Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Abstract—Four control topologies for single-phase uninterrupt- Many instantaneous controllers have been presented in
ible power system (UPS) inverters are presented and compared, the literature that actively control the inverter’s output over
with the common objective of providing a dynamically stiff, the entire waveform. Digital controllers incorporating vari-
low total harmonic distortion (THD), sinusoidal output voltage.
Full-state feedback, full-state command controllers are shown, ous forms of state feedback have shown good performance,
utilizing both filter inductor current and filter capacitor current but at the cost of a relatively fast -processor which must
feedback to augment output voltage control. All controllers pre- compute inverter duty cycle on a pulse-by-pulse basis [3],
sented include output voltage decoupling in a manner analogous [6], [10]. Several hysteresis-type controllers have been pre-
to “back-electromotive force (EMF)” decoupling in dc motor sented in [9] and [12]. These controllers can suffer from
drives. Disturbance input decoupling of the load current and
its derivative is presented. An observer-based controller is ad- relatively high and variable switching frequencies. Analog-
ditionally considered and is shown to be a technically viable, based controllers utilizing inductor current feedback are found
economically attractive option. The accuracy transfer function in [4], [7], and [11], while capacitor current feedback topolo-
of the observer estimate is used to evaluate its measurement gies are found in [1], [2], [5], [8], and [10]. The tech-
performance. Comparative disturbance rejection is evaluated by nique of dc bus voltage decoupling has been shown in [1]
overlaying the dynamic stiffness (inverse of output impedance)
frequency response of each controller on a single plot. Experi- and [8], and the advantages of output voltage, or “back-
mental results for one controller are presented. electromotive force (EMF)” decoupling have been presented
in [1]. The importance of the inverter’s closed-loop output
Index Terms— Control systems, dc-ac power conversion,
impedance, inverters, observers, state space methods, state impedance characteristic has been recognized in [1], [4], and
estimation, transient analysis, voltage control. [6].
This paper will present several state-space control topology
options for a single-phase PWM inverter with an LC output
I. INTRODUCTION filter. Two basic feedback topologies are explored: 1) filter
Fig. 4. State feedback controller with state command feedforward, decoupling state feedback, and disturbance input decoupling via load current sensing.
Fig. 5. State feedback controller with state command feedforward, decoupling state feedback, and disturbance input decoupling via load current dio =dt sensing.
B. Load Current Decoupling With Feedback IV. FILTER CAPACITOR CURRENT REGULATOR
An alternative approach to disturbance input decoupling If capacitor current is controlled, dynamic stiffness can
which further improves the dynamic stiffness uses the be improved substantially. The key issue for capacitor cur-
derivative of the output current, , which can rent is how the sensing is performed, i.e., either via direct
be sensed with a small choke and fed back, as shown in measurement or via an observer.
Fig. 5. In conjunction with the output voltage and inductor
resistance decoupling, the term can now be used A. Capacitor Current Sensed
to fully decouple load-induced voltage transients across As an alternative to sensing inductor current and load
the output filter inductance. Thus, the system will now current (or load ), the filter capacitor current, , may
exhibit infinite dynamic stiffness up to the bandwidth of the be measured and used in a state feedback controller as shown
voltage modulator, provided that the estimate of inductance in Fig. 6. It is especially relevant because the derivative of the
is accurate; it should be noted that may be mapped output voltage, , is proportional to . Because is small
as a nonlinear function of to improve the parameter and ac in nature, it may be sensed with a small inexpensive
estimate. current transformer. From a disturbance rejection point of
This increased dynamic stiffness, and the likelihood that view, capacitor current feedback directly senses changes in
sensing with a small choke will be less expensive load current, as the capacitor current is the sum of inductor and
than a full current sensor for , makes this an attractive load currents. Thus, without some form of disturbance input
control topology. As such, the topology in Fig. 5 is consid- decoupling, as shown in Figs. 4 and 5, a capacitor current
ered the “upper bound” of the controllers represented in this feedback topology will exhibit better dynamic stiffness than
paper. that of a controller with inductor current feedback alone.
496 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 33, NO. 2, MARCH/APRIL 1997
Fig. 6. State feedback controller based on capacitor current sensing with state command feedforward and output voltage decoupling state feedback.
The command response and dynamic stiffness transfer func- capacitor value is usually quite stable. Fig. 8 depicts the
tions can be found as dynamic stiffness frequency response and Table II lists the
controller gains and eigenvalues used for all of the controller
(3) alternatives.
and
B. Capacitor Current Feedback via Observer
(4)
If only output voltage is measured. the derivative term,
respectively. , may be estimated by an enhanced Luenberger observer.
Because is not measured, the inductor resistance is not The Luenberger observer, introduced in [13] with design
decoupled through state feedback, but rather through the examples in [14]–[16], makes use of all available manipulated
feedforward control path. Because of this, the resistance affects inputs as command feedforward information to allow the
the dynamic stiffness, in the form of a low break frequency, observer to track commanded inputs with the same response
. Again, the controller has perfect command tracking for as the physical system. It also actively controls the error in
all frequencies if the parameter estimates are correct. While its estimate of the measured physical state and so forces
the inductor resistance and nominal inductance may change convergence of the estimated state, , to the actual state value.
significantly over temperature and loading, respectively, the An integration state is added to the observer controller to force
RYAN et al.: CONTROL TOPOLOGY OPTIONS FOR SINGLE-PHASE UPS INVERTERS 497
(6)
498 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 33, NO. 2, MARCH/APRIL 1997
(a)
(b)
Fig. 10. 8-kW step load response. (a) Output voltage. (b) Output current.
RYAN et al.: CONTROL TOPOLOGY OPTIONS FOR SINGLE-PHASE UPS INVERTERS 499
(a)
(b)
Fig. 11. FW diode bridge load. (a) Output voltage. (b) Output current.
REFERENCES
Fig. 9 depicts the relative magnitude of the components [1] M. J. Ryan and R. D. Lorenz, “A high-performance sine wave
inverter controller with capacitor current feedback and “Back-EMF”
making up the inverter command (refer to Fig. 6). Note decoupling,” in Conf. Rec. IEEE-PESC, Atlanta, GA, 1995, pp.
that the output voltage decoupling makes up 80%–90% of the 507–513.
total inverter command; since the filter inductor impedance is [2] N. Abdel-Rahim and J. E. Quaicoe, “A single-phase voltage-source
utility interface system for weak AC network applications,” in Conf.
relatively small ( m @ 60 Hz), the fundamental Rec. IEEE-APEC Conf., Orlando, FL, 1994, pp. 93–99.
voltage drop across it is also small. With most of the in- [3] S. Jung and Y. Tzou, “Sliding mode control of a closed-loop regulated
verter command being created from the output voltage (i.e., PWM inverter under large load variations,” in Conf. Rec. IEEE-PESC
Conf., Seattle, WA, 1993, pp. 616–622.
“back-EMF”) decoupling, the closed-loop controller gains can [4] S. D. Finn, “A high performance inverter technology, architecture and
be lower and more robust, while still providing excellent applications,” in Conf. Rec. IEEE-APEC Conf., San Diego, CA, 1993,
pp. 556–560.
disturbance rejection. [5] N. R. Zargari, P. D. Ziogas, and G. Joos, “A two switch high
To simulate a worst-case loading, a full-wave diode bridge performance current regulated DC/AC converter module,” in Proc.
rectifier load was tested. The output of the diode bridge was IEEE-IAS Annu. Meeting, Seattle, WA, 1990, pp. 929–934.
[6] S. Vukosavic, L. Peric, E. Levi, and V. Vuckovic, “Reduction of
connected directly to a 1000- F capacitor, with resistive load the output impedance of PWM inverters for uninterruptible power
of 18 . Fig. 11 depicts the results. Note that although the supplies,” in Conf. Rec. IEEE-PESC Conf., San Antonio, TX, 1990,
current is drawn in 100-A spikes, the voltage waveform is only pp. 757–762.
[7] G. Venkataramanan, D. M. Divan, and T. M. Jahns, “Discrete pulse
slightly distorted. Note additionally that with relatively stiff modulation strategies for high-frequency inverter systems,” in Rec.
voltage sources on either side of the diodes, small oscillations IEEE-PESC Conf., Milwaukee, WI, 1989, pp. 1013–1020.
in the voltage waveform produce significant current transients. [8] A. Skjellnes, G. Snilsbert, and E. Munchow, “Matching a UPS to the
computer market,” presented at the IEEE-INTELEC, Florence, Italy,
Table III lists the THD of the output voltage under various paper no. 19.6, 1989.
load conditions. [9] M. Carpita, M. Mazzucchelli, S. Savio, and G. Sciutto, “A new PWM
control system for UPS using hysteresis comparator,” in Proc. IEEE
IAS Annu. Meeting, Atlanta, GA, 1987, pp. 749–754.
[10] T. Haneyoshi, A. Kawamura, and R. G. Hoft, “Waveform compensa-
VII. CONCLUSIONS tion of PWM inverter with cyclic fluctuating loads,” in Proc. IEEE
Several UPS inverter control topologies have been presented IAS Annu. Meeting, Denver, CO, 1986, pp. 744–751.
[11] T. Kawabata et al., “Chargerless UPS using multi-functional BIMOS
and evaluated by comparing their dynamic stiffness character- inverter—Sinusoidal voltage waveform inverter with current minor
istics. Both filter inductor and filter capacitor current feedback loop,” in Proc. IEEE IAS Annu. Meeting, Denver, CO, 1986, pp.
control topologies with full-state command structures have 513–520.
[12] A. Kawamura and R. G. Hoft, “Instantaneous feedback controlled
been examined. Various options for physical state feedback PWM inverter with adaptive hysteresis,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat.,
decoupling have been presented, each including a “back- vol. IA-20, pp. 769–775, July/Aug. 1984.
[13] D. G. Luenberger, “An introduction to observers,” IEEE Trans. Au-
EMF” decoupling of the output voltage. It has been shown tomat. Contr., vol. AC-16, pp. 596–602, Nov./Dec. 1971.
that a controller utilizing load-current derivative feedback can [14] R. D. Lorenz, T. A. Lipo, and D. W. Novotny, “Motion control
exhibit infinite dynamic stiffness up the dynamic limits of the using induction motors,” Proc. IEEE, vol. 82, pp. 1215–1240, Aug.
1994.
voltage modulator. [15] R. D. Lorenz, “Microprocessor control of motor drives and power
As a low-cost alternative, the filter capacitor current feed- converters,” IEEE Tutorial Course Note Book from 1991–1993 IEEE-
back controller exhibits outstanding performance, as can be IAS Annu. Meetings, ch. 4.
[16] R. D. Lorenz and K. VanPatten, “High resolution ve-
seen in the experimental results, less than 0.5% THD with a locity estimation,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 27, pp.
single-phase full load of 8 kW. Voltage distortion following 701–708, July/Aug. 1991.
RYAN et al.: CONTROL TOPOLOGY OPTIONS FOR SINGLE-PHASE UPS INVERTERS 501
Michael J. Ryan received the B.S. degree in electri- Robert D. Lorenz (S’83–M’84–SM’91) received
cal engineering from the University of Connecticut, the B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees from the Uni-
Storrs, in 1988, and the M.E. degree from Rensse- versity of Wisconsin, Madison, in 1969, 1970, and
laer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, in 1992, with 1984, respectively.
a concentration in robotics and automation. He is Since 1984, he has been a member of the faculty
currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree in electrical of the University of Wisconsin, Madison, where
engineering at the University of Wisconsin, Madi- he currently is a Professor of mechanical engineer-
son, where his research involves power electronic ing and of electrical and computer engineering. In
inverters and their control. this position, he acts as Associate Director of the
He has had a wide range of industrial experience Wisconsin Electric Machines and Power Electronics
with positions at General Electric, Hamilton Stan- Consortium and as Co-Director of the Advanced
dard, and Otis Elevator. His work has included power electronic converters Automation and Robotics Consortium. He is also an active consultant to
for brush and brushless dc motors, real-time micro-processor control and many organizations. He was a Visiting Research Professor in the Electrical
programming, path-planning, kinematics, and control for multiaxis winding Drives Group of the Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium, and
machines, and soft-switching design of resonant inverters for ac traction in the Electrical Drives Institute of the Technical University of Aachen, West
motor applications. While at the University of Wisconsin, he has worked in Germany, in the summer of 1989 and the summers of 1987, 1991, and 1995,
the Wisconsin Power Electronics Research Center (WisPERC) on projects respectively. From 1969 to 1970, he researched his Master’s thesis at the
including dc–dc converters, variable speed generators, and UPS inverter Technical University of Aachen.. From 1972 to 1982, he was a member of
design. In addition, he has worked with the school’s Hybrid Electric Vehicle the research staff at the Gleason Works, Rochester, NY. His current research
Group on vehicles that have won titles at several national competitions. interests include sensor-integrated electromagnetic actuator technologies, real-
Mr. Ryan is a member of the IEEE Industry Applications and Power time digital signal processing and estimation techniques, and ac drive and
Electronics Societies. high-precision machine control technologies.
Dr. Lorenz is currently Chair of the IAS Awards Department and a member
of the Industrial Automation and Control Committee, the Electrical Machines
Committee, and the Industrial Power Converter Committee, as well as being
William E. Brumsickle received the B.S. degree in past Chairman of the IAS Industrial Drives Committee. He is a Registered
physics from the University of Washington, Seattle, Professional Engineer in the States of New York and Wisconsin and is a
in 1982, and the M.S. degree in electrical engi- member of the ASME, ISA, and SPIE.
neering from the University of Wisconsin, Madison,
in 1995, where he is currently pursuing the Ph.D.
degree.
From 1986 to 1992, he worked for Enerpro Inc.,
Goleta, CA, mainly as Applications Engineer for
thyristor phase control applications. Since 1993,
he has been a Research Assistant at the Wiscon-
sin Power Electronics Research Center (WisPERC),
where his work has included development of a high-efficiency dc/dc converter
for battery-powered stand-alone and UPS inverters, investigations of high-
power inverter and UPS topologies, and analysis of power electronic building
block (PEBB)-based systems. His present research interests focus on IGBT-
based soft-switching inverters and motor drives for multimegawatt systems.
Mr. Brumsickle is a member of the Industry Applications and Power
Electronics Societies.