cnx said:
Yes, please!
cnx said:
I do not see a problem with increasing the board size.
If I were to implement all that using discrete components, the board would be gigantic. 😀
Looking forward to your development.
look at this thread: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=134747&perpage=50&pagenumber=3
post #128, #129, #130 is not just theory. and btw, show me one board made by YOU, and give me the oportunity to learn from there, if you are so good.
and read the datasheet of the bridge to see the peak current supported. you will be astonished.
"it is a good idea to use a BIG bolt down 35A type rectifier on each rail to ensure minimal losses "
using 2 bridges will only increase losses as the current have to pass thru 2 times more diodes. did you know that ? i bet you don't
post #128, #129, #130 is not just theory. and btw, show me one board made by YOU, and give me the oportunity to learn from there, if you are so good.
and read the datasheet of the bridge to see the peak current supported. you will be astonished.
"it is a good idea to use a BIG bolt down 35A type rectifier on each rail to ensure minimal losses "
using 2 bridges will only increase losses as the current have to pass thru 2 times more diodes. did you know that ? i bet you don't
cnx said:
Paralleled diodes decrease losses, I thought you'd know that...
I WILL do some more reading in the other places you mentioned later, I'm really curious.
By the way, I don't design amplifier boards. I can show you a 2,4Ghz audio/video receiver-transmitter board I designed next week...
Happy easter weekend to everyone!
dudaindc said:
Yes, please!
I do not see a problem with increasing the board size.
If I were to implement all that using discrete components, the board would be gigantic. 😀
Looking forward to your development.
please let me know which of the add-ons you mention, the relay, diferential input or filters.
V-Bro, you have a lot of energy since you still want to continue.
"rectifier on each rail" means connect in series not paralel. but obviously you either fogot or you don't make the difference between series/paralel. check your own post where you write this.
to help you to understand i will attach one schematic. the left side is what you said , the right side is what i did.
sounds interesting 2.4GHz. maybe you can "teach me" about something.
i didn't designed anything yet next week, but i'm sure i will.
Attachments
A closer look at the datasheet of the rectifier you used teaches me (from the graph temp/current) it can handle just 5A continuous current when used without heatsink!
That's crazy underrated!
The peak current also doesn't hold up without heatsinking....
It REALLY TOO SMALL!
How did you solve this? NTC's in series?
I guessed not...
That's crazy underrated!
The peak current also doesn't hold up without heatsinking....
It REALLY TOO SMALL!
How did you solve this? NTC's in series?
I guessed not...
v-bro said:
and how much does hold when is used with heatsink. imagine that the bridge is fitted onto heatsink. and also imagine that if a bridge is not fitted to a heatsink it will hold the peak currents if they are short pulses with long period but not hold constant medium-high current. read some books where they explain this and maybe you will understand why.
where from u got the ideea to use an NTC ???? did you ever saw this in an amplifier, in the secondaries ?
do you have ideea what is an NTC at least ?
you still didn't solve the mistery from the previous post, where the bridges are connected in series or parallel.
dudaindc said:
i'll try to implement them all, but not only. for the filter, of course will be one choice low, band or hi pass.
cnx said:
Thanks CNX!
My particular application requires a low pass filter, but that may be different for others.
I will write you offline to discuss and ask for advice.
Cheers!
I'm sorry to keep bugging here, but I thought this was the place for doing just that 🙂 I know I'm still in the learning phase, but I would appreciate you'd stop treating me like a child. I can't stop thinking your commercial involvement biases you to react like that.
The reason why I stick to it is that I find it an interesting discussion and I'm learning here. Thanks for holding on.
NTC? Negative Temperature Coefficient. A resistor that drops in value when heated up... I knew that...
The solving the mystery is in the idea I had that there will be always two diodes conducting with a dual rectifier and with a single rectifier there will be one, I only overlooked that there is also a wire conducting there
This would perhaps introduce some more ripple (?), but providing you use enough capacitance this will be filtered away just fine. Then still two rectifiers will have better dissipation. Still all benefits and down sides here will probably be negligible.
I didn't see the rectifier is mounted on the heatsink on any of the pictures.
I would never use an NTC in the secondaries myself, but I know it is done by others...
I would still not have your "old" design as my first choice. Even though it probably all works fine I'd like to see some parts more beefed up. Your approach is a bit like saying a Fiat Panda will bring you everywhere you like, and you're right... I'd rather like to drive a BMW.....
Maybe my wish would be a luxury version TA3020 implementation. I would certainly buy one and this chip is worth it....
The reason why I stick to it is that I find it an interesting discussion and I'm learning here. Thanks for holding on.
NTC? Negative Temperature Coefficient. A resistor that drops in value when heated up... I knew that...
The solving the mystery is in the idea I had that there will be always two diodes conducting with a dual rectifier and with a single rectifier there will be one, I only overlooked that there is also a wire conducting there
This would perhaps introduce some more ripple (?), but providing you use enough capacitance this will be filtered away just fine. Then still two rectifiers will have better dissipation. Still all benefits and down sides here will probably be negligible.I didn't see the rectifier is mounted on the heatsink on any of the pictures.
I would never use an NTC in the secondaries myself, but I know it is done by others...
I would still not have your "old" design as my first choice. Even though it probably all works fine I'd like to see some parts more beefed up. Your approach is a bit like saying a Fiat Panda will bring you everywhere you like, and you're right... I'd rather like to drive a BMW.....
Maybe my wish would be a luxury version TA3020 implementation. I would certainly buy one and this chip is worth it....
spare-me with your sorries. how many times you said sorry but u just keep digging. i won't treat you as a child when you will not treat me as an idiot. i also cannot stop thinking that your commercial involvment push you to do this, before you said that you have nothing to do with those amps, in some other posts you said that you design them, or you work at the design of. maybe eventually you will start telling the truth.
try to do this with others, and see the reactions. aaaa, some others which you atack before may be just resellers and they didn't reply, as they can't hold-it.
in one hour you had plenty time to goole-it after NTC and PTC.
and surprise: even in a single rectifier connected as in the schematic which i post before, there are always 2 diodes which are conducting only when the V AC is > V DC+diode drop voltage (did you know that??) not always like you stated.
if the diodes will conduct always, i don;t think will have any DC voltage on the rails.
" This would perhaps introduce some more ripple (?) " - this is another assumption which will lead to some other conclusions....
do you want me to uderline every mistake and every perl u said untill now in this thread ? or maybe i should collect from other threads also ? there where you ask simple, basic questions, and now you criticize me.
i mentioned already that the photo is without the heatsink. here i made the biggest mistake. i removed the heatsink to allow your imagination to run free.
how do you define "luxury" version ? with gold cacastratos capacitors ? which are worst than simple propylene ones ? or with magical copper on a secret material pcb ? just another snake oil used by so many others to sell something.
try to do this with others, and see the reactions. aaaa, some others which you atack before may be just resellers and they didn't reply, as they can't hold-it.
in one hour you had plenty time to goole-it after NTC and PTC.
and surprise: even in a single rectifier connected as in the schematic which i post before, there are always 2 diodes which are conducting only when the V AC is > V DC+diode drop voltage (did you know that??) not always like you stated.
if the diodes will conduct always, i don;t think will have any DC voltage on the rails.
" This would perhaps introduce some more ripple (?) " - this is another assumption which will lead to some other conclusions....
do you want me to uderline every mistake and every perl u said untill now in this thread ? or maybe i should collect from other threads also ? there where you ask simple, basic questions, and now you criticize me.
i mentioned already that the photo is without the heatsink. here i made the biggest mistake. i removed the heatsink to allow your imagination to run free.
how do you define "luxury" version ? with gold cacastratos capacitors ? which are worst than simple propylene ones ? or with magical copper on a secret material pcb ? just another snake oil used by so many others to sell something.
This isn't worth putting any more energy in indeed.
With you it indeed doesn't lead to anything constructive and I'm getting tired of your claims and suspicions to my my intentions.
I mainly do test builds for several commercial designers and do it for fun, that's it. I don't get a penny for it other than hardware as I've said a few times now. If you have a hard time believing that I'm afraid it tells more about your intentions.
With you it indeed doesn't lead to anything constructive and I'm getting tired of your claims and suspicions to my my intentions.
I mainly do test builds for several commercial designers and do it for fun, that's it. I don't get a penny for it other than hardware as I've said a few times now. If you have a hard time believing that I'm afraid it tells more about your intentions.
Please can a mod clear this thread up? I don't see any constructive comment in the last 2 pages. It seems to have become a fight between v-bro and cnx (And as far as I'm aware, v-bro started it!)
Enless discussions
Dear Fellow DIYers.
I think that when we are commenting on eachoters design or work, it would be very very helpfull if we can show measurements to eachother, THD measurements, or under rated components or so anything that can be proofed instead of talking about opinions that have little or nothing to do with measurable reality.
V-bro, if you want to comment on others work, no problem at all, but i strongly suggest you use your tools and hook up a board and show us your measurements.
at this moment your just kicking the can and its not constructive nor usefull.
it seems this thread is infected with something...... i dont know what it is.
Greetings everyone.
Arjen.
u
Dear Fellow DIYers.
I think that when we are commenting on eachoters design or work, it would be very very helpfull if we can show measurements to eachother, THD measurements, or under rated components or so anything that can be proofed instead of talking about opinions that have little or nothing to do with measurable reality.
V-bro, if you want to comment on others work, no problem at all, but i strongly suggest you use your tools and hook up a board and show us your measurements.
at this moment your just kicking the can and its not constructive nor usefull.
it seems this thread is infected with something...... i dont know what it is.
Greetings everyone.
Arjen.
u
data_lore said:
That's not how I read it.
In post 123,
cnx said:
... then in post 125
What I read is that cnx asked for suggestions and v-bro provided his insights. The only fight going on was how cnx responded. v-bro seems to be tolerant and persistent while cnx seems to be misreading the situation and is taking it personal.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.