Scientific African 10 (2020) e00566

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Scientific African
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/sciaf

An overview of control techniques for wind turbine systems

O. Apata∗, D.T.O. Oyedokun
University of Cape Town, Private Bag X3, Rondebosch 7701, South Africa

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

Article history: Renewable energy is being embraced globally as a viable alternative to conventional fossil
Received 6 June 2020 fuels generators. This is in direct response to the challenge of depleting fossil fuel reserves
Revised 12 August 2020
and its impact on environmental pollution. Wind energy has continued to play a signifi-
Accepted 16 September 2020
cant role and can be regarded as the most deployed renewable energy source, however the
efficiency level and cost effectiveness of a wind turbine (WT) system with regards to wind
Keywords: application is very much dependent on its control. This research paper reviews the vari-
Wind turbine ous control methods associated with wind energy control. More recently there has been
Wind turbine control an attempt to review these control techniques but the authors have focused more on the
Pitch control maximum power point tracking (MPPT) techniques and pitch angle control of WTs how-
MPPT strategies ever discussions around stall control of the WT is not presented in these research papers.
This review paper presents a detailed review of the various operational control strategies
of WTs, the stall control of WTs and the role of power electronics in wind system which
have not been documented in previous reviews of WT control. This research aims to serve
as a detailed reference for future studies on the control of wind turbine systems.
© 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of African Institute of
Mathematical Sciences / Next Einstein Initiative.
This is an open access article under the CC BY license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Introduction

The rapid development of wind energy systems is a direct response to the growing need for alternative energy sources
[1]. Data obtained from the global wind energy council (GWEC) [2] reflect an increase in installed global wind capacity to
about 651 GW at the end of 2019 as shown in Fig. 1. This represents a 10% increase in global wind capacity compared to
2018. It is expected that installed wind capacity would increase exponentially over the next couple of years as a result of
the continuous demand for alternative energy source. WTs have evolved over the years from simple designs to complex
generation units. Due to this complexity and the high dependence of wind energy systems on climatic and environmental
factors, there is the need to incorporate control systems to ensure the efficient operation of WTs and effectively utilizing
the wind energy such that maximum power can be generated [3]. Control systems are incorporated into WTs to enhance
the ability of the WTs to cope with the variability of wind in producing energy in a cost effective and reliable manner.
The primary objectives of WT control schemes is to provide stability for grid integration, mitigation of static and dynamic
mechanical loads, maximization of power production and continuous power supply to the grid [4]. In order to achieve the
aforementioned control objectives, it is important to optimally control the WT generator torque and blade pitch angle. The

∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: g.apata@ieee.org (O. Apata).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2020.e00566
2468-2276/© 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of African Institute of Mathematical Sciences / Next Einstein Initiative. This is an
open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
O. Apata and D.T.O. Oyedokun Scientific African 10 (2020) e00566

Fig. 1. Installed global wind capacity.

torque control of the generator allows varying the speed of the turbine rotor by applying MPPT strategies to achieve as
much as possible maximal extraction of wind power. With changes in wind speed, the rotor torque increases or decreases,
so the generator torque must be the shock absorber for the turbine to turn at optimum speed while the pitch angle control
achieves smooth power production by controlling the input torque of wind.
The advances in power electronic systems have also contributed to various improvements in the control of WT systems
especially when considering the quality of the WT system. For a stable grid integration and variable speed operation of any
wind energy system, the role of power electronics components of the WT cannot be emphasized [5]. This research paper
therefore also considers the role of power converters in the control of a WT system.
Various research papers have extensively discussed the individual control methods associated with wind systems how-
ever only a few research papers have attempted to present in one research paper a detailed review of the various control
strategies. More recently there has been an attempt to review these control techniques but the authors have focused more
on the MPPT techniques and pitch angle control of WTs [6,7]. The authors in [6] focused on the pitch angle controller for
WTs without discussing the pitch control of wind turbines itself. Though the authors in [6] mentioned the classification of
the WT operating regions this was not discussed. In [7], the authors focused on the pitch control methods without dis-
cussing the pitch angle controller. This review paper fills this gap. It is also important to point out that this review paper
also discusses power electronics interfacing for grid integration of WTs. This review paper therefore presents a detailed re-
view of the various operational control strategies of WTs, the stall and pitch control of WTs, the various MPPT strategies
and the role of power electronics in the control of WT systems.

Operational regions of WTs and control objectives

Power and speed control are two important factors which require attention in the control of WT systems. The power
extracted by the WT is often expressed as

Pw = 0.5 ρ ACpV 3 (1)

Where Power extracted from wind is defined as Pw , ρ is the air density, the rotor area is A, the power coefficient Cp is
dependent on tip speed ratio (TSR) λ and pitch angle β . V is the wind speed, λ is expressed as a relationship between V
and linear velocity on the tip blade given as
ωR
λ= (2)
V
ω is rotor speed and R is the rotor radius.
Each control system has its unique control method which is dependent on the operational region and control objective
of the WT. Fig. 2 illustrates the distinct regions of operation of any WT system. An understanding of each of these operating
regions is essential for the analysis of each WT control technique.
In region 1, there is no power generation from the WT. This is because the wind speed in this region is too low to begin
rotation of the WT rotor. The WT in this region is in an idle mode and the rotor rotation only begins at the point where
the wind speed surpasses the cut-in wind speed of the WT. In region 2, the WT is able to generate power within a range of
wind speeds but not at nominal power. In this region the maximization of power production is the primary focus. As seen
in (1), the wind power content is in variation with the cube of the average wind speed. The rotor speed is varied to ensure
that the λ is kept at an optimal level with changes in the wind speed to ensure the production of maximum power.
It is therefore safe to say that maximal power can be obtained when the WT is operating at an optimal tip speed ratio
λopt with the rotor blades pitched at an optimal angle β opt . The generated power is therefore maximized by the generator
torque controller τ g which achieves λopt and represented as a function of the rotor speed, expressed as

τg = K. ω2 (3)

2
O. Apata and D.T.O. Oyedokun Scientific African 10 (2020) e00566

Fig. 2. Wind turbine operating regions.

Where the rotor speed is ω and K is defined as an aerodynamic constant of the WT, given as
C p.opt
K = 0.5 ρ π R5 (4)
λopt. 3
ρ is the air density, Cp.opt is optimal power coefficient, the blade radius is represented by R. As the WT reaches the rated
wind speed, it transits into region 3. Region 3 is often regarded as the full load region. In this region the wind speed is
between the rated and cut-out speed and the pitch angle controller controls the rotor rotation at nominal speed while
the generator outputs rated power as shown in Fig. 2. Unlike in region 2 where maximal power production is the control
objective, the desired control objective in region 3 is to limit power production. This is achieved by limiting both torque
and rotor speed of the WT generator in order to ensure that constant rated power is obtained from the wind. In this region,
proportional-integral-derivative (PID) control is deployed for the purpose of pitch blade control to regulate the WT speed
under varying wind conditions. In this case, the increment θ to the initial pitch of the WT can be calculated as
 K

KD .s
θ (s ) = KP + I + ω (5)
s s. τ + 1
Where ω represents the generator speed error, KP , KI and KD are gains which are chosen for the desired controller
closed loop characteristics. The WT switches off in region 4 to avoid catastrophic failures due to high wind speeds which
can mechanically damage the turbine, therefore theree is no power production and the WT is out of operation. In summary,
the control targets of the WT operational regions are as follows:

• Maximal power production bearing in mind the load and constraints of the WT components.
• Ensuring the safe operation of the WT.
• Providing the required power quality at point of grid connection.
• Prevention of extreme loads and minimizing damages which may arise due to fatigue.

Power control techniques in wind turbines

WTs are typically designed to withstand extreme weather conditions but they are not designed for extreme speeds or
rotational torques. At very large aerodynamic torques or rotational speeds, the force on the blades of the WT is enormous
and can tear the turbine apart. To avoid this, WTs are always designed with a cut-out speed above which brakes will slow
the turbine to a halt. However, there is s range of wind speeds before the cut-out speed where the WT employs various
control strategies to deal with high wind speeds that would otherwise pose a threat to the turbines. All WTs are therefore
designed with a kind of power control technique. This can either be stall control or pitch control. Stall control of WTs is
further classified as passive and active stall control. Fig. 3 gives a description of these control strategies while Table 1 shows
a summary of the advantages and drawbacks of the stall and pitch control methods.

Passive stall power control

Passive stalled controlled WTs have their blades bolted to the hub at a fixed angle. The geometry of the rotor blade
profile is aerodynamically designed to ensure that in high wind speed conditions, it creates turbulence on the side of the

3
O. Apata and D.T.O. Oyedokun Scientific African 10 (2020) e00566

Fig. 3. Power control of WTs.

Table 1
Summary of passive, active and pitch control of WTs.

Control method Advantage Disadvantage

Passive stall Simple and low complexity. Low cost and cheaper than
other control systems. It is robust compared to the active
stall and pitch control. It has a faster response to wind
gusts compared with other control systems.
Active stall Higher power production compared to the passive control
method as a result of the blade angle of the WT being
optimized according to the wind speed. Better and more
accurate control of power output. The ability to
counteract power peaks very efficiently without a change
in rotational speed. Lower load and power peaks
compared to pitch control.
Pitch control Efficient power control. Assisted start up. Emergency stop.
Not suitable for large WTs. It is less efficient in low wind
speeds. It causes variations in the maximum steady state
power as a result of variations in grid frequencies and air
density.
Forced reduction of the generator rotor speed to stall the
rotor blades during an increase in wind speed.
High power fluctuations in high wind speed conditions.
Extra complexities and increased costs as a result of the
pitch mechanism.

rotor blade which not facing the wind. This stall prevents the lifting force of the rotor blade from acting on the rotor. The
rotor blade of a passively stalled controlled WT is slightly twisted along its longitudinal axis to ensure a gradual stalling
of the rotor blades rather than abruptly when the wind speed reaches its critical value [8,9]. This is a very simple and
low cost technique which does not require the installation of additional actuators, however because this method is largely
dependent on natural stalling of the turbine blades the control process is very limited and the WT is exposed to torque
spikes and power fluctuations. As seen in Fig. 3 with passive stall control the output power of the WT slightly peaks higher
than the rated limit before decreasing until it reaches the cut-out speed. This behavior ensures the wind generator does not
experience overloading as the wind speed goes above the nominal values. The passive stall control of WTs presents a very
simple control system which is devoid of all complexities associated with WT control and the moving parts of the WT rotor.
Passive stall control is implemented in fixed speed WT systems so that the rated power of the WT is not exceeded in high
wind speed conditions. This invariably means poor power regulation as a result of constrained operations.

Active stall power control

In response to this apparent setback of the passive stall control, the active stall power control of WTs was introduced.
Active stall controlled WTs are fitted with active power control mechanisms and pitchable blades similar to pitch controlled
WTs. The active stall control of WTs is popular with larger WTs rated at 1 MW and above though this can also be applied
to fixed speed WTs designed to operate in high speed wind conditions. During low wind speed conditions the WT blades
are pitched in steps to get large torque. In order to prevent the overloading of the WT generator at its rated power, the
active stall controlled WT increases the angle of attack of the rotor blades in order to make the blades go into a deeper stall
rather than decreasing the angle of attack to reduce the lift and rotational speed of the blades [10]. In comparison to the
passive stall, active stall control enables power output control more accurately to avoid overshooting the rated power of the
WT at the beginning of a wind gust [11]. Another advantage of active stall control over passive stall control is the possibility
of running the WT almost exactly at rated power at all high wind speeds. A passive stall controlled WT will usually have a
drop in the electrical power output for higher wind speeds, as the rotor blades go into deeper stall.

4
O. Apata and D.T.O. Oyedokun Scientific African 10 (2020) e00566

Pitch control

Pitch controlled WTs use an electronic controller to sense the output power of the WT several times per second. An elec-
tronic signal is generated which pitches the turbine blades out of the wind when the power level goes above the prescribed
safe level. The turbine blades are pitched or turned back into the wind at an optimal angle of attack to catch the wind
when the power level gets lower. Minimal power loss can be achieved by pitching the WT blades and this results in the
captured power being equal to the electrical power produced by the wind generator. Pitch controlled WTs have an active
control system which varies the pitch angle of the turbine blades to decrease torque and rotational speed in WTs. This type
of control is usually employed in high wind speeds only where high rotational speeds and aerodynamic torques can damage
the equipment.
The difference between pitch control and stall control of WTs is mostly noticeable in high wind speeds. While the stall
controlled systems rely on aerodynamic designs of the blades to control the aerodynamic torque or the rotational speed of
the turbine in high wind speeds, the pitch controlled systems use an active pitch control for the blades. This allows the
pitch controlled system to have a constant power output above the rated wind speed while the stall controlled systems are
not able to keep a constant power output in high winds. The pitch control and active stall control of WTs are both based
on the rotating actions on the WT blade. The difference in mode of operation is the turning of the WT blades. While pitch
control turns the blade away from the wind in order to reduce the lift force on the turbine blades, the active stall control
of the WT turns the turbine blades into the wind.
Pitch control of WTs is classified into two control methods: collective pitch control (CPC) and individual pitch control
(IPC) [12,13]. Both control methods can be implemented using either an electric controller or a hydraulic controller [14].

Collective pitch control

The collective pitch control method is implemented in majority of commercial WTs by implementing the same control
collectively for all the WT blades in a wind energy system [15]. Each WT blade is pitched the same way regardless of the
existence of independent servomechanisms. CPC is reliant on traditional proportional-integral (PI) control laws and its main
objective is the regulation of rotor speed thereby limiting the power captured from wind by adjusting the pitch angles. The
controlled variable in this case collective blade pitch while the difference between the nominal rotor speed reference and
its actual value is the error. This is expressed in (6) as
 
K  
βc = Kp 1 + i ωre f − ω (6)
s
Where β c is the collective demand on the blade pitch angles, the proportional controller gain is given as Kp , the in-
tegral gain is Ki , ωref is the rotor speed reference and ω is the actual speed which is measured at the rotor axis. This
control is implemented in region 3. Various researches have been carried out on the CPC in [16–18]. Schlipf demonstrated
the effectiveness of CPC for WT control in his research in [19]. Although PI control with gain scheduling is the classical
implementation for CPC, the constant need for load reduction has motivated various researches in modern CPC approaches.
Adaptive and robust techniques have been introduced to overcome modeling uncertainties. An adaptive CPC technique to
address disturbance rejection in WTs is described in [20]. This adaptive technique was further explored in [21] to avoid the
excitation of modal WT subsystems in turbulent wind conditions. The set back of the CPC strategy is the erroneous assump-
tion that all blades of the WT have the same physical attributes hence subjected to equivalent aerodynamic loads while in
operation. The resultant effect of this is that the rotor disk is exposed to unbalanced loads which induces stress on the WT
and can lead to an eventual failure of the WT.

Individual pitch control

This control method is deployed to reduce mechanical loads by individually controlling the pitch angles. The IPC is a
very recent development in the pitch control of WTs. Though well researched over the last decade, it has not been totally
realized on a commercial scale in WTs. It is believed that results of the current researches being carried out in this area of
research will be validated in the next generation of WTs with larger and more flexible blades [22,23]. This technique allows
for the measurement of variables such as tower displacement, reduces fatigue damage and capable of load reduction [24–
26]. As the name implies, IPC operates by controlling each WT blade individually using additional sensors. The aim of IPC
is to reduce the blade root moment or damping structural modes by adjusting the pitch angle of the WT. Since IPC of WTs
require additional sensors and individual pitch commands for each blade, it makes the WT control system an inherently
multiple –input-multiple output (MIMO) system. A major challenge faced by this method of control is the reliability of the
sensors since majority of modern WTs have blades which are already fitted with individual pitch actuators [27].
The majority of research carried out on the IPC of WTs focuses on reducing the rotor blade load using the Coleman
transformation which expresses the bending moment of the rotor blade with respect to the fixed direct-quadrature (d-q)
axes as shown in (7). Two independent PI- control loops are then designed with the aim of suppressing loads on the d-q
axes.
      M1
Md cos (ψ ) cos ψ + 23π cos ψ + 43π
= 2/3     M2 (7)
Mq sin (ψ ) sin ψ + 23π sin ψ + 43π
M3

5
O. Apata and D.T.O. Oyedokun Scientific African 10 (2020) e00566

Fig. 4. Block diagram of individual pitch control of WTs.

Table 2
Comparison of electric pitch controllers.

Controller Complexity Performance Reliability

Robust controller High High Moderate - high

Soft computing Controller Low Moderate-high High
Conventional Controller Low Low High
Hybrid controller High High Moderate

M1 ,M2 , and M3 are the blade root load which can be determined either by estimation or detection. These are transformed
into two orthogonal d-q axes signals Md and Mq . In order to generate the corresponding required pitch angle, the Coleman
transformation is inverted as expressed in (8) and shown in Fig. 4 by transforming the desired d-q pitch angle β d and β q
respectively into pitch angle increments β 1 , β 2 and β 3 for the three blades of the WT.
 ⎛ ⎞
 
β1  (ψ 2)π 
cos  (ψ )  β
sin
β2 = 2/3⎝ cos ψ + 3  sin ψ + 23π ⎠ d
  βq (8)
β3 cos ψ + 43π sin ψ + 43π

Electric pitch controller

The electric pitch controller comprises of an electro-mechanical actuator which controls the WT blade. Other component
parts include the energy storage which is a power source for the pitch controller in case of a power failure, a gear box
which adjusts the motor speed and a power supply unit. A unique feature of this controller is its fast response time and
higher efficiency when compared to the hydraulic controller [28], however with regards to cost efficiency the electric pitch
controller is more expensive compared to the hydraulic controller. This is as a result of high installation costs and the
need for a power back up [29]. Extensive researches have been carried out exploring the electric pitch angle controller.
This review paper has grouped the various electric pitch controllers into four categories namely: robust controller, soft
computing controller, conventional controller and the hybrid electric pitch controller. Table 2 compares the four categories
of the electric pitch controller in terms of complexity, performance and reliability.

Robust controller
Various authors in [30–34] have investigated the robust pitch angle controller. From these available literatures, it can
be safely concluded that this controller exhibits a high efficiency, has the ability to compensate for uncertainties and pro-
vide system stability. However, the drawback of this controller is the complexity of its control scheme. An increase in the
mechanical stress of the WT as a result of sudden changes in control variables is another major setback of the pitch con-
troller. It is necessary to state that the use of the robust controllers is dependent on prior insight of the WT system and
its mechanical model. The robust controller integrates feed forward, feedback system and the sliding mode control (SMC) to
improve the robustness of pitch angle control in WT systems.

6
O. Apata and D.T.O. Oyedokun Scientific African 10 (2020) e00566

Soft computing controller

The soft computing controllers are based on artificial techniques which offer a quick, predictive and efficient response
to overcome uncertainties in the wind energy system which may occur from variations in environmental conditions. The
most commonly used techniques with these controllers are metaheuristic algorithms, fuzzy logic control (FLC) and artificial
neural networks (ANN).
The use of fuzzy logic control in pitch control of WTs is getting a lot of attention because of its adaptability and simplic-
ity. A unique characteristic of the fuzzy logic controllers is the possibility of changing the controller parameters quickly to
respond to changes in system dynamics without parameter estimation, however the strength of this controller is dependent
on the knowledgeability of the user. The need for memory allocation in FLC techniques is a major setback of this technique
for WT control. The authors in [35] improved the performance of a microgrid by using a FLC based controller. The simplicity
of this technique was demonstrated by comparing with the battery storage technique for control of frequency deviation in
the microgrid. In [36], the authors utilized FLC in the analysis of the various operating regions of a low speed wind system
by generating a reference power from the WT and analyzing the difference between the reference power and the actual
generator power. The disadvantage of this technique is the high cost involved. In [37], this pitch angle controller was pro-
posed for smoothing wind power fluctuations which occur below rated wind speeds, selecting the targeted output based on
the available wind speed.
ANN is also a very popular control technique that has been used in various control systems [38,39]. Variables such as
rotor speed, output torque, wind speed, pitch angle and terminal voltage or a combination of these can be used as the input
variable to the controller. ANN is suitable for WT control in situations where the aim is optimization of power at wind
speeds above the rated wind speed. The nonlinear characteristics of the WT can also be estimated using ANN techniques.
GA based pitch angle controllers are the most commonly used metaheuristic algorithms deployed for system stability
during low wind speed conditions to allow for maximal extraction of wind power by the pitch angle from the available
wind speed [6]. Usually the reference speed is used as a control signal in the control of generator speed to optimal speed.

Conventional controller
The conventional controllers are the most commonly used in small wind energy conversion systems. These usually con-
sists of a PID/PI controller for rotor speed and generated power control. These controllers are more suitable for small WT
systems. The conventional controllers derive their pitch angle reference from parameters like wind speed, generator power
and rotor speed [40]. The conventional controllers have been well researched in literatures as seen in [41–43]. Despite the
simplicity of these controllers, accurate wind speed measurements cannot be obtained [44]. In comparison to other con-
trollers, the response time of this controller is very high. The most efficient and reliable conventional controller is the rotor
speed and generator power based pitch angle controller.
The control performance of a system with non-linear characteristics can be improved by the conventional controller using
gain scheduling. This method is often used in overcoming the sensitivity of the aerodynamic torque to the pitch angle since
this is dependent on the variation of the output power to the pitch angle. The relationship between the system sensitivity
and the controller gain is inversely proportional therefore making the conventional controller with gain scheduling more
reliable than one without gain scheduling.

Hybrid controller
The hybrid pitch controller is a combination of robust control and soft computing control. This controller was developed
in response to the challenges associated with the conventional controller to maximize the power from the WT system. This
controller improves the dynamic performance of the WT system by reducing the complexity of the system and improving
stability [45]. The main advantage of this controller is the reliable solution it provides for a nonlinear system while its major
drawback is the addition of extra costs to the WT system.

Hydraulic pitch controller

The hydraulic pitch controller controls the wind turbine blades using a hydraulic actuator which is placed alongside an
accumulator tank for providing the required linear movement of the blades. The required energy for the rotation of the
WT blades is provided by the hydraulic pump situated in the nacelle of the WT. Different researches have been carried out
on hydraulic pitch controllers, however the most recent researches have been focused on the detailed dynamic analysis,
efficient control strategies, modeling and reliability of the hydraulic pitch controller [46–50]. From these literatures, it can
be inferred that the hydraulic pitch controllers can smoothen output power of WTs by eliminating the drive train torque
fluctuations. It is also possible to diagnose fault occurrence using online fault compensation techniques.
Compared to the electromechanical controllers, the hydraulic pitch controller is safer to operate and more robust towards
the non-linear characteristics of wind speed. The cost of initial installation of this controller is lower when compared to the
electromechanical controller. Another unique characteristic of this control system for WTs is its adaptability to work under
extreme weather conditions and can operate without power supply from external sources under an emergency control
situation. Furthermore, it is not sensitive to vibrations and highly reliable. The major setback of the hydraulic controller
is its high cost of maintenance and operation.

7
O. Apata and D.T.O. Oyedokun Scientific African 10 (2020) e00566

MPPT control strategies

MPPT control algorithms are a necessity in WT systems for maximum extraction of available wind energy based on wind
speed. The MPPT algorithms helps to stabilize the power output if and whenever the wind speed exceeds the rated wind
speed, protecting the wind generator from overloading and surges [51]. There are various MPPT algorithms available for
WTs, however the choice of algorithm is dependent on the proficiency of the user. Each of these algorithms have their own
merits and demerits. This review paper has classified the different MPPT algorithms into two broad categories namely direct
power control (DPC) and indirect power control (IPC) algorithms. The DPC algorithms directly maximizes output electrical
power (Po ) while captured mechanical wind power (Pwind ) is maximized using IPC algorithms. The relationship between Po
and Pwind is described in (9)
Po = ηg ηc Pwind (9)
Where ηg ηc represents the generator efficiency and converter efficiency respectively varying with rotor speed. Therefore
the optimal Po cannot be guaranteed even when optimal Pwind is obtained [52].
The various MPPT algorithms have been extensively discussed in [53–55]. The hill climb search (HCS), optimum relation
based MPPT (ORB) and the incremental conductance (INC) have all been classified as DPC based MPPT algorithms. The HCS
is also known as perturb and disturb (P&O) and it is the most commonly used algorithm in this category because of its
flexibility and simplicity [75]. IPC based MPPT algorithms include power signal feedback (PSF), tip speed ratio (TSR) and
optimal torque control (OTC) algorithms.
HCS also known as perturb and observe is a very robust algorithm which is not dependent on a prior knowledge of the
WT characteristic. The aim of this algorithm is to locate the local maximal point of a given function. The control variable is
the duty cycle and the implementation is executed using a DC-DC converter [56]. This MPPT algorithm works by disturbing
the duty cycle in step sizes and observing changes in the result of the objective function till the slope tends towards zero
[57]. A drawback of the HCS method is the possibility of detecting the wrong direction to get the maximum power point
under a rapid variation in wind direction. In solving this problem, a modified HCS algorithm was designed in [58] which
was able to create a uniformity between speed tracking and controlling efficiency to solving the problem of wrong direc-
tionality during varying wind conditions [59]. The direction of the next perturbation and variable step size is determined by
observation of the distance between the operating point and optimal curve [60].
The ORB based MPPT algorithm is dependent on the optimal relationship between quantities such as power output of
WTs, converter DC voltage, power, current and speed [61,62]. The advantage of this algorithm is its fast tracking speed in
comparison to other MPPT techniques. This MPPT method has no need for sensors for speed measurement, neither is there
a need for a look up table as its operation is based on a system curve which is pre-obtained [63]. However, there is the
need for a proper knowledge of the characteristics curves between turbine power and dc current at various wind speeds
since the MPP can be tracked by observing the optimum current curve [64].
The INC algorithms are independent of sensor requirements and the specs of the wind turbine and its generator, this
reduces the cost of the system and improves reliability [65]. Other merits of this algorithm includes its ability to handle
non linearity, its dynamic response and easy implementation. The authors in [66,67] came to a conclusion that the operating
point of the MPPT can be determined using the power-speed slope. A positive slope indicates the operating point lies on
the right side of the speed-power characteristics and vice versa for a negative slope. The drawback of this algorithm is its
instability when turbine inertia changes under a variable speed wind condition [68]. To solve the problem of instability in
[108], a novel INC algorithm known as fractional order INC (FO-INC) is proposed in [69]. A variable step size is used in
tracking the MPP for fast changing viable wind conditions ensuring a reduction in unnecessary power losses.
The PSF based MPPT strategy operates the same way like OTC, but unlike the OTC the PSF utilizes a power control loop
[70]. The knowledge of WT maximum power curve is required by the user of this algorithm [71]. This curve is obtained by
performing experimental tests on the individual WTs or by simulations [72]. With the PSF algorithm, optimal power can be
generated by using the expression of the WT output power as expressed in Eq. (1). Using the WT speed or wind speed as
input power. The optimal power can also be generated with the help of a pre-obtained power-speed curve [73]. The error
between the actual power and optimum power is reduced by the controller. The main disadvantage of this algorithm is the
need for a precise value of the optimal power coefficient and optimal tip speed ratio as well.
Tip speed ratio (TSR) algorithms keeps the ratio between the tip of the blade and the rotor speed to an optimal value
where extracted wind power is maximized irrespective of the variations in wind [74]. An effective feedback controller is
needed to feed the difference between the actual value and optimal value [75]. Minimal error differential is achieved re-
ducing the generator speed by the controller. The speed error generates a torque/power reference which then changes the
speed to reduce the error. The TSR based MPPT controller though simple in its implementation and highly efficient, requires
a high operation cost [55]. This is a major drawback of this MPPT technique.
The OTC method is concerned with adjusting the generator torque according to the reference torque of maximum power
at any given wind speed as expressed in Eq. (4). A maximum power reference can therefore be obtained by comparing the
actual torque with an error signal fed into a controller to maintain the optimal torque of the generator [75]. This method is
quite simple, efficient and very fast. The inherent disadvantage is the non-measurement of wind speed directly. Therefore a
change in wind speed is not reflected in the reference signal consequently [55,71].
Table 3 presents the advantages and drawbacks of each of these MPPT algorithms.

8
O. Apata and D.T.O. Oyedokun Scientific African 10 (2020) e00566

Table 3
Summary of MPPT control algorithms.

MPPT Strategy Advantages Disadvantages

Hill climb search (HCS)
Optimum relation base (ORB)
Incremental conductance (INC)
Power signal feedback (PSF)
Optimal torque control (OTC)
Tip speed ratio (TSR) measurement.
Simple implementation, excellent performance under
varying wind conditions and high flexibility.
High accuracy and efficiency in maximum wind
power tracking. It does not require a prior knowledge
of the energy system.
Increased system stability and reduced costs. Easy
implementation and ability to handle non-linearity.
The PSF provides a robust and cost effective
maximum power control of The WT. It is also simple
to use with a fast speed of convergence.
Very simple to use, fast convergence speed and high
efficiency.
High efficiency and performance with a fast
convergence speed. Its optimal point can be
determined theoretically or experimentally.
It can cause stalling in smaller WTs. Under a
rapid wind change, there is slow response and
incorrect detection of direction for maximum
power especially in large and medium inertia
WTs.
Inability to track exact maximum power point
under rapid wind changes.
High instability under a variable speed wind
condition.
Low efficiency under varying wind conditions
since it does not reflect variations in wind speed
instantly.
Just like the PSF, the OTC lacks the ability to
measure wind speed directly.
High cost of operation especially for small WT
systems. Impossible to have precise wind speed

Operational control of WTs

Advances in power electronic interfaces have contributed to various improvements in the control of WT systems espe-
cially when considering interfacing a WT system with the utility system. The grid side converter (GSC) and machine side
converter (MSC) are the two major components to be considered in a power electronic system interface when considering
the control of WT systems. The GSC focuses primarily on stable grid integration of the WT system by dc link voltage control
[76] and has implications for optimal power delivery into the power system with the objective of minimizing losses. The
GSC is classified into two groups namely direct power control (DPC) and voltage oriented control (VOC) [77].
The DPC strategy is aimed at a fast control of both the active and reactive power of the WT system. This control method
eliminates the need for pulse width modulation blocks or an inner current control loop. Setting the reactive power reference
to zero achieves a unity power factor operation. The major advantage of this control is the reduction in computational time
and system complexity [7,73]. The DPC system has a fast dynamic and robustness towards uncertainties while its parameter
variation is high. The simplicity of its algorithm and architecture is also a plus for the DPC, bearing in mind also the high
power factor. Its set back is the need for a filter inductance and a sampling frequency as a result of variable switching which
in turn increases cost.
VOC is similar to the field oriented control of the machine side converter. Both control methods use a dual loop control
structure. However, VOC focuses on the improvement of power quality with minimal power ripple. The control strategy is
based on a PI control in the synchronous reference frame and a dc link voltage control loop with an inner current control
loop. A focus of this control is a fast response and high steady performance while directly measuring the DC link voltage
[75]. The disadvantage of this method is the poor total harmonic distortion in case of line voltage distortion.
The MSC control deals with controlling the variable speed operation of the WT system by capturing maximum energy
from wind. To enhance power output and system stability, the rotor speed of the wind generator is controlled to its maximal
value. Field oriented control (FOC) and the direct torque control (DTC) are the two control strategies associated with the
MSC. Both control strategies are similar in characteristics and dynamic performance [76].
FOC ensures an increase in optimal efficiency by directly controlling the current and utilizing the total line current for
torque production. This control strategy operates on the basis of a dual loop strategy. The inner loop depends on the syn-
chronous reference frame while the control of the outer loop is dependent on the speed and rotor position for generating
the reference current of the three phases. In order to get peak electromagnetic torque with minimum stator current, the
d-axis of the stator should be set to zero while the stator current q-axis controls the developed electromagnetic torque.
Unlike the FOC, the DTC strategy works with one outer loop control eliminating the need for transformation between
reference frames. The switching pulse for the converter is directly obtained from the flux angle. This direct control of the
torque and power ensures a faster response and less complexity of the system The advantages of this control technique
includes the elimination of rotor speed sensors, a faster response and the absence of a current regulation loop. On the other
hand, the performance evaluation of the direct torque controller is limited by the torque and current ripples. The need for
a varying switching frequency is a major setback of the direct torque control.

Discussion and recent control developments in WT control

As seen from available literatures, safety enhancement, reliability, reduction of production cost and improvement in
power quality has been the focus of wind energy research. To achieve this objectives, it is very important to put in place
appropriate control strategies that can deal with multiple objective problems.

9
O. Apata and D.T.O. Oyedokun Scientific African 10 (2020) e00566

Cost and turbine technology are underlying factors to consider in choosing the appropriate control method. The fixed
speed WT though an old technology still contributes to a large number of installed WTs in Africa and globally. The passive
stall control is originally designed to work with fixed speed WTs, however the active stall control of WTs is now recom-
mended in fixed speed WTs though slightly more expensive than passive stall control but more efficient than passive control
and less expensive than pitch control. For variable speed wind systems especially in areas with high wind speeds such as
the coastal areas of the Western Cape in South Africa, pitch control is recommended for better performance and efficiency.
Pitch control of WTs is gaining traction especially with large variable speed WTs. Irrespective of the chosen pitch control
technique, each control method in WT systems can be implemented either by electrical or hydraulic controller. There has
been a raging debate on the suitability of one controller over the other. The proponents of electric pitch controllers hinge
their arguments on environmental issues since the electric pitch controller poses no risk of leaking hydraulic fluids under
high pressure. The risk of energy waste is also lower while consumption of power is less than its hydraulic counterpart
because the latter requires a pump running at all times. This pump is required to keep the system’s oil at high pressure as
well as to be ready at all times when the rotor blades have to be turned. However, a major concern of the electric pitch
controller is the failsafe of the batteries or capacitors. The battery life of an electric pitch controller system is between two to
three years. The electric pitch controller for WTs is better suited for colder climates. This is because the hydraulic oil tends
to lose its viscosity as temperature plummets. This places the hydraulic controller in a pole position to be implemented in
warmer climates like the African continent. However, this is not to say that the electric pitch controller cannot be used in
warmer climates. The speed and reliability of the hydraulic system is also an outstanding strength. Despite the fluctuations
and rise in the cost of oil, the price of hydraulic fluid in pitch control is irrelevant since it is a closed system which recycles
all of its oil needs. Also, since hydraulic systems use fewer technical components compared to the electric control systems,
its maintenance and diagnostics is much easier to implement.
However, recent developments in WT control shows that a hybrid controller for pitch control of WT systems may be
possible. With a hybrid controller for pitch control, the turbine blades are turned electrically while the failsafe features
which prevent damage to the blades runs hydraulically. The risk of leaking oil would be mitigated in the hybrid control
because the pitch control would rely mostly on electrical power with a reduction in energy costs since the control system
would rely on a hydraulic system for failsafe power. This will be an excellent option for countries especially in Africa where
governments are concerned about reduced costs and high efficiency.
There is a need to focus on mitigating structural loads on various WT subsystems. The IPC if properly researched can
greatly contribute to mitigation of rotor blade load. Using IPC, output power fluctuations of WTs can also be reduced stabi-
lizing the output and improving the power quality of the grid while CPC can be deployed for rotor speed regulation during
high wind speed. It is also possible to achieve the simultaneous reduction in structural loads on the different subsystems of
the WT by the fusion of more than one control technique. However it is important to ensure that each of these methods do
not interfere with each other. Future research on the IPC could lead to improved performance in WT control by combining
optimization and intelligent control methods in wind power systems.
The variety of algorithms available for tracking the optimum power point of the WT makes the task of choosing an
appropriate MPPT technique a difficult one. It is therefore imperative to carry out an analysis of these techniques with
respect to their complexity, speed of convergence and performance requirements. The IPC based algorithms such as the
TSR and PSF in comparison to the DPC algorithms are simpler to use and respond faster. The drawback of these however
is that rather than the maximization of output electrical power, the captured mechanical wind power is maximized. The
OTC algorithm though simple and fast, is less efficient in comparison to the TSR algorithm because it does not measure
wind speed directly which implies that variations in wind speed are not reflected instantly and more importantly on the
reference torque. The TSR algorithm has a fast response to variations in wind conditions making it highly efficient however
it is expensive to implement thereby adding extra cost to the WT system. The PSF algorithm is similar to the OTC in terms
of its performance and complexity. The DPC algorithms on the other hand are more reliable, more cost effective and require
less memory. Without any prior measurement of the wind speed, these algorithms can optimally calculate the available
electrical power. The major setback of the DPC algorithms is their unsatisfactory behavior during varying wind conditions
therefore their application is limited. There are currently no available methodologies or selection criteria available which can
assist designers and developers of wind energy systems in choosing the best MPPT technique for a given WT installation.
This is a potential research area which can be further developed to assist in determining the best MPPT technique for a
specific application.
Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) for WT control is an old technology which has been in existence for over four
decades [78] but rarely discussed in research papers of WT control, however its application in WT control has been limited
due to high costs. LIDAR-based feedforward control has been proposed as complementary to the baseline control system
so as to enhance the above rated pitch control performance. The initial attempts focus on the design of independent feed-
forward controllers which enable the wind information as an input to the controllers and thereby compensate the wind
disturbances in the control system [79]. This technology works by measuring wind speed before it interacts with the WT by
the aid of sensors. This gives the WT time to react to the control output signals. This can be very useful in large WTs with
massive blades making it possible to activate pitch actuation ahead of time in order to minimize the effect of asymmetrical
loads on the rotor blades. This technology though an old one is still very well researched and very important for the control
of WTs in the future. Model predictive control (MPC) is the main control method for LIDAR. This control technique considers
future states as inputs for the control law optimization [80]. These future states can be provided by LIDAR by measuring

10
O. Apata and D.T.O. Oyedokun Scientific African 10 (2020) e00566

wind speed ahead of the rotor. LIDAR allows the deployment of feedforward control. LIDAR-assisted control has limited im-
provements in energy capture and yaw control performances in below rated operation, but requires more control actions.
Therefore, applying LIDAR measurements for above rated pitch control could be more beneficial [79]. The concept of LIDAR
needs to be properly investigated since it is not currently implemented commercially in WTs.
Another recent development in the control of WTs is smart rotor application. This is an intensive research area which
deals with reduction of loads for future WTs. This concept employs sensors and actuators which are distributed along the
blades of the WT with embedded intelligence. Unlike the pitch angle control which turns the entire blade by a pitch motor,
the relative wind flow is controlled by the smart rotor by using the specific actuators located along the blade making the
WT rotor a smart device which can react faster and more precisely to load events. A lot of proposals such as trailing edge
flaps, micro tabs active blade twist, and boundary layer control have been made for installing various active load control
devices in WTs [81–83]. Some authors have suggested that smart rotors be used as auxiliary devices instead of load control
systems. This would make the smart rotor act as a compliment to pitch control systems [84].

Conclusion

This paper has reviewed the various concepts of WT control available in literature, providing a detailed background and
survey of literature about the subject of WT control. Most review literatures only discuss the pitch control of WTs, however
this literature review has presented discussions around the stall control of WTs reviewing both passive and active stall
control of WTs. A detailed review of the pitch control of WTs is presented and the MPPT methods available have also been
summarized. The electric pitch controller and hydraulic controller for pitch control have also been discussed. The hydraulic
converter has a tendency to loose oil viscosity in regions with lower temperatures, therefore it is believed that it may be
better suited in warmer climates like the African continent. An overview of power electronic interfaces for grid integration
of WTs have also been presented. It is believed that this paper will serve as a suitable comprehensive reference for future
researches on WT systems.

Declaration of Competing Interest

None.

Acknowledgement

This work was supported in part by ISARP programme, co-funded by DST/NRF and the Directorate General for Country
Promotion (Economy, Culture and Science) Unit for Scientific and Technological Cooperation of the Italian Ministry of Foreign
Affairs (MAECI).

References

[1] O. Apata, D. Oyedokun, Novel reactive power compensation technique for fixed speed wind turbine generators, in: Proceedings of the IEEE PES/IAS
PowerAfrica, 2018, pp. 628–633.
[2] K. Ohlenforst and G. W. E. Council, "Global Wind Report 2018," 2019.
[3] X. Yingcheng, T. Nengling, System frequency regulation in doubly fed induction generators, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 43 (1) (2012) 977–983.
[4] D. Eltigani, S. Masri, Challenges of integrating renewable energy sources to smart grids: a review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 52 (2015) 770–780.
[5] F. Blaabjerg, K. Ma, Wind energy systems, Proc. IEEE 105 (11) (2017) 2116–2131.
[6] R. Tiwari, N.R. Babu, Recent developments of control strategies for wind energy conversion system, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 66 (2016) 268–285.
[7] E.J.N. Menezes, A.M. Araújo, da Silva, Nadège Sophie Bouchonneau, A review on wind turbine control and its associated methods, J. Clean. Prod. 174
(2018) 945–953.
[8] B. Loza, et al., Comparative fatigue life assessment of wind turbine blades operating with different regulation schemes, Appl. Sci. 9 (21) (2019) 4632.
[9] Y. Golfman, Hybrid Anisotropic Materials For Wind Power Turbine Blades, CRC Press, 2012.
[10] T. Ackermann, Wind Power in Power Systems, John Wiley & Sons, 2005.
[11] H. Wagner, J. Mathur, Operation and control of wind energy converters, in: Proceedings of the Introduction to Wind Energy SystemsAnonymous, Springer,
2018, pp. 63–74.
[12] Z. Jiang, et al., A review of individual pitch control for wind turbines, in: Proceedings of the IEEE 11th Conference on Industrial Electronics and
Applications (ICIEA), 2016, pp. 399–404.
[13] R.B. Morim, et al., Analysis of wind turbine power generation with individual pitch control, in: Proceedings of the IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid
Technologies Conference-Latin America (ISGT Latin America), 2019, pp. 1–6.
[14] W. Tong, Wind Power Generation and Wind Turbine Design, WIT press, 2010.
[15] J.G. Njiri, D. Soeffker, State-of-the-art in wind turbine control: trends and challenges, Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 60 (2016) 377–393.
[16] P. Li, et al., Control and monitoring for grid-friendly wind turbines: research overview and suggested approach, IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 30 (4)
(2015) 1979–1986.
[17] S. Bououden, et al., Fuzzy model based multivariable predictive control of a variable speed wind turbine: LMI approach, Renew. Energy 37 (1) (2012)
434–439.
[18] I. Poultangari, R. Shahnazi, M. Sheikhan, RBF neural network based PI pitch controller for a class of 5-MW wind turbines using particle swarm
optimization algorithm, ISA Trans. 51 (5) (2012) 641–648.
[19] D. Schlipf, et al., Field testing of feedforward collective pitch control on the CART2 using a nacelle-based lidar scanner, in: Proceedings of the Journal
of Physics: Conference Series, 2014.
[20] S.A. Frost, M.J. Balas, A.D. Wright, Direct adaptive control of a utility-scale wind turbine for speed regulation, Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control: IFAC-Af-
filiated Journal 19 (1) (2009) 59–71.
[21] S.A. Frost, M.J. Balas, A.D. Wright, Generator speed regulation in the presence of structural modes through adaptive control using residual mode filters,
Mechatronics 21 (4) (2011) 660–667.

11
O. Apata and D.T.O. Oyedokun Scientific African 10 (2020) e00566

[22] M. Shan, J. Jacobsen, S. Adelt, Field testing and practical aspects of load reducing pitch control systems for a 5 MW offshore wind turbine, in: Pro-
ceedings of the Annual Conference and Exhibition of European Wind Energy Association, 2013, pp. 101–105.
[23] Z. Chen, K. Stol, An assessment of the effectiveness of individual pitch control on upscaled wind turbines, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. (2014) 012045.
[24] V. Petrović, M. Jelavić, M. Baotić, Advanced control algorithms for reduction of wind turbine structural loads, Renew Energy 76 (2015) 418–431.
[25] E. Bossanyi, Wind turbine control for load reduction, Wind Energy Int. J. Prog. Appl. Wind Power Convers. Technol. 6 (3) (2003) 229–244.
[26] M. Geyler, P. Caselitz, Individual blade pitch control design for load reduction on large wind turbines, in: Proceedings of the European Wind Energy
Conference (EWEC 2007), Milano, Italy, 2007, pp. 7–10. May.
[27] J. Ehlers, A. Diop, H. Bindner, Sensor selection and state estimation for wind turbine controls, in: Proceedings of the 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences
Meeting and Exhibit, 2007, p. 1019.
[28] X. Yin, et al., Design, modeling and implementation of a novel pitch angle control system for wind turbine, Renew. Energy 81 (2015) 599–608.
[29] P. Tavner, J. Xiang, F. Spinato, Reliability analysis for wind turbines, Wind Energy Int. J. Prog. Appl. Wind Power Convers. Technol. 10 (1) (2007) 1–18.
[30] H.J. Asl, J. Yoon, Power capture optimization of variable-speed wind turbines using an output feedback controller, Renew. Energy 86 (2016) 517–525.
[31] R. Saravanakumar, D. Jena, Validation of an integral sliding mode control for optimal control of a three blade variable speed variable pitch wind
turbine, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 69 (2015) 421–429.
[32] H. Moradi, G. Vossoughi, Robust control of the variable speed wind turbines in the presence of uncertainties: a comparison between H∞ and PID
controllers, Energy 90 (2015) 1508–1521.
[33] Y. Zhang, et al., Flicker mitigation by individual pitch control of variable speed wind turbines with DFIG, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 29 (1) (2014)
20–28.
[34] F. Dunne, et al., Adding feedforward blade pitch control to standard feedback controllers for load mitigation in wind turbines, Mechatronics 21 (4)
(2011) 682–690.
[35] R.M. Kamel, A. Chaouachi, K. Nagasaka, Enhancement of micro-grid performance during islanding mode using storage batteries and new fuzzy logic
pitch angle controller, Energy Convers. Manag. 52 (5) (2011) 2204–2216.
[36] R.M. Kamel, A. Chaouachi, K. Nagasaka, Three control strategies to improve the microgrid transient dynamic response during isolated mode: a com-
parative study, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 60 (4) (2013) 1314–1322.
[37] M. Chowdhury, N. Hosseinzadeh, W. Shen, Smoothing wind power fluctuations by fuzzy logic pitch angle controller, Renew. Energy 38 (1) (2012)
224–233.
[38] R. Ata, Artificial neural networks applications in wind energy systems: a review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 49 (2015) 534–562.
[39] M. Pucci, M. Cirrincione, Neural MPPT control of wind generators with induction machines without speed sensors, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 58 (1)
(2011) 37–47.
[40] E. Hau, H. von Renouard, Wind Turbines: Fundamentals, Technologies, Application, Economics, Springer, 2003.
[41] A.M.S. Hwas, R. Katebi, Wind turbine control using PI pitch angle controller, in: Proceedings of the IFAC Conference on Advances in PID Control PID’12,
2012.
[42] J. Wang, N. Tse, Z. Gao, Synthesis on PI-based pitch controller of large wind turbines generator, Energy Convers. Manag. 52 (2) (2011) 1288–1294.
[43] M. Qian, et al., A new pitch control strategy for variable-speed wind generator, in: Proceedings of the Innovative Smart Grid Technologies-Asia (ISGT
Asia), 2012 IEEE, 2012, pp. 1–7.
[44] A.M. Knight, G.E. Peters, Simple wind energy controller for an expanded operating range, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 20 (2) (2005) 459–466.
[45] M.A. Abdullah, et al., Particle swarm optimization-based maximum power point tracking algorithm for wind energy conversion system, in: Proceedings
of the IEEE International Conference On Power and Energy (PECon), 2012, pp. 65–70.
[46] X. Yin, et al., Design, modeling and implementation of a novel pitch angle control system for wind turbine, Renew. Energy 81 (2015) 599–608.
[47] X. Yang, et al., Petri net model and reliability evaluation for wind turbine hydraulic variable pitch systems, Energies 4 (6) (2011) 978–997.
[48] Y. Kong, Z. Wang, Modelling and analysing the hydraulic variable-pitch mechanism for a variable-speed wind turbine, Wind Eng. 31 (5) (2007)
341–352.
[49] L. Chen, F. Shi, R. Patton, Active FTC for hydraulic pitch system for an off-shore wind turbine, in: Proceedings of the Conference On Control and
Fault-Tolerant Systems (SysTol), 2013, pp. 510–515.
[50] S. Vásquez, M. Kinnaert, R. Pintelon, Active fault diagnosis on a hydraulic pitch system based on frequency-domain identification, IEEE Trans. Control
Syst. Technol. (2017).
[51] W. Lin, C. Hong, Intelligent approach to maximum power point tracking control strategy for variable-speed wind turbine generation system, Energy
35 (6) (2010) 2440–2447.
[52] S.M.R. Kazmi, et al., A novel algorithm for fast and efficient speed-sensorless maximum power point tracking in wind energy conversion systems, IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron. 58 (1) (2011) 29–36.
[53] S. Tripathi, A. Tiwari, D. Singh, Grid-integrated permanent magnet synchronous generator based wind energy conversion systems: a technology review,
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 51 (2015) 1288–1305.
[54] M.A. Abdullah, et al., A review of maximum power point tracking algorithms for wind energy systems, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16 (5) (2012)
3220–3227.
[55] D. Kumar, K. Chatterjee, A review of conventional and advanced MPPT algorithms for wind energy systems, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 55 (2016)
957–970.
[56] S. Lalouni, et al., Maximum power point tracking based hybrid hill-climb search method applied to wind energy conversion system, Electric Power
Comp. Syst. 43 (8–10) (2015) 1028–1038.
[57] M. Kesraoui, N. Korichi, A. Belkadi, Maximum power point tracker of wind energy conversion system, Renew. Energy 36 (10) (2011) 2655–2662.
[58] A.C. Hua, B.C. Cheng, Design and implementation of power converters for wind energy conversion system, in: Proceedings of the International Power
Electronics Conference (IPEC), 2010, pp. 323–328.
[59] N. Fermia, et al., Predictive & adaptive MPPT perturb and observe method, IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst. 43 (3) (2007).
[60] R. Ahmed, A. Namaane, N. M’Sirdi, Improvement in perturb and observe method using state flow approach, Energy Proc. 42 (2013) 614–623.
[61] A. Urtasun, et al., Modeling of small wind turbines based on PMSG with diode bridge for sensorless maximum power tracking, Renew. Energy 55
(2013) 138–149.
[62] Y. Xia, K.H. Ahmed, B.W. Williams, Wind turbine power coefficient analysis of a new maximum power point tracking technique, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron. 60 (3) (2013) 1122–1132.
[63] C. Carrillo, et al., Review of power curve modelling for wind turbines, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 21 (2013) 572–581.
[64] M. Abdullah, A. Yatim, C. Tan, An online optimum-relation-based maximum power point tracking algorithm for wind energy conversion system, in:
Proceedings of the Power Engineering Conference (AUPEC), 2014 Australasian Universities, 2014, pp. 1–6.
[65] B. Bendib, H. Belmili, F. Krim, A survey of the most used MPPT methods: conventional and advanced algorithms applied for photovoltaic systems,
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 45 (2015) 637–648.
[66] S.H. Hosseini, A. Farakhor, S.K. Haghighian, Novel algorithm of maximum power point tracking (MPPT) for variable speed PMSG wind generation
systems through model predictive control, in: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Electrical and Electronics Engineering (ELECO), 2013,
2013, pp. 243–247.
[67] K.N. Yu, C.K. Liao, Applying novel fractional order incremental conductance algorithm to design and study the maximum power tracking of small wind
power systems, J. Appl. Res. Technol. 13 (2) (2015) 238–244.
[68] D. Hohm, M.E. Ropp, Comparative study of maximum power point tracking algorithms, Prog. Photovolt. Res. Appl. 11 (1) (2003) 47–62.

12
O. Apata and D.T.O. Oyedokun Scientific African 10 (2020) e00566

[69] K.N. Yu, C.K. Liao, Applying novel fractional order incremental conductance algorithm to design and study the maximum power tracking of small wind
power systems, J. Appl. Res. Technol. 13 (2) (2015) 238–244.
[70] M. Cheng, Y. Zhu, The state of the art of wind energy conversion systems and technologies: a review, Energy Convers. Manag. 88 (2014) 332–347.
[71] M.A. Abdullah, et al., A review of maximum power point tracking algorithms for wind energy systems, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16 (5) (2012)
3220–3227.
[72] L.C. Pagnini, M. Burlando, M.P. Repetto, Experimental power curve of small-size wind turbines in turbulent urban environment, Appl. Energy 154
(2015) 112–121.
[73] Q. Wang, L. Chang, An intelligent maximum power extraction algorithm for inverter-based variable speed wind turbine systems, IEEE Trans. Power
Electron. 19 (5) (2004) 1242–1249.
[74] H. Yokoyama, F. Tatsuta, S. Nishikata, Tip speed ratio control of wind turbine generating system connected in series, in: Proceedings of the International
Conference on Electrical Machines and Systems (ICEMS), 2011, pp. 1–4.
[75] M. Nasiri, J. Milimonfared, S. Fathi, Modeling, analysis and comparison of TSR and OTC methods for MPPT and power smoothing in permanent magnet
synchronous generator-based wind turbines, Energy Convers. Manag. 86 (2014) 892–900.
[76] B. Jain, S. Jain, R. Nema, Control strategies of grid interfaced wind energy conversion system: an overview, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 47 (2015)
983–996.
[77] S. Li, et al., Optimal and direct-current vector control of direct-driven PMSG wind turbines, IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 27 (5) (2012) 2325–2337.
[78] M. Harris, M. Hand and A. Wright, "Lidar for Turbine Control,"National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO, Report no.NREL/TP-500-39154, 2006.
[79] J. Bao, et al., Feedforward control for wind turbine load reduction with pseudo-lidar measurement, Int. J. Autom. Comput. 15 (2) (2018) 142–155.
[80] L. Wang, Model Predictive Control System Design and Implementation using MATLAB R
, Springer Science & Business Media, 2009.
[81] L. Bergami, M. Gaunaa, Stability investigation of an airfoil section with active flap control, Wind Energy Int. J. Prog. Appl. Wind Power Convers. Technol.
13 (2-3) (2010) 151–166.
[82] S. Kota, Variable geometry airfoils and active flow control, in: Proceedings of the IEA Topical Expert Meeting on the Application of Smart Structures
for Large Wind Turbine Rotor Blades, 2008.
[83] T.N. Jukes, Smart control of a horizontal axis wind turbine using dielectric barrier discharge plasma actuators, Renew. Energy 80 (2015) 644–654.
[84] C.E. Plumley et al., "Supplementing Wind Turbine Pitch Control With a Trailing Edge Flap Smart Rotor," 2014.

13