SLYT816 October   2021 TPS548B27 , TPS548B28

 

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

8 Conclusion

The Enhanced HotRod QFN package offered no noteworthy degradation of performance compared to the HotRod package under the established operating conditions. Under very close inspection, the power dissipation showed a difference of 50 mW, but only at 15-A load current. On the other hand, the Enhanced HotRod QFN package offered a 0.1-V improvement in switch-node ringing and a 1-mV improvement in load transient output voltage overshoot and undershoot, which is relatively negligible. Table 8-1 summarizes the results.

Table 8-1 Results summary
Package Enhanced HotRod QFN package HotRod QFN
Temperature at 15 A 70.3°C 70.3°C
Efficiency difference 87.2% at 15 A 87.4% at 15 A
VOUT over- and undershoot 133.9 mV 134.8 mV
Ringing 0.7 V 0.8 V

It is easy to view new packaging technologies with skepticism, since comparison results are often inconclusive, with too many variables. In this case, however, the circuit differences are minimal and the measurement results are very similar. Designing with the Enhanced HotRod QFN package is a low-risk alternative when new DC/DC converters become available using the package, and allows suppliers to address parasitic effects inside the package.

The Enhanced HotRod QFN package offers a novel approach to improving the footprint of the integrated circuit and achieving better ringing performance and has the potential to provide a more user-friendly and flexible layout compared to other existing packaging technologies.