Co-Simulation Interfacing Capabilities in Device-Level Power Electronic Circuit Simulation Tools: An Overview

Abstract

Power electronic circuit simulation today has become increasingly more demanding in both the speed and accuracy. Whilst almost every simulator has its own advantages and disadvantages, co-simulations are becoming more prevalent. This paper provides an overview of the co-simulation capabilities of device-level circuit simulators. More specifically, a listing of device-level simulators with their salient features are compared and contrasted. The co-simulation interfaces between several simulation tools are discussed. A case study is presented to demonstrate the co-simulation between a device-level simulator (PSIM) interfacing a system-level simulator (Simulink), and a finite element simulation tool (FLUX). Results demonstrate the necessity and convenience as well as the drawbacks of such a comprehensive simulation.

Electro-magneto-mechanical co-simulation in strongly coupled dynamic applications

“…A common approach toward these arising aspects is to narrow the complexity of the numerical modeling through the isolation of the main macro-domains, and thus solving the different phenomena through dedicated languages, tools, and algorithms [2]. However, in applications where the strict interdependence between the different physical domains and scales cannot be decoupled the introduction of a complete multidomain co-simulation architecture is required necessary [3]- [5]. Matlab/Simulink® certainly represents the most advanced graphical programming environment for the simulation of dynamic systems, being developed for the analysis of multipurpose and general nature problems, the proposed co-simulation algorithm exploits the capabilities of a system-level environment in order to integrate under a single dynamic model, whose core is designed into a multibody model, several device-level simulators implemented respectively for the electronic and magnetostatic analysis through the equivalent circuit methodology (ECM) and the 3D finite volume modeling (3DFVM).…”

“…Currently, device-level circuit simulators represent the standard solution in complex electronic simulations. Their strengths is based on the conformity to fundamental physical principles [3], which in turns introduces long-time simulation, losses in computing performances and difficulty in multi-domain integration. On the other side, system-level like ambient such Matlab/Simulink [8] can guarantee high computational performances and multipurpose analysis at the expense of a reduced range of possible simulations, due to lack of transient, AC/DC or sweeps analysis capabilities and a limited availability of complete components libraries [9].…”

An Alternative Multi-Physics-Based Methodology for Strongly Coupled Electro-Magneto-Mechanical Problems

“…However, in applications where the strict interdependence between the different physical domains and scales cannot be decoupled, such as mechatronic devices, strongly coupled electro-magnetic applications (WPT, electric vehicle re-charging, etc. ), and active analog electronics controllers, the introduction of a complete multidomain co-simulation architecture is required [3][4][5][6][7].…”

“…The increasing demand for accuracy and reliability in the design and analysis of complex electronic integrated systems has, in recent years, pushed toward a greater use of device-level circuit simulators. Their strengths are based on the conformity to fundamental physical principles [6], which in turn introduces long-time simulation, losses in computing performances, and difficulty in multi-domain integration. On the contrary, a system-level ambient such as Matlab/Simulink can guarantee high computational performances and multipurpose analysis at the expense of a reduced range of possible simulations, due to lack of transient, AC/DC, or sweeps analysis capabilities and a limited availability of complete components libraries [9].…”

“…Starting from the geometry's properties, such as the number of turns n, the internal R in , external radius R out , and the distance between two turns d = (R out − R in )/n, the author proposed a set of equations for the analytical formulation of the equivalent stray capacitance. Modeling the whole planar coil as a series of i-th parasitic capacitances delimited by the polar coordinates a and b defined in Equation ( 4) with the potential and the electrical flux between two turns, it is thus possible to define the global X and Y constitutive Equations ( 5) and (6).…”