IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 23, NO.

4, JULY 2008

1899

An Improved Control Strategy for Grid-Connected Voltage Source Inverters With an LCL Filter
Guoqiao Shen, Dehong Xu, Member, IEEE, Luping Cao, and Xuancai Zhu
AbstractA novel current control strategy based on a new current feedback for grid-connected voltage source inverters with an LCL-lter is proposed in this paper. By splitting the capacitor of the LCL-lter into two parts, each with the proportional division of the capacitance, the current owing between these two parts is measured and used as the feedback to a current regulator to stabilize and improve the system performances. Consequently, the VI transfer function of the grid-connected inverter system with the LCL-lter is degraded from a third-order function to a rst-order one, therefore the closed-loop current feedback control system can be optimized easily for minimum steady-state error and current harmonic distortion, as well as the system stability. The characteristics of the inverter system with the proposed controller are investigated and compared with those using traditional control strategies. Experimental results are provided, and the new current control strategy has been veried on a 5 kW fuel cell inverter. Index TermsCurrent control, harmonic distortion, interconnection, inverters, LCL-lter.

I. INTRODUCTION RADITIONALLY, L-lter is used as the interface between the grid network and the grid-connected voltage source inverters (VSIs). With the L-lter, high switching frequency must be used to obtain high dynamic performance and sufcient attenuation of harmonics caused by the pulsewidth modulation (PWM) method. In contrast, the alternative LCL form of low-pass lter offers the potential for improved harmonic performance at lower switching frequencies, which is a signicant advantage in higher-power applications [1]. However, the systems incorporating LCL lters are of third order, and they require more complex current control strategies to maintain system stability and are more susceptible to interference caused by grid voltage distortion because of resonance hazards and the lower harmonic impedance to the grid. When the reference current is a nonsinusoidal signal, a hysteresis or predictive controller is often deemed a viable solution [2]. While the hysteresis controller is simple and robust, it has major drawbacks in variable switching frequency, current error of twice the hysteresis band, and high-frequency limit-cycle operation [3]. The performance of the predictive controller, on the other hand, is subject to the accuracy of the plant model as well as the accuracy of the reference current prediction [4].
Manuscript received January 3, 2007; revised March 28, 2007. Published June 13, 2008. This work was supported in part by the Delta Power Electronic Technology and Education Foundation. Recommended for publication by Associate Editor J. Espinoza. The authors are with the Institute of Power Electronics, College of Electrical Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China (e-mail: s_gq@mail.hz.zj.cn; xdh@cee.zju.edu.cn; peter.clp@163.com; zxc@zju.edu.cn). Digital Object Identier 10.1109/TPEL.2008.924602

Current feedback Proportional Integrate (PI) control with grid voltage feed-forward is commonly used in stationary reference frame for current-controlled inverters. But these solutions have two main drawbacks: inability of the PI controller to track a sinusoidal reference without steady-state error and poor disturbance rejection capability. This is due to the denite control loop gain required for system stability at the LCL-lter resonance frequency. Grid voltage feed-forward is often used to get a good dynamic response, but this leads in turn to the increase of the grid-voltage background harmonics in the current waveform because of the imperfect compensations [5], [6]. The rotating synchronous frame PI controller for current control is widely used in three phase inverters to obtain a zero steady-state error [7], [8]. The limitation consists of signicant computation arising from the need for multiple reference frames for harmonic currents attenuations, and its inability of directly use in single phase inverters. Proportional resonant (PR) controller gained a large popularity in recent years in current regulation of grid-tied systems [9][12]. It introduces an innite gain at a selected resonant frequency for eliminating steady-state error at that frequency. However the harmonic compensators of the PR controllers are limited to several low-order current harmonics, due to the system instability when the compensated frequency is out of the bandwidth of the system [12]. Passive damping method is often used to maintain the system stability, but it is limited by cost, the value of the inductors, losses, and degradation of the lter performance [13], [14]. This paper proposes a new control strategy for grid-connected VSI with an LCL-lter, here, referred as LCCL. The LCCL strategy split the capacitor of LCL-lter into two parts, and the current owing between these two parts is measured and used as the feedback of a current controller. In this way, without any damping resistor, the inverter control system is degraded from third-order to rst-order, as a rst-order system with L-lter. Consequently, the control loop gain and bandwidth can be increased and many existent current control methods can be implemented to minimize steady-state error and current harmonic distortion. The characteristics of the inverter system with the proposed LCCL controller are investigated and compared with the traditional strategy. The new current control strategy has been experimentally veried on a 5 kW DSP controlled fuel cell inverter. II. SYSTEM STRUCTURE AND CHARACTERISTICS Fig. 1 shows a system topology for a 5 kW grid-connected VSI inverter for fuel cell generation. The topology comprises of a proton exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC) system, a dcdc converter with three-level regulated dc output interfacing the fuel cell output to the inverter dc side, a half-bridge

0885-8993/$25.00 2008 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY TIRUCHIRAPALLI. Downloaded on May 23, 2009 at 09:33 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

1900

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 23, NO. 4, JULY 2008

Fig. 1. System topology for the grid-connect fuel cell inverter.

single-phase PWM inverter, a low-pass LCL-lter connecting the inverter output to the grid through a static transfer switch, and a current controller to regulate the inverter. The LCL-lter is mainly used to achieve decreased switching ripple with only a small increase in lter hardware compared with the L-lter. It has the following components:

(1) (2) (3) here, is the inverter side inductance, is the grid side inis the line inductance of the grid, and ductance of the lter, , , and retheir equivalent series resistors (ESR) are spectively. is the capacitance of the LCL-lter. For the purpose of current control, three transfer functions are given as
Fig. 2. Bode plots of the transfer function of the LCL-lters/

( ).

(4) (5) (6) where is the inverter output current, is the grid side is the inverter output voltage. For comparing current, and with an L-lter (with inductance ), we assume , , and neglect ESR of the inductor. From (1)(6), the transfer function from inverter output voltage to inverter curand , can be rent, and grid current, i.e., expressed as
TABLE I LCL-FILTER PARAMETERS

(7) (8) In order to demonstrate the characteristic of the lter, Fig. 2 of the shows the bode plots of the transfer function

lter in four cases of component parameters that are listed in Table I. Though all the lters in four cases have a constant total value of inductance, i.e., the same lter cost and size, but the LCL-lter (case 24) has more attenuation to the high frequency switching ripple, 60 dB per decade, compared with the L-lter (case 1), and the LCL-lter gets the maximum attenuation when the inverter side inductance is equal to the grid side inductance, as shown in the case 3. However, system incorporating LCL lter is of third order, and there exists a peak amplitude response at the resonant frequency of the LCL-lter, it requires more carefully design of LCL-lter parameters and current control strategy to maintain system stability.

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY TIRUCHIRAPALLI. Downloaded on May 23, 2009 at 09:33 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

SHEN et al.: IMPROVED CONTROL STRATEGY FOR GRID-CONNECTED VSIS

1901

Fig. 4. Block diagrams of the conventional current control: (a) with the inverter current feedback ( ) and (b) with the grid current feedback ( ).

rating, more than 30 dB additional attenuation is required in at the switching frequency. the transfer function Consequently, with the damped lter, the inverter switching frequency must be about 30 times higher than the grid side resonant frequency, whereas with non-damped lter, it can be no more than six times. So, for a given switching frequency of the grid-connected inverter, with passive damping method, the lter size and cost will be raised, and the system bandwidth will be decreased.
Fig. 3. Bode plots of the transfer function of the lters: (a) ( ).

( ) and (b)

III. PRINCIPLE AND ANALYSIS OF CONTROL STRATEGIES A. Conventional Control Strategies Conventionally, the inverter current or the grid current is used as a feedback of the current controller to regulate the current injected into the grid. The block diagrams of two typical conventional current controllers are shown in Fig. 4. Where, is the inis the current regulator determined verter current reference, is the combination of inby the special control strategy, ) including the PWM switching delay, verter gain (equal to is the grid voltage and is dened as the noise voltages, such as the dead time effect of the PWM inverter. The inverter current or the grid current is introduced to the current conis the troller through a feedback proportional gain ( ). transfer function of the LCL-lter, given by (4) for the inverter current feedback, in Fig. 4(a) or (5) for the grid current feedback, in Fig. 4(b). Then, the control loop gain for the system of Fig. 4 can be derived as

The most popular method is to insert a damping resistor in the capacitor shunt branch of the LCL-lter [13]. Then, the (3) should be modied to

Fig. 3 shows the bode plots of the transfer function and of the lter with a passive damping and without a passive damping. The damping resistor is 10 , and the other lter parameters are set as case 3 of Table I. Note that the high frequency amplitude attenuation in the transfer is 20 dB per decade only when the passive function damping is introduced. As shown in Fig. 3, the damped lter has more attenuation on the resonant frequency, but it has less attenuation in the high frequency region, 20 dB per decade less than that of the non-damped lter. This will make the damping lter a serious problem to match the EMI standards for high power converters with a lower switching frequency. IEEE Std.519-1992 recommended that the harmonics higher than 35th should be limited to be less than 0.3%. Hence, if the switching ripple in the inverter side inductance is designed to be 10% of the

(9) The steady-state error can be described as

(10)

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY TIRUCHIRAPALLI. Downloaded on May 23, 2009 at 09:33 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

1902

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 23, NO. 4, JULY 2008

Fig. 6. Block diagrams of the proposed current control: under LCCL control.

or

(14) Here, is the total current of the lter capacitors. From (13) and (14), it should be noted that the new control strategy takes the sum of the grid current and partial capacitor current as the current feedback, instead of which contains no capacitor current or which contains full capacitor current. In other words, the weighted average of the inverter current and the grid current is used as the feedback in the proposed new control strategy. By splitting the capacitor of the LCL-lter, only one current sensor is required to obtain the weighted average of the inverter current and the grid current. Now, the LCL-lter is in form of L-C-C-L, so this control strategy is named as LCCL method in short. to current can The third-order transfer function from be derived, and expressed as (15). There are three poles and two zeros in this function

Fig. 5. Bode plots of the open-loop transfer function under conventional control without current regulators.

The gain of the PWM inverter can be expressed approximately as

(11) where is the time of PWM control delay. Fig. 5 shows the bode plots of the open-loop transfer function under the conventional current feedback control strategies without current regulators, where the parameters of the lter are 0.023, 400 V, and given as the case 3 of Table I, is assumed to be 100 s. can be If a PI current regulator is used, for example, then dened as

(15) When the value of sented as is selected to satisfy the condition pre-

(16) (12) For the purpose of the system stability, the proportional gain is limited due to the peak amplitude existing at the resonant frequency of the non-damped LCL-lter in the open-loop transfer function, as shown in Fig. 5. Hence, the control loop gain for the traditional strategy is quite small, and the system output is not able to track a sinusoidal reference without steadystate error. B. Proposed Control Strategy The proposed new control structure is shown in Fig. 6. By splitting the capacitor of the LCL-lter into two parts, i.e., and , the current between and , which is indicated as , is used as the current feedback to control the inverter. and , then the feedback Assume can be expressed as current Equation (16) can be represented as

(17) After substituting (16) in (15), third-order to rst-order is degraded from

(18) Note that the two zeros counteract two poles in function , and (18) is similar to the transfer function of L-lter. However, the switching ripple current injected into the grid is still attenuated by a third-order LCL-lter. In a word, the proposed LCCL control strategy splits the capacitance in the LCL-lter into two parts with a proportion presented as (17), then measures and takes the current between the two parts of the capacitor as the feedback for current control.

(13)

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY TIRUCHIRAPALLI. Downloaded on May 23, 2009 at 09:33 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

SHEN et al.: IMPROVED CONTROL STRATEGY FOR GRID-CONNECTED VSIS

1903

TABLE II LCL-FILTER WITH DIFFERENT ESRS OF INDUCTOR

Fig. 7. Bode plots of the open-loop transfer function under the LCCL control without current regulators (different ESR values are listed in Table II).

For the steady-state precision of grid current control, the reference of the current control should be modied by adding the grid frequency current of the second capacitance in LCL-lter, . that is, Equation (9) and (10) are valid under the proposed LCCL transfer function, , is given control strategy, but the by (18) instead. Consequently, the peak amplitude existing at the resonant frequency of the LCL-lter is cancelled in the control may be applied loop gain now. Also, the PI current regulator value can be in the LCCL control strategy, but this time the increased to a larger value to improve the system performance. Considering the ESRs of inductor in LCL-lter, if they are proportional to the corresponding inductances, e.g., as

Fig. 8. Bode plots of loop transfer function for different current feedback controls.

TABLE III PI PARAMETERS AND RESULTS FOR DIFFERENT CONTROL STRATEGIES

C. Design of the Current Controllers (19) then the two zeros counteract two poles in pletely, (17) should be modied to comThe merits of the LCCL control strategy can be demonstrated by a comparison of current controller designs for the system. If PI regulators are selected for the current controllers, for example, the bode plots of the loop transfer function under different control strategies are shown in the Fig. 8, with the PI parameters listed in Table III. All the control strategies have a phase margin more than 30 , but the proportional gains of the PI regulators are quite different to maintain the system stability. The loop gains, error attenuations at the fundamental frequency, and the bandwidth are also calculated and listed in Table III. Fig. 9 shows the low order harmonics attenuations obtained by (10) for corresponding control strategies. Obviously, the loop gain and the cross-over frequency with new control strategy is much higher than those with conventional control strategies, resulting in minor steady-state error and a better dynamic response in close-loop control. If the Proportional Resonant (PR) controller with harmonic compensations (HC) is to be introduced, it should rstly base on a proportional or PI system to maintain system stability [11],

(20) If the ESR of inductor mismatches (19), zeros can not counteract poles completely, but the counteracting effect will exist for rational ESR values. Fig. 7 shows the bode plots of the open-loop transfer function under the LCCL control strategies for three cases of ESR value listed in Table II. The parameters 0.023, of the lter are given as the case 3 of Table I, 400 V, 100 s, and the current regulator is not included. It is shown that the LCCL control is still effective in case of mismatched ESR values of inductors.

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY TIRUCHIRAPALLI. Downloaded on May 23, 2009 at 09:33 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

1904

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 23, NO. 4, JULY 2008

Fig. 9. Attenuation of the low order harmonics for different current feedback controls. Fig. 11. Experimental result with i feed-back and grid voltage feed-forward (K 0.8, I 23 A).

Fig. 10. Experimental result with 0.8, I 8 A). (K

feed-back, no voltage feed-forward

[12], [15]. Only the LCCL control strategy can provide a sufcient bandwidth for harmonic compensations of PR to attenuate the predominant low order harmonics in the current spectrum, as shown in Fig. 8. Otherwise a passive damping must be introduced to expend the bandwidth of the proportional system with LCL-lter, and that will in return degrade the switching frequency harmonic attenuation in case of a lower switching frequency, as mentioned in Section II of this paper. IV. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS A 5 kW DSP controlled prototype is built to verify the proposed LCCL control strategy for the grid-connected fuel cell inverter, as shown in Fig. 1. The circuit parameters are: input voltage: 400 Vdc and 400 Vdc; output: AC 220 V/50 Hz, 5 kW; switching frequency: 16 kHz. Parameters of the LCL-lter are selected as the case 3 in Table I. The experimental results are shown in Figs. 1017. In Figs. 1013, the grid current is shown on the top, and the grid voltage is shown on the bottom with 210 V/div. The current in Figs. 10 and 12 are 12 A/div, and it is 24 A/div in Figs. 11 and 13. Fig. 10 shows the experimental result with the grid current feed-back and without voltage feed-forward, in the case of 0.8. The grid current is not stable, and is markedly lagged

Fig. 12. Experimental result with proposed control strategy (K 8 A).

= 2.8, I =

Fig. 13. Experimental result with proposed control strategy (K 23 A).

= 2.8, I =

to the grid voltage. Fig. 11 shows the experimental result with the grid current feed-back and grid voltage feed-forward con0.8 with a little damping. Though the trol, in the case of grid current is nearly in phase with the grid voltage, the current wave form is badly distorted.

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY TIRUCHIRAPALLI. Downloaded on May 23, 2009 at 09:33 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

SHEN et al.: IMPROVED CONTROL STRATEGY FOR GRID-CONNECTED VSIS

1905

Fig. 14. Experimental results of THDs of the grid currents.

Fig. 17. Experimental results of power factor with different grid side inductances.

Fig. 15. Experimental results of power factor for different strategies.

Fig. 16. THD results with different grid side inductances.

From Figs. 1013, we can see that the new proposed current control strategy is effective for minor steady-state error and good harmonic compensation. Fig. 14 shows the experimental results of the grid current THD and the power factor generated. Curve 1 is the system output under traditional grid current feedback with grid voltage 0.8. Curve 2 are the results feed-forward control, and under the proposed LCCL control strategy without voltage feed2.8. It is shown that, as the grid current inforward, and creases, the current THD decreases and the new control strategy presents a less distortion. Fig. 15 shows the experimental results of the power factor of the inverter. Curve 1 is the system output under traditional grid current feedback with grid voltage feed-forward control, 0.8. Curve 2 and 3 are the results under the proposed and LCCL control strategy, without or with voltage feed-forward, 2.8. The grid voltage feed-forward can efciently and improve the power factor of the output, but for the grid current more than half rating, grid voltage feed-forward can be omitted under the proposed LCCL control strategy. Generally, the grid impedance is not easy to be evaluated exactly. This is a big problem for most of the grid current control strategies. Figs. 16 and 17 show the experimental results with varied grid side inductances under LCCL control, with the same control parameters and without grid voltage feed-forward. The grid side inductance rating is treated as 1.51 mH in controller design. While the grid side inductance is varying from 70% to 125% of the rated value, the inverter control system is stable and of good performance. So, it is proved that inverter with the proposed control strategy can robustly response to the variety of the grid.

Fig. 12 and Fig. 13 show the experimental results with the proposed control strategy, in the case of 2.8, and no voltage feed-forward are introduced. When the grid current 23 A, as shown in Fig. 13, the current total harmonic distortion (THD) is 3.49%, the third order harmonic current is 2.7%, the power factor is 0.995. It should be noted that the grid background voltage has a THD of 5.75% and up to 5.6% third harmonic at the same time.

V. CONCLUSION A novel control strategy for grid-connected voltage source inverters (VSI) with an LCL-lter is proposed. By splitting the capacitor of LCL-lter into two parts proportionally, a new current feedback control is introduced. In this way, the inverter control system can be degraded from third-order to rst-order, the open loop gain and the bandwidth can be increased, and the

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY TIRUCHIRAPALLI. Downloaded on May 23, 2009 at 09:33 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

1906

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 23, NO. 4, JULY 2008

close-loop control system can easily optimized for minimum steady-state error and current harmonic distortion. Compared with the traditional strategies, the new control strategy has the superiority of simple, low cost and size, high efciency, and its adaptability to single-phase or three-phase inverters. Thus, the new current control strategy is more attractive to grid-connected PV, fuel cell, and wind generation systems. REFERENCES [1] M. Lindgren and J. Svensson, Control of a voltage-source converter connected to the grid through an LCL-lterApplication to active ltering, in Proc. IEEE PESC, 1998, pp. 229235. [2] S. Buso, L. Malesani, and P. Mattavelli, Comparison of current control techniques for active power lter applications, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 722729, 1998. [3] R. D. Lorenz, T. A. Lipo, and D. W. Novotny, Motion control with induction motors, Proc. IEEE, vol. 82, no. 8, pp. 11151135, Aug. 1994. [4] D. G. Holmes and D. A. Martin, Implementation of a direct digital predictive current controller for single and three phase voltage source inverters, in Proc. IEEE IAS Annu. Meeting, 1996, pp. 906913. [5] D. M. Brod and D. W. Novotny, Current control of VSI-PWM inverters, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. IA-21, no. 4, pp. 562570, Jul./ Aug. 1985. [6] R. D. Lorenz and D. B. Lawson, Performance of feedforward current regulators for eld-oriented induction machine controllers, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. IA-23, no. 4, pp. 597602, Jul./Aug. 1987. [7] M. P. Kazmierkowski and L. Malesani, Current control technique for three-phase voltage-source PWM converters: A survey, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 691703, Oct. 1998. [8] N. Zargari and G. Joos, Performance investigation of a current-controlled voltage-regulated PWM rectier in rotating and stationary frame, in Proc. IECON Conf., 1993, pp. 11931197. [9] S. Fukuda and T. Yoda, A novel current-tracking method for active lters based on a sinusoidal internal model, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 888895, May/Jun. 2001. [10] X. Yuan, W. Merk, H. Stemmler, and J. Allmeling, Stationary-frame generalized integrators for current control of active power lters with zero steady-state error for current harmonics of concern under unbalanced and distorted operating conditions, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 523532, Mar./Apr. 2002. [11] D. N. Zmood and D. G. Holmes, Stationary frame current regulation of PWM inverters with zero steady-state error, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 814822, May 2003. [12] M. Liserre, R. Teodorescu, and F. Blaabjerg, Stability of photovoltaic and wind turbine grid-connected inverters for a large set of grid impedance values, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 263272, Jan. 2006. [13] M. Liserre, F. Blaabjerg, and S. Hansen, Design and control of an LCL-lter based active rectier, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 12811291, Sep./Oct. 2005. [14] B. Bolsens, K. D. Brabandere, J. V. D. Keybus, J. Driesen, and R. J. M. Belmans, Model-based generation of low distortion currents in grid-coupled PWM-inverters using an LCL output lter, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 10321040, Jul. 2006. [15] M. Liserre, R. Teodorescu, and F. Blaabjerg, Multiple harmonics control for three-phase grid converter systems with the use of PI-RES current controller in a rotating frame, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 836841, May 2006.

Guoqiao Shen was born in Hangzhou, China, in 1968. He received the B.S. degree in electrical engineering and M.S. degree in power electronics from the Department of Electrical Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China in 1990, and 1993, where he is currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree. From 1993 to 2002, he was with the Zheda Hi-Tech Development Co., Ltd., Hangzhou, where he was a Design Engineer on power supply and a R&D Manager. His areas of interests include power converters for renewable energy systems, power quality, digital control, and energy storage technology.

Dehong Xu (M94) was born in Hangzhou, China, in 1961. He received the B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees from the Department of Electrical Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China, in 1983, 1986, and 1989, respectively. Since 1989, he has been a faculty member at Zhejiang University, where he is currently a Professor in the Department of Electrical Engineering. He was a Visiting Professor with the Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan, from 1995 to 1996, and with the Center of Power Electronics System, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, from June to December 2000. His research interests include high-density power conversion, fuel cell power generation system, power quality, and SMES. Dr. Xu is a Vice Chairman of the Chinese Power Supply Society and a Vice Chairman of the Chinese Power Electronics Society.

Luping Cao was born in Huzhou, China, in 1982. He received the B.S degree in electrical engineering, from the Department of Electrical Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China, in 2005 where he is currently pursuing the M.S. degree. His research interests include current control and islanding detection for distributed systems.

Xuancai Zhu was born in China in 1980. He received the B.S degree from the College of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China, in 2003 and is currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree in the Department of Electrical Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China. His research interests include high efciency power converter and fuel cell distributed power systems.

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY TIRUCHIRAPALLI. Downloaded on May 23, 2009 at 09:33 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.