4
\$\begingroup\$

I read application report from Texas Instruments:
Practical Feedback Loop Design Considerations for Flyback Converter Using UCC28740 (SLUAA66)

There is a schematic (Figure 4. Optocoupler Frequency Response Analysis Test Circuit) on page 3.
And transfer function is on page 4.

enter image description here

I'm trying to figure out how to get that transfer function.
I know that \$ I_c(s) = CTR * I_d(s) \$ and calculated \$ V_{out}(s) = \frac{R_{pullup}}{(R_{pullup} s C_{opto}+1)} I_c(s) \$
so \$ V_{out}(s) = CTR \frac{R_{pullup}}{(R_{pullup} s C_{opto}+1)} I_d(s) \$
where
\$ I_d(s) \$ - current through diode of optocoupler
\$ I_c(s) \$ - current through transistor/collector of optocoupler

but now I do not know how to continue, how to calculate \$ I_d(s) \$ and so how to get to complete transfer function.

My idea was:
\$ I_1(s) \$ - current through R1 + C1
\$ I_2(s) \$ - current through R2
\$ V_d(s) \$ - voltage of node at the diode anode
V2 is shorted to ground

\$ I_d(s) = I_1(s) - I_2(s) \$
\$ I_1(s) = \frac{V_{in}(s) - V_d(s)}{ R1 + \frac{1}{s C1}} \$
\$ I_2(s) = \frac{V_{d}(s)}{ R2} \$

There is something I am missing. How to continue?

\$\endgroup\$
4
  • \$\begingroup\$ I recommend you have a look at the seminar I taught in 2009, entirely dedicated to loop control with the TL431. I like when TI reproduces figures without referencing original publications (see their figure 4 and slide 20 of my PPT). You have the calculation details in the seminar. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 15 at 15:57
  • \$\begingroup\$ In the figure, the current in \$R_2\$ is dc only (for bias purposes) and is not part of the ac equation. Same for \$C_1\$, it is just a dc-blocking element considered as a short circuit for high frequencies. The only resistance to consider for the ac analysis is \$R_1\$ and, to be more accurate, the LED dynamic resistance \$r_d\$. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 15 at 16:12
  • \$\begingroup\$ @VerbalKint I understand R2 is there for biasing. But I would assume that it influences ac signal too (just intuition). When you look at the transfer function in TI's document (page 4, equation 1), R2 is there. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 15 at 19:37
  • \$\begingroup\$ \$R_2\$ has no influence on the pole position which is extracted by the circuit I proposed. \$R_2\$ should be chosen to be sufficiently large compared to \$R_1\$, what the author did not follow. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 15 at 21:04

1 Answer 1

3
\$\begingroup\$

As explained in the comment section, the entire transfer function of the circuit shown in Figure 4 - which is, by the way, a figure I drawn in my seminar from 2009, slide 20 - is irrelevant for the loop stability exercise. What you want to extract is the high-frequency pole from which you infer the collector-emitter parasitic capacitance of the optocoupler. But I understand you want to look at the transfer function yourself and, for the sake of the exercise, I will apply the fast analytical circuits techniques or FACTs as described in my last book on the subject.

In this circuit, the stimulus is the input voltage and the first response is the LED current. Then, this current is brought to the collector via the current transfer ratio (CTR) and the pull-up resistance: the response is the output voltage \$V_{out}\$, observed at the collector. Since capacitor \$C_1\$ blocks the dc component, the 0-Hz gain is zero and we can study the circuit for \$s\$ approaching infinity instead. This gives us a high-frequency gain. Then, we can determine the time constant of this circuit by zeroing the input source and determining the resistance "seen" from the capacitor's connecting terminals:

enter image description here

With these elements in hand, the output voltage is simply the LED current scaled by CTR and \$R_{pullup}\$ with a pole implying \$R_{pullup}\$ and the parasitic capacitance (or the combination including the 1.3-nF capacitor):

enter image description here

If the LED dynamic resistance \$r_d\$ is small enough, the mid-band gain simplifies to \$CTR\frac{R_{pullup}}{R_1}\$.

\$\endgroup\$
4
  • \$\begingroup\$ Do you know how the author of this document derives the transfer function? He assumed rd = 0? \$\endgroup\$
    – G36
    Commented Jun 17 at 14:35
  • \$\begingroup\$ No idea but his equations are all but low-entropy with \$s\$ alone in the numerator. Assuming \$r_d=0\$ is a possibility but does not reflect the reality. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 17 at 16:19
  • \$\begingroup\$ Very interesting. Your calculations look easy, while the transfer function in that TI's document looks not right. It makes sense that influence of \$ R_2 \$ is negligible because \$ r_d \$ has much lower value. While transfer function in TI's document has \$ R_2 \$ in numerator and \$ (R_1+R_2) \$ in denominator so it seems that \$ R_2 \$ has significant role. Thank you for very fine explanation. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 18 at 19:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ That is the problem with the raw or brute-force transfer functions which are not correctly formatted. Yes, once you've tasted the FACTs, there is no going back! : ) \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 18 at 20:05

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.