Comparing Different 6LF22 to +5V supplies

Circuits ::

---

Cross Ref. ::

Param.	100	110	120	122	124	128
Description	Pos. collector-load linear-reg.	Pos. collector-load linear-reg. with fold-back	Pos. experimental Op-Amp regulated collector-load linear-reg.	Neg. j-Fet - emitter-load linear-reg. with fold-back	Pos. emitter-load linear-reg. with current lim.	Pos. VF-PWM buck conv.
Average Efficiency	51%	53%	57%	38%	28%	83%
Short-Circuit Current	120 mA	1.7 mA	NOT Ltd.	2.6 mA	* 57 mA	NOT Ltd.
Voltage Regulation	± 600 µV	± 250 µV	± 300 µV	± 15 µV	(± 550µV)	± 54 mV
Output Current : Nominal (Max.)	80 (85) mA	80 (145) mA	80 (150) mA	50 (105) mA	* 50 (54) mA	200 (>400) mA

---

Source Circuits ::

↑↑ src :: ISBN 5-440-00345-2

↑↑ src :: GE Transistor Manual 1964 ↑↑

↑↑ found from :: LED Torch Circuits ↑↑

---

[Eop]

9V-to-5V Step-down concep design

the thing

switching wave-forms at max.-min. load

---

[Eop]

yet another 1.2V supply

Dif. Amp. Draft design:

Dif. Amp. to Op. Amp. - with overshoot shunt:

New concept with a short circuit limit and indication:

---

[EoP]

a fuzzy science on old transformers 2

finding the optimum simple design for 9V linear adapter

---

using std. parts 7805 , TL431

the load peak/-step response is somewhat unexpected here

---

using low ß , high power switch (such as *MJE13003)

the load regulation stays below acceptable

---

using bridged LM78L05 and LM324

fine tuning the bridge may induce better results this 1 however won´t pass because it´s load response

---

same as above with an attempt to add a reference to be used in better line rejection ...

... can´t gain steady reference - won´t test all possible situations for such a noisy one = reference failure , halt, halt

---

using low ß , high power switch* and random intuitive design

looks pass - tough i don´t know about higher frequency load responce

---

[Eop]

supply test defaults update

±1µV precision @ 1Hz ::


PS! this simulation uses 2N3906 for switch transistor
for 300mA continuous drainthere should be
6x 2N3906 in parallel or higher I.continuos switch
Switching v. ::

PS! this circuit is too complex to succeed @ 1-st build
- "we" feature here a quick poor setup example
for testing the grid at higher varying rate loads . . .

[Eop]

a Collector load (sc proof) Vtg. Regulator

since the component countfor this bullsh¡t

is higher and it has an error to the range
 of the following (! not built / tested -- but i guess it's not far from it´s actual)

then i guess i gonna get this 1 PCB-d and cased in with an appropriate ( 300+mA @ 10V DC ) transformer , damn it takes long to test out what you actually need and that actually works as designed -- should've brought a random 600÷1000mA 9V SC proof linear reg. such as KA7809

Update !

now more precise v. of the above is available

[EoP]

How to kill your LDO

extends http://chpsndtch.blogspot.com.ee/2015/05/two-random-voltage-regulators-practical.html , http://chpsndtch.blogspot.com.ee/2015/04/regulator-redesign-lab-as-always.html

Getting some numbers . . .

a quick fix + improved zener
(*update :: i used in practice a darlington - not the super ß - "power switch" - this cfg. seems to have a better supply-/load rejection than below ↓↓)

insane . . . improving Vs rejection + "digital" current limit

"back to analog" -- adding batteries . . .
 (*update :: see above ↑↑)

(hope idon't uploadthis2wce) -- a fold-back sc current Lim.

[EoP]

Two random voltage regulators (practical)

a pre-conditioner (the 1-st of 2) for 9V linear reg. amazingly falls to that 10% of circuits that GO as they simulate !

an error-trial fast compile of the 9V from 12.8V - even more amazingly the circuit falls to that 2% of circuits that actually GO better than they simulate -- this 1 has 2...3mV output change on load variation -- donno what happens if we vary the input . . . likely the bias increases decreases along the V.in resulting unspec. change for V.out . . . not tested -- the russian KT815 mounted on about (both sides tot.) 1²' (1side tot.) ½²' heatsink (that seems to be sufficient for <avg.100mA <peak.240mA I.out)

[EoP]

Regulator Redesign (/Lab -- as always . . .)

________________________________________________
2015-04-15 ::
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
 . . . trying to "de(/un)-bug" the last design from prev. post -- normalize power range , minimize the error . . .

+ a modified v.'s foldback diagram

Customizing/"improving" the 78Lxx for 1.2V

i only guess it's 3.0V
________________________________________________
2015-04-16 ::
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"Minimizing Compile" , exploring the switcher mode v. , experimenting with foldback . . .

thought to use the LT's µ-P 2.5V LDO -- but the 3uA is likely causing it's instability in high loads env.

________________________________________________
2015-04-17 ::
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Optimizing "Design"

Update! :: the foldback re-visited . . .

Update+ :: ±10µV version ::

Update+ :: ±12µV version with foldback updated to support high load capacities (no frequency test - what so ever- carried out + i donno how to thermal compensate - /!\ so i never do /!\) e.g. you have to recalculate the design before any attempt to assemble it

________________________________________________
[EoP]
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯