Voltage Control of the Boost Converter: PI vs. Nonlinear Passivity-based Control

TL;DR

This paper compares classical PI control and nonlinear passivity-based control for a Boost converter, showing that nonlinear controllers provide more stable and predictable voltage regulation with simpler tuning.

Contribution

It introduces and analyzes three nonlinear passivity-based controllers for Boost converters, demonstrating their advantages over traditional PI control in stability and ease of tuning.

Findings

PI control leads to complex and often unstable equilibria.

Nonlinear passivity-based controllers ensure stable and smooth voltage regulation.

Modified PID-Passivity-based Control with current observer improves practical implementation.

Abstract

We carry-out a detailed analysis of direct voltage control of a Boost converter feeding a simple resistive load. First, we prove that using a classical PI control to stabilize a desired equilibrium leads to a very complicated dynamic behavior consisting of two equilibrium points, one of them always unstable for all PI gains and circuit parameter values. Interestingly, the second equilibrium point may be rendered stable -- but for all tuning gains leading to an extremely large value of the circuit current and the controller integrator state. Moreover, if we neglect the resistive effect of the inductor, there is only one equilibrium and it is always unstable. From a practical point of view, it is important to note that the only useful equilibrium point is that of minimum current and that, in addition, there is always a resistive component in the inductor either by its parasitic resistance or by the resistive component of the output impedance of the previous stage. In opposition to this troublesome scenario we recall three nonlinear voltage-feedback controllers, that ensure asymptotic stability of the desired equilibrium with simple gain tuning rules, an easily defined domain of attraction and smooth transient behavior. Two of them are very simple, nonlinear, static voltage feedback rules, while the third one is a variation of the PID scheme called PID-Passivity-based Control (PBC). In its original formulation PID-PBC requires full state measurement, but we present a modified version that incorporates a current observer. All three nonlinear controllers are designed following the principles of PBC, which has had enormous success in many engineering applications.