See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271385575

Indirect Power Control of a DFIG using Model-

Based Predictive Rotor Current Control with an
Indirect Matrix Converter

CONFERENCE PAPER · JUNE 2015

DOI: 10.1109/ICIT.2015.7125433

CITATION READS

1 25

7 AUTHORS, INCLUDING:

Marco Rivera Manuel Macias

Universidad de Talca Tecnológico de Monterrey
120 PUBLICATIONS 1,023 CITATIONS 15 PUBLICATIONS 44 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Osvaldo Miguel Micheloud P. Wheeler

Tecnológico de Monterrey University of Nottingham
20 PUBLICATIONS 44 CITATIONS 416 PUBLICATIONS 5,819 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, Available from: Marco Rivera
letting you access and read them immediately. Retrieved on: 03 February 2016
 Indirect Power Control of a DFIG
using Model-Based Predictive Rotor Current Control
with an Indirect Matrix Converter
A. Olloqui1 , J.L. Elizondo1 , M. Rivera2 , M.E. Macı́as1 , O.M. Micheloud1 , R. Peña3 and P. Wheeler4
1
Dep. of Electrical and Computational Engineering, Tecnológico de Monterrey, Nuevo León, MEXICO, Email: alex.olloqui@ieee.org
2
Dep. of Industrial Technologies, Universidad de Talca, Curicó, CHILE, Email: marcoriv@utalca.cl
3
Dep. of Electrical Engineering, Universidad de Concepción, Concepción, CHILE, Email: rupena@udec.cl
4
Dep. of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, U.K., Email: Pat.Wheeler@nottingham.ac.uk

Abstract—A new indirect power control strategy using model-
based predictive current control (MB-PCC) is presented in this
paper for a doubly fed induction generator (DFIG) driven by an
indirect matrix converter suitable for wind energy systems. In this
paper the power reference is used to develop a new expression for
the stator current in terms of the rotor current. A step by step
methodology is presented to generate a dynamic reference for the
whole operating regions of the DFIG including synchronization
process. Once the reference is generated model-based predictive
control (MBPC) is used as it takes into account the nonlinear
behavior of the power converter and the discrete-time system
model to select the best switching state to be applied in the
next sampling period. The switching state is selected using a cost
function that minimizes the error between the references and
the predicted values. Results are presented for fast and smooth
synchronization of the DFIG and flexible active and reactive
power control for variable shaft speed to validate the feasibility
of the proposed strategy.
Index Terms—AC/AC power conversion, predictive current
control (PCC), indirect matrix converter (IMC), model-based pre-
dictive control (MBPC), doubly fed induction generator (DFIG),
power control, wind energy conversion systems (WECS).
N OMENCLATURE
S𝑟 , S𝑖 Rectifier and inverter switching states
v𝑖𝑛 , i𝑖𝑛 IMC voltage and current input
𝑣𝑑𝑐 , 𝑖𝑑𝑐 IMC dc-link voltage and current
𝑇𝑠 Sampling time
Superscripts
𝑠, 𝑟 Referred to stator, referred to rotor
∗, 𝑝 Reference value, predicted value
𝑘 Value in sampling time 𝑘
𝑘+𝑦 𝑦 sample times predicted value from 𝑘
Subscripts
𝑠, 𝑟 Stator, rotor variable
𝑚, 𝑓, 𝑔 Mechanical, filter, grid variable
𝑒𝑚, 𝑇 Electromagnetic, wind turbine
I. I NTRODUCTION
Wind energy conversion systems (WECS) are one of the
fastest growing and most promising renewable energy tech-
nologies, from a few tens of kW in late 80’s to multi-MW
systems now being installed worldwide [1]. Current research is
focused on greater efficiency, better power control, maximum
The doubly fed induction generator (DFIG) has become
popular in variable speed WECS. The DFIG has several advan-
tages over synchronous generators in terms of weight and size.
Other advantages can include decoupled active and reactive
power control over a wider speed range and partial scale of
the power converter rating when used at rotor terminals. The
power converter must satisfy the grid requirements, such as:
voltage and current rating of the generator, bidirectional power
flow, total harmonic distortion (THD), among others.
Matrix converters (MCs) are compact, lightweight and reli-
able alternative to conventional back to back converter (BBC)
mainly due to the advantage of handling higher power densities
and to operate in environments with harsh temperatures and
pressures [3]. Because of the robustness and reliability of the
matrix converters, they are suitable for variable-speed WECS
featuring sinusoidal input and output currents, bidirectional
energy flow, controllable input displacement power factor [4].
The indirect power converter (IMC) is another AC-AC
converter which not only holds the same features of the
conventional direct matrix converter (DMC) but also is easier
to control and allows secure commutation [5]–[7]. The IMC’s
advantages in terms of weight and size limits the reactive
power capability to the energy stored in the filter and in the
load. However there is not an intrinsic limitation to the power
of an IMC and the reactive power handling capability is limited
only by the active power output to the converter and the input
displacement power factor [8], [9].
AC-Grid Transformer DFIG
𝑃𝑔 , 𝑄 𝑔 𝑃𝑠 , 𝑄 𝑠 Stator 𝜔𝑚
v𝑔 i𝑔 i𝑠 v𝑠
Contactor
𝜔𝑇
Gearbox
Rotor
Indirect
v𝑓 v𝑟
Matrix
i𝑓 Converter i𝑟
Wind
Turbine

energy capture as well as recent grid codes and fault ride- Fig. 1. Wind energy conversion system with DFIG technology controlled by
through compliance [2]. an IMC on the rotor side.

978-1-4799-7800-7/15/$31.00 ©2015 IEEE 2275

 Conventional power control techniques for DFIGs in genera-
tion systems can be classified as direct or indirect [10]. Indirect
control is often related to vector control (VC) and it is charac-
terized by using modulation such as pulse width modulation
(PWM) [11] and space vector modulation (SVM) to control
the power converter [12]. Direct control techniques such as
direct power control (DPC) and direct torque control (DTC),
establish a direct relation between the controlled variables
and the state of the converter’s switches [13]. Vector control
applied to DFIGs involves relatively complex calculations and
requires extra current loops carefully tuned to ensure system
performance and stability under the whole operating range of
the system [14]. In DPC, the converter’s switching states are
selected by a table based on the instantaneous errors in the
control variables. The key part of the DPC implementation
is the correct and fast estimation of the power output of the
WECS and the main disadvantage can be the resulting variable
switching frequency and high power ripple [15].
In order to overcome the complexity and ripple problems,
mixed schemes have been presented using membership func-
tions [16], [17], model-based predictive control (MBPC) [18],
direct power control (DPC) applying a modulation strategy
as PWM [19], SVM [20] or predictive direct power control
(PDPC) [21]. Most of named power control methods for grid-
connected DFIGs do not address grid synchronization, which
is important at startup and after a fault. The generator must be
connected quickly and with minimal impacts on both grid and
generators, in other words it requires a fast and smooth con-
nection process. Recent works have proposed predictive DPC
with virtual power [22] or virtual torque [23] reference for the
synchronization (mode 1) and power regulation (mode 2) of
the DFIG in a two step strategy. Other new implementation in
[7] proposed a MBPC synchronization strategy for the DFIG
using simplified model with an open stator performed in the
𝛼𝛽 reference frame were the process was achieved without the
need for any modulation strategies. The focus of this work
is to present a fast and smooth synchronization and power
regulation control strategy for the DFIG where the transition
from synchronization to power regulation is held by MBPC of
the rotor currents with a dynamic reference developed in terms
of the rotor speed and position, the grid voltage characteristics
and the power reference.
II. BACKGROUND
In this paper the variable speed wind turbine system pre-
sented uses the IMC to drive the DFIG as in a Scherbius
system [11] showed in Fig. 1. In this WTS the power converter
is rated to one third of machine power since it is located at
the rotor side of the DFIG.
A. Indirect Matrix Converter Model
The configuration of the IMC is divided in two stages: the
rectifier and the inverter. This characteristic becomes an ad-
vantage when using the zero dc-link current switching scheme,
which allows a safe operation of the converter and a reduction
of the switching losses. In particular, the mathematical model
2276
of the rectifier stage has the phase voltage v𝑖𝑛 and dc-link
current 𝑖𝑑𝑐 as inputs and the dc-link voltage 𝑣𝑑𝑐 and input
current i𝑖𝑛 , as outputs. This is shown in equations (1) and (2):
[ ]
𝑣𝑑𝑐 = 𝑆𝑟1 − 𝑆𝑟4 𝑆𝑟3 − 𝑆𝑟6 𝑆𝑟5 − 𝑆𝑟2 v𝑖𝑛 (1)
⎡ ⎤
𝑆𝑟1 − 𝑆𝑟4
i𝑖𝑛 = ⎣ 𝑆𝑟3 − 𝑆𝑟6 ⎦ 𝑖𝑑𝑐 (2)
𝑆𝑟5 − 𝑆𝑟2
The inputs and outputs of each stage of the converter are
related by the associated switching states. For the inverter this
relation involves the output current i𝑟 and dc-link voltage 𝑣𝑑𝑐
as inputs, and the dc-link current 𝑖𝑑𝑐 and the output voltage
v𝑟 as outputs, as can be seen in equations (3) and (4):
[ ]
𝑖𝑑𝑐 = 𝑆𝑖1 𝑆𝑖3 𝑆𝑖5 i𝑟 (3)
⎡ ⎤
𝑆𝑖1 − 𝑆𝑖4
v𝑟 = ⎣ 𝑆𝑖3 − 𝑆𝑖6 ⎦ 𝑣𝑑𝑐 (4)
𝑆𝑖5 − 𝑆𝑖2
Not all the possible switching states are allowed. There are
some constraints which are mandatory for the safe operation
of the converter:
∙ Input phases of the rectifier stage cannot be short circuited
thus, only nine valid rectifier states can be used.
∙ Output phases of the inverter stage cannot be discon-
nected thus, from all possible only eight inverter states
are allowed.
B. DFIG Dynamic Model
The doubly fed induction generator (DFIG), also called
wound rotor induction machine (WRIM) or slip ring induction
machine is widely used as generator in variable speed wind
turbine systems [24]. This topology shows some advantages
over other topologies of induction generators such as the squir-
rel cage induction machine, the synchronous generator (SG)
and the permanent magnet synchronous generator (PMSM) in
terms of the cost, weight and size [2]. In a typical DFIG-
based WTS the power converter is relatively small because it
is located at the rotor side (Scherbius configuration) and it is
generally rated at one third of the total machine power. The
Scherbius system shown in Fig. 1 allows bidirectional power
flow in the rotor circuit and operation of the DFIG both below
and above its synchronous speed.
The DFIG can be modeled with a simple equivalent electri-
cal circuit. There are three main reference frames: stationary
fixed to the stator (𝛼𝛽), stationary fixed to the rotor (𝑥𝑦)
or synchronous (𝑑𝑞) rotating at arbitrary angular speed (𝜔𝑒 ).
For this work the DFIG is defined by equations (5) to (8)
in the stationary reference frame fixed to the stator. This 𝛼𝛽
reference frame is selected since the constraints are imposed
directly on the stator variables and the two-axis reference
simplifies the control variables.
𝑑𝑖𝑠𝛼 𝑑𝑖𝑠
𝑣𝑠𝛼 = 𝑅𝑠 𝑖𝑠𝛼 + 𝐿𝑠 + 𝐿𝑚 𝑟𝛼 (5)
𝑑𝑡 𝑑𝑡
𝑑𝑖𝑠𝛽 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑟𝛽
𝑣𝑠𝛽 = 𝑅𝑠 𝑖𝑠𝛽 + 𝐿𝑠 + 𝐿𝑚 (6)
𝑑𝑡 𝑑𝑡
 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝛼 𝑑𝑖𝑠
𝑠
𝑣𝑟𝛼 = 𝐿𝑚 +𝜔𝑟 𝐿𝑚 𝑖𝑠𝛽 +𝑅𝑟𝑠 𝑖𝑠𝑟𝛼 +𝐿𝑠𝑟 𝑟𝛼 +𝜔𝑟 𝐿𝑠𝑟 𝑖𝑠𝑟𝛽 (7) the DFIG and is not suitable for the synchronization process.
𝑑𝑡 𝑑𝑡 The proposed power control algorithm use MBPC to control
𝑠 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝛼 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑟𝛽 the DFIG rotor current by means of an IMC. It is consistent
𝑣𝑟𝛽 = −𝜔𝑟 𝐿𝑚 𝑖𝑠𝛼 + 𝐿𝑚 − 𝜔𝑟 𝐿𝑠𝑟 𝑖𝑠𝑟𝛼 + 𝑅𝑟𝑠 𝑖𝑠𝑟𝛽 + 𝐿𝑠𝑟
𝑑𝑡 𝑑𝑡 with those presented in [28] and [6] with the inclusion of the
(8) power references and without any simplifications in the DFIG
model.
C. Model-Based Predictive Control B. Rotor Current Reference Generation
Model-based predictive control takes advantage of the dis- The purpose of this algebraic procedure is to decouple
crete and nonlinear nature of matrix converters, and has several power references into a simple representation of the rotor
advantages over traditional linear controllers, such as fast current reference and at the same time to reduce the com-
dynamic responses, easy inclusion of nonlinearities and system putational effort by grouping the constants. In an 𝛼𝛽 system
constraints [25], [26] and therefore no modulators are needed. fixed to the stator there is not a simple expression that relates
MBPC is a control strategy applied recently in the control of 𝑃 and 𝑄 with 𝑖𝑟𝛼 and 𝑖𝑟𝛽 . However after this detailed
power converters. This strategy uses the mathematical model procedure developed for the reader, many terms are simplified
of the system for predicting, at each sampling instant 𝑘, the as constants or gathered in groups to be easily included in a
behavior of the system at 𝑘 +1. In order to choose the optimal digital control platform with minor computational effort.
state of the converter, a cost function defined by the control First it is necessary to establish the requirements to oper-
requirements is used. This function is commonly composed of ate the DFIG synchronized to the grid. These requirements
several terms, containing the difference between the references mean that the stator voltage must have the same amplitude,
and the predicted values of the variables to be controlled. frequency and sequence as well as being in phase with the grid
Many other terms representing some specific request, such as voltage. This new reference must meet former synchronization
limitation of the switching frequency or nonlinearities can also requirements and then control the power flow by only changing
be included [25]. the power set point.
III. P ROPOSED SCHEME : I NDIRECT P OWER C ONTROL Equation (5) and (6) define the stator voltage of the DFIG,
(IPC) FOR THE DFIG USING M ODEL -BASED P REDICTIVE which depends on the stator and rotor currents and their
ROTOR C URRENT C ONTROL (MB-PCC) derivatives, as explained in [6]. In the vectorial form the stator
voltage can be stated as:
Once the stator is connected to the grid, the stator flux can
𝑠
be considered constant and the amplitude and phase angle 𝑑i𝑠𝛼𝛽 𝑑i𝑟𝛼𝛽
v𝑠𝛼𝛽 = 𝑅𝑠 i𝑠𝛼𝛽 + 𝐿𝑠 + 𝐿𝑚 + 𝑗𝜔𝑟 𝐿𝑚 i𝑠𝑟𝛼𝛽 (11)
of the rotor flux can be controlled by the rotor currents 𝑑𝑡 𝑑𝑡
[27]. Assuming a possible active and reactive power delivery where
capability of a DFIG stator, this control can be achieved
𝑁𝑟
using the rotor currents as the primary control variable, if the i𝑠𝑟𝛼𝛽 = i𝑠𝑟𝑥𝑦 𝑒𝑗(𝜃𝑟 +𝜃𝑎𝑢𝑥 ) = 𝐼𝑟 𝑒𝑗(𝜃𝑟 +𝜃𝑎𝑢𝑥 ) (12)
reference is generated using a specific stator current derived 𝑁𝑠
from the active and reactive power references. The rotor and
current reference can be formed from the dynamic equations of i𝑠𝛼𝛽 = 𝐼𝑠 𝑒𝑗(𝜃𝑔 +𝜃𝑓 𝑝 ) (13)
the DFIG in a time-varying stator-fixed (𝛼𝛽) reference frame.
Using equations (9) and (10) the stator currents are formed
A. Justification using the power references 𝑃𝑠∗ and 𝑄∗𝑠 and modified to
The active and reactive powers for the stator-side of the independently get the amplitude and the phase angle of the
DFIG can be calculated directly from 𝛼𝛽 components of stator stator current for a specific power reference:
√
current and voltage as follows:
2 𝑃𝑠∗ 2 + 𝑄∗𝑠 2
3 𝐼𝑠∗ = ∣i∗𝑠 ∣ = (14)
𝑃𝑠 = (𝑣𝑠𝛼 𝑖𝑠𝛼 + 𝑣𝑠𝛽 𝑖𝑠𝛽 ) (9) 3 ∣v𝑠 ∣
2 ( ∗)
3 −1 𝑄𝑠
𝑄𝑠 = (𝑣𝑠𝛽 𝑖𝑠𝛼 − 𝑣𝑠𝛼 𝑖𝑠𝛽 ) (10) 𝜃𝑓 𝑝 = 𝑡𝑎𝑛 (15)
2 𝑃𝑠∗
In order to control the power of the DFIG, the next switching Equation (16) is a polar representation of equation (11) using
state (S𝑘+1 ) of the IMC can be selected based on a MBPC (14), (15) and their derivatives after grouping and simplifying
strategy using the prediction of the stator voltage v𝑘+1 𝑠 and the constants:
the stator current i𝑘+1 . At each sampling time the power is
𝑠 𝑉𝑠 𝑒𝑗𝜃𝑔 =𝑅𝑠 𝐼𝑠∗ 𝑒𝑗(𝜃𝑔 +𝜃𝑓 𝑝 ) + 𝑗𝜔𝑔 𝐿𝑠 𝐼𝑠∗ 𝑒𝑗(𝜃𝑔 +𝜃𝑓 𝑝 ) +
controlled and the error in the active and reactive power is min-
𝑁𝑟 ∗ (16)
imized. Nonetheless a predictive strategy based on equations 𝐿𝑚 𝐼 (𝜔𝑠𝑙𝑖𝑝 + 𝜔𝑟 ) 𝑒𝑗(𝜃𝑎𝑢𝑥 +𝜃𝑟 )
(9) and (10) does not guarantee sinusoidal waveform for the 𝑁𝑠 𝑟
stator and rotor currents, nor constant electromagnetic torque; References 𝑃𝑠∗ and 𝑄∗𝑠 are constant during the sampling time,
therefore it does not guarantee full control of the power of therefore 𝜃𝑓 𝑝 is constant and equation (16) can be expanded

2277
 Transformer Contactor 𝜔𝑟 , 𝜃𝑟 DFIG
as shown in equation (17), where the contributions of the
Grid Stator
power references to the stator current are expressed in terms
3 3
of 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝜃𝑓 𝑝 and 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜃𝑓 𝑝 simplified as 𝑥 and 𝑦 respectively. It is 𝜔𝑟 𝜃 𝑟 v𝑠 i𝑠
𝑃𝑠∗ 𝑄∗𝑠
clear that there is critical information of 𝑃𝑠∗ and 𝑄∗𝑠 within 𝐼𝑠∗ AC
Source
and 𝜃𝑓 𝑝 for the synchronization process and power control of Dynamic Predictive
i𝑟
3
the DFIG. reference Eq.(14)-(15) Model v𝑖𝑛
[ ] generation 3
[𝑉𝑠 − (𝑅𝑠 𝐼𝑠∗ 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝜃𝑓 𝑝 − 𝜔𝑔 𝐿𝑠 𝐼𝑠∗ 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜃𝑓 𝑝 )] − 𝑗𝜃𝑔 3
∣i∗𝑠 ∣ 𝜃𝑓 𝑝 i𝑘+1
𝑟𝛼𝛽
24
𝑒 = v𝑔
𝜔𝑟 , 𝜃 𝑟
𝑗 (𝑅𝑠 𝐼𝑠∗ 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜃𝑓 𝑝 + 𝜔𝑔 𝐿𝑠 𝐼𝑠∗ 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝜃𝑓 𝑝 ) 𝜔𝑠𝑙𝑖𝑝 i∗𝑟𝛼𝛽 Cost
[ ] (17) 𝜃 𝑔 , 𝜔𝑔 Eq.(18)-(21) Function
𝑁𝑟 ∗ 𝑗(𝜃𝑎𝑢𝑥 +𝜃𝑟 ) ∣v𝑔 ∣ Minimization
𝐿𝑚 𝐼 (𝜔𝑠𝑙𝑖𝑝 + 𝜔𝑟 ) 𝑒
PLL

𝑁𝑠 𝑟 𝑆𝑟𝑥 ...𝑆𝑖𝑥

Analysing only the left hand side of equation (17) and trans- v𝑓 v𝑖𝑛
Indirect
v𝑟
Filter Matrix
forming real and imaginary parts into polar components, the 3 3
Converter
3

contributions of the power references can be synthesized as

shown in equations (18) and (19).
Fig. 2. Block diagram of the indirect power control using predictive rotor
[ 2( ) ]1/2 current control strategy.
𝐼𝑠∗ 𝐿𝑠 2 𝜔𝑔 2 + 𝑅𝑠 2 +
𝜁𝑚𝑎𝑔 = ∗ (18)
𝐼𝑠 (2𝐿𝑠 𝑦𝑉𝑠 𝜔𝑔 − 2𝑅𝑠 𝑥𝑉𝑠 ) + 𝑉𝑠 2
[ ] [7] is implemented as a numerical approximation of (II-B)
−1 −𝑅𝑠 𝐼𝑠∗ 𝑦 − 𝜔𝑔 𝐿𝑠 𝐼𝑠∗ 𝑥 to predict the values for the next sample time 𝑓 𝑘+1 .
𝜃𝜁 =𝑡𝑎𝑛 (19)
𝑉𝑠 − 𝑅𝑠 𝐼𝑠∗ 𝑥 + 𝜔𝑔 𝐿𝑠 𝐼𝑠∗ 𝑦 The prediction model for the DFIG currents for a stator-
Finally the amplitude and phase angle of the rotor current fixed time-varying 𝛼𝛽 reference frame is presented in [6], [7]
reference can be formed from the above equations: where the stator and rotor equations are shown to be highly
coupled. The rotor current prediction is formed by the stator
𝑁𝑠 𝜁𝑚𝑎𝑔 and rotor current derivatives which are explained in detail in
𝐼𝑟∗ = (20)
𝑁𝑟 𝐿𝑚 (𝜔𝑠𝑙𝑖𝑝 + 𝜔𝑟 ) [7]. Next equations show the rotor current predictions (referred
to the stator) that are going to be compared with the reference
𝜃𝑎𝑢𝑥 = 𝜃𝑔 + 𝜃𝜁 − 𝜃𝑟 − 𝜋/2 (21)
developed in subsection III-B.
C. IPC using MB-PCC Methodology ⎡ 𝑠𝑘
⎤
𝐿𝑠 𝑣𝑟𝛼 − 𝐿𝑚 𝑣𝑠𝛼 −
Indirect power control (IPC) using model-based predictive 1 ⎢ ⎥
𝑖𝑘+1
𝑟𝛼 = ⎣𝐿𝑠 𝑅𝑟𝑠 𝑖𝑠𝑟𝛼 + 𝐿𝑚 𝑅𝑠 𝑖𝑠𝛼 − ⎦ 𝑡𝑠 + 𝑖𝑟𝛼
current control (MB-PCC) is a novel technique developed to 𝐿𝑠 𝐿𝑠𝑟 − 𝐿2𝑚
operate the DFIG on its four operating quadrants, including 𝐿𝑠 𝐿𝑠𝑟 𝜔𝑟 𝑖𝑠𝑟𝛽 − 𝐿𝑚 𝐿𝑠 𝜔𝑟 𝑖𝑠𝛽
during the startup and synchronization process. The MB-PCC (22)
proposed in Fig. 2, takes advantage of the nonlinear nature ⎡ 𝑠𝑘
⎤
𝐿𝑠 𝑣𝑟𝛽 − 𝐿𝑚 𝑣𝑠𝛽 −
of finite-states power converters as the IMC and it uses the 𝑘+1 1 ⎢ 𝑠 𝑠 ⎥
discrete-time model of the DFIG to control not only the active 𝑖𝑟𝛽 = ⎣𝐿𝑠 𝑅𝑟 𝑖𝑟𝛽 + 𝐿𝑚 𝑅𝑠 𝑖𝑠𝛽 + ⎦ 𝑡𝑠 + 𝑖𝑟𝛽
𝐿𝑠 𝐿𝑠𝑟 − 𝐿2𝑚
and reactive power but also the synchronization process. 𝐿𝑠 𝐿𝑠𝑟 𝜔𝑟 𝑖𝑠𝑟𝛼 + 𝐿𝑚 𝐿𝑠 𝜔𝑟 𝑖𝑠𝛼
Each sampling time, there are only three valid states for (23)
the rectifier and eight valid states for the inverter; then the
D. Cost Function
rotor current prediction is evaluated twenty-four times and
compared to the reference. The switching state with the least A definition of the cost function is necessary in order
error is applied. The rotor electrical angular velocity 𝜔𝑟 and to track the error between the reference and the controlled
its angle 𝜃𝑟 are important variables to calculate the dynamic variable. This cost function is used to compute each possible
reference in a variable speed WT. The grid electrical angular states of the converter for every sample period in order to
velocity 𝜔𝑔 and its angle 𝜃𝑔 are the output of a synchronous apply the state with the least error during the following sample
reference frame phase locked loop (PLL) as studied in [29]. period. The cost function is defined as follows:
To select the best switching state for the IMC in the 𝑔 𝑘+1 = ∣𝑖∗𝑟𝛼 − 𝑖𝑘+1 ∗ 𝑘+1
𝑟𝛼 ∣ + ∣𝑖𝑟𝛽 − 𝑖𝑟𝛽 ∣ (24)
next sampling time, the rotor current i𝑘+1 𝑟 is predicted and
compared to i∗𝑟 , which has the required amplitude, frequency, where the rotor values, reference and predicted values are
phase and sequence. Since the reference algorithm is per- referred to the stator.
formed in the 𝛼𝛽 frame and the reference depends mainly on
magnitudes and steady state parameters, its waveform will be IV. R ESULTS
sinusoidal. Therefore if the control can follow the rotor current Simulation results were carried out in Gecko Circuits⃝to
R
reference, the stator current waveform will be sinusoidal in validate the proposed IPC MB-PCC algorithm, using a 5.5kW
steady state. The forward-difference Euler formula used in DFIG with parameters : 𝑅𝑟𝑠 = 0.783Ω, 𝐿𝑠𝑙𝑟 = 10.5 [mH]

2278
 𝑣𝑠𝑎 𝑣𝑠𝑏 𝑣𝑠𝑐
↘ ↘ ↘ 𝑣𝑔𝑎 𝑣𝑔𝑏 𝑣𝑔𝑐 3. Before grid interconnection the total harmonic distortion of
327 ↘ ↘ ↘
v𝑠 is 1.52% and a maximum difference of 25 [V] between v𝑠
v𝑠𝑎𝑏𝑐 , v𝑔𝑎𝑏𝑐 [V]

163.5
and v𝑔 which causes an overshoot of only 1 [A] in the stator
0 currents when the contactor is closed.
In the bottom of Fig. 4 the rotor currents are shown
-163.5
with a series of power reference step changes from zero
-327
𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑛
𝑆𝑦𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑟𝑜𝑛𝑖𝑧𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 (Synchronization) to 3 [kW], 3 [kVAR]. Three step changes
1
𝑐𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑒𝑑
0
0 20
↘
40
↘
60 [ms]
in the power reference were made. The first step from zero
to 3kW and 1 [kVAR], the second step to 2 [kW] and 2
Fig. 3. Synchronization process and closure of grid contactor. [kVAR] and the last step to 1 [kW] and 3 [kVAR]. During
the simulation time wind speed and therefore the shaft speed
[A] 𝑄𝑠 , 𝑄𝑠∗ [kVAR]𝑃𝑠 , 𝑃𝑠∗ [kW]

3.2
2.4 of the wind turbine changed from 680 [rpm] to 860 [rpm]. In
1.6 𝑃𝑠 𝑃𝑠∗
0.8 ↘
↘
these variable speed conditions the DFIG is operating below
0
3.2
and above synchronous speed, which is 750 [rpm] for the 8-
2.4 pole machine used in this work.
1.6
𝑄𝑠 𝑄∗𝑠 With the discretized system model and the dynamic refer-
0.8 ↘ ↘
0
ence correctly generated, a model-based predictive control can
𝑖𝑠𝛽
6.4
3.2 ↘
be designed to follow the named reference with minimum er-
[A] i𝑠𝛼𝛽 , i𝑠𝛼𝛽

0 ror. The method’s objective is to select the optimum switching

∗

state for the IMC, namely an S𝑘+1

-3.2 ↗
-6.4 𝑖𝑠𝛼 𝑖 switching state, to provide
16 𝑖𝑠𝑟𝛼 𝑖𝑠𝑟𝛽 the right rotor voltage space vector v𝑟 , and thus to obtain
the least possible error between the rotor current reference i∗𝑟
8 ↘ ↘
i𝑠𝛼𝛽 , i𝑠𝛼𝛽

0
∗

-8
-16
0 40 80
Fig. 4. Predictive control of the stator active and reactive power using model
predictive current control.
, 𝐿𝑠𝑟 = 75 [mH], 𝑅𝑠 = 0.718 [Ω], 𝐿𝑙𝑠 = 10.7 [mH],
𝐿𝑠 = 75.2 [mH], 𝐿𝑚 = 64.5 [mH], stator to rotor turns ratio
𝑁 𝑠/𝑁 𝑟 = 1.447 and pole pairs 𝑃𝑝 = 4 . The IMC used
in this simulation is rated to 10 [kW] and the bidirectional
switches are formed by two IGBTs in common collector con-
figuration rated to 600[V] and 80[A]. Input filter parameters
are: 𝐿𝑓 = 400 [𝜇H], 𝑅𝑓 = 0.5 [Ω], 𝐶𝑓 = 21 [𝜇F]. Ideal grid
voltage is assumed, along with balanced DFIG windings and
no saturation effects.
For this simulation the power reference is changed from zero
to fifty percent of nominal electric power of the machine. Zero
conditions (𝑃𝑠∗ = 0, 𝑄∗𝑠 = 0) set the stator current reference
to ∣𝐼𝑠∗ ∣ = 0 [A] and 𝜃𝑓 𝑝 = 0𝑜 for equations (14) and (15)
respectively. These parameters establish the synchronization
conditions of equal frequency, amplitude, phase and sequence
between the stator and the grid as stated in [7] and showed in
Fig. 3.
In the generation system shown in Fig. 2, the stator and
grid terminals are connected using a three-phase contactor
and for the first forty milliseconds the contactor is kept open
until full synchronization conditions were guaranteed. After
the first forty milliseconds, the grid contactor is closed and the
stator current flows to the grid with the required amplitude and
phase which is proportional to the reference. The rotor current
references are formed originally from equation (17) which
after some algebraic simplifications shown in (18) and (19),
the amplitude and phase angle of rotor current is presented in
(20) and (21). The synchronization process can be seen in Fig.
↗
𝑖∗𝑟𝛼
↗
𝑖∗𝑟𝛽 and rotor current prediction i𝑘+1𝑟 . Therefore, with a precise
160 240 320 400 480 560 640 720 [ms] tracking of the rotor current reference, MBPC will ensure fast
grid synchronization and fast response to step reference with
low ripple as it can be seen in Fig. 3 and Fig. 5 respectively.
Fig. 4 shows the synchronization and power flow control
for the DFIG using only one control scheme. As can be seen,
it is sufficient to know the grid voltage requirements and set
𝑄∗𝑠 = 0 and 𝑃𝑠∗ = 0 to achieve fast synchronization of the
DFIG with the proposed predictive scheme. In this simulation
the closure of grid contactor was made 40 [ms] after the
initialization but it can be seen in Fig. 3 that grid requirements
were fulfilled in about 20 [ms]. As it can be seen in Fig. 5
there is a fast response to step changes in the power reference
in less than 1[ms]. Analysing the segment from 400 [ms] to
600 [ms] the power average is 0.989 [kW] and 3[kVAR], the
power rms is 0.991 [kW] and 3.08[kVAR] and a ripple of
0.36 [kW] and 0.35 [kVAR] respectively. These results are
better to those presented in [23] considering larger sampling
time and the implementation of the method without digital
delay compensation. Moreover the ripple of active and reactive
power depends on the rotor current tracking accuracy and not
on the level of power reference.
V. C ONCLUSIONS
This novel control method gives smooth grid synchroniza-
tion and fast response to power step commands under variable
speed conditions. It is sufficient to know the grid voltage
requirements and set 𝑄∗𝑠 = 0 and 𝑃𝑠∗ = 0 to generate a
reference for the rotor current and achieve the DFIG synchro-
nization. This predictive scheme controls the rotor current with
a sinusoidal reference and it keeps sinusoidal waveform on
stator to track the active and reactive power references with a
sampling time of 100 [𝜇s] and one third of grid voltage for
the converter.

2279
 2
𝑃𝑠 , 𝑃𝑠∗ [kW]
Δ𝑃𝑠 = 360[W] 𝑃𝑠 𝑇𝑠 = 0.1[ms]
↘
𝑃𝑠∗
↘
1
2 control methods for wind turbines using doubly-fed induction machines,”
𝑄𝑠 , 𝑄𝑠∗ [kVAR]
Δ𝑃𝑠 = 350[VAR]
𝑄𝑠
↘ 𝑄∗𝑠
↘ wound rotor induction machine without rotor position sensors,” Power
1
Δ𝑡 = 7 ∗ 𝑇𝑠
600 [ms]
Fig. 5. Close look of the DFIG active and reactive power to see the ripple
and dynamic response during a step change.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This publication was made possible by the Initiation
FONDECYT Research Project 11121492, CONICYT/BMBF
PCCI 12048 and the Universidad de Talca.
R EFERENCES
[1] R. Teodorescu, M. Liserre, and P. Rodriguez, Grid converters for
photovoltaic and wind power systems. Piscataway, N.J. Chichester,
West Sussex ; Hoboken, N.J.: IEEE ; Wiley, 2011.
[2] R. Cardenas, R. Pena, S. Alepuz, and G. Asher, “Overview of con-
trol systems for the operation of dfigs in wind energy applications,”
Industrial Electronics, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 60, no. 7, pp. 2776–
2798, 2013.
[3] P. W. Wheeler, J. Rodriguez, J. C. Clare, L. Empringham, and A. Wein-
stein, “Matrix converters: a technology review,” Industrial Electronics,
IEEE Transactions on, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 276–288, 2002.
[4] R. Cardenas, R. Pena, P. Wheeler, J. Clare, and G. Asher, “Control of
the reactive power supplied by a wecs based on an induction generator
fed by a matrix converter,” Industrial Electronics, IEEE Transactions
on, vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 429–438, Feb 2009.
[5] J. Rodriguez, M. Rivera, J. W. Kolar, and P. W. Wheeler, “A review
of control and modulation methods for matrix converters,” Industrial
Electronics, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 58–70, 2012.
[6] M. Rivera, J. L. Elizondo, M. E. Macias, O. M. Probst, O. M. Micheloud,
J. Rodriguez, C. Rojas, and A. Wilson, “Model predictive control of a
doubly fed induction generator with an indirect matrix converter,” in
IECON 2010 - 36th Annual Conference on IEEE Industrial Electronics
Society, 7-10 Nov. 2010 2010, pp. 2959–2965.
[7] J. L. Elizondo, A. Olloqui, M. Rivera, M. E. Macias, O. Probst, O. M.
Micheloud, and J. Rodriguez, “Model-based predictive rotor current
control for grid synchronization of a dfig driven by an indirect matrix
converter,” IEEE Journal of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power
Electronics, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 715–726, December 2014.
[8] Y. Sun, X. Li, M. Su, H. Wang, H. Dan, and W. Xiong, “Indirect matrix
converter-based topology and modulation schemes for enhancing input
reactive power capability,” Power Electronics, IEEE Transactions on,
vol. PP, no. 99, pp. 1–1, 2014.
[9] R. Cardenas, R. Pena, P. Wheeler, and J. Clare, “Reactive power
capability of wecs based on matrix converter,” Electronics Letters,
vol. 44, no. 11, pp. 674–676, May 2008.
[10] E. Tremblay, S. Atayde, and A. Chandra, “Comparative study of
control strategies for the doubly fed induction generator in wind energy
conversion systems: A dsp-based implementation approach,” Sustainable
Energy, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 288–299, 2011.
[11] R. Pena, J. C. Clare, and G. M. Asher, “Doubly fed induction generator
using back-to-back pwm converters and its application to variable-speed
wind-energy generation,” Electric Power Applications, IEE Proceedings
-, vol. 143, no. 3, pp. 231–241, 1996.
2280
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
[12] R. Cardenas, R. Pena, P. Wheeler, J. Clare, A. Munoz, and A. Sureda,
“Control of a wind generation system based on a brushless doubly-fed
induction generator fed by a matrix converter,” Electric Power Systems
Research, vol. 103, no. 0, pp. 49–60, 2013.
[13] G. Abad, M. A. Rodriguez, G. Iwanski, and J. Poza, “Direct power
control of doubly-fed-induction-generator-based wind turbines under
unbalanced grid voltage,” Power Electronics, IEEE Transactions on,
vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 442–452, 2010.
[14] A. Petersson, L. Harnefors, and T. Thiringer, “Evaluation of current
Ieee Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 227–235,
Jan 2005, iSI Document Delivery No.: 885TR Petersson, A Harnefors,
L Thiringer, T Ieee-inst electrical electronics engineers inc Piscataway.
[15] R. Datta and V. T. Ranganathan, “Direct power control of grid-connected
Electronics, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 390–399, 2001.
[16] C. F. Calvillo, F. Martell, J. L. Elizondo, A. Avila, M. E. Macias,
M. Rivera, and J. Rodriguez, “Rotor current fuzzy control of a dfig with
an indirect matrix converter,” in IECON 2011 - 37th Annual Conference
on IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, 7-10 Nov. 2011 2011, pp. 4296–
4301.
[17] C. F. Calvillo, A. Olloqui, F. Martell, J. L. Elizondo, A. Avila, M. E.
Macias, M. Rivera, and J. Rodriguez, “Comparison of model based
predictive control and fuzzy logic control of a dfig with an indirect
matrix converter,” in IECON 2012 - 38th Annual Conference on IEEE
Industrial Electronics Society, 25-28 Oct. 2012 2012, pp. 6063–6068.
[18] A. Sguarezi Filho and E. Filho, “Model-based predictive control applied
to the doubly-fed induction generator direct power control,” Sustainable
Energy, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 398–406, July 2012.
[19] Z. Dawei and X. Lie, “Direct power control of dfig with constant switch-
ing frequency and improved transient performance,” Energy Conversion,
IEEE Transactions on, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 110–118, 2007.
[20] M. Malinowski, M. Jasinski, and M. P. Kazmierkowski, “Simple direct
power control of three-phase pwm rectifier using space-vector modula-
tion (dpc-svm),” Industrial Electronics, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 51,
no. 2, pp. 447–454, 2004.
[21] G. Abad, M. A. Rodriguez, and J. Poza, “Predictive direct power control
of the doubly fed induction machine with reduced power ripple at
low constant switching frequency,” in Industrial Electronics, 2007. ISIE
2007. IEEE International Symposium on, 4-7 June 2007 2007, pp. 1119–
1124.
[22] M. Shahroozi, R. Ghobadi, and A. Radan, “Using virtual direct power
control for synchronizing dfig with grid,” in Power Electronics, Drive
Systems and Technologies Conference (PEDSTC), 2014 5th, Feb 2014,
pp. 96–101.
[23] J. Hu, J. Zhu, Y. Zhang, G. Platt, Q. Ma, and D. Dorrell, “Predictive di-
rect virtual torque and power control of doubly fed induction generators
for fast and smooth grid synchronization and flexible power regulation,”
Power Electronics, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 28, no. 7, pp. 3182–3194,
July 2013.
[24] M. Liserre, R. Cardenas, M. Molinas, and J. Rodriguez, “Overview of
multi-mw wind turbines and wind parks,” Industrial Electronics, IEEE
Transactions on, vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 1081–1095, 2011.
[25] M. Rivera, A. Wilson, C. A. Rojas, J. Rodriguez, J. R. Espinoza, P. W.
Wheeler, and L. Empringham, “A comparative assessment of model
predictive current control and space vector modulation in a direct matrix
converter,” Industrial Electronics, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 60, no. 2,
pp. 578–588, 2013.
[26] F. Villarroel, J. R. Espinoza, C. A. Rojas, J. Rodriguez, M. Rivera, and
D. Sbarbaro, “Multiobjective switching state selector for finite-states
model predictive control based on fuzzy decision making in a matrix
converter,” Industrial Electronics, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 60, no. 2,
pp. 589–599, 2013.
[27] X. Lie and P. Cartwright, “Direct active and reactive power control of
dfig for wind energy generation,” Energy Conversion, IEEE Transactions
on, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 750–758, 2006.
[28] P. Correa, J. Rodriguez, M. Rivera, J. R. Espinoza, and J. W. Kolar, “Pre-
dictive control of an indirect matrix converter,” Industrial Electronics,
IEEE Transactions on, vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 1847–1853, 2009.
[29] P. Rodriguez, J. Pou, J. Bergas, J. I. Candela, R. P. Burgos, and
D. Boroyevich, “Decoupled double synchronous reference frame pll for
power converters control,” IEEE Trans. Power Electronics, vol. 22, no. 2,
pp. 584–592, March 2007.