Hi

If you start dumping major current spikes into a common ground, it’s amazingly 
difficult to 
get rid of the results.

Bob

> On Sep 26, 2021, at 6:21 PM, John Ackermann N8UR <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> I got some interesting and unintended data today. I was measuring low phase 
> noise oscillators using a set of power supplies I just finished putting 
> together.
> 
> The configuration is ~24 VDC into a TPS-53400 switching regulator that 
> outputs 19.2 volts at up to 3 amps.  That output is fed to separate regulator 
> boards for each oscillator.  Those boards each have an LT-1086 linear 
> pre-regulator that drops the input to about 17 volts, which then goes into an 
> ultra-low-noise LT3045A outputting 15 volt to drive the oscillator.  So there 
> are two linear regulators and lots of caps, inductors, and ferrite beads to 
> isolate the oscillators from the switching supply.
> 
> Due to an error by an assembly tech who will remain nameless, the wrong 
> electrolytic was installed on the output side of the switching regulator.  It 
> should have been 33uF at 50 volts, but what got installed was 330 uF at 16 
> volts, so it was rated below the operating voltage. (I was building two 
> boards at the same time, one for 5V and one for 19.2V. Apart from the voltage 
> setting resistor, the only difference between the two was the output cap.  I 
> managed to swap them.)
> 
> I tested the system on the bench for 24 hours and everything worked fine, so 
> I buttoned up the enclosure and started a 4 hour data capture. About 70 
> minutes in, the electrolytic became very unhappy and whatever it turned into 
> caused the switcher to start spewing all sorts of crud. The regulator kept 
> working (sort of) through the end of the run, but when I came into the lab 
> the next morning it had shut down completely and troubleshooting showed that 
> the cap had shorted at some point after the run completed, and the regulator 
> chip went into shutdown.
> 
> Attached are a plot of frequency showing the whole run with the very obvious 
> change when the cap failed, and another zoomed view of the critical moment.  
> The failure was very abrupt with no visible lead-in.
> 
> What I find interesting is that all that crud got through not one, but two 
> linear regulators, one of which is touted for its extremely high PSRR (and I 
> did my best to follow the recommended PCB layout for that chip).  That must 
> have been one ugly 19V line when the cap went...
> 
> John
> <cap_failure_freq_2.png><cap_failure_freq_1.png>_______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] -- To unsubscribe send an 
> email to [email protected]
> To unsubscribe, go to and follow the instructions there.
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] -- To unsubscribe send an 
email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe, go to and follow the instructions there.

Reply via email to