Multioutput SMPS with coupled output inductor experience?

May 28, 2008 4 Replies

I'm looking at a design that will be based on this app note.



The supply outputs will be 5V @ 5W; 12V * 20W and -12V @ 10W. The last output is 150V at 75W.



This output will be used to drive a load that is on sometimes and off others. The +5 and +/-12 will be relatively constant (varying ~30%).



The 150V load will be PWM switched on and off and is a motor bus voltage.



I'm attracted to this design due to the low requirement for minimum current on some outputs.



My questions are for those who have sucessfully inplemented on if these


1) How good was the cross regulation? AS good as the appnote suggests?
2) What would you thinks is the minimum load on the 150V output in this design? any way to estimate?




This is the APnote I was talking about. Forgot to link it

Its the Lloyd Dixon Coupled inductor app note from the SEM500 power supply seminars.

formatting link

From memory ('89-'90), a 10% auxiliary cross-regulation (+/-5%) from a fully regulated 5V output is realistic to expect from a coupled inductor forward, in an old standard PC configuration. This scales over the 125W -350W design range. Reduced minimum loading on auxiliaries and main output is as predicted - instead a total minimum system load avoids the coupling nonlinearities associated with discontinuous choke current.

Your problem is the loading imbalance (extreme if you're actually inhibiting the 150V output). You're in the power range of a flyback, which doesn't develop cross-reg through the same mechanisms, and all your current levels are low. Why a forward converter here?

RL

The input voltage can be as high a 625V and as low as 300V. I was toying with the idea of a double ended flyback but the voltage and good transformer utilization of a full bridge lead me in that direction.

I'm looking for a desing with low stress on the Mosfets and Diodes. The high current pulse of a flyback always seened to lead me away from them.

What do you think of a DE flyback for this situation?

That would address your voltage stress issue, wouldn't it? Allows lower-loss leakage recovery, as well, for peaky currents.

RL

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required