1
\$\begingroup\$

Given the buck-boost below asdf

Fig. 3.33, page 62 from Fundamentals of Power Electronics 3rd edition by Robert W. Erickson and Dragan Maksimovic

If we assume the transistor is in conduction mode and the inductor has parasitic resistance \$R_L\$, applying KVL clock-wise we would get

$$ V_{batt} - I_LR_L - V_L = 0 \Rightarrow V_L = V_{batt} - I_LR_L $$

When the transistor is in cut-off mode, we apply KVL in the second circuit, that is:

$$ -V_L + I_LR_L + V_D + V = 0 \Rightarrow V_L = I_LR_L + V_D + V $$

When we use volts-seconds balance, the part of the relation that contains the inductor current for interval \$DT\$ and \$(1-D)T\$ will yield

$$ -I_LR_LD+I_LR_L(1-D) =I_LR_L(1 - 2D) $$

This seems to be wrong because there is no \$(1 - 2D)\$ in the final relation \$V(D)\$. The final relation assumes that the polarity of the inductor doesn't reverse, which would result in:

$$ V_L + I_LR_L + V_D = V \Rightarrow V_L = -I_LR_L - V_D + V $$

The part which contains \$I_L\$ now being

$$ -I_LR_LD-I_LR_L(1-D) =-I_LR_L $$

Using the assumption that the inductor's polarity doesn't reverse, I can get to the right relation between \$V_{batt}\$ and \$V\$, but why do we assume that it doesn't reverse? The inductor has to be in series with the battery, such that

$$ V_{batt} + V_L - I_LR_L \ge V_x - V_D $$

Where \$V_x\$ is the voltage at the top rail, but using the assumption that the polarity doesn't reverse, then

$$ V_{batt} - V_L - I_LR_L\ge V_x - V_D $$

This can't be since the current through the inductor is decreasing, hence its polarity will reverse. Why is it assumed that it is not reversed? Is this assumption only valid in this context, that is an ideal world, because the battery is connected to the terminal of the inductor so it keeps its polarity fixed?

\$\endgroup\$
2
  • \$\begingroup\$ In your volt-seconds equality where did the \$V_{batt}\$ go? When we use volts-seconds balance, the part of the relation that contains the inductor current for interval DT and (1−D)T will yield why? Why do you take those parts only? Volt-second balance is the magnetisation balance. You need to use the full inductor voltage. \$\endgroup\$ Commented May 1 at 15:10
  • \$\begingroup\$ @RohatKılıç As stated, it is this part that gives a wrong relation at the end, because of the \$(1 - 2D)\$, but you are right that it is not the entire volt-second relation. \$\endgroup\$
    – ganymede
    Commented May 1 at 15:14

2 Answers 2

1
\$\begingroup\$

When the transistor is in cut-off mode, we apply KVL in the second circuit, that is: $$ -V_L + I_LR_L + V_D + V = 0 \Rightarrow V_L = I_LR_L + V_D + V $$

Knowing that the inductor voltage polarity will reverse, you explicitly reversed it in the KVL equation. Let KVL tell you that it is reversed. The assumed "KVL polarity" must remain the same as when the switch is open to observe the polarity change.

The correct KVL equation is: $$ V_L + I_LR_L + V_D + V = 0 \Rightarrow V_L = -(I_LR_L + V_D + V) $$ which then indicates the polarity reversal.

\$\endgroup\$
2
  • \$\begingroup\$ I see. But I don't see why explicitly reversing the polarity gives the wrong result - isn't it the same when you specify the current direction and in the end, the results are just negative if the initial direction was wrong? But in this case, it seems that the result is completely wrong. \$\endgroup\$
    – ganymede
    Commented May 1 at 16:05
  • \$\begingroup\$ The assumed positive polarity for the inductor you defined opposite when the switch is open than when the switch is closed. You will get the same magnitude, but the polarity will also be opposite. Polarity is based on how the reference is defined. When the reference is changed within the analysis, so will the result. \$\endgroup\$
    – RussellH
    Commented May 1 at 16:17
-1
\$\begingroup\$

Too complex reasoning used in the question. A practical electrician cannot follow equations this long.

When switch Q1 starts to conduct the inductor current starts to grow. The inductor current is upwards in your drawing because the battery plus is the bottom side of the battery.

When the switch is turned OFF the inductor current is still upwards. Its only route without burning anything is through the diode and that current charges the output capacitor so that the plus pole of the output voltage is the marked V+.

I would claim that this reverses the polarity if the bottom horizontal line of the schematic is the GND.

\$\endgroup\$
2
  • \$\begingroup\$ My question is not how it works, but why the polarity of the inductor is not assumed reversed. \$\endgroup\$
    – ganymede
    Commented May 1 at 15:23
  • \$\begingroup\$ Maybe its's soldered so well that it cannot turn. The polarity of non-zero inductor current never turns suddenly without going gradually through zero. The inductor generates as high voltage as needed to keep the current changes gradual. Otherwise it would be something else than an inductor. \$\endgroup\$ Commented May 1 at 15:42

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.