Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.electronics.design > #747251 > unrolled thread
| Started by | john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-09-05 10:17 -0700 |
| Last post | 2026-09-09 18:59 +0000 |
| Articles | 17 — 8 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.electronics.design
hilarious circuit john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-09-05 10:17 -0700
Re: hilarious circuit Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2026-09-05 18:37 +0000
Re: hilarious circuit john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-09-05 12:18 -0700
Re: hilarious circuit Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-09-06 07:28 +0000
Re: hilarious circuit Kragen Javier Sitaker <kragen@canonical.org> - 2026-09-06 17:55 -0300
Re: hilarious circuit john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-09-06 14:37 -0700
Re: hilarious circuit Cóilín Nioclásín Glostéir <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-09-08 19:33 +0000
Re: hilarious circuit john larkin <jl@htigct.com> - 2026-09-08 16:12 -0700
Re: hilarious circuit Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-09-09 17:12 +1000
Re: hilarious circuit john larkin <jl@htigct.com> - 2026-09-09 10:37 -0700
Re: hilarious circuit Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-09-10 23:45 +1000
Re: hilarious circuit john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-09-10 07:03 -0700
Re: hilarious circuit Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-09-11 16:45 +1000
Re: hilarious circuit Cóilín Nioclásín Glostéir <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-09-11 19:10 +0000
Re: hilarious circuit Cóilín Nioclásín Glostéir <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-09-11 18:51 +0000
Re: hilarious circuit someone <2a59d59e3809f827ce709d3815e3950eef4a6a93af5557a93a7fdfba71460843@example.com> - 2026-09-09 17:45 +0000
Re: hilarious circuit Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2026-09-09 18:59 +0000
| From | john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-05 10:17 -0700 |
| Subject | hilarious circuit |
| Message-ID | <t8jo9ld5nphsg5btb3ef1movk155771b83@4ax.com> |
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/kk49kd2dbbhal7pahprkx/48v_sim.jpg?rlkey=j9cewvy6jbtnc6ptjmzes4njd&raw=1 I happened upon this Spice sim. I think some AI thing created it. It's even funnier if you run it. John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-05 18:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <117hngh$1ofjl$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #747251 |
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote: > https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/kk49kd2dbbhal7pahprkx/48v_sim.jpg?rlkey=j9cewvy6jbtnc6ptjmzes4njd&raw=1 > > I happened upon this Spice sim. I think some AI thing created it. > > It's even funnier if you run it. > > > John Larkin > Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center > Lunatic Fringe Electronics > Well, it’ll boost _a_ voltage, all right—in SPICE, probably into the megavolts. Cheers Phil Hobbs -- Dr Philip C D Hobbs Principal Consultant ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-05 12:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <eiqo9l1r82t4g73a0d0193l17925rlr8qd@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #747253 |
On Sat, 5 Sep 2026 18:37:05 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote: >john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote: >> https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/kk49kd2dbbhal7pahprkx/48v_sim.jpg?rlkey=j9cewvy6jbtnc6ptjmzes4njd&raw=1 >> >> I happened upon this Spice sim. I think some AI thing created it. >> >> It's even funnier if you run it. >> >> >> John Larkin >> Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center >> Lunatic Fringe Electronics >> > >Well, it’ll boost _a_ voltage, all right—in SPICE, probably into the >megavolts. > >Cheers > >Phil Hobbs It's good that it actually doesn't boost. D1 is rated for 20 volts. John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-06 07:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <117j4nd$25lvg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #747251 |
>john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>wrote: >>https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/kk49kd2dbbhal7pahprkx/48v_sim.jpg?rlkey=j9cewvy6jbtnc6ptjmzes4njd&raw=1 > >I happened upon this Spice sim. I think some AI thing created it. D1 connected to wrong side of L1? >It's even funnier if you run it. I would not bother . 24V out minus D1 diode drop Connect 24 V to output Remove chip and other components for savings :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kragen Javier Sitaker <kragen@canonical.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-06 17:55 -0300 |
| Message-ID | <87a4puhzgx.fsf@debian> |
| In reply to | #747271 |
Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> writes: >>john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>wrote: >>>https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/kk49kd2dbbhal7pahprkx/48v_sim.jpg?rlkey=j9cewvy6jbtnc6ptjmzes4njd&raw=1 >> >>I happened upon this Spice sim. I think some AI thing created it. > > D1 connected to wrong side of L1? Thanks for pointing that out. It's forehead-slappingly obvious now that you point it out. You have permission to make fun of me for not seeing it immediately. It might work as a way to destroy unneeded IRLML6344s? Kragen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-06 14:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3tmr9l5peaaekivf6v2p7lilkmmattjfvg@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #747296 |
On Sun, 06 Sep 2026 17:55:10 -0300, Kragen Javier Sitaker <kragen@canonical.org> wrote: >Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> writes: >>>john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>wrote: >>>>https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/kk49kd2dbbhal7pahprkx/48v_sim.jpg?rlkey=j9cewvy6jbtnc6ptjmzes4njd&raw=1 >>> >>>I happened upon this Spice sim. I think some AI thing created it. >> >> D1 connected to wrong side of L1? > >Thanks for pointing that out. It's forehead-slappingly obvious now that >you point it out. You have permission to make fun of me for not seeing >it immediately. > >It might work as a way to destroy unneeded IRLML6344s? > >Kragen Not a problem. The fet never turns on. The MODPEX operation seems to be, thankfully, out of business. But Symmetry still offers training courses for switching regulator design, for $1000 per day per person. I think the last thing to fall to AI will be circuit design. John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Cóilín Nioclásín Glostéir <thanks-to@Taf.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-08 19:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <117pnum$3ft31$2@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #747298 |
John Larkin wrote:
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|"[. . .] |
| |
|[. . .] |
|>Thanks for pointing that out. It's forehead-slappingly obvious now that|
|>you point it out. You have permission to make fun of me for not seeing |
|>it immediately. |
|[. . .] |
| |
|[. . .] |
| |
|I think the last thing to fall to AI will be circuit design." |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Recall an earlier thread ("Re: AI for FPGA design") in
sci.electronics.design and comp.arch.fpga 13 months ago -
e.g.
news:9a17f136-ba5a-4585-4fe9-aae1ae614be7@irrt.De
. . .
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|"[. . .] |
|"A lady claims via LinkedIn that an AI service produced a bad Verilog code, so|
|she concluded that an AI is not going to threaten her job, and I wrote to her |
|that she deserves a refund." |
| |
|[. . .] |
| |
|I asked Ms. Sharada Yeluri for permission to republish from that LinkedIn |
|thread. [. . .] |
| |
|[. . .]" |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john larkin <jl@htigct.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-08 16:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <sd51al5kgbiil09r38jh5nkll8utve8udj@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #747425 |
On Tue, 8 Sep 2026 19:33:44 -0000 (UTC), Cóilín Nioclásín Glostéir
<thanks-to@Taf.com> wrote:
>John Larkin wrote:
>|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>|"[. . .] |
>| |
>|[. . .] |
>|>Thanks for pointing that out. It's forehead-slappingly obvious now that|
>|>you point it out. You have permission to make fun of me for not seeing |
>|>it immediately. |
>|[. . .] |
>| |
>|[. . .] |
>| |
>|I think the last thing to fall to AI will be circuit design." |
>|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>
>Recall an earlier thread ("Re: AI for FPGA design") in
>sci.electronics.design and comp.arch.fpga 13 months ago -
>e.g.
>news:9a17f136-ba5a-4585-4fe9-aae1ae614be7@irrt.De
>. . .
>|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>|"[. . .] |
>|"A lady claims via LinkedIn that an AI service produced a bad Verilog code, so|
>|she concluded that an AI is not going to threaten her job, and I wrote to her |
>|that she deserves a refund." |
>| |
>|[. . .] |
>| |
>|I asked Ms. Sharada Yeluri for permission to republish from that LinkedIn |
>|thread. [. . .] |
>| |
>|[. . .]" |
>|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
AI can probably do FPGA design pretty well, as it helps coding Python
or C.
But analog circuit design is a different world.
It doesn't help that AI reads what are often very bad data sheets.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-09 17:12 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <117r0t4$rnn9$7@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #747435 |
On 9/09/2026 9:12 am, john larkin wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Sep 2026 19:33:44 -0000 (UTC), Cóilín Nioclásín Glostéir
> <thanks-to@Taf.com> wrote:
>
>> John Larkin wrote:
>> |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>> |"[. . .] |
>> | |
>> |[. . .] |
>> |>Thanks for pointing that out. It's forehead-slappingly obvious now that|
>> |>you point it out. You have permission to make fun of me for not seeing |
>> |>it immediately. |
>> |[. . .] |
>> | |
>> |[. . .] |
>> | |
>> |I think the last thing to fall to AI will be circuit design." |
>> |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>>
>> Recall an earlier thread ("Re: AI for FPGA design") in
>> sci.electronics.design and comp.arch.fpga 13 months ago -
>> e.g.
>> news:9a17f136-ba5a-4585-4fe9-aae1ae614be7@irrt.De
>> . . .
>> |------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>> |"[. . .] |
>> |"A lady claims via LinkedIn that an AI service produced a bad Verilog code, so|
>> |she concluded that an AI is not going to threaten her job, and I wrote to her |
>> |that she deserves a refund." |
>> | |
>> |[. . .] |
>> | |
>> |I asked Ms. Sharada Yeluri for permission to republish from that LinkedIn |
>> |thread. [. . .] |
>> | |
>> |[. . .]" |
>> |------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>> (S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
>
> AI can probably do FPGA design pretty well, as it helps coding Python
> or C.
>
> But analog circuit design is a different world.
>
> It doesn't help that AI reads what are often very bad data sheets.
John Larkin does have issues with data sheets. My suspicion is that he
doesn't read them all that carefully, and isn't careful enough to
extract all the information provided, or pay attention to the
information that isn't being provided.
A data sheet that doesn't set an upper limit on popcorn noise (1/f or
flicker noise) is effectively warning you that the device generates a
lot of it.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john larkin <jl@htigct.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-09 10:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f363al5052mgpjmb405ooiji30p5i9tab6@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #747444 |
On Wed, 9 Sep 2026 17:12:30 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
>On 9/09/2026 9:12 am, john larkin wrote:
>> On Tue, 8 Sep 2026 19:33:44 -0000 (UTC), Cóilín Nioclásín Glostéir
>> <thanks-to@Taf.com> wrote:
>>
>>> John Larkin wrote:
>>> |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>>> |"[. . .] |
>>> | |
>>> |[. . .] |
>>> |>Thanks for pointing that out. It's forehead-slappingly obvious now that|
>>> |>you point it out. You have permission to make fun of me for not seeing |
>>> |>it immediately. |
>>> |[. . .] |
>>> | |
>>> |[. . .] |
>>> | |
>>> |I think the last thing to fall to AI will be circuit design." |
>>> |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>>>
>>> Recall an earlier thread ("Re: AI for FPGA design") in
>>> sci.electronics.design and comp.arch.fpga 13 months ago -
>>> e.g.
>>> news:9a17f136-ba5a-4585-4fe9-aae1ae614be7@irrt.De
>>> . . .
>>> |------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>>> |"[. . .] |
>>> |"A lady claims via LinkedIn that an AI service produced a bad Verilog code, so|
>>> |she concluded that an AI is not going to threaten her job, and I wrote to her |
>>> |that she deserves a refund." |
>>> | |
>>> |[. . .] |
>>> | |
>>> |I asked Ms. Sharada Yeluri for permission to republish from that LinkedIn |
>>> |thread. [. . .] |
>>> | |
>>> |[. . .]" |
>>> |------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>>> (S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
>>
>> AI can probably do FPGA design pretty well, as it helps coding Python
>> or C.
>>
>> But analog circuit design is a different world.
>>
>> It doesn't help that AI reads what are often very bad data sheets.
>
>John Larkin does have issues with data sheets. My suspicion is that he
>doesn't read them all that carefully, and isn't careful enough to
>extract all the information provided, or pay attention to the
>information that isn't being provided.
>
>A data sheet that doesn't set an upper limit on popcorn noise (1/f or
>flicker noise) is effectively warning you that the device generates a
>lot of it.
Data sheets often hide part defects. Deliberately.
Test stuff that really matters.
Does popcorn noise still happen? I think it was caused by oxide
contamination and that's been fixed. Popcorn is distinct from 1/f.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-10 23:45 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <117ucal$21isl$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #747492 |
On 10/09/2026 3:37 am, john larkin wrote: > On Wed, 9 Sep 2026 17:12:30 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> > wrote: > >> On 9/09/2026 9:12 am, john larkin wrote: >>> On Tue, 8 Sep 2026 19:33:44 -0000 (UTC), Cóilín Nioclásín Glostéir >>> <thanks-to@Taf.com> wrote: >>> >>>> John Larkin wrote: <snip> >> A data sheet that doesn't set an upper limit on popcorn noise (1/f or >> flicker noise) is effectively warning you that the device generates a >> lot of it. > > Data sheets often hide part defects. Deliberately. > > Test stuff that really matters. > > Does popcorn noise still happen? I think it was caused by oxide > contamination and that's been fixed. Popcorn is distinct from 1/f. I thought that way until 1987, until I swapped out a 741 op-amp (which doesn't have a 1/f noise spec) in favour of a marginally more modern part that did. The GaAs crystal puller it was controlling went from bang-bang operation - full on for about 30 seconds then off for about 60 seconds - to running quietly at about 30% of full output. There was a about 30 kW of heating involved, and it took about a day and half to pull a crystal, so the operators who had to baby sit the machine for the whole period were a lot happier. My guess is that a lot of what was being packaged up and sold as 741s were actually better parts that had failed their 1/f noise screening. Popcorn noise is a sort of 1/f noise. There are apparently others. Regular noise is an aspect of thermodynamics - entropy and disorder. If you let unintended impurities get into your thin base layer, and they move around you've got a different kind of noise source. The relevant theory talks about a drunkard's walk, which is about a graphic as "pop-corn noise". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_walk -- Bill Sloman, Sydney
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-10 07:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <etd5al1tk86nrpf84o0eji8nvobvgu29k3@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #747535 |
On Thu, 10 Sep 2026 23:45:44 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote: >On 10/09/2026 3:37 am, john larkin wrote: >> On Wed, 9 Sep 2026 17:12:30 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >> wrote: >> >>> On 9/09/2026 9:12 am, john larkin wrote: >>>> On Tue, 8 Sep 2026 19:33:44 -0000 (UTC), Cóilín Nioclásín Glostéir >>>> <thanks-to@Taf.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> John Larkin wrote: > ><snip> > >>> A data sheet that doesn't set an upper limit on popcorn noise (1/f or >>> flicker noise) is effectively warning you that the device generates a >>> lot of it. >> >> Data sheets often hide part defects. Deliberately. >> >> Test stuff that really matters. >> >> Does popcorn noise still happen? I think it was caused by oxide >> contamination and that's been fixed. Popcorn is distinct from 1/f. > >I thought that way until 1987, until I swapped out a 741 op-amp (which >doesn't have a 1/f noise spec) in favour of a marginally more modern >part that did. That was almost 40 years ago, and you likely used a part that had been manufactured well before that. Has anyone seen popcorn noise lately? https://www.electronics-notes.com/articles/basic_concepts/electronic-rf-noise/burst-noise-what-is.php John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-11 16:45 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <118083j$2kpki$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #747536 |
On 11/09/2026 12:03 am, john larkin wrote: > On Thu, 10 Sep 2026 23:45:44 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> > wrote: > >> On 10/09/2026 3:37 am, john larkin wrote: >>> On Wed, 9 Sep 2026 17:12:30 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On 9/09/2026 9:12 am, john larkin wrote: >>>>> On Tue, 8 Sep 2026 19:33:44 -0000 (UTC), Cóilín Nioclásín Glostéir >>>>> <thanks-to@Taf.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> John Larkin wrote: >> >> <snip> >> >>>> A data sheet that doesn't set an upper limit on popcorn noise (1/f or >>>> flicker noise) is effectively warning you that the device generates a >>>> lot of it. >>> >>> Data sheets often hide part defects. Deliberately. >>> >>> Test stuff that really matters. >>> >>> Does popcorn noise still happen? I think it was caused by oxide >>> contamination and that's been fixed. Popcorn is distinct from 1/f. >> >> I thought that way until 1987, until I swapped out a 741 op-amp (which >> doesn't have a 1/f noise spec) in favour of a marginally more modern >> part that did. > > That was almost 40 years ago, and you likely used a part that had been > manufactured well before that. Pop-corn noise was a solved problem back then too, but we were still seeing it. We didn't use recycled parts - when you are selling to customers like IBM and Fairchild you don't cut corners. Clive Sinclair famously got most of his semi-conductors from the reject bins at the TI plant in Bedford, England. The contents weren't supposed to be sold but the shop floor had worked out that they could steal a lot of them without anybody noticing, and Clive always bought the cheapest parts he could get. > Has anyone seen popcorn noise lately? > > https://www.electronics-notes.com/articles/basic_concepts/electronic-rf-noise/burst-noise-what-is.php The industry doesn't like talking about the stuff that gets nicked from its waste bins. -- Bill Sloman, Sydney
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Cóilín Nioclásín Glostéir <thanks-to@Taf.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-11 19:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <1181jnc$fme1$2@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #747492 |
John Larkin wrote: |----------------------------------------------------| |"Data sheets often hide part defects. Deliberately."| |----------------------------------------------------| True. |---------------------------------------------------| |"Test stuff that really matters." | |---------------------------------------------------| Indeed. (S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Cóilín Nioclásín Glostéir <thanks-to@Taf.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-11 18:51 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <1181ijd$fme1$1@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #747425 |
John Larkin wrote: |-------------------------------------------------------------| |"[. . .] | | | |I think the last thing to fall to AI will be circuit design."| |-------------------------------------------------------------| Many minutes ago Channel-4 News reported that various persons attempted to use Claude AI to design weapons. (S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | someone <2a59d59e3809f827ce709d3815e3950eef4a6a93af5557a93a7fdfba71460843@example.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-09 17:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <18d3b81abaa64506$5730$2028749$4226dc73@news.newsgroupdirect.com> |
| In reply to | #747251 |
Their graphic design and art department produced the schematic. It appears it wasn't proofread by an engineer. The Golden Rule of Application Notes: Ultimately, the prevalence of this rumor highlights a fundamental truth about engineering documentation: Application notes are templates and educational tools, not drop-in manufacturing files. Experienced analog engineers always treat app note schematics as conceptual guides, verifying the pinouts against the official datasheet and simulating or breadboarding the circuit before finalized manufacturing. -- For full context, visit https://www.electrondepot.com/electrodesign/hilarious-circuit-4410016-.htm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-09 18:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <117saa4$1db5i$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #747503 |
someone <2a59d59e3809f827ce709d3815e3950eef4a6a93af5557a93a7fdfba71460843@example.com> wrote: > Their graphic design and art department produced the schematic. It > appears it wasn't proofread by an engineer. > > The Golden Rule of Application Notes: Ultimately, the prevalence of this > rumor highlights a fundamental truth about engineering documentation: > Application notes are templates and educational tools, not drop-in > manufacturing files. Experienced analog engineers always treat app note > schematics as conceptual guides, verifying the pinouts against the > official datasheet and simulating or breadboarding the circuit before > finalized manufacturing. > BITD datasheets were engineering documents, but for the last 30 years or more they’ve been marketing documents. First one I really noticed was the noise plots in the LT1028 datasheet, which cut off at 10 kHz iirc. (This for a 100 MHz GBW, unity gain stable part.) The reason of course was to disguise the horrible noise peak at 300 kHz. After howls of anger and snorts of derision from customers, they eventually came clean about it. There are lots of other examples. So I almost always do a quick proto of any new chip that doesn’t come with a trustworthy recommendation. Cheers Phil Hobbs -- Dr Philip C D Hobbs Principal Consultant ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | sci.electronics.design
csiph-web