SiC DAB Converter Topologies: Conventional vs Series/Parallel/LLC/CLLC

SiC DAB Converter Topologies: Conventional vs Series/Parallel/LLC/CLLC
MatlabSourceCode Research Desk
September 2026
MATLAB / Power Electronics • Research Guide

A high-ratio 48 V to 380 V isolated converter can be implemented with conventional or resonant DAB variants, but topology choice changes circulating current, soft-switching range, reactive energy, ripple, component stress and control complexity.

Why a topology comparison must be normalized

Comparing converter waveforms is meaningful only when the input/output voltage, rated power, transformer ratio, switching assumptions and loss models are aligned. Otherwise differences can come from setup rather than topology.

Conventional versus resonant DAB

A conventional DAB offers simple phase-shift power control, while resonant tanks can reduce switching stress or circulating current in selected operating regions. The benefit depends strongly on load and tuning.

SiC changes the optimization

SiC devices enable high switching frequency, but their benefit should be evaluated with switching energy, conduction loss, dead time, capacitance and magnetic-frequency trade-offs rather than ideal switches.

What to compare

Use efficiency, RMS/peak current, ripple, soft-switching range, dynamic response and component stress. Power density can be discussed only when magnetics, capacitors and cooling assumptions are defined.

PhD-level extensions

Electro-thermal loss modeling, adaptive modulation, magnetic co-design and multi-objective optimization can turn the topology comparison into a deeper research contribution.

Need this topic implemented or customized?

Share your project title, abstract or base paper, preferred software version and required plots. The existing video project can be reviewed as a baseline and extended around a measurable research objective.

Related Research
More engineering research guides
Topic FAQs
Frequently asked questions
The project is modeled primarily in MATLAB / Simulink. The exact release, material data, solver options and result reports should be kept consistent for reproducible research.
Report the core physical or electrical outputs, a controlled baseline comparison, parameter sensitivity and the assumptions required to reproduce the model. Avoid claiming unverified numerical improvements.
Yes. A stronger extension should define a measurable research gap, a reproducible baseline, a proposed change and validation metrics rather than changing geometry or controller parameters without a hypothesis.
WhatsApp Instagram Facebook