• WARNING: Tube/Valve amplifiers use potentially LETHAL HIGH VOLTAGES.
    Building, troubleshooting and testing of these amplifiers should only be
    performed by someone who is thoroughly familiar with
    the safety precautions around high voltages.

Measuring Output Impedance of Power Supply

The method described in the article is good. An alternative would be to use a current output oscillator or just a large resistor in series (decoupled from the power supply through a capacitor). A constant current through the internal impedance of the PSU would give directly measurable voltage that is proportional to the impedance. This method could be applied in-circuit, that is with the amplifier stages in place. The oscillator could be replaced with a noise generator and the DVM with a FFT analyzer...
 
oshifis said:
The method described in the article is good. An alternative would be to use a current output oscillator or just a large resistor in series (decoupled from the power supply through a capacitor). A constant current through the internal impedance of the PSU would give directly measurable voltage that is proportional to the impedance. This method could be applied in-circuit, that is with the amplifier stages in place. The oscillator could be replaced with a noise generator and the DVM with a FFT analyzer...


That's what I have used also very often. For instance, if you insert a 1A current into the supply output, the measured signal at that output is directly the Zout in ohms. Insert 1A, and if you measure say 53 mV, the Zout = 53mOhms. You can do that at several frequencies if you don't have a signal sweeper/analyzer. Record the Zout at each freq, put it into a table in Exel and presto, you have a nice graph of Zout vs. frequency....

Jan Didden
 
A decent dynamic supply impedance monitor could be made pretty simply. Attached is schematic. Monitor supply with scope to see how much it dips under transients created by signal generator.
 

Attachments

  • supply_impedance.jpg
    supply_impedance.jpg
    24.2 KB · Views: 1,059
When I worked in a calibration lab we had an adjustable constant current active load which was set initially to fully on (Static Load) and adjusted for a particular current drain e.g. 1 Amp. We then switched the load on and off (Active Load) with a square wave signal and monitored the amount of ripple produced by the square wave. The higher the supply impedance then the larger the ripple produced. By knowing the static current first applied it is easy to calculate the supply impedance by measuring the square wave amplitude. In our example, a 150mV ripple would indicate an output impedance of 0.15 Ohms. The square wave can be set to any particular frequency of interest but in our particular application it was usually set to either 400 Hz or 1kHz.
 
Hi-Q said:
When I worked in a calibration lab we had an adjustable constant current active load which was set initially to fully on (Static Load) and adjusted for a particular current drain e.g. 1 Amp. We then switched the load on and off (Active Load) with a square wave signal and monitored the amount of ripple produced by the square wave. The higher the supply impedance then the larger the ripple produced. By knowing the static current first applied it is easy to calculate the supply impedance by measuring the square wave amplitude. In our example, a 150mV ripple would indicate an output impedance of 0.15 Ohms. The square wave can be set to any particular frequency of interest but in our particular application it was usually set to either 400 Hz or 1kHz.

That method gives you a feeling for the ringing and stability of the supply, but it doesn't give you a quantitative result against frequency. If you do it with a sine wave, at several frequencies, and graph it (or let Exel graph it), you have something that can be very accurately compared to other supplies or to changes you make. You also see clearly where it rises with frequency so you can concentrate on that issue if you wish.

There are many valid methods; often the crux is to find the method that helps you to design/improve it most effectively.

Jan Didden
 
oshifis said:
It gives the plot of dynamic output impedance vs. frequency of the PSU. At least it indicates if it is flat in the audio band.


Well, with noise as the test signal it doesn't tell you what the actual test signal in amplifude vs frequency is, so how can you interprete the fft? Am I missing something?

Jan Didden
 

SY

diyAudio Moderator Emeritus
2002-10-24 10:19 pm
Chicagoland
www.SYclotron.com
Maybe I am. With white noise, you know the spectrum (flat). If you feed it to the output of the PS through a known impedance, then measure the spectrum of the supply (normalizing out the supply noise), you should get the impedance versus frequency because of the voltage divider formed by the source impedance of the test signal and the output impedance of the power supply.

So, what am I missing?
 
SY said:
Maybe I am. With white noise, you know the spectrum (flat). If you feed it to the output of the PS through a known impedance, then measure the spectrum of the supply (normalizing out the supply noise), you should get the impedance versus frequency because of the voltage divider formed by the source impedance of the test signal and the output impedance of the power supply.

So, what am I missing?


Yes SY, I understand the method. But the noise sprectrum is only flat when integrated over time. So, for it to work, you would need to do a spectrum plot integrated over time. Would just averaging many periods be enough? How difficult is it to measure the RMS value (or average maybe) of the noise signal (because that would be your reference)? How does that relate to the amplitude you see in the spectrum plot?

Jan Didden
 

SY

diyAudio Moderator Emeritus
2002-10-24 10:19 pm
Chicagoland
www.SYclotron.com
In a sense, a finite length measurement IS an integration over time (think of an RTA). Now, that falls apart for frequencies below 1/t (with t being the sampling time, i.e. 1/sample rate times number of samples per measurement), but that's a matter of appropriate choice of sampling time and sampling rate.

It also appears to me that you could use an MLS or impulse to do the same thing.
 
Refreshing this -- there's a company in Pennsylvania which makes measurement apparatus for batteries and fuel cells -- some good information their website (such as use of twisted pair instead of coax, use of Faraday shield, etc.) -- New Page 1 -- Gamry has some nice charts with measurements into the microhms from DC to a MHz.

I've found that milliOhms, hundreds of uOhms aren't too difficult but require care. 10's of uOhms aren't that easy. My hat is constantly off to Janneman and WJ who seem to have gotten this nailed down (impedance measuremetn probably accounts for my tonsure looking like that of a Franciscan monk) -- WJ to one uOhm:

[IMGDEAD]http://www.tech-diy.com/RegPowerSupplies/DIY_JungSuperReg/Impedance_Graph.gif[/IMGDEAD]