IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 23, NO.
4, JULY 2008
Evaluation of Resonant Damping Techniques
for Z-Source Current-Type Inverter
Poh Chiang Loh, Member, IEEE, Chandana Jayampathi Gajanayake, Student Member, IEEE,
D. Mahinda Vilathgamuwa, Senior Member, IEEE, and Frede Blaabjerg, Fellow, IEEE
Abstract—For the renewable energy sources whose outputs vary
continuously, a Z-source current-type inverter has been proposed
as a possible buck-boost alternative for grid-interfacing. With a
unique X-shaped LC network connected between its dc power
source and inverter topology, Z-source current-type inverter is
however expected to suffer from compounded resonant complica-
tions in addition to those associated with its second-order output
filter. To improve its damping performance, this paper proposes
the careful integration of Posicast or three-step compensators
before the inverter pulse-width modulator for damping triggered
resonant oscillations. In total, two compensators are needed for
wave-shaping the inverter boost factor and modulation ratio, and
they can conveniently be implemented using first-in first-out stacks
and embedded timers of modern digital signal processors widely
used in motion control applications. Both techniques are found to
damp resonance of ac filter well, but for cases of transiting from
current-buck to boost state, three-step technique is less effective
due to the sudden intermediate discharging interval introduced
by its non-monotonic stepping (unlike the monotonic stepping of
Posicast damping). These findings have been confirmed both in
simulations and experiments using an implemented laboratory
prototype.
Index Terms—Buck-boost, current source inverters (CSIs), posi-
cast control, pulsewidth modulation (PWM), resonant damping,
Z-source inverters.
I. INTRODUCTION
T O date, current source inverter (CSI) has found applica-
tions in grid-interfaced inverter for superconducting mag-
netic energy storage (SMES) and other utility systems where
its large dc inductive current filtering and implicit output short-
circuit protection are found to be desirable [1]. Despite these
applications and the direct control of ac current, CSI suffers
from oscillatory complications caused by its ac-side second-
Manuscript received March 28, 2006; revised March 19, 2007. Published June
13, 2008. This paper was presented in part at the 21st IEEE Applied Power
Electronics Conference (APEC’06), Dallas, TX, March 19–23, 2006. This work
was supported by the Ministry of Defence (Singapore), Nanyang Technological
University, and Aalborg University under Grants RG98/05, MD-NTU/05/04,
and SUG30/04, by an Aalborg Visiting Fellowship, and by the Defense Science
and Technology Agency. Recommended for publication by Associate Editor
L. P. Chiang.
P. C. Loh, C. J. Gajanayake, and D. M. Vilathgamuwa are with the School
of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Nanyang Technological Univer-
sity, Singapore S639798 (e-mail: pcloh@ieee.org; chan0178@ntu.edu.sg;
emahinda@ntu.edu.sg).
F. Blaabjerg is with the Institute of Energy Technology, Aalborg University,
Aalborg East DK-9220, East, Denmark (e-mail: fbl@iet.aau.dk).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPEL.2008.924590
0885-8993/$25.00 © 2008 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Hindustan College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 05,2010 at 15:54:05 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
2035
order filter [2] and limited capability of only dc–ac cur-
rent-buck conversion, which can be a serious limitation for re-
newable sources with wide-ranging output operating conditions.
The constraint of oscillatory response has motivated the de-
velopment of various damping techniques (preferably without
using physical damping resistors to minimize losses) with one of
the most recent solutions being the three-step damping method
reported in [2].
For the second constraint of only current-buck power con-
version, the traditional solution is to add a controlled front-end
rectifier for stepping up the inverter dc link current, but unfor-
tunately, adding a controlled rectifier would usually complicate
the inverter control and synchronization, and might not function
well under severely distorted supply conditions. As an alterna-
tive solution, the Z-source current-type inverter reported in [3]
can be used. Functionally, the Z-source current-type inverter
is a robust single-stage buck-boost converter derived from the
Z-source voltage-type topology presented in [4]–[6], and can
easily be controlled by adding unconventional open-circuit
states to the inverter pulsewidth modulated state sequence.
Under steady-state conditions, the Z-source current-type in-
verter functions well, but during a dynamic step transition, it is
expected to response sub-optimally due to the oscillatory
complications introduced by its unique dc-side Z-source net-
work, in addition to those caused by its ac-side second-order
filter.
Based on the above problem identification, this paper presents
and evaluates the careful integration of Posicast or three-step
compensators to the Z-source current-type inverter for res-
onant damping (particularly for grid-interfaced applications).
Both types of compensators can conveniently be implemented,
together with the inverter control and modulation algorithms, in
a low-cost digital signal processor (DSP) widely used in motion-
control applications, hence offering an attractive low-cost ap-
proach for rendering the inverter as a better grid power conver-
sion solution. To begin with, the paper reviews basic operational
principles of a Z-source current-type inverter, indicating specif-
ically sources of resonant oscillations. The paper then presents
Posicast damping technique, and discusses through mathemat-
ical formulation and frequency domain analysis how multiple
Posicast compensators can be added to the inverter control paths
for improving its damping performance. Similar analytical for-
mulations are next performed for the three-step damping tech-
nique to specifically identify that three-step technique is ef-
fective in damping ac filter oscillations, but less effective in
2036
Fig. 1. Topology of Z-source current-type inverter.
damping dc Z-source oscillations. All findings in the paper have
been confirmed in simulation and experimentally with atten-
tion focused on validating the merits and shortcomings of each
damping technique.
II. OPERATIONAL PRINCIPLES OF Z-SOURCE
CURRENT-TYPE INVERTER
Fig. 1 shows the topology of a Z-source current-type in-
verter [3], where the only topological difference identified, as
compared to a conventional CSI, is the presence of a Z-source
impedance network comprising of a split inductor
and two capacitors . Using the Z-source network,
the derived current-type inverter can step-up its output current
by assuming open-circuit states with all power devices turned
OFF, in addition to the six conventional CSI active states
and three null states (open-circuit states are not allowed for
conventional CSI since they give rise to large over-voltage
due to the breaking of dc link current). As documented in [3],
mathematical expressions for the peak inverter dc link current
and ac output current , with open-circuit
states inserted, are derived as
(1)
where and are the input and Z-source inductor currents,
and are the open-circuit duration and switching period,
and are the control boost factor and modulation ratio respec-
tively, and the term in { } represents the ac output of a conven-
tional CSI. Obviously, (1) shows that the ac output current of a
Z-source current-type inverter can be stepped down below
by decreasing and maintaining , and boosted above
by increasing above 1.
Although having the Z-source network gives the inverter
buck-boost capability, it also introduces new resonant
complications caused by oscillatory charging/discharging of
its inductors and capacitors, in addition to those caused by
the ac filter placed at the inverter output for harmonic filtering
(see Fig. 1 for the locations of the two sources of resonance).
These oscillatory responses, usually triggered by the step tran-
sitions in command references, can over-stress power devices,
passive components and other power equipment connected to
the inverter, and should preferably be damped using software
solutions, which can conveniently be integrated to the inverter
DSP control algorithms, without using external resistors to
Authorized licensed use limited to: Hindustan College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 05,2010 at 15:54:05 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 23, NO. 4, JULY 2008
Fig. 2. Control algorithm with Posicast or three-step compensators.
minimize conduction losses. Note that for this work, the inten-
tion is to propose techniques for damping resonance under all
circumstances, regardless of the LC values found in the system
and their influences on the resonant amplification. Therefore
to avoid diverting away from the paper intent and over-length-
ening the paper, readers interested in resonant fundamental
principles can refer to [7] for details.
III. POSICAST DAMPING TECHNIQUE
Posicast is a classical feedforward technique originally pro-
posed in [8] for oscillatory damping of lightly damped systems.
Unfortunately, it is fundamentally a pole cancellation technique
that depends on the proper tuning of its control parameters,
and is therefore sensitive to inaccurate knowledge of the plant
damped resonant frequency (a common feature shared by all
feedforward techniques that rely on dynamic cancellation). To
reduce its parametric and load sensitivities, [9] has proposed the
inclusion of Posicast within the system feedback loop, and has
proven through sensitivity analysis that feedback control with
Posicast yields a system, whose sensitivity within the system
bandwidth reduces as the system loop gain increases (but within
stability limits). This finding and the suggested design proce-
dure in [9] have rendered Posicast as a good damping technique
with a wide range of industrial and utility applications like in
the dynamic voltage restorers [10].
Appreciating its advantages, this section now explores the
possibility of using Posicast for the dynamic damping of a
Z-source current-type inverter. To begin with, Fig. 2 shows
the appropriate placement of two Posicast compensators for
damping changes in and . Mathematically, the Posicast
compensators can be expressed as:
S-Domain Representation
(2)
Steady-State Representation
(3)
where denotes the system angular frequency, and
represent the step response overshoot and damped response
period of , respectively. An example showing the op-
erating principle of (2) is given in Fig. 3, where the Posi-
cast compensator is shown taking in a unit step as input,
and outputting an intermediate signal
LOH et al.: EVALUATION OF RESONANT DAMPING TECHNIQUES 2037

Fig. 3. Control block structure for demonstrating Posicast and three-step

damping.

Fig. 5. Bode plots of Posicast compensator.

revealing the dynamic damping performance of Posicast

Fig. 4. Posicast compensator intermediate waveforms. Top to bottom:
u ,u + u , u , u , and u (see Fig. 3).
in addition to . Analyzing the expression for
(2), it is deduced that is a negative pulse whose height
and width depend on and respectively. This nega-
tive pulse essentially reshapes the original reference step
by subtracting a scaled amount from the original reference
before re-adding the same scaled amount back at
to give a monotonically increasing two-step solution (see
third trace of Fig. 4). Its impact on the plant step response
can more clearly be analyzed by passing
and independently through two identical dupli-
cates of the plant (labeled as plants 1 and 2 in Fig. 3), before
adding up their outputs to give the overall plant response.
Observing the fourth and fifth traces of Fig. 4, it is noted
that by tuning and , oscillations of the intermediate
plant outputs and can be made 180 -out-of-phase
with the same oscillating amplitude. Summation of and
then produces a well-damped resultant plant output ,
compensator.
In the frequency domain, Posicast appears as a multiple-notch
filter with an infinite number of zeros spaced at odd multiples
of the damped natural frequency, as shown in Fig. 5. By tuning
and , the first pair of zeros (first notch) can be made to
cancel the dominant pair of poles of the lightly damped plant,
resulting in a less oscillatory plant output. Note however that
Posicast pole cancellation is not the same as pole cancellation
using model inversion since Posicast has limited high frequency
gain (see Fig. 5) and therefore is less sensitive to noise, unlike
model inversion, which has increasing gain at high frequency.
Being a notch filter with multiple notches, Posicast damper also
functions as a noise attenuator for removing harmonics at odd
multiples of the damped natural frequency from the modulating
signals, hence minimizing their influences on the system perfor-
mance.
u ,
IV. THREE-STEP DAMPING TECHNIQUE
Instead of Posicast, alternative three-step compensators [2]
in can also be inserted before the pulsewidth modulation (PWM)
block shown in Fig. 2 for resonant damping. Mathematically,
the three-step compensators can be expressed as:
S-Domain Representation
2
(4)
Steady-State Representation
(5)
where and denote time delays, whose expressions
are derived in [2] by formulating empirical differential
equations. The formulation of empirical equations how-
ever does not visually illustrate the effect of (4), which is
better illustrated here by using the control block arrange-
ment shown in Fig. 3.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Hindustan College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 05,2010 at 15:54:05 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
2038 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 23, NO. 4, JULY 2008

Fig. 7. Bode plots of three-step compensator.

(gain of Posicast is always lesser than 0 dB at all frequencies).

These 10 dB peaks unfortunately amplify harmonic noises at
their respective frequencies, giving a poorer system response in
the steady state.

V. PARAMETRIC SENSITIVITIES OF DAMPING TECHNIQUES

Noted in (2) and (4) that the effectiveness of the presented
damping techniques depends on the correct tuning of , which
in turn depends on the accurate measurement of the system
Fig. 6. Three-step compensator intermediate waveforms. Top to bottom: u , parameters. A careful evaluation of the technique parametric
u ,u + u , u , u and u (see Fig. 3). sensitivities is therefore necessary, and can be mathematically
performed by computing the magnitude of (3) for Posicast
damping and that of (5) for three-step damping, as follows.
As indicated in Fig. 3, a unit step input is fed to a three-step (Computation presented here is expressed in terms of the
compensator to produce an intermediate signal generic variables and , representing either the Z-source
, which is a negative pulse delayed by , with a width parameters or ac filter parameters ).
given by . Adding to then gives a three- Posicast Damping
step non-monotonic “fro-back-fro” waveform (see third trace
of Fig. 6, which obviously shows a waveform that increases,
decreases and increases again), whose damping effect can be
demonstrated by passing and independently through
two identical duplicates of the plant (see Fig. 3) before sum-
ming their outputs ( and ) to give the overall plant re- (6)
sponse . Noted from the last three traces of
Fig. 6 that again produces an oscillation with opposite Three-Step Damping
polarity for canceling with that produced by to give a well-
damped plant response . But unlike Posicast, which damps
by creating a smooth 180 -out-of-phase intermediate waveform
without delay, the three-step compensation technique damps by
creating a delayed (by one-sixth of an oscillatory period since
6) piecewise waveform, starting with an oscilla- (7)
tory trace for one-sixth of a period (since 6)
before following a second smooth oscillating wave-shape. The where denotes the gain of the damping compensators.
three-step method therefore has a finite phase difference at the Solving (6) and (7) for , and normalizing it relative to its
frequency of pole cancellation, as illustrated by the first fre- nominal value then gives:
quency notch in the Bode plot of (5) (see Fig. 7). Comparing Posicast Damping
Figs. 5 and 7, it is also noted that three-step compensator has
numerous 10 dB peaks at frequencies of 3 2 1 , where
(8)
and is an integer greater than or equal to zero

Authorized licensed use limited to: Hindustan College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 05,2010 at 15:54:05 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
LOH et al.: EVALUATION OF RESONANT DAMPING TECHNIQUES
Fig. 8. Attenuation factors achieved under different percentage variations of
inductance with Posicast (solid) and three-step (dotted) damping.
Three-Step Damping
(9)
Noting that 1 and assuming a constant capaci-
tance , variations in ( , where
1 is the nominal inductance value) and
are derived as 2 (alternatively, a con-
stant can be assumed for evaluating sensitivity level of ).
Normalizing relative to its nominal value then gives
. Using this expression, (8) and (9), the
total ranges of inductive variations (both above and below )
for the two damping techniques are derived as:
Posicast Damping
(10)
Three-Step Damping
(11)
Plotting the attenuation factor 1 versus and
for the two damping techniques respectively then gives the para-
metric sensitivity diagram in Fig. 8. As expected, the level of
attenuation decreases when varies from its nominal value,
but a closer view of Fig. 8 would reveal that the two compen-
sators still provide an attenuation factor of 10 even when
varies by 20%. This performance is comparatively better than
the case with no damping scheme, and can be achieved with
no significant increase in computational cost (see Section VII
describing the physical implementation). In passing, it is also
commented that the achieved damping performance can be fur-
ther improved by using the damping schemes in a closed-loop
system [9], and for grid-interfaced applications, where in-
cludes the grid-impedance, for damping the ac filter reso-
nance can be adaptively tuned if the grid impedance is actively
measured using, for example, the non-characteristic harmonic
current injection method reported in [11].
Authorized licensed use limited to: Hindustan College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 05,2010 at 15:54:05 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
2039
VI. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF DAMPING TECHNIQUES
Based on the above descriptions, Posicast and three-step
damping should conceptually perform well, but when used with
a Z-source current-type inverter, their performances have to be
re-evaluated due to the simultaneous presence of a dc resonant
circuit, an ac circuit and their cross-coupling interactions in the
inverter circuitry. This section now presents a sequential testing
procedure using Matlab/Simulink to show that both Posicast
and three-step compensators damp the ac resonance well, but
unfortunately, the “fro-back-fro” wave-shaping of the three-step
compensator is less effective in damping the dc Z-source reso-
nance. For the testing, and are either changed individually
or simultaneously to vary the inverter output current, which
certainly is needed for controlling the output power supplied
by an inverter, interfaced to a stiff grid, whose voltage cannot
be altered. (This current control method is similarly adopted by
the widely used voltage-source grid-connected inverter, where
a current control loop is usually used for controlling the power
flowing into the grid, whose voltage cannot be varied).
A. Step Transition in M With a Constant B
From (1), stepping (0.5 0.9) with kept constant at
unity 0 would theoretically trigger an ac filter reso-
nance only since remains unchanged with a constant (even
though slight oscillations may be observed due to cross-cou-
pling interactions between dc and ac sides of an inverter), while
steps together with . During this step transition, Fig. 9
clearly shows oscillations (whose amplitude depends on the size
of step transition in ) superimposed on the ac output current
when no damping scheme is used with the Z-source current-type
inverter. On the other hand, with Posicast or three-step compen-
sators added, Figs. 10 and 11 show the effective damping of ac
resonance with virtually no performance differences identified
between the two damping techniques.
B. Step Transition in B With a Constant M
For this work, is selected to step from 1 to 1.61
with kept constant at 0.5, for studying interesting
effects that might occur when a Z-source current-type inverter
transits from a current-buck to a current-boost state. From (1),
the step transition in would result in (oscillatory) increase in
and , as depicted in Fig. 12 when no damping scheme is
used. Also noted in Fig. 12 is the transition of dc current from a
constant value of 4.5 A ( , current-buck state) to a boosted
waveform switching between 0 A (open-circuit) and
(non open-circuit).
With Posicast damping added, the improved current wave-
forms are shown in Fig. 13, where is less oscillatory and
is less distorted, confirming the good performance of Posi-
cast damping. Instead, when three-step damping is used, Fig. 14
shows the captured dc and ac current waveforms, which unfor-
tunately are more distorted than those of Posicast. The distinct
feature noted here is the multiple transitions between current-
buck and boost states caused by the “fro-back-fro” waveform of
2040 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 23, NO. 4, JULY 2008

Fig. 9. Simulated dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during a step in-
=
crease in M from 0.5 to 0.9 with B 1, source current I = 4.5 A (see Fig. 1)
Fig. 11. Simulated dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during a step
increase in M from 0.5 to 0.9 with B = 1, source current I =
4.5 A (see
and no damping. Fig. 1) and three-step damping.

Fig. 10. Simulated dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during a step
increase in M from 0.5 to 0.9 with B = 1, source current I =
4.5 A (see
Fig. 12. Simulated dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during a step
increase in B from 1 to 1.61 with M =0.5, source current I =
4.5 A (see
Fig. 1) and Posicast damping. Fig. 1) and no damping.

three-step damping (unlike the monotonically increasing wave-

form of Posicast, see third traces of Fig. 4 and Fig. 6). To be
precise, the “fro-back-fro” action causes the inverter to return
back to the current-buck state during the short interval from
to , where no open-circuit state is used. The Z-source
network is therefore always connected to the external ac load
during this interval, allowing magnetic energy gained by the
Z-source inductors before to discharge through the load.
This discharging of energy is clearly reflected by an increase
in ac current during the short current-buck interval. Three-step
damping is therefore effective with ac resonant damping, but is
less satisfactory with dc Z-source damping.

C. Simultaneous Step Transitions in B and M

The individual step transitions described in the earlier two
sections are now combined for studying the system response Fig. 13. Simulated dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during a step
under simultaneous step transitions in both and . Specif- increase in B from 1 to 1.61 with M =0.5, source current I =
4.5 A (see
Fig. 1) and Posicast damping.
ically, is stepped from 0.5 to 0.75 while is stepped from

Authorized licensed use limited to: Hindustan College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 05,2010 at 15:54:05 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
LOH et al.: EVALUATION OF RESONANT DAMPING TECHNIQUES
Fig. 14. Simulated dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during a step
increase in B from 1 to 1.61 with M =0.5, source current I =4.5 A (see
Fig. 1) and three-step damping.
Fig. 15. Simulated dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during simulta-
neous step increases in M from 0.5 to 0.75 and B from 1 to 1.61 with source
current I = 4 A (see Fig. 1) and no damping.
1 to 1.61. Under these transitions, increases to a value sim-
ilar to that obtained in Section VI-B since [see (1)]
and the same final steady-state value is used in both cases.
On the other hand, a larger transition in , as compared to that
in Section VI-A, is expected with the selected and values
since (depending on both and ).
With no damping technique incorporated, Fig. 15 shows sig-
nificant oscillations superimposed on the dc link current upon
initiation of the transient event. These dc-side oscillations in
turn distort the inverter ac output currents with slight ac resonant
oscillations observed. As anticipated, the observed oscillations
can be damped by adding either a Posicast or three-step damper
before the PWM modulator (see Fig. 2), as demonstrated in
Figs. 16 and 17, respectively. Between the two damping tech-
niques, Posicast damper exhibits a better response with both its
dc and ac current oscillations suppressed, as compared to three-
step damper whose dynamic “fro-back-fro” transition causes a
Authorized licensed use limited to: Hindustan College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 05,2010 at 15:54:05 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
2041
Fig. 16. Simulated dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during simulta-
neous step increases in M from 0.5 to 0.75 and B from 1 to 1.61 with source
current I = 4 A (see Fig. 1) and Posicast damping.
Fig. 17. Simulated dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during simulta-
neous step increases in M from 0.5 to 0.75 and B from 1 to 1.61 with source
=
current I 4 A (see Fig. 1) and three-step damping.
sudden current surge during the intermediate non-chopping in-
terval.
VII. EXPERIMENTAL Z-SOURCE PROTOTYPE AND RESULTS
For verifying the damping techniques experimentally, a
Z-source inverter prototype was implemented in the laboratory
using 20 mH inductors and 15 F capacitors, connected as in
Fig. 1. (As a general guideline, the capacitance used must be rel-
atively small to allow the inverter to operate with current-source
characteristics, while at the same time, provide a dc current
flow path during open-circuit states [3], [4]). The resulting
inverter was powered from a constant dc voltage source with a
20 mH inductor connected in series (initial source current set
to 4 A), and controlled using a commercially available
digital signal processor (DSP) and a digital erasable/complex
programmable logic device (EPLD or CPLD). Details of the
controller design and PWM algorithm are already documented
by the authors in [3], and are therefore not duplicated here, but
in brief, the DSP was used for computing control/modulation
2042 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 23, NO. 4, JULY 2008

TABLE I
PERFORMANCE SUMMARY OF PRESENTED DAMPING TECHNIQUES

Fig. 19. Experimental dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during simul-
Fig. 18. Experimental dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during si- taneous step increases in M from 0.5 to 0.75 and B from 1 to 1.61 with Posicast
multaneous step increases in M from 0.5 to 0.75 and B from 1 to 1.61 without damping (source current I = =
4 A (see Fig. 1), vertical scale 3 A/div, hori-
damping (source current I = =
4 A (see Fig. 1), vertical scale 3 A/div, hori- =
zontal scale 5 ms/div).
=
zontal scale 5 ms/div).

commands while the EPLD was used for mapping out the
correct gating signals for switching the Z-source current-type
inverter. Comparing with the work in [3], the only additional
computational capacities needed by the proposed damping
techniques are two first-in first-out (FIFO) stacks and a gen-
eral-purpose timer for implementing the damping “1
blocks shown in Fig. 2. For modern commercial DSPs, both
of the mentioned functionalities are already embedded in an
integrated chip together with the processor core, implying that
the improvement in damping performance can be achieved with
no significant increase in computational cost.
With no damping scheme used, Fig. 18 shows the captured
waveforms during simultaneous step transitions in from 0.5
to 0.75 and from 1 to 1.61 . As ob-
served, the dc link current rises towards a significant peak value
upon initiation of the transient event, which in turn distorts the
ac output current with an overshoot noted in the first half cycle.
By adding two monotonically transiting Posicast dampers to
the inverter controller, Fig. 19 shows less oscillatory dc and ac
currents with a much shorter settling time. Replacing the Posi-
cast dampers with three-step dampers, Fig. 20 shows the cor-
responding waveforms with a sudden current surge observed
during the middle “back” interval of the “fro-back-fro” path fol-
lowed by the three-step dampers. Comparing the three plots, it
is therefore obvious that Posicast achieves the best damping per-
formance with the least distorted ac output current generated.
Note that for the experimental plots, the extent of oscillations
observed is not as severe as those obtained from simulations
(see Figs. 9–17). This is because for the simulation studies, a
stiff constant current source was used, but for the experimental
”
Fig. 20. Experimental dc (top) and ac (bottom) current responses during si-
multaneous step increases in M from 0.5 to 0.75 and B from 1 to 1.61 with
three-step damping (source current I =
4 A (see Fig. 1), vertical scale 3 =
=
A/div, horizontal scale 5 ms/div).
testing, a constant voltage source in series with a 20 mH in-
ductor was used to emulate a current source. The finite induc-
tance value for the latter unfortunately is not strong enough to
hold the source current constant at its pre-transient value
of 4 A. Instead, is noted to drop slightly when increases
(since a longer open-circuit duration now appears across the
input dc voltage source), giving rise to a less severe current
step change, and hence less severe oscillations. Despite of that,
the proper damping of oscillations achieved by the Posicast and
three-step dampers is still clearly illustrated by the experimental
plots, hence confirming their theoretical soundness.
VIII. CONCLUSION
This paper presents Posicast and three-step damping
techniques for Z-source current-type inverter control. Both

Authorized licensed use limited to: Hindustan College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 05,2010 at 15:54:05 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
LOH et al.: EVALUATION OF RESONANT DAMPING TECHNIQUES
techniques function by reshaping step transitions in command
references using time delays, and therefore can conveniently
be implemented using FIFO stacks and internal timers of a
low-cost DSP widely used in motion control. Through sim-
ulation and experimental confirmations, Posicast, being a
monotonically stepping solution, is found to exhibit better
damping performance, unlike the “fro-back-fro” three-step
technique, which unfortunately introduces an intermediate
current-buck interval during a step transition in . This short
interval causes magnetic energy gained earlier in the Z-source
network to discharge through external ac load, resulting in a
steep rise and hence a more distorted ac output current. Lastly,
for easy reference, Table I provides a comprehensive summary
of the performance features of the two damping techniques
identified in this paper.
REFERENCES
[1] Z. C. Zhang and B. T. Ooi, “Multimodular current-source SPWM con-
verters for superconducting a magnetic energy storage system,” IEEE
Trans. Power Electron., vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 250–256, Jul. 1993.
[2] Y. Neba, “A simple method for suppression of resonance oscillation in
PWM current source converter,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 20,
no. 1, pp. 132–139, Jan. 2005.
[3] P. C. Loh, D. M. Vilathgamuwa, C. J. Gajanayake, L. T. Wong, and C.
P. Ang, “Z-source current-type inverters: Digital modulation and logic
implementation,” in Proc. IEEE Annu. Meeting, 2005, pp. 940–947.
[4] F. Z. Peng, “Z-source inverter,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 39, no. 2,
pp. 504–510, Mar./Apr. 2003.
[5] F. Z. Peng, A. Joseph, J. Wang, M. Shen, L. Chen, Z. Pan, E.
Ortiz-Rivera, and Y. Huang, “Z-source inverter for motor drives,”
IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 857–863, Jul. 2005.
[6] P. C. Loh, D. M. Vilathgamuwa, Y. S. Lai, G. T. Chua, and Y. W. Li,
“Pulse-width modulation of Z-source inverters,” IEEE Trans. Power
Electron., vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 1346–1355, Nov. 2005.
[7] P. M. Anderson, Subsynchronous Resonance in Power Systems. New
York: IEEE Press, 1990, 0879422580.
[8] O. J. M. Smith, “Posicast control of damped oscillatory systems,” Proc.
IRE, vol. 45, pp. 1249–1255, 1957.
[9] J. Y. Hung, “Feedback control with Posicast,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Elec-
tron., vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 94–99, Feb. 2003.
[10] P. C. Loh, D. M. Vilathgamuwa, S. K. Tang, and H. L. Long, “Multi-
level dynamic voltage restorer,” IEEE Power Electron. Lett., vol. 2, no.
4, pp. 125–130, Dec. 2004.
[11] A. V. Timbus, R. Teodorescu, F. Blaabjerg, and U. Borup, “Online
grid measurement and ENS detection for PV inverter running on highly
inductive grid,” IEEE Power Electron. Lett., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 77–82,
Sep. 2004.
Poh Chiang Loh (S’01–M’04) received the B.Eng.
(with honors) and M.Eng degrees from the National
University of Singapore in 1998 and 2000, respec-
tively, and the Ph.D. degree from Monash University,
Australia, in 2002, all in electrical engineering.
During the summer of 2001, he was a visiting
scholar with the Wisconsin Electric Machine
and Power Electronics Consortium, University
of Wisconsin-Madison, where he worked on the
synchronized implementation of cascaded multilevel
inverters, and reduced common mode carrier-based
and hysteresis control strategies for multilevel inverters. From 2002 to 2003,
he was a Project Engineer with the Defense Science and Technology Agency,
Singapore, managing major defense infrastructure projects and exploring new
technology for defense applications. In 2003, he became an Assistant Professor
with the Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, and in 2005, a member
of the Visiting Staff first at the University of Hong Kong, and then at Aalborg
University, Aalborg East, Denmark. In 2007, he again returned to Aalborg
University as a member of the Visiting Staff to work on matrix converters and
the control of grid-interfaced inverters.
Dr. Loh received two third paper prizes from the IEEE-IAS IPCC committee
in 2003 and 2006. He is an Associate Editor of the IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON
POWER ELECTRONICS.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Hindustan College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 05,2010 at 15:54:05 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
2043
Chandana Jayampathi Gajanayake (S’07) re-
ceived the B.Sc. degree in electrical and electronic
engineering from the University of Peradeniya, Sri
Lanka, in 2003 and is currently pursuing the Ph.D.
degree in the School of Electrical and Electronic
Engineering, Nanyang Technological University,
Singapore.
He was with the Institute of Energy Technology,
Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark, as a Visiting
Scholar in 2006. His research interests are power con-
verters, power quality, and distributed generation.
Mr. Gajanayake is a member of the IEEE Power Electronics Society.
D. Mahinda Vilathgamuwa (S’90–M’93–SM’99)
received the B.Sc. degree in electrical engineering
from the University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka, in 1985
and the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from
Cambridge University, Cambridge, U.K., in 1993.
He joined the School of Electrical and Electronic
Engineering, Nanyang Technological University,
Singapore in 1993 as a Lecturer and he is now an
Associate Professor. He has published more than
100 research papers in refereed journals and con-
ferences. His research interests are power electronic
converters, electrical drives and power quality.
Dr. Vilathgamuwa is the Secretary of IEEE Section, Singapore. He was the
co-Chairman of the 2005 Power Electronics and Drives Systems Conference.
Frede Blaabjerg (S’86–M’88–SM’97–F’03) was
born in Erslev, Denmark, on May 6, 1963. He
received the M.Sc.EE. and Ph.D. degrees from
Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark, in 1987 and
1995, respectively.
He was with ABB-Scandia, Randers, Denmark,
from 1987 to 1988. He became an Assistant Pro-
fessor in 1992 at Aalborg University, in 1996 an
Associate Professor, and in 1998 a Full Professor in
power electronics and drives. Today he is also Dean
of the Faculty of Engineering Science and Medicine.
In 2000, he was a Visiting Professor with the University of Padova, Padova,
Italy, as well as a part-time Programme Research Leader in wind turbines at
the Research Center Risoe. In 2002, he was a Visiting Professor at Curtin
University of Technology, Perth, Australia. He is involved in more than ten
research projects within the industry. Among them is the Danfoss Professor
Programme in Power Electronics and Drives. He is the author or coauthor of
more than 500 publications in his research fields including Control in Power
Electronics (New York: Academic, 2002). He is an Associate Editor for the
Journal of Power Electronics and Elteknik. He has been very involved in
Danish Research policy in the last ten years. His research interests are in power
electronics, static power converters, ac drives, switched reluctance drives,
modeling, characterization of power semiconductor devices and simulation,
wind turbines, and green power inverters.
Dr. Blaabjerg received the 1995 Angelos Award for his contribution in
modulation technique and control of electric drives, the Annual Teacher Prize
from Aalborg University, in 1995, the Outstanding Young Power Electronics
Engineer Award from the IEEE Power Electronics Society in 1998, five IEEE
Prize paper awards during the last five years, the C. Y. O’Connor fellow-
ship from Perth, Australia in 2002, the Statoil-Prize for his contributions in
power electronics in 2003, and the Grundfos-prize for his contributions in
power electronics and drives in 2004. He is an Associate Editor of the IEEE
TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS and the IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON
POWER ELECTRONICS. He is a member of the Danish Academy of Technical
Science, the European Power Electronics and Drives Association, and the
IEEE Industry Applications Society Industrial Drives Committee. He is also a
member of the Industry Power Converter Committee and the Power Electronics
Devices and Components Committee, IEEE Industry Application Society.