X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=kpf8OHlKeAb6xeNJ5dyIH49Q08/GlGoX590GdPAERX0=; b=S7HSKawr9Sk3nPIv/KsAd7YEzj6D/lTgNAnMIJLJUn2qBNt4BFJK/m33/ksK5pqUuD JKm2F/djGRyUW1wyCa4KcGcohPDESpK3YmH2iRXtSxIQTg5/z48uluZ52QbYxja2MJte +c+TCjXmsVM3lfy4fqPoNcsii9elTr6mCWL0W0vNpqeW1b3zjkIoTyiHy2nikvLR2Spx HKzfDGny0z2PE5swD2VLtC5T72/1ccjBzbSM9e6RFdeKR7eqqUXh1u429cYkG/XEAWkf biTRtYIqhLdJUpo5rBM+qiM76mD+gdEXvQnIyfOYgJKlocIIVQgWl1OyqZGRKZPuBVOC u2Yw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=kpf8OHlKeAb6xeNJ5dyIH49Q08/GlGoX590GdPAERX0=; b=bj2U5Daw+wGFef3z6Hd0EmjvTO8hIr1TuLfCJLTmVFwJw4fI2kA1BTBf3nET3gwPHi fYgRUxtwJCufsY/STBHG0w1Xaomaod6bTEbJ6YOoWCQRuIt24SQgTjr8p3fu1piFcT7t RYbi7httlyzDC6aBFcxONdjtWew7mwrdisXJyN3A6QycWbO+lzCsy/b4whqIczfo/74A fpne/mdGCm+bAoT3y0MFvKzRZfyZoLSYOfUl7UMN87DXUjVTobsH+6SqUACqqQCUAI51 QMYARGnpYYcquJpSFx+UzpW2/pc6SWKyS+WeuiykmVS9Kar0YUbxAPKAkMgyVFmoGQVM n6cA== X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gIWWS5H7qu5bIFjogGPv/f76aysk7u0M6iST99H3HVzw56qKfgh i0V42HpmLKl3xpmgGwS4xBAaCsVCVZHxsFSmyvNem/RW X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5ell1biB13lkBzJcbO5emYDaJEw9jEjnvFI6rDnIVMvnlnItXVV0C4uu6JrCVtPpdb7Y8V3nEGDyFwP9/wcZ/s= X-Received: by 2002:aca:68c4:: with SMTP id o65mr18330209oik.175.1543359310571; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 14:55:10 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <54e56571-e668-f382-5f18-7e8f579c8531@linetec.nl> References: <7c1717bb-1b7d-360f-d06a-71ee6983eea1 AT linetec DOT nl> <54e56571-e668-f382-5f18-7e8f579c8531 AT linetec DOT nl> From: "Luis de Arquer (ldearquer AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 23:55:09 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [geda-user] [off-topic] 24V automotive (truck) design issues To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk Richard, I looked up the truck specs, and the TVS spec is indeed close to low. I got a bit misguided when you said the electronics survived 50V on the bench, but my guess is either you were not using the TVS there, or the power supply was limited in current. ISO-16750-2 (2012) specifies 32V as max continuous operating voltage for trucks, and 36V for up to 60 min, which is very close to the TVS breakdown voltage already -in the best case, it will warm up the TVS, which reduces its peak pulse absorbing capacity. Is there a trade-off for you to go for a higher voltage TVS? Hope you find the fix! Luis 2018-11-27 19:13 GMT+01:00, Richard Rasker (rasker AT linetec DOT nl) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] : > Hello Luis, > > Op 27-11-18 om 16:54 schreef Luis de Arquer (ldearquer AT gmail DOT com) [via > geda-user AT delorie DOT com]: >> Hi Richard, >> >> On car, we normally use a TVS with a high enough value so that >> supressed load dump doesn't affect it, yet the other pulses can be >> drained through -so 36V to 40V. 33V TVS showed to burn on load dumps. >> >> Anyway, let us know what you find out! I am curious to see why it failed >> :) > > I just got the boards in, and sure enough, the TVS diode was obliterated > in the broken ones. > > This Friday, I'll go to the truck company with a DSO for measurements on > the actual vehicles, both in the workshop and 'live' on the road. > > I'll let you know what I find! > > Thanks again, > > Best regards, > > Richard Rasker >