Furlongs per fortnight?? Right... A comedian...
And apparently the world is supposed to agree with you simply because YOU are saying it.I don't have to prove anything.
All I am saying is slew is already V/s.
Hence slew rate is V/s/s.
No one has claimed that baud is not a rate, only that slew is not a rate. Why does it have to be all or nothing?Ok, I can live with that.
Next question, why do people say "baud rate" instead of "baud"?
This is not the slew rate. It is merely the average rate of change of voltage between two arbitrarily chosen points on a waveform.For voltage, take V(t) at 10% and 90% of the final value of v(t). (V2(t2)-V1(t1))/(t2-t1)
Often expressed in V/uS or Volts per microsecond
You put in a signal that is fast enough and large enough that the output can't keep up. At that point the amplifier's output is being slew-rate limited. Many (most?) amplifiers, particularly if they are intended to have high linearity, will exhibit a linear change in voltage. That rate is the slew rate.Ok, suppose I have an audio amplifier. I want to determine it's slew rate. Now what?
......(I think) under the restrictions as mentioned in post #17 .You put in a signal that is fast enough and large enough that the output can't keep up.
Yes, well the exam has been and slew rate didn't come up, but we covered it this year and I would like to be able to understanding before next year.Is this for school work?
So do you think you have a good understanding of it now?Yes, well the exam has been and slew rate didn't come up, but we covered it this year and I would like to be able to understanding before next year.
Are you just trying to understand the definition or are you trying to understand what causes it?Yes, well the exam has been and slew rate didn't come up, but we covered it this year and I would like to be able to understanding before next year.
Nor would we. Just as we wouldn't say that an aircraft that had a roll rate of 60°/sec was roll rating at 60°/sec, we would say that it was rolling at 60°/sec.
You've done nothing but reinforced my case.
If someone says that the car is speeding at 60 mph they almost certainly do not mean that the speed of the car is 60 mph, but rather that at a speed of 60 mph the car is speeding (i.e., exceeding the speed limit) or some other implied use where the word "speeding" is not directly tied to the 60 mph, such as the car is speeding (down the road) at 60 mph.
And, no, we don't say that the speed rate is 60 mph because speed IS a rate.
Then it should be a trivial matter to come up with all kinds of references from at least some of the hundreds of sites dedicated to proper grammar and used to back up the claim that "slew rate" is improper.
Then i guess you have also heard the arguments that "current flow" is bad grammar too because "current" is already a flow of electrons. So it is like we are saying "electron flow flow". ha ha.The amplifier's output is slewing at 20V/μs. We don't say the amplifier is slew rating at 20V/μs.
We say a car's speed is 60mph. The car is speeding at 60mph.
We don't say the speed rate is 60mph.
Slew rate and baud rate are examples of poor grammar, regardless of common usage.
Nope, since even a slew rate per your implied definition is not a dimensionless quantity.If David killed 0ne giant per week. Would he have a slew rate of 52?
by Duane Benson
by Aaron Carman
by Aaron Carman
by Duane Benson