2022 IEEE IAS Global Conference on Emerging Technologies (GlobConET): Arad, Romania. May 20-22, 2022.
Piscataway, New Jersey:
IEEE, 2022.
Dual Loop Cascade Control of a Stacked
Interleaved Buck Converter for Electrolyzer
Application
2022 IEEE IAS Global Conference on Emerging Technologies (GlobConET) | 978-1-6654-4357-9/22/$31.00 ©2022 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/GlobConET53749.2022.9872460
Rammohan Rao Makineni, Danny Sutanto, Kashem M. Muttaqi, Md. Rabiul Islam, and Ashish P. Agalgaonkar
Faculty of Engineering and Information Sciences, University of Wollongong, New South Wales, 2522, Australia
rrm358@uowmail.edu.au, soetanto@uow.edu.au, kashem@uow.edu.au, mrislam@uow.edu.au, and ashish@uow.edu.au
Abstract—Hydrogen production has piqued the scientific
community's interest in the last two decades due to its inherent
very low pollution when energy is derived from renewable
energy sources (RESs). Due to the intermittent nature of RESs,
the potential of generating and storing hydrogen using
electrolyzer from excess energy from RESs, for later use in
generating electricity using fuel cells to help RESs when their
outputs are low, are considered an attractive solution. One of
the best ways of producing hydrogen from RESs is using water
electrolysis. Generally, in the water electrolysis systems,
DC/DC buck converters are used, as the electrolyzer needs a
very low input DC voltage to produce the hydrogen from
deionized water. However, the traditional DC/DC step-down
converters have several drawbacks such as ripples in the
output current, low energy efficiency, and high switching
losses. In this paper, a stacked interleaved buck converter
(SIBC) has been investigated to overcome the drawbacks of the
traditional DC/DC converter used in electrolyzer applications.
The paper presents a novel control strategy for the proposed
SIBC using a dual-loop PI control that controls both the
current and the voltage across the load terminal. The dynamics
of the proton exchange Membrane (PEM) electrolyzer is also
considered for validating the results. The proposed strategy is
validated using MATLAB/SIMULINK and the results show
that the regulations of the voltage and current at the output
side are significantly better than those from the traditional PI
controlled DC/DC converters.
Keywords— current control, energy conversion, proton
exchange PEM electrolyzer, RESs, PI control, SIBC.
I. INTRODUCTION
The use of energy storage systems (ESSs) has lately
aided the expansion of renewable energy sources (RES) by
mitigating the RESs’ intermittency. ESSs enable the RESs to
meet the changing weather conditions (which affects the
energy generated by RES) while still meeting customer
demands and delivering an uninterrupted power supply [1].
The use of ESSs can provide an immediate balance between
energy requirements and active power generation, reducing
grid oscillations caused by intermittent energy supply. ESSs
that are available nowadays are super capacitors, batteries,
flywheels, and compressed air energy storage (CAES)
systems [2]. Hydrogen production, storage, and its later use
to generate electricity can be considered as a viable option
for ESS. Hydrogen has an energy density of (120 MJ/kg),
which is almost three times more compared to diesel and
gasoline and can be used as fuel in fuel cells (FCs) for the
generation of electricity, and can also be used for power, or
heat [3]. The electricity to produce hydrogen can come from
conventional fossil fuels, like coal, oil, or natural gas, or
RES, such as wind, solar, and biomass. Coal emits the most
damaging pollutants to human health and is also the primary
978-1-6654-4357-9/22/$31.00 ©2022 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA. Downloaded on March 21,2023 at 02:42:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
producer of greenhouse gases (approximately 45 percent of
CO2 emissions are generated by fossil fuels equating to 14.5
gigatons of CO2) [4]. As a result, it is preferable to employ
renewable energy sources rather than fossil fuels. Generating
hydrogen from RES using water electrolysis results in almost
zero greenhouse gas emissions. As a result, it is preferable to
employ renewable energy sources rather than fossil fuels.
Water electrolysis is based on an electrochemical process in
which electricity is used to divide water into oxygen and
hydrogen, and this is achieved using an electrolyzer (EL)
[5]-[7]. Three forms of ELs have been described in the
scientific literature: (i) alkaline EL; (ii) proton exchange
membrane (PEM) EL; and (iii) solid oxide EL.
Alkaline ELs lasts longer and the capital cost is cheaper
compared to other electrolyzers but suffer from low current
density and high operating pressure, which further influences
the size of the system and hydrogen generation costs [9].
Although PEM ELs have a shorter lifetime and a higher
initial cost, PEM ELs, in comparison to alkaline ELs, offer
numerous benefits, including low power density and high
cell efficiency, a broad partial load range, great operational
flexibility and the response of the system is quick [8],[9].
However, PEM ELs have significant disadvantages in terms
of platinum catalyst price and longevity. This technology is
an appealing alternative for grid integration, including
renewable power generating systems [10], due to its benefits
over alkaline ELs.
The voltages generated in a RES system are very high in
comparison to the input voltage of an EL, electrical energy
generated by RES cannot be directly utilized to supply EL.
As a result, a power conversion unit is required to connect
the source and the load. The DC bus voltage in multi-source
systems based on RES and DC bus design may typically
approach hundreds of volts [11]. To create hydrogen from
deionized water, EL requires a DC voltage significantly
lower than the voltage available at the DC bus (in our
instance, 8V). This necessitates the use of power converters.
The minimum requirement needed from the DC/DC
converter linked to a PEM EL is having a very high step-
down ratio to deal with a high voltages originating from the
RES DC bus voltage [12]-[14].
For PEM EL applications, high energy economy and low
current ripple at the output are also significant issues.
Because of the poor efficiency of PEM EL, the DC-DC
converter must have the highest energy efficiency feasible.
The output current ripple, on the other hand, must be as
minimal as feasible to improve the EL's efficiency and
hydrogen generation while also increasing its dependability.
1029
These two limitations necessitate a converter control method
that is appropriate.
Buck converters are usually used as DC/DC step-down
converters due to their simple construction and high
efficiency. In [12] the authors focused on different type of
DC/DC stepdown converters for electrolyzer applications,
isolated DC/DC converters can also be used for electrolyzer
applications by using high-frequency transformers. Even
though isolated and non-isolated topologies fit for the
applications which require a low voltage ratio, these
topologies have drawbacks such as the current ripple at the
output side and reliability issues when there exists a power
switch failure. Compared to the above topologies there is
another classification of DC/DC step-down converters
known as interleaved DC/DC converters which exhibits a
high conversion ratio and minimum current ripple. Out of the
various interleaved structures presented in the literature [15],
a stacked interleaved buck converter has been considered to
meet the electrolyzer application requirements. In [14] the
authors implemented the output voltage PI control strategy
along with a feed-forward loop for the selected topology. In
[15] the authors considered only the current control for the
chosen topology, in both [14], [15] the authors considered
only either current control only or output voltage control but
not both at the same time
In this paper a stacked interleaved buck converter with a
dual-loop PI controller is implemented to regulate the output
voltage and current across the load. A small signal modeling
[13] is used to derive the transfer function modelling of the
SIBC. The dual loop PI controller is used to control the
output voltage and current to follow the voltage and current
reference values [17], [18]. The proposed dual-loop control
is more efficient compared to other single loop PI control
strategies because of its effectiveness in responding to
disturbances along with reduced overall variability thereby
achieving superior performance.
II. STACKED INTERLEAVED BUCK CONVERTER
The objective of this Section is to present an explanation
about the selected topology compared to the other DC/DC
buck converters and to provide the detailed equations of the
selected topology.
The proposed SIBC is intended to be powered by an
RES, such as wind or solar PV to generate hydrogen using a
PEM EL. In order to obtain a DC voltage, A three-phase
rectifier is connected to a wind turbine whereas the solar PV
can be directly connected to SIBC converter. The block
diagram of a PEM electrolyzer connected to the RESs is
shown in Fig. 1. DC voltage amplitude in both the cases can
be affected by weather conditions and can fluctuate very
dramatically. A DC voltage of up to 200V at the input has
been considered in the proposed application.
Fig. 1. Block diagram of PEM electrolyzer connected to an RES system
1030
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA. Downloaded on March 21,2023 at 02:42:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
The chosen SIBC is identical to the traditional two-phase
interleaved DC/DC buck architecture, except that it contains
an extra capacitor Cs in between both the phases, as shown
in Fig. 2.
The rate of flow of hydrogen is derived from the
Faradays first law of electrolysis and it is expressed in mol s-
1
[15]. By using the electrolyzer current (Iel), the overall
relation between hydrogen flow rate and Iel is as follows:
ఎಷ ఎ೎೐೗೗ ூ೐೗
‫ܪ‬ଶ௥௔௧௘ ൌ  (1)
௠ಹమ ி
Where Ʉ୊ is the Faradays efficiency and is given by
బǤబవ ళఱǤఱ
ሾ൬ ൰ିቆ మ ቇሿ
Ʉ୊ ൌ ͻ͸Ǥͷ‡ ౅౛ౢ ౅౛ౢ , Ʉୡୣ୪୪ is the number of electrolyzer
cells in series, F is the faradays constant which is equal to
96485 Cmol-1 and ୌଶ is molar mass of hydrogen.
Fig. 2. Stacked interleaved Buck converter
The electrolyzer behavior and production of hydrogen
are approximated by the electrical equivalent model in [19],
both anode and cathode reaction of the electrochemical
process are considered. Whereas in our case only cathode
reaction is considered due to its faster response in
comparison to the anode one. The final equivalent circuit of
the PEM electrolyzer is highlighted as shown in Fig.2.
The efficiency of the PEM electrolyzer is given by as
follows:
୚౟ ୍౛ౢ
Ʉ୔୉୑ ൌ  ሺ୚ మ (2)
౟ ୍౛ౢ ሻାሺୖభ ାୖ౟ ାሻ୍౛ౢ
The resistance  ୧ represents the losses that exist in the
electrolyzer membrane and ଵ ƒ†ଵ represents the
behavior in the cathode.
The amount of power converted into hydrogen is
represented by the product of electrolyzer current ( ‫ܫ‬௘௟ ሻ
andሺܸ௜ ) voltage.
The control of switches happen in a bipolar manner: S1's
gate signal is the same as S4's, while S2 and S3's gate signals
are logically negated. The switches have two working
conditions: {S1 = S4 = ON, S2 = S3 = OFF}, {S1=S4= OFF, S2
= S3 = ON}, in the first case input supply (ܸ௜௡ ) is connected
to the inductor ‫ܮ‬௦ and the ground is connected to inductor‫ܮ‬௣ ,
where as in the second case input supply (ܸ௜௡ ) is connected
to the inductor ‫ܮ‬௣ and the inductor ‫ܮ‬௦ to ground.
Furthermore, the duty cycles for both coupled power
switches are different: ‫ ܦ‬is for the primary phase
inductance ‫ܮ‬௣ , and ሺͳ െ ‫ܦ‬ሻ is for the secondary phase
inductance ‫ܮ‬௦ . Each phase creates a different voltage
because of the extra capacitor‫ܥ‬௦ . When the primary phase
(‫ܮ‬௣ ,‫ܥ‬௣ ) is taken independently, the output voltage is equal
to a typical buck converter regulated with a duty cycle ‫ ܦ‬as
given in (3).
 ܸ௢௨௧ ൌ ܸ௜௡ ‫ܦ‬ (3) The contribution of the capacitance ‫ܥ‬௦ in the circuit of
Fig. 3 must be taken into consideration to derive the voltage
The duty cycle of the secondary phase (‫ܮ‬௦ , ‫ܥ‬௦ ) is equal ripple equation. Because the two-phase currents pass through
toሺͳ െ ‫ܦ‬ሻ, thus the voltage equation is in (4). By using an the output capacitance‫ܥ‬௣ , the ripple is calculated, and the
additional capacitor (‫ܥ‬௦ ) in between the two phases which
final expression is given by [20] as follows:
leads to two different voltages at the converter output as
follows: ଵ ஼ ௏೔೙ ஽
οܸ௢ ൌ  ට ೄ ‫ܦ‬ሺͳ െ ‫ܦ‬ሻ •‹ ൬ ൰ ൅ ܸ௜௡ ሺͳ െ
ଶ஼ು ௅ ௙ೞ ௙ೞ ඥ௅஼ೄ
ܸ௢௨௧ ൅  ܸ௖௦ ൌ  ܸ௜௡ ሺͳ െ ‫ܦ‬ሻ (4)
஼ೄ ஽
‫ܦ‬ሻ ሾ ‘•ሺ ሻ െ ͳሿ (10)
A. Current and Voltage ripple evaluation ஼ು ௙ೞ ඥ௅஼ೄ

The ripple voltage and current can be determined by the B. System Configuration and Analysis
simplified circuit shown in Fig. 3
Based on the circuits illustrated in Fig. 4, the SSA
By using KVL equations (5) and (6) can be written: method was used to estimate the transfer function.

ܸ௦ ൌ ‫ܮ‬
ௗூೞ ሺ௧ሻ
൅ ܸ௖௦ ൅ ܸ௖௣ (5) The SSA method is broken down into three parts [13]:
ௗ௧
ܸ௣ ൌ ‫ܮ‬
ௗூೞ ሺ௧ሻ
൅ ܸ௖௣ (6) i. For each circuit state (i.e., during ܶைே andܶைிி ),
ௗ௧ describe the input-state-output (ISO) model.
Where ܸ௖௦ and ܸ௖௣ are the voltages across the capacitor ii. Add tiny ac perturbations and separate the ac and dc
terminals ‫ܥ‬௦ and ‫ܥ‬௣ respectively. components.
iii. Solve the transfer function by transforming the ac
equations into the Laplace domain.

Fig. 3. Simplified schematic of the SIBC

The voltages on the inductors are constant during the

time interval ‫ ܶܦ‬since the primary phase inductor is
connected to ܸ௜௡ and the secondary phase to the ground. As a
result, the current waveform is a ramp, with the derivative
݀‫ܫ‬ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻൗ ο‫ܫ‬
݀‫ ݐ‬represented as ൗοܶ. In this period, the value of
the voltage source can also be determined: Fig. 4. Equivalent Circuits of SIBC: (i) During, (ii) duringሺͳ െ ሻ.
ܸ௦ ൌ Ͳǡ ܸ௣ ൌ  ܸ௜௡ ǡ ܸ௖௣ ൌ ‫ܸܦ‬௜௡ ǡ
The SIBC is initially split into two sub-circuits by
ܸ௖௦ ൅ ܸ௖௣  ൌ  ሺͳ െ ‫ܦ‬ሻܸ௜௡ (7) operating the four switches as indicated in Fig. 4's timing
diagram. As a result, using Kirchhoff's laws to analyze the
All the elements in the circuit shown in Fig. 3 are two circuital designs, the following input-state-output
considered ideal, which means there is no series resistance, models may be written:
which results in negligible losses.
Mode-1: when S1, S4 are ON, and S2, S3 are OFF for
Assuming thatοܶ ൌ ‫ܶܦ‬,ܶ ൌ ݂௦ , in which ݂௦ represents
switching frequency, and the equations for the ripple current ሺܶ ൏ ‫ ݐ‬൑ ‫ܶܦ‬ሻ
can be calculated by substituting (7) in (5) and (6) as ௗூ೛
‫ܮ‬௣ ൌ  ܸ௣ െ ‫ܫ‬௣ ܴ௣ െ ܸ௖௣ 
௏೔೙ ௗ௧
ο‫ܫ‬௦ ൌ  െሺͳ െ ‫ܦ‬ሻ‫ܦ‬ (8) ௗூೞ
௙ೞ Ǥ௅
 ‫ܮ‬௦ ൌ  െܸ௖௦ െ ‫ܫ‬௦ ܴ௦ െ ܸ௖௣ 
ௗ௧
௏೔೙
ο‫ܫ‬௣ ൌ  ሺͳ െ ‫ܦ‬ሻ‫ܦ‬ (9) ௗ௏೎ೞ
௙ೞ Ǥ௅  ‫ܥ‬௦ ൌ  ‫ܫ‬௦ ሺͳͳሻ
ௗ௧
It can be seen from (8) and (9) that the current ripple at ௗ௏೎೛ ௏೎೛ ௏೎భ ௏
the output side of the load is canceled when both the ‫ܥ‬௣ ൌ  ‫ܫ‬௣ ൅ ‫ܫ‬௦ െ ൅ ൅ ೔
ௗ௧ ோ೔ ோ೔ ோ೔
inductors have equal value, i.e., ‫ܮ‬௦ ൌ ‫ܮ‬௣ .
ௗ௏೎భ ௏೎೛ ௏೎భ ௏೎భ ௏
 ‫ܥ‬ଵ ൌെ ൅ െ ൅ ೔
ௗ௧ ோ೔ ோ೔ ோభ ோ೔

1031

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA. Downloaded on March 21,2023 at 02:42:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Mode-2: when S1, S4 are OFF and S2, S3 are ON for In the above, B matrix is the average state space model of
ሺͲ ൏ ‫ ݐ‬൑ ሺͳ െ ‫ܦ‬ሻܶሻ B1 and B2
ௗூ೛
‫ܮ‬௣ ൌ  െ‫ܫ‬௣ ܴ௣ െ ܸ௖௣ ‫ ܤ‬ൌ ሺ‫ܤ כ ܦ‬ଵ ሻ ൅ ሺͳ െ ‫ܦ‬ሻ ‫ܤ כ‬ଶ 
ௗ௧

‫ܮ‬௦
ௗூೞ
ൌ ܸ௦  െ ܸ௖௦ െ ‫ܫ‬௦ ܴ௦ െ ܸ௖௣ From the above state equations, ‫ܩ‬௜ ሺ‫ݏ‬ሻ ൌ  ‫ܥ‬௡ ሺܵ‫ ܫ‬െ
ௗ௧ ‫ܣ‬ሻିଵ ‫ܤ‬௡ where (i=0, 1, 2 & n =1, 2) is used to obtain the
ௗ௏೎ೞ open loop transfer functions. The parameter values are
‫ܥ‬௦ ൌ  ‫ܫ‬௦ (12)
ௗ௧ considered from Table 1 and the final transfer functions
ௗ௏೎೛ ௏೎೛ ௏೎భ ௏೔ ‫ܩ‬௜ௗ ሺ‫ݏ‬ሻ‫ܩ‬௩௜ ሺ‫ݏ‬ሻ are derived by submitting the respective
‫ܥ‬௣ ൌ  ‫ܫ‬௣ ൅ ‫ܫ‬௦ െ ൅ ൅ parameter values.
ௗ௧ ோ೔ ோ೔ ோ೔

ௗ௏೎భ ௏೎೛ ௏೎భ ௏೎భ ௏೔

‫ܥ‬ଵ ൌെ ൅ െ ൅ III. CONTROL STRATEGY (DUAL LOOP PI CONTROL)
ௗ௧ ோ೔ ோ೔ ோభ ோ೔
The primary goal of a SIBC control is to keep the voltage
SIBC’s small signal model is derived by adding small and current across the Stacked PEM Electrolyzer at a
perturbation around the steady-state operating point using constant level. A dual-loop control technique has been
the state-space equations in (11) and (12). To acquire the implemented in this study. The multi-loop control method's
results, the state-space averaging technique is applied. The loop-bandwidth shaping is critical for attaining the desired
overall linearized model is as follows: system performance, overshoot/undershoot system response
For time duration of‫ܶܦ‬, the state space modelling is as time, such as line-load transients, attenuating ripple
follows frequency, and the other system characteristics [21]. In
general, the voltage dynamics of a capacitor are slower than
‫ݔ‬ሶ ൌ  ‫ܣ‬ଵ ‫ ݔ‬൅ ‫ܤ‬ଵ ‫ݑ‬ǡ the current dynamics of an inductor. As a result, the current-
loop is considered for the inner loop control and the voltage-
‫ݕ‬ଵ ൌ  ‫ܥ‬ଵ ‫ ݔ‬൅ ‫ܧ‬ଵ ‫(ݑ‬13) loop is considered for the outer loop control in the dual-loop
‘” –‹‡ †—”ƒ–‹‘ ‘ˆ ሺͳ െ ‫ܦ‬ሻܶ –Š‡ •–ƒ–‡ •’ƒ ‡ control approach. This is also why the voltage error is used
‘†‡ŽŽ‹‰‹•ƒ•ˆ‘ŽŽ‘™•ǣ to derive the current reference. An inner current loop and an
outer voltage loop make up the system. A proportional-
‫ݔ‬ሶ ൌ  ‫ܣ‬ଶ ‫ ݔ‬൅ ‫ܤ‬ଶ ‫ݑ‬ǡ integral (PI) controller was used to implement both controls
as shown in Fig. 5. The tuning of PI values is done by
‫ݕ‬ଶ ൌ  ‫ܥ‬ଶ ‫ ݔ‬൅ ‫ܧ‬ଶ ‫(ݑ‬14)
considering the frequency response especially Bode plots
Š‡”‡ and accordingly the stability of the system is achieved.
‫ݔ݀݊ܽݔ‬ሶ are the state vector and the differential state
vectors. ‫ݔ‬ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ ൌ ሾ݅௣ ݅௦ ‫ݒ‬௖௣ ‫ݒ‬௖௦ ‫ݒ‬௖ଵ ሿ T, u is the input
vector: ‫ݑ‬ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ ൌ ሾ‫ݒ‬௜௡ ‫ݒ‬௜ ሿ T and y is the output vector,
‫ݕ‬ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ ൌ ሾ݅௣ Ͳ ‫ݒ‬௖௣ Ͳ ͲሿT. B and C are input and output
matrices. E is the feed forward matrix in our case it is zero,
as we didn’t consider feed forward loop.
The state space matrix of the system can be determined:
‫ܣ‬ଵ ൌ ‫ܣ‬ଶ ൌ ‫ܣ‬
െͳ
‫ۍ‬ Ͳ ‫ې‬
‫ێ‬െܴ௣ െܴ௦ ‫ܮ‬௣ Ͳ ‫ۑ‬
‫ܮ ێ‬௣ െͳ Ͳ Ͳ ‫ۑ‬
‫ܮ‬௦ െͳ ͳ
‫Ͳ ێ‬ ͳ ‫ܮ‬௦ ‫ۑ‬
ൌ  ‫ͳ ێ‬ െͳ ‫ܮ‬௦ ‫ܥ‬௣ ܴ௜ ‫ۑ‬
‫ێ‬ ‫ܥ‬௣ Ͳ ‫ۑ‬
‫ܥ‬ ‫ܥ‬௣ ܴ௜ Ͳ
‫ ێ‬௣ ͳ Ͳ ͳ ͳ ‫ۑ‬ Fig. 5. Control strategy of SIBC
‫ێ‬ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ െ ‫ۑ‬
‫ܥ‬௦ െͳ ‫ܥ‬௣ ܴ௜ ‫ܥ‬ଵ ܴଵ
‫Ͳ ێ‬ Ͳ ‫ۑ‬ A. Design of Dual Loop PI control
‫ۏ‬ ‫ܥ‬ଵ ܴ௜ ‫ے‬ In Fig. 6, the block diagram of the dual-loop control
method for the circuit is shown.
஽
ଵ
Ͳ ‫ې‬ Ͳ Ͳ ‫ ۍ‬௅೛ Ͳ ‫ې‬
‫ۍ‬௅೛ ‫ۍ‬ଵ ‫ې‬
Ͳ ‫ێ‬ଵି஽ ‫ۑ‬
‫Ͳێ‬ Ͳ ‫ۑ‬ ‫ێ‬௅ೞ ‫ۑ‬ Ͳ ‫ۑ‬
‫ ێ‬௅ೞ
‫ێ‬ ଵ ‫ۑ‬ ‫ێ‬ ଵ ‫ۑ‬
‫ܤ‬ଵ ൌ  ‫Ͳ ێ‬ ஼೛ ோ೔ ‫ۑ‬
‫ܤ‬ଶ ൌ  ‫ Ͳ ێ‬஼೛ோ ‫ ܤ ۑ‬ൌ  ‫ێ‬ ଵ ‫ۑ‬

‫Ͳێ‬
೔
‫Ͳ ێ‬ ஼೛ ோ೔ ‫ۑ‬
‫Ͳێ‬ Ͳ ‫ۑ‬ Ͳ ‫ۑ‬ ‫Ͳ ێ‬
‫Ͳێ‬ ଵ ‫ۑ‬ ‫Ͳێ‬ ଵ ‫ۑ‬ Ͳ ‫ۑ‬
‫Ͳ ێ‬ ଵ ‫ۑ‬
‫ۏ‬ ஼భ ோ೔ ‫ے‬ ‫ۏ‬ ஼భ ோ೔ ‫ے‬
‫ۏ‬ ஼భ ோ೔ ‫ے‬
‫ܥ‬ଵ ൌ  ሾͳ Ͳ ͲͲ Ͳሿ
Fig. 6. Dual loop PI control
‫ܥ‬ଶ ൌ  ሾͲ Ͳ ͳͲ Ͳሿ
‫ܧ‬ଵ ൌ ‫ܧ‬ଶ ൌ ‫ ܧ‬ൌ Ͳ

1032

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA. Downloaded on March 21,2023 at 02:42:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Among the two control loops, i) inner loop control and ii) IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
outer loop control. The output current of the SIBC converter
is controlled by the inner loop control whereas the output In the MATLAB/SIMULINK environment, the SIBC
voltage is controlled by the outer loop controller. The and its control were tested. Table I below shows the
reference for the inner loop control is generated by the outer- parameters that are used in the simulation.
loop voltage controller. For SIBC, two PI controllers
TABLE I. SIMULATION PARAMETERS
are utilized. There are different strategies in tuning the
parameters of PI controllers as given in [13]-[14]. In this Parameters Values
research, the parameters of the PI controller are tuned by ܴ௜ 0.088 Ω
utilizing the frequency domain, so in this paper, the Bode ܸ௜ 4.38 V
plot stability criterion is used for tuning the PI controller ܴଵ 0.035 Ω
parameters. In Fig. 6, the loop gains of both current and
‫ܥ‬ଵ 37.26 F
voltage are calculated as follows:
‫ܮ‬௣ and ‫ܮ‬௦ 400 μH
1) Inner loop Current gain: ܴ௣ and ܴ௦ 60 mΩ
‫ܥ‬௣ 100 μF
ீ೔ ሺ௦ሻீೄಹ ሺ௦ሻீ೔೏ ሺ௦ሻு೔ ሺ௦ሻ
ܶ௜ ሺ‫ݏ‬ሻ ൌ   (15) ‫ܥ‬௦ 10 μF
௄೛ೢ೘
Switching frequency (‫ܨ‬௦ ) 20kHz
DC bus voltage (ܸ௜௡ ) 100-200V
2) Outer loop Voltage gain
PEM EL rated current 50A
ீ೔ ሺ௦ሻீೄಹ ሺ௦ሻீ೔೏ ሺ௦ሻு೔ ሺ௦ሻீೡ ሺ௦ሻீೡ೔ ሺ௦ሻ PEM EL rated voltage 8V
ܶ௜ ሺ‫ݏ‬ሻ  ൌ 
௄೛ೢ೘ ାீ೔ ሺ௦ሻீೄಹ ሺ௦ሻீ೔೏ ሺ௦ሻு೔ ሺ௦ሻீೡ ሺ௦ሻீೡ೔ ሺ௦ሻுೡ ሺ௦ሻ
 (16)

ଵି௘ షೞ೅ೞ
A total of three cases are considered as shown, the first
In (15) and (16), ‫ܩ‬ௌு ሺ‫ݏ‬ሻ  ൌ  is the sample and case is for the steady-state condition, the second case is for
௦
hold (S/H) time delay, where ܶ௦ is the sampling rate and the the transient state, and the third case is for a step-change in
approximate linear time delay is ‫ܩ‬ௌு ሺ‫ݏ‬ሻ  ൌ 
ଵ input voltages.
ଵା଴Ǥହ௦்ೞ

The Bode plots for the loop gains of voltage and current
are shown in Fig.7. The gain margin (GM) and phase margin
(PM) for the current loop are infinity, and 900 respectively in
the case of open loop, whereas in closed loop the values are
like infinity and 1200 respectively. The GM and PM of the
outer voltage loop are 9.75dB, and 1480 respectively for
open loop, whereas in closed loop the values are like 1dB
and 1800 respectively. For DC/DC converters, the PM must
be more than 60 degrees which gives better stability of the
converter control [17].

Fig. 7. Bode plots (a) & (b) for current loop, (c) & (d) voltage loop
Fig. 8. Simulation results for a steady-state operation. (a) Output voltage,
(b) Output current (c) Secondary current (d) Primary current

1033

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA. Downloaded on March 21,2023 at 02:42:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Fig. 8 depicts the results from the steady-state test in case
1. It has an output voltage and current of 8V and 29 A
approximately when the input voltage of the converter is
200V. The output voltage and current, currents on the
primary and secondary phase are all shown in Fig. 8 (from
top to bottom). Fig. 8 shows that the output voltage remains
almost constant, whereas the output current, has a very
negligible ripple. The primary and second leg current ripples
correspond to the inductors' values; they are in phase
opposition, resulting in the output ripple current
compensation. The transient test in case 2 was performed
with a step-change in the reference voltage from 6 to 8 volts.
Fig. 9 shows that there is no overshoot during the time
instant of change in reference voltage. Fig. 9 shows that the
rise time, in this case, is nearly 0.04 seconds.
As the dual-loop PI control is designed to maintain the
voltage and currents of the converter constant, the input
voltage is varied from 200V to 150V and from 150 to 100V
in case 3.
Fig.10 shows that the dip in the voltage and currents are
small in magnitude and are observed at the instants of
change in voltages. The settling times for output voltage and
currents are 0.3 seconds when there is a sudden change in the
input side. When the voltage at the input side again changes
from 100V to 200V there is an overshoot at both the voltage
and current waveforms but settled in nearly 0.3 s. As the
controller is a dual-loop PI, both current and voltage are
maintained constant despite the changes in the input voltage.
Fig. 10. Simulation results for the changes in input voltage.
V. CONCLUSION
A dual-loop PI controller for the stacked interleaved buck
converter has been developed for the PEM electrolyzer. With
this controller, the SIBC can deliver the desired power by
tracking the corresponding output reference voltage and
regulating the converter current at its output. The main
contributions are the state space and transfer function
analysis of the converter along with considering the
electrolyzer dynamic behavior and is validated in
MATLAB/SIMULINK.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support
by the Future Fuels-CRC, Australia.
REFERENCES
[1] Mathiesen, Brian Vad & Lund, Henrik & Karlsson, Kenneth, 2011.
"100% Renewable energy systems, climate mitigation and economic
growth," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 488-501,
February.
[2] Gianpaolo Vitale, “Renewable energies – Future perspectives
Renew”. Energy Environ. Sustain. 1 17 (2016) DOI:
10.1051/rees/2016035
[3] W. Na, E. Muljadi, B. Leighty and J. Kim, "Control and analysis for a
self-excited induction generator for wind turbine and electrolyzer
applications," 2017 IEEE 6th International Conference on Renewable
Energy Research and Applications (ICRERA),2017, pp.802-807.
[4] R. Bhosale, V. Agarwal, Proc. of 2018 International Conference on
Power, Instrumentation, Control and Computing (PICC), Thrissur,
India, 2018, 1.
[5] Carmo M, Fritz DL, Mergel J, Stolten D. A comprehensive review on
PEM water electrolysis. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2013;38(12):4901e34.
[6] Schmidt O, Gambhir A, Staffell I, Hawkes A, Nelson J, Few S.
Future cost and performance of water electrolysis: an expert
elicitation study. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2017;42(52):30470e92.
[7] Koponen J. Review of water electrolysis technologies and design of
renewable hydrogen production systems, Master's Thesis.
Lappeenranta University of Technology; 2015. p. 1e87.

Fig. 9. Simulation results for a dynamic operation.

1034

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA. Downloaded on March 21,2023 at 02:42:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[8] T. Zhou, B. Francois, M. el Hadi Lebbal and S. Lecoeuche, "Real-
Time Emulation of a Hydrogen-Production Process for Assessment of
an Active Wind-Energy Conversion System," in IEEE Transactions
on Industrial Electronics, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 737-746, March 2009.
[9] Muyeen SM, Takahashi R, Tamura J. Electrolyzer switching strategy
for hydrogen generation from variable speed wind generator. Electr
Power Syst Res 2011;81(5):1171e9.
[10] Genc¸ G, C¸ Elik M, Serdar Genc¸ M. Cost analysis of wind
electrolyzer- fuel cell system for energy demand in Pinarbas‚ I
Kayseri. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2012;37(17):12158e66.
[11] D. Guilbert, S. M. Collura, A. Scipioni, DC/DC converter topologies
for electrolyzers: State-of-the-art and remaining key issues,
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, Volume 42, Issue 38,2017,
Pages 23966-23985
[12] V. Guida, Guilbert, D., & Douine, B. (2019). Literature Survey of
Interleaved DC-DC Step-Down Converters for Proton Exchange
Membrane Electrolyzer Applications. Transactions on Environment
and Electrical Engineering, 3(1),
https://doi.org/10.22149/teee.v3i1.129
[13] N. Mohan, T. M. Undeland, W. P. Robbins, Power Electronics.
Converters, Applications, and Design, 3rd Edition, John Wiley &
Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2003, pp.322.
[14] D. Guilbert, D. Sorbera, G. Vitale, A stacked interleaved DC-DC
buck converter for proton exchange membrane electrolyzer
applications: Design and experimental validation, International
Journal of Hydrogen Energy, Volume 45, Issue 1, 2020, Pages 64-79,
ISSN 0360-3199.
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA. Downloaded on March 21,2023 at 02:42:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[15] V. Guida, Guilbert, D., Vitale, G. and Douine, B. (2020), Design and
Realization of a Stacked Interleaved DC–DC Step-Down Converter
for PEM Water Electrolysis with Improved Current Control. Fuel
Cells, 20: 307-315. https://doi.org/10.1002/fuce.201900153
[16] S. Battula, M. Mohan Garg, A. Kumar Panda, M. Preetam Korukonda
and L. Behera, "Analysis and Dual-loop PI Control of Bidirectional
Quasi Z-source DC-DC Converter," IECON 2020 The 46th Annual
Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, 2020, pp.
2939-2944, doi: 10.1109/IECON43393.2020.9255017.
[17] M. Veerachary, “Two-loop controlled buck-SEPIC converter for
input source power management,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol.
59, no. 11, pp. 4075–4087, 2012.
[18] Özdemir and Z. Erdem, “Double-loop PI controller design of the DC-
DC boost converter with a proposed approach for calculation of the
controller parameters,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part I J. Syst.Control
Eng., vol. 232, no. 2, pp. 137–148, 2018.
[19] D. Guilbert and G. Vitale, “Dynamic Emulation of a PEM
33. Electrolyzer by Time Constant Based Exponential Model,” Energies,
vol. 12, no. 4, p. 750, Feb. 2019.
[20] J. Wibben and R. Harjani, "A High-Efficiency DC–DC Converter
Using 2 nH Integrated Inductors," in IEEE Journal of Solid-State
Circuits, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 844-854, April 2008.
[21] A.R. Gautam, D. Fulwani, R. R. Makineni and N. Rathore, "ISMC for
Boost-Derived DC–DC–AC Converter: Mitigation of $2\omega$-
Ripple and Uncertainty, and Improvement in Dynamic Performance,"
in IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 4353-
4364, April 2020.
1035