Stability issues in three-phase PWM current/voltage source rectifiers in the regeneration mode
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pulse-width modulated current-source and voltage-source rectifiers are becoming an interesting alternative as a source of variable DC power. Advantages include reduced line current harmonic distortion and complete displacement power factor control, including reactive power compensation. Consequently, literature has recently reported different control strategies, where the active power flows from the AC mains into the load. Unfortunately, when active power flows from the load into the converter, it is usually dissipated in the DC link by means of switched resistors. Such approach reduces the overall efficiency; specially, when regeneration is the normal operating mode as in down-hill belt conveyors and electrical shovels in mining applications. In these cases, the regenerative operating mode should be permanently sustained. This work reviews several important issues concerning such an operating mode; specifically, the stability of the converter-load system, and stability analysis of closed loop operation. The paper shows that PWM rectifiers controlled by a regular linear controller (such as PIs) may become unstable under the regenerative operating mode and analyses a control strategy to overcome such difficulties. Simulated results confirm the validity of theoretical considerations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".