F3 PS Options using PD boards - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Amplifiers > Pass Labs

Pass Labs This forum is dedicated to Pass Labs discussion.

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
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 6th January 2009, 06:18 PM   #1
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Default F3 PS Options using PD boards

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
Attached Images
File Type: jpg f3 psu options.jpg (44.3 KB, 1252 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th January 2009, 10:30 PM   #2
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Ireland
I think both are ok, but the major advantage of option 1 is that you can use 35V rated caps - in 15000uF or greater these are pretty widely available..... but to use option 2 you would need caps rated at probably 63V and these are much dearer.

someone else check this though.....

Fran
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th January 2009, 09:34 AM   #3
h_a is offline h_a  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
h_a's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Graz, Austria
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
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th January 2009, 10:43 AM   #4
steenoe is offline steenoe  Denmark
diyAudio Member
 
steenoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Looks like the caps in option 1 are in series, electrically. If the caps are 15.000uF and connected in series, then:
C equiv= 15.000:2= 7500uF. Looks like pretty wastefull to me.
Option 2 looks mucho better.

  Reply With Quote
Old 7th January 2009, 12:58 PM   #5
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
thanks for replies, i realize the question may be trivial but a little support is always appreciated.

I believe setup is CRC and therefore capacitors are not series. thanks again.

pathmark
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th January 2009, 01:26 PM   #6
h_a is offline h_a  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
h_a's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Graz, Austria
Shame on me, I completely missed that option1 is not intended as split-power supply

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
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th January 2009, 03:36 PM   #7
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
oops...i just got it! As wired in option 1 the capacitors from the two boards are in series, even though each board individually is not.

Ok looks like option 2 with higher value caps!

pathmark
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th January 2009, 11:38 AM   #8
Formerly "jh6you". R.I.P.
 
Babowana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
. . . ???

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,

>><<
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th January 2009, 02:14 PM   #9
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
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
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th January 2009, 02:30 PM   #10
Formerly "jh6you". R.I.P.
 
Babowana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Quote:
Originally posted by Pathmark

In option 1, using 15000uf would yield 7500uf-R-7500uf.
Steen's comment on the capacitance is right.
And, I inperprete Option 1 as 7500uF-(R+R)-7500uF.

Cheers,

  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
L/R Boards and Matched IRFP240 Boards for Aleph/ A-X lgreen Swap Meet 7 25th August 2009 04:56 AM
FS: Conrad Heatsinks;.... 'PASS' B1 boards w/JFETS;...... F4 AMP & PSU boards cowboy99 Swap Meet 5 25th August 2009 02:39 AM
Pass Aleph 1.7 boards, Zhaolu 2.5A, P700 VRDS, UGS PS boards, dac chips analog_sa Swap Meet 4 14th March 2009 05:29 PM
FT: Pass boards for P101 boards bjefferys Swap Meet 1 26th March 2006 07:39 PM
Any Bi-Amp options? chris ma Everything Else 3 10th May 2002 10:02 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:29 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2