18 Mosfet Infineon Controller

Not at that price. The 4110 fets on ebay appear to be counterfeit.
But IR does have service in China (just not manufacturing).
The "real" 4110 fets are available anywhere in the world (so are real 4310 fets).

Heck ... Keywin (in Shenzhen) uses real 4310 fets in the Infineon (but these fets are clearly imported into China).
Keywin does not use 4110 fets (yet) because the real 4110 fets are twice the cost (or more) than the 4310 fets.
 
Dirtdad,

i'm not sure it's you that sale the 72V65A on ebay but i asked the question to the seller and still wait for the answer.

i'm considering buying another controller but i hesitate between buying a kelly 120V 200A like Method did.. or to try that Infineon but with 18x 4110 mosfet... it would be cheaper!..

I dont care about burning my 5305 since i'll probably mod it to watercooled using cooper pipe on the stator this summer...

I want continuous 5kW without any problem! :twisted:

Do you know that they could make some stock 18x 4110 controller :twisted: ?.. with the true IR mosfet (not chinesse)

Doc
 
So Dirtdad - How much voltage do you think the 18 Mosfet IN will handle? Presently running 80V.
Would like to run 120V one of these days.

You would think our mod guys would be all over this one. :p

Kelly controllers are nice but getting into the $350-$500 range. :|

DK
 
Deepkimchi said:
So Dirtdad - How much voltage do you think the 18 Mosfet IN will handle? Presently running 80V.
Would like to run 120V one of these days.

You would think our mod guys would be all over this one. :p

Kelly controllers are nice but getting into the $350-$500 range. :|

DK

the IRFB4110 mosfet is rated at 100v. they will take a few volts over, but most people prefer to leave a little room for the noise spikes that could make the voltage the fets see higher than the battery voltage. I would not run at much over 80v but some people have pushed it to 100. The problem when you go over 100v is that the on-resistance of the fets goes up as the layers get thicker to stand off the increased voltage. With the 6 fets per phase of this unit you could probably use 150v fets and still run 50A or so but it will probably get hot. The IRFP4568 looks like the best 150v part, and it has twice the on resistance, so it will create 4x the heat at the same current as a 4110. 3 of these will still run hotter than 2 4110s.

i contacted the vendor on ebay who is selling the suspicious 4110 fets and asked them this: "where were these parts made, and why do they not have the embossed batch codes or standard IR format date codes? do you have any evidence they are not counterfeit? thanks"

they responded: "thanks for contacting us. we get them from our supplier. and we always offer no-question-money-back, so pls don't worry. Best Wishes goodbuy711 janet"

this is not an adequate response, IMHO
 
bobmcree said:
The IRFP4568 looks like the best 150v part, and it has twice the on resistance, so it will create 4x the heat at the same current as a 4110. 3 of these will still run hotter than 2 4110s.

Actually, the heat is I^2R, so double the resistance will give double the heat. Still, there is a huge difference between a 4110 and the best 150v rated part. The 18 FET design will give you a larger surface area to dissipate on, so you might be OK running at 50 -70 amps.
 
fechter said:
bobmcree said:
The IRFP4568 looks like the best 150v part, and it has twice the on resistance, so it will create 4x the heat at the same current as a 4110. 3 of these will still run hotter than 2 4110s.

Actually, the heat is I^2R, so double the resistance will give double the heat. Still, there is a huge difference between a 4110 and the best 150v rated part. The 18 FET design will give you a larger surface area to dissipate on, so you might be OK running at 50 -70 amps.

sorry, brain fart i guess. of course when you double the current you get 4x the heat, but not when you double the resistance. guess i should wake up before i answer emails. ;)
 
bobmcree said:
they responded: "thanks for contacting us. we get them from our supplier. and we always offer no-question-money-back, so pls don't worry. Best Wishes goodbuy711 janet"
What, Me Worry? I guess this response is better than ... "we get them from our supplier's dumpster" :roll:

alfred_e_neuman.jpg
 
so .. are you suggesting that an infineon with these 150V fets could take 150V 70A? (10.5kW) ?

cause if i stay with the nice 4110 (18x) on an infineon and that i can drive 100A continuous no prob.. that's also 10kW..

and.. the perfect setup to me would be:

To get higher speed with the delta/wye config that give 1.73x the kV (speed per volt) that would solve the problem since delta would requier much more current.. so the 4110 are perfect and i cold stay at 100V...

I just realize that if i return with a 26" wheel in delta mode at 100V i would theoricaly get over 125km/h on the 1/4 mile lane :twisted: but almost 110kmh i guess ...

Doc
 

Attachments

  • POwer vs speed graph.JPG
    POwer vs speed graph.JPG
    80.7 KB · Views: 3,756
Doctorbass said:
I just realize that if i return with a 26" wheel in delta mode at 100V i would theoricaly get over 125km/h on the 1/4 mile lane :twisted: but almost 110kmh i guess ...

Doc

in other words, 100v is plenty unless you are building a drag bike to run over 75 mph. Remember that the impedance of each cell adds drop, so if you only need 100v you are throwing away power without any gain.
 
bobmcree said:
if you look closely at the parts shown in the ebay ad the part number starts with FB4110 while all the mexican ir fets i have on the shelf are labeled IRFB4110. The date code and the IR logo are also in the wrong place, and the embossed batch code at the bottom on the mexican fets is missing completely.
"REAL" IR mosfet markings ...

IR_Logo.jpg

mosfet info from here ... http://endless-sphere.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8728#p133606
 
AndyH - thanks for the connectors & small parts. Really appreciated that.

Has anyone got general mod ideas for the 18 Fet Infineon? They were changing out caps, FETs, resistors etc on the older CLyte controller.

Lets not hijack the thread beating fake 4110s to death...
DK
 
Agree.. So let's return to the 18 fets infineon mod...

Who will build the first 18 mosfet controller with IRFB4110?? :twisted:

just with the 4310 it is rated to 65A so i guess that 100A continuous with the 4110 would be easy...

And... since 100A at 90-100V burst have been done with the original 12 fets c-lyte controller probably that 150A burst on the 18 mosfet controller wold be feasible too?

Doc
 
Hey Everyone,

I've heard some good things on this controller .. including more rpm vs the original e-crazyman controller ..

Does anyone know how this controller would run with 150v and the right mosfets..

As for anyone who saw my post of my knockoff ecrazyman replica @ 133v i was getting a shutter at about 15km/h .. refer to my previous post.

http://endless-sphere.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6930&p=126966#p126966

I was wondering .. if this controller would have the same issue or if it may work ..

-steveo
 
Knuckles said:
"REAL" IR mosfet markings ...

thanks for posting that. in addition, the mexican parts i have purchased the past couple of years have an embossed code in the middle of the bottom line. it looks like the IR4115 is the best choice for a 150v drop-in replacement in a TO-220 package, but it is over twice the on resistance of the stock parts. they are also on allocation and at least 6 weeks delivery.

there are better TO-247 150v parts that could be used with a little hacking. see the thread on 150v fets.
 
Oedered today: two 18 mosfet controller without mosfet

both will be equiped with pure 4110 !!

They will also have stock 3 1000uF 100V caps.. but i'll replace them for two big 6800 uF 160V

One will be more for reviewing and test.. the other will be the one on my drag bike setup.

And this controller DOES HAVE THE REGEN BRAKING !!

this is what Keywin wrote to answer me regarding this question:
:mrgreen:
Hello Stephane,
...i shipping your item on Friday and tell you the tracking number,of course ,this controller have the regen braking,i will open the regen braking for your controller ,you connect the "BK" with "GND" will ok ,thank you very much.

Best Regards
Keywin

here is some pics Keywin sent me as i asked for
 

Attachments

  • 18fet bottom_1600x580.jpg
    18fet bottom_1600x580.jpg
    171.8 KB · Views: 1,517
  • 18fet front_1600x1069.jpg
    18fet front_1600x1069.jpg
    214 KB · Views: 1,506
  • PCB du Infineon 18 Fets_1600x576.jpg
    PCB du Infineon 18 Fets_1600x576.jpg
    206.1 KB · Views: 1,510
I found a text on their website that seems to descrive the different controller size they have:
(used Babelfish translator Chinese simp to english)

Product introduction and parameter

Product range: The XC846 monolithic integrated circuit makes controller's master control chip

Product classification: Chip version series

Product model: EB812XC-A

Refresh time: 2009-3-8
:D


Product synopsis:
XC846 monolithic integrated circuit synopsis
1st, the XC846 monolithic integrated circuit designs the production by world-famous semiconductor company Infieon, is the automobile level microprocessor.
2nd, XC846 according to the automobile level's standard design production, the trouble-free service temperature reaches 130°c above, is higher than PIC16F72, CY8C2443A, NEC9234, the R8C series, TMP88F846UG by far and so on monolithic integrated circuit 85°c technical grade designs, enables the controller to be possible in a worse heat, the vibration and under the electromagnetic interference environment works.
3rd, XC846 the monolithic integrated circuit fiach space is 4K, the disposable compilation's program limit is broad, and simultaneously realizes the function are many.
4th, takes controller's core MCU by XC846, may output 6 group independent belt dead area protection 16 PWM, namely enhanced the performance to simplify the periphery component arrangement, the part quantity reduction reduced the controller cost at the same time to enhance the reliability.
5th, XC846 has the field best real-time performance, the operating frequency reaches as high as 26.67 Mhz, handling ability compared to PIC16F72 which, CY8C2443A, NEC9234, the R8C series, TMP88F846UG present industry in uses and so on must be higher than above 52%.
6th, XC846 uses the TSSOP subminiature seal, pin several 38, may provide most IO ports to reach 15 to use in the function expanding, may realize the control, the measuring appliance integration, simplifies the complete bikes to design and to reduce the complete bikes cost.
XC846 plan serial products type:
1st, ordinary series, remote control security lock electrical machinery series
2nd, zero power loss series
3rd, multi-purpose from study series
4th, does not have the Hall series
Technical parameter:
1st, working voltage: DC24V/DC36V/DC48V/DC64V/DC72V
2nd, governor deflection: 0~100%
3rd, working efficiency: ≥84%
4th, current limiting electric current: 6 ≤18A, 9 ≤25A, 12 ≤35A, 18 ≤55A
5th, rated power: 6 350W, 9 450W, 12 500W, 18 1000W

6th, fixed power loss: <1.5W
Function characteristic:
1st, time the start noise control, causes the electrical machinery to be able to surpass the static sound start;
2nd, the independent 6 group PWM space vector modulating technology causes the magnetic moment control to be more accurate, brings a better speed change and the braking quality, simultaneously reduced the energy consumption, the continue voyage distance enhanced above 9%;
3rd, zero power loss series control panel: In only lacks two not commonly used function mouths with the ordinary board on as controller's audio frequency output, zero power loss to compare, uses zero power loss pattern, causes the controller in the security condition power loss extremely micro, when control panel when security condition, can deadlock automatically the electrical machinery, causes to rob the vehicle to be unable to carry out;
4th, does not have the Hall series control panel: The phenomenon which uses 1 group independent PWM when in the original independent 6 group PWM foundation to carry on Hall to adjust brings a better speed change and the braking quality increases the starting torque, the reduction start backs up, simultaneously reduced the energy consumption; The continue voyage distance enhances above 9%;
5th, linear EBS gets on the brakes as well as slides in the counter-charging-up voltage as well as the electric current accurate control, guarantees in this process controller's security as well as the control effect, and supports the EBS linear brake crank;
6th, the formidable hardware monitoring protection module, guaranteed that the electrical machinery movement is reliable, and convenient breakdown judgment;
7th, the complete function according to the modular design, the user may through the hardware wiring or the serial port communication disposition functional module and the system parameters;
8th, the intelligence from the study function, may outputs according to the phase line connection and the electrical machinery phase angle adjustment controller;
9th, this series control panel realizes the control by the unique programming, causes the electric car driving system work in the optimum condition, thus enhances the product the reliability and the service life;
10th, the software, the hardware simultaneously have the start short circuit protection, the movement short circuit protection, to stop up transfer the protection, the undervoltage protection, on the electricity against speeding car protection, to move against speeding car protection, the soft start, the brakes automatic power failure, the high/low level braking, the cruise, 1:1 boost, three speeds, three speeds to instruct that the high/low level security may choose, functions and so on back-draft, failure indication, pronunciation warning, reliable carries on the protection to the electrical machinery and the battery; The control panel high performance, the reliability is high; The control panel has the ABS electron brake system, the counter-charge system, the driving circuit observation system, the function port, flexible, the convenient user carries on the production;
 
4th, current limiting electric current: 6 ≤18A, 9 ≤25A, 12 ≤35A, 18 ≤55A
5th, rated power: 6 350W, 9 450W, 12 500W, 18 1000W

I guess that at 55A using the 4310.. that mean with 4110 that would be:

5.6mohm /3.7 mohm=1.51.. so i expect to be able AT LEAST TO GET 83A continuous

Doc
 
i think we have come to the point where the to220 package is just too small for the high power controllers. the T0247 packaged 100v IR fets have .002 ohms on resistance and 3x better conductivity from the junction to the heat sink. When we drop in a 4110 to an existing design, it cuts down the heat generated, but there is still no better path for the heat to flow from the device junction to the outside world. Adding heat sink surface area helps, adding fans or other airflow helps, it all adds up; but it will never eliminate the bottleneck of the TO220 package.

gary has run 12 fet crystalyte controllers i upgraded to 4110s at 85A, so i think that is a good place for yours to run where it will be quite reliable. i expect you could go to 100A with a little extra airflow. there are some very cheap cpu heat sink / fan combinations available at http://www.weirdstuff.com/cgi-bin/category/10072 bolting a few of these to the main heat sink could greatly improve cooling if it turns out you need to do that.
 
I agree Bob, my choice for the 4110 is because i want them to fit in an existing controller.

The 18 fets infineon i'll upgrade will probably the first to have the 4110 and the first ebike controller with 18 mosfet that can run high current like that.

as for the heat sink, plan first to maximize the heat transfer from the to-220 to the case and then we will see..

what i appreciate o fthe infineon controlelr desing is that it have a thick alunimium bar that iuniformize the heat and help to slow doen the heat increase. much better than the crystalyte i guess.. that had 2 different interface between the transistor and the case.. the infineon have only one direct..

I never felt that my controller got warm.. this is what make me confident with it and the 4110.

if i need heat sink.. i'll check in my stock.. i have miore than 30lbs of them :wink:

I think that 18 fets controller will be very interesting.. and.. it also have regen braking!.. for tests....
 
definitely 50% more fets gets you better cooling. it will be very interesting to see if the controller meets your ultimate needs. since we can now get 18 4110s for about $35 it makes these controllers look very attractive.
 
jeremy was gonna build big copper bus bars that he was gonna hang rows of FETs on and drive them off the same gate driver, with the bar coming out the end of the controller case as i remember, using the 12FET infineon.

for the power rating, he wanted to get to 300A as i remember, with three rows of FETs in parallel on separate bussbars.

what if the FETs were back to back attached to the bussbar/heatsink and the second set of gates were hacked through space with a resistor from the driver and a second source lead was picked up off the source trace on the pcb and hung out in air on the other side to attach all the source leads to, to carry the current to the second set of FETs, then maybe this could be hacked up into the 200-240A range? at 72V nominal or 88V while hot then that would be almost 2 kW.
 
when i first started using fets about 30 years ago, we thought the gate capacitance was all you cared about as long as the voltage rating was high enough for the job at hand. IR later determined that not only do you have to drive the capacitance of the gate, but you have to allow for the effects of the gate driving the junction and the device transferring current. they came up with the "miller" charge, which is in nC or nanoCoulombs. the miller charge tells you what it will take to drive a particular device. the miller charge of the advanced IR devices keeps getting lower, making it easier to parallel devices with the same current drive required for earlier single devices. for the 4110 the miller charge is 43 nC, for the 4115 it is only 26. this means you can drive 2 4115's with not much more current than it took to drive a single 4110.

when replacing 4310's with 4110's the gate capacitance goes up, but because of the improved device structure the miller charge goes down. i was educated on this effect by another group member here when the formulas i learned in school 35 years ago proved to be inadequate. I try to pass on the favor he did me by passing on the same information to others. fets are much easier to parallel than conventional transistors, because they share naturally. the gate resistors do very little to equalize charge, but do more to isolate failures to the output stage when the resistors blow with the output fets, protecting the drivers. these devices are pretty well matched in terms of rise time and current gain, so the major issue when putting them in parallel becomes the miller charge and supplying solid power to the array.

forgive me if this is too much of a tech ramble, i just thought there might be somebody who like me was not totally up to speed on miller charge.
 
bobmcree said:
when i first started using fets about 30 years ago, we thought the gate capacitance was all you cared about as long as the voltage rating was high enough for the job at hand. IR later determined that not only do you have to drive the capacitance of the gate, but you have to allow for the effects of the gate driving the junction and the device transferring current. they came up with the "miller" charge, which is in nC or nanoCoulombs. the miller charge tells you what it will take to drive a particular device. the miller charge of the advanced IR devices keeps getting lower, making it easier to parallel devices with the same current drive required for earlier single devices. for the 4110 the miller charge is 43 nC, for the 4115 it is only 26. this means you can drive 2 4115's with not much more current than it took to drive a single 4110.

when replacing 4310's with 4110's the gate capacitance goes up, but because of the improved device structure the miller charge goes down. i was educated on this effect by another group member here when the formulas i learned in school 35 years ago proved to be inadequate. I try to pass on the favor he did me by passing on the same information to others. fets are much easier to parallel than conventional transistors, because they share naturally. the gate resistors do very little to equalize charge, but do more to isolate failures to the output stage when the resistors blow with the output fets, protecting the drivers. these devices are pretty well matched in terms of rise time and current gain, so the major issue when putting them in parallel becomes the miller charge and supplying solid power to the array.

forgive me if this is too much of a tech ramble, i just thought there might be somebody who like me was not totally up to speed on miller charge.

Bob, one thing i did with my actual 12 fets 4110controller was to put strong wires on the high current + and - bus bar on both end.. I wanted to avoid that the first mosfet conduct more than the last at the end of the bus bar.. far from t the wire soldered on it... or the shunt.. etc...

but what i wonder is.. does it create problem with inductive loop??.. I mean the busbar with one wire soldered on both end.. and joined together few inches further...?

cause bus bar are good i guess to share heat from the fet leg... and to uniformise the current share for every fets... but if you only connect one wire to one end.. the mosfet closer it it will carry more current and then maybe have unbalanced phase current??

thanks for the miller explanation.. that help me to understand ho they work.

I guess that 6x 4115 would represent the same charge to drive than 3x 4110??

if so.. a 36 fets controller would be awsome!.. 150V 150A with good heat dissipation on 36 fets! right?
 
we like this stuff bob, i was just thinking in terms of how to tie the drains together by mounting the FETs back to back, to double the power without going to the lengths that jeremy was talking about. but the gate leads would have to be tied together for each block of 3 and then have the resistor loop around under the board to the bottom side of the gate driver output throughhole, and then the source legs would be sticking straight out of the T220 package the other way and tied to a strand of cable which would essentially hang off the leg of the FET in space, and thinking of the vibrations for a large mass hanging out there means it would need support, some insulator capable of handling the heat and keeping it off the pcb and other leads, but then the heat going into the bussbar would be the factor to deal with, not sure what could be used to expand the drain bussbar to increase its ability to carry away the heat.

anyway, i was just thinking of how this really could be the format for more powerful applications without the cost of an expensive controller. i had heard you mention miller charge before but never understood what it was doing.
 
I'm still looking at ways to get high power (around 200A, 60V+) from an affordable controller. I've been trying to buy the 18 FET board from Keywin since last September, but although he quoted me a price for a couple, I've not yet managed to get a PayPal invoice from him (I've just emailed him again to ask for one).

Looking at just the resistive losses, and comparing the 18 FET board with the known performance of the 6 FET Infineon board (which seems to run reliably at 50A), gives some surprising numbers. The 6 FET controller is reported to "barely get warm" when run with 4110s at 50A. My quick sums show that each 4110 FET in a 6 FET controller will be dissipating around 10W maximum at 50A (considering just the I²R losses). This isn't exactly challenging for a TO220 package, as this package will very easily get rid of much more heat than this into a suitable heatsink. It's quite easy to get around 5 deg C per watt from junction to air, which means that a TO220 package FET can reasonably handle around 25 watts or so without resorting to forced air cooling and other exotic methods.

If we can live with a max voltage of below 75V (perhaps 65V - 70V maximum) then a lower Rdson FET than the IRFB4110 can be used. IRFB3077 FETs look to be a good choice, with their max Rdson of 3.3mOhms and 120A package limit (210A semiconductor limit).

So, if a 6 x 4110 FET controller can handle 50A OK, then a 6 x 3077 FET controller should handle around 68A with the same temperature rise as the 50A 4110 FET version. Scaling this up to an 18 x 3077 FET controller would give a max current capability of around 204A. Pretty impressive, but the real world limit might be how well the controller can drive the gate charge. Still, as these Infineon controllers use discrete component drivers, it might well be possible to do some simple changes to increase the peak gate drive current.

Jeremy
 
Back
Top