Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 328–338

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Electric Power Systems Research

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

Conventional and novel control designs for direct driven PMSG wind turbines
Shuhui Li ∗ , Timothy A. Haskew, Ling Xu
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, The University of Alabama, 317 Houser Hall, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487, USA

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

Article history: With the advance of power electronic technology, direct driven permanent magnet synchronous gener-
Received 28 June 2009 ators (PMSG) have increasingly drawn interests to wind turbine manufactures. This paper studies and
Received in revised form compares conventional and a novel control designs for a direct driven PMSG wind turbine. The paper
21 September 2009
presents transient and steady-state models of a PMSG system in a d–q reference frame. Then, general
Accepted 22 September 2009
PMSG characteristics are investigated in the rotor-flux-oriented frame. A shortage of conventional con-
Available online 21 October 2009
trol mechanisms is studied analytically and through computer simulation. A novel direct-current based
d–q vector control technique is proposed by integrating fuzzy, adaptive and traditional PID control tech-
Keywords:
Permanent magnet synchronous generator
nologies in an optimal control configuration. Comparison study demonstrates that the proposed control
Rotor-flux-oriented frame approach, having superior performance in various aspects, is effective not only in achieving desired PMSG
d–q vector control control objectives but also in improving the optimal performance of the overall system.
PWM converter © 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Wind power

1. Introduction d–q vector control approach using a current-regulated voltage-

The variable-speed wind turbine with multipole permanent
magnet synchronous generator and full-scale/fully controllable
PWM power converter is considered to be a promising but not yet
very popular wind turbine concept [1]. The advantages of such a
PMSG configuration include: a gearless construction, an elimina-
tion of DC excitation system, full controllability of the system for
maximum wind power extraction and grid interface, and ease in
accomplishing fault ride through and grid support [2,3]. Hence, the
efficiency and reliability of a full-PWM-converter PMSG wind tur-
bine is assessed to be higher than that of a DFIG wind turbine [4–6].
Due to the intensified grid codes, a full-PWM-converter PMSG wind
turbine is becoming favored by the wind power industry [5].
However, the performance of a PMSG system depends not only
on the synchronous generator but also on how it is controlled. The
two typical PMSG wind turbine configurations are (1) a PMSG sys-
tem with a passive diode rectifier followed by an IGBT inverter
[7,8], and (2) a more efficient PMSG system with two full-scale/fully
controllable IGBT PWM converters [9–11]. Although other PMSG
concepts are also proposed recently without using power convert-
ers between the generator and the grid [12], the variable-speed
capability of those PMSG systems are not competitive to the above
two PMSG configurations. Traditionally, a PMSG with full-scale
PWM converters is controlled through the conventional decoupled
source PWM scheme [9,10]. The behavior of the controller is
evaluated through either transient simulation or transient mea-
surement approaches [9–11]. But, the steady-state characteristic
study of this paper indicates that there is an inherent weakness
associated with the traditional decoupled d–q vector control mech-
anism in the full-scale PWM converter PMSG system.
This paper proposes a novel control design for the purpose to
improve the control effectiveness and overall performance of a
PMSG system. The proposed approach employs a decoupled d–q
vector control technique while the details of the control imple-
mentation are completely different from the conventional control
technique. In the sections that follow, the paper first introduces
the fundamental principle of the PMSG system in Section 2. Then,
Section 3 presents both transient and steady-state models of the
PMSG in a d–q reference frame, based on which general character-
istics of the PMSG under d–q vector control are reviewed in Section
4. A weakness of the traditional d–q control strategy is analyzed
through theoretical study and computer simulation. A novel con-
trol design is developed in Section 6. The proposed and traditional
control approaches are compared and evaluated by using MAtLab
SimPowerSystems. Finally, the paper concludes with the summary
of the main points.
2. Direct driven PMSG wind turbine and controls

A PMSG for wind power generation is essentially a standard

∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 205 348 9085; fax: +1 205 348 6959. permanent magnet synchronous machine with the stator winding
E-mail address: sli@eng.ua.edu (S. Li). connected to the grid through a frequency converter (Fig. 1) [9].

0378-7796/$ – see front matter © 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.epsr.2009.09.016
 S. Li et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 328–338
Fig. 1. Configuration of a PMSG wind turbine.
In modern PMSG wind turbine designs, the frequency converter is
built by two self-commutated PWM converters, machine- and grid-
side converters, with an intermediate DC voltage link. The DC link
created by the capacitor in the middle decouples the operation of
the two converters, thus allowing their design and operation to be
optimized. The two back-to-back converters are controlled inde-
pendently through the decoupled d–q vector control approach for
modern PMSG wind turbine designs [9–11,13].
2.1. Power from a wind turbine
The mechanical power extracted by a wind turbine from the
wind is expressed by the well-known cube law equation [14]:
1
Pw = air Ablade Cp (ˇ, )v3w
2 The synchronous machine of a PMSG system is controlled by the
Rblade ωm
=
vw
where air is the air density [kg/m3 ], Ablade is the area covered by
the rotor blades [m2 ], Cp is the turbine performance coefficient,
vw is wind speed [m/s], Rblade is the radius of the rotor blades [m],
and ωm is the angular speed of the turbine blades. The performance
coefficient, Cp , is a function of the tip-speed-ratio  (2) and the pitch
angle of the rotor blades ˇ. It is determined by aerodynamic laws
and thus may change from one wind turbine type to another.
Fig. 2 shows the Cp curves for a 2.5 MW PMSG wind turbine
[15]. The mathematical representation of the Cp curves is obtained
through curve fitting as shown by (3) where aij coefficients are given
in [16]. The curve fit is a very good approximation for values of
2 <  < 13. Values of  outside this range represent very high and low
wind speeds, respectively, that are normally outside the continuous
rating of the machine [16].

4

4
Cp (ˇ, ) = aij ˇi j
i=0 j=0
Fig. 2. A 2.5 MW wind turbine Cp curves.
329
Fig. 3. Maximum torque control of the machine-side converter.
For each pitch angle, there is an optimal tip-speed-ratio opt
under which Cp takes a maximum value, i.e., maximum power
extraction from the wind for that pitch angle. Therefore, at a low
wind speed vw , the rotational speed of the rotor blades ωm is reg-
ulated to a value of ωm opt through PMSG controls at the generator
R ω
and turbine levels so that  = bladevwm opt = opt while the pitch
angle keeps unchanged. As the captured wind power exceeds the
rated power at a high wind speed, a power limitation control is acti-
vated to keep the generated power at the rated value by adjusting
the pitch angle.
2.2. PMSG control
(1)
machine-side converter. The controller of the machine-side con-
(2) verter normally has a nested-loop structure: a fast inner current
loop, controlling the stator d- or q-axis currents, combined with an
outer slower loop for torque and/or stator reactive power control.
Conventional PMSG control strategies include (1) unity power fac-
tor control, (2) constant stator voltage control, and (3) maximum
torque control [3].
Assume the d-axis of the reference frame is aligned along the
permanent magnet flux position. Then, in the unity power factor
control strategy, the stator current is controlled to have both q and
d components in such a way that stator reactive power can be fully
compensated. Main advantage of this control strategy is that the
generator is expected to operate with unity power factor. However,
as the stator voltage is not controlled directly, stator voltage may
exceed the rated voltage in the case of an over speed [3].
In the constant stator voltage control, the stator voltage is con-
trolled instead of the reactive power. Due to the constant stator
voltage, there is no risk of over voltage and saturation of the con-
(3) verter at high speeds [3]. But, a disadvantage of this control is the
reactive power demand of the generator that increases the con-
verter power rating.
In the maximum torque control, the stator current is controlled
to have the q-component only [9]. Therefore, the generator pro-
vides the maximum possible torque. But, since the reactive power
is not controlled, converter or generator power rating may be
exceeded [3].
Fig. 3 shows a conventional maximum torque control strategy
in the rotor-flux-oriented frame [9,10], in which the q-component
reference of the stator current is generated from a speed controller
while the d-component reference is set to zero. To maintain a con-
stant switching frequency within the converter, a common practice
is to control the d- and q-axis currents indirectly through a current-
regulated voltage-source PWM converter [17]. The d–q voltage
control signals of the converter are obtained by comparing the d-
and q-axis current setpoints to the actual generator stator d- and
q-axis currents, as shown by the second stage controller in Fig. 3.
For such a design, it is the d- and q-axis voltage control signals that
implement the final control action.
330 S. Li et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 328–338

Fig. 4. d–q vector control structure for PMSG machine-side converter.

The control signal applied directly to the machine-side con- where Ld = Lls + Ldm and Lq = Lls + Lqm . Under the steady-state condi-
verter is a three-phase sinusoidal voltage. The general strategy for tion, (7) reduces to
transformation from the d–q signal to the three-phase sinusoidal       
signal is illustrated in Fig. 4 [9], in which the d and q reference Vsd −Rs −ωe Lq Isd 0
= + (8)
voltages, v∗sd and v∗sq , are d and q output voltages from the PMSG Vsq ωe Ld −Rs Isq ωe f

machine-side controller (Fig. 3). The ˛ and ˇ reference voltages, v∗s˛

where Vsd , Vsq , Isd , and Isq are the d and q components of the steady-
and v∗sˇ , are obtained from the d–q reference voltages through a vec-
state stator voltage and current. The electromagnetic torque, stator
tor rotation of ejωe t , where ωe represents PMSG angular frequency active and reactive power are (9), (10) and (11), respectively.
in electrical quantities. The relationship between the angular speed
of turbine blades ωm and the generator electrical speed ωe for em = p( sd isq − sq isd ) = p( f isq + (Ld − Lq )isd isq ) (9)
a direct driven PMSG is (4), where p is the generator pole pairs.
Ps = vsd isd + vsq isq (10)
The two ˛ and ˇ voltages together are then used to generate the
three-phase sinusoidal reference voltage signals, v∗sa , v∗sb , and v∗sc , for Qs = vsd isq − vsq isd (11)
control of the machine-side converter. From the converter average
Normally, the difference between the d- and q-axis mutual
model point of view, this causes a three-phase sinusoidal voltage,
inductance is very small for a direct driven multipole PMSG [19]
vsA , vsB , and vsC , injected into the PMSG stator path. This injected
(such as a PMSG with 160 pole pairs [5]) and the stator winding
voltage is linearly proportional to the three-phase sinusoidal con-
resistance is much smaller than the synchronous reactance. Under
trol voltage signals in a normal converter linear modulation mode
the simplified condition, (9) reduces to (12) and the steady-state
[17]. Hence, in a d–q reference frame, the direct axis component of
stator d- and q-axis currents obtained from (8) are (13).
the injected stator voltage vsd is proportional to the d-axis refer-
ence voltage v∗sd , and the quadrature component vsq is proportional em = p f isq (12)
to the q-axis reference voltage v∗sq .
−Vsd Vsq − ωe f
ωe = ωm p (4) Isq = , Isd = (13)
ωe Lq ωe Ld
Eq. (12) shows that, in the rotor-flux-oriented frame, the elec-
3. PMSG transient and steady-state models in d–q reference
tromagnetic torque or the wind turbine speed should be controlled
frame
by regulating the stator q-axis current while Eq. (13) indicates the
stator d- and q-axis currents are controllable through stator q- and
A commonly used PMSG transient model is the Park model.
d-axis voltages, respectively. But, if the stator winding resistance is
Using the generator convention, the space vector theory yields sta-
considered, stator d- and q-axis currents obtained from (8) are (14)
tor voltage equations in the form [18]:
         and (15), which indicates that both Vsd and Vsq can affect stator d-
vsd isd d sd 0 −1 sd
and q-axis currents.
= −Rs − + ωe (5)
vsq isq dt sq 1 0 sq ωe Lq Vsq − Rs Vsd − ωe2 Lq f
Isd = (14)
where Rs is the resistance of the stator winding; and vsd , vsq , isd , isq , ωe2 Ld Lq + Rs2
sd , and sq are the d and q components of instantaneous stator −ωe Lq Vsd − Rs Vsq + ωe Rs f
voltage, current and flux. If the d-axis is aligned along the rotor-flux Isq = (15)
position, the stator flux linkages are ωe2 Ld Lq + Rs2
      
sd Lls + Ldm 0 isd f 4. PMSG characteristics under d–q control
= + (6)
sq 0 Lls + Lqm isq 0
As shown in Section 2, PMSG operation depends on wind tur-
where Lls is the leakage inductance of the stator winding; Ldm and bine driving power and the generator converted power while
Lqm are the stator and rotor d- and q-axis mutual inductances; PMSG control is implemented through the decoupled d and q
f is the flux linkage produced by the permanent magnet. When current-loop controllers. Since the final control action applied to
replacing (6) in (5), the stator voltage is the PMSG are stator d- and q-axis voltages, Vsd and Vsq , it is there-
        fore important to examine how Vsd and Vsq affect (1) stator d
vsd isd d Ld isd −Lq isq
= −Rs − + ωe (7) and q current characteristics and (2) the interaction of the gen-
vsq isq dt Lq isq Ld isd + f erator converted power characteristics with the turbine driving
 S. Li et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 328–338 331

Table 1
Typical PMSG data used in the simulation study.

Parameter Value Units

Rated power 2500 kVA

Rated line voltage 575 V
Permanent magnet flux 1.0 pu
Mutual inductance in q-axis, Lqm 0.48 pu
Mutual inductance in d-axis, Ldm 0.43 pu
Stator leakage inductance, Lls 0.02 pu
Stator resistance, Rs 0.0025 pu
Frequency 60 Hz

power characteristics through computer simulation. Unlike a con-

ventional synchronous generator that operates at the synchronous
speed ωsyn of the grid system, a PMSG can run both over and below
ωsyn to generate electricity depending on wind turbine drive power
and the stator d–q control voltage. The PMSG data used in the
simulation is given in Table 1. It is important to specify that a fea-
sible region for a PMSG on each individual characteristic curve as
shown below should be those segments that are within the rated
conditions, i.e., 1 pu.

4.1. Stator current characteristics under Vsd control

The simulation-based analysis corresponding to Vsd control rep- Fig. 6. Stator d–q current characteristics, (Vsq = −1.0 pu to 1.0 pu, Vsq = 0.2,
resents a condition of variable Vsd but constant Vsq . For a given Vsd = −0.4 pu).

generator speed and a control voltage, Vs dq = Vsq + jVsd pu, applied

to the stator, the stator d- and q-axis currents are solved from (14)
and (15). With the turbine rated frequency ωsyn as the base, the per-
unit generator rotating speed is (16) where ωe is obtained from (4).
Fig. 5 presents typical stator d- and q-axis current characteristics
versus ωm pu as Vsd of the stator voltage changes from −1.0 pu to
0 pu (generator mode [20]) while Vsq is fixed at 0.8 pu. Simulation
analysis shows the following regularities.
ωe
ωe pu = (16)
ωsyn
At a constant generator speed, the stator d-axis current almost
remains constant as Vsd changes (Fig. 5a), implying that it is impos-
sible to control the stator d-axis current through Vsd (consistent
with (13)).
The stator q-axis current is clearly affected by Vsd (Fig. 5b). Under
a constant generator speed, the more negative Vsd is, the higher the
stator q-axis current (Fig. 5b). In other words, PMSG torque or speed
can be controlled by regulating Vsd (consistent with (12) and (13)).
Under a condition of a constant stator q-axis current in the gen-
erating mode, the higher the generator speed, the more negative
Vsd is. In other words, for the same q-axis current control demand,
the machine-side converter is closer to its linear modulation limit
at a high generator speed.

4.2. Stator current characteristics under Vsq control

Unlike Vsd control, Vsq affects the stator current characteristics

differently. Fig. 6 shows typical stator d- and q-axis current charac-
teristics as Vsq changes from −1.0 pu to 1.0 pu while Vsd is fixed at
−0.4 pu. The following properties are obtained from the simulation
study.

(1) The stator d-axis current is clearly affected by Vsq (Fig. 6a),
showing that it is possible to control Isd by adjusting Vsq for
stator reactive power (10) or other control purposes (Section
2.2).
(2) Under a constant generator speed, the stator d-axis current
could be positive, negative, or zero. Thus, it is possible to reg-
ulate the stator d-axis current to zero by adjusting Vsq if the
generator speed is low, which could enhance the PMSG effi-
ciency.
(3) The stator q-axis current characteristics almost maintain
unchanged as Vsq varies (Fig. 6b), implying that the stator q-axis
Fig. 5. Stator d–q current characteristics, (Vsd = −1.0 pu to 0 pu, Vsd = 0.1 pu,
current cannot be controlled through Vsq , which is consistent
Vsq = 0.8 pu). with (13).
332 S. Li et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 328–338
Fig. 7. Combined generator converted power and extracted wind power character-
istics (Vsq = 0.7 pu, p = 150, ˇ = 1◦ ).
4.3. Generator converted and turbine driving power
characteristics
For a given pitch angle and wind speed, the characteristics of the
power extracted from the wind (turbine driving power) versus the
turbine rotational speed ωm is obtained from (1) to (3). For a given
generator speed and a control voltage applied to the stator, the
generator converted power equals to stator power Ps (10) plus the
stator winding loss. To integrate the extracted wind power and the
converted power characteristics together, it is needed to represent
the turbine driving power characteristics using generator per-unit
speed (16) rather than the turbine rotational speed. Fig. 7 shows
the converted power characteristics under typical Vsd control con-
ditions together with the extracted wind power characteristics in
one plot. For a wind speed and a stator control voltage Vs dq , the
generator must operate at a point that is the intersection of the two
characteristics when omitting the rotational losses. In addition, a
stable power balance point requires that, for any small increase or
decrease of the generator speed, a PMSG can return to the balance
point effectively. By analyzing the figure as well as other simulation
results obtained for different d–q control conditions, the following
PMSG speed control properties are obtained.
(1) Under a constant stator d–q control voltage, the extracted
power characteristic curve of each wind speed has two inter-
sections with the generator converted power characteristics,
one corresponding to a low speed point and the other one cor-
responding to a higher speed point. As the stator d-axis control
voltage becomes more negative, the two interactions get closer
to each other toward the maximum power extraction speed
point.
(2) Although there are two intersections between the extracted
and converted power characteristics given a wind speed and
a d–q control voltage, only the intersection corresponding to
the higher speed point on the right side is dynamically stable.
(3) Under a constant stator d–q control voltage, increasing the wind
speed causes the generator operating at a higher rotating speed
while the change of the converted power is little.
Fig. 8. A system block diagram for design of current-loop controller.
(4) Under a constant wind speed, the more negative Vsd is, the
smaller the generator per-unit speed, i.e., decreased turbine
rotational speed.
5. PMSG conventional control mechanism
The conventional control approach of a PMSG consists of an
inner current loop and an outer torque and/or reactive power loops
∗
(Fig. 3) [9–11]. The torque loop outputs a q-axis current reference isq
depending on the difference between the desired and actual gener-
ator speed. The inner current loop assures that the q-component of
the measured current reaches the q-axis current reference isq ∗ and
the d-component of the measured current reaches a d-axis cur-
rent reference isd∗ . Therefore, the effectiveness of the PMSG torque
and/or reactive power control depends on the d and q current-loop
controllers.
5.1. Conventional current-loop control design
The strategy of the conventional decoupled d and q current-loop
controllers [9,10] is obtained by rewriting (7) as
 disd

vsd = − Rs isd + Ld − ωe Lq isq (17)
dt
 
disq
vsq = − Rs isq + Lq + ωe Ld isd + ωe f (18)
dt
in which the item in the bracket of (17) and (18) is treated as the
state equation between the voltage and current on d and q loops,
and the other items are treated as compensation or disturbance
items. Hence, the controller design of traditional approaches is
based on the system block diagram as shown in Fig. 8, in which
1/(L·s + R) represents plant transfer function for d or q current loop,
kPWM is the gain of the power electronic converter (Fig. 4), kFB is a
gain on the feedback path such as a gain from a sensor, and the PID
block stands for the controller to be designed.
Fig. 9 shows the overall structure of the conventional control
mechanism after the compensation items are included. In the fig-
ure, the d and q reference voltages v∗sd and v∗sq , are the d and q
voltages vsd and vsq from the controllers plus the compensation
items as shown by (19) and (20). The two reference voltages, v∗sd
and v∗sq , are used to generate the three-phase sinusoidal reference
voltage to control the synchronous generator (Figs. 4 and 9). Thus,
this control configuration actually intends to control the stator d-
and q-axis currents through the decoupled d and q voltages, vsd and
vsq , respectively. But, according to Section 4, d-axis voltage is only
effective for stator q-axis current control, and q-axis voltage is only
supportive for stator d-axis current control, implying that there is
an inherent shortage in the traditional decoupled d–q vector con-
trol technology. Although there are compensation items in both d
and q current loops, they are not contributed in a feedback control
principle and concept.
v∗sd = v sd − ωe Lq isq (19)
v∗sq 
= v sq + ωe Ld isd + ωe f (20)
 S. Li et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 328–338 333

Fig. 9. Conventional PMSG decoupled d–q vector control structure.

5.2. Control evaluation using converter average model
The current-loop control structure of Fig. 9 is built by using
SimPowerSystems (Fig. 10). The wind turbine driving torque is
computed based on wind speed and turbine rotational speed using
(1)–(3). The voltage applied to the PMSG stator is represented by a
three-phase controlled voltage source that is regulated by v∗sd and
v∗sq using the converter average model [17]. To prevent the con-
verter from getting into a nonlinear modulation mode, a saturation
mechanism is applied to the output voltage of the controller if
the amplitude of the reference voltage generated by the controller
exceeds the linear modulation voltage. The general strategy is to set
a limitation on |v∗s dq | but keeps ∠v∗s dq unchanged as shown by (21)
[21], where v∗sd new and v∗sq new are the d and q components of the
modified controller output voltage. It is found that other saturation
mechanisms could cause more system oscillations.
   
v∗sd new
= 1 · cos ∠v∗s dq , v∗sq new = 1 · sin ∠v∗s dq (21)
The performance of the conventional control approach is eval-
uated for the PSMG system parameters shown in Table 1. Major
measurements include speed, torque, and three-phase voltage,
current, and stator real and reactive power. For the power mea-
surement, active sign convention is used, i.e., power generated by
the generator toward the machine-side converter is positive. Fig. 11
shows the performance of the controller for the direct driven PMSG

Fig. 10. PMSG control simulation using converter average model.

334 S. Li et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 328–338

The q-axis current for maximum power extraction as shown in

Fig. 11 is high. To reduce stator q-axis current, the number of PMSG
pole pairs should be larger. According to (4), for a maximum power
extraction demand at the same turbine rotational speed, the gen-
erator speed is higher and the stator q-axis current is lower if a
PMSG has a larger number of pole pairs (Fig. 5b). However, zero
stator d-axis current may be unable to obtain at a higher generator
rotating speed due to the converter linear modulation constraint
(Fig. 6a). Fig. 12 shows the performance of the conventional control
approach for the PMSG (Table 1) having 200 pole pairs while the DC
link voltage is 900 V. The initial wind speed is 7 m/s. Before t = 3 s,
the system operates in an open-loop condition. At t = 3 ms, when
the current-loop controllers are introduced, the system fluctuates
greatly using the conventional control approach. The reference d
and q currents are isd ∗ = 0 A and i∗ = 237 A, a current reference
sq
that causes |v∗s dq | exceeding the linear modulation voltage limit
due to a high generator rotating speed. As such, the actual stator q
and/or d current are unable to be regulated to the desired values
∗ changes to 2450 A, a required q-axis cur-
(Fig. 12b). At t = 6 s, isq
rent for maximum power extraction at the wind speed of 7 m/s.
Under the new current reference, the generator speed decreases
and |v∗s dq | drops below the linear modulation limit. Nevertheless, a
large oscillation of the system is found using the conventional con-
trol approach. At t = 9 s, the wind speed changes to 9 m/s while the
d and q current references remain unchanged, making |v∗s dq | over
∗ changes to 4150 A
the linear modulation limit again. At t = 12 s, isq
for maximum wind power extraction at the wind speed of 9 m/s.

Fig. 11. Performance of conventional PMSG current-loop controller within the con-
verter linear modulation limit.

having 150 pole pairs while the DC link voltage is 1000 V. The rotor
diameter of the turbine blades is 100 m [15], the air density is
1.17 kg/m3 and the initial wind speed is 7 m/s. Before t = 4 s, the sys-
tem operates in an open-loop condition for a pre-specified stator
d–q control voltage. Under the open-loop control condition, both
d and q currents are not controlled. Thus, the system takes a long
time to get into a natural stable state. At t = 4 s, the current-loop
controllers start to operate with a current reference of isd ∗ = −480 A
∗ = −305 A which are the stator d and q currents before the
and isq
current-loop controllers start to function. Even so, the PMSG speed
fluctuates greatly before it is stabilized using the conventional con-
∗ changes to 0 A while i∗ remains
trol approach (Fig. 11a). At t = 6 s, isd sq
unchanged, i.e., a minimum stator current control strategy. The sys-
tem first oscillates for a while and then becomes stable at the new
current reference. The speed and the stator real power are almost
unchanged (Fig. 11a and c), demonstrating that the torque, speed
and stator real power depend primarily on the q-axis current con-
∗ changes to 3350 A, a required
trol (consistent with (12)). At t = 8 s, isq
q-axis current for PMSG maximum wind power extraction at the
wind speed of 7 m/s. With this current reference, the stator q-axis
current increases causing the electromagnetic torque to increase
and the generator speed to decrease toward the maximum power
extraction speed point (consistent with Fig. 7). At t = 10 s, the wind
speed changes from 7 m/s to 9 m/s, causing the wind turbine driving
torque larger than the electromagnetic torque (Fig. 7) and the gen-
∗ changes to 5300 A, a
erator speed to increase (Fig. 11). At t = 12 s, isq
q-axis current reference for maximum power extraction at the wind
speed of 9 m/s. Again, the generator speed decreases until a new
speed point satisfying the maximum power extraction requirement
is reached. As it can be seen from Fig. 11, for each system condition
change, there is a large oscillation using the conventional control Fig. 12. Performance of conventional PMSG current-loop controller with |v∗s dq |
approach. exceeding the linear modulation limit at some conditions.
 S. Li et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 328–338 335

Fig. 13. A novel PMSG decoupled d–q vector control structure.

Like before, the stability and reliability of a PMSG system is signif-
icantly affected using the conventional control approach as shown
in Fig. 12.
6. A novel PMSG decoupled d–q vector control design
The theoretical foundation of the proposed PMSG vector control
technology is Eqs. (12) and (11), i.e., using q-axis current for torque
control and d-axis current for reactive power or other control pur-
poses. However, different from the traditional control strategy that
generates a d- or q-axis voltage based on a d- or q-axis current error
signal [8–10], the novel control mechanism of this paper outputs
a current signal at the d or q loop of the controller, i.e., a direct-
current vector control technology. The d and q current signals isd  rated current and linear modulation constraints, the system should
 generated by the controllers are then used to compute d and
and isq
q reference voltages v∗sd and v∗sq according to (22) and (23), which
is equivalent to the transient d–q Eq. (7) after being processed by a
low pass filter for the purpose to reduce the high voltage oscillation
applied directly to the converter.
and its target value, and the change in error ce as shown in Fig. 14.
For instance, if the error e is small, both the proportional and inte-
gral gains of the PI system should be small; if the change of error
ce is large, both the proportional and integral gains of the PI sys-
tem keep almost unchanged. The advantage of the fuzzy tuned PI
controller can be seen from Fig. 7. When a PMSG stabilizes at a max-
imum power extraction point (Fig. 7), a controller with reduced PI
gains is more stable for short-term disturbances.
In addition, a nonlinear programming formulation as shown
below is developed to prevent the resultant d–q current from going
over the converter rated current and to prevent the converter from
getting into a nonlinear modulation mode. The basic principle of
the nonlinear programming formulation is that under the converter
operate to meet the q-axis current control goal while minimizing
the difference between the reference and actual d-axis currents.

v∗sd = −Rs i sd − ωe Lq isq


(22)

v∗sq = 
−Rs isq 
+ ωe Ld isd + ωe f (23)

The control configuration of the system is shown in Fig. 13,

which consists of a q-axis current loop for torque control and a
d-axis current loop for reactive power or other control purposes.
Signal processing technology is applied to the measured d and
q currents after the transformation of stator current from three-
phase a–b–c to d–q domain to prevent the high order harmonics of
the d and q currents from entering the controllers. The controller
integrates PID, fuzzy and adaptive control technologies. The PID
parts of the controller operate on a direct target control princi-
ple. The fuzzy and adaptive parts of the controllers adjust the PID
parameters based on the error e, between the controlled variable Fig. 14. Basic concept of fuzzy-PI based PI control mechanism.
336 S. Li et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 328–338

Minimize: isd − isd
∗
∗
Subject to: isq = isq

2 + i2
isd v2sd + v2sq
sq Vdc
≤ Irated , Vconv = ≤ √
3 3 2 2V̂tri
The nonlinear programming formulation is implemented by
modifying isd∗ and i∗ or v∗ and v∗ , if the condition of over the rated
sq sd sq
current or over the linear modulation limit appears.
To prevent the converter from exceeding the rated current, the
d-axis current reference may need to be adjusted depending on
the amplitude of the reference current generated by the speed
and reactive power control loops (Fig. 3). The general strategy is
keeping the q-axis current reference unchanged to maintain speed
control effectiveness while modifying the d-axis current reference
to satisfy the d-axis current control demand as much as possible as
shown by (24).

∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ 2 2
isq new = isq isd new
= sign (isd )· (is∗ dq max
∗ )
) − (isq (24)

To prevent the converter from getting into the nonlinear modu-

Fig. 15. Performance of novel PMSG current-loop controller.
Note that this nonlinear programming strategy is effective to imple-
ment using the proposed control structure (Fig. 13) but would
cause major oscillations using the conventional control structure
(Fig. 9).
lation mode, the final output voltage of the controller may need to
be modified depending on the reference voltage generated by the
controller as shown by (25). In fact, according to (13) and Fig. 5,
(25) represents an optimal strategy of keeping the d-axis voltage
reference v∗sd unchanged so as to maintain the speed control effec-
tiveness while modifying the q-axis voltage reference v∗sq to meet
the reactive power or other control demand as much as possible if
the output voltage of the controller exceeds the linear modulation
limit. But, this nonlinear programming strategy cannot be applied
to the conventional control structure (Fig. 9), which could result
in major oscillations due to the “competing” control mechanism of
the conventional d–q control method.
v∗sq new = sign(v∗sq ) · (v∗s dq max
)2 − (v∗sd )2 v∗sd new
= v∗sd (25)
The control system of Fig. 13 is built by using SimPowerSystems
and the converter average model, which is similar to Fig. 10 except
that the conventional control mechanism is replaced by the novel
control design. Fig. 15 demonstrates the performance of the novel
control approach for the same close-loop control conditions used in
Fig. 12. Before t = 3 s, the system operates in an open-loop condition.

Fig. 16. PMSG system using converter switching model.

 S. Li et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 328–338
At t = 3 ms, when the current-loop controllers are introduced, the
novel control technique quickly shifts the system from open-loop
to close-loop condition with much less oscillation (Figs. 12 and 15).
Although the current reference causes |v∗s dq | exceeding the con-
verter linear modulation limit, the novel control design operates
the system in the optimal control mode by minimizing the differ-
ence between isd and isd ∗ while maintaining the torque and speed
∗ changes to 2450 A for
control effectiveness (Fig. 15b). At t = 6 s, as isq
maximum power extraction at wind speed of 7 m/s, the proposed
control design quickly drags the controller out of the nonlinear
modulation mode and regulate isd and isq to the new reference val-
ues. For any condition changes, such as a wind speed change from
7 m/s to 9 m/s at t = 9 s and a control reference change at t = 12 s, the
novel control mechanism demonstrates much better performance
in various aspects than the conventional control approach.
Fig. 17. Performance of traditional PMSG control in switching condition: (a) gener-
ator rotor speed, (b) stator d- and q-axis current waveforms.
Fig. 18. Performance of novel PMSG control in switching condition: (a) generator
rotor speed, (b) stator d- and q-axis current waveforms.
337
7. Control evaluation in switching environment
The power electronic converter of a PMSG system switches on
and off continuously. Hence, performance of a PSMG system should
be validated in a more practical transient switching environment.
Fig. 16 shows the configuration of the PMSG system using a detailed
switching model from the SimPowerSystems library for the power
converter. The output voltage from the controller is applied to a
three-phase DC/AC PWM converter. The converter switching fre-
quency is 1800 Hz. This configuration emulates a real-life PMSG
system under power converter control more closely. However,
simulation of a PMSG system is much slower in the switching
environment because a small simulation time step is needed for
the power converter simulation. Figs. 17 and 18 show PMSG per-
formance using the conventional and novel control techniques,
respectively, for the same control demands used in Fig. 11. Com-
pared to Fig. 11, there are evident oscillations in instantaneous d–q
current and real/reactive power waveforms due to the switching
effect (Figs. 17b and 18b). Nevertheless, the generator rotational
speed is very close using both the switching and average models
(Figs. 17a and 18a). In the switching environment, it can be seen
that the performance of the novel control design is much better
than that of the conventional control mechanism.
8. Conclusions
This paper compares conventional and novel control designs
for a variable-speed PMSG wind turbine. The special features and
results obtained from this paper include: (1) a steady-state model
of PMSG system in a d–q reference frame, (2) simulation study
of steady-state PMSG characteristics under general decoupled d–q
control strategy, (3) detection of a deficiency in the existing PMSG
decoupled d–q vector control mechanism, (4) a novel optimal con-
trol design in a direct-current vector control configuration for
the best system performance, and (5) a performance evaluation
and comparison between the conventional and proposed control
approaches by using PWM converter average and switching mod-
els. Performance study shows that the proposed control technology
has superior performance to the traditional control technique in
various aspects.
Future research needs associated with the proposed tech-
nology may include (1) detailed theoretical foundation of the
direct-current d–q vector control technology, (2) signal processing
technology for enhanced direct-current-based d–q vector control
development, (3) enhancement of the direct-current vector con-
trol technology with optimal control strategy, (4) implementation
of intelligent control in the direct-current vector control configu-
ration, and (5) investigation of the novel vector control technology
for other electric power and energy systems.
In the scope of this paper, the integration of machine- and grid-
side system is not considered. Currently, a direct-current vector
control approach is under the development for the grid-side con-
verter too, which would allow the machine- and grid-side systems
to be integrated under an optimal and smart configuration for the
best performance of the overall system.
References
[1] S. Jöckel, High energy production plus builtin reliability—the new Vensys 70/77
gearless wind turbines in the 1.5 MW class, in: Proceedings of 2006 European
Wind Energy Conference (EWEC), Athens, February 27–March 2, 2006.
[2] H. Polinder, S.W.H. de Haan, M.R. Dubois, J. Slootweg, Basic operation principles
and electrical conversion systems of wind turbines, in: NORPIE/2004, Nordic
Workshop on Power and Industrial Electronics, Paper 069, Trondheim, Norway,
14–16 June, 2004.
[3] G. Michalke, A.D. Hansen, T. Hartkopf, Control strategy of a variable speed wind
turbine with multipole permanent magnet synchronous generator, in: 2007
European Wind Energy Conference and Exhibition, Milan (IT), 7–10 May, 2007.
338 S. Li et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 328–338
[4] H. Li, Z. Chen, H. Polinder, Optimization of multibrid permanent-magnet wind
generator systems, IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion 24 (March (1))
(2009) 82–92.
[5] D.J. Bang, H. Polinder, G. Shrestha, J.A. Ferreira, Review of generator systems
for direct-drive wind turbines, in: 2008, European Wind Energy Conference &
Exhibition, Belgium, 31 March–3 April, 2008.
[6] S. Muller, M. Deicke, R.W. De Doncker, Doubly fed induction generator systems
for wind turbines, IEEE Industry Applications Magazine 8 (May/June (3)) (2002)
26–33.
[7] K. Tan, S. Islam, Optimum control strategies in energy conversion of PMSG
wind turbine system without mechanical sensors, IEEE Transactions on Energy
Conversion 19 (June (2)) (2004) 392–399.
[8] F. Velenciaga, P.F. Puleston, High-order sliding control for a wind energy
conversion system based on a permanent magnet synchronous generator,
IEEE Transaction on Energy Conversion 23 (September (3)) (2008) 860–
867.
[9] J. Belhadj, X. Roboam, Investigation of different methods to control a
small variable-speed wind turbine with PMSM drives, Journal of Energy
Resources Technology, Transactions of the ASME 129 (September) (2007) 200–
213.
[10] M. Chinchilla, S. Arnaltes, J.C. Burgos, Control of permanent-magnet generators
applied to variable-speed wind-energy systems connected to the grid, IEEE
Transaction on Energy Conversion 21 (March (1)) (2006) 130–135.
[11] W. Qiao, L. Qu, R.G. Harley, Control of IPM synchronous generator for maximum
wind power generation considering magnetic saturation, IEEE Transactions on
Industry Applications 45 (June (3)) (2009) 1095–1105.
[12] S. Brabic, N. Celanovic, V.A. Katic, Permanent magnet synchronous generator
for wind turbine application, IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics 13 (May
(3)) (2008) 1136–1142.
[13] A. Mullane, G. Lightbody, R. Yacamini, Wind-turbine fault ride-through
enhancement, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 20 (November (4)) (2005)
1929–1937.
[14] L.L. Freris, Wind Energy Conversion System, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River,
NJ, 1990.
[15] G.E. Energy, 2.5 MW Wind Turbine: A Product of Ecomagination, General Elec-
tric Company, 2008.
[16] N.W. Miller, W.W. Price, J.J. Sanchez-Gasca, Dynamic modeling of GE 1.5 and
3.6 wind turbine-generators, GE Power Systems, October 27, 2003.
[17] N. Mohan, Advanced Electric Drives—Analysis, Modeling and Control using
Simulink, Minnesota Power Electronics Research & Education, MN, 2001, ISBN
0-9715292-0-5.
[18] A.R. Bergen, V. Vittal, Power System Analysis, 2nd ed., Prentice Hall, Upper
Saddle River, NJ, 2000.
[19] M.B. Bana Sharifian, Y. Mohamadrezapour, M. Hosseinpour, S. Torabzade, Max-
imum power control of variable speed wind turbine connected to permanent
magnet synchronous generator using chopper equipped with superconductive
inductor, Journal of Applied Sciences 9 (4) (2009) 777–782.
[20] S. Li, T. Haskew, Characteristic study of direct driven PMSG wind turbine under
general d–q control strategies, in: Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE PES (Power &
Energy Society) General Meeting, Pittsburgh, PA, July 21–24, 2008.
[21] R. Gagnon, Detailed model of a doubly-fed induction generator (DFIG) driven
by a wind turbine, The MathWork (January) (2009).