4
\$\begingroup\$

In previous question TL494 step-down converter high voltage LTSpice

I have established that hacking around LTspice isn't going to work since in the end, schematic must be proper. However I was never able to get it to work either because simulations is extremely slow or I get error I am not able to fix:

enter image description here

Now I have added all the missing pieces ie bootstrap circuit and proper connection to driver. Is this even possible to run thru LTspice?

Here is the new model: https://hastebin.skyra.pw/coziqeharo.sql

EDIT:

I was able to get it somewhat far: enter image description here

But now I get the error of too small time step.

\$\endgroup\$
5
  • \$\begingroup\$ Hi there, those errors posted as a picture, if you would be kind and add them as text instead, formatted as code? Thank you. \$\endgroup\$
    – MiNiMe
    Commented Nov 3, 2023 at 20:32
  • \$\begingroup\$ Can you force LTspice to put node numbers onto the nodes in the schematic? Also, I can see 6 nodes that are not connected in the schematic. Displaying pin numbers would also be very useful. \$\endgroup\$
    – Andy aka
    Commented Nov 3, 2023 at 20:35
  • \$\begingroup\$ Can you show a better list of the errors? \$\endgroup\$
    – Voltage Spike
    Commented Nov 4, 2023 at 5:50
  • \$\begingroup\$ Tweaking TRTOL, VNTOL, CHGTOL, RELTOL and setting different integration methods usually address stability issues. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Nov 4, 2023 at 6:15
  • \$\begingroup\$ The file at the link has problems, I get this error when I opened it with LTspice: Couldn't find symbols: TL494 IRS21271 TL431 BSS126 \$\endgroup\$ Commented Nov 4, 2023 at 6:15

2 Answers 2

3
\$\begingroup\$

I suggest replacing the MOSFET with an ideal switch (voltage-controlled switch). This simplifies the simulation and avoids the need for an accurate MOSFET model. This also allows you to remove the boot-strapped gate driver, further simplifying the circuit and increasing the chances of the simulator "working as expected".

After the circuit simulates well (ie: the simulator runs to completion with no errors, and is sufficiently fast) then proceed to investigate overall stability, and ensure the circuit is well-behaved on start-up and fault conditions.

After that is done, replace the switch with the real-world MOSFET you plan to use, but only after confirming that the MOSFET model is accurate, and of course, restore its boot-strapped gate driver.

Simulation is a game of stacking the odds in your favour: keep things simple to start with, use "ideal" components wherever possible, and gain an understanding of what effect the imperfections of "real-world components" have on circuit behaviour. Improving how well the simulated circuit matches the real world should be done slowly, carefully, and methodically.

And always ask "What am I trying to learn from this simulation?" For example, are you trying to determine how sensitive the start-up behaviour is to the type of MOSFET used, perhaps to a particular MOSFET parameter such as the drain-to-gate capacitance? Or are you more concerned with how the inductance of L1 changes with the current it carries, which may affect the stability of the control loop?

\$\endgroup\$
3
  • \$\begingroup\$ I replaced mosfet with ideal switch, .Model SW SW(Ron=0.1m Vt=0 Vh=-.5 Lser=0 Vser=0) and it sure did fix occasional "timestep too small errors" but it did not fix the overall slowness of model. The answer i was trying to get out of this is how bad the output will be, and sure its terrible: i.imgur.com/XgdOhKC.png \$\endgroup\$
    – Kaminari
    Commented Nov 5, 2023 at 8:27
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Kaminari How did you manage to post a screenshot to this comment section? Suggest check setting of Vt=0, unless the gate drive to the switch is +1 and -1, then may need to change this to 0.5V. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Nov 5, 2023 at 8:33
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I am going to accept this answer as it was the closest to actually doing something, i am still not sure how to make this foolproof but at least its pretty fast now regardless of circuit \$\endgroup\$
    – Kaminari
    Commented Nov 12, 2023 at 7:57
5
\$\begingroup\$

You have floating nodes (that are not connected to anything) connect all nodes. For nodes that are not connected use a 1e9Ω resistor or other large value to simulate air.

Edit:
For convergence problems try this:

https://ltwiki.org/index.php?title=Convergence_problems%3F

Also make sure you make the sim as real world as possible, put in parasitics for all capacitors and inductors involved in the control loop or power components. Put in series resistance in inductors

\$\endgroup\$
5
  • \$\begingroup\$ This unfortunately makes zero difference in this case, tried it. Tried pulling them with big resistor or directly to ground. \$\endgroup\$
    – Kaminari
    Commented Nov 4, 2023 at 1:16
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Kaminari May I suggest trying the various suggestions outlined in the excellent link provided by Voltage Spike. For example: 1. Increase Gmin by 2, 3, or 4 orders of magnitude, ie: default is 1e-012, change this to, say, 1e-10. || 2. Increase cshunt from default (0) to, say, 1e-12. If the sim runs OK, then gradually return these to default values to see the effect - often these changes have little to no effect on the sim results (waveforms) but speed up simulation time considerably. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Nov 4, 2023 at 6:14
  • \$\begingroup\$ While adding some "real world" small series ESR and small Gmin helps indeed, in my experience, adding both ESL and stray capacitance ubiquitously can also have adverse effects on convergence and performance because you get many nodes that could ring at extremely high frequencies. \$\endgroup\$
    – tobalt
    Commented Nov 4, 2023 at 7:09
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Kaminari I agree with Fabio except probably the first thing to try when working with 3rd party subcircuits is the .options cshunt=1p command. Then proceed to try the rest of the tips. \$\endgroup\$
    – Ste Kulov
    Commented Nov 5, 2023 at 0:06
  • \$\begingroup\$ ok so i did this, .options gmin=1e-10, .options cshunt=1p and simulation got considerably faster \$\endgroup\$
    – Kaminari
    Commented Nov 5, 2023 at 8:23

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.