Sei sulla pagina 1di 8

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 3, MAY 2003

823

Analysis and Design of Direct Power Control (DPC) for a Three Phase Synchronous Rectifier via Output Regulation Subspaces

Gerardo Escobar, Aleksandar M. Stankovic´, Member, IEEE, Juan M. Carrasco, Member, IEEE, Eduardo Galván, and Romeo Ortega, Fellow, IEEE

Abstract—In this paper, we present a controller that directly reg- ulates the active and instantaneous reactive power in a synchronous three-phase boost-type rectifier. The controller ensures a good regu- lation of the output voltage, and guarantees the power factor close to one. The controller builds upon the ideas of the well known di- rect torque control (DTC) for induction motors. In our case, the active and reactive powers replace the torque and flux amplitude used as the controlled outputs in DTC, thus motivating the name DPC-control. We show that a simple modification to the original al- gorithm makes the selection of the control inputs more accurate. To formalize this technique we utilize the concept of output regulation subspaces. A modification is added to the basic controller to deal with disturbances such as unbalance and distortion in the source voltage. Finally, the proposed controller was tested both in simu- lations and experimentally, and illustrative results are presented here.

Index Terms—ac–dc power conversion, nonlinear systems.

I. INTRODUCTION

I N THIS paper we explore direct regulation of active and instantaneous reactive power in a synchronous three-phase

boost-type rectifier. The use of instantaneous active and reac- tive power for control purposes was first introduced in [6]. In that work the authors propose a method to compute the current references based on the computation of the instantaneous active and reactive power. These current references were later used in a high gain (hysteresis) current loop, together with a pulse-width modulated (PWM) or space vector modulation (SVM) block. In some applications, this basic method may exhibit disadvan- tages that have been addressed (and in large degree overcomed) in the literature. First, hysteresis controllers cannot guarantee perfect tracking of a time varying signal, unless arbitrarily fast

Manuscript received February 11, 2002; revised November 1, 2002. This work was supported by the Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología de México (CONACYT) and the Virtual Test Bed (VTB) Project (University of South Carolina) Grant to Northeastern University. Recommended by Associate Editor F. Blaabjerg.

G. Escobar is with the Department of Applied Mathematics and Com-

puter Systems, IPICyT, San Luis Potosí SLP 78210, México (e-mail:

gescobar@ipicyt.edu.mx).

A. M. Stankovic´ is with the Department of Electrical and Computer

Engineering, Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115 USA (e-mail:

astankov@cdsp.neu.edu). J. M. Carrasco and E. Galván are with Escuela Superior de Ingeniería, Univer-

sidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain (e-mail: carrasco@esi.us.es; galvan@esi.us.es).

R. Ortega is with the Laboratoire des Signaux et Systèmes, CNRS-Supélec,

France (e-mail: ortega@lss.supelec.fr). Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPEL.2003.810862

switching is used. Second, this technique fully applies only in balanced and sinusoidal operation. In [7], the authors also utilize the instantaneous active and reactive power for control purposes. They establish first a pro- portional relationship between these variables and the currents expressed in the rotational reference (which holds only for sinu- soidal balanced operation). Then, they propose a commutation algorithm based on the voltage source angular position and the proportionality between the time derivative of currents in the ro- tational reference and the corresponding injected voltage. Thus, a preliminary vector is proposed in such a way that the sign of these time derivatives opposes the sign of the errors in real and reactive power. A phase locked loop (PLL) is introduced to determine the voltage source angular position. Although in the final expression of the controller only the active and reactive powers are involved, the strong use of the properties of the cur- rents makes this method close to the original method proposed in [6]. In addition, the method still needs a PWM block to gen- erate the final control vector. Therefore, this technique cannot be considered as direct in the terminology that we use. Later in [9] the authors introduce an algorithm referred as di- rect power control (DPC). The idea behind this technique con- sists in selecting a control vector from a look up table based on the error of active and reactive powers as well as on the angular position of the estimated voltage source vector. For the latter, the authors propose to divide the input space (in the plane) in twelve sectors, and then determine the position of the estimated voltage source vector with respect to these sectors. They use the fact that dc-bus voltage is regulated by controlling the active power, while the unity power factor operation is achieved by control- ling the reactive power to zero. The look up table is considered optimal, although no further explanation is given about the gen- eration of the table. The authors propose to use an estimation of the voltage vector to reduce the number of voltage sensors and to simplify the implementation. Unfortunately, this modi- fication to the algorithm involves the computation of the time derivative of measured currents. This computation may become noisy, especially at low currents, and it is strongly dependent on parameters like the inductance, as pointed out by the authors. Recently, in [8] the authors follow a similar control scheme as in [9]; the main difference is that they propose to estimate a vector named virtual flux instead of the voltage source vector. With this modification, the authors try to reduce the extremely large sampling frequency required in the original DPC, as well as the inherent noise introduced in the computation of real and

0885-8993/03$17.00 © 2003 IEEE

824

reactive power. The estimation algorithm is basically an open loop integration of the injected voltage plus the voltage drop in the inductance. This technique, although inherently very prac- tical, may be sensitive to inductance parameter variations, and to initial conditions. Again, the algorithm equations are based on the assumption of sinusoidal balanced line voltage. This al- gorithm requires a large value of the inductance and a large sam- pling frequency, and results in variable switching frequency. To alleviate the last problem, in [10] the authors propose to use a SVM algorithm to guarantee a constant switching frequency. Reference [1] presented an interpretation of DTC control in terms of output regulation subspaces (ORS). It has been shown in [2] that this concept can also be applied to synchronous rec- tifiers. In this paper we elaborate further on this idea, taking instantaneous active and reactive power as the output signals to be regulated. The two power signals play the role of the torque and flux amplitude in DTC of IM. The resulting controller, re- ferred to as ORS-DPC, is a controller that, as the original DPC, is intended to directly generate the control vector without the requirement of current control loops. The algorithm selects a vector from a look-up table based on the instantaneous active and reactive power errors with respect to their references, as well as the angular position of a modified line voltage vector relative to a given sector distribution. This modification consists in rotating the line voltage vector a precalculated angle before making the selection of the control input vector, with the aim of refining the selection. Because of the properties of the ORS ap- proach, we are able to justify both the design of such a look-up table and the use of the angular position of the modified line voltage vector. Some related work is reported in [3], where the problem of output voltage regulation in three phase rectifiers is formulated, and guidelines are given to implement a controller based on the definition of subspaces in the control input space. Later in [4] the same authors presented an approach based on the concept of sliding modes and the computation of the equivalent control. They propose to divide the input space into four quadrants ac- cording to the different signs of the sliding surfaces. Then, they select the control vector that is contained in the good quadrant, i.e., the one that fulfills the sliding criteria. Special attention is given to the case where no vectors or more than one vector are contained in such quadrant. In that case, the authors propose to select the control vector nearest to the equivalent control. This criterion, while practical, may exhibit a poor performance in the transients and lacks of a more complete analytical justification. In most DPC schemes for synchronous rectifier, an external PI loop utilizing the dc-voltage error is used to compute the de- sired active power. In our case we propose to use a modified PI controller where we replace the proportional part by a low pass filter, and use the error of the square of the dc-voltage in- stead of the dc-voltage error. The justification for the integral part in this control stems from the uncertainty about the load (represented here as a resistive element), while the low pass filter reduces the effects of the capacitor ripple in the control loop, while still guaranteeing a good performance. We also ad- dress the issues concerning unbalance and harmonic distortion in the source voltage. We evaluated experimentally the proposed strategy, and results illustrating the performance are presented.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 3, MAY 2003

TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 3, MAY 2003 Fig. 1. Circuit schematic of a

Fig. 1.

Circuit schematic of a three phase boost-type rectifier.

TABLE

I

AVAILABLE SWITCH POSITIONS IN THE -MODEL

TABLE I A VAILABLE S WITCH P OSITIONS IN THE -M ODEL II. P ROBLEM F

II. PROBLEM FORMULATION

Consider the synchronous three-phase (boost-type) rectifier shown in Fig. 1.

transformation, we obtain the fol-

) coordi-

nates

lowing model expressed in terms of fixed frame (

After the standard

model expressed in terms of fixed frame ( After the standard (1) (2) where vector of
model expressed in terms of fixed frame ( After the standard (1) (2) where vector of
model expressed in terms of fixed frame ( After the standard (1) (2) where vector of

(1)

(2)

where

vector of line currents; output capacitor voltage; vector of the source line voltages; inductance filter at the line source inputs;

inductor parasitic resistance (neglected in the model); output capacitor; load resistance; vector of control inputs.

Vectors

load resistance; vector of control inputs. Vectors , , are of the form . Vector represents
, ,
,
,

are of the form

vector of control inputs. Vectors , , are of the form . Vector represents the switch

. Vector represents the switch position and takes values in the discrete set , described in Table I. These vectors, expressed in the fixed frame, form the

input space, which can be drawn in a plane as shown in Fig. 2. The control objective is to design a switching sequence of control vectors to regulate the output capacitor voltage to a desired constant value given by . Moreover, the system should achieve a near unity power factor (PF), meaning that the current vector should track a vector signal proportional to the line voltage . The current tracking problem can be reinterpreted as a set point control problem if the outputs are

to the line voltage . The current tracking problem can be reinterpreted as a set point
to the line voltage . The current tracking problem can be reinterpreted as a set point
to the line voltage . The current tracking problem can be reinterpreted as a set point
to the line voltage . The current tracking problem can be reinterpreted as a set point
to the line voltage . The current tracking problem can be reinterpreted as a set point

ESCOBAR et al.: ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF DIRECT POWER CONTROL (DPC)

et al. : ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF DIRECT POWER CONTROL (DPC) Fig. 2. ORS for the

Fig. 2.

ORS for the synchronous rectifier.

chosen to be the active and reactive power defined as

andchosen to be the active and reactive power defined as , which are (3) (4) These

chosen to be the active and reactive power defined as and , which are (3) (4)

, which are

be the active and reactive power defined as and , which are (3) (4) These new

(3)

(4)

These new outputs are driven toward some desired constant ref-

erences, i.e.,

antee a power factor close to one, and is a slowly varying signal generated by an outer loop to guarantee . For the sake of simplicity we have assumed here that the voltage source is balanced and free of harmonic distortion. The case when these disturbances are present requires some further mod- ifications, which are treated in Section VI.

The time derivatives of the active and reactive powers are given by

, where to guar-

the active and reactive powers are given by , where to guar- and (5) (6) where

and

active and reactive powers are given by , where to guar- and (5) (6) where ,
active and reactive powers are given by , where to guar- and (5) (6) where ,

(5)

(6)

where

powers are given by , where to guar- and (5) (6) where , and we have

, and we have used

.
.

III. OUTPUT REGULATION SUBSPACES (ORS)

The output regulation subspaces, or simply ORS [1], [2] are the subspaces of the input space where each . Thus we are defining hyperplanes (one hyperplane for each output) with the characteristic that points “above” the th hyperplane satisfy while those “below” satisfy . The interested reader is referred to [1] for a description of such subspaces for (general vector relative degree ) nonlinear systems. In the case of a synchronous rectifier, the ORS can be com- puted from (5)–(6) yielding

rectifier, the ORS can be com- puted from (5)–(6) yielding 825 Fig. 3. Sector definitions for
rectifier, the ORS can be com- puted from (5)–(6) yielding 825 Fig. 3. Sector definitions for
rectifier, the ORS can be com- puted from (5)–(6) yielding 825 Fig. 3. Sector definitions for
rectifier, the ORS can be com- puted from (5)–(6) yielding 825 Fig. 3. Sector definitions for
rectifier, the ORS can be com- puted from (5)–(6) yielding 825 Fig. 3. Sector definitions for
rectifier, the ORS can be com- puted from (5)–(6) yielding 825 Fig. 3. Sector definitions for

825

the ORS can be com- puted from (5)–(6) yielding 825 Fig. 3. Sector definitions for the

Fig. 3.

Sector definitions for the control algorithm implementation.

TABLE

II

USING ONLY THE ROTATION ANGLE TO MODIFY THE SECTOR DISTRIBUTION ON FIG. 3(a)

THE S ECTOR D ISTRIBUTION ON F I G . 3 ( a ) , AND

, AND USING

D ISTRIBUTION ON F I G . 3 ( a ) , AND U SING with

with as scalar constants. Clearly, if

( a ) , AND U SING with as scalar constants. Clearly, if then . Hence,
( a ) , AND U SING with as scalar constants. Clearly, if then . Hence,

then . Hence, the ORS define two straight lines dividing the input space into four quadrants corresponding to different combinations of signs for and , as shown in Fig. 2. More- over, both ORS’s are perpendicular to each other all the time, as

ORS’s are perpendicular to each other all the time, as is in the direction of the
ORS’s are perpendicular to each other all the time, as is in the direction of the
ORS’s are perpendicular to each other all the time, as is in the direction of the

is in the direction of the vector

other all the time, as is in the direction of the vector while is in the

while

all the time, as is in the direction of the vector while is in the direction

is in the direction of . Note, however, that the intersection point identified by in Fig. 2 (representing the equivalent control or feedback linearizing, decoupling control) is not nec- essarily at the origin. Our next step is thus to re-examine the use of ORS in the case of a synchronous rectifier.

the use of ORS in the case of a synchronous rectifier. I V . O R

IV. ORS-BASED DIRECT POWER CONTROL

A nice feature of the classical DTC is that the selection of the control vector is based only on the knowledge of the position of the vector of the stator flux relative to the sector definition as given by Fig. 3(a). This makes implementation very simple, as it suffices to enter this information plus the signs of the output er- rors into a table [see for instance Table II(b)], to immediately get the control vector that accomplishes the objective at that instant. Notice that in the case of the synchronous rectifier, under the assumption that both ORS’s are close to the origin (assumption usually made in DTC), it is enough to determine the position of vector relative to the sectors defined in Fig. 3(a) to obtain a control vector. Nevertheless, this simple strategy would exhibit problems whenever the ORS’s are far from the origin, which is common for the synchronous rectifier. We aim to preserve the same overall philosophy in our algo- rithm, and thus maintain low complexity, but still achieve im- proved accuracy. The idea behind our approach consists in ro- tating the vector by a certain angle just before going into the table to extract the control vector. We will refer to as the rotated vector , for instance is a rotation

going into the table to extract the control vector. We will refer to as the rotated
going into the table to extract the control vector. We will refer to as the rotated
going into the table to extract the control vector. We will refer to as the rotated
going into the table to extract the control vector. We will refer to as the rotated
going into the table to extract the control vector. We will refer to as the rotated

826

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 3, MAY 2003

TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 3, MAY 2003 TABLE III U SING B OTH

TABLE

III

USING BOTH ROTATION ANGLES AND TO MODIFY THE SECTOR DISTRIBUTION ON FIG. 3(a)

TO M ODIFY THE S ECTOR D ISTRIBUTION ON F IG . 3(a) , AND U

, AND USING

THE S ECTOR D ISTRIBUTION ON F IG . 3(a) , AND U SING TABLE IV

TABLE

IV

USING THE SECTOR DISTRIBUTION ON FIG. 3(b) TO SELECT THE CLOSEST CONTROL VECTOR TO THE MODIFIED

S ELECT THE C LOSEST C ONTROL V ECTOR TO THE M ODIFIED , dicates a
S ELECT THE C LOSEST C ONTROL V ECTOR TO THE M ODIFIED , dicates a

, dicates a rotation backward, i.e., in the clockwise direction. We first rotate vector by angle , according to Table II(a) to obtain the modified , i.e., . Now, once has been rotated, we look for the position of . Assume at this point that is located in the sector ; then we propose to select the control vector according to Table II(b). Notice that Table II(b) is the standard algorithm used in the DTC technique. We observed in our experiments, however, that this first approx- imation still leads to some distortion in currents. This distortion can be reduced if angle is also considered for the rotation of as we do in our second scheme. In fact, depending on the parameters of the system, we can adjust the compensating angles (and corresponding tables) to generate the control vectors that may better fit a given application. An ex- ample of modification involving both angles is Table III. 1 When the output voltage is small, a larger equivalent control is obtained, and problems arise when trying to search for a con- trol vector in the area in Fig. 2 (or in sector as depicted in Fig. 4). If this is the case, a good option would be to select the closest control vector to the ORS( ). To this end, we propose to use the distribution of sectors presented in Fig. 3(b) [instead of the standard distribution of sectors in Fig. 3(a)]. This allows us to consider the closest control vectors (ahead and behind the vector ) in a more natural way. However, the use of another sector distribution entails a change in the search algorithm for the relative position of vector in the new sector distribution. To avoid this modification, we propose to keep the same sector distribution Fig. 3(a), but to use a rotation of rads to emulate the sector distribution Fig. 3(b). Finally, the algorithm shown in Table IV is proposed. With the idea of making more accurate the selection of the control vector in areas and , we propose to increase the resolution of the sector distribution by superimposing two sec- tors in Fig. 3. This yields the sector distribution with enhanced resolution shown in Fig. 5. We note that now each sector has two coordinates , being the location on sector dis- tribution of Fig. 3(a), and the one on sector distribution of

, the minus sign in-

In Table II,

on sector distribution of , the minus sign in- In Table II, 1 Similar results have
on sector distribution of , the minus sign in- In Table II, 1 Similar results have
on sector distribution of , the minus sign in- In Table II, 1 Similar results have
on sector distribution of , the minus sign in- In Table II, 1 Similar results have
on sector distribution of , the minus sign in- In Table II, 1 Similar results have
on sector distribution of , the minus sign in- In Table II, 1 Similar results have
on sector distribution of , the minus sign in- In Table II, 1 Similar results have
on sector distribution of , the minus sign in- In Table II, 1 Similar results have
on sector distribution of , the minus sign in- In Table II, 1 Similar results have
on sector distribution of , the minus sign in- In Table II, 1 Similar results have
on sector distribution of , the minus sign in- In Table II, 1 Similar results have
on sector distribution of , the minus sign in- In Table II, 1 Similar results have
on sector distribution of , the minus sign in- In Table II, 1 Similar results have
on sector distribution of , the minus sign in- In Table II, 1 Similar results have
on sector distribution of , the minus sign in- In Table II, 1 Similar results have
on sector distribution of , the minus sign in- In Table II, 1 Similar results have
on sector distribution of , the minus sign in- In Table II, 1 Similar results have

1 Similar results have been observed if Table III(b) is replaced by Table II(b).

Fig. 4.

Deformed ORS for the synchronous rectifier.

of

is described by

rads in the counterclockwise direction, where matrixORS for the synchronous rectifier. of is described by This rotation is intended to compensate the

by rads in the counterclockwise direction, where matrix This rotation is intended to compensate the error
by rads in the counterclockwise direction, where matrix This rotation is intended to compensate the error

This rotation is intended to compensate the error produced when considering the approximated ORS. Moreover, the angle for the rotation of should also be selected. We propose to chose it as a function of the sign of the output errors. Following the standard DTC, we displace the exact ORS in such a way that their boundaries cross the origin and remain perpendicular to each other, which yields the dash-dotted lines sown in Fig. 4. Next, let us divide the modified ORS into two segments and rotate each segment in such a way that they induce the same partition of the circle in arcs (AB, BC, CD, DA) as the original exact ORS. The modified ORS (now composed of two segments each) crosses the circle in the same points (A,B,C,D) as the corresponding original ORS segment. This yields the thick lines shown in Fig. 4, where the segments corresponding to the modified ORS( ) have been rotated backward or forward by depending on the position of the segment, while those cor- responding to ORS( ) are rotated by . The angles and are computed from the following rela- tions:

The angles and are computed from the following rela- tions: (7) ; moreover, we in typical
The angles and are computed from the following rela- tions: (7) ; moreover, we in typical
The angles and are computed from the following rela- tions: (7) ; moreover, we in typical
The angles and are computed from the following rela- tions: (7) ; moreover, we in typical
The angles and are computed from the following rela- tions: (7) ; moreover, we in typical
The angles and are computed from the following rela- tions: (7) ; moreover, we in typical
The angles and are computed from the following rela- tions: (7) ; moreover, we in typical

(7)

; moreover, we

in typical oper-

ation, and it is even smaller more for low currents. This can be easily seen from the steady state values

observed that

Notice that both angles decrease for larger

is quite small compared withobserved that Notice that both angles decrease for larger (8) In our first scheme, we rotate

both angles decrease for larger is quite small compared with (8) In our first scheme, we
both angles decrease for larger is quite small compared with (8) In our first scheme, we

(8)

In our first scheme, we rotate the vector as follows. First, we consider only the angle , that is, we assume that ORS( ) is very close to the origin.

the vector as follows. First, we consider only the angle , that is, we assume that
the vector as follows. First, we consider only the angle , that is, we assume that
the vector as follows. First, we consider only the angle , that is, we assume that

ESCOBAR et al.: ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF DIRECT POWER CONTROL (DPC)

et al. : ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF DIRECT POWER CONTROL (DPC) Fig. 5. Sector distribution with

Fig. 5.

Sector distribution with enhanced resolution.

Fig. 3(b). This sector distribution allows us to select among the closest control vectors, and thus guarantees a more accurate se- lection in the case when some searching areas are much smaller than the others, which is the case with areas and . The algorithm described next applies only in cases when the search for a controller occurs in areas or ; in other cases we can apply any of the previous algorithms. First, we obtain the modified vector by rotating vector an angle , that is, . Second, we find locations for the vector (this is done by searching separately in sector distri- butions in Fig. 3). Third, we select the control vector according to Table V. Notice that in Fig. 5 we redefined sector (6, 1) as (0, 1) to be in agreement with our algorithm.

(6, 1) as (0, 1) to be in agreement with our algorithm. V . E X
(6, 1) as (0, 1) to be in agreement with our algorithm. V . E X
(6, 1) as (0, 1) to be in agreement with our algorithm. V . E X
(6, 1) as (0, 1) to be in agreement with our algorithm. V . E X
(6, 1) as (0, 1) to be in agreement with our algorithm. V . E X

V. EXTERNAL CONTROL LOOP

Let us assume that the control loop for and is fast com-

pared with the dynamics of the dc voltage loop. Thus, after a rel-

with the dynamics of the dc voltage loop. Thus, after a rel- , atively short time,
with the dynamics of the dc voltage loop. Thus, after a rel- , atively short time,
,
,

atively short time, we have , and solve for from (5)–(6), which represents the equivalent control as depicted in Fig. 2, yielding

the equivalent control as depicted in Fig. 2, yielding (9) which exists whenever . Now, as
the equivalent control as depicted in Fig. 2, yielding (9) which exists whenever . Now, as

(9)

which exists whenever . Now, as the control objective mainly focus on the regulation of the dc component of , we substitute in expression (2) by

which represents the average of the control signal . Thus we neglect higher harmonics introduced by the switching. This results in the remaining dynamics

by the switching. This results in the remaining dynamics (10) where we have introduced the coordinate
by the switching. This results in the remaining dynamics (10) where we have introduced the coordinate
by the switching. This results in the remaining dynamics (10) where we have introduced the coordinate
by the switching. This results in the remaining dynamics (10) where we have introduced the coordinate
by the switching. This results in the remaining dynamics (10) where we have introduced the coordinate
by the switching. This results in the remaining dynamics (10) where we have introduced the coordinate

(10)

where we have introduced the coordinate transformation . System (10) can be seen as a first order filter where

resents the actual control signal. We propose the following dy- namical controller for subsystem (10)

rep-

the following dy- namical controller for subsystem (10) rep- , (11) TABLE V U SING THE
,
,
following dy- namical controller for subsystem (10) rep- , (11) TABLE V U SING THE S
following dy- namical controller for subsystem (10) rep- , (11) TABLE V U SING THE S

(11)

TABLE

V

USING THE SECTOR DISTRIBUTION ON FIG. 5 TO SELECT THE CLOSEST CONTROL VECTOR TO THE MODIFIED

S ELECT THE C LOSEST C ONTROL V ECTOR TO THE M ODIFIED 827 (12) ,

827

ELECT THE C LOSEST C ONTROL V ECTOR TO THE M ODIFIED 827 (12) , ,
ELECT THE C LOSEST C ONTROL V ECTOR TO THE M ODIFIED 827 (12) , ,

(12)

, , , and are design pa-

where

rameters. The form of this controller is motivated by the form of a simple PI [to see this, replace with in (11) and integrate both sides], where (referred to in the control literature as ap- proximate or “dirty” derivative) is the result of low-pass filtering the time derivative of signal . We observed experimentally that direct use of in the computation of (using a standard PI con- troller) introduces additional harmonics into the control loop.

The controller (11)–(12) can be rewritten in the form of a transfer function having as input and output as:

,
,
form of a transfer function having as input and output as: , what turns out to
form of a transfer function having as input and output as: , what turns out to
form of a transfer function having as input and output as: , what turns out to
form of a transfer function having as input and output as: , what turns out to
form of a transfer function having as input and output as: , what turns out to
form of a transfer function having as input and output as: , what turns out to
form of a transfer function having as input and output as: , what turns out to
form of a transfer function having as input and output as: , what turns out to
form of a transfer function having as input and output as: , what turns out to
form of a transfer function having as input and output as: , what turns out to

what turns out to be a simple low pass filter plus an integrator.

closed loop with subsystem

(10) yields a LTI system whose equilibrium point is

. Following classical tools, like the Routh–Hurwitz criterion, it can be proved that this controller stabilizes the closed loop system in the desired equi- librium point provided , , and are all chosen positive. This technique is applicable to power converters where the load is unknown, but mostly resistive and constant. To guarantee the validity of this technique, we should constrain the time scale of the external PI loop to be significantly slower than inner (directly controlled) active and reactive power dynamics. Moreover, notice that the control vector is limited to the hexagon shown on Fig. 2, and more conservatively inside the

inner circle of radius

lation here). This imposes a restriction expressed as

(as we do not consider the overmodu-

The

controller

above

in

(as we do not consider the overmodu- The controller above in with the condition which guarantees
(as we do not consider the overmodu- The controller above in with the condition which guarantees
(as we do not consider the overmodu- The controller above in with the condition which guarantees
(as we do not consider the overmodu- The controller above in with the condition which guarantees
(as we do not consider the overmodu- The controller above in with the condition which guarantees
(as we do not consider the overmodu- The controller above in with the condition which guarantees
(as we do not consider the overmodu- The controller above in with the condition which guarantees
(as we do not consider the overmodu- The controller above in with the condition which guarantees

with the condition which guarantees the existence of real solutions for the bounds. This upper and lower bound on the desired output voltage give the interval where the existence of an equilibrium is guaranteed. Notice that if is much smaller than (what holds in practical cases), then the

much smaller than (what holds in practical cases), then the condition above is reduced to ,
much smaller than (what holds in practical cases), then the condition above is reduced to ,
much smaller than (what holds in practical cases), then the condition above is reduced to ,

condition above is reduced to , in agreement with the amplification characteristic of the boost rectifier. A block diagram of the proposed controller is presented in Fig. 6 where we can identify an inner loop, consisting of the switching strategy, and the outer loop, consisting of the low pass filter plus an integrator.

828

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 3, MAY 2003

TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 3, MAY 2003 Fig. 6. Block diagram of the

Fig. 6.

Block diagram of the proposed ORS-DPC controller.

VI. CASE OF UNBALANCE AND HARMONIC DISTORTION IN

SOURCE VOLTAGE

In the case of a source voltage with unbalance and harmonic distortion, we propose to redefine the outputs as

harmonic distortion, we propose to redefine the outputs as Fig. 7. Resonant filter used to obtain
harmonic distortion, we propose to redefine the outputs as Fig. 7. Resonant filter used to obtain
harmonic distortion, we propose to redefine the outputs as Fig. 7. Resonant filter used to obtain

Fig. 7.

Resonant filter used to obtain the th harmonic components of signal

.
.

Fig. 8.

compared with ( ) its reference current

plot of the steady state operation of (–) the input current

. .

of the steady state operation of (–) the input current . where quence (component) of stant

where

quence (component) of

stant or slowly varying signal) and

quence (component) of stant or slowly varying signal) and represents the fundamental positive symmetric se- .

represents the fundamental positive symmetric se-

and represents the fundamental positive symmetric se- . Notice that, if ( then, the cur- a

. Notice that, if

the fundamental positive symmetric se- . Notice that, if ( then, the cur- a con- is

( then, the cur-

a con-

is forced to follow a balanced signal proportional

VII. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

An evaluation of the proposed control policy was com- pleted on a conventional three-phase boost-type rectifier. The prototype comprises a DSP-based interface, with controllers programmed in C language. The following parameters have been used in the prototype: grid connection inductance mH, output capacitance mF and an AC grid voltage of 380 V at 50 Hz. The three phase inverter was implemented using IGBT’s, rated at 15 kW output load. The output voltage can be regulated from 560 V to 900 V under the full load conditions. These values correspond to a laboratory prototype that was designed for different applications, namely, motor drives, static VAR compensator, and synchronous rectifier. The experimental setup allows changes in the load from no load to (corresponding to 11.43 KW at 600 V), and the switching frequency was fixed to 20 KHz. The experiments were performed with: the output voltage V, and the output load . Based on time response criteria, we tuned the parameters of the PI external control loop to

rent vector

to

parameters of the PI external control loop to rent vector to , guaranteeing a PF close

, guaranteeing a PF close to unity. In this case the time derivatives are given by

to unity. In this case the time derivatives are given by The angles relations and are

The angles

relations

case the time derivatives are given by The angles relations and are now computed from the

and

the time derivatives are given by The angles relations and are now computed from the following

are now computed from the following

The angles relations and are now computed from the following and , Notice that the expressions
The angles relations and are now computed from the following and , Notice that the expressions
The angles relations and are now computed from the following and , Notice that the expressions
The angles relations and are now computed from the following and , Notice that the expressions
The angles relations and are now computed from the following and , Notice that the expressions
and ,
and
,

Notice that the expressions above involve the use of . However, direct access to this quantity is not available. Instead, we propose to estimate using a filter with the structure shown in Fig. 7, which follows very closely the ideas presented in [5], and referred to as resonant filters. The filter in Fig. 7 extracts the th harmonic component of a time varying periodic (two-dimensional) signal . Moreover, according to the structure of the filter, it is possible to extract both positive an negative sequence symmetric components and , respectively, of the th harmonic ( for funda- mental), as well as the associated complex Fourier coefficients (phasors) and . The gain is a design parameter that for smaller values makes the filter more selective, but slower.

smaller values makes the filter more selective, but slower. . and In this paper, we only
smaller values makes the filter more selective, but slower. . and In this paper, we only
smaller values makes the filter more selective, but slower. . and In this paper, we only
smaller values makes the filter more selective, but slower. . and In this paper, we only
smaller values makes the filter more selective, but slower. . and In this paper, we only
smaller values makes the filter more selective, but slower. . and In this paper, we only
smaller values makes the filter more selective, but slower. . and In this paper, we only
smaller values makes the filter more selective, but slower. . and In this paper, we only
smaller values makes the filter more selective, but slower. . and In this paper, we only
smaller values makes the filter more selective, but slower. . and In this paper, we only
smaller values makes the filter more selective, but slower. . and In this paper, we only
.
.

and

In this paper, we only present the experimental results for the ORS-DPC controller based on the Table IV. The results for the other controllers based on the other tables are mildly inferior, with exception of Table V, and are omitted here for the reason of space. First we show the steady state responses of the currents when

load of

show the steady state responses of the currents when load of is connected. We observe in

is connected. We observe in Fig. 8 that the

input currents follow quite well their corresponding ref-

input currents follow quite well their corresponding ref- erence currents . The latter has been computed
input currents follow quite well their corresponding ref- erence currents . The latter has been computed

erence currents . The latter has been computed according

. Fig. 9 shows that input currents and and their cor- responding AC source voltages and are in phase, thus guaranteeing operation with a power factor very close to

to

ESCOBAR et al.: ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF DIRECT POWER CONTROL (DPC)

829

al. : ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF DIRECT POWER CONTROL (DPC) 829 Fig. 9. Steady state operation

Fig. 9. Steady state operation of (–) the input current corresponding ac voltage .

of (–) the input current corresponding ac voltage . and ( ) its Fig. 10. Transient

andof (–) the input current corresponding ac voltage . ( ) its Fig. 10. Transient response

( )

its

current corresponding ac voltage . and ( ) its Fig. 10. Transient response of the output

Fig. 10. Transient response of the output voltage , for a step load change from no load ( ) to .

, for a step load change from no load ( ) to . Fig. 11. Transient
, for a step load change from no load ( ) to . Fig. 11. Transient

Fig. 11. Transient response of input currents (–) and ( ) , for a step load change from no load ( ) to .

, for a step load change from no load ( ) to . Fig. 12. from
, for a step load change from no load ( ) to . Fig. 12. from
, for a step load change from no load ( ) to . Fig. 12. from

Fig. 12.

from no load ( ) to .

Transient response of the output power , for a step load change

response of the output power , for a step load change Fig. 13. Steady state operation
response of the output power , for a step load change Fig. 13. Steady state operation

Fig. 13. Steady state operation of (–) the input current corresponding AC voltage , with .

current corresponding AC voltage , with . and ( ) its Fig. 14. Transient response of
current corresponding AC voltage , with . and ( ) its Fig. 14. Transient response of

and

( )

its

corresponding AC voltage , with . and ( ) its Fig. 14. Transient response of the

Fig. 14. Transient response of the output voltage for a step load change from no load ( ) to .

for a step load change from no load ( ) to . one. Notice that in

one. Notice that in this figure the scale of voltage has been scaled

by a factor of 1/10, that is, the figure shows the (scaled) voltages

. To show the robustness of the proposed controller against load step disturbances, we abruptly change the load applied to the system from no load ( ) conditions to . Figs. 10 and 11 show the transient response of the output voltage

Fig. 13 shows that currents , under a load of

output voltage Fig. 13 shows that currents , under a load of , and the corresponding
,
,
voltage Fig. 13 shows that currents , under a load of , and the corresponding AC

and the corresponding AC source voltages are in phase to each other, thus guaranteeing operation with a power factor very close to one. Fig. 14 shows that after a relatively short transient following an abrupt change on the load resistance going from no load ( ) to , the voltage converges (in the average)

toward its desired reference

converges (in the average) toward its desired reference and and input currents and . Notice that,

and

converges (in the average) toward its desired reference and and input currents and . Notice that,
converges (in the average) toward its desired reference and and input currents and . Notice that,
converges (in the average) toward its desired reference and and input currents and . Notice that,
converges (in the average) toward its desired reference and and input currents and . Notice that,
converges (in the average) toward its desired reference and and input currents and . Notice that,
converges (in the average) toward its desired reference and and input currents and . Notice that,
converges (in the average) toward its desired reference and and input currents and . Notice that,
converges (in the average) toward its desired reference and and input currents and . Notice that,

and input currents and . Notice that, after a rel- atively short transient, the output voltage is maintained close to its reference value V. Fig. 12 shows the transient re- sponse of the power delivered to the load for the same step load change.

power delivered to the load for the same step load change. V I I I .
power delivered to the load for the same step load change. V I I I .

VIII. SIMULATION RESULTS FOR UNBALANCED CASE

To show the effectiveness of the proposed controller in case of unbalance and harmonic distortion, we consider the unbalanced voltage shown in Fig. 13 which is polluted with 3rd and 5th har- monics. These harmonics are unbalanced independently, corre- sponding to approximately 5% THD. Notice that the voltage scale is multiplied by factor 1/10. We used the model (1)–(2)

for the system rectifier with the same parameter values as in the experimental setup. In this case we used the control algorithm based on Table V. Current reference is computed in the un-

balance case according to

The control parameters for the external PI controller were

.
.
chosen as follows , , ( ( ) to .
chosen as follows ,
,
(
( ) to
.

and

controller were . chosen as follows , , ( ( ) to . and , ).

, ). The test consists in introducing a step

change on the load resistance at s going from no load

V.

IX. CONCLUSION

In this paper we showed that the basic principles used for DTC can be applied to synchronous rectifiers. The strategy is denoted as ORS-DPC control, where the name DPC is moti- vated by the fact that active and reactive powers are “directly” controlled, just as the torque and flux amplitude are in DTC. The concept of output regulation subspaces (ORS) is revisited, and used to formalize the new switching strategies. It was estab- lished in [1] that the standard DTC uses an approximated ORS. The strategy proposed here is a modified version of the stan- dard DTC, where we rotate the approximated ORS by a certain angle to consider the exact ORS. Nevertheless, we preserve the basic ideas of DTC to select the control input vector by means of a look-up table. Several modifications are possible depending on the system characteristics and the desired references. We ob- served from our experimental results that the controller guar- antees a good regulation of the output voltage with a near unit power factor. This holds true even after abrupt load changes, suggesting a robust performance of ORS-DPC against this type of disturbances.

830

REFERENCES

[1] R. Ortega, N. Barabanov, and G. Escobar, “Direct torque control of in- duction motors: Stability analysis and performance improvement,” IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., vol. 46, pp. 1209–1222, Aug. 2001. [2] G. Escobar, R. Ortega, H. Sira-Ramirez, and H. Ludvigsen, “A hybrid passivity based controller design for a three phase voltage sourced re- versible boost type rectifier,” in Proc. 37th. IEEE Conf. Decision Contr., Tampa, FL, 1998. [3] A. Sabanovic´, N. Sabanovic´, and K. Ohnishi, “Sliding modes in power

converters and motion control systems,” Int. J. Contr., vol. 57, no. 5, pp. 1237–1259, 1993. [4] A. Sabanovic´ , N. Sabanovic´ -Behlilovic´ , and T. Ninomiya, “Pwm in three-phase switching converters—Sliding mode solution,” in Proc. IEEE Power. Electron. Spec. Conf. (PESC’94), 1994, pp. 560–565.

[5]

G. Escobar, A. M. Stankovic´ , and P. Mattavelli, “An adaptive controller for D-Statcom in the stationary reference frame,” in Proc. IEEE 9th Europ. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat. EPE’01, Graz, Austria, Aug. 27–29, 2001.

[6] H. Akagi, Y. Kanazawa, and A. Nabae, “Generalized theory of the in-

stantaneous reactive power in three-phase circuits,” in Proc. Int. Power Electronics Conf. IPEC’83, Tokyo, Japan, 1983, pp. 1375–1386. T. Ohnishi, “Three phase PWM converter/inverter by means of instanta- neous active and reactive power control,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Ind. Elec-

[7]

tron., Contr. Instrum. (IECON’91), vol. 1, 1991, pp. 819–824. [8] M. Malinowski, M. P. Kazmierkowski, S. Hansen, F. Blaabjerg, and

G. D. Marques, “Virtual-flux-based direct power control of three-phase PWM rectifiers,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 37, pp. 1019–1027, July/Aug. 2001. T. Noguchi, H. Tomiki, S. Kondo, and I. Takahashi, “Direct power con-

trol of PWM converter without power-source voltage sensors,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 34, pp. 473–479, May/June 1998. [10] M. Malinowski and M. P. Kazmierkowski, “Direct power control of three-phase PWM rectifier using space vector modulation—Simulation study,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Ind. Electron. ISIE 2002, vol. 4, 2002, pp. 1114–1118.

[9]

Electron. ISIE 2002 , vol. 4, 2002, pp. 1114–1118. [9] Gerardo Escobar was born in Xochimilco,

Gerardo Escobar was born in Xochimilco, Mexico, in 1967. He received the B.Sc. degree in electrome- chanics engineering and the M.Sc. degree in elec- trical engineering from the Engineering Faculty, Na- tional University of Mexico, in 1991 and 1995, re- spectively, and the Ph.D. degree from the Signals and Systems Laboratory, LSS-SUPELEC, Paris, France, in 1999. He was a Technical Assistant in the Automatic Control Laboratory, Graduate School of Engi- neering, National University of Mexico, from May 1990 to April 1991. From August 1991 to August 1995, he was an Assistant Professor in the Control Department, Engineering Facility, National University of Mexico. He was a Visiting Researcher at Northeastern University, Boston, MA, from August 1999 to June 2002. In July 2002, he joined the Research Institute of Science and Technology, San Luis Potosí, México (IPICyT), where he holds a Professor-Researcher position. His main research interests include nonlinear control design, passivity based control, switching power converters, and electrical drives.

control, switching power converters, and electrical drives. Aleksandar M. Stankovic´ (M’93) received the Dipl.Ing.

Aleksandar M. Stankovic´ (M’93) received the Dipl.Ing. and M.S. degrees from the University of Belgrade, Yugoslavia, in 1982 and 1986, respec- tively, and the Ph.D. degree from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, in 1993, all in electrical engineering. He has been with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, since 1993, presently as a Professor. His research interests are in modeling, analysis, estimation and control of energy processing systems. Dr. Stankovic´ is a member of the IEEE Power Engineering, Power Elec- tronics, Control Systems, Circuits and Systems, Industry Applications, and Industrial Electronics Societies. He was an Associate Editor for the IEEE

TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEM TECHNOLOGY, from 1997 to 2001, and

presently serves the IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS in the same capacity.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 3, MAY 2003

TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 3, MAY 2003 Juan M. Carrasco (M’97) was born

Juan M. Carrasco (M’97) was born in San Roque, Spain, in September 1965. He received the M.Eng. and Dr. Eng. degrees in industrial engineering from Sevilla University, Sevilla, Spain, in 1989 and 1992, respectively. He was an Assistant Professor from 1990 to 1995, and is currently an Associate Professor with the De- partment of Electronic Engineering, Sevilla Univer- sity. He has been working for several years in the power electronic field where he was involved in in- dustrial application for the design and development of power converters applied to renewable energy technologies. His current re- search areas include several novel control electronic implementations for power converters, applying new techniques such as sliding modes, fuzzy logic, and neural networks.

such as sliding modes, fuzzy logic, and neural networks. Eduardo Galván was born in Aracena, Huelva,

Eduardo Galván was born in Aracena, Huelva, Spain, in 1964. He received the M.S. degree in electrical engineering and the Ph.D. degree in industrial engineering from the University of Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain, in 1991 and 1994, respectively. He is an Associate Professor of electronic engineering at the Escuela Superior de Ingenieros, Sevilla. His research interests include control of power converters (resonant converters, wind turbine applications, active filters, and induction motors).

turbine applications, active filters, and induction motors). Romeo Ortega (F’00) was born in Mexico. He re-

Romeo Ortega (F’00) was born in Mexico. He re- ceived the B.Sc. degree in electrical and mechanical engineering from the National University of Mexico, in 1974, the M.Eng. degree from the Polytechnical Institute of Leningrad, Leningrad, Russia, in 1978, and the Ph.D. degree from the Politechnical Institute of Grenoble, Grenoble, France in 1984. He then joined the National University of Mexico, where he worked until 1989. He was a Visiting Professor at the University of Illinois, Urbana, from 1987 to 1988, and at McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada, from 1991 to 1992, and a Fellow of the Japan Society for Promotion of Science, from 1990 to 1991. He has been a member of the French National Researcher Council (CNRS) since June 1992. Currently, he is in the Laboratoire de Signaux et Systemes (SUPELEC), Paris, France. His research interests are in the fields of nonlinear and adaptive control, with special emphasis on applications. Dr. Ortega was the Chairman of the IEEE Working Group on Adaptive Con- trol and Systems Identification, of the IFAC Technical Committee on Adaptive Control and Tuning, and of the Automatica Paper Prize Award Committee. He is currently a member of the IFAC Technical Board and Chairman of the IFAC Coordinating Committee on Systems and Signals. He is an Associate Editor of Systems and Control Letters and the International Journal of Adaptive Control and Signal Processing.