2018 IEEE International Power Electronics and Application Conference and Exposition (PEAC) 2018
DOI: 10.1109/peac.2018.8590438
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison between Control Methods of Active Clamp Flyback for Adaptor Application

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The detailed comparison shown in TABLE IV proves the effectiveness of the optimal design procedure given in Chapter III. The peak efficiency of converters built in [35] and [36] is 96.4% and 96.25%, respectively. However, these converters are operating at a low frequency around 200 kHz.…”
Section: Experiments Verificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The detailed comparison shown in TABLE IV proves the effectiveness of the optimal design procedure given in Chapter III. The peak efficiency of converters built in [35] and [36] is 96.4% and 96.25%, respectively. However, these converters are operating at a low frequency around 200 kHz.…”
Section: Experiments Verificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For 65W-level commercial charger or adaptor applications, active clamp flyback converter (ACF) is widely used with good features of high-efficiency, smallsize and flexible voltage output [3]- [9]. For 100W or above charger applications, PFC plus AHB can be used with flexible output voltage.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%