The IC is using 5v as the reference on pin 2. If you lowered the value of the 47k, it would increase the rail voltage.
It's better to have both the positive and negative feed the regulator unless you're running a bridged amplifier or an amp that pulls from both rails at the same time.
It's better to have both the positive and negative feed the regulator unless you're running a bridged amplifier or an amp that pulls from both rails at the same time.
Thanks Perry, I think we've got it.😀
17.5k gives me +/-40v with a 14.4v input. Before it was +/-47.5v.
The amp will either be bridged mono or at least stereo with one channel driven out of phase.
Now, do I need to add an output inductor to each rail since it is regulated now?
Thanks again and sorry if I was any hassle.😱
17.5k gives me +/-40v with a 14.4v input. Before it was +/-47.5v.
The amp will either be bridged mono or at least stereo with one channel driven out of phase.
Now, do I need to add an output inductor to each rail since it is regulated now?
Thanks again and sorry if I was any hassle.😱
I'd try it without the filter inductors. You're unlikely to see any improvement by using them. I know that some people will disagree but there are many manufacturers that don't use them and their amps work flawlessly.
Perry,
I have noticed that you are expert in SMPS and know it by heart...
I have a question (which i have tried to solve, but, since i am no expert...cant solve it without your help)
have a look at this inverter schematic....
there is a TL494 at the high frequency side...and another on at 50hz section...
both error amplifiers are either controlled by LM324 or 50hz TL494...
I need to remove both - LM324 and 50hz tl494...and use two error amplifiers as a voltage regulator and current regulator...
and there is no way i can do it....i have tried to reduce the voltages and i was successfull....but, removing 50hz tl494 just brings the voltages back to full...if both are there, then i can regulate the voltages on both side (high frequency and low frequency sides)
If you can help ....i will be really greatfull...
or if thats not possible to modify, then if you have another TL494 regulated smps circuit...?
one way or another, you are my best bet 🙂
i am pretty sure you can help.
Thanks again.
Regards
I have noticed that you are expert in SMPS and know it by heart...
I have a question (which i have tried to solve, but, since i am no expert...cant solve it without your help)
have a look at this inverter schematic....
there is a TL494 at the high frequency side...and another on at 50hz section...
both error amplifiers are either controlled by LM324 or 50hz TL494...
I need to remove both - LM324 and 50hz tl494...and use two error amplifiers as a voltage regulator and current regulator...
and there is no way i can do it....i have tried to reduce the voltages and i was successfull....but, removing 50hz tl494 just brings the voltages back to full...if both are there, then i can regulate the voltages on both side (high frequency and low frequency sides)
If you can help ....i will be really greatfull...
or if thats not possible to modify, then if you have another TL494 regulated smps circuit...?
one way or another, you are my best bet 🙂
i am pretty sure you can help.
Thanks again.
Regards
I'm no expert. The experts are on the power supply design forum.
Can you tell me precisely what you've done so far and the results?
You've been somewhat vague about what you're using this for. Can you provide more details?
Can you tell me precisely what you've done so far and the results?
You've been somewhat vague about what you're using this for. Can you provide more details?
well...the first thing i did was to reduce the output voltages at U2 to 44 volts - by changing resistance R29/R30 to lower values and increasing ground resistance R31....i was successfull
Then I reduce the voltages at the high-frequency side
by reducing resistance R42 and increasing resistance R39....
i was successfull in that too...and manage to get 44-volts.
but, since i dont need the low frequency stage, i want to get rid of it and get 44-volts output from U1....
I have also tried to totally remove U2 but, that brings the voltages back to 120v at U1 (power stage DC)
also, I have tried to remove R14 at U1 connected to pin 4...(dont know if it was a smart move) but, it did'nt work...
so, here i am... 🙂
Then I reduce the voltages at the high-frequency side
by reducing resistance R42 and increasing resistance R39....
i was successfull in that too...and manage to get 44-volts.
but, since i dont need the low frequency stage, i want to get rid of it and get 44-volts output from U1....
I have also tried to totally remove U2 but, that brings the voltages back to 120v at U1 (power stage DC)
also, I have tried to remove R14 at U1 connected to pin 4...(dont know if it was a smart move) but, it did'nt work...
so, here i am... 🙂
Did you try changing the 152v Zener before you changed the resistor values for the regulation?
Where does VCC connect in the inverter?
Can you post a photo of the insides? If you have a high res photo, email it to me:
babin_perry@yahoo.com
The transformer in this inverter probalby has a winding ratio that's too high to operate efficiently at 44v.
Where does VCC connect in the inverter?
Can you post a photo of the insides? If you have a high res photo, email it to me:
babin_perry@yahoo.com
The transformer in this inverter probalby has a winding ratio that's too high to operate efficiently at 44v.
no...i never tried to change the zener....i did'nt even know that its a 152v zener....i only knew that its a zener...
here is another part of the schematic...
here is another part of the schematic...
Looking at the second part of the schematic, I think it's probably a 15v. It's probably a over-voltage shutdown for the B+ input.
Try this...
Pull U2. Connect pin 14 of U1 to the pad for pin 14 of U2. This will restore Vref that's being lost when U2 is removed. If the voltage drops below ~4.8v, you may have to use a 5v reg to supply the Vref. The output of the 5v reg of the 494 is very limited. The regulation will be controlled by the deadtime pin on U1. Replace R42 with a 120k ohm resistor. This should give you something close to 44v.
Try this...
Pull U2. Connect pin 14 of U1 to the pad for pin 14 of U2. This will restore Vref that's being lost when U2 is removed. If the voltage drops below ~4.8v, you may have to use a 5v reg to supply the Vref. The output of the 5v reg of the 494 is very limited. The regulation will be controlled by the deadtime pin on U1. Replace R42 with a 120k ohm resistor. This should give you something close to 44v.
coooool.....i knew you have a solution...
i will check it and follow as you mentioned and post the results soon !
Thanks again Perry !
i will check it and follow as you mentioned and post the results soon !
Thanks again Perry !
Would either of these toroids be a good candidate for a SMPS core?
Steward 35T1417-10H
OD: 36mm
ID: 23mm
HT: 15mm
Permeability: 5000
Steward 40T1417-10H
OD: 36mm
ID: 23mm
HT: 15mm
Permeability: 10000
Thanks,
David
Steward 35T1417-10H
OD: 36mm
ID: 23mm
HT: 15mm
Permeability: 5000
Steward 40T1417-10H
OD: 36mm
ID: 23mm
HT: 15mm
Permeability: 10000
Thanks,
David
Re: Commentable Thoughts
Bro do you have PCB top and bottom for this smps schematics?
Workhorse said:
Bro do you have PCB top and bottom for this smps schematics?
Hi
Use whatevery you want...SG has push pull outputs, TL don't. You can replace anything with anything, so SG with TL = yes you can
Use whatevery you want...SG has push pull outputs, TL don't. You can replace anything with anything, so SG with TL = yes you can
ah.. i see... then its better to use SG3525 !
I noticed that SG application is simpler as well. Worth the try.. thnx luka
I noticed that SG application is simpler as well. Worth the try.. thnx luka
Hi
For PP I think it is better coz you can drive fets directly, but say in buck converter, TL would be easy to use coz you have E and C of transistor in pins and you can use them however you want, so that good...
But SG really is ic that needs only few components, and you can do a lot with it and has some features like dead time and shutdown which you can use really easy...
I don't know, I like SG better...
For PP I think it is better coz you can drive fets directly, but say in buck converter, TL would be easy to use coz you have E and C of transistor in pins and you can use them however you want, so that good...
But SG really is ic that needs only few components, and you can do a lot with it and has some features like dead time and shutdown which you can use really easy...
I don't know, I like SG better...