Discrete vs. Discretized Control in Voltage Source Inverters for UPS Systems

Zbigniew Rymarski (), Wojciech Oliwa and Grzegorz Wieczorek
Additional contact information
Zbigniew Rymarski: Department of Electronics, Electrical Engineering and Microelectronics, Faculty of Automatic Control, Electronics and Computer Science, Silesian University of Technology, 44-100 Gliwice, Poland
Wojciech Oliwa: Department of Electronics, Electrical Engineering and Microelectronics, Faculty of Automatic Control, Electronics and Computer Science, Silesian University of Technology, 44-100 Gliwice, Poland
Grzegorz Wieczorek: Department of Electronics, Electrical Engineering and Microelectronics, Faculty of Automatic Control, Electronics and Computer Science, Silesian University of Technology, 44-100 Gliwice, Poland

Energies, 2025, vol. 18, issue 13, 1-26

Abstract: Digital control in UPS systems is currently the only reasonable way of controlling a voltage source inverter (VSI). The control frequency range is restricted to up to about 1 kHz owing to the output low-pass LC filter, which should also maintain the output voltage during one switching period for the step unload. The measurement channels in the low-pass frequency range can be modeled as delays equal to some switching periods. A reasonably high (about 50 kHz) switching frequency minimizes the delays of the measurement channels. Two control systems will be compared—the pure discrete control, in this case a one-sample-ahead preview deadbeat control (OSAP), and a discretized passivity-based control (PBC). The OSAP control is easy to realize, is very fast, and enables one to obtain a steady state in a restricted number of steps after disturbance. However, the single-input single-output deadbeat control version is useless because it depends very strongly on the parameters of the inverter. The multi-input single-output OSAP (MISO-OSAP) control is directly based on discrete state equations (we treat the output voltage, output current, and inductor current as the measured state variables) and works perfectly for the nonlinear rectifier RC load (PF = 0.7) in a system without delay. The version of this with a linear prediction of state variables by means of a full-order state Luenberger observer (MISO-OSAP-LO) will be used in systems with different delays and compared with the discretized MISO passivity-based control without prediction for relatively high switching frequency (about 50 kHz). The aim and the novelty of the paper are in enabling a choice between one of these control systems for high switching frequency VSI with delays in the measurement channels.

Keywords: voltage source inverter; deadbeat control; one-sample-ahead preview control; passivity-based control; multi-input single-output control; Luenberger observer (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q Q0 Q4 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q47 Q48 Q49 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/13/3336/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/13/3336/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jeners:v:18:y:2025:i:13:p:3336-:d:1687232

Access Statistics for this article

Energies is currently edited by Ms. Agatha Cao

More articles in Energies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().