Ohm's Law 101

[hitsware]

>We're supposed to be measuring amplifier distortion.

I ( and the author ) have been talking about system distortion. Perhaps that's the reason for the head bumping. We've been talking about 2 differant things, thinking we're talking about the same thing............Not unusual actually......Part of the human condition. I'll let you off with 1 beer. I'm having a special on knowledge this week
Mega Regards .............. mike

[Steve Eddy]

Originally posted by hitsware
>We're supposed to be measuring amplifier distortion.

I ( and the author ) have been talking about system distortion. Perhaps that's the reason for the head bumping. We've been talking about 2 differant things, thinking we're talking about the same thing............Not unusual actually......Part of the human condition. I'll let you off with 1 beer. I'm having a special on knowledge this week

What he's talking about is amplifier behavior while driving a reactive load as opposed to a purely resistive load. And to that end, he says that we should measure the distortion of the current waveform rather than the voltage waveform.

By the way, I tried EMailing the author but the EMail address he has on his website is no longer active and my EMail was bounced back.

se

[hitsware]

We understood it 2 differant ways. Groovy if you can communicate with him, but that's an old article so ?

mm

[Steve Eddy]

Originally posted by hitsware
We understood it 2 differant ways. Groovy if you can communicate with him, but that's an old article so ?

The EMail address I tried was from the author's web page at:

http://www.omegav.ntnu.no/~dunker/horns.html

se

[hitsware]

Are you sure about the electrical model of a driver being parralell resonant. I really agree from an empirical standpoint, since impedance goes up at Fs, but seems I've read (more than one place) and been told by a 'guru' that it is considered series?
.........??????

[Steve Eddy]

Originally posted by hitsware
Are you sure about the electrical model of a driver being parralell resonant. I really agree from an empirical standpoint, since impedance goes up at Fs, but seems I've read (more than one place) and been told by a 'guru' that it is considered series?

Why would something that behaves as a parallel RLC circuit and whose behavior can be modeled with a parallel RLC circuit be considered a series RLC circuit? This has been verified over and over again.

Here's the basic model of an electrodynamic loudspeaker:



R_e is the voice coil's DC resistance, L_vc is the voice coil's inductance, L_ces is the electrical equivalent of the cone's compliance, C_mes is the electrical equivalent of the cone's mass, and R_es is the cone's losses.

se

[dkemppai]

Originally posted by jam

Another "Law" Bites The Dust
(Ohms Law full of crap)

Some of you have seen it before. But it's proof that "laws" are FULL OF ****.

Seems to me, further reading indicates that the "negistor", or "negative differential resistor" is really a voltage cotrolled resistor, such that the impressed voltage changes the resistance characteristic. The "negative" comes from the slope of differential of the current vs voltage (di/dv) curve changing to a negative value at some region. Simply stated more V gives you less I, therefore R increses with V for any operating point along the "negative differential region". For each operating point, I = E / R still holds true, it's just that R = f(E) modifies the equation.

Ohms law still applies....

[Steve Eddy]

Originally posted by dkemppai
Seems to me, further reading indicates that the "negistor", or "negative differential resistor" is really a voltage cotrolled resistor, such that the impressed voltage changes the resistance characteristic. The "negative" comes from the slope of differential of the current vs voltage (di/dv) curve changing to a negative value at some region. Simply stated more V gives you less I, therefore R increses with V for any operating point along the "negative differential region". For each operating point, I = E / R still holds true, it's just that R = f(E) modifies the equation.

Ohms law still applies....

DON'T BELIEVE HIM! HE WAS PAID TO SAY THIS! He's one of... them.

FREE YOURSELVES FROM THE VAST CONSPIRACY! IT'S ALL A LIE! FREE ENERGY FOR EVERYONE!

se

[hitsware]

Sounds good to me.
Only possibility I can see is if the top inductor dominates over the bottom one then it (the whole network) becomes series ..... right ?

[dkemppai]

Originally posted by Steve Eddy


DON'T BELIEVE HIM! HE WAS PAID TO SAY THIS! He's one of... them.

FREE YOURSELVES FROM THE VAST CONSPIRACY! IT'S ALL A LIE! FREE ENERGY FOR EVERYONE!

se