energies
Article
Stability Analysis of Shunt Active Power Filter with Predictive
Closed-Loop Control of Supply Current
Agata Bielecka 1, * and Daniel Wojciechowski 2






Citation: Bielecka, A.;
Wojciechowski, D. Stability Analysis
of Shunt Active Power Filter with
Predictive Closed-Loop Control of
Supply Current. Energies 2021, 14,
2208. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14
082208
Academic Editors: Marcin Macia˛żek
and Mihaela Popescu
Received: 16 March 2021
Accepted: 12 April 2021
Published: 15 April 2021
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Energies 2021, 14, 2208. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14082208
1 Department of Ship Automation, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Gdynia Maritime University,
81-225 Gdynia, Poland
2 Department of Power Electronics and Electrical Machines, Faculty of Electrical and Control Engineering,
Gdansk University of Technology, 80-233 Gdańsk, Poland; daniel.wojciechowski@pg.edu.pl
* Correspondence: a.bielecka@we.umg.edu.pl
Abstract: This paper presents a shunt active power filter connected to the grid via an LCL coupling
circuit with implemented closed-loop control. The proposed control system allows selective harmonic
currents compensation up to the 50th harmonic with the utilization of a model-based predictive
current controller. As the system is fully predictive, it provides high effectiveness of the harmonic
reduction, which is proved by waveforms achieved in performed tests. On the other hand, the
control system is prone to loss of stability. Therefore, the paper is focused on the stability analysis
of the discussed control system with the additional outer control loop of the supply current with
predictive control of this current. The conducted stability analysis encompasses the assessment of
system stability as a function of the coupling circuit parameter identification accuracy, whose values
are implemented in the current controller, as well as parameters such as the sampling frequency
and proportional-integral (PI) controller coefficients. The obtained results show that the ranges of
the LCL circuit parameter identification accuracy for which the system remains stable are relatively
wide. However, the most effective compensation of the supply current distortion is achieved for the
parameters identified correctly, and the greatest impact on the compensation quality has the value of
L1 inductance.
Keywords: shunt active power filter; harmonic currents compensation; closed-loop control; stability
analysis; predictive control
1. Introduction
The active power filter (APF) is a proven tool for power quality problems as it provides
controllable and very effective harmonic currents compensation. On account of this, such a
device has become more and more popular, which is reflected by the numerous research
works on its control strategies published in scientific journals.
APFs can be classified into three types on the basis of their topology and connec-
tion to the power grid. The series APF, which is connected to the grid via a coupling
transformer, constitutes a controlled voltage source and is utilized to directly mitigate
voltage distortion [1,2]. However, the shunt APF, being connected in parallel between
the supply and non-linear loads via a passive circuit, compensates directly for current
distortion [3–30] and also, indirectly, the grid voltage. It acts as a controlled current source
and is characterized by more merits in comparison to the series APF, which has made it
widely used in industrial applications. The hybrid APF [31,32], holding the advantages of
both passive and active power filters, combines improved performance and cost-effective
solutions. There are two prominent configurations of the hybrid APF: a combination of
the series APF and a shunt passive filter and a combination of the shunt APF and a shunt
passive filter.
There are two main control strategies for the shunt APF in accordance with the
control theory: feedforward open-loop control [8,11,17,19,24–26] and feedback closed-loop
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies
Energies 2021, 14, 2208 2 of 17

control [3–7,9–12,15,16,18,21–23,30]. They are based on the selection of the current around
the point of common coupling (PCC), which is used in the control. The load current
measurement is used to determine the set current in the open-loop system, while the
supply current measurement is utilized in the closed-loop control. This control system
is more complex than open-loop control as it requires the use of an outer control loop of
the upstream current with simultaneous control of this current. It is less popular than the
open-loop control structure on account of the fact that it is more prone to loss of stability. On
the other hand, it ensures a higher level of harmonic currents compensation. Another less
common control strategy is based on the measurement of voltage in the PCC. The reference
current, which is proportional to voltage harmonic components, ensures compensation of
distortions regardless of whether they come from the load or the supply side [28,29].
Determination of current harmonics to be compensated is significant and established
on their detection with the utilization of the particular techniques in either the time or
the frequency domain. The former approach encompasses methods such as instanta-
neous reactive power theory (p-q theory) [8,13–15], stationary reference frame theory [12]
or synchronous rotational reference frame theory relying on Park’s transformation (d-q
transformation) [3,7,18,22,25], whereas the latter comprises Fourier transform techniques
(FFT, DFT) [11,20] as well as their variations [4–7,11]. Apart from this, harmonic currents
compensation can be broadband or selective, often comprising harmonic current orders
equal to 6k ± 1 as they are the most common existing in three-phase plants. There are also
new approaches for this issue, such as the one presented in [32], which shows a hybrid
APF defining the reference current on the basis of the sliding mode control. Another
interesting study case is presented in [18], which proposes rectifying the problem in the
electromagnetic compatibility of power electronics equipment by developing the APF’s
high control accuracy based on d-q control.
A crucial element of the APF control structure is a current controller due to the fact that
it determines the quality of the reference current tracking. There is a wide range of various
current controllers, among which one can distinguish a simple proportional-integral (PI)
controller [3,4,7,10,15,17,18], a proportional-resonance (PR) controller [13,16,23], a deadbeat
controller [12] and a model-based predictive controller (MPC) [8,20]. The challenges for
current controllers include maximizing the harmonic currents compensation, correction of
delays between the measurements and control and cooperation with the coupling circuit. In
APFs, an LCL circuit has to be used as a coupling circuit due to its facility to mitigate current
ripples resulting from the pulse modulation of the converter. However, it causes a resonance
hazard. One solution to this issue is applying the active damping method [16,23,33]. The
literature [16] presents the combination of using a current controller based on PR units
with phase compensation along with the inverter-side current feedback active damping to
attenuate the LCL resonance peak. Another approach for developing a current controller
is shown in [22], which presents a current controller consisting of n parallel-connected PI
controllers. There is a coupling circuit in the form of the inductance which does not cause
a risk of resonance, but it is less effective in attenuating the switching ripples. However,
although the mentioned solutions are well developed, they do not compensate the delays
resulting from the discrete control system. Achieving this is possible with the utilization
of a predictive current controller. The MPC of the control system proposed in this paper
not only compensates for the mentioned delays but also fully blocks the resonance of the
LCL circuit and is characterized by great dynamics of operation. Using this controller
with the additional outer control loop of the upstream current in a control system of an
APF is a novelty. Nevertheless, the application of the additional outer control loop for
the upstream current with the predictive control of this current implies the necessity of
applying prediction also when determining the reference current, which makes it more
complex. Another problematic issue resulting from this outer current feedback loop is its
proneness to loss of stability in the system. Therefore, defining the stability margins for
this control system is of high importance.
Energies 2021, 14, 2208 3 of 17

The stability analysis of the proposed system has not been presented in the literature.
Generally, the stability analysis is an important issue in control systems which is why it is
shared by some researchers [8,22–24,28]. Not only does it present the impact of particular
parameters on the system stability but it also allows defining the range of their possible
changes in such a way as to avoid the loss of stability. There are very little papers focusing
on the stability analysis of an APF with external closed-loop control from the supply
current. Existing ones, such as [22,23], do not involve predictive solutions; therefore, such
an analysis seems to be important to introduce. Although the significance of such an
analysis is considerable, conducting it can be complicated. Therefore, the introduction of
some simplification is often demanded, especially in systems with complex structures.
The main subject of this paper is the stability analysis of a three-phase shunt APF with
an implemented control system with an additional predictive outer control loop of the
upstream current with predictive control of this current. This includes defining transfer
functions of the system and examining the impact of the sampling period value, control
system parameters and the accuracy of coupling circuit parameter identification on the
system stability.
The paper is divided into five sections. Section 2 presents a circuit structure, a descrip-
tion of the implemented control and the parameters of the discussed system. Then, sample
waveforms to illustrate the operation and a harmonic currents compensation level realized
by the proposed shunt APF are presented. Section 3 focuses on the stability analysis of
the system with the defining partial and overall transfer functions of the control system.
Section 4 depicts root locations as a function of the changes in the particular control sys-
tem’s parameter values and defines the margins of the system stability for this system. The
paper ends with a brief conclusion summarizing the significant contributions of the work
in Section 5.

2. Proposed Control System

The presented system is a shunt APF which is connected in parallel between the
supply and the load. Its circuit structure along with detailed parameters and proposed
control strategy is described below.

2.1. System Description

The system under study is a three-phase, three-wire low-voltage power grid with a
non-linear load connected to the grid via LL inductors. The load consists of a three-phase
rectifier with the RL load on the DC side of this converter. The implemented shunt APF
comprises a two-level voltage source inverter (VSI), which acts as a controlled current
source, connected to the grid between the source and the load in the PCC via a coupling
circuit. An LCL circuit was applied to ensure the attenuation of current ripples which are
caused by the impulse operation of the converter. The proposed main circuit topology,
which is a diagram of the tested system, is shown in Figure 1. The parameters in the figure
indicate the following: iu —upstream current, id —downstream current, i1 —L1 current, i2
= ik —L2 current. The values of the circuit’s parameters along with the parameters of the
control are presented in Table 1.
rgies 2021, Energies
14, x FOR PEER
2021, 14,REVIEW
2208 4 of 17 4 of 17

L
Ea LS iu PCC id LL
LS iu id LL
Eb
Ec LS iu id LL
R
i2 i2 i2 = ik

L2 L2 L2
C
C
C

uC
L1 L1 L1
i1
i1 CDC
i1

Figure 1. Main circuit structure.

Figure 1. Main circuit structure.

Table 1. Parameters
Table 1. of proposed of
Parameters system.
proposed system.
Parameter Value
Parameter Value
Line to line grid voltage 3 × 400 V
Line to line grid voltage 3 × 400 V
Grid frequency
Grid frequency
f = 50 Hz f = 50 Hz
Grid inductance
Grid inductance LS = 40 µH LS = 40 µH
Non-linear load 6-pulse diode bridge
6-pulse diode with
bridge RLRL
with load (R(R= =0.7
load Ω, L = 1.0 mH)
0.7Ω,
Non-linear loadload inductor
Non-linear L = 40 µH
L = 1.0 mH)L
LCL circuit L1 = 150 µH, L2 = 75 µH, C = 100 µF
Non-linear load inductor LL = 40 µH
APF rated power 120 kVA
LCL circuit (uncompensated)
Deadtime L1 = 150 µH, L2 = 75 µH,3.0 C =µs100 µF
APF ratedIGBTpower
voltage drop 120 kVA
1.5 V
(uncompensated)
Deadtime (uncompensated) 3.0 µs
IGBT voltage dropDiode voltage drop
(uncompensated) 1.5 V 1.0 V
(uncompensated)
Diode voltage drop (uncompensated)
PWM carrier frequency 1.0 Vf PWM = 8 kHz
PWM carrier frequency
Sampling frequency fPWM = 8 kHz f s = 16 kHz
Sampling frequency fs = 16 kHz
The selection of the LCL circuit parameter values as well as the value of the sampling
2.2. Control period
Structure
was performed in accordance with the methodology proposed in [8].
The proposed control system is a predictive closed-loop control of the shunt APF
2.2. the
which utilizes Control
outerStructure
control loop of the upstream current with simultaneous realiza-
tion of the control
Theofproposed
this current. Its main
control units
system is include the uclosed-loop
a predictive DC controller, which of
control serves
the shunt APF
the superordinate function
which utilizes theinouter
the system, the predictive
control loop set current
of the upstream currentdetermination unit, realization
with simultaneous
the predictive current
of the controller
control of this and the space
current. vectorunits
Its main pulse width modulation
include (SVPWM)
the uDC controller, which serves
modulator.theThesuperordinate
system’s blockfunction
diagraministhe
presented
system,inthe
Figure 2.
predictive set current determination unit,
the predictive current controller and the space vector pulse width modulation (SVPWM)
modulator. The system’s block diagram is presented in Figure 2.
Energies 2021, 14, 2208 5 of 17
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 17

CDC
uDC set
set
uDC _ p set Set current
set
ik Predictive uk H set
VSI
uDC
calculation; current SVPWM
controller
limits controller

set
i2
State variables of LCL circuit
Predictive set i2
ePCC PLL current i d1
calculation
i d2
iu i d3
iu
ePCC
Figure 2. Block diagram of the control system.

The implemented
The implemented control
control algorithm
algorithm is is developed
developedin inthe
theorthogonal
orthogonalstationary
stationaryrefer-
ref-
ence frame projected on the complex plane α-jβ with the usage of
erence frame projected on the complex plane α-jβ with the usage of the Clarke transform the Clarke transform
with power
with power invariance.
invariance. TheThe application
application of of prediction
prediction demands
demands the the use
use of
of the
the predictive
predictive
current controller, which provides correction of delays between
current controller, which provides correction of delays between the feedbacks the feedbacks and control,
and con-
prediction of the supply voltage and prediction of the reference
trol, prediction of the supply voltage and prediction of the reference current. current.
The outer
The outer control
control loop
loop of
of the
the upstream
upstream current
current isis predictive
predictive and and determines
determines thethe APF
APF
reference current
reference currentininaaselective
selectivemanner.
manner.It Itwaswassetset
to allow
to allowcompensating
compensating harmonic
harmoniccurrents
cur-
whose orders are equal to ± (6k ± 1), up to the 50th harmonic. The
rents whose orders are equal to ±(6k ± 1), up to the 50th harmonic. The particular refer- particular reference
harmonic current calculation, which is shown as a block diagram in Figure 3, includes the
ence harmonic current calculation, which is shown as a block diagram in Figure 3, in-
discrete Fourier transform (DFT), PI control, inverse discrete Fourier transform (IDFT) and
cludes the discrete Fourier transform (DFT), PI control, inverse discrete Fourier transform
prediction. The outer PI controllers, which are independent for each of the compensated
(IDFT) and prediction. The outer PI controllers, which are independent for each of the
current harmonics, control the complex amplitudes of these current harmonics to be equal
compensated current harmonics, control the complex amplitudes of these current har-
to zero (separately, their orthogonal real and imaginary components), which are constant
monics to be equal to zero (separately, their orthogonal real and imaginary components),
for the quasi-steady state of the compensated non-linear loads. Therefore, the task of these
which are constant for the quasi-steady state of the compensated non-linear loads.
outer PI controllers is to completely eliminate the compensated current harmonics from
Therefore, the task of these outer PI controllers is to completely eliminate the compen-
the upstream current thanks to the action of its integral parts. The dynamics of these
sated current harmonics from the upstream current thanks to the action of its integral
outer loop PI current controllers determine only the APF response time for changes in
parts. The dynamics of these outer loop PI current controllers determine only the APF
the power of compensated loads. They substantially improve the APF current compensa-
response time for changes in the power of compensated loads. They substantially im-
tion effectiveness in quasi-steady states, regardless of the dynamics of the inner current
prove the APF
controller. currentsymbols
Particular compensation
appearing effectiveness in quasi-steady
in the figure, not mentioned states, regardless
before, indicate:of
the
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW dynamics of the inner current controller. Particular symbols appearing
ϕe,1 —the instantaneous phase angle of the supply voltage fundamental harmonic, k—the in the figure,
6 of 17
not
ordermentioned
of harmonicbefore, indicate:
current to be φ e,1—the instantaneous phase angle of the supply voltage
compensated, r—prediction horizon, n—sample number.
fundamental harmonic, k—the order of harmonic current to be compensated,
r—prediction horizon, n—sample number.
jΔϕk ,e,pred
The resultant k reference current is a superposition ofethe currents of individual har-
monics determined in accordance with the diagram shown in Figure 3. The applied pre-
ϕe ϕ1,e horizon is equalkϕto1,e3 on account of the efact
diction − jkϕthat
1,e LCL is a third-order circuit. It
means that zero error of the set current is possible to achieve in a discrete control system
in three control steps, which corresponds to three sampling periods Ts.

set
i u (n − 1) I u,k i u,k (n − 1) i u,k (n − 1 + r )

Figure
Figure 3.
3. Block
Block diagram
diagram of
of the
the determination
determination of
of the
the particular
particular current
current harmonic
harmonic to be compensated.
to be compensated.

2.3. Sample Waveforms

The discussed system, whose structure is presented in Figure 1, was examined in the
simulation tests conducted in the PLECS software. The control system, shown in Figure 2,
 jΔϕk ,e,pred
k e
ϕ e
ϕ1,e kϕ1,e e
− jkϕ1,e
Energies 2021,14,
Energies2021, 14,2208
x FOR PEER REVIEW 66 of
of 17
17

set
i u (n − 1) k u,k I u, k i (n − 1)
e i (n − 1 + r )
jΔϕk ,e,predof individual harmon-
The resultant reference current is a superposition of the currents
u,k applied prediction
ics determined in accordance with the diagram shown in Figure 3. The
horizon is equal to 3 on account of the fact that LCL is a third-order circuit. It means that
zeroϕerror
ϕeFigure 3. Block diagram kϕof1,ethe − jkϕ
ofdetermination
1,eof the the set current is particular
possible to e in 1,e
achieve
current harmonic
a discrete control system in three
to be compensated.
control steps, which corresponds to three sampling periods Ts .
2.3. Sample Waveforms
2.3. Sample Waveforms
The discussed system, whose structure is presented in Figure 1, was examined in the
The discussed system, whose structure is presented in Figure 1,set was examined in the
i u (n − 1) simulation I
tests conducted in the PLECS software. The
simulation tests conductedu,kin the PLECS software. i (n − 1) control system,
u,k The control system,
i (n − 1 + r )
shown in Figure 2,
u,k shown in Figure 2,
and the diagram for the outer control loop of the upstream
and the diagram for the outer control loop of the upstream current, determining current, determining the the
APF’s reference current, which is depicted in Figure 3, were implemented
APF’s reference current, which is depicted in Figure 3, were implemented as an algorithm as an algo-
rithm written
Figure 3. Block diagram
written ofinthe
the in programming
C the C programming
determination of the particular
language. language.
current The simulation
harmonic
The simulation to be testsconducted
compensated.
tests were were conducted
taking
taking into consideration the feedback path from the upstream
into consideration the feedback path from the upstream current, delays between the current, delays between
the
2.3. feedback
Sample
feedback and and
the the
Waveforms control
control andandthe the non-linearities
non-linearities resulting
resulting fromfromthethe impulse
impulse operation
operation of
of the converter.
The discussed
the converter. The presented
system, whose
The presented results,
structure
results, which
which are are
is presenteddepicted
depicted ininFigures in Figures
Figure 41,and 4 and
was5,examined 5, in
were
were achieved the
achieved
simulation
for fortests
the system’s theparameters
system’s parameters
conducted in the PLECS
given given
in Table 1. in
software.Table
Figure 4 1.
The Figure
control
shows 4system,
showsshown
waveforms waveforms
in the in
PCC in
Figure the
when 2,
PCC
there
and thewhen
is no there
harmonic
diagram is no harmonic
forcompensation compensation
the outer control in theloop
system,in the
of the system,
whilst whilst
Figurecurrent,
upstream Figure
5 presents 5 presents the
the transients
determining the
transients
when
APF’sthe when
APF
reference is the APF iswhich
enabled.
current, enabled.
is depicted in Figure 3, were implemented as an algo-
rithm written in the C programming language. The simulation tests were conducted
taking into consideration the feedback path from the upstream current, delays between
the feedback and the control and the non-linearities resulting from the impulse operation
of the converter. The presented results, which are depicted in Figures 4 and 5, were
achieved for the system’s parameters given in Table 1. Figure 4 shows waveforms in the
PCC when there is no harmonic compensation in the system, whilst Figure 5 presents the
transients when the APF is enabled.

(a) (b)
4. Harmonic compensation disabled: (a)
Figure 4. (a) voltage
voltage waveform
waveform in the PCC; THD
THDuu = 5.11%; (b) upstream current
waveform in
waveform in the
the PCC; THDii = 23.42%.
PCC; THD
The above results prove that the proposed control strategy provided a high level of
harmonic current limitation, which resulted, consequently, in voltage harmonics mitigation.
THDi decreased about twenty-seven times, whereas THDu decreased almost four and a
half times. Moreover, waveforms depicted in Figure 5c,d reflect the effect of the influence
(a)of the LCL circuit on the system. The ripples contained in(b) the APF current observed in
Figure 5cdisabled:
Figure 4. Harmonic compensation and related to pulse
(a) voltage modulation
waveform were
in the reduced
PCC; THDu =almost
5.11%;completely, which
(b) upstream can be
current
waveform in the PCC; THDnoticed in Figure 5d.
i = 23.42%.

(a) (b)

(a) (b)
Figure 5. Cont.
Energies 2021, 14,
Energies 2021, 14, 2208
x FOR PEER REVIEW 77of
of 17
17

(c) (d)
Figure 5. Harmonic compensation enabled: (a) voltage waveform in the PCC; THDu = 1.17%; (b) upstream current
waveform in the PCC; THDi = 0.87%; (c) L1 current waveform (i1); (d) L2 current waveform (i2 = ik).

The above results prove that the proposed control strategy provided a high level of
harmonic current limitation, which resulted, consequently, in voltage harmonics mitiga-
tion. THDi decreased about twenty-seven times, whereas THDu decreased almost four
and a half times. Moreover, waveforms depicted in Figure 5c,d reflect the effect of the
(c)influence of the LCL circuit on the system. The ripples contained (d) in the APF current ob-
Figure
Figure 5. Harmonic
5. Harmonic compensation served
compensation
enabled: in Figure
enabled:
(a) voltage 5c and
(a) voltage
waveformrelated
waveform to pulse
in the PCC; in the modulation
THDPCC; THDu(b)
u = 1.17%;
were reduced
= upstream
1.17%; (b)current almost
upstream completely,
current
waveform in the
PCC; waveform in the
THDi = 0.87%; (c)PCC; which
THDi =waveform
L1 current can be noticed
0.87%; (c)(iL11);current in Figure
waveform
(d) L2 current 5d.
(i1); (d) (iL22 current
waveform = ik ). waveform (i2 = ik).
Figure 6 shows examples of waveforms obtained for the laboratory model. They il-
Figure
lustrate
The the
above6effectiveness
shows
resultsexamples
of the
prove ofpredictive
that waveforms
the proposed obtained
controller
control for the
along withlaboratory
strategy the current
provided amodel. They
and level
high voltage
of
illustrate
prediction
harmonic the effectiveness
algorithms.
current The
limitation, of which
the predictive
presented resulted, controller
laboratory along in
system
consequently, with
is the current
a three-phase
voltage harmonicsand voltage
low-voltage
mitiga-
prediction
power
tion. THD ialgorithms.
network (400 V,
decreased The 50presented
about Hz) andlaboratory
twenty-seven a non-linear
times,system
loadisof
whereas a three-phase
apparent
THDu decreased low-voltage
power equal
almost power
tofour
10.3
network
kVA,
and in (400
a half the V, 50Moreover,
form
times. Hz)
of a and
diodea waveforms
non-linear
rectifier with load of apparent
an
depicted RCinload power
on
Figure 5c,dequal
the DC to the
side.
reflect 10.3 kVA, of
A effect
shunt in the
active
form
power of filter
influence a diode
of the rectifier
withLCLrated with
power
circuit on RCsystem.
anthe
equal load to 10onThe
the DC
kVA side.
was
ripples A shuntbetween
connected
contained active
in thepower filter with
the current
APF supply net-
ob-
rated power
work and
served equal
the load
in Figure to 10
5cvia kVA was
andanrelated connected
LCL circuit
to pulse between
withmodulation
the followingthe supply network
parameters:
were reduced L and the
mH, L2 =via
load
1 = 2.0 completely,
almost 1.4
an LCL
mH, Ccan
which circuit
= 10beµF. with the following
noticed in Figure 5d. parameters: L1 = 2.0 mH, L 2 = 1.4 mH, C = 10 µF.
Figure 6 shows examples of waveforms obtained for the laboratory model. They il-
lustrate the effectiveness of the predictive controller along with the current and voltage
prediction algorithms. The presented laboratory system is a three-phase low-voltage
power network (400 V, 50 Hz) and a non-linear load of apparent power equal to 10.3
kVA, in the form of a diode rectifier with an RC load on the DC side. A shunt active
power filter with rated power equal to 10 kVA was connected between the supply net-
work and the load via an LCL circuit with the following parameters: L1 = 2.0 mH, L2 = 1.4
mH, C = 10 µF.

(a) (b)
Figure6.6.Oscillograms
Figure Oscillogramsofofthethefollowing
following waveforms:
waveforms: (a)(a) from
from thethe top:
top: voltage
voltage in the
in the PCC,
PCC, downstream
downstream current,
current, APFAPF cur-
current,
rent, upstream
upstream currentcurrent
in the in the (b)
PCC; PCC; (b)the
from from thevoltage
top: top: voltage
in the in thethree
PCC, PCC,phases
three phases of the upstream
of the upstream currentcurrent in the PCC.
in the PCC.

The value
The value of
of the
the THD
THDi i coefficient
coefficient of
of the
the upstream
upstream current
current was
was equal
equal to
to 44%
44%with
with
disabled
disabled compensation
compensation in in the
the system.
system. The
The results
results achieved
achieved when
when the
theAPF
APFwaswasenabled
enabled
show
show that
thatthe
theupstream
upstreamcurrent
currentdistortion
distortionwaswascompensated
compensatedtotoTHD THDi i==2.5%,
2.5%,whilst
whilstthe
the
value
valueof
ofthe
theTHD
THDuu coefficient
coefficient was
wascompensated
compensatedto to1.69%.
1.69%.
(a) (b)
3. Stability Analysis
Figure 6. Oscillograms of the following waveforms: (a) from the top: voltage in the PCC, downstream current, APF cur-
The
rent, upstream current in the PCC; (b)subject
from theoftop:
thevoltage
stability analysis
in the is thephases
PCC, three control system
of the withcurrent
upstream the outer closed-loop
in the PCC.
current reference control, inner model-based predictive current controller and an object in
the form
The of an LCL
value coupling
of the THDicircuit, an ideal
coefficient gridupstream
of the voltage source andwas
current a current
equal source-based
to 44% with
load. The current controller requires both the information about
disabled compensation in the system. The results achieved when the APF state variables of the
was enabled
LCL circuit and the reference current signal for proper operation. Such a
show that the upstream current distortion was compensated to THDi = 2.5%, whilstsystem is prone
the
to the loss of stability in case of operating with an
value of the THDu coefficient was compensated to 1.69%. improper control sampling frequency
 3. Stability Analysis
The subject of the stability analysis is the control system with the outer closed-loop
current reference control, inner model-based predictive current controller and an object in
Energies 2021, 14, 2208 the form of an LCL coupling circuit, an ideal grid voltage source and a current source-based 8 of 17
load. The current controller requires both the information about state variables of the LCL
circuit and the reference current signal for proper operation. Such a system is prone to the
loss of stability in case of operating with an improper control sampling frequency and poor
and poor identification of the LCL circuit parameters required by the MPC controller. The
identification of the LCL circuit parameters required by the MPC controller. The presence
presence of the outer control loop results in additional roots of the characteristic equation
of the system.
of the outer control
As theloop results
proposed in additional
control system isroots of the characteristic
not designed to be adaptive, equation of the
its important
system. As the proposed control system is not designed to be adaptive, its important
quality factor is the robustness. Due to the relatively high complexity of the system, certain qual-
ity factor is the robustness. Due to the relatively high complexity of the system,
simplifications were adopted for the need to perform this analysis. Performing the stability certain
simplifications
analysis demanded were adopted
definingfor the need transfer
particular to perform this analysis.
functions of thePerforming
system first theand
stability
then
analysis demanded defining particular transfer functions of the system first
determining their generalization. These operations as well as the stability analysis were and then de-
termining their generalization. These operations as well as the stability analysis
performed with the utilization of MATLAB software with the following toolboxes: System were per-
formed with the
Identification utilization
Toolbox, of MATLAB
Control software
System Toolbox andwith the following
Symbolic toolboxes: System
Math Toolbox.
Identification Toolbox, Control System Toolbox and Symbolic Math Toolbox.
3.1. Assumptions
3.1. Assumptions
The stability analysis was conducted with the presumption that the grid is ideally
stiff, The
andstability analysisunder
thus operation was conducted
conditions with
of athe presumption
weak grid is notthat the grid isinideally
considered stiff,
this paper.
and
The thus operation
discussed systemunder conditions
is based on theofdiscrete-continuous
a weak grid is not considered in thisthe
model, in which paper. The
applied
discussed
predictivesystem
currentiscontroller
based on isthe discrete–continuous
the discrete part, and the model, in whichparts
continuous the applied predic-
are the voltage
inverter
tive current the LCL circuit.
andcontroller Therefore,
is the discrete theand
part, stability analysis ofparts
the continuous the entire
are thesystem
voltageis possible
inverter
onlythe
and when LCLit circuit.
is reduced to eitherthe
Therefore, a continuous or a discrete
stability analysis of the form.
entire However,
system is reducing it to
possible only
the discrete form allows the stability analysis as a function of the sampling
when it is reduced to either a continuous or a discrete form. However, reducing it to the frequency, which
constitutes
discrete formanallows
essential
the parameter of the as
stability analysis system as it affects
a function the stability
of the sampling of the control
frequency, which
system. On
constitutes anaccount
essentialofparameter
that, continuous parts as
of the system were discretized
it affects and the
the stability whole
of the system
control sys-
was examined
tem. On accountinofthe z-domain.
that, continuousFurthermore, the model of
parts were discretized andthe inverter
the was linearized
whole system was ex-
and simplified.
amined Assuming
in the z-domain. an unlimited
Furthermore, theuDC voltage
model of theand neglecting
inverter the inverter’s
was linearized and non-
sim-
linearities, there is an opportunity to adopt a linear model of the inverter
plified. Assuming an unlimited uDC voltage and neglecting the inverter’s non-linearities, as a zero-order
hold (ZOH).
there is an opportunity to adopt a linear model of the inverter as a zero-order hold (ZOH).
3.2. Overall
3.2. Overall and
and Partial
Partial Transfer
Transfer Functions
Functions
Figure 7 presents the z-domain block diagram of the proposed system with com-
Figure 7 presents the z-domain block diagram of the proposed system with com-
pensation for a particular harmonic current. This scheme contains all considered partial
pensation for a particular harmonic current. This scheme contains all considered partial
transfer functions, whilst equivalent block diagrams with generalized transfer functions
transfer functions, whilst equivalent block diagrams with generalized transfer functions
are depicted in Figure 8. All symbols utilized both in diagrams and transfer functions are
are depicted in Figure 8. All symbols utilized both in diagrams and transfer functions are
consistent with those used in the previous figures, tables and text.
consistent with those used in the previous figures, tables and text.

iuset Δiu Δ iu i2set i2set i2set u u u u u u u i2 i2 iu

GCL GC GPWM GLCL

i1 u i1 i1 u i1 u
u
GC ZOH GLCL
u u i2 u i2 i2 u i2 u
ZOH
GC GLCL
u
uc u uc uc u uc u
GC ZOH
GLCL
GCO
GOL

Figure
Figure 7. Z-domain control
7. Z-domain control block
block diagram.
diagram.
Energies 2021, 14,
Energies 2021, 14, 2208
x FOR PEER REVIEW 99 of
of 17
17

id

iuset Δiu Δiu i2set i2set i2set u u u u u u i2 i2 iu iuset iu

GCL GC GOL GLCL G

Figure 8. Z-domain
Figure 8. Z-domain equivalent control block
block diagrams.
diagrams.

The discrete
The discrete transfer
transfer function
functionmatrix
matrixofofthe
thepredictive
predictivemodel-based
model-basedcurrent controller
current control-
derives from difference equations described in detail in [8] and is as follows:
ler derives from difference equations described in detail in [8] and is as follows:
 2 2 2 2 4
T T
 −3L1 L2C +2L( LL1 C
2
2
+ 4 L1 L23C )T2s − ( L1 + L2 )Ts 
−3L2 1 L2 C 2+( L1 C +4L1 L2 C ) Ts2−( L1 + L2 ) Ts 4

GC,i1 →u (z)  2 C Ts − L2 CTs +C L1 L2 Ts · z

 
 
 2L2 L2 C12 −(

 2 L1 L1 C T L
2 4L1 L32 C
−1 CL+2CT + Ts22+(
)C L LL1+T L2⋅) Tz
4
  
s
 GC,i2 →u (z)  2
2L L
s
C
s 1
2 T − L CT 3 +C2 L L T · z 2 s 
 GGC,C,u
GC (z) =  ( z )   = 2 22 21 22 2 s 2 s 22 1 2 s
i1 → u → u ( z ) 
4 ,
s )T 
(1)

L1 L− CL+ 4
2 L1L C 2 C( L
−(C 1 C4
+L3LL1 LC2 C))T
Ts +(+ + L+
L(1L L
2 )T
 GC,iset →u (z)  
 c

2 1 1 2 s
( L2 Ts4 −2CL1 L2 Ts2 )z−CL1 L2 Ts2 ·z2
1 2 s 
G  ( z)
  2 L1 LL2C C ·−
1 L2T
2 2 2 3
1 L2 sC +
L2LCT ·z C
32 2 2 2
+ LL L T·z ⋅ z  ,
z − 2 2 2
1 CT
 
C, i2 →2u
s 1 s2 s
GC ( z ) =  =
GC,u →u ( z )   L2 L C 2 − (CL2 C + 3L L C )T 2 + ( L + L )T 4 
2L 1 CT 3 − T 5 +CL T 3 · z
s s 1 s (1)
  
c 1 2 1 1 2 s 1 2 s

where Ts denotes the sampling period.
G ( z )   ( L T 4
− 2 CL L T 2
) z − CL L T 2
⋅ z 2
 system)
 C,i →ufunction
The discrete transfer   matrix2ofs the LCL
set
2
1 2circuit
s (analog1 2 s part of the
 of the
2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2
results from the cascade connection of the
 L1 LZOH,
2
C ⋅ zwhich − L1 Lreflects
2
C ⋅z + the CTs ⋅ operation
L1pulse z 
APF inverter, and the LCL continuous  transfer2 Lfunction
CT 3
− T
matrix
5
+ CL T
derived
3
⋅ z 
from differential
equations of the LCL coupling circuit outlined 1in [8]. s s
Therefore, 1 s
the GLCL (z) matrix is
described
where by the following
Ts denotes equation:
the sampling period.
The discrete transfer function matrix of the LCL circuit (analog part of the  system)
L1 ωr Ts (z2 −2 cos(ωr Ts )z+1)+ L2 sin(ωr Ts )(z2 −2z+1)

results from the cascade connection of the ZOH, which reflects the pulse operation  of the
 
GLCL,u→i1 (z)  2
L1 ωr (z−1)( L1 + L2 )(z −2 cos(ωr Ts )z+1)
APF inverter, and the LCL continuous ωr Ts (z2 −function
 transfer 2 cos(ωr Ts )matrix (ωr Ts )(z2 −from
z+1)−sinderived 2z+1) differential
GLCL (z) = GLCL,u→i2 (z) = , (2)
  
ω ( z − 1 )( L + L )( z 2 −2 cos( ω T ) z +1)
r 1 2 r s
equations of the LCL coupling
GLCL,u →uc ( z ) circuit outlined in [8].

L2 (1Therefore,
−cos(ωr Ts ))(zthe +1) GLCL(z) matrix is de-

2 −2 cos( ω T ) z +1)
scribed by the following equation: ( L 1 + L 2 )( z r s

where ω r is the LCL L1ωresonant

T ( z 2 − 2angular
r s s
) z + 1) + L2 sin(ωrTs )( z 2 − 2 z + 1) 
cos(ωrTfrequency:
 L1ωr ( z − 1)( L1 + L2s )( z 2 − 2 cos(ωrTs ) z + 1)

GLCL,u →i1 ( z )   L1 + L2 
   ωrTs ( z 2 − 2 cos(ωωrTr s=) z + 1)L1−Lsin( ,
2 C ωr Ts )( z − 2 z + 1)
2
 (3)
GLCL ( z ) = GLCL,u →i ( z )  =  , (2)
2

while the resonant ωr ( z − 1)( L1 + L2 )( z 2 − 2 cos(ωrTs ) z + 1)

  frequency 
is expressed by
GLCL,u →u ( z )  
c
L2 (1 − cos(ωrTs ))( z + 1) 
 s

 )(rz =− 21cos(ω
( L1f r+=L2 ω 2 L1T+)Lz 2+ 1)
r s , (4) 
2π 2π L1 L2 C
where ωr is the LCL resonant angular frequency:
which in the discussed system is equal to f r = 2.25 kHz.
GCL (z) is the set current transfer function. + L2
L1 Determining the reference current in the
presented circuit requires transforming ωr the
= signal , the frequency domain with the
into (3)
1 2
LLC
usage of the DFT. From a mathematical point of view, this operation is identical to the Park
transform,
while where the
the resonant angle of is
frequency rotation is thebyproduct of the order of a given harmonic and
expressed
the instantaneous angle of the grid voltage obtained from the phase-locked loop (PLL),
followed by low-pass filtering. The next ω 1 L1 of
steps consist +LPI2 control, prediction and the IDFT,
fr = r = , (4)
2π 2π L1 L2C

which in the discussed system is equal to fr = 2.25 kHz.

GCL(z) is the set current transfer function. Determining the reference current in the
presented circuit requires transforming the signal into the frequency domain with the
usage of the DFT. From a mathematical point of view, this operation is identical to the
Park transform, where the angle of rotation is the product of the order of a given har-
Energies 2021, 14, 2208 10 of 17

which is the same as the inverse Park transform. Bearing this in mind, the GCL (z) matrix
derives from the following equation:
     
cos( ϕk ) sin( ϕk ) GLPF (z) 0 GPI (z) 0
GCL (z) = · · ·
− sin( ϕk) cos( ϕk) 0 G (z)
  LPF
0 G (z)
 PI
Gpred (z) 0 cos( ϕk) − sin( ϕk )
· ·
0 Gpred (z) sin( ϕk) cos( ϕk)
(5)
where ϕ and k denote the instantaneous phase angle of the supply voltage fundamental
harmonic and the order of the compensated harmonic current, respectively.
In the case where the matrices between the Park transforms are diagonal with the same
coefficients on the main diagonal, the Park transform matrices do not affect the value of
the resultant matrix. This is because the product of Park transform matrices is the identity
matrix:      
cos( ϕk) sin( ϕk) cos( ϕk) − sin( ϕk) 1 0
· = (6)
− sin( ϕk) cos( ϕk) sin( ϕk) cos( ϕk) 0 1
Therefore, the final transfer function can be expressed by

GCL (z) = GLPF (z) · GPI (z) · Gpred (z), (7)

and is represented as follows:

a(Kp · z − Kp + Ki Ts )
GCL (z) = , (8)
z2 · (z − 1)( a + z − 1)

where a is the coefficient of the low-pass filter, while Kp and Ki denote proportional and
integral coefficients of the PI controller.
The whole system is reduced to the single-input, single-output (SISO) form, as it is
shown in Figure 8. On account of that, the overall transfer function is represented as

GCL (z) · GC,iset →u (z) · GOL (z) · GLCL (z)

2
G (z) = , (9)
1 − GCL (z) · GC,iset →u (z) · GOL (z) · GLCL (z)
2

with GOL (z) expressed by the following equation:

GPWM (z) 1
GOL (z) = = , (10)
1 − GPWM (z) · GCO (z) 1 − GCO (z)

where the minus in the denominator results from taking into account the negative feedbacks
in the transfer function of the current controller.

4. Results
The stability of the considered control system results from the root locations of the
characteristic equation of the G(z) transfer function on the z-plane. In the discussed APF
circuit, it is conditioned by the value of the sampling period, the Kp and Ki coefficients
and the identification accuracy of the LCL coupling circuit parameters. The latter aspect
is especially significant when the applied current controller is predictive. To examine
the impact of this factor on stability, the exact parameters L1 , L2 and C in the predictive
controller transfer function GC (z) were replaced with the identified (measured or estimated)
values L1c , L2c and Cc , respectively. This results from the fact that parameters of the LCL
circuit implemented in the control algorithm (L1c , L2c , Cc ) constitute the parameters of the
current controller. Changes in their values, which determine the percentage accuracy of
their compliance with the parameters of the LCL circuit, as well as the range of values of
changes in the Ts , Kp and Ki parameters, define the area of stable operation of the system.
Root locus analyses of the APF feedback control system as a function of the above-
mentioned parameters are presented in Figure 9. Red crosses in each figure indicate the
Energies 2021, 14, 2208 11 of 17
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 17

pole locations of the discussed system for the following parameters: L1c = L1 = 150 µH, L2c
current controller. Changes in their values, which determine the percentage accuracy of
= L2 = 75 µH, Cc = C = 100 µF, Ts = 6.2510−5 s, Kp = 0.02, Ki = 10.0. The presented results
their compliance with the parameters of the LCL circuit, as well as the range of values of
were obtained from tests conducted in MATLAB software.
changes in the Ts, Kp and Ki parameters, define the area of stable operation of the system.
The spans of the permissible changes in the Kp and Ki coefficients in the area of system
Root locus analyses of the APF feedback control system as a function of the
stability are below 1.08 and above 120, respectively, when the other parameter remains
above-mentioned parameters are presented in Figure 9. Red crosses in each figure indi-
unchanged. This control system was not tested under the conditions of changes in both
cate the pole locations of the discussed system for the following parameters: L1c = L1 = 150
coefficients simultaneously.
µH, L2c = L2 = 75 µH, Cc = C = 100 µF, Ts = 6.25⸱10−5 s, Kp = 0.02, Ki = 10.0. The presented
The control system is stable in terms of the sampling period value being below
results
7.38 10−were obtained
5 s and from tests
in the range fromconducted
1.3510−4 sin toMATLAB
1.510−4 s.software.
These values correspond to the
sampling frequency between 6.67 and 7.46 kHz andKabove
The spans of the permissible changes in the p and Ki coefficients in the area of sys-
13.55 kHz. The relation between
temsampling
stability frequency
are below f1.08 and above 120, respectively, when the other parameter re-
the s and the modulation frequency f PWM in the proposed system is
mains
as follows:unchanged. This control system was not tested under the conditions of changes in
both coefficients simultaneously. f s = 2 f PWM , (11)
The control system is stable in terms of the sampling period value being below
and thus
7.38⸱10 −5 the
s andsystem
in the remains
range stable when the
from 1.35⸱10 −4 s modulator
to 1.5⸱10−4 pulsation frequency
s. These values is in the range
correspond to the
from 3.33 to 3.73 kHz and above 6.77 kHz. This means that the
sampling frequency between 6.67 and 7.46 kHz and above 13.55 kHz. The relation minimum sampling frequencybe-
within
tween the thestable area isfrequency
sampling approximately
fs and1.5thetimes the LCL circuit
modulation resonant
frequency fPWMfrequency: f PWM =
in the proposed
1.5 f r . However,
system a relatively large margin of stability can be obtained when f PWM > 3 f r .
is as follows:
As far as the changes in the identification accuracy of the LCL coupling circuit param-
eters are concerned, the feedback controlfsystem s
= 2 f PWM ,
remains stable for the given inductance (11)
value L1c in the range from 88% to 136% of the exact value (L1 ), for the inductance L2c
and thus
above 64%the of system
the exact remains
value (Lstable when the modulator pulsation frequency is in the
2 ) and for the capacitance Cc in the range from 74% to
rangeof
290% fromthe 3.33
exacttovalue
3.73 kHz andonly
(C). Not above do6.77
these kHz. Thisfar
ranges means
exceedthat
thethe minimum
practical sampling
tolerances of
frequency
the choke and within the stable
capacitor area is approximately
parameters but they are also 1.5beyond
times thetheLCL circuit resonant
achievable accuracyfre- of
quency: fPWM = 1.5
measurements fr. However,
of these a relatively large margin of stability can be obtained when
quantities.
fPWM > 3 fr.

(a) (b)
Figure 9. Cont.
Energies 2021, 14, 2208 12 of 17
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 17

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

FigureFigure 9. Results
9. Results of the of
APF theclosed-loop
APF closed-loop
controlcontrol
systemsystem
stabilitystability analysis.
analysis. Rootaslocus
Root locus as a function
a function of the following
of the following pa-value
parameter
rameter value changes: Kp (a), Ki (b), Ts (c), L1c (d), L2c (e), Cc (f).
changes: Kp (a), Ki (b), Ts (c), L1c (d), L2c (e), Cc (f).

As far as the
Simulation changes
tests were in the identification
conducted in PLECSaccuracy
to defineofthethevalues
LCL coupling circuit pa-
of the considered
rameters are concerned, the feedback control system remains stable
parameters, for which the loss of stability is observed in the control system. The simulatedfor the given in-
ductance value L in the range from 88% to 136% of the exact value
control system is stable when the value of the L1c parameter is within the range from
1c (L 1 ), for the induct-
89%
ance
to L2c above
136% of the 64%
exactofvalue
the exact
(L1 ),value (L2) and
the value of Lfor
2c
the
is capacitance
above 64% of C c in
the the
exact range
value from
(L 74%
2 and
)
to 290%
the valueofofthe
Cc exact value 74%
is between (C). Not
and only
325%doofthese ranges
the exact far (C).
value exceed
Thethelosspractical tolerances
of stability occurs
of thethe
when choke and capacitor
sampling period isparameters
above 1.4910 −4they
but s andarein also beyond
the range fromthe1.29 ·10−4 to 7.38
achievable 10−5
accuracy
of The
s. measurements of these
obtained values arequantities.
almost completely consistent with the values achieved in the
stability analysis conducted conducted
Simulation tests were in MATLAB, in which
PLECSmakes to define the values
the results of the considered
reliable.
parameters, for which the loss of stability is observed in the control system. The simu-
lated control system is stable when the value of the L1c parameter is within the range from
Energies 2021, 14, 2208 13 of 17

Further tests performed for the determinants of the experimental system provided
results which show that the stability regions for the examined parameters are wider than
those obtained in the stability analysis. This is due to limits of the control signals which
result from the value of the uDC voltage (and, consequently, the range of the inverter AC
voltage) as well as the value of the APF’s maximum current. However, a relatively high
consistency is obtained for the Ts parameter. It is an important issue on account of the
fact that this parameter determines the value of the inverter modulation frequency f PWM ,
and in consequence, due to switching losses, the maximum rated power of the single-
inverter-based APF. Although the system remains stable in a wide range of the mentioned
parameter value changes, the compensation effectiveness beyond the stability region is
noticeably lower, which is shown further in the paper. The comparison of the results
obtained on the basis of the simulation tests, the stability analysis and tests performed for
the determinants of the experimental system is presented in Table 2.

Table 2. Comparison of analytical and simulation stability limits of the system.

L1c Parameter L2c Parameter Cc Parameter T s Parameter

Stability analysis
88% ÷ 136% of 150 ÷ 135 µs
performed in >64% of L2 74% ÷ 290% of C
L1 and <73.8 µs
MATLAB
Simulation tests
89% ÷ 136% of 149 ÷ 130 µs
conducted in >64% of L2 74% ÷ 325% of C
L1 and <73.8 µs
PLECS
Tests performed
for the
13% ÷ 214% of
determinants of >16% of L2 24% ÷ 315% of C <150 µs
L1
the experimental
system

Presented results prove that the stability margins obtained by the analytical method
ensure the stability in actual systems.
Sample waveforms of the APF current, measured on L1 and L2 inductances, illustrating
the loss of stability are shown in Figure 10. The values of parameters L2c and Cc are equal to
parameters L2 and C, respectively, given in Table 1. The value of parameter L1c is changed
in the time equal to 0.5 s from the value L1c = 136% of L1 to the value L1c = 137% of L1 ,
which is the same as exceeding the stability limit shown in Table 2. The waveforms up
to time t = 0.5 s present stable operation of the system, whilst the waveforms in the time
ranges from 0.5 to 0.6 s depict the system’s operation in case of loss of stability. The choice
of the L1c parameter to represent the system stability loss results from the fact that the value
of this parameter has the greatest impact on the system stability, which will be presented
later in the paper.
The obtained results show that the greatest effects of the loss of stability in the control
system are visible on the waveforms of currents i1 and iC as they reached very high values.
The value of the current i2 is smaller due to the secondary influence of the resonance
formed in the circuit L1 -C.
Figure 11 presents values of THDi in the PCC as a function of the LCL circuit parameter
identification. It completes previous results and shows the effectiveness of compensation
performed by the APF in case of introducing LCL parameters inaccurately in the control
system. The presented characteristics are an approximation of the points obtained on the
basis of a series of simulations, assuming that only one of the parameters is changed while
the others are identified correctly and remain unchanged. The discussed parameters were
tested within the following identification accuracy ranges: L1c : 30% ÷ 200% of L1 , L2c : 30%
÷ 250% of L2 , Cc : 50% ÷ 200% of C.
 Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 17

Energies 2021, 14, 2208
obtained on the basis of a series of simulations, assuming that only one of the parameters
is changed while the others are identified correctly and remain unchanged. The 14 ofdis-
17
cussed parameters were tested within the following identification accuracy ranges: L1c:
30% ÷ 200% of L1, L2c: 30% ÷ 250% of L2, Cc: 50% ÷ 200% of C.

Figure10.
Figure 10.Loss
Lossofofstability
stabilityininthe
thecontrol
controlsystem
systemafter
afterchanging
changingthe
thevalue
valueofofL1c L1cparameter
parameterwhen
whent =
t =0.5
0.5s.s.From
Fromthe
thetop:
top:LL
11
current waveform (i ), C current waveform (i ), L current waveform
current waveform (i1 ), C current waveform (iC ), L2 current waveform (i2 = ik ).
1 C 2 (i 2 = i k).

The obtained results show that the optimal values of the current controller parameters
(L1c , L2c , Cc ), from the point of view of the compensation effectiveness determined on the
basis of the THD coefficient, are the exact values of the LCL circuit. It is also noticeable
from the characteristics that the correctness of determining the value of inductance L1 has
the greatest impact on the quality of compensation.
Energies 2021,
Energies 14, x2208
2021, 14, FOR PEER REVIEW 1515ofof17
17

10%

8%

6%
THDi

L1c
L2c
Cc

4%

2%

0%
0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250%
Accuracy of the measured / estimated parameters L1c, L2c, and Cc with respect to exact values L1, L2, and C

Figure 11. THDi value changes as a function of the accuracy of LCL circuit parameter identification.
Figure 11. THDi value changes as a function of the accuracy of LCL circuit parameter identification.

The obtained results show that the optimal values of the current controller parame-
5. Conclusions
ters (LThe
1c, Lobtained
2c, Cc), from the pointresults
simulation of view of the acompensation
confirm great level of effectiveness
grid harmonic determined
currents com- on
the basis ofofthe
pensation anTHD coefficient,
LCL-based shuntare
APFthewith
exactpredictive
values ofclosed-loop
the LCL circuit. It is also
control. Alongnoticeable
with the
from
high the characteristics
effective that the correctness
filtering performance, of determining
a simultaneous the value
high reduction inof inductance
filter L1 has
current ripples
the greatestwith
associated impact theon the width
pulse qualitymodulation
of compensation.
(PWM) modulation was achieved.
The presented stability analysis included the determination of overall and partial
5. Conclusions
transfer functions of the discussed control system and defining the boundaries of particular
parameter changessimulation
The obtained for whichresults
the control
confirmsystem remains
a great level stable.
of grid The APF stability
harmonic currentsregion,com-
obtained by
pensation theLCL-based
of an analytical method,
shunt APF is determined
with predictive by the values ofcontrol.
closed-loop the parameters
Along with L1c , the
L2c ,
Cc , Keffective
high p , Ki andfiltering
Ts in theperformance,
following ranges: L1c = 88% ÷
a simultaneous 136%
high of L1 , L2c
reduction in>filter of L2 , Cripples
64%current c = 74%
÷ 290% ofwith
associated C, Kthe 1.08, K
p < pulse i > 120,
width modulation 10−5 s and
Ts < 7.38(PWM) Ts =1.35was
modulation 10−achieved.
4 ÷ 1.510−4 s, which

correspond to the sampling

The presented stabilityfrequency s = 6.67 ÷the
analysis fincluded kHz and f s > 13.55
7.46determination kHz. The
of overall andachieved
partial
results show that there is a wide range of the LCL
transfer functions of the discussed control system and defining the boundaries ofaccuracy
circuit parameter identification partic-
for which
ular parameterthe system
changes is stable.
for whichThisthe
is very important
control system in controlstable.
remains systems ThewithAPFpredictive
stability
currentobtained
region, controllers. by The stability range
the analytical for the
method, is LCL circuit parameter
determined valueofchanges
by the values achieved
the parameters
L1c, L2c, Cc, Kp, Ki and Ts in the following ranges: L1c = 88% ÷ 136% of L1, L2c > 64% of LFrom
by tests conducted for the determinants of the experimental system is even wider. a
2, Cc =
practical point of view, this means that introducing the values
74% ÷ 290% of C, Kp < 1.08, Ki > 120, Ts < 7.38⸱10–5 s and Ts =1.35⸱10–4 ÷ 1.5⸱10–4 s, of the parameters L , L
1 which
2 and
C to the system
correspond to theonsampling
the basisfrequency
of their rating plates,
fs = 6.67 which
÷ 7.46 kHz are andgiven withkHz.
fs > 13.55 certain
Thetolerances,
achieved
ensuresshow
results the system’s
that there robustness
is a widetorange
a sufficient
of the degree.
LCL circuitFurthermore,
parameterthe obtained range
identification accu-of
the switching frequency proves the possibility of the application
racy for which the system is stable. This is very important in control systems with pre- of this APF in a system
which requires
dictive current acontrollers.
low switching Thefrequency
stabilityofrange
the power
for thetransistors.
LCL circuitResults acquired value
parameter in the
stability analysis performed in MATLAB were confirmed by simulation
changes achieved by tests conducted for the determinants of the experimental system is tests conducted in
PLECS. Parameter values for which the control system lost its stability, obtained in both the
even wider. From a practical point of view, this means that introducing the values of the
Energies 2021, 14, 2208 16 of 17

stability analysis and simulation examinations, were consistent. Further analysis showed
that the value of inductance L1 implemented in the control system (L1c ) was the most
influential regarding the effectiveness of compensation expressed by the value of the THDi
coefficient. It was also noticed that the accuracy of LCL parameter identification affects
the compensation quality realized by the APF. The greatest level of harmonic currents
compensation was obtained for the values implemented in the current controller equal to
the actual values of the coupling circuit.
Further research will focus on considering other factors influencing the stability of
the system, such as the value of the grid impedance, as well as the type of load and its
voltage susceptibility.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, A.B. and D.W.; methodology, A.B. and D.W.; software,
A.B. and D.W.; validation, A.B. and D.W.; formal analysis, A.B. and D.W.; investigation, A.B.;
resources, A.B. and D.W.; data curation, A.B. and D.W.; writing—original draft preparation, A.B.;
writing—review and editing, A.B and D.W.; visualization, A.B.; supervision, D.W. All authors have
read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available from the corresponding
author on reasonable request.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Sleszynski, W.; Cichowski, A.; Mysiak, P. Suppression of Supply Current Harmonics of 18-Pulse Diode Rectifier by Series Active
Power Filter with LC Coupling. Energies 2020, 13, 6060. [CrossRef]
2. Rao, M.U.M.; Rosalina, K.M. Transient stability improvement of Microgrid using Series Active Power Filters. In Proceedings
of the 2019 Fifth International Conference on Electrical Energy Systems (ICEES), Chennai, India, 21–22 February 2019; pp. 1–4.
[CrossRef]
3. Sun, B.; Xie, Y.; Ma, H. An enhanced repetitive control strategy for shunt active power filter with LCL output filter. In Proceedings
of the IECON 2015 41st Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, Yokohama, Japan, 9–12 November 2015; pp.
001351–001356. [CrossRef]
4. Geng, H.; Zheng, Z.; Zou, T.; Chu, B.; Chandra, A. Fast Repetitive Control with Harmonic Correction Loops for Shunt Active
Power Filter Applied in Weak Grid. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2019, 55, 3198–3206. [CrossRef]
5. Mattavelli, P.; Marafao, F.P. Repetitive-based control for selective harmonic compensation in active power filters. IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron. 2004, 51, 1018–1024. [CrossRef]
6. Chen, H.; Liu, H.; Xing, Y.; Hu, H.; Sun, K. Analysis and design of enhanced DFT-based controller for selective harmonic
compensation in active power filters. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition
(APEC), San Antonio, TX, USA, 4–8 March 2018; pp. 1305–1309. [CrossRef]
7. Chen, X.; Dai, K.; Xu, C.; Lin, X. Harmonic suppression and resonance damping for shunt APF with selective closed-loop
regulation of PCC voltage. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE), Montreal, QC,
USA, 20–24 September 2015; pp. 6439–6443. [CrossRef]
8. Wojciechowski, D. Unified LCL circuit for modular active power filter. COMPEL Int. J. Comput. Math. Electr. Electron. Eng. 2012,
31, 1985–1997. [CrossRef]
9. Tumbelaka, H.H.; Borle, L.J.; Nayar, C.V.; Lee, S.R. A grid current-controlling shunt active power filter. In Proceedings of the 2007
7th Internatonal Conference on Power Electronics, Daegu, South Korea, 22–26 October 2007; pp. 956–961. [CrossRef]
10. Lascu, C.; Asiminoaei, L.; Boldea, I.; Blaabjerg, F. High Performance Current Controller for Selective Harmonic Compensation in
Active Power Filters. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2007, 22, 1826–1835. [CrossRef]
11. Mariethoz, S.; Rufer, A.C. Open loop and closed loop spectral frequency active filtering. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2002, 17,
564–573. [CrossRef]
12. Mattavelli, P. A closed-loop selective harmonic compensation for active filters. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2001, 37, 81–89. [CrossRef]
13. Chen, W.; Zhang, D.; Zhang, H.; Wang, Z.; Sun, M. The Research on Composite Control Strategy of Active Power Filter. In
Proceedings of the 2019 34rd Youth Academic Annual Conference of Chinese Association of Automation (YAC), Jinzhou, China,
6–8 June 2019; pp. 431–436. [CrossRef]
Energies 2021, 14, 2208 17 of 17

14. Gautam, S.; Aeidapu, M. Sine Cosine Algorithm Based Shunt Active Power Filter For Harmonic Compensation. In Proceedings
of the 2019 3rd International Conference on Electronics, Communication and Aerospace Technology (ICECA), Coimbatore, India,
12–14 June 2019; pp. 1051–1056. [CrossRef]
15. Ouchen, S.; Steinhart, H.; Blaabjerg, F.; Benbouzid, M.; Betka, A.; Gaubert, J.P. Performance Analysis of Direct Power Control with
Space Vector Modulation for Shunt Active Power Filter. In Proceedings of the IECON 2019 45th Annual Conference of the IEEE
Industrial Electronics Society, Lisbon, Portugal, 14–17 October 2019; pp. 467–472. [CrossRef]
16. Yang, L.; Yang, J. Robust Current Control Method for LCL-Type Shunt Active Power Filters with Inverter-Side Current Feedback
Active Damping. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE), Portland, OR, USA,
23–27 September 2018; pp. 5706–5712. [CrossRef]
17. Cao, X.; Dong, K.; Wei, X. An Improved Control Method Based on Source Current Sampled for Shunt Active Power Filters.
Energies 2020, 13, 1405. [CrossRef]
18. Wang, S.; Pei, Y.; Yi, H.; Zhang, J.L. A New High Control Precision Active Power Filter. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 10th
International Symposium on Power Electronics for Distributed Generation Systems (PEDG), Xian, China, 3–6 June 2019; pp.
1109–1112. [CrossRef]
19. Mysak, T.V.; Shapoval, I.A. A simple control strategy for a three-phase shunt active power filter based on second-order sliding
mode. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE 4th International Conference on Intelligent Energy and Power Systems (IEPS), Istanbul,
Turkey, 7–11 September 2020; pp. 27–32. [CrossRef]
20. Iturra, R.G.; Cruse, M.; Mütze, K.; Dresel, C.; Soleimani, I.; Thiemann, P. Model Predictive Control for Shunt Active Power Filter
with Harmonic Power Recycling Capability. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Smart Energy Systems and
Technologies (SEST), Sevilla, Spain, 10–12 September 2018; pp. 1–6. [CrossRef]
21. Yi, H.; Zhuo, F.; Wang, X.; Liu, J. Study of closed-loop control scheme for source current detection type Active Power Filter. In
Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, Atlanta, GA, USA, 12–16 September 2010; pp. 145–150.
[CrossRef]
22. Briz, F.; Díaz-Reigosa, D.; Degner, M.W.; García, P.; Guerrero, J.M. Dynamic behavior of current controllers for selective harmonic
compensation in three-phase active power filters. In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition,
Phoenix, AZ, USA, 17–22 September 2011; pp. 2892–2899. [CrossRef]
23. Yang, L.; Yang, J.; Gao, M.; Watson, A.; Wheeler, P. Current Control of LCL-Type Shunt APFs: Damping Characteristics, Stability
Analysis, and Robust Design Against Grid Impedance Variation. IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Top. Power Electron. 2020. [CrossRef]
24. Zhang, Y.; Dai, K.; Chen, X.; Kang, Y.; Dai, Z. Stability Analysis of SAPF by Viewing DFT as Cluster of BPF for Selective Harmonic
Suppression and Resonance Damping. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2019, 55, 1598–1607. [CrossRef]
25. Hoon, Y.; Mohd Radzi, M.A.; Hassan, M.K.; Mailah, N.F. DC-Link Capacitor Voltage Regulation for Three-Phase Three-Level
Inverter-Based Shunt Active Power Filter with Inverted Error Deviation Control. Energies 2016, 9, 533. [CrossRef]
26. Bing, Y.; Jiang, D.; Liang, Y.; Jiang, C.; He, T.; Yang, L.; Hu, P. Modified Modeling and System Stabilization of Shunt Active Power
Filter Compensating Loads with µF Capacitance. Energies 2019, 12, 2084. [CrossRef]
27. Popescu, M.; Bitoleanu, A.; Suru, C.V.; Linca, M.; Subtirelu, G.E. Adaptive Control of DC Voltage in Three-Phase Three-Wire
Shunt Active Power Filters Systems. Energies 2020, 13, 3147. [CrossRef]
28. Grugel, P. Stability analysis of Parallel Active Power Filter operating on the basis of network voltage distortion. In Proceedings
of the 2016 10th International Conference on Compatibility, Power Electronics and Power Engineering (CPE-POWERENG),
Bydgoszcz, Poland, 29 June–1 July 2016; pp. 240–243. [CrossRef]
29. Guzman Iturra, R.; Thiemann, P. Asymmetrical Three-Level Inverter SiC-Based Topology for High Performance Shunt Active
Power Filter. Energies 2020, 13, 141. [CrossRef]
30. Imam, A.A.; Sreerama Kumar, R.; Al-Turki, Y.A. Modeling and Simulation of a PI Controlled Shunt Active Power Filter for Power
Quality Enhancement Based on P-Q Theory. Electronics 2020, 9, 637. [CrossRef]
31. Wang, L.; Lam, C.; Wong, M. The Analysis of DC-link Voltage, Compensation Range, Cost, Reliability and Power Loss for Shunt
(Hybrid) Active Power Filters. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE PES Asia-Pacific Power and Energy Engineering Conference
(APPEEC), Kota Kinabalu, MA, USA, 7–10 October 2018; pp. 640–645. [CrossRef]
32. Torabi Jafrodi, S.; Ghanbari, M.; Mahmoudian, M.; Najafi, A.M.G.; Rodrigues, E.; Pouresmaeil, E. A Novel Control Strategy
to Active Power Filter with Load Voltage Support Considering Current Harmonic Compensation. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1664.
[CrossRef]
33. Gao, N.; Lin, X.; Wu, W.; Blaabjerg, F. Grid Current Feedback Active Damping Control Based on Disturbance Observer for Battery
Energy Storage Power Conversion System with LCL Filter. Energies 2021, 14, 1482. [CrossRef]