From: "Harry Dellamano"
References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <3E06A99F.776F9A81@ieee.org> <3E07486E.424879B1@ieee.org> <951O9.102279$4W1.email@example.com> <3E0A3631.4A5C4AC5@ieee.org>
Subject: Re: 87% All that vector calculus paid off
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 16:13:45 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 11:13:45 EST
"analog" wrote in message
> Harry Dellamano, analog, wrote:
> > I bet I can design it with less components than you, maybe. If you show
> > me yours I will show you mine.
> My, but you Brits are a cheeky bunch. Ok, then. For starters I would
> ascertain some basic design information such as the input voltage range
> required, the output voltage and current ranges required including
> abnormal loads, and efficiency, noise, ripple and EMI requirements. It
> seems keeping the magnetics as simple as possible is very important to
> Chris, but if it were my project, I would probably go to a true flyback
> or a push-pull dc-to-dc converter, depending on what Chris answered about
> the project requirements.
Cheeky, yes. Brit, no.
I agree, we do not have a complete spec from Chris. With that, I propose we
can use any topology to get the job done. Hopefully this challenge it open
to anyone interested. The designs should be submitted to a.b.s.e. on a clean
schematic with critical parts numbers included.
There are no winner only learners.
What's your take?