JL
Joe Leikhim
Wed, Dec 7, 2016 7:30 PM
Could the low noise parts actually be counterfeit, relabeled as such?
Is the circuit the regulator feeds sensitive to a narrow band of voltage
that the "good regulator" is outside of?
Try replacing the regulator with a battery supply and resistor divider
to attain the working voltage. Move the voltage around. A good
potentiometer and stiff filter capacitors are recommended so as not to
introduce "pot noise".
Is something corrupting your test procedure? I had a circuit that
misbehaved due to floating logic pins reacting to static electricity on
the work bench. Another time a diode was photosensitive.
--
Joe Leikhim
Leikhim and Associates
Communications Consultants
Oviedo, Florida
JLeikhim@Leikhim.com
407-982-0446
WWW.LEIKHIM.COM
Could the low noise parts actually be counterfeit, relabeled as such?
Is the circuit the regulator feeds sensitive to a narrow band of voltage
that the "good regulator" is outside of?
Try replacing the regulator with a battery supply and resistor divider
to attain the working voltage. Move the voltage around. A good
potentiometer and stiff filter capacitors are recommended so as not to
introduce "pot noise".
Is something corrupting your test procedure? I had a circuit that
misbehaved due to floating logic pins reacting to static electricity on
the work bench. Another time a diode was photosensitive.
--
Joe Leikhim
Leikhim and Associates
Communications Consultants
Oviedo, Florida
JLeikhim@Leikhim.com
407-982-0446
WWW.LEIKHIM.COM
CJ
Clint Jay
Wed, Dec 7, 2016 8:16 PM
I was looking for a low noise regulator to power a log amp/detector earlier
this year and was rather surprised to find the 78xx regulators were
considerably better than many of the "low noise" devices.
But!!
I've also had odd experiences with some brands of 78xx devices (and way
before the 'net was anything more than SLIP dial up to a shell so I doubt
they were Chinese fakes) , one was bad enough that it gave some very
random voltage measurements on a digital meter, turned out of the was
creating all sorts of RF hash in the low VHF range up to and possible
beyond the FM broadcast band.
On 7 Dec 2016 20:10, "Joe Leikhim" jleikhim@leikhim.com wrote:
Could the low noise parts actually be counterfeit, relabeled as such?
Is the circuit the regulator feeds sensitive to a narrow band of voltage
that the "good regulator" is outside of?
Try replacing the regulator with a battery supply and resistor divider to
attain the working voltage. Move the voltage around. A good potentiometer
and stiff filter capacitors are recommended so as not to introduce "pot
noise".
Is something corrupting your test procedure? I had a circuit that
misbehaved due to floating logic pins reacting to static electricity on the
work bench. Another time a diode was photosensitive.
--
Joe Leikhim
Leikhim and Associates
Communications Consultants
Oviedo, Florida
JLeikhim@Leikhim.com
407-982-0446
WWW.LEIKHIM.COM
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/m
ailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
I was looking for a low noise regulator to power a log amp/detector earlier
this year and was rather surprised to find the 78xx regulators were
considerably better than many of the "low noise" devices.
But!!
I've also had odd experiences with some brands of 78xx devices (and way
before the 'net was anything more than SLIP dial up to a shell so I doubt
they were Chinese fakes) , one was bad enough that it gave some very
random voltage measurements on a digital meter, turned out of the was
creating all sorts of RF hash in the low VHF range up to and possible
beyond the FM broadcast band.
On 7 Dec 2016 20:10, "Joe Leikhim" <jleikhim@leikhim.com> wrote:
> Could the low noise parts actually be counterfeit, relabeled as such?
>
> Is the circuit the regulator feeds sensitive to a narrow band of voltage
> that the "good regulator" is outside of?
>
> Try replacing the regulator with a battery supply and resistor divider to
> attain the working voltage. Move the voltage around. A good potentiometer
> and stiff filter capacitors are recommended so as not to introduce "pot
> noise".
>
> Is something corrupting your test procedure? I had a circuit that
> misbehaved due to floating logic pins reacting to static electricity on the
> work bench. Another time a diode was photosensitive.
>
>
>
> --
> Joe Leikhim
>
>
> Leikhim and Associates
>
> Communications Consultants
>
> Oviedo, Florida
>
> JLeikhim@Leikhim.com
>
> 407-982-0446
>
> WWW.LEIKHIM.COM
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/m
> ailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
CH
Chuck Harris
Wed, Dec 7, 2016 8:56 PM
I don't think so. I first ran into a batch of LM340-5's
that were excellent oscillators back in the 1970's... long
before counterfeiting was even remotely possible.
The symptom is the regulator puts out only 4.5 out of 5V.
LM309's were, however, totally immune.
Usually, I had to be really bad to make it happen, things
like using clip leads between the power supply and load
with the LM340-5 dangling in between.
The answer is as simple as a couple of 0.1uf ceramic caps
soldered right at the input and ground, and the output
and ground pins.
LDO (low dropout) regulators are very susceptible to
oscillation. They need to have a couple of hundred uf
of good quality capacitance right on the input and output
leads. Where people usually get in trouble, is in not
knowing that electrolytic capacitors lose most of their
capacitance as the temperature starts hovering around 0C.
The circuit works great on the bench, but fails when out
hanging on a light pole...
-Chuck Harris
Joe Leikhim wrote:
Could the low noise parts actually be counterfeit, relabeled as such?
Is the circuit the regulator feeds sensitive to a narrow band of voltage that the
"good regulator" is outside of?
Try replacing the regulator with a battery supply and resistor divider to attain the
working voltage. Move the voltage around. A good potentiometer and stiff filter
capacitors are recommended so as not to introduce "pot noise".
Is something corrupting your test procedure? I had a circuit that misbehaved due to
floating logic pins reacting to static electricity on the work bench. Another time a
diode was photosensitive.
I don't think so. I first ran into a batch of LM340-5's
that were excellent oscillators back in the 1970's... long
before counterfeiting was even remotely possible.
The symptom is the regulator puts out only 4.5 out of 5V.
LM309's were, however, totally immune.
Usually, I had to be really bad to make it happen, things
like using clip leads between the power supply and load
with the LM340-5 dangling in between.
The answer is as simple as a couple of 0.1uf ceramic caps
soldered right at the input and ground, and the output
and ground pins.
LDO (low dropout) regulators are very susceptible to
oscillation. They need to have a couple of hundred uf
of good quality capacitance right on the input and output
leads. Where people usually get in trouble, is in not
knowing that electrolytic capacitors lose most of their
capacitance as the temperature starts hovering around 0C.
The circuit works great on the bench, but fails when out
hanging on a light pole...
-Chuck Harris
Joe Leikhim wrote:
> Could the low noise parts actually be counterfeit, relabeled as such?
>
> Is the circuit the regulator feeds sensitive to a narrow band of voltage that the
> "good regulator" is outside of?
>
> Try replacing the regulator with a battery supply and resistor divider to attain the
> working voltage. Move the voltage around. A good potentiometer and stiff filter
> capacitors are recommended so as not to introduce "pot noise".
>
> Is something corrupting your test procedure? I had a circuit that misbehaved due to
> floating logic pins reacting to static electricity on the work bench. Another time a
> diode was photosensitive.
>
>
>
BC
Bob Camp
Wed, Dec 7, 2016 9:11 PM
Hi
There are a bunch of people making stuff like 78xx regulators. Even
20 years ago, there was a lot of difference between brand M, brand T,
and brand F on these devices. Today the spread is even larger. Toss in
outfits that sub contract the work to who knows where this week ….
What you get today may not be what you got yesterday or what you
get tomorrow. At least 20 years ago you got the same thing when you
re-ordered.
Crazy stuff
Bob
On Dec 7, 2016, at 3:16 PM, Clint Jay cjaysharp@gmail.com wrote:
I was looking for a low noise regulator to power a log amp/detector earlier
this year and was rather surprised to find the 78xx regulators were
considerably better than many of the "low noise" devices.
But!!
I've also had odd experiences with some brands of 78xx devices (and way
before the 'net was anything more than SLIP dial up to a shell so I doubt
they were Chinese fakes) , one was bad enough that it gave some very
random voltage measurements on a digital meter, turned out of the was
creating all sorts of RF hash in the low VHF range up to and possible
beyond the FM broadcast band.
On 7 Dec 2016 20:10, "Joe Leikhim" jleikhim@leikhim.com wrote:
Could the low noise parts actually be counterfeit, relabeled as such?
Is the circuit the regulator feeds sensitive to a narrow band of voltage
that the "good regulator" is outside of?
Try replacing the regulator with a battery supply and resistor divider to
attain the working voltage. Move the voltage around. A good potentiometer
and stiff filter capacitors are recommended so as not to introduce "pot
noise".
Is something corrupting your test procedure? I had a circuit that
misbehaved due to floating logic pins reacting to static electricity on the
work bench. Another time a diode was photosensitive.
--
Joe Leikhim
Leikhim and Associates
Communications Consultants
Oviedo, Florida
JLeikhim@Leikhim.com
407-982-0446
WWW.LEIKHIM.COM
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/m
ailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Hi
There are a *bunch* of people making stuff like 78xx regulators. Even
20 years ago, there was a lot of difference between brand M, brand T,
and brand F on these devices. Today the spread is even larger. Toss in
outfits that sub contract the work to who knows where this week ….
What you get today may not be what you got yesterday or what you
get tomorrow. At least 20 years ago you got the same thing when you
re-ordered.
Crazy stuff
Bob
> On Dec 7, 2016, at 3:16 PM, Clint Jay <cjaysharp@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I was looking for a low noise regulator to power a log amp/detector earlier
> this year and was rather surprised to find the 78xx regulators were
> considerably better than many of the "low noise" devices.
>
> But!!
>
> I've also had odd experiences with some brands of 78xx devices (and way
> before the 'net was anything more than SLIP dial up to a shell so I doubt
> they were Chinese fakes) , one was bad enough that it gave some very
> random voltage measurements on a digital meter, turned out of the was
> creating all sorts of RF hash in the low VHF range up to and possible
> beyond the FM broadcast band.
>
> On 7 Dec 2016 20:10, "Joe Leikhim" <jleikhim@leikhim.com> wrote:
>
>> Could the low noise parts actually be counterfeit, relabeled as such?
>>
>> Is the circuit the regulator feeds sensitive to a narrow band of voltage
>> that the "good regulator" is outside of?
>>
>> Try replacing the regulator with a battery supply and resistor divider to
>> attain the working voltage. Move the voltage around. A good potentiometer
>> and stiff filter capacitors are recommended so as not to introduce "pot
>> noise".
>>
>> Is something corrupting your test procedure? I had a circuit that
>> misbehaved due to floating logic pins reacting to static electricity on the
>> work bench. Another time a diode was photosensitive.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Joe Leikhim
>>
>>
>> Leikhim and Associates
>>
>> Communications Consultants
>>
>> Oviedo, Florida
>>
>> JLeikhim@Leikhim.com
>>
>> 407-982-0446
>>
>> WWW.LEIKHIM.COM
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/m
>> ailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
R(
Richard (Rick) Karlquist
Wed, Dec 7, 2016 11:32 PM
On 12/7/2016 12:16 PM, Clint Jay wrote:
I was looking for a low noise regulator to power a log amp/detector earlier
this year and was rather surprised to find the 78xx regulators were
considerably better than many of the "low noise" devices.
Are you kidding me? Check out the Linear Technology LT3042 and
LT3045 with 2 (yes, TWO) NANOVOLTS/root-Hz spot noise. Orders of
magnitude better than the 78XX introduced 45 years ago.
Rick N6RK
On 12/7/2016 12:16 PM, Clint Jay wrote:
> I was looking for a low noise regulator to power a log amp/detector earlier
> this year and was rather surprised to find the 78xx regulators were
> considerably better than many of the "low noise" devices.
>
Are you kidding me? Check out the Linear Technology LT3042 and
LT3045 with 2 (yes, TWO) NANOVOLTS/root-Hz spot noise. Orders of
magnitude better than the 78XX introduced 45 years ago.
Rick N6RK
CJ
Clint Jay
Wed, Dec 7, 2016 11:48 PM
I've no doubt there are many excellent low noise regulators out there that
are orders of magnitude better than the 78xx series, but there are also
many that claim low noise as a headline feature and are actually worse
when you dig into the specification.
On 7 Dec 2016 23:42, "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" richard@karlquist.com
wrote:
On 12/7/2016 12:16 PM, Clint Jay wrote:
I was looking for a low noise regulator to power a log amp/detector
earlier
this year and was rather surprised to find the 78xx regulators were
considerably better than many of the "low noise" devices.
Are you kidding me? Check out the Linear Technology LT3042 and
LT3045 with 2 (yes, TWO) NANOVOLTS/root-Hz spot noise. Orders of
magnitude better than the 78XX introduced 45 years ago.
Rick N6RK
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/m
ailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
I've no doubt there are many excellent low noise regulators out there that
are orders of magnitude better than the 78xx series, but there are also
many that claim low noise as a headline feature and are actually worse
when you dig into the specification.
On 7 Dec 2016 23:42, "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>
wrote:
> On 12/7/2016 12:16 PM, Clint Jay wrote:
>
>> I was looking for a low noise regulator to power a log amp/detector
>> earlier
>> this year and was rather surprised to find the 78xx regulators were
>> considerably better than many of the "low noise" devices.
>>
>>
> Are you kidding me? Check out the Linear Technology LT3042 and
> LT3045 with 2 (yes, TWO) NANOVOLTS/root-Hz spot noise. Orders of
> magnitude better than the 78XX introduced 45 years ago.
>
> Rick N6RK
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/m
> ailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
J
jimlux
Wed, Dec 7, 2016 11:50 PM
On 12/7/16 3:32 PM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist wrote:
On 12/7/2016 12:16 PM, Clint Jay wrote:
I was looking for a low noise regulator to power a log amp/detector
earlier
this year and was rather surprised to find the 78xx regulators were
considerably better than many of the "low noise" devices.
Are you kidding me? Check out the Linear Technology LT3042 and
LT3045 with 2 (yes, TWO) NANOVOLTS/root-Hz spot noise. Orders of
magnitude better than the 78XX introduced 45 years ago.
I'd second the recommendation for the LT3042 - I'm using them in a
science instrument which is very noise sensitive.
On 12/7/16 3:32 PM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist wrote:
> On 12/7/2016 12:16 PM, Clint Jay wrote:
>> I was looking for a low noise regulator to power a log amp/detector
>> earlier
>> this year and was rather surprised to find the 78xx regulators were
>> considerably better than many of the "low noise" devices.
>>
>
> Are you kidding me? Check out the Linear Technology LT3042 and
> LT3045 with 2 (yes, TWO) NANOVOLTS/root-Hz spot noise. Orders of
> magnitude better than the 78XX introduced 45 years ago.
>
I'd second the recommendation for the LT3042 - I'm using them in a
science instrument which is very noise sensitive.
BC
Bob Camp
Wed, Dec 7, 2016 11:53 PM
Hi
You can indeed find regulators with noise densities that work out to be uV/sqrt(Hz) advertised as
“low noise”. Who knows how marketing justified making the claim other than “not as totally rotten
as our older part”.
Bob
On Dec 7, 2016, at 6:32 PM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist richard@karlquist.com wrote:
On 12/7/2016 12:16 PM, Clint Jay wrote:
I was looking for a low noise regulator to power a log amp/detector earlier
this year and was rather surprised to find the 78xx regulators were
considerably better than many of the "low noise" devices.
Hi
You can indeed find regulators with noise densities that work out to be uV/sqrt(Hz) advertised as
“low noise”. Who knows how marketing justified making the claim other than “not as totally rotten
as our older part”.
Bob
> On Dec 7, 2016, at 6:32 PM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist <richard@karlquist.com> wrote:
>
> On 12/7/2016 12:16 PM, Clint Jay wrote:
>> I was looking for a low noise regulator to power a log amp/detector earlier
>> this year and was rather surprised to find the 78xx regulators were
>> considerably better than many of the "low noise" devices.
>>
>
> Are you kidding me? Check out the Linear Technology LT3042 and
> LT3045 with 2 (yes, TWO) NANOVOLTS/root-Hz spot noise. Orders of magnitude better than the 78XX introduced 45 years ago.
>
> Rick N6RK
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
GH
Gerhard Hoffmann
Thu, Dec 8, 2016 1:12 AM
Am 08.12.2016 um 00:50 schrieb jimlux:
On 12/7/16 3:32 PM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist wrote:
On 12/7/2016 12:16 PM, Clint Jay wrote:
I was looking for a low noise regulator to power a log amp/detector
earlier
this year and was rather surprised to find the 78xx regulators were
considerably better than many of the "low noise" devices.
Are you kidding me? Check out the Linear Technology LT3042 and
LT3045 with 2 (yes, TWO) NANOVOLTS/root-Hz spot noise. Orders of
magnitude better than the 78XX introduced 45 years ago.
I'd second the recommendation for the LT3042 - I'm using them in a
science instrument which is very noise sensitive.
The LT3042 outclasses the old crowd, whether they are called low noise
or not.
Don't overdo it with the output capacitor, the 4.7uF from the data sheet
is ideal.
Too much, and the response gets a peak. The pic was taken from a dead
bug implementation
involving a Micro-SO with thermal pad on the belly, too horrible to show.
There is also a pic with an external D44VH10G power transistor to supply
more current.
And remember, 0dB == 1nV/rtHz is the INPUT voltage noise of an LT1028 or
AD797.
(give or take 10%...)
regards, Gerhard
p.s.
Ulrich, I seem to remember that you were in Ulm in a previous life.
Then you might recognize the Blau valley on the leftmost image. :-)
Am 08.12.2016 um 00:50 schrieb jimlux:
> On 12/7/16 3:32 PM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist wrote:
>> On 12/7/2016 12:16 PM, Clint Jay wrote:
>>> I was looking for a low noise regulator to power a log amp/detector
>>> earlier
>>> this year and was rather surprised to find the 78xx regulators were
>>> considerably better than many of the "low noise" devices.
>>>
>>
>> Are you kidding me? Check out the Linear Technology LT3042 and
>> LT3045 with 2 (yes, TWO) NANOVOLTS/root-Hz spot noise. Orders of
>> magnitude better than the 78XX introduced 45 years ago.
>>
>
> I'd second the recommendation for the LT3042 - I'm using them in a
> science instrument which is very noise sensitive.
>
I can only point again to my own measurements under comparable conditions:
<
https://www.flickr.com/photos/137684711@N07/24070698809/in/album-72157662535945536/
>
The LT3042 outclasses the old crowd, whether they are called low noise
or not.
Don't overdo it with the output capacitor, the 4.7uF from the data sheet
is ideal.
Too much, and the response gets a peak. The pic was taken from a dead
bug implementation
involving a Micro-SO with thermal pad on the belly, too horrible to show.
There is also a pic with an external D44VH10G power transistor to supply
more current.
And remember, 0dB == 1nV/rtHz is the INPUT voltage noise of an LT1028 or
AD797.
(give or take 10%...)
regards, Gerhard
p.s.
Ulrich, I seem to remember that you were in Ulm in a previous life.
Then you might recognize the Blau valley on the leftmost image. :-)
VH
Van Horn, David
Thu, Dec 8, 2016 4:37 PM
I did check the circuit through the whole range that it should operate in, based on component data sheets. No issues.
I also carefully varied the voltage right around where the regulator output is, to see if there was some very narrow band of sensitivity.
Nothing.
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On Behalf Of Joe Leikhim
Sent: Wednesday, December 7, 2016 12:31 PM
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Totally unrelated, but..
Could the low noise parts actually be counterfeit, relabeled as such?
Is the circuit the regulator feeds sensitive to a narrow band of voltage that the "good regulator" is outside of?
Try replacing the regulator with a battery supply and resistor divider to attain the working voltage. Move the voltage around. A good potentiometer and stiff filter capacitors are recommended so as not to introduce "pot noise".
Is something corrupting your test procedure? I had a circuit that misbehaved due to floating logic pins reacting to static electricity on the work bench. Another time a diode was photosensitive.
--
Joe Leikhim
Leikhim and Associates
Communications Consultants
Oviedo, Florida
JLeikhim@Leikhim.com
407-982-0446
WWW.LEIKHIM.COM
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
I did check the circuit through the whole range that it should operate in, based on component data sheets. No issues.
I also carefully varied the voltage right around where the regulator output is, to see if there was some very narrow band of sensitivity.
Nothing.
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On Behalf Of Joe Leikhim
Sent: Wednesday, December 7, 2016 12:31 PM
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Totally unrelated, but..
Could the low noise parts actually be counterfeit, relabeled as such?
Is the circuit the regulator feeds sensitive to a narrow band of voltage that the "good regulator" is outside of?
Try replacing the regulator with a battery supply and resistor divider to attain the working voltage. Move the voltage around. A good potentiometer and stiff filter capacitors are recommended so as not to introduce "pot noise".
Is something corrupting your test procedure? I had a circuit that misbehaved due to floating logic pins reacting to static electricity on the work bench. Another time a diode was photosensitive.
--
Joe Leikhim
Leikhim and Associates
Communications Consultants
Oviedo, Florida
JLeikhim@Leikhim.com
407-982-0446
WWW.LEIKHIM.COM
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.