IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO.

2, MARCH 2010

323

Formal Framework for Nonlinear Control of PWM AC/DC Boost RectiersController Design and Average Performance Analysis
Fouad Giri, Abdelmajid Abouloifa, Ibtissam Lachkar, and Fatima Zahra Chaoui
AbstractWe are considering the problem of controlling ltered AC/DC switched power converters of the Boost type. The control objectives are twofold: 1) guaranteeing a regulated voltage for the supplied load and 2) enforcing power factor correction (PFC) with respect to the main supply network. The considered problem is dealt with using a double-loop controller developed on the basis of the system nonlinear model. The inner-loop is designed by the backstepping technique to cope with the PFC issue. The outer-loop is designed to regulate the converter output voltage. Experimental tests show that the proposed controller actually meets the objectives it is designed for. While similar performances have been experimentally demonstrated, for different converters and controllers, it is the rst time that a complete and rigorous formal analysis, based on averaging theory, is developed to describe the observed performances (PFC and output voltage ripples). As a matter of fact, the averaging theory constitutes the natural framework to analyzing the performances due to the periodic nature of the system input signals. Index TermsAC/DC switched power converters, average performances, nonlinear control, power factor correction, stability, voltage regulation.

I. INTRODUCTION HE role of AC-DC power converters is to produce a regulated DC voltage drawing power from an AC supply net. These are needed to supplying a too wide class of equipments: personal as well as industrial, xed as well as imbedded. Their necessity has considerably increased due to the boom in computerized technology applications (microelectronics, telecom, etc.). From a control viewpoint, an AC/DC converter is a nonlinear and hybrid system. Then, undesirable current harmonics may be generated when the converter is connected to an AC power source. These harmonics may be harmful for both the converter and the main supply network necessitating additional protection and over-dimensioning of both the converter components and the network elements (transformers, condensers,). These precautions are costly (higher component prices, higher power consumption). To avoid the above drawback, the converter should be controlled bearing in mind not only output voltage regulation but

Manuscript received March 28, 2007; revised January 27, 2009. Manuscript received in nal form April 23, 2009. First published August 18, 2009; current version published February 24, 2010. Recommended by Associate Editor A. Bazanella. The authors are with the Groupe de Recherche en Informatique, Image, Automatique, Instrumentation de Caen (GREYC), University of Caen Basse-Normandie, 14032 Caen, France (e-mail: fouad.giri@unicaen.fr). Digital Object Identier 10.1109/TCST.2009.2022014

also rejection of undesirable current harmonics. The last objective is referred to power factor correction (PFC). A comprehensive overview on circuits that are able (if well controlled) to achieve the PFC requirement can be found e.g., in [11], [12], and [14]. The problem of designing controllers that are able to achieve simultaneously the PFC requirement and the output regulation objective has been considered in many places, e.g., [1], [3], [4], [6], [7], [13], [16], [17]. The solution proposed in [4] and [7] involves a single-loop controller designed using the passivity technique. The control objective is the enforcement of the current (entering the considered second-order boost rectier) to asymptotically track a sinusoidal reference signal that oscillates at the same frequency as the supply-net. The constant amplitude of the reference current is a priori computed so that, in steady-state, the output voltage equals its desired value. That is, voltage regulation is indirectly achieved through the achievement of the PFC property. The shortcoming of this solution lies in the following facts: 1) it applies solely to the case of constant voltage reference signals; 2) the lack of voltage loop makes the output voltage regulation extremely sensitive to model uncertainties (mainly those resulting from load changes); and 3) the experimentally observed output voltage ripples were not shown to be actually weak through a formal analysis. These drawbacks are presently overcome using a control strategy that involves the following two loops: 1) a current loop to enforce the PFC by acting on the switch duty ratio; 2) a voltage loop to achieve output voltage regulation through the tuning of the reference input of the current loop. In fact, the double-loop idea is not new; it was proposed in the early 1990s [3], [13], [16], [17]. However, the proposed regulators were not formally demonstrated to achieve the performances they were designed for. As a matter of fact, this is not surprising as those regulators were linear (typically PID regulators) while the controlled power converters are highly nonlinear and time-varying. It is only recently that a serious attempt to build up a formal framework for the above double-loop control strategy has been made [1], [6], considering ltered boost and buck-boost diode-based converters. The ltering was introduced through LC and LCL lters placed at the converter input stage in order to reduce the pollution of the power supply net. The complexity of the resulting control problem is twofold: 1) the PFC requirement and the output regulation must be simultaneously achieved; 2) the converter model is nonlinear and hybrid.

1063-6536/$26.00 2009 IEEE

Authorized licensd use limted to: IE Xplore. Downlade on May 13,20 at 1:428 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.

324

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO. 2, MARCH 2010

Following the usual practice, the hybrid feature was coped with, in [1] and [6], basing the control design on average models. Invoking the double-loop control strategy, a nonlinear controller was developed in two stages. First, a current-loop was designed using the backstepping technique in order to achieve a unitary power factor, i.e., enforcing the converter input current to be sinusoidal and in phase with the supply net voltage. This control issue has been mathematically formulated as a problem of regulating the ratio input-current/supply-voltage to a desired value (by acting on the duty ratio, subsequently denoted ). The value of is allowed to be time-varying (and it will be so in transient periods) but it must rapidly converge to a positive constant value. As long as the inner-loop is concerned the limit value of is not important. The purpose of the voltage outer-loop is precisely to tune so that the output voltage tends to its desired value (despite the load changes). The rewas shown to be a linear differlationship between and ential equation involving (time-varying) periodic parameters. A linear regulator has then been synthesized, for achieving the desired output reference tracking, based upon the time-invariant linear average model. The resulting closed-loop system turned out to be a time-varying and highly nonlinear. The time-varying feature leads to output voltage ripples and the question is: how small the ripples amplitude is? It is worth noting that the averaging theory is the natural framework to analyzing such an issue, due to the periodic nature of the closed-loop signals. However, the analysis developed in [6] was not complete and, by some aspects, not fully rigorous [this will be made clear later (Remark 3.2)]. Furthermore, the function was not shown there to be convergent which means that the PFC requirement was not really been guaranteed. In the present is paper, we aim at developing a complete and rigorous analysis of the closed-loop performances generated by the double-loop regulator rst presented in [6]. Making better use of the averaging theory [8], [15], it is established that the PFC requirement is actually achieved (i.e., converges) and the output ripples are actually insignicant. More precisely, the output tracking error is shown to be, in steady-state, a harmonic signal whose amplitude depends on the frequency of the supply net voltage. The larger the net frequency is, the smaller the tracking error. It is the rst time that the insignicance of the output ripples is so formally analyzed. Finally, the above PFC and voltage regulation results are experimentally conrmed using industrial scale components; the experiments show further that the proposed controller presents quite interesting robustness properties especially when facing unknown load changes. This paper is organized as follows. The class of converters under study is presented and modeled in Section II, the controller design and analysis are dealt with in Section III, the control performances are experimentally illustrated in Section IV, a conclusion and a reference list end the paper. To help this paper reading, the main notations are recapitulated in Table V. II. CONVERTER DESCRIPTION AND MODELING The full-bridge PWM boost rectier under study is represented by Fig. 1. It includes a -lter, on one hand, and a commutation-cell , on the other hand. The circuit
Authorized licensd use limted to: IE Xplore. Downlade on May 13,20 at 1:428 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.

Fig. 1. PWM boost rectier under study.

operates according to the well known pulse width modulation (PWM) principle, [9], [2], [14], [5]. Accordingly, the time is shared in intervals of length ( is referred to cutting period). Within a given period, the switches are both ON while are OFF during , for some . During the rest of time, i.e., , are OFF and are ON. The value of changes when passing from one period to another and its variation law determines the trajectory of the output voltage . The variable thus dened is called duty ratio and serves as the control signal for the considered converter. Mathematical modeling of the converter is completed applying Kirchhoffs laws. Doing so, one gets (1a) (1b) (1c) (1d) Equations (4a)-(4d) involve the internal voltage and the current , which need to be expressed in function of the state variables ( to ). To this end, let us introduce the following binary variable: if if Then, are ON and are OFF and are OFF are ON.

can be expressed as follows: (2a)

Similarly, the current is given the following expression: (2b) Finally, notice that the duty ratio may simply be interpreted as the mean value of over a cutting period . Then, substituting (2a)(2b) in (1a)-(1d) yields the (instantaneous) converter model (3a) (3b) (3c)

GIRI et al.: FORMAL FRAMEWORK FOR NONLINEAR CONTROL OF PWM AC/DC BOOST RECTIFIERS

325

(3d) This model is useful to buildup an accurate simulator for the converter. But, it is not suitable for designing a continuous control law, because it involves a binary control input, namely . To overcome this difculty, it is usually resorted to model averaging over cutting intervals (e.g., [9]). This process gives rise to average versions (of the instantaneous model) involving as control input the mean value of which is nothing other than the duty ratio . The average model thus obtained [1], is described by the following equations, where denotes the average value of ( ), over cutting periods: (4a) (4b) (4c) (4d)

is a design parameter. If was actually where would imply the control input in (6), letting which clearly establishes asymptotic stability that: of (6) with respect to the Lyapunov function (8) Then, time-derivation of would be (9) As is not the actual control input in (6), one cannot . However, we retain the expression of the let and introduce a new error variable, destabilizing function noted , between the virtual control and its desired value ( ): (10) Then, (6) becomes, using (7) and (10) (11) Also, the derivative of Lyapunov function (9) becomes (12)

III. CONTROLLER THEORETICAL DESIGN AND ANALYSIS The controller synthesis is carried out in two major steps. First, a current inner loop is designed to cope with the PFC issue. In the second step, an outer loop is built-up to achieve voltage regulation. A. Current Loop Design The PFC objective means that the input current must be sinusoidal and in phase with the AC supply voltage. We therefore seek a regulator that enforces to track a reference signal of the form

2) Step 2: Stabilization of the Subsystem: Achieving the PFC objective amounts to enforcing the error vector to vanish asymptotically. To this end, one needs to know the dynamics of . Deriving (10), it follows from (4b) that: (13) stands as a new In the previous equation, the quantity virtual control input. We now need to select a Lyapunov function for the -system. As the objective is to drive the states to zero, it is natural to choose the following function: (14) Using (12)(14), one gets the following derivative:

At this point the parameter is any function of time. The (inner) control loop will now be designed using the backstepping technique [10], [8], based on the partial model (4a)-(4c). 1) Step 1: Output Regulation of Subsystem (4a): Let us introduce the current tracking error (5) Using (4a), time-derivation of (5) yields the following error dynamics: (6) In (6), stands for a (virtual) control variable. Then, can be regulated to zero if , where , called stabilizing function, is dened by (7)
Authorized licensd use limted to: IE Xplore. Downlade on May 13,20 at 1:428 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.

(15) For the -system to be globally asymptotically stable, it is sufcient to choose the virtual control input so that (for any ). If this holds, (15) implies (16) Now, comparing (16) and (13) one gets that with (17) However, is not the actual control input. Then, as previously a new error variable between the above virtual control and the stabilizing function is introduced (18)

326

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO. 2, MARCH 2010

Then, (13) becomes, using (17) and (18) (19) Also, the Lyapunov function derivative (15) becomes (20) 3) Step 3: Stabilization of the Subsystem: Time-derivation of gives, using (18) and (4c) (21) The actual control variable, namely , appears for the rst time in (21). An appropriate control law for generating has now to be found for the system (11), (19), and (21) whose state vector . Let us consider the Lyapunov function is (22) Using (20), the time-derivative of can be rewritten as (23) This shows that, for the -system to be globally asymptotically stable, it is sufcient to choose the control so which, due to (23), amounts that to ensuring that (24) Comparing (24) and (21) yields the following backstepping control law (25) It can be easily checked that the previous control law involves and its three rst derivatives. the reference signal Then, it follows from (17) and (7) that the ratio should be derivable up to the third order and its three rst derivatives should be available. The results thus established are summarized in the following proposition. Proposition 1: Consider the control system, next called inner closed-loop, consisting of the subsystem (4a)-(4d) and the control law (25). If and its three rst derivatives are available then one has the following. 1) The inner closed-loop system undergoes the following -coordinates equation in the (26) Furthermore, (26) is globally asymptotically stable with respect to the Lyapunov function because is negative denite. As (26) is linear, then the error vector converges exponentially fast to zero, whatever the initial conditions. It follows in particular that the
Authorized licensd use limted to: IE Xplore. Downlade on May 13,20 at 1:428 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.

tends asymptotically (and (average) input current . exponentially fast) to its reference value 2) If in addition converges (to a positive limit value), then the PFC requirement is fullled. Remarks 3.1: a) As mentioned previously, the signal is arbitrary at this point. This provides a degree of freedom that will be used, in Section III-B, to enforce the achievement of the output voltage regulation. Specically, the signal will be generated by the external loop in order to achieve output voltage regulation. Then, it becomes obvious that Part 1 of Proposition 1 is not sufcient to conclude that the PFC objective is realized; the additional statement in Part 2 is in effect necessary. It will be established later (see Theorem 1) that actually converges to a positive limit value, proving thus the PFC achievement. b) The control strategy based upon in [4] involved a single loop namely the current loop. The latter was designed for the achievement of the current tracking objective, i.e., must tracks a reference signal of the form the current . The amplitude , taken constant, that is a priori computed in such a way that the steady-state output voltage equals its desired value. Since the computed excontains the model parameters, it is expression of pected that perfect output voltage regulation cannot be achieved unless all model parameters are perfectly known. The point is that some model parameters may be (and generally are) ill-known or time-varying. This is especially the case of the converter load and converter supply net (which may not be rigorously sinusoidal). voltage B. Voltage Loop Design The aim of the outer loop is to generate a tuning law for the signal so that the output voltage is steered to a given reference value . 1) Relation Between and : The rst step in designing such a loop is to establish a relationship between (the control signal) and the output voltage . This is the subject of the following proposition. Proposition 2: Consider the power converter described by (4a)-(4d) augmented with the inner control law dened by (25). Under the same assumptions as in Proposition 1, one has the following. varies in response to the signal 1) The output voltage according to the following equation: (27) where denotes the amplitude of the (sinusoidal) supply net voltage and is dened by (5). 2) Then, the squared-voltage varies, in response to the tuning ratio , according to the following rst-order time-varying linear equation (28) with .

GIRI et al.: FORMAL FRAMEWORK FOR NONLINEAR CONTROL OF PWM AC/DC BOOST RECTIFIERS

327

C. Control System Analysis In the following Theorem, it is shown that, for a specic class of reference signals, including periodic signals, the control objectives are achieved (in the mean) with an accuracy that de. The folpends, among others, on the network frequency lowing notations are needed to formulate the results:
Fig. 2. Equivalent current generator as seen by the circuit (C

;R

).

(32) Theorem 1 (Main Result): Consider the AC/DC Boost power converter, shown by Fig. 1, represented by its average model (4a)-(4d), in closed-loop with the controller consisting of the inner-loop regulator (25) and the outer-loop regulator (31a)-(31b). Then, the closed-loop system has the following properties. vanishes exponentially fast (where 1) The error ). be nonnegative and periodic 2) Let the reference signal , where is any positive integer. with period Let the converter components , the supply net voltage frequency and the regulator positive paramesatisfy the following inequalities: ters with (33a) with

Proof: Part 1: The rst step consists in replacing the circuit part , by an equivalent current generlocated above the set ator, as shown by Fig. 2. In view of (4d), the underlying current coincides with . So, (4d) becomes value (29) The equivalent current will now be expressed in function of the signal , using power conservation arguments. From (5) one has . Then, the instantaneous power injected to the converter turns out to be the following:

(30) On the other hand, the power that is actually consumed by the . But, the injected power is integrally load is transmitted to the load (which is the only dissipative element). does coincide with . This yields: Then, the quantity , which together with (29) establishes (27). Part 2: Deriving with respect to time and using (27), yields the rst-order differential (28) and completes the proof of Proposition 2. 2) Squared Output Voltage Regulation: The ratio stands as a control input in the rst-order system (28). The problem at hand is to design for a tuning law so that the squared voltage tracks a given reference signal . Ignoring the linear time-varying feature of the rst-order system, a PI control is invoked. Bearing in mind the fact that and its three rst derivatives should be available (Proposition 1), a ltered PI control law is resorted to

(33b) with (33c) Then, there exists a positive real such that if (i.e., if ), one has the following. a) The tracking error and are harmonic signals that continuously depend on , i.e.,

b) Furthermore, the above signals satisfy:

(31a) (31b) where may denote as well the Laplace variable or the derivative operator , depending on the context. At this point, the regulator parameters are any positive real constants. The next analysis will make it clear how these should be chosen for the control objectives to be achieved.
Authorized licensd use limted to: IE Xplore. Downlade on May 13,20 at 1:428 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.

where denotes the mean value of the reference signal . Before embarking in the proof of the previous theorem, there are some comments pointing out the originality of the result. Remarks 3.2: a) Part 1 and Part 2b-ii of the Theorem demonstrate that, under conditions (33a)-(33c), the PFC requirement is actually fullled with an accuracy that depends on the value . The smaller is, the more accurate the PFC of quality. It will be seen, in the next experimental study that conditions (33a)-(33c) are not an issue. b) Part 2b-i demonstrates that tracking objective is achieved in the mean for the output squared voltage with an accuracy that depends on the voltage network frequency . The class of admissible reference signals includes peri. That is, the reference odic signals with period

328

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO. 2, MARCH 2010

signal should be slower than the network voltage. Nevertheless, the involved class of reference signals is larger than in earlier relevant works, e.g., [4] where only constant references were considered. is harmonic (Part c) The fact that the tracking error 2a) proves the existence of output ripples. Then, Part 2b-i is ensures that the effect of ripples is insignicant if sufciently large. d) It is the rst time that the control performances (PFC requirement and output ripples) are so rigorously described. In this respect, Theorem 1 constitutes a quite signicant progress with respect to previous works, e.g.,[1], [4], [7], and [6]. e) Concerning the output tracking objective, the average analysis presented in this paper generalizes the work started in[6] where the problem has been improperly are simplied supposing that the variables null. Furthermore, the fact that converges to a positive limit has not been proved in that work. f) The control strategy presented in this paper involves an explicit voltage regulation loop unlike in[4] and [7] where the output voltage regulation objective was indirectly ensured as a consequence of the PFC achievement. The lack of an explicit voltage loop makes the regulator sensitivity (to the parameter uncertainties and load changes) higher. Proof of Theorem 1: Part 1: Equation (31a) guarantees that and its derivatives (up to the third order) are available. Then, Part 1 of the Theorem follows directly from Proposition 1 (Part 1). Note that Proposition 1 also guarantees that (28), in Proposition 2, holds. Part 2: In order to prove the second part of Theorem l, let , us introduce a state vector, denoted dened as follows: (34a)

Stability of the above system will now be dealt with using avis periodic with period , it will eraging theory. As prove to be useful introducing the following auxiliary reference function: (37) is periodic, with period , and This readily implies that . Let us now introduce the time-scale that change . Then, the term containing in (36) becomes (38) It also follows from (35) and (36) that ential equation undergoes the differ-

(39) with

(40a)

where (40b) Now, let us introduce the average function , where follows from (40a)(40b) that

. It

(34b) Then, it follows from (26), (28), and (31a)-(31b) that goes the following state equation: under-

(35) with

(41)

(36a)

where (36b)
Authorized licensd use limted to: IE Xplore. Downlade on May 13,20 at 1:428 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.

and represents where the s denote the components of the mean value of (which is the same as that of ). Note that of the derivative in the rst line of the mean value over (36) is zero because is periodic with period . In order to get stability results regarding the system of interest (35)(36), it is sufcient (thanks to averaging theory) to analyze the following averaged system: (42)

GIRI et al.: FORMAL FRAMEWORK FOR NONLINEAR CONTROL OF PWM AC/DC BOOST RECTIFIERS

329

To this end, notice that (42) has a unique equilibrium at (43) On the other hand, as (42) is linear the stability properties of its equilibrium are fully determined by the state-matrix

TABLE I CONVERTER CHARACTERISTICS

where

denotes null matrices of appropriate dimensions and

IV. EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION A. Experimental Setup 1) Converter Characteristics: The performances of the proposed controller are now experimentally evaluated using a real PWM rectier with the characteristics of Table I. is motivated as follows: the R-C The previous choice of lter at the converter output should reject well the unavoidable must be sufripples. To this end, the lter time-constant ciently larger than the inverse ripples frequency, which is equal [see e.g., (28)]. This condition should be fullled for to all possible values of the load (as this is allowed to be changing). Let us suppose that the smallest value of the changing load is . Then, the previous condition amounts to the following:

(44) will be globally asympMore specically, the equilibrium totically stable if the matrix is Hurwitz. It has already noted is Hurwitz. So, it is sufcient to (see Proposition 1) that is in turn Hurwitz. To this end, note that its eigencheck that values are the zeros of the following polynomial: (45) where the s are dened by (32). Applying for instance the well known Rouths algebraic criteria, it follows that all zeros of the polynomial (45) have negative real parts if the coefcients ( to ) satisfy (33a)-(33c). Now, invoking averaging theory, e.g., Theorem 4.1 in [15], one concludes that there exists a such that for , the differential (35) -(36) has a harmonic , that continuously depends on , and solution that (46) and Then, one readily gets that are in turn harmonic and depend continuously on . Then, it follows from (31a) that is in turn harmonic and depends continuously on . This proves part 2a of the theorem. To establish part 2b, note that (46) and (39) imply (47) (48) Using (31a), one gets from (48) that (49) where we have used the fact that Part 2b follows from (47) and (49). Theorem 1 is thus established.
Authorized licensd use limted to: IE Xplore. Downlade on May 13,20 at 1:428 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.

2) Regulator Parameter Tuning: : These are the parameters of the outer Parameters PI regulator (31a). For the sake of simplicity, the third-order lter in (31a) is ignored (which amounts to suppose be large enough) and the output voltage (28) is assimilated to a time-invariant rst-order system. Then, the mentioned equations simplify respectively to (50) That is, the last term (including ), that acts as an external disturbance in (28), is simply ignored. It is easily checked that the closed-loop system (50) has the transfer function with (51) which presents a unit static gain, due to the integral nature of the regulator. It is not necessary, in the present case, that the closed-loop system is more rapid than the open-loop. Also, it is preferable to have a weakly oscillatory closed-loop response. The above remarks can be formulated as follows: and . The values , meet these requirements as they yield ,

330

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO. 2, MARCH 2010

TABLE II COEFFICIENTS a TO a

TABLE III COEFFICIENTS  TO 

(the last value is close to . Parameter b: This is tuned so that the lter in (31a) can be made much more rapid than the closed-loop system dened previously and represented by the transfer function (51). To this , i.e., . This motiend, it is sufcient that vates the value used in the present experiment. The choices made until now for the different parameters makes it possible to compute the coefcients to using the denitions (32). Doing so, one obtains the values of Table II. to Then, one readily gets the values of the coefcients involved in (33a)-(33c) (see Table III). Hence, conditions (33a)-(33c) are all fullled. Inner-Loop Design Parameters: The parameters and should be chosen so that the inner loop (characterized ) is much more rapid than the by the state vector outer voltage loop (the latter being approximately represented by the transfer function (51)). It was already shown (see Proposition 1) that the time-derivative of the Lyapunov function is . This implies with and, consequently that . Then, the inner-loop will be much more , i.e., if . This rapid than the outer-loop if used in the experiment. justies the values 3) Control Implementation: The controller we have to implement involves two control laws, (25) and (31a). Implementation of (25): In order to implement (25), we and . need the quantities The voltages are accessible to measurement. From (10), (7) and (5) one has

13.3 rd s,

Fig. 3. Generation of  and its derivatives.

we need, in addition to the previously menTo compute and the computation of tioned signals, the measurement of the derivative . The latter can be computed as follows: using where using (56) (55)

using

and (57)

and

(52)

Note that because is sinusoidal with frequency . Then, it is seen from (55) that can be computed, using (56) and (57), provided that and its derivatives and are available. To be able to implement (25), it only remains to com. It readily follows from (54) that pute the derivative (58) From (4a), it is easily seen that the rst term, on the right side of (58), can be computed by . The third term is given by (57). So, we will focus on the second and fourth term. First, it readily follows from (10) that (59) . That is, From (4b), it is seen that and are needed to compute . the measurements of The computation of is performed using (55).

which show that can be computed, using the measures of the and the net voltage , provided that and its input current derivative are available. These are needed to get (53) Note that is a known sinusoidal signal and so the computation is not an issue. of the derivative From (18) and (17), it is readily seen that with
Authorized licensd use limted to: IE Xplore. Downlade on May 13,20 at 1:428 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.

(54)

GIRI et al.: FORMAL FRAMEWORK FOR NONLINEAR CONTROL OF PWM AC/DC BOOST RECTIFIERS

331

TABLE IV MAIN CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DIGITAL-ANALOG CARD

TABLE V MAIN NOTATIONS

Fig. 4. Output voltage x in response to a step in the reference voltage.

Fig. 5. Input current x in response to a step reference voltage.

Owing to

, it follows from (55) that (60)

Authorized licensd use limted to: IE Xplore. Downlade on May 13,20 at 1:428 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.

Fig. 6. Zoom on the supply voltage v and input current x in steady state.

332

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO. 2, MARCH 2010

Fig. 7. Variation of the ratio  in response to a varying reference voltage.

It was already noted that the computation of the derivatives of is not an issue as this signal is sinusoidal and known. Furthermore, (56) implies (61) can be computed provided that which shows that and its three rst derivatives are available. Finally, we get from (57) (62) The rst term on the right side of (62) is computed as follows:
Fig. 8. Output voltage x in response to load changes.

using

(63)

The last term in (62) is computed using (56). In the light of the previous discussion it is clearly seen that the control law (25) can be implemented, using (52) to (63), provided that the voltages and currents to are accessible to measurements and the signal and its three rst derivatives are available. In this study, the rst requirement is met using Hall effect sensors. The second requirement is coped with in the next point. Computation of and its Three First Derivatives: The control law (31a) shows that is obtained ltering the signal through the third-order lter . The error is easily computed and is obtained . The derivatives of are also obtained ltering integrating as shown in Fig. 3. Note that all lters are realizable because they are proper or strictly proper. Digital-Analog Card: The controller is implemented using an Analog Device AMC401 DSP Motor Control Development Tool Kit. This has the characteristics of Table IV.
Authorized licensd use limted to: IE Xplore. Downlade on May 13,20 at 1:428 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.

Fig. 9. Input current x in response to load changes.

B. Experimental Results The experiments aim at illustrating the behavior of the controller in response to step changes on both the voltage reference and the load resistance . More specically, the voltage reference goes from 100 V to 120 V and then back to 100 V. The load resistance steps from its nominal value (40 ) up to no load condition (load less) and then back to its nominal value. 1) Controller Performances in Presence of Varying Output Voltage Reference: The output voltage reference is a step like signal that switches from 100 to 200 V at time 0.4 s and goes

GIRI et al.: FORMAL FRAMEWORK FOR NONLINEAR CONTROL OF PWM AC/DC BOOST RECTIFIERS

333

Fig. 10. Variation of the ratio  in response to load changes.

back to 100 V at 1.4 s. As stipulated by theorem 1 (and pointed out in Remarks 3.2b), the output voltage converges in the mean to its reference value with a good accuracy (see Fig. 4). Furthermore, it is observed that the voltage ripples oscillates at but their amplitude is insignicant compared the frequency to the average value of the signals, conrming thus Theorem is shown in 1 (Part 2b-i). The corresponding input current Fig. 4. Comparing Figs. 4 and 5, one particularly notes that the is correlated with variation of the input current magnitude . This conthe (mean) value of the squared output voltage rms power conservation through the circuit. Finally, the zoom in Fig. 6 shows that the input current and the network voltage are actually in phase in steady state. Hence, the requirement of unitary power factor is achieved after transient periods following output reference steps. This is further demonstrated by Fig. 7 which shows that the ratio always takes a constant value, after those transient periods. 2) Control Performances in Presence of Varying Converter Load: Figs. 8 and 9 illustrate the behavior of the control system in presence of load changes that are not accounted for in the controller design. The rest of the converter characteristics are kept unchanged. It is seen from Fig. 7 that the disturbing effect due to load changes is well compensated by the controller. Furthermore, Fig. 9 shows the correlation of the current amplitude with the output voltage. Finally, Fig. 10 shows that the ratio takes constant values after the (nite) transient periods following the load changes, conrming thus the achievement of unitary power factor. Robustness of the proposed controller with respect to load changes is thus established. C. Additional Simulation Results 1) Effect of the Filter Capacitance: Such effect is illustrated by Fig. 11 which shows the input current and output voltage for two values of the capacitance . All other control parameters are kept unchanged. It is observed that the sought two control objectives (output voltage regulation and power factor correction) are achieved in the mean for both capacitances. However,
Authorized licensd use limted to: IE Xplore. Downlade on May 13,20 at 1:428 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.

Fig. 11. Effect of the lter capacitance.

the larger capacitance ensures smaller ripples and a more rapid transient conrming thus the discussion in Section IV-A1. 2) Comparison Between the Double-Loop and Single-Loop Control Strategies: Comparison in Presence of Load Uncertainty: The supremacy of the double-loop strategy over the single-loop approach, suggested in, e.g., [4] and [7], is now illustrated using the same rectier. The single-loop (current) controller is designed using the backstepping technique. The involved current reference signal is given a constant value chosen such that the resulting steady-state output voltage is equal to its desired value. The relation between the current reference and the corresponding steady-state voltage involves the converter load. While the load is supposed to be constant (equal to its nominal value) in both single-loop and double-loop controllers, it is in fact time-varying during the experiments. More specically, the load changes at time 1.5 s, falling from its nominal value (40 ) to half this value (20 ). Figs. 12 and 13 illustrate the

334

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO. 2, MARCH 2010

Fig. 12. Rectier in closed-loop with single-loop controller: (a) input current x (solid line) and supply net voltage v (dotted line); (b) Output voltage (x ).

Fig. 13. Rectier in closed-loop with double-loop controller: (a) input current x (solid line) and supply net voltage v (dotted line); (b) Output voltage (x ).

resulting performances for both controllers in presence of a step reference signals. More precisely, the output voltage reference signal, for the double-loop controller, steps from 100 to 120 V at time 0.5 s. The corresponding current reference signal, for the single-loop controller, steps at the same time from 7 to 10 A. As pointed out previously (e.g., Remarks 3.2-f), the output voltage regulation in the single loop-controller is achieved indirectly through input current regulation. It is observed from (the zoomed curves in) Fig. 12(a) and (b) that the two controllers perform equally well as long as the PFC issue is concerned. Note that the PFC requirement is well fullled, in both cases, even after the converter load changes at time 1.5 s. Figs. 12(b) and 13(b) show that both controllers guarantee asymptotically a good tracking of the output voltage reference before the load changes at time 1.5 s. But, this is no longer the case after the change of the load. Indeed, it is observed in Figs. 12(b) and 13(b) that, after time 1.5 s, only the double-loop controller proves still the output voltage at its desired value (120 V). The single-loop controller only regulates well the current to its true value (10 A) after the load change. But, such current regulation does not correspond to the desired output voltage (i.e., 120 V) because the load is no longer equal to its nominal value. Comparison in Presence of Power Supply Net Voltage Distortion: Fig. 14 illustrates the behavior of the double-loop and single-loop control strategies in the presence of distorted power supply net voltage. To this end, the input voltage is disturbed by a stochastic noise of signicant amplitude. The maximum value of the latter is approximately 20% of the nominal V. That is the really applied net voltage is value
Authorized licensd use limted to: IE Xplore. Downlade on May 13,20 at 1:428 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.

Fig. 14. Controller behavior in presence of input voltage distortion.

. Such noisy voltage is used in the simulation model only; in the regulator, the net voltage is still supposed to be perfectly sinusoidal with constant, equal to its nominal value 50 V. It is seen from Fig. 14 that the double-loop regulator is more robust against such important net voltage distortion (than the single-loop controller). As expected, the supremacy of the double-loop strategy concerns mainly the output voltage regulation: the transient is much more rapid and the average steady-state tracking error is null. As long as the PFC requirement is concerned, the two control strategies are comparable.

GIRI et al.: FORMAL FRAMEWORK FOR NONLINEAR CONTROL OF PWM AC/DC BOOST RECTIFIERS

335

V. CONCLUSION In this paper, we have considered the problem of controlling a full-bridge rectier of the boost type. The converter dynamics have been described by the averaged 4th order nonlinear state-space model (4a)-(4d). Based on such a model, a cascade nonlinear controller has been designed. It has been formally established that the obtained controller meets its objectives. Specically, we have the following. (where denotes the converter The error input average current) vanishes exponentially fast and the signal is, in steady-state, a harmonic signal that oscillates around a positive mean value with an amplitude that . The larger is depends on the supply net frequency the small the oscillation amplitude and, consequently, the better the quality of power factor correction. tracks its reference with The (average) output voltage an accuracy that depends on the supply net frequency: the larger is the frequency, the more accurate the output tracking. It is the rst time that a so complete formal description of the closed-loop system performances is achieved making use of stability and averaging theory. REFERENCES [1] A. Abouloifa, F. Giri, and I. Lachkar, Nonlinear control of a PWM rectier output voltage regulation and power factor correction, in Proc. 5th Int. Symp. Adv. Electromech. Motion Syst. (ELECTROMOTION), Marrakech, Morocco, 2003, pp. 27. [2] C. Andrieu, J. P. Ferrieux, and M. Rocher, The ac/dc stage: A survey of structures and chopper control modes for power factor correction, EPE J., vol. 5, pp. 1722, 1996. [3] M. O. Eissa, S. B. Leeb, G. C. Verghese, and A. M. Stankovic, A fast analog controller for a unity-power factor AC/DC converter, in Proc. IEEE APEC, 1994, pp. 551555. [4] G. Escobar, D. Chevreau, R. Ortega, and E. Mendes, An adaptive passivity-based controller for a unity power factor rectier, IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 637644, Jul. 2001. [5] R. Erickson, M. Madigan, and S. Singer, Design of simple high power factor rectier based on the yback converter, in Proc. IEEE Appl. Power Electron. Conf. Expo., 1990, pp. 792801. [6] F. Giri, A. Abouloifa, and I. Lachkar, Nonlinear control of boost AC/DC converters, presented at the IFAC World Congr., Prague, Czech Republic, Jul. 2005. [7] Karagiannis, D. E. Mendes, A. Astol, and R. Ortega, An experimental comparison of several PWM controllers for a single-phase AC-DC converter, IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 940947, Nov. 2003. [8] H. Khalil, Nonlinear Systems. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2003. [9] P. T. Krein, J. Bentsman, R. M. Bass, and B. Lesieutre, On the use of averaging for analysis of power electronic system, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 182190, Feb. 1990. [10] M. Krstic, I. Kanellakopoulos, and P. V. Kokotovic, Nonlinear and Adaptive Control Design. New York: Wiley, 1995. [11] A. Mechi and S. Funabiki, Step-up/down voltage PWM AC to DC convector with one switching device, IEE Proc.-B, vol. 140, no. 1, pp. 3543, 1993. [12] R. Redl, Power-factor correction in single-phase switching-mode power supplies, Int. J. Electron., vol. 77, pp. 555582, 1994. [13] G. Spiazzi, P. Mattavelli, and L. Rossetto, Power factor preregulators with improved dynamic response, in Proc. IEEE Power Electron. Spec. Conf. (PESC), 1995, vol. 1, pp. 150156. [14] C. K. Tse and M. H. L. Chow, Theoretical study of switching converters with power factor correction and output regulation, IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I, Reg. Papers, vol. 47, no. 7, pp. 104755, Jul. 2000. [15] Z. Zhi-Fen, D. Tong-Ren, H. Wen-Zao, and D. Zhen-Xi, Qualitative Theory of Differential Equations. Rhode Island: American Mathematical Society, 1992.
Authorized licensd use limted to: IE Xplore. Downlade on May 13,20 at 1:428 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.

[16] M. J. Zhou, Design trade-offs in continuous current-mode controlled boost power-factor correction circuits, in Proc. High Frequency Power Converter Conf. (HFPC), 1992, pp. 209220. [17] S. Wall and R. Jackson, Fast controller design for practical power-factor correction systems, in Proc. IEEE IECON, 1993, pp. 10271032.

Fouad Giri was born in 1957. He received the Ph.D. degree in automatic control from the Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble, Grenoble, France, in 1988. He is currently with the Groupe de Recherche en Informatique, Image, Automatique, Instrumentation de Caen (GREYC Lab). He has spent long-term visits at the Laboratoire dAutomatique de Grenoble, and the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, and the Ruhr University, Bochum, Germany. Since 1982, he has been successively Assistant Professor and Professor with the Mohammadia School of Engineers, Rabat-Morocco and the Universit de Caen, France. His research interests include nonlinear system identication, nonlinear control, adaptive control, constrained control, power converters and electric machine control. He has published over 150 journal/conference papers. He has coauthored the books (in French) Feedback Systems in Control and Regulation: Representations Analysis and Performances (Eyrolles, 1993) and Feedback Systems in Control and Regulation: Synthesis, Applications and Instrumentation (Eyrolles, 1994).

Abdelmajid Abouloifa received the Aggregation of Electrical Engineering from the Ecole Normale Suprieure de lEnseignement Technique, Rabat, Morocco, in 1999, the Ph.D. degree in control engineering from the Universit de Caen Basse-Normandie, Caen, France, in 2008, under the supervision of Prof. F. Giri and Prof. F. Z. Chaoui. Currently, he is a Professeur-Agrg with The Lyce Technique, Casablanca-Morocco. His research interests include high-frequency power converter topologies, power-factor-correction techniques, power supplies, and nonlinear control. He has coauthored several papers on these topics.

Ibtissam Lachkar received the graduate degree from the Ecole Normale Suprieure de lEnseignement Technique, Rabat, Morocco, in 1995 and the Diplme dEtudes Suprieures Approfondies from the Ecole Mohammadia dIngnieurs (EMI), Rabat, in 2005. She is currently working towards the Ph.D. degree on nonlinear control of power converters from the Laboratoire dAutomatique et dInformatique Industrielle (EMI), under the supervision of Prof. F. Giri and Prof. F. Z. Chaoui. Currently, he is a teacher of electrical engineering with the the Lyce Technique, Sal, Morocco.

Fatima-Zahra Chaoui was born in 1969. She received the Ph.D. degree in automatic control from the Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble, Grenoble, France, in 2000. Since 1995, she has been successively Assistant Professor and Professor at the Ecole Normale Suprieure dEnseignement Technique (ENSET), Rabat, Morocco. She has spent long-term visits at the Laboratoire dAutomatique de Grenoble and the GREYC Lab, University of Caen, both in France. She is also with the Laboratoire dAutomatique et Informatique Industrielle (LAII). Her research interests include nonlinear system identication and control. She published several journal and conference papers on these topics.