• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 6 replies
  • Answers 3 answers
  • Subscribers 81 subscribers
  • Views 1455 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

CCS/LAUNCHXL-F280049C: Digital Power Buck Converter BoosterPack [CCS,PSIM,PIL,LAunchpadD/CONTROLCard F280049C]

Zi123D CH123KHA
Prodigy 110 points
Part Number: LAUNCHXL-F280049C
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: BOOSTXL-BUCKCONV, LAUNCHXL-F28069M, LAUNCHXL-F28379D, CONTROLSUITE

Tool/software: Code Composer Studio

Good Morning,

Please I  Have two questions  : 

1- My first one, I  have recently bought  this 

I want to test   this launchPAd F280049C with  Digital Power Buck Converter BoosterPack.

My problem is that I'am afraid that it won't  work because  in control Suite they said it is only compatible with F28069M or F2837xS

Which  version should I use ??? is there any modifications in the code to do to make it  compatible with My device  ??? 

2-  My second question that I want to do a PIL simulation   using a control Card F280049C  to drive a virtual  converter similar to BoosterPAck  done in PSIM.

So , I can use the same code for the launchPad or not  to verify iof I have the same results in simulations ??????????

Is there a big difference between the code in the launchPad via the control Cards 

I will appreciate any advice  :)  

Thank you for your Help .

  • 0
    TI__Guru 62975 points

    Zi123D CH123KHA said:
    I want to test   this launchPAd F280049C with  Digital Power Buck Converter BoosterPack.

    My problem is that I'am afraid that it won't  work because  in control Suite they said it is only compatible with F28069M or F2837xS

    Which  version should I use ??? is there any modifications in the code to do to make it  compatible with My device  ???

    The BOOSTXL-BUCKCONV and LAUNCHXL-F280049C are pin compatible. However, there is no software example available today to operate the two together. A working example for the BOOSTXL-BUCKCONV and LAUNCHXL-F280049C combination is expected to be available around 3Q19.

    Porting the software to F280049C will take some detailed work, even for someone who is familiar with the devices. If you wish to proceed with porting, it will be easier to use the F2837xS example (as opposed to the F28069M example) as a starting point because F2837xS and F280049C have very similar architectures. 

    If you wish to observe a running example on any platform, it would be easier to purchase the LAUNCHXL-F28069M to use the existing software.

    Zi123D CH123KHA said:
    My second question that I want to do a PIL simulation   using a control Card F280049C  to drive a virtual  converter similar to BoosterPAck  done in PSIM.

    So , I can use the same code for the launchPad or not  to verify iof I have the same results in simulations ??????????

    Is there a big difference between the code in the launchPad via the control Cards

    Code that runs on the controlCARD will also run on the LaunchPad. The major difference would be in pin availability. Generally, the controlCARDs are geared for better performance and more pin access, while the LaunchPads are focused on lower cost and ecosystem compatibility.

  • 0 in reply to tlee
    Prodigy 110 points

    Thank you sir for your prompt answer .

    If I understand very well, 

    When I buy a F2837xS , normally the code will run automatically without any problems ?? (without the  need of porting from F28069M coz the code is already existed in CCS).

    But I when I buy a F280049C  I will port the code from F28068M which is a little bit difficult .Therefore I want to know what kind of difficulties we are talking about .

    Could I do it by self (am an engineering student) or not ? 

    I do not understand why only  to run this  example on any platform we need just LAUNCHXL-F28069M  and not F2837xS.

  • 0 in reply to Zi123D CH123KHA
    TI__Guru 62975 points

    Zi123D CH123KHA said:
    When I buy a F2837xS , normally the code will run automatically without any problems ?? (without the  need of porting from F28069M coz the code is already existed in CCS).

    The LAUNCHXL-F28377S board was discontinued and replaced by the LAUNCHXL-F28379D board. If you can manage to obtain a LAUNCHXL-F28377S board, it will work with the controlSUITE demo as-is.

    The LAUNCHXL-F28377S code will execute on the LAUNCHXL-F28379D board, but the header pin assignments are different between the two boards so you would need to make modifications to the software to handle the different pins.

    Zi123D CH123KHA said:
    But I when I buy a F280049C  I will port the code from F28068M which is a little bit difficult.

    F2837x and F28004x have similar architectures so you would want to use the F2837xS code base for the port. F2806x will not be a straightforward port.

    Zi123D CH123KHA said:
    Therefore I want to know what kind of difficulties we are talking about .

    At a minimum, the pin and module assignments will need to be modified. Device initialization will also be modified. I will not go into all details here because it is impractical to do so and we do not have an exhaustive list of changes required.

    Zi123D CH123KHA said:
    Could I do it by self (am an engineering student) or not ?

    It depends on your time allowance, proficiency with embedded programming, and familiarity with C2000 devices. This would likely take multiple days even for someone with high proficiency and familiarity.

    Zi123D CH123KHA said:
    I do not understand why only  to run this  example on any platform we need just LAUNCHXL-F28069M  and not F2837xS.

    The intended message to you is that there is already a demo released for LAUNCHXL-F28069M. This is your best option if you do not have any platform requirements.

  • 0 in reply to tlee
    Prodigy 110 points

    Thank you Sir for your help .

    I have some more questions . I will appreciate  your  answers .

    Based on our previous discussion, I bought a  F280049C LaunchPad.

    I do a small comparaison of pins between F280049C/F2837xS , presented on this Table

     My question is I do not understand why the connections is on the first 40 pins(1-->40) and not on  the second 40pins  (40-->80)( we have 80 in total)  as you see  in this picture .Normally in the picture the pins from  40 to 80 are connected to the boosterPack.

    I know that We have two Booster connections , but I found it so weird to connect the first pins ???????

    My second question , Why we have 6 channels of PWMs are connected to the boosterPack.

    Normally based on the datasheet we need 4 channels as mentionned on this Table 

    "www.ti.com/.../tidu986.pdf"

  • 0 in reply to Zi123D CH123KHA
    TI__Guru 62975 points

    Zi123D CH123KHA said:
    My question is I do not understand why the connections is on the first 40 pins(1-->40) and not on  the second 40pins  (40-->80)( we have 80 in total)  as you see  in this picture .Normally in the picture the pins from  40 to 80 are connected to the boosterPack.

    I know that We have two Booster connections , but I found it so weird to connect the first pins ???????

    It sounds to me like you are going about this exercise backward. You must also use the second set of headers (pins 40-80) on LAUNCHXL-F280049C or else BOOSTXL-BUCKCONV will not fit because of the heat sinks. Therefore, the correct exercise is to change the module assignments and resources to be used by F280049C in order to use the desired headers.

    Zi123D CH123KHA said:
    My second question , Why we have 6 channels of PWMs are connected to the boosterPack.

    The only required signals are EPWM-4A, EPWM-4B, and EPWM-6A. If you look at the BOOSTXL-BUCKCONV schematic, you will see that EPWM-5B and EPWM-6B are connected to the header, but are not used by any components. EPWM-5A is included for flexibility and is not needed.

  • 0 in reply to tlee
    TI__Guru 62975 points
    Zi123D CH123KHA,

    It has been a while since your last update. I assume that you were able to resolve your issue.

    If not, please reply to this thread. If the thread has locked due to timeout, please create a new thread describing the current status of your issue.

    -Tommy