SLVAFJ9 March   2023 TPSF12C1 , TPSF12C1-Q1 , TPSF12C3 , TPSF12C3-Q1

 

  1.   Abstract
  2. Table of Contents
  3.   Trademarks
  4. Introduction
  5. EMI Frequency Ranges
  6. Passive EMI Filters for High-Power, Grid-Tied Applications
  7. Active EMI Filters
  8. Generalized AEF Circuits
  9. Selection of the CM Active Filter Circuit
  10. The Concept of Capacitive Amplification
  11. Practical AEF Implementations
  12. 10Practical Results
    1. 10.1 Low-Voltage Testing
    2. 10.2 High-Voltage Testing
  13. 11Summary
  14. 12References

High-Voltage Testing

Figure 10-4 and Figure 10-5 show the measured CM EMI performance with the TPSF12C1-Q1 single-phase AEF IC using the power stage of the High-Efficiency GaN CCM Totem-Pole Bridgeless Power Factor Correction (PFC) Reference Design (TIDM-1007 shown in Figure 4-2), which is a 3.3-kW single-phase bridgeless PFC converter [3] with LMG3410 GaN power devices switching at 100 kHz.

GUID-20230223-SS0I-VPZS-TD9H-8TBQDGGXVQKV-low.pngFigure 10-4 EMI Performance With TIDM-1007: AEF Disabled vs. Enabled Using the Same Filter
GUID-20230223-SS0I-QLXP-H4JF-VCF8N0GBDDZC-low.pngFigure 10-5 EMI Performance with TIDM-1007: A Small-Choke AEF Design Compared to a Large-Choke Passive Filter

As evident in Figure 10-4, the AEF provides 15 to 30 dB of CM noise attenuation in the low-frequency range (150 kHz to 3 MHz), which enables a filter using 1- and 4-mH nanocrystalline chokes to achieve an equivalent CM attenuation performance as a passive filter design with two 12-mH chokes, as shown in Figure 10-5. To support a fair comparison, these chokes derive from the same component family with a similar core material (vendor: Würth Elektronik). In addition, the smaller-size chokes of the AEF-based design provide better attenuation at frequencies above 10 MHz given the lower intrawinding parasitic capacitance.

Figure 10-6 shows photos of the filters used for the EMI results presented in Figure 10-5. The AEF enables a 52% reduction in box volume of the CM chokes, as highlighted in Figure 10-7.

Figure 10-6 Size Reduction Enabled by AEF: Passive Filter (a); Active Filter (b)
Figure 10-7 Area, Volume, Cost and Weight Reduction Enabled by AEF (a); Choke Size Comparison (b)

Table 10-1 captures the applicable parameters for the CM chokes highlighted in Figure 10-6. The AEF achieves a 60% total copper loss reduction at 10 ARMS (PCU = 6 W – 2.36 W = 3.64 W, neglecting the winding resistance increase from temperature rise), which implies lower component operating temperatures and improved capacitor lifetimes.

Table 10-1 CM Choke Component Details for the Passive and Active Filter Implementations
Filter CM Choke Part Number Quantity LCM (mH) RDCR (mΩ) fSRF (MHz) Size (L × W × H, mm) Mass (g) PCu (W)
Passive 7448051012 2 12 15 0.8 23 × 34 × 33 36 3.0
Active 7448041104 1 4 8.5 10 19 × 28 × 28 17 1.7
7448031501 1 1 3.3 40 17 × 23 × 25 10 0.66

Figure 10-8 provides impedance curves for the CM chokes to highlight the smaller-size components that have a higher self-resonant frequency and improved high-frequency performance. As an example of the higher CM impedance at high frequencies because of the lower intrawinding capacitance, the impedance of the grid-side CM choke at 30 MHz increases from 150 Ω to 1.1 kΩ (when going from 12 mH in the passive design to 1 mH in the active design). The × and o markers shown at 10 MHz and 30 MHz in Figure 10-8 demarcate the respective impedances for passive and active designs. The higher choke impedance above 10 MHz for active designs largely obviates the need for grid-side Y-capacitors.

GUID-20230223-SS0I-XXW7-7NSB-Z5MVQKXPSV6J-low.png Figure 10-8 Impedance Characteristics of the Selected CM Chokes in the Passive Design (2 × 12 mH) and Active Design (4 mH and 1 mH)

As expected, horizontally mounted chokes in three-phase circuits can generally yield even larger percentage footprint reductions relative to the vertically mounted chokes common in single-phase designs.