We are using TPS54302 and TPS562208. I haven't been able to get their Pspice models to work in LT Spice. They throw goofy errors, or run but at fs speeds and make no useful progress. TI apparently has their own sim, Cadence maybe, that might run these parts. Does anyone know how to do that, run the TI models with the TI software? Or to get the Pspice models to run usefully in LT Spice? We have a few situations I'd like to check for load step response and maybe feedforward compensation in the feedback divider. We could pay a consultant to help, to save us breadboarding time.
simulating TI switchers
Started by ●October 20, 2022
Reply by ●October 20, 20222022-10-20
On 21-10-2022 01:28, John Larkin wrote:> > > We are using TPS54302 and TPS562208. I haven't been able to get their > Pspice models to work in LT Spice. They throw goofy errors, or run but > at fs speeds and make no useful progress. > > TI apparently has their own sim, Cadence maybe, that might run these > parts. > > Does anyone know how to do that, run the TI models with the TI > software? Or to get the Pspice models to run usefully in LT Spice? > > We have a few situations I'd like to check for load step response and > maybe feedforward compensation in the feedback divider. We could pay a > consultant to help, to save us breadboarding time. > >You can download "Pspice for TI". It is fully functional, only that is allows only TI models
Reply by ●October 20, 20222022-10-20
On 21-10-2022 01:34, Klaus Vestergaard Kragelund wrote:> On 21-10-2022 01:28, John Larkin wrote: >> >> >> We are using TPS54302 and TPS562208. I haven't been able to get their >> Pspice models to work in LT Spice. They throw goofy errors, or run but >> at fs speeds and make no useful progress. >> >> TI apparently has their own sim, Cadence maybe, that might run these >> parts. >> >> Does anyone know how to do that, run the TI models with the TI >> software? Or to get the Pspice models to run usefully in LT Spice? >> >> We have a few situations I'd like to check for load step response and >> maybe feedforward compensation in the feedback divider. We could pay a >> consultant to help, to save us breadboarding time. >> > You can download "Pspice for TI". It is fully functional, only that is > allows only TI modelshttps://www.ti.com/tool/PSPICE-FOR-TI
Reply by ●October 21, 20222022-10-21
On Fri, 21 Oct 2022 01:35:12 +0200, Klaus Vestergaard Kragelund <klauskvik@hotmail.com> wrote:>On 21-10-2022 01:34, Klaus Vestergaard Kragelund wrote: >> On 21-10-2022 01:28, John Larkin wrote: >>> >>> >>> We are using TPS54302 and TPS562208. I haven't been able to get their >>> Pspice models to work in LT Spice. They throw goofy errors, or run but >>> at fs speeds and make no useful progress. >>> >>> TI apparently has their own sim, Cadence maybe, that might run these >>> parts. >>> >>> Does anyone know how to do that, run the TI models with the TI >>> software? Or to get the Pspice models to run usefully in LT Spice? >>> >>> We have a few situations I'd like to check for load step response and >>> maybe feedforward compensation in the feedback divider. We could pay a >>> consultant to help, to save us breadboarding time. >>> >> You can download "Pspice for TI". It is fully functional, only that is >> allows only TI models >https://www.ti.com/tool/PSPICE-FOR-TIYikes, another password login, install, learning curve. I'll assign a junior engineer to try all that. One virtue of LT Spice is that it's an open download, free, unlicensed, non-brain damaged. https://www.dropbox.com/s/qpidqsm9f8oxfvm/A4_green_pub19.jpg?raw=1 All that needs to be tuned. Thanks
Reply by ●October 21, 20222022-10-21
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 7:28:14 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:> We are using TPS54302 and TPS562208. I haven't been able to get their > Pspice models to work in LT Spice. They throw goofy errors, or run but > at fs speeds and make no useful progress. > > TI apparently has their own sim, Cadence maybe, that might run these > parts. > > Does anyone know how to do that, run the TI models with the TI > software? Or to get the Pspice models to run usefully in LT Spice? > > We have a few situations I'd like to check for load step response and > maybe feedforward compensation in the feedback divider. We could pay a > consultant to help, to save us breadboarding time.They used to use TINA.
Reply by ●October 21, 20222022-10-21
On Fri, 21 Oct 2022 08:38:59 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs <bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:>On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 7:28:14 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote: >> We are using TPS54302 and TPS562208. I haven't been able to get their >> Pspice models to work in LT Spice. They throw goofy errors, or run but >> at fs speeds and make no useful progress. >> >> TI apparently has their own sim, Cadence maybe, that might run these >> parts. >> >> Does anyone know how to do that, run the TI models with the TI >> software? Or to get the Pspice models to run usefully in LT Spice? >> >> We have a few situations I'd like to check for load step response and >> maybe feedforward compensation in the feedback divider. We could pay a >> consultant to help, to save us breadboarding time. > >They used to use TINA.That's being phased out. One of my guys installed their (brain-damaged) version of Pspice and it looks like it will work to sim our weird switchers. Of course my secondary switchers present a negative impedance load to the first one, so we'll have to sim all four together. Even funner.
Reply by ●October 21, 20222022-10-21
On Fri, 21 Oct 2022 12:02:17 -0700, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:>On Fri, 21 Oct 2022 08:38:59 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs ><bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote: > >>On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 7:28:14 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote: >>> We are using TPS54302 and TPS562208. I haven't been able to get their >>> Pspice models to work in LT Spice. They throw goofy errors, or run but >>> at fs speeds and make no useful progress. >>> >>> TI apparently has their own sim, Cadence maybe, that might run these >>> parts. >>> >>> Does anyone know how to do that, run the TI models with the TI >>> software? Or to get the Pspice models to run usefully in LT Spice? >>> >>> We have a few situations I'd like to check for load step response and >>> maybe feedforward compensation in the feedback divider. We could pay a >>> consultant to help, to save us breadboarding time. >> >>They used to use TINA. > >That's being phased out. > >One of my guys installed their (brain-damaged) version of Pspice and >it looks like it will work to sim our weird switchers. Of course my >secondary switchers present a negative impedance load to the first >one, so we'll have to sim all four together. Even funner. > >A single switcher runs at about a minute per millisecond. Four together will run a couple of useful sims per day, if that.
Reply by ●October 23, 20222022-10-23
John Larkin wrote:> On Fri, 21 Oct 2022 12:02:17 -0700, John Larkin > <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote: > >> On Fri, 21 Oct 2022 08:38:59 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs >> <bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 7:28:14 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote: >>>> We are using TPS54302 and TPS562208. I haven't been able to get their >>>> Pspice models to work in LT Spice. They throw goofy errors, or run but >>>> at fs speeds and make no useful progress. >>>> >>>> TI apparently has their own sim, Cadence maybe, that might run these >>>> parts. >>>> >>>> Does anyone know how to do that, run the TI models with the TI >>>> software? Or to get the Pspice models to run usefully in LT Spice? >>>> >>>> We have a few situations I'd like to check for load step response and >>>> maybe feedforward compensation in the feedback divider. We could pay a >>>> consultant to help, to save us breadboarding time. >>> >>> They used to use TINA. >> >> That's being phased out. >> >> One of my guys installed their (brain-damaged) version of Pspice and >> it looks like it will work to sim our weird switchers. Of course my >> secondary switchers present a negative impedance load to the first >> one, so we'll have to sim all four together. Even funner. >> >> > > A single switcher runs at about a minute per millisecond. Four > together will run a couple of useful sims per day, if that. >Aren't there any eval boards? Cheers Phil Hobbs -- Dr Philip C D Hobbs Principal Consultant ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 http://electrooptical.net http://hobbs-eo.com
Reply by ●October 24, 20222022-10-24
On Sun, 23 Oct 2022 18:21:37 -0400, Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:>John Larkin wrote: >> On Fri, 21 Oct 2022 12:02:17 -0700, John Larkin >> <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 21 Oct 2022 08:38:59 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs >>> <bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 7:28:14 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote: >>>>> We are using TPS54302 and TPS562208. I haven't been able to get their >>>>> Pspice models to work in LT Spice. They throw goofy errors, or run but >>>>> at fs speeds and make no useful progress. >>>>> >>>>> TI apparently has their own sim, Cadence maybe, that might run these >>>>> parts. >>>>> >>>>> Does anyone know how to do that, run the TI models with the TI >>>>> software? Or to get the Pspice models to run usefully in LT Spice? >>>>> >>>>> We have a few situations I'd like to check for load step response and >>>>> maybe feedforward compensation in the feedback divider. We could pay a >>>>> consultant to help, to save us breadboarding time. >>>> >>>> They used to use TINA. >>> >>> That's being phased out. >>> >>> One of my guys installed their (brain-damaged) version of Pspice and >>> it looks like it will work to sim our weird switchers. Of course my >>> secondary switchers present a negative impedance load to the first >>> one, so we'll have to sim all four together. Even funner. >>> >>> >> >> A single switcher runs at about a minute per millisecond. Four >> together will run a couple of useful sims per day, if that. >> > >Aren't there any eval boards? > >Cheers > >Phil HobbsWe have a couple. What I want to do is test my primary switcher, 12 or 24 volts down to +5, and then the three secondary switchers to 3.3, 1.8, and 1.0. The secondaries will present a negative load impedance to the primary, and we'll have a mess of bypass caps and ferrite beads everywhere. I really want to sim all that, but we'll breadboard if we have to. It's about worth a proto board PCB layout. Eval boards are messy, every possible jumper option.
Reply by ●October 24, 20222022-10-24
mandag den 24. oktober 2022 kl. 21.41.25 UTC+2 skrev John Larkin:> On Sun, 23 Oct 2022 18:21:37 -0400, Phil Hobbs > <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote: > > >John Larkin wrote: > >> On Fri, 21 Oct 2022 12:02:17 -0700, John Larkin > >> <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote: > >> > >>> On Fri, 21 Oct 2022 08:38:59 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs > >>> <bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 7:28:14 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote: > >>>>> We are using TPS54302 and TPS562208. I haven't been able to get their > >>>>> Pspice models to work in LT Spice. They throw goofy errors, or run but > >>>>> at fs speeds and make no useful progress. > >>>>> > >>>>> TI apparently has their own sim, Cadence maybe, that might run these > >>>>> parts. > >>>>> > >>>>> Does anyone know how to do that, run the TI models with the TI > >>>>> software? Or to get the Pspice models to run usefully in LT Spice? > >>>>> > >>>>> We have a few situations I'd like to check for load step response and > >>>>> maybe feedforward compensation in the feedback divider. We could pay a > >>>>> consultant to help, to save us breadboarding time. > >>>> > >>>> They used to use TINA. > >>> > >>> That's being phased out. > >>> > >>> One of my guys installed their (brain-damaged) version of Pspice and > >>> it looks like it will work to sim our weird switchers. Of course my > >>> secondary switchers present a negative impedance load to the first > >>> one, so we'll have to sim all four together. Even funner. > >>> > >>> > >> > >> A single switcher runs at about a minute per millisecond. Four > >> together will run a couple of useful sims per day, if that. > >> > > > >Aren't there any eval boards? > > > >Cheers > > > >Phil Hobbs > We have a couple. What I want to do is test my primary switcher, 12 or > 24 volts down to +5, and then the three secondary switchers to 3.3, > 1.8, and 1.0. The secondaries will present a negative load impedance > to the primary, and we'll have a mess of bypass caps and ferrite beads > everywhere. > > I really want to sim all that, but we'll breadboard if we have to. > It's about worth a proto board PCB layout. Eval boards are messy, > every possible jumper option.JLPCB has both in stock for assembly, so you could probably get 5 board with parts and assembly for $50 in a week
