Calculating VDS(off) for Electronic Converters

Click For Summary
Calculating VDS(off) for buck, boost, and inverting converters involves understanding the voltage across the FET when it is off. VDS(off) is influenced by the input voltage (Vin), output voltage (Vout), and the duty cycle. For the buck converter, when the FET is off, the voltage at the input to the inductor drops to approximately -0.7V due to the diode's forward voltage drop. In the boost converter, VDS(off) can be calculated as Vin minus Vout, while for the inverting converter, it involves considering the negative output voltage relative to ground. Understanding these relationships is crucial for accurate calculations in DC-DC converter designs.
  • #31
Ah I see, so that's just the voltage drop across there (i.e. to get the diode 'working'), not that it limits the voltage in the circuit to 0.7V.

Ok, so starting with the Buck converter:
Vout = 12V
D = 0.25
Therefore Vin = Vout/D = 12/0.25 = 48V

Vds(off) = 48-0 = 48V

Boost converter:
Vout = 12V
D = 0.25
Therefore Vin = Vout(1-D) = 12(1-0.25) = 9V

Vds(off) = Vin - ground = 9 - 0 = 9V

Inverting converter:
Vout = 12V
D = 0.25
Therefore Vin = (Vout(1-D))/D = 36V

Vds(off) = Vin + Vout = 36+12 = 48V

How's this looking?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
D44 said:
Ah I see, so that's just the voltage drop across there (i.e. to get the diode 'working'), not that it limits the voltage in the circuit to 0.7V.

Ok, so starting with the Buck converter:
Vout = 12V
D = 0.25
Therefore Vin = Vout/D = 12/0.25 = 48V

Vds(off) = 48-0 = 48V

Boost converter:
Vout = 12V
D = 0.25
Therefore Vin = Vout(1-D) = 12(1-0.25) = 9V

Vds(off) = Vin - ground = 9 - 0 = 9V

Inverting converter:
Vout = 12V
D = 0.25
Therefore Vin = (Vout(1-D))/D = 36V

Vds(off) = Vin + Vout = 36+12 = 48V

How's this looking?

Thanks

Good work. The only thing I'd change is say that for the Inverting converter, Vout is -12V, and the difference voltage Vds(off) is Vin - Vout, which gives the same answer. I can see why you did it your way, because of how the original figure is labeled.

Whew, that wasn't such a chore now, was it? :smile:
 
  • #33
Ahh right ok I see. That makes sense.

Ha, it does seem so much straight forward now I'm further down the line.

Thank you so much for your help. I'm sure you can see I would have never in a million years worked all this out myself.

You guys and this forum are great!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
55
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K