PFC Offline Converters -- SEPIC, Cuk, Boundary Conduction Mode Flybacks

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on upgrading a non-PFC offline power supply design to include power factor correction for European deployment, specifically for outputs under 25W. The user is considering SEPIC and Cuk topologies due to their efficiency in managing capacitor voltages but is concerned about their complexity compared to boost-flyback designs. Recommendations from IC vendors lean towards a boundary-conduction mode flyback followed by buck converters, which the user finds cumbersome. There is also a query about the feasibility of using a tapped-inductor buck topology for multiple output voltages, highlighting concerns about cross-regulation. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the trade-offs between efficiency, complexity, and compliance with EU regulations.
berkeman
Admin
Messages
69,104
Reaction score
24,021
I'm upgrading a non-PFC (power factor corrected) offline power supply design to include PFC for European deployment. The total output power is less than 25W, and the two output windings are around 20V.

I'm familiar with boost-flyback topologies for isolated PFC supplies, but that seems to have been passed up recently by other topologies to limit the peak intermediate storage capacitor voltages. SEPIC and Cuk topologies would seem to be much more efficient in terms of any capacitor voltages, but they involve extra complexity in terms of switch FETs.

Have any of you worked with offline PFC supplies in the 20W range that use one of these topologies? Can you let me know about the tradeoffs and why you chose the topology that you went with in the end? The Cuk topology seems to have some technical advantages (for the isolated version which I obviously need), but it seems to be a bit overly complicated compared to a SEPIC topology version.

The topology that I'm being recommended by the IC vendors is a boundary-conduction mode flyback followed by multiple buck down-converters, but that seems a bit clumsy compared to the SEPIC and Cuk converter topologies.

On a related question, have you had any experience with tapping multiple voltages off of a tapped-inductor buck topology DC-DC converter? This project is the first time I've heard of this option, and although it sounds okay at first suggestion by the IC vendors, I'm having a bit of a hard time with my initial visualization of the concept. The regulation loop is obviously only closed on one of the output voltages, but it seems like the cross-regulation issues would be pretty significant.

Thanks for your thoughts!
 
Hi Berkeman,

It is surprising that you need PFC for something as low as 25W. As far as I know, EU mandates PFC for powers >= 70W (or was it 75W)? The other question is do you need isolation or not. If not, then use a standard Boost PFC in DCM which will be well suited for this application and then use a second stage that is a DC-DC however, it seems to be a bit cumbersome just by intuition for only 25W.

If the application is something like an LED driver you can use a PFC+isolated flyback all in one. Power Integrations, TI have many solutions and the former may even have a reference design online.

If it is not an LED driver you can also try the buck PFC stage. http://www.ti.com/tool/ucc29910aevm-730

HTH.
 
EU regulations seem to only apply under the 39th harmonic (of 50 HZ). Is it possible to go with a higher frequency?

I don't know, but it's a thought.
 
Thread 'Weird near-field phenomenon I get in my EM simulation'
I recently made a basic simulation of wire antennas and I am not sure if the near field in my simulation is modeled correctly. One of the things that worry me is the fact that sometimes I see in my simulation "movements" in the near field that seems to be faster than the speed of wave propagation I defined (the speed of light in the simulation). Specifically I see "nodes" of low amplitude in the E field that are quickly "emitted" from the antenna and then slow down as they approach the far...
Hello dear reader, a brief introduction: Some 4 years ago someone started developing health related issues, apparently due to exposure to RF & ELF related frequencies and/or fields (Magnetic). This is currently becoming known as EHS. (Electromagnetic hypersensitivity is a claimed sensitivity to electromagnetic fields, to which adverse symptoms are attributed.) She experiences a deep burning sensation throughout her entire body, leaving her in pain and exhausted after a pulse has occurred...
Back
Top