Re: Multi-cycle current control
Hi Andy, Thanks for pointing that out. YES, I missed the missing dot (.) in front of the "options plotwinsize=0" I will blame the oversight on the highly acute and superior vision, which seems to
By
Mike Fraser
·
#147661
·
|
Re: Multi-cycle current control
John, Here is a follow-up to yesterday's mention of the spurious stuff at 3.33 Hz (and odd harmonics) that was about 80 dB below the fundamental. It's an artifact.? It's not in the signal. I am not
By
Andy I
·
#147660
·
|
Re: Multi-cycle current control
Mike, maybe you missed it, but I answered John already.? John wrote "options" instead of ".options".? That turned it from a dot-command to a lossy transmission line, and gave us the error. Andy
By
Andy I
·
#147659
·
|
Re: Multi-cycle current control
Hi John, I do not know why this works. I changed the commands on the schematic to include more precision. .options numdgt=10 .options measdgt=10 .options plotwinsize=0 is listed on it's own seperate
By
Mike Fraser
·
#147658
·
|
Re: Multi-cycle current control
John, The command-line you tried to add was "options plotwinsize=0".? That.s OK, except that it is missing the leading period.? So, LTspice sees it as an attempt to add an O-device, which is a Lossy
By
Andy I
·
#147657
·
|
Re: Multi-cycle current control
Thanks, Andy. I have uploaded '3-cycle sine symmetry.asc'. To see the waveforms, simulate for 120 ms. You may tell me that I don't need to specify the PWL for as much as 120 ms, but that raises an
By
John Woodgate
·
#147656
·
|
Re: Multi-cycle current control
I am pretty sure that the "Missing node(s)" warning is not related to the ".options plotwinsize=0".? I can't see any way that one would cause the other. Any chance of uploading the schematic? It's
By
Andy I
·
#147654
·
|
Re: Multi-cycle current control
I am now looking at another control method that changes the amplitudes of successive half-cycles of the sine wav, in the sequence 1,0.5,0.5,1, 0.5,0.5,1,0.5,0.5,1,0.5,0.5. I made a PWL voltage source
By
John Woodgate
·
#147653
·
|
Re: Bad noise models for jfet transistors
#NOISE
Yes, this is a "known" problem, and it's been known for a rather long time.? It was before Tony's message in 2022 ( /g/LTspice/message/138735 ).? I don't recall exactly when it was
By
Andy I
·
#147652
·
|
Re: Bad noise models for jfet transistors
#NOISE
Can you share the "good" jfet models or point me to where I can find them? Thanks
By
@bobobob
·
#147651
·
|
Re: Bad noise models for jfet transistors
#NOISE
I have written about this several times in this group, starting with #138735 </g/LTspice/message/138735>. I have also complained to ADI about it a number of times. All to no avail. It
By
Tony Casey
·
#147650
·
|
Re: Bad noise models for jfet transistors
#NOISE
My files are tools and one should take care of them.
By
Richard Andrews
·
#147649
·
|
Re: Bad noise models for jfet transistors
#NOISE
I always do a backup of my stuff before updating, but I haven't updated in a long time, because wouldn't of they done it right the first time?
By
Richard Andrews
·
#147648
·
|
Bad noise models for jfet transistors
#NOISE
I haven't updated for a long time (since March 15). Now I updated and found that Linear Systems' JFET models have been changed. From weakly wrong noise models they replaced them with ultra-noisy
By
§¡§Ý§Ö§Ü§ã§Ñ§ß§Õ§â §¢§à§â§Õ§à§Õ§í§ß§à§Ó
·
#147647
·
|
Re: BPS19 equiv.
It seams if I go with a little higher collector current the ZTX458 works just fine.
By
Richard Andrews
·
#147646
·
|
Re: Reflected power in RF power supplies
Thank you for your information!
By
minsun@...
·
#147645
·
|
Re: BPS19 equiv.
Thanks for the help guys. I guess there is no through hole replacement of the BPS19 which is SMD.
By
Richard Andrews
·
#147644
·
|
Re: Reflected power in RF power supplies
/g/Test-Equipment-Design-Construction/ You're right; this discussion is off-topic for LTspice. Have you considered /g/Test-Equipment-Design-Construction/ They have
By
Donald H Locker
·
#147643
·
|
Re: BPS19 equiv.
Oops, sorry. Now I can't find the BPS19 either. I expect it's shy and you have frightened it away. I'm sure I did find it. BPS19: f_t 200 MHz Vce 20 V BFS19 f_t 260 MHz? Vce 30 V.
By
John Woodgate
·
#147642
·
|
Re: BPS19 equiv.
John wrote, " That's odd. I found several. Try: https://assets.nexperia.com/documents/data-sheet/BFS19.pdf ". No, that's the BFS19.? Richard asked about the BPS19. My take on it is that BPS19 is
By
Andy I
·
#147641
·
|