Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
4473
I. INTRODUCTION
HE development of FACTS devices, which aim for the
transmission network to operate close to its thermal limit
by providing a fast dynamic control [1][3], has been boosted
in recent times by the emergence of new semiconductor devices such as high-voltage insulated-gate bipolar transistors (IGBTs) [4]. The well-known neutral point clamped (NPC) 3-level
(3-L) inverter has been widely used in this type of applications [1], [2], and [4]. These inverters are often based on wellproven solutions, also used in other high-integrity demanding
applications such as steel mill processes, ship propulsion, and
ship dredger pumps [6]. An example of such equipment, are the
Ingedrive MV100 range of Ingeteam, shown in Fig. 1. These
are 3-L NPC IGBT-based inverters, where each has a power in
the range of 3.5 MVA.
One of the main control challenges in 3-L NPC inverters is to keep the voltage across the two dc-split capacitors
balanced [5], [7][29]. The use of space vector pulse width modulation (SVPWM) techniques, widespread these days, presents
limitations to control the midpoint voltage at very low power
factor operation and high modulation indexes, as is often the
case of FACTS devices [7][9]. Moreover, there are applications where the use of traditional triangle carrier modulation is
preferred. For instance when the output waveforms are nonsinusoidal, as is the case of active filters, or when the topology
requires additional balancing loops, for instance antisaturation
control of magnetic devices connected at the inverter output,
i.e., coupling transformers.
The addition of a dc-offset to the reference waveform is a
recurred technique in applications with a power factor close to
unity, but that has no effect on pure reactive compensation [26].
The next section describes three voltage-balancing techniques
suitable for this purpose, two of them have been found in the
literature and the third one is a contribution of this paper.
II. VOLTAGE BALANCING TECHNIQUES FOR REACTIVE
COMPENSATION
This section begins by describing the compensation techniques based on sinusoidal second and sixth harmonic injection,
followed by the newly proposed compensation method. The explanation of the voltage balancing technique is based on the
3-L NPC inverter seen in Fig. 2. The explanation assumes that
4474
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 28, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2013
The effect of this technique in the modulation reference waveforms is seen in Fig. 3(a), where the modulation index for the
reference and injected waveform is 0.6 and 0.1, respectively.
The magnitude of the injected waveform in these figures has
been exaggerated for clarity purposes.
One of the disadvantages of this method is that second harmonic voltage components are heavily penalized in most power
quality legislations. To overcome this problem, the injection of
a sinusoidal waveform at six times the supply frequency can be
used instead, as explained in the next section.
Fig. 2. Three-level NPC inverter configuration with ideal sinusoidal current
sources.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(5)
vA 6sq = vA + v6sq
(4)
vB 6sq = vB + v6sq
vC 6sq = vA + v6sq
v6sq = E/2m6sq sign [sin (6t + 6sq )] .
(6)
4475
Fig. 3. Line-to-midpoint output voltage for: (a) sinusoidal second harmonic injection; (b) sinusoidal sixth harmonic injection; (c) squared sixth harmonic
injection. Continuous line: v A ; dashed line: v B ; dotted line: v C , normalized with respect to E/2.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.
= 0.2.
E/ vK < 0
1 + 2vK/E
2
dK =
(7)
0 vK E/
1 2vK/E
2
where k = A, B, or C
Consequently, the instantaneous contribution of any phase to
the midpoint current is obtained by multiplying the duty ratio
dK by the phase current (1)
iM K = dK iK .
(8)
(10)
The effect that the injection of a negative sequence second harmonic, sinusoidal sixth harmonic and squared sixth harmonic,
have on the midpoint current can be visually seen by looking at
the waveforms in Figs. 46 respectively, corresponding to phase
A.
These waveforms have been computed using the MATLAB
software using (1)(10) for a modulation index of the fundamental waveform of m1 = 0.6. The modulation index for the
compensation waveforms where m2 = 0.3, m6sin = 0.2, and
m6sq = 0.2 and the phase angle of the injection waveforms
was set to zero, that is, 2 = 0, 6sin = 0, and 6sq = 0. The
first two waveforms on top of every figure show the fundamental and the compensating waveforms in continuous and dotted
lines. The second waveform depicts the instantaneous duty ratio
d of the current to the midpoint. The third waveform shows the
current iA flowing into phase A, 90 out of phase with respect
to the output voltage. The fourth waveform shows the current
4476
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 28, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2013
TABLE I
IM /m 2 AND IM /m 6 GAINS IN THE FIRST LINEAR OPERATING REGION
Fig. 6. Sixth harmonic squared injection at six times the supply frequency for
m 1 = 0.6 and m 6 sq = 0.2.
IM
IM
IM
or KM =
or KM =
.
2
6sin
6sq
Im
Im
Im
(11)
4477
Fig. 7. Current to midpoint im against phase-shift angle 2 for second harmonic sinusoidal injection. (a) Current contribution IM (p.u.) against 2 for a pure
capacitive (continuous trade) and inductive (dashed trace) load. (b) Current contribution IM (p.u.) against .
Fig. 8. Variation of the average current to the midpoint against modulation index of the injected waveform. (a) Second harmonic compensation. (b) Second
harmonic compensation using third harmonic injection. (c) Sinusoidal sixth harmonic compensation. (d) Sinusoidal sixth harmonic compensation using third
harmonic injection. (e) Squared sixth harmonic compensation. (f) Squared sixth harmonic compensation using third harmonic injection.
Fig. 9. Variation of the p.u. average current to the mid-point against the modulation index of the injected waveform, using third harmonic injection, for
an unbalanced set of currents represented by the addition of a 0.5 p.u. inverse sequence. (a) Second harmonic compensation. (b) Sinusoidal sixth harmonic
compensation. (c) Squared sixth harmonic compensation.
collapses to zero. Also, the squared harmonic injection technique provides a slightly higher midpoint current IM than the
sinusoidal one.
The reason for this behavior is the linearity property
of the integral appearing in (9), resembling the calculation
of a Fourier series coefficient, which can be expressed as
4478
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 28, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2013
follows:
iM A =
1
2
1
=
2
iM A (t) dt
2 vA
1
E
(12)
where the time integral has been multiplied by the angular speed
, to get an angle integral. This can be simplified to
2
iM A = 1 2 I
vA sign(vA ) cos(t) dt
2 E 0
(13)
finally resulting in
iM A = 2 I
vA cos(t) dt
(14)
E 0
where it has been assumed that vA is positive for angles t in
the range 0 < t , and negative for angles < t 2 .
This assumption will be justified later, and its range of validity
calculated accordingly.
Note that, due to the waveform symmetry, the upper integration limit has been changed from 2 to , and the value of
the resulting integral has been doubled accordingly. Thus, the
sign(vA ) function can be suppressed. Therefore, the expression
in (14) becomes linear in the amplitudes of the different harmonics which may form vA . This is expected as odd voltage
harmonics forming vA do not contribute to the integral of (14),
since only even voltage harmonics are expected to contribute to
the balance of the dc voltage of a 3-L-NPC inverter.
For phase symmetry reasons (phase voltages and currents
are supposed to be direct-sequence or zero-sequence, but not
negative-sequence), the average current entering the midpoint
of the dc-bus provided by phases B and C must be the same
as that provided by phase A. Consequently, the values obtained
previously must by multiplied by three to get the total contributions.
This behavior will persist as long as the voltage harmonics
added to the fundamental signal do not force a sign change in the
total voltage waveform vA at any angle, as previously assumed.
Since all harmonics are set up in sine phase, this is, all cross the
zero level, at the same angle and with positive slope, the limit
for that condition is met when the derivative gets close to zero
at the opposite angle (t = ), when the waveform crosses zero
from positive to negative values).
Therefore, an algebraic expression for the validity of the linearity condition is obtained as follows:
mh sin(h t)
V =
h
dV
=
dt
h mh cos(h t)
dV
=
h
h mh < 0. (15)
h
dt t=P i
heven
2 m2 + 6 m6 < 1 m1 .
sign(vA ) I cos(t) dt
ho dd
(16)
0
iM
4
4
(17)
= I m2 KM =
=
I m2
vA =
iM
iM
6I
= 3 iM A =
vA cos(t) dt
E 0
6 I E
=
m6 sin(6 t) cos(t) dt
E 0 2
3 I m6
=
sin(6 t) cos(t) dt
0
iM
36
36
I m6 KM =
(18)
=
=
35
35
I m6
vA =
iM
iM
(20)
4479
4480
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 28, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2013
Fig. 10. (a) Maximum compensating modulation index and (b) produced compensating IM current (normalized against the peak value of the line current),
for the modulation index of the reference waveform. Continuous line: second harmonic compensation, dashed line: sinusoidal sixth harmonic compensation,
dashed-dotted line: squared sixth harmonic compensation, dotted line: SVPWM.
Fig. 11. Maximum instantaneous (continuous trace) and average (dotted trace) current contribution to the mid-point of the dc-capacitors for m 1 = 0.9.
(a) Second harmonic compensation using third harmonic injection for m 2 = 0.237. (b) Sinusoidal sixth harmonic compensation using third harmonic injection
for m 6 sin = 0.236. (c) Squared sixth harmonic compensation using third harmonic injection for m 6 sq = 0.221. (d) SVPWM.
overvoltage across the power devices, aims to reduce the voltage switching ripple to a very low value by including enough
capacitance. For that reason, the voltage unbalance within one
switching cycle for the different modulation methods has not
been considered.
By looking at the diagram of Fig. 1, it can be easily deducted
that voltage balance of the midpoint capacitors is
vC 2 vC 1 =
1
C
1
(iC 2 iC 1 ) dt =
C
iM dt
(21)
Expressing this equation in the S domain, and relating the average midpoint current IM to the peak phase current and the
modulation index of the compensating waveform by means of
the KM ratio (11) seen in Table I, the following transfer function
is obtained:
I sin () KM
VC 2 VC 1
=
m2 (or m6 )
CS
Fig. 12. Control loop of the split capacitors mid-point balance for reactive
power compensation.
(22)
4481
Fig. 13. Step response of the split capacitors voltage balance loop. (a) positive step response and (b) positive and negative step response. The thick continuous
line: averaged response; the thin continuous line: instantaneous response; the tick dotted line: setpoint.
for a 50 Hz system), for example at 15 Hz or 94.25 rad/s. Subsequently, the PI loop can be tuned using conventional techniques,
for instance, aiming to achieve a reasonable Phase Margin [30].
Although, as explained in the next Section IV, the dynamic response achieved using this control strategy is sufficient for most
large power electronics applications, other suitable strategies
compatible with the proposed compensating techniques could
also be devised
Controller T F =
KP
S/ + 1
P
(S + iTn )
S
(23)
settling time of 0.784 s (for a 1% error criteria) and an overshoot of 12%. Therefore, with the proposed adjustment, it will
take about 40 line cycles to complete a step response. Although
this may seem a long time, in practice, due to the amount of
capacitance present in the dc link, as explained in this Section III-D, the dc-link midpoint voltage balance changes relatively slowly. This is confirmed in the experimental section and
in several industrial applications where this strategy has been
implemented.
In the experimental validation, the inverter output terminals
were connected to an 18 mH inductive load and it was operated in current control mode. To verify the ability to control
the midpoint, an offset step of 50 V was introduced when the
output current was controlled to be 70-A RMS and the results
are shown in Fig. 14(a)(c), for second harmonic, sinusoidal
sixth harmonic, and squared sixth harmonic compensation, respectively.
The first two waveforms show the capacitor voltages vC 1 and
vC 2 , the third waveform the inverter output voltage with respect
to the midpoint of the dc-link capacitors vAG and the bottom
waveform shows the output current iA . The proportional gain
KP for second and sixth harmonic was chosen to be 0.3 and
0.85, respectively, whereas the integral term iTn and the filter
crossover frequency were 2.93 and 94.24 rad/s, respectively, in
all three cases (23). These waveforms show how the midpoint
voltage balance can be successfully controlled for all the proposed strategies. A similar response was obtained for a falling
50 V to 0 V step response. By looking at the results, it is very hard
to appreciate substantial differences between response obtained
using sinusoidal and squared sixth harmonic injection. Therefore, the main difference between these two techniques lies in the
easier implementation offered by the squared harmonic injection at low switching frequencies. In the waveforms of Fig. 14,
a dip in the output current during the midpoint transient can be
observed, which highlights a limitation of the proposed compensation techniques. This is due to the output voltage required
to control the output current, already operating close to its limit
in this experiment, diminishing to accommodate the midpoint
compensating waveforms. This effect is significantly greater in
the case of the sixth harmonic injection strategies as their compensation power is about three or four times smaller than that of
the second harmonic strategy. This limitation is only likely to
appear when operating at very high modulation indexes and is
4482
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 28, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2013
Fig. 14. Instantaneous response for a mid-point imbalance step of 0 to 50 V, 70 A RMS. (a) sinusoidal second harmonic injection; (b) sinusoidal sixth harmonic
injection; (c) squared sixth harmonic injection. First waveform: v c 1 (100 V/div), second waveform: v c 2 (100 V/div), third waveform v A G (500 V/div), fourth
waveform: iA (100 A/div). Time scaling: 40 ms/div.
Fig. 15. Instantaneous response for a mid-point imbalance step of 0 50 V, 35 A RMS, unbalanced load: (a) sinusoidal second harmonic injection; (b) sinusoidal
sixth harmonic injection; (c) squared sixth harmonic injection. First waveform: v c 1 (100 V/div), second waveform: v c 2 (100 V/div, third waveform iA (50 V/div),
fourth waveform: iB (50 A/div). Time scaling: 40 ms/div.
Fig. 16. Instantaneous response for a step change on the phase current, second harmonic compensation K P = 0.3, iTn = 2.93, P = 94.24 rad/s. (a) 10 to
75 A RMS, K P = 0 (controller disabled); (b) 10 to 75 A RMS (c) 75 to 10 A RMS. First waveform: v c 1 (100 V/div), second waveform: v c 2 (100 V/div), third
waveform: v A G (500 V/div), fourth waveform: iA (100 A/div); Time scaling: (a): 40 ms/div. (b) and (c): 100 ms/div.
The next test consisted in evaluating the performance midpoint balance control loop for a sudden step change of the output
current. The waveforms seen in Fig. 16(a) show that, for a rising step from 10 to 75 A, under no midpoint control (KP =
0), there was a drift of the midpoint voltage balance, eventually causing a inverter trip. The order of the waveforms is the
same as that explained for Fig. 14. However, when the midpoint voltage balance control is activated, in this case for second harmonic compensation, the midpoint remained balanced
for both a rising current step (10 to 75 A), Fig. 16(b), and a
falling step (75 to 10 A), Fig. 16(c). Similar results were obtained when sinusoidal or squared sixth harmonic injection was
used.
4483
4484
Javier Chivite-Zabalza received the B.Sc. Eng. degree in electrical and electronic engineering from
Mondragon University, Mondragon, Spain, in 1993,
the M.Sc. degree in power electronics and drives
from the Universities of Birmingham and Nottingham (joint degree), Birmingham, U.K., in 2003, and
the Ph.D. degree from the University of Manchester,
Manchester, U.K., in 2006.
He was a Project Engineer in the field of industrial
automation and drives from 1994 to 1999 in Spain,
and from 1999 to 2003 in the U.K. From 2003 to
2006, he was with Goodrich ESTC, Birmingham, U.K. where he was involved
in the development of high power-factor rectifiers for aerospace applications.
From 2006 to 2008, he was with the Rolls-Royce University Technology Centre,
University of Manchester, where he was involved in research on more electric
concepts for autonomous aerospace power systems. In 2008, he joined Ingeteam
Technology S.A., in Spain, developing power electronic converters for FACTS
devices and motor drives applications, where he is currently In-Charge of the
voltage source converter development for the 47 MVAR SSSC demonstrator.
Dr. Chivite-Zabalza is a Registered Chartered Engineer in the U.K. and a
member of the Institution of Engineering and Technology.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 28, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2013