Modern Direct Torque and Flux Control methods of an induction machine supplied by three-level inverter

Open access

Abstract.

This paper describes two modern direct torque and flux control methods of an induction machine supplied by a three-level inverter. Additionally, it presents a comparison of the methods both in static and dynamic states. The methods, in a specific way, make use of an increased number of active vectors of the three-level inverter in order to improve control quality and reduce switching frequency. The two methods modify the DTC method by using its advantages and eliminating, at the same time its drawbacks.

In static states the comparison was based on the results of investigations performed for two different load values and three set values of angular speed, whereas in dynamic states the comparison was focused on the behavior of the machine at startup.

The results of the investigations have shown that both methods give very good performance. They are characterized by both sinusoidal shape of flux and low current deformations even at low angular speeds i.e. less than 10% of the nominal value. The presented methods also allow to generate nominal flux for set zero angular speed in order to achieve excitation of the induction machine. The switching frequencies for both methods are very similar in almost the whole range of control but the methods have shown some differences in control quality, particularly for higher torque values.

[1] M. Korzeniewski and A. Sikorski, “Three-level DC/AC inverter controlled by direct torque and flux control method of induction motor”, Electrical Review 86, 263-268 (2010).

[2] I. Takahashi and T. Noguchi, “A new quick - response and high - efficiency control strategy of an induction motor”, IEEE Trans. on Ind. Appl. 22, 820-827 (1986).

[3] G.S. Buja and M.P. Kazmierkowski, “Direct torque control of PWM inverter-fed AC motors-a survey”, IEEE Trans. on Ind. Electronics 51 (4), 744-757 (2004).

[4] A. Sikorski, Direct Torque and Flux Regulation of an Induction Motor, Białystok Technical University, Białystok, 2009, (in Polish).

[5] A. Sikorski, M. Korzeniewski, A. Ruszczyk, M.P.Kaźmierkowski, P. Antoniewicz, W. Kolomyjski, and M.Jasiński, “A comparison of properties of direct torque and flux control methods (DTC-SVM,DTC-, DTC-2x2, DTFC-3A)”, Int. Conf. on Computer as a Tool EUROCON 2007 1, 1733-1739 (2007).

[6] R. Grodzki, “Nowy algorytm bezpośredniej regulacji momentu i strumienia maszyny indukcyjne”, Electrical Review 88 (12), 34-37 (2012).

[7] M.P. Kazmierkowski and A.B. Kasprowicz, “Improved direct torque and flux vector control of PWM inverter-fed induction motor drives”, IEEE Trans. on Ind. Electronics 42 (4), 344-350 (1995).

[8] V. Ambrozic, G.S. Buja, and R. Menis, “Band-constrained technique for direct torque control of induction motor”, IEEE Trans. on Ind. Electronics 51 (4), 776-784 (2004).

[9] P. Wojcik, D. Świerczynski, M. P. Kazmierkowski, and M.Janaszek, ”Direct torque and flux control of PWM inverter fed induction motor drive for electrical tram transportation”, Electrical Review 84 (12), 115-118 (2008).

[10] H. Abu-Rub, D. Stando, and M.P. Kaźmierkowski, “Simple speed sensorless DTC-SVM scheme for induction motor drives”, Bull. Pol. Ac.: Tech. 61 (2), 301-307 (2013).

[11] C. Lascu, I. Boldea, and F. Blaabjerg, “Variable structure direct torque control - a class of fast and robust controllers for induction machine drives”, IEEE Trans. on Ind. Electronics 51 (4), 785-792 (2004).

[12] S. Styński, M.P. Kaźmierkowski, and D. Świerczynski, “Analysis of the multistage AC/DC/AC convertor with capacitors with variable voltage powered by the single phase source“, Electrical Review 87 (1), 153-158 (2011), (in Polish).

[13] K. Kulikowski and A. Sikorski, “Efficiency improvement due to direct torque and flux three levels three areas control method applied to small hydroelectric power plant”, Bull. Pol. Ac.: Tech. 59 (4), 569-574 (2011).

Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences Technical Sciences

The Journal of Polish Academy of Sciences

Journal Information


IMPACT FACTOR 2016: 1.156
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 1.238

CiteScore 2016: 1.50

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.457
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 1.239

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 105 104 6
PDF Downloads 35 34 7