SLYT816 October   2021 TPS548B27 , TPS548B28

 

  1. Introduction
  2. Design considerations
  3. Layout comparison
  4. Thermal comparison
  5. Efficiency comparison
  6. Load transient comparison
  7. Switch-node ringing comparison
  8. Conclusion
  9. Additional Resources
  10. 10Important Notice

Load transient comparison

A load transient test was performed with a 0% to 60% load step at a 20-A full-load condition, or 0 A to 12 A and then 12 A to 0 A. The rising load step had an 8-A/μs slew rate. When comparing the transient response waveforms shown in Figure 6-1 and Figure 6-2, the Enhanced HotRod QFN package design was very similar to the HotRod package design, with only a 1-mV difference between the total output voltage overshoot and undershoot, because of the load transient. The Enhanced HotRod QFN design offered a hardly noticeable, but very slight improvement of load transient performance compared to the HotRod package. Table 6-1 shows the results.

Table 6-1 Load transient conditions and results
Package VIN VOUT FSW Load step Slew Rate Vpeak-peak
Enhanced HotRod QFN package 12 V 1 V 600 kHz 0 A to 12 A 8 A/μs 133.9 mV
HotRod package 134.8 mV
GUID-20210908-SS0I-GPDW-J9LT-7QFQCJH0RDK9-low.jpg Figure 6-1 Enhanced HodRod QFN package transient response
GUID-20210908-SS0I-W3BL-RCJV-NDFVN1ZC7WGS-low.jpg Figure 6-2 HotRod package transient response