Final P2 Power Estimation

cgraceycgracey Posts: 9,185
edited July 5 in Propeller 2 Vote Up1Vote Down
We had a chance to run some more simulations, so I thought a little more about the test program that tries to maximize power consumption.

I had eight cogs executing from register memory at 180MHz. I made their loops in hub memory, instead, which forces frequent FIFO reloads. The simulation showed a worst-case power consumption of:

2.4 Watts

That measurement was taken at fastest process corner, highest voltage (1.98V) and lowest temperature (-40C). I don't think a customer will ever see more than 2 Watts consumed by the core. So, the original estimation of about 2 Watts is probably accurate.

Comments

  • 24 Comments sorted by Date Added Votes
  • Thanks for the update, sounds good.
  • That's good news.
    Infernal Machine
  • Excellent news Chip.

    I knew hubexec would push the power envelope, and we are likely to see a lot of hubexec cogs in P2.

    However, in reality, I doubt any customer is going to get anywhere near 2W. Most will be hard pressed to even see 1W.
  • There is additional power consumed by the I/O pins.

    The DAC burns constant power. The ADC burns about 1.5mA. Swinging the output at high frequency will take power, too
  • Thanks for those figures Chip. Did you happen to simulate "typical" power consumption somehow? I don't think I will be ever be operating at -40'C, nor 1.98V nor at the same time too although the -40 should help to keep it cool. I have no control over the "Q factor" of the chip itself though.

    Tachyon Forth - compact, fast, forthwright and interactive
    useforthlogo-s.png
    --->CLICK THE LOGO for more links<---
    Latest binary V5.4 includes EASYFILE +++++ Tachyon Forth News Blog
    P2 SHORTFORM DATASHEET +++++ TAQOZ documentation
    Brisbane, Australia
  • I will ask ON if they can run the same simulation at typical conditions.
  • roglohrogloh Posts: 653
    edited July 16 Vote Up0Vote Down
    So from a power perspective on the P2 is there any requirement for the 1.8V core supply to come up before or after or be synchronized with the 3.3V supply? Are there any special restrictions there so as not to degrade or damage the device?
  • I think it might be good to employ a brownout detector on the 1.8V core supply and then have the 3.3V I/O supply power up within 3ms of the 1.8V supply.
  • jmgjmg Posts: 11,780
    cgracey wrote: »
    I think it might be good to employ a brownout detector on the 1.8V core supply and then have the 3.3V I/O supply power up within 3ms of the 1.8V supply.

    Are there any 'damage' paths ? - eg 3v3=3v3 with 1.8V = 0, or 3v3=0 and 1.8V = 1.8V ?

    With the 3v3 elements resetting at the same time, provided the core is up before reset is released, things should be ok ?
  • roglohrogloh Posts: 653
    edited July 17 Vote Up0Vote Down
    Thanks Chip. I had recently found a possible dual output buck switching regulator from TI (TPS54383) that I was interested in so I had been wondering if it might be usable with a P2 based system. I was imagining it could be of use in some high current (up to 3A) applications to step down from a 4.5-28V source input to 3.3V and 1.8V for example. Fortuitously it appears this device may be able sequence its two outputs in a manner you have indicated where the 1.8V can come up first to regulation, then the 3.3V enabled in 3ms.

    Of course there may be more suitable devices, just happened to find this one and start looking at it and wondering what the P2 requirements would be there with its voltage rails.
  • tonyp12tonyp12 Posts: 1,915
    edited July 17 Vote Up0Vote Down
    If you use a switching regulator, I would go down to maybe 4-5V and use a analog friendly ldo for the final step down to 3.3V and 1.8V

    ON Semiconductor have a 1Amp one for 24cent: NCP59800 (nice big 0.65mm pad pitch and top layer thermal spread)
    https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/ON-Semiconductor/NCP59800BMNADJTBG?qs=/ha2pyFadujw87dMGaQs86X4pq3J/8Ei9C2UMd/G2yhz6CoIN/zrhlNiA2PNN/Ks
    images.jpg?psid=1
    Use two, one for 3.3v and one for 1.8V and use the soft start feature and tie the 1.8V output to enable pin on the 3.3V,
    as enable have 1.2v threshold, could resistor divide it down to 1.7V threshold if you want it to wait just a little longer

    Or the 1.8V ldo's enable pin tied to the 3.3V output if power up sequence is opposite.
  • tonyp12 wrote: »
    If you use a switching regulator, I would go down to maybe 4-5V and use a analog friendly ldo for the final step down to 3.3V and 1.8V
    Good for 3.3v quiet analogue I/O portion.

    1.8v core voltage should definitely be direct switcher supplied though. And this will control just as easily, btw. All sequencing can be downstream of the 1.8v supply. Otherwise you're talking a 3-4 volt linear drop to the 1.8 volts - the losses aren't pretty.

    "Are we alone in the universe?"
    "Yes," said the Oracle.
    "So there's no other life out there?"
    "There is. They're alone too."
  • roglohrogloh Posts: 653
    edited July 18 Vote Up0Vote Down
    evanh wrote: »

    .... Otherwise you're talking a 3-4 volt linear drop to the 1.8 volts - the losses aren't pretty.

    Agree, if the P2 draws up to 1A on its 1.8V under heavy load then this is an additional 3-4W of loss that way which is already a lot more than the P2 itself requires. A switching regulator for the 1.8V and a 3.3V linear LDO regulator from (say) a 5V rail when enabled by the 1.8V core output though sounds like a reasonable compromise in heat wasted and the hopefully reduced analog noise it delivers. I am going to consider that approach now as I have an potential application where I'd need 5V (for LCD backlighting, audio amp, and a USB host) and 3.3V and 1.8V for the P2, all from a single higher supply from 6-12V. This type of switcher and another 3.3V LDO might work, though I don't like the idea of needing to go design and analyze phase margins and gain response to see if it will be stable etc, as I'd then have to try to remember all that control theory stuff from my earlier EE days. LOL.

    By the way this topic may have ramifications for Peter Jakacki's P2D2 board if the 3.3V P2 supply has to come up only after the 1.8V, though that discussion probably belongs in his thread.

  • Murata are pulling out of those LXDC2's unfortunately. They're down as 'last time buy'.

    The Torex range looks like the way to go for something similar.
  • jmgjmg Posts: 11,780
    edited July 19 Vote Up0Vote Down
    Tubular wrote: »
    Murata are pulling out of those LXDC2's unfortunately. They're down as 'last time buy'.

    The Torex range looks like the way to go for something similar.

    Yes, but you do pay a premium for the merged packaging, and that also puts more power loss into a small area.

    You can get Dual 3v3/1v8 fixed-voltage switching regulators, like PAM2306AYPKE IC REG BCK 1.8V/3.3V 1A DL 12DFN 0.27550/3k

    I like the idea of an i2c programmable regulator, but it's not easy finding one that is mainstream, and not a silly price.
    It may be cheaper to use a 25c MCU with i2c/PWM peripherals, and control standard FB regulators from that ?

    Or, you can take the KISS path, and get a simple, high volume part like AP3402 TSOT23-6 2A at 12c/3k - the AP3402 includes a Power Good & Enable
    Addit: the FP6373 looks pin compatible with AP3402, but 3A nominal, and 9.16c/500

    For designs that do not need the full power envelope, simple LDOs like SOT223 1.2A LDL1117S18R / LDL1117S33R have real appeal. ( the price of $0.0890/2k5 helps too )
  • jmgjmg Posts: 11,780
    cgracey wrote: »
    I think it might be good to employ a brownout detector on the 1.8V core supply and then have the 3.3V I/O supply power up within 3ms of the 1.8V supply.

    Looking around for more top-end Power solutions, for lab testing and characterization uses, I find the MxL7704-A / MxL7704-X as used in the latest RaspPi
    This could pair with the new Microchip PAC1932/PAC1933 Current/Voltage Monitor.


    2 part codes with differing default settings,
    MxL7704-A is ARM/Pi sequencing, 1.8V up after 3v3 _/=, down before 3v3 =\_
    MxL7704-X is Xilinx sequencing, 1.8V up before 3v3 _/=, down after 3v3 =\_
    Maybe both can be tested ? -


    Input voltage range: 4.0V to 5.5V
    4 Synchronous Buck Regulators
    Internally compensated current mode
    1MHz to 2.1MHz switching frequency
    Buck 1: 3.0V to 3.6V, 20mV step, 1.5A
    Buck 2: 1.3V to 1.92V, 20mV step, 1.5A
    Buck 3: 0.8V to 1.6V, 6.25mV step, 2.5A
    Buck 4: 0.6V to 1.4V, 6.25mV step, 4A
    100mA LDO: 1.5V to 3.6V, 20mV step

    ±2% maximum total dc output error over line, load and temperature
    3.3V/5V 400kHz I2C interface
    Dynamic voltage scaling
    Status monitoring by channel
    Sequencing control
    Input voltage status register
    Highly flexible conditional sequencing engine with external input
    2 configurable PGOOD outputs
    Adjustable switching frequency
    5mm x 5mm 32-pin QFN package

    If anyone wanted to push P2 below 1.3V, then Buck3 could be used ?

    Looks to be ~ $2.30/3k (I'm sure RaspPi buy them for much less ! ) so not low-end, but it is compact and highly flexible, and being able to readily adjust voltages over i2c, is good for data-sheet generate.
    ( They do not seem to do a cheaper one, with fewer converters.)
  • Peter JakackiPeter Jakacki Posts: 7,590
    edited July 20 Vote Up0Vote Down
    Could we perhaps have a 1.7V LDO in parallel with the 1.8V switcher to ensure that the core has sufficient voltage at the same time as I/O power? The power supplies would rise at the same rate and the voltage differential would only occur once the core voltage is close to operating range. The 1.7V will be low enough that once 1.8V is present the LDO is effectively disconnected but the advantage of this approach is that we avoid "sequencing" and instead use the simultaneous power-up method.

    P2D2 has an LDO footprint in parallel with the switcher, all I would do is use a 1.7V LDO there and since the processor is going through reset and running RCFAST on one cog the actual power consumption is very small, especially since we are only talking about milliseconds anyway.

    Tachyon Forth - compact, fast, forthwright and interactive
    useforthlogo-s.png
    --->CLICK THE LOGO for more links<---
    Latest binary V5.4 includes EASYFILE +++++ Tachyon Forth News Blog
    P2 SHORTFORM DATASHEET +++++ TAQOZ documentation
    Brisbane, Australia
  • jmgjmg Posts: 11,780
    Could we perhaps have a 1.7V LDO in parallel with the 1.8V switcher to ensure that the core has sufficient voltage at the same time as I/O power? The power supplies would rise at the same rate and the voltage differential would only occur once the core voltage is close to operating range. The 1.7V will be low enough that once 1.8V is present the LDO is effectively disconnected but the advantage of this approach is that we avoid "sequencing" and instead use the simultaneous power-up method.

    It's not clear on P2 how the Reset/registers span the voltage domains, or if there are any damage paths, or how critical sequencing is.
    Clearly, you want to avoided device damage, and avoid undefined pin states.

    Xilinx version of that MxL7704 seems to bring up the core, I guess to configure things and define IO settings, before VIO applies, whilst -A version brings up VIO, and seems to rely on (reset) IO registers giving defined states, before the core is applied.

    With Power-Good outputs, the P2 should be held in (async?) reset .
    The lowest cost parts I linked above, with PG, release on 90% of Nominal, and have soft-starts of 1~2ms
  • TLE9861 is ~$2.30@2.5k, and could do the work of a power monitor as well as switching controller. I just discovered it now, but it's looking better and better the more I look.
  • TLE9861 is ~$2.30@2.5k, and could do the work of a power monitor as well as switching controller. I just discovered it now, but it's looking better and better the more I look.

    Wow things must be getting bad if we need to resort to use a motor controller IC to power the P2! LOL.
  • rogloh wrote: »
    TLE9861 is ~$2.30@2.5k, and could do the work of a power monitor as well as switching controller. I just discovered it now, but it's looking better and better the more I look.

    Wow things must be getting bad if we need to resort to use a motor controller IC to power the P2! LOL.

    Yes, this whole matter of powering the P2 could become over complicated quite easily yet simultaneous powerup is dead simple.



    Tachyon Forth - compact, fast, forthwright and interactive
    useforthlogo-s.png
    --->CLICK THE LOGO for more links<---
    Latest binary V5.4 includes EASYFILE +++++ Tachyon Forth News Blog
    P2 SHORTFORM DATASHEET +++++ TAQOZ documentation
    Brisbane, Australia
  • jmgjmg Posts: 11,780
    edited July 21 Vote Up0Vote Down
    rogloh wrote: »
    TLE9861 is ~$2.30@2.5k, and could do the work of a power monitor as well as switching controller. I just discovered it now, but it's looking better and better the more I look.

    Wow things must be getting bad if we need to resort to use a motor controller IC to power the P2! LOL.

    Hehe, no, not that bad that it needs kW power handling ;) !

    The appeal is being able to easily control the voltages, mainly on a well featured EvalPCB, so the MxL7704 is one candidate.
    The new Microchip PAC1932 series can read I.V to good 16b precision, at under $1


    One irony is, that specific purpose MxL7704 part is actually not super-cheap, at $2.30/3k ( but it is powerful, and keeps BOM small, and appears to have natural range limiting )

    An alternative would be a MCU with a clean/decent 2+ DAC like EFM8BB31F16G-B-QFN24R 24QFN $0.62370/3k plus 2 mainstream SOT23-6 SMPS parts, ( FP6373 ~ 9c or AP3402 ~ 12c), for a sub $1 BOM
    An EFM8BB3 can drive Vo adjustments to either Linear or PWM-FB regulators, and could read 12b ADC, with an external dual-current amplifier.
    The EFM8BB31F64 has 4 x 12b DAC, ( ~$1) so that could support both Voltage adjust, and P2 ADC checking.
  • For my use the problem is not in the circuit design, part availability, or cost. Multiple options are available. My main concern is how long those parts will be available. Most of the equipment I deal with is high cost, high reliability, and expected to be in use for many years, at least a decade or two.
    In science there is no authority. There is only experiment.
    Life is unpredictable. Eat dessert first.
Sign In or Register to comment.