Solution 1
If you know the leakage slope of your cap, you could repeatedly "top off" the cap at timed intervals, to compensate for droop.
However, the slope is likely nonlinear, so the top-off amount would be nonlinear. It's possible the amount could be a simple percentage of the cap's charge l...
it would be helpful to know the reason for the downvote on this answer. This will be a more useful learning resource for future readers, if the impracticality of this answer is explained.
is it acceptable on SE to combine multiple answers into one? How can people vote if multiple answers are combined? We won't know which solution for which they're voting.
@clabacchio looking forward to your explanation. Plz point me to the SE policy that says different solutions should be combined into a single answer. Thx
"i appreciate the info in this answer, but i'm confused by all the upvotes-- it does not seem to contain an analog solution"
"This answer seems to get most votes for the fun photo. There are practical solutions getting pushed down by this answer due to a fun photo"
" Hi Trevor, thx for info. But, the SE "what to ask" and "what not to ask" pages emphasize practicality. This answer does not seem to offer an actionable analog solution. "
"you don't offer any math or estimates on how long, or how much loss, relative to the size of the cap, so that's not so helpful."
Of course, the whole question answer page is not just for me, it's to be useful to others. Not saying it's about "me", i'm saying that a stronger answer is better for everyone. i noticed that, since my critiques, we've gotten better answers.
in the end, i'm glad we now have some viable answers. Peter K's answer is better because it show's how it can be done in analog, which is great from theoretical standpoint. Trevor's answer is better cuz simpler, more stable, more practical. Tough choice.
Discussion on answer by Johny Radio: …
Discussion on answer by Johny Radio: …