Electronics > Beginners

Portable Low Frequency square wave generator circuit - Solved - page 3

<< < (10/16) > >>

spec:

--- Quote from: Zero999 on February 01, 2019, 01:03:10 pm ---Has anyone actually tried building the 50% duty cycle 7555 circuit before?
--- End quote ---
You keep raising a flag and saluting it. There is no requirement for an exact 1:1 M/S ratio. If it were required I would have done it- it's dead simple to do.

Then, of course you would be able to bang on about a 1:1 M/S ratio not being required and the circuit is too complicated.

spec:

--- Quote from: soldar on February 06, 2019, 04:39:49 pm ---
--- Quote from: spec on February 06, 2019, 04:06:55 pm --- It doesn't matter what you have done or what you are. That does not grant you the right to make derogatory unfounded statements about other peoples designs.

Just for the record, I have been designing circuits since before the 555 was even thought of. In fact I had a 555 chip before they were released in the UK.

--- End quote ---
I have no idea what your problem is with me since all my posts in this thread have been cordial exchanges with Zero999 and I have not once in this thread addressed or responded to your posts or made any comment about them. I do not understand your attitude and I have no idea why you called me "presumptuous". I don't know if you are mistaking me with someone else from some other thread or what. I have made no comments on anything you have said in this thread or, as far as I can remember, in any other thread.

I have reported your posts in the hope that you will just leave me alone. 

E.T.A: I see you also have a beef with Zero999. Are you sure it's us? Maybe you are just misinterpreting people's motives? Why the confrontational attitude?

--- End quote ---
Just read my posts and reply to them specifically and directly. That is the way that things are resolved.

I have no beef with anyone- just what they do or say. I just posted a schematic and you and zero99 have been making unwarranted negative comments about it, continuously, implying it is not up to the job.  I didn't want to waste time replying to all the comments, but have been forced to do so.

And the final killer is that you and zero99 are now implying that there is something wrong with posting a schematic to meet the OP's requirement. By the way, if I hadn't posted the schematic, this thread would have died, as many others have.

I would welcome a constructive discussion about any schematic that I post, especially about an error. But the whole tone has been dictatorial and negative ... and in error.

I would appreciate it if you could stick to facts, as posted, and not go in for gratuitous personal innuendo.

Zero999:

--- Quote from: spec on February 06, 2019, 04:44:34 pm ---
--- Quote from: Zero999 on February 01, 2019, 01:03:10 pm ---Has anyone actually tried building the 50% duty cycle 7555 circuit before?
--- End quote ---
You keep raising a flag and saluting it. There is no requirement for an exact 1:1 M/S ratio. If it were required I would have done it- it's dead simple to do.

Then, of course you would be able to bang on about a 1:1 M/S ratio not being required and the circuit is too complicated.

--- End quote ---
If it's that simple then why not do it? The CD4013 circuit I posted previously would do that. It doesn't take much imagination to connect it to a suitable MOSFET driver to give the required +/-6V out.


--- Quote from: spec on February 06, 2019, 05:10:52 pm ---
--- Quote from: soldar on February 06, 2019, 04:39:49 pm ---
--- Quote from: spec on February 06, 2019, 04:06:55 pm --- It doesn't matter what you have done or what you are. That does not grant you the right to make derogatory unfounded statements about other peoples designs.

Just for the record, I have been designing circuits since before the 555 was even thought of. In fact I had a 555 chip before they were released in the UK.

--- End quote ---
I have no idea what your problem is with me since all my posts in this thread have been cordial exchanges with Zero999 and I have not once in this thread addressed or responded to your posts or made any comment about them. I do not understand your attitude and I have no idea why you called me "presumptuous". I don't know if you are mistaking me with someone else from some other thread or what. I have made no comments on anything you have said in this thread or, as far as I can remember, in any other thread.

I have reported your posts in the hope that you will just leave me alone. 

E.T.A: I see you also have a beef with Zero999. Are you sure it's us? Maybe you are just misinterpreting people's motives? Why the confrontational attitude?

--- End quote ---
I have no beef with anyone- just what they do or say. I just posted a schematic and you and zero99 have been making unwarranted negative comments about it, implying it is not up to the job.  I didn't want to waste time replying to all the comments, but have been forced to do so.

And the final killer is that you and zero99 are now implying that there is something wrong with posting a schematic to meet the OP's requirement. By the way, if I hadn't posted the circuit, this thread would have died, as many others have.

I would welcome a discussion about any schematic that I post, especially about an error. But the whole tone has been dictatorial and negative ... and in error.

--- End quote ---

* No, we just pointed out that it has room for improvement. Part of the problem is the original poster's requirements were ambiguous. He said he wanted something portable and preferably battery powered.
* No one forced you to do anything.
* No we didn't, by all means please do post schematics. I'm certainly glad you posted the schematic because it prompted me to breadboard the 7555 astable to see how well it meets the 50% duty cycle criteria.
* No, you're clearly not interested in what anyone has to say about the circuits you post. The tone of this thread was cordial, until you started getting defensive in response to some polite feedback on the circuit you posted.

spec:

--- Quote from: Zero999 on February 06, 2019, 05:40:13 pm ---
--- Quote from: spec on February 06, 2019, 04:44:34 pm ---
--- Quote from: Zero999 on February 01, 2019, 01:03:10 pm ---Has anyone actually tried building the 50% duty cycle 7555 circuit before?
--- End quote ---
You keep raising a flag and saluting it. There is no requirement for an exact 1:1 M/S ratio. If it were required I would have done it- it's dead simple to do.

Then, of course you would be able to bang on about a 1:1 M/S ratio not being required and the circuit is too complicated.

--- End quote ---
If it's that simple then why not do it? The CD4013 circuit I posted previously would do that. It doesn't take much imagination to connect it to a suitable MOSFET driver to give the required +/-6V out.


--- Quote from: spec on February 06, 2019, 05:10:52 pm ---
--- Quote from: soldar on February 06, 2019, 04:39:49 pm ---
--- Quote from: spec on February 06, 2019, 04:06:55 pm --- It doesn't matter what you have done or what you are. That does not grant you the right to make derogatory unfounded statements about other peoples designs.

Just for the record, I have been designing circuits since before the 555 was even thought of. In fact I had a 555 chip before they were released in the UK.

--- End quote ---
I have no idea what your problem is with me since all my posts in this thread have been cordial exchanges with Zero999 and I have not once in this thread addressed or responded to your posts or made any comment about them. I do not understand your attitude and I have no idea why you called me "presumptuous". I don't know if you are mistaking me with someone else from some other thread or what. I have made no comments on anything you have said in this thread or, as far as I can remember, in any other thread.

I have reported your posts in the hope that you will just leave me alone. 

E.T.A: I see you also have a beef with Zero999. Are you sure it's us? Maybe you are just misinterpreting people's motives? Why the confrontational attitude?

--- End quote ---
I have no beef with anyone- just what they do or say. I just posted a schematic and you and zero99 have been making unwarranted negative comments about it, implying it is not up to the job.  I didn't want to waste time replying to all the comments, but have been forced to do so.

And the final killer is that you and zero99 are now implying that there is something wrong with posting a schematic to meet the OP's requirement. By the way, if I hadn't posted the circuit, this thread would have died, as many others have.

I would welcome a discussion about any schematic that I post, especially about an error. But the whole tone has been dictatorial and negative ... and in error.

--- End quote ---

* No, we just pointed out that it has room for improvement. Part of the problem is the original poster's requirements were ambiguous. He said he wanted something portable and preferably battery powered.
* No one forced you to do anything.
* No we didn't, by all means please do post schematics. I'm certainly glad you posted the schematic because it prompted me to breadboard the 7555 astable to see how well it meets the 50% duty cycle criteria.
* No, you're clearly not interested in what anyone has to say about the circuits you post. The tone of this thread was cordial, until you started getting defensive in response to some polite feedback on the circuit you posted.

--- End quote ---
Here we go again... on and on- you just never let go do you. I asked you a while back to get off my back- can you please do so.

spec:
Just for the record I tried to avoid all the negative statements about the circuit, but it got so intense and extended that I had to counter it.  I don't care, but the problem is that others, who don't know about design, who read this thread will think that the comments you have been making are relevant and that the circuit is no good. This has happened quite a few times on other threads.

Another thing to remember is it is not your prerogative to tell members how to design or demand that they do this or that. As far as I know you are just a member, like everyone else. For example, if I want to use split supplies- and I have good reason for doing so- I will. I don't need your approval. You will notice that I have made no derogative personal remarks about you, just about your posts.

This is all a great shame, and it is an even bigger shame that Soldar got mixed up in all this, because I know that you are interested in electronic design, and you have some great ideas- I have said so, but it is the nature of your posts and the fact that you will not see reason in many cases, that is the problem.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod