Low-Switching-Loss Finite Control Set Model Predictive Current Control for IMs Considering Rotor-Related Inductance Mismatch

Abstract

This paper develops a high-performance finite control set model predictive current control (FCS-MPCC) method for induction motors (IM) to ensure the system control performance over the lowswitching-frequency (LSF) range, where the switching loss is low. The new controller is based on tripartite calculations in each control period and sliding mode (SM) rotor-related inductance observer. In detail, firstly, to solve the problem that the control performance of the traditional FCS-MPCC methods is low when they are used at low frequencies, tripartite calculations are employed in each control period to improve the prediction accuracy. By dividing one control period into three equal parts and executing the prediction algorithm in each subsection, the current estimation errors become lower compared to the conventional single-step Euler-discretization controller. Then, considering that the performance of an FCS-MPCC controller highly relies on the machine parameter values, but it is hard to directly obtain the accurate rotor-related inductances (mutual inductance and rotor inductance), this paper uses an online parameter observer based on the sliding mode (SM) principle to diagnose them in real time. It needs to be mentioned that when discussing the stability of the sigmoid-function-based SM observer, a new technique called estimation-error-limitation is initially adopted in this paper to simplify the analysis process. Finally, the proposed algorithms are verified by simulation, which is conducted on a three-phase IM at LSF situations. INDEX TERMS Induction motor, finite control set model predictive control, sliding mode observer, parameter mismatch, low switching frequency.

A Synchronized Current Difference Updating Technique for Model-Free Predictive Current Control of PMSM Drives

“…This suggests that the differential stator currents of active switching states (S 1 , S 2 , S 3 , S 4 , S 5 , and S 6 ) contains both the components of the natural response and the enforced response. Given (17), one may rewrite (13) as…”

Composite control for disturbed direct-driven surface-mounted permanent magnet synchronous generator with model prediction strategy

“…where T em , v e , J e , b e are used to estimate T m , v, J, and Àb 0 . According to equations (19) and (20), the modelcompensation ADRC, can be designed as:…”

“…First, literature [16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24] all show that current predictive control has higher system bandwidth than PI. Therefore, this paper designs current predictive control strategy instead of PI control.…”

“…The time delay compensation scheme of current predictive control is proposed in literature, 18 which can reduce the oscillation of the current prediction control, improve the current control accuracy and reduce the harmonic content. In Wang et al, 19 according to the frequency spectrum of load current, the loss function of the algorithm is modified to the discrete transfer function to realize the suppression of current harmonics. We can find out the current predictive control algorithm is not only helpful to improve the response speed of the current, but also to reduce the current harmonics and improve the current control accuracy.…”

Continuous Control Set Predictive Current Control for Induction Machine

“…Authors Wang et al use universal proportional integral observer instead of PI speed regulator in [21] to improve the load torque disturbance rejection and in [22] they modify it to deal with parameter uncertainties. Authors of [23] improve the PCC for low sampling time controllers by adjusting the discrete predicting plant model. Authors Wang et al improved upon the method by replacing the conventional speed PI controller with extended high-gain state observer in [24] and Luenberger observer in [25] to enable encoderless operation.…”