Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mystery problems SVT 4 Pro continues

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mystery problems SVT 4 Pro continues

    Still trying to resolve some issues with one channel of an SVT 4 Pro. I posted a week ago about what I found in it and currently am at an impass trying to find the source of weird voltage readings.

    All the issues are contained in channel A only (B works fine): The hi side had blown all the outputs, ballast, 47 ohm & 1.5k resistors. I replaced those along with several of the ballast resistors on the Lo side (the 47ohm & 1.5k were good). R118 which feeds the V+ to the driver section was also blown/scortched. I pulled the Hi side heatsink with all the devices to replace the ballest resistors and have it out while I'm trying to normalize the voltage.

    What I'm seeing is a very low V+ on the outputs (.4 volts instead of 3.6-4.5v), and a very weird -12.5v at TP4 which should be +/- 1 volt w/o load. I think that this is shutting everything down in the driver section and giving the low volts on gates of the outputs. The center rail (Output A) between the two sides also has a -1.7v where I'm assuming it should be zero. I realize that Output A feeds back to the pin 3 of the IC1 and is probably generating the -12v that I'm seeing on pin 1 (output of IC1).

    At this point I've replaced all the diodes in the driver stage and the output stage (D114/115, D116/117, D110/D111, D112/D113, D106/107, D108/109). I've also replaced all the transistors in the driver stage (Q102/103, Q104/105, Q106/107 and Q108/109). Q102 which is where I first spotted the blown resistor has the right voltage on the E=77v and B=78v, but only putting out .3-.4 v on the collector. Same is true for the neg side although the neg voltages are a bit higher than the positive ones. I should say that Q103 & Q104 (the inside pair) seem to be about right: Q103B=4.5v, E=4v, C=77v. While Q104 B=-5.3, E=-8.3v, C=-78v.

    Up to now I also resisted the reflow all solder joints process, but as a last resort tonight I did that also. At least on the "A" side components. I've been comparing down the line the voltage readings from the B channel and checking it against A, but I can't seem to figure out why they are different, just that they are. All the voltage supplies seem good and consistant from one side to the other. I also pulled the 5532 and socketed it and put in another, but I get the same reading of -12v on pin one, so I put the old part back in. I know that both channels share that device, but the B side reads zero on pin 7 (it's output).

    Any thoughts or aha's? I feel like I'm flailing at this point. Also the readings up to IC1 seem about right.

    Matt

  • #2
    Matt,

    In such cases (or maybe in all cases) it's details that counts. You need to find that small little component that failed. That's why I wonder when you say that voltages on Q103 and Q104 are "about right" . If you just try to calculate base-emitter voltages, you get: Q103 0.5V, Q104 3V. For me it's very far from beeing "about right". The circuit is symmetrical. Shouldn't the voltages be symmetrical too (at least to some extents)?
    What is the voltage on R120/R121? What is the voltage on the output of IC1:A? The IC is connected to the output of the amp (R112). Is there any DC voltage there? I think this is the place where you should make some measurements.

    Mark

    Comment


    • #3
      Ok....
      the junction of R120/121 = -7.9v; the output of IC1(A) -12.6v; R112 has -1.7v (Aout side) and of course -7.9v (R121/120).
      I should also point out that the input of IC1A has a very small -.026v there, which I thought was from the -1.7 on the other side of R110 that connects OUTA w/input of IC1. The B half of IC1 is "0" all around, with +/- 15 at (8&4).

      I guess from a design point, what determines the 3.6v that's supposed to be at TP9? Is it R135 feeding back thru C111(1uf@50v)--->D110 or...? R135 (82k) measures ok, I lifted one end to be sure, but it's weird that I see 80v on one side of R135 and -1.5 on the other, which connects to the base of Q108. The zeners D114/115 were replaced also, the only thing in that area that wasn't replaced was the 1uf caps that go between B/C of Q108/Q109.
      Matt

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by phydauex View Post
        Ok....
        the junction of R120/121 = -7.9v; the output of IC1(A) -12.6v; R112 has -1.7v (Aout side) and of course -7.9v (R121/120).
        I should also point out that the input of IC1A has a very small -.026v there, which I thought was from the -1.7 on the other side of R110 that connects OUTA w/input of IC1. The B half of IC1 is "0" all around, with +/- 15 at (8&4).
        So you have a lot of incorrect voltages. The circuit is symmetrical and I assume that the voltages should be symmetrical too. This yields 0V on R120/121.
        It is possible that -12.6V is caused by -1.7V from the output of the amp.
        Originally posted by phydauex View Post
        I guess from a design point, what determines the 3.6v that's supposed to be at TP9? Is it R135 feeding back thru C111(1uf@50v)--->D110 or...? R135 (82k) measures ok, I lifted one end to be sure, but it's weird that I see 80v on one side of R135 and -1.5 on the other, which connects to the base of Q108. The zeners D114/115 were replaced also, the only thing in that area that wasn't replaced was the 1uf caps that go between B/C of Q108/Q109.
        Matt
        I don't have schematic with TP9 on it. Is it the A_HI rail? If you mean bias voltage, it is determined by Q106/107. When the ouptut MOSFETs were shorted, there was very high voltage in the driver stage. So you may check C111/112, as well as C110. In such difficult cases I start from the simplest verification of components of the circuit. In this case I would start from measuring voltages on R122/123/124, then proceed with Q103/104, D106/109, R118/125, R119/126.

        Mark

        Comment


        • #5
          Yeah Mark, TP9 is the Hi rail (should be 3.6v). I've been trying to go from know reference points, R122 is good and correct (4.3/-4.3v); That answers one question, that the 3.6/-3.6v on the HI/Lo rails is produced by Q106/Q107, they've been replaced, but I need to double check that the resistors around it are correct. C110 was replaced, as was C113/114. I didn't replace C111/112 (I ddin't have any handy). Again If I can start to get some points correct and start working from there to correct the rest along the way, I'll be making some progress.

          I still think the funny voltages at output of IC1 is from the anomily at Output A, and not being produced by/around IC1.

          Comment


          • #6
            Hey Mark and to anyone who cares!! I believe I found it.
            Mark - I went back as per your suggestion and started calmly and slowly checking every resistor starting in the driver section, with no change, then went back to what I thought was a good resistor(actually I measured voltage on either end, I didn't however actually check the resistor itself). Put the meter on it and to my suprise - no reading. Pulled it out and sure enough, nothing. This was R119, the bias resistor for Q102. Replaced it and turned it on, voltages now matching what I was reading on the other channel.

            Unbelievable! There is still a tiny bit high voltage at TP4 on the output of IC1, but where it's supposed to be +/- 1 volt, I get -1.5v. Other than that, the center rail is now 0v; the Hi/Lo rails now match the B channel. I just need to put the heatsink/output block back in, and check the bias of it.

            What an ordeal. I just was going in circles there for a week and not getting anywhere. I guess calm & methodical win the day! There was alot to mess things up as so many resistors and trans where toast, it was kind of hard to find a starting piont. While I got it apart, I think I'm still going to replace the 1uf caps anda couple more10uf caps around the limiter and drivers, just because.

            Thanks for the suggestions and helping me step back with a plan.
            Matt

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by phydauex View Post
              Hey Mark and to anyone who cares!! I believe I found it.
              I'm glad that I was able come up with some suggestions.
              Originally posted by phydauex View Post
              There is still a tiny bit high voltage at TP4 on the output of IC1, but where it's supposed to be +/- 1 volt, I get -1.5v.
              I think that -1.5V is still acceptable.
              Originally posted by phydauex View Post
              I guess calm & methodical win the day! There was alot to mess things up as so many resistors and trans where toast, it was kind of hard to find a starting point.
              You are right that in such cases it is good to have a starting point. But it's not that difficult. In this amp you can start either from +/-15V and R122/123/124 voltage divider, or from +VD/-VD rails and continue with R118/119, D106, Q102 and so on. In all these places you have predictible voltages. It seems to me that you made one small mistake; you most probably measured voltages in reference to the ground. And then you don't know whether the voltage on R119 is right, about right, or completely wrong. If you'd measure the voltage across R119, I'm sure you'd get 0V - a clear indication of the problem.
              I hope that now you are not affraid of this amp .

              Mark

              Comment

              gebze escort kurtköy escort maltepe escort
              pendik escort
              betticket istanbulbahis zbahis
              deneme bonusu veren siteler deneme bonusu veren siteler
              casinolevant levant casino
              Working...
              X