IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 68, NO.

5, MAY 2019 4537

A Single-Switch Transformerless DC–DC

Converter With Universal Input Voltage for Fuel
Cell Vehicles: Analysis and Design
Nour Elsayad , Student Member, IEEE, Hadi Moradisizkoohi , Student Member, IEEE,
and Osama A. Mohammed , Fellow, IEEE

Abstract—A new single-switch high step-up dc–dc converter is

proposed, in this paper, for fuel cell vehicles. The proposed topol-
ogy utilizes an L2 C3 D2 network to obtain high voltage gain and
reduce the voltage stress on the power switch. Additionally, the pro-
posed converter has a universal input voltage in order to suit the
soft output characteristics of the fuel cell. Comprehensive analyses
of the steady-state operation in continuous conduction mode and
discontinuous conduction mode, and design considerations of the
proposed converter are given. Finally, a 400 V/1.6 kW scaled-down
prototype is developed to validate the effectiveness and feasibility
of the proposed converter.
Index Terms—DC-DC converter, universal input voltage, boost,
fuel cell, electric vehicle, transformerless.
I. INTRODUCTION
ITH the increasing efforts to decrease the dependency on
W the depleting fossil fuels and the growing acceptance of
clean energy sources adoption, a lot of research has been focused
on the electrification of transportation means [1]–[3]. Fuel cell-
powered electric vehicles (EVs) are an important player in the
clean energy vehicles segment and they have the following ad-
vantages: clean electrical energy generation with zero emissions,
high energy conversion efficiency, and a higher range compared
to battery-powered EVs [4]–[7]. On the other hand, the fuel cell
has a relatively low output voltage and high current, and it has
soft output characteristics as its output voltage drops as the out-
put current increases [7], [8]. Therefore, the fuel cell cannot be
directly interfaced to the dc-link bus (400 V) of the inverter in-
side the EV [4], [7]. The fuel cell requires a high step-up dc-dc
converter to interface it to dc-link of the inverter, as shown in
Fig. 1. This dc-dc converter should have a universal input volt-
age feature with wide voltage gain range to suit the soft output
characteristics of the fuel cell.
Additionally, this dc-dc converter has to have low input cur-
rent ripple to prolong the life time of the fuel cell [9], and a
common ground between its input and output ports to avoid ad-
ditional EMI and maintenance safety problems [10].
Manuscript received August 6, 2018; revised December 31, 2018; accepted
March 9, 2019. Date of publication March 18, 2019; date of current version May
28, 2019. The review of this paper was coordinated by Dr. M. Vasic. (Corre-
sponding author: Osama A. Mohammed.)
The authors are with the Electrical and Computer Engineering Department,
Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199 USA (e-mail:, nelsa007@
fiu.edu; hmora041@fiu.edu; mohammed@fiu.edu).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TVT.2019.2905583
0018-9545 © 2019 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Fig. 1. Typical fuel cell-powered EV.
The conventional boost converter is commonly adopted in
many applications due to its simple operation and low compo-
nent count. Theoretically, its voltage gain extends from unity
(at duty cycle = 0) to infinity (at duty cycle = 1). However,
due to the conduction losses its output voltage and efficiency
drop significantly at extreme duty cycle values. Additionally,
the voltage stress on its power switch equals the output volt-
age, while the current stress equals the input current, which
yields a non-efficient power conversion process at high step-up
gains [11].
Many high step-up dc-dc converter topologies have been dis-
cussed in literature [12], and can generally be classified into
topologies with magnetic coupling and topologies without mag-
netic coupling. The topologies with magnetic coupling utilize
either a high frequency transformer or a coupled inductor to
achieve high conversion ratios and reduce the voltage stress
on the power switches via the turns ratio of the magnetic cou-
pling component [13], [14]. Nevertheless, in single-stage single-
switch topologies with magnetic coupling components, the
energy stored in the leakage inductance of the magnetic cou-
pling component may cause high voltage spikes across the power
switch, high switching losses, and increase the EMI [15]–[17].
To alleviate this problem, regenerative snubber circuits or active
clamp circuits should be utilized to recycle the stored leakage
inductance energy, which will increase the circuit complexity
and cost [16], [17]. On the other side, the topologies without
magnetic coupling commonly have lower volume, lower cost,
and less circuit complexity. The three-level boost converter has
gained a lot of interests recently due to its low voltage stress on

Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Saudi Arabia SDL. Downloaded on June 11,2020 at 07:26:15 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
4538 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 68, NO. 5, MAY 2019

the semiconductor devices ( = half the output voltage). How-

ever, its gain is limited as the conventional boost and the potential
difference between the grounds of its input and output ports is a
high frequency pulse-width-modulation (PWM) voltage which
may increase the EMI and require additional maintenance [18].
Boost converters with z-source or quasi-z-source networks have
emerged as high step-up solutions where an impedance network
replaces the boost inductor in order to enhance the voltage gain
of the converter [19]–[23]. The main drawback of these convert-
ers is the limited allowed duty cycle range (e.g., the maximum
duty cycle dmax = 0.5, as in [19], [20], dmax = 0.33, as in [21],
[22], and dmax = 0.41, as in [23]). In [24], a hybrid switched-
inductor converter is discussed, and it is composed of active and
passive switched inductor networks. This converter can achieve
high conversion ratios, however, it utilizes two power switches
and there is a high frequency PWM potential difference between Fig. 2. The schematic of the proposed converter.
the grounds of its input and output ports. In [25], a voltage-lift TABLE I
based boost converter is presented. This converter has a high SWITCHING STATES OF THE SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICES
voltage gain, common ground, and low voltage stress on the
power switch. Nevertheless, the input current ripple of this con-
verter is high, hence, an additional input filter may be needed,
which will increase the weight and size of the converter. In [7],
a boost converter with a diode-capacitor multiplier cells is dis-
cussed. This converter has a low input current ripple, high con-
version ratio, and low voltage stress on the power switch. The
C4 , and Co ), and R represents a resistive load. A conventional
main drawback for this converter is that the output voltage and
boost switching network is formed by (L1 , Q, D1 , and C3 ), and
the efficiency will drop as the number of multiplier cells in-
an L2 C3 D2 network formed by (L2 , L3 , C1 , C2 , C4 , D2 , and D3 )
crease due to the increased conduction losses of the diodes. Al-
is integrated between the conventional boost switching network
ternatively, a quadratic boost converter is discussed in [26]. This
and the output capacitor Co . The L2 C3 D2 network enhances the
converter has a very high voltage gain and a common ground,
voltage gain of the proposed converter and reduces the voltage
however, the voltage stress on the power switch is high and the
stress on the power switch.
input current ripple is high. In another way, the authors in [27]
proposed a novel boost converter with high step-up voltage gain,
low input current ripple, and low voltage stress on the semicon- B. Switching States Analysis
ductor devices. Nevertheless, this converter utilizes two power According to the conduction states of the semiconductor de-
switches and has a high frequency PWM potential difference vices, the operation of the proposed converter can be divided
between the grounds of its input and output ports. into three switching states, as shown in Table I. In this analysis,
In this paper, a new single-switch transformerless boost dc- the following abbreviations are used: Vin , Vo , VC1 , VC2 , VC3 ,
dc converter is proposed. The proposed converter utilizes a VC4 , VL1 , VL2 , VL3 , IL1 , IL2 , IL3 and Io , to refer to the input
L2 C3 D2 network and has the following advantages: high step-up voltage, the output voltage, the instantaneous voltages across
gain, low voltage stress on the semiconductor devices, common L1 , L2 , and L3 , the dc currents flowing through L1 , L2 , and
ground, and low input current ripple. L3 , and the output current, respectively. Additionally, iC1_ch ,
This paper is organized as follows: In Section II, the structure iC1_dis , iC2_ch , iC2_dis , iC3_ch , iC3_dis , iC4_ch , iC4_dis , iCo_ch ,
and operating principle of the proposed dc-dc converter are pre- and iCo_dis , refer to the charging and discharging currents of
sented. Steady-state analysis in CCM and DCM are discussed in the five capacitors. For convenience of analysis, the following
Section III. In Section IV, the design considerations and compo- assumptions are made:
nents selection are presented. The experimental results measured 1) The power switch and diodes are ideal.
from the scaled-down prototype are presented and analyzed in 2) The equivalent series resistances of the inductors and ca-
Section V. Finally, the conclusion is given in Section VI. pacitors equal zero.
3) The capacitors and inductors are large enough, so, the
II. STRUCTURE AND OPERATING PRINCIPLE OF THE small ripple principle can be applied.
PROPOSED CONVERTER 1) Switching State I: This switching state is for CCM and
DCM operations and it takes place when the gate voltage Vgs of
A. Configuration of the Proposed Converter the power switch is high, and Q is turned on. In this switching
The topology of the proposed converter is shown in Fig. 2. It state, the three diodes are reverse-biased, the three inductors are
is composed of one power switch (Q), three diodes (D1 , D2 , and charging, C3 and C4 are discharging, C1 and C2 are charging, and
D3 ), three inductors (L1 , L2 , and L3 ), five capacitors (C1 , C2 , C3 , Co is discharging. Fig. 4(a) shows the current flow paths for this

Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Saudi Arabia SDL. Downloaded on June 11,2020 at 07:26:15 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
ELSAYAD et al.: SINGLE-SWITCH TRANSFORMERLESS DC–DC CONVERTER WITH UNIVERSAL INPUT VOLTAGE FOR FUEL CELL VEHICLES 4539

switching state. By applying Kirchhof’s Voltage Law (KVL),

and Kirchhof’s Current Law (KCL) on the equivalent circuit
depicted in Fig. 4(a), we can extract the following relationships:
⎧
⎨ VL1 = Vin
VL2 = VC3 − VC1 (1)
⎩
VL3 = VC3 + VC4 − VC2 − VC1
⎧
⎪
⎪ iC1_ch = IL2 + IL3
⎪
⎪
⎨ iC2ch = IL3
iC3_dis = IL2 + IL3 (2)
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ i C4_dis = I L3
⎩
iCo_dis = Io

2) Switching State II: This switching state is for CCM and

DCM operations and it takes place when Vgs is low, and Q is
turned off. In this switching state, the three diodes are forward-
biased, the three inductors are discharging, C3 and C4 are charg-
ing, C1 and C2 are discharging, and Co is charging.
Fig. 4(b) shows the current flow paths for this switching state.
By applying KVL and KCL laws on the equivalent circuit de-
picted in Fig. 4(b), we can extract the following relationships:
⎧
⎨VL1 = Vin − VC3
VL2 = −VC1 = −VC4 (3)
⎩
VL3 = −VC2
⎧ Fig. 3. Key waveforms of the proposed converter. (a) CCM operation.
⎨ iC1_dis = iC2_dis + IL3 + iC4_ch − IL2 (b) DCM operation.
iC3_ch = IL1 − iC1_dis − IL2 + iC4_ch (4)
⎩
iCo_ch = iC2_dis + IL3 − Io
we can obtain (7)–(9):
3) Switching State III: This switching state is for DCM op-
eration and it takes place when Vgs is low, Q is turned off, and d
VC1 = VC2 = VC4 = Vin (7)
all the diodes are reverse-biased. Since all the semiconductor 1−d
devices do not conduct in this switching state, a positive con- 1
stant current IL1_min flows through L1 , and negative constant VC3 = Vin (8)
1−d
currents IL2_min , IL3_min flow through L2 and L3 , as shown in
Fig. 4(c). The summation of the inductor currents is zero, and 1 + 2d
Vo = Vin (9)
the voltages across the inductors in this switching state are null, 1−d
as depicted in (5) and (6). Thus, the voltage gain MCCM can be calculated by (10):
IL1_min + IL2_min + IL3_min = 0 (5) Vo 1 + 2d
⎧ MCCM = = (10)
Vin 1−d
⎨ VL1 = 0
VL2 = 0 (6)
⎩ 2) Analysis of Voltage Stress
VL3 = 0
The stress across the five capacitors is delivered by (7)–(9). As
shown in Fig. 3(a), the voltage across the semiconductor devices
III. STEADY STATE ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSED CONVERTER
swings between 0 V and VC3 , hence the voltage stress across the
A. CCM Operation power switch VQ and the voltage stress across the diodes VD
The key waveforms for this operation is presented in Fig. 3(a). can be obtained by (11):
In this subsection, the voltage gain, the voltage stresses, the cur- 1
rent stresses, and the efficiency analysis of the proposed con- VQ = VD = VC3 Vin (11)
1−d
verter operating in CCM are extracted. The operation in CCM
is composed of switching state I (period = dT) and switching Additionally, using (10), and (11) the voltage stress across
state II (period = (1-d) T), where d and T are the duty cycle and the power switch and diodes can be represented as a function of
the periodic switching time, respectively. MCCM , as in (12):
1) Voltage Gain: By applying the voltage second principle 2 + MCCM
on the inductors L1 , L2 , and L3 and using equations (1) and (3), VQ = VD = Vo (12)
3MCCM

Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Saudi Arabia SDL. Downloaded on June 11,2020 at 07:26:15 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
4540 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 68, NO. 5, MAY 2019

Fig. 4. Equivalent circuits of the proposed converter. (a) Switching state I. (b) Switching state II. (c) Switching state III.

3) Analysis of Current Stress: Assuming the input power MCCM + 2

equals the output power of the converter (i.e., Vin × IL1 = iD1 = iD2 = iD3 = Io (25)
3
Vo × Io ), hence, the currents IL2 , IL3 , and IL1 can be calcu-
lated as in (13) and (14):
The root-mean-square (rms) values of the currents flowing
IL2 = IL3 = Io (13) through the power switch, diodes, and capacitors are important
1 + 2d in the efficiency analysis, and they can be extracted as following:
IL1 = Io = MCCM Io (14)
1−d 
By applying the charge-second balance principle on the five iQ_rms = (MCCM + 2) (MCCM − 1) Io (26)
capacitors to calculate the charging and discharging currents of 
MCCM + 2
them, we can get (15)–(19): iD1_rms = iD2_rms = iD3_rms = Io (27)
 3
iC1_ch = 2Io 
 −1
 (15) MCCM − 1
iC1_dis = 2Io (1−d)d
= 2Io MCCM 3 iC1_rms = iC3_rms = 2 Io (28)
3
 
iC2_ch = Io  
−1 (16) MCCM − 1
d
iC2_dis = Io (1−d) = Io MCCM 3
iC2_rms = iC4_rms = iCo_rms = Io (29)
3
  −1

iC3_ch = 2Io (1−d)d
= 2Io MCCM 3 (17) 4) Effect of Parasitic Elements on the Voltage Gain: In or-
iC3_dis = 2Io
  −1
 der to evaluate the effect of the parasitic elements of the pas-
d
iC4_ch = Io (1−d) = Io MCCM 3 sive and active components of the proposed converter on its
(18)
iC4_dis = Io voltage gain, some of these parasitic parameters were mod-
  −1
 eled in the proposed converter circuit, shown in Fig. 5. In
d
iCo_ch = Io (1−d) = Io MCCM 3 the non-ideal model of the converter, the following parame-
(19)
iCo_dis = Io ters are included: the resistances of the windings of inductors
By means of (13)–(19), Fig. 4(a), and Fig. 4(b), the currents (rL1 = rL2 = rL ), the equivalent-series-resistances of capaci-
flowing through Q, D1 , D2 , and D3 can be described as follow- tors (rC1 = rC2 = rC3 = rC4 = rCo = rC ), the on-resistance
ing: of the power switch (rS ), the forward voltages of the diodes
(VF 1 = VF 2 = VF 3 = VF ), and their respective on-resistances
3
iQ = IL1 + IL2 + IL3 = Io (20) (rD1 = rD2 = rD3 = rD4 = rD ). After accounting for these
1−d parasitic parameters, the voltage gain of the proposed con-
1 verter in its non-ideal model (ḾCCM ) is depicted by equation
iD1 = IL1 − iC1_dis = Io (21)
1−d (30) shown at the bottom of the next page. Fig. 6 shows the
1 graphical comparison between the voltage gain curves using the
iD2 = IL2 + iC1_dis − IC2_dis = Io (22) ideal and non-ideal models of the proposed converter, where
1−d
the parasitic and operating parameters are considered as fol-
1
iD3 = iC2_dis + Io = Io (23) lowing: Vin = 50 V, R = 100 Ω, rL = 30 m Ω, rC = 15 mΩ,
1−d rS = 20 mΩ, VF = 1 V, and rD = 70 mΩ. It shows that the
voltage gain of the non-ideal model of the converter is close
Using (10), equations (20)–(23) can be depicted as functions
to that of the ideal model when d is between 0 and 0.8 (where
of MCCM , as following:
ḾCCM ≈ 13) which indicates the high step-up capability of the
iQ = (MCCM + 2) Io (24) proposed converter.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Saudi Arabia SDL. Downloaded on June 11,2020 at 07:26:15 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
ELSAYAD et al.: SINGLE-SWITCH TRANSFORMERLESS DC–DC CONVERTER WITH UNIVERSAL INPUT VOLTAGE FOR FUEL CELL VEHICLES 4541

Fig. 7. Power switch and diodes currents in DCM.

Vo − Vin
VC1 = VC2 = VC4 = (33)
3
By means of (1), (3), (6), (31)–(33), and applying the voltage
Fig. 5. Equivalent circuit of the proposed converter with the parasitic elements. second principle on L1 , we get the following:
dT dx T

1 Vo − Vin
Vin dt − dt = 0 (34)
T 0 0 3
To solve (34) in order to extract the voltage gain in DCM, dx
should be determined.
As shown in Fig. 7, and using equations (20)–(23), iQ equals
the summation of the three inductors’ currents, and the current
flowing in any of the three diodes equals one third iQ . Thus, the
peak diode current iD(P eak) can be calculated as following:
1
iD(P eak) = (ΔiL1 + ΔiL2 + ΔiL3 ) (35)
3

The three inductors’ currents in DCM can be calculated as:

⎧
⎪
⎪ Δi = dV in
⎨ L1 f s L1
ΔiL2 = dV in
(36)
⎪
⎪
f s L2
⎩Δi = dVin
L3 f s L3
Fig. 6. Voltage gain curves of the proposed converter.
By substituting (36) into (35), we get (37):

B. DCM Operation dVin

iD(P eak) = (37)
3fs Leq
The key waveforms for this operation is shown in Fig. 3(b).
In this subsection, the voltage gain in DCM, boundary operating Where,
condition between CCM and DCM, and current stresses in DCM
−1
1 1 1
are given. Leq = + + (38)
L1 L2 L3
The operation in DCM is composed of Switching State I
(period = dT), Switching State II (period = dx T ), and Switching The average current flowing through any of the three diodes
State III (period = 1 − (d + dx )T ). equals Io , hence, we get the following:
1) Voltage Gain: From (7)–(9), the capacitors’ voltages can 1 Vo
be rewritten as: dx iD(P eak) = (39)
2 R
Vo = VC3 + 2VC2 (31) By substituting (37) into (39), we can get dx as following:
Vo + 2Vin 6Vo
VC3 = Vin + VC2 = (32) dx = Ʈ (40)
3 dVin

R (1 − d) (Vin − 3VF + 3d VF + 2d Vin )

Ḿ CCM = (30)
Vin [R + 3rD + 3rL + d (6rC − 2R − 3rD + 3rS + d (R − 6rC + 6rL − 12rS ))]

Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Saudi Arabia SDL. Downloaded on June 11,2020 at 07:26:15 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
4542 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 68, NO. 5, MAY 2019

Fig. 8. Boundary condition of the proposed converter.

Where Ʈ is the normalized inductor time constant, defined as:

Leq fs
Ʈ= (41)
R
By substituting (40) into (34), we get the following:
Vo
Vin + (Vin − Vo ) Ʈ=0 (42)
dVin
By solving this quadratic equation (42), the voltage gain in
DCM MDCM can be extracted as in (43):
  
1 2d2
MDCM = 1+ 1+ (43)
2 Ʈ

2) Boundary Operating Conduction: In boundary conduc-

tion mode (BCM) operation, MCCM equals MDCM , and ac-
cordingly, from (10) and (43), the boundary normalized inductor
Fig. 9. Comparison of voltage gain MCCM versus duty cycle d. (a) Between
time constant Ʈb can be obtained, as in (44). the proposed converter, conventional boost converter, converters in [25], [26],
and [28]. (b) Between the proposed converter, converters in [31]–[33], and [35].
d (1 − d)
Ʈb = (44)
12d + 6
The relationship between Ʈb and d is presented in Fig. 8. If in (47):
Ʈ > Ʈb , then the proposed converter is working in CCM.  dVin
iQ(P eak) = ΔiL1 + ΔiL2 + ΔiL3 = fs Leq
3) Voltage Stress Analysis: As shown in Fig. 3(b), the voltage (47)
1 dVin
stress across Q during Switching State I VQ (I) is null, while dur- iD(P eak) = 3 (ΔiL1 + ΔiL2 + ΔiL3 ) = 3fs Leq
ing Switching State II VQ (II) and Switching State III VQ (III)
The rms currents of the power switch and diodes are expressed
are expressed in (45):
in (48):
 
VQ (II) = VC3 = MDCM +2
Vin ⎧
3
(45) ⎨iQ(rms) = dVin d
fs Leq 3
VQ (III) = Vin  (48)
⎩i dVin dx
D(rms) = 3fs Leq 3
The voltage stress across any of the three diodes during
Switching State II VD (II) is null, while during Switching State
C. Comparisons With Other Step-Up Converters
I VD (I) and Switching State III VD (III) are shown in (46):
 +2
In this section, the proposed converter is compared with other
VD (I) = VC3 = MDCM 3 Vin non-isolated step-up converters. The static voltage gain, the nor-
MDCM −1
(46)
VD (III) = VC2 = Vin malized voltage stress across the semiconductor devices, com-
3
ponents counts, and the voltage gain range of these converters
4) Current Stress Analysis: Fig. 7 depict the currents flowing are summarized in Table II. Fig. 9 shows MCCM versus d for
through the semiconductor devices of the proposed converter in the compared converters, while Fig. 10 and Fig. 11 show the
DCM. The peak currents flowing through Q, and the diodes, maximum normalized voltage stress across the power switches
iQ(P eak) , and iD(P eak) , respectively, are expressed as shown and diodes, respectively, among the compared converters.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Saudi Arabia SDL. Downloaded on June 11,2020 at 07:26:15 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
ELSAYAD et al.: SINGLE-SWITCH TRANSFORMERLESS DC–DC CONVERTER WITH UNIVERSAL INPUT VOLTAGE FOR FUEL CELL VEHICLES 4543

TABLE II
COMPARISON BETWEEN THE PROPOSED AND OTHER STEP-UP DC-DC CONVERTERS

Fig. 11. Normalized maximum voltage stress across the diodes in the
Fig. 10. Normalized maximum voltage stress across the power switches in the
compared converters.
compared converters.

In order to properly compare the added weight and size of the in inductor Li .
capacitors and inductors used in each topology of the compared  Li I 2  ILi dM VLi

Li
converters, the energy stored in inductors (EL ) and the energy EL = = (49)
2 2 ΔL % fs
stored in capacitors (EC ) are calculated for each converter in
Table II at the same output power, switching frequency, output The stored energy in the capacitors of a converter can be cal-
voltage, voltage gain, and specific percentage of ripple current in culated by (50), where ΔC % is the percentage of ripple voltage,
inductors and ripple voltage in capacitors. The stored energy in iCi is the current of capacitor Ci when the main switch is on,
the inductors of a converter can be calculated by (49), where dM and VCi is the dc voltage of capacitor Ci .
is the value of duty cycle at the specific voltage gain, ΔL % is the
percentage of ripple current, VLi is the voltage across inductor  Ci V 2  VCi dM iCi

Ci
EC = = (50)
Li when the main switch is on, and ILi is the dc current flowing 2 2 ΔC % fs

Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Saudi Arabia SDL. Downloaded on June 11,2020 at 07:26:15 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
4544
Fig. 12. Stored energy in the inductors of the compared converters at different
voltage gain values.
Fig. 13. Stored energy in the capacitors of the compared converters at different
voltage gain values.
In order to compare the estimated cost of the semiconductor
devices used in the converters in Table II, the utilization factor
of these semiconductor devices (US ) is used, and it is defined
as given in (51):
Po
US =  (51)
VKi IKi (rms)
Where VKi is the voltage stress on a semiconductor device Ki ,
and IKi (rms) is the rms value of the current stress on semicon-
ductor device Ki . Fig. 12, Fig. 13, and Fig. 14 show the energy
stored in inductors and capacitors and the semiconductor utiliza-
tion factor for the compared converters in Table II, respectively,
when Vo = 400 V, Po = 1.6 kW, fs = 100 kHz, ΔL % = 25%,
ΔC % = 10% (for the output capacitors) and 20% (for the mid-
dle capacitors), and MCCM = 4 → 8.
Comparing the proposed converter with the conventional
boost converter (CBC), on one hand, the CBC has lower num-
ber of diodes and passive components, on the other hand, the
proposed converter has higher voltage gain, lower voltage stress
on the semiconductor devices, and wider voltage gain range.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Saudi Arabia SDL. Downloaded on June 11,2020 at 07:26:15 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 68, NO. 5, MAY 2019
Fig. 14. Semiconductor utilization factor of the compared converters at
different voltage gain values.
The converter in [28], is composed of less number of induc-
tors and capacitors, however, it utilizes an extra power switch
compared to the proposed converter, does not have a common
ground and has a high voltage stress on the output diode. Addi-
tionally, the converter in [28] has a narrower voltage gain range
and its voltage gain is less compared to the proposed converter
for d > 0.5. In [25], the voltage lift-based converter has the
same number of semiconductor devices, and utilizes less ca-
pacitors and less inductors compared to the proposed converter.
Nevertheless, the converter in [25] has high input current rip-
ple, narrower voltage gain range, less voltage gain, and higher
voltage stress on its power switch and diodes compared to the
proposed converter. The quadratic converter presented in [26],
on one hand has higher voltage gain and less number of induc-
tors and capacitors compared to the proposed converter, and on
the other hand it has high input current ripple and higher voltage
stress on the power switch. In [31], converter II, on one side has
double the voltage gain of the conventional boost converter and
utilizes less number of diodes, inductors, and capacitors com-
pared to the proposed converter, but on the other side, it utilizes
an extra power switch compared to the proposed converter, has
a pulsating input current, does not have a common ground, and
the voltage stress on its output diode is high. The voltage gain
of the proposed converter is higher for d > 0.5, and the voltage
stress on the semiconductor devices of the proposed converter
is less for d > 0.5, compared to the converter II in [31]. The
boost converter that utilizes diode-capacitor voltage multipliers
in [32] has less inductors compared to the proposed converter,
however, to increase its voltage gain, the number of diodes of
the voltage multipliers duplicates, leading to increased conduc-
tion losses and decreased efficiency. Additionally, as the number
of voltage multipliers increases, the minimum boosting gain in-
creases, rendering it not sufficient for applications with wide
voltage fluctuations such as fuel cells. Comparing the hybrid
boost converter in [33] with the proposed converter, the number
of inductors and capacitors in the converter in [33] is less, while
it utilizes an extra diode. The input current ripple of the converter
in [33] is high which can affect the life time of the fuel cell. Ad-
ditionally, the proposed converter has higher voltage gain for
ELSAYAD et al.: SINGLE-SWITCH TRANSFORMERLESS DC–DC CONVERTER WITH UNIVERSAL INPUT VOLTAGE FOR FUEL CELL VEHICLES 4545

d > 0.65, and less voltage stress on the semiconductor devices TABLE III
EXPERIMENT PARAMETERS
for MCCM > 7 compared to the converter in [33]. The con-
verter presented in [35] has less capacitors, less diodes, and an
extra power switch compared to the proposed converter. Also,
it has a wider voltage gain range, and less voltage stress on the
semiconductor devices. The main drawbacks of this converter
are the higher number of power switches, the pulsating input
current and the lack of common ground between its input and
output ports, as the potential difference between the two grounds
is high frequency PWM voltage which can increase the EMI and
requires more maintenance.
Based on Fig. 12, the energy stored in the inductors of the pro-
posed converter is the same as the CBC, while it is lower than that
of the converters in [25], [26], and [28], and is higher than that
of the converters in [31]–[33], and [35]. This means that the es-
timated weight and size of inductors for the proposed converter
is close to that of the CBC while it is lower than that of the
converters in [25], [26], and [28], and is higher than that of the
converters in [31]–[33], and [35]. Similarly, based on Fig. 13,
the energy stored in the capacitors of the proposed converter
is lower than that of the converters in [25], [31], [33] and [28]
(when MCCM < 6.5), while it is higher than that of the CBC
and the converters in [26], [32], and [35]. This means that the
estimated weight and size of capacitors for the proposed con-
verter is lower than that of the converters in [25], [31], [33], and
[28] (when MCCM < 6.5), and is higher than that of the con-
verters in [26], [32], and [35]. Fig. 14 shows that the proposed
converter has the highest utilization factor compared to all the
converters in Table II, which means that the estimated cost of
the semiconductor devices of the proposed converter is lower Fig. 15. Experimental prototype.
than that of the other compared converters.
From the above comparisons, it is evident that the proposed can be determined using (52).
converter integrates many advantages such as: high conversion ⎧
⎨ L1 ≥
dVin
ratio, wide voltage gain range, low voltage stress on the semi- ⎪ fs ΔiL1
conductor devices, common ground between its input and out- L2 ≥ dVin
fs ΔiL2 (52)
put ports, low input current ripple, and utilizes a single power ⎪
⎩
L3 ≥ dVin
fs ΔiL3
switch. This makes it an excellent candidate for fuel cell vehicles
application.
C. Capacitors Design

IV. DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS AND COMPONENTS SELECTION By means of (7)–(9), the voltages across the five capaci-
tors can be calculated. Assuming the maximum ripple voltages
A. Semiconductor Devices Selection ΔVC1 , ΔVC2 , ΔVC3 , ΔVC4 and ΔVCo are known. The mini-
By knowing the maximum value of MCCM (max) needed mum required capacitances can be determined using (53).
by the converter, and the maximum output load current, the ⎧
⎪
⎪ C ≥ fs2IΔV
od

peak currents flowing through the power switch and diodes can ⎨ 1 C1
C4 ≥ fsIΔV
od

be calculated using (24) and (25), respectively. From (12), the C2 ≥ fs ΔVC2 ,
Io d C4
(53)
⎪
⎪ C ≥ Io d
maximum voltage stress on the power switch and diodes can ⎩C ≥ 2Io d o fs ΔVCo
3 fs ΔVC3
be calculated when MCCM (max) is known. These maximum
voltage and current stresses should be within the safe operating V. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
area (SOA) of the selected power switch and diodes.
In order to validate the theoretical analysis of the proposed
converter, a scaled-down 1.6 kW laboratory prototype was built,
B. Inductors Design
presented in Fig. 15. The input voltage to the converter is de-
By knowing the maximum output load current and by means picted by an adjustable dc power supply, and the converter is
of (13) and (14), the currents flowing through the three inductors controlled by a microcontroller TMS320f28377s.
can be calculated. Assuming the maximum ripple currents ΔiL1 , The power circuit is built using (IXFP72N30X3M) power
ΔiL2 , and ΔiL3 are known. The minimum required inductances MOSFET and (MBRF40250TG) Schottky diodes. The values

Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Saudi Arabia SDL. Downloaded on June 11,2020 at 07:26:15 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
4546 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 68, NO. 5, MAY 2019

Fig. 16. Experimental results. (a) Current of L1 , and voltage stress across Q. (b) Currents of L2 and L3 . (c) Voltages across C1 , C2 , C3 , and C4 . (d) Output voltage
and output current. (e) Voltage stresses across D1 , D2 , and D3 . (f) Current stresses of Q and D1 . (g) Current stresses of D2 and D3 . (h) Dynamic performance of
the output voltage with input voltage variation. (i) Dynamic performance of the input current with input voltage variation.

of inductors and capacitors used in the developed prototype are
as following: L1 = L2 = L3 = 250 µH, C1 = C2 = 40 µF,
C3 = C4 = 220 µF, and Co = 240 µF. In addition, the load R =
100 Ω, and switching frequency fs = 100 KHz. The case study
investigated in this section is Vin = 50 V, and the duty cycle
d = 0.7.
According to equations (7)–(9), the voltages across the five
capacitors can be calculated as following: VC1 = VC2 = VC4 ≈
116.7 V, VC3 ≈ 166.7 V, and Vo ≈ 400 V, which closely agree
with the experimental results in Fig. 16(c) and Fig. 16(d).
The output current can be theoretically calculated as: Io =
Vo /R = 4A , which agrees with the experimental result shown in
Fig. 16(d). Accordingly, the currents of the three inductors can
be calculated using (13) and (14), as following: IL2 = IL3 =
Io = 4 A, and IL1 = 32 A, which closely agree with the experi-
mental results shown in Fig. 16(a) and Fig. 16(b). Additionally,
the ripple currents of the three inductors can be calculated us-
ing (52), as following: ΔiL1 = ΔiL2 = ΔiL3 = 1.4A, which
comply with the experimental results presented in Fig. 16(a)
and Fig. 16(b). The voltage stresses across the power switch
and the three diodes can be calculated using equation (11), as
following: VQ = VD1 = VD2 = VD3 ≈ 166.7 V, which closely
comply with the experimental results given in Fig. 16(a) and
Fig. 16(e). The current stresses on the power switch and the
three diodes can be derived via equations (20) and (21), as
following: iQ = 40 A, and iD1 = iD2 = iD3 ≈ 13.3 A, which
closely agree with the experimental results shown in Fig. 16(f)
and Fig. 16(g).

Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Saudi Arabia SDL. Downloaded on June 11,2020 at 07:26:15 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
ELSAYAD et al.: SINGLE-SWITCH TRANSFORMERLESS DC–DC CONVERTER WITH UNIVERSAL INPUT VOLTAGE FOR FUEL CELL VEHICLES
Fig. 17. (a) Inductor currents during start-up. (b) Voltages across C1 , C2 , and C4 during start-up. (c) Voltages across C3 and Co during stat-up.
Fig. 18. Calculated power loss distributions for the experiment (Vin = 50 V,
Vo = 400 V, and R = 100 Ω).
In order to test the wide-input feature of the proposed con-
verter, Fig. 16(h) shows the input voltage of proposed converter
changed from 40 V to 120 V, while the output voltage is fixed at
400 V. In this test, the converter is controlled by a closed-loop
proportional-integral (PI) voltage controller. Fig. 16(i) shows
the effect of the change in the input voltage from 40 V to
120 V on the input current (current flowing in L1 ) and it shows
that IL1 = 40 A when Vin = 40 V, while IL1 ≈ 13.3 A when
Vin = 120 V, as IL1 is directly proportional to the voltage gain
of the converter (when the output current is constant). The results
given in Fig. 16(h) and Fig. 16(i) show evidently that the pro-
posed converter has an acceptable dynamic performance under
wide changes in its input voltage.
In order to build the initial voltages across the capacitors of
the proposed converter without having high inrush currents that
may damage the semiconductor devices, a soft-starting algo-
rithm is adopted. This soft-starting algorithm gradually increases
the value of duty cycle from zero to the desired value during the
starting instant. Fig. 17 shows the currents of the three inductors
and the voltages of the five capacitors during the soft start and
during steady state. Based on these results, the converter appears
to not have high inrush inductor currents during the start instant,
and the capacitor voltages increase gradually without having
high voltage overshoots during the start instant. The calculated
loss distributions for the investigated case study of the experi-
ment is presented in Fig. 18. The total losses of this case study
PLoss = 73.88 W, and it is distributed as following: The con-
duction losses of D1 , D2 , and D3 are 14.4 W and they account
for 19% of the total losses of the converter, the conduction loss
of Q is 21.28 W and it accounts for 29% of the total converter
Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Saudi Arabia SDL. Downloaded on June 11,2020 at 07:26:15 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
4547
Fig. 19. Efficiency curves of the proposed converter (Vo = 400 V, Vin =
40 → 120 V, output power = 800 W, 1200 W, and 1600 W).
losses, the switching loss of Q is 13.11 W and it accounts for
18% of the total converter losses, the conduction losses of L1 ,
L2 , and L3 are 16.88 W and they account for 23% of the total
converter losses, and finally, the conduction losses of C1 , C2 ,
C3 , C4 , and Co are 8.21 W and they account for 11% of the total
converter losses. The conduction and switching losses of Q are
low due to the utilization of low voltage power MOSFET with
low RDS and low COSS . The efficiency curves of the laboratory
prototype at different values of Vin (Vin = 40 → 120), and dif-
ferent output powers (Po = 800 W, 1200 W, and 1600 W), while
keeping Vo fixed at 400 V, are shown in Fig. 19. The measured ef-
ficiency curves are obtained using a power analyzer (Tektronix
PA3000). The maximum recorded efficiency is 97.8%, when
Po = 800 W and Vin = 120 V, while the minimum recorded ef-
ficiency is 92.5%, when Po = 1600 W and Vin = 40 V.
VI. CONCLUSION
In this paper, a new single-switch dc-dc converter with an in-
tegrated L2 C3 D2 network is presented. The proposed converter
has many merits such as: high voltage gain without magnetic
coupling, low voltage stress on the semiconductor devices, com-
mon ground, and universal input voltage. These features make it
4548
an excellent candidate for fuel cell vehicles. Steady-state anal-
yses in CCM and DCM operations of the proposed converter
were discussed. The proposed converter is compared with other
step-up converters in literature regarding the voltage gain, the
voltage stress on the semiconductor devices, the number of com-
ponents, and other specifications, and the privilege of the pro-
posed topology is justified. Finally, a 1.6 kW 400 V prototype
for the proposed topology was built, and the theoretical analysis
was verified by the experimental results.
REFERENCES
[1] A. T. Langerudy, A. Mariscotti, and M. A. Abolhassani, “Power quality
conditioning in railway electrification: A comparative study,” IEEE Trans.
Veh. Technol., vol. 66, no. 8, pp. 6653–6662, Aug. 2017.
[2] B. Lequesne, “Automotive electrification: The nonhybrid story,” IEEE
Trans. Transport. Electrific., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 40–53, Jun. 2015.
[3] S. S. Raghavan and A. Khaligh, “Electrification potential factor: Energy-
based value proposition analysis of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles,” IEEE
Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 61, no. 3, pp. 1052–1059, Mar. 2012.
[4] Y. Zhang et al., “Wide input-voltage range boost three-level DC–DC con-
verter with quasi-Z source for fuel cell vehicles,” IEEE Trans. Power Elec-
tron., vol. 32, no. 9, pp. 6728–6738, Sep. 2017.
[5] Y. Wu and H. Gao, “Optimization of fuel cell and supercapacitor for fuel-
cell electric vehicles,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 1748–
1755, Nov. 2006.
[6] U. R. Prasanna, X. Pan, A. K. Rathore, and K. Rajashekara, “Propulsion
system architecture and power conditioning topologies for fuel cell vehi-
cles,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 640–650, Feb. 2015.
[7] Y. Zhang, L. Zhou, M. Sumner, and P. Wang, “Single-switch, wide voltage-
gain range, boost DC–DC converter for fuel cell vehicles,” IEEE Trans.
Veh. Technol., vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 134–145, Jan. 2018.
[8] U. R. Prasanna and A. K. Rathore, “Dual three-pulse modulation-based
high-frequency pulsating DC link two-stage three-phase inverter for elec-
tric/hybrid/fuel cell vehicles applications,” IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Topics
Power Electron., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 477–486, Oct. 2014.
[9] C. Liu and J. Lai, “Low frequency current ripple reduction technique with
active control in a fuel cell power system with inverter load,” IEEE Trans.
Power Electron., vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 1429–1436, Jul. 2007.
[10] P. Wang, L. Zhou, Y. Zhang, J. Li, and M. Sumner, “Input-parallel output-
series DC-DC boost converter with a wide input voltage range, for fuel
cell vehicles,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 66, no. 9, pp. 7771–7781,
Sep. 2016.
[11] R. W. Erickson and D. Maksimovic, Fundamentals of Power Electronics,
2nd ed. Norwell, MA, USA: Kluwer, 2001.
[12] M. Forouzesh, Y. P. Siwakoti, S. A. Gorji, F. Blaabjerg, and B. Lehman,
“Step-Up DC–DC converters: A comprehensive review of voltage-
boosting techniques, topologies, and applications,” IEEE Trans. Power
Electron., vol. 32, no. 12, pp. 9143–9178, Dec. 2017.
[13] W. Li, W. Li, X. Xiang, Y. Hu, and X. He, “High step-up interleaved
converter with built-in transformer voltage multiplier cells for sustain-
able energy applications,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 29, no. 6,
pp. 2829–2836, Jun. 2014.
[14] R. Moradpour, H. Ardi, and A. Tavakoli, “Design and implementation of
a new SEPIC-based high step-up DC/DC converter for renewable energy
applications,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 1290–1297,
Feb. 2018.
[15] M. Prudente, L. L. Pfitscher, G. Emmendoerfer, E. F. Romaneli, and
R. Gules, “Voltage multiplier cells applied to non-isolated DC–DC con-
verters,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 871–887,
Mar. 2008.
[16] G. Chen, Y. Lee, S. Y. R. Hui, D. Xu, and Y. Wang, “Actively clamped
bidirectional flyback converter,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 47, no. 4,
pp. 770–779, Aug. 2000.
[17] H. Liu, H. Hu, H. Wu, Y. Xing, and I. Batarseh, “Overview of high-step-
up coupled-inductor boost converters,” IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Topics Power
Electron., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 689–704, Jun. 2016.
[18] X. Ruan, B. Li, Q. Chen, S. Tan, and C. K. Tse, “Fundamental considera-
tions of three-level DC–DC converters: Topologies, analyses, and control,”
IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I, Reg. Papers, vol. 55, no. 11, pp. 3733–3743,
Dec. 2008.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Saudi Arabia SDL. Downloaded on June 11,2020 at 07:26:15 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 68, NO. 5, MAY 2019
[19] D. Vinnikov and I. Roasto, “Quasi-Z-source based DC/DC converters for
distributed power generation,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 58, no. 1,
pp. 192–201, Jan. 2011.
[20] M. M. H. Esmaeili, E. Babaei, and M. Sabahi, “High step-up quasi-Z
source DC-DC converter,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 33, no. 12,
pp. 10563–10571, Dec. 2018.
[21] D. Vinnikov, I. Roasto, R. Strzelecki, and M. Adamowicz, “Step-up
DC/DC converters with cascaded quasi-Z-source network,” IEEE Trans.
Ind. Electron., vol. 59, no. 10, pp. 3727–3736, Oct. 2012.
[22] A. Ho, T. Chun, and H. Kim, “Extended boost active-switched capaci-
tor/ switched-inductor quasi-Z-source inverters,” IEEE Trans. Power Elec-
tron., vol. 30, no. 10, pp. 5681–5690, Oct. 2015.
[23] M. Nguyen, Y. Lim, and G. Cho, “Switched-inductor quasi-Z-source in-
verter,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 26, no. 11, pp. 3183–3191,
Nov. 2011.
[24] Y. Tang, D. Fu, T. Wang, and Z. Xu, “Hybrid switched-inductor converters
for high step-up conversion,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 62, no. 3,
pp. 1480–1490, Mar. 2015.
[25] F. M. Shahir, E. Babaei, and M. Farsadi, “Voltage-lift technique based
nonisolated boost DC–DC converter: Analysis and design,” IEEE Trans.
Power Electron., vol. 33, no. 7, pp. 5917–5926, Jul. 2018.
[26] Y. M. Ye and K. W. E. Cheng, “Quadratic boost converter with low
buffer capacitor stress,” IET Power Electron., vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 1162–1170,
May 2014.
[27] H. Kang and H. Cha, “A new nonisolated high-voltage-gain boost con-
verter with inherent output voltage balancing,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 1480–1490, Mar. 2015.
[28] F. M. Shahir, E. Babaei, and M. Farsadi, “Extended topology for boost DC-
DC converter,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 2375–2384,
Mar. 2019.
[29] C. T. Pan, C. F. Chuang, and C. C. Chu, “A novel transformer-less adaptable
voltage quadrupler DC converter with low switch voltage stress,” IEEE
Trans. Power Electron., vol. 29, no. 9, pp. 4787–4796, Sep. 2014.
[30] M. Soltani, A. Mostaan, Y. P. Siwakoti, P. Davari, and F. Blaabjerg, “Family
of step-up DC/DC converters with fast dynamic response for low power ap-
plications,” IET Power Electron., vol. 9, no. 14, pp. 2665–2673, Nov. 2016.
[31] L. S. Yang, T. Liang, and J. Chen, “Transformerless DC–DC converters
with high step-up voltage gain,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56, no. 8,
pp. 3144–3152, Aug. 2009.
[32] J. C. R. Caro, J. M. Ramirez, F. Z. Peng, and A. Valderrabano, “A DC-DC
multilevel boost converter,” IET Power Electron., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 129–
137, Jan. 2010.
[33] B. Wu, S. Li, Y. Liu, and K. M. Smedley, “A new hybrid boosting converter
for renewable energy applications,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 31,
no. 2, pp. 1203–1215, Feb. 2016.
[34] V. F. Piresa, D. Foitoa, and J. F. Silvab, “A single switch hybrid DC/DC
converter with extended static gain for photovoltaic applications,” Elect.
Power Syst. Res., vol. 146, pp. 228–235, May 2017.
[35] M. A. Salvador, T. B. Lazzarin, and R. F. Coelho, “High step-up DC–DC
converter with active switched-inductor and passive switched-capacitor
networks,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 65, no. 7, pp. 5644–5654,
Jul. 2018.
Nour Elsayad received the B.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees
in electrical engineering from Ain Shams Univer-
sity, Cairo, Egypt, in 2010 and 2014, respectively. He
is currently working toward the Ph.D. degree with
the Department of Electrical and Computer Engi-
neering, Florida International University, Miami, FL,
USA. His research interests include high-frequency
link converters, bidirectional dc–dc converters, wide-
input dc–dc converters, multilevel power electronic
architectures, and high-frequency power converters
design using wide-bandgap devices.
ELSAYAD et al.: SINGLE-SWITCH TRANSFORMERLESS DC–DC CONVERTER WITH UNIVERSAL INPUT VOLTAGE FOR FUEL CELL VEHICLES 4549

Hadi Moradisizkoohi received the B.S. degree from Osama A. Mohammed (S’79–M’83–SM’85–F’94)
the University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran, in 2010, and the received the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical en-
M.S. degree from the Amirkabir University of Tech- gineering from Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA,
nology, Tehran, Iran, in 2013. He is currently work- in 1981 and 1983, respectively. He is currently a
ing toward the Ph.D. degree with the Department of Distinguished Professor and the Associate Dean of
Electrical and Computer Engineering, Florida Inter- Research with the College of Engineering and
national University, Miami, FL, USA. His research Computing, Florida International University (FIU),
interests include power converters for renewable en- Miami, FL, USA. He is also the Director with the
ergy applications, electric vehicle powertrain system, Energy Systems Research Laboratory, Electrical and
and high-efficiency converters using wide bandgap Computer Engineering Department, FIU. He is a
semiconductors. world renowned leader in electrical energy systems.
He was designated Distinguished University Professor in 2018. He has authored
or coauthored more than 750 articles in refereed journals and other IEEE refereed
international conference records. He has also authored a book and several book
chapters. His publications are highly cited, and frequently invited to lecture at
research and industrial organizations worldwide. He has performed research on
various topics in power and energy systems in addition to design optimization
and physics based modeling in electric drive systems and other low-frequency
environments. He has also performed research in the areas of electromagnetic
signature, wideband gap devices and switching, and ship power systems mod-
eling and analysis. He has current active research projects for several federal
agencies dealing with power system analysis and operation, smart grid dis-
tributed control and interoperability, cyber physical systems, and co-design of
cyber and physical components for future energy systems applications. He is
a Fellow of the Applied Computational Electromagnetic Society. He was the
recipient of the prestigious IEEE Power and Energy Society Cyril Veinott Elec-
tromechanical Energy Conversion Award. He was also the recipient of the 2012
Outstanding Research Award and the 2017 Outstanding Doctoral Mentorship
Award from Florida International University.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Saudi Arabia SDL. Downloaded on June 11,2020 at 07:26:15 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.