Gentlemen, either we get back on the topic or the topic risks being locked, I am afraid.
Then go make your own videos.
What?! Did not expect such "argument" from you.QuoteBut if you can't at least understand my intention, even if you don't like it, then
I said it already - you are doing business. Sometimes engineering excellence have to be traded for clicks. That's OK especially for professional youtuber. BTW existence of argument do not prove that I don't like video. Your videos are fine, they get better over time as well.
If you cared to actually watch the video:Text overlay that looks like afterthought? - Nah. Sad that you consider critique as an attack rather than idea for your future video(s).
This is how the semiconductor industry works. If you have a part with some novelty there are small volume users who will pay a good price for it, so you set the small volume price high. However, high volume users are ALWAYS driven by the BOM above all other factors. You need to offer attractive volume pricing to win any high volume design. The markets for this device are high volume things like smoke detectors, where you can lose a design over a fraction of a cent on the BOM, and utility meters, which will be attracted to the lack of any magnetic components (they are sensitive to tampering issues), but still need to meet aggressive BOM goals.
I am really glad Dave made this video, because it does matter.
How do I know? Because it exactly mirrors the standby power issues a decade or two ago. It was common for devices to waste up to tens of watts in standby power, because designers and engineers didn't think it mattered.
But it did. I recall a time here in Finland, where those of us with devices like TVs and computers on extension cords with power switches could save on their electricity bills simply by completely unplugging the devices when not in use. For me, dwelling in a city apartment but with lots of electronics in the late nineties, it was about a third of my electricity bill.
Some of you might have seen my Beginner thread about USB-to-3.3V, too. That is this exact same situation in another form. Most of the USB gadgets not running on battery power use an LDO to drop the USB 5V to 3.3V. Sure, that keeps the BOM cost low. But it also turns a third of the consumed power into waste heat. In some cases, like LTE modem dongles (the USB sticks in particular), that extra heat is a real issue, and shortens the devices' lifespan and usability.
I am more than a little annoyed at so many people trying to convince others that this is a non-issue, because the BOM cost is too high to make this kind of a change. Yet, we basically eliminated the standby power issues within a decade, as knowledge about it grew; and I'm absolutely sure the EEs at that time tried to make the same argument, that significantly lowering the standby power would never be cost effective or competitive, because of the increased cost of the designs. Fuck that kind of statist thinking: wasting power is silly, and sooner or later people will understand its effects on their finances, and will switch.
Before any of you respond with "but Nominal, making a better but slightly more expensive product makes no business sense, so you're wrong", I'll just say that unless you have earned millions from your EE designs, your opinion has zero weight in real life. The trajectory I am seeing has happened several times in the past (different technologies, from steam forwards), and most recently, just over a decade ago with standby power. So I am not proposing this is anything out of the ordinary; I am saying this has happened before, will happen again, and Dave pointing out one possible (albeit small) way we could take right now along this trajectory, is a very good point.
I only wish Dave would attack USB and LiPo power supplies to 3.3V projects, because there is very little talk of this right now on the internet, we're talking about 34% of losses (5V to 3.3V using LDO is only 66% efficient; step-down converters with low enough ripple and noise are black magic to us hobbyists), and even a bumblefuck like I can find chips and datasheet designs that can reach 90%-95% for ≲ 5€ total cost per unit for a set of ten, using resources available for us hobbyists. Yes, small Chinese step-down modules are ubiquitous, but because their ripple and noise are unknown factors (and one really needs an oscilloscope to determine them in practice), so many avoid them, and opt to use wasteful and hot LDOs instead, because at least their characteristics are easy to understand and determine, needing just a multimeter, really.
Yet, thousands of us hobbyists are doing these projects, and would love to know how to do it better/properly; and realize that just like standby power or bad product design that wastes power, this too is one way we can reduce the overall energy costs of our projects: many do not even realize how many of the practical problems of their projects are due to waste heat or too high current draw. (The latter is more of an issue with single-board computers; desktop machines and laptops tend to have better filtering and power budgets for USB power lines.) For these USB gadgets, the vastly reduced waste heat means one can use cheap 3D printed closed enclosures -- which was kinda the way I stumbled on this myself.
Like it, or not. It will likely take legislation to change this.
I only wish Dave would attack USB and LiPo power supplies to 3.3V projects, because there is very little talk of this right now on the internet, we're talking about 34% of losses (5V to 3.3V using LDO is only 66% efficient; step-down converters with low enough ripple and noise are black magic to us hobbyists), and even a bumblefuck like I can find chips and datasheet designs that can reach 90%-95% for ≲ 5€ total cost per unit for a set of ten, using resources available for us hobbyists. Yes, small Chinese step-down modules are ubiquitous, but because their ripple and noise are unknown factors (and one really needs an oscilloscope to determine them in practice), so many avoid them, and opt to use wasteful and hot LDOs instead, because at least their characteristics are easy to understand and determine, needing just a multimeter, really.
It is not that simple. A switching DC-DC converter uses a few to several tens of mA for itself.
It is not that simple. A switching DC-DC converter uses a few to several tens of mA for itself.What you are claiming is that TI Webench is lying, and that you know better. For some reason, I'm not convinced.
The particular circuit I am talking about is the one straight off the TPS82084 datasheet, except with a 510k:162k voltage divider to get the 3.3V instead of the 200k:162k to get 1.8V shown in the datasheet. The figures I quoted are from the TI webench design report that I first found; I only later noticed it is really a direct copy of the datasheet circuit.
So, which one is it, then? TI straight out lying and you right, or you too stuck in your familiar patterns to admit there might be something here?
Well, this didn't stand out in your wall of text.
Well, this didn't stand out in your wall of text. But this converter looks like it (finally) addresses the downside of switching converters at low load.
Well, this didn't stand out in your wall of text.Yeah right. You're very talented in avoiding admitting any error or culpability, instead hiding it inside a snipe at the accuser. The trick with the compliment at the end was a masterful stroke; it makes you look like a reasonable person, if one isn't very observant.
Ofcourse it is a masterfull stroke. Carefully designed to piss you off so the next time you write a shorter text and put a link in there with an actual part we can check out (instead of a writing a long rant nobody is interested in). Take an example from how I can do so much with so little text.
Reported to moderators as rude hijacking idiot ^
It is not that simple. A switching DC-DC converter uses a few to several tens of mA for itself. Often this means it is actually less efficient compared to an LDO in that situation. If you want to power a microcontroller from USB an LDO is the most efficient solution in many cases.
Like it, or not, it will likely take legislation to change this.
The local Eco Electronics Recycling Center is full of cheap consumer electronics that had a short life. I dumpster dive, put in new electrolytics and it's good for years.
I think longer lifetime electronics benefits the planet more than a bit higher efficiency.
Engineers gone down the rabbit hole. The power supply that is say 25% more efficient is better for the environment?
You have to compare a high and low efficiency PSU from end to end. The fact that the capacitors fail after 2 years while the low efficiency PSU is still running for 5+ years, consider the manufacturing, recycling, disposal costs and the coal burned to do that.
You save 25% on energy and global warming during the PSU's running life - but had to use two power supplies after the high efficiency one failed due to cheap parts.
The local Eco Electronics Recycling Center is full of cheap consumer electronics that had a short life. I dumpster dive, put in new electrolytics and it's good for years.
I think longer lifetime electronics benefits the planet more than a bit higher efficiency.
I'm not sure why you instantly imply the high efficiency PSU is less reliable.