Yes and the classic 1 cap with an IGBT would be 3x heat riseha ha, 8 gate driver ckts, 6 needing isolaiton, required on the flying cap version, versus 1 gnd referenced on the classic booster.
I must be honest i can't really see the benefit of doing that, most bridge rectifiers are relatively slow which means you'd probably end up building the bridges through discrete parts to get faster diodes. With that you now require 3 more diodes than a standard Boost all of which could cause EMI issues and therefore most likely all require damping networks etc.... Now factor in the Vf of the diodes has now been doubled due to 2 diodes in the output the losses go up which causes heat issues. Looks like a can of worms to me, will be interesting to see what the others think.Hi, this is what i am talking about. I know designing with other topology and using GaN, SiC. However, we need to choose cheaper way to do it.
View attachment 171917
you’ll have to weigh up the pros and cons of the various options. More parts may not necessarily be more cost with all things considered. Interleaving will add more parts but they could be lower spec and you’ll get higher volumes which will help in bulk buying. Also the filtering requirements will be less which will bring these costs down. You may be able to do it in your micro assuming youhave the bandwidth.Hi, PFC will probably be controlled by MCU but i will take a look analog PFC controllers as you said.
I have seen a PFC app note from TI and they were using single CCM boost PFC for 3.5kW. However, they used 2 mosfet and 2 output diode for current handling in that app note.
MCU will be already used for Inverter. Therefore, using analog controller may add additional cost up.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?