Timeline for Explanation for design choices for snubber / debouncing circuit
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 10, 2019 at 11:43 | comment | added | ARF | Many thanks for your detailed explanations. | |
| Aug 10, 2019 at 11:41 | comment | added | Marko Buršič | @ARF I wouldn't be concerned about the EMI, anyway. It's just a pusbutton, not a PWM converter. | |
| Aug 10, 2019 at 11:31 | comment | added | Marko Buršič | @ARF Yes, due to the sharper characteristics, the di/dt is higher. | |
| Aug 10, 2019 at 10:37 | comment | added | ARF | Why is there more EMI with the TVS? Because it operates faster than the MOV? | |
| Aug 10, 2019 at 10:33 | comment | added | Marko Buršič | Yes, the MOV has limited nr. of absorbed pulses. The TVS will introduce more EMI | |
| Aug 10, 2019 at 10:18 | vote | accept | ARF | ||
| Aug 10, 2019 at 10:10 | comment | added | ARF | Am I correct in assuming the lifetime of the MOV is limited? Would a bidirectional TVS, e.g. a SMBJ54CA be a more durable alternative? | |
| Aug 10, 2019 at 9:54 | history | answered | Marko Buršič | CC BY-SA 4.0 |