Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY

Started by 27Bubba, September 18, 2012, 02:17:22 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 292 Guests are viewing this topic.

Jeg

Hi guys. To Verpies or anyone else who feels familiar with this.

I would like to produce a pulse train with controllable time intervals with the less ic's. In the attached image i use two 555. The left one resets the right one and produces the effect i want, but i am not sure if it is a valuable method. What is your opinion?

verpies

Quote from: Jeg on October 28, 2016, 05:55:34 AM
I would like to produce a pulse train with controllable time intervals with the less ic's. In the attached image i use two 555. The left one resets the right one and produces the effect i want, but i am not sure if it is a valuable method. What is your opinion?
If by "controllable" you mean manual control, then you could use the dual TLC556 timer to decrease the package count (one half wired as an astable, that triggers the other half wired as a monostable).

But if I were you, I'd prefer an all-digital method (not relying on RC time constants) built around the 74HC40103 chips, because they are so cheap and can be wired without any programming down to 30ns resolution. 
The time intervals can be controlled with DIP switches + diodes or the 74HCT595 registers connected to an old computer (in lieu of the manual DIP switches).  The latter option is less expensive than switches ...surprisingly.

...and if programming is acceptable to you, then you could do everything in one 8-pin chip like the PIC 12F1612.  I am sure this  guy would help you with the program if you ask him.

AlienGrey


verpies

Both are possible.
A fixed crystal oscillator can be easily bought for couple of bucks ( e.g. here ) or substituted with a PLL if a synchronization with an external signal is needed.

Jeg

Quote from: verpies on October 28, 2016, 06:16:51 AM
If by "controllable" you mean manual control, then you could use the dual TLC556 timer to decrease the package count (one half wired as an astable, that triggers the other half wired as a monostable).

But if I were you, I'd prefer an all-digital method (not relying on RC time constants) built around the 74HC40103 chips, because they are so cheap and can be wired without any programming down to 30ns resolution. 
The time intervals can be controlled with DIP switches + diodes or the 74HCT595 registers connected to an old computer (in lieu of the manual DIP switches).  The latter option is less expensive than switches ...surprisingly.

...and if programming is acceptable to you, then you could do everything in one 8-pin chip like the PIC 12F1612.  I am sure this  guy would help you with the program if you ask him.

Thanks a lot Verpies. I will consider all the variables you mentioned before proceeding.

ps. (Even i think i already have some 556. I'll try to design it today and ask you again if something go wrong. )