CSEE JOURNAL OF POWER AND ENERGY SYSTEMS, VOL. 6, NO.
4, DECEMBER 2020
Contemporary Trends in Power Electronics
Converters for Charging Solutions of
Electric Vehicles
Salman Habib, Muhammad Mansoor Khan, Farukh Abbas, Abdar Ali, Muhammad Talib Faiz, Farheen Ehsan,
and Houjun Tang
Abstract—Electrifying the transport sector requires new pos-
sibilities for power electronics converters to attain reliable and
efficient charging solutions for electric vehicles (EVs). With the
continuous development in power electronics converters, the
desire to reduce gasoline consumption and to increase the battery
capacity for more electric range is achievable for EVs in the
near future. The main interface between the power network and
EV battery system is a power electronics converter, therefore,
there is a considerable need of new power converters with low
cost and high reliability for the advance charging mechanism of
EVs. The rapid growth in power converter topologies brings
substantial opportunities in EV charging process. In view of
this fact, this paper investigates the significant aspects, current
progress, and challenges associated with several power converters
to suggest further improvements in charging systems of EVs. In
particular, an extensive analysis of front-end as well as back-end
converter configurations is presented. Moreover, the comparative
properties of resonant converter topologies along with other DC-
DC converters are discussed in detail. Additionally, isolated,
and non-isolated topologies with soft switching techniques are
classified and rigorously analyzed with a view to their respective
issues and benefits. It is foreseen that this paper would be
a valuable addition and a worthy source of information for
researchers exploring the area of power converter topologies for
charging solutions of EVs.
Index Terms—Batteries chargers, converter topologies, electric
vehicles (EVs), power electronics, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles
(PHEVs).
I. I NTRODUCTION
I N the last decade, worldwide challenging concerns in-
cluding the global call for clean energy, imminent energy
crises, and fossil fuel dependence are driving the demand
Manuscript received October 23, 2019; revised December 21, 2019; ac-
cepted February 17, 2020; Date of online publication April 30, 2020, date of
current version August 16, 2020.
S. Habib (corresponding author, e-mail: sams560@sjtu.edu.cn) is with
School of Electronic, Information and Electrical Engineering, and Key
Laboratory of Control of Power Transmission and Conversion, Shanghai
Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China, and with Department of
Electrical Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology, Lahore
54890, Pakistan.
M. Khan, F. Abbas, A. Ali, M. T. Faiz and H. J. Tang are with with School
of Electronic, Information and Electrical Engineering, and Key Laboratory
of Control of Power Transmission and Conversion, Shanghai Jiao Tong
University, Shanghai 200240, China.
F. Ehsan is with School of International and Public Affairs, Shanghai Jiao
Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China.
DOI: 10.17775/CSEEJPES.2019.02700
2096-0042 © 2019 CSEE
911
to adopt the new eco-friendly technologies. Transport and
power sectors are directly linked with all the considerable
climate and environmental issues as contributing largely in
utilizing fossil fuels and CO2 emissions. The emission rate can
be considerably reduced by electrifying the transport sector
with smart grid involvement. Recently, EVs as an eco-friendly
power source are gaining much popularity with a promising
objective to replace internal combustion engines (ICEs) and
to reduce CO2 emissions. Worldwide, the government and
researchers are working collaboratively to lessen fossil fuel
dependence with clean energy solutions. The development and
deployment of EVs are rapidly observed with new incentive-
based policies introduced by the government and policy-
makers [1], [2]. The incentive policies formulated by the
government are based on financial measures, which include tax
exemption (vehicle purchase tax), exemption from road tolling
and preferred parking place for extensive consumer adoption.
Regular increments in fuel prices and high standard envi-
ronmental policies are driving the need for an energy system,
which has a much higher participation of EVs. In the trans-
portation sector, the EVs act as an emerging approach and an
alternative technology, which can alleviate the non-renewable
fossil fuel dependency. Lower operating costs, better fuel econ-
omy with reduced carbon emissions are the reasons for higher
preferences of EVs [3], [4]. The participation of EVs in a smart
grid environment offers many substantial features including
load balancing, peak load shaving, revenue generation, and
tracking of renewable energy resources (RES) are observed
in [5]–[7]. Advancements in EV charging technology based
on converter topologies contribute towards many significant
benefits of EVs over many other traditional clean energy ap-
plications. Recent research revealed that EVs can be integrated
with many RES including wind, solar panels, fuel cells, etc.
to realize the improved performance of power networks [5],
[7].
Despite several developments in EV technology, there are
still some potential barriers including charging infrastructure,
a suitable design of battery chargers (converter topologies),
battery degradation and driving range issues for widespread
adoption [8]. Harmful harmonics are introduced by EV charg-
ers, which lead to potential issues for distribution networks
in terms of its stability and power quality. Harmonic com-
pensation techniques and improved converter topologies are
employed to reduce power quality issues [9], [10]. As far
912 CSEE JOURNAL OF POWER AND ENERGY SYSTEMS, VOL. 6, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2020

as charging power levels are concerned, Level 1 charging is
employed at residential levels. Higher charging levels (Level
2 and Level 3) are required at commercial locations including
shopping malls, rest areas and various parking lots. Compar-
ative analysis of various AC and DC charging power levels
as explained by several international standards [11]–[13] is
summarized in Table I.
The main interface between the power network and EV
battery system is a power electronics converter, therefore,
there is a considerable need of new power converters with
low cost and high reliability for advance charging mechanism
of EVs [14]. Consequently, in this paper, several power
converters are investigated by considering various important
requirements including capability of bidirectional power flow,
high efficiency, and high power density.
There have been several review articles published on var-
ious important features of power converters for charging of
EVs [1]–[4], [7], [9], [14]–[19]. In study [15], EV charging
levels, battery chargers, charging infrastructure with on-board
and off-board chargers are thoroughly reviewed. Similarly,
in study [20], the details of EV charging power levels, EV
charging infrastructure along with optimization techniques for
optimal charging of EVs are provided. The work presented
in [1], [3] briefly highlighted the classification of EV con-
verters topologies along with a comparison of unidirectional
and bidirectional power flows. Charging systems, charging
standards and EV charging impacts are broadly described
in [2]. A thorough discussion regarding energy management
strategies for EVs is presented in [4]. Research presented
in [16] discussed several DC-DC converter topologies in
context to unidirectional and bidirectional charging for EVs.
The bidirectional charging system along with its benefits
and challenging issues is analyzed in [7]. Three-phase front-
end AC-DC converters with improved characteristics of power
quality are exhaustively reviewed in [9]. Current-fed bidi-
rectional converters are thoroughly discussed and compared
in the research study described in [21]. The work reported
in [17] extensively described the single or multi-stage inte-
grated charging solutions for EVs along with inductive and
conductive battery chargers. Similarly, integrated on-board
chargers for fast charging of EVs based on power electronics
drives are well explained in [18]. The study described in [14]
provided a detailed overview of high power on-board chargers,
charging strategies based on EV infrastructure, power flow of
EV chargers and EV charger classification for fast charging of
EVs. Various control techniques associated with dual-active-
bridge based DC-DC power converters are overviewed and
compared in study presented in [22]. Resonant converters are
briefly compared in [19] for charging applications of EVs.
In view of foregoing discussion, it is clear that most of
the previous review studies are limited to some specific area.
To the best knowledge of authors, this study is the first to
present a broad perspective of power electronics converters
through an in-depth assessment of several power converters
in EV charging technologies. The tenacity of the work is
to outline an ample, well-organized, and updated analysis
on various types of power converters. Moreover, quantitative
aspects of converter topologies including voltage and power
ratings along with expected efficiency are not addressed in
most of the earlier studies. Additionally, power electronics
challenging issues exist in the transport sector are not covered.
Battery chargers of EVs must have higher efficiency in
power conversion along with high power density for wide-
spread deployment of EVs. Several types of power converters
may be required depending on the type of EV and needs of
manufacturers. Attributes of battery chargers are dependent on
the design conditions and market requirements. Consequently,
a comprehensive discussion regarding the isolated and non-

TABLE I
I NTERNATIONAL S TANDARDS FOR AC AND DC C HARGING
Charging Power Levels Location for charger Expected power level
AC and DC Charging based on SAE STANDARDS
Basic: Level 1 Charging
Single Phase • P = 1.4 kW with (12 A)
• Vac = 230 (EU)
• On-board • P = 1.9 kW with (20 A)
• Vac = 120 (US)
Main: Level 2 Charging I P = 4 kW with (17 A)
Single Phase/Three Phase
• Vac = 400 (EU) I P = 8 kW with (32 A)
• On-board
• Vac = 240 (US) I P = 19.2 kW with (80 A)
Fast: Level 3 Charging Three Phase • P = 50 kW
• Vac = 208–600 • Located Off-Board • P = 100 kW
Level 1: DC Charging
• Located Off-Board • P = 40 kW with (80 A)
• Vdc = 200–450
Level 2: DC Charging
• Located Off-Board • P = 90 kW with (200 A)
• Vdc = 200–450
Level 3: DC Charging
• Located Off-Board • P = 240 kW with (400 A)
• Vdc = 200–600
AC and DC Charging based on IEC STANDARDS
Single Phase
AC Power Level 1 • P = 4–7.5 kW with (16 A)
• On-board
Single Phase/Three Phase
AC Power Level 2 • P = 8–15 kW with (32 A)
• On-board
Three Phase
AC Power Level 3 • P = 60–120 kW with (250 A)
• On-board
DC Rapid Charging • Off-Board • P = 1000–2000 kW with (400A)
CHAdeMo Charging Standard
DC Rapid Charging • Off-Board • 62.5 kW with (125 A)
HABIB et al.: CONTEMPORARY TRENDS IN POWER ELECTRONICS CONVERTERS FOR CHARGING SOLUTIONS OF ELECTRIC VEHICLES 913

isolated power converters is presented in this manuscript, as
these power converter topologies can be the potential candi-
dates for charging applications of electric vehicles. Each type
of converter holds its own benefits and drawbacks, therefore,
isolated, and non-isolated topologies with soft switching tech-
niques are classified and rigorously analyzed with a view to
their respective issues and benefits. Several power electronics
converters for charging solution of EVs are presented in Fig. 1.
The main objective of this paper is to investigate the present
needs, recent progress, and challenging issues associated with
power electronics converters to suggest possible improvements
in the charging mechanisms of EVs. This work comprehen-
sively provides the recent state-of-the-art on power converters
depending on possible charging solutions of EVs. Further-
more, significant, and up-to-date aspects of power converter
topologies are summarized in detail. The principle under-
standing of several power converter configurations are well
explained. The investigation begins with a concise background
of battery chargers. Afterward, the operating principles of
various front-end converters are briefly highlighted. Moreover,
an extensive analysis of back-end (DC/DC) topologies with
their corresponding issues and benefits is performed. This
is followed by a detailed comparison of several DC-DC
converter configurations. A comparative analysis of resonant
converter topologies is also addressed in this study. Isolated
and non-isolated topologies with soft switching techniques
are classified and rigorously reviewed with a view to their
respective constraint analysis. Furthermore, the idea of an
integrated battery charger along with front-end (AC-AC) and
back-end (AC-DC) converters for battery charging of EVs are
briefly described. Finally, the concluding remarks are drawn
in the last section.
II. C ONVERTER T OPOLOGIES FOR EV BATTERY
C HARGERS
Improved converter topologies of a battery charger have a
substantial role in the further development process of charging
infrastructure of EVs. The standard properties of a battery
charger reflect the battery life degradation and required charg-
ing time. EV design challenges are introduced by various types
of battery chargers as being the main power source. Driving
range of EV is significantly dependent on design constraints of
battery chargers including weight, volume and power density.
Several switching techniques with control connections are
involved in proper working of a battery charger. However, the
hardware configurations related to battery charging decide the
required control algorithm and type of switching methodology.
Various control algorithm needed for charging can be imple-
mented with the help of converters, integrated circuits, micro-
controllers, and signal processors. The EV power architecture
of a battery charger is shown in Fig. 2.
Power quality issues can be reduced by observing high
power factor and less distorted utility current drawn by EV
chargers [23]. DC current injection and contents of harmonics
should be minimized as supported by various international
standards such as SAE: J2894, IEEE: 1000–3-2 and National
Electric Code (NEC): 690 [24]–[27]. Various requirements
prescribed in different standards must be met by EV. Various

Power Converter
Topologies for Charging of
Electric Vehicles

Back-End (DC-DC) Isolated and Non-Isolated Front-End (AC-AC) and

Front-End (AC-DC) Power Converters with Integrated Charger
Converters Converters Back-End (DC-AC) Converters Topology
Soft-switching

Buck-Converter
Bridgeless Interleaved Converter Current Source Converters
with Power Factor Correction Boost-Converter
Interleaved Converter with Buck-Boost Converter
Power Factor Correction Voltage Source Converters
Fly Back Converter
Bridgeless Converter with Z-Source Network
Power Factor Correction Forward Converter

Conventioanl Converter with Push-Pull Converter

Power Factor Correction Matrix Converters
CUK Converter
SEPIC Converter
Half-Bridge Converter
Full-Bridge Converter
Resonant Converter
Z-Source Network
Dual Active Bridge (DAB)

Fig. 1. Power electronic converters for charging solution of EVs.

914 CSEE JOURNAL OF POWER AND ENERGY SYSTEMS, VOL. 6, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2020
PFC Based
Input Front-end
Filter AC-DC
Converter
3φAC
Supply AC-DC Battery Charging Converter
Fig. 2. Power architecture of a battery charger.
international standards emphasizing on the safety concerns for
EVs are summarized in Table II.
TABLE II
S AFETY S TANDARDS FOR EV S
Technical Code Details
Safety rules for recharge energy storage systems
SAE J-2464:
(RESS) are described.
SAE-J2929: Safety for EV propulsion battery system.
Electrically propelled road vehicles, inside and
ISO 6469-1: 2009
outside protection of a person, on-board RESS are
(IEC):
described.
UL 2202: Protection of charging system is described.
IEC 61851-21: Requirements for conductive connection of EVs.
ECE R100: Electric shock protection.
Workplace safety, branch circuit protection, and
NFPA 70/70E:
charging system safety.
Electric shock protection, EV infrastructure safety,
IEC TC 69/64
and Electrical installation.
A. I st Stage Front-End Converters (AC-DC)
Several converters topologies are used by charging systems
of EVs including rectifiers (AC to DC converters), inverters
(DC to AC converters), DC-DC as well as AC to AC converters
based on the necessity of certain applications. The AC to
DC power converter has its input from the utility mains and
converts it into an isolated DC output. As these converters are
connected to a utility main so they can inject and generate cur-
rent harmonics. The power factor correction (PFC) techniques
are implemented to overcome the issue of current harmonics.
The PFC techniques applied to these converters support to
control the input currents to be sinusoidal and in phase with
their respected phase voltages. These converters are developed
with two independent converter stages. Rectification is the first
stage to get a middle level DC voltage, while PFC technique is
parallelly implemented to achieve an input power factor close
to unity and this is performed by a front-end converter, while
the second stage is used to get converted and desired isolated
dc voltage to charge the battery of an EV from a back-end
converter. The PFC technique is implemented in such a way
that at first it senses the input currents and voltages and then
turn-on and turn-off the switches such that to control the input
currents to be sinusoidal and in phase with their respected
phase voltages. A summarized discussion about a few 3-phase
front-end topologies is presented only. Fig.3(a) shows a case
for a converter with two stages where the first stage (AC-DC
front-end) has a converter with six switches and the second
stage (DC-DC back-end) has a full-bridge converter. The use
of six switches in the front-end part of a two-stage converter
could make it costly and complicated, particularly when we
DC-Link
Back-end
DC-DC EV Battery
Converter
are considering the related gate drivers, input current sensors,
and control circuitry.
The significant aspects, which need to be considered be-
fore an appropriate selection is made about the PFC con-
verter/rectifier configurations are: power factor, cost issues,
complications in control circuitry, efficiency, robustness, and
total harmonic distortion (THD). The main topologies used
for the rectification process with PFC involve configurations
of the Boost type and their variations [28], [29]. A lot of
research activities in the field of power electronics are in on-
going stages to find alternative approaches for a converter to
do AC to DC conversion and PFC with minimum number
of switches. One alternative way is to have three units of 1-
phase boost PFC converter as shown in Fig. 3(b). Each Unit
consists of a front-end converter with PFC technique followed
by a back-end converter to find the desired voltage. The main
benefit is the wide range availability of the existing units of a
single-phase converter. The drawbacks of this method are the
difficulties in keeping synchronism between the three units and
the triplen harmonics created in the units due to parametric
variations.
On the other hand, there are some famous front-end con-
verter configurations with lesser number of switches such as:
four switch front-end converter and a Vienna rectifier. Fig. 3(c)
represents a four-switch front-end converter. Each leg in the
converter consists of two switches and the third leg with two
capacitors. One phase from three-phase source is connected
at the center point of each leg. The basic operating principle
of this converter is that if somehow the phase currents are
controlled that are linked with legs of converter which have
switches, then the phase current of the third leg which is
without switches will be constrained by the phase current of
other two legs, so that currents will become sinusoidal and in
phase with its respected phase voltage.
The other significant front-end converter configuration is a
Vienna rectifier which is shown in Fig. 3(d). It consists of
18 diodes with three main power switches. Diodes are imple-
mented in such a way that four diodes to each power switch
to enable the bidirectional operation and permits the flow of
current in both directions. The operation of this converter can
be similar to a conventional converter with six switches, but
each converter leg has one bidirectional switch rather than
two unidirectional switches. The noteworthy benefits of a
Vienna rectifier are higher reliability, low cost, lower EMI,
higher power density, lesser switches, low input inductance,
less voltage component stress, and higher efficiency [30].
Even if the lower number of switches make these converters
cost-effective than the six switch converters, however, the
HABIB et al.: CONTEMPORARY TRENDS IN POWER ELECTRONICS CONVERTERS FOR CHARGING SOLUTIONS OF ELECTRIC VEHICLES 915

Full Wave Bridge DC Regulation

Rectification Stage Stage

A DC Bus

B
AC-DC DC-DC
Six Switch AC-DC Converter Converter
DC-DC Conversion
PFC Rectification
A
S1 S3 S5 S7 S10 Lo
B
AC-DC DC-DC
Cbus Co Converter Converter
R
A
S4 S6 S2 S9 S8
B
Stage 1 Stage 2 AC-DC DC-DC
Converter Converter

(a) (b)

S+
S1 S2 C1 + C+
Vdc/2
− Sa Sb Sc
VOUT
C−
+ S−
S3 S4 Vdc/2
C2 −

(c) (d)

Fig. 3. AC-DC power converters: (a) Three-phase two-stage AC-DC power converter, (b) 3-phase converter using three 1-phase units, (c) Front-end converter
with four switches, (d) Topology of vienna rectifier .

conventional six switch converters use much simpler control
techniques than are used in the reduced switch converters,
which required more complex control methods [31]. Presently,
many researchers have managed to overcome the issues of
complex control and cost therewith in two switch-mode con-
verters by combining the functionality of the first stage of a
converter i.e. AC-DC conversion with PFC technique, with
DC-DC conversion stage into a single converter [32]–[35].
A single controller is used for the implementation of such
converters to get the desired regulated DC output voltage so
that there is no need of a controller for the regulation of
intermediate DC voltage as well as to perform PFC at the
input stage which is done as a part of converter’s operation.
To perform both DC-DC conversion and PFC concurrently
over the full load is a challenging task for the designing of
a 3-phase one-stage converter. For low power applications,
these 3-phase single switch converters are simple and cheaper
solution.
Such types of converters have their own drawback of peak
voltage stress on main switching device. Usually, a front-
end converter, which performs the AC-DC conversion is an
active rectifier with a filtering device to perform PFC. Several
objectives can be accomplished by using these controllable
converters such as: 1) Elimination of current harmonics, 2)
Voltage regulation of DC-link, 3) Unity power factor correc-
tion, 4) Decoupled control of active and reactive powers, and
5) Compensation of reactive power.
A control strategy is developed in [36] associated with
front-end converters in EV battery chargers to obtain the
unity power factor correction along with removal of current
harmonics regardless of the variations in gird voltage. The
current harmonics related to battery charger are effectively
removed by implementing the control scheme. The grid current
is controlled with the proposed algorithm, as a result, it can
be in phase with voltage component of the grid. The proposed
control strategy is comprised of control algorithm for EV
charging as well as algorithm for controlling the grid. The
digital signal processor (DSP) kit is utilized to implement
the control method, therefore, all controlling variables are
converted by using analog to digital converters (ADC) as
mentioned in the Fig. 4(a). A bandpass filter along with feed-
forward duty-ratio term and phase-locked loop method are
utilized in the current control algorithm as illustrated in the
Fig. 4(b). The efficacy of the proposed scheme is verified with
both the experimental and simulation results. Further details
to achieve the current harmonics elimination as well as power
factor closed to unity are described in [36].
Proper handling of control system techniques permits to get
multiple useful features from AC-DC front-end converters.
As desired switching of a front-end active rectifier can be
achieved by appropriate management of control strategies that
generate the required pulses for the operation. The control
techniques, which are extensively used such as: direct-voltage
control, current control and direct-power control. The control
and operation of a conventional boost rectifier is much easier
to implement in a continues conduction mode and it becomes
916 CSEE JOURNAL OF POWER AND ENERGY SYSTEMS, VOL. 6, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2020

iB+

EMI Filter
iG iR L D

LOAD
vG M C vB
d
−
PFC Boost Converter
vB iR
Driver −
Feed-Forward PI
PWM
Term d2 d1 +
vG d vB(t)
vG(t) IG* vB iR*
T0 Current Charging
T1
ADC

ADC
vG vF θ IG*
Control Control iB(t)
iR(t) Algorithm Algorithm PLL |sin()|
T2 T3 BPF
iR VG iB Current Control Algorithm
DSP vB VM IM VG
(a) (b)

Fig. 4. Control algorithms: (a) current and charging control algorithms [36], (b) control algorithm for gird current [36].

the simplest AC-DC converter. As the requirements of power
rating increases in an EV’s energy storage system, it raises
the need to develop an interleaved technique (Series or parallel
linkage) in the boost converters. The benefits of employing the
interleaved boost converters in high power applications include
reduced inductor size, better performance, double switching
frequency, increase power conversion density, reduce EMI,
partial cancellation of input and output ripples, minimize high
frequency ripples of the output capacitor, reduced conduction
losses and higher efficiency. However, there are some draw-
backs including complex control circuitry, reverse recovery
losses of boost diodes and heating issues for input diode
bridge [28]. Reverse recovery losses create heat problems
at the input rectifier and limit application of this converter
for 3.5 kW charging power level. Therefore, soft switching
techniques are implemented, and faster reverse recovery diodes
are utilized in power converters to minimize the reverse
recovery losses, which lead to higher efficiency [37].
The introduction of a new topology, which is a combination
of bridgeless and interleaved topologies called as Bridgeless
interleaved (BLIL) boost converters. The BLIL converters
achieve lower EMI due to interleaving concept and higher
efficiency because of the removal of boost diode rectifier
bridge [38]. BLIL retains the similar number of semicon-
ductors devices as interleaved boost PFC converter. However,
BLIL needs two extra MOSFETs and two fast diodes in
comparison with four slow diodes which are utilized in bridge
section of the interleaved boost PFC converter. Table III [28],
[38], [39] summarizes the comparison of better and poor
properties of different front-end AC-DC converter with PFC
for EV battery charging.
B. 2nd Stage Back-End Converters (DC-DC)
The most extensively accepted EV charging topology con-
sists of front-end (AC-DC) and back-end (DC-DC) converters.
The front-end topology completes the rectification process
with PFC, whereas, the voltage level from the rectification
process is adjusted by the back-end DC/DC converter to make
it suitable for EV battery charging. The designing of a battery
charger for EVs faces substantial challenges, which includes
obtaining higher efficiency, lower cost, higher power density,
isolation and meeting safety requirements. The increase in
switching frequency permits to decrease the cost of passive
elements. Turn on/off time and switching losses are the
reason to limit the switching frequency. Therefore, to increase
the switching frequency, resonant circuits and soft-switching
methods are widely adopted. The selected converter topology
must be able to control the higher output current. The converter
configurations of back- end DC-DC converters can be divided
into isolated and non-isolated categories depending on whether
there is a galvanic isolation present between the input source
and the output circuitry.
To achieve galvanic isolation, low frequency transformer
is used at the grid side or integration of high frequency
transformer is needed in DC-DC converter stage. If the switch
has ideal characteristics, then it can be turned on/off instan-
taneously and there is no delay exit between voltage across
a switch and current passing through it. However, ideally
such delays happen during the switching transition state (turn
on/off). These delays in switching states cause switching losses

TABLE III
C OMPARATIVE P ROPERTIES OF F RONT- END C ONVERTERS FOR BATTERY C HARGING
Converters Conventional Converter Bridgeless Converter Interleaved Converter Bridgeless Interleaved
Configuration with PFC with PFC with PFC Converter with PFC
Power Ratings (W) Less than 1000 Less than 2000 Less than 3000 Greater than 3000
Ripples for Capacitor − − + +
Noise or EMI 0 − + 0
Ripples for Input Main − − + +
Magnetic Size − 0 + +
Efficiency − 0 0 ++
Cost + 0 0 −
**(Where + represents the best quality, 0 for neutral one, − for Poor Quality).
HABIB et al.: CONTEMPORARY TRENDS IN POWER ELECTRONICS CONVERTERS FOR CHARGING SOLUTIONS OF ELECTRIC VEHICLES
to occur in a semiconductor device. If somehow during the
transition state switching current/voltage is made to be zero,
switching losses can be reduced. Soft switching methods are
implemented to make these switching transitions soft (gradual)
to minimize the switching losses. Two most widely adopted
soft switching techniques are: (a) Zero voltage switching
(ZVS), and (b) Zero current switching (ZCS). The design of
the new converter topologies incorporates these soft switching
techniques to improve the efficiency of EVs chargers. Usually,
an active auxiliary circuit is used in zero current transition
methods which have a switch of lower-rated current to change
the path of a current from the switch of the main converter
each time it turns to be off.
C. Comparison of Various DC-DC Converters
Conventionally, the required level of output power decides
the selection criteria of a DC-DC converter. Examining
the basic configurations of converter, the output power level
(low to high power converter), is fly-back, forward, push-pull,
half-bridge and full-bridge. Generally, for low power appli-
cations, the most commonly used isolated topology with low
possible cost is fly-back converter. For a fly-back converter,
a separate output inductor is not required, however, only a
single active switch is essential, which makes it a less costly
as well as easy to implement. Unsatisfactory utilization of the
transformer and necessity of supplementary capacitors due to
high input and out ripple currents are the drawback of the
topology. As for as medium power level applications, forward
and active clamp forward converters are often implemented.
The topology has the similar problems as in case for fly-back
converter i.e. limited duty cycle causes the unsatisfactory uti-
lization of the transformer. During the steady-state operation,
both quadrants are utilized by the transformer for forward
and active clamp forward converters. However, maximum duty
cycle is limited during transformer reset process, as peak
flux during startup and transient states can increase to higher
levels. The remaining three topologies (Push-pull, half and full
bridge) are much appropriate for applications which require
high power/high density as: 1) There is a full utilization
of a transformer core, 2) Power transfer occurs in both the
quadrants, 3) No need for special provisions to reset the
transformer, 4) Further optimization of a transformer due to
large available range of duty cycle, and 5) Higher duty cycle
at the output filter inductor (100%). The turns ratio of the
transformer is designed in such a way to effectively maximize
the duty cycle to decrease the RMS current and size of an
output filter.
The drawback of a push-pull topology is the higher voltage
stress on the input switches during the off-state; much higher
than the input voltage. This issue is not arising in a half-bridge
topology i.e. the voltage stress is not higher than the input
voltage. This is the added benefit of half-bridge topology over
push-pull configuration. The other major benefit is much better
utilization of a transformer core, depending on the switching
of active switches, either operating in a buck or a boost mode.
Comparing the half-bridge topology with the CUK and SEPIC,
only a single inductor is required (half of the size) as two in
other configurations (CUK and SEPIC) and active components
917
have less current ratings. This would lead to less switching
and conduction losses which subsequently raise the efficiency
of a half-bridge converter. The problem with this topology is
the discontinuity in its output current during the boost mode
operation. CUK has the benefit of reduced ripple current at the
input and output but the problem is higher voltage rating (Vin
+ Vout) on the transfer capacitor (Ct). This issue is resolved
in SEPIC topology with less rated voltage (Vin). The topology
of split-pi converter has a smaller size of passive components
with benefits of reduced switching losses, less harmonics in
the current waveform and higher efficiency [39], [40].
The full-bridge topology has the benefits of best core uti-
lization, switch voltage less than the input, much less current
for a given power as compared to half-bridge topology. All
these benefits raise the efficiency of a full-bride converter as
compared to half-bridge converter particularly at high load
currents. The cost of extra switches and complications for
driving the switches are the drawbacks of full-bridge con-
verter configuration. Furthermore, cascaded DC-DC converters
(back-end) has many benefits e.g. lower thermal and electrical
stress, and interleaved topologies are much beneficial to reduce
the current ripples [16], [41]. Simply to represent charging
operation of a charger, some studies focused on a simple
buck or boost converter for a back-end operation of an EV
charger [36], [42]. The comparative properties of several DC-
DC converters are summarized in Table IV.
III. I SOLATED AND N ONISOLATED T OPOLOGIES
WITH VARIATIONS
A. Isolated Full-Bridge Converter Topologies with its varia-
tions
Among various converter configurations, the current and
voltage fed bridges, a suitable combination of both, and
resonant converters with different variations are the best appro-
priate and mostly utilized DC-DC back-end converters. One
famous topology is the combination of current-and voltage-fed
full-bridge (VCFFB) converter topology, where ZVS used for
current-fed side and for voltage-fed side either ZCS or ZVS
can be attained [17]. The schematic illustration of full-bridge
DC-DC converter is represented in Fig. 5(a).
The DC-DC power converters usually required to operate
at high switching frequencies to gain higher power densities,
however, the increase in switching frequency of a transistor
not only rise the total switching losses and also decrease the
supply efficiency. With the rise in switching frequencies, the
turn-on/turn-off losses (Switching losses) of semiconductor
devices become higher. Therefore, ZCS and ZVS techniques
are implemented to allow the operation at higher frequencies,
while reducing the switching losses, increase the efficiency
and lower the cost and size, which outcomes in higher power
densities. Higher variations in dv/dt and di/dt can be eliminated
by using the soft-switching techniques due to a significant
reduction in EMI. Moreover, ripples for output voltage and
input current should be minimum to efficiently charge the
battery. The interleaved design is implemented to achieve the
target. Bidirectional non-isolated configuration is preferred due
to involvement of cost issue. The common implementation
918 CSEE JOURNAL OF POWER AND ENERGY SYSTEMS, VOL. 6, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2020

TABLE IV
C OMPARATIVE P ROPERTIES OF VARIOUS DC-DC C ONVERTER T OPOLOGIES
Performance Enhancement
Topologies Comparative Properties
Methods
I FLYBACK:
• Lower cost of converter, Fewer components
• Input current is pulsating
• O/P filter inductor is not required
• Offer DC isolation which make it available in applications which
need isolation conversion
• Converter can perform the step up or step-down operation and
work as either non-inverting or inverting converter
• Higher current and voltage stresses, however, simple and inex-
pensive
• Inductor efficiency is low due to leakage problem
I FORWARD:
• Converter can perform the step up or step-down operation I Power factor correction
• Unsatisfactory utilization of magnetic core and input current is I Bridgeless boost topology
pulsating with power factor
• Benefit of lower cost correction
I PUSH-PULL: I Simple interleaved
• Converter can perform the step up or step-down operation Buck topologies have advantages
I 1-Phase Isolated derived converter and voltage stresses are higher such as:
or Non-isolated • Imbalance magnetic flux • Less charging current of
topology with I CUK: battery
less power and z Different • Reduced inductor size
• Inverting converter i.e. getting a-ve polarity output • Less stress on output
slow charging configurations • Continuous current at input and output
Including: capacitor but power
• Large Inductors with higher electrical stresses level is limited
I Fly-back • Reduced ripple current at input and output
I Push-pull • More passive components are required I Bridgeless interleaved
I Forward topologies:
I SEPIC:
I Half bridge • Power levels are higher
• Non-inverting Buck-Boost
I Full bridge • Gate drive circuitry is simpler I Multicell converter
I CUK • Less voltage stresses as compared to CUK topologies
I SEPIC • Input current is non-pulsating I Resonant circuit
I Multi-level ***CUK and SEPIC Bidirectional power conversion can be topologies:
I 3-Phase Isolated and Matrix achieved with two active switches, however, both suffer by high • Switching stress is
or Non-isolated Converters current stress in diodes and switches as compared to Half Bridge lesser
topology with with similar voltage and power conditions • Lesser losses
high power and • Efficiency is higher
I HALF-BRIDGE and FULL-BRIDGE:
fast charging I Soft switching topologies
• Can be used as step up or step-down converter
• Transformer core is effectively utilized I Hard switching Topologies
• Conduction and switching losses are lesser I Zero voltage, Zero current
• Lower component stress, higher conversion ratio, and higher switching topologies
power level are benefits of full-bridge, however, higher cost and (ZVS, ZCS)
complex control are the main issues • ZVS and ZCS provide
• Less components, lower cost, and high component stress are reduced size and weight
benefits and issues of half-bridge respectively
• Higher efficiency as compared to CUK and SEPIC
I MULTI-LEVEL and MATRIX CONVERTERS:
• Higher efficiency, less losses, less component stress and reduced
switching frequency are the main benefits, whereas, added cir-
cuitry with complex control are issues of multilevel converters
• Sinusoidal input and output waveforms, reduced higher order har-
monics with no sub harmonics, maximum voltage transformation
ratio, controlled input power factor, least energy storage require-
ments, inherently presented bidirectional flow and exclusion of
bulky storage capacitors are the significant benefits of Matrix
converters

of traditional phase shift modulation is based on the reason
that there is no need to use an extra circuitry to deliver soft
switching. For DC-DC converters, the major reasons, which
make phase shift modulation technique extremely widespread
are: much simpler implementation, soft-switching operation
and obtaining symmetrical pulses [43], [44].
Currently, numerous studies have been conducted for the
development of efficient and reliable chargers for EVs. For
several DC-DC converters, phase-shifted full-bridge (PSFB)
converter, resonant power converters have gained much con-
sideration and ensured three main aspects for an effective EV
charger: 1) Soft switching operation, 2) Reduction in rectified
voltage peak, and 3) Extended regulated range for output
voltage. Quantitative design specs of high-power isolated dc-
dc converters are summarized in Table V [17].
Another topology related to full-bridge configuration is
the PSFB converter used in high power applications. The
topology is same as the traditional full-bridge converter;
HABIB et al.: CONTEMPORARY TRENDS IN POWER ELECTRONICS CONVERTERS FOR CHARGING SOLUTIONS OF ELECTRIC VEHICLES 919

Full-Bridge DC/DC Converter wider range of output voltage. So, it becomes one best dc/dc
Iin Lo io converter option that is appropriate for high input voltage,
S1 S3 D1 D3 high frequency and high- power applications due to the afore-
+
Ls mentioned advantages. The main issues reported in PSFB
k:1 isec Co
Vin ip + topology are: 1) Higher circulating currents, 2) Secondary side
A Vsec
B − hard switching, 3) Light load efficiency, 4) Small effective
S2 S4 duty cycle, and 5) Secondary side switching losses and voltage
−
D2 D4 stress.
The PSFB performs regulation of output voltage through
(a)
changing the phase shift among the two legs, but the problem
Iin Lo io of hard switching at secondary side switches and lose of ZVS
Sa1 D1 at lighter load conditions are major concerns for PSFB [50].
+ S1 S3 D3
L1
k:1 isec
Laux Caux
Vin A ip +
Vsec Co B. Soft-Switching Techniques
Sa2 B −
S2 S4 Several approaches have been proposed for an extended
−
D2 D4 range of output voltage regulation and provide soft-switching
to semiconductor switches such as: 1) Auxiliary circuits
(b)
for soft switching, 2) Fixed variable duty-cycle, 3) Self-
Iin Lo io
sustained oscillation control (SSOC), 4) Hybrid modulation
+ S1 S3 D1 D3 schemes [51]–[53]. Some of the techniques which maintain
Ca1 L1
k:1 isec the soft-switching for different load conditions are discussed
Laux +
Vin ip Co
A Vsec below:
B −
− Ca2 S2 S4 1) Active Auxiliary Circuits for Soft-Switching
D2 D4
The soft-switching can be achieved by using the active
auxiliary circuits and a traditional auxiliary circuit used for
(c)
this specific intent is shown in Fig. 5(b). They used to provide
Fig. 5. Full-bridge DC-DC converter with soft-switching auxiliary circuits (a) soft-switching for DC-DC converters independent of the con-
full-bridge power Converter, (b) active auxiliary Circuit, (c) passive auxiliary ditions for load. Although, these active auxiliary circuits create
circuit. complications for a power circuitry of the DC-DC converter
and lower the reliability of the converter topologies. Therefore,
TABLE V
Q UANTITATIVE D ESIGN S PECS OF H IGH -P OWER DC-DC C ONVERTER applications for active auxiliary circuits in practical converter
T OPOLOGIES topologies are fewer [54]–[56].
PSFB LLC
Interleaved 2) Passive Auxiliary Circuits for Soft-Switching
Quantitative Parameters Buck
Topology Topology
Topology To provide and sustain the soft switching, passive auxiliary
Output Capacitor (µF) 100 50 1 circuits can be employed, and a traditional auxiliary circuit
Output Inductor (µH) 96 − − used for this specific intent is shown in Fig. 5(c). The major
Switch Count 4 2 3
11 µF
benefit of these passive auxiliary circuits is that there is
Transfer Capacitor (µF) − − no need for added active components to implement them
(820) V
3 × 1.1 mH except their required circuitry. Thus, these circuits have more
Transfer Inductor (mH) − −
(66 A)
Transformer 1 1 −
reliability and easier implementation. The main issues with
Isolation Yes Yes No passive auxiliary circuits are: 1) Lower the power density of
Control PWM Frequency PWM the DC-DC power converters, and 2) Contribution in overall
Efficiency (%) 94 97 96
power losses of a converter topology [57]–[59].
**(Converter Topologies are designed for 40 kW output Power, 200 V
output Voltage and Switching Frequency 8.5 kHz) 3) Modulations Techniques for Soft-Switching
There are many modulation techniques applied to sustain
however, the control method is different; it implements the the soft-switching and increase the range of soft switching
zero voltage transitions (ZVT) and ZCS combinedly (ZVZCS) under different load conditions. Particularly, the modulation
while maintaining the switching frequency constant [45]–[48]. scheme SSOC is implemented to assure soft-switching. In
The oscillations can be reduced by shifting the phases of a gate this control modulated scheme, soft-switching is performed in
pulse for switches S3 and S4 in accordance with switches S1 a way that switching frequency is adjusted automatically, so
and S2. For both lagging and leading leg switches, zero voltage the impedance considered from full-bridge converter topology
and zero current switching can be realized over a particular is inductive. The main issue is that the control involved in
level of power. The transformer is used in such kind of this modulation scheme pushed the switching frequency of
converter topology to provide galvanic isolation [49]. Reduced the converter to a higher range of frequency under lighter load
switching and circulating conducting losses, PWM control and conditions. Thus, it leads to high overall power losses and low-
less current stress are the benefits of this topology, which ering the efficiency of converter topology [57]–[64]. In general
makes its efficiency higher for several load conditions and a terms, the implementation of soft-switching techniques with
920
different control schemes leads to following major benefits of
Back-End DC-DC power converters for EVs: 1) Appropriate
choice of the rectifier diodes with respect to reverse voltage, 2)
Lower EMI, 3) Better operation in higher switching frequency,
and 4) Higher efficiency [51], [65].
C. Isolated Resonant Topologies with Variations and Compar-
ison Analysis
Among several solutions, the best alternative to minimize
the switching losses along with conduction losses is the
implementation of different soft-switching resonant methods
with various topologies of converters. Efficient and effective
charger design for EVs is obtained from resonant topologies
due to high switching operation [66]. Alternating voltage gain
for an extended range of operating frequencies can also be
obtained by implementing the resonant converters [66]–[68].
Different variations can be observed from resonant topologies
including: Series resonant converters (SRC), Parallel resonant
converters (PRC), Series-Parallel resonant converters (SPRC,
named as LCC) and LLC. SRC, PRC and LCC are con-
ventional configurations, whereas, LLC topology is the most
popular one. The comparative properties of different traditional
resonant topologies are summarized in Table VI.
1) Series Resonant Converter Topology
The converter topology of a conventional half-bridge SRC is
shown in Fig. 6(a). In SRC, the modelling of resonant network
is achieved by using a resonant inductor with a capacitor
presented by Lr and Cr respectively. Resonant tank is modelled
with the series combination of Lr and Cr, and then a rectifier-
load network is further in series to make a complete system.
The resonant network and the load acts as a voltage divider in
operational process of SRC. The impedance of resonant tank
will be altered by changing the frequency of a driving voltage.
The SRC always has less than unity DC gain since it works as
a voltage divider. The impedance of the resonant network is
much lower as compared to the impedance of the load under
lighter load conditions. This makes all the input voltage to
TABLE VI
C OMPARATIVE P ROPERTIES OF T RADITIONAL R ESONANT T OPOLOGIES .
Type of
Resonant Benefits
Converter
• EMI and switching losses are reduced by ZVS, which
eventually increase the efficiency.
• High frequency operation reduces the size of magnetic
SRC
components.
• ZVS can be achievable above the resonant frequency and
ZCS below the resonant frequency.
• Regulation of output voltage under no load condition is not
a problem.
• Rectifier current is continuous; thus, applications of higher
PRC
output current and low output voltage are suitable.
• There is no need to change too much frequency to maintain
the regulation of output voltage.
• Lesser circulating energy as compared to PRC.
• Regulation of output voltage under no load condition.
SPRC • Less sensitivity to load change.
• More efficient due to highest resonant frequency.
CSEE JOURNAL OF POWER AND ENERGY SYSTEMS, VOL. 6, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2020
impose on the load. Therefore, the regulation of output voltage
becomes difficult under these conditions. The ZCS condition
will work for the SRC, when switching frequency of the
converter is less than resonant frequency. On the contrary, ZVS
condition will work for the SRC in case of higher switching
frequency. At no load, regulation of output is achieved at
infinite frequency. To avoid this major issue for SRC, some
other control techniques must be implemented with SRC for
the regulation of output voltage under lighter load conditions.
The increase in impedance of the resonant network with an
increase in frequency tends to increase the circulating energy
in the resonant network which further increase the conduction
losses of the converter [69].
2) Parallel Resonant Converter Topology
The converter of a conventional half-bridge PRC is shown
in Fig. 6(b). In PRC, the resonant tank is again in series
combination, however, the load and the resonant network are
in parallel. To match the impedance, an inductor is included
on the secondary side. For PRC, the DC voltage gain can
be larger than unity and operating region is much smaller as
compared to SRC. The issue of light load regulation does
not occur in PRC. However, the main issue is much higher
circulating energy under lighter load condition as compared
with SRC. Thus, it is difficult to implement PRC topologies
in high power applications.
3) Series Parallel Resonant Converter Topology
The converter topology of a conventional SPRC is shown
in Fig. 6(c). In SPRC, the tank network is modeled by three
components represented by Lr, Csr, and Cpr. The resonant
network is a combination of SRC and PRC, however, it has
improved characteristics as compared to both SRC and PRC.
As the resonant components, Lr and Csr are in series with the
load, this makes the circulating energy smaller in comparison
with PRC. In SPRC, the output voltage regulation can be
attained with the parallel capacitor Cpr. However, the design of
wider range of input still creates the issue of losses. In SPRC,
Issues
• There is no optimize performance with extended range of input
voltage and variations in load.
• Regulation of output voltage under no load condition is not possible.
• Rectifier current is pulsating; thus, applications of higher output
current are limited.
• Applications with higher output voltage, lesser output current and
need of no load regulation are available only.
• Issues of higher circulating energy and turn-off current at high input
voltage.
• The current at primary side is not depending on the condition of
load: Issues of much higher circulating energy and turn-off current.
• Needed for applications with high short circuit requirements.
• Higher input voltage will tend to increase the switching and conduc-
tion losses.
HABIB et al.: CONTEMPORARY TRENDS IN POWER ELECTRONICS CONVERTERS FOR CHARGING SOLUTIONS OF ELECTRIC VEHICLES 921

Square wave generator SRC

Square wave generator
Rectifier network Voltage load PRC
S1 Resonant network Rectifier network Current load
S1 Resonant network
Lr TR Lf
Lr TR
Vin +
−
vd + +
Vin + Vd +
Np Ns vac Co Ro Vo −
Np Ns iac Co Ro Vo
S2 − S2 Cr
− −
Cr

(a) (b)
Square wave generator
Square wave generator SPRC LLC
Rectifier network Voltage load
Rectifier network Current load S1
S1 Resonant network Resonant network
Lf Cr Lr
Lr Csr TR Vd TR
Vd + Vin + + +
Vin + − ip
− Np Ns vac Co Ro Vo
Np Ns iac Co Ro Vo S2
S2 Cpr Lm −
− −

(c) (d)
+
S1 Cs ldeal Transformer Equivalent Circuit C′j C′j
2 D1 D3
Lext Llk,p Ideal L′lk,s
n:1
+ Vin
− Cs Lm C′w C′p C′f R′L V′out

C′j C′j
Cs Ls1 Lp Ls2 D2 D4
S2
2
−
(e)

Fig. 6. Resonant Converter Topologies (a) Series Resonant Converter (SRC), (b) Parallel Resonant Converter (PRC), (c) Series Parallel Resonant Converter
(SPRC), (d) LLC Resonant Converter Topology, (e) L3C2 Resonant Converter Topology [51].

higher input voltage will tend to increase the conduction and
switching losses.
In Sum, these traditional resonant converter topologies cope
with some major issues to deal with the extended range of
input voltage and they cannot be optimized for this extended
range. High conduction and switching losses will occur for a
wider range. To achieve higher efficiency and better results,
some control techniques should be implemented with these
traditional resonant converters, and other resonant converter
topologies should be under consideration [51], [67], [70].
4) LLC Resonant Converter Topology
The limitations in conventional resonant converters have
been resolved in the modern LLC resonant topology. The
LLC resonant topology has attracted much attention for the
designing of EVs chargers. The schematic of half-bridge LLC
resonant converter topology is shown in Fig. 6(d). It can be
implemented as a full-bridge type as well depending upon the
need to design the charger of EVs.
Several operating modes and various resonant components
makes the design and analysis of LLC resonant topology
difficult. Efficient working of resonant tank network can be
realized if it will work on the resonant frequency. Usually, a
resonant converter achieves high efficiency at the resonance
frequency. The resonant tank is modeled in such a way
that Lr (leakage inductance) and Cr (resonant capacitor) are
in series, and Lm (magnetizing inductance) is in parallel
with the transformer. Lr and Cr are responsible for higher
frequency and (Lm + Lr) and Cr are responsible for lowest
frequency. Higher resonance frequency occurs in the ZVS
region, it means converter can be designed to work around
this resonance frequency. The converter behavior can be
observed in such a way, if the switching frequency is less
as compared to the resonant frequency and the load is less,
its working and DC voltage gain characteristics are more
like PRC. On the other hand, LLC gain characteristics and
working are more like SRC, if the switching frequency is
high as compared to the resonant frequency and the load is
heavier [19], [69], [70]. In LLC resonant converter topology,
the buck and boost modes can be analyzed by controlling
the DC voltage gain with variable control of frequency. The
LLC resonant converter topology turns out to be an attractive
resonant converter which has introduced many major benefits
than traditional topologies such as: 1) Extended range of load
variation over a small range of switching frequency, 2) Wide
line output voltage regulation, 3) Can achieve zero voltage
and zero current switching combinedly (ZVZCS), 4) ZVS can
922 CSEE JOURNAL OF POWER AND ENERGY SYSTEMS, VOL. 6, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2020
be observed over the entire operating range even under no
load condition, 5) Capability to control the ZVS for entire
range of load leads to lower switching losses which eventually
higher the efficiency of a converter, 6) Utilization of each
essential parasitic element containing magnetizing and leakage
inductance of the transformer to attain soft switching operation
of ZVS, and 7) Less EMI emissions, higher reliability, higher
power density, higher efficiency, and lower cost [19], [69]–
[74].
All the above-mentioned features of an LLC resonant
converter topology greatly fit for the demand of effective
and efficient chargers of EVs. In comparison with traditional
resonant topologies e.g. SRC, PRC, LCC etc., the efficiency
of an LLC resonant converter topology in constant current and
constant voltage (CC and CV) charging modes is much higher,
as circulating energy and conduction losses are very small
in both charging modes [19], [73]. However, the maximum
operating frequency of an LLC topology is limited by the
existence of capacitances related to diode junction [67], [74].
The main issue arises due to this junction capacitance is an
unexpected rise in voltage gain. Consequently, the increase in
switching frequency will not be able to decrease the output
voltage and this will lead to loss of regulation for lower levels
of output voltages [51], [65], [74]. As a result, higher-order
resonant converter topologies fulfil the need by presenting
more required and preferred characteristics such as a capa-
bility to utilize all parasitic elements of the circuit effectively
containing capacitances and inductances of the elements and
using them as resonant elements, in comparison with LLC
converter topology [75], [76].
A new multi-resonant converter topology for EVs battery
charging application named as L3C2 resonant converter is
proposed in [51] and shown in Fig. 6(e) with relevant par-
asitics, where the parameters of the topology are: 1) Lext:
External series inductance (H), 2) Llk, p: Transformer primary
leakage inductance (H), 3) Llk, s: Transformer secondary
NP M2 NS
Cd + Lo
+ AC
DC BUS M1 C Co EV
Rd BATTERY
− Co
− S3
(a)
S3u S2u S1u
+ Ld1
Ld2
DC BUS
Chigh Ld3 AC
+ Grid
− S3d S2d S1d
EV BATTERY
Clow −
(c)
Fig. 7. (a) Non-Isolated bidirectional DC-DC topology, (b) On-board non-isolated bidirectional charger, (c) Bidirectional converter topology with interleaving,
(d) Bidirectional charger with cascaded buck-boost operation.
leakage inductance (H), 4) Lm: Transformer magnetizing in-
ductance (H), 5) Lp: Parallel resonant inductance (H), 6) Ls1:
First series-resonant inductance (H), 6) Ls2: Second series-
resonant inductance (H), 7) Cj: Diode junction capacitance
(F), 8) Cp: Parallel resonant capacitance (F), 9) Cs: Series-
resonant capacitance (F), 10: Cw: Winding capacitance of the
transformer secondary side (F). It has the capability to operate
in an extended range of switching frequency to perform the
regulation of output voltage (zero to 1.5 times of minimal
output voltage) for various output loading conditions. L3C2
resonant converter topology able to get rid of voltage peak
which is produced by reverse recovery current in diodes
and lower the noise in output voltages. Higher efficiency
is achieved due to more efficient steady-state analysis as
compared to LLC resonant converter.
D. Bidirectional Non-Isolated/Isolated and Soft Switching
Configurations
1) Bidirectional Non-Isolated Topologies with soft-switching
This section has a summarized discussion on various con-
verter configurations that are divided into an isolated/non-
isolated topology in conjunction with selected soft-switching
converter configurations. A basic non-isolated bidirectional
charging topology proposed in [77] for an EV charger with
lower cost and high efficiency is presented in Fig. 7(a). The
converter can perform the step-up and step-down operation
without ZCS and ZVS switching operation; however, the
operation of a converter topology at rated power has a higher
efficiency which is stated around 95%. Smoother control
operation and removal of an extra filter circuit can be achieved
by a coupled inductor.
Different research studies [78]–[80] have discussed the con-
verter configuration implemented for non-isolated bidirectional
on-board chargers for EVs as shown in Fig. 7(b). The topology
is implemented with 1-phase PWM converter and bidirectional
DC/DC converter with the buck-boost operation, having major
S1 S2 S5
L
Cdc
Grid
EV
S4 S6 Battery
(b)
S1 S2 S5 S7
L
L1 L2
Cdc1 Cdc2
Co EV
S3 S4 S6 S8 Battery
(d)
HABIB et al.: CONTEMPORARY TRENDS IN POWER ELECTRONICS CONVERTERS FOR CHARGING SOLUTIONS OF ELECTRIC VEHICLES 923

benefit of fewer switches. However, operational safety of the power losses as compared to topology mentioned in Fig. 7(b).
converter topology is compromised. Quantitative design specs of DC-DC converters are given in
The converter configuration proposed in [81] is a half- Table VII [77], [81].
bridge bidirectional converter as shown in Fig. 7(c). The TABLE VII
converter topology is implemented with interleaved technique Q UANTITATIVE D ESIGN S PECS OF DC-DC CONVERTER T OPOLOGIES
and intended to work in discontinuous current mode (DCM) to Quantitative DC-DC Converter DC-DC Converter
reduce the size of an inductor. However, the current of inductor Parameters Topology [Fig. 7(a)] Topology [Fig. 7(c)]
moves towards the negative side before it tends to rise again, Range of Input Voltage 85–100 [V] 450 [V]
which is not like pure DCM mode. The complementary control Output Voltage 120 [V] ± 5% 280 [V]
Switching Frequency 100 [kHz] 25 [kHz]
structure of a gate signal is used to achieve the soft switching Output Power 8 [kW] 100 [kW]
(turn on), so the direction of current changes, and it passes Efficiency > 95 [%] 98 [%]
through the anti-parallel diode of the switch that is not active
at that time. The size of an inductor as well as the input current The converter topology proposed in [83] and presented
ripple is reduced by employing the interleaved technique. The in Fig. 8(a) is a bidirectional DC-DC converter with higher
benefits which can be achieved with complimentary control voltage conversion ratio. The converter has the capability to
switching structure are: 1) High switching frequency operation manage a larger amount of power in charging and discharging
and, 2) Heat Sink size is reduced. Turn-on/Turn-off losses modes of operation (Buck & Boost). It can operate under a
are optimized with proper designing of snubber capacitors wider range of voltage. The soft-switching operation can be
and inductors. Additionally, imbalance situation regarding realized including ZVS and ZCS with an auxiliary resonant
charging and discharging would occur in the circuit if proper circuit composed of La, Ca and auxiliary power switches.
parametric design values of snubber capacitors and inductors The Buck and boost mode of operation can be observed with
are not chosen. the direction of current in the inductor i.e.(iLf).The voltage
In another work [82], the converter configuration imple- ripple can be reduced by adopting the interleaved technique.
mented for non-isolated bidirectional on-board chargers for However, the converter topology has more conduction losses
EVs as shown in Fig. 7(d) is a combination of 1-phase PWM as resonant elements are in the path of power flow for a major
converter and a DC/DC converter based on the cascaded portion of the operating cycle.
buck-boost operation. The operation of a cascaded buck-boost The converter topology suggested in [84] and shown in
DC-DC converter permits the capability of a vehicle-to-grid Fig. 8(b) has higher efficiency, which is achieved by imple-
transfer of energy as well as overlapping of input/output menting the soft-switching technique using an auxiliary circuit.
ranges of voltage. The transient performance of the converter The auxiliary resonant circuit is composed of a resonant
topology is improved with the modifications in the voltage of inductor with power switches as shaded in the diagram. To
intermediate DC-link capacitor. This converter has improved minimize the conduction losses and to control the peak current
applicability for battery voltage, but the drawback of higher of an inductor, the converter is operated in a continuous

Sc Sa CSa
C2 S4 S1 Ca L2 L1
La Lf
+ + +
S3 Ca S2
DC BUS iLf DC BUS EV BATTERY
+ Lr
Sq
− − −
EV BATTERY Cb S2 S1
C1
− Sd CSb

(a) (b)

Da4
D1 Da2
Lr1 S1
S1 Ca1 Sa2 Da3 Ls1 Da1 Cr1
L2 D1
+ + Sa1 Lf
DC BUS DC BUS Ls2 Lr2 +
L1 +
− Da2 D2
− EV BATTERY
S2 Ca2 Sa1 EV BATTERY S2 Cr2
Sa2
−
D2 Da1 −

(c) (d)

Fig. 8. Bidirectional Converter (BDC) Topologies: (a) BDC) with High Gain and ZVT Implementation, (b) Interleaved BDC with ZVT Implementation, (c)
BDC Topology with Coupling of Inductors, (d) BDC Topology with Auxiliary Resonant Network and Coupled Inductor.
924 CSEE JOURNAL OF POWER AND ENERGY SYSTEMS, VOL. 6, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2020

current mode. The soft-switching technique either ZCS or
ZVS is implemented to lower the current and voltage stresses
on the switching devices. The interleaved technique can be
implemented to reduce the ripple current and an inductor
size. However, reverse recovery losses lower the efficiency for
higher power applications.
Another appropriate charging converter configuration [85]
for an EV charger is presented in Fig. 8(c). The soft-switching
technique ZVS is achieved by using an added inductor L2 in
the converter topology, and it is joined with the main in-
ductor L1, along with the power switches (Sa1 and Sa2).
Additionally, the circuit has the flexibility to switch moods
from hard switching to soft-switching and vice versa. In [86],
the proposed converter configuration for an EV charger has
higher gain and efficiency, as presented in Fig. 8(d). The
efficiency of an EV charger is increased by applying the
zero-voltage transition (ZVT) soft-switching method in both
charging and discharging (Buck & Boost) modes. Moreover,
the fast-dynamic response can be achieved using the auxiliary
resonant circuit as shown with a dotted box. Quantitative
design specs of various bidirectional converters (Fig. 8(a) to
Fig. 8(d)) are given in Table VIII [99]–[105].
E. Bidirectional Isolated Topologies with soft-switching
To use isolated or non-isolated charger depends on the need
and design requirement of the charging converter topology
of an EV. The preference is also set according to charging
environment. Higher gain and galvanic isolation are the ben-
efits of isolated converters. For isolated chargers, the dual
active bridge (DAB) topologies are much appropriate for
the interface among an EV battery and a DC bus. Several
research studies with modification for DAB are reported in
the literature [87]–[95]. The typical circuit topology of DAB
with lossless snubber circuit is shown in Fig. 9(a) [87].
Soft-switching techniques are employed in the reported
literature [87]–[95]. The isolated converter topology discussed
in [87] is based on a ZVS DAB with snubber capacitors across
the power switches. However, implementation of ZVS is based
on specific conditions. The ZCS mode is not realized for the
converter topology, it causes the higher turn-off losses for the
converter at higher switching frequencies. Another variation
of DAB based on higher current and voltage conversion ratio
is proposed in [88], [89]. Voltage clamping is implemented to
minimize the voltage stress on the power switches. In [90], a
bidirectional converter topology based on ZCS-ZVS DAB is
implemented. The ZVS and ZCS conditions are implemented
with an LC network, which utilizes the one capacitor and
leakage inductance of the transformer. Using the LC filter
networks, the input current and output voltage ripples are
reduced. However, the complexity of the control system is
increased. The dual active full bridge topologies reduce the
stress on the power switches and minimize the number of
active switches in comparison with VCFFB. However, the
DAB converter topologies have various limitations such as:

TABLE VIII
Q UANTITATIVE D ESIGN S PECS OF VARIOUS B IDIRECTIONAL C ONVERTER (BDC) T OPOLOGIES AS GIVEN IN F IG . 8( A - D )
Prototype BDC converter Prototype BDC converter Prototype BDC converter Prototype BDC converter
Parameters [Fig. 8(a)] parameters [Fig. 8(b)] parameters [Fig. 8(c)] parameters [Fig. 8(d)]
Input voltage 72–100 [V] Input voltage 70 [V] Input voltage 50 [V] Input voltage 120 [V]
Output voltage 400 [V] Output voltage 400 [V] Output voltage 100 [V] Output voltage 48 [V]
Resonant Inductance Inductance 80.7, 0.78, 1.3 Resonant
13 [µh] 45 [µh] 2.4, 86.4 [µh]
inductor (La) (Lr) (L1, L2, L3) [µh] inductors
Resonant
Capacitance Capacitance Resonant
capacitance 30 [µf] 30 [pF] 3000 [pF] 2 [nF]
(Csa, csb) (Ca1, ca2) capacitance
(Ca)
Output power 5 [kW] Output power 1000 [W] Output power 1000 [W] Output power 240 [W]
Switching Switching Switching Switching
30 [kHz] 20 [kHz] 50 [kHz] 100 [kHz]
frequency frequency frequency frequency
Efficiency 97 [%] Efficiency Up-to 95 [%] Efficiency 96 [%] Efficiency Up-to 95 [%]

Q5
D1
Cd1
Q7 Cs1
i2
CS4d S2u CS2u Q1 Q3 Tr
S4u CS1u
CS3u + Lk C
+ Ci A N2 L M
+ S3u S1u + N1
EV BATTERY ii B O
Lk − V
Clow Bat N3 is +
− D
DC BUS EV BATTERY 2n:1:1 Vout
Chigh Q2 Q4 i3 Cs2
Q8 −
Cd2
− S4d CS4d S2d CS2d −
CS1d
CS3d D2
Q6
S3d S1d

(a) (b)

Fig. 9. Dual Active Bridge Topologies: (a) DAB with lossless snubber circuit (b) 3-Level DAB with ZVS.
HABIB et al.: CONTEMPORARY TRENDS IN POWER ELECTRONICS CONVERTERS FOR CHARGING SOLUTIONS OF ELECTRIC VEHICLES
1) Higher Pulsating current at the input side, 2) Limited range
of soft-switching, 3) Higher circulating current through power
switches [22], [95].
In different research studies [91]–[94] the series resonant
DAB converter topologies are proposed. The soft-switching
techniques ZVS and ZCS are implemented for power switch-
ing devices with an extended range of load variations. Dif-
ferent LC resonant tank networks are utilized to employ ZCS
or ZVS depending on the design requirement of the converter
topology. However, the efficiency of the topology reduces due
to the conduction losses of the circuit.
In [96], an isolated 3-level bidirectional converter topology
based on ZVS DAB is employed as shown in Fig. 9(b). The
ZVS condition can be achieved for a wide operating range
from no load to full load. The specific purpose is obtained by
utilizing an auxiliary inductor for high voltage applications.
The auxiliary inductor is placed in the 3-level stage of a
bidirectional converter across the center tap of secondary
side and the center point of split flying capacitors. The ZVS
range is examined according to several operating modes. The
ZVS condition is maintained by controlling the current in the
auxiliary inductor.
IV. I NTEGRATED C HARGER AND C HARGER
C ONFIGURATION WITH F RONT- END AC-AC A ND
BACK - END AC-DC C ONVERTERS
The second most extensively implemented battery charger
configuration for EVs consists of two stages. Front-end AC-
AC converter is employed in the first stage and Back-end AC-
DC converter is applied in the second stage. Initially, this
kind of charger topology utilizes front-end device (AC-AC)
to appropriately change the level of AC input supply before
the operation of rectification that is performed by a back-end
AC-DC converter to properly charger the batteries of EVs.
In previous research studies, two main topologies have been
used to present front-end AC-AC device that includes: 3-phase
transformers and Z-source network [97], [98]. The benefits
which can be achieved by three-phase transformers are: 1)
Altering the AC input supply to a suitable level of voltage for
EV charging, 2) Galvanic isolation is provided between the
input side and the vehicle. Meanwhile, the benefits offered
by Z-source AC-AC converter network are: 1) Capability to
perform buck and boost operation of output voltage with fewer
components, 2) Harmonic and inrush currents can be reduced
by acting as static transformer, 3) Control and structure are
simpler, 4) Voltage sag can be easily controlled by Z-source
network in any power network, 5) Continuous input currents,
6) Improvement in input profiles by operating in continuous
current mode(CCM), 7) Common ground is shared between
the input and output, thus maintaining the phase angle, 8)
Turns ratio of the transformers is regulated to adjust the volt-
age gain of the converter, therefore achieve the desired voltage
gain, 9) High efficiency, reliability and reduced cost [99],
[100].
Z-source networks can act in two ways; one as a voltage
source converter and other as a current source converter. It is
implemented like an impedance network to join main converter
925
circuit to load/power source [101]. On the other hand, three
converter topologies can be implemented to represent a back-
end AC-DC converter for such kind of charging configurations
of EVs, which includes: 1) 3-phase three-level converter with
diode clamping, 2) Uncontrolled rectifier, and 3) Active rec-
tifier. The main benefit which can be realized from a 3-phase
three-level converter with diode clamping is the capability to
perform bi-directional flow, which further offers the fundamen-
tal feature of an EV called vehicle-to-grid technology [102],
[103]. Ancillary services to a power network such as voltage
and frequency control can also be achieved by using this
type of converter topology [5], [7], [102]. The uncontrolled
rectifier only has the capability to provide the process of
rectification excluding the feature of an active control [104].
Conversely, controllable rectification is achievable with active
rectifier configuration. The convenience of fast charging to EV
owners along with unity power factor can be attained using
active rectifier converter configuration [98], [104].
The third major type of charging topology, which is adopted
for EVs chargers can be understood by an interesting con-
cept; that utilize the already available electric drive parts
for the representation of an EV charger named as integrated
charger [105]–[108]. The major reasons to employ the concept
of an integrated charging function into an electric drive compo-
nent system are: 1) Weight, volume, and size of the system are
minimized, 2) Cost is reduced, and 3) Better efficiency [109].
When the traction and charging of an EV do not perform
simultaneously, then integration of a charging system can be
obtained. The concept of an integrated charging function can
be realized practically because at that time charging of an EV
is performed externally when it is stopped. Consequently, the
components of the electric drive system can be operated as
charger of an EV. The working of an inverter in electric drive
system is similar to rectification process during the reverse
operation. Thus, modification can be performed for an inverter
in electric drive system frequently to use it as charger of an EV.
On the other hand, the electric motor windings are employed to
behave as inductors and to perform function as a filter device,
and inverter of motor drive acts as an AC-DC converter in
the EV power train [101]–[109]. The benefits which can be
obtained to utilize inductors of the motor drive as a filtering
device are: 1) Ripple current is reduced, 2) Reduce harmonics,
3) System components are minimized, 4) Optimization of
weight and space, and 5) Cost is saved.
The most beneficial advantage is the achievement of higher
charging power levels (Level 2 and 3) having bi-directional
fast charging support with reduced cost and unity power
factor [101]–[109]. Complications in control structure and
designing of hardware are major challenges to employ this
concept in different products commercially. Many market lead-
ing companies in automotive industry sector e.g. FORD Motor
Company are currently utilizing battery recharge and electric
motor drive system combinedly depending on an induction
motor, and split winding ac motor has been implemented for
non-isolated integrated charger [109]. Few applications related
to two-wheeled vehicles and electric scooter are employed
in [105]. A structure of an EV charger based on integrated
charging system is shown in Fig. 10.
926 CSEE JOURNAL OF POWER AND ENERGY SYSTEMS, VOL. 6, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2020
3-phase Inverter
and Winding
Battery Switching
Device
DC/DC
Converter
Fig. 10. EV charger based on integrated charging system.
V. C ONCLUSION
This paper thoroughly examines the present needs, recent
development and challenges issues associated with power elec-
tronics converters to suggest possible improvements in charg-
ing solutions of EVs. The advancement in power converter
topologies brings considerable improvement to EV charging
technologies for electric transportation. This paper highlights
the international standards, which are applied for massive de-
ployment of EVs. In particular, an extensive analysis of front-
end along with back-end converter topologies is presented with
their corresponding issues and benefits. Comparative proper-
ties of front-end converters with PFC for EV battery charging
are presented. Moreover, a detailed comparison of several DC-
DC converter configurations and key issues of full-bridge con-
verter topologies along with soft-switching auxiliary circuits
are explained in detail. A comparative analysis of resonant
converter topologies with special emphasis on benefits and
issues of LLC resonant topology are addressed in this study.
Furthermore, isolated and non-isolated topologies with soft
switching techniques are classified and rigorously analyzed
with a view to their respective constraint analysis. Addition-
ally, the charging topologies with integrated chargers, front-
end (AC-AC) and back-end (AC-DC) converters are discussed.
Quantitative design specs of several topologies are presented.
Current EV research in more than one sub-areas corresponding
to power electronic converters is comprehensively analyzed for
the electrification of a transportation system. It is foreseen that
this paper would be a valueable addition and a worthy source
of information for researchers exploring the area of power
converter topologies in EV charging systems.
R EFERENCES
[1] V. Krithika and C. Subramani, “A comprehensive review on choice
of hybrid vehicles and power converters, control strategies for hybrid
electric vehicles,” International Journal of Energy Research, vol. 42,
no. 5, pp. 1789–1812, Apr. 2018.
[2] S. Habib, M. M. Khan, F. Abbas, L. Sang, M. U.S.ahid, and H. J.
Tang, “A comprehensive study of implemented international standards,
technical challenges, impacts and prospects for electric vehicles,” IEEE
Access, vol. 6, pp. 13866–13890, Mar. 2018.
[3] S. Habib, M. M. Khan, F. Abbas, and H. J. Tang, “Assessment
of electric vehicles concerning impacts, charging infrastructure with
unidirectional and bidirectional chargers, and power flow comparisons,”
International Journal of Energy Research, vol. 42, no. 11, pp. 3416–
3441, Sep. 2018.
Wheel
Electric Motor
Differential
T,W
Wheel
[4] M. F. M. Sabri, K. A. Danapalasingam, and M. F. Rahmat, “A
review on hybrid electric vehicles architecture and energy management
strategies,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 53, pp.
1433–1442, Jan. 2016.
[5] K. Knezović, M. Marinelli, A. Zecchino, P. B. Andersen, and C.
Traeholt, “Supporting involvement of electric vehicles in distribution
grids: Lowering the barriers for a proactive integration,” Energy, vol.
134, pp. 458–468, Sep. 2017.
[6] M. Muratori, “Impact of uncoordinated plug-in electric vehicle charg-
ing on residential power demand,” Nature Energy, vol. 3, no. 3, pp.
193–201, Jan. 2018.
[7] K. M. Tan, V. K. Ramachandaramurthy, and J. Y. Yong, “Integration of
electric vehicles in smart grid: A review on vehicle to grid technolo-
gies and optimization techniques,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, vol. 53, pp. 720–732, Jan. 2016.
[8] K. Vatanparvar, S. Faezi, I. Burago, M. Levorato, and M. A. Al
Faruque, “Extended range electric vehicle with driving behavior es-
timation in energy management,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid,
vol. 10, no. 8, pp. 2959–2968, May 2019.
[9] B. Singh, B. N. Singh, A. Chandra, K. Al-Haddad, A. Pandey, and D.
P. Kothari, “A review of three-phase improved power quality AC-DC
converters,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 51, no.
3, pp. 641–660, Jun. 2004.
[10] H. F. Farahani, A. Rabiee, and M. Khalili, “Plug-in electric vehicles
as a harmonic compensator into microgrids,” Journal of Cleaner
Production, vol. 159, pp. 388–396, Aug. 2017.
[11] (2019, Jan. 2). “Vehicle Technologies Office j Department of Energy.”
[Online]. Available: http://energy.gov/eere/vehicles/vehicletechno-
logies-office
[12] T. Anegawa, “Characteristics of CHAdeMO quick charging system,”
World Electric Vehicle Journal, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 818–822, Dec. 2010.
[13] SAE. (2019, Jan. 1). “J1772: SAE Electric Vehicle and Plug in Hy-
brid Electric Vehicle Conductive Charge Coupler-SAE International,”
2010. [Online]. Available: https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j177
2 201210
[14] A. Khaligh and M. D’Antonio, “Global trends in high-power onboard
chargers for electric vehicles,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Tech-
nology, vol. 68, no. 4, pp. 3306–3324, Apr. 2019.
[15] M. Yilmaz and P. T. Krein, “Review of battery charger topologies,
charging power levels, and infrastructure for plug-in electric and hybrid
vehicles,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 28, no. 5, pp.
2151–2169, May 2013.
[16] S. F. Tie and C. W. Tan, “A review of energy sources and energy
management system in electric vehicles,” Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews, vol. 20, pp. 82–102, Apr. 2013.
[17] A. Khaligh and S. Dusmez, “Comprehensive topological analysis
of conductive and inductive charging solutions for plug-in electric
vehicles,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 61, no.
8, pp. 3475–3489, Oct. 2012.
[18] I. Subotic, N. Bodo, E. Levi, B. Dumnic, D. Milicevic, and V. Katic,
“Overview of fast on-board integrated battery chargers for electric
vehicles based on multiphase machines and power electronics,” IET
Electric Power Applications, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 217–229, Mar. 2016.
[19] H. Y. Wang and A. Khaligh, “Comprehensive topological analyses of
isolated resonant converters in PEV battery charging applications,” in
HABIB et al.: CONTEMPORARY TRENDS IN POWER ELECTRONICS CONVERTERS FOR CHARGING SOLUTIONS OF ELECTRIC VEHICLES
2013 IEEE Transportation Electrification Conference and Expo (ITEC),
2013.
[20] I. Rahman, P. M. Vasant, B. S. M. Singh, M. Abdullah-Al-Wadud,
and N. Adnan, “Review of recent trends in optimization techniques for
plug-in hybrid, and electric vehicle charging infrastructures,” Renew-
able and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 58, pp. 1039–1047, May
2016.
[21] X. W. Pan, H. Q. Li, Y. T. Liu, T. Y. Zhao, C. C. Ju, and A. K. Rathore,
“An overview and comprehensive comparative evaluation of currentfed-
isolated-bidirectional DC/DC converter,” IEEE Transactions on Power
Electronics, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 2737–2763, Mar. 2020.
[22] N. Hou and Y. W. Li, “Overview and comparison of modulation and
control strategies for a nonresonant single-phase dual-active-bridge
DC-DC converter,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 35,
no. 3, pp. 3148–3172, Mar. 2020.
[23] F. Musavi and D. S. Gautam, “Overview of power electronics product
development cycle and fundamentals of charger design,” in 2013 IEEE
Transportation Electrification Conference and Expo, 2013.
[24] National Fire Protection Associatio, “National Electrical Code,” Na-
tional Fire Protection Association, Inc.,”uincy, 2013.
[25] “Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC)-Part 3-2: Limits-Limits for
Harmonic Current Emissions, IEC 61000–3–2,”999.
[26] “EEE Standard for Interconnecting Distributed Resources with Electric
Power Systems,” EEE Std 1547-2003, 2003.
[27] SAE International. (2018, Apr. 30). “J2894–1 Power quality require-
ments for plug-in electric vehicle chargers,” 2011. [Online]. Available:
https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j2894/1 201112/
[28] J. P. M. Figueiredo, F. L. Tofoli, and B. L. A. Silva, “A review
of single-phase PFC topologies based on the boost converter,” in
2010 9th IEEE/IAS International Conference on Industry Applications-
INDUSCON, 2010.
[29] F. Musavi, M. Edington, W. Eberle, and W. G. Dunford, “Energy
efficiency in plug-in hybrid electric vehicle chargers: Evaluation and
comparison of front end AC-DC topologies,” in 2011 IEEE Energy
Conversion Congress and Exposition, 2011, pp. 273–280.
[30] A. Ali, M. Mansoor Khan, J. Yuning, Y. Ali, M. T. Faiz, and
J. Chuanwen, “ZVS/ZCS Vienna rectifier topology for high power
applications,” IET Power Electronics, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 1285–1294,
May 2019.
[31] K. Yao, X. B Ruan, C. Zou, and Z. H. Ye, “Three-phase single-switch
boost PFC converter with high input power factor,” in 2010 IEEE
Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, 2010, pp. 2921–2928.
[32] L. S. Yang, C. C. Lin, and E. C. Chang, “Study and implementation of a
single-stage three-phase AC-DC converter,” in 2012 IEEE International
Symposium on Industrial Electronics, 2012, pp. 533–538.
[33] T. Meng, H. Q. Ben, and D. Q. Wang, “Improved three-phase sin-
glestage isolated PFC converter with voltage-clamping in primary side,”
in 2008 International Conference on Electrical Machines and Systems,
2008, pp. 1909–1913.
[34] B. Tamyurek and D. A. Torrey, “A three-phase unity power factor
single-stage AC-DC converter based on an interleaved flyback topol-
ogy,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 308–
318, Jan. 2011.
[35] P. M. Barbosa, F. Canales, J. M. Burdio, and F. C. Lee, “A three-
level converter and its application to power factor correction,” IEEE
Transactions on Power Electronic, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 1319–1327, Nov.
2005.
[36] C. L. Nguyen and H. H. Lee, “An effective control scheme for a
universal input battery charger in electric vehicle applications,” in 2012
7th International Forum on Strategic Technology (IFOST), 2013.
[37] F. Musavi, W. Eberle, and W. G. Dunford, “A phase-shifted gating tech-
nique with simplified current sensing for the semi-bridgeless ACDC
converter,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 62, no. 4,
pp. 1568–1576, May 2013.
[38] Y. Du, X. H. Zhou, S. Z. Bai, S. Lukic, and A. Huang, “Review of
nonisolated bi-directional DC-DC converters for plug-in hybrid electric
vehicle charge station application at municipal parking decks,” in 2010
Twenty-Fifth Annual IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference and
Exposition (APEC), 2010, pp. 1145–1151.
[39] F. Musavi, W. Eberle, and W. G. Dunford, “A high-performance single-
phase bridgeless interleaved PFC converter for plug-in hybrid electric
vehicle battery chargers,” IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications,
vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 1833–1843, Jul./Aug. 2011.
[40] A. MacLaurin, R. Okou, P. Barendse, M. A. Khan, and P. Pillay,
“Control of a flywheel energy storage system for rural applications
using a Split-Pi DC-DC converter,” in 2011 IEEE International Electric
Machines & Drives Conference (IEMDC), 2011, pp. 265–270.
927
[41] A. Kuperman, U. Levy, J. Goren, A. Zafransky, and A. Savernin,
“Battery charger for electric vehicle traction battery switch station,”
IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 60, no. 12, pp. 5391–
5399, Dec. 2013.
[42] A. Dubey, S. Santoso, and M. P. Cloud, “Average-value model of
electric vehicle chargers,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 4,
no. 3, pp. 1549–1557, Sep. 2013.
[43] W. H. Li, C. Xu, H. Z. Luo, Y. H. Hu, X. N. He, and C. L. Xia,
“Decoupling-controlled triport composited DC/DC converter for mul-
tiple energy interface,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics,
vol. 62, no. 7, pp. 4504–4513, Jul. 2015.
[44] I. O. Lee, “Hybrid DC-DC converter with phase-shift or frequency
modulation for NEV battery charger,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Electronics, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 884–893, Feb. 2016.
[45] Y. C. Zhang, J. T. Long, W. Gong, Y. Liu, and B. Zhang, “Imple-
mentation of high efficiency batteries charger for EV based on PWM
rectifier,” in 2012 IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference,
2012, pp. 1525–1528.
[46] C. Liu, B. Gu, J. S. Lai, M. Y. Wang, Y. C. Ji, G. W. Cai, Z. Zhao,
C. L. Chen, C. Zheng, and P. W. Sun, “High-efficiency hybrid full-
bridgehalf- bridge converter with shared ZVS lagging leg and dual
outputs in series,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 28,
no. 2, pp. 849–861, Feb. 2013.
[47] Z. Z. Zhang, H. P. Xu, L. Shi, D. X. Li, and Y. C. Han, “Application
research of an electric vehicle DC fast charger in smart grids,” in 2012
IEEE 6th International Conference on Information and Automation for
Sustainability, 2012, pp. 258–261.
[48] M. K. Yang, H. S. Cho, S. J. Lee, andW. Y. Choi, “High-efficiency
softswitching PWM DC-DC converter for electric vehicle battery
chargers,” in 2013 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition,
2013, pp. 1092–1095.
[49] L. M. Miranda, D. Varaj˜ao, B. Dos Santos, R. E. Araújo, C. L.
Moreira, and J. A. P. Lopes, “Power flow control with bidirectional dual
active bridge battery charger in low-voltage microgrids,” in 2013 15th
European Conference on Power Electronics and Applications (EPE),
2013.
[50] D. S. Gautam, F. Musavi, W. Eberle, and W. G. Dunford, “A zerovolt-
age switching full-bridge DC–DC converter with capacitive output filter
for plug-in hybrid electric vehicle battery charging,” IEEE Transactions
on Power Electronics, vol. 28, no. 12, pp. 5728–5735, Dec. 2013.
[51] N. Shafiei and M. Ordonez, “Improving the regulation range of EV
battery chargers with L3C2 resonant converters,” IEEE Transactions
on Power Electronics, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 3166–3184, Jun. 2015.
[52] B. Gu, C. Y. Lin, B. F. Chen, J. Dominic, and J. S. Lai, “Zerovoltage-
switching PWM resonant full-bridge converter with minimized circulat-
ing losses and minimal voltage stresses of bridge rectifiers for electric
vehicle battery chargers,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol.
28, no. 10, pp. 4657–4667, Oct. 2013.
[53] M. Pahlevaninezhad, S. Eren, P. K. Jain, and A. Bakhshai, “Self-
sustained oscillating control technique for current-driven full-bridge
DC/DC converter,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 28,
no. 11, pp. 5293–5310, Nov. 2013.
[54] G. N. B. Yadav and N. L. Narasamma, “An active soft switched
phaseshifted full-bridge DC-DC converter: Analysis, modeling, design,
and implementation,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 29,
no. 9, pp. 4538–4550, Sep. 2014.
[55] Z. Chen, S. S. Liu, and L. C. Shi, “Improved zero-voltage-switching
pulse width modulation full bridge converter with self-regulating aux-
iliary current,” IET Power Electronics, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 287–296, Feb.
2013.
[56] J. Dudrik and N. D. Trip, “Soft-switching PS-PWM DC-DC converter
for full-load range applications,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Electronics, vol. 57, no. 8, pp. 2807–2814, Aug. 2010.
[57] M. Borage, S. Tiwari, and S. Kotaiah, “A passive auxiliary circuit
achieves zero-voltage-switching in full-bridge converter over entire
conversion range,” IEEE Power Electronics Letters, vol. 3, no. 4, pp.
141–143, Dec. 2005.
[58] M. Pahlevaninezhad, P. Das, J. Drobnik, P. K. Jain, and A. Bakhshai,
“A ZVS interleaved boost AC/DC converter used in plug-in electric
vehicles,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 27, no. 8, pp.
3513–3529, Aug. 2012.
[59] Y. Jang and M. M. Jovanović, “A new PWM ZVS full-bridge con-
verter,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 22, no. 3, pp.
987–994, May 2007.
[60] T. T. Song and N. C. Huang, “A novel zero-voltage and zero-
currentswitching full-bridge PWM converter,” IEEE Transactions on
Power Electronics, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 286–291, Mar. 2005.
928 CSEE JOURNAL OF POWER AND ENERGY SYSTEMS, VOL. 6, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2020
[61] M. Z. Youssef, H. Pinheiro, and P. K. Jain, “Self-sustained phase-shift
modulated resonant converters: modeling, design, and performance,”
IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 401–414,
Mar. 2006.
[62] M. Z. Youssef and P. K. Jain, “Series- Parallel resonant con-
verter in self-sustained oscillation mode with the high-frequency
transformerleakage- inductance effect: Analysis, modeling, and de-
sign,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 54, no. 3, pp.
1329–1341, Jun. 2007.
[63] J. L. Sosa, M. Castilla, J. Miret, L. G. De Vicu˜na, and J. Matas,
“Modeling and performance analysis of the DC/DC series– parallel
resonant converter operating with discrete self-sustained phase-shift
modulation technique,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics,
vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 697–705, Mar. 2009.
[64] M. Pahlevani, S. Eren, A. Bakhshai, and P. Jain, “A series-parallel
current-driven full-bridge DC/DC converter,” IEEE Transactions on
Power Electronics, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 1275–1293, Feb. 2016.
[65] M. Pahlevani, S. Z. Pan, and P. Jain, “A hybrid phase-shift modulation
technique for DC/DC converters with a wide range of operating
conditions,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 63, no.
12, pp. 7498–7510, Dec. 2016.
[66] W. S. Lee, J. H. Kim, J. Y. Lee, and I. O. Lee, “Design of an
isolated DC/DC topology with high efficiency of over 97% for EV
fast chargers,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 68,
no. 12, pp. 11725–11737, Dec. 2019.
[67] F. Musavi, M. Craciun, D. S. Gautam, W. Eberle, and W. G. Dunford,
“An LLC resonant DC-DC converter for wide output voltage range bat-
tery charging applications,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics,
vol. 28, no. 12, pp. 5437–5445, Dec. 2013.
[68] C. H. Chang, E. C. Chang, and H. L. Cheng, “A high-efficiency solar
array simulator implemented by an LLC resonant DC-DC converter,”
IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 3039–3046,
Jun. 2013.
[69] D. C. Huang, F. C. Lee, and D. B. Fu, “Classification and Selection
Methodology for multi-element resonant converters,” in 2011 Twenty-
Sixth Annual IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference and Expo-
sition (APEC), 2011, pp. 558–565.
[70] J. J. Deng, S. Q. Li, S. D. Hu, C. C. Mi, and R. Q. Ma, “Design
methodology of LLC resonant converters for electric vehicle battery
chargers,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 63, no. 4,
pp. 1581–1592, May 2014.
[71] S. Dusmez, A. Cook, and A. Khaligh, “Comprehensive analysis of high
quality power converters for level 3 off-board chargers,” in 2011 IEEE
Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference, 2011, pp. 1–10.
[72] H. Choi, “Analysis and design of LLC resonant converter with in-
tegrated transformer,” in Twenty-Second Annual IEEE Applied Power
Electronics Conference and Exposition, 2007, pp. 1630–1635.
[73] H. Choi, “Design Considerations for an LLC Resonant Converter,” in
Fairchild Semi-Conductor Corporation, 2007.
[74] B. H. Lee, M. Y. Kim, C. E. Kim, K. B. Park, and G. W. Moon,
“Analysis of LLC resonant converter considering effects of parasitic
components,” in 31st International Telecommunications Energy Con-
ference, 2009.
[75] C. P. Dick, F. K. Titiz, and R. W. De Doncker, “A high-efficient LLCC
series-parallel resonant converter,” in 2010 Twenty-Fifth Annual IEEE
Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition (APEC), 2010,
pp. 696–701.
[76] N. Shafiei, M. Pahlevaninezhad, H. Farzanehfard, and S. R. Motahari,
“Analysis and implementation of a fixed-frequency LCLC resonant
converter with capacitive output filter,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Electronics, vol. 58, no. 10, pp. 4773–4782, Oct. 2011.
[77] E. Sanchis-Kilders, A. Ferreres, E. Masef, J. B. Ejea, V. Esteve,
J. Jordán, J. Calvente, and A. Gamgós, “Bidirectional high-power
highefficiency non-isolated step-up DC-DC converter,” in 37th IEEE
Power Electronics Specialists Conference, 2003.
[78] J. R. Pillai and B. Bak-Jensen, “Integration of vehicle-to-grid in the
Western Danish power system,” IEEE Transactions on Sustainable
Energy, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 12–19, Jan. 2011.
[79] M. Jarnut and G. Benysek, “Application of power electronics devices
in smartgrid and V2G (vehicle to grid) technologies,” Przeglad Elek-
trotechniczny, vol. 86, no. 6, pp. 93–96, Jun. 2010.
[80] M. C. Kisacikoglu, B. Ozpineci, and L. M. Tolbert, “Effects of V2G
reactive power compensation on the component selection in an EV
or PHEV bidirectional charger,” in 2010 IEEE Energy Conversion
Congress and Exposition, 2010, pp. 870–876.
[81] J. H. Zhang, R. Y. Kim, and J. S, Lai, “High-power density design of
a soft-switching high-power bidirectional DC-DC converter,” in 37th
IEEE Power Electronics Specialists Conference, 2006.
[82] M. A. Khan, I. Husain, and Y. Sozer, “A bi-directional DC-DC
converter with overlapping input and output voltage ranges and vehicle
to grid energy transfer capability,” in 2012 IEEE Internaional Electric
Vehicle Conference, 2012.
[83] M. Kwon, S. Oh, and S. Choi, “High gain soft-switching bidirectional
DC–DC converter for eco-friendly vehicles,” IEEE Transactions on
Power Electronics, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 1659–1666, Apr. 2014.
[84] J. T. Han, C. S. Lim, J. W. Cho, R. Y. Kim, and D. S. Hyun,
“A high efficiency non-isolated bidirectional DC-DC converter with
zerovoltage- transition,” in 39th Annual Conference of the IEEE In-
dustrial Electronics Society, 2013, pp. 198–203.
[85] K. L. Jørgensen, M. C. Mira, Z. Zhang, and M. A. E. Andersen¨u
“Review of high efficiency bidirectional DC-DC topologies with high
voltage gain,” in 2017 52nd International Universities Power Engineer-
ing Conference (UPEC), 2017.
[86] A. Mirzaei, A. Jusoh, Z. Salam, E. Adib, and H. Farzanehfard, “Anal-
ysis and design of a high efficiency bidirectional DC-DC converter for
battery and ultracapacitor applications,” in 2010 IEEE International
Conference on Power and Energy, 2010, pp. 803–806.
[87] S. Inoue and H. Akagi, “A bidirectional DC-DC converter for an energy
storage system with galvanic isolation,” IEEE Transactions on Power
Electronics, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 2299–2306, Nov. 2007.
[88] N. M. L. Tan, T. Abe, and H. Akagi, “Topology and application of
bidirectional isolated dc-dc converters,” in 8th International Conference
on Power Electronics, 2011, pp. 1039–1046.
[89] T. F. Wu, Y. C. Chen, J. G. Yang, and C. L. Kuo, “Isolated bidirectional
full-bridge DC-DC converter with a flyback snubber,” IEEE Transac-
tions on Power Electronics, vol. 25, no. 7, pp. 1915–1922, Jul. 2010.
[90] Z. Zhang, O. C. Thomsen, M. A. E. Andersen, J. D. Schmidt,
and H. R. Nielsen, “Analysis and design of bi-directional DC-DC
converter in extended run time DC UPS system based on fuel cell and
supercapacitor,” in 2009 Twenty-Fourth Annual IEEE Applied Power
Electronics Conference and Exposition, 2009, pp. 714–719.
[91] C. L. Chu and Y. Chen, “ZVS-ZCS bidirectional full-bridge DC-DC
converter,” in 2009 International Conference on Power Electronics and
Drive Systems (PEDS), 2009, pp. 1125–1130.
[92] X. D. Li and A. K. S. Bhat, “Analysis and design of high-frequency
isolated dual-bridge series resonant DC/DC converter,” IEEE Transac-
tions on Power Electronics, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 850–862, Apr. 2010.
[93] S. Jalbrzykowski, A. Bogdan, and T. Citko, “A dual full-bridge res-
onant class-E bidirectional DC-DC converter,” IEEE Transactions on
Industrial Electronics, vol. 58, no. 9, pp. 3879–3883, Sep. 2011.
[94] T. Hirose, T. Kimura, K. Harada, and H. Matsuo, “An analysis of
bidirectional superposed dual active bridge DC-DC converter with
synchronous rectifier,” in 2010 IEEE Region 10 Conference, 2010, pp.
1241–1246.
[95] L. Zhu, “A novel soft-commutating isolated boost full-bridge
ZVSPWM DC-DC converter for bidirectional high power applications,”
in 35th Annual Power Electronics Specialists Conference, 2004, pp.
2141– 2146.
[96] Z. Q. Guo, K. Sun, and T. F. Wu, “Three-level dual active bridge with
auxiliary inductor for wide zero voltage switching for energy storage
system in DC microgrid,” in 2017 20th International Conference on
Electrical Machines and Systems (ICEMS), 2017, pp. 6–10.
[97] R. J. Rei, F. J. Soares, P. M. R. Almeida, and J. A. P. Lopes,
“Grid interactive charging control for plug-in electric vehicles,” in 13th
International IEEE Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems,
2010, pp. 386–391.
[98] J. H. Lee, J. S. Moon, Y. S. Lee, Y. R. Kim, and C. Y. Won, “Fast
charging technique for EV battery charger using three-phase AC-DC
boost converter,” in 37th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial
Electronics Society, 2011, pp. 4577–4582.
[99] P. Kumar, S. Sonar, and P. Shaw, “Comparative analysis of three phase
AC-AC Z-source converter topologies,” in 2016 IEEE 1st International
Conference on Power Electronics, Intelligent Control and Energy
Systems, 2016, pp. 1–6.
[100] H. F. Ahmed and H. Cha, “A new class of single-phase high-frequency
isolated Z-source AC-AC converters with reduced passive compo-
nents,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 33, no. 2, pp.
1410–1419, Feb. 2018.
[101] X. Y. Fang, D. Xie, Z. W. Yu, J. Q. Feng, and Q. Ai, “EV battery
charger that uses Z-source AC/AC converter,” in Proceedings of The
7th International Power Electronics and Motion Control Conference,
2012, pp. 2673–2677.
HABIB et al.: CONTEMPORARY TRENDS IN POWER ELECTRONICS CONVERTERS FOR CHARGING SOLUTIONS OF ELECTRIC VEHICLES
[102] S. Habib, M. Kamran, and U. Rashid, “Impact analysis of vehicleto-
grid technology and charging strategies of electric vehicles on distri-
bution networks- A review,” Journal of Power Sources, vol. 277, pp.
205–214, Mar. 2015.
[103] S. Habib and M. Kamran, “A novel vehicle-to-grid technology with
constraint analysis-a review,” in 2014 International Conference on
Emerging Technologies (ICET), 2014, pp. 69–74.
[104] N. Mi, B. Sasic, J. Marshall, and S. Tomasiewicz, “A novel economical
single stage battery charger with power factor correction,” in Eighteenth
Annual IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition,
2003, pp. 760–763.
[105] G. Pellegrino, E. Armando, and P. Guglielmi, “An integral battery
charger with power factor correction for electric scooter,” IEEE Trans-
actions on Power Electronics, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 751–759, Mar. 2010.
[106] S. Lacroix, E. Laboure, and M. Hilairet, “An integrated fast battery
charger for electric vehicle,” in Vehicle Power and Propulsion Confer-
ence, 2010.
[107] S. Dusmez and A. Khaligh, “Cost effective solutions to level 3 onboard
battery chargers,” in 2012 Twenty-Seventh Annual IEEE Applied Power
Electronics Conference and Exposition, 2012, pp. 2121–2127.
[108] D. G. Woo, G. Y. Choe, J. S. Kim, B. K. Lee, J. Hur, and G. B. Kang,
“Comparison of integrated battery chargers for plug-in hybrid electric
vehicles: Topology and control,” in 2011 IEEE International Electric
Machines & Drives Conference, 2011, pp. 1294–1299.
[109] T. P. Na, Q. F. Zhang, S. Dong, H. J. Raherimihaja, G. M. Chuai,
and J. X. Wang, “A soft-switched modulation for a single-phase
quasi-Z-source-integrated charger in electric vehicle application,” IEEE
Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 4602–4612, May
2020.
Salman Habib received the Ph.D. degree in Electri-
cal Engineering with specialization in power system
operation and control from the School of Electronic,
Information and Electrical Engineering (SEIEE),
Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China in
September 2020. He is a faculty member at Univer-
sity of Engineering and Technology (UET), Lahore,
Pakistan since 2014.
His current research interest includes the role of
plug-in Electric Vehicles in distribution grids, Op-
erational strategies and risks of smart EV charging
solution, power system planning, Vehicle-to-grid technology, integration of
renewable energy resources, power system network reliability analysis with
renewable energy integration considering large scale EV coordination, and
power electronic drives. He is a reviewer of Journal of Power Sources Elsevier,
IET Generation, Transmission and Distribution Systems, IEEE Transaction on
Industrial Electronics and many other reputed journals.
Muhammad Mansoor Khan is an Associate Pro-
fessor in Department of Electrical Engineering
Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China since 2005.
His current research interests include electric ve-
hicles impacts, hierarchical control of AC and DC
microgrids, integration of distributed power genera-
tion units to the power system through microgrids,
integration of renewable energy resources, power
quality issues, FACTS devices, and power electronic
drives.
929
Farukh Abbas received the B.Sc. degree in Elec-
trical Engineering from National University of Sci-
ences and Technology, Pakistan (NUST) in 2013,
and M.Sc. degree in Power System from North
China Electric Power University, Beijing (NCEPU)
in 2015.
He is a teaching faculty member at NUST since
2015. He is currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree in
electrical engineering with specialization in Power
System Optimization from the School of Electronic,
Information and Electrical Engineering (SEIEE),
Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China.
Abdar Ali received the B.Sc degree and M.Sc
degree in Electrical Engineering from University of
Engineering and Technology, Peshawar, Pakistan in
2007 and 2014, respectively. He has worked as fac-
ulty member in department of Electrical Engineering
at CECOS University of IT and Emerging Sciences,
Peshawar, Pakistan. He is currently pursuing the
Ph.D. degree in Electrical Engineering at the depart-
ment of electrical engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong
University, Shanghai, China.
His research interests include analysis and design
of High Power Converter Systems for renewable energy and battery charger
applications.
Muhammad Talib Faiz received the B.Sc. degree in
Electrical Engineering from The Islamia University
of Bahawalpur, Pakistan in 2012. He did his M.Sc.
degree in Electrical Engineering (Power System and
its Automations) from Xi’an Jiaotong University,
Xi’an, China in 2016. He is currently pursuing
the Ph.D. degree in Electrical Engineering at the
department of electrical engineering, Shanghai Jiao
Tong University, Shanghai, China.
His areas of interests include digital control in
power electronics, microgrids and renewable energy
generation systems.
Farheen Ehsan received her Bachelor’s degree in
Business Administration from University of The
Punjab, Pakistan in 2016. She did her Master’s
degree in Public Administration and Public Poli-
cies from Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai,
China in 2019. She is currently pursuing the Ph.D.
degree in Public Administration from the School of
International and Public Affairs (SIPA), Shanghai
Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.
Her areas of interests include electric vehicle
policy framework, consumer adoption of electric
vehicles and sustainable development.
Houjun Tang received the Ph.D. degree in Electrical
Engineering from Yamagata university, Yamagata,
Japan in 1997.
He is a Professor in Department of Electrical
Engineering Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China.
His current research interests include contactless
power transfer system, contactless electric vehicles
charging device, integration of renewable energy
resources, and power electronic drives.