Analysis and design of single‐stage, two‐mode AC/DC converters for on‐board battery charging applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On‐board battery chargers (OBCs) offer the feasibility of charging electric vehicles or plug‐in hybrid electric vehicles with a standard household power supply. In this study, an OBC using two‐mode topology (step‐up or step‐down) is presented. One of the main concern with two‐mode topologies is the hard transitions of the converter operating from boost mode to buck mode or vice versa, which can deteriorate the performance of converter. This study provides smooth transitions between the modes and can have an output that could be more or less than the peak of input voltage. The detailed analysis of operating modes involved in the converter are analysed in the study. Moreover, the stress analysis on the components is also detailed in this study and the results are compared with existing two‐mode converters. A simple dual‐loop control structure with the proposed modulation technique eliminates the sub‐harmonic oscillations and stabilizes the output voltage is also presented in the study. Experimental validation is performed for a 1.0 kW laboratory prototype and the results obtained are detailed in the study. This proposed converter topology can be applied as a single‐stage OBC or as a power factor correction converter with variable DC link voltages in isolated two‐stage OBC.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".