Design of Forward Converter with Energy Regenerative

Snubber

1. Introduction

The forward converter is a relatively simple and popular topology and retains many

features of the buck converter. The greatest advantage of the forward converter is its

ability to provide multiple outputs by means of an isolation transformer. With a proper

choice of the transformers’ turn-ratio the forward converter can attain wide voltage

step-down useful for off-line applications. In addition, forward converter provides the

load with non-pulsating output current and, therefore, is well suited for high output

current applications. Moreover, with linear small-signal control-to-output transfer

function, a fixed output filter resonant frequency and no right half-plain-zeros the

forward converter is quite easy to control. These advantages make the forward

converter the designers’ choice for low to medium isolated off-line power

applications.

The transformer, however, brings in two main problems. Firstly, the transformer core

needs to be reset to prevent the magnetizing current build up and transformer damage.

Secondly, the transformer leakage inductance has to be discharged to prevent voltage

spike and switch over-voltage breakdown. These problems were tackled by many
researchers in the past and still are of interest at present.

In the classical configuration the forward converter uses a tertiary winding for core

reset as shown in Fig. 1 (a). By this method the magnetizing inductance energy is

recycled to the source. The reset winding somewhat complicates the transformer

structure, and a reset diode is also required. However, a major disadvantage of the

reset winding method is that the high voltage spike across the active switch caused by

the transformer leakage inductance discharge can not be put off. Another disadvantage

is the hard turn-off of the active switch.

D1 Lo 1: n D1 Lo

V1 V2 D2 Co Vo RL V1 V2 Vo
V3 D2 Co RL
RS CS
1 : n2 : n3
DS
Vg DR Vg

Vds Vds
Vgs Vgs

(a) (b)

Fig. 1. Forward converter with transformer reset winding (a) and RCD clamp (b).

An alternative method of forward converter transformer reset is using a RCD clamp

as shown in Fig. 1 (b). The RCD clamp circuit is quite simple, consisting only of three

components, a resistor, a capacitor and a diode and requires a simpler two winding

transformer. The clamp absorbs the magnetizing inductor energy as well as provides a

discharge path for the leakage inductance. Thus, with RCD clamp the transformer is

totally reset and the power switch experiences significantly less voltage stress than

that with the reset-winding method. For these reasons, RCD clamp forward converter
is widely used in power supply industry. The main disadvantage of RCD clamp is that

the recovered energy is dissipated and the overall converters’ efficiency deteriorates.

Moreover, with the RCD clamp the switch still experiences a hard turn-off.

An elegant solution proposed by [1], [2] was using a non dissipative LCD snubber as

shown in Fig. 2 (a). As the switch turns off the transformer core is reset by

transferring the magnetizing and the leakage energy to the snubber capacitor via Ds1.

At switch turn-on the snubber capacitor, CS, resonates with the snubber inductor, LS,

and then recycles the absorbed energy back to the source via the snubber diodes Ds1

and Ds2. The non-dissipative turn-off snubber protects the switch from excessive

voltage and second-breakdown stress caused by the energy stored in the leakage

inductance of the transformer. A considerable advantage over the commonly used

RCD clamp is that the non-dissipative snubber recycles the magnetizing energy and,

thus, improves the converters’ efficiency. Moreover the lossless snubber provides the

active switch Zero Voltage (ZV) turn-off which also improves efficiency. Another

advantage of the non-dissipative snubber is that the reset winding and the reset diode,

which are usually used in forward converter, are eliminated. This also means that the

power transformer structure is simpler, requiring only two windings. However, this

comes at the cost of an additional inductive component in the circuit.

Recently, a regenerative snubber for Flyback converter using an auxiliary winding

was proposed in [3] as shown in Fig. 2 (b). The hidden feature of this circuit is the

auxiliary winding leakage inductance which is exploited to perform the task of the

resonant inductor in Fig. 2 (a). Also, there is no need for a separate core since the
tertiary winding is a part of the main transformer structure. Since the flyback

transformer reset is attained inherently through normal operation, the objective of the

snubber in Fig. 2 (b) is only to recycle the leakage energy back to the source and,
dv
therefore, alleviate the voltage spike across the switch and moderate the .
dt
1: n D1 Lo 1 : n2 : n3 D1

V1 V2 D2 Co Vo RL V1 V2 C Vo
DS 1 DS 1 o RL
Cs Cs

Vg DS 2 Vg DS 2

Vds Vds
Ls V3
Vgs Vgs

(a) (b)

Fig. 2. Forward converter with the Non-dissipating snubber (a), Flyback converter

with the regenerative snubber (b).

In this paper a regenerative snubber for the forward converter is proposed. The

suggested snubber is an evolution of the reset and snubber circuits of Fig. 1(a), Fig. 2

(a) and Fig. 2 (b) and attains the best of their characteristics. As compare to the

non-dissipative snubber, the proposed energy regenerative snubber has all the

advantages of the former, however, eliminates the need for a discrete inductor. When

properly designed, the proposed snubber: a) allows zero-voltage turn-off; b) provides

dv
transformer reset; c) absorbs the leakage energy; d) controls switch ; e) transfers
dt
the recovered energy to both to the source and to the load side; and f) provides

zero-current turn-on. This paper presents the principle of operation of the proposed

regenerative snubber, as well as simulation and experimental results.

2. The proposed topology

A forward converter with the proposed energy regenerative snubber is shown in Fig. 3.

The snubber is comprised of the capacitor C1, tertiary transformer winding n3, and a

pair of snubber diodes, DS1 and DS2. The resemblance with the regenerative snubber

of the flyback converter in Fig. 2(b) is obvious. However, the forward converter

operation is very much different from the flyback converter operation. The

dissimilarities arise due to the different winding polarity arrangement, reset

requirement of the transformer core and nature of the rectifier and the output filter. In

a flyback converter the input and output circuits conduct consecutively whereas, in

forward converter the primary and secondary conduct simultaneously. While the

capacitive filter in flyback converter clamps the secondary winding to the output

voltage, inductive output filter in the forward converter can sustain primary current

and affect the snubber. Flyback converter operates by charging the transformer core

and then discharging the magnetizing energy to the load, thus, transformer reset is

natural whereas, a forward converter lacks such reset mechanism. Accordingly,

snubber task in a flyback converter is to absorb the leakage energy whereas, in the

forward converter the snubber should provide both core reset and discharge of leakage

inductance.
 1 : n2 : n3 D1 I D1 I o Lo
I D2
DS1 V1 V2 D Co Vo RL
2
VC1
I Ds1
C1
Vg
V3 I ds
M
DS 2 Vds
Cds
Vgs
I Ds 2

Fig. 3. Forward converter with the proposed energy regenerative snubber.

3. Analysis of Energy Regenerative Snubber

The transformer is central to analyzing the operation of the forward converter with the

proposed regenerative snubber of Fig. 3. The analysis to follow relies on the three

winding transformer model, shown in Fig. 4. Here, the transformers’ magnetizing and

the leakage inductances are all referred to the primary. In the following it is assumed

that all the semiconductor switches are ideal with zero forward voltage drop and no

storage time. It is also assumed that the ac current ripple of the large output filter

inductor, LO, is negligible. Therefore, to study the snubber operation within one cycle

of the switching frequency, the filter and load are substituted by a dc current sink, IO.

These assumptions lead to the equivalent circuit of Fig 5, which shows the forward

converter with the proposed regenerative snubber with the load side reflected to the

primary. Fig. 5 also explicitly reveals how the transformers’ magnetizing and leakage

inductances of the primary and secondary affect the circuit.

 LL1 LL 2

1 : n3 1 : n2
LL 3
V1 V2
LM V3

Fig. 4. A three winding transformer model.

LL1 LL 2 n2 I D1 D1

DS 1 V1 D2
LM
I Ds1 VC1 n2 I D 2
n2 I o

Vg
C1 I ds
V3 M
Vds
DS 2 Vgs Cds
I Ds 2

Fig. 5. Equivalent circuit of the forward converter with regenerative snubber with the

load side reflected to the primary.

 Vds

VC 1
0 t

Vout VD 2

0 t

I D2 I ds I D1

0 t

I Ds1 I Ds 2
0 t
B
AC D E F G H I
t 0 t1 t2 t3 t 4 t5 t6 t7 t8 Ts
Fig. 6. The waveforms of a forward converter with the proposed energy regenerative
snubber during a complete switching period.
The proposed snubber capacitances and transformer inductances comprise a rather

complicated multi-resonant system. Resonant networks are known to exhibit many

operational modes as function of the switching frequency, duty cycle and loading

conditions. The waveforms of a main operational mode of the proposed energy

regenerative snubber are shown in Fig. 6. Inspection of the converters’ waveforms

reveals that during one cycle of the switching frequency the snubber goes through

nine topological states. The equivalent circuits of the snubber states are given in Fig. 7.

The description follows.

 LL1 LL 2 n2 I D1 D1 LL1

DS 1 V1 D2 DS 2 LL 3
LM
I Ds1 n2 I o Vg VC 1 LM D2 n2 I o
VC 1 n2 I D 2 n32C1
n3
Vg
C1 M
I ds
V3
M
Vds
DS 2 Cds
Vgs
I Ds 2

(a) State A (t0-t1).

LL1 LL 2 n2 I D1 D1
LL 3 LL 2 D1
V1 D2 DS 2
DS1 LM
VC1 n2 I o Vg VC1 n32C1 LM D2
I Ds1 n2 I D 2 n2 I o
n3
Vg
C1 M I ds
V3 I ds
M
DS 2 Vds
I Ds 2 Cds
Vgs

(b) State B (t1-t2).

LL1 LL 2 n2 I D1 D1 LL1 LL 2 D1
LL 3
V1 D2 DS 1
DS 1 LM Vg
n2 I o LM n2 I o
VC1 Vg
I Ds1 n2 I D 2
Vg n32
C1 I ds DS 2 M I ds
V3
M
DS 2 Vds
Cds
I Ds 2 Vgs

(c) State C (t3-t4).

 LL1 LL 2 n2 I D1 D1 LL1 LL 2 D1

DS 1 V1 Vg LM
D2 n2 I o
LM n2 I o
I Ds1 VC1 n2 I D 2
M I ds
Vg
C1 I ds
V3
M
Vds
DS 2 Cds
I Ds 2 Vgs

(d)State D (t4-t5).

LL1 LL 2 n2 I D1 D1 LL1 LL 2 D1
DS1
DS1 LM
V1 D2 C1 n2 I o
LM VC1
I Ds1 VC1 n2 I o
n2 I D 2
Vg
Vg Vds
C1 C ds
I ds
V3
M
DS 2 Vds
Vgs Cds
I Ds2

(e) State E (t5-t6).

LL1 LL 2 n2 I D1 D1 LL1 LL 2 D1
DS 1 n2 I o
DS 1 n2 I o LM
V1 C1 D2
LM VC1
I Ds1 VC1 D2
n2 I D 2 Vg
Vg Vds
C1 Cds
I ds
V3
M
DS 2 Vds
Vgs Cds
I Ds 2

(f) State F (t6-t7).

 LL1 LL 2 n2 I D1 D1 LL1
DS 1 n2 I o
DS 1 V1 D2 LM
LM C1 VC1 D2
I Ds1 VC1 n2 I o
n2 I D 2
Vg
Vg Vds
C1 Cds
I ds
V3
M
DS 2 Vds
Vgs Cds
I Ds 2

(g) State G (t7-t8).

LL1 LL 2 n2 I D1 D1 LL1

n2 I o
n2 I o LM
DS 1 V1
LM D2
I Ds1 VC1 D2
n2 I D 2 Vg
Vg Vds
C1 Cds
I ds
V3
M
Vds
DS 2 Cds
Vgs
I Ds 2

(h) State H (t8-t9).

LL1 LL 2 n2 I D1 D1 LL1

n2 I o
DS 1 V1 D2 LM
VC1 D2
LM
I Ds1 VC1 n2 I D 2 n2 I o
Vg C1
Vg
C1 I ds n3
Vds
V3 Cds
M DS 2
DS 2 Vds
Vgs Cds I Ds 2
I Ds 2

(i) State I (t9-t10).

Fig. 7. Topological states of the forward converter with energy regenerative snubber.

State A (t0-t1) commences as the duty cycle command initiates the power switch

turn-on. The equivalent circuit of State A is shown in Fig. 7 (a). Here, the power
switch is on and applies the input dc voltage to the transformers’ primary. The rectifier

diode D1 is off whereas, D2 is on and carries the output current. The snubber capacitor

C1 is allowed to discharge on the tertiary winding via the snubber diode DS2. Initially,

C1 is positively charged and still holding some of the energy absorbed during the

transformer reset from the preceding cycle. Now, the leakage inductances LL1 and LL3

start resonating and exchange energy with the snubber capacitor C1. The voltage

across C1 rings, and reverses polarity. State A terminates as the voltage across C1

change polarity and turns D1 on.

State B (t1-t2) commences as the power rectifiers D1 start conducting. The equivalent

circuit of State B is shown in Fig. 7 (b). Here, the snubber capacitor C1 is reflected to

the primary. The snubber capacitance resonates with all three leakage inductances LL1,

LL2 and LL3. The resonant current commutates the output rectifiers. State B terminates

as the voltage across C1 reaches (-Vg) and the snubber diode DS1 clamps C1 voltage to

the source. At the final instant of state B the leakage inductances LL1 and LL3 still

store some surplus energy, previously stored in the snubber capacitor. Also

worthwhile mentioning that clamping the snubber capacitor to the source ensures

correct pre-charging of C1, and prepares true zero voltage turn-off condition for the

power switch in a later stage.

State C (t3-t4) commences as both the snubber diodes DS1 and DS2 conduct and

provide the tertiary winding a conduction path to the input source. Input voltage, Vg,
appears both across the transformers’ primary and tertiary windings. Transformer

model in Fig. 4 is used to reflect the tertiary winding voltage to the primary. The

resulting equivalent circuit of State C is shown in Fig. 7 (c). The tertiary transformer

turn ratio is smaller than unity, n3 < 1 , hence, the reflected voltage is greater than the

Vg
input voltage > Vg . Consequently, in Fig. 7 (c) the leakage inductances LL1 and
n3

LL3 are discharging. In other words, the snubber is recycling the energy stored in the

leakage inductances back to the source via the tertiary winding. This is the

regenerative action of the snubber. During the state C the secondary winding voltage

raises according to the secondary to tertiary turns ratio. For this reason a voltage pulse

n2
appears across the free-wheeling diode D2 with a magnitude of approximately Vg .
n3

State C terminates as the leakage inductances are discharged and snubber diodes are

cut off under zero current condition. The primary leakage inductance, LL1, keeps

carrying both the magnetizing and the reflected load current components.

State D (t4-t5) commences as both the snubber diodes DS1 and DS2 are cut off. The

equivalent circuit of State D is shown in Fig. 7 (d). Here, the power transformer

supplies the load side, the transformer magnetizing inductance is charged and the

magnetizing current ramps. State D continues for a while until the power transistor is

turned off by the drive signal command.

State E (t5-t6) commences as the power transistor is cut off. The equivalent circuit of
State E is shown in Fig. 7 (e). Here, the transformers’ magnetizing current forces the

snubber diode DS1 on. Since the snubber capacitor C1 is pre-charged to (–Vg) from

state C, the power switch turns off under zero voltage condition. The voltage across

C1 is discharged by both the magnetizing and the reflected load currents. This means

that some of the energy stored in C1 is released to the load side. Negative voltage

across C1 keeps the rectifier diode D1 on and, as a result, the reflected load current

keeps flowing in the primary winding, see Fig. 6. As the voltage across C1 decreases

the voltage across the switch capacitance, Cds, increases. Both the snubber capacitor

C1, and the switch parasitic capacitance, Cds, appear in parallel and form an

equivalent snubber capacitance referred to the primary:

C S = C1 + C ds (1)

State E terminates as the snubber capacitor C1 voltage polarity reverses allowing the

rectifier D2 to cut in.

The duration of State E interval depends on the operating conditions. Under heavy

load the reflected output current quickly discharges the snubber capacitance. At light

loading, however, the duration of state E is the longest, approaching a quarter of the

resonant period determined by the total capacitance seen by the primary winding and

the total primary inductance:

π
∆t 5 ≤ (Lm + LL1 )CS (2)
2

State F (t6-t7) commences as the power rectifier D2 is turned on. The equivalent circuit

of the State F is shown in Fig. 7 (f). Here, the snubber capacitor, C1, and the switch
capacitance, Cds, resonate with the leakage inductances, LL1 and LL2. The resonance is

driven by the transformer magnetizing current. The large magnetizing inductance only

marginally affects the resonant frequency. The resonant current starts the power

rectifiers’ commutation so that D1 current drops while D2 current rises. State F is

terminated as D1 is turned off at zero current and D2 conducts the full load current.

The duration of state F depends on the load current and is much shorter than quarter

cycle of the leakage resonant period:

π
t6 < (LL1 + LL2 )CS (3)
2

State G (t7-t8) commences as D1 is cut off. The equivalent circuit of State G is shown

in Fig. 7 (g). Here, the snubber capacitor C1 is allowed to participate in resonance

together with Cds and the leakage inductances LL1 and the magnetizing inductance Lm.

State G terminates as the magnetizing current drops to zero and DS1 turns off. As the

magnetizing inductance energy is transferred to the snubber capacitance the

transformer reset is now complete.

The equivalent snubber capacitance, CS, resonates with the transformer winding

inductance for a quarter of the resonant period. Therefore, the approximated duration

of state G is:
π
∆t 7 ≈ (L m + LL1 LL 2 )C S (4)
2

State H (t8-t9) commences as DS1 is cut off. The equivalent circuit of State H is shown

in Fig. 7 (h). Here, the switch parasitic capacitor, Cds , resonates with the leakage

inductances LL2 and the magnetizing inductance Lm. Initially, Cds is charged above the
source voltage, Vg, and, thus, the magnetizing inductance current reverses. Therefore,

some of the energy stored in Cds is recycled to the source. State H ends as the switch

capacitance voltage drops and allows the snubber diode DS1 start conducting.

The duration of state H, is about a quarter of resonant period determined by the

magnetizing inductance and the switch drain to source capacitance, Cds :

π
∆t8 ≈ (Lm + LL2 )Cds (6)
2

State I (t9-t10) commences as DS1 turns on. The equivalent circuit of State I is shown in

Fig. 7 (i). Here, DS1 conducts and allows discharge of the snubber capacitance, C1 via

both the primary and tertiary windings. Note, that since the windings appear in series,

2
the equivalent inductance seen by C1 is approximately (1+ n3 ) Lm .The negative

magnetizing current recycles some of the snubber energy back to the source. State I

lasts till the end of the switching cycle.

4. Approximate Snubber Analysis

The proposed regenerative snubber operation, as described in the previous section,

reveals multiple resonant intervals. Clearly, a complete analytical solution of the

snubber states is a rather tedious task. Moreover, in view of the restricted component

values and limited tolerances, the exact solution is of little value to a practicing

engineer. A circuit designer would rather have at his disposal a straightforward design

procedure that can provide fast approximate results. Hence, approximate snubber

analysis is offered based on several simplifying considerations.

a) Duty Cycle Limitation

In order to de-energize a transformer core an appropriate volt-sec should be applied to

the transformer winding. Hence, the circuit designer should resolve the tradeoff

between the applied voltage and the reset time requirements. The described forward

converter with the proposed energy regenerating snubber completes the transformer

reset and the turn-off transient in within the time interval of:

∆toff = ∆t5 + ∆t6 + ∆t7 + ∆t8 (6)

Substituting the expressions (2), (3), (4), and, (5) into (6) gives:
π
∆toff ≤ (Lm + LL1 )C S + π (LL1 + LL 2 )CS + π (Lm + LL1 LL 2 )CS + π (Lm + LL 2 )Cds
2 2 2 2
(7)

It is assumed that the snubber capacitance required is greater then the switch parasitic

capacitance, C1 > C ds . Thus, the contribution of the last term in (7) is insignificant.

The second term in (7) is determined by leakage inductances and can be neglected too.

These considerations lead to a simple estimation of the maximum reset time as:

∆toff ≤ ∆t off max ≈ π L p C S (8)

where, L p = Lm + LL1 , is the total primary inductance.

When the converter is operated at maximum allowable duty cycle Stage I could be

arbitrary shorten, so that the next cycle can start right after the state H terminates. In

this case the controller should allow a sufficient reset time by making the switch

off-time, Toff, longer than ∆toff max :

Toff = Doff Ts ≥ ∆toff max (9)

Hence, a limitation on the converters’ maximum on duty-cycle arises. Combining (8)

and (9) the maximum allowable on duty-cycle is derived as:

Don max ≈ 1 − π ⋅ f s ⋅ L p CS (10)

Here, as usual, Ts is the switching period and fs is the switching frequency, Doff is the

off duty cycle and Don =1-Doff is the on duty cycle.

b) The Switch Voltage Stress.

The worst case voltage stress scenario arises when the converter is operated at

maximum duty cycle and under light load conditions. The energy acquired by the

snubber capacitor C1 during state E, is:

1
EC1 ≈ C1Vg2 (11)
2
With no load the energy, EC1, is left circulating in the circuit.

The leakage and magnetizing energy stored in the transformer primary is proportional

to the duty cycle:

2 2
1 1  Vg DonTs 
 = 1
 Vg Don 
Em = L p I m2 = L p    (12)
2 2  L p 
 2L p  fs 

As the snubber capacitor absorbs the magnetic energy the voltage across the capacitor

increases to:

2(EC1 + Em )  1  Vg Don 
2
2
VCs max ≈ = Vg2 +    (13)
CS  L p CS  fs  

Clearly, the highest voltage appears at the highest duty cycle, Don = Don max . The

normalized snubber voltage can be derived using (10) and (13) as function of the max

duty cycle Don max :

 1

V   πD 
2
2
VCs max norm = Cs max = 1 +  on max
  (14)
Vg   1 − Don max  

Recall that the expression (13) above was derived under no load condition. Under full

load the initial snubber capacitor energy, EC1, is quickly discharged. Hence, the term

Vg2 disappears from equation (13) and does not contribute to the voltage build up.

Accordingly, the unity term disappears from (14). As a result, under full load

conditions, the snubber voltage is lower and, for arbitrary duty cycle, Don, is given by:

πDon
VCsnorm = (15)
1 − Don max

The normalized peak switch voltage is given by:

V pknorm
V pknorm = = 1 + VCsnorm (16)
Vg

The maximum normalized peak switch voltage as function of Don max is plotted in

Fig.8. The differences between the max and min voltage stress are noticeable at low

duty cycle range, however, diminish as the max duty cycle increases. A practical limit

to operate the converter is probably up to Donmax=0.4, where the normalized peak

voltage is moderate and equals 3.32. Clearly, for max duty cycle beyond 0.5, the

voltage stress becomes quite significant. Extending the max duty cycle up to

Donmax=0.6 increases the normalized peak switch voltage to 5.82. This means that for

off line applications, a switch with quite high voltage blocking capability is required.
 V pkMnorm
Don max

Fig. 8. Max normalized switch peak voltage as a function of max duty cycle Don max

under extreme loading conditions.

c) Switch voltage rise rate

Under heavy load C1 is rapidly discharged by the dominant reflected current

component. Thus, neglecting the magnetizing current component, the fastest rate of

voltage rise across the power switch is:

 dVds  n2 I
  ≈ 2 O max (17)
 dt  max CS

d) Input Current Pulse and Minimum Duty Cycle Limit

Inspection of the waveforms of Fig. 6 (b) reveals a quite significant quasi-sinusoidal

current pulse in the switch current during the switch turn-on transient. The current

pulse develops during the State B as the leakage inductances LL1 and LL3 resonate

with the snubber capacitor C1. In sake of clarity, the equivalent circuit of Fig. 7 (b) is

simplified and redrawn referred to the tertiary as shown in Fig. 9. Only the resonant

contour is presented. Note, that the actual switch current is a sum of the primary
resonant pulse and the tertiary resonant pulse superimposed on the reflected load

current component. Hence, the switch current pulse has a peak value of:

C1
I pk = n2 I O + (1 + n3 )(n3Vg + VCs max ) (18)
n (LL1 + LL 3 )
2
3

Since the snubber capacitance voltage, VCsmax, depends on the load and on duty cycle,

see eq. (13), so does the peak current, Ipk.

n32 LL1 n32 LL 3

n3Vg C1 VC1

Fig. 9. State B simplified equivalent circuit referred to the tertiary.

Note that, due to the fact that transformer is reset each switching cycle, switch turn-on

occurs with zero primary current. The resonant pulse follows the switch turn-on and,

thus, does not abolish the zero current switching conditions.

The resonant pulse current requires the on-time to last longer than half the resonant

cycle. Accordingly, in order to avoid switching under ubnormal conditions, the on

duty-cycle should be limited to a minimum value of:

Don min ≈ πf s (LL1 + LL3 )n32C1 (19)

A simple, however, overestimated value of the resonant pulse rms switch current is:

Don min
I Pr ms = I pk (20)
2

The resonant pulse amplitude should be limited by design to avoid unnecessary

conduction losses. A larger leakage inductance, LL1, and larger tertiary turn ratio, n3,

help decreasing the resonant peak.

e) Zero Voltage Turn-Off Condition

The initial voltage of the snubber capacitor C1 at the onset of state B is determined by

the stored energy from the preceding cycle, which is given by equation (13) whereas,

the resonant current component of the leakage inductors LL1 and LL3 is zero. With

these initial conditions the capacitor voltage in Fig. 9 tends to reach the peak value of:

 πDon 
VC1 = −(2n3Vg + VCs ) = −Vg  2 n3 +  (21)
 1 − Don max 

In a normal mode of operation, by the end of state B, the snubber capacitor voltage,

should overshoot the input source voltage and turn the clamp diode, DS1, on. However,

under heavy load and low duty cycle conditions the snubber energy may become

insufficient. With the snubber low on energy, the snubber capacitor voltage

undershoots the source voltage. As a result, clamp state C will not take place and the

snubber changes operation mode. The disadvantage of this mode change is that the

power switch turns off at some remnant voltage, ∆Vds , which is given by:

 πDon 
∆Vds = Vg + VC1 = V g − Vg  2 n3 +  > 0 (22)
 1 − Don max 

Hence, the zero voltage turn–off conditions are lost. A properly designed snubber

should avoid mode change and provide zero voltage switching conditions, ∆Vds = 0 ,

or at least minimize the turn off voltage and keep the turn-off losses low.

f) Active Switch Utilization

Generally, in order to attain higher efficiency, Buck derived converters should be

operated at as large a duty cycle as possible. The duty cycle, however, is limited by

switching stress. To find an optimum operating point, switch utilization function is

considered next.

The forward converter output power is given by:

PO = n2 DVg I O (23)

whereas, the switch rms current can be approximated as:

I Srms ≈ n2 I O D (24)

Thus, using (23), (24) and (15) the switch utilization function, defined as in reference

[7], can be derived as follows:

PO D (1 − D )
U (D ) = = (25)
V pk I Srms (1 + (π − 1)D )

The plot of the switch utilization function (25) is given in Fig. 10. The function

reaches maximum value of 0.251 for optimum duty cycle Dopt = 0.181 .

0.3

0.25

0.2
U (D )

0.15

0. 1

0.05

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0. 8 1
D

Fig. 10. Switch utilization function U(D).

5. Experimental Results

An experimental forward converter with energy regenerating snubber was built and
tested. The converter specs were as follows. Input voltage: Vg = 28Vdc ; output

voltage: VO = 5Vdc , output current: I O max = 5 Adc ; switching frequency:

f s = 200KHz . Wide duty cycle range, Dmax=0.7 , was chosen for experimental

purposes. Minimum duty cycle of Dmax=0.1 was assumed. The transformers’ primary

magnetizing inductance was Lm = 411µHy ; secondary and tertiary transformer turns

ratio was found using: n2 = n3 = 0.4 . The snubber capacitance calculated using (10),

yielding: C1 ≈ 3nF .

Experimental waveforms are shown in Figs. 11, 12 and 13. The waveforms of Fig. 11

closely resemble the simulation waveforms in Fig. 6. Described above topological

states could be clearly recognized. Fig. 12 reveals the zero current condition at the

turn on and zero voltage turn-off of the active switch. Fig. 13 shows the snubber

capacitance voltage and tertiary winding current. Note that the current portion to the

left of the capacitor voltage peak is fed back to the source. No effort was made to

optimize the rectifiers and only simple diode rectifiers were used. Consequently, due

to low output voltage, the rectifiers’ voltage drop somewhat lowered the converters’

efficiency. The efficiency plot is given in Fig. 14. The converter was also operated

under no load condition and the peak switch voltage measured. The measured

normalized peak switch voltage as function of the duty cycle is plotted in Fig. 15.

Experimental results closely support the theoretical expectations as presented above in

Fig. 8.
 (a)

(b)

Fig. 11. Experimental waveforms of the Forward converter with the proposed energy

regenerating snubber, Horizontal scale: 1µSec (a); expanded view near the switch

turn-on, Horizontal scale: 200nSec. (b). Vertical: Ch1- switch voltage Vds (20V/div);

Ch2- Freewheeling diode voltage Vd2 (10V/div); Ch3- Snubber capacitor voltage Vc1

(20 V/div); Ch4- Tertiary winding current It (5Amp/div).

 (a)

(b)

Fig. 12. Experimental waveforms: Switch Zero current turn on (a); Switch Zero

voltage turn off (b). Ch1- Switch voltage Vds (20V/div); Ch4- Primary winding

current Ip (5Amp/div); Horizontal scale: 200nSec/div.

 (d)

Fig. 13. Experimental waveforms: snubber capacitor voltage Ch3-Vc1 (20 V/div);

Primary winding current R1- Ip (2Amp/div); Tertiary winding current Ch4- It

(2Amp/div); Horizontal scale: 400nSec.

η
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
efficiency

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 I out [ Amp ]
0.45 0.685 0.87 1.2 1.38 1.95 2.85 4.8
Output Current

Fig. 14. Measured efficiency of the experimental converter.

 V pknorm

Fig. 15. Measured normalized peak switch voltage.

6. Conclusions

The non-dissipating snubber reported by [1], [2] uses a discrete inductor to perform

the reversal of the snubber capacitor voltage and feed the energy back to the source.

Recycling of the energy takes place during the clamp state. However, when the

converter operates with low duty cycle, the magnetizing energy the capacitor absorbs

may be insufficient to raise the capacitor voltage to the value of the source voltage.

Consequently, the clamp state will not occur and the non-dissipating snubber changes

the operating mode. The undercharged snubber capacitor can not provide true ZVS

condition for the power switch and the power stage efficiency deteriorates [10]. The

non-dissipating snubber provides no means to make any readjustments in order to

improve the performance. Contrary to that, the proposed regenerative snubber uses a

tertiary transformer winding and beneficially exploits the transformer leakage

inductances. The tertiary winding turn-ratio introduces another degree of freedom and

can be adjusted to ensure a complete pre-charge of the snubber capacitor to the full
value of the source voltage. As a result, mode changes can be avoided and perfect

ZVS conditions for the power switch can be provided for a wide range of operation

conditions. This is the one most important advantage of the proposed snubber circuit

over the previously reported counterpart. The disadvantages of the proposed snubber

are the more elaborated transformer structure, and secondly, the voltage spike which

appear across the free-wheeling diode during the interval C.

References

[1] M.Domb, R.Red1, N.O.Soka1: "Nondissipative Turn-off Snubber Alleviates

Switching Power Dissipation, Second-breakdown Stress and Vce Overshoot,"

PESC '82 Record, pp.445-454, (1982-6).

[2] M.Domb, R.Red1: "Nondissipative Turnoff Snubber in a Forward Converter:

Analysis. Design Procedure, and Experimental Veri f icat ion, " PCI '85 Proc.,

pp.54-68, (1985-10).

[3] K. M. Smith, Chuanwen Ji, and K. M. Smedley, “Energy regenerative clamp for

flyback Converter”, UCI, invention disclosure, Sept. 1998.

[4] Chuanwen Ji, K. Mark Smith, Jr., and Keyue M. Smedley “Cross Regulation in

Flyback Converters: Analytic Model and Solution” IEEE Trans. On Power

Electronics, Vol. 16, No.2, March 2001.

[5] Alenka Hren, Joze Korelic, and Miro Milanovic “RC-RCD Clamp Circuit for

Ringing Losses Reduction in a Flyback Converter” IEEE Trans. On Circuits and

systems—II:Express Briefs. Vol. 53. No. 5 May 2006.

[6] Tsu-Hua Ai, “A Novel Integrated Non-dissipative Snubber for Flyback

Converter”.

[7] Robert W. Ericson, and Dragon Maksimovic, “Fundamentals of Power

Electronics”, Second Edition.

[8] N. Mohan, T. M. Undeland, and W. P. Robbins, “Power Electronics; Converter,

Applications and Design” Third Edition.

[9] _____, “Snubber Circuits Suppress Voltage Transient Spikes in Multiple Output

DC-DC Flyback Converter Power Supplies”, Application note 848, Nov12, 2001,

http://www.maxim-ic.com/an848 .

[10] T. Tanaka, T. Ninomiya, K. Harada, “Design of a NonDissipative Turn-off

Snubber in a forward Converter”, Power Electronics Specialists conference,

PESC88 record, Vol. 2, 11-14 April, 1988, pp. 789-796.