pot.com> wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 16:15:59 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
[...]
Calculators yes.
We weren't alowed to use a calculator on exams because it would give
an unfair advantage to the students that could afford one.
We were allowed mechanical calculators (Facits etc.) but there were only
enough for half the candidates. Half of us were locked in a room with a
spare envigilator acting as a guard while the other half sat the exam
then we swapped places and the ones who had taken the exam were locked
in while the second group sat the exam.
Electronic calculators did not exist, but we did learn to program an
analogue computer where 100v = 1 Machine Unit.
A lot of current engineering practise is left over from the days when computing was expensive or non-existant. Things like s-parameters and
Smith charts.
On 1/09/2024 12:03 am, john larkin wrote:amazon.com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
On Sat, 31 Aug 2024 16:03:39 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 31/08/2024 3:14 am, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 14:17:14 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>> wrote:
On 30/08/2024 4:59 am, john larkin wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 20:23:19 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>>> wrote:
On 29/08/2024 2:32 am, john larkin wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:21:00 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a Siglenthttps://www.
Or a least to be able to react to John Larkin's insultingly trivial >>>>>>> questions in a way that leaves him thinking that.At the original purchase price, adjusted for inflation, I must have >>>>>>>> half a million dollars worth of sampling heads.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350 >>>>>>>>>>>>> dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope
for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has
all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work
from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz >>>>>>>>>> DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :) >>>>>>>>
The color grading and jitter measurement is great on the 11801C, but >>>>>>>> the old B+W screens photograph better.
I'll miss my 11802 when it eventually dies.
The TDR is great. I'm going to give my new kids a lecture on
transmission lines, and I'll show them some TDR.
It is apparently possible these days to get an EE degree and be >>>>>>>> completely ignorant of transmission lines. Or even electricity. >>>>>>>
Maybe he didn't understand the answers.
You're impossible to talk too. Your only motivation is to insult.
If your idea of a conversation is one where you get flattered nonstop, >>>>> I'm not the ideal conversational partner.
My idea of good conversation is a group of people playing with ideas
and inventing stuff together. "Egoless" is the word, as in "egoless
programming."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egoless_programming
I don't think you can do that. Some people are too fragile.
Your opinion is noted. I doubt if the people with whom I have
collaborated would agree.
Sloman A.W., Buggs P., Molloy J., and Stewart D. A
microcontroller-based driver to stabilise the temperature of an optical
stage to 1mK in the range 4C to 38C, using a Peltier heat pump and a
thermistor sensor Measurement Science and Technology, 7 1653-64 (1996)
You did one academic, unremarkable temperature controller, published
in a journal, and have cited it here maybe 50 times now. Do something
new.
I did quite a lot of stuff. That one wasn't in the least academic, and
it got published because I didn't have anything better to do with my
time immediately after I moved to the Netherlands
Here's my millikelven temperature controller.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/emxfaurnyj35t0y84tvwl/Oven_Cables_pub.jpg?rlkey=jpcnmnt1pcooz9nj7d0j4rah0&raw=1
That's a dual-stage Mach-Zender e/o modulator whose extinction is
much better if the temperature is stable to milllikelvins. The big
hogged-aluminum box is heated by six mosfets on the bottom, and there
are four thermistors for feedback. It runs at 30C.
Why four thermistors? The only temperature that matters is that of the >modulator itself. People who need to minimise temperature gradients do
need more than one temperature sensor, but it isn't clear why you would
have. I used a second thermistor to monitor the temperature of the
exhaust side of my Peltier cooler (which does matter) but you seem to
have used mosfets as resistive heaters which is rather easier.
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 21:50:19 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@650pot.com> wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 16:15:59 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
[...]
Calculators yes.
We weren't alowed to use a calculator on exams because it would give
an unfair advantage to the students that could afford one.
We were allowed mechanical calculators (Facits etc.) but there were only >>> enough for half the candidates. Half of us were locked in a room with a >>> spare envigilator acting as a guard while the other half sat the exam
then we swapped places and the ones who had taken the exam were locked
in while the second group sat the exam.
Electronic calculators did not exist, but we did learn to program an
analogue computer where 100v = 1 Machine Unit.
A lot of current engineering practise is left over from the days when
computing was expensive or non-existant. Things like s-parameters and
Smith charts.
Ive done a lot of lowish-power RF stuff, and mostly agree with you about
the practicality of using S parameters in hand calculations.
However, I cordially disagree with your sentiments regarding Smith charts.
For one thing, theyre super useful for designing optical coatings, but >thats a minority interest on SED.
In RF work one runs into a lot of matching jobs involving modulated sine >waves.
One typical example from my work is coupling sine modulation into a diode >laser, for modulation-generated carrier interferometry. (*)
A Smith chart makes it super easy to try out different schemes, such as >series/shunt stubs, lumped elements, or any combination thereof.
Useless for bandwidths of an octave or more, and so apt to be undervalued
by crass time-domain types. ;)
On Sat, 31 Aug 2024 17:59:04 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 21:50:19 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@650pot.com> wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 16:15:59 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>>>> wrote:
[...]
Calculators yes.
We weren't alowed to use a calculator on exams because it would give >>>>> an unfair advantage to the students that could afford one.
We were allowed mechanical calculators (Facits etc.) but there were only >>>> enough for half the candidates. Half of us were locked in a room with a >>>> spare envigilator acting as a guard while the other half sat the exam
then we swapped places and the ones who had taken the exam were locked >>>> in while the second group sat the exam.
Electronic calculators did not exist, but we did learn to program an
analogue computer where 100v = 1 Machine Unit.
A lot of current engineering practise is left over from the days when
computing was expensive or non-existant. Things like s-parameters and
Smith charts.
Ive done a lot of lowish-power RF stuff, and mostly agree with you about >> the practicality of using S parameters in hand calculations.
However, I cordially disagree with your sentiments regarding Smith charts. >>
For one thing, theyre super useful for designing optical coatings, but
thats a minority interest on SED.
In RF work one runs into a lot of matching jobs involving modulated sine
waves.
One typical example from my work is coupling sine modulation into a diode
laser, for modulation-generated carrier interferometry. (*)
A Smith chart makes it super easy to try out different schemes, such as
series/shunt stubs, lumped elements, or any combination thereof.
Useless for bandwidths of an octave or more, and so apt to be undervalued
by crass time-domain types. ;)
The interesting parts of the world are wideband and nonlinear. So are
we.
Sine waves are BORING.
john larkin <jl@650pot.com> wrote:
Sine waves are BORING.
You’ve been hanging out with the wrong crowd, obviously. Tsk tsk.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
john larkin <jl@650pot.com> wrote:
On Sat, 31 Aug 2024 17:59:04 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 21:50:19 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@650pot.com> wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 16:15:59 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>>>>> wrote:
[...]
Calculators yes.
We weren't alowed to use a calculator on exams because it would give >>>>>> an unfair advantage to the students that could afford one.
We were allowed mechanical calculators (Facits etc.) but there were only >>>>> enough for half the candidates. Half of us were locked in a room with a >>>>> spare envigilator acting as a guard while the other half sat the exam >>>>> then we swapped places and the ones who had taken the exam were locked >>>>> in while the second group sat the exam.
Electronic calculators did not exist, but we did learn to program an >>>>> analogue computer where 100v = 1 Machine Unit.
A lot of current engineering practise is left over from the days when
computing was expensive or non-existant. Things like s-parameters and
Smith charts.
I?ve done a lot of lowish-power RF stuff, and mostly agree with you about >>> the practicality of using S parameters in hand calculations.
However, I cordially disagree with your sentiments regarding Smith charts. >>>
For one thing, they?re super useful for designing optical coatings, but
that?s a minority interest on SED.
In RF work one runs into a lot of matching jobs involving modulated sine >>> waves.
One typical example from my work is coupling sine modulation into a diode >>> laser, for modulation-generated carrier interferometry. (*)
A Smith chart makes it super easy to try out different schemes, such as
series/shunt stubs, lumped elements, or any combination thereof.
Useless for bandwidths of an octave or more, and so apt to be undervalued >>> by crass time-domain types. ;)
The interesting parts of the world are wideband and nonlinear. So are
we.
I noticed. ;)
Sine waves are BORING.
Youve been hanging out with the wrong crowd, obviously. Tsk tsk.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 01:43:32 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>amazon.com/gp/product/B06XZML6RD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1and gave it to one of my engineers. I'll ask him how he likes it.It has an up-front DEFAULT button, which a digital scope needs to getyou out of nightmare states.
wrote:
On 1/09/2024 12:03 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sat, 31 Aug 2024 16:03:39 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 31/08/2024 3:14 am, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 14:17:14 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>> wrote:
On 30/08/2024 4:59 am, john larkin wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 20:23:19 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 29/08/2024 2:32 am, john larkin wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:21:00 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn
<ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:28:02 -0000 (UTC), Sergey Kubushyn >>>>>>>>>>> <ksi@koi8.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:55:32 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid >>>>>>>>>>>>> <martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> Wrote in message:r >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:40:15 -0400 (EDT), Martin Rid<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:>Anyone own the gds-1202b ?>>Any good?>>$350 at tequipment>>CheersI haven't tried that one. We like the Rigols.I recently acquired a Siglenthttps://www.
You did one academic, unremarkable temperature controller, publishedIf your idea of a conversation is one where you get flattered nonstop, >>>>>> I'm not the ideal conversational partner.Or a least to be able to react to John Larkin's insultingly trivial >>>>>>>> questions in a way that leaves him thinking that.At the original purchase price, adjusted for inflation, I must have >>>>>>>>> half a million dollars worth of sampling heads.
Other than the lack of software features, the 200mhz bw for 350 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> dollars is intriguing.
Cheers
It sounds pretty good to me.
https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/02/SDS1000X-E_DataSheet_DS0101E-E04C.pdf
What's missing?
I like the 500 uV/div.
If you want to save the last penny, maybe. But you can get way better scope
for slightly more -- Rigol DHO800/DHO900. It is 12-bit, same 550uV/div, has
all standard serial protocols decoding, very light and compact, can work
from a battery with USB-C power connector, way better than that Siglent that
feels like relic next to those DHOs.
We use almost all Rigols at work. My slow bench scope is a 500 MHz >>>>>>>>>>> DS4034 (upgraded from 350 MHz)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ns08x686afbayjsw8c2ab/h?rlkey=iu4h89057t755pueg4ijnldbo&dl=0
and my fast scope is a Tek 11802 sampler.
I also have one, 11801C. Couple of SD-24s, SD-20, and SD-22 heads :) >>>>>>>>>
The color grading and jitter measurement is great on the 11801C, but >>>>>>>>> the old B+W screens photograph better.
I'll miss my 11802 when it eventually dies.
The TDR is great. I'm going to give my new kids a lecture on >>>>>>>>> transmission lines, and I'll show them some TDR.
It is apparently possible these days to get an EE degree and be >>>>>>>>> completely ignorant of transmission lines. Or even electricity. >>>>>>>>
Maybe he didn't understand the answers.
You're impossible to talk too. Your only motivation is to insult. >>>>>>
My idea of good conversation is a group of people playing with ideas >>>>> and inventing stuff together. "Egoless" is the word, as in "egoless
programming."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egoless_programming
I don't think you can do that. Some people are too fragile.
Your opinion is noted. I doubt if the people with whom I have
collaborated would agree.
Sloman A.W., Buggs P., Molloy J., and Stewart D. “A
microcontroller-based driver to stabilise the temperature of an optical >>>> stage to 1mK in the range 4C to 38C, using a Peltier heat pump and a
thermistor sensor” Measurement Science and Technology, 7 1653-64 (1996) >>>
in a journal, and have cited it here maybe 50 times now. Do something
new.
I did quite a lot of stuff. That one wasn't in the least academic, and
it got published because I didn't have anything better to do with my
time immediately after I moved to the Netherlands
Here's my millikelven temperature controller.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/emxfaurnyj35t0y84tvwl/Oven_Cables_pub.jpg?rlkey=jpcnmnt1pcooz9nj7d0j4rah0&raw=1
That's a dual-stage Mach-Zender e/o modulator whose extinction is
much better if the temperature is stable to milllikelvins. The big
hogged-aluminum box is heated by six mosfets on the bottom, and there
are four thermistors for feedback. It runs at 30C.
Why four thermistors? The only temperature that matters is that of the
modulator itself. People who need to minimise temperature gradients do
need more than one temperature sensor, but it isn't clear why you would
have. I used a second thermistor to monitor the temperature of the
exhaust side of my Peltier cooler (which does matter) but you seem to
have used mosfets as resistive heaters which is rather easier.
One thermistor is on the heater board, on the bottom of the big block.
Three are on the platform that mounts the e/o modulator. We really
don't need three up there, but we wanted to error check and snoop for gradients and optionally do some averaging if we had noise.
The EOM platform is spaced off the bottom of the big block, which
makes us a 2nd order thermal system. The main block has a 75 minute
time constant, and the platform inside is 17 minutes. Our control
algorithm uses the difference as, essentially, a derivative term.
Coolers have lots of problems, including condensation. Heating to 30C
worked fine. This is in maybe the world's biggest single clean room
and the local air is always 20C.
Here's my millikelven temperature controller.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/emxfaurnyj35t0y84tvwl/Oven_Cables_pub.jpg?rlkey=jpcnmnt1pcooz9nj7d0j4rah0&raw=1
That's a dual-stage Mach-Zender e/o modulator whose extinction is
much better if the temperature is stable to milllikelvins. The big
hogged-aluminum box is heated by six mosfets on the bottom, and there
are four thermistors for feedback. It runs at 30C.
Why four thermistors? The only temperature that matters is that of the >>modulator itself. People who need to minimise temperature gradients do
need more than one temperature sensor, but it isn't clear why you would >>have. I used a second thermistor to monitor the temperature of the
exhaust side of my Peltier cooler (which does matter) but you seem to
have used mosfets as resistive heaters which is rather easier.
One thermistor is on the heater board, on the bottom of the big block.
Three are on the platform that mounts the e/o modulator. We really
don't need three up there, but we wanted to error check and snoop for >gradients and optionally do some averaging if we had noise.
The EOM platform is spaced off the bottom of the big block, which
makes us a 2nd order thermal system. The main block has a 75 minute
time constant, and the platform inside is 17 minutes. Our control
algorithm uses the difference as, essentially, a derivative term.
Coolers have lots of problems, including condensation. Heating to 30C
worked fine. This is in maybe the world's biggest single clean room
and the local air is always 20C.
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to
make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested. >>
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today
than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
mathematical bullshit much of the time.
That is why we are stuck with Albert onestone crap and wrong cosmological models
that even a 10 year old can see are wrong.
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to
make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today
than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are
doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
mathematical bullshit much of the time.
It does happen. You do have to know what to look out for.
That is why we are stuck with Albert onestone crap and wrong cosmological models
that even a 10 year old can see are wrong.
Ten year-old don't usually know all that much,
and quite a lot of perfectly correct ideas look wrong to them, as they do to you, for much
the same reasons.
On a sunny day (Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vb163a$1dt9b$1@dont-email.me>:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it >>>> is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to
make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today
than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are
doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance. >>
mathematical bullshit much of the time.
It does happen. You do have to know what to look out for.
That is why we are stuck with Albert onestone crap and wrong cosmological models
that even a 10 year old can see are wrong.
Ten year-old don't usually know all that much,
'Usually'
I was looking back at stuff I worked at at <10 years old, like OLED TV display
long before anyone even had the idea AFAIK.
I made conductors with carbon pencil on paper and tried stuff if it would light up if
the crossings were powered.
and quite a lot of perfectly correct ideas look wrong to them, as they do to you, for much
the same reasons.
The whole stuff of what they call big bang is sold the wrong way around.
If indeed there was a big explosion the resulting fragments were black holes that then later started spewing out
material that formed galaxies or was - and became stars.
Like fireworks.
His time / space is curved shit means he had no clue of any mechanism...
Look up Le Sage wikipedia for a mechanism.
Albert's is as dumb as is electricity without electrons.
Billions are wasted in job creation programs for parrots of his crap,
like CERN and ITER that never go anywhere.
On 1/09/2024 9:06 pm, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vb163a$1dt9b$1@dont-email.me>:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it >>>>> is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>> make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>> than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are
doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
mathematical bullshit much of the time.
It does happen. You do have to know what to look out for.
That is why we are stuck with Albert onestone crap and wrong cosmological models
that even a 10 year old can see are wrong.
Ten year-old don't usually know all that much,
'Usually'
I was looking back at stuff I worked at at <10 years old, like OLED TV display
long before anyone even had the idea AFAIK.
I made conductors with carbon pencil on paper and tried stuff if it would light up if
the crossings were powered.
That's not any kind of organic light-emitting diode. Graphite is
elemental carbon, not any kind of organic compound. A ten-ear-old might
not know that. You still don't seem to be aware of it.
and quite a lot of perfectly correct ideas look wrong to them, as they do to you, for much
the same reasons.
The whole stuff of what they call big bang is sold the wrong way around.
It's not "sold". It's published as model that fits pretty much all the >observations we've collected.
If indeed there was a big explosion the resulting fragments were black holes that then later started spewing out
material that formed galaxies or was - and became stars.
Explosion isn't quite the right concept. The universe is pictured as
starting off very small, very dense, and expanding rapidly, but it
created the space it expanded into as it expanded.
Albert's is as dumb as is electricity without electrons.
Neither CERN nor ITER is designed to go anywhere
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to
make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today
than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are
doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
On a sunny day (Sun, 1 Sep 2024 21:38:47 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vb1job$1fp20$1@dont-email.me>:
On 1/09/2024 9:06 pm, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vb163a$1dt9b$1@dont-email.me>:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
Explosion isn't quite the right concept. The universe is pictured as
starting off very small, very dense, and expanding rapidly, but it
created the space it expanded into as it expanded.
Only in the imagination of mathematicians who are starting as kids to try to do a divide by nothing (zero)
and then create infinities such as black's holes.
Tip: there are no infinities in nature, something always will give way.
Same with Ohm's law, 1 V in zero Ohm gves infinte curent , no it does not. Understand electrons, without electrons Ohms law is useless.
Without a mechanism onestoines babble is uselessBy which you mean that you can't understand it.
Without onestine's babble things become fun.
Without Ohm's law and with electrons things become fun.
Albert's is as dumb as is electricity without electrons.
Neither CERN nor ITER is designed to go anywhere
Right. they are job creation programs for Albert's parrots.
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it >>>> is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to
make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today
than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are
doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually
more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver,
after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked.
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully
reserved.
https://www.highlandtechnology.com/Product/T850
The grey gap-pad gives it some extra cooling. The board has lots of
thermal vias down to the water-cooled baseplate.
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it >>>> is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to
make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today
than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are
doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually
more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver,
after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked.
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully
reserved.
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it >>>>> is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>> make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>> than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are
doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually
more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver,
after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked.
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully
reserved.
It better have a regular calibration schedule, or your semiconductor >customers may give you the raised eyebrow.
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:55:58 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs ><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it >>>>>> is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>>> make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>>> than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are >>>> doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually
more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver,
after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked.
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully
reserved.
It better have a regular calibration schedule, or your semiconductor >>customers may give you the raised eyebrow.
Hmm. To be overly serious: With traceability to NIST (US) or NPL
(UK) or the like.
The trend in standards is to eliminate standards tied tp a physical
object.
I have a Sharpie in hand. The barrel that is not covered by the cap
is a truncated cone, being 11.0 mm at the blunt end and 12.32 mm near
the cap, 73 mm away.
Actually, all that's needed is to specify an ideal geometric shape,
with tolerances, in the formal documentation.
Joe Gwinn
On 2/09/2024 12:09 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it >>>>> is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>> make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>> than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are
doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually
more important.
And you don't simulate them either.
letting the math throw up unexpected effects that appear when you hook
up a bunch of components. Knowing when it matter relies on the
simulation inside your head.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver,
after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked.
So you didn't read the data sheets carefully enough.
that would usually be described as "surface mount". If you'd scraped the >enamel off the bottom of the coil and soldered each turn down onto an >isolated copper pad on the board, it probably would qualify as surface
mount, and would have had better thermal contact with the board.
You might have had to make it as sintered metal 3-D printed structure to
get this to work - the wound coil looks a bit irregular.
Lost wax casting could have worked too.
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully
reserved.
That defines it diameter. Measuring that with a vernier caliper would
give you a number you could document.
https://www.highlandtechnology.com/Product/T850
The grey gap-pad gives it some extra cooling. The board has lots of
thermal vias down to the water-cooled baseplate.
If you'd wound it with copper tube you could have pumped water through
the tube, or made it a heat pipe.
A 3-D printed structure would have offered more options.
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 15:53:46 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:55:58 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs >><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>>>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it >>>>>>> is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>>>> make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>>>> than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are >>>>> doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually
more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver,
after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked.
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully
reserved.
It better have a regular calibration schedule, or your semiconductor >>>customers may give you the raised eyebrow.
Hmm. To be overly serious: With traceability to NIST (US) or NPL
(UK) or the like.
The trend in standards is to eliminate standards tied to a physical
object.
I have a Sharpie in hand. The barrel that is not covered by the cap
is a truncated cone, being 11.0 mm at the blunt end and 12.32 mm near
the cap, 73 mm away.
Mine is pretty cylindrical for the length of the coil. I expect that
the operator's (ie, my) applied tension affects the radius too.
That inductor sees 25 amps p-p, roughly a sawtooth, at 4 MHz. The
Coilcraft parts that I tried all smoked, I guess from skin effect and >proximity effect.
Actually, all that's needed is to specify an ideal geometric shape,
with tolerances, in the formal documentation.
Joe Gwinn
I'll have someone start on a SolidWorks model.
On 1/09/2024 10:41 pm, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 1 Sep 2024 21:38:47 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vb1job$1fp20$1@dont-email.me>:
On 1/09/2024 9:06 pm, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vb163a$1dt9b$1@dont-email.me>:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>>>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
<snip>
Explosion isn't quite the right concept. The universe is pictured as
starting off very small, very dense, and expanding rapidly, but it
created the space it expanded into as it expanded.
Only in the imagination of mathematicians who are starting as kids to try to do a divide by nothing (zero)
and then create infinities such as black's holes.
You've got that backwards. Black holes are entirely finite, because they >contain enough mass to close space back in on itself.
Tip: there are no infinities in nature, something always will give way.
With black holes it's the curvature of space-time.
Same with Ohm's law, 1 V in zero Ohm gves infinte curent , no it does not. >> Understand electrons, without electrons Ohms law is useless.
Georg Ohm published his law in 1827, 70 years before J J Thompson
discovered the electron. It works just as well for other charge carriers.
Without a mechanism onestoines babble is uselessBy which you mean that you can't understand it.
My inductor is cheap and simple and works.
If I get a gigantic order, I'll have a coil winding company make them
and retire the Sharpie.
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 13:17:03 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 15:53:46 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:55:58 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs >>><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>> wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>>>>> make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>>>>> than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are >>>>>> doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually
more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver,
after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked.
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully
reserved.
It better have a regular calibration schedule, or your semiconductor >>>>customers may give you the raised eyebrow.
Hmm. To be overly serious: With traceability to NIST (US) or NPL
(UK) or the like.
The trend in standards is to eliminate standards tied to a physical >>>object.
I have a Sharpie in hand. The barrel that is not covered by the cap
is a truncated cone, being 11.0 mm at the blunt end and 12.32 mm near
the cap, 73 mm away.
Mine is pretty cylindrical for the length of the coil. I expect that
the operator's (ie, my) applied tension affects the radius too.
Most likely.
That inductor sees 25 amps p-p, roughly a sawtooth, at 4 MHz. The
Coilcraft parts that I tried all smoked, I guess from skin effect and >>proximity effect.
Actually, all that's needed is to specify an ideal geometric shape,
with tolerances, in the formal documentation.
Joe Gwinn
I'll have someone start on a SolidWorks model.
I bet you need the standoff, so the lossy FR4 material isn't too
close. That should be in the requirements as well.
I'd specify the coil dimensions, not the mandrel dimensions, which may
be provided as a helpful suggestion only.
Joe Gwinn
On a sunny day (Sun, 01 Sep 2024 13:32:59 -0700) it happened john larkin ><jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote in <ncj9djtjao9gsvtojue9q9jph1ro1gl8or@4ax.com>:
My inductor is cheap and simple and works.
If I get a gigantic order, I'll have a coil winding company make them
and retire the Sharpie.
Some time ago I mentioned ceramic coil formers with grooves to you.
There were some in the mil transceivers.
It fixes the turns in position and diameter
https://www.surplussales.com/Inductors/Ind-SlugTu/Ind-SlugTu-4.html
ebay has some too I think
You could have some made if you sell thousands, any pottery;-)
I had some nice big ones with silvered wire in my 250 W linear in school days.
Inductors are a pain.
On Mon, 2 Sep 2024 02:20:42 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 2/09/2024 12:09 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it >>>>>> is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>>> make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>>> than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are >>>> doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually
more important.
And you don't simulate them either.
Only when they matter.
Simulation is - in part - about
letting the math throw up unexpected effects that appear when you hook
up a bunch of components. Knowing when it matter relies on the
simulation inside your head.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver,
after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked.
So you didn't read the data sheets carefully enough.
Sure I did. They should have worked, based on the data sheets.
It's not a part
that would usually be described as "surface mount". If you'd scraped the
enamel off the bottom of the coil and soldered each turn down onto an
isolated copper pad on the board, it probably would qualify as surface
mount, and would have had better thermal contact with the board.
I did that on the ends. I think the gap-pad works better thermally
than soldering every turn to the board.
Have you ever used a surface-mount coil that soldered every turn to
the board? Got a link?
You might have had to make it as a sintered metal 3-D printed structure to >> get this to work - the wound coil looks a bit irregular.
Losses would be crazy.
Lost wax casting could have worked too.
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully
reserved.
That defines it diameter. Measuring that with a vernier caliper would
give you a number you could document.
https://www.highlandtechnology.com/Product/T850
The grey gap-pad gives it some extra cooling. The board has lots of
thermal vias down to the water-cooled baseplate.
If you'd wound it with copper tube you could have pumped water through
the tube, or made it a heat pipe.
And supply a water tank and a pump and water connectors?
A 3-D printed structure would have offered more options.
Again, massive losses.
My inductor is cheap and simple and works.
If I get a gigantic order, I'll have a coil winding company make them
and retire the Sharpie.
On a sunny day (Mon, 2 Sep 2024 01:56:13 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vb22qu$1hles$2@dont-email.me>:
On 1/09/2024 10:41 pm, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 1 Sep 2024 21:38:47 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vb1job$1fp20$1@dont-email.me>:
On 1/09/2024 9:06 pm, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vb163a$1dt9b$1@dont-email.me>:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
<snip>
Explosion isn't quite the right concept. The universe is pictured as
starting off very small, very dense, and expanding rapidly, but it
created the space it expanded into as it expanded.
Only in the imagination of mathematicians who are starting as kids to try to do a divide by nothing (zero)
and then create infinities such as black's holes.
You've got that backwards. Black holes are entirely finite, because they
contain enough mass to close space back in on itself.
Sound like shit talk.
In a Le Sage system there is a point where all LS particles are intercepted.
Tip: there are no infinities in nature, something always will give way.
With black holes it's the curvature of space-time.
Space and time are not curved, matter is less compressed near a big mass that intercepts some
LS particles, making the pendulum longer and clocks slowing down.
Same limits apply
It is simple.
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 17:43:32 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 13:17:03 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 15:53:46 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:55:58 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>>> wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
I'll have someone start on a SolidWorks model.
I bet you need the standoff, so the lossy FR4 material isn't too
close. That should be in the requirements as well.
The turns squish down into the gap-pad gunk, which is an OK heat
conductor. The PCB under the pad is a big copper pour, top and bottom,
with a zillion thermal vias. There's more gap-pad on the underside of
the board to dump heat into the baseplate.
At 4 MHz, skin depth is 32 microns, so most of the copper is wasted.
That's why it gets so hot.
I tried three of the Coilcraft 1010VS parts in series, but they
smoked, probably skin+proximity effect. Maybe parallel would have
been better.
I'd specify the coil dimensions, not the mandrel dimensions, which may
be provided as a helpful suggestion only.
I could have a mandrel machined or 3D printed, to more accurately wind
the inductor. The improvement would be mostly cosmetic.
Inductors are a pain.
On 2/09/2024 12:34 pm, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Mon, 2 Sep 2024 01:56:13 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vb22qu$1hles$2@dont-email.me>:
On 1/09/2024 10:41 pm, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 1 Sep 2024 21:38:47 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vb1job$1fp20$1@dont-email.me>:
On 1/09/2024 9:06 pm, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>>>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vb163a$1dt9b$1@dont-email.me>:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
<snip>
Explosion isn't quite the right concept. The universe is pictured as >>>>> starting off very small, very dense, and expanding rapidly, but it
created the space it expanded into as it expanded.
Only in the imagination of mathematicians who are starting as kids to try to do a divide by nothing (zero)
and then create infinities such as black's holes.
You've got that backwards. Black holes are entirely finite, because they >>> contain enough mass to close space back in on itself.
Sound like shit talk.
Which is to say you don't understand it, and resent having your
ignorance highlighted
In a Le Sage system there is a point where all LS particles are intercepted.
Pity about all the other defects in the Le Sage model.
Tip: there are no infinities in nature, something always will give way. >>>With black holes it's the curvature of space-time.
Space and time are not curved, matter is less compressed near a big mass that intercepts some
LS particles, making the pendulum longer and clocks slowing down.
That would be relevant is the Le Sage model could work. It can't.
Gravitational lensing demonstrates that space-tine is curved in the
vicinity of any mass - you need a lot of mass to get an observable
curvature,
The first big test of that prediction was made during the 1919 eclipse
of the sun.
https://earthsky.org/human-world/may-29-1919-solar-eclipse-einstein-relativity/
There have been plenty of others since then.
Same limits apply
It is simple.
If you ignore most of the data.
<snipped more ill-informed nonsense.>
On a sunny day (Mon, 2 Sep 2024 16:54:18 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vb3neq$1scn0$2@dont-email.me>:
On 2/09/2024 12:34 pm, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Mon, 2 Sep 2024 01:56:13 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vb22qu$1hles$2@dont-email.me>:
On 1/09/2024 10:41 pm, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 1 Sep 2024 21:38:47 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vb1job$1fp20$1@dont-email.me>:
On 1/09/2024 9:06 pm, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>>>>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vb163a$1dt9b$1@dont-email.me>:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
<snip>
Explosion isn't quite the right concept. The universe is pictured as >>>>>> starting off very small, very dense, and expanding rapidly, but it >>>>>> created the space it expanded into as it expanded.
Only in the imagination of mathematicians who are starting as kids to try to do a divide by nothing (zero)
and then create infinities such as black's holes.
You've got that backwards. Black holes are entirely finite, because they >>>> contain enough mass to close space back in on itself.
Sound like shit talk.
Which is to say you don't understand it, and resent having your
ignorance highlighted
In a Le Sage system there is a point where all LS particles are intercepted.
Pity about all the other defects in the Le Sage model.
Tip: there are no infinities in nature, something always will give way. >>>>With black holes it's the curvature of space-time.
Space and time are not curved, matter is less compressed near a big mass that intercepts some
LS particles, making the pendulum longer and clocks slowing down.
That would be relevant is the Le Sage model could work. It can't.
Gravitational lensing demonstrates that space-tine is curved in the
vicinity of any mass - you need a lot of mass to get an observable
curvature,
The first big test of that prediction was made during the 1919 eclipse
of the sun.
https://earthsky.org/human-world/may-29-1919-solar-eclipse-einstein-relativity/
There have been plenty of others since then.
Same limits apply
It is simple.
If you ignore most of the data.
<snipped more ill-informed nonsense.>
You need a brain-wash.
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 17:43:32 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 13:17:03 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 15:53:46 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> >>>wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:55:58 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs >>>><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>>> wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>>>>>> make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>>>>>> than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are >>>>>>> doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually >>>>>> more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver, >>>>>> after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked.
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully >>>>>> reserved.
It better have a regular calibration schedule, or your semiconductor >>>>>customers may give you the raised eyebrow.
Hmm. To be overly serious: With traceability to NIST (US) or NPL
(UK) or the like.
The trend in standards is to eliminate standards tied to a physical >>>>object.
I have a Sharpie in hand. The barrel that is not covered by the cap
is a truncated cone, being 11.0 mm at the blunt end and 12.32 mm near >>>>the cap, 73 mm away.
Mine is pretty cylindrical for the length of the coil. I expect that
the operator's (ie, my) applied tension affects the radius too.
Most likely.
That inductor sees 25 amps p-p, roughly a sawtooth, at 4 MHz. The >>>Coilcraft parts that I tried all smoked, I guess from skin effect and >>>proximity effect.
Actually, all that's needed is to specify an ideal geometric shape, >>>>with tolerances, in the formal documentation.
Joe Gwinn
I'll have someone start on a SolidWorks model.
I bet you need the standoff, so the lossy FR4 material isn't too
close. That should be in the requirements as well.
The turns squish down into the gap-pad gunk, which is an OK heat
conductor. The PCB under the pad is a big copper pour, top and bottom,
with a zillion thermal vias. There's more gap-pad on the underside of
the board to dump heat into the baseplate.
At 4 MHz, skin depth is 32 microns, so most of the copper is wasted.
That's why it gets so hot.
I tried three of the Coilcraft 1010VS parts in series, but they
smoked, probably skin+proximity effect. Maybe parallel would have
been better.
I'd specify the coil dimensions, not the mandrel dimensions, which may
be provided as a helpful suggestion only.
Joe Gwinn
I could have a mandrel machined or 3D printed, to more accurately wind
the inductor. The improvement would be mostly cosmetic.
Inductors are a pain.
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 19:49:39 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 17:43:32 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 13:17:03 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 15:53:46 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:55:58 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>: >>>>>>>>>
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to
make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today
than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are >>>>>>>> doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually >>>>>>> more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver, >>>>>>> after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked.
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully >>>>>>> reserved.
It better have a regular calibration schedule, or your semiconductor >>>>>> customers may give you the raised eyebrow.
Hmm. To be overly serious: With traceability to NIST (US) or NPL
(UK) or the like.
The trend in standards is to eliminate standards tied to a physical
object.
I have a Sharpie in hand. The barrel that is not covered by the cap >>>>> is a truncated cone, being 11.0 mm at the blunt end and 12.32 mm near >>>>> the cap, 73 mm away.
Mine is pretty cylindrical for the length of the coil. I expect that
the operator's (ie, my) applied tension affects the radius too.
Most likely.
That inductor sees 25 amps p-p, roughly a sawtooth, at 4 MHz. The
Coilcraft parts that I tried all smoked, I guess from skin effect and
proximity effect.
Actually, all that's needed is to specify an ideal geometric shape,
with tolerances, in the formal documentation.
Joe Gwinn
I'll have someone start on a SolidWorks model.
I bet you need the standoff, so the lossy FR4 material isn't too
close. That should be in the requirements as well.
The turns squish down into the gap-pad gunk, which is an OK heat
conductor. The PCB under the pad is a big copper pour, top and bottom,
with a zillion thermal vias. There's more gap-pad on the underside of
the board to dump heat into the baseplate.
At 4 MHz, skin depth is 32 microns, so most of the copper is wasted.
That's why it gets so hot.
I tried three of the Coilcraft 1010VS parts in series, but they
smoked, probably skin+proximity effect. Maybe parallel would have
been better.
I'd specify the coil dimensions, not the mandrel dimensions, which may
be provided as a helpful suggestion only.
Joe Gwinn
I could have a mandrel machined or 3D printed, to more accurately wind
the inductor. The improvement would be mostly cosmetic.
Or choose a 12mm OD mandrel, and adjust elsewhere. The advantage of
12mm is that it's a common size. so just buy the rod and use it.
.<https://www.mcmaster.com/products/shafts/shafts-2~/rotary-shafts-5/diameter~12-mm/>
Actually, the requirement is a certain inductance while handling a
4-MHz sawtooth at 25 Amps (p-p), so the frequency band is roughly 4 to
20 MHz, to cover the first five harmonics Which harmonic causes the
most heating?
The dimensions et al are the construction details needed for Highland
to be able to replicate the part without your help.
On 2/09/2024 6:32 am, john larkin wrote:
On Mon, 2 Sep 2024 02:20:42 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 2/09/2024 12:09 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>>>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it >>>>>>> is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>>>> make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>>>> than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are >>>>> doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually
more important.
And you don't simulate them either.
Only when they matter.
Simulation is - in part - about
letting the math throw up unexpected effects that appear when you hook
up a bunch of components. Knowing when it matter relies on the
simulation inside your head.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver,
after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked.
So you didn't read the data sheets carefully enough.
Sure I did. They should have worked, based on the data sheets.
Based on your understanding of the data sheet, which was obviously >inadequate. It's revealing that you don't post links to the data sheets
or specify the number that you relied on when you assumed that they
ought to have worked.
It's not a part
that would usually be described as "surface mount". If you'd scraped the >>> enamel off the bottom of the coil and soldered each turn down onto an
isolated copper pad on the board, it probably would qualify as surface
mount, and would have had better thermal contact with the board.
I did that on the ends. I think the gap-pad works better thermally
than soldering every turn to the board.
Solder is metal, and has a higher conductivity than your gap-pad
material. You can over-fill the joint, which would help.
Have you ever used a surface-mount coil that soldered every turn to
the board? Got a link?
No. It's merely an obvious possibility.
You might have had to make it as a sintered metal 3-D printed structure to >>> get this to work - the wound coil looks a bit irregular.
Losses would be crazy.
What makes you think that? The fact that the part is sintered doesn't
mean that you won't get close to solid metal electrical conductivity.
Lost wax casting could have worked too.
And even you must concede that that wouldn't have been lossy.
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully
reserved.
That defines it diameter. Measuring that with a vernier caliper would
give you a number you could document.
https://www.highlandtechnology.com/Product/T850
The grey gap-pad gives it some extra cooling. The board has lots of
thermal vias down to the water-cooled baseplate.
If you'd wound it with copper tube you could have pumped water through
the tube, or made it a heat pipe.
And supply a water tank and a pump and water connectors?
Heat pipes don't need that. A closed system doesn't need a water-tank,
and lots of top-end computer coolers do rely on circulating water.
A 3-D printed structure would have offered more options.
Again, massive losses.
Imagined massive losses.
My inductor is cheap and simple and works.
It's hand-wound, so it looks cheaper than it is.
If I get a gigantic order, I'll have a coil winding company make them
and retire the Sharpie.
Or come up with a more sensible solution?
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 13:17:03 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 15:53:46 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:55:58 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs >>><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>> wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>>>>> make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>>>>> than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are >>>>>> doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually
more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver,
after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked.
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully
reserved.
It better have a regular calibration schedule, or your semiconductor >>>>customers may give you the raised eyebrow.
Hmm. To be overly serious: With traceability to NIST (US) or NPL
(UK) or the like.
The trend in standards is to eliminate standards tied to a physical >>>object.
I have a Sharpie in hand. The barrel that is not covered by the cap
is a truncated cone, being 11.0 mm at the blunt end and 12.32 mm near
the cap, 73 mm away.
Mine is pretty cylindrical for the length of the coil. I expect that
the operator's (ie, my) applied tension affects the radius too.
Most likely.
That inductor sees 25 amps p-p, roughly a sawtooth, at 4 MHz. The
Coilcraft parts that I tried all smoked, I guess from skin effect and >>proximity effect.
Actually, all that's needed is to specify an ideal geometric shape,
with tolerances, in the formal documentation.
Joe Gwinn
I'll have someone start on a SolidWorks model.
I bet you need the standoff, so the lossy FR4 material isn't too
close. That should be in the requirements as well.
I'd specify the coil dimensions, not the mandrel dimensions, which may
be provided as a helpful suggestion only.
Joe Gwinn
On 2/09/2024 12:49 pm, john larkin wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 17:43:32 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 13:17:03 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 15:53:46 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:55:58 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
<snip>
I'll have someone start on a SolidWorks model.
I bet you need the standoff, so the lossy FR4 material isn't too
close. That should be in the requirements as well.
If the FR4 losses matter, the printed circuit board under the coil would >darken, which the customers wouldn't like. The Cambridge Instruments
0.5nsec beam blanker did that so we swapped to a different substrate
that didn't discolour.
The turns squish down into the gap-pad gunk, which is an OK heat
conductor. The PCB under the pad is a big copper pour, top and bottom,
with a zillion thermal vias. There's more gap-pad on the underside of
the board to dump heat into the baseplate.
At 4 MHz, skin depth is 32 microns, so most of the copper is wasted.
That's why it gets so hot.
It's a sawtooth so it has quite a lot of higher harmonic components with
even thinner skin depths. Baxandall's preference for sine waves has >incidental advantages.
The turns are wide and flat, which reduces the effect of skin dept.
I tried three of the Coilcraft 1010VS parts in series, but they
smoked, probably skin+proximity effect. Maybe parallel would have
been better.
https://www.coilcraft.com/getmedia/55a4b40a-2e02-4bf5-b0af-2ea5db75b6cf/1010vs.pdf
There are five 1010VS parts, all rated at about 25A rms. You haven't >specified which one you used three of.
That 25A rms isn't going to include any allowance for skin effect.
They don't look as if there would be much cross-talk from one to the
next. Making space for more parts might have been a better approach.
With +/-20% tolerance on inductance, putting them in parallel wouldn't
have been a good idea.
I'd specify the coil dimensions, not the mandrel dimensions, which may
be provided as a helpful suggestion only.
I could have a mandrel machined or 3D printed, to more accurately wind
the inductor. The improvement would be mostly cosmetic.
Inductors are a pain.
Particularly when you don't think about what you doing.
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 19:49:39 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 17:43:32 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 13:17:03 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 15:53:46 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> >>>>wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:55:58 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs >>>>><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>: >>>>>>>>>
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to
make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today
than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are >>>>>>>> doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually >>>>>>> more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver, >>>>>>> after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked.
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully >>>>>>> reserved.
It better have a regular calibration schedule, or your semiconductor >>>>>>customers may give you the raised eyebrow.
Hmm. To be overly serious: With traceability to NIST (US) or NPL >>>>>(UK) or the like.
The trend in standards is to eliminate standards tied to a physical >>>>>object.
I have a Sharpie in hand. The barrel that is not covered by the cap >>>>>is a truncated cone, being 11.0 mm at the blunt end and 12.32 mm near >>>>>the cap, 73 mm away.
Mine is pretty cylindrical for the length of the coil. I expect that >>>>the operator's (ie, my) applied tension affects the radius too.
Most likely.
That inductor sees 25 amps p-p, roughly a sawtooth, at 4 MHz. The >>>>Coilcraft parts that I tried all smoked, I guess from skin effect and >>>>proximity effect.
Actually, all that's needed is to specify an ideal geometric shape, >>>>>with tolerances, in the formal documentation.
Joe Gwinn
I'll have someone start on a SolidWorks model.
I bet you need the standoff, so the lossy FR4 material isn't too
close. That should be in the requirements as well.
The turns squish down into the gap-pad gunk, which is an OK heat
conductor. The PCB under the pad is a big copper pour, top and bottom,
with a zillion thermal vias. There's more gap-pad on the underside of
the board to dump heat into the baseplate.
At 4 MHz, skin depth is 32 microns, so most of the copper is wasted.
That's why it gets so hot.
I tried three of the Coilcraft 1010VS parts in series, but they
smoked, probably skin+proximity effect. Maybe parallel would have
been better.
I'd specify the coil dimensions, not the mandrel dimensions, which may
be provided as a helpful suggestion only.
Joe Gwinn
I could have a mandrel machined or 3D printed, to more accurately wind
the inductor. The improvement would be mostly cosmetic.
Or choose a 12mm OD mandrel, and adjust elsewhere. The advantage of
12mm is that it's a common size. so just buy the rod and use it.
.<https://www.mcmaster.com/products/shafts/shafts-2~/rotary-shafts-5/diameter~12-mm/>
Actually, the requirement is a certain inductance while handling a
4-MHz sawtooth at 25 Amps (p-p), so the frequency band is roughly 4 to
20 MHz, to cover the first five harmonics Which harmonic causes the
most heating?
The dimensions et al are the construction details needed for Highland
to be able to replicate the part without your help.
Inductors are a pain.
But useful. Or essential in some cases.
Joe Gwinn
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 17:43:32 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 13:17:03 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 15:53:46 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> >>>wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:55:58 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs >>>><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>>> wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>>>>>> make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>>>>>> than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are >>>>>>> doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually >>>>>> more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver, >>>>>> after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked.
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully >>>>>> reserved.
It better have a regular calibration schedule, or your semiconductor >>>>>customers may give you the raised eyebrow.
Hmm. To be overly serious: With traceability to NIST (US) or NPL
(UK) or the like.
The trend in standards is to eliminate standards tied to a physical >>>>object.
I have a Sharpie in hand. The barrel that is not covered by the cap
is a truncated cone, being 11.0 mm at the blunt end and 12.32 mm near >>>>the cap, 73 mm away.
Mine is pretty cylindrical for the length of the coil. I expect that
the operator's (ie, my) applied tension affects the radius too.
Most likely.
That inductor sees 25 amps p-p, roughly a sawtooth, at 4 MHz. The >>>Coilcraft parts that I tried all smoked, I guess from skin effect and >>>proximity effect.
Actually, all that's needed is to specify an ideal geometric shape, >>>>with tolerances, in the formal documentation.
Joe Gwinn
I'll have someone start on a SolidWorks model.
I bet you need the standoff, so the lossy FR4 material isn't too
close. That should be in the requirements as well.
That's another function of the gap-pad material. And the flattish part
of the circular solenoid windings make a big contact area into the
pads, for more heat transfer.
I'd specify the coil dimensions, not the mandrel dimensions, which may
be provided as a helpful suggestion only.
It would be cool is the bottom of the windings were actually flat, a
square or elliptical winding, for more heat transfer area.
On Mon, 02 Sep 2024 10:02:34 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 19:49:39 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 17:43:32 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> >>>wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 13:17:03 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 15:53:46 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> >>>>>wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:55:58 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs >>>>>><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>: >>>>>>>>>>
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to
make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today
than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are
doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually >>>>>>>> more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver, >>>>>>>> after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked.
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully >>>>>>>> reserved.
It better have a regular calibration schedule, or your semiconductor >>>>>>>customers may give you the raised eyebrow.
Hmm. To be overly serious: With traceability to NIST (US) or NPL >>>>>>(UK) or the like.
The trend in standards is to eliminate standards tied to a physical >>>>>>object.
I have a Sharpie in hand. The barrel that is not covered by the cap >>>>>>is a truncated cone, being 11.0 mm at the blunt end and 12.32 mm near >>>>>>the cap, 73 mm away.
Mine is pretty cylindrical for the length of the coil. I expect that >>>>>the operator's (ie, my) applied tension affects the radius too.
Most likely.
That inductor sees 25 amps p-p, roughly a sawtooth, at 4 MHz. The >>>>>Coilcraft parts that I tried all smoked, I guess from skin effect and >>>>>proximity effect.
Actually, all that's needed is to specify an ideal geometric shape, >>>>>>with tolerances, in the formal documentation.
Joe Gwinn
I'll have someone start on a SolidWorks model.
I bet you need the standoff, so the lossy FR4 material isn't too
close. That should be in the requirements as well.
The turns squish down into the gap-pad gunk, which is an OK heat >>>conductor. The PCB under the pad is a big copper pour, top and bottom, >>>with a zillion thermal vias. There's more gap-pad on the underside of >>>the board to dump heat into the baseplate.
At 4 MHz, skin depth is 32 microns, so most of the copper is wasted. >>>That's why it gets so hot.
I tried three of the Coilcraft 1010VS parts in series, but they
smoked, probably skin+proximity effect. Maybe parallel would have
been better.
I'd specify the coil dimensions, not the mandrel dimensions, which may >>>>be provided as a helpful suggestion only.
Joe Gwinn
I could have a mandrel machined or 3D printed, to more accurately wind >>>the inductor. The improvement would be mostly cosmetic.
Or choose a 12mm OD mandrel, and adjust elsewhere. The advantage of
12mm is that it's a common size. so just buy the rod and use it.
.<https://www.mcmaster.com/products/shafts/shafts-2~/rotary-shafts-5/diameter~12-mm/>
Actually, the requirement is a certain inductance while handling a
4-MHz sawtooth at 25 Amps (p-p), so the frequency band is roughly 4 to
20 MHz, to cover the first five harmonics Which harmonic causes the
most heating?
That's past my pay grade. I wound coils until it worked. The cooling
issues complicate things.
How about Litz wire wound on a spiral-grooved aluminum nitride tube,
with air blown inside maybe?
The dimensions et al are the construction details needed for Highland
to be able to replicate the part without your help.
Inductors are a pain.
But useful. Or essential in some cases.
Joe Gwinn
We are lucky to have resistors and capacitors and inductors, linear
and derivative and integral. There is no thermal equivalent of an
inductor, which is why thermal systems are dynamically sloppy.
Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 19:49:39 -0700, john larkinLo these forty year gone, I had this RF gig that involved making a lot of
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 17:43:32 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 13:17:03 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 15:53:46 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> >>>>> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:55:58 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>: >>>>>>>>>>
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to
make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today
than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are
doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually >>>>>>>> more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver, >>>>>>>> after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked.
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully >>>>>>>> reserved.
It better have a regular calibration schedule, or your semiconductor >>>>>>> customers may give you the raised eyebrow.
Hmm. To be overly serious: With traceability to NIST (US) or NPL >>>>>> (UK) or the like.
The trend in standards is to eliminate standards tied to a physical >>>>>> object.
I have a Sharpie in hand. The barrel that is not covered by the cap >>>>>> is a truncated cone, being 11.0 mm at the blunt end and 12.32 mm near >>>>>> the cap, 73 mm away.
Mine is pretty cylindrical for the length of the coil. I expect that >>>>> the operator's (ie, my) applied tension affects the radius too.
Most likely.
That inductor sees 25 amps p-p, roughly a sawtooth, at 4 MHz. The
Coilcraft parts that I tried all smoked, I guess from skin effect and >>>>> proximity effect.
Actually, all that's needed is to specify an ideal geometric shape, >>>>>> with tolerances, in the formal documentation.
Joe Gwinn
I'll have someone start on a SolidWorks model.
I bet you need the standoff, so the lossy FR4 material isn't too
close. That should be in the requirements as well.
The turns squish down into the gap-pad gunk, which is an OK heat
conductor. The PCB under the pad is a big copper pour, top and bottom,
with a zillion thermal vias. There's more gap-pad on the underside of
the board to dump heat into the baseplate.
At 4 MHz, skin depth is 32 microns, so most of the copper is wasted.
That's why it gets so hot.
I tried three of the Coilcraft 1010VS parts in series, but they
smoked, probably skin+proximity effect. Maybe parallel would have
been better.
I'd specify the coil dimensions, not the mandrel dimensions, which may >>>> be provided as a helpful suggestion only.
Joe Gwinn
I could have a mandrel machined or 3D printed, to more accurately wind
the inductor. The improvement would be mostly cosmetic.
Or choose a 12mm OD mandrel, and adjust elsewhere. The advantage of
12mm is that it's a common size. so just buy the rod and use it.
.<https://www.mcmaster.com/products/shafts/shafts-2~/rotary-shafts-5/diameter~12-mm/>
Actually, the requirement is a certain inductance while handling a
4-MHz sawtooth at 25 Amps (p-p), so the frequency band is roughly 4 to
20 MHz, to cover the first five harmonics Which harmonic causes the
most heating?
The dimensions et al are the construction details needed for Highland
to be able to replicate the part without your help.
VHF LC oscillatior and filter protos.
We had a hand-cranked coil winder that had a good selection of cylindrical >steel mandrels with helical grooves to guide the wire, plus three or four >sheets with tables of measured values for single-layer coils of various >lengths. With a couple of training runs, one learned how hard to pull on
the wire so that it would just spring free from the mandrel.
That made it easy to make nice looking, high-Q coils for the inductance
range of interest. Good Medicine.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
On Mon, 2 Sep 2024 15:25:59 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 19:49:39 -0700, john larkinLo these forty year gone, I had this RF gig that involved making a lot of
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 17:43:32 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 13:17:03 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 15:53:46 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> >>>>>> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:55:58 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>: >>>>>>>>>>>
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to
make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today
than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are
doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually >>>>>>>>> more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver, >>>>>>>>> after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked. >>>>>>>>>
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully >>>>>>>>> reserved.
It better have a regular calibration schedule, or your semiconductor >>>>>>>> customers may give you the raised eyebrow.
Hmm. To be overly serious: With traceability to NIST (US) or NPL >>>>>>> (UK) or the like.
The trend in standards is to eliminate standards tied to a physical >>>>>>> object.
I have a Sharpie in hand. The barrel that is not covered by the cap >>>>>>> is a truncated cone, being 11.0 mm at the blunt end and 12.32 mm near >>>>>>> the cap, 73 mm away.
Mine is pretty cylindrical for the length of the coil. I expect that >>>>>> the operator's (ie, my) applied tension affects the radius too.
Most likely.
That inductor sees 25 amps p-p, roughly a sawtooth, at 4 MHz. The
Coilcraft parts that I tried all smoked, I guess from skin effect and >>>>>> proximity effect.
Actually, all that's needed is to specify an ideal geometric shape, >>>>>>> with tolerances, in the formal documentation.
Joe Gwinn
I'll have someone start on a SolidWorks model.
I bet you need the standoff, so the lossy FR4 material isn't too
close. That should be in the requirements as well.
The turns squish down into the gap-pad gunk, which is an OK heat
conductor. The PCB under the pad is a big copper pour, top and bottom, >>>> with a zillion thermal vias. There's more gap-pad on the underside of >>>> the board to dump heat into the baseplate.
At 4 MHz, skin depth is 32 microns, so most of the copper is wasted.
That's why it gets so hot.
I tried three of the Coilcraft 1010VS parts in series, but they
smoked, probably skin+proximity effect. Maybe parallel would have
been better.
I'd specify the coil dimensions, not the mandrel dimensions, which may >>>>> be provided as a helpful suggestion only.
Joe Gwinn
I could have a mandrel machined or 3D printed, to more accurately wind >>>> the inductor. The improvement would be mostly cosmetic.
Or choose a 12mm OD mandrel, and adjust elsewhere. The advantage of
12mm is that it's a common size. so just buy the rod and use it.
.<https://www.mcmaster.com/products/shafts/shafts-2~/rotary-shafts-5/diameter~12-mm/>
Actually, the requirement is a certain inductance while handling a
4-MHz sawtooth at 25 Amps (p-p), so the frequency band is roughly 4 to
20 MHz, to cover the first five harmonics Which harmonic causes the
most heating?
The dimensions et al are the construction details needed for Highland
to be able to replicate the part without your help.
VHF LC oscillatior and filter protos.
I still design LC oscillators!
We had a hand-cranked coil winder that had a good selection of cylindrical >> steel mandrels with helical grooves to guide the wire, plus three or four
sheets with tables of measured values for single-layer coils of various
lengths. With a couple of training runs, one learned how hard to pull on
the wire so that it would just spring free from the mandrel.
That made it easy to make nice looking, high-Q coils for the inductance
range of interest. Good Medicine.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
Coilcraft makes a bunch of bare-naked RF inductors.
We like this encapsulated part:
https://www.coilcraft.com/en-us/products/rf/air-core-inductors/midi-spring/1812sms/?skuId=26054|26274
What's surprising is that the "natural" tempco of a copper solenoid
inductor runs around +120 ppm/degC, but this one is around +40. The
plastic must compensate for the copper somehow.
On Mon, 2 Sep 2024 17:13:59 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:
On 2/09/2024 6:32 am, john larkin wrote:
On Mon, 2 Sep 2024 02:20:42 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:
On 2/09/2024 12:09 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
And you don't simulate them either.
Only when they matter.
Simulation is - in part - about
letting the math throw up unexpected effects that appear when you hook >>>> up a bunch of components. Knowing when it matter relies on the
simulation inside your head.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver,
after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked.
So you didn't read the data sheets carefully enough.
Sure I did. They should have worked, based on the data sheets.
Based on your understanding of the data sheet, which was obviously
inadequate. It's revealing that you don't post links to the data sheets
or specify the number that you relied on when you assumed that they
ought to have worked.
It's not a part
that would usually be described as "surface mount". If you'd scraped the >>>> enamel off the bottom of the coil and soldered each turn down onto an
isolated copper pad on the board, it probably would qualify as surface >>>> mount, and would have had better thermal contact with the board.
I did that on the ends. I think the gap-pad works better thermally
than soldering every turn to the board.
Solder is metal, and has a higher conductivity than your gap-pad
material. You can over-fill the joint, which would help.
It wouldn't help much to conduct heat into a PCB pad. FR4 is a
terrible heat conductor.
Have you ever used a surface-mount coil that soldered every turn to
the board? Got a link?
No. It's merely an obvious possibility.
Ha.
You might have had to make it as a sintered metal 3-D printed structure to >>>> get this to work - the wound coil looks a bit irregular.
Losses would be crazy.
What makes you think that? The fact that the part is sintered doesn't
mean that you won't get close to solid metal electrical conductivity.
Skin depth is about 30 microns here, and we need a smooth, homogenous, annealed surface. Ask a chemist.
Lost wax casting could have worked too.
And even you must concede that that wouldn't have been lossy.
Impractical,
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully
reserved.
That defines it diameter. Measuring that with a vernier caliper would
give you a number you could document.
https://www.highlandtechnology.com/Product/T850
The grey gap-pad gives it some extra cooling. The board has lots of
thermal vias down to the water-cooled baseplate.
If you'd wound it with copper tube you could have pumped water through >>>> the tube, or made it a heat pipe.
And supply a water tank and a pump and water connectors?
Heat pipes don't need that. A closed system doesn't need a water-tank,
and lots of top-end computer coolers do rely on circulating water.
My gadget is cheap and easy and works.
A 3-D printed structure would have offered more options.
Again, massive losses.
Imagined massive losses.
Certainly imagined. Please make a 3D fabbed inductor and measure its Q
and report back to us.
My inductor is cheap and simple and works.
It's hand-wound, so it looks cheaper than it is.
This Pockels Cell driver is maybe 1/20 the volume of competitors' and
uses a few per cent of the power. The inductor is a detail.
Most drivers dissipate
F * C * V^2
in the driver itself, but it should take zero energy to charge and
discharge a capacitor.
If I get a gigantic order, I'll have a coil winding company make them
and retire the Sharpie.
Or come up with a more sensible solution?
More sensible than winding an inductor from magnet wire?
On Mon, 2 Sep 2024 17:52:09 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 2/09/2024 12:49 pm, john larkin wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 17:43:32 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 13:17:03 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 15:53:46 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> >>>>> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:55:58 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
<snip>
I'll have someone start on a SolidWorks model.
I bet you need the standoff, so the lossy FR4 material isn't too
close. That should be in the requirements as well.
If the FR4 losses matter, the printed circuit board under the coil would
darken, which the customers wouldn't like. The Cambridge Instruments
0.5nsec beam blanker did that so we swapped to a different substrate
that didn't discolour.
The turns squish down into the gap-pad gunk, which is an OK heat
conductor. The PCB under the pad is a big copper pour, top and bottom,
with a zillion thermal vias. There's more gap-pad on the underside of
the board to dump heat into the baseplate.
At 4 MHz, skin depth is 32 microns, so most of the copper is wasted.
That's why it gets so hot.
It's a sawtooth so it has quite a lot of higher harmonic components with
even thinner skin depths. Baxandall's preference for sine waves has
incidental advantages.
The turns are wide and flat, which reduces the effect of skin dept.
I tried three of the Coilcraft 1010VS parts in series, but they
smoked, probably skin+proximity effect. Maybe parallel would have
been better.
https://www.coilcraft.com/getmedia/55a4b40a-2e02-4bf5-b0af-2ea5db75b6cf/1010vs.pdf
There are five 1010VS parts, all rated at about 25A rms. You haven't
specified which one you used three of.
That 25A rms isn't going to include any allowance for skin effect.
They don't look as if there would be much cross-talk from one to the
next. Making space for more parts might have been a better approach.
With +/-20% tolerance on inductance, putting them in parallel wouldn't
have been a good idea.
Don't they have the same tolerance in series?
In parallel, each would get 1/3 the current. But each would need to be
9x the inductance. I suspect that's a wash, something fundamental
going on.
My coil opens itself up for a lot of air cooling, and bare copper can
run pretty hot.
I'd specify the coil dimensions, not the mandrel dimensions, which may >>>> be provided as a helpful suggestion only.
I could have a mandrel machined or 3D printed, to more accurately wind
the inductor. The improvement would be mostly cosmetic.
Inductors are a pain.
Particularly when you don't think about what you doing.
But it works. A big laser company buys them.
Why don't you design a 1200 volt, 4 MHz pulse generator and we can
discuss it here.
On Mon, 2 Sep 2024 15:25:59 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 19:49:39 -0700, john larkinLo these forty year gone, I had this RF gig that involved making a lot of
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 17:43:32 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 13:17:03 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 15:53:46 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> >>>>>> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:55:58 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>: >>>>>>>>>>>
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to
make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today
than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are
doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually >>>>>>>>> more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver, >>>>>>>>> after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked. >>>>>>>>>
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully >>>>>>>>> reserved.
It better have a regular calibration schedule, or your semiconductor >>>>>>>> customers may give you the raised eyebrow.
Hmm. To be overly serious: With traceability to NIST (US) or NPL >>>>>>> (UK) or the like.
The trend in standards is to eliminate standards tied to a physical >>>>>>> object.
I have a Sharpie in hand. The barrel that is not covered by the cap >>>>>>> is a truncated cone, being 11.0 mm at the blunt end and 12.32 mm near >>>>>>> the cap, 73 mm away.
Mine is pretty cylindrical for the length of the coil. I expect that >>>>>> the operator's (ie, my) applied tension affects the radius too.
Most likely.
That inductor sees 25 amps p-p, roughly a sawtooth, at 4 MHz. The
Coilcraft parts that I tried all smoked, I guess from skin effect and >>>>>> proximity effect.
Actually, all that's needed is to specify an ideal geometric shape, >>>>>>> with tolerances, in the formal documentation.
Joe Gwinn
I'll have someone start on a SolidWorks model.
I bet you need the standoff, so the lossy FR4 material isn't too
close. That should be in the requirements as well.
The turns squish down into the gap-pad gunk, which is an OK heat
conductor. The PCB under the pad is a big copper pour, top and bottom, >>>> with a zillion thermal vias. There's more gap-pad on the underside of >>>> the board to dump heat into the baseplate.
At 4 MHz, skin depth is 32 microns, so most of the copper is wasted.
That's why it gets so hot.
I tried three of the Coilcraft 1010VS parts in series, but they
smoked, probably skin+proximity effect. Maybe parallel would have
been better.
I'd specify the coil dimensions, not the mandrel dimensions, which may >>>>> be provided as a helpful suggestion only.
Joe Gwinn
I could have a mandrel machined or 3D printed, to more accurately wind >>>> the inductor. The improvement would be mostly cosmetic.
Or choose a 12mm OD mandrel, and adjust elsewhere. The advantage of
12mm is that it's a common size. so just buy the rod and use it.
.<https://www.mcmaster.com/products/shafts/shafts-2~/rotary-shafts-5/diameter~12-mm/>
Actually, the requirement is a certain inductance while handling a
4-MHz sawtooth at 25 Amps (p-p), so the frequency band is roughly 4 to
20 MHz, to cover the first five harmonics Which harmonic causes the
most heating?
The dimensions et al are the construction details needed for Highland
to be able to replicate the part without your help.
VHF LC oscillatior and filter protos.
I still design LC oscillators!
We had a hand-cranked coil winder that had a good selection of cylindrical >> steel mandrels with helical grooves to guide the wire, plus three or four
sheets with tables of measured values for single-layer coils of various
lengths. With a couple of training runs, one learned how hard to pull on
the wire so that it would just spring free from the mandrel.
That made it easy to make nice looking, high-Q coils for the inductance
range of interest. Good Medicine.
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Mon, 2 Sep 2024 15:25:59 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 19:49:39 -0700, john larkinLo these forty year gone, I had this RF gig that involved making a lot of >>> VHF LC oscillatior and filter protos.
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 17:43:32 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> >>>>> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 13:17:03 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 15:53:46 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> >>>>>>> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:55:58 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>: >>>>>>>>>>>>
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to
make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today
than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are
doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually >>>>>>>>>> more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver, >>>>>>>>>> after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked. >>>>>>>>>>
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully >>>>>>>>>> reserved.
It better have a regular calibration schedule, or your semiconductor >>>>>>>>> customers may give you the raised eyebrow.
Hmm. To be overly serious: With traceability to NIST (US) or NPL >>>>>>>> (UK) or the like.
The trend in standards is to eliminate standards tied to a physical >>>>>>>> object.
I have a Sharpie in hand. The barrel that is not covered by the cap >>>>>>>> is a truncated cone, being 11.0 mm at the blunt end and 12.32 mm near >>>>>>>> the cap, 73 mm away.
Mine is pretty cylindrical for the length of the coil. I expect that >>>>>>> the operator's (ie, my) applied tension affects the radius too.
Most likely.
That inductor sees 25 amps p-p, roughly a sawtooth, at 4 MHz. The >>>>>>> Coilcraft parts that I tried all smoked, I guess from skin effect and >>>>>>> proximity effect.
Actually, all that's needed is to specify an ideal geometric shape, >>>>>>>> with tolerances, in the formal documentation.
Joe Gwinn
I'll have someone start on a SolidWorks model.
I bet you need the standoff, so the lossy FR4 material isn't too
close. That should be in the requirements as well.
The turns squish down into the gap-pad gunk, which is an OK heat
conductor. The PCB under the pad is a big copper pour, top and bottom, >>>>> with a zillion thermal vias. There's more gap-pad on the underside of >>>>> the board to dump heat into the baseplate.
At 4 MHz, skin depth is 32 microns, so most of the copper is wasted. >>>>> That's why it gets so hot.
I tried three of the Coilcraft 1010VS parts in series, but they
smoked, probably skin+proximity effect. Maybe parallel would have
been better.
I'd specify the coil dimensions, not the mandrel dimensions, which may >>>>>> be provided as a helpful suggestion only.
Joe Gwinn
I could have a mandrel machined or 3D printed, to more accurately wind >>>>> the inductor. The improvement would be mostly cosmetic.
Or choose a 12mm OD mandrel, and adjust elsewhere. The advantage of
12mm is that it's a common size. so just buy the rod and use it.
.<https://www.mcmaster.com/products/shafts/shafts-2~/rotary-shafts-5/diameter~12-mm/>
Actually, the requirement is a certain inductance while handling a
4-MHz sawtooth at 25 Amps (p-p), so the frequency band is roughly 4 to >>>> 20 MHz, to cover the first five harmonics Which harmonic causes the
most heating?
The dimensions et al are the construction details needed for Highland
to be able to replicate the part without your help.
I still design LC oscillators!
We had a hand-cranked coil winder that had a good selection of cylindrical >>> steel mandrels with helical grooves to guide the wire, plus three or four >>> sheets with tables of measured values for single-layer coils of various
lengths. With a couple of training runs, one learned how hard to pull on >>> the wire so that it would just spring free from the mandrel.
That made it easy to make nice looking, high-Q coils for the inductance
range of interest. Good Medicine.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
Coilcraft makes a bunch of bare-naked RF inductors.
We like this encapsulated part:
https://www.coilcraft.com/en-us/products/rf/air-core-inductors/midi-spring/1812sms/?skuId=26054|26274
What's surprising is that the "natural" tempco of a copper solenoid
inductor runs around +120 ppm/degC, but this one is around +40. The
plastic must compensate for the copper somehow.
Sounds awfully high.
To about 1% accuracy (over most useful aspect ratios), the inductance of a >single-layer coil is
L(uH) = a**2 n**2 /(9a + 10b),
Where a is the mean radius and b is the overall length, both in inches.
If the thermal expansion is unconstrained, a and b vary together, so the TC >of inductance of such a coil is the same as the CTE of copper, about 17 >ppm/K.
A solid plastic form is strong enough to stretch the copper and increase
the TCL to the CTE of the plastic.
If the length only is constant, the TCL is increased, and for a short fat >coil its nearly doubled.
In the case of something like B&W Miniductor, which has fairly fine-pitched >turns held by a few small axial stringers, the plastic stretches the length >of the coil but leaves the radial expansion free.
Because both a and b enter in the denominator, its possible to choose >dimensions that make the TCL of a Miniductor or similar coil very nearly >zero.
A normal single layer coil has a TCL around +30 ppm. Ive never measured
one as bad as +120.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
On Mon, 2 Sep 2024 15:25:59 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs ><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 19:49:39 -0700, john larkinLo these forty year gone, I had this RF gig that involved making a lot of >>VHF LC oscillatior and filter protos.
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 17:43:32 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 13:17:03 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 15:53:46 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> >>>>>> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:55:58 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>: >>>>>>>>>>>
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to
make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today
than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are
doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually >>>>>>>>> more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver, >>>>>>>>> after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked. >>>>>>>>>
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully >>>>>>>>> reserved.
It better have a regular calibration schedule, or your semiconductor >>>>>>>> customers may give you the raised eyebrow.
Hmm. To be overly serious: With traceability to NIST (US) or NPL >>>>>>> (UK) or the like.
The trend in standards is to eliminate standards tied to a physical >>>>>>> object.
I have a Sharpie in hand. The barrel that is not covered by the cap >>>>>>> is a truncated cone, being 11.0 mm at the blunt end and 12.32 mm near >>>>>>> the cap, 73 mm away.
Mine is pretty cylindrical for the length of the coil. I expect that >>>>>> the operator's (ie, my) applied tension affects the radius too.
Most likely.
That inductor sees 25 amps p-p, roughly a sawtooth, at 4 MHz. The
Coilcraft parts that I tried all smoked, I guess from skin effect and >>>>>> proximity effect.
Actually, all that's needed is to specify an ideal geometric shape, >>>>>>> with tolerances, in the formal documentation.
Joe Gwinn
I'll have someone start on a SolidWorks model.
I bet you need the standoff, so the lossy FR4 material isn't too
close. That should be in the requirements as well.
The turns squish down into the gap-pad gunk, which is an OK heat
conductor. The PCB under the pad is a big copper pour, top and bottom, >>>> with a zillion thermal vias. There's more gap-pad on the underside of >>>> the board to dump heat into the baseplate.
At 4 MHz, skin depth is 32 microns, so most of the copper is wasted.
That's why it gets so hot.
I tried three of the Coilcraft 1010VS parts in series, but they
smoked, probably skin+proximity effect. Maybe parallel would have
been better.
I'd specify the coil dimensions, not the mandrel dimensions, which may >>>>> be provided as a helpful suggestion only.
Joe Gwinn
I could have a mandrel machined or 3D printed, to more accurately wind >>>> the inductor. The improvement would be mostly cosmetic.
Or choose a 12mm OD mandrel, and adjust elsewhere. The advantage of
12mm is that it's a common size. so just buy the rod and use it.
.<https://www.mcmaster.com/products/shafts/shafts-2~/rotary-shafts-5/diameter~12-mm/>
Actually, the requirement is a certain inductance while handling a
4-MHz sawtooth at 25 Amps (p-p), so the frequency band is roughly 4 to
20 MHz, to cover the first five harmonics Which harmonic causes the
most heating?
The dimensions et al are the construction details needed for Highland
to be able to replicate the part without your help.
I still design LC oscillators!
We had a hand-cranked coil winder that had a good selection of cylindrical >>steel mandrels with helical grooves to guide the wire, plus three or four >>sheets with tables of measured values for single-layer coils of various >>lengths. With a couple of training runs, one learned how hard to pull on >>the wire so that it would just spring free from the mandrel.
That made it easy to make nice looking, high-Q coils for the inductance >>range of interest. Good Medicine.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
Coilcraft makes a bunch of bare-naked RF inductors.
We like this encapsulated part:
https://www.coilcraft.com/en-us/products/rf/air-core-inductors/midi-spring/1812sms/?skuId=26054|26274
What's surprising is that the "natural" tempco of a copper solenoid
inductor runs around +120 ppm/degC, but this one is around +40. The
plastic must compensate for the copper somehow.
On 3/09/2024 7:57 am, john larkin wrote:
On Mon, 2 Sep 2024 15:25:59 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 19:49:39 -0700, john larkinLo these forty year gone, I had this RF gig that involved making a lot of >>> VHF LC oscillatior and filter protos.
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 17:43:32 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> >>>>> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 13:17:03 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 15:53:46 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> >>>>>>> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:55:58 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>: >>>>>>>>>>>>
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to
make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today
than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are
doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually >>>>>>>>>> more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver, >>>>>>>>>> after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked. >>>>>>>>>>
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully >>>>>>>>>> reserved.
It better have a regular calibration schedule, or your semiconductor >>>>>>>>> customers may give you the raised eyebrow.
Hmm. To be overly serious: With traceability to NIST (US) or NPL >>>>>>>> (UK) or the like.
The trend in standards is to eliminate standards tied to a physical >>>>>>>> object.
I have a Sharpie in hand. The barrel that is not covered by the cap >>>>>>>> is a truncated cone, being 11.0 mm at the blunt end and 12.32 mm near >>>>>>>> the cap, 73 mm away.
Mine is pretty cylindrical for the length of the coil. I expect that >>>>>>> the operator's (ie, my) applied tension affects the radius too.
Most likely.
That inductor sees 25 amps p-p, roughly a sawtooth, at 4 MHz. The >>>>>>> Coilcraft parts that I tried all smoked, I guess from skin effect and >>>>>>> proximity effect.
Actually, all that's needed is to specify an ideal geometric shape, >>>>>>>> with tolerances, in the formal documentation.
Joe Gwinn
I'll have someone start on a SolidWorks model.
I bet you need the standoff, so the lossy FR4 material isn't too
close. That should be in the requirements as well.
The turns squish down into the gap-pad gunk, which is an OK heat
conductor. The PCB under the pad is a big copper pour, top and bottom, >>>>> with a zillion thermal vias. There's more gap-pad on the underside of >>>>> the board to dump heat into the baseplate.
At 4 MHz, skin depth is 32 microns, so most of the copper is wasted. >>>>> That's why it gets so hot.
I tried three of the Coilcraft 1010VS parts in series, but they
smoked, probably skin+proximity effect. Maybe parallel would have
been better.
I'd specify the coil dimensions, not the mandrel dimensions, which may >>>>>> be provided as a helpful suggestion only.
Joe Gwinn
I could have a mandrel machined or 3D printed, to more accurately wind >>>>> the inductor. The improvement would be mostly cosmetic.
Or choose a 12mm OD mandrel, and adjust elsewhere. The advantage of
12mm is that it's a common size. so just buy the rod and use it.
.<https://www.mcmaster.com/products/shafts/shafts-2~/rotary-shafts-5/diameter~12-mm/>
Actually, the requirement is a certain inductance while handling a
4-MHz sawtooth at 25 Amps (p-p), so the frequency band is roughly 4 to >>>> 20 MHz, to cover the first five harmonics Which harmonic causes the
most heating?
The dimensions et al are the construction details needed for Highland
to be able to replicate the part without your help.
I still design LC oscillators!
You may put them together, but it sounds as if you evolve them rather
than design them. And you'd have your own coil-winding gear if you did
much of it. As Phil did.
We had a hand-cranked coil winder that had a good selection of cylindrical >>> steel mandrels with helical grooves to guide the wire, plus three or four >>> sheets with tables of measured values for single-layer coils of various
lengths. With a couple of training runs, one learned how hard to pull on >>> the wire so that it would just spring free from the mandrel.
That made it easy to make nice looking, high-Q coils for the inductance
range of interest. Good Medicine.
At George Kent in Luton (1973-76) I got to wind my own small-signal >transformers. At Cambridge Instruments (1982-1991) I had to ask the >coil-winders on the shop floor to do it for me.
On Tue, 3 Sep 2024 15:30:13 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 3/09/2024 7:57 am, john larkin wrote:
On Mon, 2 Sep 2024 15:25:59 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 19:49:39 -0700, john larkinLo these forty year gone, I had this RF gig that involved making a lot of >>>> VHF LC oscillatior and filter protos.
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 17:43:32 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> >>>>>> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 13:17:03 -0700, john larkin
<jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 15:53:46 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> >>>>>>>> wrote:Most likely.
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:55:58 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to
make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today
than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are
doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually >>>>>>>>>>> more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver, >>>>>>>>>>> after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked. >>>>>>>>>>>
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully >>>>>>>>>>> reserved.
It better have a regular calibration schedule, or your semiconductor >>>>>>>>>> customers may give you the raised eyebrow.
Hmm. To be overly serious: With traceability to NIST (US) or NPL >>>>>>>>> (UK) or the like.
The trend in standards is to eliminate standards tied to a physical >>>>>>>>> object.
I have a Sharpie in hand. The barrel that is not covered by the cap >>>>>>>>> is a truncated cone, being 11.0 mm at the blunt end and 12.32 mm near >>>>>>>>> the cap, 73 mm away.
Mine is pretty cylindrical for the length of the coil. I expect that >>>>>>>> the operator's (ie, my) applied tension affects the radius too. >>>>>>>
That inductor sees 25 amps p-p, roughly a sawtooth, at 4 MHz. The >>>>>>>> Coilcraft parts that I tried all smoked, I guess from skin effect and >>>>>>>> proximity effect.
Actually, all that's needed is to specify an ideal geometric shape, >>>>>>>>> with tolerances, in the formal documentation.
Joe Gwinn
I'll have someone start on a SolidWorks model.
I bet you need the standoff, so the lossy FR4 material isn't too >>>>>>> close. That should be in the requirements as well.
The turns squish down into the gap-pad gunk, which is an OK heat
conductor. The PCB under the pad is a big copper pour, top and bottom, >>>>>> with a zillion thermal vias. There's more gap-pad on the underside of >>>>>> the board to dump heat into the baseplate.
At 4 MHz, skin depth is 32 microns, so most of the copper is wasted. >>>>>> That's why it gets so hot.
I tried three of the Coilcraft 1010VS parts in series, but they
smoked, probably skin+proximity effect. Maybe parallel would have >>>>>> been better.
I'd specify the coil dimensions, not the mandrel dimensions, which may >>>>>>> be provided as a helpful suggestion only.
Joe Gwinn
I could have a mandrel machined or 3D printed, to more accurately wind >>>>>> the inductor. The improvement would be mostly cosmetic.
Or choose a 12mm OD mandrel, and adjust elsewhere. The advantage of >>>>> 12mm is that it's a common size. so just buy the rod and use it.
.<https://www.mcmaster.com/products/shafts/shafts-2~/rotary-shafts-5/diameter~12-mm/>
Actually, the requirement is a certain inductance while handling a
4-MHz sawtooth at 25 Amps (p-p), so the frequency band is roughly 4 to >>>>> 20 MHz, to cover the first five harmonics Which harmonic causes the >>>>> most heating?
The dimensions et al are the construction details needed for Highland >>>>> to be able to replicate the part without your help.
I still design LC oscillators!
You may put them together, but it sounds as if you evolve them rather
than design them. And you'd have your own coil-winding gear if you did
much of it. As Phil did.
Design, simulate, build, test, evolve. That's how engineering usually
works.
At the bleeding edge of performance, unpredictable higher-order
effects happen.
Sometimes whacking the competition depends on
understanding and taming those effects. That's more fun to me than
pushing a bunch of equations around.
We had a hand-cranked coil winder that had a good selection of cylindrical >>>> steel mandrels with helical grooves to guide the wire, plus three or four >>>> sheets with tables of measured values for single-layer coils of various >>>> lengths. With a couple of training runs, one learned how hard to pull on >>>> the wire so that it would just spring free from the mandrel.
My Sharpie is a nice red marker when it's not winding coils.
That made it easy to make nice looking, high-Q coils for the inductance >>>> range of interest. Good Medicine.
At George Kent in Luton (1973-76) I got to wind my own small-signal
transformers. At Cambridge Instruments (1982-1991) I had to ask the
coil-winders on the shop floor to do it for me.
I used to have toroid winding machine. That's not actually a rational
thing to do.
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it >>>> is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to
make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today
than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are
doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually
more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver,
after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked.
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully
reserved.
https://www.highlandtechnology.com/Product/T850
The grey gap-pad gives it some extra cooling. The board has lots of
thermal vias down to the water-cooled baseplate.
On 01/09/2024 3:09 pm, john larkin wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill
Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice
than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>> make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work
when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>> than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up
stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are
doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel
capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually
more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver,
after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked.
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully
reserved.
https://www.highlandtechnology.com/Product/T850
The grey gap-pad gives it some extra cooling. The board has lots of
thermal vias down to the water-cooled baseplate.
That sharpie formed coil looks like the turn-to-turn air-spacing is done
by eyeball? Can you find a bolt or screw with right pitch and diameter
to make winding easier?
piglet
To get nice even spacing in hand-wound coils, I would pull on
the wire until it gave just a bit, then wind it tightly spaced
on a mandrel of appropriate size and finally, stick a toothpick,
or something like that, transversely through the turns, 'screwing'
it from one end to the other. My coils ended up looking perfectly
neat.
On 01/09/2024 3:09 pm, john larkin wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill Sloman >>>> <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice than it >>>>> is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>> make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>> than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are
doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually
more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver,
after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked.
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully
reserved.
https://www.highlandtechnology.com/Product/T850
The grey gap-pad gives it some extra cooling. The board has lots of
thermal vias down to the water-cooled baseplate.
That sharpie formed coil looks like the turn-to-turn air-spacing is done
by eyeball? Can you find a bolt or screw with right pitch and diameter
to make winding easier?
piglet
On 9/9/24 20:51, piglet wrote:
On 01/09/2024 3:09 pm, john larkin wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 17:45:46 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 30/08/2024 2:21 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:43:39 +1000) it happened Bill
Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in <vaq1f2$jdj$1@dont-email.me>:
It's lot easier and quicker to bread-board a circuit in LTSpice
than it
is to wire up a test circuit, but what that means is that you need to >>>>>> make fewer real circuits and they are a lot more likely to work
when tested.
That, on it's own, is enough to explain why labs look different today >>>>>> than they did in the dark ages.
All it explains is boeings falling apart and astronuts ending up
stuck at the ISS
and no moonlanding from the US, not even a probe.
Slimulations are _not_ realty and never will be.
But they can capture useful parts of reality, if you know what you are >>>> doing.
John Larkin's simulated inductors tend not to have any parallel
capacitance.
The trick is to know when it matters. ESR and core loss are usually
more important.
I designed this surface-mount inductor for my Pockels Cell driver,
after several tries using commercial parts. They all smoked.
It's wound on a specially marked Sharpie pen that we have carefully
reserved.
https://www.highlandtechnology.com/Product/T850
The grey gap-pad gives it some extra cooling. The board has lots of
thermal vias down to the water-cooled baseplate.
That sharpie formed coil looks like the turn-to-turn air-spacing is done
by eyeball? Can you find a bolt or screw with right pitch and diameter
to make winding easier?
piglet
It /does/ look a bit messy.
To get nice even spacing in hand-wound coils, I would pull on
the wire until it gave just a bit, then wind it tightly spaced
on a mandrel of appropriate size and finally, stick a toothpick,
or something like that, transversely through the turns, 'screwing'
it from one end to the other. My coils ended up looking perfectly
neat.
Jeroen Belleman
Anyone own the gds-1202b ?
Any good?
$350 at tequipment
Cheers
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 415 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 107:37:53 |
Calls: | 8,692 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 13,257 |
Messages: | 5,948,376 |