## 7 Experimental Results  
In order to validate the theoretical analyses, a two-unit interleaved boost PFC rectifier, depicted in Figure 1, operating in CCM is taken into account. The required data are summarized in Table 5. A laboratory setup, including EMI receiver, LISN, and the two-unit interleaved converter is considered to validate theory and design. A simplified prototype of the single-phase interleaved boost PFC converter, illustrated in Figure 13, is utilized to verify the proposed method. In addition, the simulation model is carried out in PLECS. The sampling frequency for simulations and experiments is 100 kHz, and Figure 14 depicts the experimental waveforms of two units--interleaved through the parameters (\(f_{gap}\) = 20 kHz) and phase shift 180\({}^{\circ}\) given in Table 5. The first test case is a two-unit interleaved PFC with a zero-phase shift. Figure 15a compares the simulation and experimental results for two-unit interleaved with \(\theta\) = 0\({}^{\circ}\). The purpose of employing the phase-shifting technique is to suppress the harmonics. As there is no cancelation impact for the \(\theta\) = 0\({}^{\circ}\), it can be simply used as an acceptable case scenario for filter's attenuation requirement. In the second test, a 180\({}^{\circ}\) phase difference between two interleaved PFC is applied which is called interleaving using a conventional phase shift. It is obvious from Figure 15b that the experimental results are verified via simulations by the conventional phase shift between the units. Notably, the first order of harmonics appears in \(2f_{gap}\) compared to \(\theta\) = 180\({}^{\circ}\) at higher frequencies. It has many benefits on Band A, including the elimination of the odd order noises, and it is shifting the EMI filter design frequency to a higher frequency. Therefore, the filter size decreases as it occurs at a high frequency. The second part of the experiments is related to the selective unconventional phase shift. As mentioned before, the second order harmonics disappear when 90\({}^{\circ}\) is considered as a phase shift. This scenario illustrates the effect of 90\({}^{\circ}\) as a phase shift if the switching frequency is selected to be 75-150 kHz. Hence, the second-order harmonics appear to be above 150 kHz, and by using the 90\({}^{\circ}\) as a phase shift, it can remove the second harmonics, which is the first harmonic in Band B. Since the switching frequency limitation of the test setup, the effect of this phase shift is investigated at 20 kHz. On the other hand, Figure 15c  
Figure 14: Measured waveforms of two units interleaved using parameters (\(f_{sw}\) = 20 kHz) and a phase shift of 180\({}^{\circ}\) given in Table 5.  
Figure 15: EMI results measurement for 2-unit interleaved boost PFC converter, including estimation-based proposed model, simulations, and experiments for different phase shift including (**a**) 0\({}^{\circ}\), (**b**) 180\({}^{\circ}\), and (**c**) 90\({}^{\circ}\). Test system specification is on the basis of results given in Table 5.  
is shown the effects of the 90\({}^{\circ}\) phase shift on the second harmonics cancelation. Hence, Figure 15c shows the unconventional phase shift impacts considering 90\({}^{\circ}\) as a phase shift between the units for two-unit interleaved. As the noise-emission level is quite above the standard requirements, as depicted in Figure 15, designing an appropriate EMI filter is necessary. Further, Figure 15 depicts the simplified estimated DM EMI approach for different phase shifts as the method estimates the DM EMI noise with an error lower than 1 dB in Band A and Band B. As the concentration of harmonics energy on the top of the harmonics is important, the results are just shown on the top of the harmonics' multiple order. Hence, Table 6 summarizes the comparative DM noise results for one case study having different phase shifts for comparisons.