IRF540/9540 or IRFP240/9240-power,better? - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Amplifiers > Solid State
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Gallery Wiki Blogs Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Solid State Talk all about solid state amplification.

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
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 25th March 2005, 02:44 PM   #1
zox2003 is offline zox2003  United States
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: usa
Default IRF540/9540 or IRFP240/9240-power,better?

Which pair would be better to use on +/- 40v rails and which pair will give me more power on that rail voltage and 4 ohms speaker?


IRF540/9540 or IRFP240/9240
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th March 2005, 03:09 PM   #2
ilimzn is offline ilimzn  Croatia
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Zagreb
IRF540/9540 will give you about 1-1.5V more output voltage on account of slightly better transconductance. That being said, IRFP240/9240 will be better for cooling which is something you need to think about. On a nominal 4 ohm load from 40V rails, with about 6V loss, the peak power dissipation will be quite high. IRFP devices have a thermal resistance of about 1.1K/W while the IRFs have 1.5-1.6, AND have a lower rated dissipation, which certainly makes things far worse compared to the IRFPs.

One other thing: the 9xxx part will be the problem one, as it's current rating is lower and transconductance also, which makes for a higher loss on the P side, and more heat. Not a good combination.

To make matters worse, you will be getting asymetric transconductance in the output stage, which will not do good for distortion, especially into 4 ohms.

You might want to plug a IRF9540/IRF640 pair into your simulator and see the distortion fall
Also, IRFP parts were engineered for better analog performance and will offer better linearity. You may want to look into that...
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th March 2005, 03:23 PM   #3
zox2003 is offline zox2003  United States
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: usa
Default Another question?

Is that mean that IRF240/9240 combination is better.
If that is the case with 9XXX series why peolple are not using just a N-Channel MOS like 540 or IRFp240.

  Reply With Quote
Old 25th March 2005, 10:11 PM   #4
ilimzn is offline ilimzn  Croatia
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Zagreb
OK, let me give you a bit longer answer then...

If I was making an amp with your conditions (+-40V rails, 4 ohm load), I would use IRFP240 and IRFP9140. This are much more complementary than 240/9240 even though the P channel part if 100V and the N is 200. In either case, with 40V rails, both will do fine, and besides 540/9540, which were your alternatives, are 100V also.

If you only have 40V rails (no auxiliary rails for the driver stage of the MOSFETs), the power with 540/9540 would be about 7W more, assuming no rail sag (no drop from 40V under load).

If you design your driver stage well (so it can swing to voltages close to power rails), the maximum power will be about 130W into 4 ohms (again, assuming no rail sag - but this is a large assumption). The fact is, this will not work reliably with 540/9540. It would if you could assume a resistor load, but not on a realistic speaker load. Also, it is doubtful they would survive a short circuit when hot. Although the power rating for these is 100W, in practise, it is nearly impossible to come even close.
The IRFPs would be a far better choice because they are more robust. Although they are rated 150W, which does not seem dramatically better than IRFs, they have a much more massive metal tab which alowes them to better survive short current transients much higher than rated current, and also short power dissipation transients much higher than rated power. They are also easyer to fit on a heatsink while assuring uniform distribution of force - the TO220 tabs on IRF transistors bends too easily.

Also, simulation and real world testing confirms much better distortion figures on IRFP types - sometimes even 10x better!
  Reply With Quote


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
IRF540/9540 or IRFP240/9240 Ermac Solid State 19 21st May 2015 03:06 AM
Irfp240/9240 A75 PassFan Pass Labs 4 6th July 2008 02:58 PM
On IRF540/9540 Hans Olofsson Solid State 40 21st October 2007 07:00 PM
WTB: IRF540 and 9540 fets demogorgon Swap Meet 21 1st October 2005 03:46 PM
Irf540/9540 bengt Solid State 16 1st March 2004 04:11 PM

New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:18 PM.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2017 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2