From: email@example.com (N. Thornton)
Subject: Re: A Simple Circuit Design Challange
Date: 23 Oct 2002 09:35:29 -0700
References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 23 Oct 2002 16:35:29 GMT
Dan wrote in message news:<firstname.lastname@example.org>...
> Not too bad... that's right to the point and very simple. Elegant in
> it's simplicity. I've been trying to figure out a way to use some
> comparators so that in this scenario, the individual lines were tested
> independant of one another. That way one could pinpoint the exact
> fault. The detail that throws the wrench in the works is testing
> between 1 and 3. In your circuit, the first LED will always be on
> even if there is a short circuit. And if there is a short between 1
> and 3 and an open between the 1s or the 2s, the red LED on 1 will not
> Nice though, none the less.
Well, I'll throw out my thought FWIW. I am tihnking in terms of using
a chopper for this. A 3 channel chopper that puts pulses onto each of
the 3 lines separately, one at a time, and listens on all 3 lines,
interpreting signal as desired.
I dont think I'm explaining this very well...
1. Put a pulse on in1
2. Put pulse on in2
3. put pulse on in 3
The interpretation bit is easy enough.
I havent thought this through, but it might be easier to do the
suggested simple LEDs circuit, except running it off ac, and having 2
set of LEDs, one for each polarity. Now insted of connecting the
various point together with wire, complete the circuit using diodes,
and use a different cct config in each direction (for + and - cycles)
Now all errors will show up on at least one set of LEDs.
Havent traced it thru, but maybe.