Advertisement

Improved three-vector based dead-beat model predictive direct power control strategy for grid-connected inverters

  • Chen-wen Cheng
  • Heng NianEmail author
  • Long-qi Li
Article
  • 12 Downloads

Abstract

Since only one inverter voltage vector is applied during each duty cycle, traditional model predictive direct power control (MPDPC) for grid-connected inverters (GCIs) results in serious harmonics in current and power. Moreover, a high sampling frequency is needed to ensure satisfactory steady-state performance, which is contradictory to its long execution time due to the iterative prediction calculations. To solve these problems, a novel dead-beat MPDPC strategy is proposed, using two active inverter voltage vectors and one zero inverter voltage vector during each duty cycle. Adoption of three inverter vectors ensures a constant switching frequency. Thus, smooth steady-state performance of both current and power can be obtained. Unlike the traditional three-vector based MPDPC strategy, the proposed three vectors are selected based on the power errors rather than the sector where the grid voltage vector is located, which ensures that the duration times of the selected vectors are positive all the time. Iterative calculations of the cost function in traditional predictive control are also removed, which makes the proposed strategy easy to implement on digital signal processors (DSPs) for industrial applications. Results of experiments based on a 1 kW inverter setup validate the feasibility of the proposed three-vector based dead-beat MPDPC strategy.

Key words

Grid-connected inverter Model predictive control Direct power control Three vectors Constant switching frequency Power errors 

CLC number

TM464 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aguilera RP, Quevedo DE, Vazquez S, et al., 2013. Generalized predictive direct power control for AC/DC converters. Proc IEEE ECCE Asia Downunder, p.1215–1220. https://doi.org/10.1109/ECCE-Asia.2013.6579263 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blasko V, Kaura V, 1997. A new mathematical model and control of a three-phase AC-DC voltage source converter. IEEE Trans Power Electron, 12(1):116–123. https://doi.org/10.1109/63.554176 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chen X, Zhang Y, Wang SS, et al., 2017. Impedance-phased dynamic control method for grid-connected inverters in a weak grid. IEEE Trans Power Electron, 32(1):274–283. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2016.2533563 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cheng CW, Nian H, Wang XH, et al., 2017. Dead-beat predictive direct power control of voltage source inverters with optimized switching patterns. IET Power Electron, 10(12):1438–1451. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-pel.2016.0869 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Choi DK, Lee KB, 2015. Dynamic performance improvement of AC/DC converter using model predictive direct power control with finite control set. IEEE Trans Ind Electron, 62(2):757–767. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2014.2352214 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cortes P, Rodriguez J, Quevedo DE, et al., 2008a. Predictive current control strategy with imposed load current spectrum. IEEE Trans Power Electron, 23(2):612–618. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2007.915605 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cortes P, Rodriguez J, Antoniewicz P, et al., 2008b. Direct power control of an AFE using predictive control. IEEE Trans Power Electron, 23(5):2516–2523. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2008.2002065 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dekka A, Wu B, Yaramasu V, et al., 2017. Model predictive control with common-mode voltage injection for modular multilevel converter. IEEE Trans Power Electron, 32(3): 1767–1778. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2016.2558579 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fang H, Zhang ZB, Feng XY, et al., 2016. Ripple-reduced model predictive direct power control for active front-end power converters with extended switching vectors and time-optimised control. IET Power Electron, 9(9):1914–1923. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-pel.2015.0857 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Golestan S, Guerrero JR, Vasquez JC, 2017. Three-phase PLLs: a review of recent advances. IEEE Trans Power Electron, 32(3):1894–1907. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2016.2565642 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hu JB, 2013. Improved dead-beat predictive DPC strategy of grid-connected dc-ac converters with switching loss minimization and delay compensations. IEEE Trans Ind Inform, 9(2):728–738. https://doi.org/10.1109/TII.2012.2223705 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hu JB, Zhu ZQ, 2013. Improved voltage-vector sequences on dead-beat predictive direct power control of reversible three-phase grid-connected voltage-source converters. IEEE Trans Power Electron, 28(1):254–267. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2012.2194512 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Larrinaga SA, Vidal MAR, Oyarbide E, et al., 2007. Predictive control strategy for DC/AC converters based on direct power control. IEEE Trans Ind Electron, 54(3):1261–1271. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2007.893162 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Malinowiski M, 2001. Sensorless control strategies for threephase PWM rectifiers. PhD Thesis, Warsaw University of Technology, Warsaw, Poland.Google Scholar
  15. Rodriguez JR, Dixon JW, Espinoza JR, et al., 2005. PWM regenerative rectifiers: state of the art. IEEE Trans Ind Electron, 52(1):5–22. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2004.841149 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Song ZF, Chen W, Xia CL, 2014. Predictive direct power control for three-phase grid-connected converters without sector information and voltage vector selection. IEEE Trans Power Electron, 29(10):5518–5531. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2013.2289982 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Vargas R, Cortes P, Ammann U, et al., 2007. Predictive control of a three-phase neutral-point-clamped inverter. IEEE Trans Ind Electron, 54(5):2697–2705. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2007.899854 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Vazquez S, Marquez A, Aguilera R, et al., 2015. Predictive optimal switching sequence direct power control for grid-connected power converters. IEEE Trans Ind Electron, 62(4):2010–2020. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2014.2351378 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Zeng Z, Li H, Tang SQ, et al., 2016. Multi-objective control of multi-functional grid-connected inverter for renewable energy integration and power quality service. IET Power Electron, 9(4):761–770. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-pel.2015.0317 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Zhang YC, Zhu JG, 2011. A novel duty cycle control strategy to reduce both torque and flux ripples for DTC of permanent magnet synchronous motor drives with switching frequency reduction. IEEE Trans Power Electron, 26(10): 3055–3067. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2011.2129577 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Zhang YC, Xie W, Li ZX, et al., 2013. Model predictive direct power control of a PWM rectifier with duty cycle optimization. IEEE Trans Power Electron, 28(11):5343–5351. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2013.2243846 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Zhang YC, Xie W, Li ZX, et al., 2014. Low-complexity model predictive power control: double-vector-based approach. IEEE Trans Ind Electron, 61(11):5871–5880. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2014.2304935 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Zhang YC, Peng YB, Yang HT, 2016. Performance improvement of two-vector-based model predictive control of PWM rectifier. IEEE Trans Power Electron, 31(8): 6016–6030. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2015.2498306 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Zhao QS, Ye YQ, Xu GF, et al., 2016. Improved repetitive control scheme for grid-connected inverter with frequency adaptation. IET Power Electron, 9(5):883–890. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-pel.2015.0057 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Editorial Office of Journal of Zhejiang University Science and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Electrical EngineeringZhejiang UniversityHangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations