2 Bobine Cuplate

Copyright (c) 2010 IEEE. Personal use is permitted.
For any other purposes, Permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.
1

Modeling and Analysis of Coupled Inductors in Power Converters

Guangyong Zhu

Richtek Technology Corp.
1006 East Yager Ln, Unit 101C, Austin, TX 78753
Brent McDonald, Member, IEEE
Texas Instruments
12500 TI Blvd., MS8709, Dallas, TX 75243
Kunrong Wang, Sr. Member, IEEE
Dell, Inc.
One Dell Way, Round Rock, TX 78682

Abstract-This paper describes a new approach to the analysis of switched mode power converters
utilizing coupled inductors and presents a novel canonical circuit model for N-winding coupled
inductors. Waveform and ripple of the winding current in a coupled inductor converter can be
easily determined using the developed model similar to those obtained in an uncoupled inductor
converter. Influence of coupling coefficient on converter steady state and transient performance
is readily predicted by the proposed model. It is found that in an N-phase coupled inductor
converter, the voltage waveforms driving the leakage inductors are no longer the phase node
voltages, but are the modified voltages with a frequency N times the original switching
frequency. In addition, their magnitudes also vary with the coupling coefficient among the
coupled windings. Through coupling, a converter is capable of responding faster to load transient
depending on the coupling coefficient and control mechanism, and that dependency is
analytically revealed in the paper. Finally, a two-phase buck regulator is experimentally tested to
verify the proposed model.
Key words: coupled inductors, coupled magnetics, coupled inductor modeling, multiphase dc-dc
converters, symmetrical transformer model.

This paper was presented at IEEE APEC, Feb. 15-19, 2009, Washington DC.

corresponding author: Dr. Guangyong Zhu, 1006 East Yager Ln, Unit 101C, Austin, TX 78753. Tel.: 512-719-
5272, fax: 512-719-4556, email: guangyong_zhu@richtek.com.
Copyright (c) 2010 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, Permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
2

I. INTRODUCTION
Power engineers are facing increasing challenges to design small, low cost, efficient and
reliable switching power supplies. It is even more challenging in todays computing industry
with the ever increasing processor speed as power supplies are required to support not only the
high processor current, but also its fast slew rate.
To meet these demands, new circuit topologies and improved control mechanisms have been
proposed and studied, among which inter-leaved multi-phase coupled inductor converters
attracted special attention. As of today, there are a few such solutions commercially available on
the market.
Some studies [1-10, 16-19] reported that a converter utilizing coupled inductors can reduce
phase current and output voltage ripple, respond faster to load transients, and reduce the amount
of output decoupling capacitance. These benefits make it an appealing technique in the
computing industry. However, a comprehensive explanation is still unavailable or unconvincing
theoretically; some questions remain unanswered, such as: Is it universally true that a coupled
inductor converter always respond faster to load transient than its uncoupled counterpart? Are
there any special conditions that must be satisfied to optimize performance? To truly take
advantage of the coupled inductor technique, a clear understanding is needed of its limitations, of
the effect of the coupling coefficient on the current distribution in each winding and on the
overall regulator steady-state and transient performance, as well as of the specification of the
coupling coefficient in order to meet certain performance requirements.
The concept of magnetic coupling has been around for a long time. Its general operation
principles are well known and basic to the electrical engineering society. It is the special
application in switching power converters where periodic (as during steady state) or random (as
3

during transient) driving voltage pulses can be applied to the coupled inductors that makes it
difficult for many power engineers and designers to analyze. Advanced simulation tools are able
to demonstrate changes to overall converter performance caused by different couplings, but are
unable to reveal mathematically the inherent correlation between them. A valid circuit model for
coupled inductors suitable for power converter analysis becomes a necessity.
Over the years, different transformer models for coupled inductors or magnetic structures
have been published [2, 3, 11-15], which attempted to establish certain equivalent circuit models
suitable for analyzing switched mode power converters. One model directly links each of the
parameters to a particular type of magnetic fluxes which are usually difficult to measure or
calculate [11]. Discussion and construction of reluctance models for some special core magnetic
structures with simulation and experimental results can be found in [2], [3] and [13]. An
improved reluctance model which simplifies circuit simulation was given in [12]. In [14], a
cantilever transformer model was proposed, in which all parameters can be directly measured.
However, all these circuit models are either too complicated to use or unable to provide enough
analytical insight and design guidelines to help power engineers in designing power supplies
using the coupled inductor technique.
The purpose of this article is to clarify the operation of coupled inductor converters by
presenting a simple analytical modeling approach for coupled inductors based on the basic
circuit principle, which leads to a simple canonical symmetrical circuit model. This model
enables power engineers with a basic understanding of switching power converters to analyze
and design coupled inductor converters more effectively [20].

4

II. ANALYSIS OF COUPLED INDUCTORS AND DERIVATION OF A
SYMMETRICAL MODEL
For ease of derivation and understanding, only coupled inductors with two windings will be
discussed in this section. The methodology presented here and the derived conclusions can be
easily extended to multi-winding coupled inductors, which will be elaborated in section IV.
A. Review of the Transformer Model
Fig. 1(a) shows two inversely coupled inductors where v
L1
, i
1
and v
L2
, i
2
are voltages and
currents across each winding, respectively. Its transformer model can be derived mathematically
and can be expressed by the following equation according to the well-known basic circuit theory:

dt
di
L
dt
di
M v
dt
di
M
dt
di
L v
L
L
2
2
1
2
2 1
1 1
+ =
=
, (1)
where L
1
, L
2
and M are the self inductance of each winding and the mutual inductance between
them, respectively.
The expression can be rearranged as:

dt
di
L L
M
L v
L
M
v
v
L
M
dt
di
L L
M
L v
L L
L L
2
2 1
2
2 1
1
2
2
2
1
2 1
2
1 1
) 1 (
) 1 (
+ =
=
, (2)
or,

dt
di
L v
L
L
k v
v
L
L
k
dt
di
L v
k L L
L k L
2
2 1
1
2
2
2
2
1 1
1 1
+ =
=
, (3)
5

where k 1
2 1
=
L L
M
is the well-defined coupling coefficient and L
k1
=(1-k
2
)L
1
and L
k2
=(1-k
2
)L
2

are commonly referred to as the leakage inductances.
If we assume L
1
=L
2
=L, as is usually true in a two-phase dc-dc converter, eq. (3) is simplified
as:

dt
di
k L kv v
kv
dt
di
k L v
L L
L L
2 2
1 2
2
1 2
1
) 1 (
) 1 (
+ =
=
. (4)
From eq. (4) an equivalent circuit can be constructed as shown in Fig. 1(b), where L
M
=k
2
L is
commonly referred to as the magnetizing inductance. Note that Fig. 1(b) is one form of the
transformer models for two coupled inductors, where the leakage inductor appears only on one
side. The leakage inductor shown in the figure has the inductance seen from that side when the
other side is shorted.

(a) (b)
Fig. 1. Two inversely coupled inductors (a), and their equivalent
transformer circuit model if L
1
=L
2
=L (b).
B. Derivation of a New, Symmetrical Model
The model derived above, though mathematically accurate, is not easily used in analyzing
power converter operations, as it is asymmetrical to each inductor winding with the presence of
6

the magnetizing inductor, L
M
, and with the leakage inductor only on one winding. It is known
that the leakage inductance can be distributed to the two sides, but it still fails to make the model
symmetrical because of the presence of a magnetizing inductor on one side, whose impact on the
converter operation cannot be neglected [4].
As will be seen later, a symmetrical model developed in this paper can simplify the analysis
and understanding of coupled inductors in power converter applications under steady state and
dynamic load transient conditions. Specifically, the model is able to provide additional insight to
the impact of leakage inductance and coupling coefficient (or mutual inductances in case of
multiple coupled inductors) on individual winding current, overall output current ripple, and
converter response to sudden load transient. Therefore, it offers an additional tool to allow power
supply engineers to optimize the design and to analyze the performance of coupled inductor
voltage regulators.
In order to derive such a model, eq. (3) is re-arranged as:

2 1
1
2 2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
L L k
L L k
v v
L
L
k
dt
di
L
v
L
L
k v
dt
di
L
+ =
+ =
. (5)
In the case of L
1
=L
2
=L, eq. (5) will be simplified to eq. (6) below, where L
k
=(1-k
2
)L is the
leakage inductance.

2 1
2
2 1
1
L L k
L L k
v kv
dt
di
L
kv v
dt
di
L
+ =
+ =
. (6)
From eqs. (5) and (6), one can easily come up with a generalized symmetrical circuit model
for Fig. 1(a), as shown in Fig. 2.
7

2
2
1
L
v
L
L
k
1
1
2
L
v
L
L
k

(a) (b)
Fig. 2. A generalized symmetrical circuit model of two inversely coupled
inductors (a), and the simplified model if L
1
=L
2
=L (b).
It is also easy to verify that, by changing the polarity of the two controlled voltage sources,
the model shown in Fig. 2 also applies to the case with two non-inversely coupled inductors.
One of the distinctive features of the equivalent circuit model for two coupled inductors
given in Fig. 2 is that it does not contain the magnetizing inductor which, to most of us, is a
fundamental element of the well-known transformer model. Instead, the coupling effect is
reflected in the controlled voltage sources and the associated coupling coefficient k. In addition,
an inductor with a leakage inductance L
k
is shown on each inductor winding.
The benefits of the derived model in Fig. 2 in analyzing coupled inductor converters will be
elaborated in the following sections.
III. APPLICATION OF THE DERIVED COUPLED INDUCTOR MODEL IN A TWO-
PHASE BUCK CONVERTER
Fig. 3 shows a two-phase buck converter utilizing inversely coupled inductors. By replacing
the coupled inductors with the symmetrical equivalent circuit model in Fig. 2(b), an equivalent
two-phase buck converter can be obtained, as shown in Fig. 4.
If we denote v
ph1
and v
ph2
as the phase node voltage of each phase (reference to ground),
respectively, then from Fig. 4, v
L1
and v
L2
can be expressed as:
8

Fig. 3. A two-phase coupled inductor buck converter.

Fig. 4. An equivalent circuit of the two-phase coupled inductor buck converter.

0 2 2
0 1 1
V v v
V v v
ph L
ph L
=
=
. (7)
Therefore, voltages (reference to ground) at nodes x
1
and x
2
can be derived as:

0 2 1 1 2 2
0 2 1 2 1 1
) (
) (
kV v kv kv v v
kV kv v kv v v
ph ph L ph x
ph ph L ph x
+ = + =
+ = + =
. (8)
Notice that x
1
and x
2
are two fictitious nodes emerged from the derivation of the model and
therefore, they are not physically accessible. However, interpretation of the result from eq. (8) is
very important in understanding the operation of the coupled inductor converter shown in Fig. 3
since v
x1
and v
x2
serve as the switching node voltages (to the leakage inductance) similar to those
9

in an uncoupled two phase converter. As a result, the current waveform through the leakage
inductor can be easily determined once the waveforms of v
x1
and v
x2
are obtained.
A. Steady-State Performance Analysis Using the Derived Model
Based on eq. (8), steady-state waveforms of the actual phase node voltages, v
ph1
and v
ph2
, the
fictitious node voltages, v
x1
and v
x2
, as well as the current waveforms generated in the leakage
inductors, i
1
and i
2
, are shown in Fig. 5. It can be seen from the figure that, analogous to the
uncoupled inductor converter where an inductor is driven by the switching pulse, v
ph1
or v
ph2
, the
leakage inductor of each phase in a coupled inductor converter is now driven by a new series of
periodic switching pulses, v
x1
or v
x2
. However, because of the coupling, the fundamental
frequency of this new periodic pulse becomes twice of the original switching frequency f
s
=1/T
s
.
In addition, the magnitude of this new periodic pulse also varies with the coupling coefficient of
the two inductors.
According to Fig. 5, the slopes of inductor ripple current, S
R1
, S
F
and S
R2
, and the peak-to-
peak inductor current ripple, I
p1
, in each phase as well as the induced current ripple from
coupling, I
p2
, are given by eqs. (9) and (10), respectively:

+
=
=
+
=
+
=
+
=
L k
V k kV
S
L k
V
L
V k
S
L k
V k V
L
V k V
S
in
R
k
F
in
k
in
R
) 1 (
) 1 (
) 1 (
) 1 (
) 1 (
) 1 ( ) 1 (
2
0
2
0 0
2
0 0
1
, (9)

s
k
in
s R p
s
k
in
s R p
DT
L
V k kV
DT S I
DT
L
V k V
DT S I
0
2 2
0
1 1
) 1 (
) 1 (
+
= =
+
= =
. (10)
10

In eq. (10) and Fig. 5, D=V
0
/V
in
is the duty cycle, which is assumed to be less than 0.5 during
steady state operation of the two-phase converter discussed in this section. This means there is no
phase node voltage overlapping between phases in steady state.

Fig. 5. Steady-state voltage and current waveforms from the converter circuit in Fig. 4.
Unlike in an uncoupled converter where the inductor winding current ripple (and also output
voltage ripple) in each phase is determined by the self inductance L, eq. (10) shows that in a
coupled inductor converter, the steady state current ripple in each phase is affected by the
coupling coefficient k and is inversely proportional to the leakage inductance L
k
. It is therefore
11

clear that a smaller L
k
will result in larger output voltage and winding current ripple. Even
though meeting the output voltage ripple specification in todays power regulators for modern
microprocessors has not been a big challenge in general [19], the self inductance, coupling
coefficient and switching frequency still need to be properly selected to limit the winding current
and output voltage ripple.
Fig. 5 also reveals quantitatively how the coupling coefficient affects the inductor current
waveforms with two unequal inductor current peaks or valleys in a switching cycle in each phase.
To obtain an equal peak or valley current, coefficient k has to be close to 1 according to Fig. 5
and eq. (10), which will affect the winding current and output voltage ripple.
The converter in Fig. 3 turns to the traditional uncoupled inductor converter if k=0. The new
model shown in Fig. 2 is still valid in this scenario as now the controlled voltage sources are both
shorted and voltages at nodes x
1
and x
2
become equal to that at nodes ph
1
and ph
2
, respectively,
as can also be verified in eq. (8), and Figs. 4 and 5.
In an inter-leaved two-phase converter, the total output peak-to-peak current ripple with
coupled (I
coupled-total
) and uncoupled (I
dis-total
with inductance L
dis
) inductors is given as:

s
k
in
p p total coupled
DT
L
V k
D I I I
) 1 (
) 2 1 (
2 1
+
= + =
, (11)

s
dis
in
total dis
DT
L
V
D I ) 2 1 ( =
. (12)
Since the output voltage ripple is proportional to the total output current ripple, it can be
concluded from eqs. (11) and (12) that converters utilizing coupled inductors always generate
higher total output current ripple and output voltage ripple considering the following two special
conditions: L
dis
=L and L
dis
= L
k
=(1-k
2
)L.
B. Transient Performance Analysis Using the Derived Model
12

In todays computer systems, a regulator powering a micro-processor is frequently subject to
a substantial load application with a slew rate as high as hundreds of amperes per microsecond
following a processors exit from a deeper sleep state. To ensure that the voltage does not fall
below a minimum level required by the processor for its normal operation, the regulator must be
able to respond quickly to deliver the required current or energy before the output decoupling
capacitors are over-discharged.
The most effective solution to speeding up the regulator response to a sudden load
application is to increase the duty cycle of the phase immediately following the event while
pulling in the remaining phases. Fig. 6 depicts a scenario in a two-phase regulator where an event
of load application happens at t=0. The arrows on V
ph1
and V
ph2
waveforms show that the duty
cycle of the phase node voltage V
ph1
increases (pulse pushed out from the dotted line) and V
ph2

goes from 0 V to V
in
earlier than it is normally scheduled (pulse pulled in from the dotted line),
resulting in a short period of pulse overlapping between t
1
and t
2
. It should be pointed out that
duty cycle increase and phase node pulse overlapping can take place over several switching
cycles depending on the controller behavior. However, only the first phase node pulse
overlapping between the phases is illustrated in the figure to demonstrate the effectiveness of the
proposed coupled inductor model and to show the pattern of energy transfer from input to the
load.
In Fig. 6, the voltage waveforms of the two fictitious nodes, v
x1
and v
x2
, are first determined
from eq. (8). Waveforms of current in each inductor winding are then derived based on these
waveforms. As can be seen, the inductor current in each winding ramps up at a slew rate of S
T

which is much higher than its steady state slew rate S
R1
or S
R2
in eq. (9) whenever there is phase
node voltage overlapping during a transient. This slew rate is given by:
13

L k
V V
L
V V
k S
in
k
in
T
) 1 (
) 1 (
0 0
+ = (13)
For comparison purposes, the inductor current waveform in each phase in an uncoupled
inductor converter is also depicted in the figure in dotted lines. Its slew rate during inductor
charging period is given by:

Fig. 6. Transient voltage and current waveforms in a coupled inductor converter
during a sudden load application.
14

dis
in
R
L
V V
S
0
= . (14)
Since S
T
> S
R
no matter L
dis
=L or L
dis
= L
k
, it is obvious that, depending on the coupling
coefficient k, the current in each winding is able to ramp up much faster in a coupled inductor
regulator if the controller allows phase overlapping. This means that a two-phase coupled
inductor converter is inherently capable of transferring more current or energy to the load when
needed. The difference between the solid and dotted lines in the i
1
or i
2
waveform in Fig. 6 shows
how much higher the phase current in a coupled inductor converter can build up than that in an
uncoupled converter. Conceivably, this difference will only get larger if more than one phase
node voltage overlapping occurs.
On the other hand, when a microprocessor suddenly reduces its current drawn from the
regulator (an event of sudden load release), the extra energy built up and stored in the inductors
right before the load release will transfer to the output capacitors and cause the output voltage to
rise. To avoid overshooting above a microprocessors acceptable maximum voltage level,
presence of larger capacitance may be required at the regulator output. The regulator controller
should also turn off the highside mosfets on all phases to prevent delivering extra energy to the
microprocessor.
Coupled inductors also perform favorably in this situation when all phase node voltages
remain at 0 V. Unlike in an uncoupled inductor converter where the inductor current decreases at
a slew rate of
dis
L t v ) (
0
, each winding current in the coupled inductor converter decreases at a
slew rate of L k t v ) 1 ( ) (
0
, which means that it decreases faster and causes less overshoot on the
output voltage.
15

That conclusion can be explained by examining the proposed coupled inductor model in Fig.
4. Now that the phase nodes ph
1
and ph
2
are grounded, the two controlled voltage sources kv
L1

and kv
L2
are actually receiving part of the energy being released from the leakage inductor from
each winding as current i
1
and i
2
are flowing through them (note v
L1
=v
L2
=-v
0
(t)). As a result, the
output capacitors do not need to absorb all the magnetic energy stored in the leakage inductors,
and therefore less output voltage overshoot will be expected. This interesting mechanism does
not exist in uncoupled inductor regulators.
IV. EXTENSION OF THE MODEL TO MULTI-COUPLED INDUCTORS
The concept of the symmetrical coupled inductor model as well as the process of derivation
can be easily extended to multiple coupled inductors so that the performance of multiphase
interleaved coupled inductor regulators can be analyzed and understood.
In order to derive closed-form expressions and to explain the methodology of analyzing
coupled inductor converters using the proposed model, the following assumptions are made for
the coupled inductors with N windings:
a. Each coupled winding has an equal inductance L,
b. The mutual inductance between any two coupled windings is equal to M=kL. This
assumption implies the coupled flux generated by one winding is equally distributed to
the rest of the N-1 windings, or
1
1
N
k , and,
c. There is no phase node voltage overlapping during steady state, which implies D<1/N, or
a high step down conversion from input to output for high number of phases N. This is
usually the case in low output voltage, high current and fast load transient applications
such as in powering todays computer processors.
16

With these assumptions, the relationship among all winding voltages, v
Lj
(t), and currents, i
j
(t)
(j=1, 2, , N), can be expressed in the form of an NN dimension symmetrical matrix given
below in (15). It should be pointed out that for this inductor network to work properly in a buck
regulator, inverse coupling has to be maintained between any two windings.

(
(
(
(
=
(
(
(
(
) (
) (
) (
) (
) (
) (
2
1
2
1
t i
t i
t i
dt
d
t v
t v
t v
N LN
L
L
M M
L or,
(
(
(
(
=
(
(
(
(
) (
) (
) (
) (
) (
) (
2
1
1 2
1
t v
t v
t v
t i
t i
t i
dt
d
LN
L
L
N
M M
L , (15)
where
(
(
(
(

=
L M M
M L M
M M L
L
M O M M
L
L
L , and

[ ]
(
(
(
(

+
=
k N k k
k k N k
k k k N
L k N k
) 2 ( 1
) 2 ( 1
) 2 ( 1
) 1 ( 1 ) 1 (
1
1
L
M O M M
L
L
L .
Define:

[ ]
L
k N
k N k
L
k
) 2 ( 1
) 1 ( 1 ) 1 (

+
, (16)
as the equivalent leakage inductance of the multiple coupled inductors with N windings. The
voltage across the leakage inductance of each winding can be expressed in terms of voltages
across every winding as follows:

j m N j
t v
k N
k
t v
dt
t di
L
N
m
Lm Lj
j
k
=

+ =
=
, , , 2 , 1
) (
) 2 ( 1
) (
) (
1
L
, (17)
Equation (17) describes a canonical model for Nwinding coupled inductors. Based on this
equation, a canonical symmetrical equivalent circuit model can be obtained as shown in Fig. 7.
17

It is noticed that the second term on the right side of eq. (17) and the controlled voltage
sources in Fig. 7 reflect the influence of the quality of coupling (denoted by the coupling
coefficient k) among all inductor windings. k also affects the equivalent leakage inductance of
the coupled inductors. It is easy to prove that when N=2, eq. (17) and Fig. 7 are simplified to the
previously discussed two-winding coupled inductor model, as in eq. (6) and Fig. 2.

=

N
m
Lm
t v
k N
k
2
) (
) 2 ( 1
|
\
|
+

=
N
m
Lm L
t v t v
k N
k
3
1
) ( ) (
) 2 ( 1
=

1
1
) (
) 2 ( 1
N
m
Lm
t v
k N
k

Fig. 7. A canonical symmetrical equivalent circuit model for multiple coupled inductors.
Fig. 8 shows an equivalent symmetrical circuit when the derived canonical model is applied
to an N-phase interleaved buck converter. One can easily obtain the voltage at any fictitious node
x
j
, v
xj
(t) (j=1, 2, , N), in terms of all phase node voltages as:

j m N j
k N
kV N
t v
k N
k
t v t v
N
m
phm phj xj
=

+ =
=
, , , 2 , 1
) 2 ( 1
) 1 (
) (
) 2 ( 1
) ( ) (
0
1
L
. (18)
Similar to previous discussions in a two-phase converter with coupled inductors, steady state
and transient current waveforms on each phase in an N-phase converter can be accurately
18

determined and converter performance can be predicted once the voltage waveform on each
fictitious node is derived according to eq. (18).

|
\
|
+

=
N
m
Lm L
t v t v
k N
k
3
1
) ( ) (
) 2 ( 1
=

N
m
Lm
t v
k N
k
2
) (
) 2 ( 1
=

1
1
) (
) 2 ( 1
N
m
Lm
t v
k N
k

Fig. 8. An N-phase interleaved buck converter with the canonical symmetrical coupled inductor
model.

The total output peak-to-peak current ripple, I
coupled-total
, is the sum of the phase current
ripple, I
ripple-coupled
, when a particular phase is turned on and the induced current ripple on all
other windings, and can be calculated from eq. (17):

[ ]
[ ]
s
in
coupled ripple
DT
L k N k
V N k k N V V
I
) 1 ( 1 ) 1 (
) 1 ( ) 2 ( 1 ) (
0 0
+

=
, (19)

[ ]
[ ]
s
in
s
k
in
coupled ripple total coupled
DT
L k N
V ND
DT
L
V N V V
k N
k
V
I I
) 1 ( 1
) 1 (
) 2 ( ) (
) 2 ( 1
0 0 0

=

+
+ =

. (20)
When N=2, eq. (19) is simplified to I
p1
in eq. (10) and eq. (20) is simplified to eq. (11).
19

For comparison purposes, the phase current ripple, I
ripple-dis
, and the total output peak-to-
peak current ripple, I
dis-total
, in an uncoupled inductor converter are also given below in eqs. (21)
and (22):

s
dis
in
dis ripple
DT
L
V V
I
0
(21)

s
dis
in
s
dis
in
total dis
DT
L
V ND
DT
L
V V
D
ND
I
) 1 (
1
1
0

=
. (22)
Since
1
1
N
k , it can be proven from eqs. (20) and (22) that I
coupled-total
is always greater
than I
dis-total
under two specific conditions of L
dis
=L and L
dis
=L
k
, where L
k
is now defined in eq.
(16). Therefore it can be concluded that the output voltage ripple in a coupled inductor converter
is always greater than that in an uncoupled inductor converter if L
dis
=L and L
dis
=L
k
, as the output
voltage ripple is proportional to the total output current ripple.
When k=0 and L=L
dis
, eq. (20) is simplified to eq. (22), as is expected.
During transient when all phases are turned on (v
Lj
(t)=V
in
-V
0
, j=1, , N) at load applications
or turned off (v
Lj
(t)=-V
0
) at load releases, the ramp-up and ramp-down slew rates of the current
in each winding can be obtained from eq. (17) as:

[ ]L k N
V V
L
V V N
k N
k
V V
S
in
k
in in
T
) 1 ( 1
) )( 1 (
) 2 ( 1
) (
0
0 0

=

+
= , (23)

[ ]L k N
V
S
D
) 1 ( 1
0

= . (24)
By comparing eqs. (14) and (23), it can be easily found out that S
T
>S
R
for L
dis
=L or L
dis
=L
k
,
where L
k
is defined in eq. (16). Again it shows that during load applications the phase current
ramp-up slew rate in coupled inductor regulators is always higher than that in uncoupled inductor
20

regulators when phase overlapping is allowed; therefore faster energy transfer during load
applications can be achieved in coupled inductor regulators. Similarly, during load releases the
phase current always ramps down faster in coupled inductor regulators (at a slew rate determined
by eq. (24)) than that in uncoupled inductor regulators, which implies less overshoot on the
output voltage in coupled inductor regulators. This observation has been discussed extensively in
Section III for the two-phase regulator.
Based on the above discussions, Table I summaries if an N-phase coupled inductor converter
performs better or worse than its uncoupled counterpart in terms of steady state phase current
ripple, output voltage ripple (proportional to total output current ripple) and response speed to
load transient (assume phase overlapping is allowed) under the specific condition of L
dis
=L or
L
dis
=L
k
. It is shown that, in both cases, coupled inductor regulators always perform inferior in
terms of output voltage ripple but have the capability of responding faster to load transient if
phase node voltage overlapping is allowed. However, the phase current ripple, I
ripple-coupled
,
obtained in eq. (19) in coupled inductor regulators may be higher or lower than I
ripple-dis
given in
eq. (21) in uncoupled inductor regulators depending on the inductance (L
dis
=L or L
dis
=L
k
) and the
coupling coefficient, k.
TABLE I: Performance Advantages of Coupled over Uncoupled Inductor Converters
Uncoupled with L
dis
=L
Uncoupled with
L
dis
=L
k

Condition

Category
D
D
k
<
1

1
1
1
< <
N
k
D
D

1
1
<
N
k

Steady state phase
current ripple
better worse better
Steady state output
voltage ripple
worse worse worse
Transient response better better better

V. EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION
21

A two-phase regulator test board shown in Fig. 9 using the ISL6266 controller was used to
verify the validity of the derived model. The measured data were then compared with the results
predicted by the model.
The coupled inductor adopted on the test board is LC1740-R30R09A from NEC/Tokin,
which specifies a typical self inductance of 310 nH. The measured parameters (with a short
external wire connected to one terminal of each winding to fit a current probe) are L=353.5 nH,
k=0.622, and L
k
=216.7 nH.

Fig. 9. Picture of the two-phase coupled inductor regulator test board.
A. Steady State Comparison
Fig. 10 shows the captured phase node voltage and inductor winding current waveforms of
the regulator under two different input voltages. Table II summaries the test condition, measured
current ripple and the calculated current ripple predicted by the model in these two cases. In Fig.
10(a), for example, the current ripple in each winding can be obtained according to eq. (10) as:

) A ( 61 . 5 10 215
10 7 . 216
) 622 . 0 1 ( 115 . 1 12 622 . 0
) A ( 11 . 10 10 215
10 7 . 216
) 622 . 0 1 ( 115 . 1 12
9
9
2
9
9
1

+
=

+
=
p
p
I
I

22

(a) V
in
=12 V (time scale: 500 ns/div)

(b) V
in
=19.5 V (time scale: 500 ns/div)
Fig. 10. Experimental waveforms with 1.115V output voltage and 20A load.

5.30 A
Phase 1 switching node
i
L1

i
L2

9.85 A

10.50 A
6.00 A
i
L1

i
L2

23

TABLE II: Measured and Calculated Current Ripple in the Inductor Windings
I
p1
(A) I
p2
(A)
D
f
s

(kHz)
measured calculated measured calculated
V
in
=12 V 10.1% 470 9.85 10.11 5.30 5.61
V
in
=19.5 V 6.19% 476 10.50 10.61 6.00 6.19

B. Transient State Comparison
Fig. 11 shows the scope waveforms of the winding current with V
in
=9 V, V
0
=1.15 V under a
sudden load application at the regulator output. The waveforms clearly show a distinctive and
sharp increase in the current of both inductor windings during a particular time period (71 ns)
when both phases are on (the slope is measured as 58.64 A/s.) This observation agrees with the
theoretical analysis elaborated in section III that faster energy transfer can be achieved in
coupled inductor converters whenever phase node voltages overlap.
The slope of this current, S
T
, according to eq. (13), is given as:
76 . 58
10 7 . 216
15 . 1 9
) 622 . 0 1 (
9
=
+ =
T
S (A/s)
As can be seen, both steady state and transient experimental results match excellently with
the theoretical prediction from the proposed model.
VI. CONCLUSION
A new modeling approach for analyzing coupled inductors is proposed and a novel canonical
symmetrical circuit model is developed. The proposed model is easy to use and suitable for
analyzing switched-mode power converters utilizing coupled inductors. With the introduction of
fictitious nodes, the model states that coupling among inductor windings creates a new series of
periodic voltage waveforms on the fictitious nodes. It is this new series of periodic voltage
waveforms with N times the original switching frequency and varying magnitudes that actually
drives each leakage inductor of the coupled inductors. The symmetrical model successfully and
quantitatively reveals how model parameters affect the steady state and transient performance of
24

power converters. It is found that coupled inductors are able to respond faster to a load transient
if phase overlapping is allowed. Results from experimental measurement and theoretical
calculation show excellent agreement, demonstrating the validity and accuracy of the proposed
model.

Fig. 11. Experimental waveforms under a sudden load application
with 9 V input and 1.15 V output (time scale: 500 ns/div).

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors would like to thank Dr. Jia Wei and Dr. Kun Xing from Intersil Corp. for
providing the test board to support the validation of the derived model in this study.
REFERENCES
[1]. P.L. Wong, Q. Wu, P. Xu, B. Yang, and F.C. Lee, Investigating coupling inductor in
interleaving QSW VRM, Proc. of IEEE APEC 2000, pp. 973-978.
i
L1

i
L2

71 ns
58.64 A/s

25

[2]. J. Li, A. Stratakos, A. Schultz, and C.R. Sullivan, Using coupled inductors to enhance
transient performance of multi-phase buck converters, Proc. of IEEE APEC 2004, pp. 1289-
1293.
[3]. J. Li, C.R. Sullivan, and A. Schultz, Coupled-inductor design optimization for fast-response
low-voltage dc-dc converters, Proc. of IEEE APEC 2002, pp. 817-823.
[4]. S. Xiao, W. Qui, T. Wu, and I. Batarseh, Investigating effects of magnetizing inductance on
coupled-inductor voltage regulators, Proc. of IEEE APEC 2008, pp. 1569-1574.
[5]. A.M. Schultz, and C.R. Sullivan, Voltage converter with coupled inductive windings and
associated methods, U.S. Patent 6,362,986, Mar. 26, 2002, Volterra Semiconductor Corp.
[6]. A.V. Ledenev, G.G. Gurov, and R.M. Porter, Multiple power converter system using
combining transformers, U.S. Patent 6,545,450 B1, Apr. 8, 2003, Advanced Energy Industries,
Inc.
[7]. P.L. Wong, P. Xu, B. Yang, and F.C. Lee, Performance improvements of interleaving
VRMs with coupling inductors, IEEE Trans. on Power Electronics, vol. 16, no. 4, July 2001, pp.
499-507.
[8]. Y. Dong, F.C. Lee, and M. Xu, Evaluation of coupled inductor voltage regulators, Proc. of
IEEE APEC 2008, pp. 831-837.
[9]. W. Wu, N. Lee, and G. Schuellein, Multi-phase buck converter design with two-phase
coupled inductors, Proc. of IEEE APEC 2006, pp. 487-49.
[10]. J. Gallagher, Coupled inductors improve multiphase buck efficiency, Power Electronics
Technology, Jan. 2006, pp. 36-42.
[11]. Q. Chen, F.C. Lee, and M.M. Jovanovic, A new model for multiple-winding transformer,
Proc. of IEEE PESC 1994, pp. 864-871.
[12]. P.L. Wong, F.C. Lee, X. Jia, and J.D. van Wyk, A novel modeling concept for multi-
coupling core structures, Proc. of IEEE APEC 2001, pp. 102-108.
[13]. Y. Dong, Y. Yang, F.C. Lee, and M. Xu, The short winding path coupled inductor voltage
regulators, Proc. of IEEE APEC 2008, pp. 1446-1452.
[14]. D. Maksimovic, R. Erickson, and C. Griesbach, Modeling of cross-regulation in
converters containing coupled inductors, Proc. of IEEE APEC 1998, pp. 350-356.
26

[15]. N. Bouhalli, M. Cousineau, E. Sarraute, and T. Meynard, "Multiphase coupled converter
models dedicated to transient response and output voltage regulation studies," Proc. of EPE-
PEMC 2008, pp.281-287.
[16]. M.C. Gonzalez, P. Alou, O. Garcia, J.A. Oliver, J.A. Cobos, and H. Visairo, "DC-DC
transformer multiphase converter with transformer coupling for two-stage architecture," Proc. of
IEEE APEC 2010, pp.781-786.
[17]. H.B. Shin, E.S. Jang, J.G. Park, H.W. Lee, and T.A. Lipo, "Small-signal analysis of
multiphase interleaved boost converter with coupled inductors," IEE Proc. of Electr. Power
Appl., vol.152, no.5, Sept. 2005, pp. 1161- 1170.
[18]. H.B. Shin, J.G. Park, S.K. Chung, H.W. Lee, and T.A. Lipo, "Generalised steady-state
analysis of multiphase interleaved boost converter with coupled inductors," IEE Proc. of Electr.
Power Appl., vol.152, no.3, May 2005, pp. 584- 594.
[19]. A.V. Peterchev, and S.R. Sanders, Load-line regulation with estimated load-current
feedforward: application to microprocessor voltage regulators, IEEE Trans. on Power
Electronics, vol. 21, no. 6, Nov. 2006, pp. 1704-1717.
[20]. G. Zhu, and K. Wang, Modeling and design considerations of coupled inductor
converters, Proc. of IEEE APEC 2010, pp. 7-13.

2 Bobine Cuplate

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2 Bobine Cuplate

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Copyright (c) 2010 IEEE. Personal use is permitted.

You might also like