Go Back   Home > Forums > Amplifiers > Power Supplies
Home Forums Rules Articles Store Gallery Blogs Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts 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
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12th February 2008, 06:14 PM   #1
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Default Super regulator concept question

A conceptual question about composite voltage regulators. Looking at the provided schematic, R1 and R2 are user-adjustable (potentiometer) for the desired output voltage. VREF is a precision reference, and the opamp is a precision opamp. The negative feedback loop (if I have drawn it correctly) causes the opamp to adjust the common pin of the 7805 voltage regulator through a transistor, but I guess there are two ways of doing it. My question is: which way is correct?


In this first picture, the feedback opamp adjusts the NPN transistor, which in turn adjusts the common pin of the voltage reulator. I guess you could say this is the "current mode" adjustment, because the NPN transistor draws a current from the collector, and the collector output is high impedance.

==> The opamp output voltage controls the voltage regulator "common" pin via a current.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg vreg1.jpg (31.9 KB, 347 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2008, 06:17 PM   #2
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
In this second schematic, the transistor is now a PNP, and the opamp terminals have been reversed to preserve negative feedback.

The output opamp voltage is now buffered by the PNP transistor (common collector), which leads to the common pin of the 7805 voltage regulator.

==> The opamp output voltage controls the voltage regulator through the buffered voltage via the PNP transistor.

==> Which method is correct (current or voltage), or leads to better performance?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg vreg2.jpg (33.1 KB, 306 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2008, 07:05 PM   #3
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Bath, UK
I have to say, if you are in that far you should just replace the 78xx with a proper pass transistor driven by a CCS from which the opamp steals base drive. A real super-regulator.

The problem with the layout illustrated is that, however good your voltage reference and opamp/f/back network, the output will be dominated by the noise and internal error-amp performance of the three pin reg. In other words the composite will allow you higher output voltage, but not necessarily better performance. Sorry!
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th February 2008, 12:51 AM   #4
gootee is offline gootee  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Indiana
Blog Entries: 1
I simulated something that looked similar, once, mainly to try to eliminate voltage variations due to fluctuations in load current, as well as to try to eliminate any noise or ripple that made it through the regulator. It worked quite well, although it needed a negative supply rail for the opamp. The opamp's positive supply came from the regulator output (So a 7805 might need a low-voltage opamp. I was doing 12v regs, dual supply.).

It was somewhat similar to your second schematic, but with no transistor (i.e. opamp output went directly to regulator ground pin), and no voltage reference (i.e. opamp's positive input went directly to Gnd rail).

The main idea, though, that made it work so well, was to take the opamp's negative input through a capacitor, from the regulator output (rather than through a resistor), so that only fluctuations were acted upon. I used something like 33uF and then 300 Ohms in series, from regulator output to opamps's neg input, and 10k paralleled with 150 pF from opamp output (& regulator's gnd pin) to opamp's neg input.

When simulated, with a 36v p-p 60 Hz sine, bridge rectifier, and 2200 uF || 0.1uF before an LT1086-12 12v fixed regulator (166 mV p-p ripple at regulator's input), with 100 uF || 0.1uF || 100 Ohms to ground on the regulator's output, PLUS a current source in parallel with the 100 Ohms, pulling a 200 mA p-p 1 kHz sinusoidal current from the regulator, the output noise and ripple went from 4 mV p-p of 1 kHz and 0.5 mV p-p of 120 Hz (without the opamp 'canceller' circuit) to about 100 uV p-p of 1 kHz and about 15 uV p-p of 120 Hz (WITH the opamp 'canceller' circuit). So it seems to have worked well-enough, in simulations, at least.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
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
Super Regulator TheDriver Parts 2 21st July 2008 10:54 AM
Lithos regulator - A new super regulator? peranders Parts 7 8th May 2008 02:01 PM
Super Regulator for DAC rockytro Digital Source 11 19th May 2006 07:31 PM
Dynavector 'super stereo' concept Salas Everything Else 3 2nd November 2003 05:07 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:33 AM.

Page generated in 0.09029 seconds (66.46% PHP - 33.54% MySQL) with 11 queries

Copyright ©1999-2012 diyAudio