• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 2 replies
  • Subscribers 64 subscribers
  • Views 215 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.

LM5023-2NBEVM: UCC24630

john Pucci
Prodigy 50 points
Part Number: LM5023-2NBEVM
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: UCC24630EVM-636, LM5023, UCC24630, UCC24610,

LM5023-2EVM Notebook Adapter

VOUT

Output voltage ripple

VIN = nom, IOUT = max load

100

mVPP

 

UCC24630EVM-636

ΔVOUT

Output voltage ripple

VIN = VMIN to VMAX, IOUT = 0 to INOM

500

mV

 

Both use LM5023, the same voltage, and +/- the same current; the difference is the output using UCC24630. 

From the result, I must deduce that UCC24630 Increases the ripple five times?

Thanks

John

  • 0
    TI__Mastermind 32940 points

    Hello John, 

    Thank you for your interest in the LM5023 QR flyback controller and UCC24630 SR controller.

    Actually, the LM5023-2NBEVM uses the UCC24610 SR controller, so use of the UCC24630 or not has nothing to do with the output ripple specification. 
    In the Test Conditions column of the Specifications tables, the LM5023 EVM 10mVpp ripple is spec'd at "IOUT = max load" only, whereas for the UCC24630 EVM, the 500mVpp ripple is spec'd for "IOUT = 0 to Inom".  The higher ripple spec covers the full load range including skip-cycle operation at light-to-zero load. 
    The difference is in the details.  

    Regards,
    Ulrich