12 views

Uploaded by mkashkooli_scribd

DFIG LVRT Capability Journal

- 10.1.1.156
- Course 06
- AI for power system problems
- HWinAction 4 Optimizing Sheet Metal Structures
- ABB Raw Mix Preparation.pdf
- 1
- 9.pdf
- Rachford Carter 2000
- Management of Cost and Time in Construction Projects
- 5
- Pesaran
- 0802-ff-008591
- Decentralized Energy Planning
- Wind turbine
- ballbouncing (1).pdf
- 2007 Topo Cons
- Optimization For Engineers By Kalyanmoy Deb
- -28sici-291097-0207-2819981130-2943-3A6-3C1109-3A-3Aaid-nme465-3E3.0.co-3B2-r
- Process Economics
- Linear Programming Word Problems

You are on page 1of 11

org

Published in IET Renewable Power Generation

Received on 26th December 2011

Revised on 23rd October 2012

Accepted on 14th November 2012

doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2011.0348

ISSN 1752-1416

of doubly fed induction generator-based wind energy

conversion system under various voltage dips

Shuai Xiao1, Hua Geng1, Honglin Zhou2, Geng Yang1

1

DEC Central Academy, Intelligent Equipments and Control Technology Institute, Chengdu, Peoples Republic of China

E-mail: xiaos09@mails.tsinghua.edu.cn

Abstract: For the grid-connected doubly-fed induction generator (DFIG)-based wind energy conversion system (WECS), many

improved control algorithms have been developed for the rotor-side converter (RSC) to suppress the overcurrents in the rotor-side

under voltage dips. However, such objective can hardly be achieved under severe grid fault conditions because of the limitation of

RSCs output voltage. An analysis tool is proposed to estimate the the theoretical control limit of the RSC in suppressing the shortcircuit rotor currents during grid faults in this study. The tool is based on the optimisation theory and takes the practical constraints

of the RSC into account. To execute the analysis, a simplied DFIG model with decoupled stator and rotor uxes is presented, and

the low-voltage ride through (LVRT) problem can be formulated as an optimisation problem, which intends to suppress the rotor

winding currents with voltage constraints. The Pontryagins minimum principle is employed to solve the optimisation problem

and the results can identify the control limit of the RSC. A case study based on a typical 1.5 MW DFIG-based WECS under

various grid voltage dips is carried out to validate the analytical method. The proposed method is also further veried by

experimental tests on a scaled 3 KW DFIG system. The results are expected to help the manufacturers to assess and improve

their RSC controllers or LVRT measures.

Introduction

countries have revised their grid codes in order to ensure the

stable operation of the power system. In the new grid codes,

the wind energy conversion system (WECS) is required to

remain connected to the grid even with grid faults, which is

known as the so-called low-voltage ride through (LVRT)

capability [1].

The doubly-fed induction generator (DFIG)-based WECS

is widely used in the world and its typical conguration is

shown in Fig. 1. In such concept, the stator is connected

to the grid directly while its rotor is integrated into the

grid via a back-to-back converter. When grid fault occurs,

the stator ux would contain dc and negative sequence

components, which can induce large electromotive force

(EMF) in the rotor circuit. Without proper protection

scheme, the generator rotor will suffer from overcurrents,

which may even destroy the rotor-side converter (RSC) [2].

To avoid such problem, the crowbar circuits were

commonly used to short circuit the rotor windings and

bypass the RSC during the grid faults [35]. This kind of

method can work well even under severe grid faults.

However, the DFIG will lose controllability and absorb

large amount of reactive power from the grid when the

crowbar is activated. Such property can even aggravate the

grid faults. At the same time, the electromagnetic torque of

IET Renew. Power Gener., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 1, pp. 7181

doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2011.0348

press on the drive train [6, 7]. Therefore for less severe

faults, instead of activating the crowbar, it is preferred to

ride through the faults with advanced control of the RSC [8].

As analysed in [9], the short-circuit currents of the DFIG

can reach its peak value in 1/43/4 grid period after the

grid fault occurs. During this crucial period, the RSC must

be controlled properly, so that the rotor-side short-circuit

currents can be suppressed effectively. However, such

objective cannot always be achieved. Usually, the

commercial converter for the DFIG is voltage source based

and the output voltage of the RSC is restricted by the

dc-link voltage. If the voltage dips are severe, the EMF

induced in the rotor winding can be too large to be

counteracted by the output voltage of the RSC. In such

case, the overcurrent cannot be limited with the control of

RSC. Therefore there is a theoretical control limit for the

RSC under voltage dips.

As presented in [818], several improved RSC control

methods have been proposed for the LVRT of DFIG-based

WECS. However, the control limit of RSC is not clear and

has not been explored completely. This paper proposes a

method to nd out the control limit of RSC under voltage

dips. First, the control limit calculation is formulated to be

an optimisation problem with practical constraints. Then,

such optimisation problem is solved with Pontryagins

minimum principle (PMP) and the control limit can be

71

www.ietdl.org

dened as

sm = Rs Lm / Ls Lr L2m

v

v

rm = Rr Lm / Ls Lr L2m

(4)

a guideline to assess the performance of different LVRT

methods, optimise the capacity of the RSC or determine the

activation time of the crowbar for the turbine manufacturers

etc.

This paper is organised as follows. First, a simplied ux

model of DFIG is derived for the subsequent transient

analysis. Based on the model, the analysis of the control

limit of RSC under voltage dips is then formulated as an

optimisation problem with constraints. Afterwards, the

procedure to solve the optimisation problem utilising PMP

is discussed. Then, a simulation case study of the typical

1.5 WM DFIG-based WECS is presented to evaluate the

control limits for different types of grid faults. Finally,

experimental tests are carried out to further verify the

proposed analysis.

study

Selecting the stator and rotor uxes as state variables, and

following the generation convention, the ux model of

DFIG in synchronous dq-reference frame can be expressed as

dc/dt = Ac + u

i = L1 c

(1)

i = [isd , isq , ird , irq ]T are the ux, voltage and current of

DFIG, respectively. The superscript T denotes transpose.

The primed variables represent the quantity referred to the

stator-side throughout this paper. The matrix A is given by

vs

vs

A=

v

rm

0

vs

vs

0

v

rm

v

sm

0

vr

vsr

0

v

sm

vsr

vr

(2)

where s and sr are the stator and the slip angular frequency.

s and v

v

r reect the damping speed of the dc component of

the stator and rotor uxes, respectively, and they are dened

as

s = Rs Lr / Ls Lr L2m

v

v

r = Rr Ls / Ls Lr L2m

(3)

resistance, stator inductance, rotor inductance and mutual

inductance, respectively. v

sm and v

rm reect the coupling

strength between rotor ux and stator ux, and they are

72

Ls

0

L=

Lm

0

0

Ls

0

Lm

L1

Lr

0

1

2

Ls Lr Lm Lm

0

Lm

0

Lr

0

0

Lm

0

Lr

0

Lr

0

Lm

Lm

0

Ls

0

(5)

0

Lm

0

Ls

(6)

rotor of DFIG changes little during LVRT because of the

large inertia of the mechanical system [3].

Since Rs and Rr are very small, the couplings between

stator and rotor ux, v

sm and v

rm are very weak [19],

which will be ignored in the analysis. Therefore matrix A

can be approximately expressed as

vs

vs

A

0

0

vs

vs

0

0

0

0

vr

vsr

0

0

= As

vsr

0

vr

0

A r

(7)

The poles of the system, that is, the eigenvalues of A are given

by ps1,2 =

vs + jvs and pr1,2 =

vr + jvsr , whose real

parts reect the damping speed of the dc component of the

uxes, and the imagine parts reect the angular frequency

of the uxes. Note that the matrix with block diagonal

implies that the ux responses of the stator and rotor are

decoupled, that is, similar to that of two independent

second-order systems. Therefore the state-variable model

(1) can be simplied as

dc /dt = As cs + us

s

dc r /dt = A r c r + u r

i = kr cs + km c r

s

i r = km cs ks c r

(8)

stator voltage, rotor voltage, stator current and rotor current,

respectively. The parameters ks , km , kr are dened as

ks = Ls /(Ls Lr L2m )

km = Lm /(Ls Lr L2m )

(9)

kr = Lr /(Ls Lr L2m )

The block diagram of the simplied model is illustrated in

Fig. 2, where the dashed lines indicate that the couplings

between the stator and rotor uxes are removed. The

IET Renew. Power Gener., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 1, pp. 7181

doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2011.0348

www.ietdl.org

problem. From (8), the stator ux equation of DFIG is

rewritten as

dcs /dt = As cs + us

fundament circle after the faults [19, 20].

dips

3.1 Optimisation problem formulation

of the control limit analysis

To realise LVRT for DFIG-based WECS, it is critical to

reduce the short-circuit rotor current during the rst few

cycles after voltage dips. To achieve such objective, the

output voltage of RSC has to be properly adjusted to

counteract the large EMF induced in the rotor circuit.

However, since the dc-link voltage of RSC is kept almost

constant during the process of LVRT [4, 21], the rotor

voltage is restricted because of the buck inherence of

converter. The maximum amplitude of rotor voltage can be

expressed as Urmax = kmax

Udc, where kmax = 1/2 for SPWM

modulation, and kmax = 3/3 for SVPWM (kmax is slightly

larger if overmodulation is considered). If the grid fault

is so severe that the induced EMF is too large to be

counteracted by the RSC, overcurrent will occur regardless

of which the specic RSC control method is used.

Therefore it is understandable that there exists a control

limit for RSC in suppressing the short-circuit rotor current

under voltage dips.

Intuitively, the analysis of the control limit is an

optimisation problem in fact, that is, how to minimise the

rotor current with the restricted rotor voltage during grid

faults. Therefore the analysis of the control limit is then

formulated as a rotor current suppression optimisation

problem with rotor voltage constraints, as

min J u r =

u r Ulim

tf

2

i dt

r

(10)

|||| is the Euclidean norm of a vector, Ulim is the constraint

of the amplitude of rotor voltage and [0, tf ] is the interested

time interval. The optimisation problem means that, during

the interested time interval, the rotor voltage is optimally

explored within the constraint range to minimise the

amplitude of the short-circuit rotor current.

3.2 Mathematic expression of the optimisation

problem

The expression of stator ux has to be derived rst in order

to obtain the mathematic expression of the optimisation

IET Renew. Power Gener., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 1, pp. 7181

doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2011.0348

(11)

voltage dips occur, regardless of the types of voltage dips, the

stator terminal voltage can be decomposed into

positive-sequence, negative-sequence and zero-sequence

components according to the symmetrical components

theory [22]. Assuming that a fault happens at t = 0, the

stator voltage space vector oriented on positive-sequence

stator voltage can be given in the form of the sum of

symmetrical components as

1

cos(2vs t + wu0 )

us (t) =

U s2

U s1 +

sin(2vs t + wu0 )

0

(12)

DFIG, Us1 is the amplitude of positive-sequence vector and

Us2 is the amplitude of negative-sequence vector, which is

zero for symmetrical faults. ju0 represents the initial space

angle between positive- and negative-sequence voltage

vectors, and its value is variable in the range of [0, 2)

depending on the fault occurrence time.

The positive- and negative-sequence stator voltages create

positive- and negative-sequence stator ux vectors,

respectively, and zero-sequence stator voltage creates no

ux vector. For asymmetrical faults, different values of ju0

lead to different values of j0, which is the initial apace

angle between positive- and negative-sequence stator ux

vectors. Neglecting the stator resistance, the positive- and

negative-sequence stator ux vectors s1, s2 in the

steady-state condition can be expressed as

us1

cs1 = jv

s

u

cs2 = s2

jvs

(13)

voltage vectors. So, the relation between ju0 and j0 can

be obtained

wc0 = wu0 + p

(14)

depths of voltage dips are the same, the amplitudes of the

induced positive- and negative-sequence stator ux vector

will keep constant. However, the dc component of stator

ux vector is variable because of the difference of j0. No

dc component is induced if j0 = 0, whereas the dc

component is of largest amplitude if j0 = [2, 23].

Substituting (12) into (11), the expression of stator ux can

be obtained as

and

T 1 (t) = e

vs t

cos(vs t) sin(vs t)

sin(vs t) cos(vs t)

73

www.ietdl.org

v

s

1

vs t

(1

e

cos(

v

t))

s

v2s + v

2s

v s

vs

+ evs t sin(vs t)

vs

state is adopted [25].

The optimal solutions of u(t) and cr (t) are denoted by the

optimal variable u (t) and the optimal state trajectory c

r (t)

(t will be omitted in the following part for simplicity).

According to (31), the Hamiltonian for this optimisation

problem can be expressed as

T 2 (t) =

1

sin(2vs t + wu0 )

A2

1

T 3 (t) = 1 + s2

4vs

2vs

cos(2vs t + wu0 )

vs t sin(vs t + wu0 )

e

cos(vs t + wu0 )

cos(2vs t + wu0 )

As

+ 2

4vs

sin(2vs t + wu0 )

cos(vs t + wu0 )

vs t

+e

sin(vs t + wu0 )

T

T

H = ks2 c r c r 2ks km cTs c r + km2 c s c s + lT A r c r + u r

(17)

where is a covariate. According to the minimum condition

(33), ur satises

Us1(0+), Us2(0+) are the amplitudes of positive- and

negative-sequence stator voltage vector, respectively.

It can be seen that the expression of stator ux vector

consists of three parts: the rst part T1(t)s(0) represents

the zero-input response, and it is related to the pre-fault

value of stator ux s(0); the second part T2(t)Us1(0+)

represents the zero-state response of the positive-sequence

stator voltage, and it depends on the amplitude of positivesequence stator voltage; the third part T3(t)Us2(0+)

represents the zero-state response of the negative-sequence

stator voltage, and it is not only decided by the amplitude

of negative-sequence stator voltage, but also by the initial

space angle ju0. For symmetrical faults, the third part is zero.

During the transient analysis for LVRT, the following

assumptions are made:

1. No extra protection (e.g. crowbar) is activated.

2. The dc-link voltage of RSC is well controlled by the

coordination of grid-side converter (GSC) and the dc-link

chopper during faults [4, 21].

3. The peak value appears in the rst fundament circle after

the instant of faults occurrence [3, 19]; so tf = 2/s.

Substitute (8) and (15) into (10), the mathematic expression

of the optimisation problem can be nally expressed as

min J [u r ] =

u r Ulim

H(t, c r , u r , l ) =

t f

T

ks2 c r c r 2ks km cTs c r + km2 cTs cs dt

min H(t, c r , u r , l )

Ulim

ur

(18)

variable. Substituting (17) into (18), it can be found that

solving (18) is equal to the solution of the following

convex optimisation problem

arg min lT u r

ur

s.t. u r Ulim

(19)

the constraints condition, it can be obtained that

T

l u l u U l

lim

r

r

(20)

lT u r Ulim l

(21)

opposite direction of * and ||ur|| = Ulim. Therefore the

solution of (19) can be given by

Ulim l

u r =

lT l

(16)

(22)

s.t.

dc r /dt = A r c r + u r

c r (0+ ) = c r (0)

tf = 2p/vs

3.3

problem with constraints. With respect to the optimisation

problem (16), a form of PMP that intends to solve the

non-autonomous optimisation problem with integral cost,

74

Hamiltonian can be further expressed as

H = ks2 cT r c r 2ks km cTs c r + km2 cTs cs + lT A r c r

Ulim lT l

(23)

dc r /dt = A r c r Ulim l/ lT l

T

(24)

doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2011.0348

www.ietdl.org

l(2p/vs ) = 0

c r (0) = c r (0)

(25)

optimal covariate * can be gained. Then substitute the

control limit of RSC can be analysed based on the obtained

results. So far, the theoretical derivation of the proposed

analytical method is completed, and the owchart is

illustrated in Fig. 3. In the next section, a case study of a

typical 1.5 MW DFIG-based wind turbine is carried out.

Case study

WECS is carried out in MATLAB based on the proposed

analytical method using optimisation theory. The

parameters of the system are listed in the Appendix. The

control limits under various voltage dips, including both

symmetrical and asymmetrical voltage dips, are evaluated,

and further the safe operation regions are depicted. Finally,

a brief comparison of the situations under various voltage

dips is shown.

4.1

Initially, the rotor speed of the turbine r is 1.2 pu, and the

mechanical power produced by the turbine is 0.67 pu,

whereas the reactive power output of the stator of DFIG is

0. Assuming that a three-phase symmetrical voltage dip

with 60% depth happens at t = 0.1 s. Applying the proposed

IET Renew. Power Gener., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 1, pp. 7181

doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2011.0348

r is

shown in Fig. 4, and the amplitude of the corresponding

rd , urq

are the optimal values of urd , urq , and urm is the amplitude

of the optimal rotor voltage. To validate the analysed

results, the three-phase rotor current response of the

full-order DFIG system under the optimal rotor voltage u

r

is shown in Fig. 6.

Fig. 4 shows that the amplitude of rotor voltage is always

kept at its constraint during the interested time interval,

which implies that the rotor voltage constraint is optimally

used to suppress the rotor current. As a result, the rotor

current is well suppressed as shown in Fig. 5, and the

amplitude of peak value is a little < 2 pu. If the threshold,

namely the maximum current allowed by RSC is 2 pu, it

means that the fault is possible to be ride through with

the proper control of RSC. Otherwise, some additional

protection circuits, such as crowbar, have to be activated.

From Fig. 6, it can be seen that the time-domain response

of the full-order DFIG system coincides well with the

calculated result as shown in Fig. 5, which validates the

analysed results.

The pre-fault states, including the input mechanical power

from the turbine PWT and the output reactive power of stator

Qs, affect the dynamical response of DFIG during faults.

Usually, when the grid is normal, the DFIG is under MPPT

75

www.ietdl.org

Fig. 6 Rotor current response of the full-order DFIG system under

the optimal rotor voltage

the grid voltage or the power factor [26]. In the case study,

the MPPT curve of the system is shown in Fig. 7, and the

reactive power output is assumed to vary between 0.2 and

0.2 pu. Once the pre-fault states are known, the unique

operating point can be determined. Then applying the

proposed optimisation method, the rotor current under

certain depth of voltage dip can be calculated. In each case,

the amplitude of the maximum rotor current irm max can be

extracted. Finally, the control limit of the RSC is

represented by a collection of maximum rotor current

surfaces as shown in Fig. 8, in which a surface corresponds

to a certain depth of voltage dip. The percentage labelled in

this gure is the depth of the voltage dip. The gures

indicate that the control limit tends to be larger with

increased initial active and reactive power output, which

means that it becomes more difcult for the RSC to

ride-through the fault. This is because that increased active

power output corresponds to higher speed with MPPT

control, and the induced EMF during faults becomes larger

at higher speed. Moreover, increased active and reactive

power output mean larger pre-fault rotor current, which

makes overcurrent more prone to appearing in the presence

of grid faults.

Further, with the control limits achieved, the safe operation

regions by the control of RSC can be depicted. If the

threshold is 2 pu, the safe operation regions are shown in

76

the DFIG may successfully ride through the grid faults with

the proper control of RSC, and the grey coloured regions

mean that LVRT cannot be realised with the control of

RSC. For the latter cases, some other protection measures,

for example, triggering the crowbar circuit, have to be

taken. If the capacity of RSC is improved to 1.5 times, as

Fig. 10 shows, the safe operation regions become larger

signicantly, which means that the RSC are able to

cope with more severe faults. With this information,

manufactures can make a good compromise between the

LVRT performances and the cost according to local grid

codes.

4.2

analysed, including single-phase-to-ground faults, phase-tophase faults and two-phase-to-ground faults. Different from

symmetrical faults, the stator ux would contain not only

dc component, but also negative-sequence component

during asymmetrical faults. First single-phase faults are

considered. When single-phase faults occur, voltage dips

will appear in one phase, and phase A is taken for example.

threshold)

IET Renew. Power Gener., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 1, pp. 7181

doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2011.0348

www.ietdl.org

with different j0

Fig. 10 Safe operation regions of three-phase faults (3 pu

threshold)

have the same impedance, the voltages of phases B and C

remain unchanged. Then the phase voltage of phases AC

are given by

r is

shown in Fig. 12, and the corresponding irm is shown in

Fig. 13. Similar to the symmetrical faults, the amplitude of

rotor voltage is kept at its constraint to minimise the rotor

current. The time-domain response of the full-order DFIG

system under the optimal rotor voltage is shown in Fig. 14,

which also agrees well with the analysed result.

U a = U (1 p)

U b = Ua2

(26)

U c = Ua

where U is the amplitude of pre-fault phase voltage, p is

the depth of voltage dips, a = 1120 = ej(2/3). Then the

positive-, negative- and zero-sequence components of stator

voltage are expressed as

U 1

1 a

1

U = 1 a2

2

3

U 0

1 1

U (1 p)

1 p/3

a2

2

= U p/3

a Ua

Ua

p/3

1

(27)

single-phase faults can be expressed in dq synchronous

reference frame as

us (t) =

1

cos(2vs t + wu0 )

U (p/3)

Us (1 p/3) +

sin(2vs t + wu0 ) s

0

(28)

dynamical response of DFIG is related to j0. To compare

the dynamical response of DFIG with different j0, a

group of simulations is done, as shown in Fig. 11. In this

simulation, the rotor voltage is kept unchanged during the

faults. The results show that if j0 = , the rotor overcurrent

is largest, whereas if j0 = 0, the rotor overcurrent is

smallest. This is well consistent with the theoretical analysis.

To ensure that LVRT is feasible for cases with different

j0, only the worst situation j0 = is considered

throughout the remainder of the analysis. For a single-phase

voltage dip with a 60% depth, using the proposed

IET Renew. Power Gener., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 1, pp. 7181

doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2011.0348

77

www.ietdl.org

The obtained control limits for single-phase faults are

shown in Fig. 15, and the safe operation regions with

threshold 2 pu are shown in Fig. 16. The meanings of the

gures are identical with the symmetrical case, and are

omitted here for brevity. The similar conclusions to the

symmetrical case can be derived, which are not repeated here.

Using the similar method, the cases of phasephase and

two-phase faults can also be analysed. The detailed process

is not presented here for brevity. The control limits for

phasephase faults and two-phase-to-ground faults are

shown in Figs. 17 and 18, respectively.

4.3

of faults is carried out. Applying the proposed optimisation

method, the amplitudes of the minimised rotor current

under different types of voltage dips with 60% depth are

shown in Fig. 19. Also, only the worst situation j0 = is

considered for asymmetrical faults. It can be seen that, the

peak value of short-circuit rotor current is largest under

three-phase faults, the second is phasephase faults, the

third is two-phase faults and the last one is single-phase

faults. It implies that for the typical 1.5 MW DFIG-based

WECS, the three-phase faults are the most difcult for the

the easiest. This conclusion can also be derived by a

comparison of the calculated control limits under different

faults obtained before in this section.

Fig. 14 Rotor current response of the full-order DFIG system

under the optimal rotor voltage

control limit calculated by the proposed analytical method

is obtained using optimisation method, it should be the best

result that can be achieved for the specic cost function

with the rotor voltage constraint. In this section, to further

verify the proposed analytical method, the calculated

control limits is compared with the experiment results of

the ux linkage tracking control strategy as presented in

[17] on a scaled 3 KW DFIG system. The ux linkage

tracking control strategy has been proven to be effective to

suppress the rotor current under various voltage dips by

controlling the RSC [17]. The experiment system has been

introduced in detail in [17], and it is not repeated here for

brevity.

Initially, the DFIG is under the VC control, with 0.2 pu

active power output and 0 pu reactive power output. When

grid faults occur, the control strategy switches to the ux

linkage tracking method immediately on detecting the

78

Experiment verification

doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2011.0348

www.ietdl.org

strategy and the calculated control limits

a 90% symmetrical fault

b 90% single-phase fault

pretty good.

Fig. 19 Amplitudes of the minimised rotor currents under different

types of voltage dips

0.2 by the prime mover controller during the faults. Both

symmetrical and asymmetrical faults are examined and only

single-phase faults are studied here representatively for

asymmetrical faults.

The experimental results for a symmetrical fault and a

single-phase fault both with a dip depth of 90% are shown

in Fig. 20. It is shown that the short-circuit rotor current

can be reduced effectively with the ux linkage tracking

control strategy. The control limits of the 3 KW DFIG

system calculated by the proposed method are also

indicated in Fig. 20. The calculated control limit for the

symmetrical fault is 1.23 pu, and for single-phase fault is

1.40 pu. It can be seen that, although the ux linkage

tracking control strategy is effective to suppress the

short-circuit rotor current, the maximum amplitude of the

rotor current response can still not be smaller than the

calculated control limit. This result supports the proposed

analytical theory, since the calculated control limit is the

optimised result. It is also partly because of the delay

existing in the real control system, which may degrade the

control performance slightly. On the other hand, the control

limit can be used to evaluate the performance of the control

strategy. In Fig. 20, it is also shown that the maximum

amplitude of the rotor current response is very close to the

control limit, and it can be derived that the control

IET Renew. Power Gener., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 1, pp. 7181

doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2011.0348

Conclusions

the RSC in suppressing the short-circuit rotor current because

of the limitation of dc-link voltage. To analyse the control

limit, the rotor current suppression problem is formulated as

an optimisation problem with rotor voltage constraint. PMP

is successfully applied to solve the optimisation problem.

A case study of a typical 1.5 MW DFIG-based WECS is

carried out to validate the analytical method quantitatively.

Applying the proposed method, the control limit of RSC

under various voltage dips can be evaluated and nally

represented by a collection of maximum short-circuit

current surfaces over the operation area. With the result, the

safe operation regions can be readily worked out, thus

allowing different LVRT strategies to be designed

predictably. Experimental tests are also carried out to

further verify the proposed analytical method. The proposed

method can be used to evaluate the performance of existing

control systems, and is also useful to optimise the design of

RSC capability and LVRT controllers.

Acknowledgments

Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant numbers

60974130 and 61273045) and the Power Electronics

Science and Education Development Programme of Delta

Environmental and Educational Foundation.

79

www.ietdl.org

8

References

requirements for wind farms, IET Renew. Power Gener., 2008, 3, (3),

pp. 308332

2 Lopez, J., Sanchis, P., Roboam, X., Marroyo, L.: Dynamic behavior of

the doubly fed induction generator during three-phase voltage dips,

IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., 2007, 22, (3), pp. 709717

3 Morren, J., Haan, S.W.: Ride through of wind turbines with doubly-fed

induction generator during a voltage dip, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers.,

2005, 20, (2), pp. 435441

4 Erlich, I., Kretschmann, J., Fortmann, J., Mueller-Engelhardt, S., Wrede,

H.: Modeling of wind turbines based on doubly-fed induction

generators for power system stability studies, IEEE Trans. Power

Syst., 2007, 22, (3), pp. 909919

5 Kayikci, M., Milanovic, J.V.: Assessing transient response of

DFIG-based wind plants the inuence of model simplications and

parameters, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2008, 23, (2), pp. 545554

6 Yao, J., Liao, Y.: Analysis on the operations of an AC excited wind

energy conversion system with crowbar protection, Autom. Electr.

Power Syst., 2007, 31, (23), pp. 7983 (in Chinese)

7 Jiang, X., Zhao, F.: Crowbar control strategy for doubly fed induction

generator of wind farm during power grid voltage dips, Power Syst.

Technol., 2008, 32, (12), pp. 8489 (in Chinese)

8 Xiang, D., Ran, L., Tavner, P., Yang, S.: Control of a doubly fed

induction generator in a wind turbine during grid fault ride-through,

IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., 2006, 21, (3), pp. 652662

9 Morren, J., Haan, S.W.: Short circuit current of wind turbines with

doubly fed induction generator, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., 2007,

22, (1), pp. 174180

10 He, Y., Hu, J., Zhao, R.: Modeling and control of wind-turbine used

DFIG under network fault conditions. Proc. Eighth Int. Conf.

Electrical Machines and Systems, 2005, pp. 986991

11 Gomis-Bellmunt, O., Junyent-Ferre, A., Sumper, A., Bergas-Jane, J.:

Ride-through control of a doubly-fed induction generator under

unbalanced voltage sags, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., 2008, 23,

(4), pp. 10361045

12 Peng, L., Colas, F., Francois, B., Li, Y.: A modied vector control

strategy for DFIG based wind turbines to ride-through voltage dips.

Proc. 13th European Conf. Power Electronics and Applications, 2009

13 Zhou, Y., Bauer, P., Ferreira, A., Pierik, J.: Operation of grid-connected

DFIG under unbalanced grid voltage condition, IEEE Trans. Energy

Convers., 2009, 24, (1), pp. 240246

14 Santos-Martin, D., Rodriguez-Amenedo, J.L., Arnaltes, S.: Providing

ride-through capability to a doubly fed induction generator under

unbalanced voltage dips, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., 2009, 24, (7),

pp. 17471775

15 Flannery, P.S., Venkataramanan, G.: Unbalanced voltage sag ride

through of a doubly fed induction generator wind turbine with

series grid side converter, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., 2009, 45, (5),

pp. 18791887

16 Lima, F.K.A., Luna, A., Rodriguez, P., Watanabe, E.H., Blaabjerg, F.:

Rotor voltage dynamic in the doubly fed induction generator during

grid faults, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., 2010, 25, (1), pp. 118130

17 Xiao, S., Yang, G., Zhou, H., Geng, H.: A LVRT control strategy based

on ux linkage tracking for DFIG-based WECS, IEEE Trans. Ind.

Electron. accepted

18 Hu, S., Lin, X., Kang, Y., Zou, X.: An improved low-voltage

ride-through control strategy of doubly fed induction generator

during grid faults, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., 2011, 26, (12),

pp. 36533665

19 Zhou, H., Yang, G.: Short circuit current analysis of DFIG wind

turbines with crowbar protection. Proc. 12th Int. Conf. Electrical

Machines and Systems, 2009, pp. 16

20 Zhou, H., Yang, G., Geng, H.: Evaluation of the control limit of

rotor-side converters in DFIG-based wind energy conversion systems

under symmetrical voltage dips. Asia-Pacic Power and Energy

Engineering Conf., 2011

21 Yao, J., Li, H., Liao, Y., Chen, Z.: An improved control strategy of

limiting the dc-link voltage uctuation for a doubly fed induction

wind generator, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., 2008, 23, (3),

pp. 12051213

22 Wagnes, C.F., Evans, R. D.: Symmetrical components as applied to the

analysis of unbalanced electrical circuits (McGraw Hill, 1933)

23 Lopez, J., Gubia, E., Sanchis, P., Roboam, X., Marroyo, L.: Wind

turbines based on doubly fed induction generator under asymmetrical

voltage dips, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., 2008, 23, (1),

pp. 321330

24 Gamkrelidze, R.V.: Principle of optimal control theory (Translated by

K. Makowski) (Plenum Press, 1978)

80

25 Hu, S., Wang, Z., Hu, W.: Optimal control theory and system (Science

Press, 2005) (in Chinese)

26 Grid Code High and Extra High Voltage. Technical Report, E.ON Netz

GmbGBayreuth, 2006. Available at http://www.eon-netz.com

Appendix

9.1

min J[u] =

tf

u(t)[V

t0

t [ [0, tf ], with fixed tf

(29)

, Rm is the class of admissible controls, assume that

1. f(x, u) is continuous with respect to x, u.

2. f(x, u) has a continuous derivative with respect to x and

locally Lipschitz in u.

If u*(t) is the optimal variable, then there exists a non-zero,

absolutely continuous co-state function *(t) such that for

almost all t [0, tf ], the optimal variable u*(t), the optimal

state trajectory x*(t) and *(t) satises the following conditions:

1. Canonical equation

dl(t)

H(t, x(t), u(t), l(t))

dt

x(t)

dx(t)

H(t,

x(t),

u(t), l(t))

=

dt

l(t)

(30)

H(t, x(t), u(t), l(t)) = L(t, x(t), u(t)) + lT (t)f (x(t), u(t))

(31)

2. Boundary conditions

l(tf ) = 0

x(t0 ) = x0

(32)

H(t, x (t), u (t), l (t)) = min H(t, x (t), u(t), l (t))

u(t)[V

(33)

4. The Hamiltonian is constant over the optimal trajectory

H(t, x (t), u (t), l (t)) = H(t, x (tf ), u (tf ), l (tf ))

= const

9.2

(34)

System parameters

Nominal capacity of DFIG: 1.67 MVA;

Rated stator voltage: 690 V;

Pairs of poles: 2;

IET Renew. Power Gener., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 1, pp. 7181

doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2011.0348

www.ietdl.org

Turn ratio: 1: 3;

Stator resistance:

Lls = 0.171 pu;

Rotor resistance:

Lls = 0.156 pu;

Rs = 0.007 pu,

linkage

inductance:

Rs = 0.007 pu,

linkage

inductance

doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2011.0348

Rotational inertia: H = 4.5s;

Stator-rated current (base value): 1105 A;

Rotor-rated current (base value): 476 A;

dc-link rated voltage: 1200 V.

81

- 10.1.1.156Uploaded bygetme_sam
- Course 06Uploaded bydbzo
- AI for power system problemsUploaded byvmbharani9740
- HWinAction 4 Optimizing Sheet Metal StructuresUploaded bykasreedhar
- ABB Raw Mix Preparation.pdfUploaded byrudye kardun
- 1Uploaded byMadhusudhan Srinivasan
- 9.pdfUploaded byMaroju Santosh Kiran
- Rachford Carter 2000Uploaded byJohn Buntales
- Management of Cost and Time in Construction ProjectsUploaded byIRJET Journal
- 5Uploaded byAvidiPrasad
- PesaranUploaded byArthuro Bandini
- 0802-ff-008591Uploaded byh_derghal1011
- Decentralized Energy PlanningUploaded byAmir Joon
- Wind turbineUploaded byAlaeddine
- ballbouncing (1).pdfUploaded bymfqc
- 2007 Topo ConsUploaded byRoshdy AbdelRassoul
- Optimization For Engineers By Kalyanmoy DebUploaded bylankyrck
- -28sici-291097-0207-2819981130-2943-3A6-3C1109-3A-3Aaid-nme465-3E3.0.co-3B2-rUploaded byLata Deshmukh
- Process EconomicsUploaded bybioenviron
- Linear Programming Word ProblemsUploaded byJR Deviente
- OS-06_Introduction_of_optimization_tools_Maruti.pdfUploaded byRawnak Prajapati
- 2007 Maximizing the Energy Output of an Axial Flux Permanent Generator for Small Wind Energy Applications (Not Attached With Endnote)Uploaded byFazal Karim Mahsud
- chapter 1Uploaded byMaricar Abuel Agudilla
- Lecture 2 (Notes)Uploaded byillustra7
- Shaheen Wind Turbine DatasheetUploaded byShaheen Enterprise (Pvt.) Ltd.
- IJET-V3I3P8Uploaded byInternational Journal of Engineering and Techniques
- Chapter 1.pdfUploaded byCharleneKronstedt
- Annx B Syallbus With Structure Sem-VII & VIII.docxUploaded byKaranMuley
- Fm.lautenschlager.confpro.dac 3961.1997Uploaded byramya2212
- New-PK60Uploaded byAnonymous zFCK8R7Ls

- CVTbook UkUploaded bymkashkooli_scribd
- chapter 6Uploaded bymkashkooli_scribd
- 19-21Uploaded bymkashkooli_scribd
- 1273Uploaded bymkashkooli_scribd
- Energy management in micro gridUploaded bymkashkooli_scribd
- PIR (PASSIVE INFRARED) DETECTOR USING ST7FLITE05/09/SUPERLITEUploaded bybingwazzup
- DFIG Contribution in Frequency Control-IravaniUploaded bymkashkooli_scribd
- Listening for PRE-ToEFLUploaded bymkashkooli_scribd
- Famco - تماس با ماUploaded bymkashkooli_scribd
- Voltage stability reviewsUploaded bymkashkooli_scribd
- spra953bUploaded byrajdrkl
- Power BalanceUploaded bysunnyatchut
- 4123Uploaded bymkashkooli_scribd
- sprz193mUploaded bymkashkooli_scribd
- Using PWM Output as a Digital-To-Analog Converter on a TMS320F280x Digital Signal ControllerUploaded byAtakan OzturK
- ch-1Uploaded bymkashkooli_scribd
- COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS - Anderson, Dale a. Computational Fluid Mechanics and Heat Transfer100-150Uploaded bymkashkooli_scribd
- Berry JackieUploaded bymkashkooli_scribd
- 321_1315Uploaded bymkashkooli_scribd
- Current Control Techniques for Three-phase Voltage-source PWM ConvertersUploaded byedvin_s667
- Sydney Metro-Preliminary Reference Concept of OperationsUploaded bymkashkooli_scribd
- Simple Direct Torque Control 01283594Uploaded bymkashkooli_scribd
- APTA RT OP S 007 04 Standard for Rail Transit System Emergency ManagementUploaded bymkashkooli_scribd
- Chapter 4Uploaded bymkashkooli_scribd
- AEROSPACE08_143_594438Uploaded bymkashkooli_scribd
- AEROSPACE08_143_594438Uploaded bymkashkooli_scribd
- Direct Active and Reactive Power Control of DFIG for Wind Energy GenerationUploaded byyourou1000
- View PaperUploaded byankit1979
- MPC of HVDC Power Flow to Improve Transient Stability in Power SystemsUploaded bymkashkooli_scribd

- CMS156Uploaded byzinab90
- A Distributed Parameter Electromechanical Model for Cantilevered Piezoelectric Energy HarvestersUploaded byDaniel Osorio
- 4.DC1 Biasing - BJTsUploaded byFaisal Aftab
- Transistor 2N4401NPNUploaded bySwisela Oktavia Tumembow II
- Cummins C33D5 - Specification SheetUploaded bymunh
- inverterUploaded byBharat
- harman_kardon_avr3550_sm_2.pdfUploaded byaziztcf
- ITR8102Uploaded bySalvador Reyes
- Grounding Transformer and SimulationUploaded bySe Samnang
- IJETTCS-2014-10-30-4Uploaded byAnonymous vQrJlEN
- Lecture 1 SlidesUploaded bymanasgupta496
- NR24A-SR_datasheet_en-gb.pdfUploaded byWagesusilo23121986_
- OB2268CP_datasheetUploaded byAnonymous XoW23y58O
- CQ 01 January 1945Uploaded byСергей Безразличный
- Induction Generator - 100255KUploaded byChamath Kirinde
- L&T GIC Catalogue 25 Sep 09Uploaded byNaresh Kapu
- Esa620_safety Electric Analyzer_fluke Biomedical_operating ManualUploaded byALEXANDER1819
- Circuit Digram SymbolsUploaded byabdul-mateen
- RAK CablesUploaded byHussainhabeebi
- Letters IIUploaded byksriniwas
- Matrial RetailUploaded byDeni Rohendar
- MosfetSic , 20kw Full Bridge Resonant Llc ConverterUploaded byManuel Sierra
- Electronic Circuits NotesUploaded byAnonymous cJZSLMc
- 1 FDAS BasicsUploaded byBea Ducao
- Micom BIU241-A02 SupplyUploaded byYasser Ragab
- 325 repair circuit.Uploaded byJamie Brown
- MOSFET- NPTELUploaded byAnshuman Mitra
- fluke catalogUploaded byHANIF AKBAR
- AS50D hbk Eng.pdfUploaded byflvh
- List of is StandardsUploaded byAnantha Narayanan