(IGBT WELDER) looking at this transistors, can it work like this, and the output current

Status
Not open for further replies.
No, for multiple reasons.

The upper and lower FETs must have totally separate gate drive signals, as the gates can only stand somewhere around 20V maximum and you have a DC supply of around 320V.

There are specially designed "high side" driver ICs to control the upper FETs in such H-Bridge circuits; remember that the upper gate drive is relative to the source of each device - which is changing in voltage over a wide range as the various devices switch on and off.

The output from an H-Bridge is taken between the two centre junctions, where you have the heavy link. If either diagonal pair of transistors switched on, they would short the supply.

If you are trying to trace the circuit of a machine, either the transformer is connected between the centre junctions, or both upper devices are driven simultaneously and both lower devices are driven simultaneously.
eg. A half-bridge with parallelled power devices, rather than the crossed gate connections.
 
The device came with two 50t65 which is 100a + 100a =200a, while I couldn't find it, that is why I wanted to use 60N60 which is 60a * 4 =240a.
With the look of things which one is preferable among the diagram
 
The 50T65 is rated 50A RMS, 650V maximum.
The 60N60 has a higher current rating at 60A, with a 600V maximum.

They are both rated for 15V gate-emitter, so the 60N60 could be a 1:1 replacement with better ratings, as long as the switching frequency is not too high; it's a slightly slower device than the 50T65.

Paralleling more devices than in the original setup is not a good idea as they have very high gate capacitance and doubling that with two in tandem would further slow the switching and increase device heating and power losses.
 
The 50T65 is rated at 50A continuous.

"Maximum" or "peak" current are for short duration pulses, often how much they can take for eg. 10mS.
They are the threshold-of-destruction figures, not operational values.

See the headline data in the datasheet here: 650V 50a.

It's also part the device name; 50A & 65(0) volts, as with the 60N60: 60A & 60(0) volts.
 
Check this out

the two of 50N60 won't be able to handle 200a load, unlike two of 50t65
 
Wrong, sorry.
Look at the actual tables within those two datasheets.

IC values.
50T65 = 100A & 50A, depending on temperature.

60N60 = 120A & 60A for the same temperatures.
 
Wrong, sorry.
Look at the actual tables within those two datasheets.

IC values.
50T65 = 100A & 50A, depending on temperature.

60N60 = 120A & 60A for the same temperatures.
Yes, you are right
but physically the (50T65) pin and tube is ticker and bigger than the said (60n60)
 
just changed the transistors now with 60n60 1:1, but unfortunately it blown off
What could be the problem?
 
Was it previously working OK?
Something caused the previous power devices to fail - have you located the cause of that?
 

Attachments

  • IGBT Welder (7).jpg
    3.4 MB · Views: 635
  • IMG_20201102_085123.jpg
    3.2 MB · Views: 462
  • IMG_20201102_085134.jpg
    3.2 MB · Views: 348
  • IGBT Welder (3).jpg
    2.6 MB · Views: 446
  • IGBT Welder (5).jpg
    2.2 MB · Views: 347
  • IGBT Welder (2.jpg
    1.6 MB · Views: 495
  • 123757981_389169675601133_6939331024051308955_n.jpg
    51 KB · Views: 329
Was it previously working OK?
Something caused the previous power devices to fail - have you located the cause of that?
No, the previous 50t65 got burnt, 60n60 got burnt also.
and nothing wrong with the rectifier diode
Was it previously working OK?
Something caused the previous power devices to fail - have you located the cause of that?
I have checked the rectifier diode, is still good
but I don't have oscilloscope to check the driver signals
 

Attachments

  • 123757981_389169675601133_6939331024051308955_n.jpg
    51 KB · Views: 304
  • IGBT Welder (3).jpg
    2.6 MB · Views: 349
  • IGBT Welder (7).jpg
    3.4 MB · Views: 419
  • IGBT Welder (8).jpg
    2.8 MB · Views: 452
  • IMG_20201102_085123.jpg
    3.2 MB · Views: 202
  • IMG_20201102_085134.jpg
    3.2 MB · Views: 264
Status
Not open for further replies.
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…