A Comparison between the Buck, Boost and Buck-Boost inverters

J. Almazbl N. Vhzquez** C. Hernbdez** J. Alvarez.". J. Arau*

Acapulco, MEXICO
October15-19 *CENIDET.
Depto. de Electronica.
Cuernavaca, MCxico
Phone: 52 (731) 877-41
Fax: 52 (731) 224-34
E-Mail: jalmazan@cenidet.edu.mx
**Institute Tecnologico de Celaya.
Depto. de Electronica.
Celaya, Mexico.
Phone: 52 (461) 175-75
Fax: 52 (461) 179-79
E-mail: nvazquez@itc.mx
* * *CINVESTAV-IPN.
Depto. de Ingenieria ElCctrica.
Mtxico, D.F.
Phone: 52 (5) 747-7000
Fax: 52 (5) 747-7089
E-Mail: jalvarez@ctrl.cinvestav.mx

Abstract -In this paper the analysis and experimental study of
three kinds of inverters are presented. Beginning with the
traditional full bridge buck inverter; followed by two different
inverter approaches, the boost and buck boost ones. This last
two converters have the property of produce an output voltage
higher or lower than the input voltage additionally to its
inversion capability, which is a desired characteristic to some
applications.
The paper include a comparison between the different
inverter approaches, additionally to the analysis and
experimental results of the converters. The control strategy used
for all the converters is the sliding mode control in order to
introduce a good dynamic response for the closed loop system.
I. INTRODUCTION.
One of the converters used in power electronics is the
dclac converter (inverter) in applications such as
unintermptible power supply (UPS), active filter, motor
control, etc.; this paper is focused in this kind of converters.
Recently a new topology of inverter has been proposed for
UPS applications: a boost inverter [1,2]; the idea of this new
topology can be easily extrapolated to produce other
topologies of inverters: buck-boost, sepic or cuk inverters
[3,4]; in general for each dc/dc converter topology.
These new converters, additionally to the inversion
characteristic, can produce an output voltage higher or lower
than the input voltage [3-4]; this characteristic is suitable for
applications like UPS or photovoltaic systems, where the
output voltage is needed to be higher than the input voltage.
In this paper the analysis and experimental study of three
kinds of inverters are presented. Firstly with the traditional
full bridge buck inverter (FBI); followed by two different
inverters: the boost and buck-boost. The advantages and
drawbacks of each converter are addressed.
This work was sponsored by COSNET (Mexican Council of the
Technological Education System).
The control stra.:gy used is based on the variable
structure theory: sliding mode control (SMC). This strategy is
used to introduce a good dynamic response of the studied
converters.
In the next section the control strategy is briefly
described; in the following three sections the traditional, the
boost and the buck boost inverters are discussed. The
comparison is treated in sixth section. Some experimental
results are presented in their respective section.
11. THESLIDING MODE CONTROL.
The SMC has been used to improve the robustness and
the dynamic response in different converters such as active
filters, inverters and dc/dc converters [5-71. Many papers
have presented a variety of sliding mode control design steps
[7-91, but they could be summarized as follows [lo]: to
propose the sliding surface, to verify the existence of a
sliding mode, and finally the stability analysis into the sliding
surface.
Typically, the sliding surface proposed is a linear
combination of the state variables; this is because of the easy
implementation and theoretical analysis. The SMC forces the
system to be held in the mentioned surface and then the
system is driven to the equilibrium point, the sliding surface
must include the equilibrium point.
A complete analysis of the control strategy for the three
converters are not presented in this paper; only for the boost
inverter a formal analysis is presented, since the analysis of
this converter is more complex than for the buck inverter and
almost equal than for the buck-boost inverter.
111. THETRADITIONAL BUCK INVERTER.
The traditional full bridge inverter (Fig 1) is a converter
which can not produce an output voltage greater that the
input voltage, but is easy to control it. This converter
operates, in a simplified manner, tuming on and off the
switches to produce a bipolar square output voltage; after

2000 IEEE
0-7803-6489-9/00/$10.000 34 1
this, a low pass band filter is used to obtain the sinusoidal In figure 3 is shown the gain vs. the duty cycle. It can be
voltage (L and C, Fig 1). In general this principle is the same observed that the converter can not produce an output voltage
that the dcldc buck converter, the difference is that, for this larger than the input voltage. Experimental results of this
last converter, the output voltage is unipolar and not converter are shown in figure 4 and 5; the output voltage and
sinusoidal. current in Fig. 4, the output voltage and inductor current in
Fig. 5. The experiments were realized with Vin=260V,
Other idea to built an inverter was proposed in [3]. This L=3.3mH, C=27pF and R=48R.
idea consists in to obtain a inverter topology with two bi-
directional in current dc/dc converters, where the load is
connected differentially across the converters. If the dc/dc
buck converter is used, the topology shown in figure 2 is
obtained. This converter can be considered equal to the
traditional full bridge inverter if the current I, in figure 2 is
zero, resulting that the capacitors are reduced in one of value
C, and the inductors in one of value L.
The analysis of the converter in steady state is made
considering .the inverter shown in figure 2, neglecting the
parasitic element effects, and taking into account that the
switching frequency is higher than the output voltage
frequency. One dcldc converter is worked with a duty cycle Duty cycle d ( d s )
(d) and the other dcldc converter with the complementary
duty cycle (d'=l-d). The gain (Vo/Vin) of the converter vs. Fig 3. Gain vs. duty, buck inverter
the duty cycle can be easily obtained:
l e k Run 10 OkS/r H i Res
- T 1
Vo = Vu - Vb = dVin - (1 - d)Vin , then
vo
-=2d-1
Vin

The inductor current is almost equal to the current

demanded to the converter, then is determined by:
Vin
I , = (2d - 1)-
R
9 . . .

j , .
MS.OOmr Chl f 122
Math1 lOO.$m ?O%'

Fig 4. Output voltage and current, buck inverter.

Tek Run 10 O k S f S
r _Hi_Res T 1

Fig 1. Traditional full bridge inverter

1
vin

.. .. .. . . -

Fig 2. Buck inverter based on dc/dc converters Fig. 5. Output voltage and inductor current, buck inverter

342
 Iv. THEBOOST INVERTER.

The boost inverter features an excellent property: it

naturally generates an output ac voltage lower or larger than
the dc input voltage, depending on its duty cycle [2-41. This
property is not found in the traditional full bridge inverter
which produces an instantaneous ac output voltage always vc
I.
t
-1
T
/U=' . IL ("In
lower than the input dc voltage as was mentioned before.

The boost inverter achieves dclac conversion as follows:

the power stage consists of two current bi-directional boost
l
I
l
I I 1

Fig. 8. Simplified circuit of the boost inverter.

converter and the load is connected differentially across them
(Fig. 6 ) . These converters produce a dc-biased sinusoidal
waveform (Fig. 7). The modulation of each converter is 180
degrees out of phase with respect to the other, which
maximizes the voltage excursion over the load [3-41.
The analysis of the converter in steady state is at the same
conditions of the buck inverter case, but one converter is
considered as a voltage source (Fig. 8); the gain of the
converter vs. the duty cycle is obtained [4]:
Vo = 2Va - 2Vdq , then
Vo - 2d-Gm(l-d)
_ -
Vin 1-d
where: Gm is the maximum gain ( Vop I Vin )
Vop is the peak output voltage.
Va is the capacitor voltage.
Vdc, is the dc component of Va.
In this case the inductor current depends on the current
demanded and the duty cycle, then is determined by [4]:
2d-Gm(l-d) .-Vin
I, = (4)
(1 - d)' R
The gain vs. the duty cycle is shown in figure 9 with
Gm=4. It is important to note that in this case the gain
depends on Gm and the duty cycle, and for the buck inverter
the gain only depends on the duty cycle. If the gain of the
buck inverter is analyzed as the boost inverter case
(considering one converter as a voltage source), the gain of
the converter is exactly the obtained in (1).
(3)
a) system modeling.
The boost inverter is modeled as two dc/dc boost
converters, but one of them is considered as an ideal
sinusoidal voltage source plus a dc component (Fig 8). The
system model is then given by [4]:

Va + vo - vb

-- --
1 1
w, =- b = -Vin c=-
RC ' fi' R4z' -1

Fig. 6. Boost inverter.

Duty cycle d ( s l s )

Fig 7. Output voltage for each DC-DC converter. Fig. 9. Gain vs. Duty cycle for the boost inverter ( G d ) .

343
 Tek Run 10 Okws HI Res
b) Design of the Sliding mode controller. r T 1

The design steps of sliding mode controller can be

summarized in the three following steps [lo]:

i. The sliding surface. The proposed sliding surface is a linear

combination of the state variables and the
variables, that is: I
I
i
I
a=SX-SX, =Sex
t /
where: S = [sl s2] , X = State variables, I MS.OOms C h l 1 158
$a,o~n
Mathl loov 5 OOms
X, = Reference variables, eX = [exl
Fig 10 Output voltage and current, boost inverter
Tek Run 10 OkWs
The control law proposed is: HI Res
T 1

U = ueq+ U N (7)

where: ueg= Equivalent control,

UN =-sgno

ii. Existence of a sliding mode. This implies that the

following condition is fulfilled [6-71:
biT( 0 (8) II , , ,
1
Wi.OOmS Chl 1 158V
rSm 100AR
.It can be easily shown that in order to guarantee the Mathl lOOV 5 OOms

existence conditions of a sliding mode the following
inequality must be fulfilled:
In order to assure the existence conditions, s, must be
positive since x2 is always positive.
iii. Stability analysis in the sliding surface. A tool developed
to describe the movement in the sliding surface is the
equivalent control [ l l ] . The equivalent control is valid
when an analysis of the dynamics of the system is made
assuming the system is on the sIiding surface ( CT = 0),
hence 2r = 0 . Therefore, the equivalent control (ucq ) is
obtained from & = 0 ,.resulting:
Fig 11. Output voltage and inductor current, boost inverter
v . THEBUCK-BOOST INVERTER
The buck-boost inverter (Fig.12) has almost the same
characteristic that the boost inverter, also it naturally
generates an output AC voltage lower or larger than the DC
input voltage. The analysis of the converter in steady state is
at the same conditions of the boost inverter, the gain of the
converter vs. the duty cycle is obtained:
Vo = 2Va - 2Vdc2 , then
Vo - 2 d - G m ( l - d )
Vin 1-d
where: Gm is the maximum gain ( Vop I Vin )

ueq= - [SBXI-'[SAX + SC - SXr] (10)

The equivalent control is substituted in the model of the

system, and the stability analysis must be made under this
condition. A simplified design method of the controller
parameters was presented in [ 101.

Some experimental results of the converter are shown in

figure 10 and 11; The converter parameters are Vin= 50V,
Vo=120Vac (Gm 3.4), L=260pH, C= 27pF and R=48 R. Fig 12 Buck-boost inverter.

344
 The inductor current is also determined by: TABLE I
Semiconductor Device Stresses and Current Levels.
2d - Gm (1 - d ) .-Vin
I, = (12)
(1 - d)' R
The graph of the gain is almost the same that in the boost
inverter case (Fig 9), but inverted due to the minus sign in
(1 1). In figure 13 and 14 are shown some experimental results,
they were realized with Vin=SOV, L=260pH, C= 27pF and
R=48 R.
VI. COMPARISON BETWEEN THE INVERTERS.
The comparison between the inverters include
semiconductor device stresses, number of active and passive
components, and area product (AP). The different inverters,
presented in previous sections, have a different
semiconductor device stresses, they are summarized in the
table 1. The current semiconductor stress is determined by The buck inverter has the lower current semiconductor
the maximum inductor current, and the voltage stress, but has one the disadvantage: the .output voltage is
semiconductor stress is determined by the input voltage and always lower than the input voltage.
in some cases by the input voltage and peak output voltage.
In table 1 they were obtained in function of the maximum The boost inverter voltage stress depends on the
gain (Gm) and the output power (Po). maximum gain and the peak output voltage, actually this
voltage stress is almost equal than for the buck inverter if the
As it can be observed in table 1, the buck inverter voltage input voltag; for the boost inverter is around 50 Volts or
stress only depends on the input voltage, and the current lower. Now the current stress depends on the current
stress depends only on the demanded current. demanded, as in the buck inverter case, but multiplied by
Tek Run 10 OkS/s HI Res
r - T- 1 (l+Gm); this term causes that the current semiconductor
stress will increased considerably if Gm is higher, that is to
take the advantage of boosting function of the inverter.

The same occurs for the buck-boost inverter, this

converter has the same voltage and current semiconductor
stress than the boost inverter. The semiconductor device
I ! I stress of the converters were graphed as a function of the
maximum gain normalized respect to the output power (Fig
15 and 16). The peak output voltage considered in the figures
is 170 Volts (120 Vac).
I I
MS.OOmr Chl 1 142 In the figure 17 is shown experimental waveforms of the
, Mathl lOO\$m :Q%" input, output and inductor current for the boost inverter.
Fig 13. Output voltage and current, buck-boost inverter
Tek Run 10 O k S l s Hi Res
1 - T 1
Normalized
IA A Inductor Current
ILmax
Po
(mA/W)
I 1.75

1 , ,
IOOAQ
i MsOb
ms
,
14 V
1 11.7 I
0.1 0.4 0.7
Maximum Gain Gm ( V N )
I
I

Mathl lOOV 5 OOmS

Fig 14 Output voltage and inductor current, buck-boost inverter. Fig 15. Current semiconductor device stress vs. Gm, buck inverter

345
 100
Normalized
Inductor Current
& 75 __ - -- ---- - - I-

Po
)”( 50

25
~

0 Fig. 18. Internal power flow of the boost and buck-boost inverters
01 I75 35 5 25 7
MaximumGain Gm ( V N ) In table 2 are summarized the number of components and
Fig 16. Current semiconductor device stress vs. Gm, boost and buck-boost the area product (AP) for the boost and buck-boost inverters
inverter. and a two-power stage solution (DC-DC boost converter plus
In table 1 and figure 17, it can be derived that for buck inierter). AS iccan be observed in table 2, the number
Of components and the AP needed for the mo-power stage
boost and also for the buck-boost inverter, the maximum
input current and maximum output current are lower than the solution are greater than the needed for the boost and buck-
current semiconductor device stress; that is because there is a boost
power flow (Pint) into the converter that is not reflected to VII. CONCLUSIONS
the input and the output (Fig 18). This power flow will In this paper the analysis and experimental study of three
increased when the power demanded is increased or when the kinds of inverters are presented. The traditional full bridge
maximum gain is incremented. buck inverter is analyzed as an inverter derived from two
This internal power flow is alternated between the two dc/dc converters; followed by two different inverters, the
dc/dc converters that is formed the boost or buck boost boost and buck-boost inverters, that have the property of
inverter (Fig 18). This energy is the price to pay for the produce an output voltage higher than the input voltage
boosting function of the converter, this results in a high additionally to the inversion capability. A comparison
current semiconductor device stress. between the different inverter approaches is presented.
TABLE II REFERENCES.
Components and Area Product.
[I J R. Caceres, N. Vazquez, C. Aguilar, J. Alvarez, 1. Barbi, J. Arau “A
High Performance Uninterruptible Power Supply System with Power
Factor Correction”, IEEE Power Electronics Specialists Conference -
PESC’97, pp. 304 - 309.
121 R. Caceres, 1. Barbi. “Sliding Mode control for the boost inverter”,
CIEP 96, Mexico.
[3] R. Caceres, I. Barbi, “A Boost DC-AC Converter: Operation, Analysis,
Control and Experimentation“, Proceedings of International
Conference on Industrial Electronics, Control and Instrumentation -
IECON95, pp. 546 - 551.
[4] N. Vazquez “New structure of Inverter Based on the dc-dc Boost
Converter” (in Spanish), Ms. Sc. Thesis, Centro Nacional de
Investigacion y Desarrollo Tecnologico (CENIDET), Cuemavaca,
Mexico, November 1997.
[SI V. Cardenas, N.Vazquez, C.Hemandez, “Sliding Mode Control
Applied to a 3 0 Shunt Active Power Filter Using Compensation with
Tem Run. 10 O k S l S HI Res
I - - - 1 Instantaneous Reactive Power Theory” IEEE Power Electronics
t ” ’ Specialists Conference -PESC’98. pp. 236 -24 I .
[6] M. Carpita, M. Marchesoni, “Experimental Study of a Power
Conditioning Using Sliding Mode Control”, IEEE Transactions on
R1 Power Electronics, vol. 1 1 No. 5, Sept. 1996, pp. 73 1 - 742.
. .
[7] P. Mattavelli, L. Rossetto, G . Spiazzi, “General Purpose Sliding Mode
Controller For Dc/Dc Converter Applications”, IEEE Power
Electronics Specialists Conference -PESC’93, pp. 609 - 61 5.
[8] R. A. De Carlo, S. Zak, G. P. Matthews, “Variable Structure Control of
t Nonlinear Multivariable Systems: A Tutorial”, Proceedings of the
I IEEE, vol. 76 No. 3, March 1988,pp. 212 - 232.
w. t f
[9] J. Y. Hung, W. Gao, J. C. Hung, “Variable Structure Control: A
Survey”, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 40, No. 1,
Feb. 1993, pp. 2-18.
[lOJN.Vizquez, J.Alvarez, C. Aguilar, J.Arau. “Some critical aspects in
sliding mode control design for the boost inverter”, CIEP 98, Mexico.
[ll]V.I Utkin, Sliding Modes And Their Application In Variable Structure
Fig 17. Input, inductor and output current for boost and buck-boost inverter. Systems, MIR Publishers, Moscow, 1974.

346