Page Comparison

Status

Contributors

Aleena Khatum Erika Feller Isaac Neideffer

Approver

[Not Completed]

Due date

--

On this page

• Previous Design

• Timeline

• Decision 1

• Engineering Diary

Overview

Design already implemented, and tested so kinks are worked out. Only capable of boosting, and has a generally lower efficiency than other two options.

Capable of boosting or bucking, very standard circuit layout that wouldn’t take too much messing around to make work. Generally higher efficiency and smaller passive components than boost converter.

Can implement ZVS or “soft switching” which is intended to reduce or eliminate switching losses. Probably most efficient design, but only has this efficiency at relatively small input voltage ranges in basic designs. There are slightly more complex versions that can handle large ranges of voltage inputs and maintain efficiency. Dr. Hanson has a really good paper over this which pretty much tells you how to design one of these.

Visual

Pros and Cons

• Simple Design

• Already made and tested so no changes needed other than flyback concerns

• Least efficient option

• Simple Design

• Very well known design and component requirements

• Efficient

• Can boost and buck

• Needs to be designed and tested from scratch

• Slightly more complex design

• Most efficient option

• Can boost and buck

• More difficult to design and implement

• Dr. Hanson has a paper telling us how to make one that works for our purposes, he could be a valuable resource