R22, C22, C23, together with Rfbt (feedback top) and Rfbb (feedback bottom) form what is called a type II compensator, using TL431 as an opamp with built-in reference. The feedback network is a bit different than what you'd see -- usually it's R22 series with C23, and C22 in parallel with both of them, but it doesn't matter as long as the overall transfer function is achieved (there's probably a more readable way to write it):

$$H(s)=\dfrac{C_{22}||C_{23}}{R_{fbt}}\dfrac{s+\dfrac{1}{R_{22}(C_{22}+C_{23})}}{s(s+\dfrac{1}{R_{22}C_{22}})}$$

Its purpose is to add a pole and a zero in the feedback loop such that the phase gain at the cross-over is enough to avoid instabilities (usually around $60^\circ$ or so). If you'd use a SPICE simulation with a regular opamp (or ideal, in this case) and that particular network, you'd get this frequency response:

As you can see, there's a zero at around 10 kHz which adds phase (it goes positive), and a pole at 100+ kHz, whose purpose is to bring the phase back. The peak is about $70^\circ$ worth, and that's about how much phase would be gained if the peak coincided with the desired frequency (which I don't know, that's up to the designer).

About R/C/D21, I also have no clue about ther purpose. If the diode was meant for reverse voltage protection then why does it have R21 in there, and if it was meant as a sort of a voltage stabilizer, or limiter, then why did they use a Schottky and why isn't the voltage at the K junction used, instead? Olin's guess seems like a better one, about the pulse, but I give up.

Replying to your comment took too long, so I decided to edit the answer, instead.

The switching frequency of that flyback is 98kHz. So it corresponds with the chart of the compensator response you posted.

The switching frequency of the converter has nothing to do with the choice for the compensating pole. In fact, ...

Do I understand it correctly that it (R22, C22, C23) basically filters out 100kHz ripple from feedback?

... I never said anything about any ripple and filtering, but about stability and phase margin (gain).

I don't know how much you know these, so if I happen to repeat what you already know, just skip those lines. A flyback's "transformer" is nothing more than two (or more) coupled inductors. As such, there is a magnetizing inductance in there that, together with the output capacitor and the load, form an LC filter of varying quality factor (the load is not fixed). Because it's an LC filter it means that the phase shift at the output can reach $-180^\circ$ (asymptotically). Due to the presence of other parasitics and/or additional filtering (sometimes another small valued LC filter is added, for additional filtering), the phase may reach and exceed $-180^\circ$ when the magnitude gain is 0 dB, which can lead to oscillations. Even if it doesn't oscillate, operating the controller with a phase margin that is too close to the limit will cause the converter's transient response to wobble with a decaying exponential (best case scenario), eventually settling to a value (which is not at all desirable, but at least it settles down). The worst case is oscillation, but also wobbling uncontrollably, since the feedback loop will try to compensate the error and it ends up chasing its own tail. This is why, in practice, a phase margin of at least $40^\circ...50^\circ$ is used.

Therefore it's all about stability. If that pole would be needed at 1 MHz in order for the phase to be tamed, then that's where it would be placed. It's not the value of the frequency, but the value of the total phase which needs to be compensated due to the inherent filtering (and imperfections) that's part of a switching converter.

posted over 3 years ago

CC BY-SA 4.0

3y ago

a concerned citizen‭

391 reputation 0 16 39 13