Abstract

The problem of control of stator currents in multi-phase induction machines has recently been tackled by direct digital model predictive control. Although these predictive controllers can directly incorporate constraints, most reported applications for stator current control of drives do no use this possibility, being the usual practice tuning the controller to achieve the particular compromise solution. The proposal of this paper is to change the form of the tuning problem of predictive controllers so that constraints are explicitly taken into account. This is done by considering multiple controllers that are locally optimal. To illustrate the method, a five-phase drive is considered and the problem of minimizing x − y losses while simultaneously maintaining the switching frequency and current tracking error below some limits is tackled. The experiments showed that the constraint feasibility problem has, in general, no solution for standard predictive control, whereas the proposed scheme provides good tracking performance without violating constraints in switching frequency and at the same time reducing parasitic currents of x − y subspaces.

Highlights

  • This papers deals with stator current control of Induction Machines (IM) with more than three phases

  • It is well known that Model Based Predictive Control (MBPC) can be applied for this task in a configuration where the controller directly commands the inverter without modulation techniques [1]

  • One of the key aspects of MBPC is the possibility of handling constraints directly [5] and, the Predictive Current Control (PCC) could benefit from the constraint-handling capability of MBPC, in most reported cases this possibility is not used

Read more

Summary

Introduction

This papers deals with stator current control of Induction Machines (IM) with more than three phases. It is well known that Model Based Predictive Control (MBPC) can be applied for this task in a configuration where the controller directly commands the inverter without modulation techniques [1] This control scheme is a particular case of the more general Finite State Model Predictive Control and is often referred to as Predictive Current Control (PCC) [2,3,4]. The higher number of phases (compared to the standard three-phase case) provides further room for optimization, more tuning possibilities and complex trade-offs between the different figures of merit. For this application, the problem of minimizing x − y losses while simultaneously maintaining the switching frequency and current tracking error below some limits is considered.

PCC for Five-Phase IM
Constraint Handling with Local Controllers
Local Controllers
Partition of Operating Space
Local Tuning
Results
Conclusions

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.