I have written a document stating why the ti.com article below is rather wide of the mark, in its claim about the usefulness of loosely coupled sepic inductors.
Article concerning loosely coupled sepic inductors:
http://www.powerpulse.net/techPaper.php?paperID=153&print
Attached is my document and the LTspice simulations which prove what my document says is correct....they are the simulations of the sepic converters discussed in the above ti.com article (both loosely coupled sepic, and tightly coupled sepic)
You can clearly see that there is virtually no difference in the primary RMS currents of the loosely coupled and tightly coupled sepic converters in the article. Also, the loosely coupled sepic suffers higher peak fet current, so really, there is going to be no improvement in efficiency by using the loosely coupled sepic....so the article is somewhat "wide of the mark"
...ok , my document is too big to attach, so here it is uploaded...
http://www.2shared.com/document/uiJmN6pP/Sepic_inductor_Degree_of_coupl.html
Article concerning loosely coupled sepic inductors:
http://www.powerpulse.net/techPaper.php?paperID=153&print
Attached is my document and the LTspice simulations which prove what my document says is correct....they are the simulations of the sepic converters discussed in the above ti.com article (both loosely coupled sepic, and tightly coupled sepic)
You can clearly see that there is virtually no difference in the primary RMS currents of the loosely coupled and tightly coupled sepic converters in the article. Also, the loosely coupled sepic suffers higher peak fet current, so really, there is going to be no improvement in efficiency by using the loosely coupled sepic....so the article is somewhat "wide of the mark"
...ok , my document is too big to attach, so here it is uploaded...
http://www.2shared.com/document/uiJmN6pP/Sepic_inductor_Degree_of_coupl.html
