Pill

Before you decide to build this, you may want to have a look at acolomichi's design as
well

Warning: this project uses deadly voltages, as well as a sizeable capacitor to store these
deadly voltages. Even after you disconnect the circuit from the grid, the capacitor still
can give you a jolt to remember!!
Over 3 years ago, I published a simpel TRIAC AC dimmer for the arduino. That proved
to be a very popular design. Yet in spite of the simplicity of the circuit the software
needed was a bit complicated as it needed to keep track of the zero crossing of the AC
signal, then keep track of the time and then finally open the TRIAC. So to avoid letting
the arduino just wait for most of the time, an interrupt and a timer were necessary.
So why can't we just use PWM, like with LED's? Well, I explained that in that
instructable, but there are possibilities to do that. Someone looking for that would no
doubt end up at design by Ton Giesberts/Elektor Magazine that can do PWM of an AC
source. This design is on Instructables as well.
That will work, but in spite of my admiration for Giesberts and Elektor, there is
something fundamentally wrong with that circuit. I think it is necessary that I explain
what is wrong before I come up with improvements. If you are not interested in the
technical details, just skip to the next step.

At first glance, the Giesberts circuit seems like a complicated circuit, but we can bring it
back to 2 or 3 components: A lamp, and a switch, but as in fact the switching is done in
DC rather than AC, it becomes a lamp, a bridge rectifier and a switch. That switch, which
is in fact the MOSFET and the components around it is controlled by the Arduino (or PIC
or whatever). So, switching that on and off in a certain duty cycle will switch the lamp on
and off and if done fast enough the lamp won't be seen anymore as flickering, but as
being dimmed, similar as we do with LED's and PWM.
So far so good. The theory behind the circuit is sound. However, the MOSFET needs a
voltage on its gate to be switched on and as we cannot get that from an arduino for
obvious reasons (it is only 5 Volt, which isnt enough AND you don't want your arduino
to be connected to the mains grid), Giesberts uses an optocoupler. That optocoupler still
needs a DC voltage and Giesberts is using the to DC rectified AC voltage for that.
 And
that is where the problems start, because he is feeding the gate from the MOSFET, with a
voltage that is shorted by that same MOSFET. In other words, if the MOSFET is fully
opened the DC voltage coming from the rectifier is completely shorted. Therefore there
will be no voltage anymore to put on the gate and the MOSFET will block again. This
effect might not be so outspoken by a low dutycycle (= lamp on a low intensity), because
of the presence of C1, that will retain its charge for a while and will be receiving new
charge thanks to the low dutycycle, but at 25-80% dutycycle the voltage on C1 just
cannot be sustained anymore and the lamp may start to flicker. What's worse is that at
moments that the voltage on the gate drops, for a while the MOSFET will be still
conducting, but not be fully saturized: it will slowly go from its nominal 0.04 Ohm
resistance to infinite resistance and the slower this goes, the higher the power that needs
to be dissipated in the MOSFET. That means a lot of heat. MOSFETS are good switches
but bad resistors. They need to be switched ON and OFF fast. Currently the circuit
heavily relies on D1 to keep the voltage on the gate of T1 at acceptable limits while the
voltage is swinging between 0 Volt and Full peak At peak the rectified voltage is
230x1.4=330V The average rectified voltage is 230x0.9=207V
If we forget about the smoothing effect of the capacitor for a while and presume the
optocoupler to be fully open the average voltage on the capacitor would be 22/88 * 207
=52 Volts and in peak 22/88 * 330= 83 Volts. That it is not is because of D1 and the fact
that the MOSFET will short the Voltage.
If the optocoupler is not in saturation and its impedance therefore infinite, the capacitor
C1 would charge up to full rectified voltage if not for D1. On average 3mA will flow
through R3,R4 and R5 (207-10)/66k which equals a power consumption of 0.6 Watt in
the resistors R3,R4, R5

Improvements
The problems mentioned with the Giesberts circuit can be remedied by putting the lamp
somewhere else: remove it from the AC line and put it in the Drain of the MOSFET. For
the lamp it doesnt really matter if it is receiving DC or AC. You could make more
improvements, as now there is no need to cater for a a voltage swinging between 0 and
330 Volt

Step 1: AC PWM Dimmer: IGBT or MOSFET

 (Insulated
But
its gate
as I was
and
Gate
changing
a bipolar
BipolarThus
transistor
the
Transistor)
design,
we canatISimply
its
come
might
Collector
toas
put,
the
well
an
following
and
take
IGBT
Emitter,
it is
a circuit:
step
a device
making
further
that
it and
anis ideal
ause
MOSFET
an
switch.
IGBTat
But as I was changing the design, I might as well take it a step further and use an IGBT
(Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistor) Simply put, an IGBT is a device that is a MOSFET at
its gate and a bipolar transistor at its Collector and Emitter, making it an ideal switch.
Thus we can come to the following
circuit:

The IRG4PC30 acts as a fast switch that either switches the lamp on or off. It needs about
12 Volt on its gate to do that. The voltage divider R1/R2 should put about 13-15 volts*
max on the Gate of the IGBT, switching the lamp fully ON. As there might be some
fluctuations on the grid 4k7 is a safe value. If you want to be safe, make sure you have an
IGBT with a Base Emmitter breakdown voltage of >= 20 Volt and put a zenerdiode of 15
V parrallel to R2. Possible IGBT's are IRGPC40W or IRG4PC30, but basically any will
do provided they have a Base emmitter voltage rating of at least 20 Volts When the
optocoupler receives a signal, it opens and pulls the voltage on R1/R2 to zero, effectively
closing the IGBT. The PWM signal of an Arduino is faster than the 50Hz Frequency so
you will basically see the PWM signal modulated on the 50Hz rectified sine wave,
making the effective voltage lower. This circuit is ONLY for incandescant bulbs. It is
NOT for any inductive load as it is DC biased. With regard to the capacitor C1, I have
tested it with 100uF but will probably work with lower capacity as well.
 Although the average voltage will be 230*0.9, C1 may eventually charge to 310-
330 hence 4k7 is a safe value.
Reader acolimitchi pointed out to me that if you add the zener, the 6k8 resistor isnt really
necessary anymore, which is true, so the circuit becomes like this:

With regard to MOSFETs vs IGBTs both have their pro's and con's and the voltage and
switching rate this circuit is operating under may just be in an overlap of both spectra.
Using a MOSFET rather than an IGBT is therefore possible. MOSFETS are generally
also cheaper than IGBT's. A tried and tested MOSFET is the STP10NK60Z (Thanks
Pavel). This MOSFET has a gate-source breakdown voltage of 30 Volt and has clamping
diodes protecting the the gate. Another one that worked quite well is the relatively cheap
IRF 730. MOSFETs usually need a bit of a higher voltage than IGBTs to switch so a 6k8
resistor should be fine. If you use a MOSFET without clamping diodes a zener of 15 Volt
is adviseable.

I couldnt embed a video, but you will find it here. It is a 60 Watt lamp. The slight flicker
you may see when the lamp is turned up, is an artefact. It is caused by my cellphone
camera trying to adapt to the changing light intensity

Conclusion: stick to the MOSFET, they are on average 4 times cheaper than IGBT's
BOM:
Bridge rectifier. I used a 1 amp 400 Volt DIL pack 0.25 euro
Diode 1n4001 or 1N4007 0.10 euro
Capacitor 100uF 350-400 Volt 1.36 euro
resistor 100k 0.5-06 Watt (actually it dissipates abt 480mW max) 0.12 euro
resistor 6k8 1/4 Watt 0.10 euro
Zener 15 Volt 0.5 Watt 0.08 euro
MOSFET IRF730 or STP10NK60 0.58 euro
Optocoupler 4n35 0.25 euro
Resistor between 330ohm-470ohm (possibly even 1k dpending on the Optocoupler) 0.10
euro

So, alltogether at single piece retail prices the cost is 2.94 euro

Step 2: AC PWM Dimmer for Arduino: Thoughts

Without any input signal the lamp will burn at max.
If you notice that When writing a zero PWM value to the circuit the lamp burns a bit less
than when you switch off the Arduino, that means that the 4n35 is still opened a bit. Play
around with t470 Ohm serial resistor, maybe you need a higher value.
The 100uF 400 Volt can be quite big. A 50 uF may work as well and maybe even a
smaller value. However, you do not want the value to be too small thus as not to be able
to deliver enough voltage for the Gate of the MosFet in fast switching.

Should you wonder if perhaps you can use a capacitor of a lower voltage -say 25 Volt-
and connect that over the zener/6k8 resistor in order to replace the 400 Volt one... maybe
that will work, but the 4N35 will make it lose its charge almost instantaneously and due
to the large RC time (remember, there is 100k resistor) it might not have time to fully
recharge again. At least it will make keep the MOSFET in its resistive phase longer,
leading to extra heat development.

The Arduino has a PWM frequency of about 500 Hz. That is ample enough. My guess is
that around 100 would be more than enough. The Attiny85 delivers I think 280 Hz on its
PWM pins. Software ofcourse can always elevate that if necessary.

This dimmer is not suitable for inductive loads

This dimmer does NOT need zero cross detection.

Heat development:
I tested this with a 60 Watt lamp at full brightness, without any heatsink: the temperature
rose with 9 degrees above ambient after half an hour and an hour.
Then I tried with continous dimming from zero to full and back again.: The temperature
rose with 10 degrees above ambient after about 10-15 minutes and stayed like that for the
hour I tried.

With a 150 Watt halogen spot the temperature went up 15 degrees. It reached max
temperature after about 10 minutes and then stayed the same for the hour tested.

This was measured with a DHT11 sensor directly clamped to the MOSFET

A PWM Dimmer Revisited

This project revisits one of the (inspirational) earlier projects of dyi_bloke: the "AC
PWM Dimmer for Arduino". There were a number of things in the original design
that I wanted to understand in detail and a couple of things I thought are worth
trying to improve.
The things of which I wanted to dig into their details are related to the
latency/response times, something on the line of "how far can I go in increasing
the PWM frequency until the things won't go as expected anymore?"
The things I thought worth trying to improve:

1. the big, hundreds of volts, capacitor - I'll let aside the price for it, but that's
such a waste of PCB/box space;
2. the fact that the PWM logic is "polarity inverted" - when the input of the
optocoupler is on, the load goes disconnected and viceversa

Additionally, I threw a challenge in front of me. Some year-and-something ago,

quite a beginner in electronics (not that I'm hugely more advanced now), I bought
a handful of FDP46N30 MOSFETS to use on projects dealing with main power.
At the time, I forgot that the main AC 220-240V is RMS voltage, and notthe
maximum voltage, so I ended with that handful of MOSFETs with a maximum
Vds=300V. As a "lest I forget" lesson for myself and to quench the regret of
spending $20 for 50 NMOS-es only to decorate the inside of a drawer seldom
opened, I challenged myself in using them instead of buying some other more
appropriatelly rated MOSFETs - if I'd succeed in doing it (I have), I'll theoretically
be able to switch up to 46Amps - man, that's like 10kW of power to control with
PWM ;) !
Now, the warning: with great power (and high enough voltage, like the one in
mains) comes great responsibility! This project uses deadly voltages, if you
decide to do it, it will be your responsibility to take the necessary
precautions - I'll take no responsibility whatsoever for your actions in
implementing it. Even more, I am NOT a qualified electrical engineer, thus I
offer no warranties for the design or the fitness of this design to your
purposes.
If you decide to go ahead, my advice: do NOT use a breadboard for the power
side of the circuit - the connection wires won't carry more than some (small
number of) hundred milliamps before overheating and melting - possibly in an
explosive way, sending melted copper drops (at 2000C) around, maybe in your
inquisitive eyes. More than that, they have the nasty habit of getting loose and
out of the breadboard holes when you expect the least - if those hundred of
milliamps goes through your limbs, in the best case scenario, prepare for one of
the most ouch-inspiring shocks of your life. If they go through your heart,
chances are you'll not going to finish the project or any other project for the
matter.
Seriously, guys, either take the due care or don't do it at all. Stay safe

Step 1: The Single MOSFET Variant

I haven't made this one, but I'm confident it will work as intended if you use an
appropriately rated NMOS (e.g. IRF730 for 220-240AC) for switching. I'm using
this one as a simple enough case to explore how does it work before jumping
into the design using two MOSFETs in series to switch a higher voltage than the
Vds(max) of a single MOSFET.
So how does this one work?
1. the D1, R1-R5, C1 and D2 group functions as a 15V source able to deliver a
3.5 mA current on average.
Why 5 resistors in parallel? First of all: use metallic film resistors rated at 0.5W
(instead of carbon film ones, rated at 0.25W). And here's why: 240V AC (RMS)
will have a maximum value voltage of 330V (or close to that value). At the max,
each of the 5 resistor will deliver 1mA - leading to a 0.33W as maximum power
each of them needs to sustain. If you later decide to add to the circuit some
filtering capacitors downwards the rectifier bridge, you may work mostly with the
maximum voltage, so it makes sense to put a safety factor. If you let it without
filtering capacitors, well, 5mA at peak translate into 3.53mA as RMS - the
average.
In any case, if you feel like reducing the number of resistors or using other
series/parallel combinations, be my guest - just make sure:
 the average (RMS) current supplied through the combination of resistors is
3.5mA or (marginally) better
the power rating of all resistors that you use must be higher than the power
they'll support while inside the circuit

The same goes for switching other voltages, like the (copper hungry) 110V/120V
in other parts of this world.
The C1 will buffer the current and is protected by the D1 against discharge when
the rectified voltage goes close to zero. Together with the D2 Zener, the group
should be able to keep a constant 15V and deliver currents well over 3.5mA for
brief moment (microseconds) without dropping the voltage too much.
C1 needs to be rated at 24V and the 15V Zener at least 0.25W or better.
2. the 4N35 and R7, R8 make up the galvanic decoupler - its role is to isolate the
high voltage switching circuit (the presented one) from the PWM control circuit.
Now, I promise that I'll cover the "magic" value of the R7, R8 resistors later -
perhaps into another 'ible, but for now I got some things to say:
the way R8 is connected makes it a Common Collector configuration for the
output phototransistor. This is what leads the "positive PWM-ing": when the
input is low, the output transistor is non-conductive and the MOSFET's gate is
pulled to the ground by R8, thus non-conductive as well; when the input
switches to high, the output transistor opens up and connects the MOSFET's
gate to the 15V "rail", your load will feel the current.
Now, the price to pay for "connecting" the MOSFET gate to 15V is the current
flowing (lost) through the optocoupler's output transistor and R8 into the
ground. It is 15V/5600ohm=2.5mA drained from the source - this is why the
15V "source" needs to deliver over 2.5 mA - if it would be under this value, in
cases when the duty cycle of the PWM is 1 (always on), the "source" won't be
able to maintain the 15V output.

the value for R7 - the resistor in the optocoupler's input is chosen for a PWM
amplitude of 5V.

If you use other PWM voltages, do use a value which will cause the same
current - e.g for a 3.3V PWM, use a 220R resistor.
do not feed into the optocoupler PWM with pulses shorter than 10 usec
(that's 10 microseconds) with high frequency. Doing so will cause the
switching MOSFET to work into resistive mode, with all the heat that ensues.
If the PWM frequency is low enough, the MOSFET will get enough time to
cool even when the duty cycle is small; otherwise, it will let out the magic
smoke sooner than you would like.
 in regards with the point above - keep in mind that the common optocouplers
are in general quuuiiitte slooow to react. For example, take a look (and
understand the implications) of the circuit and diagrams on page 5 of
the 4n35 datasheet - if the best switch on/off response of the optocoupler is
10usec, then this value will define your shortest pulse that will see your
optocoupler conducting. So with 20 usec per bit (10 to open, 10 to close) -
when you do a digital PWM with 256 pulse-width per cycle, it makes a 5.12
msec (milliseconds!) per PWM cycle. That's like 200Hz PWM, right?

But that's a story I'll tell later - I promise to link the (future) 'ible here when I'm
done telling it.
3. the Qs1 and Qs2 emitter follower push pull (totem pole) current amplifier
between the optocoupler/R8 and the MOSFET's gate is meant to speed-up the
draining of the gate's capacitance on high-to-low transitions (ask me in the
comments if you don't know how this amplifier configuration work, I'll add some
notes at the end of the 'ible)
Now, if the MOSFET's input capacitance is in the 400-800 pF (and if you use
4N35, which is rather slow) you may do without this amplifier; and IRF730 is one
of them (with an input capacitance of 700pF - see page 2 of the datasheet). But
there are MOSFETs with quite high input capacitance and FDP46N30 is one of
them (and you can use one if your mains run at 110-120V AC) - its maximum
input capacitance is 3380pF.
So what would happen if we connect the output from optocoupler directly to the
MOSFET's gate in cases of high input capacitance. Well:

the low-high transition is mostly unaffected - the charge flows from C1 through
the output transistor of the optocoupler, which I'll assume will show a low
resistance (the input of the optocoupler sees a 15mA current, the typical
current transfer ratio of 4n35 is 100%, so the output transistor should be able
to supply 15mA. And we are "draining" through R8 only 2.5mA, so plenty of
spare conductivity to use in loading the MOSFET's gate);
the high-low transitions is however interesting - suppose the output transistor
closes suddenly; the charge of the MOSFET's gate will drain into ground
through R8. We know that a typical power MOSFET will stop conducting on a
Vgs(th) of around 5V (maybe lower, but let's take the optimistic case).

So, how long will take a capacitance of 3300pF to discharge from 15V to 5V
through a 4700 resistor? Well, that's about 17usecs. Add this to the lag
caused by the non-ideal switch-off time of the optocoupler to understand why
the presence of the current amplifier is almost mandatory for cases of high
MOSFET input capacitance.
4. The Q3 switching MOSFET (and the rectifier bridge) - first thing, look up
their current rating, take so that the maximal current you need is at most 70% of
their maximum rating (or less; that is, put in a higher safety margin). Look up in
the datasheets the de-rating of max current with the temperature and think how
well your circuit would behave if the ambient temperature is 45C instead of 20C;
and what happens if the components are heating quicker than you expect.
The same goes for their maximum voltage rating - it too should have a safety
margin of extra 30%, except that the rectifier bridges are usually rated for an AC
voltage while the maximum voltage for a MOSFET - Vds(max) - is always for DC;
remember this and have a refresher on the RMS (Vpeak = Vac * 2) - if you
forget this, you will need to read the second step of this 'ible.
Another point concerning the timing and PWM switching frequency - the 4N35
optocoupler is already slow enough, but do lookup the datasheet of your
MOSFET of choice for the "Turn-On Rise Time" and "Turn-Off Fall time" - if they
are slower than even the optocoupler (gosh, what MOSFET did you choose?)
then the MOSFET is the bottleneck that will limit your switching frequency.
5. PCB and component cooling - a bit more about the maximum current your
power side of the circuit is going to serve: let me warn you that the PCB traces
may need to be wider than you may think - use an online calculator for the trace
width of your power traces. If you make the circuit on a pre-perforated prototype
board, use thick wire to connect the power circuit.
Also, when designing your PCB, let enough space around the MOSFET and the
rectifier bridge to mount radiators if it turns out they are needed.
If you plan to use the dimmer with devices over 500W, the cooling solutions are
going to be needed, possibly at even lower level of power but do experiment
(with due care paid to deadly voltages)

Step 2: Switching With Two MOSFETs in Series

I tempted to start a "do the best you can with what you have" 'ible series, with this
project being the first. I wanted to make a dimmer based on the original design,
only to realize that I have no power MOSFETs able to support the maximum 325-
330V a rectified main will provide. But I had some FDP46N30able to go up to
300V (and 46A max). Now, price-wise, getting some appropriate MOSFETs
would not have ruined me, but I hate waiting weeks for parcel delivery and I also
hate wastage (and this includes paying 3-5 times more for courier delivery than
for the components and the idea of a 3-tonnes van burning diesel for kilometres
to deliver 50g worth of components in my mailbox).
And so, the challenge: could I find a solution to use two (or more) lower voltage
rated MOSFETs to switch a higher voltage? Yes, it is possible - and that's quite
easy. It's a variant of the cascode amplifier, simplified for switching purposes.
How does it work? Have a look on the Q3/Q4 stack of MOSFETs - the Q3 gate
will receive its gate control from the PWM galvanic isolation complex, but how the
Q4 is controlled?
So let's start with the assumption that upper voltage of the stack is DC and has
the value at the peak of the rectified DC (this is what the C1+C2 capacitors after
the rectifier will do).
The starting state
Assume the input on the Q3's gate is low and thus non conductive (the switch is
off). The voltage at Q4's gate will be half of the max voltage, while the Q4's
source voltage:

1. cannot be lower down than its gate by more than Vgs(ths) - would it be any
lower, the Q4 will start conducting and let some charge flow into its source
until the voltage grows back to stop it from conducting
2. cannot be higher than its gate by more that a diode-drop (0.65-0.7V) - would it
be any higher, the D4 diode will drain the extra charge.

BTW, this mechanism also takes care of a mismatch in the Idss - zero-gate-
voltage drain (leakage) current - for FDP46N30, this is maximum 10uA at 125C,
but since the output capacitance is as small as 500pF, without a balancing
mechanism, a mismatch in the leakage current between the two MOSFETs will
result in having the one with lower leakage charging until the Vds builds up to
over the maximum rating. Specifically:

if Q4 is leaking less than Q3, Q4 source would leak charge through Q3 until
the Q4 source voltage would be close enough to zero to blow Q4. However,
because the Q4's gate is clamped by the R9/R10 voltage divisor, the moment
the Q4's source drops only a bit lower than the threshold voltage, the Q4 will
open just enough to compensate for the lower leakage - in other words, Q4
will leak a bit more, to match the leakage of Q3
if Q4 leaks more than Q3, the charge on Q4's source would build up (Q3
doesn't drain it fast enough). As a consequence, Q3 would feel an increase
on its drain-to-source voltage until it will go over the maximum rated and Q3
will blow. But the presence of D4 will act as a path to drain the excess of
charge through R10, so even if Q4 leaks more, the leak won't cause a...
ummm... disastrous pooling of charge.

In conclusion, when there's no input (a zero voltage on Q3's gate), both Q3 and
Q4 are non-conducting and Q4's source voltage is approximately half the voltage
on the ends of the Q3/Q4 stack - give a diode-drop or take a Vgs(th) - which
mean that the MOSFETs will feel a voltage of about 160-170V, well inside the
safe operating area.
The low-high input transition
Assume that the input on Q3's gate goes high - the galvanic isolation complex
will apply a step voltage of +15V.
If Q3 would be ideal, it will open instantly, letting Q4 taking the brunt of the full
330V and blowing it up. But nothing in electronics happens instantly and both Q3
and Q4 has similar "reaction times".
So, Q3's drain voltage (same as Q4's source voltage) starts to go down, until the
voltage difference between Q4's gate and its source is large enough for the Q4 to
start conducting itself. The result is the same current will flow through the load
and both of the MOSFETs. It may seem that the voltage on Q4's gate, as
established by the R9/R10 voltage divider, will lag behind until Q4's Vgs will go
over the maximum +20V rated. This is where the D4 Zener offers protection - the
moment Q4's Vgs goes over 15V, the Zener starts conducting and diverts the
current from R10 and into the more-conducting Q3.
The process goes until both Q3 and Q4 are at their peak conductivity, both
showing a resistance of about 0.08R and with all the voltage drop on the power
side of the circuit being caused by the load.
The high-low input transition
So, both of Q3 and Q4 are conducting, Q3 because it has +15V applied by the
input and Q4 because the gate voltage is maintained by the flow of current
through R9, D4 and Q3.
What happens when the input is switched off? Q3 start to become less
conductive, opening up the power circuit. If Q4 would remain fully conductive, Q3
would reach a stage in which it supports the entire power voltage (and let its
magic smoke go). But, as Q3 becomes less conductive:

Q3 drain (common with Q4 source) starts to have a higher voltage, so any

excess of charge (let through by a more conductive Q4) will start to flow
through D4 - now polarized directly - increasing the Q4 gate voltage, and as
such will force Q4 to close as well
the less current Q3 let pass (equivalent with an increase of resistivity), the
more current R10 will take, reestablishing R9/R10 as a voltage divider

At the end, both the Q3 and Q4 are non-conductive and the voltage drop across
any of them is about half of the power voltage.
But, but...

1. you told us that one of the possible improvements you chased is getting rid of
the big filtering capacitor after the rectifier. And now you are assuming the
power is DC. What's the deal, mate?

Well, if you get out the filtering capacitors, then:

 - if Q3 is conductive, without any help, Q4 may not have enough voltage on its
gate to stay conductive when the power voltage goes to zero. See? the Q4
gate would be only maintained at 15V through R9. Fortunately, D3 - a fast
switching diode - is there to help. The moment the voltage on the Q4's gate
goes below 15V because the mains voltage goes to zero, the Cs1 capacitor
(acting as a 15V source) will take... ummm.... charge of the situation and keep
Q4 opened;
- and if Q3 is non-conductive and the mains voltage goes towards zero, won't
Q4 still be conductive? Well, yes, but what's the problem? The power circuit is
still maintained opened (no current) by a non-conductive Q3 and the voltage
Q3 is required to support is, well, towards 0.
One on top of the other, it is safe to work without filtering capacitors at the exit
of the rectifier, D3 takes care of it

2. what's the fuss with C1, the one in parallel with R10?

Well, its sorta snubber, to mellow a bit the transitions low-high and high-low
on Q4's gate. But... to be absolutely sincere, beat me if I know how it does
work or if the value for it is sufficient or excessive. If you know better, do tell
me