## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

**Universal-Input PFC Applications
**

Jingquan Chen. Dragan Maksimovic and Robert Erickson

Colorado Power Electronics Center

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering

University of Colorado at Boulder

Boulder, CO 80309-0425, USA

1

This work is supported by Philips Research, Briarcliff Manor, NY, through Colorado Power Electronics Center

Abstract – In converters for power-factor-correction (PFC),

universal-input capability (ability to operate from any AC line

voltage, world-wide) comes with a heavy price in terms of

component stresses and losses, size of components, and

restrictions on the output DC voltage. A new two-switch

topology is proposed to offer very significant performance

improvements over the single-switch buck-boost converters

(including flyback, SEPIC, and Cuk topologies) and

conventional two-switch buck-boost cascaded converters. The

proposed converter has buck-boost conversion characteristic,

switch conduction losses comparable to the boost converter, no

inrush current problem, and potential for smaller inductor size

compared to the boost converter.

I. INTRODUCTION

It is well known that boost topology is highly effective in

PFC applications, provided that the dc output voltage is close

to, but slightly greater than the peak AC input voltage [1]. In

universal-input applications, with the RMS input line voltage

in the 90-305V range, the output voltage has to be set to

about 450V. At low line (90V

rms

), the switch conduction

losses are high because the input RMS current has the largest

value, and the largest step-up conversion is required. The

inductor has to be oversized for large RMS current at low line

input, and for the highest volt-seconds applied throughout the

input-line range. As a result, a boost converter designed for

universal-input PFC applications is heavily oversized

compared to a converter designed for a narrow range of input

line voltages. Furthermore, because of the large energy

storage filter capacitor at the output, the boost converter has

inrush current problem that can only be mitigated using

additional components.

In universal-input PFC applications, the capability of

providing both step-up and step-down conversion is attractive

because the output DC voltage can be set to any value.

However, conventional single-switch buck-boost topologies,

including the plain buck-boost, flyback, SEPIC, and Cuk

converters [2, 3] have greatly increased component stresses,

component sizes, and reduced efficiency compared to the

boost converter.

The boost and the buck converter are known to have the

potentials for highest efficiency and lowest component

stresses if their conversion characteristics meet the

input/output specifications. Based on this observation, our

objective was to construct a converter topology with two

independently controllabe switches such that it can operate as

a buck or as a boost in portions of the AC line cycle. Such

two-switch topologies could offer higher efficiency, reduced

size, and ability to arbitrarily choose the DC output voltage.

R

o

L

2

C

2

V

g

D

1

D

2

Q

1

Q

2

C

1

L

1

a)

R

o

L

C V

g

D

2

D

1

Q

2

Q

1

b)

Fig.1. Cascaded two-switch buck-boost topologies: a) boost-buck-

cascaded, b) buck-boost-cascaded

R

o

L

2

C

2

V

g

D

1

D

2

Q

2

Q

1

C

1

L

1

Fig. 2. Boost Interleaved Buck-Boost Converter (BoIBB).

Two simple examples illustrated in Fig. 1 (a) and (b) are the

conventional cascade connections of the buck and the boost

converters [4, 5]. These converters can operate as a boost

when Q

2

is always on, and as a buck when Q

1

is always off.

In continuous conduction mode, the overall voltage

conversion ratio is:

) 1 (

1 2

d d M − · (1)

where d

1

and d

2

are the duty ratios of Q

1

and Q

2

respectively.

We have found that other two-switch topologies with buck-

boost characteristic are possible by adopting the converter

synthesis approach described in [6]. One of these new DC-

DC converters is the “Boost Interleaved Buck-Boost”

(BoIBB) converter shown in Fig. 2. Operating modes and

basic steady-state characteristics of this converter are

described in Section II. Operation of the BoIBB converter as

a low-harmonic rectifier is discussed in Section III. The

results for transistor and inductor conduction losses are

derived in this section. Comparisons in terms of component

stresses, component conduction losses and magnetic sizes

among the new two-switch topology and boost, single-switch

buck-boost, and cascade connections of buck and boost

converters are presented in Section IV. Section V describes a

prototype of the new converter operating as a PFC rectifier

with universal-line input. Experimental results are provided

for both high-line and low-line input.

II. OPERATING MODES AND STEADY-STATE

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE BOOST INTERLEAVED

BUCK-BOOST CONVERTER

The proposed Boost-Interleaved Buck-Boost (BoIBB)

converter is shown in Fig. 2. Unlike the cascaded topologies,

the boost switch cell (Q

1

and D

1

) is interleaved with the buck

switch cell (Q

2

and D

2

). In continuous conduction mode

(CCM), the converter has the following overall voltage

conversion ratio:

) 1 (

1 1 2

d d d M − + · (2)

If Q

2

is always on, the converter operates in boost mode,

which is shown in Fig. 3(a). The average voltage on C

1

is

zero. In this mode, the input current is divided through L

1

and

L

2

. As a result, the total RMS current in L

1

and L

2

is smaller

than the current in a single inductor.

If Q

1

is always off, the converter operates in the buck mode

as shown in Fig. 3(b). L

1

and C

1

form a low-frequency filter.

The average current through L

1

and C

1

is zero and the voltage

on C

1

is equal to the difference between the input and the

output voltage. The inductor L

2

in the buck mode takes the

same role as the inductor in the simple buck converter. The

basic steady-state results for both modes of operation are

summarized in TABLE I.

III. OPERATION OF THE BOIBB CONVERTER AS AN

IDEAL RECTIFIER

In this section, we analyze operation of the BoIBB

converter as a low-harmonic rectifier. Expressions for RMS

currents of both transistors and inductors, and volt-seconds of

inductors are derived so that conduction losses and magnetic

sizes can be evaluated.

In PFC applications, the rectified input voltage is:

) sin( ) ( t V t v

M g

ϖ · (3)

R

o

L

2

C

2

v

g

(t)

D

1

Q

1

C

1

L

1

i

L2

(t)

i

L1

(t)

i

Q1

(t)

(a)

R

o

L

2

C

2

v

g

(t)

D

2

Q

2

C

1

L

1

i

L2

(t)

i

L1

(t)

i

Q2

(t)

(b)

Fig. 3. Operating modes of BoIBB: (a) boost, (b) buck.

TABLE I

BASIC FUNTIONS IN BOOST AND BUCK MODES

Boost Mode Buck Mode

Q

1

active always off

Q

2

always on active

M ) 1 /( 1

1

d −

2

d

I

L1

o

R

V

d

d

1

1

1−

0

I

L2

o

R V /

o

R V /

V

C1

0 V V

g

−

It is desired that the output voltage is regulated at a constant

voltage V and that the input current i

g

(t) is proportional to the

input voltage:

Re

t v

t i

g

g

) (

) ( · (4)

where the emulated resistance Re is constant for a given

output power.

Fig. 4(a) shows the waveforms of the input and the output

voltage in one half of a line period, for the case when the

output voltage is chosen to be lower than the peak of the

input voltage. The converter operates in boost or buck modes

according to the condition of the input and the output DC

voltage. In the following analysis, CCM operation is

assumed.

A. Boost mode

In the time period [0, t

m

], shown in Fig. 4, the input voltage

is lower than the output voltage, the boost switch cell (Q

1

, D

1

)

is active, and the buck cell (Q

2

, D

2

) is inactive (Q

2

is always

on).

In quasi steady-state operation, the duty ratios of the

transistors as functions of time are:

¹

¹

¹

'

¹

·

− ·

1 ) (

) sin( 1 ) (

2

1

t d

t

V

V

t d

M

ω

(5)

The average inductor currents are:

¹

¹

¹

¹

¹

'

¹

·

− ·

VRe

t V

t i

VRe

t V

Re

t V

t i

M

L

M

M

L

) ( sin

) (

) ( sin

) sin(

) (

2 2

2 2

2

1

ω

ω

ω

(6)

When Q

1

is conducting, its current is the sum of the two

inductors current.

In the buck mode, Q

1

is always off, and the current through

L

1

equals to a small current ripple. Therefore, the RMS

currents of Q

1

and L

1

are found from (5) and (6) in the boost

mode. The results are given by (7) and (8) respectively:

[ ]

]

]

]

]

− ·

]

]

]

+ ·

∫

∫

m

m

t

e

M

e

M

ac

t

boost L L

ac

rms Q

dt t

VR

V

dt t

R

V

T

dt t i t i t d

T

I

0

3

2

3

2

2

2

0

2

1 ,

)) ( sin ) ( sin (

4

)) ( ) ( )( (

4

2 1 1

ω ω

(7)

]

]

]

]

− ·

∫

m

t

e

M

e

M

ac

rms L

dt

VR

t V

R

t V

T

I

0

2

2 2

,

)

) ( sin ) sin(

(

4

1

ω ω

(8)

The volt-seconds applied to L

1

and L

2

during a switching

period are the same as the volt-seconds applied to the

inductor in a simple boost converter, and are given by

s

M

M

g s

T t

V

V

t V

t v T t d s v

⋅ − ·

⋅ · ⋅

)) ( sin ) sin( (

) ( ) (

2

2

1

ω ω

(9)

where T

s

is the switching period.

B. Buck mode

In the time period [t

m

, T

ac

/4], where T

ac

is the line period, the

instantaneous input voltage is greater than the output voltage,

the buck cell becomes active and the boost cell goes inactive

(Q

1

is always off). L

1

and C

1

form a low frequency filter

between the input and the output. They have insignificant

effects in quasi steady-state operation.

The duty ratios of Q

1

and Q

2

can be expressed as:

¹

¹

¹

'

¹

·

·

) sin(

) (

0 ) (

2

1

t V

V

t d

t d

M

ω

(10)

The inductor currents are:

¹

¹

¹

'

¹

·

·

VRe

t V

t i

t i

M

L

L

) ( sin

) (

0 ) (

2 2

2

1

ω

(11)

v

g

(t)

t

t

d

1

(t)

,

d

2

(t)

V

V

M

d

1

(t)

d

2

(t) 1

V/V

M

Boost Buck Boost

t

m

T

ac

/4

(a)

(b)

Fig. 4. (a) Rectified input voltage and DC output voltage waveforms,

(b) duty ratios of the boost and the buck cells in the BoIBB converter

operated as a low-harmonic rectifier.

The duty ratios of Q

1

and Q

2

during one half of a line cycle

are plotted in Fig. 4(b). The transitions between the boost and

buck modes are continuous. Both Q

2

and L

2

are conducting

currents in both boost and buck modes, and the RMS currents

are found from (5), (6), and (11):

[ ] [ ]

]

]

]

]

+ ·

]

]

]

+ + ·

∫ ∫

∫ ∫

m ac

m

m ac

m

t T

t

o e

M

e

M

ac

t T

t

buck L boost L L

ac

rms Q

dt t

V R

V

dt t

R

V

T

dt i d dt i i d

T

I

0

4 /

3

2

3

2

2

2

0

4 /

2

2

2

2 ,

) ( sin ) ( sin

4

) (

4

2 2 1 2

ω ω

(12)

o

t T

t

e

M

e

M

ac

rms L

R

V

dt t

R V

V

dt t

R V

V

T

I

m ac

m

8

3

) ( sin ) ( sin

4

0

4 /

4

2 2

4

4

2 2

4

,

2

·

]

]

]

]

+ ·

∫ ∫

ω ω

(13)

R

o

in (13) is the load resistance.

The volt-seconds applied to L

2

during a switching period

are the same as those on the inductor of a simple buck

converter:

s

M

s

T

t V

V

V

V T t d s v

⋅ − ·

⋅ − · ⋅

)

) sin(

(

)) ( 1 (

2

2

ω

(14)

The volt-seconds applied to L

1

are close to zero in the buck

mode.

As an example, the component RMS currents are evaluated

and shown in TABLE II for two different lines.

IV. PERFORMANCE COMPARISONS

In this section, the BoIBB converter is compared to the

boost, the single-switch buck-boost, and cascaded buck-boost

topologies in terms of switch voltage stresses, conduction

losses, and size of magnetics. All results are obtained under

the assumption that the converters operate in continuous

conduction mode (CCM).

A. Switch voltage stresses

The comparison of worst-case switch voltage stresses is

summarized in Table II. The output voltage V

o

in the boost

converter must be greater than the maximum peak input

voltage V

M

, while in all buck-boost converters, the output

voltage can be arbitrarily set to any value. All two-switch

topologies, including the BoIBB converter, have lower

voltage stresses than the single-switch buck-boost converters,

TABLE II

COMPONENT RMS CURRENT AT LOW LINE AND HIGH LINE

V

in,rms

(V) I

Q1,rms

(A) I

Q2,rms

(A) I

L1,rms

(A) I

L2,rms

(A)

120 0.22 0.417 0.25 0.306

240 0.032 0.245 0.076 0.306

V

o

=200V, P

o

=100W

TABLE III

COMPARISON OF SWITCH VOLTAGE STRESSES

Q

1

Q

2

D

1

D

2

Boost V

o

V

o

Single-switch buck-boost V

M

+V

o

V

M

+V

o

Buck-boost-cascaded V

o

V

M

V

o

V

M

Boost-buck-cascaded V

M

V

M

V

o

V

M

BoIBB V

M

V

M

V

o

V

M

V

o

: output DC voltage, V

M

: input peak voltage

Transistor(s) Conduction Losses

Compared to Boost Converter

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

150 200 250 300 325 350 400 450

Vo(V)

BoIBB and

boost-buck-

cascaded

single-switch

buck-boost

buck-boost-

cascaded

(a)

Inductor(s) Conduction Losses

Compared to Boost Converter

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

150 200 250 300 325 350 400 450

Vo(v)

BoIBB

single-switch

buck-boost

buck-boost-

cascaded

boost-buck-

cascaded

(b)

Fig. 5. (a) Worst-case transistor conduction losses comparisons (b)

worst-case inductor conduction losses comparisons

and have almost the same voltage stress as the boost

converter (at the expense of more switching devices).

B. Transistor conduction losses

In this comparison, we assume that all devices have the

same on-resistance, and so we compare the total transistor

RMS currents defined as the sum of the squares of the

individual transistor RMS currents. In practice, for the same

die size, the on-resistance for the transistor in single-switch

buck-boost converters would be higher because of the higher

voltage rating. The worst case for switch conduction losses

occurs at the minimum ac line input (90Vrms). Switch

conduction losses for all buck-boost topologies are found as

functions of the DC output voltage and normalized to the

switch conduction losses in a boost converter operating with

fixed DC output voltage equal to 450V. The results are

shown in Fig. 5(a). The proposed converter and the boost-

buck-cascaded converter have the total transistor conduction

losses very close to the boost converter, and much smaller

losses than in the single-switch buck-boost or the buck-boost-

cascaded converters. For example, at 300V output, the

transistor conduction losses in the single-switch buck-boost

converter and the buck-boost-cascaded converter are 1.78 and

2.15 times of the transistor conduction losses in the new

topology.

C. Comparison of magnetics

Worst-case inductor copper losses and volt-seconds

applied to inductors are two factors that determine the

inductor size.

1. Inductor conduction losses

The worst-case inductor copper loss also occurs at the

minimum AC line input. The results for copper losses as

functions of the dc output voltage, normalized to the copper

losses in the boost converter with fixed V

o

= 450V, are shown

in Fig. 5(b). Again, the same resistance is assumed for all

inductors, so that total RMS currents are compared. The new

converter has significantly lower losses than the other buck-

boost topologies; and by proper selection of the output DC

voltage, the loss can be as low as 50% of the inductor

conduction loss in the boost converter.

2. Volt-seconds applied to the inductors

The volt-seconds applied to the inductor in the single-

switch buck-boost converters are given by (15). For a two-

switch buck-boost converter, an inductor can play the role as

part of a low-frequency filter in one of the modes. In this

case, the volt-seconds applied during a switching cycle are

almost zero. When the input voltage is lower than the output

voltage, the inductor operates as in a boost converter and the

volt-seconds applied follow from (9). When the input voltage

is greater than the output voltage, the inductor operates as in a

buck converter, and the volt-seconds applied follow from

(14).

s

M

M

T

t V V

t VV

s v ⋅

+

· ⋅

) sin(

sin

ω

ω

(15)

The total volt-seconds applied to the inductors for the

boost, single-switch buck-boost and two-switch buck-boost

converters are plotted in Fig 6. as functions of time over one

half of the line cycle. Three curves are shown, based on

different rms input voltages and for a fixed switching

0

0.0004

0.0008

0.0012

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Radian

vs

Vin=90Vrms

Vin=220Vrms

Vin=305Vrms

0

0.0004

0.0008

0.0012

0.0016

0.002

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Radian

vs

Vin=90Vrms

Vin=220Vrms

Vin=305Vrms

0

0.0002

0.0004

0.0006

0.0008

0.001

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Radian

vs

Vin=90Vrms

Vin=220Vrms

Vin=305Vrms

(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 6. The volt-seconds applied to the inductors (a) boost, (b) single-switch buck-boost, (c) two-switch buck-boost

R

o

L

2

C

2

D

1

D

2

Q

2

Q

1

C

1

L

1

L

f

C

f

V

ac

Current Shaping

Dual PWM

Driver

Voltage

Compensator

Controller

V

control

Fig. 7. Experimental BoIBB converter,

L

1

=1.1mH, L

2

=2mH, C

1

=2.25uF, C

2

=150uF, fs=100KHZ, Vo=200V

(a)

(b)

Fig. 10. Rectified input voltage and input line current: (a) 120Vrms low-line

input, (b) 240Vrms high-line input

Ch2: 100V/div, Ch4: 0.5A/div

(a)

(b)

Fig. 9. Rectified input voltage and control voltage V

control

:

(a) 120Vrms low-line input, (b) 240Vrms high-line input.

Ch2: 100V/div, Ch3: 500mV/div

V

control

d

2

=1+V

control

d

1

=V

control

Max(d

1

)=0.9

1

-1 1

t

v

control

(t)

1

-1+V

o

/V

M

v

g

(t)

V

(a)

(b)

Fig. 8. (a) Duty ratios as functions of V

control

, (b) V

control

(t)

in half line

cycle

0.93

0.932

0.934

0.936

0.938

0.94

0.942

0.944

0.946

0.948

90 120 150 180 210 240 270

Vin,rms

Efficiency

Fig. 11. Efficiency vs line input

frequency of 100KHz. For single-switch and two-switch

buck-boost converters, the output voltage is set to 325V,

while the boost dc output voltage is 450V. The peak volt-

seconds applied to the inductors for all two-switch buck-

boost converters has the smallest value of 0.812e

-3

(vs),

compared to 1.8e

-3

(vs) for all single-switch buck-boost

converters, and 1.125e

-3

(vs) for the boost converter.

As a result of low inductor conduction losses and low peak

volt-seconds applied, the BoIBB topology has the potential

for smaller inductor size compared to other buck-boost

topologies and the boost converter.

V. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

An experimental prototype (Fig. 7) has been built to verify

feasibility of the proposed converter. L

1

and L

2

are selected so

that the converter operates in CCM in both boost and buck

modes at full load. A single control voltage V

control

is used to

produce the switch control signals with the duty ratios d

1

for

the switch Q

1

and d

2

for the switch Q

2

as shown in Fig. 8(a).

The steady state value of V

control

as a function of time is

shown in Fig. 8(b). The control voltage is the input to a dual

PWM circuit that outputs drive signals for Q

1

and Q

2

. The

experimental waveform of V

control

is shown in Fig. 9.

Average current control is applied to achieve PFC operation.

Experimental waveforms are shown in Fig 9. The output

power is 100W. In Fig. 10(a), the input line voltage has low

rms value 120Vrms and the converter operates in the boost

mode always. The efficiency is 93.8% and the total current

harmonic distortion is 1.9%. The waveforms of Fig. 10(b) are

for high input (240Vrms) and converter works in the boost

and buck mode in different parts of the line period. The

efficiency is 93.8% and the total current harmonic distortion

is 4.6%.

Fig. 11 shows the rectifier efficiency as a function of the

input line RMS voltage. Efficiency of over 93% is achieved

throughout the line voltage range (90Vrms-264Vrms).

VI. CONCLUSIONS

A new two-switch topology, named Boost Interleaved

Buck-Boost (BoIBB) converter, has been proposed for

universal-input PFC applications. The new converter has

advantages of low voltage stresses, low switch and inductor

conduction losses, potential for small inductor size, and the

ability to set the output dc voltage arbitrarily. Experimental

results are provided to verify the validity of the new

topology. High efficiency (over 93% throughout the whole ac

line voltage range), and low current harmonic distortion at

both high and low line inputs are demonstrated.

REFERENCES

[1] R. Erickson, Fundamentals of Power Electronics, Kluwer 1997, ch17.

[2] D.S.L. Simonetti, J.Sebastian, F.S.dos Reis and J.Uceda,"Design

criteria for SEPIC and CUK converters as power factor preregulators in

discontinuous conduction mode," IEEE IECON92, 1992, pp283-288.

[3] R.Erickson, R.Madigan, and S.Singer," Design of a simple high power

factor rectifier based on the flyback converter," IEEE APEC90, 1990,

pp.792-801.

[4] O. Lopez, L. Vicuna, M. Castilla, J. Matas and M. Lopez, "Sliding-

mode-control design of a high-power-factor buck-boost rectifier," IEEE

Trans. Indu. Elec., Vol. 46, No.3, June 1999, pp.604-612.

[5] M.C.Ghanem, K. Al-Hassad, and G.Roy," A new control strategy to

achieve sinusoidal line in a cascade buck-boost converter," IEEE Trans.

Indu. Elec., Vol.43, pp. 441-449, May 1996.

[6] D.Zhou, "Synthesis of PWM Dc-to-Dc Power Converters,” Ph.D.

thesis, California Institute of Technology, October 1995

One of these new DCDC converters is the “Boost Interleaved Buck-Boost” (BoIBB) converter shown in Fig. 3(a). Unlike the cascaded topologies. the input current is divided through L1 and L2. In continuous conduction mode (CCM). Section V describes a prototype of the new converter operating as a PFC rectifier with universal-line input. The average voltage on C1 is zero. component conduction losses and magnetic sizes among the new two-switch topology and boost. and cascade connections of buck and boost converters are presented in Section IV. 3(b). If Q1 is always off. OPERATION OF THE BOIBB CONVERTER AS AN IDEAL RECTIFIER In this section. The average current through L1 and C1 is zero and the voltage on C1 is equal to the difference between the input and the output voltage. In continuous conduction mode. 2. the converter operates in boost mode. The basic steady-state results for both modes of operation are summarized in TABLE I. 2. The inductor L2 in the buck mode takes the same role as the inductor in the simple buck converter.iL2 (t) iL1 (t) L1 L2 D1 TABLE I BASIC FUNTIONS IN BOOST AND BUCK MODES C1 vg(t) iQ1(t) Q1 C2 Ro Q1 Q2 M IL1 Boost Mode active always on 1 /(1 − d1 ) d1 V 1 − d 1 Ro V / Ro 0 Buck Mode always off active d2 0 V / Ro Vg − V (a) iQ2(t) iL1 (t) L1 v g(t) Q2 L2 iL2 (t) IL2 VC1 C1 C2 Ro II. we analyze operation of the BoIBB converter as a low-harmonic rectifier. and volt-seconds of inductors are derived so that conduction losses and magnetic sizes can be evaluated. which is shown in Fig. OPERATING MODES AND STEADY-STATE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE BOOST INTERLEAVED BUCK-BOOST CONVERTER The proposed Boost-Interleaved Buck-Boost (BoIBB) converter is shown in Fig. the boost switch cell (Q1 and D1) is interleaved with the buck switch cell (Q2 and D2). (b) buck. Comparisons in terms of component stresses. the converter operates in the buck mode as shown in Fig. The results for transistor and inductor conduction losses are derived in this section. Expressions for RMS currents of both transistors and inductors. In this mode. 5]. We have found that other two-switch topologies with buckboost characteristic are possible by adopting the converter synthesis approach described in [6]. Experimental results are provided for both high-line and low-line input. III. 1 (a) and (b) are the conventional cascade connections of the buck and the boost converters [4. L1 and C1 form a low-frequency filter. Operating modes and basic steady-state characteristics of this converter are described in Section II. If Q2 is always on. 3. In PFC applications. Operation of the BoIBB converter as a low-harmonic rectifier is discussed in Section III. Operating modes of BoIBB: (a) boost. These converters can operate as a boost when Q2 is always on. the overall voltage conversion ratio is: M = d 2 (1 − d1 ) (2) (1) where d1 and d2 are the duty ratios of Q1 and Q2 respectively. single-switch buck-boost. the total RMS current in L1 and L2 is smaller than the current in a single inductor. As a result. Two simple examples illustrated in Fig. the converter has the following overall voltage conversion ratio: M = d 2 + d1 (1 − d1 ) D2 (b) Fig. and as a buck when Q1 is always off. the rectified input voltage is: v g (t ) = V M sin(ϖ t ) (3) .

I L1 . (a) Rectified input voltage and DC output voltage waveforms. (b) duty ratios of the boost and the buck cells in the BoIBB converter operated as a low-harmonic rectifier. Q1 is always off. In the buck mode. A. the input voltage is lower than the output voltage. rms = 4 Tac ∫ tm ( 0 2 VM sin(ω t ) VM sin 2 (ω t ) 2 − ) dt Re VRe (8) (5) The volt-seconds applied to L1 and L2 during a switching period are the same as the volt-seconds applied to the inductor in a simple boost converter. CCM operation is assumed. the buck cell becomes active and the boost cell goes inactive (Q1 is always off). the boost switch cell (Q1. The duty ratios of Q1 and Q2 can be expressed as: d 1 (t ) = 0 V d (t ) = 2 V M sin(ω t ) When Q1 is conducting. for the case when the output voltage is chosen to be lower than the peak of the input voltage. where Tac is the line period. 4. Therefore. The average inductor currents are: 2 V M sin(ω t ) V M sin 2 (ω t ) − i L1 (t ) = Re VRe 2 V M sin 2 (ω t ) i L2 (t ) = VRe = (V M sin(ω t ) − (9) (6) B.It is desired that the output voltage is regulated at a constant voltage V and that the input current ig(t) is proportional to the input voltage: i g (t ) = v g (t ) Re vg(t) VM V (4) tm d1(t). and the current through L1 equals to a small current ripple. tm]. The converter operates in boost or buck modes according to the condition of the input and the output DC voltage. the duty ratios of the transistors as functions of time are: V d 1 (t ) = 1 − M sin(ω t ) V d 2 (t ) = 1 d2(t) V/VM d1(t) t Boost Buck Boost (b) Fig. Fig. the instantaneous input voltage is greater than the output voltage. In the following analysis. rms = 4 Tac ∫ [d (t )(i tm 0 1 tm 2 VM 0 L1 (t ) + iL2 (t )) 2 ] boost dt (10) 4 = Tac ∫ ( 2 sin 2 (ω t )dt − 2 sin 3 (ω t ))dt Re VRe 3 VM (7) The inductor currents are: i L1 (t ) = 0 2 V M sin 2 (ω t ) i L2 (t ) = VRe (11) . the RMS currents of Q1 and L1 are found from (5) and (6) in the boost mode. They have insignificant effects in quasi steady-state operation. Boost mode In the time period [0. and are given by v ⋅ s = d 1 (t )Ts ⋅ v g (t ) 2 VM sin 2 (ω t )) ⋅ Ts V where Ts is the switching period. d2(t) 1 Tac /4 (a) t where the emulated resistance Re is constant for a given output power. The results are given by (7) and (8) respectively: I Q1 . D2) is inactive (Q2 is always on). its current is the sum of the two inductors current. and the buck cell (Q2. shown in Fig. In quasi steady-state operation. 4. L1 and C1 form a low frequency filter between the input and the output. Tac/4]. Buck mode In the time period [tm. 4(a) shows the waveforms of the input and the output voltage in one half of a line period. D1) is active.

and cascaded buck-boost topologies in terms of switch voltage stresses.rms(V) 120 240 IQ1. conduction losses. .5 1 0. PERFORMANCE COMPARISONS In this section. 5.rms(A) 0. Po=100W IL1.rms = = 4 Tac 3 V 8 Ro ∫ tm 4 VM 0 V 2 2 Re sin 4 (ω t )dt + ∫ Tac / 4 4 VM tm V 2 2 Re sin 4 (ω t )dt (13) Ro in (13) is the load resistance. have lower voltage stresses than the single-switch buck-boost converters. The volt-seconds applied to L2 during a switching period are the same as those on the inductor of a simple buck converter: The comparison of worst-case switch voltage stresses is summarized in Table II. The transitions between the boost and buck modes are continuous.rms(A) 0. the single-switch buck-boost.076 IL2. Switch voltage stresses 4 = Tac ∫ sin 2 (ω t )dt + ∫ Tac / 4 tm 3 VM sin 3 (ω t )dt 2 Re Vo (12) I L2 . while in all buck-boost converters.417 0.rms(A) 0. 4(b).5 buck-boostcascaded 1 0. The output voltage Vo in the boost converter must be greater than the maximum peak input voltage VM.306 0. including the BoIBB converter.5 Transistor(s) Conduction Losses Compared to Boost Converter COMPONENT RMS CURRENT AT LOW LINE AND HIGH LINE Vin. (6).5 (a) Inductor(s) Conduction Losses Compared to Boost Converter BoIBB single-switch buck-boost buck-boostcascaded boost-buckcascaded COMPARISON OF SWITCH VOLTAGE STRESSES Q1 Boost Single-switch buck-boost Buck-boost-cascaded Boost-buck-cascaded BoIBB Vo VM+Vo Vo VM VM VM VM VM Q2 D1 Vo VM+Vo Vo Vo Vo VM VM VM D2 3 2. All results are obtained under the assumption that the converters operate in continuous conduction mode (CCM).245 Vo=200V.rms(A) 0. and the RMS currents are found from (5). IV. Both Q2 and L2 are conducting currents in both boost and buck modes.032 IQ2.306 BoIBB and boost-buckcascaded single-switch buck-boost 2 1. and (11): I Q2 . A. (a) Worst-case transistor conduction losses comparisons (b) worst-case inductor conduction losses comparisons Vo: output DC voltage.25 0. the component RMS currents are evaluated and shown in TABLE II for two different lines. the output voltage can be arbitrarily set to any value. rms = 4 Tac = (V − V2 ) ⋅ Ts VM sin(ω t ) (14) ∫ [d (i tm 0 tm V 2 M 0 R2 e 2 L1 + iL2 ) 2 ] boost dt + ∫ Tac / 4 tm [d i ] 2 2 L2 buck dt The volt-seconds applied to L1 are close to zero in the buck mode. All two-switch topologies. VM: input peak voltage v ⋅ s = (1 − d 2 (t ))Ts ⋅ V The duty ratios of Q1 and Q2 during one half of a line cycle are plotted in Fig.5 2 1.TABLE II 2. the BoIBB converter is compared to the boost.22 0. and size of magnetics.5 Vo(V) 0 150 200 250 300 325 350 400 450 TABLE III 3.5 Vo(v) 0 150 200 250 300 325 350 400 450 (b) Fig. As an example.

5 0 0. single-switch buck-boost and two-switch buck-boost converters are plotted in Fig 6.0008 0. 5(a). Inductor conduction losses The worst-case inductor copper loss also occurs at the minimum AC line input.001 Vin=90Vrms Vin=220Vrms Vin=305Vrms 0. Volt-seconds applied to the inductors The volt-seconds applied to the inductor in the singleswitch buck-boost converters are given by (15).5 1 1.0012 0. Comparison of magnetics Worst-case inductor copper losses and volt-seconds applied to inductors are two factors that determine the inductor size. based on different rms input voltages and for a fixed switching Lf Q2 L2 D1 L1 Vac Cf Q1 D2 C1 C2 Ro Current Shaping Vcontrol Dual PWM Driver Controller Voltage Compensator Fig. (c) two-switch buck-boost and have almost the same voltage stress as the boost converter (at the expense of more switching devices). 1. When the input voltage is greater than the output voltage.0012 Vin=220Vrms Vin=305Vrms 0.5 2 2.5 2 2. C1=2. L1=1. Experimental BoIBB converter. B.0002 Radian Radian 0 0 0. In practice. and by proper selection of the output DC voltage.5 2 Radian 0 3 2. at 300V output. fs=100KHZ. Switch conduction losses for all buck-boost topologies are found as functions of the DC output voltage and normalized to the switch conduction losses in a boost converter operating with fixed DC output voltage equal to 450V.78 and 2. and so we compare the total transistor RMS currents defined as the sum of the squares of the individual transistor RMS currents. The results are shown in Fig. (b) single-switch buck-boost. The worst case for switch conduction losses occurs at the minimum ac line input (90Vrms).25uF. The proposed converter and the boostbuck-cascaded converter have the total transistor conduction losses very close to the boost converter. the loss can be as low as 50% of the inductor conduction loss in the boost converter.0008 0.5 1 1. Transistor conduction losses In this comparison. 2.002 vs Vin=90Vrms Vin=220Vrms Vin=305Vrms vs 0. and the volt-seconds applied follow from (14). When the input voltage is lower than the output voltage. C.1mH. For example. C2=150uF. For a twoswitch buck-boost converter. an inductor can play the role as part of a low-frequency filter in one of the modes.0016 0. as functions of time over one half of the line cycle. the inductor operates as in a buck converter. the volt-seconds applied during a switching cycle are almost zero. Vo=200V . v⋅s = VV M sin ω t V + V M sin(ω t ) ⋅ Ts (15) The total volt-seconds applied to the inductors for the boost.0006 0.5 3 (a) (b) (c) Fig. the same resistance is assumed for all inductors. normalized to the copper losses in the boost converter with fixed Vo = 450V. The volt-seconds applied to the inductors (a) boost. In this case. the transistor conduction losses in the single-switch buck-boost converter and the buck-boost-cascaded converter are 1.0004 0. so that total RMS currents are compared. The results for copper losses as functions of the dc output voltage. Again.15 times of the transistor conduction losses in the new topology. and much smaller losses than in the single-switch buck-boost or the buck-boostcascaded converters. The new converter has significantly lower losses than the other buckboost topologies. L2=2mH. 6. for the same die size. the on-resistance for the transistor in single-switch buck-boost converters would be higher because of the higher voltage rating. 5(b).0004 0.Vin=90Vrms vs 0. 7. Three curves are shown. we assume that all devices have the same on-resistance.5 1 1. the inductor operates as in a boost converter and the volt-seconds applied follow from (9).0008 0. are shown in Fig.0004 0.5 3 0 0 0.

Rectified input voltage and input line current: (a) 120Vrms low-line input. (b) Vcontrol(t) in half line cycle (b) Fig. Ch4: 0. Ch2: 100V/div. (b) 240Vrms high-line input Ch2: 100V/div.1 Max(d1)=0.948 0.944 0.946 0.942 0.938 0. 11. (a) Duty ratios as functions of Vcontrol . 9.5A/div Fig. (b) 240Vrms high-line input.94 0. Ch3: 500mV/div (a) Efficiency 0.rms (b) Fig.9 d2=1+Vcontrol d1=Vcontrol Vcontrol -1 1 (a) vcontrol(t) 1 vg(t) V t -1+Vo/VM (b) (a) Fig.934 0. 10.932 0.936 0. 8. Rectified input voltage and control voltage Vcontrol: (a) 120Vrms low-line input. Efficiency vs line input .93 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 Vin.

dos Reis and J.6%. the output voltage is set to 325V. while the boost dc output voltage is 450V. Experimental results are provided to verify the validity of the new topology.3. VI.812e-3(vs). and G. 7) has been built to verify feasibility of the proposed converter. Average current control is applied to achieve PFC operation. Lopez. The experimental waveform of Vcontrol is shown in Fig.8% and the total current harmonic distortion is 1. R. Elec. CONCLUSIONS A new two-switch topology. 10(b) are for high input (240Vrms) and converter works in the boost and buck mode in different parts of the line period. Experimental waveforms are shown in Fig 9. pp.S. compared to 1. 11 shows the rectifier efficiency as a function of the input line RMS voltage. ch17. 8(b). October 1995 [3] [4] [5] [6] . No.” Ph. R."Design criteria for SEPIC and CUK converters as power factor preregulators in discontinuous conduction mode.125e-3(vs) for the boost converter.Madigan. The peak voltseconds applied to the inductors for all two-switch buckboost converters has the smallest value of 0. As a result of low inductor conduction losses and low peak volt-seconds applied. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS An experimental prototype (Fig. 1992. 46. and low current harmonic distortion at both high and low line inputs are demonstrated.L. M. "Synthesis of PWM Dc-to-Dc Power Converters." A new control strategy to achieve sinusoidal line in a cascade buck-boost converter. 10(a). Erickson. Castilla. Vol. J.S. "Slidingmode-control design of a high-power-factor buck-boost rectifier.9%. pp. L.Uceda. Elec.604-612. The efficiency is 93. Indu. Fig.Sebastian. the BoIBB topology has the potential for smaller inductor size compared to other buck-boost topologies and the boost converter.frequency of 100KHz.D. M. The efficiency is 93. V.8% and the total current harmonic distortion is 4. Fundamentals of Power Electronics. Efficiency of over 93% is achieved throughout the line voltage range (90Vrms-264Vrms).8e-3(vs) for all single-switch buck-boost converters. thesis." IEEE Trans.Roy. low switch and inductor conduction losses. L1 and L2 are selected so that the converter operates in CCM in both boost and buck modes at full load. the input line voltage has low rms value 120Vrms and the converter operates in the boost mode always." Design of a simple high power factor rectifier based on the flyback converter. D.Zhou. Lopez.43.792-801." IEEE APEC90. The steady state value of Vcontrol as a function of time is shown in Fig. O. 1990. 9. High efficiency (over 93% throughout the whole ac line voltage range). Vol. June 1999. and S. Indu. For single-switch and two-switch buck-boost converters. pp. Vicuna.. California Institute of Technology. named Boost Interleaved Buck-Boost (BoIBB) converter. F. The new converter has advantages of low voltage stresses. REFERENCES [1] [2] R. has been proposed for universal-input PFC applications. The control voltage is the input to a dual PWM circuit that outputs drive signals for Q1 and Q2. The waveforms of Fig. Matas and M. pp283-288. 8(a). potential for small inductor size." IEEE IECON92. May 1996. Al-Hassad. A single control voltage Vcontrol is used to produce the switch control signals with the duty ratios d1 for the switch Q1 and d2 for the switch Q2 as shown in Fig. K.. 441-449. In Fig. and 1. J.Singer. The output power is 100W. D.Ghanem. Kluwer 1997." IEEE Trans. Simonetti.C. and the ability to set the output dc voltage arbitrarily.Erickson.

- 12V 24V boost converter.pdf
- abcd
- Integrated Dual-Output Converter
- Buck and Boost Converter Using PSPICE
- Buck-boost Converter for Battery Chargers
- boost converter coursework
- 1_CONTROL
- buck boost converter
- Philips Dharmaraj 1
- Efficient Power Factor Correction For Multipulse Bridgeless Active Boost Converter 3 Phase Ac-Dc Converter
- Boost converter
- 112-222-1-SM
- l 24(Dk&Ssg)(Pe) ((Ee)Nptel)
- Buck Converter
- Ahmad Efendi Mohamad ( CD 5307 )
- Power Factor
- CHH User Manual 1.00
- Yokogawa_CW121
- Power Supply
- Progress-Energy-Florida-Inc-General-Service---Demand-(Time-of-Use)
- 784472 Invertronic Modular En
- A Shunt Active Filter Based on Voltage Detection for Harmonic Termination of a Radial Power Distribution Line 2
- ROJ
- Elektro 2014 Svc Scopus
- Elkhorn-Rural-Public-Pwr-Dist-Urban-Commercial-General-Service-Single-Phase
- 6_Hierarchical Velocity Control Based on Differential Flatness for a DC-DC Buck Converter-DC Motor System_2014
- Brochure Smart UPS -VT 50hz
- Zhuo Bi Dual Mode DC DC
- Power Factor Correction of Three Phase Induction Motor
- Cosinus-Phi

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulClose Dialog## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Loading