Thank you Brent. Your re-drawn schematic looks amazing! I am going to be away 
for a few days, I have reassembled the machine and there is a lot to digest, so 
it may take a while for me to go through it all.

 

Regards

 

Rob

 

From: Brent Hilpert <[email protected]> 
Sent: 07 September 2025 04:45
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <[email protected]>; 
[email protected]
Subject: Re: [cctalk] Repairing an Olivetti M24 PSU

 

On 2025Sep 5,, at 11:35 PM, Rob Jarratt via cctalk <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

 

Thanks Scott. I removed a couple of other caps on the 12V output, tested them 
and then put them back as they seemed OK. I have tested the ESR (in circuit) on 
all the other electrolytics and they all seemed fine. I tested a few resistors 
but not particularly rigorously though.

The resistive load I applied was calibrated to the specs of the PSU, above the 
minimum load and below the maximum. I didn’t load the -12V and +15V outputs 
though, only +5 and +12. The -12V output has no minimum current spec.

I can always consider the meanwell supplies but so far I have been able to 
repair my PSUs and I hope to do the same here.

I am going to try installing it back in the machine today and see how it fares.

 

 

Here is yet another (4th) version of the schematic, redrawn for greater 
functional clarity:

 

          http://madrona.ca/e/misc/OlivettiM24PS.pdf

 

This version follows the component IDs of the marked-up version of the main 
Olivetti schematic, though I’m not clear

where these IDs came and they don’t seem to have much order (perhaps they came 
from grid locations on the PCB?).

These IDs are inconsistent with the main Olivetti schematic and Olivetti 
ThOfOp, which seem to use a component type

designator rather than component instance ID.  There are some number of errors 
or inconsistencies in the Olivetti docs.

 

- - -

 

Some ThOfOp further to the Olivetti manual:

 

This is a 'self-oscillating’ design in that the switching-oscillation is built 
into the primary drive circuit - there is no independent oscillator driving the 
primary driver.

 

The primary drive circuit is basically a dual-supply push-pull amplifier 
driving the main transformer primary, though the drive output has a capacitor 
C141) and a winding of the control reactor transformer (T365) in series in the 
circuit.

 

The feedback loop to make it oscillate goes through the base-drive transformer 
(T366) with its two secondaries feeding the bases of the two drive transistors. 
 The main feedback path is presumably via T748.4,5.  I would guess winding 
T365.5,6 is a 2nd-level regulation control altering the drive level.  The T366 
base-drive secondaries would be polarity-oriented so they drive the bases in 
cross-over, that is one transistor ON driving the primary feeds back (with 
delay) to eventually drive the other transistor ON.  So to speak, the 
oscillator is a high-power magnetically-coupled positive/negative-pulsing 
astable flip-flop.  You see that in the +/- pulses on the input to the output 
rectifiers (per your scope pics).  The Olivetti ThOfOp says the output 
rectifiers are half-wave, but they’re two half-wave rectifiers operating on 
opposite polarities from a center tap .. which is a full-wave rectifier.

 

Not sure, but I surmise that C141 may be a/the primary determinant of the 
oscillation frequency, while the 4 caps around the driver bases (C131,etc.) 
determine the intra-cycle pulse periods and delays.  Or C141 may be there to 
keep any DC drive imbalance out of the primary (..?).

 

Regulation-control operation in summary:

 

          - Q83,85 form a differential pair for the regulation error sense.

          - Q83.B is the reference input, supplied by U49.

          - Q85.B is the sense input, supplied by V+5s from the +5V output via 
divider R80,R87,RV89.

 

          The trail of regulation-control influence, by example:

                      - A + increase of V+5s results in increased drive current 
thru Q85.BE, sending Q85.C more +.

                      - This drives Q86 to greater conduction, thus Q86.C goes 
lower to GND.

                      - This lowers Q44.B, reducing its conduction and so 
reducing current through the control reactor input winding (T365.7,9)

                      - The reduced current in the reactor input winding 
reduces T365’s core saturation.

                        This enables the primary driver pulse currents flowing 
through the primary-side control winding (T365.3,4) to have more

                         magnetic influence in the T365 core, which is to say 
those driver currents now see a higher impedance to their current flow.

                      - The current through the main transformer primary 
winding (T748.1,2) is thus reduced, counteracting the increased V+5,

                        thus completing the control loop.

- - -

 

As the oscillation is built into the primary drive circuit, presumably the 
control system has a lower limit that inhibits shutting the primary drive 
completely off because if it did, the primary oscillation would stop.  This 
lower limit may be designed into the maximum impedance of the T365 
primary-control winding, but it may also involve the (relatively high) minimum 
load specs per the manual.

 

You didn’t specify the currents for your dummy loads.  The min spec for the 
V+15 is 1A, i.e. 15W. That isn’t trivial so you may want to ensure the total 
dummy load is accounting for that: total power of dummy load(s) > total power 
of min output specs.

 

Hypotheses, in the absence of other measurements: the control circuitry is 
faulty and holding the primary drive level to a minimum, enough to maintain 
oscillation but not enough to produce significant output.  The primary drive is 
minimised by zero current in the control reactor input winding (T365.7,9) and 
increases with increasing current in that winding.

 

Observe:  Measure the V across the 16*100 resistor bank when the PS is 
functioning, perhaps at different load levels, and and when it is in fault.

 

There are all sorts of failures in the control circuitry that could send the 
supply into minimum drive (basically anything that shuts off current in the 
T365 input winding).

 

The Olivetti ThOfOp suggests fault-detection circuitry (involving Q59,75) can 
latch-up the supply into minimum drive.

I haven’t looked into that circuitry in much depth, but the latch-up mechanism 
seems to be:

          - at lesser/minimum drive the T365 core goes out of saturation, 
allowing the now-varying magnetic field from remaining

            primary drive pulse current to induce V in T365.1,2.

          - this is rectified and filtered and supplies drive to Q86 via Q75 
(if Q75 conditions are appropriate).

          - this holds Q44 off to shut off T365 input current, so keeping the 
primary drive at minimum.

 

Reply via email to