|
[si-list]
||
[Date Prev]
[11-2005 Date Index]
[Date Next]
||
[Thread Prev]
[11-2005 Thread Index]
[Thread Next]
[SI-LIST] Re: ESR too low?
- From: "Dimiter Popoff" <dp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: weirsi@xxxxxxxxxx, <si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 14:26:39 +0300
Steve,
you are right there are many nice new chips available. I myself
use some when applicable - I started doing it with a lower voltage
derivative of the LTC1374 to make the 2.5V for a processor 5 years ago.
Recently I had to use an even lower voltage version to do 1.5V... and I
have yet to enter the 1 and below volt area :-). The advantages you mention
were there - most importantly, compactness. Those use a bipolar
switch, which brings lower power losses at the cost of poorer regulation
at not so low loads (because of storage time they begin to do on/off bursts,
something nearly avoidable with MOSFET switches).
However, I also used my old 123/lmc6482 circuit on the same board...
Two chips - two convertors (minus the 100 kHz clock, it must come
from somewhere). I needed a +/-15V and a +/-36V - and I did not
find anything to beat my solution (OK, I did not look quite that hard).
All of the current protection, slow start, gating etc. features plus
the (sometimes invaluable) flexibility of being able to fix something
if things go wrong, I do low volume things which must have the very
first revision of the board usable if I want to live...
OK, I wrote that much, I'll go ahead with another related story.
About 10 years ago I designed a HV source (up to 5 kV, microamp range,
straight flyback, no multiplyers) using a HC11E9 MCU. It got the output
through an ADC input and drove the power mosfet using a PWM with
a 0.5 uS resolution. Response time could be as slow as one would like it,
noise had (still has..) to be in the millivolt range, better < 10 mV p-p...
I had to do some miracles to stabilize the loop (0.5 uS resolution was
way too high, I had to do dithering on a periodic basis), but because PW
correction
took place only once every few seconds once regulation had begun,
the ripple noise energy was unbeatably low...
So again, it is all up to the application. Hope some of you have fun reading
this...
Dimiter
------------------------------------------------------
Dimiter Popoff Transgalactic Instruments
http://www.tgi-sci.com
------------------------------------------------------
> -------Original Message-------
> From: steve weir <weirsi@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: ESR too low?
> Sent: Nov 10 '05 08:16
>
> Dimiter, I've got to disagree there. While it did take almost 20 years for
> the SMPS IC makers to discover the joys of constant on and constant off
> time parts, ( a '123 to you, a CMOS 555, or digital counter off a high
> speed clock to others ), they have been available now for several
> years. LTC has several very nice parts. I hope the POLA guys update with
> these, because right now the POLA converters have really mediocre
> responses. Transient responses for these controllers are one to two orders
> of magnitude ( a couple to a few cycles for full recovery ) faster than
> constant frequency units you rightfully disdain. As a result, the
> effective inductance is much smaller, and they remain stable with much
> lower ESR caps than constant frequency controllers.
>
> This newer breed of controller have a lot more housekeeping functions than
> you will get with a home grown comparator / op-amp / one-shot
> solution. And the control function in a little SSOP or SSOIC is going to
> be a whole lot smaller as well, with less opportunity for stray pick-up and
> other issues multi chip solutions impose. New entrants into the field
> are offering digitally controlled loops with some impressive specs as
> well. It would be nice if these parts were also very cheap, but we know
> better than to expect that.
>
> Steve.
> At 11:32 PM 11/9/2005 +0300, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
> >About 15 (if not 20...) years ago, I could not find a suitable off-the-shelf
> >flyback convertor chip so I designed it using a 74HC123 and an opamp.
> >
> > One of the benefits of having the opamp outside allowed me to
> >put a non-linear feedback, consisting of a group of forward biased
> >diodes in the feedback path. The result was fast response to
> >large changes and stablity (being slower when no transients) the
> >rest of the time.
> > Of course, it is again all about the numbers, one has to do his job.
> >
> > Over the years, I have been looking around for some readily available
> >single-chip replacement of this circuit. For some mainstream applications,
> >I have been able to find something. However, I had to design the 123
> +lmc6482
> >in a board this very year again, there was just no comparable choice...
> >Amazing how long some things take sometimes..
> >
> >Dimiter
> >
> >------------------------------------------------------
> >Dimiter Popoff Transgalactic Instruments
> >
> >http://www.tgi-sci.com
> >------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > -------Original Message-------
> > > From: Henson, Bradley S <Bradley.S.Henson@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: ESR too low?
> > > Sent: Nov 09 '05 22:57
> > >
> > > It's all in the numbers. I just went and looked at these parts on their
> > > site. I looked at a 30A model. It mandated 470uF each on the input AND
> > > output to meet the specs. So right off the bat, they are stipulating
> > > almost 1000uF of bulk capacitance. A fairly slow 50% load step causes
> > > 150mV noise (not good enough for my stuff). Looks like the loop response
> > > is 50us and it is switching at 470KHz: There is a limit to what can be
> > > done. I'm not knocking their regulators at all, just saying each person
> > > needs to work through their real application numbers. I don't see my
> > > need for low esr bulk decoupling going away real soon :)
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Calvo, Oscar A (FL51) [mailto:Oscar.A.Calvo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]=20
> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 11:30 AM
> > > To: Henson, Bradley S; si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: RE: [SI-LIST] Re: ESR too low?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > In one of their slides they showed that you could actually get rid of
> > > the tantalum bulk capacitors altogether by using this Turbo Trans
> > > feature and by increasing the total ceramic capacitance.
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Henson, Bradley S [mailto:Bradley.S.Henson@xxxxxxxxxx]=20
> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 2:17 PM
> > > To: Oscar.A.Calvo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; electronbob2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > matusov@xxxxxxxxxxxx; si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: RE: [SI-LIST] Re: ESR too low?
> > >
> > > This is an interesting problem. Modern high current/low voltage chips
> > > require giant step load currents (e.g. 25A) at very low impedance to
> > > stay within voltage tolerance. Regulators take hundreds of ns or
> > > microseconds to respond to load transients. This drives us to need very
> > > low esr bulk caps to supply virtually all of the demand while the
> > > regulator loop responds. If you speed up the regulator response, you
> > > simply move the transient problem to the input of the regulator, albeit
> > > there should be more noise tolerance there possibly. I would also think
> > > you are not going to be able to get rid of the need for a considerable
> > > amount of very low esr bulk capacitance even with pretty fast response
> > > times, at least with the regulator speeds I've seen.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Calvo, Oscar A (FL51) [mailto:Oscar.A.Calvo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]=20
> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 10:58 AM
> > > To: electronbob2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; matusov@xxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: ESR too low?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I just attended a TI Web-seminar in where they talked about their new
> > > line of PTH power modules which include a new feature that they call
> > > Turbo Trans. Turbo Trans allows the user to custom tune the module to
> > > meet a specific transient load requirement. Tuning is accomplished with
> > > a single external resistor. They claim that by using TurboTrans one can
> > > achieve a reduction in bulk output capacitance which leads to an
> > > increase in ESR.
> > >
> > > Has anyone had any experience using this feature?
> > >
> > > The link below has more information.
> > >
> > > http://www.ti.com/corp/docs/landing/t2/index.htm
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > On Behalf Of Bob McNamara
> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 11:51 AM
> > > To: matusov@xxxxxxxxxxxx; si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: ESR too low?
> > >
> > > [For anyone else trying to follow the link, it should be
> > > http://focus.ti.com/docs/toolsw/folders/print/swift-sw.html]
> > >
> > > Thanks, I hadn't seen that software before. It's missing the ability to
> > > optimize what I really care about as a user of the regulator - the
> > > closed loop output impedance. I claim that if you optimize the closed
> > > loop response, one consequence is that you'll have adequate phase
> > > margin. On the other hand, optimizing the open loop response won't
> > > guarantee me the best closed loop response.
> > >
> > > Bob McNamara
> > > Broadcom Corp.
> > >
> > > --- Mikhail Matusov <matusov@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Now if only the vendors would supply such a tool...
> > > >=20
> > > > Have you seen the TI SWIFT Designer Software:
> > > > http://focus.ti.com/docs/toolsw/folders/print/swift-sw.htm
> > > >=20
> > > >=20
> > > >=20
> > > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> > > > Mikhail Matusov
> > > > Hardware Design Engineer
> > > > Square Peg Communications
> > > > Tel.: +1 (613) 271-0044 ext.231
> > > > Fax: +1 (613) 271-3007
> > > > http://www.squarepeg.ca
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe from si-list:
> > > si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
> > >
> > > or to administer your membership from a web page, go to:
> > > http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
> > >
> > > For help:
> > > si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
> > >
> > > List FAQ wiki page is located at:
> > > http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
> > >
> > > List technical documents are available at:
> > > http://www.si-list.org
> > >
> > > List archives are viewable at: =20
> > > http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
> > > or at our remote archives:
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
> > > Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
> > > http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
> > > =20
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe from si-list:
> > > si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
> > >
> > > or to administer your membership from a web page, go to:
> > > http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
> > >
> > > For help:
> > > si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
> > >
> > > List FAQ wiki page is located at:
> > > http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
> > >
> > > List technical documents are available at:
> > > http://www.si-list.org
> > >
> > > List archives are viewable at: =20
> > > http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
> > > or at our remote archives:
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
> > > Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
> > > http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
> > > =20
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe from si-list:
> > > si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
> > >
> > > or to administer your membership from a web page, go to:
> > > http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
> > >
> > > For help:
> > > si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
> > >
> > > List FAQ wiki page is located at:
> > > http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
> > >
> > > List technical documents are available at:
> > > http://www.si-list.org
> > >
> > > List archives are viewable at:
> > > http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
> > > or at our remote archives:
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
> > > Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
> > > http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe from si-list:
> >si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
> >
> >or to administer your membership from a web page, go to:
> >http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
> >
> >For help:
> >si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
> >
> >List FAQ wiki page is located at:
> > http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
> >
> >List technical documents are available at:
> > http://www.si-list.org
> >
> >List archives are viewable at:
> > http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
> >or at our remote archives:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
> >Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
> > http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from si-list:
> si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
>
> or to administer your membership from a web page, go to:
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
>
> For help:
> si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
>
> List FAQ wiki page is located at:
> http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
>
> List technical documents are available at:
> http://www.si-list.org
>
> List archives are viewable at:
> http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
> or at our remote archives:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
> Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
> http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from si-list:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
or to administer your membership from a web page, go to:
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
For help:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
List FAQ wiki page is located at:
http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
List technical documents are available at:
http://www.si-list.org
List archives are viewable at:
http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
or at our remote archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
|
|
