Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 46–52

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Electric Power Systems Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/epsr

Modeling and control of PMSG-based variable-speed wind turbine

Hong-Woo Kim a , Sung-Soo Kim b , Hee-Sang Ko a,∗
a
Wind Energy Research Center, Korea Institute of Energy Research, Yuseong-gu Jang-Dong 71-2,305-343 Daejeon, Republic of Korea
b
Chungbuk National University, Republic of Korea

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper presents a control scheme of a variable-speed wind turbine with a permanent-magnetic
Received 19 July 2008 synchronous generator (PMSG) and full-scale back-to-back voltage source converter. A comprehensive
Received in revised form 1 August 2009 dynamical model of the PMSG wind turbine and its control scheme is presented. The control scheme
Accepted 5 August 2009
comprises both the wind-turbine control itself and the power-converter control. In addition, since the
Available online 22 October 2009
PMSG wind turbine is able to support actively the grid due to its capability to control independently active
and reactive power production to the imposed set-values with taking into account its operating state and
Keywords:
limits, this paper presents the supervisory reactive power control scheme in order to regulate/contribute
Permanent-magnetic synchronous
generator
the voltage at a remote location. The ability of the control scheme is assessed and discussed by means of
Variable speed simulations, based on a candidate site of the offshore wind farm in Jeju, Korea.
Wind turbine © 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Wind farm

1. Introduction However, the electromagnetic construction of the PMSG is more

VARIABLE-SPEED power generation enables the operation of the
turbine at its maximum power coefficient over a wide range of
wind speeds, obtaining a larger energy capture from the wind with
a power converter which allows variable-speed operation. One of
the problems associated with variable-speed wind systems today
is the presence of the gearbox coupling the wind turbine (WT) to
the generator. This mechanical element suffers from considerable
faults and increases maintenance expenses. To improve reliability
of the WT and reduce maintenance expenses the gearbox should
be eliminated.
Megawatt (MW) class wind turbines equipped with a
permanent-magnetic synchronous generator (PMSG) have been
announced by Siemens Power Generation and GE Energy. In this
concept, the PMSG can be directly driven or have smaller gearboxes
or even gearless and is connected to the ac power grid through the
power converter. Use of the power converter is essential because
it allows the linkage of the generator operating at variable speed
to the ac power grid at a fixed electrical frequency. The converter
rating must be similar to or even larger than the rated power of the
generator. Permanent-magnetic excitation allows to use a smaller
pole pitch than do conventional generators, so these machines can
be designed to rotate at rated speeds of 20–200 rpm, depending on
the generator rated power [1].
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 550 630 1670.
E-mail address: heesangko@gmail.com (H.-S. Ko).
complex than in the case of conventional WT concepts such as
fixed-speed with squirrel induction generators and variable speed
with doubly fed induction generators, etc. Also, the reduced gear
ratio may require an increase in the number of generator pole pairs,
which complicates the generator construction [1–8].
MW class wind turbines (WTs) have been commissioned in
large (offshore) wind farms connected directly to transmission
networks. However, increased wind power generation has influ-
enced the overall power system operation and planning in terms
of power quality, security, stability, and voltage control [9–14].
The local power flow pattern and the system’s dynamic char-
acteristics change when large WTs are connected to the utility
grid [15]. Thus, the compliance with the grid codes of national
Transmission System Operators (TSOs) becomes an important issue
[16].
Therefore, the interaction between wind farms (WFs) and power
systems is a research topic that needs more attention. To get a better
understanding of how the control systems of the individual WTs
and the WFs influence each other, modeling and simulation are
essential. To investigate the interaction between controllers of WTs
or WFs and the controllers of the grid is considered a challenge.
With more advanced control algorithms, WTs and WFs can provide
ancillary services to the grid, e.g. by providing reactive power or
participate in voltage/frequency control. To study the impacts of
these advanced control strategies on a system level, more modeling
efforts are required.
Therefore, this paper presents the detail system modeling and
the control design of a PMSG-based-WT. As well as alternative
design and/or control solutions are proposed to improve the voltage

0378-7796/$ – see front matter © 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.epsr.2009.08.003
 H.-W. Kim et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 46–52
Fig. 1. Grid-connected wind-turbine system.
control at a required location such as a point-of-common coupling
(PCC).
This paper is organized as follows: the detail dynamic model
including voltage source converter (VSC) control design is pre-
sented in Section 2; in Section 3, the supervisory reactive power
control scheme is proposed; case studies are carried out in Section
4; and conclusions are drawn in Section 5.
2. Dynamic model of PMSG-WT-based power system
The system considered in this paper is shown in Fig. 1. The WF
consists of 5 unit of WT. Each WT is equipped with a 0.69/22.9 kV
step-up transformer (TR). The WF is connected to the grid using
a 2 km submarine cable (Ca) and a 14 km overhead transmission
line (TL). The considered operating condition is as follows: the WF
supplies 7 MW of active power and 0.3 MVar of reactive power to
the local load, which consumes 8 MW and 1.9 MVar. The remain-
ing active power comes through the 154 kV utility grid, which is
represented by an infinite bus (Table 1).
Although the fundamental principle of a WT is straightforward,
modern WTs are very complex systems. The design and optimiza-
tion of the WT’s blades, drive train, and tower require extensive
knowledge of aerodynamics, mechanical and structural engineer-
ing, control and protection of electrical subsystems, etc.
The details of the WT considered in the model are shown in
Fig. 2. The WT consists of the following components: a three-bladed
rotor with the corresponding pitch controller [17]; a PMSG with
two converters, a dc-link capacitor, and a grid filter; and converter
controllers.
Although personal computers are becoming increasingly faster,
computational speed is still one of the limiting factors in dynamic
simulation of power systems [18,19]. Electrical transients have very
small time constants that require small integration time steps and
result in long computation time. To keep the simulation speed rea-
Table 1
Operating conditions.
p (pu) q (pu)
IB 0.419 0.8039
WF 3.562 0.1687
Total 3.981 0.9725
Resistance
Load 0.3099
Bus: 4 (PCC); v (pu): 1.1435.
47
Fig. 2. Permanent-magnetic synchronous generator wind turbine (PMSG-WT).
sonable, special attention should be given to model development. In
particular, in this paper, to increase the simulation speed of various
electrical components, these components are modeled in the dq-
synchronous reference frame [20]. Wherein, the d-axis is assumed
to be aligned to the stator flux, and the current coming out of the
machine is considered positive. The PMSG controllers utilize the
concept of disconnection of the active and reactive power controls
by transformation of the machine parameters into the dq-reference
frame and by separating forming of the stator voltages. Then, the
active power can be controlled by influencing the d-axis component
of the stator current while the reactive power can be controlled by
influencing the q-axis components of the stator current. The system
parameters and control gains, etc., are summarized in Appendix A.
2.1. Permanent-magnetic synchronous-generator (PMSG)
The PMSG was represented by the following equations [1]:
1 d ds
= vd1 + Rs ids + ωe qs ,
ωb dt
1 d qs
= vq1 + Rs iqs − ωe ds (1)
ωb dt
with
= −Lds ids − = −Lqs iqs
ds m, qs (2)
where v is the voltage, R is the resistance, i is the current, ωe is
the stator electrical angular speed, ωb is the base angular speed in
rad/s, Ls is the stator leakage inductance, m is the exciter flux of
the PMSG, and is the flux linkage. The subscripts d and q indi-
cate the direct and quadrature axis components, respectively. The
subscripts s indicates stator quantities. The electrical active and
reactive power delivered by the stator are given by
Ps = vd1 ids + vq1 iqs , Qs = vd1 iqs − vq1 ids (3)
The mathematical model of a TL, a TR, a cable, and a load can be
obtained from the description of the R, L, C segment [20] into the
dq-synchronous reference frame. The equations of the TL, the TR,
the cable, and the RL load are given in (4)–(7) based on Fig. 3 where
superscript s and e stand for the sending-end and the receiving-end.
Reactance
0.0757
Fig. 3. Lumped-parameter  equivalent-circuit description in the dq-domain.
48 H.-W. Kim et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 46–52

For example, in the TL model (see. Eq. (4)) vsd corresponds to vd3 at
bus 3 and ved corresponds to vd4 at bus 4.

2.2. Transmission line (TL)

LTL didl
= vd4 − vd3 − RTL idl + ωe LTL iql ,
ωb dt

LTL diql
= vq4 − vq3 − RTL iql − ωe LTL idl ,
ωb dt
Fig. 4. Block diagram of the VSC controller showing the input/output variables.
CTL dvd3 s CTL dvq3 s
= idc + ωe CTL vq1 , = iqc − ωe CTL vd3 ,
ωb dt ωb dt
CTL dvd4 e CTL dvq4 e
= idc + ωe CTL vq4 , = iqc − ωe CTL vd4 (4)
ωb dt ωb dt

2.3. Transformer (TR)

Ltr didl
= vd2 − vd1 − Rtr idl + ωe Ltr iql ,
ωb dt

Ltr diql
= vq2 − vq1 − Rtr iql − ωe Ltr idl ,
ωb dt
Co dvd1 Co dvq1
= idl + ωe Co vq1 , = iql − ωe Co vd1 (5)
ωb dt ωb dt
where Co is the dummy capacitor to obtain voltage for modeling
Fig. 5. WT maximum energy-harvesting curve.
purpose.

2.4. Cable
2.7. Voltage source converter controller

Lca didl Fig. 4 presents the detailed block diagram of the VSC controller
= vd3 − vd2 − Rca idl + ωe Lca iql ,
ωb dt depicting the respective input and output variables. Here, Pgset is
the set-value for the active power for the WT terminal. The value
Lca diql
= vq3 − vq2 − Rca iql − ωe Lca idl , of Pgset is determined from the WT energy-harvesting character-
ωb dt
istic as shown in Fig. 5, which is represented here as a look-up
Cca dvd2 s Cca dvq2 s table Pgset (ωr ) determined in terms of generator rotational-speed ωr .
= idc + ωe Cca vq2 , = iqc − ωe Cca vd2 (6)
ωb dt ωb dt Since variable-speed WTs are traditionally operated in the power
factor control (PFC) mode to achieve the unity power factor at the
terminal of the WT, the reactive power set-points Qgset is set to zero.
2.5. RL load The VSC control module consists of the generator-side, the dc-
link, and the grid-side converter controller. These controllers utilize
The RL load in the dq-domain can be described as proportional-integral (PI) controllers. These PI controllers are tuned
using the Nyquist constraint technique to deal with model uncer-
Lload didL
= vd4 − Rload idL + ωe Lload iqL , tainties [21,22]. Each of the controllers is briefly described below.
ωb dt
Generator-side converter controller: Fig. 6 shows a block diagram
Lload diqL of the generator-side converter controller module, which includes
= vq4 − Rload iqL − ωe Lload idL ,
ωb dt four internal PI controllers, PI1 through PI4. The controller is imple-
mented as two branches, one for the active power (PI1 and PI2) and
Co dvd4 Co dvq4
= idL + ωe Co vq4 , = iqL − ωe Co vd4 (7) one for the reactive power (PI3 and PI4) with the corresponding
ωb dt ωb dt de-coupling terms between the d and q axes, respectively.

As shown in Fig. 2, the grid-side converter is connected to the

grid through the filter. The voltage equations for the filter in the
dq-synchronous reference frame are as follows.

2.6. RL-filter on the grid-side converter

Lfilt didg
= vd1 − Rfilt idg + ωe Lfilt iqg ,
ωb dt
Lfilt diqg
= vq1 − Rfilt iqg − ωe Lfilt idg (8)
ωb dt
where subscript filt stands for filter. Fig. 6. Block diagram of the generator-side converter controller.
 H.-W. Kim et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 46–52 49

Fig. 8. DC-link model and its controller.

Fig. 7. Block diagram of the grid-side converter controller.

The transfer function from the stator voltage to the stator cur-
rent is approximated as
 T  T
Ids (s) Iqs (s) 1 1
 (s)  (s) = (9)
Vds Vqs Rs + s(Lds /ωb ) Rs + s(Lqs /ωb )
Fig. 9. Schematic diagram of the supervisory reactive power control.
Similarly, the transfer function from the stator current to reac-
tive and active power is approximated as
 T controller PI7. The set-point for the output active power by Psset =
Ps (s) Qg (s)
 Lqs
T set .
L vdc idc,s
= Rs + s ds Rs + s (10)
Ids (s) Iqs (s) ωb ωb
3. The supervisory reactive power control
Then, (9) is used to tune PI2 and PI4, and (10) is used to tune PI1
and PI3.
The purpose of the supervisory reactive power control pre-
Grid-side converter controller: Fig. 7 shows a block diagram of
sented in this section is to regulate the voltage at the specified
the grid-side converter controller module, which also includes two
remote PCC (see Fig. 1) by adjusting the reactive power produced by
internal PI controllers PI5 and PI6, with corresponding de-coupling
the grid-side converter, taking into account its operating state and
terms between the d and q axes.
limits. As shown in Fig. 9, the control objective is to utilize Qj from
The voltage equation for the grid-side converter RL-filter can be
the grid-side VSC to control the voltage at the PCC to the predefined
expressed as
value by the reactive power set-point control signal Qjset .
 L  di
filt dg When controlling WT, it is important that the operating limit of
= vd1 − Rfilt idg + ωe Lfilt iqg ,
ωb dt WT is not exceeded. The reactive power required from an individual
 L  di grid-side converter of the VSC can be computed as
filt qg
= vq1 − Rfilt iqg − ωe Lfilt idg (11)

ωb dt Qjmax
Qjset = min Qjmax , max Qpcc
(15)
from which the transfer function from the filter voltage to current Q1max + · · · + Q5
is where j = 1, . . . , 5, Qjmax is the maximum reactive power (limit)
 T  T that the jth grid-side converter can provide, and Qpcc is the total
Idg (s) Iqg (s) 1 1
= (12) reactive power required to support the voltage at the PCC.
Vd1 (s) Vq1 (s) Rfilt +s(Lfilt /ωb ) Rfilt +s(Lfilt /ωb )
Fig. 10 shows the active and reactive power operating lim-
The inputs to the grid-side controller are the set-values for the its, wherein it is assumed that the grid-side converter should not
currents, which flows to the grid through the VSC. The set-values of exceed its apparent power limit Sjmax depicted by the half-circle.
the input currents are calculated by the active and reactive power Suppose that at a given time each grid-side converter is delivering
commands Psset and Qgset as follows: the active power denoted herein by Pj . Then, in addition to the active
  −1   power, the converter can supply or absorb a maximum of Qjmax of
set
iqg vq1 vd1 Psset the reactive power. Therefore, the reactive power available from the
= (13)
set
idg −vd1 vq1 Qgset grid-side converter lies within the limits [−Qjmax ; + Qjmax ], which
are operating-condition dependent.
where Psset and Qgset are the set-point of the active and reactive
power commands. The value for Psset is provided by the dc-link con-
troller, which determines the flow of active power and regulates the
dc-link voltage by driving it to a constant reference value.
DC-link dynamic model and its controller: The capacitor in the
dc-link is an energy storage device. Neglecting losses, the time
derivative of the energy in this capacitor depends on the difference
of the power delivered to the grid filter, Pg , and the power provided
by the stator circuit of the PMSG, Ps , which can be expressed as
2
1 Cdc dvdc
= Pg − Ps (14)
2 ωb dt
The dc-link controller regulates the capacitor voltage by driving
it to the reference value vref
dc
, and outputs the set-point for the active
power Psset needed in (13). Fig. 8 shows the dc-link model with its Fig. 10. VSC active and reactive power operating limits.
50 H.-W. Kim et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 46–52

Fig. 11. Implementation of PI controller with the distributed anti-windup.

Fig. 13. Voltage observed at the PCC due to the wind-speed variation.
Thus, the maximum available reactive power from the each grid-
side converter can be expressed as

Qjmax = (Sjmax )2 − Pj2 (16)

where it is assumed that the nominal apparent power of the each

converter is Sjmax , defined here as the WT rating. Based on Fig. 10,
it also follows that −Sjmax ≤ Pj ≤ Sjmax . Thus, the maximum reactive
power set-point of Qjset (see Fig. 4) can be determined by (15) and
(16).
Finally, a proportional-integral (PI) controller is designed for a
controller shown in Fig. 9. The PI gains are summarized in Appendix
A. Since limiting control action should be implemented together
with the integrator-anti-windup scheme that would stop inte-
grating the error when the limit is being reached, a PI controller
with the proposed distributed anti-windup is implemented in Mat-
lab/Simulink [23] as shown in Fig. 11 for case studies.

4. Case studies

The system depicted in Fig. 1 was implemented in detail using

the Matlab/Simulink [21]. Computer studies considering the wind-
speed variations, the local-load variations, and the voltage sag due
to the fault were conducted to compare the dynamic responses of
the system with different controls. In comparison, Mode 1 indi-
cates the PFC-mode operation of the grid-side converter of the WT,
which Qgset is set to zero. As the proposed operation, Mode 2 actively
utilizes Qgset from the grid-side converter for voltage control at the
PCC.
4.1. Wind-speed variation
In this study, the wind speed shown in Fig. 12 was considered
for the WTs. Fig. 13 shows the voltage at the PCC, predicted by the
model with different controls, respectively. As shown in Fig. 13,
Mode 1 operation caused the voltage deviation about 3%, which
is much higher than the permissible voltage range of HV power
Fig. 14. Active and reactive power from WF to PCC for wind-speed variation.
system network ±2% while Mode 2 operation achieved the voltage
regulation at the PCC. Fig. 14 shows the measured data of the active
power and the reactive power from the WF to the PCC (see Fig. 1).
The reactive power contribution from the WTs is the difference
between Mode 2 and Mode 1.
4.2. Local-load variation
For this study, the local-load impedance is decreased by 20%
with wind speed 12 m/s. The comparison of the voltage transients
observed at the PCC was showed in Fig. 15. As can be noticed, when

Fig. 12. Wind speed (m/s). Fig. 15. Voltage observed at the PCC due to the 20% impedance decrease.
 H.-W. Kim et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 46–52
Fig. 16. Active and reactive power from WF to PCC for the load variation.
Fig. 17. Voltage observed at the PCC due to voltage sag in the infinite bus.
Mode 1 was in operation, the load impedance changes resulted in
noticeable drop of the bus voltage by 4.5% which does not satisfy the
permissible voltage range ±2%. When the WT operated in Mode 2,
the voltage recovery to its predefined value was achieved. Thus, the
performance in Mode 2 operation has been significantly improved
Fig. 18. Active and reactive power from WF to PCC for the voltage sag.
51
Fig. 19. Voltage observed at the PCC due to the fault.
at the PCC from Mode 1 operation. Fig. 16 shows the measured data
of the active power and the reactive power from the WF to the PCC.
The reactive power contribution from the WTs is the difference
between Mode 2 and Mode 1.
4.3. Voltage sag in the infinite bus
To emulate this scenario, it is assumed that there was a fault at
t = 0.5 s in the network that caused 10% voltage drop at the infinite
bus with wind speed 12 m/s. As can be noted in Fig. 17, Mode 1 oper-
ation showed the significant voltage drop by 14.5% while Mode 2
operation resulted in the voltage recovery to its predefined voltage
at the PCC. Fig. 18 shows the measured data of the active power
and the reactive power from the WF to the PCC.
4.4. Fault ride-through study
A three-phase symmetrical fault was assumed in the middle of
TL with wind speed 12 m/s. To emulate this fault scenario, the fault
was assumed at t = 0.2 s and was subsequently cleared at t = 0.36 s
by restoring the initial TL impedance. As can be noted in Fig. 19,
the fault resulted in significant voltage swings that can undesir-
ably interfere with the protection circuitry and possibly trip the
Fig. 20. Active and reactive power from WF to PCC due to the fault.
52 H.-W. Kim et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 46–52

WT. From this point of view, it is desirable to minimize and/or sup- [2] P. Lampola, J. Perho, J. Saari, Electromagnetic and thermal design of a low-
press the voltage swings. During the fault, the voltage drop has speed permanent magnet wind generator, in: Proceedings of the International
Symposium on Electric Power Engineering, 1995, pp. 211–216.
been slightly improved in Mode 2. After the fault was cleared, faster [3] A. Grauers, Design of direct-driven permanent magnet generators for wind tur-
voltage recovery to reach to its predefined voltage at the PCC was bines, in: Technical Report 292, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg,
noticed in Mode 2.Fig. 20 shows the measured data of the active 1996.
[4] V. Akhmatov, Variable-speed wind turbines with multi-pole synchronous per-
power and the reactive power from the WF to the PCC. The reactive manent magnet generators. Part 1. Modeling in dynamic simulation tools, Wind
power contribution from the WTs is the difference between Mode Eng. 27 (2003) 531–548.
2 and Mode 1. [5] F.M. Gonzales-Longatt, Dynamic model of variable speed WECS: attend of sim-
plification, in: Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Large-scale
Integration of Wind Power and Transmission Networks for Offshore Wind
5. Conclusion Farms, 2005.
[6] L.H. Hansen, L. Helle, F. Blaabjerg, E. Ritchie, S. Munk-Nielsen, H. Binder, P.
Sørensen, B. Bak-Jensen, Conceptual Survey of Generators and Power Electron-
The paper presented the modeling and the control design of ics for Wind Turbines, Risø National Laboratory, 2001.
the variable-speed wind turbine with a permanent-magnetic syn- [7] A. Cavagnino, M. Lazzari, F. Profumo, A. Tenconi, A comparison between the
chronous generator. The detailed models of a candidate industrial axial and the radial flux structures for PM synchronous motors, IEEE Ind. Appl.
Conf. Proc. 3 (2000) 1611–1618.
site with multiple wind turbines were developed and were used to
[8] E. Spooner, A.C. Williamson, Direct coupled, permanent magnet generators for
perform simulation studies and evaluate alternative control solu- wind turbine applications, IEE Electric Power Appl. Proc. 143 (1996) 1–8.
tions. The goal of the investigation was to make use of available [9] R. Doherty, E. Denny, M. O’Malley, System operation with a significant
wind-turbine technology, namely the variable-speed permanent- wind power penetration, IEEE Power Eng. Summer Meeting Proc. 1 (2004)
1002–1007.
magnetic synchronous generator with power electronic converters, [10] K.S. Salman, A.L.J. Teo, Windmill modeling consideration and factors influenc-
to actively participate in improving voltage control in the system. ing the stability of a grid-connected wind power-based embedded generator,
To ensure reliable operation of the supervisory reactive power con- IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 18 (2003) 793–802.
[11] Z. Litipu, K. Nagasaka, Improve the reliability and environment of power system
trol scheme, the operating-point-dependent reactive power limit of based on optimal allocation of WPG, IEEE Power Syst. Conf. Exposition Proc. 1
each grid-side converter was taken into account. The overall super- (2004) 524–532.
visory reactive power control scheme can be applied to larger wind [12] N. Dizdarevic, M. Majstrovic, S. Zutobradic, Power quality in a distribution net-
work after wind power plant connection, IEEE Power Syst. Conf. Exposition
farms and network configurations. Proc. 2 (2004) 913–918.
[13] E. ON Netz, Wind power report, Available: http://www.nowhinashwindfarm.
Appendix A. co.uk/EON Netz Windreport e eng.pdf (April 22, 2005).
[14] N. Protter, G. Garnett, S. Pai, BC Wind Integration System Expansion Study,
Elsam Engineering, 2004.
Base values [15] T. Gjengedal, Large scale wind power farms as power plants, in: Proceedings
Nordic Wind Power Conference, 2004.
Sb = 2 MVA, Vb = 690 V, ωb = 2f (rad/s), f = 60 Hz, [16] J. Matevosyan, T. Ackermann, S.M. Bolik, Technical regulations for the inter-
√ connection of wind farms to the power system, Wind Power Power Syst. Proc.
V / 3 Z 1 S (2005) 115–142.
Vdc = 800 V, Zb = b , Lb = b , Cb = , Tb = b , [17] H.S. Ko, Supervisory voltage control scheme for grid-connected wind farms,
ib ωb Zb ωb ωb
PhD Dissertation, Dept. Elect. and Comp. Eng., Univ. of British Columbia, Van-
Sb Sb Vdc Zdc 1 couver, BC, Canada, 2006.
Jb = , idc = , Zdc = , Ldc = , Cdc = [18] C.H. Ong, Dynamic Simulation of Electric Machinery, Prentice Hall, New Jersey,
ωb2 Vdc idc ωb Zdc ωb 1998.
[19] J. Morren, S.W.H. de Haan, P. Bauer, J.T.G. Pierik, Comparison of complete and
Infinite bus voltage and maximum operating limit of VSC (pu) reduced models of a wind turbine using doubly-fed induction generator, in:
Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Power Electronics and Appli-
vdq,inf = 1.1 0.5 , Smax = 1 cations, 2003.
[20] P.C. Krause, O. Wasynczuk, S.D. Sudhoff, Analysis of Electric Machinery and
Line parameter (pu) Drive Systems, John Wiley & Sons Inc, New Jersey, 2002.
[21] K. Åström, T. Hägglung, PID Controllers, Lund Institute of Technology, 2004.
[22] H.-S. Ko, S. Bruey, G. Dumont, J. Jatskevich, A. Ali, A PI control of DFIG-based
RTL = 0.0059, LTL = 0.1132, CTL = 0.025, Rca = 0.006,
wind farm for voltage regulation at remote location, IEEE Power Eng. Soc. Gen.
Meet. Proc. (2007) 1–6.
Lca = 0.003, Cca = 0.042, Rfilt = 0.014, Lfilt = 0.175,
[23] MATLAB® and Simulink® , MathWorks, January 2000.
Rtr1 = 0.0003, Ltr1 = 0.001, Rtr2 = 0.0005, Ltr2 = 0.004

Hong-Woo Kim received his B.S. degree in mechanical engineering from Daejeon
PMSG (pu) Engineering University, Daejeon, Korea, in 1990, his M.Sc. degree in energy system
engineering from Sunggyun University, Daejeon, Korea, in 1998, and his Ph.D. candi-
Rs = 0.042, Lds = 1.05, Lqs = 0.75, m = 1.16 date in electrical engineering at Chungbuk National University, Korea since 2005. He
is a senior engineer in the wind energy research center at Korea Institute of Energy
Controller gains (pu) Research (KIER), Daejeon, Korea since 1990.

• Generator-side converter:
Controllers PI1 and PI3: kp = 0.2953, ki = 12.4832.
Controllers PI2 and PI4: kp = 21.5, ki = 11.5.
• Grid-side converter: controllers PI5 and PI6: kp = 0.7147,
ki = 7.1515.
• DC-link module: vref = 1.16, Cdc = 0.1, kp = 0.9544, ki = 7.8175.
dc
• Reactive power controllers: kp = 0.001, ki = 120.
References
[1] T. Ackermann, Wind Power in Power Systems, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, UK, 2005.
Sung-Soo Kim received his M.S. degree in electrical engineering from the University
of Arkansas-Fayetteville in 1989 and his Ph.D. from the University of Central Florida
in 1997. He is presently a professor of electrical engineering at Chungbuk National
University. Prof. Kim’s interests include signal processing, communication theory,
and artificial intelligence.
Hee-Sang Ko received his B.Sc. degree in electrical engineering from Jeju National
University, Jeju, Korea, in 1996, his M.Sc. degree in electrical engineering from Penn-
sylvania State University, University Park, USA, in 2000, and his Ph.D. in electrical and
computer engineering from the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada,
in 2006. He is a researcher in the wind energy research center at Korea Institute of
Energy Research (KIER), Daejeon, Korea. His research interests include wind power
generation, power systems voltage and transient stability, data processing for power
systems security analysis, electricity market analysis, control design, and system
identification.