Ripple rejection caps - multiple?

tonyptony · 22nd March 2006, 02:26 AM

I was reading through the spec sheet of the LM1085 linear regulator and thought about what they said regarding improving ripple rejection. No surprise, the value of the cap on the bypass pin would have to change depending on the input ripple frequency. I started wondering if using a number of paralleled caps - say 47uF, .22uF, and then .10uF - to "cover" a broader frequency range with the improved ripple rejection would actually work. It may be a dumb thought, but let me know if it is.

Hmm, in looking at the graph it shows 200uF for frequencies below 60Hz, and 25uF for those above 60Hz. Does that mean that if I paralleled these two together I'd get good rejection through the audio band?

lndm · 22nd March 2006, 03:14 AM

It's not dumb.

In theory, a capacitor that will work at one frequency, will work at all higher frequencies and what you suggest would not be necessary. But, in practice larger capacitors do not function well at high frequencies, and bypassing with smaller values can help.

IMO, only use quality capacitors (both) when paralleling values, and check your reg for oscillation after adding caps.

tonyptony · 22nd March 2006, 06:43 PM

Thanks lndm, that's what I suspected. I'll have to see if I can find any more info on the LT1085 that might help in understanding when it would go into oscillation. Unfortunately I don't have a scope! There wouldn't happen to be another way to check for oscillation?

AndrewT · 23rd March 2006, 08:26 AM

Hi,
the cap on the bypass pin is usually of small value, you quoted 25uF to 200uF.

These sort of values can be LESR and use the highest quality to suit the value of your circuit.

There should be no glitches appearing at the bypass pins, I think this is a voltage reference input terminal, therefore there is no need for a ceramic to minimise the glitch on the input voltage.

The input and output pins are a completely different ballgame. Glitches on the rails every time the output current steps from one value to another.

tonyptony · 23rd March 2006, 06:58 PM

Thanks Andrew. I will be posting in the PS forum for thoughts on the design I intend to use. Not rocket science, but I'm sure I'll be able to use the help.

22nd March 2006, 02:26 AM	#1
tonyptony diyAudio Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: New Jersey	Ripple rejection caps - multiple? I was reading through the spec sheet of the LM1085 linear regulator and thought about what they said regarding improving ripple rejection. No surprise, the value of the cap on the bypass pin would have to change depending on the input ripple frequency. I started wondering if using a number of paralleled caps - say 47uF, .22uF, and then .10uF - to "cover" a broader frequency range with the improved ripple rejection would actually work. It may be a dumb thought, but let me know if it is. Hmm, in looking at the graph it shows 200uF for frequencies below 60Hz, and 25uF for those above 60Hz. Does that mean that if I paralleled these two together I'd get good rejection through the audio band?

23rd March 2006, 08:26 AM	#4
AndrewT diyAudio Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Scottish Borders	Hi, the cap on the bypass pin is usually of small value, you quoted 25uF to 200uF. These sort of values can be LESR and use the highest quality to suit the value of your circuit. There should be no glitches appearing at the bypass pins, I think this is a voltage reference input terminal, therefore there is no need for a ceramic to minimise the glitch on the input voltage. The input and output pins are a completely different ballgame. Glitches on the rails every time the output current steps from one value to another. __________________ regards Andrew T.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Any disadvantage to multiple parallel caps for PS?	theAnonymous1	Power Supplies	14	31st May 2009 04:09 PM
Replacing multi-section caps with multiple caps?	Sir Trefor	Tubes / Valves	1	29th May 2007 10:17 PM
film caps and ripple current	jarthel	Parts	9	9th October 2006 12:33 PM
Connecting Multiple PSU Caps	mothman	Chip Amps	7	6th May 2003 01:08 PM

New To Site?	Need Help?
Register to Participate Search Privacy Statement Contact Us	Frequently Asked Questions Did you forget your password? Mark Forums Read


	Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you. Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving

22nd March 2006, 03:14 AM	#2
lndm diyAudio Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: nsw	It's not dumb. In theory, a capacitor that will work at one frequency, will work at all higher frequencies and what you suggest would not be necessary. But, in practice larger capacitors do not function well at high frequencies, and bypassing with smaller values can help. IMO, only use quality capacitors (both) when paralleling values, and check your reg for oscillation after adding caps.

22nd March 2006, 06:43 PM	#3
tonyptony diyAudio Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: New Jersey	Thanks lndm, that's what I suspected. I'll have to see if I can find any more info on the LT1085 that might help in understanding when it would go into oscillation. Unfortunately I don't have a scope! There wouldn't happen to be another way to check for oscillation?

23rd March 2006, 06:58 PM	#5
tonyptony diyAudio Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: New Jersey	Thanks Andrew. I will be posting in the PS forum for thoughts on the design I intend to use. Not rocket science, but I'm sure I'll be able to use the help.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)