Guidelines for dSPACE-Based Real-Time
Implementation of Predictive Current Control for
Grid-Connected Converters
Christopher LefÀer, Kaylub Hemphill, Anthony Sagg, Ryan Lee,
Christian Endsley, Omar Almuharrami, Samkruth Aluru, and Venkata Yaramasu
Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ, USA
Email: {crl235,kdh247,axs2,rwl26,ce377,oza2,sa959,venkata.yaramasu}@nau.edu
Abstract—This paper provides guidelines for the MATLAB-
based simulation and dSPACE-based real-time implementation
of predictive current control scheme for grid-connected two-
level voltage source converters. A step-by-step procedure for the
calculation and extrapolation of reference grid currents, and
design of predictive model and cost function is provided. The
predictive model uses grid voltages, grid currents, DC voltage,
system parameters, and discrete-time mathematical model of the
system to calculate the future values of grid currents. The cost
function evaluates the error between reference and predicted
grid currents and selects an optimal switching state based on the
minimum error value. The proposed design and implementation
approaches are validated by the simulation and experimental
results. This paper serves as a valuable reference for novice
readers in the model predictive control area.
Index Terms—Current control, DC-AC power conversion,
digital control, ¿nite control-set model predictive control, grid-
connected converter, renewable energy.
I. I NTRODUCTION
The grid connected converters (GCCs) enable bidirectional
power Àow and are used in various multistage power conver-
sion applications such as photovoltaic energy, wind energy,
motor drives, high voltage direct current transmission, active
power ¿lters, electric vehicle charging stations, etc. [1]. The
control objectives for GCCs are active power control, reactive
power control, and grid synchronization [2], [3]. These control
objectives are ful¿lled through the control of grid currents in
synchronous (dq) or stationary (αβ) reference frames.
The classical GCC control techniques such as voltage-
oriented control employs proportional-integral (PI) controllers
in the inner current control loop to eliminate steady state
current errors, and pulse width (or space vector) modulation
stage to generate the gating signals [2], [4]–[6]. The linear
control based on low band-width control loop and space vector
modulation leads to analytical approaches for PI controller
tuning, complex implementation of modulation stage, sluggish
dynamic response, and poor power quality [7], [8]. Moreover,
the grid voltage harmonics and control delay degrade the
performance of modulation based linear controller [9].
Finite control-set model predictive control (FCS-MPC) is a
simple and Àexible control scheme that is an attractive alter-
native to the classical control schemes [10]–[14]. The FCS-
MPC scheme offers many advantages including fast dynamic
response even with low switching frequency operation, digital
controller friendliness with ¿nite number of optimizations,
simple concepts, and the ability to include nonlinearities and
constraints in the design of controller [1]. The MPC greatly
reduces the complexity of control schemes by eliminating the
need for PI controllers and modulation stage in the inner
control loops. The MPC scheme predicts the future behavior of
control variables for each valid switching state of the converter
using the discrete-time model of complete power conversion
system. During each sampling interval, these predictions are
evaluated with a cost function that minimizes the error between
predicted and reference control variables.
The predictive current control (PCC) scheme is well studied
in literature for two-level and multilevel GCCs [3], [9], [15]–
[20]. However, there are no papers that provide detailed
guidelines for the simulation and real-time implementation of
PCC for GCC. The authors do not claim any new contributions
through this work in terms of PCC scheme for GCCs. Rather,
this work targets the novice readers and new researchers in
the MPC area. This paper provides a step-by-step procedure
to develop the MATLAB/Simulink simulation models for PCC
scheme of two-level voltage source converter (2L-VSC), and
discusses how to transfer these simulation models for dSPACE
DS1103-based rapid prototyping and real-time implementa-
tion. The implementation of PCC scheme is discussed in detail
with respect to the grid voltage angle estimation, calculation
and extrapolation of reference grid currents, predictions of
future grid currents, and cost function minimization. This work
considers the αβ reference frame for PCC design as it reduces
the number of online calculations in comparison to the dq
frame. The authors hope that this work serves as a useful
reference to develop and verify the MPC algorithms with
MATLAB simulations and DS1103-based experiments.
This paper is organized as follows: Section II discusses
the PCC scheme for two-level GCC. The MATLAB/Simulink
implementation of PCC scheme is outlined in Section III.
The real-time implementation guidelines are given in Section
IV. The simulation and experimental results are discussed in
Section V, and ¿nally conclusions are given in Section VI.
 II. PCC S CHEME FOR GCC grid, it is not necessary to measure phase-c grid voltages and
Fig. 1 shows the power circuit of grid-connected 2L-VSC. currents because vcg (k) = −vag (k) − vbg (k) and icg (k) =
The active power is considered to Àow from the DC circuit −iag (k) − ibg (k).
to the utility grid. The phase-leg of GCC consists of two The αβ-frame grid voltages are estimated from the natural
switches based on insulated-gate bipolar transistors (IGBTs). (abc) frame grid voltages by using the abc/αβ transformation
The active power extracted by the renewable energy sources expressed below:
⎡ ⎤
is represented by a variable DC current source, idc [18].    1 1  vag
The three-phase grid voltages are de¿ned as vag , vbg , and vαg 2 1 − √2
−
√2 ⎣ vbg ⎦
= 3 3 (1)
vcg . The three-phase grid currents are represented as iag , vβg 3 0 2 − 2 v cg
ibg , and icg . The grid harmonic ¿lter inductance and its
internal resistance are represented by Li and ri , respectively. where vαg and vβg are stationary frame grid voltages. Simi-
The switching signals (sai , sbi and sci ) produce eight (23 ) larly, the abc-frame grid currents are transformed to the αβ-
switching combinations for a three-phase GCC. frame using the transformation matrix in (1).

B. Estimation of Grid Voltage Angle

sai sbi sci To perform grid synchronization, the grid voltage angle θg
iag ri , Li vag
is estimated from the measured three-phase grid voltages. The
ibg vbg
idc Cdc vdc n transformation of variables between abc, αβ, and dq frames
icg vcg heavily relies on the estimation of θg . Under the ideal grid
voltage conditions, the phase-locked loop (PLL) obtains grid
sai sbi sci voltage angle θg from the αβ-frame grid voltages as shown
below [4]:

vβg
Figure 1. Power circuit of three-phase grid-connected 2L-VSC. θg = tan−1 . (2)
vαg
The PCC block diagram in αβ-frame for a grid-connected In real time, the grid voltages are distorted and contain
2L-VSC is shown in Fig. 2. The 2L-VSC control system harmonics. In such cases, the synchronous reference frame
performs the following functions: grid active power control PLL can be used to detect the grid voltage angle more
through the d-axis current control, grid reactive power control ef¿ciently [2], [21].
through the q-axis current control, and grid synchronization.
The PCC design procedure for a GCC is given as follows. C. Calculation of Reference Grid Currents
idc (k) The GCC control requirements are translated as the refer-
ence grid currents. The reference reactive power command Q∗g
is provided by the grid operator, which can be set to zero for
vdc (k) unity, negative value for leading, and positive value for the
i∗αg (k) i∗αg (k + 1)
i∗dg (k) sai (k)
dq Extrapolation lagging power factor. The active and reactive power control
i∗βg (k) i∗ (k + 1)
i∗qg (k) αβ Eq. (4) βg Cost
sbi (k)
GCC
loops provide reference currents i∗dg and i∗qg , respectively. The
ipαg (k + 1) Fucntion
θg (k)
Predictive Model Eq. (11) θg helps to transform the dq-frame reference grid currents into
vdc (k) ipβg (k + 1) sci (k)
the αβ-frame as shown below:
Eq. (7)
∗    
iαg (k) cos θg (k) −sin θg (k) i∗dg (k)
= . (3)
ri , Li
i∗βg (k) sin θg (k) cos θg (k) i∗qg (k)
iαg (k) iag (k)
iβg (k)
αβ
ibg (k) D. Extrapolation of Reference Grid Currents
abc
vαg (k) vag (k) To compute the grid current error at (k+2) sampling instant,
αβ
vβg (k) vbg (k) the αβ-axis reference grid currents are extrapolated to (k +
abc
2) state with the help of second-order Lagrange extrapolation
θg (k)
PLL
Grid shown below [22]:

i∗αg (k + 2) = 6 i∗αg (k) − 8 i∗αg (k − 1) + 3 i∗αg (k − 2)
Figure 2. Block diagram of PCC scheme for grid-connected 2L-VSC. (4)
i∗ (k + 2) = 6 i∗ (k) − 8 i∗ (k − 1) + 3 i∗ (k − 2)
βg βg βg βg

A. Measurement of Feedback Signals E. Prediction of Future Grid Currents

The measured three-phase grid voltages and currents, and The continuous-time grid current dynamic model in αβ-
DC link voltage vdc are supplied as input signals to the GCC frame is presented below [20]:
       
control scheme. The PCC scheme generates switching signals d iαg (t) iαg (t) vαi (t) vαg (t)
sai , sbi , and sci for the GCC. For a balanced three-phase =A +B −B (5)
dt iβg (t) iβg (t) vβi (t) vβg (t)
where continuous-time parameters A and B are de¿ned by, Table I
 ri  1  R ATED PARAMETERS FOR GCC
− Li 0 0
A= , B = Li . (6)
0 − Lrii 0 L1i Parameter Symbol Value

The discrete-time model of grid currents with exact or zero- Control sampling time Ts (s) 20 × 10−6
order hold discretization is obtained as follows [1]: Simulation sampling time Tsim (s) 2 × 10−6
     p    GCC apparent power Sg (VA) 5000
ipαg (k + 1) iαg (k) vαi (k) vαg (k) Grid phase Voltage vg (V, rms) 208
=Φ +Γ −Γ (7)
ipβg (k + 1) iβg (k)
p
vβi (k) vβg (k) Grid line current ig (A, rms) 13.88
Grid frequency fg (Hz) 60
where superscript p denotes the predicted variable. Filter resistance ri (Ω) 0.1348 (0.02 pu)
The discrete-time parameters Φ and Γ are de¿ned in terms Filter inductance Li (H) 5.65 × 10−3 (0.25 pu)
of continuous-time parameters A and B as shown below: DC link capacitance Cdc (F) 1000 × 10−6 (3.26 pu)
Reference DC link voltage ∗ (V)
vdc 367 (3.062 pu)
Φ = eA Ts , Γ = A−1 (Φ − I) B (8) DC link resistance Rdc (Ω) 1 × 10−3 (0.00015 pu)
where I is second-order unitary matrix.
The GCC output voltages are predicted with the help of
switching signals and measured DC link voltage vdc , that is, window, enter mex -setup command and follow on-screen
 p   p  instructions to setup the mex needed for the S-function builder.
vαi (k) sαi (k) The following ¿les are created to implement the PCC
p = vdc (k) p (9)
vβi (k) sβi (k) scheme through simulations and experiments:
where sαi and sβi are the αβ-frame switching signals. These 1) GCC PCC Init.m (Initialization ¿le containing all the
switching signals are de¿ned ofÀine along with the natural system parameters)
frame switching signals to reduce the online calculations. 2) lib parameters.h (Parameters library ¿le for the S-
In the real-time implementation of PCC scheme, the com- function builder)
putational delay caused by the dSPACE deteriorates the per- 3) lib vectors.h (GCC vectors library ¿le for the S-function
formance of PCC scheme [23]. To overcome this issue, two- builder)
samples-ahead predictive model is used as follows [24]: 4) GCC PCC Model Sim.slx (Simulink model ¿le)
  p   p    5) GCC PCC Model Exp.slx (Real-time model ¿le)
ipαg (k + 2) iαg (k + 1) vαi (k) vαg (k)
p
iβg (k + 2) = Φ p
iβg (k + 1) +Γ p
vβi (k) −Γ . (10)
vβg (k) A. Initialization and Library File Description
F. Cost Function Minimization The GCC PCC Init.m script ¿le shown below contains the
model parameters listed in Table I.
The GCC cost function evaluates the error between extrap-
1 clc, clear all, close all
olated reference grid currents and predicted grid currents at 2 Ts = 20e-6;
(k + 2) sampling instant, that is, 3 Tsim = 2e-6;
 2 4 Sg = 5000;
5
gi (k) = i∗αg (k + 2) − ipαg (k + 2)
Vgll = 208;
6 Ig = 13.88;
 2 (11) 7 Fg = 60;
+ i∗βg (k + 2) − ipβg (k + 2) . 8 ri = 0.1348;
9 Li = 5.65e-3;
With the eight combinations for GCC switching signals, 10 Cdc = 1000e-6;
p p 11 Vdcr = 367;
eight different predictions are obtained for vαi and vβi , which 12 Rdc = 1e-3;
in turn leads to eight different future values of iαg and ipβg .
p
The lib parameters.h ¿le contains the parameter values
The predicted currents are compared with the extrapolated required for the S-function builder.
reference grid currents (i∗αg and i∗βg ) to select an optimal 1 #define Phi 0.999522238058405
switching state combination that minimizes the cost function. 2 #define Gamma 0.003538977345145
The switching signals sai , sbi , and sci corresponding to the The lib vectors.h ¿le shown below is required for the
optimal sαi and sβi are selected and applied to the GCC during PCC algorithm implementation with the S-function builder.
next sampling period. The program lines 1 to 2 correspond to initial values of
counter number j_i and optimal counter number ji_opt.
III. S IMULINK I MPLEMENTATION OF PCC S CHEME The program lines 3 to 4 de¿ne initial values for cost function
g_i. The vector format for GCC output voltages and predicted
This section describes the MATLAB/Simulink implemen- grid currents in αβ-frame are de¿ned in lines 5 to 7. The
tation of PCC scheme for grid-connected 2L-VSC. The sim- structure type for abc and αβ frame switching signals is
ulation ¿les are developed by using the Simscape toolbox in de¿ned in lines 8 to 12. The GCC switching signals in abc
MATLAB/Simulink 2015b release software. Table I represents and αβ frames are de¿ned in lines 16 to 31 according to the
the parameters of overall system. At the MATLAB command notation given in Table II.
 1 int j_i = 0; Table II
2 int ji_opt = 0; 2L-VSC S WITCHING SIGNALS IN abc AND αβ FRAMES
3 double g_i = 0.0;
4 double gi_opt = 0.0;
5 double vi_ab[2] = {0.0,0.0}; Switching abc Frame αβ Frame
Combination Switching Signals Switching Signals
6 double ig_ab_k1[2] = {0.0,0.0}; s sai sbi sci sαi sβi
7 double ig_ab_k2[2] = {0.0,0.0};
8 typedef struct s0 0 0 0 0 0
9 { s1 1 0 0 2
0
10 unsigned short int si_abc[3]; 3
1 √1
s2 1 1 0
11 double si_ab[2]; 3 3
12 } s3 0 1 0 − 13 √1
3
13 vector; s4 0 1 1 − 23 0
14 vector vinv[8]=
s5 0 0 1 − 13 − √1
15 { 3
1
16 0, 0, 0, s6 1 0 1 3
− √1
3
17 0, 0, s7 1 1 1 0 0
18 1, 0, 0,
19 6.666667e-01, 0,
20 1, 1, 0,
21 3.333333e-01, 5.773503e-01, maintained constant by the front-end converter in multistage
22 0, 1, 0,
23 -3.333333e-01, 5.773503e-01, power conversion system. The Simulink model uses ¿xed-
24 0, 1, 1, step ode3 (Bogacki-Shampine) type solver with Tsim sampling
25 -6.666667e-01, 0, time.
26 0, 0, 1,
27 -3.333333e-01, -5.773503e-01, A DC-link capacitor Cdc is connected to the DC power sup-
28 1, 0, 1, ply through a resistor Rdc . The Rdc represents the resistance of
29 3.333333e-01, -5.773503e-01, wire that connects the DC capacitor with the DC power supply.
30 1, 1, 1,
31 0, 0, A series RLC branch block is used to implement Cdc with
32 }; capacitance variable Cdc and capacitor initial voltage variable
Vdcr . The Rdc is also implemented by the series RLC branch
B. Simulink Model Description block. The GCC is realized by default values selected for
The complete simulation model of grid-connected 2L-VSC three-arm universal bridge block in Simscape which require
with PCC scheme is shown in Fig. 3 and is implemented six gating signals in the following order: sai , sai , sbi , sbi , sci ,
by the GCC PCC Model Sim.slx ¿le. The overall Simulink and sci . Similarly, the harmonic ¿lter is implemented with
model consists of several subsystems and blocks: DC link, 2L- a series RLC branch block with branch type set to RL. The
VSC, harmonic ¿lter, grid voltage and current sensors, three- resistance value is set to ri and inductance value is set to
phase grid, PCC scheme, and measurements. The constant Li . The From and Goto blocks with global tag visibility are
DC power supply implies that the net DC-bus voltage is used to reduce the wiring complexity of simulation model.

Figure 3. MATLAB/Simulink model for complete power conversion system.

The three-phase grid voltages and currents are measured with in line 3, the GCC output voltages are predicted in αβ-frame
the help of three-phase VI measurement block. The DC link in lines 5 and 6, the grid currents are predicted in lines 7 to
voltage (vdc ) is measured by the voltage measurement block. 10, the cost function is de¿ned in line 11, the optimal vector
The grid is realized by the three-phase programmable voltage ji_opt number is selected in lines 12 to 16, the for loop is
source block in Simscape, with positive sequence amplitude terminated in line 17, and the optimal GCC switching states
Vgll , phase set to 0, and frequency Fg . are produced in lines 18 to 23 according to the ji_opt value.
The S-function builder block in Fig. 3 implements the PCC 1 gi_opt = 1000000000;
scheme. The feedback measurements such as αβ-axis grid 2 ji_opt = 1000;
3 for(j_i = 0; j_i<8; j_i++)
voltages and currents (vαg (k), vβg (k), iαg (k), and iβg (k)), 4 {
and DC link voltage (vdc (k)) are provided as inputs to the 5 vi_ab[0] = vdc[0]*vinv[j_i].si_ab[0];
S-function builder through RateTransition blocks with output 6 vi_ab[1] = vdc[0]*vinv[j_i].si_ab[1];
7 ig_ab_k1[0] = (Phi*ig_ab[0]) +
port sample time of Ts . The dq-axis reference currents are (Gamma*vi_ab[0]) - (Gamma*vg_ab[0]);
de¿ned by the user with the help of repeating sequence 8 ig_ab_k1[1] = (Phi*ig_ab[1] +
blocks. The Ref Currents subsystem (Fig. 4) transforms the dq- (Gamma*vi_ab[1]) - (Gamma*vg_ab[1]);
9 ig_ab_k2[0] = (Phi*ig_ab_k1[0]) +
frame reference currents into αβ-frame with the help of grid (Gamma*vi_ab[0]) - (Gamma*vg_ab[0]);
voltage angle θg (Eq. (7)). This is implemented by function 10 ig_ab_k2[1] = (Phi*ig_ab_k1[1]) +
blocks Fcn1 and Fcn2 for i∗αg (k) and i∗βg (k) by using the (Gamma*vi_ab[1]) - (Gamma*vg_ab[1]);
11 g_i = (igr_ab_k2[0] -
following expressions: “(u(1)*cos(u(3))) - (u(2)*sin(u(3)))” ig_ab_k2[0])*(igr_ab_k2[0] - ig_ab_k2[0])
and “(u(1)*sin(u(3))) + (u(2)*cos(u(3)))”, respectively. The + (igr_ab_k2[1] - ig_ab_k2[1])*(igr_ab_k2[1]
PLL subsystem is developed to calculate grid voltage angle - ig_ab_k2[1]);
12 if(g_i<gi_opt)
θg as in equation (2). The θg value is limited between 0 13 {
and 2π using the mod function. The Ref Currents subsystem 14 gi_opt=g_i;
also extrapolates the αβ-frame reference currents to (k + 2) 15 ji_opt=j_i;
16 }
sampling instant. The six gating signals produced by the S- 17 }
function builder are connected to the 2L-VSC gating terminal 18 s_ai1[0] = vinv[ji_opt].si_abc[0];
through the RateTransition blocks with output port sample 19 s_ai2[0] = !vinv[ji_opt].si_abc[0];
20 s_bi1[0] = vinv[ji_opt].si_abc[1];
time of Tsim . With the RateTransition blocks, the S-function 21 s_bi2[0] = !vinv[ji_opt].si_abc[1];
builder implements the PCC algorithm at Ts sampling time, 22 s_ci1[0] = vinv[ji_opt].si_abc[2];
even though the simulation runs at Tsim time. 23 s_ci2[0] = !vinv[ji_opt].si_abc[2];
The measurements subsystem as shown in Fig. 3 provides
all the system measurements at one place. The Fcn3 and Fcn4
blocks compute the grid active and reactive powers from the
αβ-axis grid voltages and currents. The Fcn5 block computes
grid apparent power from the active and reactive powers. The
grid active, reactive, and apparent powers are given as follows
[20]:
Pg = 1.5 (vαg iαg + vβg iβg ) (12)
Qg = 1.5 (vβg iαg − vαg iβg ) (13)

Figure 4. MATLAB/Simulink model for reference currents subsystem. Sg = Pg2 + Q2g . (14)

The S-function builder implements the PCC algorithm for
the GCC. The parameters for the S-function builder are de¿ned
as explained below and the default values are not altered.
Under the data properties tab, the inputs and outputs of the
system are de¿ned with 1-D dimension. The inputs ports are
de¿ned as igr_ab_k2 (2 Rows), vg_ab (2 Rows), ig_ab
(2 Rows), vdc (1 Row). The output ports are de¿ned as
s_ai1 (1 Row), s_ai2 (1 Row), s_bi1 (1 Row), s_bi2 (1
Row), s_ci1 (1 Row), s_ci2 (1 Row). Under the libraries
tab, in the includes section, #include <math.h>, #include
<lib parameters.h>, #include <lib vectors .h> are added.
The following code is included in the outputs section
of S-function builder and this code is developed based on
the mathematical models in Section II. The lines 2 and 3
correspond to PCC initialization, the for loop is initialized
The expressions for Fcn3, Fcn4, and Fcn5 are given as
“1.5*(u(1)*u(3) + u(2)*u(4))”, “1.5*(u(2)*u(3) - u(1)*u(4))”,
and “sqrt(u(1)2̂ + u(2)2̂)”, respectively.
IV. R EAL -T IME I MPLEMENTATION OF PCC S CHEME
This section deals with the experimental setup and transfor-
mation of simulation models into the real-time models.
A. Experimental Setup
Fig. 5 shows a closed loop circuit between two AC power
supplies (a) and (g) at 208 V (line-to-line, rms) and 60 Hz.
The Magna-Power DC power unit (model number XR500-
20/208+HS) is powered by AC power #1 and the output DC
voltage is connected to the DC link capacitor. Three Semikron
SKM75GB123D IGBT modules are used to implement the
GCC topology. The three-phase output terminals of GCC are Repeating
idg*
s_ai1 boolean BIT #0

connected to AC grid #2 via LEM LA55-P current sensors, Sequence1 iqg* igab*(k+2) igr_ab_k2
Data Type Conversion1
Repeating
Sequence2 Vg_ab

harmonic ¿lters, and isolation transformer. The grid phase MUX ADC
DS1103MUX_ADC_CON1
Ref Currents s_ai2 boolean

Data Type Conversion2

BIT #1

voltages are measured by the LEM LV25-P sensors. A Dell MUX ADC
DS1103MUX_ADC_CON2
1000

Gain3
K*u

Gain1
Vg_ab
vg_ab
s_bi1 boolean BIT #2

computer is used to run the dSPACE control desk software MUX ADC Data Type Conversion3
SF_GCC_PCC_K2
DS1103MUX_ADC_CON3

and to connect to the DS1103 R&D controller board and

ADC s_bi2 boolean BIT #3
50 K*u ig_ab
DS1103ADC_C17 Data Type Conversion4
Gain2

CLP1103 connector panel. The gating signals produced by

ADC Gain4
Ig_ab
DS1103ADC_C18 s_ci1 boolean BIT #4

ADC Data Type Conversion5

the DS1103 controller are connected to IGBT module gating DS1103ADC_C19

vdc
s_ci2 boolean BIT #5

terminals via 50 pin D-SUB connector, interface board, and

ADC 1000
DS1103ADC_C20 Data Type Conversion6
Gain5 S-Function Builder

Semikron SKHI22B gate drivers. Vg_ab

f(u) DAC
0 boolean
BIT #6

Fcn3 DS1103DAC_C1
Constant Data Type Conversion7
Ig_ab BIT #7
f(u) DAC

(a) (g) Fcn4 DS1103DAC_C2

DS1103BIT_OUT_G0

f(u) DAC
(i) (j) Fcn5 DS1103DAC_C3

(h)
Figure 6. Real-time implementation model for PCC scheme.

(k)
(b) (c) (d) (e) (f)
Figure 5. Block diagram of experimental setup: (a) three-phase grid #1, (b)
DC power supply, (c) DC link capacitor, (d) IGBT modules, (e) harmonic
¿lters, (f) isolation transformer, (g) three-phase grid #2, (h) DS1103, (i)
interface board, (j) gate drivers, and (k) voltage and current sensors.
B. Real-Time Models
Fig. 6 shows the real-time model used for the PCC scheme
and is implemented by GCC PCC Model Exp.slx ¿le. This
model is like the simulation model discussed in Section III ex-
cept that the simulated measurements are replaced by the real-
time measurements. The voltage and current measurements
are interfaced to the real-time simulation model via ADC
channels of CLP1103 connector panel. The ADC channel gain
is 10 and voltage sensors gain is 100; therefore, the three-
phase grid voltages (vag , vbg , vcg ) and DC link voltage (vdc )
are multiplied by a coef¿cient of 1000. Similarly, the current
sensors gain is 5 and thus the three-phase grid currents (iag ,
ibg , icg ) are multiplied by a coef¿cient of 50. The output
gating signals from the S-function builder block are sent out
using the BIT OUT G0 connector. The RateTransition blocks
used at the input and output ports of S-function builder of
simulation model are eliminated in real-time model because
all the blocks run at Ts sampling time. The powergui block
in the simulation model is replaced by the RTI data block in
the real-time model. The active, reactive, and apparent powers
computed by the DS1103 controller are sent to the Agilent
oscilloscopes through CLP1103 DAC channels. The powers
are divided by a coef¿cient of 10,000 to ensure that the inputs
to the DAC channels are in ±1 V range.
V. R ESULTS AND A NALYSIS
In order to validate the proposed design procedure, sim-
ulation and experimental tests are conducted by using the
MATLAB/Simulink software and DS1103 controller, respec-
tively with the parameters as indicated in Table I.
A. Simulation Results and Analysis
The simulation results with programmed dq-axis reference
currents are shown in Fig. 7. The d-axis reference current
(i∗dg ) is programmed to increase linearly from 0 pu to 1.0 pu
from t = 0 s to 0.4 s. A step change in i∗dg from 1.0 pu 0.6
pu is applied at t = 0.8 s. The grid active power Pg in Fig.
7(a) follows the i∗dg trajectory with fast dynamic response and
without any overshoots. A step change in i∗qg from 0 pu to 0.8
pu is applied at t = 1.0 s. At t = 1.2 s, i∗qg is switched back
from 0.8 pu to 0 pu. A step change in i∗qg from 0 pu to –0.8 pu
is applied at t = 1.4 s. The i∗qg is again switched back to 0 pu
from –0.8 pu at t = 1.6 s. The grid reactive power Qg in Fig.
7(b) follows the i∗qg trajectory but with negative sign (note that
Qg = −1.5vdg iqg [3]). The grid active and reactive powers
also exhibit decoupled control nature during step-changes in
dq-axis reference grid currents. This phenomenon is similar
to the classical control schemes, but the PCC scheme uses
simpler approach for design and implementation. During the
time intervals 0.4 s to 0.8 s, 1 s to 1.2 s and 1.4 s to 1.6 s, the
grid apparent power Sg is found to be 1.0 pu (Fig. 7(c)). The
Sg value is 0.6 pu during time intervals 0.8 s to 1.0 s, and 1.2
s to 1.4 s. The phase-a grid current iag waveform follows the
Sg shape as shown in Fig. 7(d).
The reference tracking capability of PCC scheme is demon-
strated in Fig. 8 during step-changes in dq-axis reference
grid currents. The αβ-axis reference and measured currents
are shown in Fig. 8 though the actual reference currents are
de¿ned in the dq-frame. The result in Fig. 8(a) corresponds
to the operation during a step change at t = 0.8 s in Fig.
7. Similarly, Figs. 8(b), (c), and (d) are obtained during a
step change at t = 1.0 s, 1.2 s, and 1.4 s in Fig. 7. The PCC
scheme replaces the cascaded control structure and modulation
stage and provides a fast-dynamic response in addition to good
steady-state reference tracking.
B. Experimental Results and Analysis
The parameters of the experimental setup are identical
to the simulation tests discussed earlier. The experimental
tests are conducted using the similar operating conditions of
6000
Pg vag
3000
Qg iag
0
-3000 Sg
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 t (s)
(a)
6000 Pg
4000
2000
0 iag Qg
-2000
-4000 (a) (b)
-6000
(b) vag iag vag iag
6000
3000

-3000 Pg Pg
(c)
Qg
25.0 Qg
12.5
(c) (d)
0
-12.5
Figure 9. Experimental results with programmed changes in dq-axis reference
-25.0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 t (s) currents. Subplot (a) Ch1: active power Pg (5 kW/div), Ch2: reactive power
(d) Qg (5 kVAR/div), Ch3: apparent power Sg (5 kVA/div), Ch4: phase-a grid
current iag (25 A/div). Subplots (b)–(d) Ch1: phase-a grid voltage vag (200
Figure 7. Simulation results with programmed changes in dq-axis reference V/div), Ch2: phase-a grid current iag (10 A/div), Ch3: active power Pg (5
currents: (a) active power Pg , (b) reactive power Qg , (c) apparent power Sg , kW/div), Ch4: reactive power Qg (5 kVAR/div).
and (d) phase-a grid current iag .

25.0 iαg i∗αg iβg i∗βg iαg i∗αg iβg i∗βg

12.5 i∗αg iαg
0
-12.5 i∗βg
iβg
-25.0
0.7750 0.7833 0.7917 0.8 0.8083 0.8167 t (s)
(a)
25.0
12.5 i∗αg iαg
0 (a) (b)
-12.5 i∗βg
-25.0
iβg iαg i∗αg iβg i∗βg
0.975 0.9833 .9917 1.0 1.0083 1.0167 t (s) iαg i∗αg iβg i∗βg
(b)
25.0
12.5 i∗αg iαg
0
-12.5 i∗βg
iβg
-25.0
1.1750 1.1833 1.1917 1.2 1.2083 1.2167 t (s)
(c)
25.0 (c) (d)
12.5 i∗αg iαg
0 Figure 10. Experimental results showing reference tracking capability. Sub-
-12.5 i∗βg plot (a) step-change in i∗dg from 1.0 pu to 0.6 pu with i∗qg = 0 pu. Subplot (b)
iβg
-25.0
1.375 1.3833 1.3917 1.4 1.4083 1.4167 t (s) step-change in i∗qg from 0 pu to 0.8 pu with i∗dg = 0.6 pu. Subplot (c) step-
(d) change in i∗qg from 0.8 pu to 0 pu with i∗dg = 0.6 pu. Subplot (d) step-change
in i∗qg from 0 pu to –0.8 pu with i∗dg = 0.6 pu. Channels for all subplots:
Figure 8. Experimental results showing reference tracking capability: (a) step- Ch1: α-axis reference grid current (10 A/div), Ch2: α-axis measured grid
change in i∗dg from 1.0 pu to 0.6 pu with i∗qg = 0 pu, (b) step-change in i∗qg current (10 A/div), Ch3: β-axis reference grid current (10 A/div), Ch4: β-
from 0 pu to 0.8 pu with i∗dg = 0.6 pu, (c) step-change in i∗qg from 0.8 pu axis measured grid current (10 A/div).
to 0 pu with i∗dg = 0.6 pu, and (d) step-change in i∗qg from 0 pu to –0.8 pu
with i∗dg = 0.6 pu.

vag with the changes in active power Pg and reactive power

simulation tests. The experimental results with programmed
i∗dg and i∗qg values are shown in Fig. 9. The active and reactive
powers follow i∗dg and i∗qg trajectories similar to the simulation
results. Similarly, iag follows the Sg trajectory. The simulation
and experimental results are identical in terms of dynamic
response, decoupled control, and steady-state performance.
Figs. 9(b) to (d) demonstrate the steady-state relationship
between the phase-a grid current iag and phase-a grid voltage
Qg during three different regions in Fig. 9(a). In Fig. 9(b),
iag and vag are in phase because Qg is 0 pu and grid power
factor is unity. In Fig. 9(c), a step-change in Qg from zero
to negative value is applied, therefore the grid power factor
changes from unity to leading. With negative Qg value, the
iag leads the vag waveform by 53.13◦. A step-change in Qg
from zero to positive value is applied in Fig. 9(d), and the grid
power factor changes from unity to lagging. With positive Qg
value, the iag lags the vag waveform by 53.13◦.
 The reference tracking capability of PCC scheme is exper-
imentally veri¿ed with step-changes in i∗dg and i∗qg and the
corresponding results are presented in Fig. 10. The αβ-axis
reference and measured currents in Fig. 10 are identical to
the simulation results in terms of excellent reference tracking
and fast dynamic response. The PCC scheme offers a dynamic
response that is faster than that of the classical control tech-
niques, along with good steady-state reference tracking that is
comparable to that of the classical control techniques.
VI. C ONCLUSIONS
In this paper, a step-by-step procedure for simulation
and real-time implementation of predictive current control
scheme for grid-connected two-level voltage source converter
is presented. The design procedure is analyzed in terms of
estimation of grid voltage angle, calculation and extrapola-
tion of reference currents, prediction of future grid currents,
and selection of optimal switching signals through the cost
function minimization. The authors experienced simplicity
in transforming simulation models to the real-time models
and obtain identical experimental results. The PCC scheme
involves neither PI controllers nor a modulation stage in the
inner control loop; therefore, a fast-dynamic response is ob-
served for grid currents during all operating conditions. During
the experimental tests, no stability related issues are observed
with the PCC scheme though the operating conditions are
changed in extreme manner. Through a detailed analysis of
simulation and experimental results, the PCC scheme is proved
as a simple and powerful tool in controlling GCCs with
excellent performance indices. The authors hope that this work
meets its objective of providing detailed guidelines for novice
readers in the MPC research area.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work is completed as a part of Undergraduate Capstone
Design Project. The authors wish to thank the ¿nancial sup-
port from the School of Informatics, Computing, and Cyber
Systems (SICCS), and the College of Engineering, Forestry,
and Natural Sciences (CEFNS), Northern Arizona University.
R EFERENCES
[1] V. Yaramasu and B. Wu, Model Predictive Control of Wind Energy
Conversion Systems, 1st ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-IEEE Press, Dec.
2016.
[2] F. Blaabjerg, R. Teodorescu, M. Liserre, and A. Timbus, “Overview
of control and grid synchronization for distributed power generation
systems,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 53, no. 5, pp. 1398–1409,
Oct. 2006.
[3] V. Yaramasu and B. Wu, “Model predictive decoupled active and reactive
power control for high-power grid-connected four-level diode-clamped
inverters,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 61, no. 7, pp. 3407–3416,
Jul. 2014.
[4] B. Wu, Y. Lang, N. Zargari, and S. Kouro, Power Conversion and
Control of Wind Energy Systems, 1st ed., ser. IEEE Press Series on
Power Engineering. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-IEEE Press, Jul. 2011.
[5] R. Teodorescu, M. Liserre, and P. Rodriguez, Grid Converters for
Photovoltaic and Wind Power Systems. Chichester, UK: Wiley-IEEE
Press, Jan. 2011.
[6] V. Yaramasu, A. Dekka, M. J. Durn, S. Kouro, and B. Wu, “Pmsg-
based wind energy conversion systems: Survey on power converters and
controls,” IEE Proc. Electr. Power Appl., vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 956–968,
Jul. 2017.
[7] V. Yaramasu, Advances in Energy Research. Edited by Morena J. Acosta.
Volume 27. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers Inc., 2017, ch.
MATLAB/Simulink Implementation of Predictive Current Control for
PMSG Wind Energy Conversion Systems, pp. 187–230.
[8] S. Kouro, B. La Rocca, P. Coŕtes, S. Alepuz, B. Wu, and J. RodrṌguez,
“Predictive control based selective harmonic elimination with low
switching frequency for multilevel converters,” in IEEE Energy Conver-
sion Congr. and Expo. (ECCE), Sep. 2009, pp. 3130–3136, San Jose,
CA, USA.
[9] Q. Zeng and L. Chang, “An advanced SVPWM-based predictive current
controller for three-phase inverters in distributed generation systems,”
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 1235–1246, Mar. 2008.
[10] S. Vazquez, J. Rodriguez, M. Rivera, L. G. Franquelo, and M. No-
rambuena, “Model predictive control for power converters and drives:
Advances and trends,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 64, no. 2, pp.
935–947, Feb. 2017.
[11] J. RodrṌguez, M. P. Kazmierkowski, J. R. Espinoza, P. Zanchetta,
H. Abu-Rub, H. A. Young, and C. A. Rojas, “State of the art of ¿nite
control set model predictive control in power electronics,” IEEE Trans.
Ind. Informat., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 1003–1016, May. 2013.
[12] S. Kouro, P. Coŕtes, R. Vargas, U. Ammann, and J. RodrṌguez, “Model
predictive control-A simple and powerful method to control power
converters,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 1826–1838,
Jun. 2009.
[13] P. Coŕtes, M. Kazmierkowski, R. Kennel, D. Quevedo, and J. RodrṌguez,
“Predictive control in power electronics and drives,” IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 55, no. 12, pp. 4312–4324, Dec. 2008.
[14] S. Vazquez, J. Leon, L. Franquelo, J. Rodriguez, H. Young, A. Marquez,
and P. Zanchetta, “Model predictive control: A review of its applications
in power electronics,” IEEE Ind. Electron. Mag., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 16–31,
Mar. 2014.
[15] V. Yaramasu, B. Wu, S. Alepuz, and S. Kouro, “Predictive control for
low-voltage ride-through enhancement of three-level-boost and NPC-
converter-based PMSG wind turbine,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
vol. 61, no. 12, pp. 6832–6843, Dec. 2014.
[16] S. Aurtenechea, M. Vidal, E. Oyarbide, and J. Apraiz, “Predictive control
strategy for DC/AC converters based on direct power control,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 54, no. 3, pp. 1261–1271, Jun. 2007.
[17] S. Mariethoz and M. Morari, “Explicit model-predictive control of a
PWM inverter with an LCL ¿lter,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56,
no. 2, pp. 389–399, Feb. 2009.
[18] V. Yaramasu, B. Wu, and J. Chen, “Model-predictive control of grid-
tied four-level diode-clamped inverters for high-power wind energy
conversion systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 29, no. 6, pp.
2861–2873, Jun. 2014.
[19] J. Moreno, J. Huerta, R. Gil, and S. Gonzalez, “A robust predictive
current control for three-phase grid-connected inverters,” IEEE Trans.
Ind. Electron., vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 1993–2004, Jun. 2009.
[20] V. Yaramasu and B. Wu, “Predictive power control of grid-connected
four-level inverters in stationary reference frame,” in IEEE Int. Conf. on
Circuits, Power and Computing Tech. (ICCPCT), Mar. 2013, pp. 636–
641, Kumaracoil, India.
[21] A. Timbus, M. Liserre, R. Teodorescu, and F. Blaabjerg, “Synchroniza-
tion methods for three phase distributed power generation systems - an
overview and evaluation,” in IEEE Power Electron. Spec. Conf. (PESC),
Jun. 2005, pp. 2474–2481, Recife, Brazil.
[22] J. RodrṌguez, J. Pontt, C. A. Silva, P. Correa, P. Lezana, P. Coŕtes, and
U. Ammann, “Predictive current control of a voltage source inverter,”
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 495–503, Feb. 2007.
[23] P. Coŕtes, J. RodrṌguez, C. Silva, and A. Flores, “Delay compensation in
model predictive current control of a three-phase inverter,” IEEE Trans.
Ind. Electron., vol. 59, no. 2, pp. 1323–1325, Feb. 2012.
[24] V. Yaramasu, M. Rivera, M. Narimani, B. Wu, and J. Rodriguez,
“High performance operation for a four-leg NPC inverter with two-
sample-ahead predictive control strategy,” Int. J. Electric Power Systems
Research, vol. 123, pp. 31–39, Jun. 2015.