>>>>>>I have a version I personally liked better that used a cheapy TRIAC
>>>>>>under DDROP3, but I could not find a way to get some "free" power for
>>>>>>the gate... needed while pumping, goes away when overcome by the
>>>>>>switcher coming on line.
>>>>>>(This is a wild high PFC, high efficiency dude, where the customer is
>>>>>>squeezing me for milliwatts :-)
>>>>>> ...Jim Thompson
>>>>>That's crazy. Not only is it expensive, once the 24 volt supply kicks
>>>>>in, it dissipates most of a watt, doing nothing.
>>>>>Boy, did I just save you some embarassment.
>>>>You're so ignorant you don't know how it works. Thanks for the
>>>>exhibition!
>>>> ...Jim Thompson
>>>Well, how much power do R1, R2, the TL431, and ROFF dissipate once the
>>>main supply is up?
>>It was "my bad" to have emulated the main supply with a pulse
>>source... doesn't work that way at all, but I can't show the
>>customer's circuitry.
>I was thinking about that, specifically where that idealized 300
>volt-peak full-wave-rectified waveform came from. If it is through
>diodes, there's no pull-down to pump the series RC thing; if it also
>drives a 24-volt non-PFC switcher front-end, you won't get that
>waveform. If the startup circuit has to be working before a main PFC
>switcher starts up, there are all sorts of interesting tangles. If the
>switcher starts up on its own, what's this circuit for? Standby power
>for some controls? It would still have to work when the PFC was down.
>>In actual practice a PFC/PWM chip comes alive and the switcher starts.
>>But that "20V" sags since the charge pump can only support ~24mA.
>>The switcher takes over at 14.5V (about 250ms into the action), the
>>FET gate is pulled low to shut off the wasted power. The gate
>>resistor is actually 220K, but the demo TL431 won't work (because of
>>Iq) to show how "regulation" might be accomplished.
>Right. ROFF is obviously over-constrained, hence my question about
>power consumption, which you elected to not answer. There's no ROFF
>value that works sensibly. A much simpler circuit would work.
>Does this rig have to work from 90 to 264 volts AC? That, and the Idss
>spread, gets interesting.
>>>Harder question: what's the worst-case dissipation of the fet if the
>>>main supply doesn't come up, like if the load is shorted or something?
>>You are trying to amuse yourself by throwing sand in the air. But you
>>don't understand how it works. Will some first year EE student
>>explain it on Larkin ?:-)
>I understand how it doesn't work. And so far, it doesn't.
>You've made a pretty quick transition from "I ended up with this..."
>to "my bad." But you're not done yet.
>ps - the answer is just about 1 watt lost, with your values of R1, R2,
>the TL431, and ROFF. That is, for the record, about 1000 of your
>customer's milliwatts.
>Keep trying.
My fault for trying to demo without telling ;-)
There's roughly 400mW consumed while bringing up the switcher. Drops
to ~1mW when turned off.
If the load is shorted ?:-) 212mW in RDROP, 31.9mW in the FET. See,
you clearly don't understand how these things work :-)
...Jim Thompson
-- | James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
>>>>>>>I have a version I personally liked better that used a cheapy TRIAC
>>>>>>>under DDROP3, but I could not find a way to get some "free" power for
>>>>>>>the gate... needed while pumping, goes away when overcome by the
>>>>>>>switcher coming on line.
>>>>>>>(This is a wild high PFC, high efficiency dude, where the customer is
>>>>>>>squeezing me for milliwatts :-)
>>>>>>> ...Jim Thompson
>>>>>>That's crazy. Not only is it expensive, once the 24 volt supply kicks
>>>>>>in, it dissipates most of a watt, doing nothing.
>>>>>>Boy, did I just save you some embarassment.
>>>>>You're so ignorant you don't know how it works. Thanks for the
>>>>>exhibition!
>>>>> ...Jim Thompson
>>>>Well, how much power do R1, R2, the TL431, and ROFF dissipate once the
>>>>main supply is up?
>>>It was "my bad" to have emulated the main supply with a pulse
>>>source... doesn't work that way at all, but I can't show the
>>>customer's circuitry.
>>I was thinking about that, specifically where that idealized 300
>>volt-peak full-wave-rectified waveform came from. If it is through
>>diodes, there's no pull-down to pump the series RC thing; if it also
>>drives a 24-volt non-PFC switcher front-end, you won't get that
>>waveform. If the startup circuit has to be working before a main PFC
>>switcher starts up, there are all sorts of interesting tangles. If the
>>switcher starts up on its own, what's this circuit for? Standby power
>>for some controls? It would still have to work when the PFC was down.
>>>In actual practice a PFC/PWM chip comes alive and the switcher starts.
>>>But that "20V" sags since the charge pump can only support ~24mA.
>>>The switcher takes over at 14.5V (about 250ms into the action), the
>>>FET gate is pulled low to shut off the wasted power. The gate
>>>resistor is actually 220K, but the demo TL431 won't work (because of
>>>Iq) to show how "regulation" might be accomplished.
>>Right. ROFF is obviously over-constrained, hence my question about
>>power consumption, which you elected to not answer. There's no ROFF
>>value that works sensibly. A much simpler circuit would work.
>>Does this rig have to work from 90 to 264 volts AC? That, and the Idss
>>spread, gets interesting.
>>>>Harder question: what's the worst-case dissipation of the fet if the
>>>>main supply doesn't come up, like if the load is shorted or something?
>>>You are trying to amuse yourself by throwing sand in the air. But you
>>>don't understand how it works. Will some first year EE student
>>>explain it on Larkin ?:-)
>>I understand how it doesn't work. And so far, it doesn't.
>>You've made a pretty quick transition from "I ended up with this..."
>>to "my bad." But you're not done yet.
>>ps - the answer is just about 1 watt lost, with your values of R1, R2,
>>the TL431, and ROFF. That is, for the record, about 1000 of your
>>customer's milliwatts.
>>Keep trying.
>My fault for trying to demo without telling ;-)
You always brag about designing great circuits without "telling." You
troll for ideas, then hide behind "proprietary" when you do settle on
something... even if you got the ideas here.
>There's roughly 400mW consumed while bringing up the switcher. Drops
>to ~1mW when turned off.
Then you have some other circuitry that specifically turns off the
startup supply, that is not shown in the circuit that you posted here.
What is it?
Your circuit is complex. Something much simpler would work, and would
go to very low power all by itself once the main switcher comes up.
>If the load is shorted ?:-) 212mW in RDROP, 31.9mW in the FET. See,
>you clearly don't understand how these things work :-)
Is that worst-case? The fet Idss is min 20 mA, typ 80, no specified
max. There is some value of Idss that results in the maximum power
dissipation. What is that value, and what is the dissipation? You
should be able to tease Idss to dump around a watt in the fet, which
is fine if you heat sink it.
<jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:49:45 -0700, Jim Thompson
><To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:29:37 -0700, John Larkin
>><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
[snip]
>>>Keep trying.
>>My fault for trying to demo without telling ;-)
>You always brag about designing great circuits without "telling." You
>troll for ideas, then hide behind "proprietary" when you do settle on
>something... even if you got the ideas here.
>>There's roughly 400mW consumed while bringing up the switcher. Drops
>>to ~1mW when turned off.
>Then you have some other circuitry that specifically turns off the
>startup supply, that is not shown in the circuit that you posted here.
>What is it?
>Your circuit is complex. Something much simpler would work, and would
>go to very low power all by itself once the main switcher comes up.
What's "complex" about it? I need to support 20V at 15mA-20mA for
250ms.
>>If the load is shorted ?:-) 212mW in RDROP, 31.9mW in the FET. See,
>>you clearly don't understand how these things work :-)
>Is that worst-case? The fet Idss is min 20 mA, typ 80, no specified
>max. There is some value of Idss that results in the maximum power
>dissipation. What is that value, and what is the dissipation? You
>should be able to tease Idss to dump around a watt in the fet, which
>is fine if you heat sink it.
"should be" is not an engineering term. My wife uses that term
"should be" a lot while referring to the present administration.
Annoys the hell out of me. We "should be" a Representative Republic,
but we're a dictatorship, the other branches of government are sitting
on their hands and letting Obama do everything by executive order :-(
...Jim Thompson
-- | James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 09:29:47 -0700, John Larkin
><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:49:45 -0700, Jim Thompson
>><To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:29:37 -0700, John Larkin
>>><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>[snip]
>>>>Keep trying.
>>>My fault for trying to demo without telling ;-)
>>You always brag about designing great circuits without "telling." You
>>troll for ideas, then hide behind "proprietary" when you do settle on
>>something... even if you got the ideas here.
>>>There's roughly 400mW consumed while bringing up the switcher. Drops
>>>to ~1mW when turned off.
>>Then you have some other circuitry that specifically turns off the
>>startup supply, that is not shown in the circuit that you posted here.
>>What is it?
>>Your circuit is complex. Something much simpler would work, and would
>>go to very low power all by itself once the main switcher comes up.
>What's "complex" about it? I need to support 20V at 15mA-20mA for
>250ms.
It has a lot of parts. And you won't address the 1-watt dissipation
issue.
>>>If the load is shorted ?:-) 212mW in RDROP, 31.9mW in the FET. See,
>>>you clearly don't understand how these things work :-)
>>Is that worst-case? The fet Idss is min 20 mA, typ 80, no specified
>>max. There is some value of Idss that results in the maximum power
>>dissipation. What is that value, and what is the dissipation? You
>>should be able to tease Idss to dump around a watt in the fet, which
>>is fine if you heat sink it.
>"should be" is not an engineering term. My wife uses that term
>"should be" a lot while referring to the present administration.
>Annoys the hell out of me. We "should be" a Representative Republic,
>but we're a dictatorship, the other branches of government are sitting
>on their hands and letting Obama do everything by executive order :-(
> ...Jim Thompson
You are obligated to find the maximum power dissipation point as a
function of possible Idss values, and to heatsink such that nothing
catches fire.
If the design is for universal, CE-tested use, AC line voltage can go
to 264 RMS. That's 373 peak. In that case, the maximum fet dissipation
can be teased well over 1 watt; try it. That fet is rated 1.8 watts
max. If you sim one case, with nominal line voltage and typical Idss,
you are taking risks. Test lab time is expensive; product recalls and
fires are more expensive.
Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom laser drivers and controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME thermocouple, LVDT, synchro acquisition and simulation
<jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 10:08:16 -0700, Jim Thompson
><To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 09:29:47 -0700, John Larkin
>><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:49:45 -0700, Jim Thompson
>>><To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>>>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:29:37 -0700, John Larkin
>>>><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>[snip]
>>>>>Keep trying.
>>>>My fault for trying to demo without telling ;-)
>>>You always brag about designing great circuits without "telling." You
>>>troll for ideas, then hide behind "proprietary" when you do settle on
>>>something... even if you got the ideas here.
>>>>There's roughly 400mW consumed while bringing up the switcher. Drops
>>>>to ~1mW when turned off.
>>>Then you have some other circuitry that specifically turns off the
>>>startup supply, that is not shown in the circuit that you posted here.
>>>What is it?
>>>Your circuit is complex. Something much simpler would work, and would
>>>go to very low power all by itself once the main switcher comes up.
>>What's "complex" about it? I need to support 20V at 15mA-20mA for
>>250ms.
>It has a lot of parts. And you won't address the 1-watt dissipation
>issue.
What 1-Watt dissipation issue? Just because you made up some
bull-shit issue doesn't make it real.
>>>>If the load is shorted ?:-) 212mW in RDROP, 31.9mW in the FET. See,
>>>>you clearly don't understand how these things work :-)
>>>Is that worst-case? The fet Idss is min 20 mA, typ 80, no specified
>>>max. There is some value of Idss that results in the maximum power
>>>dissipation. What is that value, and what is the dissipation? You
>>>should be able to tease Idss to dump around a watt in the fet, which
>>>is fine if you heat sink it.
>>"should be" is not an engineering term. My wife uses that term
>>"should be" a lot while referring to the present administration.
>>Annoys the hell out of me. We "should be" a Representative Republic,
>>but we're a dictatorship, the other branches of government are sitting
>>on their hands and letting Obama do everything by executive order :-(
>> ...Jim Thompson
>You are obligated to find the maximum power dissipation point as a
>function of possible Idss values, and to heatsink such that nothing
>catches fire.
>If the design is for universal, CE-tested use, AC line voltage can go
>to 264 RMS. That's 373 peak. In that case, the maximum fet dissipation
>can be teased well over 1 watt; try it. That fet is rated 1.8 watts
>max. If you sim one case, with nominal line voltage and typical Idss,
>you are taking risks. Test lab time is expensive; product recalls and
>fires are more expensive.
>Your sim seems to assume 240 line voltage.
Poor baby! Go sit in the corner and suck your thumb.
...Jim Thompson
-- | James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
>If the design is for universal, CE-tested use, AC line voltage can go
>to 264 RMS. That's 373 peak. In that case, the maximum fet dissipation
>can be teased well over 1 watt; try it. That fet is rated 1.8 watts
>max. If you sim one case, with nominal line voltage and typical Idss,
>you are taking risks. Test lab time is expensive; product recalls and
>fires are more expensive.
>Your sim seems to assume 240 line voltage.
It's down-right amusing, YOU lecturing me on rigorous simulation. I
often do 45 PVT corners.
YOU, You post nothing but vague crap.
Once I decide on a configuration I'll beat the crap out of it to make
sure it's a valid design.
Go sit in the corner and suck your thumb and contemplate how many
other ways you can think of to pimp yourself >:-)
...Jim Thompson
-- | James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 10:42:54 -0700, John Larkin
><jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 10:08:16 -0700, Jim Thompson
>><To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 09:29:47 -0700, John Larkin
>>><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:49:45 -0700, Jim Thompson
>>>><To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>>>>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:29:37 -0700, John Larkin
>>>>><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>[snip]
>>>>>>Keep trying.
>>>>>My fault for trying to demo without telling ;-)
>>>>You always brag about designing great circuits without "telling." You
>>>>troll for ideas, then hide behind "proprietary" when you do settle on
>>>>something... even if you got the ideas here.
>>>>>There's roughly 400mW consumed while bringing up the switcher. Drops
>>>>>to ~1mW when turned off.
>>>>Then you have some other circuitry that specifically turns off the
>>>>startup supply, that is not shown in the circuit that you posted here.
>>>>What is it?
>>>>Your circuit is complex. Something much simpler would work, and would
>>>>go to very low power all by itself once the main switcher comes up.
>>>What's "complex" about it? I need to support 20V at 15mA-20mA for
>>>250ms.
>>It has a lot of parts. And you won't address the 1-watt dissipation
>>issue.
>What 1-Watt dissipation issue? Just because you made up some
>bull-shit issue doesn't make it real.
In the PDF that you posted, when the startup circuit is back-fed to 23
volts or so by the main switcher, the parts that I've named dissipate
about one watt. ROFF alone burns over 800 mW. If you have a workaround
for that, show it.
>>>>>If the load is shorted ?:-) 212mW in RDROP, 31.9mW in the FET. See,
>>>>>you clearly don't understand how these things work :-)
>>>>Is that worst-case? The fet Idss is min 20 mA, typ 80, no specified
>>>>max. There is some value of Idss that results in the maximum power
>>>>dissipation. What is that value, and what is the dissipation? You
>>>>should be able to tease Idss to dump around a watt in the fet, which
>>>>is fine if you heat sink it.
>>>"should be" is not an engineering term. My wife uses that term
>>>"should be" a lot while referring to the present administration.
>>>Annoys the hell out of me. We "should be" a Representative Republic,
>>>but we're a dictatorship, the other branches of government are sitting
>>>on their hands and letting Obama do everything by executive order :-(
>>> ...Jim Thompson
>>You are obligated to find the maximum power dissipation point as a
>>function of possible Idss values, and to heatsink such that nothing
>>catches fire.
>>If the design is for universal, CE-tested use, AC line voltage can go
>>to 264 RMS. That's 373 peak. In that case, the maximum fet dissipation
>>can be teased well over 1 watt; try it. That fet is rated 1.8 watts
>>max. If you sim one case, with nominal line voltage and typical Idss,
>>you are taking risks. Test lab time is expensive; product recalls and
>>fires are more expensive.
>>Your sim seems to assume 240 line voltage.
>Poor baby! Go sit in the corner and suck your thumb.
OK, you can't calculate the worst-case fet dissipation.
> ...Jim Thompson
Hey, spin the design as many times as your customer can stand. And
have lots of liability insurance, 'cause you're going to be on the
painful end of the expert-witness game. And you're being this sloppy,
in public, archived forever.
Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom laser drivers and controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME thermocouple, LVDT, synchro acquisition and simulation
<jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 18:03:56 -0500, John Fields
><jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 08:34:46 -0700, John Larkin
>><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>On 1 Oct 2012 06:00:24 GMT, Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
>>>>On 2012-09-30, John Larkin <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>> The series current-limiting cap dissipates no power,
>>---
>>Not quite true, since no dielectric is lossless.
>>---
>>>>>so it can be shorted by a low voltage switch.
>>---
>>It can be but, depending on when in the cycle the switch turns on,
>>things might get grim.
>>---
>>>>>If it drives, say, the input of a
>>>>> bridge rectifier or a 2-diode restore thing, short the input of that.
>>---
>>Still, depending on when in the cycle the switch turns on, things
>>might get grim.
>Bad engineering can create grim outcomes. Better to not do that.
>>---
>>>>> It becomes a bang-bang regulator. If the controller is to be a custom
>>>>> IC, a modest amount of complexity is free, so some intelligent
>>>>> zero-crossing thing would be appropriate. But just dumb bang-bang
>>>>> ought to work.
>>---
>>From the ridiculous to the sublime to the ridiculous!
>>---
>>>As I mentioned, and you snipped, people often include a series
>>>resistor to limit transient currents.
>>---
>>And yet your circuit shows that some people - who should know better -
>>don't.
>Idiot whining again. That's pretty much your skill set.
---
I'm the idiot???
You claim that people often include a series resistor to limit
transient currents and yet, the circuit you show - which seems to be
susceptible to damage from transients - doesn't include the resistor
you claim should be there.
---
>>>C-limited supplies are commonly used for things like LED night-lights.
>>---
>>C = current?
>Idiot whining again.
---
Then what does C-limited mean?
Be careful, that's a trick question. :-)
---
>>Since resistors are way cheaper than caps, my feeling is that using
>>cheap 2mA LEDs in parallel opposition with a 1/4 watt resistor in
>>series with 120V mains will do the trick.
>A 1/4 watt resistor dissipating 1/4 watt in a confined space won't
>last long.
---
Could you be a little less specific, please?
---
At 240 volts, 2 mA dissipates a half watt.
---
Oh, goody!!!
You know Ohm's law too!!!
---
>>You?
>>---
>>>It does take good engineering to do them right.
>>---
>>Then you don't make LED night-lights, I take it?
>What an ass you are.
---
Ah, then the inference didn't go over your head?
---
>I certainly don't make night lights for production. My stuff sells for
>kilobucks, not cents. I have done a few for myself, for personal
>applications.
---
Wowie zowie!
How ever so kewl!
---
>I assume that JT has some commercial application in mind, with a low
>vampire power budget, and has no ideas of his own.
---
With no ideas of his own?
I think the US government would quarrel with you on that one, and win.
<jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 11:26:51 -0700, Jim Thompson
><To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 10:42:54 -0700, John Larkin
>><jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 10:08:16 -0700, Jim Thompson
>>><To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>>>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 09:29:47 -0700, John Larkin
>>>><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:49:45 -0700, Jim Thompson
>>>>><To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>>>>>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:29:37 -0700, John Larkin
>>>>>><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>[snip]
>>>>>>>Keep trying.
>>>>>>My fault for trying to demo without telling ;-)
>>>>>You always brag about designing great circuits without "telling." You
>>>>>troll for ideas, then hide behind "proprietary" when you do settle on
>>>>>something... even if you got the ideas here.
>>>>>>There's roughly 400mW consumed while bringing up the switcher. Drops
>>>>>>to ~1mW when turned off.
>>>>>Then you have some other circuitry that specifically turns off the
>>>>>startup supply, that is not shown in the circuit that you posted here.
>>>>>What is it?
>>>>>Your circuit is complex. Something much simpler would work, and would
>>>>>go to very low power all by itself once the main switcher comes up.
>>>>What's "complex" about it? I need to support 20V at 15mA-20mA for
>>>>250ms.
>>>It has a lot of parts. And you won't address the 1-watt dissipation
>>>issue.
>>What 1-Watt dissipation issue? Just because you made up some
>>bull-shit issue doesn't make it real.
>In the PDF that you posted, when the startup circuit is back-fed to 23
>volts or so by the main switcher, the parts that I've named dissipate
>about one watt. ROFF alone burns over 800 mW. If you have a workaround
>for that, show it.
>>>>>>If the load is shorted ?:-) 212mW in RDROP, 31.9mW in the FET. See,
>>>>>>you clearly don't understand how these things work :-)
>>>>>Is that worst-case? The fet Idss is min 20 mA, typ 80, no specified
>>>>>max. There is some value of Idss that results in the maximum power
>>>>>dissipation. What is that value, and what is the dissipation? You
>>>>>should be able to tease Idss to dump around a watt in the fet, which
>>>>>is fine if you heat sink it.
>>>>"should be" is not an engineering term. My wife uses that term
>>>>"should be" a lot while referring to the present administration.
>>>>Annoys the hell out of me. We "should be" a Representative Republic,
>>>>but we're a dictatorship, the other branches of government are sitting
>>>>on their hands and letting Obama do everything by executive order :-(
>>>> ...Jim Thompson
>>>You are obligated to find the maximum power dissipation point as a
>>>function of possible Idss values, and to heatsink such that nothing
>>>catches fire.
>>>If the design is for universal, CE-tested use, AC line voltage can go
>>>to 264 RMS. That's 373 peak. In that case, the maximum fet dissipation
>>>can be teased well over 1 watt; try it. That fet is rated 1.8 watts
>>>max. If you sim one case, with nominal line voltage and typical Idss,
>>>you are taking risks. Test lab time is expensive; product recalls and
>>>fires are more expensive.
>>>Your sim seems to assume 240 line voltage.
>>Poor baby! Go sit in the corner and suck your thumb.
>OK, you can't calculate the worst-case fet dissipation.
>> ...Jim Thompson
>Hey, spin the design as many times as your customer can stand. And
>have lots of liability insurance, 'cause you're going to be on the
>painful end of the expert-witness game. And you're being this sloppy,
>in public, archived forever.
I know you're a pimp, but I don't think you're dense... just a dense
asshole. That's not the real circuit. I walked you thru that this
morning. Now go away.
...Jim Thompson
-- | James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
<jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 02 Oct 2012 11:08:51 -0700, John Larkin
><jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 18:03:56 -0500, John Fields
>><jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>>On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 08:34:46 -0700, John Larkin
>>><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>On 1 Oct 2012 06:00:24 GMT, Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
>>>>>On 2012-09-30, John Larkin <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>>> The series current-limiting cap dissipates no power,
>>>---
>>>Not quite true, since no dielectric is lossless.
>>>---
>>>>>>so it can be shorted by a low voltage switch.
>>>---
>>>It can be but, depending on when in the cycle the switch turns on,
>>>things might get grim.
>>>---
>>>>>>If it drives, say, the input of a
>>>>>> bridge rectifier or a 2-diode restore thing, short the input of that.
>>>---
>>>Still, depending on when in the cycle the switch turns on, things
>>>might get grim.
>>Bad engineering can create grim outcomes. Better to not do that.
>>>---
>>>>>> It becomes a bang-bang regulator. If the controller is to be a custom
>>>>>> IC, a modest amount of complexity is free, so some intelligent
>>>>>> zero-crossing thing would be appropriate. But just dumb bang-bang
>>>>>> ought to work.
>>>---
>>>From the ridiculous to the sublime to the ridiculous!
>>>---
>>>>As I mentioned, and you snipped, people often include a series
>>>>resistor to limit transient currents.
>>>---
>>>And yet your circuit shows that some people - who should know better -
>>>don't.
>>Idiot whining again. That's pretty much your skill set.
>---
>I'm the idiot???
>You claim that people often include a series resistor to limit
>transient currents and yet, the circuit you show - which seems to be
>susceptible to damage from transients - doesn't include the resistor
>you claim should be there.
I said in plain English that a series resistor might be appropriate.
In some cases, like a clean low-voltage AC source, it might not be
needed. I've done lots of voltage-doubler type supplies with no series
R.
Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom laser drivers and controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME thermocouple, LVDT, synchro acquisition and simulation
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 13:19:47 -0700, John Larkin
><jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 11:26:51 -0700, Jim Thompson
>><To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 10:42:54 -0700, John Larkin
>>><jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 10:08:16 -0700, Jim Thompson
>>>><To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>>>>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 09:29:47 -0700, John Larkin
>>>>><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:49:45 -0700, Jim Thompson
>>>>>><To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:29:37 -0700, John Larkin
>>>>>>><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>>[snip]
>>>>>>>>Keep trying.
>>>>>>>My fault for trying to demo without telling ;-)
>>>>>>You always brag about designing great circuits without "telling." You
>>>>>>troll for ideas, then hide behind "proprietary" when you do settle on
>>>>>>something... even if you got the ideas here.
>>>>>>>There's roughly 400mW consumed while bringing up the switcher. Drops
>>>>>>>to ~1mW when turned off.
>>>>>>Then you have some other circuitry that specifically turns off the
>>>>>>startup supply, that is not shown in the circuit that you posted here.
>>>>>>What is it?
>>>>>>Your circuit is complex. Something much simpler would work, and would
>>>>>>go to very low power all by itself once the main switcher comes up.
>>>>>What's "complex" about it? I need to support 20V at 15mA-20mA for
>>>>>250ms.
>>>>It has a lot of parts. And you won't address the 1-watt dissipation
>>>>issue.
>>>What 1-Watt dissipation issue? Just because you made up some
>>>bull-shit issue doesn't make it real.
>>In the PDF that you posted, when the startup circuit is back-fed to 23
>>volts or so by the main switcher, the parts that I've named dissipate
>>about one watt. ROFF alone burns over 800 mW. If you have a workaround
>>for that, show it.
>>>>>>>If the load is shorted ?:-) 212mW in RDROP, 31.9mW in the FET. See,
>>>>>>>you clearly don't understand how these things work :-)
>>>>>>Is that worst-case? The fet Idss is min 20 mA, typ 80, no specified
>>>>>>max. There is some value of Idss that results in the maximum power
>>>>>>dissipation. What is that value, and what is the dissipation? You
>>>>>>should be able to tease Idss to dump around a watt in the fet, which
>>>>>>is fine if you heat sink it.
>>>>>"should be" is not an engineering term. My wife uses that term
>>>>>"should be" a lot while referring to the present administration.
>>>>>Annoys the hell out of me. We "should be" a Representative Republic,
>>>>>but we're a dictatorship, the other branches of government are sitting
>>>>>on their hands and letting Obama do everything by executive order :-(
>>>>> ...Jim Thompson
>>>>You are obligated to find the maximum power dissipation point as a
>>>>function of possible Idss values, and to heatsink such that nothing
>>>>catches fire.
>>>>If the design is for universal, CE-tested use, AC line voltage can go
>>>>to 264 RMS. That's 373 peak. In that case, the maximum fet dissipation
>>>>can be teased well over 1 watt; try it. That fet is rated 1.8 watts
>>>>max. If you sim one case, with nominal line voltage and typical Idss,
>>>>you are taking risks. Test lab time is expensive; product recalls and
>>>>fires are more expensive.
>>>>Your sim seems to assume 240 line voltage.
>>>Poor baby! Go sit in the corner and suck your thumb.
>>OK, you can't calculate the worst-case fet dissipation.
>>> ...Jim Thompson
>>Hey, spin the design as many times as your customer can stand. And
>>have lots of liability insurance, 'cause you're going to be on the
>>painful end of the expert-witness game. And you're being this sloppy,
>>in public, archived forever.
>I know you're a pimp, but I don't think you're dense... just a dense
>asshole. That's not the real circuit. I walked you thru that this
>morning. Now go away.
> ...Jim Thompson
It's what you "wound up with." It's stupid, so now you say it's "not
the real circuit." Of course, you won't reveal the "real" circuit...
it's proprietary.
Or more likely it doesn't exist. Or it's full of bugs, too.
Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom laser drivers and controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME thermocouple, LVDT, synchro acquisition and simulation
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 10:42:54 -0700, John Larkin
><jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>[snip]
>>If the design is for universal, CE-tested use, AC line voltage can go
>>to 264 RMS. That's 373 peak. In that case, the maximum fet dissipation
>>can be teased well over 1 watt; try it. That fet is rated 1.8 watts
>>max. If you sim one case, with nominal line voltage and typical Idss,
>>you are taking risks. Test lab time is expensive; product recalls and
>>fires are more expensive.
>>Your sim seems to assume 240 line voltage.
>It's down-right amusing, YOU lecturing me on rigorous simulation. I
>often do 45 PVT corners.
>YOU, You post nothing but vague crap.
>Once I decide on a configuration I'll beat the crap out of it to make
>sure it's a valid design.
>Go sit in the corner and suck your thumb and contemplate how many
>other ways you can think of to pimp yourself >:-)
> ...Jim Thompson
Quote Jim:
"That's not the real circuit."
"Once I decide on a configuration..."
So, no good ideas yet? This is awfully simple; what's wrong?
John Larkin wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 15:39:58 -0500, John Fields
> <jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>On Tue, 02 Oct 2012 11:08:51 -0700, John Larkin
>><jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>>On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 18:03:56 -0500, John Fields
>>><jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>>>On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 08:34:46 -0700, John Larkin
>>>><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>>On 1 Oct 2012 06:00:24 GMT, Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
>>>>>>On 2012-09-30, John Larkin <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>The series current-limiting cap dissipates no power,
>>>>---
>>>>Not quite true, since no dielectric is lossless.
>>>>---
>>>>>>>so it can be shorted by a low voltage switch.
>>>>---
>>>>It can be but, depending on when in the cycle the switch turns on,
>>>>things might get grim.
>>>>---
>>>>>>>If it drives, say, the input of a
>>>>>>>bridge rectifier or a 2-diode restore thing, short the input of that.
>>>>---
>>>>Still, depending on when in the cycle the switch turns on, things
>>>>might get grim.
>>>Bad engineering can create grim outcomes. Better to not do that.
>>>>---
>>>>>>>It becomes a bang-bang regulator. If the controller is to be a custom
>>>>>>>IC, a modest amount of complexity is free, so some intelligent
>>>>>>>zero-crossing thing would be appropriate. But just dumb bang-bang
>>>>>>>ought to work.
>>>>---
>>>>From the ridiculous to the sublime to the ridiculous!
>>>>>As I mentioned, and you snipped, people often include a series
>>>>>resistor to limit transient currents.
>>>>---
>>>>And yet your circuit shows that some people - who should know better -
>>>>don't.
>>>Idiot whining again. That's pretty much your skill set.
>>---
>>I'm the idiot???
>>You claim that people often include a series resistor to limit
>>transient currents and yet, the circuit you show - which seems to be
>>susceptible to damage from transients - doesn't include the resistor
>>you claim should be there.
> I said in plain English that a series resistor might be appropriate.
> In some cases, like a clean low-voltage AC source, it might not be
> needed. I've done lots of voltage-doubler type supplies with no series
> R.
incandescent lamp in series, drops back down to low R afterwards, keeps
every one happy :)
Actually, a depletion mode mosfet inseries with a network can act as a current limiter, give you low Ron values when not hitting the current wall. That should make the heat radiator police happy.
<jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 15:39:58 -0500, John Fields
><jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>On Tue, 02 Oct 2012 11:08:51 -0700, John Larkin
>><jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>>On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 18:03:56 -0500, John Fields
>>><jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>>>On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 08:34:46 -0700, John Larkin
>>>><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>>On 1 Oct 2012 06:00:24 GMT, Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
>>>>>>On 2012-09-30, John Larkin <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> The series current-limiting cap dissipates no power,
>>>>---
>>>>Not quite true, since no dielectric is lossless.
>>>>---
>>>>>>>so it can be shorted by a low voltage switch.
>>>>---
>>>>It can be but, depending on when in the cycle the switch turns on,
>>>>things might get grim.
>>>>---
>>>>>>>If it drives, say, the input of a
>>>>>>> bridge rectifier or a 2-diode restore thing, short the input of that.
>>>>---
>>>>Still, depending on when in the cycle the switch turns on, things
>>>>might get grim.
>>>Bad engineering can create grim outcomes. Better to not do that.
>>>>---
>>>>>>> It becomes a bang-bang regulator. If the controller is to be a custom
>>>>>>> IC, a modest amount of complexity is free, so some intelligent
>>>>>>> zero-crossing thing would be appropriate. But just dumb bang-bang
>>>>>>> ought to work.
>>>>---
>>>>From the ridiculous to the sublime to the ridiculous!
>>>>---
>>>>>As I mentioned, and you snipped, people often include a series
>>>>>resistor to limit transient currents.
>>>>---
>>>>And yet your circuit shows that some people - who should know better -
>>>>don't.
>>>Idiot whining again. That's pretty much your skill set.
>>---
>>I'm the idiot???
>>You claim that people often include a series resistor to limit
>>transient currents and yet, the circuit you show - which seems to be
>>susceptible to damage from transients - doesn't include the resistor
>>you claim should be there.
>I said in plain English that a series resistor might be appropriate.
>In some cases, like a clean low-voltage AC source, it might not be
>needed. I've done lots of voltage-doubler type supplies with no series
>R.
---
In this instance, since you identified the input as "AC LINE" and the
thread is about mains driven current limited supplies, your
low-voltage driven doublers are irrelevant.
Also, the cleanliness of the source has very little to do with what
will happen when the mains gets switched into the load at different
angles.
<jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 14:55:09 -0700, John Larkin
><jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 15:39:58 -0500, John Fields
>><jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>>On Tue, 02 Oct 2012 11:08:51 -0700, John Larkin
>>><jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>>>On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 18:03:56 -0500, John Fields
>>>><jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>>>>On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 08:34:46 -0700, John Larkin
>>>>><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>>>On 1 Oct 2012 06:00:24 GMT, Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
>>>>>>>On 2012-09-30, John Larkin <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> The series current-limiting cap dissipates no power,
>>>>>---
>>>>>Not quite true, since no dielectric is lossless.
>>>>>---
>>>>>>>>so it can be shorted by a low voltage switch.
>>>>>---
>>>>>It can be but, depending on when in the cycle the switch turns on,
>>>>>things might get grim.
>>>>>---
>>>>>>>>If it drives, say, the input of a
>>>>>>>> bridge rectifier or a 2-diode restore thing, short the input of that.
>>>>>---
>>>>>Still, depending on when in the cycle the switch turns on, things
>>>>>might get grim.
>>>>Bad engineering can create grim outcomes. Better to not do that.
>>>>>---
>>>>>>>> It becomes a bang-bang regulator. If the controller is to be a custom
>>>>>>>> IC, a modest amount of complexity is free, so some intelligent
>>>>>>>> zero-crossing thing would be appropriate. But just dumb bang-bang
>>>>>>>> ought to work.
>>>>>---
>>>>>From the ridiculous to the sublime to the ridiculous!
>>>>>---
>>>>>>As I mentioned, and you snipped, people often include a series
>>>>>>resistor to limit transient currents.
>>>>>---
>>>>>And yet your circuit shows that some people - who should know better -
>>>>>don't.
>>>>Idiot whining again. That's pretty much your skill set.
>>>---
>>>I'm the idiot???
>>>You claim that people often include a series resistor to limit
>>>transient currents and yet, the circuit you show - which seems to be
>>>susceptible to damage from transients - doesn't include the resistor
>>>you claim should be there.
>>I said in plain English that a series resistor might be appropriate.
>>In some cases, like a clean low-voltage AC source, it might not be
>>needed. I've done lots of voltage-doubler type supplies with no series
>>R.
>---
>In this instance, since you identified the input as "AC LINE" and the
>thread is about mains driven current limited supplies, your
>low-voltage driven doublers are irrelevant.
>Also, the cleanliness of the source has very little to do with what
>will happen when the mains gets switched into the load at different
>angles.
All you do is whine.
Hey, the Blue Angels are buzzing the building. I'm headed for the
roof.
Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom laser drivers and controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME thermocouple, LVDT, synchro acquisition and simulation
<jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 04 Oct 2012 14:40:04 -0500, John Fields
><jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 14:55:09 -0700, John Larkin
>><jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 15:39:58 -0500, John Fields
>>><jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>>>On Tue, 02 Oct 2012 11:08:51 -0700, John Larkin
>>>><jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>>>>On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 18:03:56 -0500, John Fields
>>>>><jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>>>>>On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 08:34:46 -0700, John Larkin
>>>>>><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>On 1 Oct 2012 06:00:24 GMT, Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
>>>>>>>>On 2012-09-30, John Larkin <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> The series current-limiting cap dissipates no power,
>>>>>>---
>>>>>>Not quite true, since no dielectric is lossless.
>>>>>>---
>>>>>>>>>so it can be shorted by a low voltage switch.
>>>>>>---
>>>>>>It can be but, depending on when in the cycle the switch turns on,
>>>>>>things might get grim.
>>>>>>---
>>>>>>>>>If it drives, say, the input of a
>>>>>>>>> bridge rectifier or a 2-diode restore thing, short the input of that.
>>>>>>---
>>>>>>Still, depending on when in the cycle the switch turns on, things
>>>>>>might get grim.
>>>>>Bad engineering can create grim outcomes. Better to not do that.
>>>>>>---
>>>>>>>>> It becomes a bang-bang regulator. If the controller is to be a custom
>>>>>>>>> IC, a modest amount of complexity is free, so some intelligent
>>>>>>>>> zero-crossing thing would be appropriate. But just dumb bang-bang
>>>>>>>>> ought to work.
>>>>>>---
>>>>>>From the ridiculous to the sublime to the ridiculous!
>>>>>>---
>>>>>>>As I mentioned, and you snipped, people often include a series
>>>>>>>resistor to limit transient currents.
>>>>>>---
>>>>>>And yet your circuit shows that some people - who should know better -
>>>>>>don't.
>>>>>Idiot whining again. That's pretty much your skill set.
>>>>---
>>>>I'm the idiot???
>>>>You claim that people often include a series resistor to limit
>>>>transient currents and yet, the circuit you show - which seems to be
>>>>susceptible to damage from transients - doesn't include the resistor
>>>>you claim should be there.
>>>I said in plain English that a series resistor might be appropriate.
>>>In some cases, like a clean low-voltage AC source, it might not be
>>>needed. I've done lots of voltage-doubler type supplies with no series
>>>R.
>>---
>>In this instance, since you identified the input as "AC LINE" and the
>>thread is about mains driven current limited supplies, your
>>low-voltage driven doublers are irrelevant.
>>Also, the cleanliness of the source has very little to do with what
>>will happen when the mains gets switched into the load at different
>>angles.
>All you do is whine.
>Hey, the Blue Angels are buzzing the building. I'm headed for the
>roof.
John Fields wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Oct 2012 13:14:50 -0700, John Larkin
> <jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>On Thu, 04 Oct 2012 14:40:04 -0500, John Fields
>><jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 14:55:09 -0700, John Larkin
>>><jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 15:39:58 -0500, John Fields
>>>><jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>>>>On Tue, 02 Oct 2012 11:08:51 -0700, John Larkin
>>>>><jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>>>>>On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 18:03:56 -0500, John Fields
>>>>>><jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 08:34:46 -0700, John Larkin
>>>>>>><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>On 1 Oct 2012 06:00:24 GMT, Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>On 2012-09-30, John Larkin <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>The series current-limiting cap dissipates no power,
>>>>>>>---
>>>>>>>Not quite true, since no dielectric is lossless.
>>>>>>>---
>>>>>>>>>>so it can be shorted by a low voltage switch.
>>>>>>>---
>>>>>>>It can be but, depending on when in the cycle the switch turns on,
>>>>>>>things might get grim.
>>>>>>>---
>>>>>>>>>>If it drives, say, the input of a
>>>>>>>>>>bridge rectifier or a 2-diode restore thing, short the input of that.
>>>>>>>---
>>>>>>>Still, depending on when in the cycle the switch turns on, things
>>>>>>>might get grim.
>>>>>>Bad engineering can create grim outcomes. Better to not do that.
>>>>>>>---
>>>>>>>>>>It becomes a bang-bang regulator. If the controller is to be a custom
>>>>>>>>>>IC, a modest amount of complexity is free, so some intelligent
>>>>>>>>>>zero-crossing thing would be appropriate. But just dumb bang-bang
>>>>>>>>>>ought to work.
>>>>>>>---
>>>>>>>From the ridiculous to the sublime to the ridiculous!
>>>>>>>>As I mentioned, and you snipped, people often include a series
>>>>>>>>resistor to limit transient currents.
>>>>>>>---
>>>>>>>And yet your circuit shows that some people - who should know better -
>>>>>>>don't.
>>>>>>Idiot whining again. That's pretty much your skill set.
>>>>>---
>>>>>I'm the idiot???
>>>>>You claim that people often include a series resistor to limit
>>>>>transient currents and yet, the circuit you show - which seems to be
>>>>>susceptible to damage from transients - doesn't include the resistor
>>>>>you claim should be there.
>>>>I said in plain English that a series resistor might be appropriate.
>>>>In some cases, like a clean low-voltage AC source, it might not be
>>>>needed. I've done lots of voltage-doubler type supplies with no series
>>>>R.
>>>---
>>>In this instance, since you identified the input as "AC LINE" and the
>>>thread is about mains driven current limited supplies, your
>>>low-voltage driven doublers are irrelevant.
>>>Also, the cleanliness of the source has very little to do with what
>>>will happen when the mains gets switched into the load at different
>>>angles.
>>All you do is whine.
>>Hey, the Blue Angels are buzzing the building. I'm headed for the
>>roof.
>> On Thu, 04 Oct 2012 13:14:50 -0700, John Larkin
>> <jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>>On Thu, 04 Oct 2012 14:40:04 -0500, John Fields
>>><jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 14:55:09 -0700, John Larkin
>>>><jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>>>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 15:39:58 -0500, John Fields
>>>>><jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>>>>>On Tue, 02 Oct 2012 11:08:51 -0700, John Larkin
>>>>>><jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 18:03:56 -0500, John Fields
>>>>>>><jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 08:34:46 -0700, John Larkin
>>>>>>>><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>On 1 Oct 2012 06:00:24 GMT, Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>On 2012-09-30, John Larkin <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>The series current-limiting cap dissipates no power,
>>>>>>>>---
>>>>>>>>Not quite true, since no dielectric is lossless.
>>>>>>>>---
>>>>>>>>>>>so it can be shorted by a low voltage switch.
>>>>>>>>---
>>>>>>>>It can be but, depending on when in the cycle the switch turns on,
>>>>>>>>things might get grim.
>>>>>>>>---
>>>>>>>>>>>If it drives, say, the input of a
>>>>>>>>>>>bridge rectifier or a 2-diode restore thing, short the input of that.
>>>>>>>>---
>>>>>>>>Still, depending on when in the cycle the switch turns on, things
>>>>>>>>might get grim.
>>>>>>>Bad engineering can create grim outcomes. Better to not do that.
>>>>>>>>---
>>>>>>>>>>>It becomes a bang-bang regulator. If the controller is to be a custom
>>>>>>>>>>>IC, a modest amount of complexity is free, so some intelligent
>>>>>>>>>>>zero-crossing thing would be appropriate. But just dumb bang-bang
>>>>>>>>>>>ought to work.
>>>>>>>>---
>>>>>>>>From the ridiculous to the sublime to the ridiculous!
>>>>>>>>>As I mentioned, and you snipped, people often include a series
>>>>>>>>>resistor to limit transient currents.
>>>>>>>>---
>>>>>>>>And yet your circuit shows that some people - who should know better -
>>>>>>>>don't.
>>>>>>>Idiot whining again. That's pretty much your skill set.
>>>>>>---
>>>>>>I'm the idiot???
>>>>>>You claim that people often include a series resistor to limit
>>>>>>transient currents and yet, the circuit you show - which seems to be
>>>>>>susceptible to damage from transients - doesn't include the resistor
>>>>>>you claim should be there.
>>>>>I said in plain English that a series resistor might be appropriate.
>>>>>In some cases, like a clean low-voltage AC source, it might not be
>>>>>needed. I've done lots of voltage-doubler type supplies with no series
>>>>>R.
>>>>---
>>>>In this instance, since you identified the input as "AC LINE" and the
>>>>thread is about mains driven current limited supplies, your
>>>>low-voltage driven doublers are irrelevant.
>>>>Also, the cleanliness of the source has very little to do with what
>>>>will happen when the mains gets switched into the load at different
>>>>angles.
>>>All you do is whine.
>>>Hey, the Blue Angels are buzzing the building. I'm headed for the
>>>roof.
>> ---
>> All you do is run.
Could also be signs of boredism?
---
In response to any of _your_ posts, more than likely.
>> On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 15:39:58 -0500, John Fields
>> <jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>>On Tue, 02 Oct 2012 11:08:51 -0700, John Larkin
>>><jlar...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>>>On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 18:03:56 -0500, John Fields
>>>><jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>>>>On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 08:34:46 -0700, John Larkin
>>>>><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>>>On 1 Oct 2012 06:00:24 GMT, Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
>>>>>>>On 2012-09-30, John Larkin <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>The series current-limiting cap dissipates no power,
>>>>>---
>>>>>Not quite true, since no dielectric is lossless.
>>>>>---
>>>>>>>>so it can be shorted by a low voltage switch.
>>>>>---
>>>>>It can be but, depending on when in the cycle the switch turns on,
>>>>>things might get grim.
>>>>>---
>>>>>>>>If it drives, say, the input of a
>>>>>>>>bridge rectifier or a 2-diode restore thing, short the input of that.
>>>>>---
>>>>>Still, depending on when in the cycle the switch turns on, things
>>>>>might get grim.
>>>>Bad engineering can create grim outcomes. Better to not do that.
>>>>>---
>>>>>>>>It becomes a bang-bang regulator. If the controller is to be a custom
>>>>>>>>IC, a modest amount of complexity is free, so some intelligent
>>>>>>>>zero-crossing thing would be appropriate. But just dumb bang-bang
>>>>>>>>ought to work.
>>>>>---
>>>>>From the ridiculous to the sublime to the ridiculous!
>>>>>>As I mentioned, and you snipped, people often include a series
>>>>>>resistor to limit transient currents.
>>>>>---
>>>>>And yet your circuit shows that some people - who should know better -
>>>>>don't.
>>>>Idiot whining again. That's pretty much your skill set.
>>>---
>>>I'm the idiot???
>>>You claim that people often include a series resistor to limit
>>>transient currents and yet, the circuit you show - which seems to be
>>>susceptible to damage from transients - doesn't include the resistor
>>>you claim should be there.
>> I said in plain English that a series resistor might be appropriate.
>> In some cases, like a clean low-voltage AC source, it might not be
>> needed. I've done lots of voltage-doubler type supplies with no series
>> R.
>incandescent lamp in series, drops back down to low R afterwards, keeps
>every one happy :)
<prese...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
>In sci.electronics.design Tom Biasi <tombi...@optonline.net> wrote:
>> On 9/27/2012 3:44 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
>>> AC Cap Dropper DC Power Supply
>>> Anyone know of a clever way to regulate other than the typical
>>> brute-force zener clamp?
>>> ...Jim Thompson
>> A long,long time ago in a place not so far away I used a transformer >> made by Sola that had a matched resonant capacitor.
>>In sci.electronics.design Tom Biasi <tombi...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>> On 9/27/2012 3:44 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
>>>> AC Cap Dropper DC Power Supply
>>>> Anyone know of a clever way to regulate other than the typical
>>>> brute-force zener clamp?
>>>> ...Jim Thompson
>>> A long,long time ago in a place not so far away I used a transformer >>> made by Sola that had a matched resonant capacitor.
> On 1 Oct 2012 06:00:24 GMT, Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
>>On 2012-09-30, John Larkin <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>> The series current-limiting cap dissipates no power, so it can be
>>> shorted by a low voltage switch. If it drives, say, the input of a
>>> bridge rectifier or a 2-diode restore thing, short the input of that.
>>> It becomes a bang-bang regulator. If the controller is to be a custom
>>> IC, a modest amount of complexity is free, so some intelligent
>>> zero-crossing thing would be appropriate. But just dumb bang-bang
>>> ought to work.
> As I mentioned, and you snipped, people often include a series
> resistor to limit transient currents.
> C-limited supplies are commonly used for things like LED night-lights.
> It does take good engineering to do them right.
Not sure anybody cares, but the P3 killawatt meter uses cap shunter power supply. Those thigs have no memory, so if you lose power you lose all your logged data.
I figured, easy, I'll toss a supercap in there, no big deal, and who cares if the display stays on.
Of course that never worked as the current from that power supply was close to nothing and unable to charge the cap in the first place. Even being plugged in for days didn't help as the leakage probably exceeded what the watt meter itself used.
> On 9/27/2012 3:44 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
>> AC Cap Dropper DC Power Supply
>> Anyone know of a clever way to regulate other than the typical
>> brute-force zener clamp?
>> ...Jim Thompson
> A long,long time ago in a place not so far away I used a transformer
> made by Sola that had a matched resonant capacitor.
> Tom
Years ago at a hamfest booth, I had a vendor begging me to take one off his table. It weighed about 50 lbs, he was down to $9. It was closing time. I didn't get it. It would still be in my storage.
Mikek
>>>In sci.electronics.design Tom Biasi <tombi...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>>> On 9/27/2012 3:44 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
>>>>> AC Cap Dropper DC Power Supply
>>>>> Anyone know of a clever way to regulate other than the typical
>>>>> brute-force zener clamp?
>>>>> ...Jim Thompson
>>>> A long,long time ago in a place not so far away I used a transformer >>>> made by Sola that had a matched resonant capacitor.
