Silly Arrow. You should always connect the feedback to the + pin!
In our school for higher education we had a docent claiming that in an inverting amplifier all currents magically disappears into the inverting input because the other terminal is held at 0 V. So he consistently drew current arrows around such an amplifier pointing towards the inverting input.
Why the hell are Vs and Ve used to label the input and output? Why not Vin and Vout..
Super confusing.
Why the hell are Vs and Ve used to label the input and output?
Probably from French
entrée and
sortie.
English is not the only language of this world, luckily.
This does not diminish or excuse the idiotic blunder.
At least they did not connect the supply - so it may actually work in some cases.
Probably from French entrée and sortie.
The author apparently is a french marketing manager.
Let's hope he is better at marketing for Arrow's sake.
Funnily, the example that follows with a resistive divider followed by an opamp buffer is correct, and the rest of the schematics in the article look correct as well.
So it's unclear what happened here.
Why the hell are Vs and Ve used to label the input and output?
Probably from French entrée and sortie.
English is not the only language of this world, luckily.
This does not diminish or excuse the idiotic blunder.
Not to be confused with (English) "source" and "exit".
I remember an industrial products web site that had potentiometers listed under "Switches", in a sub-category titled "Variable-Output Switches".
In our school for higher education we had a docent claiming that in an inverting amplifier all currents magically disappears into the inverting input because the other terminal is held at 0 V. So he consistently drew current arrows around such an amplifier pointing towards the inverting input.
That's why he is a docent and not doing anything remotely close to practical engineering.
Silly Arrow. You should always connect the feedback to the + pin!
Yeah, should send them a email with some negative feedback.