10x11.4mm buck-boost driver, miniaturized version

Is Foulmist also using a high side LT chip?
I know he is using the TSP63020. BTW sorry about the double post up there! Walked into the kitchen to grab a beer. Come back and my cat is warming his toes on my keyboard. Edit my post and sent it

I believe Tom's is not continuous negative as I used his in my saik build & he told me to not just wire the - to the diode, had to go through the driver

Onryo said:

BTW sorry about the double post up there! Walked into the kitchen to grab a beer. Come back and my cat is warming his toes on my keyboard. Edit my post and sent it

Click to expand...

ahahahahahahahahah :crackup:
Many thanks, Onryo!!!!
-Luke

Who is actually assembling these drivers? Further, how are these getting quality tested? I can promise you that at FlexDrive prices, these will be kicked out of the market soon enough. I have a cheapo $15-$18 (retail) boost driver on its way to the market soon enough that is capable of 2.5A+.

Further... I can see some improvements that will decrease the price and size of this driver. May have to design one myself. I hate to see the original designer not assembling and not selling. That doesn't make me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Another thing... not so sure this will be capable of driving these 9mm diodes very hard. Always assume minimum current rating (i.e. 3.5A in this case): isn't that about what the FlexDrive draws when paralleling them for 1.8A at 3.7V? Food for thought.

Wolfman, I am assembling them, I have all nescessary tools to properly assemble them. I don't see any problems assembling them instead of Luke, how do you see a possible problem from that if you don't mind me asking???

Best of luck with your driver, although This driver may very well end up less than the flex drive cost. About your boost driver that will kick this from the market, just remember, this is a buck boost capable of both & fully capable of running the 9mm 445's.

Nothing against you, Anthony. I just remember I got a driver that was sourced from you (through DTR, I believe), and it came not working. I understand you probably have all of the tools to assemble them properly, I just like to see the designer doing assembly because he has a more complete understanding of the driver than anyone else will - that's why I assemble my own BlitzBucks. It's easier for me, knowing the operation of the BlitzBuck, to easily see, diagnose, and repair any problems from a given output.

My driver current is in development now (I actually just got boards for it today). The reason I think it will kick buck-boosts from the market is that why would you need a buck-boost driver when you have two equally useable and cheaper drivers available for use for both situations? I suppose it won't be kicked entirely, for those that just want an all-around driver.

I don't remember - I read through that other thread that someone else posted on the TPS63020, but the start-up ripple and the ringing that was caused by the high-frequency switch of the TPS caused a lot of weariness towards this driver. Has this been tested on an o-scope yet in the final version?

Will you be testing all of the drivers for output, Antho?

Wolfman29 said:

Nothing against you, Anthony. I just remember I got a driver that was sourced from you (through DTR, I believe), and it came not working. I understand you probably have all of the tools to assemble them properly, I just like to see the designer doing assembly because he has a more complete understanding of the driver than anyone else will - that's why I assemble my own BlitzBucks. It's easier for me, knowing the operation of the BlitzBuck, to easily see, diagnose, and repair any problems from a given output.

My driver current is in development now (I actually just got boards for it today). The reason I think it will kick buck-boosts from the market is that why would you need a buck-boost driver when you have two equally useable and cheaper drivers available for use for both situations? I suppose it won't be kicked entirely, for those that just want an all-around driver.

I don't remember - I read through that other thread that someone else posted on the TPS63020, but the start-up ripple and the ringing that was caused by the high-frequency switch of the TPS caused a lot of weariness towards this driver. Has this been tested on an o-scope yet in the final version?

Will you be testing all of the drivers for output, Antho?

Click to expand...

This driver was scoped & the original Zener was removed which solved the problems & turned out to be a very solid driver.

About my driver coming to you defective, my apologies that had to happen, but I inspect them all before shipping them out, obvious mistakes are corrected & I've honestly not had a problem, you could've PM'd me or DTR at the time & one of us would have surely solved your problem. I usually replace things like that if it happens but I don't make those anymore. I like to stick to one at a time, I take my time to do things right.

About your concern of my understanding of this, I fully understand this circuit, I will take greater care assembling them now that I've heard you got a faulty circuit.

But honestly, why can't both these drivers just be there, let people choose which they want, the more options the better for this forum. I wouldnt go to your blitz buck thread saying I'll destroy your sales & question your quality, sales methods or anything else, if you remember I was actually encouraging you in one of your earlier threads about it. Let's just be chill about this :beer:

That's good about the o-scope I'm honestly interested: can you link me?

I didn't want to make a big deal about the driver - wasn't going to complain about a $12 driver or what have you. I then noticed it wasn't sold anymore, so I couldn't get another one anyway

I just want to make sure that you know what you are getting yourself into. Not sure how many QFNs you have done before, but it's a HUGE pain in the *** to make sure you get them right. You're a relatively new member, and despite the fact that you have done a great job since you've been here, no one wants anyone getting in over their heads =p Looking out for you

The reason I bring up the testing problem is actually out of my good will I've gotten a bunch of complains of faulty BlitzBucks in the past few months (probably 15 or so out of the 120 that I shot to Clif) because I didn't fully test each individual. Since then, I am actually individually testing each driver to make sure it is fully functional so that I get less complaints. Fortunately, in my case, I bought 20% extra parts, etc. so that I could send Clif 20% more drivers than he paid for so that he could deal with faulty drivers without having to have me make them to have them shipped out. Just something to consider.

These drivers can both certainly be there! Not saying they won't - I'm just not too enthusiastic about these TPS drivers. The IC alone costs a significant portion of the whole part cost of the BlitzBuck and the BlitzBoost. Because of that fact, they will always either be hardly profitable at all to the assembler (in this case, you) or they will be along the same price as the FlexDrives. I think the age of the buck-boost is nearing a close as we get more and more effective/cheaper buck drivers and boost drivers.

I'm really sorry if I managed to offend you :\ I didn't mean it. I am just really hesitant about these TI-based drivers. These chips are expensive!

If you do have any complaints about the BlitzBuck, I am ready to hear them! That's why I am on revision four! The first two were not very efficient. The next version was prone to failure in the potentiometer, had a huge inductor, and had multiple points of failure. Hopefully, V4 will be an effective replacement, at least until I come up with a better solution

Driver development is all about progress. Let's keep things moving forward!

The o scope is on the 17mm thread page 8 post 143 I believe.


Lol I've made a few of these types of drivers, they are a PITA but ive gotten it down pretty good I actually like TI's IC's as they are powerful for such a tiny minimal component circuit .

I didn't take any offense don't worry, just making sure nothing is sparking here.

Sorry I wrote a longer one but it glitched & didn't post so I just got to the point here :beer:

Best of luck with your buck drivers the tiny size looks great :beer:

Yeah, the new tiny version of the BlitzBuck is a PITA too, and it is only a DFN8!

Anyway, best of luck! I actually may need one of these soon if my IMR14250s can't supply 1.2A (I doubt they will be able to, but it's worth a shot! XD)

Wolfman29 said:

Yeah, the new tiny version of the BlitzBuck is a PITA too, and it is only a DFN8!

Anyway, best of luck! I actually may need one of these soon if my IMR14250s can't supply 1.2A (I doubt they will be able to, but it's worth a shot! XD)

Click to expand...

Sure thing they will be here

Now that you have a low output blitz buck I'll be tryin one out, I've been waiting for the lower output one

Haha you should get 1.2amps outta those IMR's no problem :beer:

Good stuff. Unfortunately, there will still be a 300mA gap between low and high - lows go up to around 1A and highs start at around 1.25-1.35A.

Wolfman29 said:

Good stuff. Unfortunately, there will still be a 300mA gap between low and high - lows go up to around 1A and highs start at around 1.25-1.35A.

Click to expand...

I don't think that will be a problem

I'm very happy that this driver is becoming so interesting for a competitor
-Luke

LOL,

I personally don't see a problem with the driver being assembled by someone besides the designer - especially when the designer is working with the builder/seller. Moh used to build all kinds of drivers designed by others. And God only knows how many people have built and sold benboosts.

I'm not jumping anyone, I'm just chiming in with my two cents about the builder/seller issue. I could imagine designing a driver and not wanting to build/sell them. (Although I have a ways to go before I am selling anything I can design!)

I do agree that prices need to come down, and unfortunately most of these small, high current chips seem to be expensive. I know that all of the TPS6x chips everyone is playing with are expensive, although as LeQuack pointed out - shop around, you can find them cheaper sometimes.

The more choices we have, the better. And the more people who are working on drivers the better - but I would warn that anyone planning on getting rich off of drivers is headed for a rough road ahead. The margins are low, startup costs and design expenses are high and the workload is tough. And competition is stiff - the x-drive is tough to beat for a buck, and there are a lot of options out there.

Also, Dr. Lava's demise is greatly exaggerated, he is alive and well on one of the more projector-oriented forums and I know he was moving across country - so he may be back with the very tried-and-true driver that a lot of folks in the projector community count on...

I would only approach driver design with an idea of MAYBE making a few bucks while designing something cool for a hobby you love, because I just don't think there are riches to be had doing stuff for such a small niche hobby. And no amount of bashing competitors products, or wishing competitors away or anything else will beat price/performance - that will win in the end. (And I mean that pointed at NO ONE in particular, I've seen most of the designers/builders react to some competition in one way or another over time - and I understand it. It is frustrating to put a lot of time in a project and then see someone come along claiming they have a great idea that is going to compete with your idea...)

Just my opinions... bring on the 3A buck-boosts for under $10!!!



P.S. In an effort to bring down these prices for everyone, AnthoT - check for coupon codes with Newark, more often than not they have 15%-20% off of non-sale items and that would take the TPS63020 down to $4 for you! That would be a big help in bringing the price of the driver down!

Thanks tsteele

Luckily I've found a source for cheaper TPS IC's let's just say its even better than the Newark deal with a discount

It won't be much