Post History
In my 15 yrs of intense deadline R&D for new state-of-the-art design in my 45yrs experience, estimation of time is inversely proportional to the number of mini failures from bad assumptions fro...
Answer
#8: Post edited
by
TonyStewart
·
2020-11-22T12:51:50Z (about 4 years ago)
- In my 15 yrs of intense deadline R&D for new state-of-the-art design in my 45yrs experience, estimation of time is inversely proportional to the number of mini failures from bad assumptions from which you learn to expand your understanding of everything. You don’t have to be brilliant, that helps immensely, in my case I needed to understand thousands of cases why designs fail with creative intuition and testing assumptions.
- e.g.
- - how much noise does an arc radiate for distance, geometry and wavelength of emitter-detectors?
- - which devices have negative resistance?
- - how do you estimate loss of phase margin?
- - how do nonlinear solutions improve or degrade performance.
- - how can you quickly verify assumptions? And which ones did you forget?
- Incremental improvements always reduce the time from repetition of what you learn from others that works or your own successes of the same then factor a huge unknown depending on how skilled you are at realization of fundamentals in simulation. e.g. race conditions, ESR, DCR, impedance ratio of EMI crosstalk, PSRR, CM imbalance.
- Logical inquisitive minds find solutions quickly from the library of professional solutions in high volume production. For me it was HP and Tek, then later Hitachi, Fujitsu and Toshiba. (There was a well known nationalistic reasons why new Japanese parts were never available until at least 5 yrs later and why “made in Japan” quickly reversed its connotation.) In 2 words, quality advantage.
- Reading and reverse engineering are the necessary ingredients to rapid learning. Without a mentor, your time might be up to 10 times what it would take to repeat the same design next time.
Our rule of thumb in the late 70’s was 2x to 3x what you optimistically expect then add documentation time to define EVERY measurable spec for interference and tolerance of all inputs and outputs as an “a priori” to every great design. That includes every environmental stress, mech.elect.climatic.aging...
- In my 15 yrs of intense deadline R&D for new state-of-the-art design in my 45yrs experience, estimation of time is inversely proportional to the number of mini failures from bad assumptions from which you learn to expand your understanding of everything. You don’t have to be brilliant, that helps immensely, in my case I needed to understand thousands of cases why designs fail with creative intuition and testing assumptions.
- e.g.
- - how much noise does an arc radiate for distance, geometry and wavelength of emitter-detectors?
- - which devices have negative resistance?
- - how do you estimate loss of phase margin?
- - how do nonlinear solutions improve or degrade performance.
- - how can you quickly verify assumptions? And which ones did you forget?
- Incremental improvements always reduce the time from repetition of what you learn from others that works or your own successes of the same then factor a huge unknown depending on how skilled you are at realization of fundamentals in simulation. e.g. race conditions, ESR, DCR, impedance ratio of EMI crosstalk, PSRR, CM imbalance.
- Logical inquisitive minds find solutions quickly from the library of professional solutions in high volume production. For me it was HP and Tek, then later Hitachi, Fujitsu and Toshiba. (There was a well known nationalistic reasons why new Japanese parts were never available until at least 5 yrs later and why “made in Japan” quickly reversed its connotation.) In 2 words, quality advantage.
- Reading and reverse engineering are the necessary ingredients to rapid learning. Without a mentor, your time might be up to 10 times what it would take to repeat the same design next time.
- Our rule of thumb in the late 70’s was 2x to 3x what you optimistically expect then add documentation time to define EVERY measurable spec for interference and tolerance of all inputs and outputs as an “a priori” to every great design. That includes every environmental stress, mech.elect.climatic.aging...
- A great design may follow your best specifications. Look at any datasheet to understand why.
#7: Post edited
by
TonyStewart
·
2020-11-22T12:50:39Z (about 4 years ago)
- In my 15 yrs of intense deadline R&D for new state-of-the-art design in my 45yrs experience, estimation of time is inversely proportional to the number of mini failures from bad assumptions from which you learn to expand your understanding of everything. You don’t have to be brilliant, that helps immensely, in my case I needed to understand thousands of cases why designs fail with creative intuition and testing assumptions.
- e.g.
- - how much noise does an arc radiate for distance, geometry and wavelength of emitter-detectors?
- - which devices have negative resistance?
- - how do you estimate loss of phase margin?
- - how do nonlinear solutions improve or degrade performance.
- - how can you quickly verify assumptions? And which ones did you forget?
- Incremental improvements always reduce the time from repetition of what you learn from others that works or your own successes of the same then factor a huge unknown depending on how skilled you are at realization of fundamentals in simulation. e.g. race conditions, ESR, DCR, impedance ratio of EMI crosstalk, PSRR, CM imbalance.
Logical minds find solutions quickly from the library of professional solutions in high volume production. For me it was HP and Tek, then later Hitachi, Fujitsu and Toshiba. (There was a well known nationalistic reasons why new Japanese parts were never available until at least 5 yrs later and why “made in Japan” quickly reversed its connotation.) In 2 words, quality advantage.- Reading and reverse engineering are the necessary ingredients to rapid learning. Without a mentor, your time might be up to 10 times what it would take to repeat the same design next time.
- Our rule of thumb in the late 70’s was 2x to 3x what you optimistically expect then add documentation time to define EVERY measurable spec for interference and tolerance of all inputs and outputs as an “a priori” to every great design. That includes every environmental stress, mech.elect.climatic.aging...
- In my 15 yrs of intense deadline R&D for new state-of-the-art design in my 45yrs experience, estimation of time is inversely proportional to the number of mini failures from bad assumptions from which you learn to expand your understanding of everything. You don’t have to be brilliant, that helps immensely, in my case I needed to understand thousands of cases why designs fail with creative intuition and testing assumptions.
- e.g.
- - how much noise does an arc radiate for distance, geometry and wavelength of emitter-detectors?
- - which devices have negative resistance?
- - how do you estimate loss of phase margin?
- - how do nonlinear solutions improve or degrade performance.
- - how can you quickly verify assumptions? And which ones did you forget?
- Incremental improvements always reduce the time from repetition of what you learn from others that works or your own successes of the same then factor a huge unknown depending on how skilled you are at realization of fundamentals in simulation. e.g. race conditions, ESR, DCR, impedance ratio of EMI crosstalk, PSRR, CM imbalance.
- Logical inquisitive minds find solutions quickly from the library of professional solutions in high volume production. For me it was HP and Tek, then later Hitachi, Fujitsu and Toshiba. (There was a well known nationalistic reasons why new Japanese parts were never available until at least 5 yrs later and why “made in Japan” quickly reversed its connotation.) In 2 words, quality advantage.
- Reading and reverse engineering are the necessary ingredients to rapid learning. Without a mentor, your time might be up to 10 times what it would take to repeat the same design next time.
- Our rule of thumb in the late 70’s was 2x to 3x what you optimistically expect then add documentation time to define EVERY measurable spec for interference and tolerance of all inputs and outputs as an “a priori” to every great design. That includes every environmental stress, mech.elect.climatic.aging...
#6: Post edited
by
TonyStewart
·
2020-11-22T12:49:30Z (about 4 years ago)
- In my 15 yrs of intense deadline R&D for new state-of-the-art design in my 45yrs experience, estimation of time is inversely proportional to the number of mini failures from bad assumptions from which you learn to expand your understanding of everything. You don’t have to be brilliant, that helps immensely, in my case I needed to understand thousands of cases why designs fail with creative intuition and testing assumptions.
- e.g.
- - how much noise does an arc radiate for distance, geometry and wavelength of emitter-detectors?
- - which devices have negative resistance?
- - how do you estimate loss of phase margin?
- - how do nonlinear solutions improve or degrade performance.
- - how can you quickly verify assumptions? And which ones did you forget?
- Incremental improvements always reduce the time from repetition of what you learn from others that works or your own successes of the same then factor a huge unknown depending on how skilled you are at realization of fundamentals in simulation. e.g. race conditions, ESR, DCR, impedance ratio of EMI crosstalk, PSRR, CM imbalance.
Logical minds find solutions quickly from the library of professional solutions in high volume production. For me it was HP and Tek, then later Hitachi, Fujitsu and Toshiba. (There was a well known nationalistic reasons why new Japanese parts were never available until at least 5 yrs later and why “made in Japan” quickly reversed its connotation.)- Reading and reverse engineering are the necessary ingredients to rapid learning. Without a mentor, your time might be up to 10 times what it would take to repeat the same design next time.
- Our rule of thumb in the late 70’s was 2x to 3x what you optimistically expect then add documentation time to define EVERY measurable spec for interference and tolerance of all inputs and outputs as an “a priori” to every great design. That includes every environmental stress, mech.elect.climatic.aging...
- In my 15 yrs of intense deadline R&D for new state-of-the-art design in my 45yrs experience, estimation of time is inversely proportional to the number of mini failures from bad assumptions from which you learn to expand your understanding of everything. You don’t have to be brilliant, that helps immensely, in my case I needed to understand thousands of cases why designs fail with creative intuition and testing assumptions.
- e.g.
- - how much noise does an arc radiate for distance, geometry and wavelength of emitter-detectors?
- - which devices have negative resistance?
- - how do you estimate loss of phase margin?
- - how do nonlinear solutions improve or degrade performance.
- - how can you quickly verify assumptions? And which ones did you forget?
- Incremental improvements always reduce the time from repetition of what you learn from others that works or your own successes of the same then factor a huge unknown depending on how skilled you are at realization of fundamentals in simulation. e.g. race conditions, ESR, DCR, impedance ratio of EMI crosstalk, PSRR, CM imbalance.
- Logical minds find solutions quickly from the library of professional solutions in high volume production. For me it was HP and Tek, then later Hitachi, Fujitsu and Toshiba. (There was a well known nationalistic reasons why new Japanese parts were never available until at least 5 yrs later and why “made in Japan” quickly reversed its connotation.) In 2 words, quality advantage.
- Reading and reverse engineering are the necessary ingredients to rapid learning. Without a mentor, your time might be up to 10 times what it would take to repeat the same design next time.
- Our rule of thumb in the late 70’s was 2x to 3x what you optimistically expect then add documentation time to define EVERY measurable spec for interference and tolerance of all inputs and outputs as an “a priori” to every great design. That includes every environmental stress, mech.elect.climatic.aging...
#5: Post edited
by
TonyStewart
·
2020-11-22T12:48:37Z (about 4 years ago)
- In my 15 yrs of intense deadline R&D for new state-of-the-art design in my 45yrs experience, estimation of time is inversely proportional to the number of mini failures from bad assumptions from which you learn to expand your understanding of everything. You don’t have to be brilliant, that helps immensely, in my case I needed to understand thousands of cases why designs fail with creative intuition and testing assumptions.
- e.g.
- - how much noise does an arc radiate for distance, geometry and wavelength of emitter-detectors?
- - which devices have negative resistance?
- - how do you estimate loss of phase margin?
- - how do nonlinear solutions improve or degrade performance.
- - how can you quickly verify assumptions? And which ones did you forget?
- Incremental improvements always reduce the time from repetition of what you learn from others that works or your own successes of the same then factor a huge unknown depending on how skilled you are at realization of fundamentals in simulation. e.g. race conditions, ESR, DCR, impedance ratio of EMI crosstalk, PSRR, CM imbalance.
Logical minds find solutions quickly from the library of professional solutions in high volume production. For me it was HP and Tek, then later Hitachi, Fujitsu and Toshiba.- Reading and reverse engineering are the necessary ingredients to rapid learning. Without a mentor, your time might be up to 10 times what it would take to repeat the same design next time.
- Our rule of thumb in the late 70’s was 2x to 3x what you optimistically expect then add documentation time to define EVERY measurable spec for interference and tolerance of all inputs and outputs as an “a priori” to every great design. That includes every environmental stress, mech.elect.climatic.aging...
- In my 15 yrs of intense deadline R&D for new state-of-the-art design in my 45yrs experience, estimation of time is inversely proportional to the number of mini failures from bad assumptions from which you learn to expand your understanding of everything. You don’t have to be brilliant, that helps immensely, in my case I needed to understand thousands of cases why designs fail with creative intuition and testing assumptions.
- e.g.
- - how much noise does an arc radiate for distance, geometry and wavelength of emitter-detectors?
- - which devices have negative resistance?
- - how do you estimate loss of phase margin?
- - how do nonlinear solutions improve or degrade performance.
- - how can you quickly verify assumptions? And which ones did you forget?
- Incremental improvements always reduce the time from repetition of what you learn from others that works or your own successes of the same then factor a huge unknown depending on how skilled you are at realization of fundamentals in simulation. e.g. race conditions, ESR, DCR, impedance ratio of EMI crosstalk, PSRR, CM imbalance.
- Logical minds find solutions quickly from the library of professional solutions in high volume production. For me it was HP and Tek, then later Hitachi, Fujitsu and Toshiba. (There was a well known nationalistic reasons why new Japanese parts were never available until at least 5 yrs later and why “made in Japan” quickly reversed its connotation.)
- Reading and reverse engineering are the necessary ingredients to rapid learning. Without a mentor, your time might be up to 10 times what it would take to repeat the same design next time.
- Our rule of thumb in the late 70’s was 2x to 3x what you optimistically expect then add documentation time to define EVERY measurable spec for interference and tolerance of all inputs and outputs as an “a priori” to every great design. That includes every environmental stress, mech.elect.climatic.aging...
#4: Post edited
by
TonyStewart
·
2020-11-22T12:45:46Z (about 4 years ago)
- In my 15 yrs of intense deadline R&D for new state-of-the-art design in my 45yrs experience, estimation of time is inversely proportional to the number of mini failures from bad assumptions from which you learn to expand your understanding of everything. You don’t have to be brilliant, that helps immensely, in my case I needed to understand thousands of cases why designs fail with creative intuition and testing assumptions.
- e.g.
- - how much noise does an arc radiate for distance, geometry and wavelength of emitter-detectors?
- - which devices have negative resistance?
- - how do you estimate loss of phase margin?
- - how do nonlinear solutions improve or degrade performance.
- - how can you quickly verify assumptions? And which ones did you forget?
- Incremental improvements always reduce the time from repetition of what you learn from others that works or your own successes of the same then factor a huge unknown depending on how skilled you are at realization of fundamentals in simulation. e.g. race conditions, ESR, DCR, impedance ratio of EMI crosstalk, PSRR, CM imbalance.
Logical minds find solutions quickly from the library of professional solutions in high volume production. For me it was HP and Tek.- Reading and reverse engineering are the necessary ingredients to rapid learning. Without a mentor, your time might be up to 10 times what it would take to repeat the same design next time.
- Our rule of thumb in the late 70’s was 2x to 3x what you optimistically expect then add documentation time to define EVERY measurable spec for interference and tolerance of all inputs and outputs as an “a priori” to every great design. That includes every environmental stress, mech.elect.climatic.aging...
- In my 15 yrs of intense deadline R&D for new state-of-the-art design in my 45yrs experience, estimation of time is inversely proportional to the number of mini failures from bad assumptions from which you learn to expand your understanding of everything. You don’t have to be brilliant, that helps immensely, in my case I needed to understand thousands of cases why designs fail with creative intuition and testing assumptions.
- e.g.
- - how much noise does an arc radiate for distance, geometry and wavelength of emitter-detectors?
- - which devices have negative resistance?
- - how do you estimate loss of phase margin?
- - how do nonlinear solutions improve or degrade performance.
- - how can you quickly verify assumptions? And which ones did you forget?
- Incremental improvements always reduce the time from repetition of what you learn from others that works or your own successes of the same then factor a huge unknown depending on how skilled you are at realization of fundamentals in simulation. e.g. race conditions, ESR, DCR, impedance ratio of EMI crosstalk, PSRR, CM imbalance.
- Logical minds find solutions quickly from the library of professional solutions in high volume production. For me it was HP and Tek, then later Hitachi, Fujitsu and Toshiba.
- Reading and reverse engineering are the necessary ingredients to rapid learning. Without a mentor, your time might be up to 10 times what it would take to repeat the same design next time.
- Our rule of thumb in the late 70’s was 2x to 3x what you optimistically expect then add documentation time to define EVERY measurable spec for interference and tolerance of all inputs and outputs as an “a priori” to every great design. That includes every environmental stress, mech.elect.climatic.aging...
#3: Post edited
by
TonyStewart
·
2020-11-22T12:45:00Z (about 4 years ago)
- In my 15 yrs of intense deadline R&D for new state-of-the-art design in my 45yrs experience, estimation of time is inversely proportional to the number of mini failures from bad assumptions from which you learn to expand your understanding of everything. You don’t have to be brilliant, that helps immensely, in my case I needed to understand thousands of cases why designs fail with creative intuition and testing assumptions.
- e.g.
- - how much noise does an arc radiate for distance, geometry and wavelength of emitter-detectors?
- - which devices have negative resistance?
- - how do you estimate loss of phase margin?
- - how do nonlinear solutions improve or degrade performance.
- how can you quickly verify assumptions?- Incremental improvements always reduce the time from repetition of what you learn from others that works or your own successes of the same then factor a huge unknown depending on how skilled you are at realization of fundamentals in simulation. e.g. race conditions, ESR, DCR, impedance ratio of EMI crosstalk, PSRR, CM imbalance.
- Logical minds find solutions quickly from the library of professional solutions in high volume production. For me it was HP and Tek.
- Reading and reverse engineering are the necessary ingredients to rapid learning. Without a mentor, your time might be up to 10 times what it would take to repeat the same design next time.
- Our rule of thumb in the late 70’s was 2x to 3x what you optimistically expect then add documentation time to define EVERY measurable spec for interference and tolerance of all inputs and outputs as an “a priori” to every great design. That includes every environmental stress, mech.elect.climatic.aging...
- In my 15 yrs of intense deadline R&D for new state-of-the-art design in my 45yrs experience, estimation of time is inversely proportional to the number of mini failures from bad assumptions from which you learn to expand your understanding of everything. You don’t have to be brilliant, that helps immensely, in my case I needed to understand thousands of cases why designs fail with creative intuition and testing assumptions.
- e.g.
- - how much noise does an arc radiate for distance, geometry and wavelength of emitter-detectors?
- - which devices have negative resistance?
- - how do you estimate loss of phase margin?
- - how do nonlinear solutions improve or degrade performance.
- - how can you quickly verify assumptions? And which ones did you forget?
- Incremental improvements always reduce the time from repetition of what you learn from others that works or your own successes of the same then factor a huge unknown depending on how skilled you are at realization of fundamentals in simulation. e.g. race conditions, ESR, DCR, impedance ratio of EMI crosstalk, PSRR, CM imbalance.
- Logical minds find solutions quickly from the library of professional solutions in high volume production. For me it was HP and Tek.
- Reading and reverse engineering are the necessary ingredients to rapid learning. Without a mentor, your time might be up to 10 times what it would take to repeat the same design next time.
- Our rule of thumb in the late 70’s was 2x to 3x what you optimistically expect then add documentation time to define EVERY measurable spec for interference and tolerance of all inputs and outputs as an “a priori” to every great design. That includes every environmental stress, mech.elect.climatic.aging...
#2: Post edited
by
TonyStewart
·
2020-11-22T12:43:57Z (about 4 years ago)
In my 15 yrs of intense deadline R&D of 45yrs experience, estimation of time is inversely proportional to the number of mini failures from bad assumptions from which you learn to expand your understanding of everything.- Incremental improvements always reduce the time from repetition of what you learn from others that works or your own successes of the same then factor a huge unknown depending on how skilled you are at realization of fundamentals in simulation. e.g. race conditions, ESR, DCR, impedance ratio of EMI crosstalk, PSRR, CM imbalance.
- Logical minds find solutions quickly from the library of professional solutions in high volume production. For me it was HP and Tek.
- Reading and reverse engineering are the necessary ingredients to rapid learning. Without a mentor, your time might be up to 10 times what it would take to repeat the same design next time.
- Our rule of thumb in the late 70’s was 2x to 3x what you optimistically expect then add documentation time to define EVERY measurable spec for interference and tolerance of all inputs and outputs as an “a priori” to every great design. That includes every environmental stress, mech.elect.climatic.aging...
- In my 15 yrs of intense deadline R&D for new state-of-the-art design in my 45yrs experience, estimation of time is inversely proportional to the number of mini failures from bad assumptions from which you learn to expand your understanding of everything. You don’t have to be brilliant, that helps immensely, in my case I needed to understand thousands of cases why designs fail with creative intuition and testing assumptions.
- e.g.
- - how much noise does an arc radiate for distance, geometry and wavelength of emitter-detectors?
- - which devices have negative resistance?
- - how do you estimate loss of phase margin?
- - how do nonlinear solutions improve or degrade performance.
- - how can you quickly verify assumptions?
- Incremental improvements always reduce the time from repetition of what you learn from others that works or your own successes of the same then factor a huge unknown depending on how skilled you are at realization of fundamentals in simulation. e.g. race conditions, ESR, DCR, impedance ratio of EMI crosstalk, PSRR, CM imbalance.
- Logical minds find solutions quickly from the library of professional solutions in high volume production. For me it was HP and Tek.
- Reading and reverse engineering are the necessary ingredients to rapid learning. Without a mentor, your time might be up to 10 times what it would take to repeat the same design next time.
- Our rule of thumb in the late 70’s was 2x to 3x what you optimistically expect then add documentation time to define EVERY measurable spec for interference and tolerance of all inputs and outputs as an “a priori” to every great design. That includes every environmental stress, mech.elect.climatic.aging...
#1: Initial revision
by
TonyStewart
·
2020-11-22T12:34:47Z (about 4 years ago)
In my 15 yrs of intense deadline R&D of 45yrs experience, estimation of time is inversely proportional to the number of mini failures from bad assumptions from which you learn to expand your understanding of everything. Incremental improvements always reduce the time from repetition of what you learn from others that works or your own successes of the same then factor a huge unknown depending on how skilled you are at realization of fundamentals in simulation. e.g. race conditions, ESR, DCR, impedance ratio of EMI crosstalk, PSRR, CM imbalance. Logical minds find solutions quickly from the library of professional solutions in high volume production. For me it was HP and Tek. Reading and reverse engineering are the necessary ingredients to rapid learning. Without a mentor, your time might be up to 10 times what it would take to repeat the same design next time. Our rule of thumb in the late 70’s was 2x to 3x what you optimistically expect then add documentation time to define EVERY measurable spec for interference and tolerance of all inputs and outputs as an “a priori” to every great design. That includes every environmental stress, mech.elect.climatic.aging...