Comparison of Average Current Controlled PFC SEPIC and CUK Converter Feeding Current Controlled SRM

In this paper, current control of 6/4 switched reluctance motor (SRM) fed by both power factor correction (PFC) SEPIC and CUK converter is realised and asymmetric bridge converter is used to drive SRM. Furthermore, SEPIC and CUK DC-DC converters are connected in series to diode bridge rectifier in order to build PFC converters. Average current control of PFC converters is carried out by PI algorithm and both converters are operated at continuous conduction mode (CCM). Besides, switching frequency of PFC and asymmetric bridge converters is 62, 9 kHz with 5750 W power. Studies are conducted by using MATLAB/Simulink software. Total harmonic distortions (THD)s of grid current, grid power factor (PF) and output voltages of the converters are compared. Also, THDs of grid current of each converter are compared by IEEE 519-2014 standard. In addition, current waveform and flux of SRM phases are shown. It is validated by simulations that PFC CUK converter gives better result with 9.08% THD, 0.998 PF than PFC SEPIC converter having 9.61% THD and 0.997 PF. Furthermore, both converters provide the limit defined by standards

Current‐Controlled SRM Fed by Three‐Phase Boost PFC

In this chapter, firstly, converter types of switched reluctance motor (SRM) are described. Current control structure of SRM, which has six stator and four rotor poles, over an asymmetric bridge converter, is also explained. While feeding SRM by an AC grid, grid voltages have to be converted to DC voltage; to realize this conversion, in order to obtain high power factor and sinusoidal grid current, power factor correction (PFC) circuits must be used. In this study, an asymmetric bridge converter of SRM is fed by three‐phase PFC boost converter that consists of uncontrolled diode rectifier and DC‐DC boost converter with high frequency operation. PFC boost converter is controlled by nonlinear control algorithm. By means of the simulations that are conducted by MATLAB/Simulink, grid voltage and current, current harmonics of each phase, three‐phase currents of phases, flux, and current of SRM are presented. Simulation results show that proposed SRM that is fed by three‐phase PFC boost converter system gives the desired performance, for both grid and SRM side

Feedback Linearization Control of Interleaved Boost Converter Fed by PV Array

One of the powerful methods of nonlinear control is the feedback linearization technique. This technique consists of input state and input-output linearization methods. In this chapter, the feedback linearization technique, including input state and input-output linearization methods, is described. Then, input-output linearization method is used for output voltage control of interleaved boost converter. Firstly, mathematical model of the interleaved boost converter is derived after that the method is applied. Besides, the interleaved boost converter is fed by a PV array under irradiation level and ambient temperature change. As a result of the simulation study, output voltage control of interleaved boost converter under reference voltage change is realized as desired

Comparison of the input filter effect to PV panel by SEPIC MPPT converter

PV panel with front end converter for MPPT purpose is always employed for solar energy. The current that front end converter draws from PV panel are generally includes ripple regarding to operation mode of the converter and the type of converter. Such current ripple when it has higher magnitude is so harmful for the PV panel, it either shortened lifetime or results faults on PV panel. To overcome such drawbacks, input filter must be used with front end converter for PV panel connection. Although, in the literature, there are a few types of input filter, the effect of the filter and input current ripple and current noises are not compared for PV panel integration. The original contribution of the study is the analysis of input filter types for PV panel integration. As an input filter, LCL, LCL with damping, LC, C filters are used, and their effects are compared for PV panel. In addition, as a front-end converter SEPIC converter is chosen because of having lower or higher output voltage regarding to input voltage. Besides, using LCL based filters as input filters of SEPIC converter are another contribution of the paper. By means of the applications with up to 15 W SEPIC converter and simulations with DC source and PV panel, it is shown that LC filter ensures better results using DC source by applications regarding current ripple and noise level. However, C filter is better for PV panel by simulations than DC source, it is because PV panel exhibits current source character, and LC filter has lower current ripple. Also with PV source, LCL with damping filter transfers higher energy to the load than the others. Furthermore, LCL type filter reduces inductor by 35% and capacitor by 4.7 times in total. Moreover, LCL filter has higher efficiency with 88% than others in the applications and lower ripple for simulations with DC source