Activity for Lundin
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Edit | Post #289419 | Initial revision | — | 9 months ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Tag creation/deletion criteria Draft for a tag creation/deletion criteria A tag must fulfill all of the below requirements or it may get renamed or deleted: 1. A tag must be named appropriately, considering Tag naming guidelines. 2. A tag must be on-topic, meaning it has to be related to Electrical Engineering. 3. A tag m... (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #289417 | Initial revision | — | 9 months ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Tag naming guidelines. Additions: - Do not use company names in tags. Questions should be about specific products, not about companies. Furthermore, silicon companies merge/split and purchase each other all the time, so company tags will quickly become outdated. For example, questions about STM32 should be tagged... (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #289416 | Initial revision | — | 9 months ago |
| Question | — |
Tag creation/deletion criteria Because of recent discussions regarding whether vague terms like `voltage` and `ground` should be valid tag names or not, it is clear that we have no consistent rules here. These terms are about on-topic matters, but they are vauge and ambiguous and cannot "stand alone" without other tags. In comp... (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Comment | Post #289348 |
@#52991 But if we look at more specific tags, you also propose to delete `PTC`, which stands for positive temperature coefficient. This term is (almost?) exclusively used in the context of thermistors, at least as far as I know. Therefore `PTC` is a clarification of a question tagged `thermistor` in ... (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Comment | Post #289348 |
But also **we should not make it harder to change tags than to invent them**. If we allow everyone and their mother to create tags, which is usually the case, I don't think we can regard tags as something "holy" as on SE but let trusted users/moderators change them without too much meta debating. I t... (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Comment | Post #289348 |
I think we have to live with on-topic tags that hold no meaning of their own and this is how SE always worked too. (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Comment | Post #289348 |
I think the main issue here is that there's no clear consensus regarding tags that aren't meaningful stand-alone but otherwise clearly on-topic. As I already tried to explain here https://electrical.codidact.com/posts/289217/289280#answer-289280, such tags might give the post a meaning in combination... (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Comment | Post #289392 |
@#8046 Hmm I had not realized there were differently formatted tags at Proposals :) I can see it now that you told me, but maybe the problem there is the opposite - too subtle. (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Comment | Post #289392 |
@#8046 Different colors might be interesting, as long as it doesn't turn out far too eye-catching that way (not like the status-complete etc meta tags for example that are meant to stand out). (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #289395 | Initial revision | — | 9 months ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Disabling breakpoints in real-time section of firmware Breakpoints are beyond the scope of the C language, so this is up to the specific debugger and CPU core. What you will probably have to do to block accidental breakpoints is to not provide any debug information, so that the debugger won't know which line to place a breakpoint at. How to do this is... (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Comment | Post #289392 |
@#53890 The code review category at software development isn't very active though, compared to the main Q&A, so I don't think it serves an advertising purpose. I think the main reason for adding several categories is if the posting policies are very different for certain types of questions. For examp... (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #289392 | Initial revision | — | 9 months ago |
| Question | — |
How to deal with design review questions? A while back someone suggested that we added a section for reviews to the site - How about a new section for code reviews? From that meta thread we gathered that: - There seems to be community consensus that code review is perfectly fine and on-topic for this site, given that the topic is about mi... (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #289363 | Initial revision | — | 9 months ago |
| Answer | — |
A: How to request a mass-change in capitalization for tags? Apart from correcting capitalization, which is a valid change, I think you are at the same time doing a lot of subjective changes to certain tags and it can get very intrusive on the site. I don't agree with a lot of the tag changes proposed here. First of all, please note that there is no criter... (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #289280 |
Post edited: |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #289284 | Initial revision | — | 9 months ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Tag naming guidelines. I agree with everything said. I didn't really consider until now that Codidact (unlike Someplace Else) supports case-sensitive tagging. So in addition, perhaps add a note regarding the following: Capitalization of scientific units and quantities/prefixes should always be in accordance with the SI ... (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Comment | Post #289280 |
@#52991 Yeah it does also make sense to have the tags for very fundamental physics questions. "What is voltage?" or whatever (which may be more suitable for https://physics.codidact.com/ anyway). I think the key here is not to remove the tags, but to have active tag moderation and replace tags with s... (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #289280 | Initial revision | — | 9 months ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Tags about quantities: should we have them? Using `voltage` as a way of saying "I'm dealing with voltage here" is pointless - most electronics questions do. I think the `voltage` vs `current` tags are however relevant in the case when you need to be more specific about which one of the two that applies. For example if you have a digital ... (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Comment | Post #289074 |
This makes me recall the time when the biggest Swedish newspaper "DN" reported that Ericsson telecom had production problems due to lack of silicone. Some swede had translated the English term _silicon_ into the Swedish word _silikon_, meaning silicone. Naturally Ericsson were lacking silicon, not si... (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Comment | Post #289054 |
A submarine ought to be a pretty perfect RF environment with no unknowns. These controllers likely transmit on the 2.4GHz band and you'll know about every other such device present (if any). You are pretty much sitting inside a Faraday cage. Wired communication can actually be more noisy, because gro... (more) |
— | 10 months ago |
| Edit | Post #288710 | Initial revision | — | 10 months ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Titanic submarine control considerations Coming from a background of safety-related applications and industrial control systems, with some maritime applications experience, I could offer a few insights. These kind of game controls are literally only good for one single thing: button ruggedness. They need to withstand some pretty brutal t... (more) |
— | 10 months ago |
| Comment | Post #288550 |
@#36396 I can't really answer the question as whole and I haven't used most of these standards either, so I have no idea if it is correct enough to be answer. (more) |
— | 11 months ago |
| Comment | Post #288550 |
IEC 60364-5-52:2009 looks like it might be relevant for the actual calculation, though I haven't used it myself (doesn't seem harmonized under EU LVD Directive either). Regarding insulation there are plenty of application-specific standards, most notably the UN "ADR" directive regarding Carriage of D... (more) |
— | 11 months ago |
| Comment | Post #288404 |
I'd add a decoupling cap to the +12V line in addition to the TVS. The TVS will take the blow in case of spikes and the cap will ensure that the voltage stays otherwise stable. Something along the lines of 100nF X7R 50V will probably work ok. (more) |
— | 11 months ago |
| Comment | Post #288163 |
@#60399 The reason why one should avoid high ohm pull resistors is because RF energy from external spurious emissions (radiated or conducted) will be present and with 5V/1Mohm you only need >5uA to pull the line in the opposite direction. There's a big design difference between low power consumer app... (more) |
— | 11 months ago |
| Comment | Post #288163 |
Oh and 600W peak pulse is too weak TVS for automotive, you need 1500W. I don't remember which exact standard that requires this, but I do remember failing EMC testing once for this very reason. (more) |
— | 11 months ago |
| Comment | Post #288163 |
@#60399 So why did you ground pin 12, isn't that one to be used (ie tied to pin 8/input)? Do you intend to use this as a "watchdog" or as some "555 timer" or something else? (more) |
— | 11 months ago |
| Comment | Post #288163 |
@#60399 I mean the supply voltages. Placing TVS only makes sense on inputs/outputs, not in the middle of the circuit - everything after the voltage regular is to be regarded as relatively clean. You absolutely do need to have decoupling caps there however, 100nF close to the supply pin of the IC. Als... (more) |
— | 11 months ago |
| Comment | Post #288163 |
@#60399 Well that's a weird schematic. Why do you have zener diodes where one would expect to see capacitors? Are you running this from some raw battery voltage or something? Also if you have a pull-down on the P MOSFET, it will conduct as default, is this intentional? What are the voltages? (more) |
— | 11 months ago |
| Comment | Post #288163 |
You should be getting 0V, please post your schematic. Also don't use some horrible scanned datasheet, I found better ones here: https://www.datasheetcatalog.com/datasheets_pdf/C/D/4/0/CD4047.shtml. The Fairchild one shows how the trigger, clock and outputs act digitally (p7). (more) |
— | 11 months ago |
| Comment | Post #288118 |
@#60091 No, drain should be to the left, that's the whole trick and what the whole design is based on. It is purposely mounted backwards. The body diode should be included in the symbol to make it even clearer though. (more) |
— | 12 months ago |
| Comment | Post #288118 |
@#60091 It's more like: you get ESD protection for free. As for protecting the MOSFET I'm no expert but I believe the gate-source voltage is what might damage it and if so the TVS after the MOSFET does that. Of course it helps if the MOSFET is also rugged. I've used a similar polarity protection circ... (more) |
— | 12 months ago |
| Edit | Post #288120 |
Post edited: |
— | 12 months ago |
| Edit | Post #288120 |
Post edited: |
— | 12 months ago |
| Edit | Post #288120 | Initial revision | — | 12 months ago |
| Answer | — |
A: MOSFET protection with TVS: at the source pin or at the drain pin Using a P FET for polarity protection like this means that in case you flip + and -, the gate will be inactive, meaning that GND which is now connected to drain will get disconnected - no current will flow. If you put a TVS before the MOSFET, you cancel this out. Instead the TVS will short + and -... (more) |
— | 12 months ago |
| Comment | Post #288118 |
@#60311 A regular zener is too slow to handle transients and ESD. The zener only protects against overvoltages. (more) |
— | 12 months ago |
| Comment | Post #288107 |
In that case you really need to specify what the voltage source is and why it would be vulnerable to such. (more) |
— | 12 months ago |
| Comment | Post #288107 |
The circuit is so artificial and abstract there's no telling what a cap would be good for. Mostly caps directly on the supply are there to act as "bulk caps", stabilizing the voltage coming from the supply. (more) |
— | 12 months ago |
| Edit | Post #288026 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Using arc trace routing instead of 45 degree trace routing The 45° routing makes it easier to route multiple parallel traces across the PCB - I would say that's the main reason why they are so popular. Whereas 90° turns of multiple parallel traces next to each other is a big no-no, since that may lead to crosstalk. And routing multiple parallel traces as arc... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #288011 |
It might be common that students have to solder the boards themselves. And they (unfortunately) don't teach soldering in EE classes. Through-hole is the only sensible choice if you have zero experience with soldering. Apart from that, I agree that SMD layouts and 4 layer boards is the way to go for l... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |