Electr Eng
DOI 10.1007/s00202-017-0552-0
ORIGINAL PAPER
Efficiency optimization of a conventional boost DC/DC converter
Mehmed Çelebi1
Received: 27 November 2014 / Accepted: 1 May 2017
© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017
Abstract In this paper, a numerical multivariable efficiency
optimization of a Conventional DC/DC boost converter is
presented. The optimization based on efficiency function
includes parameters of both frequency and coil values. An
experimental data population has created regarding to fixed
input and output values to achieve a multivariable optimiza-
tion procedure. The optimum frequency and coil values are
obtained from experimental results to achieve maximum
efficiency and compared with genetic algorithm simulation
results.
Keywords Efficiency · Optimization · Boost converter · GA
1 Introduction
As boost converters are widely used in industrial applica-
tions, there are many topologies and methods to reduce
losses, to improve the efficiency. One of the special appli-
cations of the optimization related to magnetic material and
operation points, which includes a photo voltaic system, is
presented in [1]. The other special issues are for wind tri-
bunes. Simulation and experimental results of a variable
switching technique method are proposed for a permanent
magnet generator in wind turbine in case of different load
rates [2]. A variable switching technique algorithm is applied
to wind turbine application by experimental results in [3],
and it concludes higher efficiency. Also an efficiency opti-
mization of the boost converter is presented in a conference
publication subject to an improved method in wind tur-
B Mehmed Çelebi
mcelebi@atauni.edu.tr
1 Department of Electrical Engineering, Atatürk University,
Erzurum, Turkey
bine with a permanent magnet generator at lower load rates
[4]. In general applications for bidirectional converters, a
converter scheme is implemented with a coupled inductor
by using only three power switches, while the system has
large voltage diversity with high efficiency [5]. A coupled-
inductor bidirectional converter is proposed with only three
power switches to fulfill the objective of bidirectional current
control and to reduce the switching losses, and it con-
cludes a 95% maximum efficiency according to experimental
results [6]. The bidirectional DC–DC converter based on
the four-switch non-inverting buck boost is presented for a
wide voltage range [7]. A new current sharing technique is
developed through online parameter estimation for parallel
DC–Dc boost converters in [8] to maximize efficiency. Sil-
icon carbide (SiC)-based boost converter is presented with
the advantages of these semiconductors over silicon ones, in
terms of efficiency [9].
A boost converter (stepup converter) is a DC-to-DC power
converter with an output voltage greater than its input volt-
age. It is a class of switched-mode power supply (SMPS)
containing at least two semiconductors (a diode and a tran-
sistor) and at least one energy storage element, a capacitor,
inductor, or the two in combination. Filters made of capaci-
tors (sometimes in combination with inductors) are normally
added to the circuit to reduce output voltage ripple. Since
boost converter is a well-known topology, they are used
intensively especially in photovoltaic and wind turbine appli-
cations today.
The heating loss of the used switching semiconductor is
the most affecting factor of the efficiency of the converter.
Furthermore, much difference between input and output
voltages considerably affects the efficiency of the system.
Besides, appropriate values of coil and frequency are also
must be considered in the terms of efficiency. As it is clear
from to the references above, boost converters are designed
123
 Electr Eng

+ + The switch is off,

L RL
VD D    
VC di L 1 VC R RC R
= Vg − − iL + R L − VD
dt L R + RC RC + R
S
C R  
Vg dVC 1 R VC
=− iL − (2)
RC dt C RC + R R + RC

So,

Fig. 1 Real model of boost converter di L 1 VC R(1 − D)
= Vg D − i L R L −
dt L R + RC
  
RC R(1 − D)
to produce a feed backed or fixed output at definite ranges. −DVCE − i L − VD (1 − D)
RC + R
In this study the system to be optimized is a system which  
dVC 1 VC R(1 − D)
produces a fixed output voltage by a constant voltage source. =− − iL (3)
Because of the efficiency optimization depends on reduction dt C R + RC RC + R
of losses, this study will be a numerical solution on the ques-
tion of what is the appropriate frequency and coil value in This is the solution of i L ,
terms of maximum efficiency.  
− R L + −11−D −1 t
(R + RC )(−DVCE + VG )
L
RC +R
i L (t) = C1 e +
A
2 Theoretical approach ((−1 + D)(RC + R) + R D)VD
+
A
For the efficiency optimization of the real model of boost VC R(−1 + D)
+ (4)
converter (Fig. 1) the losses must be determined first. Capac- A
itor, electrical, magnetic losses are listed in Table 1, as well
as the switching and conductivity losses occur in the semi- Here, A = (R L + R(1 − D))RC + R L R and C1 = derivative
conductor device. constant, D = duty cycle, VD = diode voltage drop,
The switch is on, VG = source voltage, R = load, RC = the resistor of capaci-
tor, R L = the resistor of inductor, VCE = the voltage between
di L 1  emitter and collector. The solution of VC (voltage of capaci-
= Vg − i L R L − VCE tor) is,
dt L  
dVC 1 VC
=− (1) VC (t) = i L R(R + RC )2 (1 − D) + e
1
− C(R+R
C)
t
C1 (5)
dt C R + RC

Table 1 Continuous conduction

2 [10]
normalized to IOUT NFET DC power PNDC = RNFET IOUT
2 D
2
RNFET IAC
Ripple current NFET power loss PNAC = 12 D 3 (1 − D)2
Inductor DC power loss PL DC = R L IOUT
2

R I2
Ripple current inductor power loss PL AC = L12AC D 2 (1 − D)2
V2 C f
CDS capacitor power loss PC DS = out 2DS SW (1 − D)2
V2 C f
CD capacitor power loss PD = out 2D SW (1 − D)2
IDS and VDS overlap losses due to Inductor DC PCCDC = VOUT2IOUT (tRISE + tFALL ) f SW
current
VOUT IOUT
IDS and VDS overlap losses due to Inductor ripple PCCAC = 4 (tRISE − tFALL ) f SW D(1 − D)2
current
Diode reverse recovery charge loss PQ RR = VOUT Q RR f SW (1 − D)2
Output power POUT = IOUT VOUT (1 − D)2
Input power PIN = IOUT VIN
IOUT
Input current IIN = 1−D

123
Electr Eng

i L is the current of inductance here. Besides the equations Table 2 Cold and hot resistance mH Cold Hot
concerning efficiency can be written below: values of the coil used in the
circuit 0.91 1.342 2.4
PIN − (PSW + PIND + PDIO ) 1.357 1.652 2.3
η= (6)
PIN 2.098 2.195 2.2
 
IOUT 2 3.728 2.85 2.9
PSW = RNMOS D (7)
1− D
 
IOUT 2 Table 3 Data for load
PIND = R L (8) characteristic
Voltage (V) Current (A)
1− D
27 0.041
PDIO = R D IOUT
2
+ VF IOUT (9)
41 0.046
VOUT − VIN η
D= (10) 57 0.053
VOUT 72 0.06

PSW , PIND , PDIO are inductor, switching and diode losses

while PIN source power. RNMOS is the MOS resistance. The Table 4 The boundaries of the model
first-order model can be determined as, Parameter Min Max
 
VIN IOUT IOUT 2 Source voltage (V) 6 12
= VF IOUT + R D IOUT
2
+ RN D
1− D 1− D Switching frequency (Hz) 400 1200
  Coil (mH) 0.96 3.725
IOUT 2
+R L + VOUT IOUT (11)
1− D

And this is the high-order model,
PIN = PF + PD + PN + PL + PCDS + PC D + POUT (12)
PCDS is the power loss between drain and source of the MOS-
FET, while PCD is drain capacitor loss.
3 Numerical approach
Although some analytic solutions are presented, the mis-
match values between theoretical and real results occur. The
nonlinear behavior of devices and inconsistent switching
losses related to heat characteristic are the reason of this
affect. Since analysis achieved by the equations in (6)–(12)
and in Table 1 gives improper results, specifically a numer-
ical solution and model is presented in this study. Besides
GA simulation results are compared with this approach. The
analytic expression of the heat characteristic of the load must
be defined first. Experimental hot and cold resistance values
of the coil used in demonstration and related parameter are
given in Tables 2 and 3.
The expression of output load current as a function of
output voltage including heat characteristic is,
Iout = 42.42∗ 10−5 Vout + 29.1∗ 10−3 (A) (13)
This analytic expression is used for finding load current
to simplify the analysis. Then boundaries must be defined
for the numerical modeling of the system. According to
boundaries the definition of the problem is the calculation
of appropriate both coil and switching frequency values for
a mixed output voltage and load, regarding maximum effi-
ciency. The boundaries are shown in Table 4. As these limits
are full experimental, it is seen that the fixed output 70 V
voltage could not be produced at lower values of 400 Hz
and upper ones of 1200 Hz. For the lower coil values of
0.96 mH the losses are maximum, while for the upper values
of 3.72 mH the output voltage value cannot reach to 70 V. The
input voltage is assumed as constant accumulator voltage as
12 V. Switching device is chosen as MOSFET IRF 760.
It is necessary an experimental data pool to implement the
mathematic model of the system. Therefore, the data pool has
created respect to the boundaries as seen in Table 5. So now,
the analytical expression of efficiency can be determined in
terms of coil and frequency value for the mixed output voltage
of 72, and then a multivariable optimization procedure will
be welcome.
The reader can see the experimental values of frequencies
and coil values for a mixed 70 V output in Table 5. It can be
noticed that suitable coil and frequency values have existed
to determine 70 V output. Because there are no exact values,
the coil and frequency values are calculated by interpola-
tion. Efficiency optimization will be done by means of these
interpolation values between 1300 and 400 Hz for a mixed
output, and they are listed in Table 6. The analytical equation
and variation of coil values versus to frequency is depicted
in Fig. 2.
To make a multivariable optimization we must find the
component of efficiency. Efficiency versus both L (mH) and

123
 Electr Eng

Table 5 Data pool

Switching frequency (Hz) Vin (V) 12 12 12
L (mH) 3.57 2.089 1.358

1300 Source current (A) 0.31 0.29 0.72

Output voltage (V) 40 55 65
Output current (A) 0.045837 0.052297 0.056927
Efficiency (%) 0.492869 0.826535 0.428271
1200 Source current (A) 0.33 0.42 0.75
Output voltage (V) 47 63.5 71
Output current (A) 0.04874 0.056228 0.059714
Efficiency (%) 0.578482 0.708425 0.471074
1100 Source current (A) 0.355 0.515 0.78
Output voltage (V) 52 68 75
Output current (A) 0.05094 0.058324 0.061544
Efficiency (%) 0.621808 0.641753 0.493139
1000 Source current (A) 0.39 0.585 0.82
Output voltage (V) 55.7 68.6 77.8
Output current (A) 0.052617 0.058603 0.062802
Efficiency (%) 0.62623 0.572671 0.496547
900 Source current (A) 0.425 0.64 0.88
Output voltage (V) 58.6 69.4 79.3
Output current (A) 0.053951 0.058974 0.063467
Efficiency (%) 0.619905 0.532914 0.476603
800 Source current (A) 0.46 0.685 0.95
Output voltage (V) 59.6 71 79.7
Output current (A) 0.054414 0.059714 0.063643
Efficiency (%) 0.58751 0.515774 0.444942
700 Source current (A) 0.51 0.75 1.05
Output voltage (V) 61.7 72 80.2
Output current (A) 0.055389 0.060174 0.063862
Efficiency (%) 0.558418 0.481392 0.406486
600 Source current (A) 0.56 0.83 1.15
Output voltage (V) 63.6 72.7 79
Output current (A) 0.056274 0.060495 0.063335
Efficiency (%) 0.532596 0.441567 0.362568
500 Source current (A) 0.64 0.935 1.27
Output voltage (V) 65.2 72.2 76
Output current (A) 0.05702 0.060266 0.061996
Efficiency (%) 0.484078 0.387807 0.309165
400 Source current (A) 0.73 1.08 1.41
Output voltage (V) 65.5 71.2 70.1
Output current (A) 0.05716 0.059806 0.059298
Efficiency (%) 0.427396 0.328563 0.245673
Bold values indicate the used data for analytical expression of the topology

f (Hz) diagrams are shown in Figs. 3 and 4, respectively, and
their analytical expressions are in (14) and (15).
eff(L(mH)) = −27.49∗ L 5 + 269.1∗ L 4 − 1045∗ L 3
+2012∗ L 2 − 1920∗ L + 726 (14)
eff( f (Hz)) = −2.282∗ 10−19∗ f 7 + 1.209∗ 10−15∗ f 6
−2.697∗ 10−12∗ f 5 + 3.28∗ 10−9∗ f 4
−2.344∗ 10−6∗ f 3 + 9.825∗ 10−4∗ f 2
−0.2224∗ f + 21.22 (15)

123
Electr Eng

Table 6 Frequency, coil and f (Hz) L (mH) Efficiency + p23∗ f 5 + p24∗ f 4 + p25∗ f 3 + p26∗ f 2
efficiency values determined by 
interpolation for the fixed 70 V
+ p27∗ f + p28 (16)
1200 1.45 0.5
output voltage
1100 1.88 0.6
According to multivariable optimization theory (first-
1000 1.98 0.56
order conditions), a necessary condition for a differentiable
900 2.045 0.53 function f (x, y) to have maximum or a minimum at an inte-
800 2.173 0.524 rior point (x0 , y0 ) of its domain is that (x0 , y0 ) is a stationary
700 1.5 0.49 point of f , that is:
600 1.575 0.47
500 1.587 0.42 ∂f ∂f
(x0 , y0 ) = 0, (x0 , y0 ) = 0 (17)
400 1.51 0.35 ∂x ∂y
Bold values represent the
selected values for the efficiency So,
function
∂η 5 3
Finally, 3D diagram of efficiency of the system is shown = ∗ p11∗ L 4 + 2∗ p12∗ L 3 + ∗ p13∗ L 2
∂L 2 2
in Fig. 5. It can be clearly seen from Fig. 5 that the optimum 1
values of two parameters are at 1000 Hz and 1.9 mH approx- + p14∗ L + ∗ p15 = 0
2
imately. The obtained function of efficiency is in (16). The ∂η 7
= ∗ p21∗ f 6 + 3∗ p22∗ f 5
reason why it is multiplied by 0.5 is the effect of frequency, ∂f 2
and inductance parameter is estimated as 50%. 5
+ ∗ p23∗ f 4 + 2∗ p24∗ f 3
 2
eff(L(mH)) = 0.5∗ p11∗ L 5 + p12∗ L 4 3 1
+ ∗ p25∗ f 2 + p26∗ f + ∗ p27 = 0 (18)
2 2
∗ 3 ∗ 2 ∗
+ p13 L + p14 L + p15 L + p16
 The solution of (17) and (18) is 1.53, 1.83, 2.12, and 2.35 mH
eff( f (Hz)) = 0.5∗ p21∗ f 7 + p22∗ f 6 for coil value, 375 and 1137 Hz (others are complex) for fre-

Fig. 2 The polynomial curve

L vs. ff
fitting of the variation of coil 2.1
fit 1
values versus frequency 2

1.9
L (mH)

1.8

1.7

1.6

1.5
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200
f (Hz)

Fig. 3 The variation of 0.6

efficiency versus coil values eff vs. L
fit 1
0.55

0.5
eff (%)

0.45

0.4

0.35
1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2 2.1
L (mH)

123
 Electr Eng

Fig. 4 The variation of 0.6

efficiency frequency values

0.55 eff vs. ff

fit

0.5

eff (%)
0.45

0.4

0.35
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200
f (Hz)

Fig. 5 3D plot of the efficiency

function

quency. The optimum values which give the higher efficiency
are 1.83 mH and 1137 Hz respectively.
Genetic algorithm is an evolution algorithm modeling
the biologic procedure, and optimizing functions. The algo-
rithm consists of well-known three operators: reproduction,
crossover, mutation. Reproduction is to obtain a mate pool
which contains individuals according to their fitness values.
Then the best individuals are chosen from this pool. The
next steps are crossing over and mutation. There is very
strong relationship between generation number (the number
of loops) and fitness value. The algorithm is highly sensi-
tive to the initial conditions, in other words, pool mate. In
addition, selection and crossing over methods are especially
important parts of algorithm. GA may find local optimals
with these operators, not the real extramums. To overcome
this disadvantage mutation is used. The real parameter-based
GA is simulated in this study, and the fitness function of
the system is the efficiency function in (16). One of the
important issues in GA is the bounds and as the same in
Fig. 5.
Population and subpopulation number of 50 and 10
individuals are selected, respectively, for GA. Mutation oper-
ator is 1%. Weighted selection method is chosen for the
paper. Crossing over dominant genotype the first chromo-
some of subpopulation between the dominant parameter
of the last chromosome has an advantage of which elim-
inates unwanted individuals. Final results are listed in
Table 7.

123
Electr Eng

Table 7 The final results depend on multivariable optimization theory References

and GA simulation
Final results 1. Beltrame F, Dupont FH, Sartori HC, Cancian EC, Rech C,
Renes Pinheiro J (2013)Efficiency optimization of DC/DC boost
Multi variable optimization approach L = 1.83 mH converter applied to the photovoltaic system. In: Industrial elec-
Switching frequency (Hz) Source current (A) 0.588 tronics society, IECON 2013—39th annual conference of the IEEE
publication year: 2013, pp 706–711. doi:10.1109/IECON.2013.
1137 Output voltage (V) 70.2 6699221
Output current (A) 0.059344 2. Kwak D-K, Lee S-H, Jung D-Y (2009) A new buck-boost dc/dc
Efficiency (%) 0.590413 converter of high efficiency by soft switching technique. In: Power
electronics and motion control conference, 2009. IPEMC ’09. IEEE
Genetic algorithm L = 1.8303 mH 6th international publication year: 2009, pp 1295–1299. doi:10.
1109/IPEMC.2009.5157585
Switching frequency (Hz) Source current (A) 0.588
3. Ivanovic Z, Blanusa B, Knezic M (2012) Algorithm for efficiency
1140 Output voltage (V) 70.22 optimization of the boost converter in wind turbine. In: Power
Output current (A) 0.05904 electronics and motion control conference (EPE/PEMC), 2012
Efficiency (%) 0.5875 15th international publication year: 2012, pp DS3c.9-1–DS3c.9-
6. doi:10.1109/EPEPEMC.2012.6397345
4. Ivanovic Z, Dokić B, Blanusa B, Knežić M (2010) Boost converter
efficiency optimization in wind turbine. In: Power electronics and
4 Conclusion motion control conference (EPE/PEMC), 2010 14th international
publication year: 2010, pp T3-1–T3-5. doi:10.1109/EPEPEMC.
2010.5606839
A numeric multivariable optimization of a conventional 5. Wai R-J, Duan R-Y, Jheng K-H (2012) High-efficiency bidirec-
DC/DC boost converter has been presented and compared tional dc–dc converter with high-voltage gain. IET Power Electron
with GA in this paper. To achieve the optimization procedure 5(2):173–184. doi:10.1049/iet-pel.2011.0194
6. Wai Rong-Jong, Duan Rou-Yong (2007) High-efficiency bidirec-
efficiency function is obtained regarding coil and frequency tional converter for power sources with great voltage diversity.
values. Mixed input voltage and constant output voltage val- IEEE Trans Power Electron 22(5):1986–1996
ues are the initial conditions for the system. The goal of 7. Stahl G, Rodriguez M, Maksimovic D (2012) A high efficiency
the paper is to determine the appropriate frequency and coil bidirectional buck-boost DC–DC converter. In: Applied power
electronics conference and exposition (APEC), 2012 twenty-
values for maximum efficiency. A multivariable optimiza- seventh annual IEEE publication year: 2012, pp 1362–1367
tion theory has implemented and validated by test results. 8. Renaudineau H, Houari A, Shahin A, Martin J-P, Pierfederici
Interpolation method has used to obtain fixed 70 V output S, Meibody-Tabar F, Gerardin B (2014) Efficiency optimization
voltage from data values. Experimental results reveal that through current-sharing for paralleled DC–DC boost converters
with parameter estimation. IEEE Trans Power Electron 29(2):759–
the maximum efficiency has obtained for 1137 Hz switch- 767. doi:10.1109/TPEL.2013.2256369
ing and 1.83 mH coil values. Also GA results show a slight 9. Abbatelli L, Macauda M, Catalisano G (2014) Fully SiC based
difference between multivariable optimization approach. So high efficiency boost converter. In: Applied power electronics con-
this application shows that all topology of converters can ference and exposition (APEC), 2014 twenty-ninth annual IEEE
publication year: 2014, pp 1835–1837. doi:10.1109/APEC.2014.
be optimized by numerical methods via GA for maximum 6803555
efficiency. 10. Eichhorn T Boost converter efficiency through accurate calcu-
lations. In: IEEE conference publications, senior applications
Acknowledgements The author would like to thank to Ataturk Uni- engineer, national semiconductor, Grass Valley, Calif
versity for technical support.

123