See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/355198409

Efficiency optimization of double-sided LCC topology for inductive power

transfer systems

Conference Paper · July 2021

DOI: 10.1109/APEC42165.2021.9487207

CITATIONS READS
4 64

4 authors, including:

Binh Vu Ghanshyamsinh Gohil

Newcastle University University of Texas at Dallas
20 PUBLICATIONS 617 CITATIONS 70 PUBLICATIONS 1,074 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

High Power Density MV Converter View project

Wireless Dynamic Charging for Electric Vehicles View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Binh Vu on 13 October 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Efficiency optimization of double-sided LCC
topology for inductive power transfer systems
Van-Thuan Nguyen+ , Van-Binh Vu++ , Ghanshyamsinh Gohil∗ , Babak Fahimi+
+ The University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, TX, USA
++ Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
*Hitachi ABB Power Grids, Raleigh, NC, USA
Email: thuannv1988@gmail.com
Abstract—This paper presents an optimal design method of the
double-sided LCC (Inductor-capacitor-capacitor) compensation
network to achieve a high efficiency by optimizing compensation
factors of the primary and secondary circuit of an inductive
power transfer (IPT) system. Simulation and experimental results
show that with a proper selection of the compensation factors,
it is possible to achieve a high and sustained efficiency over a
wide load variation and misalignment. The double-sided LCC
topology is compared with the LCC-S (S: series) and LCC-
P (P: parallel) topology in terms of the transfer efficiency at
the operating frequency of 85kHz, transfer gap of 160mm and
misalignment up to 90mm. The result reveals that the designed
double-sided LCC topology is superior to its counterparts in
terms of transfer efficiency. A deep discussion of these topologies
is included to provide insights for all three topologies analyzed
in this paper.
Index Terms—Inductive power transfer, electric vehicles, com-
pensation topology, doubled-side LCC.
I. I NTRODUCTION
The double-sided LCC (or LCC-LCC) compensation topol-
ogy is widely adopted in EVs wireless power transfer in view
of its robustness to the coupling coefficient and load variations,
its inherent output voltage and current sources, and providing
additional degrees of freedom for the design criteria [1]–[5].
The double-sided LCC has a symmetrical structure where each
side includes an external inductor, a series capacitor, and a
parallel capacitor. Two compact external inductors are adopted
on both sides, where their inductances are normally smaller
than the wireless coilâs inductances. In general, the external
inductor and the parallel capacitor are designed to resonate at
the switching frequency, which results in a constant current on
the transmitter regardless of the load conditions. This helps to
simplify the control of the output voltage/power, especially for
the multiple-output applications [3]. Furthermore, the double-
sided LCC also easily supports the bidirectional vehicle-to-
grid ability (i.e. charging and discharging) as owning its
inherent symmetrical structure [6], [7].
Different design methods have been presented for the
double-sided LCC topology. In [8], passive components of
LCC-LCC topology were calculated based on the required
output voltage and current. In [2], [9], a comparison of
different matching networks was carried out, which shows
that LCC-LCC topology can have higher transfer efficiency,
compared to series-series (SS) and series-parallel (SP) under
conditions of large air gap (small mutual inductance M ) or
light load operation (high RL ). However, a clear explanation
based on an analytical foundation for this observation is still
missing. More importantly, the design procedure is still not
fully established for the double-sided LCC to achieve high
efficiency
In this research, a theoretical analysis of the LCC-LCC
topology is presented, which firstly establishes a general for-
mula of the transfer efficiency considering the coupling coils’
resistance. Compensation factors, ktx and krx , are defined for
the primary and secondary LCC network, respectively, which
relates between the value of passive components, the coil
inductance and operating frequency. By taking derivative of
the transfer efficiency with regard to the compensation factor
krx of the secondary LCC network, the optimal compensation
factor krx can be found. Simulation and experimental results
show that with a proper selection of compensation factor
krx on the secondary, the LCC-LCC circuit brings a high
and more stable transfer efficiencies than LCC-S and LCC-
P topology. Explanation of the transfer efficiency based on
reflected resistance and optimal load resistance are provided,
which gives insights about these three topologies.
In addition, this research reveals that although ktx has
no effect on the AC-AC efficiency between two coils, it
contributes to the inverter’s loss. In detail, the switching and
conduction losses can be reduced by selecting ktx at a low
value. PLECS simulations are carried out to calculate the
system transfer efficiency for different values of compensation
factor ktx .
Preliminary experiments are carried out for the designed
doubled-side LCC topology as well as LCC-S and LCC-P
topologies. The measurement is conducted under an air gap
of 160mm and 85kHz switching frequency of the primary
inverter. Resistive loads with resistance value between 20Ω
and 60Ω are selected for experiments. The experimental results
show that, when transferring 500W, the maximum AC-AC effi-
ciency of the LCC-LCC topology is 93.9% at 160mm transfer
gap and without misalignment. With 90mm misalignment, its
maximum efficiency drops to 89.9%.
This paper is organized as follows: Section II presents
basic features of the doubled-side LCC topology and the
definition of compensation factors, ktx and krx . Section III
establishes an analytical framework to derive the optimal
compensation factor krx on the secondary circuit. Section IV by defining a compensation factor krx , which satisfies below
compares the doubled-side LCC topology with LCC-S and equations:
LCC-P topology (with an identical primary LCC circuit) to
1
provide insights about their efficiency tendency based on their C2s = , L2B = (1 − krx )L2
krx ωo2 L2
reflected resistance and optimal load resistance. Afterwards, (2)
1
section V presents the selection of the primary compensation C2p = 2 (krx < 1)
factor ktx , showing that a small value of ktx can reduce the ωo L2B
switching loss and conduction loss of the primary inverter, Similarly, for the primary LCC network, a compensation
but with a cost of a higher input voltage required. Section factor ktx is defined to satisfy below equations:
VI provides preliminary experiment results, and section VII
concludes the paper. 1
C1s = , L1B = (1 − ktx )L1
ktx ωo2 L1
II. D EFINITION OF COMPENSATION FACTORS (3)
1
C1p = 2 (ktx < 1)
Fig. 1a shows an IPT system with the LCC-LCC topology, ωo L1B
an inverter and rectifier circuit. Fig. 1b shows the cascade of
T networks of the circuit in Fig. 1a (parasitic resistance R1 In (2) and (3), ktx and krx should be smaller than one
and R2 have been neglected for simplification). In Fig. 1a, because the bridge inductances should have positive values.
the IPT system is fed by a full bridge inverter with a square- However, they can be negative (ktx < 0, krx < 0). In this
wave input voltage VAB . LCC resonant circuits are utilized case, L1B > L1 , L2B > L2 , and we need to remove C1s ,
to create resonance for the primary and secondary coil. A C2s , add two additional inductors to the primary coil L1 and
full-bridge rectifier converts the ac voltage Vab to dc voltage the secondary coil L2 so that the resonant T networks can
VDC2 to feed to the load. RL0 is the load resistance. RL is be achieved at the operating frequency. However, in practice,
the equivalent resistance of the full-bridge rectifier and RL0 : doing so will cause a high volume and high ESR of the bridge
RL = 8RL0 /π 2 . L1B and L2B are called bridge inductors of inductors L1B and L2B . The method to optimize and select
LCC networks as they connect to the full-bridge inverter and the compensation factor will be discussed in next sections in
rectifier, respectively. The operating frequency of the system order to reduce the power loss of the transformer as well as
is at fo = 85 kHz. Components of the primary and secondary the input inverter.
LCC compensation networks are selected to satisfy [1], [9]:
III. O PTIMIZATION OF COMPENSATION FACTOR krx
1 1
ωo = p , and L1B = L1 − 2 In order to calculate the efficiency of the secondary circuit,
L1B C1p ωo C1s
(1) Fig. 2b simplifies the secondary LCC circuit and RL by C2eq
1 1 and RLeq , which can be calculated by:
ωo = p , and L2B = L2 − 2
L2B C2p ωo C2s
1
If the inductance and capacitance values of the LCC net- RLeq + =
jωo C2eq
works satisfy (1), C1p will resonate with both L1B and (L1 (4)
1 (jωo L2B + RL )1/(jωo C2p )
+ C1s ) at the operating frequency ωo . Similarly, C2p also = +
resonates with both L2B and (L2 + C2s ) at the operating jωo C2s jωo L2B + RL + 1/(jωo C2p )
frequency ωo . At this condition, the T model convert its input which results in below equations:
voltage source to output current source and vise versa [10].
As can be seen in Fig. 1b, at the resonant frequency of ωo , C2s C2p 1 ωo2 L22B
C2eq = = 2 ; RLeq = (5)
the input voltage source VAB generates a constant current I1 C2s + C2p ωo L2 RL
on the primary coil, which is the output of the T network 1.
From (5), C2eq and L2 fully resonate to each other at
The constant current I1 induces a constant voltage Vind2 on
the operating frequency ωo , therefore, the impedance of the
the secondary coil, which is the output of the T network 2.
secondary circuit is purely resistive at this frequency. The
Similar to the T network 1, the T network 3 creates a constant
efficiency of the secondary circuit can be calculated as:
output current Iab , feeding to the rectifier and the load. As a
result, at the resonant frequency wo , the LCC-LCC network
has a characteristic of output constant current (CC), which is RLeq ω 2 L2
ηRx−LCC = = 2 2 o 2B (6)
preferred for battery charging of electric vehicles or mobile RLeq + R2 ωo L2B + R2 RL
devices.
In order to calculate the efficiency of the primary circuit, the
Fig. 2a shows the equivalent circuit of the IPT system shown
secondary circuit can be equally represented on the primary
in Fig. 1a. Because the IPT system with LCC-LCC topology
circuit by a reflected impedance Z1ref as shown in Fig. 2c,
is a high-order filter, which makes coil currents sinusoidal,
which satisfy [11]:
first-harmonic approximation (FHA) is applied to analyze the
circuit. Since the LCC network is selected for the secondary ωo2 M 2 ωo2 M 2 RL
circuit, we have a freedom to determine its passive components Z1ref = = (7)
R2 + RLeq R2 RL + ωo2 L22B
 T network 1 T network 2 T network 3
+ +
S1 S3
D1 D3 L1B C1s L1 -M -M L2 C2s L2B
L1B C1s I1 M I2 C2s L2B A a
A
+
k a +
Co RL0 VAB C1p M C2p Vab
VDC1 C1p C2p Vab VDC2
VAB L1 L2
IAB I1 I2 Iab
- B IAB R1 R2 Iab b - B b

S2 S4 Primary Secondary D2 D4
- I1 Iab
- LCC LCC VAB Vind2

(a) (b)
Figure 1: (a) IPT system with LCC-LCC topology; (b) Cascaded T model of IPT system with LCC-LCC topology shows the
conversion from a constant voltage source to a constant current source, and vise versa, inside the circuit at resonant frequency.

IAB L1B I1 C C2s I2 L2B Iab IAB L1B I1 C1s I2 C2eq IAB L1B I1 C1s
1s M M L1
L2
VAB C L1 1p C2p RL VAB C1p L1 L2 RLeq VAB C1p
RLeq + 1/ Z1ref
R1 R2 (jȦC2eq) R1 R2 R1

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 2: (a) Equivalent circuit of Fig. 1a for efficiency calculation; (b) Simplify Rx circuit with RLeq and C2eq ; (c) Equivalently
represent the Rx circuit on the Tx by Z1ref .

The efficiency of the primary circuit can be calculated as: From (12), the optimal value of compensation factor krxopt
re(Z1ref ) depends on three parameters based on operating points: ωo , M ,
ηT x−LCC = and RL . Therefore, the optimal compensation factor krxopt
re(Z1ref ) + R1
(8) varies with the misalignment between the transmitting and
ωo2 M 2 RL receiving coil, and also with the load resistance RL .
= 2 2
ωo M RL + R1 (ωo2 L22B + R2 RL ) Fig. 3a shows the variation of the optimal secondary
Finally, the efficiency of the IPT system with LCC-LCC compensation factor krxopt against the coupling coefficient k
matching network can be calculated as: and load resistance RL . As can be seen, when the coupling
coefficient and the load change, the optimal compensation
ηLCC = ηT x−LCC ηRx−LCC factor varies significantly. Therefore, during the design pro-
cess, one need to select a proper value of krx taking into
D1 L22B (9)
= the account of misalignment and load resistance variation.
D2 L42B + D3 L22B + D4 Fig. 3b shows the calculated AC-AC transfer efficiency when
with the secondary compensation factor is selected following (12).
Since, the equivalent capacitance C2eq in Fig. 2b resonates
D1 = M 2 ωo4 RL , D2 = R1 ωo4
with the secondary coil’s inductance L2 , the optimal efficiency
D3 = 2R1 R2 RL ωo + M 2 ωo4 RL
2
(10) is independent of load resistance.
D4 = R1 R22 RL
2
+ ωo2 M 2 R2 RL
2
Since the operating point of an IPT system for battery
A. Optimization of compensation factor krx charger varies dynamically depending on the state-of-charge
(SoC) of battery and misalignment, keep tracking of krxopt for
In order to find an optimal value of compensation factor
the secondary circuit seems not feasible. Therefore, in practice,
krx for a maximal efficiency, derivation of ηLCC with regard
a fixed value of krx is selected, which needs to achieve a high
to L2B is proceeded, which results:
efficiency over a full charging process of the IPT system and
dηLCC −2D2 L52B + 2D4 L2B a certain range of misalignment. Therefore, the calculation of
= D1 (11)
dL2B (D2 L42B + D3 L22B + D4 )2 transfer efficiency vs. variation of compensation factor krx at
different values of coupling coefficient and load resistance is
In order to achieve a maximal efficiency, dηLCC /dL2B = 0
necessary.
(L2B 6= 0), we have:
Fig. 4a and Fig. 4b shows the simulated efficiency of the
r s wireless coils (AC-AC efficiency) when the compensation
D4 R1 R22 RL
2 + ω 2 M 2 R R2
o 2 L factor krx varies in two cases : (a) transfer gap = 50mm or
L2Bopt = 4
= 4
D2 R1 ωo4 (12) coupling coefficient k = 0.6; (b) transfer gap = 150mm or
L2Bopt coupling factor k = 0.2. These two coupling coefficients k
krxopt =1− are selected as they represent for a low and high transfer gap.
L2
 order to have a high transfer efficiency, the compensation
factor krx should not be over 0.6.
2) The optimal compensation factor krxopt is selected based
on a trade-off between the efficiency on the primary and
secondary circuit (ηRx−LCC and ηT x−LCC ). From (6), in
order to have a high efficiency on the secondary circuit,
the compensation factor krx should be small so that the
(a) bridge inductance L2B is high, and the equivalent load
resistance RLeq will be high and dominates over the
secondary coil’s resistance R2 . However, a high value of
L2B reduces the transfer efficiency of the primary circuit
ηT x−LCC since it reduces the reflected impedance Z1ref
in (7). This issue is more clear at low mutual inductance
and small load resistance, where the reflected impedance
Z1ref can be very small if the compensation factor krx
is selected to be small enough (the Red curve in Fig. 4b).
(b)
B. Optimal load resistance of LCC-LCC topology
Figure 3: (a) Optimal compensation factor krxopt vs. coupling
coefficient k and load resistance RL . krxopt < 0 means L2B Finding the optimal load resistance is critical in designing
> L2 ; (b) Calculated maximum transfer efficiency at krxopt of an IPT system as it relates to the control strategy designed
LCC-LCC topology. The maximum efficiency is independent for the system. The optimal load impedance of the LCC-LCC
of load resistance. topology needs to satisfy equation dηLCC /dLRL = 0, which
results in:
Coupling coefficient k = 0.6 ω 2 L22B
RLopt,LCC = (13)
Efficiency (%)

100 p
R2 1 + k 2 Q1 Q2
50 RL = 20 where Q1 , Q2 are the unloaded quality factors of the primary
RL = 60
and the secondary coil, respectively: Q1 = ωL1 /R1 , Q2 =
RL = 100
0 ωL2 /R2 . From (13), we can use the bridge inductance L2B
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Compensation factor, krx
(or krx ) to adjust the optimal load resistance such as it is well
within the variation of the load impedance RL during charging
(a)
process, resulting a high transfer efficiency.
Coupling coefficient k = 0.2
Fig. 5 illustrates the optimal load resistance of the LCC-
Efficiency (%)

100
LCC topology when the coupling coefficient k varies between
50 RL = 20 0.2 (transfer gap = 150mm) and 0.6 (transfer gap = 50mm).
RL = 60 The range of load resistance RL is between 20Ω and 100Ω.
RL = 100
0 Two values of compensation factor krx is selected for demon-
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
stration, namely krx = 0.1 and krx = 0.4. Based on the position
Compensation factor, krx
of the optimal load resistance relative to its operating range,
(b) the following point can be drawn from Fig. 5: Based on the
mutual inductance available to the IPT system, we can select
Figure 4: Simulated transfer efficiency vs. compensation factor
a suitable compensation factor krx (or L2B ), such as the load
krx of LCC-LCC topology: (a) Transfer gap = 50mm; (b)
resistance is close to the optimal value during the charging
Transfer gap = 150mm.
process in order to achieve a high transfer efficiency.

IV. E FFICIENCY COMPARISON WITH S ERIES - AND

Three values of load resistance RL are selected, namely 20Ω,
60Ω, and 100Ω. Several key takeaways can be obtained as
below:
1) With a high compensation factor, e.g., krx > 0.80, the
transfer efficiency is low, regardless of the coupling
coefficient. This can be explained from (5). With a high
krx , L2B = (1 − krx ) is small, leading to a small
value of load equivalent resistance RLeq = ωo2 L22B /RL ,
and causing a low efficiency on the secondary circuit
ηRx−LCC , consequently. From Fig. 4a and Fig. 4b, in
PARALLEL - CONNECTED SECONDARY
In order to have a better understanding of the proposed
optimization for the compensation factor krx of the double-
sided LCC topology, the AC-AC transfer efficiency of a series-
and parallel- connected secondary compensation circuit, as
illustrated in Fig. 6a and Fig. 6b, respectively, are calculated
and compared with that of the LCC-LCC topology. This anal-
ysis assumes that the matching networks are lossless, which
means that the selection of primary matching network will not
affect on the transfer efficiency of the coupled coils (or AC-AC
 - LCC-S LCC-P LCC-LCC
RLeq RL 1/(1 + ω 2 Cs2 RL
2
) ω 2 L22B /RL

Re(Z1ref ) ω 2 M 2 /RL ≈ M 2 RL /L22 M 2 RL /L22B

p p p
RL,opt R2 1 + k 2 Q1 Q2 ≈ (ωL2 /M ) (R1 L22 + M 2 R2 )/R2 ω 2 L22B /(R2 1 + k 2 Q1 Q2 )

Table I: Formulation of Z1ref and RLopt of three topologies

Coupling coefficient k = 0.6

99
LCC-LCC (krx = 0.1)
100 LCC-P

Efficiency (%)
98
LCC-LCC (krx = 0.4)
RLopt, (Ohm)

RL = 20 -100 97
S - Sec.
50 P - Sec.
96
LCC - Sec. (krx = 0.1)
LCC - Sec. (krx = 0.32)
20 95
LCC-S 20 40 60 80 100
0 Load resistance RL, (Ohm)
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Coupling coefficient, k (a)
Coupling coefficient k = 0.2
Figure 5: Optimal load resistance of different topologies: LCC- 100
LCC with krx = 0.1, LCC-LCC with krx = 0.4, LCC-S and
Efficiency (%)
LCC-P. 90

S - Sec.
80
P - Sec.
I2 C2 I2 LCC - Sec. (krx = 0.1)
M M 70 LCC - Sec. (krx = 0.32)
20 40 60 80 100
L1 L2 RL L1 L2 C2 RL Load resistance RL, (Ohm)

R2 (b)
R1 R1 R2
Figure 7: Simulated transfer efficiency of three topologies at
(a) (b)
two different transfer gap: (a) transfer gap = 50mm or coupling
Figure 6: (a) Series-connected secondary. (b) Parallel- coefficient k = 0.6; (b) transfer gap = 150mm or coupling
connected secondary. coefficient k = 0.2.

efficiency). In order to operate at resonance, the capacitor on

the secondary of the series- and parallel-connected secondary RL
is calculated by C2 = 1/ω 2 L2 . ZLeq−P = (C2 //R2 ) =
1 + jωC2 RL
The calculation procedure of transfer efficiency for the (16)
ω2 M 2
LCC-LCC topology is adopted for the series- and parallel- Z1ref −P =
connected secondary. Specifically, the transfer efficiency of jωL2 + R2 + ZLeq−P
the series-connected secondary is calculated by: Fig. 7 shows the transfer efficiency of the three topologies
at different transfer gaps. Several conclusions can be made
RL real(Z1ref −S )
ηS = from Fig. 7: (1) Efficiency with series-connected secondary
RL + RS real(Z1ref −S ) + R1 drops quickly as the load resistance increases, especially at
(14)
RL ω2 M 2 low coupling condition (k = 0.2); (2) Efficiency of parallel-
=
RL + RS ω 2 M 2 + R1 (RL + R2 ) connected secondary is low at small load resistance, however,
it overcomes the efficiency of other topologies at high load
Similarly, the transfer efficiency of the parallel-connected
resistance (e.g., from RL > 60Ω); (3) The efficiency of
secondary is calculated by:
LCC-LCC topology can be stable over a wide range of load
real(ZLeq−P ) real(Z1ref −P ) resistance if the compensation factor krx is selected properly:
ηP = (15) when the coupling coefficient k is high (k = 0.6), krx should
real(ZLeq−P ) + R2 real(Z1ref −P ) + R1
be small (e.g., krx = 0.1). When the coupling coefficient k
with is small (k = 0.2), krx should be higher (e.g., krx = 0.4).
This conclusion of LCC-LCC topology agrees well with the
analysis result shown in Fig. 3a. Rdson R1B L1B I1 C1s Rdson R1B
IAB L1 IAB
To explain the trend of transfer efficiency of these three VAB R1eq C1p VAB R1eq
topologies, Table. I illustrates the analytical formulae for the Z1ref
optimal load resistance and real part of reflected impedance R1
Z1ref for each topology. The variation of the optimal load
resistance of series- and parallel-connected topology versus (a) (b)
the coupling coefficient k are shown in Fig. 5 together with
that of LCC-LCC topology. From Table. I and Fig. 5, we can Figure 8: (a) Equivalent circuit of the primary LCC circuit with
predict the transfer efficiency when the load resistance RL is on-state resistance of Mosfet Rdson and ESR of the bridge
in between 20Ω and 100Ω as below: inductor R1B ; (a) Simplified circuit with R1eq representing
for the primary LCC matching network and inductor L1 .
1) For series-connected secondary: From Table. 1, the re-
flected resistance real(Z1ref ) is proportional to M 2 and

Efficiency (%)
96
inversely proportional to load resistance RL . Therefore,

VDC1 (V)
200
at a low coupling coefficient (i.e. k = 0.2), and at 94
high RL , the reflected resistance is small, leading to a 100
significant portion of power loss on the primary coil, 92 0
and a significant degradation of the transfer efficiency, 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0
consequently. The low efficiency of the series-connected Compensation factor ktx
secondary can also be explained by the optimal load (a)
resistance as shown in Fig. 5. As can be seen, the optimal
VAB/5

VAB/5, IAB
load resistance of the LCC-S is below the load range, 20

resulting a low efficiency, and the transfer efficiency will 0

IAB
further decease when the load resistance increases. At -20
a high coupling coefficient (i.e. k = 0.6), the transfer 0.08434 0.08436 0.08438
efficiency is higher since the optimal load resistance Time (s)
approaches its operating range. However, the transfer (b)
efficiency will gradually reduce when the load resistance
RL increases since it further and further deviates from Vab/5
Vab/5, Iab

20
the optimal load resistance. 0
2) For parallel-connected secondary: The transfer efficiency -20
Iab

is high in the above load range since its optimal load

0.08434 0.08436 0.08438
resistance is well within the load range. However, at Time (s)
low coupling coefficient, the load resistance is high and
outside of the load resistance range, causing a drop on (c)
the transfer efficiency.
Figure 9: PLECS simulated results with Mosfet
3) For LCC-LCC topology: Table.I shows that the optimal
C3M0060065K (650V/37A, Rdson = 79mΩ) and load
load resistance and the Re(Z1ref ) of LCC-LCC topology
resistance RL = 50Ω: (a) DC-DC efficiency (red) and
contains the inductance L2B , which is served as an addi-
required input voltage VDC1 (blue) vs. compensation factor
tional degree of freedom for the efficiency optimization.
ktx ; (b) Input voltage VAB (red) and input current IAB (blue);
With a proper design of L2B , the optimal load resistance
(c) Output voltage Vab (red) and output current Iab (blue).
of the LCC-LCC topology can be controlled to be within
the operation range of load resistance, resulting a high
efficiency over the entire range of load and misalignment.
From Fig. 8, in order to have a high efficiency for the
inverter, a high value of R1eq is required, which makes
V. S ELECTION OF COMPENSATION FACTOR ktx
it dominate over Rdson and R1B and help to reduce the
Fig. 8 shows an equivalent circuit of the primary side and conduction loss of the switches. This can be achieved by
its simplified form at the resonant frequency, where Rdson and selecting a high value of L1B . Based on Fig. 1b, the output
R1B reflects the on-state resistance of the Power MOSFET or current Iab on the secondary can be calculated by following
IGBT of the inverter and the internal resistance of the bridge equations:
inductor L1B , respectively. The equivalent resistance R1eq can
be calculated by [11]: V̇AB M
I˙1 = ; V̇ind2 = jωo M I˙1 = V̇AB
jωo L1B L1B
(18)
ω02 L21B V̇ind2 M V̇AB
R1eq = (17) I˙ab = =
Z1ref + R1 jωo L2B jωo L1B L2B
 When the required output current Iab,rms is given, the
primary bridge inductor can be calculated by; 100 LCC-LCC

Efficiency (%)
M VAB,rms L1B 80
L1B = ; ktx = 1 − (19)
ωo L2B Iab,rms L1
60 LCC-P
Based on (19), the primary bridge inductor L1B (and its
compensation factor ktx ) is selected to achieve the required
secondary current Iab,rms . In DC-DC converter systems, it
40 LCC-S RL (Ohm)
is feasible to adjust the DC link voltage, and VAB,rms , con- 20 30 40 50
sequently, for example by means of a power-factor-correction
(PFC) circuit. Therefore, the bridge inductance L1B should be (a)
selected according to the maximum available DC link voltage
for a given output current Iab,rms . Physically explaining,
because the LCC-LCC can achieve zero-phase angle (ZPA)
for a wide range of load RL and coupling coefficient k [11],
with a fixed output power, when we raise the input voltage
to VAB,rms,max , the output current IAB,rms will reduce, and
the conduction loss and switching loss of the inverter reduce
accordingly. Hence, we have:
M VAB,rms,max L1B
L1B = ; ktx = 1 − (20)
ωo L2B Iab,rms L1
Fig. 9 shows the system efficiency (DC-DC efficiency) when
varying the compensation factor ktx of the primary. Mosfet
C3M0060065K (650V/37A, Rdson = 79mΩ) is selected for
PLECS simulations since it is used for the measurement later
on. As can be seen, when the compensation factor ktx reduces (b)
from 0.78 to 0.57, the system efficiency increases significantly
(roughly 2.7%). Further reducing ktx does not increase the
efficiency much since the inverter’s current is already small,
and the inverter’s loss is small compared to other losses in the
system. Fig. 9 also shows the voltage and current waveforms
at the input and output of the system.

VI. E XPERIMENTAL RESULTS

An experimental setup is established in order to verify the
theory. Three different compensation topologies are designed,
namely LCC-LCC, LCC-S and LCC-P. The primary LCC
circuit is identical for the three topologies. The compensation
factor krx of the secondary LCC circuit is 0.5 in order to have
a high efficiency over the entire range of load resistance. The
secondary capacitor for the LCC-S and LCC-P is calculated
by C2 = 1/ω 2 L2 . A maximum power of 500W is transferred
between two coils.
Fig. 10b and Fig. 10c shows the experimental waveforms
and setup, respectively. The primary and secondary coil’s
parameters are: L1 = 36µH, R1 = 0.07Ω, L2 = 37µH, R2
= 0.06Ω. GaN transistor LMG5200s (80V/10A) is utilized
to make a full-bridge inverter on the primary. The transfer
gap is fixed at G = 160mm. Two positions of the Rx coil
are evaluated: (1) Without misalignment; (2) With 90mm
misalignment. Fig. 10a shows the measured efficiency between
the wireless coils (AC-AC efficiency). As can be seen, in both
cases of misalignment, the transfer efficiency of the LCC-
LCC topology is high and stable over the entire load and
misalignment range. In contrast, an opposite trend is seen
(c)
Figure 10: (a) Measured transfer efficiency (AC-AC effi-
ciency): Solid line - Without misalignment; Dash line - With
90mm misalignment.(b) Waveforms of input voltage VS , input
current IS , and load current IL with LCC-LCC topology: ZVS
operation is achieved; (c) Experimental setup with LCC-LCC
topology. Transfer gap G = 160mm.
for the LCC-S and LCC-P topology. The maximum measured
efficiency of LCC-LCC topology is 93.9% at 160mm transfer
gap and without misalignment. With 90mm misalignment, its
maximum efficiency drops to 89.9%.
VII. C ONCLUSION
In this paper, a novel design method for optimal efficiency
of the double-sided LCC topology is presented by introducing
compensation factors for the primary and secondary LCC
circuit. This research shows that selecting a proper compen-
sation factor krx on the secondary of LCC-LCC network is
paramount in order to reduce the power loss on the wireless
coils. This is especially important when designing LCC-LCC
network for low mutual inductance and high load resistance
applications. In addition. a low value of the primary compen-
sation factor ktx will reduce the power loss associated with
the primary inverter, however, at the cost of a higher input
voltage required.
R EFERENCES
[1] M. Park, V. T. Nguyen, S. Yu, S. Yim, K. Park, B. D. Min, S. Kim,
and J. G. Cho, “A study of wireless power transfer topologies for 3.3
kw and 6.6 kw electric vehicle charging infrastructure,” in 2016 IEEE
Transportation Electrification Conference and Expo, Asia-Pacific (ITEC
Asia-Pacific), pp. 689–692, 2016.
[2] W. Li, H. Zhao, J. Deng, S. Li, and C. C. Mi, “Comparison study on
ss and double-sided lcc compensation topologies for ev/phev wireless
chargers,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 65, no. 6,
pp. 4429–4439, 2016.
[3] B. Esteban, M. Sid-Ahmed, and N. C. Kar, “A comparative study of
power supply architectures in wireless ev charging systems,” IEEE
Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 30, no. 11, pp. 6408–6422,
2015.
[4] M. Mohammad, S. Anwar, O. Onar, J. Pries, V. P. Galigekere, E. Asa,
G. Su, and J. Wilkins, “Sensitivity analysis of an lcc-lcc compensated 20-
kw bidirectional wireless charging system for medium-duty vehicles,” in
2019 IEEE Transportation Electrification Conference and Expo (ITEC),
pp. 1–7, 2019.
[5] C. R. Teeneti, U. Pratik, A. Azad, R. Tavakoli, C. Bodine, R. Zane,
and Z. Pantic, “1-kw wireless charger for power wheelchairs,” in 2020
IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition (APEC),
pp. 1641–1648, 2020.
View publication stats
[6] M. Mohammad, O. C. Onar, G. J. Su, J. Pries, V. P. Galigekere,
S. Anwar, E. Asa, J. Wilkins, R. Wiles, C. P. White, and L. E. Seiber,
“Bidirectional lcc-lcc compensated 20 kw wireless power transfer system
for medium-duty vehicle charging,” IEEE Transactions on Transporta-
tion Electrification, pp. 1–1, 2021.
[7] L. Zhao, D. J. Thrimawithana, and U. K. Madawala, “Hybrid bidirec-
tional wireless ev charging system tolerant to pad misalignment,” IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 64, no. 9, pp. 7079–7086,
2017.
[8] V. Vu, D. Tran, and W. Choi, “Implementation of the constant current
and constant voltage charge of inductive power transfer systems with
the double-sided lcc compensation topology for electric vehicle battery
charge applications,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 33,
no. 9, pp. 7398–7410, 2018.
[9] V. T. Nguyen, S. Yu, S. Yim, and K. Park, “Optimizing compensation
topologies for inductive power transfer at different mutual inductances,”
in 2017 IEEE PELS Workshop on Emerging Technologies: Wireless
Power Transfer (WoW), pp. 153–156, 2017.
[10] L. Yang, X. Li, S. Liu, Z. Xu, and C. Cai, “Analysis and design of an
lccc/s-compensated wpt system with constant output characteristics for
battery charging applications,” IEEE Journal of Emerging and Selected
Topics in Power Electronics, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 1169–1180, 2021.
[11] N. A. Keeling, G. A. Covic, and J. T. Boys, “A unity-power-factor ipt
pickup for high-power applications,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Electronics, vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 744–751, 2010.