Sujet : Re: another fast one-shot
De : bill.sloman (at) *nospam* ieee.org (Bill Sloman)
Groupes : sci.electronics.designDate : 23. Jun 2024, 03:38:28
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v57ual$qng$2@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 22/06/2024 3:23 pm, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jun 2024 19:02:11 +0100, piglet <erichpwagner@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On 13/06/2024 07:03, Bill Sloman wrote:
On 13/06/2024 4:11 am, john larkin wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jun 2024 17:22:49 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
<cd999666@notformail.com> wrote:
>
On Wed, 12 Jun 2024 09:33:17 -0700, john larkin wrote:
<snip>
It's really a slow diffamp, not a one-shot. It will make a nice clean
1 second output, given a 1 second trigger input.
It isn't. John could have tried to simulate his "one second trigger input", if he could have worked out what he meant by that.
And it is hard to make a really slow differential amplifier out of a BFR92 long-tailed pair.
He got very excited about the 43mV threshold voltage. Just for fun, I increased R7 in my simulation from 1k2 to 1k5, which doubles the threshold.
The same trigger pulse gave a visually identical output pulse. My guess is that it will be picoseconds later and picoseconds narrower, but I'm not going to make a meal of it by actually measuring the differences.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney-- This email has been checked for viruses by Norton antivirus software.www.norton.com
another fast one-shot
Re: another fast one-shot