Exploration: Improving Power Bank Ripple Performance

Those who have been following along in my power bank testing articles will note that the vast majority that I have looked at have hardly been impressive. Some things seem rather fixed – for example, the voltage regulation which is partly determined by the algorithms in the microcontroller.

However, I did have a thought one day – what would it take to improve the ripple performance of a power bank which has already decent voltage regulation (on average)? How much more might the manufacturer have needed to spend?

A Bit of Nostalgia

Remembering back to the early days of my electronics experimentation, when linear plug-pack transformers were more common, a big issue would be the 100Hz ripple encountered from full wave rectification of 50Hz AC mains. A common solution is to stick a few big filter capacitors and you could smooth it out enough for your liking. My methodology back then was to always err on the safe side and throw a little more bulk capacitance – you rather have power that’s smoother than expected rather than ripple/hum-laden power!

Switching converters generally operate through a cyclical process of storing power into an inductor and releasing “bursts” of energy from the inductor which are then smoothed into the required output by controlling the duty cycle (mostly) of the storing process. This can happen at rates from about 150khz up to several megahertz.

Generally there is a tradeoff involved in design when choosing the frequency – with higher frequencies, filtering requires smaller components but losses can be greater in inductors.

Lets Try it Out!

Being a practical sort of guy, I just thought “meh, lets just try it out and see what happens.” The first candidate for modification is the Power on the Go! unit which had decent regulation but a failure to meet ripple specs. It wasn’t too far out, so it was a good candidate to try playing with.

Lets first piggy back a 1200uF Matsushita Low-ESR electrolytic capacitor (overkill) and a polyester greencap on the USB output and see what happens.

DSC_7726

Well, what do you know? Ripple improved. Slightly.

Power-On-The-Go-PlusCaps-1A

Formerly, the ripple at 1A averaged 627.2mV, now it is 248.1mV. Looks like the bulk capacitance did help the ripple somewhat because of the relatively low 300khz switching rate. Unfortunately, the main contributor to ripple is the fast, high frequency rise spikes. How can we deal with this?

I know! Lets try piggybacking a ceramic capacitor onto it.

DSC_7728

At this point, the unit failed to start up, and removing all of my modifications made no difference. It seems I have killed it. Damn. Failure is always an option.

It seems I may have inadvertently shorted something out at one stage, which shouldn’t have made contact, and that may have destroyed the switching MOSFET or microcontroller. There wasn’t any heat, smell or visible sign of distress.

Lessons Learned So Far

It seems that I might have been too hasty with my attempt to modify, and now that power bank rests in pieces. Nice cells though.

Using very large bulk electrolytics with low ESR seems to be a bad choice, after some further research, as they often draw a very high current to charge up when the converter is starting up. This “overkill” was okay back in the days of mains transformers as they could tolerate abuse, but it seems switching converters with “closely” specified MOSFETs might not be as happy.

In fact, using electrolytics isn’t a good idea at all at high ripple frequencies. Their apparent capacitance falls quite quickly as a function of frequency, and really aren’t good for applications above 100khz. I sort of knew that, but didn’t know their effectiveness fell off so quickly.

The guides also point to another enemy of the non-ideal capacitor, normally denoted XL, which stands for self inductance. This property affects the capacitor’s “speed” at reacting to changes to input.

As a result, for high frequency operation, ceramic capacitors offer very quick response and low self inductance but very limited capacitance. Electrolytic capacitors offer slow response with limited frequency response, but with much greater capacitance. Tantalum and polyester capacitors sit somewhere in the middle depending on the capacitance. This might explain why so many of the power banks appeared to have a single smaller tantalum capacitor – as it may have a higher effective capacitance at the frequency of interest.

As it seems, there’s a whole plethora of things to consider when choosing the right capacitors during switching converter design. However, it seems a mixture of capacitor types is important for suppressing different sorts (frequency wise) of ripple. Remember, the ripple itself is a complex waveform – the square edges correspond to a wide range of frequencies from low to very high, whereas the “slower” variation corresponds to the lower frequencies. So it seems my idea was … on the right track.

Giving it Another Shot

With the other power bank in the bin, I had to choose another one. In this case, I decided to go for the Lanu Power LP-401B with the counterfeit cells, which I would sacrifice anyway (I don’t need another risk in the house!). I had some “salvaged” capacitors I stole from old boards to play with, so lets give this another go.

At 1A, this power bank originally put out a ripple of 763.6mV which is quite high. Putting one ceramic capacitor across the output, rating 4.7nF …

oneceramic

… increased it to 810.4mV. What? It seems to have an oscillatory effect on the system which increased the spike heights.

Lets try two ceramic capacitors in parallel, for a total of 104.7nF.

It was then, like before, this power bank decided not to power up at all. Not having gotten over the guilt of breaking the last one, did I kill, yet another power bank?

The answer was, no. It turns out that my disassembly and re-assembly had triggered the protection mechanism in the microcontroller, which is reset by applying charger power.

Maybe the last one didn’t die, but I mistook it as dead. Either way, the guilt lingers.

Back to the show …

twoceramic

Now we’re down to 724.9mV but that’s only a marginal improvement. Lets add a 1uF polyester capacitor to add some bulk capacitance to it … for a total of 1.1047uF total capacitance …

twoceramic-onepolyester

and what a big difference that makes. We are now down to 221.3mV peak to peak, which is starting to reach the territory where it might be comfortable to use. That’s three capacitors, not even 50c worth of components.

But not content with this, lets try super-sizing this. Lets chuck a 680uF Low-ESR electrolytic on the top …

twoceramic-onepolyester-oneelectrolytic

… 228.7mV. Not much change, a slight increase actually. This thus validates that the contribution of electrolytic capacitors at 1Mhz+ is pretty non-existent. But 1Mhz is pretty high for a switching frequency.

Lets try four ceramic and one polyester for a total of 1.3047uF.

fourceramic-onepolyester

This brings us down to 169.4mV peak to peak, on par with wall chargers from something that was out of spec just a moment ago. Lets try adding another polyester cap to it, for a total of 1.3727uF.

fourceramic-twopolyester

A further improvement to 137.8mV is seen, although there is a feeling of diminishing returns. Part of the reason is that, the longer the leads of the capacitor, the more self inductance exists due to the leads themselves. Therefore, it’s best for this to be mounted on the PCB itself (i.e. designed with it in mind) and with as short leads and traces as possible! I have the distinct feeling that it needs another ceramic capacitor.

fiveceramic-twopolyester

We get down to 126.7mV from a 763.6mV starting point – an 83.4% reduction in ripple, with a sum total of components that cost no more than $2 but compromise the form factor. It shows that quality needs not be expensive but needs to be designed properly!

DSC_7732

Please don’t write about the hackiness of this soldering. I know. It’s hacky. But that’s what happens when I decide to explore. After its noble effort, this power bank was disposed along with several others which were otherwise damaged or very non-compliant (i.e. the majority). I have no room for sub-par equipment.

Conclusion

I think it’s clear that I’m learning as I go, and trying to explain things to the best of my knowledge. I’m rediscovering some things which I had entirely forgotten. Not having dealt with linear power supplies and analog electronics for a very long time meant that I forgot what might even be considered basic for some people. But it was an interesting course of discovery – for example, you don’t need much capacitance for high frequency converters, but you do need effective capacitance. Just throwing capacitors at the problem, especially electrolytics, are unlikely to provide too many benefits unless the switching frequency is low, and the waveform contains larger slow components. A mixture of capacitance is best, allowing each capacitor to contribute where it is able to.

High quality ceramic multilayer capacitors are probably the best pick to augment existing capacitors (if any), given their higher capacitance and high frequency response. The ones I used were traditional ceramic disc capacitors salvaged from old electronics, and so offer much less capacitance for the same space.

So there, it’s possible to fix your own power bank … maybe. Or break it. Whatever.

About lui_gough

I'm a bit of a nut for electronics, computing, photography, radio, satellite and other technical hobbies. Click for more about me!
This entry was posted in Electronics, Power Bank and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Exploration: Improving Power Bank Ripple Performance

  1. snailmail says:

    what is the affect (good AND bad ) of this ripple ?
    if i think of this ripple as a sinosoidal wave riding on a DC wave . the ill affect from the sinosoidal can be be when at negative cycle it discharges the device it is supposed to charge .. this would happen if the negative cycle goes below the voltage level of the device it is charging ..

    so as long as its negative cycle stays above certain level (should be 4.7 as 4.3v maximum for battery charging and 4 volts for the compoenets .. and below certain level specified by device maximum operating limits it should have no ill consequnce.

    please can you do some writing on these ?
    affect of ripple in mobile chargers and what disadvantage it could cause ..

    • lui_gough says:

      I don’t have the time to explain everything – most of the things I write are targeted at engineers who already understand these concepts.

      In short, ripple is bad. There is no upside to it. It is an unwanted byproduct of the switching converted stages which escaped filtering.

      Devices are designed to require a certain voltage to operate and charge correctly. If the average voltage falls below what is needed, slow charging or incomplete charging may result.

      Devices are designed to operate with small amounts of ripple and noise in the power. Too much of this can have effects such as erratic touch screen responses when plugged in, noisy audio output, inconsistent charging, additional stress on capacitors and voltage regulators causing heat and premature ageing, to even crashing or reboots of the device due to brownout (especially relevant to non battery USB devices like the Raspberry Pi). Extremely high levels of ripple may cause peaks (surges) to exceed absolute maximum ratings causing permanent device damage.

      Running any device outside its design parameters and expecting no ill consequence is silly. It might have no immediate consequences, but the damage may manifest itself over time as cells are overcharged due to charge regulators not reacting fast enough to spikes, or silicon receiving higher than expected voltages repeatedly. USB is strictly 5v +/- 0.25v inclusive of resistive losses and ripple and noise.

      – Gough

Error: Comment is Missing!