Finished capacitance multiplier

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
IvanLukic(4)
Freeman(2)
Idefixes(4)
Touchdown(2)
vgeorge(2)
Jameshillj(2)
Jsixis(2)
Praudio(2)
Compressit(2)
Cambe(2)
Gannaji(1)
Potepuh(4)
Syklab(2)
quan(4)
tjencks(2)
BYRTT(4)
Ryssen(2)
rickmcinnis(3)
Joachim Gerhard(2)
still4given(2)
Rick G(2)
androa76(2)
fredlock(2)
stajo(4)
kimon(2)
SigFire (2)
vitalica(4)
dw1narso (2)
analog_sa(2)
buzzforb(2)
kindhornman (6) as long as it will be next month, blew my budget this month already!
Luke(4)
pchw (4)
jj506 (4)[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Pinnocchio (2)
 

Attachments

  • PSU2_schematic.png
    PSU2_schematic.png
    6.7 KB · Views: 414
  • PSU2_PCB.png
    PSU2_PCB.png
    21.5 KB · Views: 406
Last edited:

Schematic and BOM

Design Changes:
Link above was my original post where the design details were presented, comments in post after that refer to this version. This was modified a bit for higher voltage rails, and for a larger output cap to suit the needs of a class A-B amplifier up to about 100W per channel. So, strictly speaking, a small modification of MrEvil's design after the changes referred to in the above post.

(More power or class A may require larger heatsinks for the pass transistor, as shown in a later post, and also in version designed by Idefixes.)

Orders: I did not anticipate as much interest, frankly. First I was surprised that there was so little interest in MrEvil's original thread. Then it built very quickly, so I was surprised again. I was originally planning on perhaps a dozen sets of boards, the order quantity was increased twice, and we are close to have to place another order.

Construction: I will repost all of the information, with as many details as I have. I am also working on a short build guide.

Errata: In the original BOM, values of R11 and R12 were not yet changed from the original 100R to the 470R to be used with the J112 Jfet. This resistor value should be adjusted if using a different jfet.

The problem which led to two drill sizes defaulting to the smallest tool has been corrected by the board house.

Rev B of the board, which is shipping now (names on the list) has been modified to include the hole pattern which accommodates both screw terminals and Faston connectors.
 

Attachments

  • PSU4_revA.jpg
    PSU4_revA.jpg
    410.7 KB · Views: 478
  • Cap_Multiplier PCB rev B.jpg
    Cap_Multiplier PCB rev B.jpg
    357.5 KB · Views: 497
  • VSSA_PeeCeeBee2.jpg
    VSSA_PeeCeeBee2.jpg
    337.3 KB · Views: 474
  • VSSA_PeeCeeBee3.jpg
    VSSA_PeeCeeBee3.jpg
    290.7 KB · Views: 463
  • PSU4 - Schematic.pdf
    43.9 KB · Views: 204
  • PSU4 (Bill Of Materials).pdf
    46.1 KB · Views: 135
Last edited:
Can the power output be scaled past 100W easily?
Scaled, yes. Easily, I am not sure. That may also depend on your tolerance for higher component cost.

Past 100W into 4 Ohm load should not be a problem with some care. Past 100W into 8 Ohm load generally requires rail voltages over 55V. This requires operating the pass transistor past its maximum voltage at startup, or a different transistor with higher breakdown voltage spec. In other words, the main issue is the maximum power supply voltage required for an amplifier, not so much the maximum peak power.
 
Pinnocchio, you left off Raj1 and myself when you updated the list :-(

IvanLukic(4)
Freeman(2)
Idefixes(4)
Touchdown(2)
vgeorge(2)
Jameshillj(2)
Jsixis(2)
Praudio(2)
Compressit(2)
Cambe(2)
Gannaji(1)
Potepuh(4)
Syklab(2)
quan(4)
tjencks(2)
BYRTT(4)
Ryssen(2)
rickmcinnis(3)
Joachim Gerhard(2)
still4given(2)
Rick G(2)
androa76(2)
fredlock(2)
stajo(4)
kimon(2)
SigFire (2)
vitalica(4)
dw1narso (2)
analog_sa(2)
buzzforb(2)
kindhornman (6) as long as it will be next month, blew my budget this month already!
Luke(4)
pchw (4)
jj506 (4)
Raj1 (6)
Ranchu32 (2)
Pinnocchio (2)
 
Put the latest sch and changes posts in the post1 index.
Andrew: I am being encouraged to just start a thread in the Group Buy forum, and once I do that, I can keep the documents updated in the first post there.

We can still have the technical discussion here, and the other thread will be mostly for the orders and documents. That is what I am hoping, at least.
Then we can also get back to Marc's version, which may be the preferred one for people etching their own boards.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.