| Kai Klaas 07/11/03 15:30 Read: 516 times Germany |
#50512 - RE: More detailed schematic, Kai Responding to: Erik Malund's previous message |
Even if it's part of specifications, for me it's totally stupid to use an interfacing technique, which generates common mode interference by design. And it heavily violates concept of saftey earth connections, because then you are not allowed to make any earth connections at recievers! That's really stupid. Why not using voltage generators (0...10V) when wanting to connect more than one reciever? This would be much easier, and no additional common mode signal is generated.
For me the only good reason to use 4...20mA technique is, that it supports two-wire transmitter technique. Means, you can route power supply and signal by the help of only two wires. XTR100 from Burr-Brown is a good example. Use it with 500R shunt resistance and without chaining, and of course, make a earth connection to signal ground. Our products exhibit symmetrical signal routing (signal voltage of +-10V). When we use current sources we forbidd 'chaining' and recievers have shunt resistors of 500R. Kai |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| DAQ card isolation | Parviz Parvizi | 07/05/03 13:21 |
| RE: DAQ card isolation | Jez Smith | 07/05/03 14:54 |
| RE: DAQ card isolation | Raghunathan R | 07/05/03 20:46 |
| Why galvanic isolation? | Kai Klaas | 07/06/03 02:02 |
| RE: Why galvanic isolation? | Parviz Parvizi | 07/06/03 09:09 |
| RE: Why galvanic isolation? | Erik Malund | 07/07/03 08:58 |
| RE: Why galvanic isolation? | Parviz Parvizi | 07/13/03 05:55 |
| RE: Why galvanic isolation? | Kai Klaas | 07/13/03 22:20 |
| RE: Why galvanic isolation? | Terry Lingle | 07/14/03 00:52 |
| RE: Why galvanic isolation? | Kai Klaas | 07/14/03 04:09 |
| RE: Why galvanic isolation? | Terry Lingle | 07/14/03 10:35 |
| RE: Why galvanic isolation? | Kai Klaas | 07/14/03 14:43 |
| RE: Why galvanic isolation? | Dave Nelson | 07/16/03 10:53 |
RE: Why galvanic isolation? | Terry Lingle | 07/16/03 11:38 |
| RE: DAQ card isolation | Kai Klaas | 07/07/03 20:45 |
| RE: DAQ card isolation | Parviz Parvizi | 07/08/03 14:03 |
| RE: DAQ card isolation | Erik Malund | 07/08/03 14:28 |
| RE: DAQ card isolation | Kai Klaas | 07/09/03 01:09 |
| RE: DAQ card isolation, Kai | Erik Malund | 07/09/03 08:05 |
| RE: DAQ card isolation, Kai | Parviz Parvizi | 07/09/03 14:23 |
| RE: DAQ card isolation, Kai | Erik Malund | 07/09/03 14:31 |
| RE: DAQ card isolation, Kai | Raghunathan R | 07/10/03 01:29 |
| RE: DAQ card isolation, Kai | Erik Malund | 07/10/03 08:21 |
| RE: DAQ card isolation, Erik | Raghunathan R | 07/11/03 11:22 |
| More detailed schematic | Kai Klaas | 07/10/03 23:18 |
| RE: More detailed schematic, Kai | Erik Malund | 07/11/03 08:35 |
| RE: More detailed schematic, Kai | Kai Klaas | 07/11/03 13:22 |
| RE: More detailed schematic, Kai | Erik Malund | 07/11/03 13:50 |
| RE: More detailed schematic, Kai | Kai Klaas | 07/11/03 15:30 |
| RE: DAQ card isolation | Parviz Parvizi | 07/11/03 14:06 |
| RE: DAQ card isolation | Erik Malund | 07/11/03 14:43 |
| RE: DAQ card isolation | Kai Klaas | 07/12/03 03:13 |
| RE: DAQ card isolation | Parviz Parvizi | 07/12/03 10:36 |
| I am very unhappy! | Kai Klaas | 07/12/03 13:26 |
| RE: I am very unhappy! | Rob Redding | 07/12/03 16:03 |
| RE: I am very unhappy! | Kai Klaas | 07/12/03 18:14 |
| RE: I am very unhappy! | Raghunathan R | 07/12/03 22:12 |
| No more unhappy | Kai Klaas | 07/12/03 22:44 |
| RE: No more unhappy | Michael Karas | 07/12/03 23:26 |
| RE: No more unhappy | Kai Klaas | 07/13/03 02:58 |
| RE: No more unhappy | Erik Malund | 07/14/03 17:02 |
| RE: I am very unhappy! | Parviz Parvizi | 07/13/03 05:39 |
| I say you need isolation at BOTH ends! | Michael Karas | 07/12/03 18:13 |
| RE: I say you need isolation at BOTH ends! | Parviz Parvizi | 07/14/03 05:39 |
| RE: I say you need isolation at BOTH ends! | Erik Malund | 07/14/03 17:00 |
| RE: DAQ card isolation | Erik Malund | 07/11/03 16:31 |
| RE: DAQ card isolation | Kai Klaas | 07/12/03 00:30 |



