• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 3 replies
  • Subscribers 63 subscribers
  • Views 265 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.

TPS40200: help to review schematic

Yue TANG
Expert 8695 points
Part Number: TPS40200
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: LM5145

Hi,

My customer use TPS40200 for 42V input and 5V7A output. I can't find a close ref design and this device is unavaiable in WEBENCH. Please help to review this design. thanks. 

3652.1.pdf

  • 0
    TI__Guru 73202 points

    Hi Yue,

    The design looks good. I would check compensation given the ESR of the 220uF electrolytic output cap.

    Also, given that the current is 7A, you might consider a synchronous buck solution for better efficiency / lower power loss. My recommendation in that case is the LM5145.

    Regards,

    Tim

    www.ti.com/widevin

  • 0 in reply to Timothy Hegarty
    TI__Expert 8695 points

    Tim,

    Thanks again.  their setting is as attachedhttps://e2e.ti.com/cfs-file/__key/communityserver-discussions-components-files/196/TPS40KType-III-Loop-Stability-kVenable_5F00_sluc263c_2D00_071312.7z. I have a few questions:

    1.comparing to the table, their compensation part is different. do you think is this a right way to decide the compenstation part?

    2. will the  wrong compenstaion  impact the drive waveform of MOSFET?

  • 0 in reply to Yue TANG
    TI__Guru 73202 points

    Hi Yue,

    Either the venable method or the conventional voltage-mode compensator design (for example, see the LM5145 datasheet) is acceptable. As long as the regulator is stable, the drive waveform should not be affected.

    Regards,

    Tim