78
1, JANUARY 2009
Multiphase Bidirectional Flyback Converter
Topology for Hybrid Electric Vehicles
Tanmoy Bhattacharya, V. Shriganesh Giri, K. Mathew, and L. Umanand
AbstractFor hybrid electric vehicles, the batteries and the
drive dc link may be at different voltages. The batteries are at
low voltage to obtain higher volumetric efficiencies, and the dc
link is at higher voltage to have higher efficiency on the motor
side. Therefore, a power interface between the batteries and the
drives dc link is essential. This power interface should handle
power flow from battery to motor, motor to battery, external
genset to battery, and grid to battery. This paper proposes a
multi-power-port topology which is capable of handling multiple
power sources and still maintains simplicity and features like
obtaining high gain, wide load variations, lower output-current
ripple, and capability of parallel-battery energy due to the mod-
ular structure. The scheme incorporates a transformer winding
technique which drastically reduces the leakage inductance of the
coupled inductor. The development and testing of a bidirectional
flyback dcdc converter for hybrid electric vehicle is described in
this paper. Simple hysteresis voltage control is used for dc-link
voltage regulation. The experimental results are presented to show
the working of the proposed converter.
Index TermsBidirectional flyback converter, hybrid electric
vehicle, leakage inductance.
I. I NTRODUCTION
R EFERENCE [1] shows power electronics as an enabling
technology for the development of electric or hybrid elec-
tric vehicles. For both ac and dc motor drives used in electric
and hybrid electric vehicles, the basic requirement for efficient
control is that the power electronic circuit should be capable of
handling bidirectional power flow, i.e., energy transfer should
be possible from battery to motor during motoring mode and
motor to battery during regeneration. Now, the need for a
bidirectional power converter should be properly examined. A
battery can be used as a dc bus if the motor is rated for that
voltage level. Thus, bidirectional power flow is not a prob-
lem because of the bidirectional power-handling capacity of
a standard two-level three-phase inverter and also sinking and
sourcing capacity of the battery. However, the traction motor
should be rated for higher voltage to achieve higher efficiency
for a given power rating. Therefore, the dc bus voltage should
be maintained high enough to match the motor voltage rating.
This problem can be solved by connecting a number of batteries
Manuscript received January 17, 2008; revised August 6, 2008. First pub-
lished October 31, 2008; current version published December 30, 2008.
T. Bhattacharya and L. Umanand are with the Centre for Electronics Design
and Technology, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012, India (e-mail:
btanmoy@cedt.iisc.ernet.in; lums@cedt.iisc.ernet.in).
V. S. Giri is with NVIDIA, Bangalore 560001, India (e-mail: vsgiri83@
yahoo.com).
K. Mathew is with Mahatma Gandhi University, Kerala 686560, India
(e-mail: kmathewmace@gmail.com).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TIE.2008.2004661
0278-0046/$25.00 2008 IEEE
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 56, NO.
in series. However, if too many batteries are connected in series,
then the volumetric efficiency of the battery comes down.
Therefore, there is a need for a bidirectional converter which
interfaces the low-voltage battery with a high-voltage dc bus
and maintains a bidirectional power flow. Reference [2] shows
the use of a bidirectional converter for a permanent-magnet ac-
motor-driven electric vehicle. Reference [3] shows the use of
a cascaded bidirectional buckboost converter for the use in
dc-motor-driven electric vehicle. Both schemes emphasize the
importance of bidirectional dcdc converter for electric vehicle
application. The dcdc converters can be divided into hard-
switching converters and soft-switching converters. Because
of the low efficiency of hard-switching converters, recently,
soft-switching techniques are getting popular. Reference [4]
proposes ZVS techniques for different nonisolated dcdc con-
verters. There is a limit on the voltage gain that can be achieved
using a buckboost or a boost converter. It is not desirable to
operate the boost or the buckboost converter at very high duty
ratio because of very high capacitor current ripple. Thus, the
solution is to go for isolated topologies for getting the high
voltage gain in between the battery and the dc bus. In such
topologies, any voltage gain can be achieved by setting the turns
ratio of the transformers or the coupled inductors. Moreover,
such topologies also provide the advantage of galvanic isolation
between the battery bank and the dc bus. The recently proposed
topologies mostly use soft-switching techniques. Reference [5]
proposes a novel soft-switching topology for zetaflyback con-
verter. Reference [6] proposes a bidirectional dcdc converter
topology with dual half-bridge topology which has the ad-
vantage over dual full-bridge topology in terms of reduced
device count. Reference [7] proposes a bidirectional flyback
dcdc converter with ZCS. The soft-switching topologies give
higher efficiency at the cost of increased device count. Higher
device count also reduces the reliability of the circuit. Now, if
multiple batteries are to be connected in parallel to increase the
total energy storage capacity, it is not possible by connecting
the terminals of two batteries in parallel. This leads to the
option of multiphase converter topology. Apart from giving
the flexibility of paralleling multiple batteries, it also increases
the fault-tolerant capacity, i.e., if one of the phases fails, then
other phases can still operate, and the whole system will not
come to a halt. Reference [8] proposes a bidirectional dcdc
converter with many interleaved buck stages for automotive
application. Apart from multiphase operation, the power con-
verter should also be able to interface multiple energy sources
to the battery. Reference [9] proposes a scheme where multiple
energy sources and the battery are connected to the dc bus, and
the dc bus works as a junction point for all energy transfer.
BHATTACHARYA et al.: FLYBACK CONVERTER TOPOLOGY FOR HYBRID ELECTRIC VEHICLES 79

This scheme uses nonisolated boost converter topology.

Reference [10] proposes a three-port magnetically coupled
bidirectional converter topology which uses a common mag-
netic coupling as a junction point of energy transfer. This
scheme also provides galvanic isolation between different
power ports. Reference [11] presents a general multi-input
bidirectional dcdc converter topology using a combination of
dc-link and magnetic coupling.
It is to be noted that the flyback topology leads to least device
count. The problem with hard-switched flyback converter is
that the energy stored in the leakage inductance of the cou-
pled inductor should be dissipated at every switching cycle. If
snubber is not used, then the energy is dissipated through the
device parasitic which results in very high voltage stress on the
device. If passive snubber is used, then it increases the power
loss, and active snubber increases the device count. Recently, Fig. 1. Block diagram of the proposed power schematic.
some converter topologies have been proposed in the literature,
which reduce the voltage stress on the switch without the loss
of efficiency. Reference [12] uses voltage-clamped technology
to reduce the switch voltage stress. Reference [13] proposes
the use of a three-winding coupled inductor providing high
voltage gain, and that the energy in the leakage inductor be
released directly to the output which achieves higher efficiency
and reduced switch surge voltage. However, if the leakage
inductance is reduced, then these problems can be minimized.
Reference [14] proposes a coupled-inductor winding technique
which reduces the leakage inductance to a very less value and
without the use of any snubber, and that very less voltage spike
be achieved during switching transients. Next, the paralleling
of four batteries is done using a four-phase flyback topology,
and outputs of all the four phases are connected to the same dc
link. To reduce the current ripple through the dc-link capacitor,
all the four phases are switched at a fixed 75% duty cycle
with 90 (considering one switching period as 360 ) phase Fig. 2. Four-phase bidirectional flyback converter.
difference between subsequent phases. This configuration is
also suitable for connecting multiple power sources. For battery S2 and D1 are active as well. During forward power flow,
charging from mains, a front-end converter is used which uses active switches S1, S3, S5, and S7 get switching pulses of
the same dc bus. Thus, the same flyback converter is used for 75% duty cycle with 90 phase difference between subsequent
battery charging. For seriesparallel hybrid electric vehicles, phases, as shown in Fig. 3(a). During reverse power flow, active
the output of the synchronous generator can be connected switches S2, S4, S6, and S8 get switching pulses of 25% duty
to the same dc bus through a rectifier. For fuel-cell-powered cycle which are 90 phase shifted to each other, as shown in
vehicles, the output of the fuel cell can be connected to the Fig. 3(b). Fig. 3(c) and (d) shows the ideal switch voltage
same dc bus by adding one more leg to the multiphase flyback and current waveforms assuming continuous conduction mode
converter and adjusting the turns ratio of the coupled inductor (CCM) for forward and reverse power flows, respectively.
accordingly. CCM is not the only conduction mode for this bidirectional
converter. This can also operate in critical conduction mode
(CRM) or discontinuous conduction mode (DCM), depending
II. P RINCIPLE OF MPP
on the load. During forward power flow, if the load is very
The basic block diagram of the prototype of the multi power less, then the converter can go into CRM or DCM, similar
port (MPP) which is built for hybrid electric vehicle application to any standard flyback converter. However, for circuit de-
is shown in Fig. 1. The heart of the circuit is the bidirectional sign, only CCM is considered. As no snubber is used, circuit
flyback dcdc converter. A four-phase converter is constructed. design involves the design of the inductor and the capacitor.
The power schematic of the bidirectional dcdc converter is The load connected at the output of the converter is a three-
shown in Fig. 2. It has four identical bidirectional flyback dcdc phase inverter connected to the motor. Thus, the capacitor
converters. Each converter has an individual battery, and all the voltage ripple is dominated by the dc-link current ripple of
converters are connected to the common dc bus. the inverter, and capacitor value is decided depending on that
If we consider the first converter, then, during forward power ripple. The flyback inductor value is selected such that the
flow, S1 and D2 are active, and during reverse power flow, inductor current ripple is 10% of the full-load current during
80
Fig. 3. (a) Switching pulses during forward power flow. (b) Switching pulses
during reverse power flow. (c) Ideal switch voltage and current waveforms
during forward power flow for phase A assuming continuous conduction.
(d) Ideal switch voltage and current waveforms during reverse power flow for
phase A assuming continuous conduction.
CCM. DCM and CRM are not considered for circuit design
because there is no stringent voltage regulation requirement for
the MPP output. The regulation is handled by the downstream
inverter.
III. C ONTROL S CHEME
Simple hysteresis voltage control is used for dc-link volt-
age regulation for power management in the proposed MPP
scheme. During power flow in the forward direction, i.e., from
the battery to the dc bus, the duty cycles of switching voltages
of S1, S3, S5, and S7 are fixed at 75%, while switches S2, S4,
S6, and S8 are permanently off. During reverse power flow,
S1, S3, S5, and S7 are permanently off, and S2, S4, S6, and
S8 are switched at 25% duty cycle. Therefore, during forward
power flow, the voltage is boosted by a factor of three, and
during reverse power flow, the voltage is stepped down by
a factor of three. It is to be noted that this voltage boost is
only due to duty-cycle operation. The coupled-inductor turns
ratio is fixed in such a way that during full-load operation
in forward mode, the converter output voltage is the rated dc
bus voltage Vdc . For an operating condition with lesser load,
the series voltage drop in the converter will be less. Thus, the
dc-link voltage will get increased from the rated value because
of fixed duty cycle of operation. At a voltage Vdc + v1 , the
pulses to switches S1, S3, S5, and S7 are stopped. If the load is
still drawing current, then it will discharge the capacitor. When
the voltage reaches Vdc , again, the switching pulses are given
to S1, S3, S5, and S7. Therefore, during light-load conditions,
the voltage is maintained between Vdc and Vdc + v1 . If there
is no load, then the voltage will also be maintained in between
Vdc and Vdc + v1 .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 56, NO. 1, JANUARY 2009
Fig. 4. (a) Block diagram of the control scheme used. (b) Dynamic response
of the dc-link voltage after the sudden application of powering and regenerative
loads.
However, during regeneration, even if switches S1, S3, S5,
and S7 are off, because of reverse power flow, the voltage will
increase beyond Vdc + v1 . This is the time when energy should
flow back to the battery. Thus, at a voltage Vdc + v1 + v2 ,
switches S2, S4, S6, and S8 are pulsed, and because of the
flyback action, current flows into the battery, and the battery
gets charged. Here also, if the capacitor voltage falls below
Vdc + v1 , the pulses to switches S2, S4, S6, and S8 are stopped.
In this way, during regeneration, the voltage is maintained
above Vdc + v1 . Here, the upper limit of the dc bus voltage
is not fixed. It can be more than Vdc + v1 + v2 also if very
high regenerative current flows. However, the rate at which the
converter feeds current to the battery can be less because of
fixed duty cycle of operation. Therefore, the capacitor voltage
can shoot up to a very high value. The dynamic resistance of
the inverter provides the necessary protection at this operating
condition. The dynamic resistance of the inverter is activated
when the capacitor voltage reaches Vdc + v1 + v2 + v3 . The
dynamic resistor can be switched off when the capacitor voltage
decreases below Vdc + v1 + v2 . This same control scheme is
exploited during the battery-charging operation. For battery
charging, the front-end converter is designed to maintain a volt-
age more than Vdc + v1 + v2 but less than Vdc + v1 + v2 + v3 .
Thus, automatically, the reverse-power-flow operation gets ac-
tivated, and the battery gets charged. Fig. 4(a) shows the control
scheme in a pictorial form. Fig. 4(b) shows the simulation result
depicting the dynamic response of the dc-link voltage after
BHATTACHARYA et al.: FLYBACK CONVERTER TOPOLOGY FOR HYBRID ELECTRIC VEHICLES 81

Fig. 5. Proposed winding patterns of the primary and secondary windings.

the sudden application of powering and regenerative modes.

It is to be noted that before 1 s, the converter is operating
at no load which results in discontinuous mode of operation.
Therefore, the dc-link voltage oscillates between the hysteresis
band confined by Vdc and Vdc + v1 .

IV. I MPLEMENTATION I SSUES

The converter was designed and manufactured according to
the aforementioned concept, and a few implementation issues
are explained hereinafter.

A. Coupled-Inductor Design
In hard-switched flyback converter, the energy stored in the
leakage inductance of the coupled inductor gets dissipated
through the parasitic of the switch. Because of this, a high-
frequency ringing is observed at the switching edge. The peak
amplitude of the ringing voltage can be very high, depending on
the energy stored in the leakage inductance. For an application
like electric vehicle, the current is considerably high. This
means that the energy stored in the leakage inductance is also
considerably high. Thus, it may result in a very high voltage
spike which may damage the switch. One option to reduce this
spike is by using a passive snubber circuit. A passive snubber
protects the device but results in high power loss. To eliminate
this power loss, active snubber circuits can be used at the cost
of extra components. However, the strategy followed in the
proposed scheme is to reduce the leakage inductance itself.
First, the transformer is designed, and cross-sectional areas
of the primary and secondary windings are found out. Let the
designed value of the cross section of the primary be A1 and
that of the secondary be A2. Now, let a wire of a single cross-
sectional area A3 be chosen for winding the transformer. If
A3 is much less than A1 and A2 and if A1/A3 = n1 and
A2/A3 = n2, then the primary will comprise n1 parallel wires,
and the secondary will comprise n2 parallel wires of cross-
sectional area A3. If n1/n2 = 2, then, after winding two wires
of the primary, one wire of the secondary is wound, and it
is continued until all the parallel wires are wound. Using this
technique, extensive reduction in the leakage inductance was
achievable. Leakage inductance dropped to less than 0.1% of
the inductance of the coupled inductor. The winding patterns
of the primary and secondary windings are shown in Fig. 5
Fig. 6. (a) Building up the capacitor voltage without soft start. (b) Building
up the capacitor voltage with soft start.
when the turns ratio between the primary and the secondary
is 1 : 2. All the layers are parallel to each other.
B. Soft Start
One more important aspect to be taken care of in the imple-
mentation is building the capacitor voltage. It is to be noted
that there is no current controller. Therefore, because of the
second-order-type response, there can be high initial current
during the building up of capacitor voltage. This high current is
dangerous for the semiconductor switches, and it can saturate
the core of the coupled inductor also. This problem is taken
care of by the soft-start strategy. The converter is operated
at fixed duty cycle of 75%. However, at the start, the duty
cycle is linearly increased from 0% to 75%. Because of this,
there is no significant overshoot of current. This phenomenon
is verified using simulation, and the simulation result is shown
in Fig. 6. Fig. 6(a) shows the dc bus voltage and the primary
current when the primary switch is pulsed with 75% duty
cycle at the start. Thus, heavy current overshoot is observed.
Fig. 6(b) shows the dc voltage and current waveform when
the dc-link voltage is built up using soft start, i.e., duty cycle
is slowly increased from 0% to 75% in a linear fashion. The
simulation result shows that overshoot in the primary current is
very less.
82
Fig. 7. Operation of the converter in forward power flow. Channel 1 (fourth
waveform from top) (12.8 A/div)secondary-diode current. Channel 2 (sec-
ond waveform from top) (25.6 A/div)primary-switch current. Channel 3
(first waveform from top) (200 V/div)voltage across the primary switch.
Channel 4 (third waveform from top) (500 V/div)voltage across the sec-
ondary diode.
Fig. 8. Secondary-diode voltage of the two adjacent phases of the four-phase
flyback converter during forward-power-flow operation.
V. E XPERIMENTAL R ESULTS
A prototype of the proposed bidirectional converter is made
and experimentally verified. This converter is tested for both
forward and reverse power flows. For forward power flow, the
converter is tested with a resistive load and for reverse power
flow, the dc-link capacitor of this converter is charged from
mains using a diode rectifier. The output capacitor voltage dur-
ing reverse-power-flow mode is maintained higher compared
with that during forward-power-flow mode, which is evident
from Fig. 4(b). The reason for maintaining the voltage high
during reverse power flow is that, during charging, there is an
increase in the terminal voltage of the battery, and because the
duty cycle of operation is fixed, and if the voltage is less, then
the charging rate will be less. Fig. 7 describes the operation
of the system during forward power flow. It shows the switch
voltages and the switch currents of a single leg. It can be seen
that even without using a snubber, the voltage overshoot at
the switching edges is very less. This explains the advantage
of the transformer winding technique followed here. Fig. 8
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 56, NO. 1, JANUARY 2009
Fig. 9. Operation of the converter during battery charging from mains.
Channel 1 (fourth waveform from top) (2.56 A/div)secondary-switch
current. Channel 2 (second waveform from top) (5.12 A/div)primary-diode
current. Channel 3 (first waveform from top) (200 V/div)voltage across the
primary diode. Channel 4 (third waveform from top) (500 V/div)voltage
across the secondary switch.
Fig. 10. Converter output voltage during soft starting and resistive loading of
the converter (scale: x-axis: 5 s/div; y-axis: 100 V/div).
shows the secondary diode voltage of two different phases dur-
ing the same mode of operation. Fig. 9 shows the primary diode
and secondary switch voltages and currents during charging
the battery from the mains. It can be noted that the current
directions are negative. This means that the current is flowing
from the capacitor to the battery. Figs. 7 and 8 are similar
to the waveforms shown in Fig. 3(a) and (c) because both of
them are in CCM. Whereas for reverse power flow, Fig. 9 is
not similar to Fig. 3(b) and (d) because the experimental result
of Fig. 9 is in DCM and the simulation results of Fig. 3(b)
and (d) are in CCM. Fig. 10 shows the dynamic response
of the converter during forward-power-transfer mode. Initial
portion of the response shows the soft starting of the dc-link
voltage. After that, because of no-load operation, the output
voltage oscillates between the hysteresis band. Then, after
the converter is loaded, the dc-link voltage comes out of the
hysteresis band and falls to a lesser value which is the effect
of constant duty cycle of operation. However, the controller
for the traction inverter compensates for this dc-link voltage
variation.
BHATTACHARYA et al.: FLYBACK CONVERTER TOPOLOGY FOR HYBRID ELECTRIC VEHICLES
VI. C ONCLUSION
This paper proposes a four-phase bidirectional flyback dcdc
converter which serves the role of an MPP interface for
electric and hybrid electric vehicle applications. The bidirec-
tional nature of the converter allows battery charging dur-
ing regeneration and also from mains. The multiple phases
give the flexibility of paralleling multiple batteries. Simple
hysteresis control is used for converter control. Because of
the four converters operating with 90 phase shift with fixed
75% duty cycle of operation, the capacitor ripple current is
also reduced. The novel transformer design technique drasti-
cally reduces the leakage inductance and eliminates the re-
quirement of snubber. Furthermore, it should be noted that
the MPP interface could be made between any given bat-
tery voltage and dc-link voltage by only tuning the turns
ratio of the flyback transformers. The scheme is experimen-
tally verified, and the experimental results are presented.
When it comes to the analysis of dcdc converter, efficiency
is a major factor of concern. Because the proposed converter is
a hard-switched one, the efficiency is definitely less than that
of soft-switched converters. However, the drastic reduction in
leakage inductance limited the losses mostly to switching and
conduction losses. From the practically measured parameters
of the converter and using an IGBT datasheet, the theoretical
operating efficiency of the converter was found to be near
96% from part-load to full-load conditions, assuming that the
converter operates in CCM. It is a fact that a typical hybrid car
like Toyota Prius uses a 50-kW motor according to its THS II
technology, whereas the proposed system is tested only for
6 kW. There are two ways of increasing the power rating of
the system. If the device current ratings are doubled, then the
flyback transformers have to be wound with double number
of parallel windings, and also, the core size will be increased.
However, the transformer winding technique will be the same
as explained in Section IV-A. In that way, the system will
be rated for 12 kW. However, this will lead to the use of
higher AH batteries. An easier way to double the power rating
is to use one more system similar to Fig. 2 and shorting
both the system in the capacitor side. This will increase the
associated control and drive circuitry. However, with the re-
cent development in power semiconductor technology where
devices come with integrated driver and protection circuitry,
the space and component count constraints are drastically
reduced.
A PPENDIX
This section provides the following specifications of the
prototype converter which was built:
1) nominal battery voltage: 60 V;
2) nominal output voltage: 330 V;
3) switching frequency: 20 kHz;
4) turns ratio: 63/31;
5) nominal power: 6 kW;
6) IGBT part number: SKM50GB123D.
83
R EFERENCES
[1] A. Emadi, Y. J. Lee, and K. Rajashekara, Power electronics and motor
drives in electric, hybrid electric, and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles,
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 22372245, Jun. 2008.
[2] F. Caricchi, F. Crescimbini, G. Noia, and D. Pirolo, Experimental study
of a bidirectional DCDC converter for the DC link voltage control and
the regenerative braking in PM motor drives devoted to electrical vehi-
cles, in Proc. IEEE APEC, Orlando, FL, Feb. 1994, vol. 1, pp. 381386.
[3] F. Caricchi, F. Crescimbini, F. G. Capponi, and L. Solero, Study
of bi-directional buckboost converter topologies for application in
electrical vehicle motor drives, in Proc. IEEE APEC, Feb. 1998, vol. 1,
pp. 287293.
[4] C.-M. Wang, Novel zero-voltage-transition PWM DCDC converters,
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 254262, Feb. 2006.
[5] B.-R. Lin and F.-Y. Hsieh, Soft-switching zetaflyback converter with
a buckboost type of active clamp, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 54,
no. 5, pp. 28132822, Oct. 2007.
[6] F. Z. Peng, H. Li, G.-J. Su, and J. S. Lawler, A new ZVS bidirectional
DCDC converter for fuel cell and battery application, IEEE Trans.
Power Electron, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 5465, Jan. 2004.
[7] H. S.-H. Chung, W.-L. Cheung, and K. S. Tang, A ZCS bidirectional
flyback DC/DC converter, IEEE Trans. Power Electron, vol. 19, no. 6,
pp. 14262434, Nov. 2004.
[8] O. Garcia, P. Zumel, A. de Castro, and J. A. Cobos, Automotive DCDC
bidirectional converter made with many interleaved buck stages, IEEE
Trans. Power Electron., vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 578586, May 2006.
[9] L. Solero, A. Lidozzi, and J. A. Pomilio, Design of multiple-input
power converter for hybrid vehicles, in Proc. IEEE APEC, vol. 2,
pp. 11451151.
[10] M. Michon, J. L. Duarte, and M. Hendrix, A three port bi-directional
converter for hybrid fuel cell systems, in Proc. IEEE PESC, Aachen,
Germany, Jun. 2004, pp. 47364742.
[11] H. Tao, A. Kotsopoulos, J. L. Duarte, and M. A. M. Hendrix, Fam-
ily of multiport bidirectional DCDC converters, Proc. Inst. Elect.
Eng.Electr. Power Appl., vol. 153, no. 3, pp. 451458, May 2006.
[12] R.-J. Wai, L.-W. Liu, and R.-Y. Duan, High-efficiency voltage-clamped
DCDC converter with reduced reverse-recovery current and switch-
voltage stress, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 272280,
Feb. 2006.
[13] R.-J. Wai, C.-Y. Lin, R.-Y. Duan, and Y.-R. Chang, High-efficiency
DCDC converter with high voltage gain and reduced switch stress,
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 354364, Feb. 2007.
[14] T. Bhattacharya, V. S. Giri, K. Mathew, and L. Umanand, Multi power
port converter for hybrid electric vehicles using multi phase bidirectional
fly-back topology, in Proc. IEEE ICIT, Dec. 2006, pp. 12011205.
Tanmoy Bhattacharya received the B.E. degree in
electrical and electronics engineering from the Na-
tional Institute of Technology, Tiruchirapalli, India,
in 2002, and the M.Sc.(Eng.) degree in power elec-
tronics from the Indian Institute of Science (IISc),
Bangalore, in 2005. He is currently working toward
the Ph.D. degree at the Centre for Electronics Design
and Technology, IISc.
His current areas of research include hybrid
electric vehicles, traction drives, windsolar hybrid
systems, etc.
V. Shriganesh Giri received the B.Tech. degree from
the College of Engineering, Trivandrum, India, in
2004, and the M.Tech. degree from the Indian Insti-
tute of Science, Bangalore, India, in 2006.
He is currently with NVIDIA, Bangalore. His
research interests include analog and digital circuit
design, hybrid electric vehicles, etc.
84 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 56, NO. 1, JANUARY 2009

K. Mathew received the B.E. degree in electronics L. Umanand received the B.S. degree in electron-
and communication engineering from the KVG Col- ics and communications from Bangalore University,
lege of Engineering, Sullia, India, in 1994, and the Bangalore, India, in 1987, and the M.Tech degree
M.Tech degree from the Indian Institute of Science, in electronics design and the Ph.D. degree from
Bangalore, India, in 2006. the Centre for Electronics Design and Technol-
He is currently a Lecturer in electronics and ogy (CEDT), Indian Institute of Science (IISc),
communication engineering with Mahatma Gandhi Bangalore, in 1989 and 1996, respectively. His
University, Kerala, India. His research interests in- Ph.D. thesis was in the area of control for high-
clude embedded systems, power electronics, and performance induction motors drives.
electromechanical systems. He is currently a Principal Research Scientist with
CEDT, IISc. His major research interests include
photovoltaic system design, bond graph modeling of power electronic systems,
high-performance control of induction motors, designing for reliability, and
hybrid electric vehicles.