Activity for Olin Lathropâ€
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comment | Post #286589 |
Content is not easily noticed in comments, and can get deleted altogether. (more) |
— | almost 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #286589 |
This is an interesting discussion, but not suited for comments. (more) |
— | almost 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #286589 |
The underlying physics is more complicated than strictly voltage-controlled or current-controlled. However, a reasonable physics model is that trying to draw electrons out of the base (NPN example) is a lossy process, since most of the electrons that leave the emitter get swept away to the collector... (more) |
— | almost 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #286537 |
Your new picture shows the basic configuration, but not the specs of what you want the circuit to achieve. Is it amplifying a digital signal? Analog? What impedance? Voltage/current range? The picture is also obnoxiously large. Being rude to the volunteers you seek a favor from is not a good wa... (more) |
— | almost 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #286537 |
Show the circuit. The operating point depends on other circuit elements around the transistor. (more) |
— | almost 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #286181 |
It would also add an offset error. (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #286103 |
How accurate must the output current be? If this is driven from a 16 bit D/A, it's a very different problem than if ±2% is good enough.
You need complete specs before even starting a design. There are various topologies, each with different things they are good at. You are getting way ah... (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #286103 |
What's the complete compliance range your current source needs to have. You said the upper end is 36 V, but how close to 0 V must it still work? Also, what supply voltages are available, and don't tell me 36 V is the max. There will always be <i>some</i> drop across the current sense and/or pass e... (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #286090 |
By starting out lecturing, you make it difficult to answer any question. Answerers then have to either spend effort dispelling false assertions, or answer but have others think they agree with the false assertions. If you have a question, ask it. Don't try to tell us what "we" do. (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #286030 |
Important information to a question must be in the question itself. That also allows distilling down to the relevant information. I did try to look at your "a" link, but that was a whole web page with lots of babble and multiple diagrams. Put at least one example from each of your groups here in t... (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285921 |
This answer could be better, but it's written well enough, not wrong, and does supply some useful information. I wouldn't have normally upvoted it, but it doesn't deserve to be labeled a net negative. (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285854 |
Don't just tell me you're up for it. Help build a consensus at https://electrical.codidact.com/posts/285889 (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285854 |
The setting has been changed so that new users don't automatically get the Participate Everywhere privilege. That means they can't downvote until they get a few positive votes themselves. (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285854 |
We are discussing making downvotes public. If you want to see reform, it would be helpful if you weighed in. (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285913 |
Stalker can harass you on SE *because* of the hidden voting, not despite it. (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285913 |
These are the same arguments we here all the time, about what some people think <i>might</i> happen. There is no evidence. I think you're wrong. We won't know until it is actually tried. Until then we'll continue to have this <i>no it won't, yes it will</i> pissing contest. (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285907 |
@#53042 I really don't think it will get to that in the vast majority of times. Any system will have its problems. Don't forget that the current system has substantial problems this is trying to solve. It's easy to get caught up in the potential downside, but forget the very real downside of the s... (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285907 |
Vandals and retribution voters tend to hit only high-profile users, especially those that explain what they think is wrong with others' posts. In other words, responsible users will publicly explain problems, but then be targeted by anonymous retribution. That makes it less likely people will expre... (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285892 |
@Monica Rep *should* be at least part of earning abilities. I remember from early on that there was supposed to be a blended formula so that activity and rep could be weighted as desired. We don't want people being able to do important things on the site just because they have done a number of them... (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285889 |
@#53042 You can still downvote for whatever reason you like, just that you will be judged by all users whether you are being reasonable. Mods wouldn't step in unless the stated reason is blatantly made up or ridiculous.
You like to complain about others being rude, but belittling Andy getting vic... (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285892 |
I agree with new user's shouldn't be able to downvote, except answers to their own questions. 100 rep sounds about right to allow downvoting in general. That would thwart the trolls and sock puppets. They'd have a hard time building up 100 rep. Even then, they'd get to use that only once before t... (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285889 |
Yes, please remove any rep change from votes on meta. This is one of the things Elsewhere got right. (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285878 |
I agree that those downvotes make no sense. Some vandal has created multiple accounts. (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285878 |
I agree. New users should only be allowed to downvote answers to their own questions. (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285876 |
Sorry about all this. It looks like the team already handled it while I was sleeping. I've seen vandal or retribution downvotes on other Codidact sites too. This was one of the aggrevations Elsewhere, and now it's happening here. It's time we made all downvotes public, at least here on EE as a tes... (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285864 |
The bullet points you list are from the examples section. They are not meant to be exhaustive. The actual definition is a bit broader. (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285854 |
Update: I've been informed that the Codidact team found that the downvotes were done from a new account with a throw-away email address. The downvotes will be removed, but this is a delicate operation, and the right people have to get involved, spanning time zones. It will be fixed, but may take a l... (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285854 |
I agree about downvotes should be visible to all. (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285851 |
This question is off topic because it is about the use of electronic devices, not their design or theory of operation.
In short you plugged a device into an outlet with very vague specs, which turned out to be incompatible with your device. Bzzt. Poof. You're luck nothing caught fire or that yo... (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285458 |
By running the transformer in flyback mode. For more detail, ask a separate top level question. (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285814 |
Your updated schematic is much better. I guess we can put the tars and feathers back in the closet now :-) (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285814 |
What's with the stars in the title? Trying to be special at the expense of others is not cool. I deleted them. Don't do that again.
We shouldn't have to tilt our heads to read a schematic. Rotated labels are annoying. Also, try to keep high voltage at top, low voltages at bottom, and logical ... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285737 |
You got another downvote from an imposter account posing as me. That wasn't me, and the account has been disabled. When the account is eventually deleted, the downvote will disappear. I left it there for now so that the Codidact team has a better chance of tracking down who did it. I'll delete th... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285737 |
I don't understand the downvotes either. I upvoted. Unfortunately, I can't see who downvoted, only look at general trends. I think all downvotes should be public, but the Codidact team is still against that. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285787 |
It's your paper, so use whatever process you're comfortable with. Personally, I've found trying to make something a community effort to be far more trouble than it's worth. One person's coherent vision is usually better than a bunch of people's ideas all jumbled about presented in patchwork styles.... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285725 |
Yup, that does smell like an ESD problem. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285657 |
Your whole picture is 1152 x 1275 pixels in size. Only about 680 x 370 pixels, or 17%, has any useful content. We require questions here to be well written, with proper schematics or diagrams when required. Dumping something with 83% useless content on us is just plain rude. That's probably what ... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285657 |
Without a schematic or a system diagram, this is a non-question. We do engineering here, not hand waving. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285392 |
I liked your write thru step 6. The schematics are nice and clear, and you show incrementally how you end up with the classic instrumentation amp.
Then you're back to those cluttered diagrams. I know you think they illustrate, but honestly, they just look like a mess to me, where it's hard to fi... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285325 |
What is the "line" in this case? Both Y and Delta have three power "lines". Talking about a single voltage or current phase doesn't make sense without identifying which of the three, or something else.
I'm getting tired of playing "20 questions" here. I gave you some slack by leaving the questi... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285325 |
But what do those mean? What's Y-Y (or star-star) as opposed to just Y, for example. Also, clarifications need to be in the question, not buried in a comment. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285325 |
Define your terms. The 3-phase systems I've seen are all either Y or Delta. I've never encountered anything called "Y-Y" or "D-D". Explain what those are. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285242 |
I had to look at it a bit to realize that your X axis is negative time. That's unconventional. Worse yet, it's not even labeled. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285198 |
The passive sensors connected to my circuit will be in a fuel tank, but the circuit itself won't be in a hazardous location. As I understand it, the focus is then on making sure that whatever voltage and current is delivered to the sensor can't ignite volatile gasses. That means a maximum voltage a... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285201 |
Thanks. This is exactly the type of feedback I am looking for! I was trying to show that the current coming out of the flyback converter can't exceed a certain value. But, it makes a lot more sense to just put a fuse there and be done with it (Duh! Seems obvious now that you point it out). As I u... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285198 |
It seems you are talking about circuitry that is actually in the hazardous environment. What I'm designing is an "associated apparatus". It will not itself be in the hazardous location, but will connect to passive sensors that will be. As far as I am aware, the current and temperature limitations ... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285170 |
@Monica: That's hard to guess. I wouldn't have thought of capacitance multipliers until I saw that paper, for example. I did write a few self-answered question early-on that I knew from elsewhere were common topics of questions. That was before we had the Papers category. I've got several ideas f... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285170 |
@Monica: If people are finding that post by searching for "capacitance multiplier", then things are working well. I think what's going on is that there isn't a lot about capacitance multipliers out there, so the search engines find this post. That's actually a great result. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285170 |
@Monica: I don't see anything particularly special, other then a well written post that does a good job of covering its topic. Being a fairly long post, it contains a bunch of search-fodder jargon words. Maybe that helps. Maybe the topic is covered in some courses, and this post matches all the ty... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284995 |
This doesn't answer the question of "how" at all. It's merely another way to model the non-linear behavior of a diode (or any two-terminal device). You could just as well have said it's a current source that is a non-linear function of voltage, or a voltage source that is a non-linear function of t... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |