high voltage charge pump

On Sunday, January 5, 2020 at 2:42:38 PM UTC+11, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
> Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in news:45891de0-c0de-4c51-
> a3d7-b07d1b21db81@googlegroups.com:
> 
> > 
> > Who cares what it is called - apart from military clowns.
> 
>   The term "requirements analysis" has been around as long as computers 
> have because application programmers use it, database administrators 
> use it, PCB layout engineers use it, colleges use it.  The list is 
> pretty darn big, and not related to military.

And I've been around since before there were database administrators.

My first job - in 1970 - was actually on a military project, and came with a liberal dose of that kind of jargon. It also came with a "computerised" requirements analyses, which turned out to be a way for the analysts to hide their prejudices in a badly constructed assessment scheme. I had fun nailing that.

There's an endless stream of alphabet soup available. You do have to put in an effort to get past the pretentious verbiage.
 
>   Only Bill Sloman wants to downplay proper terminology.  Too bad, 
> Bill.  Everybody uses it.  Nice try, classless clown.

I don't want to downplay proper terminology, but I'm well aware that there is a lot of pretentious nonsense around that hides it's pretensions with obscure jargon.

DLUNU seems to be relatively unsophisticated about this.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in news:9def23af-439b-4db7-
b3bd-b4243514c122@googlegroups.com:

> And I've been around since before there were database administrators.
> 

  And yet you are so stupid as to NOT know what a requirements analysis 
of ANYTHING is.

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in news:9def23af-439b-4db7-
b3bd-b4243514c122@googlegroups.com:

>  and came with a liberal dose of that kind of jargon. 

  You are an extremely liberal dose of utterly stupid.

On Sunday, January 5, 2020 at 4:10:32 PM UTC+11, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
> Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in news:9def23af-439b-4db7-
> b3bd-b4243514c122@googlegroups.com:
> 
> > And I've been around since before there were database administrators.
> 
>   And yet you are so stupid as to NOT know what a requirements analysis 
> of ANYTHING is.

And you are silly enough to make that claim without having any kind of information to base it on. If you thought about the matter hard enough, you do have enough information to realise that it couldn't possibly  be correct, but you don't do that kind of thinking.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Sunday, January 5, 2020 at 4:11:25 PM UTC+11, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
> Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in news:9def23af-439b-4db7-
> b3bd-b4243514c122@googlegroups.com:
> 
> >  and came with a liberal dose of that kind of jargon. 
> 
>   You are an extremely liberal dose of utterly stupid.

Do comfort yourself with that thought. It isn't a remotely plausible claim, but you are silly enough to waste bandwidth making it.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:254c6d62-9a43-42d1-984e-103c720ea19b@googlegroups.com: 

> And you are silly enough to make that claim without having any
> kind of information to base it on. 

  How does that feel, hypocritical fucktard?

  ISTR you claiming to have great knowledge about gapping pot cores, 
when in fact the exact opposite is true.

  All the while you were being RETARDED enough to make that stupid 
claim without said experience or any other information to base it on.
Against someone with years of experience with miniature pot core 
transformers and the characterization thereof.  While you constantly 
and continually touted otherwise.  And you fucking did it deliberately.

On Monday, January 6, 2020 at 3:28:28 AM UTC+11, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
> Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
> news:254c6d62-9a43-42d1-984e-103c720ea19b@googlegroups.com: 
> 
> > And you are silly enough to make that claim without having any
> > kind of information to base it on. 
> 
>   How does that feel, hypocritical fucktard?
> 
>   ISTR you claiming to have great knowledge about gapping pot cores, 
> when in fact the exact opposite is true.

You made the silly claim that gapping a pot core was useful as a device to minimise ringing in a switching inverter, when the main effect of gapping the core is to change the inductance the windings in the transformer, which can change what the ringing looks like, but doesn't address the source of the ringing.

This is actually entirely obvious, and can be worked out from elementary theory. I've used gapped pot cores (not all that often), and went to trouble of understanding what I was doing.

You don't seem to have bothered, but think that having been exposed to a lot of gapped cores automatically instilled some kind of comprehension into your brain, which obviously didn't happen.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Piglet wro

> The advantage is at low power. I built a 6 stage capacitive divider 48V 
> to 5V at max 10 microamperes input (on-hook POTS 48V). Microamp inductor 
> based buck converters do not appear to be easy.

If I wanted 500V->2V step-down at 2uA and reasonable efficiency (say, 
50+%), how would you approach that requirements? The Oxford bell? :-)

I am thinking about a ~5uW supercap replacement for backup purposes,
which can't dry out -- a 10uF polypropylene cap at 1kV is equivalent to 
10F@1V in 1/2*C*V^2 terms. According to the specs, supercaps are 
expected to last some mediocre thousands of hours, e.g. 4kHr is just 166 
days at the max ratings.

Why there are no glass-embedded supercaps, or 'lytics in general, 
looking like vacuum tubes? What did they use in Voyager?

	Best regards, Piotr

Klaus Kragelund wrote:

> Don't buy from Power Integrations. They have dubious sales techniquies and the products from OnSemi and Diodes are better
> 
> Use NCP10670 for example

Or UCC28701, I use it in a HV PSU together with a 1.7kV SiC MOSFET.

	Best regards, Piotr

bitrex wrote:

> If the OP needs a really low-cost solution for 150/200 -> 12 the 
> self-oscillating/hysteric flyback is a classic and a negative aux 
> voltage is easily done by adding a winding. Don't even really need a 
> controller at all for well-behaved loads

But they are super-hard to design properly, a lot of prototyping is 
required. An UCC7870x controller will work reliably in the first 
iteration and requires no optocoupler. A very robust little thingy.

	Best regards, Piotr