results somewhat done, I guess

This commit is contained in:
Tom Selier 2024-02-03 16:08:35 +01:00
parent 8a60f955e5
commit f71bb93d94
4 changed files with 81 additions and 9 deletions

Binary file not shown.

Before

Width:  |  Height:  |  Size: 28 KiB

After

Width:  |  Height:  |  Size: 27 KiB

Binary file not shown.

Before

Width:  |  Height:  |  Size: 32 KiB

After

Width:  |  Height:  |  Size: 33 KiB

Binary file not shown.

Before

Width:  |  Height:  |  Size: 33 KiB

After

Width:  |  Height:  |  Size: 34 KiB

View File

@ -112,7 +112,7 @@
$N$ is the total amount of samples.
\subsection{Ripple characteristics}
\subsection{Ripple characteristics} \label{section:ripple}
\begin{Figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{RIPPLE.png}
@ -143,7 +143,7 @@
preparing the signal for the FFT.
\subsection{Start up}
\subsection{Start up} \label{section:start_up}
The last characteristics is the start up, specifically the different rise times
under load. The voltage was measured at the output as the supply was turned on.
@ -162,7 +162,7 @@
discussed, as well as discuss some probable causes for unknown or unintended
results.
\subsection{Efficiency}
\begin{Figure}
\centering
@ -176,14 +176,14 @@
an unexplained jump back to a higher percentage.
\subsection{Noise}
\subsection{Noise} \label{section:result_noise}
\begin{Figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{SNR_LOADVSPKPK.jpg}
\captionof{figure}{WIP}
\label{fig:noise_pkpk}
\end{Figure}
\noindent The results for the efficiency measurements, as described in section
\noindent The results for the noise measurements, as described in section
\ref{section:peak_to_peak} are displayed in figure \ref{fig:noise_pkpk}.
The peak to peak voltage is a significant fraction of the output voltage,
with $3V$ peaking at $33\%$. It seems there is a relation between peak to
@ -196,13 +196,85 @@
\captionof{figure}{WIP}
\label{fig:noise_sd}
\end{Figure}
\noindent The results for the efficiency measurements, as described in section
\noindent The results for the noise measurements, as described in section
\ref{section:standard_devation} are displayed in figure \ref{fig:noise_sd}.
Although the voltage peaks are high, the noise's standard deviation is in the
range of millivolts. The trend that a higher output voltage has more noise
is continued in this graph.
Although the voltage peaks are high, the standard deviation of the noise is
in the range of millivolts. The trend that a higher output voltage has more
noise is continued in this graph.
\subsection{Ripple}
\begin{Figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{RIPPLE_LOADVSPKPK.jpg}
\captionof{figure}{WIP}
\label{fig:ripple_pkpk}
\end{Figure}
\noindent The results for the ripple measurements, as described in section
\ref{section:ripple} are displayed in figure \ref{fig:ripple_pkpk}. The
voltage level in the graph seems to confirm that the peak to peak noise,
seen in section \ref{section:result_noise} is caused by the ripple.
\begin{Figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{RIPPLE_LOADVSFREQ.jpg}
\captionof{figure}{WIP}
\label{fig:ripple_freq}
\end{Figure}
\noindent The frequency of the ripple is roughly $38 MHz$ and independant of
the load. To figure out if this ripple is caused by the combination of the
inductor and the capactitor the following equation can be used.
\begin{equation}
f = \frac{1}{2 \pi \sqrt{LC}}
\end{equation}
Using the values from figure \ref{fig:schematic_full}, the resonating frequency
of the circuit should be around $27KHz$. Thus, this cannot be the cause of
the high frequency. As the frequency of the ripple is magnitudes higher
than the LC-circuit's resosonant frequency, what is seen is most likely the
Self Resonating Frequency (SRF) of the inductor. Typically the SRF is
$>10 MHz$, so that could be a probable source of the high frequencies.
\subsection{Start Up}
\begin{Figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{TRANSIENT_RISE_10_MA.jpg}
\captionof{figure}{WIP}
\label{fig:start_10}
\end{Figure}
\begin{Figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{TRANSIENT_RISE_50_MA.jpg}
\captionof{figure}{WIP}
\label{fig:start_50}
\end{Figure}
\begin{center}
\captionof{table}{$10 mA$}
\label{table:start_10}
\begin{tabular}{llll}
Metric & $\tau$ & $2\tau$ & Rise time \\
Percentage [$\%$] & 63 & 95 & 90 \\
Time [$s$] & 0.031 & 0.075 & 0.053 \\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\begin{center}
\captionof{table}{$50 mA$}
\label{table:start_50}
\begin{tabular}{llll}
Metric & $\tau$ & $2\tau$ & Rise time \\
Percentage [$\%$] & 63 & 95 & 90 \\
Time [$s$] & 0.033 & 0.048 & 0.043 \\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\noindent The results for the start up measurements, as described in section
\ref{section:start_up} are displayed in figure \ref{fig:start_10} and
\ref{fig:start_50}, and table \ref{table:start_10} and \ref{table:start_50}.
Counterintuitively, the rise time is shorter with a higher load.
\section{Conclusion}
\lipsum[3-4]