开云体育

re: Negative Feedback example, etc. Folks tell me that a gentle answer turns away wrath, so I hope this is a gentle reply. I mean it in that spirit. Tom, with respect to your criticism of my example,

Hi, It good you asked but I made sure it's in defined known position. The time base knob cannot be inserted in any other way. It's all locked

Both marked 820 ohms (grey-red-brown); initial measure in circuit R155 real value 1053 ohms (same value when removed), R290 real value 832 ohms and they look like 0.5W (if not more). Now the two have

Thanks everyone for the very interesting contributions. I have one more question about the feedback/noise debacle. Without feedback we have less linearity, therefore the original signal comes with a

I thank everyone for their help. No, it's my mistake, it's "A2 board", not A3: C1274 and C1291. Tek "2465" should not have C1292.

I'm also planning to recap my 2465 (plain vanilla, not -A or -B) as some RIFA's have already exploded, so if Giorgio or someone else puts together an up-to-date list could it please be posted here in

Ignorant question: On the video, I see you are missing some knobs, like the one for Holdoff. Are you sure that you have set that to minimum and others correctly as well and what's more: Are you sure

https://youtu.be/IPcyfDF65oU Here are the observations on the A sweep. Note the difference between free running and triggered

Giorgio, I may have TDK/Epcos B57238S809M 16 mm 8R 5,5A , solded 3 euro, or B57153S0150M000, 15R, 1.8 A, possible 2 in // for the current, my supplier gives 2 to 3 weeks (to be realy verified...)

Your observations in the video look OK for B sweep: 1) There is no change in B sweep in 1n/div and 2n/div settings. 2x is handled by the horizontal amp for 2n -> 1n setting. 2) Delay changing B gate

Hi Chris, Yes, there are many "proofs" that reveal various misconceptions about negative feedback. Many of them start with a kernel of truth, but then veer off into the weeds. Unfortunately, it is

R155 should be 820-ohm, R290 changed from 1k-ohm to 820-ohm in later revisions. They were both upgraded to 0.5W from 0.25W. What value do you have for R155 and R290 now? It makes a difference in

Tom is right. Negative feedback can only reduce the noise introduced by the amplifier itself. If the system works properly, the input will be perfectly amplified - with no noise added by the

A3 1 uF 50v nonplzd 505-MKS2C041001FJC00 Film capacitor 1uF 63 Volt 5% That is an error in my very old list. It should be 4.7uF

I had made a mistake on the round leaded ones. They are leaky the same way as the square leaded ones. The bend in the leads is opposite, Base is to the back instead of the front. I apologize for any

I decided to further test the ones I had pulled out of various pieces because of the leakage. I know they test as a diode. The round lead 0367 types with the oxidation on the leads close to the body

That's exactly the "not even wrong" attribution that I warned about. Your example has nothing at all to do with negative feedback, and it horribly muddies the waters to shoehorn negative feedback into

I will jump in with my explanation.? Negative feedback does nothing for noise on the input.? That input noise looks just like a valid signal to the circuit input so it gets amplified at the same

I found the manual for my allen-bradley series 70 mod pots instant prototypes. It's been scanned and I'll upload it to the files section here. In the process, I also found an ordering guide for the

https://youtu.be/A4IGmQKUV2w wrote: