MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211215196 · doi:10.1109/tpel.2022.3150319

Modified Droop Strategy for Wide Load Range Efficiency Improvement of Parallel Inverter Systems

2022· article· en· W4211215196 on OpenAlexaff
Nima Amouzegar Ashtiani, Ali Sheykhi, S. Ali Khajehoddin

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Electronics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrogrid Control and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVoltage droopInverterPower (physics)Reliability (semiconductor)Computer scienceElectronic engineeringRange (aeronautics)Control theory (sociology)EngineeringVoltageElectrical engineeringVoltage regulator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parallel inverters are used in many modern applications, and thus, improving the inverter system efficiency plays a key role in energy savings. The conventional droop strategy used for power sharing among inverters, however, leads to a low efficiency especially at light loads, as the low power demand is divided among inverters, forcing them to process a fraction of the low power at a low efficiency according to their efficiency curve. To avoid such operating conditions, a communicationless modified droop strategy is proposed in this article to select an optimal number of inverters to process fractions of the power demand that leads to a higher system efficiency considering the efficiency curve of the inverters. To achieve this objective at very light load situations, an online-inverter detection method is developed so that each inverter detects the online inverters and the unnecessary inverters turnoff. The proposed method is employed in a system with three single-phase parallel inverters to evaluate the effectiveness of the method. It is observed that the proposed strategy can improve the system efficiency by up to 14% at light loads compared with the conventional droop. Additionally, the reliability of the system is enhanced by extending the lifetime of inverters with higher power ratings, which are considered as valuable assets of the system. Detailed derivations, simulations, and experimental results are presented to validate the proposed method.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power ElectronicsSame topicMicrogrid Control and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207