00 positive Bewertungen00 negative Bewertungen

12 Ansichten9 SeitenEvaluation of Resonant Damping Techniques

Feb 06, 2017

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT oder online auf Scribd lesen

Evaluation of Resonant Damping Techniques

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

12 Ansichten

00 positive Bewertungen00 negative Bewertungen

Evaluation of Resonant Damping Techniques

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

Sie sind auf Seite 1von 9

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 23, NO. 4, JULY 2008

2035

Evaluation of Resonant Damping Techniques for Z-Source Current-Type Inverter

Poh Chiang Loh, Member, IEEE, Chandana Jayampathi Gajanayake, Student Member, IEEE, D. Mahinda Vilathgamuwa, Senior Member, IEEE, and Frede Blaabjerg, Fellow, IEEE

Abstract—For the renewable energy sources whose outputs vary continuously, a Z-source current-type inverter has been proposed as a possible buck-boost alternative for grid-interfacing. With a unique X-shaped LC network connected between its dc power source and inverter topology, Z-source current-type inverter is however expected to suffer from compounded resonant complica- tions in addition to those associated with its second-order output ﬁlter. To improve its damping performance, this paper proposes the careful integration of Posicast or three-step compensators before the inverter pulse-width modulator for damping triggered resonant oscillations. In total, two compensators are needed for wave-shaping the inverter boost factor and modulation ratio, and they can conveniently be implemented using ﬁrst-in ﬁrst-out stacks and embedded timers of modern digital signal processors widely used in motion control applications. Both techniques are found to damp resonance of ac ﬁlter well, but for cases of transiting from current-buck to boost state, three-step technique is less effective due to the sudden intermediate discharging interval introduced by its non-monotonic stepping (unlike the monotonic stepping of Posicast damping). These ﬁndings have been conﬁrmed both in simulations and experiments using an implemented laboratory prototype.

Index Terms—Buck-boost, current source inverters (CSIs), posi- cast control, pulsewidth modulation (PWM), resonant damping, Z-source inverters.

I. INTRODUCTION

T O date, current source inverter (CSI) has found applica- tions in grid-interfaced inverter for superconducting mag-

netic energy storage (SMES) and other utility systems where its large dc inductive current ﬁltering and implicit output short- circuit protection are found to be desirable [1]. Despite these

applications and the direct control of ac current, CSI suffers from oscillatory complications caused by its ac-side second-

Manuscript received March 28, 2006; revised March 19, 2007. Published June 13, 2008. This paper was presented in part at the 21st IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference (APEC’06), Dallas, TX, March 19–23, 2006. This work was supported by the Ministry of Defence (Singapore), Nanyang Technological University, and Aalborg University under Grants RG98/05, MD-NTU/05/04, and SUG30/04, by an Aalborg Visiting Fellowship, and by the Defense Science and Technology Agency. Recommended for publication by Associate Editor L. P. Chiang.

P. C. Loh, C. J. Gajanayake, and D. M. Vilathgamuwa are with the School

of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Nanyang Technological Univer-

sity, Singapore S639798 (e-mail: pcloh@ieee.org; chan0178@ntu.edu.sg; emahinda@ntu.edu.sg).

F. Blaabjerg is with the Institute of Energy Technology, Aalborg University,

Aalborg East DK-9220, East, Denmark (e-mail: fbl@iet.aau.dk). Color versions of one or more of the ﬁgures in this paper are available online

at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. Digital Object Identiﬁer 10.1109/TPEL.2008.924590

order ﬁlter [2] and limited capability of only dc–ac cur- rent-buck conversion, which can be a serious limitation for re- newable sources with wide-ranging output operating conditions. The constraint of oscillatory response has motivated the de- velopment of various damping techniques (preferably without using physical damping resistors to minimize losses) with one of the most recent solutions being the three-step damping method reported in [2]. For the second constraint of only current-buck power con- version, the traditional solution is to add a controlled front-end rectiﬁer for stepping up the inverter dc link current, but unfor- tunately, adding a controlled rectiﬁer would usually complicate the inverter control and synchronization, and might not function well under severely distorted supply conditions. As an alterna- tive solution, the Z-source current-type inverter reported in [3] can be used. Functionally, the Z-source current-type inverter is a robust single-stage buck-boost converter derived from the Z-source voltage-type topology presented in [4]–[6], and can easily be controlled by adding unconventional open-circuit states to the inverter pulsewidth modulated state sequence. Under steady-state conditions, the Z-source current-type in- verter functions well, but during a dynamic step transition, it is expected to response sub-optimally due to the oscillatory complications introduced by its unique dc-side Z-source net- work, in addition to those caused by its ac-side second-order ﬁlter. Based on the above problem identiﬁcation, this paper presents and evaluates the careful integration of Posicast or three-step compensators to the Z-source current-type inverter for res- onant damping (particularly for grid-interfaced applications). Both types of compensators can conveniently be implemented, together with the inverter control and modulation algorithms, in a low-cost digital signal processor (DSP) widely used in motion- control applications, hence offering an attractive low-cost ap- proach for rendering the inverter as a better grid power conver- sion solution. To begin with, the paper reviews basic operational principles of a Z-source current-type inverter, indicating specif- ically sources of resonant oscillations. The paper then presents Posicast damping technique, and discusses through mathemat- ical formulation and frequency domain analysis how multiple Posicast compensators can be added to the inverter control paths for improving its damping performance. Similar analytical for- mulations are next performed for the three-step damping tech- nique to speciﬁcally identify that three-step technique is ef- fective in damping ac ﬁlter oscillations, but less effective in

0885-8993/$25.00 © 2008 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: Hindustan College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 05,2010 at 15:54:05 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

2036

Fig. 1.

Topology of Z-source current-type inverter.

damping dc Z-source oscillations. All ﬁndings in the paper have been conﬁrmed in simulation and experimentally with atten- tion focused on validating the merits and shortcomings of each damping technique.

II.

OPERATIONAL _{P}_{R}_{I}_{N}_{C}_{I}_{P}_{L}_{E}_{S} OF _{Z}_{-}_{S}_{O}_{U}_{R}_{C}_{E} CURRENT-TYPE INVERTER

Fig. 1 shows the topology of a Z-source current-type in- verter [3], where the only topological difference identiﬁed, as compared to a conventional CSI, is the presence of a Z-source impedance network comprising of a split inductor and two capacitors . Using the Z-source network, the derived current-type inverter can step-up its output current by assuming open-circuit states with all power devices turned OFF, in addition to the six conventional CSI active states and three null states (open-circuit states are not allowed for conventional CSI since they give rise to large over-voltage due to the breaking of dc link current). As documented in [3], mathematical expressions for the peak inverter dc link current and ac output current , with open-circuit states inserted, are derived as

(1)

where and are the input and Z-source inductor currents,

and

are the open-circuit duration and switching period,

and are the control boost factor and modulation ratio respec- tively, and the term in { } represents the ac output of a conven-

tional CSI. Obviously, (1) shows that the ac output current of a Z-source current-type inverter can be stepped down below by decreasing and maintaining , and boosted above

by increasing

above 1.

Although having the Z-source network gives the inverter buck-boost capability, it also introduces new resonant complications caused by oscillatory charging/discharging of its inductors and capacitors, in addition to those caused by the ac ﬁlter placed at the inverter output for harmonic ﬁltering (see Fig. 1 for the locations of the two sources of resonance). These oscillatory responses, usually triggered by the step tran- sitions in command references, can over-stress power devices, passive components and other power equipment connected to the inverter, and should preferably be damped using software solutions, which can conveniently be integrated to the inverter DSP control algorithms, without using external resistors to

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 23, NO. 4, JULY 2008

Fig. 2.

Control algorithm with Posicast or three-step compensators.

minimize conduction losses. Note that for this work, the inten- tion is to propose techniques for damping resonance under all circumstances, regardless of the LC values found in the system and their inﬂuences on the resonant ampliﬁcation. Therefore to avoid diverting away from the paper intent and over-length- ening the paper, readers interested in resonant fundamental principles can refer to [7] for details.

III. POSICAST _{D}_{A}_{M}_{P}_{I}_{N}_{G} _{T}_{E}_{C}_{H}_{N}_{I}_{Q}_{U}_{E}

Posicast is a classical feedforward technique originally pro- posed in [8] for oscillatory damping of lightly damped systems. Unfortunately, it is fundamentally a pole cancellation technique that depends on the proper tuning of its control parameters, and is therefore sensitive to inaccurate knowledge of the plant damped resonant frequency (a common feature shared by all feedforward techniques that rely on dynamic cancellation). To reduce its parametric and load sensitivities, [9] has proposed the inclusion of Posicast within the system feedback loop, and has proven through sensitivity analysis that feedback control with Posicast yields a system, whose sensitivity within the system bandwidth reduces as the system loop gain increases (but within stability limits). This ﬁnding and the suggested design proce- dure in [9] have rendered Posicast as a good damping technique with a wide range of industrial and utility applications like in the dynamic voltage restorers [10]. Appreciating its advantages, this section now explores the possibility of using Posicast for the dynamic damping of a Z-source current-type inverter. To begin with, Fig. 2 shows

the appropriate placement of two Posicast compensators for damping changes in and . Mathematically, the Posicast compensators can be expressed as:

S-Domain Representation

(2)

Steady-State Representation

(3)

where denotes the system angular frequency, and represent the step response overshoot and damped response period of , respectively. An example showing the op- erating principle of (2) is given in Fig. 3, where the Posi- cast compensator is shown taking in a unit step as input, and outputting an intermediate signal

LOH et al.: EVALUATION OF RESONANT DAMPING TECHNIQUES

Fig. 3.

damping.

Control block structure for demonstrating Posicast and three-step

Fig. 4.

,

Posicast compensator intermediate waveforms. Top to bottom:

(see Fig. 3).

,

,

, and

,

in addition to . Analyzing the expression for in (2), it is deduced that is a negative pulse whose height and width depend on and respectively. This nega- tive pulse essentially reshapes the original reference step by subtracting a scaled amount from the original reference before re-adding the same scaled amount back at 2

to give a monotonically increasing two-step solution (see third trace of Fig. 4). Its impact on the plant step response can more clearly be analyzed by passing and independently through two identical dupli- cates of the plant (labeled as plants 1 and 2 in Fig. 3), before adding up their outputs to give the overall plant response. Observing the fourth and ﬁfth traces of Fig. 4, it is noted

, oscillations of the intermediate

that by tuning and

plant outputs and can be made 180 -out-of-phase with the same oscillating amplitude. Summation of and

then produces a well-damped resultant plant output ,

2037

Fig. 5.

Bode plots of Posicast compensator.

revealing the dynamic damping performance of Posicast compensator. In the frequency domain, Posicast appears as a multiple-notch ﬁlter with an inﬁnite number of zeros spaced at odd multiples of the damped natural frequency, as shown in Fig. 5. By tuning and , the ﬁrst pair of zeros (ﬁrst notch) can be made to cancel the dominant pair of poles of the lightly damped plant, resulting in a less oscillatory plant output. Note however that Posicast pole cancellation is not the same as pole cancellation using model inversion since Posicast has limited high frequency gain (see Fig. 5) and therefore is less sensitive to noise, unlike model inversion, which has increasing gain at high frequency. Being a notch ﬁlter with multiple notches, Posicast damper also functions as a noise attenuator for removing harmonics at odd multiples of the damped natural frequency from the modulating signals, hence minimizing their inﬂuences on the system perfor- mance.

IV. THREE-STEP DAMPING TECHNIQUE

Instead of Posicast, alternative three-step compensators [2] can also be inserted before the pulsewidth modulation (PWM) block shown in Fig. 2 for resonant damping. Mathematically, the three-step compensators can be expressed as:

S-Domain Representation

(4)

Steady-State Representation

(5)

where and denote time delays, whose expressions are derived in [2] by formulating empirical differential equations. The formulation of empirical equations how- ever does not visually illustrate the effect of (4), which is better illustrated here by using the control block arrange- ment shown in Fig. 3.

2038

Fig. 6.

,

Three-step compensator intermediate waveforms. Top to bottom:

,

,

and

(see Fig. 3).

,

As indicated in Fig. 3, a unit step input is fed to a three-step compensator to produce an intermediate signal , which is a negative pulse delayed by , with a width given by . Adding to then gives a three- step non-monotonic “fro-back-fro” waveform (see third trace of Fig. 6, which obviously shows a waveform that increases, decreases and increases again), whose damping effect can be demonstrated by passing and independently through two identical duplicates of the plant (see Fig. 3) before sum- ming their outputs ( and ) to give the overall plant re- sponse . Noted from the last three traces of Fig. 6 that again produces an oscillation with opposite polarity for canceling with that produced by to give a well- damped plant response . But unlike Posicast, which damps by creating a smooth 180 -out-of-phase intermediate waveform without delay, the three-step compensation technique damps by creating a delayed (by one-sixth of an oscillatory period since 6) piecewise waveform, starting with an oscilla- tory trace for one-sixth of a period (since 6) before following a second smooth oscillating wave-shape. The three-step method therefore has a ﬁnite phase difference at the frequency of pole cancellation, as illustrated by the ﬁrst fre- quency notch in the Bode plot of (5) (see Fig. 7). Comparing Figs. 5 and 7, it is also noted that three-step compensator has numerous 10 dB peaks at frequencies of 3 2 1 , where and is an integer greater than or equal to zero

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 23, NO. 4, JULY 2008

Fig. 7.

Bode plots of three-step compensator.

(gain of Posicast is always lesser than 0 dB at all frequencies). These 10 dB peaks unfortunately amplify harmonic noises at their respective frequencies, giving a poorer system response in the steady state.

V. PARAMETRIC SENSITIVITIES OF DAMPING TECHNIQUES

Noted in (2) and (4) that the effectiveness of the presented damping techniques depends on the correct tuning of , which in turn depends on the accurate measurement of the system parameters. A careful evaluation of the technique parametric sensitivities is therefore necessary, and can be mathematically performed by computing the magnitude of (3) for Posicast damping and that of (5) for three-step damping, as follows. (Computation presented here is expressed in terms of the generic variables and , representing either the Z-source parameters or ac ﬁlter parameters ). Posicast Damping

Three-Step Damping

(6)

(7)

where denotes the gain of the damping compensators. Solving (6) and (7) for , and normalizing it relative to its nominal value then gives:

Posicast Damping

(8)

LOH et al.: EVALUATION OF RESONANT DAMPING TECHNIQUES

2039

Fig. 8. Attenuation factors achieved under different percentage variations of inductance with Posicast (solid) and three-step (dotted) damping.

Three-Step Damping

(9)

_{V}_{I}_{.} _{P}_{E}_{R}_{F}_{O}_{R}_{M}_{A}_{N}_{C}_{E} EVALUATION OF DAMPING TECHNIQUES

Based on the above descriptions, Posicast and three-step damping should conceptually perform well, but when used with a Z-source current-type inverter, their performances have to be re-evaluated due to the simultaneous presence of a dc resonant circuit, an ac circuit and their cross-coupling interactions in the inverter circuitry. This section now presents a sequential testing procedure using Matlab/Simulink to show that both Posicast and three-step compensators damp the ac resonance well, but unfortunately, the “fro-back-fro” wave-shaping of the three-step compensator is less effective in damping the dc Z-source reso- nance. For the testing, and are either changed individually or simultaneously to vary the inverter output current, which certainly is needed for controlling the output power supplied by an inverter, interfaced to a stiff grid, whose voltage cannot be altered. (This current control method is similarly adopted by the widely used voltage-source grid-connected inverter, where a current control loop is usually used for controlling the power ﬂowing into the grid, whose voltage cannot be varied).

A. Step Transition in M With a Constant B

kept constant at

unity 0 would theoretically trigger an ac ﬁlter reso- nance only since remains unchanged with a constant (even though slight oscillations may be observed due to cross-cou- pling interactions between dc and ac sides of an inverter), while steps together with . During this step transition, Fig. 9 clearly shows oscillations (whose amplitude depends on the size of step transition in ) superimposed on the ac output current when no damping scheme is used with the Z-source current-type inverter. On the other hand, with Posicast or three-step compen- sators added, Figs. 10 and 11 show the effective damping of ac resonance with virtually no performance differences identiﬁed between the two damping techniques.

Noting that

1

and assuming a constant capaci-

tance

, variations in

(

, where

1

is the nominal inductance value) and

are derived as

2

(alternatively, a con-

stant

can be assumed for evaluating sensitivity level of

).

Normalizing

relative to its nominal value

then gives

)

. Using this expression, (8) and (9), the total ranges of inductive variations (both above and below for the two damping techniques are derived as:

Posicast Damping

(10)

Three-Step Damping

From (1), stepping

(0.5

0.9) with

B.

(11)

Plotting the attenuation factor

1

versus

and

for the two damping techniques respectively then gives the para- metric sensitivity diagram in Fig. 8. As expected, the level of

attenuation decreases when varies from its nominal value, but a closer view of Fig. 8 would reveal that the two compen- sators still provide an attenuation factor of 10 even when varies by 20%. This performance is comparatively better than the case with no damping scheme, and can be achieved with no signiﬁcant increase in computational cost (see Section VII describing the physical implementation). In passing, it is also commented that the achieved damping performance can be fur- ther improved by using the damping schemes in a closed-loop system [9], and for grid-interfaced applications, where in- cludes the grid-impedance, for damping the ac ﬁlter reso- nance can be adaptively tuned if the grid impedance is actively measured using, for example, the non-characteristic harmonic current injection method reported in [11].

Step Transition in B With a Constant M

For this work, is selected to step from 1 to 1.61 with kept constant at 0.5, for studying interesting effects that might occur when a Z-source current-type inverter transits from a current-buck to a current-boost state. From (1), the step transition in would result in (oscillatory) increase in

and , as depicted in Fig. 12 when no damping scheme is used. Also noted in Fig. 12 is the transition of dc current from a constant value of 4.5 A ( , current-buck state) to a boosted waveform switching between 0 A (open-circuit) and (non open-circuit). With Posicast damping added, the improved current wave- forms are shown in Fig. 13, where is less oscillatory and

is less distorted, con ﬁrming the good performance of Posi- cast damping. Instead, when three-step damping is used, Fig. 14 shows the captured dc and ac current waveforms, which unfor- tunately are more distorted than those of Posicast. The distinct feature noted here is the multiple transitions between current- buck and boost states caused by the “fro-back-fro” waveform of

2040

Fig. 9. Simulated dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during a step in- crease in from 0.5 to 0.9 with 1, source current 4.5 A (see Fig. 1) and no damping.

Fig. 10.

increase in from 0.5 to 0.9 with 1, source current

Simulated dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during a step

4.5 A (see

Fig. 1) and Posicast damping.

three-step damping (unlike the monotonically increasing wave- form of Posicast, see third traces of Fig. 4 and Fig. 6). To be precise, the “fro-back-fro” action causes the inverter to return back to the current-buck state during the short interval from to , where no open-circuit state is used. The Z-source network is therefore always connected to the external ac load during this interval, allowing magnetic energy gained by the Z-source inductors before to discharge through the load. This discharging of energy is clearly reﬂected by an increase in ac current during the short current-buck interval. Three-step damping is therefore effective with ac resonant damping, but is less satisfactory with dc Z-source damping.

C. Simultaneous Step Transitions in B and M

The individual step transitions described in the earlier two sections are now combined for studying the system response under simultaneous step transitions in both and . Specif- ically, is stepped from 0.5 to 0.75 while is stepped from

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 23, NO. 4, JULY 2008

Fig. 11.

increase in from 0.5 to 0.9 with 1, source current Fig. 1) and three-step damping.

Simulated dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during a step

4.5 A (see

Fig. 12.

increase in from 1 to 1.61 with 0.5, source current Fig. 1) and no damping.

Simulated dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during a step

4.5 A (see

Fig. 13. Simulated dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during a step increase in from 1 to 1.61 with 0.5, source current 4.5 A (see Fig. 1) and Posicast damping.

LOH et al.: EVALUATION OF RESONANT DAMPING TECHNIQUES

Fig. 14.

increase in from 1 to 1.61 with 0.5, source current Fig. 1) and three-step damping.

Simulated dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during a step

4.5 A (see

Simulated dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during simulta-

neous step increases in from 0.5 to 0.75 and from 1 to 1.61 with source

current

Fig. 15.

4 A (see Fig. 1) and no damping.

1 to 1.61. Under these transitions, increases to a value sim- ilar to that obtained in Section VI-B since [see (1)] and the same ﬁnal steady-state value is used in both cases.

On the other hand, a larger transition in , as compared to that

in

and values

since (depending on both and ). With no damping technique incorporated, Fig. 15 shows sig- niﬁcant oscillations superimposed on the dc link current upon initiation of the transient event. These dc-side oscillations in turn distort the inverter ac output currents with slight ac resonant oscillations observed. As anticipated, the observed oscillations can be damped by adding either a Posicast or three-step damper before the PWM modulator (see Fig. 2), as demonstrated in

Figs. 16 and 17, respectively. Between the two damping tech-

niques, Posicast damper exhibits a better response with both its

dc and ac current oscillations suppressed, as compared to three-

step damper whose dynamic “fro-back-fro” transition causes a

Section VI-A, is expected with the selected

2041

Simulated dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during simulta-

neous step increases in from 0.5 to 0.75 and from 1 to 1.61 with source

current

Fig. 16.

4 A (see Fig. 1) and Posicast damping.

Simulated dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during simulta-

neous step increases in from 0.5 to 0.75 and from 1 to 1.61 with source

current

Fig. 17.

4 A (see Fig. 1) and three-step damping.

sudden current surge during the intermediate non-chopping in- terval.

_{V}_{I}_{I}_{.} _{E}_{X}_{P}_{E}_{R}_{I}_{M}_{E}_{N}_{T}_{A}_{L} Z-SOURCE PROTOTYPE AND _{R}_{E}_{S}_{U}_{L}_{T}_{S}

For verifying the damping techniques experimentally, a Z-source inverter prototype was implemented in the laboratory using 20 mH inductors and 15 F capacitors, connected as in Fig. 1. (As a general guideline, the capacitance used must be rel- atively small to allow the inverter to operate with current-source characteristics, while at the same time, provide a dc current ﬂow path during open-circuit states [3], [4]). The resulting inverter was powered from a constant dc voltage source with a 20 mH inductor connected in series (initial source current set to 4 A), and controlled using a commercially available digital signal processor (DSP) and a digital erasable/complex programmable logic device (EPLD or CPLD). Details of the controller design and PWM algorithm are already documented by the authors in [3], and are therefore not duplicated here, but in brief, the DSP was used for computing control/modulation

2042

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 23, NO. 4, JULY 2008

TABLE I

PERFORMANCE SUMMARY OF PRESENTED DAMPING TECHNIQUES

Fig. 18. Experimental dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during si- multaneous step increases in from 0.5 to 0.75 and from 1 to 1.61 without damping (source current 4 A (see Fig. 1), vertical scale 3 A/div, hori- zontal scale 5 ms/div).

commands while the EPLD was used for mapping out the correct gating signals for switching the Z-source current-type inverter. Comparing with the work in [3], the only additional computational capacities needed by the proposed damping techniques are two ﬁrst-in ﬁrst-out (FIFO) stacks and a gen- eral-purpose timer for implementing the damping “1 ” blocks shown in Fig. 2. For modern commercial DSPs, both of the mentioned functionalities are already embedded in an integrated chip together with the processor core, implying that the improvement in damping performance can be achieved with no signiﬁcant increase in computational cost. With no damping scheme used, Fig. 18 shows the captured waveforms during simultaneous step transitions in from 0.5

. As ob-

to 0.75 and from 1 to 1.61

served, the dc link current rises towards a signiﬁcant peak value upon initiation of the transient event, which in turn distorts the ac output current with an overshoot noted in the ﬁrst half cycle. By adding two monotonically transiting Posicast dampers to the inverter controller, Fig. 19 shows less oscillatory dc and ac

currents with a much shorter settling time. Replacing the Posi- cast dampers with three-step dampers, Fig. 20 shows the cor- responding waveforms with a sudden current surge observed during the middle “back” interval of the “fro-back-fro” path fol- lowed by the three-step dampers. Comparing the three plots, it is therefore obvious that Posicast achieves the best damping per- formance with the least distorted ac output current generated. Note that for the experimental plots, the extent of oscillations observed is not as severe as those obtained from simulations (see Figs. 9–17). This is because for the simulation studies, a stiff constant current source was used, but for the experimental

Fig. 19. Experimental dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during simul- taneous step increases in from 0.5 to 0.75 and from 1 to 1.61 with Posicast

4 A (see Fig. 1), vertical scale 3 A/div, hori-

damping (source current zontal scale 5 ms/div).

Fig. 20. Experimental dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during si- multaneous step increases in from 0.5 to 0.75 and from 1 to 1.61 with three-step damping (source current 4 A (see Fig. 1), vertical scale 3 A/div, horizontal scale 5 ms/div).

testing, a constant voltage source in series with a 20 mH in- ductor was used to emulate a current source. The ﬁnite induc- tance value for the latter unfortunately is not strong enough to hold the source current constant at its pre-transient value of 4 A. Instead, is noted to drop slightly when increases (since a longer open-circuit duration now appears across the input dc voltage source), giving rise to a less severe current step change, and hence less severe oscillations. Despite of that, the proper damping of oscillations achieved by the Posicast and three-step dampers is still clearly illustrated by the experimental plots, hence conﬁrming their theoretical soundness.

VIII. CONCLUSION

damping

techniques for Z-source current-type inverter control. Both

This paper presents Posicast and three-step

LOH et al.: EVALUATION OF RESONANT DAMPING TECHNIQUES

techniques function by reshaping step transitions in command references using time delays, and therefore can conveniently be implemented using FIFO stacks and internal timers of a low-cost DSP widely used in motion control. Through sim- ulation and experimental conﬁrmations, Posicast, being a monotonically stepping solution, is found to exhibit better damping performance, unlike the “fro-back-fro” three-step technique, which unfortunately introduces an intermediate current-buck interval during a step transition in . This short interval causes magnetic energy gained earlier in the Z-source network to discharge through external ac load, resulting in a steep rise and hence a more distorted ac output current. Lastly, for easy reference, Table I provides a comprehensive summary of the performance features of the two damping techniques identiﬁed in this paper.

REFERENCES [1] Z. C. Zhang and B. T. Ooi, “Multimodular current-source SPWM con- verters for superconducting a magnetic energy storage system,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 250–256, Jul. 1993. [2] Y. Neba, “A simple method for suppression of resonance oscillation in PWM current source converter,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 132–139, Jan. 2005. [3] P. C. Loh, D. M. Vilathgamuwa, C. J. Gajanayake, L. T. Wong, and C. P. Ang, “Z-source current-type inverters: Digital modulation and logic implementation,” in Proc. IEEE Annu. Meeting, 2005, pp. 940–947.

[4] F. Z. Peng, “Z-source inverter,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 504–510, Mar./Apr. 2003. [5] F. Z. Peng, A. Joseph, J. Wang, M. Shen, L. Chen, Z. Pan, E. Ortiz-Rivera, and Y. Huang, “Z-source inverter for motor drives,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 857–863, Jul. 2005. [6] P. C. Loh, D. M. Vilathgamuwa, Y. S. Lai, G. T. Chua, and Y. W. Li, “Pulse-width modulation of Z-source inverters,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 1346–1355, Nov. 2005. [7] P. M. Anderson, Subsynchronous Resonance in Power Systems. New York: IEEE Press, 1990, 0879422580.

O. J. M. Smith, “Posicast control of damped oscillatory systems,” Proc.

IRE, vol. 45, pp. 1249–1255, 1957. [9] J. Y. Hung, “Feedback control with Posicast,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Elec- tron., vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 94–99, Feb. 2003. [10] P. C. Loh, D. M. Vilathgamuwa, S. K. Tang, and H. L. Long, “Multi- level dynamic voltage restorer,” IEEE Power Electron. Lett., vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 125–130, Dec. 2004. [11] A. V. Timbus, R. Teodorescu, F. Blaabjerg, and U. Borup, “Online grid measurement and ENS detection for PV inverter running on highly inductive grid,” IEEE Power Electron. Lett., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 77–82, Sep. 2004.

[8]

Poh Chiang Loh (S’01–M’04) received the B.Eng. (with honors) and M.Eng degrees from the National University of Singapore in 1998 and 2000, respec- tively, and the Ph.D. degree from Monash University, Australia, in 2002, all in electrical engineering. During the summer of 2001, he was a visiting scholar with the Wisconsin Electric Machine and Power Electronics Consortium, University of Wisconsin-Madison, where he worked on the synchronized implementation of cascaded multilevel inverters, and reduced common mode carrier-based and hysteresis control strategies for multilevel inverters. From 2002 to 2003, he was a Project Engineer with the Defense Science and Technology Agency, Singapore, managing major defense infrastructure projects and exploring new technology for defense applications. In 2003, he became an Assistant Professor with the Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, and in 2005, a member of the Visiting Staff ﬁrst at the University of Hong Kong, and then at Aalborg University, Aalborg East, Denmark. In 2007, he again returned to Aalborg University as a member of the Visiting Staff to work on matrix converters and the control of grid-interfaced inverters. Dr. Loh received two third paper prizes from the IEEE-IAS IPCC committee in 2003 and 2006. He is an Associate Editor of the IEEE TRANSACTIONS _{O}_{N}

_{P}_{O}_{W}_{E}_{R} ELECTRONICS.

2043

Chandana Jayampathi Gajanayake (S’07) re- ceived the B.Sc. degree in electrical and electronic engineering from the University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka, in 2003 and is currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree in the School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. He was with the Institute of Energy Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark, as a Visiting Scholar in 2006. His research interests are power con- verters, power quality, and distributed generation. Mr. Gajanayake is a member of the IEEE Power Electronics Society.

D. Mahinda Vilathgamuwa (S’90–M’93–SM’99) received the B.Sc. degree in electrical engineering from the University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka, in 1985 and the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from Cambridge University, Cambridge, U.K., in 1993. He joined the School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore in 1993 as a Lecturer and he is now an Associate Professor. He has published more than 100 research papers in refereed journals and con- ferences. His research interests are power electronic converters, electrical drives and power quality. Dr. Vilathgamuwa is the Secretary of IEEE Section, Singapore. He was the co-Chairman of the 2005 Power Electronics and Drives Systems Conference.

Frede Blaabjerg (S’86–M’88–SM’97–F’03) was born in Erslev, Denmark, on May 6, 1963. He received the M.Sc.EE. and Ph.D. degrees from Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark, in 1987 and 1995, respectively. He was with ABB-Scandia, Randers, Denmark, from 1987 to 1988. He became an Assistant Pro- fessor in 1992 at Aalborg University, in 1996 an Associate Professor, and in 1998 a Full Professor in power electronics and drives. Today he is also Dean of the Faculty of Engineering Science and Medicine. In 2000, he was a Visiting Professor with the University of Padova, Padova, Italy, as well as a part-time Programme Research Leader in wind turbines at the Research Center Risoe. In 2002, he was a Visiting Professor at Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Australia. He is involved in more than ten research projects within the industry. Among them is the Danfoss Professor Programme in Power Electronics and Drives. He is the author or coauthor of more than 500 publications in his research ﬁelds including Control in Power Electronics (New York: Academic, 2002). He is an Associate Editor for the Journal of Power Electronics and Elteknik. He has been very involved in Danish Research policy in the last ten years. His research interests are in power electronics, static power converters, ac drives, switched reluctance drives, modeling, characterization of power semiconductor devices and simulation, wind turbines, and green power inverters. Dr. Blaabjerg received the 1995 Angelos Award for his contribution in modulation technique and control of electric drives, the Annual Teacher Prize from Aalborg University, in 1995, the Outstanding Young Power Electronics Engineer Award from the IEEE Power Electronics Society in 1998, ﬁve IEEE Prize paper awards during the last ﬁve years, the C. Y. O’Connor fellow- ship from Perth, Australia in 2002, the Statoil-Prize for his contributions in power electronics in 2003, and the Grundfos-prize for his contributions in power electronics and drives in 2004. He is an Associate Editor of the IEEE

TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS and the IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON

POWER ELECTRONICS. He is a member of the Danish Academy of Technical Science, the European Power Electronics and Drives Association, and the IEEE Industry Applications Society Industrial Drives Committee. He is also a member of the Industry Power Converter Committee and the Power Electronics Devices and Components Committee, IEEE Industry Application Society.

## Viel mehr als nur Dokumente.

Entdecken, was Scribd alles zu bieten hat, inklusive Bücher und Hörbücher von großen Verlagen.

Jederzeit kündbar.