If you need assistance, please send an email to forum at 4hv dot org. To ensure your email is not marked as spam, please include the phrase "4hv help" in the subject line. You can also find assistance via IRC, at irc.shadowworld.net, room #hvcomm.
Support 4hv.org!
Donate:
4hv.org is hosted on a dedicated server. Unfortunately, this server costs and we rely on the help of site members to keep 4hv.org running. Please consider donating. We will place your name on the thanks list and you'll be helping to keep 4hv.org alive and free for everyone. Members whose names appear in red bold have donated recently. Green bold denotes those who have recently donated to keep the server carbon neutral.
Special Thanks To:
Aaron Holmes
Aaron Wheeler
Adam Horden
Alan Scrimgeour
Andre
Andrew Haynes
Anonymous000
asabase
Austin Weil
barney
Barry
Bert Hickman
Bill Kukowski
Blitzorn
Brandon Paradelas
Bruce Bowling
BubeeMike
Byong Park
Cesiumsponge
Chris F.
Chris Hooper
Corey Worthington
Derek Woodroffe
Dalus
Dan Strother
Daniel Davis
Daniel Uhrenholt
datasheetarchive
Dave Billington
Dave Marshall
David F.
Dennis Rogers
drelectrix
Dr. John Gudenas
Dr. Spark
E.TexasTesla
eastvoltresearch
Eirik Taylor
Erik Dyakov
Erlend^SE
Finn Hammer
Firebug24k
GalliumMan
Gary Peterson
George Slade
GhostNull
Gordon Mcknight
Graham Armitage
Grant
GreySoul
Henry H
IamSmooth
In memory of Leo Powning
Jacob Cash
James Howells
James Pawson
Jeff Greenfield
Jeff Thomas
Jesse Frost
Jim Mitchell
jlr134
Joe Mastroianni
John Forcina
John Oberg
John Willcutt
Jon Newcomb
klugesmith
Leslie Wright
Lutz Hoffman
Mads Barnkob
Martin King
Mats Karlsson
Matt Gibson
Matthew Guidry
mbd
Michael D'Angelo
Mikkel
mileswaldron
mister_rf
Neil Foster
Nick de Smith
Nick Soroka
nicklenorp
Nik
Norman Stanley
Patrick Coleman
Paul Brodie
Paul Jordan
Paul Montgomery
Ped
Peter Krogen
Peter Terren
PhilGood
Richard Feldman
Robert Bush
Royce Bailey
Scott Fusare
Scott Newman
smiffy
Stella
Steven Busic
Steve Conner
Steve Jones
Steve Ward
Sulaiman
Thomas Coyle
Thomas A. Wallace
Thomas W
Timo
Torch
Ulf Jonsson
vasil
Vaxian
vladi mazzilli
wastehl
Weston
William Kim
William N.
William Stehl
Wesley Venis
The aforementioned have contributed financially to the continuing triumph of 4hv.org. They are deserving of my most heartfelt thanks.
Registered Member #89
Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 02:40PM
Location: Zadar, Croatia
Posts: 3145
Sort off. Driver actually uses very little power to drive bipolar transistors just because of large positive feedback from current transformer. If drive was removed in operation halfbridge would continue to work as a blocking oscillator (and probably overvolt and unleash chaos to low voltage components of a supply).
AT supplies also have pullup resistors wich seemingly start the oscillation and power the controller up, as there's no auxiliary supply to do it.
Registered Member #187
Joined: Thu Feb 16 2006, 02:54PM
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 140
There is a version of that floating around here somewhere that I posted a while back, but I modified it to use resistors to place a bias on the transistors to start the oscillation instead of the diac/capacitor startup circuit.
I was very pleased with the results, and it is the circuit that I will be using from now on. If you like I can try to locate the thread, or you can just search all posts for cbfull, it shouldn't take you very long to find. The nice thing about the circuit is that you don't need any extra gate/base transformers, they are intrinsic to the design.
Registered Member #89
Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 02:40PM
Location: Zadar, Croatia
Posts: 3145
Yes, I remember the thread and app note...
The circuit saves on current transformer but still needs feedback windings to be wound, and I actually find external transformer more neat than it. For the rest of the circuit, it seems doesn't seem to have some special advantage over resonant version.
OK.. Can anyone answer; why operating frequency of (blocking) circuit *decreases* with increase of load? IN all occasions I would expect the little transformer to saturate faster under higher current and thus make the frequency increase. It's still boggling me up!
Registered Member #152
Joined: Sun Feb 12 2006, 03:36PM
Location: Czech Rep.
Posts: 3384
Firkragg wrote ...
OK.. Can anyone answer; why operating frequency of (blocking) circuit *decreases* with increase of load? IN all occasions I would expect the little transformer to saturate faster under higher current and thus make the frequency increase. It's still boggling me up!
possibly storage times of driver transistors increase with load?
Registered Member #95
Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 04:57PM
Location: Norway
Posts: 1308
Happy Birthday Firkragg! Did you get that DRSSTC working in time for your birthday?
Back on topic, what frequency does the driver drop to while running a flyback? I'm sure you've thought of it already, but if the the frequency is dropping too low, saturating the flyback, which would overheating the transistors. I'll try making a mosfet based version later this week some time, so I can see for myself whats happening.
Registered Member #89
Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 02:40PM
Location: Zadar, Croatia
Posts: 3145
uzzors wrote ...
Happy Birthday Firkragg! Did you get that DRSSTC working in time for your birthday?
Back on topic, what frequency does the driver drop to while running a flyback? I'm sure you've thought of it already, but if the the frequency is dropping too low, saturating the flyback, which would overheating the transistors. I'll try making a mosfet based version later this week some time, so I can see for myself whats happening.
Thanks..
I ordered some new transistors as well as some ribbon connectors an LM311's for DRSSTC I forgot to buy earlier.
I somehow feel that mosfets will be harder to get working because of their narrow operating region. You may easily overvolt the gates with just slight miscalculation of your current transformer and expected max current. You may need some kind of hard clamping and would probably waste a lot of power there.
Most of new CFL bulbs actually use mosfets in their designs, but I'm not sure how is circuit constructed since it has no current transformer and takes feedback from ballast inductor directly. Ic could be just saturating the whole inductor wich may even not be too big problem since mosfets are very fast, or it may be a resonant circuit ala CFbull's scheme.
Anyway I would much rather use SG3525 and normal GDT since it is way more robust adn mosfets are easy to drive.
Registered Member #89
Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 02:40PM
Location: Zadar, Croatia
Posts: 3145
possibly storage times of driver transistors increase with load?
Apparently, they do; more precisely, storage and fall times increase as transistor goes deeper and deeper in saturation.
Large amount of charge needs more time to get removed from the base and thus switching times adn losses increase. Anyway, I tought that any such effect should still be maybe an order of magnitude weaker than response of the current transformer.
I fiddled around a lot last days, and it seems that I basically misunderstood how the circuit was supposed to operate.
At first I tought that it's just better to drive a transistor deep into saturation and make sure it stays there, basically with as much current I can allow it's base to take.
Such gross overdriving of bases must have caused very long storage and fall times. As load is purely inductivetransistors were switching off at maximum current with very long fall times, suffering massive switching losses and blowing themselves out.
The trick, or better said all the point of current transformers are used for is to always keep the ratio of collector and base current same. (proportional base drive).
That way transistor is always kept at or just over saturation with smallest possible charge storage and fall times and circuit operates at maximum efficiency. From what I know, delays can be minimized as much as a factor of ten.
Current transformer, seemingly, needs to be designed with a turns ratio *just lower* than minimal expected current gain gain of the transistor, in order to keep it just around saturation and in sweet spot of operation.
BUT11A's are relatively small, high gain transistors (Hfe 10..20 or so) and would now seem to be best with bigger ratio transformer, 1:8:8 from pc power supply or even bigger looked just fine.
Large transistors like MJE13009 have much lower gain, for this example it wanders from 4..8! This explains why these work well just with 1:3:3 or similar CT.
Current gain varies with load put on transistor, but at low powers higher gain and little bigger switching loss just isn't important. So, transformer is designed around lowest expected Hfe.
****
Just this evening (night) I lashed up a new design using ATX supply BDT (1:8:8??). I also ditched the diac startup circuit and switched to DC block cap + diode with pullup resistor, exactly the circuit as in AT power supply.
I was a bit confused with orientation of the transformer, and after I got it to oscillate the power transformer was giving off terrible sound, looking like it's saturating and transistors were getting hot quickly.
PS. as a sort of update; my frustration continues.
Two times I tried the reconfigured circuit, the transistors failed immediately with their bases shorted out. Even after I completely copied the supposedly working circuit from old AT supply, with same components, I again blew the transistor without having any clue what was going on.
So I'm back on the beggining with a pile of 4 dead BUT's. It's hard to believe that such a small and simple-looking oscillator can be so complex and frustrating to actually get running.
Registered Member #95
Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 04:57PM
Location: Norway
Posts: 1308
This is proving to be quite the mystery. I haven't gotten to try anything myself yet as my SGTC is keeping me busy. (Not that I could with contribute much, lol.) Aren't there any engineers here? I saw this a few days ago, a lot of talking in circles but it may help.
Registered Member #89
Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 02:40PM
Location: Zadar, Croatia
Posts: 3145
I don't know what was with those PC-power supply BDT's, as I can't see neither number of turns nor orientation, and even while following the original PCB and schematic I could have done something wrong.
I switched back to my little toroid transformer and diac circuit, and it works all fine now up to 30W or so with ATX transformer.
Since I now got and idea how to design a proper proportional-drive transformer, I started increasing secondary turns from 3 to up. At over 6, the transformer started throttling. 5 turns seemed to be a sweet spot for operation, and switching times indeed got much shorter!
I measured both rise and fall times to be closely 400ns compared to some 1,5..2us as of before, when I used something like 2:3:3 transformer.. what was I doing!
Maybe it could go even faster with a bit of twiddling on a base circuit, but I just didn't want to touch anything.
Here are some better pics so you guys can finally see what's all about now. I used a filter cap so I could actually scope something clearly.
This is primary voltage, at some 40kHz with some 20W load. Frequency tends to drop pretty much with load. I guess I could get no more than 50W this way without saturation... I use bigger ferrite for CT, as this one is really tiny one from CFL lamp.
The PC power supply CT's from those 200W supplies are often about 1:8:8 or so.. they may have just been too big!
This is closeup on a falling and rise edge, 2us div:
This site is powered by e107, which is released under the GNU GPL License. All work on this site, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 License. By submitting any information to this site, you agree that anything submitted will be so licensed. Please read our Disclaimer and Policies page for information on your rights and responsibilities regarding this site.