cupoftea
Advanced Member level 5

Hi,
Would you agree, BCM PFC can more readily be done with faster transient response for 300W PFC over 100-265VAC.
I mean, say you wanted to have lower voltage rise following full-to-no-load transient...then you would pick BCM, would you agree?
The AvCM has an error amp on the current aswell as the voltage...so its going to be slower.
Also, as is known, AvCM PFC needs a V^2 term to be put in the multiplier, otherwise at low line, the transient response is very slow....BCM does not suffer this.
So BCM is for when you want to limit that upper rise on vout, following full-to-no-load transient...would you concur?
Besides, its a general rule that when you have a bigger swing in inductor current, you can more easily get a faster transient response......may you nod in agreement?
Would you agree, BCM PFC can more readily be done with faster transient response for 300W PFC over 100-265VAC.
I mean, say you wanted to have lower voltage rise following full-to-no-load transient...then you would pick BCM, would you agree?
The AvCM has an error amp on the current aswell as the voltage...so its going to be slower.
Also, as is known, AvCM PFC needs a V^2 term to be put in the multiplier, otherwise at low line, the transient response is very slow....BCM does not suffer this.
So BCM is for when you want to limit that upper rise on vout, following full-to-no-load transient...would you concur?
Besides, its a general rule that when you have a bigger swing in inductor current, you can more easily get a faster transient response......may you nod in agreement?