• State
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 1 reply
  • Subscribers 63 subscribers
  • Views 183 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.

LM5122-Q1: LM5122 minimum on-time vs current limiting

Baudouin Bout de Marnhac
Prodigy 60 points
Part Number: LM5122-Q1
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: LM5122

Tool/software:

Hi,

we want to use the LM5122 as a SEPIC controller. We have a mock up that works but we want to use the current cycle-by-cycle protection as a short-circuit protection.

As we use it now the protection works but has the following limitation: it seems the minimum-on time takes priority over the current limiting function, could you confirm that ? is there a way to make the minimum on-time shorter or have the current limit to take the priority over the minimum on-time ?

Thank you for tour answer and have a nice day,

Baudouin

  • 0
    TI__Mastermind 29990 points

    Hi Baudouin,

    Thanks for using the e2e forum.
    You are current in your understanding of the cycle-by-cycle protection.
    The minimum on-time of the device always has priority and cannot be overwritten by the overcurrent protection. Meaning in a short-circuit scenario, the device would still try to switch with minimum on-time.

    However, there is one additional feature called hiccup overload protection.
    This feature will actually turn of the device for a certain period of time after cycle-by-cycle protection is triggered for several times in a row.
    It is described in the datasheet:

    Please let me know if you have additional questions on this feature.
    Best regards,
    Niklas