??? 06/29/05 12:26 Modified: 06/29/05 12:33 Read: times |
#96180 - Theoretical work missed Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Stanley said:
This is the circuit. Any mistake or improvment? Use 1k and 100k instead of 10k and 1M in the feedback of first LM318. Use 1k and 47k instead of 10k and 470k in the feedback of second LM318. Use 22R + 100µF + 100nF in each supply voltage line to each LM318. Connect a 10k resistor from input of second LM318 to ground. Remove first diode, use 4k7 resistor instead. Remove 10k resistor at second diode, use 47k instead. Connect the cathode of second diode to inverting input of LM339, not to non-inverting input. Connect the poti to non-inverting input. Connect 1M resistor from non-inverting input to output of LM339. Remove 10k resistor at output, use 4k7 instead. I don't understand how you calculate and conclude that the LM324 can't have a high gain at 40kHz. Something relate to the frequency response? Sorry, but I have to state this: It's time that you have a look into a textbook about OPamps, because you ask this question over and over again and make the same mistakes. Designing a circuit needs two things to do, theoretical work and practical work. But you totally omit the theoretical work! For properly working with OPamps there's a minimum of theoretical knowledge needed! Most Opamps have a maximum gain called 'open loop gain', that is frequency dependent. At unity gain bandwidth the maximum achievable gain is 1 and increases by about 20dB with decreasing frequency by one decade. So, LM324 showing a unity gain bandwidth of 1MHz has a maximum gain of 10 at 100kHz and 100 at 10kHz. At 40KHz the maximum gain is 25. So, you can theoretically achieve a maximum gain of 25 at 40kHz. But, as most OPamps are very unlinear, which is especially true for LM324 you need a certain gain reserve called 'loop gain' to increase the linearity. A gain reserve of at least 10 is needed for most applications. So, this gives you a maximum gain of your circuit called 'closed loop gain' of 25/10 = 2.5 for LM324 at 40kHz!! In applications, where the linearity of gain is not so demanding, especially if only a simple detection of a carrier is needed, then 'closed loop gain' can be increased a little bit, means 'loop gain' can be decreased a little bit. But take care, there's no much headroom for doing this, because there are many negative effects with this, like increased risk of instability and so forth. Kai |
Topic | Author | Date |
Ultrasonic Signal Processing | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Time dependant gain | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Further attenuation... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Signal recovery. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
AGC? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
AGC as Steve said// | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
My Algorithm was: | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
My Algorithm was: | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Ultrasonic Ranging | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Matched filter on the rescue | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
matched filters | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Phase locked amplifier | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Its a different thing | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Ah | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Thats the one.... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Clever woman | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Just an idea | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
The scope plot tells it all! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Largest signal | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
'Greatest' echo is the wrong criterion! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| 01/01/70 00:00 | |
somehow I remember... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
No, no... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Oops~ forgot... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
the product | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Power of transmission pulse | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Preamp circuit Here | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Add caps to remove base line noise | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Another potential problem... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Problem with ADC? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
possible solution to the ADC problem | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Ok~ | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Debug Result | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
ADC Sampling and code debugging | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
sampling time | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Adc for Ultrasonic? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Next, comes to "average" | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Why use the adc? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Forgot to tell... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Circle in RED | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Asking for help again - Filter | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Notch | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I don't know | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
DSP | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Nah | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
for the sake of learning | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
so | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I agree | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Amplitude | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Op amps | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
100pF | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
bypass ?? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Yes | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
No sort of bypass | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
BTE054 BTE054USS2 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Better noise control | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
re: BTE054 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Replace LMV6032 with LM324 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
re:low sensitivity | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
re:no filtering | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Note | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Notch filter? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
No, | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Bandpass | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
NOT a criticism | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Update... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Umm... Nowadays? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Op amp parameters | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
"Filters for Dummy" | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Have you tried it with ..... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Yes, I've tried it and it works well | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Basic electronics | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
0.002uF -> 3300uF | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
re:noise | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Exactly the same | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
test of signal | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
It's over 1.2m | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
TWO bypass caps. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Two were found | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Usenet | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Why using a PLL, when a bandpass can ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
which is why ,,,, | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Not sure what you meant.. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Already | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
But it MUST work properly!! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Circuit here | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Op-amp to replace LM324 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Non-inverting Input Voltage Divider | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
LM567 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
re:LM324 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
re:wrong link | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
No AGC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
AGC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Yes | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
re: no AGC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
LMC6032 is much more linear than LM324 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
re: | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
re:attenuation of signal | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Good ones and bad ones | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
another article of interest | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
tramsmit & receive | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
how to measure the distance perfectly? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Fatal Error! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
How about this one.... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Ultrasonic Detection Code! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
is that right? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Not right,,,,, | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Thanks! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
another missing! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
i'll try it.. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Some Applications of ultrasonic | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
"Op amps for everyone" | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
woo... tiring trip | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Check this one | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Thanks | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
is it not fundamentally wrong | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Both | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I knew that... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Synthetic grounds | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
no, Kai | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Steve, Erik | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
The circuit works, but... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Moral | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Puh, what antennas... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Which means I can't use breadboard | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
In one word. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Using the LM318 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Missing 10K | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
More caps | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Where? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Parallel | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Does it work now? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Yes, it works fine | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Theoretical work missed | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Fatal Error! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Another article to peruse | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Another one... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
same application | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Sorry | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Why sorry? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
That's exactly what I want to do | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
which one is the best way? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Capacitors | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
i've got it | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
not the best solution | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Laser ranging | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
how much | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I've withdrawn from the competition | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
NOT finance | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Re: money is not everything | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Good Luck | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
good luck | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Good luck | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Thanks! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
The noise again | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
re:link | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Link | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
this is the link | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
re:noise | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
5-14 Khz | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
re:5-14kHz | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
The Noise Amplitude | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
gain | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
the problem is gain | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Schematic | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Thank You but... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Thank You but... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
1/4Watt is enough | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Simulation result | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Strange plots... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
How about Compensation? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Not needed | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Bigger Pulse | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Bridge configuration can help | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
The same circuit but... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
...but much stronger | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I have tried | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
What do you mean by ripple? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
The ripple | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
No, it is not. The output from a logic | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Answer | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Yup Kai | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
It's to adjust oscillating frequency | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Finished![]() | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Exams VS academic | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
"Plan B" | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Universities in HongKong | 01/01/70 00:00 |