"Iron Garter" Push-Pull Amplifier - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Amplifiers > Tubes / Valves

Tubes / Valves All about our sweet vacuum tubes :) Threads about Musical Instrument Amps of all kinds should be in the Instruments & Amps forum

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 21st November 2010, 02:34 AM   #1
diyAudio Member
 
wrenchone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Silicon Valley
Default "Iron Garter" Push-Pull Amplifier

Attached is the first cut of a schematic for what I'm calling the "Iron Garter", incorporating a mosfet concertina splitter and source follower for the outputs, combined with Blumlein "Garter" compensation to help even out the bias current between the output tubes. I had tried adding garter compensation to my "No Light District Amp", but it was touchy/high gain with that particular circuit and and doubled the parts count. Here the compensation is more easily controlled, and with fewer parts. Since I have boards built up with all the mosfet bits, breadboarding should start on this amp shortly. I may change to an input tube with lower gain than the 6AM4, but I'm leaving it in for now.
Attached Images
File Type: gif IGB_SCH1.gif (33.9 KB, 403 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st November 2010, 04:34 PM   #2
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dallas
I count four caps (if count includes gates) and a transformer as possible
poles of phase shift in the feedback loop. Which one is the dominant, how
high did you set the -3db knee, and how high before +/-120 shift rolls in?

Since you have a loop, I'd be tempted to sacrifice splitter symmetry to
lose some of the gatecappage. What made you choose MOSFETs rather
than BJT for concertina and driver/followers? We seem already given up
linearity by allowing output Pentodes to operate with no local feedback
aside from the DC garter. So good function of the loop will be essential.

If all else being equal, and I'm not saying it is or ain't...
With BJT in those locations, you could ditch at least six Zeniers.
How many D14's you got in that schematic anyway?
D14's not even all the same type 1N4752 (neg rail) vs 1N5248 (gates)...

You got 50V OPT swing either way before screen currents begin to
begin to affect the quiescent bias of the garter. With the feedback
loop correcting crossing errors, that might be acceptable, but just
be aware of it. How fast do things return to smooth crossing after
a loud passage has dumped a lot of screen current?

I am really stretching here to find details I can nitpick. Its a good
first draft that would no doubt function as-is.

Last edited by kenpeter; 21st November 2010 at 05:04 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st November 2010, 07:55 PM   #3
diyAudio Member
 
wrenchone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Silicon Valley
The feedback compensation cap is there as a placeholder until I see how the circuit really performs. In all the p-p circuits I've done, the transformer acts as dominant pole, actually rolling off signs of input/driver stage misbehavior so that I had to probe previous stages as well as the output to see what was really going on. There is no place for partial feedback here, unless one wants to do it right from plate to grid (or plate to follower) on the outputs. Having said that, I was just looking at on old copy of the ARRL handbook yesterday, where they show a capacitive divider used for "neutralization" (actually negative feedback) used on the final stage to quell oscillation. Food for thought, but only after I get the amp running in its current state.

The follower mosfets are selected for low gate charge and low input capacitance. The stage driving them is a triode with relatively low Rp. I don't anticipate any problems, and indeed have not had any with this arrangement in the past. The zeners are all the same type in the schematic (18V), except for the one regulating the negative bias(33V). They will not conduct unless the gate is overdriven. As for mosfets vs. BJTs, I don't like having to supply base current, or having to worry about recovery from saturation (perhaps a real concern in the case of the splitter). In the breadboard stage, I'll do a little tinkering with the input to provide maximum headroom for the splitter.

One interesting worry is how long it will take the cut-off follower to recover from a negative signal excursion. That's what square wave tests are for...

I went back last night and corrected the reference designators (and some values) to make everything line up nicely. I want to take a look at my notes at work to check on a few more values in the bias circuit, them I will post the revised schematic. The 6P14P data sheet claims that I need only around ~8V of negative bias for my planned quiescent current of ~30ma/tube. That's a pretty sensitive tube. We'll see what actually happens in the breadboard.
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st November 2010, 08:16 PM   #4
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dallas
Neutralization is a positive feedback, best only abused for killing capacitance at RF.
I seriously doubt it would quell an oscillation by further opening top end bandwidth.
But phase shift is wierd, who's to say it didn't make something or other more stable?
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st November 2010, 08:30 PM   #5
diyAudio Member
 
wrenchone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Silicon Valley
The neutralization scheme I saw was a capacitive voltage divider from plate to grid - that looks like negative feedback to me.
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st November 2010, 10:15 PM   #6
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dallas
Miller cap from V1 plate to V1 grid. Neutralization cap from V2 plate to V1 grid.
Hopefully neutralizer cap is equal to Miller. Miller NFB + Neutralization PFB = 0.
Grid V1 in middle of this voltage divider sees only parallel caps to virtual GND.

I don't think Pentode Miller is significant at audio frequency compared to the
MOSFETs or even the Triode.

Last edited by kenpeter; 21st November 2010 at 10:20 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2010, 01:35 AM   #7
diyAudio Member
 
wrenchone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Silicon Valley
Neutralization or no, here's a pic of the first breadboard for the "Iron Garter". No smoke was released, but as I thought, I will need to tweak the bias current through the 6AM4 downward so that I can get a little headroom at the mosfet concertina. No snarky spurious oscilation was seen, so the last thing I'll do before I put the breadboard away and spend some effort on my "No Light" project is to take a clip lead and close the loop.

I'm using a Baldwin 6BQ5 P-P transformer in the breadboard because it was close at hand, and I would spend far less tears on it if I accidently zorched it for some reason. The new values I find will be included in the next schematic I post.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMG_1765.jpg (234.2 KB, 212 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2010, 07:12 AM   #8
diyAudio Member
 
wrenchone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Silicon Valley
Attached is the updated schematic for the Iron Garter, with changes to reduce current in the input tube to bring down the plate voltage a bit, and a change to a value in the output bias string. The breadboard functions well enough open loop that I want to put together a chassis with the Fisher X-100 output transformers before I start working really hard on the closed loop compensation. It oscillates closed-loop with the Baldwin output transformer, but there's no loop compensation cap in place. For once, this project came together without a lot of roaring and screaming and hair-tearing.
Attached Images
File Type: gif IGB_SCH2.gif (32.8 KB, 160 views)
  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
"Killer" Screen Driven Push-Pull Amp Initial Queries wrenchone Tubes / Valves 55 7th September 2014 11:39 PM
"Push-Pull" for push und "Push-Pull" for pull (like Gamnut) - whats the right name? tiefbassuebertr Solid State 70 15th August 2012 08:08 PM
"The Bursar" Push-Pull Amplifier wrenchone Tubes / Valves 24 9th November 2010 11:46 PM
829B/3E29 "Triode" Push Pull Paralleled Sections coldcathode Tubes / Valves 26 28th October 2010 06:39 PM
Finished - Pics of my new push-pull subwoofer with 2 x 12" + Bash amplifier :) Xmax BR Subwoofers 26 11th March 2007 09:16 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:57 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