Cost-Function based Predictive Voltage Control of
Two-Level Four-Leg Inverters using Two Step
Prediction Horizon for Standalone Power Systems
V. Yaramasu and B. Wu
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Ryerson University
Toronto, ON M5B 2K3 Canada
Email: vyaramas@ee.ryerson.ca
Abstract—This paper presents a cost-function based predictive
voltage control strategy with a prediction horizon of two samples
to effectively control the output voltage of three-phase four-
leg inverter used for the standalone power systems. The three-
phase inverter with an additional leg is developed to deliver
symmetrical sinusoidal three-phase voltages irrespective of the
arbitrary consumer load profiles. The proposed controller uses
the discrete model of the inverter and RLC filter for two-
step prediction of output voltage for each switching state of
the inverter. The control method chooses a switching state that
minimizes the error between the output voltage and its reference.
The proposed controller offers an excellent reference tracking
with less voltage harmonic distortion for balanced, unbalanced
and nonlinear loading conditions. The feasibility of the proposed
control scheme has been verified by MATLAB/Simulink.
I. I NTRODUCTION
The standalone power systems are an alternative solution to
power-up remotely located consumers where the expansion of
electrical grid is prohibitive and expensive. The hybrid power
system combines two or more power generation units such
as photovoltaic (PV), solar thermal, wind energy conversion
system (WECS), mini/micro hydro, fuel-cell and biomass and
so on to overcome inherent limitations in either; and two
or more energy storage systems such as battery banks and
flywheel to provide continuous and high-quality energy flow
to the consumers [1]. The load could be a single home or
several homes or large communities or islands. The other
examples of standalone systems include satellite earth stations;
broadcasting stations; military, medical and telecommunica-
tion equipments; aircraft and ship power supply networks;
and large scale computer systems. The voltage source inverter
in standalone power system needs to provide symmetrical
and robust three-phase sinusoidal voltages irrespective of the
arbitrary consumer load profiles. In order to supply such loads,
a three-phase four-wire system is used with the neutral point
accomplished by an additional transformer or by the inverter.
The three-phase inverter with an additional fourth (neutral)
leg and output RLC filter is proved to be the best candidate
to provide transformerless neutral connection and symmetrical
sinusoidal voltages to the loads [2]–[5].
M. Rivera, J. Rodriguez and A. Wilson
Department of Electronics Engineering
Universidad Técnica Federico Santa Marı́a
Valparaı́so, 2390123 Chile
Email: Marco.Rivera@usm.cl
Three different output variables for four-leg converter such
as voltage, current or power can be controlled depending upon
the application. The current and power control techniques
are used for grid connected distributed generation [6], active
power filters [7], [8], active front-end rectifiers [9] and control
of two or more motors from an inverter [10]. The voltage
control technique is used for standalone distributed generation
[11], uninterruptible power supplies (UPS) [12] and dynamic
voltage regulators [13]. The voltage control using hysteresis
regulators [14]; open-loop feed forward controllers [15]; linear
PID controllers in stationary (αβ0) [16], synchronous (qd0)
[17], [18] and natural (abcn) [3] reference frame with external
voltage and internal current control loops; and pole placement
controllers [19], [20] are being analyzed before. The tuning of
PI controller is a trade-off between robustness and transient
performance and is very empirical. All these abstruse voltage
control techniques use even more complicated modulation
stage in order to generate switching signals for the inverter.
Various carrier-less modulation schemes such as hysteresis
[21], [22], flux vector [23] and selective harmonic elimination
(SHE) [24]; and carried-based sinusoidal pulse width modula-
tion (SPWM) [4], [5], [25]–[27] and three-dimensional space
vector modulation (3D-SVM) [28]–[31] methods are analyzed
before. The hysteresis and flux vector techniques use compli-
cated switching tables. The calculation of switching angles and
their digital implementation for SHE is quite complex. Com-
pared to the SPWM, 3D-SVM offers many advantages: good
dc-link utilization, lower switching frequency and minimum
output distortion [28]. Despite its benefits, the 3D-SVM is very
complicated, time consuming and non-intuitive for software
and hardware implementation [26], [32].
The cost-function based finite control set model predictive
control (FCS-MPC) has found recent application in power
electronics [33], [34]. This method appears as an attractive
alternative to the classical control methods, due to its sim-
ple concept, fast dynamic response, and easy inclusion of
nonlinearities & constraints in the design of controller [35].
Moreover, this scheme does not require internal current control
loops and modulators and thus greatly reduces the complexity.
 PV Array DC/DC Converter-1 4L-Inverter AC Filter 3 ∼ Linear
AC PCC
DC PCC 4 4 4

Wind Turbine

PMSG AC/DC Converter-1 DC/DC Converter-2 Battery Banks 1 ∼ Linear

Gear Box
2
+

Flywheel Storage AC/DC Converter-2 DC Loads 3 ∼ Non-Linear

4
+

Figure 1. Standalone hybrid power system with four-leg inverter.

Su Sv Sn AC Filter
Sw

iu Rf Lf iou Unknown Load

u

v
vdc
w
n
Su Sv Sw Sn vou Cf
vnN

Figure 2. Two-level four-leg inverter topology.

This digital control technique has successfully been applied to
a wide range of power converters, drives and energy systems
applications [36]–[48].
The above FCS-MPC methods usually consider one step
horizon due to the reduced number of switching states and
the reduced order of the load models. But in case of complex
systems and special applications such as voltage control in
standalone systems, a higher prediction horizon is necessary
to improve the control performance [33], [49], [50]. The output
voltage control for two- and three-level four-leg inverters using
one step prediction has been analyzed in [51], [52]. In [53]
two-step prediction for three-phase UPS system is presented.
In this paper, the concept of FCS-MPC with two-step
prediction has been extended to four-leg inverter to improve
the output voltage regulation under unbalanced and nonlinear
loading conditions. This controller predicts the behavior of the
output voltage in terms of the measured voltages, currents and
possible switching states of the inverter. The controller then
selects a switching state that minimizes the error between the
measured and desired output voltage.
II. F OUR -L EG I NVERTER M ODEL
The typical standalone hybrid power system which consists
of PV arrays, PMSG WECS, flywheel for short-term energy
storage, battery banks for long-term energy storage, three-
phase four-leg inverter, RLC filter and arbitrary loads is shown
in Fig. 1. The DC/DC converter-1 and AC/DC converter-1
perform maximum power point tracking to extract maximum
possible energy from the sun and wind respectively. The power
generation and storage units provide constant dc-link voltage
to the four-leg inverter. The loads are unknown and can be
of single-phase or three-phase, balanced or unbalanced, linear
or non-linear nature. The power converter topology for four-
leg inverter with output RLC filter is shown in Fig. 2. The
connection format is similar to the conventional three-phase
inverter with fourth leg connected to the neutral point of the
load. As shown in Fig. 3, the fourth leg increases switching
states from 8 (23 ) to 16 (24 ) and thus offers control flexibility
and improved output voltage quality [15].
The voltage in any leg x of the inverter, measured from the
negative point of the dc-link (N ) can be expressed in terms
 1110
III. M ODEL P REDICTIVE VOLTAGE C ONTROL S CHEME
β
γ 1100
α The proposed model predictive voltage control scheme is
0110 shown in Fig. 4. This method uses the inherent discrete nature
of the four-leg inverter and RLC filter to predict the output
0100 1010
voltage vector for a predefined horizon time k + N , in terms
1000 of the measured voltage and current in time k, and selects
a switching state based on the minimization of cost (quality)
0010
function for each sampling time.
1111
0000 A. Discrete-Time Model for Predictive Control
1101 The cost function requires the predicted output voltage
0111 vector vo [k + N ] in discrete-time form. For this reason, the
space-state system in (9) can be represented in discrete-time
0101 1011 as follows:
     
1001 vo [k + N ] vo [k + N − 1] v[k + N − 1]
=Φ +Γ ,
i [k + N ] i [k + N − 1] io [k + N − 1]
0011 0001 (11)
where,
Figure 3. Switching vectors for four-leg inverter in αβγ coordinates.
Φ = eTs A , Γ = A−1 (Φ − I2x2 )B, (12)

of switching states as, by using (10) and (12),

   
vxN = Sx vdc , x = u, v, w, n, φ φ12 1 − cos(q) p sin(q)
(1) Φ = 11 = , (13)
φ21 φ22 (1/p) sin q cos(q)
and hence, the voltage applied to the output RLC filter, in
   
terms of these inverter voltages is: γ γ12 cos(q) −p sin(q)
Γ = 11 = , (14)
γ21 γ22 −(1/p) sin q 1 − cos(q)
vyn = vyN − vnN = (Sy − Sn ) vdc , y = u, v, w. (2)
where,
The differential equations for the output filter, in terms of 
voltage and current vectors is described as follows: Lf Ts
p= , q= . (15)
di Cf Lf Cf
vo = v − Lf − Rf i, (3)
dt
dvo
i = io + Cf , (4) 4L-Inverter AC filter Load
dt i[k] Rf Lf io [k]
where the voltage and current vectors are defined as,
u, v, w
 T
v = vun vvn vwn , (5) vdc [k] vo [k] Cf
 T
io = iou iov iow , (6) n
 T
i = iu iv iw , (7)
 T
vo = vou vov vow . (8) 8 S[k]
Minimization of
The system in (3) and (4) can be represented in space state cost function g vo∗ [k + N ]
form as follows: with (24)
     
v˙o vo v
=A +B , (9)
i̇ i io vo [k + N ] Prediction of vdc [k]
16N
vo [k]
where, output voltage vo
    io [k]
with (11) and (12)
0 1/Cf 0 −1/Cf i[k]
A= , B= . (10)
−1/Lf −Rf /Lf 1/Lf 0
Figure 4. Block diagram of model predictive voltage control scheme for the
four-leg inverter.
B. Two-Step Prediction Horizon C. Minimization of Cost Function
The FCS-MPC with a prediction horizon of N = 1 is used As shown in Fig. 4, the cost function requires output voltage
in many power electronics applications due to the simplified vector vo [k+N ], and the reference voltage vector vo ∗ [k+N ].
mathematical modeling and reduced computational burden To calculate the future reference voltage vector for N step
[34]. For one-step prediction horizon, the discrete-time model prediction model, the Lagrange extrapolation method of order
for predictive control can be expressed as follows using (11): 4 can be used as follows:
     
vo [k + 1] vo [k] v[k] vo ∗ [k + N ] = 4vo ∗ [k + N − 1] − 6vo ∗ [k + N − 2]+
=Φ +Γ , (16) (23)
i [k + 1] i [k] io [k] 4vo ∗ [k + N − 3] − vo ∗ [k + N − 4]
from which, The cost function for N step prediction horizon can be
defined as follows:
vo [k + 1] = φ11 vo [k] + φ12 i [k] + γ11 v[k] + γ12 io [k]. (17)

N
The 16 switching states at sampling time k, are used to g= αn ||vo [k + n]∗ − vo [k + n]||, (24)
predict the inverter voltage v[k] as shown in Fig. 5a. These n=1
16 predictions for v along with measured variables vo , i and where αn is an arbitrary weighting factor.
io at sampling time k are used to predict future (at sampling For one- and two-step predictive control, 16 and 256 predic-
time k + 1) behavior of vo . These 16 predictions for vo are tions are compared with the reference during each sampling
used by the cost function as shown in Fig. 4. There is no need time. The output voltage vector equals its reference when
to calculate i [k + 1] with one-step predictive control. g = 0. Therefore, objective of the cost function considered
For applications where robust control performance is in this paper is to achieve g value close to zero. The voltage
needed, such as the one in this paper, the FCS-MPC algorithm vector that minimizes the cost function is chosen and then
requires a prediction horizon greater than 1. For prediction applied at the next sampling instant. Additional constraints
horizon of N =2, the number of feasible switching states K such as switching frequency reduction, current limitation and
become: spectrum shaping can also be included in this cost function g.
K = 16N = 162 = 256. (18)
IV. S IMULATION R ESULTS
For two-step prediction horizon, the discrete-time model for
To validate the proposed control scheme, a simulation model
predictive control can be expressed as follows using (11):
      for the three-phase four-leg inverter with the parameters as
vo [k + 2] vo [k + 1] v[k + 1] indicated in Table I, has been developed using MATLAB-
=Φ +Γ , (19)
i [k + 2] i [k + 1] io [k + 1] Simulink. The phase sequence of the three phases is con-
sidered to be 0, 2 π/3 and 4π/3. Three different loading
from which,
conditions are considered: balanced loads, unbalanced loads
vo [k + 2] = φ11 vo [k + 1] + φ12 i [k + 1]+ and non-linear loads. All the results are presented in peak
(20)
γ11 v[k + 1] + γ12 io [k + 1]. per-unit system to simplify the analysis. The base values for
voltage and current are given in Table I.
From the above it can be noted that the prediction vo at
The phase-u output voltage with 1- and 2-step MPC for
sampling time k + 2 requires the prediction of all the four
balanced loading condition is shown in Fig. 6. As shown in
variables vo , i, v and io at sampling time k + 1. The output
Fig. 6b, the 2-step MPC tracks reference very well compared
voltage vo [k + 1] can be predicted using (17). The inverter
current i [k + 1] can be obtained from (16) as follows:
Table I
i [k + 1] = φ21 vo [k] + φ22 i [k] + γ21 v[k] + γ22 io [k]. (21) F OUR - LEG I NVERTER AND L OAD PARAMETERS

The 256 switching states at sampling time k + 1, are used Variable Description Value
to predict the inverter voltage v[k + 1] as shown in Fig. 5b.
vdc dc-link voltage 515 [V ]
The consumer maintains unknown load profile, and this leads Cdc dc-link capacitor 1000 [μF ]
to unknown mathematical model for the output current io . In An dc-link noise amplitude 2 [V ]
such cases Lagrange extrapolation method of order 4 [36], fn dc-link noise frequency 100 [Hz]
[54] can be used to extrapolate current vector io into future fo∗ Reference output frequency 50 [Hz]
in terms of the present and past values: vo∗ Peak reference output voltage 311 [V ][1.0 pu]
ioB Peak base load current 15.52 [A][1.0 pu]
io [k + 1] = 4 io [k] − 6 io[k − 1] + 4 io[k − 2] − io [k − 3]. (22) Lf Filter inductor 2 [mH]
Compared to one-step prediction, this method considerably Rf Filter resistor 0.05 [Ω]
Cf Filter capacitor 80 [μF ]
increases the amount of calculations per sample. However,
R Load resistance 20 [Ω]
with the development of faster and more powerful digital
L Load inductance 3 [mH]
signal processors, the industry standard discrete-time digital Ts Sampling time 50 [μs]
implementation is possible and reachable.
 v[k] v[k + 1] v[k + 2] v[k] v[k + 1] v[k + 2]
1

1 1

16 16

256

k k+1 k+2 k k+1 k+2

(a) (b)
Figure 5. Four-leg inverter output voltages using: (a) one-step prediction, (b) two-step prediction.

vou (pu) vo (pu)

vou vov vow
1 1

0 0

−1 −1
(a)
vou (pu) io (pu)
(a)

iou iov iow

0 1
0
−1

∗
vou (b)
in (pu)
2-step 1-step 0.5
0
−1 −0.5

6π 6.2π 6.4π 6.6π 6.8π t(s) 7π 0 π 2π 3π 4π 5π 6π 7π t(s)

(b) (c)
Figure 6. Simulation results for 1- and 2-step MPC with balanced loads: (a) Figure 7. Simulation results for 2-step MPC with balanced loads: (a) output
phase-u output voltage, (b) zoom of phase-u output voltage. voltages, (b) output currents, (c) neutral current.

to the 1-step MPC. The output voltages, line and neutral
currents with 2-step MPC are shown in Fig. 7. Since load is
balanced, the neutral current (in = iou +iov +iow ) is observed
to be zero as shown in Fig. 7c.
For unbalanced loading condition, a step change in phase-
u, v, w from 1pu, 0pu, 1pu to 0.5pu, 1pu, 1.5pu respectively
is applied at time t = 4π. This is the typical case for most
of the standalone power system. The phase-u output voltage
with 1- and 2-step MPC is shown in Fig. 8. The 2-step MPC
tracks reference with very less error compared to the 1-step
MPC. The load step change does not perturb the output voltage
control as observed in Fig. 9a. The output voltages, line and
neutral currents with 2-step MPC are shown in Fig. 9. The
neutral current in which is sinusoidal in nature flows through
the fourth-leg as shown in Fig. 9c.
The diode rectifier bridge along with RL load as shown in
Fig. 1 is used to simulate non-linear loading condition. A step
change from no-load to nonlinear load is applied at time t =
4π. The 1-step MPC generates more ripple than 2-step MPC
as shown in Fig. 10. The non-linear current flowing through
the all the four-wire do not effect the output voltage control
as shown in Fig. 11.
A detailed measurement of the output rms voltage error, ve
and % total harmonic distortion (THD) of the output voltage
are summarized in Table IV for the 1- and 2-step MPC. The
2-step MPC provides high quality power supply in typical
standalone power system compared to the 1-step MPC as
proved by the significant reduction in ve and %THD.
 vou (pu) vou (pu)
1 1

0 0

−1 −1
(a) (a)
vou (pu) vou (pu)

0 0

∗ ∗
vou vou

2-step 1-step 2-step 1-step

−1 −1

6π 6.2π 6.4π 6.6π 6.8π t(s) 7π 6π 6.2π 6.4π 6.6π 6.8π t(s) 7π
(b) (b)
Figure 8. Simulation results for 1- and 2-step MPC with unbalanced loads: Figure 10. Simulation results for 1- and 2-step MPC with non-linear loads:
(a) phase-u output voltage, (b) zoom of phase-u output voltage. (a) phase-u output voltage, (b) zoom of phase-u output voltage.

vo (pu) vo (pu)
vou vov vow vou vov vow
1
1
0
0
−1
−1
(a)
io (pu) io (pu)
(a)
iou iov iow ioviow
1 iou
1
0
0
−1
−1
(b)
in (pu) in (pu)
(b)

0.5 0.5
0 0
−0.5 −0.5

0 π 2π 3π 4π 5π 6π 7π t(s) 2π 3π
(c) 0 π 4π 5π 6π 7π t(s)
(c)
Figure 9. Simulation results for 2-step MPC with unbalanced loads: (a) Figure 11. Simulation results for 2-step MPC with non-linear loads: (a)
output voltages, (b) output currents, (c) neutral current. output voltages, (b) output currents, (c) neutral current.

V. C ONCLUSION
A finite control set model predictive voltage control strategy
for standalone three-phase four-leg inverter with a prediction
horizon of two samples has been proposed to improve the
output voltage quality compared to the one-step prediction
horizon. This algorithm does not need internal current con-
trollers and modulation stages. The proposed predictive control
strategy is much simpler and intuitive than the classical
methods proposed previously. The algorithm tests each of the
256 possible switching states and then selects a state that
minimizes the cost function. The proposed controller delivers
high quality power to the standalone hybrid power system
with stiff and symmetrical three-phase sinusoidal voltages and
also offers lower values of voltage error in reference tracking
and less %THD for output voltages for balanced, unbalanced
and nonlinear loading conditions. The proposed control can
compensate the effect of uncertainties in the load and dc-link
voltage and in consequence the load voltage waveform remains
balanced. This compensation has been achieved without any
penalty in the transient and steady state operation.
 Table II
C OMPARISON OF O UTPUT V OLTAGE E RROR ev AND %THD FOR 1- AND [14] X. Zhang, J. Wang, and C. Li, “Three-phase four-leg inverter based on
2-S TEP MPC M ETHODS . voltage hysteresis control,” in Proc. IEEE–ICECE Conf., Jun. 2010, pp.
4482–4485, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
[15] S. Ali and M. Kazmierkowski, “PWM voltage and current control of
Before Load Step After Load Step four-leg VSI,” in Proc. IEEE–ISIE Conf., vol. 1, Jul. 1998, pp. 196–
MPC 1-step 2-step 1-step 2-step 201, Pretoria, South Africa.
[16] R. Gannett, J. Sozio, and D. Boroyevich, “Application of synchronous
ve (V ) 11.08 5.28 11.08 5.28 and stationary frame controllers for unbalanced and nonlinear load
Balanced
% THD 4.38 1.99 4.38 1.99 compensation in 4-leg inverters,” in Proc. IEEE–APEC Conf., vol. 2,
Mar. 2002, pp. 1038–1043, Dallas, TX, USA.
ve (V ) 11.41 5.54 12.00 5.57 [17] C. Liu, F. Wang, and H. Bai, “High performance controller design
Unbalanced
% THD 4.54 2.15 4.85 2.12 with PD feedback inner loop for three-phase four-leg inverter,” in Proc.
IEEE–ICIEA Conf., May 2009, pp. 1057–1061, Singapore.
ve (V ) 13.23 5.75 14.93 6.20 [18] H. Z. Yi and S. Jin, “Study on control strategy for three-phase four-leg
Nonlinear
% THD 5.35 2.08 6.06 2.45 inverter power supply,” in Proc. IEEE–IECON Conf., vol. 1, Nov. 2004,
pp. 805–809, Husan, South Korea.
[19] R. Nasiri and A. Radan, “Pole-placement control strategy for 4-leg
voltage-source inverters,” in Proc. IEEE–PEDSTC Conf., Feb. 2010, pp.
74–79, Tehran, Iran.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT [20] H. Bai, F. Wang, D. Wang, C. Liu, and T. Wang, “A pole assignment of
state feedback based on system matrix for three-phase four-leg inverter
The authors wish to thank the financial support from the of high speed PM generator driven by micro-turbine,” in Proc. IEEE–
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada ICIEA Conf., May 2009, pp. 1361–1366, Singapore.
(NSERC) through Wind Energy Strategic Network (WESNet) [21] P. Verdelho and G. Marques, “A current control system based in αβ0
variables for a four-leg PWM voltage converter,” in Proc. IEEE–IECON
Project 3.1 and from the Chilean Fund for Scientific and Tech- Conf., vol. 3, Sep. 1998, pp. 1847–1852, Aachen, Germany.
nological Development FONDECYT through project 1100404, [22] S. Ali and M. Kazmierkowski, “Current regulation of four-leg
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria and Basal Project PWM/VSI,” in Proc. IEEE–IECON Conf., vol. 3, Sep. 1998, pp. 1853–
1858, Aachen, Germany.
FB0821. [23] D. C. Patel, R. R. Sawant, and M. C. Chandorkar, “Three-dimensional
flux vector modulation of four-leg sine-wave output inverters,” IEEE
R EFERENCES Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 1261–1269, Apr. 2010.
[24] F. Zhang and Y. Yan, “Selective harmonic elimination PWM control
[1] I. Vechiu, H. Camblong, G. Tapia, B. Dakyo, and O. Curea, “Control of scheme on a three-phase four-leg voltage source inverter,” IEEE Trans.
four leg inverter for hybrid power system applications with unbalanced Power Electron., vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 1682–1689, Jul. 2009.
load,” Energy Convers. Manage., vol. 48, no. 7, pp. 2119–2128, 2007. [25] O. Ojo and P. Kshirsagar, “Concise modulation strategies for four-leg
[2] R. Zhang, “High performance power converter systems for nonlinear voltage source inverters,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 19, no. 1,
and unbalanced load/source,” Ph.D. dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic pp. 46–53, Jan. 2004.
Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, Nov. 1998. [26] J.-H. Kim and S.-K. Sul, “A carrier-based PWM method for three-
[3] G. Kasal and B. Singh, “Voltage and frequency controllers for an phase four-leg voltage source converters,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron.,
asynchronous generator-based isolated wind energy conversion system,” vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 66–75, Jan. 2004.
IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 402–416, Jun. 2011. [27] G. Dong and O. Ojo, “Current regulation in four-leg voltage-source
[4] M. Ryan, R. Lorenz, and R. De Doncker, “Modeling of multileg sine- converters,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 2095–2105,
wave inverters: a geometric approach,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., Aug. 2007.
vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 1183–1191, Dec. 1999. [28] R. Zhang, V. Prasad, D. Boroyevich, and F. Lee, “Three-dimensional
[5] N.-Y. Dai, M.-C. Wong, F. Ng, and Y.-D. Han, “A FPGA-based space vector modulation for four-leg voltage-source converters,” IEEE
generalized pulse width modulator for three-leg center-split and four-leg Trans. Power Electron., vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 314–326, May 2002.
voltage source inverters,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 23, no. 3, [29] D. Shen and P. Lehn, “Fixed-frequency space-vector-modulation control
pp. 1472–1484, May 2008. for three-phase four-leg active power filters,” IET Electr. Power Appl.,
[6] E. dos Santos, C. Jacobina, N. Rocha, J. Dias, and M. Correa, “Single- vol. 149, no. 4, pp. 268–274, Jul. 2002.
phase to three-phase four-leg converter applied to distributed generation [30] M. Perales, M. Prats, R. Portillo, J. Mora, J. Leon, and L. Franquelo,
system,” IET Power Electron., vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 892–903, Nov. 2010. “Three-dimensional space vector modulation in abc coordinates for four-
[7] V. George and M. Mishra, “Design and analysis of user-defined constant leg voltage source converters,” IEEE Power Electron. Lett., vol. 1, no. 4,
switching frequency current-control-based four-leg DSTATCOM,” IEEE pp. 104–109, Dec. 2003.
Trans. Power Electron., vol. 24, no. 9, pp. 2148–2158, Sep. 2009. [31] I. Vechiu, O. Curea, H. Camblong, S. Ceballos, and J. Villate, “Digital
[8] T. Rachmildha, A. Llor, M. Fadel, P. Dahono, and Y. Haroen, “Hybrid control of a three-phase four-leg inverter under unbalanced voltage
direct power control using p-q-r power theory applied on 3-phase 4- conditions,” in Proc. IEEE–EPE Conf., Sep. 2007, pp. 1–10, Aalborg,
wire active power filter,” in Proc. IEEE–PESC Conf., Jun. 2008, pp. Denmark.
1183–1189, Rhodes, Greece. [32] T. Glasberger, Z. Peroutka, and J. Molnar, “Comparison of 3D-SVPWM
[9] R. Zhang, F. Lee, and D. Boroyevich, “Four-legged three-phase PFC and carrier-based PWM of three-phase four-leg voltage source inverter,”
rectifier with fault tolerant capability,” in Proc. IEEE–PESC Conf., in Proc. IEEE–EPE Conf., Sep. 2007, pp. 1–9, Aalborg, Denmark.
vol. 1, Jun. 2000, pp. 359–364, Galway, Ireland. [33] P. Cortes, M. Kazmierkowski, R. Kennel, D. Quevedo, and J. Rodriguez,
[10] K. Matsuse, N. Kezuka, and K. Oka, “Characteristics of independent “Predictive control in power electronics and drives,” IEEE Trans. Ind.
two induction motor drives fed by a four-leg inverter,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 12, pp. 4312–4324, Dec. 2008.
Electron., vol. 47, no. 5, pp. 2125–2134, Oct. 2011. [34] S. Kouro, P. Cortes, R. Vargas, U. Ammann, and J. Rodriguez, “Model
[11] I. Vechiu, O. Curea, and H. Camblong, “Transient operation of a four- predictive control - A simple and powerful method to control power
leg inverter for autonomous applications with unbalanced load,” IEEE converters,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 1826–1838,
Trans. Power Electron., vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 399–407, Feb. 2010. Jun. 2009.
[12] J.-K. Park, J.-M. Kwon, E.-H. Kim, and B.-H. Kwon, “High- [35] W. Kwon, S. Han, and S. Han, Receding Horizon Control: Model
performance transformerless online UPS,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., Predictive Control for State Models, ser. Advanced Textbooks in Control
vol. 55, no. 8, pp. 2943–2953, Aug. 2008. and Signal Processing. Springer Verlag, 2005.
[13] S. Naidu and D. Fernandes, “Dynamic voltage restorer based on a four- [36] J. Rodriguez, J. Pontt, C. Silva, P. Correa, P. Lezana, P. Cortes, and
leg voltage source converter,” IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., vol. 3, no. 5, U. Ammann, “Predictive current control of a voltage source inverter,”
pp. 437–447, May 2009. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 495–503, Feb. 2007.
[37] J. Rodriguez, J. Pontt, P. Correa, P. Lezana, and P. Cortes, “Predictive
power control of an AC/DC/AC converter,” in Proc. IEEE–IAS Annu.
Meeting, vol. 2, Oct. 2005, pp. 934–939, Hong Kong.
[38] P. Cortes, G. Ortiz, J. Yuz, J. Rodriguez, S. Vazquez, and L. Franquelo,
“Model predictive control of an inverter with output LC filter for UPS
applications,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 1875–1883,
Jun. 2009.
[39] P. Cortes, J. Rodriguez, P. Antoniewicz, and M. Kazmierkowski, “Direct
power control of an AFE using predictive control,” IEEE Trans. Power
Electron., vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 2516–2523, Sep. 2008.
[40] M. Rivera, J. Rodriguez, B. Wu, J. Espinoza, and C. Rojas, “Current
control for an indirect matrix converter with filter resonance mitigation,”
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 71–79, Jan. 2012.
[41] M. Rivera, C. Rojas, J. Rodriguez, P. Wheeler, B. Wu, and J. Espinoza,
“Predictive current control with input filter resonance mitigation for a
direct matrix converter,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 26, no. 10,
pp. 2794–2803, Oct. 2011.
[42] M. Perez, J. Rodriguez, and A. Coccia, “Predictive current control in a
single phase PFC boost rectifier,” in Proc. IEEE–ICIT Conf., Feb. 2009,
pp. 1–6, Gippsland, Australia.
[43] R. Vargas, P. Cortes, U. Ammann, J. Rodriguez, and J. Pontt, “Predictive
control of a three-phase neutral-point-clamped inverter,” IEEE Trans.
Ind. Electron., vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 2697–2705, Oct. 2007.
[44] P. Cortes, A. Wilson, S. Kouro, J. Rodriguez, and H. Abu-Rub, “Model
predictive control of multilevel cascaded H-bridge inverters,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 57, no. 8, pp. 2691–2699, Aug. 2010.
[45] P. Lezana, R. Aguilera, and D. Quevedo, “Model predictive control of
an asymmetric flying capacitor converter,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 1839–1846, Jun. 2009.
[46] R. Vargas, U. Ammann, B. Hudoffsky, J. Rodriguez, and P. Wheeler,
“Predictive torque control of an induction machine fed by a matrix con-
verter with reactive input power control,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron.,
vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 1426–1438, June 2010.
[47] M. Rivera, J. Elizondo, M. Macias, O. Probst, O. Micheloud, J. Ro-
driguez, C. Rojas, and A. Wilson, “Model predictive control of a doubly
fed induction generator with an indirect matrix converter,” in Proc.
IEEE–IECON Conf., Nov. 2010, pp. 2959–2965, Glendale, AZ, USA.
[48] S. Alepuz, S. Busquets-Monge, J. Bordonau, P. Cortes, J. Rodriguez, and
R. Vargas, “Predictive current control of grid-connected neutral-point-
clamped converters to meet low voltage ride-through requirements,” in
Proc. IEEE–PESC Conf., Jun. 2008, pp. 2423–2428, Rhodes, Greece.
[49] P. Correa, J. Rodriguez, I. Lizama, and D. Andler, “A predictive control
scheme for current-source rectifiers,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56,
no. 5, pp. 1813–1815, May 2009.
[50] T. Geyer, “Generalized model predictive direct torque control: Long
prediction horizons and minimization of switching losses,” in Proc.
IEEE–CCC Conf., Dec. 2009, pp. 6799–6804, Shanghai, China.
[51] V. Yaramasu, J. Rodriguez, B. Wu, M. Rivera, A. Wilson, and C. Rojas,
“A simple and effective solution for superior performance in two-level
four-leg voltage source inverters: Predictive voltage control,” in Proc.
IEEE–ISIE Conf., Jul. 2010, pp. 3127–3132, Bari, Italy.
[52] J. Rodriguez, B. Wu, M. Rivera, A. Wilson, V. Yaramasu, and C. Rojas,
“Model predictive control of three-phase four-leg neutral-point-clamped
inverters,” in Proc. IEEE–IPEC Conf., Jun. 2010, pp. 3112–3116,
Sapporo, Japan.
[53] P. Cortes, J. Rodriguez, S. Vazquez, and L. Franquelo, “Predictive con-
trol of a three-phase UPS inverter using two steps prediction horizon,”
in Proc. IEEE–ICIT Conf., Mar. 2010, pp. 1283–1288, Viña del Mar,
Chile.
[54] O. Kukrer, “Discrete-time current control of voltage-fed three-phase
PWM inverters,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 260–
269, Mar. 1996.