Twenty-First Annual IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition, 2006. APEC '06.
DOI: 10.1109/apec.2006.1620528
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Hybrid Indirect Matrix Converter Immune to Unbalanced Voltage Supply, with Reduced Switching Losses and Improved Voltage Transfer Ratio

Abstract: A note on versions:The version presented here may differ from the published version or from the version of record. If you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the repository url above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
5
0

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
(16 reference statements)
1
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As can be seen from Table 3, the theoretical maximum VTR in [7,11,15,17] and this study are 0.955, ∞, 0.928, 0.97 and ∞, respectively. On the other hand, the required semiconductor switches in [7,11,15,17] are 22 and 18, respectively, while the number of the switches in this study is 20. However, it should be noted that the comparison of the number of the switches only gives a first overview of the performance of the topologies, because the current/voltage stress and the losses of the switches for each topology are quite different.…”
Section: Comparison Of 3tsmc and Other Tsmcssupporting
confidence: 55%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…As can be seen from Table 3, the theoretical maximum VTR in [7,11,15,17] and this study are 0.955, ∞, 0.928, 0.97 and ∞, respectively. On the other hand, the required semiconductor switches in [7,11,15,17] are 22 and 18, respectively, while the number of the switches in this study is 20. However, it should be noted that the comparison of the number of the switches only gives a first overview of the performance of the topologies, because the current/voltage stress and the losses of the switches for each topology are quite different.…”
Section: Comparison Of 3tsmc and Other Tsmcssupporting
confidence: 55%
“…Regarding the input waveforms quality, 3TSMC has a superior performance than the others in terms of the total harmonic distortion (THD) of the input current because of the pre‐filtering effect of the third‐harmonic injection inductor [20], while [7, 17] have the inferior input current THD performance among the five methods due to the low‐order current harmonics caused by the fluctuant input power and over‐modulation, respectively. For the comparison of the output waveforms quality, in [15] the 3TSMC have the best output voltage THD performance, and the output voltage THD performance in [7, 11] is a little bit worse because of the higher inverter side DC link voltage, while the over‐modulation in [17] results in the worst output voltage THD performance.…”
Section: Simulation and Experimental Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Table 2 shows a comparison between the results of this work and the other Z-source matrix converters in different reports in terms of quantity of elements in topology, maximum voltage transfer ratio, the quantity and values of Z-source elements, switching frequency, output current THD and maximum tolerated abnormality of input voltage. The proposed strategy drives an IM under 40% abnormal input voltage, while [27][28][29][30] have launched the static RL load. In the recommended topology, the overall volume and weight of the system is 2.3 L which is considerably lower than the conventional back-to-back converter with a volume of 4.6 L for the same power rating and thermal limitation of the USMC described in [31,32].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%