IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 18, NO.
3, MAY 2003
Analysis and Design of Direct Power Control (DPC)
for a Three Phase Synchronous Rectifier via Output
Regulation Subspaces
Gerardo Escobar, Aleksandar M. Stanković, Member, IEEE, Juan M. Carrasco, Member, IEEE, Eduardo Galván,
and Romeo Ortega, Fellow, IEEE
Abstract—In this paper, we present a controller that directly reg-
ulates the active and instantaneous reactive power in a synchronous
three-phase boost-type rectifier. The controller ensures a good regu-
lation of the output voltage, and guarantees the power factor close
to one. The controller builds upon the ideas of the well known di-
rect torque control (DTC) for induction motors. In our case, the
active and reactive powers replace the torque and flux amplitude
used as the controlled outputs in DTC, thus motivating the name
DPC-control. We show that a simple modification to the original al-
gorithm makes the selection of the control inputs more accurate. To
formalize this technique we utilize the concept of output regulation
subspaces. A modification is added to the basic controller to deal
with disturbances such as unbalance and distortion in the source
voltage. Finally, the proposed controller was tested both in simu-
lations and experimentally, and illustrative results are presented
here.
Index Terms—ac–dc power conversion, nonlinear systems.
I. INTRODUCTION
I N THIS paper we explore direct regulation of active and
instantaneous reactive power in a synchronous three-phase
boost-type rectifier. The use of instantaneous active and reac-
tive power for control purposes was first introduced in [6]. In
that work the authors propose a method to compute the current
references based on the computation of the instantaneous active
and reactive power. These current references were later used in a
high gain (hysteresis) current loop, together with a pulse-width
modulated (PWM) or space vector modulation (SVM) block.
In some applications, this basic method may exhibit disadvan-
tages that have been addressed (and in large degree overcomed)
in the literature. First, hysteresis controllers cannot guarantee
perfect tracking of a time varying signal, unless arbitrarily fast
Manuscript received February 11, 2002; revised November 1, 2002. This
work was supported by the Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología de
México (CONACYT) and the Virtual Test Bed (VTB) Project (University of
South Carolina) Grant to Northeastern University. Recommended by Associate
Editor F. Blaabjerg.
G. Escobar is with the Department of Applied Mathematics and Com-
puter Systems, IPICyT, San Luis Potosí SLP 78210, México (e-mail:
gescobar@ipicyt.edu.mx).
A. M. Stanković is with the Department of Electrical and Computer
Engineering, Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115 USA (e-mail:
astankov@cdsp.neu.edu).
J. M. Carrasco and E. Galván are with Escuela Superior de Ingeniería, Univer-
sidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain (e-mail: carrasco@esi.us.es; galvan@esi.us.es).
R. Ortega is with the Laboratoire des Signaux et Systèmes, CNRS-Supélec,
France (e-mail: ortega@lss.supelec.fr).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPEL.2003.810862
0885-8993/03$17.00 © 2003 IEEE
823
switching is used. Second, this technique fully applies only in
balanced and sinusoidal operation.
In [7], the authors also utilize the instantaneous active and
reactive power for control purposes. They establish first a pro-
portional relationship between these variables and the currents
expressed in the rotational reference (which holds only for sinu-
soidal balanced operation). Then, they propose a commutation
algorithm based on the voltage source angular position and the
proportionality between the time derivative of currents in the ro-
tational reference and the corresponding injected voltage. Thus,
a preliminary vector is proposed in such a way that the sign
of these time derivatives opposes the sign of the errors in real
and reactive power. A phase locked loop (PLL) is introduced to
determine the voltage source angular position. Although in the
final expression of the controller only the active and reactive
powers are involved, the strong use of the properties of the cur-
rents makes this method close to the original method proposed
in [6]. In addition, the method still needs a PWM block to gen-
erate the final control vector. Therefore, this technique cannot
be considered as direct in the terminology that we use.
Later in [9] the authors introduce an algorithm referred as di-
rect power control (DPC). The idea behind this technique con-
sists in selecting a control vector from a look up table based on
the error of active and reactive powers as well as on the angular
position of the estimated voltage source vector. For the latter, the
authors propose to divide the input space (in the plane) in twelve
sectors, and then determine the position of the estimated voltage
source vector with respect to these sectors. They use the fact
that dc-bus voltage is regulated by controlling the active power,
while the unity power factor operation is achieved by control-
ling the reactive power to zero. The look up table is considered
optimal, although no further explanation is given about the gen-
eration of the table. The authors propose to use an estimation
of the voltage vector to reduce the number of voltage sensors
and to simplify the implementation. Unfortunately, this modi-
fication to the algorithm involves the computation of the time
derivative of measured currents. This computation may become
noisy, especially at low currents, and it is strongly dependent on
parameters like the inductance, as pointed out by the authors.
Recently, in [8] the authors follow a similar control scheme
as in [9]; the main difference is that they propose to estimate a
vector named virtual flux instead of the voltage source vector.
With this modification, the authors try to reduce the extremely
large sampling frequency required in the original DPC, as well
as the inherent noise introduced in the computation of real and
824 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 3, MAY 2003

reactive power. The estimation algorithm is basically an open

loop integration of the injected voltage plus the voltage drop in
the inductance. This technique, although inherently very prac-
tical, may be sensitive to inductance parameter variations, and
to initial conditions. Again, the algorithm equations are based
on the assumption of sinusoidal balanced line voltage. This al-
gorithm requires a large value of the inductance and a large sam-
pling frequency, and results in variable switching frequency. To
alleviate the last problem, in [10] the authors propose to use a
SVM algorithm to guarantee a constant switching frequency.
Reference [1] presented an interpretation of DTC control in
terms of output regulation subspaces (ORS). It has been shown
in [2] that this concept can also be applied to synchronous rec- Fig. 1. Circuit schematic of a three phase boost-type rectifier.
tifiers. In this paper we elaborate further on this idea, taking
instantaneous active and reactive power as the output signals to TABLE I
AVAILABLE SWITCH POSITIONS IN THE  -MODEL
be regulated. The two power signals play the role of the torque
and flux amplitude in DTC of IM. The resulting controller, re-
ferred to as ORS-DPC, is a controller that, as the original DPC,
is intended to directly generate the control vector without the
requirement of current control loops. The algorithm selects a
vector from a look-up table based on the instantaneous active
and reactive power errors with respect to their references, as
well as the angular position of a modified line voltage vector
relative to a given sector distribution. This modification consists
in rotating the line voltage vector a precalculated angle before
making the selection of the control input vector, with the aim of
II. PROBLEM FORMULATION
refining the selection. Because of the properties of the ORS ap-
proach, we are able to justify both the design of such a look-up Consider the synchronous three-phase (boost-type) rectifier
table and the use of the angular position of the modified line shown in Fig. 1.
voltage vector. After the standard transformation, we obtain the fol-
Some related work is reported in [3], where the problem of lowing model expressed in terms of fixed frame ( ) coordi-
output voltage regulation in three phase rectifiers is formulated, nates
and guidelines are given to implement a controller based on the
definition of subspaces in the control input space. Later in [4] (1)
the same authors presented an approach based on the concept
of sliding modes and the computation of the equivalent control. (2)
They propose to divide the input space into four quadrants ac-
cording to the different signs of the sliding surfaces. Then, they where
select the control vector that is contained in the good quadrant, vector of line currents;
i.e., the one that fulfills the sliding criteria. Special attention is output capacitor voltage;
given to the case where no vectors or more than one vector are vector of the source line voltages;
contained in such quadrant. In that case, the authors propose to inductance filter at the line source inputs;
select the control vector nearest to the equivalent control. This inductor parasitic resistance (neglected in the model);
criterion, while practical, may exhibit a poor performance in the output capacitor;
transients and lacks of a more complete analytical justification. load resistance;
In most DPC schemes for synchronous rectifier, an external vector of control inputs.
PI loop utilizing the dc-voltage error is used to compute the de- Vectors , , are of the form
sired active power. In our case we propose to use a modified . Vector represents the switch position
PI controller where we replace the proportional part by a low and takes values in the discrete set , described
pass filter, and use the error of the square of the dc-voltage in- in Table I. These vectors, expressed in the fixed frame, form the
stead of the dc-voltage error. The justification for the integral input space, which can be drawn in a plane as shown in Fig. 2.
part in this control stems from the uncertainty about the load The control objective is to design a switching sequence of
(represented here as a resistive element), while the low pass control vectors to regulate the output capacitor voltage
filter reduces the effects of the capacitor ripple in the control to a desired constant value given by . Moreover, the system
loop, while still guaranteeing a good performance. We also ad- should achieve a near unity power factor (PF), meaning that
dress the issues concerning unbalance and harmonic distortion the current vector should track a vector signal proportional
in the source voltage. We evaluated experimentally the proposed to the line voltage . The current tracking problem can be
strategy, and results illustrating the performance are presented. reinterpreted as a set point control problem if the outputs are
ESCOBAR et al.: ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF DIRECT POWER CONTROL (DPC) 825

Fig. 3. Sector definitions for the control algorithm implementation.

Fig. 2. ORS for the synchronous rectifier. TABLE II

USING ONLY THE ROTATION ANGLE '
TO MODIFY v , AND USING
THE SECTOR DISTRIBUTION ON FIG. 3(a)
chosen to be the active and reactive power and , which are
defined as

(3)

(4)

These new outputs are driven toward some desired constant ref- with as scalar constants. Clearly, if
erences, i.e., and , where to guar- then . Hence, the ORS define two straight lines dividing
antee a power factor close to one, and is a slowly varying the input space into four quadrants corresponding to different
signal generated by an outer loop to guarantee . For combinations of signs for and , as shown in Fig. 2. More-
the sake of simplicity we have assumed here that the voltage over, both ORS’s are perpendicular to each other all the time, as
source is balanced and free of harmonic distortion. The case is in the direction of the vector while
when these disturbances are present requires some further mod- is in the direction of . Note, however, that the intersection
ifications, which are treated in Section VI. point identified by in Fig. 2 (representing the equivalent
The time derivatives of the active and reactive powers are control or feedback linearizing, decoupling control) is not nec-
given by essarily at the origin. Our next step is thus to re-examine the use
of ORS in the case of a synchronous rectifier.
(5)
IV. ORS-BASED DIRECT POWER CONTROL
(6)
A nice feature of the classical DTC is that the selection of the
control vector is based only on the knowledge of the position
where , and we have used . of the vector of the stator flux relative to the sector definition as
given by Fig. 3(a). This makes implementation very simple, as it
III. OUTPUT REGULATION SUBSPACES (ORS) suffices to enter this information plus the signs of the output er-
rors into a table [see for instance Table II(b)], to immediately get
The output regulation subspaces, or simply ORS [1], [2] are the control vector that accomplishes the objective at that instant.
the subspaces of the input space where each . Thus we Notice that in the case of the synchronous rectifier, under the
are defining hyperplanes (one hyperplane for each output) with assumption that both ORS’s are close to the origin (assumption
the characteristic that points “above” the th hyperplane satisfy usually made in DTC), it is enough to determine the position of
while those “below” satisfy . The interested reader vector relative to the sectors defined in Fig. 3(a) to obtain a
is referred to [1] for a description of such subspaces for (general control vector. Nevertheless, this simple strategy would exhibit
vector relative degree ) nonlinear systems. problems whenever the ORS’s are far from the origin, which is
In the case of a synchronous rectifier, the ORS can be com- common for the synchronous rectifier.
puted from (5)–(6) yielding We aim to preserve the same overall philosophy in our algo-
rithm, and thus maintain low complexity, but still achieve im-
proved accuracy. The idea behind our approach consists in ro-
tating the vector by a certain angle just before going into
the table to extract the control vector. We will refer to as
the rotated vector , for instance is a rotation
826
Fig. 4. Deformed ORS for the synchronous rectifier.
of rads in the counterclockwise direction, where matrix
is described by
This rotation is intended to compensate the error produced
when considering the approximated ORS. Moreover, the angle
for the rotation of should also be selected. We propose to
chose it as a function of the sign of the output errors.
Following the standard DTC, we displace the exact ORS in
such a way that their boundaries cross the origin and remain
perpendicular to each other, which yields the dash-dotted lines
sown in Fig. 4. Next, let us divide the modified ORS into two
segments and rotate each segment in such a way that they induce
the same partition of the circle in arcs (AB, BC, CD, DA) as the
original exact ORS. The modified ORS (now composed of two
segments each) crosses the circle in the same points (A,B,C,D)
as the corresponding original ORS segment. This yields the
thick lines shown in Fig. 4, where the segments corresponding
to the modified ORS( ) have been rotated backward or forward
by depending on the position of the segment, while those cor-
responding to ORS( ) are rotated by . closest control vector to the ORS( ). To this end, we propose
The angles and are computed from the following rela-
tions:
(7)
Notice that both angles decrease for larger ; moreover, we
observed that is quite small compared with in typical oper-
ation, and it is even smaller more for low currents. This can be
easily seen from the steady state values
(8)
In our first scheme, we rotate the vector as follows. First,
we consider only the angle , that is, we assume that ORS( )
is very close to the origin.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 3, MAY 2003
TABLE III
USING BOTH ROTATION ANGLES AND ' TO MODIFY v , AND USING
THE SECTOR DISTRIBUTION ON FIG. 3(a)
TABLE IV
USING THE SECTOR DISTRIBUTION ON FIG. 3(b) TO SELECT THE CLOSEST
CONTROL VECTOR TO THE MODIFIED v
In Table II, , , the minus sign in-
dicates a rotation backward, i.e., in the clockwise direction. We
first rotate vector by angle , according to Table II(a) to
obtain the modified , i.e., . Now, once
has been rotated, we look for the position of . Assume at
this point that is located in the sector ; then we propose
to select the control vector according to Table II(b). Notice that
Table II(b) is the standard algorithm used in the DTC technique.
We observed in our experiments, however, that this first approx-
imation still leads to some distortion in currents.
This distortion can be reduced if angle is also considered
for the rotation of as we do in our second scheme. In fact,
depending on the parameters of the system, we can adjust the
compensating angles (and corresponding tables) to generate the
control vectors that may better fit a given application. An ex-
ample of modification involving both angles is Table III.1
When the output voltage is small, a larger equivalent control
is obtained, and problems arise when trying to search for a con-
trol vector in the area in Fig. 2 (or in sector as depicted
in Fig. 4). If this is the case, a good option would be to select the
to use the distribution of sectors presented in Fig. 3(b) [instead
of the standard distribution of sectors in Fig. 3(a)]. This allows
us to consider the closest control vectors (ahead and behind the
vector ) in a more natural way. However, the use of another
sector distribution entails a change in the search algorithm for
the relative position of vector in the new sector distribution.
To avoid this modification, we propose to keep the same sector
distribution Fig. 3(a), but to use a rotation of rads to emulate
the sector distribution Fig. 3(b). Finally, the algorithm shown in
Table IV is proposed.
With the idea of making more accurate the selection of the
control vector in areas and , we propose to increase the
resolution of the sector distribution by superimposing two sec-
tors in Fig. 3. This yields the sector distribution with enhanced
resolution shown in Fig. 5. We note that now each sector has
two coordinates , being the location on sector dis-
tribution of Fig. 3(a), and the one on sector distribution of
1Similar results have been observed if Table III(b) is replaced by Table II(b).
ESCOBAR et al.: ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF DIRECT POWER CONTROL (DPC) 827

TABLE V
USING THE SECTOR DISTRIBUTION ON FIG. 5 TO SELECT THE CLOSEST
CONTROL VECTOR TO THE MODIFIED v

(12)

where , , , , and are design pa-

Fig. 5. Sector distribution with enhanced resolution.
rameters. The form of this controller is motivated by the form
of a simple PI [to see this, replace with in (11) and integrate
both sides], where (referred to in the control literature as ap-
Fig. 3(b). This sector distribution allows us to select among the proximate or “dirty” derivative) is the result of low-pass filtering
closest control vectors, and thus guarantees a more accurate se- the time derivative of signal . We observed experimentally that
lection in the case when some searching areas are much smaller direct use of in the computation of (using a standard PI con-
than the others, which is the case with areas and . troller) introduces additional harmonics into the control loop.
The algorithm described next applies only in cases when the The controller (11)–(12) can be rewritten in the form of a
search for a controller occurs in areas or ; in other cases transfer function having as input and output as:
we can apply any of the previous algorithms. First, we obtain the
modified vector by rotating vector an angle , that
is, . Second, we find locations for the
vector (this is done by searching separately in sector distri-
butions in Fig. 3). Third, we select the control vector according what turns out to be a simple low pass filter plus an integrator.
to Table V. The controller above in closed loop with subsystem
Notice that in Fig. 5 we redefined sector (6, 1) as (0, 1) to be (10) yields a LTI system whose equilibrium point is
in agreement with our algorithm. . Following classical tools, like
the Routh–Hurwitz criterion, it can be proved that this
V. EXTERNAL CONTROL LOOP controller stabilizes the closed loop system in the desired equi-
librium point provided , , and are all chosen positive.
Let us assume that the control loop for and is fast com- This technique is applicable to power converters where the load
pared with the dynamics of the dc voltage loop. Thus, after a rel- is unknown, but mostly resistive and constant. To guarantee the
atively short time, we have , , validity of this technique, we should constrain the time scale
and solve for from (5)–(6), which represents the equivalent of the external PI loop to be significantly slower than inner
control as depicted in Fig. 2, yielding (directly controlled) active and reactive power dynamics.
Moreover, notice that the control vector is limited to the
hexagon shown on Fig. 2, and more conservatively inside the
(9)
inner circle of radius (as we do not consider the overmodu-
lation here). This imposes a restriction expressed as
which exists whenever .
Now, as the control objective mainly focus on the regulation
of the dc component of , we substitute in expression (2) by
which represents the average of the control signal . Thus
we neglect higher harmonics introduced by the switching. This
results in the remaining dynamics
with the condition which guarantees the existence of
real solutions for the bounds. This upper and lower bound on the
(10)
desired output voltage give the interval where the existence of
an equilibrium is guaranteed. Notice that if is
where we have introduced the coordinate transformation much smaller than (what holds in practical cases), then the
, . condition above is reduced to , in agreement with
System (10) can be seen as a first order filter where rep- the amplification characteristic of the boost rectifier.
resents the actual control signal. We propose the following dy- A block diagram of the proposed controller is presented in
namical controller for subsystem (10) Fig. 6 where we can identify an inner loop, consisting of the
switching strategy, and the outer loop, consisting of the low pass
(11) filter plus an integrator.
828 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 3, MAY 2003

Fig. 7. Resonant filter used to obtain the k th harmonic components of signal

x 2 .

Fig. 6. Block diagram of the proposed ORS-DPC controller.

VI. CASE OF UNBALANCE AND HARMONIC DISTORTION IN

SOURCE VOLTAGE
In the case of a source voltage with unbalance and harmonic
distortion, we propose to redefine the outputs as
Fig. 8. XY
– plot of the steady state operation of (–) the input current i (t)
compared with (11) its reference current i t
( ).

where represents the fundamental positive symmetric se-

quence (component) of . Notice that, if ( a con- VII. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
stant or slowly varying signal) and then, the cur- An evaluation of the proposed control policy was com-
rent vector is forced to follow a balanced signal proportional pleted on a conventional three-phase boost-type rectifier. The
to , guaranteeing a PF close to unity. prototype comprises a DSP-based interface, with controllers
In this case the time derivatives are given by programmed in C language. The following parameters have
been used in the prototype: grid connection inductance
mH, output capacitance mF and an AC grid voltage of
380 V at 50 Hz. The three phase inverter was implemented
using IGBT’s, rated at 15 kW output load. The output voltage
can be regulated from 560 V to 900 V under the full load
conditions. These values correspond to a laboratory prototype
that was designed for different applications, namely, motor
The angles and are now computed from the following drives, static VAR compensator, and synchronous rectifier. The
relations experimental setup allows changes in the load from no load to
(corresponding to 11.43 KW at 600 V), and the
switching frequency was fixed to 20 KHz. The experiments
were performed with: the output voltage V, and
the output load . Based on time response criteria,
we tuned the parameters of the PI external control loop to
and , and .
Notice that the expressions above involve the use of . In this paper, we only present the experimental results for the
However, direct access to this quantity is not available. Instead, ORS-DPC controller based on the Table IV. The results for the
we propose to estimate using a filter with the structure other controllers based on the other tables are mildly inferior,
shown in Fig. 7, which follows very closely the ideas presented with exception of Table V, and are omitted here for the reason
in [5], and referred to as resonant filters. of space.
The filter in Fig. 7 extracts the th harmonic component of First we show the steady state responses of the currents when
a time varying periodic (two-dimensional) signal . Moreover, load of is connected. We observe in Fig. 8 that the
according to the structure of the filter, it is possible to extract input currents follow quite well their corresponding ref-
both positive an negative sequence symmetric components erence currents . The latter has been computed according
and , respectively, of the th harmonic ( for funda- to .
mental), as well as the associated complex Fourier coefficients Fig. 9 shows that input currents and and their cor-
(phasors) and . The gain is a design parameter that responding AC source voltages and are in phase,
for smaller values makes the filter more selective, but slower. thus guaranteeing operation with a power factor very close to
ESCOBAR et al.: ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF DIRECT POWER CONTROL (DPC) 829

Fig. 12. Transient response of the output power P ( ), for a step load change
t
from no load (R  1) to R = 31:5
.
Fig. 9. Steady state operation of (–) the input current i and (11) its
corresponding ac voltage v .

Fig. 10. Transient response of the output voltage v ( ), for a step load change
t Fig. 13. Steady state operation of (–) the input current i and (11) its
from no load (R  1) to R = 31:5
. corresponding AC voltage v , with R = 33:3
.

Fig. 11. Transient response of input currents (–) i ( ) and (

t )
11 i ( ), for a step
t Fig. 14. Transient response of the output voltage v ( ) for a step load change
t
load change from no load (R  1) to R = 31:5
. from no load (R  1) to R = 33:3
.

one. Notice that in this figure the scale of voltage has been scaled Fig. 13 shows that currents , under a load of ,
by a factor of 1/10, that is, the figure shows the (scaled) voltages and the corresponding AC source voltages are in phase to
and . each other, thus guaranteeing operation with a power factor very
To show the robustness of the proposed controller against close to one.
load step disturbances, we abruptly change the load applied to Fig. 14 shows that after a relatively short transient following
the system from no load ( ) conditions to . an abrupt change on the load resistance going from no load (
Figs. 10 and 11 show the transient response of the output voltage ) to , the voltage converges (in the average)
and input currents and . Notice that, after a rel- toward its desired reference V.
atively short transient, the output voltage is maintained close to
its reference value V. Fig. 12 shows the transient re- IX. CONCLUSION
sponse of the power delivered to the load for the same step
In this paper we showed that the basic principles used for
load change.
DTC can be applied to synchronous rectifiers. The strategy is
denoted as ORS-DPC control, where the name DPC is moti-
VIII. SIMULATION RESULTS FOR UNBALANCED CASE vated by the fact that active and reactive powers are “directly”
To show the effectiveness of the proposed controller in case of controlled, just as the torque and flux amplitude are in DTC.
unbalance and harmonic distortion, we consider the unbalanced The concept of output regulation subspaces (ORS) is revisited,
voltage shown in Fig. 13 which is polluted with 3rd and 5th har- and used to formalize the new switching strategies. It was estab-
monics. These harmonics are unbalanced independently, corre- lished in [1] that the standard DTC uses an approximated ORS.
sponding to approximately 5% THD. Notice that the voltage The strategy proposed here is a modified version of the stan-
scale is multiplied by factor 1/10. We used the model (1)–(2) dard DTC, where we rotate the approximated ORS by a certain
for the system rectifier with the same parameter values as in the angle to consider the exact ORS. Nevertheless, we preserve the
experimental setup. In this case we used the control algorithm basic ideas of DTC to select the control input vector by means
based on Table V. Current reference is computed in the un- of a look-up table. Several modifications are possible depending
balance case according to . on the system characteristics and the desired references. We ob-
The control parameters for the external PI controller were served from our experimental results that the controller guar-
chosen as follows , , and antees a good regulation of the output voltage with a near unit
( , ). The test consists in introducing a step power factor. This holds true even after abrupt load changes,
change on the load resistance at s going from no load suggesting a robust performance of ORS-DPC against this type
( ) to . of disturbances.
830 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 3, MAY 2003

REFERENCES Juan M. Carrasco (M’97) was born in San Roque,

[1] R. Ortega, N. Barabanov, and G. Escobar, “Direct torque control of in-
duction motors: Stability analysis and performance improvement,” IEEE
Trans. Automat. Contr., vol. 46, pp. 1209–1222, Aug. 2001.
[2] G. Escobar, R. Ortega, H. Sira-Ramirez, and H. Ludvigsen, “A hybrid
passivity based controller design for a three phase voltage sourced re-
versible boost type rectifier,” in Proc. 37th. IEEE Conf. Decision Contr.,
Tampa, FL, 1998.
[3] A. Sabanović, N. Sabanović, and K. Ohnishi, “Sliding modes in power
converters and motion control systems,” Int. J. Contr., vol. 57, no. 5, pp.
1237–1259, 1993.
[4] A. Sabanović, N. Sabanović-Behlilović, and T. Ninomiya, “Pwm in
three-phase switching converters—Sliding mode solution,” in Proc.
IEEE Power. Electron. Spec. Conf. (PESC’94), 1994, pp. 560–565.
[5] G. Escobar, A. M. Stanković, and P. Mattavelli, “An adaptive controller
for D-Statcom in the stationary reference frame,” in Proc. IEEE 9th
Europ. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat. EPE’01, Graz, Austria, Aug.
27–29, 2001.
[6] H. Akagi, Y. Kanazawa, and A. Nabae, “Generalized theory of the in-
stantaneous reactive power in three-phase circuits,” in Proc. Int. Power
Electronics Conf. IPEC’83, Tokyo, Japan, 1983, pp. 1375–1386.
[7] T. Ohnishi, “Three phase PWM converter/inverter by means of instanta-
neous active and reactive power control,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Ind. Elec-
tron., Contr. Instrum. (IECON’91), vol. 1, 1991, pp. 819–824.
[8] M. Malinowski, M. P. Kazmierkowski, S. Hansen, F. Blaabjerg, and
G. D. Marques, “Virtual-flux-based direct power control of three-phase
PWM rectifiers,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 37, pp. 1019–1027,
July/Aug. 2001.
[9] T. Noguchi, H. Tomiki, S. Kondo, and I. Takahashi, “Direct power con-
trol of PWM converter without power-source voltage sensors,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 34, pp. 473–479, May/June 1998.
[10] M. Malinowski and M. P. Kazmierkowski, “Direct power control of
three-phase PWM rectifier using space vector modulation—Simulation
study,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Ind. Electron. ISIE 2002, vol. 4, 2002,
pp. 1114–1118.
Gerardo Escobar was born in Xochimilco, Mexico,
in 1967. He received the B.Sc. degree in electrome-
chanics engineering and the M.Sc. degree in elec-
trical engineering from the Engineering Faculty, Na-
tional University of Mexico, in 1991 and 1995, re-
spectively, and the Ph.D. degree from the Signals and
Systems Laboratory, LSS-SUPELEC, Paris, France,
in 1999.
He was a Technical Assistant in the Automatic
Control Laboratory, Graduate School of Engi-
neering, National University of Mexico, from May
1990 to April 1991. From August 1991 to August 1995, he was an Assistant
Professor in the Control Department, Engineering Facility, National University
of Mexico. He was a Visiting Researcher at Northeastern University, Boston,
MA, from August 1999 to June 2002. In July 2002, he joined the Research
Institute of Science and Technology, San Luis Potosí, México (IPICyT), where
he holds a Professor-Researcher position. His main research interests include
nonlinear control design, passivity based control, switching power converters,
and electrical drives.
Spain, in September 1965. He received the M.Eng.
and Dr. Eng. degrees in industrial engineering from
Sevilla University, Sevilla, Spain, in 1989 and 1992,
respectively.
He was an Assistant Professor from 1990 to 1995,
and is currently an Associate Professor with the De-
partment of Electronic Engineering, Sevilla Univer-
sity. He has been working for several years in the
power electronic field where he was involved in in-
dustrial application for the design and development
of power converters applied to renewable energy technologies. His current re-
search areas include several novel control electronic implementations for power
converters, applying new techniques such as sliding modes, fuzzy logic, and
neural networks.
Eduardo Galván was born in Aracena, Huelva,
Spain, in 1964. He received the M.S. degree in
electrical engineering and the Ph.D. degree in
industrial engineering from the University of Sevilla,
Sevilla, Spain, in 1991 and 1994, respectively.
He is an Associate Professor of electronic
engineering at the Escuela Superior de Ingenieros,
Sevilla. His research interests include control of
power converters (resonant converters, wind turbine
applications, active filters, and induction motors).
Romeo Ortega (F’00) was born in Mexico. He re-
ceived the B.Sc. degree in electrical and mechanical
engineering from the National University of Mexico,
in 1974, the M.Eng. degree from the Polytechnical
Institute of Leningrad, Leningrad, Russia, in 1978,
and the Ph.D. degree from the Politechnical Institute
of Grenoble, Grenoble, France in 1984.
He then joined the National University of Mexico,
where he worked until 1989. He was a Visiting
Professor at the University of Illinois, Urbana, from
1987 to 1988, and at McGill University, Montreal,
QC, Canada, from 1991 to 1992, and a Fellow of the Japan Society for
Promotion of Science, from 1990 to 1991. He has been a member of the
French National Researcher Council (CNRS) since June 1992. Currently, he
is in the Laboratoire de Signaux et Systemes (SUPELEC), Paris, France. His
research interests are in the fields of nonlinear and adaptive control, with
special emphasis on applications.
Dr. Ortega was the Chairman of the IEEE Working Group on Adaptive Con-
trol and Systems Identification, of the IFAC Technical Committee on Adaptive
Control and Tuning, and of the Automatica Paper Prize Award Committee. He
is currently a member of the IFAC Technical Board and Chairman of the IFAC
Coordinating Committee on Systems and Signals. He is an Associate Editor of
Systems and Control Letters and the International Journal of Adaptive Control
and Signal Processing.

Aleksandar M. Stanković (M’93) received the

Dipl.Ing. and M.S. degrees from the University of
Belgrade, Yugoslavia, in 1982 and 1986, respec-
tively, and the Ph.D. degree from the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, Cambridge, in 1993, all in
electrical engineering.
He has been with the Department of Electrical
and Computer Engineering, Northeastern University,
Boston, MA, since 1993, presently as a Professor.
His research interests are in modeling, analysis,
estimation and control of energy processing systems.
Dr. Stanković is a member of the IEEE Power Engineering, Power Elec-
tronics, Control Systems, Circuits and Systems, Industry Applications, and
Industrial Electronics Societies. He was an Associate Editor for the IEEE
TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEM TECHNOLOGY, from 1997 to 2001, and
presently serves the IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS in the same
capacity.