On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 08:22:21 GMT, Robert Baer
wrote:


Not a varactor (diode), but a switching diode; fast. Snap-off is lotz
better.
And they are a *LOT* smaller!

Thanks, Robert (and all else)
I'd prefer a diode solution as there'd be no power supply requirements
for each device. The tiny size is an added bonus, of course. But
what's the drawback with superfast switching diodes as against active
inverters? I'm sure there must be (at least) one...

On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 08:22:21 GMT, Robert Baer
wrote:


Not a varactor (diode), but a switching diode; fast. Snap-off is lotz
better.
And they are a *LOT* smaller!

Thanks, Robert (and all else)
I'd prefer a diode solution as there'd be no power supply requirements
for each device. The tiny size is an added bonus, of course. But
what's the drawback with superfast switching diodes as against active
inverters? I'm sure there must be (at least) one...

I'd prefer a diode solution as there'd be no power supply requirements
for each device. The tiny size is an added bonus, of course. But
what's the drawback with superfast switching diodes as against active
inverters? I'm sure there must be (at least) one...

Well for starters, they often, (VERY often) act as parametric devices and
oscillate on their own at the frequency of their choosing.

W4ZCB

I'd prefer a diode solution as there'd be no power supply requirements
for each device. The tiny size is an added bonus, of course. But
what's the drawback with superfast switching diodes as against active
inverters? I'm sure there must be (at least) one...

Well for starters, they often, (VERY often) act as parametric devices and
oscillate on their own at the frequency of their choosing.

W4ZCB

Paul Burridge wrote:

On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 08:22:21 GMT, Robert Baer
wrote:

Not a varactor (diode), but a switching diode; fast. Snap-off is lotz
better.
And they are a *LOT* smaller!

Thanks, Robert (and all else)
I'd prefer a diode solution as there'd be no power supply requirements
for each device. The tiny size is an added bonus, of course. But
what's the drawback with superfast switching diodes as against active
inverters? I'm sure there must be (at least) one...

An active inverter is S L O W by comparison; a good, fast diode can
have turnoff times in the tens of picoseconds region.

Paul Burridge wrote:

On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 08:22:21 GMT, Robert Baer
wrote:

Not a varactor (diode), but a switching diode; fast. Snap-off is lotz
better.
And they are a *LOT* smaller!

Thanks, Robert (and all else)
I'd prefer a diode solution as there'd be no power supply requirements
for each device. The tiny size is an added bonus, of course. But
what's the drawback with superfast switching diodes as against active
inverters? I'm sure there must be (at least) one...

An active inverter is S L O W by comparison; a good, fast diode can
have turnoff times in the tens of picoseconds region.

"Robert Baer" a écrit dans le message news:
...
Paul Burridge wrote:

On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 08:22:21 GMT, Robert Baer
wrote:

Not a varactor (diode), but a switching diode; fast. Snap-off is lotz
better.
And they are a *LOT* smaller!

Thanks, Robert (and all else)
I'd prefer a diode solution as there'd be no power supply requirements
for each device. The tiny size is an added bonus, of course. But
what's the drawback with superfast switching diodes as against active
inverters? I'm sure there must be (at least) one...

An active inverter is S L O W by comparison; a good, fast diode can
have turnoff times in the tens of picoseconds region.


Don't let Paul dream too much about picoseconds.
In order to achieve results that good, one have to pay very careful
attention to "wiring". There's still a lot of room for Paul to improve his
PCB design skills ;-)

Thanks,
Fred.

"Robert Baer" a écrit dans le message news:
...
Paul Burridge wrote:

On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 08:22:21 GMT, Robert Baer
wrote:

Not a varactor (diode), but a switching diode; fast. Snap-off is lotz
better.
And they are a *LOT* smaller!

Thanks, Robert (and all else)
I'd prefer a diode solution as there'd be no power supply requirements
for each device. The tiny size is an added bonus, of course. But
what's the drawback with superfast switching diodes as against active
inverters? I'm sure there must be (at least) one...

An active inverter is S L O W by comparison; a good, fast diode can
have turnoff times in the tens of picoseconds region.


Don't let Paul dream too much about picoseconds.
In order to achieve results that good, one have to pay very careful
attention to "wiring". There's still a lot of room for Paul to improve his
PCB design skills ;-)

Thanks,
Fred.

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 14:14:56 +0200, "Fred Bartoli"
r_AndThisToo wrote:

Don't let Paul dream too much about picoseconds.

Well, quite. I wouldn't know what to do with all those extra
harmonics, anyway. :-)
Diodes sound great, but I'm heavily put off by that comment earlier in
the thread that they're prone to self oscillation. :-( What's a
"parametric device" anyway?

In order to achieve results that good, one have to pay very careful
attention to "wiring". There's still a lot of room for Paul to improve his
PCB design skills ;-)

Fair comment. But I *am* working on it!

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 14:14:56 +0200, "Fred Bartoli"
r_AndThisToo wrote:

Don't let Paul dream too much about picoseconds.

Well, quite. I wouldn't know what to do with all those extra
harmonics, anyway. :-)
Diodes sound great, but I'm heavily put off by that comment earlier in
the thread that they're prone to self oscillation. :-( What's a
"parametric device" anyway?

In order to achieve results that good, one have to pay very careful
attention to "wiring". There's still a lot of room for Paul to improve his
PCB design skills ;-)

Fair comment. But I *am* working on it!