At 10:48 AM 9/29/2009, Rocket J Squirrel wrote: >That's not the same as a 0pf capacitor. It's the same as a resistor, and >if the capacitor is being charged through another resistor until it >reaches the shutoff trigger voltage, and that capacitor is paralleled with >a resistor to model the internal leakage (or schmutz on the board, the >proposed "external" portion of the leakage) then you got a voltage divider >which will prevent the voltage at the top of the cap from ever reaching >blink-o-matic shutoff voltage. Mike's talking about removing the cap entirely, so aside from the fact that the newer level controllers *need* that timed blink, the only issue would be leakage across the board, which isn't enough to matter by itself. The current source for the cap would drive the chip high directly. Of course that might inhibit the blink completely, probably would I think -- can't remember the circuit well enough. But it's moot because of the controllers. :-) d |
Please note - During the past 17 years of operation, several gigabytes of
Vanagon mail messages have been archived. Searching the entire collection
will take up to five minutes to complete. Please be patient!
Return to the archives @ gerry.vanagon.com
The vanagon mailing list archives are copyright (c) 1994-2011, and may not be reproduced without the express written permission of the list administrators. Posting messages to this mailing list grants a license to the mailing list administrators to reproduce the message in a compilation, either printed or electronic. All compilations will be not-for-profit, with any excess proceeds going to the Vanagon mailing list.
Any profits from list compilations go exclusively towards the management and operation of the Vanagon mailing list and vanagon mailing list web site.