Talk:Function generator

Sine wave shaping
diode-shaping from triangle --> sine?? how does that work? - Omegatron 20:26, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)


 * I can't draw you a schematic, but the way it works is essentially as follows:


 * Imagine that we have our triangle wave and it's coming from some low but non-zero impedance. And for our discussion, lets say the triangle sweeps between +10 to -10 volts. Also imagine a series of voltages developed from a number of voltage dividers set to Thevenin voltages of, say, +/-1.5 volts, +/-3.5 volts, +/-4 volts, and +/-4.5 volts.


 * Now, connect these voltage dividers to the triangle source through diodes that only allow the connection of the (positive) voltage dividers when the triangle waveform is above the voltage set by the various positive dividers or the connection of the (negative) voltage dividers when the triangle waveform is below the voltage set by the various negative dividers. The end result is that the triangle wave is subject to more and more load (a lower load resistance, provided by the Thevenin resistances of the various voltage dividers) as its voltage moves towards the positive or negative extremes and additional voltage dividers become "connected" through the diodes.


 * The end result is that slope of the triangle waveform becomes shallower and shallower as it moves towards the extreme voltages. So what we might get out of this shaper is a waveform that swings between (say) +5 to -5 volts and has 5 different "slope steps" (no dividers in parallel, one divider in parallel, etc.). Do this carefully enough and with enough "slope steps" and the waveform becomes a reasonable approximation of a sine wave. It doesn't take too many steps to make it "good enough", and nowadays, this kind of circuitry integrates really well into a monolithic or hybrid integrated circuit; laser trimming can tune the voltage dividers for lowest sine-wave distortion.


 * Atlant 23:30, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * That sounds like the beginnings of an interesting article on its own, go for it! :)  --Hooperbloob 02:39, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks, but I think I'd better "SPICE" it first; overnight, I decided my breakpoint voltages were way off. :-) I've edited them to be more-realistic, but some simulation would still be a good idea. And the article referenced below by Omegatron describes several other techniques that should be incorporated into any article that claimed "completeness".


 * Atlant 11:41, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Cool! This page has a schematic of diode shaping: Sine wave generation techniques - Omegatron 02:54, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the referenced article!


 * Atlant 11:41, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Waveform pictures
"Thanks!" to Omegatron for adding the image of the waveforms; that was something this article really needed for completeness!

Atlant 15:40, 10 October 2005 (UTC)


 * :-) — Omegatron 23:33, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Merge
It has been suggested that this article be merged with Signal generator.

I believe this would be a mistake. "Function generators" are a very specialized portion of the vastly-larger world of generic signal generators. Besides function generators, signal generators include such beasts as low distortion audio generators, noise generators, microwave generators, sweepers, synthesized signal generators, and so on.

I beleieve that the articles are correctly factored as they stand.

Atlant 14:45, 2 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I think that some words (possible those supra) in the respective articles to compare and contrast the two types of instruments would benefit the reader and prevent a future attempt to merge. Cutler 23:46, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I rewrote signal generator, so the merge tag is no longer appropriate--hence I removed it. If someone disagrees, please let us know. --EngineerScotty 01:17, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Manufacturers
Hi All (especially Requestion)

A question concerning the "Manufacturers of Function Generators" section of the Function Generator page.

I was given notice that adding another company to the list was Spam.

My question, is if adding another company to a list of Manufacturers is Spam? What is the purpose of the list of manufacturers? I thought Wikipedia was for information..... Restricting the information on a page is either a form of censorship, or indirectly can be interpreted as select group of people who edit this page of being in the back pocket of the companies that are listed, as this list can be considered a form of free advertising, especially as it is a "closed" list.

Thanks

Lopatg


 * National Instruments is a bit of a touchy subject around here. Every so often, someone (usually an anonymous "IP" editor) comes around and spams NI links into a lot of electronics articles. I think for this reason, most people rapidly dismiss any NI link as spam.


 * Me, I'm mostly on the fence, but I really don't think NI is up there in the same class as Agilent, Tek, Anritsu, etc.


 * Atlant 15:53, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Lately my response to these lists of manufacturers is to delete them utterly. Those manufacturers already have their own articles, and I see little point in enumerating even the major manufacturers unless they have had some significant impact on the industry (and it could be argued that companies like Tek and HP/Agilent have).  Lists of equipment manufacturers rarely, if ever, improve an article, and I find that removing them helps reduce the temptation for spam. -- mattb
 * In fact, in the spirit of boldness, I've deleted these manufacturer lists from this and two other similar pages. -- mattb


 * In the spirits of boldness, I felt that it was necessary to add the deleted content back to the article. Two of the manufactures were actually wiki-links.  Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 19:10, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Do you have a particular reason to re-add the list? Does it enhance the article in any way?  You'll note that prose is almost universally preferred over lists per WP:EMBED, and if something cannot easily be turned into useful prose it is listcruft in my mind. -- mattb


 * In terms of class, I would argue the point of whether National Instruments is in the same class or not. It seems Agilent may think so as they recently purchased a few months back a competitor of NI that manufactures PXI based digitizers.  There may have been an argument in the past about whether a PXI based digitizer can be compared to a box oscilloscope, but the fact is that Agilent has lost a sale or two of box oscilloscopes to National Instrument's digitizers (and the reverse).  Agilent knows they are loosing sales to customer who are demanding PXI and are no competing directly.  As for function generators, National Instrument's customers are not purchasing them because they are cheaper than Agilent's 33250/33220.

Second, in terms of whether TEK and Agilent add something to the page that National Instruments does not, who decides that? I have no proof that the person who keeps Agilent and TEK there does not have any other ulterior motive.

So, in the spirit of BOLDNESS, I’m adding the WIKI page for National Instruments. Although, in fairness, to keep Wikipedia “clean”, I do not agree with having this either.

Last, I admit I am a fan of National Instruments products, I have used them and I believe they offer me greater flexibility in their use. --Jerry Lopato 23:58, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Use

 * So... What is a Function Generator used for? It doesn't say at all in the article. Whynotbeme2 (talk) 22:11, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

India Education Program course assignment
This article was the subject of an educational assignment supported by Wikipedia Ambassadors through the India Education Program.

The above message was substituted from by PrimeBOT (talk) on 19:58, 1 February 2023 (UTC)