In message 
          The Natural Philosopher  wrote:

> On 16/01/2021 20:09, David Higton wrote:
> > Using an inductor in a conventional step-down switching regulator is much
> > more efficient, and of course requires the inductor to store energy.
> >
>
> No, it doesn't have to store ALL the energy - like it does in a step up
>
> And if you don't mind massive ripple, it isn't needed *at all*. Consider a
> 6V battery deeding a 3V lamp. Simply chop the 6V on a 50%  duty cycle and
> there you are. No choke needed at all.

Yes, but that situation is entirely unlike what the OP was talking about,
and is indeed inapplicable.

> Add an LC filter and the cap stores all that is necessary. All the L  does
> is limit the peak current into the C.

If it's going to limit the current, it must not saturate, in which case
it'd store the energy that you claim is unnecessary.  You'd also have
to remove the energy from the inductor every time the switch switched
off, otherwise the switch would break down.  Basically you'd have created
a conventional step-down converter.

Or, if the inductor saturated but still limited the current, it would
have to be a high enough resistance to be quite lossy.

David

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05