Maker Pro
Maker Pro

+/- 5 vdc signal to 0-10 vdc signal

   Yawn. You think that you are worth a lot more than you really are.

Something is worth what somebody will pay for it. No local employer is
willing to hire me, so I'm not worth anything. That doesn't leave me
much room to think that I'm worth more than I really am.
As far as lying? You are an expert, making ASS-umtions about people that
you've never met.

As do you.
 No one beleives 90% of what you say.

You can speak for the whole world? Like I said, you are a little out
of touch with reality.
You presume to know everything about my medical problems, and you know almost nothing.
I would tell you to get a life, but you've already wasted one.

Where have I claimed any detailed knowledge of your medical problems?
From time to time I echo the claims that you make about your medical
problems, and I've no reason to beleive that you lie about them, but
I've got no independent source of information about them either.

   Why not?  You expect us to believe everything you say.

Why not? It does happen to be true.
 
M

Michael A. Terrell

Jan 1, 1970
0
Something is worth what somebody will pay for it. No local employer is
willing to hire me, so I'm not worth anything. That doesn't leave me
much room to think that I'm worth more than I really am.


As do you.


You can speak for the whole world? Like I said, you are a little out
of touch with reality.


Where have I claimed any detailed knowledge of your medical problems?
From time to time I echo the claims that you make about your medical
problems, and I've no reason to beleive that you lie about them, but
I've got no independent source of information about them either.



Why not? It does happen to be true.


Yawn.


--
aioe.org is home to cowards and terrorists

Add this line to your news proxy nfilter.dat file
* drop Path:*aioe.org!not-for-mail to drop all aioe.org traffic.

http://improve-usenet.org/index.html
 
"Ignorant" is a multisylabic word and correspondingly unlikely to show
up in idiomatic expressions. The phrase "dumb newbie" is an idiom -
google finds 28,700 hits - which conveys exactly the same idea, and is
easier to type. If you were fluent in proper English - as opposed to
your impoverished Texan dialect - you'd be aware of this.
Perhaps feigning ignorance is better than having to admit your
insult was gratuitous?  

I suspect so.

Sadly, the ignorance is all yours.

In that context it is most certainly appropriate!
Also, in order to be grammatically correct, your sentence needs a
'to' between 'have' and 'characterize'
---

Getting excited about a typo again? You really are grasping at straws.

<snipped the rest - life's too short>
 
J

JosephKK

Jan 1, 1970
0
On Mar 10, 12:15 pm, John Fields <[email protected]>
wrote:
I need to convert a +/- 5 vdc analog signal to a 0-10 vdc analog
signal.  In effect, 0.0 vdc needs to be shifted to 5 vdc.  Is there a
simple IC that can be used to do this?
                      +15
                       |
VIN>--[10K]--+--------|+\ LM318
             |        |  >--+-->
           [10K]   +--|-/   |
             |     |   |  [10K]
            +5V    |  -15   |
                   +--------+
                            |
                          [10K]
                            |
                           GND
Good grief. An LM318. Why? Farnell still stocks them, but they always
were noisy and cranky. I never used one after the LF356 came on the
market around 1974 - the LF356 wasn't quite a fast, but it was quiet
and well behaved.
If you need real speed these days, the LM318 isn't remotely
interesting.

---
I don't see where the OP asked for speed or, in fact, for anything
other than how to do the level shift with a simple IC.

That's what he got and, of course, he's free to do any substitutions
he chooses to.

So why suggest an obsolete and cranky - but moderately fast - op amp
to do the job?

The 741 is the traditional part for this sort of work - I prefer the
OP-07 because it has no vices and a low offest voltage, but without
some detail about the application you can't go very far.

741? That 45 year old fossil? It was brilliant in its day, but that
day is long since passed (like yours). Even the OP07 is obsolete at
35 years old. Actually finding either of these still in production
would be a surprise.
 
741? That 45 year old fossil? It was brilliant in its day, but that
day is long since passed (like yours).

It was never brilliant - the LM107 did the same job a whole lot
better. And unfortunately, people who should know better are still
designing it in.
 Even the OP07 is obsolete at
35 years old.  Actually finding either of these still in production
would be a surprise.

Prepare to be surprised. Try looking in the Farnell catalogue - both
parts are available in several packages from several sources. I
imagine that this is mostly to supply the legacy market, but people do
have a tendency to use the part that worked last time, even if it is
pretty much obsolete.
 
J

John Fields

Jan 1, 1970
0
"Ignorant" is a multisylabic word and correspondingly unlikely to show
up in idiomatic expressions. The phrase "dumb newbie" is an idiom -
google finds 28,700 hits - which conveys exactly the same idea, and is
easier to type.

---
What a liar you are.

Had you wanted to deliver a message without rancor you could have
left it at 'newbie' and not included the 'dumb' slap by which you
meant 'stupid'.

You always try to belittle anyone you can whenever you get a chance,
and that was no exception, so your trying to get out of it by trying
to spread the blame is contemptible.

But, since it's you, expected.
---
If you were fluent in proper English - as opposed to
your impoverished Texan dialect - you'd be aware of this.

---
With your sloppy and careless writing you're hardly one to judge
what is and what isn't proper English.
---
Sadly, the ignorance is all yours.
 
This claim happens to be wrong; you should know that it is wrong, but
you may just be deluded.
Had you wanted to deliver a message without rancor you could have
left it at 'newbie' and not included the 'dumb' slap by which you
meant 'stupid'.

As I've already explained, the phrase "dumb newbie" is an idiom, which
is to say the meaning of these two words taken together isn't what it
would be if it wasn't an idiom. If I'd left out the "dumb" component,
I'd have failed to catch the RTFM component in "dumb newbie". A "dumb
newbie" differs from a "newbie" in not appreciating that there is a
manual than could be read - there's no suggestion that the "dumb
newbie" is stupid, merely ignorant.
You always try to belittle anyone you can whenever you get a chance,
and that was no exception, so your trying to get out of it by trying
to spread the blame is contemptible.

This pretty much describes your own behaviour
But, since it's you, expected.

Everybody makes errors of action. Professional proof readers catch
better than 90% of typos, while the rest of us don't do better than
30%. The presence of typo's in a text says nothing about the author's
grasp of grammar.

<snipped the rest of the ill-founded nit-picking>
 
R

Richard Henry

Jan 1, 1970
0
I need to convert a +/- 5 vdc analog signal to a 0-10 vdc analog
signal.  In effect, 0.0 vdc needs to be shifted to 5 vdc.  Is there a
simple IC that can be used to do this?

After all this noise, Craig never checked back in to say whether he
got what he was looking for.
 
J

John Fields

Jan 1, 1970
0
This claim happens to be wrong;

---
Prove it.
---
you should know that it is wrong, but you may just be deluded.

---
"No, I'm not crazy, everyone else is."
---
As I've already explained, the phrase "dumb newbie" is an idiom, which
is to say the meaning of these two words taken together isn't what it
would be if it wasn't an idiom. If I'd left out the "dumb" component,
I'd have failed to catch the RTFM component in "dumb newbie".

---
And you felt compelled to issue a RTFM slap, why???

Someone interested in issuing information without attaching
emotional strings to it would certainly have left out the pejorative
'dumb' and proceeded with the objective dissemination of the
information.

Not you, though.

In order to maintain your self-esteem you find it necessary to try
to pull everyone down to a level below yours. Not really a very
nice way to be and probably one of the reasons you've found
employment so difficult to obtain.
---

A "dumb
newbie" differs from a "newbie" in not appreciating that there is a
manual than could be read - there's no suggestion that the "dumb
newbie" is stupid, merely ignorant.

---
Hogwash.

You meant 'stupid' so why don't you just own up to it?

Yeah, like when hell freezes over...
---
This pretty much describes your own behaviour

---
IKYABWAI?

That's lame, Bill, even for you.
---
Everybody makes errors of action.

---
So on the one hand poor little Billy is just like everyone else so
he abrogates responsibility for his English errors, while on the
other His Grace is a judge as to what constitutes the proper use of
English?
---
Professional proof readers catch
better than 90% of typos, while the rest of us don't do better than
30%. The presence of typo's in a text says nothing about the author's
grasp of grammar.

---
Improper use of grammar, however, does.

Note your grasp slipping with "typo's" which is two grammatical
errors at the same time, since neither the use of the contraction of
'typo is' or the possessive is correct there!

You got it right the first time, so I can only assume the apostrophe
was intentional...
---
 
J

John Fields

Jan 1, 1970
0
I have to grasp every opportunity I get. There are so few areas where
I've got somethig to be modest about.
/
--- /
/
Here's one:
 
Calling him a coward are you John? That really is a gratuitous
insult ...

A more likely - and less insulting - hypothesis is that you gave him
all the answer he though he needed, and he's been busy since then
trying to get his hands on an LM318.
 
J

JosephKK

Jan 1, 1970
0
It was never brilliant - the LM107 did the same job a whole lot
better. And unfortunately, people who should know better are still
designing it in.

The LM107 like the OP07 came out 10 years later. Thus are not
properly comparable (more so back then).
And NS obsoleted the LM107 in 1996. Reproduction parts are not the
original design for either one (and usually have better performance).
Prepare to be surprised. Try looking in the Farnell catalogue - both
parts are available in several packages from several sources. I
imagine that this is mostly to supply the legacy market, but people do
have a tendency to use the part that worked last time, even if it is
pretty much obsolete.

Reproduction parts, not the original designs.
 
J

JosephKK

Jan 1, 1970
0
And maybe OP is just kicking back reading this from google groups and
laughing his arse off.
 
J

John Fields

Jan 1, 1970
0
Calling him a coward are you John?

---
Nope, a wise man.
---
That really is a gratuitous insult ...

---
Did you miss the winky, Mr. asshole?
---
A more likely - and less insulting - hypothesis is that you gave him
all the answer he though he needed, and he's been busy since then
trying to get his hands on an LM318.

---
Except for the wafer and the 'H' package, the device seems to be in
full production and stocked by lots of folks, so he shouldn't have
much trouble with that:

http://www.national.com/search/psearch.cgi?keywords=LM318
 
The LM107 like the OP07 came out 10 years later.  Thus are not
properly comparable (more so back then).

http://www.uoguelph.ca/~antoon/gadgets/741/741.html

The LM101 (the LM107 without internal compensation) came out in 1967.
The uA741 came out in May 1968 and the LM101A and the LM107 in
December 1968.

The OP-07 came out seven years later. It's major advantages were that
the off-set voltage was trimmed at manufacture (by zenner zapping) and
the input offset currents were actively cancelled - very handy in
precision circuits. For a lot of applications swapping it in let you
dump a trimming potentiometer or two.

http://www.ieee.org/portal/site/ssc...cle&TheCat=2171&path=sscs/07Fall&file=Lee.xml
 
And NS obsoleted the LM107 in 1996.  Reproduction parts are not the
original design for either one (and usually have better performance).

But they meet the original specifications - which tended to leave out
important stuff like input noise voltage (the original 741's were
horrible) and input capacitance. I've got a nasty suspicion that many
modern "741"s and the like, are more modern parts that failed to meet
the meet their more comprehensive modern specifications and get
packaged and shipped out under the older, less closely specified, part
numbers.
Reproduction parts, not the original designs.

Who cares. And you can't rely on it. Around 1987 I significantly
improved the performance of the Metals Research gallium arsenide
crystal puller by taking out a 741 and replacing it with an OP-07. The
741 had been injecting pop-corn noise in the worst possible place, and
the OP-07 injected much less sub-10Hz noise.

By 1987, whatever was being sold in the 741 package should not have
exhibited pop-corn noise, but the Cambridge Instuments buyers had a
genius for finding cheap and nasty components (Metals Research was a
wholly owned subsidiary of Cambrdige Instruments at the time).
 
Top