• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 4 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 62 subscribers
  • Views 205 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.

UCD9222: How to choose digital power controllers?

user4811888
Intellectual 530 points
Part Number: UCD9222
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: TPS53667, TPS53681, TPS53647, TPS53659, TPS53622, TPS53679

As seen from TI web that for external switch digital power controllers, especially multi-phase below, there're three types of them:

TPS404xx, TPS536xx, UCD92xx, from description, they're analog fixed-frequency PWM control, analog CM-COT control, fully digital(A/D sensing, digital compensation and DPWM) control.

Except communication protocol and phase number limitations, why there're so many kinds of products, and how to choose appropriate parts for my design?

Thanks for it.

  • 0
    TI__Genius 11095 points

    Hello,

    A few of these devices are the same family of product, just different phase and protocol communication. Example TPS53622, TPS53659, TPS53679, TPS53681 are the same product family. So are (TPS53647 and TPS53667), and  the UCD92k devices. 

    Obviously there can be more subtle details mentioned in each datasheet, but as a general guideline:

    Where fixed frequency operation is important, and the PMBus interface may be optional, or not required, look at the TPS40k series.

    Where fast transient is important, look at TPS53k. 

    Where most configurability is important look at UCD92k. 

    We can also suggest a device if you provide some more details about your application. 

  • 0 in reply to Matt Schurmann
    Intellectual 530 points

    Thanks for your reply. I'm looking at a multi-phase solution by converting 12V to a ASIC core voltage <1V, but the total current is not very high ~140A. 

    Could I learn that why UCD92k series seem not be invested any more? Are they still recommended to use? What could I conclude if I compare UCD92K with TPS53k?

  • +1 in reply to user4811888
    TI__Genius 11095 points

    I would suggest to look at TPS53647 or TPS53681 for this application. 

    This is more of the strategy from TI as a business than the major technology limitations. Compared to the existing UCD92k, TPS53k generally has better performance for less expensive solutions. And the business unit has a strong analog team and technology roadmap. 

    However, the UCD92k has more configurability so it is a little more customizable and general purpose. 

  • 0 in reply to Matt Schurmann
    Intellectual 530 points

    Nice comments, I will look into those.