samiran_dam
Full Member level 2
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2010
- Messages
- 122
- Helped
- 3
- Reputation
- 6
- Reaction score
- 3
- Trophy points
- 1,298
- Activity points
- 2,419
State space averaging can be applied directly to multiphase converters, but it doesn't really change the results. An N phase converter can be modeled as a single phase converter with the impedance scaled down by 1/N. In the case of a voltage mode converter this means your effective inductance is reduced, for a current mode converter it means the effective output current is increased, etc.
Design of multiphase converters is usually guided by ripple requirements, so you should start there.
No, that's not a design recommendation, it's just what happens to the effective inductance of a multiphase converter.In my case it is a voltage-mode control. So, according to your suggestion I should decrease the inductance (L) by 1/N times.
Correct, that's what I meant.Actually, I have seen one paper where, for multiphase buck converter, it was shown that equivalent L = (actual L in each phase)/N
No, this isn't really correct. Keep in mind that from a state space averaging perspective, the switching frequency is completely irrelevant (except in determining what frequency range the SSA model is valid for). In terms of input and output ripple, a multiphase converter will also be different from an equivalent single phase converter operating at N times the frequency. The ripple vs duty cycle dependence for multiphase converters is very different to single phase converters.and equivalent Fs=actual Fs*N.
It's the same result. It's a somewhat trivial thing, so I'm not aware of any papers that actually derive it, but it shouldn't be difficult to do so by hand.However for the boost converter, I am not getting any paper which explains how to derive the equivalent single-phase circuit.
I think for DCM, I need to know the switching frequency. So from DCM point of view, I need to ensure what would be the equivalent switching frequency. Am I correct?No, this isn't really correct. Keep in mind that from a state space averaging perspective, the switching frequency is completely irrelevant (except in determining what frequency range the SSA model is valid for).
Let me do some analysis and simulations to convince myself with this point.In terms of input and output ripple, a multiphase converter will also be different from an equivalent single phase converter operating at N times the frequency. The ripple vs duty cycle dependence for multiphase converters is very different to single phase converters.
I am not really bothered about the derivation of input current ripple or output voltage ripple by the equivalent single-phase circuit. My motivation is to derive the control-to-output transfer function of the converter in DCM and then verify the same by simulating the equivalent circuit in Cadence (through PSS/PAC analysis).For deriving the input and output ripple for a multiphase DCM boost, I doubt you'll find any references giving the formula, but it is not very difficult to derive by hand.
Surely, that would be helpful. Let me start with the knowledge I have gathered from you. I will surely ping you whenever I stumbleI can assist if you need help.
I suppose that for DCM converters, frequency can be thought of as affecting the state space model, in that the relationship between average currents/voltages and duty cycle will depend on frequency (which is not the case with CCM operation). However, when actually deriving the SSA model, what you ultimately want is your bias conditions, partial state matrices, and interval weights, all of which are affected by frequency.I think for DCM, I need to know the switching frequency. So from DCM point of view, I need to ensure what would be the equivalent switching frequency. Am I correct?
That's strange, because usually the main objective of using multiphase converters is to lower ripple, sometimes almost eliminating it completely. It's also quite uncommon for interleaving to be applied to DCM converters, or to voltage mode converters. In fact, you may end up being concerned about imbalances in duty cycle between phases which lead to strange behavior. Such is a problem with voltage mode interleaved converters, but I'm not sure about voltage mode ones.I am not really bothered about the derivation of input current ripple or output voltage ripple by the equivalent single-phase circuit.
I suppose that for DCM converters, frequency can be thought of as affecting the state space model, in that the relationship between average currents/voltages and duty cycle will depend on frequency (which is not the case with CCM operation). However, when actually deriving the SSA model, what you ultimately want is your bias conditions, partial state matrices, and interval weights, all of which are affected by frequency.
It's also quite uncommon for interleaving to be applied to DCM converters, or to voltage mode converters. In fact, you may end up being concerned about imbalances in duty cycle between phases which lead to strange behavior. Such is a problem with voltage mode interleaved converters, but I'm not sure about voltage mode ones.
I'm not sure that trying to go directly to a single phase equivalent circuit with an "equivalent switching frequency" is the right approach for a DCM converter... at least if you take that approach then you should find biasing conditions before converting to a single phase model (since for biasing in very nonlinearly dependent on frequency and duty cycle). Then once biasing for the phases is established you could find the SSA model for each one (with 1/N of the load impedance) or combine them into a single phase model (with 1/N of the inductance).As you agreed that frequency is of concern for DCM, then what about the equivalent Switching Frequency - what will be its value?
I would only expect equivalent performance for averaged small signal disturbances.Another thing is the equivalent converter will not give exactly same transient performance (switching ripple, settling and overshoot) as that by the actual multiphase converter, right? If that is true, then the equivalence only lies from the averaged perspective - is it so? - please explain.
For a multiphase VMC you'll need interleaved ramp signals which are ideally identical except they're out of phase. But in reality there will be offsets and slope differences, as well as skew in the PWM signal path, so you should expect some imbalance in the phase duty cycles. This will lead to current imbalances, which can potentially defeat your attempts at analysis. On the other hand, if you are in DCM then such errors probably won't have a huge effect since their effects die off every cycle.Going by a simplistic approach, if I derive the Gvd(s) considering only one phase (not equivalent, just one of the N phases) considering the load current divided by N (as the load current is equally shared by all the phases), and then design the compensator based on that, will it be a problem when actual multiphase converter is working is closed loop? Please have a look at the attached plots (from simulation). Here I have shown the inductor current ripple and output voltage ripple for a single-phase and a 5-phased DCM boost converter. L=1 uH (for each phase), Fs=500 KHz, C=10 uF, Vg=5 V. For the 5-phased converter, load current is 1 A while for the single-phase, the load current is scaled down to 1/5 i.e. 0.2 A. Duty ratio (D) is same (=24.4%) for both the cases. Inductor current ripple is same for both the cases, however, average output voltage is 12 V in case of 5-phase whereas it is 11.77 V in case of single-phase. So, what is your suggestions?
If I am controlling all the phases by a single compensator then what could cause the imbalance of duty cycle? I am not clear about this point.
The effect of multiple phases is just to multiple that current source be N, which is the same thing you'd get if you took a single phase and analyzed it with L/N (but with the same switching frequency!!).
Why are you trying to use large-signal transient response to verify the small-signal behavior of a very nonlinear system? The results are believable, but they don't seem to prove anything either.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?