Microprojects - A simple (stereo) bar-LED driven driving indicator.

398216 Usunięty wrote:

AS a matter of fact, I don't understand the trend to litter topics with side threads not directly related to the content of the topic.

.
You started littering earlier than I did, we can stop together.

About 20 years ago, when I started my adventure with electronics, I made myself such an output indicator for my car. Leds were placed in a groove in the dashboard and everything was soldered with a "transformer" on a spider. It worked fine on some crappy Chinese radio. When I fitted a factory radio from an Opel, it stopped working. The radio had just a symmetrical output, and none of the speaker outputs were connected to the power supply ground. And the power supply grounds were all connected together. As it is in an old car. How could this be circumvented? I'd be curious to know now, although it's been a long time since I had that car. Any examples of solutions welcome. Thanks.

Moderated By ArturAVS:

3.1.14. Posting inconsistent with the subject matter of a forum section or discussion thread.

.

The flowery descriptions of the sound of vinyl and the persuasion of superiority are laughable. Anyway, I have already heard some opinions saying that a cassette sounds better than a CD. Subjectively better perhaps, but never more faithfully. For some reason, however, the compact disc was invented and it is worth comparing such copies that are not affected by loudness war, necessarily on a good quality player. If we are comparing a poorly realised CD with poor dynamics, then, to be fair, the comparison should be made with a worn-out vinyl record, the sound of which has nothing to do with the original.

It's true that listening to vinyl records and the whole procedure of playing them back is cool, "magical" in its own way, but let's not get crazy - it's an archaism that can sound great but only during the first plays of the record and, it's worth adding, only on the first tracks.

By the way, a little more and we'll see the opinion that AM radio sounds better than FM.

As for the subject itself - nice device. I have been considering using such a ledbar as a discrete voltmeter and tachometer in the car - I wonder how that would work.

James596 wrote:

.
I was considering using such a ledbar as a discrete voltmeter and tachometer in a car - I wonder how that would work.

Towards the end of communist Poland, someone published a booklet of electronic projects and there was such a ruler in the form of a tachometer from a Fiat 126p (i.e. "Maluch"). Implementation in the form of a small tachometer or ruler. I saw 2 different implementations, but I don't remember the details - it was a very long time ago, but it was something similar. RPM dependent voltage, so a simple f/U converter.

Not someone but Maria and Wojciech Nowakowski
https://tezeusz.pl/wojcech-24-proste-uklady-e...moje-hobby-nowakowscy-maria-i-wojciech-886351

James596 wrote:

I was considering using such a ledbar as a discrete voltmeter and tachometer in a car - I wonder how that would work.

.
It wouldn't work. In a car, the signal level is linear to the speed, and this circuit represents the logarithm of the given voltage.

gps79 wrote:

James596 wrote:

I was considering using such a ledbar as a discrete voltmeter and tachometer in a car - I wonder how that would work.

It wouldn't work. In a car, the signal level is linear to the speed, and this circuit represents the logarithm of the given voltage value.

Well then make a linear f/U converter.

It is not yet so poor that a linear light ruler controller cannot be bought. The circuit presented has its uses: measuring signals with exponential characteristics. It's like proposing to the owner of a Tesla to drive a petrol genset.

gps79 wrote:

(...) That's like suggesting a Tesla owner drive a generator on petrol.

.
They do drive, but probably on oil - haven't you seen the memes with the generator in the Tesla charging trailer?

Moderated By ArturAVS:

3.1.14. Posting inconsistent with the subject matter of the relevant forum section or discussion thread.

.

Hello

The circuit could actually be made simpler with a double sided PCB, it would make it easier to run the ground and power paths with several ICs. The advantage of using comparators is that the supply voltage can be reduced, which reduces power consumption.

A year ago I assembled something similar and simpler using two LM339N chips and 8 3mm LEDs, 5V supply. The board was drawn by hand, without using a thermal transfer.

żarówka rtęciowa wrote:

The circuit could actually be made simpler with a double-sided PCB, it would make it easier to run the ground and power paths with several ICs.

.
I was referring to the ease of PCB fabrication by the "Young Talented". Anyway - even the first amplifiers were made the same way ; a single sided board and hundreds of jumpers. It was simpler and (despite appearances) cheaper that way.

żarówka rtęciowa wrote:

The advantage of using comparators is that the supply voltage can be reduced, which reduces power consumption.

.
Firstly, there are comparators inside this circuit. Secondly, the LED current can be varied - I wrote about this to look at the circuit's datasheet - everything is described there in detail.
And as for the voltage and current indicator in the car - just "truncate" the schematic to the simplest application (it is also in the DS of the circuit) and use a version of the LM 3914, which has "steps" spaced linearly. So the considerations of Colleagues gps79 and sq3evp lose their point and illustrate the Colleagues commitment to finding problems where there are none.

żarówka rtęciowa wrote:

The circuit could actually be made simpler with a double-sided PCB, it would make it easier to run the ground and power paths with several ICs.

Simpler to make a double-sided PCB in amateur conditions? Not a chance.

acctr wrote:

No chance.

As much as possible it is doable.

ArturAVS wrote:

As much as it is doable.

Doable yes, but simpler than unilateral? Not a chance.

With double-sided plates, it depends on what offset tolerance of the Top and Bottom holes satisfies the builder.
For me, this is an incomparably more difficult task than with a single-sided plate. The minimum offset I was able to achieve in the end was about 0.2 mm. I press the plates with a laminator.
Generally I prefer to make some transitions with silver-plating rather than struggle with a double-sided plate.

efi222 wrote:

Generally, I prefer to do some silver-plated transitions rather than agonise with a double-sided plate.

.
This is also what I just wrote. Yes double-sided plates can be made at home, but (as the paraphrased student saying goes) "Why bother?" I don't want to say here that I haven't made such boards myself, but compared to making a single-sided PCB there is a lot more work, and the result.... not at all good enough to play with. Yes, if the board has to be smaller and there are too many jumpers, double-sided PCB is a better solution, but on the other hand, there is a necessity to buy special rivets for vias (which makes the time of making the board longer and increases its cost), or soldering the elements in crucial places on both sides, which is not always possible (especially when the elements are packed too much).
There is no point in proving that it can be done, because it is possible, but the question here is whether it is worth making life difficult for yourself? Does it make sense?

I will tell you frankly that I expected more from you.
You presented a supposedly your own design, but in fact it is a redrawn schematic from "Electronics for All". All you have done is to verify the circuit many times (as you yourself mentioned). You did not describe in your own words what the resistors R1, R2 determine, you only refer to the application note. You write several times what can be done with resistor R13 but so far you have not given its value.
You have placed your topic in the "Articles" section, under the name Microprojects, but whose projects, you have only made the board, (but still praise you for making it available).
You have inspired colleagues to discuss vinyl records, which nobody needs, (and you have fuelled this discussion yourself), which has nothing to do with your topic.

It could have been better.

Yours sincerely.

damian1115 wrote:

You have supposedly presented your design, and in fact it is a redrawn schematic from "Electronics for All".

.
And do you distinguish between a design and a schematic? The schematic is from EDW - I have not negated that anywhere. My contribution (and that's what the article is about) is an example design of a PCB solution - adapted to the available LED displays (as I wrote in the topic).

damian1115 wrote:

You did not describe in your own words what the resistors R1, R2 determine, you just refer to the application note.

.

Maybe in a different way... Which is more valuable : Snipping a ready-made one, or doing it yourself to learn something? I believe it is the latter. I myself have "learned" electronics in this way and it gives results. If you redraw someone else's painting without thinking, you cannot call yourself a painter.
Anyway, I think your post is valuable - if only to show the difference between a schematic and a PCB design.
The schematic is generally available - even if not in its entirety then in individual components on the web (DS of the LM1915 circuit and the quasi active rectifier) - What supposedly can be changed in the application as given for general information and use by the circuit manufacturer?

damian1115 wrote:

You just made the board

.
Not only that... I was trying to present a way to use the LM chip and displays to create as small an output indicator module as possible.
I'm just sorry that you don't see this and prefer to spam my topic. I only hope unintentionally.

damian1115 wrote:

You have presented a purported design and in fact it is a redrawn scheme

.
Why the agitation? After all, @398216 Usunięty already wrote at the beginning that it's a circuit from EdW, as you can see from the schematic.

I did not and do not intend to spam your topic. However, I would like to say that, for an article, it is a bit weak compared to the others posted in this section.
You didn't make much of an effort by posting this topic in this section.

398216 Usunięty wrote:

Maybe otherwise.... What is more valuable : Snipping a ready-made, or doing it yourself to learn something?

.
In this sentence I really don't know what you mean. You have provided a ready-made circuit by posting a schematic from "Electronics for All", and then provided a mosaic of paths to copy directly and perform a thermo transfer. But when you should write something about the circuit (which, in my opinion, is the basis of the author of the article), you hide behind the fact that everyone who wants to, should find materials related to it, (because it is more valuable, because he will learn something).
You think that's what posting articles is about, because I don't.

acctr wrote:

Why the agitation? After all, @398216 Usunięty wrote right at the beginning that it's a circuit from EdW, as you can see from the schematic.

I know he wrote it, and I don't deny it at all, but I think that if someone wants to write an article, they should put a little effort into it, and not write "in the gloom". Instead of flooding the subject with a number of unnecessary pictures taking up almost a whole page, he should at least write something substantive about what he has posted there.
One more thing as far as substantive criticism on my part is concerned (which the author calls spamming), let's not look for the guilty ones around us, sometimes it is enough to hit one's own breast and read again what one has written.
Sometimes that helps.

damian1115 wrote:

In this sentence I really don't know what you mean.

.
And somehow I don't dzxiw. Instead of reading carefully the passage containing the quoted sentence, you have taken it out of context, and in that form it actually conforms to what you write. On the other hand (I don't know if I need to explain, I think I am dealing with an intelligent person) this sentence you quoted refers to your allegation about referring to DS. And it just means that instead of blindly copying a circuit (inserting elements as in the posted template) it is good to take an interest in what the element "does" in the circuit and how its value can trigger changes in the operation of the circuit.

damian1115 wrote:

But how you should write something from yourself about the circuit,

.
Do I really need to show with my finger where I wrote about it? No exaggeration...

damian1115 wrote:

Let's not look for blame around us, sometimes all we need to do is hit our own breast

.
Well... You hit the nail on the head, however, it was a shot across the knee.
I have come to the conclusion, based on my own experiences in my youth, that it is good to give a taste of a dish instead of immediately serving it on a tray. The point is (so that someone does not understand something again, I will try to explain the analogy), not to make all the knowledge available in one article, because such a large dose of information may have the opposite effect - instead of learning something, the reader will focus on what seems to be the most important for him (let me remind you again - I dedicate my articles to Young Talented, so to those Readers who are just starting their adventure with electronics); why should he go through the content that does not interest him? For such a Beginner, it is important to build something that works and not (at least not immediately!) to learn by heart what for what and why. When the time comes, he will start looking for the information he needs himself and then he will certainly remember better what he has found on his own after searching the web and studying the whole data sheet.
For me, this is a much more effective way for acquiring information and thus PRACTICE.
But... this is probably the hundredth time I've written this and there's always someone who can't see the obvious - I don't know maybe they've forgotten how they started? I don't think there is anyone here on the Forum who took their first steps in acquiring hectobytes of theoretical knowledge, which may be useful only in a few years' time, if they don't get discouraged earlier.

So - please forgive me, but if you think otherwise, you are either wrong or clinging.
Or why don't you instead write something yourself in the way you think is most right? Then I can "play along"....

@damian1115 There are many projects (different). @398216 Usunięty Showed his own solution. Compact and easy to replicate. Is this a bug?

The best thing I can do is to drop the subject, because I can see that it is all pointless anyway.
I had hoped that "The Removed" would at least reflect a little and at least partly admit that things could have been better, that we could have done more. Unfortunately, I was wrong; instead, he defends himself as best he can against substantive criticism by presenting the same arguments over and over again, putting them into different words.
You started a topic for "Young Talents", you gave them the schematics and boards and now you expect someone to look at the data sheet to find out how it works, let's be serious.
I think it would be much better and you would put yourself in a much better light if you described the few details in your own words.
Electronics for All 2/96 published this schematic on which, as you mentioned, you relied, it also provided descriptions and the principle of operation. The schematic is the result of a reworking of the application note for your needs. Now think about it and tell me in which datasheet Young Talented will find a similar schematic so that he can satisfy his curiosity.
Yours sincerely
Damian.
I read your next post of 13:46
I see that there really is no point in discussion with you at all. At all costs you want to prove that you are the one who is right you turn the "cat's tail" so that it is only on yours. I leave the evaluation of our conversation to other readers of this topic, I'm off.
PS.
I decided to put this post in the previous one, because in a moment you will accuse me of scoring points.

damian1115 wrote:

I think it would be much better and you would put yourself in a much better light if you described these few details in your own words.
Electronics for All 2/96 published this schematic on which, as you mentioned, you relied, also provided descriptions and the principle of operation.

So if I described in my own words as it was done in EdW you could cling that it is plagiarism, because after all it has already been described? After all, I would not be able to say anything more than what the circuit manufacturer presented in the data sheet. A strange way of perceiving what is good and what is bad. After all, EdW has written exactly what can be read in the DS of this layout????
So what would constitute plagiarism? Is it my design to use the layout and DESIGN the plates, or the description from EdW?
Some details in your own words... And what do I seem to be doing?

damian1115 wrote:

Elektronika dla Wszystkich 2/96 published this schematic on which, as you mentioned, you relied, it also made available the descriptions and working principle. The schematic is the result of reworking the application note for your needs. Now think about it and tell me in which data sheet the Young Talented One will find a similar schematic so that he can satisfy his curiosity.

And who says so?
https://www.elektroda.pl/rtvforum/topic4124213.html#21564777 After all, you're doing exactly the same thing - referring people to read guides instead of offering something of your own or describing the problem in your own words.
So now it is quite beyond me to understand your accusations. How is a description based on a datasheet a bad thing, how is a duplication of a schematic diagram (also not the author's version) of a rectifier glued to a TYPICAL (because recommended by the designer of the circuit) application plagiarism according to you, and no one wants to look at the datasheet (which you wrote yourself) so what? So, is it best to sit in an armchair with warm slippers on your feet and watch TV, or maybe to encourage those "Young Talented" to take an interest in electronics at least in the way I present it in my articles?
Please think about it, and if you don't come up with anything new - I repeat my suggestion - try to describe something yourself in the way YOU think is best. After all, it is easier to criticise without giving anything in return. How about I take up the idea and change my topics myself? Only then won't I be accused again of not inventing anything new, of just copying the ideas of others????

One thing I will agree with - Posts similar to yours make no sense.

And I was further inspired by the topic to scour AliExpress and found a cheap item there, which I intend to write material about soon.
Ali has become a bit of the equivalent of the old Volumen and similar exchanges where you could buy something on the cheap that could potentially be a working or require a minor repair.

TechEkspert Something about it... Personally, I miss the old Volume a bit. A lot of wholesalers used to come down and you could buy certain things really cheaply. I used to visit on average three times a month back then and there was always something to be had.

I wish the theme would work out for you and that there would be no users like here.