You are on page 1of 7

Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 46–52

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Electric Power Systems Research
journal homepage:

Modeling and control of PMSG-based variable-speed wind turbine
Hong-Woo Kim a , Sung-Soo Kim b , Hee-Sang Ko a,∗

Wind Energy Research Center, Korea Institute of Energy Research, Yuseong-gu Jang-Dong 71-2,305-343 Daejeon, Republic of Korea
Chungbuk National University, Republic of Korea

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 19 July 2008
Received in revised form 1 August 2009
Accepted 5 August 2009
Available online 22 October 2009
Permanent-magnetic synchronous
Variable speed
Wind turbine
Wind farm

a b s t r a c t
This paper presents a control scheme of a variable-speed wind turbine with a permanent-magnetic
synchronous generator (PMSG) and full-scale back-to-back voltage source converter. A comprehensive
dynamical model of the PMSG wind turbine and its control scheme is presented. The control scheme
comprises both the wind-turbine control itself and the power-converter control. In addition, since the
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
limits, this paper presents the supervisory reactive power control scheme in order to regulate/contribute
the voltage at a remote location. The ability of the control scheme is assessed and discussed by means of
simulations, based on a candidate site of the offshore wind farm in Jeju, Korea.
© 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
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: (H.-S. Ko).
0378-7796/$ – see front matter © 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

However, the electromagnetic construction of the PMSG is more
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 influenced 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 characteristics 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
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

p (pu) q (pu) 0. m is the exciter flux of the PMSG.981 0. This paper is organized as follows: the detail dynamic model including voltage source converter (VSC) control design is presented in Section 2. a cable. In particular. and the RL load are given in (4)–(7) based on Fig. Fig. and conclusions are drawn in Section 5. special attention should be given to model development. L. and tower require extensive knowledge of aerodynamics. Kim et al. ωb is the base angular speed in rad/s. 3 where superscript s and e stand for the sending-end and the receiving-end. sonable.1435. The subscripts s indicates stator quantities. ωe is the stator electrical angular speed. The system parameters and control gains. and a grid filter. and a load can be obtained from the description of the R. Lumped-parameter  equivalent-circuit description in the dq-domain.-W. 2. qs = −Lqs iqs Load Bus: 4 (PCC). these components are modeled in the dqsynchronous reference frame [20]. in this paper. IB WF Total (1) Fig. 3. The design and optimization of the WT’s blades. The equations of the TL. The electrical active and reactive power delivered by the stator are given by Ps = vd1 ids + vq1 iqs . Ls is the stator leakage inductance.419 3.. Each WT is equipped with a 0. the d-axis is assumed to be aligned to the stator flux.H. the cable.69/22. Wherein. i is the current. Electrical transients have very small time constants that require small integration time steps and result in long computation time. The details of the WT considered in the model are shown in Fig. . 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.9725 Resistance Reactance 0. and is the flux linkage. control and protection of electrical subsystems. to increase the simulation speed of various electrical components.9 kV step-up transformer (TR). computational speed is still one of the limiting factors in dynamic simulation of power systems [18.3099 0.562 3.8039 0. The WF is connected to the grid using a 2 km submarine cable (Ca) and a 14 km overhead transmission line (TL). To keep the simulation speed rea- 1 d ds = vd1 + Rs ids + ωe ωb dt qs . which is represented by an infinite bus (Table 1). Grid-connected wind-turbine system. The considered operating condition is as follows: the WF supplies 7 MW of active power and 0. Qs = vd1 iqs − vq1 ids (3) The mathematical model of a TL. etc. C segment [20] into the dq-synchronous reference frame. The WT consists of the following components: a three-bladed rotor with the corresponding pitch controller [17]. are summarized in Appendix A. control at a required location such as a point-of-common coupling (PCC). mechanical and structural engineering. a dc-link capacitor. drive train. the TR. 1. Permanent-magnetic synchronous generator wind turbine (PMSG-WT). and the current coming out of the machine is considered positive. and converter controllers. 1. modern WTs are very complex systems.1. The WF consists of 5 unit of WT. Although personal computers are becoming increasingly faster. a PMSG with two converters. The subscripts d and q indicate the direct and quadrature axis components. Permanent-magnetic synchronous-generator (PMSG) 2. 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. 1 d qs = vq1 + Rs iqs − ωe ωb dt ds with ds = −Lds ids − m. in Section 3. respectively.1687 0. v (pu): 1. Then. Although the fundamental principle of a WT is straightforward. the supervisory reactive power control scheme is proposed. 2.9 MVar.0757 (2) where v is the voltage. etc. 2. / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 46–52 47 Fig. Table 1 Operating conditions. R is the resistance. case studies are carried out in Section 4. The remaining active power comes through the 154 kV utility grid.19]. a TR.3 MVar of reactive power to the local load. Dynamic model of PMSG-WT-based power system The PMSG was represented by the following equations [1]: The system considered in this paper is shown in Fig. which consumes 8 MW and 1.

2. 5.3. The voltage equations for the filter in the dq-synchronous reference frame are as follows. Voltage source converter controller Lca didl = vd3 − vd2 − Rca idl + ωe Lca iql . Cable 2.-W. Transmission line (TL) LTL didl = vd4 − vd3 − RTL idl + ωe LTL iql . ωb dt Cca dvd2 s + ωe Cca vq2 . 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. which is represented here as a look-up table Pgset (ωr ) determined in terms of generator rotational-speed ωr . ωb dt LTL diql = vq4 − vq3 − RTL iql − ωe LTL idl . the dclink. PI1 through PI4. (4)) vsd corresponds to vd3 at bus 3 and ved corresponds to vd4 at bus 4. respectively. which includes four internal PI controllers.4. Here. Transformer (TR) Ltr didl = vd2 − vd1 − Rtr idl + ωe Ltr iql .6. ωb dt Lca diql = vq3 − vq2 − Rca iql − ωe Lca idl . Eq. Co dvq4 = iqL − ωe Co vd4 ωb dt (7) Fig. ωb dt Co dvq1 = iql − ωe Co vd1 ωb dt (5) where Co is the dummy capacitor to obtain voltage for modeling purpose. Block diagram of the generator-side converter controller. the grid-side converter is connected to the grid through the filter. ωb dt Co dvd4 = idL + ωe Co vq4 . = idc ωb dt CTL dvq4 e − ωe CTL vd4 = iqc ωb dt Fig. 2. 6. These controllers utilize proportional-integral (PI) controllers. ωb dt Ltr diql = vq2 − vq1 − Rtr iql − ωe Ltr idl .5. The controller is implemented as two branches. ωb dt Lfilt diqg = vq1 − Rfilt iqg − ωe Lfilt idg ωb dt where subscript filt stands for filter. RL load The RL load in the dq-domain can be described as Lload didL = vd4 − Rload idL + ωe Lload iqL . The VSC control module consists of the generator-side. = idc ωb dt CTL dvq3 s − ωe CTL vd3 . in the TL model (see. Generator-side converter controller: Fig.7. 2. WT maximum energy-harvesting curve.48 H. and the grid-side converter controller. = iqc ωb dt CTL dvd4 e + ωe CTL vq4 . The value of Pgset is determined from the WT energy-harvesting characteristic as shown in Fig. one for the active power (PI1 and PI2) and one for the reactive power (PI3 and PI4) with the corresponding de-coupling terms between the d and q axes. ωb dt Co dvd1 = idl + ωe Co vq1 . 2. . / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 46–52 For example. Pgset is the set-value for the active power for the WT terminal. As shown in Fig. 4 presents the detailed block diagram of the VSC controller depicting the respective input and output variables.22]. 6 shows a block diagram of the generator-side converter controller module. 4. RL-filter on the grid-side converter Lfilt didg = vd1 − Rfilt idg + ωe Lfilt iqg . Each of the controllers is briefly described below. (4) 2. 2. the reactive power set-points Qgset is set to zero. ωb dt Fig. Block diagram of the VSC controller showing the input/output variables. Kim et al. ωb dt Lload diqL = vq4 − Rload iqL − ωe Lload idL . (8) Fig. These PI controllers are tuned using the Nyquist constraint technique to deal with model uncertainties [21. = idc ωb dt Cca dvq2 s − ωe Cca vd2 = iqc ωb dt (6) 2. 5. ωb dt CTL dvd3 s + ωe CTL vq1 .

which are operating-condition dependent. DC-link model and its controller. The supervisory reactive power control The purpose of the supervisory reactive power control presented in this section is to regulate the voltage at the specified remote PCC (see Fig. Then. and Qpcc is the total reactive power required to support the voltage at the PCC. The voltage equation for the grid-side converter RL-filter can be expressed as  L  di dg filt ωb dt ωb dt  L  di qg filt = vd1 − Rfilt idg + ωe Lfilt iqg . Grid-side converter controller: Fig. the control objective is to utilize Qj from the grid-side VSC to control the voltage at the PCC to the predefined value by the reactive power set-point control signal Qjset . and outputs the set-point for the active dc power Psset needed in (13). . the reactive power available from the grid-side converter lies within the limits [−Qjmax . . vdc idc. 1) by adjusting the reactive power produced by the grid-side converter. and (10) is used to tune PI1 and PI3. When controlling WT. . (14) The dc-link controller regulates the capacitor voltage by driving it to the reference value vref . The transfer function from the stator voltage to the stator current is approximated as  Ids (s)  (s) Vds Iqs (s)  (s) Vqs T  = 1 Rs + s(Lds /ωb ) 1 Rs + s(Lqs /ωb ) T (9) Similarly. . 10 shows the active and reactive power operating limits. the transfer function from the stator current to reactive and active power is approximated as  Qg (s) Iqs (s) Ps (s) Ids (s) T =  Lqs Rs + s ωb L Rs + s ds ωb T (10) Then. As shown in Fig. 8. Qjmax is the maximum reactive power (limit) that the jth grid-side converter can provide. VSC active and reactive power operating limits. in addition to the active power. Block diagram of the grid-side converter controller.H. The set-point for the output active power by Psset = set . DC-link dynamic model and its controller: The capacitor in the dc-link is an energy storage device. 7. which determines the flow of active power and regulates the dc-link voltage by driving it to a constant reference value. which can be expressed as 2 1 Cdc dvdc = Pg − Ps 2 ωb dt controller PI7. 5. 8 shows the dc-link model with its (15) Fig. 10. Qjmax max Qpcc Q1max + · · · + Q5 where j = 1. Therefore. Fig. = vq1 − Rfilt iqg − ωe Lfilt idg Idg (s) T  Iqg (s) Vd1 (s) Vq1 (s) = 1 Rfilt +s(Lfilt /ωb ) 1 Rfilt +s(Lfilt /ωb ) T (12) The inputs to the grid-side controller are the set-values for the currents. The reactive power required from an individual grid-side converter of the VSC can be computed as (11) from which the transfer function from the filter voltage to current is  Fig. Fig. Neglecting losses. taking into account its operating state and limits.s 3. . the time derivative of the energy in this capacitor depends on the difference of the power delivered to the grid filter. the converter can supply or absorb a maximum of Qjmax of the reactive power. 9. The value for Psset is provided by the dc-link controller. which flows to the grid through the VSC. with corresponding de-coupling terms between the d and q axes. it is important that the operating limit of WT is not exceeded. Fig. + Qjmax ]. Schematic diagram of the supervisory reactive power control. Qjset = min Qjmax . Suppose that at a given time each grid-side converter is delivering the active power denoted herein by Pj . The set-values of the input currents are calculated by the active and reactive power commands Psset and Qgset as follows:  set iqg set idg  = vq1 vd1 −vd1 vq1 −1  Psset Qgset  (13) where Psset and Qgset are the set-point of the active and reactive power commands. Kim et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 46–52 49 Fig. (9) is used to tune PI2 and PI4. 7 shows a block diagram of the grid-side converter controller module. wherein it is assumed that the grid-side converter should not exceed its apparent power limit Sjmax depicted by the half-circle. Ps . and the power provided by the stator circuit of the PMSG. Pg . 9.-W. which also includes two internal PI controllers PI5 and PI6.

11. Kim et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 46–52 Fig.-W. Implementation of PI controller with the distributed anti-windup. 13. Fig. Thus.50 H. the maximum available reactive power from the each gridside converter can be expressed as Qjmax = . Voltage observed at the PCC due to the wind-speed variation.

13 shows the voltage at the PCC. the local-load variations. which Qgset is set to zero. 12 was considered for the WTs. 13. (Sjmax )2 − Pj2 (16) where it is assumed that the nominal apparent power of the each converter is Sjmax . Fig. 14 shows the measured data of the active power and the reactive power from the WF to the PCC (see Fig. Local-load variation For this study. As shown in Fig. Mode 2 actively utilizes Qgset from the grid-side converter for voltage control at the PCC. 9. The reactive power contribution from the WTs is the difference between Mode 2 and Mode 1. Thus. respectively. and the voltage sag due to the fault were conducted to compare the dynamic responses of the system with different controls. a proportional-integral (PI) controller is designed for a controller shown in Fig. 10. Wind speed (m/s). it also follows that −Sjmax ≤ Pj ≤ Sjmax . Computer studies considering the windspeed variations. 14. The comparison of the voltage transients observed at the PCC was showed in Fig. 4) can be determined by (15) and (16). 15. Since limiting control action should be implemented together with the integrator-anti-windup scheme that would stop integrating the error when the limit is being reached. when Fig. As can be noticed. 1 was implemented in detail using the Matlab/Simulink [21]. a PI controller with the proposed distributed anti-windup is implemented in Matlab/Simulink [23] as shown in Fig. Based on Fig. Voltage observed at the PCC due to the 20% impedance decrease. In comparison. the maximum reactive power set-point of Qjset (see Fig. 1). Fig. Fig. 12. 4. Case studies The system depicted in Fig. defined here as the WT rating. which is much higher than the permissible voltage range of HV power Fig. Active and reactive power from WF to PCC for wind-speed variation. Mode 1 indicates the PFC-mode operation of the grid-side converter of the WT. Mode 1 operation caused the voltage deviation about 3%. The PI gains are summarized in Appendix A.1. Finally. the local-load impedance is decreased by 20% with wind speed 12 m/s. the wind speed shown in Fig. 4. predicted by the model with different controls. .2. system network ±2% while Mode 2 operation achieved the voltage regulation at the PCC. 15. 4. As the proposed operation. 11 for case studies. Wind-speed variation In this study.

Fig. the performance in Mode 2 operation has been significantly improved Fig. Fault ride-through study Fig. at the PCC from Mode 1 operation.5 s in the network that caused 10% voltage drop at the infinite bus with wind speed 12 m/s. Voltage observed at the PCC due to the fault. Thus. 4. Mode 1 operation showed the significant voltage drop by 14. Active and reactive power from WF to PCC for the load variation. Voltage sag in the infinite bus To emulate this scenario. 17. 18 shows the measured data of the active power and the reactive power from the WF to the PCC. As can be noted in Fig.5% which does not satisfy the permissible voltage range ±2%. .4. Active and reactive power from WF to PCC for the voltage sag. 19. To emulate this fault scenario. the voltage recovery to its predefined value was achieved. As can be noted in Fig.36 s by restoring the initial TL impedance. Fig. the fault was assumed at t = 0. 16 shows the measured data of the active power and the reactive power from the WF to the PCC. / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 46–52 51 Fig. Voltage observed at the PCC due to voltage sag in the infinite bus.H. Kim et al. The reactive power contribution from the WTs is the difference between Mode 2 and Mode 1. 17.2 s and was subsequently cleared at t = 0. When the WT operated in Mode 2.5% while Mode 2 operation resulted in the voltage recovery to its predefined voltage at the PCC. it is assumed that there was a fault at t = 0. Fig. Mode 1 was in operation. 19. the fault resulted in significant voltage swings that can undesirably interfere with the protection circuitry and possibly trip the Fig. 18.3.-W. 4. 20. the load impedance changes resulted in noticeable drop of the bus voltage by 4. 16. A three-phase symmetrical fault was assumed in the middle of TL with wind speed 12 m/s. Active and reactive power from WF to PCC due to the fault.

LTL = 0. After the fault was cleared. Litipu. Spooner. Salman. Exposition Proc.D. IEEE Power Eng. Jeju. Appendix A. Garnett. IEE Electric Power Appl. Ltd. Williamson.003. degree in electrical engineering from Jeju National University. Munk-Nielsen. electricity market analysis. data processing for power systems security analysis.S. dc • Reactive power controllers: kp = 0. Teo.175. in 1990. 2005. [7] A. M. L. Power Syst. Hee-Sang Ko received his B. Lund Institute of Technology. ON Netz. A. Majstrovic. in: Technical Report 292.8175. Bauer. Vdc Zdc = Vdc . Korea since 2005. Proc.042. IEEE Power Eng.S. • DC-link module: vref = 1. Base values Sb = 2 MVA. ki = 7. During the fault. Univ.025. Canada. 143 (1996) 1–8. Akhmatov. Smax = 1 Line parameter (pu) RTL = 0. J. Lazzari. √ V / 3 Z 1 S Zb = b . Cavagnino. Protter. S. To ensure reliable operation of the supervisory reactive power control scheme. 2004. Available: http://www. ωb = 2f (rad/s).C. of British Columbia. IEEE Power Syst. Lqs = 0. S. Denny. He is presently a professor of electrical engineering at Chungbuk National University. Cdc = 0. BC Wind Integration System Expansion Study. [5] F. control design.M. Bolik. 2006. Saari. 2 (2004) 913–918.05. Rfilt = 0. 1 (2004) 524–532. [17] H.004 PMSG (pu) Rs = 0. Wind Power in Power Systems. in 2000. Conf.J.nowhinashwindfarm. From this point of view. Krause. Lds = 1. 2004. A PI control of DFIG-based wind farm for voltage regulation at remote location. Zutobradic. Ltr2 = 0. The reactive power contribution from the WTs is the difference between Mode 2 and Mode 1. Cb = . [16] J. Prof. Lb = b . [10] K. Summer Meeting Proc. His research interests include wind power generation. S. System operation with a significant wind power penetration.T. Cca = 0. [4] V. 27 (2003) 531–548. Dynamic Simulation of Electric Machinery. BC. New Jersey. [20] P. Binder. Part 1. F. = 1.C. T.D. 5. Bruey. A. and artificial intelligence. Comparison of complete and reduced models of a wind turbine using doubly-fed induction generator. New Jersey. Dumont. 2005. co. Wind Power Power Syst.16 Controller gains (pu) • Generator-side converter: Controllers PI1 and PI3: kp = 0. from the University of Central Florida in 1997. John Wiley & Sons.4832.042. B.-W. • Grid-side converter: controllers PI5 and PI6: kp = 0. Wind Eng. [11] Z. Elect. Ong. Elsam Engineering.D. in: Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Power Electronics and Applications. The detailed models of a candidate industrial site with multiple wind turbines were developed and were used to perform simulation studies and evaluate alternative control solutions. Prentice Hall. Exposition Proc. Rca = 0.inf = 1. 20 shows the measured data of the active power and the reactive power from the WF to the PCC.W. Chalmers University of Technology. Dynamic model of variable speed WECS: attend of simplification. Korea. Ackermann. IEEE Ind.001. Blaabjerg. Appl. candidate in electrical engineering at Chungbuk National University. Eng. Doherty. Vancouver. degree in electrical engineering from Pennsylvania State University.014. Bak-Jensen.H. ki = 11. Technical regulations for the interconnection of wind farms to the power system. The overall supervisory reactive power control scheme can be applied to larger wind farms and network configurations. 2002. University Park.52 H. [21] K. Variable-speed wind turbines with multi-pole synchronous permanent magnet generators. Conf.. MathWorks. Daejeon. and system identification. faster voltage recovery to reach to its predefined voltage at the PCC was noticed in Mode 2. UK. A.-S. in 1998.1515. Lca = 0. ki = 12. Korea. Risø National Laboratory. Hong-Woo Kim received his B. degree in mechanical engineering from Daejeon Engineering University. power systems voltage and transient stability. [12] N.Sc. 211–216.0005. ki = 120. Jatskevich. Sørensen. in: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Electric Power Engineering. 2001.pdf (April Netz Windreport e eng. Daejeon.9544. (2007) 1–6. Vdc = 800 V. January 2000. Canada. Windmill modeling consideration and factors influencing the stability of a grid-connected wind power-based embedded generator.2953. degree in electrical engineering from the University of Arkansas-Fayetteville in 1989 and his Ph.S. G. K. and his Ph. Pierik. P. permanent magnet generators for wind turbine applications. 18 (2003) 793–802. O’Malley.75. Lampola. Vancouver. f = 60 Hz. the operating-point-dependent reactive power limit of each grid-side converter was taken into account. J. and Comp.0003. John Wiley & Sons Inc. Dizdarevic. Large scale wind power farms as power plants. his M. [19] J. S. Daejeon. ωb Cdc = 1 Zdc ωb Infinite bus voltage and maximum operating limit of VSC (pu) vdq. [9] R. to actively participate in improving voltage control in the system.5.Sc. Conf. Ali. Åström.5 . 1998. Korea. S. Electromagnetic and thermal design of a lowspeed permanent magnet wind generator. Modeling in dynamic simulation tools. Controllers PI2 and PI4: kp = 21. ωb Zb ωb ωb ib idc = Sb . The goal of the investigation was to make use of available wind-turbine technology.Sc.001. Meet. in 1996. Helle. Vb = 690 V. [6] L.H.1132. T. PhD Dissertation. [14] N. Proc. E. Improve the reliability and environment of power system based on optimal allocation of WPG. Kim et al. He is a senior engineer in the wind energy research center at Korea Institute of Energy Research (KIER). O. Hansen. Ko. [22] H. Conceptual Survey of Generators and Power Electronics for Wind Turbines. A comparison between the axial and the radial flux structures for PM synchronous motors. F. PID Controllers. References [1] T.D.1 0. [3] A. Ackermann. [13] E. Rtr1 = 0. Power quality in a distribution network after wind power plant connection. Tb = b . Tenconi.0059. G. 3 (2000) 1611–1618. S. 2004. IEEE Power Syst. (2005) 115–142. J. in: Proceedings Nordic Wind Power Conference.7147. Morren. de Haan. Sung-Soo Kim received his M. 1 (2004) 1002–1007. Ltr1 = 0. Analysis of Electric Machinery and Drive Systems. IEEE Trans. his M. S. communication theory. [8] E. Gjengedal. Ko.5. Dept. Sudhoff. 2005). Direct coupled. Gen. [18] C. Göteborg. Jb = Sb ωb2 . M.006. Soc. in 2006. He is a researcher in the wind energy research center at Korea Institute of Energy Research (KIER). in electrical and computer engineering from the University of British Columbia. / Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 46–52 WT. and his Ph. in: Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Large-scale Integration of Wind Power and Transmission Networks for Offshore Wind Farms.S. E. 1996. P. J.G. m [2] P. M.M. USA. [23] MATLAB® and Simulink® . Kim’s interests include signal processing. Conclusion The paper presented the modeling and the control design of the variable-speed wind turbine with a permanent-magnetic synchronous generator. Matevosyan.L. A. Grauers. CTL = 0. pp. degree in energy system engineering from Sunggyun University. Supervisory voltage control scheme for grid-connected wind farms. Pai. Hägglung. idc Ldc = Zdc .16.1. Lfilt = 0. namely the variable-speed permanentmagnetic synchronous generator with power electronic converters. 1995. kp = 0. Proc. Daejeon. Design of direct-driven permanent magnet generators for wind turbines. Perho. H. ki = 7.H. the voltage drop has been slightly improved in Mode 2. Ritchie. Gonzales-Longatt. Profumo. Korea. . Rtr2 = 0.Fig. Wasynczuk. [15] T. it is desirable to minimize and/or suppress the voltage swings. Nagasaka. Proc. 2003. Wind power report. Korea since 1990.