Showing posts with label multisim. Show all posts
Showing posts with label multisim. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 28, 2012

PWM amplifier 1 - The PWM modulator design II.

I have successfully cleared the last design example of PWM modulator circuit. This PWM modulator will be used before TAS H-bridge chip. In this article, I don't really like the signal at the end, and I made mistakes about power sources (with Zener diodes) on the last simulation schematic. Not too much, but I modified the design, and I got better result. I deleted the dead-time logic, because for the TAS chip not required, the soft start only is easier. At the end of this newer design, I got nice signal from both TTL and CMOS outputs and comparator without dead-time logic. See images.

In this image the green is the triangle signal, the red is 10 kHz sinus, a yellow is the PWM output on the CMOS 4009 inverter.

I know, that not really important, but how I know about the quality of modulated PWM signal? I have to convert back to the original with RLC network. This is the blue line.
I changed the CMOS 4009 (15V power for comparator and CMOS circuit) to TTL 7414 (5V power for comparator and TTL circuit). The TTL output is the yellow line.

 The decoded result at the end of TTL circuit is the blue signal.

I made small modifications on the circuit around the comparator. I changed Z diodes DC power sources, the output of the comprator continued with only one TTL or CMOS gate (inverter). I analyzed the PWM signal after the TTL/CMOS chip, but the output of comparator is really good too with this schematic:

Saturday, January 7, 2012

Simulation of 8 band parametric equalizer

On the previous post I talking about software simulation of parametric EQ filter. The simulation result is exactly same as the original official datasheet of 4 band EQ (with really small differences on the lowest frequencies). But I would like to design parametric EQ with more than 4 bands. No math expression, but the simulation is easier solution for this modification.

For the first design, I modified the original 4 band schematic to 8 bands, and the simulation works with this modification very fast, the required time is same as like with 1 filter only (while several software running on the background). The schematic simplified, I removed virtual batteries, used VCC/VEE power sources instead. Deleted the on/off switch which is really needless. This simplified schematic without virtual instruments working well for AC analysis.

First of all, I need math expression (again :) for getting frequency values between 20 Hz and 20 kHz for 8 bands. I think about 10 bands, but for parametric EQ where the middle frequency and the Q are adjustable, I think 10 bands are too much. The parametric EQ of URS software have 5 bands only. The first solution to get middle values between the lowest and highest band I found on the NET by this page. This webpage counts the geometric mean between f1 and f2, which are the lowest and highest frequencies on the system.

This solution is not the best for 8 bands, because first I can get the middle of the lowest and highest value which are 3 bands, but after, I have to get all middles between these 3 values, finally I have 5 or 9 results instead of 8. Maybe the possible solution if the highest frequency is around 40 kHz, get 9 results with this page, and delete the last (40 kHz) value. So you can have 8 results, where the highest around 20 kHz.

The really tricksy solution is the Excel spreadsheet. This table is not my own work, I got help from Frank Walker. I just enter the start and end values to this spreadsheet, and the required numbers between these values, and the table getting back the solutions.

First, compare the result of this expression with the original 4 band UREI EQ:


Compared with the UREI datasheet and the result of simulation, we can see, the datasheet values contains the result of expression not the simulation. The trust, on the UREI schematic I can found capacitor with 27.5 nf value, which is not the standard value.


Tables for more than 4 bands:

Finally, here is the expression of spreadsheet from the cell where we got the results of bands:
=IF(C8<$D$5,$D$3*10^((LOG10($D$4)-LOG10($D$3))*(C8-1)/($D$5-1)), IF(C8=$D$5,$D$4,IF(C8>$D$5," ","?")))

This expression counts the required frequencies between the lowest and highest bands. The lowest frequency is on the cell no. D3, the highest on D4, the number of bands is on the D5. The column C is the serial number of bands from 1 to 8.

More than 8 channels have problem with Q, what must be very high if the number of bands are too much. If less than 8 band required, all channels have bypass switch and the Q parameter can be set to lower.

For the current design, I need the table of 8 bands EQ. The range of frequency adjustment must be smaller than with 4 bands only, modifications of the schematic required:


The important aspect, that we have to work with standard values of capacitors and potentiometers. The first modification requires for possible higher Q value, and less possible range of the adjustment of Q:

  • R2 120 Ohm instead of 390 Ohm
  • R3 1.5 KOhm instead of 390 Ohm

The second modification is for the less range of frequency adjustment.

  • R5 and R7 potentiometers changed from 55 KOhm to 22 KOhm.

After these changes, on the filters have to be modified the C1 and C2 capacitors only:

  1. 330 nF
  2. 150 nF
  3. 68 nF
  4. 33 nF
  5. 15 nF
  6. 7.5 nF
  7. 3.6 nF
  8. C1 = 1.8 nF, C2 = 1.6 nF

Possible to fine tune the required frequency, if the values of C1 and C2 are not same. With this method, the required frequency can be fine shifted to lower or higher value, and can be re-tuned the value of Q.

First, I determine the maximum possible frequency (green) of the first (lowest) band by new C1 and C2 capacitors, and after I analyzed the low (red) and the middle (blue) frequency:

After analyzing the first band I started to define the second, but before, I wonder how about these bands on the original 4 band EQ:

This is the result of analysis for all 4 bands, with possible lowest, middle, and the possible highest frequencies.

Finally, the graph of AC analysis of 1st, 2nd, and 3rd frequencies not succeed pretty like on the original UREI EQ, because with available standard values this is not possible:

These graphs are not really pretty, but this is no problem, because the parameters are adjustable, and the graph cannot visible during operation :).

The next step is the AC analysis of all 8 bands:


The graphs are really not nice like the original one :(.

With the next analysis I reduced the Q from 100% to 70% on all bands:

This analysis would be more interested, if I bypass some filters, or changing the cut/boost parameter too.

Finally I tried to correct the "errors" of the graph. I reduced the bands frequency to 93...95% from 100, this is the thinner red line. The new line is closer to the green, which is the possible lowest frequencies of all 8 bands:

For this equalizer I have PCB for 4 and 6 bands only, but my next PCB project is the expandable modular parametric equalizer from 4 bands to any.

The available mainboard for 6 band parametric EQ:

See also:


PCB sales of this project
Module name Size
(mm)
Area
(cm2)
PDF SCH PCB image Tested Price (US$)
Des./3D Sim.1 Full2 Sim.1 Full2 Man3
Mainboard for 6 band EQ
173x143 247 - Yes Yes - - No 35
44 Ask
How to order? Please read the rules carefully!

Friday, January 6, 2012

Simulation and software analysis of UREI 546

This is my first post about simulation. The reason why I simulated UREI EQ filter, that I cannot found math expression to get parts for more than 4 bands parametric EQ, and I cannot modify the center frequency of original bands.

Finally I did software simulation, what is succeed. The simulation of analog circuits are very fast and exact, very easy to measure and analyze any parameters depending on the parts, easy to get result of parts modifications by graph or by simulated measuring devices. The best is, lot of AC sources and measuring instruments are available, like function generators and oscilloscopes. I used Multisim, because the simulation of Altium is more harder, and I cannot found good examples on the net how to use Altium for simulation. But as I see, the Multisim is very popular (because easy to use, I think):



This is the schematic of one filter from the UREI 546 parametric EQ. Function generator, one channel (yelow) of oscilloscope, and U3 AC voltmeter connected to the input. Second channel of oscilloscope (blue) and U2 AC voltmeter connected to the output. The power supply is the simulation of 2x18V DC power source. On/off switch, and bypass switch included. With simulation, all switches and potentiometers are working well and real time. To see the simulation result, the circuit is very exact, same as like datasheet of original UREI device, with really small differences. The bypass switch or the Cut/Boost potentiometer on center make the output voltage to same with input. I made a movie about simulation:



I wonder, the simulation result is same as the original datasheet, or have some differences. If the result is closed to the original datasheet, I don't need expression for the modifications.

I made new schematic with simple AC voltage source instead of function generator, and I deleted the scope from the output. I used AC analysis on the output point instead of scope. The result is more useful on the graph:


Here is the frequency response of the filter. All modifications can be analyzed and displayed with graph, for example new middle frequency, Q, and Cut/Boost function of EQ between 20 Hz and 20 kHz. Later I analyzed the circuit up to 100 kHz.

With these simulations, I can't compare the results with the original datasheet. Therefore I made 4 bands with exactly same values with the original schematic. I made AC analysis with min, max, and middle frequencies of 4 bands, and compared the maximum and minimum points to the official datasheet:


The red line is the lowest frequency on all 4 bands, the blue is the another side of potentiometer, the possible highest frequency. This is the comparison with the original EQ, where is the upper frequencies are really same, the lower shows small differences. Now I think, because the simulation result and the datasheet are same with small differences, the simulation of this schematic is good idea to modify the original EQ (instead of math expressions).

This is the 5 steps of Q by the original schematic, what is same as than the graph in the datasheet:


The method of software simulation is really big help if I have to modify something. For example, this is the modified possible min and max Q with new values of parts, because for more bands I need better Q:

2 resistors are changed to make new Q values.

Here is the result of the first and last filter, from the lowest to highest possible frequencies of bands:

To make the lowest and highest frequencies of the band closer, the potentiometers changed from original 55 kOhm to new 4.7 kOhm. The lowest band on the graph have 680 nF on the integrators, the highest have 2.2 nF.

With this result, I analyzed the highest band with lower (80%) Q and compared to the result with maximum Q:


The max point of the highest band are much higher than the lowest band, I changed the possible maximum Q to lower, I modified the 80 Ohm resistor to 120 Ohm. To found the ideal resistor value for the maximum Q, I made analysis with several resistor values from 80 Ohm to original 390 Ohm:

This is the first step to design 8 bands parametric equalizer with new values.

See also: