Author Contributions
Conceptualization, Y.Y. and S.W.; methodology, Y.Y. and S.W.; software, Y.Y.; validation, Y.Y.; formal analysis, Y.Y. and S.W.; investigation, Y.Y. and S.W.; resources, M.S. and X.Z.; data curation, Y.Y.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.Y.; writing—review and editing, Y.Y. and S.W.; visualization, Y.Y.; supervision, S.W.; project administration, S.W.; funding acquisition, M.S. and X.Z. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Figure 1.
Modulation process of DC side voltage.
Figure 1.
Modulation process of DC side voltage.
Figure 2.
Single-phase bridge-controlled rectifier circuit topology (a) and corresponding schematic waveforms under intermittent load current conditions (b).
Figure 2.
Single-phase bridge-controlled rectifier circuit topology (a) and corresponding schematic waveforms under intermittent load current conditions (b).
Figure 3.
Establishment process of CFAM analytical model based on piecewise linearization.
Figure 3.
Establishment process of CFAM analytical model based on piecewise linearization.
Figure 4.
Schematic waveforms of AC side voltage , DC side voltage , and AC side current of the single-phase bridge-controlled rectifier under continuous load current conditions.
Figure 4.
Schematic waveforms of AC side voltage , DC side voltage , and AC side current of the single-phase bridge-controlled rectifier under continuous load current conditions.
Figure 5.
Three phase bridge-controlled rectifier circuit with resistive-inductive load.
Figure 5.
Three phase bridge-controlled rectifier circuit with resistive-inductive load.
Figure 6.
Schematic waveforms of line voltages, AC side phase-A current , and DC side voltage of the three-phase bridge rectifier. (a) Intermittent current condition. (b) Continuous current condition.
Figure 6.
Schematic waveforms of line voltages, AC side phase-A current , and DC side voltage of the three-phase bridge rectifier. (a) Intermittent current condition. (b) Continuous current condition.
Figure 7.
The magnitudes and phases of 600 supply voltages generated from the six typical harmonic scenarios.
Figure 7.
The magnitudes and phases of 600 supply voltages generated from the six typical harmonic scenarios.
Figure 8.
Distribution of the amplitude relative error and the phase absolute error of different order currents for the single-phase bridge rectifier. (a) Intermittent load current condition. (b) Continuous load current condition.
Figure 8.
Distribution of the amplitude relative error and the phase absolute error of different order currents for the single-phase bridge rectifier. (a) Intermittent load current condition. (b) Continuous load current condition.
Figure 9.
Distribution of calculated and simulated conduction angles of thyristors in 600 test samples.
Figure 9.
Distribution of calculated and simulated conduction angles of thyristors in 600 test samples.
Figure 10.
Comparison of the current measurements and model estimates for the single-phase bridge rectifier under intermittent current conditions when supplied by the voltage in Case 6. (a) Comparison of current waveforms. (b) Comparison of current amplitude spectrums and phase spectrums.
Figure 10.
Comparison of the current measurements and model estimates for the single-phase bridge rectifier under intermittent current conditions when supplied by the voltage in Case 6. (a) Comparison of current waveforms. (b) Comparison of current amplitude spectrums and phase spectrums.
Figure 11.
Comparison of the current measurements and model estimates for the single-phase bridge rectifier under continuous current conditions when supplied by the voltage in Case 6. (a) Comparison of current waveforms. (b) Comparison of current amplitude spectrums and phase spectrums.
Figure 11.
Comparison of the current measurements and model estimates for the single-phase bridge rectifier under continuous current conditions when supplied by the voltage in Case 6. (a) Comparison of current waveforms. (b) Comparison of current amplitude spectrums and phase spectrums.
Figure 12.
Magnitude of CFAM elements for the single-phase bridge rectifier under intermittent (a) and continuous (b) load current conditions in Case 6.
Figure 12.
Magnitude of CFAM elements for the single-phase bridge rectifier under intermittent (a) and continuous (b) load current conditions in Case 6.
Figure 13.
Distribution of total harmonic distortion across 600 different power voltage scenarios.
Figure 13.
Distribution of total harmonic distortion across 600 different power voltage scenarios.
Figure 14.
Distribution of the amplitude relative error and the phase absolute error of different order currents for the three-phase bridge rectifier. (a) Intermittent load current condition. (b) Continuous load current condition.
Figure 14.
Distribution of the amplitude relative error and the phase absolute error of different order currents for the three-phase bridge rectifier. (a) Intermittent load current condition. (b) Continuous load current condition.
Figure 15.
The current measurements and model estimates for the three-phase bridge rectifier under intermittent load current conditions when supplied by the voltage in Case 12. (a) Comparison of current waveforms. (b) Comparison of current amplitude spectrums and phase spectrums.
Figure 15.
The current measurements and model estimates for the three-phase bridge rectifier under intermittent load current conditions when supplied by the voltage in Case 12. (a) Comparison of current waveforms. (b) Comparison of current amplitude spectrums and phase spectrums.
Figure 16.
The current measurements and model estimates for the three-phase bridge rectifier under continuous load current conditions when supplied by the voltage in Case 12. (a) Comparison of current waveforms. (b) Comparison of current amplitude spectrums and phase spectrums.
Figure 16.
The current measurements and model estimates for the three-phase bridge rectifier under continuous load current conditions when supplied by the voltage in Case 12. (a) Comparison of current waveforms. (b) Comparison of current amplitude spectrums and phase spectrums.
Figure 17.
Magnitude of CFAM elements for the three-phase bridge rectifier under intermittent (a) and continuous (b) load current conditions in Case 12.
Figure 17.
Magnitude of CFAM elements for the three-phase bridge rectifier under intermittent (a) and continuous (b) load current conditions in Case 12.
Figure 18.
(a) Experimental test platform for the three-phase bridge rectifier. (b) Excitation cabinet.
Figure 18.
(a) Experimental test platform for the three-phase bridge rectifier. (b) Excitation cabinet.
Figure 19.
Distribution of the amplitude relative error and the phase absolute error of different order currents. (a) Intermittent load current condition. (b) Continuous load current condition.
Figure 19.
Distribution of the amplitude relative error and the phase absolute error of different order currents. (a) Intermittent load current condition. (b) Continuous load current condition.
Figure 20.
The measured waveforms of the AC−side resistor voltage (blue line) and the secondary winding line voltage (yellow line) under the two operating states of (a) and (b).
Figure 20.
The measured waveforms of the AC−side resistor voltage (blue line) and the secondary winding line voltage (yellow line) under the two operating states of (a) and (b).
Figure 21.
The current measurements and model estimates for the three-phase bridge rectifier under operating state. (a) Comparison of current waveforms. (b) Comparison of current amplitude spectrums and phase spectrums.
Figure 21.
The current measurements and model estimates for the three-phase bridge rectifier under operating state. (a) Comparison of current waveforms. (b) Comparison of current amplitude spectrums and phase spectrums.
Figure 22.
The current measurements and model estimates for the three-phase bridge rectifier under operating state. (a) Comparison of current waveforms. (b) Comparison of current amplitude spectrums and phase spectrums.
Figure 22.
The current measurements and model estimates for the three-phase bridge rectifier under operating state. (a) Comparison of current waveforms. (b) Comparison of current amplitude spectrums and phase spectrums.
Table 1.
The measured PCC voltages under six typical harmonic scenarios.
Table 1.
The measured PCC voltages under six typical harmonic scenarios.
| Case 1 | Case 2 | Case 3 | Case 4 | Case 5 | Case 6 |
---|
| Mag | Phs | Mag | Phs | Mag | Phs | Mag | Phs | Mag | Phs | Mag | Phs |
---|
| (V) | (°) | (V) | (°) | (V) | (°) | (V) | (°) | (V) | (°) | (V) | (°) |
---|
1st | 230.6 | 0 | 231.1 | 0 | 225.7 | 0 | 226.1 | 0 | 222.8 | 0 | 208.5 | 0 |
3rd | 0.6 | −55 | 1.4 | −60 | 3.8 | −64 | 6.4 | −58 | 7.8 | −55 | 8.2 | −70 |
5th | 1.2 | 164 | 2.1 | 170 | 3.4 | 255 | 2.2 | 117 | 2.7 | 134 | 3.2 | 120 |
7th | 1.1 | −1 | 0.9 | 24 | 1.2 | 38 | 2.1 | 153 | 1.8 | 134 | 2.4 | 115 |
9th | 0.7 | −71 | 0.5 | 230 | 1.7 | 192 | 2.2 | 180 | 2.0 | 173 | 2.2 | 167 |
11th | 0.3 | −6 | 0.6 | −19 | 2.5 | −99 | 0.8 | 73 | 0.9 | 56 | 1.5 | 39 |
13th | 0.1 | 125 | 0.8 | 128 | 0.8 | −10 | 1.3 | 132 | 1.5 | 120 | 1.7 | 108 |
15th | 0.3 | 114 | 0.4 | −73 | 0.5 | 20 | 0.5 | 95 | 0.7 | 117 | 1.2 | 139 |
17th | 0.2 | 252 | 0.4 | 60 | 1.2 | −60 | 0.8 | 88 | 0.8 | 54 | 1.1 | 20 |
19th | 0.2 | −72 | 0.3 | 166 | 1.1 | −55 | 0.6 | 108 | 0.5 | 73 | 0.9 | 38 |
| 0.84 | 1.29 | 2.81 | 3.39 | 4.01 | 4.72 |
Table 2.
Evaluation metrics of different harmonic source models under intermittent load current conditions for the single-phase bridge rectifier.
Table 2.
Evaluation metrics of different harmonic source models under intermittent load current conditions for the single-phase bridge rectifier.
Model | (%)
| (%)
| (°)
| (°)
| (%)
| (%)
|
---|
CFAM_pro | 2.61 | 0.58 | 0.91 | 0.41 | 1.34 | 0.06 |
CFAM_tra | 6.94 | 4.97 | 11.31 | 8.04 | 2.01 | 0.70 |
CCS | 11.47 | 4.47 | 13.52 | 7.64 | 5.31 | 3.23 |
Table 3.
Evaluation metrics of different harmonic source models under continuous load current conditions for the single-phase bridge rectifier.
Table 3.
Evaluation metrics of different harmonic source models under continuous load current conditions for the single-phase bridge rectifier.
Model | (%)
| (%)
| (°)
| (°)
| (%)
| (%)
|
---|
CFAM_pro | 0.68 | 0.34 | 3.67 | 2.25 | 8.70 | 0.32 |
CFAM_tra | 4.89 | 3.61 | 11.32 | 9.77 | 9.53 | 1.18 |
CCS | 5.86 | 4.13 | 11.39 | 9.71 | 10.81 | 2.11 |
Table 4.
Voltage magnitudes and phases of six cases.
Table 4.
Voltage magnitudes and phases of six cases.
| Case 7 | Case 8 | Case 9 | Case 10 | Case 11 | Case 12 |
---|
| Mag | Phs | Mag | Phs | Mag | Phs | Mag | Phs | Mag | Phs | Mag | Phs |
---|
| (V) | (°) | (V) | (°) | (V) | (°) | (V) | (°) | (V) | (°) | (V) | (°) |
---|
1st | 218.7 | 0 | 217.6 | 0 | 216.3 | 0 | 214.7 | 0 | 213.2 | 0 | 196.0 | 0 |
5th | 1.9 | −40 | 3.4 | −38 | 4.8 | −37 | 6.6 | −38 | 8.1 | −36 | 9.7 | −33 |
7th | 0.4 | 152 | 0.6 | 153 | 0.8 | 154 | 1.1 | 150 | 1.4 | 151 | 2.0 | 158 |
11th | 0.6 | 17 | 1.1 | 21 | 1.6 | 24 | 2.1 | 19 | 2.5 | 23 | 3.2 | 31 |
13th | 0.3 | 214 | 0.5 | 219 | 0.6 | −138 | 0.8 | −144 | 1.1 | −140 | 1.4 | −130 |
17th | 0.4 | 75 | 0.6 | 81 | 0.9 | 85 | 1.2 | 78 | 1.5 | 84 | 1.8 | 97 |
19th | 0.2 | −87 | 0.4 | −80 | 0.5 | −75 | 0.7 | −83 | 0.8 | −77 | 1.1 | −63 |
23th | 0.3 | 133 | 0.4 | 141 | 0.6 | 147 | 0.8 | −223 | 1.0 | −214 | 1.3 | −197 |
25th | 0.1 | −28 | 0.3 | −19 | 0.4 | −13 | 0.6 | −24 | 0.6 | −15 | 0.8 | 4 |
| 0.97 | 1.72 | 2.46 | 3.37 | 4.17 | 5.51 |
Table 5.
Evaluation metrics results for the three-phase bridge rectifier in intermittent current conditions.
Table 5.
Evaluation metrics results for the three-phase bridge rectifier in intermittent current conditions.
Model | (%)
| (%)
| (°)
| (°)
| (%)
| (%)
|
---|
CFAM_pro | 2.44 | 0.36 | 5.59 | 0.49 | 13.74 | 0.97 |
CFAM_tra | 6.81 | 4.81 | 17.33 | 12.98 | 17.85 | 5.56 |
CCS | 8.33 | 5.26 | 17.49 | 12.92 | 19.76 | 6.84 |
Table 6.
Evaluation metrics results for the three-phase bridge rectifier in continuous current conditions.
Table 6.
Evaluation metrics results for the three-phase bridge rectifier in continuous current conditions.
Model | (%)
| (%)
| (°)
| (°)
| (%)
| (%)
|
---|
CFAM_pro | 5.20 | 1.46 | 3.19 | 2.28 | 14.63 | 0.20 |
CFAM_tra | 13.80 | 14.04 | 10.83 | 9.58 | 17.89 | 5.09 |
CCS | 15.60 | 15.98 | 10.89 | 9.61 | 19.28 | 6.52 |
Table 7.
Circuit parameter settings and DC side voltage measurements under intermittent load current conditions for the three-phase bridge rectifier.
Table 7.
Circuit parameter settings and DC side voltage measurements under intermittent load current conditions for the three-phase bridge rectifier.
| | | | | | | | | | |
| 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 11.22 | 10.20 | 9.82 | 9.37 | 8.94 | 8.55 | 8.12 | 7.76 | 7.40 | 6.98 |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 |
| 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| 10.44 | 9.95 | 9.53 | 9.06 | 8.66 | 8.24 | 7.92 | 7.47 | 7.06 | 6.68 |
Table 8.
Circuit parameter settings and DC side voltage measurements under continuous load current conditions for the three-phase bridge rectifier.
Table 8.
Circuit parameter settings and DC side voltage measurements under continuous load current conditions for the three-phase bridge rectifier.
| | | | | | | | | | |
| 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 28.14 | 27.41 | 26.88 | 26.36 | 25.87 | 25.40 | 24.85 | 24.27 | 23.85 | 23.13 |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 |
| 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| 27.97 | 27.31 | 26.84 | 26.52 | 25.80 | 25.31 | 24.84 | 24.30 | 23.80 | 23.15 |
Table 9.
Evaluation metrics of the harmonic models under intermittent load current conditions for the three-phase bridge rectifier.
Table 9.
Evaluation metrics of the harmonic models under intermittent load current conditions for the three-phase bridge rectifier.
Model | (%)
| (%)
| (°)
| (°)
| (%)
| (%)
|
---|
CFAM_pro | 5.88 | 1.14 | 9.75 | 3.26 | 21.31 | 6.11 |
CFAM_tra | 12.97 | 5.47 | 33.20 | 18.97 | 28.69 | 9.22 |
CCS | 12.44 | 6.10 | 32.99 | 19.86 | 27.00 | 9.33 |
Table 10.
Evaluation metrics of the harmonic models under continuous load current conditions for the three-phase bridge rectifier.
Table 10.
Evaluation metrics of the harmonic models under continuous load current conditions for the three-phase bridge rectifier.
Model | (%)
| (%)
| (°)
| (°)
| (%)
| (%)
|
---|
CFAM_pro | 7.54 | 1.08 | 8.41 | 3.05 | 18.64 | 5.58 |
CFAM_tra | 10.81 | 5.06 | 35.17 | 20.29 | 19.55 | 5.06 |
CCS | 12.60 | 7.33 | 37.32 | 25.36 | 19.34 | 5.26 |