Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.electronics.design > #453180 > unrolled thread

Interesting instrument

Back to article view | Back to sci.electronics.design

Contents

  Interesting instrument John S <Sophi.2@invalid.org> - 2017-03-22 22:26 -0500
    Re: Interesting instrument John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2017-03-22 21:21 -0700
      Re: Interesting instrument George Herold <gherold@teachspin.com> - 2017-03-23 06:04 -0700
      Re: Interesting instrument Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2017-03-23 14:26 -0500
        Re: Interesting instrument John S <Sophi.2@invalid.org> - 2017-03-23 15:28 -0500
        Re: Interesting instrument George Herold <gherold@teachspin.com> - 2017-03-23 17:48 -0700
          Re: Interesting instrument pcdhobbs@gmail.com - 2017-03-24 05:04 -0700
            Re: Interesting instrument George Herold <gherold@teachspin.com> - 2017-03-24 05:50 -0700
        Re: Interesting instrument pcdhobbs@gmail.com - 2017-03-24 04:59 -0700
        Re: Interesting instrument Cursitor Doom <curd@notformail.com> - 2017-03-24 22:56 +0000

#453180 — Interesting instrument

But expensive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmCvrGVtC0M

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#453191

On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 22:26:51 -0500, John S <Sophi.2@invalid.org>
wrote:

>But expensive.
>
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmCvrGVtC0M

Please tell me about it. I can't stand to listen to that guy.


-- 

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453217

On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 12:21:15 AM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 22:26:51 -0500, John S <Sophi.2@invalid.org>
> wrote:
> 
> >But expensive.
> >
> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmCvrGVtC0M
> 
> Please tell me about it. I can't stand to listen to that guy.

AIM-TTi I-Prober 520 Current Probe Review
There was a link to it in a previous thread about current monitoring.  
5MHz bandwidth flux gate magnetometer.

George H.   
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc
> 
> jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
> http://www.highlandtechnology.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453253

John Larkin wrote:

> On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 22:26:51 -0500, John S <Sophi.2@invalid.org>
> wrote:
> 
>>But expensive.
>>
>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmCvrGVtC0M
> 
> Please tell me about it. I can't stand to listen to that guy.
> 
> 
I had EXACTLY the same reaction!

Jon

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453262

On 3/23/2017 2:26 PM, Jon Elson wrote:
> John Larkin wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 22:26:51 -0500, John S <Sophi.2@invalid.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> But expensive.
>>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmCvrGVtC0M
>>
>> Please tell me about it. I can't stand to listen to that guy.
>>
>>
> I had EXACTLY the same reaction!
>
> Jon
>

Sorry, guys. I accidentally posted this when I meant to send it to a 
coworker.

Apologies.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453304

On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 3:25:54 PM UTC-4, Jon Elson wrote:
> John Larkin wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 22:26:51 -0500, John S <Sophi.2@invalid.org>
> > wrote:
> > 
> >>But expensive.
> >>
> >>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmCvrGVtC0M
> > 
> > Please tell me about it. I can't stand to listen to that guy.
> > 
> > 
> I had EXACTLY the same reaction!
> 
> Jon

I had it playing in the background as I tested an instrument.
I looked fun, ~mA to A resolution, calibration for trace width looked
tweaky... But think of it as a magnetic field sensor and you are fine. 

For low fields is a flux gate more sensitive than GMR?  

George H.  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453372

>For low fields is a flux gate more sensitive than GMR?   

Flux gates are limited by Barkhausen noise, iirc--the domains kind of rattle around as they switch. 

GMR is a huge effect, so I expect it's quieter but maybe less linear than a flux gate. (Not that I've built either one myself.) 

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453376

On Friday, March 24, 2017 at 8:04:44 AM UTC-4, pcdh...@gmail.com wrote:
> >For low fields is a flux gate more sensitive than GMR?   
> 
> Flux gates are limited by Barkhausen noise, iirc--the domains kind of rattle around as they switch. 
> 
> GMR is a huge effect, so I expect it's quieter but maybe less linear than a flux gate. (Not that I've built either one myself.) 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Phil Hobbs

I made a flux gate... well helped a colleague get his to work better.  
I know little about GMR.  
I only looked at pictures here, (from 1999)
https://www.nve.com/Downloads/lowfield.pdf
GMR looks to have a fair amount of hysterisis, which would make it not so great 
for small field AC stuff.  

George H. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453368

>> Please tell me about it. I can't stand to listen to that guy. 
>>  
>I had EXACTLY the same reaction! 

Yup. I watch the occasional teardown video of his, mostly to learn more about good/bad construction practices, but there's no way I could take a steady diet of that voice. The editorializing about things he knows nothing about gets a bit old too.  

Jones seems to work pretty hard at it, though, and kudos to him for all his tutorials and explanations for beginners. 

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453465

On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 14:26:54 -0500, Jon Elson wrote:

> John Larkin wrote:
 
>> Please tell me about it. I can't stand to listen to that guy.
>> 
>> 
> I had EXACTLY the same reaction!

Same here. It's a shame as this chap does make some really interesting 
vids.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.electronics.design

csiph-web