I need to generate approx. 200V at 20mA from a 12V supply.
My first attempt is a multiplying SEPIC (i.e. the 2nd inductor is connected to the output of the first stage, instead of ground). It's working reasonably well but I'd like to improve the efficiency.
I'm getting 80% efficiency at the moment which is acceptable but I'm sure it could be better.
I'm using a couple of 100uH inductors which are nowhere near saturation (1.4A peak and they're rated for 3.4A). They have quite a low DCR, around 130mR, and I doubt I can get much lower than that cheaply. They settle at around 40 Celcius.
The inductors are joined with a large 1uF PET film cap (EPCOS B32562J3105K). Is this the best type?
The FET (A D2PAK with no PCB heatsink area) is slightly cooler than that, around 35C. The gate is driven from 12V with an 85ns rise time and a 170ns fall time. It's just a few transistors driving the gate, not a driver IC. As the FET is cool, is there much efficiency to be gained by improving the drive speed?
I'm driving this at 40kHz, from a processor PWM so I can't really increase the frequency much.
The two diodes Schottkys, so they should be fast enough
The output electrolytic (4u7 @ 400V) gets to around 40C as well. I could use several to lower the ESR but would that give a better overall efficiency?
I appreciate the obvious solution might be a transformer, but I'd like to get the most out of what I've got for now.
So 4W, not a whole lot. But 12V to 200V is quite ambitious.
At 4W that means your total losses have to be well under 800mW. Very feasible but now you have to look in every nook and cranny.
250mW peak loss just from the DC resistance, too much. You need inductors with lower DCR.
40C mean they are either tiny or you also have RF losses in the core. So you may need a lower loss core as well.
Yikes! 170nsec is an eternity for a switcher designer. Either drive the driving transistors with more gusto or, better yet, us a real gate driver chip. TC or MC series, for example. And gate resistors are only for wimps :-)
At 40W that's ok. But 100uH doesn't sound like much for a 200V supply at
40kHz. Also, try not to drop this below 40kHz because it could drive animals nuts. They'll hear the magnetostrictive buzz.
Sure? Schottkies are generally The output electrolytic (4u7 @ 400V) gets to around 40C as well. I
40C in the cap is not good at all. Get a better one or hang several 1uF in parallel, and also make sure there is a 0.1uF/250V ceramic in parallel.
12V -> 200V is a strrrrretch but can be done. If you want >80% in such a low power case you've got to look at all the stuff meantioned above. No stone can be left unturned.
That's a high boost ratio for what is (I think) a 2:1 inductor stepup ratio. A lot of energy is going to go into charging and discharging capacitances.
Have you considered a C-W type multiplier? Diode drops won't cost much efficiency at 200 volts out, and you could get the basic boost ratio down by some factor.
I like to make boost converters using a 1:1 dual-winding inductor to double the p-p swing.
+12-------/////--+--/////--------|>|------ HV | nfet (diode or C-W thing) | gnd
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom laser drivers and controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME thermocouple, LVDT, synchro acquisition and simulation
Your on-time is "long" and your off-time where the inductor delivers
200V is short.
You mayvbe need to measure if the diodes "shorts" for some time at the end of off-time. If so, then considerably energy might be lost during output capacitor discharge.
Use Silicon-carbide diode (?) if you increase your frequency considerably:
formatting link
CSD01060A, No Recovery Time > 500mA (Io). Can they be bought with smaller current rating?:
formatting link
You could try to decouple with 100nF and 10nF?
Mayby you should consider another topology?:
Cuk-converter
transformer/flyback
?uk converter:
formatting link
home.netvigator.com: Cuk converter:
formatting link
Quote: "...The Cuk converter is a new SMPS topology at this moment. It include higher efficiency, low input and output current ripple, minimal RFI, small size and weight..."
Use an isolated Cuk-converter:
formatting link
-
September 1, 1994 Cuk converter yields 90% efficiency Peter Demchenko, VN, Vilnius, Lithuania
It might be a little higher in the end, 220V @ 25mA. I've tried this on the existing design and I still get the same 80% efficiency so I'm happy there's enough wiggle room for later changes.
And there're two of them... The 2nd one is only around 1A peak though.
They're a Coilcraft MSS1210-104KEB, 12mm square and 10mm high and shielded. It was the lowest DCR I could easily find in a smallish SMD.
It looks like the next step up would be a leaded toroid at around 80mR or an SMD toroid at 32mR but an enormous 25mm diameter, and around twice the price.
I'll get some to experiment with and see how much difference they make, I can solder them to the existing pads to test.
To be honest, I wasn't really considering RF losses. I didn't think they'd be significant at 40kHz.
I'm driving the gate with an emitter follower plus a few other parts for level shifting with, of course, no gate resistor :) I tried tweaking a few resistor values to speed up the transition, I shaved off a few mA but nothing really significant. The current you save improving the efficiency of the FET is lost in the driver.
I do have a 15V zener on the gate but that should be > The two diodes Schottkys, so they should be fast enough
They're Vishay VSSB420S, 200V 4A (Cj of 120pF). Over-specced and expensive. I was thinking of just using an ES1J, much cheaper and a Cj of 8pF.
I do have a ceramic on there, a 1206 100nF.
I just measured a 3.2ohn ESR on one of those caps. That won't be helping any.
Thanks for you help, I've got a few things to try.
It's not that bad, the duty cycle is around 40% for 200V. Take a look at the attached schematic. I didn't model the gate driver but the pulse source rise/fall times are approximately correct.
Yeah, I see your predicament. Another option is to increase the frequency but for that you'd need an external oscillator outside your uC. Or see if you can trick the uC by using a timer and let the loop alter the CC register on the fly.
But there have to be some. Because the Coilcraft lists 2.5A for a 20C rise. Your average current is maybe a 1/5th of that, yet you still see a
20C rise. Since you are in the UK and the weather wasn't that great lately in Europe I assume ambient was 20C or less :-)
If that is the case then the FET may be oversized. If you use one with a very fat gate capacitance that can result in a penalty. With a 20:1 step-up ratio there is always a penalty. The Miller feedback is a real issue.
Those would definitely be a step in the right direction. 170nsec turn-off time are really painful here, much more so than any turn-on time. Even if you used your transistor scheme, if you could have a snappier path to zero that would help. Or maybe if you could even pull negative, that helps a ton.
40% duty cycle? That has me confused, normally it would be much more extreme.
But you should also be able to do that with one of then timers in there, hoping it has one. The off state current would also be very low. Your loop would have to set values in a CC register.
Yikes. Those are monsters, way too big, too much capacitance:
formatting link
I was thinking of just using an ES1J, much cheaper and a Cj
Mucho mejor. No Schottky but at 35nsec I think they could be snappy enough.
formatting link
Ouch. But electrolytics in that capacitance and voltage range will always be around that value. I never use electrolytics on switchers if I can help it. And of course no tantalums either. TDK has 2.2uF/250V in
2220 size, but they are over a buck a pop. This type is usually still the better deal:
formatting link
formatting link
You are welcome. Getting the FET to turn off in well under 100nsec will go a long way here.
96% would be high, but the classic circuit for the job - Peter Baxandall's class-D oscillator - usually gets pretty close
Peter Baxandall described his parallel- and series-resonant class-D oscillators in 1959 in a paper in the Proceedings of the (British) Institute of Electrical Engineers (P.J.Baxandall "Transistor sine-wave LC oscillators, some general considerations and new developments" Proc. I.E.E. vol. 106, part B, supplement 16 pages 748-58, May 1959). It's hard to get hold of, so my web-page discussing the circuit
formatting link
scillator1.htm
provides a link to a pdf copy of the paper.
formatting link
He is reputed to have developed the circuit for driving high turns- ratio step-up transformers ? which tend to have low self-resonant frequencies ? being used to generate high output voltages from battery- level inputs.
The circuit is probably best known from Jim Williams? series of application notes for Linear Technology, on high frequency inverters for driving cold cathode back-lights used in laptop computers (application notes AN45, AN49, AN51, AN55, AN61, AN65). Jim Williams describes the inverter as a current-driven Royer inverter, referring back to the non-resonant inverter described by Bright, Pittman and George H. Royer in 1954 in a paper ?Transistors as on-off switches in saturable core circuits? in Electrical Manufacturing. AN65 does include a reference to Peter Baxandall, but to his 1960 paper ?Transistor Sine-Wave LC Oscillators? in the British Journal of the IEEE paper number 2978E which is cited in a discussion of root-mean- square power measurements.
As Jim Williams points out, this circuit can offer good efficiency ?
90% - when driving difficult loads. Even when lightly loaded, it produces a slightly distorted sine wave, with an appreciable odd harmonic content, about one percent of the third harmonic, and decreasing proportions of the higher odd harmonics.
Interesting but for a DCDC step up I can't see that this inverter is the classic approach. All automotive HID ballasts which are using an internal conversion:
5V-32V -> 30VDC-500VDC -> inverter square wave to bulb are using flyback transformers.
If in case you need just 5W at fixed 200VDC you can do that with a very small transformer core already like RM6. In case you want to have it as a compact type you may use a planar transformer and hang it into cut outs of the PCB itself, etc.
Because you may not like or are used to develop your own transformers for such applications and want also an SMD type, it makes sense to start to google for such step up transformer and base the design on it.
If the project is high volume and you have no luck finding existing type, I am sure you can get full design support for instance from EPCOS and they will supply you transformer samples based on the specs.
I have also some small SMD bobbins in mind like from SUMIDA EFD15
But like the other Joerg already mentioned you may just work on the details of the existing design for some improvements here and there......
Joerg
--
Nucon Gesellschaft bürgerlichen Rechts Geschäftsführer: Joerg
Niggemeyer & Gert G.Niggemeyer Email: Joerg.Niggemeyer@nucon.de WEB:
http://www.nucon.de
It's the approach that copes most elegantly with the relatively high interwinding capacitances and low self-resonant frequencies of high turns-ratio transformers.
The Baxandall circuit uses two cores - one for an inductor and the other for the transformer. This makes it expensive in very high-volume applications, where it can be worth bank-winding a single inductor to get low inter-winding capacitance.
So nominate one.
EPCOS makes cores and formers, and their application notes are the best in the business, but I've never heard that they wind coils for anybody - coil winding is pretty much a cottage industry.
For development work I've mostly wound my own - when I've been able to get hold of a minimal coil-winding machine with a built-in turns counter.
Voltage step-up applications do tend to be idiosyncratic. Jim Williams' series of application notes are aimed at a single application - high frequency inverters for driving cold cathode back- lights used in laptop computers. The curious thing is that he latched onto the Baxandall architecture - probably from a U.K. informant - and ran with it.
The Baxandall approach is one of the existing designs, and definitely worht looking at.
When using a PCB planar transformer you don't suffer on those interwinding capacities.
On our own ballasts we do 2 turns on the primary and 10 on the secondary. On a ELP22 core set gapped with 100um. Runs with output max 75W avg 200DC of input 10DC can generate up to 600V with a transformer ratio of just 5 :-O
Because it's not a sinus driven transformer you don't need that high transformer ratios, the switch off speed gives you the high volts.
Because you have only low volt you must reach some amps to get the energy stored into the core - you won't do that with the transistors of what have been available the last century.
Actually they don't wind for anybody, that's what I said and they are only to considered if you need their quality otherwise it's too expensive.
But they had or still have an EHP16-SMD Xenon transformer
3/15/8 L 1-2 1.4uH Rdc 11/105/205 mOhms H 10mm 23mm gullwing distance width 16mm
formatting link
(I have of that type of transformer EHP19 samples available
4:24.15 primary inductance 5uH 9mR/210mR/165mR)
In case you need just some transformers and you know what type you can try to go to some Chinese companies and pay some bucks to get ready wound samples for little money only.
The ferrite powder EPCOS or Ferrox is using is from CHina anyhow. Custom design of transformers is not expensive there.
I like todo the copper windings in the PCBs, this is very precise and no one makes a mistake or crosses a wire on another and is covered by this yellow tape......
If I am winding my owns I have an more than 50 yers old drilling machine from the US with a mechanic gear to make very slow turns and having a very hi force available for bending thick wires arroung small bobbins :-) yes the clock counter is a must have.......
That's dam right but the software control of the PWM generation is in this critical designs very important too and gives you nowadays the option to get rid of most analogue PWM ICs, their shunts and even worse their "nice" compensation networks, because we have now inexpensive micros in our hands which get by software the safe operating areas and the reg speed simply coded.
Those type of converters are driving an AC high voltage load directly. It makes no sense to use for Cold cathode: DCDC plus 50Khz inverter. The inverters can be designed and operated by none or primitive PWM generators.
Yes it is very good to have a look on old circuit design, because it was not yet the time of AN cookbook design finding the right IC or component over the internet. Because this base principle was already working well with old semis for the CCL application the type of transformer and the principle is still working very well and even better with modern switches.
However if you need a DCDC converter from input 12V and 0V-200V also controlable on a shortened output, minimum, no load, etc. or for fast charging up flash cap, I prefer to you use the flyback. If it must be a transformer for the 200VDC here it is to be fined out and it depends on price and if it's available ;-)
rgds
Joerg
--
Nucon Gesellschaft bürgerlichen Rechts Geschäftsführer: Joerg
Niggemeyer & Gert G.Niggemeyer Email: Joerg.Niggemeyer@nucon.de WEB:
http://www.nucon.de
I don't believe the 96% at all, I would be very happy if it got to 90% in reality though.
Tapped inductors are not something I've looked at before... I thought they were a bit boutique. Something like a Bourns SRF1280 type seems to be easily available though and I won't need to 1uF between the two inductors any more.
Interesting idea, thanks. I've got a couple of those inductors on order.
Oh c'mon, Bill. There is a plethora of COTS flyback transformers available. Such as this example for a buck fifty:
formatting link
Fast forward to the 21st century. There's lots of companies who will gladly wind prototypes and production volumens for you. Last time for me was a few months ago when we needed a really odd form factor.
Coilcraft makes duals, too. They are very much mainstream these days and I use them in switchers all the time.
In the simulation one should set the coupling coefficient to around
0.98. That's where it realistically is for most of them. Unfortunately SPICE does not easily take core losses into account. When simulating loop behavior set it back to 1 for the initial runs because that saves a lot of CPU runtime.
If you are ordering stuff anyway, why not add a few mains flybacks, CCFL transformers and PoE flybacks? Those are cheap.
If you build a regular buck or boost switcher with one winding, you get free AC out of the other winding. For floating supplies, negative supplies, whatever.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com
Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.