Mr RB
Well-Known Member
I modified my circuit per these suggestions. When simulated, it took a few tries to get it to work. The biggest problem with it is that the gate pull-up resistor, even when it was 680Ω could not source enough current to turn on the NFET fast enough. The power dissipation in the NFET during the first few tries was a Watt or two. I borrowed Hero's bootstrapped gate driver, and that fixed that. Now even with a crummy NFET, the dissipation is < 500mW.
Looks good. You used my circuit and improved the gate drive. I wasn't sure that the FET would turn on quick enough, but then I would have used a larger value inductor and run it about 18kHz so the FET switching losses are reduced a lot and may have been ok with the resistor.
How did you go with voltage regulation?? I see you used a compensating resistor as I mentioned (R2 110K). Did you simulate for the full range of 12v battery input voltage and check current regulation?
Next issue, which always bothered me with most of RB's circuits, is that the base of Q1 was driven far enough below ground so as to exceed the Vbe reverse breakdown, so I added the diode clamp D3, and limited the current with R6. I played with R2 to equalize the output current both at 12V and 15V input.
Yep, that's what Ctime is for (which you left out). The energy from Cfb won't drive the base voltage lower than about 2v if you use the cap from base to ground (which is normally much larger than Cfb). This is a fundamental part of the black reg, the other thing it does is produce a timed off-period which is basically the way all the SMPS IC's work using a cap to give a timed off-period after the switching event. With Ctime you will get a lower switching frequency and no need for the diode.
Added: I changed the inductor to 33uH; that just raised the switching frequency without changing anything else. When the input is 15V, the average input power (from the battery) is 17W. The LED power is 16W, but somehow I dont believe that this circuit is 94% efficient?
That's about right for a simulator. With the real thing you get milliohms everywhere in the solder joints, parts leads, PCB tracks etc which is usually about 5% lost. So it would be about 90% which is what I expected. That change we made placing the current sense resistor in the input current path, not in the buck loop, is worth 2 to 3%. I still want to see your Vin to Iout regulation chart.
Hero999 said;
RB. Why are you so obsessed with using large inductors?
Because lower switching speeds mean less switching losses, means less fussy gate drivers, less parts, less to go wrong, lower switching speeds mean higher reliability in silicon. An inductor with 20 turns of 1mm wire doing 20kHz is an incredibly reliable part compared to a FET silicon die doing 100kHz... I would also prefer to have heat dissipated in that inductor than in the FET given equal total circuit efficiency.
I understand the modern trend is toward tiny inductors and very high switching frequencies. Like modern cars use tiny engines revving their guts out. But I prefer the casual revs of a big old V8 or Harley that will go forever. Just because you can go smaller and higher revving doesn't mean that it's the best way.
For anything over an amp I just wind my own toroids here with 1mm wire and have no problems getting 330uH with 10-15 milliohms. If it was for a commercial product things would be different though.