P. 1
A Simple Snubber Configuration for Three-Level GTO Inverters-Jeong-Hyoun

A Simple Snubber Configuration for Three-Level GTO Inverters-Jeong-Hyoun

|Views: 7|Likes:

More info:

Published by: Andrés Felipe Celis on Jun 03, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less







A Simple Snubber Configuration for Three-Level GTO Inverters
Jeong-Hyoun Sung, Student Member, IEEE, and Kwanghee Nam, Member, IEEE
Abstract— A simple snubber configuration for three-level gate turn-off thyristor (GTO) inverters is proposed. The proposed snubber has a single resistor per arm for stored energy dissipation, while the conventional RLD/RCD snubber contains six. This implies that the proposed snubber needs only one chopper circuit per arm for snubber energy recovery. This helps reduce the size, cost, and number of components. Besides the single resistor, the proposed snubber requires two less diodes per arm than the RLD/RCD snubber. Furthermore, the proposed snubber resolves the voltage imbalance problem between inner and outer GTO’s without additional components. We have analyzed the proposed circuits and proven its performance through simulations and experiments. Index Terms— Energy recovery circuit, snubber circuit, threelevel GTO inverter.

I. INTRODUCTION N HIGH-POWER systems, such as a steel mill drive, gate turn-off thyristors (GTO’s) are widely used. Due to the high-power rating (6 kV, 6 kA) and the turn-off capability, GTO’s are much more attractive than conventional thyristors for sophisticated applications. GTO’s, however, require a snubber circuit which limits the current and voltage rising rate at the time of turning on and off, respectively. When turning on must be restricted below a a GTO, the current rising rate specified value to prevent an excessive initial current loading. also When turning off a GTO, the voltage rising rate must be restricted below a specified value to avoid a sudden heat pulse generation and to prevent retriggering by an internal capacitance. A number of snubber configurations have been proposed for two-level GTO voltage source inverters [1]–[3]: the RLD/RCD snubber, Undeland snubber, and McMurray snubber [1], [2]. The Undeland and McMurray snubbers are modified from the RLD/RCD snubber, minimizing the number of snubber circuit components. Specifically, they have a single resistor per arm for energy dissipation. This is particularly useful in constructing an energy recovery circuit. Holtz has investigated an energy recovery circuit for the McMurray snubber that did not employ a chopper [3]. The three-level inverter, often called a neutral point clamped (NPC) inverter, is suitable for high-voltage applications since it guarantees equal voltage sharing between serially connected


power devices. Furthermore, the three-level configuration contributes to reducing voltage harmonics [4]–[8]. For the three-level system, the RLD/RCD snubber could be constructed as shown in Fig. 1(a), but is impractical for energy recovery, since it requires six discharging resistors in separate locations on each arm. Furthermore, such a snubber would cause a voltage imbalance between serially connected GTO’s or turns off, since the middle snubber when either do not find their discharging paths due to capacitors This the blocking action of the clamping diodes imbalance imposes higher voltage stress on the inner GTO’s and may lead to a destruction of inner GTO’s. Okayama et al. [6] proposed a snubber circuit which is able to locate energy recovery choppers at points of fixed voltage, such as at the dc-link side or the neutral point. Hence, the chopper bank capacitors can be connected in parallel among arms yielding a suitable structure for energy recovery. It also has some noticeable characteristics such as a guaranteed voltage balancing mechanism between serially connected GTO’s and a reduced capacitance of turn-off snubbers. However, it has more components, compared with the RLD/RCD snubber. On the other hand, Suh et al. extended the Undeland snubber to the three-level system with overvoltage clamping capability. This paper presents a new and efficient snubber configuration for three-level GTO inverters. The proposed snubber configuration can be regarded as an extension of the McMurray snubber [1] to the three-level system. Advantages of the proposed scheme are: 1) small number of parts; 2) suitable structure for snubber energy recovery; 3) secondorder current dynamics in the period of the snubber capacitor discharging; and 4) no voltage imbalance between serially connected GTO’s. We have analyzed the proposed circuit, and proven its performance through simulations and experiments. II. NEW SNUBBER CONFIGURATION FOR THREE-LEVEL GTO ARM A. Structure The RLD/RCD snubber and the proposed snubber circuits for a single arm appear in Fig. 1. The proposed snubber circuit ), two seincludes four shunt capacitors ( ), four diodes ( ), ries inductors ( and a single resistor ( ). Table I compares the number of components for the RLD/RCD snubber and the proposed snubber. The proposed snubber includes a single resistor, while the RLD/RCD snubber has six resistors. When a need to construct an energy recovery system occurs, the advantage

Manuscript received July 10, 1997; revised July 17, 1998. Recommended by Associate Editor, L. Xu. The authors are with the Department of Electrical Engineering, POSTECH University, Pohang 790-784, Korea. Publisher Item Identifier S 0885-8993(99)01825-6.

0885–8993/99$10.00 © 1999 IEEE

(1) where and and are the voltages over . hoff’s voltage law. but not in the discharging paths of and of Hence. growth rate is determined by the sum i. we let . the voltage rating of and must be two times larger than that of the RLD/RCD snubber. we cannot place an inductor at the load terminal because the inductors cannot play any role in limiting the and If we put inductors between current rising rates of serially connected GTO’s as shown in Fig.. We also choose let B. If is completely discharged and is charged turned on.e. and are shown in the discharging paths Inductors and . 1. 1(b). we can obtain. Due to the symmetry of the circuit. (b) TABLE I THE NUMBER OF SNUBBER CIRCUIT COMPONENTS of the proposed snubber is quite clear in the number of chopper circuits. rather than on the dc-link sides. the proposed snubber has two less diodes. we obtain (2) For the same reason. the current path is made made through so that is charged to through the clamping diode and discharged to zero.SUNG AND NAM: SIMPLE SNUBBER CONFIRMATION FOR THREE-LEVEL GTO INVERTERS 247 (a) Fig. However. Therefore. the same thing happens. An advantage of in the blocking stage is not affected such location is that by the turning off process of Since an inductor is absent on the dc-link side in the proposed snubber circuit. in the steady state. In the McMurray snubber [1]. to prevent a large chosen small. i. the voltage of . Another characteristic feature of this snubber is the location of the inductors. all capacitors participate in determining the voltage growth rate of a switch. They are located between the serially connected GTO’s. but i. the proposed snubber can be looked upon as an extended version of the McMurray snubber to the three-level case. Furthermore. while the RLD/RCD snubber requires at least four. we obtain (3) Equations (2) and (3) play the crucial role in simplifying the circuit analysis which follows. from the Kirchconstant. capacitance of . and is Furthermore. a commutation path is in case load current and Finally.. where respectively.e. we can circumvent the above-mentioned problems. that and denote voltages over and . In this McMurray-type snubber. the same logic applies in determining the voltage growth rates and Specifically. we will briefly describe the and are basic functions of the proposed snubber. We can see from (1) that the required capacitance of the proposed circuit is less than half of the capacitance of the RLD/RCD snubber. Snubber circuits for a three-level GTO arm: (a) RLD/RCD snubber and (b) proposed snubber. since the common node of and through connected to the common node of . Overview of the Basic Principle Before the detailed analysis.. charged from Therefore. the capacitance of and needs to be and . an inductor cannot reside on the dclink side because the stored field energy cannot be dissipated. if is small. We and for symmetry.e. Furthermore. respectively. compared with are turning on. the capacitors in the lower part are also disand to zero and . respectively. [9]. When begins to turn off to flows out. Thus. We choose the current loading when and to be one tenth of and . the proposed snubber requires one chopper circuit.

3(b) that Hence. Note that turning does not make any difference in this process since off of no current flows though it. is turned on. In this period. then the voltage takes place when is turning (a) (b) SWITCHING SEQUENCES All possible switching states of the three-level inverter are listed in Table II. the load current is completely transferred to at from Step 2): In Step 2. TABLE II THREE SWITCHING STATES cannot be eliminated. is turned off. Due to the symmetry. 2 and 3. and after a dead time. Snubber capacitors diode are assumed to be charged up to . If and imbalance between off. (b) Step 1. 14. Since . it is sufficient to consider only a complete cycle of commutation assuming that the load current is flowing out. (c) Step 2. As soon as clamping diode and the load terminal voltage goes up. Equivalent circuits during the transition from S0 to S1 : In this commutation. (d) Step 3. Step 1): Step 1 begins with increases. where are the currents flowing through and the clamping diode . Commutation sequences and the equivalent circuits are shown in Figs. it follows from (5) and (6) that (7) . since they are unnecessary. Commutation paths during the transition from (b) S0 (c) to S1 : (d) (a) Initial state. 2(c).248 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS. voltage remains the same value. 3. 2(a). the inductor voltage is kept at is the diode recovery current. 2. We have not considered the direct transition of states from to . As an initial state. MARCH 1999 (a) Fig. 2. the current increase through and determined by . the current through continues to ceases to conduct. A. 3(b). turning on. or from to . charging and discharging The discharging loop is formed as shown in Fig. we assume that the load current is flowing through the clamping and as shown in Fig. while the current through the current through decreases. increase. we obtain from (2) that (4) where from Fig. the inductor and We thus obtain Hence. VOL. III. Commutation from to (c) Fig. ANALYSIS OF do not exist. NO. respectively. through Its equivalent circuit for this step is shown in Fig. We is constant during the whole assume that load current commutation process and thus model it by a current source [9]. Neglecting In this step. and are assumed to be totally discharged. Even though is turned on. the discharging is not formed since the load terminal current path of as far as conducts. we obtain (5) Note on the other hand that (6) Therefore.

e. We assume that the initial state is the time. final state of the previous commutation. we obtain from (15) and (9) is not that large in governing the oscillatory motion. Therefore. i. Thus. and also play roles in limiting the voltage rising rate of Commutation sequences and the equivalent circuits are shown in Figs. 3(c). does not appear in the equivalent circuit ducting.SUNG AND NAM: SIMPLE SNUBBER CONFIRMATION FOR THREE-LEVEL GTO INVERTERS 249 Applying Kirchhoff’s current law (KCL) at point P in Fig. With the proposed scheme. and after a dead is turned on. we obtain from (20) that Therefore. 3(b) and using (3) and (4). does not make the current peak at the beginning. we obtain from the equivalent circuit shown in Fig. This makes a Such a voltage overshoot usually voltage overshoot over makes a voltage imbalance between the inner and outer GTO’s and ) in the RLD/RCD snubber since clamping diode ( blocks the discharging path of inner GTO [8].e. a voltage is developed over with positive polarity on the side. differentiating (16) Using (16) that . decreases linearly from to zero during Step 1): for this period. snubber capacitor (21) Using (2). we assume Then. however. Step 3): The current overshoot made in Step 2 decreases in Step 3. is completely discharged and is conIn Step 3. is turned off. Hence. the corresponding solutions are and At the end is completely discharged and and of this step. the second-order system. (17) yields the underdamped solution (18) (11) where where obtained such that for Thus. as shown in Fig. 4 and 5. This helps reduce the initial current loading of GTO’s and is another characteristic feature that makes this proposed snubber look like the McMurray snubber. are charged to and respectively. thus causing a current to overshoot. the load current rejected by is absorbed by period of and as shown in Fig. overvoltage across the proposed scheme does not cause an imbalance problem. During the turning off . 4(b). At the end at and and of this step. B. At the same time. we obtain (22) .. differentiating (19) and using (21). and are charged to and respectively. but after a certain time elapses. we obtain (15) (8) and Since constant. This commutation process is separated by following three steps. 5(a) that (19) (20) (14) in the capacitor chargExistence of the inductor ing/discharging path makes the dynamics of the loop a second-order system. i. differently from the first-order system. In other words. (9) reduces to (10) and its solution is given by (17) Since such that is small. we obtain finds a discharging path through – – so that the is discharged (to ). During this period. Commutation from (13) to (12) In this commutation. When the tail current of is neglected. This step ends when reaches its maximum. we have (8) and using (4) and (7). Since to be zero for computational convenience. we obtain is assumed to be Then. .

Then. 14. 2. we may assume that of Step 2. Also up to along with in this commutation. 5(c) that and Thus. is turned on. the clamping Step 3): After begins to conduct and the field energy in diode dissipates through as shown in Fig. (d) Step 3. Equivalent circuits during the transition from S1 to S0 : Hence. NO.250 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS. This step ends at flows through Step 2): In Step 2. it follows that (29) (23) With the initial conditions . are charged and are completely discharged. a voltage overshoot is generated over Note from Fig. is turned off. Commutation paths during the transition from (b) S1 (c) to S0 : (d) (a) Initial state. At the initial state. and all the load current flows through the When turns on after a dead time. C. 5. the inductor current decreases to zero. Thus. it follows from (24) and (25) that (26) As an initial value. Then. (b) Step 1. the load current charging and discharging and diode Using and again. much. the clamping diode whole commutation is completed. (c) Step 2. it follows approximated to be a constant from (25) that for (a) (b) (28) may not be true. and after a dead time. we obtain from Fig. where To asceris small tain a simple solution. 4(d). is compared with the period. we obtain Note that this result is identical to (1). we use such (30) (31) where and In the last step. Hence. snubber capacitors . Due to the dissipation current. we obtain the solution and its corresponding that for (c) Fig. but The assumption does not change the resulting error is not so large if while is conducting. VOL. 4. MARCH 1999 (a) Fig. Commutation from to which is the final value of Step 1. the solution is given by (27) In this commutation. Note that differentiating (28) with respect to . is charged to . 5(b) that (24) (25) Thus. its solution is given by when reduces to zero.

(a) (b) Step 2): The equivalent circuit of Step 2 is shown in Fig. 6 and 7. since is assumed to be constant. i. We obtain from Fig. Hence. 8(a). Therefore. Note that the number of choppers can be reduced further to one for an inverter by using the isolation transformers as shown in Fig. 5(b). we obtain (38) and With the initial conditions . 7(b). is turned off. This step ends at (40) where IV. (b) Step 1. 8(b).SUNG AND NAM: SIMPLE SNUBBER CONFIRMATION FOR THREE-LEVEL GTO INVERTERS 251 (a) Fig. Commutation paths during the transition from (b) S0 (c) to S (d) 01 : (a) Initial state. Note again that our proposed on each arm. 7(c) and using (36). its solution when reduces to zero. the load current flows through the freewheeling diodes and Commutation sequences and the equivalent circuits are shown in Figs. Thus snubber has only one dissipation resistor only one chopper per arm can handle the energy recovery as shown in Fig. the voltage over remains During the while the voltage over increases. 7(c) that (35) For simplicity. the solution and corresponding values are obtained such that (39) limit the voltage rising rate of At the final state. the load current rejected Step 1): When is absorbed by both and as shown in Fig. In Step 1. [12]. 6. a voltage This voltage overshoot will overshoot is generated over We obtain disappear soon in the current loop from Fig. Then. a chopper circuit is used in place of a dissipation resistor. [13]. and obtained from . To recover the energy into the dc-link capacitor. (c) Step 2. Note that this equivalent circuit is identical to Fig. by turn-off operation.e. 7(a) that (32) (33) Note that the derivation process of (33) is similar to that of (20). We obtain from (32) and (33) that (34) is the same which is identical to (22). the solution is given by which is the same as (28). ENERGY RECOVERY CIRCUITS In high-power inverter systems. 8(a). In Fig. 7. as (24). we assume that obtain from (35) that is equal to zero. decreases linearly from to zero during the period. (d) Step 3. Equivalent circuits during the transition from S0 to S 01 : Applying KCL at point P in Fig. we (36) (37) (c) Fig. 6(b). This step ends at when reaches Step 3): Due to the current flowing through . (37). the snubber . it is common to recover the energy stored in the snubber circuits [6].

14. for the PWM sequence . Energy recovery circuit. In the first case. we obtain and a the critical rate of rise of off-state voltage maximum rate of rise of on-state current • Step 1) (Capacitor): Choose capacitance such that and The voltage rating of capacitors and should meet • Step 2) (Inductor): Choose inductance such that Obviously. can sufficiently larger than be regarded as a voltage source. the turn ratio of the transformer is chosen such that the energy is transferred during the turnoff period (flyback chopper) [10]. If the voltage level over exceeds a threshold level. Energy transfer during the on period. Using the two IGBT’s prevents the magnetization of the transformer [1]. The power rating of the resistor (41) In calculating the transferred energy from the snubber . We calculate the total energy transfer from the snubber in a inductors and capacitors to storage capacitor pulsewidth modulation (PWM) cycle. (b) Three-arm integration to a single chopper. however. MARCH 1999 (a) Fig. we may summarize the design procedure of the proposed snubber components. [3]. we neglect since they are small capacitors to There are two operations in the compared with change: when changes from to zero and when changes from to The amount of transferred energy for the two cases is different. the transferred energy is equal to (42) . V. DESIGN PROCEDURE AND SIMULATION RESULTS Based on the circuit analysis. the chopper size or the power rating of dissipation resistor must be estimated based on (44). neglecting the diode recovery current. 4(d) and 10] and is equal to In the second case. then the two insulated gate bipolar transistors (IGBT’s) begin to switch alternately. If the capacitance of (for example.252 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS. The stored energy in is transferred to the storage capacitor when inductor turns off from a conducting state [see Figs. it is normal to choose . (b) resistor is replaced by a capacitor to which charges are transferred whenever the stored in is discharging paths are formed. is undesirable because the current may go beyond the limits of IGBT or diode rating. Hence. VOL. 8. (a) For an arm. the total energy per arm is equal to transferred to (44) Thus. 2. Design Procedure We assume that a proper GTO is selected for an inverter. where is the minimum turn-on time of the GTO. the transferred energy is equal to (43) Therefore. [11]. 100 times). A. Energy can then be delivered to the dc link during both turn-on and turnoff periods. NO. current rating of inductor should be larger than • Step 3) (Resistor): To ensure safe discharging during such that turn-on period. and maximum load current with a specified dc-link voltage From the GTO manufacturer’s specification.

where is the repetitive peak off-state voltage and is the maximum controllable turn-off current. (b) v G2 . (b) v G1 . For we choose A/ s. and (d) vCS 3 . vCS 2 .SUNG AND NAM: SIMPLE SNUBBER CONFIRMATION FOR THREE-LEVEL GTO INVERTERS 253 Fig. Simulation results (S0 to vCS 1 . (c) Fig. Simulation results (S1 to vCS 1 . and the peak turn-on current of while the load current is 300 A. in part. 11. 9(a) that is 260 growing rate of is almost 1000 A A/ s. where is the PWM switching frequency [see (44)]. (b) v LS1 . Simulation Results All the simulations were carried out for a three-level single arm using the commercial simulation tool SABER with example parameters which are described in the previous subsection. (c) TABLE III COMPARISON OF DATA OBTAINED FROM ANALYSIS AND SIMULATION (ED = 2600 V. Additionally. 9 shows the inductor current inductor voltage and capacitor diode current during the commutation from voltages to off. to Step 2). Voltage and current transitions in the three basic are shown in commutations clamping Figs. vCS 4 : S0 ): (a) i LS1 . For a V/ s. 9–11. vCS 2 . vCS 2 . This relatively large current overshoot is caused. (c) must be larger than . V and We further assume that A. We then obtain from Step 1) that F and F. and A/ s. we choose according to the inequality in Step 3). For the experiment. vCS 4 : S 01 ): (a) i LS2 . we choose H. ILOAD = 300 A) . iDC 1 . by the charging current of and and results in a voltage overshoot over as shown in Fig. V/ s. on). 10. Fig. 9(a) and helps reduce the current (b) that the presence of inductor Note from Fig. Conforming a safe turn-on. and (d) vCS 3 . and (d) vCS 3 . Simulation results (S0 to vCS 1 . maximum load current is assumed to be F. iDC 1 . One can notice from Fig. we chose a GTO (ABB 5SGA A. Hence. 1028F0001) with the following ratings: V. 9(d). Since s. we let B. Fig. vCS 4 : S1 ): (a) i LS1 . we limit A. iDC 1 . 9. the safe turn off.

10(b). The current decreasing in rate of the inductor is about 65 A/ s. We can note from Fig. We simulated the chopper with a constant switching frequency (2 kHz). (a) The storage capacitor voltage vCSS . thus contributing a induces a sudden voltage drop in reduction of the turn-on switching loss. the anode–cathode voltage of . 13(b) that the voltage developed over the inductor . Snubber parameters were the same used in the simulation. 11 shows . . the values of (18). 3300 V) was constructed with commercial GTO’s (ABB 5SGA 1028F0001). MARCH 1999 Fig. SABER simulation results of the energy recovery circuit are shown in Fig. A simulation result shown in Fig. . 13(a) shows to The load current on during the commutation from is 100 A/ s. 14.254 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS. The voltage overshoot same as that of caused by the current increase in is about 340 over V [see Fig. The residual voltage oscillation might be caused by the parasitic capacitance and inductance of the circuit. showing that The voltage overshoot over caused by the current decrease is about 340 V [see Fig. 13. 10(c)]. and Fig. we have computed analytically by using (15). One should notice from Fig. Since some assumptions are used in obtaining the analytical solutions. but agree within a reasonable amount. both results are not identical. NO. One can check from Fig. remains around 220 V. 12. with and when is turning Fig. 12(d) shows the voltage of the primary coil. VI. 2. but a different environment caused us to perform the experiment V and A. and during the commutation from to ( off. Fig. on). We can observe from Figs. the anode–cathode voltage of Fig. with no voltage imbalance problem between the serially connected GTO’s in the blocking state. except for a large current undershoot and a relatively large residual voltage oscillation observed in Fig. We can see from the load terminal voltage that the switching is repeated. 9 corresponds to Fig. (28). A digital signal processor (DSP) processor TMS320C31 was used in the control boards. (31). and the current rising rate of Fig. 12(a) shows the over . Simulation results of energy recovery circuit. and one can check it by the clamped voltage of the secondary coil. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS A three-level GTO converter/inverter system for an induction motor (500 kW. 13(a) and (b). VOL. 11(b) and (c)]. (d) The voltage of the primary coil. . Table III shows both results. 11(b) (165 V/ s) is about the that the voltage rising rate of shown in Fig. The PWM signals were transmitted to the GTO gate amps through optical fibers. A space-vector modulation technique was used to generate three-level PWM signals and was implemented in EPLD by utilizing counters and digital comparators. (b) The load terminal voltage. 13(b) shows the corresponding voltage over inductor and the anode–cathode voltage of The experimental condition and the simulation conditions are different. 12(c) shows the voltage of the secondary coil. is about 85 A. 9–11 and that substantiates (2) and (3). 10(c) and are the same that the voltage rising rates of increases without affecting (158 V/ s). The large current undershoot is caused by the snubber diode reverse recovery current. the shapes agree. 12. Fig. Energy sequence Fig. but one can compare the voltage and current transition shapes. To verify the previous analytical results. and during the commutation from to ( off. 10 shows is transferred to the dc link during the turn-off period of the chopper switches. Fig. on). 12(b) shows the load terminal voltage voltage. When we compare both figures. and (40) and numerically by using SABER. (c) The voltage of the secondary coil.

vCS2 : (b) v CS1 .SUNG AND NAM: SIMPLE SNUBBER CONFIRMATION FOR THREE-LEVEL GTO INVERTERS 255 (a) Fig. 14(b) shows that the is controlled at 38 V/ s by the action of rising rate of The corresponding simulation result. vG1 : Fig. 14(b) rate of and the corresponding shows the capacitor voltage anode–cathode voltage of Fig. is shown in Fig. Experimental plots during the transition from S1 (b) to S0 : (a) i LS1 . 14. Fig. v G1 : (a) Fig. 13. although in different condition. v CS 2: (b) v LS 1. Experimental plots during the transition from S0 (b) to S1 : (a) i LS 1. . 14(a) shows and when is turning to The current decreasing off during the transition from is 15 A/ s under 85-A load current. vCS1 . v CS 1. 10.

14. [8] B. vol. no. v CS 2: (b) v CS 2. “A nondissipative snubber circuit for highpower GTO inverters.. Tamai.. the proposed snubber can be looked upon as an extended version of the McMurray snubber for the three-level system. all snubber capacitors in an arm participate in limiting the voltage rising rate of a GTO. within a small range for error or minor adjustments. ILOAD = 85 A) Fig. Nabae. Hernes. v G2 : TABLE IV COMPARISON OF DATA OBTAINED FROM ANALYSIS AND EXPERIMENTS (ED = 1000 V. H. [7] J. 1997. 264–272. an inductor is also integrated into the capacitor circuit. pp. 5. 4. and T. VOL. Okayama. S. REFERENCES [1] W. S.” IEEE Trans. 1981. Rec. due the maximum overshoot value.” in EPE Annu. PEL-2. Akagi. [3] J. 5) reduced capacitance of snubber capacitors. “Large capacity high performance 3-level GTO inverter system for steel main rolling mill drives... pp. Applicat. 15(a) shows and when is turning to Fig. rising rates of Table IV shows data obtained from analytical solutions and experimental results. Werner. IAS Annu. pp. and H. [6] H. Ind. Meeting.” in IEEE PESC Rec. 25. it can stay at . MARCH 1999 (a) Fig. 2) suitable structure for snubber energy recovery.. 11. 145–156. 13. “A new snubber circuit for high efficiency and overvoltage limitation in three-level GTO inverters. 14(b). Ind. 17. Note further that from Fig. Steinbakk. although in a different condition. 518–523. Furthermore. Jenset. we can see that the voltage are the same. 44. vol. 42–53. Hyun. 15(b). 2.. I. F. M. and D. Experimental plots during the transition from S0 (b) to S 01 : (a) i LS 2. 620–626.” IEEE Trans. of reaches V after the anode–cathode voltage of overshoot. but in the RLD/RCD snubber circuit. Ind. “A circuit design for clamping an over-voltage in three-level GTO inverters. McMurray. 15(b) also shows off during the transition from and the anode–cathode voltage of The rising rate is about 42 V/ s. [2] T. Applicat. 1984. Suh. “3 level GTO converter-inverter pair system for large capacity induction motor drive. pp. Suh. 2. vol. Simulation and experimental works have demonstrated the validity of the proposed snubber.” in Conf. no.. We can see that both results agree. and M. is shown in Fig. which is about the same value as that of shown in Fig. Hyun. 15. 1993. 174–179. B. vol. 4) guaranteed voltage balancing mechanism between serially connected GTO’s.” IEEE Trans. Holtz and K. 651–656. Rogne. Undeland. From these facts. no. Takahashi. pp. Tamai et al. Koyama. July 1987.” IEEE Trans. “A snubber configuration for both power transistor and GTO PWM inverters. The characteristics of the proposed snubber are: 1) small number of parts. ’96. thus there is no extra inductor energy discharging circuit. v CS 1. pp. which verifies (2). H. especially a reduced number of resistors. From all experimental figures. Rec. . “A new neutral-point-clamped PWM inverter. Sept. 45–50. Power Electron. T. pp.256 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS. CONCLUDING REMARKS A simple snubber circuit is proposed for a three-level GTO inverter/converter. In the proposed snubber circuit. [5] S. VII. without returning to The corresponding simulation to the blocking action of result. Meeting Conf. S. S. Suh and D. 3) second-order current discharging dynamics relieving the large initial current loading to GTO’s. NO. Applicat. [4] A. A. vol. S. 1989. pp. Fuji.” in IECON ’94. “Efficient snubbers for voltage-source GTO inverters.

1993. 1956. M.S. highpower drives. both from Seoul National University. Verghese. Reading.A. power converters. F. T. Shakweh. Irokawa. in 1986.S. [13] S. Labrique. He received the B.S. respectively. and M. in 1980 and 1982. Jeong-Hyoun Sung (S’96) was born in Pusan. [12] J. 1995. [11] N. A. on August 6. Schlecht. Undeland. Kassakian. POSTECH University. 1572–1577. pp. Pohang.SUNG AND NAM: SIMPLE SNUBBER CONFIRMATION FOR THREE-LEVEL GTO INVERTERS 257 [9] G. 1970. New York: Wiley. T. respectively. “A new snubber energy recovery method for voltage source self-commutated converters.S. MA: Addison-Wesley. 1991. Kitahara. Power Electronic Converters. and nonlinear systems analysis. and T. and W. Korea. He received the B. Nakajima. degree in electrical engineering at POSTECH University. and G. Mohan. degree in chemical technology and the M. M. Kchikawa.” in IPEC-Yokohama ’95. [10] J. Pohang. C. Kwanghee Nam (S’83–M’86) was born in Seoul. Korea. degrees in electrical engineering from POSTECH University.D. P. Robbins. His main interests are ac motor control. Taufiq and Y. degree in mathematics and the Ph. Principles of Power Electronics. and the M. Seguier and F. Korea. Austin. degree in control and instrumentation engineering.D. New York: Springer-Verlag. Seoul. pp. Korea. F. degree in electrical engineering from the University of Texas. He is currently an Associate Professor in the Department of Electrical Engineering. He is currently working towards the Ph. Power Electronics. “New snubber energy recovery scheme for high power traction drive. . on September 26.” in IPEC-Yokohama ’95. in 1995 and 1997. 825–830. His main interests are ac motor control and power inverter/converter systems. G.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->