Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY

[Hoppy]

Nick,

Has there been a misunderstanding between pin number references? Are you also referring to your allocation of pot pin numbers?

[verpies]

Pins #13, #14, and also pin #15 are soldered and bridged together, and all three are connected to pin #2.

This, together with grounding of pins 1 and 16, effectively disables the internal amplifiers that are intended for duty cycle control.

Pin #3 is left open.

Because the internal amplifiers are disabled!

Pin #2 then also goes to pin #1 of the duty cycle pot,

It would be more useful to write that this pin and pot are connected to  V_REF (+5V) pin 14.

then the center pin of that pot (pin 2) goes to TL pin #4. Pin #3 of the pot goes to ground. 

Which means that we are back to misusing the Dead Time control pin as a Duty Cycle adjustment.
Also, according to the datasheet, the max voltage on this pin should be +3.3V and this pot arrangement will not give you that range.

That's where the 0.1 uf cap goes, as shown on his diagram in the video link posted below. Between TL pin 2 and pin 4.  Why?  I don't know. Maybe you can see the reason as to why it's placed there.

It is a bypass cap for stabilization of the voltage on pin 4.  Pin 2 is connected to V_REF (+5V), so that cap is really between pin 4 and V_REF (+5V).  Bypasing to a power rail is wrong - that cap should be between pin 4 and ground.

If pin #3 is bridged to pin #2, I have problems.

That is to be  expected if pin 2 is also connected to pin 14 V_REF (+5V).
I never connect pin 3 to V_REF (+5V).

Stalker uses a toggle switch between pin #3 and #15, as his on/off switch.

It is the connection of pin 3 with pin 14 that is responsible for this ( not with pin 2 or pin 15 !!! )

So, when that connection is closed, the driver STOPS the output signal.

What this does is adjusts the duty cycle to zero, making it appear like the TL393 is OFF.
This is not the optimal way to turn it off, BTW.

My set up is also the same or similar to what Stalker showed as his last push pull driver, on his latest video.
Please look at his diagram, which I recommend that everyone look at, again. Watch his scope signal from the TL494, carefully,  please.     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YohJeG2DsSA

That is an over 1 hour long video!
I found his schematic a 7:25 but when are his scopeshots?

[itsu]

Here the circuit used by Stalker, the scope shots (output of the MOSFET drivers) are at 31 minutes into the video.

Itsu

[TinselKoala]

Note the 1k pulldowns on the 494 outputs.

[NickZ]

   Thanks for checking into Stalker's last video. So, it may be that there are no connection methods that work as they should. Yet, Stalker does have a previous self runner, and so does Adrian.  And Stalker may have made another one, if his last video is working to provide this last circuit to self run, also.
Yet, this we still have not seen yet.

   I would like to make a TL494 circuit that works for me, but the last schematic that Verpies posted did not work on my set up, only on one of both output channels, for some reason. I checked, and double checked the connections to it many times.
 
    The topruslan 7 schematics does work for me, on both output channels, also for apecore. Even though it does not work as Verpies would like it to, or the way that it should work. Yet Stalker is going that route in any case. Maybe they know something that we don't? 
   Oleg who is also an electronics expert and has made several working self running circuits, his TL connection method does work for meto some degree, and there are duty cycle controls. Yet possibly it can also be improved to show the duty cycle working as Verpies would like to see it work.
   
   I'm into making any needed changes, as I only wanted to see if my TL chip was fried, or not.  So, now I know that it's ok, and does not need to be pulled.