Non-Linear Modeling and Control of DC-DC Buck
and Boost Converters For EV Application
2022 1st International Conference on Sustainable Technology for Power and Energy Systems (STPES) | 978-1-6654-5915-0/22/$31.00 ©2022 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/STPES54845.2022.10006486
Marya Andleeb, Khuban Lateef Khan, Shoeb Hussain, Shiekh Javed Iqbal
Department of Electrical Engineering, National Institute of Technology Srinagar, J&K-190006, India
Email: marya 2020melepe015@nitsri.net, khuban 2020melepe004@nitsri.net
Abstract—In DC-DC converters, the state-space averaging
method used for mathematical modeling of the circuits leads to
the significant loss of switching information, which is primarily
due to the averaging property of this approach. Therefore,
non-linear modeling is used to obtain an exact mathematical
model of the actual circuit and achieve a precise control of
the circuit. In this paper, linear and non-linear models are
derived for investigating and comparing the accuracy of buck and
boost converters for EV applications. The performance of both
converters is evaluated using three different control techniques,
including Proportional Integral Derivative (PID), Non-linear
Proportional Integral Derivative (NL-PID), and Tilt Integral
derivative (TID) control. When it comes to overall performance
and dependability, it has been noticed that NL-PID controller is
better. The MATLAB simulations, which have been presented,
demonstrate the correctness and efficacy of the designs under
observation.
Index Terms—DC-DC converters, buck converter, boost con-
verter, non-linear modeling, Proportional Integral Derivative
(PID), Nonlinear Proportional Integral Derivative (NL-PID), and
Tilt- Integral Derivative (TID)
I. I NTRODUCTION
The world currently relies heavily on DC-DC power
electronic converter systems for power systems, solar photo-
voltaic systems, aircraft power systems, hybrid and electric
vehicles [1], [2]. An electrified and connected mobility
future can save India 64% of expected passenger road-based
transportation energy consumption and 37% of carbon
emissions by 2030. With oil at USD 52 per barrel, this
saves 156 Mtoe of diesel and petrol annually, saving Rs
3.9 lakh crore or USD 60 billion. Between 2017 and 2030,
the cumulative savings for petrol and diesel are 876 Mtoe,
amounting to Rs 22 lakh crore or USD 330 billion, and for
CO2 emissions are 1 gigatons. Therefore, transitioning to
green and clean energy appears to be the only alternative. In
electric vehicles, power electronic converters are crucial in
energy conversion, battery charging, and voltage regulation.
Additionally, increased load demand is causing global power
shortages, which cannot be met by traditional power sources.
Due to these challenging circumstances, researchers are
focusing on non-traditional energy sources to create power.
DC–DC converters are utilized in the first stage to increase
power conversion efficiency [3]. In solar photo-voltaic power
generation, dc-dc boost converters are controlled to maximize
power output [4]. For this reason, DC-DC converters are
978-1-6654-5915-0/22/$31.00 ©2022 IEEE ©2022 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY WARANGAL. Downloaded on May 31,2023 at 09:04:08 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
frequently employed in renewable energy applications. Fig 1
shows the block diagram of an electric vehicle where different
converters including DC-DC converter is used to charge the
battery. This paper deals with battery charging considering
the non-linear model of DC-DC converters. The results are
shown for a single battery which can be connected in series
to form a battery pack.
Analysing, constructing, and managing converters that
meet specific needs is critical. Since DC-DC converter
is a non-linear, time-varying system, establishing its
dynamic characteristics analytically is a complicated process.
Generalizations aside, there are two types of power electronics
converter analysis: small-signal and large-signal (or, in certain
cases, a combination of the two). With a little disturbance
near the equilibrium point, small-signal analysis may
approximately linearize the system. In this scenario, it has the
benefit of applying mature linear system theory for analysis
and design, but fails to study transient features of large
signal perturbations like ripples due to the non-linearity. The
large signal analysis method preserves as much non-linear
information about the original system as possible. The average
large-signal modeling approach based on state space averaging
is one of two large-signal modeling analysis methods for
closed-loop switching power converters. However, state-space
averaging has a number of disadvantages. First, the method
of averaging prevents effective ripple analysis. Additionally,
this method is not applicable to resonant converters and
is difficult to perform an appropriate stability analysis. To
address these limitations, a unified non-linear large signal
modeling technique is adopted.
In this paper, state space averaging method for modeling buck
and boost converter is discussed in section II. The general
non-linear modeling approach is a focus of section III. The
control techniques such as Proportional Integral Derivative
(PID), Non-linear Proportional Integral Derivative (NL-PID),
and Tilt- Integral Derivative (TID) used for non-linear models
are presented and compared in section IV. The next section
V presents the results followed by conclusions in section VI.
II. S TATE -S PACE AVERAGE MODELLING OF DC-DC BUCK
AND BOOST CONVERTERS
The state space model employs first-order differential equa-
tions to describe a physical system, including switching
 + VLbu -
EV DC-AC
MOTOR CONVERTER + +
VCbu Vout
- -
AC-DC DC-DC
GRID
CONVERTER CONVERTER
Fig. 4: DC-DC buck converter when Sw = 0.

BATTERY This can rewritten as,

PACK
Vinp VCbu
i̇Lbu = (2)
Lbu
Also, from Fig. 3,
Fig. 1: Block diagram of an EV system.
iCbu = iLbu iout (3)
This can be rewritten as,
Lbu iLbu vCbu
v̇Cbu = (4)
Sw Cbu Rout Cbu
Vinp + The state space model of DC-DC buck converter in ON
Cbu Rbu
Vout state is given as,
  1   1
- i̇Lbu 0 iLbu
= 1 Lbu
1 + Lbu V
inp (5)
v̇Cbu Cbu Rout Cbu vCbu 0

Fig. 2: DC-DC buck converter. This can also be written as,

ẋon = Aon xon + Bon Ui (6)

converters [3]. Power electronic converters regularly change Fig. 4 shows the state of converter when switch Sw is OFF.
circuit components owing to intrinsic switching activity, which From this figure,
is characterized by a separate set of equations for every con- vCbu
figuration. To perform transient analysis and converter control i̇Lbu = (7)
Lbu
design, a sequence of equations must be solved. The averaging
method can resolve this problem. To approximate the converter iLbu vCbu
v̇Cbu = (8)
across many switching cycles, a linearly weighted average of Cbu Rout Cbu
the individual equations for each switched configuration of the The state space model of DC-DC buck converter in OFF
converter may be used to produce a single equation [5]. state is given as,

A. Buck converter   1  
i̇Lbu 0 iLbu 0
The DC-DC buck converter is shown in Fig. 2 = Lbu
+ V (9)
v̇Cbu 1
Cbu
1
Rout Cbu vCbu 0 inp
Fig. 3 shows the state of converter when switch Sw is ON,
This can also be written as,
VLbu = Vinp VCbu (1)
ẋof f = Aof f xof f + Bof f Ui (10)
From equations (5) and (9),
iLbu + VLbu - iout A = Aon D + (1 D)Aof f (11)

Vinp + iCbu + B = Bon D + (1 D)Bof f (12)

VCbu Vout
From equations (5) and (9), A and B is calculated and the
- - state space averaged model for buck converter in CCM is given
as,
  1   D
Fig. 3: DC-DC buck converter when Sw = 1. i̇Lbu 0 iLbu
= 1 Lbu
1 + Lbu Vinp (13)
v̇Cbu Cbu Rout Cbu vCbu 0

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY WARANGAL. Downloaded on May 31,2023 at 09:04:08 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Lbo ẋon = Aon xon + Bon Ui (19)

+ Fig. 7 shows the state of converter when switch Sw is OFF.

Vinp
Sw Cbo Rbo From this figure,
Vout
- vinp vCbo
i̇Lbo = (20)
Lbo Lbo

Fig. 5: DC-DC boost converter. iLbo vCbo

v̇Cbo = (21)
Cbo Rout Cbo
The state space model of DC-DC boost converter in OFF
+ VLbo - iout state is given as,
iLbo + iLbo    
+ 1 1
Vinp i̇Lbo 0 iLbo
VCbo = 1
Lbo
1 + Lbo Vinp (22)
Vout v̇Cbo Cbo Rout Cbo vCbo 0
- - This can also be written as,

ẋof f = Aof f xof f + Bof f Ui (23)

Fig. 6: DC-DC boost converter when Sw = 1.
From equations (18) and (22),
A = Aon D + (1 D)Aof f (24)
B. Boost converter
The DC-DC boost converter is shown in Fig. 5
Fig. 6 shows the state of converter when switch Sw is ON, B = Bon D + (1 D)Bof f (25)

VLbo = Vinp (14) From equations (22) and (26), A and B is calculated and
the state space averaged model for boost converter in CCM is
This can rewritten as, given as,
Vinp  " #
i̇Lbo = (15) (1 D)   1
Lbo i̇Lbo 0 iLbu
= (1 D) Lbu
+ Lbu V
inp (26)
v̇Cbo 1 vCbu 0
Also, from Fig. 6, Cbu Rout Cbu

iCbo = iout (16) From the above equations, we observe that the information
of the switching non-linearity is lost using state space mod-
This can be rewritten as,
elling approach. In order to retain the switching information,
vCbo the non-linear model is proposed [6].
v̇Cbo = (17)
Rout Cbo
The state space model of DC-DC boost converter in ON III. N ON - LINEAR MODELLING OF DC-DC BUCK AND
BOOST CONVERTERS
state is given as,
    1 After describing the switching functions, this section offers
i̇Lbo 0 0 iLbo
= 1 + Lbo Vinp (18) a unified non-linear large signal model for DC-DC buck and
v̇Cbo 0 Rout Cbo vCbo 0
boost converters. The model keeps the non-linearity of the
This can also be written as, original circuit intact. Such a switching function-based mod-
elling technique may be simply used to the study and design
of resonant converters [6]. Non-linear state space models of
DC-DC converters is governed by the following equation,
+ VLbo - iLbo iout
(1)
G0 (M )x + G1 (M ) (F1 x + e1 )+
Vinp + iCbo + (3)
G3 (M ) (x + e3 ) = u (27)
VCbo Vout
- where x denote the state variables (inductor current and
-
capacitor voltage), ei is a constant vector, u is the input power
vector, Gi (M ) is the coefficient matrix related to the circuit
Fig. 7: DC-DC boost converter when Sw = 0. structure, F1 indicates the strength of non-linearity. F1 = 0
for buck and F1 = 1 for boost.

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY WARANGAL. Downloaded on May 31,2023 at 09:04:08 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 TABLE I
TID controller
Combination results Switching function ST SD
A (1) 1 0 1
B (2) 0 1 KT 1
sn
C (3) 0 0 +
+ E(s) U(s) Y(s)
D (4) 1 1 1 +
 KI  Plant
s
-
+
1
KD
Kp + s

e(t) u(t)
Ki  e(t ) +
Fig. 9: TID implementation.

d
Kd dt
e(t ) +
consistent steady error-reducing term in the equation. If the
error is rising, the Derivative term leads in a drop in the output
Fig. 8: Schematic structure of L-PID controller. variable and a reduction in oscillations.
Despite their efficiency for linear systems, standard PID con-
trollers are incompatible with non-linear, higher-order, and
For buck converter, time-delayed systems [8]. Therefore, for non-linear systems,
 1   1
 non-linear controllers like NL-PID, TID are used.
M Lbu iLbu 0 Lbu (1) 0
1 + + B. Non-linear PID controller
Cbu M + Rout1Cbu vCbu 0 0 Vs
 1   The NLPID controller was designed for the non-linear buck
0 (3) iLbu 0
1
Lbu
= (28) and boost converter system by replacing each term of the LPID
Cbu 0 vCbu 0
controller with a non-linear function f (e), which is a non-
For boost converter, linear combination of sign and exponential functions of the
 1   1  error signal, its derivative, and its integral as shown below.
M Lbo iLbo 0 Lbo (1) iLbo Z
1 + 1 +
Cbo M + Rout1Cbo vCbo Cbo 0 vCbo
UN LP ID = g1 (e) + g2 (ė) + g3 ( edt) (31)
 1 ✓   ◆  Vs
0 (3) iLbo 0
1
Lbo
+ = Lbo (29)
0 vCbo Vs 0
Cbo gi (!) = ki (!)|!|↵i sign(!) (32)
where, M = d
dt and is the duty ratio.
ki2
IV. C ONTROLLER D ESIGN ki (!) = ki1 + , i = 1, 2, 3 (33)
1 + exp(µi ! 2 )
A. PID controller R
where, ! 2 e, ė or (edt), ↵i 2 R+ , ki (!) > 0 with
The Control System sector typically uses linear PID con-
coefficients ki1 , ki2 , µi 2 R+ . The term ki (!) is used to
trollers to solve real-world control challenges. Its simplicity of
increase the sensitivity of the NL-PID. The upper bound for
modeling, low cost, and high performance are all reasons for
non-linear gain term ki (!) is ki1 + k2i2 for errors close to
its desirability. Ziegler and Nichols pioneered PID controller
zero and for large errors, the lower bound is ki1 . Hence,
tuning. Typically, PIDs use Ziegler-Nichols rules. The per-
ki (!) 2 [ki1 , ki1 + k2i2 ]. The above NL-PID design is taken
formance of L-PID degrades dramatically when dealing with
from [9] and is implemented for the non-linear control of
systems that are nonlinear or whose parameters have a large
power electronic converter application.
range of values [7]- [8].
The L-PID receives an error signal, e(t), which represents C. TID controller
the difference between the intended output and the real-time The TID controller has KT , KI , and KD as control pa-
output, and processes it according to the equation below. Its rameters and n as a tuning parameter. It is quite similar to
schematic structure is shown in Fig. 8 as follows: PID, except that the proportional behaviour is replaced with
Z t2 transfer function s 1/n . It is superior to PID as it is better
de(t)
u(t) = Kp e(t) + Ki e(t)dt + Kd (30) in preserving system response stability during disturbance,
t1 dt parameter fluctuations, and is also easily tuned [10]. Fig. 9
The relevance of each term in the preceding equation is clear. shows the implementation of a TID controller.
The system response speed may be enhanced by using the The mathematical expressions for TID controller is given
proportional term. The variable under consideration will begin as,
to oscillate at higher values. The Integral term is the most UT ID = GT ID (s,✓ )ET ID (s) (34)

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY WARANGAL. Downloaded on May 31,2023 at 09:04:08 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 ET ID = RT ID (s,✓ )YT ID (s) (35) IoNL IoL
1

where GT ID (s,✓ ) is the transfer function in complex vari-

0.5
able S 2 C and is parameterized by ✓ 2 R4 .
0
KT KI 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045 0.05

GT ID (s,✓ ) = 1 + + KD (36) 1

s n s
0.5
where ✓T = [KT KI KD n], KT KI KD are the control
parameters and n ideally ranges from 1 to 10. 0
0.0095 0.0096 0.0097 0.0098 0.0099 0.01 0.0101 0.0102 0.0103 0.0104 0.0105

V. R ESULTS A ND D ISCUSSION
The system consists of various controllers where switching Fig. 11: Linear and non-linear buck converter output current
frequency is taken to be 10kHz and system L and C are taken IoL , IoN L respectively
to be 10mH and 450µF respectively which are compared to
achieve the overall desired results. Firstly, open loop systems
are compared for linear and non-linear buck, and linear and V
oL
V
oNL

non-linear boost converters. These results are shown in Fig.

200

10,11,12 and Fig 13. The comparative results are compiled 100

and are shown in Table I. Secondly, closed loop systems are 0

compared for linear and non-linear buck, and linear and non-
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12
170

linear boost converters. These results are given in Fig. 13,14,15 160

and Fig 16. The comparative results are compiled and are 150

shown in Table I. These results show that the output voltage of 140

the state space averaged model and non-linear model of buck 0.0605 0.061 0.0615 0.062

and boost converters. Evidently, the switching information

using non-linear modeling is retained. Fig 14 and 15 illustrate Fig. 12: Linear and non-linear boost converter output voltage
the findings for buck converters using PID, NL-PID, and TID. VoL , VoN L respectively.
Table II summarizes the results. Similarly, Fig 16 and 17
compare results for boost converters with PID, NL-PID, and
TID. Table II summarizes the findings. Results demonstrate the
closed loop response of buck and boost converter.From fig 14- using three control techniques: PID, NL-PID, and TID. It is
16, it can be observed that PID performs miserably and fails observed that:
to achieve desired response. The NL-PID controller converters 1) The state-space averaging technique utilized for mathe-
tend to be more accurate than PID and TID controllers. The matical modeling of DC-DC converters causes consider-
table shows the rise time, overshoot, and settling time of buck able loss of switching information owing to the averaging
and boost converters in open and closed loops employing feature.
various controllers. 2) To achieve the better approximation of a real circuit non-
linear modeling is required as derived in this paper.
3) The performance of buck and boost converters for EV
V V
applications is compared using PID, NL-PID and TID
oNL oL
30

20
controllers.
4) The NL-PID controller follows the reference more
10

0
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045 0.05

28

26
15 I I
oL oNL
24 10

5
0.0095 0.0096 0.0097 0.0098 0.0099 0.01 0.0101 0.0102 0.0103 0.0104 0.0105
0

-5
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1

Fig. 10: Linear and non-linear buck converter output voltage 6

VoL , VoN L respectively. 4

2
0.0385 0.039 0.0395 0.04 0.0405 0.041 0.0415 0.042

VI. C ONCLUSION
This work investigates the behaviour of linear and non- Fig. 13: Linear and non-linear boost converter output current
linear mathematical models of buck and boost converters. IoL , IoN L respectively.
Furthermore, the performance of both converters is tested

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY WARANGAL. Downloaded on May 31,2023 at 09:04:08 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 30
TABLE II: System response
20
Converter type Rise time Overshoot Settling time
10 Linear buck open loop 393.15µs 44.2% 5.04ms
V oNLPID V oPID V oTID Non-linear buck open loop 427.25µs 30.92% 19.65ms
0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 Linear boost open loop 815.1µs 136.9%
Non-linear boost open loop 1.03ms 14.36%
25.5
25

25 24.9

24.5
24.8
TABLE III: System response
0.013 0.0135 0.014 0.0145 0.015 0.0155 0.0599 0.06 0.0601 0.0602 0.0603
Converter Controller type Rise time (Tr ) Overshoot Settling time (Ts )
PID 18.51µs 0.703% 23.18µs
BUCK Non-linear PID 7.23µs 0.502% 15.77µs
Fig. 14: Buck converter output voltage VoP ID , VoT ID & TID 8.18µs 1.57% 29.74µs
VoN LP ID with PID, TID and NLPID controllers respectively. PID 89.23ms 0.521% –
BOOST Non-linear PID 5.14ms 4.01% 12.553ms
TID 6.70ms 7.556% 18.95ms

50
ITID INLPID IPID
0

-50 closely.
-100

0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 R EFERENCES

20 4 [1] P. Azer and A. Emadi, “Generalized state space average model for
10 2 multi-phase interleaved buck, boost and buck-boost dc-dc converters:
0
0 Transient, steady-state and switching dynamics,” IEEE Access, vol. 8,
-10

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 0.013 0.0135 0.014 0.0145 0.015

pp. 77 735–77 745, 2020.
10-3 [2] K. Karimi, A. Booker, and A. Mong, “Modeling, simulation, and
verification of large dc power electronics systems,” in PESC Record.
27th Annual IEEE Power Electronics Specialists Conference, vol. 2,
1996, pp. 1731–1737 vol.2.
Fig. 15: Buck converter output current IoP ID , IoT ID & [3] S. Sivakumar, M. J. Sathik, P. Manoj, and G. Sundararajan,
IoN LP ID with PID, TID and NLPID controllers respectively. “An assessment on performance of dc–dc converters for
renewable energy applications,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, vol. 58, pp. 1475–1485, 2016. [Online]. Available:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032115014409
[4] M. Nisa, M. Andleeb, and B. F. Ilahi, “Effect of partial shading on a
150 PV array and its maximum power point tracking using particle swarm
100 optimization,” Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 1817, no. 1,
50 p. 012025, mar 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-
0
V
oTID
V
oNLPID
V
oPID
6596/1817/1/012025
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5
[5] M. F. N. Tajuddin, N. A. Rahim, I. Daut, B. Ismail, and M. F.
154
151 Mohammed, “State space averaging technique of power converter with
152 digital pid controller,” in TENCON 2009 - 2009 IEEE Region 10
150
150 Conference, 2009, pp. 1–6.
148 149 [6] Y. Chen and B. Zhang, A General Nonlinear Mathematical Model of
0.036 0.0365 0.037 0.0375 0.038 0.0385 0.38 0.385 0.39 0.395 0.4 0.405 0.41
DC/DC Converter. Singapore: Springer Singapore, 2019, pp. 23–32.
[7] S. K. Valluru, M. Singh, A. Goel, M. Kaur, D. Dobhal, K. Kartikeya,
A. Verma, and A. Gupta, “Design of multi-loop l-pid and nl-pid
controllers: An experimental validation,” in 2018 2nd IEEE Interna-
Fig. 16: Boost converter output voltage VoP ID , VoT ID & tional Conference on Power Electronics, Intelligent Control and Energy
VoN LP ID with PID, TID and NLPID controllers respectively. Systems (ICPEICES), 2018, pp. 1228–1231.
[8] V. Vindhya and V. Reddy, “Pid-fuzzy logic hybrid controller for a
digitally controlled dc-dc converter,” in 2013 International Conference
on Green Computing, Communication and Conservation of Energy
ITID INLPID IPID (ICGCE), 2013, pp. 362–366.
50 [9] A. A. Najm and I. K. Ibraheem, “Nonlinear pid
0 controller design for a 6-dof uav quadrotor system,”
-50 Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal,
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 1087–1097, 2019. [Online]. Available:
100
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2215098618318846
4
[10] K. Singh, M. Amir, F. Ahmad, and M. A. Khan, “An integral tilt deriva-
50
2
tive control strategy for frequency control in multimicrogrid system,”
0
0 IEEE Systems Journal, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 1477–1488, 2021.
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 0.013 0.0135 0.014 0.0145 0.015
10-3

Fig. 17: Boost converter output current IoP ID , IoT ID &

IoN LP ID with PID, TID and NLPID controllers respectively.

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY WARANGAL. Downloaded on May 31,2023 at 09:04:08 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.