Have you been cleaning the board?
post #121 of 162
1/27/09 at 2:45pm
Be a part of the community.
It's free, join today!
|
Have you been cleaning the board?
|

|
Why not? Tangent reports 7µV noise. AMB reports less than 12µV. Both are far superior to commercial designs.
|
| Can you get a 5 V output from this design? |
|
Fully loaded, with case and all, something like $90. I haven't really priced it out...that's just based on the old STEPS cost of $70 for something similar, plus the additional costs here. Might even be closer to $80.
|
|
Sure. You need to change the voltage reference, probably the op-amp, and maybe the gain setting resistors. You need an op-amp that will itself run well on 5 V, and for the rest I recommend a 2.5 V reference and a gain of 2. This is covered in the YJPS docs, but I haven't tried it, so you'd be pioneering. Jung covered this in the original 1995 series of articles, and recommended the AD848 for the op-amp.
|
| I should get around 7V DC. Would that be enough to use as input to the design? |
| Do you have any more boards left ? |
| Does p-2 p wiring have any effects on your design? |
|
Fully loaded, yes. Nothing left out.
No. The Jung 2000 design is a "high drop-out" regulator. To get 5 V out, you might need as much as 10 V unregulated. This makes it less than 50% efficient at such low voltages, I know. If you want efficiency, there are many other designs to choose from. |
|
No. I'm still tweaking the design. What with that work ongoing and manufacturing time, we're a month or two away from seeing final boards.
|
|
Are you asking what would happen if you made it on a perfboard? It's a fairly "fast" design, so it benefits from a good, tight PCB layout. If you switched to a slow op-amp, it could tolerate a big sloppy layout, but then you'd lose a lot of the performance advantages.
|
|
is there any detriment in using the same secondary taps for both digital and analog sections of the DAC?
|
| I had read one of the many Analog Devices application notes which said that most prototyping they did for fast designs were point to point. With the minimal use of wires I wonder if point to point would be fast enough. |
|
Oh, probably, but I'm not the right guy to ask. I've done nearly zero digital audio DIY.
The issue is parasitics. The document you're talking about probably referred to ratsnest type builds, where you take a copper-clad board, tie that to some solid ground, then build your circuit in the air above it, with connections to ground as needed, and everything else held up above the board only by the stiffness of the wires. You still have to keep details in mind like minimizing the distance of bypass caps from the nodes in the circuit that need to be bypassed. Other than that, this keeps parasitics very very low: thick wires for low L's and R's, and air dielectric makes for low C's. This sort of build doesn't hold up well to vibration. It's good for prototyping and hackery. |
The use of a copper board to build the circuit.