Can I Use Parallel Buck Converters to Achieve Higher Amperage?

In summary, the conversation discussed using multiple 1A buck converters in parallel to achieve a 5A application. It was suggested to have a common controller to distribute the load equally between them to prevent overheating. The possibility of using a μ-processor to read and output suitable pulses for the converters was also mentioned. It was advised to test and monitor the temperature of each converter to prevent thermal runaway. The concept of calibrating the converters to prevent thermal runaway was also discussed, but it was explained that thermal runaway is a result of something being out of control and cannot be avoided simply by calibration.
  • #1
Puglife
157
2
I have a ton of 1A buck converters, and have a 5A application in which i need to run. I do not want to order any new buck converters, because I already have so many 1A ones, and do not have money for any new ones. Each one can only handle 1A before it over heats.

I was wondering if I could use multiple 1A buck converters in parallel with each other in order to achieve 5A? if not, could i some how modify the buck converter i have to handle 5 times more amperage?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2
Puglife said:
I was wondering if I could use multiple 1A buck converters in parallel with each other in order to achieve 5A?
Yes, you can.
But you must have a common controller, sensing five currents, that distributes the total load current equally between them.
Otherwise one of them will be over heated.
The controller must generate various pulses to each of the converters.
 
  • #3
Hesch said:
Yes, you can.
But you must have a common controller, sensing five currents, that distributes the total load current equally between them.
Otherwise one of them will be over heated.
The controller must generate various pulses to each of the converters.
Is is at all possible to do it without one, if not how would i make one?
 
  • #4
Puglife said:
Is it at all possible to do it without one, if not how would i make one?
I don't think so. There will always be small differences between the converts, and if one of them yields just a little more current than the others, it could be a little more heated up, increasing the problem/difference. It could make a thermal run away.

I will suggest five VCO's ( voltage controlled oscillators ) that counts up five counters, therby forming an integrating A/D-converter that smoothes the noisy currents.
A μ-processor could read/sample the counters and be programmed to output suitable pulses for the buck-converters.
 
  • #5
Hesch said:
I don't think so. There will always be small differences between the converts, and if one of them yields just a little more current than the others, it could be a little more heated up, increasing the problem/difference. It could make a thermal run away.

I will suggest five VCO's ( voltage controlled oscillators ) that counts up five counters, therby forming an integrating A/D-converter that smoothes the noisy currents.
A μ-processor could read/sample the counters and be programmed to output suitable pulses for the buck-converters.
so what exactly would happen if I where to just put them in parallel?
 
  • #6
Puglife said:
so what exactly would happen if I where to just put them in parallel?
Try! You have five fingers, so you can sense the temperature for each of them with one hand.

Your other hand could be used to increase voltage/current/load slowly.

If one of your sensing fingers starts smoking, you have a problem with your parallel converters.
 
  • #7
Hesch said:
Try! You have five fingers, so you can sense the temperature for each of them with one hand.

Your other hand could be used to increase voltage/current/load slowly.

If one of your sensing fingers starts smoking, you have a problem with your parallel converters.
I don't want to burn any out if their is a risk, I would like to know first, exactly how to solve the problem. Could i distribute it between 6 or 7 in parallel instead? would that work?
 
  • #8
Puglife said:
I don't want to burn any out if their is a risk, I would like to know first, exactly how to solve the problem. Could i distribute it between 6 or 7 in parallel instead? would that work?
Your fingers will be the ones to be burned as the first. Your transistors will give up at 200 C°.

Using 6 or 7 converters, one of them may still make a thermal run away.
 
  • #9
Hesch said:
Your fingers will be the ones to be burned as the first. Your transistors will give up at 200 C°.

Using 6 or 7 converters, one of them may still make a thermal run away.
so what exactly causes a thermal runaway?
 
  • #10
Puglife said:
what exactly causes a thermal runaway?
E.g. some transistor that decreases its VBE voltage due to a higher temperature, thereby conducting more current than the other transistors.
So this transistor will be even more heated up, . . . . ., and so on.

Also the kernel of the inductor will change characteristics due to temperature.
 
  • #11
Hesch said:
E.g. some transistor that decreases its VBE voltage due to a higher temperature, thereby conducting more current than the other transistors.
So this transistor will be even more heated up, . . . . ., and so on.
they each have potientiometers on them, in which i can control the voltage, is it possible for me to adjust each one individually, and test them out, and change the POT for each one, to prevent that from happening, sort of like calibrating them?
 
  • #12
Puglife said:
they each have potientiometers on them, in which i can control the voltage
You need a potentiometer that can control the temperature/current on the fly.

That's what my suggested controller will do: Adjust on the fly.
 
  • #13
Hesch said:
You need a potentiometer that can control the temperature/current on the fly.

That's what my suggested controller will do.
so you can't just calibrate them once, and avoid any sort of thermal runaway?
 
  • #14
Puglife said:
so you can't just calibrate them once, and avoid any sort of thermal runaway?

The term "thermal run away" means that something is completely out of control. It won't just increase the temperature by some predictable 10 degrees. It will increase the temperature forever until something evaporates.

It's the butterfly that starts a tornado.
 
  • #15
Hesch said:
The term "thermal run away" means that something is completely out of control. It won't just increase the temperature by some predictable 10 degrees. It will increase the temperature forever until something evaporates.
i know, but the reason that happens, is because one of the buck converters gets a change in voltage, which causes it to draw more current, causing a chain reaction right, so why can't you just limit the voltage that can come into your buck converters to 5v to prevent that?
 
  • #16
Puglife said:
why can't you just limit the voltage that can come into your buck converters to 5v
You cannot limit some voltage to 5.00000000000000V, but to say 5.0001V

These extra 0.0001V is the butterfly to start the tornado.
 
  • #17
Hesch said:
You cannot limit some voltage to 5.00000000000000V, but to say 5.0001V

These extra 0.0001V is the butterfly to start the tornado.
so what is the absolute cheapest way to stop this from happening, I need to make a ton of these, and need it to be as cheap as humanly possible. Thank you
 
  • #18
Puglife said:
so what is the absolute cheapest way to stop this from happening, I need to make a ton of these
Make a big buck-converter that can handle 5A.
No distribution problem.
You need a ton of these.
 
  • #19
Hesch said:
Make a big buck-converter that can handle 5A.
No distribution problem.
You need a ton of these.
is their any way of doing it asside from that?
 
  • #20
Puglife said:
is their any way of doing it asside from that?
Yes, of course.

Example:
You can connect a current limiter at the output of every buck-converter, say 6 converters + 6 current limiters, each limited to 0,9A.
Then you will have a total current = 5.4A.

But I don't think that will be the cheapest way.
 
  • #21
Hesch said:
Yes, of course.

Example:
You can connect a current limiter at the output of every buck-converter, say 6 converters + 6 current limiters, each limited to 0,9A.
Then you will have a total current = 5.4A.

But I don't think that will be the cheapest way.
would i buy current limiters, if so what are they called, can i make them, if so how?
 
  • #22
Puglife said:
would i buy current limiters, if so what are they called, can i make them, if so how?
Well, there is a simple one here:

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS1IR-mer3QzDDInkNJlb-8QoP1efRGlNz1rqD3QRRuDiHDcdUT.jpg

You can choose other circuits here:

https://www.google.dk/search?q=curr...-JbLAhUzb5oKHWmBDS0Q_AUIBygB&biw=1920&bih=946
 
  • #24
I don't know.
 
  • #25
Hesch said:
I don't know.
ok, that's fine, do you know where i could buy one, so that i may compair the prices, Thanks!
 
  • #26
No, I'm not staying in the USA.
 
  • #27
Hesch said:
No, I'm not staying in the USA.
ok, that's fine, you have been of great help to me, just one last question, do i put the limiters on the inputs, or outputs of the buck converters?
 
  • #28
Puglife said:
do i put the limiters on the inputs, or outputs of the buck
On the outputs.
You must calculate with a voltage drop across the suggested current limiter of about 1V, using silicon transistors.
 
  • #29
Hesch said:
On the outputs.
You must calculate with a voltage drop across the suggested current limiter of about 1V, using silicon transistors.
what do you mean?
 
  • #30
Say you need 10V on the output of the current limiter, the buck converter must yield 11V on the output.
11V - 1V = 10V.
 
  • #31
Hesch said:
Say you need 10V on the output of the current limiter, the buck converter must yield 11V on the output.
11V - 1V = 10V.
ok, Thank you very much for your time. Thanks!
 

1. Can I use parallel buck converters to increase the overall current output?

Yes, parallel buck converters can be used to increase the overall current output. By connecting multiple buck converters in parallel, the current output of each converter is combined, resulting in a higher overall current output.

2. Are there any limitations to using parallel buck converters?

Yes, there are some limitations to using parallel buck converters. One limitation is that the converters must be carefully matched in terms of their voltage and current ratings. If they are not matched, it can lead to unequal current sharing and potential damage to the converters. Additionally, the control circuitry for each converter must be synchronized to ensure proper operation.

3. Will using parallel buck converters affect the efficiency of the system?

Using parallel buck converters can affect the efficiency of the system. It is important to consider the efficiency of each individual converter as well as the overall system efficiency. In some cases, using parallel converters can improve efficiency, but in others, it may decrease efficiency due to losses in the control circuitry and current sharing imbalances.

4. Can I use different types or brands of buck converters in parallel?

It is generally not recommended to use different types or brands of buck converters in parallel. Each converter may have slightly different characteristics and may not operate well together, leading to unequal current sharing and potential damage to the converters. It is best to use identical converters for parallel operation.

5. How do I determine the number of buck converters needed for my system?

The number of buck converters needed for a system will depend on the desired output current and the current rating of each individual converter. To determine the number of converters needed, divide the desired output current by the current rating of each converter, taking into account any safety margins. It is also important to consider the limitations and efficiency of using parallel converters in your specific system.

Similar threads

  • Electrical Engineering
Replies
14
Views
810
  • Electrical Engineering
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Electrical Engineering
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • Electrical Engineering
Replies
32
Views
2K
  • Electrical Engineering
Replies
2
Views
966
  • Electrical Engineering
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • Electrical Engineering
Replies
27
Views
4K
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Electrical Engineering
Replies
10
Views
4K
Back
Top