Improving on LCaudio LowNoise regulator - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Amplifiers > Power Supplies

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 11th November 2004, 09:00 PM   #1
ABO is offline ABO  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Amst
Default Improving on LCaudio LowNoise regulator

I just ordered one of these regs.

http://www.lcaudio.dk/com/dcreg1.jpg

Looking at the schematic I see some possibilities for further improvement of the noise performance.

http://www.lcaudio.dk/com/dcreg.gif


As I am merely an armchair designer, I am looking your opinions on my ideas:

- Bypassing D20 (led) with 47 uF in order to filter out led noise;

- Adding a cap across the lower leg of the potmeter ( from opamp in+ to ground) to create some lowpass filtering, in order to filter out zenernoise;

- Decreasing noise gain of both opamps by bypassing R39 and R36 with appropriate cap, some 22 uF;

- Adding power supply bypasses (10-22 nF) for the opamp;

- ??

What do you think? Will this work and improve the performance of this circuit?

thanks,

Abo

By the way: Does anybody know what that thing is across the higher leg of R35?
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th November 2004, 07:54 PM   #2
ABO is offline ABO  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Amst
Surely someone must have ideas?
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th November 2004, 08:26 PM   #3
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: The Lab
Hi

That thing on R35 is a bubble to enable the regulator to be used at full voltage with no trimmer.

I personally don't subscribe to filtering out Zener or LED noise with caps, as they will not remove noise, merely move the noise to lower frequency zones. Better is to use a low noise reference, that don't need filtering.

Cheers

LC
__________________
www.newclassd.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th November 2004, 08:43 PM   #4
diyAudio Moderator Emeritus
 
jean-paul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Germany
Quote:
Originally posted by Lars Clausen
Better is to use a low noise reference, that don't need filtering.
Please send that design improvement to the designer It could have been implemented in the design.

At least the decoupling of the opamp supply lines won't hurt.

Quote:
Originally posted by Lars Clausen
I personally don't subscribe to filtering out Zener or LED noise with caps, as they will not remove noise, merely move the noise to lower frequency zones.
??
__________________
It's only audio. Official member of the Norske Brillegeit Gang.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2004, 02:57 PM   #5
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Zamboanga, City of Flowers, Mindanao
Send a message via Yahoo to Elso Kwak
Question Questions

Quote:
Originally posted by ABO
Surely someone must have ideas?

Hi Abo,
I would be more inclined to ask:
Why MOSFETs as the pass-element?.
Why a constant current source for the reference comprised of two transistors, three resistors and a blue LED?.
Why the antiquated NE5532 as the opamp? Then.....
Just some questions.
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th November 2004, 08:29 PM   #6
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: The Lab
Elso: Sorry i didn't see your questions until now. Here are some answers for you:

1..MOSFET's are perfect a pass elements, as they require no drive current, and will stand high loads. I see no drawbacks of using MOSFET's, the highest pole of the regulator loop is handled by capacitors, so a particularly high loop speed is not required.

2..The constant current source, for which the base current is pre regulated using the LED as a sort of Zener shunt, gives the Zener perfect working conditions. Free of the load regulations found in other types of low noise regulators taking the Zener current from the output of the positive regulator, and thus allows the reference to fluctuate when the regulator loop reacts to changing loads. (If present).

3..Well the NE5532 may be old, but as i often tell my employees, just because something (or someone) is old, doesn't mean it's useless. The NE5532 is very low noise (definitely not the bottleneck in any regulator, the Zener will most probably have 100 times higher noise than the op-amp) In this case the Zener has typ 7 uV RMS noise, (Max 100 uV) while the NE5532 has just around 30 nV RMS input related noise.
So it makes no sense to use a lower noise op-amp.
And it has one great advantage over any ultra low noise opamp: it can operate on +/- 22V (Philips brand).

I hope this answers your questions.

All the best from

Lars
__________________
www.newclassd.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st November 2004, 04:47 PM   #7
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Zamboanga, City of Flowers, Mindanao
Send a message via Yahoo to Elso Kwak
Cool Improving on LCaudio LowNoise regulator

Quote:
Originally posted by Lars Clausen
Elso: Sorry i didn't see your questions until now. Here are some answers for you:

1..MOSFET's are perfect a pass elements, as they require no drive current, and will stand high loads. I see no drawbacks of using MOSFET's, the highest pole of the regulator loop is handled by capacitors, so a particularly high loop speed is not required.

2..The constant current source, for which the base current is pre regulated using the LED as a sort of Zener shunt, gives the Zener perfect working conditions. Free of the load regulations found in other types of low noise regulators taking the Zener current from the output of the positive regulator, and thus allows the reference to fluctuate when the regulator loop reacts to changing loads. (If present).

3..Well the NE5532 may be old, but as i often tell my employees, just because something (or someone) is old, doesn't mean it's useless. The NE5532 is very low noise (definitely not the bottleneck in any regulator, the Zener will most probably have 100 times higher noise than the op-amp) In this case the Zener has typ 7 µV RMS noise, (Max 100 µV) while the NE5532 has just around 30 nV RMS input related noise.
So it makes no sense to use a lower noise op-amp.
And it has one great advantage over any ultra low noise opamp: it can operate on +/- 22V (Philips brand).

I hope this answers your questions.

All the best from

Lars
Quote:
Originally by MalichiConstant
I think most of the choices are for less $$. The choice of high current mosfets is a mystery to me since at currents of a few 10s of milliamps the transconductance is very low and the output impedance VERY high. Figure 4 volts turn on for the mosfets and a couple of volts overhead from the op amp output and the minimum supply voltage for the op amp is about Vout plus 6 volts or about 20 volts. This is about the highest recommended supply voltage for the NE5532 (and higher than most op amp supply limits). Anyone wanting +/15 volts out of this design topology is out of luck. Using a faster op amp or lower current mosfets without gate resistors is asking for trouble.

IMO this a very poor implementation for a low current op amp based regulator for a commercial regulator. The lack of filtering for the LM 329 defies logic other than cost savings run amuck. Spend another 10 cents for a cap and resistor if you are going to call it a low noise regulator.
Lars,
I am well aware that a constant current source improves the performance of the LM329, as I am using it all the time in my supply for the TDA1543. I was merely asking why this particular current source for the reference. Why not a red LED and a transistor or two FETs or simply a J505?
Your claim that the extended supply range of the NE5532 (+/-22V) is an advantage is invalid as you are using the opamp on a + or - 20V single supply to ground. 20V total span. So any low noise opamp designed for a regular +/- 15V supply will do.
It is intriguing that you are using the suggested noise filtering by MalichiConstant in you XO-3 circuit. (R14 and C7). I am afraid you are confusing noise filtering with noise shifting by a Delta-Sigma DAC. I never experienced an increase in low frequency noise when applying low-pass noise filtering.
Last question why not using a dual-tracking regulator? (Horowitz page 351)

MalichiConstant,
As Lars is running the opamps single supply he could use a higher supply voltage for more drive. This will increase the dropout voltage. But the dropout voltage of the regulator is already a hefty 7V.
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th November 2004, 10:42 AM   #8
diyAudio Member
 
QSerraTico_Tico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Exclamation Re: Improving on LCaudio LowNoise regulator

Quote:
Originally posted by Elso Kwak



Lars,
I am well aware that a constant current source improves the performance of the LM329, as I am using it all the time in my supply for the TDA1543. I was merely asking why this particular current source for the reference. Why not a red LED and a transistor or two FETs or simply a J505?
Your claim that the extended supply range of the NE5532 (+/-22V) is an advantage is invalid as you are using the opamp on a + or - 20V single supply to ground. 20V total span. So any low noise opamp designed for a regular +/- 15V supply will do.
It is intriguing that you are using the suggested noise filtering by MalichiConstant in you XO-3 circuit. (R14 and C7). I am afraid you are confusing noise filtering with noise shifting by a Delta-Sigma DAC. I never experienced an increase in low frequency noise when applying low-pass noise filtering.
Last question why not using a dual-tracking regulator? (Horowitz page 351)

MalichiConstant,
As Lars is running the opamps single supply he could use a higher supply voltage for more drive. This will increase the dropout voltage. But the dropout voltage of the regulator is already a hefty 7V.

Hey Kwak, wake up!
The NE5532 is a dual opamp so Lars is using it on a dual supply. The OPA2604 could be used and this one can accomodate higher supply rails till +/-25V. Lars' regulator is not a dual tracking regulator as claimed on www.lcaudio.dk but could easily be modified to be one.
Here is an example of a dual tracking regulator:
(figure 3)
http://headwize.com/projects/showfil...lmore3_prj.htm
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th November 2004, 10:55 AM   #9
Electrons are yellow and more is better!
diyAudio Member
 
peranders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Göteborg, Sweden
Blog Entries: 4
Default Re: Re: Improving on LCaudio LowNoise regulator

Quote:
Originally posted by QSerraTico_Tico
Lars' regulator is not a dual tracking regulator as claimed on www.lcaudio.dk but could easily be modified to be one.
Here is an example of a dual tracking regulator:
(figure 3)
http://headwize.com/projects/showfil...lmore3_prj.htm
Yes it is! Check carefully, once again.
__________________
/Per-Anders (my first name) or P-A as my friends call me
Tube Buffered Gainclone in work |Thread || Diamond buffer |Thread for the group buy | Wiki
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th November 2004, 11:06 AM   #10
diyAudio Member
 
QSerraTico_Tico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Cool Re: Re: Re: Improving on LCaudio LowNoise regulator

Quote:
Originally posted by peranders


Yes it is! Check carefully, once again.

No, I a dual tracking regulator the negative output is just the inverted positive supply. Or in other words the regulated positive supply is used as a reference for the negative supply. In Lars' design the negative is obtained from the same reference, not the positive output.
Any disturbance on the positive line is not tracked by the negative line in Lars' design.
  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
Improving the LM3x7 regulator circuit Geoff Power Supplies 200 3rd October 2013 04:09 AM
lcaudio`s LN regulator Mikewong Solid State 1 31st January 2009 06:54 PM
Vbe Lowest? In lownoise bipolar transistors lineup Solid State 40 26th July 2008 12:37 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:00 PM.


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