Microcontroller True RMS with noisy waveforms?

[EnigmaPaul]

Guys -

In measuring True RMS voltage and current, waveforms from non-linear loads like rectifiers chop up the current and cause noise on the voltage. In measuring with an A/D converter of a microcontroller, we need to figure out zero crossing points in order to avoid truncation errors in the data to define the start and stop of each cycle. That is challenging with a lot of harmonics and noise that cause tons of false zero crossings.

Does anyone have any experience in doing something similar to this and how did you deal with the zero crossing noise?

Thanks!

 

[EnigmaPaul]

Guys -



In measuring True RMS voltage and current, waveforms from non-linear loads like rectifiers chop up the current and cause noise on the voltage. In measuring with an A/D converter of a microcontroller, we need to figure outzero crossing points in order to avoid truncation errors in the data to define the start and stop of each cycle. That is challenging with a lot of harmonics and noise that cause tons of false zero crossings. I am attempting to measure AC power line voltages and current.



Does anyone have any experience in doing something similar to this and how did you deal with the zero crossing noise?



Thanks!

 

[EnigmaPaul]

Yes, harmonics make it harder to synchronize to some fundamental

frequency.



No, you don't have to measure synchronously to some fundamental frequency..



No, looking for zero-crossing points is not the best way to synchronize

to some fundamental frequency.



No, you don't have to synchronize at all. In fact, unless you know that

you are looking at a signal that is dominated by a single tone at a

constant frequency, you probably should not synchronize.



And your worst problems are going to be due to issues that you didn't

even mention.



What exactly are you trying to measure? Power line voltage? Some other

low-frequency power? Audio? Anything at all?

Power Line Voltage.

As JL said, sampling, squaring, low-pass filtering, and square-rooting is

a good general technique. The amount of low-pass filtering you need is

usually disappointingly large -- getting the RMS power of noise just

takes a lot of time.



If you're making some sort of power line monitoring equipment, and if you

don't mind if it doesn't work well when powered from gen-sets and 3rd-

world grids, then sample the noise over 100ms. That's exactly 5 cycles

of 60Hz, and 6 cycles of 50 Hz. Better yet, give it ramps on each end so

that it has zeros at 50 and 60Hz, but filters the edges better.

Actually it specifically needs to work with gensets, and gensets that are being loaded by non-linear loads like VFDs.

If it's for power line measurement and you want to accurately measure gen

sets and stuff, and for some reason you don't like Mr. Larkin's

suggestion of just low-passing the squared wave, then get lots of samples

per cycle (which you need to do anyway, to catch all the harmonics). Low-

pass or band-pass filter so that you capture everything up to about 65Hz;

you should get a clean-enough sine wave that you can phase lock to the

power line. Then phase lock using a multiplying phase detector (and if

you don't know what a multiplying phase detector is, ASK). DON'T use the

filtered version for your measurement -- you're just using that for

synchronization.

There may be other reasons where synchronization is needed, such as to synchronize the transfer between two sources, but that appears to be a separateproblem. I probably need to also compute phase angle at some point as a future add-on so that needs to be considered.

 

[[email protected]]

If it's for power line measurement and you want to accurately measure gen
sets and stuff, and for some reason you don't like Mr. Larkin's
suggestion of just low-passing the squared wave, then get lots of samples
per cycle (which you need to do anyway, to catch all the harmonics). Low-
pass or band-pass filter so that you capture everything up to about 65Hz;
you should get a clean-enough sine wave that you can phase lock to the
power line. Then phase lock using a multiplying phase detector (and if
you don't know what a multiplying phase detector is, ASK). DON'T use the
filtered version for your measurement -- you're just using that for
synchronization.

You didn't ask about how fast to sample. The answer is -- fast. You
need to sample fast enough so that the squared version of your waveform
does not suffer from significant aliasing. That means that if your
frequency of interest in the non-squared signal is f_i, you need to
sample fast enough to capture the signal at 2 * f_i that you'll be
generating in the squaring operation. I'd probably use f_s = 5 * f_i as
an absolute minimum sampling rate, and I wouldn't hesitate to go to ten
times if my hardware would allow it.

The actual sampling rate does not have to be very high, if you can
wait for the result for a few seconds.

The sampling pulse to the S&H circuit must be narrow (hundreds of
microseconds) but the actual A/D sampling rate could be about the same
(but not exactly the same) as the mains frequency. With a sampling
pulse every 361 degrees of mains frequency, it would take about 7
seconds at 50 Hz and 6 seconds at 60 Hz to reconstruct a repetitive
waveform with 1 degree resolution. Taking a few samples every mains
cycle or reducing time resolution, would drop the averaging time
considerably.

Think about how sampling oscilloscopes works.

 

[EnigmaPaul]

That's true, at least if you're much more interested in repetitive
phenomena than random noise. In fact I discuss that effect here: http://
www.wescottdesign.com/articles/Sampling/sampling.pdf. I was just
assuming (or perhaps presuming) that the OP needed numbers in a snappy
fashion.

Hi Guys -

As the OP, I realized that I should probably more clearly state my
objectives so as to make it easier for you to focus your advice.

1. I am measuring 3-Phase Volts and 3-Phase Amps
2. It must yield a 'True RMS' measurement accurate to 1% of full scale
for voltage (say 480V), and 2% of full scale current (5A).
3. The current sensing will use standard 5A secondary Current
Transformers across a precision shunt resistor.
4. The processor available is a 32 bit ARM Cortex with built-in ADC (12Bit).
5. I expect substantial harmonics and possibly conducted/radiated noise
from non-linear loads such as VFDs. Measurement up to the 10th
harmonic is desirable.
6. I don't need especially speed response of the Volts and Amps values,
substantial delay is acceptable up to perhaps a second or two.
7. It must work with engine-driven generator outputs which may not be
'stiff' power supplies compared to the grid. However, usually the
outputs will be reasonably well regulated with electronic governors and
automatic voltage regulators.
8. Although its not part of my initial design, I do anticipate adding
phase angle to complete KW and PowerFactor and to possibly trigger
in-phase synchronization of two AC sources.
9. Although there is a fairly high power CPU available, lots of other
activities will be happening at the same time such as network
communications, supervisory functions, time delay logic, processing of
sensors, etc. This is happening within the framwork of a basic
pre-emptive RTOS (FreeRTOS).
10. It is desirable to do as much of the RMS processing and filter in
software so as to keep the hardware generic.

Hopefully this helps to focus the discussion.

Thanks for your input Tim, John, and Mike.

Paul

 

[[email protected]]

As the OP, I realized that I should probably more clearly state my
objectives so as to make it easier for you to focus your advice.

1. I am measuring 3-Phase Volts and 3-Phase Amps

Since 6 pulse rectifiers (without smoothing) tend to have quite long
conducting angles, the peak/average ratio is pretty moderate, compared
to single phase rectifier with a large capacitor, thus less problems
with the dynamic range.

2. It must yield a 'True RMS' measurement accurate to 1% of full scale
for voltage (say 480V), and 2% of full scale current (5A).

The peak current handling (full scale) capacity needs to be many times
the average ratings, if big single phase electronic loads without PFC
are expected.

3. The current sensing will use standard 5A secondary Current
Transformers across a precision shunt resistor.
4. The processor available is a 32 bit ARM Cortex with built-in ADC (12Bit).
5. I expect substantial harmonics and possibly conducted/radiated noise
from non-linear loads such as VFDs. Measurement up to the 10th
harmonic is desirable.

So at least 20-30 sample points are needed.
To get those points during a single 60 Hz cycle, a sampling rate above
2000 Hz would be sufficient.

6. I don't need especially speed response of the Volts and Amps values,
substantial delay is acceptable up to perhaps a second or two.

If the generator frequency is sufficiently stable during that one
second (mechanical inertia), you could spread out those 20-30 sample
points all over the 1 s period, thus less than one sample/cycle.
Taking a few asynchronous samples every cycle and the measurement will
also follow subsecond speed fluctuation. Some odd sampling frequency,
such as 379 Hz should work with 50/60 Hz with some governor
tolerances, without falling to sync.

7. It must work with engine-driven generator outputs which may not be
'stiff' power supplies compared to the grid. However, usually the
outputs will be reasonably well regulated with electronic governors and
automatic voltage regulators.
8. Although its not part of my initial design, I do anticipate adding
phase angle to complete KW and PowerFactor and to possibly trigger
in-phase synchronization of two AC sources.

While real power [kW] and power factor [0..1] make sense for any kind
of waveform, the phase angle is relevant only for linear (RCL) loads,
not for non-linear loads, such as the VFD input rectifiers.

I think that you should forget the issue of trying to measure phase
angles at the moment and study other methods to measure the RMS
current. The real power can be obtained by multiplying the voltage and
current samples obtained out and averaging the result.

Doing a three lamp phase synchronizer in software ?? I still do not
think that you need to know the phase angle.

 

[EnigmaPaul]

Hi Guys -

As the OP, I realized that I should probably more clearly state my
objectives so as to make it easier for you to focus your advice.

1. I am measuring 3-Phase Volts and 3-Phase Amps
2. It must yield a 'True RMS' measurement accurate to 1% of full scale
for voltage (say 480V), and 2% of full scale current (5A).
3. The current sensing will use standard 5A secondary Current
Transformers across a precision shunt resistor.
4. The processor available is a 32 bit ARM Cortex with built-in ADC (12Bit).
5. I expect substantial harmonics and possibly conducted/radiated noise
from non-linear loads such as VFDs. Measurement up to the 10th
harmonic is desirable.
6. I don't need especially speed response of the Volts and Amps values,
substantial delay is acceptable up to perhaps a second or two.
7. It must work with engine-driven generator outputs which may not be
'stiff' power supplies compared to the grid. However, usually the
outputs will be reasonably well regulated with electronic governors and
automatic voltage regulators.
8. Although its not part of my initial design, I do anticipate adding
phase angle to complete KW and PowerFactor and to possibly trigger
in-phase synchronization of two AC sources.
9. Although there is a fairly high power CPU available, lots of other
activities will be happening at the same time such as network
communications, supervisory functions, time delay logic, processing of
sensors, etc. This is happening within the framwork of a basic
pre-emptive RTOS (FreeRTOS).
10. It is desirable to do as much of the RMS processing and filter in
software so as to keep the hardware generic.

Hopefully this helps to focus the discussion.

Thanks for your input Tim, John, and Mike.

Paul

Good comments guys.

I am reviewing an existing software design from another engineer so I
needed to spend some time trying to understand what is currently being
done. This design works but has problems with current sensing not
working or working inaccurately when presented with non-linear VFD
loads.

The basic sequence is as follows. Each RMS calculation is tored in a
ring buffer in FIFO fashion:

Calculate average RMS current (Ph A, B, and C)
Wait 200ms while doing other systems tasks

Calculate average RMS Voltage (Ph A, B, and C)
Wait 200ms while doing other systems tasks

Calculate average RMS current (Ph A, B, and C)
Wait 200ms while doing other systems tasks

Calculate average RMS Voltage (Ph A, B, and C)
Wait 200ms while doing other systems tasks

Calculate average RMS current (Ph A, B, and C)
Wait 200ms while doing other systems tasks

Calculate average RMS Voltage (Ph A, B, and C)
Wait 200ms while doing other systems tasks

Calculate average RMS current (Ph A, B, and C)
Wait 200ms while doing other systems tasks

Calculate average RMS Voltage (Ph A, B, and C)
Wait 200ms while doing other systems tasks

Calculate average RMS current (Ph A, B, and C)
Wait 200ms while doing other systems tasks

Calculate average RMS Voltage (Ph A, B, and C)

The averages of the above 5 calculations is taken and presented to the
display screen and monitoring system.

Each RMS calculation consists of:
1) Each 1/2 waveform being sampled at 21us between each sample.
2) Slope detection and zero crossing detection is used to start and
stop the sampling and to identify "tops" and "bottoms" of the waveforms.
3) The tops and bottoms are sampled in an alternating fashion for each
RMS calculation above. Hence, we might sample a top and then approx
200ms later start sampling a bottom.
4) When two tops and two bottoms are sampled (equivalent to 2 cycles),
then these are used to calculuate RMS and is fed to the ring buffer
above.
5) The microcontroller has a hardware feature for detecting zero
crossings which is used at the basis of the zero crossing detection
using interrupts. We also do some additional checks to verify
monotonicity on the result of the zero crossing to try to verify that
its legitimate and not "noise".
6) There does not appear to be any low pass filtering in the digital
domain. There is some hardware filtering; a second order filter that
starts to roll off quickly after the 10th harmonic (assuming 60hz
fundamental).


I know the devil is in the details and I've probably left out some
important ones that I have yet to discover but I am wondering if anyone
has any general comments or critique on this overall approach?

It strikes me that:

a) The sampling rate seems unnecessarily high. Its sort of like we can
vastly oversampling with LONG gaps between sampling runs.
b) Splitting the waveforms into tops and bottoms seems complicated and
subject to error in the presence of harmonics. i.e. how do we know we
are on a positive slope of the fundamental and not the positive slope
of a double dip bump due to harmonics?
c) There could be things changing in between the long gaps of sampling
runs. For example the frequency shifts between the time we sampled the
top and later sampled a bottom.
d) the zero crossing detection in the microcontroller is a bit of a
black box for me. Its not clear to me these are designed to work on
noisy waveforms.

Thanks!

 

[EnigmaPaul]

5) The microcontroller has a hardware feature for detecting zero
crossings which is used at the basis of the zero crossing detection
using interrupts. We also do some additional checks to verify
monotonicity on the result of the zero crossing to try to verify that
its legitimate and not "noise".

I fogot to mention that it is called the "Analog Watchdog".

 

[EnigmaPaul]

Sampling fast and then pausing to calculate is certainly valid to my
mind. Sampling at ~ 50kHz is more than you need.


Among many other problems, yes. I would think that sampling at half the
rate, but for a known full cycle would be better. For that matter,
sampling at 1/4 the rate for two full cycles, and having some sort of
windowing would be better yet.

Is the sampling preemtive, or does all the other processing stop while a
half-wave is being sampled? Much of what I say about "easy" or "hard" is
predicated on the idea that you're perfectly capable of writing an ISR to
sample data while other processing is going on.

Actually the sampling uses a DMA channel such that you 'set and forgot'
and come back later to get the results in a large array in memory.

Indeed. Or getting the phase wrong. This is a big part of why I'm
suggesting that slower sampling of longer intervals is a good idea.


The answer to that would come from close scrutiny of the microprocessor
data sheet, but I'm 99.44% sure that it just detects when the input is
above some threshold. Whether that's good enough for what you're trying
to do is beyond me, though.

It is. It uses an Analog 'watchdog' feature that looks for thresholds
and triggers an interrupt.

Another option I'm exploring it to use a hardware circuit to trigger on
the 60hz (schmitt trigger plus filtering). Then use this result in a
pulse width accumulator and use this to sync to the waveform to
determine the sample length of exactly one period (or two or more if if
we chose). The schmitt trigger circuit appears to be much more robust
against noise and harmonics and can be heavily filtered without
introducing a lot of software complexity. Its about a 20 cent circuit
so . . . . . Please i need it anyway to compute Hz for display
purposes. In this scenario we might start at any point in a given
cycle and stop at the same point in the next cycle; result should be
the same.

 

[Guest]

Excuse me, but that's insane.

Periodically and continuously do this, probably in an ISR:

Sample voltage:current pairs as close in time as possible; call the samples E
and I

Autozero the samples.

Compute P = E*I, lowpass filter to get realtime power

Integrate power to get energy

Compute E^2, lowpass filter. Square root whenever you want RMS voltage results.

Ditto current

Compute volt-amps from RMS voltage and current



Do that for each CT in the system.

Can't do it continuously as many other functions are handled such as
communications, operator interface, loads of fault management, timers, and
other control logic. There needs to be some sort of time slicing to do
everything.

 

[josephkk]

I know the devil is in the details and I've probably left out some
important ones that I have yet to discover but I am wondering if anyone
has any general comments or critique on this overall approach?

It strikes me that:

a) The sampling rate seems unnecessarily high. Its sort of like we can
vastly oversampling with LONG gaps between sampling runs. b) Splitting
the waveforms into tops and bottoms seems complicated and subject to
error in the presence of harmonics. i.e. how do we know we are on a
positive slope of the fundamental and not the positive slope of a double
dip bump due to harmonics? c) There could be things changing in between
the long gaps of sampling runs. For example the frequency shifts
between the time we sampled the top and later sampled a bottom.
d) the zero crossing detection in the microcontroller is a bit of a
black box for me. Its not clear to me these are designed to work on
noisy waveforms.

Thanks!

Holy crud. Wow, are you in way over your head. You NEED a micro
dedicated to your measurement tasks. One pass at your stuff once every
200 ms just won't cut it. You need at least one pass every 1 us (due to
the high frequency hash generated by the VFDs). Yes, you NEED that much
data. Well, maybe not really. You can use equivalent time random
sampling for the final product, with rep rate of a few ms; but that is a
much more complex design.

?-/

 

[Chris Jones]

Hi Guys -

As the OP, I realized that I should probably more clearly state my
objectives so as to make it easier for you to focus your advice.

1. I am measuring 3-Phase Volts and 3-Phase Amps
2. It must yield a 'True RMS' measurement accurate to 1% of full scale
for voltage (say 480V), and 2% of full scale current (5A).
3. The current sensing will use standard 5A secondary Current
Transformers across a precision shunt resistor.
4. The processor available is a 32 bit ARM Cortex with built-in ADC
(12Bit).
5. I expect substantial harmonics and possibly conducted/radiated noise
from non-linear loads such as VFDs. Measurement up to the 10th harmonic
is desirable.
6. I don't need especially speed response of the Volts and Amps values,
substantial delay is acceptable up to perhaps a second or two.
7. It must work with engine-driven generator outputs which may not be
'stiff' power supplies compared to the grid. However, usually the
outputs will be reasonably well regulated with electronic governors and
automatic voltage regulators.
8. Although its not part of my initial design, I do anticipate adding
phase angle to complete KW and PowerFactor and to possibly trigger
in-phase synchronization of two AC sources.
9. Although there is a fairly high power CPU available, lots of other
activities will be happening at the same time such as network
communications, supervisory functions, time delay logic, processing of
sensors, etc. This is happening within the framwork of a basic
pre-emptive RTOS (FreeRTOS).
10. It is desirable to do as much of the RMS processing and filter in
software so as to keep the hardware generic.

Hopefully this helps to focus the discussion.

Thanks for your input Tim, John, and Mike.

Paul

You might want to consider using one of the Analog Devices chips that
were custom designed for calculating these things:

http://www.analog.com/en/analog-to-...nt/products/index.html#Poly_Phase_Measurement

http://www.analog.com/static/imported-files/data_sheets/ADE7854_7858_7868_7878.pdf

You would just have to poll it and get the measurement results out
periodically.

Chris

 

[josephkk]

No it's not: just sample less.

He's trying to measure average values, not reconstruct waveforms.

You are also way out of your depth. The final instrument may not have to
have a really fast sample rate, but to understand the waveforms in a
laboratory test regime with over 10 samples at the VFD switching
frequency is needed to have any hope of understanding those waveforms.
That frequency is many kilohertz to many tens of kilohertz. Thus the
high sample rate for the lab work. If the field requirement is serious
high accuracy in characterizing the hash the sample rate requirement
remains high in the final instrument.

?-)

 

[[email protected]]

You are also way out of your depth. The final instrument may not have to
have a really fast sample rate, but to understand the waveforms in a
laboratory test regime with over 10 samples at the VFD switching
frequency is needed to have any hope of understanding those waveforms.
That frequency is many kilohertz to many tens of kilohertz. Thus the
high sample rate for the lab work. If the field requirement is serious
high accuracy in characterizing the hash the sample rate requirement
remains high in the final instrument.

?-)

While you need short (say 1 us) sampling pulses to a S&H circuit, for
a repetitive waveform, there are plenty of time to do the ADC and post
processing for reconstructing the waveform or calculating the
effective value.

Sampling every 200 ms is a bit slow, but sampling every 10-20 ms
should give good results, especially noting the mechanical inertia of
the motor, which does not allow fast speed changes.

 

[whit3rd]

On Tuesday, July 30, 2013 7:41:30 AM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:

[on electric metering, for three-phase power]

Periodically and continuously do this, probably in an ISR:

Sample voltage:current pairs as close in time as possible; call the samples E

and I

Compute P = E*I, lowpass filter to get realtime power

That's a potential weakness; any low currents-for-a-long-time will get
underreported, because of quantization error. It might be better to use
an analog E*I multiplier, and a dither add-in signal, and digitize THAT.
It might also help to integrate E*I onto a hold capacitor, 'cuz it's cheaper
than fast sampling.

Integrate power to get energy

I'm curious: can one rely on the AC frequency as an integration timebase, or does
a crystal clock have to be employed? I'm guessing this depends on the customer.
It has to use a local clock if there's a variable-frequency motor drive target system.

Compute E^2, lowpass filter. Square root whenever you want RMS voltage results.

 

[josephkk]

The final instrument may not have to

A power meter doesn't "understand" waveforms. It just averages a lot of
sampled E*I products.

Blather all you will. The issue IIUC is trying to understand how the VFD
hash might upset metering and switchgear equipment.

?-)

 

[John Devereux]

Blather all you will. The issue IIUC is trying to understand how the VFD
hash might upset metering and switchgear equipment.

?-)

Doesn't sound like blather, that is the key insight for power
measurement isn't it? It transforms the problem. Instead of needing to
perfectly reconstruct the current and voltage signals, requiring high
performance, fast ADCs and CPU horsepower... you can just randomly
sample (acquire instantaneous voltage/current pairs) at whatever speed
you can manage.

If you want to "understand the waveforms" you need a scope, not a
"microcontroller [to measure] true RMS".

 

[P E Schoen]

"John Larkin" wrote in message

Doesn't sound like blather, that is the key insight for power
measurement isn't it? It transforms the problem. Instead of needing to
perfectly reconstruct the current and voltage signals, requiring high
performance, fast ADCs and CPU horsepower... you can just randomly
sample (acquire instantaneous voltage/current pairs) at whatever speed
you can manage.

If you want to "understand the waveforms" you need a scope, not a
"microcontroller [to measure] true RMS".

Right. Average or lowpass filter enough samples to get the
measurement-to-masurement noise down where you want it.

There's a trick: real-word power measurements are inherently so noisy that
you
don't need to be compulsive about this. And if anybody certifies your
meter for
power, they will do it with a nice steady lab source, probably of a known
frequency like 50 or 60 Hz.

The thing that people pay money for is energy, and energy is a long-term
integral, millions or billions of samples in a billing period. The
statistics
win here.

Actually, there are a few tricks.

Many years ago, I worked at a meter shop (EIL) where we built true-RMS
analog meters which used glass vacuum-filled thermocouple bulbs to read the
signal of about 5-8 volts RMS on the filament of a high voltage CRT, and
IIRC it used two of them and applied a DC current to one and measured the
differential of the thermocouple outputs until they matched, at which point
the DC voltage equaled the noisy AC signal. This would work for anything
from DC to high frequency RF.

But the thermocouple bulbs were very expensive, fragile, and hard to obtain,
so I sought to design a less expensive alternative. I made a transducer
consisting of a small incandescent lamp and a photocell, and it seemed to
work fairly well, but I thought I could use just one of them, and found that
the bulb (and/or photocell) would age appreciably over several hours or
days. But such a system should work OK with two such sensors as in the
thermocouple design.

A better system might be to use one sensor and switch between the input
signal and a known DC signal and obtain a match. This should take care of
any aging or differences in the sensors. The AC signal could be processed
with dividers and amplifiers to read either voltage or current. This method
should be accurate and capable of handling wideband noise and odd waveforms
with high crest factors, but it would be slow.

In any case, measuring true RMS voltage and current is different from
reconstructing waveforms and power measurement. For true power readings,
simultaneous samples of voltage and current are necessary, or an analog
multiplier can be used. With PWM VFDs, the chopping frequency is generally
in the 5kHz to 25kHz range, so a sampling rate of 50 kHz or so should be
sufficient. Of course there may be much higher harmonics, but they are
probably not too significant, and may be filtered at the output of the VFD
or by the instrumentation. Power, power factor, and phase angle are
generally not too critical, although power needs to be measured fairly
accurately especially at lower levels which may affect energy measurement
over long periods of time.

I think it is best to add some LC filtering to the output of the VFD to
reduce the fast switching and high frequency harmonics, which can cause high
voltage transients that can damage insulation and introduce losses due to
dielectric dissipation.

Measuring phase angle can be tricky, and in some cases it is better to
determine the peak signal rather than zero crossings. I have found that some
AC waveforms are asymmetrical to the point that zero crossings can vary up
to several degrees. This was especially noticeable in a phase angle meter
that used zero crossings and read several degrees differently when one
signal was inverted for a +/- 180 degree reading instead of 0-360.

Paul




--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators