Why not, at the 1k resistors going into IC5, add a pair of AND gates instead?
Tim
Hi Tim, Chris, Andy and all.
The reason I am having to do this is as follows.
The output FET driver chip must not be left where it leaves an output FET in an ON state. It's fine when an input signal to the amp is present, but should that stop a protection circuit based on the monostable vibrator chip kicks in, and the amp shuts down with the warning LED illuminated. It works fine!
But WSPR and OPERA, two ham radio digital mode programmes, stop and start transmission on a time based format. 70% of the time the software will send the opening data and the amp wakes up and goes to TX. But the rest of the time I believe the "about to transmit, start the amp" signal from the transceiver that drives the TIP125 in the amp arrives sufficiently before the data from its output terminal for the amp to shut down, thinking there is no signal. Or maybe arrives between pulses from the monostable??
My thinking was if I could delay the grounding of the TIP125 for a short period, yet allow the drive from the transceiver to start, all would be well. A viable signal would be there *BEFORE* the TIP125 started to conduct. I had not considered that an RC network would slowly bring up the voltage, rather than suddenly turn it fully on, after the delay. That may or may not be satisfactory, but I suspect it could have unpredictable effects.
The gates in series with the 1K resistors to IC5 would not work, I don't think, as the safety stuff is before them, so it would still shut down due to no signal, or poor signal timing.
The FET sounds good, and, as was talked of in another of my posts elsewhere in here, it would not drop the voltage as much due to a FETS low on resistance, either.
The Zener also sounds like another avenue to explore, I certainly hadn't considered that.
Hopefully the above sufficiently explains why I am trying to delay the switch on?
Thanks!