Other Parts Discussed in Thread: LM5007,
Hello,
Why does analysis pick the most expensive ceramic capacitors (X7R huge 1206) and doubles them up and doubles voltage rating at the LMR input pin? Placing a good MOV at the power connector protects LMR, not doubling voltage/size of downstream ceramic caps. Why is ESR value so important to input caps versus placing an electrolytic and 100nF bypass? Perhaps webench could use a tune up to be a bit more Froogle relative to parts selection size and costs.
We currently have 180uF 50v radial electrolytic for 24v linear DC supply powering 3x 1.5MHz switchers less than 20mV ripple during PWM HV drive. Intention is for LMR buck 48v battery feed to 24v 3x 1.5MHz existing bucks, each have 4.7µF/35v ceramic at the input addition of LMR reduced 50v/1206/X7R 4.7µF to 35v/0805/X7R to save PCB space. There is no need to double the voltage on every part or the manufacturer is not being prudent in testing when voltages are typically rated some % of listed was the rule of thumb.
Can we kick up the LMR 764KHz frequency still get 2.5A peak as to reduce Webench BOM parts cost/sizes and reduce inductor and output capacitance?
Oddly LM5007 easily bucked +36v down to +5v/1A had no heat sink pad underside. Why LMR with robust heat pad underside is not more versatile to buck 48v to 24v and produce full 3A if when demanded, change duty cycle more dynamically to current demands being low or high? Apologize for being any bit critical but I'm used to PWM of half bridge NFETS having a bit more intuitive control loop, wider range duty cycle to reach peak current demand when it is required.