See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261304619

Adaptive control design for the buck-boost

converter with desired pole/zero assignment

Conference Paper · October 2012

DOI: 10.1109/IECON.2012.6389114

CITATIONS READS

3 131

3 authors, including:

Chung-Shi Tseng
Minghsin University of Science and Technology
74 PUBLICATIONS 2,946 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Chung-Shi Tseng on 09 September 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Adaptive Control Design for the Buck-Boost
Converter with Desired Pole/Zero Assignment
Ming-Fa Tsai, Chung-Shi Tseng, and Zen-Chen Zhou
Department of Electrical Engineering, Minghsin University of Science and Technology, Hsinchu, Taiwan
E-mail: mftsai@must.edu.tw and cstseng@must.edu.tw
Abstract- In this paper, an adaptive digital control scheme is
proposed for the buck-boost converter using a desired pole/zero
assignment approach. In the case that the plant parameters are
well-known, through the sensitivity function a digital controller
for the buck-boost converter with desired pole/zero assignment
is proposed by solving some simple algebraic equations instead
of solving a Diophantine equation to meet the requirements of
internal stability for the closed-loop system. In the case that the
plant parameters are uncertain, a digital adaptive controller for
buck-boost converter is also proposed using the recursive least-
squares (RLS) algorithm to estimate the uncertain parameters,
where the desired poles and zero are still assigned for the
sensitivity function with respect to the estimated parameters at
each sampling step. A projection algorithm is proposed for the
estimated parameters to satisfy the characteristics of poles and
zero for a buck-boost converter, where poles should be inside the
unit circle and zero should be outside the unit circle,
respectively. To verify the validity of the proposed digital
controller, experimental set-up is built for the buck-boost
converter and the fully digital adaptive controller is
implemented by a digital signal processor TMS320- F28335.
I. INTRODUCTION
The dc-dc converter is used as a power supply in a wide
variety of applications. Basically, there are two standard types
of dc-dc converters that are buck converter which decreases
the voltage level and boost converter which increases the
voltage level from an input dc source. Alternatively, the
buck-boost converter, which has abilities of either decreasing
or increasing the voltage level from an input dc source, is a
combination of buck converter and boost converter.
Inherently, the buck-boost converter has a right half-plane
(RHP) zero, which is also called non-minimum phase (NMP)
system [1]. As well known, the control system design for a
non-minimum phase system is more difficult than that for a
minimum phase system [2]-[3]. The controller design for a
non-minimum phase system should avoid the unstable
pole/zero cancellation to guarantee the internal stability for
the closed-loop system. Conventionally, PI (or PID) control
scheme is proposed for the buck-boost converter via root-
locus method or pole-placement technique [5]-[10]. However,
these methods fail to determine suitable PI (or PID) control
gains when system parameters such as the inductance,
capacitance, and the load resistance are uncertain. Therefore,
various kinds of adaptive control have been proposed to deal
with the control system design for the plants with the
uncertain parameters [11]-[18].
Almost all the adaptive pole-assignment algorithms need to
solve a Diophantine equation at each sampling step [19]-[20].
978-1-4673-2420-5/12/$31.00 ©2012 IEEE 5924
It is time consuming and is an obvious obstacle to actual
application. The purpose of this paper is to develop a simple
algorithm to synthesize an adaptive controller such that the
desired pole/zero of the sensitivity function can be arbitrarily
assigned and the stability of the closed-loop system is always
guaranteed for the buck-boost converter. The importance of
pole assignment has been shown in many previously
published papers and the desired zero assignment of the
sensitivity function can make reference signal tracking
possible. In the case that the plant parameters are assumed to
be well-known, based on the small signal model of the buck-
boost converter, the proposed digital controller with the
desired pole/zero assignment for the sensitivity function can
be obtained by solving some simple algebraic equations
instead of solving a Diophantine equation. In the case that the
plant parameters are uncertain (or unknown), an adaptive
digital controller is proposed for the buck-boost converter
using the recursive least-squares (RLS) algorithm [21] to
estimate the uncertain parameters, where the desired poles
and zero are still assigned for the sensitivity function with
respect to the estimated parameters at each sampling step.
Finally, the proposed adaptive digital controller is
implemented by a digital signal processor (DSP-TMS320
F28335) to verify the validity of the proposed approaches for
the buck-boost converter. From the experimental results, the
proposed digital adaptive controller can achieve good
performance on voltage regulation for the buck-boost
converter with uncertain parameters.
II. CONTROL DESIGN FOR BUCK-BOOST CONVERTER
WITH DESIRED POLE/ZERO ASSIGNMENT
The circuit schematic of a buck-boost converter with
voltage-mode control is shown in Fig. 1. The continuous-time
control-to-output (or incremental duty ratio-to-incremental
output) transfer function of the small signal model for a buck-
boost converter in continuous conduction mode (CCM) can
be derived as follows [1].
1
G pdo ( 1 − s)
ωz
Gp( s ) =
1 1
(1 + s )( 1 + s)
p1 p2 (1)
where
ω2G
G pdo = 0 do ,
ωz
 Q1 D1 Ts u (t )
Buck − Boost
Zero − order hold y(t )
Converter
D/ A
Gho (s) G p (s )
DTSp Digital
VI L C R VO
Controller
TSp Ts
A/ D
Fig. 1 The circuit schematic of a buck-boost converter.

Fig. 2 A digital control scheme for a buck-boost converter.

V D
Gdo = o , D′ = 1 − D , Vo = − V I ,
DD ′ D′ Ghop ( z ) = Z{Gho ( s )G p ( s )}
D′ 1
ω0 = , G pd 0 (1 − s)
LC −1 ωz
= (1 − z )Z { }
RD ′ 2 1 1
ωz = , s (1 + s )(1 + s)
LD p1
(4) p2
ω0 ± jω 0 4Q − 1 2 1
p1 , p 2 = , In the case of Q > , the discrete-time transfer function for
2Q 2
the buck-boost converter with a zero-order hold has the
C following form
Q = RD ′ .
L
b0 z + b1 B( z )
As can be seen from (1), there are two poles and one zero. Ghop ( z ) = 2
=
In general, the poles locate at the left-half plane (LHP) and z + a0 z + a1 A( z )
(5)
the zero locates at the right-half plane (RHP), respectively.
where
The characteristics of poles depends on the value of Q and
has the following three types. A(z) = z 2 + a0 z + a1
1 ω ± jω 0 4Q 2 − 1 B(z) = b0 z + b1
(1) When Q > , p1 , p 2 = 0 are complex (6)
2 2Q In (5), due to the mapping from (4), the poles of Ghop ( z )
conjugate poles.
locate inside the unit circuit of z-plane and zero of Ghop ( z )
1 ω
(2) When Q = , p1 , p 2 = 0 are the same real poles. locates outside the unit circuit of z-plane. In this study, A( z )
2 2Q
and B( z ) are coprime and can be factorized as follows.
1 ω ± ω0 1 − 4Q 2
(3) When Q < , p1 , p 2 = 0 are the A( z ) = A+ ( z ) A− ( z )
2 2Q
different real poles. B( z ) = B+ ( z ) B− ( z )
1 (7)
In this paper, we study the case of Q > , i.e., two poles where
2
of the buck-boost converter are complex conjugate and the A+ ( z ) and B+ ( z ) have all their zeros in z ≥ 1 .
other two cases can also be followed by the proposed method. A− ( z ) and B− ( z ) have all their zeros in z < 1 .
A digital control scheme for the buck-boost converter is For a buck-boost converter, there are two poles inside the
depicted in Fig. 2, where G ho ( s ) is a zero-order hold. unit circle and one zero outside the unit circle and therefore
Combining the zero-order hold G ho ( s ) and the buck- A− ( z ) = A( z ), B+ ( z ) = B( z ),
boost converter, G p ( s ) , we define A+ ( z ) = 1, B− ( z ) = 1.
and
b0 z + b1 B (z)
G hop ( s ) Δ G ho ( s )G p ( s ) Ghop ( z ) = 2
= +
z + a0 z + a1 A− ( z )
(2) (8)
where The configuration of the proposed digital control is shown
1 − e −Ts s in Fig. 3, where the reference input r ( z ) is assumed to be a
G ho ( s ) = (3)
s step function as follows.
where Ts is the sampling period. Taking the Z-transform on
G hop ( s ) , we obtain

5925
 r(z) ~
e (z) u(z) B(z) y(z) If S ( z ) satisfies all the requirements of internal stability,
C(z) Ghop (z) =
A(z) then we can directly obtain the controller C ( z ) as follows
1 − S ( z)
C ( z) =
Fig. 3 The configuration of the proposed digital control Ghop ( z ) S ( z ) (13)
rm z r z With the above controller, there is no unstable pole/zero
r ( z) = = m cancellation between C ( z ) and Ghop ( z ) . From condition (b)
z −1 M + ( z)
(9) of above lemma, the numerator of sensitivity function must
where rm is the amplitude of the step input and contain A+ ( z ) , i.e., the sensitivity function must be of the
M + ( z ) = ( z − 1) . following form
Let us define a sensitivity function for Fig. 3 as W ( z )( z − 1) l ( z ) A+ ( z )( z − 1) l ( z )( z − 1)
S ( z) = = =
S ( z ) = (1 + Ghop ( z )C ( z ) ) −1
(10)
g ( z) g ( z) g ( z) (14)
where C ( z ) denotes the controller to be determined later. where g ( z ) contains the desired poles which satisfy the
From Fig. 3, the tracking error e ( z ) is given as condition (a) and l ( z ) is a polynomial to be determined by
the condition (c) in the above lemma. From (14), we obtain
e ( z ) = S ( z )r ( z ) (11) g ( z ) − l ( z )( z − 1)
To track a step reference signal r ( z ) , the right hand side 1 − S ( z) =
g ( z) (15)
of (11) must not have any pole in z ≥ 1 , i.e., for this study To satisfy condition (c) in the above lemma, the numerator
the sensitivity function S ( z ) must have a zero at ( z − 1) to g ( z ) − l ( z )( z − 1) in (15) must contain B+ ( z ) , i.e., it must be
cancel the pole of r ( z ) at ( z − 1). Hence the zero assignment of the following form
of is very important in this tracking problem. The importance g ( z ) − l ( z )( z − 1) = B+ ( z ) F ( z ) = B ( z ) F ( z ) (16)
of pole assignment has been shown in many previously with
published papers. Our design objective is to synthesize a
deg ( l ( z ) ) = deg ( B+ ( z ) ) = deg ( B ( z ) ) = 1 (17)
controller C ( z ) such that the sensitivity function S ( z ) has
and we simply let
all desired poles and one desired zero for the purpose of
tracking a step reference signal. For the purpose of tracking a l ( z ) = ( z + l1 ) (18)
step reference signal and desired pole assignment, the −b
sensitivity function S ( z ) must be of the following form Since B+ ( z ) = b0 z + b1 , if let z1 = 1 , then
b0
W ( z ) M + ( z ) W ( z )( z − 1)
S ( z) = = g ( z1 ) − l ( z1 )( z1 − 1) = B+ ( z1 ) F ( z1 ) = 0 ,
g (z) g ( z) (39)
(12)
where g ( z ) is a Hurwitz polynomial containing the desired g ( z1 )
l ( z1 ) = z1 + l1 = ,
( z1 − 1) (20)
poles in z < 1 , ( z − 1) is the desired zero for S ( z ) to cancel
and
the pole of r ( z ) at ( z − 1) , and W ( z ) is an undetermined g ( z1 )
monic polynomial which should be determined to satisfy the l1 = − z1
( z1 − 1) (21)
following internal stability constraint.
In order to satisfy the requirement of causality for the
Definition [22]： The sensitivity function S ( z ) is said to be
sensitivity function S ( z ) in (14),
stable if the closed-loop of Fig. 3 is asymptotically stable for
some choice of the controller C ( z ) , i.e., no pole/zero deg( g ( z )) ≥ deg(l ( z )) + deg(( z − 1)) = 1 + 1 = 2 (22)
cancellation between C ( z ) and Ghop ( z ) in z ≥ 1 . For the simplicity of design, let deg( g ( z )) = 2 and
The following lemma provides the conditions of internal g ( z ) = ( z − d1 )( z − d 2 )
(23)
stability for a closed-loop sensitivity function. where d1 and d 2 are desired poles for the sensitivity
Lemma [22]-[23]: The sensitivity function S ( z ) ≠ 0 is
function. Hence, F ( z ) can be obtained from (16) as follows.
internally stable if and only if all the following conditions
( z − d1 )( z − d 2 ) − ( z + l1 )( z − 1)
hold F ( z) =
(a) S ( z ) is analytic in z ≥ 1 . B+ ( z )
(1 − d1 − d 2 − l1 ) z + d1d 2 + l1
(b) Every zero of the polynomial A( z ) in z ≥ 1 is a zero of =
b0 z + b1 (24)
S ( z ) of at least the same multiplicity.
After determining l ( z ) and F ( z ) , we can obtain the
(c) Every zero of the polynomial B ( z ) in z ≥ 1 is a zero of
corresponding controller C ( z ) as
1- S ( z ) of at least the same multiplicity.

5926
 yˆ(k ) = [ − y ( k − 1) − y ( k − 2) u ( k − 1) u (k − 2)]
r(k) e~ (k) u(k) y(k)
T
× ⎡⎣ aˆ0 aˆ1 bˆ0 bˆ1 ⎤⎦
Ghop (z)
Ĉ(z)

e(k)
Ĝhop (z) = ϕ (k )θˆ(k ) (30)
ŷ(k)

u(k) e(k)
θˆ(k ) y(k)
Fig. 4 shows the adaptive control scheme for the buck-
boost converter, where a recursive least-squares (RLS)
algorithm [21] is used to estimate the uncertain parameters of
the buck-boost converter. In Fig. 4, Ĝ hop (z) is an estimated
Fig. 4 The adaptive control scheme for the buck-boost converter.
model (transfer function) of the buck-boost converter, where
1 − S (z) ( z 2 + a0 z + a1 ) F ( z )
C ( z) = = e(k ) = y (k ) − yˆ (k ) and estimated parameter vector
Ghop ( z ) S ( z ) ( z + l1 )( z − 1) (25)
θˆ(k ) = [aˆ 0 aˆ1 bˆ0 bˆ1 ]T is updated by the following recursive
Example: It is assumed that the transfer function of a buck- least-squares (RLS) algorithm.
boost converter is with B( z ) = −12.07 z − 15.32 and θˆ(k ) = θˆ(k − 1) + P (k )ϕ (k − 1)e(k ) (31)
A(z) = z 2 − 1.77 z + 0.98, and desired poles P(k ) = [ P(k − 1) − P (k − 1)ϕ (k − 1)
g ( z ) = ( z − 0.2)( z − 0.2). From the above analysis, we can × V (k − 1) −1ϕ (k − 1)T P (k − 1)] / λ (32)
solve l1 = 0.318 and where
( z − 0.2)( z − 0.2) − ( z + 0.318)( z − 1) e(k ) = y (k ) − ϕ (k − 1)T θˆ(k − 1) (33)
F ( z) =
−12.07 z − 15.32 T
V (k − 1) = λ + ϕ (k − 1) P(k − 1)ϕ (k − 1) (34)
= −0.0234 (26) and λ (0 < λ ≤ 1) is a forgetting factor which is chosen close
By substituting l ( z ) = z + 0.318 and F ( z ) = −0.0234 into
to unity, θˆ(k ) = [aˆ 0 aˆ1 bˆ0 bˆ1 ]T is an estimate of
(25), we obtain
−0.0234 z 2 + 0.0414 z − 0.0229 θ (k ) = [a0 a1 b0 b1 ]T . The initial values of θˆ(0) and
C ( z) = P(0) = κI 4×4 ( κ >> 1 and I is an identity matrix) are given
z 2 − 0.682 z − 0.318 (27)
in advance.
When performing the estimating process, the estimated
III. ADAPTIVE CONTROL DESIGN FOR BUCK-BOOST poles and zero may be outside, on, or inside the unit circle
CONVERTER WITH DESIRED POLE/ZERO ASSIGNMENT
in z-plane. As known, the poles of the buck-boost
converter are inside the unit circle and the zero is outside
In the above section, the digital controller C ( z ) can be the unit circle. Therefore, we have to judge whether the
obtained if the parameters a 0 , a1 , b0 , and b1 are exactly locations of the estimated poles and zero are inside the unit
known. The exact values of a 0 , a1 , b0 , and b1 depend on circle and outside the unit circle, respectively. The
projection algorithm for the estimated poles and zero is
the exact information of resistor R , inductor L , capacitor
proposed as follows:
C , duty ratio D and input voltage V I in the buck-boost
(a) Projection of the estimated zero: Since the
converter. Sometimes, true values of these parameters may numerator of the estimated model (transfer function) is
not be exactly measured. In this section, an adaptive control
b̂
design for the buck-boost converter is proposed in the case Bˆ ( z ) = bˆ0 z + bˆ1 , if 1 > 1 then the estimated zero is outside
that the parameters of a 0 , a1 , b0 , and b1 are uncertain. b̂0
From (5), the difference-type of the transfer function for b̂1
the buck boost converter is expressed as follows. the unit circle and is reasonable. If ≤ 1 then the estimated
y (k ) = −a0 y (k − 1) − a1 y (k − 2) b̂0
+b0 u (k − 1) + b1u (k − 2) (28) zero is not outside the unit circle and the estimated b̂0 and
The above equation can be written as b̂1 can’t be used. In this case, we have to project this
y (k ) = [ − y ( k − 1) − y ( k − 2) u ( k − 1) u (k − 2)] estimated zero to the previously estimated zero. In other
× [ a0 a1 b0 b1 ]
T words, we can project b̂0 and b̂1 , which are improper, to the

= ϕ (k )θ (k ) previously estimated values of b̂0 and b̂1 to preserve the

(29)
property of zero, which is outside the unit circle, in the buck-
If θ (k ) is replaced by its estimate θˆ(k ), then the estimated
boost converter.
output yˆ(k ) is represented by (b) Projection of the estimated poles: Since the
denominator of the estimated model (transfer function) is

5927
 Buck-Boost Converter
Fig. 5 The configuration of adaptive control for the buck-boost converter.
Â(z) = z 2 + â 0 z + â 1 , the Jury’s Test can be used to
determine the locations of the estimated poles. According
to the Jury’s Test, if (a) Aˆ (1) > 0 , (b) Aˆ (−1) > 0 , and (c)
â1 < 1 are all satisfied then all the estimated poles are
inside the unit circle. If one of them is not satisfied, similarly
we can project the estimated values of â0 and â1 to the
previously estimated values of â0 and â1 to preserve the
property of poles, which are inside the unit circle, in the
buck-boost converter.
According to the above analysis, the Design Procedure of
the proposed adaptive control design for the buck-boost
converter with desired pole/zero assignment is summarized as
follows:
Step 1: Given initial â0 , â1 , b̂0 , and b̂1 which satisfy
b̂1
> 1 and (a) Aˆ (1) > 0 , (b) Aˆ (−1) > 0 , and (c)
b̂0
â1 < 1 .
Step 2: Solve l̂1 from (21) and obtain Fˆ ( z ) from (24) by
the estimated â0 , â1 , b̂0 , and b̂1 .
Step 3: Substitute lˆ( z ) and Fˆ ( z ) into (25), we obtain
Aˆ ( z ) Fˆ ( z )
Cˆ ( z ) = − .
lˆ( z )( z − 1)
Step 4: Update Aˆ ( z ) = z 2 + aˆ z + aˆ and Bˆ ( z ) = bˆ z + bˆ
0 1
using RLS and the projection algorithm.
Repeat Step 2 to Step 4 to update the digital controller Cˆ ( z )
and the parameters of â0 , â1 , b̂0 , and b̂1 at every adaptive
step.
IV. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
In this section, to verify the performance of the proposed
adaptive control scheme for the buck-boost converter,
experiments are carried out using a floating-point 150 MHz
DSP TMS320-F28335. The configuration of the proposed
adaptive control for the buck-boost converter is shown in Fig.
5, in which the left part is the proposed digital controller
realized by a DSP TMS320-F28335 and the right part is the
circuit of buck-boost converter. The sampling period for the
digital controller is Ts = 0.88ms and an 18-KHz PWM
module is used in the DSP as the duty ratio to drive the power
MOSFET.
The digital controller is realized according the Design
Procedure in the above Section. From Fig. 5, the output
voltage Vo is sampled by ADC module and becomes digital
output signal y (k ) . By giving initial â0 , â1 , b̂0 , and b̂1 , the
polynomials lˆ( z ) and Fˆ ( z ) can be obtained by solving (21)
and (24), respectively. Then, the digital controller Cˆ ( z ) can
be obtained from (25). The control input, which is the duty
ratio, is calculated by u (k ) = Cˆ ( z )e (k ) , where the error signal
is calculated by e (k ) = r (k ) − y (k ) . The duty ratio is
implemented by a PWM module in the DSP. The recursive
least-squares algorithm and a projection algorithm of judging
estimated poles and zero are used to update the estimated
parameters θˆ(k ) = [aˆ aˆ bˆ bˆ ]T using u (k ) , y (k ) , and
0 1 0 1
e( k ) .
The experimental results for the boost-mode converter
using the proposed adaptive control are shown in Fig. 6 with
desired poles g ( z ) = ( z − 0.2)( z − 0.2), a forgetting factor
λ = 0.99 , initial values â 0 = −1.41 , â1 = 0.92 , b̂0 = −5.76 ,
b̂1 = −6.7 , and P(0) = 1000 I 4×4 . The initial values for â 0 ,
â1 , b̂0 , b̂1 can be obtained from rough knowledge of resistor
R , inductor L , capacitor C , duty ratio D and input voltage
V I . The desired output voltage is set to be 24V and the input
voltage is about 8V. The experiment is performed without the
exact knowledge of all parameters. The experimental results
for the buck-mode converter using the proposed adaptive
control are shown in Fig.7 with the same conditions as that in
the boost mode. The desired output voltage is set to be 5V.
V. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, an adaptive digital control scheme with
desired pole/zero assignment of the sensitivity function is
proposed for the buck-boost converter. The controller design
is based on the small signal model of the buck-boost
converter and the sensitivity function of the closed-loop
0 1 system. In the case that the plant parameters are well-known,
a digital controller is obtained for the buck-boost converter by
solving some simple algebraic equations instead of a
Diophantine equation. In the case that the plant parameters
are uncertain (or unknown), a digital controller with adaptive
control scheme is proposed for the buck-boost converter
using the recursive least-squares (RLS) algorithm and a
projection algorithm to estimate the uncertain parameters,
where the desired poles and zero are still assigned for the
sensitivity function with respect to the estimated parameters.
To verify the validity of the proposed digital controller,
experimental set-up is built for the buck-boost converter and
the fully digital adaptive controller is implemented by a
digital signal processor TMS320-F28335. From the
5928
 experimental results, the proposed adaptive controller can [1] R. W. Erickson, Fundamentals of Power Electronics, Fifth Edition,
U.S.A, Kluwer Academic Pub., 1991.
achieve good performance on the voltage regulation for the [2] E. Vidal-Idiarte, L. Martinez-Salamero, H. Valderama-Blavi, F.
buck-boost converter with uncertain parameters. The Guinjoan, and J. Maixe, “Analysis and Design of H ∞ Control of
proposed method is simple and is suitable for practical Nonminimum Phase-Switching Converters,” IEEE Transactions on
control design for the buck-boost converter. Circuits and Systems I: Fundamental Theory and Applications, vol. 50,
no. 10, pp. 1316–1323, Oct. 2003.
[3] J. Alvarez-Ramirez, L. Cervantes, G. Espinosa-Perez, P. Maya, and A.
Morales, “A Stable Design of PI Control for DC-DC Converters with
24V an RHS Zero,” IEEE Trans. on Circuits and Systems I: Fundamental
Theory and Applications, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 103–106, Jan. 2001.
[4] S.-C. Tan, Y. M. Lai, and C. K. Tse, “General Design Issues of Sliding-
Mode Controllers in DC-DC Converters,” IEEE Trans. on Ind.
Electron., vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 1160–1174, March 2008.
[5] D. Trevisan, P. Mattavelli, and P. Tenti, “Digital Control of Single-
Inductor Multiple-Output Step-Down DC-DC Converters in CCM,”
IEEE Trans. on Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 9, pp. 3476–3483, Sep.
2008.
[6] K. M. Tsang, W. L. Chan, and X. L. Wei, “Robust DC/DC Buck
Converter using Conditional Integrator Compensator,” Electronic
Letters, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 152–153, Jan. 2008.
(a) [7] C. Sreekumar and V. Agarwal, “Hybrid Control Approach for the
Output Voltage Regulation in Buck Type DC-DC Converter,” IET
Proceedings-Electric Power Applications, vol. 1, no. 6, pp. 897–906,
Nov. 2007.
[8] C. Sreekumar and V. Agarwal, “A Hybrid Control Algorithm for
Voltage Regulation in DC-DC Boost Converter,” IEEE Trans. on Ind.
Electron., vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 2530–2538, June 2008.
[9] G. K. Andersen and F. Blaabjerg, “Current Programmed Control of a
Single-Phase Two-Switch Buck-Boost Power Factor Correction
Circuit,” IEEE Trans. on Ind. Electron., vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 263–271,
Feb. 2006.
[10] A. J. Forsyth, I. K. Ellis, and M. Moller, “Adaptive Control of a High-
Frequency DC-DC Converter by Parameter Scheduling,” IEE
Proceedings-Electric Power Applications, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 447–454,
(b) July 1999.
Fig. 6 Boost mode: (a) the transient waveform of the output voltage, (b) the [11] P. Y. Wu and P. K. T. Mok, “A Monolithic Buck Converter with Near-
PWM signal. Optimum Reference Tracking Response using Adaptive-Output-
Feedback,” IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, vol. 42, no. 11, pp.
2441–2450, Nov. 2007.
[12] M. F. Mahmoud and Fred C. Y. Lee, “Analysis and Design of an
5V Adaptive Multiloop Controlled Two-Winding Buck/Boost Regulator,”
IEEE Trans. on Ind. Electron., vol. IE-29, no. 1, pp. 7–18, Feb. 1982.
[13] L. Yacoubi, K. Al-Haddad, L.-A. Dessaint, F. Fnaiech, “A DSP-Based
Implementation of a Nonlinear Model Reference Adaptive Control for a
Three-Phase Three-Level NPC Boost Rectifier Prototype,” IEEE Trans.
on Power Electron., vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 1084–1092, Sep. 2005.
[14] S.-C. Tan, Y. M. Lai, C. K. Tse, and M. K. H. Cheung, “Adaptive
Feedforward and Feedback Control Schemes for Sliding Mode
Controlled Power Converter,” IEEE Trans. on Power Electron., vol.
21, no. 1, pp. 182–192, Jan. 2006.
[15] E. Figueres, G. Garcera, J. M. Benavent, M. Pascual, and J. A.
(a) Martinez, “Adaptive Two-Loop Voltage-Mode Control of DC-DC
Switching Converters,” IEEE Trans. on Ind. Electron., vol. 53, no. 1,
pp. 239–253, Feb. 2006.
[16] J. Leyva-Ramos, J. A. Morales-Saldana, and M. Martinez-Cruz,
“Robust Stability Analysis for Current-Programmed Regulators,” IEEE
Trans. on Ind. Electron., vol. 49, no. 5, pp. 1138–1145, Oct. 2002.
[17] Y. Wang, H. Yu, and J. Yu, “The modeling and control of buck-boost
converter based on energy-shaping theory,” IEEE ICIT 2008. pp. 1-6.
[18] F. Luo and D. Ma,” Design of tri-mode adaptive-output buck-boost
power converter for power efficient integrated system,” IEEE Trans. on
Ind. Electron., vol. 57, no. 6, pp. 2151–2160, June 2010.
[19] C. M. Lin and B. S. Chen, “Adaptive Controller with desired pole/zero
assignment,” IEE Proc., vol. 133, pt. D, no. 6, pp. 301-305, 1986.
[20] P. E. Wellstead, J. M. Edmunds, D. Prager, and P. Zanker, “Self-tuning
pole/zero regulations,” Int. J. Control, vol. 30, pp. 1-26, 1979.
[21] G. C. Goodwin and K. S. Sin, Adaptive Filtering Prediction and
(b) Control, Prentice-Hall Inc., 1984.
Fig. 7 Buck mode: (a) the transient response of the output voltage, (b) the [22] D. C. Youla, J. J. Bongiorno, and H. A. Jabr, “Modern Wiener-Hopf
PWM signal Design of Optimal Controllers-part Π,” IEEE Trans., Automat. Control,
AC-26, pp. 319-338, 1976.
REFERENCES [23] G. F. Franklin. and J. D. Powell, Digital Control of Dynamic System,
Addison-Welsley, 1980.

5929

View publication stats

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)