what do you think about my simple class D amplifier
class-d-1 — imgbb.com circuit simulation
class-d-2 — imgbb.com amplifier PCB
class-d-3 — imgbb.com detail output low pass filter
class-d-4 — imgbb.com power supply
class-d-1 — imgbb.com circuit simulation
class-d-2 — imgbb.com amplifier PCB
class-d-3 — imgbb.com detail output low pass filter
class-d-4 — imgbb.com power supply
Nice.
May be fine for a School demonstration or Lab project, not efficient enough for a Commercial product.
Hint:
* limited to +/-15V rails
* Op Amp does not reach rails anyway, but loses a couple Volts each side
* Mosfets also lose a couple volts each side.
Guess you would get some 10/12V peak.
May be fine for a School demonstration or Lab project, not efficient enough for a Commercial product.
Hint:
* limited to +/-15V rails
* Op Amp does not reach rails anyway, but loses a couple Volts each side
* Mosfets also lose a couple volts each side.
Guess you would get some 10/12V peak.
Commercially it would have been a significant advantage 30 years ago to have a simple circuit. Less components to buy, less components to mount etc.......Today, as soon as an even complex circuit is tugged down as a monolithic chip, it is only the chip-price that counts. Which again depends on the production volume. TPA3116 is very difficult to compete with because this probably rather complex circuit is sold at a very low price and has a performance most simple circuits can't beat. Simplicity demonstrates your skills, not that you will be rich.
True. It is the commercial situation in electronics that we cannot disregard. Anything that can be put in a single chip disrupts traditional engineering goals. In mechanics the price is often dependent on the number of components. In electronics with integration often not.
An exception is very high reliability electronics where the parts-count is of importance and the number of elements on the chip has an effect.
You make a link to a patent application that will soon/has expired. Yours? This patent application claims an improved performance, not just a simpler implementation. And, on components that cannot be integrated.
The Philips UcD concept was at first look an impressive simplification. It survives because it claims also to have superior performance and shall not just be judged on its simplicity.
An exception is very high reliability electronics where the parts-count is of importance and the number of elements on the chip has an effect.
You make a link to a patent application that will soon/has expired. Yours? This patent application claims an improved performance, not just a simpler implementation. And, on components that cannot be integrated.
The Philips UcD concept was at first look an impressive simplification. It survives because it claims also to have superior performance and shall not just be judged on its simplicity.
Yes and it has expired. Reference made in respect of grounded operation. The OPs proposal, N/P channel, would fit in with a swinging supply but that would mean the supply being driven up and down at the switching frequency which might be nasty in terms of noise. The patent offers a possible solution. Beyond that swinging the supply means the OPs circuit is not limited to the power stage supply being the same as that used for the control electronics.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.