Comparison of Finite Control Set Model Predictive Control Methods for Five-Level NNPC Inverter

Hua Liao, T. Jin, D. L. Mon‐Nzongo, Jinquan Tang, Ziqiang Liu
{"title":"Comparison of Finite Control Set Model Predictive Control Methods for Five-Level NNPC Inverter","authors":"Hua Liao, T. Jin, D. L. Mon‐Nzongo, Jinquan Tang, Ziqiang Liu","doi":"10.1109/PRECEDE51386.2021.9681030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Based on the topology of five level nested neutral point clamped (NNPC) grid connected inverter, this paper compares two type of finite control set model predictive control (FCS-MPC) methods to reduce the amount of calculation time compare with the traditional FCS-MPC. The first method is based on space vector modulation approach which uses 60- degree voltage state vector for the prediction to reduce the calculation time of each control period in FCS-MPC algorithm. While the second method is to simplify the calculation time by using the FCS-MPC based on adjacent state vector method. Through comparative analysis, it can be seen that the 60 degrees sector FCS-MPC have similar performances regarding the current THD; the upper and lower DC voltage deviation of DC- link capacitors. The main difference is on the computation time which results to 35 control periods compare to 125 for the traditional FCS-MPC. The adjacent state vector method results to 7-29 control period.","PeriodicalId":161011,"journal":{"name":"2021 IEEE International Conference on Predictive Control of Electrical Drives and Power Electronics (PRECEDE)","volume":"60 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2021 IEEE International Conference on Predictive Control of Electrical Drives and Power Electronics (PRECEDE)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/PRECEDE51386.2021.9681030","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Based on the topology of five level nested neutral point clamped (NNPC) grid connected inverter, this paper compares two type of finite control set model predictive control (FCS-MPC) methods to reduce the amount of calculation time compare with the traditional FCS-MPC. The first method is based on space vector modulation approach which uses 60- degree voltage state vector for the prediction to reduce the calculation time of each control period in FCS-MPC algorithm. While the second method is to simplify the calculation time by using the FCS-MPC based on adjacent state vector method. Through comparative analysis, it can be seen that the 60 degrees sector FCS-MPC have similar performances regarding the current THD; the upper and lower DC voltage deviation of DC- link capacitors. The main difference is on the computation time which results to 35 control periods compare to 125 for the traditional FCS-MPC. The adjacent state vector method results to 7-29 control period.
五电平NNPC逆变器有限控制集模型预测控制方法的比较
基于五层嵌套中性点箝位(NNPC)逆变器的拓扑结构,比较了两种有限控制集模型预测控制(FCS-MPC)方法,与传统的FCS-MPC方法相比,减少了计算时间。第一种方法是基于空间矢量调制方法,采用60度电压状态矢量进行预测,减少了FCS-MPC算法中每个控制周期的计算时间。第二种方法是采用基于相邻状态向量的FCS-MPC方法来简化计算时间。通过对比分析可以看出,60度扇形FCS-MPC对于当前THD具有相似的性能;直流链路电容器的上、下直流电压偏差。主要的区别在于计算时间,它导致35个控制周期,而传统的FCS-MPC为125个控制周期。邻态向量法控制期为7-29。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信