The Cyber-Spy.Com Usenet Archive Feeds Directly
From The Open And Publicly Available Newsgroup
This Group And Thousands Of Others Are Available
On Most IS NNTP News Servers On Port 119.
Cyber-Spy.Com Is NOT Responsible For Any Topic,
Opinions Or Content Posted To This Or Any Other
Newsgroup. This Web Archive Of The Newsgroup And
Posts Are For Informational Purposes Only.
From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Dale Chisholm)
Subject: Re: three-terminal regulator question
Date: 9 Jan 2003 07:10:18 -0800
References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 9 Jan 2003 15:10:18 GMT
"fred bartoli" wrote in message news:<email@example.com>...
> Jim Thompson a écrit dans le message :
> > On Wed, 8 Jan 2003 21:00:47 +0100,
> > (1) With three-legged regulators it is *impossible* to obtain more
> > voltage at the output than is available at the input.
> Hmmm, are you *sure* Jim ?
> I can remember some early 80's app note showing such linear regs perversely
> used as a (probably bad) self oscillating switcher but I don't remember
> exactly how it was done.
> Those were step down ones though but if some one can recall this I'm pretty
> sure that I can convert it for stepping up or inverting.
Yeah, I recall something like that, too. In the late 70's,
"Switch-mode Power Supply" and "Microprocesser" were the only
buzz-words that marketeers knew, so EVERYTHING you built had to have
at least one of each. I believe there's a similar circuit in the
uA723 data sheet from the same era. As you imply, it's like the bear
walking upright on his back legs: the marvel is NOT that it's done
well, but that it can be done AT ALL!
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The sci.electronics.design Newsgroup