Welcome
Username or Email:

Password:


Missing Code




[ ]
[ ]
Online
  • Guests: 51
  • Members: 0
  • Newest Member: omjtest
  • Most ever online: 396
    Guests: 396, Members: 0 on 12 Jan : 12:51
Members Birthdays:
No birthdays today

Next birthdays
05/07 a.gutzeit (64)
05/08 wpk5008 (35)
05/09 Alfons (37)
Contact
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.
Forums
4hv.org :: Forums :: General Science and Electronics
« Previous topic | Next topic »   

linear shunt failure

 1 2 3 4 
Move Thread LAN_403
Steve Conner
Wed Aug 19 2009, 08:53PM
Steve Conner Registered Member #30 Joined: Fri Feb 03 2006, 10:52AM
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 6706
Yes, you're seriously mixed up. Here's the bottom line.

If you're using the MOSFET itself to dissipate the power, on a big heatsink, then this is "linear use", of the sort that the datasheet discourages.

If the MOSFET stays cold and some sort of other load dissipates the power you need rid of, then it's switched mode.
Back to top
IamSmooth
Wed Aug 19 2009, 09:01PM
IamSmooth Registered Member #190 Joined: Fri Feb 17 2006, 12:00AM
Location:
Posts: 1567
Steve,

I plan to have an 18-20 ohm/3000w resistor from the rail to the IGBT or MOSFET. I did not plan to use the IGBT/FET as a pure short on the line.

Is this an acceptable plan?
Back to top
Steve Conner
Thu Aug 20 2009, 10:24AM
Steve Conner Registered Member #30 Joined: Fri Feb 03 2006, 10:52AM
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 6706
Yes, provided that your turbine isn't so powerful that it could overvolt the system even with that resistor connected across it. In which case you need a lower value of resistor.

In the light of what people have discussed, I think I'd do this with a TL494 or whatever. Wire it like the boost converter schematic in the application note, but with the resistor where the inductor would go.

With a large wirewound resistor a clamp diode would be needed across it, analogous to the boost diode in a boost converter. It's just making sure that energy stored in the resistor's stray inductance stays in the resistor and gets dissipated, rather than kicking back and overvolting the MOSFET.

You'd also need to invert the + and - terminals of the error amp, since an increase in voltage should result in more duty cycle, not less.

The TL494 solves the voltage reference problem you mentioned in another thread, since like all SMPS controller chips, it has a built-in reference.
Back to top
IamSmooth
Thu Aug 20 2009, 02:03PM
IamSmooth Registered Member #190 Joined: Fri Feb 17 2006, 12:00AM
Location:
Posts: 1567
This chip certainly makes things easier. I was going to use a 555 and comparator to make a pwm, but now I don't.

I think I will just keep the duty constant near 50% and use it to pulse an IGBT when the turbine voltage gets too high. Is there a RESET pin on the device that disables the output on the chip?
Link2

I thought the output mode control would do it, but it does not look like it.
Back to top
Steve Conner
Thu Aug 20 2009, 02:08PM
Steve Conner Registered Member #30 Joined: Fri Feb 03 2006, 10:52AM
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 6706
No, you're missing the whole point. You need to feed a sample of the DC bus voltage into the TL494's control loop, and it will automatically adjust the switching duty cycle to draw whatever average current is needed to drag the bus voltage down to whatever you set your dial to. It's just like a switched-mode power supply, but backwards: a switched-mode power waster.

Until you can get your head round that concept, I can't really help you any more.
Back to top
IamSmooth
Thu Aug 20 2009, 02:23PM
IamSmooth Registered Member #190 Joined: Fri Feb 17 2006, 12:00AM
Location:
Posts: 1567
I see what you are saying. It start with a 0 duty, leaving the IGBT off. As the voltage increases the duty cycle will increase, turning the IGBT on that percent of the time. If that is correct, I can see it working if the duty ramps up sufficiently.

I still don't see what is wrong with keeping the duty constant and just hitting the IGBT with it when the voltage climbs above the threshold. The IGBT will conduct and rapidly bring the voltage down.

The point of this device is to keep the voltage from exceeding a set point. It does not matter that I keep this voltage constant at this point; I just don't want to exceed it.

Is there anything wrong with this approach compared with the one you suggest?
Back to top
Steve Conner
Thu Aug 20 2009, 02:42PM
Steve Conner Registered Member #30 Joined: Fri Feb 03 2006, 10:52AM
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 6706
Yes, your approach is pretty pointless. A constant duty of 50% is no different to just using twice the resistance and a duty of 100%, ie, wedging the IGBT on. In both cases you need some circuit to limit the maximum rate at which the device can dither on and off, or it'll burn out from switching losses.

The whole point of the switchmode approach is that you can modulate it just as if it was a linear circuit by changing the duty cycle.
Back to top
IamSmooth
Thu Aug 20 2009, 03:01PM
IamSmooth Registered Member #190 Joined: Fri Feb 17 2006, 12:00AM
Location:
Posts: 1567
I didn't realize that it could still burn out even if switched at a frequency of 50khz. If my maximum current and voltage in switch-mode still fall within the SOA can't I run it at 50%? If not, how do I know what duty cycle I can go up to?


I see what you mean about inverting the outputs.
Back to top
Steve Conner
Thu Aug 20 2009, 03:18PM
Steve Conner Registered Member #30 Joined: Fri Feb 03 2006, 10:52AM
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 6706
If it only switched at 50kHz that would be fine. But you also have the "Is voltage greater than setpoint?" signal combined with the 50kHz carrier. There's no reason why that signal shouldn't contain frequencies greater than 50kHz: the comparator you use will amplify any noise on the DC bus. If the IGBT tries to switch at 500kHz instead of 50 as a result of this amplified noise, or if the gate drive circuitry gets overwhelmed by the noise and sticks partly on, the device will burn.

We already covered stuff like this, people referred to it as bang-bang or hysteretic control.
Back to top
IamSmooth
Thu Aug 20 2009, 03:25PM
IamSmooth Registered Member #190 Joined: Fri Feb 17 2006, 12:00AM
Location:
Posts: 1567
Don't think I do not appreciate your time, Steve.

What I was hoping to do was run the IGBT at 30-50khz. I would use the DTC pin on the chip to enable or disable the signal to the gate, depending on the turbine voltage. If it is too high I would hit the gate at 50khz @ 18v; if the voltage drops I would turn the signal off (gnd) to disable the IGBT from conducting.

Back to top
 1 2 3 4 

Moderator(s): Chris Russell, Noelle, Alex, Tesladownunder, Dave Marshall, Dave Billington, Bjørn, Steve Conner, Wolfram, Kizmo, Mads Barnkob

Go to:

Powered by e107 Forum System
 
Legal Information
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.