Open AccessPassivity‐based controllers for ZVS quasi‐resonant boost converter
Author(s) -
Shipra Kumari,
Sharma Shambhu N.,
Maurya Rakesh
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
iet control theory and applications
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.059
H-Index - 108
eISSN - 1751-8652
pISSN - 1751-8644
DOI - 10.1049/iet-cta.2020.0129
Subject(s) - control theory (sociology) , passivity , robustness (evolution) , converters , computer science , matlab , boost converter , benchmark (surveying) , buck–boost converter , state space , state space representation , voltage , engineering , mathematics , control (management) , algorithm , biochemistry , chemistry , statistics , electrical engineering , geodesy , artificial intelligence , gene , geography , operating system
There is a consistent demand for reliable, efficient, small‐sized, and light weight power supply for electronics devices. To meet the aforesaid requirements, Quasi Resonant converters are being used due to low switching losses, high efficiency, small size and weight. With these motivations, in this paper, two different methodologies of passivity‐based controllers namely (EL‐PBC and PCH‐PBC) are proposed for Zero Voltage Switching Quasi Resonant (ZVS‐QR) boost converter to regulate the output voltage. First, the Euler‐Lagrange (EL) formulation is used to derive state‐space equations for ZVS‐QR boost converter under different operating modes and then, average state‐space model is developed using generalized state space average (GSSA) technique. In order to improve the dynamic performance of the ZVS‐QR boost converter, the aforesaid passivity‐based controllers are designed and its stability analysis is carried out. The entire system is developed with Sim Power System toolbox of MATLAB software and validated through OP‐5142 real time simulator. Steady state and dynamic performances are examined under several operating conditions. It is observed that the passivity‐based controllers of the paper achieve robustness against the uncertainties at the input and the load side. It is compared with benchmark PI controller as well.