516 IEEE JOURNAL OF EMERGING AND SELECTED TOPICS IN POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 03, NO.

2, JUNE 2015

Comparison of Advanced Control Techniques for

Grid Side Converter of Doubly-Fed Induction
Generator Back-to-Back Converters to
Improve Power Quality Performance
During Unbalanced Voltage Dips
Murali M. Baggu, Senior Member, IEEE, Badrul H. Chowdhury, Senior Member, IEEE,
and Jonathan W. Kimball, Senior Member, IEEE

Abstract A doubly-fed induction generator grid side N OMENCLATURE

converter is studied under voltage disturbances. During volt-
age dips, conventional current control techniques involving the
X qde dq-axis component SRF.
decoupling of dq axis in the synchronous reference frame (SRF) X qdpe dq-axis sequence components in positive SRF.
exhibits oscillations in the stiff dc link voltage, as well as in the T32 ABC to stationary dq reference frame
active and reactive power outputs of the voltage source converter transformation.
(VSC). To mitigate the oscillations, an advanced control technique R(t) reference frame transformation.
called the sequence domain control (SDC) is evaluated. This
approach implements individual controllers in the positive and
X qdne dq-axis sequence components in negative SRF.
negative sequence domains and demonstrates stabilization of the X abc A, B, and C phase components.
dc link voltage to a greater extent during a disturbance, but vdpe Positive sequence d-axis SRF voltage.
is more sluggish than the conventional control. An innovative E DC link voltage.
control technique called direct power control (DPC) is also inves- i os DC link current of VSC.
tigated. This control achieves active and reactive power stability
with simple active and reactive power control variables replacing
vqpe Positive sequence q-axis SRF voltage.
the traditional current control loops. The DPC technique is vdne Negative sequence d-axis SRF voltage.
verified using a prototype in the laboratory. A modified DPC vqne Negative sequence q-axis SRF voltage.
algorithm combining the benefits of DPC and SDC to eliminate i dpe Positive sequence d-axis SRF current.
the current harmonics created by DPC during system distur- i qpe Positive sequence q-axis SRF current.
bances is introduced. The benefits of the proposed controllers are
compared using a simulation of voltage dip on a VSC based on the
i dne Negative sequence d-axis SRF current.
IEC-61400-21 standard. i qne Negative sequence q-axis SRF current.
P Active power.
Index Terms Back-to-back pulsewidth modulation (PWM)
converters, current control, direct power control (DPC), P0 Active power average component.
doubly-fed induction generator (DFIG), sequence domain Ps2 Active power sine term coefficient.
control (SDC), voltage dip, voltage source converters (VSCs). Pc2 Active power cosine term coefficient.
Q Reactive power.
Manuscript received May 31, 2014; revised July 27, 2014; accepted Q0 Reactive power average component.
August 31, 2014. Date of publication September 19, 2014; date of current
version April 30, 2015. This work was supported in part by the U.S. National Q c2 Reactive power cosine coefficient.
Science Foundation under Grant ECS-0523897 and in part by the Department Q s2 Reactive power sine coefficient.
of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Missouri University of Science and Pimb Active power due to system imbalance.
Technology, Rolla, MO, USA. Recommended for publication by Associate
Editor W. Gao. Q imb Reactive power due to system imbalance.
M. M. Baggu was with the GE Global Research Center, Schenectady,
NY 12309 USA. He is now with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory,
Golden, CO 80401 USA (e-mail: murali.m.baggu@ieee.org). I. I NTRODUCTION
B. H. Chowdhury was with the Missouri University of Science and
Technology, Rolla, MO 65409 USA. He is now with the University
of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC 28223 USA (e-mail:
b.chowdhury@uncc.edu).
T HE major issues concerning integration of wind turbines
are the best wind regimes that are located in rural areas
and the power grid in these areas is often weak and prone to
J. W. Kimball was with the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,
Champaign, IL 61801 USA. He is now with the Missouri University of voltage sags, faults, and imbalances. Unbalanced grid voltages
Science and Technology, Rolla, MO 65409 USA (e-mail: kimballjw@ can cause many problems for doubly-fed induction genera-
mst.edu). tor (DFIG)-based wind turbines, such as torque pulsations,
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available
online at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. unbalanced currents, and reactive power pulsations in con-
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/JESTPE.2014.2359205 ventional current control (CCC) techniques discussed in [1].
2168-6777 2014 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
BAGGU et al.: COMPARISON OF ADVANCED CONTROL TECHNIQUES FOR GSC OF DFIG BACK-TO-BACK CONVERTERS
These problems are attributed to the instability and distortion
in the power converters dc link voltage caused by the positive
sequence current control during system disturbances.
A review of the pertinent literature reveals several advanced
control techniques for addressing the effect of imbalance
associated with the converters installed with DFIGs. These
techniques are broadly divided into two major categories. The
first category is an advanced current control technique that
involves decomposing the system voltage and currents into
symmetrical components and using separate controllers in pos-
itive and negative sequence domains as described in [2][10].
The second category is a novel direct power control (DPC)
technique that is more applicable for utility connected systems
as they can directly achieve unity power factor requirements.
References [11] and [12] discuss this technique for the
DFIG back-to-back pulsewidth modulation (PWM) convert-
ers. A variety of sequence domain control (SDC) methods
have been proposed. Enjeti and Choudhury [2] proposed a
feed-forward approach, where the sequence components of
the unbalanced input are calculated and used to counter-
unbalance the PWM gating signals of the converter switches
to cancel the generated abnormal harmonics. Rioual et al. [3]
proposed a cascade regulation of PWM rectifier in the Parks
dq frame. This control achieves desired positive and neg-
ative sequence current commands for a constant dc link
voltage and average reactive power. Kim et al. [4] pro-
posed a PWM converter where the input voltage is decom-
posed into symmetrical components and the negative sequence
current component is commanded to be zero. Song and
Nam [5] proposed a dual converter scheme where two ref-
erence frames are used for measuring and regulating the
positive sequence components in the positive synchronous
reference frame (SRF) and negative sequence components in
negative SRF. Saccomando et al. [6] proposed two different
controllers similar to the one proposed in [5]; however, the
transient performance of the controller is further analyzed
in [5]. Xu et al. [7] proposed the use of a main controller
(without any decomposition) and an auxiliary controller in
negative sequence domain with inclusion of cross coupling
for negative sequence components. Xu [8] proposed complete
modeling of the DFIG in positive and negative sequence
frames to counter network disturbances. Lee et al. [9]
presented a control method consisting of a proportional
integral (PI) controller in a positive synchronously rotating
reference frame, which is capable of providing precise current
control for a rotor-side converter with separated positive and
negative components to reduce the pulsating torque and dc
voltage problems of a DFIG-based wind turbine system.
Qiao and Harley [10] proposed a method in which RSC
and grid side converter (GSC) of the DFIG are controlled in
a positive (dq)+ reference frame, as well as in a negative
(dq) reference frame. The (dq)+ references frame control
of RSC and GSC are similar to CCC. The supplementary
control of the RSC in the (dq) reference frame minimizes the
electromagnetic torque pulsations of the DFIG caused by the
unbalanced network voltage and the supplementary control of
the GSC in the (dq) reference frame contributes to balance
the total output currents of the DFIG.
517
The DPC is simple and alternative control formulation that
does not require decomposition into symmetrical components.
Noguchi et al. [11] and Malinowski et al. [12] proposed
DPC of a three-phase PWM converter without line voltage
sensors. In [12], the control assumes the three phase grid as
a virtual induction machine, and the flux in it is defined as
virtual flux (VF). It is shown that the VF-DPC exhibits several
advantages, particularly providing sinusoidal line current when
the supply voltage is not ideal.
From the literature, it can be inferred that SDC and DPC
techniques are suitable to address the issue of voltage imbal-
ance on DFIG back-to-back PWM converters. Hence, these
are further evaluated in this paper. A hybrid control approach
to gain the advantages of both sequence controllers and DPC
is introduced for DFIG-based wind turbines during voltage
disturbances. This paper contributes to the state of art in wind
energy technology for low voltage (LV) ride through appli-
cations. This paper successfully compares different advanced
control techniques, namely SDC and DPC, to identify the best
control technique suitable for LV ride through applications of
DFIG-based wind system converters. Both the SDC and DPC
were adopted from conventional motor drives and applied to
the GSC of a DFIG. A modified DPC (MDPC) algorithm that
combines the SDC and DPC techniques together was intro-
duced in this paper for GSC and RSC of DFIG to overcome the
disadvantages of the SDC and DPC. The proposed modified
controller uses a hybrid approach of the power control used
in SDC and the delta modulation and lookup table algorithm
of DPC.
In Section II, the effect of unbalance on the GSC of DFIG
is discussed in detail. An advanced control technique using
SDC to stabilize the operation of the grid-side converter during
grid imbalance is also presented in detail in this section. A
novel control technique using direct active and reactive power
control called DPC is discussed in Section IV. This controller
eliminates the conventional current loops and uses delta mod-
ulation comparators, hence has faster response. The switching
of the converter is done using a simple optimum switching
table. A grid-side controller is simulated using DPC and the
results are compared with the CCC and SDC. The DPC is
practically implemented in hardware to test its applications. An
MDPC technique combining the advantages of DPC and SDC
is also introduced in this section and the results are compared
with the CCC, SDC, and DPC techniques according to IEC
61400-21 standard. Finally, the conclusion is drawn in Section
V. The Appendix presents the converter and DFIG simulation
parameters.
II. A NALYSIS OF U NBALANCED VOLTAGE I NPUTS
ON GSC AND THE E FFECT OF SDC
A disturbance on the grid-side voltage is generally
characterized by an imbalance in the voltage or the cur-
rent, either in magnitude or phase (or both). The nature of
the disturbance may be analyzed using symmetrical com-
ponents theory. Hence, the control of a voltage source
converter (VSC) during a grid disturbance is studied using
symmetrical components and multiple reference frame theory.
518 IEEE JOURNAL OF EMERGING AND SELECTED TOPICS IN POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 03, NO. 2, JUNE 2015

A detailed analysis of sequence domain decomposition of

dq components during the presence of both positive and
negative sequence components is presented in [13]. It can
be derived in SRF that the positive sequence component is
expressed as a dc component and the negative sequence as a
second-harmonic component as shown in
X qde = X qdpe + T32 R(2t)X qdne . (1)
During disturbances, the SRF components are distorted by
a second-harmonic oscillation due to the presence of the
negative sequence components. Hence, a more detailed control
that considers this imbalance needs to be investigated.
As discussed in Section I, imbalances in source voltages
are identified and mitigated using two different refer-
ence frames for the positive and the negative sequence
components [2][10]. Using positive and negative SRFs, (1)
can be derived as shown in
X abc = T32 R(t)X qdpe + T32 R(t)X qdne . (2)
This approach would decouple the control in the respective
sequence reference frames and called SDC. A dual control
scheme similar to that reported in [5] is evaluated. The positive
sequence is simulated in the positive SRF and the negative
sequence is simulated in the negative SRF. A second-order
notch filter of 120-Hz frequency is used to separate the
dc components. Since the imbalance is seen as a 120-Hz
oscillation, it is eliminated using the notch filter. As a choice,
a low pass filter is excluded due to instability issues with
the simulation [5]. Equation (3) gives the active power of
Fig. 1. Control block diagram for SDC technique.
the system during the presence of both positive and negative
sequence components. Equation (4) gives the short form of (3)
where the constant terms are the coefficients of average, sine
controllers can be commanded to zero [3], [15], but this
and cosine terms as represented by the subscripts. Similarly,
does not achieve the desired reactive power output. The block
the reactive power of the system is given by
diagram of the SDC is shown in Fig. 1.
E i os
3 III. SDC S IMULATION OF GSC FOR A VOLTAGE D IP
= (Vqpe i qpe + Vdpe i dpe + Vdne i dne ) . . .
2 The behavior of the VSC is simulated in MATLAB
3
+ cos(2 t) (Vqne i qpe + Vdne i dpe Simulink along with PLECS block set for two phase voltage
2 dip of 20% of the remaining voltage for 0.15 s on
+ Vqpe i qne + Vdpe i dne ) . . .
the high voltage side of the transformer according to
3
+ sin(2 t) (Vdne i qpe + Vqne i dpe IEC-61400-21 standards for voltage dip [16]. The DFIG wind
2 turbine generator step-up transformer has three windings. The
+ Vdpe i qne + Vqde i dne )
high voltage winding is delta connected. Both LV windings
(3) have grounded-wye connections [17]. One LV winding is
P = E i os = P0 + Pc2 cos(2 t) + Ps2 sin(2 t) connected to the stator circuit and the other to the rotor circuit.
(4) Hence, a 20% line-to-line voltage dip on the high voltage side
is equivalent to 20% line-to-ground voltage dip on a single
Q = Q 0 + Q c2 cos(2 t) + Q s2 sin(2 t). (5)
phase of the LV side of the wind turbine.
The dq controller currents in the positive and negative The CCC technique discussed in [1] and [13], as well
sequence domains are derived from the required active and as the SDC technique discussed in Section II are simulated
reactive power commands. The dc controller commands the dc and compared. The voltage dip is initiated at 0.2 s after
link voltage to a constant value thus producing the command the converter reached steady-state operation. The results of
for average dc voltage. The q and d controllers in the posi- the CCC and SDC methods are shown in Figs. 25. It is
tive and negative SDC the average active power component, observed from Figs. 2 and 3 that in the steady state, the
average reactive power component, active power cosine oscillations in the dc link voltage and thereby in the active
component, and active power sine component coefficients and reactive powers of the SDC are less than that obtained by
to zero [7], [14]. In general, the negative sequence current the conventional control. However, the dc link voltage of SDC
BAGGU et al.: COMPARISON OF ADVANCED CONTROL TECHNIQUES FOR GSC OF DFIG BACK-TO-BACK CONVERTERS 519

Fig. 2. Voltage dip simulation of CCC for VSC. (a) DC link voltage.
(b) Active power. (c) Reactive power.

Fig. 4. Voltage dip simulation of CCC for VSC. (a) Source voltages.
(b) Source currents. (c) Converter voltage. (d) d-axis voltage. (e) q-axis
voltage. (f) d-axis current.

Fig. 3. Voltage dip simulation of SDC for VSC. (a) DC link voltage.
(b) Active power. (c) Reactive power.

takes a longer time to achieve steady state and has higher peak
over shoot compared with the conventional controller this is
due to the complexity of the SDC control (more PI loops)
making the response sluggish. Figs. 4 and 5 compare the
dq-axis components. In the conventional controller (Fig. 4),
the d-axis voltage is proportional to dc link voltage and is a
straight line for normal operation. During voltage imbalance,
the dc link voltage exhibits 120-Hz oscillations.
The currents of the SDC (Fig. 5) are smoother compared
with the conventional control (Fig. 4). The q-axis currents of
the conventional controller have an average dc value. The
SDC technique achieve an average zero q-axis currents, as
shown in Fig. 5.
In summary, SDC for VSC is a good choice for a prolonged
disturbance in the power system as in the case of a weak
grid [13]. It achieves stable voltages and currents even in
the presence of a disturbance. This technique employs two
Fig. 5. Voltage dip simulation of SDC for VSC. (a) Source voltages.
(b) Source currents. (c) Converter voltage. (d) Positive sequence d-axis
voltage. (e) Positive sequence d-axis current. (f) Positive sequence q-axis
current. (g) Negative sequence d-axis voltage. (h) Negative sequence d-axis
current. (i) Negative sequence q-axis current.
different PI loops in both positive SRF and negative SRF
(one PI loop in the d-axis and the other PI loop in the
q-axis). The separation of voltage and currents in these frames
is done using two notch filters in each reference frame. There
are a total of five PI controllers, including the dc link voltage
and four notch filters, which should be fine-tuned according to
520 IEEE JOURNAL OF EMERGING AND SELECTED TOPICS IN POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 03, NO. 2, JUNE 2015

Fig. 7. Voltage dip simulation of DPC for VSC. (a) Voltage. (b) Source
currents. (c) Converter voltage.
Fig. 6. Voltage dip simulation of DPC for VSC. (a) DC link voltage.
(b) Active power. (c) Reactive power.

the system parameters, thus increasing the complexity of the

system implementation. A larger number of controllers make
the system sluggish when compared with the performance
of a conventional controller. Hence, a fast acting control
technique that uses fewer control loops, such as the direct
power control technique, is evaluated in Section IV for further
analysis.

IV. DPC OF DFIG-BASED W IND T URBINE GSC

A. DPC of GSC Fig. 8. Experimental setup of the converter with DPC control.

A DPC technique in which the converter modulates to the

active and reactive power error is also investigated and com-
voltage sags to imitate actual conditions on the grid during a
pared against CCC and SDC. In DPC, the converters switching
disturbance.
technique is based on voltage space vectors approach presented
A TMS320LF2812 DSP samples the signals and calculates
in [18]. The application of DPC for GSC is further discussed in
the appropriate vector of DPC to apply at a rate of 20 kHz.
detail in [13] and [19]. To compare the conventional controller,
A six-pack insulated-gate bipolar transistor module, Interna-
SDC (results discussed in Section IV-B) and DPC, a simulation
tional Rectifier CPV364MU, is used for switching.
for a voltage dip similar to the one discussed in Section IV-B
The dc link voltage and the converter A-phase voltage
is carried out using DPC. The DPC results are shown in
during balanced three phase voltages is show in Fig. 9(a).
Figs. 6 and 7. Initial settling time and peak overshoot of dc
The results demonstrate that the coded algorithm is capable
link voltage of DPC and CCC are less than that of SDC. The
of maintaining the dc link voltage.
active and reactive powers oscillations and the initial transient
To test the application of DPC during unbalance, a 30%
are the least in case of the DPC. In DPC, the currents are
of the nominal voltagevoltage sag on Va is applied to the
characterized by high distortion, whereas SDC has less total
system for three cycles. The dc link voltage, the converter
harmonic distortion (THD).
A-phase voltage, and the source A-phase voltage are shown
in Fig. 9(b). As seen in the results the dc link voltage does
B. Practical Implementation of DPC
not vary during the fault and stays flat. Hence, the DPC is
To test the practical applicability of DPC it is implemented capable of holding these postfault recovery sags and operates
on hardware. A diagram of the experimental setup is shown normally for voltages >30%.
in Fig. 8.
Due to limitations associated with the protection circuitry,
the 230 V three-phase source is connected to a three-phase C. MDPC of GSC
variable transformer to step the voltage down to 35 V An MDPC approach presented in [13] by the same author
line-to-line. The output of the variable transformer is con- and similar to [19][21] is further investigated to reduce
nected to a delta-wye transformer, which connects to the indus- the current distortion caused in DPC. In this approach, the
trial power corrupter (IPC). The IPC is capable of creating active and reactive power command references of the DPC
BAGGU et al.: COMPARISON OF ADVANCED CONTROL TECHNIQUES FOR GSC OF DFIG BACK-TO-BACK CONVERTERS 521

Fig. 10. Control block diagram for MDPC technique.

Fig. 9. (a) DC link voltage and three phase ac voltage of converter with DPC
during balanced voltages. (b) DC link voltage and three phase ac voltage of
converter with DPC during voltage sag.

are appended with powers due to the average component of

the imbalance shown in (4) and (5). Neglecting the negative
sequence current components as they contribute for higher
oscillation in powers, the active and reactive power equations
due to the imbalance are as in
Pimb = vdnei dpe + vqnei qpe
Q imb = vdnei dpe vqnei dpe .
The sequence domain voltage and currents during imbal-
ances for the MDPC implementation are calculated using
notch filters for positive and negative sequence domain
separation, as described in Section III. The block diagram
of the MDPC is shown in Fig. 10. To compare the results
with CCC, SDC, and DPC methods, MDPC is simulated for a
voltage dip similar to the one discussed in Section IV-B. The
MDPC results are shown in Figs. 11 and 12.
The tradeoff of MDPC method is that the dc link voltage,
the active and reactive powers as shown in Fig. 11 have
slightly higher oscillations than the normal DPC, but have
lesser oscillations than the CCC technique. From Fig. 12,
it is be observed that the source currents are less distorted in
(6)
Fig. 11. Voltage dip simulation of MDPC for VSC. (a) DC link voltage.
(7) (b) Active power. (c) Reactive power. (d) Real power imbalance. (e) Reactive
power imbalance.
MDPC than the normal DPC due to active and reactive power
imbalance compensation. The settling time and overshoot
are similar to the normal DPC as there is no addition of
new controllers. Four new notch filters are added to the circuit
that adds computational complexity. Hence, a compromise
between current distortion and power oscillations need to
be considered while choosing between DPC and MDPC.
Table I shows the comparison of peak-to-peak ripple in dc
link voltage, active, and reactive powers and source current
THD of the CCC, SDC, DPC, and MDPC. The DPC and
MDPC have similar oscillations in the dc link voltage and
522 IEEE JOURNAL OF EMERGING AND SELECTED TOPICS IN POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 03, NO. 2, JUNE 2015
Fig. 12. Voltage dip simulation of MDPC for VSC. (a) Voltage.
(b) Source currents. (c) Converter voltage. (d) d-axis negative sequence
voltage. (e) q-axis negative sequence voltage. (f) d-axis positive sequence
current. (g) q-axis positive sequence current.
TABLE I
C OMPARISON OF R IPPLE IN DC L INK V OLTAGE , A CTIVE P OWER ,
R EACTIVE P OWER , AND THD OF THE P HASE C URRENTS
FOR V OLTAGE D IP
real and reactive powers as the SDC with faster response and
simple control algorithm. The THD of the supply currents for
SDC and MDPC are lesser compared with the DPC and CCC
as these techniques have control compensation for imbalance
power. Hence, the MDPC offers the combined advantage of
SDC and DPC techniques.
To understand the behavior of the VSC and demonstrate
the effectiveness of SDC for a continuous disturbance as in a
weak grid or for industrial applications, CCC, SDC, DPC, and
MDPC are simulated for a set of unbalanced voltage inputs
given by (8). This input has a continuous voltage of 88% of
nominal in phase A, 49.33% of nominal in phase B, and a
phase angle difference of 24 to nominal in phase B and 56
to nominal in phase C
vabc = [132 cos(t)74 cos(t 95)150 cos(t 214)]. (8) and hence, has limited response to sudden disturbances in
Table II shows the comparison of peak-to-peak ripple in the
dc link voltage, active power, and reactive power and source
TABLE II
C OMPARISON OF R IPPLE IN DC L INK V OLTAGE , A CTIVE P OWER ,
R EACTIVE P OWER , AND THD OF THE P HASE C URRENTS
FOR A C ONTINUOUS D ISTURBANCE
current THD of the CCC, SDC, DPC, and MDPC. The DPC
and MDPC have lesser oscillations in the dc link voltage and
real and reactive powers than the SDC with faster response
and simple control algorithm. Even though the SDC takes
longer time to settle down, it has similar performance as the
DPC and the MDPC. Hence, the SDC would be a good fit for
industrial applications with poor source voltages and stringent
requirements on THDs. The MDPC fits both for continuous
disturbances, as well as sudden disturbances like system
faults.
The MDPC offers all the advantages of both DPC and
SDC using a simple control algorithm. The MDPC uses fast
acting controllers and hence are suitable for sudden grid and
wind disturbances. Another advantage of MDPC and DPC is
that these methods use only one PI controller compared with
five PI controllers for the CCC method and seven or more
PI controllers for SDC method, thus simplifying the setup
and controller tuning. The DPC and MDPC does not depend
on DFIG system parameters. The drawback of the DPC and
the MDPC is that they need high switching frequencies to
lower the harmonics and oscillations in the powers, thereby
increasing the computational burden. The DPC is a viable solu-
tion for sudden voltage disturbance imbalance ride-through
applications for DFIG-based wind turbines.
V. C ONCLUSION
This paper discusses multiple control techniques for
DFIG-based wind turbine converters. Initially, the SDC is
mathematically analyzed and evaluated. Later a novel and
simple control technique called the DPC is also investigated
in this paper. The simulation results for the SDC method
shows that the d-axis voltage is smooth both in positive and
negative reference frames. In DPC and MDPC methods, the
dc link voltage and the active and reactive powers have fewer
oscillations compared with the CCC. The current waveforms
in the CCC and SDC methods have less THD compared with
the same for the DPC method. The SDC technique uses four
current loops leading to a sluggish response of the controller,
the system. The SDC technique has five PI loops and four
notch filters; hence it needs more fine tuning of the controllers
and complex hardware implementation. The DPC utilizes delta
BAGGU et al.: COMPARISON OF ADVANCED CONTROL TECHNIQUES FOR GSC OF DFIG BACK-TO-BACK CONVERTERS
TABLE A.I
VSC S IMULATION PARAMETERS
modulation technique for direct control of active and reactive
powers. The DPC offers the same advantages as the SDC with
faster response compared with the CCC. The drawback of
the DPC is high current distortion compared with the SDC.
An MDPC technique is introduced using both SDC and DPC
techniques to improve the current distortion by modifying
the commanded active and reactive powers during voltage
disturbances. The MDPC of RSC is capable of producing sinu-
soidal stator currents and controlling the stator side active and
reactive power without using system parameters. The DFIG
system with back-to-back PWM converters using MDPC for
GSC and DPC for RSC is capable of sustaining the voltage
disturbances. The DPC and MDPC utilizes only one PI loop
for dc bus voltage control and is a simple control technique
to implement.
A PPENDIX
See Table A.I for details.
R EFERENCES
[1] R. Pena, J. C. Clare, and G. M. Asher, Doubly fed induction generator
using back-to-back PWM converters and its application to variable-speed
wind-energy generation, IEE Proc. Electr. Power Appl., vol. 143, no. 3,
pp. 231241, May 1996.
[2] P. N. Enjeti and S. A. Choudhury, A new control strategy to improve the
performance of a PWM AC to DC converter under unbalanced operating
conditions, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 493500,
Oct. 1993.
[3] P. Rioual, H. Pouliquen, and J.-P. Louis, Regulation of a PWM rectifier
in the unbalanced network state using a generalized model, IEEE Trans.
Power Electron., vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 495502, May 1996.
[4] H. S. Kim, H. S. Mok, G. H. Choe, D. S. Hyun, and S. Y. Choe,
Design of current controller for 3-phase PWM converter with unbal-
anced input voltage, in Proc. 29th Annu. IEEE Power Electron.
Specialists Conf. (PESC), vol. 1. May 1998, pp. 503509.
[5] H.-S. Song and K. Nam, Dual current control scheme for PWM
converter under unbalanced input voltage conditions, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 46, no. 5, pp. 953959, Oct. 1999.
[6] G. Saccomando, J. Svensson, and A. Sannino, Improving voltage
disturbance rejection for variable-speed wind turbines, IEEE Trans.
Energy Convers., vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 422428, Sep. 2002.
[7] L. Xu, B. R. Andersen, and P. Cartwright, VSC transmission operating
under unbalanced AC conditionsAnalysis and control design, IEEE
Trans. Power Del., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 427434, Jan. 2005.
[8] L. Xu and Y. Wang, Dynamic modeling and control of DFIG-based
wind turbines under unbalanced network conditions, IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 314323, Feb. 2007.
[9] S.-B. Lee, K.-B. Lee, D.-C. Lee, and J.-M. Kim, An improved control
method for a DFIG in a wind turbine under an unbalanced grid voltage
condition, J. Elect. Eng. Technol., vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 614622, 2010.
[10] W. Qiao and R. G. Harley, Improved control of DFIG wind turbines for
operation with unbalanced network voltages, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Appl.
Soc. Annu. Meeting, Oct. 2008, pp. 17.
523
[11] T. Noguchi, H. Tomiki, S. Kondo, and I. Takahashi, Direct power
control of PWM converter without power-source voltage sensors, IEEE
Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 473479, May/Jun. 1998.
[12] M. Malinowski, M. P. Kazmierkowski, S. Hansen, F. Blaabjerg, and
G. D. Marques, Virtual-flux-based direct power control of three-phase
PWM rectifiers, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 10191027,
Jul./Aug. 2001.
[13] M. M. Baggu, Advanced control techniques for doubly fed
induction generator-based wind turbine converters to improve
low voltage ride-through during system imbalances, Ph.D.
dissertation, Dept. Electr. Comput. Eng., Missouri Univ.
Sci. Technol., Rolla, MO, USA, 2009. [Online]. Available:
http://scholarsmine.mst.edu/thesis/pdf/Baggu_09007dcc806684bd.pdf
[14] J. Morren and S. W. H. de Hann, Ridethrough of wind turbines
with doubly-fed induction generator during a voltage dip, IEEE Trans.
Energy Convers., vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 435441, Jun. 2005.
[15] M. M. Baggu and B. H. Chowdhury, Implementation of a converter in
sequence domain to counter voltage imbalances, in Proc. PES General
Meeting, Tampa, FL, USA, Jun. 2007, pp. 15.
[16] Wind TurbinesPart 21: Measurement and Assessment of Power
Quality Characteristics of Grid Connected Wind Turbines,
IEC Standard 61400-21, 2008.
[17] M. L. Reichard, D. Finney, and J. T. Garrity, Windfarm system pro-
tection using peer-to-peer communications, in Proc. 60th Annu. Conf.
Protective Relay Eng., Mar. 2007, pp. 511521. [Online]. Available:
http://www.gedigitalenergy.com/smartgrid/Aug07/windfarm.pdf
[18] H. W. Van-der-broeck, H.-C. Skudelny, and G. V. Stanke, Analysis and
realization of a pulsewidth modulator based on voltage space vectors,
IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 142150, Jan./Feb. 1988.
[19] M. M. Baggu, L. D. Watson, J. W. Kimball, and B. H. Chowdhury,
Direct power control of doubly-fed generator based wind turbine con-
verters to improve low voltage ride-through during system imbalance,
in Proc. 25th Annu. IEEE Appl. Power Electron. Conf. Expo. (APEC),
Palm Springs, CA, USA, Feb. 2010, pp. 21212125.
[20] J.-B. Hu, Y.-K. He, and L. Xu, Dynamic modeling and direct power
control of wind turbine driven DFIG under unbalanced network voltage
conditions, J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. A, vol. 9, no. 12, pp. 17311740,
2008.
[21] J. Eloy-Garcia, S. Arnaltes, and J. L. RodriguezAmenedo, Extended
direct power control of a three-level neutral point clamped voltage source
inverter with unbalanced voltages, in Proc. IEEE Power Electron.
Specialists Conf., Jun. 2008, pp. 33963400.
Murali M. Baggu (S04M09SM13) received
the B.Tech. degree in electrical and electronics engi-
neering from the University College of Engineering,
Kakatiya University, Kothagudem, India, in 2003,
the M.S. degree in electrical engineering from the
University of Idaho, Moscow, ID, USA, in 2005,
and the Ph.D. degree in electrical and computer
engineering from the Missouri University of Science
and Technology, Rolla, MO, USA, in 2009.
He was with Broadstar Wind Systems, Dallas,
TX, USA, as a Senior Research and Development
Engineer, where he designed an electrical system for a 10-kW wind turbine.
From 2010 to 2013, he was a lead Electrical Power/Energy Systems Engineer
with the Electrical Power Systems Research Group, GE Global Research,
Niskayuna, NY, USA. In 2013, he joined the Distributed Energy Systems
Integrations Group at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden,
CO, USA, as a Senior Electrical Engineer, where he became the Manager of
the Distributed Power Systems Section with the Distributed Energy Systems
Integrations Group. He is an expert in distribution system modeling and
visualization for Volt-VAr control/optimization and mitigation of distribution
grid issues arising due to high penetration of PV. His current research
interests include grid integration of renewable systems (wind and solar),
energy storage system integration, distributed energy resources, distribution
automation, power electronics, and electric machines and drives.
524 IEEE JOURNAL OF EMERGING AND SELECTED TOPICS IN POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 03, NO. 2, JUNE 2015
Badrul H. Chowdhury (S83M87SM93)
received the B.S. degree from the Bangladesh
University of Engineering and Technology,
Dhaka, Bangladesh, in 1981, and the M.S. and
Ph.D. degrees from the Virginia Polytechnic
Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA,
USA, in 1983 and 1987, respectively, all in
electrical engineering.
He was a Professor with the Department of
Electrical and Computer Engineering, Missouri
University of Science and Technology, Rolla, MO,
USA. He is currently a Professor with the Department of Electrical and
Computer Engineering with joint appointment with the Department of
Systems Engineering and Engineering Management, University of North
Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, USA. His current research interests
include power system modeling, analysis and control, and renewable and
distributed energy resource modeling and integration in smart grids.
Dr. Chowdhury is a Member of Tau Beta Pi and Phi Kappa Phi. He has
served on the IEEE Technical Activities Board and Periodicals Review
Committee, and served as the Chair of the St. Louis Chapter of the Power
and Energy Society of IEEE from 2002 to 2005.
Jonathan W. Kimball (M96SM05) received the
B.S. degree in electrical and computer engineer-
ing from Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh,
PA, USA, in 1994, and the M.S. degree in electri-
cal engineering and the Ph.D. degree in electrical
and computer engineering from the University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA,
in 1996 and 2007, respectively.
He was with Motorola, Phoenix, AZ, USA,
from 1996 to 1998, where he was involved in
designing insulated-gate bipolar transistor modules
for industrial applications. He joined Baldor Electric, Fort Smith, AR, USA,
where he designed industrial adjustable-speed drives ranging 1150 hp.
In 2003, he joined the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign as a
Research Engineer, where he became a Senior Research Engineer. In 2003, he
co-founded SmartSpark Energy Systems, Inc., Champaign, IL, USA, where
he was the Vice President of Engineering. In 2008, he joined the Missouri
University of Science and Technology, Rolla, MO, USA, where he is currently
an Associate Professor.
Dr. Kimball is a Member of Eta Kappa Nu, Tau Beta Pi, and Phi Kappa Phi.
He is also a licensed Professional Engineer in the State of Illinois. He has
served on the IEEE Power Electronics Societys Administrative Committee,
as a Member-at-Large and an Education Chair, since 2010, and is currently
the Chairperson of the St. Louis Chapter of the Industry Applications Society.