开云体育

My remarks refer specifically to EDN's Design Ideas.

This is an extract from the official:

Design Ideas Submission Guide

What about images and CAD schematics?
We strongly encourage?CAD-generated?schematics. If you don’t have access to commercial software, there are many free alternatives, such as:

• , , Digi-Key’s , & (online design (and sometimes simulation) websites)

• & (open-source EDA systems)

• , , & (commercial programs with free versions)

On the web site, images can be 600 pixels wide, maximum. If you can make your schematic legible at this size, perfect. If not, we’ll link it to a larger version. Don’t worry about downsizing images. We do that.

I can provide the complete guide for anyone interested, but it's not hard to find on the EDN site.

My recent experience is that most schematics are now author-provided. Transcription errors were always common in technical publications, precisely because diagrams got re-drawn by people who weren't familiar (enough) with the topic, something familiar to people that had to deal with traditional Drawing Offices.

On a general note, it isn't just EDN where it is often impossible to locate things that appeared some time ago. Websites undergo constant change and traceability is often compromised.

On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 04:54 AM, Tony Casey wrote:

This is a recent article, and I know from experience that the EDN editors encourage writers to supply their own diagrams, at least for their "Design Ideas". ...

Perhaps I remember incorrectly.? But I thought all circuit diagrams in EDN articles were re-drawn by EDN's editors.? I do not recall seeing author-drawn schematics in their "Design Ideas" or elsewhere.

?

EDN's resources are extremely unreliable, in my opinion.? Try finding any article older than a couple of years old, with figures and comments intact.? What's worse, when you point it out to EDN, they can't find it either.? They are a black hole of electronics knowledge.

?

I often see replies by authors, pointing out the mistakes EDN made when publishing their article.? Occasionally EDN actually gets it right, but their track record for accuracy is not good.

开云体育

Yes, and I posted that I understood the error.

?

On Sun, May 11, 2025 at 10:21 AM, John Woodgate wrote:

I have uploaded the above as a .ZIP. According to Bob Pease, the gain at the peak should be close to 34 dB, independent of the tuned frequency. I don't get either of those results using version 24.1.8. ...

Have you corrected the position of the OUT node?

开云体育

Thank you very much.

for instance.

Being lazy, I searched for "another single pot tunable band pass network called Hall’s network"

DaveD
KC0WJN

On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 04:41 John Woodgate via <jmw=[email protected]> wrote:

Thank you:Do you have a reference to it? Google doesn't help, because the name has been re-used. The Pease circuit will tune over a decade with 100:1 change in R2 value, which is just about practicable, 100 ohms/100k.

On 2025-05-12 00:21, Jeff Furman via wrote:

There is another single pot tunable band pass network called Hall’s network.

it can tune over a decade. The commercial worked example is used in the general radio model 1232a tuned amplifier/null detector. It is a different circuit than Pease’s.

Jeff Furman AD6MX

--
Best wishes John Woodgate RAYLEIGH Essex OOO-Own Opinions Only If something is true: * as far as we know - it's science *for certain - it's mathematics *unquestionably - it's religion

Virus-free.

开云体育

I haven't seen Pease's original diagram. I was going strictly by the EDN article.

This is a recent article, and I know from experience that the EDN editors encourage writers to supply their own diagrams, at least for their "Design Ideas". Perhaps main articles are different. But given the error in the article name, anything's possible.

开云体育

Thank you:Do you have a reference to it? Google doesn't help, because the name has been re-used. The Pease circuit will tune over a decade with 100:1 change in R2 value, which is just about practicable, 100 ohms/100k.

There is another single pot tunable band pass network called Hall’s network.

it can tune over a decade. The commercial worked example is used in the general radio model 1232a tuned amplifier/null detector. It is a different circuit than Pease’s.

Jeff Furman AD6MX

开云体育

Figure 1 was probably drawn by an EDN person. Bob's rough sketch is OK. I was taking the output from the wrong place.

You should also note, John, that there are errors in the EDN article.

The first picture shows the opamp in non-inverting configuration - this is, of course positive feedback, and sure enough it will latch to one of the rails.

Further down in the article, variations of the circuit are re-drawn in the inverting configuration - this is the correct version.

It is a quirk of AC analyses that sometimes an unstable configuration appears to be stable, when in fact it isn't. Always check in the time domain!

I presume Bob got it right. He would never have made that mistake. I'm surprised nobody else pointed that out.

--
Regards,
Tony

On 11/05/2025 16:20, John Woodgate via groups.io wrote:

I have uploaded the above as a .ZIP. According to Bob Pease, the gain at the peak should be close to 34 dB, independent of the tuned frequency. I don't get either of those results using version 24.1.8. However, the bandwidth is fairly constant with frequency, as predicted. I can't believe Bob Pease reported the performance in error.

开云体育

You should also note, John, that there are errors in the EDN article.

The first picture shows the opamp in non-inverting configuration - this is, of course positive feedback, and sure enough it will latch to one of the rails.

Further down in the article, variations of the circuit are re-drawn in the inverting configuration - this is the correct version.

It is a quirk of AC analyses that sometimes an unstable configuration appears to be stable, when in fact it isn't. Always check in the time domain!

I presume Bob got it right. He would never have made that mistake. I'm surprised nobody else pointed that out.