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.

WEBENCH® Tools/TPS54160A: TPS54160A

Part Number: TPS54160A
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: TPS54160

Tool/software: WEBENCH® Design Tools

Hi,

I want to calculate Gain at 1hz OR we can say low freq gain.

So I calculated A0 using the equation no.20 from the dataheet of tps54160A,

And then converted the value in dB using the equation 20logbase10(A0).

But my calculated value doesnot match the stimulation value on webench software.

Am i using different equation to calculated low frequency gain, can someone tell me how to calculate low frequency gain.

Thank you.

  • Hi

    No. 20 equation is Compensator DC gain,the open loop DC gain is around A0*Adc(equation 14)

    Thanks

    Daniel Li

  • hi Daniel Li,

    Thanks for the reply,

    Taking the following value :

    vout=3.3v       Iout=1.5A       Rload=Vout/Iout = 2.2       gmps=6 A/V       gmea=97 uA/V       Ro=100Mohms (calculated from datasheet)

    R2= 10Kohms      R1=31.6Kohms

    Now when i calculate the low freq gain as suggested by Daniel i got Gain= 89.76dB .

    But it's not matching with the webench stimulation value which is 75.31dB and it keep on changing when i change components value other then the value mention above.

    I have also noticed that on changing Cc value in stimulation from 1nF to 4.7nF low frequency gain changes from 84.37dB to 75.31dB.

    So the question arise here is that  does low frequency gain value depend upon Cc?

  • Hi 

    you DC gain will be right at 0.1Hz, there is a pole in the compensator which equal to 1/(2*pi*Cc*Ro), based on you setting, 1nF with 100Mohm, the pole is at 1.59Hz, so at 10Hz, the gain will decrease 15.96dB, which is 89.76-15.96=73.7dB.

    you can also check 4.7nF, based on rough esimation, it will be reduce -13dB at 10hmz compare to 1nF

  • hi Daniel,

    thanks for the reply,

    But still i am not getting your answer.

    I am calculating it as follow:

    pole at 1.59Hz converting it to radian/sec i.e (2*3.14*1.59 = 9.99 rad/sec) and now using the formula 

    dc gain = 20log(A0*Adc) - 20log(9.99) [ as we have a pole at w=9.99 so -20dB slope]

    dc gain = 89.76 -19.9 = 69.7dB

    I am not getting 15.96dB what am i doing wrong can you please explain.

    Thank you.

  • HI 

    you don't need change to radian. For 1nF, 100Mohm, the pole at 1.59Hz, you are check the gain at 10Hz, the gain will decrease by 20dB from 1.59Hz, so at 10Hz, it will decrease 20log(1.59/10)=-15.972

    Thanks

  • Hi Daniel

    Thanks for the reply

    I got what you have done but why are we calculating gain at 10hz is there any specific reason?

    Also by taking 4.7nf  and 100Mohms i got pole at 0.334hz and at 10hz i am getting -29.52dB which doesn't match your answer of -13dB.

    And also i have done stimulation on webench using the above described value and i am getting 84.37dB when i use Cc = 1nf, Ro=100Mohms and 75.31dB when i use Cc = 4.7nf , Ro= 100Mohms.

    Previously i was using the following formula to calculate DC gain

    DC gain = 20log(Ao*Adc) - 20log(w(rad/sec) of pole)

    And then used formula suggested by you as

    Dc gain = 20log(Ao*Adc) - 20log(freq of pole/10hz)

    But using both of this formula i am not able to get the value that is nearer to the stimulation value on webench.

    What am i doing wrong? Is their anything that plays a vital role in this calculation and i am missing it.

  • Hi

    1. 10Hz because wenbench loop start at 10Hz , but the low frequency pole one is at 1.37Hz(1nF), one is at 0.339Hz(4.7nF) which can't been show by wenbench

    2. with 1nF Ccomp, wenbench loop at 10Hz is 68.4, our calculation is 73.7dB, so it is close

    3. with 4.7nF, 10Hz is 55.425, our calculation is 60.604(I may write wrong pole frequency in previous answer).

    you can write Adc(f)=Adc*A0/(1+s/w0) w0=1/Ro*Cc then you ingore 1 you can have Adc(f) gain at 10Hz

    and I don't think the mismatch between calculation will affect the practical performance of TPS54160.

    Thanks

    Daniel Li