202 2022 1691 Author

Dear Author,
Here are the proofs of your article.
You can submit your corrections online, via e-mail or by fax.
For online submission please insert your corrections in the online correction form. Always indicate the line number to which the
correction refers.
You can also insert your corrections in the proof PDF and email the annotated PDF.
For fax submission, please ensure that your corrections are clearly legible. Use a fine black pen and write the correction in the margin,
not too close to the edge of the page.
Remember to note the journal title, article number, and your name when sending your response via e-mail or fax.
Check the metadata sheet to make sure that the header information, especially author names and the corresponding affiliations are
correctly shown.
Check the questions that may have arisen during copy editing and insert your answers/ corrections.
Check that the text is complete and that all figures, tables and their legends are included. Also check the accuracy of special characters,
equations, and electronic supplementary material if applicable. If necessary refer to the Edited manuscript.
The publication of inaccurate data such as dosages and units can have serious consequences. Please take particular care that all such
details are correct.
Please do not make changes that involve only matters of style. We have generally introduced forms that follow the journal’s style.
Substantial changes in content, e.g., new results, corrected values, title and authorship are not allowed without the approval of the
responsible editor. In such a case, please contact the Editorial Office and return his/her consent together with the proof.
If we do not receive your corrections within 48 hours, we will send you a reminder.
Your article will be published Online First approximately one week after receipt of your corrected proofs. This is the official first
publication citable with the DOI. Further changes are, therefore, not possible.
The printed version will follow in a forthcoming issue.
Please note
After online publication, subscribers (personal/institutional) to this journal will have access to the complete article via the DOI using the URL:
http://dx.doi.org/[DOI].
If you would like to know when your article has been published online, take advantage of our free alert service. For registration and further
information go to: http://www.link.springer.com.
Due to the electronic nature of the procedure, the manuscript and the original figures will only be returned to you on special request. When you
return your corrections, please inform us if you would like to have these documents returned.
Metadata of the article that will be visualized in OnlineFirst
ArticleTitle An in-depth study of robust MPPT for extend optimal power extraction using wind speed compensation technique of wind generators
Article Sub-Title
Article CopyRight The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature
(This will be the copyright line in the final PDF)
Journal Name Electrical Engineering
Corresponding Author FamilyName Billel
Particle
Given Name Meghni
Suffix
Division LSEM Laboratory, Department of Electrical Engineering
Organization University Badji Mokhtar
Address Annaba, Algeria
Phone
Fax
Email maghni_1990@yahoo.fr
URL
ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6153-2252
Author FamilyName Ilham
Particle
Given Name Toumi
Suffix
Division Laboratoire LAGE, Department of Electronics and Telecommunications, Faculty of New Technologies of
Computing and Communication
Organization University of Ouargla
Address 30000, Ouargla, Algeria
Phone
Fax
Email toumiilham@yahoo.com
URL
ORCID
Author FamilyName Amira
Particle
Given Name Boulmaiz
Suffix
Division L.E.R.I.C.A., Department of Electronics
Organization University of Badji Mokhtar
Address P.O. Box 12, 23000, Annaba, Algeria
Phone
Fax
Email boulmaiz.ami2012@gmail.com
URL
ORCID
Author FamilyName Oussama
Particle
Given Name Hachana
Suffix
Division Department of Drilling and Rig Mechanics, Faculty of Hydrocarbons, Renewable Energies, and Earth and Universe
Sciences
Organization University of Ouargla
Address 30000, Ouargla, Algeria
Phone
Fax
Email oussama.hachana@gmail.com
URL
ORCID
Schedule Received 21 Jan 2022
Revised
Accepted 9 Nov 2022
Abstract To achieve effective power production and control, it is essential to establish an effective maximum power point tracking (MPPT) approach.
This makes designing a wind turbine easier. A brand new method called robust changeable step-perturb & observe (RVS-P&O) is created to
address the issues of wind speed variable situations, significant oscillations around the maximum power point (MPP), and step size estimate all
at once. Where two main points are involved, it is first suggested to choose step sizes systematically based on the normalization of power and
speed data. Second, a novel adjustment to compute the power variation is made in order to provide adequate resilience for large and prolonged
wind speed fluctuations. According to the simulation findings, the suggested RVS-P&O-based MPPT approach is better to the competing P&O
techniques, variable step-P&O, small fixed step-P&O, and large fixed step-P&O. An improvement of 1.34% over the variable step-P&O
algorithm is provided by the suggested RVS-P&O approach, which delivers a WECS efficiency of 99.05%, when compared to the 0.032 s,
0.071 s, 0.018 s, 0.012 s, and 0.007 s provided by LS-P&O, SS-P&O, VS-P&O, ME-PO, and AD-P&O, respectively. The settling time for V =
6 m/s is really noticeably improved; it is now 0.004 s. As a result, the RVS-P&O algorithm could be a good choice for MPP online operation
monitoring in terms of energy efficiency, transient- and steady-state regime performances under diverse operating situations, and multiple data
for wind speed.
Keywords (separated by '- MPPT - Robust variable step-perturb & observe - Normalization - PMSG - Systematic step size - SOSMC - ST
')
Footnote Information
Electrical Engineering
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00202-022-01691-5
ORIGINAL PAPER
An in-depth study of robust MPPT for extend optimal power extraction
of
using wind speed compensation technique of wind generators
Meghni Billel1 · Toumi Ilham2 · Boulmaiz Amira3 · Hachana Oussama4
pro
Received: 21 January 2022 / Accepted: 9 November 2022
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2022
1 Abstract
2 To achieve effective power production and control, it is essential to establish an effective maximum power point tracking
1 3 (MPPT) approach. This makes designing a wind turbine easier. A brand new method called robust changeable step-perturb
4 & observe (RVS-P&O) is created to address the issues of wind speed variable situations, significant oscillations around the
2 5 maximum power point (MPP), and step size estimate all at once. Where two main points are involved, it is first suggested to
6 choose step sizes systematically based on the normalization of power and speed data. Second, a novel adjustment to compute
7
10
11
cted
the power variation is made in order to provide adequate resilience for large and prolonged wind speed fluctuations. According
to the simulation findings, the suggested RVS-P&O-based MPPT approach is better to the competing P&O techniques, variable
step-P&O, small fixed step-P&O, and large fixed step-P&O. An improvement of 1.34% over the variable step-P&O algorithm
is provided by the suggested RVS-P&O approach, which delivers a WECS efficiency of 99.05%, when compared to the
0.032 s, 0.071 s, 0.018 s, 0.012 s, and 0.007 s provided by LS-P&O, SS-P&O, VS-P&O, ME-PO, and AD-P&O, respectively.
12 The settling time for V = 6 m/s is really noticeably improved; it is now 0.004 s. As a result, the RVS-P&O algorithm could
13 be a good choice for MPP online operation monitoring in terms of energy efficiency, transient- and steady-state regime
3 14 performances under diverse operating situations, and multiple data for wind speed.
15 Keywords MPPT · Robust variable step-perturb & observe · Normalization · PMSG · Systematic step size · SOSMC · ST
orre
List of symbols 16
Variables 17
B Meghni Billel
maghni_1990@yahoo.fr
CP Coefficient power 18
Toumi Ilham F Simplex 19

toumiilham@yahoo.com
fg Grid frequency 20
unc
Boulmaiz Amira Id d-axis current 21

boulmaiz.ami2012@gmail.com
Idg Grid d-axis current 22
Hachana Oussama Iq q-axis current 23

oussama.hachana@gmail.com
Iqg Grid q-axis current 24
1 LSEM Laboratory, Department of Electrical Engineering, K First unknown gain 25
University Badji Mokhtar, Annaba, Algeria l Sector index 26
2 Laboratoire LAGE, Department of Electronics and Ld d-axis inductance 27
Telecommunications, Faculty of New Technologies of Lq q-axis inductance 28
Computing and Communication, University of Ouargla, M Second unknown gain 29

30000 Ouargla, Algeria
m Complex size 30
3 L.E.R.I.C.A., Department of Electronics, University of Badji N Normalization index 31
Mokhtar, P.O. Box 12, 23000 Annaba, Algeria
P Number of independent complexes 32
4 Department of Drilling and Rig Mechanics, Faculty of Pg Grid active power 33
Hydrocarbons, Renewable Energies, and Earth and Universe
Pt Power of the air mass 34
Sciences, University of Ouargla, 30000 Ouargla, Algeria
123
SPI Journal: 202 MS: 1691 TYPESET DISK LE CP Disp.:2022/11/23 Pages: 24 Layout: Large
35 Pk Turbine power DC Direct current 79
36 Qg Grid reactive power DFIG Doubly fed induction generator 80
37 Rs Stator resistance DPC Direct power control 81
38 S Surface FLC Fuzzy logic control 82
39 SP Sliding surface of the active power FOSMC First-order sliding mode control 83
sQ Sliding surface of the reactive power FOC Field-oriented control
of
40 84
41 Te Electromagnetic torque FS Fixed 85
42 αL Weighting factor GSC Grid side converter 86
43 V Wind speed INC Incremental conductance 87
44 Vd d-axis voltage IPC Indirect power controller 88
Vdg Grid d-axis voltage LS Large step
pro
45 89
46 Vdi Inverter d-axis voltage MPPT Maximum power point tracking 90
47 Vq q-axis voltage MSC Machine side converter 91
48 Vqg Grid q-axis voltage ORB Optimum relation-based 92
49 Vqi Inverter q-axis voltage ORC Optimal rotational cycle 93
50 W Selection factor OTC Optimal torque control 94
P&O Perturb & observe 95
PMSG Permanent magnet synchronous generator 96
51 Subscripts and superscripts PSO Particle swarm optimizer 97
PSF Power signal feedback 98
52
53
54
55
d
e
f
g
Stator axis
Electromagnetic
Flux
Grid
cted RVS
SCIG
SS
SOSMC
Robust variable step
Squirrel cage induction generator
Small step
Second-order sliding mode control
99
100
101
102
56 i Element (solution) STA Super-twisting algorithm 103
57 j Point index SVM Support vector machine 104
58 k Complex index SVPWM Space vector pulse width modulation 105
59 max Maximum THD Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization 106
60 mes Measure VS Variable step 107

orre
61 opti Optimum VSWT Variable speed wind turbine 108
62 p Power WECS Wind energy control system 109
63 q Stator axis WSE Wind speed estimated 110
64 ref Reference WT Wind turbine 111
65 s Stator VDC ref Reference of DC link voltage 112
Pg ref Reference of grid active power 113
Qg ref Reference of grid reactive power 114
66 Greek letters
67 α Number of iteration for each simplex

unc
68 β Blade pitch angle

69 λ Tip speed ratio 1 Introduction 115
70 ρ Air density
71 τ Number of offspring Globally, there is a gradual expansion of the wind energy 116
72 ω Electric pulsation system’s integration with the grid, which increases the contri- 117
73 ψf Magnetic flux bution of WT generation to the total global power generation 118
[1]. The improvement in the Wind Energy Conversion Sys- 119
tem’s (WECS) efficiency in this respect is essential for 120
74 Abbreviations successful operation. 4

121
75 AC Alternate current 1.1 Wind generation system 122
76 AI Artificial intelligent
77 ANFIS Adaptive neuro fuzzy inference system The best way to attain this benefit is to continuously acquire 123
78 ANN Artificial neural network the WT’s maximum power as the ambient weather conditions 124
123
125 change. In order to increase the overall system efficiency, in Fig. 1. These may be divided into the direct power 176
126 the WT must be operated using maximum power point controller (DPC) and indirect power controller (IPC). Addi- 177
127 tracking (MPPT) [1]. Wind speed variation represents the tionally, although fuzzy and artificial intelligence MPPT 178
128 change in weather conditions during the day. Wind turbines algorithms are considered, their industrial applications are 179
129 (WTs), which may be classified as fixed-speed wind tur- seldom expanded [2]. With regard to MPPT algorithms, the 180
bines (FSWT) and variable-speed wind turbines (VSWT), tip speed ratio (TSR) [9], the optimum torque (OT) [10], and
of
130 181
131 are the main component of wind energy conversion sys- the power signal feedback (PSF) [11] algorithms are all used 182
132 tems (WECS) [2]. Despite being simple to install, the FSWT as inputs in IPC control methods. The TSR method, which 183
133 cannot use 100% of the available wind energy. The VSWT aims to maximize C p by keeping the system in λopt, is rather 184
134 was conceived to address this problem by ensuring maxi- simple. However, it needs information about wind speed. The 185
mum wind power production when the wind speed varies average effective wind speed across the swept area of the WT
pro
135 186
136 [3]. Synchronous generators (PMSG) with full-scale con- blades should be measured by an anemometer in order to pre- 187
137 verters and doubly fed induction generators (DFIGs) are the cisely identify the MPP [9]. This, in addition to decreasing 188
138 generator types employed in VS-WECS. The PMSG has WECS efficiency, is difficult, expensive, and complicated to 189
139 been introduced in order to extract high power from wind execute. To address this issue, many wind speed estimation 190
140 turbines, increase energy conversion efficiency from the VS- (WSE) techniques are researched in [12] to precisely predict 191
141 WECS, and provide power electronic converters that are the effective wind speed. One of the basic methods is the 192
142 cost-effective [4]. With no need for a multistage gearbox, OTC strategy, which seeks to adjust the generator torque to 193
143 PMSGs can generate their entire amount of power at varying the reference torque at which it will generate its maximum 194
5144 wind speeds, which can raise the WECS efficiency by 10%. power at a certain wind speed. Although OTC’s efficiency 195
145
146
147
148
Due to the VSWT-PMSG’s complexness and the extent to
which wind energy systems depend on meteorological and
environmental conditions [5]. WTs have evolved throughout
time from simple generating systems to more complex ones.
cted is still much lower than that of TSR’s, it performs worse in
conditions of intense wind turbulence [10]. Even though the
PSF technique does not need wind speed measurements, it
is crucial to carry out off-line testing in order to obtain the
196
197
198
199
149 To guarantee the effective functioning of WTS, complex con- WECS characteristic curve, also known as the turbine power 200
150 trol mechanisms must be included. The primary objectives curve shaft speed [11]. The PSF and OT algorithms’ control 201
151 of WT control techniques are to enable obtaining maximum objectives rely on knowledge of the mathematical model of 202
152 power output, decrease static and dynamic mechanical loads, the generator, especially the torque constant, which may be 203
153 and ensure a steady flow of energy into the grid. In order to roughly calculated [13]. However, the link between track- 204
orre
154 achieve the aforementioned control objectives, the machine ing speed and WT inertia, which causes large-inertia WT 205
155 side converter (MSC) and grid side converter (GSC), which to track more slowly at low wind speeds, makes it difficult 206
156 provide UG with real power for unity power factor (UPF) to attain the precise MPP. The DPC algorithms are used to 207
157 condition, should be properly regulated [6]. At every wind accomplish the pre-established optimal connection by detect- 208
158 speed, the MSC controls the generator’s speed to harvest the ing the power variations in relation to the operational wind 209
159 maximum amount of power from the wind [7]. Hence, the speed. The Perturb and Observe (P&O) [14, 15], incremental 210
160 WT aerodynamics, rotor speed, and collected wind power conductance (INC) [16], and optimal relation-based (ORB) 211
161 are strongly linked to the availability of random wind. Thus, MPPT [17] algorithms are examples of DPC algorithms. The 212
162 for variable-speed WECSs, maximum power point tracking INC technique may be more successful than other algorithms 213
6163 (MPPT) algorithms are crucial [2]. for extracting more effectively the greatest amount of elec- 214
unc
164 Operationally, MPPT is analyzed, in the literature, accord- tricity. However, their performance is limited and cannot be 215
165 ing to the following perspectives: assured in the event of a rapid shift in wind speed since the 216
P/ characteristic includes several peaks [18]. To use the 217
166 • MPPT search techniques to identify the optimal operating ORB approach, the system parameters and optimal curve 218
167 point. must be determined. These are difficult to calculate and sub- 219
168 • Controller architecture to help the WECS reach this opti- ject to change in real-world situations [19]. The absence of 220
169 mal point and at the same time protecting the wind system requirement for previous knowledge of the WT character- 221
170 in high wind speeds. istic curve has been the drive behind the extensive use of 222
the P&O algorithm for monitoring the optimal rotor speed. 223
171 Both of these categories are essential and have attracted The P&O algorithms are heavily used in WECS to main- 224
172 a lot research since they have an impact on the total sys- tain optimal operation. The P&O algorithm is regarded as 225
173 tem efficiency [8]. As reported in the literature, to achieve a mathematical optimization technique developed to search 226
174 comprehensive controllability of the wind generating system, for the MPP. The P&O method works by changing the rotor 227
175 several MPPT algorithms have been discussed, as depicted speed as the control variable and then monitoring the output 228
123
of
pro
Fig. 1 MPPT algorithms classification
cted
229 mechanical power changes until the slope of the mechanical the distribution of the extracted power based on the sug- 257
230 power reaches zero [20]. gested approach (RVS-P&O), we suggested a direct power 258
231 The operating point’s locus may be on either side of the controller termed a DPC-SOSMC-ST in the (GSC) part [23]. 259
232 optimum P- curve. If it is on the left side, the perturba- This suggestion allows for uninterrupted active and reactive 260
233 tion direction is to the right and progressively decreases as power exchange between the generator and grid demand dur- 261
orre
234 one gets closer to the MPP, or in the opposite direction if ing actual variations in wind speed. 262
235 it is on the other side [2]. The performance of the dynamic

236 system as a whole is impacted by the standard P&O (CPO)
237 algorithm’s perturbation of the rotor speed with a set step 1.2 Literature review 263
238 size. As a consequence, the CPO algorithms have a number

239 of issues, such as failing to reach the MPPs during fast wind A number of variable step size P&O (VSPO) algorithms are 264
240 variations, particularly on large-inertia WTs. Additionally, investigated in order to overcome the shortcomings of CPO. 265
241 selecting an appropriate step size is a difficult undertaking The speed convergence, oscillation, and inertia effect issues 266
242 that might result in tracking failure and issues with direc- are better solved by VSPO algorithms [6]. The latter fall into 267
tionality [21]. Therefore, it should reflect a clearly defined two categories: modified P&O algorithms and adaptive P&O 268
unc
243
244 connection between the power fluctuations according to the algorithms. 269
245 operational wind speed and the preceding perturbation step In Ref. [24], a quick and effective variable-step P&O 270
246 size of the rotor speed. The classic FLC-based MPPT method method with two control stages is used to track the MPP. 271
247 requires very specific instructions for the controller design. An intermediate variable calculated from the system param- 272
248 This includes the choice of measurement quantities and eters was used in this technique. As a result, this method 273
249 the choice of inferences, defuzzification, and fuzzification. suffers from its dependency on system factors. The authors 274
250 Longer execution times are another drawback of larger data of Ref. [25] employed an adaptive sensor less P&O method 275
251 memory space, which is particularly detrimental for online in conjunction with the ideal power curve to resolve the 276
252 applications. For an ANN-based MPPT approach, the opti- loss tracking issue. This method resolves the drift problem 277
253 mal network architecture and the number of neurons to insert with the conventional P&O algorithm. Similarly, an ORB- 278
254 in the hidden layer are often established via a formal process P&O method that reliably predicts the optimal relationships 279
255 [22]. Determining the learning step parameters and choosing under rapid changes of wind speed has been presented in 280
256 the network weight starting points are essential. To provide [26]. The slow speed tracking issue is improved in [27] by 281
the modified P & O (M-P&O) method, which employs a 282
123
283 large forward step and a tiny backward step. However, this • The ratio assessment between the actual and intended MPP 333
284 technique employs a continuous large forward step size that in the RVS-P&O optimization approach led to the division 334
285 results in steady-state oscillations around the MPP and needs of the P/ curve into various modular operational sectors. 335
286 an anemometer for wind speed monitoring. Also suggested • When the output power is far from the MPP, the step size 336
287 in Ref. [28] is an effective adaptive P&O MPPT algorithm. has a high value and gradually drops as it approaches the 337
The many assumptions required by this approach, neverthe- MPP. As a result, depending on the power precision and
of
288 338
289 less, lower system performance. By measuring the separation faster speed monitoring, oscillations around the MPP are 339
290 between the operating point and the ideal curve in [25, 29], diminished and disturbed with negligible values. 340
291 it is possible to ascertain the variable step size and the direc- • When using WTs with various dimensions, the controller’s 341
292 tion of the perturbation. Based on an exact value of K opt optimality can be maintained by normalizing the speed 342
t that is updated in response to changes in wind speed, it variation and observation measurement, in addition to the
pro
293 343
294 tracks the MPP. This algorithm is a fast tracking method, set-point speed increment and the power measurement’s 344
295 but as it necessitates wind speed data to compute the K opt normalization. 345
296 value at various wind speeds, it is unlikely to track the MPP • To improve robustness, the wind speed effect was taken 346
297 accurately. According to [30], separating the operating zone into account when correcting the observation measure- 347
298 into four sectors by comparing the power–speed curve and ment. 348
299 a customized curve is key to a fast and efficient variable • A new MPPT-protection approach (RVS-P&O-SOSMC) 349
300 step P&O algorithm. The wind speed is measured using an was applied for the extended control of VSWT that 350
301 anemometer. In refs. [31, 32], a P&O algorithm based on a includes both operational regions (II and III) simultane- 351
302 variable step is designed. The difference between the oper- ously. 352
303
304
305
306
ational point and the P/ curve’s maximum point may be
measured to establish the step size. The authors divided the
curve into sections that functioned in a modular manner using
specified ratios. Because a precise ratio must be established
cted • Using adaptive control (MEPO-SOSMC-MPPT and the
detected extracted power), keeping the extracted power
near to its nominal value in (V > Vnominal ) a feedback
power).
353
354
355
356
307 for each wind speed measurement, this method’s exhibits • The estimated wind speed is utilized to determine the 357
308 poor effectiveness when the weather changes rapidly. As sug- proper adaptive step size and identify the ideal rotor speed. 358
309 gested by [21], the step size is altered in accordance with an • The recommended RVS-P&O-MPPT algorithm improves 359
310 objective function and other regulating factors. This method the overall performance of existing MPPT algorithms by 360
311 yields superior results when wind speed is constant. How- removing the shortcomings of the CPO method. 361
• The ideal generator speed is utilized by the proposed RVS-

orre
312 ever, when there is a considerable random shift in wind speed, 362
313 the P/ curve’s performance suffers because of its multiple P&O method, which concentrates the search area for the 363
314 peak points. To improve the speed tracking responsiveness MPP to a very small area of the main power curve without 364
315 and overall efficiency, improved P&O algorithms incorpo- performing excessive calculations of the perturbation step 365
316 rate wind speed data with the P&O algorithm. In addition to sizes. This allows to accelerate the tracking process with 366
317 eliminating CPO issues, adaptive P&O algorithms are used low power fluctuations around the MPP. 367
318 to attenuate the effect of inertia. The step size is automatically • When compared to other MPPT algorithms already in use, 368
319 adjusted in adaptive P&O algorithms in accordance with the the RVS-P&O method is highlighted as a highly straight- 369
320 operating point. To precisely track and settle at the MPP, the forward tracking approach with simplicity of implemen- 370
321 step size is gradually reduced till it approaches zero. This tation and minimal variations around the MPP. This offers 371
unc
322 method decreases oscillations caused by CPO algorithms, the benefit of overcoming the inaccuracy caused by the 372
323 although with quick changes in wind speed, incorrect per- arrangement that was used to measure wind speed in var- 373
324 turbing direction and loss of tracking may take place. ious climatic situations. 374
• Additionally, the suggested RVS-P&O method is validated 375
with respect to various speed conditions and real wind 376
325 1.3 Article’s contribution speed. The efficiency of the WECS as a consequence is 377
21.34% and 1.34% higher than that of FS-P&O and VS- 378
326 This article proposes a quick and robust variable-step P&O P&O MPPT algorithms, respectively. 379
327 MPPT method that eliminates the flaws of traditional P&O • The DPC-SOSMC-based STA approach enables tracking 380
328 MPPT methods, such as steady state oscillations, poor accuracy improvement, grid power quality improvement, 381
329 speed tracking response, vibration, and noise of high-inertia and chattering level removal. In comparison with con- 382
330 machines. ventional approaches, it enables to reach higher dynamic 383
331 The important contributions of this study are summarized performances, better speed, harmonic attenuation, and 384
332 in the list below. increased steady-state stability. 385
123
of
pro
cted
orre
unc
Fig. 2 Complete control description of the studied wind system
386 This work is divided into the following sections: After 2 Mathematical model of WECS 396
387 introduction, Sect. 2 is focused on mathematical model-

388 ing of the primary components of the PMSG-based VSWT. The planned WECS configuration’s schematic diagram is 397
389 Section 3 discusses the structure of the converter controller, shown in Fig. 2. Here, the WECS setup is comprised of a 398
390 and the proposed conventional P&O and RVS-P&O algo- wind turbine, a PMSG, two back-to-back AC/DC/AC IGBT 399
391 rithms are described. To demonstrate the efficiency of the bridges, the grid, and two combined control loops: genera- 400
392 suggested algorithm, simulation results conducted in MAT- tor side converter (GSC) and the grid side converter (GSC)” 401
393 LAB/SIMULINK environment are illustrated, examined, [22]. Additionally, the unified framework can be observed 402
394 and discussed in Sect. 4. In the final section, the conclusions to include hybrid optimization using the RVS-P&O MPPT 403
395 and future trends are presented.
123
be attained under conditions of maximum wind speed at a 427
certain range of rotor speeds [22]. When maintained at ˘opt, 428
the turbine can generate its maximum power. Only when the 429
turbine is rotating at its ideal speed, which may be accom- 430
plished by managing the rational speed of the turbine, can 431
the most power be generated [36].
of
432
2.2 PMSG model 433
By using Concordia and Park’s transformation (d, q), the 434
pro
Fig. 3 Typical power coefficient (C pmax ) versus specific speed curve dynamic voltage equations for the PMSG under investigation 435
(˘opt) in the literature have been established. They are provided by 436
Eq. (6) [36]: 437
404 approach and a second-order sliding mode controller with a ⎧

power limiting scheme [8]. ⎨ Vd = Rs Id + L d dId − ωL q Iq
405 dt
dIq (6)
⎩ Vq = Rs Iq + L q dt + ω(L d Id + ψ f )
438
406 2.1 Wind turbine modeling

The electromagnetic torque for the PMSG system is given 439
407 The power of the air mass (Pω ) is provided by Eq. (1) when as [28]: 440
the wind is moving across an active surface (S), where the
408
409
410
411
wind sail turns an amount of air mass energy into movement
[33].
Pω =
1
ρ.S.v 3
cted
(1)
Te =
3
2

p L d − L q I d Iq + I d ψ f

(7) 441
2 2.3 Grid model 442
412 It will be sent to the generator shaft as either turbine power

The d-q plane grid model is provided by Eq. (8) [20]: 443
413 or aerodynamic power, according to Eq. (2) [34]:

dI
1 Vdg = Vdi − Rg Idg − L dg dtdg + L qg wg Iqg
orre
414 Pk = ρ.SC p (λ, β).Vk3 (2) dI (8) 444
2 Vqg = Vqi − Rg Iqg − L qg dtqg − L dg wg Idg
415 where λ represents the relationship between the wind speed In order to calculate the relevant grid real and reactive 445
416 and the turbine’s angular speed. The wind turbine’s tip speed power, the power loss of the grid resistance is ignored [37]. 446
417 ratio is determined by Eq. (3):

Pg = 23 (V dg Idg + Vqg Iqg )
R × k (9) 447
418 λ= (3) Q g = 23 (V dg Iqg − Vqg Idg )
Vk
419 while C p is the power coefficient, which can be calculated

unc
420 using Eq. (4) [35]:

3 PMSG converter control strategy 448
151 −18.4
421 C p = 0.073 − 0.058β − 0.002β 2.14 − 13.2 e λi
λi 3.1 General description of converter controller 449
(4)
The WT-above-described PMSG’s energetic and environ- 450
422 where λi can be given by Eq. (5): mental restrictions call for the implementation of a com- 451
prehensive supervision and a suitable energy management 452

1 system. Figure 2 describes the control system, where machine
423 λi = (5) 453
1
λ−0.02β − 0.003
β 2 +1 side converter (MSC) and grid side converter (GSC) are the 454
two key components of the control approach [38]. 455
424 The relationship between the turbine speed and mechan-

425 ical power is shown in Fig. 3. The optimal tip speed ratio • Machine Side Converter: The PMSG speed and torque 456
426 ˘opt is linked to the optimum rotor speed ¨opt which may are controlled using a an advanced controller based on the 457
123
458 MPPT algorithm RVS-P&O and the Second-Order Sliding in Fig. 7 is added to the previously mentioned RVS-P&O- 505
459 Mode Control (SOSMC), which extracts the MPP in region MPPT-SOSMC design (Fig. 4). 506
460 II and also protects the wind turbine in region 3 [39].

461 • Grid Side Converter: With changing wind speed, the 3.1.2 Grid side converter (GSC) controller 507
462 amplitude of energy generated and the electrical frequency
also change, which is not suitable for grid integration. The
of
463
This converter enables to control the active and reactive 508
464 GSC is often used to address this issue and guarantee a power transfer between the PMSG and the grid. In order 509
465 stronger active and reactive power link between the wind to keep the DC-link voltage constant, it also ensures that the 510
466 system and the electrical grid. The DPC-SOSMC-ST tech- user always has power in the event of grid malfunctions or 511
467 nique is then used to directly regulate the reference voltage wind fluctuations. A new direct power control (DPC) method 512
generation’s active and reactive power, in contrast with the
pro
468
is supported by the space vector modulation (SVM) technol- 513
469 conventional vector method [40]. ogy and based on the SOSMC-ST algorithm is suggested 514
in order to accomplish these objectives. The DPC-SOSMC- 515
SVM technology directly provides the reference voltage, in 516
470 3.1.1 Machine side converter (MSC) controller contrast to the vector conventional method [38, 41]. 517
471 For any wind speed, VSWT enables the extraction of a max- • Higher-order SMC based DPC-SVM design 518
472 imum power. But for this degree of flexibility to work, a
473 sophisticated and reliable speed/power management system
The traditional control rules [20, 43] may not be adequate
474
475
476
477
is needed in order to:
• Safeguard the “PMSG/WT” system.

• Monitor the available power’s peak (Region II).
cted
• When wind speed is higher than a certain amount, it serves
in the management of nonlinear systems with non-constant
parameters. Therefore, it is necessary to use effective and
reliable control strategies [10, 12, 29] that are not sensitive
to changes in parameter values, disturbances, and nonlin-
519
520
521
522
523
earities. The sliding mode control is regarded as one of the 524

478 to stabilize the collected power at that level (region III) most crucial of these strategies [44]. However, the primary 525
479 [22]. drawback of this approach in actual use is the high commuta- 526
tion frequencies (chattering) that are created. To preserve the 527
480 This section describes the MSC’s architecture, which robustness, efficiency, and speed of the original approach 528
orre
481 incorporates two more operating modes (adaptive). while reducing the chattering, one must employ a higher 529
482 In region (II): In order to get the rotor’s maximum speed, order control via sliding mode based on nth derivate [45]. 530
483 the electromagnetic torque can be adjusted to obtain the

484 greatest amount of mechanical power. This is achieved
by maintaining the power coefficient C p at its maximum Pg = 23 Vdg Idg
485 (10) 531
486 (C pmax ). For that purpose, the Field Oriented Control (FOC) Q g = 23 Vdg Iqg
487 technique is employed to manage the PMSG. As shown in
488 Fig. 2, it is composed of two control loops: an internal loop To achieve a null operational power factor, the optimal 532
489 for the current and an external loop for speed [22]. reactive power is set to Q gref = 0, whereas the optimal active 533
490 In order to establish an electromagnetic torque refer- power Pgref is determined by the grid demand. Figure 1 shows 534
unc
491 ence, the first control loop employed the RVS-P&O-MPPT- the SOSMC block diagram. Equation (11) determines the (S P 535
492 SOSMC method to determine a reference ideal speed for each and S Q ) sliding surface of active and reactive powers: 536
493 wind speed. Based on Eq. (7), the d-q axis’s stator currents
494 are regulated individually using the current control loop. By
using the Space Vector Pulse Width Modulation (SV-PWM) s P = Pgref − Pg
495 (11) 537
496 to create the commutation pulses and regulate the three-phase s Q = Q gref − Q g
497 currents, the PI controller is used [41].
498 In region (III): To protect the WT and PMSG, this system The first derivative of the sliding surfaces is given by 538
499 only intervenes in the acceptable band between “Pl/1.2Pl” to Eq. (12): 539
500 guarantee a restriction of the extracted power (Stable Oper-

501 ation Mode) [42]. 1.5Vdg
ṡ P = Ṗgref − Lg −V dg − Rg Idg + L g wg Iqg − VLidg
In order to create a lower reference speed during the
1.5V V
502 540
503 period when the extracted power increases (and to stop fur- ṡ Q = Q̇ gref − L gqg −V qg − Rg Iqg − L g wg Idg − Liqg
504 ther production of high power), the control circuit shown (12)
123
Fig. 4 Operation principle of the

RVS-P&O-based MPPT
controller
of
pro
cted
541 The second derivative of both surfaces is given by Eq. (13): Equation (17) may be used to calculate the ST proposed 550
orre
⎧ by Levant [46]: 551
⎨ s̈ P = Ġ p − V̇id
√
Lg
542 (13) V p ref = V p eq − M |s P |sign(s P ) − K sign(s P )
⎩ s̈ Q = Ġ Q − V̇iq
552
Lg VQ ref = VQ eq − M s Q sign s Q − K sign s Q
543 where G P and G Q are defined by Eq. (14): (17)
1.5Vdg To ensure the sliding manifolds’ convergence to zero in 553

G P = Ṗgref − Lg −V dg − Rg Idg + L g wg Iqg finite time, K and M are unknown parameters [47]. Accord- 554
544
1.5Vqg (14)
G Q = Q̇ gref − Lg −V qg − Rg Iqg − L g wg Idg ing to Eq. (18), both parameters could be constrained: 555
unc

545 The SOSMC defines two main parts either for V p ref or K > KCm0 0 < ρ < 0.5
0 K M (K −C 0 )
(18) 556
546 VQ ref as given by Eq. (15): M 2 ≥ 4C
K 2 K (K −C )
i f ρ = 0.5
m m 0

where: C0 , K m and K M are positive constants. 557
V P ref = V p N + V p eq
547 (15)
VQ ref = VQ N + VQ eq
3.2 MPPT-based control algorithms 558
548 while V N is determined by Eq. (16): 3.2.1 Classical P&O algorithm 559
⎧
⎪
⎪ ẇ1 = −K • sign(s P ) The P&O approach, one of the most important MPPT
⎪
⎨ √ 560
w2 = −M • |s P |sign(s P ) strategies, is widely used in scientific research due to its 561

549 (16)
⎪
⎪ V p N = w1 + w2 straightforward structure and simple implementable [31]. 562
⎪
⎩
V Q N = w1 + w2 After each change in the reference speed, this algorithm 563
123
Table 1 Study of decreased

power coefficient cases of classic The function point is to the left of
Pw > 0
P&O algorithm
Case 1:−
ωref , +
v Case 2:+
ωref , −
v
MPP3 MPP1
of
P5 P2
MPP2
Mechanical Power (W)

P3 MPP2
P1
MPP1
P3
P4
P1
pro
P2
Rotor speed (rad/s) Rotor speed (rad/s)

The function point is to the right of
Pw < 0
Case 3:+
ωref , −
v Case 4:−
ωref , +
v
MPP1 MPP1
P1 P2

P2
MPP2 P1
MPP2
P3
P3 P5
MPP3
Rotor Speed (rad/s)

cted
P4
Rotor Speed (rad/s)
564 looks at the power change. If the system’s collected power is is the maximum mechanical power. 586
565 increased, the rotor speed must also be changed in the same
566 direction. Reversing the direction should be used to change 1
speed when power is diminished. The sign of P determines Pkmax = ρ.s.vk 3 .C pmax (19) 587
orre
567 2
568 the tracking direction, and by analyzing this algorithm, the
569 following rules can be found: Standardizing the power measurement and the set-point 588
speed increment is advised to retain the best controller 589
570 • The reference speed is raised by a step if the power varia- dynamics with turbines of various sizes. According to 590
571 tion is positive. Eq. (20), the instantaneous definition of the normalized 591
572 • The reference speed is reduced by a step if the power vari- power PkN is the ratio of the actual absorbed power to the 592
573 ation is negative. maximum one available: 593
Pk
PkN = × 100 (20)
unc
594
574 Picking the proper step size is difficult because a smaller Pkmax
575 step size boosts efficiency but slows convergence, whereas a
576 larger step size predicts a faster reaction and more oscillations
If the speed reference step is kept constant, the controller 595
577 around the MPP point [48] (Table 1).
will take longer to achieve the MPP for significant variations 596
in wind speed. As a non-adaptive action, it will provide the 597
578 3.2.2 Proposed method RVS-P&O same result as it does in the case of a slight difference in wind 598
speed. Therefore, it is suggested that this step size be adjusted 599
579 The standardization of the generator speed and mechanical by a corresponding amount to the corrective signal in order 600
580 power variables serves as the foundation for the RVS-P&O. to attain the MPP in order to avoid the sluggish reaction. It 601
581 By eliminating the impact of wind disturbances, a correction is necessary to designate the (S − 1) level as the delimiter 602
582 to the power variation estimate has been made. A WT-PMSG in order to divide the range of the normalized power into a 603
583 system that operates with the wind speed vk at instant k is limited number of sectors (s = 1..S) (Table 2). 604
584 taken into consideration to offer a systematic technique for For that, let’s think about the maximum power level for 605
585 sizing the reference step size. According to Eq. (19), Pkmax each section, denoted by Pmax l as a ratio (βs ) of the highest 606
123
Table 2 Algorithm characteristic parameters
Sector β S−1 αS
s=1 0.6 0.03

s=2 0.4 0.02
of
s=3 0.01 0.01
s = S-1 0.00 0.0001
607 possible mechanical power Pkmax where Eq. (21) defines: Fig. 5 Structure applied to speed control
pro
608
s
Pmax = βs .P max
k (21) disturbance: 639

where the ratio βs is in the range of [0,1], while s = 1, ω ∂ f
609

P k =
P k −
v k (25)
∂v
640
610 . . . , S − 1. (k , vk−1 )
611 The P&O algorithm is based essentially on the product
612 sign of the power variation and the speed step increment. If Sector size is determined by the arbitrary parameter βl , 641
613 positive, the speed reference step will be incremented and in since it is best to execute a harsh action when the operational 642
614 the negative case, it will be decreased. Essentially, the power point is placed distant from the MPP and vice versa. The 643
615
616
617
618
variation product sign and the speed step increment form
the foundation of the P&O algorithm. The speed reference
step will be increased if the result is positive, and lowered
if the result is negative. The method will act less efficiently
cted MPP must be adjusted to a fine step size, and the following
guidelines are advised Eq. (26):
βs =

al = 1
(26)
644
645
646
619 since the power variation is also dependent on the wind speed b ∗ βs−1 1 < l < L
620 variation, which imposes a perturbation on the power vari-
621 ation
Pk . One of the arguments in favor of the RVS-P&O By doing this, a quick initial reaction will be guaranteed 647
622 method is this. Eliminating this disturbance requires merely in the presence of disturbance in steady state. A matching 648
623 taking into account the portion of

Pk caused by the speed step size for each sector is determined by αs from the real 649
opt
orre
624 modification in the preceding step. As a result, the control optimum speed (k ) using Eq. (27). 650
625 algorithm is more resistant to disturbances caused by changes The RVS-P&O algorithm flowchart is illustrated in Fig. 5; 651
626 in wind speed. By using Eq. (22), it is known that the power the step speed reference at instant k is calculated as follows: 652
627 at moment k relies on the wind speed and the turbine speed:
opt

ref
k = αs × k (27) 653
628 Pk = f (k , vk ) (22)

opt
while k is given by Eq. (28): 654
629 As a result, Eq. (23) gives the power variation at moment

630 k: opt λopt × Vk
k = (28) 655
unc
R
631
P k = Pk (k , vk ) − Pk (k−1 , vk−1 ) (23)
where s = 1, . . . , S signifies the sector index and αs is a 656
weighting factor with a range of [0,1]; αs is the sector index. 657

632 The development in the first order of Eq. (26) gives It displays how much the speed modification has been made 658
633 Eq. (24): in relation to the ideal speed. This weighting factor should be 659
reduced while traveling from a sector to the higher one since 660
∂ f a precise adjustment is required close to the MPP, because a

P k f (k , vk−1 ) +
v k − f (k−1 , vk−1 ) 661
∂v
634
(k , vk−1 ) small tweak is required close to the MPP. 662
(24) Practically, the error between computed powers (Pk , 663
Pk−1 ) at various times can be easily lowered to lower

P k . 664
635 The wind speed variation disturbance is represented by the Unfortunately, due to the intricate formulae of the nonlinear 665
636 second component in Eq. (24). This term equals zero when function, the calculation of the practical derivative compo- 666
637 the wind speed remains constant. Therefore, Eq. (25) is used nent in Eq. (27) differs. We suggest utilizing linear formulas 667
638 to calculate the adjusted power variation

P ωk without wind that plot power versus wind speed in the (P − ω) plane to 668
123
of
pro
cted
orre
unc
Fig. 6 Detailed flowchart of the RVS-P&O based MPPT technique drift-free
123
3.2.4 Wind speed control with estimator function 684
An erroneous measurement of the wind speed leads to an 685
erroneous value of the reference speed to be imposed on 686
the generator and therefore a degradation of the extracted 687
power [12]. For this reason, we propose a function that makes
of
688
it possible to estimate the wind speed from the mechanical 689
7 Fig. 7 Power limit detailed block diagram power and rotor speed of the wind turbine as Fig. 5 shows. 690
Estimation function: 691
estimate that term; Fig. 6 shows the control applied in this
pro
669
670 study.
cted 692
orre
671 3.2.3 Speed control with power limit (region III)

4 Results analysis and discussion 693
672 Beyond the nominal wind speed of 11.07 m/s, the power
673 limitation system is necessary in order to increase opera- To evaluate the performances and efficacy of the suggested 694
unc
674 tional efficiency in VSWT, ensure a limitation of the extracted RVS-P&O approach in the both areas (II and III), a thor- 695
675 power (Stable Operation Mode), and protect the WT and ough comparison has been conducted in this research. For 696
676 PMSG. This scheme is appropriate in area III [39]. purposes of comparison, five based P&O techniques have 697
677 The SOSMC-RVS-PO-MPPT design from before is been proposed: Fixed Small Step (SS)-P&O, Fixed Large 698
678 enhanced with the control circuit in Fig. 7 to provide a slower Step (LS)-P&O, Variable Step size (VS)-P&O [4, 31], Mod- 699
679 reference speed during the time when the extracted power ified Enhanced (ME)-P&O [39], and Adaptive Step sizes 700
680 increases (to prevent the continuation of producing quanti- (AD)-P&O [28, 32]. Through three case studies, many sim- 701
681 ties of high power). Reducing the quantity “K ” of early speed ulations have been performed using MATLAB/SIMULINK 702
682 results in the new reference rate knew−ref [42], as seen in: under different wind speed changes. In the first case, it is 703
presumable that the wind speed profile varies in a variety of 704
steps. In the second case, a random wind speed profile is used 705
683 knew−ref = kref −

(29) in two different ranges (under and above the nominal wind 706
speed), whereas a real wind speed behavior is used in the 707
third (Fig. 8). 708
123
The tip speed ratio (λ) is maintained at its optimal level 745
with all competing algorithms, as illustrated in Fig. 9c. RVS- 746
P&O successfully maintains the operation with optimal TSR 747
(8.100) and follows it with minimum settling time, rising 748
time, and undershoot under rapid wind changes, in contrast 749
with the other algorithms (as summarized in Table 3).
of
750
With a minimum percentage undershoot (%) for RVS- 751
P&O, these are 18.037, 58.024, 73.086, 25.123, and 58.395 752
for LS-P&O, SS-P&O, VS-P&O, ME-P&O, and AD-P&O, 753
consecutively. The RVS-P&O technology offers higher speed 754
represents in (settling time = 0.005 s and rise time = 0.004 s)
pro
Fig. 8 Optimal rotational speed (ORC) real tracking in regions “II and 755
III” when compared to the other techniques among different wind 756
speed values. When the [0–4 s], V = 6m/s the magnified por- 757
tion of Fig. 9d and Table 3 shows that the rotor speed settling 758
time (s) while utilizing the RVS-P&O technique is faster in 759
709 4.1 Machine side converter controller around 0.008 as compared to 0.263,0.018,0.020,0.014, and 760
0.019 when using the LS-P&O, SS-P&O, VS-P&O, ME- 761
710 4.1.1 Step wind speed variation P&O, and AD-P&O, consecutively. According to Fig. 9d and 762
Table 3, the generator speed is correctly controlled. Zoomed 763
711 Figure 9 displays the outcomes of the opposing strategies graphics demonstrate how the proposed RVS-P&O algorithm 764
712
713
714
715
with a gradual shift in wind speed. As shown in Fig. 9a,
the wind speed varies by 6 m/s, 9 m/s, and 11 m/s per 4 s
of samples. In fact, the anticipated wind speed value has
been shown and compared with the actual wind speed profile.
cted quickly follows the ideal speed (0.008 s) with low (speed fluc-
tuations and undershoot 0.123%) around the MPP, because
the operation at optimum WT characteristic values has a sig-
nificant impact on the mechanical power collected and overall
765
766
767
768
716 This pattern of wind speed enables analysis of the competing dynamic performance. Additionally, despite rapid variations 769
717 algorithms’ transient- and steady-state capabilities, including in wind speed, the RVS-P&O algorithm reaches the new 770
718 their settling time and undershoot. MPP faster than the other algorithms. For instance, RVS- 771
719 The results are evaluated against industry norms. The most P&O needs just 0.004 s and 0.003 s, which is less than the 772
720 important factor for determining if the recommended tech- other algorithms, to stabilize the system at full power during 773
orre
721 nique is successful is looking at the optimum values of C p a rapid change from 6 to 9 m/s and from 9 to 11 m/s, consec- 774
722 and λ. Figure 9b, c depicts how these values behave. utively. According to Table 3, there is a clear improvement 775
723 The suggested RVS-P&O follows the ideal C p more fast in the extracted power equivalent to 20.39% compared to the 776
724 than the other techniques, as shown in Fig. 9b. In this case, classical technique in the interval of wind speed [0, 4 s]. The 777
725 the 5% settling time (sec) is 0.004 for (the first wind speed same observations can be reported for the two other wind 778
726 variation [0–4 s], V = 6 m/s), whereas the corresponding speed ranges [4, 8 s] and [8, 12 s]. For each wind speed, the 779
727 values for the LS-P&O, SS-P&O, VS-P&O, ME-P&O, and RVS-PO algorithm demonstrates clearly a high efficiency 780
728 AD-P&O techniques are, respectively, 0.032, 0.017, 0.018, compared to the other techniques (LS-P&O, SS-P&O, VS- 781
729 0.012, and 0.007. In the other two wind speed values ([4–8 s], P&O, ME-P&O, and AD-P&O). This is represented in the 782
730 V = 9 m/s and [8–12 s], V = 11 m/s), the proposed RVS- value of the extracted power as well as the efficiency. 783
unc
731 P&O method clearly demonstrates a faster time response

732 0.003 s and 0.002 s, respectively.
733 LS-P&O, SS-P&O, ME-P&O, and VS-P&O exhibit large 4.1.2 Random wind speed fluctuations 784
734 oscillations that are continuous and follow around the MPP
735 when the wind speed abruptly changes from 6 to 9 m/s and Figure 10 displays the machine-side results of the algorithms 785
736 from 9 to 11 in the transient response. Figure 9b magnified used in the competition under various variations in wind 786
737 portion reveals an intriguing and nearly identical settling time speed. To verify the effectiveness of the suggested RVS-P&O 787
738 for AD-P&O and RVS-P&O. under shifting climatic conditions, the system was simu- 788
739 At V = 6m/s the LS-P&O, SS-P&O, VS-P&O, ME- lated with a nominal wind speed of 8.018 m/s, as shown in 789
740 P&O, and AD-P&O all have undershoot percentages (%) Fig. 10a. This graph clearly shows how well the predicted 790
741 that are, respectively, 44.562, 55.416, 96.208, 81.875, and wind speed corresponds to the actual wind speed. When 791
742 83. 333. The enlarged part of Fig. 9b shows that, in contrast compared to the (LS-P&O, SS-P&O, VS-P&O, ME-P&O, 792
743 with the other approaches, the RVS-P&O methodology offers and AD-P&O) methods, the suggested RVS-P&O algorithm 793
744 a lower undershoot value (42.708%) with quick wind shifts. exhibits promising results by monitoring the ideal C p and λ, 794
123
of
(a) Wind speed profile.
pro
(b) Power coefficient.
cted (c) Tip speed ratio.
orre
unc
(d) Rotor speed. (e) Mechanical power.
Fig. 9 Results from the machine side when the wind speed gradually changes
795 as shown in Fig. 10b, c. The suggested RVS-P&O, in compar- consecutively, RVS-P&O does not exhibit any overshoot. 803
796 ison, effectively maintains the ideal C p during the 0.0033 s of With a mean value of 8.101, it maintains effectively the opti- 804
797 varying wind speed, with a mean value of 0.479. It should be mal TSR value. 805
798 noted that Table 4 displays the average C p of the examined Which in turn has an immediate impact on the generator’s 806
799 methods. The ideal TSR value preserved by RVS-P&O is speed and the mechanical power it captures. In contrast with 807
800 illustrated in Fig. 10c. Compared to the five approaches (LS- the FS-P&O method, the suggested RVS-P&O algorithm 808
801 P&O, SS-P&O, VS-P&O, ME-P&O and AD-P&O) which clearly has a better dynamic performance while monitoring 809
802 have average values of 7.686, 8.542, 7.794, 8.095 and 8.082, the ideal generator speed, as shown in Fig. 10d. In terms of 810
123
Table 3 Comparison of extracted power by MPPT methods for test scenario I
Wind Parameter WT Algorithms

speed characteristics
LS-P&O SS-P&O VS-P&O ME-P&O AD-P&O RVS-P&O
[0–4 s] Cp Settling time (s) 0.032 0.017 0.018 0.012 0.007 0.004
of
V = Rise time (s) 0.027 0.016 0.010 0.009 0.006 0.003
6m/s
Undershoot (%) 44.562 55.416 96.208 81.875 83.333 42.708
λ Settling time (s) 0.038 0.018 0.020 0.015 0.008 0.005
Rise time (s) 0.260 0.057 0.018 0.012 0.007 0.004
pro
Undershoot (%) 18.037 58.024 73.086 25.123 58.395 12.049
Settling time (s) 0.263 0.018 0.020 0.014 0.019 0.008
Rise time (s) 0.258 0.057 0.018 0 0.007 0
Undershoot (%) 0.959 0.874 0.521 0.412 0.325 0.123
Pω Average power 786.612 744.067 786.490 797.091 791.525 797.616
(W)
Power loss (W) 110.007 53.552 11.128 0.528 6.085 0.453
Efficiency (%) 78.60 93.29 98.60 99.10 99.20 99.94
V =
9m/s
λ
Rise time (s)
Undershoot (%)
Settling time (s)
Rise time (s)
Undershoot (%)
0.038
65.000
0.048
0.044
47.876
cted
0.005
32.833
0.009
0.008
31.777
0.007
27.291
0.175
0.082
28.530
0.011
34.645
0.018
0.016
33.3703
0.007
34.791
0.012
0.010
33.333
0.003
13.270
0.004
0.003
20.530
Settling time (s) 0.047 0.009 0.172 0.018 0.012 0.004
Rise time (s) 0.044 0.008 0.077 0.016 0.01 0.003
Undershoot (%) 0.988 0.956 0.758 0.625 0.425 0.256
Pω Average power 2.471e + 2.588e + 2.687e + 2.690e + 03 2.689e + 03 2.691e + 03
orre
(W) 03 03 03
Power loss (W) 160.361 103.451 4.135 1.804 0.385 0.446
Efficiency (%) 79.24 96.16 99.85 99.73 99.76 99.98
V Rise time (s) 0.015 0.003 0.021 0.001 0.002 0.001
= 11m/s
Undershoot (%) 16.062 10.080 97.916 10.791 10.833 3.750
λ Settling time (s) 0.030 0.009 0.247 0.0120 0.009 0.002
Rise time (s) 0.024 0.006 0.134 0.008 0.006 0.002
Overshoot (%) 22,716 17.481 80.061 18.209 18.185 11.209
unc
Settling time (s) 0.029 0.009 0.243 0.011 0.01 0.003

Rise time (s) 0.023 0.006 0.129 0.007 0.007 0.002
Undershoot (%) 1.233 1.110 0.885 0.785 0.587 0.358
Pω Average power 4.695e + 4.350e + 4.878e + 4.910e + 03 4.912e + 03 4.914e + 03
(W) 03 03 03
Power loss (W) 119.617 564.358 36.197 0.569 0.148 0.085
Efficiency (%) 89.60 88.52 98.16 99.31 99.84 99.99
123
of
pro
orre
unc
Fig. 10 Results from the machine side when the wind speed randomly changes
811 convergence, the proposed approach outperforms competing extracted power equivalent to 27.202% compared to the FS- 819
812 algorithms by tracking the reference rapidly with less speed P&O with a minimum power ripple 22.293%. 820
813 error (0.015 rad/s). As shown in Fig. 10e, despite the quick
814 swings, the power loss is reduced (07.413 W) and the max-
815 imum power is reached (1.568e + 03). It is also clear that
4.1.3 Real wind speed fluctuations 821
816 the suggested RVS-P&O algorithm can function effectively
817 under abrupt changes in wind speed. According to Table 4,
The suggested method has been evaluated under real wind 822
818 there is a clear augmentation of tracking accuracy in the
speed variations given from Adrar Scientific Research Center 823
123
Table 4 Comparison of extracted

power by MPPT methods for test Algorithms C p average λ average
Pω average Tracking accuracy Power ripple
scenario II (%) (%)
LS-P&O 0.436 7.686 1.562 1.585e + 71.849 97.697

03
SS-P&O 0.459 8.542 1.852 1.412e + 96.377 60.364
of
03
VS-P&O 0.464 7.794 0.699 1.018e + 62.643 51.761
03
ME-P&O 0.468 8.095 1.431 1.989e + 87.184 56.158
03
pro
AD-P&O 0.471 8.082 1.938 1.495e + 97.375 27.884
03
RVS-P&O 0.479 8.101 0.015 1.568e + 99.051 22.293
03
824 (CDER) at January 2018, as illustrated in Fig. 11a with a hand, the MPPT algorithm has to cope with accurately track- 857
825 speed greater than 10 m/s. ing the MPP only in the region II or V < 11.07m/s. On the 858
826 The difference in wind speed between the predicted and other hand, a power limiting algorithm supports the proposed 859
827
828
829
830
831
has been evaluated at 0.478 by using RVS-P&O with a very
cted
actual wind speeds is almost negligible. Table 5 presents a
summary of the simulation findings; it indicates the superi-
ority of the RVS-P&O algorithm. The average value of C p
quick reaction; this is the result of the suggested correction

MPPT approach to expand the operating area to include
region III (V > 11.07m/s). With an average wind speed
of 11.07 m/s, the proposed RVS-P&O limitation SOMSC
method is tested during sudden and unpredictable wind speed
fluctuations in order to demonstrate its durability and robust-
860
861
862
863
864
832 used to classical P&O technique to solve the issue of avoiding ness. Figure 12 shows an average wind profile (11.07 m/s) 865
833 trajectory loss and the misdirection of tracking under various that includes areas II and III. As shown in Fig. 12b, c, the sug- 866
834 and realistic climatic circumstances, as presented in Fig. 11b. gested RVS-P&O method correctly maintains the appropriate 867
835 Except for LS-P&O, SS-P&O and VS-P&O techniques, C p and λ below the rated wind speed (area II). Moreover, the 868
836 which captured low oscillations, the ME-P&O and AD-P&O C p and λ are reduced as illustrated in Fig. 12b, c, respectively, 869
orre
837 methods all captured high oscillations. Additionally, the aver- to safeguard the wind power generating system over the rated 870
838 age obtained by utilizing RVS-P&O is of 8.061, which is wind speed (area III). The results demonstrate the control 871
839 higher than the averages obtained by using LS-P&O (8.023), & System’s dependability and flexibility (switching) (parts 872
840 SS-P&O (8.120), VS-P&O (11.698), ME-P&O (10.048), and II and III). As shown in Fig. 12d, the proposed RVS-P&O 873
841 AD-P&O. (8.041). The obtained Pω average (W) by means of method outperforms the FS-P&O approach dynamically in 874
842 RVS-P&O is of (887.8502) which is the best compared to LS- both locations while tracking the ideal tip speed ratio. As a 875
843 P&O (1040.700), SS-P&O (871.794), VS-P&O (562.611), result, the power loss is decreased, the maximum is attained, 876
844 ME-P&O (1045.500), and AD-P&O (874.726). The tracking and it is fixed at its nominal value (5000 W) despite fast 877
845 accuracy (%) provided by RVS-P&O is estimated to be 98.12, oscillations. 878

unc
846 which is higher than that the given by LS-P&O (88.520),

847 SS-P&O (93.870), VS-P&O (63.370), ME-P&O (83.350),
848 and AD-P&O. (95.140). Furthermore, the power ripple (%) 4.2 Grid side converter DPC-SOSMC-STA controller 879
849 presented by RVS-P&O is of 10.480; it is better than given

850 by using LS-P&O (21.400), SS-P&O (14.120), ME-P&O By using the RVS-P&O technique that has been proposed in 880
851 (29.40), VS-P&O (19.330), and M-P&O (12.520). the MSC, the simulation results of the GSC performance are 881
shown in Fig. 13. The quality of such energy is determined by 882
the control techniques used on the grid-connected parameters 883
under management. Unique direct power control DPC-SVM- 884
852 4.1.4 Performance assessment of the proposed RVS-P&O based nonlinear control SOSMC-ST has been proposed to 885
853 algorithm for extended operational range “areas II achieve this. The effectiveness of the recommended tech- 886
854 and III” nique was evaluated by a comparison of the traditional PI, 887
ISMC, FOSMC and SOSMC; these results were supported 888
855 The random variability of the wind speed is a major problem by harmonic analysis of each controller. If the DC-bus is set 889
856 when it exceeds a certain value V > 11.07m/s. On the one to a constant value, regardless of the transient difference in 890
123
of
pro
orre
unc
891 the available wind power, at most, the exchange of electric and reactive power varies among them. According to the 899
892 power between the PMSG and the grid is ensured. The DC- simulation findings, the suggested SOSMC, which is based 900
893 link voltage should remain at 800 V or close to it using the on the “super-adaptive convolution” approach, is superior 901
894 grid side converter shown in Fig. 13a. Two distinct types of than PI, ISMC, and FOSMC. This regulator provides higher 902
895 regulators are employed with DPC-SVM to control the elec- efficiency and a smooth intended slip path without the phe- 903
896 trical power provided for the grid, as shown in Fig. 13b, c. nomena of chatter or oscillations. 904
897 PI, ISMC, FOSMC, and SOSMC control units can accurately To show the effectiveness of the suggested control strat- 905
898 track the required value. However, the quality of the active egy, an evaluation and comparison with the conventional 906
123
Table 5 Comparison of extracted

power by MPPT methods for test Algorithms C p Average λ average
Pω average Tracking Power ripple
scenario III accuracy (%) (%)
LS-P&O 0.466 8.023 4.459 1040.700 88.520 38.400

SS-P&O 0.469 8.120 2.986 871.794 93.870 14.120
of
VS-P&O 0.318 11.698 1.136 562.611 63.370 29.400
ME-P&O 0 .211 10.048 2.798 1045.500 83.350 42.330
AD-P&O 0.476 8.041 3.126 874.726 95.140 12.520
RVS-P&O 0.478 8.061 0.095 887.850 98.120 10.480
pro
907 approach have been done. Figure 13d shows the current that Due to other ways’ avoidance of the tracking loss worry 937
908 has been injected into grid phase A. Given that the current and misdirection, the step size value has been precisely deter- 938
909 (phase A, Fig. 13f) used in the FOSMC has a higher THD mined. 939
910 of 4.06%, it is crucial to examine each controller’s harmonic The suggested design of the control systems RVS-P&O- 940
911 distortion. The use of FOSMC results in the grid receiving MPPT-SOSMC gives the WTs the flexibility to operate in an 941
912 low-quality electrical electricity. As shown in Fig. 13e, g, the enlarged range with good protection in nominal wind speed 942
913 THD employing the PI and ISMC is reduced to 2.52% and in both zones (II and III). 943
914 2.38%, respectively; however, the power quality is never ade- The following observations are provided during analysis 944
915
916
917
918
919
quate and the network current injection is still undesirable.
The smooth shape of the current, shown in Fig. 12h, and the
decrease in the best current distortion recorded (0.98%), both
point to SOMSC superiority. Filtering, THD reduction, and
odd harmonic removal have been improved [23, 30]. When
cted to demonstrate the effectiveness of the suggested MPPT con-
trol method.
• According to simulation findings, the suggested RVS-

P&O algorithm offers a 21.34% (than that of FS-P&O) and
945
946
947
948
920 compared to PI, ISMC, and FOSMC, the SOSMC method 1.34% (than that of FS-P&O and VS-P&O) improvement 949
921 is estimated to attenuate between 30 and 70% of the odd in system efficiency and the least variations (0.015 rad/s.) 950
8922 harmonics inherent in the technology. and settling time (0.008 s) around the MPP. 951
• Analysis of the RVS-P&O algorithm demonstrates a good 952
degree of stability with a little fluctuation around the MPP, 953

orre
923 5 Conclusion where the mean energy loss is predicted to be 14.880 W 954
independent of the operating circumstances. 955
924 This study effort suggests an innovative and robust MPPT • The suggested combination control has outperformed the 956
925 control method for PMSG-WECS in order to overcome traditional control strategies, boosting security and simul- 957
926 the shortcomings of the pre-existing traditional P&O-MPPT taneously maximizing power extraction in both areas (II 958
927 algorithms. The suggested MPPT controller has the capacity and III). 959
928 to regulate the variable speed wind turbine system and track • The creatively suggested method is straightforward and 960
929 maximum power across a broad range of wind speeds. simple to use in actual practice. 961
930 A thorough comparison between the proposed algorithm • To control the active and reactive powers transferred 962
unc
931 and other contemporary MPPT algorithms is made to confirm between the generator and the grid in the GSC, a speci- 963
932 the performance of the proposed RVS-P&O method. fied high-order SMC has been constructed. On the other 964
933 By comparing a freshly synthesized ratio with another hand, the grid power values provided by the SOSMC 965
934 one linked to the needed power accuracy, the RVS-P&O approach exhibit smooth waveforms with appropriate 966
935 technique is based on the split of the P/ curve into many tracking indices and minimal THD, as well as undesirable 967
936 horizontal modular operational sectors. current distortion. The chattering phenomena are disre- 968
garded in the context of FOSMC control. 969
• The suggested RVS-PO algorithm performs well and offers 970
a number of intriguing advantages. 971
123
of
pro
orre
unc
(d) Mechanical power.
123
of
pro
(a) DC-link voltage. (b) Grid acive power.
(c) Grid reacive power.

cted (d) Grid current phase “A” .
orre
(e) THD for PI algorithm. (f) THD for FOSMC algorithm.

unc
(g) THD for ISMC algorithm. (h) THD for SOSMC algorithm.
Fig. 13 Results for the FOSMC, ISMC and SOSMC algorithms on the grid
123
972 Acknowledgements In their acknowledgements, the writers mention References 984
973 the “LSEM Laboratory, University Badji Mokhtar, Annaba, Algeria).”

1. Ali MN, Mahmoud K, Lehtonen M, Darwish MM (2021) An 985
974 Funding The authors received no specific funding for this study. efficient fuzzy-logic based variable-step incremental conductance 986
MPPT method for grid-connected PV systems. IEEE Access 987
975 Data availability statement The data that support the findings of this 9:26420–26430 988
976 study are available from the corresponding author, [MEGHNI BILLEL], 2. Youssef AR, Mousa HH, Mohamed EE (2020) Development of 989
of
977 upon reasonable request. self-adaptive P&O MPPT algorithm for wind generation systems 990
with concentrated search area. Renew Energy 154:875–893 991
3. Cheng M, Zhu Y (2014) The state of the art of wind energy conver- 992
978 Declarations sion systems and technologies: a review. Energy Convers Manag 993
88:332–347 994
979 Conflict of interest The authors affirm that they have no known financial 4. Ali MM, Youssef AR, Ali AS, Abdel-Jaber GT (2020) Variable 995
pro
980 or interpersonal conflicts that would have seemed to have an impact on step size PO MPPT algorithm using model reference adaptive con- 996
981 the research presented in this study. trol for optimal power extraction. Int Trans Electr Energy Syst 997
30(1):e12151 998
5. Apata O, Oyedokun DTO (2020) An overview of control tech- 999
niques for wind turbine systems. Sci Afr 10:e00566 1000

982 Appendix 6. Mousa HH, Youssef AR, Mohamed EE (2019) Study of robust 1001
adaptive step-sizes P&O MPPT algorithm for high-inertia WT 1002
983 See Tables 6, 7, 8. with direct-driven multiphase PMSG. Int Trans Electr Energy Syst 1003
29(10):e12090 1004
7. Tripathi SM, Tiwari AN, Singh D (2015) Grid-integrated perma- 1005
nent magnet synchronous generator based wind energy conver- 1006
Table 6 PMSG setting parameters

cted sion systems: a technology review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
51:1288–1305
8. Dursun EH, Koyuncu H, Kulaksiz AA (2021) A novel unified max-
imum power extraction framework for PMSG based WECS using
chaotic particle swarm optimization derivatives. Eng Sci Technol
Int J 24(1):158–170
1007
1008
1009
1010
1011
1012
9. Castelló J, Espí JM, García-Gil R (2016) Development details and 1013

Rated power Pe = 10kw
performance assessment of a wind turbine emulator. Renew Energy 1014
Stator resistance Rs = 0.00829 86:848–857 1015
Stator direct inductance L d = 0.174mH 10. Ghaffari A, Krstić M, Seshagiri S (2014) Power optimization and 1016
control in wind energy conversion systems using extremum seek- 1017

Stator quadrature inductance L q = 0.174mH ing. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 22(5):1684–1695 1018
Permanent magnet flux ψm = 0.071wb 11. Taveiros FEV, Barros LS, Costa FB (2015) Back-to-back converter
orre
1019
Number of pole pairs np = 6 state-feedback control of DFIG (doubly-fed induction generator)- 1020
based wind turbines. Energy 89:896–906 1021

Inertia Jt = 0.089kg.m2 12. Jena D, Rajendran S (2015) A review of estimation of effective 1022
Friction f = 0.005N.m wind speed based control of wind turbines. Renew Sustain Energy 1023
Rev 43:1046–1062 1024
13. Alanis AY (2022) Adaptive neural sensor and actuator fault-tolerant 1025
control for discrete-time unknown nonlinear systems. Frankl Open 1026
1:9–16 1027
Table 7 WT setting parameters 14. Ramadan H, Youssef AR, Mousa HH, Mohamed EE (2019) An 1028
efficient variable-step P&O maximum power point tracking tech- 1029

Radius of the turbine Rt = 2m nique for grid-connected wind energy conversion system. SN Appl 1030
unc
Air density ρ = 1.225kg.m3 Sci 1(12):1–15 1031

◦ 15. Lahfaoui B, Zouggar S, Mohammed B, Elhafyani ML (2017) 1032
Pitch angle β=0
Real time study of P&O MPPT control for small wind PMSG 1033
Optimal tip speed ratio λopti = 8.1 turbine systems using Arduino microcontroller. Energy Procedia 1034
power Coefficient C p = 0.48 111:1000–1009 1035
16. Mei Q, Shan M, Liu L, Guerrero JM (2010) A novel improved 1036
variable step-size incremental-resistance MPPT method for PV 1037
systems. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 58(6):2427–2434 1038
17. Abdullah MA, Yatim AHM, Tan CW, Saidur R (2012) A review 1039
Table 8 DC bus and Grid setting parameters of maximum power point tracking algorithms for wind energy sys- 1040
tems. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 16(5):3220–3227 1041
Grid resistance Rg = 0.02 18. Yu KN, Liao CK (2015) Applying novel fractional order incre- 1042
Grid direct inductance L dg = 0.005H mental conductance algorithm to design and study the maximum 1043
power tracking of small wind power systems. J Appl Res Technol 1044
Grid quadrature inductance L qg = 0.005H 13(2):238–244 1045
DC-link-voltage Vdc = 800v 19. Abdullah MA, Al-Hadhrami T, Tan CW, Yatim AH (2018) Towards 1046
green energy for smart cities: Particle swarm optimization based 1047
MPPT approach. IEEE Access 6:58427–58438 1048
123
1049 20. Meghni B, Saadoun A, Dib D, Amirat Y (2015) Effective MPPT 36. Matraji I, Al-Durra A, Errouissi R (2018) Design and experimental 1105
1050 technique and robust power control of the PMSG wind turbine. validation of enhanced adaptive second-order SMC for PMSG- 1106
1051 IEEJ Trans Electr Electron Eng 10(6):619–627 based wind energy conversion system. Int J Electr Power Energy 1107
1052 21. Mousa HH, Youssef AR, Hamdan I, Ahamed M, Mohamed EE Syst 103:21–30 1108
1053 (2021) Performance assessment of robust P&O algorithm using 37. Hong YY, Lu SD, Chiou CS (2009) MPPT for PM wind generator 1109
1054 optimal hypothetical position of generator speed. IEEE Access using gradient approximation. Energy Convers Manag 50(1):82–89 1110
1055 9:30469–30485 38. Meghni B, Dib D, Azar AT (2017) A second-order sliding mode and 1111
of
1056 22. Meghni B, Dib D, Azar AT, Saadoun A (2018) Effective super- fuzzy logic control to optimal energy management in wind turbine 1112
1057 visory controller to extend optimal energy management in hybrid with battery storage. Neural Comput Appl 28(6):1417–1434 1113
1058 wind turbine under energy and reliability constraints. Int J Dyn 39. Meghni B, Ouada M, Saad S (2020) A novel improved variable- 1114
1059 Control 6(1):369–383 step-size P&O MPPT method and effective supervisory controller 1115
1060 23. Hachana, O., Meghni, B., Benamor, A., & Toumi, I. (2022). Effi- to extend optimal energy management in hybrid wind turbine. 1116
1061 cient PMSG wind turbine with energy storage system control based Electr Eng 102(2):763–778 1117
pro
1062 shuffled complex evolution optimizer. ISA Trans 40. Meghni B, Dib D, Azar AT, Ghoudelbourk S, Saadoun A (2017) 1118
1063 24. Agarwal V, Aggarwal RK, Patidar P, Patki C (2009) A novel scheme Robust adaptive supervisory fractional order controller for opti- 1119
1064 for rapid tracking of maximum power point in wind energy gener- mal energy management in wind turbine with battery storage. In: 1120
1065 ation systems. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 25(1):228–236 Fractional order control and synchronization of chaotic systems. 1121
1066 25. Kazmi SMR, Goto H, Guo HJ, Ichinokura O (2010) A novel algo- Springer, Cham., pp 165–202 1122
1067 rithm for fast and efficient speed-sensorless maximum power point 41. Jain B, Jain S, Nema RK (2015) Control strategies of grid inter- 1123
1068 tracking in wind energy conversion systems. IEEE Trans Ind Elec- faced wind energy conversion system: an overview. Renew Sustain 1124
1069 tron 58(1):29–36 Energy Rev 47:983–996 1125
1070 26. Xia Y, Ahmed KH, Williams BW (2011) A new maximum power 42. Abdeddaim S, Betka A (2013) Optimal tracking and robust power 1126
1071 point tracking technique for permanent magnet synchronous gen- control of the DFIG wind turbine. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 1127
1072 erator based wind energy conversion system. IEEE Trans Power 49:234–242 1128
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
Electron 26(12):3609–3620
27. Linus RM, Damodharan P (2015) Maximum power point track-
cted
ing method using a modified perturb and observe algorithm for
grid connected wind energy conversion systems. IET Renew Power
Gener 9(6):682–689
28. Putri RI, Pujiantara M, Priyadi A, Ise T, Purnomo MH (2018) Max-
43. Pan L, Shao C (2020) Wind energy conversion systems analysis of
PMSG on offshore wind turbine using improved SMC and extended
state observer. Renew Energy 161:149–161
44. Lin H, Yan W, Wang J, Yao Y, Gao B (2009) Robust nonlinear
speed control for a brushless DC motor using model reference
adaptive backstepping approach. In: 2009 international conference
1129
1130
1131
1132
1133
1134
1079 imum power extraction improvement using sensorless controller on mechatronics and automation. IEEE, pp 335–340 1135
1080 based on adaptive perturb and observe algorithm for PMSG wind 45. Benelghali S, Benbouzid MEH, Charpentier JF, Ahmed-Ali T, 1136
1081 turbine application. IET Electr Power Appl 12(4):455–462 Munteanu I (2011) Experimental validation of a marine current tur- 1137
1082 29. Wang P, Liu F, Song Y (2013) A novel maximum power point track- bine simulator: application to a PMSG-based system second-order 1138
1083 ing control method in wind turbine application. In: Proceedings of sliding mode control. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 58(1):118–126 1139
1084 the 32nd Chinese control conference. IEEE, pp 7569–7574 46. Guo B, Su M, Wang H, Tang Z, Liao Y, Zhang L, Shi S 1140
30. Youssef AR, Ali AI, Saeed MS, Mohamed EE (2019) Advanced (2020) Observer-based second-order sliding mode control for grid-
orre
1085 1141
1086 multi-sector P&O maximum power point tracking technique for connected VSI with LCL-type filter under weak grid. Electric 1142
1087 wind energy conversion system. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst Power Syst Res 183:106270 1143
1088 107:89–97 47. Fazli E, Rakhtala SM, Mirrashid N, Karimi HR (2022) Real-time 1144
1089 31. Mousa HH, Youssef AR, Mohamed EE (2019) Variable step size implementation of a super twisting control algorithm for an upper 1145
1090 P&O MPPT algorithm for optimal power extraction of multi-phase limb wearable robot. Mechatronics 84:102808 1146
1091 PMSG based wind generation system. Int J Electr Power Energy 48. Belkaid A, Colak I, Kayisli K (2017) Implementation of a modified 1147
1092 Syst 108:218–231 P&O-MPPT algorithm adapted for varying solar radiation condi- 1148
1093 32. Mousa HH, Youssef AR, Mohamed EE (2019) Adaptive P&O tions. Electr Eng 99(3):839–846 1149
1094 MPPT algorithm based wind generation system using realistic wind
1095 fluctuations. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 112:294–308
1096 33. Pathak D, Gaur P (2019) A fractional order fuzzy-proportional-
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to juris- 1150
unc
1097 integral-derivative based pitch angle controller for a direct-drive

dictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. 1151
1098 wind energy system. Comput Electr Eng 78:420–436
1099 34. Zhou F, Liu J (2018) Pitch controller design of wind turbine based
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds
1100 on nonlinear PI/PD control. Shock Vib
exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the
1101 35. Karim Belmokhtar HI, Doumbia ML (2016) A maximum power
author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted
1102 point tracking control algorithms for a PMSG-based WECS for
manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such
1103 isolated applications: critical review. Wind Turbines Des Control
publishing agreement and applicable law.
1104 Appl 199
123
Journal: 202
Article: 1691
Author Query Form

Please ensure you fill out your response to the queries raised below
of
and return this form along with your corrections
Dear Author
pro
During the process of typesetting your article, the following queries have arisen. Please check your typeset proof carefully
against the queries listed below and mark the necessary changes either directly on the proof/online grid or in the ‘Author’s
response’ area provided below
Query Details required Author’s response

1. Please confirm the corresponding author is correctly
I checked, it is correct
identified.
2. Please check and confirm organizational division and
3.
4.
name are correct in Affiliations 1.
cted
Please confirm the inserted city name is correct.
Please check and confirm the inserted citation of Fig. 4,
8 is correct. If not, please suggest an alternative citation.
The quotations of the figure 4 and 8
are not correct, the figure 4
must be added and quoted i
Please note that figures should be cited in sequential n the line 662, the figure 8 must be added a
nd quoted in the line 682.
order in the text.
5. Kindly check and confirm inserted section headings are I checked, it is correct
correct.
6. Kindly provide complete details for the references [23, 1. the complete details of the references (23,34,35 and 40) are:
orre
• 23.Hachana, O., Meghni, B., Benamor, A., & Toumi, I. (In Press). Efficient PMSG wind turbine with energy storage system control based shuffled complex evolution optimizer. ISA transactions.
• 34.Zhou, F., & Liu, J. (2018). Pitch controller design of wind turbine based on nonlinear PI/PD control. Shock and Vibration, vol. 2018, Article ID 7859510, 14 pages.
• 35. Karim Belmokhtar, H. I., & Doumbia, M. L. (2016). A Maximum Power Point Tracking Control Algorithms for a PMSG‐based WECS for Isolated Applications: Critical Review. Wind Turbines: Design, Control and Applications, 199.
• 40. Meghni, B., Dib, D., Azar, A.T., Ghoudelbourk, S., Saadoun, A. (2017). Robust Adaptive Supervisory Fractional Order Controller for Optimal Energy Management in Wind Turbine with Battery Storage. In: Azar, A., Vaidyanathan, S., Ouannas
34, 35, 40].

7. Please check and confirm the inserted citation of I checked, it is correct
Tables 1, 2 is correct. If not, please suggest an alter-
native citation. Please note that Tables should be cited
in sequential order in the text.
8. As References [8] and [33] are same, we have deleted I checked, it is correct
the duplicate reference and renumbered accordingly.
Please check and confirm.
unc

202 2022 1691 Author

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

202 2022 1691 Author

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dear Author,

Here are the proofs of your article.

You can submit your corrections online, via e-mail or by fax.

An in-depth study of robust MPPT for extend optimal power extraction

Toumi Ilham F Simplex 19

Boulmaiz Amira Id d-axis current 21

Hachana Oussama Iq q-axis current 23

1 LSEM Laboratory, Department of Electrical Engineering, K First unknown gain 25

University Badji Mokhtar, Annaba, Algeria l Sector index 26

2 Laboratoire LAGE, Department of Electronics and Ld d-axis inductance 27

Telecommunications, Faculty of New Technologies of Lq q-axis inductance 28

Computing and Communication, University of Ouargla, M Second unknown gain 29

35 Pk Turbine power DC Direct current 79

36 Qg Grid reactive power DFIG Doubly fed induction generator 80

37 Rs Stator resistance DPC Direct power control 81

38 S Surface FLC Fuzzy logic control 82

sQ Sliding surface of the reactive power FOC Field-oriented control

41 Te Electromagnetic torque FS Fixed 85

42 αL Weighting factor GSC Grid side converter 86

43 V Wind speed INC Incremental conductance 87

44 Vd d-axis voltage IPC Indirect power controller 88

Vdg Grid d-axis voltage LS Large step

46 Vdi Inverter d-axis voltage MPPT Maximum power point tracking 90

47 Vq q-axis voltage MSC Machine side converter 91

48 Vqg Grid q-axis voltage ORB Optimum relation-based 92

49 Vqi Inverter q-axis voltage ORC Optimal rotational cycle 93

50 W Selection factor OTC Optimal torque control 94

P&O Perturb & observe 95

PMSG Permanent magnet synchronous generator 96

51 Subscripts and superscripts PSO Particle swarm optimizer 97

PSF Power signal feedback 98

56 i Element (solution) STA Super-twisting algorithm 103

57 j Point index SVM Support vector machine 104

58 k Complex index SVPWM Space vector pulse width modulation 105

59 max Maximum THD Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization 106

60 mes Measure VS Variable step 107

62 p Power WECS Wind energy control system 109

63 q Stator axis WSE Wind speed estimated 110

64 ref Reference WT Wind turbine 111

65 s Stator VDC ref Reference of DC link voltage 112

Pg ref Reference of grid active power 113

Qg ref Reference of grid reactive power 114

67 α Number of iteration for each simplex

68 β Blade pitch angle

[1]. The improvement in the Wind Energy Conversion Sys- 119

tem’s (WECS) efficiency in this respect is essential for 120

74 Abbreviations successful operation. 4

75 AC Alternate current 1.1 Wind generation system 122

P/ characteristic includes several peaks [18]. To use the 217

235 it is on the other side [2]. The performance of the dynamic

238 size. As a consequence, the CPO algorithms have a number

the modified P & O (M-P&O) method, which employs a 282

• The ideal generator speed is utilized by the proposed RVS-

• Additionally, the suggested RVS-P&O method is validated 375

with respect to various speed conditions and real wind 376

330 machines. ventional approaches, it enables to reach higher dynamic 383

332 in the list below. increased steady-state stability. 385

Fig. 2 Complete control description of the studied wind system

387 introduction, Sect. 2 is focused on mathematical model-

395 and future trends are presented.

be attained under conditions of maximum wind speed at a 427

certain range of rotor speeds [22]. When maintained at ˘opt, 428

turbine is rotating at its ideal speed, which may be accom- 430

P/ characteristic includes several peaks [18]. To use the 217

1.5Vdg To ensure the sliding manifolds’ convergence to zero in 553

628 Pk = f (k , vk ) (22)

683 knew−ref = kref −