ESR Modeling of Class II MLCC Large-Signal-Excitation Losses

Multilayer ceramic capacitors (MLCCs) with ferroelectric Class II dielectrics enable extremely high volumetric capacitance density, and are therefore preferred in high-power-density power conversion. These MLCCs, though, suffer from a nonlinear dielectric constant and substantial low-frequency, larg...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inIEEE transactions on power electronics Vol. 38; no. 5; pp. 5711 - 5715
Main Authors Menzi, David, Ben-Yaakov, Shmuel, Zulauf, Grayson, Kolar, Johann W.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published New York IEEE 01.05.2023
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE)
Subjects
AC-DC power converters
Capacitance
Current measurement
DC–AC power converters
Density
Dielectric loss measurement
effective series resistance (ESR)
Energy conversion
Excitation
Ferroelectricity
IGSE
IGSE-C
inverters
Loss measurement
loss modeling
Magnetic materials
Mathematical models
Modelling
multilayer ceramic capacitors (MLCCs)
Multilayers
Parameters
power capacitors
Power measurement
Q measurement
rectifiers
Steinmetz equation
Voltage measurement
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Multilayer ceramic capacitors (MLCCs) with ferroelectric Class II dielectrics enable extremely high volumetric capacitance density, and are therefore preferred in high-power-density power conversion. These MLCCs, though, suffer from a nonlinear dielectric constant and substantial low-frequency, large-signal excitation losses. Previously, a Steinmetz-parameter-based loss model accurately described these large-signal losses in MLCCs, but a difficult peak-charge measurement was required. For magnetic materials, a Steinmetz-based model is translated to an operating-point-specific effective series resistance (ESR) model, which then allows for a low-complexity loss calculation. In this letter, we introduce and verify an ESR-based loss model for MLCCs, with the ESR derived from the MLCC Steinmetz parameters. Our modeling error is below <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{25}{\%}</tex-math></inline-formula> across all evaluated operating points, a major improvement over modeling with the small-signal ESR provided in the MLCC datasheet, which may result in a loss approximation error of up to 10×.
ISSN:0885-8993
1941-0107
DOI:10.1109/TPEL.2023.3246095