energies

Review
Non-Isolated Multiport Converter for Renewable Energy
Sources: A Comprehensive Review
Jayakumar Narayanaswamy and Srihari Mandava *

School of Electrical Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technology, Tamil Nadu 632014, India
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: A key focus of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is to harvest electricity from
renewables. The fields of renewable energy sources (RES) and harvesting methods have seen
tremendous growth. Multiport power electronic converter circuits integrate multiple energy sources.
This integration aids in powering the load with different required voltage ratings. A simple and
reliable control scheme for this system can maintain high power transfer efficiency and reliability.
To integrate RES, non-isolated (NI) DC-DC multiport converters (MPC) are introduced; however,
the main objective is to concentrate on NI MPC which provide a reliable output. In this paper
non-isolated MPC topologies are reviewed and analyzed based on difference parameters considering
circuit configuration; operating principal; number of components; complexity; and efficiency. This
comprehensive review can be used as a guide for the suitable selection of converter topology to
RES integration.

Keywords: multiport converter; non-isolated converters; converters in renewable energy; converters

for energy conversion

1. Introduction
Globally, electricity consumption is rising but it continues to be generated with tra-
ditional energy sources which cause air pollution and other environmental damage [1,2].
Over 75% of CO2 emissions are emitted by the energy sector, and the air temperature is
Citation: Narayanaswamy, J.;
expected to increase by 1.5 ◦ C by the end of the 21st century [1]. More electricity must
Mandava, S. Non-Isolated Multiport
be generated to meet this massive energy demand. Traditional fossil-fuel-based power
Converter for Renewable Energy
Sources: A Comprehensive Review.
generation technologies have lost their utility because of the release of toxic pollutants, the
Energies 2023, 16, 1834. https://
depletion of fossil fuels, and the increase of environmental restrictions [2]. Meanwhile, sus-
doi.org/10.3390/en16041834
tainable energy sources offer free, renewable, nontoxic, and eco-friendly fuel. This makes
green sources capable of balancing industrial needs. Renewable energy demand continues
Academic Editor: Vítor Monteiro
to grow, as concerns about the overconsumption of non-renewable resources grow [1–3].
Received: 23 January 2023 Over a decade, green and brown technologies have grown by 8.7 and 2.2%, respectively.
Revised: 6 February 2023 This has helped in the reduction of carbon emissions by 8.4% since 2015 (IEA, 2021a).
Accepted: 9 February 2023 Figure 1 shows the renewable energy capacity by continent. Where only less than 1 percent
Published: 12 February 2023 energy is harvested by biomass based energy conversion systems. However, this increase in
renewable load to gird requires predominantly multiport converters. This work reviews the
presently available converters for renewable energy integration into the grid and analyzes
the performance and significance of different converters in different applications.
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors. In recent years, the emphasis on alternative energy generation has switched to RES [2,3].
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. Whatever the system may be, it is common to have classifications such as solar systems or
This article is an open access article
energy harvesters [4,5]. Wind and solar energy sources have a fundamental disadvantage in
distributed under the terms and
that they are weather-dependent, making them intermittent [3–6]. A hybrid energy system
conditions of the Creative Commons
combining both renewable and non-renewables can eliminate this drawback [7]. Since these
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
drawbacks make the reliability of the system challenging, it is necessary to develop a hybrid
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
grid integration model which combines both renewable and nonrenewable energy sources
4.0/).

Energies 2023, 16, 1834. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16041834 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2023, 16, 1834 2 of 25

with advanced power electronics systems for coordinating their operation [7]. Even while the
integration of numerous sources addresses the RES’s erratic power supply, this multisource
interface comes with its own set of issues. As a result, the power storage unit must attach to
provide compensation or retain the power discrepancy between what is generated and what
is required. Due to supply voltage changes, renewable energy interfaces might cause power
quality concerns [7,8]. Regardless of the benefits of RES, their exploration and integration
into an electric network is a complex undertaking. Due to the use of a switched-mode power
(SMP) converter, the power electronic interface can convert and control electric power [9].
Most of the problems caused by the penetration of RES can be avoided or eliminated with
the deployment of power electronics systems that are quite reliable and low-cost [10,11].
Multiport DC-DC converters are able to solve this challenge by allowing them to react
quickly to faults caused by RES and correcting them without affecting the existing grid
protection mechanism [10]. Multiport converters are electrical power conversion devices
that are used to control the flow of electrical power between multiple input and output
ports. They are used in a variety of applications, including renewable energy systems to
manage the flow of power between solar panels, wind turbines, batteries, and the grid to
ensure a reliable and efficient supply of energy. Multiport converters are used to balance
the load between different sources of energy to ensure that the energy demand is met and
the grid operates efficiently. The integration of renewable energy sources, such as solar
panels and wind turbines, into the grid increase the use of clean energy and the quality of
the electrical power being supplied to the grid by reducing power losses and improving
it’s stability. Because hybrid energy storage (HES) inverters are self-commutated and can
produce AC voltage, through power electronics converters the voltage and reactive power
control of RES are reliable [12]. Hence, it delivers the power factor and reactive power as
required to the grid. Figure 2 shows the converters in DC grids for renewable energy (RE)
integration. The work substantially describes the operational performance characteristics of
MPC along with their recent advancements and application. Further, this is an extended
detailed briefing on each type of MPC with respect to RES applications.

Figure 1. Renewable generation capacity by region and technology, 2020–21(IEA, 2021a).

Energies 2023, 16, 1834 3 of 25

Figure 2. Multiport converters for DC grid integration.

2. Classification of NI DC-DC Converter for RES

The most popular and commonly utilized converters in RES are DC-DC converters.
These converters regulate the power output from an uncontrolled input. For RE appli-
cations, the major DC-DC converters are the isolated type, which use a high-frequency
transformer to produce isolation between both the source and the load, and do not require
low-power applications for output and input isolation [13,14]. Because of their tiny size,
fewer components, and excellent conversion efficiency, these are highly common in RES
applications [14,15]. NI converters are further broken down into two types, namely single-
port converters (SPC) and MPC. Table 1 shows a comparative analysis of the different
DC-DC converter topologies. Figure 3 shows a typical schematic structure of the multiport
converter of a non-isolated and isolated converter.

Table 1. Comparative analysis of the different DC-DC converter topologies [3].

Parameter Conventional Converter Isolated Multiport Converter Non-Isolated Multiport

Converter
Isolation transformer Required/Not required Required Not required
Switching and switching losses Both More Less
Efficiency Less Greater than conventional Greater than conventional
converter converter
Input sources Individual, integrated Hybrid Multi-input hybrid system Multi-input hybrid system
System
Size Both high and low High Low
Ripple factor High Less than conventional Less
Noise filtering capability Strong Strong Less
Circuit Simple Complex Simple
Stability analysis Not constant Steady in operating points Steady in operating points

Figure 3. The typical schematic structure of a multiport converter, (a) non-isolated and (b) isolated.
Energies 2023, 16, 1834 4 of 25

Non-Isolated Converter Family

SPC are available with various DC-DC converter topologies. Figure 4 shows the
DC-DC converter’s single port NI topologies employed with an RES system.

Figure 4. Various DC-DC non-isolated converter topologies.

(a) Boost Converters

Boost converters are a step-up converter; here, the required load voltage is more than
the generating supply voltage. Boost converters are widely employed in solar systems,
both freestanding and grid connected. The DC-DC boost or step-up converter in Figure 5 is
a traditional boost converter that has been modified to achieve high gain and efficiency, by
combining the coupled inductor or switched capacitor and the integration of both switched
capacitor inductors being introduced [16,17].

Figure 5. DC-DC boost or step-up converter.

(b) Buck DC-DC Converters

A buck DC-DC converter is a step-down converter, since the voltage magnitude of
the output is less than the input. Figure 6 shows that the architecture of a DC-DC buck
converter is useful in high voltage renewable energy sources feeding a low-voltage load or
storage device. Here, the pulse width modulation (PWM) signal is used to modulate the
voltage to charge the batteries and for maximum power point tracking (MPPT) in the wind
and solar systems. These can be modified into standard, interleaved, two-phase, linked
synchronous inductors and interleaved buck converters to attain a high step-down voltage
ratio [18,19].
Energies 2023, 16, 1834 5 of 25

Figure 6. DC-DC buck converter.

(c) Buck–boost Converters

This converter is used for both the step up and step down of voltage levels. This
feature makes it a more reliable and popular converter among the converter topologies.
This design interconnects the load and source voltages that are virtually identical. Two
basic converters can be cascaded to create this topology (boost and buck converters) shown
in Figure 7, a DC-DC buck–boost converter. If the duty ratio of the converter switches is the
same, then the output and input voltages conversion ratio is the ratio of the two converters
in a cascade [20]. A synchronous rectifier approach is proposed to expand the converter’s
voltage-conversion range. A bidirectional inductor capacitor inductor (LCL) resonant
converter is used to provide a high step up and down ratio and zero voltage switching
(ZVS) [21]. The merits include a continuous current at both the input and output, while
there is a demerit of components that are under increased electrical stress, and there are
more passive components. Several control methods, including proportional integral (PI),
sliding mode control, and fuzzy-logic control, are widely utilized to harvest the maximum
power from PV panels using this architecture [22,23].

Figure 7. DC-DC buck–boost converter.

(d) DC-DC Cuk Converter

This converter is similar to the buck–boost and is used for both the step up and step
down of voltage levels, and is shown in Figure 8. Because of this feature, it is used to link
nearly matched loads to source voltages. The merits include a continuous current at both
the input and output, while there is a demerit of components that are under increased
electrical stress, and there are more passive components [24]. Several control methods,
including fuzzy-logic control, PI, and sliding mode control, are widely utilized to harvest
the maximum power from PV panels using this architecture [25,26].
Energies 2023, 16, 1834 6 of 25

Figure 8. DC-DC Cuk converter.

(e) SEPIC DC-DC Converter

SEPIC stands for single-ended primary inductor converter. This converter consists of a
non-inverting buck–boost converter capable of stepping up or down the input voltage [27].
Its two inductors instead of one makes this model differ from regular converters. A DC-DC
SEPIC converter is shown in Figure 9. SEPIC converters, like Cuk converters, require the
switch control terminal to be connected to the ground. In addition, like Cuk converters,
a continuous ripple-free input current is drawn from a PV panel, which is critical for
successful MPPT. This topology is only suitable when the battery voltage exceeds the PV
source voltage [14,28]. By charging and discharging the batteries in the converters above,
bidirectional switching cells provide a bidirectional power flow. These topologies are
created by combining numerous converters, resulting in lower converter efficiency and
the inability to use soft switching. The circuit has a limited power flow due to topological
restrictions. Coupled inductor topologies are employed to boost the voltage gain of the
converter. Working this type of converter in multiple modes is challenging in a single-stage
power conversion with a low device operating count that is executed but changeable.

Figure 9. DC-DC SEPIC converter.

(f) Charge pump converter

A charge pump converter is an electronic circuit that manipulates the voltage of a
direct current (DC) power supply. This is achieved by using capacitors to store and transfer
electrical energy, enabling the conversion of voltage levels. The basic principle of operation
involves charging a capacitor to the input voltage and then switching it to the output,
with the output voltage being proportional to the input multiplied by the number of
capacitors used. Charge pump converters come in various types, including linear, switch-
mode, and current-mode variations. The selection of the appropriate type depends on the
Energies 2023, 16, 1834 7 of 25

requirements of the specific application, such as efficiency, output voltage, power output,
and size. Figure 10 shows a DC-DC charge pump converter. Charge pump converters are
popular in portable electronic devices due to their affordability, simple design, and low
power consumption. They are also utilized in other areas where a high voltage or current
is needed, such as in medical devices, power management systems, and lighting systems.

Figure 10. DC-DC Charge pump converter.

3. Multiport Non-Isolated Converter

In the early 20th century, the evolution of MPC topologies began to appear in the liter-
ature. The NI topologies reduce the number of active switches and increases efficiency. On
the other hand, isolated topologies remained in demand because of their high adaptability
in routing the power flow between numerous ports and offering a high-end performance
in high power rating systems. This work covers the evolution of both NI and isolated
topologies, in terms of the switching frequency, power ratings, and efficiency of MPCs in
recent times. The research of new DC-DC power conversion systems looks into combining
two separate converters with an increased voltage gain and fewer switching elements.
Recent advancements in RE-based power solutions for portable electronics technology
have made things more complicated. This new system will consist of a variety of input
energy sources that will be merged by utilizing multi-input power electronics converters to
produce a regulated output for a variety of applications [29]. In the typical configuration,
many sources are joined at a common DC bus, and individual DC-DC conversion stages
are employed for each source, with converters controlled separately [30]. Consequently,
a single converter connects the load to the power source, while a bidirectional converter
connects the second port to store energy. Sometimes, a communication bus is used to send
data between sources [31,32].
The converter is more expensive since it involves numerous stages of power conver-
sion and communication device requirements. Because it manages numerous converters
individually, the system is also advanced. Figure 10 shows how an NI multiport structure
is used to deal with these issues. This system, which incorporates many sources of power,
treats the entire building as a single power converter [33]. A load is connected to a high
voltage DC and low voltage DC output port. Due to their power-sharing technique, easy
structure, minimal number of conversion stages, and fewer components, these MPC are
suitable for contributions in HES, satellite/aerospace applications, hybrid vehicles, and
uninterrupted power supplies (UPS). These are further classified as isolated converters and
non-isolated converters. The different NI topology of converters published in the literature
are compared in Table 2. To reduce shock hazards, attain a high voltage conversion, match
voltages, and avoid using semiconductor devices with huge current and voltage ratings,
Energies 2023, 16, 1834 8 of 25

an isolated converter separates the low-voltage DC side from the high-voltage DC side.
This is performed with high-frequency transformers. A downside of this technology is the
need for a transformer core, which increases the size and cost of the overall system. On
the other hand, NI converters are easy to make and use when there is no need for galvanic
isolation between the source and load. Its design has fewer components, is less expensive,
uses a one-stage power conversion, and allows bidirectional power flow across the ports,
which results in a high-power density. In addition, there is less current ripple across all
duty cycles [34]. Figure 11 shows the energy conversion process using a non-conventional
energy multiport DC-DC converter structure. Figure 12 shows the possible combination of
HRES systems.

Table 2. Reported parameters for NI topologies.

Topology [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [31] [41] [42]
Rated power (W) 50–500 110 18000 245 220 100 400 550 220
PV voltage (V)/
17 22 600 20 Vin 26 Vin 24 Vin 30-40 80 120
Input voltage
Bat voltage (V) 36 18 345.6 - - - 24 60 10–35
Load voltage (V) 24 110 120 300 300 172 28 50 48
Switches and diodes 9 5 10 5 5 4 6 5 4
Switching
20 100 20,10 50 30 50 100 50 100
frequency (Khz)
Inductor (µh) 170 160,600 3000 320 100 1000 40,65 50 300
Energy storage capacitor (µf) 100 24,24,17.8 4400,2200 47,180 180 220 - 150 100,1000
Avg. efficiency 90% 93.9% 92.25% 93.5% 94% ≤91.4% 92% 84 94.3%
≤

Figure 11. Non-isolated compact multiport DC-DC converter for renewable applications.
Energies 2023, 16, 1834 9 of 25

Figure 12. Possible combination of HRES systems.

4. Generalized Operating Mode of MPC

MPCs’ main function is to combine numerous port inputs into a single power stage,
allowing power to flow in between. There are various power flow modes available; each
one corresponds to a particular MPC working mode shown in Figure 12. Here, the PV
source is a renewable source, and the consumer is a lithium-ion battery to examine this
integration. The following is a representation of the power flow equation:

Pb + PV =𝑃𝑏PL++ 𝑃𝑉
PG = 𝑃𝐿 + 𝑃𝐺

where Pb is the battery power, PV is the generated power of PV, PL is the local loads, and
POut is the output from the PV to the battery system, where PG is the integration with the
grid. POut = PL for a standalone application, and POut = PL + PG for grid-tied systems,
where PG is either positive or negative depending on the power export or import. Based
on the operating mode, control strategies are chosen. Figure 13 shows the different modes
of operation for the MPC converter. Figure 13 shows the different modes of operation
for the NI-MP converter with typical power flow diagrams; power flow plays a key role
in the topology selected. The drop in cost for ES and PV systems encourages its use in
power applications, while converters play a crucial role in the frequency, output power
regulation, and peak load sharing. A summary of the modes of operation of proposed MPC
is tabulated in Table 3 [43].

Table 3. Summary of operation modes in MPC [30].

No. of Modes Power Flow Bucking Boosting

Modes 1 PV to Load (Va & Vb ) - Boost
Modes 2 PV to Battery and Load (Va and Vb ) Buck Boost
Modes 3 Battery to Load (Va and Vb ) - Boost
Modes 4 PV and Battery to Load (Va and Vb ) - Boost
Modes 5 Load to Battery Buck -
Energies 2023, 16, 1834 10 of 25

Figure 13. Typical Non isolated multiport converter. From (a–e) different modes of operation for the
NI-MP converter with typical power flow diagrams.

MODE 1: The PV connected to the load/grid delivers power when the PV panels are
exposed to radiation; this results in the battery charging. MODE 2: Loading the battery
when the PV panels are not producing enough power; the load can be provided by the
battery. From the grid to the battery, only one control signal can be used to charge the
battery from the grid in a grid-connected application. MODE 3: PV panels charge the
Energies 2023, 16, 1834 11 of 25

battery when there is no load. In this example, the PV battery provided direct energy
storage. MODE 4: Both PV panels and batteries feed the load when demand is high, or the
grid must be supported; PV panels provide power once more.
Power is again supplied to the load from the PV panels and battery. MODE 5: The
load to battery here is a bidirectional process that takes place from both the sources. A
representation of the different multiport converters are shown in Figures 13–16. The
NI-MPC is classified as shown in Figure 17.

Figure 14. Topology structure of multi-source cell.

Figure 14. Topology structure of multi-source cell.

Figure 15. Three-port unidirectional SEPIC converter.

Figure 16. Hybrid non-isolated three-port buck–boost converter with two bidirectional ports.
Energies 2023, 16, 1834 12 of 25

Figure 17. Multiport converter (NI-MPC).

4.1. DISO DC-DC Converter

A dual input–single output converter is employed in almost all RES. Multiple PV
panels are connected to a dual-input NI converter. A central capacitor boosts the voltage
of multiple PV strings and tracks two MPPs with reduced voltage stress [44]. For PV
and battery HES, an NI DC-DC converter is described. Similarly, PV systems, hybrid
electric vehicles (HEV) and fuel cells, computers, mobile devices, and other devices use
a DISO converter to enable power flow and voltage regulation between diverse inputs
and outputs [45]. For low-voltage applications, three-switched-leg MPCs are the emerging
concept. Without the use of transformers in this topology, the number of input sources
is increased, and the shared load can be powered up concurrently with the bidirectional
operation. For a high, low voltage source, DISO DC-DC converters are presented and
examined, and the buck–boost and buck converters are combined in this converter [46].
A multiple-input topology is proposed based on a buck–boost converter. This topology
has the advantage of providing a positive output voltage without the use of an extra
transformer, as well as improved efficiency, lower volume, fewer components, and ease of
implementation and control. It can also function in a bidirectional mode without the need
for a separate converter. It has three modes of operation: buck, boosts, and buck–boost.
However, as the number of devices has grown, conduction losses have increased, making
the converter more expensive. In the proposed boost converter, switches conduction losses
are considerably decreased. Architecture makes use of fewer controlled switches to achieve
an asymmetric bidirectional operation. However, the output diode’s reverse recovery
current decreases the converter’s overall efficiency. The problem focuses on a multi-input
converter with ZVS. It takes the current source as the input. Switch conduction loss is
low in the dual-power supply mode, connecting series input cells and PWM signals. The
integrated topologies of buck-buck and buck–boost are presented in [47]. With both sources,
the former design may deliver an individual and simultaneous output power; yet, with the
architecture, voltage sources are incapable to feed the load simultaneously [48].
The design of dual or MI converters from SI converters is enumerated in depth by
multiple authors of the work in the topologies mentioned above, and are developed from
the six fundamental non-isolated converters; namely buck, boost, buck–boost, Cuk, zeta,
and SEPIC converters. By putting these six fundamental non-isolated converters, two
types of multi-input converters (MICs) have been produced. The input sources of the
generated NI-MICs transfer energy to the load either individually or together [49,50].
This technique, however, does not examine topologies with a time-multiplexing control
system. Based on some requirements, assumptions, and limits, the various topologies of
MI DC-DC converters are discussed. From this MPC, other models are developed using a
time-multiplexing control technique. A systematic method is also used to construct MICs
employing six basic pulse width modulated DC-DC converters [51]. There are two varieties
of MICs: the first transmits power to the output load at a time, while the latter permits both
input sources to deliver energy to the load either individually or at a time.
For a high step-down conversion voltage ratio, a hybrid MI DC-DC converter was
proposed, shown in Figure 18. The output voltage can vary more widely with this design.
Energies 2023, 16, 1834 13 of 25

Hybrid and classical buck structures are used to create the proposed two-input hybrid DC-
DC converters. For an HES, an MI power converter with dual inputs and output DC-DC
boost converter is proposed [52]. The proposed system solves the problem of a capacitor
voltage imbalance in single-source MPC. This has the merit of low voltage stress on the
DC-DC converter’s power switch, low switching loss, a regulated output, and delivers
constant output power. The findings indicate that the topology is quite suitable in RE
applications. An MI converter was proposed by merging Cuk and SEPIC converters [53].
This eliminates the need for separate input filters, enable step-up/down operations for all
renewable energy sources, gives MPPT for each source, and can support both individual
and simultaneous operations [54].

Figure 18. Buck-based dual input–single output converter.

4.2. DC-DC Converter in Single Input–Dual Output Configuration (SIDO)

SIDO is widely used in all types of power electronic devices including EVs, power
factor correction devices, USB links [55], and the latest electronic gadgets, e.g., mobile
phones, MP3 players, digital cameras, handheld devices, etc. [56]. Figure 19 shows a buck-
based single input–dual output converter. It has few components and different output
voltages [57–60]. A SISO DC-DC converter with NI outputs produce either step-up or
step-down outputs from a single DC source. The control switches of a boost converter
are changed with the switches connected in the series, resulting in extra outputs at the
switch nodes in this topology. This literature reviews different SIDO converters [59]. This
model aims to limit cross-regulation by employing a multivariable digital controller [61].
The design techniques for a four-output converter with an efficiency of 86% are described
and confirmed. These methods are said to be capable of producing an infinite number
of outputs [62]. The research demonstrates a balanced power loss distribution and high
efficiency with low count switching devices and presents the design and control of a dual
output buck converter with a minimum number of components with unidirectional or
bidirectional characteristics for motor drive system applications. The drawback in this
converter model makes high current switch ratings compulsory [63,64].
Energies 2023, 16, 1834 14 of 25

Figure 19. DC-DC buck converter with single input–dual output.

4.3. Multi Input–Multi Output Converters (MIMO)

MIMO converters are used in hybrid RE sources and EVs for increasing efficiency and
reliability [65]. A MIMO converter with different voltage-current characteristics at the input
source is proposed [66]. Here, the switch voltage stress is reduced by increasing output
voltage [66]. EVs with these converters became more efficient, less expensive, and highly
reliable. A MIMO boost converter with diverse voltage-current (VI) characteristics as input
energy sources is proposed. Figure 20 depicts a circuit diagram of a MIMO converter. The
voltage load on the switches is decreased in this configuration by increasing the output
voltage level [67]. A two-input–tri-output buck–boost converter for single-step power
transmission from the source to the load is proposed. Pulse-skipping modulation and
pulse frequency modulation techniques are used as control methods for the output [68,69].
A MIMO NI converter with fewer parts and more outputs is proposed by combining
MIMO converters. This converter in a micro-grid interfaces with DC loads and multiple
renewable input sources. By using a buck–boost converter in a matrix format, smooth
power sharing is possible. The input sources are at different power and voltage ranges,
while the output voltage range may be below the minimum input to the above maximum
value. The findings of the simulation have been reported as part of the analysis. It is stated
that the number of inputs and outputs is limitless. The input sources, on the other hand,
are unable to power up all the outputs at the same time [70]. Triple port converters (TPC)
have emerged in the current research. It has an input port connected to the input source, an
output port connecting with the load, and a bidirectional port connected to the storage unit.
The operating modes of a TPC is shown in Figures 21 and 22. NI three-port buck–boost
converters with different modes is shown in the circuit diagram in Figure 23.
The power flow diagram of a TPC in the different modes of operations is shown in
Figure 22. Using a power balancing principle relationship between the input and output
port, it can be expressed as
Pi + Pb = P0
where Pi is the power at the renewable energy source input port, Pb is the power at the
energy storage system input port, and P0 is the power at the load port. The operating
modes of the non-isolated DC-DC TPC are classified into three, which are based on the
input power and the output power relationship, i.e., the input power is either greater or
equal or lesser than the load demand.
Energies 2023, 16, 1834 15 of 25

Figure 20. Circuit Diagram of MIMO Converter.

Figure 21. General form of triple port converter.

Figure 21. General form of triple port converter.

Figure 22. Operating modes of the TPC (a) DISO (b) SIDO (c) SISO.
Energies 2023, 16, 1834 16 of 25

Figure 23. NI three-port buck–boost Converters.

The power balancing principle relationship between the input and output port for the
operating modes of a TPC can be expressed as

(a) Pi + Pb = P0 , (b) Pi = P0 , Pb (c) Pb = P0

Recent research has piqued interest in TPC. The three ports are the voltage port,
storage port, and load or output port. There are three modes of operation for this converter:
DI, DO, and SISO. If the load obtains power from both the battery and the input source,
then it operates as a DI converter. The converter is in DO mode if the load and batteries
consume all the power. In a MIMO, the load can be powered by an input source or a battery.
Increased efficiency, small size, dependability, and effective power management are all
advantages of this design. These are commonly employed in renewable energy systems
because of their advantages [71,72]. An NI-TPC that connects the PV, battery, and load is
described. A higher power density and dependability are attained with fewer conversion
stages, as evidenced by experimental data. [73,74] introduce a family of NI-TPCs. In a DI
converter or DO converter, a SISO converter is used to create these TPCs. This explains
the development of a systematic process to derive TPCs from DI and DO converters. This
approach developed several TPC topologies, and a boost-type TPC was studied in DI, DO,
and SISO. TPCs have three possible generalized operating modes, shown in Figure 24.

Figure 24. Generalized operating modes for a TPC.

(a) Dual input (DI) mode

Energies 2023, 16, 1834 17 of 25

The suggested DI converter is appropriate for power conversion in RE, automotive,

telecommunications, and power systems. The DI converter is appropriate for applica-
tions that require energy to be transferred from two different port sources with a high
voltage range to load. It expands the use of hybrid DC-DC converters with a high voltage-
conversion ratio in a DI layout. A new DI hybrid converter is shown and examined,
including the operation modes, analytical descriptions, digital simulations, and test results
which are all in good agreement. Future publications will expand on this approach by
proposing closed-loop control techniques for various applications such as wind energy
conversion systems [75,76]. MI DC-DC converters for HES remain a difficult challenge
to solve, particularly when all input and output ports must be bidirectional. To connect
two DC power sources, an NI bidirectional DC-DC converter is proposed. The suggested
converter can obtain energy from two different sources, either separately or concurrently.
In both buck and boost modes, it can be operated bidirectionally. In comparison to standard
DI boost converters, the suggested converter requires only three programmable power
switches, making it far more cost-effective. In comparison to standard double input boost
converters, a new DC-DC converter is developed to interface the two power sources, which
is quite cost-effective due to the lower power switches. With all bidirectional input/output
ports, the new converter may operate in six different power flow modes. This converter is
well suited for hybrid energy systems with varying power flow requirements due to its
small structure and control flexibility [77,78]. The DI mode during which the storage unit
discharges to support the load along with the input source is illustrated below in Table 4.

Table 4. Power flow of a TPC-integrated non-isolated MPC topology.

Power Flow of TPC Power Flow State of Mode When Power Flow Analysis
Power Flow of TPC

LOAD

TPC
Dual input (DI) state In this scenario, the battery is the only source of
PV < PL power for the load.

SOURCE STORAGE
(RES) UNIT

LOAD
LOAD

Both the main source and the battery are used to

power the load in this stage. The input is the
Dual output (DO) state
TPC primary source, while the battery and load are the
PV > PL
outputs. Excess electricity is also used to charge
the battery.

SOURCE STORAGE
SOURCE
(RES) STORAGE
UNIT
(RES) UNIT
LOAD
LOAD

TPC
Single input single–output (SISO) mode In this scenario, the battery is the sole source of
PV = 0 power for the load.

SOURCE STORAGE
SOURCE
(RES) STORAGE
UNIT
(RES) UNIT
Energies 2023, 16, 1834 18 of 25

(b) Dual output (DO) mode

The output produced with traditional DO converters are two identical voltage levels;
here, the output topology is two different voltage levels. One output voltage gain has
a significant increase in this configuration. This eliminates the need for transformers by
converting power through two switches. Instead of two SO power supplies, one can be
utilized. The capacity to have negative and positive output voltage is one of the topology’s
most notable features. Furthermore, compared to traditional DO output converters, this
topology provides a significant voltage gain. The volt-second and ampere-second laws
were used to evaluate the switching strategy in two separate modes. Furthermore, the
voltage stress of the switches has been computed to confirm that the suggested converter
is feasible [79], [80]. This converter is ideal for driving the half-bridge class-D amplifier
because it has a dual output with positive and negative output voltages, which eliminates
the need for a DC-blocking capacitor in the half-bridge class-D amplifier. The following are
some of the features of the proposed converter. A single positive voltage source feeds both
positive and negative output voltages. This circuit is simple to build [81]. In DO mode, the
source feeds the load and storage unit.
(c) Single input–single output (SISO) mode
In a weak-grid situation, the converter-grid interaction is of tremendous interest. A
SISO open-loop transfer function is used for the stability analysis of grid-connected voltage-
source converters. In contrast to the traditional input impedance approach and eigenvalue
analysis, the research develops an alternative multi-input–multi-output closed-loop system
that eventually provides a SISO open-loop transfer function. This allows a single Nyquist
curve to be used to analyze the total system stability, which can be ensured by carefully
setting the controller parameters. The SISO open-loop transfer function was built using
generic transfer functions found in various controllers and filters. For controllers or filters,
different transfer functions can be employed, but the procedures for constructing the SISO
open-loop transfer function remain the same [82]. The corresponding SISO feedback control
model is based on the individual channel analysis and design (ICAD) theory, which has
the merit of a quantitative evaluation of the system stability margin. The gain margin
(GM) and phase margin (PM) indexes of the derived SISO mode are used to quantify
the effects of the AC system strength, as well as in the control system on the system
stability margin [83]. Two types of SISO impedance models were developed, one based
on a moderately strong and DQ symmetric grid assumption (a reduced SISO model), and
the other on a closed-loop equivalent grid assumption (a closed SISO model) (an accurate
SISO model). The accurate SISO model was shown to have the same marginal stability
requirement as the MIMO model [84], [85]. Impedance modeling and stability studies of
a single-phase grid-connected voltage-source converter using a harmonic-domain SISO
equivalent modeling technique (VSC) have been conducted. The foundation is a strategy
for converting a harmonic transfer function (HTF)-based model into a SISO equivalent
model while keeping all frequency coupling information. The proposed SISO modeling
concept is useful for comprehending the significance and implications of SISO impedance
measurements in a system with frequency couplings. This method’s applications for VSC
model reduction and stability characteristic analyses are discussed. These findings lead
to helpful conclusions on the correctness of three types of reduced-order VSC impedance
models, as well as the stability impacts of VSC management with and without DC voltage
compensation [86].
TPC stands for two-port converter, and its distinguishing feature is the various work
states with separate power flows. The power flows through the main source (RES), storage
unit, and load are indicated by PV, PB, and PL, respectively, to simplify the study. The
power flow diagrams and the three operating states are listed below in Table 4. Different
topologies have been examined for the comparison of NI-MPCs that can be seen in their
construction. Because parasitic losses of transformer and leakage inductance are eliminated
Energies 2023, 16, 1834 19 of 25

in non-isolated MPC topologies, they are more efficient. A comprehensive classification of

the reported cases is shown in Figure 25.

Figure 25. General classification of a non-isolated MPC.

There are three types of MPC in NI topologies. The “combined input/output-port

MPCs” are made up of a variety of basic converter cells, namely buck, boost, and buck–
boost. NI-MPCs can also be made by combining complex converter cells such as full bridge
and half bridge. The construction of “reconfigurable-port MPCs” is simpler. For interfacing
several ports, they usually utilize one or two converters. Relays or other slow switching
devices are also used to modify the circuit such that the same power converter is used for
numerous ports. In addition to a generic combination of basic converter cells, the third form
of NI-MPCs uses “magnetic/capacitive coupling.” Magnetic or capacitive coupling does
not always offer galvanic isolation between the ports, yet it is commonly employed to boost
voltage. This is especially important for RES and ES integration, as it allows for a greater
voltage range. A high step-up TPC for stand-alone systems is required for the integration
of solar input and battery storage. In this topology, two coupled inductors are used for
voltage gain in high voltage applications. Two sets of buck–boost converter active-clamp
circuits are used to recall the energy balance in the leakage inductors to improve efficiency,
with ratios in different operation modes [87].

5. Topologies Comparison in Multi-Input Non-Isolated DC-DC Converter

These topologies have their own pros and cons; there are no pre-determined criteria
for selecting a specific topology for a given application. However, several features, such
LOAD as cost, reliability, flexibility, and efficiency, can be compared amongst the topologies. The
comparison is only based on the topology that has been synthesized. Different types
of renewable energy multiport converters comparisons are shown in Table 5. In this
comparison, the control mechanisms and extra cells with added components for additional
benefits are neglected. The cost of the converter is determined by the total components
employed in the topology. When compared with independent SI converters, MI converters
with a balanced share of components at their input and output stages can be developed
SOURCE STORAGE
at lower costs. In NI converters, there is a lack of transformer requirements for input–
(RES) UNIT
output isolation; this makes them less expensive than isolated converters. Buck and boost
converters are less expensive than other non-isolated topologies because they have a smaller
requirement for the number of components. Boost converters are the more cost-effective
topologies among them all. The boost converter has advantages over the buck converter in
solar applications. The current requirement of MOSFETs in boost converters is lower than
in buck converters. Boost converters, in comparison to buck converters, require a greater
inductance to achieve the current ripple. Buck converters require a large capacitor when
Energies 2023, 16, 1834 20 of 25

the input current is erratic. In a boost converter, the freewheeling diode can be utilized
as a blocking diode, but it is an extra component in a buck converter [88]. A rise in the
utilization of renewables such solar PV and wind results in high-end research attention
for cost effectiveness. Additional to this, they will offer environmental benefits. These
traditional solutions have poor efficiency when an additional converter is used in energy
storage systems.

Table 5. Different types of renewable energy multiport converters.

Converter Topology Loss and Stress Analysis Power Output Safety Stability Reliability
The hybrid buck combines When compared with It enables the employment of
with three buck structure quadratic converters, this hybrid DC-DC converters in a
converters which give a high gives a higher voltage dual-input configuration with a
Two-input DC-DC voltage-to-conversion ratio. reduction; hybrid converters It manages a large amount of high voltage-conversion ratio.
converter [74] DC input sources supply to store low energy in the output power. All of the modes of operation,
the load individually or magnetic field of the analytical descriptions, digital
in parallel. inductors. Hence, there are simulations, and test results are
Soft switching is usable. fewer switching losses. in agreement.
The boost’s basic topology. The maximum power output
Multiple step conversion
Three-port grid converter The TPC topology depicts a is 200W. The switching Effective use of a three-port
reduces system efficiency,
power converters [71] power flow in various frequency is 80 kHz, and the standalone converter
which is a considerable loss.
operating conditions. rated load power is 140 watts.
This section describes a
five-port converter. This In non-isolated multiport
Active multiport Stability and dependability
multiport electrical interface converters, voltage and This can process a stable
integrating multiple source demonstrate
topology connects PV, fuel current strains output power for RES.
and loads for grid [85] excellent performance.
cells, wind power, and are considerable.
batteries to a DC bus.
This can process a huge
The suggested MPC has a
Multiport DC-DC Conduction losses are kept to amount of output power. This
straightforward topology It has a low level of stability and
directional converter for PV a minimum, and voltage is capable of processing a
with only four dependability.
battery system [86] stress is kept to a minimum. huge amount of
power switches.
output power.

The multi-stage architecture increases the size, has a lower power density, and is not
economical. The single switch to manage the power distribution of all three ports reduces
the size and cost [89]. Reliability & There are two factors that influence the converters’
stability. The investigation into the common components in the circuit and in the load
placed on each component states that buck–boost, Cuk, and SEPIC converters need more
passive devices and more electrical stress on the switches, diodes, and capacitors compared
with buck and boost converters [90]. Flexibility the topology’s compatibility with various
sorts of input sources can be configured. Because the major purpose of MI converters is to
integrate diverse input sources to produce the desired output, the topology input interface
is crucial. A wide range of output voltages should be provided, and different input sources
should be able to be integrated. Since the input current is continuous and ripple-free,
Cuk and SEPIC converters are more flexible, and they can step up or decrease the input
voltage at the same time [91]. It is found that NI topologies are more efficient [92,93]. While
moving towards to modern control techniques, many investigations have proven to be
effective using algorithms and fuzzy systems approaches. A thorough model for modeling
actuator faults is presented, and a novel fault-tolerant control (FTC) technique is provided
to compensate for the loss of actuator efficacy in networked control systems. To address
the stochastic nature of network difficulties, a Markov chain is used to depict networked-
induced unpredictable delays, data packet dropouts, and diseases [94]. As a result, the
resulting closed-loop system belongs to the class of Markovian jump systems. The aperiodic
sampled-data control problem for flexible spacecraft with stochastic actuator failures is
addressed in this work. Due to significant nonlinearity, flexible spacecraft dynamics are
represented by a collection of T-S fuzzy models, and multi-stochastic spacecraft failures are
portrayed by a time continuous and state-discrete Markov chain [95]. The outputs of energy
hubs (EHs) and system parameters, which have a large impact on security performance,
should be properly adjusted for the integrated energy system (IES) established by a cluster
of EHs. An event-triggered distributed hybrid control strategy is proposed in this paper to
Energies 2023, 16, 1834 21 of 25

ensure security and economic operations for the IES. First, the EH output control is created
using energy network properties as well as containment and consensus techniques [96].

6. Conclusions
This review detailed a comparison of multiport converters for RE applications using
NI topologies. The modes of operation, working, merits, and demerits of MPC DC-DC
converters are presented here. The comparison of the NI-MPC converter with TPCs
provides the highlights and drawbacks in both models for renewable applications. The
operation and circuit level differences in each converter are highlighted briefly with their
respective application. It is clear that NI-MPC topologies are the better solution to reduce
the cost of the converters in renewable systems. However, when a bidirectional power
flow is introduced to reduce the number of converters, system efficiency slightly reduces.
So, this review insists that more research focuses on the bidirectional mode of NI-MPC to
improve system efficiency. Apart from this, we discussed the converter’s behavior with
grid-tied, off-grid, and microgrid systems. The multiple topologies comparison represented
one system’s advantage over another in a respected system. The research gap and the
future needs of converters for renewable applications are elaborated.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.N.; methodology, J.N.; software, J.N.; validation, J.N.;
formal analysis, J.N.; investigation, J.N.; resources, J.N.; data curation, J.N.; writing—original draft
preparation, J.N.; writing—review and editing, J.N.; visualization, S.M.; supervision, S.M.; project
administration, S.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This publication is funded by Vellore institute of technology, vellore, india-632014.
Data Availability Statement: All data is in article.
Acknowledgments: We thank VIT university for funding this work.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Nomenclature
MPC DC-DC multiport converter
DISO Dual input single output
GM Gain margin
HEV Hybrid electric vehicle
HES Hybrid energy storage
ICAD Individual channel analysis and design
MPPT Maximum power point tracking
MIMO Multi-input single output
NI Non-isolated
PM Phase margin
PI Proportional Integral
PWM Pulse width modulation
RE Renewable energy
RES Renewable energy sources
SISO Single input single output
SEPIC Single-Ended Primary Inductor Converter
SPC Single-port converters
SDGs Sustainable Development Goals
SMP Switched Mode Power
HTF The harmonic transfer function
TPC Two-port converter
UPS Uninterrupted power supplies
VSC Voltage source converter
ZVS Zero voltage switching
Energies 2023, 16, 1834 22 of 25

References
1. Elavarasan, R.M.; Shafiullah, G.M.; Padmanaban, S.; Kumar, N.M.; Annam, A.; Vetrichelvan, A.M.; Mihet-Popa, L.;
Holm-Nielsen, J.B. A Comprehensive Review on Renewable Energy Development, Challenges, and Policies of Leading Indian
States With an International Perspective. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 74432–74457. [CrossRef]
2. Gomathy, S.; Senthilnathan, D.N.; Swathi, S.; Poorviga, R.; Dinakaran, P. Review On Multi Input Multi Output DC-DC Converter.
Int. J. Sci. Technol. Res. 2020, 9, 428–440.
3. Karimi-Davijani, H.; Ojo, O. Controllability Analysis of Renewable Energy Systems. Power Electron. Renew. Energy Syst. Transp.
Ind. Appl. 2014, 199–230. [CrossRef]
4. Kumar, A.R.; Ramakrishnan, M. A scoping review on recent advancements in domestic applications of solar thermal systems.
J. Therm. Eng. 2022, 8, 426–444. [CrossRef]
5. Ramkumar, A.; Ramakrishnan, M. A comprehensive review on small-scale thermal energy harvesters: Advancements and
applications. Mater. Today Proc. 2022, 66, 1552–1562. [CrossRef]
6. Gielen, D.; Boshell, F.; Saygin, D.; Bazilian, M.D.; Wagner, N.; Gorini, R. The role of renewable energy in the global energy
transformation. Energy Strategy Rev. 2019, 24, 38–50. [CrossRef]
7. Tang, Z.; Yang, Y.; Blaabjerg, F. An Interlinking Converter for Renewable Energy Integration Into Hybrid Grids. IEEE Trans. Power
Electron. 2021, 36, 2499–2504. [CrossRef]
8. Babu, T.S.; Vasudevan, K.R.; Ramachandaramurthy, V.K.; Sani, S.B.; Chemud, S.; Lajim, R.M. A Comprehensive Review of Hybrid
Energy Storage Systems: Converter Topologies, Control Strategies and Future Prospects. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 148702–148721.
[CrossRef]
9. Raheja, L. Power Electronics for Renewable Energy Systems: Current Approaches and Future Prospects. Int. J. Sci. Eng. Manag.
2019, 4, 3–7.
10. Choy, W.J.; Costabeber, A.; Buticchi, G.; Trentin, A.; Walker, A.; Galea, M.; Paciura, K.; O’Brien, J.; Palmer, B. A Multiport Power
Electronics Converter for Hybrid Traction Applications. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 99181–99192. [CrossRef]
11. Marchesoni, M.; Vacca, C. New DC–DC Converter for Energy Storage System Interfacing in Fuel Cell Hybrid Electric Vehicles.
IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2007, 22, 301–308. [CrossRef]
12. Amirabadi, M.; Toliyat, H.A.; Alexander, W.C. A Multiport AC Link PV Inverter With Reduced Size and Weight for Stand-Alone
Application. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2013, 49, 2217–2228. [CrossRef]
13. Jalbrzykowski, S.; Citko, T. A bidirectional DC-DC converter for renewable energy systems. Bull. Pol. Acad. Sci. Tech. Sci. 2009, 57,
363–368. [CrossRef]
14. Moradpour, R.; Ardi, H.; Tavakoli, A. Design and Implementation of a New SEPIC-Based High Step-Up DC/DC Converter for
Renewable Energy Applications. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2017, 65, 1290–1297. [CrossRef]
15. Fang, X.; Ding, X.; Zhong, S.; Tian, Y. Improved Quasi-Y-Source DC-DC Converter for Renewable Energy. CPSS Trans. Power
Electron. Appl. 2019, 4, 163–170. [CrossRef]
16. Bhaskar, M.S.; Almakhles, D.J.; Padmanaban, S.; Blaabjerg, F.; Subramaniam, U.; Ionel, D.M. Analysis and Investigation of
Hybrid DC–DC Non-Isolated and Non-Inverting Nx Interleaved Multilevel Boost Converter (Nx-IMBC) for High Voltage Step-Up
Applications: Hardware Implementation. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 87309–87328. [CrossRef]
17. Liu, H.; Hu, H.; Wu, H.; Xing, Y.; Batarseh, I. Overview of High-Step-Up Coupled-Inductor Boost Converters. IEEE J. Emerg. Sel.
Top. Power Electron. 2016, 4, 689–704. [CrossRef]
18. Esteki, M.; Poorali, B.; Adib, E.; Farzanehfard, H. Interleaved Buck Converter With Continuous Input Current, Extremely Low
Output Current Ripple, Low Switching Losses, and Improved Step-Down Conversion Ratio. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2015, 62,
4769–4776. [CrossRef]
19. Sidorov, V.; Chub, A.; Vinnikov, D.; Bakeer, A. An Overview and Comprehensive Comparative Evaluation of Constant-Frequency
Voltage Buck Control Methods for Series Resonant DC–DC Converters. IEEE Open J. Ind. Electron. Soc. 2020, 2, 65–79. [CrossRef]
20. Lee, H.-S.; Yun, J.-J. High-Efficiency Bidirectional Buck–Boost Converter for Photovoltaic and Energy Storage Systems in a Smart
Grid. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2019, 34, 4316–4328. [CrossRef]
21. Sarikhani, A.; Allahverdinejad, B.; Hamzeh, M. A Nonisolated Buck–Boost DC–DC Converter With Continuous Input Current for
Photovoltaic Applications. IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Top. Power Electron. 2021, 9, 804–811. [CrossRef]
22. Onar, O.C.; Kobayashi, J.; Erb, D.C.; Khaligh, A. A Bidirectional High-Power-Quality Grid Interface With a Novel Bidirectional
Noninverted Buck–Boost Converter for PHEVs. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2012, 61, 2018–2032. [CrossRef]
23. Wu, H.; Zhang, J.; Xing, Y. A Family of Multiport Buck–Boost Converters Based on DC-Link-Inductors (DLIs). IEEE Trans. Power
Electron. 2015, 30, 735–746. [CrossRef]
24. Khodabandeh, M.; Afshari, E.; Amirabadi, M. A Family of Ćuk, Zeta, and SEPIC Based Soft-Switching DC–DC Converters. IEEE
Trans. Power Electron. 2019, 34, 9503–9519. [CrossRef]
25. Pandey, R.; Singh, B. A Power-Factor-Corrected LLC Resonant Converter for Electric Vehicle Charger Using Cuk Converter. IEEE
Trans. Ind. Appl. 2019, 55, 6278–6286. [CrossRef]
26. Ferrera, M.B.; Litran, S.P.; Aranda, E.D.; Marquez, J.M.A. A Converter for Bipolar DC Link Based on SEPIC-Cuk Combination.
IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2015, 30, 6483–6487. [CrossRef]
27. Ardi, H.; Ajami, A. Study on a High Voltage Gain SEPIC-Based DC–DC Converter With Continuous Input Current for Sustainable
Energy Applications. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2018, 33, 10403–10409. [CrossRef]
Energies 2023, 16, 1834 23 of 25

28. Maroti, P.K.; Padmanaban, S.; Holm-Nielsen, J.B.; Bhaskar, M.S.; Meraj, M.; Iqbal, A. A New Structure of High Voltage Gain
SEPIC Converter for Renewable Energy Applications. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 89857–89868. [CrossRef]
29. Karimian, F.; Nahavandi, A. Design and analysis of a new structure of non-isolated DC–DC cuk–boost converter with high
voltage gain. IET Power Electron. 2019, 12, 530–540. [CrossRef]
30. Suresh, K.; Bharatiraja, C.; Chellammal, N.; Tariq, M.; Chakrabortty, R.K.; Ryan, M.J.; Alamri, B. A Multifunctional Non-Isolated
Dual Input-Dual Output Converter for Electric Vehicle Applications. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 64445–64460. [CrossRef]
31. Zhou, Z.; Wu, H.; Ma, X.; Xing, Y. A non-isolated three-port converter for stand-alone renewable power system. In Proceedings
of the IECON Proceedings (Industrial Electronics Conference), Montreal, QC, Canada, 25–28 October 2012; pp. 3352–3357.
[CrossRef]
32. Zhu, H.; Zhang, D.; Zhang, B.; Zhou, Z. A Nonisolated Three-Port DC–DC Converter and Three-Domain Control Method for
PV-Battery Power Systems. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2015, 62, 4937–4947. [CrossRef]
33. Anuradha, C.; Sakthivel, C.; Venkatesan, T.; Chellammal, N. Analysis of Non-Isolated Multi-Port Single Ended Primary Inductor
Converter or Standalone Applications. Energies 2018, 11, 539. [CrossRef]
34. Sivasankar, N.; Devabalaji, K.R. Comparative Analysis of Non-Isolated Three port converters for Solar and Energy Storage
Integration. Int. J. Eng. Trends Technol. 2020, 68, 73–77.
35. Cheng, T.; Lu, D.D.-C.; Qin, L. Non-Isolated Single-Inductor DC/DC Converter With Fully Reconfigurable Structure for
Renewable Energy Applications. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. II Express Briefs 2018, 65, 351–355. [CrossRef]
36. Khasim, S.R.; Dhanamjayulu, C.; Muyeen, S.M. A Single Inductor Multi-Port Power Converter for Electric Vehicle Applications.
IEEE Access 2023, 11, 3367–3385. [CrossRef]
37. Shayeghi, H.; Pourjafar, S.; Lopez, J.A. A Bidirectional Multi-Port Structure of DC-DC Converter for Energy Storage Systems.
J. Energy Manag. Technol. 2023, 7, 69–79.
38. Suvvala, J.; Kumar, K.S. Implementation of EFC Charging Station by Multiport Converter with Integration of RES. Energies 2023,
16, 1521. [CrossRef]
39. Gevorkov, L.; Domínguez-García, J.L.; Martínez, À.F. Modern Trends in MultiPort Converters: Isolated, Non-Isolated, and
Partially Isolated. In Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE 63th International Scientific Conference on Power and Electrical Engineering
of Riga Technical University (RTUCON), Riga, Latvia, 10–12 October 2022; pp. 1–6.
40. Rezaii, R.; Ghosh, S.; Safayatullah, M.; Tayebi, S.M.; Batarseh, I. Quad-Input Single-Resonant Tank LLC Converter for PV
Applications. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2023, 1–19. [CrossRef]
41. Veerachary, M.; Yadav, N. Design and Analysis of Two-input Single-output DC-DC Converter. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE
4th International Conference on Computing, Power and Communication Technologies, GUCON 2021, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia,
24–26 September 2021; pp. 1–6. [CrossRef]
42. Tian, Q.; Zhou, G.; Liu, R.; Zhang, X.; Leng, M. Topology Synthesis of a Family of Integrated Three-Port Converters for Renewable
Energy System Applications. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2021, 68, 5833–5846. [CrossRef]
43. Al-Soeidat, M.R.; Aljarajreh, H.; Khawaldeh, H.A.; Lu, D.D.-C.; Zhu, J. A Reconfigurable Three-Port DC–DC Converter for
Integrated PV-Battery System. IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Top. Power Electron. 2020, 8, 3423–3433. [CrossRef]
44. Zhao, J.; Iu, H.H.; Fernando, T.; An, L.; Lu, D.D.-C. Design of a non-isolated single-switch three-port DC-DC converter for
standalone PV-battery power system. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems, Lisbon,
Portugal, 24–27 May 2015; Volume 2015, pp. 2493–2496. [CrossRef]
45. Chen, G.; Jin, Z.; Deng, Y.; He, X.; Qing, X. Principle and Topology Synthesis of Integrated Single-Input Dual-Output and
Dual-Input Single-Output DC–DC Converters. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2018, 65, 3815–3825. [CrossRef]
46. Dhananjaya, M.; Jagabar Sathik, M.; Padmanaban, S.; Almakhles, D.; Potnuru, D. A New Configuration of Switch and Source
Fault-Tolerant Dual-Input Single-Output DC-DC Converter. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE 4th International Conference on
Computing, Power and Communication Technologies, GUCON 2021, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 24–26 September 2021; pp. 1–6.
[CrossRef]
47. Danyali, S.; Moradkhani, A.; Aazami, R.; Haghi, M. New Dual-Input Zero-Voltage Switching DC–DC Boost Converter for
Low-Power Clean Energy Applications. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2021, 36, 11532–11542. [CrossRef]
48. Prabhala, V.A.K.; Fajri, P.; Gouribhatla, V.S.P.; Baddipadiga, B.P.; Ferdowsi, M. A DC–DC Converter With High Voltage Gain and
Two Input Boost Stages. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2016, 31, 4206–4215. [CrossRef]
49. Kumar, L.; Jain, S. A multiple source DC/DC converter topology. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2013, 51, 278–291. [CrossRef]
50. Li, Y.; Ruan, X.; Yang, D.; Liu, F.; Tse, C.K. Synthesis of Multiple-Input DC/DC Converters. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2010, 25,
2372–2385. [CrossRef]
51. Zhang, N.; Sutanto, D.; Muttaqi, K.M. A review of topologies of three-port DC–DC converters for the integration of renewable
energy and energy storage system. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 56, 388–401. [CrossRef]
52. Mishra, S.K.; Nayak, K.K.; Rana, M.S.; Dharmarajan, V. Switched-boost action based multiport converter. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl.
2018, 55, 964–975. [CrossRef]
53. Rehman, Z.; Al-Bahadly, I.; Mukhopadhyay, S. Multiinput DC–DC converters in renewable energy applications—An overview.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 41, 521–539. [CrossRef]
Energies 2023, 16, 1834 24 of 25

54. Behera, D.K.; Anand, I.; Reddy, B.M.; Senthilkumar, S. A Robust Power Control Scheme for a Dual-Input Single-Output converter
with a Standalone Solar PV System. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Conference on Power Electronics, Drives and
Energy Systems, PEDES 2018, Chennai, India, 18–21 December 2018; pp. 1–6. [CrossRef]
55. Liu, X.; Xu, J.; Chen, Z.; Wang, N. Single-Inductor Dual-Output Buck–Boost Power Factor Correction Converter. IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron. 2015, 62, 943–952. [CrossRef]
56. Yang, H.-A.; Yang, W.-H.; Chen, K.-H.; Wey, C.-L.; Lin, Y.-H.; Lee, C.-C.; Lin, J.-R.; Tsai, T.-Y.; Lai, S.-C. 12.7 A 96%-efficiency and
0.5%-current-cross-regulation single-inductor multiple floating-output LED driver with 24b color resolution. In Proceedings
of the Digest of Technical Papers—IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference, Cambridge, MA, USA, 3 February 2016;
Volume 59, pp. 230–231. [CrossRef]
57. Liu, Y.; Chen, G.; Hu, Y.; Huang, L.; Qing, X. Magnetic Coupling Branch Based Dual-Input/Output DC–DC Converters With
Improved Cross-Regulation and Soft-Switching Operation. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2020, 67, 7167–7178. [CrossRef]
58. Ye, Y.; Cheng, K.W.E. Single-switch single-inductor multi-output pulse width modulation converters based on optimised
switched-capacitor. IET Power Electron. 2015, 8, 2168–2175. [CrossRef]
59. Ray, O.; Josyula, A.P.; Mishra, S.; Joshi, A. Integrated Dual-Output Converter. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2015, 62, 371–382.
[CrossRef]
60. Hajari, S.; Ray, O. Operation and Control of Integrated Dual-Output Converter interfacing non-linear loads. In Proceedings of the
9th IEEE International Conference on Power Electronics, Drives and Energy Systems, PEDES 2020, Jaipur, India, 16–19 December
2020; pp. 1–6. [CrossRef]
61. Dam, S.; Mandal, P. A Hybrid, Fully-Integrated, Dual-Output DC–DC Converter for Portable Electronics. IEEE Trans. Power
Electron. 2021, 36, 4360–4370. [CrossRef]
62. Goh, T.Y.; Ng, W.T. Single Discharge Control for Single-Inductor Multiple-Output DC–DC Buck Converters. IEEE Trans. Power
Electron. 2018, 33, 2307–2316. [CrossRef]
63. dos Santos, E.C. Dual-output dc–dc buck converters with bidirectional and unidirectional characteristics. IET Power Electron.
2013, 6, 999–1009. [CrossRef]
64. Song, S.; Chen, G.; Liu, Y.; Hu, Y.; Ni, K.; Wang, Y. A Three-Switch-Based Single-Input Dual-Output Converter With Simultaneous
Boost & Buck Voltage Conversion. IEEE Trans. Ind. Informatics 2020, 16, 4468–4477. [CrossRef]
65. Nahavandi, A.; Hagh, M.T.; Sharifian, M.B.B.; Danyali, S. A Nonisolated Multiinput Multioutput DC–DC Boost Converter for
Electric Vehicle Applications. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2015, 30, 1818–1835. [CrossRef]
66. Mohseni, P.; Hosseini, S.H.; Sabahi, M.; Jalilzadeh, T.; Maalandish, M. A New High Step-Up Multi-Input Multi-Output DC–DC
Converter. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2019, 66, 5197–5208. [CrossRef]
67. Shan, Z.; Ding, X.; Jatskevich, J.; Tse, C.K. Synthesis of Multi-Input Multi-Output DC/DC Converters Without Energy Buffer
Stages. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. II Express Briefs 2021, 68, 712–716. [CrossRef]
68. Ahrabi, R.R.; Ardi, H.; Elmi, M.; Ajami, A. A Novel Step-Up Multiinput DC–DC Converter for Hybrid Electric Vehicles
Application. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2017, 32, 3549–3561. [CrossRef]
69. Kim, T.; Kwak, S. Single pole switch leg based multi-port converter with an energy storage. IET Power Electron. 2016, 9, 1322–1330.
[CrossRef]
70. Chen, G.; Liu, Y.; Qing, X.; Wang, F. Synthesis of Integrated Multiport DC–DC Converters With Reduced Switches. IEEE Trans.
Ind. Electron. 2020, 67, 4536–4546. [CrossRef]
71. Chandrasekar, B.; Nallaperumal, C.; Padmanaban, S.; Bhaskar, M.S.; Holm-Nielsen, J.B.; Leonowicz, Z.; Masebinu, S.O. Non-
Isolated High-Gain Triple Port DC–DC Buck-Boost Converter With Positive Output Voltage for Photovoltaic Applications. IEEE
Access 2020, 8, 113649–113666. [CrossRef]
72. Nejabatkhah, F.; Danyali, S.; Hosseini, S.H.; Sabahi, M.; Niapour, S.M. Modeling and Control of a New Three-Input DC–DC Boost
Converter for Hybrid PV/FC/Battery Power System. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2012, 27, 2309–2324. [CrossRef]
73. Ding, S.; Wu, H.; Xing, Y.; Fang, Y.; Ma, X. Topology and control of a family of non-isolated three-port DC-DC converters
with a bidirectional cell. In Proceedings of the Conference Proceedings—EEE Applied Power Electronics Conference and
Exposition—APEC, Long Beach, CA, USA, 17–21 March 2013; pp. 1089–1094. [CrossRef]
74. Wu, H.; Xing, Y.; Xia, Y.; Sun, K. A family of non-isolated three-port converters for stand-alone renewable power system. In
Proceedings of the IECON Proceedings (Industrial Electronics Conference), Melbourne, Australia, 7–10 November 2011; pp.
1030–1035. [CrossRef]
75. RamKumar, A.; Marimuthu, R. Energy, exergy, economic, environmental (4E) and frequency distribution analysis of train wind
gust with real-time data for energy harvesting. Environ. Res. Commun. 2022, 12, 125002. [CrossRef]
76. Gavris, M.; Muntean, N.; Cornea, O. A new dual-input hybrid buck DC-DC converter. In Proceedings of the International Aegean
Conference on Electrical Machines and Power Electronics, ACEMP 2011 and Electromotion 2011 Joint Conference, Istanbul,
Turkey, 8–10 September 2011; pp. 109–114. [CrossRef]
77. Cai, J.; Zhong, Q.-C. Compact bidirectional DC-DC converters with two input sources. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE 5th
International Symposium on Power Electronics for Distributed Generation Systems, PEDG 2014, Galway, Ireland, 24–27 June
2014; pp. 1–5. [CrossRef]
78. Chen, Y.-M.; Liu, Y.-C.; Lin, S.-H. Double-Input PWM DC/DC Converter for High-/Low-Voltage Sources. IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron. 2006, 53, 1538–1545. [CrossRef]
Energies 2023, 16, 1834 25 of 25

79. Marjani, J.; Imani, A.; Afjei, E.; Hekmati, A. A new dual output DC-DC converter with enhancing output voltage level. In
Proceedings of the 2016 24th Iranian Conference on Electrical Engineering, ICEE 2016, Shiraz, Iran, 10–12 May 2016; pp. 573–577.
[CrossRef]
80. Kumar, P.; Rojas-Gonzalez, M. Novel 3-Switch Dual Output Buck Voltage Regulator. In Proceedings of the Conference
Proceedings—IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition—APEC, Dallas, TX, USA, 19–23 March 2006; Volume
2006, pp. 467–473. [CrossRef]
81. Hwu, K.I.; Yau, Y.T.; Shieh, J.-J. Dual-output boost converter. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Power Electronics
and Drive Systems, Singapore, 5–8 December 2011; pp. 940–943. [CrossRef]
82. Zhang, H.; Wang, X.; Harnefors, L.; Gong, H.; Hasler, J.-P.; Nee, H.-P. SISO Transfer Functions for Stability Analysis of Grid-
Connected Voltage-Source Converters. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2019, 55, 2931–2941. [CrossRef]
83. Guo, C.; Yang, S.; Liu, W.; Zhao, C. Single-Input–Single-Output Feedback Control Model and Stability Margin Analysis for
Hybrid Dual-Infeed HVDC System. IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Top. Power Electron. 2021, 9, 3061–3071. [CrossRef]
84. Zhang, C.; Cai, X.; Rygg, A.; Molinas, M. Sequence Domain SISO Equivalent Models of a Grid-Tied Voltage Source Converter
System for Small-Signal Stability Analysis. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 2018, 33, 741–749. [CrossRef]
85. Honarjoo, B.; Madani, S.M.; Niroomand, M.; Adib, E. Non-isolated high step-up three-port converter with single magnetic
element for photovoltaic systems. IET Power Electron. 2018, 11, 2151–2160. [CrossRef]
86. Deepa, K.; Sharika, M.; Kumar, M.V. Implementation of a SISO-ZVS push-pull converter fed DC servo motor. In Proceedings of
the India International Conference on Power Electronics, IICPE, Delhi, India, 6–8 December 2012; pp. 1–5. [CrossRef]
87. Chen, Y.-M.; Huang, A.Q.; Yu, X. A High Step-Up Three-Port DC–DC Converter for Stand-Alone PV/Battery Power Systems.
IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2013, 28, 5049–5062. [CrossRef]
88. An, L.; Lu, D.D.-C. Design of a Single-Switch DC/DC Converter for a PV-Battery-Powered Pump System With PFM+PWM
Control. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2015, 62, 910–921. [CrossRef]
89. Zhang, P.; Chen, Y.; Lu, Z.; Kang, Y. The cost-efficient, common-ground, non-isolated three-port converter deduced from the
single-inductor dual-output (SIDO) topology. In Proceedings of the Conference Proceedings—IEEE Applied Power Electronics
Conference and Exposition—APEC, Charlotte, NC, USA, 15–19 March 2015; Volume 2015, pp. 2020–2025. [CrossRef]
90. Zhu, B.; Ding, F.; Vilathgamuwa, D.M. Coat Circuits for DC–DC Converters to Improve Voltage Conversion Ratio. IEEE Trans.
Power Electron. 2020, 35, 3679–3687. [CrossRef]
91. Teja, V.R.; Srinivas, S.; Mishra, M.K. A three port high gain non-isolated DC-DC converter for photovoltaic applications. In
Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology, Taipei, Taiwan, 14–17 March 2016; Volume 2016,
pp. 251–256. [CrossRef]
92. Chen, Y.; Wen, G.; Peng, L.; Kang, Y.; Chen, J. A family of cost-efficient non-isaolated single-inductor three-port converters for
low power stand-alone renewable power applications. In Proceedings of the Conference Proceedings—IEEE Applied Power
Electronics Conference and Exposition—APEC, Long Beach, CA, USA, 17–21 March 2013; pp. 1083–1088. [CrossRef]
93. Tomas-Manez, K.; Anthon, A.; Zhang, Z.; Ouyang, Z.; Franke, T. High efficiency non-isolated three port DC-DC converter
for PV-battery systems. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE 8th International Power Electronics and Motion Control Conference,
IPEMC-ECCE Asia 2016, Hefei, China, 22–26 May 2016; pp. 1806–1812. [CrossRef]
94. Bahreini, M.; Zarei, J.; Razavi-Far, R.; Saif, M. Robust and Reliable Output Feedback Control for Uncertain Networked Control
Systems Against Actuator Faults. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man, Cybern. Syst. 2022, 52, 2555–2564. [CrossRef]
95. You, Z.; Yan, H.; Sun, J.; Zhang, H.; Li, Z. Reliable Control for Flexible Spacecraft Systems With Aperiodic Sampling and Stochastic
Actuator Failures. IEEE Trans. Cybern. 2022, 52, 3434–3445. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
96. Zhang, N.; Sun, Q.; Yang, L.; Li, Y. Event-Triggered Distributed Hybrid Control Scheme for the Integrated Energy System. IEEE
Trans. Ind. Informatics 2022, 18, 835–846. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.