562-

IEEE

TRANSACTIONS ON

INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS,

VOL. IA-21.

NO. 4,

MAY/WUNE 1985

Current Control of VSI-PWM Inverters

DAVID M. BROD,
MEMBER, IEEE, AND

DONALD W. NOVOTNY,

SENIOR MEMBER, IEEE

Abstract-The inherent limitations of commanding voltages and currents in a three-phase load with an inverter are examined. An overview of several current controllers described in the literature is presented, and computer simulations are used to compare performance. A switching diagram is developed which reveals some of the operating characteristics of hysteresis controllers. For ramp comparison controllers, a frequency transfer function analysis is used to predict the line currents and provide some insight into the compensation required to reduce the current errors.

INTRODUCTION C URRENT-CONTROLLED PWM inverters offer substantial advantages in eliminating stator dynamics a in high-performance ac drives and are widely applied in such systems. A basic VSI-PWM system with current control is shown in Fig. 1. Presently, current controllers can be classified as hysteresis, ramp comparison, or predictive controllers. Hysteresis controllers utilize some type of hysteresis in the comparison of the line currents to the current references [1]-[4]. The ramp comparison controller compares the current errors to a triangle waveform to generate the inverter firing signals [5]. Predictive controllers calculate the inverter voltages required to force the currents to follow the current references [4], [6], [7]. This paper presents a general overview of the behavior and inherent limitations of current controllers when commanding currents in a three-phase load. Typical simulation results for several current controllers are presented to illustrate important performance characteristics. The hysteresis controller and the ramp comparison controller are studied in greater depth because of their simplicity and widespread use. A switching diagram for a hysteresis controller is developed and utilized to help explain the controller operation. For the ramp comparison controller, a frequency domain transfer function analysis is presented, and its use in compensator design is illustrated.

l(
6

b !H Cntroler

Fig. 1. Basic system diagram of PWM current controller.

expression:
V

2 (Va+ dub+d2vc) 3

(1)

where
a = ej(2,x/3)

which defines a two-timensional vector (or complex number) associated with the three-phase voltages. The actual voltages can be recovered from v and the zero sequence component v0 using the equations

VaI=UI
Vb =

cos 0+VO

|V|I COS
1171
Cos

00+

)+ O
+ )

GENERAL CURRENT CONTROLLER PROPERTIES Before analyzing specific controllers, the general properties of current controllers are examined. The concept of the voltage (current) vector is utilized because it is a very convenient representation of a set of three-phase voltages (or currents). The voltage vector is defined by the following
Paper IPCSD 84-31, approved by the Industrial Drives Committee of the IEEE Industry Applications Society for presentation at the 1984 Industrial Applications Society Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL, April 3-6, 1984. Manuscript released for publication August 9, 1984. This work was supported in part by the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation and in part by the Wisconsin Electric Machine and Power Electronics Consortium. D. M. Brod is with the Borg-Warner Corporation, Wolf and Algonquin Roads, Des Plaines, IL 60018. D. W. Novotny is with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Wisconsin, 1415 Johnson Drive, Madison, WI 53706.

Vc=

(2)

where 0 is the angle between the voltage vector and the real axis. Fig. 2 shows the basic circuit of a three-phase voltage source inverter. Notice that the dc bus midpoint is assumed to be the ground reference. The inverter operates in one of eight conduction modes to produce one of six nonzero voltage vectors or a zero voltage vector as illustrated in Fig. 3. The line-to-ground voltages: vag, Vbg, and vcg are uniquely specified by the inverter with the line-to-neutral voltages equal to the line-to-ground voltages if the neutral is connected to the dc bus midpoint. Otherwise, the line-to-neutral voltages sum to zero, and the inverter cannot apply a zero sequence voltage across the load.

0093-9994/85/0500-0562$01.00 1985 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY TIRUCHIRAPALLI. Downloaded on May 25, 2009 at 10:11 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

BROD AND NOVOTNY: CURRENT CONTROL OF VSI-PWM INVERTERS

563

Fig. 2. Power circuit configuration of VSI inverter.

Im

13

expected to experience interaction between the phases if the load has no neutral connection. Some current controllers may exacerbate this interaction between the phases by adding offsets to the current errors. The added offsets may cause unexpected and even incorrect lineto-neutral voltages to be produced. For example, if the current in phase A is too low and the currents in phases B and C are too high, then the controller probably should apply the voltage vector v1, (A +, B -, C -), to reduce the current errors quickly. If the current controller adds an offset to the phase A current error, the controller might switch phase A low and attempt to drive all three line currents lower by producing the voltage vector v8, (A -, B-, C- ). Under this condition the load is effectively allowed to coast, and the controller seems to experience a lack of control during this time. In this example, the controller attempted to command a zero sequence current change. A current controller should not need to command a zero sequence current change because the current errors sum to zero if the three-phase current reference sums to zero. Adding offsets to the line current errors may be beneficial in reducing the inverter switching frequency. However, if the offsets are added improperly, higher current errors and a poorer dynamic response may result.

Effect of DC Voltage Limit

14

VI
I

Re

v6

For a current controller to operate properly, there must be sufficient voltage to force the line currents in the desired direction. For loads with low counter EMF the dc bus voltage is not critical, but as the counter EMF is increased, a point is reached where the current controller is not able to command the desired current. This condition is reached when the line-toneutral voltages approach a six-step quasi-square wave. In the following sections it is assumed that there is sufficient voltage to command the line currents. Inverter Switching Frequency To determine the factors that influence the inverter switching frequency, let one phase of the load be described by the following differential equation:

Fig. 3. Six

nonzero

voltage vectors associated with VSI inverter.

Effect of Unconnected Neutral A current controller can exhibit an ambiguity when comv = Ri + Ldi/dt + e (3) manding the firing signals to an inverter that supplies a load with an unconnected neutral. When an inverter leg switches state, the resulting voltage vector is dependent on the state of where the other two inverter legs. For example, if phase A switches v line-to-neutral load voltage, from high to low, the following inverter voltage vectors can i line current, result: e counter EMF, L leakage inductance. tl(A+, B-, C-)-'i78(A-, B-, C-) The time A t in which the line current will increase by A i can be found from (3) assuming that v and e do not change 92(A+, B+, C-)-4-(A-, B+, C-) appreciately over the interval and that the resistance is 97(A+, B+, C+)--i4(A -, B+, C+) negligible: 96(A +, B-, C+)-*i7(A-, B-, C+). At = LAi/(v - e). (4)
If the neutral is not connected, the individual line-to-neutral voltages are not independent of each other, and the response of each line current will depend not only on the state of the corresponding inverter leg but also on the state of the other two inverter legs. Therefore, a current controller can be

Equation (4) shows that the inverter switching frequency is influenced by several factors: inductance and the counter EMF of the load, dc bus voltage, and the current ripple. The fundamental of the line-to-neutral voltage and the counter EMF vary periodically. Therefore, either the inverter switch-

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY TIRUCHIRAPALLI. Downloaded on May 25, 2009 at 10:11 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

564

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS. VOL.

IA-21. NO. 4, MAYiJUNE 1985

ing frequency or/and the current ripple will vary over a fundamental inverter period.

DESCRIPTION OF CURRENT CONTROLLERS Several of the current controllers described in the literature are briefly reviewed to provide a basis for the subsequent sections. Hysteresis Controller: Three Indepenfent Controllers One version of hysteresis control, described in [1], uses three independent controllers, one for each phase. The control for one inverter leg is shown in Fig. 4. When the line current becomes greater (less) than the current reference by the hysteresis band, the inverter leg is switched in the negative (positive) direction, which provides an instantaneous current limit if the neutral is connected to the dc bus midpoint. Therefore, the hysteresis band specifies the maximum current ripple assuming neither controller nor inverter delays. The inverter switching frequency will vary over a fundamental inverter period since the current ripple is specified by the hysteresis band. In a system without a neutral connection, the actual current error can reach double the hysteresis band assuming the three-phase current reference sums to zero. A more complete discussion of this phenomenon is given later.

Fig. 4. Hysteresis control for one phase.

Fig. 5. Ramp comparison controller for one phase.

Hysteresis Controller: Three Dependent Controls In many applications the inverter switching frequency can be reduced if a zero voltage vector is applied at the appropriate time. Also, the maximum current error can be limited within the hysteresis band, rather than twice the band, with proper control. Predictive Controller: Constant Switching Frequency A controller has been suggested which incorporates three The constant inverter switching frequency predictive condependent hysteresis controls and the intelligent application of the zero voltage vector to accomplish these improvements. troller calculates an inverter voltage vector, once every sample The controller is described in 141 and requires knowledge of period, that will force the current to track the current the load counter EMF for the proper application of the zero command. The controller is shown in Fig. 6 and is described voltage vector. A new inverter state is commanded when the in [41, [6]. The following is a description of the controller current error in any line exceeds the hysteresis band providing operation. Let the load be represented by the differential an instantaneous current limit. First, a zero voltage vector is equation in (3) which can be converted to a difference equation applied if the counter EMF is in the appropriate direction to and solved for i: reduce the current error in all three lines. If a line current error i (T,,, + 1) =f(i (Tn), &(Tn), &(Tn)) (5) exceeds the hysteresis band after a time delay, then new inverter firing signals are obtained from comparators without where the inverter voltage and counter EMF are assumed to be hysteresis. If the line current error is positive (negative), then constant over one sample period. A current command i*(Tn+ I) the corresponding inverter leg is fired in the positive (nega- can be substituted for i(Tn + 1), and the voltage vector j(T,)that tive) direction, reducing the current error as quickly as changes the current from i( T,) to the commanded value possible. i*(Tn+) can be written as follows:
Ramp

frequency of the triangle wave and produces well-define harmonics [5]. Multiple crossings of the ramp by the current error may become a problem when the time rate of change of the current error becomes greater than that of the ramp. It will be shown later that there is an inherent magnitude and phase error in the line currents. The errors can be reduced by increasing the controller gain or adding compensation. The gain of the controller can be adjusted by either adjusting the triangle amplitude or amplifying the current error.

Comparison Controller: Asynchronous Sine-Triangle PWM with Current Feedback A ramp comparison control for one inverter leg is shown in Fig. 5. The controller can be thought of as producing asynchronous sine-triangle PWM with the current error considered to be the modulating function. The current error is compared to a triangle waveform and if the current error is greater (less) than the triangle waveform, then the inverter leg is switched in the positive (negative) direction. With sine-triangle PWM, the inverter switches at the

6(Tn) = g(i*'(Tn + 1,)

i (Tn),

j(Tn))

(6)

If the load is described by (3), then

v(Tn) is given by

R[i*(Tn I) - i(Tn)e
I
-

e- TRIL

TR L]

j(T)

(7)

where T is the sample period. The voltage vector u(T,) has to be transformed into a weighted average of three inverter voltage vectors. Each inverter voltage vector is applied for a portion of the sample period with each inverter leg switched

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY TIRUCHIRAPALLI. Downloaded on May 25, 2009 at 10:11 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

BROD AND NOVOTNY: CURRENT CONTROL OF VSI-PWM INVERTERS

e

565
r,

jxt Es L8

VS

aB Lm Xi (Lm+Ltr1
e

Xt

Xm Xt X mode+ fori

Fig. 6. Predictive controller: constant inverter switching frequency.

once every sample period, producing a constant inverter switching frequency of 1/(27). For faster dynamic response, the closest inverter voltage vector to v(Tn) can be applied for the entire sample period. The actual current lags the current reference by as much as one sample period. Longer lags probably will be realized due to calculation delays. The current ripple cannot be explicity specified as with a hysteresis controller but the inverter switching frequency is well-defined. The controller does not provide an inherent instantaneous current limit.

Fig. 7. Transient model for induction motor.

TRANSIENT MODEL OF INDUCTION MOTOR

4-

Ln

TORQUE-O.N-m, VDC=300V, FREQ=3OHz, BAND=1. 5A

Ln

1.

14'

Predicitve Controller: Minimum Switching Frequency 9 0. ; 0 The minimum inverter switching frequency controller is I similar to the previous predicitve controller in that the proper E-4 I z I II Iinverter voltage vector is found with knowledge of the load 1 8 and operating conditions. When the current error vector magnitude exceeds a specified value, the controller predicts 9. the current trajectory for each possible inverter state and determines the length of time that the current error vector will I -1 -1 I i i i 4 ti-n remain within the specified value. The inverter switching I 0-71 1.43 2.14 2.86 3.57 4.29 5.00 by selecting the inverter state that frequency is minimized TIME (Secs ) * 10maximizes the following expression: Fig. 8. Simulated current error waveform of typical 10-hp induction motor
itn I
.

cn

tn
,

Vv.

v. /

XL . 4.

TIME tSc

U0l

J..,

't. .,

I.. v1

t(k)/nc(k)
where
t

(8)

operating at no-load and one-half rated speed with hysteresis controller incorporating three independent controls.

predicted time before next inverter switching, nc number of commutations required to reach the new inverter state, k new inverter state. The controller is discussed in detail in [7]. This controller provides an instantaneous current limit, although there will be a calculation delay in determining the next inverter state. The controller response might be slower than any of the hysteresis controllers due to the necessary calculations, but this was not investigated. SIMULATION OF THE CURRENT CONTROLLERS Simulations were carried out on a VAX 11/780 using the Advanced Continuous Simulation Language (ACSL). Since the inverter switching period is very short, the constant flux linkage model for the transient behavior of the induction machine is employed in the simulations. The machine is assumed to be in a high-performance field-oriented drive operating at constant speed over the period of the simulation. The magnitude and phase of the counter EMF is calculated assuming that the actual currents track the current references

within a reasonable tolerance. This assumption will create an error for the ramp comparison controller which can produce relatively large current errors if the controller gain is low. The transient model for the induction motor is shown in Fig. 7 with the parameters for a typical 220-V three-phase 60-Hz four-pole 10-hp induction motor listed in the Appendix. The simulations only investigated the steady-state operation of the current controllers using the transient model with an operating frequency of 30 Hz and were run for one and one-half cycles with the load currents initialized to zero. The simulations did not incorporate controller or inverter delays and did not account for variation of motor parameters, i.e., saturation. More detail on the simulation technique and additional simulation results can be found in [8].

Hysteresis Controller: Three Independent Controls Simulation results for the hysteresis controller with three independent controls illustrate the properties of the controller. Fig. 8 shows the current error when the induction motor operates at no-load and one-half rated speed with the hysteresis band set at 1.5 A. The average inverter switching frequency

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY TIRUCHIRAPALLI. Downloaded on May 25, 2009 at 10:11 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

566
TRANSIENT MODEL OF INDUCTION MOTOR

IEEE TRANSAC7'C)\ O

-t W (- v -,, -CA ?
:

-.I

TRIANGLE PEAKC i).

CJJ$4]r NOO>1_ U{. T1k I U` I 'A!JCN IOT3.rR )POULE=rE.N-M, JID=30:,J FRE>-)OHz, 3ANM-)
T`RilRGLE FPEQ=2000Hz

urrent

Reference
IA

- IAREF

40

s._|.s

~Current

j~~

-;

0 0

1.43

2.14

2.86

'0.0

0.83

Fig. 9. Simulated waveforms of stalled typical 10-hp induction motor with hysteresis controller incorporating three independent controls.

1.67 TIME

2.50 (Secs)

3.33

4.17

5.0

TIME

(Secs)

*1Q2

*102

Fig. 10. Simulated waveforms of typical 10-hp induction motor operating at no-load and one-half rated speed with ramp comparison controller.
TRANSIENT MODEL OF INDUCTION

is approximately 2600 Hz. The figure shows that the maximum line current error can be double the hysteresis band. A load consisting of a stalled induction motor was simulated to observe the operating characteristics of the hysteresis controller when the load counter EMF is zero. The line current and current reference are shown in Fig. 9. The inverter has periods of high switching frequency which are interrupted occasionally when the inverter applies a zero voltage vector across the load. The periods of high switching frequency are referred to as limit cycles in this paper. The switching frequency during the limit cycles is approximately 6600 Hz. Hysteresis Controller: Three Dependent Controls Simulation results for the hysteresis controller with three dependent controls and the programmed application of the zero voltage vector indicate that the magnitude and phase error in the line currents are small. Also, the current errors remain within the hysteresis band. The average inverter switching frequency is approximately 5350 Hz when the induction motor operates at no-load and one-half rated speed with a hysteresis band of 1.5 A. The switching frequency is much higher than for the previous hysteresis controller. There are two reasons for this: 1) the maximum current error is smaller, and 2) when any one hysteresis band is exceeded, more than one inverter leg may switch. A load consisting of a stalled induction motor was also simulated. The simulation showed that the limit cycles that occur with the previous controller are eliminated, and the average inverter switching frequency is much lower (approximately 550 Hz) than that of the hysteresis controller with three independent controls. Ramp Comparison Controller Fig. 10 shows the line current, current reference, and counter EMF that result with the ramp comparison controller

MOTOR TORQUE-O.N-m, VDC=300V, FREQ=30Hz INVERTER SWITCHING FREQ=2000Hz

40
D

u)

cn

vi

--

w;
_

r0
40 D
0
l4

0.0

0.71

_ I

I-

1.43

2.14
TIME

I *

*-

2.86

3.57

(Secs)

*102

Fig. 11. Simulated waveforms of typical 10-hp induction motor operating at no-load and one-half rated speed with constant inverter switching frequency predictive controller.

without any additional compensation. Some hysteresis was added to the controller to prevent multiple crossings of the triangle ramp. There is a magnitude and phase error in the line current which results in a sinusoidal current error. The inverter switching frequency is approximately equal to the triangle frequency of 2000 Hz. The current ripple amplitude is reduced when the triangle frequency is increased. Predictive Controllers The predictive controllers performed as expected with a typical simulation for the constant inverter switching frequency controller shown in Fig. 11. Additional simulation results are given in [8].

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY TIRUCHIRAPALLI. Downloaded on May 25, 2009 at 10:11 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

BROD AND NOVOTNY: CURRENT CONTROL OF VSI-PWM INVERTERS

567

HYSTERESIS CONTROLLERS-THE SWITCHING DIAGRAM A switching diagram can be used to explain some of the characteristics of hysteresis controllers. The diagram indicates when and how a hysteresis current controller switches the inverter given the current references and the load currents. The derivation of the switching diagram for the hysteresis controller with three independent controls is presented as follows. Referring to Fig. 12, the current reference vector, the actual current vector, and the current error vector along with the A, B, and C axes of a three-phase set of coordinates are drawn in the complex plane. The line current errors Aia, Aib, and A i are the projections of the current error vector A i on the corresponding A, B, and C axes. The hysteresis controller switches the A inverter leg when Ai, exceeds the hysteresis band as represented in Fig. 13 by two switching lines drawn perpendicular to the A axis. The switching lines are located from the current reference vector by a distance equal to the hysteresis band. Similarly, the switching lints for phases B and C can be drawn. Fig. 14 shows the switching diagram that results when the switching lines for each phase are combined. The switching diagram will move with the current reference vector since the current reference vector locates the center of the switching diagram in the complex plane. A somewhat similar development is contained in [9]. The switching diagram confirms that the maximum line current can be double the hysteresis band, 2h, and the maximum spatial current error (magnitude of the current error vector) is also double the hysteresis band. Fig. 15 shows a current trajectory which results in the maximum error in a line current. This trajectory occurs when the initial voltage vector vI, (A +, B-, C- ), forces the line current vector to hit the -A switching line which results in the zero voltage vector v8, (A-, B-, C-). The line current error in phase A can increase further because of the load resistance, load counter EMF, or movement of the switching diagram due to variation of the current references. The voltage vector will not change until the actual current vector crosses another switching line. The maximum current error occurs if the actual current vector hits one of the outside corners of the switching diagram. The switching diagram can also be used to show that limit cycles, which are interrupted occasionally, can occur when the load counter EMF is low. Fig. 16 shows a current trajectory, indicated by the solid line, that may occur during a limit cycle. The initial voltage vector VI, (A +, B-, C-), forces the current vector to travel in the same direction as the voltage vector since the counter EMF and resistance are assumed to be zero. The current vector hits the + C switching line, causing inverter leg C to switch and produce the inverter voltage vector v2, (A +, B -, C+ ). Next, the current vector will hit the -A switching line producing the voltage vector V3, (A -, B-, C+ ). Continuing with the same line of reasoning, the six nonzero voltage vectors are applied repeatedly, and a high switching frequency results if there is a low leakage inductance and a small hysteresis band. Notice that the magnitude of the current error vector is not reduced to zero during the limit cycle. The dashed line in Fig. 16 represents a current trajectory when there is a nonzero counter EMF.

Im
b

IAT

Re

Fig. 12. Current vectors in complex plane.

tm

Re

Fig. 13. Switching lines for phase A.

Im

Fig. 14. Switching diagram for hysteresis controller with three independent controls located in complex plane.

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY TIRUCHIRAPALLI. Downloaded on May 25, 2009 at 10:11 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

568

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. IA-21 NO. 4, MAY/JUNE 1Q"

Fig. 15. Current trajectory which results in maximum line current error.

consider the limit cycle in the previous example. A zero voltage vector occurs when one of the switching lines in the sequence is skipped due to the load counter EMF, load resistance, or the movement of the switching diagram. If the switching diagram moves, the voltage vector VI, (A +, B -. C - ), in Fig. 16 may cause the current vector to cross the - A switching line instead of the + C switching line which results in the zero voltage vector v8, (A -, B-, C- ). The application of a zero voltage vector will significantly reduce the inverter switching frequency when the counter EMF is low since the velocity along a trajectory with a zero voltage vector is much lower (zero if the counter EMF is zero) than with a nonzero voltage vector.
RAMP-COMPARISON CONTROLLERS: FREQUENCY-DOMAIN ANALYSIS The following analysis assumes that the ramp comparison controller produces asynchronous sine-triangle pulsewidth modulation. Sine-triangle PWM produces fundamental line-toneutral voltages which are proportional to the ratio of the sine wave peak and triangle peak. The block diagram of the frequency domain model for the ramp comparison controller is shown in Fig. 17. The line current f can be found from the following quantities: I* current reference, E load counter EMF, Z load impedance, K system gain. The system gain is given by the following expression [5], [10]:

-B

+C

IA

va E_I_, _ _ _g
+3,

-A

Fig. 16. Current trajectory for two limit cycles. Solid line: zero load counter EMF. Dashed line: nonzero counter EMF.

The frequency of the limit cycle can be found by dividing the velocity of the current trajectory by the distance traveled in one complete inverter switching period. The velocity is given by (for zero counter EMF): 2 di 3 Vdc (9) vel=-=dt L and the distance traveled by a limit cycle is approximately
-

K=KsG
where

(13)
(14)

d= 6h.

(10)

=-V

Therefore, the inverter switching frequency can be written as (11) vel Vdc Sd 9hL

2At

A, triangle peak, G additional gain and/or compensation.

Equation (11) can be used to estimate the inverter switching The line-to-neutral voltage phasor V is given by frequency of the limit cycles observed in the simulation in Fig. V=(I* - f),
9:

(15)

=s 9(1.5)(0.00336) =6614

300

HIz

(12)

and the line-to-neutral voltage and load current are related as follows:

which is close to the value estimated from the simulation. The highest inverter switching frequency occurs during the limit cycles when the counter EMF is zero (since the counter EMF tends to reduce the switching frequency). Therefore, the inverter has to be designed to handle the switching frequency that occurs with zero counter EMF. This is an important limitation of this type of controller. The limit cycle may be occasionally interrupted by the intermittent occurrence of a zero voltage vector. For example,

P. V=ILZ+E

(16)

Equations (15) and (16) can be equated and written as (17) K(I* - 1) = IZ +E.
Equation (17) can be rearranged to give an expression for the load current
I KI*-E (18)

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY TIRUCHIRAPALLI. Downloaded on May 25, 2009 at 10:11 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

BROD AND NOVOTNY: CURRENT CONTROL OF VSI-PWM INVERTERS

569

t*

I +

Fig. 17. Frequency domain transfer function model for ramp comparison
controller.

which shows that the counter EMF can have a significant effect on the line currents and current error especially at higher motor speeds. The magnitude and phase errors of the line currents are reduced by increasing the controller gain or including some type of compensation. This frequency-domain analysis is substantiated by the previous simulations. For example, substituting the following information, obtained from Figs. 7 and 10,

constant of the controller TC can be set stator transient time constant

Using the concept of cancellation compensation, the time equal to the motor
TC = Ts' = L,/r which results in the following expression:
JX

(22)

k= 15z00 -= 76.6 z900

* = 12.4 0 V

A
1+

.,

,jKsKc

E.

Z=0.66z72.9o

into (18) results in a line current of 13.2z - 24.8 A which corresponds to that shown in Fig. 10. The analysis can be extended to incorporate the steady-state equivalent circuit for the induction motor. This is useful since the counter EMF is not normally known explicity. The equivalent circuit can be reduced to an equivalent impedance Zq which provides the following expression for the line current

KsKc

JrS

(23)

(1 + jws ')( 1 + KgK

KI*
K+ Zeq

(I9)

The compensation gain KC would be set to as large a value as permitted by the parasitic poles (and/or the delays associated with the inverter switching and sampling effects). For systems in which the closed loop phase error is a major concern (i.e., field orientation), the best choice of a compensator will depend on the speed range of the system. If small phase errors at high speed are required, the compensator should be chosen to minimize the phase error near the cutoff frequency. This design problem was not considered in this

This expression can be useful in evaluating system response at specific operating points (i.e., evaluating the effect of load or changes in machine parameters). As an illustration of the use of (18) for compensation design, consider a proportional-integral compensator to improve the low-frequency response. The transfer function of a proportional-integral controller is

project.

G=Kc

+j-

(20)

where Tc is the time constant of the compensation network. Using the transient model of the induction motor and substituting (20) into (18), the following expression for the current results:

KsKc(I + jwTC)] P*_I

jw(L+ ')K +
rS

( sK O+jCOTC)

'21'

SUMMARY Of the controllers studied, the hysteresis controller with three independent controls is the simplest to implement. The predictive controllers are the most complex and require knowledge of the load and extensive hardware which may limit the dynamic response of the controller. The ramp comparison controller has the advantage of limiting the maximum inverter switching frequency and producing welldefined harmonics, but the controller requires a large gain and compensation to reduce the current error and generally has lower bandwidth than hysteresis controllers. The hysteresis controller with three independent controls works very well except the inverter switching frequency is higher than required when there is low counter EMF due to limit cycles. The switching frequency can be reduced by introducing zero voltages at the appropriate times (when the counter EMF is low). A combination of a ramp comparison controller for low-speed operation and a simple hysteresis controller for high-speed operation may provide a good overall solution.

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY TIRUCHIRAPALLI. Downloaded on May 25, 2009 at 10:11 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

570

IEBEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL, IA-21, NO. 4, MAY/JUNE 1985

degree from Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, and the M.S. degree from the University of Wisconsin, Madison, in 1982 and 1984, respectively, both in electrical engineering.
is currently a Research Engineer at the BorgWarner Research Center. His interests include electric machines, variable frequency drives, and power electronics. Mr. Brod is a member of Eta Kappa Nu and Tau Beta Pi.

APPENDIX TYPICAL 10-hp INDUCTION MOTOR PARAMETERS 220 V, FOUR POLE, 60 Hz r, Stator resistance, 0.195 Q. rr Rotor resistance, 0.195 Q. x15 Stator leakage reactance, 0.649 O. x,, Rotor leakage reactance, 0.649 O. xm Magnetizing reactance, 12.98 U. REFERENCES
t1] A. B. Plunkett, "A current-controUed PWM transistor inverter drive," in Conf. Rec. 1979 14th Annu. Meet. IEEE Ind. Appl. Soc., pp.
[21 S. C. Peak and A. B. Plunkett, "Transistorized PWM inverterinduction motor drive system," in Conf, Rec. 1982 17th Annu. Meet. IEEE Ind. Appl. Soc., pp. 892-898. [3] W. McMurray, "Modulation of the chopping frequency in dc choppers and PWM inverters having current-hysteresis controllers," in Conf. Rec. 1983 IEEE PESC, pp. 295-299. [41 G. Pfaff, A. Weschta, and A. Wick, "Design and experimental results of a brushless ac servo-drive," in Conf. Rec. 1982 17th Annu. Meet. IEEE Ind. Appi. Soc., pp. 692-697. t5] A. Schonung and H. Stemmler, "Static frequency changers with 'subharmonic' control in conjunction with reversible variable-speed a.c. drives," Brown Boveri Rev., pp. 555-577, Aug./Sept. 1964. [6] I. Takahashi, "A flywheel energy storage system having harmonic power compensation," Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison, WEMPEC Res. Rep. 82-3, June 1982. [7] J. Holtz and S. Stadtfeld, "A predictive controller for the stator current vector of ac machines fed from a switched voltage source," in Conf. Rec. 1983 Annu. Meet. Int. Power Electronics Conf., pp. 1665of Wisconsin, Madison, 1984. [9] G. Pfaff and A. Wick, "Direct current control of ac drives with pulsed frequency converters," Process Automat., vol. 2, pp. 83-88, 1983. [10] P. Wood, Switching Power Converters. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1981, ch. 4, pp. 152-153.

David M. Brod (S'79-M'83) received the B.S.

Borg-Warner Research Center, Des Plaines, IL. He

From 1979 to 1982, he was a co-op student at the

785-792.

Donald W. Novotny (M'62-SM'77) received the B.S. and M.S. degrees in electrical engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, and the Ph.D. degree from the University of Wisconsin, Madison, in 1956, 1957, and 1961
currently Professor and Director of the Wisconsin Electric Machines and Power Electronics Consortium (WEMPEC). He served as Chairman of the Electrical and Computer Engineering Department from 1976 to 1980 and as an Associate Director of the University-Industry Research Program from 1972 to 1974 and from 1980 to the present. He has been active as a consultant to many organizations including Marathon Electric Company, Borg Warner Corporation, Barber Coleman Company, Otis Elevator Corporation, Allen Bradley Company, Eaton Corporation, and the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. He has also been a Visiting Professor at Montana State University and the Technical University of Eindhoven, Eindhoven, Netherlands, and a Fulbright Lecturer at the University of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium. His teaching and research interests include electric machines, variable frequency drive systems and power electronic control of industrial systems. Dr. Novotny is a member of ASEE, Sigma Xi, Eta Kappa Nu, and Tau Beta Pi, and he is a Registered Professional Engineer in the State of Wisconsin.

respectively. Since 1961 he has been a member of the faculty at the University of Wisconsin-Madison where he is

[8] D. Brod, "Current control in VSI-PWM inverters," M.S. thesis, Univ.

1675.

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY TIRUCHIRAPALLI. Downloaded on May 25, 2009 at 10:11 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.