• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 1 reply
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 80 subscribers
  • Views 187 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Similar topics

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.

BOOSTXL-BUCKCONV: Migrate Buck Application from F280049C to F28002x Family

Mitchell
Expert 4915 points
Part Number: BOOSTXL-BUCKCONV
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: LAUNCHXL-F280049C, , LAUNCHXL-F280025C, TIDM-DC-DC-BUCK

Hi Team,

My customer is recently discovered that the buck application (BOOSTXL-BUCKCONV board) is designed for the LAUNCHXL-F280049C board which is a different family of ICs compared to the one they'd like to use (F28002x).

They tried to migrate the project using the wizard available in CCS GUI (syscfg) for the buck project (see below), but it didn’t really work (it says it’s still a beta version):

For now, their purpose is to become familiar with the tool chain and in particular see how to modify the compensation for the buck (as described in the BOOSTXL-BUCKCONV board manual). This would help themin determining whether the F28002x IC would satisfy them requirements and decide whether they can adopt it for their product development.

Would be possible for you to provide the equivalent buck project compatible with the LAUNCHXL-F280025C board or if you can suggest any other way to get this going (maybe there is a document online explaining how to perform the migration that we didn’t find); that would really help us in this first definition phase?

Thanks,
Mitchell

  • 0
    TI__Guru 62975 points

    Mitchell,

    The F28004x and F28002x device families share a common lineage of design and architecture. The differences are primarily in terms of memory size and some top-level features that can be identified from the Device Overview Features list and Device Comparison tables from the respective datasheets.

    I would estimate the device differences between F28004x and F28002x to be negligible when it comes to evaluating the BOOSTXL-BUCKCONV. Instead of porting the example to F28002x, it would be easier to emulate the F28002x by running the TIDM-DC-DC-BUCK example on the native LAUNCHXL-F280049C with a few modifications to the .CMD file to reduce the usable memory size to match the F28002x.

    -Tommy