Fixed-frequency Pseudo Sliding Mode Control for a Buck-Boost DC-DC Converter in Mobile Applications: A Comparison with a Linear PID

Controller
Matteo Agostinelli1 , Robert Priewasser1 , Stefano Marsili2 and Mario Huemer1
1

Networked and Embedded Systems University of Klagenfurt 9020 Klagenfurt, Austria email: matteo.agostinelli@uni-klu.ac.at

Inneon Technologies Austria AG 9500 Villach, Austria email: stefano.marsili@inneon.com II. C ONTROLLER DESIGN A. Buck-Boost converter topology A schematic representation of the noninverting Buck-Boost DCDC converter, including the most important parasitic components, is reported in Fig. 1. Essentially, it results from the cascading of a Buck and a Boost converter employing a single inductor [2], [11]. As shown in the picture, the converter can be operated in different operating modes, depending on the value of a selection signal um :

AbstractInterest is apparently growing in the four-switch noninverting Buck-Boost converter, which can be effectively used as a power supply for mobile devices. A typical application is a dynamic power supply for third-generation (3G) Wideband Code Division Multiple Access (WCDMA) Power Ampliers (PA). While several control strategies based on the linear control theory have been proposed recently, there is still room for investigation of nonlinear control techniques. In this paper, a xed-frequency nonlinear controller based on the sliding mode theory is presented and compared to a classical linear Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID) implementation. The main differences from the design perspective and in terms of performance are then pointed out and commented. The main advantages of the proposed technique generally include an improvement of the dynamic performance and increased energy efciency of the conversion. Simulation results are provided in order to evaluate and compare the different control strategies. Index TermsDC-DC converters, Sliding mode control, Nonlinear control, Noninverting Buck-Boost

I. I NTRODUCTION The four-switch noninverting Buck-Boost DC-DC converter topology [1], [2] is recently attracting interest in mobile applications. In general, the Buck-Boost topology is needed when the output voltage lies in the mid-range of the input battery voltage. Due to the extended voltage range provided by latest generation batteries, this condition is increasingly common [3]. An application where the noninverting Buck-Boost topology has been effectively employed is an adaptive power supply for 3G RF WCDMA power ampliers [4][6]. Depending on a reference control signal, the Buck-Boost converter adjusts the voltage supplied to the PA. Several control techniques have been proposed to regulate the output voltage of this converter topology, mainly based on linear schemes [4][7]. On the other hand, nonlinear techniques are capable of providing an improved dynamic performance and an increased robustness to parameters, line and load variations. Different nonlinear schemes have been already investigated for other DC-DC converter topologies [8][10]. In particular, sliding mode control has been introduced to regulate variable structure systems (VSS), a category that includes DC-DC converters, which are therefore well suited for this type of control scheme. However, conventional sliding mode control operates at a variable frequency, which is undesired in many applications, such as mobile devices. In fact, in order to reduce interferences with other parts of the system, it is preferable to operate the DC-DC converter at a constant switching frequency. Therefore, a modied sliding mode architecture, referred as Pseudo Sliding Mode (PSM) in the following, is proposed to support xed-frequency operation. The performance of the controller has been evaluated by means of simulations and has been compared to a linear PID architecture.

Buck mode (um = 0): switch S3 is always closed while S4 is always left open, as shown in Fig. 1(a). The remaining switches S1 and S2 are operated by the pulse-width modulated (PWM) actuating signal ud ; Boost mode (um = 1): switches S1 and S2 are always closed and open, respectively, while S3 and S4 are operated by the actuating PWM signal ud , as reported in Fig. 1(b); Buck-Boost mode: all switches are operated by the PWM signal (four-switch PWM). With this operating mode, the current stress is much higher than in Buck or Boost modes, i.e. the average inductor current is higher. Moreover, the increased switching activity leads to a lower conversion efciency [4], [6], [12], [13]. Therefore, this mode is never employed in the proposed control scheme, in order to minimize the inductor size and losses.

It is worth noting that the Buck and the Boost modes share a common switch conguration. This corresponds to the phase in Buck mode in which the inductor is connected to the battery and the phase in Boost mode where the load is connected to the inductor, i.e. switches S1 and S3 are on, while S2 and S4 are off. This fact is exploited in the mode selection algorithm of the proposed control scheme, which will be described in Section II-D. B. Linear PID control A linear PID controller has been designed to regulate the output voltage of the noninverting Buck-Boost converter. A schematic representation of the controller is depicted in Fig. 2. The same controller coefcients have been used in both operating modes (Buck and Boost). Although this is not the optimal approach [6], this solution has been adopted to provide a fair comparison with the proposed nonlinear scheme, where the controller coefcients are also xed. For the same reason, the linear PID controller has been forced to employ the Buck and Boost modes only, but never the four-switch PWM mode. The selection of the operating mode is done according to the duty cycle in the previous switching period. In particular, if the duty cycle exceeds 95% in Buck mode, then Boost mode is selected. Conversely, if the duty cycle falls under 5% in Boost mode, the Buck operating mode is selected for the next switching period.

Vi + S1 ud iL S2 L RL S3 RC C R + vo

Let us consider the following general representation of the converter: x = f (x, t, u), (1) where u is the input vector, which comprises two components: the mode selection signal um and the PWM modulated signal ud u= ud um . (2)

S4

(a) Buck mode (um = 0): switch S3 is always closed while S4 is always open. S1 and S2 are operated by the actuating signal ud .

The sliding mode controller drives the signal ud in order to maintain the representative point (RP) of the system on a surface (x) = 0, where (x) is called sliding function and is dened as a linear combination of the state variables x, yielding (x) = sT x = s1 x1 + s2 x2 + s3 x3 = 0, (3)

Vi + S1 iL S2 L RL S3 ud S4 RC C R + vo

where x is dened as

x1 x3

vo Vref iL (vo Vref ) dt

. (4)

x= x2 =

It is worth noting that the inductor current iL is used in the denition of the sliding surface. This is justied by the fact that the time derivative of the output voltage is not continuous in Boost mode and thus it cannot be included in the sliding function [14]. The action of the controller can be summarized as: ud = u+ d u d if (x) > 0 . if (x) < 0 (5)

(b) Boost mode (um = 1): switch S1 is always closed while S2 is always open. S3 and S4 are operated by the actuating signal ud . Fig. 1. Four-switch Buck-Boost converter topology operating in (a) Buck and (b) Boost mode.
Vi + S1 iL S2 L RL S3 RC C R + vo

S4

When the existence conditions are met, the representative point of the system will reach the sliding surface (x) = 0 and will slide towards the reference point. The existence conditions can be obtained by using the Lyapunov stability theory and it can be shown that they are met if d < 0. (6) dt This condition limits the possible choices of the sliding coefcients si and the region of the phase plane where sliding regime is possible. When the system operates under the sliding mode regime, the RP will stay on the sliding surface and the dynamic behavior of the system is given by: (x) = sT x = 0. (7) In the case under exam, this condition is equivalent to dx1 diL + s2 + s3 x1 = 0 dt dt which can be reduced to a differential equation in x1 only: d2 x1 1 + dt 2 Cs2 1+ s2 R dx1 s3 + x1 = 0 dt Cs2 (8)

ud Driver um PWM PID + Vref

Fig. 2. Schematic representation of the complete system, including the power stage and the PID control loop.

The PID coefcients have been chosen in such a way that the equivalent closed-loop bandwidth and damping factor in Buck mode [11] are comparable to their nonlinear counterparts, which are dened in (9) and (10) in the following section. C. Pseudo sliding mode (PSM) control The proposed nonlinear control scheme is based on the sliding mode theory. The conventional sliding mode architecture has been adapted in order to support a xed-frequency operation, thus yielding a Pseudo Sliding Mode (PSM) controller. A novel mode selection algorithm is introduced, which is capable of improving the dynamic performance of the system.

Under sliding mode regime, the system under exam is equivalent to a second-order system with a natural frequency n equal to n = s3 . s2 C (9)

For typical values of the sliding coefcients, we have s2 /R 1 and a simple expression of the damping factor can be derived: 1 2 s2 s3 C (10)

Eqs. 9 and 10 can be used to tune the sliding coefcients according to the desired dynamic performance.

vo Vref

+ s3 +

CLK

Tsw

(x )

(x)
Vbuck

Tsw

2Tsw

3Tsw

iL

s2

Threshold Buck

um
R Q

to power stage ud Drive signal generator

Vboost

um
BUCK BOOST t

Threshold Boost S

ud

Fig. 3.

Pseudo sliding mode (PSM) control loop

ton to

As it can be observed in Fig. 3, the conventional sliding mode structure has been modied to support xed switching frequency operation [10]. This has been achieved by replacing the output hysteretic comparator, which is usually adopted in sliding mode controllers, with a comparator and a ip-op. A clock signal is given as input to the ip-op, setting the actuating signal ud to 1 at every rising edge of the clock. The ip-op is then reset to 0 when the sliding function reaches a predened threshold. In addition to the PWM modulated signal, the controller is also responsible for the selection of the appropriate operating mode (Buck or Boost mode). Additional details on the selection algorithm are given in the following section. D. Selection algorithm The selection of the operating mode plays a critical role in the performance of the controller. Several selection strategies have been proposed in previous literature, mainly based on an estimation of the duty cycle of the following switching period [3], [5][7]. In the proposed non-linear control strategy, the common switch conguration is always forced at the beginning of every switching period and the selection of the operating mode (Buck or Boost only) is made on the y during the period (see Section II-C). The decision on the operating mode is based on the comparison of the sliding function (x) with two thresholds, one corresponding to Buck (Vbuck ) and one to Boost (Vboost ) mode. At every clock event, the common switch conguration shared by the Buck and the Boost mode is selected rst (i.e. switches S1 and S3 are on while S2 and S4 are off), which means that no decision on the operating mode is made at this time instant. Then, depending on which threshold is hit by the sliding function (x), the corresponding operating mode is chosen and the corresponding switch conguration is selected. An example of the operation of the controller is reported in Fig. 4. It is assumed that the converter initially operates in Buck mode (um = 0), i.e. Vref < Vi . At every rising edge of the clock signal, the shared switch conguration is forced (ud = 1), which in Buck mode corresponds to the phase where the inductor current iL increases (because the battery voltage is larger than the output voltage). Therefore, assuming that the integral term varies slowly and the error voltage is negligible, the sliding function (x) will increase until it reaches the Buck threshold. At this time, the second switch conguration of the Buck mode is selected (ud = 0, i.e. the inductor is connected to ground: switches S2 and S3 are on while

Fig. 4. Clock, sliding function (x) and actuating signals um and ud waveforms in the proximity of a transition from Buck to Boost mode, occurring at t = t . TABLE I S YSTEM PARAMETERS Parameter Vi Vref fsw L C Value 3.6 V 5.1 V 3.4 V 1.5 MHz 3.3 H 22 F Parameter RC RL RHS RLS Value 5 m 100 m 150 m 150 m

S1 and S4 are off), the Buck mode remains enabled and iL will decrease until the next clock event occurs. Shortly after t = 3Tsw , we assume that a reference voltage jump occurs, with Vref rising to a new value, higher than the battery voltage. At the clock event (i.e. t = 3Tsw ), the shared switch conguration is selected, but since Vref > Vi , the error term vo Vref will drop, causing the sliding function (x) to decrease. Eventually, (x) will reach the Boost threshold (at t = t in Fig.4), causing the controller to enable Boost mode (um = 1) and to select the second switch conguration of Boost mode (i.e. inductor shorted to battery: switches S1 and S4 are on while S2 and S3 are off). The current will now increase until the next clock event occurs. At this point, the common conguration is selected again and, since the voltage across the inductor is reversed with respect to the Buck case, the current will decrease until (x) reaches the Boost threshold. The main advantage of the proposed technique over traditional linear control schemes lies in the fact that the selection of the operating mode is made on the y during the switching period and it is immediately applied without waiting for the end of the period. Furthermore, only two operating modes are used (Buck or Boost) and four-switch PWM is never employed, thus improving the converter efciency. In addition, all the benets of sliding mode control are inherited. In particular, thanks to its robustness to large parameters, line and load variations, it is possible to effectively use just one set of coefcients for all operating conditions. III. S IMULATION RESULTS In order to evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed controller, simulations have been carried out with realistic parameters taken

3.4

vo [V]

3.39 3.38 3.37 0.445 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0.445 1 0.45 0.455 0.46 0.465 0.47 0.45 0.455 0.46 PSM PID 0.465 0.47

to the PID scheme. It is noticeable in both gures, that the mode transition is taking place earlier in the proposed PSM scheme. IV. C ONCLUSIONS A xed-frequency nonlinear controller based on the sliding mode theory has been proposed and its effectiveness has been proven by means of simulations. The controller has been compared to a conventional linear PID regulator in order to highlight the advantages of the proposed strategy. It has been shown that the Pseudo Sliding Mode controller is capable of an improved dynamic performance with respect to conventional linear schemes. One of the main advantages of the proposed control strategy lies in the fact that the selection of the operating mode is made on the y during the switching period and it is applied immediately. Additionally, the efciency of the conversion has also been maximized by avoiding the four-switch PWM mode. ACKNOWLEDGMENT This work was supported by Lakeside Labs GmbH, Klagenfurt, Austria and was funded by the European Regional Development Fund and the Carinthian Economic Promotion Fund (KWF) under grant 20214/16470/23854. R EFERENCES
PSM PID 0.45 0.455 0.46 0.465 0.47 0.475 0.48

um
0 0.445

iL [A]

0.45

0.455

0.46

0.465

0.47

t [ms]

Fig. 5. Output voltage vo , inductor current iL and mode selection signal um waveforms during a transient response due to a load jump from 10 mA to 600 mA. The battery voltage is Vi = 5.1 V and the reference is Vref = 3.4 V. The solid line corresponds to the Pseudo Sliding Mode (PSM) case while the dashed line corresponds to the PID case.
3.4

vo [V]

3.38 3.36 3.34 0.445 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0.445 1 0.45 0.455 0.46 0.465 0.47 0.475 0.48

0 0.445

0.45

0.455

0.46

0.465

0.47

0.475

0.48

t [ms]

Fig. 6. Output voltage vo , inductor current iL and mode selection signal um waveforms during a transient response due to a load jump from 10 mA to 600 mA. The battery voltage is Vi = 3.6 V and the reference is Vref = 3.4 V. The solid line corresponds to the Pseudo Sliding Mode (PSM) case while the dashed line corresponds to the PID case.

from a real-world commercial application [12], which are reported in Table I. The equivalent on-resistances RHS and RLS of the high-side and low-side switches, respectively, have been included in the model. Fig. 5 shows the waveforms of the output voltage vo , inductor current iL and mode selection signal um , when the load current is changed from 10 mA to 600 mA at t = 0.45 ms with a rise time of 100 ns. The input and reference voltages have been set to Vi = 5.1 V and Vref = 3.4 V, respectively. As expected, a majority of Buck cycles is used but, interestingly, a single Boost cycle is selected by both control schemes during the transient, improving the recovery from the load jump. It can also be seen that the nonlinear PSM scheme has an better dynamic performance with respect to the PID case. Fig. 6 depicts the same waveforms but with the input voltage set to Vi = 3.6 V. In this case, a combination of Buck and Boost cycles is used independently of the control scheme. Again, the PSM architecture provides a better dynamic performance when compared

[1] J. Chen, D. Maksimovi c, and R. Erickson, Buck-boost PWM converters having two independently controlled switches, in Proc. IEEE Power Electron. Specialists Conf., 2001, pp. 736 741. [2] B. Bryant and M. K. Kazimierezuk, Derivation of the buck-boost PWM DC-DC converter circuit topology, in Proc. IEEE Intl. Symp. on Circuits and Systems, 2002, pp. 841844. [3] Y.-J. 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, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 12671279, May 2009. [4] B. Sahu and G. A. Rinc on-Mora, A low voltage, dynamic, noninverting, synchronous buck-boost converter for portable applications, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 443452, 2004. [5] R. Paul, L. Sankey, L. Corradini, Z. Popovi c, and D. Maksimovi c, Power Management of Wideband Code Division Multiple Access RF Power Ampliers With Antenna Mismatch, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 981991, 2010. [6] R. Paul, L. Corradini, and D. Maksimovi c, - Modulated Digitally Controlled Non-Inverting Buck-Boost Converter for WCDMA RF Power Ampliers, in Proc. IEEE Appl. Power Electron. Conf. Expo., 2009, pp. 533539. [7] M. Gaboriault and A. Notman, A high efciency, noninverting, buckboost DC-DC converter, in Proc. IEEE Appl. Power Electron. Conf. Expo., 2004, pp. 14111415. [8] M. Agostinelli, R. Priewasser, S. Marsili, and M. Huemer, Nonlinear control for energy efcient DC-DC converters supporting DCM operation, Proc. IEEE Intl. Midwest Symp. on Circuits and Systems, pp. 11531156, 2010. [9] S.-C. Tan, Y. M. Lai, and C. K. Tse, An Evaluation of the Practicality of Sliding Mode Controllers in DC-DC Converters and Their General Design Issues, in Proc. IEEE Power Electron. Specialists Conf., 2006, pp. 17. [10] S.-C. Tan, Y. M. Lai, and C. K. Tse, General Design Issues of Sliding-Mode Controllers in DC-DC Converters, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 11601174, 2008. [11] R. Erickson and D. Maksimovi c, Fundamentals of Power Electronics, 2nd ed. Springer, 2001. [12] Linear Technology Design Notes, Single Inductor, Tiny Buck-Boost converter provides 95% Efciency in Lithium-Ion to 3.3V Applications. [Online]. Available: http://cds.linear.com/docs/Design%20Note/dn275f.pdf [13] B. Erisman, Controller for two-switch buck-boost converter, U.S. Patent 5,402,060, 1995. [14] G. Spiazzi, P. Mattavelli, and L. Rossetto, Sliding mode control of DC-DC converters, in Proc. of Brazilian Power Elec. Conf. (COBEP), 1997.

um

iL [A]