Reply by Tom Del Rosso February 22, 20122012-02-22
John Larkin wrote:
> Just avoid the singularity.
Avoiding black holes goes without saying. -- Reply in group, but if emailing add one more zero, and remove the last word.
Reply by Ian Field February 21, 20122012-02-21
"Jim Thompson" <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote in 
message news:qsc7k7ps9drmj5ecu8h28qvcbu6tdek0b0@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 00:45:00 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" > <td_03@verizon.net.invalid> wrote: > >> >>Jim Thompson wrote: >>> On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 20:34:28 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" >>> <td_03@verizon.net.invalid> wrote: >>> >>> > >>> > Jim Thompson wrote: >>> > > >>> > > PWM BOOST is NOT trivial, though I'm well on my way to an >>> > > off-the-wall STABLE solution... found by running the math instead >>> > > of my mouth. >>> > >>> > Off the wall in what way? >>> >>> In ways I will apply for patent, then explain ;-) >> >>So it's totally wacky then. >> >>:) > > Of course. That's my specialty... be different :-) > > ...Jim Thompson
Some would say; "special".
Reply by Ian Field February 21, 20122012-02-21
"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message 
news:ajg7k7ha1jh779rjp3cbrau9eqhlr99oj1@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 08:11:30 -0700, Jim Thompson > <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote: > >>On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 22:02:09 -0800, John Larkin >><jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >>>On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 00:45:00 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" >>><td_03@verizon.net.invalid> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>Jim Thompson wrote: >>>>> On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 20:34:28 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" >>>>> <td_03@verizon.net.invalid> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> > >>>>> > Jim Thompson wrote: >>>>> > > >>>>> > > PWM BOOST is NOT trivial, though I'm well on my way to an >>>>> > > off-the-wall STABLE solution... found by running the math instead >>>>> > > of my mouth. >>>>> > >>>>> > Off the wall in what way? >>>>> >>>>> In ways I will apply for patent, then explain ;-) >>>> >>>>So it's totally wacky then. >>>> >>>>:) >>> >>>Continuous-mode PWM boost is just one baby step past trivial. All you >>>minimally need to do is limit the ON duty cycle to a modest amount >>>past what you need to overcome losses, to avoid the 100% ON >>>singularity. It's been done zillions of times. If a uP is generating >>>the PWM, you can do a smart algorithm with nice ramp-ups and stable >>>current limiting. >>> >> >>I'm sure glad everything is trivial for his majesty. >> >> ...Jim Thompson > > Not everthing, but continuous-mode, PWM controlled boost has been done > for about 0.4 century now. I doubt there's anything patentable that > somebody hasn't done already. > > I've done it a bunch of times, including boosters that transitioned > from discontinuous to continuous as the load increased. I've met > people who were horrified of continuous-mode boost; don't know why > they were. It's really nice and clean and doesn't need snubbing. Just > avoid the singularity.
Stop - you'll confuse the poor little mite.
Reply by John Larkin February 21, 20122012-02-21
On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 08:11:30 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 22:02:09 -0800, John Larkin ><jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >>On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 00:45:00 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" >><td_03@verizon.net.invalid> wrote: >> >>> >>>Jim Thompson wrote: >>>> On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 20:34:28 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" >>>> <td_03@verizon.net.invalid> wrote: >>>> >>>> > >>>> > Jim Thompson wrote: >>>> > > >>>> > > PWM BOOST is NOT trivial, though I'm well on my way to an >>>> > > off-the-wall STABLE solution... found by running the math instead >>>> > > of my mouth. >>>> > >>>> > Off the wall in what way? >>>> >>>> In ways I will apply for patent, then explain ;-) >>> >>>So it's totally wacky then. >>> >>>:) >> >>Continuous-mode PWM boost is just one baby step past trivial. All you >>minimally need to do is limit the ON duty cycle to a modest amount >>past what you need to overcome losses, to avoid the 100% ON >>singularity. It's been done zillions of times. If a uP is generating >>the PWM, you can do a smart algorithm with nice ramp-ups and stable >>current limiting. >> > >I'm sure glad everything is trivial for his majesty. > > ...Jim Thompson
Not everthing, but continuous-mode, PWM controlled boost has been done for about 0.4 century now. I doubt there's anything patentable that somebody hasn't done already. I've done it a bunch of times, including boosters that transitioned from discontinuous to continuous as the load increased. I've met people who were horrified of continuous-mode boost; don't know why they were. It's really nice and clean and doesn't need snubbing. Just avoid the singularity.
Reply by Jim Thompson February 21, 20122012-02-21
On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 22:02:09 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 00:45:00 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" ><td_03@verizon.net.invalid> wrote: > >> >>Jim Thompson wrote: >>> On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 20:34:28 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" >>> <td_03@verizon.net.invalid> wrote: >>> >>> > >>> > Jim Thompson wrote: >>> > > >>> > > PWM BOOST is NOT trivial, though I'm well on my way to an >>> > > off-the-wall STABLE solution... found by running the math instead >>> > > of my mouth. >>> > >>> > Off the wall in what way? >>> >>> In ways I will apply for patent, then explain ;-) >> >>So it's totally wacky then. >> >>:) > >Continuous-mode PWM boost is just one baby step past trivial. All you >minimally need to do is limit the ON duty cycle to a modest amount >past what you need to overcome losses, to avoid the 100% ON >singularity. It's been done zillions of times. If a uP is generating >the PWM, you can do a smart algorithm with nice ramp-ups and stable >current limiting. >
I'm sure glad everything is trivial for his majesty. ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, CTO | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
Reply by Jim Thompson February 21, 20122012-02-21
On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 00:45:00 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso"
<td_03@verizon.net.invalid> wrote:

> >Jim Thompson wrote: >> On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 20:34:28 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" >> <td_03@verizon.net.invalid> wrote: >> >> > >> > Jim Thompson wrote: >> > > >> > > PWM BOOST is NOT trivial, though I'm well on my way to an >> > > off-the-wall STABLE solution... found by running the math instead >> > > of my mouth. >> > >> > Off the wall in what way? >> >> In ways I will apply for patent, then explain ;-) > >So it's totally wacky then. > >:)
Of course. That's my specialty... be different :-) ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, CTO | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
Reply by John Larkin February 21, 20122012-02-21
On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 00:45:00 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso"
<td_03@verizon.net.invalid> wrote:

> >Jim Thompson wrote: >> On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 20:34:28 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" >> <td_03@verizon.net.invalid> wrote: >> >> > >> > Jim Thompson wrote: >> > > >> > > PWM BOOST is NOT trivial, though I'm well on my way to an >> > > off-the-wall STABLE solution... found by running the math instead >> > > of my mouth. >> > >> > Off the wall in what way? >> >> In ways I will apply for patent, then explain ;-) > >So it's totally wacky then. > >:)
Continuous-mode PWM boost is just one baby step past trivial. All you minimally need to do is limit the ON duty cycle to a modest amount past what you need to overcome losses, to avoid the 100% ON singularity. It's been done zillions of times. If a uP is generating the PWM, you can do a smart algorithm with nice ramp-ups and stable current limiting.
Reply by Tom Del Rosso February 21, 20122012-02-21
Jim Thompson wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 20:34:28 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" > <td_03@verizon.net.invalid> wrote: > > > > > Jim Thompson wrote: > > > > > > PWM BOOST is NOT trivial, though I'm well on my way to an > > > off-the-wall STABLE solution... found by running the math instead > > > of my mouth. > > > > Off the wall in what way? > > In ways I will apply for patent, then explain ;-)
So it's totally wacky then. :) -- Reply in group, but if emailing add one more zero, and remove the last word.
Reply by Jim Thompson February 20, 20122012-02-20
On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 20:34:28 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso"
<td_03@verizon.net.invalid> wrote:

> >Jim Thompson wrote: >> >> PWM BOOST is NOT trivial, though I'm well on my way to an off-the-wall >> STABLE solution... found by running the math instead of my mouth. > >Off the wall in what way?
In ways I will apply for patent, then explain ;-) ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, CTO | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
Reply by Tom Del Rosso February 19, 20122012-02-19
Jim Thompson wrote:
> > PWM BOOST is NOT trivial, though I'm well on my way to an off-the-wall > STABLE solution... found by running the math instead of my mouth.
Off the wall in what way? -- Reply in group, but if emailing add one more zero, and remove the last word.