Continue to Site

Welcome to EDAboard.com

Welcome to our site! EDAboard.com is an international Electronics Discussion Forum focused on EDA software, circuits, schematics, books, theory, papers, asic, pld, 8051, DSP, Network, RF, Analog Design, PCB, Service Manuals... and a whole lot more! To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

High failure rate of LLC converter

cupoftea

Advanced Member level 6
Advanced Member level 6
Joined
Jun 13, 2021
Messages
3,364
Helped
65
Reputation
132
Reaction score
155
Trophy points
63
Activity points
17,355
Hi,
The attached LLC LED driver was once due to be the future of offline LED Drivers.
The old Fluorescent ballasts used PFC stages followed by Soft Switched Half bridge Fluorescent
ballast Drivers using simple bootstrap high side FET drive.

The "equivalent" to that is the attached Half Bridge LLC LED driver.
(LTspice and PNG attached)

But no-one has ever done the attached for offline LED driving, in spite of it being
the obvious "equivalent" to the old fluorescent ballast driver, which incidentally, was
also soft switching.

The reason the LLC LED driver never took off was the danger of the insidious LLC topology.
The LLC converter simply suffers too many failures due to startup, re-start,
return from brownout, etc etc.

Yet never do we see these ills being mentioned in the LLC controller datasheets.

The LLC is tolerated in server farm PSU's where there are zillions of PSU's
so efficiency trumps the high failure rate of the LLC....they just make them hot-swappable so the
many failures can be swapped out quickly and harmlessly. The LLC is also tolerated in HV
PSU's where the leakage of the Txformer can be utilised, and its by far the cheapest way
to get a HV PSU, so here again LLC is tolerated there.

Most other places and the LLC is a nightmare to be avoided. Even the GaN fraternity have stayed well
shy of the LLC....which you would have thought would have been there "prodigal son", since the GaN's
lack of internal diode (well, lack of 'low voltage' internal diode) means that a parallel SiC diode can be put with it and so avoiding the
reverse recovery nightmare of the LLC......the thing is, that the LLC has more bad points than just reverse recovery...it also suffers
terribly from spurious on-coming of the opposite FET unless an expensive gate drive set-up is chosen.

And have you ever used an LLC with a large output capacitor bank?
The soft start runs out of time, and then the LLC goes into
severe overcurrent pulsation, (due to cap bank still too low voltage st startup) and the overcurrent comparator
has to cut in, causing mayhem amongst the resonant L and C.
Several reverse recovery events are often seen during this malarkey...
reducing the lifetime of the LLC FETs.

Very often there is not a tight overcurrent comparator on the LLC bridge current...
(unlike in a current mode or even voltage mode controlled hard switched topology)
this is because they are scared of a low current turn off as it may upset this
wild horse resonant stage. Not to mention...just imagine if there was a sudden
overcurrent turn off in the LLC, and then the 48%/48% gate drive would be suddenly changed
and the ringing in the gate drive transformers primary cap and magnetising current would likely see a spurious turn ON of the
top and bottom fets together...shoot-through and Ka-Boom!
So overcurrents in the LLC are unfortunately allowed to run free for a lot longer than your typical hard switched alternative....and the components
of the LLC are thus stressed and blow up in earlier life.

So we can see exactly why the old fluorescent ballast soft switched drivers never got replaced by their "equivalent" Half Bridge LLC stage when LEDs took over the lighting world!!

Page 56, 57 of the below shows some of the perils of the LLC:
...This shows that a specific processor programmed for LLC is needed, and pages 56 and 57 show the features implemented using the processor, and that these protections are not available with a plain LLC controller such as the ICE2HS01G......i would hazard a guess that these software features are not available in any of the offTheShelf Analog LLC controllers.

People follow the App notes and think they have designed an LLC with op point away from the peak that gives the onset of capacitive region operation...however, when the output is hard shorted, you end up in this capacitive region even if you limited your lower Fsw to be above the peak of the gain curve during max normal loading.....this is why all LLC controllers implement short circuit protection by latching off...there is no re-try or hiccuping......this is not made clear to the readers of those datasheets. I was in a small, relatively non-wealthy company once and a certain pair of Apps Guys came in and tried hard to flog us their LLC silicon...they said nothing of the failure modes of the LLC.....it was only 300W and customer had access to load terminals so may short them....thank goodness that company did not pick LLC...and instead picked a plain old Full Bridge...

See page 8 of ICE2HS01G datasheet to see that short cct protection is by way of "immediate latch off"....no hiccuping into an output short with an LLC.....it'll likely blow up!...

Plain old Full Bridge has far better short circuit withstand than LLC AND can hiccup ON/OFF into a hard short no problem!...The Apps guys didnt tell us this when they came to flog their LLC silicon!

I once worked for a radar company who did LLC converters simply because they had to...due to the high voltage output
that they had to provide.....and I remember the top designer telling me about a particular consignment that
was sent to a military customer...….his words were.....they will fail, usually around a year (on average) into their
service life...….he said regarding their failure, "it's not if, but when".

I also visited a HV PSU company in UK....the MD was telling me that he had come away from the LLC and
was instead preferring the "LC Series Resonant converter".....he said that this was "more bullet-proof" than the
LLC. Obviously the "LC series resonant converter" is a slightly "Tamed" version of the full blooded LLC, which
has a low Lmag value in comparison, and a lot more circulating current.

As we also know, special FETs have to be used with the LLC, as eg the coolMOS CFD series...but even then, their parameters may improve reliability, but their is no talk of them removing the failure mode completely....

So when will we start to see the true nature of the LLC being admitted in the LLC controller datasheets?
 

Attachments

  • LLC LED driver  100W.png
    LLC LED driver 100W.png
    65.8 KB · Views: 49
  • LLC LED driver.zip
    2.8 KB · Views: 32
Last edited:
Thanks.....
Another point about the LLC....is that the following tells us that if we do an LLC converter, then we need to buy
special FETs...preferably the CoolMOS CFD7 series FETs...

..as can be seen, these come at a price.
The IPB60R040CFD7 isn't a cheap FET like you can select for a plain old Two Transistor Forward or Full Bridge etc.

If you have a LLC designed for you, then hopefully there will be a LLC FET savvy engineer available who can recomend an alternative FET...because unlike a plain old Two Transistor Forward the choice of FETs is a lot more constrained and strict.

The above App Note calls for low trr and low Qrr and low Qg. However, it obviously doesn't say how low these parameters need to be
in order to keep failures below a certain level....so i guess you can "take a guess" at what your failure levels might be.

If you implement an LLC, then you immediately have stocking worries...because are sufficient FETs with suitable parameters going to
be available in the quantities in which you need them, when you need them for your production run. And if you have to choose a "lesser" FET, then what exact effect on the field failure rate will that have?

Doing a review of digikey to see how many FETs with coolMOS level parameters are available is going to take a long time....and in a few weeks time the levels of stock that you found a few weeks before may well now not be relevant.

Obselescence and stocking issues are a big enough problem as it is...without lumping oneself with another big stocking issue courtesy of the "specialised LLC FET"

___ ___ ___
And its odd because the above App Note tells that the CoolMOS CFD7 FET series is good for both LLC and PSFB......but the following (below) talks of the requirements for a PSFB FET and the requirements include things like "V/ns of the diode" and "Qgd/Qgs value less than 1.5"...none of which are even mentioned in the App Note about CoolMOS CFD7 FETs.

 
Last edited:
have you ever used an LLC with a large output capacitor bank?
No but others have
--- Updated ---

Datasheets are a marketing tool, nothing more. Just enough facts* to interest you but not enough to scare you off, that would be bad marketing.
It's also an OEM contract with the supplier/ distributor for acceptance criteria for parameters with min/max that are 100% tested limited by the legalese of replacements only and limited application scope.

Plots are nominal.
 
Last edited:
One can make turn on of the MOSFETs slower to limit the reverse recovery current (to prevent the self latching failure) or one can add an LDR Snubber to limit any reverse recovery current spikes in the MOSFETs


and also increase the gate-source capacitance to increase the ratio of Cgs\Cgd (to prevent cdV\dT turn on).

I'm sure not all LLCs in the world has special MOSFETs and probably some designs use different approaches to prevent any violations of SOA of MOSFET.


To be honest, some of your stated failures in the first post just screams flawed design rather then actual problem with the LLC.
Soft start time runs out before output capacitance charged?
design a more robust soft start and stat to the user how big of an external output capacitance it can add (or use a buck after the LLC)
Ringing due to OCP hard switch? Do a better layout and add clamping diodes of the gate x'mer.
 
Last edited:
One can make turn on of the MOSFETs slower to limit the reverse recovery current
Thanks, but this wouldnt help because the FET is "shorted" by the diode when it turns ON anyway. And even in that "nice" situation the rev rec faults can occur.

Page 56, 57 of the below shows some of the perils of the LLC:
https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/Infin...N.pdf?fileId=5546d46253f6505701544cc1d15c20d7

..if one is doing LLC, and has not implemented those protection measures on pages 56, 57, then the failure rate can be high.

or one can add an LDR Snubber to limit any reverse recovery current spikes in the MOSFETs
Thanks, the problem with LDR snubbers is that they slow up the slewing of the VDS across the FET down to zero volts just prior to switch on....meaning too long dead time is needed
 
Thanks, but this wouldnt help because the FET is "shorted" by the diode when it turns ON anyway. And even in that "nice" situation the rev rec faults can occur.

Page 56, 57 of the below shows some of the perils of the LLC:
https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/Infin...N.pdf?fileId=5546d46253f6505701544cc1d15c20d7

..if one is doing LLC, and has not implemented those protection measures on pages 56, 57, then the failure rate can be high.

Top mosfet diode conducts --> *bottom* mosfet turn on but slowly --> lower reverse recovery current
 
Ringing due to OCP hard switch? Do a better layout and add clamping diodes of the gate x'mer.
Thanks but i was speaking about the ringing that happens in gate rive transformers when there is sudden duty cycle change.....it cannot be corrected in anyway.......if a sudden duty cycle change occurs then it rings...the ringing is between the series capacitor and the Lmag of the gate drive transformer, so it cant be damped out either.
Top mosfet diode conducts --> *bottom* mosfet turn on but slowly --> lower reverse recovery current
Thanks, but the lower mosfet is already shorted when the lower mosfet gets turned ON.....the vds voltage slews down when the top fet turns off.....and the lower fet has -0.7v across it........so the top fet's diode already has a big voltage applied to it...turning the lower fet on doesnt apply any more voltage to the top fet's diode in that instance.
--- Updated ---

There is only one occasion where it helps to slow up the turn on of a LLC FET.. and that is described in bottom pf page 12 of this..
 
Last edited:
No but others have
--- Updated ---


It's also an OEM contract with the supplier/ distributor for acceptance criteria for parameters with min/max that are 100% tested limited by the legalese of replacements only and limited application scope.

Plots are nominal.

No, a datasheet is not a contract.

You will find fine print that says so. You will not find a signature from either party. You may or may not find GNT or "char only" line items. So no, not "100%" either.

Other than that ....
 
I'm sure not all LLCs in the world has special MOSFETs
Thanks you are right..and often they fail regular and the customer just keeps buying more because the customer is making money anyway.
___ ___ ___
The following article further discusses the LLC dreaded failure modes....
..they recommend use of the "FRFET" to reduce LLC failures.
Sounds great but findchips.com shows the total world stock of this part to add up to just 19000 pieces at the moment...so best hope nobody else orders them for a big production run when you need them...

From reading AN9067 above, it does indeed appear that if there is any chance of output short circuit...simply avoid the LLC.
___ ___ ___
And for those thinking of escaping the LLC failure modes by migrating to the PSFB.....stand by!..
The PSFB also suffers the same kind of failure modes....

..as seen, and as confessed on page 9's conclusion, even FETs with low trr diodes aren't good enough to rescue
the PSFB.....relatively high value capacitors across the Vds of the Power FETs of the PSFB are needed to prevent
the high dv/dt induced breakdown......then you come to the biq question...what value of capacitor is needed to prevent
such breakdown or reduce it to "acceptable" levels?......well.
___ ___ ___ ___

...Its enough to make you want to just scrap the LLC and PSFB altogether...just use as many paralleled Two Tran forwards or Full Bridges as it takes.........so very often, size does not matter for multi kilowatt power supplies anyway..........having been on many welding shop floors there is often loads of space....no need to have the smallest converter ever.
 
Last edited:
No, a datasheet is not a contract.

You will find fine print that says so. You will not find a signature from either party. You may or may not find GNT or "char only" line items. So no, not "100%" either.

Other than that ....
Acceptance of a PO is the agreement to a contract to deliver parts according to the Mfg name, PN and inferred specs in the datasheet.

Industry practice is to treat the inferred datasheet as specifications of the contract with RMA's as one of the tools to handle documented discrepancies.

The front page may be a marketing strategy while the details with test conditions define the deliverable spec limits when a PO contract is made.
 
So we ask when a government grant might be awarded for someone to make a 3kW electro plating PSU with say six paralelled Two Transistor Forwards?
Probably never...though this is the sort of thing needed to cut industry PSU failure rates.

There is now an alternative to the PSFB.....the "Phase shift Half Bridge"....literally a half bridge with no output inductor but just a pretty large leakage inductance.....its switched 48%/48% and so the bottom fets diode starts conducting just before it gets switched on......it suffers all the same ailments as the PSFB of course...but has two less FETs..........seen in many industrial converters from 800-3kW.....inputs from 6 pulse 3 phase rect to single phase 240VAC. The PSHB gets a look-in because the failure rate of the PSFB is no great shakes anyway.
 
Supposing you are a silicon vendor and you want to sell loads of your LLC and Phase Shift Full Bridge (PSFB) control chips.
What would be the best advertisement for selling them?
Of course, it would be to point out a well known brand of power supplys in the market place, that have high sales volumes, high efficiency, and a known
low field failure rate.
But note that no silicon vendor points out any such example of an in-the-field power supply as being an example of the brilliance of power supplies
controlled by its control chips. (ie LLC and PSFB control chips)
This is most likely because of the relatively poor field failure rate of the LLC and PSFB. The silicon vendors do not have any examples of low_field_failure rate
LLC and PSFB power supplies controlled by its controllers....if they did, then they would be screaming about this from the rooftops.

I worked for a Guitar Amp company and we had some well known silicon company guys come to us and desperately try and flog us their LLC controllers......though LLC would have been a totally unsuitable power supply for us, since average power is incredibly low even for high power amplifiers.
Also, when you have a dirty great speaker cab and an amplifier which nobody wants small otherwise they trip over it on stage, (or tread on it) then making the smallest possible power supply just isnt important.

All the guitarist cares about is the sound of the guitar.

Take the 600W Fanless Prime Titanium Seasonic Power Supply.
No figures on failure rate....wonder why...(it looks like it might be a PSFB from the youtube videos of people repairing it?)

600W Fanless Prime Titanium Seasonic Power Supply
 

LaTeX Commands Quick-Menu:

Similar threads

Part and Inventory Search

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top