Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

floating ground on 1st smoothing capacitor

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

  • #16
    To add to the comments about the dropping resistor in the 0V line providing a benefit for some forms of noise, this situation is related to parasitic capacitances between the power transformer HT secondary winding and a variety of capacitive paths back to 0V, such as via the transformer core, or primary winding, or electrostatic shield, or other secondary windings (eg. heater).

    Capacitor noise current is proportional to the parasitic capacitance level, and the applied dV/dt. The HT winding has lots of voltage swing (dV) but at a somewhat low mains frequency (1/dt). Rectifier related hash/noise can be much higher frequency, although at lower voltage levels (depending on leakage inductance levels and current waveforms). Adding resistance to the loop that is closed by that parasitic capacitance, in the form of the additional dropping resistor, would be of some benefit to attenuating that noise current from flowing in the remainder of the 0V distribution (eg. to chassis for parasitic capacitances to chassis).

    However the parasitic capacitances are likely to be small, perhaps up to hundreds of pF for transformer windings layered over each other.

    A practical dropping resistor value is unlikely to be very large in comparison to the impedance of the parasitic capacitance, except at frequencies beyond audio range, and hence little benefit may be achieved. If that noise is a concern then maybe a few ferrite beads/tubes slipped over the 0V link between first and second filter cap, and the related HV DC dropper resistor leads, would be of similar or more benefit.

    Comment


    • #17
      Ok, so you can't just leave us hanging here.

      You're duty bound to move the resistors both to the + side and listen, then both to the - side and listen. Inquiring minds want to know.

      It is possible that simply forcing the rectifier pulses into a different path that doesn't touch the signal ground was responsible for much of the new quiet. I have seen cases where simply rewiring that one wire made a massive difference in hum.
      Amazing!! Who would ever have guessed that someone who villified the evil rich people would begin happily accepting their millions in speaking fees!

      Oh, wait! That sounds familiar, somehow.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by R.G. View Post
        Ok, so you can't just leave us hanging here.

        You're duty bound to move the resistors both to the + side and listen, then both to the - side and listen. Inquiring minds want to know.

        It is possible that simply forcing the rectifier pulses into a different path that doesn't touch the signal ground was responsible for much of the new quiet. I have seen cases where simply rewiring that one wire made a massive difference in hum.
        ok, i'll take 3 measurements on the old scope i rarely use.

        1-short the + resistor
        2-short the - resistor
        3-parallel both resistors with resistors of equal value (so total dropping resistance is the same in all 3 tests)

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by yunger View Post
          ok, i'll take 3 measurements on the old scope i rarely use.
          1-short the + resistor
          2-short the - resistor
          3-parallel both resistors with resistors of equal value (so total dropping resistance is the same in all 3 tests)
          That works. I'm guessing you're using the scope to see the speaker output voltage? Be really, really careful if you use the scope on the high voltage sides.
          And I guess I'd like to see how it is (and have your subjective reaction to how much noise there is) with the resistors shorted AND without the additional cap, to test how much of the quietness comes from an additional cap.

          And thank you very much for running the tests!
          Amazing!! Who would ever have guessed that someone who villified the evil rich people would begin happily accepting their millions in speaking fees!

          Oh, wait! That sounds familiar, somehow.

          Comment


          • #20
            Yes, thanks for taking the time to make those tests. The results will be very interesting.

            Comment


            • #21
              Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_20150116_201451.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	975.4 KB
ID:	836572ripple readings.pdf

              ok, i made the readings. see the attached pdf.
              i wasn't able to remove the added first filter cap since space is too tight to get cleanly get a soldering iron in there without disassembling the board from the chassis(which takes a long time). also, a few of the pictures didn't turn out but i think there are enough to see what's going on. all readings were taken with volume turned off to reduce any noise from the preamp.

              some observations:

              -shorting the positive resistor, the negative resistor and paralleling both with equal values made no difference in ripple reduction between the 3 options. total dropping resistance made more visible difference on the scope. more total resistance reduced the magnitude of ripple.

              -after eliminating all dropping resistance by shorting the + and - resistors between the 1st and 2nd filters, i could hear hum coming through the speaker. enough hum that i wouldn't have been satisfied with just doubling the capacitance of the 1st filter.

              hope this helps

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by yunger View Post
                [ATTACH=CONFIG]32462[/ATTACH][ATTACH]32463[/ATTACH]

                -shorting the positive resistor, the negative resistor and paralleling both with equal values made no difference in ripple reduction between the 3 options. total dropping resistance made more visible difference on the scope. more total resistance reduced the magnitude of ripple.
                Interesting. It looks like it doesn't give any noticeable improvement by putting half the dropping resistance in the grounded side.
                Thanks for posting the results.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Malcolm Irving View Post
                  Interesting. It looks like it doesn't give any noticeable improvement by putting half the dropping resistance in the grounded side.
                  Compared to?
                  Originally posted by Enzo
                  I have a sign in my shop that says, "Never think up reasons not to check something."


                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by g-one View Post
                    Compared to?
                    Sorry, I wasn't very clear.
                    I meant there doesn't seem to be any noticeable difference among the three cases:
                    560 ohms on + side only,
                    560 ohms on grounded side only, and
                    280 ohms on + side with 280 ohms on grounded side.

                    I was thinking in terms of 560 ohms being the dropping resistance, and
                    in the last above case half of it being placed in the grounded side.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X