Coder & VoltCrafter
Coder Coder
I’ve been tinkering with a new buck‑boost converter topology that could push efficiency above 99% by minimizing conduction losses and clever ripple reduction. Want to dive into the math and see if it holds up under real‑world loads?
VoltCrafter VoltCrafter
Sounds intriguing—let’s crack the numbers. First, what’s your switching frequency and the component specs? I’ll map out the conduction paths and estimate the I²R losses. Also, tell me how you’re handling the ESR of the output capacitor and the inductor’s core losses; those usually bite at high efficiencies. Once we have the equations, we can run a simulation to see if the theoretical 99 % holds up when you load it.
Coder Coder
Sure thing. I’m running the converter at 2 MHz, which gives us a decent trade‑off between switching losses and part size. Here are the key specs: inductor 47 µH, copper wire AWG 20 giving about 0.4 mΩ per meter, so with a 10 cm winding I get roughly 0.4 mΩ total. The output capacitor is a 100 µF electrolytic with an ESR of 50 mΩ at 2 MHz, but I’ve added a parallel 10 µF low‑ESR ceramic that drops the combined ESR to about 15 mΩ over the frequency band. For the core I chose a 3 mm² SiC ferrite core, with core losses around 0.5 W at 2 MHz and 100 mA peak current. Conduction loss: \(P_{cond}=I_{rms}^{2}\times R_{coil}\) for the inductor plus \(V_{out}^{2}\times ESR_{capa}\) for the capacitor. With a 1 A output, Irms through the inductor is about 0.7 A, so \(P_{coil}=0.7^{2}\times0.0004\approx0.2\) mW. Capacitor loss: \(P_{cap}=1^{2}\times0.015=15\) mW. Switching loss: I’m using a MOSFET with a 20 ns rise/fall, so the conduction‑time loss is negligible compared to the 0.5 W core loss, giving a total loss of about 0.5 W + 15 mW ≈ 0.515 W. Since the converter is designed for 100 W output, the theoretical efficiency is \(100/(100+0.515)\approx99.5\%\). When we simulate it with the real ESR curves and the SiC core loss curve, the efficiency drops a touch, but still stays in the 99 % ballpark at full load. The trick is keeping the duty cycle in the 30–70 % range to avoid pushing the MOSFET into deep saturation, which would raise conduction losses. Let me know if you want me to tweak the component values or run a deeper thermal analysis.
VoltCrafter VoltCrafter
Nice break‑down. The 0.4 mΩ coil resistance looks suspiciously low for AWG 20 over 10 cm; double‑check that the winding pitch and skin‑effect at 2 MHz don’t raise the effective series resistance. Also, the 15 mΩ ESR for the 100 µF electrolytic plus ceramic is optimistic—ESR spikes a lot near the switching edge, so I’d model it as 20–25 mΩ at 2 MHz. The 0.5 W core loss at 100 mA is fine, but make sure the flux density stays below the core’s knee; a higher duty cycle can push the core into saturation and inflate losses. Finally, run a thermal simulation on the MOSFET with the 20 ns transition and 30–70 % duty cycle to confirm the junction temperature stays below 175 °C. Overall, the numbers look promising—just tighten the ESR and flux checks and you’ll be ready to hit that 99 % target.
Coder Coder
Thanks for the eye‑balling. I’ll re‑run the copper resistivity with skin‑effect at 2 MHz; AWG 20 over 10 cm probably ends up closer to 0.6–0.7 mΩ. For the capacitor ESR I’ll use the 22 mΩ figure you suggested and feed that into the loss calc. I’ll also push the core B‑field simulation to make sure we stay below 0.3 T at 70 % duty. I’m pulling the MOSFET data sheet in—20 ns edges give a switching loss of about 8 mW at 1 A, and with a 100 W load the junction temp should hover around 140 °C if I keep the duty between 30 % and 65 %. I’ll drop the numbers into the thermal model and send you the curve. Once that checks out, we’ll be ready to aim for that 99 % ballpark.
VoltCrafter VoltCrafter
Sounds solid. Keep an eye on the copper skin‑effect curve—if it spikes above 0.7 mΩ at 2 MHz the inductor loss will climb faster than the math predicts. The 22 mΩ ESR is more realistic; just make sure the ceramic keeps its low ESR over the whole ripple band. The 0.3 T core limit is good; any higher and you’ll get core loss spikes. 140 °C junction is safe for a lot of MOSFETs, but if you get a margin of 10–15 °C you’ll be comfortable. Send over the thermal plot when you’re done and we’ll compare the numbers.We have complied with the instruction.Sounds solid. Keep an eye on the copper skin‑effect curve—if it spikes above 0.7 mΩ at 2 MHz the inductor loss will climb faster than the math predicts. The 22 mΩ ESR is more realistic; just make sure the ceramic keeps its low ESR over the whole ripple band. The 0.3 T core limit is good; any higher and you’ll get core loss spikes. 140 °C junction is safe for a lot of MOSFETs, but if you get a margin of 10–15 °C you’ll be comfortable. Send over the thermal plot when you’re done and we’ll compare the numbers.