Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Robust LMI-LQR Control For Dual-Active-Bridge DC-DC Converters With High Parameter Uncertainties
Robust LMI-LQR Control For Dual-Active-Bridge DC-DC Converters With High Parameter Uncertainties
Authorized licensed use limited to: Northwestern University. Downloaded on May 03,2020 at 13:05:41 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
132 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON TRANSPORTATION ELECTRIFICATION, VOL. 6, NO. 1, MARCH 2020
observed in the practical dynamic performance of DAB con- complexity compared with the buck converter since totally
verters considering the devices’ voltage drop, switching tran- eight power devices should be controlled for DAB converters.
sients, dead time, saturation of the duty cycle, minimum phase Thus, the design of LQR controller for DAB converters
shift, and parasitics. becomes difficult. Furthermore, the classical LQR must be
Thus, two-category methods can be adapted to address the improved, especially its dynamic performance considering
nonlinear characteristics. One way is to improve the converter the applications for complicated isolated bidirectional power
model accuracy with the classical linear-average-model-based converters such as DAB converters with complicated circuit
controls. Another way is to propose the optimal control structure and high system uncertainty.
strategies to breakthrough the limitations of the classical The LQR controller is normally derived by a pole placement
control strategies. The former category covers many improved method, solving algebraic Riccati equations, or advanced
modeling methods. For instance, a bilinear discrete-time DAB intelligent optimization techniques. In [32], the weighting
model considering the parasitics and digital control delay was matrices of LQR controller are obtained by the pole placement
built to improve the stability in [16]. A new reduced-order method. In [33], the particle swarm optimization is used
average-value modeling for DAB converters was discussed to search for the best weighting factors in the quadratic
in [17] by considering the conduction losses and transformer cost function of LQR. Besides, the intelligent optimization
power losses. In [18], a discrete-time DAB model was pre- techniques, such as genetic algorithms (GAs), differential
sented by considering the input filter, output filter, and time evolution (DE), imperialist competitive algorithm (ICA), and
delays. The latter category methods include many optimal flower pollination algorithm (FDA), have been discussed for
controls that are able to get rid of the limitation of the classical the LQR controller [34]–[36]. However, these methods show
control strategies. For instance, a reference modification model obvious limitations in the determination key parameters of
with the feedforward control was presented to improve the LQR controller; the pole placement method is based on
transient response of DAB converters in [19]. A feedforward the trial-and-error, which cannot guarantee the optimal per-
with the coefficient optimization was discussed in [20] to formance for different operation conditions. The intelligent
achieve fast regenerative braking for DAB-based ac motor optimization techniques are quite complicated in the opti-
drive system. An active disturbance rejection control (ADRC) mization of weighting matrices. Furthermore, the performance
was discussed in [21], which is regarded as an advanced con- of the conventional LQR controller must be improved by
trol in addressing the disturbances and uncertainty. The sliding considering the uncertain parameter such as the input voltage
mode control in [22] is capable of improving the dynamic or load resistance. Otherwise, the uncertain parameters may
performance and attaining tight output voltage regulation. deteriorate the robustness of the closed-loop system when the
However, the computational burden of these methods is rela- load or input voltage is dramatically changed.
tive high. The predictive current mode controller is proposed Here, an improved LQR control based on linear matrix
to reduce settling time and dc offset current in [23], which is inequalities (LMIs) is presented in this article to address
more targeted on the load variation condition. Combined with the abovementioned concern and optimize the key control
SPS, the virtual current control in [24] and virtual direct power parameters for the DAB converters. In this article, the proposed
control were discussed in [25]. Similarly, combined with TPS, LMI-LQR control can extend to multiple plants by addressing
a power-balancing control was proposed in [26] to improve the the system uncertainty at different operation points and achieve
dynamic performance. Originated from the natural switching robust stability. Besides, the proposed control can cover dif-
surface (NSS) principle, a boundary control was proposed ferent design requirements such as pole placement restrictions
in [27] to achieve fast dynamic response for different transient and enhance the overall control performance. Finally, an LMI-
conditions. Furthermore, the NSS-based boundary control can LQR-based hybrid closed-loop control is implemented with
address the constant power load instability concern for the the output current introduced in the control loop to further
electric vehicle applications [27]. However, these strategies enhance the dynamic performance. The main simulation and
may result in unstable behavior or deteriorated performance experimental results are presented to validate the effectiveness
for large perturbations in the line and load. of the proposed LMI-LQR control.
As one optimal control, linear-quadratic regulator (LQR)
provides good robustness by minimizing a quadratic cost
II. P OLYTOPIC M ODELING OF U NCERTAIN
function or performance indexes such as the settling time,
DAB C ONVERTERS
overshoot during transient, and steady-state error in output
voltage of the buck converter with physical constraints such The operations of DAB converters are analyzed here, and
as the phase and gain margins and bandwidth [28]. Similar the polytopic model of an uncertain DAB converter is intro-
research works can be found and their results show that the duced according to the simplified equivalent circuit. The
LQR method can improve the dynamic response of dc–dc resistive load will be discussed here, the same as the research
converters with less response time, smaller overshot voltage, in [14] and [28]. For other types of loads such as inductive
and reduced transient power losses [28]–[31]. However, these load, a similar analysis can be made accordingly, which will
research works are mainly focused on nonisolated dc–dc be not discussed due to the limited space. The diagram
converters with one power device, such as the single-ended of DAB converters is shown in Fig. 2, which consists of
primary inductor converter (SEPIC), buck converter, or boost two symmetrical switching bridges connected through the
converter. However, the DAB converter shows higher control auxiliary inductor L and transformer. The typical operation
Authorized licensed use limited to: Northwestern University. Downloaded on May 03,2020 at 13:05:41 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
XIA et al.: ROBUST LMI-LQR CONTROL FOR DAB DC–DC CONVERTERS WITH HIGH PARAMETER UNCERTAINTIES 133
Authorized licensed use limited to: Northwestern University. Downloaded on May 03,2020 at 13:05:41 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
134 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON TRANSPORTATION ELECTRIFICATION, VOL. 6, NO. 1, MARCH 2020
where Ve and De represent the dc component of the reference where G k is a known matrix, composed by [ Ak , Bk ], and λk
output voltage and phase-shift duty cycle, respectively, and is the uncertain parameter.
ṽ 0 and d̃ represent the ac component of the output volt- In the DAB converter, two major uncertain elements are
age and phase shift, respectively. Combining (9) with (10), considered, which are the input voltage V1 and load R L .
the small-signal model of DAB converters can be obtained as Other elements in the DAB converter are assumed to be
d(ṽ 0 ) ṽ 0 N V1 N V1 2 clarified. Thus, n p = 2 and parameter vector p = [1/R, V1 ].
=− + (1 + 2De )d̃ − d̃ . (11) Furthermore, these two parameters are limited within the
dt RC0 2LC0 f s 2LC0 f s
following boundaries:
Since the ac component of phase shift d̃ is much smaller
1/R ∈ [1/Rmax , 1/Rmin ] , V1 ∈ [V1 min , V1 max ] . (17)
than the reference phase shift De , (1 + 2De )d̃ is much larger
than d̃ 2 . Thus, the square of ac component d̃ 2 can be omitted The defined polytopic model has NT = 2n p vertices that
so that the small-signal model can be simplified as contain all possible values of uncertain matrices, and the
d(ṽ 0 ) ṽ 0 N V1 vertices (boundaries) can be described as follows:
=− + (1 + 2De ) d̃. (12) ⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
dt RC0 2LC0 fs 1 N V1 min
− 0 (1 + 2D )
In order to achieve the zero steady-state error, a state A1 = ⎣ Rmax C0 ⎦ B1 = ⎣ 2LC0 f s e ⎦
−1
˜ = − v˜0 dt is introduced, which stands for the
variable x(t) 0 0
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
integral of output voltage error. Thus 1 N V1 max
− 0⎦ (1 + 2De )⎦
A2 = ⎣ Rmin C0 B2 = ⎣ 2LC0 f s
x 1 (t) ṽ 0 −1
x(t) = = . (13) 0 0
x 2 (t) − ṽ 0 dt
A 3 = A 2 B3 = B1
Combining the output voltage expression (12) and the small A 4 = A 1 B4 = B1 . (18)
signal of DAB (9), the following differential equation can be
obtained as: This model will be used in Section III to build an LQR
controller for DAB converters and limit the upper or lower
ẋ 1 (t)
ẋ(t) = = Ax(t) + Bd(t) (14) band of LQR controller. If all the uncertainty was bounded
ẋ 2 (t)
within the vertices of this polytopic model, the system stability
where A and B are the state-space matrices that can be can be guaranteed with the LQR controller.
expressed by
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
1 N V1 III. P ROPOSED LMI-LQR C ONTROL
− 0 (1 + 2D )
A = ⎣ RC0 ⎦ B = ⎣ 2LC0 f s e ⎦
. (15) In this section, the principle of LMI is introduced, and
−1 0 0 then, the LQR controller is formulated into the form of LMI.
Because the state-space matrices A and B affect the Finally, an optimal LMI-LQR algorithm is presented for the
dynamic response of DAB converters, it is important to DAB converter.
analyze the characteristics of A and B in the design of
the closed-loop controller. For a designed DAB prototype, A. Quadratic Stability of an Uncertain Plant
normally, these parameters, such as L, C0 , f s , and N, can be Given a linear time-invariant system with the expression as
regarded constant, while the load resistance R and the input
voltage V1 are uncertain, which will change with respect to ẋ = Ax + Bu. (19)
the transmission power and the voltage conversion ratio.
By introducing a state-feedback gain K with the expression
Thus, the state-space matrices A and B will be influenced by
uncertain variables, including the load or input disturbances. of “u = −K x” into the transfer function (19), the state
Here, a vector p is introduced by grouping all these uncertain function of the closed-loop control system can be expressed as
terms altogether, p = ( p1, p2 , . . . , pn p ). Each uncertain term ẋ = Ax + Bu = (A − B K )x. (20)
pi will be constrained between the minimum value pmin and
the maximum value pmax . According to the Lyapunov theory, there exists a matrix P
Generally, the possible values within vector p are bounded with the quadratic function as
within a hyperrectangular with NT = 2n p vertices in the V (x) = x T Px > 0 ∀x = 0. (21)
parameter space Rn p . The system matrices A and B for
each vertex in this hyperrectangular correspond to the set Furthermore, the necessary and sufficient condition that
{G 1 , . . . , G k }, which is a polytopic model, and this model can assure the system quadratically stable is to satisfy the
will be convexly combined by matrices finite vertices with inequality as
their values determined by the matrix polytopic model. Thus
V̇ (x) = x T ((A − B K )x)T Px + x T P((A − B K )x))
[ A( p), B( p)] ∈ Co{G 1 , . . . , G n } = x T ((A − B K )T P + P(A − B K )x) > 0 ∀x = 0
NT
NT
(22)
:= λi G i , λi ≥ 0, λi = 1 (16)
i=1 i=1 P > 0 indicates that the matrix P is positive definite.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Northwestern University. Downloaded on May 03,2020 at 13:05:41 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
XIA et al.: ROBUST LMI-LQR CONTROL FOR DAB DC–DC CONVERTERS WITH HIGH PARAMETER UNCERTAINTIES 135
Assume that there is a matrix P > 0 that satisfies the such that
following expression:
AP + PA T + BY + Y T B T + x˜0 x˜0 T < 0. (28)
V̇ (x) = x ((Ai + Bi K ) P + P(Ai + Bi K ))x > 0
T T
Now, the inequality in (28) is homogeneous. Furthermore,
∀x = 0 ∀i = 1, 2, . . . , N (23) K = Y P−1 will not change with u. Therefore, if matrix A x̃ 0
where Ai is the vertex of the polytopic model as analyzed in is controllable, LMI can be expressed as
Section II. Therefore, expression (23) can be used to judge AP + PA T + BY + Y T B T + I < 0. (29)
whether the system within this uncertain range are quadrat-
ically stable or not. In another way, an appropriate matrix Thus, when u > 0, for arbitrary matrices P and Y that
variable P should be determined in order to guarantee the satisfy (28), both uP and uY can automatically fulfill (29).
quadratic stability of the system. Since the variables discussed Here, a second auxiliary variable X is introduced so that the
nonlinear term Tr(Rw Y P−1 Y T Rw ) can be replaced, while
1/2 1/2
in this article are linearly correlated, they can be solved by the
convex optimization. Schur’s complement can be used to simplify the inequality
constraint. Then, one target of performance index can be
rewritten as
B. LMI Derivation min X
For the system described by (14), an LMI formulation X
solution for LQR problem can be adopted. In order to evaluate such that
⎡ ⎤
the quadratic stability of proposed linear system with the 1 1
1
2
X Rw Y ⎦
closed-loop control (20), a quadratic cost function can be X > Rw Y P−1 Y T Rw ↔ ⎣
2 2
1 > 0. (30)
expressed as Y T Rw2 P
∞
As a result, the complete LMI formulation of this LQR
J= (x̃ T (Q w + K T Rw K )x̃)dt (24)
0 problem can be expressed as
where Q w is a symmetric semidefinite matrix, Rw is a min Tr (Q w P) + Tr (X)
symmetric definite matrix, and K is state-feedback gain of P,Y,X
closed control system. Besides, [ A Bu ] must be controllable. subject to
Thus, LQR can be considered as the weighted minimization
AP + PA T + ⎡
BY + Y T B T +⎤I < 0
process for a linear combination of the state variable x̃ and 1
input variable ũ. The weighted matrix Q w describes which X R 2
w Y⎦
⎣ 1 > 0, P > 0. (31)
state variable has to be controlled more strictly than others, T 2
Y Rw P
and this matrix can be a diagonal matrix with each weighted
value decided by the importance of matching physical state Once the solution is obtained from this minimizing process,
value [28]. The matrix Rw determines the actual control the optimal LQR controller can determine K from K = Y P −1 .
behavior, which is mainly dependent on the state deviation. Thus, the LQR control can be formulated as the process in
In order to find the state-feedback gain K in (24), there solving a convex optimal problem.
should be a matrix P that can ensure the following condition: According to the polytopic model of DAB converters and
d T combining (18) with (31), the complete LMI formulation of
(x Px) = −x̃ T (Q w + K T Rw K )x̃. (25) this LQR controller can be obtained as
dt
min Tr(Q w P) + Tr(X)
P,K ,X
Now, a trace operator Tr(·) is introduced, which is the
sum of all elements on the main diagonal of an n × n subject to
matrix. This trace operator satisfies a T Xb = Tr(Xba)T , A1 P + PA1T + B1 Y + Y T B1T + I < 0
and then, the performance index with closed-loop control is
equivalent to A2 P + PA2T + B2 Y + Y T B2T + I < 0
A3 P + PA3T + B3 Y + Y T B3T + I < 0
J = Tr((Q w + K T Rw K )P) (26)
∞ A4 P + PA4T + B4 Y + Y T B4T + I < 0
⎡ ⎤
where matrix P = 0 (x̃ x̃ T )dt is positive definite, and 1
2
satisfies ⎣ X R w Y ⎦ > 0, P > 0.
1 (32)
T Y Rw2 P
(A + B K )P + P(A + B K ) + x˜0 x˜0 = 0
T
(27)
According to the expressions of the LMI solution for LQR
where x˜0 is the initial value of state variable x˜i . In order to controller shown in (31) and (32), the optimal feedback gain
eliminate the multiplication term of K P, the positively defined K for DAB converters must be determined by considering
matrix Y = K P is introduced. Then, the optimal feedback gain high system uncertainty, especially the input voltage V1 and
K can be found by minimizing the following expression: the load resistance R. Thus, in order to enhance the robustness
1 1
performance, the parameters’ uncertainty, including the input
min Tr(Q w P) + Tr Rw2 Y P−1 Y Rw2
P,Y voltage V1 and the load resistance R, must be restricted by
Authorized licensed use limited to: Northwestern University. Downloaded on May 03,2020 at 13:05:41 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
136 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON TRANSPORTATION ELECTRIFICATION, VOL. 6, NO. 1, MARCH 2020
the polytopic model through A1 – A4 and B1 –B4 . Section III-C Fig. 6. Diagram of the dual-PI LMI-LQR closed-loop control for DAB
demonstrates three controller designs based on parameters converters.
proposed by LMI-LQR in order to find the most sufficient
control. The detailed calculation of K will be discussed in
Section III-D.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Northwestern University. Downloaded on May 03,2020 at 13:05:41 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
XIA et al.: ROBUST LMI-LQR CONTROL FOR DAB DC–DC CONVERTERS WITH HIGH PARAMETER UNCERTAINTIES 137
TABLE I
DAB C ONVERTER PARAMETERS
Authorized licensed use limited to: Northwestern University. Downloaded on May 03,2020 at 13:05:41 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
138 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON TRANSPORTATION ELECTRIFICATION, VOL. 6, NO. 1, MARCH 2020
Fig. 11. Various closed-loop control scheme with LMI-LQR controller under
load step change from 20 to 60 at t = 0.01 s, and back to 20 at t = 0.06 s:
the proposed LMI-LQR closed-loop control (red line), the single-PI LMI-LQR
closed-loop control (green line), and the dual-PI LMI-LQR closed-loop control
(blue line).
Authorized licensed use limited to: Northwestern University. Downloaded on May 03,2020 at 13:05:41 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
XIA et al.: ROBUST LMI-LQR CONTROL FOR DAB DC–DC CONVERTERS WITH HIGH PARAMETER UNCERTAINTIES 139
Authorized licensed use limited to: Northwestern University. Downloaded on May 03,2020 at 13:05:41 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
140 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON TRANSPORTATION ELECTRIFICATION, VOL. 6, NO. 1, MARCH 2020
TABLE II
C OMPARISON OF C ALCULATION B URDEN
Authorized licensed use limited to: Northwestern University. Downloaded on May 03,2020 at 13:05:41 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
XIA et al.: ROBUST LMI-LQR CONTROL FOR DAB DC–DC CONVERTERS WITH HIGH PARAMETER UNCERTAINTIES 141
Authorized licensed use limited to: Northwestern University. Downloaded on May 03,2020 at 13:05:41 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
142 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON TRANSPORTATION ELECTRIFICATION, VOL. 6, NO. 1, MARCH 2020
Fig. 17. Start-up process of DAB converters under (a) conventional LQR
controller and (b) proposed LMI-LQR controller.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Northwestern University. Downloaded on May 03,2020 at 13:05:41 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
XIA et al.: ROBUST LMI-LQR CONTROL FOR DAB DC–DC CONVERTERS WITH HIGH PARAMETER UNCERTAINTIES 143
VI. C ONCLUSION
A novel approach for controlling bidirectional isolated DAB
converters digitally using state-feedback techniques and LMI
technique has been proposed. According to the simplified DAB
equivalent circuit, the polytopic model is introduced, which
can consider the parameter uncertainty, whereas the LMI tech-
nique can guarantee the system robust stability. Consequently,
an LMI-LQR-based hybrid control is derived with the output
current introduced in the closed-loop control to enhance the
dynamic performance. Three LMI-LQR closed-loop controls
for DAB converters have been discussed, including the conven-
tional single-PI LMI-LQR control, dual-PI LMI-LQR control,
and the proposed LMI-LQR control. Different dynamic scenar-
ios, including the load step change, input-voltage step change,
start-up process, and the output reference voltage change, are
considered to evaluate the performance improvement of the
proposed LMI-LQR control. Both simulation and experimental
results under various scenarios are presented to validate the
advantages of the proposed control in terms of the fast tran-
sient response and system robustness stability improvement
under various load and line disturbances.
As an advanced mathematical tool that recently emerged
Fig. 19. Main experimental results under (a) conventional LQR control when as an effective method in convex optimization, with the
the input step changes from 75 to 50 V and (b) proposed LMI-LQR control introduction of LMI in the conventional linear control LQR,
when the input step changes from 75 to 50 V.
the proposed algorithm shows obvious advantages that can be
summarized as: 1) improved system stability and robustness
with fewer oscillations; 2) easy implementation for system per-
formance optimization by incorporating several performance
indices with some constraints through LMI formula; and
3) high capability in dealing with system uncertainty through
building polytopic model of uncertainty circuit. Although
this article is mainly focused on the SPS-based LMI-LQR
control optimization, the proposed LMI-LQR closed-loop
control is universal and can be easily extended to the
multiple-phase-shift (MPS) control in order to improve the
power conversion efficiency and simultaneously the dynamic
performance.
R EFERENCES
[1] T. LaBella, W. Yu, J.-S. Lai, M. Senesky, and D. Anderson,
“A bidirectional-switch-based wide-input range high-efficiency isolated
resonant converter for photovoltaic applications,” IEEE Trans. Power
Electron., vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 3473–3484, Jul. 2014.
[2] H. Wen, W. Xiao, and B. Su, “Nonactive power loss minimization in a
bidirectional isolated DC–DC converter for distributed power systems,”
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 61, no. 12, pp. 6822–6831, Dec. 2014.
[3] J.-W. Yang and H.-L. Do, “Soft-switching dual-flyback DC–DC con-
verter with improved efficiency and reduced output ripple current,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 64, no. 5, pp. 3587–3594, May 2017.
[4] D. Murthy-Bellur and M. K. Kazimierczuk, “Isolated two-transistor zeta
converter with reduced transistor voltage stress,” IEEE Trans. Circuits
Fig. 20. Experimental comparison when the output reference voltage Ve Syst. II, Exp. Briefs, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 41–45, Jan. 2011.
changes from 50 to 40 V. (a) Conventional LQR controller. (b) Proposed [5] F. Zhang and Y. Yan, “Novel forward–flyback hybrid bidirectional
LMI-LQR controller. DC–DC converter,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56, no. 5,
pp. 1578–1584, May 2009.
[6] Z. Zhang, O. C. Thomsen, and M. A. E. Andersen, “Optimal design of a
push-pull-forward half-bridge (PPFHB) bidirectional DC–DC converter
with variable input voltage,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 59, no. 7,
fewer oscillations within 0.01 s. It indicates that the proposed pp. 2761–2771, Jul. 2012.
[7] B. Han, C. Bai, J. S. Lee, and M. Kim, “Repetitive controller of
LMI-LQR controller has better dynamic performance than capacitor-less current-fed dual-half-bridge converter for grid-connected
the conventional LQR controller under the reference voltage fuel cell system,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 65, no. 10,
step-down change condition. pp. 7841–7855, Oct. 2018.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Northwestern University. Downloaded on May 03,2020 at 13:05:41 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
144 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON TRANSPORTATION ELECTRIFICATION, VOL. 6, NO. 1, MARCH 2020
[8] H. Wen, B. Su, and W. Xiao, “Design and performance evaluation of a [28] C. Olalla, R. Leyva, A. El Aroudi, and I. Queinnec, “Robust LQR control
bidirectional isolated DC–DC converter with extended dual-phase-shift for PWM converters: An LMI approach,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
scheme,” IET Power Electron., vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 914–924, May 2013. vol. 56, no. 7, pp. 2548–2558, Jul. 2009.
[9] H. Shi et al., “Minimum-backflow-power scheme of DAB-based solid- [29] A. Sel, U. Gunes, O. Elbir, and C. Kasnakoglu, “Comparative analysis
state transformer with extended-phase-shift control,” IEEE Trans. Ind. of performance of the SEPIC converter using LQR and PID controllers,”
Appl., vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 3483–3496, Jul. 2018. in Proc. 21st Int. Conf. Syst. Theory, Control Comput. (ICSTCC),
[10] H. van Hoek, M. Neubert, and R. W. De Doncker, “Enhanced modulation Oct. 2017, pp. 839–844.
strategy for a three-phase dual active bridge—Boosting efficiency of an [30] A. Deihimi and M. E. S. Mahmoodieh, “Analysis and control of battery-
electric vehicle converter,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 28, no. 12, integrated DC/DC converters for renewable energy applications,” IET
pp. 5499–5507, Dec. 2013. Power Electron., vol. 10, no. 14, pp. 1819–1831, Nov. 2017.
[11] Q. Ye, R. Mo, and H. Li, “Low-frequency resonance suppression of [31] D. O. Neacsu and A. Sirbu, “Energy savings with LQR control of
a dual-active-bridge DC/DC converter enabled DC microgrid,” IEEE DC/DC converters,” in Proc. 44th Annu. Conf. IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc.
J. Emerg. Sel. Topics Power Electron., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 982–994, (IECON), Oct. 2018, pp. 1198–1203.
Sep. 2017. [32] S. A. Lindiya, K. Vijayarekha, and S. Palani, “Deterministic LQR
[12] A. Rodriguez, A. Vazquez, D. G. Lamar, M. M. Hernando, and controller for DC–DC buck converter,” in Proc. Biennial Int. Conf.
J. Sebastian, “Different purpose design strategies and techniques to Power Energy Syst., Towards Sustain. Energy (PESTSE), Jan. 2016,
improve the performance of a dual active bridge with phase-shift pp. 1–6.
control,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 790–804, [33] B. Ufnalski, A. Kaszewski, and L. M. Grzesiak, “Particle swarm
Feb. 2015. optimization of the multioscillatory LQR for a three-phase four-wire
voltage-source inverter with an LC output filter,” IEEE Trans. Ind.
[13] X. Liu et al., “Novel dual-phase-shift control with bidirectional inner
Electron., vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 484–493, Jan. 2015.
phase shifts for a dual-active-bridge converter having low surge current
[34] J. V. Fonseca, I. S. Abreu, P. H. M. Rego, M. D. P. M. Wolff,
and stable power control,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 32, no. 5,
and O. F. Silva, “A genetic algorithm convergence and models for
pp. 4095–4106, May 2017.
eigenstructure assignment via linear quadratic regulator (LQR),” IEEE
[14] B. Zhao, Q. Yu, and W. Sun, “Extended-phase-shift control of isolated Latin Amer. Trans., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–9, Mar. 2008.
bidirectional DC–DC converter for power distribution in microgrid,” [35] H. Asadi, S. Mohamed, C. P. Lim, and S. Nahavandi, “Robust optimal
IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 27, no. 11, pp. 4667–4680, Nov. 2012. motion cueing algorithm based on the linear quadratic regulator method
[15] K. Wu, C. W. de Silva, and W. G. Dunford, “Stability analysis of and a genetic algorithm,” IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern., Syst., vol. 47,
isolated bidirectional dual active full-bridge DC–DC converter with no. 2, pp. 238–254, Feb. 2017.
triple phase-shift control,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 27, no. 4, [36] T. Tarczewski, L. J. Niewiara, and L. M. Grzesiak, “An application of
pp. 2007–2017, Sep. 2012. flower pollination algorithm to auto-tuning of linear-quadratic regulator
[16] L. Shi, W. Lei, Z. Li, J. Huang, Y. Cui, and Y. Wang, “Bilinear discrete- for dc-dc power converter,” in Proc. 20th Eur. Conf. Power Electron.
time modeling and stability analysis of the digitally controlled dual Appl. (EPE ECCE Europe), Sep. 2018, pp. P.1–P.8.
active bridge converter,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 32, no. 11, [37] A. Özdemir and Z. Erdem, “Double-loop PI controller design of the
pp. 8787–8799, Nov. 2017. DC–DC boost converter with a proposed approach for calculation of
[17] K. Zhang, Z. Shan, and J. Jatskevich, “Large- and small-signal the controller parameters,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., I, J. Syst. Control
average-value modeling of dual-active-bridge DC–DC converter con- Eng., vol. 232, no. 2, pp. 137–148, Nov. 2017.
sidering power losses,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 32, no. 3,
pp. 1964–1974, Mar. 2017.
[18] F. Krismer and J. W. Kolar, “Accurate small-signal model for the digital
control of an automotive bidirectional dual active bridge,” IEEE Trans.
Power Electron., vol. 24, no. 12, pp. 2756–2768, Dec. 2009.
[19] F. Kurokawa, A. Yamanishi, and S. Hirotaki, “A reference modifi-
cation model digitally controlled DC–DC converter for improvement
of transient response,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 31, no. 1,
pp. 871–883, Jan. 2016.
Peizhou Xia was born in Chengdu, China, in 1996.
[20] D. Sha, J. Zhang, X. Wang, and W. Yuan, “Dynamic response He received the B.E. degree in electrical engineering
improvements of parallel-connected bidirectional DC–DC converters for from the Department of Electrical and Electronic
electrical drive powered by low-voltage battery employing optimized Engineering, Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University,
feedforward control,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 32, no. 10, Suzhou, China, in 2018, and the M.S. degree in
pp. 7783–7794, Oct. 2017. electrical power engineering from the Department
[21] J. Yang, H. Cui, S. Li, and A. Zolotas, “Optimized active disturbance of Engineering, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh,
rejection control for DC–DC buck converters with uncertainties using a U.K., in 2019.
reduced-order GPI observer,” IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I, Reg. Papers, His current research interests include bidirectional
vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 832–841, Feb. 2018. dc–dc converters, power electronics, and renewable
[22] S. Zou, S. Zheng, and M. Chinthavali, “Design, analyses and validation power conversion systems.
of sliding mode control for a DAB DC–DC converter,” in Proc. IEEE
Transp. Electrific. Conf. Expo (ITEC), Jun. 2019, pp. 1–6.
[23] S. Dutta, S. Hazra, and S. Bhattacharya, “A digital predictive current-
mode controller for a single-phase high-frequency transformer-isolated
dual-active bridge DC-to-DC converter,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
vol. 63, no. 9, pp. 5943–5952, Sep. 2016.
[24] X. Gao, L. Fu, F. Ji, and Y. Wu, “Virtual current based direct power
control strategy of dual-active-bridge DC–DC converter,” in Proc. IEEE
Int. Conf. Mechatronics Autom. (ICMA), Aug. 2019, pp. 1947–1952. Haochen Shi (Student Member, IEEE) was born
[25] W. Song, N. Hou, and M. Wu, “Virtual direct power control scheme of in Hubei, China, in 1992. He received the B.S.
dual active bridge DC–DC converters for fast dynamic response,” IEEE degree from the Department of Electrical Engi-
Trans. Power Electron., vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 1750–1759, Feb. 2018. neering, China Three Gorge University, Yichang,
[26] N. Hou, W. Song, Y. Li, Y. Zhu, and Y. Zhu, “A comprehensive China, in 2014, and the M.Eng. degree from the
optimization control of dual-active-bridge DC–DC converters based on Department of Electrical Engineering, University of
unified-phase-shift and power-balancing scheme,” IEEE Trans. Power Leicester, Leicester, U.K., in 2015. He is currently
Electron., vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 826–839, Jan. 2019. pursuing the Ph.D. degree with the University of
[27] G. G. Oggier, M. Ordonez, J. M. Galvez, and F. Luchino, “Fast transient Liverpool, U.K.
boundary control and steady-state operation of the dual active bridge His current research interests include bidirectional
converter using the natural switching surface,” IEEE Trans. Power dc–dc converter, electrical vehicles, and renewable
Electron., vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 946–957, Feb. 2014. power conversion systems.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Northwestern University. Downloaded on May 03,2020 at 13:05:41 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
XIA et al.: ROBUST LMI-LQR CONTROL FOR DAB DC–DC CONVERTERS WITH HIGH PARAMETER UNCERTAINTIES 145
Huiqing Wen (Senior Member, IEEE) received the Yihua Hu (Senior Member, IEEE) received the B.S.
B.S. and M.S. degrees in electrical engineering from degree in electrical engineering and the Ph.D. degree
Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China, in 2002 and in power electronics and drives from the China Uni-
2006, respectively, and the Ph.D. degree in electrical versity of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou, China,
engineering from the Chinese Academy of Sciences, in 2003 and 2011, respectively.
Beijing, China, in 2009. From 2011 to 2013, he was with the Col-
From 2009 to 2010, he was an Electrical Engineer lege of Electrical Engineering, Zhejiang University,
with GE (China) Research and Development Center Hangzhou, China, as a Post-Doctoral Fellow. From
Company, Ltd., Shanghai, China. From 2010 to 2013 to 2015, he worked as a Research Asso-
2011, he was an Engineer with the China Coal ciate with the Power Electronics and Motor Drive
Research Institute, Beijing. From 2011 to 2012, Group, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, U.K.
he was a Post-Doctoral Fellow with the Masdar Institute of Science and From 2016 to 2019, he was a Lecturer with the Department of Electrical
Technology, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. In 2013, he joined the Engineering and Electronics, University of Liverpool (UoL), Liverpool, U.K.
Electrical and Electronic Engineering Department, Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool He is currently a Reader with the Electronics Engineering Department, Uni-
University (XJTLU), Suzhou, China. He is currently an Associate Professor versity of York (UoY), York, U.K. He has published 100 articles in the IEEE
with XJTLU. He has published more than 50 peer-reviewed technical articles T RANSACTIONS journals. His research interests include renewable generation,
in leading journals. His research interests include renewable energy, electric power electronics converters and control, electric vehicle, more electric
vehicle, power electronics, microgrid, and power semiconductor devices. ship/aircraft, smart energy systems, and nondestructive test technology.
Dr. Wen is also an Associate Editor of IEEE A CCESS , the International Dr. Hu is also an Associate Editor of the IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON I NDUS -
Journal of Photoenergy, and Journal of Power Electronics. TRIAL E LECTRONICS , IET Renewable Power Generation, IET Intelligent
Transport Systems, and Power Electronics and Drives.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Northwestern University. Downloaded on May 03,2020 at 13:05:41 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.