Coils throw electrons around with inductive charges . Caps throw electrons around with static charges. Richard Jungert > Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: Latching relays in optical switches > Date: Sat, 30 May 2009 20:34:57 -0400 > From: RWeiss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To: dhwn@xxxxxxx; si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Let he without capacitance throw the first electron------------- > > > > Roger E. Weiss, PhD > Paricon Technologies > 421 Currant Rd > Fall River, MA 02720 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] > On Behalf Of Don Nelson > Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2009 7:59 PM > To: SI List > Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: Latching relays in optical switches > > Hi Chris, and everyone else who was kind enough to offer their > suggestions related to our latching relay issue. We did find the > problem and I'm almost--no, DEFINITELY--embarrassed to say what it > turned out to be. > We discovered after much agony that our design was fundamentally > sound. The relay appeared to be operating as it should, but as it got > hotter, or as the coil voltage was reduced, it took longer for the > armature to swing from one position to the other (observed by watching > the voltage across the un-engergized coil change as the armature > magnet moved) until it wouldn't budge at all. However, when wiring > the relay in reverse (coils energized with reverse polarity) it worked > just fine over a wide range of temperatures and voltages. Uh oh... > > The CAD designer (or whoever created the footprint) evidently made a > mistake when he created the PCB shape and reversed the coil pin > polarities, so that although the schematic was correct, the board was > reversed. Ugh. Clearly, I feel like an idiot for not realizing this > sooner!! Even more insidious was the fact that the relay MOSTLY > worked, and it was only a few that failed at high temperatures. By > the time I was brought in to look at this problem, the team was > totally flummoxed, was screening parts, and the idea of a layout > error--which typically results in a fatal error--was off everyone's > radar. Let this be a lesson to me NEVER to take anything for > granted! :-) > > Thanks again to everyone who generously gave their time by giving us > great suggestions. This is a great community of engineers and I am > now prepared to accept my deserved ridicule and derision! :-) > > Kind regards, > Don Nelson > Netronome Systems > > > > >> From: Christopher.Jakubiec@xxxxxxxxxxxx > >> Date: May 29, 2009 9:37:21 AM EDT > >> To: dhwn@xxxxxxx > >> Subject: RE: [SI-LIST] Latching relays in optical switches > >> > >> Don, > >> > >> We are interested in your conclusion on this topic. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> Chris > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> ] On Behalf Of Don Nelson > >> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2009 2:46 PM > >> To: si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> Subject: [SI-LIST] Latching relays in optical switches > >> > >> Hello, > >> > >> I know that this question strays from SI, but it involves EM, and > >> that's something that we in SI seem to know pretty well. Well, I > >> *thought* I knew it pretty well, but this has me stumped. I was > >> brought in to help solve a problem with an existing product. > >> > >> We are using an optical switch that utilizes a dual-coil latching > >> relay. The relay will not reliably switch from one bistable state > >> to the next at relatively high temperatures (still well within the > >> environmental specification of the relay). The company that makes > >> the relay believes that the problem lies in the method we are using > >> to drive it: > >> > >> We tie one leg of each coil to 5V and the other leg to a relay > >> driver, which consists of an NPN transistor with an integrated > >> diode to absorb the back-EMF created when the coil is de- > >> energized. This transistor switches the low-side of the coil to GND. > >> > >> The manufacturer recommends the opposite method: tying one leg of > >> each coil to GND and switching the high side. They contend that > >> having the 5V potential on the coil permanently is "interfering > >> with the magnetic field". I find this hard to believe, but physics > >> was a long time ago. > >> > >> My working hypothesis is that the coils are being energized and de- > >> energized too quickly. Because the relay coils share a core, the > >> dI/dt in the coil being energized is inducing a current in the > >> opposite coil: I can see a significant voltage spike generated > >> across the opposite coil when I energize and de-energize the coil I > >> intend to. I am concerned that this spike in the opposite coil is > >> preventing the relay from switching states by opposing the > >> mechanical force. So, I am reducing the edge rate at the base of > >> the drive transistor to lower the dI/dt of the coil. The spikes on > >> the opposite coil are now reduced significantly. I have not, > >> however, gotten permission to test this modification on our only > >> board that exhibits the problem reliably. I, justifiably, need to > >> make my case first... > >> > >> The problem is, the manufacturer disagrees and insists our circuit > >> needs to be redesigned to permanently tie one leg of the coils to > >> GND and switch the high side instead. They will not tell me why, > >> and cannot explain the physics behind this recommendation. Since > >> the coils have no reference, I don't understand why they would care > >> what potential is on either leg--I thought that only the magnitude > >> and direction of current through them was relevant. I did check to > >> see if the 5V rail was moving during the switching on and off of > >> the coils, but it is stable. > >> > >> I am continuing to perform experiments in an attempt to isolate the > >> root cause, but I am curious if anyone might have another > >> hypothesis--in particular, why a coil might care if one leg was > >> permanently tied high while the low side is switched? Even if I > >> accidentally try something that seems to fix the problem in the > >> lab, I don't feel that I am truly understanding the root cause and > >> am uncomfortable proposing a solution until I DO understand it. > >> > >> Thank you all kindly in advance for your assistance, > >> > >> regards, > >> Don Nelson > >> Netronome Systems > >> -- > >> Don Nelson > >> > >> "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are so > >> sure of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubt" --Bertrand > >> Russell > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> To unsubscribe from si-list: > >> si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field > >> > >> or to administer your membership from a web page, go to: > >> //www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list > >> > >> For help: > >> si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field > >> > >> > >> List technical documents are available at: > >> http://www.si-list.net > >> > >> List archives are viewable at: > >> //www.freelists.org/archives/si-list > >> or at our remote archives: > >> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages > >> Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: > >> http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu > >> > >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > To unsubscribe from si-list: > si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field > > or to administer your membership from a web page, go to: > //www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list > > For help: > si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field > > > List technical documents are available at: > http://www.si-list.net > > List archives are viewable at: > //www.freelists.org/archives/si-list > or at our remote archives: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages > Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: > http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > To unsubscribe from si-list: > si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field > > or to administer your membership from a web page, go to: > //www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list > > For help: > si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field > > > List technical documents are available at: > http://www.si-list.net > > List archives are viewable at: > //www.freelists.org/archives/si-list > or at our remote archives: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages > Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: > http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu > > _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail® goes with you. http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/Mobile?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_Mobile1_052009 ------------------------------------------------------------------ To unsubscribe from si-list: si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field or to administer your membership from a web page, go to: //www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list For help: si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field List technical documents are available at: http://www.si-list.net List archives are viewable at: //www.freelists.org/archives/si-list or at our remote archives: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu