Bahir Dar University

Bahir Dar Institute of Technology

Faculty of Electrical and Computer Engineering

Post Graduate Program in Power Systems Engineering

Course: Advanced Power Electronics for Utility Applications (EEng 6024)

Paper Review on

Criteria for Selection of Current or Voltage Source Converter in Shunt Active Power
Filter Structure

Prepared By:

Fekadu Gebey /BDU1401884

Selamsew Eshetie /BDU1401879

Submitted to: Teketay Mulu (Ph.D.)

January, 2023
Bahir Dar, Ethiopia
 Criteria for Selection of Current or Voltage Source Converter in
Shunt Active Power Filter Structure

Abstract

Harmonics that created in power system and in electric power conversion processes can
be eliminated using Voltage source converter (VSC) or current source converter (CSC)
based shunt active power filter (SAPF). This paper presents Criteria for Selection of
Current or Voltage Source Converter in Shunt Active Power Filter Structure. Five selection
criteria defined to select the right converter-based shunt active power filter are power
losses, nature of load, cost, protection and complexity. VSC based SAPF is better in some
criteria and in another criteria CSC based SAPF takes precedence. Active power losses of
VSSAPF are more than that of CSSAPF while DC power losses and switching losses for
the same switching frequency are more in CSSAPF than VSSAPF. Better SAPF regarding
to cost and complexity criteria depends on the type and order of passive filter used. When
third order inductive capacitive inductive LCL filter is used, cost and complexity is more
in VSSAPF but cost and complexity is more in CSSAPF if the output passive filter used in
VSSAPF is first order. In this paper, the structure of current source shunt active power
filter (CSSAPF) and voltage source shunt active power filter (VSSAPF) is developed. This
developed system is inserted in parallel with the load bus in the studied system and
simulated in MATLAB. From the simulation result, the parameters of inductor resistance
in inductor of CSSAPF and VSSAPF, switching frequency and other parameters are taken
and hence losses are also evaluated to select the type of SAPF used.

Keywords Active power filter, Shunt active power filter based on the voltage source
converter (VSSAPF), Shunt active power filter based on the current source converter
(CSSAPF), Selection criteria, Passive filter

i
 1. Introduction

Harmonics are a type of disturbance that take the form of voltage or current wave forms
and emerge from a perfectly smooth sinusoidal wave form. They are caused by the use of
power electronics in electrical power conversion and by the presence of nonlinear loads.
Their frequency is a positive integer multiple of the fundamental frequency. The current
harmonic cause magnetic interference in machine windings, more heat in transformers,
cables, transmission lines and breakdown of relays and protection devices. These is
eliminated by providing proper compensation mechanism like passive filter and converter-
based shunt active power filters (SAPF) [1].
Shunt active power filters mitigate current harmonics by injecting equal magnitude but
opposite phase compensating current and they have better advantages than passive filters
like accuracy and fast response for compensating injected harmonic current. [2].
Depending on the type of converter used, SAPF may be voltage source shunt active power
filter (VSSAPF) or current source shunt active power filter (CSSAPF). The choice between
the two configurations depends on several criterion namely the semiconductors used, the
DC energy storage element, power ratings, control complexity and losses etc... [3].
In VSSAPF, the calculated reference current (Irf), is applied to the control unit. Irf is
generated from the receiving current and voltage of load whereas the generated Irf is applied
directly to the switching command unit (not sampled and feedback) in CSSAPF.
Substruction of irf and filter current sent to pulse width modulation PWM as a reference
signal [4]. Then the VSC acts and generates current which tracks the reference current.

1.2. Features of CSSAPF and VSSAPF

As per figure 1 below converter based SAPFs have DC side, converter and passive filter.
DC side: - The DC sides nature of the VSSAPF and CSSAPF are capacitive and inductive,
respectively. The amplitude of the DC inductor current in the CSC is low. Hence, to get
high enough harmonic current to compensate harmonics caused by the load with the desired
range, using VSC is more appropriate since the DC capacitor voltage range is high. For
low current injection the output voltage of the VSC based filter is close to the network
voltage, therefore in addition to increasing the voltage of the DC capacitor in the VSC,

1
large amplitude voltage harmonics are produced. From protection view, there is inherent
short-circuit protection in CSSAPF though short-circuit protection is also considered in the
VSSAPF scheme, hence the overall cost will be increased in CSSAPF than VSSAPF.

Figure 1 The structure of converter in (a) CSSAPF and (b) VSSAPF [1]
Converter: - The upper and lower parts of each arm of the converter contain an IGBT in
series with a diode in CSSAPF and VSSAPF has reverses blocking a diode that is in parallel
with IGBT. The converter used in CSSAPF is more complicated than the converter used in
VSSAPF because of the overvoltage clamp circuit and the existence of series diodes in its
structure to block the reverse voltage in the IGBT, leads to increased conduction losses
compared to the VSSAPF structure. The reliability of CSSAPF compared to VSSAPF is
low due to usage of increased number of semiconductors in its structure.
Passive filter: - The passive filter used in CSSAPF is a 2nd order LC, which complicates
the design, while VSSAPF uses a 1st order L filter. When 3rd order LCL filter is used in
VSSAPF for high power and low switching frequency, system become complex.
Depending on the filter order used, the complexity of the SAPF increases and selected
accordingly. This also increases costs. Switching currents are not the same in VSCs as they
are in CSCs. Switching currents, and the use of capacitors increases the conduction and
switching losses of the semiconductors used in VSCs. CSSAPF is preferable in such cases.

1.3. Criteria selection

Five selection criteria for SAPF are power losses, nature of load, cost, protection and complexity.
Power losses: Four types of losses, including losses of AC section (Δp1), conduction losses
of power switches (Δp2), switching losses (Δp3) and DC losses (Δp4) are take account.
Active power loses (Δp1): In the Figure 1.2 AC side losses include ohmic losses in the AC
inductor. Mathematically, (Δp1csc) equals to 3RL1i2rms or 3RL1 (I21rms + I22rms + I23rms + …)
Where, RL1 is inductor resistance, I1rms, I2rms, […] are effective value of the 1st, 2nd and […]
2
current i, for CSSAPF. Similarly, the AC power losses (Δp1vsc) for AC inductor with
resistance RL2 equals with 3RL2i2rms or 3RL2(I21rms + I22rms + I23rms + …) [1]. Since inductance
is directly proportional to square of number of turns, an increase in inductance increases
resistance. As a result, the AC power losses in VSSAPF is more than that of CSSAPF.
Conduction Losses (Δp2): The conduction losses in CSSAPF structure includes conduction
losses of an IGBT, conduction losses on the diodes (R D) and conduction losses in switches
(RSW). Mathematically, these losses expressed as follows by the final equation [1]:
Δp2csc = r1(i′12rms + i′22rms) Where, r1= RD + RSW
Regarding to figure 1 (a) above, Kirchhoff’s current law and regardless of the overlapping
of I′1 and I′2 currents at the moment of commutation, in equations Δp 2 is presented as:
i′ = i′1 + i′2→ i′2rms = i′12rms + i′22rms
Δp2csc = 3r1(i′12rms + i′22rms + i′22rms+ …)
Δp2vsc = 3[r2i12rms + r2 i22rms)] = 3r2i2rms = =3r2(i12rms + i22rms + i32rms+ …)
Where, Δp2vsc is conduction losses in VSC, for r2 = RIGBT and I2krms is effective value of kth
component of i′rms.. Conduction losses of an IGBT in VSC is less than the IGBT + D set in
the CSC and therefore r2 < r1. As a result, power losses in VSSAPF are less than CSSAPF.
Switching losses (Δp3): switching losses depend on the switch current (isw), switch voltage
(vsw), the switching frequency (fsw) and the turn on and turn off time (t ON, tOFF). The
simplified equation for switching losses in CSSAPF and VSSAPF is presented below [1].
Δp3CSC = 3kvsw1rmsfsw1(√ (i′12rms + i′22rms + i′32rms+ …))
Δp3VSC = 3kvsw2rmsfsw2(√ (i12rms + i22rms + i32rms+ …))
Where, Δp3CSC and Δp3VSC are switching losses in CSSAPF and VSSAPF respectively.
fsw1, vsw1rms and fsw2, vsw2rms are switching frequency and voltage in CSSAPF and VSSAPF.
In the values of Δp3CSC and Δp3VSC the term i′12rms + i′22rms + i′32rms+ … is greater than the
values in the term i12rms + i22rms + i32rms+ …, as IGBT voltage in CSC has larger peaks than
VSC and Δp3CSC is more than Δp3VSC at the same switching frequency but this is not true if
switching frequency is not equal. By taking into account switching current, switching
frequency, and switch voltage, it is impossible to determine with certainty what have larger
switching loss. The DC side power losses (Δp4) is also an additional factor to determine
higher power losses filter. CSSAPF have larger DC power losses than VSSAPF [1] due to
null power loss of due to Capacitor in DC side of VSSAPF.

3
Nature of load: When the VSC run for high power and low switching frequency, third
order LCL filters are used, which incurs cost. Due to lower current amplitude of the DC
inductor in the CSC and the higher voltage range of the DC capacitor in the VSC, the DC
energy in the CSC is lower than the capacitor in the VSC. Hence, CSSAPF is preferable.
Cost: In VSSAPF, the cost includes cost of DC side capacitor, IGBT switches, AC side
inductor (LCL filter cost). If the filter is carried out using CSSAPF, the cost includes DC
inductor, IGBT switches, series connected diodes with IGBT, AC-side inductor and
capacitor. The IGBT used in VSSAPF does not have the same price (lower) with the IGBT
used in CSSAPF [1]. Besides the type and order of passive filter used also a determinant
parameter in determining the cost. Since the control system in VSSAPF is closed loop, it
incurred more cost than that of CSSAPF by neglecting costs of CPU and sensors.
Protection and complexity: From protection and reliability point of view CSSAPF is
preferred to VSSAPF due to lower possibility of filter outage in CSSAPF and no need to
use short circuit protection equipment that leads overall cost saving. Since, SAPF is
connected at the load bus, VSSAPF needs protective equipment to protect the filter from
outage. In complexity comparison, CSC contain six diode, one capacitor in each phase,
inductor current control and open loop in control system but in VSC based SAPF closed
loop control system, LCL filter at the output and a capacitor voltage control. For accurate
evaluation, VSSAPF may be mor complex than CSSAPF [1]. Evaluation of selecting the
necessity of LCL is important to select type of Converter because LCL based VSSAPF is
much important for load that have high power with low-frequency.

1.4. Simulation results

Figure 2 (a) is modeled with three phase rectifiers which is inserted in parallel with the line
that is exposed to harmonics and with resistive-inductive (RL) nature load. The the DC
side is considered as a harmonic load and harmonic source. Converter based SAPF which
is connecting to the load bus bar is used as a compensator. The voltage source provides
symmetric three-phase voltage with the amplitude of a certain value, may be 35v and the
frequency of 50 Hz. grid and load inductances have been valued as 0.1e _3H and 3e_3H,
respectively. The structure of converter in (a) CSSAPF and (b) VSSAPF in figure 1 is
inserted in figure 2 of block named shunt active power filter and simulated in MATLAB.

4
Figure 2 (a) SAPF power filter (b) The current wave forms (c) harmonic contents [1]
The reference current wave form is also used to track the harmonic contents.

Figure 3 Simultaneous reference and filter current for (a) VSSAPF in the left; (b) CSSAPF
at the middle; and (c) Network current in the right [1]
The simulation result show as the harmonic distortion is reduced and filter parameters R L1,
RL2, RLDC, r1, r2, fsw1 obtained and due to DC losses, the power losses in CSC based APF
is more than VSC based APF. The cost for CSC includes cost of the components like DC
inductor, AC inductor, capacitor and series diodes with IGBT whereas cost of DC
capacitor, AC inductor and Parallelly connected reverse blocking diode are considered in
VSC. As a result, the cost of the VSSAPF is more than CSSAPF.

1.5. Conclusion

In selecting the better converter, one is superior than the other in some circumstances while
the other is better in another circumstance. In both power losses and cost criteria, VSSAPF
is preferred than CSSAPF. Using third-order LCL passive filters in VSSAPF, using IGBT
with reverse-voltage blocking ability in CSSAPF, which eliminates the need to use series
diodes, and the use of superconducting technology in the DC-side endpoint in CSSAPF,
Not only reduce the difference of cost and losses in both converters, but also, it may lead
to the lower costs and losses in CSSAPF than VSSAPF.

5
 References
[1] Ali Zafari, Mohammad Firoozian, Seyyed Jafar Fazeli Abelouei and Ahmad Azadi
Hematabadi, "Criteria for selection of current or voltage source converter in shunt
active power filter structure," World Journal of Engineering, vol. 5, pp. 660-669, 2019.
[2] Nelson K. Bett, Christopher C. Maina, Peterson K. Hinga, "New Approach for Design
of Shunt Active Power Filter for Power Quality Improvement in a Three Phase Three
Wire System," IEEE PES/IAS Power Africa, 2020.
[3] Abdelaziz Zouidi, Farhat Fnaiech and Kamal AL-Haddad , "Voltage source Inverter
Based Three-Phase Shunt Active Power Filter: Topology, Modeling and Control
Strategies," EEE ISIE 2006, pp. 785-790, July 9-12, 2006.
[4] Minarti Mane, Mini K. Namboothiripad, "PWM based Sliding Mode Controller for
Shunt Active Power Filter," in 2017 International Conference on Nascent
Technologies in the Engineering Field, Navi Mumbai, 2017.