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: "Phil Allison"
Subject: Re: PSU ripple current
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 23:18:23 +1100
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 23:07:23 EST
Organization: Telstra BigPond Internet Services (http://www.bigpond.com)
"John Woodgate" wrote in message
> I read in sci.electronics.design that Phil Allison
> wrote (in ) about 'PSU
> ripple current', on Thu, 16 Jan 2003:
> >"John Woodgate" wrote in message
> >> I read in sci.electronics.design that Phil Allison
> >> >> > This represents a 2% error and so is way less than the other
> >> >> >approximations involved.
> >> >>
> >> >> OK, in this case, but it isn't always so, IMHO, that ESR is very
> >> >> less than Xc.
> >> >
> >> > ** It would be so at 100 Hz.
> >> >
> >> No, I meant that different capacitors have different ratios of ESR to
> >> at a given frequency.
> >> > Huh ? That contradicts your post.
> >> If you say so.
> > ** You are being too pithy again.
> > The context here is 100 Hz - you dropped that without giving any
> > ............... Phil
> I wrote 'at a given frequency'; that includes 100 Hz and any other Hz. A
> denial of my statement would be that all capacitors have the same ratio
> of ESR to Xc at 100 Hz (or any other frequency).
** The original comment ( OK, in this case ..... ) is both out of context
and ambiguous - but you will not admit that since the prior Nit Pick was
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The sci.electronics.design Newsgroup