Proceedings of the 7th

World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation

June 25 - 27, 2008, Chongqing, China

Optimal Control of Buck Converter by State Feedback

Linearization
SHUAI Dingxin,XIE Yunxiang,WANG Xiaogang
College of electric power
South China University of Technology
Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China
Shuai.dingxin@mail.scut.edu.cn

Abstract - Based on the feedback linearization theory of
differential geometry theory and the state-space-averaging model
of Buck converter working on continuous conduction mode
(CCM), the nonlinear state feedback law is proposed. Further, a
linear quadratic performance index is presented based on the
passivity-based control theory. The state feedback coefficients
are optimized using the optimal control theory. The controller is
robust to the load variation and variety of parameters. Key
waveforms based on simulated extensive work show that the
control system has good static and dynamic performance.
Index Terms - Buck converter; state feedback; exact
linearization; passivity; optimal control.
I. INTRODUCTION
The switching-mode power converter is a typical
discontinuous nonlinear system, which usually uses traditional
linear control method. Traditional linear control method has
met great difficulties in this field and cannot satisfy the high
quality requirements in the transient response and control
precision. Studying new nonlinear control methods can deal
with the problem in nature. Some nonlinear control methods,
such as sliding mode control [1-3], passivity-based control [4],
neural network control [5], fuzzy logic control [6,7] and H
control [8], have been developed and applied to meet the
increasing demands of power converters.
In the past 20 years, the nonlinear control theory and
application made rapid progress in nonlinear control field.
Especially, the exact linearization method based on
differential geometry theory has been attached importance to
widely. The nonlinear system can be converted into state or
input/output exact linear system by proper nonlinear
coordinate and state feedback transform. Then the complex
synthesis problem of the nonlinear system can be converted
into the simple synthesis problem of the linear system. The
nonlinear control method based on differential geometry
theory has been applied to the manipulator control, the aircraft
automatic control [9] and dynamic control of power system
[10]. It was pointed out that the differential geometry theory
in nonlinear system is similar to Laplace transform in single-
input and single-output (SISO) system in 1950's, or the state
space description method and linear algebra in the multi-
variable linear system in 1960’s [11].
The dynamic system optimal problem is called the
optimal control problem of the linear system and quadratic
performance index if we select the quadratic function integral
of the state variables and the control variables for a linear
system. It also called a linear quadratic problem simply. Its
optimal solution can expressed to a unified resolution
expression, and a simple linear state feedback control law can
be derived. The optimal linear quadratic control has been
successfully used in engineering practice widely.
References [12, 13] introduced the state feedback exact
linearization method used in switching-mode power converter.
The original nonlinear system was converted into linear
system by proper nonlinear coordinate and state feedback
transformation. Then, the control law was derived based on
the linear optimal control method. It’s apparent that the
control law is not the impulse mode function u(t) as the author
declared but the duty ratio indeed. Moreover, the optimal
feedback coefficients in these literatures are not proper
apparently.
In this paper, an affine nonlinear model of the CCM
(continuous-conduction-mode) Buck converter which is
suitable for the differential geometry theory is set up by state-
space average modelling method in section II. In section III, a
feedback control law is derived based on the state feedback
linearization method. Then, a kind of quadratic performance
index is proposed based on the passivity considerations. At
last, the coefficients of feedback control law are optimized

978-1-4244-2114-5/08/$25.00 © 2008 IEEE. 2265

using the optimal quadratic control theory. The simulation When the above two conditions are satisfied, and the
results are presented in Section IV. Section V contains the relative degree of the system r equals to the system dimension
conclusions. n, the coordinate transformation of the nonlinear system can
be chosen to be
II. THE STATE-SPACE AVERAGING MODEL of CCM Buck
ª z1 º ª h ( x) º
CONVERTER « »
«z » Lf h ( x) »
A Buck converter is shown in Fig.1. State-space Z = « 2 » = Φ ( x) = « (3)
«"» « " »
averaging produces a nonlinear, smooth model of a switching « » « n −1 »
circuit using the average values of the switching circuit state
¬ zn ¼ ¬« L f h ( x ) ¼»
variables. Using this technique the averaged state space model
Then the nonlinear system can be converted into the
is given by
following linear normalized form:
­ x = f ( x ) + g ( x )u
® (1) ­ z1 = z2
¯ y = h( x ) = x2 − U ref °
ª 1 º ° z2 = z3
− x2 ªU in º ° (4)
« L » ®#
where f ( x ) = « » Δ g ( x) = « L » , ° z = z
«1 x − 1 x » « » ° n −1 n
«C 1 R C 2 » ¬« 0 ¼»
¬ L ¼ °¯ zn = Lnf h ( x ) + Lg Lnf−1h ( x ) u
x=[x1, x2]=[iL, uC] is the state vector, u=d where d is the duty
ratio of switch S, Uref is the expectation value of the output From (4), all the equation except the last one is linearized.
voltage. In order to realize the exact linearization, set v as the new
This model is an affine nonlinear model and suite for control variable of the system.
differential geometry theory. v = α ( x ) + β ( x )u (5)

where α ( x ) = Lnf h ( x ) and β ( x ) = Lg Lnf−1h ( x ) ≠ 0 .

Therefore, the original nonlinear system can be
transferred into the Brunovsky normalized form of linear
system:
 = AZ + Bv
Z (6)
Fig.1 Main circuit of Buck converter

III. NONLINEAR CONTROLLER for CCM Buck CONVERTER ª0 1 0 " 0 0º ª0 º

«0 0 1 " 0 0» «0 »
A. Principle of State Feedback Linearization Based on the « » « »
where A = «" " " " " "» , B = «"» .
Differential Geometry « » « »
Theorem 1: For the SISO affine nonlinear system «0 0 0 " 0 1» «0 »
­ x = f ( x ) + g ( x )u «¬ 0 0 0 " 0 0 »¼ «¬1 »¼
® , (2)
¯ y = h( x ) The feedback control law of original nonlinear system is
proposed as
the necessary and sufficient conditions of state feedback α ( x) 1
linearization are [11]: u=− + v . (7)
Condition (1.1): For all x in enclosure of x0, the rank of β ( x ) β ( x)
matrix ª¬ g ( x ) ad f g ( x ) " ad nf −1 g ( x ) º¼ is equal to the
As v is the control variable of the Brunovsky normalized
dimension of the system n.
Condition (1.2): The set of the vector fields form, it can be decided by the optimal linear design method
D = {g ( x ) , ad f g ( x ) , ", ad n −2
f g ( x )} is involutory in based on the optimal quadratic index in the linear system:
v = − K ∗Z(t ) = − R −1 BT P ∗Z(t ) , (8)
x = x0 .

2266
where R is a weighted matrix and P* is the solution of the From (7), the state variable feedback control law is
−1
− L2f h ( x ) + v
Riccati equation PA+ A P − PBR B +Q =0 .
T T
u= , (11)
Lg L f h ( x )

B. Controller Design for CCM Buck Converter

where the Li derivative is
Based on the affine nonlinear model of CCM Buck x1 1 1
converter showed as (1) and the differential geometry theory, L2f h ( x ) = − 2
− x2 + 2 2 x2
RLC LC RL C
we can compute the Li bracket and Li derivatives as follow:
∂g ( x ) ∂f ( x ) and v is the new input variable of the linear system.
ad f g ( x ) =
f ( x) − g ( x)
∂x ∂x
C. Optimal Control and Selection of the Quadratic
ª 1 º
«0 − » ª U in º Performance Index Power Matrix Q and R
L « » ,
= 0− « » L By nonlinear coordinate transformation (9) and the state
«1 − 1 »« 0 »
RLC »¼ ¬ ¼
feedback control law (11), the original affine nonlinear system
«¬ C
(1) has been converted into a linear system. So, the synthesis
ª 0 º question of the nonlinear system now can be transfer into the
= « U in »
« » synthesis question of the linear system.
¬ LC ¼ For a linear system
ªU in º ವ
« 0 » ˫ = Aξ (t ) + Bv(t ), ξ (t0 ) = ξ0 , (12)
the rank of matrix ª g ( x ) ad g ( x )º = « L »
¬ f ¼ U in » defining a quadratic performance index
« 0
¬« LC ¼» 1 ∞ T
equals to 2, and the system dimension is 2 as well, therefore
J=
2 ³t 0
(ξ Qξ + v T Rv )dt (13)

the linearization condition (1.1) is satisfied. where A and B are constant matrices, Q is a positive definite
As the system dimension n=2, the condition (1.2) is also symmetric matrix or a positive semi-definite symmetric
satisfied. Hence, the CCM Buck converter can be linearized matrix, R is a positive definite symmetric matrix. The physical
through a state feedback linearization. meanings of the performance index (13) are: the first item
∂h ( x ) x x
Since L f h( x ) = ⋅ f ( x) = 1 − 2 , embody that the state error is close to zero during the control
∂x C RLC process and the terminal end, the second item could limit the
∂h( x ) amplitude of the control variable.
Lg h ( x ) = ⋅ g( x) = 0 ,
∂x Based on optimal quadratic control theory, the optimal
∂L h( x ) 1
Lg L f h ( x ) = f ⋅ g ( x) = U in ≠ 0 , control law is
∂x LC v = − Kξ (14)
the system relative degree r = 2 = n . Based on (1), the
Where the gain matrix K = B P and P is the positive
T

coordinate transformation of the CCM Buck converter is definite symmetric solution of the Riccati equation
ª h( x ) º PA+ AT P − PBR−1BT +Q =0 .
ξ =« »
¬ L f h( x )¼ The basic ideas of passivity-based control method are
(9)
ª x2 − U ref º based on the modification of the total energy function of the
=«1 1 » system and enhancing the dissipation structure of the system
« x1 − x2 »
through suitable ‘damping injections’. These procedures can
¬« C RLC »¼
force the total energy of the system to track the energy
Therefore, the new linear system of ξ -coordinate can be function we desired and make the whole closed-loop control
expressed as: system be passivity. Then, the state variables asymptotically
ª0 1 º ª 0º stabilize to the desired equilibrium and the asymptotically
ξ = « » ξ + « »v . (10)
¬ 0 0¼ ¬ 1¼ stable closed-loop behaviour can be achieved.

2267
 Based on passivity consideration, in this paper we The circuit parameters are as follows: input voltage Uin
construct the closed-loop system energy function: =32V, output voltage Uo=12V, load RL=10, fs=100kHz,
1 1 input inductor L=2mH, output capacitor C=10μF. Useing
H = ξ T Qξ = L+iL 2 + C+uC 2 . (15)
2 2 MATLAB instruction KЈlqr(A,B,Q,R), we get the feedback
gain matrix K = [k1 k2 ] = ª¬1.3693 × 109 123445º¼ .
T T
From equation (9), we get
­ ξ1 = h( x ) = x2 − U ref =+uC
° 1 1
A. Start-up Response
°ξ2 = L f h( x ) = x1 − x2 Fig.2 shows the dynamic behaviours of inductor current
° C RLC
° . (16) and output voltage at start-up, the setting time is extremely
® 1§ +uC ·
° = +
¨ Li − ¸ short (0.5ms), there is no overshoot of the output voltage.
C© RL ¹
° Output ripple is rather small as show in Fig.2 (b).
° U ref
°+iL䰉x1䯹
¯ RL
A matrix form of (16) is given by

iL (A)
ª0 1 º
ª +iL º .
ξ =«1 1 »« (17)
« − » ¬+uC ¼»
¬« C RLC ¼»
So corresponding to (15), Q is given by
Time (ms)
ª L C LC º
«( 2 R 2 + 2 ) 2 RL » (a) Inductor current iL
Q=« ».
L (18)
« LC LC 2 »
« 2 RL 2 »¼
¬
iL (A)

and select another weighted matrix

R = ( LC ) .
3
(19)
From (10), we get
ª0 1º ª 0º
A=« » ,B = « » .
¬0 0¼ ¬1 ¼ Time (ms)
Then, take A, B, Q and R into the Riccati equation, we get P (b) Zoom of iL
and the feedback gain matrix K. Take the K into (14) and (11),
we get the feedback control law u of the original nonlinear
Uo (v)

system (1).
LC 1 1 1
u= [ x − (−
2 1
+ 2 2 ) x2 + v ]
U in RLC LC RL C . (20)
LC 1 1 1
= [ x − (−
2 1
+ 2 2 ) x2 − k1ξ1 − k2ξ 2 ]
U in RLC LC RL C
Time (ms)

IV. SIMULATION RESULTS (c) Output voltage Uo

Fig.2 Start-up behaviours of inductor current and output voltage

In order to test the effectiveness of the control strategy
and the feasibility of the selected power matrixes of the
quadratic optimal performance index, simulations are
performed for the closed-loop behaviour of a CCM Buck
circuit by MATLAB software.
B. Dynamic Response to Load Variation
Fig.3 shows the dynamic behaviours of inductor current iL
and output voltage Uo in the case of load variation. While load
varies between 10 and 20 periodically, the inductor current
iL and output voltage Uo response fast (0.5mS) with small

2268
overshoots. So, it can be concluded that the closed-loop
system based on the control scheme we have presented shows
excellent stability and robustness to the load variation.
R ()
Time (s)
(a) Load resistance variation
Uo (v)
Time (s)
(b) Output voltage Uo
iL (A)
Time (s)
(c) Inductor current iL
Fig.3 Dynamic response of load variation
C. Transient Response to Input Voltage Variation
Fig.4 shows the dynamic behaviours of inductor current iL
and output voltage Uo in the case of input voltage variation.
When input voltage varies between 32V and 42V periodically,
the inductor current iL and output voltage Uo are almost not be
influenced. The closed-loop system shows strong robustness
to the input voltage variation. This characteristic can be
explained by the feedback control law (20) theoretically. The
input voltage Uin acts as the denominator in equation (20),
when it varies, the nonlinear feedback control law will
automatically adjust the duty ration of switch S direct to the
variation and the output voltage can keep constant.
2269
Uin (V)
Time (s)
(a) Input voltage variation
Uo (v)
Time (s)
(b) Output voltageUo
iL (A)
Time (s)
(c) Inductor current iL
Fig.4 Dynamic response of input voltage variation
V. CONCLUSIONS
Applying new nonlinear control method can overcome the
shortcomings of the traditional linear control method used in
switching-mode converters power in route. The affine
nonlinear model for the CCM Buck converter is set up using
state-space averaging theory. The nonlinear coordinate
transformation and the state feedback control law are derived
based on the state feedback linearization theory of differential
geometry theory and the optimal linear quadratic control
technique. Further, based on passivity control theory, a
quadratic performance index is proposed, and the weighted
matrixes Q and R are presented also.
The proposed control law has the advantages of large-
signal stability, small overshoots of state variables, and short
setting time. The closed-loop system shows strong robust to
load variation and input voltage variation. Simulation results
verify the correctness of the control strategy and the feasibility
of the selected weighted matrixes.
REFERENCES
[1] L. Malesani, R. Spiazzi and P. Tenti “Performace optimization of Cuk
converters by sliding-mode control”, IEEE Trans. Power Electro.,
vol.10, no.3, pp: 302-309, 1995.
[2] J.-U. Lee; J.-Y Yoo and G.-T. Park, “Current control of a PWM inverter
using sliding mode control and adaptive parameter estimation”, in Proc.
IEEE IECON’94, pp: 372-377, 1994, Bologna, Italy.
[3] R.- J. Byeong, W.- A. Hee and J.- Y. Myung, “Optimal output voltage
control of quantum series resonant converter using integral sliding
mode”, in Proc. IEEE IECON’93, pp: 869-874, 1993, Hawaii, USA.
[4] H. Sira-ramirze, R. Perez-moreno, R. Ortega, et al. “passivity-based
controllers for the stabilization of DC-to-DC power converters”,
automatic, vol.33, no.4, pp.499-513, 1997, Elsevier science ltd. Great
Britain.
[5] Y. Ito, T. Furuhashi, S. Okuma and Y. Uchikawa, “A digital current
controller for a PWM inverter using a neural network and its stability”,
in Proc. IEEE PESC’90, pp: 219-224, 1990.
[6] B.-R Lin and C.-C. Hua, “Uninterruptible power supply with fuzzy logic
approach”, in Proc. IEEE IECON’93, pp: 1123-1128, 1993, Hawaii,
USA.
[7] P. Mattavelli, L. Rossetto, G. Spiazzi and P. Tenti, “General-purpose
fuzzy controller for DC-DC converters”, IEEE Trans. Power Electro.,
vol.12, no.1, pp: 79-86, 1997.
[8] R. Naim, G. Weiss and S. Ben-Yaakov, “H ∞ control applied to boost
power converters”, IEEE Trans. Power Electro., vol.12, no.4, pp: 667-
683, 1997.
[9] A. W. Divelbiss and J. T. Wen, “A path space approach to
nonholonomic motion planning in the presence of obstacles”, IEEE
Trans. Robot. & Automat, vol.13, no.3, pp. 443-451, 1997.
[10] Q. Lu and Y.-Z. Sun, “Nonlinear control of power system”, Beijing:
Science Publication, 1993.
[11] A. Isidori, “Nonlinear Control Systems, Communications and Control
Engineering Series”, 3rd ed. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag, 1995.
[12] W. Deng, B. Zhang, Z. Hu, et al, “Research of nonlinear decoupled
control law using state variable feedback linearization method based on
the CCM Buck converter”, Proceedings of the CSEE, 2004, 24(5):120-
125.
[13] W. Deng, B. Zhang, D. Qiu ,et al, “The research of state variable
feedback linearization method on the CCM Boost converter and
nonlinear PID control law”, Proceedings of the CSEE,2004, 24(8):45-
50.

2270