John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
You will not get correct results with the AP if the loss mechanism is rate of change dependent as eddy dissipation is. While the differential with sine plus noise is interesting, you most likely will not be able to develop an analytical relationship to describe the difference. That means that the chances are great that you will come to incorrect conclusions.

That is why I recommended sine first.

jn

The AP is capable of doing a swept sine and non FFT level measurement! It is not just an FFT box!
 
The AP is capable of doing a swept sine and non FFT level measurement! It is not just an FFT box!

Good. But as I said, measurement of only the bybee or the reference will be useless due to the low impedance and the parasitics. The only choice you have is comparison by differential. And using extreme care to make the setup very symmetrical with respect to magnetic field.

jn
 
Good. But as I said, measurement of only the bybee or the reference will be useless due to the low impedance and the parasitics. The only choice you have is comparison by differential. And using extreme care to make the setup very symmetrical with respect to magnetic field.

jn

We are talking about signal levels of 25 mV much higher than I usually play with!
 
We are talking about signal levels of 25 mV much higher than I usually play with!

We are discussing the accurate measurement of a .025 ohm, 600 nanohenry inductor over frequency. You do not have the equipment to measure that puppy in isolation accurately. If you do not work it differentially against a reference, your data and conclusions will be useless.

jn
 
We are discussing the accurate measurement of a .025 ohm, 600 nanohenry inductor over frequency. You do not have the equipment to measure that puppy in isolation accurately. If you do not work it differentially against a reference, your data and conclusions will be useless.

jn

Which is a technique I have had a great deal of practice with.

600 nH at 100 Hz is .00038 ohms. That would not account for the difference in level of a 160 Hz low pass filtered noise signal.

I'll post a picture of the test jig next time I set it up.
 
Which is a technique I have had a great deal of practice with.

600 nH at 100 Hz is .00038 ohms. That would not account for the difference in level of a 160 Hz low pass filtered noise signal.

I'll post a picture of the test jig next time I set it up.

I have no confidence in your measurement of 600 nanohenries. Nor have you demonstrated the tools or techniques to measure Rs in the frequency band of interest. As I said, .025 ohm impedance circuitry is not easy.

I occasionally do work in the sub nanohenry regime, so know very well what problems you will run into.

Pics would be nice. DON'T make me drive there!!!!!

jn
 
Status
Not open for further replies.