Bridgeless PFC Implementation Using One Cycle

Control Technique
Bing Lu Ron Brown, Marco Soldano
Center for Power Electronics Systems AC-DC Applications Group
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University International Rectifier Corp.
674 Whittemore Hall 101 N. Sepulveda Blvd
Blacksburg, VA 24061 USA El Segundo, CA, 90245 USA
As presented at APEC ‘05

Abstract: Conventional boost PFC suffers from the high results show both the efficiency improvement and good power
conduction loss in the input rectifier-bridge. Higher efficiency factor correction function. At the same time EMI results show
can be achieved by using the bridgeless boost topology. This new that the circuit noise is controllable.
circuit has issues such as voltage sensing, current sensing and
EMI noise. In this paper, one cycle control technique is used to II. BRIDGELESS PFC CIRCUIT
solve the issues of the voltage sensing and current sensing.
Experimental results show efficiency improvement and EMI The bridgeless PFC circuit is shown in Figure 1. The
performance. boost inductor is split and located at the AC side to construct
the boost structure. The equivalent circuit of positive half line
I. INTRODUCTION cycle is show in Figure 2. In this half line cycle, MOSFET S1
Single switch CCM PFC is the most widely used topology and boost diode D1, together with the boost inductor construct
for the PFC applications because of its simplicity and smaller a boost DC/DC converter. Meanwhile, MOSFET S2 is
EMI filter size. Due to the high conduction loss and switching operating as a simple diode. The input current is controlled by
loss, this circuit has a low efficiency at low input line. With the boost converter and following the input voltage.
the development of super junction MOSFET and SiC Schottky
diode, switching loss of the PFC circuit is dramatically
improved [1]. Meanwhile, the circuit still suffers from forward
voltage drop of the rectifier bridge caused high conduction
loss, especially at low input line.
To reduce the rectifier bridge conduction loss, different
topologies have been developed. Among these topologies, the
bridgeless boost doesn’t require range switch, shows both the
simplicity and high performance [2][3].
Without the input rectifier bridge, bridgeless PFC
generates less conduction loss comparing with the Figure 1 - Bridgeless PFC circuit
conventional PFC. Although the circuit structure is simple,
the location of the boost inductor on the AC side makes it
difficult to sense the AC line voltage and inductor current.
At the same time, since the AC side inductor structure
makes the output floating regarding the input line, the circuit
suffers from high common mode noise.
Comparing with the average current mode control, one
cycle control shows many benefits such as no multiplier
requirement, no input voltage sensing requirement, and no
inductor current sensing requirement. Therefore, one cycle
control gives an attractive solution for the bridgeless PFC Figure 2 - Equivalent circuit of bridgeless PFC
circuit [5][7][8].
During the other half line cycle, circuit operation as the
In this paper, One Cycle Control technique is same way. Thus, in each half line cycle, one of the MOSFET
implemented in the bridgeless PFC. By using one cycle operates as active switch and the other one operates as a diode:
control both the voltage sensing and current sensing issues of both the MOSFETs can be driven by the same signal.
the bridgeless PFC circuit can be solved. The experimental
 The difference between the bridgeless PFC and 15
conventional PFC is summarized in Table 1. Comparing the
Loss (w)
conduction path of these two circuits, at every moment,
bridgeless PFC inductor current only goes through two
semiconductor devices, but inductor current goes through 10
three semiconductor devices for the conventional PFC circuit. Body diode
As shown in Table 1, the bridgeless PFC uses one
MOSFET body diode to replace the two slow diodes of the
5
conventional PFC. Since both the circuits operating as a boost S ynchronous
DC/DC converter, the switching loss should be the same. rectifier
Thus the efficiency improvement relies on the conduction
loss difference between the two slow diodes and the body
0
diode of the MOSFET. Besides, comparing with the 0 500 1000 1500
conventional PFC, the bridgeless PFC not only reduces P o (w)
conduction loss, but also reduces the total components count.
Figure 4 - MOSFET loss comparison between the body
Table 1 – Summary of differences between conventional diode and synchronous rectifier at 25°C
PFC and bridgeless PFC
For all the power level range, bridgeless PFC can improve
Slow Fast Conduction Path
the total efficiency at the full power level by around 1%.
diode Diode MOSFET On/(Off) Considering small MOSFET on state resistance, turning on the
2 slow diode, 1MOSFET/ MOSFET may further reduce the conduction loss by using
Conventional synchronous rectifier. The conduction loss of the MOSFET is
PFC 4 1 1 (2 slow diode, 1 fast diode)
evaluated based on the lower voltage drop caused by the
1 body diode, 1 MOSFET/ MOSFET body diode and on state resistance. The calculation
Bridgeless PFC 0 2 2 (1 MOSFET body diode, 1diode) results are shown in Figure 4. The power losses of these two
cases are very similar.
To estimate the efficiency improvement by using Although the synchronous rectifier has slight
bridgeless PFC circuit, the loss comparison is performed based improvement at low power cases, the improvement goes away
on theoretical analysis. The switch of choice is a super when the MOSFET temperature rises up, since the on state
junction MOSFET rated at 22A, 600V and the diode bridge is resistance is higher with higher temperature. Considering the
chosen as GBPC2506W, rated at 25A, 600V. Curve fitting complexity of synchronous rectifier, it shouldn’t be
method is used to generate the conduction loss model of these implemented.
devices. Based on the inductor current instantaneous current,
the conduction losses generated by these two devices at 90V III. CHALLENGES OF BRIDGELESS PFC CIRCUIT
input and different output power are calculated as shown in
Figure 3. As shown in Figure 1, the bridgeless PFC circuit doesn’t
have an input diode bridge and the boost inductor is located on
40 the AC side. Since the output and input of the circuit have no
Loss (W)
direct connection, the bridgeless circuit has several issues of
input voltage sensing, current sensing and EMI noise.
30
The voltage sensing and current sensing issues are related
Conventional P FC
to the control of bridgeless PFC circuit. For the conventional
20 PFC circuit, several kinds of different control methods have
been developed [4], such as the average current mode control,
peak current mode control, and one cycle control [7][8].
10
Bridgeless P FC The average current mode control is the most popular
control method because of its high performance and easy to
0 understand: the controller multiplies input voltage signal with
0 500 1000 1500
P o (W) the voltage loop output voltage to generate the current
reference while the current loop controls the inductor average
Figure 3 - Diode conduction loss comparison between
conventional PFC and bridgeless PFC current to follow the current reference.
As for the One Cycle Control, the controller uses the
voltage loop output voltage and inductor peak current to
calculate the duty cycle of each switching cycle. Since the
duty cycle meets the requirement of the boost circuit input and
output voltage relationship, the inductor current peak current The optical coupler is also a good candidate for the
automatically follows the input voltage shape. Thus the power voltage sensing, because it can easily achieve isolation, as
factor correction function is achieved [7][8]. shown in Figure 7. To achieve lower distortion of the voltage
A. Input voltage sensing sensing, higher linearity optical coupler with wide operating
range needs to be used, which is not practical and much more
For the conventional PFC, input voltage sensing is simple.
complex comparing with the conventional voltage divider
Because of the existence of the rectifier bridge, the rectified
sensing.
input voltage can be directly sensed by using the voltage
divider, as shown in Figure 5. For the average current mode control, the inductor current
reference is generated based on the sensed input voltage: the
input voltage sensing is necessary and will cause higher cost
or larger converter size.
When One Cycle Control is used all the necessary
information is generated out of the peak inductor current
working and the voltage loop output, making input voltage
sensing unnecessary.
For the conventional PFC circuit, the voltage sensing is
simple, which makes the benefit of the one cycle control less
obvious. The complex input voltage sensing of bridgeless PFC
makes the one cycle control a more attractive control method.
Figure 5 - Input voltage sensing for conventional PFC
B. Current sensing
For the conventional PFC, inductor current sensing is
quite simple. Simply putting a shunt resistor at the return path
of the inductor current, the inductor current can be sensed and
with the common ground of the control, as shown in Figure 8.
There is no isolation requirement for the current sensing.

Figure 6 - Low frequency transformer for bridgeless PFC

voltage sensing

Figure 8 - Current sensing for conventional PFC

For the bridgeless PFC, the inductor return path doesn’t
share the same ground as the output. Therefore an isolated
sensing method has to be used. Same as voltage sensing, a
60Hz current transformer will give a straightforward solution.
In general a low frequency transformer will introduce a
non negligible phase delay on the current signal, causing a
Figure 7 - Optical coupler for bridgeless PFC voltage degradation of the power factor.
sensing Another isolation method is to use the differential mode
For the bridgeless PFC, there is no rectifier bridge and no amplifier, as shown in Figure 9. Because the PFC circuit
place to use the voltage divider to sense the input voltage. A switching at high switching frequency and high output
line frequency transformer is a simple solution for the voltage voltage, the high common mode voltage will cause extra noise
sensing, as shown in Figure 6. Due to the larger size of low in the current signal. Since the current sensing voltage is low
frequency transformer and the cost issue, it is generally to minimize the power loss, the power factor may be hurt by
unacceptable for an efficient design. the current sensing noise. Besides, the differential amplifier
cost is much higher comparing with the shunt resistor solution.
 Alternatively, the inductor current can be reconstructed common mode noise is the parasitic capacitance between the
by the switch and diode current. Due to the different MOSFET drain to the earth ground, as shown in Figure 11.
conduction path of the inductor current a total of three current
transformers is required for the current sensing.
Figure 10 shows the position of the required current
transformers. The input current IIN can be reconstructed as the
sum of the three sensed currents:

Figure 11 - Parasitic capacitance that contributes to

common mode noise for conventional PFC

Figure 9 - Differential mode amplifier for bridgeless PFC

current sensing

Figure 12 - Parasitic capacitances that contribute to

common mode noise for bridgeless PFC
800V

Vp Vp

400V

Vn
Vn
0V

Figure 10 - Current transformer for bridgeless PFC

current sensing SEL>>
-400V
V(n)- V(earth) V(p)- V(earth)
338V

For average current mode control, inductor average Vd1

current is required for the current loop. But for One Cycle 200V Vcd1
Control only the inductor peak current is required for the
control. Therefore, the current sensing can be simplified.
0V

By using two current transformers in series with the Vcd2 Vd2

switches, the inductor peak current can be easily sensed. At -122V

49.19546ms 49.20000ms
V(d1) - V(earth)
49.20500ms 49.21000ms
V(d2) - V(earth)
49.21500ms 49.22000ms 49.22500ms 49.23000ms 49.23636ms

the same time the use of current transformer can further Figure 13 - Voltage on the parasitic capacitor of bridgeless
reduce the power loss caused by shunt resistor. Same as the PFC
voltage sensing, the simple current method for the
conventional PFC circuit makes the one cycle control less For the bridgeless PFC the output voltage is always
attractive. For bridgeless PFC, the complexity of current floating in regard of the input AC line. Thus, not only the
sensing makes one cycle control the most attractive control parasitic capacitance between the MOSFET drains to the earth
method. ground Cd1 and Cd2, but also all the parasitic capacitances
C. EMI Noise between the output terminals to the earth ground Cn and Cp
contribute to the common mode noise, as shown in Figure 12.
EMI noise issues rely on the power stage structure. For
the conventional PFC, the output voltage ground is always The simulation results are shown in Figure 13. The dv/dt
connected with the input line, through the rectifier bridge. on the parasitic capacitors between the MOSFET drains to the
Therefore, the only parasitic capacitor contributes to the earth ground Vcd1 and Vcd2 are reverse polarity.
 By carefully designing the parasitic capacitances, noise
cancellation can be achieved [9]. As the dv/dt of the parasitic
capacitances between the output terminals to the earth ground,
Vp and Vn, are the same, there is no way to achieve noise
cancellation.
Considering these capacitors not only include the output
of the PFC stage parasitics but also the input for the load, the
common mode noise can be much worse comparing with the
conventional PFC circuit.

Figure 15 - Input voltage and current waveforms of the

bridgeless PFC

0.96
Bridgeless PFC

Efficiency
0.95
Figure 14 - An improved EMI performance bridgeless
PFC circuit 0.94
To solve the EMI noise issue, a new EMI noise reduction 0.93 Conventional PFC
circuit for the bridgeless PFC circuit is introduced. The circuit
schematic is shown in Figure 14. Comparing with the original 0.92
bridgeless PFC circuit, the circuit adds two capacitors in the 0 100 200 300 400 500
circuit to create a high frequency path between the output Po (W)
voltage to the input AC line. Figure 16 - Efficiency comparison between conventional
PFC and bridgeless PFC
IV. EXPERIMENTAL IMPLEMENTATION
Based on the analysis above, the bridgeless PFC circuit 1
can both simplify the circuit topology and improve the
efficiency, while the One Cycle Control is the most attractive
control method for the bridgeless PFC circuit. 0.99
One 500W, 100 kHz switching frequency, universal line
input bridgeless PFC circuit is designed and implemented with
0.98
One Cycle Control, using IR1150S controller.
Super Junction MOSFET 600V 22A and 600V 4A SiC Bridgeless PFC
diode are used in the prototype. Besides, the conventional PFC 0.97 Conventional PFC
circuit using same devices is built to serve as the benchmark.
0.96
90 V 140 V 190 V 240 V

Figure 17 - PF comparison at different input line

The input voltage and current waveforms are shown in
Figure 15. The input current perfectly follows the input
voltage. Thus the power factor correction function is achieved
by using one cycle controller. The efficiency comparison
between these two circuits at 90V input line is shown in
Figure 16.
For the whole power range, efficiency improvement is
around 1%, which is quite coincident with the theoretical
analysis. The power factor at full output power and different
input line is shown in Figure 17. The high power factor is can be also overcome by using a modified version of the
achieved by using the One Cycle Control for the whole input bridgeless topology.
line range. EMI performances of the bridgeless PFC and the The experimental results show the simplicity of the One
conventional PFC circuit are compared, and the results are Cycle Control and high power factor, meanwhile, verify that
shown in Figure 18 and Figure 19. From the experimental the bridgeless PFC can improve 1% efficiency comparing with
results, the bridgeless PFC noise is similar to the conventional the conventional PFC circuit.
PFC circuit noise at low frequency range. Although the noise
Although the bridgeless PFC circuit exhibits slightly
is slightly higher at the high frequency range, the EMI noise of
higher EMI levels, the noise is controllable and similar to the
the bridgeless PFC circuit is controllable.
conventional PFC circuit EMI.

REFERENCES
[1] Lu, B.; Dong, W.; Zhao, Q.; Lee, F.C.; “Performance
evaluation of CoolMOSTM and SiC diode for single-
phase power factor correction applications”, APEC '03.
Pages:651 - 657 vol.2
[2] Liu J.; Chen W.; Zhang J.; Xu, D.; Lee, F.C.; “Evaluation
of power losses in different CCM mode single-phase
boost PFC converters via a simulation tool”, IAS’2001,
Pages:2455 - 2459 vol.4
[3] Srinivasan, R.; Oruganti, R.; “A unity power factor
converter using half-bridge boost topology”, IEEE
Figure 18 - EMI noise of the conventional PFC Transactions on Power Electronics, Volume: 13 , Issue: 3
, May 1998, Pages:487 - 500
[4] Sebastian, J.; Jaureguizar, M.; Uceda, J.; “An overview of
power factor correction in single-phase off-line power
supply systems”, IECON '94, Pages:1688 - 1693 vol.3
[5] Lai Z.; Smedley, K.M.; “A family of continuous-
conduction-mode power-factor-correction controllers
based on the general pulse-width modulator”, IEEE
Transactions on Power Electronics, Volume: 13 , Issue: 3
, May 1998, Pages:501 - 510
[6] Liu, Y.; Smedley, K.; “Control of a dual boost power
factor corrector for high power applications”, IECON '03.
Pages:2929 - 2932
[7] Smith, K.M., Jr.; Lai, Z.; Smedley, K.M.; “A new PWM
Figure 19 - EMI noise of bridgeless PFC controller with one-cycle response”, IEEE Transactions
on Power Electronics, Volume: 14 , Issue: 1 , Jan. 1999,
V. CONCLUSIONS Pages:142 - 150
The bridgeless PFC topology removes the input rectifier [8] Gegner, J.P.; Lee, C.Q.; “Linear peak current mode
conduction losses and is able to achieve higher efficiency. control: a simple active power factor correction control
Based on the theoretical analysis, 1% efficiency improvement technique for continuous conduction mode”, PESC '96
is expected from the circuit. Pages:196 - 202 vol.1
The efficiency improvement comes at the cost of [9] Shoyama M., Tsumura T., and Ninomiya T., “Mechanism
increased complexity for input voltage and current sensing. At of Common-Mode Noise Reduction in Balanced Boost
the same time additional EMI issues are present. Switching Converter”, PESC’04, p1115~1120
[10] International Rectifier, IR1150S data sheet
The One Cycle Control does not require input line sensing [11] K. Smedley - US Patent 5,278,490 – California Institute
and can operate in peak current mode, providing a simple and of Technology
high performance solution and overcoming the limitation of
bridgeless topology with conventional control. The EMI issues