Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 715e728

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/renene

Analysis and synthesis of sliding mode control for large scale variable
speed wind turbine for power optimization
Jova
rida a, *, Luis T. Aguilar a, Jorge Da

n Me
vila b
a
Instituto Polit

ecnico Nacional e CITEDI, Av. del Parque 1310, Mesa de Otay, Tijuana, BC 22510, Mexico
b
n, Av. Ticoma

n 600, Col. San Jos

n, Delegacio
Instituto Polit

ecnico Nacional, ESIME e Ticoma e Ticoma
n Gustavo A. Madero, M

exico, DF 07340, Mexico

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

Article history: The problem of designing a nonlinear feedback control scheme for variable speed wind turbines, without
Received 2 August 2013 wind speed measurements, in below rated wind conditions was addressed. The objective is to operate
Accepted 18 June 2014 the wind turbines in order to have maximum wind power extraction while also the mechanical loads are
Available online 15 July 2014
reduced. Two control strategies were proposed seeking a better performance. The first strategy uses a
tracking controller that ensures the optimal angular velocity for the rotor. The second strategy uses a
Keywords:
Maximum Power Point Tracking (MPPT) algorithm while a non-homogeneous quasi-continuous high-
Sliding mode control
order sliding mode controller is applied to ensure the power tracking. Two algorithms were devel-
Wind turbines
Maximum power point tracking
oped to solve the tracking control problem for the first strategy. The first one is a sliding mode output
Renewable energy feedback torque controller combined with a wind speed estimator. The second algorithm is a quasi-
Nonlinear control continuous high-order sliding mode controller to ensure the speed tracking. The proposed controllers
are compared with existing control strategies and their performance is validated using a FAST model
based on the Controls Advanced Research Turbine (CART). The controllers show a good performance in
terms of energy extraction and load reduction.
© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction produce electrical energy. Wind energy is currently one of the

1.1. Overview
As a result of population expansion and increased global inte-
gration, there has been a high growth in energy consumption. The
high rates of electricity consumption supposes a risk for the
depletion of natural resources, therefore the demand of renewable
energy generation systems has increased [1]. Such demand is
supported by social and environmental reasons: the debate on
climate change, depletion of fossil resources and nuclear damage
caused by the use of non-fossil fuels. All these factors have led to
the global community, and national governments to set new pol-
icies in favor of renewable energy and drive future improvements
in related technologies. Wind energy has been proved to be an
important source of clean and renewable energy in order to
fastest growing renewable energy technologies in the world [2].
On the other hand, wind turbines present great challenges
because they are complex nonlinear systems containing uncertain
parameters, unmodeled dynamics, and unknown disturbances.
Ongoing research is focused on increasing energy efficiency and
reducing mechanical stress. One solution is to use advanced control
strategies that enhance the performance of the turbine, which allows
a better use of resources of the turbine, augmenting the lifetime of
mechanical and electrical components, earning higher returns.
There are two primary types of horizontal-axis wind turbines:
fixed speed and variable speed [3]. In this work, we choose the
variable speed because although the fixed speed system is easy to
build and operate, it does not have the ability that the variable
speed system has in energy extraction, up to a 20e30% increase
over fixed speed [3]. Wind turbine controller objectives depend on
the operation area [4e7]. Variable speed wind turbine operation
can be divided into three operating regions (Fig. 1):

 Region I: below cut-in wind speed.

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: merida@citedi.mx, jovan21@gmail.com (J. Me

rida), laguilarb@  Region II: between cut-in wind speed and rated wind speed.
ipn.mx (L.T. Aguilar), jadavila@ipn.mx (J. D

avila).  Region III: between rated wind speed and cut out wind speed.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.06.030
0960-1481/© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
716 J. M
erida et al. / Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 715e728
Fig. 1. Power curve for the CART.
In Region I, wind turbines do not move because power available
in the wind is low compared to losses in the turbine system. Region
II is an operational mode where it is desirable that the turbine
captures as much power as possible from the wind, because wind
energy extraction rates are low, and the structural loads are rela-
tively small. Generator torque provides the control input to vary the
rotor speed while the blade pitch is held constant. Region III occurs
when the wind speed are high enough for the turbine, such that it
must be limited the fraction of the wind power captured in order to
guarantee that the safe electrical and mechanical loads limits are
not exceeded.
The problem in Region II is considered in the present work.
Classical controllers have been extensively used because linear
control theory is a well-developed topic while nonlinear control
theory is less developed and difficult to analyze and implement. PI
and PID controllers are extensively used [8e10]. PID, gain sched-
uling, and LQR controllers are designed in Ref. [11]. LQR controllers
reduce the pitch activity and power excursions compared to the PID
controllers. In Ref. [12], a PI controller is used in conjunction with a
gain-scheduled control to accommodate variations in the wind,
while the gain-scheduled control allows better power regulation
and load reduction. Although some of those classical methods have
been successfully applied, they do not consider the nonlinearities
on their controllers and do not take into account the dynamical
aspect of the wind and the turbine [4,7,13,14]. To get a mathematical
model that reflects accurately the wind dynamics and the me-
chanical behavior of the turbine, is a high difficult task because its
complexity. That is the main reason to use a simplified model,
mainly if it is pretended to perform a real implementation. One way
of circumvent the modeling problem is through a control strategy
that compensated the discrepancies between the real plant and the
mathematical model.
1.2. Literature review
Recently, nonlinear controllers for wind turbines have been of
interest to the scientific community; such as variable structure
controllers. This approach is robust against parametric un-
certainties, external disturbances, and unmodeled dynamics and
presents the characteristic of finite-time reachability. A first-order
sliding mode controller for power regulation is developed in
Ref. [15], demonstrating the viability and effectiveness of the con-
trol strategy. Beltran et al. [16] extended the control to region II in
conjunction with a Maximum Power Point Tracking algorithm,
showing that the proposed control strategy is more efficient in
terms of reduction of the drive-train mechanical stresses and
output power fluctuations with respect to standard control. The
main disadvantage of the proposed strategy by Beltran et al. [16] is
that it uses a monotonic approximation of the signum function in
order to avoid the chattering phenomena, losing robustness. An
additional drawback of this strategy is that the rotor speed is not
limited around its nominal value, allowing high mechanical loads
over the drive-train. Four second-order sliding mode controllers
are compared in Ref. [17] working in Region II concluding that the
super-twisting algorithm is the best option for the studied case.
Evangelista et al. [18] synthesized a super-twisting sliding mode
control with variable gain, which is compared with a super-
twisting algorithm with fixed gain showing a better performance
in terms of chattering, mechanical loads, and power tracking. In
Refs. [19], we developed a first-order sliding mode controller to
solve the problem of power optimization assuming that all states
can be measured. The strategy has a good capture of power, but
presents chattering in generator torque. The chattering causes high
torque variations increasing mechanical stress. The wind speed
measurement is not an easy task, for that reason in Ref. [20] a wind
speed estimator, using the wind turbine itself as a measuring de-
vice, was designed, the estimator is based on super-twisting
observer and NewtoneRaphson algorithm. A quasi-continuous
second-order sliding mode controller was proposed in Ref. [21] to
reduce the effects of chattering in the generated torque. The
strategy provides a suitable compromise between conversion effi-
ciency and mechanical loads, and there is no need for wind speed
measured or estimated. The quasi-continuous second-order sliding
mode controller was also used to solve the problem of power
regulation and load reduction in Region III [22].
1.3. Contribution
The objective of this paper is to design controllers that in spite of
nonlinear behavior, unmodeled dynamics, and unknown distur-
bances, maximize the capture of aerodynamic power and reduce
the mechanics loads over the wind turbine. The contribution of this
work consists in two proposing strategies using quasi-continuous
sliding mode control [23,24]:
 The first approach uses a tracking algorithm with a wind speed
estimator that ensures the optimal angular velocity for the rotor.
The proposed controllers consist of two algorithms. The first one
is a sliding mode state output feedback torque controller. The
second proposed algorithm uses a quasi-continuous high-order
sliding mode controller to ensure the speed tracking.
 The second strategy presents a non-homogeneous quasi-
continuous high-order sliding mode controller [25] with MPPT
algorithm to ensure the power tracking. This strategy only needs
to measure the rotor speed and electric power.
 Effective improvements are brought regarding a previously
proposed control strategies, such a better energy extraction and
load alleviation without wind speed measurement.
The proposed controllers are validated using the high-order
nonlinear aeroelastic model FAST (fatigue, aerodynamics, struc-
tures, and turbulence) of the CART [26e28].
1.4. Organization of the paper
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, the wind turbine
model and problem formulation are presented. The design of the
first strategy of control is covered in Section 3. In Section 4, the
second strategy of control is given. Simulation results are provided
and discussed in Section 5. Section 6 presents some conclusions.
 J. M
erida et al. / Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 715e728 717

2. Wind turbine model and problem statement is the aerodynamic torque which depends nonlinearly upon the tip
speed ratio. The main components of a variable speed wind turbine
This section presents the dynamic model of a variable speed are: an aeroturbine, a gearbox, and a generator. The energy in the
wind turbine and the problem statement. The wind turbine model wind turns two or three propellers around a rotor. Because the
incorporates aerodynamic characteristics, turbine mechanics, and rotor is connected to the main shaft which in turn is connected to
generator dynamics. Detailed descriptions of the different dynamic the high speed shaft through a gearbox, the aerodynamic power is
sub-models are given in the following subsections. transferred to generator. Finally, the electrical power generated is
transferred to the grid.
2.1. Aerodynamics
2.2. Turbine mechanics
The aerodynamic power captured by the rotor is given by the
nonlinear expression [29] The mechanical model of the two-mass wind turbine (Fig. 3) can
be described as follows [7,31]:
1
Pa ¼ rpR2 Cp ðl; bÞvðtÞ3 (1)
2 Ta ður ; b; vÞ Kls ðqr qls Þ Dls ður uls Þ Dr ur
u_ r ¼
where v(t) is the wind speed, r is the air density, and R is the rotor Jr
radius. The efficiency of the rotor blades is denoted as Cp, which Te ng þ Kls ðqr qls Þ þ Dls ður uls Þ Dg ng ug
depends on the blade pitch angle b, or the angle of attack of the u_ g ¼ (5)
Jg ng
rotor blades, and the tip speed ratio l, the ratio of the blade tip
ug
linear speed to the wind speed. The parameters b and l affect the d_ ¼ ur
ng
efficiency of the system. The coefficient Cp is specific for each wind
turbine. The relationship of tip speed ratio is given by
where Te is the generator (electromagnetic) torque, uls is the low
ur shaft speed, qr is the rotor side angular deviation, qls is the gearbox
l¼R (2)
vðtÞ side angular deviation, Jr > 0 is the rotor inertia, Jg > 0 is the
generator inertia, ug is the generator speed, Dr is the rotor external
where ur is the rotor speed. The turbine estimated Cp surface as a damping, Dg is the generator external damping, Dls is the low speed
function of tip speed ratio and blade pitch based on the CART is shaft damping, Kls is the low speed shaft stiffness, and d described
illustrated in Fig. 2. This surface was created using modeling soft- the deflection of the drive-shaft. Assuming an ideal gearbox with
ware WTPerf which uses blade-element-momentum theory to transmission ng
predict the performance of wind turbines [29,30].
Fig. 2 indicates that there is a unique l at which the turbine is
ug T
most efficient. From (1) and (2), notice that the rotor efficiency is ng ¼ ¼ ls (6)
highly nonlinear and makes the entire system a nonlinear system. uls Ths
The efficiency of power capture is a function of the tip speed ratio
and the blade pitch. The power captured from the wind follows the where Tls ¼ Kls ðqr qls Þ þ Dls ður uls Þ is the low speed shaft tor-
relationship que. A simple rigid body model (single-mass) of a wind turbine can
be considered if ur ¼ uls . Therefore, upon using (6) and (5), one gets
Pa ¼ Ta ur (3) [16,32]:

where
Jt u_ r ¼ Ta ður ; b; vÞ Dt ur Tg (7)
1 Cp ðl; bÞ
Ta ¼ rpR3 vðtÞ2 (4)
2 l where Jt ¼ Jr þ n2g Jg , Dt ¼ Dr þ n2g Dg , and Tg ¼ ng Te are the turbine
total inertia, turbine total external damping, and generator torque
in the rotor side, respectively. The controllers are synthesized using
a single-mass model of a variable speed wind turbine (7).

0.4

0.3
Cp(λ,β)

0.2

0.1

0
−10 15
0 10
10
20 5
30 λ
β

Fig. 2. Power coefficient curve. Fig. 3. Two-mass model.

718 J. M
erida et al. / Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 715e728

2.3. Generator dynamics T_ a Dt u_ r Jt u

€ ropt Jt b1 e_ u Jt b0 eu
T_ e ¼ (14)
ng
The generator model is described by a first-order linear model [7]:
The coefficients b0 and b1 are found by using the pole-placement
1 1 criteria, that is
T_ e ¼ Te þ Te;r (8)
tT tT
s2 þ b1 s þ b0 ¼ s2 þ 2xu0 s þ u20 (15)
where Te;r is the requested generator torque and Te is the actual
generator torque with the time constant tT ¼ 0:01 s. leading to b0 ¼ u20 and b1 ¼ 2xu0 . Further, the gains a0, b0, and b1
are chosen such the control action keeps a good tradeoff between
2.4. Problem statement power generation and load reduction. These existing control
techniques are not robust enough against unmodeled dynamics,
The main objective in Region II is to maximize the power parametric uncertainties, and external disturbances. The proposed
extracted from the wind. While energy is captured from the wind, control strategies, therefore, shall overcome this problem in order
the aerodynamic power should be maximized below rated wind to improve the performance.
speed. This operating strategy uses system speed control to track
the maximum efficiency curve developed in the torque speed plane 3. Sliding mode control design
in order to maximize the efficiency of the extraction of energy [33].
This makes the efficiency crucial. In (2), the tip speed ratio can be In this section, a combination of first and second-order sliding
altered to include the optimized points mode controllers with a wind estimator is presented (Fig. 4).
uropt
lopt ¼ R (9) 3.1. Wind estimator
v

leading to a unique maximum point given by For a wind turbine, it is usual to measure the wind speed by an

anemometer installed on the top of the nacelle. The measured wind
Cp lopt ; bopt ¼ Cpmax (10) speed is called point wind speed. The point wind speed does not
represent the rotor effective wind speed since it is impossible to
that corresponds to the maximum power production. represent the wind speed v by a unique measure. The wind speed
To maximize the extracted energy, the maximum rotor effi- varies spatially on the swept rotor area, consequently it is difficult
ciency must be maintained during operation. For this purpose, b is to obtain an accurate value of the rotor effective wind speed. From
fixed to bopt and uropt should change depending on the wind speed Eq. (9), the estimation of the wind speed bv is related to the Ta by the
variations following equation:

lopt v 1  
uropt ¼ (11) Ta rpR3 Cq b
l bv2 ¼ 0 (16)
R 2
Then, the control objective is to find a control law Te to maximize where
power extraction by adjusting the rotational speed of the wind
changes, such that ur follows uropt and the aerodynamic power b b rR
u
l¼
remains at its maximum value, while also reducing transient loads b
v
presented in the turbine components.
In order to make a measurement of the proposed controller and Cq ðb
lÞ ¼ Cq ðb
l; bopt Þ is a tabulated function of b v is calculated
l. b
performance, a comparison will be done with some existing control using the NewtoneRaphson algorithm [6]. The obtained value of b v
laws. A brief description of the controllers to be compared is given allows to deduce the optimal rotor speed u v =R. The
b ropt ¼ lopt b
below. closed-loop system, under the proposed controllers, will track the
The following control law tries to keep the turbine operating at wind speed in order to achieve u b ropt .
the peak of its curve Cpmax
3.2. Quasi-continuous sliding mode control

Kopt u2r Dt ur 1 Cp The quasi-continuous of an arbitrary order sliding mode

Te ¼ ; with Kopt ¼ prR5 3max (12)
ng 2 lopt controller was suggested in Refs. [24] and [34]. For i ¼ 1; …; n 1,
let us denote
The optimal tip speed ratio lopt of the CART is equal to 8.5 and
Cpmax ¼ 0:4291. This method is known as Indirect Speed Control
(ISC) [32]. Boukhezzar and Siguerdidjane [32] proposed two state
feedback controllers. The controllers show a good performance in
terms of efficiency with acceptable efforts on the rotor speed and
control torque. The nonlinear static state feedback control
(NSSFC) is:

Ta D t ur Jt u_ ropt Jt a0 eu
Te ¼ (13)
ng

where eu ¼ uropt ur is the rotor speed error and a0 > 0. The

nonlinear dynamic state feedback control (NDSFC) is: Fig. 4. First proposed control scheme.
 J. M
erida et al. / Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 715e728 719

Remark 1. If FðxÞ is equal to 1, then we have the case of homo-

geneous control with constant gain and other case we have the
non-homogeneous control.
It has been proved that the quasi-continuous high-order sliding
mode controllers present robustness to parametric uncertainties,
robustness with respect to external disturbances, robustness to
unmodeled dynamics, exactness, finite-time convergence, and
asymptotic accuracies. On the other hand, quasi-continuous high-
order sliding mode controllers provide better transient features
than other high-order sliding mode controllers. The non-
homogeneous high-order sliding mode controller preserves the
Fig. 5. Second proposed control scheme.
characteristic of homogeneous sliding mode controller, but allows
to adjust the amount of energy supplied into the system in order to
maintain the desired performance reducing at the same time the
40;n ¼ s; N0;n ¼ jsj; J0;n ¼ signðsÞ (17) effects of chattering.

ðn 1Þ=ðr nþ1Þ 3.2.1. First-order sliding mode controller

4i;n ¼ sðiÞ þ bi Ni 1;n
Ji 1;n (18) Here, a first-order sliding mode controller (FOSMC) is synthe-
sized. For this purpose, let us consider the next sliding variable
ðn 1Þ=ðr nþ1Þ
Ni;n ¼ sðiÞ þ bi Ni (19) s1 ¼ u
b ropt
1;n ur (23)

Ji;n ¼ 4i;n Ni;n (20) where s1 is the rotor speed error. Computing the time derivative of
(23) and using Eq. (7), we get
where bi ; …; bn 1 are positives numbers. The controller takes the
form b_ ropt þ Dt ur þ ng Te
s_ 1 ¼ Jt u Ta (24)
  The following controller
1Þ
u¼ aFðxÞJn 1;n _ …; sðn
s; s; (21)
Ta D t ur b_ ropt
Jt u a1 s1 a1 signðs1 Þ
Te ¼ ; with a1 ; a1 > 0
ng
FðxÞ ¼ k1 kxk þ k2 (22)
(25)
where a, k1, and k2 are constants sufficiently large, and FðxÞ is the drives s1 to the origin in finite-time.
so-called gain function [25]. It was shown in Refs. [24,25,34] that,
provided the sufficiently large tuning parameters bi ; …; bn 1 and a 3.2.2. Stability analysis
and considering (22), then the control law defined by (17)e(22) Consider the Lyapunov function candidate
ensures the convergence of s ¼ s_ ¼ / ¼ sðnÞ ¼ 0 in finite-time.
1
Moreover, the control is globally bounded ðu  aFðxÞÞ and V ¼ s21 (26)
continuous everywhere except in the origin of the n-dimensional 2
error space. The time derivative of (26) is:

Fig. 6. (a) Wind speed and (b) wind speed estimation.

720 J. M
erida et al. / Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 715e728

Fig. 7. Rotor speed.

 _  €
V_ ¼ s1 s_ 1 ¼ s1 Jt u
b ropt þ Dt ur þ ng Te Ta Jt u
b ropt þ Jt d1 s_ 1 þ Jt d0 s1 þ Dt u_ r þ ng T_ e T_ a ¼ 0 (29)

¼ s1 ½a1 s1 þ a1 signðs1 ފ ¼ a1 s21 a1 ks1 k (27) The following controller is thus derived for (29) based on [24]

Notice that V_ is negative definite if and only if a1 and a1 are

T_ a b€ropt
Jt u Dt u_ r Jt d1 s_ 1 Jt d0 s1
positives. T_ e ¼
ng
 
1=2
3.2.3. Second-order sliding mode controller a2 s_ 1 þ s1 signðs1 Þ
Now, a second-order sliding mode controller (SOSMC) is syn-   ; with d0 ; d1 ; a2 > 0 (30)
1=2
thesized to maximize the efficiency of aerodynamic power ng s_ 1 þ s1
extraction. We impose a second-order dynamics to (23)

€s1 þ d1 s_ 1 þ d0 s1 ¼ 0 (28) Note that controller (30) requires the time derivative of s1, there-
fore, we use the sliding mode differentiator from Levant [23,35] to
where d0 > 0, d1 > 0. Substituting the second time derivative of s1 estimate s_ 1 which consist of a first-order real-time differentiator of
into (28), we obtain the form

Fig. 8. Generator speed.

 J. M
erida et al. / Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 715e728 721

Fig. 9. Generator torque.

z_ 0 ¼ z1 l2 jLj1=2 jz0 s1 j1=2 signðz0 s1 Þ
(31)
z_ 1 ¼ l1 Lsignðz1 z_ 0 Þ
where z0 and z1 are the real-time estimations of s1 and s_ 1 , respec-
tively. The time derivatives that appear in the generator torque
expression (13), (14), (25), and (30) are obtained by a filtered de-
rivative s=ðq þ 1Þ.
4. Sliding mode control design with MPPT algorithm
In this section, a second-order quasi-continuous control in
combination with a maximum power point tracking (MPPT) algo-
rithm is presented. In most of the wind energy conversion systems,
MPPT algorithm is implemented using wind speed data obtained
from wind speed sensors. However, accurate measurement of wind
speed is not an easy task mainly in large size wind turbines.
Therefore, a lot of researches are underway in order to develop
controllers which do not require measurements of wind speed. In
Refs. [36,37], a reviewing state of the art of MPPT algorithms for
wind energy systems is done, making a comparison between the
different strategies. We choose the power output as the controlled
variable, such that, a simple structure controller can be utilized. We
are using power signal feedback (PSF) control to generate the po-
wer reference, no wind velocity measurement is required in this
method. Taking the data supplied by WTPerf [30] for the CART and
based on tests and design calculations we obtain the electrical
power output Peopt against shaft speed ur characteristic of the
system.
4.1. Non-homogeneous quasi-continuous control design
Here, the non-homogeneous quasi-continuous sliding mode
controller is developed to achieve robust power tracking. The
following sliding variable is proposed

Fig. 10. Low speed shaft torque.

722 J. M
erida et al. / Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 715e728

Fig. 11. Electric power.

 . 
a3 Fðs2 Þ s_ 2 þ b1 js2 j1=2 signðs2 Þ js_ 2 j þ b1 js2 j1=2
s2 ¼ Peopt Pe (32) T_ e ¼ ;
n g ur
where s2 is the power tracking error and Pe ¼ ng ur Te is the elec- with a3 > 0
trical power. Then, we obtain the first time derivative of s2 (34)

 
s_ 2 ¼ P_ eopt ng u_ r Te ng ur T_ e þ x (33) Fðs2 Þ ¼ k1 jjs2 jj þ k2 ; k1 > 0; with k2 > P_ eopt þ ng u_ r Te
þ ng ur xþ
where xðt; ur Þ2ℝ represents the uncertainties and disturbances. It
is assumed that xðt; ur Þ is Lebesgue measurable and it is matched (35)
and uniformly bounded, that is, jxðt; ur Þj < xþ . Providing the tuning
The time derivative s_ 2 is computed using (31).
parameters b1 and a3 > 0 sufficiently large in the list order, the
following controller drives s2 to the origin in finite-time even in Remark 2. If Fðs2 Þ is equal to 1, then we have the case of homo-
presence of uncertainties and perturbations term x geneous control with constant gain.

Fig. 12. (a) Rotor speed; (b) generator speed.

 J. M
erida et al. / Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 715e728 723

Fig. 13. (a) Generator torque; (b) low speed shaft torque.

The proposed generator power control strategy is as shown in
Fig. 5. The non-homogeneous controller with variable gain (NHVG)
(34) and (35) will be compared with the homogeneous controller
with constant gain (HCG). We assume for these controllers that
only the rotor speed and electric power are available from mea-
surements on the wind turbine.
5. Simulation results under turbulent wind
The dynamic model of a horizontal-axis turbine CART is simu-
lated in Matlab-Simulink and validated with FAST simulator [26]
which is interfaced with Simulink. Based on [6], the simulations
are carried out under the following operating conditions:
 Filtering the reference speed uropt and its time derivatives to
obtain a less turbulent signal.
 Filtering the rotor speed signal by a low-pass filter for the con-
trol laws NHVG and HCG to reduce the effects of drive-train
oscillations and provide a smoother reference signal.
 In presence of an additive measurement noise on ur with an SNR
around 7 dB.
 In presence of a constant additive control input disturbance
115.8346 Nm in the generator torque Te.
The wind speed is described as a slowly varying average wind
speed superimposed by a rapidly varying turbulent wind speed.
The model of the wind speed v at the measured point is

 Choosing dynamics that track the mean tendency wind speed,
along a short-time interval, while avoiding to track the wind
speed local high-turbulence fluctuations.
 Filtering the generator torque Te using a low-pass filter in order
to smooth the control action.
v ¼ vm þ vt (36)
where vm is the mean value and vt is the turbulent component. The
hub-referenced wind field was generated using Turbsim [38]. The
wind data consist of 600 s [29] in vm ¼ 7.5 m/s with 18% turbulence
intensity, via Kaimal turbulence model.
In Fig. 6a, we show the wind speed v and Fig. 6b is the corre-
sponding wind speed estimation b v . Fig. 6b shows that the wind speed
estimation is very closely tracked. The discrepancies are caused by
the effects of unmodeled turbine dynamics, errors in the Cp curve,
changes in the power function due to dynamic effects, and speed of
convergence of NewtoneRaphson algorithm. The estimator provides
a good estimated of wind speed, this allows to get a better rotor speed

Table 1
Comparison of control strategies using FAST simulator.

ISC NSSFC FOSMC NDSFC SOSMC HCG NHVG

haero (%) 80.68 81.97 82.01 82.33 82.36 82.76 82.83

helect (%) 81.24 82.27 82.30 82.42 82.46 83.08 83.14
std(Tls) 13.186 13.072 13.113 12.437 12.325 12.269 12.902
(kN m)
max(Tls) 77.954 78.075 78.047 72.587 72.381 75.140 76.714
(kN m)
std(Te) 0.3014 0.2921 0.2938 0.2906 0.2879 0.2841 0.2905
(kN m)
max(Te) 1.791 1.645 1.640 1.589 1.588 1.668 1.721
(kN m)
Fig. 14. Electric power.
724 J. M
erida et al. / Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 715e728

Fig. 15. Rotor speed.

reference. We chose the following gains for the controllers (12)e(14),
(25), (30), (34) and (35): Kopt ¼ 5:3813  103 , a0 ¼ 0:115,
b0 ¼ 0:0005, b1 ¼ 0:0402, a1 ¼ 4:746  104 , b1 ¼ 1, a1 ¼ 389:0947,
d0 ¼ 0:0005, d1 ¼ 0:0402, a2 ¼ 19:4547, a3 ¼ 50  103 ,
k1 ¼ 0:00006, and k2 ¼ 0:00001, under the following initial
conditions: ur ð0Þ ¼ 33:7042 rpm, ug ð0Þ ¼ 1454:8417 rpm,
Te ð0Þ ¼ 1408:5919 Nm, and bð0Þ ¼ 1 . We used q ¼ 100 for the
filtered derivative.
5.1. Using the mathematical model
First, we describe the results obtained using the mathematic
model. The controllers are applied to optimize the extracted
aerodynamic power and reduce strong torque variations in the
generator that could lead to increase mechanical stresses. Follow
the optimal rotor speed (see Fig. 7) means following the short-
time changes fast in wind speed. Due to the dynamics of the
rotor is impossible to achieve this optimal value; thus, an inter-
mediate tracking dynamics should be chosen to establish a
compromise between energy capture improvement and dynamic
loads reduction. Looking at Figs. 7e14 we see the commitment
made between power extraction and loads reduction of each
controller. In general, ISC shows the lowest performance. Rotor
and generator speed are shown in Figs. 7, 8 and 12. SOSMC and
NDSFC follow more closely the optimal value of the average trend
of the optimal rotor speed uropt avoiding following the short-time
turbulent component, but HCG and NHVG have a smoother
tracking. Because ISC and NSSFC are unable to reject the additive
disturbance input, tracking the optimal value is slower than that
achieved by the other controllers, which results in a loss of power
extraction. The power obtained by FOSMC is a little better than
NSSFC, but smaller than NDSFC (see Fig. 11). Examining Fig. 9, we

Fig. 16. Generator speed.

 J. M
erida et al. / Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 715e728 725

Fig. 17. Generator torque.

see that the torque with FOSMC is longer, causing strong efforts on aerodynamic haero and electrical helec efficiency, the standard
the drive-train (Fig. 10), even so, the generator torque remains deviation and maximum value of the generator and low speed
below the limit value of 3.753 kN m. SOSMC has better perfor- shaft torque. The aerodynamic and electrical efficiency are
mance than NDSFC. NHVG increases the electric power and me- defined as follows:
chanical loads compared to HCG (see Figs. 13 and 14). SOSMC
produces the lower mechanical stresses while NHVG has the best Z Z
tfin tfin
capture and generation power avoiding long fluctuations (Figs. 9
Pa ðtÞdt Pe ðtÞdt
and 14). tini tini
haero ð%Þ ¼ Z tfin
; helec ð%Þ ¼ Z tfin
(37)
Paopt ðtÞdt Paopt ðtÞdt
5.2. Validation using FAST simulator tini tini

The performance of the proposed control strategies have been
verified using a FAST model of the CART interfaced with Simulink.
The FAST model has three DOFs active including the generator
speed, drive-train flexibility, and blade teeter DOFs. The criteria
for assessing the performance of the controllers are [6]: the
where Paopt ¼ 0:5rpR2 Cpmax v3 is the optimal aerodynamic power
corresponding to the wind speed and Pe ¼ Te ug . The controllers
performance are summarized in Table 1.
The rotor and generator speed of all controllers is depicted in
Figs. 15, 16 and 20. Based on the results shown in Table 1, ISC has

Fig. 18. Low speed shaft torque.

726 J. M
erida et al. / Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 715e728

Fig. 19. Electric power.

the lowest performance as established in the previous analysis of
the controllers. Only ISC and NSSFC are unable to reject the input
disturbance, in consequence these controllers do not follow the
wind speed adequately. SOSMC and NDSFC track more closely the
optimal rotor speed uropt , but NHVG and HCG track uropt without
tracking the large variations of wind speed allowing to have a
smooth power reference. Observe that SOSMC has better power
generation (see Fig. 19) and load reduction than NDSFC. In Table 1,
we can see that SOSMC has the best dynamic characteristics (has
the lowest maximum and minimum standard deviation in Te
value) with slower mechanical stresses on low speed shaft (the
standard deviation of Tls is minimal, as well as, its maximum value
is the lowest) than the other controllers as it is corroborated in
Figs. 17, 18 and 21. HCG increases power capture with a very close
performance in loads reduction to SOSMC. The NHVG has the best
generation power (see Fig. 22), but the dynamic characteristics, in
comparison with the homogeneous controller, are slightly lower
generating high mechanical stresses as illustrated in Fig. 21.
Table 1 shows that NHVG and HCG have a better power generation
avoiding long electrical power fluctuations (see Fig. 22). NHVG and
HCG only need measurements of the rotor speed and electrical
power, while SOSM, FOSM, NDSFC, and NSSF need to measure the
rotor speed and aerodynamic torque, estimate the wind speed,
estimate the first derivative of aerodynamic torque T_ a , estimate
the first derivative of rotor speed error and the second derivative
of optimal rotor speed u€ ropt . Another advantages of NHVG and HCG
are the simplicity in terms of adjustment of their coefficients and
the design procedure is more simple. Compared to SOSM and
NDSFC, NHVG and HCG require less number of real-time
differentiators.

Fig. 20. (a) Rotor speed; (b) generator speed.

 J. M
erida et al. / Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 715e728 727

Fig. 21. (a) Generator torque; (b) low speed shaft torque.

Acknowledgments

L. Aguilar and J. Da

vila gratefully acknowledge the financial
support from CONACYT (Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología)
under Grants 127575 and 151855.

Appendix A

The CART is variable speed one, in which the rotor speed in-
creases and decreases with changing wind speed producing
electricity with a variable frequency. The parameters of the model
are given in Table A.1. Those parameters are based on the CART
which is a two-bladed, teetered, active-yaw, upwind, variable
pitch, and horizontal-axis wind turbine which is located at the
National Wind Technology Center in Colorado [27,28]. The nom-
inal power is 600 kW; the startup wind speed is 5 m/s, the rated
wind speed of 12 m/s, and a cut out wind speed of 26 m/s [39].
The rated rotor speed is 41.7 rpm. The pitch system can pitch the
blades up to 18 /s with pitch accelerations up to 150 /s2 [11]. The
Fig. 22. Electric power.
required constraints for torque and rotor speed are 162 kN m and
58 rpm, respectively [28]. The gearbox is connected to an induc-
6. Conclusions tion generator via the high speed shaft, and the generator is
connected to the grid via power electronics. In this work, we
This paper addresses the problem of power generation control ignore the power electronics control and an ideal performance
in variable speed wind turbines without wind speed measurement. will be assumed [7,31].
The objective was to synthesize robust controllers to maximize the
energy extracted from the wind while ensuring reduction of me-
chanical loads. Two strategies of sliding mode control were pro- Table A.1
posed. The first strategy uses a wind speed estimator. The second Two-mass model parameters.
strategy uses an MPPT algorithm that does not need wind speed Notation Numerical value Units
measurements. The resulting controllers provide better power
R 21.65 m
extraction and dynamic characteristics with respect to the r 1.308 kg/m3
compared control strategies. The proposed strategies com- Jr 3.25  105 kg m2
plemented with high-order sliding modes controllers ensure better Jg 34.4 kg m2
Dr 27.36 N m/rad/s
performance thanks to their features: robustness against unmod-
Dg 0.2 N m/rad/s
eled dynamics, parametric uncertainties, external disturbances, Kls 9500 N m/rad
and chattering attenuation; providing a suitable compromise Dls 2.691  105 N m/rad/s
among conversion efficiency, mechanical stresses, and perturbation Penom 600  103 W
rejection. The validation results, developed with FAST model, have Temax 3.753  105 Nm
ng 43.165
shown the feasibility of the proposed strategies.
728 J. M
erida et al. / Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 715e728

References [20] Me
rida J, Aguilar L, Davila J. Robust sliding mode control for large scale wind
turbine for power optimization. Res Comput Sci Adv Comput Sci control
2012;59:65e76.
[1] Masters G. Renewable and efficient electric power systems. John Wiley &
[21] Me
rida J, Davila J, Aguilar L.. Robust quasi-continuous sliding-mode control of
Sons; 2004.
a variable-speed wind turbine. In: 2012 9th International conference on
[2] World wind energy half-year report 2012. The World Wind Energy Associa-
electrical engineering, computing science and automatic control (CCE); 2012.
tion; 2012. Available from: http://www.wwindea.org/webimages/Half-year_
p. 1e6.
report_2012.pdf [accessed: 1.05.2013].
[22] Me
rida J, Davila J, Aguilar L. Quasi-continuous high-order sliding-mode
[3] Ofualagba G, Ubeku E. Wind energy conversion system e wind turbine
controller design for variable-speed wind turbines. In: Congreso Nacional
modeling. In: 2008 IEEE power and energy society general meeting e con-
2012 de la Asociacio
n de Me
xico de Control Automa
tico; 2012. p. 507e512.
version and delivery of electrical energy in the 21st century; 2008. p. 1e8.
[23] Levant A. High-order sliding modes, differentiation and output-feedback
[4] Pao L, Johnson K. Control of wind turbines. IEEE Control Syst Mag 2011;31(2):
control. Int J Control 2003;76:924e41.
44e62.
[24] Levant A. Quasi-continuous high-order sliding-mode controllers. IEEE Trans
[5] Laks J, Pao LY, Wright A. Control of wind turbines: past, present, and future. In:
Automatic Control 2005;50(11):1812e6.
American control conference, 2009. ACC '09; 2009. p. 2096e2103.
[25] Levant A, Michael A. Adjustment of high-order sliding-mode controllers. Int J
[6] Boukhezzar B, Siguerdidjane H. Comparison between linear and nonlinear
Robust Nonlinear Control 2008;19:1657e72.
control strategies for variable speed wind turbines. Control Eng Pract
[26] Jonkman J, Buhl M. Fast user's guide. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy
2010;18(12):1357e68.
Laboratory; 2005. Technical report. NREL/EL-500-38230.
[7] Thomsen S. Nonlinear control of a wind turbine. Lyngby: Informatik og
[27] Stol KA. Geometry and structural properties for the controls advanced
Matematisk Modellering, Danmarks Tekniske Universitet; 2006. ME thesis.
research turbine (cart) from model tuning. Golden, CO: National Renewable
[8] Bossanyi E. The design of closed loop controllers for wind turbines. Wind
Energy Laboratory; 2003. Technical report. NREL/SR-500-32087.
Energy 2000;3:149e63.
[28] Fingersh L, Johnson K. Controls advanced research turbine commissioning and
[9] Hand M, Balas M. Non-linear and linear model based controller design for
baseline data collection. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory;
variable-speed wind turbines. In: Proceedings of FEDSM99: third ASME/JSME
2002. Technical report. NREL/TP-500-32879.
joint fluids engineering conference, San Francisco, California; 1999. p. 1e6.
[29] Burton T, Jenkins N, Sharpe D, Bossanyi E. In: Wind energy handbook. 2nd ed.
[10] Boukhezzar B, Lupu L, Siguerdidjane H, Hand M. Multivariable control strategy
John Wiley & Sons, Limited; 2011.
for variable speed, variable pitch wind turbines. Renew Energy 2007;32(8):
[30] Buhl M. WT_Perf user guide for version 3.05.00. Golden, CO: National
1273e87.
Renewable Energy Laboratory; 2012. Technical report. NREL/TP-XXXXX.
[11] Wright A, Fingersh L. Advanced control design for wind turbines. Part I:
[31] Hammerum K. A fatigue approach to wind turbine control. Informatics and
control design, implementation, and initial tests. Golden, CO: NREL; 2008.
mathematical modelling. Richard Petersens Plads, Building 321, DK-2800 Kgs,
Technical report. NREL/TP-500-42437.
Lyngby: Technical University of Denmark, DTU; 2006. ME thesis.
[12] Hansen M, Hansen A, Larsen T, Øye S, Sørensen P, Fuglsang P. Control design
[32] Boukhezzar B, Siguerdidjane H. Nonlinear control of variable speed wind
for a pitch regulated, variable speed wind turbine. Denmark: Risø National
turbines without wind speed measurement. In: 44th IEEE conference on de-
Laboratory; 2005. Technical report. Ris-R-1500(EN).
cision and control, 2005 and 2005 European control conference, CDC-ECC '05;
[13] Grimble M. Horizontal axis wind turbine control: comparison of classical, LQG
2005. p. 3456e3461.
and H∞ designs. Dyn Control 1996;6(2):143e61.
[33] Leithead W, Connor B. Control of variable speed wind turbines: design task.
[14] Bianchi FD, de Battista H, Mantz RJ. Wind turbine control systems: principles,
Int J Control 2000;73:1189e212.
modelling and gain scheduling design. In: Advances in industrial control. 1st
[34] Levant A. Homogeneous quasi-continuous sliding-mode control. Lect Notes
ed. London: Springer-Verlag; 2007.
Control Information Sci 2006;334:143e68.
[15] Beltran B, Ahmed-Ali T, Benbouzid M. Sliding mode power control of variable
[35] Levant A. Homogeneity approach to high-order sliding mode design. Auto-
speed wind energy conversion systems. Electric machines drives conference,
matica 2005b;41(5):823e30.
2007. IEMDC '07, vol. 2. IEEE International; 2007. pp. 943e8.
[36] Abdullah M, Yatim A, Tan C, Saidur R. A review of maximum power point
[16] Beltran B, Ahmed-Ali T, Benbouzid M. Sliding mode power control of variable-
tracking algorithms for wind energy systems. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
speed wind energy conversion systems. IEEE Trans Energy Convers
2012;16(5):3220e7.
2008;23(2):551e8.
[37] Musunuri S, Ginn H. Comprehensive review of wind energy maximum power
[17] Evangelista C, Puleston P, Valenciaga F. Wind turbine efficiency optimization.
extraction algorithms. In: 2011 IEEE power and energy society general
Comparative study of controllers based on second order sliding modes. Int J
meeting; 2011. p. 1e8.
Hydrogen Energy 2010;35(11):5934e9.
[38] Jonkman B, Kilcher L. Turbsim user's guide: version 1.06.00. Golden, CO:
[18] Evangelista C, Puleston P, Valenciaga F, Fridman L. Lyapunov-designed super-
National Renewable Energy Laboratory; 2012. Technical report. NREL/TP-xxx-
twisting sliding mode control for wind energy conversion optimization. IEEE
xxxx.
Trans Ind Electron 2013;60(2):538e45.
[39] Stol KA, Fingersh L. Wind turbine field testing of state-space control designs.
[19] Me
rida J, Aguilar L. Control robusto por modos deslizantes de turbinas de
Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory; 2003. Technical report.
viento de velocidad variable para optimizacio
n de potencia. DIFU100ci@
NREL/SR-500-35061.
2012;6(1):18e24.