You can subscribe to this list. Attachments: Hi Joerg, Once again, thank you for your time and information. I will definitely give it a try, and hope that I don't fry my laptop and/or EEG, as a result of some misconnection. Not having to mess around with batteries will be a real help. Rechargeable battery technology just isn't where it needs to be, yet, and 'normal' batteries are too expensive to keep buying very often. As you stated, this information will undoubtedly be of interest to many others who frequent this website, so I'm sure that you have helped several of us. Have a good day!

TWELVE-BUTTON USB 2.0 GAME CONTROLLER FOR PC / FIFA 2013 UPDATE. File, Action. USB GAMEPAD FIFA13 Update, Download.

--Ray Cole ----- Original Message ----- From: Joerg Hansmann To: Discussion of EEG hardware, software, training protocols, NFB theory - for developers and users. Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 1:43 AM Subject: Re: [Openeeg-list] Battery Elimination--Second Try (ForgotAttachment) Hi, Ray Cole, 07:15: > > Hi Joerg, > > Thank you for your patience and replies; I appreciate your effort and > time in doing that. > > I have attached a quick sketch of what I think you have described, > regarding the second option for stealing some power from the USB cable. > Ist es richtig, oder nicht? It looks perfectly OK. > I hope that you can open it. > > Oh, one more thing: When you said, 'Make sure you have patched the > ModularEEG for +5V supply.

The unpatched > ModularEEG needs at least 7.5V for operation,' how do I do that? Unsolder IC107 (the 7805 voltage regulator) and solder a piece of wire from the left to the right pad of the 7805 footprint on the pcb. Cid new episodes 2012 free download full. This connects IN with OUT and bypasses the regulator. Additionally you have to unsolder or simply short D103. This is a diode that protects the modularEEG from reversed batteries. However it takes 0.7V away and that is not acceptable when we have only 5V.

Solder in D104 (if you have no spare one, you can use the D103 you have desolderd). This now is the new reverse polarity protection in shunt mode. Instead of blocking as D103 did, this one protects by the crowbar method: A reversed power supply is shorted to GND. Not so nice but better than no protection at all. You can omit D104 if you are very sure that the power polarity is always right. This is a valid assumption on USB cables. Regards, Joerg ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world; _______________________________________________ Openeeg-list mailing list Openeeg-list@.; Go to the above address to change your subscription options, e.g unsubscribe.

Hi, Mike, 12:28: > The openEEG has been well designed to resist ESD damage. However, I have been > careless in the past. I have left the electrodes connected to the openEEG > amplifier, and let them dangle. Should be no problem. Plugging in a charged cable is more likely to challenge the ESD protection. > This has led to one of the INA114 amplifiers > -ve inputs becoming damaged by ESD. Did you verify the defect by swapping the INAs from one channel to the other?

> Or at least, I am assuming that was the > cause. The INA114/INA118 devices are expensive to replace.

AD620 and re adjust the DRL. > Looking at the PCEEG project's use of the LT1168, I was wondering if I could, > in theory, use this as a replacement in my openEEG. The improved ESD > robustness of the LT1168, combined with the input transistors in the openEEG > design should make the amplifiers ESD 'bulletproof'. When using the LT1168 all you need for a bullet proof ESD protection is a series carbon composition (bulk not carbon or metal film) resistor for each electrode input - as described in the datasheet. Also you have to down adjust the DRL output voltage level to center the common mode input range. Regards, Joerg. Hi, Stefan Jung, 14:23.

> Talking about noise, theoretically it would have made sense to > increase the gain of the INA stage to something closer to x100. Increasing the gain of the INA stage would somewhat benefit the noise performance, but there is a good reason not to do this: The INA input stage is DC coupled to the electrodes.

So any DC electrode offset voltage from electrode polarisation or electrolyte concentration differences will be amplified by the INA gain. Up to +-100mV DC should be tolerated without clipping. The INA supply voltage results with some margins defined in the datasheet in 1) a certain common mode input range (there was some need for a downwards adjustment of the DRL output voltage for the LT1168 in order to center the common mode operating point) 2) and some output range. Both 1) and 2) must not be exceeded.