MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multi-FPGA Co-simulation of SST and DAB in HIL: A Case Study for EV Charging Station Application

2024· article· en· W4407305218 on OpenAlexaff
Juan Páez Alvarez, Satish Kumar Ancha, Milad Hoseinizadeh, Wei Li

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReal-time simulation and control systems
Canadian institutionsOpal-Rt Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsField-programmable gate arrayComputer scienceCo-simulationEnvironmental scienceEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this energy transition era, the penetration of power electronic converters is increasing rapidly for diverse applications. High-fidelity Central Processing Unit (CPU) and Field-Programmable Gate Array (FPGA)-based solutions for Hardware-In-the-Loop (HIL) simulation are becoming obligatory for the study of these bulk power converters which encompass a high number of switches operating at very high switching frequencies. This paper presents a co-simulation of two solutions, i.e., a Modular Voltage Source Converter (MVSC) solver and Electrical Hardware Solver (eHS), with multi-FPGA-based real-time and HIL-based simulations to address the stated issue. The MVSC solver can handle large modular converters while eHS allows flexibility on converter topology. To show the flexibility and capability of these solvers, a DC-bus-based Electrical Vehicle (EV) charging station with Solid State Transformer (SST) and Dual Active Bridges (DABs) has been modeled in the real-time simulation platform, RT-LAB. Both converters, SST and DAB, have been simulated on a multi-FPGA solution. Both FPGAs communicate via Small Form-factor Pluggable (SFP) fiber optic using Aurora protocol. In addition, an external controller was used to control the DAB to demonstrate HIL operation. This high-fidelity simulation of an EV-charging station has been validated in the HIL testbench and results are presented in the paper.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.407
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReal-time simulation and control systemsFrench-language works237,207