6 vues

Titre original : Cost-based Droop Scheme With Lower Generation Costs for Microgrids

Transféré par Anooshdini2002

Cost-based Droop Scheme With Lower Generation Costs for Microgrids

Cost-based Droop Scheme With Lower Generation Costs for Microgrids

© All Rights Reserved

- A Review of Hybrid Renewable / Alternative Energy Systems for Electric Power Generation Configurations, Control, And Applications
- DC microgrid control
- Control Strategies for Micro Grids
- Improvements in Bidirectional Power-Flow Balancing and Electric Power Quality of a Microgrid With Unbalanced Distributed Generators and Loads by Using Shunt Compensators
- ELE_20150301_Mar_2015
- technical_program_schedule.pdf
- IRJET-Comparison between Ideal and Estimated PV Parameters using Evolutionary Algorithms
- Josep M. Guerrero Public CV
- Optimal Sitting and Sizing of Distributed Generation (DG) Units for Minimization of Losses using Imperialist Competitive Algorithm
- Power From the People - Draft Report
- An Enhanced Droop Control
- smart building
- Aura e Brochure
- Control of PV Array Based Distributed Generator
- EW-200937-FR.pdf
- Fuel Consumption Minimization of a Microgrid
- 9_04348113.pdf
- IJMER-46061528.pdf
- sss3
- 1564732322435_A Multivariable Optimal Energy Management.pdf

Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 5

Inam Ullah Nutkani1,2, Poh Chiang Loh2,3 and Frede Blaabjerg3

iExperimental Power Grid Centre, Agency for Science, Technology and Research, Singapore

2School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

3Department of Energy Technology, Aalborg University, Denmark

inam0003 @e.ntu.edu.sg

management and communication links are not viable, droop

control has been the preferred scheme for power sharing among

distributed generators (DGs). At present, although many droop

variations have been proposed to achieve proportional power

sharing

based

on

the

DG

kVA

ratings.

Other

operating

penalties at different loadings have not been considered. This

makes existing droop schemes not too well-suited for standalone

microgrids without central management system, where different

types of DGs usually exist. As an alternative, this paper proposes

a cost-based droop scheme, whose objective is to reduce a

generation

cost

realized

with

various

DG

operating

usually decided from a combination of factors rather than

ratings alone [3]-[5]. The same thought has however never

been tried with droop control for an autonomous islanded

microgrid.

To address the concern raised above, a cost-based droop

scheme has been proposed, whose power sharing in the

steady state will result in a lower total generation cost (TGCi

for the microgrid, as compared to the traditional droop

schemes. The proposed scheme methodology, simulation and

experimental findings are given in subsequent sections

followed by review of traditional droop scheme.

scheme therefore retains all advantages of the traditional droop

schemes, while at the same time keep its generation cost low.

These findings have been validated through simulation and

scaled down lab experiment.

control, autonomous control, power converters.

I. I NTRODUCTION

Distributed generators (DGs), when clustered to form

small microgrids, offer many advantages like resource

optimization, improved power quality, stability and reliability

[1]-[3]. The formed microgrids can certainly be controlled by

centralized management systems [3]-[5], but for widely

dispersed DGs where communication links are not viable,

autonomous droop schemes might be more appropriate. So

far, the common objective focused by the droop schemes has

been proportional power sharing among the DGs based on

their respective kVA ratings [5]-[6]. This objective is no

doubt fme if the DGs are of the same type just like in the

earlier control of parallel synchronous generators [7],

uninterruptible power supplies [8] and interlinked ac

microgrids [9]-[10]. It is however usually not the case for

standalone microgrids, where different types of DGs havmg

different cost functions and emission characteristics usually

exist, like for an example microgrid shown in Fig I.

Proportional power sharing based on ratings alone might

therefore not be sufficient or appropriate for microgrids.

Other factors like costs, efficiencies, pricing schedules and

emission penalties should rightfully be considered just like in

339

The basic droop scheme explained in the literature is

based on the two linear expressions written in (1) and (2),

where x, I, V , {P, Q and S}, and {max and min} are the DG

unit number, frequency, terminal voltage, active, reactive and

apparent power generations, and their corresponding

maximum and minimum values, respectively. Also included

in the two expressions are the active wand reactive u droop

coefficients, which no doubt are just the gradients of the two

droop lines. Implementation of the two droop lines would

generally mvolve measuring the DG terminal voltages and

currents for computmg its active and reactive power

generations [11]-[12]. The obtamed powers Px and Qx can

then be substituted into (1) and (2) to obtain the frequency Ix

and voltage Vx references for forming a set of three-phase

sinusoidal commands. The sinusoidal voltages can finally be

tracked by a standard multi- or single-loop controller, whose

design can be found in [5],[13].

Ix

Vx

wx -

Imax- wxPx;

Vmax- uxQx

Ux

fmax-f min

Sx,max

Vmax-Vmin

SX,max

(1)

(2)

basic droop lines, whose common objective is still to

mamtain proportional power sharmg based on the DG ratmgs

i TGC is used here to refer to a weighted combination of factors

like fuel, emission, maintenance and operational costs, which

rightfully can be freely tuned by the users and/or operators

droop coefficients according to (3) and (4).

WISI,max

W2S2,max

. . .

WxSx,max

. . .

[max - [min

(3 )

microgrid with three DGs is considered, which in the steady

state, will share a single common network frequency [

(= [1 = [2= [3)' Substituting [ into (1) leads to (5), which

would force the higher rated DG to produce more active

power in order to satisfy the equality. The same principle can

be applied to reactive power sharing, whose resulting

expression is shown in (6). In (6), the equality shown is only

approximate due to the practical fact that terminal voltages of

DGs will never be exactly equal in the steady state. This

imperfection has led to many variations, whose sole objective

is to improve on reactive power sharing based again on

ratings.

PI

P2

P3

51,max

52.max

53max

51,max

III.

52,max

53,max

generation costs of a dispatch-able renewable DG such as

fuel cell, wind or photovoltaic with storage even though it is

derived differently, by adding the direct or fix operating cost

and emission penalty/incentive cost and then dividing it by

inverter loss-efficiency function [19]-[21].

To illustrate, TGC curves of two engine driven DGs (CI

and C2) and one renewable DG ( C3 ) for the example

microgrid shown in Fig 1 are plotted in Fig. 2(a), where the

cost function (y-axis) of the DGs has been normalized and

plotted against the P (x-axis). The definition of the

normalized cost and power is given by (8) and (9),

respectively.

(5)

(6)

the traditional droop scheme based only on ratings might not

be suitable for microgrids with different types of DGs. In

addition, it should be mentioned that most droop schemes

proposed so far have always been based on those linear

expressions shown in (1) and (2). It is certainly not a strict

requirement, meaning that nonlinear droop curves can also be

used for the intended autonomous control. This is in fact the

case for the proposed droop scheme based on reducing the

TGC of the overall microgrid. Details of the scheme are

discussed as follows.

A.

in general, can be grouped under two categories named as

operating cost Cx,o(Px) and emission penalty-incentive cost

Cx,((Px)' When added together like in (7), the TGC of each

DG represented by Cx (Px) can rightfully be drawn as a

quadratic function.

(7)

Referring back to the operating cost, fuel costs of a diesel

generator driven by an internal combustion engine or a DG

driven by a micro-turbine can usually be represented by a

second-order quadratic function [16]-[18]. Adding to these is

a second set of quadratic functions, whose purposes are to

account for emission penalties faced by the engine or turbine

driven generator or incentives rewarded to the renewable DG

[17]-[18].

C'x (Px)

Cx(Px)

Px,max

Cx(Px)

(8)

P x,rated

(9)

p'==

X

PX,max

px.rated

maximum/rated power (Px,max)helps to place the cost ofDGs

within a common range for comparison on equal scale

regardless ofDGs different kVA rating.

Further it shall be noted that at zero P, the costs are noted

to be non-zero. These no-load costs are always there so long

as their associated droop controlled DGs are operating. Being

independent of P , they should be removed from

consideration when deciding on the amount of active power

generation. The modified cost curves shown in Fig. 2(b) can

hence be represented by (10).

C;(Px) = C(Px) - C(Px

= 0)

(10)

340

proposed droop scheme is expressed as:

kx

imax-i min

= max

(Cmax)

(11)

0.3 ,------,

0.199

0.3

-.,

), 0.2

0.2

-\,.)

'"

0.1 0.0602

0 .0 51

1

C

0 03476

0======: =::=========== = =J

0.4

0.2

0.6

0.8

0.1

0.2

0.4

51.5 r----------'

51

50.5 r-=;;;;:-----.!._J

50

0.8

0.6

51

-: 50.5

c-

49.7511z

tt

50

49.5

49 L-------------L---LL----

49 L-----------------L-L-

0.2

0.4

0.6

r=::::::

::: __

0.8

0.2

0.6

0.8

Fig. 3. Frequency versus power curves for the cost-based droop scheme with (a)

maximwn generation cost among the DGs when they are

at the 100% generation limit (P; = 1). Applying it to

the example microgrid with three DGs of cost curves

shown in Fig 2(b), results in:

k1 - k2 - k3 - mimax-i

axCCmax) - c:max

C'CPl) = C'CP 2 ) = C'CP 3 )

0.4

max

.

.

discussed next.

(14)

C.

(12)

three DGs leads to the following expression.

(13)

DG with the lowest TGC would produce more and vice versa.

Pictorially, it can also be seen by either drawing a horizontal

constant cost line in Fig. 2(b) or a horizontal constant

frequency line in Fig. 3(a). The overall TGC of the microgrid

can hence be an addition of three DGs TGC, which will

surely be lower than that produced by the traditional droop

scheme. From the understanding gained from (13), it should

rightfully be mentioned too that the denominator of kx in (11)

should not be mistaken as G.max. Else, the resulting equality

will become (14), which will also depend on the individual

maximum TGCs of the DGs when at full-loadCP; = 1). This

dependence is not encouraged since it causes the DG with the

lowest TGC to produce less active power in order to give a

smaller C;CPx) to counter the smaller Gmax . This

shortcoming can also be seen by drawing a horizontal line

across Fig. 3(b), which shows the cost curves plotted with

(9), but with the denominator of kx replaced by C.max' It is

hence important to set kx appropriately in order to meet the

Parameter Limits

lFmin = lFmax-

1,max

The maximum frequency [max is obviously arrived at

when P; = 0 and hence C;CPx) = 0 according to the cost

frequency [min is arrived at when the most costly DG is

operating at its full-loadCP = 1). For the example microgrid,

it happens when C;CPx) = C',max' which confIrms that the

proposed droop scheme can operate within the defined

frequency range from [min to [max ' It should however be

noted that the minimum frequency [min is somehow not

reached by the other two less costly DGs since their

maximum costs at the full-load is lesser than C,max' Their

respective frequencies at full-load are hence higher than [min

but smaller than [max according to those cost curves drawn in

Fig. 3(a). Because of that, for a common steady state

frequency close to [min, active power outputs of the two

lower cost DGs must be limited to P;,max (or lower), which in

practice can be done by adding a simple proportional-integral

controller (16) to (11).

341

Experiment Results

Simulation Results

o.8 ,------,---,--,,-

Time(vec)

O--5O-1OO-15O2OO-250-300

00

00

1

0----4L- -6- --L--10- -2

Tillie

(sec)

Fig. 4. Variation of microgrid TGC(PJ as load changes with traditional and cost-based droop scheme (a) simulation and (b) experiment results

.

'"

"

.

-.:

0.8

0.6

0.49:t====j=

0.2

OL----L-----L--0

1 ---2

1

Time(sec)

Thne

00

00

51.5

51

505

"' 50

49.5

<t 49

48.50

(sec)

Fig. S. Variations of DG active powers as load changes in the cost-based droop scheme (a) simulation and (b) experiment results.

: 50.87

,-------r---,----,----...,----__,

51

50.5

50

S. 49.5

48.5

>l'

"

-..,"

12

300

nme (,wc)

00

00

Fig. 6. Variations of microgrid frequency as load changes in the cost-based droop scheme (a) simulation and (b) experiment results.

Ix

(p.max- px')

Kp

where

and

respectively.

Ki are

(Kp Ki/S);

+

Px' P,max

(16)

IV.

TABLE I

MJCROGRlD SYSTEM PARAMETERS

SIMULATION RESULTS

droop scheme, the example microgrid shown in Fig. 1 was

simulated in Matlab/Simulink software. The DGs rating and

other system parameters are given in TABLE I. Their

respective cost and droop curves are similar to those shown in

Fig. 2(a) and Fig. 3(a), which when applied to (11), lead to

kl

k2

k3

2

__

0.245

individual DG active outputs for the three loading conditions.

Their corresponding common frequency variation is also

shown in Fig. 6(a) for easier correlation of events happened

during the three load intervals.

loading conditions

30%(Iow), 6O%(moderate) and

90%(heavy) of the total microgrid generation capacity.

Figure 4(a) shows the corresponding microgrid total

generation cost obtained with the cost-based and traditional

droop schemes, where the fonner clearly shows a reduction in

TGC for the studied microgrid. The saving is, as anticipated,

achieved by forcing the low-cost DG to produce more and the

high-cost DG to produce less. According to Fig. 2(b), the

low-cost DG will always be unit 3, while the high-cost DG

will be unit 2 from 0 to 60% loading (P

0.6), and then

unit 3 from 60% loading ( P

0.6) onwards. This is

=

342

Parameters

Values

{min H {max

Vmin H Vmax

49 H SlHz

Phases

Max. Pl, P2 P3

Max. Ql Q2

Q3

Max. P; and Q

Base Power 5

Base Voltage

=

kl

k2 k3

(,max

0.9SpUH 1.0Spu

3

IkW

0.7SkVAr

1.0 each

1 kVA

190.S

8.16

shown in Fig 2(b)

that the 14% saving in TGC for the second loading condition

in Fig. 3 is greater than the 2% saving experienced in the first

interval. This is undeniably the case as differences in the cost

curves become more prominent at higher loading condition.

An increase in saving is however not observed in the third

interval during which the load has further increased. The

reason for that is due to the saturation of DG unit 3 at its rated

value (full-load), which to a sizable extent, has hindered its

saving in the third interval has hence dropped from 14% to

6.8% in Fig. 3, which after all is still a saving as compared to

the traditional scheme.

V.

[10]

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

emulated using digitally controlled three phase inverters and

variable active and reactive load banks. The DGs rating,

frequency, cost curves and other parameters were set same as

described in section IV, also given in TABLE I. The

experiment was carried with three different loading

conditions. However, the total % load in all three intervals

was not exactly same as simulation cases, this relatively

higher loading during experiment can be observed from the

cost and power values shown in Fig. 4 and Fig. 5. The

experiment results for TGC saving, power sharing among

DGs agrees with the proposed scheme theoretical findings

and simulation results, as shown in Fig. 4(b) to Fig 5(b). The

experimental results for microgrid frequency variation are

also shown Fig. 6(b).

VI.

CONCLUSION

autonomous microgrid applications with different types of

DGs considered. Instead of relying only on the DG power

ratings, the proposed scheme arrives at a steady-state power

sharing based on various cost factors grouped under the

general term of TGC. The goal is to reduce the overall

microgrid TGC without affecting the simplicity of the droop

scheme. Effectiveness of the proposed scheme has been

dually verified through simulation and scaled-down lab

experiment.

REFERENCE

[I] R. H. Lasseter, P. Paigi, "Microgrid: A conceptual solution", PESC

Record - iEEE Annual Power Electronics Specialists Conference, vol. 6,

pp. 4285-4290, 2004.

[2] H. Farhangi "The path of the smart grid", iEEE Power Energy

Mag., vol. 8, pp.18 -28, 20IO.

[3] D. Pudjianto, G. Strbac, F. van O verbeeke, A. Androutsos, Z. Larrabe

and J. T. Saraiva, "Investigation of regulatory, commercial, economic

and environmental issues in micro-grids", Proc. int. Conj Future Power

Syst., 2005.

[4] A. G. Tsikalakis and N. D. Hatziargyriou, "Centralized control for

optimizing microgrids operation", iEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol.

23, no.l, pp.241-248, 2008.

[5] F. Katiraei, R. Iravani, N. Hatziargyriou, A. Dimeas, "Microgrids

management," iEEE Power Energy Mag., vol.6, no.3, pp.54,65, 2008.

[6] Psolo Piagi and Robert Lasseter. "Autonomous control of microgrids,"

iEEE PES Meeting, 2006.

[7] R.E. Cosse, M.D. Alford, M. Hajiaghajani, E.R. Hamilton,

"Turbine/generator governor droop/isochronous fundamentals - A

graphical approach," Petroleum and Chemical industry Conference

(PCiC), iEEE Record of Conference Papers industry Applications

Society 58th Annual, pp.I-8, 19-21 Sept. 2011.

[8]

[9]

Y.B. Byun, T.G. Koo, K.Y. Joe, E.S. Kim, 1. I. Seo, D.H. Kim,

"Parallel operation of three-phase UPS inverters by wireless load

sharing control," Telecommunications Energy Conference, iNTELEC.

Twenty-second international, pp.526-532, 2000.

343

[II]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

Interlinked Hybrid Microgrids", In Proceedings of the i 5th

international Power Electronics and Motion Control Conference.. pp.

DS3b.17-1 - DS3b. I7-6, 2012.

I. U. Nutkani, P. C. Loh, F. Blaabjerg, "Distributed control of hybrid

AC microgrids with dynamic active and reactive power capacity

tuning," iEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE),

2012, pp.I954-1959, Sept. 2012.

I. U. Nutkani, P. C. Loh, F. Blaabjerg, "Distributed control of hybrid

AC microgrids with dynamic active and reactive power capacity

tuning," Trans. of indus. App., vo1.49, no.5, 2013

I. U. Nutkani, P. C. Loh, F. Blaabjerg, "Power Flow Control of

Interlinked Hybrid Microgrids", Trans. iET in Power Electronics, In

press.

J. Rocabert , A. Luna , F. Blaabjerg and P. Rodriguez "Control of

power converters in AC microgrids", iEEE Trans. Power

Electron., vol. 27, no. II, pp.4734 -4749, 2012.

A. Mohd, E. O rtjohann, D. Morton, O. O mari, "Review of control

techniques for inverters parallel operation", Electric Power Systems

Research, vol. 80, no.I2, pp. 1477-1487, 2010.

J. M. Guerrero, 1. Matas, 1. Garcia de Vicuna; M. Castilla, J. Miret,

"Decentralized Control for Parallel O peration of Distributed Generation

Inverters Using Resistive O utput Impedance", iEEE Trans. ind.

Electron., vo1.54, no.2, pp.994-1004, April 2007.

multiobjective optimization procedures using linear programming

techniques," iEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol.lO, no.2, pp.731,738, May

1995.

[17] M. A. Abido, "A niched Pareto genetic algorithm for multi objectives

environmental/economic dispatch", Journal of Electrical power and

energy systems, pp. 97-105, 2003.

[18] D. B. Das and C. Patvardhan., "New Multi-objective Stochostic Serch

Technique for Economic Load Dispatch", iEE Proc.-Gener. Transm.

Distrib., vo1.l45, no.6, pp.747- 752, 1998.

[19] F. P. Baumgartner, "Euro realo inverter efficiency: DC_ voltage

dependency," in 20th European Fhotovoltaic Solar Energy Conference,

Sept 2005.

[20] A. EI-Maaty, M. A. EI-Aal, J. Schmid, 1. Bard, and P. Caselitz,

"Modeling and optimizing the size of the power conditioning unit for

photovoltaic systems," Journal of Solar Energy Engineering,

Transactions of the ASME, vo1.l28, no.I, pp.40-44, Feb.2006.

[21] A. Driesse, P. Jain, S. Harrison, "Beyond the curves: Modeling the

electrical efficiency of photovoltaic inverters," 33rd iEEE Fhotovoltaic

Specialists Conference, 2008. PVSC '08. pp. 1-6, May 2008.

- A Review of Hybrid Renewable / Alternative Energy Systems for Electric Power Generation Configurations, Control, And ApplicationsTransféré parMd Abdul Raheman
- DC microgrid controlTransféré parUday Mujumdar
- Control Strategies for Micro GridsTransféré parpeng_electrical
- Improvements in Bidirectional Power-Flow Balancing and Electric Power Quality of a Microgrid With Unbalanced Distributed Generators and Loads by Using Shunt CompensatorsTransféré parKaiba Seto
- ELE_20150301_Mar_2015Transféré partorinomg
- technical_program_schedule.pdfTransféré parSoumitra Mehrotra
- IRJET-Comparison between Ideal and Estimated PV Parameters using Evolutionary AlgorithmsTransféré parIRJET Journal
- Josep M. Guerrero Public CVTransféré parAn00pgadzilla
- Optimal Sitting and Sizing of Distributed Generation (DG) Units for Minimization of Losses using Imperialist Competitive AlgorithmTransféré parIJSTE
- Power From the People - Draft ReportTransféré parcoolgreenoz
- An Enhanced Droop ControlTransféré parPudi Sekhar
- smart buildingTransféré parMin'Tu BeloveXim
- Aura e BrochureTransféré parrajeshkumar_t8233
- Control of PV Array Based Distributed GeneratorTransféré parShareef Khan
- EW-200937-FR.pdfTransféré parSandeep Rai
- Fuel Consumption Minimization of a MicrogridTransféré parSandu Dan
- 9_04348113.pdfTransféré parJitender Kaushal
- IJMER-46061528.pdfTransféré parIJMER
- sss3Transféré parmyapps948
- 1564732322435_A Multivariable Optimal Energy Management.pdfTransféré parVikash Kumar
- 969fffc5f035281927cb9670eb25abf8e3f3Transféré parWoldemariam Worku
- Call for Papers_Special Issue on MicrogridsTransféré parJuan Marin
- 2019-05-015393.pdfTransféré parZunairaNazir
- Isorap2013 RaTransféré parraalaoui
- Nikola Kako s 2014Transféré paramol
- convertTransféré parjeos20132013
- Smart Grid Operational Services - Distributed Generation Fact SheetTransféré parGord Reynolds
- Towards Real-time Microgrid Power Management using Computational Intelligence MethodsTransféré partissatom
- RefTransféré parSoumyadeep Nag
- IJERTV1IS5321Transféré parJeyanthi Ganesan

- iec60598-1-i1{ed8.0}bTransféré parAnooshdini2002
- Frequency Control of Electric Power Microgrids Using Distributed Cooperative Control of Multi-Agent SystemsTransféré parAnooshdini2002
- Analysis of Microgrid Inverter Droop Controller With Virtual Output Impedance Under Non-linear Load ConditionTransféré parAnooshdini2002
- Battery Energy Storage Station (BESS)-Based Smoothing Control of Photovoltaic (PV) and Wind Power Generation FluctuationsTransféré parAnooshdini2002
- Gutor AC UPS System GuideTransféré parbookbum
- Ziegler-Nichols Based Controller Parameters Tuning for Load Frequency Control in a MicrogridTransféré parAnooshdini2002
- Advanced Control Architectures for Intelligent Microgrids—Part II: Power Quality, Energy Storage, and AC/DC MicrogridsTransféré parAnooshdini2002
- IPSTransféré parAnooshdini2002
- Study BatteryTransféré parsreelakshmisnr
- led light Home Power 73Transféré parMohamed Hareesh
- Basics Every Battery User Should KnowTransféré parAnooshdini2002

- Wind Generator Fabrication PicsTransféré parBruceBaynosa
- 154749265 RTWP Problem Troubleshooting HWTransféré parMarius Matei
- DOORDARSHAN TRAINING REPORTTransféré parGarvitChopra
- FOLLETO 86BTransféré parBruno Demmian Cabrera Letzkus
- Functional Requirement Specification for Supply Installation Testing & Commisioning of Intelligent Fire Detection & Alarm System With Integrated Digital Voice Evacuation SystemTransféré parrahult19
- Arduino LogicTransféré parNelson Naval Cabingas
- NEWS_636897377767992207 (1).pdfTransféré parShivani Agarwal
- TektronixTransféré parJohn
- Common Mode Voltage Control in Three Level Diode Clamped InverterTransféré parAnonymous 7VPPkWS8O
- Online Read Me Who BabaTransféré parJason Makiaris
- RCS-9659_X_Instruction Manual_EN_Domestic General_X_R1.02_(EN_DYBH0319.0086.0003).pdfTransféré parTonyBui
- 04463847[1]Transféré parzohara
- ME_ECETransféré parSenthilarasu Subramanian
- npu3c-mmu2k-mmu3aTransféré parUday Sreedhar
- MANUAL LG 43LJ55_49LJ55_0622_8302_RS232CTransféré parNelCamHer
- Panel Mounting Switches IEC60947- Product Guide- EATONTransféré parrasheed313
- datasheet atmega32.pdfTransféré parNgôTháiTuấnCường
- Chapter 4 - Frequency Modulation (FM)Transféré parDavid
- Basic DC TheoryTransféré parDivyanshu Bhardwaj
- 5g Research on Waveform and Multiple Access Techniques (1)Transféré parAnonymous 0riMfln4VZ
- CCK Serries & Parallel Current FlowTransféré parAnbaananthan Thever
- RFI - Array Combination AntennaTransféré parbuditux
- Dynamic Element MatchingTransféré parIvar Løkken
- DGS 1210 Series Manual v4 00 EnTransféré parIrish Carlo Juliales Cadague
- PLC zen 10-C1AR-V2Transféré parteguhtriyanto
- Analyzing Harmonic DistortionTransféré parMuhamad Mukhsital Azizi
- RDS Technical SpecificationTransféré parwhistle-blower
- Efficiency Calculation- TransformerTransféré parShraddha Raut
- ZetdTransféré parzoki
- Interupting Current CalculationTransféré parvisanu