• BAW

    From john larkin@21:1/5 to All on Mon Jan 20 10:36:42 2025
    https://www.ti.com/product/CDC6C

    These are like 35 cents at 1K.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Hobbs@21:1/5 to john larkin on Mon Jan 20 19:52:03 2025
    john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
    https://www.ti.com/product/CDC6C

    These are like 35 cents at 1K.



    Of course a crystal oscillator is a BAW device too. ;)

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

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

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From john larkin@21:1/5 to pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical. on Mon Jan 20 16:26:10 2025
    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 19:52:03 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
    https://www.ti.com/product/CDC6C

    These are like 35 cents at 1K.



    Of course a crystal oscillator is a BAW device too. ;)

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    Don't get technical with me!

    I wonder if it's all silicon, a sort of bulk MEMS thing. The price is
    absurd. I guess every one has to be trimmed to frequency.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From john larkin@21:1/5 to jrwalliker@gmail.com on Mon Jan 20 16:22:02 2025
    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 20:19:09 +0000, John R Walliker
    <jrwalliker@gmail.com> wrote:

    On 20/01/2025 18:36, john larkin wrote:
    https://www.ti.com/product/CDC6C

    These are like 35 cents at 1K.

    They look very nice, but where do you see such low prices?
    Certainly not at Mouser or Digikey.

    John


    That's the 1K price on the TI page. Maybe 1/3 the price of a junky XO.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From john larkin@21:1/5 to john larkin on Tue Jan 21 10:56:49 2025
    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:22:02 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:

    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 20:19:09 +0000, John R Walliker
    <jrwalliker@gmail.com> wrote:

    On 20/01/2025 18:36, john larkin wrote:
    https://www.ti.com/product/CDC6C

    These are like 35 cents at 1K.

    They look very nice, but where do you see such low prices?
    Certainly not at Mouser or Digikey.

    John


    That's the 1K price on the TI page. Maybe 1/3 the price of a junky XO.



    This has got to crush the XO business. It looks like it's a single
    chip that's encapsulated like any other IC. XOs are complex and need
    hermetic cans.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Buzz McCool@21:1/5 to john larkin on Tue Jan 21 15:52:05 2025
    On 1/21/2025 10:56 AM, john larkin wrote:

    This has got to crush the XO business. It looks like it's a single
    chip that's encapsulated like any other IC. XOs are complex and need
    hermetic cans.


    Looking through this BAW app note https://www.ti.com/lit/an/snaa362/snaa362.pdf, I couldn't tell BAW
    devices would work at high altitude or in a vacuum. I have to ask
    because the "acoustic" in the name makes me want to make sure that some
    sort of atmosphere isn't needed.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bill Sloman@21:1/5 to Buzz McCool on Wed Jan 22 15:30:48 2025
    On 22/01/2025 10:52 am, Buzz McCool wrote:
    On 1/21/2025 10:56 AM, john larkin wrote:

    This has got to crush the XO business. It looks like it's a single
    chip that's encapsulated like any other IC. XOs are complex and need
    hermetic cans.

    XOs used to use handmounted crystals. There's nothing all that
    complicated about them, but low volume manufacture tends to be a bit
    knife and fork.

    Looking through this BAW app note https://www.ti.com/lit/an/snaa362/snaa362.pdf, I couldn't tell BAW
    devices would work at high altitude or in a vacuum. I have to ask
    because the "acoustic" in the name makes me want to make sure that some
    sort of atmosphere isn't needed.

    As far as I can see these are surface acoustic wave devices. Integrated circuits are pretty well encapsulated. This one probably dumps any heat
    it generates into the board it is mounted on, which might run a bit
    warmer in a vacuum, but that would be the only risk I can see.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeroen Belleman@21:1/5 to John R Walliker on Wed Jan 22 10:36:06 2025
    On 1/22/25 09:38, John R Walliker wrote:
    On 22/01/2025 04:30, Bill Sloman wrote:
    On 22/01/2025 10:52 am, Buzz McCool wrote:
    On 1/21/2025 10:56 AM, john larkin wrote:

    This has got to crush the XO business. It looks like it's a single
    chip that's encapsulated like any other IC. XOs are complex and need
    hermetic cans.

    XOs used to use handmounted crystals. There's nothing all that
    complicated about them, but low volume manufacture tends to be a bit
    knife and fork.

    Looking through this BAW app note
    https://www.ti.com/lit/an/snaa362/snaa362.pdf, I couldn't tell BAW
    devices would work at high altitude or in a vacuum. I have to ask
    because the "acoustic" in the name makes me want to make sure that
    some sort of atmosphere isn't needed.

    As far as I can see these are surface acoustic wave devices.
    Integrated circuits are pretty well encapsulated. This one probably
    dumps any heat it generates into the board it is mounted on, which
    might run a bit warmer in a vacuum, but that would be the only risk I
    can see.


    It does look more like bulk acoustic waves - hence the name!  There
    is no cavity inside, so they should be immune to the effects of
    helium, unlike the  oscillators that use MEMS resonators where it
    appears that helium can diffuse through the silicon to clog up
    the vacuum cavity.
    Phase noise performance looks excellent as is the temperature
    stability.
    John


    You can look up the patent: <https://patents.google.com/patent/US20070285191A1/en>.

    Apparently the resonator is built up layer by layer, first
    the multi-layer Bragg reflector, then the bottom resonator
    electrode, the resonator material itself, and finally the
    top electrode. The patent does not mention a top reflector,
    so such a resonator would need a bit of free space above.

    The patent text is voluntarily vague about the materials
    used for the reflector and resonator layers. They mention
    lots of examples, without clearly saying what they really
    used. I'd expect that most examples don't work.

    Jeroen Belleman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From john larkin@21:1/5 to jeroen@nospam.please on Wed Jan 22 08:27:40 2025
    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 10:36:06 +0100, Jeroen Belleman
    <jeroen@nospam.please> wrote:

    On 1/22/25 09:38, John R Walliker wrote:
    On 22/01/2025 04:30, Bill Sloman wrote:
    On 22/01/2025 10:52 am, Buzz McCool wrote:
    On 1/21/2025 10:56 AM, john larkin wrote:

    This has got to crush the XO business. It looks like it's a single
    chip that's encapsulated like any other IC. XOs are complex and need >>>>> hermetic cans.

    XOs used to use handmounted crystals. There's nothing all that
    complicated about them, but low volume manufacture tends to be a bit
    knife and fork.

    Looking through this BAW app note
    https://www.ti.com/lit/an/snaa362/snaa362.pdf, I couldn't tell BAW
    devices would work at high altitude or in a vacuum. I have to ask
    because the "acoustic" in the name makes me want to make sure that
    some sort of atmosphere isn't needed.

    As far as I can see these are surface acoustic wave devices.
    Integrated circuits are pretty well encapsulated. This one probably
    dumps any heat it generates into the board it is mounted on, which
    might run a bit warmer in a vacuum, but that would be the only risk I
    can see.


    It does look more like bulk acoustic waves - hence the name!  There
    is no cavity inside, so they should be immune to the effects of
    helium, unlike the  oscillators that use MEMS resonators where it
    appears that helium can diffuse through the silicon to clog up
    the vacuum cavity.
    Phase noise performance looks excellent as is the temperature
    stability.
    John


    You can look up the patent: ><https://patents.google.com/patent/US20070285191A1/en>.

    Apparently the resonator is built up layer by layer, first
    the multi-layer Bragg reflector, then the bottom resonator
    electrode, the resonator material itself, and finally the
    top electrode. The patent does not mention a top reflector,
    so such a resonator would need a bit of free space above.

    The patent text is voluntarily vague about the materials
    used for the reflector and resonator layers. They mention
    lots of examples, without clearly saying what they really
    used. I'd expect that most examples don't work.

    Jeroen Belleman

    The next step might be to have BAWs on uPs or FPGAs or watch circuits
    or something, super accurate clocks instead of external XOs or bad RC oscillators.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Cursitor Doom@21:1/5 to john larkin on Wed Jan 22 17:59:47 2025
    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:26:10 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:

    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 19:52:03 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs ><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
    https://www.ti.com/product/CDC6C

    These are like 35 cents at 1K.



    Of course a crystal oscillator is a BAW device too. ;)

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    Don't get technical with me!

    I wonder if it's all silicon, a sort of bulk MEMS thing. The price is
    absurd. I guess every one has to be trimmed to frequency.

    When they quote jitter at 0.1ps, does that translate to phase noise?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Cursitor Doom@21:1/5 to john larkin on Wed Jan 22 18:07:06 2025
    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:26:10 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:

    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 19:52:03 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs ><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
    https://www.ti.com/product/CDC6C

    These are like 35 cents at 1K.



    Of course a crystal oscillator is a BAW device too. ;)

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    Don't get technical with me!

    I wonder if it's all silicon, a sort of bulk MEMS thing. The price is
    absurd. I guess every one has to be trimmed to frequency.

    Phil's pretty good in that regard. There are some people who see
    everything in terms of equations and use higher mathematics to explain
    their function. A xtal oscillator would provide a very simple example
    for such persons to exhibit this (most unfortunate) character trait.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From john larkin@21:1/5 to All on Wed Jan 22 10:55:39 2025
    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 18:07:06 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
    wrote:

    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:26:10 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:

    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 19:52:03 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs >><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
    https://www.ti.com/product/CDC6C

    These are like 35 cents at 1K.



    Of course a crystal oscillator is a BAW device too. ;)

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    Don't get technical with me!

    I wonder if it's all silicon, a sort of bulk MEMS thing. The price is >>absurd. I guess every one has to be trimmed to frequency.

    Phil's pretty good in that regard. There are some people who see
    everything in terms of equations and use higher mathematics to explain
    their function. A xtal oscillator would provide a very simple example
    for such persons to exhibit this (most unfortunate) character trait.

    Phil is one of those people who can see equations in motion. I can't.
    I operate on instinct and simulation.

    We have brainstormed on some pretty important projects and generated
    some ideas that influence most everyone here. The skills are
    complementary.

    His book is good to have if you design electro-optics or low-level
    analog stuff.

    https://www.amazon.com/Building-Electro-Optical-Systems-Making-Applied/dp/1119438977/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?crid=3M9PG1T68443R&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.xIlGO_AWviZZRYMlHFKJuNzKnLc8MDBpUjgE7RsYsDk.WiFCuc8GjBlGtPimMCFx0kOu5NieBv0TzXDNCokyLQM&dib_tag=se&keywords=phil+
    hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0

    Be cautioned that there are equations.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Cursitor Doom@21:1/5 to All on Thu Jan 23 00:55:25 2025
    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 10:55:39 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>
    wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 18:07:06 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
    wrote:

    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:26:10 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:

    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 19:52:03 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs >>><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
    https://www.ti.com/product/CDC6C

    These are like 35 cents at 1K.



    Of course a crystal oscillator is a BAW device too. ;)

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    Don't get technical with me!

    I wonder if it's all silicon, a sort of bulk MEMS thing. The price is >>>absurd. I guess every one has to be trimmed to frequency.

    Phil's pretty good in that regard. There are some people who see
    everything in terms of equations and use higher mathematics to explain >>their function. A xtal oscillator would provide a very simple example
    for such persons to exhibit this (most unfortunate) character trait.

    Phil is one of those people who can see equations in motion. I can't.
    I operate on instinct and simulation.

    We have brainstormed on some pretty important projects and generated
    some ideas that influence most everyone here. The skills are
    complementary.

    His book is good to have if you design electro-optics or low-level
    analog stuff.

    https://www.amazon.com/Building-Electro-Optical-Systems-Making-Applied/dp/1119438977/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?crid=3M9PG1T68443R&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.xIlGO_AWviZZRYMlHFKJuNzKnLc8MDBpUjgE7RsYsDk.WiFCuc8GjBlGtPimMCFx0kOu5NieBv0TzXDNCokyLQM&dib_tag=se&keywords=phil+
    hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0

    Be cautioned that there are equations.

    Equations are fine (unavoidable anyway) in this science. But it's not
    helpful in the first instance to gain an intuitive idea of how
    something works - unless you're one of the people I mentioned above.
    This is my main issue with Tom Lee's otherwise superb book, 'Planar
    Microwave Engineering' where he typically launches into higher
    mathematics almost from the get-go.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From john larkin@21:1/5 to All on Wed Jan 22 17:09:29 2025
    On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 00:55:25 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
    wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 10:55:39 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>
    wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 18:07:06 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>wrote:

    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:26:10 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:

    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 19:52:03 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs >>>><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
    https://www.ti.com/product/CDC6C

    These are like 35 cents at 1K.



    Of course a crystal oscillator is a BAW device too. ;)

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    Don't get technical with me!

    I wonder if it's all silicon, a sort of bulk MEMS thing. The price is >>>>absurd. I guess every one has to be trimmed to frequency.

    Phil's pretty good in that regard. There are some people who see >>>everything in terms of equations and use higher mathematics to explain >>>their function. A xtal oscillator would provide a very simple example
    for such persons to exhibit this (most unfortunate) character trait.

    Phil is one of those people who can see equations in motion. I can't.
    I operate on instinct and simulation.

    We have brainstormed on some pretty important projects and generated
    some ideas that influence most everyone here. The skills are
    complementary.

    His book is good to have if you design electro-optics or low-level
    analog stuff.
    https://www.amazon.com/Building-Electro-Optical-Systems-Making-Applied/dp/1119438977/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?crid=3M9PG1T68443R&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.xIlGO_AWviZZRYMlHFKJuNzKnLc8MDBpUjgE7RsYsDk.WiFCuc8GjBlGtPimMCFx0kOu5NieBv0TzXDNCokyLQM&dib_tag=se&keywords=phil+
    hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0

    Be cautioned that there are equations.

    Equations are fine (unavoidable anyway) in this science. But it's not
    helpful in the first instance to gain an intuitive idea of how
    something works - unless you're one of the people I mentioned above.
    This is my main issue with Tom Lee's otherwise superb book, 'Planar
    Microwave Engineering' where he typically launches into higher
    mathematics almost from the get-go.

    I have that book. It's mostly useless. One equation will be a full
    page of fine print, and then the next page turns out to be one term of
    that equation.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Cursitor Doom@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jan 25 00:41:39 2025
    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 17:09:29 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>
    wrote:

    On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 00:55:25 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
    wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 10:55:39 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 18:07:06 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>>wrote:

    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:26:10 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:

    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 19:52:03 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs >>>>><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
    https://www.ti.com/product/CDC6C

    These are like 35 cents at 1K.



    Of course a crystal oscillator is a BAW device too. ;)

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    Don't get technical with me!

    I wonder if it's all silicon, a sort of bulk MEMS thing. The price is >>>>>absurd. I guess every one has to be trimmed to frequency.

    Phil's pretty good in that regard. There are some people who see >>>>everything in terms of equations and use higher mathematics to explain >>>>their function. A xtal oscillator would provide a very simple example >>>>for such persons to exhibit this (most unfortunate) character trait.

    Phil is one of those people who can see equations in motion. I can't.
    I operate on instinct and simulation.

    We have brainstormed on some pretty important projects and generated
    some ideas that influence most everyone here. The skills are >>>complementary.

    His book is good to have if you design electro-optics or low-level
    analog stuff.
    https://www.amazon.com/Building-Electro-Optical-Systems-Making-Applied/dp/1119438977/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?crid=3M9PG1T68443R&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.xIlGO_AWviZZRYMlHFKJuNzKnLc8MDBpUjgE7RsYsDk.WiFCuc8GjBlGtPimMCFx0kOu5NieBv0TzXDNCokyLQM&dib_tag=se&keywords=phil+
    hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0

    Be cautioned that there are equations.

    Equations are fine (unavoidable anyway) in this science. But it's not >>helpful in the first instance to gain an intuitive idea of how
    something works - unless you're one of the people I mentioned above.
    This is my main issue with Tom Lee's otherwise superb book, 'Planar >>Microwave Engineering' where he typically launches into higher
    mathematics almost from the get-go.

    I have that book. It's mostly useless. One equation will be a full
    page of fine print, and then the next page turns out to be one term of
    that equation.


    Indeed. Not only that, but the mathematics is unfamiliar. I know most
    of the equations for transmission line theory by sight, but the ones
    Tom cites are completely different and tend to use a lot of Greek
    letters which relate to physical constants I've never even heard of.
    On the other hand, where he doesn't use unfamiliar mathematics,
    there's a *lot* in there I haven't seen any any other RF books which I
    find really interesting.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From john larkin@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jan 24 17:46:24 2025
    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 00:41:39 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
    wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 17:09:29 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>
    wrote:

    On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 00:55:25 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 10:55:39 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 18:07:06 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>>>wrote:

    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:26:10 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:

    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 19:52:03 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs >>>>>><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
    https://www.ti.com/product/CDC6C

    These are like 35 cents at 1K.



    Of course a crystal oscillator is a BAW device too. ;)

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    Don't get technical with me!

    I wonder if it's all silicon, a sort of bulk MEMS thing. The price is >>>>>>absurd. I guess every one has to be trimmed to frequency.

    Phil's pretty good in that regard. There are some people who see >>>>>everything in terms of equations and use higher mathematics to explain >>>>>their function. A xtal oscillator would provide a very simple example >>>>>for such persons to exhibit this (most unfortunate) character trait.

    Phil is one of those people who can see equations in motion. I can't.
    I operate on instinct and simulation.

    We have brainstormed on some pretty important projects and generated >>>>some ideas that influence most everyone here. The skills are >>>>complementary.

    His book is good to have if you design electro-optics or low-level >>>>analog stuff.
    https://www.amazon.com/Building-Electro-Optical-Systems-Making-Applied/dp/1119438977/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?crid=3M9PG1T68443R&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.xIlGO_AWviZZRYMlHFKJuNzKnLc8MDBpUjgE7RsYsDk.WiFCuc8GjBlGtPimMCFx0kOu5NieBv0TzXDNCokyLQM&dib_tag=se&keywords=phil+
    hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0

    Be cautioned that there are equations.

    Equations are fine (unavoidable anyway) in this science. But it's not >>>helpful in the first instance to gain an intuitive idea of how
    something works - unless you're one of the people I mentioned above.
    This is my main issue with Tom Lee's otherwise superb book, 'Planar >>>Microwave Engineering' where he typically launches into higher >>>mathematics almost from the get-go.

    I have that book. It's mostly useless. One equation will be a full
    page of fine print, and then the next page turns out to be one term of
    that equation.


    Indeed. Not only that, but the mathematics is unfamiliar. I know most
    of the equations for transmission line theory by sight, but the ones
    Tom cites are completely different and tend to use a lot of Greek
    letters which relate to physical constants I've never even heard of.
    On the other hand, where he doesn't use unfamiliar mathematics,
    there's a *lot* in there I haven't seen any any other RF books which I
    find really interesting.

    It's easier to design with a geometry for which there are good
    calculator programs.

    We have used ATLC to do e/m simulations of transmission line cases.

    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/6kdejmbybk4u5mq1xjait/Edge_alone_4.jpg?rlkey=volom4afazo44o6cpedgl89ge&raw=1

    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/82ysq5m13br8ahubdi4z7/Rob1.jpg?rlkey=4bnm3uu5otfolka9gqsov5tel&raw=1

    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ogfqs1m93mf1uw80hwkpi/Rob_51_ohms.jpg?rlkey=u4q3fumbzwmpojck5ih88c45q&raw=1

    That one butchers a multilayer PCB stack to get a good match with a
    cheap edge-launch SMA connector.

    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/n7hlatrxdoiywfkvebqj9/DSC01527.JPG?rlkey=hycib2nrk4zv662mu5vndy23g&raw=1

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Cursitor Doom@21:1/5 to john larkin on Sat Jan 25 13:55:05 2025
    On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 17:46:24 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:

    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 00:41:39 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
    wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 17:09:29 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>wrote:

    On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 00:55:25 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>>wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 10:55:39 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>>wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 18:07:06 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>>>>wrote:

    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:26:10 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote: >>>>>>
    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 19:52:03 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs >>>>>>><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
    https://www.ti.com/product/CDC6C

    These are like 35 cents at 1K.



    Of course a crystal oscillator is a BAW device too. ;)

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    Don't get technical with me!

    I wonder if it's all silicon, a sort of bulk MEMS thing. The price is >>>>>>>absurd. I guess every one has to be trimmed to frequency.

    Phil's pretty good in that regard. There are some people who see >>>>>>everything in terms of equations and use higher mathematics to explain >>>>>>their function. A xtal oscillator would provide a very simple example >>>>>>for such persons to exhibit this (most unfortunate) character trait. >>>>>
    Phil is one of those people who can see equations in motion. I can't. >>>>>I operate on instinct and simulation.

    We have brainstormed on some pretty important projects and generated >>>>>some ideas that influence most everyone here. The skills are >>>>>complementary.

    His book is good to have if you design electro-optics or low-level >>>>>analog stuff.
    https://www.amazon.com/Building-Electro-Optical-Systems-Making-Applied/dp/1119438977/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?crid=3M9PG1T68443R&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.xIlGO_AWviZZRYMlHFKJuNzKnLc8MDBpUjgE7RsYsDk.WiFCuc8GjBlGtPimMCFx0kOu5NieBv0TzXDNCokyLQM&dib_tag=se&keywords=
    phil+hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0

    Be cautioned that there are equations.

    Equations are fine (unavoidable anyway) in this science. But it's not >>>>helpful in the first instance to gain an intuitive idea of how >>>>something works - unless you're one of the people I mentioned above. >>>>This is my main issue with Tom Lee's otherwise superb book, 'Planar >>>>Microwave Engineering' where he typically launches into higher >>>>mathematics almost from the get-go.

    I have that book. It's mostly useless. One equation will be a full
    page of fine print, and then the next page turns out to be one term of >>>that equation.


    Indeed. Not only that, but the mathematics is unfamiliar. I know most
    of the equations for transmission line theory by sight, but the ones
    Tom cites are completely different and tend to use a lot of Greek
    letters which relate to physical constants I've never even heard of.
    On the other hand, where he doesn't use unfamiliar mathematics,
    there's a *lot* in there I haven't seen any any other RF books which I
    find really interesting.

    It's easier to design with a geometry for which there are good
    calculator programs.

    We have used ATLC to do e/m simulations of transmission line cases.

    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/6kdejmbybk4u5mq1xjait/Edge_alone_4.jpg?rlkey=volom4afazo44o6cpedgl89ge&raw=1

    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/82ysq5m13br8ahubdi4z7/Rob1.jpg?rlkey=4bnm3uu5otfolka9gqsov5tel&raw=1

    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ogfqs1m93mf1uw80hwkpi/Rob_51_ohms.jpg?rlkey=u4q3fumbzwmpojck5ih88c45q&raw=1

    That one butchers a multilayer PCB stack to get a good match with a
    cheap edge-launch SMA connector.

    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/n7hlatrxdoiywfkvebqj9/DSC01527.JPG?rlkey=hycib2nrk4zv662mu5vndy23g&raw=1


    I had to google ATLC simulator as I've not heard of it before. Anyway,
    these plots are all very interesting, but you have no way of verifying
    their accuracy AFAICS.
    You mentioned a while ago you had a good source for cheap but
    reasonable quality edge connectors (Aliexpress?) Can you post a link
    to them please?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From john larkin@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jan 25 09:05:42 2025
    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 13:55:05 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
    wrote:

    On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 17:46:24 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:

    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 00:41:39 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 17:09:29 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>wrote:

    On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 00:55:25 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>>>wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 10:55:39 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>>>wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 18:07:06 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>>>>>wrote:

    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:26:10 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 19:52:03 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs >>>>>>>><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
    https://www.ti.com/product/CDC6C

    These are like 35 cents at 1K.



    Of course a crystal oscillator is a BAW device too. ;)

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    Don't get technical with me!

    I wonder if it's all silicon, a sort of bulk MEMS thing. The price is >>>>>>>>absurd. I guess every one has to be trimmed to frequency.

    Phil's pretty good in that regard. There are some people who see >>>>>>>everything in terms of equations and use higher mathematics to explain >>>>>>>their function. A xtal oscillator would provide a very simple example >>>>>>>for such persons to exhibit this (most unfortunate) character trait. >>>>>>
    Phil is one of those people who can see equations in motion. I can't. >>>>>>I operate on instinct and simulation.

    We have brainstormed on some pretty important projects and generated >>>>>>some ideas that influence most everyone here. The skills are >>>>>>complementary.

    His book is good to have if you design electro-optics or low-level >>>>>>analog stuff.
    https://www.amazon.com/Building-Electro-Optical-Systems-Making-Applied/dp/1119438977/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?crid=3M9PG1T68443R&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.xIlGO_AWviZZRYMlHFKJuNzKnLc8MDBpUjgE7RsYsDk.WiFCuc8GjBlGtPimMCFx0kOu5NieBv0TzXDNCokyLQM&dib_tag=se&keywords=
    phil+hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0

    Be cautioned that there are equations.

    Equations are fine (unavoidable anyway) in this science. But it's not >>>>>helpful in the first instance to gain an intuitive idea of how >>>>>something works - unless you're one of the people I mentioned above. >>>>>This is my main issue with Tom Lee's otherwise superb book, 'Planar >>>>>Microwave Engineering' where he typically launches into higher >>>>>mathematics almost from the get-go.

    I have that book. It's mostly useless. One equation will be a full
    page of fine print, and then the next page turns out to be one term of >>>>that equation.


    Indeed. Not only that, but the mathematics is unfamiliar. I know most
    of the equations for transmission line theory by sight, but the ones
    Tom cites are completely different and tend to use a lot of Greek
    letters which relate to physical constants I've never even heard of.
    On the other hand, where he doesn't use unfamiliar mathematics,
    there's a *lot* in there I haven't seen any any other RF books which I >>>find really interesting.

    It's easier to design with a geometry for which there are good
    calculator programs.

    We have used ATLC to do e/m simulations of transmission line cases.
    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/6kdejmbybk4u5mq1xjait/Edge_alone_4.jpg?rlkey=volom4afazo44o6cpedgl89ge&raw=1
    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/82ysq5m13br8ahubdi4z7/Rob1.jpg?rlkey=4bnm3uu5otfolka9gqsov5tel&raw=1
    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ogfqs1m93mf1uw80hwkpi/Rob_51_ohms.jpg?rlkey=u4q3fumbzwmpojck5ih88c45q&raw=1

    That one butchers a multilayer PCB stack to get a good match with a
    cheap edge-launch SMA connector.
    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/n7hlatrxdoiywfkvebqj9/DSC01527.JPG?rlkey=hycib2nrk4zv662mu5vndy23g&raw=1


    I had to google ATLC simulator as I've not heard of it before. Anyway,
    these plots are all very interesting, but you have no way of verifying
    their accuracy AFAICS.
    You mentioned a while ago you had a good source for cheap but
    reasonable quality edge connectors (Aliexpress?) Can you post a link
    to them please?

    ATLC2 is a bit easier to drive.

    The way to verify a sim is to make a board and TDR it. They are
    usually close.

    The one in the pic above is from Shining Star.

    SHINING STAR 19521000

    We use

    SHINING STAR 24521116

    too, a bit longer part. Both about $1.90.


    I've bought a bunch of similar ones from Amazon and they have been
    great. But it's our general policy to not use Amazon parts in
    production.

    Here's a 4-layer proto board that let us TDR the connectors and the
    relay.

    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/bvcnqnvb4euc7pqw7wzab/DSC06884.JPG?rlkey=q1op81z1bumkfxoq8d5mtzi91&raw=1

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Cursitor Doom@21:1/5 to john larkin on Sat Jan 25 19:36:19 2025
    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 09:05:42 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:

    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 13:55:05 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
    wrote:

    On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 17:46:24 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:

    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 00:41:39 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>>wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 17:09:29 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>>wrote:

    On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 00:55:25 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>>>>wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 10:55:39 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>>>>wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 18:07:06 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>>>>>>wrote:

    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:26:10 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 19:52:03 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs >>>>>>>>><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
    https://www.ti.com/product/CDC6C

    These are like 35 cents at 1K.



    Of course a crystal oscillator is a BAW device too. ;)

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    Don't get technical with me!

    I wonder if it's all silicon, a sort of bulk MEMS thing. The price is >>>>>>>>>absurd. I guess every one has to be trimmed to frequency.

    Phil's pretty good in that regard. There are some people who see >>>>>>>>everything in terms of equations and use higher mathematics to explain >>>>>>>>their function. A xtal oscillator would provide a very simple example >>>>>>>>for such persons to exhibit this (most unfortunate) character trait. >>>>>>>
    Phil is one of those people who can see equations in motion. I can't. >>>>>>>I operate on instinct and simulation.

    We have brainstormed on some pretty important projects and generated >>>>>>>some ideas that influence most everyone here. The skills are >>>>>>>complementary.

    His book is good to have if you design electro-optics or low-level >>>>>>>analog stuff.
    https://www.amazon.com/Building-Electro-Optical-Systems-Making-Applied/dp/1119438977/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?crid=3M9PG1T68443R&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.xIlGO_AWviZZRYMlHFKJuNzKnLc8MDBpUjgE7RsYsDk.WiFCuc8GjBlGtPimMCFx0kOu5NieBv0TzXDNCokyLQM&dib_tag=se&keywords=
    phil+hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0

    Be cautioned that there are equations.

    Equations are fine (unavoidable anyway) in this science. But it's not >>>>>>helpful in the first instance to gain an intuitive idea of how >>>>>>something works - unless you're one of the people I mentioned above. >>>>>>This is my main issue with Tom Lee's otherwise superb book, 'Planar >>>>>>Microwave Engineering' where he typically launches into higher >>>>>>mathematics almost from the get-go.

    I have that book. It's mostly useless. One equation will be a full >>>>>page of fine print, and then the next page turns out to be one term of >>>>>that equation.


    Indeed. Not only that, but the mathematics is unfamiliar. I know most >>>>of the equations for transmission line theory by sight, but the ones >>>>Tom cites are completely different and tend to use a lot of Greek >>>>letters which relate to physical constants I've never even heard of.
    On the other hand, where he doesn't use unfamiliar mathematics,
    there's a *lot* in there I haven't seen any any other RF books which I >>>>find really interesting.

    It's easier to design with a geometry for which there are good
    calculator programs.

    We have used ATLC to do e/m simulations of transmission line cases.
    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/6kdejmbybk4u5mq1xjait/Edge_alone_4.jpg?rlkey=volom4afazo44o6cpedgl89ge&raw=1
    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/82ysq5m13br8ahubdi4z7/Rob1.jpg?rlkey=4bnm3uu5otfolka9gqsov5tel&raw=1
    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ogfqs1m93mf1uw80hwkpi/Rob_51_ohms.jpg?rlkey=u4q3fumbzwmpojck5ih88c45q&raw=1

    That one butchers a multilayer PCB stack to get a good match with a
    cheap edge-launch SMA connector.
    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/n7hlatrxdoiywfkvebqj9/DSC01527.JPG?rlkey=hycib2nrk4zv662mu5vndy23g&raw=1


    I had to google ATLC simulator as I've not heard of it before. Anyway, >>these plots are all very interesting, but you have no way of verifying >>their accuracy AFAICS.
    You mentioned a while ago you had a good source for cheap but
    reasonable quality edge connectors (Aliexpress?) Can you post a link
    to them please?

    ATLC2 is a bit easier to drive.

    The way to verify a sim is to make a board and TDR it. They are
    usually close.

    The one in the pic above is from Shining Star.

    SHINING STAR 19521000

    We use

    SHINING STAR 24521116

    too, a bit longer part. Both about $1.90.


    I've bought a bunch of similar ones from Amazon and they have been
    great. But it's our general policy to not use Amazon parts in
    production.

    Here's a 4-layer proto board that let us TDR the connectors and the
    relay.

    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/bvcnqnvb4euc7pqw7wzab/DSC06884.JPG?rlkey=q1op81z1bumkfxoq8d5mtzi91&raw=1


    Forgot to mention (and sorry if I've asked you this before but you
    have to allow me some extra forbearance on account of my age) - what
    do you use for your TDR?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Cursitor Doom@21:1/5 to john larkin on Sat Jan 25 19:33:15 2025
    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 09:05:42 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:

    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 13:55:05 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
    wrote:

    On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 17:46:24 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:

    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 00:41:39 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>>wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 17:09:29 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>>wrote:

    On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 00:55:25 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>>>>wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 10:55:39 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>>>>wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 18:07:06 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>>>>>>wrote:

    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:26:10 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 19:52:03 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs >>>>>>>>><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
    https://www.ti.com/product/CDC6C

    These are like 35 cents at 1K.



    Of course a crystal oscillator is a BAW device too. ;)

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    Don't get technical with me!

    I wonder if it's all silicon, a sort of bulk MEMS thing. The price is >>>>>>>>>absurd. I guess every one has to be trimmed to frequency.

    Phil's pretty good in that regard. There are some people who see >>>>>>>>everything in terms of equations and use higher mathematics to explain >>>>>>>>their function. A xtal oscillator would provide a very simple example >>>>>>>>for such persons to exhibit this (most unfortunate) character trait. >>>>>>>
    Phil is one of those people who can see equations in motion. I can't. >>>>>>>I operate on instinct and simulation.

    We have brainstormed on some pretty important projects and generated >>>>>>>some ideas that influence most everyone here. The skills are >>>>>>>complementary.

    His book is good to have if you design electro-optics or low-level >>>>>>>analog stuff.
    https://www.amazon.com/Building-Electro-Optical-Systems-Making-Applied/dp/1119438977/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?crid=3M9PG1T68443R&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.xIlGO_AWviZZRYMlHFKJuNzKnLc8MDBpUjgE7RsYsDk.WiFCuc8GjBlGtPimMCFx0kOu5NieBv0TzXDNCokyLQM&dib_tag=se&keywords=
    phil+hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0

    Be cautioned that there are equations.

    Equations are fine (unavoidable anyway) in this science. But it's not >>>>>>helpful in the first instance to gain an intuitive idea of how >>>>>>something works - unless you're one of the people I mentioned above. >>>>>>This is my main issue with Tom Lee's otherwise superb book, 'Planar >>>>>>Microwave Engineering' where he typically launches into higher >>>>>>mathematics almost from the get-go.

    I have that book. It's mostly useless. One equation will be a full >>>>>page of fine print, and then the next page turns out to be one term of >>>>>that equation.


    Indeed. Not only that, but the mathematics is unfamiliar. I know most >>>>of the equations for transmission line theory by sight, but the ones >>>>Tom cites are completely different and tend to use a lot of Greek >>>>letters which relate to physical constants I've never even heard of.
    On the other hand, where he doesn't use unfamiliar mathematics,
    there's a *lot* in there I haven't seen any any other RF books which I >>>>find really interesting.

    It's easier to design with a geometry for which there are good
    calculator programs.

    We have used ATLC to do e/m simulations of transmission line cases.
    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/6kdejmbybk4u5mq1xjait/Edge_alone_4.jpg?rlkey=volom4afazo44o6cpedgl89ge&raw=1
    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/82ysq5m13br8ahubdi4z7/Rob1.jpg?rlkey=4bnm3uu5otfolka9gqsov5tel&raw=1
    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ogfqs1m93mf1uw80hwkpi/Rob_51_ohms.jpg?rlkey=u4q3fumbzwmpojck5ih88c45q&raw=1

    That one butchers a multilayer PCB stack to get a good match with a
    cheap edge-launch SMA connector.
    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/n7hlatrxdoiywfkvebqj9/DSC01527.JPG?rlkey=hycib2nrk4zv662mu5vndy23g&raw=1


    I had to google ATLC simulator as I've not heard of it before. Anyway, >>these plots are all very interesting, but you have no way of verifying >>their accuracy AFAICS.
    You mentioned a while ago you had a good source for cheap but
    reasonable quality edge connectors (Aliexpress?) Can you post a link
    to them please?

    ATLC2 is a bit easier to drive.

    The way to verify a sim is to make a board and TDR it. They are
    usually close.

    The one in the pic above is from Shining Star.

    Yeah, that's it, I remember now.

    SHINING STAR 19521000

    We use

    SHINING STAR 24521116

    too, a bit longer part. Both about $1.90.

    Yeah, I made that mistake once too. A longer shank is definitely
    desirable.

    I've bought a bunch of similar ones from Amazon and they have been
    great. But it's our general policy to not use Amazon parts in
    production.

    Here's a 4-layer proto board that let us TDR the connectors and the
    relay.

    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/bvcnqnvb4euc7pqw7wzab/DSC06884.JPG?rlkey=q1op81z1bumkfxoq8d5mtzi91&raw=1

    Neat! Who do you use for your board fab?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From john larkin@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jan 25 15:08:36 2025
    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 19:36:19 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
    wrote:

    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 09:05:42 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:

    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 13:55:05 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>wrote:

    On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 17:46:24 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:

    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 00:41:39 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>>>wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 17:09:29 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>>>wrote:

    On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 00:55:25 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>>>>>wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 10:55:39 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>>>>>wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 18:07:06 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>>>>>>>wrote:

    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:26:10 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 19:52:03 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs >>>>>>>>>><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
    https://www.ti.com/product/CDC6C

    These are like 35 cents at 1K.



    Of course a crystal oscillator is a BAW device too. ;)

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    Don't get technical with me!

    I wonder if it's all silicon, a sort of bulk MEMS thing. The price is >>>>>>>>>>absurd. I guess every one has to be trimmed to frequency.

    Phil's pretty good in that regard. There are some people who see >>>>>>>>>everything in terms of equations and use higher mathematics to explain >>>>>>>>>their function. A xtal oscillator would provide a very simple example >>>>>>>>>for such persons to exhibit this (most unfortunate) character trait. >>>>>>>>
    Phil is one of those people who can see equations in motion. I can't. >>>>>>>>I operate on instinct and simulation.

    We have brainstormed on some pretty important projects and generated >>>>>>>>some ideas that influence most everyone here. The skills are >>>>>>>>complementary.

    His book is good to have if you design electro-optics or low-level >>>>>>>>analog stuff.
    https://www.amazon.com/Building-Electro-Optical-Systems-Making-Applied/dp/1119438977/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?crid=3M9PG1T68443R&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.xIlGO_AWviZZRYMlHFKJuNzKnLc8MDBpUjgE7RsYsDk.WiFCuc8GjBlGtPimMCFx0kOu5NieBv0TzXDNCokyLQM&dib_tag=se&keywords=
    phil+hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0

    Be cautioned that there are equations.

    Equations are fine (unavoidable anyway) in this science. But it's not >>>>>>>helpful in the first instance to gain an intuitive idea of how >>>>>>>something works - unless you're one of the people I mentioned above. >>>>>>>This is my main issue with Tom Lee's otherwise superb book, 'Planar >>>>>>>Microwave Engineering' where he typically launches into higher >>>>>>>mathematics almost from the get-go.

    I have that book. It's mostly useless. One equation will be a full >>>>>>page of fine print, and then the next page turns out to be one term of >>>>>>that equation.


    Indeed. Not only that, but the mathematics is unfamiliar. I know most >>>>>of the equations for transmission line theory by sight, but the ones >>>>>Tom cites are completely different and tend to use a lot of Greek >>>>>letters which relate to physical constants I've never even heard of. >>>>>On the other hand, where he doesn't use unfamiliar mathematics, >>>>>there's a *lot* in there I haven't seen any any other RF books which I >>>>>find really interesting.

    It's easier to design with a geometry for which there are good >>>>calculator programs.

    We have used ATLC to do e/m simulations of transmission line cases.
    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/6kdejmbybk4u5mq1xjait/Edge_alone_4.jpg?rlkey=volom4afazo44o6cpedgl89ge&raw=1
    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/82ysq5m13br8ahubdi4z7/Rob1.jpg?rlkey=4bnm3uu5otfolka9gqsov5tel&raw=1
    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ogfqs1m93mf1uw80hwkpi/Rob_51_ohms.jpg?rlkey=u4q3fumbzwmpojck5ih88c45q&raw=1

    That one butchers a multilayer PCB stack to get a good match with a >>>>cheap edge-launch SMA connector.
    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/n7hlatrxdoiywfkvebqj9/DSC01527.JPG?rlkey=hycib2nrk4zv662mu5vndy23g&raw=1


    I had to google ATLC simulator as I've not heard of it before. Anyway, >>>these plots are all very interesting, but you have no way of verifying >>>their accuracy AFAICS.
    You mentioned a while ago you had a good source for cheap but
    reasonable quality edge connectors (Aliexpress?) Can you post a link
    to them please?

    ATLC2 is a bit easier to drive.

    The way to verify a sim is to make a board and TDR it. They are
    usually close.

    The one in the pic above is from Shining Star.

    SHINING STAR 19521000

    We use

    SHINING STAR 24521116

    too, a bit longer part. Both about $1.90.


    I've bought a bunch of similar ones from Amazon and they have been
    great. But it's our general policy to not use Amazon parts in
    production.

    Here's a 4-layer proto board that let us TDR the connectors and the
    relay.
    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/bvcnqnvb4euc7pqw7wzab/DSC06884.JPG?rlkey=q1op81z1bumkfxoq8d5mtzi91&raw=1


    Forgot to mention (and sorry if I've asked you this before but you
    have to allow me some extra forbearance on account of my age) - what
    do you use for your TDR?

    I have an ancient Tek 11802 with an SD24 TDR plugin.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Hobbs@21:1/5 to john larkin on Sun Jan 26 03:11:42 2025
    john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 19:36:19 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
    wrote:

    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 09:05:42 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:

    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 13:55:05 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
    wrote:

    On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 17:46:24 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:

    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 00:41:39 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>>>> wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 17:09:29 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>>>> wrote:

    On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 00:55:25 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>>>>>> wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 10:55:39 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 18:07:06 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:

    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:26:10 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 19:52:03 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs
    <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
    https://www.ti.com/product/CDC6C

    These are like 35 cents at 1K.



    Of course a crystal oscillator is a BAW device too. ;) >>>>>>>>>>>>
    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    Don't get technical with me!

    I wonder if it's all silicon, a sort of bulk MEMS thing. The price is
    absurd. I guess every one has to be trimmed to frequency. >>>>>>>>>>
    Phil's pretty good in that regard. There are some people who see >>>>>>>>>> everything in terms of equations and use higher mathematics to explain
    their function. A xtal oscillator would provide a very simple example
    for such persons to exhibit this (most unfortunate) character trait. >>>>>>>>>
    Phil is one of those people who can see equations in motion. I can't. >>>>>>>>> I operate on instinct and simulation.

    We have brainstormed on some pretty important projects and generated >>>>>>>>> some ideas that influence most everyone here. The skills are >>>>>>>>> complementary.

    His book is good to have if you design electro-optics or low-level >>>>>>>>> analog stuff.

    https://www.amazon.com/Building-Electro-Optical-Systems-Making-Applied/dp/1119438977/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?crid=3M9PG1T68443R&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.xIlGO_AWviZZRYMlHFKJuNzKnLc8MDBpUjgE7RsYsDk.WiFCuc8GjBlGtPimMCFx0kOu5NieBv0TzXDNCokyLQM&dib_tag=se&
    keywords=phil+hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0

    Be cautioned that there are equations.

    Equations are fine (unavoidable anyway) in this science. But it's not >>>>>>>> helpful in the first instance to gain an intuitive idea of how >>>>>>>> something works - unless you're one of the people I mentioned above. >>>>>>>> This is my main issue with Tom Lee's otherwise superb book, 'Planar >>>>>>>> Microwave Engineering' where he typically launches into higher >>>>>>>> mathematics almost from the get-go.

    I have that book. It's mostly useless. One equation will be a full >>>>>>> page of fine print, and then the next page turns out to be one term of >>>>>>> that equation.


    Indeed. Not only that, but the mathematics is unfamiliar. I know most >>>>>> of the equations for transmission line theory by sight, but the ones >>>>>> Tom cites are completely different and tend to use a lot of Greek
    letters which relate to physical constants I've never even heard of. >>>>>> On the other hand, where he doesn't use unfamiliar mathematics,
    there's a *lot* in there I haven't seen any any other RF books which I >>>>>> find really interesting.

    It's easier to design with a geometry for which there are good
    calculator programs.

    We have used ATLC to do e/m simulations of transmission line cases.

    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/6kdejmbybk4u5mq1xjait/Edge_alone_4.jpg?rlkey=volom4afazo44o6cpedgl89ge&raw=1

    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/82ysq5m13br8ahubdi4z7/Rob1.jpg?rlkey=4bnm3uu5otfolka9gqsov5tel&raw=1

    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ogfqs1m93mf1uw80hwkpi/Rob_51_ohms.jpg?rlkey=u4q3fumbzwmpojck5ih88c45q&raw=1

    That one butchers a multilayer PCB stack to get a good match with a
    cheap edge-launch SMA connector.

    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/n7hlatrxdoiywfkvebqj9/DSC01527.JPG?rlkey=hycib2nrk4zv662mu5vndy23g&raw=1


    I had to google ATLC simulator as I've not heard of it before. Anyway, >>>> these plots are all very interesting, but you have no way of verifying >>>> their accuracy AFAICS.
    You mentioned a while ago you had a good source for cheap but
    reasonable quality edge connectors (Aliexpress?) Can you post a link
    to them please?

    ATLC2 is a bit easier to drive.

    The way to verify a sim is to make a board and TDR it. They are
    usually close.

    The one in the pic above is from Shining Star.

    SHINING STAR 19521000

    We use

    SHINING STAR 24521116

    too, a bit longer part. Both about $1.90.


    I've bought a bunch of similar ones from Amazon and they have been
    great. But it's our general policy to not use Amazon parts in
    production.

    Here's a 4-layer proto board that let us TDR the connectors and the
    relay.

    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/bvcnqnvb4euc7pqw7wzab/DSC06884.JPG?rlkey=q1op81z1bumkfxoq8d5mtzi91&raw=1


    Forgot to mention (and sorry if I've asked you this before but you
    have to allow me some extra forbearance on account of my age) - what
    do you use for your TDR?

    I have an ancient Tek 11802 with an SD24 TDR plugin.



    My SD-24s have been dropping like flies lately—I have four that show “Illegal channel number “and only one that still works.

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

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

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Cursitor Doom@21:1/5 to pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical. on Sun Jan 26 11:17:57 2025
    On Sun, 26 Jan 2025 03:11:42 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 19:36:19 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
    wrote:

    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 09:05:42 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:

    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 13:55:05 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
    wrote:

    On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 17:46:24 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:

    On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 00:41:39 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>>>>> wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 17:09:29 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>>>>> wrote:

    On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 00:55:25 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 10:55:39 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:

    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 18:07:06 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
    wrote:

    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:26:10 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
    On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 19:52:03 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs
    <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
    https://www.ti.com/product/CDC6C

    These are like 35 cents at 1K.



    Of course a crystal oscillator is a BAW device too. ;) >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    Don't get technical with me!

    I wonder if it's all silicon, a sort of bulk MEMS thing. The price is
    absurd. I guess every one has to be trimmed to frequency. >>>>>>>>>>>
    Phil's pretty good in that regard. There are some people who see >>>>>>>>>>> everything in terms of equations and use higher mathematics to explain
    their function. A xtal oscillator would provide a very simple example
    for such persons to exhibit this (most unfortunate) character trait.

    Phil is one of those people who can see equations in motion. I can't.
    I operate on instinct and simulation.

    We have brainstormed on some pretty important projects and generated >>>>>>>>>> some ideas that influence most everyone here. The skills are >>>>>>>>>> complementary.

    His book is good to have if you design electro-optics or low-level >>>>>>>>>> analog stuff.

    https://www.amazon.com/Building-Electro-Optical-Systems-Making-Applied/dp/1119438977/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?crid=3M9PG1T68443R&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.xIlGO_AWviZZRYMlHFKJuNzKnLc8MDBpUjgE7RsYsDk.WiFCuc8GjBlGtPimMCFx0kOu5NieBv0TzXDNCokyLQM&dib_tag=se&
    keywords=phil+hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0

    Be cautioned that there are equations.

    Equations are fine (unavoidable anyway) in this science. But it's not >>>>>>>>> helpful in the first instance to gain an intuitive idea of how >>>>>>>>> something works - unless you're one of the people I mentioned above. >>>>>>>>> This is my main issue with Tom Lee's otherwise superb book, 'Planar >>>>>>>>> Microwave Engineering' where he typically launches into higher >>>>>>>>> mathematics almost from the get-go.

    I have that book. It's mostly useless. One equation will be a full >>>>>>>> page of fine print, and then the next page turns out to be one term of >>>>>>>> that equation.


    Indeed. Not only that, but the mathematics is unfamiliar. I know most >>>>>>> of the equations for transmission line theory by sight, but the ones >>>>>>> Tom cites are completely different and tend to use a lot of Greek >>>>>>> letters which relate to physical constants I've never even heard of. >>>>>>> On the other hand, where he doesn't use unfamiliar mathematics,
    there's a *lot* in there I haven't seen any any other RF books which I >>>>>>> find really interesting.

    It's easier to design with a geometry for which there are good
    calculator programs.

    We have used ATLC to do e/m simulations of transmission line cases. >>>>>>
    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/6kdejmbybk4u5mq1xjait/Edge_alone_4.jpg?rlkey=volom4afazo44o6cpedgl89ge&raw=1

    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/82ysq5m13br8ahubdi4z7/Rob1.jpg?rlkey=4bnm3uu5otfolka9gqsov5tel&raw=1

    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ogfqs1m93mf1uw80hwkpi/Rob_51_ohms.jpg?rlkey=u4q3fumbzwmpojck5ih88c45q&raw=1

    That one butchers a multilayer PCB stack to get a good match with a >>>>>> cheap edge-launch SMA connector.

    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/n7hlatrxdoiywfkvebqj9/DSC01527.JPG?rlkey=hycib2nrk4zv662mu5vndy23g&raw=1


    I had to google ATLC simulator as I've not heard of it before. Anyway, >>>>> these plots are all very interesting, but you have no way of verifying >>>>> their accuracy AFAICS.
    You mentioned a while ago you had a good source for cheap but
    reasonable quality edge connectors (Aliexpress?) Can you post a link >>>>> to them please?

    ATLC2 is a bit easier to drive.

    The way to verify a sim is to make a board and TDR it. They are
    usually close.

    The one in the pic above is from Shining Star.

    SHINING STAR 19521000

    We use

    SHINING STAR 24521116

    too, a bit longer part. Both about $1.90.


    I've bought a bunch of similar ones from Amazon and they have been
    great. But it's our general policy to not use Amazon parts in
    production.

    Here's a 4-layer proto board that let us TDR the connectors and the
    relay.

    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/bvcnqnvb4euc7pqw7wzab/DSC06884.JPG?rlkey=q1op81z1bumkfxoq8d5mtzi91&raw=1


    Forgot to mention (and sorry if I've asked you this before but you
    have to allow me some extra forbearance on account of my age) - what
    do you use for your TDR?

    I have an ancient Tek 11802 with an SD24 TDR plugin.

    Aha! Vintage; splendid. That's what I like to hear.

    My SD-24s have been dropping like flies lately—I have four that show
    “Illegal channel number “and only one that still works.

    Fix 'em, then, Phil! You get a sense of achievement and a warm glow
    from knowing you're helping to save the planet. ;-)

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)