Jump to content

The Multi Amp aka Dynalo Mk2


spritzer

Recommended Posts

I am still considering building one of these to replace my dynalo, but had questions regarding the input section.

 

From what I understand, the THAT340 bipolar input can be replaced with individual JFETs simply by replacing the individual NPN or PNP in the THAT with N-ch or P-ch FETs?

 

C -> D

B -> G

E -> S

 

Advantages would seem to be higher input impedance and lower offset? Any other changes required to the circuit? Would you want to remove the input series resistors, shown as 5K on the schematic (R18/R33) and jumper these?

 

I still have enough 2SK109/2SK389 or single equivalents to do this. Or is the THAT340 recommended? Anyone listen to either version and have comments?

Edited by Pars
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another stupid question time :)

 

When replacing the THAT340 with JFETS, would the NPNs be replaced with N-ch, and PNPs replaced with P-ch, or vice versa? For a NPN, the base needs to go positive by the diode voltage, or +0.7Vdc before it will turn on. Somehow it seems that a P-ch should be used here, but not sure. Like I said, stupid question :)

 

Might not be an issue, as in going thru parts inventory, I have a bunch of 2SK170s but can't find the 2SJ74s I thought I had. If anyone has around 8 (or 4 matched Idss) they would sell, shoot me a PM.

 

Also, this is applicable to anything using complementary pairs of 2SK170 / 2SJ74, but I ran across this last night on DIYaudio:

 

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/swap-meet/232547-fs-2sk170-2sj74-matched-sets-10.html#post3966396

 

Has anyone run across this before, and what do you think of it? Not having a curve tracer, no way for me to verify this. Also see attached pdf.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't the input impedance awfully low using the THAT340? I may use it anyhow, though I already have a 4-ch RK27 50K ohm pot. I have to do this cheap if I am going to do it right now. Can embellish later.

 

I could use some 2SJ74s if anyone has a few they could spare :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't the input impedance awfully low using the THAT340? I may use it anyhow, though I already have a 4-ch RK27 50K ohm pot. I have to do this cheap if I am going to do it right now. Can embellish later.

 

I could use some 2SJ74s if anyone has a few they could spare :)

I have 2 matched pairs of 2SJ74BL bought from Jack at Tech DIY, that I can give to you. Bought them for an F5 , but used the 2SK170s in my KGST. I'm in Shenzhen China ATM, and won't get back home until Thursday. If you still need them then, PM me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Kevin,

 

After looking at the datasheets for the BJTs, 16mA seems rather low for these devices. Even the 18mA you noted on the previous page seems low. These seem pretty linear all the way out to 70-100mA. Any reason not to go higher than 18mA on these?

 

I am currently measuring hFE on the PNPs (from Avnet). Still waiting for the NPNs from Mouser. At ~16mA, using this circuit, with 100K Rb and my Fluke in series on the base in uA mode, I am not experiencing the transistors even getting warm after 2-3 minutes.

 

BJTMatching.gif

 

Current parameters I am planning on using for matching:

 

V = 7.5Vdc

Rb = 100K

Ib = ~70uA

Ic = ~16-17mA

 

The original 2SA1015 / 2SC1815 in the Dynalo are considerably lower power handling. Looking at the datasheet, I can see where 16mA was a good operating point for these.

 

Thanks.

 

BTW, anyone still looking for thru hole devices: Avnet has the MPSW56s (around 1500 still left). Mouser still has the MPSW06.

Edited by Pars
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18ma @ 20 volts power supply is 360mw.  about 1/3 of full power, and they definitely

get hot.  But you can crank it if you want.

You make a good point as always :)

 

I was planning on running @ 16V or so. I'll see what happens, but will probably stay around 16-18mA. I don't really want to use OPA445s for the servos, so need to stay below 18V.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finally got around to measuring 200 transistors: MPSW-06 NPNs from Mouser and MPSW-56 PNPs from Avnet. FIrst off, these seem to be tighter in spec than the Toshibas from the original Dynalo. The NPNs overall were a bit higher than PNPs. I used a base resistance of 221K ohms with power at 16V for these. I had a DMM in the base and collector legs set for uA and mA, respectively. Ic ranged from 15mA to 22mA or so; most fell within 19-21mA. I waited until the DMM measuring Ib hit a particular value and then recorded the Ic. Subjective, but it seemed like a good way to do it. I already had a home etched board with SIP sockets and posts on it for test leads, resistor, etc. I put resistor leads in the DUT SIP socket and tested the devices while still on the tape; didn't seem to affect the result.

transitor_measure.JPG.7eb2b5ab72abcf26d65654e3f2da3c78.JPG

Should be enough close matches for a multiamp I think.

Edited by Pars
replaced graphic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

its supersymmetry, and the 5k resistors are part of the feedback.

if you go with fets you can multiply both Rf and Ri by 10 to increase

the input impedance.

really does not matter for this. definitely does matter for the input impedance

for the ubal to bal converter.

If I am using FET inputs instead of the THAT340, is there a reason I would want to increase the input impedance even more by going 50K for Ri and 250K for Rf? I wasn't sure whether your statement really does not matter for this applied to the ubal to bal, or to the multi amp.

 

Also, a couple of part questions (trying to do this with what I have around):

 

1) The 1uf integrator caps... any reason to get ceramic X7Rs if I have some polyester film laying around?

2) The 4.7uf film caps... I presume these are rail bypass caps? So value isn't particularly important?

3) If I do raise the impedance, does the compensation 5pf cap need to be changed?

 

Thanks!

Edited by Pars
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point Marc. I hadn't thought of that, though I am not sure it is an issue. From what I gather, using the FET input instead of bipolar already increases the input impedance considerably just by itself? Looking at the original Dynalo schematic, with the SJ109/SK389 input, there is no series resistance; my stuff has no issue with driving that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Poly caps always beat ceramic in my book so go for it. 

 

As for the 4.7uf caps, I can't find the layput files here for this board but I'm pretty sure they are the bypass caps I wanted Kevin to put in. Any value that fits is fine there but moar is moar bettah!!!  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks. I just looked at the gerbers and the 4.7uf are indeed bypass caps. With 100uf electros on the board, any reason to choose 4.7uf as a bypass? I'm not really up on the latest thoughts regarding bypassing and whether it is well thought of or not. I have in the past seen some pretty good reasons not to do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I am using FET inputs instead of the THAT340, is there a reason I would want to increase the input impedance even more by going 50K for Ri and 250K for Rf? I wasn't sure whether your statement really does not matter for this applied to the ubal to bal, or to the multi amp.

 

Also, a couple of part questions (trying to do this with what I have around):

 

1) The 1uf integrator caps... any reason to get ceramic X7Rs if I have some polyester film laying around?

2) The 4.7uf film caps... I presume these are rail bypass caps? So value isn't particularly important?

3) If I do raise the impedance, does the compensation 5pf cap need to be changed?

 

Thanks!

Here I go quoting myself again :rolleyes:

 

From Kevin's post:

 

if you go with fets you can multiply both Rf and Ri by 10 to increase the input impedance.

 

1)  Is there a reason I would want to increase the input impedance even more by going 50K for Ri and 250K for Rf? I wasn't sure whether your statement really does not matter for this applied to the ubal to bal, or to the multi amp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone have a transformer recommendation for a multi-amp? The sigma22 I had built up has a Triad FD7-36 56VA 2x18V secondary on it currently, which might be enough. The original Dynalo (headamp) used an Amveco 35VA transformer in it.

 

I think Kevin mentioned that each board draws ~300mA, so 30V * 600mA (2 boards) would be ~18VA?

Edited by Pars
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.