TSSP: List Archives

From: Paul
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 22:22:09 +0000
Subject: Re: Ready :-)) - Re: [TSSP] short H/D and stuff

The analysis of the CSV files:

TEK00000.CSV
PK  FREQ kHz (Error +/-)    Q FACTOR (Error +/-)   LEVEL
 1  229.912 (0.01%,27Hz)     464.44 (4.53%,21.0)   98.3% -0.1dB
 2  578.091 (0.02%,96Hz)     185.29 (1.43%, 2.7)   14.1% -17.0dB
 3  904.579 (0.05%,441Hz)    106.80 (8.06%, 8.6)    6.3% -24.0dB
Accounted for 98.5% of input signal

TEK00001.CSV
PK  FREQ kHz (Error +/-)    Q FACTOR (Error +/-)   LEVEL
 1  229.956 (0.01%,12Hz)     283.93 (1.07%, 3.1)   97.0% -0.3dB
 2  577.965 (0.02%,99Hz)     168.62 (1.65%, 2.8)   16.3% -15.7dB
 3  903.473 (0.04%,362Hz)    102.70 (2.94%, 3.0)    7.5% -22.5dB
Accounted for 98.4% of input signal

TEK00002.CSV
PK  FREQ kHz (Error +/-)    Q FACTOR (Error +/-)   LEVEL
 1  229.974 (0.01%,12Hz)     233.71 (0.70%, 1.6)   97.2% -0.2dB
 2  578.114 (0.02%,123Hz)    135.77 (1.24%, 1.7)   16.4% -15.7dB
 3  904.198 (0.04%,379Hz)     87.93 (1.91%, 1.7)    8.1% -21.9dB
Accounted for 98.6% of input signal

TEK00003.CSV
PK  FREQ kHz (Error +/-)    Q FACTOR (Error +/-)   LEVEL
 1  229.990 (0.01%,13Hz)     219.48 (0.52%, 1.1)   96.9% -0.3dB
 2  578.117 (0.02%,121Hz)    135.77 (2.55%, 3.5)   16.5% -15.6dB
 3  904.379 (0.04%,367Hz)     99.40 (4.53%, 4.5)    8.2% -21.7dB
Accounted for 98.1% of input signal

TEK00004.CSV
PK  FREQ kHz (Error +/-)    Q FACTOR (Error +/-)   LEVEL
 1  229.990 (0.01%,13Hz)     214.51 (0.45%, 1.0)   96.2% -0.3dB
 2  578.079 (0.02%,103Hz)    153.17 (0.70%, 1.1)   17.8% -15.0dB
 3  903.893 (0.04%,358Hz)    100.09 (5.23%, 5.2)    8.6% -21.3dB
Accounted for 97.8% of input signal

TEK00005.CSV
PK  FREQ kHz (Error +/-)    Q FACTOR (Error +/-)   LEVEL
 1  229.982 (0.01%,13Hz)     217.15 (0.34%, 0.7)   96.4% -0.3dB
 2  578.003 (0.02%,98Hz)     176.83 (1.65%, 2.9)   19.1% -14.4dB
 3  903.893 (0.04%,368Hz)     86.90 (5.23%, 4.5)    7.9% -22.1dB
Accounted for 98.4% of input signal

TEK00006.CSV
PK  FREQ kHz (Error +/-)    Q FACTOR (Error +/-)   LEVEL
 1  229.974 (0.01%,12Hz)     225.57 (0.45%, 1.0)   97.1% -0.3dB
 2  578.003 (0.02%,98Hz)     180.54 (1.07%, 1.9)   19.4% -14.2dB
 3  904.083 (0.04%,384Hz)     81.83 (1.24%, 1.0)    7.5% -22.5dB
Accounted for 99.2% of input signal

TEK00007.CSV
PK  FREQ kHz (Error +/-)    Q FACTOR (Error +/-)   LEVEL
 1  229.982 (0.01%,12Hz)     243.15 (0.60%, 1.5)   96.8% -0.3dB
 2  578.041 (0.02%,100Hz)    161.10 (1.07%, 1.7)   17.4% -15.2dB
 3  904.362 (0.04%,369Hz)     90.04 (2.55%, 2.3)    7.5% -22.5dB
Accounted for 98.6% of input signal

TEK00008.CSV
PK  FREQ kHz (Error +/-)    Q FACTOR (Error +/-)   LEVEL
 1  229.990 (0.01%,12Hz)     269.18 (0.93%, 2.5)   97.0% -0.3dB
 2  578.079 (0.02%,120Hz)    136.35 (1.91%, 2.6)   14.9% -16.5dB
 3  903.969 (0.04%,352Hz)     99.69 (8.06%, 8.0)    7.5% -22.5dB
Accounted for 98.2% of input signal


TEK00009.CSV
PK  FREQ kHz (Error +/-)    Q FACTOR (Error +/-)   LEVEL
 1  229.974 (0.01%,12Hz)     308.80 (1.91%, 5.9)   97.6% -0.2dB
 2  578.041 (0.02%,124Hz)    130.60 (1.24%, 1.6)   13.9% -17.1dB
 3  904.007 (0.04%,374Hz)     91.15 (4.53%, 4.1)    7.4% -22.6dB
Accounted for 98.7% of input sig

TEK00010.CSV
PK  FREQ kHz (Error +/-)    Q FACTOR (Error +/-)   LEVEL
 1  229.964 (0.01%,11Hz)     366.24 (2.94%,10.8)   97.5% -0.2dB
 2  578.041 (0.02%,120Hz)    139.75 (1.24%, 1.7)   13.4% -17.4dB
 3  903.854 (0.04%,382Hz)     87.76 (3.92%, 3.4)    6.4% -23.9dB
Accounted for 98.5% of input signal

TEK00011.CSV
PK  FREQ kHz (Error +/-)    Q FACTOR (Error +/-)   LEVEL
 1  229.836 (0.01%,11Hz)     464.15 (4.53%,21.0)   98.4% -0.1dB
 2  577.829 (0.02%,98Hz)     184.60 (0.93%, 1.7)   14.2% -16.9dB
 3  903.893 (0.04%,355Hz)    106.04 (1.65%, 1.8)    6.2% -24.1dB
Accounted for 99.3% of input signal

None of these appear to be duplicates.  Could it be that TEK00000.CSV
is the coil without resistance, and the rest are

  posn  0 = TEK00001.CSV
  posn  1 = TEK00002.CSV
  ...
  posn 10 = TEK00011.CSV

because that would make sense looking at the above Q factors.
TEK00004.CSV and TEK00005.CSV are pretty similar, but then I'd
expect them to be as they are near where the current maximum
should be.

The program reports poor errors on the higher Q runs because
the trace ends well before the ringdown is complete. Some pings
with half the timebase would help in those cases.
--
Paul Nicholson,
--


Maintainer Paul Nicholson, paul@abelian.demon.co.uk.