This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been

fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

– 1 –

aaa Fast Dynamic Control of Medium Voltage Drives

operating at Very Low Switching Frequency – an Overview
Joachim Holtz, Fellow, IEEE, and Nikolaos Oikonomou, Student Member, IEEE
Electrical Machines and Drives Group
University of Wuppertal
42097 Wuppertal – Germany

Abstract – Medium voltage ac machines fed by high-pow-

uir /rσ kr rstr
er inverters operate at low switching frequency to restrain
the switching losses of the power semiconductor devices. Par-
ticular care is then required in the design of the drive control us 1 is yr
rs t'σ lm tr
system. The signal delay caused by low switching frequency
jtσ' jtr
operation increases undesired cross-coupling effects in vec-
tor controlled schemes. These are not sufficiently compensat-
stator rotor
ed by established methods like feedforward control.
Improvements are achieved by more accurate modelling of ws wr
the machine and the inverter. An adequate controller emerg-
yr
es, having a transfer function with complex coefficients. The 1 Te w
high harmonic distortion due to the low switching frequency kr tm
is a trade-off.
is 2 TL
Using synchronous optimal pulsewidth as an alternative
permits reducing the switching frequency without increasing Fig. 1 Signal flow graph of an induction motor modelled in syn-
the harmonics. The detrimental effects of conventional con- chronous coordinates
trol methods are eliminated by forcing the harmonic compo-
nents on an optimal spatial trajectory. Deadbeat behavior and verters is given in this paper. The investigations concentrate
complete decoupling is thus achieved. on the three-level inverter as a preferred topology for medi-
The performance of the aforementioned schemes is com- um voltage drives. The results are obtained by mathematical
pared based on mathematical analyses and experimental re- analyses and confirmed by experiments.
sults.
Keywords: Induction motor, medium voltage inverters, low II. SYSTEM MODELLING
switching frequency, current control, trajectory tracking A. The induction motor
The electromagnetic subsystem of an induction motor is
I. INTRODUCTION described using the stator current vector is and the rotor flux
Medium voltage ac drives based on voltage source invert- linkage vector yr as state variables:
ers are in increasing demand for numerous industrial applica- di s kr 1
tions. The requirement of high dynamic performance can be τ s'
dτ
+ i s = − jω sτ s' i s +
rsτ r
(1 − jωτ r )y r + r us (1a)
met by employing vector control schemes; these provide large s
control bandwidth and decoupled control of torque and exci- dyr
τr + yr = − jω r τ r yr + lm i s , (1b)
tation. dτ
It is desirable to operate medium voltage inverters at low where ts' = sls/rs is the transient stator time constant,
switching frequency [1]. This reduces the switching losses of s = 1 – lm2/(ls lr) is the total leakage factor, ls and lr are the
the power semiconductors and thus permits increasing the fun- respective inductances of the stator and the rotor, rs = rs +
damental output current. It is a disadvantage, though, that the kr2rr is an equivalent resistance where rs is the stator resis-
signal delays within the control loop increase as the switch- tance and rr is the rotor resistance, kr = lm/r where lm is the
ing frequency reduces. The control bandwidth then decreas- main inductance, tr is the rotor time constant, ω s is the stator
es, and dynamic decoupling between torque and flux becomes frequency, w r is the rotor (slip) frequency, and w is the
less effective. Operating at low switching frequency also in- angular mechanical velocity of the rotor. All quantities are
creases the harmonic distortion. The use of optimal pulsewidth normalized using the rated per-phase amplitudes of stator
modulation (PWM) techniques is then appropriate. voltage and current as base quantities. Time is normalized as
A performance comparison of different techniques for pulse- t = wsRt, where wsR is the rated stator frequency. Equations
width modulation and drive control with medium voltage in- (1) are visualized in the signal flow graph Fig. 1, [2].
Copyright © 2007 IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. Transforming (1) to the frequency domain yields the trans-
However, permission to use this material for any other purposes must be fer function of the motor:
obtained from the IEEE by sending a request to pubs-permissions@ieee.org
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

– 2 –

aaa Is ( s ) the symmetry of its track, we have ih = 0 when t0/2 has elapsed,
Fm ( s ) = (2) i.e. at the end of each half-cycle (3). A current signal sampled
Us ( s )
τ r s + 1 + jω r τ r at this time instant equals the fundamental current is1.
=
rσ (τ σ' s + 1 + jw sτ σ') (τ r s + 1 + jw r τ r ) − k1 (1 − jwτ r )
C. Inverter and sampling delay
Digital signal processing and the delay introduced by the
where k1 = kr lm/(rstr). PWM inverter are approximated by a transfer function of first-
order, referred to in synchronous coordinates
B. Carrier modulation
Carrier modulation allocates the six commutations of a six- Us ( s ) 1
Fd ( s ) = = , (5)
pulse inverter periodically within constant time intervals T0 = U* ( s ) τ d s + 1 + j ω sτ d
1/fs, where fs is the switching frequency [3, 4]. The resulting
where Us(s) and U *(s) are the Laplace transforms of the
fundamental output voltage u1 depends on the modulation
respective output and input signals us(t ) and u*(t ). The
index m = u1 /u1six-step ,
term jws td in the denominator of (5) results from the repre-
where u1six-step = 2 ud/π is
.4 sentation of the delay element in synchronous coordinates.
jℑm SVM the fundamental voltage
The normalized delay time td = 1.5 wsR/(2fs) [6], where 2fs is
at six-step operation, and
the sampling frequency and fs is the switching frequency.
SOM .2 ud is the dc link voltage.
The signal flow graph of the delay element (5) is shown as
A preferred variant of
part of Fig. 3.
carrier modulation is
– .2 .2 .4
space vector modulation
III. LINEAR CURRENT CONTROLLERS
ℜe
[5]. Among carrier mod-
ulation schemes, this Using space vector modulation permits the acquisition of
method produces the low- the instantaneous fundamental current component is1. This
est harmonic distortion favors the implementation of fast closed-loop stator current
– .4 [3], and also permits the control without the need of having a low-pass filter in the
instantaneous acquisition feedback path to reduce the current harmonics. Limiting the
Fig. 2 Trajectories of the steady- of the fundamental com- current reference vector in magnitude is a means for overload
state harmonic current ih at space ponent i s1 of the stator protection.
vector modulation (SVM) and at current vector is of an in-
synchronous optimal modulation A. PI current control
verter-fed machine.
(SOM); modulation index m = 0.85, The current control system operates in field coordinates.
switching frequency fs = 200 Hz
The modulator gener-
ates a sequence in time of Its signal flow graph is shown in Fig. 3. It is customary when
three switching state vectors ua, ub, u0 per half-cycle T0/2, designing the current controllers to neglect all signals that
were ua and ub are the two vectors in closest spatial neigh- multiply by imaginary gain coefficients. The respective sig-
borhood to the reference vector u*, and u0 stands for one of nal lines are shown in grey in Fig. 3. Given this approxima-
the zero vectors u0{+ + +} or u7{– – –}, respectivly. Two tion, the respective d- and q-component signals of the current
subsequent half-cycles are defined as loop result independent from each other. A PI controller is
assigned to each current component. The respective transfer
u0{t0/2} … ua{ta} … ub{tb} … u7{t0/2} (3a) functions are
u7{t0/2} … ub{tb} … ua{ta} … u0{t0/2} (3b) U*( s ) τ s +1
Fr ( s ) = = gc i
(6) ,
where ta, tb and t0 are the respective on-durations of the D Is ( s ) τ is
switching state vectors ua, ub and u0. The symmetric ar-
where ti is the integration time constant and gc is the propor-
rangement of switching states
in the two half-cycles (3)
makes the trajectory of the
harmonic current uir /rσ kr rstr
current
D is controller sampling
ih = is − is1 (4) delay
is* u* us 1 is yr
describe a closed pattern, gc,ti td rs tσ' lm tr
centered in the origin of the jtd jtσ' jtr
complex plane as shown by is
the red curve in Fig. 2. stator rotor
During the on-duration of ws wr
a zero vector, the trajectory ih
of the harmonic current pass- w
(≈ const.)
es through the origin of the Fig. 3 Current controlled induction motor, signal flow graph. The signals
complex plane, Fig. 2. Given represented by shaded lines are conventionally neglected in the controller design
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

– 3 –

80 A 80 A
aaa
60 60
jℑm{is} jℑm{is}
i q1 40 i q1 40
iq1 iq1
is1 is1
20 t 20 t
0 0
20 A 20 A
id1
0 0
id1
i d1 – 20 i d1 – 20
a) b) a) b)
– 40 – 40
0 20 40 60 ms – 40 0 40 A 0 20 40 60 ms – 40 0 40 A
t ℜe{is} t ℜe{is}

Fig. 4 q-current step response, PI-controller; operation at rated Fig. 6 q-current step response, PI-controller with feedforward com-
speed and 200 Hz switching frequency, (a) fundamental current pensation; operation at rated speed and 200 Hz switching frequen-
components, (b) trajectory of the fundamental current space vector, cy, (a) fundamental current components, (b) trajectory of the funda-
marked by circles at every 5 ms mental current space vector, marked by circles at every 5 ms

tional controller gain. The open loop transfer function be- – 170% deviation from its constant reference value. The ef-
comes fect leads to a temporary demagnetization of the machine. Such
undesired behavior is the consequence of using an unsuited
gc τ i s + 1 1 1 controller and neglecting the imaginary gain coefficients in
Fo ( s ) = . (7)
rs τ i s τ d s + 1 τ σ' s + 1 its design.
Letting ti = ts' eliminates the pole at – 1/ts'. The gain gc =
B. PI current control with feedforward compensation
ts'/2td is adjusted for critical damping which yields the closed
loop transfer function The dynamics of the current control loop can be improved
by compensating the motion induced voltage jwsts' is in the
F0 ( s ) I (s) 1 stator winding through a feedforward signal. Fig. 5 shows the
Fc ( s ) = = s* = . (8)
F0 ( s ) +1 I ( s ) 2τ 2 s 2 + 2τ s + 1 signal flow diagram. The signals represented by shaded lines
s d d
are again neglected in the controller design. The feedforward
This design procedure, although being based on an approx- signal is chosen as jws l̂s is which, including the gain factor
imated transfer function, gives satisfactory results if the sam- 1/r s at the input of the stator delay element, amounts to
jwsts' is. In the foregoing equation, l̂s is the
estimated total leakage inductance. Not con-
sampling uir /rσ sidered in this compensation is the sampling
delay delay. The delay is negligible if t d << ts'
is* gc
u* us 1 is holds, which is only valid at higher switch-
ti td rs t'σ ing frequency. The larger delay at low switch-
jtd jtσ'
ing frequency leads to an incomplete com-
is jlˆs pensation. It is seen in the signal flow graph
PI controller stator winding
Fig. 3 that the compensation signal gets de-
ws layed in the process of digital sampling be-
fore it is used for cross-coupling compensa-
Fig. 5 Current control with feedforward compensation
tion. The compensation is therefore not fully
effective. Parameter errors in l̂s may deteri-
pling delay is negligible, t d << ts'. This applies for switching orate the situation.
frequencies of several kHz. The sampling delay is then small, The performance of feedforward compensation at low
permitting the controller to override the machine dynamics switching frequency is illustrated in Fig. 6. Cross-coupling
and to independently force the stator current to its command- still exists with a temporary deviation of the d-current by
ed value. to – 125%. Conditions would turn worse if an error existed in
The eigenbehavior of the machine cannot be overturned if the estimated leakage inductance l̂ s. Parameter sensitivity is
t d and ts' have the same order of magnitude. This is demon- a common demerit of feedforward control.
strated in the oscillogram Fig. 4, showing a step response of The deficiencies of this approach persist even at increased
the q-current component at very low switching frequency, fs switching frequency (e.g. 1.1 kHz, [7]). These shortcomings
= 200 Hz. Cross-coupling between the q- and d-current dom- indicate that PI current control is not a viable solution when
inates the response. The peak value of the d-current exhibits the inverter operates at low switching frequency.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

– 4 –

aaa complex controller rotor yr

tr tr
jtr jtr jtr
lm lm
kr rstr kr rstr
w w wr wr
w ws

sampling uir /rσ

t'
s delay
gc rs jtσ' is
is* u* us 1
is
td rs t'σ
jtd jtd jtσ'
is td
stator
ws

Fig. 7 Current control using a PI-controller with complex gain coefficients

C. Current controller with complex eigenvalues The transient response Fig. 8 shows that cross-coupling is
The complex coefficients in the transfer functions of the almost eliminated.
induction motor (2) and the sampling delay element (5) sug-
gest the design of a current controller having complex eigen- IV. TRAJECTORY TRACKING CONTROL
values [7]. The procedure starts from the transfer function of The primary objective is to operate a medium voltage in-
the plant verter at very low switching frequency such that the switch-
Is ( s ) 1 ing losses reduce and the power output increases. The related
Fp ( s ) = = (9) dynamic problems with respect to response time and cross-
U*( s ) τ d s + 1 + jωsτ d
coupling can be solved using a current controller having com-
τ r s + 1 + jω r τ r
⋅ plex eigenvalues, described in Section III-C. A remaining
rσ (τ σ' s + 1 + jw sτ σ') (τ r s + 1 + jω rτ r ) − k1 (1 − jwτ r ) problem is the high harmonic content of the machine currents.
which includes the delay (5) and the machine (2). Based on Its solution requires a different approach.
this equation, the current controller is obtained as
A. Synchronous optimal pulsewidth modulation
U* ( s ) τ s + 1 + jω sτ d Carrier modulation produces a fixed number of inverter
Fr ( s ) = = gc rσ ⋅ d (10)
D Is ( s ) (τ d s + 1) commutations per sampling interval; optimal modulation tech-
(τ σ' s + 1 + jwsτ σ') (τ r s + 1 + jω rτ r ) − k1 (1 − jwτ r )
⋅ 80 A
τ i s (τ r s + 1 + jω r τ r ) is1
60
The controller is designed such that the poles and the ze- jℑm{is}
i q1 40 iq1
roes of the plant are cancelled, and an integrating term is add-
ed for steady-state accuracy. The signal flow graph Fig. 7 il- 20
lustrates that a compensating element is provided in the con- t
troller for every delay element of the plant. 0
The open-loop transfer function Fo(s) = Fr(s) . Fp(s), obtained 20 A
from (9) and (10), results as a second-order system with real
0
coefficients:
i d1 – 20 id1
1 a) b)
Fo( s ) = Fr ( s ) Fp( s ) = gc . (11)
τ i s (τ d s + 1) – 40
0 20 40 60 ms – 40 0 40 A
This equation is identical to (7) and hence also (8) applies t ℜe{is}
here. There is a difference, though, since no approximations
have been made in the controller design. Since the state Fig. 8 q-current step response, Current controller with complex
eigenvalues; operation at rated speed and 200 Hz switching fre-
variables in (8) are of complex nature, the two eigenvalues of quency, (a) fundamental current components, (b) trajectory of the
the characteristic equation (8) are single complex poles [7]. fundamental current space vector, marked by circles at every 5 ms
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

– 5 –

aaa optimal where uss(I) is the steady-state stator voltage defined

patterns by P (I), and ys(t1) is the stator flux vector at time
ud instant t1 at which the use of P (I) had started. The
arg(u*)
u* uk subscript ss refers to the steady-state. The trajectory
P(m,N) yss (I)(t) in (12) is optimal since it is generated by the

modulator
pattern pattern
select modifier = optimal pulse sequence uss(I), and since the initial
u* ~ value ys(I)(t1) in (12)
wsss
ω st1

yss
dˆ(t) Dys DP is y s(I) (t1 ) = ∫ uss(I) (α )dα − ys(I)(α = 0) , (13a)
optimal trajectory 0
trajectory controller
us 2π 2π

wsss yˆs
hybrid
M
3~
y s(I) (α = 0) = ∫ ∫ uss(I) (α ) dα 2 dα1 (13b)
w 0 0
observer
is defined such that it is located on the optimal flux
trajectory. Equation (13b) determines the initial value
Fig. 9 Self-controlled drive system with synchronous optimal pulsewidth in (13a) by taking the average over a full fundamental
modulation and flux trajectory tracking control period of the optimal flux trajectory.
It is now assumed that the pulse pattern changes at t2
> t1. The new pattern is P (II); it generates the voltage wave-
niques do not have this restriction. Instead, the commutations
form uss(II). The flux trajectory in interval II develops as
are distributed over a fundamental period in a defined manner
such that an optimum criterion is satisfied. Minimizing the t
total harmonic distortion is considered here [8]. y s (t ) = ∫ uss(II) (t ) dt + y s(I) (t2 ) .
(II)
(14)
The switching angles ak, k ∈ 1…N, are precalculated off- t2
line under assumed steady-state conditions. The angles are
stored in a memory table as pulse patterns P(m, N). The pat- This is not the optimal flux trajectory since its initial value
(I)(t ) at the time t of pattern change is not computed as in
terns are functions of the modulation index m and the pulse y s 2 2
number N = fs/f1. As N is integer, the pulse patterns result (13); it is rather (II)
carried over from the flux trajectory in
(I)
synchronized with the fundamental voltage and its subhar- interval I: ys (t2) = ys (t2) must hold since the stator flux
monic content is eliminated [9]. vector cannot instantaneously change. More general: It is not
The signal flow graph of a synchronous optimal pulsewidth possible to continue on the optimal trajectory after a pattern
modulator is shown in the upper portion of Fig. 9. The con- change, since any two steady-state flux trajectories that asso-
trolling input is the reference voltage vector u*. Its amplitude ciate to two different pulse patterns do not have the same
u* ∝ m selects the appropriate pulse pattern P(m, N) which is value at a given time instant. Switching from one pulse
then passed on to the modulator. The phase angle arg(u*) pattern to another therefore entails a displacement from the
determines the actual pulse location within the fundamental optimal flux trajectory.
period of the pattern. The resulting switching angles a k are
translated to switching instants tk = a k/w s ss, where w s ss is a 200 A
smoothed signal that averages the stator frequency w s, Sec- ia
tion IV-E. The output of the modulator is a sequence of dis- ia
0 a)
crete switching state vectors uk that control the inverter.
The comparison with space vector modulation, Fig. 2 and
in Fig. 10, shows that synchronous optimal modulation pro- – 200
duces much lower harmonic content of the stator currents. [10]. 0 10 20 30 40 50 ms
The difference between both methods reduces as m reduces. t
It is therefore preferred using space vector modulation in the 200 A
lower modulation range, e.g. at m < 0.3, [11]. ia
ia
B. The dynamic modulation error 0 b)
Steady-state operation with optimal pulse patterns is as-
sumed in the following discussion. A time interval I is con- – 200
sidered first in which the stator voltage is continuously de- 0 10 20 30 40 50 ms
rived from only one particular pulse pattern P (I). The trajec- t
tory of the stator flux linkage vector develops according to Fig. 10 Measured waveforms of the phase a stator current in a
t three-level inverter at 200 Hz switching frequency and 33.5 Hz
fundamental frequency; (a) space vector modulation, (b) synchro-
y ss(I) (t ) = ∫ uss(I) (t ) dt +y s(I) (t1 ) , (12) nous optimal modulation
t1
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

– 6 –

aaa90° which is used to modify the original pattern P(m, N) before it

controls the inverter.
ak 60
C. Stator flux trajectory tracking control
30 The trajectory controller in Fig. 9, through the instructions
N=1 N=2 DP, forces the estimated stator flux vector ŷs to follow the
0 optimal trajectory yss. Deviations are compensated by appro-
90° priately displacing the switching instants t i, i ∈ [1, 2, ..., n],
of the original pulse pattern P(m, N), where n is the total num-
ak 60 ber of switching transitions within the current sampling inter-
val.
30 A displacement Dt i in time of a switching transition si in a
N=3 N=4 particular phase at t i will increase or reduce the volt-second
0 contribution of the respective phase. The following cases ex-
0 0.5 m 1 0 0.5 m 1
ist in a three-level inverter:
Fig. 11 Optimal switching angles ak at different pulse numbers N • A positive transition at ti increases the phase potential
from –ud/2 to 0, or from 0 to +ud/2. Such transition is
The displacement is a dynamic modulation error. Particu- denoted si = +1. The resulting volt-seconds reduce, if t i
larly at low switching frequency, where the pulse durations is delayed by Dti > 0; they increase, if t i is advanced by
are large, can a deviation from the steady-state trajectory cause Dti < 0.
high current transients. These may even lead to overcurrent • A negative transition at ti decreases the phase potential
tripping [12]. from 0 to –ud/2 , or from +ud/2 to 0; it is denoted si = –1.
A strategy to minimize the dynamic modulation error fol- The resulting volt-seconds increase, if t i is delayed by
lows two steps: (i) modify any new pulse pattern prior to its Dti > 0; they decrease, if t i is advanced by Dti < 0.
use, based on a prediction of the dynamic modulation error, • If there is no commutation in the respective phase, then
and subsequently (ii) estimate and eliminate, to the extent si = 0.
possible, the dynamic modulation error during the subsequent
sampling interval. Similar instructions can be established for inverters pro-
An implementation of such scheme is shown in the lower ducing different voltage levels. The dc-link voltage ud in the
portion of Fig. 9. The optimal flux trajectory yss (t) of the pulse above instructions is normalized by the fundamental compo-
pattern P(m, N) in actual use is reconstructed in real-time ac- nent U1 = 2/p .Ud of the stator voltage at six-step operation of
cording to (12) and (13). The actual flux trajectory ŷs(t) is the inverter, where Ud is the dc link voltage in volts.
estimated by an observer. The dynamic modulation error is The values Dti are obtained by equating the required change
then computed as 2
D d* = − d =
(1⋅D da + aD db + a 2D dc ) (16)
ˆ t ) = y (t ) − yˆ (t ) (15) 3
d( ss s
of the dynamic modulation error with the effect of possible
This signal acts on a trajectory controller. The controller pulse displacements per phase, for example for phase a
generates a set of instructions DP per sampling interval,
n

3 d∑
1
wsss D da = u sai D t si , (17)
∠x i =1
1
(S) and similarly for phases b and c. The result is the possible
k ryˆr yˆs1 rs iˆs1
rs /sls change
wsss n
u* yˆs1 yˆs1 u*'
6 d∑
1
ts' ts' j Dd = u [(2 sai Dtai – sbi Dtbi − sci Dtci ) (18)
i =1
rotor + j 3 (sbi Dt bi – sci Dt ci )]
Dys e jd kr
Gs(w) of the complex dynamic modulation error
yˆs [d ] yrd within the sampling interval. A required
stator tr change Dd * (16) may not be executable
is
sls i s(F)
e jd lm tr since the switching transitions can be only
ŵ s
D
ŵ r d̂ displaced within the time limits of the cur-
[q ] 1 rent sampling interval. A remaining error
w N
w must be left for compensation in the subse-
quent interval.
In (16), 1, a and a2 are the respective uni-
Fig. 12 Hybrid observer for the estimation of fundamental machine quantities ty vectors in the directions of the phase axes
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.
aaa parameter
compensator
e jd wst0
u*' d̂ u* sync.-opt.
ejj
PWM
rotor flux
yr*
ys* Dys
yˆ r
speed e jd
w* d̂
is
hybrid
observer
yˆs1
w
w 3~
Fig. 13 The superimposed control system. The synchronous opti-
mal pulsewidth modulator is detailed in Fig. 9. The transformations
between the respective coordinate systems are performed by the
field angle d̂ .
a, b and c.
The trajectory controller in Fig. 9 uses the optimal trajecto-
ry yss as a the target, also during a dynamic process. The con-
troller then performs a pattern optimization in real-time.
D. The steady-state requirement
Ideal steady-state operation is difficult to establish in a drive
system. Signal noise and external disturbances inevitably gen-
erate minor, but perpetual excursions of the control signals
around the operating point. Using a noisy reference vector u*
to control the optimal modulator would create repeated pat-
tern changes. In consequence, dynamic modulation errors
would occur in every sampling interval. Although the trajec-
tory controller is designed to counteract the deviations, such
situation is undesirable for the following reasons:
• The volt-second error caused by a pattern change can be
substantial even when the noise-induced variations of the
reference voltage vector u* are small. This is because
the functions ak(m) of the optimal angles are discontin-
uous, Fig. 11. A small deviation of m may lead to large
displacements in time of the PWM pulses. A full com-
pensation is then only possible if favored by the particu-
lar locations of pulse transitions in the respective sam-
pling interval.
• Since dynamic modulation errors may appear in a rapid
sequence, the resulting deviations may accumulate to
large magnitudes before the trajectory controller can
counteract.
It is therefore expedient to maintain the modulator in an
approximate steady-state, so as to meet the condition at which
the pattern optimization was performed (Section IV-A).
E. The self-controlled machine
The requirement of near-steady-state operation of the mod-
ulator is met in an approach in which the terminal voltages of
– 7 –
the machine generate the reference voltage vector u* for the
modulator. The machine then controls itself, as shown in the
signal flow graph Fig. 9. This implies that any given steady-
ud state operation is perpetuated, unless external disturbances
uk change. It also implies that the drive system is not controlla-
=
~ ble. Controllability is established by separate means which
will be discussed in Section IV-F.
The full-order observer Fig. 12 that generates the required
us steady-state signals is implemented in a hybrid design. The
stator is modelled in stationary coordinates
Dd *
d yˆ s1 ˆ
τ s' + y s1 = k r yˆ r + Gs (ω )(yˆ s1 − yˆ s )+ τ s' u* (19a)
dτ
and the rotor in field coordinates
d yrd
τr + yrd = l m isd (19b)
M dτ
 lm iq 
δ =∫ + ω  dτ (19c)
 τ r yrd 
where ts' = sls/rs is the transient time constant of the stator
and d is the rotor field angle.
The stator model receives the reference voltage u* of the
modulator as an input. This is a signal without harmonic con-
tent. The model therefore generates the fundamental compo-
nent ŷs1 of the stator flux vector. A correcting signal ŷs1 – ŷs
is added to its input through a gain tensor Gs(w), [13, 14], to
account for model parameter mismatch.
The rotor model (19b, 19c) estimates the rotor field angle d̂
and the rotor flux vector ŷr. The latter is transformed to sta-
tionary coordinates to serve as an input to the stator model
(19a), and to generate the stator flux vector
yˆs = k ryˆr + sls i s . (20)
that forms part of the correcting signal ŷs1 – ŷs in (19a).
The output of the hybrid observer
yˆ − k yˆ
u*' = jω s ss yˆs1 + rs s1 r r (21)
sls
is a first estimate u*' of the reference voltage vector u*. In
(21), the second term represents the resistive voltage rs is.
The first term ws ss = arg(ŷr) is the steady-state stator fre-
quency. This smooth signal is obtained using the rotor equa-
tion (19b), dominated by the large rotor time constant tr, as a
filter. The signal flow is illustrated by the graph Fig. 12.
F. Decoupled control of torque and flux
The superimposed control system Fig. 13 consists of the
respective controllers for rotor flux and speed. Their output
signals are joined to form the complex reference signal ys*.
This signal is compared with the actual fundamental flux vec-
tor ŷs1 obtained from (19a). The result is the commanded
change Dys* of the stator flux vector, defined in rotor field
coordinates. Such signal would conventionally act as an input
to the pulsewidth modulator.
This is not viable when operating with synchronous opti-
mal pulse patterns. The modulator then requires a smooth ref-
erence input u*, a signal that must not be distorted by com-
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.
80 A
aaa
60
jℑm{is}
i q1 40 iq1
20
0 with complex gain coefficients. A second approach not only
20 A
id1
0
i d1 – 20
– 40
0 20 40 60 ms – 40
t ℜe{is}
Fig. 14 q-current step response, optimal trajectory tracking con-
trol; operation at rated speed and 200 Hz switching frequency, (a)
fundamental current components, (b) trajectory of the fundamental
current space vector, marked by a circle after 5 ms
manded changes from a superimposed control system, see
Section IV-D. The command input to the self-controlled sys-
tem Fig. 9 is therefore directed to the trajectory controller.
This subsystem is designed for a fast elimination of stator flux
deviations, Section IV-C. It is best suited to correct also the
error vector Dys of the superimposed control system. The
approach makes the control react in the fastest possible way.
Fig. 13 shows that error vector Dys , after its transforma-
tion to stationary coordinates, is added to the required change
Dd * of the dynamic modulation error. Both signals act on the
trajectory controller. Torque and flux control is thus achieved
by a direct manipulation of the pulse pattern. The approach
fully exploits the voltage margin of the inverter. The result-
ing response is therefore of the deadbeat type.
The error signal Dys is only nonzero during transient oper-
ation. At steady-state is the system controlled by u* through
the mechanism of self-control, Section IV-E. A steady-state
error Dys is therefore an indication that the observer parame-
ters in (19) are not correct. The effect of a parameter mis-
match can be eliminated through a modification of the ob-
server output signal u*'. The parameter compensator shown
in the upper portion of Fig. 13 is employed for this purpose.
A PI controller having a low proportional gain and a large
integrating time constant corrects the slow parameter chang-
es that would otherwise result in a persistent nonzero error
Dys . The first estimate u*' is thus converted into the effective
modulator input u*. The additional element ejwst0 compen-
sates the time delay t0 of the modulator by advancing the phase
angle of u*.
An oscillogram of the transient behavior is shown in Fig.
14. The large-signal step response from no-load to full load is
performed in a deadbeat fashion within two sampling inter-
vals without overshoot. Cross-coupling is almost zero.
V. SUMMARY
The switching frequency of medium voltage drives is rela-
tively low. This increases the signal delay in the control struc-
ture and intensifies the undesired cross-coupling between
torque and flux in vector controlled systems. Standard feed-
forward compensation reduces the effect, but may not be con-
– 8 –
sidered satisfactory if the switching frequency is well below
is1
1 kHz.
A strategy to solve this problem relies on modelling the
machine and the inverter without commonly employed ap-
t proximations. This permits the design of a current controller
addresses the dynamic problem, but also reduces the harmon-
ic distortion by introducing preoptimized synchronous pulse-
width modulation. This requires real-time optimization of the
pulse patterns during transients. The direct modification of
the pulse patterns enables deadbeat-like dynamic performance
0 40 A and eliminates cross-coupling.
VII. REFERENCES
1. Chih-Yi Huang, Chao-Peng Wei, Jung-Tai Yu, and Yeu-Jent
Hu, „Torque and Current Control of Induction Motor Drives for
Inverter Switching Frequency Reduction“, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electronics, Vol. 52, No. 5, Oct. 2005, pp. 1364-1371.
2. J. Holtz, „The Representation of AC Machine Dynamics by
Complex Signal Flow Graphs“, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electronics,
Vol. 42, No. 3, 1995, pp. 263-271.
3. J. Holtz, „Pulsewidth Modulation for Electronic Power Con-
verters“, Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 82, No. 8, Aug. 1994,
pp. 1194-1214.
4. T. Brückner and D. G. Holmes, „Optimal Pulse-Width Modula-
tion for Three-Level Inverters“, IEEE Trans. Power Electron-
ics, Vol. 20, No. 1, Jan. 2005, pp. 82-89.
5. A. Busse, J. Holtz, „Multiloop Control of a Unity Power Factor
Fast-Switching AC to DC Converter“, IEEE Power Electronics
Specialists Conference, 1982 Record, Cambridge/Ma., pp. 171-
179.
6. Pablo-F. Lara-Reyes, „Trajectory Tracking of Precalculated Pat-
terns for Current Source Rectifiers“, Ph.-D. Thesis, Wuppertal
University, 2006. ISBN 3-86130-777-4, Ed. Mainz Verlag,
Aachen, Germany, 2006.
7. J. Holtz, J. Quan, J. Pontt, J. Rodriguez, P. Newman and M.
Miranda, „Design of Fast and Robust Current Regulators for
Medium Voltage Drives Based on Complex State Variables“,
IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., Vol. 40, No. 5, Sep./Oct. 2004, pp.
1388-1397.
8. G. S. Buja, „Optimum Output Waveforms in PWM Inverters“.
IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., Vol. 16, No. 6, Nov./Dec. 1980, pp. 830
-836.
9. A. R. Beig, G. Narayanan, and V. T. Ranganathan, "Modified
SVPWM Algorithm for Three Level VSI With Synchronized
and Symmetrical Waveforms", IEEE Trans. Ind. Electronics,
Vol. 54, No. 1, Feb. 2007, pp. 486-494.
10. S. R. Bowes, and D. Holliday, „Optimal Regular-Sampled PWM
Inverter Control Techniques“, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electronics,
Vol. 54, No. 3, June 2007, pp. 1547-1559.
11. J. Holtz and N. Oikonomou, „Synchronous Optimal Pulsewidth
Modulation and Stator Flux Trajectory Control for Medium
Voltage Drives“, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., Vol. 43, No. 2, March/
April 2007, pp. 600-608.
12. J. Holtz and B. Beyer, „Fast Current Trajectory Control Based
on Synchronous Optimal Pulsewidth Modulation“, IEEE Trans.
Ind. Appl., Vol. 31, No. 5, Sep./Oct. 1995, pp. 1110-1120.
13. H. Kubota, K. Matsuse, and T. Nakano, „DSP Based Speed
Adaptive Flux Observer of Induction Motor”, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Appl., Vol. 29, No. 2, March/April 1993, pp. 344-348.
14. J. Holtz and N. Oikonomou, „Estimation of the Fundamental
Current in Low Switching Frequency High-Dynamic Medium
Voltage Drives“, IEEE Industry Applications Society Annual
Meeting, New Orleans/LA., Sept. 24-28, 2007.