What I mean by that is, if the goddamned thing works well enough to satisfy the target market that it's aimed at, build it and sell it! Continued attempts at perfecting it will lead to fewer and fewer sales!
If anyone has more suggestions or input, please continue to weigh in with an eye towards what I reiterated above.
an island off the coast of a real continent, which island is known to be populated by many of corrupt morals, conversational hyperbole, achievemental dysfunction and an affinity for inbred and, in several cases, immoral so-called "royalty" admiration syndrome.wtf have I just read.
does it really belong here?
What I mean by that is, if the goddamned thing works well enough to satisfy the target market that it's aimed at, build it and sell it! Continued attempts at perfecting it will lead to fewer and fewer sales!
If anyone has more suggestions or input, please continue to weigh in with an eye towards what I reiterated above.
First, R&D can and should result in better performance and lower costs. Both are reasonable goals for improvement.
Second, your concept of 'well enough to satisfy the target market' is a pretty modest goal simply because your target market seems to explicitly be users without the means to critically evaluate the product in any meaningful way. They're relying on you!
Here's quick drawn schematic of a simple Wein-Bridge 100Hz (Wien or Wein) Oscillator using a simple gain limiting for amplitude stability, followed by 2nd Order Active LPF to reduce harmonic content. Bridge Oscillator should produce a respectable sine-wave output if not forced into excessive limiting, so LPF may not be required.
BOM for just electronic components should be between $0.34 and $1.56, so should suffice as a Cheap Sine-Wave AC source.
Anyway, we haven't built this, someone give it a try and would expect this to outperform the schematic shown earlier. If anyone builds this, please report back results.
Best,
Here's quick drawn schematic of a simple Wein-Bridge 100Hz (Wien or Wein) Oscillator using a simple gain limiting for amplitude stability, followed by 2nd Order Active LPF to reduce harmonic content. Bridge Oscillator should produce a respectable sine-wave output if not forced into excessive limiting, so LPF may not be required.
BOM for just electronic components should be between $0.34 and $1.56, so should suffice as a Cheap Sine-Wave AC source.
Anyway, we haven't built this, someone give it a try and would expect this to outperform the schematic shown earlier. If anyone builds this, please report back results.
Best,
Which opamp part numbers would you suggest to employ? LM358, TL072? Other?
...
However, after trimming one of the 10V references 2 months ago and keeping it powered on, and after re-checking the SDM3055 vs DMM6500 readings weekly, the 10VDC reference STILL reads exactly 10.0000, spot on, if that's worth anything.
...
The wien bridge oscillator can get a good sine quite well, but the amplitude stability is usually not that great. In the version with just the simple rectifier and zener to reduce the gain the amplitude will not be very stable amplitude. E.g. there are 2 diodes in series to the zener and the capacitor ratio will also effect the needed gain. So I would expect something on the order of -8 mV_pp/K or close to -0.1%/K for the amplitude stabilty.
There are better ways to stabilize to amplitude, e.g. with an active rectifier or measureing the peak voltage and than actively regulate the oscillator gain. The LPF after the oscillator is only a thing to improve on the harmonics and this is no longer needed with a regulated (e.g. with a JFET) amplitude.
I'm mainly a marketing guy. I realize that engineers and dedicated electronic theoreticians may not appreciate that [...]
...
I'm mainly a marketing guy. I realize that engineers and dedicated electronic theoreticians may not appreciate that but here's my philosophy regarding my original intent in this thread:
Several people have, belatedly, begun to smell that. It would have helped everybody if you had made that clear earlier.Quote
What I mean by that is, if the goddamned thing works well enough to satisfy the target market that it's aimed at, build it and sell it!
A key part of marketing is to give sufficient information to determine what a product won't do.
It would have helped if you did that explicitly, rather than leaving it to people to ask questions and make inferences.
We've all seen claims/patents for better mouse traps and apple corer/peelers. Almost all aren't any such thing.
Ya know, I've never been a fan of your arrogant, self-serving, hyper-critical posts in my own, and several other threads. Guys like you NEVER have anything good to say unless you're touting your own imagined success so, your remarks and criticisms and admitted paranoid suspicions as to where I'm coming from are all wasted hot air on me.
I've noted previously how your baselessly superior attitude tends to embarrass and chase away those participants who you deem to be less learned than you and, therefore, not worthy of your respect to at least be courteous toward their requests for help in some of your replies.
Do me a favor and put me on your ignore list and I'll do the same for you. That way, other participants won't have to witness your desperate attempts to throw a wet blanket on any more of my posts.
EDIT: deleted an asinine reference I made to his homeland. Sorry. Temper got the best of me for a moment.
I'm mainly a marketing guy. I realize that engineers and dedicated electronic theoreticians may not appreciate that [...]
Belatedly commenting, although I've been lurking from the start, so not exactly one of those late-coming naysayers
As a marketing chap I am surprised you don't see the benefit of having this on a pukka PCB. The first time I saw it in the buy/sell area I just passed straight over on the basis it was an amateur lash-up, and I suspect there will be a number of potential users who have similarly done so. IMO, making it look the part would be a better improvement than improving the specs so far as sales go.
Perhaps the problem is that you're really a marketing guy and don't have the apps, or experience, to create PCBs. If that's the case, the solution may be to ask someone to do them for you. They are not very complex and should be pretty simple to do. If you then order just five, you'll get a professional-looking PCB at less than a dollar, possibly half that if you happen upon a coupon or something. As others have noted, that would improve the reliability in both building and ongoing use, and make it quicker and simpler to assemble. And at similar, or lower, hard cost than the boards you're using.
So yeah, tggzzz's comments can be not always the most adequated ones, but at least I have seen him stating he had been made aware he was wrong. That's something I have still not see coming from you. I'm sure you are able to simply state your goals, letting aside any aggresivity, probably originated from any perceived attack to the quality of your product. I for one would greatly appreciate that. Otherwise I'll stick with the people that isn't selling anything. just saying.
...
[3] possibly due to the Dunning-Krueger syndrome
...
[3] possibly due to the Dunning-Krueger syndrome
Please stop spouting that bloody stupid term, it encourages copycat use on the forum that takes a while to die down (or at least has in the past). BTW, you spelt Kruger wrong.
So yeah, tggzzz's comments can be not always the most adequated ones, but at least I have seen him stating he had been made aware he was wrong. That's something I have still not see coming from you. I'm sure you are able to simply state your goals, letting aside any aggresivity, probably originated from any perceived attack to the quality of your product. I for one would greatly appreciate that. Otherwise I'll stick with the people that isn't selling anything. just saying.
Where I'm not reasonably sure of something, I'll either not comment or I'll add caveats. When I realise I've made a mistake, I don't try to revise history, and I do try to apologise. IMHO constructive conversations cannot occur without that.
I'm very tolerant of beginners asking information, provided they listen to the answers, and think. Watching someone's capabilities improve is a profound pleasure.
We all make mistakes; that's part of learning. However, as I taught my daughter, "let's make new mistakes".
I'm less tolerant of people who don't listen[3], or don't learn, or choose not to improve, or do who misrepresent other people's position[1], or who continue to misrepresent their product[2] (typically to ignorant managers).
I've spent a lifetime being plagued by salesman/companies who make impossible claims for their products. I know others feel the same!
[1] often in the form of chosing to omitting relevant context, or with strawman arguments
[2] e.g. if their product does what they claim, then they've solved the Byzantine General's problem or the split brain problem, or broken the laws of thermodynamics etc.
[3] possibly due to the Dunning-Krueger syndrome
So yeah, tggzzz's comments can be not always the most adequated ones, but at least I have seen him stating he had been made aware he was wrong. That's something I have still not see coming from you. I'm sure you are able to simply state your goals, letting aside any aggresivity, probably originated from any perceived attack to the quality of your product. I for one would greatly appreciate that. Otherwise I'll stick with the people that isn't selling anything. just saying.
Where I'm not reasonably sure of something, I'll either not comment or I'll add caveats. When I realise I've made a mistake, I don't try to revise history, and I do try to apologise. IMHO constructive conversations cannot occur without that.
I'm very tolerant of beginners asking information, provided they listen to the answers, and think. Watching someone's capabilities improve is a profound pleasure.
We all make mistakes; that's part of learning. However, as I taught my daughter, "let's make new mistakes".
I'm less tolerant of people who don't listen[3], or don't learn, or choose not to improve, or do who misrepresent other people's position[1], or who continue to misrepresent their product[2] (typically to ignorant managers).
I've spent a lifetime being plagued by salesman/companies who make impossible claims for their products. I know others feel the same!
[1] often in the form of chosing to omitting relevant context, or with strawman arguments
[2] e.g. if their product does what they claim, then they've solved the Byzantine General's problem or the split brain problem, or broken the laws of thermodynamics etc.
[3] possibly due to the Dunning-Krueger syndromeTO TGGZZZ: Please either contribute something sane, meaningful, helpful and relevant to this thread discussion or else take your thread-clogging demented crap to some other thread. Thank you.
...
EDIT: deleted an asinine reference I made to his homeland. Sorry. Temper got the best of me for a moment.