2516 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 23, NO.

5, SEPTEMBER 2008

Direct Power Control of an AFE Using

Predictive Control
Patricio Cortés, Member, IEEE, José Rodríguez, Senior Member, IEEE,
Patrycjusz Antoniewicz, Student Member, IEEE, and Marian Kazmierkowski, Fellow, IEEE

Abstract—This paper presents a new control scheme for an ac-

tive front-end rectifier using model-based predictive control. The
control strategy minimizes a cost function, which represents the
desired behavior of the converter. Future values of currents and
power are predicted using a discrete-time model. The active and
reactive powers are directly controlled by selecting the optimal
switching state. The main advantages of this method are that there
is no need of linear current controllers, coordinates transforma-
tions or modulators. The rectifier operates with sinusoidal input
currents and unity power factor. Simulation and experimental
results are presented to verify the performance of the proposed
power control scheme. Fig. 1. Active front-end rectifier.

Index Terms—AC–DC power conversion, power control, predic-

tive control.
specially wind energy generation, as shown in [9] where DPC
is used to control a doubly fed induction generator (DFIG). A
I. INTRODUCTION DPC strategy with constant switching frequency is presented in
[10] to control a DFIG wind turbine system.

T HE use of active front-end rectifiers (AFEs) offers several

advantages compared to a diode rectifier. It is possible to
have a bidirectional power flow, with sinusoidal input currents
and minimized harmonic distortion at unity power factor [1].
The dc-link voltage is regulated by controlling the input currents
or the input power, which allows to reduce the capacitor size [2].
These converters can also be used as active filters as shown in
[3] and [4], when connected in parallel with a nonlinear load.
Rectifier control methods can be classified, as presented in
[5], as voltage–oriented control (VOC) and direct power control
(DPC). In VOC, the input active and reactive power are regu-
lated indirectly by controlling the input currents, which are ori-
ented with respect to the line voltage vector [6]. This method
presents good dynamic and static behavior; however, its per-
formance depends on the quality of the current control strate-
gies. With DPC, the active and reactive power are estimated,
using current measurements, and controlled directly with hys-
teresis controllers and a switching table similar to the one used
in direct torque control (DTC) [7], [8]. Power control has an
important application in some renewable energy systems and
Manuscript received February 13, 2007; revised June 12, 2007. Current
version published November 19, 2008. This work was supported in part by
the Chilean National Fund of Scientific and Technological Development
(FONDECYT) under Grant 1050549, in part by the Industrial Electronics and
Mechatronics Millennium Science Nucleus, and in part by the Universidad
Técnica Federico Santa. Recommended for publication by Associate Editor J.
Espinoza.
P. Cortés and J. Rodríguez are with the Department of Electronics Engi-
neering, Universidad Técnica Federico Santa María, Valparaíso 2390123, Chile
(e-mail: patricio.cortes@usm.cl).
P. Antoniewicz and M. Kazmierkowski are with the Institute of Control
and Industrial Electronics, Warsaw University of Technology, Warsaw 00-662,
Poland.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPEL.2008.2002065
0885-8993/$25.00 © 2008 IEEE
Several predictive control algorithms have found application
in converter control over the last years. A well-known approach
is deadbeat control, and has been applied to current control in in-
verters [11]–[14], rectifiers [15], multilevel active rectifiers [16],
active filters [17], [18], power factor preregulators [19], and un-
interruptible power supplies [20]. It uses the model of the system
to calculate the voltage reference in order to make the current
reach its reference in one modulation period. Then, the voltage is
applied using a pulsewidth modulator. The model of the system
is used in [21] to calculate the width of the different modulation
intervals. Model predictive control (MPC) is another family of
predictive controllers that uses a model of the system to predict
the behavior of the variables until a certain horizon of time, and
a cost function is used as a criterion to select the optimal future
actions [22], [23]. In order to reduce the big computational ef-
fort needed to solve the optimization online, in [23], the major
calculation tasks are made offline, reducing the MPC algorithm
to a search tree that can be implemented in a real system. An-
other approach to simplify the MPC is to model the converter as
a system with a finite number of states, and only one time step
can be considered for the optimization, as presented for the cur-
rent control in a matrix converter in [24], a three-phase inverter
in [25]–[27], and a three-level inverter in [28]. This way, all pos-
sible states can be evaluated online; then, the one that minimizes
the cost function is selected.
A predictive DPC is presented in this paper for the control
of the AFE. In the proposed MPC strategy, the finite number of
possible switching states of the converter are considered, evalu-
ating the effect of each one on the load current and input power.
The switching state that minimizes a cost function is selected
and applied during the next sampling period. The cost function
directly evaluates the input active and reactive power error for

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 27, 2008 at 10:06 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
CORTÉS et al.: DIRECT POWER CONTROL OF AN AFE USING PREDICTIVE CONTROL 2517

Fig. 2. Proposed control scheme for the rectifier.

the rectifier, avoiding the use of internal control loops and the B. Discrete-Time Model
modulator.
The predicted current is calculated using the discrete-time
equation
II. CONVERTER MODEL

A. Space Vector Model (6)

The AFE rectifier can be modeled as shown in Fig. 1. The
rectifier is a fully controlled bridge with power transistors, con-
nected to the three-phase supply voltages using the filter in-
ductances and resistances .
The input current dynamics can be described in the stationary
frame by the vector equation
obtained form discretizing (1) for a sampling time .
The discretization is made by approximating the derivative as
the difference over one sampling period
(7)

(1) This discretization method has been selected for simplicity.

However, it is possible to use another more accurate method,
where is the input current vector, is the supply line voltage, but for fast sampling frequencies, the coefficients of the dis-
and is the voltage generated by the converter. crete-time models are almost the same.
The input current vector is related to the phase currents by the Considering the input voltage and current vectors in orthog-
equation onal coordinates, the predicted instantaneous input active and
reactive power can be expressed by equations
(2)

where . Voltages and are defined in a sim- (8)

ilar way

(3) (9)

The voltage is determined by the switching state of the where is the predicted input current vector, for a given
converter and the dc-link voltage, and can be expressed by the voltage vector generated by the rectifier .
equation For a small sampling time, with respect to the grid funda-
mental frequency, it can be assumed that .
(4) However, if the sampling time is not small enough to consider
the grid voltage constant between two sampling intervals, the fu-
where is the dc-link voltage and is the switching state ture grid voltage can be calculated by compensating
vector of the rectifier defined as the angle of the voltage vector for one sampling time

(5) (10)

where , and are the switching states of each rectifier where is the angle advance of the grid voltage vector
leg, as shown in Fig. 1, and take the value of 0 if is OFF, or in one sampling interval and is the angular frequency of the
1 if is ON . grid voltage.

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 27, 2008 at 10:06 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
2518
Fig. 3. Performance of the input power control in steady-state operation.
(a) Without delay compensation. (b) With delay compensation.
To regulate the dc-link voltage, a PI controller is used. The
output of the PI corresponds to the power needed to compen-
sate the error in the dc-link voltage. This variable has been des-
ignated as the active power reference .
C. Compensation of the Control Delay
When implementing the predictive controller in a real system,
some consideration must be taken into account with respect to
the calculation time. As presented in (6), the prediction of the
current is calculated using the measured current
and voltage , and assuming that the selected converter
voltage is also applied at instant . It is not possible due
to the time needed to perform all the calculations of the control
algorithm, and this assumption leads to errors in the prediction
when implemented. This problem can be solved by considering
this delay in the predictive model.
Now assuming that the selected voltage will be applied at in-
stant , it is required to predict the behavior of the current
Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 27, 2008 at 10:06 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 23, NO. 5, SEPTEMBER 2008
Fig. 4. Behavior of the predictive power control for a step in the active power
reference from 750 to 1500 W. (a) Active and reactive power. (b) Input
voltage, input current, and converter voltage.
until time . By time-shifting (6) one step forward, an ex-
pression for is obtained
(11)
where is calculated using the current and voltage
measurements, and considering the converter voltage
selected in the previous sampling time. Converter voltage
is the voltage to be applied.
III. CONTROL OF THE POWER CONVERTER
For the rectifier, active and reactive input powers are con-
trolled, so the cost function evaluates the error in the input
power. The switching state of the converter is changed in
equidistant time instants and is constant during a whole sam-
pling interval. On each sampling interval, the control strategy
CORTÉS et al.: DIRECT POWER CONTROL OF AN AFE USING PREDICTIVE CONTROL 2519

Fig. 5. Performance of the input power control for a load step from 150 to 100
. Fig. 7. Active power, reactive power, and input currents considering errors in
the inductance value.

Fig. 8. Spectrum of the input current.

The active power control is intended to match the output

Fig. 6. Operation at different supply power displacement factors: step in the
reactive power reference from to
selects the switching state that will be applied during the next
interval.
The proposed predictive power control has no internal control
loops and does not need external modulators. The currents are
forced by directly controlling the active and reactive powers.
The block diagram of the control strategy is shown in Fig. 2.
The input currents are measured and the future current
is calculated using the applied converter voltage
. Predictions of the future current are gen-
erated for each one of the seven possible voltage vectors
generated by the AFE. These predictions are used to calculate
the future input active and reactive power, and
, using (8) and (9) shifted one step ahead in time.
Each prediction of and is evaluated by
the cost function . set to
The cost function summarizes the desired behavior of the
rectifier: minimize the reactive power and control the active
power to be equal to a reference value
power and control the dc-link voltage, and its reference must
consider the output power and the power required for the dc
. link to reach its reference.
Each possible voltage vector will generate a dif-
ferent value of the cost function . The voltage vector that
minimizes the function, i.e., the error in the input power,
will be selected and applied during the next sampling interval.
The presented control strategy is an application of model pre-
dictive control for plants whose input is restricted to belong to
a finite set, which means that the proposed controller is a non-
linear controller, so it is not possible to analyze stability using
standard methods like poles loci. The input filter of the con-
verter is a first-order stable plant, and it has been shown in [22]
that states of a stable system are always bounded and either con-
verge toward a fixed point or toward a limit cycle.
IV. SIMULATION RESULTS
The behavior of the proposed control scheme was simulated
for a 5-kW converter, and the sampling time for the control was
. The parameters of the system used for sim-
ulation are mH,
.
Operation in steady state is shown in Fig. 3. The input voltage,
input current, and the converter voltage when the predictive
(12) model does not include the control delay are shown in Fig. 3(a).

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 27, 2008 at 10:06 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
2520 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 23, NO. 5, SEPTEMBER 2008

Fig. 9. Experimental results: steady-state operation. 1: input voltage; 2: input Fig. 10. Experimental results: step in the active power reference from 750 to
current; 3: converter voltage. (a) Without compensation of the control delay. (b) 1500 W. (a) (Top) Active power. (Bottom) Reactive power. (b) 1: input voltage;
With compensation of the control delay. 2: input current; 3: converter voltage; 4: number of selected voltage.

It is possible to observe that the distortion in the input current

can be considerably reduced when the control delay is consid- The operation at different supply displacement power factors
ered in the model, as shown in Fig. 3(b). is shown in Fig. 6. The reactive power reference presents a step
The performance of the power control for the rectifier was from to , while the active
tested applying a step in the active power reference . The power reference is constant at . The phase shift
external PI controller used for voltage control is disconnected between the voltage and current is also shown for this change in
during this test. As shown in Fig. 4(a), the power tracking is the reactive power.
very fast and there is no coupling between the active and reactive The effect of errors in the parameter values is presented in
power. The input currents, shown in Fig. 4(b), are sinusoidal and Fig. 7. This plot is divided into three time sections, starting with
in phase with the line voltages. an inductance value of in the model, i.e., 200%
Results for the predictive DPC inside a voltage control loop of the real value; between time and , there
are shown in Fig. 5 for a step in the dc load. The active power ref- is no error, and after time , an inductance value of
erence, generated by the voltage controller, is followed with fast 5 mH is used in the model. Since the active power reference
dynamics and without affecting the reactive power. The input is achieved in all cases, it can be observed that the ripple is
currents for this test are also shown. increased when a wrong value is used in the model. In the case

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 27, 2008 at 10:06 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
CORTÉS et al.: DIRECT POWER CONTROL OF AN AFE USING PREDICTIVE CONTROL
Fig. 11. Experimental results: effect of error in the inductance value. 1: input
voltage; 2: input current; 3: converter voltage. (a) % of nominal value.
(b) % of nominal value.
of the reactive power, some steady-state error appears when an
inductance value of 5 mH is assumed in the model. Errors in the
resistance value have little effect in the performance of the
proposed control scheme.
The input current spectrum is shown in Fig. 8. It can be ob-
served that although the harmonic distortion of the current is
low, the spectrum is distributed over a range of frequencies, and
this can be considered as a disadvantage of the control strategy.
The improvement of this aspect is a challenge for future research
work.
V. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
The experimental setup was composed by a Danfoss
VLT5005 converter connected to the grid through a filter in-
ductance. The control system is based on a dspace 1103 board
with a sampling frequency of kHz. The line voltage
Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 27, 2008 at 10:06 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
2521
has an amplitude of 150 V and frequency 50 Hz, the input filter
have an inductance mH and resistance ,
and the dc-link capacitor .
The line voltage, line current, and converter voltage in steady-
state operation are shown in Fig. 9(a). The same variables in the
steady state operation are shown in Fig. 9(b) when the compen-
sation of the control delay is applied. The current ripple is re-
duced and the switching frequency of the converter is increased
without increasing the sampling frequency. The active power
reference has been set to 1500 W for both cases.
The behavior of the system for a step in the active power ref-
erence from 750 to 1500 W is shown in Fig. 10(a), while
the reactive power reference is zero. The proposed control
presents a fast dynamic response and decoupled active and re-
active powers. The input voltage and current for one phase are
shown in Fig. 10(b) for the same test. Input currents are sinu-
soidal and in phase with the line voltage.
The effect of errors in the model parameter values is shown
in Fig. 11 for errors in the filter inductance value. It is shown
that considering inductances of 50% and 150% of the nominal
value in the predictive model implies an increase of the current
ripple.
VI. CONCLUSION
The strategy introduced in this paper is simple and easy to
understand and generates sinusoidal input currents with unity
power factor without having any type of current controllers or
modulators. The proposed system presents a fast dynamic re-
sponse directly controlling the input power.
Some implementation issues have been studied, such as com-
pensation of the control delay, thus improving the performance
of the predictive power control strategy. The proposed system
has proved to be robust when errors in the inductance values are
present.
This control strategy very advantageously uses the discrete
nature of the power converters and the microprocessor used in
the control. The amount of calculations needed to predict the
behavior of the variables for all possible switching states can
be performed very fast and without problems by several digital
signal processors available today. As a consequence, predictive
control is a very promising alternative for the future of power
electronics.
REFERENCES
[1] J. Rodriguez, J. Dixon, J. Espinoza, J. Pont, and P. Lezana, “PWM
regenerative rectifiers: State of the art,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol.
52, no. 1, pp. 5–22, Feb. 2005.
[2] L. Malesani, L. Rossetto, P. Tenti, and P. Tomasin, “AC/DC/AC PWM
converter with reduced energy storage in the DC link,” IEEE Trans.
Ind. Appl., vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 287–292, Mar./Apr. 1995.
[3] S. Kwak and H. Toliyat, “Design and rating comparisons of PWM
voltage source rectifiers and active power filters for AC drives with
unity power factor,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 20, no. 5, pp.
1133–1142, Sep. 2005.
[4] M. Cichowlas, M. Malinowski, M. P. Kazmierkowski, D. Sobczuk, and
P. Rodriguez, “Active filtering function of three-phase PWM boost rec-
tifier under different line voltage conditions,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Elec-
tron., vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 410–419, Apr. 2005.
[5] M. Malinowski, M. P. Kazmierkowski, and A. M. Trzynadlowski, “A
comparative study of control techniques for PWM rectifiers in ac ad-
justable speed drives,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 18, no. 6, pp.
1390–1396, Nov. 2003.
2522
[6] T. G. Habetler, “A space vector-based rectifier regulator for AC/DC/AC
converters,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 30–36, Jan.
1993.
[7] T. Noguchi, H. Tomiki, S. Kondo, and I. Takahashi, “Direct power con-
trol of PWM converter without power-source voltage sensors,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 473–479, May/Jun. 1998.
[8] M. Malinowski, M. Jasinski, and M. P. Kazmierkowski, “Simple direct
power control of three-phase PWM rectifier using space-vector mod-
ulation (DPC-SVM),” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 51, no. 2, pp.
447–454, Apr. 2004.
[9] L. Xu and P. Cartwright, “Direct active and reactive power control of
DFIG for wind energy generation,” IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol.
21, no. 3, pp. 750–758, Sep. 2006.
[10] D. Zhi and L. Xu, “Direct power control of DFIG with constant
switching frequency and improved transient performance,” IEEE
Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 110–118, Mar. 2007.
[11] G. Bode, P. C. Loh, M. J. Newman, and D. G. Holmes, “An improved
robust predictive current regulation algorithm,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl.,
vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 1720–1733, Nov. 2005.
[12] S.-M. Yang and C.-H. Lee, “A deadbeat current controller for field ori-
ented induction motor drives,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 17,
no. 5, pp. 772–778, Sep. 2002.
[13] Y. A. R. I. Mohamed and E. F. El-Saadany, “An improved deadbeat
current control scheme with a novel adaptive self-tuning load model
for a three-phase PWM voltage-source inverter,” IEEE Transactions
Ind. Electron., vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 747–759, Apr. 2007.
[14] Y. A. R. I. Mohamed and E. F. El-Saadany, “Robust high band-
width discrete-time predictive current control with predictive internal
model—A unified approach for voltage-source PWM converters,”
IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 126–136, Jan. 2008.
[15] Y. Nishida, O. Miyashita, T. Haneyoshi, H. Tomita, and A. Maeda,
“A predictive instantaneous-current PWM controlled rectifier with
AC-side harmonic current reduction,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol.
44, no. 3, pp. 337–343, Jun. 1997.
[16] P. Zanchetta, D. B. Gerry, V. G. Monopoli, J. C. Clare, and P. W.
Wheeler, “Predictive current control for multilevel active rectifiers with
reduced switching frequency,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no.
1, pp. 163–172, Jan. 2008.
[17] L. Malesani, P. Mattavelli, and S. Buso, “Robust dead-beat current con-
trol for PWM rectifier and active filters,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol.
35, no. 3, pp. 613–620, May/Jun. 1999.
[18] J. Mossoba and P. W. Lehn, “A controller architecture for high band-
width active power filters,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 18, no.
1, pp. 317–325, Jan. 2003.
[19] P. Mattavelli, G. Spiazzi, and P. Tenti, “Predictive digital control of
power factor preregulators with input voltage estimation using distur-
bance observers,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 20, no. 1, pp.
140–147, Jan. 2005.
[20] P. Mattavelli, “An improved deadbeat control for UPS using dis-
turbance observers,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 52, no. 1, pp.
206–212, Feb. 2005.
[21] G. Brando and A. D. Pizzo, “A predictive control technique for PWM-
rectifier in vector controlled induction motor drives,” in Proc. IEEE Int.
Symp. Ind. Electron. (ISIE 2002), L’Aquila, Italy, Jul. 8–11, 2002, pp.
1196–1200.
[22] D. Quevedo, G. Goodwin, and J. Dona, “Finite constraint set receding
horizon quadratic control,” Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control, vol. 14,
pp. 355–377, 2004.
[23] A. Linder and R. Kennel, “Model predictive control for electrical
drives,” in Proc. IEEE-PESC 2005, Recife, Brazil, Jun. 12–16, 2005,
pp. 1793–1799.
[24] S. Muller, U. Ammann, and S. Rees, “New time-discrete modulation
scheme for matrix converters,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 52, no.
6, pp. 1607–1615, Dec. 2005.
[25] J. Rodríguez, J. Pontt, C. Silva, P. Correa, P. Lezana, P. Cortés, and
U. Ammann, “Predictive current control of a voltage source inverter,”
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 495–503, Feb. 2007.
[26] J. Rodríguez, J. Pontt, C. Silva, M. Salgado, S. Rees, U. Ammann, P.
Lezana, R. Huerta, and P. Cortés, “Predictive control of a three-phase
inverter,” IEE Electronics Letters, vol. 40, no. 9, pp. 561–562, Apr. 29,
2004.
[27] P. Cortes, J. Rodriguez, D. E. Quevedo, and C. Silva, “Predictive cur-
rent control strategy with imposed load current spectrum,” IEEE Trans.
Power Electron., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 612–618, Mar. 2008.
[28] R. Vargas, P. Cortes, U. Ammann, J. Rodriguez, and J. Pontt, “Pre-
dictive control of a three-phase neutral-point-clamped inverter,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 2697–2705, Oct. 2007.
Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 27, 2008 at 10:06 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 23, NO. 5, SEPTEMBER 2008
Patricio Cortés (S’05–M’08) received the Engi-
neering and M.Sc. degrees in electronic engineering
and the Ph.D. degree from the Universidad Tecnica
Federico Santa Maria (UTFSM), Valparaiso, Chile,
in 2004 and 2008, respectively.
In 2003, he joined the Department of Electronics
Engineering, UTFSM, where he is currently a
Research Associate. In 2007, he visited the Institute
of Control and Industrial Electronics, Warsaw Uni-
versity of Technology, Poland. His current research
interests include power electronics, adjustable speed
drives, and predictive control.
José Rodríguez (M’81–SM’94) received the En-
gineering degree from the Universidad Tecnica
Federico Santa Maria, Valparaiso, Chile, in 1977,
and the Dr.-Ing. degree from the University of Er-
langen, Erlangen, Germany, 1985, both in electrical
engineering. He works Since 1977, he has been
with the Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria,
where he is currently a Professor and the President.
During his sabbatical leave in 1996, he was respon-
sible for the mining division of the Siemens Corpo-
ration, Chile. He has a large consulting experience in
the mining industry, especially in the application of large drives like cyclocon-
verter-fed synchronous motors for semiautogenous grinding (SAG) mills, high-
power conveyors, controlled drives for shovels, and power quality issues. He
was engaged in research on multilevel inverters and new converter topologies.
His current research interests include power electronics and electrical drives.
He has authored or coauthored more than 130 refereed journal and conference
papers and contributed to one chapter in the Power Electronics Handbook (Aca-
demic, 2006).
Patrycjusz Antoniewicz (S’05) received the M.Sc.
degree in electrical engineering from the Institute of
Control and Industrial Electronics, Warsaw Univer-
sity of Technology, Warsaw, Poland, in 2004.
During 2006, he was visiting Technical University
of Federico Santa Maria, Chile. He is currently with
Warsaw University of Technology. He has authored
or coauthored more than 15 technical papers. His cur-
rent research interests include predictive control of
active rectifiers and digital signal processing (DSP)
applications.
Marian P. Kazmierkowski (M’89–SM’91–F’98)
received the M.Sc., Ph.D., and Dr. Sc. degrees in
electrical engineering from the Institute of Control
and Industrial Electronics (ICIE), Warsaw University
of Technology, Warsaw, Poland, in 1968, 1972, and
1981, respectively.
From 1967 to 1980, he was an Assistant Professor
at the ICIE, where, since 1987, he has been a
Professor and the Director. From 1980 to 1983,
he was an Alexander von Humboldt Fellow at
Rheinisch-Westfalische Technische Hochschule
(RWTH) Aachen, West Germany. From 1986 to 1987, he was a Visiting
Professor at Norwegian Institute of Technology (NTH), Trondheim, Norway.
He was a Visiting Professor at the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, in
1990, at Aalborg University, Denmark, in 1990 and 1995, and at the University
of Padova, Italy, in 1993. From 1996 to 2000, he was a Coordinating Professor
of the International Danfoss Professor Program, Aalborg University. From
1996 to 2004, he was an Elected Member of the State Committee for Scientific
Research, Poland. He was also the Director of the Centre of Excellence on
Power Electronics Intelligent Control for Energy Conservation—PELINCEC
2003–2006 (European Framework Program V), ICIE. He is the author or
coauthor of over 300 technical papers and reports, as well as 13 books and
textbooks. He has coauthored the book Automatic Control of Converter-Fed
Drives (Elsevier, 1994), and coedited and coauthored the compendium Control
CORTÉS et al.: DIRECT POWER CONTROL OF AN AFE USING PREDICTIVE CONTROL 2523

in Power Electronics (Academic, 2002). He is engaged in experimental research
and theoretical work on electric drives and industrial electronics.
Dr. Kazmierkowski was the recipient of an Honorary Doctorate degree from
Aalborg University in 2004 and the Dr. Eugene Mittelmann Achievement Award
by the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society in 2005. Since 2007, he has been an
elected Corresponding Member of the Polish Academy of Science. He was the
Chairman of the 1996 IEEE International Symposium on Industrial Electronics,
Warsaw, Poland. He has been the Vice President for publication in the IEEE
Industrial Electronics Society (1999–2001). He was the Editor-in-Chief of the
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS (2004–2006). He is also
a member of many IEEE committees and conference organizing committees.
In 2007, he was the General Co-Chair of the IEEE European Conference (EU-
ROCON) 2007, Warsaw. He is the Past-Chairman of the IEEE Poland Section.

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 27, 2008 at 10:06 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.