What might this term (N sub C) be, calculating ripple current for a buck converter output capacitor?












1














I'm reading through the datasheet for TI's TPS54302 step-down converter, and determining values for support components.



There is a calculation to determine ripple current for the output capacitor which is:



$$
I_{COUT(RMS)} = frac{1}{sqrt12} times left(
frac{V_{OUT}times(V_{IN(MAX)}-V_{OUT})}
{V_{IN(MAX)} times L_{OUT} times f_{SW} times N_C} right)
$$

(Where $L_{OUT}$ is the inductor value (H), $f_{SW}$ is the switching frequency (Hz).)



I'm not sure what the term $N_C$ is meant to be.



Looking around online, other formulas omit this. For example, in this document by Rohm titled Capacitor Calculation for Buck Converter IC, page 4 has the formula:



$$
I_{CO} = frac{1}{sqrt12} times left(
frac{V_{OUT}(V_{IN(MAX)}-V_{OUT})}
{L times f_{SW} times V_{IN(MAX)}} right)
$$



Either I am ignorant of what $N_C$ is in this context (the datasheet doesn't clarify); the term is optional depending on application; or TI has a mistake in the datasheet.



What is $N_C$ in this case?










share|improve this question






















  • "For this application, Equation 15 yields 296 mA for each capacitor." doh
    – Sunnyskyguy EE75
    1 hour ago












  • @SunnyskyguyEE75 It seems plainly obvious now after ThePhoton's answer!
    – JYelton
    1 hour ago










  • It is more obvious from the last sentence in spec before the formula. (5) "each capacitor"
    – Sunnyskyguy EE75
    1 hour ago












  • @SunnyskyguyEE75 Yeah, I didn't pick up on that. I kept looking for 'N' to be defined somewhere. Sometimes you just have to stop and ask for directions!
    – JYelton
    59 mins ago










  • I know. Have a good trip. ;)
    – Sunnyskyguy EE75
    36 mins ago
















1














I'm reading through the datasheet for TI's TPS54302 step-down converter, and determining values for support components.



There is a calculation to determine ripple current for the output capacitor which is:



$$
I_{COUT(RMS)} = frac{1}{sqrt12} times left(
frac{V_{OUT}times(V_{IN(MAX)}-V_{OUT})}
{V_{IN(MAX)} times L_{OUT} times f_{SW} times N_C} right)
$$

(Where $L_{OUT}$ is the inductor value (H), $f_{SW}$ is the switching frequency (Hz).)



I'm not sure what the term $N_C$ is meant to be.



Looking around online, other formulas omit this. For example, in this document by Rohm titled Capacitor Calculation for Buck Converter IC, page 4 has the formula:



$$
I_{CO} = frac{1}{sqrt12} times left(
frac{V_{OUT}(V_{IN(MAX)}-V_{OUT})}
{L times f_{SW} times V_{IN(MAX)}} right)
$$



Either I am ignorant of what $N_C$ is in this context (the datasheet doesn't clarify); the term is optional depending on application; or TI has a mistake in the datasheet.



What is $N_C$ in this case?










share|improve this question






















  • "For this application, Equation 15 yields 296 mA for each capacitor." doh
    – Sunnyskyguy EE75
    1 hour ago












  • @SunnyskyguyEE75 It seems plainly obvious now after ThePhoton's answer!
    – JYelton
    1 hour ago










  • It is more obvious from the last sentence in spec before the formula. (5) "each capacitor"
    – Sunnyskyguy EE75
    1 hour ago












  • @SunnyskyguyEE75 Yeah, I didn't pick up on that. I kept looking for 'N' to be defined somewhere. Sometimes you just have to stop and ask for directions!
    – JYelton
    59 mins ago










  • I know. Have a good trip. ;)
    – Sunnyskyguy EE75
    36 mins ago














1












1








1







I'm reading through the datasheet for TI's TPS54302 step-down converter, and determining values for support components.



There is a calculation to determine ripple current for the output capacitor which is:



$$
I_{COUT(RMS)} = frac{1}{sqrt12} times left(
frac{V_{OUT}times(V_{IN(MAX)}-V_{OUT})}
{V_{IN(MAX)} times L_{OUT} times f_{SW} times N_C} right)
$$

(Where $L_{OUT}$ is the inductor value (H), $f_{SW}$ is the switching frequency (Hz).)



I'm not sure what the term $N_C$ is meant to be.



Looking around online, other formulas omit this. For example, in this document by Rohm titled Capacitor Calculation for Buck Converter IC, page 4 has the formula:



$$
I_{CO} = frac{1}{sqrt12} times left(
frac{V_{OUT}(V_{IN(MAX)}-V_{OUT})}
{L times f_{SW} times V_{IN(MAX)}} right)
$$



Either I am ignorant of what $N_C$ is in this context (the datasheet doesn't clarify); the term is optional depending on application; or TI has a mistake in the datasheet.



What is $N_C$ in this case?










share|improve this question













I'm reading through the datasheet for TI's TPS54302 step-down converter, and determining values for support components.



There is a calculation to determine ripple current for the output capacitor which is:



$$
I_{COUT(RMS)} = frac{1}{sqrt12} times left(
frac{V_{OUT}times(V_{IN(MAX)}-V_{OUT})}
{V_{IN(MAX)} times L_{OUT} times f_{SW} times N_C} right)
$$

(Where $L_{OUT}$ is the inductor value (H), $f_{SW}$ is the switching frequency (Hz).)



I'm not sure what the term $N_C$ is meant to be.



Looking around online, other formulas omit this. For example, in this document by Rohm titled Capacitor Calculation for Buck Converter IC, page 4 has the formula:



$$
I_{CO} = frac{1}{sqrt12} times left(
frac{V_{OUT}(V_{IN(MAX)}-V_{OUT})}
{L times f_{SW} times V_{IN(MAX)}} right)
$$



Either I am ignorant of what $N_C$ is in this context (the datasheet doesn't clarify); the term is optional depending on application; or TI has a mistake in the datasheet.



What is $N_C$ in this case?







capacitor buck ripple-current






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked 2 hours ago









JYeltonJYelton

15.9k2889190




15.9k2889190












  • "For this application, Equation 15 yields 296 mA for each capacitor." doh
    – Sunnyskyguy EE75
    1 hour ago












  • @SunnyskyguyEE75 It seems plainly obvious now after ThePhoton's answer!
    – JYelton
    1 hour ago










  • It is more obvious from the last sentence in spec before the formula. (5) "each capacitor"
    – Sunnyskyguy EE75
    1 hour ago












  • @SunnyskyguyEE75 Yeah, I didn't pick up on that. I kept looking for 'N' to be defined somewhere. Sometimes you just have to stop and ask for directions!
    – JYelton
    59 mins ago










  • I know. Have a good trip. ;)
    – Sunnyskyguy EE75
    36 mins ago


















  • "For this application, Equation 15 yields 296 mA for each capacitor." doh
    – Sunnyskyguy EE75
    1 hour ago












  • @SunnyskyguyEE75 It seems plainly obvious now after ThePhoton's answer!
    – JYelton
    1 hour ago










  • It is more obvious from the last sentence in spec before the formula. (5) "each capacitor"
    – Sunnyskyguy EE75
    1 hour ago












  • @SunnyskyguyEE75 Yeah, I didn't pick up on that. I kept looking for 'N' to be defined somewhere. Sometimes you just have to stop and ask for directions!
    – JYelton
    59 mins ago










  • I know. Have a good trip. ;)
    – Sunnyskyguy EE75
    36 mins ago
















"For this application, Equation 15 yields 296 mA for each capacitor." doh
– Sunnyskyguy EE75
1 hour ago






"For this application, Equation 15 yields 296 mA for each capacitor." doh
– Sunnyskyguy EE75
1 hour ago














@SunnyskyguyEE75 It seems plainly obvious now after ThePhoton's answer!
– JYelton
1 hour ago




@SunnyskyguyEE75 It seems plainly obvious now after ThePhoton's answer!
– JYelton
1 hour ago












It is more obvious from the last sentence in spec before the formula. (5) "each capacitor"
– Sunnyskyguy EE75
1 hour ago






It is more obvious from the last sentence in spec before the formula. (5) "each capacitor"
– Sunnyskyguy EE75
1 hour ago














@SunnyskyguyEE75 Yeah, I didn't pick up on that. I kept looking for 'N' to be defined somewhere. Sometimes you just have to stop and ask for directions!
– JYelton
59 mins ago




@SunnyskyguyEE75 Yeah, I didn't pick up on that. I kept looking for 'N' to be defined somewhere. Sometimes you just have to stop and ask for directions!
– JYelton
59 mins ago












I know. Have a good trip. ;)
– Sunnyskyguy EE75
36 mins ago




I know. Have a good trip. ;)
– Sunnyskyguy EE75
36 mins ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















5














Most likely, number of capacitors.



If you make your (for example) 100 uF output capacitance using three 33-uF capacitors in parallel, then the ripple current each one needs to handle is only 1/3 of the total ripple current.



(Even though it doesn't look like the parameter is ever explained, nor is the possibility of multiple parallel capacitors discussed, the text immediately above the equation talks about the current for "each capacitor", implying that in some draft the author had the idea of using multiple capacitors, even if this didn't make it into the final version of the datasheet)






share|improve this answer





















  • The data sheet doesn't say that $N_C$ is the number of output capacitors, but the schematic has two, and the text says that equation 15 gives the equation "for each capacitor". Bad technical writing style, there TI, to not name all your variables!
    – TimWescott
    1 hour ago











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("schematics", function () {
StackExchange.schematics.init();
});
}, "cicuitlab");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "135"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2felectronics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f415780%2fwhat-might-this-term-n-sub-c-be-calculating-ripple-current-for-a-buck-convert%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









5














Most likely, number of capacitors.



If you make your (for example) 100 uF output capacitance using three 33-uF capacitors in parallel, then the ripple current each one needs to handle is only 1/3 of the total ripple current.



(Even though it doesn't look like the parameter is ever explained, nor is the possibility of multiple parallel capacitors discussed, the text immediately above the equation talks about the current for "each capacitor", implying that in some draft the author had the idea of using multiple capacitors, even if this didn't make it into the final version of the datasheet)






share|improve this answer





















  • The data sheet doesn't say that $N_C$ is the number of output capacitors, but the schematic has two, and the text says that equation 15 gives the equation "for each capacitor". Bad technical writing style, there TI, to not name all your variables!
    – TimWescott
    1 hour ago
















5














Most likely, number of capacitors.



If you make your (for example) 100 uF output capacitance using three 33-uF capacitors in parallel, then the ripple current each one needs to handle is only 1/3 of the total ripple current.



(Even though it doesn't look like the parameter is ever explained, nor is the possibility of multiple parallel capacitors discussed, the text immediately above the equation talks about the current for "each capacitor", implying that in some draft the author had the idea of using multiple capacitors, even if this didn't make it into the final version of the datasheet)






share|improve this answer





















  • The data sheet doesn't say that $N_C$ is the number of output capacitors, but the schematic has two, and the text says that equation 15 gives the equation "for each capacitor". Bad technical writing style, there TI, to not name all your variables!
    – TimWescott
    1 hour ago














5












5








5






Most likely, number of capacitors.



If you make your (for example) 100 uF output capacitance using three 33-uF capacitors in parallel, then the ripple current each one needs to handle is only 1/3 of the total ripple current.



(Even though it doesn't look like the parameter is ever explained, nor is the possibility of multiple parallel capacitors discussed, the text immediately above the equation talks about the current for "each capacitor", implying that in some draft the author had the idea of using multiple capacitors, even if this didn't make it into the final version of the datasheet)






share|improve this answer












Most likely, number of capacitors.



If you make your (for example) 100 uF output capacitance using three 33-uF capacitors in parallel, then the ripple current each one needs to handle is only 1/3 of the total ripple current.



(Even though it doesn't look like the parameter is ever explained, nor is the possibility of multiple parallel capacitors discussed, the text immediately above the equation talks about the current for "each capacitor", implying that in some draft the author had the idea of using multiple capacitors, even if this didn't make it into the final version of the datasheet)







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 2 hours ago









The PhotonThe Photon

83.5k396194




83.5k396194












  • The data sheet doesn't say that $N_C$ is the number of output capacitors, but the schematic has two, and the text says that equation 15 gives the equation "for each capacitor". Bad technical writing style, there TI, to not name all your variables!
    – TimWescott
    1 hour ago


















  • The data sheet doesn't say that $N_C$ is the number of output capacitors, but the schematic has two, and the text says that equation 15 gives the equation "for each capacitor". Bad technical writing style, there TI, to not name all your variables!
    – TimWescott
    1 hour ago
















The data sheet doesn't say that $N_C$ is the number of output capacitors, but the schematic has two, and the text says that equation 15 gives the equation "for each capacitor". Bad technical writing style, there TI, to not name all your variables!
– TimWescott
1 hour ago




The data sheet doesn't say that $N_C$ is the number of output capacitors, but the schematic has two, and the text says that equation 15 gives the equation "for each capacitor". Bad technical writing style, there TI, to not name all your variables!
– TimWescott
1 hour ago


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Electrical Engineering Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2felectronics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f415780%2fwhat-might-this-term-n-sub-c-be-calculating-ripple-current-for-a-buck-convert%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

flock() on closed filehandle LOCK_FILE at /usr/bin/apt-mirror

Mangá

Eduardo VII do Reino Unido