ark>
It's not factual - any more than "if wishes were horses beggars would ride". It may not be false, but it's not useful.
It may look logical to you. Quite a lot of it simply isn't true. In particular "A chopper op amp *uses* modulation/gain/demodulation to kill 1/f noise, same as your AC scheme, but all in one SOT23 package for $1 or so." isn't true.
The chopper op amp only kills 1/f noise originating inside it's package, so it's not the same as "my" AC excitation scheme (Larsen used it while I was still a graduate student, and didn't invent it even then)
Larsen N T 1968 Rev. Sci. Instrum. 39 pages 1=9612
That scheme also kills 1/f noise originating from the bridge, which the chopper amp doesn't.
But any thermocouple voltages in their input leads are going to look very like 1/f noise.
The RTD resistance isn't the only source of signal or noise in the system.
Why should I bother? You won't process it.
se,
eth
nThere's nothing lame about the comment. You've failed to appreciate that you have made a rather blatant error.
It's more a feature than a bug. Larsen's paper does explicitly recognise the problem, such as it is. His circuit included a complicated bandpass filter before the demodulator, and about half the components in it were devoted to keeping the phase shift though it from being a problem.
National Standards labs do go into for that kind of elaboration.
-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen