2010 9th IEEE/IAS International Conference on Industry Applications
- INDUSCON 2010 -
A Review of Single-Phase PFC Topologies Based
on The Boost Converter
João Paulo M. Figueiredo and Fernando L. Tofoli
Universidade Federal de São João del-Rei
Departamento de Engenharia Elétrica (DEPEL)
Campus Santo Antônio – Praça Frei Orlando, 170 – Centro
São João del-Rei-MG – Brasil
CEP 36307-352
Fone: 55 32 33792394
E-mail: joaopaulomfig@ yahoo.com.br
fernandolessa@ufsj.edu.br
Abstract— The need for solid-state ac-dc converters to
improve power quality in terms of power-factor correction
(PFC), reduced total harmonic distortion at input ac mains, and
precisely regulated dc output have motivated the proposal of
several topologies based on classical converters such as buck,
boost, and buck-boost. Additionally, novel control techniques
dedicated to PFC have also been introduced, motivating the
manufacturing of commercial integrated circuits to impose
sinusoidal currents in the front-end stage of switch-mode
converters. Boost converters operating in continuous current
mode (CCM) have become particularly popular because reduced
electromagnetic interference (EMI) levels result from its
utilization. Within this context, this work deals with a
comprehensive review of some of the most relevant ac-dc single-
phase boost converters for PFC applications. The evolution of
the conventional boost converter is demonstrated in terms of
improved characteristics achieved by other boost-based
topologies. Besides, it seeks to establish a fast and concise guide
on ac-dc boost converters to researchers and experts in power
electronics by comparing the topologies.
Index Terms— ac-dc converters, boost converter, harmonics,
power factor correction.
I. INTRODUCTION
Ac–dc conversion of electric power is widely used in
several applications such as adjustable-speed drives (ASDs),
switch-mode power supplies (SMPSs), uninterrupted power
supplies (UPSs), and battery energy storage. Conventionally,
ac–dc converters, also known as rectifiers, are developed
using diodes and thyristors to provide uncontrolled and
controlled dc power with unidirectional and bidirectional
power flow. Major drawbacks include poor power quality in
terms of injected current harmonics; resulting voltage
distortion, poor power factor at input ac mains, and slow
varying rippled dc output at load end; low efficiency and
large size of ac and dc filters.
Reduction of harmonic content with the consequent
increase of power factor (PF) can be obtained by using either
passive or active power factor correction (PFC) techniques.
Passive methods include the use of tuned LC filters, what
represents a robust solution. However, increased size, weight,
and volume result. Besides, the passive filter may not respond
adequately if the load power factor comes to vary. On the
978-1-4244-8010-4/10/$26.00 ©2010 IEEE
Bruno Leonardo A. Silva
Instituto Federal de Educação, Ciência e Tecnologia de Santa
Catarina
Av. Nereu Ramos, 3450-D – Bairro Seminário
Chapecó-SC – Brasil
CEP 89813-000
Fone/Fax: 55 49 33314651
E-mail: brunosilva@ifsc.edu.br
other hand, active methods come as a more efficient solution
by using controlled solid-state switches in association with
passive elements such as resistors, inductors, and capacitors.
In fact, the closed-loop operation of the static power
converter dedicated to PFC assures satisfactory performance
with high input PF and regulated dc output voltage over a
wide operating range. Increased complexity and reduced
robustness are distinct characteristics of this practice though.
In order to meet the requirements in the proposed standards
such as IEC 61000-3-2 and IEEE Std 519 on the quality of
the input current that can be drawn by low-power equipment,
a PFC circuit is typically added as a front end stage. The
boost PFC circuit operating in continuous conduction mode
(CCM) is by far the popular choice for medium and high
power (400 W to a few kilowatts) application. This is because
the continuous nature of the boost converter’s input current
results in low conducted electromagnetic interference (EMI)
compared to other active PFC topologies such as buck–boost
and buck converters.
Several issues must be taken into account to determine
which type of static power converter is the most
recommended for a given application, such as robustness,
power density, efficiency, cost, and complexity. Within this
context, numerous boost-type topologies have been proposed
in the last few years with the aim of improving the
characteristics of the traditional converter used for PFC
purposes, such as the reverse recovery problem of the boost
diode [1] [2] and increase of the output voltage [3].
The search for novel topologies comes as an imminent
effort to introduce high PF rectifiers with reduced harmonic
content of the input current, minimized EMI levels, high
efficiency, reduced size of magnetics, and increased
robustness. Considering this motivation, this paper aims to
present and summarize the characteristics of several single-
phase boost-based topologies dedicated to PFC. Key aspects
regarding each structure are investigated such as complexity,
conduction losses, inductor size, and output voltage gain. The
study is based on the careful analysis of several works
available in the literature and intends to be consolidated as a
fast and concise guide for researchers that are eventually
interested in using boost topologies for PFC applications.
 II. EVOLUTION OF TOPOLOGIES BASED ON THE AC-DC
BOOST CONVERTER DEDICATED TO PFC
A. Conventional AC-DC Boost Converter
The single-phase diode rectifier associated with the boost
converter, as shown in Fig. 1, is widely employed in active
PFC. In principle, the combination of the diode bridge
rectifier and a dc-dc converter with filtering and energy
storage elements can be extended to other topologies, such as
buck, buck-boost, and Cúk.
The boost topology is very simple and allows low-distorted
input currents, with almost unity power factor using different
dedicated control techniques. Typical strategies are hysteresis
control, average current mode control and peak current
control [4]. More recently, on-cycle control [5] and self
control [6] have also been employed.
Fig. 1. Ac-dc conventional boost converter.
The converter in Fig. 1 presents appreciable conduction
losses because the current always flows through three
semiconductor elements, which are two diodes in series with
diode Db or switch S, depending on the state of S. Therefore,
the converter efficiency is compromised, especially at low
input voltage.
Besides, to achieve high power density and faster transient
response, the converter is supposed to operate at high
switching frequencies. However, as the switching frequency
increases, the output diode operated in high voltage provides
significant reverse-recovery loss in a hard-switching boost
converter. The reverse-recovery problem of the output diode
affects the switching devices in the form of additional turn-on
loss. The reverse-recovery loss of the diode is the most
significant due to its large current at the minimum input
voltage. Other adverse effects of the reverse-recovery
problem include electromagnetic interference and additional
thermal management.
To overcome the reverse recovery problems, various
passive snubber circuits have been proposed [3] and silicon
carbide (SiC) Schottky diodes were also developed. SiC
Schottky diodes present zero-recovery current and negligible
switching losses, and have become a benchmark for virtually
lossless operation. They can deliver highly efficient switching
at frequencies up to several hundred kilohertz, and have been
deployed as the boost diodes in power factor correction units
of switched-mode power supplies operating in continuous-
current mode. However, SiC diodes remain more expensive
than their silicon counterparts due to higher material costs.
On the other hand, the conduction loss issue has also led
researchers to propose additional boost-based rectifier
topologies, which will be discussed as follows.
B. AC-DC Bridgeless Boost Converter
To increase the efficiency of the converter presented in Fig.
1, the bridgeless boost rectifiers (also referred to as dual boost
converters) shown in Fig. 2 and Fig. 3 were introduced in [7]
and [8], respectively. The conduction losses are minimized by
reducing the number of semiconductor devices that conduct
current from the source to the load. However, the output
diodes operated in high voltage have severe reverse-recovery
problems due to high diode forward current and high output
voltage. As the switching frequency increases, the large
reverse-recovery currents of the output diodes affect the
switches in the form of additional turn-on losses and also
produce electromagnetic interference (EMI) noises.
At a first glance, one can say that both converters shown in
Fig. 2 and Fig. 3 may lead to a solution with increased cost
and complexity, since two active switches are now employed.
However, the drive circuit of the main switches in Fig. 2 is
less complex than that in Fig. 3 because both switches are
connected to the same reference node. However, it must be
mentioned that this feature also eliminates the possibility of
short-circuit through one leg due to eventual malfunctioning
of the main switches. Trade-offs have also to be made
between complexity and reduced conduction losses when
considering the conventional boost converter or the
aforementioned bridgeless topologies.
Fig. 2. Symmetrical bridgeless boost rectifier.
Fig. 3. Asymmetrical bridgeless boost rectifier.
An improvement of the topology in Fig. 2 is proposed in
[9], where the diode reverse recovery problems are alleviated
by using only a coupled inductor and two additional diodes.
Zero-current turnoff of the output diodes is achieved, and the
reverse-recovery currents of the additional diodes are slowed
down by the leakage inductance of the coupled inductor. The
diode reverse recovery losses are reduced, and the switching
transients of the switching devices are improved.
The topology in Fig. 3, also called totem-pole boost
bridgeless PFC rectifier in [10], suffered some modification
as well. An interleaved totem-pole boost bridgeless PFC
rectifier with reduced reverse-recovery problems using
coupled inductor is proposed in [10], at the cost of two
additional main switches.
C. AC-DC Interleaved Boost Converter
As the power rating increases, it is often required to
associate converters in series or in parallel. In high-power
applications, interleaving of two boost converters is very
often employed to improve performance and reduce size of
the PFC front end. Besides, for high current applications and
voltage step-up, the currents through the switches become
just fractions of the input current [11]. Interleaving
effectively doubles the switching frequency and also partially
cancels the input and output ripples, as the size of the energy
storage inductors and differential-mode electromagnetic
interference (EMI) filter in interleaved implementations can
be reduced [11].
An interleaved boost converter, firstly proposed in [13],
can be seen in Fig. 4. Interleaved power conversion consists
of adequately interconnecting multiple switching cells for
which the conversion frequency is identical, although the
internal switching instants are sequentially phased over equal
fractions of a switching period. This arrangement lowers the
net ripple amplitude and raises the effective ripple frequency
of the overall converter without increasing switching losses or
device stresses. An interleaved system can therefore realize a
savings in filtration and energy storage requirements,
resulting in greatly improved power conversion densities
without sacrificing efficiency.
While the concept of interleaving can be extended to a
generic number of cells, increased design flexibility results.
For instance, in cases where the ripple may already be small,
further reductions may be of limited benefit. In such cases, a
different set of tradeoffs can be made. It becomes possible to
reduce the switching frequency by a factor of N (to increase
conversion efficiency) and to reduce the inductance per cell
by a factor of N (to reduce converter size). The resulting
system will have a per-cell ripple N2 times larger than a
single-cell converter, but the net interleaved ripple will
remain unchanged. Thus, interleaving can be used to increase
conversion efficiency and power conversion density as well
as to reduce ripple amplitude [13].
However, some drawbacks also exist. Since the current is
supposed to be adjusted to avoid overload, the drive and
control circuits become more complex. Besides, the reverse
recovery problem of the boost diodes Db1 and Db2 still exist.
Some efforts to mitigate this problem have been made in [14],
although the operation in discontinuous current mode (DCM)
causes appreciable EMI levels.
Fig. 4. Interleaved boost rectifier.
The introduction of the passive snubber described in [15]
minimizes the reverse recovery phenomenon in the
interleaved boost converter. While soft switching is also
achieved for the main switches, significant complexity results
by the increased number of components and the need to
properly design the resonant tank elements.
D. AC-DC Half-Bridge Boost Converter
The half-bridge boost converter has been introduced in
[16], as shown in Fig. 5. In the half-bridge circuit, the current
flows through only one switch during each operating stage,
while conduction losses are drastically reduced.
The use of a capacitor divider provides a split dc link, as
the voltage at the center point is half of the output voltage.
Higher output voltage gain can be then achieved if compared
with that of the conventional boost converter. However, if
two loads are supplied by the split dc link, a specific control
loop must be implemented to keep voltage balance in case of
asymmetrical loads.
Although the voltage doubler characteristic is achieved, the
output voltage will be at least twice the value of the peak of
the input voltage for proper boost operation, similarly to the
topologies shown in Fig. 7 and Fig. 8. For instance, if the
rated rms input voltage is 220 V, the output voltage is
supposed to be higher than 620 V. Such high output voltage
demands the use high-voltage-rated semiconductor
components and passive elements and also cause severely
stress in the devices of any downstream converter. However,
for a rated voltage of 127 V, the output voltage will have to
be higher than 360 V only. This voltage level is well
acceptable and is also adopted currently in many commercial
boost PFC circuits [16]. Although this circuit is less attractive
for the universal input voltage range (85–270 V), a
modification using two additional diodes and a single-pole
double-throw switch enables the circuit operate from a 220-V
system, as shown in [16].
Another disadvantage of voltage doubler boost converters
is the existence of imbalance in the capacitor voltages, which
may be caused due to some dc offsets in the controller’s
components or even two imbalanced loads connected in
parallel with the capacitors. The closed-loop control system
with the imbalance control is also studied in [16], where the
difference between the voltages across the capacitors is
calculated and the resulting dc signal is then added to the
reference current.
Fig. 5. Half-bridge boost rectifier.
The need for a specific loop to mitigate voltage imbalance
in the converter shown in Fig. 5 is eliminated in the converter
represented in Fig. 6 [17]. Even though the structure is
capable of processing higher power levels with bidirectional
power flow, increased cost and complexity are distinct
disadvantages due to the use of higher number of
semiconductor elements.
Fig. 6. Full-bridge boost rectifier.
E. AC-DC Three-Level Boost Converter
The three-level boost converter is shown in Fig. 7. Since
two active switches are used, which must be designed for half
of the total output voltage, this three-level boost converter
becomes more adequate for high power applications. The low
device voltage rating benefit is especially important in high
voltage applications. From a practical point of view, it is
recommended for applications where the output voltage is
around 400 V or higher, and the power level reaches some
kilowatts.
Fig. 7. Three-level boost rectifier.
Other important aspect to be investigated is the inductor
size. For the same voltage and power ratings, and
consequently for the same ripple current, the required
inductance is L for the three-level boost converter, 2×2L for
the interleaved boost converter shown in Fig. 4, and 4L for
the conventional boost converter shown in Fig. 1 [18].
It must be also mentioned that the current ripple
frequencies of the three-level boost converter and the
interleaved boost converter are twice as high as that of the
conventional boost converter. The ripple current frequency
has a significant impact on the input filter size [18].
From the above comparison, it can be concluded that the
three-level boost converter is much better than the
conventional boost converter with regard to the converter
efficiency (for high output voltages) and the inductor size.
The two-cell interleaved boost converter has better
performance than the conventional boost converter, but still
not as good as the three-level boost converter [18].
Another topology of single-phase three-level boost rectifier
was introduced in [19] and [20], as shown in Fig. 8. This
converter can be understood as the association of two boost
converters, where one of them operates during the positive
half cycle of the input voltage and the remaining one operates
during the negative half cycle of the input voltage.
If compared with the aforementioned topology, the
following advantages can be addressed to the converter:
reduced number of semiconductor devices due to the
integration of the diode rectifier and the boost converter;
conduction losses become significantly lower because the
diode bridge is eliminated and the current flows through at
most two semiconductor elements during any of the operating
stages; the drive circuit of the main switches is simplified
because they are connected in such a way that a switch with
bidirectional current and voltage characteristics result.
Besides, the remaining advantages of the converter shown in
Fig. 7 are maintained, such as the high voltage gain and the
reduced voltage across the main switches, which are designed
for half of the total output voltage.
Fig. 8. Bridgeless single-phase three-level boost rectifier.
F. AC-DC Boost Converter Using the Three-State Switching Cell
The three-state switching cell can be obtained by the
association of two two-state PWM cells interconnected to a
center tap transformer, from which a family of dc-dc
converters can be derived [21]. This concept is similar to the
interleaving of multiple cells, but in this case an
autotransformer is used instead of one inductor per
interleaved cell.
The use of the boost converter associated with the three-
state switching cell results in the topology shown in Fig. 9
[22]. One must notice that this arrangement is different from
that shown in Fig. 2 because of the presence of the diode
bridge and also the autotransformer. Appreciable conduction
losses are also expected in this case.
 A three-level boost rectifier associated with the three-state
cell is also presented in [24], as shown in Fig. 11, where
voltage doubler characteristic is achieved. Reduced current
stress through the semiconductor elements, reduced volume
and weight of the magnetic components, and simple control
strategy are distinct advantages of this proposal [24].

Fig. 9. Boost rectifier employing the three-state switching

cell.
Another variation of the aforementioned topology suitable
to high power levels is represented in Fig. 10 [23]. Although
four switches and two three-state cells are used, the presence
of the diode bridge is eliminated. Besides, the following
advantages can be addressed to the use of the three-state cell:
inductors are designed for twice the switching frequency,
with consequent reduction of size and weight; the current
through the switches is half of the input current; part of the
input power is delivered to the load by the transformer instead
of the main switches, therefore reducing conduction and
commutation losses; lower cost switches can be used due to
the possibility of parallelism of any number of cells.
Fig. 10. Modified boost rectifier employing the three-state
switching cell.
Fig. 11. Voltage doubler boost rectifier employing the three-
state switching cell.
III. COMPARISON OF SOME BOOST TOPOLOGIES
In Section II, the paper presented some boost topologies
dedicated to PFC applications. It is worth to mention that it
has not been dedicated to the detailed analysis of the
converters, including operating principle, design procedure or
implementation of experimental prototypes to eventually
compare them and determine which structure has the best
performance. Some important qualitative characteristics
regarding each one of the converters have been highlighted
instead, demonstrating the evolution of research works related
to ac-dc boost converters.
At this point, it is important to emphasize the major
concern of this work by presenting a table that summarizes
some important characteristics of boost-based topologies, as
effectively shown in Table I. Considering that six categories
have been previously presented in Section II.A to II.F, let us
establish a fair comparison among them considering the same
current, voltage, power and switching frequency ratings.

Table I
Comparison of some PFC boost-type converters
Parameter Ac-Dc Boost Topologies
CBC SBBC IBC B3LBC HBBC VDBC3SSC
Number of boost inductors 1 1 2 1 1 1
Size of each boost inductor L L L/2 L L/16
Total output voltage Vo Vo Vo 2⋅Vo Vo 2⋅Vo
Maximum number of semiconductor elements in
3 2 3 2 1 2
the current path
Existence of diode bridge Yes No Yes No No No
Number of active switches 1 2 2 2 2 4
Number of boost diodes 1 2 2 2 0 4
 Six topologies chosen for this purpose are: conventional
boost converter (CBC, Fig. 1); symmetrical bridgeless boost
converter (SBBC – Fig. 2); interleaved boost converter (IBC
– Fig. 4); bridgeless three-level boost converter (B3LBC –
Fig. 8); half-bridge boost converter (HBBC – Fig. 5); and
voltage doubler boost converter using the three-state
switching cell (VDBC3SSC – Fig. 11).
IV. CONCLUSION
This paper has presented some of the most relevant and
interesting ac-dc boost-type converters for PFC applications.
Besides, the literature review has been developed to explore a
perspective of various configurations of boost converters to
researchers, designers, application engineers, and end users of
ac–dc converters.
The exposition of six types of arrangement is expected to
present the evolution of the boost converter and also provide
easy selection of an appropriate topology for a given
application. While dedicated to highlight some of the main
characteristics regarding the converters, this paper seeks to
motivate the reader to analyze some of the most important
publications related to the theme by adequately citing them.
While it has not been dedicated to the detailed analysis of
each one of the aforementioned topologies, this work intends
to be a useful reference guide for power electronic
professionals working on ac–dc boost converters.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors gratefully acknowledge CNPq, CAPES, and
FAPEMIG for the support to this work.
REFERENCES
[1] W. Y. Choi, J. Kwon, E. H. Kim, J. J. Lee, and B. H. Kwon,
“Bridgeless boost rectifier with low conduction losses and reduced
diode reverse-recovery problems,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 54,
no. 2, pp. 769–780, April 2007.
[2] J. M. Kwon, W. Y. Choi, and B. H. Kwon, “Cost-effective boost
converter with reverse-recovery reduction and power factor correction,”
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 471–473, Jan. 2008.
[3] F. L. Tofoli, E. A. A. Coelho, L. C. de Freitas, V. J. Farias, and J. B.
Vieira Jr., “Proposal of a soft-switching single-phase three-level
rectifier,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 107–113, Jan.
2008.
[4] L. Rossetto, G. Spiazzi, and P. Tenti,” Control techniques for power
factor correction converters”, in Proc. Power Electronics, Motion
Control (PEMC), September 1994, pp. 1310–1318.
[5] K. M. Smedley and S. Cúk, “One-cycle control of switching
converters”, IEEE Trans. Power. Electron., vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 625–633,
Nov. 1995.
[6] D. Borgonovo, J. P. Remor, I. Barbi, and A. J. Perin, "A self-controlled
power factor correction single-phase boost pre-regulator", in Proc. IEEE
36th Power Electronics Specialists Conference (PESC '05), 2005, pp.
2351–2357.
[7] R. Martinez and P. N. Enjeti, “A high-performance single-phase
rectifier with input power factor correction,” IEEE Trans. Power
Electron., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 311–317, Mar. 1996.
[8] J. W. Lim and B. H. Kwon, “A power factor controller for single-phase
PWM rectifiers,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 46, no. 5, pp. 1035–
1037, Oct. 1999.
[9] W.-Y. Choi, J.-M. Kwon, E.-H. Kim, J.-J. Lee, and B.-H. Kwon,
“Bridgeless boost rectifier with low conduction losses and reduced
diode reverse-recovery problems,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol.
54, no. 2, pp.1406–1415, April 2007.
[10] B. Su and Z. Lu, “An interleaved totem-pole boost bridgeless rectifier
with reduced reverse-recovery problems for power factor correction,”
IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 25, no. 6, pp.769-780, June 2010.
[11] Y. Jang and M. M. Jovanovic, “Interleaved boost converter with
intrinsic voltage-doubler characteristic for universal-line PFC front
end,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 1394–1401, July
2007.
[12] D. J. Perreault and J. G. Kassakian, “Distributed interleaving of
paralleled power converters,” IEEE Trans. Circuits and Systems I:
Fundamental Theory Application, vol. 44, no. 8, pp. 728–734, Aug.
1997.
[13] B. A. Miwa, D. M. Otten, and M. E. Schlecht, “High efficiency power
factor correction using interleaving techniques,” in Proc. IEEE Applied
Power Electronics Conference and Exposition, 1992, pp. 557–568.
[14] D. Garinto, “Interleaved boost converter system for unity power factor
operation,” in Proc. European Conference on Power Electronics and
Applications, 2007, pp. 1–7.
[15] C. A. Gallo, F. L. Tofoli, and J. A. C. Pinto, “A passive lossless snubber
applied to the ac-dc interleaved boost converter,” IEEE Trans. Power
Electron., vol. 25, no. 3, pp.775-785, Mar. 2010.
[16] R. Srinivasan and R. Oruganti, “A unity power factor converter using
half bridge boost topology,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron, vol. 13, no.
3, pp. 487–500, May 1998.
[17] D. K. Jackson and S. B. Leeb, “A power factor corrector with bi-
directional power transfer capability,” in Proc. IEEE Power Electronics
Specialists Conference, 2000, vol. 1, pp. 365–370.
[18] M. T. Zhang, Y. Jiang, F. C. Lee, and M. M. Jovanovic, “Single-phase
three-level boost power factor correction converters,” in Proc. Applied
Power Electronics Conference and Exposition, 1995, vol. 1, pp. 434–
439.
[19] J. C. Salmon, “Comparative evaluation of circuit topologies for 1-phase
and 3-phase boost rectifiers operated with a low current distortion,” in
Proc. Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering,
1994, vol. 1, pp. 30–33.
[20] J. C. Salmon, T. Tang, and E. Nowicki, “Operation, control and
performance of a family of high power unity power factor rectifiers,” in
Proc. Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering,
1995, vol. 2, pp. 854–857.
[21] G. V. T. Bascopé and I. Barbi, “Generation of a family of non-isolated
DC-DC PWM converters using new three-state swiching cell,” in Proc.
IEEE Power Electronics Specialists Conference, 2000, vol. 2, pp. 858–
863.
[22] G. V. T. Bascopé and I. Barbi, “A single phase PFC 3 kW converter
using a three-state switching cell”, in Proc. Power Electronics
Specialists Conference, 2004, vol. 5, pp. 4037–4042.
[23] T. N. Santelo, J. P. R. Balestero, and F. J. M. Seixas, and G. V. T.
Bascopé, “Three-state switching cell for single-stage PFC rectifier,” in
Proc. Global Congress on Engineering and Technology Education,
2005, pp. 1521–1525.
[24] R. A. da Camara, R. N. A. L. Silva, G. A. L. Henn, P. P. Praça, C. M. T.
Cruz, and R. P. T. Bascopé, “Voltage doubler boost rectifier based on
three-state switching cell for UPS applications,” in Proc. Brazilian
Power Electronics Conference, 2009, pp. 458–463.