DC-DC LED-s Spice Experiment

No over-voltage protection ... no under-voltage lock-down ... no reverse polarity protection ... not built/tested in real life ... ::

555´s alternate ...

---

[Eop]

LM311 & LM393 common mode sensitivity test

LM311 auto-biasing test

LM311 optimal (most sensitive) input voltage offset TEST

LM393 optimal (most sensitive) input voltage offset TEST

LM393 oscillator forcing the input to it's optimal common input voltage offset ... Vee/Vss/-Vs

---

[Eop]

ADC variant using the OC outp mod from the prev. post

lately , in conjunction with the other work , i noticed that the software ADC , i fast wrote for one of the experiments , actually can be implemented pretty much "as is" and on the real components ...

here's the ADC variant (the only problem will be to keep the voltages steady enough that the output would ... exist ! ...)

in above the voltages Vr0 to Vr3 (near) match the voltages Q1 to Q4 (the least being generated by the hw implementation of the ADC)

the fascinating thing is the relative simplicity of it (although the single chip DAC or µC with the feature would require less or none components for the external network ... )

---

about TL3472

---

[Eop]

BjT versus OpAmp Staircase Generator

src::GE Transistor Manual 7-th ed. 1964 p.345
about :: it takes higher energy pulses + a NEG supply to run , (it may be not so as i quite don't get yet the anatomy of the thing but) it seems to have a worse linearity than the OpAmp v. though it also seems to keep it's levels longer in place and have a smaller variation in step size near zero to near Vcc (to "Zero the drift" it takes somewhat unreal precision tuning of the bias resistors . . . )

---

PS! -- The RESET circuitry is NOT implemented for neither one of the gen.-s -- coz it'd result in slower simulation times - and it should be relatively easy to set up one for your needs
. . . also the use of low power oscillator requires a buffer 1 to not be affected from the fast-/"a low resistance value" -biasing resistors' reaction/(?bwd coupling)

---

src::http://zpostbox.ru/g4_e.htm (Fig.28)
about :: the OpAmp v. accepts a higher variety of pulse voltages and tank-/integrator capacitor values -- the linearity is likely better than for bjt v. also the integration range is bigger (due lesser possible pulse amplitude values and the possibility to drive OUTP (Vsc) more close to upper rail . . .)

---

[Eop]

LM393 CLM TEST

LM393 speed test with a dynamic output voltage divider -- gives a best high speed sense range for the 5V supply

the divider (conditionally --and/or-- very approximately ) corresponds to about a single 3.6kΩ pullup resistor (or speculatively to about 1mA max. sink current at high frequency = (5 - 1.4)·1V/3.6kΩ)

---

An experimental javaScript Output Voltage Divider Calculator

---

Voltage Divider - Calculator

---

The Browser Detected ...
window.top.navigator.appName :
window.top.navigator.appCodeName :
window.top.navigator.platform :
window.top.navigator.product :
window.top.navigator.appVersion :
window.top.navigator.userAgent :
window.top.navigator.userAgent (about guessing the Browser) :
V_CC :
U_HI :
U_LO :
I_SNK :
Integrity of the entered data :
R₁ :
R₂ :
R₃ :
R₀ : -- R0 = R1||R3

---

Usage :: R1 to R3 correspond to {r1} to {r3} on the Fig. above

 

See also : the formulas for the Voltage comparator's resistive output delimitter

---

Summing it up ::

---

[Eop]

revised my LM393 CLM-s

using two types of test ::

about ::

---

[Eop]

Lo-Vo VCO dev. (prev. follow-up)

the ?? std. ?? VCO from LM139 d/s does not perform too good nor stable.fnOf(control voltage)

so needed to retail one for 3.3V ...

... in prior of what picking the Op Amp model capable for this task was essential

. . . & the result ordered by relative change in frequency ::

---

In "practice" the controls eat off much like half the power -- e.g. -- the LED-s need to be multiplied by the factor of 10x to get the normal efficiency out of it --or-- the controls need to be replaced by the lower power ones . . . a tricky part . . . also (in case of increasing the number of LED-s) it requires more battery power so the step up conversion is a better approach (and more efficient and easier to control by default)

---

[Eop]

Improving LM339 + "tunable" osc variant

► the tunable osc. as by selecting the RC net-wk

► the tests that lead to (as by what i've tested so far) "improved" v. of LMx93

► 2MHz - TEST (driven from realistic src. 74HC04 -- 1 gate has just about the power required!?)

---

[Eop]

LMxx39 Circus + 750ns & - 900ns Zero Cross

Circus

Ti provided Pspice thingy for LM339 (is annoyingly ▲impractical▲) + (some of the chip names might be erroneous) -- anyway a good question here is why that cfg. doesn't generate "timestep too small" error . . .

Ti LM339 behavioural model as the bottom plot -- interestingly -- the closest match to prev. does not appear to be the right transistor circuit - the LM239 - but instead my experimental design as LMx39 (respectively LM293 and LMx93 in simulation circuit - both are the component level models e.g. the sub circuits) . . .


Cross the Zero +700ns

making the src. (whitch is yet another variant of the Lim.- or the Window comparator) more practical

Cross the Zero -900ns

using the "slope detector" - the right - first occurring comp.-pair signal can be passed to outp (removes the "echo")

[Eop]

LMx39 CLM Test

since the Philips didn't provided the internals we assume it's about LMx39 ! ???

Capabilities . . . ! Optimistic . . .

The next requires a fixed supply , no aging / temperature drift of the components (or very complex / fast auto adjust to . . .)

---

[Eop]