IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v14y2021i10p2835-d555021.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Broadband Circuit-Oriented Electromagnetic Modeling for Power Electronics: 3-D PEEC Solver vs. RLCG-Solver

Author

Listed:
  • Ivana Kovacevic-Badstuebner

    (Advanced Power Semiconductor Laboratory, ETH Zurich, 8092 Zurich, Switzerland)

  • Daniele Romano

    (UAq EMC Laboratory, Università degli Studi dell’Aquila, 67100 L’Aquila, Italy)

  • Giulio Antonini

    (UAq EMC Laboratory, Università degli Studi dell’Aquila, 67100 L’Aquila, Italy)

  • Jonas Ekman

    (Department of Computer Science, Electrical and Space Engineering, Luleå University of Technology, SE-971 87 Luleå, Sweden)

  • Ulrike Grossner

    (Advanced Power Semiconductor Laboratory, ETH Zurich, 8092 Zurich, Switzerland)

Abstract

Broadband electromagnetic (EM) modeling increases in importance for virtual prototyping of advanced power electronics systems (PES), enabling a more accurate prediction of fast switching converter operation and its impact on energy conversion efficiency and EM interference. With the aim to predict and reduce an adverse impact of parasitics on the dynamic performance of fast switching power semiconductor devices, the circuit-oriented EM modeling based on the extraction of equivalent lumped R-L-C-G circuits is frequently selected over the Finite Element Method (FEM)-based EM modeling, mainly due to its lower computational complexity. With requirements for more accurate virtual prototyping of fast-switching PES, the modeling accuracy of the equivalent-RLCG-circuit-based EM modeling has to be re-evaluated. In the literature, the equivalent-RLCG-circuit-based EM techniques are frequently misinterpreted as the quasi-static (QS) 3-D Partial Element Equivalent Circuit (PEEC) method, and the observed inaccuracies of modeling HF effects are attributed to the QS field assumption. This paper presents a comprehensive analysis on the differences between the QS 3-D PEEC-based and the equivalent-RLCG-circuit-based EM modeling for simulating the dynamics of fast switching power devices. Using two modeling examples of fast switching power MOSFETs, a 3-D PEEC solver developed in-house and the well-known equivalent-RLCG-circuit-based EM modeling tool, ANSYS Q3D, are compared to the full-wave 3-D FEM-based EM tool, ANSYS HFSS. It is shown that the QS 3-D PEEC method can model the fast switching transients more accurately than Q3D. Accordingly, the accuracy of equivalent-RLCG-circuit-based modeling approaches in the HF range is rather related to the approximations made on modeling electric-field induced effects than to the QS field assumption.

Suggested Citation

  • Ivana Kovacevic-Badstuebner & Daniele Romano & Giulio Antonini & Jonas Ekman & Ulrike Grossner, 2021. "Broadband Circuit-Oriented Electromagnetic Modeling for Power Electronics: 3-D PEEC Solver vs. RLCG-Solver," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-16, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:10:p:2835-:d:555021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/10/2835/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/10/2835/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hao Liu & Xianjin Huang & Fei Lin & Zhongping Yang, 2017. "Loss Model and Efficiency Analysis of Tram Auxiliary Converter Based on a SiC Device," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-20, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Maciej Kozłowski & Andrzej Czerepicki, 2023. "Quick Electrical Drive Selection Method for Bus Retrofitting," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-17, July.
    2. Haider Zaman & Xiaohua Wu & Xiancheng Zheng & Shahbaz Khan & Husan Ali, 2018. "Suppression of Switching Crosstalk and Voltage Oscillations in a SiC MOSFET Based Half-Bridge Converter," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-19, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:10:p:2835-:d:555021. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.