hybrid go kart
play

Hybrid Go-Kart University of Connecticut Department of Electrical - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Hybrid Go-Kart University of Connecticut Department of Electrical Engineering Team Members: Jonathan Blake (EE), Nathan Butterfield (EE), Joshua Calkins (EE), Anupam Ojha (EE) Advisor: Prof. Sung-Yeul Park 4/18/2014 1 Outline System


  1. Hybrid Go-Kart University of Connecticut Department of Electrical Engineering Team Members: Jonathan Blake (EE), Nathan Butterfield (EE), Joshua Calkins (EE), Anupam Ojha (EE) Advisor: Prof. Sung-Yeul Park 4/18/2014 1

  2. Outline • System Overview • Flyback Results • PCB Revision • Software • Boost Converter • Budget • Problems Occurred • Final Steps 2

  3. What is Our Project? • Design a power electronics system to combine three separate power sources in order to drive an electric go-kart. 3

  4. The Power Sources • We will use three power sources: o A 30V Lead Acid battery o Four ultra-capacitors, wired in series, at 14V across bank o Photovoltaic Panel, 8->40V output, 200W 4

  5. System Overview 5

  6. System Layout 6

  7. Flyback Schematic

  8. Flyback Specifications • High current caused for multiple design alterations. • 4:7 turns ratio • Voltage Primary 8V-40V. Secondary Voltage 14V. • 16.7% to 50% Duty cycle • Current max 5A in 14.3A • Inductance on primary 20 μ H • 100KHz switching frequency • CCM • Selection of core geometry and material. • Toroid, E I core with gap • Kool m μ , ferromagnetic material, MPP 8

  9. Flyback Results Flyback 25% Duty Cycle 10 Ω Load 25 20 1 − 𝐸)(𝑂 𝑡 𝐸 15 ) 𝑊 𝑝𝑣𝑢 = 𝑊 𝑗𝑜 ( Vout 𝑂 𝑄 10 5 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 Vin • Windings Load Power In Power Out Efficiency 10Ω 2.96W 2.3W 77.70% • DCM 10Ω 12.2W 10.1W 82.80% • Snubber circuit 22Ω 15.6W 14.2W 91% 22Ω 35.1W 34.87W 99.30% • High Power 10Ω 47.3W 40W 84.50% 11Ω 97.7W 68.3W 60.90% • 30.01Vin 17.5Vout 97.2% 5.5Ω 102W 55.9W 54.80% 9

  10. Magnetics 𝑊 𝑞𝑙 𝑢 𝑝𝑜 𝑦10 8 Gauss 𝐶 𝑁𝑏𝑦 = • 𝑂𝐵 𝑓 Core loss due to eddy • currents and hysteresis 𝑋𝑏𝑢𝑢 𝑙𝑕 = 𝑙𝑔 𝑛 𝐶 𝑁𝑏𝑦 𝑜 • Core 585 𝐵 𝑀 = 79𝑜𝐼/𝑈 2 • 𝐵 𝑓 = 46.6𝑛𝑛 25𝑕 • Saturation 1.05Tesla • 𝐶 𝑁𝑏𝑦 =.107Tesla • Power Loss =3.4W • Wire Loss=2.8W • For 102W input 6.1% • 10

  11. Power Board Layout • Four layer board with 1oz copper with top and bottom layers devoted to low voltage signals. • Combines Flyback converter along with sensing and gate drive circuits for boost converter. 11

  12. Control Board Layout • Texas Instruments DSP TMS320F28335. • Allows up to 6 independently controlled PWM signals. • 8 ADC channels allows for multiple converters to be controlled by single DSP. 12

  13. Power Board Revision • Buck Converter • Non-isolated Output • Flyback  Discontinuous mode 13

  14. Software Design • Software being written with Texas Instruments Code Composer v5 to interface with TI DSP. • Software must read the voltage and current values from sensors. • This information will determine the duty ratios for the power converters. • Generate gate switching signal. 14

  15. Control Loop • Current mode control for Boost Converter • PI w/ PV Power Reference for Buck Converter • Danger conditionals 15

  16. ePWM and ADC • ePWM currently active with five signals switching at arbitrary duty ratios at variable frequency. • Due to nature of control board (2 signals per module), interleaving of boost controller limited to two channels always switching at the same time. Cannot interleave four power stages. • ADC and control coding in progress. Awaiting new power board revision to begin debugging. 16

  17. Boost Converter Design • The design of our boost converter has changed drastically. • The driving factor of these changes has been the input current. • Current design is rated for 120A input, with an expected maximum input of 90A. 17

  18. Boost Power-Stage Platform • High-current sections of a boost converter placed on separate platform, connected by cables. • Current and voltage sensor output to microcontroller. • Gate switching would determined by microcontroller, sent through gate drive circuit. 18

  19. Boost Power-Stage Platform (cont.) 19

  20. Budget • Reasons: • PCB $400 X 2 = $800 • Parts = $550 o Power electronics parts • Magnetics = $200 more expense by nature • Mechanical = $30 • Total Spent = $1580 o PCBs have to handle large amounts of current • Total allotted money =$1500 • Over Budget = $-80 20

  21. Problems Encountered • Flyback Efficiency • Large voltage spikes across MOSFETs • Magnetics • Programming took longer than expected 21

  22. Final Steps • Assemble and test Buck Converter • Implement Control Loop Algorithm • Assemble PV Structure 22

  23. Questions? 23

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend