Full-Speed Range Control of a Symmetrical Six-Phase Automotive IPMSM Drive With a Cascaded DC-Link Configuration

Sierra-Gonzalez, Andres; Pescetto, Paolo; Alvarez-Gonzalez, Fernando; Heriz, Borja; Trancho, Elena; Lacher, Hannes; Ibarra, Edorta; Pellegrino, Gianmario

doi:10.1109/tia.2023.3256382

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, in the case of slightly asymmetric machine parameters (i.e., especially minor differences in motor inductance and/or back-EMF of 1-2%) the steady-state DC-link voltage will have an offset, and, even more problematic, the open-loop currents in inverter B will not necessarily generate the expected output torque anymore. Consequently, active balancing is of interest, where the DC-link midpoint voltage can be regulated over a shift in output power from one inverter to the other [18,33,34]. In Field-Oriented Control (FOC), this can be achieved by altering the otherwise identical q-current component references of the two inverters, which will result in slightly different output voltage references.…”

Section: L-sscmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yet, when considering control complexity, the 2L-SSC might offer the following certain advantage, which is not represented in Figure 8: the dq-frame-based current controller (despite potential coupling in the dual three-phase winding set machine [18]) is rather standard, while the balancing of the FCs is a lesser-known concept for industrial drive systems. Furthermore, e.g., during start-up, special initialization procedures are required to charge the FCs equally, which is not necessary for the split DC-link voltage of the 2L-SSC.…”

Section: Control Effortmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Accordingly, alternative inverter concepts are of interest, such as the Stacked Polyphase Bridge Inverter (SPBI), as follows: In the case at hand, two three-phase two-level inverter stages are stacked, i.e., connected in series on the DC input side and each inverter stage supplies an individual three-phase winding set of the motor (cf. Figure 1b) [13][14][15][16][17][18][19]. Advantageously, such a 2L-SSC with an 800 V DC input can also employ latest 650 V GaN semiconductors configured in standard two-level half-bridge arrangement, and requires the same number of transistors as a 3L-FCC, but no FCs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparative Evaluation of Three-Phase Three-Level Flying Capacitor and Stacked Polyphase Bridge GaN Inverter Systems for Integrated Motor Drives

Rohner,

Huber,

Mirić

et al. 2024

Electronics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents a comprehensive comparative evaluation of a three-phase Three-Level (3L) Flying Capacitor Converter (FCC) and a spbi, specifically a converter system formed by two Series-Stacked Two-Level three-phase Converters (2L-SSC), for the realization of a 7.5 kW Integrated Motor Drive (IMD) with a high short-term overload capability. The 2L-SSC requires a motor with two three-phase windings and a split DC-link, but uses standard six-switch, two-level transistor configurations. In contrast, the bridge legs of the 3lfcc feature flying capacitors whose voltages must be actively balanced. Despite the 800 V DC-link voltage, both topologies employ the same set of 650 V GaN power transistors, i.e., the same total chip area, and if operated at the same switching frequency, show identical semiconductor losses. edm damage of the motor bearings is a relevant issue caused by the common-mode (CM) voltages of the inverter stage. The high effective switching frequency of the 3lfcc and the possibility of CM voltage canceling in the 2L-SSC facilitate mitigation of edm by means of CM chokes, whereby a substantially smaller CM choke with lower losses suffices for the 2L-SSC; based on exemplary designs, the 2L-SSC features only about 75% of the total volume and 85% of the nominal losses of the 3lfcc. If, alternatively, motor-friendliness is maximized by including DC-referenced sine-wave output filters, the 3lfcc’s higher effective switching frequency and the 2L-SSC’s need for two sets of filters due to the dual-winding-set motor change the outcome. In this case, the 3lfcc features only about 60% of the volume and only about 55% of the 2L-SSC’s nominal losses.

show abstract

Section: L-sscmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Control Effortmentioning

confidence: 99%