PDIB's Making MODs!

[SkinyFatMan]

Just in case anyone still needed to get some wood (giggidy), burlsource.us is having a sale on all their stabilized dyed blocks.

Dyed and Stabilized Wood Blocks

 

[X-Puppy]

Hey, was just doing some research and got almost all the way through before I realized that this kind of reference material is exactly what inspired the "Turboencabulator", then I couldn't read it again without bursting into chuckles. Here is one section of it.

"The power stage equations and transfer functions for CrCM are the same as CCM. The main differences relate to the current ripple profile and switching frequency, which affects RMS and switching power losses and filter design. CCM operation requires a larger filter inductor compared to CrCM. While the main design concerns for a CrCM inductor are low HF core loss, low HF winding loss, and stable value over the operating range (the inductor is essentially part of the timing circuit), the CCM mode inductor takes a different approach. For the CCM mode PFC, the full load inductor current ripple is typically designed to be 20-40% of the average input current. This has several advantages:
(1) Peak current is lower, and the RMS current factor with a trapezoidal waveform is reduced compared to a triangular waveform, reducing conduction losses (Fig 3.2).
(2) Turn off losses are lower due to switch off at much lower maximum current.
(3) The HF ripple current to be smoothed by the EMI filter is much lower in amplitude.
On the other side, CCM encounters turn on losses with the MOSFET, which can be exacerbated by the boost rectifier commutation recovery loss due to Qrr. For this reason, ultra-fast recovery diodes or silicon carbide schottky diodes with no charge Qrr are needed for CCM mode."

Cool - So you're looking into the possibility of a MOSFET switch that allows continuous contact with the battery and the power source? Thus enabling the use of a switch that doesn't require a physical make and break contact. At least not one that's exposed to air. (semiconductor)

Something like that? It would be really awesome to make something like that work. No question they (MOSFET's) would be able to handle the current.

It does bring a chuckle referencing it to the "Turboencabulator".

 

[Alexander Mundy]

Cool - So you're looking into the possibility of a MOSFET switch that allows continuous contact with the battery and the power source? Thus enabling the use of a switch that doesn't require a physical make and break contact. At least not one that's exposed to air. (semiconductor)

Something like that? It would be really awesome to make something like that work. No question they (MOSFET's) would be able to handle the current.

It does bring a chuckle referencing it to the "Turboencabulator".

No, actually that is one part of a discussion about designing boost converters. Just some light reading to stay up with current trends. Adding a MOSFET as a switch doesn't require delving into anything anywhere near this level. That would be straightforward and simple, but then it wouldn't be a pure mech anymore.

 

[MamaTried]

Schrodinger's cat walks into a bar . . .. .








and doesn't

..........

 

[pdib]

Hey, was just doing some research and got almost all the way through before I realized that this kind of reference material is exactly what inspired the "Turboencabulator", then I couldn't read it again without bursting into chuckles. Here is one section of it.

"The power stage equations and transfer functions for CrCM are the same as CCM. The main differences relate to the current ripple profile and switching frequency, which affects RMS and switching power losses and filter design. CCM operation requires a larger filter inductor compared to CrCM. While the main design concerns for a CrCM inductor are low HF core loss, low HF winding loss, and stable value over the operating range (the inductor is essentially part of the timing circuit), the CCM mode inductor takes a different approach. For the CCM mode PFC, the full load inductor current ripple is typically designed to be 20-40% of the average input current. This has several advantages:
(1) Peak current is lower, and the RMS current factor with a trapezoidal waveform is reduced compared to a triangular waveform, reducing conduction losses (Fig 3.2).
(2) Turn off losses are lower due to switch off at much lower maximum current.
(3) The HF ripple current to be smoothed by the EMI filter is much lower in amplitude.
On the other side, CCM encounters turn on losses with the MOSFET, which can be exacerbated by the boost rectifier commutation recovery loss due to Qrr. For this reason, ultra-fast recovery diodes or silicon carbide schottky diodes with no charge Qrr are needed for CCM mode."

Cool - So you're looking into the possibility of a MOSFET switch that allows continuous contact with the battery and the power source? Thus enabling the use of a switch that doesn't require a physical make and break contact. At least not one that's exposed to air. (semiconductor)

Something like that? It would be really awesome to make something like that work. No question they (MOSFET's) would be able to handle the current.

It does bring a chuckle referencing it to the "Turboencabulator".

No, actually that is one part of a discussion about designing boost converters. Just some light reading to stay up with current trends. Adding a MOSFET as a switch doesn't require delving into anything anywhere near this level. That would be straightforward and simple, but then it wouldn't be a pure mech anymore.

Oh, good. For a second there, I thought I might've read it wrong.

 

[X-Puppy]

subjective: alum. with the little piece of wire. I want to give it a few days to see if it fades or not; and then I'll swap in a fresh (clean) brass screw to compare (to try and confirm).

Just cleaned everything up and put in one of those brass screws. Worked it over with 1500 grit just to make sure there were no rough edges. I like how new stuff always hits like a steam train. I'm going to run it with just a little Deoxit on the bottom of the battery and see how it goes. So far - so good.

 

[pdib]

So, a question for my peeps. Who would be willing to pay ~$15/pc for solid sterling silver fire button contacts? I'm thinking of ordering some and modding them up to work nicely in the existing button assembly. Basically, it would replace the screw-in "contact" part of the button assembly. Between cost+shipping and modding time to make them work for us, they would cost about that much. This, I think, would be a luxury add-on. We certainly don't all need one; but some of us might just think it's the pig's chin whiskers*. I think I've got it all figured out as to the way to make this work, and, as always, the solution is amazingly simple and tidy. Not a sure thing yet; but it looks promising (in the spacious yet eerie expanse of my mind).





*that's good . .. . . right?

 

[pdib]

BTW: I'll probably start by ordering just about as many blanks to mod as there are folks wanting one.

 

[Filthy-Beast]

I'd go for it on all of mine.

 

[NickCA]

Count me in.

Gif unrelated

 

[ScandaLeX]

Count me in.

Gif unrelated

Me too! Don't know if I'd need it but you make it sound great..... What's that saying..... Take my money.

Sent from a BIG phone.....Galaxy Note 3

 

[e30ernest]

I'd want one too when my turn comes.

 

[dwcraig1]

I would like one too.
And just how many blanks might that be?

 

[SLIPPY_EEL]

just put me down already

 

[IMEDICx90]

im in for one pdib love this new spring btw.... its fantastic!

 

[milkman5306]

I'd take one, would it be less hassle on the cleaning side of things?

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Aal_]

Since I am run #7 put me down to whatever you find the most hitting in run #6

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

 

[Whiplash205]

I'm in. ^^^What he said.

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk

 

[custom-classic]

Count me in on the silver as well.

 

[Copterstyle]

i'm down for some silver