can I have some help with measuring hz of an osc with a multimeter

[ratstar]

I have a Q1088, and im only getting a hz response (that goes higher when i put the voltage up. at a couple of khz) when im splitting the circuit, it gives me no response when i dont split the circuit into the multimeter.
The manual says just "touch": the circuit.

So am I doing this right, or am I stuffing up?

Im trying to find a speaker to plug into it, and the cutting position to test.

 

[ratstar]

I checked again with the speaker in it, it runs faster with the speaker connected, but i get no sound, so it could be pretty quirkily quiet.

 

[Harald Kapp]

I have a Q1088

A Q1088 what? A multimeter?

im only getting a hz response (that goes higher when i put the voltage up

Voltage and frequency are independent from each other.

when im splitting the circuit, it gives me no response when i dont split the circuit into the multimeter.

What do you mean by "splitting the circuit"? Which circuit? What source do you use.
Show us a schematic diagram of your setup.

The manual says just "touch": the circuit.

The manual certainly says more on how to use the probes, doesn't it?

I checked again with the speaker in it

Speaker in what (what is "it")?

it runs faster with the speaker connected

What runs "faster", what is "it"?

As I mentioned before: get used to using the language of the trade or you risk not being understood. Also supply schematics. A good picture is worth a thousand words.

 

[ratstar]

The speaker is actually not conducting. I mean faster as in the oscillator was going faster (higher frequency), with more volts.

But I think it was phony results, because I think its a high impedance read, because its in the volt jack, and then your not supposed to splice in, your supposed to just read it without splitting the circuit, so it was a dodgy result definitely...

have to keep on going, and buy more speakers from the shop tomorrow maybe.

So the correct way to measure it, is to stick one probe at the battery, and the other prob on the oscillating wire? cause thats what I tried later, and it read about ~30 hz, wavering alot, but it probably could be very low amplitude and just some error, instead of an actual oscillation, because i cant see it at all on the led. it may actually just be the led itself causing the oscillation.

I worked out the secret. you tap on it, and it gives you the count of taps. and on the oscillator, im getting 0 taps.

 

[Harald Kapp]

one probe at the battery, and the other prob on the oscillating wire? cause thats what I tried later, and it read about ~30 hz

A battery delivers DC aka 0 Hz.
Your 30 Hz reading is most likely a measuring error. Without knowing your setup one cannot say more.

i cant see it at all on the led.

You don't see 30 Hz flicker of an LED unless you are very sensitive to flickering light. Cinema show movies at 24 images/second (aka 24 Hz) and flickering is normally not seen.

I worked out the secret. you tap on it, and it gives you the count of taps. and on the oscillator, im getting 0 taps.

Whatever "it" is, you still haven't revealed to us what you are trying to do and how.

 

[ratstar]

I mean by tapping the probes together, and then you get the count of taps on the hz reading.

I think im reading it right now, it actually IS 0 (stillness.) - so back to the drawing board.

I got another idea for an oscillator, but ill keep it to myself. Its a capacitor based oscillator that slowly loses its energy, I saw alot of these on EEVBLOG before I got kicked off. But thats not what I want, I want a capacitor based oscillator that goes forever like a spark gap, but I want to do it without a spark gap.

So its been a long challenge, for a long time, and i havent been able to get results, in like 3 years now.

 

[bertus]

Hello,

Do you mean something like a relaxation oscillator?
You could have a look at this one with an UJT:
https://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/power/unijunction-transistor.html

Bertus

 

[ratstar]

That looks cool. But I want to do it without transistors, because I want to make all the components from scratch, and I dont know how to craft transistors. Caps and resistors are alot easier.

 

[WHONOES]

It's like extracting teeth with this poster!

 

[Harald Kapp]

But I want to do it without transistors,

You cannot build an oscillator without active components, be they transistors, opamps, valves (or tubes) or whatever. To create a stable oscillation the overall gain of the circuit needs to be exactly 1. With only passive components gain will be < 1 and any oscillation will decay rapidly due to losses in the components.

 

[ratstar]

What about spark gap oscillators?

 

[Harald Kapp]

I mean by tapping the probes together, and then you get the count of taps on the hz reading.

If this method worked at all, you'd not get the number of taps. The meter measures frequency (unit is Hz) which is the number of cycles (or taps) per second. So the best the meter could indicate is the number of taps per second.
But the meter will require an external power source that would translate the taps into voltage pulses. No external power -> no voltage pulses -> no measurement.

 

[Harald Kapp]

What about spark gap oscillators?

You have a point there, but spark gap oscillators are not very efficient. They also do not generate a single defined frequency, as is expected from a typical oscillator, but a rather wide spectrum of frequencies. They easily interfere with other radio operated circuits. I strongly recommend not to use one as this may easily get you in trouble with regulatory agencies. Compare to what has happened here.

 

[ratstar]

If this method worked at all, you'd not get the number of taps. The meter measures frequency (unit is Hz) which is the number of cycles (or taps) per second. So the best the meter could indicate is the number of taps per second.
But the meter will require an external power source that would translate the taps into voltage pulses. No external power -> no voltage pulses -> no measurement.

Yeh I had power connected to it.

 

[ratstar]

You have a point there, but spark gap oscillators are not very efficient. They also do not generate a single defined frequency, as is expected from a typical oscillator, but a rather wide spectrum of frequencies. They easily interfere with other radio operated circuits. I strongly recommend not to use one as this may easily get you in trouble with regulatory agencies. Compare to what has happened here.

But they go extreme high frequencies, not like your average transistor, which only go ~1 megahert.

 

[Harald Kapp]

not like your average transistor, which only go ~1 megahert.

What kind of transistor do you think powers GHz radio e.g. in smartphones?

 

[ratstar]

Not average ones.

 

[Harald Kapp]

Transistors in SOC-chips built into smartphones sold by the billions - fairly average with respect to current technology, I would think.
Add fm radio at ~ 100 MHz, add TV, WiFi, Bluetooth...

 

[ratstar]

Yeh, its average technology, but the ppl that actually make it aren't average... they are like aliens, shunned by the common man, because what they do is too amazing, like being an actual millionaire, no-one believes you.

 

[Harald Kapp]

they are like aliens,

You mean people like you?