Re: Ganging H-Bridges
- From: "Jon Slaughter" <Jon_Slaughter@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2008 19:59:32 GMT
<bill.sloman@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:3db2c1e7-2d17-4e91-a7ef-2c8164f81129@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 8 apr, 15:26, "Jon Slaughter" <Jon_Slaugh...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Terry Given" <my_n...@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1207659648.392727@xxxxxxxxxx
bill.slo...@xxxxxxxx wrote:
On 8 apr, 00:25, "Jon Slaughter" <Jon_Slaugh...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Jon Slaughter" <Jon_Slaugh...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:nVwKj.1181$h75.292@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Is it common to parallel h-bridges?
It isn't usually a good idea - the tolerance on the gate threshold
voltages usually means that one side of the pair carries the bulk of
the current, and as that device gets hotter its gate threshold voltage
will drop, leading it to carry even more.
BTW, I can't seem to find any in-expensive H-Bridges for 180W@12V so I
was
thinking of using two of these
http://www.fairchildsemi.com/ds/FD%2FFDD8424H.pdf
At currents above 30A the postive temperature coefficient of the
channel resistance of these parts beats out the negative temperature
coefficient of the gate source voltage, so if you are looking to
switch more than 60A you might get away with it.
Otherwise you'd need to add a small resistance in series with each
source to force current sharing.
--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
sounds like a recipe for disaster at currents below 30A. But its also
why
IGBTs can be direct paralleled (nice +ve tempco). Extremely tight
thermal
coupling can get around a lot of the problems though.
the easiest way to parallel H-bridges is with interphase reactors to
soak
up all the little variations. Depending on the load, split the first
inductor into N inductors for N bridges, each N times more henries and
1/Nth the current so each one is N*(1/N)^2 = N times smaller. join the
ends of the inductors together, then continue with the rest of your
circuit.
I don't see any difference between parallel H-bridges and discretizing
the
H-bridge and paralleling the individual mosfets... which is no problem.
If you don't think it is a problem, you haven't been doing it for long
enough or on a large enough scale.
If you want to parallel MOSFETs or discrete transistors you almost
always have to add components to make sure that each active device
carries more or less the same current. Production tolerance is not
your friend.
But this contradicts AOE and many other sources I have read that say
paralleling them is no problem. MOSFETS have negative temperature
coefficients rather than positive like BJT's. (hence as one gets hotter it
gets more resistive and less current will flow through it and through the
other.. they should ultimately balance out, in proportion, if it is not too
bad)
I assume then you mean that one mosfet might take a little more current than
another because they are not exactly the same. Ok, that might be true but
then you just add one more mosfet to the mix and it should compensate enough
(assuming they are not that much different, which I imagine they aren't).
The only issue it says is that the more you parallelize the more gate cap
you have hence its harder to drive(and eventually becomes impossible).
Of course that stuff is for discrete mosfets and I'm not sure about
h-bridges(specially since they probably have more circuitry in it for other
things, in general).
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Ganging H-Bridges
- From: bill . sloman
- Re: Ganging H-Bridges
- From: Terry Given
- Re: Ganging H-Bridges
- References:
- Ganging H-Bridges
- From: Jon Slaughter
- Re: Ganging H-Bridges
- From: Jon Slaughter
- Re: Ganging H-Bridges
- From: bill . sloman
- Re: Ganging H-Bridges
- From: Terry Given
- Re: Ganging H-Bridges
- From: Jon Slaughter
- Re: Ganging H-Bridges
- From: bill . sloman
- Ganging H-Bridges
- Prev by Date: Re: Strain gauge to measure bandsaw tension
- Next by Date: Re: Strain gauge to measure bandsaw tension
- Previous by thread: Re: Ganging H-Bridges
- Next by thread: Re: Ganging H-Bridges
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|