Switcher ICs: Exceeding the Absolute Max limits

Doug S

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 20, 2002
Messages
2,712
Location
Chickamauga Georgia
I am normally a big advocate of paying attention to the "Absolute maximum limits" on datasheets but there are times when I am tempted to consciously exceed them where the decision is at least semi-informed and it is not an application where I would required to defend my decision before a Design Review Board or a court of law.
It seems that with the trend towards lower voltage electronics there are lots of switching voltage regulator ICs being released with Vin and Vout maximum voltage ratings of 6 volts. Some of these do not have truly comparable equivalents with higher maximum ratings. When designing switcher circuits for 1 and 5W luxeons there are battery choices that tempt one to fudge the voltage limits of these 6V ICs a bit. In the case of stepup switchers powering 5W luxeons, output voltages on the order of 7V [depending on current and bin] are required. For stepdown applications a battery of 2 CR123 cells would yield a Vin of 6.5V when fresh. For the really daring, 2 Li-ion cells gives 8.4V when fully charged, and for the downright crazed, 6 alkalines would be 9V+ when fresh.
Here is my personal list of 6V rated ICs that I have evaluated as attractive for luxeon power supply applications.
STEPDOWN: LTC1701, LTC3406, LTC3412, LTC3411, MAX1920, MAX1927, MAX1951, MAX1973, MAX1820, MAX1821, TPS62000
STEPUP: LTC3400, LTC3401, MAX1674, MAX1675, MAX1832, MAX1834
All of the above devices are CMOS devices. I can think of three mechanisms whereby higher voltages could adversely affect the ICs. These are:
1) Zener diodes incorporated in the IC for ESD protection where the avalanche voltages are slightly above the max voltage ratings
2) Exceeding the gate to source voltage capabilities of the mosfets of the IC
3) Exceeding the drain to source breakdown voltage of the mosfets in the IC.
I have *absolutely no experience or data* concerning exceeding the max voltage ratings of the above listed ICs. I do have some experience with other Mosfet devices that suggests that the limits can likely be exceeded to some degree without degrading reliability excessively for our purposes. In the case of gate to source breakdown, assuming that the voltage for instantaneous failure is not exceeded, per some IRF applications notes that I have, a 50% increase in Vgs gives a factor of 10 increase in Vgs related failures. For devices that have MTBFs in the 10s of millions of hours, a factor of 10 increase seems acceptable. For IRF GEN V mosfets, per a telephone conversion I had in 1995 with one of their technical people, the voltage for instanaeous Vgs failure is about 2X the max rated.
In the case of Vds breakdown, I once tested a small sample of 20V rated IRF mosfets for this parameter and found they all ran at least 40% over rated.
Question for members on the forum: is anyone running any of the above 6V rated parts over the max limits and what are the particulars of your experience with them? I would suspect that there must be some folks running 5W luxeons off of Waynes Madmax modules which use the Max1674 IC. If anyone with a madmax module wants to do an experiment for the benefit of the forum, here is a way to test the Vds breakdown of the switching transistor that *has a chance* of not distroying your module: Power the module through a resistance of 100-200 ohms at less than its 6V maximum, load the output with a 1K ohm resistor only. While monitoring the output voltage slowly adjust the pot on the module until the voltage stops increasing. The maximum voltage attained is the Vds breakdown voltage of the switching transistor. The resistor on the input prevents the IC from drawing excess power at Vds breakdown. Perhaps Wayne has already done the equivalent testing and can share his results. Understandably, Wayne does not endorse the use of the Madmax to power 5W luxeons but there is no reason why the more gutsy folks here might not want to give it a try. This is certainly *much tamer* than some of the stuff people here admit to doing!
 
I kind of doubt your experiment is as safe as you hope. All these step-up converters use a fairly big output capacitor which potentially would store enough energy to distory the IC if gate breakdown does happen.
 
[ QUOTE ]
LED mods As Small As Possible said:
I kind of doubt your experiment is as safe as you hope. All these step-up converters use a fairly big output capacitor which potentially would store enough energy to distory the IC if gate breakdown does happen.


[/ QUOTE ]
I regard any gate breakdown as damaging. The above experiment is based on the premise that Vds breakdown occurs. Power mosfets can disappate quite a lot of energy safely in the avalanche mode, certainly more than the output capacitor holds but the capacitor doesn't discharge anyway when avalanche occurs. The energy disappated in the avalanche is the stored inductor energy that is attempting to charge the output capacitor above the avalanche voltage.
 
Doug,

Interesting thought. One thing to note on the Madmax is that it will only goto 5V max on the output. That's just the way the feedback pin is configured. The feedback pin is tri-mode. Wiring it to ground or turning the trim pot so the wiper is at the ground side (Wide open mode), you will set the Maxim IC for 5V operation. There is no way that I'm aware of to get more than 5V output in the standard setup.

I believe wiring the fb pin to Vout sets it 3.3V. Everything else is based on the voltage divider.

So, I believe the trim pot adjustment starts at 5V, goes down to near zero, and then swings back to 3.3V. That makes the trim pot a very funny adjustment. I've been meaning to write the equation and then graph it, but, haven't gotten around to it.

Wayne
 
[ QUOTE ]
dat2zip said:
Doug,

Interesting thought. One thing to note on the Madmax is that it will only go to 5V max on the output. That's just the way the feedback pin is configured. The feedback pin is tri-mode. Wiring it to ground or turning the trim pot so the wiper is at the ground side (Wide open mode), you will set the Maxim IC for 5V operation. There is no way that I'm aware of to get more than 5V output in the standard setup.

Wayne

[/ QUOTE ]

Wayne, thanks for the input. That is an interesting observation. The figure 1 functional diagram on the datasheet certainly would not suggest that result. It would appear to be one of those "undocumented features" [translate "quirk or FU"] that we occasionally encounter with ICs. Do you think that the effect that you are seeing could be an artifact of the poor resolution of those tiny SMT pots which makes it hard to adjust to a FB ratio above 5V without taking the wiper to ground?
Do you have any other experiences with pushing the 6V rated ICs over limits?
 
Doug,

From the datasheet you can see in the Electrical Characteristic table that Vout can be preset to 3.3V or 5V depending on whether the FB is tied to OUT or GND.

That would mean that a voltage divider could only get to 5V on the output assuming the lower feedback resistor went to infinity. This would be the same as tying the FB to OUT and that is 5V.

As for CMOS voltage ratings. It would vary from wafer to wafer since it is the silicon layers that are etched or deposited on the wafer that set the transistor voltage geometry up. But, my experience is that it's pretty conservative. You probably can push to 7V and probably up to 7.5V. Don't take this as a fact... I'm just speculating based on working with ICs for many years.

There might be some long term damage effects on driving the gate charge devices with larger voltage swings and this will be hard to measure or determine except under stress testing and possibly tossing the thing in a temp chamber and running it hot and cold. You would need different wafer lots and probably at least 10 units to get any reasonable results out of this testing.

I have access to these facilities at work. I don't have a quick way to toss 10 of these into the oven without wiring them up. I'd have to scrap the units after testing since they are no longer sellable after you have done temperature testing on them.

Wayne
 
[ QUOTE ]
dat2zip said:
Doug,

From the datasheet you can see in the Electrical Characteristic table that Vout can be preset to 3.3V or 5V depending on whether the FB is tied to OUT or GND.

That would mean that a voltage divider could only get to 5V on the output assuming the lower feedback resistor went to infinity. This would be the same as tying the FB to OUT and that is 5V.

Wayne

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually the Tri-mode feedback is set up for Vout=5V when FB=Grd and Vout=3.3V when FB=Vout but I understand what you are trying to say above. I think that you are overlooking the point that as the functional diagram is drawn, the device is regulating to maintain the FB mode at the reference voltage [1.3V] when the FB node is not tied to either grd or Vout. When not operating in the preset 3.3 or 5V modes, the device is not looking at Vout and thus Vout should be adjustable upwards without limit. While the functional diagram doesn't even show a path to the input of the error amplifier from Vout, we know it has to exist for the Tri-mode scheme to work. Based upon your actual observations of the IC being unable to exceed 5V it would appear that Maxim screwed up by not adequately defeating this control when operating in the adjustable mode. Their datasheet actually explictly says that the device can be adjusted above 5V Vout [Second paragraph, P1 as well as in the ELECTRICAL CHARACTERISTICS P2]. It would not be the first time that Maxim had a significant difference between their devices and their datasheet. Don't get me started on that subject!!
 
I am still interested in this subject of exceeding voltage limits on switcher ICs. I now have a bit of data to share. I tested a MM board [uses MAX1674 a 6V part] with the adjustment pot removed. I set output by tying the FB pin to grd or out to get the fixed outputs of 5V and 3.3V respectively. I operated at Vin up to 9V both loaded and unloaded without failure. No testing to failure performed. I next used a fixed resistor divider to set the output to 9V. I operated both loaded and unloaded at Vin up to 9.3V without failure. No testing to failure performed. Note that the earlier confusion about whether this IC can be adjusted for outputs greater than 5V is resolved. It can.
 
This is interesting stuff, even if I don't understand all of it.

The madmax pot, is that between the Vout and Gnd, with FB on the slider? Is the slider the pin on opposite side of the two others?
 
[ QUOTE ]
AilSnail said:

The madmax pot, is that between the Vout and Gnd, with FB on the slider? Is the slider the pin on opposite side of the two others?


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes and yes.
 
Hmmm, pushing your luck there Doug...

I hope you changed the output cap, since it is only rated for 6.3V.
 
[ QUOTE ]
dat2zip said:
Hmmm, pushing your luck there Doug...

I hope you changed the output cap, since it is only rated for 6.3V.



[/ QUOTE ]

Nope, living dangerously. Tested with the stock caps. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
Hi Doug,

that is very interesting! Does this mean, that Vin can be also higher than vout, and the chip still regulates the Vout?
What is happening with the current? Probebly the current to the LED is only limited by the PMOS device in the schematic, right?
I've some experience with cmos processes (actually my previous job was CMOS technology development) and I agree completely with your arguments. If you increase the voltage moderately, you will only decrease lifetime and increase failure rate (but should be still in an acceptable range for our use). Since we all are overdriving the LED's, we shouldn't be shy to overdrive the regulators /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
PeterB said:
Hi Doug,

that is very interesting! Does this mean, that Vin can be also higher than vout, and the chip still regulates the Vout?
What is happening with the current? Probebly the current to the LED is only limited by the PMOS device in the schematic, right?

[/ QUOTE ]
Peter, with Vin greater than the setpoint Vout, voltage will be limited only by the resistance of the PMOS and the inductor. Current is determined by the load characteristics since this is not a current regulated device.
 
What is the PMOS? is that the switch inside the chip that allows the current to drop from the neg. end of the inductor to ground?

I assume there is no resistance between the battery and the led other than the inductor and the diode, so what makes it possible to regulate the madmax to almost no volts when the input is 3v?
Is the switch just shorting the batt parallell to the led in order to lower the voltage? What if you had a powersupply of infinate amp at 3volts?

[ QUOTE ]
I next used a fixed resistor divider to set the output to 9V. I operated both loaded and unloaded at Vin up to 9.3V without failure. No testing to failure performed. Note that the earlier confusion about whether this IC can be adjusted for outputs greater than 5V is resolved. It can.


[/ QUOTE ]
can it run a 5w then? What would limit the amperage if so?
 
[ QUOTE ]
AilSnail said:
What is the PMOS? is that the switch inside the chip that allows the current to drop from the neg. end of the inductor to ground?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. It is the switch that goes from the inductor to the load. In a synchronous stepup switchers it serves the function of the diode. Though there is a diode in parallel with it on the Madmax, the Madmax would operate without it. The diode is there to help the circuit start up a lower input voltages.

[ QUOTE ]
AilSnail said:
I assume there is no resistance between the battery and the led other than the inductor and the diode, so what makes it possible to regulate the madmax to almost no volts when the input is 3v?


[/ QUOTE ]

It cannot. To properly regulate Vout, Vin cannot be great than Vout by more than the small drop through the inductor and PMOS resistances.

[ QUOTE ]
AilSnail said:
can it run a 5w then? What would limit the amperage if so?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. Be aware though that per Wayne the output cap is a 6.3V rated part. I think that ceramic caps are pretty tolerant of overvoltage though. Appropriately, Wayne should say that you are "on your own" as you will be running two parts on the Madmax beyond their rated limits.
Amperage is limited by the IC's internal NMOS current limit which is 1.0A on the Max1674 part and 0.5A on the Max1675 part which Wayne is considering using for some lower current and higher efficiency Madmaxs.
 
You may exceed the maximum rated Vdd if you keep the switching frequency low. Generally speaking, it is not convenient because it translates in bigger inductors.

The thickness (or the "slimness", if the word exists)of metal oxide between the channel and the gate is the physical limitation to higher voltages.

I never exceed data sheet specs in my designs, because it has happened more than once that a semiconductor device, whose tolerance was down to the minimum tolerated specs, failed on me. This is of utmost importance for large scale design. You may be lucky and have a regulator that works at 9 V, at nominal frequency, forever.

Have fun

Anthony
 
So the diode runs parallel to the pmos in the madmax?
The pmos is used in place of a diode because it has a lower voltage drop?
Is the pmos open when the nmos is closed and vise versa?

[ QUOTE ]
Amperage is limited by the IC's internal NMOS current limit which is 1.0A on the Max1674 part and 0.5A on the Max1675 part which Wayne is considering using for some lower current and higher efficiency Madmaxs.

[/ QUOTE ]
Would that translate to the input current limit?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top