Hi Chuck,
I found the device I was thinking of. It's an Analog Devices ADP3000AR-5. Here's the link --> http://www.analog.com/UploadedFiles/Data_Sheets/ADP3000.pdf
Its operating temp range is -40C to +85C in an 8-lead SOIC style package.
Here's the block diagram:
Unlike most of these step-down converters, this one switches around 400 kHz regardless of the load. A wider temp range would be nice. I'll keep looking...
73, Juan
-----Original Message----- From: Chuck Green [mailto:greencl@mindspring.com] Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2007 7:28 AM To: juan-rivera@sbcglobal.net Cc: 'Bdale Garbee'; 'David Smith'; 'Dave Black (Work)'; 'Dave Black (Home)'; eagle@amsat.org; 'Samsonoff@Mac. Com'; 'Juan.Rivera (Work)' Subject: Re: [eagle] Re: Receiver Spec vs. ATP, a few Suggestions and aQuestion or Two
Hi Juan,
My use of the value 90% (efficiency) is based on your measurements of
current supplied and my previous measurements of power consumed. But it
really doesn't matter how good this figure is, I think we can do a
little better.
I really suspect the existing regulator is running normally. It is
likely in a very low power mode and therefor not running at the 100 kHz
+ speed it can run at. But I'm not defending it. If there is something
better (more suitable for our current needs), great! You may very well
have found such a device. However, since it would be running at 10-15%
of capacity it may also switch to a more efficient mode (slower
switching speed).
Given the switching speed the regulator is running at now, I doubt the
layout has much to do with the issues you have uncovered. But that
really doesn't matter because we certainly wouldn't design a new board
to install the device dead-bug stile. However, you might want to
experiment with the new device as a direct replacement on the board
which would likely mean dead-bug stile. The topology of switching
supplies are often very much alike so it may well be that you could do
this as a first experiment.
And I wouldn't give up on your idea of an analog supply. Just because
one or two of us are not excited about this doesn't mean it isn't the
right thing to do. It's a system level issue of power management. But
I still want to encourage experimenting with a new switching supply to
see if it can resolve the problem.
Chuck
Juan Rivera wrote:
Hi Chuck,
I don't think that existing supply is running at 90% efficiency. I'll
have
to solder it back together to take a few measurements but the
manufacturer's
specs don't claim quite that much and this one isn't running properly.
I've
got a bit more data in my symposium presentation and I hope to complete
that
in the next few days and get it out.
I found a step-down converter that's designed to supply a maximum of about
100 mA and it runs at 400 kHz with automotive temp range. If no one else
steps up I'll put out some info on this one.
73,
Juan
-----Original Message-----
From: Chuck Green [mailto:greencl@mindspring.com]
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2007 3:30 PM
To: juan-rivera@sbcglobal.net
Cc: 'Bdale Garbee'; 'David Smith'; 'Dave Black (Work)'; 'Dave Black
(Home)';
eagle@amsat.org; 'Samsonoff@Mac. Com'; 'Juan.Rivera (Work)'
Subject: Re: [eagle] Re: Receiver Spec vs. ATP, a few Suggestions and
aQuestion or Two
Hi Juan,
I think the reason you have not seen much regarding the CAN-Do redesign
is that, as far as I know, no one has stepped up to do the power supply
redesign. Until that happens, not much else will happen.
I'm not thrilled with the idea of giving up the switching power supply.
Remember that the efficiency hit must be multiplied by 10-15, the number
of CAN-Do's on the satellite.
The "dead-bug" modification is intended to fly. Those who were not
around in the early days have no idea what loose wires have flown
successfully in the past. That's not to say we should encourage such
things, just that it's not as ugly to those of us who have seen much
worse in the past as you might think. Because of the IC's mass (very
small) it is probably very secure just the way you see it. But we will
also epoxy a radiation shield to it and then conformal coat the whole
thing with a heave conformal coating which will make it very difficult
for anything to move.
I'm ready to start a new design (layout) just as soon as someone gives
us a new power supply design that is quieter, and hopefully, more
efficient than the 90% we now have.
Chuck
Juan Rivera wrote:
Bdale,
It would be a trade-off. I've put out all the information I have and
everyone knows my opinions. I think someone else is supposed to be
looking
into this but I forgot who it is since nothing has been posted. I'd like
to
see some alternative suggestions from the experts on the CAN-Do, the
enclosure, and the EMI situation in general.
By the way, do I have a prototype CAN-Do module or was the intent to fly
this version with the dead-bug step-down converter hanging by three leads
and a few wires?
Juan
-----Original Message-----
From: Bdale Garbee [mailto:bdale@gag.com]
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2007 2:41 PM
To: juan-rivera@sbcglobal.net
Cc: 'John B. Stephensen'; David Smith; Dave Black (Work); Dave Black
(Home);
eagle@amsat.org; Samsonoff@Mac. Com; Juan.Rivera (Work)
Subject: Re: [eagle] Receiver Spec vs. ATP, a few Suggestions and
aQuestion
or Two
On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 21:23 -0700, Juan Rivera wrote:
I have a few thoughts... The CAN-Do switching step-down converter is
only supplying 11 milliamps. If we take a slight efficiency hit we
could just go to a simple linear regulator and completely eliminate
the radiated and conducted EMI emission problem from CAN-do. That
eases the EMI filtering and shielding requirements for every single
payload. That seems like a good trade-off to me.
Hrm. What makes you say "a slight efficiency hit"?
Doing this on one or two modules that are particularly susceptible to
noise *may* make sense (and I'm certainly open to considering this as an
alternative), but we're already on our second power supply design on the
CAN-Do! because the original switcher, which was more efficient than a
linear regulator, was deemed too inefficient to fly on P3E by our
AMSAT-DL friends.
Bdale
Via the Eagle mailing list courtesy of AMSAT-NA
Eagle@amsat.org