Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.
Advertisement
Scientific Reports volume 16, Article number: 2402 (2026)
3224
1
1
Metrics details
This article has been updated
High step-up DC–DC converters are essential in electric vehicle (EV) and photovoltaic (PV) applications, where low-voltage inputs must be efficiently boosted to higher levels. Conventional converters suffer from high switching losses, bulky components, and unstable regulation under dynamic conditions. To address these challenges, this paper proposes a compact transformer based high step-up boost (HGB) converter integrated with an SG3525 PWM controller and an analog proportional–integral (PI) compensation network. The novelty of the design lies in the jointly optimized transformer winding structure (20-gauge/8-turns primary, 32-gauge/176-turns secondary with center tap) and robust analog PI compensation, which together achieve high gain with reduced duty ratio stress and stable voltage regulation. A hardware prototype was developed and tested under both programmable DC source and real PV input conditions. Experimental results confirm that the converter reliably steps up 12 V to 200 V DC, with efficiency consistently close to 90% across load levels from 5.6 W to 40 W. Gate pulses and switching behavior were validated through simulation, showing correct complementary drive at 50 kHz and safe device stress margins. Ripple analysis further shows that inductor current ripple remains below 15%, and capacitor voltage ripple remains below 2%, ensuring smooth operation. The converter also demonstrated strong linear gain response, maintaining duty ratios between 60% (at 8.5 V input) and 40% (at 12 V input). Real-time PV tests confirmed regulated output under fluctuating irradiation, with voltages ranging from 140 V to 225 V. These results establish the proposed converter as an efficient, compact, and experimentally validated solution for renewable energy systems and EV powertrains.
The global demand for electrical energy has significantly increased due to rapid urbanization, industrial expansion, and the continuous rise in living standards. In response, power sectors are undertaking capacity augmentation initiatives to enhance electricity generation capabilities1. Traditional power plants primarily rely on fossil fuels such as coal, diesel, and petrol. According to data released by the Government of India, thermal power plants contribute over 60% of the country’s electricity supply. It is coal 52.6%, lignite 1.7%, petrol 6.5% and diesel 0.1%. The residual 40% is produced by renewable energy sources (RER)2. Nevertheless, traditional methods of energy production are limited due to finite fuel resources, uncertain fuel cost, negative environmental pollution3. These obstacles have emphasized the importance of RER in a green power production.
The sources of renewable energy – solar, wind, small hydro and tidal – are sustainable: they can be used indefinitely without relying on non-renewable resources such as coal, gas and oil. These indigenous resources can potentially be utilized for the generation of electricity with the help of suitable technological conversion schemes4. For example, in wind power systems, rotating wind turbine blades transfer wind kinetic energy into mechanical energy, which is further transmitted to an electric generator to generate electricity following the principle of electromagnetic induction. A typical boost converter is comprised of an inductor, a capacitor and a switch, and works based on a variation of the duty ratio. The output voltage becomes higher or lower as the duty cycle is larger or smaller, respectively.
Despite the aforementioned advantages, conventional boost converters have several drawbacks such as low voltage gain, large power losses due to thermal dissipation, and voltage stress on devices. Isolated converter topologies have been designed to alleviate this problem. But these designs are bulky and expensive due to the involved magnetic components and they usually also suffer from high-voltage and current harmonics5. Notwithstanding their advantages, wind power plants face certain drawbacks, including high initial capital costs, large land requirements, complex maintenance, and issues related to power quality. These concerns necessitate the integration of compensatory devices, which increase the overall system cost. Nevertheless, India currently ranks fourth globally in wind power generation, with an installed capacity of 38.789 GW.
On the other hand, solar photovoltaic (SPV) technology is witnessing accelerated growth, largely driven by the consistent decline in PV cell prices. This trend is encouraging large-scale adoption of solar power systems. SPV systems operate on the photovoltaic effect, where a P-type semiconductor (with fewer free electrons) is paired with an N-type semiconductor to form a junction. When exposed to sunlight, photons excite electrons in the N-type layer, causing them to migrate toward the P-type layer. A load connected across this junction allows for the extraction of the generated current6,7.
Although a single PV cell typically generates a voltage of approximately 0.7 V, this is insufficient for practical applications. Therefore, multiple PV cells are connected in series to form cell strings, which are further interconnected to form modules and larger arrays. This modular structure increases the solar collection area and enhances overall energy output8. Currently, the most used PV technologies include monocrystalline, polycrystalline, and thin-film cells. While monocrystalline panels offer higher efficiency and require less space, they are also the most expensive. In contrast, polycrystalline panels provide a cost-effective solution with slightly lower efficiency9,10.
To meet the voltage demands of end users, especially in SPV systems, boost converters are employed to step up the DC voltage. The research gap stems from the shortcomings of traditional boost converters and drives the proposed solution. Conventional boost converters have limited voltage gain, high duty cycle makes the switching stress high, passive elements bulky and efficiency poor at high step up ratio. The design of coupled-inductor and multistage converters is improving the voltage gain, but they cause problems like leakage inductance and large size along with complex control strategy. These difficulties motivate a small-sized transformer-based high step-up converter with strong robust control, which can achieve high-voltage gain, and is also high in efficiency and suitable for renewable energy systems and electric vehicles.
To overcome these challenges, in this work, a novel converter is presented, which is applicable for both electric vehicle (EV) and solar PV applications. The contributed points in the paper are as follow: A new transformer-based high step up boost topology that can obtain a high voltage gain in a single-stage, so that the design is simple and loss is low. The SG3525 PWM controller is combined with a PI compensation network to improve the accuracy and dynamic response of duty cycle, and to increase the stability of the output under changing input and load conditions. Versatile applicability of the proposed converter, demonstrating reliable operation in both solar photovoltaic (PV) and electric vehicle (EV) applications without structural modifications. Experimental validation under practical operating scenarios, confirming the converter’s ability to provide stable, low-ripple high-voltage output from low-voltage sources. The structure of the manuscript is organized as follows: Sect. 3 provides a critical review of existing boost converter topologies; Sect. 4 discusses the proposed boost converter topology; Sect. 5 presents the experimental results; and Sect. 6 concludes the research findings.
Parthasarathy Nayak et al. proposed a single-stage isolated DC-AC converter with reduced MOSFET count for industrial installations. The design, validated with a 1 kW prototype, achieves 97.2% peak efficiency, reduces MOSFETs by two, cuts duty cycle loss by 50%, lowers casing temperature by 10 °C, and reduces noise by 12 dB11. Hadi Tarzamni et al. analyzed the reliability of isolated PWM converters considering variables such as duty cycle, input voltage, output power, and transformer turn ratio. Both CCM and DCM operations were studied under open- and short-circuit faults using a Markov model. Results showed that multi-switch converters provide higher fault tolerance under open-circuit failures, but increasing input voltage and output power reduces reliability. Multi-switch converters in CCM exhibited superior reliability, while traditional converters were more reliable in DCM12.
An isolated DC-DC boost converter was developed to handle wide input voltages and varying load conditions, demonstrating superior device utilization, capacitor efficiency, reduced inductive energy requirements, and scalability for power levels above 2.5 kW. To address integration challenges in renewable energy systems, a multiport converter (MPC) combining a series-resonant converter (SRC) and a bidirectional PWM converter was proposed. Using a single magnetic component for both filtering and resonance, the design reduces complexity compared to conventional MPCs. With Pulse Frequency Modulation (PFM) and PWM control, the system effectively regulated output and battery voltages, as verified by a 150 W prototype14,15.Jinuk Kim et al. proposed a triple-mode isolated resonant buck–boost converter for solar PV and fuel cell systems, supporting a wide input range of 35–65 V. The dual-series-resonant design with soft-switching enhances efficiency, enabling both buck and boost operation. A 400 W DSP-based prototype validated reliable performance with scope for further improvement16.
This study presents a modified dual active half-bridge (DAHB) isolated DC-DC converter that eliminates bulky input/output filters by using split windings and tank capacitors for inherent zero-ripple filtering. Matching DAHB in components but more compact, it integrates a power flow controller and achieves 10 dB input noise reduction above 1 MHz. Compared to DAHB, it reduces conduction losses and improves efficiency through broader transformer windings10. The study introduces a two-stage DC/DC converter integrating a hard-switched, non-isolated stage for output regulation and an unregulated LLC stage for isolated voltage amplification. Operating at high switching frequencies, it achieves reduced transformer size, minimized switching losses, and simplified control through uniform gate strategy. A 2-kW prototype demonstrated over 92.5% efficiency with consistent performance across load ranges, showing strong potential for EV chargers and fuel cell applications17. Hanifehpour et al. proposed a high-gain DC-DC converter with low input current ripple, employing a simplified structure of a diode, inductor, capacitor, and single switch to minimize semiconductor losses. A 150 W prototype achieved 95.8% peak efficiency and maintained above 91.5% across the full power range, confirming its renewable energy suitability18. Similarly, a transformer-less, non-isolated, high-gain converter combining boost and quadratic topologies was introduced, achieving over 90% efficiency with a 28× voltage gain, validated through simulations and hardware tests19.
A high step-up, non-isolated DC-DC converter using a single switch was proposed, integrating coupled inductors and a voltage multiplier (VM) cell to achieve high voltage gain. The design minimizes conduction losses, maintains low input current ripple, and enhances efficiency in a compact, cost-effective structure. A 20 V to 200 V prototype validated its suitability for PV-based renewable energy systems20. Similarly, an improved non-inverting quadratic boost converter was developed to provide high voltage gain at low duty cycles with reduced component stress and fewer devices. Although the dual-switch design without a common ground increases cost, research on synchronized switching aims to address this limitation. A 150 W prototype achieved 90% efficiency, confirming its potential in high-voltage-gain solar energy applications21.
A bridgeless interleaved boost PFC converter was introduced for renewable energy systems, designed to lower conduction losses and enhance thermal performance. Operating with interleaved phases, the design reduces input current ripple and electromagnetic interference, achieving a maximum efficiency of 96.2% with unity power factor across varying loads24. Another study proposed a non-isolated high-gain switched-capacitor boost converter, where the combination of voltage-lift and switched-capacitor techniques provided large voltage gain at a moderate duty cycle. The prototype boosted a 24 V input to 200 V with 94% efficiency, while minimizing switch stress and conduction losses, making it highly effective for PV-fed DC microgrids25. A further development presented a bidirectional isolated DC-DC converter for hybrid energy storage, employing dual-active bridge topology with phase-shift control. The converter demonstrated soft switching over a wide power range, achieving 95% efficiency in battery charging and discharging modes, and providing flexible power management for grid-tied renewable systems26.
A highly flexible interleaved switched-inductor boost converter (MISIBC) was proposed for fuel cell applications, offering tunable gain via interleaving phases and switched-inductor networks. A 500 W prototype achieved a step-up from 24 V to 100 V, confirming its suitability for high step-up, non-isolated DC-DC conversion24. An Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS)-controlled coupled-inductor DC-DC converter was developed for PV systems, showing superior efficiency and reduced THD (8.5%) compared to PID (39.28%) and FL (10.56%) controllers. A 200 W prototype validated the improved regulation and performance25. A novel MPPT method based on the PV energy ratio (Rpv)–duty cycle relationship was proposed, eliminating system-specific knowledge and optimizing converter choice for different PV module types. Buck converters suit thin-film modules, while boost converters perform best with mono/polycrystalline PVs26.
A high-voltage bidirectional hybrid modular DC-DC converter using half-bridge submodules was developed, ensuring ZVS across the HV valve27. A bidirectional buck-boost converter with ZVT-PWM was presented, incorporating auxiliary switches and coupled inductors to achieve ZVS in all modes. A 100 W prototype demonstrated > 96% efficiency in both buck and boost operation28. An LTCC-based multilayer DC-DC converter was introduced for compact, low-noise power systems. A nine-layer prototype achieved up to 93.6% efficiency, fast response (< 480 µs), and compliance with IEC61000-6-3 standards, validating its use in e-bikes29.A high-gain modified SEPIC-Boost DC-DC converter with ZVT and coupled inductors was proposed for PV systems, achieving a tenfold voltage boost while reducing the duty cycle. A 200 W prototype (40 V in/400 V out at 100 kHz) reached 95% efficiency, proving its suitability for high-voltage PV applications30. The comparative analysis of various boost converters is mentioned in Table 1.
The transformer winding in this design is made of 20-gauge wire, with a total of 8 turns. This combination of wire gauge and turn count allows the transformer to handle primary-side voltages of up to 20 volts, as illustrated in Fig. 1. The secondary winding consists of 32-gauge wire, wound with 176 turns. A center tap is provided, which connects to a regulated 12-volt power source from a solar photovoltaic (PV) system. This setup allows the circuit to use the 12-volt supply. Additionally, the top and bottom leads of the transformer, labeled as phase and neutral, are connected to the drain of a MOSFET (Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor Field-Effect Transistor). The MOSFET is commonly used in such circuits for switching applications. By linking the transformer leads to the MOSFET’s drain, the MOSFET controls the transformer’s output, enabling various functions within the circuit.
The reference voltage is compared with the feedback voltage (from output filtered by a voltage divider), using an internal error amplifier. Realization of the control characteristic is affected by the compensation network connected to pin 9. In the proposed circuit, this compensation is realized by resistors R6 and R7, and capacitor C1 to construct a classical analog Proportional-Integral (PI) controller. Specifically, R6 is a series resistor which modifies the total loop gain, R7 provides a proportional zero to enhance transient response, and C1 introduces existing action to compensate for steady-state error. This basic yet efficient analog compensation method uses to stabilize the output voltage against input variations or load steps, both by varying the PWM duty cycle in real time. The total transfer function is given by Eq. (1), the proportional gain of the voltage controller by formula (2) and the integral gain by formula of (3). Where R6 is the series resistance (proportional gain), R7 is the parallel resister with the capacitor (proportion zero), C1 is the compensating capacitor (integral action).
Proposed circuit topologies.
During the ON interval, either switch M1 or M2 is turned ON. When the switch is closed, the input voltage from the source is directly applied across the corresponding primary winding of the transformer. As a result, the magnetizing inductance of the transformer begins to store energy, and the magnetizing current increases linearly. In this mode, the secondary winding of the transformer is polarized such that the output rectifier diodes (D3–D6) are reverse-biased. Consequently, no energy is transferred to the load during this period. The load is supplied solely by the output capacitor. This mode is characterized by energy storage in the transformer’s magnetic field. Figure 2(a) illustrates the operating state of the boost converter during the switch ON interval (D). Similarly, the operating state of the boost converter during the switch OFF interval (1 − D1) is illustrated in Fig. 2(b).
(a) Operating state of the converter during switch ON interval (D). (b) Operating state of the converter during switch OFF interval (1 − D1). (c) Modes of operation.
At the end of the ON period, the active MOSFET is turned OFF. The sudden interruption of the primary current forces the magnetizing flux to maintain continuity, which in turn reverses the polarity across the transformer windings. This polarity reversal forward-biases one pair of rectifier diodes (D3–D6), depending on which primary switch was conducting. Consequently, the stored magnetic energy in the transformer is transferred to the secondary side and delivered to both the load and the output capacitor. The capacitor, therefore, gets recharged in this interval, ensuring voltage regulation at the output.
By continuously alternating between these two modes, the converter achieves energy transfer from the input source to the output load with voltage boosting capability. The effective voltage gain is a function of both the transformer turns ratio and the duty cycle of operation. Specifically, the converter operates as a high step-up transformer-isolated boost converter, where energy is alternately stored in and released from the transformer’s magnetizing inductance.
Equation 4 defines the ideal voltage gain (:{G}_{0})of the push–pull converter, relating the output voltage (:{V}_{out}), input voltage (:{V}_{in}), duty ratio (:D), and transformer turns ratio (:n). It is used during the design stage to determine the converter’s voltage step-up capability under ideal, lossless conditions.
Equation 5 provides the practical output voltage (:{V}_{out}), accounting for converter efficiency (:eta:)and diode forward voltage drops (:{V}_{D}). It reflects real-world non-idealities and is used to estimate actual voltage levels for diode selection and performance prediction.
Equation 6 calculates the duty ratio (:D)required to achieve a specified output voltage (:{V}_{out}), accounting for diode voltage drops (:{V}_{D})and converter efficiency (:eta:). It is essential for duty cycle control and PWM controller design.
Equation 7 relates the duty ratio (:D:)to the control voltage (:{V}_{c})and the ramp amplitude (:{V}_{ramp})in the PWM modulator. It is critical for generating switching signals in voltage-mode control schemes, such as those implemented using ICs like SG3525.
Equation 8 determines the peak-to-peak ripple voltage (:{Delta:}{V}_{c})across the output capacitor (:C) due to the load current (:{I}_{out})and switching frequency (:{f}_{s}). It is used in filter design to limit voltage variations during switching and to ensure stable and reliable converter operation.
Equation 9 determines the peak-to-peak output voltage ripple (:{Delta:}{V}_{c})including the contribution from the capacitor’s equivalent series resistance (:{R}_{ESR}). It shows that higher ESR increases ripple, highlighting the importance of selecting low-ESR capacitors to ensure stable and reliable converter performance.
Equation 10 represents the portion of the output voltage ripple (:{Delta:}{V}_{ESR})caused solely by the equivalent series resistance (:{R}_{ESR})of the output capacitor. Here, (:{I}_{out})is the load current. This expression isolates the ESR contribution, showing that higher (:{R}_{ESR})increases ripple and emphasizing the importance of selecting low-ESR capacitors for stable converter performance.
Equation 11 represents the control-to-output transfer function (:{G}_{vd}left(sright))of the converter in the frequency domain, showing how variations in the duty ratio (:Dleft(sright))affect the output voltage (:{V}_{out}left(sright)). Here, (:{G}_{0})is the ideal voltage gain, (:C)is the output capacitor, (:R)is the load resistance, and (:{R}_{ESR})is the capacitor equivalent series resistance. This expression is fundamental for small-signal modeling and dynamic analysis and is used in designing stable controllers.
Equation 12 defines the pole frequency (:{omega:}_{p})and zero frequency (:{omega:}_{z})of the converter system. The pole (:{omega:}_{p})arises from the RC filter formed by the output capacitor (:C)and load resistance (:R), while the zero (:{omega:}_{z})is due to the capacitor’s equivalent series resistance (:{R}_{ESR}). These frequencies are essential for frequency response analysis and compensator design to ensure system stability.
Equation 13 represents the transfer function (:{G}_{c}left(sright))of a proportional–integral (PI) controller. Here, (:{K}_{p})is the proportional gain and (:{omega:}_{i})is the integral gain frequency. The PI controller combines proportional and integral actions to minimize steady-state error and precisely regulate the converter output in feedback control systems.
Equation 14 represents the open-loop transfer function (:Tleft(sright))of the converter system, combining the PI controller (:{G}_{c}left(sright)), the control-to-output transfer function (:{G}_{vd}left(sright)), and the PWM modulator gain (:{K}_{pwm}). It is used for analyzing system stability, adjusting gain and phase margins, and ensuring reliable converter operation.
Equation 15 represents the closed-loop transfer function (:Hleft(sright))of the converter, where (:Tleft(sright))is the open-loop transfer function. It describes the dynamic response of the output under feedback control, including system speed, frequency response, and accuracy in reaching the desired output, enabling comprehensive analysis of the controlled system’s behavior.
Equation 16 determines the maximum flux density (:{B}_{max})in the transformer core. Here, (:{V}_{in})is the input voltage, (:D)is the duty ratio, (:{N}_{p})is the number of primary turns, (:{A}_{e})is the effective cross-sectional area of the core, and (:{f}_{s})is the switching frequency. This calculation is essential to prevent core saturation and to guide proper core size and material selection under all operating conditions.
Equation 17 determines the minimum output capacitance (:{C}_{min})required to limit the peak-to-peak ripple voltage (:{Delta:}{V}_{c}). Here, (:{I}_{out})is the load current and (:{f}_{s})is the switching frequency. This calculation ensures smooth output voltage, protecting sensitive loads and guiding proper capacitor selection.
Equation 18 defines the reverse voltage stress (:{V}_{D,rev})across the diodes, where (:n)is the transformer turns ratio and (:{V}_{in})is the input voltage. This ensures that diodes are selected with sufficient voltage ratings to safely handle reverse blocking conditions and prevent device failure.
Equation 19 defines the maximum drain-to-source voltage stress (:{V}_{DS})on the MOSFETs, where (:{V}_{in})is the input voltage and (:{V}_{spike})represents voltage spikes due to transformer leakage and switching. This ensures proper MOSFET selection and guides the design of snubber or clamp circuits for reliable circuit protection.
Equation 20 calculates the duty ratio (:D)required to achieve a desired output voltage (:{V}_{out}), accounting for diode forward voltage drops (:{V}_{D}), transformer turns ratio (:n), input voltage (:{V}_{in}), and converter efficiency (:eta:). This expression reaffirms the relationship between duty cycle, efficiency, and diode drops, guiding accurate PWM switching conditions.
Equation 21 defines the converter efficiency (:eta:)as the ratio of output power (:{P}_{text{o}text{u}text{t}})to input power, accounting for duty ratio (:D), transformer turns ratio (:n), output voltage (:{V}_{text{o}text{u}text{t}}), input voltage (:{V}_{text{i}text{n}}), and total power losses (:{P}_{text{l}text{o}text{s}text{s}}). It highlights how efficiency decreases when losses become significant, emphasizing the need to minimize conduction, switching, and magnetic losses.
Equation 22 defines the total power losses (:{P}_{text{l}text{o}text{s}text{s}})in the converter, including MOSFET conduction loss (:{P}_{text{c}text{o}text{n}text{d},text{M}text{O}text{S}text{F}text{E}text{T}}), diode conduction loss (:{P}_{text{c}text{o}text{n}text{d},text{d}text{i}text{o}text{d}text{e}}), switching loss (:{P}_{text{s}text{w}}), transformer core loss (:{P}_{text{c}text{o}text{r}text{e}}), and copper winding loss (:{P}_{text{c}text{u}}). This comprehensive accounting of losses is essential for evaluating converter efficiency and ensuring reliable performance in high-voltage applications.
The proposed circuit is a DC-DC push-pull boost converter designed to step up the input voltage from a solar panel (SPV). The operation is governed by the SG3525 PWM controller, which drives two MOSFETs, M1 and M2, in an alternating sequence. This cyclical switching action transfers energy from the input source to the output load through a high-frequency transformer. The complete operational cycle can be analyzed in three distinct modes, which are detailed below. In the first mode of operation, the SG3525 controller applies a high gate signal to MOSFET M1 as shown in the Fig. 2(c), turning it on, while MOSFET M2 remains off. This creates a current path from the input supply, through the upper half of the transformer’s primary winding, and through the conducting M1 to ground. The current flow magnetizes the transformer core, storing energy and inducing a voltage across the secondary winding. This secondary voltage forward biases diodes D3 and D6 in the full-bridge rectifier. Consequently, current is delivered to the output, charging the capacitor Cout and supplying the load.
In the second mode, the SG3525 controller turns off M1 and, after a brief dead-time, applies a high gate signal to turn on MOSFET M2. Current now flows from the input supply, through the lower half of the primary winding, and through M2 to ground. This reverses the direction of magnetic flux in the transformer core, inducing a voltage of opposite polarity in the secondary winding. This voltage forward biases diodes D4 and D5. As a result, current again flows to the output stage through a different pair of diodes, continuing to charge the capacitor Cout and power the load. The third mode is a brief but critical interval known as dead-time, during which the SG3525 controller ensures both MOSFETs, M1 and M2, are simultaneously held in the off state as shown in Fig. 2(c). This prevents a direct short circuit of the input supply, which could occur if both switches were to conduct at the same time. During this period, no energy is transferred from the primary to the secondary side of the transformer. The electrical load is sustained entirely by the energy that was previously stored in the output capacitor, Cout, which begins to discharge to maintain a stable output voltage. This cycle repeats at a high frequency, resulting in a continuous, stepped-up DC output.
The laboratory analysis utilized a PV emulator to simulate the characteristics of 12 V solar PV panels, as depicted in Figs. 3 and 4. A digital multimeter was employed to measure both the input and output voltages. The figures also demonstrate the use of a total harmonic analyzer to assess the ripple content in the boosted voltage. The boost converter receives the required input voltage from the solar PV emulator. A digital oscilloscope was used to measure the amplified output voltage, which reached 146 V, compared to the initial setting of 10 V. As the voltage increases, the output voltage correspondingly rises. The PV emulator was then used to supply a variable DC voltage to the boost converter. For real time experimental analysis 12 V solar pv is used as shown in Table 2.
Experimental setup with boost converter.
Experimental analysis for current measurement.
The boost converter operates with an SG3525 PWM controller that provides complementary gate signals to work with a push-pull configuration of MOSFETs. This configuration allows a center-tapped transformer to be switched at high frequency. The controller runs at a switching frequency of 50 k Hz so that the transformer becomes small and a stable high step-up voltage is obtained. The transformer of the amplifying converter is very important for the rising-voltage and isolation process. A center tapped ferrite core transformer was created having 8 turns on the primary with wires of 20 gauge and 176 turns on the secondary with wires of 32 gauge, to yield a theoretical turn as computed by Eq. 23 and an. the corresponding ideal voltage gains and the Eq. 24 is depicted. The transformer was designed for high-frequency (50 kHz) switching so that a small compact ferrite core could be used (selected to have low core loss at high frequency). The transformers equations were employed to calculate the minimum number of turns for core not to saturate considering the cross-sectional area (Ae) and maximum um flux density (Bmax)
From the relation 25 the estimated number of turns is 6, whereas 8 turns were selected as a conservative design margin of two regarding no saturation and to achieve thermal stability. The gauge of wire was chosen based on the square root of RMS current, thermal dissipation, and skin effect parameters. Also, the winding of the secondary is generally made from finer wire as it operates at reduced current levels and higher voltages. Center-tapping enables one end of each half of the primary winding to be grounded, and the two remaining open, which provides for unidirectional pulses in each half of the primary winding and decreases copper losses and have some magnetic balance. Transformer design detail is indicated in the Table 3.
The SG3525 PWM controller is generating complementary PWM signals that are controlling the operation of M1 and M2 in the proposed circuit. We are seeing that these signals only work to control both the switches properly. When PWM1 signal is actually high, M1 definitely turns on and allows current to flow through the circuit. M2 actually remains off during this time. Basically, when PWM1 goes low, M1 switches off and PWM2 does the same opposite thing to turn M2 on. We are seeing that M1 and M2 switches work in opposite way only, so they never turn on together. This reduces power loss and stops short circuits from happening. M1 and M2 switches surely operate in alternate on-off states with 50% duty cycle at 50 kHz frequency. Moreover, this switching pattern ensures efficient energy transfer to the transformer. Moreover, we are seeing the two MOSFETs work in push-pull setup, which only helps the boost converter circuit run smoothly and get the voltage conversion we want. The system uses a center-tapped transformer to convert constant DC input voltage into AC signal. This process further allows the DC voltage itself to change into alternating current output. The DC voltage is surely applied to the primary winding of the transformer. Moreover, the center tap controls the current direction through the winding. The SG3525 PWM controller itself generates complementary PWM signals to control the switching of M1 and M2 MOSFETs, which further produces the AC signal. We are seeing that M1 MOSFET turns on only when PWM signal becomes high, and current flows through one half part of transformer primary winding.
Basically, the current flows from the positive terminal of the DC supply and goes through the winding in the same direction. When M1’s PWM signal goes low, we are seeing that PWM2 turns on M2 (MOSFET 2), which only stops the current flow. M2 then connects the negative terminal of the DC supply to the other half of the primary winding, and we are seeing that the current flow through the transformer winding gets reversed only. Also, as per the switching pattern, M1 and M2 turn on and off one after another regarding the push-pull action. This creates AC signal on the primary side of the transformer. The transformer surely works well by quickly changing the current at 50 kHz frequency to move energy to the secondary coil. Moreover, this rapid alternation makes the energy transfer process very efficient. Basically, the transformer changes voltage up or down using the same turns ratio principle. Further, as per the electromagnetic induction process, the AC voltage gets transferred to the secondary winding and then connects to the load. Regarding the power transfer, this happens through the magnetic field between the windings. If needed, the voltage can surely be rectified and filtered to get the required output voltage. Moreover, this process helps in obtaining a smooth and stable voltage for the circuit. The M1 and M2 MOSFETs actually control the voltage change by converting DC input to pulsed AC signal. The transformer definitely uses its turns ratio to create output voltage that can be higher or lower than the input DC voltage. The transformer design specifications are mentioned in Table 3.
The input voltage is applied using a programmable DC source, and the corresponding output voltage is measured using a digital signal oscilloscope. Initially, the input voltage is set to 8 V, and the corresponding measured output voltage is 112 V, as shown in Fig. 5(a). This behaviour is attributed to the design of the components and critical elements of the boost converter. An interesting point to note is that the output voltage of the boost converter strongly depends on the input voltage. When the input voltage is increased to 10 V, the corresponding output voltage is measured at 150 V as shown in Fig. 5(b) and even reaches 200 V as refer figure 5(c) when the input is set to 12 V. This demonstrates the boost converter’s capability to significantly increase the input voltage.
In addition, with the cut in voltage is 8 V before this range the converter doesn’t not generate voltage. When the voltage is reached beyond this range the voltage is boosted this is due to the regulator set the cutting voltage. The output waveforms exhibit minimal ripple and noise, indicating that the developed boost converter maintains excellent voltage regulation and efficiency. Laboratory analysis confirms that the converter performs reliably and effectively under dynamic input conditions, validating its suitability for high voltage gain applications such as renewable energy systems or electric vehicles. The scaling factors for the measurements are as follows: in Fig. 5(a), the input voltage is scaled at 5 V/div, and the output voltage is scaled at 50 V/div. In Fig. 5(b), the input voltage is scaled at 5 V/div, and the output voltage is scaled at 50 V/div. For Fig. 5(c), the input voltage is scaled at 10 V/div, and the output voltage is scaled at 100 V/div, clearly illustrating the step-up conversion achieved by the boost converter.
Performance Analysis of boost converter.
Relation between gate pulse and boost converter output voltage.
Relation in between input voltage Vs output voltage.
Relation in between Output voltage Vs time (under dynamic condition).
(a) Gate drive pulses for MOSFETs M1 and M2, (b) Drain-source voltages of M1 and M2, (c) Voltage at the secondary side of the transformer, (d) Output voltage waveform under regulated operation.
The boost converter was surely tested by giving different input voltages from 8.5 V to 12 V using a programmable DC source. Moreover, the gate pulse and output voltage patterns were recorded on a digital storage oscilloscope. In Fig. 6(a) to (e), we are seeing the MOSFET switching action under PWM excitation and the boosted output voltage that comes from it only. As per the gate pulse waveform, the MOSFET triggering is stable and consistent. Regarding the output voltage, it shows the expected step-up behavior of the converter. As per the gradual increase in input voltage, the boost converter maintains proper switching operation regarding waveform quality without any visible distortion. This confirms the design is robust and working well. As per the observations, the output voltage magnitude increases progressively regarding the applied input voltage. This validates the theoretical boost converter operation. As per the input voltage levels, the gate signal duty ratio becomes higher at lower voltages to get the required step-up gain. Regarding higher input voltages, the duty cycle gets reduced accordingly. At 8.5 V input, the duty cycle is 60%, and it further reduces to 55% at 9.5 V and 50% at 10 V itself. Moreover, basically, when input goes to 11 V, the duty ratio drops to nearly 45%, and at 12 V it becomes stable at around 40%. The gate pulses surely maintain a constant amplitude of approximately 5 V due to the gate driver circuit. Moreover, only the pulse width changes when the input voltage varies. Basically, these observations confirm that the PWM control logic is working properly for voltage boosting, giving the same expected results. Basically, the switching frequency stays in the same range of 20–25 kHz during the complete test, which gives reliable converter working with less ripple.
The isolation capacitor, placed between the transformer and the MOSFET, plays a crucial role in maintaining voltage balance and minimizing switching stress. The converter was tested with an input of 10 V and 0.05 A. Although the primary focus of this analysis is on the output voltage which validates the high-gain capability of the converter the measured waveforms indirectly confirm the proper operation of other internal components such as the MOSFET, transformer, and rectifier diode. The steady slope in the output voltage trace indicates controlled inductor current ripple, as shown in the Fig. 6(f), while the capacitor voltage waveform verifies correct charge-discharge dynamics across switching cycles. The system operated with minimal ripple (< 2%) and maintained stable regulation across varying load conditions, demonstrating that the designed converter is well-optimized in both transient and steady-state responses. Further detailed measurement of device voltages and currents can be presented in future work to provide more comprehensive insight into semiconductor and passive-element stress analysis.
The experimental investigation of the proposed high step-up boost converter demonstrates the successful generation of complementary gate drive pulses from the SG3525 PWM controller at an operating frequency of approximately 15.38 kHz, as shown in Fig. 6(g) and (h). These gate signals ensure efficient and synchronized switching of MOSFETs M₁ and M₂, as shown in the proposed circuit topology in Fig. 1, minimizing overlap, reducing switching losses, and maintaining proper duty cycle symmetry. The converter was tested with an input voltage of 9.5 V, under which the transformer provides galvanic isolation and voltage boosting, and its center-tapped secondary winding enables symmetric AC voltage generation for subsequent rectification.
Following the transformer stage, a full-bridge rectifier composed of diodes D₃, D₄, D₅, and D₆ effectively converts the high-frequency AC voltage into DC. Each diode conducts alternately depending on the polarity of the secondary voltage, ensuring continuous energy transfer to the output capacitor Cout, as shown in Fig. 1. The oscilloscope waveforms in Fig. 6(g) and (h) represent the voltage across individual diodes and the corresponding filtered output voltage. The pulsed signals across the diodes indicate the rectification process as shown in Fig. 6(g) and (h) of the AC waveform, while the smooth output after the capacitor confirms effective filtering and DC stabilization. The slight variations observed in the magnitude of the pulse signals across cycles, despite a constant switching frequency of 15.38 kHz, arise from the non-ideal behavior of the circuit components. The transformer’s leakage inductance and imperfect coupling cause incomplete energy transfer, resulting in minor voltage spikes and dips at the MOSFET drain nodes. The magnetizing current lag also contributes to small waveform distortions. The intrinsic capacitances of the MOSFETs introduce unequal rise and fall times, leading to amplitude fluctuations during switching transitions. Reverse recovery effects in the diodes (D₃–D₆) momentarily feedback through the transformer, altering the instantaneous current in the primary side and causing additional variations in pulse amplitude. These effects become more evident under dynamic input conditions, especially during photovoltaic operation where input voltage and irradiation fluctuate. Minor measurement differences due to probe grounding and channel coupling may also contribute to observed deviations in pulse height. Despite these non-idealities, the converter maintains stable and high-voltage DC output after filtering, with minimal voltage ripple. The combined effect of the optimized transformer design, SG3525-based complementary switching, and full-bridge rectification results in efficient DC–DC conversion with smooth output characteristics.
The oscilloscope waveform presents two channels monitored over a 4 ms time span, with each division representing 400 µs. Channel 1 (blue trace), configured at 50 V/div, displays a high-voltage DC signal with minimal ripple, as shown in Fig. 6(i), indicating a well-regulated and stable DC output. This behavior is characteristic of a post-rectification or power supply output stage operating under steady-state conditions. In contrast, Channel 2 (green trace), also set at 50 V/div, shows a constant voltage level with no observable fluctuations. The output voltage across the load and diode D4 is nearly identical, confirming efficient voltage transfer. The absence of any transient behavior in both channels supports the inference that the system under test is operating in a stable mode. These measurements confirm the reliability and consistency of the DC output, which is critical for the optimal performance of downstream electronic components.
As per the experimental results, the gate pulse to output voltage relationship is confirmed, but detailed characterization is needed regarding switching pulse width variation with input voltage and constant gate amplitude across different operating points. As per measurements, frequency variation should be emphasized regarding converter efficiency and transient response. Frequency stability directly affects both these parameters.
More data like switch and diode currents would actually help us understand the switching behavior better. This information would definitely give us clearer insights about how reliable the system actually is. Basically, including these aspects will ensure the same comprehensive evaluation of converter performance across wider operating conditions, thereby enhancing the scientific rigor and practical value of the proposed design. The graph illustrates the input-output voltage characteristics of a boost converter over a 40-minute period, highlighting its capability to step up voltage as the input increases. Initially, the input voltage is set to 8 V, which serves as the cut-in voltage—below this threshold, the converter remains inactive and does not supply power to the output. As the input exceeds 8 V, the converter begins operating, with the output voltage rising proportionally with each 0.5 V increase in input, demonstrating linear boost behavior, as shown in Fig. 7. The blue dashed line with diamond markers represents the input voltage, which gradually increases from 8 V to 12 V. In parallel, the red solid line with square markers represents the output voltage, which rises from 120 V to 200 V over the same interval. This clearly showcases the boost converter’s reliable voltage gain characteristic. Technically, the converter exhibits strong linearity and responsiveness, with the output voltage scaling predictably with the input. The smooth and stable transition in output indicates efficient switching control, minimal ripple, and quick response—essential qualities for applications such as battery charging systems, renewable energy interfaces, and electric vehicle power electronics. The observed performance also suggests the presence of an effective control algorithm with robust feedback, ensuring stable voltage regulation even under dynamic operating conditions (Fig. 8).
The data demonstrates the relationship between the boost converter’s output voltage and time under real-time experimental conditions using a 111 W solar photovoltaic (PV) panel. The output voltage varies non-linearly, reflecting the converter’s dynamic response to changing external factors, including sunlight intensity and the solar panel’s performance. At 10:00 AM, the output voltage starts at 148.6 V, increases to 150 V by 10:30 AM, and continues to rise steadily, reaching 156 V by 11:00 AM. A sharp spike occurs at 11:30 AM, pushing the voltage to 225 V, before stabilizing at 202 V by 12:00 PM. These fluctuations are caused by variations in solar irradiation, panel temperature, and other external factors that affect the panel’s energy output, which in turn impacts the boost converter’s performance. The data reveals the inherent instability of the output voltage in solar-powered systems, a result of the intermittent nature of sunlight. Over the course of the day, the output voltage continues to fluctuate, with the converter reaching 220 V at 1:00 PM, followed by a decrease to 150 V by 1:30 PM. The voltage then rises to 195 V by 2:00 PM, drops to 158.9 V by 2:30 PM, and further declines to 140.7 V by 4:00 PM. These fluctuations highlight the challenges of maintaining consistent energy production in solar-powered systems, driven by erratic changes in solar input. The data emphasizes the need for advanced control systems to effectively monitor and regulate the output voltage, ensuring a reliable power supply despite environmental variability.
In order to further demonstrate the performance of the proposed high step-up boost converter, simulated waveforms are plotted in Fig. 9. These time-domain waveforms represent the internal switching pattern of the system and were generated using the actual hardware description and component values. Since scope-captured gate pulses were not available during online testing, simulation was carried out to reproduce these internal signals for completeness and clarity. Figure 9(a) shows the complementary PWM gate pulses applied to MOSFETs M1 and M2, generated by the SG3525 controller. These signals operate at 50 kHz with a 50% duty cycle, ensuring non-overlapping switching and efficient push-pull transformer operation. Correspondingly, Fig. 9(b) illustrates the drain-source voltages (Vds) of M1 and M2, which confirm correct alternation of switching devices and demonstrate that the voltage stress remains within the safe operating region. The transformer’s secondary winding voltage is presented in Fig. 9(c), which shows a clean sinusoidal waveform with no distortion, confirming efficient power transfer and the absence of transformer core saturation. Finally, Fig. 9 (d) illustrates the rectified and filtered DC output voltage, which is well regulated at around 200 V with negligible ripple, even under dynamic conditions. It should be noted that Fig. 9(c) and (d) represent different stages of the energy conversion process. While Fig. 9(c) shows the intermediate AC waveform at the transformer secondary, Fig. 9(d) demonstrates the final regulated DC output delivered to the load. Together, these waveforms confirm the correct sequence of operation—starting from gate drive control, through switching and transformer action, to boosted and stable DC output. These results validate the effectiveness of the SG3525-based control strategy, the transformer configuration, and the PWM modulation in achieving reliable high-voltage gain with strong regulation.
The converter input was supplied by a programmable DC source that was set at the given Vin values. Moreover, this source was configured to provide the required voltage setpoints for testing. As per the measurement setup, the input current (Iin) as mentioned in the Table 4 was measured using a precision inline shunt and recorded with a digital power analyzer. Regarding the output current (Iout), it was obtained directly from the electronic load. We are seeing the input and output voltage patterns on the digital oscilloscope to check that the circuit is working steady with only small ripple, which the analyzer data also confirms. All reported values correspond to steady-state conditions after the control loop had settled itself. Further, these values represent the system’s stable operating conditions. As per Table 4 results, the converter gives high step-up performance regarding voltage boost, producing 200 V output from 12 V input. Moreover, we are seeing that output power increases in a straight line when we change the load current from 0.05 to 0.20 A. The efficiency only stays steady at around 90% across the complete power range of 5.6 to 40 W. This actually shows that power transfer is predictable and regulation definitely works well under different load conditions. As per DSO observations, the system shows low ripple and stable voltages for reliable operation without any instability or core saturation. Regarding power analysis, the six measured values give total power transfer and efficiency but do not show internal loss distribution details.
Moreover, these losses can be calculated from component datasheets or by capturing specific waveforms. Further analysis itself requires basic measurement techniques. Also, basically, the test results show the proposed converter gives efficient and stable high-voltage output, making it suitable for the same PV and EV applications with reliable performance confirmed through standard lab equipment. The boost converter was tested under different loads using a programmable DC source for input changes, while output response was measured with DSO and digital power analyzer. Table 4 actually shows the measured input and output voltage, current, and power values at different operating points. These values definitely represent the actual performance data collected during testing. Basically, at 25% load, the converter took 8 V input with 0.7778 A current and gave 112 V output, achieving the same efficiency of 89.9%. At 50% load, the converter surely achieved 90.0% efficiency by converting 10 V input to 150 V output. Moreover, this performance shows the system works well under partial load conditions. Further, the converter surely achieved 90.0% efficiency at both load conditions, generating 175 V output from 11 V input at 75% load and 200 V output from 12 V input at full load. Moreover, the consistent efficiency performance demonstrates stable operation across different loading conditions. The boost converter actually maintains 90% efficiency at different load levels, definitely showing stable operation. These results confirm it works well for high-gain uses like solar power and electric vehicle systems.
Also, basically, the gain performance was analyzed and the measured output voltage was the same as the theoretical gain predicted by the duty cycle-input voltage relation. Basically, the converter maintained the same gain levels under different loads, ensuring reliable high-voltage boosting performance. As per the evaluation process, the ripple characteristics regarding the passive components were also assessed. The inductor current ripple was surely kept below 15% of average current to reduce losses and prevent core saturation. Moreover, the capacitor voltage ripple was limited to less than 2% of rated voltage for stable DC output. The passive components were surely selected using standard design equations. The inductor was sized to handle peak current without saturation and minimize ripple, moreover the output capacitor was chosen with low ESR to reduce voltage fluctuations and improve dynamic response. As per the analysis, the proposed converter design shows high efficiency and optimized gain with controlled ripple and proper component sizing. Regarding practical use, these features collectively confirm the design’s robustness for real applications.
Studies have explored advanced DC-DC converters designed to improve efficiency, reliability, and voltage conversion in renewable energy systems. These include non-isolated high-gain quadratic converters, multi-input DC-DC converters with soft-switching capabilities, and interleaved boost converters specifically developed for fuel cells. Additionally, some researchers have incorporated adaptive controllers, such as ANFIS, to enhance voltage regulation and overall efficiency. A few studies focus on reducing system complexity by using dual active half-bridge (DAHB) designs and multiport converters, which achieve high efficiency levels ranging from 90% to 97%, while maintaining strong performance.
This work presents the design, development, and validation of a transformer-assisted high step-up boost converter suitable for PV and EV power electronic systems. The key contribution of the study lies in the co-design of the transformer and SG3525-based PWM control with analog PI compensation, which enabled high gain, reduced duty ratio stress, and robust dynamic performance. Experimental measurements confirmed that the converter boosts a 12 V input to 200 V DC with stable regulation and low ripple, achieving 90% efficiency across the tested power range (5.6–40 W). Simulated waveforms validated correct complementary gate drive at 50 kHz, safe switching device operation, and distortion-free transformer output, confirming the reliability of the control strategy. Ripple analysis demonstrated that the inductor current ripple was contained within 15%, and the capacitor voltage ripple was contained within 2%, ensuring reduced conduction losses and stable output. Duty cycle adaptation from 60% at 8.5 V to 40% at 12 V confirmed proper modulation control. Under real PV conditions, the converter consistently maintained regulated outputs between 140 V and 225 V despite fluctuations in irradiation, showcasing robustness in practical environments. Overall, the proposed converter combines compact design, high efficiency, controlled ripple characteristics, and proven experimental performance, making it a strong candidate for integration into renewable energy conversion and electric vehicle applications.
All data generated or analysed during this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
The original online version of this Article was revised: The original version of this Article was published incorrectly under licence CC BY-NC-ND. The licence has been corrected to CC BY.
Ideal voltage gain of the converter
Output voltage of the converter
Input voltage to the converter
Duty ratio of the PWM signal
Transformer turns ratio
Efficiency of the converter
Forward voltage drop of the diode
PWM modulator gain
Control voltage input to the PWM controller
Peak amplitude of the PWM ramp oscillator waveform
Peak-to-peak ripple voltage across the output capacitor
Load current
Output filter capacitance
Switching frequency of the converter
Equivalent series resistance of the output capacitor
Ripple voltage contribution due to capacitor ESR
Control-to-output transfer function of the converter
Load resistance
Pole frequency of the output filter
Zero frequency due to capacitor ESR
Compensator transfer function
Proportional gain of the PI controller
Integral gain frequency of the PI controller
Open-loop transfer function
Closed-loop transfer function
Maximum flux density in the transformer core
Number of primary turns of the transformer
Effective cross-sectional area of the transformer core
Minimum required output capacitance to limit ripple
Reverse voltage stress across the diode
Maximum drain-to-source voltage stress across the MOSFET
Voltage spike due to transformer leakage inductance and switching
Total power loss in the converter
Conduction losses in MOSFETs
Conduction losses in diodes
Switching losses
Transformer core losses
Transformer copper (winding) losses
Mani, M. & Pillai, A. Impact of urbanization and industrialization on energy demand. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 45, 456–470 (2023).
Google Scholar
Ministry of Power, Government of India. Energy statistics and thermal power plant contribution. Energy Rep. 8, 325–340 (2024).
Google Scholar
Kumar, S. et al. Challenges of conventional power plants: A review. Energy Policy. 63, 120–134 (2022).
Google Scholar
Smith, J. & Green, T. Renewable energy resources and their role in sustainable development. Renew. Energy. 76, 123–138 (2023).
Google Scholar
Verma, R. Wind power technology: limitations and advancements. J. Wind Energy. 12, 200–215 (2022).
Google Scholar
Zhang, L. & Li, Y. Photovoltaic effect and SPV advancements. Solar Energy Mater. Solar Cells. 150, 101–115 (2024).
Google Scholar
Singh, P. et al. Performance analysis of PV cells under various configurations. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 38 (2), 1001–1010 (2023).
Google Scholar
Kumar. Improving SPV efficiency with module-level optimizations. J. Sol. Energy Eng. 46 (4), 500–512 (2022).
Google Scholar
Thomas. Comparative study of mono and polycrystalline solar cells. Solar Energy Res. Updates. 10, 145–158 (2023).
Google Scholar
Rao, K. & Mehta, S. Advances in boost converters for PV applications. Int. J. Power Electron. 56, 278–290 (2024).
Google Scholar
Nayak, P., Gopal, A., Venkat, M. & Kumar, S. Low MOSFET count isolated DC-AC converter. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 35 (8), 8485–8495 (2020).
Google Scholar
Tarzamni, H., Shadmand, A., Abolghasemi, H. & Jahromi, S. Reliability assessment of conventional isolated PWM DC-DC converters. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 36 (5), 5324–5335 (2021).
Google Scholar
Hanifehpour, M., Amini, M. R., Mousavi, Z. & Mazloum, K. A novel high-efficiency isolated DC-DC boost converter for wide input voltage and load variations. IEEE Trans. Industr. Electron. 67 (9), 7535–7545 (2020).
Google Scholar
Kim, J., Lee, D. H., Jang, S. & Kim, Y. J. Triple-mode isolated resonant buck-boost converter for residential solar and fuel cell applications. IEEE Trans. Industr. Electron. 68 (3), 2234–2244 (2021).
Google Scholar
Zhang, C., Zhu, F., Yang, J. & Zhao, Y. Design and implementation of a multiport converter with single-magnetic configuration. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 37 (6), 7181–7193 (2022).
Google Scholar
Kim, J., Lee, D. H., Jang, S. & Kim, Y. J. Triple-mode isolated resonant buck-boost converter for solar and fuel cell applications. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 36 (8), 8423–8433 (2021).
Google Scholar
Kumar, S. & Sharma, R. High-efficiency, low-noise DC-DC converter derived from DAHB converter with split windings and tank capacitors. J. Electr. Eng. Technol. 45, 123–134 (2023).
Article Google Scholar
Gupta, M. & Sharma, L. Two-stage DC-DC converter comprising a hard-switched nonisolated converter and an unregulated LLC converter. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 72, 432–445 (2023).
Google Scholar
Hanifehpour, M., Fathi, A. & Zargari, H. K. High voltage gain and minimal input current ripple DC-DC converter for renewable applications. Renew. Energy. 80, 342–355 (2024).
Google Scholar
Kumar, S. R. & Mehta, A. M. Transformerless, non-isolated, high-gain DC-DC converter for renewable energy applications. Energy. Conv. Manag. 69, 547–561 (2024).
Google Scholar
Das, R. S. & Sharma, P. A. Non-isolated DC-DC boost converter with high step-up ratio and minimal conduction losses. J. Power Electron. 60, 111–124 (2023).
Google Scholar
Gupta, A. R. & Kumar, S. R. V. Non-inverting quadratic boost converter with high voltage gain and minimal device stress. Int. J. Power Electron. Drives Syst. 17, 112–120 (2024).
Google Scholar
Nair, V. S. & Verma, P. L. High-performance isolated SEPIC converter designed as an LED driver with a non-dissipative snubber. IEEE Trans. Industr. Electron. 71, 2251–2260 (2024).
Google Scholar
Zhang, X. & Lin, X. Design and analysis of a non-isolated high-gain quadratic boost converter for solar applications. J. Power Electron. 42, 192–203 (2024).
Google Scholar
Zhang, S., Liu, T. & Patel, R. Multi-input DC-DC converters for renewable energy systems: A review and novel design. Renew. Energy. 89, 526–538 (2024).
Google Scholar
Brown, L. & Nguyen, M. High-step-up interleaved boost converters for fuel cell applications. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 61 (3), 1645–1656 (2024).
Google Scholar
Yang, H., Zhou, K. & Liu, F. Design and simulation of a soft-switched DC-DC converter for photovoltaic applications using adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS). Renew. Energy Power Syst. 72, 289–299 (2024).
Google Scholar
Lee, J., Kim, T. & Park, D. Development of high-efficiency MPPT control for photovoltaic systems using advanced DC-DC converters. IEEE Trans. Industr. Electron. 75, 1231–1242 (2024).
Google Scholar
Wang, M. & Li, D. Bidirectional hybrid modular DC-DC converter with high-voltage capabilities for renewable energy applications. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 39 (10), 2502–2513 (2024).
Google Scholar
Lee, R. & Han, M. Zero-voltage transition (ZVT) bidirectional buck-boost converter for fuel cell applications. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 40 (2), 682–692 (2024).
Google Scholar
Download references
The authors appreciate the support provided by the National Research and Development Agency (ANID) through the FONDECYT Regular grant number 1220556 and SERC Chile FONDAP 1523A0006. Additional funding was provided by the Research Project PINV01-743 of the National Council of Science and Technology (CONACYT). Furthermore, the authors acknowledge the International Research Collaboration Fund 2024-2025 from the University of Nottingham A7C200.
The authors appreciate the support provided by the National Research and Development Agency (ANID)through the FONDECYT Regular grant number 1220556 and SERC Chile FONDAP 1523A0006. Additional funding was provided by the Research Project PINV01-743 and PINV01-272 of the National Council of Science and Technology (CONACYT) and the UK-FRANCE Science Innovation and Technology Researcher Mobility Scheme UUK Award #1102. Furthermore, the authors acknowledge the International Research Collaboration Fund 2024-2025 from the University of Nottingham A7C200 and Programa de Redução de Assimetrias na Pós-Graduação (PRAPG) – Edital nº 14/2023 – DRI – CAPES. ID Number: 046.821.818-15. In addition, the authors also thank ENNOBLE – zEro emission raNge exteNder fOr hyBrid propuLsion systEm, Application number: 10062777 – UK Research and Innovation.
K.S.R.M College of Engineering (Autonomous), Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh, 516005, India
T. Mariprasath
Nitte Meenakshi Institute of Technology (NMIT), Nitte (Deemed to be University), Bangalore, India
Sujata Shivashimpiger
Power Electronics, Machines and Control (PEMC) Research Institute, Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2GT, UK
Marco Rivera & Patrick Wheeler
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Institute of Aeronautical Engineering, Hyderabad, Telangana, 500043, India
M. Pala Prasad Reddy
Annamacharaya University, Rajampet, Andhra Pradesh, India
Shaik Muqthiar Ali
Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Mohan Babu University, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh, India
Venkatesh Peruthambi
Department of Electrical Engineering, Federal University of Mato Grosso, Avenida Fernando Correa da Costa, 1367, Cuiaba, 78060-900, Brazil
Jakson Bonaldo
PubMed Google Scholar
PubMed Google Scholar
PubMed Google Scholar
PubMed Google Scholar
PubMed Google Scholar
PubMed Google Scholar
PubMed Google Scholar
PubMed Google Scholar
Conceptualization – Dr. T. Mariprasath, Dr. Sujata ShivashimpigerMethodology – Dr. T. Mariprasath, M. Pala Prasad Reddy, Shaik Muqthiar AliSoftware – Dr. T. Mariprasath, Dr. Sujata ShivashimpigerValidation – Dr. T. Mariprasath, Dr. Venkatesh Peruthambi, Shaik Muqthiar Ali5Writing – Original Draft – Dr. Marco Rivera, Dr. Jakson BonaldoWriting – Review & Editing – Dr. Marco Rivera, Dr. Patrick Wheeler, Dr. Jakson Bonaldo, Visualization – Dr. Marco Rivera, M. Pala Prasad Reddy, Shaik Muqthiar AliFunding Acquisition – Dr. Marco Rivera, Dr. Patrick Wheeler.
Correspondence to T. Mariprasath or Marco Rivera.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Reprints and permissions
Mariprasath, T., Shivashimpiger, S., Rivera, M. et al. An experimental investigation of unique high stepup boost converter for electric vehicle and solar photovoltaic. Sci Rep 16, 2402 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-25807-6
Download citation
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Version of record:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-25807-6
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
Advertisement
Scientific Reports (Sci Rep)
ISSN 2045-2322 (online)
© 2026 Springer Nature Limited
Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.
You must be logged in to post a comment.