The judgement was made when the group was originally set up - the group topic is electronic design, not hand-holding for electronic hobbyists,
You do seem to have a funny idea of what constitutes "electronic design" and what the business of this group might be. I'm sure that you have no reason to be ashamed of what you do with the - limited - ability that you have got, but your talents - such as they are - are better suited to sci.electronics.basics.
I'm sure that there are people around who know even less about electronics than you do, and are grateful for the kind of help you can give them. They don't need to know that there's a better alternative for the 555 and the 741 in almost every application - as has been true in the real world since around 1980. All they want is a solution that works, no matter how crude and clumsy.
--
Well, since you seem unable (disguised as unwilling) to post the LFSR
circuit which you tout as trivial and only requiring a few minutes of
your time to do, I\'ve gone ahead and posted (since the OP said "about 25
lamps") a 24 lamp version to abse.
The clock is a 7555, which will, no doubt, give you heartburn, and I
didn\'t show the frequency control pot which will, no doubt, cause you to
launch a tirade of one kind or another, but there ya go...
Enjoy, if you can:
news:b3n1e51hpa7di1hctj0tpvc4tb3n4uu093@4ax.com
Not me John - I first used TTL shift registers back in 1972, and CMOS in 1974 - early enough that the cost of the CMOS parts in my design went down from fifty U.K . pounds to fifteen U.K. pounds in the month or so between the time I passed my design over to the drawing office and the time they gave purchasing a parts list.
I've used quite a lot of other monostables - the 74121, 74123 and the MC10198 come to mind - and I've had to trouble-shoot other peoples designs, propose modifications for stuff that was giving trouble in final test, and listen to final test's opinions of the modifications after they had been put into practice.
There was one real stinker - a complicated scan control board for the Cambridge Instruments S.200 electron microscope, that was crawling with LM311 comparators, which are normally hard to provoke into oscillation. I finally got permission to rework the printed circuit layout, which made things a lot better. Final test still found occasional examples of the revised boards that would oscillate, but they were a lot easier to tame than the original, so final test was tolerably happy with me.
I've designed and developed circuits to make pulses that would look like glitches to you - a 500psec +/-50psec unblanking pulse for our stroboscopic electron microscope - using 100k ECL and Gigabit Logic's GaAs. Because I read the application notes and did proper tolerancing on the set-up and hold times I never ran into trouble with glitches, but I did have to do quite a lot of work helping out people who were less careful.
Even when it is impracticable?
More components and more solder joints are a real disadvantage of your approach.
By individually decoupling each of the 25 oscillators and lamps - even more components? And enough attenuation to stablise three or four oscillators against mutual interference isn't always enough to tame an assembly of five or six., let alone 25. Reworking all 25 wouldn't be all that enjoyable.
If that was the degree of randomness that the OP actually wanted or needed. and he might have to spend quite a while stopping the individual oscillators from sel-sychronising
True. If it were something that was going to worry the OP. But two pseudo-random binary sequence generators with clocks divided down form a common master clock by two different prime numbers would probably break that up enough for all practical purposes, and still be cheaper than your solution, use fewer components and be much more likely to work out of the box.
But I got in first.
Always was. What he actually asked for was "a circuit, either a kit, or built" so we've both been wasting our time.
--
If the group\'s charter was rigidly enforced, you\'d have been tossed off
the group long ago because of your incessant off-topic abuse of the
charter.
Fortunately, it isn\'t, [enforced] so we get to see what an asshole you
really are when you\'re left to your own devices when the rules are
stated but not enforced.
AS far as the rest of it goes, I think most of the rest of us are happy
to help hobbyists who wanders in here on occasion.
I know I am; YMMV
I think you may be confusing me with Jim Thompson, who seems to think that Arizona weather reports are of interest to the group.
Of coure you. They are the only people here who know so little about electronics that you can help them.
p.
e
e
Probably not. You may differ - since 101 things a boy can do with the
555 seem to be most of the electronics you know, and most of the electronics that you know about. My own expertise is a little broader.
Sledge hammer? You peddle the electronic equivalents of stone axes, which are cheap. You don't understand the advantages of more modern tools, which give rather more bang for the buck if you know how to use them.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.