Driver to drive?

Jamie · Feb 5, 2012

Bart! wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:44:44 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

OK, you have your super multimode Wal-Mart LED flashlight,

What is this another attempt at a social insult?

Fuck off and DIE, John Larkin. You are a sad excuse for a civil,
intelligent man. That may well mean that you qualify for none of the
three titles. Likely even. You are worse, in fact, than Ross Perot could
have ever been. And his remarks were not racist. It was just a poor
choice of words. You actually were trying to be insulting. Big
difference.

It means that a real, intelligent man like Ross has more honor and
character than an insulting, pathetic, self aggrandizing piece of shit
like you ever will.

It's truly amazing what woman are pushing out these days.

Jamie

Bart! · Feb 5, 2012

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 14:22:16 -0500, Jamie
<jamie_ka1lpa_not_valid_after_ka1lpa_@charter.net> wrote:

I am sure it would be your desire to do so, if you only knew, and then
most likely would be a case where we wouldn't be able to shut you up!

You're an idiot. Go away, little boy.

Bart! · Feb 5, 2012

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 14:22:16 -0500, Jamie
<jamie_ka1lpa_not_valid_after_ka1lpa_@charter.net> wrote:

Well, there is a sucker born in every crowd. I am sure with your
skills you'll be able to find some. Most people tend to hang with their
own kind.

Which is why we see you "hanging with" John, particularly in the midst
of his dishonorable moments, which is nearly always.

You are pathetic. A coattail hanging twit, if there ever was one.

John Larkin · Feb 5, 2012

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 10:43:46 -0800, Bart!
<B@rt_The_Sheriff_Is_A_Nig***!.org> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:44:44 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

OK, you have your super multimode Wal-Mart LED flashlight,

What is this another attempt at a social insult?

Hey, I like Wal-Mart. Too bad there are none nearby. We go to the ones
in Sacramanto or Reno when we're in the neighborhood.

Fuck off and DIE, John Larkin. You are a sad excuse for a civil,
intelligent man. That may well mean that you qualify for none of the
three titles. Likely even. You are worse, in fact, than Ross Perot could
have ever been. And his remarks were not racist. It was just a poor
choice of words. You actually were trying to be insulting. Big
difference.

It means that a real, intelligent man like Ross has more honor and
character than an insulting, pathetic, self aggrandizing piece of shit
like you ever will.

Which means that you don't know how your flashlight works, and you're
not interested anyhow.

--

John Larkin, President Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators

John Larkin · Feb 5, 2012

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 10:51:43 -0800, Bart!
<B@rt_The_Sheriff_Is_A_Nig***!.org> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:44:44 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

The question is, how does it regulate the LED
current?

A simple ditz like you wouldn't know.

Inductive boost? Capacitive charge pump? Resistor? Linear or
PWM current-regulator IC? Raw battery connected to LEDs?

Think about cost, idiot.

You could take it apart and see what's inside.

Here we go with retarded primer boy, on his retarded primer boy soap
box... again.

Or you could search the
web for controller ICs. Or, more fun, you could learn some things
about the issue without opening the flashlight at all.

Any ideas how?

It's a 555 timer circuit, you fucking retard. Even when it appears to
be "full on",it is really being pulsed. It is detectable at night.

That still doesn't say how the current is controlled. Or what stores
the multiple operating states.

--

John Larkin, President Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators

John Larkin · Feb 5, 2012

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 10:57:00 -0800, Bart!
<B@rt_The_Sheriff_Is_A_Nig***!.org> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:47:40 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

I don't know either.

The first time you have spoken the truth in this group in quite some
time.

He should tell us how his flashlight regulates
current.

I would, but only if it is MY desire, you pathetic, cringing little
milksop.

Or, if he doesn't know (which he doesn't)

Back to the lying horseshit behavior already, I see. There was a time
when a man would simply drop you where you stand for pathetic, uncivil
behavior like that. That is where the Colt motto came from.

he could do a
little work to find out,

You are an idiot.

and tell us. Which he won't.

For all you know, utilization of LEDs is what will make me rich.

Then start by understanding how they work. How does your high-end
flashlight regulate LED current?

--

John Larkin, President Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators

Jim Thompson · Feb 5, 2012

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:38:32 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 10:24:56 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:08:32 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 19:03:59 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

Actually, I did peruse two of those sites and found that with the
voltage drop across the diode, at the currents you mentioned, both
cases resulted in real-world power dissipation in excess of the limits
allowed.

Now you are weaseling.

---
Nope, just stating a fact.
---

In addition, the Fairchild site which, in figure 5, clearly plots the
ordinate in millivolts, is wrong.

Apparently not having noticed that, I suspect you'll now make excuses
and bitch on forever about how unimportant accuracy is.

It's not a matter of "accuracy", it's an obvious typo. The axis is
obviously volts.

---
If the axis was correctly annotated, would that not be more accurate
than if it were annotated incorrectly?

The y-axis on that fig 5 graph is obviously volts, and the "m" is
obviously a typo. Given that, there's no accuracy problem. My job is
to design stuff, not freeze in my tracks at the slightest excuse.

If you look at a smattering of 1N4148 data sheets, there's a huge
spread of I-V curves. So I certainly wouldn't design a circuit that
depends on the high-current I-V curve without making sure we'd
purchase only one vendors's parts, and even then it would be risky. I
wouldn't depend on their capacitance or reverse leakage behavior,
either. 1N4148 is a very sloppy part.

All of which is aside from the issue of paralleling LEDs, which lots
of people seem to do.

Phil Hobbs · Feb 5, 2012

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:38:32 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 10:24:56 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:08:32 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 19:03:59 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

Actually, I did peruse two of those sites and found that with the
voltage drop across the diode, at the currents you mentioned, both
cases resulted in real-world power dissipation in excess of the limits
allowed.

Now you are weaseling.

---
Nope, just stating a fact.
---

In addition, the Fairchild site which, in figure 5, clearly plots the
ordinate in millivolts, is wrong.

Apparently not having noticed that, I suspect you'll now make excuses
and bitch on forever about how unimportant accuracy is.

It's not a matter of "accuracy", it's an obvious typo. The axis is
obviously volts.

---
If the axis was correctly annotated, would that not be more accurate
than if it were annotated incorrectly?

The y-axis on that fig 5 graph is obviously volts, and the "m" is
obviously a typo. Given that, there's no accuracy problem. My job is
to design stuff, not freeze in my tracks at the slightest excuse.

If you look at a smattering of 1N4148 data sheets, there's a huge
spread of I-V curves. So I certainly wouldn't design a circuit that
depends on the high-current I-V curve without making sure we'd
purchase only one vendors's parts, and even then it would be risky. I
wouldn't depend on their capacitance or reverse leakage behavior,
either. 1N4148 is a very sloppy part.

All of which is aside from the issue of paralleling LEDs, which lots
of people seem to do.

It must be hell to be manic depressive.

Nah, some of my favourite transistors are bipolar.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
845-480-2058

hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net

krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz · Feb 5, 2012

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 14:22:16 -0500, Jamie
<jamie_ka1lpa_not_valid_after_ka1lpa_@charter.net> wrote:

Bart! wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:47:40 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

I don't know either.

The first time you have spoken the truth in this group in quite some
time.

You mean it is the first time you have understood comments made from
JL in a long time?

DimBulb didn't this time, either.

He should tell us how his flashlight regulates
current.

I would, but only if it is MY desire, you pathetic, cringing little
milksop.

I am sure it would be your desire to do so, if you only knew, and then
most likely would be a case where we wouldn't be able to shut you up!

When has knowledge ever had anything to do with AlwaysWrong's screeching on?

Or, if he doesn't know (which he doesn't)

Back to the lying horseshit behavior already, I see. There was a time
when a man would simply drop you where you stand for pathetic, uncivil
behavior like that. That is where the Colt motto came from.

And there were and still is, times where the pen is mightier than the sword.

Certainly mightier than Nymbecile's limp-wristed threats.

he could do a
little work to find out,

You are an idiot.

Yes, how shameful of him to make such rude remarks about you doing work!

But not unexpected. It's the thought of a little knowledge that's really got
his back hair in a bun.

and tell us. Which he won't.

For all you know, utilization of LEDs is what will make me rich.

Well, there is a sucker born in every crowd. I am sure with your
skills you'll be able to find some. Most people tend to hang with their
own kind.

Come on. Dimbulb couldn't calculate the resistance of an LED's ballast
resistor. He's called DimBulb for a reason.

Fact is, you don't know a goddamned thing, you pathetic, characterless,
honorless piece of shit.

He may appear to you to be character less in your eyes, but I believe
that would be due to lack of time on his part, wasting such traits to
pamper the likes of you.

Have a good day, I am sure i'll be next on the list.

Back of the line. Back of the line.

Jim Thompson · Feb 5, 2012

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 15:31:32 -0500, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:38:32 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 10:24:56 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:08:32 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 19:03:59 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

Actually, I did peruse two of those sites and found that with the
voltage drop across the diode, at the currents you mentioned, both
cases resulted in real-world power dissipation in excess of the limits
allowed.

Now you are weaseling.

---
Nope, just stating a fact.
---

In addition, the Fairchild site which, in figure 5, clearly plots the
ordinate in millivolts, is wrong.

Apparently not having noticed that, I suspect you'll now make excuses
and bitch on forever about how unimportant accuracy is.

It's not a matter of "accuracy", it's an obvious typo. The axis is
obviously volts.

---
If the axis was correctly annotated, would that not be more accurate
than if it were annotated incorrectly?

The y-axis on that fig 5 graph is obviously volts, and the "m" is
obviously a typo. Given that, there's no accuracy problem. My job is
to design stuff, not freeze in my tracks at the slightest excuse.

If you look at a smattering of 1N4148 data sheets, there's a huge
spread of I-V curves. So I certainly wouldn't design a circuit that
depends on the high-current I-V curve without making sure we'd
purchase only one vendors's parts, and even then it would be risky. I
wouldn't depend on their capacitance or reverse leakage behavior,
either. 1N4148 is a very sloppy part.

All of which is aside from the issue of paralleling LEDs, which lots
of people seem to do.

It must be hell to be manic depressive.

Nah, some of my favourite transistors are bipolar.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Mine, too >:-}

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice

Jamie · Feb 5, 2012

Bart! wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 14:22:16 -0500, Jamie
jamie_ka1lpa_not_valid_after_ka1lpa_@charter.net> wrote:

Well, there is a sucker born in every crowd. I am sure with your
skills you'll be able to find some. Most people tend to hang with their
own kind.

Which is why we see you "hanging with" John, particularly in the midst
of his dishonorable moments, which is nearly always.

You are pathetic. A coattail hanging twit, if there ever was one.

You're correct to assume so, I hang with the best!

At least you got something correct, for a change.

Jamie

Jamie · Feb 5, 2012

Phil Hobbs wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:38:32 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 10:24:56 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:08:32 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 19:03:59 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

Actually, I did peruse two of those sites and found that with the
voltage drop across the diode, at the currents you mentioned, both
cases resulted in real-world power dissipation in excess of the limits
allowed.

Now you are weaseling.

---
Nope, just stating a fact.
---

In addition, the Fairchild site which, in figure 5, clearly plots the
ordinate in millivolts, is wrong.

Apparently not having noticed that, I suspect you'll now make excuses
and bitch on forever about how unimportant accuracy is.

It's not a matter of "accuracy", it's an obvious typo. The axis is
obviously volts.

---
If the axis was correctly annotated, would that not be more accurate
than if it were annotated incorrectly?

The y-axis on that fig 5 graph is obviously volts, and the "m" is
obviously a typo. Given that, there's no accuracy problem. My job is
to design stuff, not freeze in my tracks at the slightest excuse.

If you look at a smattering of 1N4148 data sheets, there's a huge
spread of I-V curves. So I certainly wouldn't design a circuit that
depends on the high-current I-V curve without making sure we'd
purchase only one vendors's parts, and even then it would be risky. I
wouldn't depend on their capacitance or reverse leakage behavior,
either. 1N4148 is a very sloppy part.

All of which is aside from the issue of paralleling LEDs, which lots
of people seem to do.

It must be hell to be manic depressive.

Nah, some of my favourite transistors are bipolar.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz · Feb 5, 2012

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 15:31:32 -0500, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:38:32 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 10:24:56 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:08:32 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 19:03:59 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

Actually, I did peruse two of those sites and found that with the
voltage drop across the diode, at the currents you mentioned, both
cases resulted in real-world power dissipation in excess of the limits
allowed.

Now you are weaseling.

---
Nope, just stating a fact.
---

In addition, the Fairchild site which, in figure 5, clearly plots the
ordinate in millivolts, is wrong.

Apparently not having noticed that, I suspect you'll now make excuses
and bitch on forever about how unimportant accuracy is.

It's not a matter of "accuracy", it's an obvious typo. The axis is
obviously volts.

---
If the axis was correctly annotated, would that not be more accurate
than if it were annotated incorrectly?

The y-axis on that fig 5 graph is obviously volts, and the "m" is
obviously a typo. Given that, there's no accuracy problem. My job is
to design stuff, not freeze in my tracks at the slightest excuse.

If you look at a smattering of 1N4148 data sheets, there's a huge
spread of I-V curves. So I certainly wouldn't design a circuit that
depends on the high-current I-V curve without making sure we'd
purchase only one vendors's parts, and even then it would be risky. I
wouldn't depend on their capacitance or reverse leakage behavior,
either. 1N4148 is a very sloppy part.

All of which is aside from the issue of paralleling LEDs, which lots
of people seem to do.

It must be hell to be manic depressive.

Nah, some of my favourite transistors are bipolar.

Me too. The unipolar ones are just, well, weird.

John Larkin · Feb 5, 2012

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 10:57:00 -0800, Bart!
<B@rt_The_Sheriff_Is_A_Nig***!.org> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:47:40 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

I don't know either.

The first time you have spoken the truth in this group in quite some
time.

He should tell us how his flashlight regulates
current.

I would, but only if it is MY desire, you pathetic, cringing little
milksop.

Or, if he doesn't know (which he doesn't)

Back to the lying horseshit behavior already, I see. There was a time
when a man would simply drop you where you stand for pathetic, uncivil
behavior like that. That is where the Colt motto came from.

Which Colt motto? There seem to be a number of them.

--

John Larkin, President Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators

Phil Hobbs · Feb 5, 2012

John Larkin wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 10:57:00 -0800, Bart!
B@rt_The_Sheriff_Is_A_Nig***!.org> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:47:40 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

I don't know either.

The first time you have spoken the truth in this group in quite some
time.

He should tell us how his flashlight regulates
current.

I would, but only if it is MY desire, you pathetic, cringing little
milksop.

Or, if he doesn't know (which he doesn't)

Back to the lying horseshit behavior already, I see. There was a time
when a man would simply drop you where you stand for pathetic, uncivil
behavior like that. That is where the Colt motto came from.

Which Colt motto? There seem to be a number of them.

I assume "It works every time!" (*)

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

(*)
http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2009/06/warning_it_works_every_time_colt_45_ads_now_come_with_disclaimer.php

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
845-480-2058

hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net

John Larkin · Feb 5, 2012

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 13:28:58 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:38:32 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 10:24:56 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:08:32 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 19:03:59 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

Actually, I did peruse two of those sites and found that with the
voltage drop across the diode, at the currents you mentioned, both
cases resulted in real-world power dissipation in excess of the limits
allowed.

Now you are weaseling.

---
Nope, just stating a fact.
---

In addition, the Fairchild site which, in figure 5, clearly plots the
ordinate in millivolts, is wrong.

Apparently not having noticed that, I suspect you'll now make excuses
and bitch on forever about how unimportant accuracy is.

It's not a matter of "accuracy", it's an obvious typo. The axis is
obviously volts.

---
If the axis was correctly annotated, would that not be more accurate
than if it were annotated incorrectly?

The y-axis on that fig 5 graph is obviously volts, and the "m" is
obviously a typo. Given that, there's no accuracy problem. My job is
to design stuff, not freeze in my tracks at the slightest excuse.

If you look at a smattering of 1N4148 data sheets, there's a huge
spread of I-V curves. So I certainly wouldn't design a circuit that
depends on the high-current I-V curve without making sure we'd
purchase only one vendors's parts, and even then it would be risky. I
wouldn't depend on their capacitance or reverse leakage behavior,
either. 1N4148 is a very sloppy part.

All of which is aside from the issue of paralleling LEDs, which lots
of people seem to do.

It must be hell to be manic depressive.

...Jim Thompson

So far, life has been a huge amount of fun. But what does that have to
do with diodes?

--

John Larkin, President Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators

Jim Thompson · Feb 5, 2012

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 14:08:18 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 13:28:58 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:38:32 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 10:24:56 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:08:32 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 19:03:59 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

Actually, I did peruse two of those sites and found that with the
voltage drop across the diode, at the currents you mentioned, both
cases resulted in real-world power dissipation in excess of the limits
allowed.

Now you are weaseling.

---
Nope, just stating a fact.
---

In addition, the Fairchild site which, in figure 5, clearly plots the
ordinate in millivolts, is wrong.

Apparently not having noticed that, I suspect you'll now make excuses
and bitch on forever about how unimportant accuracy is.

It's not a matter of "accuracy", it's an obvious typo. The axis is
obviously volts.

---
If the axis was correctly annotated, would that not be more accurate
than if it were annotated incorrectly?

The y-axis on that fig 5 graph is obviously volts, and the "m" is
obviously a typo. Given that, there's no accuracy problem. My job is
to design stuff, not freeze in my tracks at the slightest excuse.

If you look at a smattering of 1N4148 data sheets, there's a huge
spread of I-V curves. So I certainly wouldn't design a circuit that
depends on the high-current I-V curve without making sure we'd
purchase only one vendors's parts, and even then it would be risky. I
wouldn't depend on their capacitance or reverse leakage behavior,
either. 1N4148 is a very sloppy part.

All of which is aside from the issue of paralleling LEDs, which lots
of people seem to do.

It must be hell to be manic depressive.

...Jim Thompson

So far, life has been a huge amount of fun. But what does that have to
do with diodes?

480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

The first sign of senility is persistently trying to be an asshole

The second sign of senility is touting your company's wonderful
circuit designs as your own, while posting amateur crap on S.E.D

The third sign is acting like Polly Prissypants

josephkk · Feb 5, 2012

On Thu, 02 Feb 2012 21:09:10 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Thu, 02 Feb 2012 20:28:15 -0800, josephkk
joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 17:42:27 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

I don't really think an "arbitrary" definition is necessary, since the
location of the knee has been with us for decades.

John, I told you there are people who believe there is a "knee" in an
exponential function. ;-)

And there are people who think that the only kind of resistance is
E/I.

Some famous person once said "When all you know is Ohm's Law,
everything looks like a resistor."

Well, that was me, actually.

Switch famous to infamous and the description of yourself is all too apt.

?-)

After almost a week of brooding, that's all you can come up with?

Naw, it is all you are worth. But it is fun to rag on your vainglory.

?-)

John Larkin · Feb 5, 2012

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 15:39:42 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 14:08:18 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 13:28:58 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:38:32 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 10:24:56 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:08:32 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 19:03:59 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

Actually, I did peruse two of those sites and found that with the
voltage drop across the diode, at the currents you mentioned, both
cases resulted in real-world power dissipation in excess of the limits
allowed.

Now you are weaseling.

---
Nope, just stating a fact.
---

In addition, the Fairchild site which, in figure 5, clearly plots the
ordinate in millivolts, is wrong.

Apparently not having noticed that, I suspect you'll now make excuses
and bitch on forever about how unimportant accuracy is.

It's not a matter of "accuracy", it's an obvious typo. The axis is
obviously volts.

---
If the axis was correctly annotated, would that not be more accurate
than if it were annotated incorrectly?

The y-axis on that fig 5 graph is obviously volts, and the "m" is
obviously a typo. Given that, there's no accuracy problem. My job is
to design stuff, not freeze in my tracks at the slightest excuse.

If you look at a smattering of 1N4148 data sheets, there's a huge
spread of I-V curves. So I certainly wouldn't design a circuit that
depends on the high-current I-V curve without making sure we'd
purchase only one vendors's parts, and even then it would be risky. I
wouldn't depend on their capacitance or reverse leakage behavior,
either. 1N4148 is a very sloppy part.

All of which is aside from the issue of paralleling LEDs, which lots
of people seem to do.

It must be hell to be manic depressive.

...Jim Thompson

So far, life has been a huge amount of fun. But what does that have to
do with diodes?

The same as talking amps of current in a 1N4148.

...Jim Thompson

The datasheets I linked to go to 500 and 800 mA. Presumably those were
pulsed measurements, but don't say so.

But what is a 1N4148 anyhow? I suppose JEDEC specs exist, but I've
never seen one. And if JEDEC defines the part, where's the
enforcement? What keeps some Chinese chop shop from shipping anything
they care to call a 1N4148?

We have a number of cases where we have stock numbers for, say, a
generic 2N7002, and another stock number for a Fairchild 2N7002,
because sometimes it matters. It's safer to use a house number than a
1N or 2N number, if performance really matters.

I remember the classic 2N3055 fiasco, when people started selling tiny
epitaxial parts in aluminum cans as "2N3055", and they tended to blow
up.

Hmmm, I don't seem to use many 1N4148s. They appear on only about 10
of our 800 BOMs. The MELF version on even fewer. We do use a ton of
BAV types.

Anybody know how, say, a BAV99 is defined and enforced?

--

John Larkin, President Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators

Jim Thompson · Feb 5, 2012

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 15:22:14 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 15:39:42 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 14:08:18 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 13:28:58 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:38:32 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 10:24:56 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:08:32 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 19:03:59 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

Actually, I did peruse two of those sites and found that with the
voltage drop across the diode, at the currents you mentioned, both
cases resulted in real-world power dissipation in excess of the limits
allowed.

Now you are weaseling.

---
Nope, just stating a fact.
---

In addition, the Fairchild site which, in figure 5, clearly plots the
ordinate in millivolts, is wrong.

Apparently not having noticed that, I suspect you'll now make excuses
and bitch on forever about how unimportant accuracy is.

It's not a matter of "accuracy", it's an obvious typo. The axis is
obviously volts.

---
If the axis was correctly annotated, would that not be more accurate
than if it were annotated incorrectly?

The y-axis on that fig 5 graph is obviously volts, and the "m" is
obviously a typo. Given that, there's no accuracy problem. My job is
to design stuff, not freeze in my tracks at the slightest excuse.

If you look at a smattering of 1N4148 data sheets, there's a huge
spread of I-V curves. So I certainly wouldn't design a circuit that
depends on the high-current I-V curve without making sure we'd
purchase only one vendors's parts, and even then it would be risky. I
wouldn't depend on their capacitance or reverse leakage behavior,
either. 1N4148 is a very sloppy part.

All of which is aside from the issue of paralleling LEDs, which lots
of people seem to do.

It must be hell to be manic depressive.

...Jim Thompson

So far, life has been a huge amount of fun. But what does that have to
do with diodes?

The same as talking amps of current in a 1N4148.

...Jim Thompson

The datasheets I linked to go to 500 and 800 mA. Presumably those were
pulsed measurements, but don't say so.

But what is a 1N4148 anyhow? I suppose JEDEC specs exist, but I've
never seen one. And if JEDEC defines the part, where's the
enforcement? What keeps some Chinese chop shop from shipping anything
they care to call a 1N4148?

We have a number of cases where we have stock numbers for, say, a
generic 2N7002, and another stock number for a Fairchild 2N7002,
because sometimes it matters. It's safer to use a house number than a
1N or 2N number, if performance really matters.

I remember the classic 2N3055 fiasco, when people started selling tiny
epitaxial parts in aluminum cans as "2N3055", and they tended to blow
up.

Hmmm, I don't seem to use many 1N4148s. They appear on only about 10
of our 800 BOMs. The MELF version on even fewer. We do use a ton of
BAV types.

Anybody know how, say, a BAV99 is defined and enforced?

Driver to drive?

Jamie

Guest

Bart!

Guest

Bart!

Guest

John Larkin

Guest

John Larkin

Guest

John Larkin

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Phil Hobbs

Guest

krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Jamie

Guest

Jamie

Guest

krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz

Guest

John Larkin

Guest

Phil Hobbs

Guest

John Larkin

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

josephkk

Guest

John Larkin

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Log in

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor