Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsElectronicsBasicsRepairDesignCADComponentsEquipmentElectrical Engineering
ElectronicsKB.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Electronics Forum / Basics / August 2007



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Simple Linear Supply (for teaching my son)

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Jonathan Kirwan - 27 Aug 2007 05:28 GMT
I picked up a few 16VACrms, 1Amp transformers from a junk table at a
local supermarket store (I think they are used for doorbells and the
like) for $2/each, new.  Cheap.  Couldn't resist.  Anyway, I just do
this stuff for a hobby but I'm thinking of teaching my son some of the
design issues for a completely discrete, bjt-only, linear power supply
that supports variable voltages from something just under 1VDC to
perhaps maybe 12V, at no more than say .6-.7Amps.

Here is the schematic I came up with to teach from:

http://www.infinitefactors.org/misc/images/ps1.gif

I intend to start by using a 3.3k ohm resistor for the "BASE DRIVE"
circuit, instead of the current source shown.  Just by way of showing
that it can work either way and some of the trade-offs.

I also will start without including the current limit circuit, but
adding that in later on.  Then once we get the current limiter put on
the high side, I'll also do the same thing for the circuit but instead
linking the current limiter into the ground return instead (and change
where the voltage control circuit 'grounds') so that I can illustrate
its operation in either configuration.

Might even make this into small, separate component boards that can be
linked together in pieces.  That way, these steps will be easier to
add and pull apart.

I'd like any thoughts, though.  Questions asked here would help me
make the presentation better, later on.  Or perhaps I'm not thinking
about something I need to deal with.

Thanks for any thoughts,
Jon
John Popelish - 27 Aug 2007 06:03 GMT
> I picked up a few 16VACrms, 1Amp transformers from a junk table at a
> local supermarket store (I think they are used for doorbells and the
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
> make the presentation better, later on.  Or perhaps I'm not thinking
> about something I need to deal with.

Sounds like a plan, but substitute 1 amp rectifier diodes
like 1N4001 (or 1N4002, 1N4003, 1N4004 or a 1 amp packaged
bridge rectifier) in place of the 200 mA 1N4148 shown on the
schematic.  Those tiny diodes might blow just charging the
storage capacitor the first time.
Jonathan Kirwan - 27 Aug 2007 07:42 GMT
>> I picked up a few 16VACrms, 1Amp transformers from a junk table at a
>> local supermarket store (I think they are used for doorbells and the
[quoted text clipped - 32 lines]
>schematic.  Those tiny diodes might blow just charging the
>storage capacitor the first time.

I was just using those as placemarkers for the schematic and forgot to
change them out before posting it up.  Thanks for the reminder,
though.

I'm thinking of two different "blocks" for the drive supply -- one is
just a 3.3k resistor and the other is the current source shown.  Each
of these can be swapped in.  Also, two or three blocks for the voltage
limit -- one a fixed voltage one using a pair of resistors and a bjt,
then one adding the ripple compensation cap only, and then the one as
shown on the schematic.  Those can be likewise swapped.  Finally the
current limit block, just to remind, can be attached either on the
high side or the ground side (with slight other wiring differences.)

What do you think of the schematic layout?  Are the purposes and
blocks clear?

Thanks,
Jon
Fred - 27 Aug 2007 09:04 GMT
>>> I picked up a few 16VACrms, 1Amp transformers from a junk table at a
>>> local supermarket store (I think they are used for doorbells and the
[quoted text clipped - 49 lines]
> Thanks,
> Jon

Jon,
there are lots of good 'bad ideas' to be improved on there :-)
so this indeed is a good circuit... to start with.
* Temperature sensitivity. How to improve his?
* Then, how to improve this while still satisfying the 1V min requirement?
* What will happen to Q3 if you suddenly dead short your supply while
it's set at 12V output?
* What will happen to Q4 if you suddenly dead short your supply while
it's set at 12V output?
* Is Q2 sized adequately?
* What is the transient resposne of this supply?
* Q1 will benefit from a E-B 1K or so resistor.
Jonathan Kirwan - 27 Aug 2007 10:18 GMT
>>>> I picked up a few 16VACrms, 1Amp transformers from a junk table at a
>>>> local supermarket store (I think they are used for doorbells and the
[quoted text clipped - 53 lines]
>there are lots of good 'bad ideas' to be improved on there :-)
>so this indeed is a good circuit... to start with.

My son basically understands resistors, Ohms' law, less-than-EM1
hybrid-pi model of BJTs, a little about inductors (the differential
equation) and a little about capacitors (also, the differential
equation.)  He knows about Thevenin but hasn't really had to apply it
much, and knows about the two basic forms of Kirchoff's
somewhat-obvious-today laws, though again he hasn't had to apply them
all that much.  He also has a passing exposure to ideal opamps.

One of the more important things I'm trying is to avoid hitting him
with too many details and to allow him to see just how much reasonable
performance can be achieved with only a little bit of quantitative
theory and knowledge.  Although I want him to see this in the broader
behavioral blocks (excluding having to look into exact details of
each), I also want him to be able to quickly approximate values within
a block almost on sight and without the need for much use of a
calculator.  I also want him to see what can be done with just a few
simple components, which is part of why I'm completely avoiding
anything that looks like an IC.  (No MOSFETS, for now, too.)

Plus, I like being able to swap in supposedly improved bits and pieces
and see how they help (or hurt) things.

He and I have already covered, in some detail, the issue of a bridge
rectifier and following capacitor -- including what happens to the
peak current when you just hang on a huge capacitor, because of the
much shorter moment available then for recharging it (load current
remaining the same.)  Once we get through some variations on this
theme, and I feel he has mastered the details well enough, that will
be the time to start asking some new questions to complicate the
result a bit.

>* Temperature sensitivity. How to improve his?

A large source of heat is with the 2N3055 and keeping it away from
other elements will be helpful.  The other BJTs won't heat much on
their own -- I think they are probably in the few tens of milliwatts,
or so.  I expect some dissipation in the bridge.

All BJTs have a lower Vbe with higher temperature, I think.  Perhaps
dropping 0.23V in 100C change, just going from some vague experience I
recall.  The main problem will be with the voltage comparison, as it
entirely depends on this Vbe as a reference value.  As this Vbe goes
lower with higher temp, the output voltage will be driven lower as a
result.  The output is about Vbe(Q3)*((R3+R4)/R5+1) so as Vbe(Q3)
drops with rising temp, it directly affects the output voltage,
dropping it as suggested in the formula.  With R3=10k, this would be
some 2.8V change.  At R3=0, the change would be only .2V.

The current source is a BJT, too, so the current there also goes down
with lower Vbe -- higher temperatures would tend to reduce the source
magnitude.  But I set the base drive current source far above the
needed drive current, more than double what I expect to use.  It would
be trivial to increase that even further to provide more margin.

Most of the improvement here would come from improving the voltage
control section.  (Assuming one can live with the current limit
section's drift over temp.)

>* Then, how to improve this while still satisfying the 1V min requirement?

Actually, I'd like to hear from you about this.  One quick possibility
comes to mind, by adding a couple of diodes and capacitors to the
existing bridge to add a negative rail for some headroom.

>* What will happen to Q3 if you suddenly dead short your supply while
>it's set at 12V output?
>* What will happen to Q4 if you suddenly dead short your supply while
>it's set at 12V output?

C2 (now that I look, I see I didn't renumber the capacitors... oh,
well) will deliver a bit of a short current pulse.  But are you
referring here to the equivalent C from emitter to base and base to
collector and the stored charge there at the time?  Or?

>* Is Q2 sized adequately?

Estimate beta=30 at .5A-.7A for Q1.  Call it 600mA/30 or 20mA.  But
probably less, really.  Q2 will be at a beta of about 200, or so.  So
we are talking about 20mA/200 or about 100uA.  Again, probably less. I
think the 2N3904 can handle the 20mA collector current just fine.

>* What is the transient resposne of this supply?

That would be well beyond where my son is at and probably something
for which I wouldn't mind an education and would likely miss some
important considerations as I went through what I know.  Remember,
I've had no training whatsoever.  It's just something I enjoy thinking
about, at times.

>* Q1 will benefit from a E-B 1K or so resistor.

Yes!

Jon
Paul E. Schoen - 27 Aug 2007 19:22 GMT
>I picked up a few 16VACrms, 1Amp transformers from a junk table at a
> local supermarket store (I think they are used for doorbells and the
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
> Thanks for any thoughts,
> Jon

I have read the other comments as well. But some suggestions I have are:

1. The current limit as shown requires a power pot. You could use a single
sense resistor and a small pot to adjust the limit, but the resistor would
dissipate more power at higher current levels. For a variable limit, it's
probably best to use a small sense resistor and low level comparators or
op-amps,

2. High-side series pass elements are more easily implemented with PNP
devices, although they are usually more expensive and not as rugged. The
base drive is then just a current path to the common return.

3. You can get very good regulation by using a zener reference and a simple
op-amp type circuit comprised of BJTs. I have attached an LTspice model of
a simplified version, and I used an AC source for the reference, but you
can substitute a zener and a pot. I have left off capacitors and other
components that might be necessary for stability, but this circuit should
work well, and can be modified with higher gain to produce almost any level
of regulation desired. It does not work too well at very low output
voltages, but that can be fixed if needed. (Hint: add a power diode).

Paul

ASCII file follows:

Version 4
SHEET 1 880 680
WIRE 240 -128 -144 -128
WIRE -144 -64 -144 -128
WIRE -144 -64 -320 -64
WIRE 16 -64 -144 -64
WIRE 368 -64 112 -64
WIRE 432 -64 368 -64
WIRE 464 -64 432 -64
WIRE 368 -16 368 -64
WIRE 64 96 64 0
WIRE 240 96 240 -128
WIRE -320 112 -320 -64
WIRE 0 144 -160 144
WIRE 368 144 368 64
WIRE 368 144 304 144
WIRE 432 176 432 -64
WIRE -48 224 -160 224
WIRE -16 224 -48 224
WIRE 64 224 64 192
WIRE 160 224 64 224
WIRE 240 224 240 192
WIRE 240 224 160 224
WIRE 160 272 160 224
WIRE -160 288 -160 224
WIRE -320 400 -320 192
WIRE -160 400 -160 368
WIRE -160 400 -320 400
WIRE 160 400 160 352
WIRE 160 400 -160 400
WIRE 432 400 432 256
WIRE 432 400 160 400
WIRE -320 448 -320 400
FLAG 464 -64 Vout
FLAG -48 224 Vin
FLAG -320 448 0
SYMBOL npn 0 96 R0
SYMATTR InstName Q1
SYMATTR Value 2N3904
SYMBOL npn 304 96 M0
SYMATTR InstName Q2
SYMATTR Value 2N3904
SYMBOL pnp 112 0 M270
SYMATTR InstName Q3
SYMATTR Value BCW68G
SYMBOL res 144 256 R0
SYMATTR InstName R3
SYMATTR Value 100
SYMBOL res -176 128 R0
WINDOW 3 -26 67 Left 0
SYMATTR Value 1k
SYMATTR InstName R1
SYMBOL res 352 -32 R0
SYMATTR InstName R2
SYMATTR Value 1k
SYMBOL res 416 160 R0
SYMATTR InstName R4
SYMATTR Value 5
SYMBOL voltage -320 96 R0
WINDOW 123 0 0 Left 0
WINDOW 39 0 0 Left 0
SYMATTR InstName V1
SYMATTR Value 15
SYMBOL Misc\\signal -160 272 R0
WINDOW 123 0 0 Left 0
WINDOW 39 0 0 Left 0
SYMATTR InstName V2
SYMATTR Value SINE(2.5 2.5 60 .02)
TEXT -288 504 Left 0 !.tran .1
Jonathan Kirwan - 27 Aug 2007 20:04 GMT
>>I picked up a few 16VACrms, 1Amp transformers from a junk table at a
>> local supermarket store (I think they are used for doorbells and the
[quoted text clipped - 35 lines]
>sense resistor and a small pot to adjust the limit, but the resistor would
>dissipate more power at higher current levels.

I'd be using a wire-wound 10 ohm.  They are available for about $3,
but I might also just wind one myself and make a wiper for it.  (I
used to make my own diodes for my crystal radios using galena crystals
I'd sink into molten lead.  And I tried my hand at winding wire for
earphones using cylinder magnets and small bits of steel as diaphrams.
Worked, though not as good of course as those I could buy.)

>For a variable limit, it's
>probably best to use a small sense resistor and low level comparators or
>op-amps,

I am intentionally avoiding opamps.  I have already spent some time
with him so that he understands their idealized operation (trivial to
explain), but before he begins to use them in earnest I would rather
that we spend some time with a differential pair of BJTs and gradually
grow into more complex arrangements (emitter current sink for the npn
variety and the idea of using a current source on a collector leg to
increase the useful gain, etc.)

>2. High-side series pass elements are more easily implemented with PNP
>devices, although they are usually more expensive and not as rugged. The
>base drive is then just a current path to the common return.

Yes.  But this was very easy to explain as a start and, also, the
arrangements for controlling the voltage from the ground reference
work as simply designed negative feedbacks against the current source
at the top.  If I were to use a PNP (aside from the 'more expensive'
and 'less rugged' issue), I'd probably need to add more parts and the
details needed to fully apprehend the arrangement would increase, as
well.

>3. You can get very good regulation by using a zener reference

Indeed.  But I eliminated that for several reasons.  One of them was
nothing less than it was fewer parts to start.  Simply less to deal
with, at the outset.  I don't want to teach by including at the
beginning everything required for a "good design."  Just one that is
workable, from a beginners' point of view.  Understand the basic
structure, first.  Then worry about adding detail later on.

I also like to learn by seeing what doesn't work so well, too.  If you
have something simple to start and then you discover a few "problems"
with the result, you have some motivation for finding something a
little better to fix that without breaking other things in the
process.  Then as you get more sophistication, it all makes good sense
in the end.  Too much at once reduces motivation to understand the
quantitative details because they are so daunting.

>and a simple op-amp type circuit comprised of BJTs.

Yes.  We will eventually get to making up an opamp out of discrete
parts.  Once he has a basic idea of that, I won't have much problem
with just using commercial opamps for later things.

>I have attached an LTspice model of
>a simplified version, and I used an AC source for the reference, but you
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>of regulation desired. It does not work too well at very low output
>voltages, but that can be fixed if needed. (Hint: add a power diode).

Thanks.  I have done such things and have often added another diff amp
section to get good performance.  There is a temperature issue that
needs compensation also (the diff amp Vbe), when I use a zener
reference to one of the bases of the diff amp.  I usually just add a
diode elsewhere to get a matching effect to compensate for that.

I want to avoid a design like this, though, at first.  Listening to me
about the diff amp would make him "go to sleep," just now.  Got to
start a little easier.

Jon
Paul E. Schoen - 27 Aug 2007 20:41 GMT
>>2. High-side series pass elements are more easily implemented with PNP
>>devices, although they are usually more expensive and not as rugged. The
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
> in the end.  Too much at once reduces motivation to understand the
> quantitative details because they are so daunting.

When I was a teen, my father had me build a simple power supply with a
couple of 2N3055s with the base controlled by a pot across a zener, in an
emitter follower configuration. I still have and use the supply today,
although it could benefit from more modern design. It is about as simple as
can be.

I don't quite follow the logic of omitting a zener to reduce parts count,
yet using a forward B-E junction as a reference. The whole circuit would
need to be redone to do it right. I would just use a pot with a series
resistor across the raw supply at first, to demonstrate adjustability and
show the poor regulation. Then add a capacitor across the pot to show
capacitance multiplication by using the gain of the BJT, and then add a
zener for voltage stabilization. The emitter follower still suffers from
poor load regulation without direct feedback (you have indirect feedback
via the relatively constant B-E drop). So you add a diff-amp with output
voltage sense, and then you have a stable and useful supply. Add current
limiting, then make it fold-back, and you have a good all purpose supply.

After that you can go further and design for higher power and greater
efficiency by adding an SCR phase-fired front end to optimize the voltage
drop across the series pass transistors, and then you will need to add
inductors to minimize switching spikes. Also, as the design progresses in
complexity, things like transient response and feedback can be learned.

Good luck. A power supply is a solid basis upon which to build.

Paul
Jonathan Kirwan - 27 Aug 2007 22:25 GMT
>>>2. High-side series pass elements are more easily implemented with PNP
>>>devices, although they are usually more expensive and not as rugged. The
[quoted text clipped - 30 lines]
>although it could benefit from more modern design. It is about as simple as
>can be.

I've done that one to death with him, already.  It was my first shot
at this and he "gets it" very well.

>I don't quite follow the logic of omitting a zener to reduce parts count,
>yet using a forward B-E junction as a reference. The whole circuit would
>need to be redone to do it right.

Because it works sufficiently to show the operation of a summing
junction.  Which is the next step in what I'm trying to show.  I could
be wrong about that approach, though.  So as always, I love to have
informed criticism about anything I'm trying to do.  Thanks for your
kind time and that of others here, as well.  Much appreciated.

>I would just use a pot with a series
>resistor across the raw supply at first, to demonstrate adjustability and
>show the poor regulation.

Assuming you are talking about "with a bjt," here... done that.  Well,
actually I didn't need to.  It was easy enough to show by equation
form and he is gaining proficiency at differential equations so he had
more than enough math skill to have no problem seeing the details just
from this relatively simple algebra (ignoring details like temperature
variations.)

>Then add a capacitor across the pot to show
>capacitance multiplication by using the gain of the BJT, and then add a
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>voltage sense, and then you have a stable and useful supply. Add current
>limiting, then make it fold-back, and you have a good all purpose supply.

I'll take this advice.  Worthwhile doing.

>After that you can go further and design for higher power and greater
>efficiency by adding an SCR phase-fired front end to optimize the voltage
>drop across the series pass transistors, and then you will need to add
>inductors to minimize switching spikes. Also, as the design progresses in
>complexity, things like transient response and feedback can be learned.

By that time, I'll be learning as I go, as well.  These are things I
yet need to apprehend well and haven't had time in my own hobby life
to explore well.  But that's part of what makes this a good thing for
both of us to share.  At some point, I'm pushing myself to keep up
some pace and we both learn together.

>Good luck. A power supply is a solid basis upon which to build.

I think so, too.  There is plenty detail to master in something as
"simple" as a linear power supply.  You can dig deep and continue to
find nth-order effects to try and cope with until you lose interest, I
suppose.

Thanks for the thoughts and additions.  Appreciated.

Jon
JeffM - 28 Aug 2007 16:31 GMT
>[...](I used to make my own diodes for my crystal radios
>using galena crystals I'd sink into molten lead[...]

Aaaaaaa!  That's even worse than using solder.
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:2VojQZ0mo_gJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat's_wh
isker_diode+*-*-high-temperature+501+Wood's.metal+can.damage.many.crystals

http://www.google.com/search?q=define:Wood's+metal
Jonathan Kirwan - 28 Aug 2007 16:41 GMT
>>[...](I used to make my own diodes for my crystal radios
>>using galena crystals I'd sink into molten lead[...]
>
>Aaaaaaa!  That's even worse than using solder.

I used what I had that was cheap.  At the time you could buy 5lb
semi-round blocks of lead for about half a dollar.  Used to use them
as door stops, in fact.

Jon
ehsjr - 28 Aug 2007 00:49 GMT
> I picked up a few 16VACrms, 1Amp transformers from a junk table at a
> local supermarket store (I think they are used for doorbells and the
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
> Thanks for any thoughts,
> Jon

This may just be me, but it seems a little more intuitive
if you show the voltage control block to the right of Vout
with its output feeding back to the left.  Voltage control
happens after Vout - it seems to me that putting it on the
right of Vout reinforces the idea that it responds to Vout
before Vout responds to it.

Ed
Jonathan Kirwan - 28 Aug 2007 01:16 GMT
><snip>
>This may just be me, but it seems a little more intuitive
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>right of Vout reinforces the idea that it responds to Vout
>before Vout responds to it.

I thought that, too.  And in fact, my first incarnation of it had it
that way because that is how it is often shown.  However, I think this
way is a little better because the "wire" gets in the way of
understanding.  One thinks too much upon what is connected to what and
doesn't realize that it is all separable as components.  So breaking
the wire and using a symbol instead allowed me to focus the attention
on each block better and what it examines and delivers.

In any case, my preference is NOT to show a wiring diagram but a
functional one.  Avoiding showing bused wires where they don't add
meaning is only one pet peeve of mine.  Another is that I like to show
electron flow from bottom of sheet to top (no side-directions unless I
can defend it well) and to always show signal flow from left (input)
to right (output.)  In this case, there is feedback so there must be a
connection from the output to the input (backwards direction.)  The
way I arranged this keeps the left-to-right signal flow arrangement,
but just doesn't show the actual wire going backwards.  But I removed
it on the idea that the actual wire is more distraction to the eye
from the block function than it is a contribution to understanding.

But perhaps that is just me.

Jon
John Popelish - 28 Aug 2007 01:17 GMT
> This may just be me, but it seems a little more intuitive
> if you show the voltage control block to the right of Vout
> with its output feeding back to the left.  Voltage control
> happens after Vout - it seems to me that putting it on the
> right of Vout reinforces the idea that it responds to Vout
> before Vout responds to it.

Both voltage and current control are feedback loops, so it
cannot be done that all signals flow from left to right.
There has to be a jump back from right to left, somewhere.
Stanislaw Flatto - 29 Aug 2007 01:06 GMT
[story snip]
> Or perhaps I'm not thinking
> about something I need to deal with.
>
> Thanks for any thoughts,
> Jon

Just a basic querry: Is it _you_ or the child who wants to engage in this.
"You can bring the horse to water............" and so on.
Let him do it his own way and wait for questions.

Have fun

Stanislaw
Jonathan Kirwan - 29 Aug 2007 02:24 GMT
>[story snip]
>> Or perhaps I'm not thinking
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
>Just a basic querry: Is it _you_ or the child who wants to engage in this.

Actually, it's the style I've been using with him all his life.  I
work at home, so whenever he has any question or interest I drop what
I'm doing and give him whatever time he wants.  As soon as his
interest wanes, I drop it and go away.  He's old enough now that he
drives this process more than before and can stay on a subject much
longer (an hour, sometimes two.)  Sometimes, he would come home from
school with a question his teacher couldn't answer on physics and we'd
go over the details.  His interest didn't wane a bit, then.

Yes, this is _my_ hobby, too.  So I'm not going to deny an interest,
myself.  But this is his first year out of high school and he asked me
if he could take electronics at college.  So actually he is the one
driving me to produce something to discuss.  However, what that
subject actually is comes from me.

>"You can bring the horse to water............" and so on.
>Let him do it his own way and wait for questions.

I think that's what I've been doing.  But I am the one who knows what
he knows and what he can handle learning in spurts and this particular
project is at the right size for all the circumstances and to keep his
interest, without overwhelming him.

I am glad you are pressing that button, because there are a lot of
people who need that kind of kick in the pants.  But in this case I'd
just say that I'm aware of what you are talking about and keeping it
ever in mind and I think I'm being sensitive to him and not letting my
own inclinations or interests blind me to what is going on with him.

Thanks,
Jon
Stanislaw Flatto - 29 Aug 2007 20:30 GMT
>> [story snip]
>>> Or perhaps I'm not thinking
[quoted text clipped - 35 lines]
> Thanks,
> Jon
Good luck!

Stanislaw
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.