Sie sind auf Seite 1von 10

1176 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 18, NO.

5, SEPTEMBER 2003

A Comparative Analysis of Multiloop Voltage


Regulation Strategies for Single and
Three-Phase UPS Systems
Poh Chiang Loh, Student Member, IEEE, Michael John Newman, Student Member, IEEE,
Daniel Nahum Zmood, Student Member, IEEE, and Donald Grahame Holmes, Member, IEEE

AbstractMost of the many reported control algorithms for phase delays caused by the LC filter at the output stage of the
uninterruptible power supplies (UPSs) use either filter inductor converter [5], [8][13]. The reference for this current loop is
or filter capacitor currents as feedback variables to regulate the generated by an outer voltage feedback regulation loop. Various
output voltage. This paper explores the fundamental performance
issues associated with the use of these quantities as feedback vari- state and command feedback/feedforward variants generally
ables, with a view to determining their contribution to the tran- referred to as disturbance input decoupling, have also been
sient system response and output harmonic compensation in any proposed by various authors to achieve improved steady-state
particular situation. A proportional plus resonant (P resonant) + tracking and transient response.
compensator is then added into the outer voltage regulation loop These multiloop schemes usually use either the output filter
to achieve zero steady error, to develop a high performance UPS
control algorithm, which is applicable to both single-phase and capacitor current [5], [8], [9] or the filter inductor current
three-phase systems. Theory, simulation, and experimental results [10][13] as the main feedback variable, with various authors
are presented in the paper. claiming merits of their choices. This paper presents a de-
Index TermsCurrent control, harmonic impedance, PID, tran- tailed investigation of the merits and shortcomings of these
sient analysis, UPS, THD, voltage control. alternatives, and concludes that capacitor current feedback is
the superior control variable. A P Resonant feedback system
[14] is then incorporated into the outer voltage regulation loop
I. INTRODUCTION to completely eliminate the fundamental steady-state error
and achieve a significantly improved, parameter insensitive
T HE PRIMARY role of an uninterruptible power supply
(UPS) is to maintain a constant voltage and frequency
supply for critical loads under any nonlinear load conditions and
transient and steady-state response compared to other reported
feedback schemes.
irrespective of variations in the input ac source. To achieve this
result, several high performance feedback control schemes such
as predictive control [1], [2], repetitive control [3], [4], optimal II. ALTERNATIVE CONTROL STRUCTURES FOR A
state feedback [5] and selective harmonic compensation [6], [7] LINE INTERACTIVE UPS SYSTEM
have been proposed for the optimal control of an UPS system.
Although most of these schemes give good results with low Fig. 1(a) shows the general layout of a three-phase line
THD and fast dynamic response, they usually require reasonable interactive UPS system. Fig. 1(b) shows the control system
knowledge of the system parameters, require high switching fre- block diagram representation of one phase, identifying in
quencies, and involve high computational overheads. particular the four main control state variables of: filter in-
Among the reported strategies, multiple PID feedback ductor current ; filter capacitor current ; load current ;
loop control strategies have drawn the most attention among and filtered output voltage . Most of the reported control
researchers due to its ease of implementation and excellent schemes for UPS systems use various combinations of these
performance. Multiloop systems usually include an inner cur- parameters, their derivatives and commanded references as
rent regulation feedback loop, that provides fast compensation feedback and/or feedforward control variables in an attempt to
for any input supply disturbances and corrects for harmonic achieve improved tracking performance compared to a simple
PI voltage feedback scheme. In particular, control schemes
Manuscript received July 12, 2001; revised March 16, 2003. This work was with all possible feedforward and feedback paths implemented,
presented at the 32nd Power Electronic Specialists Conference, University of have been reported in [5]. These control schemes are shown to
British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada, June 1722, 2001. Recommended by
Associate Editor F. Blaabjerg. achieve zero steady-state error only when all filter parameters
P. C. Loh is with the Center for Advanced Power Electronics, School of Elec- are accurately estimated.
trical and Electronic Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singa-
pore S639798 (e-mail: pcloh@ieee.org).
In this paper, the elimination of steady-state error is achieved
M. J. Newman, D. N. Zmood, and D. G. Holmes are with the Depart- by the inclusion of a P Resonant compensator [14] into the
ment of Electrical and Computer Systems Engineering, Monash University, outer voltage regulation loop. The P Resonant compensator
Clayton VIC3800, Australia (e-mail: email@michael-newman.com; daniel@
zmood.net; grahame.holmes@eng.monash.edu.au). can be mathematically derived by transforming an ideal
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPEL.2003.816199 synchronous frame PI compensator to the stationary frame, as
0885-8993/03$17.00 2003 IEEE
LOH et al.: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF MULTILOOP VOLTAGE REGULATION STRATEGIES 1177

(a)

(a)

(b)
Fig. 1. Three phase UPS system (a) general layout and (b) per phase block
diagram representation.

demonstrated in [14]. Theoretically, the P Resonant compen-


sator functions by introducing an infinite gain at the resonant
frequency of 50 Hz [Fig. 2(a)] to force the fundamental
steady-state error of the controlled UPS output to zero [14].
This method of eliminating steady-state error by introducing
an infinite gain is an inherent feature of the P Resonant
compensator and does not depend on the precise estimation of
UPS system parameters. It is thus more robust compared to
(b)
other state feedback schemes. Also, being a stationary frame
compensator, the P Resonant compensator involves lesser Fig. 2. Bode plots of (a) ideal P+Resonant compensator (K + 2K s=(s +
! )) and (b) nonideal P+Resonant compensator (K + 2K ! s=(s +
computational requirements (as compared to a synchronous 2! s + ! )), where K = 1; K = 20; ! = 314 rad/s, and ! =
frame compensator), and can be used for both single- and 10 rad/s.

three-phase power electronic systems [14]. Note that by using


the P Resonant compensator to eliminate steady-state error, Fig. 3(c) shows a more complex structure that has been
most of the additional feedback/feedforward paths illustrated widely reported [5], [10], [12], & [13]. This scheme uses
in [5] are not needed and will not be shown in this paper. both the filter inductor and the load currents as feedback
Fig. 3 shows a more detailed representation of the various types and feedforward variables (so-called disturbance feedforward
of current control structures that are possible for a UPS system. decoupling [10]). The structure requires additional current
Fig. 3(a) and (b) show the filter capacitor and inductor currents sensors, which can have a significant impact on the cost of the
respectively, used as single feedback variable. For both these UPS. This cost can be avoided by implementing a load current
alternatives, the measured output voltage (the so-called back prediction algorithm [1], [10], although the transient response
EMF decoupling [5], [8]) and the filter current for the scheme of of the system then suffers since prediction algorithms can never
Fig. 3(b), can also be used for feedforward compensation. This determine the exact instant of a load change. Higher sampling
compensation is analogous to the feedforward decoupling used frequencies minimize this limitation but this in turn increases
in high performance dc motor control. Note also that for analysis the switching losses and hence lowers the efficiency of the
purposes, the PWM inverter can be incorporated within the PID overall system. However, as can be seen from Fig. 3(c), inductor
block as a fixed gain factor, provided the switching frequency is and load current feedback is identical to filter capacitor current
much higher than the required output frequency and the inverter feedback, so that the structure of Fig. 3(c) can be expected to
is not operating in the over-modulation region. have the same performance as Fig. 3(a).
1178 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 5, SEPTEMBER 2003

A. Filter Capacitor Current Feedback Scheme [Fig. 3(a)]


With the filter capacitor current feedback scheme, the output
filtered voltage transfer function is (1), shown at the bottom of
the page, where

(a)

(b)

(c) Equation (1) shows that the output voltage depends on


Fig. 3. Alternative current mode control structures (a) filter capacitor current both the reference voltage (first term) and the load current
feedback, (b) filter inductor current feedback, and (c) filter inductor and load (second term). The second term of (1) is commonly referred
current feedback.
as the system output impedance, and its inverse is referred
as the system dynamic stiffness (defined as the magnitude
of load current needed to produce a unit deviation in output
Fig. 3(c) also shows an additional block in the outer voltage). Ideally, the output voltage should exactly track its
voltage regulating loop, which has been proposed by many 50 Hz reference with unity gain and negligible phase offset,
researchers [5], [12], [13] to overcome the voltage reference while rejecting any load current influence. The load current can
tracking error that is inherent in conventional stationary frame therefore be viewed as a disturbance input, with a target that the
PI regulators. This block introduces an additional current transfer gain from the load current to the output voltage should
be zero at the fundamental as well as at harmonic frequencies.
demand signal , which represents the current flowing
At steady-state, the P Resonant compensator has an infi-
through the output filter capacitor if the output voltage assumes
nite gain at the fundamental (resonant) frequency [Fig. 2(a)],
the reference value . The inclusion of reduces the
which means that the first term of (1) approaches and the
integral fundamental component of the voltage error output
second term approaches zero inherently without any need to es-
and reduces the demands on the voltage tracking error. In timate the UPS system parameters. However, the gain of the
this paper, with the use of the P Resonant voltage regulator to P Resonant compensator is much reduced at other frequencies
fully compensate for tracking error, this additional block is and hence it is not adequate to eliminate harmonic influence
considered unnecessary and not implemented. caused by the load. To minimize distortion in the output voltage
caused by load current harmonics, two fine-tuning approaches
III. MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS are possible. The first obvious approach is to reduce the filter
inductance, which lessens the significance of the second term
Classical control transfer function analysis is commonly used in (1). There is however a lower limit to which the inductance
in engineering investigations to provide insights into the ex- can be reduced due to the consequential increase in ripple cur-
pected steady-state and dynamic performance of a system. In rent drawn from the inverter. The second approach is to selec-
this section, transfer functions for the various feedback control tively compensate for individual harmonics through the use of a
schemes illustrated in Fig. 3 are used to compare their antici- discrete fourier transform (DFT), or multiple synchronous d-q
pated performance characteristics, before proceeding to detailed or resonant compensators at each of the selected harmonic fre-
simulation and experimental investigations. quencies, as reported in [6] and [7], respectively. These tech-

(1)
LOH et al.: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF MULTILOOP VOLTAGE REGULATION STRATEGIES 1179

niques are well established and will not be further addressed in


this paper.

B. Filter Inductor Current Feedback Scheme [Fig. 3(b)]


With filter inductor current feedback, the transfer function of
the filtered output voltage is (2), shown at the bottom of the
page.
Again, under steady-state conditions, the infinite gain intro-
duced by the P Resonant compensator achieves excellent fun-
damental tracking of the output voltage with respect to its ref-
erence and excellent rejection of perturbations
caused by load current disturbances . These are
again achieved without any need to estimate the UPS system pa-
rameters, as discussed in the earlier sections. However, inductor
current feedback has a less satisfactory performance than ca-
pacitor current feedback scheme in terms of load harmonic re-
jection. This is because load harmonic current contributions to Fig. 4. Simulink modeling of UPS system.
the output voltage are significant even with a small filter induc-
tance, due to the term in the numerator of the second its rate of change (second term). Hence, a sudden change in the
term of (2). While the gains of the PID block can be reduced load current will result in a more severe dip or surge in the output
to minimize this dependence, this degrades the transient per- voltage.
formance of the controller in tracking changes to the reference In the simulation studies presented in the next section of the
voltage and lengthens the time period needed to recover after a paper, the transient disturbance rejection performance of the two
change in load. control schemes is analyzed with an abrupt step increase in load.
Another interesting observation can be made by comparing The results show that the initial dip in output voltage is virtually
(1) and (2) under the simplifications of a PID block with only equal for both schemes. This observation can easily be predicted
proportional gain and zero filter inductor resistance. Equations from (3) and (4). For a step increase in load , the
(1) and (2) then reduce to the simplified forms of (3) and (4), derivative term in (4) dominates even if a small filter inductance
respectively, with only the partial transfer characteristic of is used. Equation (4) therefore approaches (3) for a step increase
versus shown in load and the same initial voltage dip can be expected for both
control schemes.

IV. SIMULATION INVESTIGATIONS


(3)
The performances of the two control algorithms pre-
(capacitor current feedback) sented above have been extensively investigated using
MATLAB/SIMULINK simulations. The control algorithms
were first compared using continuous time analog represen-
(4) tations, to avoid second order effects such as sample & hold,
measurement and computational delays, and quantization
(inductor current feedback) where effects. Once the most effective structure was identified, the
simulation was extended to include these effects to determine
the expected performance of a practical system and provide a
basis for confirming the operation of the experimental UPS.
From (3), it is obvious that the initial droop/surge in output Note also that for the physical UPS voltage regulator imple-
voltage is affected by the negative rate of change of load cur- mentation, an alternative P Resonant compensator was used,
rent since the Laplace operator is equivalent to differentiation as described later in Section V. This alternative compensator
in the time domain. A sudden increase (decrease) of load with has negligible influence on the analysis presented in Section III
positive (negative) slope will in turn give rise to an initial dip and was used for the simulation investigations presented in this
(surge) in output voltage. With the inductor current feedback section, to better predict the experimental system performance.
scheme, (4) shows that the initial droop/surge in output voltage The overall UPS system was simulated, as shown in Fig. 4.
is related to the load current magnitude (first term) as well as The system control algorithm and LC filter were modeled

(2)
1180 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 5, SEPTEMBER 2003

the voltage loop proportional gain is kept small to maintain


system stability.
Fig. 8 shows the transient performance for filter capacitor cur-
rent feedback with a step change from no load to full load (4 A
peak) at ms (only the result for the load of Fig. 5(a) is
presented because the system performance is similar for both
loads immediately following a load change). It can be seen that
the transient dies out rapidly and the voltage error remains al-
most unchanged during the load change. This excellent transient
(a) performance occurs because the capacitor current changes in-
stantaneously with the load current change, irrespective of the
inductor current. Hence any load current step change is reflected
as an instantaneous capacitor current step change, which pro-
vides a rapid control action to correct for droop ( increase)
or surge ( decrease) in output voltage. It is commented that
the improved transient response reported in [5], [10] as deriving
from an inductor current feedback and load current feedforward,
(b) in fact also comes from this effect, since capacitor current is the
Fig. 5. Schematic diagrams of harmonic loads. difference between the inductor current and the load current.

B. Filter Inductor Current Feedback Scheme


using SIMULINK transfer function blocks within the Feed- Fig. 9 shows the steady-state performance of the filter
back Compensator plus PWM Modulator subsystem and inductor current feedback system of Fig. 3(b) with the two
LC Filter subsystem, respectively. To introduce inverter nonlinear loads. This performance is clearly less satisfactory,
switching dynamics, the VSI subsystem was modeled using with the load current harmonics being reflected into the filtered
the switching function concept, which represents the cur- output voltage. This occurs because the outer voltage regulator
rent states of inverter phase-legs using two discrete values loop now creates a reference for the filter inductor current.
[15]. The performances of both But this current is not at all sinusoidal since it includes the
control schemes were evaluated using two types of nonlinear load current harmonics. Hence the harmonic error propagates
loads, as shown in Fig. 5(a) and (b). The first load current was through the closed loop system to distort the output voltage, and
a combination of linear and nonlinear loads, with a THD of can only be compensated through the outer voltage regulating
about 16% [Fig. 5(a)]. The second load current was a highly loop, which then adjusts the commanded reference current.
nonlinear load with a THD of over 42% [Fig. 5(b)]. This rep- This compensation is obviously gain dependent, and hence the
resents a worst-case situation of the UPS feeding entirely into UPS output voltage becomes load sensitive, depending on the
a diode rectifier load. Both load currents were experimentally gain of the outer voltage loop.
generated, and the measured harmonic components were then Various schemes have been reported, which use load current
entered back into the simulated Nonlinear subsystem in feedback (or feedforward) to remove this load sensitivity. How-
Fig. 4 to create the simulated load currents. ever, since , it is clear that this approach essen-
For all test situations, the control system performances were tially creates filter capacitor current feedback, which has already
evaluated by subtracting the reference voltage from the filtered been identified as achieving superior steady-state and transient
output voltage, since the differences were always too small to be performance.
usefully compared by directly examining the sinusoidal output Fig. 10 shows the transient performance of the filter in-
voltages. Hence only these voltage difference plots are included ductor current feedback system. The performance is excellent,
in the paper. although the harmonic steady-state error remains. It should
be noted that while in principle this form of feedback cannot
A. Filter Capacitor Current Feedback Scheme achieve the same level of transient response as filter capacitor
current feedback, since the inductor current cannot change
Fig. 7 shows the steady-state performance of the filter capac- until the correcting control action occurs, in practice the output
itor current feedback system of Fig. 3(a). The performance is filter capacitor naturally provides the initial transient response
excellent irrespective of the load current, with no fundamental in either case so that the transient difference between the two
error and minimal harmonic distortion. This result is achieved schemes is minimal.
because the outer voltage regulation loop creates a demanded The steady-state and transient performances presented for
current , which is essentially sinusoidal. Since the actual both the filter capacitor current and filter inductor current
capacitor current is also essentially sinusoidal (assuming even feedback schemes in this section are in close agreement with
moderately effective output voltage control), there will be those predicted using linear control theory, which supports the
minimal harmonic error circulating around the closed-loop earlier conclusion that filter capacitor current feedback is the
system and hence virtually no voltage harmonic error even if superior control strategy for a UPS system.
LOH et al.: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF MULTILOOP VOLTAGE REGULATION STRATEGIES 1181

Fig. 6. Implemented experimental UPS system.

Fig. 7. Simulation-Voltage error generated under different loads shown in


Fig. 9. Simulationvoltage error generated under different loads shown in
Fig. 5(a) and (b), respectively (filter capacitor current feedback).
Fig. 5(a) and (b), respectively (filter inductor current feedback).

V. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
A three-phase digitally controlled experimental UPS with
filter capacitor current feedback was constructed to verify the
conclusions of the simulation studies. The system configuration
and parameters are given in Fig. 6 and Table I, respectively.
(The grid connection, shown in Fig. 1(a), was not implemented
since the primary focus of this work was the influence of load
nonlinearities, and the grid contributes fundamental current
only provided the output voltage is essentially sinusoidal.) For
the experimental system, the dc supply was implemented using
a front-end diode rectifier, connected to a three-phase variac.
Fig. 8. Simulationvoltage error under a step change from no load to full load The current and voltage signals were measured and digitised
using load of Fig. 5(a) (filter capacitor current feedback). using A/D converters, and then input to the controller, imple-
1182 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 5, SEPTEMBER 2003

TABLE I
DETAILS OF EXPERIMENTAL SYSTEM

Fig. 10. Simulationvoltage error under a step change from no load to full load
using load of Fig. 5(a) (filter inductor current feedback).

mented digitally using a Texas Instruments TMS320F240 DSP.


The relevant signals for display (e.g., voltage error) were
subsequently fed to an oscilloscope through D/A converters.
To physically implement the experimental controller, two is-
sues with the ideal P Resonant compensator had to be resolved.
Firstly, the P resonant gain stage implies a network with an in-
finite quality factor (an infinite gain at the resonant frequency),
which is not realisable in either digital or analog form. Secondly,
any slight displacement between the reference frequency and the
filter network resonant frequency can lead to a decline in per-
formance. These issues are equally relevant to other state feed-
back control schemes, which employ ideal filters in their con- Fig. 11. Experimental-Filter capacitor current feedback control using load of
Fig. 5(a).
trol loops. Examples of which are the many reported selective
harmonic compensation schemes, which use multiple filters to
compensate for individual voltage harmonics.
A more practical compensator that avoids these issues, is
given as follows [14]:

(5)

where: .
This alternative compensator can be derived by transforming
a high-gain low-pass filter in the synchronous frame to the
stationary frame [14], and has a frequency response given
in Fig. 2(b) with rad/s and
rad/s. Note that the resonant peak now has a finite
gain of dB, which is satisfactory high for eliminating
the fundamental tracking error and justifying the analyses
presented in Sections III and IV. In addition, a wider bandwidth
is observed around the resonant frequency, which minimizes
the sensitivity of the compensator to slight resonant frequency
variations. At other harmonic frequencies, the response of the Fig. 12. Harmonic spectrum of line voltage using load of Fig. 5(a).
compensator remains relatively unchanged.
For digital implementation with a TI TMS320-F240 DSP, the After substituting (6) into (5), the discrete transfer function
discrete time transfer characteristics obtained through Tustin becomes
Transformation are
(7)

(6) where .
can be implemented with a fixed point arithmetic
where DSP in the form given as
LOH et al.: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF MULTILOOP VOLTAGE REGULATION STRATEGIES 1183

Fig. 15. Harmonic spectrum of line voltage using load of Fig. 5(b).

Fig. 13. Experimental-Filter capacitor current feedback control with a step


change from no load to full load using load of Fig. 5(a).

Fig. 16. Experimental-Filter capacitor current feedback control with a step


change from no load to full load using load of Fig. 5(b).

TABLE II
Fig. 14. Experimental-Filter capacitor current feedback control using load of COMPARISON OF CONTROL TOPOLOGIES IN FIG. 3
Fig. 5(b).

where is the output of the transfer function and is


the voltage error.
Also, for protection issues, and in particular to be able to
protect the experimental system from an output overcurrent,
the feedback system of Fig. 3(c) was adopted for this part of
the work. But as discussed earlier, this system is identical to a
simple filter capacitor current feedback arrangement.
Figs. 11 and 14 present the steady-state performance of the at levels much lower than that of the fundamental ( of
experimental system under the two types of nonlinear loads the fundamental) even without the implementation of selective
shown in Fig. 5. In both cases, there is no steady-state error, and harmonic compensation, as reported in [6], [7].
the error ripple magnitude is very close to that predicted by the Figs. 13 and 16 present the transient performance of the
simulation studies. Figs. 12 and 15 present the spectral perfor- system under no load to full load transitions. Note that in
mance of the experimental system for these loads. It is observed this case, the practical load current transition does not exactly
that all significant low order harmonics have been maintained match the simulation, because of inductance and capacitance
1184 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 5, SEPTEMBER 2003

in the real load elements. In particular, for the load of Fig. 5(a), compensation within individual UPS modules and equal load
the 160 mH dc inductor limits the rate of rise of current, while sharing among the parallel-connected modules.
for the load of Fig. 5(b), the 16 mH ac inductor and 2350 F Finally, to better show the similarities and differences be-
dc capacitor introduce a resonance into the system that causes tween the control schemes, the analysis presented in this section
a transient 25 A peak inrush current to be drawn from the is summarized in Table II for easy reference.
inverter, as shown in Fig. 16. But despite this large transient
current, the voltage error still has a negligible fundamental
component with an error waveform variation closely matching VII. CONCLUSION
that predicted from simulation.
Current control algorithms for UPS systems can essentially
be categorised as using either filter inductor or filter capacitor
current feedback. While many variations of these two alterna-
VI. PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS tives have been investigated, a direct comparison of the two al-
ternatives has not been previously reported. This paper presents
In a practical UPS, the choice of a particular feedback scheme
an evaluation of the fundamental differences between these two
depends also on other factors than the superiority of the control
classes of algorithms through load induced harmonic distortion
strategy, including issues such as the cost of the system, protec-
and voltage droop/surge analysis. The conclusion is that only
tion issues and the availability of suitable current sensors.
those algorithms, which effectively implement capacitor current
In principle, the filter capacitor current feedback scheme of
feedback, exhibit satisfactory steady-state and transient perfor-
Fig. 3(a) achieves the best performance and is the cheapest,
mance, particularly under nonlinear loads. This conclusion is
since it requires only one current measurement with a relatively
supported by extensive simulations, and experimental confirma-
low cost current sensor. However, this scheme cannot incorpo-
tion on a prototype three-phase line interactive UPS controlled
rate inverter overcurrent protection since the inverter output cur-
by a TMS320F240 DSP.
rent is not available to implement an overcurrent trip.
With the filter inductor current feedback scheme of Fig. 3(b),
the inductor current is measured directly. This allows overcur- REFERENCES
rent protection to be easily added to the control circuitry. The
[1] J. Cho, S. Lee, H. Mok, and G. Choe, Modified deadbeat controller
measurement of inductor current however requires the use of for UPS with 3-phase PWM inverter, in Conf. Rec. IEEE-IAS Annu.
current sensors with a higher rating and wider bandwidth (e.g., Meeting, 1999, pp. 22082215.
LEM hall effect sensors) since the inductor current contains [2] S. Buso, S. Fasolo, and P. Mattavelli, Uninterruptible power supply
multiloop control employing digital predictive voltage and current reg-
most of the harmonics drawn by the load. Also, from the re- ulators, Proc. IEEE APEC01, pp. 907913, 2001.
sults presented in this paper, the system steady-state and tran- [3] Y. Y. Tzou, R. S. Ou, S. L. Jung, and M. Y. Chang, High performance
sient performance will be compromised with this scheme. programmable AC power source with low harmonic distortion using
DSP-based repetitive control technique, IEEE Trans. Power Electron.,
The filter inductor current feedback plus load current feedfor- vol. 12, pp. 715725, July 1997.
ward scheme in Fig. 3(c) is the most expensive of the three alter- [4] U. B. Jensen, P. N. Enjeti, and F. Blaabjerg, A new space vector based
natives presented, since it requires two high performance current control method for UPS systems powering nonlinear and unbalanced
loads, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 37, pp. 18641870, Nov./Dec.
sensors per phase for measuring the load and inductor currents. 2001.
However, using these variables, it achieves the performance ad- [5] M. J. Ryan, W. E. Brumsickle, and R. D. Lorenz, Control topology
vantage of the filter capacitor current feedback scheme whilst options for single-phase UPS inverters, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol.
33, pp. 493501, Mar./Apr. 1997.
also allowing inverter overcurrent protection to be implemented. [6] A. V. Jouanne, P. N. Enjeti, and D. J. Lucas, DSP control of high power
Note that for all the presented control schemes, the UPS UPS systems feeding nonlinear loads, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol.
is controlled to achieve constant output voltage indepen- 43, pp. 121125, Feb. 1996.
[7] P. Mattavelli, Synchronous-frame harmonic control for high perfor-
dent of the external loads connected to its terminals. This mance AC power supplies, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 37, pp.
load-independence can result in complications when multiple 864872, May/June 2001.
UPS modules are connected in parallel to implement a more [8] M. J. Ryan and R. D. Lorenz, A high performance sine wave inverter
controller with capacitor current feedback and back-EMF decou-
reliable system. Due to component tolerances (e.g., variations pling, Proc. IEEE PESC95, pp. 507513, 1995.
in filter parameters and processor clock signals), the sharing [9] N. M. Abdel-Rahim and J. E. Quaicoe, Analysis and design of a mul-
of (combined) load current (both fundamental and harmonic tiple feedback loop control strategy for single-phase voltage source UPS
inverter, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 11, pp. 532541, July 1996.
components) among these parallel-connected UPS modules is [10] J. Choi and B. Kim, Improved digital control scheme of three phase
usually unequal, which can then result in significant amount UPS inverter using double control strategy, in Proc. IEEE APEC97
of current circulating among the modules [16], [17]. This can Conf., 1997, pp. 820824.
[11] H. Wu, D. Lin, D. Zhang, K. Yao, and J. Zhang, A current-mode con-
be solved by introducing load-dependent control to all the trol technique with instantaneous inductor-current feedback for UPS in-
presented control schemes, which involves sensing the UPS verters, in Proc. IEEE APEC99 Conf., 1999, pp. 951957.
load currents and adjusting their individual reference voltages [12] S. Silva, P. F. Donoso-Garcia, and P. C. Cortizo, A three-phase series-
parallel compensated line-interactive UPS system with sinusoidal input
to compensate for any significant unbalance among the UPS current and sinusoidal output voltage, in Conf. Rec. IEEE-IAS Annu.
load currents [16]. In particular, the topology of Fig. 3(c) is Meeting, 1999, pp. 826832.
favorable in this aspect since it directly measures the UPS [13] S. Silva, P. F. Donoso-Garcia, P. C. Cortizo, and P. F. Seixas, A three-
phase line-interactive UPS system implementation with series-parallel
load current for implementing this load-dependent control. active power-line conditioning capabilities, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat.,
The resulting system then achieves both optimal harmonic vol. 38, pp. 15811590, Nov./Dec. 2002.
LOH et al.: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF MULTILOOP VOLTAGE REGULATION STRATEGIES 1185

[14] D. N. Zmood, D. G. Holmes, and G. Bode, Frequency domain analysis Daniel Nahum Zmood (S97) received the B.S.
of three phase linear current regulators, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. degree (with honors) in electrical engineering from
37, pp. 601610, Mar./Apr. 2001. Monash University, Clayton, Australia, in 1996,
[15] B. Lee and M. Ehsani, A simplified functional simulation model for where he is currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree in
three-phase voltage-source inverter using switching function concept, power electronics in the Department of Electrical
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 48, pp. 309321, Apr. 2001. and Computer Systems Engineering.
[16] U. B. Jensen, F. Blaabjerg, and P. N. Enjeti, Sharing of nonlinear load in In 1996, he was a Researcher for 12 months in
parallel-connected three-phase converters, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., the Power Electronics Group, Monash University,
vol. 37, pp. 18171823, Nov./Dec. 2001. working on switch-mode power supply design and
[17] A. Tuladhar, H. Jin, T. Unger, and K. Mauch, Parallel operation of power cable field measurement and prediction. He
single phase inverter modules with no control interconnections, in Proc. has authored 11 papers published in international
IEEE APEC97, 1997, pp. 94100. conference proceedings and professional journals. His major fields of interest
include the modulation and control of PWM current-source inverters, current
regulation of sinusoidal converters, switch-mode power supply design and
control, and signal processing.
Poh Chiang Loh (S01) received the B.Eng. (with Mr. Zmood received the Prize Paper Award from the Industrial Power Con-
honors) and M.Eng. degrees from the National verter Committee, IEEE Industry Applications Society, in 1999. He is a member
University of Singapore, in 1998 and 2000, re- of the IEEE Industry Applications, IEEE Power Electronics, and IEEE Indus-
spectively, and the Ph.D. degree from Monash trial Electronics Societies.
University, Clayton, 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, Donald Grahame Holmes (M87) received the M.S.
managing major defence infrastructure projects and exploring new technology degree in power systems engineering from the Uni-
for intelligent defense applications. Since 2003, he has been an Assistant Pro- versity of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia, in 1974
fessor with Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. His main research and the Ph.D. degree in PWM theory for power elec-
interests include power quality study, voltage sag mitigation, optimization and tronic converters from Monash University, Clayton,
control techniques, multilevel inverters, and hysteresis modulation and current Australia, in 1998.
regulation techniques. He worked for six years with the local power com-
pany developing SCADA systems for power trans-
mission networks, before returning to the University
of Melbourne as a faculty member. In 1984, he moved
Michael John Newman (S95) received the B.Sc. to Monash University to work in the area of power
degree in computer science and the B.E. degree electronics, where he is now a Senior Lecturer in this field. He currently heads
in electrical and computer systems engineering the Power Electronics Research Group, Monash University, where he manages
from Monash University, Melbourne, Australia, in graduate students and research engineers working together on a mixture of the-
1997 and 1999, respectively, where he is currently oretical and practical R&D projects. The present interests of the group include
pursuing the Ph.D. degree in power electronics. fundamental modulation theory, current regulators for drive systems and PWM
In 1997, he was an Intern with Siemens Australia, rectifiers, active filter systems for quality of supply improvement, resonant con-
and in 1998 he was an Intern with Australian Gas verters, current source inverters for drive systems, and multilevel converters. He
Light (AGL) working in electrical distribution sys- has a strong commitment and interest in the control and operation of electrical
tems. He is currently employed by Adrian Newman power converters. He has made a significant contribution to the understanding
and Associates and PowerCad Software, working on building services design of PWM theory through his publications and has developed close ties with the
and engineering software, respectively. His major research interests include ac- international research community in the area. He has published over 60 papers
tive filters and PWM rectifiers, Universal Power Quality Conditioners, quality at international conferences and in professional journals, and regularly reviews
of supply, digital control, and signal processing techniques. papers for all major IEEE TRANSACTIONS in his area.
Mr. Newman received the first prize from the 2000 IEEE Industry Applica- Dr. Holmes is an active member of the IPC and IDC Committees of the IEEE
tions Myron Zucker Student Design Awards for his work on active filters. Industrial Applications Society.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen