electronics

Review
Step-Down DC–DC Converters: An Overview and Outlook
Dulika Nayanasiri * and Yunwei Li

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2R3, Canada;
yunwei.li@ualberta.ca
* Correspondence: nayanasi@ualberta.ca; Tel.: +1-587-598-6063

Abstract: Voltage step-down converters have gained attention, with the rapid development in
industrial robotics, Internet of things, and embedded system applications. Therefore, a comprehen-
sive analysis has been performed, to identify the topologies and architectures used in step-down
converters. Moreover, their operation and performance have been compared. Such an analysis
is helpful, in improving performance of the existing systems, besides designing novel converter
topologies. Furthermore, the converter-topology-derivation methods have been studied, to identify
their applicability for synthesising novel non-isolated DC–DC converters.

Keywords: hybrid converters; isolated DC–DC converter; voltage step-down; non-isolated DC–DC
converters; switched-inductor converters; switched-capacitor converters

1. Introduction
There is a growing demand for step-down DC–DC converters, with the rapid devel-



opment in industrial applications such as data centres [1], industrial robotics, the Internet

 of things (IoT) [2] and embedded systems. These power converters should have high
Citation: Nayanasiri, D.; Li, Y. power density, efficiency, low cost, low weight and higher reliability, to meet the stringent
Step-Down DC–DC Converters: An requirements. There are many strategies to optimise these indices. For example, high- to
Overview and Outlook. Electronics very-high-frequency (HF and VHF) operations reduce the volume of the magnetic and
2022, 11, 1693. https://doi.org/
capacitive elements, since their sizes are inversely proportional to the frequency. However,
10.3390/electronics11111693
the higher switching frequency gives rise to higher switching losses in the semiconductor
Academic Editors: Zbigniew devices and exceeds the conduction losses, when going beyond a few hundreds of kilohertz.
Leonowicz, Tomasz Sikorski and Magnetic-core loss depends on the switching frequency, as given by the Steinmetz equation.
Michał Jasińśki One strategy to increase converter efficiency is reducing the number of semiconductor
devices, while having the required voltages gain. Moreover, the blocking voltage at the off
Received: 29 April 2022
state and the root mean square (RMS) current at the conduction state should be reduced,
Accepted: 22 May 2022
Published: 26 May 2022
to minimise the losses and improve reliability. To this end, different power system archi-
tectures and converter topologies have been synthesised, to get the required voltage gain,
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral while satisfying other requirements.
with regard to jurisdictional claims in In these applications, the system architecture depends on the load and source voltages
published maps and institutional affil-
as well as the load power level and the application [3]. Loads of the above applications
iations.
operate at significantly low voltages and high current, and, hence, the interfacing converters
should have a high to ultra-high voltage step-down capability. For example, the input
voltage of a data centre DC distribution system is in the range of 380 V–400 V, and the
connected loads operate at 1 V–2 V. The interfacing power converter should have a 400:1
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
step-down ratio, if it is realised as a single converter. Alternatively, they can be realised
This article is an open access article
as multi-stage systems, consisting of an unregulated pre-processing stage and a regulated
distributed under the terms and output stage [4]. A highly efficient unregulated step-down stage affects the voltage and
conditions of the Creative Commons provides the electrical isolation. It has an open-loop controller, to drive the active switches,
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// since tight voltage regulation is not required. However, converter realisation might be
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ complex, due to the high-frequency isolation transformer. The regulated output stage can
4.0/). be realised using different approaches, as shown in Figure 1. There is another architecture,

Electronics 2022, 11, 1693. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11111693 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/electronics

Electronics 2022, 11, 1693 2 of 20

called partial/differential power processing. In these systems, converters having fixed

and regulated output are stacked, to obtain the desired gain and voltage regulation. The
regulated converter processes a part of the input power, to improve efficiency and reduce
the device stresses. In both approaches, the non-regulated converter can be realised, either
using non-isolated or isolated converters [5,6]. Moreover, there are many approaches to
realise the regulated converter.
A comprehensive review of the existing step-down power converter topologies and
their power control strategies helps identify: (1) their operating mechanism, to devise new
power converter architectures and topologies and (2) strategies to improve the performance
of the existing methods. The analysis is performed in Sections 2–7 and the findings are
summarised in Section 8, while providing a brief overlook. Later, the methods to synthesise
novel converter topologies are briefly reviewed in Section 9. The performance of these
systems depends on the converter controller. A brief review on that topic is presented in
Section 10, before concluding this article.

Figure 1. The step-down DC–DC converter categorization.

2. Voltage Step-Down Methods

The input voltage of a converter can be step-down, using either isolated or non-isolated
converters, as shown in Figure 1. The isolated converters are based on the high-frequency
transformers (HFT), and they can be used as either DC transformers (DCX) or voltage
regulators. The non-isolated converters are realised, using either a switched inductor,
a switched capacitor, or combining them. Inductors and capacitors are used to transfer
energy in the first two converter classes, and both are employed in the latter case, known
as hybrid converters. Moreover, converters that belong to these classes can be further
divided into sub-classes, by considering their realisation and behaviour, as in Figure 1.
Converters of these classes can be employed as a single unit or in combination, to meet the
specifications. Auxiliary circuit units, such as active and passive voltage clamp circuits,
can be integrated into these circuits. Although they shape the switching trajectory of the
semiconductor devices, they do not help acquire additional voltage gain. Therefore, they
are not taken into consideration, when classifying the converters.

3. Switched-Inductor Converters
An inductor is switched between the source and the load, to transfer power while
stepping down the voltage. There is a single magnetic element in the buck and quasi-
resonant buck converters, to transfer power. The other two converter classes, called tapped-
and coupled-inductor converters, have complex magnetic structures, to acquire higher
gains and improve converter performance, as explained in the following subsections.

3.1. Buck and Quasi-Resonant Buck Converter

The buck converter shown in Figure 2a is the well-known solution to step down
a voltage, while regulating the output. However, it cannot be used in its pure form
because of the power losses of the diode and inductive filter, in high-current applications.
The diode losses are minimised, replaced with a synchronous rectifier. The interleaved
operation helps minimise inductor losses [7], despite the resultant converter having a
Electronics 2022, 11, 1693 3 of 20

higher number of active and passive devices. The buck converter does not have very high
efficiency, when providing high- to ultra-high-voltage gains, operating at extreme duty
ratios. Many other converter types have been proposed, focusing on this problem, as
explained in the following subsections. The buck converter is a hard-switched converter
and has higher switching losses. To overcome this problem, the switching trajectory of the
semiconductor devices has been modified, by integrating resonant inductors and capacitors,
and the resultant units are called resonant switches [8,9]. The resonant switch depicted in
Figure 2b has zero-current switching (ZCS) turn-on and -off. The resonant switch shown in
Figure 2c has zero-voltage-switching (ZVS) because of the parallel capacitor. The switching
frequency of quasi-resonant converters should be modulated, to vary the converter gain. A
comprehensive comparison of the quasi-resonant converter types and their operation can
be found in [10]. By extending the resonant switching concept, an optimal converter has
been derived in [11], and it is shown in Figure 2d.

Figure 2. Buck converter and quasi-resonant buck converters; (a) buck, (b) ZCS quasi-resonant,
(c) ZVS quasi-resonant and (d) modified converters.

3.2. Tapped-Inductor-Based Converters

The output filter inductor of the conventional buck converter is replaced using a
tapped inductor (TI), to add an extra degree of freedom to control the converter voltage
gain, as shown in Figure 3a [12]. The TI buck converter configuration has been rearranged,
to simplify the gate driver requirement, as explained in [13], and the resultant converter is a
coupled inductor converter, having the same voltage-conversion gain. However, the output
current ripple is significant, and, hence, the output-filter-capacitor requirement is large.
Moreover, there is a discontinuous inductor current, under certain loading conditions. As a
result, there are right-half-plane zeros. Thus, it gives rise to complex controller design.

Figure 3. Tapped inductor based buck converters; (a) diode tapped inductor, (b) three-winding
tapped inductor with series capacitor, (c) taped and coupled inductor converter and (d) tapped
inductor with auxiliary circuit.

To overcome these problems, a multi-phase buck converter, shown in Figure 3b, has
been proposed [14]. Different voltage gains can be obtained, by changing the tapping point
Electronics 2022, 11, 1693 4 of 20

of the inductor, as discussed in [15–17]. The voltage gain of diode-tapped converters can be
further increased, by adding a tertiary winding to the inductor and a series capacitor, as
shown in Figure 3c [18]. The converter is a derivative of the series capacitor TI converter,
proposed in [19]. The output current ripple of these converters can be minimised, using an
additional phase, while using the same magnetic core to realise the inductors, as in [14]. An
auxiliary circuit comprising of an additional switch and a diode, to change the equivalent
inductance, has been added, as shown in Figure 3d, to minimise the steady-state inductor
current ripple, and the converter transient response [20]. Moreover, bi-directional power
transfer capability has been introduced into the series capacitor tapped inductor converter
in [21], with the help of an additional switch and a clamping capacitor.

3.3. Multi-Phase and Coupled-Inductor Converters

There is a magnetic energy transfer element at the output of a step-down converter. It
eliminates the pulsating nature of the output current because of the current source property.
However, there is a ripple on top of the average output current, and it should be minimised
to reduce the output filter capacitor requirement. The ripple magnitude can be reduced
◦
using multi-phase operation, as in [22]. To this end, the output current is interleaved by 360
n ;
where n is the number of interleaved phases. The additional phases add semiconductor
and passive devices that cause an extra burden on the converter optimisation, especially
efficiency. The active switches switch the input voltage, and, hence, they should have high
blocking voltage with higher on resistance. It gives rise to higher conduction losses. The
duty ratio of these converters has been extended, by tapping the inductor, as demonstrated
in [23]. However, leakage energy of the magnetic elements degrades the performance of
these converters, and that problem can be circumvented to a certain extend, by coupling the
magnetic elements. Coupled inductors reduce the magnetic volume of a power converter,
besides the performance improvements in the steady-state and transient conditions of a
voltage regulator [7]. Apart from that, the winding turns ratio can be adjusted, to get the
required voltage gain, by scaling the duty ratio [24]. The performance of these coupled
inductor converters can be improved, using soft-switching techniques. To this end, resonant
tanks can be integrated, as in [25]. It helps to shape not only the switching trajectory of
active semiconductor devices but also the voltage gain. However, either solution is not
a viable option to get high- to ultra-high step-down ratios. Coupled inductors can be
integrated into the conventional buck converter, to obtain higher gain, as in [26]. The
energy stored in the leakage inductance has been recycled, using a clamp circuit.

4. Switched-Capacitor Converters
Converters of this class use capacitors as the energy transfer element. It helps increase
the power density of converters. However, the charge distribution through a capacitor
is exponential, and, hence, there are some disadvantages in the resultant converters. To
overcome this problem, the original converters belonging to this category have been modi-
fied, by integrating an element having current source properties. It could be a converter or
an inductor. The resultant converters are called hybrid, switched resonator, and resonant
switched capacitor converters. More details about these converters are provided in the
following subsections.

4.1. Pure Switched-Capacitor Converters

Converters based on a capacitor-switching network, to transfer power, have been
proposed, to increase the power density, by eliminating the magnetic elements [27]. The
resultant converter is called a switched capacitor or charge-pump-type converter. There are
many capacitor-switching networks, known as a 2-to-1 converter, shown in Figure 4a; a
series-parallel (4-to-1) converter, shown in Figure 4b; a Dickson (4-to-1) converter, shown
in Figure 4c; a Fibonacci (5-to-1) converter, shown in Figure 4d; a ladder (4-to-1) con-
verter, shown in Figure 4e; and a flying-capacitor multilevel (4-to-1) converter, shown
in Figure 4f. They have structure-dependent fixed voltage conversion ratios, along with
Electronics 2022, 11, 1693 5 of 20

other performance limits, discussed in [28,29]. Therefore, they can be cascaded to get
higher gains. Moreover, they have high input and output current ripples as well as higher
electromagnetic noises. A capacitor voltage divider, connected at the input [30], as well
as converter paralleling [31] and interleaved output [32], are the strategies proposed to
mitigate this problem. The output voltage of these converters has been controlled, by
varying the switching frequency, considering its relationship with the equivalent output
impedance [33]. However, it is not an ideal solution, when considering the realisation of
the electromagnetic interference avoidance filters. As a solution, control strategies based
on duty ratio modulation [34–36] have been proposed, to regulate the output voltage in
a limited range. Moreover, there is relatively low efficiency in these converters, with the
exponential charge distribution among capacitors. The split-phase control method has been
proposed in [37], ensuring each capacitor has an equal voltage at the transition, using more
of the buffer stage.

Figure 4. Step-down converters based on the switched-capacitors; (a) 2-to-1, (b) series-parallel (4-to-1),
(c) Dickson (4-to-1), (d) Fibonacci (5-to-1), (e) ladder (4-to-1) and (f) flying-capacitor multilevel (4-to-
1) converters.

4.2. Resonant Switched-Capacitor Converters

Another solution, to control charge-distribution loss, is placing an inductor in series
with the energy-transfer capacitor, as shown in Figure 5a. The resultant converter is called
a resonant switched-capacitor (ReSC) converter [38]. The resonant half-wave operation
gives rise to zero-current-switching (ZCS), at the turn-on and -off instance. An inductor has
been integrated into the flying capacitor multi-level converter, in [39]. These converters can
be cascaded, to get higher gain and increase the power density, as illustrated in [40]. The
inductor can be realised as a single element, as shown in Figure 5b, or distributed elements,
as illustrated in Figure 5c [41]. The output impedance and losses depend on the converter
topology and the switching frequency. The dead-time control-based voltage regulation
method has been proposed, using parametric analysis of the converter, considering the
component non-idealities in [36,42]. The capacitor charging time has been controlled, while
having a constant discharging time, to control the output voltage in [43]. Pulse density has
been modulated in [44], to control the output voltage. However, these control methods
help regulate the output voltage, within a limited range. The dual-phase version of the
conventional resonant switched-capacitor converters has been proposed in [45], to obtain
reduced output voltage ripple and high power density.
Electronics 2022, 11, 1693 6 of 20

Figure 5. Resonant switched-capacitor converters; (a) basic form, (b) with a single inductor at output
and (c) with distributed inductors.

4.3. Switched-Resonator Converter

A switched-capacitor network can be integrated with a distributed inductor, to give
rise to another converter class, having voltage step-down capability. It is called a switched-
resonator converter (SwRC). The converter depicted in Figure 6a [46] has two resonant
networks, during the two sub-intervals of the operation. Another converter class, called a
switched-tank converter (STC), has been proposed, based on the same fundamental concept
in [47,48]. Figure 6b shows a converter with a different resonant-tank configuration during
the two sub-intervals of the operation. The resonant inductor currents complete one-half
cycle, during their conduction period, and, hence, the associated switches have ZCS turn-on
and -off. Converters have fixed voltage gain, which can be obtained by considering the
charge balance of the capacitor. It is one limitation of both SC and ReSC converters, and
the above two converters have the same problem. As a solution, it is suggested to employ
multiple resonant tanks to process power, while using at least one inductor in multiple
operating modes. The inductor connected to the load shown in Figure 6c is operated in
both linear and resonant modes to regulate the output voltage in a wider range in [49].
The closed-form solution for the converter gain in [50] shows that the switched resonator
converters can be controlled by modulating either duty ratio, as conventional DC-DC
converters or switching frequency. A switched-resonator converter having a wide voltage
gain range has been proposed in [51,52]. The duty ratio range to regulate the output voltage
can be adjusted by varying the ratio between the inductors.

Figure 6. Switched resonator converters; (a) basic form, (b) switched-tank converter (STC) and
(c) SwRC having multi-mode capability.
Electronics 2022, 11, 1693 7 of 20

5. Hybrid Converters
Inductors are integrated into the switched capacitor converters, to control the charge
distribution characteristics of the switched-capacitor converters. The resultant converter
is in the resonant mode, when the switching frequency ( f s ) equals the resonant frequency
( f r ) of the LC circuit. The converter is considered an ReSC converter, in this case. The
converter goes into multi-mode, i.e., the inductor has both resonant and linear operation,
when the f s is higher than the f r , as explained in Section 4.3. Both ReSC and SwRC have a
similar behaviour. When the f s is much greater than the f r , inductors only operate in the
linear mode, and the resultant converter is called a hybrid converter. Both the inductor
and capacitor are involved in the power transfer, from the input to the output, in the
hybrid converters. Converters of this class can be classified as single-path, dual-path and
multi-phase converters, by considering the number of energy-transfer paths connected to
the load. Furthermore, there are two other converter types, called series-capacitor buck and
three-level buck converters. More details about these converter classes are presented in the
following sections.

5.1. Extended or Series-Capacitor Buck Converters

A higher conversion ratio is a concern, when step-down converters are used as voltage
regulators. This aim is achieved by introducing a capacitor into the two-phase buck
converter, as shown in Figure 7a [53], and the three-phase converter, as shown in [54]. The
added capacitor scales down the input voltage, to reduce device voltage stresses and output
capacitor requirements, by reducing the current ripple magnitude. The input voltage is
shared among the number of phases, and it decides the duty-ratio range, to regulate the
output voltage [55,56]. The series-capacitor converter has a linear gain within a limited
duty-ratio range, and beyond that, there is a quadratic relationship. A switching-control
strategy for the two-phase series capacitor converter has been proposed in [57], to obtain a
linear gain in the full range. Moreover, the voltage-gain range of the two-phase converter
can be further extended, with help of an additional capacitor, as shown in Figure 7b [58]. A
series-capacitor-based front has been introduced in [59], to reduce the inductor-switching-
node voltage. The flying capacitor of all the above converters is passively stabilised,
besides the balanced current sharing among inductors, due to capacitor-charge balance.
However, all the switches should block full-input voltage at the start up, since the series
capacitors are not charged. The introduced modification to the series-capacitor converter
front-end, shown in Figure 7c [60], charges two capacitors in a series at the start up, to
eliminate the above drawback. A similar strategy has been employed to divide the input
voltage to acquire a higher gain for the converter, proposed in [61]. It helps to reduce
the voltage stresses and losses in the devices. Moreover, the extended buck converter
and its derivatives have a hard-switching operation. A resonant tank is placed in series
with the energy-transferring capacitor, to realise the soft-switching operation, as shown in
Figure 7a [62].
The load transients response can be further improved, by coupling the output filter
into a single magnetic structure, as explained in [63,64], compared to the conventional
two-inductor realization. Furthermore, a series capacitor has been employed in the tapped-
inductor buck converter, as a part of the resonant circuit formed by an additional inductor,
in series with the extra switch [65]. The switch helps transfer the energy stored in the
tapped inductor to the output, through the formed resonant circuit. The same approach
has been incorporated in the tapped-inductor converter, shown in Figure 7d [66], to recycle
the energy stored in the leakage inductance. Both converters have higher voltage-step-
down gain, and it is a function of the tapped-inductor turns ratio and leakage inductance.
A variant of this converter has been derived, by paralleling two converters and ground
referencing the energy circulation switch [67], besides modifying the front end of the
resulting converter, similar to the series capacitor converter in [68].
Electronics 2022, 11, 1693 8 of 20

Figure 7. Extended or series-capacitor buck converter (a) with a resonant circuit, (b) gain exten-
sion using an additional capacitor, (c) with an initial capacitor charging mechanism and (d) with
a tapped-inductor.

5.2. Three-Level Buck Converter

Series-connected switching devices and flying-capacitor-based converters have been
proposed, to reduce voltage stresses on the semiconductor devices in [69]. This strategy
has been proposed for the inverter application, intially, and it is extended for the DC–
DC converters in [70]. These converters belong to the hybrid converter family because
a capacitor and an inductor are used to deliver the power, as shown in Figure 8a. The
converter topology can be directly employed to step down high input voltage, with a
modified switching sequence that effectively doubles the switching frequency. It reduces
the switching ripple and size of the filter elements, as well as increases the converter’s
open-loop bandwidth and the efficiency, as demonstrated in [71]. A different realization
of the three-level buck converter has been proposed, as shown in Figure 8b [72], with
similar properties. Moreover, they are paralleled, to reduce the device current stresses
and output-current ripple to minimise the output-filtering requirements [73]. The flying
capacitor should maintain the desired voltage at the start-up and steady-state conditions, to
have the required gain and reduce device stresses. To this end, different control strategies
have been proposed. Among them, a valley-current-control-based method is applied
in [74]. Moreover, a transient-control strategy for a modified three-level converter has been
proposed in [75]. Additional active and uncontrolled semiconductor devices are added
into the proposed converter, when active only during load-transient conditions. Moreover,
some converters belonging to this class can be used as bi-directional converters, and one
such converter has been reported in [76]. It operates in the buck-mode, when transferring
energy from the high-to-low voltage direction.

Figure 8. Different realizations of three-level buck converter; (a) basic, and (b) improved converters.

5.3. Single-Path Converters

There is a single energy-transfer path between the energy-transfer element, source
and load, during the different sub-intervals of operations in this converter class. Such a
hybrid converter can be realised, using the switched-inductor and switched-capacitor cells
proposed in [77]. They are embedded with the existing non-isolated DC–DC converters,
to get steep voltage gains. A single-path hybrid step-down converter has been realised,
Electronics 2022, 11, 1693 9 of 20

by dividing the input DC-link, using a switched capacitor network, and connecting buck
converters across the capacitors. The buck converters are controlled as interleaved units
in [78]. This approach is more useful when designing the power stage of portable systems.
A single-path hybrid converter with an inductor connected to the input port has been
proposed in [79,80], as shown in Figure 9a,b. The converter has higher efficiency, since the
equivalent series resistance of the inductor does not make a significant contribution to the
total converter power loss. An analytical method, to compare passive component volumes
of switched-capacitor hybrid converters, has been proposed in [81].

Figure 9. Single-path hybrid converters having (a) single, and (b) distributed inductors at the
input port.

5.4. Dual-Path Converters

The power losses, due to the parasitic resistance of the inductors at the output stage
of the high-current and low-voltage single-path hybrid converter, is a bottleneck behind
the efficiency improvement. The dual-path converters reduce these losses, by sharing
the output current among different branches connected to the load. The basic concept of
dual-path converters has been presented in [82], along with a novel converter that belongs
to the converter family, as shown in Figure 10a. Other converters belonging to this family
have been presented in [83,84]. Different from the above case, the converter shown in
Figure 10b has dual paths, during two sub-intervals of the operation [85]. Moreover, a
converter having a dual path, during the energy-storing state of the hybrid converter, is
proposed in [86], as depicted in Figure 10c. A dual-path hybrid converter, based on the
series capacitor, is proposed in [87]. The converter has been realised, by paralleling the
series capacitor converter with the dual-path hybrid converter.

Figure 10. Dual-path hybrid converters; (a) output dual path, (b) always dual path and (c) input
dual-path converter.
Electronics 2022, 11, 1693 10 of 20

5.5. Multi-Phase Converters

In this converter class, there are multiple inductors connected to the load, to share
the output current and switched capacitor network, to step down the input voltage. The
capacitors are charged and discharged, while keeping the inductors in their loops. As a
result, there are reduced losses and electromagnetic noises, with the absence of exponential-
charge distribution in the converter. As a result, the output-voltage gain becomes a function
of the duty ratio and the ratio of the pure flying-capacitor-converter gain. A multi-path
converter integrating an inductor to each energy transferring capacitor is proposed in [88]
as shown in Figure 11a. Dual-path converters shown in Figure 11b, based on a similar
concept have been proposed in [89–91]. The inductors of these converters are operated
in interleaved mode, and they are in series with capacitors when they are charging and
discharging. The voltage gain of these converters can be regulated as in conventional
DC-DC converters modulating the pulse width of the control signals.

Figure 11. Multi-phase converters with (a) four and (b) two output inductors.

6. Multi-Stage Converters
Another strategy to gain a high step-down ratio is using multi-stage converters. In
most cases, two-stage converters have been used, considering the efficiency and power
density. The first stage can be realised, using an unregulated converter to maintain efficiency.
It can be either an isolated LLC converter, as proposed in [92], or a non-isolated converter,
as proposed in [64]. In [64], the current stresses on the devices and, hence, the losses
have been minimised, using parallel converters. The voltage stresses on the first-stage
converter have been reduced, using input-series converters in [93,94] and using three-level
converters in [95]. The series input can be realised, using either stacked converters or the
series winding of an isolation transformer. The secondary stage of low-output voltage
and high-current applications has high-current stresses on the semiconductor devices and
losses in the magnetic devices. To minimise the volume of the magnetic devices, parallel
converters have been employed with integrated magnetic structures [93,95]. The two stages
can be connected via a strong DC link or using a virtual link. The DC-bus capacitance is a
bottleneck, when increasing the power density of the multi-stage converters. To minimise
the DC-link capacitance requirement, converters having virtual DC linked, as shown in
Figure 12, have been proposed. The converter has a topology-dependent switching-control
strategy [96,97].
Electronics 2022, 11, 1693 11 of 20

Figure 12. Dual-stage converter with a virtual bus.

7. High-Frequency Transformer-Based Converters

High-frequency transformer-based topologies help step down input voltage, while
providing electrical isolation between the source and load. These converters can be a part
of multi-stage converters, as discussed in the above section, or single-stage converters. In
the single-stage converters, they might be used in different configurations, to obtain the
required gain. Phase-shifted full-bridge (PSFB) has been used as the building block of the
series-input parallel-output converter, presented in [98]. The dual-active bridge (DAB) is
the basic building block in this converter, and its HFT can be realised using integrated
structures, as in [99], to increase the power density. The input-side switches of the converter,
presented in [99], experience high stresses. This drawback can be eliminated, using the
stacked-DAB configuration, proposed in [100], since the input voltage is shared among
series-connected switches. DAB, with a dual phase-shift-based control strategy, has been
used in pulse-power application in [101]. Different modulation and control strategies
employed with the DAB converters have been discussed in [102]. LLC-resonant converters
are widely used as unregulated converters, due to their optimal performance at the selected
switching frequency. They can be realised, using conventional and matrix transformers, as
discussed in [4]. Furthermore, to enhance the power-processing efficiency, partial power-
processing architecture and suitable converter topologies have been proposed in [103].
The unregulated power path of the converter, presented in [103], has been realised using
an LLC converter, based on the matrix transformer. A transformer for an LLC converter,
having a quarter secondary winding, has been proposed in [104], to reduce DC resistance
and, hence, improve efficiency.

8. Comparison between the Converter Classes and Outlook

In the above subsections, more details about the different converter subclasses have
been discussed, and outcomes are summarised in Table 1. Furthermore, a quantitative
comparison between the converters is provided in Table 2. The analysis shows that isolated
converters, based on an HFT, are ideal for high-voltage and high-power applications. The
passive voltage gain of HFT is crucial, when the power supply needs to be realised as a
single unit, without an intermediate bus. In those applications, input series and parallel-
Electronics 2022, 11, 1693 12 of 20

output configurations give optimal performance, when considering the stresses on the
semiconductor devices and losses in the magnetic devices. The series input can be realised,
by using either multiple stacked cells or series-transformer windings. Multiple converter
cells can be interleaved, to share the output current in low-voltage applications. The
converter power density can be further increased, by using integrated magnetic structures
and virtual intermediate links, supported by the converter-control strategies. To this end,
hybrid converters, based on the multiple output phases, could be another suitable candidate.
On the other hand, the power supply can be realised, using cascaded converters connected
by an intermediate bus. The system front end might be based on a converter having known
gain, i.e., an LLC converter operating at a fixed point. It guarantees the ZVS operation,
under different loading conditions. The converters based on switched-tank topologies
can be employed, by considering their load-independent soft-switching characteristics.
The load-connected regulated stage can be realised, using a converter belonging to the
switched capacitor converter family, by considering their power density. However, the
converters based on pure SC converters might not be ideal candidates, due to low efficiency,
topology-specific voltage gain, and discrete voltage-conversion ratios. This drawback can
be overcome, using derivatives of that converter class, such as ReSC and SwRC converters.
Among them, SwRCs have the most desirable features, for use in low-power applications.
Apart from the converter topologies, power-semiconductor and magnetic-device real-
ization play a crucial role in the efficiency and power density improvement. Semiconductor
devices, based on the wide-band-gap materials, such as GaN and SiC, help minimise losses
in the hard-switched topologies operating at high- to very-high frequencies, due to their
superior switching properties. Moreover, they have high blocking voltage and low on-
resistance, even at higher temperatures, compared to the Si devices [105]. The third factor
behind the performance improvement is magnetic-device realization. It has been shown
that many small inductors in series or parallel combinations are not a viable solution, due
to the volume and total losses [106]. Hence, the integrated magnetics sharing the same
core, for many conductors, has become one of the solutions in high-power applications. On
the other hand, in low-power applications, the thin-film-on-die realization has gained the
lead, with the advancement of the materials. These magnetic structures can be realised
as coupled inductors, to cancel DC flux to avoid saturation [107], using nano-granular
materials [108] and having radial anisotropy [106]. Nano-granular materials help increase
resistivity, to reduce losses. The radial anisotropy helps reduce the excess eddy current
losses because of the vias. Another challenge behind the performance improvement in
step-down converters is fulfilling the capacitance requirement of the energy-transfer and
filter elements. Class II multi-layer ceramic capacitors are used in SC and hybrid converter
topologies, considering their high-energy density, when considering the discrete capac-
itors. However, there are changes in capacitance and equivalent series resistance (ESR)
with ageing, temperature and electric field. Thus, the performance of the SC and ReSC
converters can be impacted by these effects [109]. On the other hand, thin-film technology
has been employed to realise capacitors in integrated voltage regulator (IVR) applications.
It reduces the ESR and equivalent series inductance, to use them in HF applications, while
embedding them into the printed circuit boards.
Most of the step-down converters analyzed in this article have a hard-switching
operation. There are switching losses at the turn-on and -off transitions, in the active
switches and reverse-recovery losses in the diodes. These losses are proportional to the
switching frequency, and it is a hurdle, when improving the efficiency of the Si-device-
based converters. To minimise switching losses, resonant tanks have been integrated [110]
or have realised the help of the parasitic elements of the magnetic and semiconductor
devices [111]. The resultant resonant-converter experiences ZVS and ZCS, at the switching
transitions. Apart from that, voltage and current stresses on the semiconductor devices play
an important role, when considering the converter reliability. The switch current depends
on the converter topology. The device voltage depends on both topology and the rate of
change of the current. The voltage stresses can be reduced, by minimising the parasitic
Electronics 2022, 11, 1693 13 of 20

inductances of the printed circuit board, following good design practices. When it considers
the integrated magnetic elements, the energy stored in the leakage inductance should be
dissipated or recycled, to minimise the stresses on the semiconductor and passive devices.
To this end, passive snubbers [112] or active clamping elements [113] can be integrated into
the converter.

Table 1. Converter comparison.

Topology Advantages Disadvantages Properties
Electrical isolation Higher number of switches There is balanced secondary
LLC Use the leakage inductance Efficiency critically depends on current, due to the matrix
as a part of the resonant circuit loading condition transformer

Isolated Good current balancing

converters capability
Control flexibility, when there Topologies are not isolated, when
DAB used as a part of stacked converter
are parallel outputs
High voltage conversion ratio,
using stacked converters

Switched Large passive device volume Low efficiency at low duty

High Gain
Inductor Hard-switching operation ratios
Switched Tapped
Extends the duty cycle range Leakage energy of inductor
Inductor Inductor Clamp circuits should be
Converters used to reduce device
Voltage overshoot, due to energy
Coupled stresses, due to the energy
High gain stored in leakage inductance
Inductor stored in leakage inductance
Large DC magnetizing current
Lack of lossless voltage
Topology dependant gain
High power density, due to a lack regulation
Switched
of magnetic elements, good devi
Capacitor Low efficiency
ce voltage clamp Discrete output levels
Switched High EMI, large capacitor bank
Capacitor Resonant High efficiency and high Controlled charge
Converters Vary output voltage modulating
Switched power density, ZCS operation, small distribution
switching frequency
Capacitor capacitor bank among circuit elements
Switched ZCS operation, small capacitor Regulate output voltage
Distributed resonant inductor
Resonator bank modulating pulse width
Higher losses on magnetic High step down gains
Low voltage stresses on switches
Single elements using tapped-inductor
Path Voltage gain control
Small passive component size
modulating duty ratio
Hard-switching converters
Low-voltage stresses on Voltage gain control
Dual/ switches modulating duty ratio
Multi
Ultra-high gain without Soft-charging for flying
Path Higher number of switches
isolation transformer capacitors
Hybrid Voltage stresses on the devices Divide input voltage, using
Converters Low devices stresses and losses
at the startup a series capacitor
Extended High step-down gains
Buck Limited regulation range when Multiple phases to share
Automatic current balance in
increasing number of phases output current
all phases
Reduce voltage stresses on
Three- switches
Suitable for high input
level High reliability and efficiency voltage applications
Buck
Reduce passive components
sizes in some converters
Electronics 2022, 11, 1693 14 of 20

Table 2. Converter comparison, considering voltage gain, and number of semiconductor and passive
devices.

Topology
Voltage Switches/Diode/ Voltage Current
Converter Converter Gain Ind/Caps Stresses Stresses
Figure
Class Type
√
Figure 2a D 1/1/1/0 Vin I D
√ 2
−b + (b − 4ac)
Buck and 2a
Lf
derivatives Figure 2d a= 1 − 2RsL 1/2/2/1
b = −D
Switched c = CR L f s
inductor D
D + (1 − D ) N
Figure 3a 1/1/1/0 Vin + (N-1)Vo
N = 1 + nn12
Tapped Figure 3b D
4/0/2/1 Vin
2( n + 1) 2( n + 1)
inductor
Dn1
Figure 3c n1 + n2 + n3 4/0/3/1 Vin
Figure 3d D 2/2/1/0
Figure 4a 2:1 4/0/0/1
( N − 1)( N + 2)
Figure 4b 4:1 3N-2/0/0/N-1 (N-1)Vo , . . ., 2Vo , Vo N
4( N − 1)
Basic Figure 4c 4:1 3N-2/0/0/N-1 2Vo , Vo N
switched 3k + 1/0/0/k F (k + 1)Vo , . . ., 2Vo , Vo
capacitor Figure 4d 5:1
k- # of stages F(.)-Fibonacci series
4( N − 1)
Figure 4e 4:1 2N/0/0/N-1 Vo N
Switched
capacitor Figure 4f 4:1 2N/0/0/N-1 Vo N
converters Vin
Figure 5a 2 2/2/1/1 Vin − Vo
Resonant Io
Vin N and
switched Figure 5b 10/0/1/3 Vin − Vo 2Io
4
capacitor N
Figure 5c Vin 10/0/3/3 Vin − Vo 2Io
4 N
Vin
Figure 6a 3 2/5/1/2 Vin − Vo
Switched Vin
Figure 6b 4 10/0/2/3 Vo and 2Vo
resonator
1
converter 2 and function of
Figure 6c 2/2/2/1 Vin − Vo
f s and D
DVin Vin
Figure 7a 2 4/0/2/1 Vin and 2
Series DVin Vin
Figure 7b 3 5/0/2/2 3
capacitor DVin Vin Io
Figure 7c 2 4/0/2/2 Vin and 2 4
converter
DVin (n + 1)Vin P
Figure 7d (n + 1 + D )
3/0/1/1 (n + 1 + D DVin

Three Figure 8a DVin 4/0/1/1 Vin and Vin − Vc

Vi n
level Figure 8b DVin 2/2/1/2 2
Hybrid Figure 9a Vin
3/0/1/1 Vo
Single 2−D
converters Vin
path Figure 9b 2−D 3/0/2/1 Vo
DVin
Figure 10a 1+D 3/0/1/1 2Vo − Vin
Dual Vin
Figure 10b 3−2D 6/0/1/2 2Vo and Vo
path
Vin
Figure 10c 2−D 4/0/1/1 Vin − Vo and Vo
DVin ( N − k)Vin
Multi Figure 11a N ; N=4 8/0/4/3 VCk = N
phase DVin ( N − k)Vin
Figure 11b N ; N=7 9/0/2/6 VCk = N

9. Topology Derivation
Synthesising the non-isolated step-down converter topology, when the voltage gain
polynomial (VGP) is given along the input and output current ripple as well as the desired
duty ratio range, is another challenging task [85]. The converter synthesis, starting from
the VGP, is called an inverse problem. To this end, there are several approaches, known as
the connection matrix method [114], along with the design rules [115], state-space model-
Electronics 2022, 11, 1693 15 of 20

based [116], flux-balance method [117] and low-entropy-equations-based method [118–121].

Connection-matrix-based methods and their derivatives give redundant, non-realizable
and degenerative solutions, at the end of the synthesis process, since they are based on
the high-entropy equations that contain more unknowns than equations. The state-space-
based methods user should have experience and intuition when synthesising the converter.
Moreover, they have limited usability, when synthesising converters containing capacitor-
only loops. Therefore, the design-oriented low-entropy-based method helps synthesise
converters, belonging to the non-isolated branch of Figure 1.
The operation of the synthesised converters is analysed, by considering the voltage-
second balance of the energy transfer inductor, using the method explained in [122]. A
converter could be in either continuous-conduction, boundary or discontinuous-conduction
modes, depending on the loading condition. Several basic step-down converter topologies
in different operation modes have been analyzed in [122]. However, the converters are
synthesised, assuming that the converter is in the continuous conduction mode.

10. Converter Control

DC–DC converters act as either a voltage regulator or a DC transformer (DCX), when
it is connected between a source and a load. The converter should maintain a constant
voltage across the load terminal, despite variations in the source voltage and the load.
However, intermediate-link DC–DC converters act as a DCX. They are based on the open-
loop controllers and maintain a constant output voltage, without regulating it. Voltage
regulators have a closed loop, to track the desired output. The converter’s transient re-
sponse has a significant impact on both the converter topology and the controller realisation
method. The controllers are realised by either sensing output voltage, called voltage-model
controller (VMC) [123], or measuring the inductor current, called current-model controller
(CMC) [124]. They are known as feedback control strategies because the output is com-
pared against a reference signal in the controller model. Disturbances are predicted in
the feed-forward controller, to inject them into the controller loop to minimise their im-
pact. There are two other frequently used controller-implementation methods, known as
observer-based feedback control and predictive control. The compensator of the feedback
loop is implemented using linear approaches, called proportional (P), proportional-integral
(PI) and proportional-integral-derivative (PID) controllers. The integral controller is known
as a Type I compensator. When it is cascaded with a phase-lead network, it is called a Type
II compensator, and when there are two cascaded phase-lead networks, it is called a Type
III compensator [125].
The control signals of these controllers can be implemented using fixed-frequency
pulse-width-modulated (PWM) control signals. The implementation can be based on either
analog circuits (operational/transcendence amplifiers) or a digital controller, such as a
microcontroller and a digital signals processor. The sampling frequency of the analog-to-
digital converters (ADC) influences the controller performance, compared to the analog
counterpart. Moreover, active switch control signals might have variable switching fre-
quencies. In one implementation, the switch is turned off for a fixed time interval, and
on time is modulated [126]. This strategy is called constant off-time modulation. On the
contrary, the on time can be modulated, and the resultant modulation method is called the
constant-on-time modulation [127]. Both approaches do not have stability issues, but they
are based on the variable frequency operation. Apart from that, there is a control strategy
called hysteresis control. It determines the switching instant, rather than the pulse width,
constraining the inductor current within a band. Therefore, it can not be considered a PWM
strategy [128]. Besides the PWM strategies, phase-shift modulation (PSM) is used to control
the power flow, especially in dual-bridge-based step-down converters. The phase angle
between the terminal voltage of the two bridges is modulated, to determine the power-
flow direction and magnitude. It gives rise to higher RMS transformer current, under the
light-load conditions. The phase shift modulation between control signals of the two legs
of a single bridge increases the degree of freedom. There is a comprehensive review of the
Electronics 2022, 11, 1693 16 of 20

PSM-based control strategies, used in the bridge converters, in [102]. A comprehensive

analysis of DC–DC power-converter-controller design methods can be found in [129].

11. Conclusions
In this article, a comprehensive overview of the existing step-down converter architec-
tures and topologies is presented. The analysis shows that these converters can be broadly
categorised into two groups, considering the transformer isolation. The transformer-
isolated converters have either fixed or regulated output. The non-isolated converters are
based on the switched-inductor, switched-capacitor and hybrid converters. They have
different sub-classes that can be identified, based on their topology and operation. They are
ideal candidates to realise the point-of-load converters in low-power applications. Among
them, hybrid converters gain attention because of their desirable features. On the other
hand, the multi-stage converters are helpful in the high-power applications.

Author Contributions: Writing review and editing, D.N.; supervision and article review, Y.L. All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was supported by the Canada First Research Excellence Fund (CFREF) -
Future Energy Systems Research Initiative at the University of Alberta.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Bindra, A. Driven by Density, Efficiency at Low Cost, Power Integration Reaches New Heights. IEEE Power Electron. Mag. 2022, 9,
14–19. [CrossRef]
2. Giasson, A.; Dokopoulos, S. Rethinking the Power Delivery Networks of Mobile Robots. IEEE Power Electron. Mag. 2020, 7, 12–18.
[CrossRef]
3. Krein, P.T. Data Center Challenges and Their Power Electronics. CPSS Trans. Power Electron. Appl. 2017, 2, 39–46. [CrossRef]
4. Fei, C.; Lee, F.C.; Li, Q. High-Efficiency High-Power-Density LLC Converter with an Integrated Planar Matrix Transformer for
High-Output Current Applications. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2017, 64, 9072–9082. [CrossRef]
5. Xue, F.; Yu, R.; Huang, A. A Family of Ultrahigh Efficiency Fractional Dc-Dc Topologies for High Power Energy Storage Device.
IEEE JESTPE 2021, 9, 1420–1427. [CrossRef]
6. Chen, L.; Wu, H.; Xu, P.; Hu, H.; Wan, C. A High Step-down Non-Isolated Bus Converter with Partial Power Conversion Based on
Synchronous LLC Resonant Converter. In Proceedings of the IEEE APEC, Charlotte, NC, USA, 15–19 March 2015; pp. 1950–1955.
7. Wong, P.L.; Xu, P.; Yang, B.; Lee, F.C. Performance Improvements of Interleaving VRMs with Coupling Inductors. IEEE Trans.
Power Electron. 2001, 16, 499–507. [CrossRef]
8. Liu, K.; Lee, F.C. Resonant Switches—A Unified Approach to Improve Performances of Switching Converters. In Proceedings of
the IEEE INTELEC, New Orleans, LA, USA, 4–7 November 1984.
9. Lee, F.C. High-Frequency Quasi-Resonant Converter Technologies. IEEE Proc. 1988, 76, 377–390. [CrossRef]
10. Jovanovik, M.M. Merits and Limitations of Resonant and Soft-Switched Converters. In Proceedings of the IEEE INTELEC,
Washington, DC, USA, 4–8 October 1992; pp. 51–58.
11. Divakar, B.P.; Sutanto, D. Optimum Buck Converter with a Single Switch. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 1999, 14, 636–642. [CrossRef]
12. Park, J.H.; Cho, B.H. The Zero Voltage Switching (ZVS) Critical Conduction Mode (CRM) Buck Converter with Tapped-Inductor.
IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2005, 20, 762–774. [CrossRef]
13. Yao, K.; Ye, M.; Xu, M.; Lee, F.C. Tapped-Inductor Buck Converter for High-Step-Down. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2005, 20,
775–780. [CrossRef]
14. Nishijima, K.; Ishida, D.; Harada, K.; Nabeshima, T.; Sato, T.; Nakano, T. A Novel Two-Phase Buck Converter with Two Cores and
Four Windings. In Proceedings of the IEEE INTELEC, Rome, Italy, 30 September–4 October 2007; pp. 861–866.
15. Grant, D.A.; Darroman, Y.; Suter, J. Synthesis of Tapped-Inductor Switched-Mode Converters. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2007,
22, 1964–1969. [CrossRef]
16. Williams, B.W. Unified Synthesis of Tapped-Inductor DC-to-DC Converters. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2014, 29, 5370–5383.
[CrossRef]
17. Abramovitz, A.; Yao, J.; Smedley, K. Unified Modeling of PWM Converters with Regular or Tapped Inductors Using TIS-SFG
Approach. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2016, 31, 1702–1716. [CrossRef]
18. Yau, Y.T.; Jiang, W.Z.; Hwu, K.I. Ultrahigh Step-down Converter with Wide Input Voltage Range Based on Topology Exchange.
IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2017, 32, 5341–5364. [CrossRef]
19. Nishijima, K.; Sato, T.; Nabeshima, T. A Novel Tapped-Inductor Buck Converter for Home DC Power Supply Sys Stem. In
Proceedings of the IEEE ICRERA, Nagasaki, Japan, 11–14 November 2012; pp. 1–8.
Electronics 2022, 11, 1693 17 of 20

20. Gu, Y.; Zhang, D. Voltage Regulator Buck Converter with a Tapped Inductor for Fast Transient Response Application. IEEE Trans.
Power Electron. 2014, 29, 6249–6254. [CrossRef]
21. Yau, Y.T.; Jiang, W.Z.; Hwu, K.I. Bidirectional Operation of High Step-Down Converter. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2015, 30,
6829–6844. [CrossRef]
22. Lee, I.; Cho, S.; Moon, G. Interleaved Buck Converter Having Low Switching Losses and Improved Step-Down Conversion Ratio.
IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2012, 27, 3664–3675. [CrossRef]
23. Xu, P.; Wei, J.; Lee, F.C. Multiphase Coupled-Buck Converter - A Novel High Efficient 12 V Voltage Regulator Module. IEEE Trans.
Power Electron. 2003, 18, 74–82.
24. Yao, K.; Qiu, Y.; Xu, M.; Lee, F.C. A Novel Winding-Coupled Buck Converter for High-Frequency, High-Step-Down DC–DC
Conversion. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2005, 20, 1017–1024. [CrossRef]
25. Ge, T.; Miao, Z.; Liu, L. Active Cross-Commutated (ACC) Buck Converter. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2022, 69, 2577–2587.
[CrossRef]
26. Hajiheidari, M.; Farzanehfard, H.; Adib, E. High-Step-Down DC–DC Converter with Continuous Output Current Using Coupled-
Inductors. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2019, 34, 10936–10944. [CrossRef]
27. Singer, Z.; Emanuel, A.; Erlicki, M.S. Power Regulation by Means of a Switched Capacitor. Proc. IEE 1972, 119, 149–152. [CrossRef]
28. Makowski, M.S.; MaksimoviC, D. Performance Limits of Switched-Capacitor DC-DC Converters. In Proceedings of the IEEE
PESC, Atlanta, GA, USA, 18–22 June 1995; pp. 1215–1221.
29. Mahnashi, Y.; Peng, F.Z. Generalization of the Fundamental Limit Theory in a Switched-Capacitor Converter. IEEE Trans Power
Electron. 2017, 32, 6673–6676. [CrossRef]
30. Umeno, T.; Takahashi, K.; Oota, I.; Ueno, F.; Inoue, T. New Switched-Capacitor DC-DC Converter with Low Input Current Ripple
and Its Hybridization. In Proceedings of the IEEE Midwest Symposium on Circuits and Systems, Calgary, AB, Canada, 12–14
August 1990; pp. 1091–1094.
31. Chung, H.S.-H.; Hui, S.Y.R.; Tang, S.C.; Wu, A. On the Use of Current Control Scheme for Switched-Capacitor DC/DC Converters.
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2000, 47, 238–244. [CrossRef]
32. Han, J.; von Jouanne, A.; Temes, G.C. A New Approach to Reducing Output Ripple in Switched-Capacitor-Based Step-down
DC-DC Converters. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2006, 21, 1548–1555. [CrossRef]
33. Seeman, M.D.; Sanders, S.R. Analysis and Optimization of Switched-Capacitor DC–DC Converters. IEEE Trans. Power Electron.
2008, 23, 841–851. [CrossRef]
34. Cheong, S.V.; Chung, S.H.; Ioinovici, A. Duty-Cycle Control Boosts DC-DC Converters. IEEE Circuits Devices Mag. 1993, 9, 36–37.
[CrossRef]
35. Cheong, S.V.; Chung, H.; Ioinovici, A. Inductorless DC-to-DC Converter with High Power Density. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 1994,
41, 208–215. [CrossRef]
36. Suetsugu, T. Novel PWM Control Method of Switched Capacitor DC-DC Converter. In Proceedings of the IEEE ISCAS, Monterey,
CA, USA, 31 May–3 June 1998; Volume 6, pp. 454–457.
37. Lei, Y.; May, R.; Pilawa-Podgurski, R. Split-Phase Control: Achieving Complete Soft-Charging Operation of a Dickson Switched-
Capacitor Converter. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2016, 31, 770–782. [CrossRef]
38. Cheng, K.W.E. New Generation of Switched Capacitor Converters. In Proceedings of the IEEE PESC, Fukuoka, Japan, 22 May
1998; pp. 1529–1535.
39. Rentmeister, J.S.; Stauth, J.T. A 48V: 2V Flying Capacitor Multilevel Converter Using Current-Limit Control for Flying Capacitor
Balance. In Proceedings of the IEEE APEC, Tampa, FL, USA, 26–30 March 2017.
40. Ye, Z.; Lei, Y.; Pilawa-podgurski, R.C.N. The Cascaded Resonant Converter: A Hybrid Switched-Capacitor Topology With High
Power Density and Efficiency. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2020, 35, 4946–4958. [CrossRef]
41. Liu, W.C.; Ye, Z.; Pilawa-Podgurski, R.C.N. Comparative Analysis on Minimum Output Impedance of Fixed-Ratio Hybrid
Switched Capacitor Converters. In Proceedings of the IEEE COMPEL, Toronto, ON, Canada, 17–20 June 2019; pp. 1–7.
42. Lin, Y.-C.; Liaw, D.-C. Parametric Study of a Resonant Switched Capacitor DC-DC Converter. In Proceedings of the IEEE
TENCON, Singapore, 19–22 August 2001; pp. 710–716.
43. Qiu, D.; Zhang, B.; Zheng, C. Duty Ratio Control of Resonant Switched Capacitor DC-DC Converter. In Proceedings of the IEEE
ICEMS, Nanjing, China, 27–29 September 2005; pp. 1138–1141.
44. Cervera, A.; Mordechai Peretz, M. Resonant Switched-Capacitor Voltage Regulator with Ideal Transient Response. IEEE Trans.
Power Electron. 2015, 30, 4943–4951. [CrossRef]
45. Ye, Y.; Eric Cheng, K.W.; Liu, J.; Xu, C. A Family of Dual-Phase-Combined Zero-Current Switching Switched-Capacitor Converters.
IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2014, 29, 4209–4218. [CrossRef]
46. Yeung, B.; Cheng, K.W.E.; Sutanto, D.; Ho, S.L. Zero-Current Switching Switched-Capacitor Quasiresonant Step-down Converter.
IEE Proc. 2002, 149, 111–121. [CrossRef]
47. Li, S.; Xiangli, K.; Zheng, Y.; Smedley, K.M. Analysis and Design of the Ladder Resonant Switched-Capacitor Converters for
Regulated Output Voltage Applications. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2017, 64, 7769–7779. [CrossRef]
48. Lyu, X.; Li, Y.; Ren, N.; Jiang, S.; Cao, D. A Comparative Study of Switched-Tank Converter and Cascaded Voltage Divider for
48-V Data Center Applications. IEEE JESTPE 2020, 8, 1547–1559. [CrossRef]
49. Cuk, S. Four-Switch Step-Down Storageless Converter. U.S. 8,134,351/B2, 2012
Electronics 2022, 11, 1693 18 of 20

50. Nayanasiri, D.; Li, Y. Voltage Gain Control of a Switched-Resonator Converter Based on the 2:1 Switched-Capacitor Cell. In
Proceedings of the IEEE ECCE, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 10–14 October 2021; pp. 1762–1769.
51. Nayanasiri, D.; Gunawardena, P.; Li, Y. Multiresonant and Multimode Operation of the Switched-Resonator Converters. IEEE
Trans. Power Electron. 2021, 36, 5622–5634. [CrossRef]
52. Nayanasiri, D.; Li, Y. Pulsewidth Modulated Switched Resonator Converter Having Continuous Buck Gain. IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron. 2022, 69, 376–386. [CrossRef]
53. Nishijima, K.; Harada, K.; Nakano, T.; Nabeshima, T.; Sato, T. Analysis of Double Step-down Two-Phase Buck Converter for VRM.
In Proceedings of the IEEE INTELEC, Berlin, Germany, 18–22 September 2005; pp. 497–502.
54. Abe, K.; Nishijima, K.; Harada, K.; Nakano, T.; Nabeshima, T.; Sato, T. A Novel Three-Phase Buck Converter with Bootstrap
Driver Circuit. In Proceedings of the IEEE PESC, Orlando, FL, USA, 17–21 June 2007; Volume 1, pp. 1864–1871.
55. Jang, Y.; Jovanović, M.M.; Panov, Y. Multi-Phase Buck Converters with Extended Duty Cycle. In Proceedings of the IEEE APEC,
Dallas, TX, USA, 19–23 March 2006; pp. 38–44.
56. Hwu, K.I.; Jiang, W.Z.; Wu, P.Y. An Expandable Four-Phase Interleaved High Step-Down Converter with Low Switch Voltage
Stress and Automatic Uniform Current Sharing. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2016, 63, 6064–6072. [CrossRef]
57. Bui, D.V.; Cha, H.; Nguyen, V.C. Asymmetrical PWM Series-Capacitor High-Conversion-Ratio DC-DC Converter. IEEE Trans.
Power Electron. 2021, 36, 8628–8633. [CrossRef]
58. Kirshenboim, O.; Peretz, M.M. High-Efficiency Nonisolated Converter with Very High Step-Down Conversion Ratio. IEEE Trans.
Power Electron. 2017, 32, 3683–3690. [CrossRef]
59. Halamicek, M.; Mcrae, T.; Prodic, A. Cross-Coupled Series-Capacitor Quadruple Step-Down Buck Converter. In Proceedings of
the IEEE APEC, New Orleans, LA, USA, 15–19 March 2020; pp. 1–6.
60. Kim, K.; Cha, H.; Park, S.; Lee, I. A Modified Series-Capacitor High Conversion Ratio DC–DC Converter Eliminating Start-Up
Voltage Stress Problem. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2018, 33, 8–12. [CrossRef]
61. Chuang, C.F.; Pan, C.T.; Cheng, H.C. A Novel Transformer-Less Interleaved Four-Phase Step-down DC Converter with Low
Switch Voltage Stress and Automatic Uniform Current-Sharing Characteristics. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2016, 31, 406–417.
[CrossRef]
62. Tu, C.; Chen, R.; Ngo, K.D.T. Series-Resonator Buck Converter—Viability Demonstration. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2021, 36,
9693–9697. [CrossRef]
63. Oraw, B.S.; Ayyanar, R. Voltage Regulator Optimization Using Multiwinding Coupled Inductors and Extended Duty Ratio
Mechanisms. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2009, 24, 1494–1505. [CrossRef]
64. Chen, Y.; Giuliano, D.M.; Chen, M. Two-Stage 48V-1V Hybrid Switched-Capacitor Point-of-Load Converter with 24V Intermediate
Bus. In Proceedings of the IEEE COMPEL, Aalborg, Denmark, 9–12 November 2020; pp. 1–8.
65. Cuk, S. Step-down Converter Having a Resonant Inductor, a Resonant Capacitor and a Hybrid Transformer. U.S. Patent 7,915,874
B1, 2011.
66. Chen, M.; Shenoy, P.S.; Morroni, J. A Series-Capacitor Tapped Buck (SC-TaB) Converter for Regulated High Voltage Conversion
Ratio Dc-Dc Applications. In Proceedings of the IEEE ECCE, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 14–18 September 2014; pp. 3650–3657.
67. Zhao, X.; Yeh, C.; Zhang, L.; Lai, J. A High-Frequency High-Step-down Converter with Coupled Inductor for Low Power
Applications. In Proceedings of the IEEE APEC, Tampa, FL, USA, 26–30 March 2017; pp. 2436–2440.
68. Zhang, L.; Chakraborty, S. An Interleaved Series-Capacitor Tapped Buck Converter for High Step-Down DC/DC Application.
IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2019, 34, 6565–6574. [CrossRef]
69. Meynard, T.A.; Foch, H. Multi-Level Conversion: High Voltage Choppers and Voltage-Source Inverters. In Proceedings of the
IEEE PESC, Toledo, Spain, 29 June–3 July 1992; pp. 397–403.
70. Pinheiro, J.R.; Barbi, I. The Three-Level ZVS-PWM DC-to-DC Converter. IEEE Trans. Power 1993, 8, 486–492. [CrossRef]
71. Yousefzadeh, V.; Alarcón, E.; Maksimović, D. Three-Level Buck Converter for Envelope Tracking Applications. IEEE Trans. Power
Electron. 2006, 21, 549–552. [CrossRef]
72. Ruan, X.; Li, B.; Chen, Q.; Tan, S.C.; Tse, C.K. Fundamental Considerations of Three-Level DC-DC Converters: Topologies,
Analyses, and Control. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I Regul. Pap. 2008, 55, 3733–3743. [CrossRef]
73. Yerra, S.; Krishnamoorthy, H. Multi-Phase Three-Level Buck Converter with Current Self-Balancing for High Bandwidth Envelope
Tracking Power Supply. In Proceedings of the IEEE APEC, New Orleans, LA, USA, 15–19 March 2020; pp. 1872–1877.
74. Reusch, D.; Lee, F.C.; Xu, M. Three Level Buck Converter with Control and Soft Startup. In Proceedings of the IEEE ECCE,
San Jose, CA, USA, 20–24 September 2009; Volume 2, pp. 31–35.
75. Shi, L.; Baddipadiga, B.P.; Ferdowsi, M.; Crow, M.L. Improving the Dynamic Response of a Flying-Capacitor Three-Level Buck
Converter. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2013, 28, 2356–2365. [CrossRef]
76. Dusmez, S.; Hasanzadeh, A.; Khaligh, A. Comparative Analysis of Bidirectional Three-Level DC-DC Converter for Automotive
Applications. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2015, 62, 3305–3315. [CrossRef]
77. Axelrod, B.; Berkovich, Y.; Ioinovici, A. Switched-Capacitor/Switched-Inductor Structures for Getting Transformerless Hybrid
DC–DC PWM Converters. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. 2008, 55, 687–696. [CrossRef]
78. Radic, A.; Ahssanuzzaman, S.M.; Mahdavikhah, B.; Prodic, A. High-Power Density Hybrid Converter Topologies for Low-Power
Dc-Dc SMPS. In Proceedings of the IEEE IPEC, Hiroshima, Japan, 18–21 May 2014; pp. 3582–3586.
Electronics 2022, 11, 1693 19 of 20

79. Gabian, G.; Gamble, J.; Blalock, B.; Costinett, D. Hybrid Buck Converter Optimization and Comparison for Smart Phone Integrated
Battery Chargers. In Proceedings of the IEEE APEC, San Antonio, TX, USA, 4–8 March 2018; pp. 2148–2154.
80. Seo, G.; Le, H. S-Hybrid Step-Down DC–DC Converter—Analysis of Operation and Design Considerations. IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron. 2020, 67, 265–275. [CrossRef]
81. Lei, Y.; Liu, W.C.; Pilawa-Podgurski, R.C.N. An Analytical Method to Evaluate and Design Hybrid Switched-Capacitor and
Multilevel Converters. IEEE Trans Power Electron. 2018, 33, 2227–2240. [CrossRef]
82. Zhen, S.; Yang, R.; Wu, D.; Cheng, Y.; Luo, P.; Zhang, B. Design of Hybrid Dual-Path DC-DC Converter with Wide Input Voltage
Efficiency Improvement. In Proceedings of the IEEE ISCAS, Daegu, Korea, 22–28 May 2021; pp. 1–5.
83. Hata, K.; Yamauchi, Y.; Sai, T.; Sakurai, T.; Takamiya, M. 48V-to-12V Dual-Path Hybrid DC-DC Converter. In Proceedings of the
IEEE APEC, New Orleans, LA, USA, 15–19 March 2020; pp. 2279–2284.
84. Huh, Y.; Hong, S.-W.; Cho, G.-H. A Hybrid Structure Dual-Path Step-Down Converter With 96.2% Peak Efficiency Using 250-m
Large-DCR Inductor. IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits 2019, 54, 959–967. [CrossRef]
85. Hata, K.; Jiang, Y.; Law, M.; Takamiya, M. Always-Dual-Path Hybrid DC-DC Converter Achieving High Efficiency at Around 2:1
Step- Down Ratio. In Proceedings of the IEEE APEC, Phoenix, AZ, USA, 14–17 June 2021; pp. 1302–1307.
86. Park, I.; Maeng, J.; Jeon, J.; Kim, H.; Kim, C. A Four-Phase Hybrid Step-Up/Down Converter With RMS Inductor Current
Reduction and Delay-Based Zero-Current Detection. IEEE Trans Power Electron. 2022, 37, 3708–3712. [CrossRef]
87. Wang, Y.; Zhang, J.; Guan, Y.; Xu, D. Analysis and Design of a Two-Phase Series Capacitor Dual-Path Hybrid DC-DC Converter.
IEEE Trans Power Electron. 2022, 37, 9492–9502. [CrossRef]
88. Das, R.; Le, H. Hybrid Converter for POL Applications in Data Centers and Telecommunication Systems. In Proceedings of the
IEEE APEC, Anaheim, CA, USA, 17–22 March 2019; pp. 1997–2001.
89. Seo, G.S.; Das, R.; Le, H.P. Dual Inductor Hybrid Converter for Point-of-Load Voltage Regulator Modules. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl.
2020, 56, 367–377. [CrossRef]
90. Das, R.; Seo, G.S.; Le, H.P. Analysis of Dual-Inductor Hybrid Converters for Extreme Conversion Ratios. IEEE JESTPE 2021, 9,
5249–5260. [CrossRef]
91. Zhu, Y.; Ye, Z.; Ge, T.; Abramson, R.; Pilawa-podgurski, R.C.N. A Multi-Phase Cascaded Series-Parallel (CaSP) Hybrid Converter
for Direct 48 V to Point-of-Load Applications. In Proceedings of the IEEE ECCE, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 10–14 October 2021;
pp.1973–1980.
92. Ahmed, M.H.; Lee, F.C.; Li, Q. Two-Stage 48-V VRM With Intermediate Bus Voltage Optimization for Data Centers. IEEE JESTPE
2021, 9, 702–715. [CrossRef]
93. Baek, J.; Elasser, Y.; Member, S.; Radhakrishnan, K.; Member, S.; Gan, H.; Member, S.; Douglas, J.P.; Krishnamurthy, H.K.;
Member, S.; et al. Vertical Stacked LEGO-PoL CPU Voltage Regulator. IEEE Trans Power Electron. 2022, 37, 6305–6322. [CrossRef]
94. Guan, Y.; Wang, P.; Liu, M.; Xu, D.; Chen, M. MSP-LEGO: Modular Series-Parallel (MSP) Architecture and LEGO Building Blocks
for Non-Isolated High Voltage Conversion Ratio Hybrid Dc-Dc Converters. In Proceedings of the IEEE ECCE, Baltimore, MD,
USA, 29 September–3 October 2019; pp. 143–150.
95. Roberts, G.; Vukadinovic, N.; Prodic, A. A Multi-Level, Multi-Phase Buck Converter with Shared Flying Capacitor for VRM
Applications. In Proceedings of the IEEE APEC, San Antonio, TX, USA, 4–8 March 2018; pp. 68–72.
96. Ursino, M.; Saggini, S.; Jiang, S.; Nan, C. High Density 48V-to-PoL VRM with Hybrid Pre-Regulator and Fixed-Ratio Buck. In
Proceedings of the IEEE APEC, New Orleans, LA, USA, 15–19 March 2020; pp. 498–505.
97. Chen, Y.; Wang, P.; Cheng, H.; Szczeszynski, G.; Allen, S.; Giuliano, D.M.; Chen, M. Virtual Intermediate Bus CPU Voltage
Regulator. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2022, 37, 6883–6898. [CrossRef]
98. Cui, Y.; Tolbert, L.M. High Step down Ratio (400 V to 1 V) Phase Shift Full Bridge DC/DC Converter for Data Center Power
Supplies with GaN FETs. In Proceedings of the IEEE WiPDA, Columbus, OH, USA, 27–29 October 2013; pp. 23–27.
99. Zhang, Z.; Huang, J.; Xiao, Y. GaN-Based 1-MHz Partial Parallel Dual Active Bridge Converter with Integrated Magnetics. IEEE
Trans Ind. Electron. 2021, 68, 6729–6738. [CrossRef]
100. Abramson, R.A.; Gunter, S.J.; Otten, D.M.; Afridi, K.K.; Member, S.; Perreault, D.J. Design and Evaluation of a Reconfigurable
Stacked Active Bridge DC–DC Converter for Efficient Wide Load Range Operation. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2018, 33,
10428–10448. [CrossRef]
101. Yao, Y.; Kulothungan, G.S.; Krishnamoorthy, S.; Soni, H.; Das, A. GaN Based Two-Stage Converter with High Power Density and
Fast Response for Pulsed Load Applications. IEEE Trans. 2022, 69, 10035–10044. [CrossRef]
102. Hou, N.; Li, Y. Overview and Comparison of Modulation and Control Strategies for a Nonresonant Single-Phase Dual-Active-
Bridge DC–DC Converter. IEEE Trans Power Electron. 2020, 35, 3148–3172. [CrossRef]
103. Ahmed, M.; Fei, C.; Lee, F.C.; Li, Q. High-Efficiency High-Power-Density 48/1V Sigma Converter Voltage Regulator Module. In
Proceedings of the IEEE APEC, Tampa, FL, USA, 26–30 March 2017; pp. 2207–2212.
104. Liu, Y.C.; Chen, K.D.; Chen, C.; Syu, Y.L.; Lin, G.W.; Kim, K.A.; Chiu, H.J. Quarter-Turn Transformer Design and Optimization for
High Power Density 1-MHz LLC Resonant Converter. IEEE Trans Ind. Electron. 2020, 67, 1580–1591. [CrossRef]
105. Lidow, A.; Strydom, J.; de Rooij, M.; Reusch, D. GaN Transistors for Efficient Power Conversion; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2019.
106. Sullivan, C.R.; Reese, B.A.; Stein, A.L.F.; Kyaw, P.A. On Size and Magnetics: Why Small Efficient Power Inductors Are Rare. In
Proceedings of the 3D PEIM, Raleigh, NC, USA, 13–15 June 2016; pp. 1–4.
Electronics 2022, 11, 1693 20 of 20

107. Sturcken, N.; Davies, R.; Cheng, C.; Bailey, W.E.; Shepard, K.L. Design of Coupled Power Inductors with Crossed Anisotropy
Magnetic Core for Integrated Power Conversion. In Proceedings of the IEEE APEC, Orlando, FL, USA, 5–9 February 2012;
pp. 417–423.
108. Harburg, D.V.; Hanson, A.J.; Qiu, J.; Reese, B.A.; Ranson, J.D.; Otten, D.M.; Levey, C.G.; Sullivan, C.R. Microfabricated Racetrack
Inductors with Thin-Film Magnetic Cores for On-Chip Power Conversion. IEEE JESTPE 2018, 6, 1280–1294. [CrossRef]
109. Xu, J.; Gu, L.; Rivas-Davila, J. Effect of Class 2 Ceramic Capacitor Variations on Switched-Capacitor and Resonant Switched-
Capacitor Converters. IEEE JESTPE 2020, 8, 2268–2275. [CrossRef]
110. Zhang, X.; Cai, H.; Guan, Y.; Han, S.; Wang, Y.; Costa, M.A.D.; Alonso, J.M.; Xu, D. A Soft-Switching Transformer-Less Step-Down
Converter Based on Resonant Current Balance Module. IEEE Trans Power Electron. 2021, 36, 8206–8218. [CrossRef]
111. Thummala, P.; Yelaverthi, D.B.; Zane, R.A.; Ouyang, Z.; Andersen, M.A.E. A 10-MHz GaNFET-Based-Isolated High Step-Down
DC–DC Converter: Design and Magnetics Investigation. IEEE Trans Ind. Appl. 2019, 55, 3889–3900. [CrossRef]
112. Yano, Y.; Kawata, N.; Iokibe, K.; Toyota, Y. A Method for Optimally Designing Snubber Circuits for Buck Converter Circuits to
Damp LC Resonance. IEEE Trans. Electromagn. Compat. 2019, 61, 1217–1225. [CrossRef]
113. Yu, Z.; Nan, C.; Ayyanar, R. Modeling and Dynamics Investigation of an Active-Clamp Buck Converter. In Proceedings of the
IEEE APEC, San Antonio, TX, USA, 4–8 March 2018; pp. 2209–2213.
114. Erickson, R. Synthesis of Switched-Mode Converters. In Proceedings of the IEEE PESC, Albuquerque, NM, USA, 6–9 June 1983;
pp. 9–22.
115. Maksimovic, D.; Cuk, S. General Properties and Synthesis of PWM DC-to-DC Converters. In Proceedings of the IEEE PESC,
Milwaukee, WI, USA, 26–29 June 1989; Volume 2, pp. 515–525.
116. Burdío, J.M.; Martínez, A.; García, J.R. A Synthesis Method for Generating Switched Electronic Converters. IEEE Trans. Power
Electron. 1998, 13, 1056–1068. [CrossRef]
117. Panigrahi, R.; Mishra, S.K.; Joshi, A.; Ngo, K. Synthesis of DC-DC Converters from Voltage Conversion Ratio and Prescribed
Requirements. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2021, 36, 13889–13902. [CrossRef]
118. Ambagahawaththa, T.S.; Nayanasiri, D.R.; Pasqual, A.; Jayasinghe, S.G.D. An Analytical Method to Derive a DC-DC Converter for
an Arbitrary Voltage Conversion Ratio. In Proceedings of the IEEE ICPES, Colombo, Sri Lanka, 21–22 December 2018; pp. 11–16.
119. Ambagahawaththa, T.S.; Nayanasiri, D.; Pasqual, A. A Four-Step Method to Synthesize a DC-DC Converter for Multi-Inductor
Realizable Arbitrary Voltage Conversion Ratio. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2021, 69, 5594–5603. [CrossRef]
120. Ambagahawaththa, T.S.; Nayanasiri, D.; Pasqual, A.; Li, Y. Non-Isolated DC-DC Power Converter Synthesis Using Low-Entropy
Equations. IEEE JESTPE 2022, Early access. [CrossRef]
121. Ambagahawaththe, T.S.; Nayanasiri, D.; Pasqual, A.; Li, Y. A Design Methodlogy to Synthesize 1st Degree Single-Path Hybrid
DC-DC Converters. IEEE Trans Power Electron. 2022, Early access. [CrossRef]
122. Erickson, R. W.; Maksimovic, D. Fundamentals of Power Electronics; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, The Netherlands,
2017.
123. Misal, S.; Veerachary, M. Analysis of a Fourth-Order Step-Down Converter. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2020, 56, 2773–2787. [CrossRef]
124. Deisch, C.W. Simple Switching Control Method Changes Power Converter into a Current Source. In Proceedings of the IEEE
PESC, Syracuse, NY, USA, 13–15 June 1978; pp. 1–7.
125. Basso, C. Designing Control Loops for Linear and Switching Power Supplies; Artech House: London, UK, 2012.
126. Mcmurray, W. A Constant Turn-Off Time Control for Variable Thyristor Inverters. IEEE Trans Ind. Appl. 1977, I, 418–422.
[CrossRef]
127. Mcmurray, W. Silicon-Controlled Rectifier DC to DC Power Converters. IEEE Trans Commun. Electron. 1964, 83, 198–203.
[CrossRef]
128. Corradini, L.; Bjeleti, A.; Zane, R.; Maksimović, D. Fully Digital Hysteretic Modulator for DC–DC Switching Converters. IEEE
Trans Power Electron. 2011, 26, 2969–2979. [CrossRef]
129. Kapat, S.; Krein, P.T. A Tutorial and Review Discussion of Modulation, Control and Tuning of High-Performance DC-DC
Converters Based on Small-Signal and Large-Signal Approaches. IEEE Open J. Power Electron. 2020, 1, 339–371. [CrossRef]