108 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 52, NO.
1, FEBRUARY 2005
Duty-Ratio Feedforward for Digitally Controlled
Boost PFC Converters
David M. Van de Sype, Member, IEEE, Koen De Gussemé, Member, IEEE,
Alex P. M. Van den Bossche, Senior Member, IEEE, and Jan A. Melkebeek, Senior Member, IEEE
Abstract—When a “classical” current control scheme is applied,
the line current of a boost power-factor-correction (PFC) converter
leads the line voltage, resulting in a nonunity fundamental dis-
placement power factor and in important zero-crossing distortion
in applications with a high line frequency (e.g., 400-Hz power sys-
tems on commercial aircraft). To resolve this problem, a current-
control scheme is proposed using duty-ratio feedforward. In this
paper, the input impedance of the boost PFC converter for both the
classical current-loop controller and the controller using duty-ratio
feedforward are derived theoretically. A comparison reveals the
advantages of the proposed control scheme: a low total harmonic
distortion of the line current, a resistive input impedance, virtu-
ally no zero-crossing distortion, and a fundamental displacement
power factor close to unity. The theoretical results obtained are
verified using an experimental setup of a digitally controlled boost
PFC converter.
Index Terms—Digital control, feedforward systems, input
impedance, power-factor correction (PFC), total harmonic distor-
tion (THD), zero-crossing distortion.
I. INTRODUCTION
I N power-factor-correction (PFC) converters operating in the
continuous conduction mode, the behavior of the current-
control loop determines how accurately the input current tracks
the desired waveshape. Since the behavior of this loop is in-
fluenced by the impedance of the electromagnetic interference
(EMI) filter and the unknown time-dependent line impedance,
guaranteeing stability of the converter under all circumstances
is not obvious. For the “classical” control loop using the mea-
surement of the input voltage, this problem is studied in [1] and
[2]. Where the method presented in [1] provides a general rule
of thumb, a more rigorous method using the state-space-aver-
aged model is described in [2]. To increase the robustness of the
current-control loop against variations of the impedance at the
input of the converter, the insertion of a low-pass filter in the
measurement circuit of the input voltage is suggested.
Another popular, more recent control method is the nonlinear
carrier (NLC) control. This control method distinguishes itself
from the “classical” control method by the absence of the input
voltage measurement. To obtain a resistive input in a boost PFC
converter either the switch current [3] or the diode current [4]
Manuscript received December 23, 2003; revised January 27, 2004. Abstract
published on the Internet November 10, 2004. This paper was presented at
the 2003 IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition, Miami
Beach, FL, February 9–13.
The authors are with the Electrical Energy Laboratory (EELAB), De-
partment of Electrical Energy, Systems and Automation (EESA), Ghent
University, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium (e-mail: vandesype@eesa.UGent.be;
degusseme@eesa.UGent.be; alex.vandenbossche@UGent.be; jan.melke-
beek@UGent.be).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TIE.2004.841127
0278-0046/$20.00 © 2005 IEEE
are first integrated and then compared to a nonlinear carrier. This
control method can also be applied to active rectifiers based on
topologies different from the boost converter [5]. In [6] a gen-
eral pulsewidth modulator is derived that allows one to easily
implement different control algorithms without input voltage
measurement for various topologies of PFC converters. One of
the controllers for the boost topology presented in [6], which
catches the eye due to its simplicity, was derived independently
in [7]. For this controller the switching waveforms for the switch
in the boost PFC converter are derived by a straightforward com-
parison between the inductor current measurement and a saw-
tooth carrier. The amplitude of the sawtooth waveform is deter-
mined by the output voltage controller.
For reasons of price, the control algorithms for single-phase
PFC converters are in most cases implemented as analog circuits
[1]–[8]. With the advent of fast digital signal processors (DSPs)
embedding control peripherals such as pulsewidth-modu-
lation (PWM) generation units, AD converters, etc. (e.g.,
TMS320C2XX from Texas Instruments, ADSP-2199X from
Analog Devices, and DSP56800 from Motorola), new and more
complicated control algorithms become feasible. For the near
future, as the ratio price/performance of DSPs is expected to
decrease further, there is a fair chance that the analog control
circuits will be abandoned in favor of digital implementations.
This tendency can also be illustrated by the recent interest in
digital control of PFC converters [9]–[12].
General design issues and peculiarities for the digital control
of boost PFC converters were discussed in [9] and [11]. Since
the measured control signals in converters often contain a sig-
nificant ripple and high-frequency oscillations at the switching
instants, special attention must be paid to the sampling instants
in digitally controlled boost PFC converters. Sampling algo-
rithms that guarantee high frequency switching noise immunity
for boost PFC converters are presented in [10] and [12].
Fig. 1 shows the circuit diagram employed. For the purpose
of digital control, the analog control variables (the inductor
current , the input voltage and the output voltage )
must be converted into digital quantities by the analog-to-dig-
ital converter. The process of sensing the control variable,
amplifying the sensor output to the appropriate range and the
analog-to-digital conversion, can be represented by a division of
the analog control variables by their respective reference values
( and, ). The obtained digital dimensionless quan-
tities ( , and ) are used by the digital controller to
act on the duty ratio of the switch . The objective of the
digital controller is to maintain a constant output voltage while
guaranteeing low harmonic content of the line current .
VAN DE SYPE et al.: DUTY-RATIO FEEDFORWARD FOR DIGITALLY CONTROLLED BOOST PFC CONVERTERS 109

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the digitally controlled boost PFC converter.

When a “classical” current control scheme is applied, the line

current of a boost PFC converter leads the line voltage ,
resulting in a nonunity fundamental displacement power factor
and in important zero-crossing distortion for applications with a
high line frequency (e.g., 400-Hz power systems on commercial
aircrafts). In [13] this problem is solved by inserting a first-order
low-pass filter in the input-voltage measurement circuit. How-
ever, a complete compensation would require a digital adap-
tive filter instead of a simple low-pass filter. In this paper the
problems with nonunity fundamental displacement power factor
and zero-crossing distortion are solved by using a current-con-
trol scheme with duty-ratio feedforward. This current-loop con- Fig. 2. Model for the operation of a boost PFC converter and key operating
waveforms.
troller was already shown in [8], but as this paper focussed on
the design of a fast voltage-loop controller, the current-loop con-
troller was only mentioned briefly. The extra circuit complexity angular frequency (Fig. 2). Considering only half a line pe-
and cost related to an analog implementation of the current-loop riod (with the line period), the input voltage can be
controller in [8] may not always counterbalance the advantages expressed as
of the control scheme. However, using a digital controller, the
increased controller complexity results in only a few extra lines (1)
of programming code. Consequently, the current-loop controller
The average switch voltage (of the switch in Fig. 1) re-
using duty-ratio feedforward is revised. In this paper, the input
quired to obtain an inductor current identical in waveshape
impedance of the boost PFC converter for both the classical cur-
to the input voltage in the time interval , can be ex-
rent-loop controller and the controller using duty-ratio feedfor-
pressed (Fig. 2) using complex notation
ward are derived theoretically. A comparison of the two con-
trollers reveals the advantages of the proposed control scheme: (2)
a low total harmonic distortion (THD) of the line current ,
a resistive input impedance, almost no zero-crossing distortion with , the emulated conductance at the input of
and a fundamental displacement power factor close to unity. The the boost PFC converter. By taking into account that
theoretical results obtained are verified using an experimental , the average switch voltage becomes
setup of a digitally controlled boost PFC converter.
(3)
II. SWITCH VOLTAGE
with
Assuming a perfect sinusoidal line voltage , the voltage at
the input of the boost converter is a rectified sinusoid with (4)
110 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 52, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2005
Fig. 3. Current loop controller.
Hence, the average switch voltage should be as indicated by the
dotted line in Fig. 2: a “rectified” sinusoid delayed over a time
, with a magnitude slightly larger than the input voltage and
with a discontinuity at the zero crossing of the line voltage. For
a boost converter operating in continuous conduction mode the
average switch voltage is
(5)
with the duty ratio of the switch and the output voltage.
As the output voltage of a boost PFC converter is always posi-
tive and the duty ratio is limited between 0–1, the average switch
voltage must always be positive. However, according to (3) and
Fig. 2 (dotted line), the average switch voltage should be neg-
ative at the zero crossing of the line voltage. This discrepancy
causes the so-called cusp distortion. Since the switch voltage
cannot become negative, it remains zero during the time until
the inductor current is back on track (Fig. 2). The time can be
calculated using the differential equation of the boost inductor
(6)
By using (1), the differential (6) can be integrated over a time
(7)
The desired inductor current is , with given by (1). Ex-
pressing that the switch voltage remains zero until the inductor
current is back on track, yields
(8)
For small the goniometric functions of (8) can be approxi-
mated by their second-order polynomials
(9)
(10)
Hence, the average switch voltage should remain zero during
a time after the zero crossing of the line voltage, before
it can adopt its normal value (3) again. The resulting average
switch voltage is indicated as a black line in Fig. 2.
III. DUTY-RATIO FEEDFORWARD
A. Current Controller Using Duty-Ratio Feedforward
As a resistive input is a desirable feature for a PFC con-
verter [15], the task of the current-loop compensator consists
of forcing the inductor current to be identical in waveshape to
the input voltage. Hence, the current-loop compensator should
reconstruct, as accurately as possible, the average switch wave-
form of Fig. 2 (black line) from the inductor current error.
Since the time delay between the input voltage and the
average switch voltage is usually very small (in our case less
than 20 s), both waveforms are almost identical. Therefore, the
average switch voltage is reconstructed better by adding the
value of the input voltage to the output of the current-loop com-
pensator. Consequently, the current-loop compensator only has
to compensate for the small difference between and in-
stead of compensating for entirely. This results in a smaller
inductor current error and a better tracking of the commanded
inductor current. The forwarded switch voltage becomes
(11)
By considering (5) for a boost converter operating in continuous
conduction mode, the forwarded duty ratio is
(12)
The resulting control scheme is depicted in Fig. 3. The con-
troller consists of a “regular” path and a feedforward path. For
the regular path, the inductor current error, the difference be-
tween the inductor current and the commanded inductor cur-
rent , is scaled (division by , see also Fig. 1) and sup-
plied to the current compensator . The output of the com-
pensator is passed on to the pulsewidth modulator (Fig. 1) with
as transfer function . The commanded inductor cur-
rent is acquired by multiplying the filtered input voltage
(the input voltage filtered by a low-pass filter) with the equiv-
alent input conductance . This commonly employed current
control scheme is extended with a duty-ratio feedforward path
implementing (12). The output of the feedforward path is
multiplied with a constant that is allowed to be either 0 or
VAN DE SYPE et al.: DUTY-RATIO FEEDFORWARD FOR DIGITALLY CONTROLLED BOOST PFC CONVERTERS 111

1, corresponding to the current-loop controller without or with
duty-ratio feedforward, respectively.
B. Input Impedance
If the output voltage of the boost PFC converter is not
constant, the feedforward path (12) introduces a nonlinearity
in the control path. To calculate the input impedance of the
boost PFC converter with a feedforward current control loop,
linearization is required. Using capitals for steady-state values
and hatted small letters for small excursions from steady state,
the linearized version of the nonlinear feedforward path (12) be-
comes
(13)
Taking into account that and , [14], the results are listed only briefly in this paper.
allows one to derive the small-signal transfer function of the
current loop controller (Fig. 3)
have a negligible influence on the ripple waveform of the in-
ductor current, which allows one to derive (15). Consequently,
the input impedance cannot be considered separately from
the impedance of the capacitor . Therefore, the total input
impedance is defined as
(18)
C. Different Transfer Functions for a Digitally Controlled
Boost PFC Converter
To obtain quantitative values for the input impedances (17)
and (18), the transfer functions of the different blocks in the
digital controller of the boost PFC converter are required. As
the different transfer functions were derived in [11], [12], and
• For reasons of stability a low-pass filter is inserted in the
signal chain of the input voltage [2]. As low-pass filter,
a first-order analog filter was inserted before the ADC

(19)

• Though the current compensator is implemented digitally,

the transfer function of its continuous equivalent is used
with good accuracy

(14) (20)

The response of the boost converter can be expressed as
(15)
By eliminating the duty ratio in (14) and (15), the inductor
current of the converter becomes
• As modulator, a uniformly sampled symmetric-on-time
modulator is used. In [14] a frequency-domain model for
this modulator was derived. Taking into account an extra
delay of half a switching period for the calculation of
the control output, the modulator response can be derived
(in the frequency domain)
(21)

(16)
Hence, the small-signal input impedance is (17), shown at the
bottom of the page.
To avoid any influence of the unknown line impedance on the
basic operation of the boost PFC converter, it is necessary to in-
sert the input capacitor (Fig. 1) with an impedance much
smaller than the impedance of the inductor at the switching
frequency. Under these circumstances, the line impedance will
D. Discussion of Results
The inductor current (16) of a boost PFC converter with
a current-control loop is determined by two external inputs: the
input voltage and the output voltage . While the response
to the input voltage results in an input impedance (17), the reac-
tion of the inductor current to a change of the output voltage is
considered to be a disturbance. The transfer function from this
disturbance to the inductor current is
(22)

(17)
112 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 52, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2005

When no feedforward is applied , disturbance rejec-

tion is achieved by making the denominator of (22) large, i.e.,
by choosing a compensator with a large gain. As a pro-
portional plus integral (PI) compensator (20) has a high gain for
“low” frequencies and, since the output voltage is in most cases
a slowly changing signal due to the large output capacitor
(Fig. 1), sufficient disturbance rejection is achieved. However,
when feedforward is applied, the numerator of (22) is
virtually zero for “low” frequencies. Hence, in the case of feed-
forward, disturbance rejection does not depend on a high gain
of the compensator.
For , and , the input
impedance (17) can be approximated by ( is small)

(23) Fig. 4. Total input impedance ^z of the boost PFC converter (dashed
lines: without feedforward; full lines: with feedforward; black lines:
G G
= (150 ) ; gray lines: = (50 ) ).
(24)
with

(25)

Using a regular control scheme , the input impedance

of the boost PFC converter (24) has a positive real part and a neg-
ative imaginary part, indicating resistive–capacitive behavior.
As a result, the inductor current of the boost PFC converter using
a regular control scheme will lead the input voltage, causing
a nonunity fundamental displacement power factor. Moreover,
the input impedance will only approximate its desired value
as long as . Hence, at low load and for increasing
frequency the input impedance will not accurately represent the
desired input impedance. However, if the control scheme with
feedforward is applied , the input impedance (24) be-
haves resistive and is equal to its desired value indepen-
dent of frequency or load conditions. Consequently, the boost
PFC converter using a feedforward controller will have a funda-
mental displacement power factor close to unity and will behave
resistive over a wide frequency range, guaranteeing superior be-
havior of the boost PFC converter.
Figs. 4 and 5 show Bode plots of the total input impedance
(18) of the boost PFC converter for different values of
the desired input conductance . The different parameters
required to calculate (17) and (18) were chosen similar to those
of the experimental setup (see Section IV). As the total input
impedance also includes the input capacitor (18), the
total input impedance always behaves capacitively as opposed
to the input impedance . Nevertheless, the advantages of the
current-control loop using feedforward over the one without
feedforward are clearly visible. When feedforward is applied,
the magnitude of the total input impedance remains nearly equal
to the desired input impedance up to the frequency where
the impedance of the input capacitor becomes significant
(Figs. 4 and 5). For the control scheme without feedforward, the
magnitude of the total input impedance already sets appreciably
at low frequencies. This effect is even more pronounced for
high values of the desired input impedance (see the expla-
nation in the previous paragraph concerning (24)). Moreover,
Fig. 5. Total input impedance ^z of the boost PFC converter (dashed
lines: without feedforward; full lines: with feedforward; black lines:
G G
= (200 ) ; gray lines: = (100 ) ).
the imaginary part of the total input impedance of the converter
applying feedforward is much smaller in the low frequency
range than for the converter without feedforward (Figs. 4 and
5). Hence, application of feedforward guarantees a resistive
behavior of the boost PFC converter for low frequencies and a
fundamental displacement power factor close to unity.
The effect of duty-ratio feedforward on the converter be-
havior can also be explained by considering the response of the
converter in (15). This equation shows that the inductor current
of the boost converter is determined not only by the control
variable, the duty ratio, but also by two other variables, the
input voltage and the output voltage. As the input voltage and
the output voltage are uncontrollable, they can be considered
as disturbances. By using duty-ratio feedforward, these distur-
bances are cancelled out. Hence, the current compensator is
relieved of the task of disturbance rejection, resulting in a better
inductor current tracking and in a resistive input impedance
of the converter over a wide frequency range. Note that for
continuous conduction mode the forwarded duty-ratio (12) is
independent of the converter parameters or the used current
compensator. In a real converter, the feedforward duty ratio
VAN DE SYPE et al.: DUTY-RATIO FEEDFORWARD FOR DIGITALLY CONTROLLED BOOST PFC CONVERTERS 113

(12) is calculated based on measured quantities that may differ

slightly from the real quantities because of measurement errors.
As a result, rejection of the input voltage, the major distur-
bance, is not always perfect. However, if measurement errors
stay below 5%, the impact on the input impedance remains
small and the THD of the line current and the fundamental
displacement power factor remain virtually unaffected.

IV. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

The two current controllers were compared by using an ex-
perimental setup. The control for the boost PFC converter was
implemented using the ADMC401 from Analog Devices. The
switches of the boost rectifier are , MOSFET SPP20N60S5,
and , diode RURP3060. The passive components used have
an inductance of mH and a capacitance of F
Fig. 6. Total input impedance z^ for G = (97 ) , theory versus
for a converter switching at 50 kHz. The converter is designed
for an output voltage of 400 V dc and is rated at 1-kW output measurement. With feedforward: theory (solid black line), experiment (circles);
power for a line voltage range of 190–264 V ac. The parame- without feedforward: theory (solid gray line), experiment (crosses).
ters of the current controller are A, ,
and s. For the control scheme without feedforward
the insertion of a low-pass filter in the signal path of the input
voltage (19) with s is required for reasons of stability
[2]. Conversely, when feedforward is used, no filtering of the
input voltage is required to obtain stability, or s.
To avoid that the input capacitor starts oscillating with
the line inductance and the inductance of the converter ,
the oscillation frequency should be sufficiently lower than the
switching frequency , or

(26)

with the minimum line inductance. If we assume that the

minimum line inductance is 250 H, a value of F
is sufficient to meet (26)1. Larger values of result in a
deterioration of the fundamental displacement power factor
and a more pronounced capacitive behavior of the convertor
input. Decreasing the value of has a positive effect on
the fundamental displacement power factor and the total input
impedance of the converter. However, to satisfy condition
(26), the minimum line inductance must be increased
artificially, leading to a bulkier EMI filter.
To test the total input impedance, the boost PFC converter is
supplied from a linear amplifier (PAS1000 from Spitzenberger
& Spieß); the output of the convertor is connected to a resistor of
160 or 320 (depending on the chosen input impedance: 50 or
100 , respcetively). The line voltage and the line current
(see Fig. 1) are measured directly with the power analyzer
PM3000A from Voltech. So as to measure the small-signal total
input impedance of the converter, the linear amplifier is set up
to supply a small sinusoidal voltage (amplitude of 10 V) with a
programmable frequency superposed on a dc voltage of 230 V.
If the power analyzer is triggered on the ac portion of the mea-
sured quantities, the impedance function of the power analyzer
can be used to retrieve the values of the total input resistance
and the total input reactance (the real and imaginary parts of
1The minimum line inductance L can be programmed by including a dif-
ferential inductance in the EMI filter (in our case 250 H).
Fig. 7. Total input impedance z^ for G = (50 ) , theory versus
measurement. With feedforward: theory (solid black line), experiment (circles);
without feedforward: theory (solid gray line), experiment (crosses).
the total input impedance, respectively) of the converter imme-
diately. The experimentally obtained values of the total input
impedance of the boost PFC converter using a control circuit
with or without feedforward are shown, as crosses and circles,
respectively, in Figs. 6 and 7. The corresponding theoretical total
input impedances were calculated for an average duty ratio of
– V V , corresponding to the supplied
dc voltage of 230 V. The obtained theoretical curves were added
as solid lines in Figs. 6 and 7 (compare also with Figs. 4 and 5).
The good agreement between the experimental results and the
theoretical waveforms demonstrates the validity of the theoret-
ical approach.
The grid waveforms obtained with the PFC converter using
the current control scheme without and with feedforward are
shown in Figs. 8 and 9, respectively. The line current clearly
leads the line voltage when no feedforward is applied (Fig. 8),
indicating that the total input impedance of the converter be-
haves capacitively. When feedforward is used, the waveshape of
the line current almost perfectly coincides with the waveshape
of the line voltage (Fig. 9, note that the voltage waveform is
114 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 52, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2005

Fig. 8. Line current and line voltage at 50 Hz of the PFC converter using the Fig. 10. Line current and line voltage at 400 Hz of the PFC converter using the
current-control loop without feedforward withG = (100 ) (line voltage: current-control loop with G = (50 ) without feedforward (line voltage:
gray line; line current: black line). gray line; line current: black line).

Fig. 11. Line current and line voltage at 400 Hz of the PFC converter using
Fig. 9. Line current and line voltage at 50 Hz of the PFC converter using the
current-control loop with feedforward with G = (100 ) (line voltage: the current-control loop with feedforward with G = (50 ) (line voltage:
gray line; line current: black line). gray line; line current: black line).

(26). Nevertheless, the line current of the boost PFC converter

hardly noticeable behind the line current). This shows that ap-
using feedforward remains a high quality waveform with a low
plying feedforward for a boost PFC converter allows one to ob-
THD and virtually no zero-crossing distortion when connected
tain a higher fundamental displacement power factor.
to a high frequency grid (Fig. 11). Due to the resistive nature
Not only the fundamental displacement power factor is ame-
of the total input impedance of the boost converter employing
liorated by using feedforward, but also the THD of the line cur-
the proposed control algorithm (Figs. 6, 7), the THD of the line
rent is reduced and the zero-crossing distortion problem for high
current remains low as long as the THD of the line voltage is
line frequencies is alleviated. These effects are demonstrated
low. In an environment with a highly distorted line voltage, low
in Figs. 10 and 11 by connecting the boost PFC converter to
line current THD is not guaranteed. However, the resistive input
a 400-Hz line. When no feedforward is used, the line current
impedance provides damping to possible resonances in the line
waveform is distorted severely (Fig. 10). This zero-crossing dis-
and improves the voltage THD in the entire power distribution
tortion is caused by the leading phase of the inductor current
network [15].
relative to the input voltage (see Section III-D) and by the low
damping factor in the input-current-control loop (both effects
V. CONCLUSION
were explained in [13]). However, when feedforward is applied,
the leading phase of the line current is mainly caused by the ex- The current-control loop commonly used for boost PFC
ternal input capacitor and not by the inductor current . To converters operated in continuous conduction mode causes
further improve the fundamental displacement power factor in a leading phase of the inductor current relative to the input
a 400-Hz grid, the input capacitance must be decreased and voltage. This effect results in a nonunity fundamental displace-
the minimum line inductance must be increased artificially ment power factor and in important zero-crossing distortion
VAN DE SYPE et al.: DUTY-RATIO FEEDFORWARD FOR DIGITALLY CONTROLLED BOOST PFC CONVERTERS
in applications with a high line frequency. To improve the
behavior of the boost PFC converter a current-control scheme
using feedforward of the duty ratio is proposed. To compare
both the “classical” control scheme and the control scheme
using feedforward, the input impedance of the boost PFC con-
verter is calculated in both cases. The theoretical analysis shows
that the input impedance of the converter using feedforward
remains resistive with an almost constant magnitude over a
wide frequency range. Hence, the main features of the converter
using a current-control loop with duty-ratio feedforward are: a
low THD of the line current, resistive input impedance, virtually
no zero-crossing distortion and a fundamental displacement
power factor close to unity.
REFERENCES
[1] J. B. Williams, “Design of feedback loop in unity power factor AC to DC
converter,” in Proc. IEEE PESC’89, vol. 2, Milwaukee, WI, Jun. 1989,
pp. 959–967.
[2] G. Spiazzi and J. A. Pomilio, “Interaction between EMI filter and power
factor preregulators with average current control: Analysis and design
considerations,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 577–584,
Jun. 1999.
[3] D. Maksimović, Y. Jang, and R. W. Erickson, “Nonlinear-carrier control
for high-power-factor boost rectifiers,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron.,
vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 578–584, Jul. 1996.
[4] Z. Yang and P. C. Sen, “A novel technique to achieve unity power factor
and high quality waveform in AC-to-DC converters,” in Conf. Rec.
IEEE-IAS Annu. Meeting, vol. 2, St. Louis, MO, Oct. 12–15, 1998, pp.
1275–1285.
[5] R. Zane and D. Maksimović, “Nonlinear-carrier control for high-power-
factor rectifiers based on up-down switching converters,” IEEE Trans.
Power Electron., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 213–221, Mar. 1998.
[6] Z. Lai and K. M. Smedley, “A family of continuous-conduction-mode
power-factor-correction controllers based on the general pulse-width
modulator,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 501–510,
May 1998.
[7] S. Ben-Yaakov and I. Zeltser, “The dynamics of a PWM boost con-
verter with resistive input,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 46, no. 3,
pp. 613–619, Jun. 1999.
[8] S. Wall and R. Jackson, “Fast controller design for single-phase power-
factor correction systems,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 44, no. 5, pp.
654–660, Oct. 1997.
[9] S. Buso, P. Mattavelli, L. Rossetto, and G. Spiazzi, “Simple digital
control improving dynamic performance of power factor preregulators,”
IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 814–823, Sep. 1998.
[10] J. Zhou, Z. Lu, Z. Lin, Y. Ren, Z. Qian, and Y. Wang, “Novel sampling
algorithm for DSP Controlled 2 kW PFC converter,” IEEE Trans. Power
Electron., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 217–222, Mar. 2001.
[11] K. De Gussemé, D. M. Van de Sype, and J. A. Melkebeek, “Design issues
for digital control of boost power factor correction converters,” in Proc.
IEEE Symp. Industrial Electronics (ISIE’02), vol. 3, L’Aquila, Italy, July
8–11, 2002, pp. 731–736.
[12] D. M. Van de Sype, K. De Gussemé, A. P. Van den Bossche, and J. A.
Melkebeek, “A sampling algorithm for digitally controlled boost PFC
converters,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 649–657,
May 2004.
[13] J. Sun, “On the zero-crossing distortion in single-phase PFC converters,”
IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 685–692, May 2004.
[14] D. M. Van de Sype, K. De Gussemé, and J. A. Melkebeek, “Frequency
domain analysis of digital pulse-width modulators,” in Proc. Electri-
macs’02, Montréal, QC, Canada, Aug. 18–21, 2002, CD-ROM.
[15] W. Ryckaert, J. Ghijselen, and J. Melkebeek, “Harmonic mitigation po-
tential of shunt harmonic impedances,” Elect. Power Syst. Res., vol. 65,
pp. 63–69, 2003.
115
David M. Van de Sype (M’01) was born in Aalst,
Belgium, in 1975. He received the M.S. and Ph.D. de-
grees in electromechanical engineering from Ghent
University, Ghent, Belgium, in 1998 and 2004, re-
spectively.
Since 1998, he has been with the Electrical Energy
Laboratory, Department of Electrical Engineering,
Systems and Automation, Ghent University. His
research interests include power electronics, control
of converters, and power-factor correction.
Koen De Gussemé (M’03) was born in Aalst, Bel-
gium, in 1979. He received the Master of Science de-
gree in electromechanical engineering in 2001 from
Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium, where he is cur-
rently working toward the Ph.D. degree in the Depart-
ment of Electrical Energy, Systems and Automation.
He is also currently a Researcher in the Department
of Electrical Energy, Systems and Automation, Ghent
University. His research topics are digital control of
switching converters and power-factor correction.
Alex P. M. Van den Bossche (M’99–SM’04) re-
ceived the M.S. and the Ph.D. degrees from Ghent
University, Ghent, Belgium, in 1980 and 1990,
respectively.
Since 1980, he has been with the Electrical Energy
Laboratory, Ghent University, where he is engaged in
research in the field of electrical drives, power elec-
tronics on various converter types, and passive com-
ponents, and where, since 1993, he has been a Full
Professor. His current work focuses on the prepara-
tion of a book on the design of inductors and trans-
formers for power electronic applications.
Jan A. Melkebeek (M’82–SM’84) was born
in Ghent, Belgium, in 1952. He received the
“Ingenieur” degree in electrical and mechanical
engineering Doctor in Applied Sciences degree, and
the Doctor Habilitus: degree in electrical and elec-
tronical power technology from from the University
of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium, in 1975, 1980, and 1986,
respectively.
Since 1987, he has been a Professor of Electrical
Engineering (Electrical Machines and Power Elec-
tronics) with the Engineering Faculty of the Univer-
sity of Ghent and the Director of the Laboratory for Electrical Machines and
Power Electronics (the former Laboratory for Industrial Electricity). Since 1993,
he has also been the Head of the Department of Electrical Power Engineering,
Systems and Automation. He was a Visiting Professor at the Université Na-
tionale de Rwanda, Butare, Rwanda, Africa, in 1981, and a Visiting Assistant
Professor at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, in 1982. His teaching activ-
ities and research interests include electrical machines, power electronics, vari-
able-frequency drives, and control systems theory applied to electrical drives.
Prof. Melkebeek is a member of the Koninklijke Vlaamse Inge-
nieurs-vereniging (KVIV) and the Koninklijke Belgische Vereniging van
Elektrotechnici (KBVE-SRBE) and a Fellow of the Institution of Electrical
Engineers, U.K. He served as the President of the IEEE Benelux IAS-PELS
Joint Chapter from 2002 to 2003 and is a longtime member of the Electric
Machines Committee of the IEEE Industry Applications Society and of the
Machine Theory Subcommittee of the IEEE Power Engineering Society.