Mosfet Keeps blowing - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / repair

author: dark_hawk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2021, 07:56:32 am
content: Hi,In this circuit, which is a PSU board for an audio amplifier, Q3 IRF740 (The one highlighted) keeps blowing up (short between the three legs)Sometimes this short happens right away after the relay click, and sometimes it takes a few minutes. The first time it blew it took like 2 hours of operation before it blew up.The four mosefts and the TOP243 gets hot in standby, about 50-70 C. Which is as reported by others normal for this board.I checked everything around this mosfet and the individual components seems fine.What can cause such failure?AUX power:Main PSU1:Main PSU2:Back of board:Front of board:

author: perieanuo
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2021, 08:48:14 am
content: Quote from: dark_hawk on October 04, 2021, 07:56:32 amhi,i suspect something in the 'command' loop for Q3, like C57, C29, C54 maybe some diode like D23 (is she ok?if it's opened, you may have some spurious spikes there killing G-S junction), maybe bad diac (but i saw this rarely)(you can just replace those caps tocheck)top243 seems independent supply, so nothing connects this to your problemvoltage on C59 and C60?

author: sean0118
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2021, 08:53:13 am
content: It's difficult to see in the photos, but aren't the mod wires for the gate and drain touching the trace connected to the source? Is there more than the soldermask providing insulation?Another option, the replacement IRF740s could be fakes?

author: dark_hawk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2021, 09:37:14 am
content: Quote from: perieanuo on October 04, 2021, 08:48:14 amThanks for the reply.C57, C29 and C54 are all fine, desoldered and measured and they measure fine.D23 is also fine. The two Diacs are showing no readings on a 9V multimeter, so I assume they are fine.TOP243 is indeed independent. And the standby voltages are fine.Voltages across the Big caps are 140-150V if I remember correctly. I didn't measure them since replacing the old CAPXCOM junk with some nichicons.

author: dark_hawk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2021, 09:40:07 am
content: Quote from: sean0118 on October 04, 2021, 08:53:13 amThe solder mask seems fine, I will added an extra layer of the UV curable solder mask though, won't hurt.The original IRF740 did blow up though, there is a problem somewhere.The replacement may be fakes, yes. But even if they were fakes, would it blow up without any load connected?

author: DavidAlfa
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2021, 11:15:07 am
content: Don't connect it directly to the mains! Put a 50-100W bulb in series!If the transistor is permanently switched on, it will bright like a normal bulb, but keep it from blowing.Normally it will be barely lit, red-orange.Check the reverse voltage on zener diode D23 (ensure it doesn't go over 15V), also the snubber C29/R36, it filters the huge switching spikes, the mosfet will die quickly if exposed to such voltages.

author: sean0118
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2021, 12:12:21 pm
content: Quote from: dark_hawk on October 04, 2021, 09:40:07 amThe reason why I mention it is I shorted out an audio amp once because there was a single wire strand touching a nearby trace. I couldn't see any holes in the solder mask but it was still shorted, that was only at a few volts as well. This is quite high voltage so I think you'd be better striping the wire insulation off right where it goes into the through hole.Quote from: dark_hawk on October 04, 2021, 09:40:07 amIt's unlikely but possible. Some of the fakes switch slower than the genuine parts so they are still conducting when they should be off etc. Just something to keep in mind, there most likely is another fault as you mention.What are the repairs you have already done on the board?

author: dark_hawk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2021, 12:24:25 pm
content: Quote from: DavidAlfa on October 04, 2021, 11:15:07 amHi David, Thanks for the reply.I'm already using a 200W incandescent lamp in series. The mosfet blows but at least it saves the fuse and the rest of the circuit.C29 and R36 are reading fine. Also test D23 out of circuit and it's working.

author: dark_hawk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2021, 12:40:40 pm
content: Quote from: sean0118 on October 04, 2021, 12:12:21 pmI changed all the electrolytic caps, replaced D9, and done some changes in the AUX part of the circuit. Nothing in the primary side.Something new happened that I don't know if it relates to this issue. C70 bulged. It's a new Nichicon GU series cap, It just won't bulge on it's own. And it's supposed to be on Q1 and Q2!Also something I don't understand, D22, D23, D24 and D25, the zener diodes at the gate of the mosfets, the read voltage drop in both directions while in circuit, but only in one direction out of circuit. The 4 diodes can't all have gone bad! And I can't understand why they are reading in the opposite direction in circuit.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 04, 2021, 01:26:58 pm
content: Quote from: dark_hawk on October 04, 2021, 09:40:07 amTotally wrong assumption. Original MOSFET may easily fail independent from other parts. And if you use crappy counterfeit as replacements you will have further failures.QuoteAs if the MOSFET as one of the most stressed components must not fail first, and there must be an issue somewhere.

author: dark_hawk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2021, 01:39:46 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on October 04, 2021, 01:26:58 pmThanks for the reply.I already have 5 failed mosfets in 5 tries. One of which is an original part since it was disassembled from a faulty HP board ( of a printer I think). I do have a problem somewhere.

author: sean0118
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2021, 01:46:59 pm
content: Quote from: dark_hawk on October 04, 2021, 12:40:40 pmThat's interesting that it can fail that quick, from the photos it looks like they are installed the right way. I can't see how their voltage rating could be exceeded with the 230V jumper set? Maybe ripple current is too high? Otherwise counterfeit capacitors are very common too unfortunately.Quote from: dark_hawk on October 04, 2021, 12:40:40 pmI'm not sure either, you might be measuring the volt drop over the resistors when in circuit? If they measure okay out of circuit they should be fine.

author: sean0118
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2021, 11:38:25 pm
content: This is a tough one, it doesn't look that complicated, but I still can't see a clear reason for the MOSFET to blow or C70 to bulge. Is R23 the correct value? Looks like it might have got hot at some point?

author: dark_hawk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 05, 2021, 12:32:15 am
content: Yes. Both R23 and R2 are reading fine out of circuit.Turns out the mosfets I have are authentic. I measured Drain-source on-state resistance using this method:Those vishay branded mosfets that I have are reading 0.43 ohm which is even better than the 0.55 ohm on the datasheet, and the original which reads around 0.5. Compared to some other mosfets I have from another source which reads 1.1 ohm.This board had a lot of that conductive glue which sticks very bad to the board, hence the lifted pads and missing connections and the jumper wires. My guess now is that the problem might be there is a short somewhere on the circuit or a trace that's not conducting, or reads fine when measured in continuity and fails when high voltage is applied . Hunting it will be tedious, but I think I don't have a choice.

author: dark_hawk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 05, 2021, 09:15:23 am
content: A question: Q2 and Q3 are on the same transformer. Should both mosfets be identical? Same manufacturer and properties.Or is it acceptable that they have slightly different RDs-ON and different manufacturer since both have the same model number IRF740?

author: timenutgoblin
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 05, 2021, 10:25:12 am
content: Just some observations...R36 (47R) is part of the snubber network and looks like it has a dry joint. Reflow it.On the schematic, component designator C56 is duplicated. C28 (220pF) on the PCB is C56 (220pF) on the schematic. The other C56 is 3.3nF (greencap) capacitor. This isn't part of Q3 circuit, though.Since Q3 MOSFET has failed numerous times, what is the likelihood that the primary HVDC winding (pins 5 and 6) has sustained some damage when Q3 drain-source channel short circuits? As a last resort, try swapping transformers T1 and T2 and see if the fault follows the transformer or stays with Q3 MOSFET. I suggest this idea because PSU1 and PSU2 are seemingly identical from what I can see in the schematic and are common to the startup circuit of Q6 etc. Maybe exercise some caution/discretion with this suggestion.

author: dl6lr
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 05, 2021, 02:38:17 pm
content: Quote from: sean0118 on October 04, 2021, 11:38:25 pmFor 230V version (which is configured on the board), the upper (A-X) and lower (Y-B) parts are in series to mains voltage. Both sheets of the main PSU schematics are in parallel, so C59||C69 and C60||C70. If the upper part (with the Mosfet Q3) is shorted, the whole voltage is applied to Y-B, where the cap C70 is only rated to 200V. R2 and R23 are the bleeders/balancers (where during normal operation the balancing should be done by the current the switches are drawing). Performance of caps C59/C60/C69/C70 will also affect the balancing, but they are replaced. With one bulging, I doubt these are still in spec. Even short times of overvoltage will degrade the caps, maybe they resume from insulation defects with some time reforming them. Running it on 110V with changed configuration is more safe to the board during testing.This a self resonating circuit, it starts with the pulse to Q3/Q4. If there is a short or break in the transformer, current flow may not stop before the FET is broken, it will happily convert to a self destructing circuit. If possible, disconnect everything from the transformer and try to inject small pulses and see the ringing with a scope. Compare both transformers.

author: dark_hawk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 05, 2021, 11:05:07 pm
content: Quote from: timenutgoblin on October 05, 2021, 10:25:12 amR36 is making a good connection, I reflowed it just in case. Your observations on the schematic are correct. Thanks for examining the schematic thoroughly to find such mistakes.I have measured all the windings on the both the transformers and compered the results, using an LCR meter at 1 KHz, inductance and resistance values are identical. I don't know if that is enough.When testing the circuit I always used an incandescent lamp in series with the 220v input along with a high quality fast blow fuse. When the short happens the lamp just lights up preventing - hopefully - any damage to other components.I don't think at this point that the transformer is damaged, or at least that's what I hope.

author: dark_hawk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 05, 2021, 11:29:19 pm
content: Quote from: dl6lr on October 05, 2021, 02:38:17 pmThe strange thing is that the bulged cap still reads the same values as a new unused one. Capacitance and ESR using at ESR meter at 1 KHz. A credit to quality caps I think. I changed it of course though.Unfortunately I don't have a scope.Since this a self resonating circuit, and the mosfets are in pull push configuration. Should both mosfets be identical? Same manufacturer and properties.Or is it acceptable that they have slightly different RDs-ON and different manufacturer since both have the same model number IRF740?And if the mosfets are slightly different, will that cause failure.Another question, When I'm testing the circuit, I have disconnected the sound amplifier boards which are the load to that output, will the lack of a load on such a circuit cause a failure?

author: sean0118
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 05, 2021, 11:37:14 pm
content: Quote from: dl6lr on October 05, 2021, 02:38:17 pmAh, that makes sense! I wasn't thinking about the voltage over C70 during the fault, that's one mystery solved.

author: perieanuo
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 07, 2021, 06:59:25 am
content: Quote from: dark_hawk on October 05, 2021, 11:29:19 pmi'm not really mosfet expert, but i think rdson is not very very important, mosfets could be different (in some limits of course), for me frequency specs could move the boat (commute time).i doubt the transformer is damaged, you can swap and test, fortunately you can in this case.btw, if you want real protection, put the bulb in series with mosfet drain (the one who blows), then you save everybody, mosfet included. calculate the 'biggest' bulb accepted and use one close to that wattage (regarding max current accepted by your mosfet). this was always my technique, putting the bulb on mains lets place to such thing like trace popcorning, transformer overcurrent and so on. of course it doesn't protect 100%, with shorted mosfet you have to disconnect quick the mains, you'll put some big dc current into the smps transformer, but keeps it under control betterso i think you missed something in that mosfet control loop or maybe we don't really understand how this ps is workingyou may also change c32 ( i strongly advice you to CHANGE the caps, not measure them, until this is resolved).why? look at the bulged cap example...with your lcr or multimeter powered from 9V you can measure 2-3 parameters, but never ever you will put that cap to 1KV voltage, so the (potentially damaged) isolation will never show up. usually your method is ok, but nor those non-baptized damaged pcb, the caps is better to be replaced, we will analyze what's happened after successful repair

author: dark_hawk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 07, 2021, 09:26:19 am
content: Quote from: perieanuo on October 07, 2021, 06:59:25 amThanks for the reply.My understanding of how this PS works is that Q6 drives the gates of Q3 and Q4. Q3 works with Q1 to drive transformer 1 and Q4 with Q2 to drive transformer 2. So you are correct, I don't really understand in depth how it works, some rudimentary info.If you mean by the mosfet control loop Q6 and the components around it, all is fine. I even desoldered the diacs and tested them and they are working fine. Also Q6 was desoldered and tested out of circuit using a transistor tester.Unfortunately I don't have a stock of those caps. C32 was desoldered and tested with an LCR meter is reading fine.I switched the mosfets around so that Q3 and Q1 are the identical and Q4 and Q2 are identical, to prevent further damage I followed dl6lr advice and hooked the board to 110V power source and it worked fine. Gave it 5 minutes and it kept working fine.Switched the jumpers to 230V configuration, and started the system, the lamp in series started to glow after I heard something like a hiss or small sparks somewhere on the board, immediately disconnected the power and nothing seemed to blow. Tried again but still can't figure out where that sparky sound is coming from. Switched the jumpers back to 110v and thought of measuring some voltages, it worked for like 10 seconds and the the relay started clicking on and off rapidly. Now Q1 is blown.

author: perieanuo
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 07, 2021, 12:53:24 pm
content: of course q6 was good, without him the ps blows at first start or does not start at allthe whissle sound is the frequency going rogue and i think we should start to investigate if 'lower' branch is working (i mean Q2 and his friends, maybe the negative alternance isn't right causing the positive to die)if you don't want to replace caps, at least start to exchange them between supplies, but C54 should be changed being unique.the relay is powered by the other ps, he sould remain steady, except if D1 bridge is on excessive load (shorted on output), making top243 ps to fail.i think you covered the basis like verify if D1 is ok and you have the correct DC voltage on C6 and C69-C70, a shorted diode in that bridge will make dust from our suppositionsyou're right about mosfet control loop Q6+D6-D7 putting Q2-Q3 in conduction, but the control loop extends to those secondary windings 7-8 and 1-2 for example, those are shutting off the mosfets via C57...for me, resistors and caps are easy to diagnose so the heavy task is to exchange T1 and T2 eliminating this (i don't think T1 or T2 are bad, those models are pretty sturdy, but who knows, attacking them with repetitive blows may damage 5-6 winding.keep digging

author: dl6lr
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 07, 2021, 07:14:31 pm
content: Quote from: dark_hawk on October 07, 2021, 09:26:19 amThis is somehow strange. The FETs to be identical should be Q3/Q2 and Q1/Q4, as those build a PP drive to the transformer each. I would just disable the second PSU completely to isolate the problem (or use it first to get some measurements on the working circuit).So the unit worked for 5 minutes in 110V configuration with 110V supplied? With or withoud load?Some thoughts, maybe wrong: TH1 is the inrush current limiter. The relay is driven from electronics supplied by the AUX PSU so if the voltage is low because the bulb starts to glow, the relay may switch off. Just bridge the relay for tests. When the MAIN PSU gets its DC input voltage, limited by TH1, C59,C60,C69,C70 will be charged, either in parallel (110V) or series (230V). With Q6 and R14 the two DIACs will be pre-charged, at about 60V the DIAC will drive the Gate of Q3 positive against the source, so Q3 will switch on and current from will flow thru the transformer. The source will "jump" to high voltage but the gate floats with it. The current induced into the second winding and as long as voltage on pin 7 of T1 rises, current flows thru C54 and keeps the gate high. When the core saturates, current thru Q3 increases but current/voltage at pin 7 will decrease, so gate will be pulled low thru R63/R66. Current thru Q3 stops and decreases, inducing voltage in opposite direction which will turn on Q2 thru C56.Ratings of the FETs are 10A, the bulb should draw a current that is lower. So even one FET stuck should not blow it up. 200W on 230V will be roughly 1A with higher inrush. I would try a lower value like 60W to start with, but a IRF740 should not bother the current from the lamp. So there must be another error, like failing snubber or excessive startup drive.Check R14, R15, R16, Q6, D14 and C54. With D15 and D16 removed, the PSU should not start up (but beware, any kind of spike to one of the gates will start it). Check D23 as a failing zener may exceed the Ugs (20V) of Q3. It should have 0.7V forward and 15V in reverse. In circuit you will not get the right values as R63-R66 are parallel to it.

author: dark_hawk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 07, 2021, 10:50:01 pm
content: Quote from: perieanuo on October 07, 2021, 12:53:24 pmWhen the relay went to clicky town the last time it was powered, there was indeed a short on the bridge due to Q1 being blown. Once Q1 was removed the short disappeared. All the bridge's diodes are fine.C64 is fine, reads 10.5N and has a better ESR that any other cap I have with the same value.All resistors read the intended value in circuit, expect for the bleeder resistors which I have to desolder to measure, and both check out fine.Quote from: dl6lr on October 07, 2021, 07:14:31 pmThanks for explaining how it works.It was tested without a load.All of R14, R15, R16, Q6, D14 and C54 were tested and checks out. I desoldered D23 and checked out of circuit and it's working fine, 14.8V. In circuit it gives voltage drop in both directions, all the zeners connected to the 100 ohm gate resistors read voltage drop in both directions while in circuit.As a last resort here is a photo of the current sorry state of my board, maybe there is something wrong glaring me in the eye and due to the lack of experience I can't see it.This board went through a lot of thermal stress due to bad thermal design. When the mosfets were working it would reach 70-80 C while in standby doing nothing, and that's in open air not inside the subwoofer box where there is no ventilation. It also had that horrible glue which turns brown and conductive when heated. The solder pads and pours are in bad shape, they get lifted and torn with the slightest move. Even at low soldering temperature of 300 C it tears through the pads. And as you can see, it turned into a wire jungle.

author: timenutgoblin
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 08, 2021, 04:29:27 am
content: On schematic, PSU2 capacitor C71 is 33µF / 100V, PSU1 capacitor C72 is 330µF / 100VOn PCB, both capacitors look like they're the same physical size (330µF ?)Q3 MOSFET:Gate terminal:Solder Gate terminal to top of PCB. The track on the top of the PCB goes to the gate resistor. Remove red-insulated wire.Drain terminal:Scrape solder mask from adjacent copper trace and solder Drain terminal directly to the exposed PCB. This should reduce connection resistance and inductance. Remove black-insulated wire.Is it easier to remove and install Q3 MOSFET with the jumper wires in place? Also, are the PCB tracks connecting to Q3 actually damaged? Seems like a stupid question to ask.

author: dark_hawk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 08, 2021, 06:16:22 am
content: Quote from: timenutgoblin on October 08, 2021, 04:29:27 amAgain, you are correct, another typo in the schematic, C71 and C72 are identical.Not a stupid question at all. Most if not all the tracks are fine, the pads are the ones that's gone. I just don't want to deal extra damage to the tracks at this stage with all the soldering and desoldering, if I got it working I will remove most of the wires and solder directly to the tracks. Desoldering from a wire is easier that from a track.

author: Dacke
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 09, 2021, 03:46:02 pm
content: It's interesting to note that initially Q3 kept failing until you swapped the replacement for Q3 to Q1, then it was Q1 that failed. Why did the failure follow the mosfet? International Rectifier components are very commonly counterfeited. Did you get them from a reputable source?

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 11, 2021, 08:40:54 pm
content: Quote from: dark_hawk on October 05, 2021, 12:32:15 amIt's probably not better and may be a sign of counterfeit. They may have a lower RDS(on) because they are actually rated for lower voltage. Counterfeiters may use not only less beefy parts with the same voltage rating, they may use cheaper parts with lower voltage rating and smaller die. Which at the same time may have low enough RDS(on). Post a picture (front and back) of the MOSFETs you have.

author: dark_hawk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 15, 2021, 10:38:41 pm
content: I was able to solve it. I desoldered everything I replaced in the primary side, and inspected every pad under the microscope. I then resoldered them making sure that the pad or the terminal was making a good connection. I don’t know exactly which pad or connection was the culprit here, but If I had to guess I think it would be the positive terminal of C70, it beeped in continuity before, but maybe it was hanging there by a thread.The unit while in standby with no load draws around 200ma from mains, and while working with medium sound levels goes to about 250ma. So, I think that even the bad fake FETs would’ve worked for a while and not blown right away.But I’m interested in how you would differentiate fake from original FETs by how they look.Here are some photos of the IRF740 I have from 6 different sources:

author: Audiorepair
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 15, 2021, 10:52:32 pm
content: I once bought fake transistors on Ebay from a supposed reputable seller.It was soon confirmed they were fake by weighing them against the originals.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 16, 2021, 06:45:58 am
content: 5 and 6 should be genuine, 2, 3, 4 look counterfeit. If taken out of an old equipment, 1 should be genuine.

author: dark_hawk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2021, 08:25:11 pm
content: Like this guy says, it's not about being fake or original, it's more of a "fit for purpose" approach:VgsOn/Ciss(gate capacity)/RdsOn/Weight1 - The original disassembled from the unit: 3.xxv/3.xxuF/0.5R/1.98g2 - 3.42v/1.53nF/0.43R/1.95g (Maybe fake but fits the purpose)3- 3.46v/760pF/2.58R/1.92g (Completely fake, and a very bad fake too. 2.58 ohm RdsOn is way high)4- 4.53v/744pF/1.08R/2.02g (Also fake, and a bad one with Rdson double of that on the datasheet)5- 3.29v/2.93nF/0.43R/1.98g (The lowest VgsOn, the highest Ciss and among the lowest RdsOn, maybe original)6- 3.54v/2.71nF/0.45R/1.97g (The second best I think)Weight does not determine much here I think, the TO220 is already light enough, maybe weighing some TO-247 could show a difference.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 17, 2021, 08:40:57 pm
content: Quote from: dark_hawk on October 17, 2021, 08:25:11 pmOr it does not. You don't know its VDS.

author: dark_hawk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2021, 08:49:45 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on October 17, 2021, 08:40:57 pmI got 2 of those in the unit right now, the voltage being applied to them is about 120V, and they seem to work fine. Their operating temperature is almost the same as the original IR next to them. So they do fit this purpose.Desoldering them and replacing them with number 5 will be a hassle, so I'm leaving them for some timeBut I see your point.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 18, 2021, 06:00:12 am
content: Lower gate capacitance at the same RDS(ON)suggests either more modern manufacturing technology or lower VDSrating. And considering that it's a counterfeit (TO220 MOSFETS from Vishay Siliconix do not look like this), the latter is more probable, as it would be a cheaper part.

author: dark_hawk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2021, 09:26:49 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on October 18, 2021, 06:00:12 amSo a lower Input Capacitance (Ciss) is considered a good thing?Following that logic, when choosing a mosfet from this list, the best one would be the cheapest one:IRF740BPBF with the lowest Input capacitance.https://www.digikey.ca/en/products/compare?s=N4IgzCBcDaIBwEYBMAGMB2EAaeyUBYVtckE1j98MBOahY5MagNioh0ZavwbAFZCfanxABdHD0ggA9AFMAdtIAOAJwD2AEwCuAYwAuAZ2kAzAJYAbPbJXS9KgIbyDpg3rUqDAWmOzDngLZqBj5%2BzvIA5uay0kjocAD8BgC8AHL4AJLhAFYAwgBCOkrhAEYAYmoAIgDiAKp5-nkVAIIp4QBaAO4A0gCaeWoAinnoXU3FAEpNeT0d9QCyOuEVABZNpSg5TQASawCeq7VITfJNAMqzRzoAHlPGTeGlPU3oTU09AKLpbQBSWwAqbTg4xqphyKlOfD4TW%2BVxSAHUtqcUgAvPgVcbvADWABlSvIrmpTAhvuYOqVTJi5uYVABHZgABTymIA8gQ4Hl0nABukVHlzAZzKUahoEKUrnklE0cj84QM2v5irs5n9jGA5jk5qUEGA8n8clt4TpdrJTqdjD1kXBkQNvm9mFccpjZAgavIKgANb5tWVSpoVGoAN3ekqaADUaqUAKRIPKtPJ8UpTNpbCoDAxrDSyLZbd5XOanJogAC%2BQAAlso, why are you so sure that number 2 is a counterfeit? It's readings are close enough to number 5 and 6?

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 19, 2021, 11:14:24 am
content: Quote from: dark_hawk on October 18, 2021, 09:26:49 pmYes it's a good thing since it's easier to drive and will have faster rise/fall times with the same gate drive. However using IRF740B as a drop-in replacement for IRF740 might be not the best idea (if original part is available). 99% chance it will work just fine, however undesirable consequences like increased EMI are also possible.QuoteYes, 100% counterfeit, a very obvious one. It's package is wrong. And marking is applied too close to the bottom as indent is located on top. Not to say gate capacitance is too low compared to genuine parts.BTW you typed capacitances as uF but they should be nF.

author: Haenk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2021, 02:20:36 pm
content: I'd vote for number 6 (only; besides 1) being a genuine one.Number 5 looks like an IR case being coated, the Siliconix logo looks off. Should be a fat "S" with an "i" embedded.(Edit: Number 5 might be the correct part in itself, just not from the stated manufacturer, so maybe old stock being "refreshed". Maybe try rubbing it with some acetone to check for coating...)

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 19, 2021, 03:51:53 pm
content: Quote from: Haenk on October 19, 2021, 02:20:36 pmNumber 5 and 6 look exactly like examples in the datasheet from 2 different factories.