Virtual Flux Control Methods for Grid-Forming Converters: A Four-Method Comparison
The increasing penetration of renewable energy generation in recent years has introduced significant changes and challenges to modern power systems. One of the most critical challenges is the reduction in system inertia, which decreases grid stability and subsequently weakens the electrical network....
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2025-05-01
|
| Series: | Applied Sciences |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/15/9/5157 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850278499419422720 |
|---|---|
| author | Juan Dolado Fernández Joaquín Eloy-García Santiago Arnaltes Gómez Samir Kouro Hugues Renaudineau José Luis Rodríguez Amenedo |
| author_facet | Juan Dolado Fernández Joaquín Eloy-García Santiago Arnaltes Gómez Samir Kouro Hugues Renaudineau José Luis Rodríguez Amenedo |
| author_sort | Juan Dolado Fernández |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The increasing penetration of renewable energy generation in recent years has introduced significant changes and challenges to modern power systems. One of the most critical challenges is the reduction in system inertia, which decreases grid stability and subsequently weakens the electrical network. To address this issue, grid-forming (GFM) converters have emerged as a promising solution to maintain stability in weak grids. This paper proposes three novel control schemes for GFM converters and compares them with the performance of another topology recently published by the same authors. The four evaluated control schemes are based on the virtual flux variable which allows current limiting without using internal current loops, improving the stability of the control system. The assessment includes methods based on PI regulators, using the mathematical flatness property of differential algebra, direct control (DC), and model predictive control (MPC). The results demonstrate the robustness and correct operation of all four control strategies as GFM converters. Furthermore, through tests involving disturbances such as frequency variations, voltage sags, phase jumps, and transitions to islanded mode, their differences in terms of dynamic response, switching frequency, and current quality are clearly evidenced. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-6bc9627399d348c2aeea1f7606abc501 |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 2076-3417 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-05-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Applied Sciences |
| spelling | doaj-art-6bc9627399d348c2aeea1f7606abc5012025-08-20T01:49:28ZengMDPI AGApplied Sciences2076-34172025-05-01159515710.3390/app15095157Virtual Flux Control Methods for Grid-Forming Converters: A Four-Method ComparisonJuan Dolado Fernández0Joaquín Eloy-García1Santiago Arnaltes Gómez2Samir Kouro3Hugues Renaudineau4José Luis Rodríguez Amenedo5Electrical Engineering Department, University CARLOS III of Madrid, Leganés, 28911 Madrid, SpainIngenia Power Solutions SL, Alcobendas, 28918 Madrid, SpainElectrical Engineering Department, University CARLOS III of Madrid, Leganés, 28911 Madrid, SpainDepartment of Electronic Engineering, Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria, Valparaíso 2390123, ChileCenter for Energy Transition (CTE), Faculty of Engineering, University San Sebastián, Valdivia 5110693, ChileElectrical Engineering Department, University CARLOS III of Madrid, Leganés, 28911 Madrid, SpainThe increasing penetration of renewable energy generation in recent years has introduced significant changes and challenges to modern power systems. One of the most critical challenges is the reduction in system inertia, which decreases grid stability and subsequently weakens the electrical network. To address this issue, grid-forming (GFM) converters have emerged as a promising solution to maintain stability in weak grids. This paper proposes three novel control schemes for GFM converters and compares them with the performance of another topology recently published by the same authors. The four evaluated control schemes are based on the virtual flux variable which allows current limiting without using internal current loops, improving the stability of the control system. The assessment includes methods based on PI regulators, using the mathematical flatness property of differential algebra, direct control (DC), and model predictive control (MPC). The results demonstrate the robustness and correct operation of all four control strategies as GFM converters. Furthermore, through tests involving disturbances such as frequency variations, voltage sags, phase jumps, and transitions to islanded mode, their differences in terms of dynamic response, switching frequency, and current quality are clearly evidenced.https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/15/9/5157current limiterdirect controlfield-oriented controlflatnessgrid formingmodel predictive control |
| spellingShingle | Juan Dolado Fernández Joaquín Eloy-García Santiago Arnaltes Gómez Samir Kouro Hugues Renaudineau José Luis Rodríguez Amenedo Virtual Flux Control Methods for Grid-Forming Converters: A Four-Method Comparison Applied Sciences current limiter direct control field-oriented control flatness grid forming model predictive control |
| title | Virtual Flux Control Methods for Grid-Forming Converters: A Four-Method Comparison |
| title_full | Virtual Flux Control Methods for Grid-Forming Converters: A Four-Method Comparison |
| title_fullStr | Virtual Flux Control Methods for Grid-Forming Converters: A Four-Method Comparison |
| title_full_unstemmed | Virtual Flux Control Methods for Grid-Forming Converters: A Four-Method Comparison |
| title_short | Virtual Flux Control Methods for Grid-Forming Converters: A Four-Method Comparison |
| title_sort | virtual flux control methods for grid forming converters a four method comparison |
| topic | current limiter direct control field-oriented control flatness grid forming model predictive control |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/15/9/5157 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT juandoladofernandez virtualfluxcontrolmethodsforgridformingconvertersafourmethodcomparison AT joaquineloygarcia virtualfluxcontrolmethodsforgridformingconvertersafourmethodcomparison AT santiagoarnaltesgomez virtualfluxcontrolmethodsforgridformingconvertersafourmethodcomparison AT samirkouro virtualfluxcontrolmethodsforgridformingconvertersafourmethodcomparison AT huguesrenaudineau virtualfluxcontrolmethodsforgridformingconvertersafourmethodcomparison AT joseluisrodriguezamenedo virtualfluxcontrolmethodsforgridformingconvertersafourmethodcomparison |