https://www.ti.com/product/CDC6C
These are like 35 cents at 1K.
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
On 20/01/2025 18:36, john larkin wrote:
https://www.ti.com/product/CDC6CThey look very nice, but where do you see such low prices?
These are like 35 cents at 1K.
Certainly not at Mouser or Digikey.
John
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/CDC6CThey look very nice, but where do you see such low prices?
These are like 35 cents at 1K.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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.
On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 18:07:06 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0
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+
Be cautioned that there are equations.
On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 10:55:39 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0
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+
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.
On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 00:55:25 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0
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+
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.
On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 17:09:29 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0
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+
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.
On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 00:41:39 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>phil+hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0
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: >>>>>>Phil is one of those people who can see equations in motion. I can't. >>>>>I operate on instinct and simulation.
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. >>>>>
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=
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
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 17:46:24 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:phil+hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0
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: >>>>>>>Phil is one of those people who can see equations in motion. I can't. >>>>>>I operate on instinct and simulation.
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. >>>>>>
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=
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?
On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 13:55:05 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>phil+hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0
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: >>>>>>>>Phil is one of those people who can see equations in motion. I can't. >>>>>>>I operate on instinct and simulation.
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. >>>>>>>
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=
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
On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 13:55:05 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>phil+hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0
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: >>>>>>>>Phil is one of those people who can see equations in motion. I can't. >>>>>>>I operate on instinct and simulation.
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. >>>>>>>
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=
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
On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 09:05:42 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:phil+hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0
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: >>>>>>>>>Phil is one of those people who can see equations in motion. I can't. >>>>>>>>I operate on instinct and simulation.
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. >>>>>>>>
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=
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?
On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 19:36:19 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>keywords=phil+hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0
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: >>>>>>>>>>Phil is one of those people who can see equations in motion. I can't. >>>>>>>>> I operate on instinct and simulation.
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 19:52:03 -0000 (UTC), Phil HobbsPhil's pretty good in that regard. There are some people who see >>>>>>>>>> everything in terms of equations and use higher mathematics to explain
<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. >>>>>>>>>>
their function. A xtal oscillator would provide a very simple example
for such persons to exhibit this (most unfortunate) character trait. >>>>>>>>>
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&
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.
john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:keywords=phil+hobbs+optics&qid=1737571796&s=books&sprefix=phil+hobbs+optics%2Cstripbooks%2C138&sr=1-1-fkmr0
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 HobbsPhil's pretty good in that regard. There are some people who see >>>>>>>>>>> everything in terms of equations and use higher mathematics to explain
<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. >>>>>>>>>>>
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&
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
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 415 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 109:29:38 |
Calls: | 8,692 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 13,259 |
Messages: | 5,948,494 |