The Rds(on) and the input cap form an LP filter -- from a practical perspective it's trivial for the frequencies in which we have an interest, but academic pedants will note the several dB difference above 10kHz. As Elvee quotes, above a few tens of 10kHz, the LM317 is "as dumb as a rock".
Yes that matters if you set a certain output from the DAC and expect that value on the input of the regulator.
That LFPAK package MOSFET I used is ok for 100mA but I think I need a larger one and a heatsink for higher current output. I might try measuring LM338 at 4Aout or something like that.
That LFPAK package MOSFET I used is ok for 100mA but I think I need a larger one and a heatsink for higher current output. I might try measuring LM338 at 4Aout or something like that.
HI. Many thanks for sharing.
Refering to the post and the further coments https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...grade-any-317-based-v-reg.331491/post-6942943. you talked for the Nonoisier of voltage than can excess the programed regulator value, e.g. 14 Vdc in lieu ofr 12V for 11s to 1m . Is it also for the design of the Dienoisier of this post linked, same soft start behavior with or without CCS ? I think I could use the BC327/337 or BC550/560 I have on hands.
Would like to know, cause some devices do not like you exceed the max Vdc : dac chips as talked, but also filament ! Would like to use the Lm317 version for a 6.3 Vdc/375mA filament, but 6.6 Vdc is a maximum for this I believe !
Refering to the post and the further coments https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...grade-any-317-based-v-reg.331491/post-6942943. you talked for the Nonoisier of voltage than can excess the programed regulator value, e.g. 14 Vdc in lieu ofr 12V for 11s to 1m . Is it also for the design of the Dienoisier of this post linked, same soft start behavior with or without CCS ? I think I could use the BC327/337 or BC550/560 I have on hands.
Would like to know, cause some devices do not like you exceed the max Vdc : dac chips as talked, but also filament ! Would like to use the Lm317 version for a 6.3 Vdc/375mA filament, but 6.6 Vdc is a maximum for this I believe !
All these have a higher initial swing. I don't rememver exactly but you need to have 10% extra margin for first swing.
Shouldn't filaments be current controlled?
Shouldn't filaments be current controlled?
Hi,
I use an indirect heated tube. So often regulated DC is used and the filament can break if too much is applied.
Should I have the over voltage data you published 4 posts after ? Or maybe use it without the ccs to have less inrush voltage ?
If anyone used it, is thete a jumper I have to open or close when not populating the bc327 ccs please ?
Many thanks for your help.
I use an indirect heated tube. So often regulated DC is used and the filament can break if too much is applied.
Should I have the over voltage data you published 4 posts after ? Or maybe use it without the ccs to have less inrush voltage ?
If anyone used it, is thete a jumper I have to open or close when not populating the bc327 ccs please ?
Many thanks for your help.
Forgot to mention that the CCS allows to set the circuit for good performance at lower Vout ( needed in the 3.3V-10V Vout range). You can use BC3x7 pair.
Hello Trileru,
A noob question, sorry... Can I use two monoboard a positive populated and a negative populated linked at their ouput for instance in order to have a + 0V - reg ?
A noob question, sorry... Can I use two monoboard a positive populated and a negative populated linked at their ouput for instance in order to have a + 0V - reg ?
@diyiggy
I didn't pay enough attention to your question. Actually you can use a center tapped transformer, no need for separate secondaries.
I thought you asked if you can use two positive boards for +/- output.
You will also need a board with the rectifier and main caps. My latest board designs have DC input only.
I didn't pay enough attention to your question. Actually you can use a center tapped transformer, no need for separate secondaries.
I thought you asked if you can use two positive boards for +/- output.
You will also need a board with the rectifier and main caps. My latest board designs have DC input only.
Hello,
In fact I have 5 mono board from your previous drawing as asked few threads ago cause I planned a 6.3V filament. It is not possible because of the drift. So mt peoject is if possible to use both for a stereo output stage that needs a postive + ground zero reg + negative.
Knowing that it is possible to output negative also on a monoboard, the idea is to use two boards with before two full bridge with a two decondary traffo without CT then tigtht the two boards one negcand one positive by their ground rail at their output plug to have a zero reference needed by the load: + zero -
I beleive it iscrefered at a floating ground when one doesn't have a traffo with a CT?
In fact I have 5 mono board from your previous drawing as asked few threads ago cause I planned a 6.3V filament. It is not possible because of the drift. So mt peoject is if possible to use both for a stereo output stage that needs a postive + ground zero reg + negative.
Knowing that it is possible to output negative also on a monoboard, the idea is to use two boards with before two full bridge with a two decondary traffo without CT then tigtht the two boards one negcand one positive by their ground rail at their output plug to have a zero reference needed by the load: + zero -
I beleive it iscrefered at a floating ground when one doesn't have a traffo with a CT?
What kind of drift? If you are referring to the startup higher swing, I don't think that should be an issue for the filament (but if someone knows otherwise please correct me). I think tubes are recommended to be kept within 5-10% of 6.3V for maximum filament life. The first startup swing should be around extra 10% I think, that is something but not a lot. And the first swing happens for 1-2 seconds or so, then it goes down to your set Vout.
Yes I refered to the 1m swing...
On my IHT datasheet 6,3 V +- 5% is refered as "absolute limits" , but I really do not know...
On my IHT datasheet 6,3 V +- 5% is refered as "absolute limits" , but I really do not know...
This may been covered, but any info on how this device compares?:
https://sparkoslabs.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Discrete-Voltage-Regulator-Data-Sheet.pdf
https://sparkoslabs.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Discrete-Voltage-Regulator-Data-Sheet.pdf
The quoted PSRR is better than for the plain-vanilla denoiser. The nonoiser, dienoiser, and some of Trileru's iterations are significantly better.
The noise is catastrophic (42nV/sqrtHz) compared to the 0.3nV of the denoiser and the 0.1nV of a ZTX equipped die- or no-noiser.
The output impedance too is much worse: from the datasheet, it is something like 25 milliohm. IIRC, the denoiser is in the milliohm range, and the nonoiser 15µohm.
The DC characteristics are similar to a 317, thus similar for the denoiser too
The noise is catastrophic (42nV/sqrtHz) compared to the 0.3nV of the denoiser and the 0.1nV of a ZTX equipped die- or no-noiser.
The output impedance too is much worse: from the datasheet, it is something like 25 milliohm. IIRC, the denoiser is in the milliohm range, and the nonoiser 15µohm.
The DC characteristics are similar to a 317, thus similar for the denoiser too
Hi Trileru,
That one seem very good
did you try It In practice
would you recommend V (n002) variant (as It Is simple) for powering digital supply of dac with 5 Vdc