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.

if the input1 shake,there output is low,but do not switch with the shake

Other Parts Discussed in Thread: TPS2121

Dear,

I have the problem,we use the tps2121 the XREF mode,when we  pull out the power 1,the will be some shake on the input 1,but the output is low some time. I think the output will switch the shake .so,why?The yellow is output .The green is the input.

  • Hi User,

    I noticed that you have made two posts on E2E. I have closed the other thread (https://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management/f/196/p/930970/3439961#3439961) and we will support this issue here.

    Can you please provide a schematic of your setup of TPS2121? This will help us troubleshoot your issue. Your waveform is a little hard to read so can you also provide the voltage levels of both inputs and the expected current for the load during normal operation?

    During XREF switching without hysteresis, there is a chance that the device bounces between the inputs 

  • Hi,Shreyas

      we test further for the TPS2121  in the XREF mode.we use the Mechanical switch to switch the in1 on or off. The in 2 is always on.And output is 1.5A  electronic load.But we see ,when  Mechanical switch on,there is some shake on the in1.but the output  is low to 0V.and the device do not bounces between the inputs .Here the schematic .

    the test wave is below.

  • Hi User,

    Thanks for the schematic and detailed waveform. The delay in switching is occurring due to the mechanical switching on VIN1.

    As you can see, the input rises in voltage which triggers the switchover incorrectly. The device tries to switch from IN2 to IN1 but IN1 is 0V (please look at the fourth division on the last waveform you shared). This triggers a UV fault in the device and the device soft starts into VIN2.

    Then IN1 starts to shake again causing another trigger event which is only resolved when IN1 is stabilized.

    Is it possible for you to add more input capacitance (1uF) to IN1 to avoid this voltage shake? Another workaround may be to add a 10nF capacitor from PR1 to GND. 

    Can you retest the board with these changes?

  • Hi,Shreyas

    Thank you for your reply.we will retest the board with your suggest  changes  quickly .But   "This triggers a UV fault in the device and the device soft starts into VIN2" I have question about this. This mean   when the output is 0v  ,the device soft starts into VIN2,but the VIN2 soft starts time is too long .The time is about 500us. It is normal?

  • Hi,Shreyas,

    Thank you.we update the schematic below.And retest the board with your suggest  changes  quickly,the result is that there is no shake on the in1,so the output is normal .The waveform is also below.The output we  series a 10uh  inductance,for the  inductance can  release the energy to charge the two 100uf  capacitance. But we do not know if there is  negative impact of the 10uh  inductance.So I think the tps2121 input can not have shake on the input.And now we use the 22uf to filter the shake.But you know,the shake is random,every time the shake maybe different.So I'm worried if there is a big shake, the 22uf  can not  filter,the output maybe low again.So,i am right?

     

      

  • Hi User,

    You are correct in mentioning that higher "shake" events could still trigger the incorrect switchover behavior but I believe that with the 22uF input capacitance and the 10nF cap on the PR1 node, the issue should be mitigated significantly. The device is analog and so will respond to the input and so the onl mitigation methodology is to make sure the input spikes are clamped. It may be possible to also add TVS diodes to the input which would clamp any high spike. This would also protect the system further.

    If possible, please remove the output inductance. TPS2121 is not meant to drive any inductive loads and so during a turn off event, the voltage on the output node could be pulled low because of the inductor. This could damage the device if there is not external clamp that keeps output voltage from violating this spec.

    Please retest without the inductor and check if it is necessary to use.

  • Hi Shreyas,

    We take your suggestions to add 22uF capacitor at the input of main battery, and 10nF capacitor at PR1 on the PR1 node, and 2x100uf capacitor at output end. The main battery has no obvious "shake", but there is still  incorrect switchover behavior when the main battery is taken away at sometimes. I wonder why this abnormal switching phenomenon still occurs. In addition, we want to know whether there is "shake" or not What is the cause? Is it over-current, under voltage or other reasons? Is there any fundamental solution?

    Test waveform as below

  • Hi User,

    One more enhancement that can aid in stable switching is adding Hysteresis.

    I did mention this earlier but I assumed your system was working as expected from your previous post so I did not go into detail.

    During fast switchover the instantaneous loading and unloading of rails can cause the device to bounce between the inputs as sudden loading/unloading events cause a change in the input voltage rail, which affect the PR1/CP2 comparison. The best way to get around this is to use the ST pin with a hysteresis resistor to the PR1 node.

    This will change the threshold of switching of IN1->IN2 to be different from the threshold of switching from IN2->IN1 as a new path to GND is provided through ST. I reccomend adding hysteresis to your system and testing once more.

    For more information on hysteresis please take a look at this document (Section 2.2.2): https://www.ti.com/lit/ug/tidue50/tidue50.pdf