1. Energy Efficiency in Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle
Chargers: Evaluation and Comparison of Front End
AC-DC Topologies
1
Fariborz Musavi, Murray Edington
Department of Research, Engineering
Delta-Q Technologies Corp.
Burnaby, BC, Canada
fmusavi@delta-q.com, medington@delta-q.com
Abstract—As a key component of a plug-in hybrid electric
vehicle (PHEV) charger system, the front-end ac-dc converter
must achieve high efficiency and power density. This paper
presents a topology survey evaluating topologies for use in
front end ac-dc converters for PHEV battery chargers. The
topology survey is focused on several boost power factor
corrected converters, which offer high efficiency, high power
factor, high density and low cost. Experimental results are
presented and interpreted for five prototype converters,
converting universal ac input voltage to 400 V dc. The results
demonstrate that the phase shifted semi-bridgeless PFC boost
converter is ideally suited for automotive level I residential
charging applications in North America, where the typical
supply is limited to 120 V and 1.44 kVA. For automotive level
II residential charging applications in North America and
Europe the bridgeless interleaved PFC boost converter is an
ideal topology candidate for typical supplies of 120 V and 240
V, with power levels of 3.3 kW, 5 kW and 6.6 kW.
I.
INTRODUCTION
A plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) is a hybrid
vehicle with a battery electric storage system that can be
recharged by connecting a plug to an external electric power
source. The vehicle charging ac inlet requires an on-board
ac-dc charger with power factor correction [1]. An on-board
3.4 kW charger can charge a depleted battery pack in PHEVs
to 95 % charge in about four hours from a 240 V supply [2].
A variety of power architectures, circuit topologies and
control methods have been developed for PHEV battery
chargers. However, due to large low frequency ripple in the
output current, the single-stage ac-dc power conversion
architecture is only suitable for lead acid batteries.
Conversely, two-stage ac-dc/dc-dc power conversion
provides inherent low frequency ripple rejection. Therefore,
the two-stage approach is preferred for PHEV battery
chargers, where the power rating is relatively high, and
lithium-ion batteries, requiring low voltage ripple, are used
This work has been sponsored and supported by Delta-Q Technologies
Corporation.
Wilson Eberle, 2 William G. Dunford
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
University of British Columbia | 1 Okanagan | 2 Vancouver
1
Kelowna, BC, Canada | 2 Vancouver, BC, Canada
1
wilson.eberle@ubc.ca | 2 wgd@ece.ubc.ca
as the main energy storage system [3]. A simplified block
diagram of a universal input two-stage battery charger used
for PHEVs is illustrated in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Simplified block diagram of a universal battery charger.
The ac/dc plus PFC stage rectifies the input ac voltage
and transfers it into a regulated intermediate dc link bus. At
the same time, power factor correction is achieved [4]. The
isolated dc-dc stage that follows then converts the dc bus
voltage to a regulated output dc voltage for charging
batteries. Boost circuit-based PFC topologies operated in
continuous conduction mode (CCM) and boundary
conduction mode (BCM) are surveyed in this paper,
targeting front end single-phase ac-dc power factor corrected
converters in PHEV battery chargers.
In the six sections that follow, five different boost based
PFC topologies are discussed and experimental results are
presented for each. The topologies in each section include:
II. Conventional Boost Converter, III. Interleaved Boost
Converter, IV. Phase Shifted Semi-Bridgeless Boost
Converter, V. Bridgeless Interleaved Boost Converter, and
VI. Bridgeless Interleaved Resonant Boost Converter. A
topology comparison is presented in section VII and the
conclusions are presented in section VIII.
II.
CONVENTIONAL BOOST CONVERTER
The conventional boost topology is the most popular
topology for PFC applications. It uses a dedicated diode

2. bridge to rectify the ac input voltage to dc, which is then
followed by the boost section, as shown in Figure 2.
This requires a design compromise between the core,
inductor size and inductance value. A lower inductance value
for a boost inductor increases the input current ripple and
consequently increases the input EMI filter size. It also
increases the output capacitor high frequency ripple, thereby
reducing the output capacitor lifetime. Therefore, it can be
concluded that a conventional boost converter is not the
preferred topology for PHEV battery charging applications.
Part # / Value
# of Devices
Regular Diode
25ETS08S
4
Fast Diode
IDB06S60C
1
MOSFET
IPB60R099CP
400 μH
1
98
97
96
95
Vin = 90 V
94
Vin = 120 V
Vin = 220 V
93
Vin = 240 V
1
Inductors
99
B. Performance Evaluation of the Conventional Boost
Converter
Figure 4 shows the efficiency of a conventional boost
converter at input voltages ranging from 90 V to 265 V. As it
can be noted from this graph, the efficiency drops
significantly at low input line as the power increases. To
solve this problem for power levels >1 kW, discrete
Vin = 265 V
92
91
500
Device
Figure 3. Input current, input voltage and output voltage of a conventional
boost converter at Vin = 240 V. Y-axis scales: Iin 10 A/div, Vin 100 V/div
and Vo 100 V/div.
2000
Components Used in Prototype Unit
Input Current
Iin
0
Conventional
PFC Boost
Converter
Topology
CONVENTIONAL BOOST CONVERTER PROTOTYPE
COMPONENTS
Output Voltage
Vo
1500
A. Experimental Results of Conventional Boost Converter
An experimental prototype was built to verify the
operation of the conventional boost PFC converter. The
components used to build the prototype are listed in Table I.
Figure 3 shows the input voltage, input current and PFC bus
voltage of the converter under the following test conditions:
Vin = 240 V, Iin = 7.5 A, Po = 1.7 kW, Vo = 400 V, fsw =
70 kHz.
Input Voltage
Vin
1000
In this topology, the output capacitor ripple current is
very high [5] and is the difference between diode current and
the dc output current. Furthermore, as the power level
increases, the diode bridge losses significantly degrade the
efficiency, so dealing with the heat dissipation in a limited
area becomes problematic. The inductor volume also
becomes a problematic design issue at high power. Another
challenge is the power rating limitation for current sense
resistors at high power. Due to these constraints, this
topology is good for the low to medium power range, up to
approximately 1 kW. For power levels >1 kW, typically,
designers parallel discrete semiconductors, or use expensive
MOSFET + SiC Diode semiconductor modules in order to
deliver greater output power. An example of a module
commonly used in industry is the APT50N60JCCU2 from
Microsemi Corporation.
Efficiency (%)
Figure 2. Conventional PFC boost converter.
TABLE I.
semiconductors are paralleled, or expensive modules are
used. This reduces the power loss in the MOSFETs, but at
low line, the input current increases and consequently the
input bridge losses increase. As a result, the inductor current
also increases.
Output Power (W)
Figure 4. Efficiency versus output power at different input voltages for a
conventional boost converter.
III.
INTERLEAVED BOOST CNVERTER
The interleaved boost converter, illustrated in Figure 5,
consists of two boost converters in parallel operating 180 °
out of phase [6-8]. The input current is the sum of the two
input inductor currents. Because the inductors’ ripple
currents are out of phase, they tend to cancel each other and
reduce the input ripple current caused by the boost switching

3. action. The interleaved boost converter has the advantage of
paralleled semiconductors. Furthermore, by switching 180 °
out of phase, it doubles the effective switching frequency and
introduces smaller input current ripple, so the input EMI
filter is relatively small [9-11]. With ripple cancellation at
the output, it also reduces stress on output capacitors.
However, similar to the boost, this topology has the heat
management problem for the input diode bridge rectifiers;
therefore, it is limited to power levels up to approximately
3.5 kW.
B. Performance Evaluation of the Interleaved Boost
Converter
Figure 7 shows the efficiency of an interleaved boost
converter at input voltages ranging from 90 V to 240 V. As it
can be noted from these graphs, the output power level has
increased. Hence, the efficiency profiles for each curve
resemble those from the conventional boost converter.
Despite the stated advantages of interleaving, the total power
losses are the same compared to a conventional boost
converter.
98
97
Efficiency (%)
96
95
Figure 5. Interleaved PFC boost converter.
94
TABLE II.
INTERLEAVED BOOST CONVERTER PROTOTYPE COMPONENTS
Interleaved PFC
Boost Converter
Topology
Components Used in Prototype Unit
Device
Part # / Value
# of Devices
Regular Diode
25ETS08S
4
Fast Diode
IDB06S60C
2
MOSFET
IPB60R099CP
2
Inductors
400 μH
Vin = 90 V
93
Vin = 120 V
92
Vin = 220 V
Vin = 240 V
91
3500
3000
Output Power (W)
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
90
0
A. Experimental Results of Interleaved Boost Converter
An experimental prototype was built to verify the
operation of the interleaved boost PFC converter. The
components used to build the prototype are listed in Table II.
Figure 6 shows the input voltage, input current and PFC bus
voltage of the converter under the following test conditions:
Vin = 240 V, Iin = 15 A, Po = 3.4 kW, Vo = 400 V, fsw = 70
kHz.
Figure 7. Efficiency versus output power at different input voltages for an
interleaved boost converter.
IV.
PHASE SHIFTED SEMI-BRIDGELESS BOOST
CONVERTER
2
Input Voltage
Vin
The bridgeless boost PFC topology avoids the need for
the rectifier input bridge yet maintains the classic boost
topology [12-19], as shown in Figure 8.
Output Voltage
Vo
Figure 8. Bridgeless PFC boost converter.
Input Current
Iin
Figure 6. Input current, input voltage and output voltage of an interleaved
boost converter at Vin = 240 V. Y-axis scales: Iin 10 A/div, Vin 100 V/div
and Vo 100 V/div.
It is an attractive solution for applications >1 kW, where
power density and efficiency are important. This converter
solves the problem of heat management in the input rectifier
diode bridge inherent to the conventional boost PFC, but it
introduces increased EMI [20, 21]. Another disadvantage of
this topology is the floating input line with respect to the
PFC ground, making it impossible to sense the input voltage
without a low frequency transformer or an optical coupler.
Also, in order to sense the input current, complex circuitry is
needed to sense the current in the MOSFET and diode paths

4. separately, since the current path does not share the same
ground during each half-line cycle [14, 22]. In order to
address these issues, a phase shifted semi-bridgeless boost
converter, shown in Figure 9 was introduced in [23].
However, this topology does not achieve high full load
efficiency since there is high power stress in the main
MOSFETs due to high intrinsic body diode losses.
B. Performance Evaluation of the Semi-bridgeless Boost
Converter
Figure 11 shows the efficiency of phase shifted semibridgeless boost converter at input voltages ranging from 90
V to 240 V. As it can be noted from this graph, the efficiency
is significantly improved at light load.
99
Efficiency (%)
98
97
96
95
Vin = 90 V
Vin = 120 V
93
Vin = 240 V
Vin = 220 V
TABLE III. COMPONENT USED IN THE SEMI-BRIDGELESS BOOST
CONVERTER PROTOTYPE
Phase Shifted
Semi-bridgeless
PFC Boost
Converter
Topology
Components Used in Prototype Unit
Device
Part # / Value
# of Devices
Regular Diode
25ETS08S
2
Fast Diode
IDB06S60C
2
MOSFET
IPB60R099CP
2
Inductors
400 μH
2
Input Voltage
Vin
Input Current
Iin
Figure 10. Input current, input voltage and output voltage of a phase shifted
semi-bridgeless boost converter at Vin = 240 V. Y-axis scales: Iin 10 A/div,
Vin 100 V/div and Vo 100 V/div.
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
Output Power (W)
Figure 11. Efficiency versus output power at different input voltages for a
phase shifted semi-bridgeless boost converter.
These results show that the phase shifted semi-bridgeless
PFC boost converter is ideally suited for automotive level I
residential charging applications in North America where the
typical supply is limited to 120 V and 1.44 kVA. As an
example, for 120 V input voltage and 1700 W load the
efficiency is 95 %, which is the same efficiency achieved
with an interleaved boost converter operating with the same
conditions. But at lighter loads, the semi-bridgeless converter
achieves much higher efficiency. This is critical for
converters used in applications such as battery chargers. In
battery chargers, the converter is fully loaded for only one
third of the total charging time (i.e. during the bulk charging
stage). However, during the absorption and float stages,
which are two thirds of the total charging time, the charger is
only partially loaded, so light load efficiency is an important
consideration.
V.
Output Voltage
Vo
1000
A. Experimental Results of the Phase Shifted Semibridgeless Boost Converter
An experimental prototype was built to verify the
operation of the phase shifted semi-bridgeless boost PFC
converter. The components used to build the prototype are
listed in Table III. Figure 10 shows the input voltage, input
current and PFC bus voltage of the converter under the
following test conditions: Vin = 240 V, Iin = 15 A, Po = 3.4
kW, Vo = 400 V, fsw = 70 kHz.
500
92
0
Figure 9. Phase shifted semi-bridgeless PFC boost converter.
94
BRIDGELESS INTERLEAVED BOOST CONVERTER
The bridgeless interleaved topology, shown in Figure 12,
was proposed as a solution to operate at power levels at and
above 3.5 kW. In comparison to the interleaved boost PFC, it
introduces two MOSFETs and also replaces four slow diodes
with two fast diodes. The gating signals are 180 ° out of
phase, similar to the interleaved boost. A detailed converter
description and steady state operation analysis are given in
[24, 25]. This converter topology shows a high input power
factor, high efficiency over the entire load range and low
input current harmonics.
Since the proposed topology shows high input power
factor, high efficiency over the entire load range, and low
input current harmonics, it is a potential option for single
phase PFC in high power level II battery charging
applications.

5. Q3
Q4
Figure 12. Bridgeless interleaved PFC boost converter.
A. Experimental Results Bridgeless Interleaved Boost
Converter
An experimental prototype was built to verify the
operation of the bridgeless interleaved boost PFC converter.
The components used to build the prototype are listed in
Table IV. Figure 13 shows the input voltage, input current
and PFC bus voltage of the converter under the following
test conditions: Vin = 240 V, Iin = 15 A, Po = 3.4 kW, Vo =
400 V, fsw = 70 kHz.
TABLE IV. BRIDGELESS INTERLEAVED BOOST CONVERTER PROTOTYPE
COMPONENTS
Bridgeless
Interleaved
PFC
converter
Topology
Components Used in Prototype Unit
Device
Part # / Value
IDB06S60C
IPB60R099CP
4
Inductors
400 μH
4
97
96
Vin = 90 V
Vin = 120 V
95
Vin = 220 V
Vin = 240 V
94
4
MOSFET
98
# of Devices
Fast Diode
99
Input Voltage
Vin
Output Voltage
Vo
Input Current
Iin
Figure 14. Efficiency versus output power at different input voltages for a
bridgeless interleaved boost converter.
VI.
BRIDGELESS INTERLEAVED RESONANT BOOST
CONVERTER
The bridgeless interleaved resonant topology operating in
BCM was first introduced by Infineon Technologies [26] and
proposed for front end ac-dc stage of level II on-board
chargers. The topology is illustrated in Figure 15. Compared
to the bridgeless interleaved boost converter, it replaces the
four fast diodes with four slow diodes; however it requires
two high side drivers for MOSFETs – Q1 and Q2 as well as
two low side drivers for Q3 and Q4. The other drawbacks
with this topology include the need for at least two sets of
current sensors, two snubbers and a complex digital control
scheme.
D1
Figure 13. Input current, input voltage and output voltage of a bridgeless
interleaved boost converter at Vin = 240 V. Y-axis scales: Iin 10 A/div, Vin
100 V/div and Vo 100 V/div.
B. Performance Evaluation of the Bridgeless Interleaved
Boost Converter
Figure 14 shows the efficiency of the bridgeless
interleaved boost converter at input voltages ranging from 90
V to 240 V. In general, this converter achieves higher
efficiency than both the phase shifted semi-bridgeless
converter and interleaved boost at the same power levels. In
addition, due to the improved efficiency, greater output
power can be achieved for a given input current. For
Output Power (W)
4500
Q2
4000
Q1
3500
L4
L
O
A
D
3000
Co
2500
L2
2000
L3
Vin
example, at 240V input, the maximum output power
increases from 3.4kW for the phase shifted semi-bridgeless
converter up to 4.2kW for the bridgeless interleaved boost
converter. These results demonstrate that the bridgeless
interleaved boost converter is ideally suited for automotive
level II residential charging applications in North America
and Europe where the typical supply is limited to input
voltages of 120/240/250 V, and power levels up to
approximately 8kVA - depending on the input supply
breaker limitation.
1500
D4
1000
D3
500
D2
0
D1
Efficiency (%)
L1
D4
LB1
Q1
Q2
LB2
Vin
D2
D3
Co
Q3
Q4
Figure 15. Bridgeless interleaved resonant PFC boost converter.
L
O
A
D

6. # of Devices
Fast Diode
-
4
MOSFET
IPW60R045CP
4
Inductors
-
2
98
Efficiency (%)
97.5
97
96.5
Vin = 230 V
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
96
Output Power (W)
Figure 16. Efficiency versus output power at 230 V input voltages for a
bridgeless interleaved resonant boost converter by Infineon Technologies
AG [26].
VII. TOPOLOGY COMPARISON
Prototypes of the converter presented in sections II-V
were built to provide data for a qualitative and quantitative
performance comparison. Loss analysis modeling was also
performed to gain insight into the noted qualitative
advantages/disadvantages of each prototype in comparison to
the measured efficiency. Figure 17 shows the modeled loss
distribution within the semiconductors for these topologies at
Vin = 240 V, Po = 3400 W, Vo = 400 V and fsw = 70 kHz.
The regular diode losses consist of only conduction losses in
bridge rectifier diodes, i.e. reverse recovery losses were
neglected due to the low frequency mains input. Due to the
low reverse recovery characteristics of SiC, these diodes
were selected for the boost diodes. Therefore reverse
recovery losses were neglected for these diodes, so that only
conduction losses were considered. Switching loss,
conduction loss, gate charge loss and ½ CV2 loss are
48.7
35.7
48.7
39.6
7.8
0.0
0.0
7.8
16.6
19.1
0.0
0.0
10
8.3
20
8.3
12.9
12.7
12.9
11.3
27.6
27.6
30
Bridgeless Interleaved Boost
FETs
0
Devices / Total Losses
Total Losses
Part # / Value
Interleaved Boost
40
Intrinsic Body
Diodes
Bridgeless
Interleaved
Resonant
PFC
converter
Device
Phase Shifted Semi-Bridgeless Boost
50
Fast Diodes
Components Used in Prototype Unit
Topology
Conventional Boost
Regular
Diodes
TABLE V. BRIDGELESS INTERLEAVED RESONANT BOOST CONVERTER
PROTOTYPE COMPONENTS
60
Power Losses (W)
A. Experimental Results and Performance Evaluation of
Bridgeless Interleaved Resonant Boost Converter
The operation of this converter and efficiency was
reported in [26]. The components used for the prototype are
listed in Table V. Figure 16 shows the reported efficiency
(reproduced) of the converter under the following test
conditions: Vin = 230 V, Iin = 16 A, Po = 3.6 kW, Vo = 400
V. This converter achieves a peak efficiency of 97.9% at
2.7kW load, but the efficiency degrades rapidly beyond
2.7kW of output power, so based on the reported data, it is
not an ideal candidate for automotive level II charging.
Figure 17. Loss distribution in semiconductors at Vin = 240 V, Vo = 400 V,
Po = 3.4 kW and fsw = 70 kHz.
included in the MOSFET losses. The inductor losses were
neglected in the comparison.
The regular diodes in input bridge rectifiers have the
largest share of losses among the topologies with the input
bridge rectifier. The bridgeless topologies eliminate this
large loss component (~27.6 W). However, the tradeoff is
that the MOSFET losses are higher and the intrinsic body
diodes of MOSFETs conduct, producing new losses (~7.8
W). The fast diodes in the bridgeless interleaved PFC have
slightly lower power losses, since the boost diode average
current is lower in these topologies. Overall the MOSFETs
have increased current stress in the bridgeless topologies, but
the total semiconductor losses for the bridgeless interleaved
boost are 37% lower than the benchmark conventional boost
and 37% lower than the interleaved boost.
Since the bridge rectifier losses are so large, it was
expected that bridgeless interleaved boost converter would
have the lowest power losses among the topologies studied
in section II-V. Also, it was noted that the losses in the input
bridge rectifiers were 56% of total losses in the conventional
PFC converter and in the interleaved PFC converter.
Therefore eliminating the input bridges in PFC converters is
justified despite the fact that new losses are introduced.
Figure 18 illustrates the measured efficiency as a
function of output power for all five topologies studied under
the following operating conditions: fsw = 70 kHz, Vin = 240
V and Vo = 400 V. All semiconductor and magnetic devices
used in prototype units were the same. Limited information
was available for Infineon bridgeless interleaved resonant
converter. Notably it was measured at 230 V input voltage.
Table VI demonstrates an overall overview and
comparison of all candidate topologies discussed for the
front end ac-dc stage of a PHEV battery charger. The phase
shifted semi-bridgeless PFC converter was the topology of
choice for level I chargers and the bridgeless interleaved
PFC converter is an optimal topology for level II chargers.

7. 99
REFERENCES
[1]
Efficiency (%)
98
97
[2]
Bridgeless Interleaved PFC Converter Vin = 240 V
96
[3]
Phase Shifted Semi-Bridgeless Converter Vin = 240 V
Interleaved PFC Converter Vin = 240 V
95
Infineon Bridgeless Resonant Converter Vin = 230 V
Conventional PFC Vin = 240 V
[4]
4500
Output Power (W)
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
94
[5]
Figure 18. Efficiency versus output power for different PFC boost
converters.
[6]
Conventional
PFC boost
converter
Phase shifted
semibridgeless
PFC boost
Interleaved
PFC boost
converter
Bridgeless
interleaved
PFC boost
converter
Bridgeless
interleaved
resonant PFC
converter
TABLE VI. TOPOLOGY OVERVIEW/COMPARISON
< 1 kW
< 3.5 kW
< 3.5 kW
> 5 kW
> 5 kW
Poor
Fair
Fair
Best
Best
High
Medium
Low
Low
Low
High
Medium
Low
Low
Low
Large
Medium
Small
Small
Small
Driver
2 LS
2 LS
2 LS
2 LS
2LS+2HS
Efficiency
Poor
Best
Fair
Best
Fair
Cost
Low
Medium
Medium
High
[7]
Highest
Topology
Power
Rating
EMI /
Noise
Capacitor
Ripple
Input
Ripple
Magnetic
Size
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
VIII. CONCLUSIONS
A topology survey aimed at evaluating topologies for use
in front end ac-dc converters for PHEV battery chargers is
presented in this paper. The potential converter solutions
have been analyzed and their performance characteristics are
presented. Several prototype converter circuits were built to
verify the proof-of-concept. The results show that the phase
shifted semi bridgeless converter is ideally suited for
automotive level I residential charging applications in North
America where the typical supply is limited to 120 V and
1.44 kVA. For high power level II residential charging
applications, the bridgeless interleaved boost converter is an
ideal topology candidate in North America and Europe
where the typical supply is limited to input voltages of
120/240/250 V, and power levels up to 8kVA.
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
Y.J. Lee ; A. Khaligh ; A. Emadi, "Advanced Integrated Bidirectional
AC-DC and DC-DC Converter for Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles,"
Vehicular Technology, IEEE Transactions on vol. 58, pp. 3970 3980 2009.
K. Morrow ; D. Karner ; J. Francfort, "Plug-in Hybrid Electric
Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Review," U.S. Departent of Energy Vehicle Technologies Program, 2008.
L. Petersen ; M. Andersen, "Two-Stage Power Factor Corrected
Power Supplies: The Low Component-Stress Approach " in IEEE
Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition, APEC. vol. 2,
2002, pp. 1195 - 1201.
B. Singh ; B.N. Singh ; A. Chandra ; K. Al-Haddad ; A. Pandey ; D.P.
Kothari, "A Review of Single-Phase Improved Power Quality AC-DC
Converters," IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 50, pp.
962 - 981, 2003.
D. Xu ; J. Zhang ; W. Chen ; J. Lin ; F.C. Lee, "Evaluation of output
filter capacitor current ripples in single phase PFC converters " in
Proceedings of the Power Conversion Conference, PCC. vol. 3
Osaka, Japan, 2002, pp. 1226 - 1231.
M. O’Loughlin;, "An Interleaved PFC Preregulator for High-Power
Converters." vol. Topic 5: Texas Instrument Power Supply Design
Seminar, 2007, pp. 5-1, 5-14.
L. Balogh ; R. Redl, "Power-factor correction with interleaved boost
converters in continuous-inductor-current mode," in IEEE Applied
Power Electronics Conference and Exposition, 1993, pp. 168 - 174
Y. Jang ; M.M. Jovanovic, "Interleaved Boost Converter With
Intrinsic Voltage-Doubler Characteristic for Universal-Line PFC
Front End," IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 22, pp.
1394 – 1401, July 2007.
Chuanyun Wang ; Ming Xu ; F.C. Lee, "Asymmetrical interleaving
strategy for multi-channel PFC," in IEEE Applied Power Electronics
Conference and Exposition, 2008, pp. 1409 - 1415.
P. Kong ; S. Wang ; F.C. Lee ; C. Wang, "Common-Mode EMI Study
and Reduction Technique for the Interleaved Multichannel PFC
Converter," IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 23, pp.
2576 - 2584 2008.
C. Wang ; Ming Xu ; F.C. Lee ; Bing Lu, "EMI Study for the
Interleaved Multi-Channel PFC," in IEEE Power Electronics
Specialists Conference, PESC, 2007, pp. 1336 - 1342
B. Lu ; R. Brown ; M. Soldano, "Bridgeless PFC implementation
using one cycle control technique," in IEEE Applied Power
Electronics Conference and Exposition. vol. 2, 2005, pp. 812 - 817.
C. Petrea ; M. Lucanu, "Bridgeless Power Factor Correction
Converter Working at High Load Variations," in International
Symposium on Signals, Circuits and Systems, ISSCS. vol. 2, 2007,
pp. 1 - 4
U. Moriconi, "A Bridgeless PFC Configuration based on L4981 PFC
Controller ": STMicroelectronics Application Note AN1606, 2002.
J. M. Hancock, "Bridgeless PFC Boosts Low-Line Efficiency,"
Infineon Technologies, 2008.
L. Huber ; J. Yungtaek ; M.M. Jovanovic, "Performance Evaluation
of Bridgeless PFC Boost Rectifiers," IEEE Transactions on Power
Electronics, vol. 23, pp. 1381 - 1390 2008.
Y. Jang ; M.M. Jovanovic ; D.L. Dillman, "Bridgeless PFC boost
rectifier with optimized magnetic utilization," in IEEE Applied Power
Electronics Conference and Exposition, 2008, pp. 1017 – 1021.
Y. Jang ; M.M. Jovanovic, "A Bridgeless PFC Boost Rectifier With
Optimized Magnetic Utilization," IEEE Transactions on Power
Electronics, vol. 24, pp. 85 - 93 2009.
W.Y. Choi ; J.M. Kwon ; E.H. Kim ; J.J. Lee ; B.H. Kwon,
"Bridgeless Boost Rectifier With Low Conduction Losses and
Reduced Diode Reverse-Recovery Problems," IEEE Transactions on
Industrial Electronics, vol. 54, pp. 769 – 780, April 2007.

8. [20] T. Baur ; M. Reddig ; M. Schlenk, "Line-conducted EMI-behaviour
of a High Efficient PFC-stage without input rectification," Infineon
Technology – Application Note, 2006.
[21] W. Frank ; M. Reddig ; M. Schlenk, "New control methods for
rectifier-less PFC-stages," in EEE International Symposium on
Industrial Electronics. vol. 2, 2005, pp. 489 - 493
[22] P. Kong ; S. Wang ; F.C. Lee, "Common Mode EMI Noise
Suppression for Bridgeless PFC Converters," IEEE Transactions on
Power Electronics, vol. 23, pp. 291 – 297, January 2008.
[23] F.Musavi ; W. Eberle ; W.G. Dunford, "A Phase Shifted SemiBridgeless Boost Power Factor Corrected Converter for Plug in
Hybrid Electric Vehicle Battery Chargers," in IEEE Applied Power
Electronics Conference and Exposition, APEC Fort Worth, TX, 2011.
[24] F. Musavi ; W. Eberle ; W.G. Dunford, "A High-Performance SinglePhase AC-DC Power Factor Corrected Boost Converter for plug in
Hybrid Electric Vehicle Battery Chargers," in IEEE Energy
Conversion Congress and Exposition Atlanta, Georgia, 2010.
[25] F.Musavi ; W. Eberle ; W.G. Dunford, "Efficiency Evaluation of
Single-Phase Solutions for AC-DC PFC Boost Converters for Plugin-Hybrid Electric Vehicle Battery Chargers," in IEEE Vehicle Power
and Propulsion Conference Lille, France, 2010.
[26] "On Board Charging: Concept Consideration and Demonstrator
Hardware," in The World Electric Vehicle Symposium and
Exposition (EVS) Shenzhen, China: Infineon Technologies, 2010.