2006 12th International Power Electronics and Motion Control Conference 2006
DOI: 10.1109/epepemc.2006.283282
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Robust Predictive Dead-Beat Controller for Buck Converters

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

1
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The computation effort of the control algorithm is quite simple. Contrary to [13] it does not need a dead beat controller and a mean value controller. In consequence, the delay time has been decreased from two pulse periods to one pulse period.…”
Section: A Experimental Resultsmentioning
confidence: 89%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The computation effort of the control algorithm is quite simple. Contrary to [13] it does not need a dead beat controller and a mean value controller. In consequence, the delay time has been decreased from two pulse periods to one pulse period.…”
Section: A Experimental Resultsmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…If they will be determined by a measurement of the current, the behaviour of the control system can be identified. As it was shown in [13], the duty cycle can be calculated in order to achieve a certain final value of the current , at the end of the pulse period, if the currents slopes ( ) , and ( ) , are known in advance. For this purpose (1) will be inserted into (4) and transposed to:…”
Section: Basic Ideasmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Unlike traditional analog methods [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10], it accurately controls the average value of the inductor current with no need for a current compensator or an external ramp. In addition, while resembling the deadbeat characteristics of digital current-mode controllers [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29], the PCPC method does not suffer from computational time delay, limit cycling, and quantization and truncation errors.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%