Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 7

1

A New Low-Stress Buck-Boost Converter for Universal-InputPFC Applications

Jingquan Chen, Dragan MaksimoviC and Robert Erickson


Colorado Power Electronics Center Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering University of Colorado at Boulder Boulder, CO 80309-0425, USA

Abstract - In converters for power-factor-correction (PFC), universal-input capability (ability to operate from any AC l i e voltage, world-wide) comes with a heavy price in terms of component stresses and losses, size of components, and restrictions on the output DC voltage. A new two-switch topology is proposed to offer very significant performance improvements over the single-switch buck-boost converters (including flyback, SEPIC, and Cuk topologies) and conventional two-switch buck-boost cascaded converters. The proposed converter has buck-boost conversion characteristic, switch conduction losses comparable to the boost converter, no inrush current problem, and potential for smaller inductor size compared to the boost converter.

I.

INTRODUCTION
b) Fig. 1. Cascaded two-switch buck-boost topologies: a) boost-buckcascaded, b) buck-boost-cascaded
Q2

It is well known that boost topology is highly effective in PFC applications, provided that the dc output voltage is close to, but slightly greater than the peak AC input voltage [l].In universal-input applications, with the R M S input line voltage in the 90-305V range, the output voltage has to be set to about 450V. At low line (90V,), the switch conduction losses are high because the input RMS current has the largest value, and the largest step-up conversion is required. The inductor has to be oversized for large RMS current at low line input, and for the highest volt-seconds applied throughout the input-line range. As a result, a boost converter designed for universal-input PFC applications is heavily oversized compared to a converter designed for a narrow range of input line voltages. Furthermore, because of the large energy storage filter capacitor at the output, the boost converter has inrush current problem that can only be mitigated using additional components. In universal-input PFC applications, the capability of providing both step-up and step-down conversion is attractive because the output DC voltage can be set to any value. However, conventional single-switch buck-boost topologies, including the plain buck-boost, flyback, SEPIC, and Cuk converters [2, 31 have greatly increased component stresses, component sizes, and reduced efficiency compared to the boost converter.

IR0+ T

II

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

The boost and the buck converter are known to have the potentials for highest efficiency and lowest component stresses if their conversion characteristics meet the inputloutput specifications. Based on this observation, our objective was to construct a converter topology with two independently controllabe switches such that it can operate as a buck or as a boost in portions of the AC line cycle. Such two-switch topologies could offer higher efficiency, reduced size, and ability to arbitrarily choose the DC output voltage.

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

0-7803-6618-2/01/$10.00 0 2001 IEEE

343

TABLE I
BASIC FUNTIONS IN BOOST AND BUCK MODES

Boost Mode active 1/(1- d , )


ILI

Buck Mode active

dl --v

1 - d , R,

1L2

Vrr

VIR, 0

VIR,

v, -v

II. OPERATING MODES AND STEADY-STATE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE BOOST INTERLEAVED BUCK-BOOST CONVERTER
The proposed Boost-Interleaved Buck-Boost (BoIBB) converter is shown in Fig. 2. Unlike the cascaded topologies, the boost switch cell (Qjand Dj) interleaved with the buck is switch cell (Q2 and Dz).In continuous conduction mode (CCM), the converter has the following overall voltage conversion ratio:

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

Two simple examples illustrated in Fig. 1 (a) and (b) are the conventional cascade connections of the buck and the boost converters [4,51. These converters can operate as a boost when Qzis always on, and as a buck when Q,is always off. In continuous conduction mode, the overall voltage conversion ratio is:

where d , and dz are the duty ratios of Ql and Q respectively. z We have found that other two-switch topologies with buckboost characteristic are possible by adopting the converter synthesis approach described in [6].One of these new DCDC converters is the Boost Interleaved Buck-Boost (BoIBB) converter shown in Fig. 2. Operating modes and basic steady-state characteristics of this converter are described in Section II. Operation of the BoIBB converter as a low-harmonic rectifier is discussed in Section III. The results for transistor and inductor conduction losses are derived in this section. Comparisons in terms of component stresses, component conduction losses and magnetic sizes among the new two-switch topology and boost, single-switch buck-boost, and cascade connections of buck and boost Section V describes a converters are presented in Section N. prototype of the new converter operating as a PFC rectifier with universal-line input. Experimental results are provided for both high-line and low-line input.

If Q is always on, the converter operates in boost mode, z I which is shown in Fig. 3(a). The average voltage on C is zero. In this mode, the input current is divided through L1 and L2. As a result, the total RMS current in LI and LZ is smaller than the current in a single inductor. If Q is always off, the converter operates in the buck mode l as shown in Fig. 3(b). LI and C form a low-frequency filter. I The average current through LI and CI zero and the voltage is on CI is equal to the difference between the input and the output voltage. The inductor Lz in the buck mode takes the same role as the inductor in the simple buck converter. The basic steady-state results for both modes of operation are summarized in TABLE I.

III. OPERATION OF THE BOIBB CONVERTER AS AN

IDEAL RECTIFIER
In this section, we analyze operation of the BoIBB converter as a low-harmonic rectifier. Expressions for RMS currents of both transistors and inductors, and volt-seconds of inductors are derived so that conduction losses and magnetic sizes can be evaluated. In PFC applications; the rectified input voltage is:

344

It is desired that the output voltage is regulated at a constant voltage V and that the input current is(t) is proportional to the input voltage:
i,

vg(o

(r) =vg

0)

Re

(4)
I

where the emulated resistance Re is constant for a given output power. Fig. 4(a) shows the waveforms of the input and the output voltage in one half of a line period, for the case when the output voltage is chosen to be lower than the peak of the input voltage. The converter operates in boost or buck modes according to the condition of the input and the output DC voltage. In the following analysis, CCM operation is assumed.
A. Boostmode

t -*

Boost

Buck

Boost

In the time period [O, r,,,], shown in Fig. 4, the input voltage 0,) is lower than the output voltage, the boost switch cell is active, and the buck cell D2) is inactive (Qz is always on). In quasi steady-state operation, the duty ratios of the transistors as functions of time are:

(e2,

(e,,

Fig. 4. (a) Rectified input voltage and DC output voltage waveform, (b) duty ratios of the boost and the buck cells in the BoIBB converter operated as a low-harmonic rectifier.

(5)
d2(t)=1

The volt-seconds applied to L, and L2 during a switching period are the same as the volt-seconds applied to the inductor in a simple boost converter, and are given by v .s = d , (t)T, .v, (Z)
(9)

The average inductor currents are: where T, is the switching period. B. Buckmode

When Q, is conducting, its current is the sum of the two inductors current. In the buck mode, Q, is always off, and the current through L, equals to a small current ripple. Therefore, the RMS currents of Q,and L, are found from (5) and (6) in the boost mode. The results are given by (7) and (8) respectively:

In the time period [t, TaJ4],where To, is the line period, the instantaneous input voltage is greater than the output voltage, the buck cell becomes active and the boost cell goes inactive (Ql is always off). Ll and C, form a low frequency filter between the input and the output. They have insignificant effects in quasi steady-state operation. can The duty ratios of Ql and Q2 be expressed as:

The inductor currents are:

ih

(t)=

V; sin (wt ) VRe

345

TABLE I1
COMPONENT RMS CURRENT AT LOW LINE AND HIGH LINE Vi,,(V) 120
240
IQI.-(A) IQZ,-(A) Gi,dA)

0.22

0.417 0.245

0.032

0.25 0.076

Lz,~(A) 0.306

0.306
VO(W

150

200

250

3w

325

3y)

450

(a)
35i

Inductor(s) Conductlon Losses Compared to Bwst Converter

-+8clBB

3-

QI
Boost
.

Q2

DI V O vM+ v o

D 2

2.5

V O VM+V*

Single-switch buck-boost Buck-boost-cascaded Boost-buck-cascaded BoIBB

v o
V M V M

V M V M V M

v o

V M V M V M

v o
vo

l;im",
1.5,
,

2-

1%

2M

250

3w

325

350

400

450

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

The duty ratios of Ql and Q2 during one half of a line cycle are plotted in Fig. 4(b). The transitions between the boost and buck modes are continuous. Both Q2 and L2 are conducting currents in both boost and buck modes, and the RMS currents are found from (S),(6). and (1 1):

The volt-seconds applied to L1 are close to zero in the buck


mode.

As an example, the component RMS currents are evaluated and shown in TABLE 1 for two different lines. 1
IV. PERFORMANCE COMPARISONS In this section, the BoIBB converter is compared to the boost, the single-switch buck-boost, and cascaded buck-boost topologies in terms of switch voltage stresses, conduction losses, and size of magnetics. All results are obtained under the assumption that the converters operate in continuous conduction mode (CCM).

A. Switch voltage stresses


(13) Ro in (13) is the load resistance. The volt-seconds applied to Lz during a switching period are the same as those on the inductor of a simple buck converter: The comparison of worst-case switch voltage stresses is summarized in Table II. The output voltage V, in the boost converter must be greater than the maximum peak input voltage V,, while in all buck-boost converters, the output voltage can be arbitrarily set to any value. All two-switch topologies, including the BoIBB converter, have lower voltage stresses than the single-switch buck-boost converters,

346

'
looo12,

V .

o.WD2
Rdul

0 0
05

1.5

2.5

05

1.5

2.5

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

and have almost the same voltage. stress as the boost converter (at the expense of more switching devices).

voltage, the loss can be as low as 50% of the inductor conduction loss in the boost converter. 2. Volt-seconds applied to the inductors

B. Transistor conduction losses


In this comparison, we assume that all devices have the same on-resistance, and so we compare the total transistor RMS currents defined as the sum of the squares of the individual transistor RMS currents. In practice, for the same die size, the on-resistance for the transistor in single-switch buck-boost converters would be higher because of the higher voltage rating. The worst case for switch conduction losses occurs at the minimum ac line input (90Vrms). Switch conduction losses for all buck-boost topologies are found as functions of the DC output voltage and normalized to the switch conduction losses in a boost converter operating with fixed DC output voltage equal to 450V. The results are shown in Fig. 5(a). The proposed converter and the boostbuck-cascaded converter have the total transistor conduction losses very close to the boost converter, and much smaller losses than in the single-switch buck-boost or the buck-boostcascaded converters. For example, at 300V output, the transistor conduction losses in the single-switch buck-boost converter and the buck-boost-cascaded converter are 1.78 and 2.15 times of the transistor conduction losses in the new topology.

The volt-seconds applied to the inductor in the singleswitch buck-boost converters are given by (15). For a twoswitch buck-boost converter, an inductor can play the role as part of a low-frequency filter in one of the modes. In this case, the volt-seconds applied during a switching cycle are almost zero. When the input voltage is lower than the output voltage, the inductor operates as in a boost converter and the volt-seconds applied follow from (9). When the input voltage is greater than the output voltage, the inductor operates as in a buck converter, and the volt-seconds applied follow from
(14).

W , (sinw tl
v * s=

v t V , (sin(wt>l =s
*

The total volt-seconds applied to the inductors for the boost, single-switch buck-boost and two-switch buck-boost converters are plotted in Fig 6 . as functions of time over one half of the line cycle. Three curves are shown, based on different rms input voltages and for a fixed switching
0 2

C. Comparison of magnetics
Worst-case inductor copper losses and volt-seconds applied to inductors are two factors that determine the inductor size. 1. Inductor conduction losses The worst-case inductor copper loss also occurs at the minimum AC line input. The results for copper losses as functions of the dc output voltage, normalized to the copper losses in the boost converter with fixed V, = 450V, are shown in Fig. 5(b). Again, the same resistance is assumed for all inductors, so that total RMS currents are compared. The new converter has significantly lower losses than the other buckboost topologies; and by proper selection of the output DC

L,

D,

347

Tek Run: lO.OkS/s

r"~'~""""""""''i""""""""'"'"''I

t----r----f-)---+

HI Res

Fig. 8. (a) Duty ratios as functions of Vamm,, Vc0,,,Jr) in half line (b) cycle

t, . . .

. . . , I . . '&2.
5OOmVC

'loo

f.

#.,

. m;

, ,

., . .. .
I

d6p1

(b)
Fig. 9. Rectified input voltage and control voltage Vcm,d:
Ms.ooms

cnh

4om

(a) l20Vrms low-line input, (b) 240Vrms high-line input.

Ch2: lOOV/div, Ch3: SOOmV/div


Tek Run: lO.OkS/s

HI Res

(a)

0.818, 0.848 .
0.944 -

0,942 0.81 -

0.938 . 0.038 0.034

.
1

0.m4

. .

. .

. .
.

. .
.

. .

. .

. .

. .

0.m 1

(b)
Fig. 10. Rectified input voltage and input line current: (a) 120Vrms low-line input, (b) 2 4 0 V m high-line input (32: lOOV/div, Ch4: 0.5Aldiv

Fig. 11. Efficiency vs line input

348

frequency of 1OOKHz. For single-switch and two-switch buck-boost converters, the output voltage is set to 325V, while the boost dc output voltage is 450V. The peak voltseconds applied to the inductors for all two-switch buckboost converters has the smallest value of 0.812e-3(vs), compared to 1.8es3(vs) for all single-switch buck-boost converters, and 1.125i3(vs) for the boost converter. As a result of low inductor conduction losses and low peak volt-seconds applied, the BoIBB topology has the potential for smaller inductor size compared to other buck-boost topologies and the boost converter.

Fig. 11 shows the rectifier efficiency as a function of the input line RMS voltage. Efficiency of over 93% is achieved throughout the line voltage range (90Vrms-264Vrms). VI. CONCLUSIONS A new two-switch topology, named Boost Interleaved Buck-Boost (BoIBB) converter, has been proposed for universal-input PFC applications. The new converter has advantages of low voltage stresses, low switch and inductor conduction losses, potential for small inductor size, and the ability to set the output dc voltage arbitrarily. Experimental results are provided to verify the validity of the new topology. High efficiency (over 93%throughout the whole ac line voltage range), and low current harmonic distortion at both high and low line inputs are demonstrated. REFERENCES
[l] [2] R. Erickson, Fundamentals of Power Electronics, Kluwer 1997, ch17. D.S.L. Simonetti, J.Sebastian, F.S.dos Reis and J.Uceda,"Design criteria for SEF'IC and CUK converters as power factor preregulators in discontinuous conduction mode," IEEE lECON92,1992, pp283-288. [3] R.Erickson, R.Madigan, and S.Singer," Design of a simple high power factor rectifier based on the flyback converter," IEEE APEC90, 1990, pp.792-801. 141 0. Lopez, L. Vicuna, M. Castilla, J. Matas and M. Lopez, "Slidingmode-control design of a high-power-factor buck-boost rectifier," IEEE Trans. Indu. Elec., Vol. 46, No.3, June 1999, pp.604-612. [5] MCGhanem, K. Al-Hassad, and G.Roy," A new control strategy to achieve sinusoidal line in a cascade buck-boost converter," lEEE Trans. Indu.Elec., Vo1.43, pp. 441-449, May 1996. [6] D.Zhou, "Synthesis of P W M Dc-to-Dc Power Converters," Ph.D. thesis, California Institute of Technology, October 1995

V.EXPERIMENTAL, RESULTS
An experimental prototype (Fig. 7) has been built to verify 2 feasibility of the proposed converter. 4 and L are selected so that the converter operates in CCM in both boost and buck is modes at full load. A single control voltage Vcontrot used to produce the switch control signals with the duty ratios dl for 2 the switch Q,and d2 for the switch Q as shown in Fig. 8(a). as The steady state value of Vconrrot a function of time is shown in Fig. 8(b). The control voltage is the input to a dual l z PWM circuit that outputs drive signals for Q and Q . The experimental waveform of Vcontrotis shown in Fig. 9. Average current control is applied to achieve PFC operation. Experimental waveforms are shown in Fig 9. The output power is 1OOW. In Fig. 10(a), the input line voltage has low rms value 120Vnns and the converter operates in the boost mode always. The efficiency is 93.8% and the total current harmonic distortion is 1.9%. The waveforms of Fig. lo@) are for high input (240Vrms) and converter works in the boost and buck mode in different parts of the line period. The efficiency is 93.8% and the total current harmonic distortion is 4.6%.

349