| moray james |
Carlosfm: seems you have a lot of successful experience with snubbers. Can you tell me how you go about decideing what values to use in your snubbers? I assume that once you have a basic value that you play with it up and down by ear to fine tune?
The standard filter equation: F = 1 / (2 pi R C). So what criteria do you use to pick you chosen frequency? As the value of R comes down what kind of impact is there (aside from heat) on the circuit? Thanks for any help from those who know.
I put a snubber on the secondary of an Acoustat 0ne plus 0ne high voltage step up transformer and was very pleased with the results. I have not played with the values, I used 10 ohms in series with 0.01 uf. Best regards Moray James. |
|
|
| jackinnj |
I think the formula used is to be found in this paraphrase of a quote from the Bogart movie "Treasure of the Sierra Madre":
"Formulas, we don't need no stinkin' formulas". |
|
|
| moray james |
| There has to be some criteria with which to judge at the very least a starting point. I have no problems with listening to choose a best value however you need to have a value to start with! Regards Moray James. |
|
|
| carlosfm |
| quote: | Originally posted by jackinnj
I think the formula used is to be found in this paraphrase of a quote from the Bogart movie "Treasure of the Sierra Madre":
"Formulas, we don't need no stinkin' formulas". |
That also sounds like Jocko. :D |
|
|
| carlosfm |
Hi Moray,
I can calculate the values for the snubber but to be spot-on (or almost) I would ideally need an impedance graph of the PSU.
Easy when we're talking about linear regulators, because they are well documented.
Measurements would also do, of course, if you have a way to make them.
Without that, I can make a calculation based on guessings, that you may need to fine-tune.
The formula is secret...:djinn:
I can give you a first hint, though: you don't want a 10R resistor for the snubber on a PSU. You need a much lower value. |
|
|
| peranders |
| quote: | Originally posted by moray james
There has to be some criteria with which to judge at the very least a starting point. I have no problems with listening to choose a best value however you need to have a value to start with! Regards Moray James. |
Thorsten simulated the whole circuit and it was pretty accurate, as much as can be expected.
One for sure (right Carlos) is to loose the unsnubbed capacitor.
have you seen my "Enhanced Carlos Snubberized Power Supply"
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/show...2312&highlight=
The first thread became pretty enlighting and my first question in my frist post was answered by measurements that Carlos' basic idea had no or little effect, seen in measurements but "my" idea had.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/show...8942&highlight=
No offence Carlos but you won't kill the peak resonance only with adding a C + R. You must loose the lonely C also... 100 uF // 100n+1R (or so) will do the trick.... to remove the "big" peak of 4-6 dB at 2-4 MHz... altough this is still a bit of a sugarpill but at least it can be measured. |
|
|
| carlosfm |
| quote: | Originally posted by peranders
No offence Carlos but you won't kill the peak resonance only with adding a C + R. You must loose the lonely C also... 100 uF // 100n+1R (or so) will do the trick.... to remove the "big" peak of 4-6 dB at 2-4 MHz... altough this is still a bit of a sugarpill but at least it can be measured. |
100uf electrolythic?
Nah...:D
No offense, but I don't like to see you calling your speculations the "Enhanced Carlos Snubberized Power Supply".
Specially coming for you, who doesn't have the honesty to give an oppinion if the snubber is an improvement or not.
Objectively or subjectively speaking, you simply don't say what you think.
You are just dicking around. |
|
|
| jackinnj |
| I was just having fun at Carlos' expense. There is a notable lack of maths from some quarters |
|
|
| peranders |
Carlos, I have noticed that you haven't commented neither Thorsten's simulations nor Joseph_K's real world measurements saying that you still have a peak which you claim will be removed be your solution. You haven't commented my solution either so I'll guess you circuit will or remove something we don't know about.
This is what I think, now and before: It's not particular important and it makes not a huge difference.
Notice also that I don't say: It's totally unimportant and it makes absolutely no difference. |
|
|
| carlosfm |
| quote: | Originally posted by peranders
Carlos, I have noticed that you haven't commented neither Thorsten's simulations nor Joseph_K's real world measurements saying that you still have a peak which you claim will be removed be your solution. You haven't commented my solution either so I'll guess you circuit will or remove something we don't know about. |
That peak is not important, you're pickink on something that is ridiculous.
The snubber attenuates the peak.
Very important for an audio amp IS a low impedance PSU.
Any cap of a smaller value that is placed after the big PSU caps will create a peak.
That means if you use 10,000uf caps on the PSU, you would have to use this value everywhere, including as a "bypass" cap on the chip.:clown:
Your suggestion of 100uf to bypass the big caps will bring the peak to a much lower frequency, not good.
You are walking in circles here.
You caught me in the mood, because I don't have to comment anything you say.
And you still didn't say if the snubber improves you amp, while those who have tried it on YOUR amp will never go back.
What makes you think that a bridge and a cap makes a good PSU?:clown: |
|
|
| peranders |
| quote: | Originally posted by carlosfm
That peak is not important |
The reason for adding the snubber is for reducing the peak.... which you feel is very important, the snubber that is.
Anyway, you don't understand what I mean, nor can I get any explaination, not in theory neither in measurements so I'll guess we can get any further. |
|
|
| jackinnj |
if we work the math backwards, then Carlos values (100nF/1R) are attempting to null a peak in the supply impedance at 1.59MHz. |
|
|
| carlosfm |
| quote: | Originally posted by peranders
The reason for adding the snubber is for reducing the peak.... |
No, it's not the main objective, of course not.
You are still fighting to understand this... |
|
|
| jackinnj |
| quote: | Originally posted by carlosfm
No, it's not the main objective, of course not.
You are still fighting to understand this... |
Well, what is it, spitz or swallows to paraphrase Austin Powers? In your prior post you said it was to eliminate the peak.
An unregulated power supply without an error amp is going to have pretty darn low impedance, unbothered as it is with the need for compensation, adequate phase margin, etc.
Of course, empiricism is a lost art... |
|
|
| carlosfm |
| quote: | Originally posted by jackinnj
Well, what is it, spitz or swallows to paraphrase Austin Powers? In your prior post you said it was to eliminate the peak. |
Hey, try to understand what I said.
It does attenuate the peak, but that's not the main objective to use the snubber.
The objective is to have very low impedance up to the Mhz.
These amps need it (others too), and the improvement is clearly audible.
| quote: | Originally posted by jackinnj
An unregulated power supply without an error amp is going to have pretty darn low impedance, unbothered as it is with the need for compensation, adequate phase margin, etc. |
It does, but not enough.
The inductance of the big caps will have the side effect of a climbing impedance towards the high frequencies.
Paralleling small caps doesn't work as well as intended (or thought) because of the unavoidable trace inductance.
The snubber is there to improve this.
Of course regulators have much higher output impedance, starting much lower in frequency.
But my recommended values for the LM338 are much different from the values for the unregulated PSU, aren't they?
If you understood this and how to use it you would snubberize every PSU.
With the right values for every occasion.
There's no turning back.
It doesn't make "little difference", as P-A says.
| quote: | Originally posted by jackinnj
Of course, empiricism is a lost art... |
Posts like this, and the story of my original thread since the beginning are the reason why I don't reveal everything.
Who cares?
Do you?
I don't.
P-A seems desperate, since the beginning.:D
I don't know why he cares, if it makes "little difference".:rolleyes: |
|
|
| jackinnj |
put the snubber where it belongs:
here's a quick and dirty bode plot -- using a MUR860 Diode and 40uH of power transformer secondary impedance -- in the real world there is also (several hundred PF) of capacitance across the transformer secondary -- which isn't modeled here --.
 |
|
|
| chris ma |
| therefore we need 4 sets of snubber cap/resistor for a bridge rectifier? |
|
|
| peranders |
If you have understood the document, what is your conclusion if you compare "my" snubberization and Carlos?
| quote: | Originally posted by carlosfm
No, it's not the main objective |
The purpose of the snubber is.... :scratch:
| quote: | Originally posted by carlosfm
P-A seems desperate, since the beginning. |
I'm not particulary desperate. I'm just trying to understand why using a snubber if you don't want to reduce impedance peaks... |
|
|
| jackinnj |
| quote: | Originally posted by chris ma
therefore we need 4 sets of snubber cap/resistor for a bridge rectifier? |
quite frankly, I have done this (4 diode snubbers), but I don't think that it is necessarily the best thing or necessary. i haven't the time right now to fiddle with it. |
|
|
| XELB |
| quote: | I'm not particulary desperate. I'm just trying to understand why using a snubber if you don't want to reduce impedance peaks...
|
Maybe it's to get high frequencys :D |
|
|
| carlosfm |
| quote: | Originally posted by peranders
The purpose of the snubber is.... :scratch:
I'm not particulary desperate. I'm just trying to understand why using a snubber if you don't want to reduce impedance peaks... |
I have told you several times, and I have told you again on this thread.
Or you are dumb, or you are just dicking around.
I'm in ignore mode now.:sleep: |
|
|
| peranders |
| quote: | Originally posted by carlosfm
I have told you several times, and I have told you again on this thread.
Or you are dumb...
|
I must be dumb because I can't find any good technical explanation in your posts. Maybe becasue there aren't any more than I have given. |
|
|
| carlosfm |
| quote: | Originally posted by peranders
I must be dumb... |
Right.
| quote: | Originally posted by peranders
...because I can't find any good technical explanation in your posts. |
I give YOU the information I want.
| quote: | Originally posted by peranders
Maybe becasue there aren't any more than I have given. |
Don't make me laugh.:D
You don't know what you are talking about.
Why use a snubber after a regulator, as on the LM338 PSU?
Forget it, you can't get it.
:sleep: |
|
|
| peranders |
| quote: | Originally posted by carlosfm
You don't know what you are talking about.
Why use a snubber after a regulator, as on the LM338 PSU?
Forget it, you can't get it.
|
Where did LM338 come into this?
I think the threadstarter asked about general guide lines and those are if you can't measure and really tune the circiut:
1 Keep it compact in order to reduce stray inductances
2 Locate the cap combination as close as possible to the consumer (amp)
3 Reasonable values: 100 uF// 100n as some average but may be increased or dicreased.
4 Suitable resistor values 0.5 ohms as a very minimum and 1-3 ohms as "normal". Power rating 0.6 W metal film but 1-2 W is also OK. The resistor should be low inductance and have good HF properties.
5 The snubber package should be 100 uF(22-220 uF) in parallel with 10-100 nF + resistor. You should not add an unsnubbed single plastic/ceramic cap IF you want the snubber to really work.
If you happen to have a regulator the same things may apply but ask yourself why you want to have a snubber. When you have the answer you also know what to do.
Is it for reducing resonances above 1 MHz?
Is it for creating perfect or at least good transisent response when you apply signals way over 20 kHz? |
|
|
| carlosfm |
| quote: | Originally posted by peranders
Where did LM338 come into this? |
Of course you can't understand this.
| quote: | Originally posted by peranders
I think the threadstarter asked about general guide lines and those are if you can't measure and really tune the circiut:
1 Keep it compact in order to reduce stray inductances
2 Locate the cap combination as close as possible to the consumer (amp)
3 Reasonable values: 100 uF// 100n as some average but may be increased or dicreased.
4 Suitable resistor values 0.5 ohms as a very minimum and 1-3 ohms as "normal". Power rating 0.6 W metal film but 1-2 W is also OK. The resistor should be low inductance and have good HF properties.
5 The snubber package should be 100 uF(22-220 uF) in parallel with 10-100 nF + resistor. You should not add an unsnubbed single plastic/ceramic cap IF you want the snubber to really work.
If you happen to have a regulator the same things may apply but ask yourself why you want to have a snubber. When you have the answer you also know what to do.
Is it for reducing resonances ave 1 MHz?
Is it for creating perfect or at least good transisent response when you apply signals way over 20 kHz? |
Lool, forgert it, ok?
Most of what you say is wrong, and I don't understand why are you so desperate.
I suspect why, but I don't say it. |
|
|
| jackinnj |
| Carlos -- please demonstrate why Peranders is incorrect. Cogito ergo sum doesn't work. |
|
|
| carlosfm |
I don't play his game.
cheers.:angel: |
|
|
| jean-paul |
| Nevertheless you should show some respect for P-A. The man is trying to calculate this the scientific way which deserves more than the way you are treating him now. |
|
|
| macboy |
| quote: | Originally posted by carlosfm
I don't play his game. |
Perhaps not, but the game that you are playing makes you appear arrogant, unhelpful, and condescending. Your answers to many questions asked of you in this forum are very often the same, and sound very much like because that's the way it is and if you can't understand that, then you are stupid so don't bother me. |
|
|
| carlosfm |
| quote: | Originally posted by jean-paul
Nevertheless you should show some respect for P-A. The man is trying to calculate this the scientific way which deserves more than the way you are treating him now. |
Sorry, but I had my dose of spanking.
Just look at my original thread and you will understand.
P-A, without understanding, is using my name on a so-called "Carlos improved snubber" schematic and (who knows?) spreading it around.
And then he gives wrong information, based on wrong assumptions.
Of course he has second-thoughts about this, as he has with other PSU schematics out there.
Due to the unfriendly "ambient" since the begining, I decided not to reveal everything.
Whatever clue I post is drawn and unnoticed on the middle of the spanking.
Some are already very happy that I share schematics.
Others will (eventually) one day get there and understand.
| quote: | Originally posted by macboy
Perhaps not, but the game that you are playing makes you appear arrogant, unhelpful, and condescending. Your answers to many questions asked of you in this forum are very often the same, and sound very much like because that's the way it is and if you can't understand that, then you are stupid so don't bother me. |
Read above and you will (hopefuly) understand.
Read the other threads if you bother and you want to understand my reasons.
I'm very a very friendly and helpful guy.
For those who treat me well, of course. |
|
|
| postpunk |
Carlos, c'mon you have to be aware of that you seem a bit touchy about this whole snubber deal, with secrets and all.
And about P-A being hostile towards you in earlier threads.. I don't know but P-A isn't hostile just because he is asking you questions. Don't be so sensitive :) |
|
|
| jh6you |
The Art of Electronics, page 369, Fig. 6.47 High Voltage regulated supply, shows the same thing with 750R+470. . . and says. . . for low Zout at high freq. . . What else is the secret. . . ?!?! Should I shut up. . . and no question. . . and just follow as you declare. . . ?!?!
Regards
jH |
|
|
| tobias_svensk |
| quote: | Originally posted by carlosfm
I'm very a very friendly and helpful guy.
For those who treat me well, of course. |
Please carlos, se it the other way around sometimes to ;) |
|
|
| carlosfm |
| quote: | Originally posted by jh6you
and says. . . for low Zout at high freq. . . |
I have been telling that for long...:bawling:
Look guys, I have made my decision some time ago and posted it.
I won't reveal my calculations. That also means that I don't reveal why I use a certain value here and another there.
The rest is public, and I don't know what takes P-A so long to understand the purpose of using a snubber.
Really, I repeated myself so much that it seems he is picking on me.
Or is he really dumb?:confused:
| quote: | Originally posted by carlosfm
It does attenuate the peak, but that's not the main objective to use the snubber.
The objective is to have very low impedance up to the Mhz.
These amps need it (others too), and the improvement is clearly audible.
...
The inductance of the big caps will have the side effect of a climbing impedance towards the high frequencies.
Paralleling small caps doesn't work as well as intended (or thought) because of the unavoidable trace inductance.
The snubber is there to improve this.
Of course regulators have much higher output impedance, starting much lower in frequency.
But my recommended values for the LM338 are much different from the values for the unregulated PSU, aren't they? |
In reality, some (P-A included) have got very mad with me because they don't understand what a resistor and a cap to ground makes on a PSU.
They called me subjectivist, ask me for proof, a never ending story.
I had my dose of that talk, not interested.
Read my lips: I don't have to prove anything, I don't care who believes and who doesn't.
I just can't understand what moves these guys, and I can't understand how difficult it is to test a snubber, measure if they want, whatever.
I give the clues I want, I keep the rest for me.
There are those who deserve to be helped, those who don't.
Moray sent me a private mail some days ago and I gave him some suggestions.
Nice guy.;)
An ESL specialist:att'n: |
|
|
| XELB |
If P-A wants to know scientifically how the snubber works, why does he not investigate?
I don’t hope to have everything done for me….
When I first register in DIYaudio didn’t know **** about the electronics of an amplifier!
I bought some books and start “working” on them in the free time.
If I came up with something new I would also not tell everything!
I hate parasites that live of others work! ( this is DIY not commercial )
( I am not telling this is the case, but I like to take precautions )
But, I also share the opinion that Carlos position in the forum depends on is mood. :p
Sometimes he just ignores the questions, others, is a nice guy. :D |
|
|
| carlosfm |
| quote: | Originally posted by XELB
If P-A wants to know scientifically how the snubber works, why does he not investigate?
I don’t hope to have everything done for me… |
I couldn't say it better.:angel:
| quote: | Originally posted by XELB
But, I also share the opinion that Carlos position in the forum depends on is mood. :p
Sometimes he just ignores the questions, others, is a nice guy. :D |
Sorry, but I don't have the time for everything.
Some questions asked here are easily found with a simple search, sometimes I don't have the time to answer, or to make a search for you and point the link.
Hopefully sometimes other members come to the rescue.
Really, I have my job and my family, no time to post on every forum in the world, much less during the day.
During the day I can't distract myself from a 2000+ lines SQL procedure to point you the correct resistor polarity.:D :D :D
Most of the times there's even no time to come here. |
|
|
| jean-paul |
| quote: | Originally posted by carlosfm
.....Some are already very happy that I share schematics.
Others will (eventually) one day get there and understand.....
....Read above and you will (hopefuly) understand.
Read the other threads if you bother and you want to understand my reasons. I'm very a very friendly and helpful guy.
For those who treat me well, of course..... |
mod mode on
:cop: Even if I try to understand why you feel like you do I still see no reason for keep calling or asking if P-A is dumb. In fact any remark to any member that he/she is dumb is something we generally don't like here.
One day we all will understand your genious mind and you being a generous guy that shares his schematics but for now I urge you to refrain from referring to P-A as dumb or similar remarks.
mod mode off |
|
|
| carlosfm |
| quote: | Originally posted by jean-paul
... but for now I urge you to refrain from referring to P-A as dumb or similar remarks. |
Ok, you're right, sorry.
I just don't understand why P-A is always invading me with questions if I already said what I wanted to say.
I thought he had already understood that long ago, as I had already told him on my thread. |
|
|
| jean-paul |
Forget the past and join forces ;) Maybe we'll see a Per-Anders/CarlosFM snubber circuit in the near future :D
Seriously, if you don't feel answering questions that you've already answered a few times please say so in the particular thread and simply do not react anymore to the questions. Better for you and better for the readers of the thread. Or simply give a link to the thread where it was discussed before. |
|
|
| mateo88 |
| Has anyone calculated the snubber values just as you would calculate a zobel? It works (I like it anyway), especially so if you have an impedance graph, as with the lm338. |
|
|
| carlosfm |
| quote: | Originally posted by mateo88
Has anyone calculated the snubber values just as you would calculate a zobel? It works (I like it anyway), especially so if you have an impedance graph, as with the lm338. |
This is what happens when you investigate instead of expecting everything done.
I cannot confirm this, though.:p
;)
I pointed in this direction many moons ago on my original thread, but it was too polluted and passed unnoticed.
You did your homework.:cool:
PS: Carlitos Cabana is cool. |
|
|
| peranders |
Ok, folks, I have made some practical guide lines which I'll believe noone has had any objections against.
A good way to get some results is to grab simulation values for the parts in mind plus some extrapolations of what the physical circuit may add in terms of parasitics. Put those data into for example LTSpice, freeware. With Spice you can solve equations with some trial and error and by that forget about formulas.
I was trying to create a technical discussion but at the moment everyone agrees with me. |
|
|
| jram |
P-A asked always the same question, since the first post Carlos wrote on the subject. Carlos just wants to share his experience. For me, the snubber works very well in both configurations (unregulated and regulated PSU) used with a GC based on LM1875. It even works with a class T amp (SI).
I don't understand why Carlos should explain, more than he actually did in several threads, how and why the snubber works.
Keep on Carlos. |
|
|
| mateo88 |
@ PA:
:att'n: Dude, don't say everyone agrees with you when they don't. Especially when the "originator" of the circuit does not agree. :att'n:
All the snubber is, is a freaking impedance corrector/lower-er/whatever-you-want-to-call-it. It is not complicated.
The snubber works basically like this: if there is a frequency where the impedance is rather high, calculate a zobel for it. If it sounds good, then yay! If it doesn't sound good, measure some more and see if there are other peaks in the impedance, then repeat.
Stop being a *******. |
|
|
| peranders |
| quote: | Originally posted by jram
I don't understand why Carlos should explain, more than he actually did in several threads.. |
Indeed you are right but so far I haven't seen any theoretical text from Carlos which explains why he has come up with his circuit compared to a conventional snubberization. So far Thorsten, Joseph_k and janneman have done a good job putting light on the snubber. Excuse me if I have forgotten somebody worth mentioning.
I think we stop here unless someone has anything to say about my guide lines. |
|
|
| XELB |
| quote: | | ... so far I haven't seen any theoretical text from Carlos which explains why he has come up with his circuit compared to a conventional snubberization... |
And why he must explain ?
This is not a school test or something that need to be proved!
Just try and then, try to compreend the logic of the "thing". |
|
|
| uli |
| quote: | Originally posted by jean-paul
Forget the past and join forces ;) Maybe we'll see a Per-Anders/CarlosFM snubber circuit in the near future :D
|
Rather a camel will fit through the eye of a needle before this will happen!
:devilr: :devilr: :devilr: :devilr: :devilr: :devilr: :devilr: :devilr: :devilr: :devilr:
| quote: | Originally posted by peranders
I was trying to create a technical discussion but at the moment everyone agrees with me. |
pls define everyone ;)
instead of playing around with simulator tools, people should
do their homework. To discuss technical matters one should
have some theoretical background. It is not old fashioned to
know how to calculate some values.
Uli
:nod: :nod: :nod: |
|
|
| carlosfm |
| quote: | Originally posted by peranders
A good way to get some results is to grab simulation... |
I think you are going around in circles.
The snubber looks like a high ESR cap.:clown:
First you need to know the principle and what you are looking for.
You can play, though...
Good Lord... my LM338 regulated snubberized PSU reveals too many things.
Can you dig it? |
|
|
| Upupa Epops |
| " Belive and your faith will health you " ;) . But we can't blind experiments without explanation ;) and some people don't like this way. Once time 1 R / 100n, once time differrent value. Say why and we will be satisfied :cool:. |
|
|
| Cal Weldon |
:cop: Language Police :cop:
XELB: Do not attempt to circumvent the autocensor as you did in post 36.
Mateo88: Do not resort to name calling.
Cal |
|
|
| carlosfm |
| quote: | Originally posted by Upupa Epops
Once time 1 R / 100n, once time differrent value. Say why and we will be satisfied :cool:. |
With the unregulated PSU, lower impedance than I initially thought was needed is beneficial.
The resistor sets the impedance.
The cap sets the frequency.
A higher frequency than I initially thought was needed is also an improvement to this amp.
This was (is) work and development in progress.
Nothing comes spot-on at first time.
Who thinks otherwise is deeply wrong.
One of the many points where P-A is wrong some posts ago is that you can even go lower that 0.47R (0.5R in his words), it can be even better.
But I have been very busy lately, so you guys go :smash: :smash: :smash: and report the results.
Jesus!
:D |
|
|
| peranders |
Moray, you may not know but "snubber" isn't the right word for this, therefore you will get up the wrong documents. We call it snubber and this has been a tradition since a while back but it is still the wrong name for it.
Maybe we should call it the german way:
Impedance Peak Reduction Resistor", an IPRR :)
or:
:idea: "Stimolence exciter"
Stimolence is coming from the famous "Facancy analysis" which was created at Chalmers Univertsity of Technolgy. The whole thing was a joke but not everyone realized it. 50-100 pages of good scientific text of something but if you have a normal intellect you will understand 0%, not a thing, still some people believed that it was about sometihng.
What do you say? "Stimolence exciter" sound good, don't you agree? |
|
|
| carlosfm |
| quote: | Originally posted by peranders
What do you say? "Stimolence exciter" sound good, don't you agree? |
This can be called a snubber.
But you can call it anything that excites you. |
|
|
| jackinnj |
| quote: | Originally posted by carlosfm
With the unregulated PSU, lower impedance than I initially thought was needed is beneficial.
The resistor sets the impedance.
The cap sets the frequency.
A higher frequency than I initially thought was needed is also an improvement to this amp.
This was (is) work and development in progress.
Nothing comes spot-on at first time.
Who thinks otherwise is deeply wrong.
One of the many points where P-A is wrong some posts ago is that you can even go lower that 0.47R (0.5R in his words), it can be even better.
|
 |
|
|
| XELB |
| quote: | Originally posted by carlosfm
This can be called a snubber.
But you can call it anything that excites you. |
:bigeyes: :bigeyes:
Mortal.... :smash: :dead:
This is better then a b serie TV show :p |
|
|
|
