Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 135 (2021) 110131

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

A finite control set model predictive control scheme for single-phase

grid-connected inverters
Mohamed Azab a, b
a
EEET Department, Faculty of Engineering, Benha University, Egypt
b
EEET Department, Yanbu Industrial College, KSA, Saudi Arabia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The present article investigates a control scheme for single-phase grid-connected inverter based on the finite
Finite control set model predictive control control set model predictive control (FCS-MPC) approach. The proposed grid integration scheme provides direct
Distributed energy resources control of the active and reactive power (PQ) injected to the grid from distributed energy resources (DER)
Low voltage ride through
composed of a photovoltaic (PV) array as a renewable resource integrated with a battery bank as energy storage.
Inverter
Grid integration
The direct PQ control scheme includes also low voltage ride through (LVRT) capability of the inverter during
Quarter cycle phase delay voltage sag.
Second-order generalized integrator The optimum inverter switching state is indicated via the employed FCS-MPC algorithm instantaneously such
All-pass filter that the actual PQ, injected to the grid, will track the corresponding reference values.
FCS-MPC During normal operation, the active power, injected to the grid, is set to the maximum possible value, while
PQ the reactive power is nil. Under voltage sag, the PQ will be injected to the grid as a function of the percentage of
DER voltage sag based on the existing grid codes and regulations.
LVRT
In single-phase systems, successful application of direct PQ control depends on accurately creating the ficti­
SOGI
tious orthogonal components of grid current and voltage required for instantaneous power computations.
APF
QCPD Therefore, the following three different orthogonal signal generation (OSG) methods are utilized in this study in
order to create such virtual (quadrature) components: second-order generalized integrator (SOGI), all-pass filter
(APF), and quarter cycle phase delay (QCPD). In addition, qualitative and quantitative analyses of the obtained
results are involved in this study of the FCS-MPC PQ system in order to compare the three adopted OSG methods.
The PSIM® software was utilized in this study for modeling and studying the overall FCS-MPC system and the
DER grid integration system.
According to the results, the investigated FCS-MPC approach is effective in providing quick response and
flexible control of PQ injected to the grid through the use of the three OSG methods. Moreover, the investigated
FCS-MPC scheme successfully involves the LVRT option in order to improve the dynamic grid voltage support
during the permissible duration of voltage sag following the LVRT profiles and grid codes of many countries.

broad range, thanks to the commercially available powerful digital

1. Introduction
Modern power systems are currently shifting from traditional
centralized generation to distributed generation, including renewable
resources and energy storage devices, toward reliable smart grids [1].
The advancement in power electronics systems (including enhanced
devices switching characteristics and high rating capability) facilitated
the rapid integration of DER with the electric grid. Therefore, imple­
menting complicated control tasks and sophisticated algorithms, needed
for reliable grid integration systems, is no longer considered as a crucial
obstacle that would restrict or limit the utilization of such systems on a
signal processors, high-speed data acquisition cards, and R&D control
boards. Fortunately, the availability of hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) sys­
tems and real-time simulators truncate dramatically the prototyping
time and permit elaborating and optimizing sophisticated control al­
gorithms for grid-connected inverters that have different features
following the grid codes standards.
1.1. Quick literature review
During the last decade, many related research activities have been
conducted and numerous articles have been published in the area of

E-mail address: mohamed.ahmed.azab@ieee.org.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110131
Received 5 January 2018; Received in revised form 19 July 2020; Accepted 20 July 2020
1364-0321/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Azab Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 135 (2021) 110131

Nomenclatures frame in the α-axis

vinv β Inverter voltage components of (α− β) stationary reference
VDC DC bus voltage frame β-axis
VXY Inverter output voltage iα iβ Grid voltage components in (α− β) stationary reference
vg Grid voltage frame
LS Grid filter inductor
ig Instantaneous value of grid current Abbreviations
i*g Reference value of grid current APF All pass filter
ESR Equivalent series resistance
ik+1 Predicted grid current at sample (k+1)
g SOGI Second order generalized integrator
C DC Capacitor filter
QCPD Quarter cycle phase delay
J Cost function of FCS-MPC
FCS-MPC Finite control set model predictive control
TS Sampling period of MPC algorithm
MPC Model predictive control
k Sample number k
DER Distributed energy resources
k1 Gain of SOGI transfer function
LVRT Low voltage ride through
fc Corner frequency of SOGI transfer function
KVL: Kirchhoff voltage law
w1 , w2 Weight factors of MPC cost function
kWp: Kilo Watt peak
S Inverter switching function
OSG Orthogonal signal generation
S1 S3 Inverter switching states
PCC Point of common coupling
z− 1 Digital time delay (one sample delay)
PF Power Factor
P Inst. Value of active power injected to grid
PI Proportional integral controller
Q Inst. Value of reactive power injected to grid
PLL: Phase locked loop
Pk+1 Predicted value of active power at sample (k+1) PR Proportional resonant controller
Qk+1 Predicted value of reactive power at sample (k+1) PU Per unit
Pref Reference value of active power injected to grid PUV Per unit value of the grid voltage at PCC
Prated Rated active power of DER injected to the grid PV Photovoltaic
Qref Reference value of reactive power injected to grid RE Renewable Energy
RS Equivalent series resistance of grid filter inductor STC Standard Test Conditions for PV
ωg Actual grid angular frequency THD Total harmonic distortion
ωnom Nominal grid angular frequency at 50 Hz VSI Voltage source inverter
ε Phase delay error due to grid frequency deviation VAR Volt-ampere reactive
iα , iβ Grid current components in (α− β) stat. Ref. Frame
vinv α Inverter voltage components of (α− β) stationary reference

distributed generation and its integration with the electric grid. In this
regard, research activities focused on several related directions such as
energy management of DER systems including secure integration with
the grid, control techniques of grid-tied inverters, and voltage ride
through capabilities.
The following subsections will address the state-of-the-art contribu­
tions related to some points such as DER grid integration, control
techniques of grid-tied inverters, LVRT capability of modern inverters,
and FCS-MPC approach.
1.1.1. DER grid integration
An overview of the recent efforts aiming at integrating renewable
energy resources into the smart grid was introduced by the authors of
[2]. The article emphasized future research directions on integrating
renewables with the smart grid. In Ref. [3], the concept of providing
active/reactive power support and renewable intermittency smoothing
to the distribution grid through the use of ultra-capacitors was dis­
cussed. Reference [4] proposed and developed taxonomy and systematic
categories of control strategies accounting for communication, control,
and physical distribution aspects of the problem. The article offered a set
of criteria that would help in the design, selection, and evaluation of
control strategies for DER applications with a focus on the control ar­
chitecture. Meanwhile, authors of [5] proposed an integrated model that
can represent and manage a diverse collection of DER, load, and storage
devices. The efficiency of the proposed active management model was
verified by numerical studies.
Investigators of [6] proposed a distributed stochastic algorithm for
managing DERs with continuous and discrete decision variables and
extended it to the practical real-time setting with time-varying operating
conditions in order to meet the operational and economic objectives and
constraints. All possible risks that could result from
communication-enabled distribution and transmission DER control
functions were investigated and evaluated in Ref. [7]. The results indi­
cated that the power system could be exposed to different types and
levels of risk that results in voltage excursions above grid code standards
or power system instabilities leading to partial load shedding or com­
plete blackout.
In [8], architecture of the cyber-physical power system with a huge
number of DERs was proposed. The study ensures the secure integration
of DER without harming the grid reliability and stability through uti­
lizing an attack-resilient framework in order to protect the integrated
DER and the critical power grid infrastructure from malicious cyber­
attacks. A concept of cascaded DC integration interface for multiple
distributed energy resources for the scenario of multi-DC voltage dis­
tribution grid was presented by the authors of [9]. The concept of power
equalizer was also introduced to achieve the wide range operation of
DERs. Furthermore, a comprehensive integration concept for DC
microgrid into the legacy AC grid based on the virtual synchronous
machine concept was proposed in Ref. [10].
1.1.2. Control of grid-tied inverters
Control techniques of grid-tied inverters play a vital role in suc­
cessfully operating and deploying renewable energy resources and DER
integrated with the electric grids. In this direction, numerous efforts and
publications [12–31,37–51] have been carried out during the last
decade.
In [11], the authors presented a comprehensive overview of control
techniques of current-controlled and voltage-controlled grid-connected

2
M. Azab
inverters in a microgrid. The important functionalities and features that
should be offered by grid-connected converters were described in the
same article.
Reference [12] analyzed a triple-loop controller employed for
single-phase, grid-tied voltage source inverters with LCL output filter.
The first two inner control loops regulate the inverter output current and
the filter capacitor voltage, respectively, while the third loop regulates
the current injected into the grid.
In [13], two optimal control objectives of multifunctional grid-tied
inverters are presented. The optimal control depends on a comprehen­
sive power quality evaluation algorithm. Authors of [14] proposed a
new method for designing a current controller, in the stationary refer­
ence frame, for grid-tied inverters under both balanced and unbalanced
grid voltage conditions. Furthermore, a robust current control of
grid-tied inverters for the integration of DER with the grid under unideal
grid conditions, including grid voltage disturbance and varying grid
impedance, were introduced by investigators of [15].
A power-voltage control strategy for a grid-tied inverter that can
raise the power injected to the grid under weak grid conditions was
proposed in Ref. [16]. The control strategy depends on the voltage
feedback control of the inverter.
Moreover, a model-based current control approach with the
compensation of dc-side inductor current ripple and active damping for
single-phase grid-tied quasi-Z-source inverters with LCL filter was pre­
sented in Refs. [17]. In addition [18], proposed active disturbance
rejection control-based current control strategy for LCCL-type grid-tied
inverters. The investigated scheme deals with the disturbance and sys­
tem uncertainty as generalized disturbance. Verification of the method
was done through testing a 2-kW experimental prototype.
In [19], the authors introduced a high-efficiency transformer-less
topology for grid-tied PV system with reactive power control. A pro­
portional integral multi-resonant type repetitive control scheme for a
grid-tied inverter was proposed in Ref. [20]. Reference [21] introduced
a reactive power control technique for single-phase photovoltaic in­
verters of unfolding topology through the generation of quasi-sinusoidal
waveform current by the inverter. In Ref. [22], a new resonant current
controller is proposed for controlling the current injected by a grid-tied
inverter through L-filter. In Ref. [23], a discrete-time modified uncer­
tainty and disturbance estimator scheme is proposed for improving the
current tracking performance and robustness of grid-tied inverter. A
distributed control strategy for the grid-tied module integrated inverter
system was introduced in Ref. [24], where both active and reactive
power control of each inverter were analyzed.
Reference [25] proposed an optimal control system for single-phase
grid-connected five-level inverter with LCL passive filter based on linear
quadratic regulator with integral action. In Ref. [26], the authors
investigated a control algorithm that can limit the inverter peak current
and achieve zero active power oscillation for the grid-connected PV
plants during unbalanced voltage sags. A general design procedure for
digital controlled modular grid-connected inverters for multi-parallel
operation was presented in Ref. [27]. Analysis of the coupling effect
between multi-parallel modular grid-tied inverters and grid impedance
is carried out. The stability of the modular inverter system was inves­
tigated as well.
Investigators of [28] employed single-phase transformer-less
grid-tied inverters with common dc bus and ac bus for enhancing the
efficiency and reliability of the grid integration system. The paper also
analyzed the high-frequency circulating current of parallel-operated
inverters under different topologies and PWM strategies.
Besides [29], introduced a decoupled power control scheme for
grid-connected quasi-impedance source inverter for photovoltaic ap­
plications based on FCS-MPC providing also LVRT feature.
On the other hand, reference [30] addressed sensor-less grid syn­
chronization method, which requires minimal computational load and
provides a fast and accurate estimation of the grid voltage when con­
nected to a weak grid such as unbalanced and distorted three-phase
3
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 135 (2021) 110131
weak grid. Moreover, authors of [31] proposed a new synchronization
method for single-phase grid-tied inverters, which provides good dy­
namics and high accuracy under a highly distorted voltage. This method
depends on a multi-harmonic decoupling cell, which can cancel out the
oscillations on the synchronization signals because of the harmonic
voltage distortion while maintaining good dynamic response of the
synchronization process. The stability analysis of three-phase grid-tied
inverter based on divided DQ small-signal model of the grid-tied inverter
in dq frame was investigated in Ref. [32]. Additionally, the stability of
grid-tied PQ-controlled VSIs under weak grid conditions was investi­
gated by the authors of [33]. The conducted study employed a
small-signal state-space model in the synchronously rotating
dq-reference frame.
1.1.3. LVRT of modern grid-tied inverters
The recent grid codes standards and regulations, related to the
integration of DER with the electric grid, obligate the grid-tied inverters
to stay connected and support the grid voltage through injecting reactive
current during voltage sag (reactive power support). This operation is
known as low voltage ride through (LVRT); see Ref. [34,40,78,83].
A comprehensive review of the LVRT techniques of the grid-
connected wind energy systems was introduced by the authors of
[35], which can assist in maintaining the connection of wind generators
to the utility during fault periods.
Authors of [36] explored different reactive power injection strategies
for single-phase PV systems taking into consideration the grid re­
quirements. The investigated strategies of the reactive power injection
included constant average active power control, constant active current
control, constant peak current control, and thermal optimized reactive
power control strategy.
Additionally [37], presented an LVRT technique to effectively utilize
the current capacity of the grid-tied converter to meet the LVRT
requirement and to reduce the potential post-sag inrush current of the
transformer within the grid-tied converter system. In Ref. [38], the au­
thors proposed a low voltage ride through technique for three-phase
grid-connected inverters based on nonlinear phase locked loop utiliz­
ing complex-coefficient filters. The investigated technique provided fast
dynamic response and improved the disturbance rejection capability.
Moreover, two control strategies for the LVRT and ZVRT operations in
the single-stage single-phase grid connected PV systems were addressed
in Ref. [39]. Single-phase PQ control and power phase-angle control are
the investigated methods. The results indicated that the power
phase-angle control method has a better performance in terms of dy­
namic response. In Ref. [40], the ability of super capacitor to enhance
the performance of single-phase grid-tied PV system during grid faults
was demonstrated. The effect of grid fault on the inverter DC side was
studied as well. Different reactive power injection strategies and their
performance were also discussed. It was observed that constant current
peak control strategy has the most severe effect on the PV MPPT per­
formance and therefore the DC side dynamic. Authors of [41] proposed
an improved method for analyzing the LVRT performance of DFIG sys­
tem with rotor crowbar, where the impact of grid impedance was also
taken into consideration.
An intelligent active and reactive power controller for the three-
phase grid-connected PV system operating under voltage sags was pre­
sented in Ref. [42]. The proposed scheme depended on fuzzy model
incorporated with artificial neural network. Furthermore, reference [43]
introduced a decoupled active and reactive power control for quasi-z
source single-phase grid-tied microinverter involving LVRT capability.
The core of control algorithm was based on a model predictive control
approach.
1.1.4. Applications of FCS-MPC approach
The model predictive control (MPC) can be considered as one of the
recent control approaches that have been applied successfully for
several optimization problems in electrical power engineering systems
M. Azab
[44–63,65,67–78,81]. In the MPC approach, the future behaviour of the
controlled variables is predicted over a finite time frame such that the
optimum future control action is applied to the system to achieve the
optimal cost function [44,45]. The MPC algorithm is repeated at every
sampling period [48,61,62,67,68]. In the case of switching power
electronics converters, finite control set model predictive control
(FCS-MPC) approach is utilized such that future system behaviour is
computed only for discrete possible switching states owing to the con­
verter topology.
During the last decade, several research activities and publications
[44–60] have been carried out based on the FCS-MPC approach in order
to control the operation of switching power converters.
Authors of [44] presented an FCS-MPC strategy for high-efficiency
two-stage grid-tied inverter with experimental verification. In
Ref. [45], the authors proposed the application of FCS-MPC strategy in
standalone ac microgrid (MG), using a single-step prediction horizon.
Reference [46] employed an FCS-MPC algorithm for dynamic stabili­
zation of a dc microgrid that supplies tightly regulated point-of-load
converters. Moreover, FCS-MPC is employed for dynamic reactive
power compensation utilizing a hybrid active power filter based on
LCL-filter equations [47]. Investigators of [48] studied a model predic­
tive based Maximum Power Point Tracking method for a photovoltaic
energy harvesting system based on a single-stage grid-tied Z-source
inverter.
Authors of [49] developed an MPC strategy for a grid-tied cascaded
full-bridge inverter with neutral-point-clamped legs. In Ref. [50], new
insights into multiple-vector FCS-MPC for power converters were pro­
posed through investigating its relationship with the space vector
modulation based on dead beat control. Another study [51] presented a
linear generalized predictive current control for the grid-tied VSI. The
proposed algorithm was characterized by a fast response to current
reference step changes and good robustness against parameter variation.
In Refs. [52], an FCS-MPC system was presented to reduce the input
current ripple of a two-level three-phase grid-connected rectifier. Au­
thors of [53] proposed some techniques to improve the performance of
optimal switching vector MPC based on dynamic weighting factor as a
function of existing error. Experimental results verified the robustness of
the proposed scheme.
Investigators of [54] introduced an FCS-MPC system with feedback
correction scheme that can adjust the prediction model output at the
current instant by a model prediction error at the previous instant.
On the other hand, authors of [55] utilized a neural network
approach for online tuning of FCS-MPC weighting factors. The proposed
scheme outperformed conventional FCS-MPC system of fixed weighting
factors. Besides [56], presented useful guidelines for weighting factors
adjustment of cost functions of FCS-MPC applied for converter control.
Additionally, the problem of time delay associated with the MPC algo­
rithms is tackled in Ref. [57–60].
1.2. Main contribution of the article
The present article proposes an integrated control scheme for single-
phase DER grid integration systems. The presented control scheme
combines FCS-MPC approach with direct PQ control including LVRT
capability for quick performance and reliable operation of grid-tied
inverter in accordance with the grid code standards such as VDE-AR-N
4120 [34], IEC 62477–1 [35], and IEEE 1547 [35,69].
The salient advantage of the employed direct PQ control scheme is
the elimination of PI or PI-PR controllers, utilized as current controllers
in Ref. [20,25,26,31,32,34,37,39] or employed as power controllers
either for reference current generation as in Refs. [19,36,40–42,70,71]
or for reference voltage generation as in Refs. [16,24,33,41,50].
Thanks to the FCS-MPC approach, both active and reactive power are
well controlled to the corresponding reference values during both
normal mode operation and fault mode (LVRT mode). The proposed
scheme exhibits fast dynamic response and reasonable steady-state
4
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 135 (2021) 110131
performance.
According to PQ theory of three-phase systems, the instantaneous
active and reactive power are computed from the ac quantities (grid
voltage and currents) resolved into equivalent two-phase system either
in stationary reference frame α− β coordinates [61,62,80] or in d-q co­
ordinates [52,63–66]. However, in case of 1-Φ systems, such quadrature
components do not exist. Consequently, to apply successfully the direct
PQ control strategy on single-phase systems, imaginary (virtual) quad­
rature components should be created through the use of a suitable
orthogonal signal generation (OSG) method.
Accordingly, this article is aimed at investigating the performance of
the proposed FCS-MPC system with different OSG methods and deter­
mining which method is the most convenient to be incorporated/utilized
with direct PQ control and LVRT of grid-tied inverter system.
In this study, three commonly used OSG methods (QCPD, SOGI, and
APF) are utilized for computing the virtual orthogonal signals of grid
voltage and current injected to the grid.
The performance of the proposed control scheme is studied under
different operating conditions, such as both normal mode of operation
and grid voltage sag (fault condition). Both steady-state and transient
performance have been investigated for the three SOG methods. More­
over, qualitative and quantitative analyses of the obtained results with
the three OSG methods have been carried out.
The obtained results proved the validity and effectiveness of the
proposed control scheme in providing high performance grid-tied in­
verters during normal and abnormal operating conditions.
The rest of this article is organized as follows. Section 2 discusses the
inverter control using generalized current-controlled FCS-MPC scheme.
Section 3 introduces the investigated PQ control through the use of FCS-
MPC approach. Section 4 presents the orthogonal signal generation
(OSG) methods. Finally, simulation results and conclusions are pre­
sented in Sections 5 and 6, respectively.
2. Inverter control using current-controlled FCS-MPC
A typical grid integration system is illustrated in Fig. 1. a and Fig. 1.
b. The simplified single-line diagram is shown in Fig. 1. a, while the
power circuit diagram of a 1-Φ grid-tied inverter is depicted in Fig. 1. b.
The energy produced by the DER is injected to the grid through the
inverter. A coupling inductor LS is inserted at PCC between the inverter
output and the grid. The inductor has small series equivalent resistance
(ESR), RS.
The inverter output voltage VXY is described by Eqn. (1) as a function
of dc link voltage VDC and the switching function SINV [61,62].
vXY = SINV VDC (1)
The inverter switching states and the corresponding switching
function are summarized in Table 1. DER system can include renewables
integrated with energy storage elements such as batteries. Therefore,
there is a common DC bus whose voltage is regulated by DC-DC con­
verter for individual DER unit.
By applying KVL at the inverter output terminals, the following
equation can be obtained:
dig
vXY = vX − vY = ig RS + LS + vg (2)
dt
The grid current injected to the grid at the sample (k+1) is predicted
by Eqn. (4), where vg is the grid voltage, vkg is the grid current at sample
(k), TS is the sampling period, LS is the grid filter inductor, and RS is the
ESR of the grid filter inductor.
dig 1 ( ) RS
= vXY − vg − ig (3.1)
dt LS LS
Δt ( ) RS
Δig = vXY − vg − Δt ig (3.2)
LS LS
M. Azab Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 135 (2021) 110131

Fig. 1. A typical grid integration system: (a) Single line diagram of 1-phase grid-tied system. (b) power circuit of 1-phase grid-tied inverter.

employing two PI-controllers to generate the reference grid current in

Table 1
d-q synchronous frame. The first PI controller is working as active power
Switching states of 1-Φ inverter.
controller, while the second PI controller is working as reactive power
Switching State Switching Function Inverter Voltage controller [19,36,40–42,70,71].
VXY
S1 S3 SINV
For a reference grid current i*g , a suitable cost function J, such as that
formulated in Eqn. (5), is evaluated for the four-possible inverter
00 0 0
10 1 + VDC switching states to minimize the absolute error between reference and
01 − 1 - VDC predicted current [65].
11 0 0 ⃒ ⃒
⃒ ⃒
J = ⃒i*g − ik+1
g ⃒ (5)

TS ( ) RS Each switching state has its own effect on the future behaviour of
ik+1
g − ikg = vXY − vg − TS ikg (3.3) grid current at sample (k+1) [49,61]. Consequently, the switching state,
LS LS
which minimizes the cost function J, is considered as the optimum state
( )
RS TS ( ) that will be applied at the new sample (k+1). Hence, the predicted grid
ik+1 = ikg 1 − TS + vXY − vg (4)
g
LS LS current tracks the reference grid current ikg . Accordingly, the FCS-MPC
The simplified block diagram of current-controlled FCS-MPC is pre­ scheme drives directly the inverter switches without requirement of
sented in Fig. 2, where the grid current at the sample (k+1) is predicted PWM unit [68]. The cost function J can take quadratic form as employed
later in PQ control scheme (Eqns. (11) and (12)).
using Eqn. (4) and vkg is measured using Hall Effect current transducer
[62,71]. Fig. 3. an illustrates the conventional (commonly used) current
3. Investigated PQ control using FCS-MPC approach
control scheme of grid-tied inverter. Another current control scheme is
depicted in Fig. 3. b. In this scheme, indirect PQ control is achieved by
Usually, the grid-tied inverter operates most of the time in “normal

5
M. Azab Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 135 (2021) 110131

the grid current at the present sample (k) [63,65,72,73].

( )
RS TS ( )
ik+1
g = ik
g 1 − T S + vXY − vg (6)
LS LS
Therefore, resolving Eqn. (6) into α− β components in the stationary
reference frame leads to Eqns. (7) and (8):
( )
RS TS
ik+1
α = ik
α 1 − TS + (vinv α − vα ) (7)
LS LS
( )
RS TS
ik+1
β = ik
β 1 − TS + (vinv β − vβ ) (8)
LS LS
Consequently, the instantaneous active and reactive power compo­
nents are predicted at the sample (k+1) for a prediction horizon of one
sampling period [61,72] using Eqns. (9) and (10):
1 ( k+1 k+1 )
Pk+1 = v i + vk+1 ik+1 (9)
2 α α β β

1 ( k+1 k+1 )
Qk+1 = v i − vk+1 ik+1 (10)
2 β α α β

The grid voltage components vα and vβ can be considered constant

during the sample period (Ts = 15 μs) because the grid voltage has low
variations with respect to the operating sampling frequency. Accord­
ingly, (vk+1
α = vkα ) and (vk+1
β = vkβ ).
A cost function J of quadratic terms is formulated such that it can
minimize the deviation in both active and reactive power as described in
Eqn. (11):
( )2 ( )2
J = Pref − Pk+1 + Qref − Qk+1 (11)

The cost function can be modified to include a weighting factor for

each term [74]. Moreover, it can be modified to represent per unit values
[6,28,36] as shown in Eqn. (12).
( )2 ( )2
Pref − Pk+1 Qref − Qk+1
J = w1 + w2 (12)
Prated Qrated
Prated and Qrated are the rated active and reactive power injected to
the grid from the distributed resource through the inverter. Initially, w1
and w2 are set to one. However, in some articles, those values are
adjustable for enhancing the dynamic response of the system [61,62,65,
73].

v 3.2. Block diagram and flowchart of the investigated FCS-MPC system

The block diagram of the investigated FCS-MPC system is displayed

Fig. 2. Simplified block diagram of grid-tied inverter control using FCS-MPC.
mode,” where the DER normally injects to the grid only active power
with nil reactive power (unity PF operation). However, when a fault
occurs “LVRT mode,” the grid voltage is reduced “voltage sag.” Owing to
the modern grid-connection regulations, the DER system should inject
reactive power to support the grid. During the voltage sag, the active
power generation is reduced and maybe stopped. This operating sce­
nario avoids activation of overcurrent protection scheme. Hence, it
prevents inverter shutdown and power interruption [34–36]. In the
present article, the proposed FCS-MPC system intends to operate the
inverter in both modes of operation as described in Sections 3.1 to 3.3.
3.1. PQ predicted model
The FCS-MPC approach is extended to be incorporated with the
direct PQ control strategy for 1-Φ grid-connected inverter. Owing to
Eqn. (6), the grid current can be predicted one step ahead (at sample
period k+1) as a function of grid voltage, inverter output voltage, and
in Fig. 4. a, where the MPC algorithm consists of four major blocks:
prediction model block for grid current components, prediction model
block for active and reactive power, cost function computation block,
and optimum switching state selection block. The output of the algo­
rithm is the optimum switching state, driving the power transistors of
the grid-tied inverter, such that instantaneous values of active and
reactive power injected to the grid keep track (follow) their reference
signals.
A flowchart of the FCS-MPC algorithm is presented in Fig. 4. b, where
Eqns. (7)–(11) are calculated at each sample t(k) for all possible inverter
switching states such that the inverter switching state, which results in
the minimum possible cost function, is to be applied during the next
sample t (k+1). The new generation of commercial grid-tied inverters
would include such option of producing arbitrary reference power sig­
nals as a standard function for optimum integration between distributed
energy resources and the electric grid. The arbitrary reference power
generation and control can perform active power injection from
distributed energy resources [78]. This operation satisfies the IEEE
Standard 1547, where the active power P is injected to the grid, while
the reactive power Q is set to zero [69,71,78]. Furthermore, during

6
M. Azab Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 135 (2021) 110131

Fig. 3. Reference current generation methods for grid-tied inverter control with FCS-MPC: (a) Current-controlled scheme. (b) Indirect PQ control scheme.

voltage sag faults of short permissible period, reactive power is injected ⎧

to the grid to support grid voltage recovery at the PCC in accordance ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
with new announced grid codes for distributed energy grid integration ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎧
⎪
in many countries [26,78,79]. The flowchart of LVRT mode is illustrated ⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎨
​ Qref = 0
⎪
in Fig. 4. c. Successful LVRT mode of operation requires quick response ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 0.9 < puv ≤ 1.0 ⇒
⎪
and fast transient performance of the FCS-MPC PQ control scheme. ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎩
⎪
⎪ Pref = Prated
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎧
⎪
3.3. LVRT mode and modification of reference power signals ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨
⎪
⎪
⎪ ​ Qref = 2 ​ Prated (1 − puv)
⎪
⎪
⎨ (13)
In case of grid voltage sag, the LVRT mode is enabled. During LVRT ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
0.5 < puv ≤ 0.9 ⇒
⎪
⎪ ⎪ √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
mode, the reference power signals Pref and Qref are modified such that ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎩ P = P2rated − Q2ref
the inverter can support dynamic grid voltage based on the grid inte­ ⎪ ref
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎧
gration protocols and regulations such as VDE-AR-N 4120 [34], IEC ⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎨ Qref = Prated
⎪
⎪
62477–1 [35], and IEEE 1547 [35,69]. ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 0 ≤ puv ≤ 0.5 ⇒
⎪
Basically, this action aims to prevent the activation of overcurrent ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎩
Pref = 0
⎪
protection in case of transient sag operation and discards momentarily ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
the disconnection of grid-tied inverter provided that the sag duration is ⎪
⎩
within the permissible limits mentioned in the related standards [26,36,
39,40]. According to Eqn. (13), the generation of reference signals of active
Owing to the flowchart of LVRT mode illustrated in Fig. 4. c, the level and reactive power is based on the puv value, which practically belongs
of sag voltage in per unit (puv) is initially computed. Once the sag to one of the three distinct zones [36]. In the first zone, puv is between
voltage is detected and determined, the LVRT routine computes the 0.9 and 1. In this zone, the inverter injects only active power to the grid.
suitable reference values of active and reactive power (Pref and Qref) In the second zone, puv is between 0.5 and 0.9. In this zone, the inverter
based on the level of voltage sag as explained in Refs. [38,83]. injects both active and reactive power with fixed apparent power, while
Equation (13) summarizes the suitable values of Pref and Qref that in the third zone, puv is below 0.5. So, in this zone, the inverter injects
should be injected to the grid as a function of voltage sag:

7
M. Azab
Fig. 4. (a) Block diagram of FCS-MPC scheme for single-phase grid-tied inverter. (b) Flowchart of the investigated FCS-MPC system. (c) Flowchart of LVRT mode.
only reactive power to the grid with nil active power.
4. Orthogonal signal generation (OSG) methods
The well-known PQ theory of three-phase systems was extended to
single-phase systems [61–63,71,75] to control the operation of
single-phase grid connected-inverter. The challenge in single-phase
8
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 135 (2021) 110131
system is how to generate quick and accurate virtual (fictitious) quad­
rature signals. The created signals should be orthogonal to the original
single-phase real quantities (grid voltage and current) to constitute the
components of the α− β coordinates [64].
Various OSG methods have been addressed in literature [64,70,
75–79,82]. However, the commonly used methods are:
M. Azab
1. Second-order generalized integrator (SOGI).
2. All-pass filter (APF).
3. Quarter-cycle phase delay (QCPD).
In all methods, both real signals of grid voltage vg and grid current ig
are aligned with the α-axis. Therefore, they are selected to form the
direct components (α-axis components) of the fictitious α− β co­
ordinates, while the quadrature components of the β-axis are created
through the application of the orthogonal signal generation method on
the original signals of α-axis as illustrated in the simplified block dia­
gram and the phasor diagram of Fig. 5. a and Fig. 5. b, respectively.
Moreover, a multiplication gin of (− 1) can be inserted to the output
of the OSG method in order to adjust the phase angle between α-β
components (to be +90◦ instead of − 90◦ ). Overview of orthogonal signal
generation methods has been addressed in Appendix A.
5. Simulation results
PSIM software has been utilized in modeling and investigating the
overall system. The specifications of the studied system and simulation
parameters are summarized in Table [B] of Appendix B. The developed
system includes the following major blocks: IGBT inverter power circuit,
FCS-MPC algorithm and related blocks, OSG methods to generate ficti­
tious quadrature components, and PQ computations. The FCS-MPC PQ
system has been investigated at normal and faulty grid conditions and
with the three OSG methods: SOGI, APF, and QCPD methods. For better
understanding and ease of reading, the simulation results of this section
are categorized in five major groups:
(1) Steady-state performance of the FCS-MPC PQ system at normal
operating conditions.
(2) Quantitative assessment of steady-state performance of the
elaborated FCS-MPC PQ system.
(3) Transient response of the FCS-MPC PQ system at normal oper­
ating conditions.
(4) Quantitative assessment of transient response of the investigated
FCS-MPC PQ system.
(5) Transient performance of LVRT scheme under grid voltage sag.
Fig. 5. Creation of virtual orthogonal components.
9
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 135 (2021) 110131
5.1. Steady state performance at normal operating conditions
a. Unity PF operation (Pref = 5 kW, Qref = 0)
The steady-state performance of the proposed FCS-MPC PQ system
has been investigated for two cases: (a) unity PF operation and (b) nil PF
operation.
Results of Fig. 6 illustrate the steady-state performance when the Pref
is 5 kW while the Qref is set to zero. The active power injected to the grid
with the three OSG methods is depicted in Fig. 6. a, while the reactive
power with the three methods is depicted in Fig. 6. b. Moreover, the
corresponding grid current and voltage are plotted in Fig. 6. c to verify
the successful operation of the unity PF mode.
According to the obtained results, the proposed FCS-MPC PQ system
is successful in operating the grid-tied inverter under unity PF operation.
The reference active power signal is arbitrarily adjusted to any value
below the peak power of the DER-inverter system. Moreover, the results
verify that the three OSG methods are successful in employing the PQ
system with slight differences. A quantitative comparison between the
utilized three OSG methods in terms of power deviation and THD of grid
current is summarized and tabulated in Table 3 of Section 5.2.
The results shown in Fig. 6a and 6. b indicate that the active and
reactive power components are well controlled to the reference
(desired) values. Furthermore, the current injected to the grid is in-phase
with the grid voltage as shown in Fig. 6. c for the three utilized OSG
methods.
5.2. Quantitative assessment of steady state performance of FCS-MPC
system
In this subsection, qualitative and quantitative analysis of FCS-MPS
PQ system have been introduced. Spectrum analysis of the active and
reactive power is presented in Fig. 7a and 7. b, respectively, while the
corresponding harmonic spectra of grid current are illustrated in Fig. 7.
c.
The assessment is conducted for unity PF operation (Pref is set to 5
kW while the Qref is set to zero). Based on the obtained results, the worst
harmonic component of the active power signal did not exceed 10 Watt
(0.2% of the reference signal), which indicates the effectiveness of the
M. Azab Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 135 (2021) 110131

Fig. 6. Steady state performance of FCS-MPC system at unity PF: (Pref = 5 kW, Qref = zero).

minimum THD of 1.64% as tabulated in Table 3.

Table 3
In case of zero PF operation, the SOGI method results in the mini­
Quantitative assessment of steady state performance of FCS-MPC system (Unity
mum reactive power deviation. The percentage of power deviation is
PF).
2.67%. The relatively worst reactive power deviation is obtained with
(Pref = 5 kW & Qref = 0 VAR) APF method with a value of 3.63% as presented in Table 4, while the
Item Formula SOGI APF QCPD THD of grid current is around 1.6% with all OSG methods.
Ripple of active power ΔP = (Pref - Pactual) 111.85 185.46 160.67 Generally, the proposed FCS-MPC PQ system is efficient in control­
[W] ling the operation of the grid-tied inverter. Good steady-state perfor­
Percentage of ripple (ΔP/Pref)*100 [%] 2.23 3.70 3.21 mance is achieved at both unity and zero PF modes with all OSG
power
methods. However, the relatively best steady-state performance is ach­
Total harmonic THD of grid current 1.64 1.66 1.66
distortion [%]
ieved with SOGI method, while the relatively worst steady-state per­
formance is obtained with APF method.

proposed FCS-MPC PQ system. Additionally, the harmonic component

5.3. Transient performance of FCS-MPC system at normal operating
of the reactive power signal did not exceed 10 VAR.
conditions
Besides, the amplitude of low order harmonic (3rd harmonic) of the
grid current did not exceed 0.1 A, which is 0.31% of the peak value of
a. Step change in Pref (0 → 3 kW), Qref = 0
grid current (Igrid-MAX is 32 A). Moreover, the computed THD of the
resultant grid current is below 2%.
The transient performance of FCS-MPC PQ system has been studied
Quantitative analysis has been conducted as well. Table 3 presents
for two cases: (a) step change in reference active power while the
the results for unity PF operation, while Table 4 presents the results for
reactive power is kept constant and (b) step change in reference reactive
zero PF operation.
power while the active power is kept constant. In case (a), the Pref is
In case of unity PF operation, the percentage of ripple active power
changed from 0 → 3 kW, while Qref is set to zero. The step response
did not exceed 4% in the worst case. It is observed that the SOGI method
under SOGI, APF, and QCPD methods are illustrated in Fig. 8a, 8b, and 8.
provides the minimum power deviation with 2.23%. Meanwhile, the
c, respectively. The obtained results demonstrate the effectiveness of the
APF method provides the relatively worst power deviation of 3.7%. The
FCS-MPC PQ system in providing fast transient response for the active
THD of grid current is below 2%. The SOGI method results in the
power injected to the grid, where the three OSG methods work

10
M. Azab Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 135 (2021) 110131

(a) (b) (c)

a Spectrum of P b Spectrum of Q c Spectrum of igrid

Fig. 7. Harmonic spectra of P, Q and igrid: (Pref = 5 kW, Qref = 0).

with SOGI method, while in case of APF method, the settling time is
Table 4
between 11 and 12 ms approximately.
Quantitative assessment of steady state performance of FCS-MPC system (Zero
In fact, the coupling effect between P and Q power loops would be
PF).
alleviated if the weight factors of cost function (Eqn. (12)) are modified
(Pref = 0 W & Qref = 5 kVAR) during transient operation. This issue is out of scope of this article and to
Item Formula SOGI APF QCPD be tackled in the future work.
Ripple of reactive power ΔQ = (Qref - Qactual) 133.9 181.5 157
[var]
Percentage of ripple (ΔQ/Qref)*100 [%] 2.67 3.63 3.14
5.4. Transient performance of FCS-MPC system at normal operating
power conditions
Total harmonic THD of grid current 1.61 1.62 1.61
distortion [%] b. Step change in Qref (0 → 4 kVAR), Pref = 0

In case (b), the Qref is changed from 0 → 4 kVAR, while Pref is set to
successfully as well. However, each method results in distinct charac­
zero. The step response under SOGI, APF, and QCPD methods is depicted
teristics on the FCS-MPC PQ response as demonstrated in Fig. 8. a to
in Fig. 9a, 9b, and 9. c, respectively.
Fig. 8. c. Owing to the obtained transient response, APF method provides
Owing to the obtained results, the FCS-MPC PQ system is successful
relatively minimum disturbance imposed on the reactive power. This
in providing fast transient response for the reactive power injected to the
disturbance is due to unavoidable coupling between P and Q control
grid. Moreover, the three OSG methods are working successfully as well.
loops. SOGI method leads to relatively worst reactive power disturbance
However, each method provides a distinct performance as observed in
with the highest peak overshoot on the active power signal. Meanwhile,
Fig. 9. a to Fig. 9. c.
the QCPD method does not produce peak overshoot on the active power
The results demonstrate that the APF method provides satisfactory
signal. The settling time of the active power is 5 ms in case of QCPD. It is
transient response with a relatively minimum disturbance imposed on
observed that the settling time is between 14 and 16 ms approximately
the active power component and accepted level of peak overshoot.

11
M. Azab Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 135 (2021) 110131

(a) (b) (c)

a SOGI b APF c QCPD

Transient response of FCS-MPC system Pref 0 3 kW , Qref = 0

Fig. 8. Transient response of FCS-MPC system (Pref = 0 → 3 kW, Qref = 0).

Fig. 9. Transient response of FCS-MPC system (Qref = 0 → 4 kVAR, Pref = 0).

Moreover, the SOGI method results in relatively worst active power
disturbance with the relatively highest peak overshoot, while the QCPD
exhibits no peak overshoot on the reactive power. The observed settling
time of the reactive power signal under QCPD method is 5 ms, while it is
between 13 and 14 ms approximately in case of SOGI method and is
between 11 and 12 ms approximately in case of APF method.
5.5. Quantitative assessment of transient response of FCS-MPC PQ system
A quantitative analysis of the transient response of the investigated
system has been conducted based on the results previously presented in
Sections 5.3.a and 5.3. b.
The analysis involved the following parameters: settling time and
peak overshoot of the power component that is subjected to step change.
Furthermore, the disturbance imposed on the power component that is
not subjected to the step change is also analyzed. The results are sum­
marized and tabulated in Table 5.
According to the obtained results, utilization of QCPD method results
in a settling time of 5 ms, which is considered as the minimum possible
time that has been achieved among the three OSG methods. In addition,
QCPD method provides also minimum peak overshoot.
Conversely, the SOGI method results in the worst settling time be­
tween 13 and 16 ms approximately and produces the worst peak over­
shoot between 12 and 13%. Meanwhile, the APF method provides
minimum disturbance on the power component that is not subjected to
the step change in its reference signal.
Therefore, the results demonstrate that the QCPD method is the most
convenient method to be utilized with FCS-MPC PQ scheme in terms of
minimum settling time and minimum peak overshoot. The APF method
provides minimum disturbance. Meanwhile, SOGI method results in the
relatively worst transient performance.
5.6. Transient performance of FCS-MPC system under voltage sag and
LVRT scheme
LVRT capability during voltage sag is involved in the proposed FCS-
MPC PQ control scheme. LVRT profile of many countries was addressed
in various references [36,38–41,83]. In this work, LVRT profile of Ire­
land/Canada is arbitrarily chosen to conduct the study. The first part of
Section 5.5 includes emulation of grid fault and voltage sag as illustrated
in Fig. 10. a. Thus, the corresponding grid voltage is depicted in Fig. 10.
b. Accordingly, the FCS-MPC PQ control unit generates suitable

Table 5
Quantitative assessment of transient performance of FCS-MPC PQ system.
Mode of operation Parameter OSG method

SOGI APF QCPD

Step change in active power (Pref 0 → 3 kW) Settling time [ms] 14–16 11–12 5
Peak overshoot [%] 13.3 6.67 0
Disturbance on Q [kVAR] − 1.77 - 0.96 − 1.56
Step change in reactive power (Qref 0 → 4 KVAR) Settling time [ms] 13–14 11–12 5
Peak overshoot [%] 12.5 6.6 0
Disturbance on P [kW] 2.37 1.277 2.1

12
M. Azab Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 135 (2021) 110131

Fig. 10. LVRT function using FCS-MPC PQ system: (a) Standard LVRT profile (Ireland/Canada grid code). (b) Grid voltage under sag.

Fig. 11. LVRT operation using FCS-MPC PQ system: (a) Active power P injected to the grid. (b) Reactive power Q injected to the grid.

reference signals of active and reactive power Pref and Qref based on Eqn.
(13), previously explained in Section 3.3.
The LVRT capability of grid-tied inverter with the proposed FCS-MPC
PQ system is illustrated in Fig. 11, where the active power injected to the
grid is plotted in Fig. 11. a, while the reactive power injected to the grid
is sketched in Fig. 11. b. The obtained results demonstrate the effec­
tiveness of the proposed scheme in enhancing the grid during voltage
sag in accordance with the existing grid codes. The results indicate that
the three OSG methods are successful and applicable in operating the
grid-tied inverter in the LVRT mode.
6. Conclusions
In the present paper, an FCS-MPC approach has been adopted to
control the operation of single-phase grid-connected inverter fed from a
pv array as a renewable resource and a battery bank as an energy storage
element. The control scheme provides LVRT capability of the grid-
connected inverter following the grid code standards. Moreover, the
study involves qualitative and quantitative analysis of the FCS-MPC PQ
performance during steady-state and transient operations. The obtained
results demonstrate the validity and effectiveness of the employed
approach to successfully control the operation of the grid-tied inverter

13
M. Azab Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 135 (2021) 110131

during normal and fault conditions. Furthermore, the paper addresses
the problem of orthogonal signal generation in case of single-phase
systems. Such virtual (fictitious) signal is needed for implementing the
PQ control of the grid-tied inverter. In this paper, three different
methods have been adopted to create the quadrature signals in sta­
tionary reference frame for both grid voltage and grid current. The ob­
tained results indicate that the three methods are applicable to
implement the FCS-MPC PQ scheme during both steady-state and tran­
sient operations. The adopted OSG methods were successful during fault
mode (voltage sag) as well.
Based on the obtained results, although the three adopted OSG
methods are successful to apply the proposed FCS-MPC PQ scheme,
there are some distinct features and slight differences. Such differences
are highlighted and summarized in the following points:
(1) Steady-State Performance:
In case of unity PF operation: It is observed that utilizing the SOGI
method leads to minimum possible deviation in active power with
2.23%. Moreover, the SOGI method provides minimum THD of grid
current with 1.64%.
In case of zero PF operation: It is also observed that the SOGI method
results in minimum possible deviation in reactive power with 2.67%.
However, the THD of grid current is around 1.6% with all OSG methods.
Furthermore, the harmonic spectra of active and reactive power and
grid current have been studied as well. According to the obtained re­
sults, the worst harmonic component of the active power signal did not
exceed 0.2% of the reference signal, which indicates the validity and
effectiveness of the proposed FCS-MPC PQ system. Moreover, the
amplitude of low order harmonic (3rd harmonic) of the grid current did
not exceed 0.31% of the peak value of grid current. Meanwhile, the
computed THD of the resultant grid current is below 2%.
The results indicate that the QCPD method lead to the minimum
possible settling time of 5 ms of the power component whose reference
signal is subjected to a step change. Meanwhile, the SOGI method results
in the worst settling time of 13–16 ms approximately. Furthermore, the
QCPD method does not produce peak overshoot on both active and
reactive power signals under step change in the reference signals, while
the SOGI method results in the relatively highest peak overshoot of
12–13%. On the other hand, it has been observed that the APF method
provides relatively minimum disturbance imposed on the active and
reactive power compared with the two other methods.
Consequently, the results demonstrated that the QCPD method is the
most convenient that could be utilized with the FCS-MPC PQ scheme
during transient operation in terms of minimum settling time and min­
imum peak overshoot. For the steady-state operation, the SOGI method
shows relatively better performance in terms of minimum active and
reactive power deviation.
On the other hand, the results proved that the proposed FCS-MPC PQ
scheme can enhance the LVRT capability of grid-tied inverter that sat­
isfies the related grid codes and regulations depending on standard
LVRT profiles of many countries.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgment
The author is grateful to Dr. Ali Abou-Sena, from Karlsruhe Institute
of Technology (KIT) for his effort in revising the English language of this
article.

(2) Transient Performance:

Appendix C. Supplementary data

Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110131.

Appendices

Appendix A. Overview of Orthogonal Signal Generation (OSG) Methods

A.1 Second-Order Generalized Integrator (SOGI)

The second-order generalized integrator technique (SOGI) is a second-order low pass filter in nature as described by Eqns. (A.1) and (A.2). SOGI
method not only creates the necessary 90◦ phase shift but also provides a low pass filtration to the high-frequency components of the grid current [61,
75].
k1 ω2c
vβ (s) = vg (s) (A.1)
s2 + k1 ωc s + ω2c

k1 ω2c
iβ (s) = ig (s) (A.2)
s2 + k1 ωc s + ω2c

The gain k1 has a great influence on the filter bandwidth and the transient response. In Eqns. (A.1) and (A.2), ωc is the corner frequency in rad/s,
which is chosen to be equal to the grid frequency (fc = 50 Hz). The gain k1 greatly influences the filter bandwidth and the transient response. There is a
trade-off between achieving quick transient response and guarantying good attenuation of the undesired high-frequency harmonics and noise
rejection. k1 is set to 1.414 resulting in a damping ratio ζ of 0.707 (ζ = k1/2), which is considered to be a good compromise between the two con­
tradicted requirements (minimum settling time and minimum overshoot) [77,78].

A.2 All-Pass Filter (APF)

A first-order all-pass filter (APF) is a simple applicable method for generating the orthogonal signal. The APF has a transfer function given by Eqn.
(A.3), where ωc is the corner frequency. At corner frequency (f = fc), the APF provides a phase shift of 90◦ to the input signal, while the amplitude of the
signal does not change (APF provides flat frequency response).

14
M. Azab Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 135 (2021) 110131

ωc − s
H(s) = (A.3)
ωc + s

vβ (s) = vg (s) H(s) (A.4)

iβ (s) = ig (s) H(s) (A.5)

A.3 Quarter-Cycle Phase Delay (QCPD)

QCPD method is considered as a simple technique for creating the orthogonal signal. In this method, both real signals of grid voltage vg and grid
current ig are aligned with the α-axis. The quadrature components of the β-axis are created through applying transport delay of ¼ cycle (90◦ ) to the real
α-axis components, followed by a multiplication gain of (− 1) in order to adjust the phase angle to be 90◦ (leading). If the multiplication gain is left
unity (+1), the created β-axis components will be delayed 90◦ (lagging). The transport delay of QCPD method is achieved in PSIM® using digital delay
block (z− 1). In real experimental systems, the ¼ cycle phase delay can be implemented through the use of digital time delay (z− 1) [77] as depicted in
Figure A.3. For 50 Hz system, the required ¼ cycle delay is 0.005 s. If the sampling frequency is 20 kHz (TS is 50 μs), the original α-component signal
should be delayed 100 samples (NS = 100) to be (z− 100). In case of 10 kHz sampling frequency, the delay is to be 50 samples (z− 50). Generally, the
required time delay Tdelay is (NS x TS).

Fig. A.3. Transport time delay technique for QCPD method.

Appendix B. Simulation parameters

Table 2
Specifications and simulation parameters of the investigated system

Parameter Value

Simulation Platform PSIM® Professional version 9.0.3

AC Bus 1-Φ
Grid voltage 220 V/50 Hz
Grid filter
Inductance LS 5 mH
ESR RS 0.1 Ω
DC Bus
DC Bus voltage VDC 400 V
Inverter Power Device
Type IGBT Branch Module
Rating 1200 V / 75 A
DER
Rated output power 4 kW
1. PV Array
Peak output power 5.12 kWp @ STC
2. Battery Bank
Total capacity 100 Ah
MPC Algorithm
Sampling time TS 15 μs
Prediction Horizon 1 sampling period (15 μs)
SOGI Parameters k1, fc, ωc 1.414, 50 Hz, 314 rad/s
APF Parameters fc, ωc 50 Hz, 314 rad/s

References [7] Johnson J, Quiroz J, Concepcion R, et al. Power system effects and mitigation
recommendations for DER cyberattacks. IET Cyber-Phys Syst: Theor Appl 2019;4
(3):240–9.
[1] Zhong QC. Power electronics-enabled autonomous power systems: architecture and
[8] Qi J, Hahn A, Lu X, et al. Cybersecurity for distributed energy resources and smart
technical routes. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2017;64(7):5907–18.
inverters. IET Cyber-Phys Syst: Theor Appl 2016;1(1):28–39.
[2] Rehmani MH, Reisslein M, Rachedi A, et al. Integrating renewable energy resources
[9] Li X, Zhu M, Li Y, et al. Cascaded MVDC integration interface for multiple DERs
into the smart grid: recent developments in information and communication
with enhanced wide-range operation capability: concepts and small-signal analysis.
technologies. IEEE Trans Ind Inf 2018;14(7):2814–25.
IEEE Trans Power Electron 2020;35(2):1182–8.
[3] Somayajula D, Crow ML. An integrated active power filter-ultracapacitor design to
[10] Chen D, Xu Y, Huang AQ. Integration of DC microgrids as virtual synchronous
provide intermittency smoothing and reactive power support to the distribution
machines into the AC grid. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2017;64(9):7455–66.
grid. IEEE Trans Sustain Energy 2014;5(4):1116–25.
[11] Liu Q, Caldognetto T, Buso S. Review and comparison of grid-tied inverter
[4] Han X, Heussen K, Gehrke O, et al. Taxonomy for evaluation of distributed control
controllers in microgrids. IEEE Trans Power Electron 2019. https://doi.org/
strategies for distributed energy resources. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 2018;9(5):
10.1109/TPEL.2019.2957975.
5185–95.
[12] Buso S, Caldognetto T, Liu Q. Analysis and experimental characterization of a
[5] Liang B, Liu W, Sun L, et al. An aggregated model for energy management
large-bandwidth triple-loop controller for grid-tied inverters. IEEE Trans Power
considering crowdsourcing behaviors of distributed energy resources. IEEE Access
Electron 2019;34(2):1936–49.
2019;7:145757–66.
[13] Zeng Z, Yang H, Tang S, et al. Objective-oriented power quality compensation of
[6] Zhou X, Anese ED, Chen L. Online stochastic optimization of networked distributed
multi-functional grid-tied inverters and its application in micro-grids. IEEE Trans
energy resources. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 2019. https://doi.org/10.1109/
Power Electron 2015;30(3):1255–65.
TAC.2019.2927925.

15
M. Azab
[14] Errouissi R, Al-Durra A. A novel control technique for grid-tied inverters
considering unbalanced grid voltage conditions and control input saturation. IEEE
Trans Sustain Energy 2019;10(4):2223–34.
[15] Huang X, Wang K, Fan B, et al. Robust current control of grid-tied inverters for
renewable energy integration under non-ideal grid conditions. IEEE Trans Sustain
Energy 2020;11(1):477–88.
[16] Sang S, Gao N, Cai X, et al. A novel power-voltage control strategy for the grid-tied
inverter to raise the rated power injection level in a weak grid. IEEE J Emerg
Selected Top Power Electr 2018;6(1):219–32.
[17] Komurcugil H, Bayhan S, Bagheri F, et al. Model-based current control for single-
phase grid-tied quasi-Z-source inverters with virtual time constant. IEEE Trans Ind
Electron 2018;65(10):8277–86.
[18] Cao Y, Zhao Q, Ye Y, et al. ADRC-based current control for grid-tied inverters:
design, analysis, and verification. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2019. https://doi.org/
10.1109/TIE.2019.2949513.
[19] Islam M, Afrin N, Mekhilef S. Efficient single phase transformer-less inverter for
grid-tied PVG system with reactive power control. IEEE Trans Sustain Energy 2016;
7(3):1205–15.
[20] Zhao Q, Ye Y. A PIMR-type repetitive control for a grid-tied inverter: structure,
analysis, and design. IEEE Trans Power Electron 2018;33(3):2730–9.
[21] Li D, Ho CNM, Liu L, et al. Reactive power control for single-phase grid-tie
inverters using quasi sinusoidal waveform. IEEE Trans Sustain Energy 2018;9(1):
3–11.
[22] Busada CA, Jorge SG, Solsona JA. Resonant current controller with enhanced
transient response for grid-tied inverters. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2018;65(4):
2935–44.
[23] Wu Y, Ye Y, Zhao Q, et al. Discrete-time modified UDE-based current control for
LCL-type grid-tied inverters. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2020;67(3):2143–54.
[24] Zhang L, Sun K, Li YW, et al. A distributed power control of series-connected
module integrated inverters for PV grid-tied applications. IEEE Trans Power
Electron 2018;33(9):7698–707.
[25] Arab N, Vahedi H, Al-Haddad Kamal. LQR control of single-phase grid-tied PUC5
inverter with LCL filter. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2020;67(1):297–307.
[26] Tafti HD, Maswood AI, Konstantinou G, et al. Active/reactive power control of
photovoltaic grid-tied inverters with peak current limitation and zero active power
oscillation during unbalanced voltage sags. IET Power Electron 2018;11(6):
1066–73.
[27] Chen T, Lee CK, Hui SYR. A general design procedure for multi-parallel modular
grid-tied inverters system to prevent common and interactive instability. IEEE
Trans Power Electron 2019;34(7):6025–30.
[28] Zhang L, Sun K, Xing Y, et al. Parallel operation of modular single-phase
transformerless grid-tied PV inverters with common DC bus and AC bus. IEEE J
Emerg Selected Top Power Electr 2015;3(4):858–69.
[29] Jain S, Easley M, Fateh F, et al. Distributed Predictive Control scheme for grid-tied
cascaded multilevel impedance source inverter with LVRT Capability. IEEE Energy
Convc Cong Exp (ECCE) 2018:6236–42. https://doi.org/10.1109/
ECCE.2018.8558223.
[30] Estevez DP, Gandoy JD. Grid-tied inverter with AC-voltage sensorless
synchronization and soft-start. IEEE Trans Ind Appl 2019;55(5):4920–33.
[31] Hadjidemetriou L, Kyriakides E, Yang Y, et al. A synchronization method for single-
phase grid-tied inverters. IEEE Trans Power Electron 2016;31(3):2139–49.
[32] Shuai Z, Li Y, Wu W, et al. Divided DQ small-signal model: a new perspective for
the stability analysis of three-phase grid-tied inverters. IEEE Trans Ind Electron
2019;66(8):6493–504.
[33] Adib A, Mirafzal B, Wang X, et al. On stability of voltage source inverters in weak
grids. IEEE Access 2018;6:4427–39.
[34] Sochor P, Tan NML, Akagi H. Low-voltage-ride-through control of a modular
multilevel single-delta bridge-cell (SDBC) inverter for utility-scale photovoltaic
systems. IEEE Trans Ind Appl 2018;54(5):4739–51.
[35] Mahela OP, Gupta N, Khosravy M, et al. Comprehensive overview of low voltage
ride through methods of grid integrated wind generator. IEEE Access 2019;7:
99299–326.
[36] Yang Y, Wang H, Blaabjerg F. Reactive power injection strategies for single-phase
photovoltaic systems considering grid requirements. IEEE Trans Ind Appl 2014;50
(6):4065–76.
[37] Chou SF, Lee CT, Ko HC, et al. A low-voltage ride-through method with transformer
flux compensation capability of renewable power grid-side converters. IEEE Trans
Power Electron 2014;29(4):1710–9.
[38] Sun G, Li Y, Jin W, et al. A novel low voltage ride-through technique of three-phase
grid-connected inverters based on a nonlinear phase-locked loop. IEEE Access
2019;7:66609–22.
[39] Zhang Z, Yang Y, Blaabjerg F, et al. Performance evaluation of low/zero voltage
ride through operations for single-stage single-phase PV inverters. IEEE 3rd Int Fut
Energy Electr Conf. (IFEEC) 2017:99–104. https://doi.org/10.1109/
IFEEC.2017.7992425.
[40] Mohammadi P, Eskandari A, Milimonfared J, et al. LVRT capability enhancement
of single-phase grid connected PV array with coupled supercapacitor. 9th Ann
Power Electr Driv Syst Technol Conf. (PEDSTC) 2018:193–8. https://doi.org/
10.1109/PEDSTC.2018.8343795.
[41] Din Z, Zhang J, Zhu Y, et al. Impact of grid impedance on LVRT performance of
DFIG system with rotor crowbar Technology. IEEE Acess 2019;7:127999–8008.
[42] Lin FJ, Lu KC, Yang BH. Recurrent fuzzy cerebellar model articulation neural
network based power control of single-stage three-phase grid-connected
photovoltaic system during grid faults. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2017;64(2):
1258–68.
16
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 135 (2021) 110131
[43] Jain S, Easley M, Shadmand MB, et al. Decoupled active and reactive power
predictive control of impedance source micro-inverter with LVRT capability. IEEE
Power and Energy Conf (PECI) 2018:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/
PECI.2018.8334982.
[44] Liu J, Cheng S, Liu Y, et al. FCS-MPC for a single-phase two-stage grid-connected
PV inverter. IET Power Electron 2019;12(4):915–22.
[45] Dragičević T. Model predictive control of power converters for robust and fast
operation of AC microgrids. IEEE Trans Power Electron 2018;33(7):6304–17.
[46] Dragičević T. Dynamic stabilization of DC microgrids with predictive control of
point-of-load converters. IEEE Trans Power Electron 2018;33(12):10872–84.
[47] Ferreira SC, Gonzatti RB, Pereira RR, et al. Finite control set model predictive
control for dynamic reactive power compensation with hybrid active power filters.
IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2018;65(3):2608–17.
[48] Sajadian S, Ahmadi R. Model predictive-based maximum power point tracking for
grid-tied photovoltaic applications using a Z-source inverter. IEEE Trans Power
Electron 2016;31(11):7611–20.
[49] Kakosimos P, Abu-Rub H. Predictive control of a grid-tied cascaded full-bridge NPC
inverter for reducing high-frequency common-mode voltage components. IEEE
Trans Ind Inf 2018;14(6):2385–94.
[50] Zhang Y, Liu J, Yang H, et al. New insights into model predictive control for three-
phase power converters. IEEE Trans Ind Appl 2019;55(2):1973–82.
[51] Judewicz MG, González SA, Echeverría NI, et al. Generalized predictive current
control (GPCC) for grid-tie three-phase inverters. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2016;63
(7):4475–84.
[52] Alam KS, Xiao D, Akter MP, et al. Modified MPC with extended VVs for grid-
connected rectifier. IET Power Electron 2018;11(12):1926–36.
[53] Caseiro LMA, Mendes AMS, Cruz SMA. Dynamically weighted optimal switching
vector model predictive control of power converters. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2019;
66(2):1235–45.
[54] Shen K, Feng J, Zhang J. Finite control set model predictive control with feedback
correction for power converters. CES Trans Electr Mach Syst 2018;2(3):312–9.
[55] Machado O, Martín P, Rodríguez FJ, et al. A neural network-based dynamic cost
function for the implementation of a predictive current controller. IEEE Trans Ind
Inf 2017;13(6):2946–55.
[56] Cortes P, Kouro S, Rocca BL, et al. Guidelines for weighting factors design in Model
Predictive Control of power converters and drives. IEEE Int Conf Ind Technol 2009:
1–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIT.2009.4939742.
[57] Yang Y, Wen H, Li D. A fast and fixed switching frequency model predictive control
with delay compensation for three-phase inverters. IEEE Access 2017;5:17904–13.
[58] Chun Z, Qishuang M, Tongkai C, et al. Model-predictive current control of DC/AC
inverters with time delay compensation. IEEE Int Conf Aircraft Util Syst 2016:
398–402.
[59] Liu S, Wu K, Tzou Y. Control of a single-phase grid inverter with on-line inductance
identification. IEEE 25th Int Symp Ind Electr 2016:454–95.
[60] Kuznietsov A, Wolf S, Happek T. Model predictive control of a voltage source
inverter with compensation of dead time effects. IEEE Int Conf Ind Technol (ICIT)
2015:2532–6.
[61] Shadmand MB, Li X, Balog RS, et al. Constrained decoupled power predictive
controller for single-phase grid-tied inverter. IET Renew Power Gener 2017;11(5):
659–68.
[62] Li X, Zhang H, Shadmand MB, et al. Model predictive control of voltage source
inverter with seamless transition between islanded and grid connected operations.
IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2017;64(10):7906–18.
[63] Zhang X, Tan L, Xian J, et al. Direct grid-side current model predictive control for
grid-connected inverter with LCL filter. IET Power Electron 2018;11(15):2450–60.
[64] Li B, Huang S, Chen X, et al. Enhanced dq current control for single-phase voltage-
source inverters. IET Power Electron 2018;11(9):1537–46.
[65] Wang X, Zou J, Ma L, et al. Model predictive control methods of leakage current
elimination for a three-level T-type transformerless PV inverter. IET Power
Electron 2018;11(8):1492–8.
[66] Tafti HD, Maswood AI, Konstantinou G, et al. Active/reactive power control of
photovoltaic grid-tied inverters with peak current limitation and zero active power
oscillation during unbalanced voltage sags. IET Power Electron 2018;11(6):
1066–73. 2018.
[67] Mirzaeva G, Goodwin GC, McGrath BP, et al. A generalized MPC framework for the
design and comparison of VSI current controllers. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2016;63
(9):5816–26.
[68] Nguyen TH, Kim KH. Finite control set-model predictive control with modulation
to mitigate harmonic component in output current for a grid-connected inverter
under distorted grid conditions. Energies J 2017;10(7).
[69] IEEE Application Guide for IEEE Standard 1547. IEEE standard for interconnecting
distributed resources with electric power systems. IEEE Stand 2008;1547(2):
1–207. 2009.
[70] Monfared M, Golestan S. Control strategies for single-phase grid integration of
small-scale renewable energy sources: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2012;
16(7):4982–93. Elsevier publisher.
[71] Azab M. Flexible PQ control for single-phase grid-tied photovoltaic inverter. 17th
IEEE Int Conf Environ Electr Eng Conf Proceed 2017:1–6.
[72] Jin N, Guo L, Gan C, et al. Finite-state model predictive power control of three-
phase bidirectional AC/DC converter under unbalanced grid faults with current
harmonic reduction and power compensation. IET Power Electron 2018;11(2):
348–56.
[73] Yang Y, Tan S, Hui SY. Adaptive reference model predictive control with improved
performance for voltage-source inverters. IEEE Trans Contr Syst Technol 2018;26
(2):724–31.
M. Azab
[74] Aguilera RP, Quevedo DE. Predictive control of power converters: designs with
guaranteed performance. IEEE Trans Ind Inf 2015;11(1):53–63.
[75] Monfared M, Sanatkar M, Golestan S. Direct active and reactive power control of
single-phase grid-tie converters. IET Power Electron 2012;5(8):1544–50.
[76] Ebrahimi M, Khajehoddin SA, Ghartemani MK. Fast and robust single-phase DQ
current controller for smart inverter applications. IEEE Trans Power Electron 2016;
31(5):3968–76.
[77] Han Y, Luo M, Zhao X, et al. Comparative performance evaluation of orthogonal-
signal-generators-based single-phase PLL algorithms-A survey. IEEE Trans Power
Electron 2016;31(5):3932–44.
[78] Yang Y, Blaabjerg F, Wang H, et al. Power control flexibilities for grid-connected
multi-functional photovoltaic inverters. IET Renew Power Gener 2016;10(4):
504–13.
17
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 135 (2021) 110131
[79] Tang C, Chen Y, Chen Y. PV power system with multi-mode operation and low-
voltage ride-through capability. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2015;62(12):7524–33.
[80] Azab M. Intra-minutes technical impacts of PV grid integration on distribution
network operation of a rural community under extreme PV power delivery.
J Energy Syst 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12667-018-0307-7. Springer-
Verlag, Germany,.
[81] Vazquez S, Leon JI, Franquelo LG, et al. Model predictive control: a review of its
applications in power electronics. IEEE Ind Electr Mag 2014;8(1):16–31.
[82] Lamo P, López F, Pigazo A, et al. An efficient FPGA implementation of a quadrature
signal-generation subsystem in SRF PLLs in single-phase PFCs. IEEE Trans Power
Electron 2017;32(5):3959–69.
[83] Shin D, Lee K, Lee J, et al. Implementation of fault ride-through techniques of grid-
connected inverter for distributed energy resources with adaptive low-pass notch
PLL. IEEE Trans Power Electron 2015;30(5):2859–71.