F3 PS Options using PD boards

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Hi all,

Just hoping someone could confirm if both options were correct using Peter Daniels F3 psu boards and I guess more importantly advantages of each option, excluding monetary.

thanks in advance.
pathmark
 

Attachments

  • f3 psu options.jpg
    f3 psu options.jpg
    44.3 KB · Views: 1,438
The pic is correct ;)

The advantage...you see twice the parts in option1, you get twice the magic. Twice capacitance gives half output ripple. Of course it's also correct that you can use 30V caps in option one (as every cap sees only half the voltage compared to option2 where you need about 60V caps) which allows you to use even larger caps (for a given diameter).

Wether you need that is entirely up to you.

Have fun, Hannes
 
Shame on me, I completely missed that option1 is not intended as split-power supply :cannotbe:

If somebody wants to use that (opt2) for a single rail and ground, steenoe is of course correct. Capacitance is halfed, not very funny.

Have fun, Hannes
 
Formerly "jh6you". R.I.P.
Joined 2006
:headshot: . . . ???

No, never.
Kindly understand that my writing is not to do back-firing anyone :)

I have also interested in the different effect between Option 1 and Option 2. I have focused my bloodshot eyes to the drawing long time till I have finally made a burnt hole on the drawing. The main purpose of the CRC filters is to make the ripple voltage as flat as possible. If I see the two options on the same boundary condition, I see the same ripple reduction effect between the two options. I conclude that any option is equally okay with respect to the ripple voltage reduction effect. The difference might be in the building cost tho . . .


Cheers,

>>:)<<
 
babo...

if i understand steenoe post, option 1 causes capacitors to be series, reducing the total effective capcitance.

In option 1, using 15000uf would yield 7500uf-R-7500uf.

While in option 2, the result would be 15000uf-R-15000uf.

Is this correct? If yes, then ripple would be less in option 2.

pathmark
 
Pathmark said:
babo...

if i understand steenoe post, option 1 causes capacitors to be series, reducing the total effective capcitance.

In option 1, using 15000uf would yield 7500uf-R-7500uf.

While in option 2, the result would be 15000uf-R-15000uf.

Is this correct? If yes, then ripple would be less in option 2.

pathmark

That is spot on;)

:)
 
diyAudio Editor
Joined 2001
Paid Member
One reason I'll bet Papa uses the approach he does (option 1) is that he can use the same power supply as he uses on the other F's. with a slight mod.

So is the final word that it is indeed better to use option one?
I'll let you think about it another night Babo ;)

IF you doubled the size of the caps in option 2 would it be as good as option 1 . How about resistor values? Double them?

Option 2 uses only one bridge and I use IXIS which are pricey..

Mark
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.