Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Comparative Study Between Sliding Mode Controller and PI Controller for AC/DC Bridgeless Converter Under Uncertain Parameters

Comparative Study Between Sliding Mode Controller and PI Controller for AC/DC Bridgeless... Acta Electrotechnica et Informatica, Vol. 22, No. 4, 2022, 3–11, DOI: 10.2478/aei-2022-0016 3 COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN SLIDING MODE CONTROLLER AND PI CONTROLLER FOR AC/DC BRIDGELESS CONVERTER UNDER UNCERTAIN PARAMETERS * ** Moayed ALMOBAIED , Ahmed Mosa MUSLEH Department of Electrical Engineering, Islamic University of Gaza, malmobaied@iugaza.edu.ps ** Master of Science, Electrical Engineering, Islamic University of Gaza, amoslih1987@gmail.com ABSTRACT In this paper, a comparative study between nonlinear sliding mode controller (SMC) and standard PI controller for stabilizing bridgeless AC/DC converter under uncertain parameters is presented. This type of converters is widely used in harvesting low energy systems as in wind turbine, piezoelectric transducers and heat exchange transducers. Designing robust controllers to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of these converters has become a promising track in control engineering field. The traditional bridge rectifier is widely used in the majority types of AC/DC conventional converters to gain the rectified DC voltage from the low AC input voltage source. However, these traditional converters are not effective for the low output voltage of renewable sources due to the voltage drops across rectifier’s diodes. The proposed SMC-PI controller is used to enhance the stability and the response of these converters under uncertain parameters comparing with the standard PI controller. The proposed approach consists of both Boost and Buck-Boost converters with two controllers in order to maximize the useful output energy from the source. The graphical method has been used to obtain the limitation of the coefficients of the standard PI controller. A parameter space approach is used to find all robust stabilization PI coefficients and the stability regions. A comparative study using simulations in MATLAB is presented to ensure the effectiveness and robustness of the proposed SMC-PI controller under some external disturbances. Keywords: AC/DC converters, Boost converter, Buck-Boost converter, Energy harvesting, Sliding mode Controller (SMC), Propotional-Integral controller PI. 1. INTRODUCTION suggested method in [1,4], the authors in this paper present an improvement to the converter and make comparison The incredible growth of the renewable energy sources between the linear and nonlinear controller and determine that generate low AC output voltage (millivolt) has led to the limitation of the linear controller coefficients by the enormous research in developing converters to utilize these graphical method. useful energy [1]. For instance, lots of devices which The main contributions of this research are that: operate in stabilized DC voltage like sensors used in  The standard PI controller is designed for the transport area and wireless communication sets. These devices need to be self-powering with about DC voltage (3 bridgeless converter which consists of the boost volt) [1], [2]. The increasing demand on such kind of and buck-boost converter. energy sources encourage the researchers in this field to  The nonlinear controller Sliding Mode Control deeply search for effective type of converters that convert with PI mechanism is illustrated. the low AC output voltage from these renewable energy  Comparative study between the two controllers to sources immediately to a beneficial DC voltage without demonstrate the response of the controller. using the traditional bridge method [13]. The traditional power converters consist mainly from two sequential parts:  Obtain the limitation of the stabilized PI the diode bridge rectifier and a standard Buck or Boost controller coefficients. DC/DC converter. The main disadvantage of this old  Lastly, checking the response of the controller method is the voltage drop on diodes which leads to under changing the load, changing the voltage decreasing the efficiency of the converter and cut off the source, and under tracking the output voltage the converter in low voltage range [1-4]. adding two DC/DC desired voltage. converters in parallel way have an advantage of converting the AC/DC immediately to skip using the traditional bridge [10]. In [1] and [4], Dwari, Dayal and Parsa published a In this paper, detailed analysis of the proposed promising method regarding direct AC/DC converter for converters is presented. Closed form relations between the effective low voltage energy harvesting. The operated output voltage and the duty cycle with parameters of the converter which used has an efficiency of 63%. The converter are derived. As a result, the performance of the researchers in [5] show double Boost converter for AC/DC proposed controller is tested using MATLAB simulation. power converter where the output DC bus is divided into This paper is structured as: Section II describes the process two stages connected capacitors. Although the converter in modes of the proposed converter. The derivation of the [5] has merit, it has disadvantage in requiring large model for the Boost and the Buck-Boost converter is capacitors which leads to slow response in output voltage demonstrated in section III. Section IV presents the of the converters. Another architecture of bridgeless derivation of both PI and SMC_PI controllers. Section V AC/DC converter is shown in [6] that demonstrate an illustrates the graphical method to obtain the coefficients efficiency about 71% at 54.5mW. Starting from the under uncertain parameters. Section VI presents the results ISSN 1335-8243 (print) ISSN 1338-3957 (online), www.aei.tuke.sk 4 Comparative Study Between Sliding Mode Controller..… of the suggested controller under load change, input change and voltage tracking. Section VI presents the conclusion. In this study, a direct AC/DC converter is proposed in Fig. 1. Fig. 4 Phase 3 of the converter Fig. 1 Suggested AC-DC bridgeless converter The converter includes Boost and Buck-Boost Fig. 5 Phase 4 of the converter converter. Both half cycles of the renewable energy source are utilized by the converter. The capacitor is charged 3. CONVERTER MATHEMATICAL MODEL continually by the converters during both the positive half cycle and the negative half cycle [14]. In this section, a short illustration of the mathematical modelling for the Boost and Buck-Boost converters is 2. CONVERTER OPERATION described. There are four phases for the converter process [1, 4]. 3.1. Boost Converter The first two phases 1 and 2, are concerned to the Boost converter which runs on the positive half cycle. The Generally, the Boost converter job is focused on rising remained two phases 3 and 4 are related to the Buck-Boost the input voltage to higher voltage. In this section, the state converter which runs on the negative half cycle. It is space model and the transfer function are obtained by using noticeable that over the positive half cycle switch the small signal model of the Boost converter. The model operates. however, in the negative cycle the switch is derived in order to use it in the following PI and SMC-PI is operating and is off [11]. In this study, the Boost designing sections. and the Buck-Boost converters are controlled with the The two phases of the boost converter [ON, OFF] are same duty cycle to ensure stable output voltage. Fig. 2, 3, described in Fig. 6 and Fig. 7. Besides that, the equations 4, 5 shows the process phases of the converter. which describe the states of the voltage and currents are also derived. Fig. 6 Boost converter at ON state 0 (1) Fig. 2 Phase 1 of the converter 0 (2) 0 (3) Fig. 7 Boost converter at OFF state Fig. 3 Phase 2 of the converter ISSN 1335-8243 (print) ISSN 1338-3957 (online), www.aei.tuke.sk Acta Electrotechnica et Informatica, Vol. 22, No. 4, 2022 5 Equation 12 describes the state space model of the V V 0 (4) Buck-Boost converter by the method of small signal model approach and the below hypothesis: [7]. i i i (5) , ̂ i C 0 (6) ̂ ̂ Equation 7 describes the state space model of the Boost converter by the small signal model approach and the below hypothesis: [7]. (12) 4. PROCESS OF DESIGNING THE CONTROLLER , ̂ 4.1. PI Controller ̂ ̂ (7) The principal control equation for the PI controller is specified in this arrange: 3.2. Buck-Boost Converter Generally, the Buck-Boost converter's job is to where , are the proportional, integral respectively. rise/down the input voltage depending on the duty cycle The coefficients of the proposed PI controller are selected value. In this section, the state space model and the transfer for the optimal values using MATLAB Simulink toolbox. function are obtained by using the small signal model of the The figure below describes the closed loop converter with Buck-Boost converter. This is derived in order to use it in PI controller in case of changing the load. the following PI and SMC-PI designing sections. The two phases of the Buck-Boost converter [ON, OFF] are described in Fig. 8 & 9. Beside that the equations which describe the states of the voltage and currents are also derived. Fig. 10 Converter with different loads Fig. 8 Buck Boost converter at ON state The purpose of sawtooth generator is generating continuous triangle sequence with fixed frequency which (8) allows to control the duty cycle. The comparator block function is used to compare between the PI signal and the (9) sawtooth to set the required duty cycle that runs the mosfet. In addition, the switch block is used to guarantee that Boost and Buck-Boost converters run separately and independently. The 3 resistors are used to change the load in different times in order to check the robustness of the controller. 4.2. Sliding Mode Control (SMC) Sliding mode control (SMC) is a nonlinear control Fig. 9 Buck Boost converter at OFF state technique that changes the behavior of the system by applying a discontinuous signal. This signal obliges the system to slide along a surface. The approach is (10) implemented by using high-speed switching control law which obliges the trajectory of the system to move forward prespecified path in the state variable space called (sliding (11) surface) and to stay in that surface thereafter. Before the system reaches the switching surface, there is a control ISSN 1335-8243 (print) ISSN 1338-3957 (online), www.aei.tuke.sk 6 Comparative Study Between Sliding Mode Controller..… directed towards the switching surface which is called Since the aim is to guarantee that the state trajectory of sliding mode. the system is directed to the sliding surface s=0 and slides Consider the system in the form: over it, this is achieved with a suitable design of control law using the reaching condition: ,, 0 (20) Where is the state vector of the system, is the control input and is a function vector. If is discontinuous on a Since: surface ( )=0 which called sliding surface in the sliding mode theory then: The steady state values of state variables coincide with ,, , 0 the corresponding reference values and they are constants, ,, (13) ,, , 0 then 0 , Replacing equation (18) into equation (20) In sliding control mode, the control purpose is to find a and solving it, we get: control input such that the state vector tracks a desired trajectory in the presence of the model uncertainties and external disturbances. Then the sliding surface can be This means that the sliding mode exists if the output written as: voltage is higher than the source voltage. The closed loop control is necessary to maintain the output voltage when the (14) input voltage has some variations. The analysis of the converter shows that the system dynamics can be divided Since the objective is to force the system states to the into fast (current) and slow (voltage) motion. In this study sliding surface, the accredited control plan must guarantee two loop control an inner current control and outer voltage the system trajectory to move toward and stay on the sliding control loop are used. The voltage loop controller is a surface from any initial condition if the following condition standard PI type. Since the motion rate of the current is meets: much faster than that of the output voltage, a sliding mode controller is used in the inner current loop. The block diagram of the overall system is shown in Fig. 11 below. | | (15) where is the positive constant that guarantees the system trajectories hit the sliding surface in finite time, the required sliding mode controller achieving finite time convergences to the sliding surface is given by: 1 0 0 0 Let and as the states of the boost converter Fig. 11 Nonlinear controller Bloch diagram and using the state equations given in equation (7) and (12) now the aim is to achieve a desired constant output voltage ∗ The components R and E are used in Fig. 11 to represent .That is, in steady state the output voltage should be the ∗ the load changes and desired voltage respectively in desired voltage . Thus, different times in order to check the robustness of the ∗ controller in different cases. The below figure describes the (16) sliding mode controller under changing the input signal. 0 (17) The state variable error, defined by the difference to the reference value, forms the sliding function: 0 (18) This means that the control forces the system to slide on the sliding surface. The reference value is derived internally to the controller from the output of the linear controller. In order to enforce sliding mode in the manifold =0, the corresponding control signal for the ideal switch for the Boost and Buck-Boost converters as follows: 1 (19) Fig. 12 Converter with SMC-PI Controller under input change ISSN 1335-8243 (print) ISSN 1338-3957 (online), www.aei.tuke.sk Acta Electrotechnica et Informatica, Vol. 22, No. 4, 2022 7 In the SMC-PI controller, the sign block is used to work as is the largest value that could be after constituting on/off switch to attain the required sliding mode in finite by the uncertainity range. time and then multiply the result by 0.5 to secure the is the smallest value that could be after constituting compatible control signal. by the uncertainity range . Also , , is the same 4.8610 5. CONTROL OF BOOST CONVERTER WITH 1.4110 6.8710 2.2610 UNCERTAIN PAREMETER In this section, we present the design steps of a robust 2.26 10 6.8710 3.4310 controller for Linear Time Invariant (LTI) uncertain systems. The type of the uncertain parameters which we 1.28∗10 3.2010 will consider is the parametric uncertainties such as resistance of the load and capacitance (R and C). A possible By substitution the given parameters in equation (24) approach in finding the stability regions in the parameter the required polynomial to test the stability is: space is the mapping of the stability boundary to the parameter space, this way is very useful if only two 1.28∗10 3.2010 2 .26 parameters are uncleared. The main purpose of the 10 6.8710 3.4310 1.41 10 graphical method is to find the limitation of PI coefficients 6.8710 2.2610 4.8610 that makes the system stable. (25) By using the pole spread method we can conclude that Here, the parameter space approach is used in order to find the system is stable for some poles and unstable for remain the stability regions for both of the above polynomials [16]. poles .We choose the two uncertain parameters (R, C) For the Real and Imaginary parts are: Where: 3.5,7.5 , 1.5 10 ,510 The open loop Transfer function for the boost converter 2 .2610 6.8710 3.43 with two uncertain parameters is as follows: 10 4.8610 (26) .. . 1.2810 3.2010 1 .41 (21) 10 6.8710 2.2610 (27) . . . The graphical method is a well-known method The above two equations are arranged in the matrix form illustrated in Systems with Uncertain Physical Parameters as: book by. J Ackermann in 1933. It used to determine the region of stability under range of uncertain parameter. 4.8610 2.2610 Finally, I choose 0 because it’s too small value so I 6.8710 3.2010 6.8710 3.4310 neglected it. Actually, I used PI controller and make comparison with SMC-PI controller. 1.2810 1.4110 2.2610 (28) The transfer function of PID controller is as follow: It is clear that the equation (28) is constructed of the (22) form 0 and the determinant of matrix should not equal to zero in order to find a solution for it. In this So, the closed loop characteristic equation is as follows: matrix in equation (28) is: case, the determinant of the 3.436 10 3.2010 2.26 4.8610 2.2610 10 6.8710 3.4310 1.4110 0 (29) 6.8710 3.2010 6.8710 2.2610 6.48310 (23) The value of the parameter has to be chosen within range to guarantee that the two lines are identical as follows The polynomial family should be belonging to interval class in order to apply Khartinove theorem for stability 4.8610 2.2610 [15]. For that, the coefficients of the multilinear polynomial 6.8710 3.2010 can be over bounded in order to convert it to interval one. 6.8710 3.4310 This can be done by assuming that the coefficients of the 1.2810 1 .4110 2.2610 multilinear polynomial are independent [16]. The characteristic polynomial in equation (23) is of order 3, (30) hence testing only one polynomial will be enough to guarantee the stability by the sense of Khartinove theorem Then, [16] . . S (24) (31) . . ISSN 1335-8243 (print) ISSN 1338-3957 (online), www.aei.tuke.sk 8 Comparative Study Between Sliding Mode Controller..… Since the frequency should be positive, the value of is For region 0 let 5 , 2∗10 then the close loop TF: chosen such that 6.2710 . Therefore, 6.2710 is the condition to insure the identically of 2.4310 1.0210 2.1310 the lines in equation (26) and equation (27). Let 6.4710 0.04 then value of 989 . And the roots of the polynomial are: 1.0210 2.3810 1.0210 2.3810 0.00397 We note that region 0 has all poles at LHP, Take 3 , 210 , 0.04 . We will neglect because it’s too small. 6. SIMULATION RESULTS Fig. 13 Plot of as function of w The converter is designed depending on Texas By Substituting value of in equation (26) and (27), instrument reference [9] in CCM. η is the efficiency of then power conversion. Normally, it is suitable to calculate the inductor peak-to-peak current of less than 40% of the 4.8610 2.26 10 2.40 average value of inductor current. Therefore, ∆ 10 (32) current is supposed to be less than 40 % of . 3.20 10 1.2810 6.87 10 1.0410 (33) Table 1 Designing the parameters of the converter Fig. 14 demonstrates the stability regions of Converter elements part Rate both and for where: Input Voltage 0.5 V 1. Real root boundary (RRB) at 0 is 0 as Output voltage 8 V shown in equation (32) Output Current 1.5 A 2. Infinity root boundary (IRB) at ∞ 0 3. Complex root boundary (CRB) at 989 .The plot Inductor , 2.37∗10 H of the line equation below at 0∞ Load resistance 5.5 R Ω Capacitor C 2.0610 F 1.9110 4.1810 9.2710 (34) Frequency 25 KHz Table 2 Calculated Converter component values 0.50.90 1 92.5% 81.5 26.66 0.5∗0.9 30 30 ∆ ∆ 26.66 8 100 100 ∆ 8 26.66 30.66 2 2 2.37 uH Fig. 14 plane with boundaries 30.660.003 9.19% 0.951.5 The curves in Fig. 14 divide the plot into six different 250000.09198 regions. The Boundary Crossing Theorem indicates that if 2.0610 one of these regions contains a stable polynomial, then that 5.5 Ω region must contain only stable polynomials. Conversely, if one of these regions contains an unstable polynomial, then that region must contain only unstable polynomials. Hence, by picking one polynomial for each region and Load variation: different loads have been applied testing its stability, by applying this step to the graph in Fig. (5.5 -20-5.5) ohm at different times (0.1, 0.2) seconds. Fig. 14, it’s obvious that there is only one stable region. 15, 16, 17 describe the response for each controller. ISSN 1335-8243 (print) ISSN 1338-3957 (online), www.aei.tuke.sk Acta Electrotechnica et Informatica, Vol. 22, No. 4, 2022 9 Fig. 15 Output response of PI controller for load change Fig. 19 Converter with SMC-PI Controller (Input variation) Fig. 20 Comparison between PI and SMC with Input variation Fig. 16 Output response of SMC-PI controller for load change Its noted here that SMC has no ripple in the output voltage with less overshoot compared with PI controller. SMC has also less settling time. Voltage Tracking: Variable desired output voltages (6V, 8V, 4V) are implemented to observe the response of system. Fig. 21, 22, 23 show the response in each controller for voltage tracking. Fig. 17 Compare between the controllers with load variation Its noted here that SMC has less ripple in the output voltage with less overshoot compared with PI controller. SMC has also less settling time. We notice above that SMC-PI has less chattering than PI contrary to custom and this happened because we used high order sliding mode (HOSM) algorithm where the system slides on the manifolds 0 0 . This is the best alternative to obtain continuous and "smooth enough" control signals. There is trade-off between overshoot and steady state error. Input Variation: we implement a variable input with Fig. 21 Output response of PI controller for voltage tracking 0.5V to 0.8V at different times to test the stability of the output voltage under this disturbance. Fig. 18, 19, 20 illustrate the response in each controller with input variation. Fig. 22 Output response of SMC-PI controller for voltage Fig. 18 Output response of PI controller for input change tracking ISSN 1335-8243 (print) ISSN 1338-3957 (online), www.aei.tuke.sk 10 Comparative Study Between Sliding Mode Controller..… Table 3 Comparison between two points in region 0 Point 1 Point 2 Criteria Overshoot 28.78% 14.1 % Steady state error 0.0026 0.0026 Settling time 0.0604 0.0056 Rising time 0.0012 9.45410 After we make a comparison between the two points in Fig. 23 Comparison between PI and SMC with Tracking voltage the same region, we conclude that at different points we have different responses. So, to optimize the optimal point The last figure shows that SMC-PI has no ripple and which gives us the best performance in the response this both of the two controllers have the same settling and rising relates to adaptive and optimal control courses which will time. The comparisons illustrate the positive behaviour of lead to the optimal point. The value of , control the the proposed controller in stabilizing the output voltage performance of the system as overshoot, settling time. Big within required voltage of value 6V under input voltage Bang-Big Crunch method and genetic algorithm are ways variations, load variation and tracking voltage. used to optimise the range of the coefficients. Each point has different performance index. Step response for the boost converter: The efficiency of the system: After selecting two random points in the same region 0, we take two points: The efficiency for the converter is tested with the exact parameters for both controllers as shown below. Point 1: 0.04 , 3 Point 2: 0.04 , 7 Fig. 26 Efficiency comparison between PI and PI-SMC Fig. 24 Step response for point 1 in the region This figure above obviously shows that PI-SMC is better than PI controller at the same parameters value with 82 % for PI-SMC controller and about 15% for PI controller. It's incomparable to compare the two controllers. 7. CONCLUSION The suggested SMC-PI direct AC/DC low voltage energy-harvesting converter overcome the traditional bridge rectification and attain more efficiency than the PI controller with efficiency about 82%. The suggested controller approach demands two separate controllers. Particular investigation of the immediate AC/DC power Fig. 25 Step response for point 2 in the region ISSN 1335-8243 (print) ISSN 1338-3957 (online), www.aei.tuke.sk Acta Electrotechnica et Informatica, Vol. 22, No. 4, 2022 11 converter is accomplished. Design instructions are offered Revised August 2020, Texas Instruments. for choosing values of the basic elements and the [10] VINIDA, K. ‒ MATHEW, D.: “Realization of Energy parameters of the controller for the converter. PI and SMC- Harvesting System Using a Frequency Generator” PI controllers are tested and results demonstrate that SMC- 2013 IEEE Global Humanitarian Technology PI has more efficiency and performance than PI. The Conference: South Asia Satellite (GHTC-SAS). specification of output voltage ripple, settling time, rising time and steady state error in SMC-PI is higher than in PI [11] SUJA PRADEEPA, M. ‒ ALLWYN CLARENCE controller. The efficiency reaches about 82% for PI-SMC. ASIS, A. ‒ EDWARD RAJAN, S.: “Performance In addition to that, the simulation results display the Evaluation of a Direct AC-DC Boost Converter for robustness of the propose controller under disturbances. As Piezo-Electric Energy Harvesting System future studying, the writers will apply the proposed “Proceeding of 2018 IEEE International Conference controllers to piezoelectric low voltage source applications on Current Trends toward Converging Technologies, as in order to approve it in real scenario. Moreover, the Coimbatore, India. authors will apply another parametric uncertainty and [12] SAI KRISHNA REDDY, M. ‒ KALYANI, CH. ‒ change the type of the polynomial which will lead to UTHRA, M. ‒ ELANGOVAN, D.: “A Small Signal complex solution to find the range of the solution. Analysis of DC-DC Boost Converter” Moreover, applying recent optimization methods as Big Bang-Big Crunch method and genetic algorithm to find the [13] SHVETS, D.: “Analysis of Ac Low-Voltage Energy range of the coefficients. Harvesting” Thesis Submitted To Naval School Monterey, California REFERENCES [14] MADHURI, K. ‒ SRUJANA, A. “Low Voltage [1] DWARI, S. ‒ DAYAL, R. ‒ PARSA, L.: “A Novel Energy Harvesting by an Efficient AC-DC Step-Up Direct AC/DC Converter for Efficient Low Voltage Converter” OSR Journal of Electrical and Electronics Energy Harvesting, 2008 34th Annual Conference of Engineering (IOSR-JEEE). IEEE Industrial Electronics. [15] ROSS BARMISH, B. ‒ JURY, E.: New tools for [2] HUQ, T. R.: “An integrated ac-dc rectifier converter robustness of linear systems. IEEE Transactions on for low voltage piezoelectric energy harvesting and Automatic Control, 39(12):2525–2525, 1994. constant-voltage lithium-ion cell charging [16] ACKERMANN, J.: Robust control: Systems with application”, Thesis submitted in Concordia uncertain physical parameters. Springer Science & University, May 2015. Business Media, 2012. [3] KAMAL, T. ‒ HASSAN, S. Z. ‒ ARIFOĞLU, U. H.: “Buck-Boost Converter Small Signal Model: Dynamic Analysis under System Uncertainties” Received April 13, 2022, accepted October 24, 2022 Journal of Electrical Systems, May 2018. [4] DWARI, S. ‒ DAYAL, R. ‒ PARSA, L.: “An BIOGRAPHIES efficient AC-DC step up converter for Low Voltage Energy Harvesting, IEEE Transactions On Power Electronics, Vol. 25, No. 8, August 2010 Moayed Almobaied is an assistant professor of electrical Engineering at Islamic University of Gaza –Palestine. He [5] MITCHESON, P. D. ‒ GREEN, T. C. ‒ YEATMAN, received his B.Sc and M.Sc degrees in control Engineering E. M. ‒ HOLMES, A. S.: “Power processing circuits from Islamic university of Gaza in 2001 and 2008, for electromagnetic, electrostatic and piezoelectric respectively. In 2017, he received the Ph.D. in control and inertial energy scavengers,” Microsystem automation systems from Istanbul Technical university- Technologies, May 2007, pp. 1629–1635. ITU have several fellowships including YTB and DAAD. His current research interests include Robust control, [6] WANG, H. ‒ BRIDGELESS, A.: Boost Rectifier for Optimal control, Designing of modern control systems, Low-Voltage Energy Harvesting Applications” IEEE Nonlinear Control systems, and Robotics. Transactions On Power Electronics, Vol. 28, No. 11, November 2013. Ahmed Mosa Musleh was born in Palestine, Rafah on [7] HART, D. W.: Power electronics Book” Valparaiso 1987. He received the B.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees from University Valparaiso, Indiana 2011. Islamic University of Gaza, in 2011 and 2021, respectively he is currently working at Gaza Electricity Distribution [8] GULDEMIR, H.: “Sliding Mode Control of Dc-Dc Company “GEDCO” as Electrical Engineer in the SCADA Boost Converter” Journal of Applied Sciences, March department. His research interests include power electronic application in renewable energy systems, energy management for microgrids, modelling and control of [9] “TPS61023 3.7-A Boost Converter with 0.5-V Ultra- power electronic systems, microgrids, smart grid. low Input Voltage” LVSF14B – September 2019 – ISSN 1335-8243 (print) ISSN 1338-3957 (online), www.aei.tuke.sk http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Acta Electrotechnica et Informatica de Gruyter

Comparative Study Between Sliding Mode Controller and PI Controller for AC/DC Bridgeless Converter Under Uncertain Parameters

Loading next page...
 
/lp/de-gruyter/comparative-study-between-sliding-mode-controller-and-pi-controller-p7ZDSZxYKz

References (2)

Publisher
de Gruyter
Copyright
© 2022 Moayed Almobaied et al., published by Sciendo
ISSN
1338-3957
eISSN
1338-3957
DOI
10.2478/aei-2022-0016
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Acta Electrotechnica et Informatica, Vol. 22, No. 4, 2022, 3–11, DOI: 10.2478/aei-2022-0016 3 COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN SLIDING MODE CONTROLLER AND PI CONTROLLER FOR AC/DC BRIDGELESS CONVERTER UNDER UNCERTAIN PARAMETERS * ** Moayed ALMOBAIED , Ahmed Mosa MUSLEH Department of Electrical Engineering, Islamic University of Gaza, malmobaied@iugaza.edu.ps ** Master of Science, Electrical Engineering, Islamic University of Gaza, amoslih1987@gmail.com ABSTRACT In this paper, a comparative study between nonlinear sliding mode controller (SMC) and standard PI controller for stabilizing bridgeless AC/DC converter under uncertain parameters is presented. This type of converters is widely used in harvesting low energy systems as in wind turbine, piezoelectric transducers and heat exchange transducers. Designing robust controllers to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of these converters has become a promising track in control engineering field. The traditional bridge rectifier is widely used in the majority types of AC/DC conventional converters to gain the rectified DC voltage from the low AC input voltage source. However, these traditional converters are not effective for the low output voltage of renewable sources due to the voltage drops across rectifier’s diodes. The proposed SMC-PI controller is used to enhance the stability and the response of these converters under uncertain parameters comparing with the standard PI controller. The proposed approach consists of both Boost and Buck-Boost converters with two controllers in order to maximize the useful output energy from the source. The graphical method has been used to obtain the limitation of the coefficients of the standard PI controller. A parameter space approach is used to find all robust stabilization PI coefficients and the stability regions. A comparative study using simulations in MATLAB is presented to ensure the effectiveness and robustness of the proposed SMC-PI controller under some external disturbances. Keywords: AC/DC converters, Boost converter, Buck-Boost converter, Energy harvesting, Sliding mode Controller (SMC), Propotional-Integral controller PI. 1. INTRODUCTION suggested method in [1,4], the authors in this paper present an improvement to the converter and make comparison The incredible growth of the renewable energy sources between the linear and nonlinear controller and determine that generate low AC output voltage (millivolt) has led to the limitation of the linear controller coefficients by the enormous research in developing converters to utilize these graphical method. useful energy [1]. For instance, lots of devices which The main contributions of this research are that: operate in stabilized DC voltage like sensors used in  The standard PI controller is designed for the transport area and wireless communication sets. These devices need to be self-powering with about DC voltage (3 bridgeless converter which consists of the boost volt) [1], [2]. The increasing demand on such kind of and buck-boost converter. energy sources encourage the researchers in this field to  The nonlinear controller Sliding Mode Control deeply search for effective type of converters that convert with PI mechanism is illustrated. the low AC output voltage from these renewable energy  Comparative study between the two controllers to sources immediately to a beneficial DC voltage without demonstrate the response of the controller. using the traditional bridge method [13]. The traditional power converters consist mainly from two sequential parts:  Obtain the limitation of the stabilized PI the diode bridge rectifier and a standard Buck or Boost controller coefficients. DC/DC converter. The main disadvantage of this old  Lastly, checking the response of the controller method is the voltage drop on diodes which leads to under changing the load, changing the voltage decreasing the efficiency of the converter and cut off the source, and under tracking the output voltage the converter in low voltage range [1-4]. adding two DC/DC desired voltage. converters in parallel way have an advantage of converting the AC/DC immediately to skip using the traditional bridge [10]. In [1] and [4], Dwari, Dayal and Parsa published a In this paper, detailed analysis of the proposed promising method regarding direct AC/DC converter for converters is presented. Closed form relations between the effective low voltage energy harvesting. The operated output voltage and the duty cycle with parameters of the converter which used has an efficiency of 63%. The converter are derived. As a result, the performance of the researchers in [5] show double Boost converter for AC/DC proposed controller is tested using MATLAB simulation. power converter where the output DC bus is divided into This paper is structured as: Section II describes the process two stages connected capacitors. Although the converter in modes of the proposed converter. The derivation of the [5] has merit, it has disadvantage in requiring large model for the Boost and the Buck-Boost converter is capacitors which leads to slow response in output voltage demonstrated in section III. Section IV presents the of the converters. Another architecture of bridgeless derivation of both PI and SMC_PI controllers. Section V AC/DC converter is shown in [6] that demonstrate an illustrates the graphical method to obtain the coefficients efficiency about 71% at 54.5mW. Starting from the under uncertain parameters. Section VI presents the results ISSN 1335-8243 (print) ISSN 1338-3957 (online), www.aei.tuke.sk 4 Comparative Study Between Sliding Mode Controller..… of the suggested controller under load change, input change and voltage tracking. Section VI presents the conclusion. In this study, a direct AC/DC converter is proposed in Fig. 1. Fig. 4 Phase 3 of the converter Fig. 1 Suggested AC-DC bridgeless converter The converter includes Boost and Buck-Boost Fig. 5 Phase 4 of the converter converter. Both half cycles of the renewable energy source are utilized by the converter. The capacitor is charged 3. CONVERTER MATHEMATICAL MODEL continually by the converters during both the positive half cycle and the negative half cycle [14]. In this section, a short illustration of the mathematical modelling for the Boost and Buck-Boost converters is 2. CONVERTER OPERATION described. There are four phases for the converter process [1, 4]. 3.1. Boost Converter The first two phases 1 and 2, are concerned to the Boost converter which runs on the positive half cycle. The Generally, the Boost converter job is focused on rising remained two phases 3 and 4 are related to the Buck-Boost the input voltage to higher voltage. In this section, the state converter which runs on the negative half cycle. It is space model and the transfer function are obtained by using noticeable that over the positive half cycle switch the small signal model of the Boost converter. The model operates. however, in the negative cycle the switch is derived in order to use it in the following PI and SMC-PI is operating and is off [11]. In this study, the Boost designing sections. and the Buck-Boost converters are controlled with the The two phases of the boost converter [ON, OFF] are same duty cycle to ensure stable output voltage. Fig. 2, 3, described in Fig. 6 and Fig. 7. Besides that, the equations 4, 5 shows the process phases of the converter. which describe the states of the voltage and currents are also derived. Fig. 6 Boost converter at ON state 0 (1) Fig. 2 Phase 1 of the converter 0 (2) 0 (3) Fig. 7 Boost converter at OFF state Fig. 3 Phase 2 of the converter ISSN 1335-8243 (print) ISSN 1338-3957 (online), www.aei.tuke.sk Acta Electrotechnica et Informatica, Vol. 22, No. 4, 2022 5 Equation 12 describes the state space model of the V V 0 (4) Buck-Boost converter by the method of small signal model approach and the below hypothesis: [7]. i i i (5) , ̂ i C 0 (6) ̂ ̂ Equation 7 describes the state space model of the Boost converter by the small signal model approach and the below hypothesis: [7]. (12) 4. PROCESS OF DESIGNING THE CONTROLLER , ̂ 4.1. PI Controller ̂ ̂ (7) The principal control equation for the PI controller is specified in this arrange: 3.2. Buck-Boost Converter Generally, the Buck-Boost converter's job is to where , are the proportional, integral respectively. rise/down the input voltage depending on the duty cycle The coefficients of the proposed PI controller are selected value. In this section, the state space model and the transfer for the optimal values using MATLAB Simulink toolbox. function are obtained by using the small signal model of the The figure below describes the closed loop converter with Buck-Boost converter. This is derived in order to use it in PI controller in case of changing the load. the following PI and SMC-PI designing sections. The two phases of the Buck-Boost converter [ON, OFF] are described in Fig. 8 & 9. Beside that the equations which describe the states of the voltage and currents are also derived. Fig. 10 Converter with different loads Fig. 8 Buck Boost converter at ON state The purpose of sawtooth generator is generating continuous triangle sequence with fixed frequency which (8) allows to control the duty cycle. The comparator block function is used to compare between the PI signal and the (9) sawtooth to set the required duty cycle that runs the mosfet. In addition, the switch block is used to guarantee that Boost and Buck-Boost converters run separately and independently. The 3 resistors are used to change the load in different times in order to check the robustness of the controller. 4.2. Sliding Mode Control (SMC) Sliding mode control (SMC) is a nonlinear control Fig. 9 Buck Boost converter at OFF state technique that changes the behavior of the system by applying a discontinuous signal. This signal obliges the system to slide along a surface. The approach is (10) implemented by using high-speed switching control law which obliges the trajectory of the system to move forward prespecified path in the state variable space called (sliding (11) surface) and to stay in that surface thereafter. Before the system reaches the switching surface, there is a control ISSN 1335-8243 (print) ISSN 1338-3957 (online), www.aei.tuke.sk 6 Comparative Study Between Sliding Mode Controller..… directed towards the switching surface which is called Since the aim is to guarantee that the state trajectory of sliding mode. the system is directed to the sliding surface s=0 and slides Consider the system in the form: over it, this is achieved with a suitable design of control law using the reaching condition: ,, 0 (20) Where is the state vector of the system, is the control input and is a function vector. If is discontinuous on a Since: surface ( )=0 which called sliding surface in the sliding mode theory then: The steady state values of state variables coincide with ,, , 0 the corresponding reference values and they are constants, ,, (13) ,, , 0 then 0 , Replacing equation (18) into equation (20) In sliding control mode, the control purpose is to find a and solving it, we get: control input such that the state vector tracks a desired trajectory in the presence of the model uncertainties and external disturbances. Then the sliding surface can be This means that the sliding mode exists if the output written as: voltage is higher than the source voltage. The closed loop control is necessary to maintain the output voltage when the (14) input voltage has some variations. The analysis of the converter shows that the system dynamics can be divided Since the objective is to force the system states to the into fast (current) and slow (voltage) motion. In this study sliding surface, the accredited control plan must guarantee two loop control an inner current control and outer voltage the system trajectory to move toward and stay on the sliding control loop are used. The voltage loop controller is a surface from any initial condition if the following condition standard PI type. Since the motion rate of the current is meets: much faster than that of the output voltage, a sliding mode controller is used in the inner current loop. The block diagram of the overall system is shown in Fig. 11 below. | | (15) where is the positive constant that guarantees the system trajectories hit the sliding surface in finite time, the required sliding mode controller achieving finite time convergences to the sliding surface is given by: 1 0 0 0 Let and as the states of the boost converter Fig. 11 Nonlinear controller Bloch diagram and using the state equations given in equation (7) and (12) now the aim is to achieve a desired constant output voltage ∗ The components R and E are used in Fig. 11 to represent .That is, in steady state the output voltage should be the ∗ the load changes and desired voltage respectively in desired voltage . Thus, different times in order to check the robustness of the ∗ controller in different cases. The below figure describes the (16) sliding mode controller under changing the input signal. 0 (17) The state variable error, defined by the difference to the reference value, forms the sliding function: 0 (18) This means that the control forces the system to slide on the sliding surface. The reference value is derived internally to the controller from the output of the linear controller. In order to enforce sliding mode in the manifold =0, the corresponding control signal for the ideal switch for the Boost and Buck-Boost converters as follows: 1 (19) Fig. 12 Converter with SMC-PI Controller under input change ISSN 1335-8243 (print) ISSN 1338-3957 (online), www.aei.tuke.sk Acta Electrotechnica et Informatica, Vol. 22, No. 4, 2022 7 In the SMC-PI controller, the sign block is used to work as is the largest value that could be after constituting on/off switch to attain the required sliding mode in finite by the uncertainity range. time and then multiply the result by 0.5 to secure the is the smallest value that could be after constituting compatible control signal. by the uncertainity range . Also , , is the same 4.8610 5. CONTROL OF BOOST CONVERTER WITH 1.4110 6.8710 2.2610 UNCERTAIN PAREMETER In this section, we present the design steps of a robust 2.26 10 6.8710 3.4310 controller for Linear Time Invariant (LTI) uncertain systems. The type of the uncertain parameters which we 1.28∗10 3.2010 will consider is the parametric uncertainties such as resistance of the load and capacitance (R and C). A possible By substitution the given parameters in equation (24) approach in finding the stability regions in the parameter the required polynomial to test the stability is: space is the mapping of the stability boundary to the parameter space, this way is very useful if only two 1.28∗10 3.2010 2 .26 parameters are uncleared. The main purpose of the 10 6.8710 3.4310 1.41 10 graphical method is to find the limitation of PI coefficients 6.8710 2.2610 4.8610 that makes the system stable. (25) By using the pole spread method we can conclude that Here, the parameter space approach is used in order to find the system is stable for some poles and unstable for remain the stability regions for both of the above polynomials [16]. poles .We choose the two uncertain parameters (R, C) For the Real and Imaginary parts are: Where: 3.5,7.5 , 1.5 10 ,510 The open loop Transfer function for the boost converter 2 .2610 6.8710 3.43 with two uncertain parameters is as follows: 10 4.8610 (26) .. . 1.2810 3.2010 1 .41 (21) 10 6.8710 2.2610 (27) . . . The graphical method is a well-known method The above two equations are arranged in the matrix form illustrated in Systems with Uncertain Physical Parameters as: book by. J Ackermann in 1933. It used to determine the region of stability under range of uncertain parameter. 4.8610 2.2610 Finally, I choose 0 because it’s too small value so I 6.8710 3.2010 6.8710 3.4310 neglected it. Actually, I used PI controller and make comparison with SMC-PI controller. 1.2810 1.4110 2.2610 (28) The transfer function of PID controller is as follow: It is clear that the equation (28) is constructed of the (22) form 0 and the determinant of matrix should not equal to zero in order to find a solution for it. In this So, the closed loop characteristic equation is as follows: matrix in equation (28) is: case, the determinant of the 3.436 10 3.2010 2.26 4.8610 2.2610 10 6.8710 3.4310 1.4110 0 (29) 6.8710 3.2010 6.8710 2.2610 6.48310 (23) The value of the parameter has to be chosen within range to guarantee that the two lines are identical as follows The polynomial family should be belonging to interval class in order to apply Khartinove theorem for stability 4.8610 2.2610 [15]. For that, the coefficients of the multilinear polynomial 6.8710 3.2010 can be over bounded in order to convert it to interval one. 6.8710 3.4310 This can be done by assuming that the coefficients of the 1.2810 1 .4110 2.2610 multilinear polynomial are independent [16]. The characteristic polynomial in equation (23) is of order 3, (30) hence testing only one polynomial will be enough to guarantee the stability by the sense of Khartinove theorem Then, [16] . . S (24) (31) . . ISSN 1335-8243 (print) ISSN 1338-3957 (online), www.aei.tuke.sk 8 Comparative Study Between Sliding Mode Controller..… Since the frequency should be positive, the value of is For region 0 let 5 , 2∗10 then the close loop TF: chosen such that 6.2710 . Therefore, 6.2710 is the condition to insure the identically of 2.4310 1.0210 2.1310 the lines in equation (26) and equation (27). Let 6.4710 0.04 then value of 989 . And the roots of the polynomial are: 1.0210 2.3810 1.0210 2.3810 0.00397 We note that region 0 has all poles at LHP, Take 3 , 210 , 0.04 . We will neglect because it’s too small. 6. SIMULATION RESULTS Fig. 13 Plot of as function of w The converter is designed depending on Texas By Substituting value of in equation (26) and (27), instrument reference [9] in CCM. η is the efficiency of then power conversion. Normally, it is suitable to calculate the inductor peak-to-peak current of less than 40% of the 4.8610 2.26 10 2.40 average value of inductor current. Therefore, ∆ 10 (32) current is supposed to be less than 40 % of . 3.20 10 1.2810 6.87 10 1.0410 (33) Table 1 Designing the parameters of the converter Fig. 14 demonstrates the stability regions of Converter elements part Rate both and for where: Input Voltage 0.5 V 1. Real root boundary (RRB) at 0 is 0 as Output voltage 8 V shown in equation (32) Output Current 1.5 A 2. Infinity root boundary (IRB) at ∞ 0 3. Complex root boundary (CRB) at 989 .The plot Inductor , 2.37∗10 H of the line equation below at 0∞ Load resistance 5.5 R Ω Capacitor C 2.0610 F 1.9110 4.1810 9.2710 (34) Frequency 25 KHz Table 2 Calculated Converter component values 0.50.90 1 92.5% 81.5 26.66 0.5∗0.9 30 30 ∆ ∆ 26.66 8 100 100 ∆ 8 26.66 30.66 2 2 2.37 uH Fig. 14 plane with boundaries 30.660.003 9.19% 0.951.5 The curves in Fig. 14 divide the plot into six different 250000.09198 regions. The Boundary Crossing Theorem indicates that if 2.0610 one of these regions contains a stable polynomial, then that 5.5 Ω region must contain only stable polynomials. Conversely, if one of these regions contains an unstable polynomial, then that region must contain only unstable polynomials. Hence, by picking one polynomial for each region and Load variation: different loads have been applied testing its stability, by applying this step to the graph in Fig. (5.5 -20-5.5) ohm at different times (0.1, 0.2) seconds. Fig. 14, it’s obvious that there is only one stable region. 15, 16, 17 describe the response for each controller. ISSN 1335-8243 (print) ISSN 1338-3957 (online), www.aei.tuke.sk Acta Electrotechnica et Informatica, Vol. 22, No. 4, 2022 9 Fig. 15 Output response of PI controller for load change Fig. 19 Converter with SMC-PI Controller (Input variation) Fig. 20 Comparison between PI and SMC with Input variation Fig. 16 Output response of SMC-PI controller for load change Its noted here that SMC has no ripple in the output voltage with less overshoot compared with PI controller. SMC has also less settling time. Voltage Tracking: Variable desired output voltages (6V, 8V, 4V) are implemented to observe the response of system. Fig. 21, 22, 23 show the response in each controller for voltage tracking. Fig. 17 Compare between the controllers with load variation Its noted here that SMC has less ripple in the output voltage with less overshoot compared with PI controller. SMC has also less settling time. We notice above that SMC-PI has less chattering than PI contrary to custom and this happened because we used high order sliding mode (HOSM) algorithm where the system slides on the manifolds 0 0 . This is the best alternative to obtain continuous and "smooth enough" control signals. There is trade-off between overshoot and steady state error. Input Variation: we implement a variable input with Fig. 21 Output response of PI controller for voltage tracking 0.5V to 0.8V at different times to test the stability of the output voltage under this disturbance. Fig. 18, 19, 20 illustrate the response in each controller with input variation. Fig. 22 Output response of SMC-PI controller for voltage Fig. 18 Output response of PI controller for input change tracking ISSN 1335-8243 (print) ISSN 1338-3957 (online), www.aei.tuke.sk 10 Comparative Study Between Sliding Mode Controller..… Table 3 Comparison between two points in region 0 Point 1 Point 2 Criteria Overshoot 28.78% 14.1 % Steady state error 0.0026 0.0026 Settling time 0.0604 0.0056 Rising time 0.0012 9.45410 After we make a comparison between the two points in Fig. 23 Comparison between PI and SMC with Tracking voltage the same region, we conclude that at different points we have different responses. So, to optimize the optimal point The last figure shows that SMC-PI has no ripple and which gives us the best performance in the response this both of the two controllers have the same settling and rising relates to adaptive and optimal control courses which will time. The comparisons illustrate the positive behaviour of lead to the optimal point. The value of , control the the proposed controller in stabilizing the output voltage performance of the system as overshoot, settling time. Big within required voltage of value 6V under input voltage Bang-Big Crunch method and genetic algorithm are ways variations, load variation and tracking voltage. used to optimise the range of the coefficients. Each point has different performance index. Step response for the boost converter: The efficiency of the system: After selecting two random points in the same region 0, we take two points: The efficiency for the converter is tested with the exact parameters for both controllers as shown below. Point 1: 0.04 , 3 Point 2: 0.04 , 7 Fig. 26 Efficiency comparison between PI and PI-SMC Fig. 24 Step response for point 1 in the region This figure above obviously shows that PI-SMC is better than PI controller at the same parameters value with 82 % for PI-SMC controller and about 15% for PI controller. It's incomparable to compare the two controllers. 7. CONCLUSION The suggested SMC-PI direct AC/DC low voltage energy-harvesting converter overcome the traditional bridge rectification and attain more efficiency than the PI controller with efficiency about 82%. The suggested controller approach demands two separate controllers. Particular investigation of the immediate AC/DC power Fig. 25 Step response for point 2 in the region ISSN 1335-8243 (print) ISSN 1338-3957 (online), www.aei.tuke.sk Acta Electrotechnica et Informatica, Vol. 22, No. 4, 2022 11 converter is accomplished. Design instructions are offered Revised August 2020, Texas Instruments. for choosing values of the basic elements and the [10] VINIDA, K. ‒ MATHEW, D.: “Realization of Energy parameters of the controller for the converter. PI and SMC- Harvesting System Using a Frequency Generator” PI controllers are tested and results demonstrate that SMC- 2013 IEEE Global Humanitarian Technology PI has more efficiency and performance than PI. The Conference: South Asia Satellite (GHTC-SAS). specification of output voltage ripple, settling time, rising time and steady state error in SMC-PI is higher than in PI [11] SUJA PRADEEPA, M. ‒ ALLWYN CLARENCE controller. The efficiency reaches about 82% for PI-SMC. ASIS, A. ‒ EDWARD RAJAN, S.: “Performance In addition to that, the simulation results display the Evaluation of a Direct AC-DC Boost Converter for robustness of the propose controller under disturbances. As Piezo-Electric Energy Harvesting System future studying, the writers will apply the proposed “Proceeding of 2018 IEEE International Conference controllers to piezoelectric low voltage source applications on Current Trends toward Converging Technologies, as in order to approve it in real scenario. Moreover, the Coimbatore, India. authors will apply another parametric uncertainty and [12] SAI KRISHNA REDDY, M. ‒ KALYANI, CH. ‒ change the type of the polynomial which will lead to UTHRA, M. ‒ ELANGOVAN, D.: “A Small Signal complex solution to find the range of the solution. Analysis of DC-DC Boost Converter” Moreover, applying recent optimization methods as Big Bang-Big Crunch method and genetic algorithm to find the [13] SHVETS, D.: “Analysis of Ac Low-Voltage Energy range of the coefficients. Harvesting” Thesis Submitted To Naval School Monterey, California REFERENCES [14] MADHURI, K. ‒ SRUJANA, A. “Low Voltage [1] DWARI, S. ‒ DAYAL, R. ‒ PARSA, L.: “A Novel Energy Harvesting by an Efficient AC-DC Step-Up Direct AC/DC Converter for Efficient Low Voltage Converter” OSR Journal of Electrical and Electronics Energy Harvesting, 2008 34th Annual Conference of Engineering (IOSR-JEEE). IEEE Industrial Electronics. [15] ROSS BARMISH, B. ‒ JURY, E.: New tools for [2] HUQ, T. R.: “An integrated ac-dc rectifier converter robustness of linear systems. IEEE Transactions on for low voltage piezoelectric energy harvesting and Automatic Control, 39(12):2525–2525, 1994. constant-voltage lithium-ion cell charging [16] ACKERMANN, J.: Robust control: Systems with application”, Thesis submitted in Concordia uncertain physical parameters. Springer Science & University, May 2015. Business Media, 2012. [3] KAMAL, T. ‒ HASSAN, S. Z. ‒ ARIFOĞLU, U. H.: “Buck-Boost Converter Small Signal Model: Dynamic Analysis under System Uncertainties” Received April 13, 2022, accepted October 24, 2022 Journal of Electrical Systems, May 2018. [4] DWARI, S. ‒ DAYAL, R. ‒ PARSA, L.: “An BIOGRAPHIES efficient AC-DC step up converter for Low Voltage Energy Harvesting, IEEE Transactions On Power Electronics, Vol. 25, No. 8, August 2010 Moayed Almobaied is an assistant professor of electrical Engineering at Islamic University of Gaza –Palestine. He [5] MITCHESON, P. D. ‒ GREEN, T. C. ‒ YEATMAN, received his B.Sc and M.Sc degrees in control Engineering E. M. ‒ HOLMES, A. S.: “Power processing circuits from Islamic university of Gaza in 2001 and 2008, for electromagnetic, electrostatic and piezoelectric respectively. In 2017, he received the Ph.D. in control and inertial energy scavengers,” Microsystem automation systems from Istanbul Technical university- Technologies, May 2007, pp. 1629–1635. ITU have several fellowships including YTB and DAAD. His current research interests include Robust control, [6] WANG, H. ‒ BRIDGELESS, A.: Boost Rectifier for Optimal control, Designing of modern control systems, Low-Voltage Energy Harvesting Applications” IEEE Nonlinear Control systems, and Robotics. Transactions On Power Electronics, Vol. 28, No. 11, November 2013. Ahmed Mosa Musleh was born in Palestine, Rafah on [7] HART, D. W.: Power electronics Book” Valparaiso 1987. He received the B.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees from University Valparaiso, Indiana 2011. Islamic University of Gaza, in 2011 and 2021, respectively he is currently working at Gaza Electricity Distribution [8] GULDEMIR, H.: “Sliding Mode Control of Dc-Dc Company “GEDCO” as Electrical Engineer in the SCADA Boost Converter” Journal of Applied Sciences, March department. His research interests include power electronic application in renewable energy systems, energy management for microgrids, modelling and control of [9] “TPS61023 3.7-A Boost Converter with 0.5-V Ultra- power electronic systems, microgrids, smart grid. low Input Voltage” LVSF14B – September 2019 – ISSN 1335-8243 (print) ISSN 1338-3957 (online), www.aei.tuke.sk

Journal

Acta Electrotechnica et Informaticade Gruyter

Published: Dec 1, 2022

Keywords: AC/DC converters; Boost converter; Buck-Boost converter; Energy harvesting; Sliding mode Controller (SMC); Propotional-Integral controller PI

There are no references for this article.