FrankenBebi - Page 4 - SailNet Community
 2Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #31 of 31 Old 02-10-2014 Thread Starter
Noah's Bosun
 
Cap-Couillon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 133
Thanks: 2
Thanked 19 Times in 17 Posts
Rep Power: 3
 
Re: FrankenBebi

Quote:
Cap, I have no certain memory just a big fuzzy thought that large series-parallel arrays of LEDs with only the one resistor feeding them were frowned upon in this type of design? Wrong fuzzy memory, or is there something to that? No drawback?
@hellosailor
Thanks for asking a question I can actually answer Up until Paul wrote up his excellent explanation of the elegant regulator circuit he designed for the FrankenBebi, I was a little unclear on how the circuit functioned as well.

Anyway on to your question... Generally speaking you would be correct for a couple of reasons.

First, a single (or even a group) of resistors for current control is not advisable in a situation where the input voltage may vary. Onboard, we could have from less than 12Vdc (batteries at less than 25% SOC) to over 18Vdc (battery equalization cycle). With a fixed resistance acting as current control, LEDs would dim at low voltages, and at higher than "nominal" voltage excess current would be dissipated as heat.

Second issue is parallel/series arrays are a problem in and of themselves. If we loose one LED in a series "leg" the current (say 100mA) that was divided among 5 legs is now supplying only 4 legs with a resultant 25% increase in forward current. If this exceeds the max forward current of the installed LEDs the magic smoke will escape, and we have a dead FrankenBebi

The latest design deals with these issues in the following manner.

Second issue first... The regulator circuit as designed is only driving the Cree C530D LEDs at about 60-70 percent of their rated max forward current. If we should lose one leg of the array, we are still below the rated max forward current for the balance of the array, hence no magic smoke.. Of course this situation would entitle you to a warranty replacement, but the FrankenBebi would continue to function until it arrives. The earlier change in board design
staggers the LEDs in any given leg around the radius preventing an entire 45 degree sector from going dark, as no LEDs in the same Leg adjoin each other.

As to the first issue (current control)... While the circuit contains a number of resistors, none of them actually provide current control as such. The current control circuit (which is on the low-side of the array) Uses a combination of 2 resistors (R3, R4) an N-channel MOSFET (Q3) and a general-purpose NPN transistor (Q2) Paul's explanation is as clear as it gets so here is a quote from his document
Quote:
The regulator uses the base-emitter junction of Q2 to sense the voltage across R4. When this voltage exceeds the 0.68V forward bias voltage of this junction, Q2 begins to conduct current through R3, reducing the gate voltage on Q3 and reducing the current through the LEDs. If the current drops slightly, the base-current in Q2 is reduced, which causes the voltage at the gate of Q3 to rise, increasing the LED current.
This current regulator is insensitive to battery-voltage variation, maintaining a fairly constant LED current for battery voltages between 11.25Vdc and over 20Vdc.

Here is a local copy of the schematic for reference.



Hope that answers the question... Nice exercise for me to prove to myself I understand the new circuit. My previous background is in the mechanical end of things (ME not EE) so this whole project has been a real learning curve on the electronics end. I will be posting the latest (and last?) revision of Paul's circuit discussion paper (doc revision 1.2) which includes another section on testing, expected vs real test values, and troubleshooting. It will be accessible via the same links in the above post in an hour or so...

Good opportunity for me to thank you for your earlier suggestion about the "icecube" case. We are well on our way to solving the issues on that one, and it should be "ready for prime time" about the time our new batch of PCB's arrive in a few weeks.

Regards, David
(aka Cap' Couillon)

"If the wind will not serve, lay to the oars"

Onboard - Solitaire
Cap-Couillon is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the SailNet Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
Please note: After entering 3 characters a list of Usernames already in use will appear and the list will disappear once a valid Username is entered.


User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome