Re: SWR vs. Resonance; Heaviside
Hi All,
Yes, Oliver Heaviside is another of our little known doyens of the electronics world. He was indeed a remarkable man.
Most of us would only know his name, let alone of his existence, if we are involved in amateur radio or radio physics through the naming of the "Heaviside layer" or "E layer" in the ionosphere.
I put Oliver Heaviside in the same category as Nicola Tesla as two of the most under rated contributors to our understanding of the science of electricity and RF propagation.
Just my 2c worth...
Cheers...Bob VK2ZRE
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 16/10/2024 12:11 pm, John Nightingale via groups.io wrote:
On 2024-10-15 12:59, W0LEV wrote:
WARNING:? MORE OFF TOPIC
And only last week I read a paper that proposed that in the big picture of
the universe which we are just on the verge of detecting, that as well
obeys quantization rules much like the electrons around the atomic nucleus
and the energy levels of the nuclear particles within the nucleus.? The
finer we poke at a problem, the more we discover we don't understand.? But
that's the joy and draw of hard science.
Oh, yes, to my last email.? Outside of Mr. Einstein, we must give Mr.
Maxwell full credit for bringing electromagnetics to a well defined set of
four equations (even though two of them are plagerized from previous
works). With the greatest respect, what Mr. Maxwell produced, so very early on, was a brilliant insight. It was, however, indigestible but for a few. Maxwell's four equations are, really, Oliver Heaviside's four equations.
Heaviside was a man without a formal background. Nonetheless, he was one of the few who did understand Maxwell's jungle of ideas and "built" his own mathematics to express Maxwell's thesis. (For doing so, Mr. Heaviside was excoriated by his "betters", learned gentlemen all, at first, for having the temerity to fabricate a "do-it-yourself" mathematics that he could not seat upon a formal basis. Heaviside answered his critics by saying, essentially,"It works, you figure it out!")
?? After all, that's what our VNAs are all about: measuring RF energy
over its many forms and frequencies.? And Mendeleev for seeing the
organization of the basic elements.
Dave - W?LEV
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 7:47?PM Ray Lulling via groups.io <ray=
[email protected]> wrote:
Waves or particles? Quantum Mechanics is stranger than truth
and physicists can¡¯t explain why. The latest read I¡¯ve seen suggests
that everything in the universe is composed of different kinds of
interacting fields. When certain fields interact with the Higgs field,
the interaction creates mass.
Don¡¯t think too much about this or your brain will hurt.? ...
|
Who was it said that there is only one electron in the universe, but it moves so fast that its everywhere.
Peter
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 15/10/2024 19:21, Tony Scaminaci wrote: Also, check out the famous dual-slit experiment here:
,particles%20%E2%80%93%20revealing%20its%20quantum%20nature.
Waves or particles? Quantum Mechanics is stranger than truth and physicists
can¡¯t explain why. The latest read I¡¯ve seen suggests that everything in
the universe is composed of different kinds of interacting fields. When
certain fields interact with the Higgs field, the interaction creates mass.
Don¡¯t think too much about this or your brain will hurt.?
Tony
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 3:10?AM G8HUL via groups.io <g8hul=
[email protected]> wrote:
Now, are the magnetic and electrical fields, waves or quantized
particles? That is the part that I do not fully understand.
Both or may be neither!
Look up wave particle duality.
73
Jeff G8HUL
|
Sorry..typos
I wanted to add ad more options anyway. What's the best bang for your buck? Maximum accurate dynamic range under 400mhz is the target too.
Lite VNA 64, SV4401A, NanoVNA V2 Plus4 or VNA6000?
|
So the SV4401A of the Lite VNA 64? Which device is more reliable?
|
String Theory.........Quantum Gravity........?? Maybe just mathematicians gone wild? Most don¡¯t know this and its been heavily downplayed but the implications are specific. We watched two stellar masses merge. The gravity detection array vibrated from the merger several seconds before anything else on light or radio. This puts gravity, even if must milliseconds, faster than light. In my mind this establishes all forms of energy as being forms of gravity. Not Exactly.??? The EM Waves have been traveling though a Plasma.Yes, a very thin Plasma, but a plasma never the less. A Plasma is a Non-Linear-Transmission line.? Meaning different wavelengths travel though it a different speeds.?? One way for getting a good estimate for the distance to a pulsar is how much ime\frequency spread there is in the pulse. I think we can safely say the light has been slowed down by passing though a media. Thin but there and been traveling for a LONG time.??? Kent
|
Re: SWR vs. Resonance; Heaviside
On 2024-10-15 12:59, W0LEV wrote: WARNING: MORE OFF TOPIC
And only last week I read a paper that proposed that in the big picture of
the universe which we are just on the verge of detecting, that as well
obeys quantization rules much like the electrons around the atomic nucleus
and the energy levels of the nuclear particles within the nucleus. The
finer we poke at a problem, the more we discover we don't understand. But
that's the joy and draw of hard science.
Oh, yes, to my last email. Outside of Mr. Einstein, we must give Mr.
Maxwell full credit for bringing electromagnetics to a well defined set of
four equations (even though two of them are plagerized from previous
works). With the greatest respect, what Mr. Maxwell produced, so very early on, was a brilliant insight. It was, however, indigestible but for a few. Maxwell's four equations are, really, Oliver Heaviside's four equations. Heaviside was a man without a formal background. Nonetheless, he was one of the few who did understand Maxwell's jungle of ideas and "built" his own mathematics to express Maxwell's thesis. (For doing so, Mr. Heaviside was excoriated by his "betters", learned gentlemen all, at first, for having the temerity to fabricate a "do-it-yourself" mathematics that he could not seat upon a formal basis. Heaviside answered his critics by saying, essentially,"It works, you figure it out!") After all, that's what our VNAs are all about: measuring RF energy
over its many forms and frequencies. And Mendeleev for seeing the
organization of the basic elements.
Dave - W?LEV
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 7:47?PM Ray Lulling via groups.io <ray=
[email protected]> wrote:
Waves or particles? Quantum Mechanics is stranger than truth
and physicists can¡¯t explain why. The latest read I¡¯ve seen suggests
that everything in the universe is composed of different kinds of
interacting fields. When certain fields interact with the Higgs field,
the interaction creates mass.
Don¡¯t think too much about this or your brain will hurt.? ...
--
|
Re: NanoVNA <---> TinySA ultra
Thanks Stan for that explanation. Very interesting...
To you and Dave, I have had the same 30dB external attenuation between the SA and VNA in all these pictures. What varies is that I've told the SA there is -30dB of external attenuation (LEVEL>EXT GAIN) so the -10 dBm you see is really -40 dBm. I am a BIG fan of attenuation!
|
Re: parasitic capacitance tests
Thanks Roger.
--
Carlos Delfino
Equipe Basic?o da Eletr?nica <>
Celular: (85) 985-205-490 (OI) - Aquiraz/CE
<>
Em ter., 15 de out. de 2024 ¨¤s 19:08, Roger Need via groups.io
<sailtamarack@...> escreveu:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
|
Re: parasitic capacitance tests
|
The unit we had when I worked at a Bell System operating company, designed by Bell Labs and manufactured by Western Electric, had the rods firmly embedded in holes in the larger diameter longitudinal shaft so the rods could only move when the long shaft rotated slightly under torsion.
73,
Maynard
W6PAP
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 10/15/24 08:57, Jim Lux wrote: The Bell Labs rods are basically showing a torsional vibration in the center conductor (that is, the rods indicate the angle, and since the deflection of the painted top is"small" deflection is approx proportional to angle).
The rods are (very) stiff, so they're essentially a "point mass" (the inductance) and the connection is a spring (the capacitance). So it's a fairly good representation of a distributed LC network. (in a straight line system the capacitor is the -kx and the mass is m)
The rods are easy, the trick is finding suitable "capacitors" - I couldn't tell from the movie what they used, but I would think piano wire might be a start. It's available in a wide variety of diameters if you want to change the distributed C. Tapered lines are basically changing the length/mass of the rods (their moment of inertia). It's a bit tricky, because it goes with length^2. (I = 1/12 * M * L^2)
-----Original Message-----
From: <[email protected]>
Sent: Oct 14, 2024 5:32 PM
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [nanovna-users] SWR vs. Resonance
On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 07:08 AM, Miro, N9LR wrote:
Maynard's more down to ground explanation got me
much closer to the answer, but I still need to apply a healthy dose of
"accept, don't ask" kind of logic" :)
This got me thinking…regarding wave transmission in other physical media, such as Dave’s rope or Bell Lab’s linked rods, in these examples what would be the equivalent parameters of the voltage and current parameters in an electrical transmission line? And could this help someone understand why the “current” equation on a transmission line is a difference, rather than a sum?
For example, on a rope with both a forward wave and a reflected wave propagating on it, what parameters would be the equivalent of Vfwd, Ifwd, Vref, and Iref on an electrical transmission line? Or are there no equivalents for all four parameters?
- Jeff, K6jca
|
Re: NanoVNA <---> TinySA ultra
Fun, right? As Dave mentioned, you will get a more accurate reading if the level lower, but it will be fundamentally similar.
This is part of the clever design of the nanovna, analogous to the clever design used in the tinySA.
The frequency generator chip used in the nanovna can only give a good signal up to about 300MHz, so for all frequencies above 300MHz it uses a harmonic. So what you are seeing is the 133.3 MHz fundamental, and the third harmonic of 400MHz, and other harmonics, same as what you would see if you set the nanovna to 133.3MHz. This clever use of the square wave and its harmonics greatly extends the usefulness of this little device.
Stan
|
Re: NanoVNA <---> TinySA ultra
I notice a measured level of -10 dBm. I believe Eric recommends for best performance and minimal aliasing to keep the input level at or below roughly -30 dBm. You might try the same sweep with a 20 dB attenuator installed between the source and the input to the VNA. Dave - W?LEV On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 8:37?PM Matthew Rapaport via groups.io <quineatal= [email protected]> wrote: Ok Stan, you got me! See picture. The marker is on 400MHz. I am seeing
signals both above and below the fundamental which is not even the
strongest signal. The other signals go in 1/2 harmonic steps (?) with
smaller spikes to either side in 1/4 steps... (?)...
-- *Dave - W?LEV* -- Dave - W?LEV
|
Re: NanoVNA <---> TinySA ultra
Ok Stan, you got me! See picture. The marker is on 400MHz. I am seeing signals both above and below the fundamental which is not even the strongest signal. The other signals go in 1/2 harmonic steps (?) with smaller spikes to either side in 1/4 steps... (?)...
|
Re: parasitic capacitance tests
QUOTE (Jim Lux): The trick is that the apparent values are affected by the gain of the active device (assuming you're measuring it with biases applied). E.g. the Miller effect. * Making the measurement with no bias gives little to no information. Note that all the datasheets of our modern MMICs, HF, and ?wave transistors, be they BJTs or FETs, give the S-parameters at specific bias points. Measuring capacitance with no realistic bias makes no sense. Dave - W?LEV On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 7:56?PM Carlos Delfino via groups.io <consultoria= [email protected]> wrote: Thank you, I will study what was suggested.
--
Carlos Delfino
Equipe Basic?o da Eletr?nica <>
Celular: (85) 985-205-490 (OI) - Aquiraz/CE
<>
Em ter., 15 de out. de 2024 ¨¤s 16:39, Jim Lux via groups.io <jimlux=
[email protected]> escreveu:
I would think that you would do it by setting up a circuit with the
transistor in an operating configuration (whether CE, CC, or CB) with
biases, and DC blocks to/from the VNA and then measuring the parameters,
comparing with a model (e.g. SPICE).
Surely there is a HP/Agilent/Keysight application note on measuring
transistor parameters with a VNA - that's where I would start.
The trick is that the apparent values are affected by the gain of the
active device (assuming you're measuring it with biases applied). E.g. the
Miller effect.
-- *Dave - W?LEV* -- Dave - W?LEV
|
String Theory.........Quantum Gravity........? Maybe just mathematicians gone wild? Most don¡¯t know this and its been heavily downplayed but the implications are specific. We watched two stellar masses merge. The gravity detection array vibrated from the merger several seconds before anything else on light or radio. This puts gravity, even if must milliseconds, faster than light. In my mind this establishes all forms of energy as being forms of gravity. Everything, is little more than a vibration on the string that binds all matter. The bigger question, what is that string made of. And if it's broken, does it damage the universe? Would a particle freed from the strings simply vanish, flying away from other? Would it travel back to the other dimensions of the universe? We have also seen more than enough evidence to support that at the sub atomic level, matter freely interacts with other planes, or other dimensions be they mathematical or literal spaces. Now for us studying RF this is very interesting because we know for certain that both matter and energy are not as absolute as we thought. We know that a laser for instance can penetrate a lead brick, without cutting a hole into the brick. ? ? ? Thank You, Ray ? Innovative?Timing?Systems? ?p:? (314) 737-4900 ?a:? 11671?Lilburn?Park?Rd,?St.?Louis,?MO?63146? ?w:? Innovativetimingsystems.com ?w:? itsyourrace.com ?e:? ray@... ?InnovativeTimingSystems?ITS?JaguarTiming??ITSYOURRACE??ITSYOURRACE The information contained in this message is privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. In addition, this information is the property of the sender. (C) Copyright 2024. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. If you are the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Information in this message may contain errors and may be subject to change at any time. ? ? -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] < [email protected]> On Behalf Of W0LEV via groups.io Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2024 2:31 PM To: [email protected]Subject: Re: [nanovna-users] SWR vs. Resonance WARNING: OFF TOPIC Take gravity. Einstein did an exquisite job of explaining the EFFECTS of gravity. That's all from the respect of the EFFECTS of gravity on propagation of EM waves (bending light, Einstein lensing, ....). However, conversely, I've never seen the mathematical treatment of the effect of propagating EM waves on gravity - just the opposite of what Mr. Einstein put on paper. Both should be true to observation and self closed. Nor do we have an "excuse" (explanation) of why with a propagating EM wave the electric and magnetic properties of that wave must be orthogonal (right angles). Further: The Higgs Boson (the "God Particle") supposedly embodies mass to standard matter (remember F=ma?). And since matter embodies gravity, what is the link between the Higgs Boson (the Higgs Field) and gravity? Future Nobel Prize winner???? We DO NOT even have an inkling at understanding gravity. Oh, yes, and then there is the loosie goosie Hubble Constant. There is a buttload of physics addressing our own universe of which we have no understanding. String Theory.........Quntum Gravity........? Maybe just mathematicians gone wild? Dave - W?LEV On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 6:22?PM Tony Scaminaci via groups.io <tonyscam= [email protected]> wrote: Also, check out the famous dual-slit experiment here:
ved-wave-nature/#:~:text=The%20original%20double%2Dslit%20experiment,p
articles%20%E2%80%93%20revealing%20its%20quantum%20nature
.
Waves or particles? Quantum Mechanics is stranger than truth and
physicists can¡¯t explain why. The latest read I¡¯ve seen suggests that
everything in the universe is composed of different kinds of
interacting fields. When certain fields interact with the Higgs field, the interaction creates mass.
Don¡¯t think too much about this or your brain will hurt.?
Tony
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 3:10?AM G8HUL via groups.io <g8hul=
[email protected]> wrote:
Now, are the magnetic and electrical fields, waves or quantized
particles? That is the part that I do not fully understand.
Both or may be neither!
Look up wave particle duality.
73
Jeff G8HUL
-- *Dave - W?LEV* -- Dave - W?LEV
|
WARNING: MORE OFF TOPIC And only last week I read a paper that proposed that in the big picture of the universe which we are just on the verge of detecting, that as well obeys quantization rules much like the electrons around the atomic nucleus and the energy levels of the nuclear particles within the nucleus. The finer we poke at a problem, the more we discover we don't understand. But that's the joy and draw of hard science. Oh, yes, to my last email. Outside of Mr. Einstein, we must give Mr. Maxwell full credit for bringing electromagnetics to a well defined set of four equations (even though two of them are plagerized from previous works). After all, that's what our VNAs are all about: measuring RF energy over its many forms and frequencies. And Mendeleev for seeing the organization of the basic elements. Dave - W?LEV On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 7:47?PM Ray Lulling via groups.io <ray= [email protected]> wrote: Waves or particles? Quantum Mechanics is stranger than truth
and physicists can¡¯t explain why. The latest read I¡¯ve seen suggests
that everything in the universe is composed of different kinds of
interacting fields. When certain fields interact with the Higgs field,
the interaction creates mass.
Don¡¯t think too much about this or your brain will hurt.? Neither strings. Seriously. If everything vibrates regardless of the
distance, then its connected. The issue is the propagation time and what's
in-between that may absorb or reflect some of the vibration. Of course we
also know that given the right conditions mater may also resonate.
While I am not a string theory subscriber. I have seen much to say that
yes, everything is linked. What exactly links everything to everything
else. That is unknown. But it certainly seems like strings.
Thank You,
Ray
Innovative Timing Systems
p:
(314) 737-4900
a:
11671 Lilburn Park Rd, St. Louis, MO 63146
w:
Innovativetimingsystems.com w: itsyourrace.com
e:
ray@...
InnovativeTimingSystems ITS JaguarTiming ITSYOURRACE ITSYOURRACE
The information contained in this message is privileged and confidential
and protected from disclosure. In addition, this information is the
property of the sender. (C) Copyright 2024. If the reader of this message
is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for
delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is
strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it
from your computer. If you are the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
communication is strictly prohibited. Information in this message may
contain errors and may be subject to change at any time.
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Tony
Scaminaci via groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2024 1:22 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [nanovna-users] SWR vs. Resonance
Also, check out the famous dual-slit experiment here:
,particles%20%E2%80%93%20revealing%20its%20quantum%20nature
.
Waves or particles? Quantum Mechanics is stranger than truth and
physicists can¡¯t explain why. The latest read I¡¯ve seen suggests that
everything in the universe is composed of different kinds of interacting
fields. When certain fields interact with the Higgs field, the interaction
creates mass.
Don¡¯t think too much about this or your brain will hurt.?
Tony
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 3:10?AM G8HUL via groups.io <g8hul=
[email protected]> wrote:
Now, are the magnetic and electrical fields, waves or quantized
particles? That is the part that I do not fully understand.
Both or may be neither!
Look up wave particle duality.
73
Jeff G8HUL
-- *Dave - W?LEV* -- Dave - W?LEV
|
Re: parasitic capacitance tests
Thank you, I will study what was suggested. -- Carlos Delfino Equipe Basic?o da Eletr?nica <> Celular: (85) 985-205-490 (OI) - Aquiraz/CE <> Em ter., 15 de out. de 2024 ¨¤s 16:39, Jim Lux via groups.io <jimlux= [email protected]> escreveu:
I would think that you would do it by setting up a circuit with the
transistor in an operating configuration (whether CE, CC, or CB) with
biases, and DC blocks to/from the VNA and then measuring the parameters,
comparing with a model (e.g. SPICE).
Surely there is a HP/Agilent/Keysight application note on measuring
transistor parameters with a VNA - that's where I would start.
The trick is that the apparent values are affected by the gain of the
active device (assuming you're measuring it with biases applied). E.g. the
Miller effect.
|
Waves or particles? Quantum Mechanics is stranger than truth
and physicists can¡¯t explain why. The latest read I¡¯ve seen suggests
that everything in the universe is composed of different kinds of
interacting fields. When certain fields interact with the Higgs field,
the interaction creates mass.
Don¡¯t think too much about this or your brain will hurt.? Neither strings. Seriously. If everything vibrates regardless of the distance, then its connected. The issue is the propagation time and what's in-between that may absorb or reflect some of the vibration. Of course we also know that given the right conditions mater may also resonate. While I am not a string theory subscriber. I have seen much to say that yes, everything is linked. What exactly links everything to everything else. That is unknown. But it certainly seems like strings. ? ? ? Thank You, Ray ? Innovative?Timing?Systems? ?p:? (314) 737-4900 ?a:? 11671?Lilburn?Park?Rd,?St.?Louis,?MO?63146? ?w:? Innovativetimingsystems.com ?w:? itsyourrace.com ?e:? ray@... ?InnovativeTimingSystems?ITS?JaguarTiming??ITSYOURRACE??ITSYOURRACE The information contained in this message is privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. In addition, this information is the property of the sender. (C) Copyright 2024. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. If you are the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Information in this message may contain errors and may be subject to change at any time. ? ? -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] < [email protected]> On Behalf Of Tony Scaminaci via groups.io Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2024 1:22 PM To: [email protected]Subject: Re: [nanovna-users] SWR vs. Resonance Also, check out the famous dual-slit experiment here: ,particles%20%E2%80%93%20revealing%20its%20quantum%20nature. Waves or particles? Quantum Mechanics is stranger than truth and physicists can¡¯t explain why. The latest read I¡¯ve seen suggests that everything in the universe is composed of different kinds of interacting fields. When certain fields interact with the Higgs field, the interaction creates mass. Don¡¯t think too much about this or your brain will hurt.? Tony On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 3:10?AM G8HUL via groups.io <g8hul= [email protected]> wrote: Now, are the magnetic and electrical fields, waves or quantized
particles? That is the part that I do not fully understand.
Both or may be neither!
Look up wave particle duality.
73
Jeff G8HUL
|
Re: parasitic capacitance tests
I would think that you would do it by setting up a circuit with the transistor in an operating configuration (whether CE, CC, or CB) with biases, and DC blocks to/from the VNA and then measuring the parameters, comparing with a model (e.g. SPICE).
Surely there is a HP/Agilent/Keysight application note on measuring transistor parameters with a VNA - that's where I would start.
The trick is that the apparent values are affected by the gain of the active device (assuming you're measuring it with biases applied). E.g. the Miller effect.
|
Re: parasitic capacitance tests
If a transistor were biased as in use, one could decouple the DC bias from the VNA and measure the junction capacitances. Just keep the RF drive extremely low as to not upset the bias point of the DUT. This does not seem like rocket science. As a test article, remember the EB junction of many BFTs can serve as a varactor. Dave - W?LEV On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 7:15?PM Carlos Delfino via groups.io <consultoria= [email protected]> wrote: Hello Michael, thank you for your attention.
In this case, the question is particularly about using the VNA, using an
LCR or a common capacitance meter I have no doubts.
--
Carlos Delfino
Equipe Basic?o da Eletr?nica <>
Celular: (85) 985-205-490 (OI) - Aquiraz/CE
<>
Em ter., 15 de out. de 2024 ¨¤s 16:06, Michael Robinson via groups.io <
kc0ta.us@...> escreveu:
First, in order to determine "parasitic capacitance" (which is generally
determined by the sum total of the circuit components and their interaction
within the circuit) you must determine the junction (P-N) capacitance of
Base-Emitter and Base-Collector and "possibly" also Emitter-Collector
capacitance, although the latter will be difficult to determine. I would
try using a capacitor function of a meter to test each junction, since that
meter function utilizes a voltage and frequency to determine a value within
a given margin of error based on the tolerance of the instrument and also
of the device under test (in the case of a true cap).
A book on transistor circuits written by Malvino (whose first name escapes
me after 50 years outside of the teaching environment) has several
subtopics on P-N junction capacitance and associated lead length of the
device (i.e., LC effect) that you might find of interest. There are likely
several editions that followed the edition that I used.
Best Regards,
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 10:57?AM Carlos Delfino via groups.io
<consultoria=
[email protected]> wrote:
Hello everyone.
A colleague told me that it is possible to perform certain transistor tests
with a VNA, but he doesn't know where he saw such a practice.
Is it really possible to perform such parasitic capacitance tests, and how
would it be done? Could you point me to a tutorial on the subject?
Thank you.
--
Carlos Delfino
Equipe Basic?o da Eletr?nica <>
Celular: (85) 985-205-490 (OI) - Aquiraz/CE
<>
--
Michael L Robinson, KC0TA
FREEDOM is NEVER given; It Is WON!
¡°In the beginning of a change the Patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and
hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it
costs nothing to be a Patriot.¡± ¨D Mark Twain
When Tyranny becomes Law, Revolution becomes Duty!
-- *Dave - W?LEV* -- Dave - W?LEV
|
Roger Need
Ray Lulling