Depend of the type of mosfet you use, reduce the IR2110 supply to 10-12V, this will change nothing on your performance and reduce a lot the dissipation of the chip!
Fred
www.d-amp.com
Fred
www.d-amp.com
ok, thanks btw I am using irf640 (not n, just 640) and do you think that pcb layout makes this amp to have channel crosstalk even if they are both sync.
It is not regular crosstalk, but some phase instability issue which resulting in quiet hifreq. noise. If one of channel is disabled then all this is gone, so what would be your oppinion ?
regards, have a nice day . . .
It is not regular crosstalk, but some phase instability issue which resulting in quiet hifreq. noise. If one of channel is disabled then all this is gone, so what would be your oppinion ?
regards, have a nice day . . .
Your ''crostalk'' is maybe beating between your 2 channel. They was syncronized? If not, that's a good reason why I always use fixed frequency amplifier!
Have a nice day!
Fredos
www.d-amp.com
Have a nice day!
Fredos
www.d-amp.com
Hi Fred,
"do you think that pcb layout makes this amp to have channel crosstalk even if they are both sync.
It is not regular crosstalk, but some phase instability issue which resulting in quiet hifreq. noise. If one of channel is disabled then all this is gone, so what would be your oppinion"
He did have them in synch, and is none the less suffering heterodyne issues. UCD has proven that with a good layout having low EMI this becomes a non issue. Each channel however requires its own rail filtering and decoupling.
This also goes to show that synchronization is not the answer to it all. It still has its uses but is not of primary concern.
Was this built in accordance with the evaluation model? I thought it looked kind of simplistic, maybe that's why?
Regards,
Chris
"do you think that pcb layout makes this amp to have channel crosstalk even if they are both sync.
It is not regular crosstalk, but some phase instability issue which resulting in quiet hifreq. noise. If one of channel is disabled then all this is gone, so what would be your oppinion"
He did have them in synch, and is none the less suffering heterodyne issues. UCD has proven that with a good layout having low EMI this becomes a non issue. Each channel however requires its own rail filtering and decoupling.
This also goes to show that synchronization is not the answer to it all. It still has its uses but is not of primary concern.
Was this built in accordance with the evaluation model? I thought it looked kind of simplistic, maybe that's why?
Regards,
Chris
Maybe could be about compensation in the feedback loop too. If amplifier is borderline unstable, it could lose syncronisation, it it was...
Fredos
www.d-amp.com
Fredos
www.d-amp.com
So, fredos, do you have any practical advice for all that ?
Now I am starting to be worried about power supply decoupling since my pcb layout has some issues, and is it normal to have voltage pumping effect on just positive rail supply when playing freq. below 100Hz ?
Positive rail gets bigger and negative gets lower when bass kicks even if I use 2A regulated lab. supply and 2x10000uF caps ? Is this completely normal ?
Now I am starting to be worried about power supply decoupling since my pcb layout has some issues, and is it normal to have voltage pumping effect on just positive rail supply when playing freq. below 100Hz ?
Positive rail gets bigger and negative gets lower when bass kicks even if I use 2A regulated lab. supply and 2x10000uF caps ? Is this completely normal ?
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
... well now it is kind of paused, because I have some college obligations lately. And it has some sync. issues and crosslistening problems beetwen two channels and LC filter is not calculated for out frq. more than 15kHz so I will need to redesign it.
For now, like I sead it is in 'frozen state' and I have finished ~80% of zappulse 2.3 rev.eng. so I will take some ideas from there . . .
For now, like I sead it is in 'frozen state' and I have finished ~80% of zappulse 2.3 rev.eng. so I will take some ideas from there . . .
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.