Author Topic: Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY (Read 11799229 times)

TinselKoala · « **Reply #16950 on:** March 27, 2017, 01:35:24 AM »

Quote

I see no other solution other than to pull the faililed or shorted TL494. A job for Super Man...
Wish me luck.

Good luck! ( I learned some time ago always to use sockets for chips in my experimental circuits when possible....

)

This may help:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdI3xDlzxVU

NickZ · « **Reply #16951 on:** March 27, 2017, 02:05:49 AM »

The TL 494 has the #13 and #14 pins soldered together, and going to the #1 pin of the duty cycle pot. No ground.

I may have to rewire it again possibly useing Stalkers TL494 circuit, which is different than Verpies posted diagram.
He has the 13, 14, as well as the 15 pins joined together. Among other changes.
Many ways to skin a cat, just wished that one way works.

I'll rewire as I had it previously, just see if I can get #10 pin to show an output, again, before I try to pull out that IC.

Thanks or the tip TK. However I'm not close to where I can get solder wick, nor a solder sucker. May have to just cut it out, from the top side, and then remove the cut off legs. What fun!!!
But, it maybe that the TL chip is still OK, I hope.

verpies · « **Reply #16952 on:** March 27, 2017, 07:42:56 AM »

Quote from: NickZ on March 27, 2017, 02:05:49 AM

He has the 13, 14, as well as the 15 pins joined together.

If you do that, then pin 16 must be grounded.
That change does not alter the operation of the circuit I posted here.

verpies · « **Reply #16953 on:** March 27, 2017, 07:47:42 AM »

Quote from: Grumage on March 26, 2017, 05:11:10 PM

That's a great start! How about going one step further and add the driver section? One suitable for both
MOSFET or IGBT.

Just like Lost-Bro wrote, but without the 74ABT04 inverter.

stivep · « **Reply #16954 on:** March 27, 2017, 07:53:41 AM »

https://youtu.be/7Ldus3AQSpE

Wesley

Hoppy · « **Reply #16955 on:** March 27, 2017, 06:44:56 PM »

Quote from: stivep on March 27, 2017, 07:53:41 AM

https://youtu.be/7Ldus3AQSpE

Wesley

Wesley,

Is this the 'surprise' part 3 video you told us you would be posting?

Zephir · « **Reply #16956 on:** March 27, 2017, 07:17:51 PM »

@Wesley: I don't understand the principle of electrostatic pump conversion - it's still too ad hoced. Will you explain it in some future videos?

NickZ · « **Reply #16957 on:** March 27, 2017, 07:53:42 PM »

Quote from: verpies on March 27, 2017, 07:42:56 AM

If you do that, then pin 16 must be grounded.
That change does not alter the operation of the circuit I posted here.

Got both #9 and #10 pins output signal back working as I had shown previously. Pin #3 needs to be left not connected.I still need to place a 0.1uf cap between pin #2 and pin #4. Which I'll do next.
So, there will be No IC yanking, today. Although, I've got a solder sucker now, and I was ready to go at it, pulling the TL494, if needed. As I had suspected, the chip was still OK.
I think that I may just continue on now installing the mosfets and snubbers. And see how it goes...

verpies · « **Reply #16958 on:** March 27, 2017, 10:18:32 PM »

Quote from: NickZ on March 27, 2017, 07:53:42 PM

Pin #3 needs to be left not connected.

If you do that, then the error amplifiers will be able to only adjust the duty cycles digitally - between minimum and maximum duty cycle (with only two discrete levels)
Pin 3 should be connected to pin 2 and/or pin 15 to have an non-discrete/analog adjustment of the duty cycle via pin 1 and/or pin 16.

Pins 2 and 15 are high-impedance pins, and they will not load down pin 3. If they do, then they are broken (measure them with an ohmmeter to ground to verify).

It works for other people, so it should also work for you.

Quote from: NickZ on March 27, 2017, 07:53:42 PM

I still need to place a 0.1uf cap between pin #2 and pin #4. Which I'll do next.

Why? That makes no sense.
What else do you have connected to pin 2 ?

NickZ · « **Reply #16959 on:** March 28, 2017, 01:56:01 AM »

Quote from: verpies on March 27, 2017, 10:18:32 PM

If you do that, then the error amplifiers will be able to only adjust the duty cycles digitally - between minimum and maximum duty cycle (with only two discrete levels)
Pin 3 should be connected to pin 2 and/or pin 15 to have an non-discrete/analog adjustment of the duty cycle via pin 1 and/or pin 16.

Pins 2 and 15 are high-impedance pins, and they will not load down pin 3. If they do, then they are broken (measure them with an ohmmeter to ground to verify).

It works for other people, so it should also work for you.
Why? That makes no sense.
What else do you have connected to pin 2 ?

Verpies:
Pins #13, #14, and also pin #15 are soldered and bridged together, and all three are connected to pin #2.
Pin #3 is left open. Pin #2 then also goes to pin #1 of the duty cycle pot, then the center pin of that pot (pin 2) goes to TL pin #4. Pin #3 of the pot goes to ground. That's where the 0.1 uf cap goes, as shown on his diagram in the video link posted below. Between TL pin 2 and pin 4. Why? I don't know. Maybe you can see the reason as to why it's placed there.
At least both outputs are working again. The signal is as it was when I used the topruslan 7 version.
If pin #3 is bridged to pin #2, I have problems. Stalker uses a toggle switch between pin #3 and #15, as his on/off switch. So, when that connection is closed, the driver STOPS the output signal.
My set up is also the same or similar to what Stalker showed as his last push pull driver, on his latest video.
Please look at his diagram, which I recommend that everyone look at, again. Watch his scope signal from the TL494, carefully, please.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YohJeG2DsSA

I just finished getting my PC going again, so I'm able to place video links, and resized images, again. Thanks for bearing with me.

Hoppy · « **Reply #16960 on:** March 28, 2017, 09:02:05 AM »

Nick,

Has there been a misunderstanding between pin number references? Are you also referring to your allocation of pot pin numbers?

verpies · « **Reply #16961 on:** March 28, 2017, 11:37:01 AM »

Quote from: NickZ on March 28, 2017, 01:56:01 AM

Pins #13, #14, and also pin #15 are soldered and bridged together, and all three are connected to pin #2.

This, together with grounding of pins 1 and 16, effectively disables the internal amplifiers that are intended for duty cycle control.

Quote from: NickZ on March 28, 2017, 01:56:01 AM

Pin #3 is left open.

Because the internal amplifiers are disabled!

Quote from: NickZ on March 28, 2017, 01:56:01 AM

Pin #2 then also goes to pin #1 of the duty cycle pot,

It would be more useful to write that this pin and pot are connected to V_REF (+5V) pin 14.

Quote from: NickZ on March 28, 2017, 01:56:01 AM

then the center pin of that pot (pin 2) goes to TL pin #4. Pin #3 of the pot goes to ground.

Which means that we are back to misusing the Dead Time control pin as a Duty Cycle adjustment.
Also, according to the datasheet, the max voltage on this pin should be +3.3V and this pot arrangement will not give you that range.

Quote from: NickZ on March 28, 2017, 01:56:01 AM

That's where the 0.1 uf cap goes, as shown on his diagram in the video link posted below. Between TL pin 2 and pin 4. Why? I don't know. Maybe you can see the reason as to why it's placed there.

It is a bypass cap for stabilization of the voltage on pin 4. Pin 2 is connected to V_REF (+5V), so that cap is really between pin 4 and V_REF (+5V). Bypasing to a power rail is wrong - that cap should be between pin 4 and ground.

Quote from: NickZ on March 28, 2017, 01:56:01 AM

If pin #3 is bridged to pin #2, I have problems.

That is to be expected if pin 2 is also connected to pin 14 V_REF (+5V).
I never connect pin 3 to V_REF (+5V).

Quote from: NickZ on March 28, 2017, 01:56:01 AM

Stalker uses a toggle switch between pin #3 and #15, as his on/off switch.

It is the connection of pin 3 with pin 14 that is responsible for this ( not with pin 2 or pin 15 !!! )

Quote from: NickZ on March 28, 2017, 01:56:01 AM

So, when that connection is closed, the driver STOPS the output signal.

What this does is adjusts the duty cycle to zero, making it appear like the TL393 is OFF.
This is not the optimal way to turn it off, BTW.

Quote from: NickZ on March 28, 2017, 01:56:01 AM

My set up is also the same or similar to what Stalker showed as his last push pull driver, on his latest video.
Please look at his diagram, which I recommend that everyone look at, again. Watch his scope signal from the TL494, carefully, please. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YohJeG2DsSA

That is an over 1 hour long video!
I found his schematic a 7:25 but when are his scopeshots?

itsu · « **Reply #16962 on:** March 28, 2017, 01:14:17 PM »

Here the circuit used by Stalker, the scope shots (output of the MOSFET drivers) are at 31 minutes into the video.

Itsu

TinselKoala · « **Reply #16963 on:** March 28, 2017, 01:31:14 PM »

Note the 1k pulldowns on the 494 outputs.

NickZ · « **Reply #16964 on:** March 28, 2017, 04:32:51 PM »

Thanks for checking into Stalker's last video. So, it may be that there are no connection methods that work as they should. Yet, Stalker does have a previous self runner, and so does Adrian. And Stalker may have made another one, if his last video is working to provide this last circuit to self run, also.
Yet, this we still have not seen yet.

I would like to make a TL494 circuit that works for me, but the last schematic that Verpies posted did not work on my set up, only on one of both output channels, for some reason. I checked, and double checked the connections to it many times.

The topruslan 7 schematics does work for me, on both output channels, also for apecore. Even though it does not work as Verpies would like it to, or the way that it should work. Yet Stalker is going that route in any case. Maybe they know something that we don't?
Oleg who is also an electronics expert and has made several working self running circuits, his TL connection method does work for meto some degree, and there are duty cycle controls. Yet possibly it can also be improved to show the duty cycle working as Verpies would like to see it work.

I'm into making any needed changes, as I only wanted to see if my TL chip was fried, or not. So, now I know that it's ok, and does not need to be pulled.

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY (Read 11799229 times)

TinselKoala

Re: Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY

NickZ

Re: Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY

verpies

Re: Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY

verpies

Re: Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY

stivep

Re: Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY

Hoppy

Re: Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY

Zephir

Re: Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY

NickZ

Re: Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY

verpies

Re: Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY

NickZ

Re: Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY

Hoppy

Re: Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY

verpies

Re: Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY

itsu

Re: Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY

TinselKoala

Re: Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY

NickZ

Re: Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY