evaluation and efficiency comparison of front end ac-dc plug-in

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SMART GRID, VOL. 3, NO. 1, MARCH 2012 413

Evaluation and Efficiency Comparison of Front EndAC-DC Plug-in Hybrid Charger Topologies

Fariborz Musavi, Member, IEEE, Murray Edington, Member, IEEE, Wilson Eberle, Member, IEEE, andWilliam G. Dunford, Senior Member, IEEE

Abstract—As a key component of a plug-in hybrid electric ve-hicle (PHEV) charger system, the front-end ac-dc converter mustachieve high efficiency and power density. This paper presents atopology survey evaluating topologies for use in front end ac-dcconverters for PHEV battery chargers. The topology survey is fo-cused on several boost power factor corrected converters, whichoffer high efficiency, high power factor, high density, and low cost.Experimental results are presented and interpreted for five pro-totype converters, converting universal ac input voltage to 400 Vdc. The results demonstrate that the phase shifted semi-bridgelessPFC boost converter is ideally suited for automotive level I resi-dential charging applications in North America, where the typicalsupply is limited to 120 V and 1.44 kVA or 1.92 kVA. For automo-tive level II residential charging applications in North America andEurope the bridgeless interleaved PFC boost converter is an idealtopology candidate for typical supplies of 240 V, with power levelsof 3.3 kW, 5 kW, and 6.6 kW.

Index Terms—AC-DC power converters, DC-DC power con-verters, power conversion, power electronics, power quality.

I. INTRODUCTION

A PLUG-IN HYBRID electric vehicle (PHEV) is a hybridvehicle with a battery electric storage system that can be

recharged by connecting a plug to an external electric powersource. The vehicle charging ac inlet requires an onboard ac-dccharger with power factor correction [1]. An onboard 3.4 kWcharger can charge a depleted battery pack in PHEVs to 95%charge in about 4 h from a 240 V supply [2].A variety of power architectures, circuit topologies, and con-

trol methods have been developed for PHEV battery chargers.However, due to large low frequency ripple in the outputcurrent, the single-stage ac-dc power conversion architectureis only suitable for lead acid batteries. Conversely, two-stageac-dc/dc-dc power conversion provides inherent low frequencyripple rejection.

Manuscript received February 26, 2011; revised July 26, 2011; accepted Au-gust 10, 2011. Date of publication October 20, 2011; date of current versionFebruary 23, 2012. This work was sponsored and supported by Delta-Q Tech-nologies Corporation. Paper no. TSG-00078-2011.F. Musavi is with the Research Department, Delta-Q Technologies Corp.,

Burnaby, BC V5G 3H3 Canada (e-mail: [email protected]).M. Edington is with the Engineering Department, Delta-Q Technologies

Corp., Burnaby, BC V5G 3H3 Canada (e-mail: [email protected]).W. Eberle is with the School of Engineering, University of British Columbia/

Okanagan, Kelowna, BC V1V 1V7 Canada (e-mail: [email protected]).W. G. Dunford is with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engi-

neering, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4 Canada(e-mail: [email protected]).Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online

at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TSG.2011.2166413

Fig. 1. Simplified block diagram of a universal battery charger.

Therefore, the two-stage approach is preferred for PHEV bat-tery chargers, where the power rating is relatively high, andlithium-ion batteries, requiring low voltage ripple, are used asthe main energy storage system [3]. A simplified block diagramof a universal input two-stage battery charger used for PHEVsis illustrated in Fig. 1.The ac-dc plus PFC stage rectifies the input ac voltage and

transfers it into a regulated intermediate dc link bus. At the sametime, power factor correction is achieved [4]. The isolated dc-dcstage that follows then converts the dc bus voltage to a regulatedoutput dc voltage for charging batteries.The most common topologies used in the following dc-dc

section are phase shifted ZVS topology [5]–[8], LLC resonanttopology [9]–[11], and capacitive output filter soft switchingconverter [12].Boost circuit-based PFC topologies operated in contin-

uous conduction mode (CCM) and boundary conductionmode (BCM) are surveyed in this paper, targeting front endsingle-phase ac-dc power factor corrected converters in PHEVbattery chargers.In the six sections that follow, five different boost based

PFC topologies are discussed and experimental results arepresented for each. The topologies in each section include:II. Conventional Boost Converter, III. Interleaved Boost Con-verter, IV. Phase Shifted Semi-Bridgeless Boost Converter, V.Bridgeless Interleaved Boost Converter, and VI. BridgelessInterleaved Resonant Boost Converter. A topology comparisonis presented in Section VII and the conclusions are presentedin Section VIII.

II. CONVENTIONAL BOOST CONVERTER

The conventional boost topology is the most populartopology for PFC applications. It uses a dedicated diode bridgeto rectify the ac input voltage to dc, which is then followed bythe boost section, as shown in Fig. 2.In this topology, the output capacitor ripple current is very

high [13] and is the difference between diode current and thedc output current. Furthermore, as the power level increases,the diode bridge losses significantly degrade the efficiency, so

1949-3053/$26.00 © 2011 IEEE

414 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SMART GRID, VOL. 3, NO. 1, MARCH 2012

Fig. 2. Conventional PFC boost converter.

TABLE ICONVENTIONAL BOOST CONVERTER PROTOTYPE COMPONENTS

Fig. 3. Input current, input voltage, and output voltage of a conventional boostconverter at V. Y-axis scales: Iin 10 A/div, Vin 100 V/div and Vo100 V/div.

dealing with the heat dissipation in a limited area becomes prob-lematic.The inductor volume also becomes a problematic design

issue at high power. Another challenge is the power rating lim-itation for current sense resistors at high power. Due to theseconstraints, this topology is good for the low to medium powerrange, up to approximately 1 kW. For power levels kW,typically, designers parallel discrete semiconductors, or useexpensive Diode semiconductor modules inorder to deliver greater output power. An example of a modulecommonly used in industry is the APT50N60JCCU2 fromMicrosemi Corporation.

A. Experimental Results of the Conventional Boost Converter

An experimental prototype was built to verify the operationof the conventional boost PFC converter. The components usedto build the prototype are listed in Table I.Fig. 3 shows the input voltage, input current and PFC bus

voltage of the converter under the following test conditions:V, A, kW, V,

kHz.

Fig. 4. Efficiency versus output power at different input voltages for a conven-tional boost converter.

Fig. 5. Interleaved PFC boost converter.

B. Performance Evaluation of the Conventional BoostConverter

Fig. 4 shows the efficiency of a conventional boost converterat input voltages ranging from 90 V to 265 V. As it can be notedfrom this graph, the efficiency drops significantly at low inputline as the power increases. To solve this problem for powerlevels kW, discrete semiconductors are paralleled, or ex-pensive modules are used. This reduces the power loss in theMOSFETs, but at low line, the input current increases and con-sequently the input bridge losses increase. As a result, the in-ductor current also increases.This requires a design compromise between the core, inductor

size and inductance value. A lower inductance value for a boostinductor increases the input current ripple and consequently in-creases the input EMI filter size. It also increases the output ca-pacitor high frequency ripple, thereby reducing the output ca-pacitor lifetime. Therefore, it can be concluded that a conven-tional boost converter is not the preferred topology for PHEVbattery charging applications.

III. INTERLEAVED BOOST CONVERTER

The interleaved boost converter, illustrated in Fig. 5, consistsof two boost converters in parallel operating 180 out of phase[14]–[16].The input current is the sum of the two input inductor cur-

rents. Because the inductors’ ripple currents are out of phase,they tend to cancel each other and reduce the input ripple cur-rent caused by the boost switching action. The interleaved boostconverter has the advantage of paralleled semiconductors. Fur-thermore, by switching 180 out of phase, it doubles the effec-tive switching frequency and introduces smaller input currentripple, so the input EMI filter is relatively small [17]–[19]. Withripple cancellation at the output, it also reduces stress on output

MUSAVI et al.: EVALUATION AND EFFICIENCY COMPARISON OF FRONT END AC-DC PLUG-IN HYBRID CHARGER TOPOLOGIES 415

TABLE IIINTERLEAVED BOOST CONVERTER PROTOTYPE COMPONENTS

Fig. 6. Input current, input voltage, and output voltage of an interleaved boostconverter at V. Y-axis scales: Iin 10 A/div, Vin 100 V/div, and Vo100 V/div.

capacitors. However, similar to the boost, this topology has theheat management problem for the input diode bridge rectifiers;therefore, it is limited to power levels up to approximately 3.5kW.

A. Experimental Results of the Interleaved Boost Converter

An experimental prototype was built to verify the operationof the interleaved boost PFC converter. The components usedto build the prototype are listed in Table II.Fig. 6 shows the input voltage, input current and PFC bus

voltage of the converter under the following test conditions:V, A, kW, V,

kHz.

B. Performance Evaluation of the Interleaved Boost Converter

Fig. 7 shows the efficiency of an interleaved boost converterat input voltages ranging from 90 V to 240 V. As it can be notedfrom these graphs, the output power level has increased. Hence,the efficiency profiles for each curve resemble those from theconventional boost converter.Despite the stated advantages of interleaving, the total power

losses are the same compared to a conventional boost converter.

IV. PHASE SHIFTED SEMI-BRIDGELESS BOOST CONVERTER

The bridgeless boost PFC topology avoids the need for therectifier input bridge yet maintains the classic boost topology[20]–[27], as shown in Fig. 8.It is an attractive solution for applications kW, where

power density and efficiency are important. This convertersolves the problem of heat management in the input rectifier

Fig. 7. Efficiency versus output power at different input voltages for an inter-leaved boost converter.

Fig. 8. Bridgeless PFC boost converter.

Fig. 9. Phase shifted semi-bridgeless PFC boost converter [31].

diode bridge inherent to the conventional boost PFC, but itintroduces increased EMI [28], [29]. Another disadvantage ofthis topology is the floating input line with respect to the PFCground, making it impossible to sense the input voltage withouta low frequency transformer or an optical coupler. Also, inorder to sense the input current, complex circuitry is needed tosense the current in the MOSFET and diode paths separately,since the current path does not share the same ground duringeach half-line cycle [20], [30]. In order to address these issues,a phase shifted semi-bridgeless boost converter, shown in Fig. 9was introduced in [31].However, this topology does not achieve high full load effi-

ciency since there is high power stress in the main MOSFETsdue to high intrinsic body diode losses.

A. Experimental Results of the Phase Shifted Semi-BridgelessBoost Converter

An experimental prototype was built to verify the operationof the phase shifted semi-bridgeless boost PFC converter. Thecomponents used to build the prototype are listed in Table III.Fig. 10 shows the input voltage, input current and PFC busvoltage of the converter under the following test conditions:


Fig. 10. Input current, input voltage, and output voltage of a phase shifted semi-bridgeless boost converter at V. Y-axis scales: Iin 10 A/div, Vin 100V/div and Vo 100 V/div.

TABLE IIICOMPONENT USED IN THE SEMI-BRIDGELESS BOOST CONVERTER PROTOTYPE

Fig. 11. Efficiency versus output power at different input voltages for a phaseshifted semi-bridgeless boost converter.

V, A, kW, V,kHz.

B. Performance Evaluation of the Semi-Bridgeless BoostConverter

Fig. 11 shows the efficiency of phase shifted semi-bridgelessboost converter at input voltages ranging from 90 V to 240 V.As it can be noted from this graph, the efficiency is significantlyimproved at light load.In order to verify the quality of the input current, the input

current THD is shown in Fig. 12. The power factor and har-monic orders are given and compared with EN 61000-3-2 stan-dard in Figs. 13 and 14. It is noted that mains current THD isless than 5% from 50% load to full load and it is compliant toEN 61000-3-2 (Figs. 12 and 14). The converter power factor is

Fig. 12. THD as a function of output power at V and 240 V,V, and 70 kHz switching frequency.

Fig. 13. Power factor as a function of output power at V and 240V, V, and 70 kHz switching frequency.

Fig. 14. Harmonics orders at V and 240 V, compared againstEN61000-3-2 standard.

shown over entire load range for 120 and 240 V input in Fig. 13.The power factor is greater than 0.99 from 50% load to full load.These results show that the phase shifted semi-bridgeless

PFC boost converter is ideally suited for automotive level Iresidential charging applications in North America where thetypical supply is limited to 120 V and 1.44 kVA or 1.92 kVA.As an example, for 120 V input voltage and 1700 W load the

efficiency is 95%, which is the same efficiency achieved with aninterleaved boost converter operating with the same conditions.But at lighter loads, the semi-bridgeless converter achievesmuch higher efficiency. This is critical for converters used inapplications such as battery chargers. In battery chargers, theconverter is fully loaded for only one third of the total chargingtime (i.e., during the bulk charging stage). However, during theabsorption and float stages, which are two thirds of the total


Fig. 15. Bridgeless interleaved PFC boost converter [34].

TABLE IVBRIDGELESS INTERLEAVED BOOST CONVERTER PROTOTYPE COMPONENTS

Fig. 16. Input current, input voltage, and output voltage of a bridgeless inter-leaved boost converter at V. Y-axis scales: Iin 10 A/div, Vin 100V/div, and Vo 100 V/div.

charging time, the charger is only partially loaded, so light loadefficiency is an important consideration.

V. BRIDGELESS INTERLEAVED BOOST CONVERTER

The bridgeless interleaved topology, shown in Fig. 15, wasproposed as a solution to operate at power levels above 3.5kW. In comparison to the interleaved boost PFC, it introducestwo MOSFETs and also replaces four slow diodes with two fastdiodes. The gating signals are 180 out of phase, similar to theinterleaved boost. A detailed converter description and steadystate operation analysis are given in [32]–[34]. This convertertopology shows a high input power factor, high efficiency overthe entire load range, and low input current harmonics.Since the proposed topology shows high input power factor,

high efficiency over the entire load range, and low input currentharmonics, it is a potential option for single phase PFC in highpower level II battery charging applications.

A. Experimental Results of the Bridgeless Interleaved BoostConverter

An experimental prototype was built to verify the operationof the bridgeless interleaved boost PFC converter. The compo-nents used to build the prototype are listed in Table IV. Fig. 16

Fig. 17. Efficiency versus output power at different input voltages for a bridge-less interleaved boost converter.

Fig. 18. THD as a function of output power at V and 240 V,V, and 70 kHz switching frequency.

shows the input voltage, input current and PFC bus voltage ofthe converter under the following test conditions: V,

A, kW, V, kHz.

B. Performance Evaluation of the Bridgeless InterleavedBoost Converter

Fig. 17 shows the efficiency of the bridgeless interleavedboost converter at input voltages ranging from 90 V to 240 V.In general, this converter achieves higher efficiency than

both phase shifted semi-bridgeless converter and interleavedboost at the same power levels. In addition, due to the improvedefficiency, greater output power can be achieved for a giveninput current. For example, at 240 V input, the maximumoutput power increases from 3.4 kW for the phase shiftedsemi-bridgeless converter up to 4.2 kW for the bridgelessinterleaved boost converter.Curves of the input current total harmonic distortion are pro-

vided in Fig. 18 for full load at 120 V and 240 V input. It isnoted that the input current THD is less than 5% from half loadto full load.Power factor is another useful parameter to show the quality

of input current. The converter power factor is provided inFig. 19 for the entire load range at 120 V and 240 V input. Thepower factor is greater than 0.99 from half load to full load.


Fig. 19. Power factor as a function of output power at V and 240V, V, and 70 kHz switching frequency.

Fig. 20. Harmonics orders at V and 240 V, compared againstEN61000-3-2 standard.

In order to verify the quality of the input current in the pro-posed topology, its harmonics up to the 39th harmonic are givenand compared with the EN 61000-3-2 standard in Fig. 20 for 120V and 240 V input. All converter harmonics are well below IECstandard, which is required for PHEV chargers.These results demonstrate that the bridgeless interleaved

boost converter is ideally suited for automotive level II residen-tial charging applications in North America and Europe wherethe typical supply is limited to input voltages of 240/250 V, andpower levels up to approximately 8 kVA—depending on theinput supply breaker limitation.

VI. BRIDGELESS INTERLEAVED RESONANT BOOST CONVERTER

The bridgeless interleaved resonant topology operating inBCM was first introduced by Infineon Technologies [35] andproposed for front end ac-dc stage of level II on-board chargers.The topology is illustrated in Fig. 21.Compared to the bridgeless interleaved boost converter, it re-

places the four fast diodes with four slow diodes; however, itrequires two high side drivers for MOSFETs -Q1 and Q2 aswell as two low side drivers for Q3 and Q4. The other draw-backs with this topology include the need for at least two setsof current sensors, two snubbers, and a complex digital controlscheme.

Fig. 21. Bridgeless interleaved resonant PFC boost converter [35].

Fig. 22. Efficiency versus output power at 230 V input voltages for a bridgelessinterleaved resonant boost converter by Infineon Technologies AG [35].

TABLE VBRIDGELESS INTERLEAVED RESONANT BOOST CONVERTER PROTOTYPE

COMPONENTS

A. Experimental Results and Performance Evaluation of theBridgeless Interleaved Resonant Boost Converter

The operation of this converter and efficiency was reportedin [35]. The components used for the prototype are listed inTable V. Fig. 22 shows the reported efficiency (reproduced) ofthe converter under the following test conditions: V,

A, , V. This converter achievesa peak efficiency of 97.9% at 2.7 kW load, but the efficiencydegrades rapidly beyond the output power of 2.7 kW, so basedon the reported data, it is not an ideal candidate for automotivelevel II charging.

VII. TOPOLOGY COMPARISON

Prototypes of the converter presented in Sections II–V werebuilt to provide data for a qualitative and quantitative perfor-mance comparison. The ac power source and dc electronics loadused in the test set-up are California Instrument Model 5001 iXand Chroma Model 63204 respectively. Loss analysis modelingwas also performed to gain insight into the noted qualitative ad-vantages/disadvantages of each prototype in comparison to themeasured efficiency.


Fig. 23. Loss distribution in semiconductors at V, V,kW, and kHz.

Fig. 23 shows the modeled loss distribution within the semi-conductors for these topologies at V, W,

V, and kHz. The regular diode losses consistof only conduction losses in bridge rectifier diodes, i.e., reverserecovery losses were neglected due to the low frequency mainsinput.DuetothelowreverserecoverycharacteristicsofSiC, thesediodes were selected for the boost diodes. Therefore reverse re-covery losses were neglected for these diodes, so that only con-duction losses were considered. Switching loss, conduction loss,gate charge loss and CV loss are included in the MOSFETlosses. The inductor losses were neglected in the comparison.The regular diodes in input bridge rectifiers have the largest

share of losses among the topologies with the input bridge recti-fier. The bridgeless topologies eliminate this large loss compo-nent W . However, the tradeoff is that the MOSFETlosses are higher and the intrinsic body diodes of MOSFETsconduct, producing new losses W . The fast diodes inthe bridgeless interleaved PFC have slightly lower power losses,since the boost diode average current is lower in these topolo-gies. Overall the MOSFETs have increased current stress in thebridgeless topologies, but the total semiconductor losses for thebridgeless interleaved boost are 37% lower than the benchmarkconventional boost and 37% lower than the interleaved boost.Since the bridge rectifier losses are so large, it was ex-

pected that bridgeless interleaved boost converter would havethe lowest power losses among the topologies studied inSections II–V. Also, it was noted that the losses in the inputbridge rectifiers were 56% of total losses in the conventionalPFC converter and in the interleaved PFC converter. Thereforeeliminating the input bridges in PFC converters is justifieddespite the fact that new losses are introduced.A more detailed circuit analysis and loss evaluation for the

proposed level I and level II chargers are given in [31], [34]Fig. 24 illustrates the measured efficiency as a function of

output power for all five topologies studied under the followingoperating conditions: kHz, V, and

V. All semiconductor and magnetic devices used in pro-totype units were the same. Limited information was availablefor Infineon bridgeless interleaved resonant converter. Notablyit was measured at 230 V input voltage.

Fig. 24. Efficiency versus output power for different PFC boost converters.

TABLE VITOPOLOGY OVERVIEW/COMPARISON

Table VI demonstrates an overall overview and compar-ison of all candidate topologies discussed for the front endac-dc stage of a PHEV battery charger. The phase shiftedsemi-bridgeless PFC converter was the topology of choice forlevel I chargers and the bridgeless interleaved PFC converter isan optimal topology for level II chargers.

VIII. CONCLUSIONS

A topology survey aimed at evaluating topologies for usein front end ac-dc converters for PHEV battery chargers ispresented in this paper. The potential converter solutions havebeen analyzed and their performance characteristics are pre-sented. Several prototype converter circuits were built to verifythe proof-of-concept. The results show that the phase shiftedsemi bridgeless converter is ideally suited for automotive levelI residential charging applications in North America wherethe typical supply is limited to 120 V and 1.44 kVA or 1.92kVA. For high power level II residential charging applications,the bridgeless interleaved boost converter is an ideal topologycandidate in North America and Europe where the typicalsupply is limited to input voltages of 240/250 V and powerlevels up to 8 kVA.


REFERENCES

[1] Y. J. Lee, A. Khaligh, and A. Emadi, “Advanced integrated bidirec-tional AC-DC and DC-DC converter for plug-in hybrid electric vehi-cles,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 58, pp. 3970–3980, Oct. 2009.

[2] K. Morrow, D. Karner, and J. Francfort, Plug-in Hybrid ElectricVehicle Charging Infrastructure Review. : U.S. Department ofEnergy—Vehicle Technologies Program, 2008.

[3] L. Petersen and M. Andersen, “Two-stage power factor correctedpower supplies: The low component-stress approach,” in Proc. 2002IEEE Appl. Power Electron. Conf. Expo., vol. 2, pp. 1195–1201.

[4] B. Singh, B. N. Singh, A. Chandra, K. Al-Haddad, A. Pandey, and D.P. Kothari, “A review of single-phase improved power quality AC-DCconverters,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 50, pp. 962–981, 2003.

[5] J. A. Sabate, V. Vlatkovic, R. B. Ridley, F. C. Lee, and B. H. Cho,“Design considerations for high-voltage high-power full-bridge zero-voltage-switched PWM converter,” in Proc. 1990 IEEE Appl. PowerElectron. Conf. Expo., pp. 275–284.

[6] R. Redl, L. Balogh, and D. W. Edwards, “Optimum ZVS full-bridgeDC/DC converter with PWMphase-shift control: Analysis, design con-siderations, and experimental results,” in Proc. 1994 Appl. Power Elec-tron. Conf. Expo., vol. 1, pp. 159–165.

[7] Y. Jang, M. M. Jovanovic, and Y.-M. Chang, “A new ZVS-PWMfull-bridge converter,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 18, pp.1122–1129, Sep. 2003.

[8] D. Gautam, F. Musavi, M. Edington, W. Eberle, and W. G. Dunford,“An automotive on-board 3.3 kW battery charger for PHEV applica-tion,” in Proc. 7th IEEE Veh. Power Propulsion Conf., Chicago, IL,2011.

[9] R. Beiranvand, B. Rashidian, M. R. Zolghadri, and S. M. H. Alavi,“Using LLC resonant converter for designing wide-range voltagesource,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 58, pp. 1746–1756, May2011.

[10] W.-Y. Choi, B.-H. Kwon, and J.-S. Lai, “A hybrid switching schemefor LLC series-resonant half-bridge DC-DC converter in a wide loadrange,” in Proc. 2010 IEEE Appl. Power Electron. Conf. Expo., pp.1494–1497.

[11] J. S. Kim, G. Y. Choe, H. M. Jung, B. K. Lee, Y. J. Cho, and K. B.Han, “Design and implementation of a high-efficiency onboard bat-tery charger for electric vehicles with frequency control strategy,” inProc. 2010 IEEE Veh. Power Propulsion Conf., pp. 1–6.

[12] I. D. Jitaru, “A 3 kW soft switching DC-DC converter,” in Proc. 2000IEEE Appl. Power Electron. Conf. Expo., vol. 1, pp. 86–92.

[13] D. Xu, J. Zhang, W. Chen, J. Lin, and F. C. Lee, “Evaluation of outputfilter capacitor current ripples in single phase PFC converters,” inProc. 2002 Power Convers. Conf. (PCC), Osaka, Japan, vol. 3, pp.1226–1231.

[14] M. O’Loughlin, “An interleaved PFC preregulator for high-powerconverters,” Proc. Texas Instrum. Power Supply Design Seminar, vol.Topic 5, pp. 5-1–5-14, 2007.

[15] L. Balogh and R. Redl, “Power-factor correction with interleaved boostconverters in continuous-inductor-current mode,” in Proc. 1993 IEEEAppl. Power Electron. Conf. Expo., pp. 168–174.

[16] Y. Jang and M. M. Jovanovic, “Interleaved boost converter with in-trinsic voltage-doubler characteristic for universal-line PFC front end,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 22, pp. 1394–1401, Jul. 2007.

[17] C. Wang, M. Xu, and F. C. Lee, “Asymmetrical interleaving strategyfor multi-channel PFC,” in Proc. 2008 IEEE Appl. Power Electron.Conf. Expo., pp. 1409–1415.

[18] P. Kong, S. Wang, F. C. Lee, and C. Wang, “Common-mode EMIstudy and reduction technique for the interleaved multichannel PFCconverter,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 23, pp. 2576–2584, Sep.2008.

[19] C. Wang, M. Xu, F. C. Lee, and B. Lu, “EMI study for the interleavedmulti-channel PFC,” in Proc. 2007 IEEE Power Electron. SpecialistsConf., pp. 1336–1342.

[20] U. Moriconi, “A bridgeless PFC configuration based on L4981 PFCcontroller,” STMicroelectronics Application Note AN1606,, 2002.

[21] B. Lu, R. Brown, and M. Soldano, “Bridgeless PFC implementationusing one cycle control technique,” in Proc. 2005 IEEE Appl. PowerElectron. Conf. Expo., vol. 2, pp. 812–817.

[22] C. Petrea and M. Lucanu, “Bridgeless power factor correction con-verter working at high load variations,” in Proc. 2007 Int. Symp. Sig-nals, Circuits, Syst. (ISSCS), vol. 2, pp. 1–4.

[23] J. M. Hancock, “Bridgeless PFC boosts low-line efficiency,” PowerElectron. Technol., 2008 [Online]. Available: http://powerelectronics.com/power_management/power_ics/bridgeless-pfc-low-line-effi-ciency-0225/

[24] L. Huber, J. Yungtaek, and M. M. Jovanovic, “Performance evaluationof bridgeless PFC boost rectifiers,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol.23, pp. 1381–1390, May 2008.

[25] Y. Jang, M. M. Jovanovic, and D. L. Dillman, “Bridgeless PFC boostrectifier with optimized magnetic utilization,” in Proc. 2008 IEEEAppl. Power Electron. Conf. Expo., pp. 1017–1021.

[26] Y. Jang and M. M. Jovanovic, “A bridgeless PFC boost rectifier withoptimized magnetic utilization,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 24,pp. 85–93, Jan. 2009.

[27] W. Y. Choi, J. M. Kwon, E. H. Kim, J. J. Lee, and B. H. Kwon,“Bridgeless boost rectifier with low conduction losses and reduceddiode reverse-recovery problems,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol.54, pp. 769–780, Apr. 2007.

[28] T. Baur, M. Reddig, and M. Schlenk, “Line-conducted EMI-behaviourof a high efficient PFC-stage without input rectification,” in InfineonTechnology—Application Note, 2006.

[29] W. Frank, M. Reddig, and M. Schlenk, “New control methods for rec-tifier-less PFC-stages,” in Proc. 2005 IEEE Int. Symp. Ind. Electron.,vol. 2, pp. 489–493.

[30] P. Kong, S. Wang, and F. C. Lee, “Common mode EMI noise suppres-sion for bridgeless PFC converters,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol.23, pp. 291–297, Jan. 2008.

[31] F. Musavi, W. Eberle, and W. G. Dunford, “A phase shifted semi-bridgeless boost power factor corrected converter for plug in hybridelectric vehicle battery chargers,” in Proc. 2011 IEEE Appl. PowerElectron. Conf. Expo., pp. 821–828.

[32] F. Musavi, W. Eberle, and W. G. Dunford, “A high-performancesingle-phase AC-DC power factor corrected boost converter for plugin hybrid electric vehicle battery chargers,” Proc. 2010 IEEE EnergyConvers. Congr. Expo., pp. 3588–3595.

[33] F. Musavi, W. Eberle, and W. G. Dunford, “Efficiency evaluation ofsingle-phase solutions for AC-DC PFC boost converters for plug-in-Hybrid electric vehicle battery chargers,” in Proc. 2010 IEEE Veh.Power Propulsion Conf., pp. 1–6.

[34] F. Musavi, W. Eberle, and W. G. Dunford, “A high-performancesingle-phase bridgeless interleaved PFC converter for plug-in hybridelectric vehicle battery chargers,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 47, no.4, pp. 1833–1843, Jul./Aug. 2011.

[35] “On board charging: Concept consideration and demonstrator hard-ware,” in Proc. 25th World Electric Veh. Symp. Expo. (EVS) InfineonTechnol., Shenzhen, China, 2010.

Fariborz Musavi (S’10–M’11) received the B.Sc.degree from Iran University of Science and Tech-nology, Tehran, Iran, in 1994, the M.Sc. degree fromConcordia University, Montreal, QC, Canada, in2001, and the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineeringwith emphasis in power electronics from the Univer-sity of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.Since 2001, he has been with several high-tech

companies including EMS Technologies Inc., Mon-treal, QC, Canada, DRS Pivotal Power, Bedford, NS,Canada and Alpha Technologies, Bellingham, WA,

USA. Currently he is with Delta-Q Technologies Corp., Burnaby, BC, Canada,where he works as the Manager of Research, Engineering and is engaged inresearch on simulation, analysis, and design of battery chargers for industrialand automotive applications. His current research interests include high power,high efficiency converter topologies, high power factor rectifiers, grid-tiedinverters, electric vehicles, and sustainable and renewable energy sources.Dr. Musavi is a Registered Professional Engineer in the Province of BritishColumbia. He was the recipient of the First Prize Paper Award from the IEEEIndustry Applications Society Industrial Power Converter Committee in 2011.

Murray Edington (M’02) studied engineeringat Cambridge University and the University ofNewcastle upon Tyne.He has 14 years experience in developing automo-

tive power electronics products (specifically EV andhybrid system components) and 11 years previous ex-perience in the development of industrial power elec-tronics products. Industrial experience includes posi-tions at Ricardo Consulting Engineers, Motorola Au-tomotive Industrial Electronics Group, Farnell Ad-vance Power, andWavedriver Ltd. He is currently Di-

rector of Product Engineering at Delta-Q Technologies Corp., Vancouver, BC,Canada.


Wilson Eberle (S’98–M’07) received the B.Sc.,M.Sc., and Ph.D. degrees from the Departmentof Electrical and Computer Engineering, Queen’sUniversity, Kingston, ON, Canada, in 2000, 2003,and 2008, respectively.From 1997 to 1999, he was an Engineering Co-Op

Student at Ford Motor Company, Windsor, ON, andat Astec Advanced Power Systems, Nepean, ON.He is currently an Assistant Professor in the Schoolof Engineering, University of British Columbia,Kelowna, BC, Canada. He is the author or coauthor

of more than 20 technical papers published in various conferences and IEEEjournals. He is the holder of one U.S. pending patent. He is also the holder ofinternational pending patents. His current research interests include high-ef-ficiency, high-power density, low-power dc-dc converters, digital controltechniques for dc-dc converters, electromagnetic interference (EMI) filterdesign for switching converters, and resonant gate drive techniques for dc-dcconverters.Dr. Eberle was the recipient of the Ontario Graduate Scholarship and has

won awards from the Power Source Manufacturer’s Association (PSMA) andthe Ontario Centres of Excellence (OCE) to present papers at conferences.

William G. Dunford (S’78–M’81–SM’92) was astudent at Imperial College, London, UK, and theUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.Industrial experience includes positions at the

Royal Aircraft Establishment (now Qinetiq),Schlumberger, and Alcatel. He has had a long terminterest in photovoltaic powered systems and is alsoinvolved in projects in the automotive and energyharvesting areas. He is a director of Legend PowerSystems, Burnaby, BC, Canada, where he has alsobeen active in product development. He has also

been a faculty member at Imperial College and the University of Toronto, and isnow on the faculty of the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.Dr. Dunford has served in various positions on the Advisory Committee of

the IEEE Power Electronics Society and chaired PESC in 1986 and 2001.

evaluation and efficiency comparison of front end ac-dc plug-in

Documents