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

net/publication/264311784

Comparative study of Series-Series and Series-Parallel compensation topologies

for electric vehicle charging

Conference Paper · June 2014

DOI: 10.1109/ISIE.2014.6864651

CITATIONS READS

38 991

2 authors, including:

Kunwar Aditya
Continental Automotive Canada, Inc
21 PUBLICATIONS   246 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Kunwar Aditya on 29 January 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Comparative Study of Series-Series and Series-Parallel
Compensation Topologies for Electric Vehicle Charging
Kunwar Aditya, Student Member, IEEE, and Sheldon S. Williamson, Member, IEEE
Power Electronics and Energy Research (PEER) Group
P. D. Ziogas Power Electronics Laboratory
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Concordia University
1455 de Maisonneuve Blvd. W.
Montreal, Quebec H3G 1M8, Canada
Phone: +1/(514) 848-2424, ext. 8741
Fax: +1/(514) 848-2802
EML: sheldon@ece.concordia.ca
URL: http://www.ece.concordia.ca/~peer/

Abstract—Loosely coupled inductive power transfer (IPT) systems
have recently gained enormous attention for electric vehicle (EV)
battery charging. For EV battery charging, a constant-current
source is required. Numerous published papers suggest that the
secondary of loosely coupled IPT systems, if series compensated,
can act as constant-voltage source; and, if parallel compensated, it
can act as constant-current source. In this paper, the authors
prove that both series as well as parallel compensated secondary
can act as constant-current source as well as a constant-voltage
source, depending on the nature of power supply. Hence, either of
the topological options can be utilized efficiently for EV charging.
The authors intend to present the work for the case where primary
is in the form of a long track, such as in a mono-rail or electric
traction metro system. Hence, the primary is always considered to
be series compensated.
Keywords—Battery, charging, electric vehicles, inductive power
transfer, power electronics, resonance,transportation.
I. INTRODUCTION
Electric vehicles (EVs) are back on track, mainly because of
growing concern over increasing environmental pollution,
depleting energy resource, increasing oil prices and other issues
arising from automobile industry. This is not only limited to cars
but also other transportation vehicles such as public transport
busses, trains and even ships and airplanes are moving toward
using electricity as one the main sources of their power trains[1].
However in order to lure general population into adopting this
technology, manufacturer must come up with some attractive
features, one of which could be wireless charging of the
vehicles. Wireless transfer of power has advantage that it can
make the charging process automated, convenient, and
unaffected by dirt, chemicals and the weather [2]. Absence of
any galvanic contact between primary and secondary makes it
robust, reliable, spark free and hands-free hence safe and free
from inconvenience of traditional plugs[3], [4]. Moreover it can
be extended to opportunity-charging as well as dynamic-
charging systems. Opportunity-charging is done when vehicle is
idle whereas dynamic-charging allows the vehicle to be charged
while it is in motion on an instrumented lane along the road or
rail [5], [6]. Both opportunity-charging and dynamic-charging
can top up the battery with extra mileage and improve range. It
can also help reduce the depth of discharge over the distance
travelled, thus increasing the life cycle of the battery in turn can
make EV’s more efficient [6].
This wireless charging technology, which is based on
principle of inductive power transfer (IPT), is not new but was
first presented by Nikola Tesla in the 1891 by his well-known
Tesla Coil. However technological limitations at the time eluded
the researcher for adopting this means of power transfer for
applications such as electric vehicle charging [7]. Now, with the
advancement of high performance power electronic devices, the
possibility of using electromagnetic induction to transfer energy
into electric vehicles is now feasible and there have been a
number of prototype vehicles produced world-wide [8].
However major problem associated with inductive power
transfer (IPT) system is leakage flux and hence poor efficiency
associated with it. To overcome this problem or limitation of IPT
system, use of capacitive compensation in both primary and
secondary side has been suggested by many authors [8], [9].
There exist four basic compensation topologies that are being
used widely. These are Series-Series (SS) topology, Series-
Parallel (SP) topology, Parallel-Series (PS) topology and
Parallel-Parallel (PP) topology [9]. Choice of topology depends
upon application for which it is being used. For battery charging
application constant current source is required hence the
topology which acts as constant current source will be a good
choice [9], [10]. In this paper the authors aim to show that both
SS and SP topology can work as current source as well as
voltage source. Following points has been discussed: Need of
compensation in primary and secondary; analysis of SS
topology; analysis of SP topology; choice between both
topologies.
II. NECESSITY OF COMPENSATION FOR WIRELESS CHARGING
Wireless charging of electric vehicles, require a significant
air gap between primary and secondary winding of IPT system.
Large air gap is required to allow for inconsistency in the road
surface and better clearance between road and vehicle.
Moreover, if its in-motion or dynamic-charging, there is always
some lateral displacement i.e. misalignment associated with it.
Because of these mechanical constraints mutual coupling
between primary and secondary is poor and leakage inductance easily derived by Norton equivalent of circuit shown in Fig. 2
is much larger compared to mutual inductance [10]. Poor (b). The value of secondary capacitance and maximum power
coupling leads to poor transfer of power. To improve coupling transferred (MPT) for uncompensated, series compensated and
and compensate leakage inductance, capacitive compensation in parallel compensated secondary has been summarized in Table
primary and secondary windings is required. However 1 [17].
compensation in primary and secondary serves different TABLE I. Value of MPT, Cs and secondary quality factor for
purpose. To understand this, consider the equivalent circuit of uncompensated and compensated secondary.
an uncompensated loosely coupled IPT system shown in Fig. 1.
Secondary quality
Secondary Status MPT Cs
factor, Qs
Ip Lp Is Ls Io ሺȁܸ௢௖ ȁ ൈ ȁ‫ܫ‬௦௖ ȁሻ ----
Uncompensated ---------
RL ʹ ---
VP -jωMIs jωMIP Vs
Parallel ܴ௅ ͳ ܴ௅
ȁܸ௢௖ ȁȁ‫ܫ‬௦௖ ȁ
compensated ߱௢ ‫ܮ‬௦ ߱௢ଶ ‫ܮ‬௦ ߱௢ ‫ܮ‬௦
Fig.1. Equivalent circuit of an uncompensated loosely coupled IPT system. Series ߱௢ ‫ܮ‬௦ ͳ ߱௢ ‫ܮ‬௦
ȁܸ௢௖ ȁȁ‫ܫ‬௦௖ ȁ
compensated ܴ௅ ߱௢ଶ ‫ܮ‬௦ ܴ௅
Here the subscript “p” and “s” have been used for primary
and secondary components, respectively. M, ω, RL, and Io
represent mutual inductance, operating frequency, load For parallel compensation, secondary quality factor is given by
ோಽ
resistance, and load current, respectively. Maximum power and for series compensated secondary quality factor is
ఠ೚ ௅ೞ
transferred (MPT) to the load for circuit shown in Fig.1 can be ఠ ௅
given by: given by: ೚ ೞ . Hence, from Table1 one can say that
ோಽ
compensated secondary have a maximum power transfer
మ
ఠమ ெమ ூ೛
‫ ܶܲܯ‬ൌ (1) capability 2*Qs times greater than uncompensated secondary.
ଶఠ௅ೞ

Eq. (1) can also be verified using Maximum Power Transfer Due to the leakage and magnetizing inductance, the IPT
theorem. Eq. (1) can be seen as: system is intrinsically inductive in nature. Since high frequency
operation is desirable for effective power transfer, impedance
௏೚೎ ൈூೞ೎ seen by source becomes more and more reactive in nature hence
‫ ܶܲܯ‬ൌ  (2)
ଶ power factor becomes poorer [9], [10]. As a result of this, for a
Here, Voc is open circuit voltage when Io becomes zero and is given amount of output, source needs to have higher Volt-
given by Ampere (VA) ratings. This is a disadvantage, since greater VA-
rating of supply means larger capacity of source side converter,
ܸ௢௖ ൌ ߱‫ܫܯ‬௣ (3) therefore system cost increases. Moreover circulation of reactive
Isc is the short circuit current flowing through secondary, when power leads to resistive losses and hence poor system efficiency.
Rl is shorted. This is given by: To overcome above said shortcomings it is required to have
output voltage and current of the power supply to be in phase, in
ெூ೛
‫ܫ‬௦௖ ൌ (4) order to minimize the VA-rating of the power supply [9], [11].
௅೛
In literature, there are many examples in which primary
f power transferred to the load needs be more than ሺܸ௢௖ ‫ܫ‬௦௖ Τʹሻ capacitances have been chosen to compensate just the self-
then secondary should be compensated [10]. Power transferred inductance of the primary [12]-[14].This is acceptable, if the
for compensated secondary will be the maximum if secondary reflected impedance is negligible in comparison to the primary
resonates at frequency, ωo. For this a capacitor (Cs) whose value self-inductance [15]. Therefore, it is better to select primary
is given by (5), can be connected in series or parallel of the capacitance which perform compensation for the entire circuit
secondary as shown in Fig.2. so that the input power factor becomes unity. Similar to
߱௢ ൌ ͳ൘ (5) secondary, primary capacitor can be connected in series and
ඥ‫ܮ‬௦ ‫ܥ‬௦ parallel. Combination of both series and parallel compensation
gives total of four topology namely SS, SP, PP and PS. Table 2
gives the value of reflected impedance (Zr), primary capacitance
Is Ls
Cs Io Is Ls Io (Cp) and total impedance seen by source (ZT), for SS and SP
topologies [15], [16].
jωMIp RL Vs jωMIp Cs RL Vs

(a) (b)
Fig. 2. (a) Series compensated secondary; (b) Parallel compensated
secondary.
MPT for series compensated secondary can be derived using
Thevenin’s theorem and for parallel compensated it can be
TABLE II. Value of primary capacitance, secondary reflected impedance& Parameters for IPT system was taken from [16] and is shown in
total impedance at resonant frequency, ߱௢
Table 3.
Topology Cp Zr ZT
TABLE III. Parameters of IPT system used in simulation.
‫ܮ‬௦ ‫ܥ‬௦ ߱௢ଶ ‫ܯ‬ଶ ߱௢ଶ ‫ܯ‬ଶ
SS Resonant frequency (fo) 20kHz
‫ܮ‬௣ ܴ௅ ܴ௅
ͳ ‫ ܯ‬ଶ ܴ௅ ݆߱௢ ‫ܯ‬ଶ ‫ܯ‬ଶ ܴ௅ Primary Inductance (Lp) 29.6 μH
SP ெమ െ
߱௢ଶ ቀ‫ܮ‬௣ െ ቁ ‫ܮ‬ଶ௦ ‫ܮ‬௦ ‫ܮ‬ଶ௦
௅ೞ Secondary Inductance (Ls) 26.9 μH

Mutual Inductance (M) 12.7 μH

Primary compensation depends a lot on the application. For
long track applications, the impedance is very high. Therefore,
the supply voltage needs to be high to drive the current through
the primary. Series compensation compensates the voltage
across the primary winding and hence the required voltage rating
of the power supply can be reduced to manageable level. In this
paper author consider primary to be series compensated as he
intends to present the work for long track applications.
III. ANALYSIS OF SERIES-SERIES TOPOLOGY
Consider the IPT system with SS topology shown below in
Fig. 3. Primary and secondary winding resistance has been
neglected in the analysis merely for the purpose of simplicity.
Primary Capacitance (Cp) 2.21 μF
Secondary Capacitance (Cs) 2.42 μH
IPT system in Fig. 3, was simulated with constant voltage
source of 230 V and load was varied in sequence of [2, 3, 4, 5,
6] Ω. Results obtained have been plotted below in Fig. 4.
Similarly, SS topology was simulated for constant current
source of 63.6 Amps and load was varied in sequence [1, 2, 3, 4,
5, and 6] Ω.Results obtained have been plotted in Fig.5.

Lp Ip Is Ls Io
Cp Cs

VP -jωMIs jωMIP RL Vs

Fig. 5. SS topology fed from constant current source.

Fig. 3. Series-series compensated IPT system.

Induced voltage in secondary is given by:

‫ܧ‬௦ ൌ ݆߱‫ܫܯ‬௣ (6)
From (6) it can be observed that induced voltage in secondary
is directly proportional to current in primary, ‫ܫ‬௣ . Here, Ip is
determined by primary source and is given by:
௏
‫ܫ‬௣ ൌ  ೛ (7)
௓೅
Where, ZT is total impedance seen by source. In case of SS Fig. 4. SS topology fed from constant voltage source.
topology, total impedance at resonance, seen by primary is
given by Table 2: From Fig. 4, one can observe that if primary voltage (Vp) is
మ ெమ
ఠ೚ maintained constant than load current (Io) remains constant and
்ܼ ൌ (8)
ோಽ hence SS topology acts as constant current source. From Fig. 5,
From (6) one can observe, if primary current Ip is maintained it can be observed that if input current (Ip) is maintained
constant then secondary induced voltage and therefore load constant, load voltage (Vs) remains constant and therefore SS
voltage will remain constant. Under this condition SS topology topology acts as constant voltage source.
will acts as constant voltage source. Primary induced voltage,
Note: Above analysis is valid only if mutual alignment
Ep is given by:
between primary and secondary coil is not variable i.e. mutual
‫ܧ‬௣ ൌ ݆߱‫ܫܯ‬௦ (9) inductance should remain constant. Voltage-source, current-
At resonance, Ep is equal to supply voltage, Vp. Hence for a source and load values were randomly selected to demonstrate
given geometry, if primary is fed from constant voltage source the theory.
secondary current (Io=Is) will remain constant and SS topology
will acts as constant current source. IV. ANALYSIS OF SERIES-PARALLEL TOPOLOGY
Hence, from above analysis it can be said that SS topology Consider the IPT system with SP topology shown below in
can behave as constant current source as well as constant Fig.6.
voltage depending upon nature of supply. To validate above
theory SS topology was simulated in MATLAB Simulink.
 Lp Ip Is Ls IR
Cp Ic
Vp -jωMIs jωMIP Cs RL Vs

Fig. 6. SS compensated IPT system.

Fig. 9. SP topology fed from constant current source

To understand the behavior of SP topology considers the
Norton’s equivalent circuit of its secondary as shown in Fig. 7.
Io
ISC Ls Cs RL Vs
Fig.7. Norton’s Equivalent of Secondary of SP Topology
Here, Isc is short circuit current given by (4). At frequency ߱௢ ൌ
ͳ Charging of EV batteries such as lithium-ion (Li-ion), which
൘ඥ‫ ܥ ܮ‬, Ls and Cs behaves as open circuit therefore Isc and
௦ ௦
Io becomes equal. From (4) it can be observed that expression
of Isc is independent of load, RL. If Ip is maintained constant i.e.
primary is fed from constant current input then Isc and therefore
load current Io will remain constant irrespective of the load. In
other word secondary will behave as constant current source.
Output voltage Vs of circuit shown in Fig. 7 is given by:
ெூ
ܸ௦ ൌ ೛ ܴ௅ (10)
௅ೞ
Also from circuit shown in Fig .6, one can write:
ܸ mutual coupling, as is evident from Table 2. References [18]
‫ܫ‬௣ ൌ ௣൘ܼ (11)
் and [19] have used SS topology, stating identical reasons.
Using the value of ZT from Table2 and from (10) and (11):
௏ ௅
ܸ௦ ൌ ೛ ೞ (12)
ெ
Equation (12) states that output voltage is independent of load,
RL and will be constant as long as Vp is maintained constant. In
other word SP topology will behave as constant voltage source
if voltage across primary is maintained constant.
To validate above theory SP topology was simulated in
Matlab-Simulink, parameters for IPT system was taken from
paper [16] and is shown in table III. IPT system in Fig. 3, was
simulated with constant voltage source of 230 V and load was
varied in sequence of [1, 2, 3, 4, and 5] Ω. Results obtained have
been plotted in Fig. 8. Similarly SP topology was simulated for
constant current source of 63.6 Amps and load was varied in
sequence [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6] Ω. Results obtained have been
plotted in Fig. 9.
Fig. 8. SP topology fed from constant voltage source.
From Fig. 8, one can observe that if primary voltage (Vp) is
maintained constant than secondary voltage (Vs) remains
constant irrespective of load and hence SP topology acts as
constant voltage source. From Fig. 9, it can be observed that if
input current (Ip) is maintained constant, secondary output
current (Io) remains constant irrespective of the load and hence
SP topology behaves as constant current source.
V. CONCLUSIONS
have two charging stages, viz., constant-current charging stage
and constant-voltage charging stage [9], can be supplied using
the same topology. From Table 2, one can observe that for SS
topology, primary capacitance is independent of mutual
inductance as well as load. Therefore, it is best suited for the
condition, where load is drastic, or for the case, where relative
position of primary is changing with respect to secondary, such
as in the case of in-motion charging or dynamic charging.
Therefore, SS topology proves to be a better option than SP
topology, wherein the compensation scheme is affected by
Reference [9] demonstrates the SS topology operating as
constant-voltage source as well as constant-current source.
However, for constant-voltage source, operating frequency is
not at resonant frequency, which will affect the power transfer
capability. One elegant solution to this problem could be, to
drive the primary of the IPT system with a dynamically
controlled voltage source, acting as a current source.
REFERENCES
[1] A. Shafiei, A. Momeni, and Williamson, “Battery modeling approaches
and management techniques for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles,” in Proc.
IEEEVehicle Power and Propulsion Conf., Chicago, IL, Sept. 2011, pp.1-
5.
[2] O. C. Onar,J. M. Miller, L. S. Campbell, C. Coomer, C. P. White, and L.
E. Seiber, “A novel wireless power transfer for in-motion EV/PHEV
charging,” in Proc. IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conf. and Expo.,
Long Beach, CA, Feb. 2013, pp. 3037-3080.
[3] A. W. Green and J. T. Boys, “l0kHz inductively coupled power transfer -
concept and control,” in Proc. IEEE International Conference on Power
Electronics and Variable Speed Drives, London, UK, Oct. 1994, pp. 694-
699.
[4] H. Sakamoto, K. Harada, S. Washimiya, K. Takehara, Y. Matsuo, and F.
Nakao, “Large air-gap coupler for inductive charger [for electric
vehicles],”IEEE Trans. on Magnetics, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 3526-3528, Sept.
1999.
[5] G. A. Covic and J. T. Boys, “Inductive power transfer,” in Proc. of the
IEEE, vol. 101, no. 6, pp. 1-14, June 2013.
 [6] T. C. Y. Ho, B. Gomersall, and R. Li, “Contactless charging for electric
vehicles with a large air gap,” in Proc.IEEE European Conf. on Power
Electronics and Applications, Birmingham, UK, Aug. 2011, pp. 1-10.
[7] G. A. J. Elliott, J. T. Boys, and A. W. Green, “Magnetically coupled
systems for power transfer to electric vehicles,” in Proc. IEEE
International Conf. on Power Electronicsand Drive Systems, Singapore,
Feb. 1995, vol. 2, pp. 797-801.
[8] C. S. Wang, O. H. Stielau, and G. A. Covic, “Load models and their
application in the design of loosely coupled Inductive power transfer
systems,”in Proc. IEEE International Conf. on Power System
Technology, Perth, Australia, Dec. 2000, pp. 1053-1058.
[9] S. Chopra and P. Bauer, “Analysis and design considerations for a
contactless power transfer system,” in Proc. IEEE International
Telecommunications Energy Conf., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Oct.
2011, pp. 1-6.
[10] O. H. Stielau and G. A. Covic, “Design of loosely coupled inductive
power transfer systems”, in Proc. IEEE International Conf. on Power
System Technology, Perth Australia, Dec. 2000, pp.85-90.
[11] C.S.Wang, G. A. Covic, and O. H. Stielau, “General stability criterions
for zero phase angle controlled loosely coupled inductive power transfer
systems,” in Proc. IEEE Annual Conf. of the Industrial Electronics
Society, Denver, CO, vol. 2, Nov. 2001, pp. 1049-1054.
[12] A. Esser and H.C. Skudelny, “A new approach to power supplies for
robots,” IEEETrans. on Industry Applications, vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 872-875,
Sept.1991.
[13] A. W. Green and J. T. Boys, “An inductively coupled high frequency
power system for material handling applications,” in Proc. International
Power EngineeringConf., Singapore, March 1993, vol. 2, pp. 821-826.
[14] T. Bieler, M. Perrottet, V. Nguyen, and Y. Perriard, “Contactless power
and information transmission,” in IEEE Trans. on Industry
Applications,vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 1266-1272, Sept. 2002.
[15] C.-S. Wang, G. A. Covic, and O. H. Stielau, ‘‘Power transfer capability
and bifurcation phenomena of loosely coupled inductive power transfer
systems,’’ IEEE Transaction on Industrial Electronics, vol. 51, no. 1,
pp. 148–157, Feb. 2004.
[16] C. S. Wang, O. H. Stielau, and G. A. Covic, “Design considerations for a
contactless electric vehicle battery charger,”IEEE Trans. on Industrial
Electronics, vol.52, no.5, pp.1308-1314, Oct. 2005.
[17] O.H. Stielau, J.T. Boys, G.A. Covic, and G. Elliot. “Battery charging
using loosely coupled inductive power transfer,” inProc. IEEE European
Conf. on Power Electronics and Applications, Lausanne, Switzerland,
Sept. 1999.
[18] J. L. Villa, J. Sallan, A. Llombart, and J. F. Sanz, “Design of a
highfrequency inductively coupled power transfer system for electric
vehiclebattery charge,”Applied Energy, vol. 86, no. 3, pp. 355-363, March
2009.
[19] J. Sallan, J. L. Villa, A. Llombart, and J. F. Sanz, “Optimal design ofICPT
systems applied to electric vehicle battery charge,”IEEE Trans. on
IndustrialElectronics, vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 2140-2149, June 2009.

View publication stats