MODELING, SIMULATION, AND VERIFICATION OF
LARGE DC POWER ELECTRONICS SYSTEMS
Kamiar J. Karimi, Member IEEE Andrew Booker
Boeing Information and Support Services, MS 7L-25
Seattle, WA 98124, USA
ABSTRACT - This paper describes modeling and simulation
of large DC power electronics systems consisting of distrib-
uted DC/DC converters. These systems have become very
popular in aerospace power systems due to their high reli-
ability. Modularized modeling approach and averaging tech-
niques for power converters have allowed us to model large,
complex DC power systems. Methods for analyses of these
system are discussed. Design of Experiments (DOE) is used
as an analysis tool for verification of these large systems.
DOE reduces the number of computer runs which are neces-
sary to analyze the performance of a complex power systems
consisting of hundreds of DC/DC converters. DOE also pro-
vides valuable information about the effect of changes in
system parameters on the performance of the system. DOE
provides information about various operating scenarios and
identification of the ones with potential for instability. Exam-
ples using applications of DOE to analysis and verification of
a large DC systems are provided.
I - INTRODUCTION
Large DC power systems (DPS) using distributed DC/DC
converters have been used in a variety of applications such
as spacecraft power systems, telecommunications, computer
systems, and medical electronics [l-51. These systems use
multiple DC/DC converters to supply needed power levels at
different voltage levels.
Testing of large DC power systems consisting of hundreds of
various subsystems is extremely expensive due to size and
high level of complexity of these systems. It is very impor-
tant to develop reliable models to analyze these systems.
Modeling and simulation of distributed power systems such
as spacecraft power systems before and during the design
has many advantages: a) allows the evaluation of subsystems
and interactions among them, b) reduces costly redesigns, c)
supports trade studies and parametric studies., d) supports
test case definitions and explanation of test anomalies.
The simulation tool used for performing system level simu-
lation of DPS is EASYSx [6].EASY5x is a dynamic system
analysis computer program developed by Boeing Informa-
tion and Support Services. It provides an efficient domain for
creating user defined behavior and functional models of dif-
0-7803-3500-7/96/$ 5.00 01996 IEEE 1731
Alvin Mong
ferent components of the system. Behavioral and functional
modelling are extremely powerful in describing circuit or
system behavior. It allows simulation of power systems with
many components and nested control loops. EASY5x also
provides a modular approach for building and analyzing
dynamic system models. Complex system models can be
easily developed using modularized modeling approach.
In order to verify that the system meets its various perfor-
mance requirements, many system operating conditions
must be analyzed or tested. Also, these performance mea-
sures need to be verified under many system uncertainties
such as component aging and load variations. Testing large
scale systems consisting of hundreds of DC/DC converters
becomes extremely expensive. It is necessary that the test are
performed on a limited number of scenarios where potential
for subsystem interaction and instability exists. We use the
model of the power system to perform analysis on the com-
patibility of various DC/DC converters. The model is also
used to determine the "worst cases" which are then candi-
dates for extensive laboratory testing. This results in tremen-
dous cost savings as compared with testing all the multiple
scenarios.
We have used the statistical method of Design of Experi-
ments as a tool to analyze the behavior of the system as a
function of system uncertainties. DOE also identifies which
system operating conditions are the most critical which are
then tested to verify system design limits.
In this paper modeling and simulation of large scale distrib-
uted power systems are described. We describe a modular
modeling approach and methods to analyze interaction
among DC/DC converters. Comparisons between test data
and modeling is given. Next, we describe the statistical
method of Design of Experiments. A brief discussion of DOE
is given. Some examples where we have used DOE to iden-
tify worst case system conditions (lowest stability margin)
are presented.
I1 - MODELING APPROACH
A modular approach is used in modeling and analysisof dis-
tributed power systems. The components and subsystems of
the system are modularized and subsequently interconnected
to form the complete system. Modularizing the system into
components and subsystems has several advantages: 1) it
reduces the complexity of analyzing large systems by ana-
lyzing a less complex subsystem, 2) subsystems and compo-
nent models can be verified with manageable test conditions,
3) component and subsystem models can be used in different
systems.
Two-port modeling is used to model each component of
the system. Each component receives two inputs from pre-
ceding and following components and supplies two outputs
to those modules (Figure 1).
+ vin vout+- vi vout
4 Iout in Iout in h systems and system level analysis can be performed. The
Figure 1: Interconnecting 'Iko-Port Components
111 - POWER SYSTEM MODELING
Large DC power systems such as the one shown in Figure 2
use multiple levels of DC/DC conversionsvia switching reg-
ulators with different characteristics. This architecture is
highly reliable and provides great flexibility as compared to
central power systems. Designing distributedpower systems
provides a challenge to system designers in terms of compat-
ibility of different subsystems. There is always the potential
that different subsystems may interact with each other result-
ing in poor power quality and in extreme cases system insta-
bility [2]. The complexity of these systems requires that the
computer models be fast and not occupy a lot of computer
memory. These models must be flexible such that future
modifications are possible when the design matures, or test
data becomes available and can be used for validation.
The DPS system shown in Figure 2 was modelled using
EASYSx. The system has multiple DC voltage levels such as
200,28,15,12,5 Volts. In this generic architecture over 200
switching power regulators were modeled. Most of these
converters share identical Macros such as input filters,P W M
switch model, transformers, inductors, compensation cir-
cuits, etc. This greatly simplifies the modeling task.
A - COMPONENT MODELS
Since the system model is developed as an interconnection
of several smaller models, a mathematical description of
each component model was developed. The mathematical
model is written in terms of port voltages and currents to
make it suitable for two port modeling. For example, the dif-
1732
ferential equations describing the behavior of a series RLC
circuit can be written with capacitor voltage and inductor
current as the state variables. The voltages become output of
one component and input to the following component. The
current becomes the output to the preceding component
L-section models were used for feeders. This type of model
lends itself easily to two-port modeling. Other types of
feeder models can also be modeled.
Various input EM1 filter models have been created in
EASYSx. A few circuit topologies such as single stage series
RLC are developed. More complex filters are created based
on Interconnecting these Macro building blocks.
Modeling of DC/DC converters is the critical part of devel-
oping a reliable system model. It is extremely important that
models be developed for the power converters such that sub-
converters can be modelled at different levels of detail.
Detailed models which include all the circuit elements are
not practical for large systems due to heavy simulation time
involved with these models. Converters are broken up into
subsystems and each subsystem is modeled behaviorally
(control loops) or in detail.
We have developed a a library of various switchmode DC/
DC converter topologies in EASYSx which are based on
averaging techniques. These models were developed to per-
form small and large signal analysis and were developed for
voltage mode and current mode regulators. The models used
for system level analysis use averaging techniques to avoid
heavy simulation times associated with detailed PWM cir-
cuit level DC/DC converter models. The models were also
developed for maximum flexibility. Many of the converter
models share the same macros for input filter, power stage,
and control loops.
The averaging technique for DCDC converters is based on
replacing the switch and diode in converter power stage by
an averaged PWM switch model [lo]. This model is a sim-
plified large signal nonlinear model of the PWM switch that
accounts for the cycle-bycycleaveraged circuit characteris-
tics. The switch model may also incorporate loss elements. If
the PWM switch model is linearized, this modeling tech-
nique results in the same equations for the converter power
stage as state-space averaging technique and will contain dc
and small signal information of the DC/DC P W M converter.
However, it is faster and easier to implement without the
matrix manipulations that are involved in state-spaceaverag-
ing [81.
The current-mode convertersare modeled based on the work
by Ridley [9].This modeling technique is accurate up to half
the switching frequency, and uses the model of the PWM
switch which makes it easy to implement in EASY5x. By
using averaged and not linear PWM switch model, large sig-
nal simulations can also be perfmed.
The equations describing various sections of the switching
regulator such as input filter or power stage can easily be
implementedin EASY5x using FORTRAN and connected to
the rest of the component models and subsystems. If the
FORTRAN component is to be used more than once in the
model, reusable Macros can be created in EASY5x. Once the
Macro for the switch or any other component is developed, it
can be used as many times in the system model. This greatly
reduces the development time of new converters and adds
flexibility to the system model for future modification.
Different component macros are connected to form the DPS
model. The model consists of m m than 200 averaged DC/
DC converters. As system model becomes more complex,
the interconnected components in the model can be repre-
sented as a single icon referred to as a submodel. This allows
a complex model schematic to be represented in three-
dimensional hierarchical form.
-
IV SYSTEM PERFROMANCE ANALYSIS
When integrating various DC/DC converters with con-
stant power characteristics or subsystems containing multi-
ple DC/DC converters, the potential for subsystem
interaction exists (Shultz et al. 1990, A. Patil1992). In many
cases the system can experience oscillatory behavior or in
200 VDC
1733
extreme cases, instability. R.D. Middlebrook [7]considered
the interaction of a DCDC converter and its input EM1 filter.
A some impedance Z,was defined as the output impedance
of the input EM1 filter. Load impedance ZLwas defined as
the input impedance of the switching regulator. Conditions
for stability and perfoxmance of the interconnected system
were derived. The same concept is applied to the integration
of various subsystems of a DPS. Various parts of the DC
power system are broken into s m e and load subsystems
and source impedanceZ,and load impedance ZLare defined
for each interface. A converter feeding multiple paralleled
converters is considered the source subsystem with its output
impedance defined as the source impedance. The aggregate
input impedance of multiple parallel converters is defined as
the load subsystem. In many spacecraft power systems
groups of various converters are paralleled and fonn a pay-
load subsystem. The input impedance of the payload is
defined as the load impedance ZL.
In our system model, load and source impedances at various
interfaces are calculated and validated with test data. Figure
3 shows a typical input impedance plot for an 80 Watt DC/
DC converter. EASY5x plot of the same converter is also
shown. Figure 4 shows source impedance for Interhce 1.
Load impedances for two load conditions (heavy and light)
are also given in this plot. It is seen that for light load condi-
tions the source and load impedances do not interact. For
heavy load conditions the source and load impedances inter-
act. The degree of interaction is assessed by examining the
Nyquist plot of WL at this interface (Figure 5). It is shown
that the system has about than 30 degrees of phase margin
for heavy load condition, and more than 60 degrees of phase
margin for light load conditions.
V - DESIGN OF EXPERIMENTS
Design of Experiments is a statistical discipline for
designing and analyzing experiments. DOE helps one
design an efficientexperiment to answer specific questions.
In addition DOE provides tools for analysis of the results of
an experiment.
the work of R. A. Fisher (Fisher 1935). More recently a
proliferation -of DOE has been seen in industtial and
engineering applications, inspired partly by the work of
Taguchi (Taguchi 1980). The large body of case studies and
industrial experiments documented is a subject for another
paper. A good overview of DOE and its role in engineering
problems is given in Box and Bisgaard (Box et al1987).
heavy load 1

10 100 1000 lE4 1E6 IE6

~ m w k l

o*y$u,~). eb 8 7 ~ I in (L

Figure 5: Nyquist Plot of Source and Load Impedances

-2m I I 1 I I I In DOE an experiment is a set of runs in which variables in

10 100 1000
kwmo/WI
1E4 IE5 IE6 the experiment are changed from run to run. The variables
changed in an experiment are calledfuctors or independem
variables. The output of the experiment is called the
Figure 3: In ut Impedance Plot (Test and response. Each run of an experiment consists of assigned
Rodel predictions)
settings for the factors. The experiment is used to
Design of Experiments has a long history beginning with understand the relationship between the factors and the
response. In this terminology, DOE provides a systematic
m
11 method to determine settings of factors at which to perform
n I experimental runs.

Much of the design and analysis of experiments is

characterized by careful consideration and modeling of
sources of random error in the responses. Proper
interpretation of the results depends on a careful analysis of
the structure and source of these random errors. Careful
attention must be paid to the order of runs, how runs are
batched, etc.

This paper describes experiments with computer

Figure 4: Source and Load Impedances for Heavy and
Light Load Conditions
simulations in which there is no random error, i.e.,
deterministic experiments. Simulation at the same input
settings twice yields the same response twice. Some of the
considerations for design of deterministic computer
experiments are the Same as for random ones and some are
not present or different. For example one need not w a y
about the structure of random errors or about the order of

1734
the NW. On the other hand the experiment should be
designed so that one can answer the questions the
experiment is supposed to answer in an efficient manner.
For example, the settings may be determined so as to
estimate a particular type of model most efficiently, or to
Simply explore the space of possible combinations of
factor settings in relation to the response. Much of the
theory of design of experiments with a random
component can be brought to bear on computer
experiments. Of particular interest here are "2-level"
experiments in which settings of variables from run to
run have only two possible values. For an excellent
treatment of the theory of "2-level'' DOE see Box, Hunter
and Hunter [111. For an introduction and overview of the
theory of design and analysis of computer experiments
(DACE) see Sacks,Welch, Mitchell and Wynn [141.
DOE analysis is a method of assessing what are called
factor effects. An effecr is a representation of the
contribution of a factor or combination of factors to the
model. The contributions are additive. We consider only
two types of effects here. The effect a factor has on the
output independent of the other factors (a main efect)
and the joint effect of two factors on the output (a two-
way interaction effect). When a two-way interaction
effect is present then the change in response due to
change in one factor depends on the setting of some other
factor. In an analogous way one may speak of three-way
and higher order interaction effects. See Box, Hunter and
Hunter [l 11 for more detail.
The importance of effects can be measured. An objective
means of determining important main effects and
interactions is to compute the main effects' and
interactions' per cent contributions to the "energy" (sum
of squares or squared integral) in the output. We refer to
this process as Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). ANOVA
takes two forms in the ensuing discussion, one in the
classical sense for ON/OFF experiments, and one in the
sense of Sacks, Welch, Mitchell and Wynn [14] for
experiments with continuous variables. For detailed
discussions of the analysis methods used in the two
examples in this paper see Box, Hunter and Hunter [1 11
and Sacks, Welch, Mitchell and Wynn [ 141.
A- RUNNING EXPERIMENTS
A single experiment consisted of a number of EASYSx
runs. The experiment may call for as many as 1024 runs.
This process was enabled by a C program that
automatically ran the EASY5x runs in batch mode from a
file describing the variable settings for each run in the
experiment, names of files describing the EASY5 models
and a Fortran program for determining phase margin
1735
from EASY5x plot output files.
Many of the runs yielded no phase margin in the chwn
frequency range, i.e., the Nyquist plot did not cross the unit
circle. In these cases we considered the phase margin to be
large (infinite) and set the response to the maximum value
observed in the experiment.
B- ON/OFF EXPERIMENTS
The computer model of the DC system was used in the
analysis of ON/OFF variables. The study was to determine
the effect on the stability margin at the two types of
interfaces when the power to the miscellaneous loads
throughout the system is turned ON or OFF. For the
analysis described here, the study involved analysis of the
effect on phase margin at one chosen load when
combinations of fifteen other loads were switched ON or
OFF.
The theory of experimental design for experiments with
variables that take on only 2 values ("2 level experiments"),
for example, ON/OFF states for power loads, is well
understood and discussed in detail in Box, Hunter and
Hunter [ll]. In order to test all combinations of ON/OFF
loads one would have to perform 215 EASY5x runs. This
"full factorial" experiment has a prohibitive number of
runs. Thus a "fractional factorial" experiment is called for
in which 256 judiciously chosen combination of ON/OFF
states for each power load is run. "Fractionating" implies
sacrificing the ability to get some information out of the
experiment, in particular, the ability to estimate high order
interactions. We note that in our experiments we were
always able to estimate at least main effects and two-way
interaction effects (Resolution V).
n 1"s 'LPW 1
$31
4
$81 I
LPC!
* ....
sc
40 50 60 70 80 80 100
cumulative %variation emhinod
Factors
Figure 6 ON/OFF Experiment Results
Figure 6 shows the results of ANOVA and the main effects
from the experiment. The top plot in the figure shows that
the 3 variables corresponding to loads being ON or OFF
(LPC3,LPD5 and LPC1) contribute 85% of the variability
observed in the phase margins from the experiment. The
plot also shows that interaction effects are relatively
unimportant. Thus the effect on phase margin of setting a
particular component in the experiment to ON or OFF does
not depend on the state of the other components. The
bottom plot indicates that these variables should be set to
ON in order to minimize the phase margin. When loads
LPC3 and LPD5 are ON they reduce the phase margin from
The importance of effects are illustrated graphically in
Figure 7. The effect importance is the percent contribution
from the estimated effect to the squared integral of the
model minus the model average. The graphs indicate that
the parameter RL.LL62 contributes almost all the
variability to the Interface C model and thus is the most
important effect. Note that no interaction effects are
important. These results confirm those of the (much larger)
full-factorial experiments. The main effect plots for phase
-' * RL.LL62

the mean value observed in the experiment (about 40) by

about 1.5 each. Setting LPCl further reduces the phase 8-
margin about.5. The other variables appear to have a very
small effect on the phase margin.

C - EXPERIMENTS WITH CONTINOUS VARIABLES

Next, we used DOE experiment with continuous variables,
where all the perturbed variables were resistor, capacitor,
and resistor values within one of the DC/DC converter
loads.
0 . . ...-
97.0 97.5 98.0 98.5 88.0 88.5 10 0
This experiment differs from the previous one in that the wmlptiVo X y.rklbn oXp*bwj

variables changed in the experiment are continuous. If one

knew a priori that the effect of these variables was Figure 7:ANOVA for Continuous Variable Experiment
monotonic then one could use a a 2 level experimental
design as in the previous experiment. Since we did not have margin for Interface 3 are in Figure 8. They show that
this a priori knowledge we chose the experimental design phase margin increases as RL.LL62 (series resistance of
and analysis approach discussed in Sacks, Welch, Mitchell input filter inductor) increases. Thus phase margin will be
and Wynn [14].
smallest (worst case) when RL.LL62 is at its low value.
In each run combinations of power supply component
parameter such as resistance. capacitance, inductance and
load level (F'OT) were assigned values chosen from 3
levels, the nominal value and 20% of nominal. The
experimental design chosen was a 54 run, 3 level
orthogonal array which is a type of experimental design
that "fils out" design space (as much as it can with 3
levels) rather than putting all runs in corners of the design
space as DOESa 2 level experimental design [13]. The 3
levels allow one to detect quadratic behavior if it exists. We
note that 54 runs is not enough to estimate quadratic
behavior and interaction among all parameters.

Thus by choosing a design with such a small number of

runs one is implicitly assuming that a small number of
parameters have an effect on the output (effect sparsity). To
analyze the results of the experiments we analyzed and fit
models described in detail in Sacks, Welch, Mitchell and
Wynn [4J. Since this was a test case assumptions implicit in
Figure 8: Main Effect Plots for Continuous Variable
any small experimental design were checked by comparing Experiment
the results from a larger and more complex experiments.
Only the results from a 54 run 3 level design are presented.

1736
 C.l- Confirmation
The results of the experiment are confiied by EASY5x runs
with important variables at worst case values and the other
variables varying randomly. Figure 9 compares phase margin
observed in the 54 run experiment to phase margin from 50
EASY5x runs where the important parameter RL.LM2 is set
at a worst case value, nominal minus 90% of nominal (since
the main effect plot indicates that worst case is when
RL.LL62 is low) and the remaining parameters are chosen
randomly from the ranges in the experiment. We note that the
s [SI R.D.Middlebrook, S. Cuk. 1976. A general unified
EXPERIMENT CONFIRM
Figure 9: Confirmation of Continuous Variable Experiment
worst case value is much more extreme than the extreme low
or high value from the experiment. This is because the
variable were only varied nominal plus or minus 20% in the
experiment. The plot illustrates how the extreme value of
RL.LL62 obtained by DOE estimation of important
parameters can yield low phase margins even when
unimportantvalues are allowed to vary randomly.
VI - SUMMARY
Modeling and simulation of large DC power electronics
systems has been presented. Modular modeling approach and
averaging techniques have been used to build models of very
large DC power electronics systems. Design of Experiments
has been used to reduce the required number of computer runs
for system performance analysis. DOE helps to identify worst
case system operating conditions. The identified cases are
then tested to verify the limits of the system. A combination
of test and analysis is then used for verification of these
systems.
REFERENCES
[l] J.R. Lee,H.H. Cho, S.J.Kim, F.C.Lee. 1988. Modeling and
Simulation of Spacecraft Power Systems, IEEE Transactions
1737
on Aerospace and Electronics Systems Vol 24, No. 3 MAy
1988 pp 295-303
[21 R. Lewis,S. Shultz, J.Liu, B.H.Cho,F.C.Lee. 1991. Dis-
tributed Power System Analysis, Final Report to IBM Cor-
poration,Manasas, VA, VPEC Publications.
[3lA. Patil, P. Huynh,D.Hulielheh,C.Wildrick,
A.Radhakrishnan, ,B.Choi, D.Sable, F.C.Lee, B.Cho, and
K.Tam1. 1992. Assessment of Space Station Power System
Performance and Stability Final Report for NASA LeRC,
VPI publications (Jan.).
141 S . Schulz, B.H.Cho, F.C.Lee. 1990. Design Consider-
ations For A Distributed Power System, Power Electronics
Specialist Conference, pp. 611-17.
[5] K. Yotsumoto, S . Muroyama, S . Matsumura, H.
Watanabe, 1988. Design for a Highly Efficient Distributed
Power Supply System Based on Reliability Analysis, Tenth
International Telecommunication Energy Conference, pp
545-550.
[6] EASY5x Users Manual, Boeing Computer Services,
Seattle, WA 1993.
[71 R.D.Middlebmk. 1976. Input Filter Considerations in
Design and Applications of Switching Regulators, IEEE
Industry Applications Society Annual Meeting Record, pp.
366-382.
approach to modelling switching converter power stages,
IEEE Power Electronics Specialist Co~erenceProceedings.
[9] R. Ridley. 1990. A New Small Signal Model far Cur-
rent-mode Control, Ph.D. Dissertation, Virginia Power
Electronic Center Publication (Dec.).
[lo] V. Voperian, 1990. Simplified Analysis of PWM con-
verters Using Model of PWM Switch Parts I &II,IEEE
Transactions on Aerospace and Electronics,May, 490-505.
[ l l ] Box, G.E.P., Hunter, W.G. and Hunter, J.S. (1978).
Statistics for Experimenters. John Wiley and Sons, New
York, N.Y.
[12] Box, G.E.P. and Draper, N.R. (1987). Empirical
Model Building and Response Surfaces. John Wiley and
Sons, New York, N.Y.
[13] Owen, A.B., (1992). Orthogonal Arrays for Computer
Experiments, Integration and Visualization. Statistica
Sinica,
[14] Sacks, J., Welch W.J., Mitchell, T.J. and Wynn, H.P.
(1989) Design and analysis of computer experiments (with
comments) Statistical Science, 4,409-435.
[15] Taguchi, Genichi and Yuin Wu, Introducnon to Of-
line Quality Control. (Nagoya, Japan: Central Japan
Quality Control Association, 1980)
[16] Box, G. E. P. and Soren Bisgaard, The Scientific
Context of Quality Improvement, Qwlity Progress. June,
1987.