Multimode Operation of Non-inverting Buck Boost
Converter for Energy Storage System
Jianjun Ma, Miao Zhu, Chunyang Pan, Xu Cai
School of Electronic Information and Electrical Engineering
Shanghai Jiao Tong University
Shanghai, China
j.j.ma@sjtu.edu.cn, miaozhu@sjtu.edu.cn, ChunyangPan@126.com, xucai@sjtu.edu.cn
Abstract—Non-inverting Buck Boost converter (NIBB) is a
versatile interfacing circuit with wide voltage regulation
capability. It can work in Buck mode, Transition mode and
Boost mode with high operating efficiency. At the same time,
the three different working modes also have different dynamic
properties. With the consideration of NIBB dynamics at all
three working modes, NIBB is first modeled as a linear
parameter varying (LPV) system. Based on the LPV system, a
digital linear controller synthesis method is proposed with
2021 IEEE 30th International Symposium on Industrial Electronics (ISIE) | 978-1-7281-9023-5/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/ISIE45552.2021.9576382
linear matrix inequity (LMI) approach and applied for
different Transition modes. The developed controllers are
comparatively evaluated through experimental results, in
verification of the analysis results.
Keywords—LPV modeling; multimode converter; energy
storage system.
I. INTRODUCTION
The ever-increasing energy demands have elevated the
need of integrating energy storage system (ESS) into a
smarter grid [1]–[4]. The output voltage of ESS inherently
fluctuating with the particular working condition, such as
state-of-charge. As a result, converters with wide voltage
regulation capability are often required as the interfacing
circuits. Similar requirements can also be founded for
supercapacitor, fuel cells, etc [5]–[8].
One versatile circuit with wide voltage regulation
capability is the non-inverting buck/boost converter [9]–[13],
as illustrated in Fig.1. It can operate in Buck mode, Boost
mode and have wide voltage conversion capability. In Buck
mode, S2 is constantly closed, only S1 and S3 switching
during each cycle. In Boost mode, S1 is constantly closed,
only S2 and S4 switching during each cycle. As a result, high
converter efficiency can be maintained over a wide
operation range. Due to the advantages of multimode
operation, NIBB has been applied for output voltage
regulation.
However, compared with single mode operation of
traditional DC/DC converter, multimode operation inherently
brings two new challenges of "working mode definition" and
"real-time mode selection". Due to the presence of switch
dead time, only Buck mode and Boost mode are not enough
to ensure continuous voltage conversion. Additional
Transition mode is required to be inserted between Buck
mode and Boost mode [14]–[15]. Many types of Transition
mode have been proposed, including Boost-clamping mode
and Extend-Buck+ Extend -Boost mode, etc. In existing
research, the only Transition mode optimization aim has
been on steady-state power loss. Influences of different
Transition modes on overall NIBB dynamic property still
remain unexplored.
The work is sponsored by Soft Science Research Program of Shanghai
City (20692110500)..
978-1-7281-9023-5/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Shanghai Jiaotong University. Downloaded on October 23,2022 at 03:16:08 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Traditional frequency-domain control design relies on
small-signal converter model at one steady-state working
point. In [16], the steady-state working point is selected at
Boost mode for overall control design, with consideration of
right half plane zero in Boost mode. The converter
performance in Buck mode and Transition mode may
downgrade as a result. To allow for the different dynamic
properties at all three working modes, separate small-signal
models and controllers can be designed. Due to the presence
of multiple controllers, extra voltage overshoot will appear
and additional bumpless control is often required [17].
Different from existing research, NIBB is first modeled
as a LPV system and a linear digital control synthesis
method is proposed in this paper. LPV system has previously
been applied for single mode operation of boost converter
[18] and single mode operation of VSC [19]. This is the first
work of applying LPV system for multimode operation of
power converter. The benefits are twofold: first, it offers a
new control design method for NIBB with balanced dynamic
response and robust performance; second, it offers the
possibility to evaluate the two key influencing factors of
"Transition mode selection" and "equivalent duty ratio
definition" on overall NIBB dynamic performance, which
are overlooked in the existing literature.
II. MULTIMODE OPERATION OF NIBB
For NIBB circuit, the norton-equivalent model of
converter load is given as a resistor R in parallel with a
current source iload. The average model of NIBB is given as:
 di L ( t )
L = d1 ( t ) ∗ vin ( t ) − 1 − d 4 ( t )  ∗ vo ( t )
 dt
 . (1)
C dvo ( t ) =1 − d 4 ( t )  ∗ iL ( t ) −
vo ( t )
− iload ( t )
 dt R
where vg is the input voltage, vo is the output voltage, iL is
the inductor current, d1 and d4 denote the duty ratio of S1 and
S4 respectively. Under CCM working condition, the
equivalent on-time ratio of S2 is defined as d2:
d2 (t )= 1 − d4 (t ). (2)
During steady-state, voltage conversion ratio K is given
by:
Vo D1
= K= . (3)
Vin D2
where D1 and D2 are the steady-state duty cycle of S1 and S2
respectively.
If take D1 as the vertical axis and D2 as the lateral axis, a
graphic representation of voltage conversion ratio K in (3) is
the slope of line connecting "O" and the working point (D1,
D2), as illustrated in Fig.2. In "Buck mode", S2 is constantly
closed (D2=1) and the working area is B1B2. In "Boost mode",  T VoTs 
S1 is constantly closed (D1=1) and the working area is A1A2.  1 − s ∗ψ 0 ∗ζ1 
L L
Due to the presence of dead time and switching delay, both  
 T T 1 VT ζ
D1 and D2 have the maximum value D= max. It will lead to a ρ ( 
+ 1)  − s ∗ψ 1 − s ∗ 0 − o s ∗ 2  ∗ ρ ( )
discontinuous voltage conversion ratio between OA1 C C R C R
(K=1/Dmax) and OB1 (K=Dmax), as shown in Fig. 2. To ensure  
 0 T s 1 0 
a continuous voltage conversion, NIBB has to operate within  0 
0 0 0
the area σ. ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Ad
(7)
 Ts 
 0 ∗d 
0  L
0   
   T  
+ ∗u ( ) + 
 − s
0  ∗ w (  ).
0  C
   
 1  0 Ts 
 0 0 
((((((((((((
Bu

Bw

The varying parameters including ψ, ζ1, ζ2, δ and 1/R.

The particular values vary with converter working modes as
well as operation condition.

1 ， [ Buck ]

1  1 1   D2 ，[Transition, b ≠ 0]
∈ , ,ψ = .
R  Rmin Rmax   D2 ，[Transition, b = 0]
 D ，Boost
Fig.2 Illustration of operation regions of NIBB working modes.
 2 [ ]
Within the area σ, any line connecting CmCn with EmEn Vin
can be adopted as the Transition mode, as represented by  V ， [ Buck ]
CkEk in Fig.2. In particular, these Transition modes can be  o
Buck/Boost mode, Boost-clamping mode, Boost-clamping Vin a
mode and Extend Buck+ Extend Boost mode. ζ1 = V + b ，[Transition, b ≠ 0].
 o
Since the Transition mode never crosses the point O, a 1 ， [Transition, b = 0]
general representation of Transition mode is given as (4). 
1 ， [ Boost ]
a ∗ D1 + b ∗ D2 + 1 =0. (4)
For example, in Boost-clamping mode a=0, b=–1/Dmax2;
0 ， [ Buck ]

in Extend-Boost mode a=–1/Dmax, b=0; in Extend-Buck mode a ∗ 1 ，
[Transition, b ≠ 0]
a=0, b=–1/Dmax.  b D2

III. LPV SYSTEM MODEL FOR MULTIMODE OPERATION ζ2 =  1 .
 D ， [Transition, b = 0]
With the selected Transition mode and the defined  2
equivalent duty ratio deq, linear parameter varying model is  1
analyzed in this Section. For an error-related control, an  ， [ Boost ]
 D2
additional variable e(t) is introduced as the output voltage
deviation. To attain zero steady-state voltage deviation, [ Buck ]
 D1 ，

integration of the voltage deviation e(t) is introduced as 1， [Transition, b ≠ 0]
vint(t). δ = . (8)
1 ， [Transition, b = 0]
e ( t ) vo ( t ) − Vref .
= (5) 1 ， Boost
[ ]

vint ( t ) = ∫ e ( t ) dt. (6) It can be seen that NIBB dynamic varies depending the
For digital control implementation, the average model of input voltage vin, load condition R, working mode and the
NIBB is discretized with zero-order holder (ZOH). With the transition mode parameters (a, b in (4)). Influence of these
varying reference voltage, the augmented disturbance array factors should be taken in account during the design of NIBB
is given as w(k). Considering the switching cycle digital control.
control delay, an intermediate variable of duty ratio is IV. CONTROL DESIGN FOR MULTIMODE OPERATION
introduced as u(k).
With the selected Transition mode and the LPV system
A general representation of NIBB model in all three model, close-loop control is analyzed in this Section. The
working modes can be represented as (7). classical linear controller is here adopted due to easy
implementation and wide applications. Fig.3 shows the
corresponding control diagram, which can be restructured as

Authorized licensed use limited to: Shanghai Jiaotong University. Downloaded on October 23,2022 at 03:16:08 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
classical dual-loop PI control. Note that the consideration of
one switching cycle control delay z-1 introduced by digital
implementation.
The derived equivalent duty ratio is given by (9).
deq ( k =
) K ∗ ρ ( k )
(9)
=  kip kvp kvi kd  ∗ ρ ( k ) .
Robust stability and decay rate of the close-loop
converter can be optimized with the following Theorem.
Theorem 1: For given real positive scalars r and d,
defining the circle belonging to the unit circle. For a given
positive μ, if there exist symmetric positive definite matrices
wi and matrices G, Z such that for i=1~n (10) holds
Fig.4. Circular region (r,d) for close-loop eigenvalues of NIBB.

TABLE I
PARAMETERS OF NIBB CONVERTER

Parameter Value

L 0.4mH
C 330μF
R 40Ω
Iload [0,4] A
Dmax 0.9
Switching frequency fs 20kHz
Fig.3 Digital control diagram for endogenous multimode operation of Vo 48 V
NIBB. Boost: [24,44]
Vin Transition: [44,53]
Buck: [53,72]
 T
G + G − wi ∗ ∗ ∗
 
 0 µI ∗ ∗ 
> 0 . (10) V. VERIFICATIONS
 r −1 ( Ad −i − dI ) G + r −1 Bu Z Bw wi ∗ 
  In order to verify the synthesized controller, a prototype
 Ci G 0 0 µ I 
of NIBB has been built. The circuit parameters follow Table
, then the state feedback gain I. The digital controller is implemented on Myway-Expert4
K = ZG −1 . (11) (TI TMS320C6657). The sampling rate is at the same
ensures switching frequency fsw=20kHz.
1. Close-loop eigenvalues are inside the circle belonging For the different Transition modes, the designed
to the unit circle. controllers are tested with varying input voltage. As is
2. The close-loop system has a prescribed H∞ norm of μ. shown in Fig. 5, with the increase of input voltage vin, NIBB
Proof of Theorem 1 comes from theorem.4 [20] by working mode autonomously changes from Boost mode to
replacing Ai and B2 by r-1(Ad-i–dI) and r-1Bu respectively. the selected Transition mode and to Buck mode. The
Selection of the circular parameters r and d involves a difference of inductor current in Transition mode relates
with the selected Transition mode. The designed controllers
balance of dynamic performances. As shown in Fig.4, to
can ensure robust voltage regulation through the wide
ensure a damping ratio above 0.3 and close-loop roots all operation range, in accordance with the design aim.
2π
−
outside the circle R = e 8 , the close-loop eigenvalues
should be confined in the region of γ. This non-convex area
of γ is approximated by a convex circular region, with
d=0.719, r=0.264.
For the considered working case, the NIBB prototype
parameters are listed in Table.I. For fair comparison of the
different Transition modes, the center of the circle (d)
remains constant and the radius r is increased to attain the
same H∞ norm. With the increase of r, the close-loop (a)
enginvalues are approaching the unit circle, indicating the
downgrade of recovery time. In Boost-clamping Mode, r is
selected as 0.274. In Extend buck+ Extend boost Mode
Mode, r is selected as 0.272.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Shanghai Jiaotong University. Downloaded on October 23,2022 at 03:16:08 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 (b)
Fig.5. Stable operation of NIBB through wide operation range (a)
Transition mode: Extend-Buck+extend-Boost mode, (c) Transition mode:
Boost-clamping mode.
Load responses of NIBB are compared in Buck mode
with the output voltage vo regulated at 48V, vin at 65V. The
voltage deviation and recovery time are measured with iload
increases from 0A to 4A and the corresponding result is
shown in Fig.6.
(a)
(b)
Fig.6. Comparison of NIBB dynamic response under Buck mode (a)
Transition mode: Extend-Buck+extend-Boost mode, (b) Transition mode:
Boost-clamping mode.
Load responses of NIBB are compared in Boost mode
with the output voltage vo regulated at 48V, vin at 35V. The
voltage deviation and recovery time are measured with iload
increases from 0A to 4A and the corresponding result is
shown in Fig.7.
In comparison, the different Transition modes have a
high influence on NIBB dynamic performance. For the
considered case, Extend-Buck+extend-Boost mode has lower
voltage deviation and recovery time compared with Boost-
clamping Mode.
(a)
Authorized licensed use limited to: Shanghai Jiaotong University. Downloaded on October 23,2022 at 03:16:08 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
(b)
Fig.7. Comparison of NIBB dynamic response under Buck mode (a)
Transition mode: Extend-Buck+extend-Boost mode, (b) Transition mode:
Boost-clamping mode.
VI. CONCLUSION
In this paper, a control synthesis method of NIBB under
multimode operation is proposed. The converter is first
modeled as linear parameter varying (LPV) system and a
linear controller design method is developed considering
both robust stability and dynamic response. Besides, the
different Transition modes will have different dynamic
properties and can be evaluated with the LPV model. The
control design method is applied under two representative
Transition modes and evaluated through comparative
experimental results, in verification of the design aim.
REFERENCES
[1] C. W. Chen, K. H. Chen and Y. M. Chen, "Modeling and Controller
Design of an Autonomous PV Module for DMPPT PV Systems," in
IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 29, no. 9, pp. 4723-
4732, Sept. 2014.
[2] M. Kasper, D. Bortis and J. W. Kolar, "Classification and
Comparative Evaluation of PV Panel-Integrated DC–DC Converter
Concepts," in IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 29, no. 5,
pp. 2511-2526, May 2014.
[3] M. Rodriguez, G. Stahl, L. Corradini and D. Maksimovic, "Smart DC
Power Management System Based on Software-Configurable Power
Modules," in IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 28, no. 4,
pp. 1571-1586, April 2013.
[4] J. Ma, M. Zhu, Y. Li and X. Cai, "Dynamic Analysis of Multimode
Buck–Boost Converter: An LPV System Model Point of View," in
IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 36, no. 7, pp. 8539-
8551, July 2021.
[5] M. Anun, M. Ordonez, I. G. Zurbriggen and G. G. Oggier, "Circular
Switching Surface Technique: High-Performance Constant Power
Load Stabilization for Electric Vehicle Systems," in IEEE
Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 30, no. 8, pp. 4560-4572,
Aug. 2015.
[6] I. Aharon, A. Kuperman and D. Shmilovitz, "Analysis of Dual-
Carrier Modulator for Bidirectional Noninverting Buck–Boost
Converter," in IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 30, no.
2, pp. 840-848, Feb. 2015.
[7] H. Ramírez-Murillo et al., "An Efficiency Comparison of Fuel-Cell
Hybrid Systems Based on the Versatile Buck–Boost Converter," in
IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 1237-
1246, Feb. 2018.
[8] C. Restrepo, J. Calvente, A. Romero, E. Vidal-Idiarte and R. Giral,
"Current-Mode Control of a Coupled-Inductor Buck–Boost DC–DC
Switching Converter," in IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics,
vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 2536-2549, May 2012.
[9] X. Ren, X. Ruan, H. Qian, M. Li and Q. Chen, "Three-Mode Dual-
Frequency Two-Edge Modulation Scheme for Four-Switch Buck–
Boost Converter," in IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol.
24, no. 2, pp. 499-509, Feb. 2009.
[10] J. Chen, P. Shen and Y. Hwang, "A High-Efficiency Positive Buck–
Boost Converter With Mode-Select Circuit and Feed-Forward
Techniques," in IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 28, no.
9, pp. 4240-4247, Sept. 2013.
[11] Y. Lee, A. Khaligh, A. Chakraborty and A. Emadi, "Digital
Combination of Buck and Boost Converters to Control a Positive
Buck–Boost Converter and Improve the Output Transients," in IEEE
 Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 1267-1279,
May 2009.
[12] D. C. Jones and R. W. Erickson, "A Nonlinear State Machine for
Dead Zone Avoidance and Mitigation in a Synchronous Noninverting
Buck–Boost Converter," in IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics,
vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 467-480, Jan. 2013.
[13] D. Kim and B. Lee, "An Enhanced Control Algorithm for Improving
the Light-Load Efficiency of Noninverting Synchronous Buck–Boost
Converters," in IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 31, no.
5, pp. 3395-3399, May 2016.
[14] C. Restrepo, T. Konjedic, J. Calvente and R. Giral, "Hysteretic
Transition Method for Avoiding the Dead-Zone Effect and
Subharmonics in a Noninverting Buck–Boost Converter," in IEEE
Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 3418-3430,
June 2015.
[15] N. Zhang, G. Zhang and K. W. See, "Systematic Derivation of Dead-
Zone Elimination Strategies for the Noninverting Synchronous Buck–
Boost Converter," in IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol.
33, no. 4, pp. 3497-3508, April 2018.
[16] Z. Zhao, M. Xu, Q. Chen, J. Lai and Y. Cho, "Derivation, Analysis,
and Implementation of a Boost – Buck Converter-Based High-
Authorized licensed use limited to: Shanghai Jiaotong University. Downloaded on October 23,2022 at 03:16:08 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Efficiency PV Inverter," in IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics,
vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 1304-1313, March 2012.
[17] J. Ma, M. Zhu, X. Li and X. Cai, "Bumpless transfer of non-inverting
buck boost converter among multiple working modes," 2018 IEEE
Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition (APEC), San
Antonio, TX, 2018, pp. 1909-1914.
[18] C. Olalla, R. Leyva, A. E. Aroudi, P. Garces and I. Queinnec, "LMI
robust control design for boost PWM converters," in IET Power
Electronics, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 75-85, January 2010.
[19] L. A. Maccari et al., "LMI-Based Control for Grid-Connected
Converters With LCL Filters Under Uncertain Parameters," in IEEE
Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 3776-3785,
July 2014.
[20] J. Daafouz and J. Bernussou, "Poly-quadratic stability and H∞
performance for discrete systems with time varying uncertainties,"
Proceedings of the 40th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control
(Cat. No.01CH37228), Orlando, FL, USA, 2001, pp. 267-272 vol.1.