Test Equipment.... The missing link

On 4/21/2018 11:17 AM, Harry D wrote:

>
> Mike, You must be long of tooth to have stored all that negative BS.

Another way to look at it is that I've described a process to AVOID
or reduce the chances of failure.
Would you rather be a financial partner in a business that
threw products over the transom to see what failed?
Or one that did the sorting on the front end and produced winners?

If you had no emotional attachment and the opportunity to invest
real cash money in this project based on
the information disclosed, would you do so?
I'm not being negative, the product (as disclosed)
speaks for itself if you ask the questions.  You decide whether
to invest.

You quote that 80% of businesses fail.
I posit that far more fail from errors in planning and execution
than from bad product concept.

> Reminds me of a lunch I had with Andy Grove at an Intel seminar. Andy,
> what is the best way to start a new company? Answer, "well there are two
> ways. One, get some PhDs with fresh Ideas and sell them to the VCs. Then
> a tall office building, carpets and pretty girls. Bankruptcy will follow
> shortly. Second, design a product that will fill a market need. Make a
> few in your garage. If there is interest, expand to a two car garage.
> Keep pushing and you have a 20% change of surviving." This is my
> paraphrase, AG said it better.
> Mike, stay away from sharp objects.
> Cheers, Harry D.
>

That's entirely consistent with what I said.

The second way can work very well when your idea has
some of these characteristics:

Your product contains 'secret sauce' that can't be copied
easily.
Is unattractive to potential copycats
Your market is small and localized so you can stay under the radar
You've researched and KNOW that you won't be infringing on 
patents/copyrights/etc.
Your product is so compelling that people who didn't know they
needed it could easily justify purchase.
You've taken steps to assure that your house can't be taken away
over a frivolous lawsuit.
You're willing to do design, development, manufacturing, marketing,
sales, support functions for zero financial compensation for as
long as it takes.
You have sufficient other income to fund the project AND the
rest of your life.
Surely you can think of lots of other potential ways that might
succeed.

The second way is a bad idea when  your idea has some
of these characteristics:

Your idea is already available in the market from hundreds of
sources who are capable of producing it in high volume
and shipping it to your house for less than your burdened
manufacturing cost.

There are multiple organizations eager to copy any improvements
in competitive offerings.

Your product contains nothing that can't be copied easily.

Your competition is a ghost that can't be held
accountable for anything.

The low-hanging-fruit portion of the market is saturated.

Most users don't NEED the improvements that your product has.

Users who do need the improvements may also want certifications,
and documentation and support.

Selling expensive picosecond pulse generators
to government funded research
facilities might be a great idea.

Selling a $10 fidget-spinner, made from commodity components,
that's GUARANTEED to spin twice
as long as the 50-cent one on the closeout shelf at Walmart
may not be such a good idea.

Understanding the market is critical.
Understanding the life-cycle of a product is critical.


My definition of a hobby is:
Spending way more time and money than you can logically
justify doing something that gives you pleasure.

Nothing wrong with that.

Finding out that you had a hobby AFTER you mortgaged the
house to fund it will not give you pleasure.

Of course, I've presented a bleak picture.  Certainly, the OP
has no INTENTION of doing any of these things.  Will be
interesting to see the postmortem two years down the road
disclosing all the issues that were never intended.

I have a long history of identifying issues with concepts, designs,
implementations, markets...AND proposing solutions.
Problem is that people don't want change...they seek validation.
Anything less than validation is viewed as negative BS.

I'd offer to help, but It's time for my shift at
Happy Burgers. ;-)

On Sat, 21 Apr 2018 10:57:51 -0700, John Robertson <spam@flippers.com>
wrote:

>On 2018/04/20 6:35 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Fri, 20 Apr 2018 17:52:43 +0530, Pimpom <Pimpom@invalid.invalid>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 4/20/2018 4:45 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>>>
>>>> However, there are a few features that I wouldn't mind seeing added.
>>>> 1.  An IR (infrared) emitter and detector for testing TV remote
>>>> controls.
>> 
>>> This is a standalone go/no-go RC tester that I made a few decades
>>> ago when repairing TVs made up a significant part of my work.
>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/4266z0r318ua82y/RC%20tester.png?dl=0
>> 
>> I use a digital camera to view the emitted near IR.

>Depends on the vintage of digital camera, earlier ones did not have an 
>IR filter, but that is more common now to be coated on the lens. As an 
>example most phones have IR filters AFAIK.

One would think that should be true because it's so commonly repeated.
However, that hasn't been my experience.  I just tried the following
cell phones and tablets with my Samsung TV remote control:
   Samsung S6      Works great and very bright
   Lumia 535(?)    Visible 
   Nexus 7 tablet  Visible
   Lumia 928W      Dim but visible
   Moto G v1       Barely visible
   
So, it seems to vary with the type of phone.  However, I don't see any
relationship to the age of the phone.  It's much the same story for
digital cameras.  All work but with varying near-IR sensitivity
levels.

Trust, but verify.

>An argument for never throwing out any potential test gear...
>John :-#)#

I spent my first 50 years collecting all this junk.  I plan to spend
my next 50 years getting rid of the junk.


-- 
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558

"mike"  wrote in message news:pbg7va$7lm$1@dont-email.me...

On 4/21/2018 11:17 AM, Harry D wrote:

>
> Mike, You must be long of tooth to have stored all that negative BS.

Another way to look at it is that I've described a process to AVOID
or reduce the chances of failure.
Would you rather be a financial partner in a business that
threw products over the transom to see what failed?
Or one that did the sorting on the front end and produced winners?

If you had no emotional attachment and the opportunity to invest
real cash money in this project based on
the information disclosed, would you do so?
I'm not being negative, the product (as disclosed)
speaks for itself if you ask the questions.  You decide whether
to invest.

You quote that 80% of businesses fail.
I posit that far more fail from errors in planning and execution
than from bad product concept.

> Reminds me of a lunch I had with Andy Grove at an Intel seminar. Andy,
> what is the best way to start a new company? Answer, "well there are two
> ways. One, get some PhDs with fresh Ideas and sell them to the VCs. Then
> a tall office building, carpets and pretty girls. Bankruptcy will follow
> shortly. Second, design a product that will fill a market need. Make a
> few in your garage. If there is interest, expand to a two car garage.
> Keep pushing and you have a 20% change of surviving." This is my
> paraphrase, AG said it better.
> Mike, stay away from sharp objects.
> Cheers, Harry D.
>

That's entirely consistent with what I said.

The second way can work very well when your idea has
some of these characteristics:

Your product contains 'secret sauce' that can't be copied
easily.
Is unattractive to potential copycats
Your market is small and localized so you can stay under the radar
You've researched and KNOW that you won't be infringing on
patents/copyrights/etc.
Your product is so compelling that people who didn't know they
needed it could easily justify purchase.
You've taken steps to assure that your house can't be taken away
over a frivolous lawsuit.
You're willing to do design, development, manufacturing, marketing,
sales, support functions for zero financial compensation for as
long as it takes.
You have sufficient other income to fund the project AND the
rest of your life.
Surely you can think of lots of other potential ways that might
succeed.

The second way is a bad idea when  your idea has some
of these characteristics:

Your idea is already available in the market from hundreds of
sources who are capable of producing it in high volume
and shipping it to your house for less than your burdened
manufacturing cost.

There are multiple organizations eager to copy any improvements
in competitive offerings.

Your product contains nothing that can't be copied easily.

Your competition is a ghost that can't be held
accountable for anything.

The low-hanging-fruit portion of the market is saturated.

Most users don't NEED the improvements that your product has.

Users who do need the improvements may also want certifications,
and documentation and support.

Selling expensive picosecond pulse generators
to government funded research
facilities might be a great idea.

Selling a $10 fidget-spinner, made from commodity components,
that's GUARANTEED to spin twice
as long as the 50-cent one on the closeout shelf at Walmart
may not be such a good idea.

Understanding the market is critical.
Understanding the life-cycle of a product is critical.


My definition of a hobby is:
Spending way more time and money than you can logically
justify doing something that gives you pleasure.

Nothing wrong with that.

Finding out that you had a hobby AFTER you mortgaged the
house to fund it will not give you pleasure.

Of course, I've presented a bleak picture.  Certainly, the OP
has no INTENTION of doing any of these things.  Will be
interesting to see the postmortem two years down the road
disclosing all the issues that were never intended.

I have a long history of identifying issues with concepts, designs,
implementations, markets...AND proposing solutions.
Problem is that people don't want change...they seek validation.
Anything less than validation is viewed as negative BS.

I'd offer to help, but It's time for my shift at
Happy Burgers. ;-)

Mike, I noticed you singled out JL in your harangue. I kind of like the guy 
and he is on the list.

Wash your hands after flushing.

On Saturday, April 21, 2018 at 1:13:01 PM UTC-4, Harry D wrote:
>
> 
> Hey Dan, I too have one of his LC meters. Use it for lower range values. His 
> meter was some of my inspiration.
> 
> Ciao,  harry D.

Neil was my load in about 1968 at the Sat V breadboard in Huntsville.  Very smart engineer.

                                   Dan

On 4/21/2018 4:20 PM, Harry D wrote:

>
> Mike, I noticed you singled out JL in your harangue. I kind of like the
> guy and he is on the list.
>
> Wash your hands after flushing.

I don't recall mentioning anyone personally.
I did give an example of a business
that appears to be based on good business sense
and a contrasting one of a fidget-spinner much too late to the market.
Anyone feeling harangued should read it again and take
a chill pill.

My intention was to inform, not harangue.
I deal in my perception of the facts.
I never intend to badmouth anybody personally.
Emotion is the enemy of logic.

I'm not afraid to argue against what I believe
to be an ill-conceived action.  I attempt to
support the logical argument with fact, history,
suggestions, education...
Typical defensive responses include reference
to a counterexample.  I'm talking human nature
and statistics.  80%+ of small businesses fail.
20% counterexamples won't change the statistics,
they ARE the statistics.

Personal attacks are never my intention.
People who like to argue or attack might
feel threatened and rush to defend.  Usually,
it's somebody on the sidelines who feels the need to
demonstrate superiority.  That's the way the internet works.

Stuff on the internet is forever.
I take that into consideration when I speak.
That often means that I expand he discussion to
include things that others may not have considered.
Failures of things that you planned for are less likely.
What bites you in the ass are the things you glossed
over or didn't consider at all.

The clever idea is a tiny piece of a successful business,
but might be the entirety of a hobby.

Knowing how to do is the easy part.
It's much harder to determine WHAT to do from a holistic
point of view.

>"This is a standalone go/no-go RC tester that I made a few decades
ago when repairing TVs made up a significant part of my work.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/4266z0r318ua82y/RC%20tester.png?dl=0 "

I threw something like that together, but my IR receiver was from a VCR and would not run on much less than 9 volts so it has a little transformer and a cord. I also didn't have any LEDs handy so I used a dial light for a stereo, and that required a buffer of course. And the transformer was 12 volts so I had to put in a regulator. 

In for a penny, in for a pound. But then I really do have too much time on my hands. Maybe I'll put up a picture of it somewhere. I mean, in next year's dictionary when you look up "kludge" there will be a picture of this ting next to it.

For Zeners I use a scope. Yup. 

My hand can pick up over 50 volts AC, so I put the Zener on the probe, tip to ground and touch the tip. Voila, a waveform of the 60 Hz in the amplitude of the Zener rating, if it is good. Of course it only works on the lower wattage ones, the bigger ones usually have too much leakage, but those can usually be tested in circuit live anyway. Most higher wattage Zeners are relegated to clamping duty now anyway, with most regulators being active and just using them for a reference. (and then we have Tektronix which used to use one Zener for a half dozen sources or more, what were they made of gold or something ?)

I also used to use a scope for faster testing of lytics. Once you learn how to read it it is the best way hands down, but you have to get used to it. You need to feed a 400 mV, 1 KHz square wave with a source impedance of about 360 ohms and let the DUT shunt it. I have used other test signals but settled on this due to experience, it is the most versatile and accurate. And you set the scope to DC, using a positive or negative going square wave and it will also tell you if the cap is shorted. I designed a small handheld unit with a simple, yet more effective, bar graph LED display that worked on a similar principle but at the time I was working and had no time for such things. The scope method was there and worked, so I used it for decades. The difference is many people don't use the scope all the time, but I did. I literally had a scope before a decent meter. I learned to really use it and it helped alot. I was fast. (it was on a scopemobile along with an isolation transformer and a few other things)

I used to work on 3 benches at once, I would troubleshoot the 3 units and by the time I got to the last one they still weren't done with the first one. Sometimes I fixed the last one and took another one, sometimes I went out for a smoke break. The owner of the company ran the road at times and would pull up in the truck, in the beginning he asked "Do I pay you to smoke ?". I just said "Yes". Later, I replied "Handsomely". And then they used to pay me (and a very few others) to date every Friday so in the afternoon they would ask me how late I'm staying, and then write the check and give it to me. So he pulls up and asks the usual question and I said "Yes, in fact you already have". 

The owners got sick of Ohio and moved to Florida and opened up shop. I could have went but I have no connections down there and the whole place smells like a dirty fish tanks. So much for that. I had another job anyway, about a third of the driving. I  got sick of getting home an hour after quitting time, with this place usually the heater in the car wouldn't even get warm by the time I made the trip, including stopping for beer. So I only worked for that place again ad hoc, part time.

On 20/04/18 05:29, Harry D wrote:
> 
> 
> "Tom Del Rosso"  wrote in message news:pbb3pj$ppv$1@dont-email.me...
> 
> Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:12:30 -0700, "Harry D" <harryd@tdsystems.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Having spent over 50 years in electronic labs, designing and
>>> testing, I find myself trying to test zener diodes, FETs, LEDs,
>>> transistors and many other semiconductor devices. (...)
>>
>> Perhaps you should do some market research before taking the plunge.
>> There are quite a few products being sold on eBay based on the MK-328
>> or "AVR Transistor Tester" project:
>> <https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=mk328>
>> <https://www.google.com/search?q=mk+328>
>> Manual:
>> <https://elecfreaks.com/estore/download/EF06128-LCR-1602tester.pdf>
>> I believe that this is the original project site:
>> <https://www.mikrocontroller.net/articles/AVR_Transistortester>
>> It will test all the devices that you mention.
> 
> Video of the $7 version from ebay:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Br3L1B80ow
> 
> Hard to compete with that.&nbsp; A curve tracer function would be a nice
> addition though.
> 
> It made me wonder, doesn't anyone make a ZIF socket with fewer than 14
> pins?
> 
> Hi Tom,
> Agreed, but I would not have one of those testers in my lab. As far as 
> LCR, there are so many testers that can do a better job. All except ESR 
> to 1.00 m Ohm. That may be my next unit.
> When a MOSFET is blown, I run for my Semi-Analyzer and measure four FET 
> parameters to 1 %. I have never encountered a bad FET passing this test. 
> Another good use is deciding&nbsp; which diode dropped on the floor. A quick 
> test comparing their forward voltage (to 1.0 m volt) will easily cull 
> the devices.
> Thanks for your interest,&nbsp; Harry D

I had been playing around with a similar idea but stopped when I saw 
https://www.ebay.ie/itm/112168149399
locky_z "my intelligent curve tracer" for 150$ PCB and 220$ complete 
with box. Both include software which seems to be superb:
<https://forums.parallax.com/discussion/137648/my-intelligent-curve-tracer>

Regards
Werner Dahn

"aioe usenet"  wrote in message news:pbi44n$j5v$1@gioia.aioe.org... 


I had been playing around with a similar idea but stopped when I saw 
https://www.ebay.ie/itm/112168149399
locky_z "my intelligent curve tracer" for 150$ PCB and 220$ complete 
with box. Both include software which seems to be superb:
<https://forums.parallax.com/discussion/137648/my-intelligent-curve-tracer>

Regards
Werner Dahn

Yep, every good lab needs a curve tracer. Have not had one for 20 years.

Ciao,  Harry D.