International Journal of Power Electronics and Drive Systems (IJPEDS)

Vol. 14, No. 3, September 2023, pp. 1497~1508

ISSN: 2088-8694, DOI: 10.11591/ijpeds.v14.i3.pp 1497-1508  1497

Model predictive control using Euler method for switched-

battery boost-multilevel inverter

Ahmad Takiyuddin Abdullah1,2, Sevia Mahdaliza Idrus1, Shahrin Md Ayob1

1
School of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor, Malaysia
2
Industrial Automation Section, UniKL MFI, Universiti Kuala Lumpur, Selangor, Malaysia

Article Info ABSTRACT

Article history: This paper presents the model predictive control (MPC) design using the
backward Euler method for an 11-level switched-battery boost multilevel
Received Nov 24, 2022 inverter (SBBMLI). The SBBMLI was proposed as the cost-effective
Revised Jan 16, 2023 solution for the communication power line in a high-speed rail (HSR)
Accepted Feb 6, 2023 system. Initially, a generalized SBBMLI problem formulation was
performed, and an open-loop simulation based on voltage and current mode
controls was conducted. The finite control set-model predictive control
Keywords: (FCS-MPC) ability to track the reference sinusoidal output with low total
harmonic distortion (THD) was then assessed as a performance criterion.
Cost function Furthermore, the performance was assessed based on no-load and load
Euler method disturbances. Finally, the results proved the ability of the proposed FCS-
MPC MPC to address non-linear dynamics, constraints, and its efficiency of
SBBMLI implementation.
Voltage control
This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license.

Corresponding Author:
Sevia Mahdaliza Idrus
School of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia
Email: [email protected]

1. INTRODUCTION
The work undertaken in this project unlocked a potent hardware-software fusion that can effectively
solve the urgent requirements for the communication power line system in a high-speed rail (HSR) system.
This can be accomplished by establishing control structures that can be applied to a newly developed inverter
architecture with fewer components. Although the topology provides a number of advantages over traditional
design, its full potential has not yet been explored.
Technology development for electrified railway networks has been heavily funded over the recent
decades. The development does not involve the electric train but also systems within the train for traction,
regenerative braking, and special power electronics applications [1]. These items additionally include
numerous power electronics converter-based solutions.
Power electronics has proven to be essential technology in various fields that can convert electrical
power from one form to another with high accuracy and efficacy for decades [2], [3]. Power inverters are
essential for combining distributed generation sources (wind generator, photovoltaic) and energy storage
systems into a micro-grid, which can supply local loads as well as link to the utility grid [4]. The importance
of these converters such as in electrified trains is shown by the fact that they can be deployed in places other
than within the train to improve power quality. They can also operate as a circuit interface between the high
voltage three-phase power grid and the medium voltage single-phase traction power grid [1]. The use of
inverters, also known as dc-ac converters, can be found in medium- or high-power systems, such as static
reactive power compensation and adjustable-speed drives, and has unquestionably made a substantial

Journal homepage: http://ijpeds.iaescore.com

1498  ISSN: 2088-8694

contribution. Yet, new multilevel inverter circuit concepts have advanced due to significant electromagnetic
interference (EMI) difficulties and stress across the power switches. Being based on low-frequency switching
and allowing for voltage and current sharing across the power semiconductors, the multilevel notion is often
a fresh solution in these applications [5], [6]
The MLI is currently acknowledged as cutting-edge technology for converting dc to ac power in the
sectors of generation, transmission, distribution, and use [7]. The most common multilevel inverter
topologies are diode-clamped (neutral-point clamped), capacitor-clamped (flying capacitor), and cascaded H-
bridge [8]. The cascaded H-Bridge is regarded as popular and well-accepted by industries with its modular
structure, simple to control, and not having an imbalance capacitor voltage problem as the neutral-point
clamp inverter. However, the limitation of the cascaded H-bridge is that it requires separate dc sources. The
number of components, especially the power switches, is considerably higher compared to the such as
neutral-point clamp inverter. On the other hand, the emerge of transformer less inverters have grown
significantly in popularity due to their desirable qualities, such as higher efficiency, smaller size, lower cost,
and higher power density. These inverters are particularly well suited for small-scale grid-connected PV
systems [9]−[10]. The biggest issue with these inverters, though, is the leakage current. As a result, it
becomes more important to use specific inverter topologies and dedicated switching approaches [9], [11],
[12], which reduces efficiency and increases control complexity.
In order to address the aforementioned problems, this research employs an architecture called as a
switched-battery boost-multilevel inverter (SBBMLI) [7]. Comparatively speaking, it requires a lot fewer
power switches than a cascaded H-bridge multilevel inverter. This architecture will result in a smaller
system, which will lower costs and enhance dependability. The goal is to create innovative, cost-effective
solutions for integrating renewable energy sources into the grid, such solar power. The ability of the inverter
to operate a single PV module for a 1 kW prototype is another crucial requirement. The outcome should also
be taken into account for the recommended attributes of its dependability, surge power capability and
efficiency [8]. The low-order harmonics will be eliminated and the desired fundamental components will be
controlled, using an efficient control approach. The management of the charging mode, inverter mode, and
battery will also be performed via an effective control scheme. Although there are numerous other control
schemes that can be employed [13], the model predictive control (MPC) scheme is widely used to achieve the
goal of the aforementioned type. The MPC is chosen since it has demonstrated its applicability to regulate
power converters such that the ideas are clear and understandable. It applies to several systems, constraints,
and nonlinearities that are simple to include. The multivariable scenario can be considered, and the resulting
controller is simple [14].
The three-level NPC inverter at the grid side has been applied to the backward Euler method
approach of MPC. It manages the reactive power to the grid and net dc-bus voltage in a medium-voltage
wind energy conversion system. The application of an FCS-MPC approach has led to the achievement of a
rapid dynamic response. There was no longer any use of linear controllers or modulation stages [15]. An
adaptive observer-based MPC has been used to regulate a multilayer flying capacitor inverter in another
typical topology. Theoretical analysis and experimental findings in this instance demonstrate that the
suggested strategy is effective even in the existence of disturbances, such as load change, input change, and
parameter variations, and is stable for all system configurations [16]. Using the Euler method, the MPC has
also been implemented on a multilevel cascaded H-bridge. This MPC approach selected the voltage vector
that minimized a cost function to project the future value of the current for all voltage vectors using a
discrete-time model of the system. The work has been claimed to perform well in terms of reference tracking
and reduced common-mode voltages because of the implementation of a rapid calculation algorithm [17].
Another control strategy has also been developed using the MPC framework and the Euler method. The
MPC predicts the states of a single-phase dual-mode inverter with an MPC algorithm. By proposing an auto-
tuning strategy for the MPC cost function, the weight factor tuning strategy was made simpler. The results
show that the load voltage is regulated without interruption and distortion [18].
Conventional topology has also been developed to reduce the components of a multilevel inverter.
A reduced multilevel converter was acquired using the MPC technique. Its main idea is that the basic dc cell,
which is able to provide the variable dc-link voltage, has a regulated approach through the floating
capacitors. This feature offers the output phases of the converter with the degree of control necessary to
enable a shared multilevel dc-link. When this converter topology was investigated using FCS-MPC, the
results showed that dc-cell capacitors could be balanced and accurately controlled to achieve sinusoidal
output currents and a five-level output voltage waveform [19].
In controlling the flow of electrical energy using power converters, which includes the subcategory
of inverters, MPC has been proven to give a highly straightforward and efficient alternative to traditional
control algorithms utilizing pulse width modulation (PWM) [14], [20], [21]. Moreover, the predictive

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 14, No. 3, September 2023: 1497-1508
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  1499

technique has the ability to adjust current, voltage, torque, flux, and other factors by developing an
appropriate cost function [22].
The analysis presented above demonstrates the effective use of MPC for inverters employing
controllers adapted to certain topologies. The basic principle of FCS-MPC is to anticipate the system's
behavior in response to a finite set of potential control actions using a discrete model of the system. This
enables it to directly select the best actuation based on an optimization criterion [23]. However, a major
shortcoming of the FCS-MPC is its computational burden, which increases with the number of switching
states [24]. Because the SBBMLI has provided fewer switching states, extra consideration must be given to
decreasing computational load while applying FCS-MPC to a multilevel inverter that satisfies its topology.

2. MPC CONTROL DESIGN USING EULER METHOD

The underpinning of MPC is a dynamic model of the process, frequently a linear empirical model
created by system identification. The primary innovation of MPC is that it optimizes the input at the present
time while taking into consideration potential future inputs. Over a finite-time horizon, it is achieved by
repeatedly optimizing the control output through the current input value. Correspondingly, MPC can
anticipate future events and can take control actions accordingly. This unique feature differentiates the MPC
from the linear-quadratic regulator (LQR). Though research is being done to find a faster response time with
specifically built analog circuitry, the MPC is typically implemented as digital control [25].
In the case of robust variants relevant to industrial applications, MPC can consider set bounded
disturbances while still ensuring state constraints are met. In general, the basic components of MPC are as
follows [26]−[27]:
− Mathematical model of the controlled plant to calculate the evolution of the system states over time.
− Optimal control problem: The changes of the control variables are described by a system of differential
equations termed optimal control that minimizes the cost function. The control objectives are stated as an
objective function. When the optimization issue is resolved, the best control strategy for the plant's best
performance over the forecast horizon is derived. It should be emphasized that the prediction horizon
refers to the period of time during which the control measures are prepared and the plant's behavior is
predicted.
− Receding horizon policy: The remaining components are eliminated under the receding horizon strategy,
the prediction horizon is advanced by one sample instant, and the optimization process is resumed, only
implementing the first component in the optimal sequence of the control inputs to the plant.
Future response in the mathematical model of a regulated plant is predicted using a dynamic model.
The following defines the state-space representation for discrete-time linear systems:

𝑥(𝑘 + 1) = 𝐴𝑥(𝑡) + 𝐵𝑢(𝑘) (1)

where at the kth sampling instant, x(k) and u(k) are the model state and input vectors. A predicted input
sequence is used to generate the corresponding series of state predictions by simulating the model forward
over the prediction horizon, assuming 𝑁-sampling intervals. Frequently, these predicted sequences are
stacked into the vectors u, x, which are defined as follows:

𝑢(𝑘|𝑘) 𝑥(𝑘|𝑘)
𝑢(𝑘 + 1|𝑘) 𝑥(𝑘 + 1|𝑘)
𝑢=[ ]𝑥 = [ ] (2)
⋮ ⋮
𝑢(𝑘 + 𝑁 − 1|𝑘) 𝑥(𝑘 + 𝑁 − 1|𝑘)

In this instance, x(k + i|k) evolves in accordance with the prediction model because the input and
state vectors at time 𝑘 + 𝑖 that are predicted at time k are denoted by u(k + i|k) and x(k + i|k):

𝑥(𝑘) = 𝐴𝑥(𝑘) + 𝐵𝑢(𝑘), 𝑖 = 0, 1, … (3)

where the initial condition of the prediction horizon is defined as:

𝑥(𝑘) = 𝑥(𝑘) (4)

As a result of computing the predicted sequences u, x for the predictive control feedback rule, the
optimal control problem minimizes a predicted performance cost. An anticipated cost in the case of quadratic
cost is defined as having the general form:

Model predictive control using Euler method for switched-battery … (Ahmad Takiyuddin Abdullah
1500  ISSN: 2088-8694

𝐽(𝑘) = ∑𝑁 𝑇 𝑇
𝑖=0[𝑥 (𝑘 + 𝑖|𝑘)𝑄𝑥(𝑘 + 𝑖|𝑘) + 𝑢 (𝑘 + 𝑖|𝑘)𝑅𝑢(𝑘 + 𝑖|𝑘)] (5)

where N is sampling intervals and Q, R are positive definite matrices (Q may be positive semi-definite). The
optimal input sequence for the issue of minimizing J(k) is designated u∗(k) and is defined as (6).

𝑢∗ (𝑘) = 𝑎𝑟𝑔 𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝐽(𝑘) (6)

𝑢

If the plant is subject to input and state constraints, the optimization might be incorporated as equivalent
constraints on u∗(k).
A general-purpose control scheme that upcoming repeatedly solving a constrained optimization
problem and selecting the control action according to predictions of upcoming costs, disturbances, and
constraints over a moving temporal horizon is known as receding horizon control. Input to the plant is only
the first element of the optimal predicted input sequence u ∗(k), which is described as (7).

𝑢(𝑘) = 𝑢∗ (𝑘|𝑘) (7)

At each sampling instant where k = 0, 1, ..., the procedure of determining u∗(k) by minimizing the
predicted cost and implementing the first element of 𝑢 is repeated. Therefore, the optimization defining u ∗ is
known as online optimization. Figure 1 shows the receding horizon strategy, in which the prediction horizon
has remained constant in length despite optimization at subsequent instants.

Figure 1. The receding horizon strategy

Since the state predictions x and, subsequently, the optimal input sequence u∗ depend on the current
state measurement x(k), the approach incorporates feedback into the MPC rule, offering a degree of
robustness to modelling errors and uncertainty. The receding horizon technique likewise attempts to take into
consideration the finite horizon by continually adjusting the horizon across which future inputs are
optimized. The initial step in applying advanced MPC to the SBBMLI topology is to use the existing MPC
implementation method on a conventional topology. Figure 2 shows the MPC design using the Euler
backward method for the SBBMLI.
The employed MPC controller embeds a discrete-time model for the prediction of control variables
of current and voltage at a certain sampling time, 𝑇𝑠 . The 𝑇𝑠 is set at 25 𝜇𝑠 for all simulation involved.
Because power converters are discrete devices, an online implementation of the optimization issue is now
feasible. The online evaluation of each switching state permits the choice of the best actuation under the
constraints of a finite number of switching states and the present generation of microprocessors. This
approach is referred to as a finite control set MPC because the switching states of power converters give rise
to a finite number of available actions.
Based on the literature review, the Euler method is commonly utilized to produce a discrete-time
model. The following are the design steps of MPC's finite control set for controlling a power converter:
− Modelling the system by identifying all potential switching states and the relationships between the input
and output.
− Establishing a cost function to describe the desired action, such as tracking the reference to a suitable
system variable.
− Acquiring discrete-time models that allow for the future behavior of the controllable variables to be
predicted.

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 14, No. 3, September 2023: 1497-1508
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  1501

Figure 2. MPC using Euler method for current control implementation

By considering the ideal switch of a power transistor, the simplest model can be realized by the
states of “on” (1) and “off” (0). In this case, a general rule for the number of possible switching states, 𝑁,
with the exception of specific combinations, such as the combination that short-circuits the dc link, is as:

𝑁 = 𝑥𝑦 (8)

where 𝑦 is the number of converter legs and 𝑥 is the number of potential states for each converter leg.
The prediction model must consider the controlled variables to derive discrete-time models that can
predict these variables. In addition, defining the measured and unmeasured variables is also important since
the predictive model needs estimation for the unmeasured variable. Finally, the discretization method is
applied to yield the discrete-time model. For example, in a first-order system, the Euler forward method is
used to approximate the derivative as described below, as used in [22]:

𝑑𝑥 𝑥(𝑘+1)−𝑥(𝑘)
= (9)
𝑑𝑡 𝑇𝑠

where 𝑇𝑠 is the sampling time.

The cost function relates to the specific application being considered upon. Each application
employs the most appropriate cost function to specify the desired behavior of the state variables of interest.
Several terms related to the tracking error of these state variables compose up the cost function. To control
them simultaneously, only one cost function is necessitated [28]. The cost function for the current control is
described as:

𝑔 = |𝑖 ∗ − 𝑖𝑜 (𝑘 + 1)| (10)

where the reference current vector and predicted voltage vector are denoted as 𝑖 ∗ and 𝑖0 (𝑘 + 1) respectively.
The following is a description of the discrete-time model for the load current prediction:

𝑅𝑇𝑠 𝑇𝑠
𝑖𝑜 (𝑘 + 1) = 𝑖(𝑘) (1 − )+ 𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑣 (𝑘) (11)
𝐿 𝐿

where 𝑅 is resistance load and 𝐿 is inductance load, 𝑇𝑠 is the sampling time, 𝑖(𝑘) is the measured load current
and 𝑖𝑜 (𝑘 + 1) is the predicted current to be considered in the controller optimization.
The similar concept to the Euler Method is designed for voltage control by applying MPC. Figure 3
shows the considered MPC scheme using the Euler method for voltage control implementation on SBBMLI.
The voltage control has been selected because it matches the needs of the MPC application.
The discrete-time model for the prediction of the load voltage is described as:

𝑔 = |𝑣 ∗ − 𝑣𝑜 (𝑘 + 1)|2 (12)

where 𝑣 ∗ is the reference voltage vector and 𝑣𝑜 (𝑘 + 1) is the predicted voltage vector:
𝐶𝐿 𝑇𝑠 𝑇𝑠 2
𝑣𝑜 (𝑘 + 1) = {𝑣𝑜 (𝑘) + [𝑖𝐿 (𝑘) − 𝑖𝑜 (𝑘 + 1)] + 𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑣 (𝑘 + 1)} (13)
𝐶𝐿+𝑇𝑠 2 𝐶 𝐶

where 𝐶 is the capacitance load and 𝐿 is inductance load, 𝑇𝑠 is the sampling time, 𝑣𝑜 (𝑘) is the measured load
voltage, 𝑖𝑜 (𝑘) ≈ 𝑖𝑜 (𝑘 + 1) when 𝑇𝑠 is small and 𝑣𝑜 (𝑘 + 1) is predicted voltage to be considered in the

Model predictive control using Euler method for switched-battery … (Ahmad Takiyuddin Abdullah
1502  ISSN: 2088-8694

controller optimization. The MPC algorithm flowchart for the current control of 11-level SBBMLI is shown
in Figure 4(a), whereas, the voltage control of 11-level SBBMLI is shown in Figure 4(b).

(a) (b)

Figure 4: The MPC algorithm flowchart for current control and voltage control of 11-level SBBMLI:
(a) current control and (b) voltage control

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

There are numerous switch combinations that might be built to generate an 11-level output voltage.
Nevertheless, Table 1 lists one possible combination of the switching states of the 11-level SBBMLI. The
simulation has been conducted under both current control and voltage control. The output load comprises a
resistor (R = 10 Ω) and the inductor (L = 10 mH) for the current control configuration without the LC filter
before the load. Figure 5 shows the 𝐼𝑟𝑒𝑓 and Io of MPC current control. It shows accurate tracking behavior
of 𝐼𝑜 with a small error compared to 𝐼𝑟𝑒𝑓 . The FFT analysis of the total harmonic distortion (THD) is
presented in Figure 6. The MPC has given rise to a small value of 1.24% THD.

Iref vs Io of MPC Current Control

Current (A)

Time (s)

Figure 5. 𝐼𝑟𝑒𝑓 and 𝐼𝑜 of MPC current control

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 14, No. 3, September 2023: 1497-1508
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  1503

Figure 6. The FFT analysis of THD for current control configuration

Table 1. The switching states for the simulation of 11-level SBBMLI

Vector 𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑣 (𝑘 + 1) S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 SA SB
V0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
V1 Vdc 1 0 0 0 0 1 0
V2 2Vdc 1 1 0 0 0 1 0
V3 3Vdc 1 1 1 0 0 1 0
V4 4Vdc 1 1 1 1 0 1 0
V5 5Vdc 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
V6 −Vdc 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
V7 −2Vdc 1 1 0 0 0 0 1
V8 −3Vdc 1 1 1 0 0 0 1
V9 −4Vdc 1 1 1 1 0 0 1
V10 −5Vdc 1 1 1 1 1 0 1
V11 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

The simulation is then run under voltage control configuration with the inverter output comprising
the LC filter (L = 2 mH and C = 2 µF) and load (𝑅𝑙 = 10 Ω). Figure 7 describes the reference 𝑉𝑟𝑒𝑓 and output
voltage 𝑉𝑜 . The result shows better tracking behavior of 𝑉𝑜 with a very small error. The FFT analysis of the
THD is depicted in Figure 8. The MPC has given rise to a very small value of 0.48% THD.
The results establish the feasibility of the initial MPC simulation using a receding horizon strategy.
The converter is subsequently subjected to the switching state, which minimizes a cost function, after the
evaluation of the predictions. One of the most crucial phases in the design of an MPC scheme is the cost
function formulation since it enables the choice of the control objectives for the application and the inclusion
of any necessary constraints.
A comparison of open-loop simulation and MPC using the Euler method (closed-loop simulation)
on 𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑣 , 𝑣𝑜 , 𝑖𝐿 and 𝑖𝑜 for the load without disturbance is shown in Figure 9. The results show more ripple,
which means a greater error in the 𝑣𝑜 , 𝑖𝐿 and 𝑖𝑜 open-loop signals compared to MPC. Figure 10 shows a
comparison between open-loop simulation and MPC for 𝑣𝑜 and 𝑖𝑜 signals for the load with disturbance. The
load with disturbance was also considered when the 10 Ω load is reduced to 5 Ω during the simulation. The

Model predictive control using Euler method for switched-battery … (Ahmad Takiyuddin Abdullah
1504  ISSN: 2088-8694

output voltage 𝑣𝑜 for both configurations is apparent to be unaffected by the disturbance, except a spike at
initial changes of load 5 Ω to 10 Ω. The result has also shown that the initial spike is less for MPC using the
Euler method than an open loop. Figure 11 shows a comparison of THD (𝑣𝑜 ) for open-loop in Figure 11(a)
and MPC for the disturbance case in Figure 11(b). MPC increased THD by 0.56% compared to open-loop
2.03%. In the case of MPC for a load without disturbance, the THD value is 0.48%, as shown in Figure 8.

Vref and Vo of MPC Voltage Control

Voltage (V)

Time (s)

Figure 7. 𝑉𝑟𝑒𝑓 and 𝑉𝑜 of MPC voltage control

Figure 8. The FFT analysis of THD for voltage control configuration

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 14, No. 3, September 2023: 1497-1508
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  1505

Figure 9. Comparison of open-loop and MPC for the configuration load without disturbance

Figure 10. Comparison of 𝐼𝑜 and 𝑉𝑜 of open-loop and MPC for the configuration load with disturbance
Model predictive control using Euler method for switched-battery … (Ahmad Takiyuddin Abdullah
1506  ISSN: 2088-8694

(a)

(b)

Figure 11. Comparison of THD (𝑣𝑜 ) for open-loop and MPC for the configuration load with disturbance:
(a) THD open-loop and (b) THD MPC using Euler method

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 14, No. 3, September 2023: 1497-1508
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  1507

4. CONCLUSION
The results establish the feasibility of the initial MPC simulation using a receding horizon strategy.
Determining the cost function is the most essential aspects in developing an MPC scheme since it enables the
selection of the application's control objectives and the inclusion of any relevant constraints. Application of
the switching state, which minimizes a cost function, to the converter is performed after evaluation of the
predictions. Within the simulation executed on the SBBMLI, the MPC using the Euler method has given
1.24% and 0.48% of THD for current control and voltage control configurations, respectively. Furthermore,
the THD with disturbance has increased to 0.56% by using the MPC compared to the open-loop, which has
given 2.03%.”

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thanks Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) for the support of the
project under UTM Institutional Grant vote 08G49.

REFERENCES
[1] J. L. Afonso et al., “A review on power electronics technologies for electric mobility,” Energies, vol. 13, no. 23, 2020, doi:
10.3390/en13236343.
[2] N. Mohan, T. M. Undeland, and W. P. Robbins, Power electronics : converters, applications, and design. Hoboken, N.J. : Wiley,
2003.
[3] M. H. Rashid, Power electronics: devices, circuits, and applications. Pearson education, 2014.
[4] Y. Yang and R. J. Wai, “Design of Adaptive Fuzzy-Neural-Network-Imitating Sliding-Mode Control for Parallel-Inverter System
in Islanded Micro-Grid,” IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 56376–56396, 2021, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3071832.
[5] G. S. Perantzakis, F. H. Xepapas, and S. N. Manias, “A Novel Four-Level Voltage Source Inverter;Influence of Switching
Strategies on the Distribution of Power Losses,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 149–159, Jan. 2007,
doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2006.886627.
[6] Y. Cheng, C. Qian, M. L. Crow, S. Pekarek, and S. Atcitty, “A Comparison of Diode-Clamped and Cascaded Multilevel
Converters for a (STATCOM) With Energy Storage,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 53, no. 5, pp. 1512–1521,
Oct. 2006, doi: 10.1109/TIE.2006.882022.
[7] S. Choudhury, M. Bajaj, T. Dash, S. Kamel, and F. Jurado, “Multilevel inverter: A survey on classical and advanced topologies,
control schemes, applications to power system and future prospects,” Energies, vol. 14, no. 18, 2021, doi: 10.3390/en14185773.
[8] S. Daher, J. Schmid, and F. L. M. Antunes, “Multilevel inverter topologies for stand-alone (PV) systems,” Industrial Electronics,
IEEE Transactions on, vol. 55, no. 7, pp. 2703–2712, 2008.
[9] S. Kakar et al., “A Common-Ground-Type Five-Level Inverter with Dynamic Voltage Boost,” Electronics (Switzerland), vol. 11,
no. 24, pp. 1–10, 2022, doi: 10.3390/electronics11244174.
[10] U. Mustafa, M. S. Bin Arif, S. Md Ayob, and M. Tariq, “Single Phase Seven-Level Inverter topology with Single DC Source and
Reduce Device Count for Medium and High Power Applications,” 2019 Innovations in Power and Advanced Computing
Technologies, i-PACT 2019, pp. 1–6, 2019, doi: 10.1109/i-PACT44901.2019.8960170.
[11] X. Guo, R. He, J. Jian, Z. Lu, X. Sun, and J. M. Guerrero, “Leakage current elimination of four-leg inverter for transformerless
three-phase PV systems,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 1841–1846, 2016, doi:
10.1109/TPEL.2015.2477539.
[12] U. Mustafa, M. S. Bin Arif, S. Ahmad, M. Tariq, and S. M. Ayob, “Performance Evaluation of Modified 5-Level T-Type H-
Bridge Inverter Utilizing Different PWM Modulation Schemes,” 2019 Innovations in Power and Advanced Computing
Technologies, i-PACT 2019, pp. 1–6, 2019, doi: 10.1109/i-PACT44901.2019.8960095.
[13] A. Poorfakhraei, M. Narimani, and A. Emadi, “A Review of Modulation and Control Techniques for Multilevel Inverters in
Traction Applications,” IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 24187–24204, 2021, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3056612.
[14] P. Cortes, M. P. Kazmierkowski, R. M. Kennel, D. E. Quevedo, and J. Rodriguez, “Predictive Control in Power Electronics and
Drives,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 55, no. 12, pp. 4312–4324, Dec. 2008, doi:
10.1109/TIE.2008.2007480.
[15] V. Yaramasu and B. Wu, “Predictive Control of a Three-Level Boost Converter and an NPC Inverter for High-Power PMSG-
Based Medium Voltage Wind Energy Conversion Systems,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 29, no. 10, pp. 5308–
5322, Oct. 2014, doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2013.2292068.
[16] M. Ghanes, M. Trabelsi, H. Abu-Rub, and L. Ben-Brahim, “Robust Adaptive Observer-Based Model Predictive Control for
Multilevel Flying Capacitors Inverter,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 63, no. 12, pp. 7876–7886, Dec. 2016,
doi: 10.1109/TIE.2016.2606359.
[17] P. Cortes, A. Wilson, S. Kouro, J. Rodriguez, and H. Abu-Rub, “Model Predictive Control of Multilevel Cascaded H-Bridge
Inverters,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 57, no. 8, pp. 2691–2699, Aug. 2010, doi:
10.1109/TIE.2010.2041733.
[18] X. Li, H. Zhang, M. B. Shadmand, and R. S. Balog, “Model Predictive Control of a Voltage-Source Inverter With Seamless
Transition Between Islanded and Grid-Connected Operations,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 64, no. 10, pp.
7906–7918, Oct. 2017, doi: 10.1109/TIE.2017.2696459.
[19] M. Norambuena, S. Kouro, S. Dieckerhoff, and J. Rodriguez, “Reduced Multilevel Converter: A Novel Multilevel Converter
With a Reduced Number of Active Switches,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 65, no. 5, pp. 3636–3645, May
2018, doi: 10.1109/TIE.2017.2762628.
[20] A. T. Abdullah, S. M. Idrus, and S. M. Ayob, “Performance Analysis of FCS-MPC Using the Generalized Formulation and Euler
Method on SBBMLI,” 5th IEEE Conference on Energy Conversion, CENCON 2021, pp. 85–90, 2021, doi:
10.1109/CENCON51869.2021.9627244.

Model predictive control using Euler method for switched-battery … (Ahmad Takiyuddin Abdullah
1508  ISSN: 2088-8694

[21] S. Kouro, P. Cortes, R. Vargas, U. Ammann, and J. Rodriguez, “Model Predictive Control 2014;A Simple and Powerful Method
to Control Power Converters,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 1826–1838, Jun. 2009, doi:
10.1109/TIE.2008.2008349.
[22] J. Rodriguez and P. Cortes, Predictive control of power converters and electrical drives, vol. 40. John Wiley \& Sons, 2012.
[23] M. Aguirre, S. Kouro, C. A. Rojas, J. Rodriguez, and J. I. Leon, “Switching Frequency Regulation for FCS-MPC Based on a
Period Control Approach,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 65, no. 7, pp. 5764–5773, 2018, doi:
10.1109/TIE.2017.2777385.
[24] S. R. Mohapatra and V. Agarwal, “Model Predictive Control for Flexible Reduction of Active Power Oscillation in Grid-Tied
Multilevel Inverters under Unbalanced and Distorted Microgrid Conditions,” IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications, vol.
56, no. 2, pp. 1107–1115, 2020, doi: 10.1109/TIA.2019.2957480.
[25] S. Vichik and F. Borrelli, “Solving linear and quadratic programs with an analog circuit,” Computers & Chemical Engineering,
vol. 70, pp. 160–171, 2014.
[26] E. F. Camacho and C. B. Alba, Model predictive control. Springer science & business media, 2013.
[27] P. Karamanakos and T. Geyer, “Guidelines for the Design of Finite Control Set Model Predictive Controllers,” IEEE
Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 35, no. 7, pp. 7434–7450, 2020, doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2019.2954357.
[28] S. Vazquez, E. Zafra, R. P. Aguilera, T. Geyer, J. I. Leon, and L. G. Franquelo, “Prediction model with harmonic load current
components for FCS-MPC of an uninterruptible power supply,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 322–
331, 2022, doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2021.3098948.

BIOGRAPHIES OF AUTHORS

Ahmad Takiyuddin Abdullah is a PhD student in Faculty of Electrical

Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) since 2021. He has been a lecturer in
Industrial Automation Section, Universiti Kuala Lumpur Malaysia France Institute since 2007.
He received his B.Eng. in Electrical and Electronic Engineering from Liverpool John Moores
University, United Kingdom in 1997. He obtained M.Eng. in Electrical (Mechatronics &
Automatic Control) from UTM in 2006. His research interests include the field of control
system, power electronics, robotics, signal processing and communication system. He can be
contacted at email: [email protected].

Sevia Mahdaliza Idrus received her Bachelor in Electrical Engineering in 1998

and Master in Engineering Management in 1999, both from UTM. She obtained her Ph.D in
2004 from the University of Warwick, United Kingdom in optical communication engineering.
She has served UTM since 1998 as an academic and administrative staff. Her main research
interests are optical communication system and network, optoelectronic design, and
engineering management. Her research output has been translated into a number of
publications (H-index-17) and IPR including a high-end reference book, 'Optical Wireless
Communication: IR Connectivity' published by Taylor and Francis, 49 book chapters and
monographs, over 200 refereed research papers, 8 patents granted, 36 patent filings and holds
31 UTM copyrights. She is Senior Member of IEEE and member of Editorial Board of few
refereed international journals. She has been appointed as Guest Professor at Osaka Prefecture
University and Tokai University, Japan in 2011 and 2014, respectively. She can be contacted
at email: [email protected].

Shahrin Md Ayob is a lecturer in Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Universiti

Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) since 2009. He received the B.E.E., M.E.E., and Ph.D. degrees
from the Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Kuala Lumpur, in 2000, 2003 and 2009,
respectively. He is currently with the Department of Energy Conversion, Faculty of Electrical
Engineering, UTM, Skudai, Malaysia. His current interest of research is on the application of
artificial intelligence on power converters. He can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 14, No. 3, September 2023: 1497-1508