Authors :
Sachin Rathod; Mahesh Jivani; Kalpesh Gajera
Volume/Issue :
Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 7 - July
Google Scholar :
https://tinyurl.com/yuy6jczx
Scribd :
https://tinyurl.com/yzuj438f
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26jul1399
Note : A published paper may take 4-5
working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and
ResearchGate.
Abstract :
Power-factor correction (PFC) is essential in modern motor-drive systems to comply with harmonic-current limits
(e.g., IEC 61000-3-2), reduce input-current distortion, and lower reactive-power burden on the supply. This paper presents
a fair head-to-head experimental comparison of three boost-based active PFC front ends for a brushless DC (BLDC) motor
drive: (i) classic boost PFC, (ii) bridgeless boost PFC, and (iii) two-phase interleaved boost PFC. All three converters are
digitally controlled using an outer DC-bus voltage loop and an inner input-current loop on the same hardware platform,
and all three are tested with the same BLDC motor, the same load profile, and the same instrumentation, so that the observed
differences reflect only the topology change. Twenty-four operating points are recorded at a fixed motor speed of 3,950 RPM
with shaft torque varied from no-load to 3.5 N.m using a HIOKI smart power analyzer. Across the load range, the measured
mean power factor improves from 0.9255 (Classic) to 0.9385 (Bridgeless) and 0.9501 (Interleaved); the peak measured
reactive power drops from 905 VAR (Classic) to 790 VAR (Bridgeless) and 664 VAR (Interleaved), corresponding to a 26.6
per cent reduction in worst-case reactive-power demand from Classic to Interleaved. A qualitative component-count and
complexity comparison is also presented to support topology selection in practical motor-drive design.
Keywords :
Power-Factor Correction (PFC); Classic Boost PFC; Bridgeless PFC; Interleaved PFC; BLDC Motor Drive; Digital Control; Reactive Power; Power Quality; Experimental Comparison.
References :
- IEC 61000-3-2, "Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) — Part 3-2: Limits — Limits for harmonic current emissions (equipment input current ≤ 16 A per phase)," International Electrotechnical Commission, Geneva, Switzerland, 2018.
- R. W. Erickson and D. Maksimović, Fundamentals of Power Electronics, 3rd ed. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2020.
- N. Mohan, T. M. Undeland, and W. P. Robbins, Power Electronics: Converters, Applications, and Design, 3rd ed. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley, 2003.
- M. H. Rashid, Power Electronics: Circuits, Devices, and Applications, 4th ed. Boston, MA, USA: Pearson, 2013.
- O. García, J. A. Cobos, R. Prieto, P. Alou, and J. Uceda, "Single phase power factor correction: A survey," IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 749–755, May 2003, doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2003.810856.
- M. Bharathidasan and V. Indragandhi, "Review of power factor correction (PFC) AC/DC-DC power electronic converters for electric vehicle applications," IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng., vol. 906, no. 1, Art. no. 012006, 2020, doi: 10.1088/1757-899X/906/1/012006.
- L. Huber, Y. Jang, and M. M. Jovanović, "Performance evaluation of bridgeless PFC boost rectifiers," IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 1381–1390, May 2008, doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2008.921107.
- Y. Jang and M. M. Jovanović, "Interleaved boost converter with intrinsic voltage-doubler characteristic for universal-line PFC front end," IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 1394–1401, Jul. 2007, doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2007.900502.
- D. Mohanraj, D. Samithas, P. K. Balachandran, and M. A. A. Mohd Zainuri, "An improved power factor correction converter for switched reluctance motor drive performance analysis," IEEE Access, vol. 13, pp. 71187–71196, 2025, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3561335.
- B. Singh, B. N. Singh, A. Chandra, K. Al-Haddad, A. Pandey, and D. P. Kothari, "A review of single-phase improved power quality AC–DC converters," IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 50, no. 5, pp. 962–981, Oct. 2003, doi: 10.1109/TIE.2003.817609.
- J. P. M. Figueiredo, F. L. Tofoli, and B. L. A. Silva, "A review of single-phase PFC topologies based on the boost converter," in Proc. IEEE/IAS Int. Conf. Industry Applications (INDUSCON), 2010, pp. 1–6, doi: 10.1109/INDUSCON.2010.5740013.
- M. M. Jovanović and Y. Jang, "State-of-the-art, single-phase, active power-factor-correction techniques for high-power applications — An overview," IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 701–708, Jun. 2005, doi: 10.1109/TIE.2005.843964.
- H. Nene, "Bridgeless PFC implementation using C2000 Piccolo microcontroller," Texas Instruments Application Report SPRABE2, 2014.
- B. Mahdavikhah, R. DiCecco, and A. Prodić, "A hardware-efficient programmable two-band controller for PFC rectifiers with ripple-cancellation," IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 30, no. 11, pp. 6363–6373, Nov. 2015, doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2015.2390235.
- A. Sheeba Joseph and S. Ramalingam, "Enhancement of power factor correction in an AC–DC converter with an integrated boost-flyback circuit," Rev. Roum. Sci. Techn.–Électrotechn. et Énerg., vol. 69, no. 2, pp. 213–218, 2024, doi: 10.59277/RRST-EE.2024.69.2.16.
Power-factor correction (PFC) is essential in modern motor-drive systems to comply with harmonic-current limits
(e.g., IEC 61000-3-2), reduce input-current distortion, and lower reactive-power burden on the supply. This paper presents
a fair head-to-head experimental comparison of three boost-based active PFC front ends for a brushless DC (BLDC) motor
drive: (i) classic boost PFC, (ii) bridgeless boost PFC, and (iii) two-phase interleaved boost PFC. All three converters are
digitally controlled using an outer DC-bus voltage loop and an inner input-current loop on the same hardware platform,
and all three are tested with the same BLDC motor, the same load profile, and the same instrumentation, so that the observed
differences reflect only the topology change. Twenty-four operating points are recorded at a fixed motor speed of 3,950 RPM
with shaft torque varied from no-load to 3.5 N.m using a HIOKI smart power analyzer. Across the load range, the measured
mean power factor improves from 0.9255 (Classic) to 0.9385 (Bridgeless) and 0.9501 (Interleaved); the peak measured
reactive power drops from 905 VAR (Classic) to 790 VAR (Bridgeless) and 664 VAR (Interleaved), corresponding to a 26.6
per cent reduction in worst-case reactive-power demand from Classic to Interleaved. A qualitative component-count and
complexity comparison is also presented to support topology selection in practical motor-drive design.
Keywords :
Power-Factor Correction (PFC); Classic Boost PFC; Bridgeless PFC; Interleaved PFC; BLDC Motor Drive; Digital Control; Reactive Power; Power Quality; Experimental Comparison.