Reply-To: "fred bartoli"
From: "fred bartoli"
Subject: Re: Cheap low frequency impedance bridge?
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 13:46:59 +0200
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
Organization: Guest of ProXad - France
NNTP-Posting-Date: 11 Oct 2002 14:47:48 MEST
Bill Sloman a écrit dans le message :
> I've got a component at work that looks like a resistance in series with a
> capacitor, and I've got to monitor the capacitance fairly precisely to
> for degradation in use - the device is set up so that the resistive
> impedance (which is what we are interested in) almost dominates the
> impedance at the measurement frequency, but the capacitance can get eroded
> in service, and we are going to have put numbers on this.
> The measurement frequency range is 2kHz to 200kHz, and we'll probably
> monitor down to rather lower frequencies if we can, to boost the reactive
> impedance to more or less match the resistive component.
> So I need an impedance bridge. I don't need - and couldn't pay for - an RF
> mpedance bridge going into the MHz range.
> The resistive impedance range runs from to 10R to 10k, but the region up
> 100R is the most interesting. The capacitance runs from about 1uF to about
> 100uF, and the higher values are frequency dependent (just to make life
> interesting and to exclude LCR measuring gear that doesn't give you
> over the excitation frequency).
> The excitation voltage should be about 5mV rms - we've used more (up to
> about 100mV) without seeing any gross problems, but more precise
> measurements may need the lower drive level.
> We've done some preliminary work on an HP 4192A bridge in a nearby
> university lab, at vast expense. The HP4192A was just what I wanted, but
> Agilent don't make it any more, and my boss couldn't afford to buy it if
> they did.
> Anybody know of anything cheap that offers frequencies up to 200kHz? I
> a signal generator and an oscilloscope for the intial development, a
> of years ago, but for this work we really need something rather more
> Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
Why not build a cheap sync detector, all being driven by a bench sig gen and
a dvm output reading ?
Couldn't be cheaper (for the parts), accuracy OK and if your sig gen and dvm
are connected to a PC you could have automated measurement, which will
compensate for the time you'll build the detector.