Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26126 invoked from network); 11 Jun 2004 09:28:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ptb-mxscan03.plus.net) (212.159.14.237) by ptb-mailstore04.plus.net with SMTP; 11 Jun 2004 09:28:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 65221 invoked from network); 11 Jun 2004 09:28:01 -0000 X-Filtered-by: Plusnet (hmail v1.01) X-Spam-detection-level: 11 Received: from ptb-mxcore03.plus.net (212.159.14.217) by ptb-mxscan03.plus.net with SMTP; 11 Jun 2004 09:27:08 -0000 Received: from pih-mxlast02.plus.net ([212.159.6.18]) by ptb-mxcore03.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1BYiJY-000EFc-6R for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Fri, 11 Jun 2004 10:27:08 +0100 Received: from post.thorcom.com ([193.82.116.20]) by pih-mxlast02.plus.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1BYOTa-0001DL-B4 for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Thu, 10 Jun 2004 13:16:10 +0100 X-Fake-Domain: majordom Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1BYLxf-0001Iv-P5 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 10 Jun 2004 10:35:03 +0100 Received: from [213.232.95.59] (helo=relay.salmark.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1BYLxf-0001Im-Co for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 10 Jun 2004 10:35:03 +0100 Received: from cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk ([195.92.195.171]) by relay.salmark.net with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1BYSWB-0005oc-BO for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 10 Jun 2004 17:35:07 +0100 Received: from modem-116.angband.dialup.pol.co.uk ([62.136.111.116] helo=d6y6c7) by cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 4.14) id 1BYLxZ-0000HV-Q9 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 10 Jun 2004 10:34:58 +0100 X-Bad-Message-ID: no DNS (d6y6c7) Message-ID: <001001c44ece$30833070$746f883e@d6y6c7> From: "Lawrence Mayhead" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 10:17:29 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=no, Subject: LF: Re Xtal osc. "delta emitter" tuning Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-PN-SPAMFiltered: yes X-Spam-Rating: 2 Yes Bob I realise I am stretching it a bit hence the rather extream variation in emitter resistance. However it works for my purposes and no doubt others would like a simple means of getting a "fine" adjustment. Regarding the mechanism behind your idea, is it possibly a form of "Miller" effect as in valve technology. Does the base emitter capacitance change with a change in emitter current? Perhaps one of the more knowledgeable members of this group could offer an opinion. Once again thanks, 73 Laurie.