On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 10:29:04 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
<td_03@verizon.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>John Larkin wrote:
>> On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 22:38:32 -0700, josephkk
>> <joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> > It may or may not work fine with ideal parts. The real question is
>> > what will it do with REAL parts! Your topology is NOT a circuit.
>> > What happens when all resistors are 10 milliohms or 10 gigaohms?
>> > No topology works in all cases. Quit the bullshit.
>> >
>> > ?-)
>>
>> I didn't say that any values would work; that would be ludicrous.
>
>Look, no values. The same goes for any classic circuit in most books. =
But the point is the topology is not a circuit. Not whether it can be
described. Topologies are not all that interesting to me unless they do
something that i haven't seen before. Phil Hobbs posts circuits when he
can but, like JT, Jeorg, KRW and others here cannot always do so.
I will post something when i have something to post. I have before, just
not much. And never just a topology.
?-)
Reply by John Larkin●August 28, 20122012-08-28
On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 10:29:04 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
<td_03@verizon.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>John Larkin wrote:
>> On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 22:38:32 -0700, josephkk
>> <joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> > It may or may not work fine with ideal parts. The real question is
>> > what will it do with REAL parts! Your topology is NOT a circuit.
>> > What happens when all resistors are 10 milliohms or 10 gigaohms?
>> > No topology works in all cases. Quit the bullshit.
>> >
>> > ?-)
>>
>> I didn't say that any values would work; that would be ludicrous.
>
>Look, no values. The same goes for any classic circuit in most books. It
>is ludicrous to say that a topology can't be described without values.
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartley_oscillator
Right. Most EE textbooks show circuits without values. Amateurs can
get upset about that; they want to Spice it without having to think
about it. They want assurance. Design is about wallowing in
uncertainty and possibility.
I've thought a lot about this circuit topology issue. There's some
enormous number of circuits that can be assembled from some small
handfull of parts, most of which are nonsense. For some stated
problem, where does the right circuit come from out of, say, 1e40
possibilities? Inventing a new circuit is only partially a conscious
process; something else is going on.
Maybe 2% of the circuits that I sketch ever get to a PCB layout. I
devastate trees worth of grid pads with circuit scribbles. That's part
of the process. It upsets some people when scribble-level thinking is
done, especially in public, like on a whiteboard or a newsgroup. I
think it's fun. Some people, most people, are too rigid to play with
ideas.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com
Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators
Reply by Tom Del Rosso●August 28, 20122012-08-28
John Larkin wrote:
>
> I didn't say that any values would work; that would be ludicrous.
>
> I did give Jim a simple procedure for finding a working set of
> resistor values: set them all to one ohm, Spice, see if it works. If
> not, increase all resistors by 1 ohm and repeat until it does work.
> Amazingly enough, he's still not satisfied.
>
> I'll leave the capacitor value, as Jim likes to say, "to the student."
>
> You don't seem very satisfied either.
I remember Win Hill quoting one of his techs, "when in doubt, use 100k and
0.01uF."
Win said he agreed.
--
Reply in group, but if emailing add one more
zero, and remove the last word.
Reply by Tom Del Rosso●August 28, 20122012-08-28
John Larkin wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 22:38:32 -0700, josephkk
> <joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > It may or may not work fine with ideal parts. The real question is
> > what will it do with REAL parts! Your topology is NOT a circuit.
> > What happens when all resistors are 10 milliohms or 10 gigaohms?
> > No topology works in all cases. Quit the bullshit.
> >
> > ?-)
>
> I didn't say that any values would work; that would be ludicrous.
Look, no values. The same goes for any classic circuit in most books. It
is ludicrous to say that a topology can't be described without values.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartley_oscillator
--
Reply in group, but if emailing add one more
zero, and remove the last word.
Reply by John Larkin●August 28, 20122012-08-28
On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 22:38:32 -0700, josephkk
<joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 21:29:39 -0700, John Larkin
><jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 20:47:48 -0700, Jim Thompson
>><To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 20:24:20 -0700, John Larkin
>>><jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 22:53:35 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
>>>><td_03@verizon.net.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>John Larkin wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You *don't* understand my circuit!
>>>>>
>>>>>I wish I did. Whether he does or not, would you mind describing it?
>>>>
>>>>This one?
>>>>
>>>>https://dl.dropbox.com/u/53724080/Circuits/Isrc_Ib_2.JPG
>>>>
>>>>U1 and the p-fet are a slow but precise closed-loop current source.
>>>>It's cascoded into the fast PNP transistor below, which gives us low
>>>>output capacitance. R3 allows the PNP emitter to move a bit and reduce
>>>>Early effect. R4 keeps the PNP from oscillating.
>>>>
>>>>The big DC error becomes the base current of the PNP. RF PNPs tend to
>>>>have have low betas, so we lose some of our precise current to the
>>>>base, and that changes with tempearture. So we dump the base current
>>>>into U2, and the resulting signal (drop across R2) increases the
>>>>effective reference voltage to the upper current source, increasing
>>>>the emitter current, almost canceling the base current error.
>>>>
>>>>R2=R1 gets us close enough. The base current cancellation is a
>>>>positive feedback loop, but the gain is low, basically 1/beta, so it's
>>>>stable.
>>>>
>>>>Jim is on record as not liking this. He won't say why.
>>>
>>>Post the circuit WITH VALUES so it can be checked. Otherwise it's a
>>>figment of the Napoleonic runt.
>>>
>>> ...Jim Thompson
>>
>>What you are saying is that you can't decide if it will work unless I
>>show all the values. Which means you can't find suitable values
>>yourself. Which meand you can't understand it.
>>
>>QED.
>>
>>Hint: all the resistor values can be the same.
>
>It may or may not work fine with ideal parts. The real question is what
>will it do with REAL parts! Your topology is NOT a circuit. What happens
>when all resistors are 10 milliohms or 10 gigaohms? No topology works in
>all cases. Quit the bullshit.
>
>?-)
I didn't say that any values would work; that would be ludicrous.
I did give Jim a simple procedure for finding a working set of
resistor values: set them all to one ohm, Spice, see if it works. If
not, increase all resistors by 1 ohm and repeat until it does work.
Amazingly enough, he's still not satisfied.
I'll leave the capacitor value, as Jim likes to say, "to the student."
You don't seem very satisfied either.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com
Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators
Reply by John Larkin●August 28, 20122012-08-28
On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 22:45:59 -0700, josephkk
<joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 10:19:39 -0700, John Larkin
><jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>>Larkin throws up (literally) his problems on this page, but never
>>>shows the final solution (probably because he stole the solution from
>>>one of responding posters).
>>
>>I've posted a number of PDFs of actual schematics in actual production
>>products. *I* decide what's proprietary. I also post circuit ideas to
>>play with, some serious and some goofy, but you never play. Playing
>>with circuits is a fun sport, like riffing on a jazz theme, but you
>>can't do it.
>
>I have seen you post fragments of something. Never a complete schematic
>of even a test jig. Interesting scope traces without useful circuit data.
>Physical test circuit layouts without any other information to make it
>useful. Not much else. Garbage really.
>
>?-)
That's silly. I post real schematics, from production products, when
it's helpful. It's more fun to post new ideas, to play with topologies
and parts. Note "design" in the group title.
My stuff may be garbage to you, because the electronics that I do
doesn't interest you, like the PHEMT measurments I posted recently. I
can't help that.
You don't seem to actually design electronics. You *could* help that.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com
Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators
Reply by Tom Del Rosso●August 28, 20122012-08-28
MrTallyman wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 12:42:32 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
> <td_03@verizon.net.invalid> wrote:
>
> > but haven't taken
> > sides other than that.
>
> You took sides calling me a troll. Is your name Zimmerman?
You are not in the category of Larkin or anyone else.
--
Reply in group, but if emailing add one more
zero, and remove the last word.
Reply by josephkk●August 28, 20122012-08-28
On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 10:19:39 -0700, John Larkin
<jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>
>>Larkin throws up (literally) his problems on this page, but never
>>shows the final solution (probably because he stole the solution from
>>one of responding posters).
>
>I've posted a number of PDFs of actual schematics in actual production
>products. *I* decide what's proprietary. I also post circuit ideas to
>play with, some serious and some goofy, but you never play. Playing
>with circuits is a fun sport, like riffing on a jazz theme, but you
>can't do it.
I have seen you post fragments of something. Never a complete schematic
of even a test jig. Interesting scope traces without useful circuit data.
Physical test circuit layouts without any other information to make it
useful. Not much else. Garbage really.
?-)
Reply by josephkk●August 28, 20122012-08-28
On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 21:29:39 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 20:47:48 -0700, Jim Thompson
><To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 20:24:20 -0700, John Larkin
>><jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 22:53:35 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
>>><td_03@verizon.net.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>John Larkin wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> You *don't* understand my circuit!
>>>>
>>>>I wish I did. Whether he does or not, would you mind describing it?
>>>
>>>This one?
>>>
>>>https://dl.dropbox.com/u/53724080/Circuits/Isrc_Ib_2.JPG
>>>
>>>U1 and the p-fet are a slow but precise closed-loop current source.
>>>It's cascoded into the fast PNP transistor below, which gives us low
>>>output capacitance. R3 allows the PNP emitter to move a bit and reduce
>>>Early effect. R4 keeps the PNP from oscillating.
>>>
>>>The big DC error becomes the base current of the PNP. RF PNPs tend to
>>>have have low betas, so we lose some of our precise current to the
>>>base, and that changes with tempearture. So we dump the base current
>>>into U2, and the resulting signal (drop across R2) increases the
>>>effective reference voltage to the upper current source, increasing
>>>the emitter current, almost canceling the base current error.
>>>
>>>R2=3DR1 gets us close enough. The base current cancellation is a
>>>positive feedback loop, but the gain is low, basically 1/beta, so it's
>>>stable.
>>>
>>>Jim is on record as not liking this. He won't say why.
>>
>>Post the circuit WITH VALUES so it can be checked. Otherwise it's a
>>figment of the Napoleonic runt.
>> =09
>> ...Jim Thompson
>
>What you are saying is that you can't decide if it will work unless I
>show all the values. Which means you can't find suitable values
>yourself. Which meand you can't understand it.
>
>QED.
>
>Hint: all the resistor values can be the same.
It may or may not work fine with ideal parts. The real question is what
will it do with REAL parts! Your topology is NOT a circuit. What =
happens
when all resistors are 10 milliohms or 10 gigaohms? No topology works in
all cases. Quit the bullshit.
?-)
Reply by josephkk●August 28, 20122012-08-28
On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 08:26:50 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>
>>>Poxy hell, you point to your own lack of understanding. That is a =
totally
>>>inappropriate use of an emitter follower. No wonder you have silly
>>>problems, you don't grok electronics at all.
>>
>>It's not an emitter follower, but it is an "emitter-follower type
>>circuit", namely the emitter does not see a low impedance to ground,
>>but the base does. A base resistor is a good way to prevent VHF
>>oscillations. This the the so-called "base stopper" or, or mosfet
>>amps, "gate stopper" resistor in Olde English.
>>
>>Don't be a jerk.
>
>Anyone who disagrees with Larkin on a technical level receives ad
>hominem designation as a jerk, old hen, senile, whatever.
>
>The truth is that Larkin is a Napoleonic runt who can't stand to be
>technically criticized, and will dream up all kinds of excuses,
>subterfuge, obfuscation to claim he's right, even when he is obviously
>wrong.
> =09
I know he is an idiot lying narcissistic POS. Just sometimes i see an
opportunity to make him display it in full gory.
?-)