1662 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 22, NO.

5, SEPTEMBER 2007

Multicell Interleaved Flyback

Using Intercell Transformers
Francois Forest, Member, IEEE, Eric Labouré, Thierry A. Meynard, Member, IEEE, and Jean-Jacques Huselstein

Abstract—An original converter composed of interleaved flyback

is presented. The cells are interconnected through intercell trans-
formers replacing the standard multi-winding inductors used as
insulation and storage magnetic device in the flyback. The combina-
tion of the interleaving effects and of the intercell transformer char-
acteristics allows eliminating the mains limitations of the standard
flyback due to the low performances of multiwindings inductors. In
a first part, the different ways to interleave galvanic insulated con-
verters as forward or flyback are briefly recalled. The second part
presents the intercell transformers and shows that they can be used
to interconnect interleaved converters cells. In the third and last
part, this particular magnetic interconnection is applied to inter-
leaved flyback cells and leads to create an “intercell transformer fly-
back”. Its specific properties and advantages are described. Experi- Fig. 1. Interleaved forward.
mental results, obtained on a 2-kW test bench are finally presented.
Index Terms—Coupled inductors, flyback, intercell transformer,
interleaved converters, interphase transformers. In the first section, some properties of interleaved control as
applied to the forward and flyback topologies are described and
the benefits obtained in case of parallel converters are shown. In
I. INTRODUCTION
the second section, the principles allowing replacing inductors
ARALLEL converters with interleaved control is an at- with intercell transformers in buck and buck-boost converters
P tractive technique in the field of low and medium voltage
(28—240 V) and high current. Fractioning power reduces the
are recalled. In the third section, the interleaved flyback with
intercell transformers, its operation and specific features are de-
switching stress (di/dt, voltage overshoot, ) and the harmonic scribed and compared with those of the single stage version and
spectrum resulting of interleaved patterns should allow a sig- those of other interleaved topologies. A 2-kW prototype allows
nificant reduction of filter size. In very low-power applications validating the theoretical analysis and demonstrates the advan-
( W), when galvanic insulation and even reversibility is tages of this topology.
required, the flyback is the simplest answer. However, many
applications (embedded networks, photovoltaic systems, fuel II. INTERLEAVING OF SMPS
cells) require a power that cannot be efficiently handled by a Most isolated SMPS can be interleaved (k identical con-
flyback (poor utilization of the magnetic device, voltage over- verters in parallel with identical control patterns phase-shifted
shoot induced by the leakage inductor). In this paper, an original by 360 /k), and the consequence of interleaving can be different
topology of interleaved flyback compatible with higher power from one topology to the other. In this section, this is detailed
is introduced. This multicell flyback uses intercell transformers. with the three most widespread topologies (forward, push-pull,
The flyback is a very simple converter even in its reversible con- and flyback) used in low-voltage application which is enough
figuration; however, using the magnetic component as inductors to reveal a significant part of the general properties associated
definitely induces poor compactness and efficiency. Using inter- with interleaved converters.
cell transformers, the problems associated with inductors should
vanish and reduced harmonic spectrum can be obtained with in- A. Forward
terleaved control.
Two variants of the interleaved forward converter with k for-
ward blocks in parallel are shown in Fig. 1, one involves series
Manuscript received November 16, 2006; revised January 23, 2007. Recom-
mended for publication by Associate Editor C. K. Tse.
connection of the secondary circuits and the other parallel con-
F. Forest and J.-J. Huselstein are with the Laboratoire d’Electrotechnique de nection [1], [2].
Montpellier (LEM), Université de Montpellier II, Montpellier 34095, France 1) Parallel Outputs: With secondaries connected in parallel,
(e-mail: forest@univ-montp2.fr).
E. Labouré is with the French National Research Institute for Transport and
a k-way interleaved forward converter requires k inductors oper-
Safety (SATIE), Cachan 94235, France. ating at the switching frequency F and k transformers operating
T. Meynard is with the Laboratoire d’Electrotechnique et d’Electronique In- at F as well (this applies for being a particular case
dustrielle (LEEI), Unité Mixte de Recherche, Toulouse 31071, France. in which only one output inductor is necessary).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. 2) Series Outputs: Connecting secondary circuits in series
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPEL.2007.904194 allows combining the rectified voltage waveforms and using a
0885-8993/$25.00 © 2007 IEEE
FOREST et al.: MULTICELL INTERLEAVED FLYBACK USING INTERCELL TRANSFORMERS
Fig. 2. Interleaved push-pull.
Fig. 3. Interleaved flyback.
single inductor. It is not a very good solution for low-output
voltages because of the number of diodes in series.
B. Push-Pull
The push-pull converter (Fig. 2—config 1: voltage-fed/output
inductor or Fig. 2—config 2: current-fed/input inductor) is well-
known for being well suited to the low voltage Power conversion
with numerous variants [1], [3]–[6]. It can also be interleaved
with two output connection options.
C. Flyback
Interleaving flybacks leads to the circuits in Fig. 3, with the
same series/parallel secondary variants.
1) Parallel Output: The interleaved flyback is well adapted
to the parallel secondary configuration because interleaved cur-
rents sum up to form a multilevel current waveform in the output
capacitor.
2) Series Output: By contrast, series connection of k sec-
ondary circuits requires k capacitors and k diodes in series.
This simple analysis of the circuits makes the interleaved fly-
back with parallel secondaries a good candidate for high current
applications.
D. Flyback Properties and Limitations
Although widely used in low power applications because of
its reduced part count (one transistor, one magnetic device, one
diode), it cannot be used for higher power mainly because gal-
vanic insulation is obtained by multiwinding inductors (often
improperly considered as a transformer) which gives low power
1663
Fig. 4. Intercell transformers. (a) Monolithic intercell transformer. (b) Associ-
ation of separated transformers.
density and efficiency, and because of the voltage overshoot at
turn-off resulting of the energy stored in the leakage inductance.
Nevertheless, its reduced part count is still an advantage in
reversible configurations (active switches on both primary and
secondary sides) and justifies a deeper analysis concerning fur-
ther extensions of this topology. In this paper, we want to show
that it is possible to take advantage of interleaved control while
solving the problem of power density associated with the in-
ductors. This will be discussed in Section V, after the complete
description of the proposed Topology.
III. INTERLEAVED CONVERTERS USING INTERCELL
TRANSFORMERS (IT)
A. Intercell Transformers
The basic principle of intercell transformers, also referred as
interphase transformers in high power rectifying applications,
in some case called improperly coupled inductors, has been
widely presented in the literature. They can be either monolithic
or made of separate transformers [7]–[13] like in Fig. 4, and
their function, in a ideal case, is to sum up the k voltages of a
polyphase system generated by k commutation cells as follows:
(1)
To express the general properties of the intercell transformer,
it is easier to consider symmetrical topologies (see the sim-
plified equivalent scheme shown in Fig. 5). Such a topology
could be obtained by building a “ring” with the basic shape of
Fig. 4(a), for example. In this scheme, the reluctances of all core
1664
Fig. 5. Simplified equivalent scheme for a symmetrical intercell transformer.
branches are neglected in regard with the leakage reluctances,
which also means that magnetizing currents are neglected. A de-
tailed study is presented in [14]. Another assumption, justified
by the scheme symmetry, is to consider a leakage reluctance
between each main branch (the main branches are those flowing
fluxes to ) of the core, each of these leakage reluctances
flows the total leakage flux divided by k. The total leakage
reluctance is with
From this scheme, the following equations can be established:
(2)
(3)
From (1) and (2), we get
(4)
From these relations, the equivalent scheme of Fig. 6 can be
deduced. The main property of intercell transformed (relation
1) is verified, but an output inductor has to be added, fitting
with the existence of the total leakage flux. It will be shown
later that this output inductance is in this case an advantage. In
a circuit like that of Fig. 4(b), the inductance is with the
leakage inductance of each transformer.
This electrical scheme is available for any topology of inter-
cell transformer even for asymmetrical magnetic cores such as
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 22, NO. 5, SEPTEMBER 2007
Fig. 6. Equivalents schemes for the intercell transformers.
the one in Fig. 4(a). In this case, the asymmetry only modifies
the flux distribution and the magnetizing currents.
An important characteristic of intercell transformers (and a
big difference compared with star connected uncoupled induc-
tors) is that the instantaneous current in any cell is equal to the
output current divided by .
Due to the winding parts of two adjacent phases placed in
the same window area, it should also be noted that the intercell
transformers really operate as transformers and have the same
advantages (compared to inductors); existence of winding con-
figurations giving a undidimensionnal field distribution and a
smaller increase of the resistance with frequency, no need for
airgap.
The optimal use of intercell transformers with a high number
of cells requires an appropriate permutated supply mode pro-
posed by the authors and described in [14]. This permutated
supply allows minimizing the fluxes in the cores and indirectly,
the core volume. It will be applied in the experimental part.
It must finally be recalled that the magnetizing currents have
been neglected in this analysis and will exist in the real intercell
transformers.
B. Interleaved Converters Using Intercell Transformers
The introduction of the intercell transformers is possible in
most of the interleaved converter topologies. Fig. 7 shows two
examples.
The first one, a classic buck topology, is described in some
publications, generally with four cells [12], [13]. The second
one, a buck-boost topology, has not been really considered. It
will be presented in the next part to introduce the intercell trans-
formers flyback.
IV. EXTENSION TO THE FLYBACK TOPOLOGIES
A. Principle
1) Buck-Boost: The operation of the intercell transformer
buck-boost is summarized by the chronograms of Fig. 8, with
the particular value (this arbitrary choice will be justified
in Section IV-A3). The shape of each voltage is iden-
tical to the voltage across the inductor of a standard single-cell
buck-boost. The internal voltage waveform of the intercell trans-
formers results from (1). The magnetizing currents are neglected
in the chronograms.
The internal voltage of the intercell transformers (frequency
kF, amplitude proportional to ) is applied to the internal
inductor that achieves the storage function. The current
FOREST et al.: MULTICELL INTERLEAVED FLYBACK USING INTERCELL TRANSFORMERS 1665

Fig. 7. Interleaved converters using IT (a) Interleaved buck. (b) Interleaved

buck-boost.

flowing through this inductor contains a current ripple

at frequency kF, according to the voltage waveform, and an
average value . It is equally distributed in the k cells (cur-
rents ), that results from the properties of intercell
transformers.
Like in classical interleaved topologies, the current ripple
is null for duty cycle (D) values equal to q/k with
.
The expression of the ripple current is

(5) Fig. 8. Theoretical waveforms of the interleaved buck-boost.

for each variation interval of D such as ,

with .
The term has to be associated to the interleaving effect on
the equivalent operating frequency. The evolution of the ripple
current versus D is shown in Fig. 9.
The current ripple in the output capacitor, of which waveform
is given in Fig. 8, is also significantly reduced by interleaving
and its literal value is

(6)

In the ideal case of a negligible current ripple , this cur-

rent ripple in the output capacitor has a rectangular waveform,
with a peak-to-peak value equal to .
2) Flyback: The topology of the intercell transformer flyback
can be directly deduced from the previous scheme by associ- Fig. 9. Current ripple in interleaved buck-boost using IT.
ating to each winding (primary) of the intercell transformers a
homologous winding (secondary). Considering the example of
the Fig. 4(a), this leads to create a two-side intercell transformer for a symmetrical intercell transformer is shown in Fig. 10(b).
of which the topology is given in Fig. 10(a). According to the ap- Reluctance is introduced to take the leakage flux between
proach of the previous section, the simplified equivalent scheme homologous windings into account ( is present in all the
1666 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 22, NO. 5, SEPTEMBER 2007

Fig. 10. Two-side intercell transformer. (a) Two-side monolithic intercell transformer. (b) Simplified equivalent scheme for a symmetrical intercell transformer.

branches but is not drawn to simplify the scheme). The magne-

tizing currents are always neglected.
The different equations of Section III-A are modified as
follows.
Voltage equations:

Fig. 11. Simplified scheme of the two-side intercell transformer.

From (7) and (8)

(7)

Current equations:
(9)

The equivalent scheme of Fig. 11 can be derived from (9):

the leakage inductor of the intercell transformer becomes a
coupled leakage inductor and additional leakage
inductors between primary and secondary windings are now
introduced.
The topology of the intercell transformer flyback (Fig. 12) is
directly derived from the scheme of Fig. 7(b) with the intercell
(8) transformers replaced the two-side intercell transformers. The
FOREST et al.: MULTICELL INTERLEAVED FLYBACK USING INTERCELL TRANSFORMERS
Fig. 12. Interleaved flyback using IT.
sum of Ampere-turn is identical to the Amp-
turn n of the initial buck-boost. In each cell, the distribution
of the currents is given by
Concerning all other features, the operating mode of the in-
tercell transformer flyback is similar to that of the buck-boost.
The numerous possible configurations of intercell transformers
can be used in the proposed flyback.
3) Cell Number: A critical feature is the determination of
the right cell number in order to obtain satisfying operating con-
ditions. Indeed, the principle of the intercell transformer is at-
tractive if a correct operating mode can been provided by using
the intrinsic leakage energy and avoiding a drastic decrease of
the coupling. Reducing the coupling is possible, but it would
lead to a significant decrease of the characteristics (volume, effi-
ciency ). A qualitative evaluation can be made by simply con-
sidering the relative ripple current existing in the windings. If the
intrinsic leakage inductor limits the current ripple value within
a reasonable range (20% to 50%), the goal is reached. This di-
rectly depends on the cell number, as will be now demonstrated
in the following part.
To achieve this demonstration, an intercell transformer made
of k separate transformer is considered. The design of each
transformer can be evaluated by the area product , that
can be associated to the power of the magnetic device [15], [16],
[17]. Under the assumption of a fixed core shape (Fig. 13), in
which all dimensions are linked by constant ratios, all the ge-
ometrical parameters can be expressed as functions of the area
product
In the same way, if the winding arrangement is the same for
any value of k, the leakage inductor of a transformer depends
on the turn number and on a geometrical function homogeneous
to a length, as follows:
1667
Fig. 13. Geometrical parameters of a transformer.
with , supply voltage, amplitude of the core induction,
and F switching frequency
(10)
The relation between and gives
(11)
where kVol is the total volume of the k transformers.
Finally, by using the (5) for the ripple output current ,
it becomes
(12)
For a given application, and F are fixed. Assuming a low
variation of the total volume kVol and of the induction ampli-
tude versus k, it can be observed that the current ripple
mainly depend on the cell number with a decrease proportional
to . Some parametric designs realized on real cases by the au-
thors, that cannot be presented here, have emphasized that kVol
and vary with k but also that the law stays the out-
standing tendency. In addition, these designs have put forward a
minimal cell number around 6 to 9, necessary to preserve an ac-
ceptable current ripple with the intrinsic leakage inductors. For
this reason, the present paper is based on examples with ,
the lower odd number in this range. The use of an even number
is possible but the odd number configurations are simplest to
study because they lead to symmetrical magnetic repartition in
the transformer cores [14].
B. Properties
In the respect of the previous assumption (number of cell suf-
ficient to limit relative current ripples), the interesting properties
of the intercell transformer flyback mainly concern the mag-
netic components, the switching stresses resulting of the leakage
inductors between primary and secondary windings being un-
changed. Nevertheless, the most important limitations of the
standard flyback are due to the inductor and if these limitations
1668
Fig. 14. Test bench scheme.
are reduced or eliminated, the problem of switching stresses can
be reasonably solved by introducing passive or active snubbers
[18]–[20].
The intercell transformers have the behavior of standard
transformers. The sum of amp-turn is null in the winding
window, leading to a monodimensional repartition of the
magnetic field favorable to the minimization of the winding
losses, if the conductor shape and the winding arrangement
are correctly chosen. This is an advantage compared with the
inductor of a standard flyback where the winding losses are
intrinsically much higher.
Another drawback of the inductors, in single or multicell
topologies, is the air gap that has an additional negative effect
on the winding losses. In the intercell transformer flyback, the
magnetic energy is very low as a results of interleaving and it is
stored in the natural leakage zones of the magnetic components,
without the negative previous effect.
To limit the inductor volume in a standard flyback, the discon-
tinuous current mode is frequently used [21]. This choice dra-
matically increases the RMS and peak-to-peak values of the cur-
rents flowing through the power stage. With the intercell trans-
former solution, the continuous current mode, minimizing the
switch losses, can be obtained without oversizing the magnetic
part, always if the number of cells is sufficient.
C. Experimental Results
To demonstrate the feasibility of the intercell transformer fly-
back, a 7-cell test bench has been realized, using seven separate
transformers arranged as shown on the scheme of Fig. 14. The
design of the test tries to simplify the practical realization and
is not dedicated to any specific application for this first step.
The turn ratio is 1:1 and the primary cells, supplied by a
100-V dc link, are asymmetrical half-bridges in order to avoid
the turn-off overshoot and losses due to the leakage inductors.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 22, NO. 5, SEPTEMBER 2007
Fig. 15. Current distribution in a transformer.
The secondary cells are simply constituted of a diode. The
primary and secondary cells have a current capability of 10 A.
Each transformer includes four windings, two for the primary
intercell transformer connections, two for the secondary con-
nections With this arrangement, a combination of the currents
provided by two adjacent cells is flowing through a given trans-
former. Fig. 15 emphasizes the subtractive Amp-turn operating
mode, considering the example of transformer . The two
primary windings conduct respectively the currents and ,
while the secondary windings conduct the currents and .
In the assumption of a perfect current balancing between the k
cells, the shape of and are those of Fig. 15 and it
can be observed that the total amp-turns in the winding window
are null for each part of the switching period. This is a major
difference with the inductor behavior.
The transformers are realized with planar cores EPLT58.
Theoretically, a total power around 4–5 kW could be reached
with these cores but in order to simplify the realization of
this first test bench, standard PCB have been used for the
windings and limit the current capability and the output power.
The main aim is here to verify the intercell flyback operating
mode and not to optimize the characteristics of the converter.
So, each of the four windings is engraved on a double-sided
PCB (150 m copper thickness, 150 m epoxy thickness) that
involves two layers and four turns. They are stacked according
to Fig. 15 with a strong coupling between primary and sec-
ondary homologous windings and a lower
coupling between the two groups. This arrangement minimizes
the primary-secondary leakage inductors (switching) and
maximizes the storage leakage inductors . The theoret-
ical parameters values given by the design are : kHz,
, main leakage
inductor of a transformer H.
This leads to a theoretical value of equal to of 171 nH.
With this value, the current ripple in a cell theoretically reaches
12 A for . The measurement of the real leakage induc-
tors made on a transformer gives: H and nH.
Fig. 16 shows a view of the complete intercell transformer with
the seven stages.
FOREST et al.: MULTICELL INTERLEAVED FLYBACK USING INTERCELL TRANSFORMERS
Fig. 16. Realization of the seven–cell intercell transformers.
Fig. 17. View of the test bench.
The control is achieved by a FPGA based control board and
operates in open loop. The two supply mode, standard (regular)
or modified (permutated) [14], can be selected. Fig. 17 shows a
complete view of the test bench.
Fig. 18 shows some experimental waveforms obtained for
two operating points (permutated supply). The results are closed
to the theoretical ones, particularly concerning the ripples. The
current balancing is not perfect because of the open loop con-
trol. This unbalance creates current sub harmonics that can be
observed in the output capacitor. To solve that, the authors are
currently working on closed-loop solutions, using a reduced
number of current sensors.
1669
Due to the arrangement of the transformers, two-leakage in-
ductors (350 nH) are concerned by the turn-off of a cell. The
measurement of the current and voltage across the two-windings
supplied by a switching cell allows deriving the total switching
inductor which gives 500 nH. This result is consistent, the in-
ductance of some connections being added to the leakage in-
ductors of the windings. With a maximal switched current of
15 A, the value of the leakage energy for a cell is 56 J (4 W
for kHz).
Nevertheless, the operation of this first test bench is very con-
clusive, with an output power of 2 kW
, and a efficiency closed to 0.92, obtained with a really
nonoptimized system. The optimal design of a 10 kW inter-
cell transformer flyback for low-voltage application is currently
studied.
V. DISCUSSION ON THE PROPOSED SOLUTION IN
LOW-VOLTAGE/HIGH CURRENT CONTEXT
The proposed solution is appropriate for low-voltage/high
power applications. In this field, bridge or half-bridge topolo-
gies are penalized by the conduction losses into the power
switches. In this context, the parallel assembling of power
switches is necessary in the case of a single converter and an
interesting option, frequently used by the designers, is to paral-
lelize the converters rather than switches. The global converter
is more complex but all components, switches, magnetic de-
vices, capacitors, are easier to design and to build. In addition,
the interleaving operating mode allows reducing drastically the
input and output filters. So, the intercell transformer flyback
is a good option although it is obviously not the only one.
The more efficient classical topology in this context is the
push-pull [Fig. 19(a)]. The proposed flyback, in a more realistic
version with single-switch cells [Fig. 19(b)], needs to be further
evaluated in comparison with this reference.
By supposing the same interleaving level k in the two cases,
for the same total power P, cells are necessary for the push-
pull and k for the flyback, k having to be even for the push-pull.
So, the modular characteristic of the flyback is better. Then,
the push-pull requires k switches, k diodes, k/2 transformers,
and k/2 output or input inductors, while the flyback requires
the same number of switches and diodes but k transformers
and no inductor. The different electrical stresses are similar in
the two cases. So the main difference results of the higher di-
viding up of the transformers in the flyback. This can be con-
sidered an advantage (transformer easier to built, increase of the
total thermal exchange surface), as well as a drawback (twice
more transformers, interconnections), that can be balanced by
the suppression of inductors. In the two topologies, the power
reversibility can be provided by adding antiparallel switches on
the secondary side and antiparallel diodes on the primary side.
In fact, this fast comparison shows many similarities between
the two topologies. Nevertheless, in the author point of view,
several features could make the intercell transformer flyback
attractive.
— It is very modular and well-suited to the design of con-
verter ranges, with the possibility to realize high-power
converters by using standard medium size cores for the
transformers.
1670 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 22, NO. 5, SEPTEMBER 2007

Fig. 18. Experimental waveforms D = 2=7, time base: 2 s/div D = 0:4, time base: 2 s/div.

Fig. 19. Topologies of push-pull and flyback for comparison. (a) Push-pull. (b) Intercell transformer flyback.

— The suppression of inductors is a significant advantage,
particularly for the low-voltage/high-current applications.
— Compared to the interleaved topologies using separated in-
ductors, the characteristic impedance of the output filter is
significantly lower with the intercell transformer topolo-
gies [10], [4], property very interesting in case of applica-
tions requiring high dynamic performances of the output
regulation.
VI. CONCLUSION
In this paper, an original topology based on the introduction
of intercell transformers in interleaved flyback converters has
FOREST et al.: MULTICELL INTERLEAVED FLYBACK USING INTERCELL TRANSFORMERS
been described. By eliminating the main drawbacks of these
topologies, due to the limitation of inductors, it makes very
attractive the “flyback way” to realize low-voltage and high
power systems by using the very simple cell of the standard fly-
back. Additional properties are the high dynamic behavior re-
sulting of the interleaving and the possibility to provide easily
the power reversibility by replacing the secondary diodes by ac-
tive switches.
A first test bench has been realized, to validate the theoretical
analysis and to demonstrate the feasibility of such converters
with a high number of cells. New developments are currently
in progress concerning the control of current balancing and the
design of high power systems.
REFERENCES
[1] M. T. Zhang, M. M. Jovanovic, and F. C. Lee, “Analysis and evaluation
of interleaving techniques in forward converters,” IEEE Trans. Power
Electron., vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 690–698, Jul. 1998.
[2] L.-P. Wong, D. K.-W. Cheng, M. H. L. Chow, and Y.-S. Lee, “In-
terleaved three-phase forward converter using integrated transformer,”
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 52, no. 5, pp. 1246–1260, Oct. 2005.
[3] P. J. Wolfs, “A current-sourced DC–DC converter derived via the du-
ality principle from the half-bridge converter,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Elec-
tron., vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 139–144, Feb. 1993.
[4] D. A. Ruiz-Caballero and I. Barbi, “A new flyback-current-fed push-
pull DC-DC converter,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 14, no. 6,
pp. 1056–1064, Nov. 1999.
[5] C.-W. Roh, S.-H. Han, S.-.S. Hong, S.-C. Sakong, and M.-J. Youn,
“Dual-coupled inductor-fed DC/DC converter for battery drive appli-
cations,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 577–584, Jun.
2004.
[6] R.-T. Chen and Y.-Y. Chen, “Single-stage push-pull boost converter
with integrated magnetic and input current shaping technique,” IEEE
Trans. Power Electron., vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 1193–1203, Sep. 2006.
[7] I. G. Park and S. I. Kim, “Modeling and analysis of multi-interphase
transformers for connecting power converters in parallel,” in Proce.
PESC’97, 1997, vol. 2, pp. 1164–1170.
[8] P.-L. Wong, P. Xu, B. Yang, and F. C. Lee, “Performance improve-
ments of interleaving VRMS with coupling inductors,” in Proc.
APEC’00, 2000, pp. 973–978.
[9] P. Zumel, O. Garcia, J. A. Cobos, and J. Uceda, “Magnetic integra-
tion for interleaved converters,” in Proc. APEC’03, 2003, vol. 2, pp.
1143–1149.
[10] J. Li, C. R. Sullivan, and A. Schultz, “Coupled inductors design op-
timization for fast-response low-voltage DC-DC converters,” in Proc.
APEC 2002, 2002, vol. 2.
[11] J. Li, A. Stratakos, A. Schultz, and C. R. Sullivan, “Using coupled
inductors to enhance transient performance of multi-phase buck con-
verters,” in Proc. APEC’04, 2004, vol. 2, pp. 1289–1293.
[12] P. Zumel, O. Garcia, J. A. Cobos, and J. Uceda, “Tight magnetic
coupling in multiphase interleaved converters based on simple trans-
formers,” in Proc. APEC’05, 2005, vol. 1, pp. 385–391.
[13] J. Czogalla, J. Li, and C. R. Sullivan, “Automotive application of multi-
phase coupled inductor DC-DC converter,” in Proc. IAS 2003, 2003,
vol. 3, pp. 1524–1529.
[14] F. Forest, T. Meynard, E. Labouré, V. Costan, A. Cuniére, and T. Mar-
tiré, “Optimization of the supply voltage system in interleaved con-
verters using intercell transformers,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol.
22, no. 3, pp. 934–942, May 2007.
[15] W. T. Mac Lyman, Transformers and Inductor Design Handbook.
New York: Dekker, 1988.
[16] G. Hurley, W. H. Wölfle, and J. G. Breslin, “Optimized transformer
design : Inclusive of high frequency effects,” IEEE Trans. Power Elec-
tron., vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 651–659, Jul. 1998.
[17] H. Njiende, N. Fröhleke, and J. Böcker, “Optimized size design of inte-
grated magnetic component using area product approach,” in CD-ROM
of EPE Conf., 10p, Dresden, Germany, 2005.
[18] R. Watson, G. C. Hua, and F. C. Lee, “Characterization of an active
clamp flyback for power factor correction applications,” IEEE Trans.
Power Electron., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 191–198, Jan. 1996.
1671
[19] G. Chen, Y.-S. Lee, S. Y. R. Hui, D. Xu, and Y. Wang, “Actively
clamped bidirectional flyback converter,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron.,
vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 770–779, Aug. 2000.
[20] A. Elasser and D. A. Torrey, “Soft switching active snubber for DC/DC
converters,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 710–722,
Sep. 1996.
[21] T. Suntio, “Average and small-signal modeling of self-oscillating fly-
back converter with applied switching delay,” IEEE Trans. Power Elec-
tron., vol. 21, no. 21, pp. 479–486, Mar. 2006.
Francois Forest (M’98) received the M.S. degree
in electrical engineering from the Ecole Normale
Supérieure de Cachan, Cachan, France, in 1982 and
the Ph.D. degree from the University of Paris 6,
Paris, France, in 1985.
From 1989 to 1999, he was a Professor in the
Electrical Engineering Department, Ecole Normale
Supérieure de Cachan, and Leader of the Power
Electronics research group in the Laboratoire Elec-
tricité, Signaux et Robotique, ESA CNRS 8029
(LESiR). Since 1999, he has been a Professor at the
Montpellier University of Sciences, Montpellier, France. His research activities
concern soft-switching converters study from low-power dc-to-dc stages to
high-power PWM inverters, power device and converter reliability, and passive
components modeling.
Eric Labouré received the electrical engineering de-
gree from INSA-Lyon, Lyon, France, in 1989 and the
Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from the Ecole
Normale Supérieure de Cachan, Cachan, France, in
1995.
He is currently with the IPEM Integration in Power
Electronics and Materials (IPEM) Team of the Lab-
oratory SATIE, SATIE/ENS de Cachan. He is also a
Senior Lecturer at the Institut Universitaire de For-
mation des Ma^itres de Créteil (Faculty of Teachers
Training). His research interests include integration
in power electronics and electromagnetic compatibility.
T. A. Meynard (M’90) received the M.S. degree
from the Ecole Nationale Supérieure d’Electrotech-
nique, d’Electronique, d’Hydraulique de Toulouse,
Toulouse, France, in 1985.
He became a Doctor of the Institut National Poly-
technique de Toulouse in 1988 and was then an In-
vited Researcher at the Université du Québec à Trois
Rivières, QC, Canada, in 1989. He joined the Lab-
oratoire d’Electrotechnique et d’Electronique Indus-
trielle (LEEI), Toulouse , France, as a Full-Time Re-
searcher in 1990 and was Head of the Static Converter
Group at the LEEI from 1994 to 2001. He is now Directeur de Recherches at the
LEEI and a part-time Consultant with Cirtem on a regular basis. His research
interests include soft-commutation, series and parallel multicell converters for
high-power and high-performance applications, and direct ac-ac converters.
Jean-Jacques Huselstein graduated in electrical
engineering from the Ecole Normale Supérieure de
Cachan, Cachan, France, in 1988 and received the
Ph.D. degree from the Montpellier University of
Sciences, Montpellier, France, in 1993.
He is currently sn Associate Professor at the
University Montpellier II and is also a Researcher at
the Laboratoire d’Electrotechnique de Montpellier
(LEM-France). His research activities concern
IGBTs converter reliability, direct ac-ac converters,
and low-power direct-drive wind power generation.