704 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 63, NO.
2, FEBRUARY 2016
Modified Model Predictive Control of a
Bidirectional AC–DC Converter Based
on Lyapunov Function for Energy
Storage Systems
Md. Parvez Akter, Saad Mekhilef, Senior Member, IEEE,
Nadia Mei Lin Tan, Member, IEEE, and Hirofumi Akagi, Fellow, IEEE
Abstract—Energy storage systems have been widely ap-
plied in power distribution sectors as well as in renewable
energy sources to ensure uninterruptible power supply.
This paper proposes a modified model predictive control
(MMPC) method based on the Lyapunov function to im-
prove the performance of a bidirectional ac–dc converter,
which is used in an energy storage system for bidirec-
tional power transfer between the three-phase ac voltage
supply and energy storage devices. The proposed control
technique utilizes the discrete behavior of the converter,
considering the unavoidable quantization errors between
the controller and the control actions selected from the
finite control set of the bidirectional ac–dc converter. The
proposed control method reduces the execution time delay
by 18% compared with the conventional model predictive
control. Moreover, the nonlinear system stability of the pro-
posed MMPC technique is ensured by the direct Lyapunov
method and a nonlinear experimental system model. De-
tailed experimental results with a 2.5-kW downscaled
hardware prototype are provided to show the efficacy of the
proposed control system.
Index Terms—Bidirectional ac–dc power conversion, en-
ergy storage system, Lyapunov methods, modified model
predictive control (MMPC), stability analysis.
I. I NTRODUCTION
E NERGY storage systems play an important role in utility
and transport applications as well as in renewable en-
Manuscript received January 14, 2015; revised April 21, 2015
and June 22, 2015; accepted August 5, 2015. Date of publication
September 14, 2015; date of current version January 8, 2016. This work
was supported in part by the High Impact Research–Ministry of Higher
Education under Project UM.C/HIR/MOHE/ENG/24 and in part by the
University of Malaya Research Grant under Project RP006E-13ICT.
M. Parvez Akter and S. Mekhilef are with the Power Electronics and
Renewable Energy Research Laboratory (PEARL), Department of Elec-
trical Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
(e-mail: parvez0602025@gmail.com; saad@um.edu.my).
N. M. L. Tan is with the Department of Electrical Power Engineering,
Universiti Tenaga Nasional, 43000 Kajang, Malaysia (e-mail: nadia@
uniten.edu.my).
H. Akagi is with the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engi-
neering, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo 152-8552, Japan (e-mail:
akagi@ee.titech.ac.jp).
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/TIE.2015.2478752
0278-0046 © 2015 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
ergy sources to ensure power reliability, active power control,
load leveling, and frequency control [1], [2]. Generally, the
energy storage system uses static storage devices such as an
electric double-layer capacitor, Li-ion battery, lead–acid bat-
tery, and nickel–metal hydride battery [3]. These static storage
devices contain high power and energy density but require
proper operation such as low ripple current and voltage at the
dc side.
The bidirectional ac–dc converter is an essential part of the
energy storage system due to its bidirectional power flow, grid
synchronization, and dc power management capabilities [4].
The control algorithm of this ac–dc converter should be highly
stable and efficient as it needs to prevent the problems of poor
power quality due to high total harmonic distortion, low power
factor, ac voltage distortion, and ripple in the dc current and
voltage [5], [6]. Therefore, several research studies have been
carried out to improve the efficiency and performance of this
bidirectional ac–dc converter. The classical control techniques
are based on voltage-oriented control [7], virtual-flux-oriented
control [8], and direct power control (DPC) [9] schemes, which
utilize the proportional–integral (PI) controllers. The major lim-
itation of these control schemes is tuning the PI controllers that
further affect the coordinate transform accuracy. To overcome
this limitation of PI controllers, a fuzzy-logic-based switching
state selection criterion has been presented in [10] by avoiding
a predefined switching table. Although the active and reactive
power values are smoothed in a fuzzy-logic-based DPC algo-
rithm compared with classical DPC, its sampling frequency is
high. Therefore, a sliding mode nonlinear [11] and artificial
neural network [12] control approach has been investigated for
active and reactive power regulation of a grid-connected dc–ac
converter, which is dependent on control variables.
The working principle of the model predictive control (MPC)
scheme is to predict the future behavior of the control variables.
This MPC algorithm has become an attractive mode of control
for the bidirectional ac–dc converters, compared with the clas-
sical solutions, due to its simple and intuitive concept with no
pulsewidth modulation blocks [13]. Moreover, the MPC algo-
rithm is very easy to configure with constraints and nonlinearity
and also for practical implementation [14]–[16]. Due to these
advantages, the MPC algorithm has been extensively applied
PARVEZ AKTER et al.: MMPC OF A BIDIRECTIONAL AC–DC CONVERTER BASED ON LYAPUNOV FUNCTION 705

in an active front-end rectifier [17], [18], an indirect matrix

converter [19], a three-level converter [20], a voltage source
inverter [21], and a neutral-point-clamped converter [22]. In
spite of these boundless advantages, MPC faces computational
burden due to solving the underlying optimization problem of
the discrete manipulated variables [23], [24]. Hence, computa-
tional issues have become very important for long prediction
horizons. As a result, the modification in the existing MPC
techniques is required for minimizing the amount of calcula-
tions as well as the computational time. Although a Luenberg
observer and a Runge–Kutta fourth-order method-based pre-
dictive control has been proposed for delay compensation
and convergence in the digital implementation of the virtual
multilevel inverter obtained in [25] and [26], the robustness Fig. 1. Three-phase bidirectional ac–dc converter topology.
analysis against parameter uncertainties is missing in these
papers. Furthermore, a complete research on the bidirectional converter operates as a front-end rectifier and allows power
ac–dc converter, considering practical nonlinearity issues and transfer from the three-phase ac voltage end to the dc voltage
explicitly addressing the stability issues in the MPC algorithm, bus. The second mode is the inverter mode, where the power
is missing in the present state of the art. flows from the dc voltage bus to the ac voltage end, and the
This paper proposes a modified model predictive control converter acts as a voltage source inverter.
(MMPC) algorithm based on the Lyapunov function that is
applied in a bidirectional ac–dc converter for an energy storage B. Working Principle
system to reduce the computational time, ensure stability and
The power circuit of the three-phase bidirectional ac–dc con-
robustness, and increase the system performance. The system
verter converts the electrical power between the ac and dc form,
configuration and working principle of the bidirectional ac–dc
utilizing the electrical scheme shown in Fig. 1. To avoid short
converter are elaborately described in Section II. The formu-
circuit, the two switches in each leg of the bidirectional ac–dc
lation of the conventional MPC method with a discrete-time
converter should be operated in a complementary mode. Hence,
model and the cost function is reviewed in Section III. The de-
the gating signals Sa , Sb , and Sc determine the switching states
termination of the proposed Lyapunov-function-based MMPC
of the three-phase bidirectional ac–dc converter as follows:
algorithm and its practical implementation into the bidirec- 
tional ac–dc converter are elaborately discussed in Section IV. 1, S1 is on and S2 is off
Sa = (1)
In Section V, the performance of the proposed Lyapunov- 0, S1 is off and S2 is on
function-based MMPC method for the bidirectional ac–dc con- 
verter is investigated with a 2.5-kW experimental system, and 1, S3 is on and S4 is off
Sb = (2)
the experimental results are presented. Section VI presents the 0, S3 is off and S4 is on
nonlinear system stability of the proposed MMPC controller 
with the direct Lyapunov method and the nonlinear experimen- 1, S5 is on and S6 is off
tal system model, as well as the robustness analysis against Sc = (3)
0, S5 is off and S6 is on.
parameter uncertainties. Moreover, the comparative evaluation
of the proposed Lyapunov-function-based MMPC technique  of the bidirectional
Therefore, the switching function vector (S)
with the conventional MPC method in terms of execution time ac–dc converter can be expressed as
is presented in Section VII. Finally, the conclusions are drawn
in Section VIII.  = 2 (Sa + ω Sb + ω 2 Sc )
S (4)
3

where ω = ej2π/3 = −(1/2) + j 3/2 is a unitary vector,
II. B IDIRECTIONAL AC–DC C ONVERTER TOPOLOGY which represents the 120◦ phase displacement between the
A. System Configuration phases.
The output voltage space vector (vconv ) of the bidirectional
Fig. 1 shows the three-phase bidirectional ac–dc converter ac–dc converter for both the rectifier and inverter modes can be
topology that transfers power between the three-phase ac volt- presented with phase-to-neutral voltages (vao , vbo , and vco ) as
age supply and the dc voltage bus. The bidirectional ac–dc
2
converter consists of six insulated-gate bipolar transistor–diode vconv = (vao + ωvbo + ω 2 vco ). (5)
switches (S1−S6 ), which is connected with three-phase ac 3
voltage supply through series filter inductance (Ls ) and re- The output voltage space vector (vconv ) can also be related
sistance (Rs ). A dc capacitor (Cdc ) is connected across dc to the dc bus voltage (Vdc ) and the switching function vector
voltage bus to keep the dc bus voltage (Vdc ) constant. The  as
(S)
bidirectional ac–dc converter operates in two modes. The first
mode is the rectifier mode, in which the bidirectional ac–dc  × Vdc .
vconv = S (6)
706 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 63, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 2016

TABLE I Therefore, the relationship between the three-phase ac voltage

VOLTAGE S PACE V ECTORS OF THE B IDIRECTIONAL
AC–DC C ONVERTER
and rectifier input voltage vectors can be rewritten from (5), (7),
and (10) as [27]

dis_rec
vs = Ls + Rsis_rec + vconv . (11)
dt
Hence, the input current dynamics of the bidirectional ac–dc
converter during the rectifier mode of operation is

dis_rec Rs 1 1
= is_rec + vs − vconv . (12)
dt Ls Ls Ls
2) Inverter Mode of Operation: The bidirectional ac–dc
converter works as a voltage source inverter during the inverter
mode, which allows power transfer from the dc voltage bus
to the three-phase ac voltage end. Hence, the load current is
180◦ out-of-phase with respect to the load voltage. Therefore,
the load current dynamics of the bidirectional ac–dc converter
during the inverter mode of operation can be presented as

There are eight possible voltage vectors that can be obtained dis_inv Rs 1 1
= − is_inv + vconv − vs . (13)
from the eight consequence switching states of the switching dt Ls Ls Ls
signals Sa , Sb , and Sc . These eight voltage space vectors are
listed in Table I.
III. C ONVENTIONAL MPC M ETHOD
The energy storage system allows bidirectional power trans-
fer between the three-phase ac voltage side and the energy stor- The formulation of the conventional MPC algorithm for
age device through the bidirectional ac–dc converter. Hence, the three-phase bidirectional ac–dc converter is described in
the bidirectional ac–dc converter needs to be operated in two the following section. The MPC controller is formulated in the
modes, which are specified as the rectifier mode and the in- discrete-time domain. Therefore, it is necessary to transform the
verter mode. The operating principle of the bidirectional ac–dc dynamic system of the bidirectional ac–dc converter for both
converter for both the rectifier and inverter modes is elaborately the rectifier and inverter modes of operation represented in (12)
described in the following section. and (13), respectively, into a discrete-time model at a specific
1) Rectifier Mode of Operation: During the rectifier mode sampling time Ts .
of operation, the bidirectional ac–dc converter acts as a front-
end rectifier that is connected to the three-phase ac voltage
A. Discrete-Time Model for Prediction Horizon
source through the input filter inductance Ls and resistance Rs ,
as shown in Fig. 1. By applying Kirchhoff’s voltage law at the A discrete-time model is used to predict the future values of
ac side of the rectifier, the relationship between the three-phase currents and voltages in the next sampling interval (k), from
ac voltage and rectifier input voltage vectors is the measured currents and voltages at the (k − 1)th sampling
instant. The system model derivative dx/dt from Euler approx-
dis_rec 2 imation can be expressed as
vs = Ls + Rsis_rec + (vao +  ω 2 vco )
ω vbo + 
dt 3 dx x(k) − x(k − 1)
≈ . (14)
2 dt Ts
− (vno +  ω vno + ω 2 vno ). (7)
3
Using one step advance of the above approximation, the
The space vector model of three-phase ac voltage (vs ) and discrete-time model of predictive currents and voltages for
current (is ) can be derived from phase voltage and current as the next (k + 1) sampling instant of the bidirectional ac–dc
converter in the rectifier and inverter modes can be derived.
2 The discrete-time model of predictive input currents at the
vs = (vsa + 
ωvsb +  ω 2 vsc ) (8)
3 next sampling instant (k + 1) for the rectifier mode of the
is = 2 (isa +  ω 2 isc )
ω isb +  (9)
bidirectional ac–dc converter can be evaluated from (12) with
3 the help of Euler approximation as

where vsa , vsb , and vsc are phase voltages, and isa , isb , and isc
is_rec (k + 1)
are phase currents of the three-phase ac voltage source.
Note that the last term of (7) is equal to zero as 1  
= Lsis_rec (k)+Ts [vs (k+1)−vconv_rec (k+1)] .
2 2 Rs Ts +Ls
(vno +  ω 2 vno ) = vno (1 + 
ω vno +  ω 2 ) = 0.
ω+ (10) (15)
3 3
PARVEZ AKTER et al.: MMPC OF A BIDIRECTIONAL AC–DC CONVERTER BASED ON LYAPUNOV FUNCTION 707

Again, the discrete-time model of predictive input currents at error vector of the input current dynamics (15) during the
the next sampling instant (k + 1) for the inverter mode of the rectifier mode can be rewritten as
bidirectional ac–dc converter can also be evaluated from (13) as
ierror_rec (k + 1)
is_inv (k + 1)
= is_rec (k + 1) − iref_rec (k + 1)
1  
= Lsis_inv (k)+Ts [vconv_inv (k + 1)−vs (k + 1)] . 1  
Rs Ts +Ls = Lsis_rec (k)+Ts [vs (k + 1)− vrec (k + 1)]
(16) Rs Ts + Ls

− iref_rec (k + 1). (19)

B. Cost Function
The main objective of the MPC algorithm is to minimize On the other hand, during the inverter mode of operation, the
the error with fast dynamic response between the predicted future current error vector can also be evaluated from (16) as
and reference values of the discrete variables. To achieve this
ierror_inv (k + 1)
objective, an appropriate cost function (e) is defined with a
measurement of predicted input error. Hence, the cost function
for the rectifier and inverter modes can be expressed with the = is_inv (k + 1) − iref inv (k + 1)
absolute error between the predictive and reference values of 1  
input and load currents for both the rectifier and inverter modes = Lsis_inv (k)+Ts [vinv (k + 1)− vs (k + 1)]
Rs Ts + Ls
of operation as follows:
  − iref_inv (k + 1).
  (20)
e = iref (k + 1) − ip (k + 1) (17)
An effective control algorithm is essential for the bidirectional
where e is the cost function. The reference input and predicted ac–dc converter so that the current (is ) tracks the reference
current are iref_rec (k+1) and ip_rec (k+1) and iref_inv (k+1) value (iref ) for both the rectifier and inverter modes of oper-
and ip_inv (k + 1) for the rectifier and inverter modes, ation. Therefore, it is necessary to find a control function such
respectively. that the current tracking error (ierror ) asymptotically converges
The operating mode of the bidirectional ac–dc converter is to zero. The Lyapunov direct method is used for the specific
first selected depending on the charging state of the energy application.
storage device, which is determined by the dc bus voltage (Vdc ). The discrete Lyapunov function (L) is taken as
If the charging state (determined by dc voltage) is less than
the threshold level, then it is operated in the rectifier mode; 1  T  
ierror (k) .
L(k) = ierror (k) (21)
otherwise, it is operated in the inverter mode. 2
From (19) and (21), the rate of change of the Lyapunov function
IV. P ROPOSED MMPC T ECHNIQUE B ASED can be expressed for the rectifier mode as
ON LYAPUNOV F UNCTION
ΔLrec (k)
A. Determination of the Lyapunov-Function-Based

MMPC Algorithm = L ierror_rec (k + 1) − L ierror_rec (k)

The proposed MMPC method directly applies the voltage 
1 1
vector constrained in the finite set. Hence, the future voltage =
vector (v (k + 1)) is expressed with the voltage vector gen- 2 Rs Ts + Ls

erated by the converter (vconv (k + 1)) and the unavoidable × Lsis_rec (k)+Ts (vs (k + 1) − vconv_rec (k + 1)
quantization error vectors as

T
v (k + 1) = vconv (k + 1) + δ(k + 1) (18) − δ(k+1)) −iref_rec (k+1)

where δ(k + 1) is the quantization error vector that satisfies 1
×
δ(k + 1) ≤ ϕ with a constant ϕ > 0. The future voltage Rs Ts + Ls
vector (v (k + 1)) is bounded in the finite set, as mentioned in
Table I, and the quantization error δ(k + 1) vector ensures the × Lsis_rec (k)+Ts (vs (k +1) − vconv_rec (k + 1)
state where vconv (k + 1) is bounded.

To determine the Lyapunov-function-based control algorithm − δ(k + 1)) − iref_rec (k+1)

for the modification of the conventional MPC method, it is
important to analyze the bidirectional ac–dc converter system 1  T  
from the control point of view. Therefore, the future current − ierror_rec (k) ierror_rec (k) . (22)
2
708 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 63, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 2016

On the other hand, the rate of change of the Lyapunov function

for the inverter mode of operation can be written from (20) and
(21) as

ΔLinv (k)

= L ierror_inv (k + 1) − L ierror_inv (k)


1 1
=
2 Rs Ts + Ls

× Lsis_inv (k)+Ts (vconv_inv (k + 1) + δ(k + 1)

T
− vs (k + 1)) −iref_inv (k+1)

1
×
Rs Ts + Ls

× Lsis_inv (k)+Ts (vconv_inv (k + 1) + δ(k + 1)


− vs (k + 1)) − iref_inv (k + 1)

Fig. 2. Proposed MMPC control technique based on the Lyapunov
1 T   function.
− ierror_inv (k) ierror_inv (k) . (23)
2
To make an effective control algorithm for converging the
states, and the state that minimizes the cost function is selected
tracking error (ierror ) to zero, the rate of change of the
for firing the power switches. One of the major limitations
Lyapunov function (ΔL) always needs to be negative. There-
of this conventional MPC algorithm is high execution time
fore, the discrete voltage vector during the rectifier mode at the
delay caused by the large number of calculation for the current
next sampling instant (vrec (k + 1) = vconv_rec (k + 1) + δ(k +
prediction. To reduce the execution time, the conventional MPC
1)), which assures that the rate of change of the Lyapunov
algorithm is modified based on the Lyapunov function. The
function (22) is negative, which is written as
proposed MMPC is based on voltage-oriented control, in which
the optimum possible future voltage vector (vopt (k + 1)) of the
Ls 
vrec (k + 1) = is_rec (k) + vs (k + 1) converter is directly selected to track the calculated reference
Ts voltage vector (v (k + 1)) of (24) and (25), for both the rectifier
Rs Ts + Ls and inverter modes by utilizing the modified cost function as
− iref_rec (k + 1). (24)
Ts
On the other hand, the discrete voltage vector during the g(k + 1) = |v (k + 1) − vopt (k + 1)| . (26)
inverter mode at the next sampling instant (vinv (k + 1) =
vconv_inv (k + 1) + δ(k + 1)), which assures that the rate of Fig. 2 shows the proposed control strategy of the MMPC
change of the Lyapunov function (23) is negative, which is be algorithm, which is a one-step modification of the conventional
written as finite control set (FCS)-MPC control scheme [13], [28]. The
reference voltage vector (v (k + 1)) of the converter is calcu-
Ls  lated from the measured current ac current (is (k)) and the
vinv (k + 1) = − is_inv (k) + vs (k + 1)
Ts reference current (iref (k)) by utilizing (24) and (25) for the
Rs Ts + Ls rectifier and inverter modes, respectively. The overall control
+ iref_inv (k + 1). (25) technique for the Lyapunov-function-based MMPC has been
Ts
described with an execution time diagram and is presented in
Fig. 3. The proposed Lyapunov-function-based MMPC method
satisfies the following steps.
B. Implementation of the Lyapunov-Function-Based
MMPC Algorithm for Bidirectional AC–DC Converter
Step 1: Measurement of the ac currents (is (k)) and calcula-
The conventional MPC is generally based on current- tion of the reference current (iref (k)).
oriented control techniques, in which the current tracks the ref- Step 2: Calculation of the future reference voltage vector
erence value by utilizing the discrete behavior of the converter. (vref (k + 1)) from the measured current ac current
In this conventional MPC method, the future current of the (is (k)) and the reference current (iref ) by utilizing
converter is calculated for each of the eight possible switching (24) and (25).
PARVEZ AKTER et al.: MMPC OF A BIDIRECTIONAL AC–DC CONVERTER BASED ON LYAPUNOV FUNCTION
Fig. 3. Execution time diagram of the proposed Lyapunov-function-
based MMPC.
Step 3: Estimation of the initial cost function value as
(ginit (k + 1) = 1e10 ) from the calculation in the kth
sampling period.
Step 4: Prediction of the optimum possible future voltage
vector (vopt (k + 1)) from Table I.
Step 5: Evaluation of the cost function (g(k+1)) by using (26).
Step 6: Optimization of the cost function and selection of the
appropriate switching state that minimizes the cost
function.
Step 7: Application of the selected switching state of the
bidirectional ac–dc converter for firing the switches.
V. E XPERIMENTAL R ESULTS
A 2.5-kW downscaled laboratory prototype of the bidirec-
tional ac–dc converter is developed for the verification of
the proposed Lyapunov-function-based MMPC algorithm. The
schematic layout of the experimental system is presented in
Fig. 4. The parameters presented in Table II are used in the
experimentation. The experimental verification of the proposed
MMPC bidirectional ac–dc converter is carried out by using
the rapid prototyping and real-time interface system dSPACE
709
Fig. 4. Experimental system of the bidirectional ac–dc converter with
MMPC.
TABLE II
S IMULATION AND E XPERIMENTAL PARAMETERS
with a DS1104 control card that consist of a Texas Instruments
TMS320F240 subprocessor and the Power PC 603e/250-MHz
main processor. This dSPACE control desk works together with
Math-work MATLAB/Simulink-R2013a real-time workshop
and real-time interface control cards to implement the proposed
MMPC algorithm. The voltage is measured with a differential
probe [PINTEK DP-25], and the current is measured with a
current transducer [LEM LA 25-NP].
Fig. 5(a) shows that the ac phase voltage and current are
exactly in phase during the rectifier operation mode, which
ensures a unity power factor. Again, in the inverter mode,
the converter allows power transfer with a unity power factor
from the dc voltage bus to the ac voltage end by keeping the
phase voltage and current with 180◦ phase shift, as presented
in Fig. 5(c). The dc bus voltage and current for both operating
modes are depicted in Fig. 5(b) and (d). The results illustrate
that the dc bus voltage ripple and the pulsation in dc current are
very low during both operating modes.
During the rectifier mode, the dc bus reference voltage
(Vdc_ref ) is varied from 270 to 320 V to check the stability
and transient responsiveness of the MMPC control algorithm.
710 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 63, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 2016

Fig. 5(a) and (b) also shows that when the reference voltage
changes from 270 to 320 V, the steady state of the ac wave-
forms is reached within a very short time (less than 10 ms).
This rapid step change confirms the fast response of the pro-
posed Lyapunov-function-based MMPC method. The steady-
state output of the dc-link voltage and current in Fig. 5(b)
remains linear in a wide range of time with very low voltage and
current ripple, which ensure the stability and good performance
of the proposed MMPC algorithm. Similarly, the stability and
responsiveness of the MMPC method for the bidirectional
ac–dc converter in the inverter mode of operation are shown in
Fig. 5(c) and (d), by varying the ac reference current (iref_inv ).

VI. S TABILITY A NALYSIS

The stability issue of the proposed Lyapunov-function-based
MMPC algorithm is very important for the high performance of
the bidirectional ac–dc converter in an energy storage system.
This section shows the stability analysis of the proposed MMPC
with the direct Lyapunov method and nonlinear stability inves-
tigation. Moreover, the robustness of the proposed Lyapunov-
function-based MMPC algorithm against parameter uncertainty
has also been analyzed in this section.

A. Stability Analysis With Direct Lyapunov Method

The stability of the proposed MMPC technique for the
bidirectional ac–dc converter is investigated with the direct
Lyapunov method. The direct Lyapunov method gives the fol-
lowing stability criteria for a continuous function L(ierror (k)),
in which the solutions of current dynamics in the rectifier mode
(12) and the inverter mode (13) are uniformly and ultimately
bounded [29], i.e.,

 l
 
L ierror (k) ≥ c1 ierror (k) , ∀ierror (k) ∈ G

 l
 
L ierror (k) ≤ c2 ierror (k) , ∀ierror (k) ∈ Γ


 l
 
L ierror (k + 1) − L ierror (k) < −c3 ierror (k) + c4
(27)

where c1 , c2 , c3 , and c4 are positive constants, l ≥ 1, G ⊆ Rn

is a positive control invariant set, and Γ ⊂ G is a compact set.
By applying the value of future voltage vector (v (k + 1)) of the
converter for the rectifier (24) and inverter (25) modes, the rate
of change of the Lyapunov function can be written as
1 T   1 Ts
2
ΔL(k) ≤ − ierror (k) ierror (k) + ϕ2.
2 2 (Rs Ts + Ls )
(28)
Therefore, the stability condition (27) is satisfied by the con-
stant values as
2
1 1 Ts
c1 = c2 = 1; c3 = ; c4 = ϕ2 . (29)
Fig. 5. Experimental results. (a) AC phase voltage and current at
2 2 (Rs Ts + L)
rectifier mode. (b) DC terminal voltage and current at rectifier mode.
(c) AC phase voltage and current at inverter mode. (d) DC terminal As a result, all signals in the Lyapunov-function-based
voltage and current at inverter mode of operation. closed-loop MMPC bidirectional ac–dc converter system are
PARVEZ AKTER et al.: MMPC OF A BIDIRECTIONAL AC–DC CONVERTER BASED ON LYAPUNOV FUNCTION 711

ultimately uniformly bounded. Then, the rate of change of the

Lyapunov function in (28) is

ΔL(k) ≤ −2c3 L ierror_inv (k) + c4 . (30)

This inequality implies that, as time increases, the current

control error vectors converge to the compact set as

  
c4
A = ierror ierror ≤
  . (31)
c3

Thus, all signals of the proposed MMPC control method in (24)

and (25) are uniformly and ultimately bounded.

B. Stability Analysis With Nonlinear Model

The stability analysis of the proposed MMPC-controlled
bidirectional ac–dc converter is performed with the direct
Lyapunov method in the previous section by neglecting the
nonlinear criteria such as the unsymmetrical three-phase sup-
ply, existence of higher harmonics in the converter input volt-
age, cross-coupling effect, and time delay variation. Therefore,
the nonlinear system stability of the Lyapunov-function-based
MMPC algorithm for the bidirectional ac–dc converter is an-
alyzed with the laboratory experimental prototype. The same
parameters as in Table II are employed.
During the rectifier mode of operation, the dc bus reference
voltage (Vdc_ref ) is varied from 270 to 320 V to check the
nonlinear stability of the proposed MMPC control algorithm.
The three-phase ac current variation drawn by the bidirectional
ac–dc converter in the rectifier mode due to the dc bus reference
voltage (Vdc_ref ) variation is presented in Fig. 6(a). The result in
Fig. 6(a) shows that the output phase current is accurately track-
ing the reference value and reached its steady-state condition
with very fast dynamic response, which verifies the stability and
effectiveness of the MMPC controller for the ac–dc converter.
Moreover, the stability of the proposed control algorithm can
be further confirmed with the variation of the dc-link voltage
and current, as shown in Fig. 6(b). The dc-link voltage and
the dc current vary with respect to the dc bus reference voltage
(Vdc_ref ) variation as the load is constant.
On the other hand, during the inverter mode of operation, the
ac load reference current (iref_inv ) is varied from 5 to 10 A peri-
odically to check the stability of the proposed MMPC controller
for bidirectional ac–dc converters. The result in Fig. 6(c) shows
that the output three-phase ac current is accurately tracking
the reference value and reached its steady-state condition with
very fast dynamic response, which verifies the stability and
effectiveness of the MMPC controller in case of output ac
reference current variation. Again, the stability of the proposed Fig. 6. Stability investigation via an experimental system. (a) Three-
control algorithm can be further confirmed with the variation of phase ac current (isa ) in the rectifier mode. (b) DC bus voltage (Vdc )
the dc-link voltage and current, as shown in Fig. 6(d). The dc versus current (Idc ) with the dc-link reference voltage (Vdc_ref ) change
in the rectifier mode. (c) Three-phase ac current (isa ) in the inverter
current varies with respect to the ac reference current variation mode. (d) DC bus voltage (Vdc ) versus current (Idc ) with the ac
as the dc voltage and load are constant. reference current (iref_inv ) change in the inverter mode.
712 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 63, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 2016

C. Robustness Analysis strictly less than |x(k) − xref (k)|, i.e.,

The control variables of nonlinear practical power converters
are always affected by state measurement errors. Generally,
these state measurement errors are caused by the filter param-
eter variation in practical power converters. Therefore, it is
important that the closed-loop control techniques of nonlinear
power converters should be robust with parameter variation
[30]–[32].
To analyze the robustness of the proposed Lyapunov-
function-based MMPC algorithm, the discrete voltage vector
(24) and cost function (26) can be simplified from the control
point of view, as follows [31]:

x(k + 1) = Ay(k) 
+ Bu(k 
+ 1) + D
g(k + 1) = |x(k + 1) − xref (k + 1)|
x(k + 1) ∈ Xv (k + 1) or g(k + 1) < g(k)
|x(k + 1) − xref (k + 1)|+ p1 |y(k)|+ p2 < |x(k) − xref (k)|.
(39)
This is equivalent to
g(k + 1) + p1 |y(k)| + p2 < g(k). (40)
To ensure the robustness of the controller, when the con-
trolled variable is outside of the bound, the constraint on the
right-hand side in (34) is to be replaced by (40). This ensures
that only voltage vectors are selected, which point with a certain
(32) minimum tracking toward the current reference.
Accordingly, when the control variable is within its bound,
(33) the constraint on left-hand side of (34) needs to be modified.
Specifically, the constraint at k + 1 is replaced by x(k + 1) ∈
(34) Xv , where Xv uses the radius (
τ ), which can be presented as

 = Ls /Ts , B
where x = vrec , y = is_rec , u = iref_rec , A  =
τ = τv − p1 |y(k)| − p2 . (41)

((Rs Ts + Ls )/Ts ), D = vs , and Xv is the voltage set region.
The robustness of the proposed Lyapunov-function-based
MMPC algorithm for the bidirectional ac–dc converter against As a result, Xv is a subset of Xv . This ensures the robustness of
parameter uncertainties has been analyzed by considering the the proposed MMPC algorithm against parameter uncertainties
addition of uncertain values of the filter resistance (R)  and once the controlled variables are within the bounds.

inductance (L). These uncertain values lead to the parameter Similarly, the robustness of the proposed MMPC algorithm
uncertainties of the model as for the bidirectional ac–dc converter with parameter uncertain-
ties can also be analyzed during the inverter mode of operation.
 s
L    The theoretical robustness analysis of the proposed MMPC
A = ,  = Rs Ts + Ls .
B (35) method with additive uncertain values of the filter resistance
Ts Ts  and inductance (L)  in (35) has been verified with a nonlin-
(R)
ear MATLAB/Simulink model and visualized in Fig. 7, which
Therefore, the control state equation (32) of the proposed MMPC
shows the variation of current error (ierror = is − iref ) against
algorithm can be written with parameter uncertainties as
the variation of the filter parameter. The value of filter resistance
 and inductance (Ls ) in (35) has been varied up to 200%
(R)

 + A)y(k) 

 + B)u(k  (36)
xunc (k + 1) = (A + (B + 1) + D. (nominal filter resistance, Rs = 0.1 Ω and inductance, Ls =
5 mH) to verify the robustness against parameter uncertainties.
Substituting (35) into |xunc (k + 1) − xref (k + 1)| leads to The results in Fig. 7 confirm that the variation of current
error is bounded within 1 A (less than 10%) for different
values of the filter parameter, which ensures the robustness
|xunc (k + 1) = xref (k + 1)| ≤ |x(k + 1) − xref (k + 1)| of the proposed control algorithm. Moreover, the percentage
deviation of current error (ierror ) with different values of filter
 
   parameters for both the rectifier and inverter modes of operation
+ Ay(k) + Bu(k + 1) . (37)
  
are compared and presented in Fig. 7(g), which shows that the
maximum deviation of current tracking error of about 8% is
negligible. Although the current tracking error is decreasing
The deviation from the reference at (k + 1) is thus bounded by with the increase in the filter inductor value, the power loss
the sum of two terms—the nominal response and an uncertainty
increases with the increase in inductor. The main focus of this
term, which is a function of the state vector and the input.
paper is to reduce the execution time with MMPC, and this
On the uncertainty term, the upper bound can be presented as section shows the robustness with parameter variation. Hence,
follows:
filter value selection and further discussion on power losses
  have been omitted. The percentage of current error is calculated
  
Ay(k)
 + Bu(k + 1) ≤ p1 |y(k)| + p2 .
 (38) from the reference (iref ) and measured (is ) current as


ierror = is − iref × 100%.

 
To ensure (robust) convergence in the presence of additional (42)
parameter uncertainties, the right-hand side of (37) has to be iref
PARVEZ AKTER et al.: MMPC OF A BIDIRECTIONAL AC–DC CONVERTER BASED ON LYAPUNOV FUNCTION
Fig. 7. Robustness analysis of the proposed MMPC algorithm against
parameter variation. (a) Reference current (isa_ref ) and measured cur-
rent (isa_meas ) of phase A. Current error (isa_error ) of phase A with
(b) Rs = 0.1 Ω, Ls = 5 mH (nominal), (c) Rs = 0.15 Ω, Ls = 7 mH,
(d) Rs = 0.20 Ω, Ls = 10 mH, (e) Rs = 0.25 Ω, Ls = 12 mH and
(f) Rs = 0.30 Ω, Ls = 15 mH filter parameter value. (g) Percentage
current error.
713
Fig. 8. Control algorithm of (a) the conventional MPC and (b) the
proposed Lyapunov-function-based MMPC.
Therefore, it is possible to demonstrate that the proposed
control strategy is robust and can efficiently operate even under
filter parameter variations.
VII. C OMPARATIVE E VALUATION OF THE P ROPOSED
MMPC W ITH C ONVENTIONAL MPC IN T ERMS
OF E XECUTION T IME
One of the major advantages of the proposed Lyapunov-
function-based MMPC algorithm is its very low execution time.
The proposed MMPC algorithm reduces the amount of calcula-
tions required to predict a future variable by half compared with
the conventional MPC method, which is elaborately presented
in Fig 8.
In the experimental system, the execution time required
in completing the algorithms of the conventional MPC and
the proposed Lyapunov-function-based MMPC techniques are
calculated by measuring the calculation cycles of the DS1104
control card of the dSPACE real-time prototype. The total
execution times of the conventional MPC method are 3.95 and
3.8 μs for the rectifier and inverter modes, respectively. Oth-
erwise, the total execution times of the proposed Lyapunov-
function-based MMPC method are about 3.24 μs during the
rectifier mode and 3.12 μs during the inverter mode. The
execution time of the rectifier mode is higher than that of
the inverter mode due the usage of the PI controller. Hence, the
total execution time is reduced by 17.89% with the proposed
MMPC method.
Fig. 9(a) presents the experimental results, which show the
step change of the high dc bus voltage and current with step
change of the dc bus reference voltage (Vdc_ref ). The high dc
bus voltage and current reached its steady-state level within
714 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 63, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 2016
Fig. 9. Experimental results with the MMPC scheme. (a) DC bus voltage
and current at the rectifier mode. (b) Three-phase ac current and cost
function at the inverter mode.
3.24 μs, which confirms the low execution time of the proposed
Lyapunov-function-based MMPC technique during the rectifier
mode of operation. On the other hand, Fig. 9(b) shows the
experimental wave shapes of the three-phase ac currents and
the cost function of the proposed MMPC method during the
inverter mode of operation. The three-phase ac current
controlled by the proposed MMPC technique follows the
references accurately with very fast dynamic response.
Moreover, the Lyapunov-function-based cost function pre-
sented in Fig. 9(b) can be referred to the ac current error,
which is bounded for its transient stability conditions with
quantization error resulting from the finite number of possible
voltage vectors of the bidirectional ac–dc converter.
A comparative evaluation between the conventional MPC
and the proposed Lyapunov-function-based MMPC has been
performed and summarized in Table III. The proposed MMPC
algorithm operates as a voltage mode control technique, which
reduces the execution time by minimizing the amount of cal-
culation compared with the conventional current-mode MPC
algorithm. Moreover, the average switching frequency of the
MMPC algorithm is also less than that of the conventional
MPC method. Finally, the proposed MMPC ensures the system
stability with the direct Lyapunov stability analysis method,
which is impossible for the conventional MPC.
VIII. C ONCLUSION
In this paper, a Lyapunov-function-based MMPC algorithm
has been proposed to control the bidirectional ac–dc converter,
TABLE III
C OMPARISON B ETWEEN C ONVENTIONAL MPC AND P ROPOSED
LYAPUNOV-F UNCTION -B ASED MMPC
which is applied in an energy storage system to transfer power
between the three-phase ac voltage source and the dc volt-
age bus. The Lyapunov-function-based MMPC is a powerful
control algorithm in the field of bidirectional ac–dc power
converters, which provides bidirectional power flow with in-
stantaneous mode-changing capability, fast dynamic response,
and nonlinear system stability. The stability analysis of this
control method is performed with the direct Lyapunov method
and nonlinear model analysis. The result confirms that the
MMPC system is stable for the operation of the bidirectional
ac–dc converter. Moreover, the most important advantage of the
proposed Lyapunov-function-based MMPC algorithm is that it
has very low execution time. The total execution time of the
proposed MMPC algorithm is about 18% lower than that of
the conventional MPC algorithm. The results associated in this
investigation are very encouraging and will continue to play a
strategic role in the improvement of modern high-performance
bidirectional ac–dc converters.
R EFERENCES
[1] J. M. Carrasco et al., “Power-electronic systems for the grid integration of
renewable energy sources: A survey,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 53,
no. 4, pp. 1002–1016, Jun. 2006.
[2] S. Vazquez, S. M. Lukic, E. Galvan, L. G. Franquelo, and J. M. Carrasco,
“Energy storage systems for transport and grid applications,” IEEE Trans.
Ind. Electron., vol. 57, no. 12, pp. 3881–3895, Dec. 2010.
[3] N. M. L. Tan, T. Abe, and H. Akagi, “Design and performance of a bidi-
rectional Isolated DC–DC converter for a battery energy storage system,”
IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 1237–1248, Mar. 2012.
[4] J. R. Rodríguez, L. Dixon, J. R. Espinoza, J. Pontt, and P. Lezana, “PWM
regenerative rectifiers: State of the art,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 5–22, Feb. 2005.
[5] P. Akter, M. Uddin, S. Mekhilef, N. M. L. Tan, and H. Akagi, “Model
predictive control of bidirectional isolated DC–DC converter for energy
conversion system,” Int. J. Electron., vol. 102, no. 8, pp. 1407–1427,
2015.
[6] B. Singh et al., “A review of three-phase improved power quality AC–DC
converters,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 641–660,
Jun. 2004.
[7] J. Dannehl, C. Wessels, and F. W. Fuchs, “Limitations of voltage-oriented
PI current control of grid-connected PWM rectifiers with LCL filters,”
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 380–388, Feb. 2009.
[8] M. Malinowski, M. P. Kazmierkowski, and A. M. Trzynadlowski, “A
comparative study of control techniques for PWM rectifiers in AC ad-
justable speed drives,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 18, no. 6,
pp. 1390–1396, Nov. 2003.
[9] D. Zhi, L. Xu, and B. W. Williams, “Improved direct power control of
grid-connected DC/AC converters,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 24,
no. 5, pp. 1280–1292, May 2009.
PARVEZ AKTER et al.: MMPC OF A BIDIRECTIONAL AC–DC CONVERTER BASED ON LYAPUNOV FUNCTION
[10] A. Bouafia, F. Krim, and J.-P. Gaubert, “Fuzzy-logic-based switching state
selection for direct power control of three-phase PWM rectifier,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 1984–1992, Jun. 2009.
[11] J. Hu, L. Shang, Y. He, and Z. Zhu, “Direct active and reactive power
regulation of grid-connected DC/AC converters using sliding mode con-
trol approach,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 210–222,
Jan. 2011.
[12] C. Reza, M. D. Islam, and S. Mekhilef, “Modeling and experimental
verification of ANN based online stator resistance estimation in DTC-IM
drive,” J. Elect. Eng. Technol., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 550–558, Mar. 2014.
[13] J. Rodriguez et al., “State of the art of finite control set model predictive
control in power electronics,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Informat., vol. 9, no. 2,
pp. 1003–1016, May 2013.
[14] M. P. Akter, S. Mekhilef, N. M. L. Tan, and H. Akagi, “Model predictive
control of bidirectional AC–DC converter for energy storage system,”
J. Elect. Eng. Technol., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 165–175, Jan. 2015.
[15] M. P. Akter, S. Mekhilef, N. M. L. Tan, and H. Akagi, “Stability and
performance investigations of model predictive controlled active-front-
end (AFE) rectifiers for energy storage systems,” J. Power Electron.,
vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 202–215, Jan. 2015.
[16] P. Cortés, M. P. Kazmierkowski, R. M. Kennel, D. E. Quevedo, and
J. Rodríguez, “Predictive control in power electronics and drives,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 12, pp. 4312–4324, Dec. 2008.
[17] M. Parvez, S. Mekhilef, N. M. L. Tan, and H. Akagi, “Model predictive
control of a bidirectional AC–DC converter for V2G and G2V applica-
tions in electric vehicle battery charger,” in Proc. ITEC, 2014, pp. 1–6.
[18] S. Muslem Uddin et al., “Model predictive control of an active front end
rectifier with unity displacement factor,” in Proc. IEEE ICCAS, 2013,
pp. 81–85.
[19] M. Uddin, S. Mekhilef, M. Mubin, M. Rivera, and J. Rodriguez, “Model
predictive torque ripple reduction with weighting factor optimization fed
by an indirect matrix converter,” Electr. Power Compon. Syst., vol. 42,
no. 10, pp. 1059–1069, 2014.
[20] R. Vargas, P. Cortés, U. Ammann, J. Rodríguez, and J. Pontt, “Predictive
control of a three-phase neutral-point-clamped inverter,” IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 2697–2705, Oct. 2007.
[21] S. Kwak and S.-K. Mun, “Model predictive control methods to reduce
common-mode voltage for three-phase voltage source inverters,” IEEE
Trans. Power Electron., vol. 30, no. 9, pp. 5019–5035, Sep. 2015.
[22] J. Scoltock, T. Geyer, and U. Madawala, “Model predictive direct
power control for grid-connected neutral-point-clamped converters,”
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 62, no. 9, pp. 5319–5328, Sep. 2015.
[23] P. Cortes, J. Rodriguez, C. Silva, and A. Flores, “Delay compensation in
model predictive current control of a three-phase inverter,” IEEE Trans.
Ind. Electron., vol. 59, no. 2, pp. 1323–1325, Feb. 2012.
[24] D. Quevedo, R. Aguilera, and T. Geyer, “Predictive control in power
electronics and drives: Basic concepts, theory, and methods,” in Ad-
vanced and Intelligent Control in Power Electronics and Drives, vol. 531,
T. Orłowska-Kowalska, F. Blaabjerg, and J. Rodríguez, Eds. Cham,
Switzerland: Springer-Verlag, 2014, pp. 181–226.
[25] M. Pozo-Palma and M. Pacas, “Predictive torque control for an induction
machine with a virtual multilevel inverter,” in Proc. IEEE IECON, 2013,
pp. 5848–5853.
[26] M. Pozo-Palma and M. Pacas, “Predictive control for a PMSM with
LC-filter and a virtual multilevel inverter,” in Proc. ICEM, 2014,
pp. 877–883.
[27] J. Rodriguez and P. Cortes, Predictive Control of Power Converters and
Electrical Drives, vol. 40. New York, NY, USA: Wiley, 2012.
[28] S. Vazquez et al., “Model predictive control: A review of its applications
in power electronics,” IEEE Ind. Electron. Mag., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 16–31,
Mar. 2014.
[29] J.-J. E. Slotine and W. Li, Applied Nonlinear Control, vol. 199.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA: Prentice-Hall, 1991.
[30] S. Dasgupta, S. N. Mohan, S. K. Sahoo, and S. K. Panda, “Lyapunov
function-based current controller to control active and reactive power
flow from a renewable energy source to a generalized three-phase mi-
crogrid system,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 799–813,
Feb. 2013.
[31] T. Geyer, R. P. Aguilera, and D. E. Quevedo, “On the stability and ro-
bustness of model predictive direct current control,” in Proc. IEEE ICIT,
2013, pp. 374–379.
[32] M. Rivera, V. Yaramasu, J. Rodriguez, and B. Wu, “Model predictive
current control of two-level four-leg inverters—Part II: Experimental
implementation and validation,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 28,
no. 7, pp. 3469–3478, Jul. 2013.
715
Md. Parvez Akter was born in Pabna,
Bangladesh. He received the B.Sc.Engg. de-
gree from Chittagong University of Engineer-
ing and Technology, Chittagong, Bangladesh,
in 2011 and the M.Eng.Sc. degree from the
University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia,
in 2015.
He is currently a Research Assistant with
the Power Electronics and Renewable Energy
Research Laboratory, Department of Electrical
Engineering, University of Malaya. His research
interests include power converters and electrical drives, bidirectional
power conversion techniques, predictive and digital control, renewable
energy, smart grids, and wireless power transfer.
Saad Mekhilef (M’01–SM’12) received the
B.Eng. degree in electrical engineering from
the University of Setif, Setif, Algeria, in 1995
and the M.Eng.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees from the
University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia,
in 1998 and 2003, respectively.
He is currently a Professor with the De-
partment of Electrical Engineering, University
of Malaya. He is the author or coauthor of
more than 250 publications in international jour-
nals and conference proceedings. He is actively
involved in industrial consultancy for major corporations in power elec-
tronics projects. His research interests include power conversion tech-
niques, control of power converters, renewable energy, wireless power
transfer, and energy efficiency.
Nadia Mei Lin Tan (S’07–M’10) was born
in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. She received the
B.Eng. degree (Hons.) from The University of
Sheffield, Sheffield, U.K., in 2002, the M.Eng.
degree from the Universiti Tenaga Nasional,
Kajang, Malaysia, in 2007, and the Ph.D. de-
gree from Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo,
Japan, in 2010, all in electrical engineering.
Since October 2010, she has been a Se-
nior Lecturer with the Department of Electrical
Power Engineering, Universiti Tenaga Nasional.
Her current research interests include power conversion systems and
bidirectional isolated dc–dc converters.
Dr. Tan is a Graduate Member of the Institution of Engineers Malaysia
and a member of the Institution of Engineering and Technology, U.K.
Hirofumi Akagi (M’87–SM’94–F’96) was born
in Okayama, Japan, in 1951. He received the
Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from
Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan,
in 1979.
Since 2000, he has been a Professor with
the Department of Electrical and Electronic
Engineering, Tokyo Institute of Technology. Prior
to this, he was with Nagaoka University of Tech-
nology, Nagaoka, Japan, and Okayama Univer-
sity, Okayama. He has authored or coauthored
some 120 IEEE T RANSACTIONS papers. His research interests include
power conversion systems and their applications to industry, transporta-
tion, and utilities.
Dr. Akagi received six IEEE T RANSACTIONS Prize Paper Awards and
14 IEEE Industry Applications Society (IAS) Committee Prize Paper
Awards. He was a recipient of the 2001 IEEE William E. Newell Power
Electronics Award, the 2004 IEEE IAS Outstanding Achievement Award,
the 2008 IEEE Richard H. Kaufmann Technical Field Award, the 2012
IEEE PES Nari Hingorani Custom Power Award, and the 2014 EPE
Outstanding Service Award. During 2007–2008, he was the President
of the IEEE Power Electronics Society. Since 2015, he has been serving
as the IEEE Division II Director.