The non-isolated switching DC-to-DC converters can be broadly divided into three basic categories based on their input to output DC voltage conversion characteristics: a) step-down only (buck converter), step-up only (boost converter) and step-down/step-up (flyback, SEPIC, and Ćuk converters). This invention relates to the step-down class of switching DC-to-DC power converters such as buck converter.
Classifications of currently known switching converters can also be made based on the type of the voltage and current waveforms exhibited by the switches into three broad categories:
The present invention creates a fourth category of the hybrid-switching converters consisting of same inductors obeying square-wave switching, but also having a resonant inductor which is flux balanced completely during only one part of the switching cycle, either ON-time interval or OFF-time interval. This results in unique three-switch converter topologies as opposed to the two or four switch topologies, which are required in all prior-art converters of the three categories described above. Because of the mixed use of the square-wave switching and unique resonant switching a term hybrid-switching method is proposed for this new switching power conversion method.
Another classification can be made with respect to number of switches used, such as two, four, six etc. The present Pulse Width Modulated (PWM) switched-mode power conversion theory a-priori excludes the converter topologies with the odd number of switches, such as 3 switches, 5 switches etc. (Ref. 2). The PWM switching method is based on the classical two square-wave switching intervals characterized by square-wave like current and voltage waveforms of its switches. The direct consequence is that switches come in complementary pairs, when one switch is closed its complementary switch is open and vice versa. Thus when half of the switches are ON their complementary switches are OFF and vice versa for second interval. Thus, the converters are characterized by two distinct switching intervals (ON and OFF) and even number of switches, such as 2, 4, 6, and cannot have an odd number of switches, such as 3, 5, etc.
The present invention breaks the new ground by introducing the switching converter featuring three switches, which results in hybrid switched-mode power conversion method and results in very high conversion efficiency.
The conventional step-down converter such as buck has two switches and linear DC gain conversion as a function of duty ratio. The new hybrid switching step-down converter has three switches and results in non-linear DC conversion gain providing higher step-down voltage conversion than the buck converter for the same operating duty ratio D.
The main objective is to replace the current prior-art buck converter, with the converter, which has inherently higher efficiency and smaller size. This is achieved by providing converter, which, in addition to inductive energy transfer only as in buck converter, provides an additional capacitive energy transfer from input to output. Both energy transfer mechanisms provide the increased total power to the load, while increasing efficiency and simultaneously reducing the size and weight.
The following notation is consistently used throughout this text in order to facilitate easier delineation between various quantities:
a illustrates a prior-art buck converter,
a shows an ideal switch which operates in all four quadrants,
a illustrates DC voltage gain characteristic for buck converter of
a shows a magnetic core with the air-gap needed for inductor of buck converter in
a illustrates the volt-second requirements for the inductor of the buck converter in
a shows a prior-art polarity inverting buck-boost converter,
a illustrates the first embodiment of the present invention and
a illustrates another embodiment of the present invention of
a illustrates a branch comprising a bi-polar transistor in series with an inductor, and
a illustrates another embodiment of the present invention of
a illustrates another embodiment of the present invention of
a illustrates linear switched network for converter of
a illustrates an equivalent circuit model for linear switched network of
a illustrates an equivalent circuit model for current trough inductor L during OFF-time interval, and
a shows the voltage waveform across the inductor L for both parts of the switching interval,
a illustrates an equivalent circuit model for current trough the resonant inductor Lr during OFF-time interval,
a illustrates that the resonant inductor Lr is exposed to the small Δvr co-sinusoidal voltage excitation during OFF-time interval, and
a shows the input current waveform for converter of
a illustrates the DC current levels IR and IRS in the resonant inductor Lr current waveform,
a shows a DC conversion gain function of the buck converter plotted in dotted line in comparison with a DC conversion gain function of present invention plotted in solid line, and
a illustrates converter circuit when switch S1 is OFF during OFF-time interval thus displaying the blocking voltage of the S1 switch and
a illustrates another embodiment of the present invention of
a illustrates the output current waveform of the present invention during the OFF-time interval of 0.5TS providing a 3:1 voltage conversion ratio, and
a illustrates the output current waveform of the present invention during the switching interval TS and providing a 3:1 voltage conversion ratio, and
a illustrates another embodiment of the present invention of
a illustrates another embodiment of the present invention of
a illustrates linear switched network for converter of
a illustrates another embodiment of the present invention of
a shows the following salient waveforms from top to bottom: drain to source voltage of the main switch, resonant inductor current, inductor L current and output current for the experimental prototype operating at 50% duty ratio and 4V output voltage, and
a shows the same currents as
a shows the same salient waveforms as
a shows the salient waveforms of the experimental prototype for the operation at light load current of 3 A and
a shows the salient waveforms of the experimental prototype operation at 14 A load current and
a shows the salient waveforms of the experimental prototype when the OFF-time interval is selected to be longer than the 50% of the resonant interval so that resonant current is going below zero current level (see resonant inductor current trace) and
a shows the voltage of the resonant inductor (second trace) displaying its DC value and superimposed AC ripple voltage and the output voltage (third trace) displaying the output DC voltage and its superimposed AC ripple voltage and
a shows the same waveforms as
a shows the salient waveforms of the experimental prototype when the switch S2 is implemented as a diode resulting in Discontinuous Inductor Current Mode (DICM) and in zero current interval in output current and
a shows the efficiency measurement results of a 200 W, 48V-to-12V prototype, and
a shows the efficiency measurements of the 200 W, 48 v to 12V prototype operating at 100 kHz and using RM8 magnetic core; the three efficnecy curves for 5 A, 10 and 15 A are displayed over the input voltage regulation range of 36V to 54V.
a shows the efficiency measurement results of a 50 W, 12V-to-1.5V prototype operating at 56 kHz, and
a shows the third party efficiency measurement results of their 40 W, 12V-to-1.3V buck converter prototype operating at 1 MHz switching frequency, and
a shows the phase-shifted application of the three-switch step-down converter using two converters operating at 50% duty ratio and
a shows the total input current of the converter in
The non-isolated prior-art Pulse Width Modulated (PWM) buck switching converter shown in
The minimum implementation of semiconductor switches in buck converter is shown on
The linear step-down DC gain characteristic of the buck converter as a function of duty ratio D is illustrated in
V=DV
g (1)
while
The inductor L in the buck converter of
In order to store this DC energy inductor must be built with an air-gap such as shown in
Size of the inductance is therefore severely affected by its need to store the DC energy. However, inductor size is in addition also required to be very large because it must also support a superimposed AC flux. In order to better utilize the magnetics for the low voltage converters with high DC load current such as 12V to 1V, 30 A Voltage Regulator Modules (VRM) the paralleled connection of several buck converters shifted in phase is used. The two-phase prior art buck converter is illustrated in
This large AC flux leads to large volts-seconds imposed on the core as given by:
Volt-sec=V(1−D)TS (2)
The graph of Volt-seconds as a function of duty ratio is shown in
In summary, the size of the inductor L in the prior-art buck converter is very large due to the two basic requirements:
The present approaches to minimize inductor size was to increase switching frequency indiscriminately to the high levels, such as 1 MHz and even 2 MHz, so that small inductance values will be sufficient. This clearly impacts the efficiency.
Prior art buck-boost converter is illustrated in
The converter of
The present invention is shown in
Such a configuration with three switches is not possible in conventional square-wave PWM and conventional true resonant switching converters (Ref 2 and Ref 3). However, here it is essential for its operation and is made possible by the new hybrid-switching method, which uses a unique combination of the square-wave switching and resonant switching.
Single quadrant switches as per switch classification illustrated in
In addition to the inductor L connected to the load, this converter also has another inductor Lr connected in the branch with active switch S3. Conventional square-wave converters explicitly forbid such a placement of the inductor for apparently obvious reason: the inductor current cannot be interrupted as it will develop a huge voltage spike across inductor and result in large voltage exceeding rating of the switch and hence in its destruction as illustrated in
For the steady-state to be established with periodic repetitive switching, the passive diode switch S2 and in its basic mode of operation does not require any drive but is instead forced to turn-ON by the turn-ON of active switch S3 and is forced to turn-OFF by the turn-ON of active switch S1. The continuous control of the voltage step-down is then achieved by the modulation of the ON-time TON of the main controlling switch S1 in
Due to the fast switching speed of the MOSFET transistors compared to bipolar transistor and consequent reduction of the size of storage components at higher switching frequencies, the MOSFET implementation of
In low voltage and high current applications, such as for example, for 12V to 1.5V, 30 A output for Voltage Regulator Modules (VRM) the diode would generate too much conduction losses. Therefore, the diode switch is then replaced by another MOSFET transistor, which is operating as a synchronous rectifier so that the body diode of the MOSFET transistor is bypassed by conduction through the channel of the MOSFET. For the above 45 W VRM example, the state-of-the-art current MOSFET device with 0.5 mg) resistance will generate only 450 mW losses for 30 A output resulting in 1% power loss due to conduction loss of switch S2. If the best Schottkey diode with 0.3V voltage drop were used, the conduction loss would be approximately 8 W or 18% of the output power. This therefore confirms the significance of an all MOSFET implementation of
The diode switch in
The implementation of the switches illustrated in the above example is not intended to be exhaustive, as a number of other implementation of ideal switches of the converter in
Irrespective of the particular switch implementation, all converter variants will result in two distinct switching networks, one for ON-time interval and another for OFF-time interval. For example, for the MOSFET transistor implementation of
From
From
From the above it is obvious how in this hybrid switching conversion method, both capacitive and inductive energy transfers take place in transferring power from the source to the load efficiently. During the first ON-time charge interval, energy transferring capacitor Cr and inductor L are storing the energy (in terms of charge on capacitor and increased current in inductor L). During the OFF-time interval both storage components are releasing its stored energy directly to the load with assistance of only a small resonant inductor Lr and an additional active switch S3.
Note the marked difference with respect to the energy transfer in the conventional buck converter of
Such higher efficiency and smaller size is also evident from the fundamental equations for the source and load currents obtained by observations from
ON time interval DTS: ig(t)=iL(t) (3)
OFF time interval (1−D)TS: i0(t)=iL(t)+ir(t) (4)
Since the load current I consist of the average (DC) current through inductor L, designated as IL and the average current IR of the resonant inductor Lr averaged over the whole switching interval TS, equation (4) can be restated in terms of the respective DC currents as:
I
L
+I
R
=I (5)
Clearly, the inductor L in the conventional buck converter of
I
R=0 (6)
This directly results in the larger DC copper losses in buck inductor. Furthermore, this inductor also has the larger DC bias requiring proportionally larger air-gap and resulting in correspondingly higher peak ripple current, thus increased peak current of inductor at instant of turn-OFF and increased turn-OFF losses and switching losses. This is explained here on a qualitative basis, as the quantitative comparison is delayed until the proper analytical equations are developed in following section.
Note the absence of the resonant capacitor current contribution in the buck converter (6), which in addition to increased losses leads also to increased size of the buck converter inductor (see Section on comparison).
We now undertake the detailed analysis of the non-inverting converter of
We now use the principle of superposition of the linear networks to break down the equivalent circuit models for:
a) inductor L for ON-time interval in
b) inductor L and resonant inductor Lr for OFF-time interval in
We now turn to evaluation of the DC voltage conversion ratio as a function of duty ratio D and possibly other quantities, such as two inductors, for example. We also assume a duty ratio control D of the main switch S1.
We now use a principle of superposition and break-down (split) the equivalent circuit models: one for inductor L in
First, we analyze two linear switched networks for the inductor L shown in
∫vLr1dt=(Vg−V−Vr)D−V(1−D)=0 (7)
where we define:
T
ON
=DT
S
T
OFF=(1−D)TS (8)
where TS is the switching period.
The inductor L current has then the familiar triangular current wave shape superimposed on the DC current IL (not DC load current I as in the prior-art buck converter) as seen in
Note also that during the ON-time interval, this DC bias current IL is also charging the resonant capacitor Cr resulting in the familiar ripple voltage of magnitude Δvr superimposed on the DC value Vr as seen in
We now analyze a linear switched network for the resonant inductor Lr shown in
∫vlrdt=Vr−V=0 (10)
The solution of (10) results in a unique solution for resonant voltage Vr as:
V
r
=V (11)
The equivalent circuit model of
C>>C
r (12)
where even a factor of three to four is sufficient to satisfy it. Under that assumption, the capacitor C can be considered short and the equivalent circuit model of
Note that the resonance is solely contained during the OFF-time interval. Thus, the equivalent circuit of
Note from the equivalent circuit model of
As seen from
From two flux balance equations, we can now calculate the voltage conversion ratio as follows:
Replacing (11) in (7) we obtain:
(Vg−2V)D−V(1−D)=0 (13)
which result in the DC conversion gain as:
V=V
g
D/(1+D) (14)
Despite the presence of the resonant inductor Lr and the sinusoidal resonance waveform of
The simple DC conversion gain (14) makes possible the simple control implementation of the output DC voltage using standard PWM controller IC circuit.
We now calculate other DC quantities, such as the DC currents IL, IR and Ig in terms of the operating duty ratio D and the load current as follows. From the DC voltage conversion ratio (14) we can find the DC current conversion ratio from input to output as:
I
G
=ID/(1+D) (15)
From the drawings of the time domain input current waveform ig(t) and the marked DC current levels IL and Ig in
I
G
=DI
L (16)
Replacing (16) into (15) we obtain:
I
L
=I/(1+D) (17)
Finally replacing (17) into (5) we obtain the solution for resonant current contribution IR:
I
R
=ID/(1+D) (18)
Note that (15) and (18) result in simple relationship:
I
R
=I
G (19)
As a cross check, this can be easily verified from the time domain waveforms of the resonant capacitor current iCr(t) shown in
Marked in
I
RS
=DI
L/(1−D) (20)
Replacing (17) into (20) we finally get:
I
RS
=ID/(1−D2) (21)
The above DC current relationships can be used to calculate the losses in various branches of the converter of
The DC current levels IR and IRS are highlighted again in the resonant inductor current waveform
The DC conversion gain function of the buck converter is plotted in dotted line on
Note that idealized DC conversion gain as seen in
The experimental measurements of the DC conversion ratio of the present invention are shown in the graph in
In another comparison for the discrete duty ratio given by:
D=1/n (22)
the DC conversion ratios for present invention and prior-art buck converters are given by:
V/V
g=1/(n+1) (23)
buck converter: V/Vg=1/n (24)
Higher conversion step-down (23) is clearly preferred since it will be shown in a later section that this results in additional advantages in terms of efficiency when compared to conventional buck converter.
Another advantage of the present invention over the prior-art buck converter is in substantial reduction of the turn-OFF losses of the switch S1 compared to buck converter. This is due to reduced turn-OFF voltage. At 60% duty ratio the turn-OFF voltage is only approximately 60% of the buck converter, while turn-OFF current is about 50% of the buck converter resulting in four times reduction of turn-OFF losses under the same conditions. As the turn-OFF losses represent the dominant switching loss this translates into substantial efficiency improvements.
In
We now undertake to develop the pertinent resonance equations, which will describe analytically such time domain solutions. The derived analytical results could then be used to calculate the component values needed for optimum operation of the converter.
From the resonant circuit model of
L
r
di
r
/dt=V
r (25)
C
r
dv
r
/dt=−i
r (26)
whose solutions are:
i
r(t)=Im sin ωrt (27)
v
r(t)=RNIm cos ωrt (28)
where RN is characteristic impedance, ωr is radial resonant frequency, fr resonant frequency and Tr resonant period given by:
R
N=√{square root over (Lr/Cr)} (29)
ωr=1/√{square root over (LrCr)} (30)
T
r=1/fr=2π√{square root over (LrCr)} (31)
Note the importance of the quantity Tr. From the equivalent circuit model in
There is another practical reason to choose that half of the resonant period Tr be equal to the OFF-time interval, so that:
Optimal condition: TOFF=0.5Tr (32)
As described above and from (12), the resonant period is constant and independent of the output capacitance C value. For most practical applications requiring low to middle output voltages such as 1V, 12V or even 24V output and high load currents such as 15 A and higher load currents, an all MOSFET implementation of
This configuration, however, does not prevent the resonant current flow in opposite directions, since the MOSFET implementation of switch S2 as in
DC voltage conversion gain for the prior-art buck converter given by (1) indicated that the DC voltage conversion gain is dependent on the duty ratio D only. More specifically it is NOT dependent on the load current. However, the minimal realization with the diode results in the load current dependency of the DC conversion ratio for light loads when the AC inductor ripple current becomes large when compared to the DC load current. Under those conditions, such converter enters the so-called Discontinuous Inductor Current Mode (DICM), and the DC voltage Conversion ratio becomes strongly dependent on the load. Although the regulation could still be performed by control of duty ratio D, this may require very low duty ratios and results in undesirable change of dynamic response when operating under the light load conditions. Both problems are sidestepped by implementing an all MOSFET switch implementation of
From (16) and (19) another important relationship emerges:
I
R
=DI
L (33)
which displays the relative contribution of the capacitive energy transfer to the load through DC current IR and inductive energy transfer through DC current IL. For example, at the high duty ratio end, such as D=0.75 and 0.43 conversion ratio, the capacitive energy transfer made through resonant inductor Lr contributes 75% of the DC load contribution made by inductive energy transfer through inductance L. At D=0.5 this contribution is still large 50% of the inductive contribution, while 3:1 voltage conversion is achieved simultaneously.
Note also as the ON-time interval and effective duty ratio D is decreased from D=0.75 to lower DC ratios such as D=0.5, 0.4 and 0.25, the peak ripple current of the inductor L will be proportionally reduced, thus resulting in smaller AC ripple of the inductor L and further away from the condition when the total output current is starting at zero current level.
The constant OFF-time interval, described above is a preferred method of control as it is most efficient and simplest to implement. Most standard IC controller chips can be made t operate in constant OFF time variable ON-time mode rather easily. However, if so desired, the constant switching frequency operation could be also implemented with some minor loss in efficiency.
The output current i0 shown in
We now develop the inequality which will make the instantaneous output current i0 (t) at particular operating duty ratio D and output voltage V and load current Ito start at zero current level at the beginning of ON-time interval and finish at zero current level at the end of OFF-time interval. This condition is met when:
T
OFF
V/L≦2IL (34)
where IL is DC current of the inductor L at the highest operating duty ratio and factor 2 above is to reflect that the peak inductor L current is two times higher than the DC current IL at such extreme conditions of zero current turn-ON and zero current turn-OFF of inductor L current.
Using (17), (29) and (31), inequality could be rearranged into more revealing form:
L/L
r≧0.5(1+D)πR/RN (35)
R=V/I (36)
where R is the DC load resistance at operating point D. For operating point at D=0.5 we get simplified formula
L/L
r≧π¾R/RN (37)
As an example, for the converter operating with load current I=10 A and 5V output, load resistance is R=0.55Ω. For Lr=1 μH and Cr=25 μF, we calculate from (29) RN=0.2Ω. Replacing those values in inequality (37) we get:
L/L
r≧5.5 (38)
Therefore the choice for inductor L of 5.5 μH will result in zero current at turn-ON and zero current turn-OFF of inductor L current at D=0.5. Reducing duty ratio from that instant at the same load current of 10 A will result in increased DC bias current on inductor L and reduction of its peak current so that zero turn-ON and zero current turn-OFF of inductor L current is no longer available. However, the reduction of duty ratio will result in reduced peak ripple of inductor L and reduced turn-OFF current of the main controlling switch S1 and its reduced turn-OFF losses.
From the derived DC currents in all branches one can also derive analytical expressions for the rms currents in various branches so that the conduction losses could be calculated. What remains is to determine the voltage stresses of all switches so that the proper rated switching devices could be selected. From the circuit diagram for OFF-time interval in
V
S1
=V
S2
=V
S3
=V
g
−V (39)
For comparison, the voltage stresses for the buck converter are given by:
V
S1
=V
S2
=V
g (40)
For example for a D=0.5, voltage stresses are reduced to ⅔Vg as opposed to Vg in the buck converter. This clearly will lead to reduction of the turn-OFF losses of S1 switch as the turn-OFF current is significantly lower than in the buck converter.
Comparison with the Buck Converter
It is now appropriate to make further comparison of the three-switch step-down converter of the present invention as illustrated in
It is now interesting to observe the component differences between the buck converter and the present invention. The present invention (
The experimental results confirm that despite the use of same total capacitance, the present invention will result in output ripple voltage reduced by at least factor of two over comparable buck converter. The conclusion is that despite initial appearance, the present invention uses the same or less total capacitance then the two-switch buck converter.
The three-switch step-down converter has one additional magnetic component, the resonant inductor Lr. As the detailed analysis and experimental data confirm, this inductor has 20 to 50 times smaller value than the PWM inductor L and thus is implemented as a one turn chip inductor typically in 90 nH inductance range. Ready made chip inductors such as TDK VLB7050HT-R09M are extremely small (7 mm×9 mm×4 mm) and yet they can handle in excess of 56 A current with 0.27 mΩ resistance. Thus its copper and core losses as well as size are in comparison to inductor L negligible. Its size is more than compensated by the significant increase of the size of inductor L needed for the buck converter.
The three-switch step-down converter has also one additional component, the third switch S3. However, this switch conducts only a fraction of the load current. Its conduction losses are more than compensated with the increased conduction loses of the switch S2 in the buck converter as the analysis in the next section reveals. Therefore, the present invention uses less total silicon area for its switches despite having the three switches as opposed to two switches of the comparable buck converter.
Finally, the general conclusion can be reached that the present invention uses less silicon, less magnetic material and less capacitive material than a comparable buck converter and yet results increased efficiency, reduced size and weight and reduced output voltage ripple over the full duty ratio D operating range.
Due to the different DC conversion gains of the two as seen in
Note also that the inductor L in the buck converter must operate at higher DC current level (50% higher at D=0.5) than the inductor L in the present invention. Therefore, buck inductor must use appropriately larger air-gap which reduces its inductance and results in higher peak ripple and therefore higher turn-OFF current and losses of switch S1 as illustrated by the comparison of the output current in present invention (
Note also the lower output ripple current of the present invention due to the current “bump” addition of the resonant inductor current contribution to the load current due to resonance during OFF-time interval. This is confirmed by actual experimental comparison in later section which results in factor of two reduction of output ripple voltage.
The theoretical prediction is that the present invention is more efficient and better performing than buck converter at any operating duty ratio D. The quantitative advantage is highlighted in the final Experimental Section in which both converters are built using effectively the same key components and their efficiency and losses compared at for the same conversion ratios. The conclusion reached is that three-switch converter provides reduction of losses of at least 50% over the full duty ratio operating range.
Several other embodiments of the present invention are obtained by placing the resonant inductor Lr in different branches of the converter. For example, by placing the resonant inductor in the output branch, as shown in
L
r
=L (41)
the DC voltage conversion ratio is obtained as:
V/V
g
=D/(1+0.5D) (42)
which is illustrated by solid line graph in
V
r=0.5V (43)
The same procedure as in previous analysis leads to DC conversion given by equation (42). It is also clear by choosing different values for Lr other than (41) a number of different DC conversion gains could be obtained and plotted as a function of D.
Yet another embodiment of the present invention is illustrated in
To verify the analytical equations derived and check the basic operation of the present invention an experimental prototype using three MOSFET switch configuration of
L=3.8 mH,Lr=0.64 mH,Cr=30 mF,C=960 mFfr=36 kHz (44)
In this prototype there was no attempt to optimize performance for highest efficiency, but instead just to demonstrate characteristic waveforms. The experimental waveforms were recorded as traces on the oscilloscope are arranged so that the top trace shows the drain to source voltage of the controlling switch S1, the second trace shows the resonant inductor current, the third trace shows the inductor L current and bottom trace shows the output current i0 as the sum of the above two currents.
b shows the operation at D=0.33 and 15 A load, which results in 3V output voltage. Once again,
Shown in
a shows for 15 A load current and 3V output, the capacitor voltage vr with a superimposed AC ripple voltage on it as a second trace. The third trace shows the output DC voltage of 3V with superimposed AC ripple voltage on it.
When the switch S2 is implemented with a diode such as in
To demonstrate ultra high efficiency of the three-switch DC-DC converter prototype is built based on the converter of
Specifications: 200 W, 48V to 12V, 18 A converter.
MOSFETS transistors:
S1=IRFH5006; 60V; 4.1 mΩ
Input capacitor: 20×10 μF
Output capacitor: 12×47 μF
Resonant capacitor: 10×2.2 μF
Resonant inductor: 200 nH (TDK chip inductor)
Inductor L: 8.2 μH (RM10 core size)
Resonant and switching frequency: 50 kHz
Graph of the efficiency and power loss as a function of the load current are shown in
Another design is made on smaller RM8 core and was operated at 100 kHz switching frequency. For this design, the measurements of the efficiency over the input voltage regulation range from 36V to 54V are shown in
To verify ultra high efficiency of the converter for low output voltages, a three-switch converter of
The above detailed description of the three-switch step-down converter and its analysis discloses a new hybrid switching method, which is utilized in operation of this converter and number of its embodiments. A hybrid switching method comprises the two switching intervals, an ON-time interval and an OFF-time interval, two inductors, a PWM inductor and a resonant inductor and a resonant capacitor and three switches connected in such a way that the PWM inductor is flux balanced over an entire switching period, the resonant inductor is flux balanced only for a portion of the switching interval, during which it forms the resonant circuit with the resonant capacitor. The converter topology is such that the step-down conversion function is obtained through the duty ratio control of the main controlling switch. The other two switches are operating in an out of phase manner with the main controlling switch, so that when main controlling switch is ON, the other two switches are OFF to result in above mentioned two switching intervals.
Hybrid switching results in a small flux excitation applied to the resonant inductor and being completed during the OFF-time interval. The voltage excitation is a small co-sinusoidal AC ripple voltage superimposed on the DC voltage of the resonant capacitor. This results in its small size being an order of magnitudes smaller than the PWM inductor. It is important that this described hybrid switching method has only one resonance with resonant inductor Lr that is completed during the part of the switching cycle. The other inductor L is subject to the larger square-wave excitation with positive Volt-second applied during ON-time interval and balancing negative Volt-seconds being applied during the OFF-time interval.
Despite hybrid switching, which involves a sinusoidal change of resonant current and resonant voltage during the resonant interval, the DC conversion gain and all other DC steady state quantities, such as DD current of inductor L, are independent of the resonant inductor and resonant capacitor, but are dependent on the duty ratio D only. This results in an easy and simple implementation of the feedback control and regulation following the same method as used for conventional converters.
The direct consequence of such duty ratio dependence is that hybrid switching can be implemented using the conventional feedback control methods as described next.
The control method introduced so far is constant OFF-time, variable ON-time control which ultimately means variable switching frequency. However, for the practical step-down conversion ratios, such as 4:1 and higher as used in experimental examples, the change of the ON-time period is relatively small from the nominal conversion ratio, so that even though a variable switching frequency is employed, he change of switching frequency is so small on the order of 20% from the nominal so that it may not be of any consequences in most practical applications. However, if so desired, a constant switching frequency and variable duty ratio could be employed at the minor sacrifice in efficiency.
For voltages VRM applications requiring 1V output voltage and high 60 A load current, two three-switch, step-down converters can be connected in parallel to share the load equally at 30 A each, such as illustrated in
Additional advantages are realized when each converter is operated at nominal 50% duty ratio and their operation phase shifted, as illustrated by the switch state-diagram of
A three-switch step-down converter provides efficiency, size, cost and other performance advantages over the conventional two-switch buck converter and other conventional step-down converters over the entire duty ratio operating range.
Unlike buck converter which uses only inductive energy transfer, the present invention of three-switch step-down converter employs the capacitive energy transfer in addition to inductive energy transfer to result in much reduced losses and better utilization of the switches resulting in reduced cost of the silicon needed for given efficiency performance.
The present invention also introduces a new hybrid switching method, which implements for the first time the use of odd number of switches, such as three in this case, which is strictly excluded from use in conventional Square-wave, Resonant and Quasi-resonant switching converters, which require an even number of switches (2, 4, 6 etc.), operating as complementary pairs.