4.8 Article

Weighting Factorless Model Predictive Thrust Control for Linear Induction Machine

Journal

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS
Volume 34, Issue 10, Pages 9916-9928

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TPEL.2019.2893373

Keywords

Linear induction machine (LIM); model predictive thrust control (MPTC); weighting factor

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [NSFC 51877093, 51707079, 61773284]
  2. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2018YFE0100200]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Compared with various commonly used control algorithms for linear induction machine, the model predictive thrust control can achieve multiple optimum control objectives, such as high dynamic performance, low power loss, and low flux and thrust ripples, hut it is difficult to find suitable weighting factors to balance them. The most commonly used method to tune the weighting factors is by enumerating numerous cases, and then evaluating and comparing each case until the best set of weighting factors is achieved, which can be a very long and tedious procedure. This paper proposes two different methods to solve this problem for minimizing the flux and thrust ripples. One method is to use the variable weighting factor related to flux ripple so that the flux ripple can be seen as a hard constraint without complex tuning process. The other is to replace the flux control term by a variable defined with the same unit as the thrust so that the weighting factor can be equal to one without tuning. These two proposed methods have been successfully applied to a test platform consisting of two 3-kW arc induction motors. The experimental results have shown smaller flux and thrust ripples, as well as tracking errors in comparison with two existing common methods, i.e., the fuzzy decision based method and model predictive flux control.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available