KrisBlueNZ
Sadly passed away in 2015
Steve, are you sure Schottky diodes have lower capacitance than fast recovery diodes?
I suggested back in post #14 that abuhafss use a UF4002 or higher because the 1N5819 has a maximum reverse voltage of 40V which is uncomfortably close to the output voltage. Of course you can get Schottky diodes with reverse voltages higher than 40V but I don't think the slight difference in forward voltage (compared to a fast recovery diode) justifies the cost. The switching frequency is 50 kHz maximum, so I think the UF400x's recovery time (45 ns, I think) is fine. Do you agree Steve?
As I mentioned in post #38, second to last paragraph, all the graphs I've posted up to and including post #38 use a COUT with an ESR of zero. Typical 10 µF 50V electrolytics have ESRs around 1.2Ω so that's what I've been using since then.
In the last paragraph of post #38 I explained that a second inductor and capacitor would be needed if you need a clean output. With just the single electrolytic with an ESR of 1.2Ω my simulation gives about 310 mV p-p of ripple, both before and after regulation is established.
With the filter inductor (3.3 mH) and second capacitor (10 µF, 50V, 1.2Ω ESR), the ripple at the output is less than 5 mV p-p at 2.5 mA load, and less than 2.2 mV p-p at 25 mA load. It's higher at lower load because the period between pulses is longer.
As I said in post #38, you can optimise the output components according to your requirements for size, cost, and regulation. DC resistance in the filter inductor compromises the output regulation (see last paragraph of post #38) so a larger inductor (thicker wire) and a lower inductance (fewer turns for a given core) will improve output regulation. Filter capacitors with higher capacitance have lower ESR but are larger and more expensive.
I suggested back in post #14 that abuhafss use a UF4002 or higher because the 1N5819 has a maximum reverse voltage of 40V which is uncomfortably close to the output voltage. Of course you can get Schottky diodes with reverse voltages higher than 40V but I don't think the slight difference in forward voltage (compared to a fast recovery diode) justifies the cost. The switching frequency is 50 kHz maximum, so I think the UF400x's recovery time (45 ns, I think) is fine. Do you agree Steve?
As I mentioned in post #38, second to last paragraph, all the graphs I've posted up to and including post #38 use a COUT with an ESR of zero. Typical 10 µF 50V electrolytics have ESRs around 1.2Ω so that's what I've been using since then.
In the last paragraph of post #38 I explained that a second inductor and capacitor would be needed if you need a clean output. With just the single electrolytic with an ESR of 1.2Ω my simulation gives about 310 mV p-p of ripple, both before and after regulation is established.
With the filter inductor (3.3 mH) and second capacitor (10 µF, 50V, 1.2Ω ESR), the ripple at the output is less than 5 mV p-p at 2.5 mA load, and less than 2.2 mV p-p at 25 mA load. It's higher at lower load because the period between pulses is longer.
As I said in post #38, you can optimise the output components according to your requirements for size, cost, and regulation. DC resistance in the filter inductor compromises the output regulation (see last paragraph of post #38) so a larger inductor (thicker wire) and a lower inductance (fewer turns for a given core) will improve output regulation. Filter capacitors with higher capacitance have lower ESR but are larger and more expensive.