Predictive Current Control of a Back-to-Back NPC

Wind Energy Conversion System to meet Low

Voltage Ride-Through Requirements
S. Alepuz(1), A. Calle(2), S. Busquets-Monge(2), J. Nicols-Apruzzese(2), J. Bordonau(2)
(1)

(2)

Matar School of Technology (Tecnocampus Matar-Maresme)

Technical University of Catalonia
Matar (Barcelona), Spain
alepuz@eupmt.es

AbstractPredictive current control is applied to a wind

energy conversion system implemented with a permanent-magnet
synchronous generator connected to the grid through a back-toback neutral-point-clamped converter. This control approach
allows to work in steady-state and to fulfill the low-voltage ride
through requirements demanded by the power system operators.
Dc-link neutral point voltage balance is also achieved by means
of the predictive control algorithm.
KeywordsLow-voltage ride-through (LVRT), neutral point
clamped converter, wind energy conversion, predictive control.

I.

INTRODUCTION

Variable-speed wind energy conversion systems (WECS)

present better efficiency and higher wind power extraction than
fixed-speed WECS [1], [2]. The doubly-fed induction
generator (DFIG) [3] is the most used implementation for
variable-speed WECS, due to the reduced rating of the
converter, but this topology has a limited speed operating range
and is particularly sensitive to grid disturbances [3], [4].
Another implementation for variable-speed WECS is based on
a full power back-to-back converter, with either an induction
generator or a permanent-magnet synchronous generator
(PMSG). In comparison with DFIG, the full power converter
provides extended speed operating range and full decoupling
between the generator and the grid, which results in higher
power capture at different wind speeds and enhanced capability
to cope with the grid disturbances. These properties make this
configuration interesting, even though converter losses
increase. With this topology, the PMSG is preferred than the
induction generator because of its higher efficiency, its
capability to work at low speed, and the possibility to suppress
the gearbox [2].
Low-voltage two-level voltage-source converters (VSC) are
the most used to implement full power back-to-back converters
in WECS. However, WECS are increasing the power rating of
the wind turbines [1], [5], and therefore three-level neutral
point clamped converters (NPC), see Fig. 1, can be better
suited than conventional VSC for higher power levels [6].
The current grid connection requirements (GCR) [79]
provided by the power system operators include the distributed
generation in operation control of the overall power system to

Dept. Electronic Engineering

Technical University of Catalonia
Barcelona, Spain
ensure its reliability and efficiency. The low voltage ridethrough (LVRT) requirement demands wind power plants to
remain connected to the grid when a grid voltage sag appears,
contributing to help the power system to keep network voltage
and frequency stable, by delivering active and reactive power
to the grid with a specific profile depending on the grid voltage
dip depth.For the WECS, LVRT is probably the most
challenging requirement to meet, among the requirements
specified in the GCR.
LVRT requirements, extracted from [7] are shown in Figs.
2 and 3. When a grid dips appears, the power generation plant
must remain connected to the utility if the line voltage remains
over the limit line 1, see Fig. 2, a brief disconnection is allowed
between the limit lines 1 and 2, and permanent disconnection is
allowed under limit line 2. During the dip, the power plant
must support the grid voltage by providing reactive power to
the utility, depending on the percentage of the grid voltage
reduction, as shown in Fig. 3.
A control approach to fulfill the LVRT requirements for the
system in Fig. 3 is found in [10], based on symmetrical
components with conventional PI controllers. The active power
surplus that appears during the grid voltage sag is stored in
inertia of the turbine-generator mechanical system. The use of
symmetrical components requires a sequence separation
method (SSM), which provides inexact response during at least
1/4 of the line period when the grid fault appears [11].
In comparison with well established control techniques,
such as PWM and PI controllers, predictive control presents
similar dynamic response and reference tracking, but working
at lower switching frequencies [12].
In this work, predictive current control is applied to both
generator- and grid-side NPC converters for system in Fig. 1,
to work in steady-state and to fulfill the LVRT requirements
with energy storage in the inertia [10]. Although predictive
control has been previously applied to back-to-back NPC
converters [13], [14], it has not been focused on the application
shown in Fig. 3. Dc-link neutral point voltage balance is also
achieved by means of the predictive control algorithm. Two
external loops with PI controllers are in charge of the PMSG
speed control and dc-link voltage control.

This work was supported in part by Grants CSD2009-00046 and

DPI2010-18822, Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovacin (Spain).

978-1-4799-0224-8/13/$31.00 2013 IEEE

5306

iu

SE

SC

SA

SFF

SDD

+
SBB vp
_

u
PMSG

iv

SEE

SCC

SF

SD

S22

S44

S66

+
SAA v_n
SB

S5

ia

RL

ib

RL

ic

RL

iw
w

S3

Vpn

S1

S11

S33

S55

S2

S4

S6

a +

vsa_

b +

vsb_

c +

vsc_

inclusion into the predictive controller will be subject of future

work.

lowest value of the voltage band

100%
90%
70%

With the control approach description given above, the

model of the system in Fig. 1 is detailed in the following
subsections.

limit line 1

45%
(U / UN)

Highest value of the three

line-to-line grid voltage

Fig. 1. WECS. PMSG connected to the grid through a back-to-back NPC converter and an inductive filter.

limit line 2

0 150

700

1500

A. Model of the generator side.

For the generator side, the electrical equations of the PMSG
are shown in (1) and (2), the torque equation in (3) and the
mechanical equation in (4). Electrical and torque equations are
expressed in the rotative dq frame, where the q axis is aligned
with the rotor flux

3000 t (ms)

time when a fault occurs

Fig. 2. Voltage limit curves to allow generator disconnection.

In

rated current

IB / In

vsd Rs isd Ls

d
isd s Ls isq
dt

(1)

vsq Rs isq Ls

d
isq s Ls isd s r
dt

(2)

IBo reactive current before the fault

IB

reactive current

Dead band

IB = IB - IBo

-50%

-10%

10% 20%

U / Un

Te

Un rated voltage

30%

Uo voltage before the fault

U

-100%

Tm Te J

voltage during fault

U = U - Uo

Fig. 3. Reactive current to be delivered to the grid.

II.

p
r isq
2

SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND MODEL

The proposed control block diagram for the system in Fig.

1 is shown in Fig. 4. It should be noted that predictive current
control is applied to the generator- and grid-side NPC
converters. The dc-link voltage balance is also controlled by
the predictive controller. Some papers are found to control the
dc-link voltage with predictive control [15], [16], but applied to
a two-level active front end rectifier. Also, predictive speed
control is currently under development [17]. Therefore, in this
present work, the dc-link voltage and the generator speed are
controlled by means of PI controllers, which is the
conventional control approach [13], [14], [17], [18]. Their

d
m bm
dt

(3)
(4)

where (vsd , vsq) is the stator voltage in the dq frame; (isd , isq)
the stator current in the dq frame; Ls the stator inductance; Rs
the stator resistance; s the rotor flux electrical speed, r the
rotor flux; Te the electromagnetic torque; p the machine pole
pairs; Tm the mechanical torque; J the moment of inertia
(turbine-generator); m = s/p the shaft mechanical speed; b
the friction coefficient.
The rotor angle is obtained by means of an encoder, and the
rotor flux has been calculated by testing the machine with no
load and measuring the electromotive force (E=sr).

B. Model of the grid side.

The model for the grid-side converter is shown in (5) and
(6).

5307

d
dt

27

vp (k) , vn (k)

+
Grid

vsa_

vsb_

Synchronization (PLL)

(grid angle)

vsc_

vgrid (k)

dq
abc

Normal operation
Operation under grid dip

igrid (k)

Grid side NPC

predictive model

dq
abc

LVRT

Filter

igrid (k+2)
vp (k+2), vn (k+2)

12

NPC

(Q )
*

NPC

i*qgrid

DC

i*dgrid (P*)

Minimization
of gGRID function

AC

*
iqgrid

P*LVRT

*
idgrid

Inverter

vpn

vp (k) , vn (k)

PI

Minimization
of g GEN function

isq*

*
vpn
+

isd* = 0

PI

AC

m* +

12

27

DC

MPPT

is (k+2)
vp (k+2), vn (k+2)

is (k)

dq
abc

Generator side NPC

predictive model

Rectifier

vp (k) , vn (k)

(rotor flux angle)

s (k)

Generator

1
p

N
Fig. 4. Proposed control block diagram for the WECS in Fig. 1, valid for normal operation and for LVRT compliance.

d
igrid d Ligrid q vgrid d
dt

(5)

d
L igrid q Ligrid d vgrid q
dt

(6)

vNPC d RL igrid d L
vNPC q RL igrid q

RT
igrid d (k 1) 1 s igrid d (k ) Ts igrid q (k )
L

T

s vNPC d (k ) vgrid d (k )
L

(8)

where (vNPC-d , vNPC-q) is the NPC output voltage in the dq

frame; (vgrid-d , vgrid-q) is the grid voltage in the dq frame; (igrid-d ,
igrid-q) the grid current in the dq frame; L the filter inductance;
RL the filter resistance; the grid angular frequency.

Finally, the model of the system is completed with the dclink equations. The dc-link capacitors verify the equation (9).

C. Model discretization.
Applying a sampling period (Ts), the derivative form
di(t)/dt is approximated by (7).

(9)

1
i p k Ts
C
1
vn k 1 vn k in k Ts
C
v p k 1 v p k

(7)

where ip , in are the currents through each dc-link capacitor ; vp

, vn the dc-link capacitor voltages; C the dc-link capacitance
value.

The discretization is applied to the electrical equations (1),

(2), (5) and (6), although the resulting equations have not been
included here, for simplicity. For instance, replacing (7) in (5),
the relation between the discrete-time variables is described in
(8).

Currents through the capacitors ip , in are calculated by

using the grid currents and the present switching state; thus, no
additional measurements are needed. Equation (9) is used to
obtain predictions for the future value of the capacitor voltages
based on its present current and voltage values.

Equation (8) is used to obtain predictions for the future

value of the grid current igrid(k+1), considering all possible
voltage vectors vNPC(k) generated by the grid-side NPC, the
measured grid current igrid(k) and grid voltage vgrid(k).

D. Delay compensation
If the effect of the delay in the actuation due to the time
needed to do the calculations is considered, then the predictions
will be calculated using the model shifted one step forward in

di (t ) i (k 1) i (k )

dt
Ts

5308

time [19]. For instance, applying it to (8), it provides the new

expression to predict (10), where grid-d(k+1), grid-q(k+1) and
v grid d (k 1) are the estimated grid current and voltage, and
vNPC(k+1) the actuation to be evaluated.

RT
igrid d (k 2) 1 s i grid d (k 1) Ts i grid q (k 1)
L

(10)
Ts

vNPC d (k 1) v grid d (k 1)
L

The predictive control strategy requires an estimation of the

future reference current i*(k+2). Depending on the sampling
time applied and the computational constrains, the estimation
can be obtained by a second-order extrapolation (12) or, for a
sufficiently small sampling time and also to save computational
efforts, it is possible to consider i*(k+2) i*(k+1); thus, no
extrapolation is necessary. However other types of
extrapolations can be considered.

III.

CONTROL SYSTEM DESCRIPTION

In this section, the control block diagram depicted in Fig. 4

is described.
A. Predictive current control method. Grid side.
As shown in Fig. 4. The future value of the grid current
igrid(k+2) and the capacitor voltages vp(k+2) and vn(k+2) are
predicted for the 27 switching states generated by the grid-side
NPC, using the predictive model of the grid side. For this
purpose, it is necessary to measure the present grid currents
igrid(k), grid voltages vgrid(k) and dc-link capacitor voltages vp(k)
vn(k). The estimated values for the variables at the instant k+1,
needed to predict the variables for k+2, are calculated with the
present values of the variables and the applied switching state.
actual. After obtaining the predictions, a quality function g is
evaluated for each switching state. The switching state (and
therefore the voltage vector generated by the NPC inverter) that
minimizes g is selected and applied during the next sampling
period.
The proposed quality function for the grid side NPC gGRID
is shown in (11).
*
gGRID igrid
d k 2 igrid d k 2
2

*
igrid
q k 2 igrid q k 2
2

DC v p k 2 vn k 2

(11)

The first two terms in the quality function gGRID (11) are
dedicated to achieve reference tracking, quantifying the
difference between the reference current i* and the current
prediction i on the sampling time k+2, for a given switching
state, in the dq frame.
The objective of the third term in the quality function gGRID
(11) is to take advantage of the state redundancy of a threelevel inverter, from the fact that the tracking cost of the current
depends only on the voltage vector selected.This third term in
the quality function gGRID (11) is proportional to the difference
between both dc-link capacitor voltage predictions. The
redundant switching state of the NPC inverter that generates
smaller difference will be preferred. The weighting factor DC
handle the relation between terms dedicated to reference
tracking and voltage balance within the quality function g. A
large value of DC implies greater priority to that objective.
Notice that quadratic error has been used in all the terms of
the quality function gGRID.

i * k 2 6i * k 1 8i * k 3i * k 1

(12)

B. Predictive current control method. Generator side.

For the generator side, the proposed quality function gGEN is
the same as for the grid side (13). Therefore, the detailed
explanation in the subsection above is also valid here.
gGEN isd* k 2 isd k 2
2

isq* k 2 isq k 2
2

DC v p k 2 vn k 2

(13)
2

Notice that grid- and generator-side

concurrently to balance the dc-link voltage.

NPCs

work

C. Control to achieve LVRT compliance.

In normal operation, for the generator-side converter, the
speed reference is given by some maximum power point
tracking (MPPT) algorithm, to extract the maximum amount of
power with the actual wind force. The MPPT algorithm has not
been considered in this work. Then, the electromagnetic torque
matches the mechanical torque at the speed reference, given the
reference to the generator-side current (isq*). The active power
drawn from the generator is delivered to the dc-link. The dclink regulator, in order to keep the dc-link voltage to the
reference, gives the d axis current reference of the grid-side
converter (igrid-d*). Therefore, the same amount of active power
drawn from the generator is delivered to the grid. On the other
hand, the reactive power given/absorbed to/from the grid can
be regulated by means of the q-axis component of the grid-side
converter current (igrid-q*), independently from the active power
regulation. It can be observed that the generator-side regulator
controls the generator speed, and the grid-side regulator
controls the dc-link voltage and the reactive power flow.
The control block diagram in Fig. 4 allows to store the
active power surplus present during the dip in the inertia of the
turbine-generator mechanical system. With this control
approach, the dc-link chopper resistor activation may not be
required in some cases [10].
Under a grid dip, with the proposed control, the active
andreactive power references to inject into the grid are given
by the LVRT requirement, the dc-link voltage is controlled by
the generator-side converter and the generator speed is not
controlled. Under this condition, the dc-link voltage keeps
regulated during the grid fault and the active power surplus is
applied to the mechanical system turbine-generator, which
increases the speed.

5309

IV. SIMULATION RESULTS

The simulation results (MatLab-Simulink) for the proposed
control strategy are presented in this section. The specifications
for the system in Fig. 1 are: J = 0.0812 kgm2; Ls = 10 mH; Rs =
0.5 ; r = 0.382 Wb; p = 4; L = 10 mH; RL = 0.1 ; C = 2200
F; Vpn = 250 V; Vgrid = 72 VRMS; fgrid = 50 Hz; Ts = 100 s
(sampling time). These specifications have been obtained from
the low power experimental setup at our laboratory, in order to
prepare the experimental validation for the proposed controller,
that will be carried out in the next step of this work, as in [10].
A voltage dip type B [20] has been simulated to show the
controller performance to meet the LVRT requirement. This is
the one of the most severe operating condition and it seems to
be enough to validate the proposed control strategy.

With the proposed controller, dc-link voltage control is

assumed by the generator-side converter, under dip condition.
As result of the LVRT requirement, there is no active power
injected to the grid during the dip. Therefore, to keep the dclink voltage at the reference, as shown in Fig. 6(d), the dc-link
voltage controller forces the generator to reduce the active
power extracted from the PMSG to zero, as shown in Fig. 6(c).
Hence, the generator current is reduced to zero, as shown in
Figs. 6(a) and 6(b), and also the generator electromagnetic
torque (3). Then, a torque mismatch is present in the
mechanical system turbine-generator, causing the speed to
increase, as shown in Fig. 6(e).
(a)
5

The grid voltage for the phase a drops 55% of its nominal
value between 0 and 60 ms, as shown in Fig. 5(a), and the gridside converter control reacts by delivering to the grid 100% of
reactive current, accordingly to the LVRT requirement shown
in Figs. 2 and 3, as shown in Fig. 5(b) and Fig. 5(c) for the grid
currents and in Fig. 5(d) for the power delivered to the grid.

-5

(a)

(b)

50

isd

-2

0
-4

isq

-6

-50

(b)

(c)

10

5
0

Qgen

-500

-5
-10

Pgen

-1000

(d)

(c)

140

10

idgrid

5
0

130
120

iqgrid

-5

110

(e)

(d)
600

1000

550

Pgrid

500

500

Qgrid
0
-0.05

0.05

0.1
0.15
time (s)

0.2

0.25

450
-0.05

0.3

Fig. 5. Simulation of the grid-side dynamic response during the voltage dip.
(a) Grid voltages (vsa , vsb , vsc [V]). (b) Grid abc currents (ia , ib , ic [A]). (c)
Grid dq currents (idgrid , iqgrid [A]). (d) Active and reactive grid power (Pgrid
[W] , Qgrid [VAR]).

0.05

0.1
0.15
time (s)

0.2

0.25

0.3

Fig. 6. Simulation of the generator-side dynamic response during the voltage

dip. (a) Generatorabc currents (isa , isb , isc [A]). (b) Generatordq currents (isd ,
isq [A]). (c) Active and reactive generator power (Pgen [W] , Qgen [VAR]). (d)
Dc-link capacitor voltages (vp , vn [V]). (e) Shaft mechanical speed (m
[rpm]).

5310

Oscillating instant active and reactive grid power are

present during the dip, as a result of the unbalanced grid
voltages and balanced grid currents, as shown in Fig. 5(d). In
this work, balanced grid currents are kept in all condition.
However, other control strategies during the dip are found in
the literature [21], some of them avoid active and reactive grid
power oscillations at the expense of having unbalanced grid
currents.
As mentioned above, the dc-link voltage is kept at its
reference value, as shown in Fig. 6(d). The dc-link voltage
deviation is caused mainly because of the controller swap after
the dip clearance. Notice that the dc-link voltages are balanced
all the time, due to the predictive control action by using the
redundant states of the NPC converters.
After the dip clearance, the generator-side recovers the
speed control and the grid-side converter the dc-link voltage
control, respectively. Rotor speed is recovered to the reference
by an electromagnetic torque greater than the mechanical
torque, and the energy stored in the inertia is then delivered to
the grid. Grid and generator currents reach their respective
limit values (10 A for idgrid and 6 A for isq) imposed by the
controller to avoid filter and stator inductance saturation, as
shown in Figs. 5(c) and 6(b).
More specifically, about the predictive current controller, it
shows at least two advantages in comparison to the
conventional PI current controllers in [10]. First, the predictive
current control does not need a SSM for control purposes.
Therefore, any inaccuracies caused by the imprecise output of
the SSM after grid appearance and clearance, present in
controllers based on symmetrical components, are not present
with the predictive control. Second, the number of
commutations with the present predictive controller with a
sampling time Ts = 100 s is 1/3 of the number of
commutations in [10], where a space vector modulation
switching strategy (fs = 5 kHz switching frequency) has been
used. This is a significant advantage, because this system is
intended to work with high power, and therefore the reduction
of the switching losses will increase the overall efficiency of
the system. With the predictive control, the number of
commutations can be reduced even more by adding a term to
reduce the commutations in the quality function [12].

[2]
[3]

[4]

[5]
[6]

[7]
[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]
[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

Finally, notice that no losses have been considered in the

simulation. Therefore, in steady-state, the generated active
power matches the active power injected to the grid.
V. CONCLUSION
A control approach for a PMSG connected to the grid
through a back-to-back NPC converter, to meet the LVRT
requirement, has been presented.
The control uses conventional PI controllers for the speed
and dc-link voltage control, and predictive control for the
current controllers.

[19]

[20]
[21]

REFERENCES
[1]

[18]

M. Liserre, R. Cardenas, M. Molinas, and J. Rodriguez, Overview of

Multi-MW Wind Turbines and Wind Parks, IEEE Transactions on
Industrial Electronics, vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 10811095, Apr. 2011.

5311

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

B. Wu, Y. Lang, N. Zargari, and S. Kouro, Power Conversion and

Control of Wind Energy Systems. Wiley-IEEE Press, 2011.
R. Cardenas, R. Pena, S. Alepuz, and G. Asher, Overview of Control
Systems for the Operation of DFIGs in Wind Energy Applications,
IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 60, pp. 11, 2013.
H. Xu, J. Hu, and Y. He, Operation of Wind-Turbine-Driven DFIG
Systems Under Distorted Grid Voltage Conditions: Analysis and
Experimental Validations, IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics,
vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 23542366, May 2012.
European Comission. (EurObservER), Wind Energy Barometer 2012,
Systmes Solaires - Le Journal de lolien, no. 12, pp. 4669, 2013.
J. Rodriguez, S. Bernet, P. K. Steimer, and I. E. Lizama, A Survey on
Neutral-Point-Clamped Inverters, IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Electronics, vol. 57, no. 7, pp. 22192230, Jul. 2010.
E. ON Netz GmbH, Grid Code: High and extra high voltage, 2006.
[Online]. Available: www.eon-netz.com.
Red Elctrica, Procedimiento de operacin P.O. 12.3: Requisitos de
respuesta frente a huecos de tensin de las instalaciones de produccin
en rgimen especial, 2006. [Online]. Available: www.ree.es.
Energinet, Technical regulation 3.2.5 for wind power plants with a
power output greater than 11 kW, 2010. [Online]. Available:
www.energinet.dk.
S. Alepuz, A. Calle, S. Busquets-Monge, S. Kouro, and B. Wu, Use of
Stored Energy in PMSG Rotor Inertia for Low-Voltage Ride-Through in
Back-to-Back NPC Converter-Based Wind Power Systems, IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 60, no. 5, pp. 17871796,
May 2013.
G. Saccomando and J. Svensson, Transient operation of grid-connected
voltage source converter under unbalanced voltage conditions, in 2001
IEEE Industry Applications Conference. 36th IAS Annual Meeting,
2001, vol. 4, pp. 24192424.
J. Rodriguez and P. Cortes, Predictive Control of Power Converters and
Electrical Drives. Wiley-IEEE Press, 2012.
S. A. Verne and M. I. Valla, Predictive control of a back to back Diode
Clamped Multilevel converter, in 2010 IEEE International Conference
on Industrial Technology, 2010, pp. 18141819.
S. A. Verne and M. I. Valla, Predictive control of a back to back motor
drive based on Diode Clamped Multilevel converters, in IECON 2010 36th Annual Conference on IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, 2010,
pp. 29722977.
D. E. Quevedo, R. P. Aguilera, M. A. Perez, P. Cortes, and R. Lizana,
Model Predictive Control of an AFE Rectifier With Dynamic
References, IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 27, no. 7,
pp. 31283136, Jul. 2012.
M. A. Perez and J. Rodriguez, Predictive control of DC-link voltage in
an active-front-end rectifier, in 2011 IEEE International Symposium on
Industrial Electronics, 2011, pp. 18111816.
J. Rodriguez, M. P. Kazmierkowski, J. R. Espinoza, P. Zanchetta, H.
Abu-Rub, H. A. Young, and C. A. Rojas, State of the Art of Finite
Control Set Model Predictive Control in Power Electronics, IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 10031016,
May 2013.
E. J. Fuentes, J. Rodriguez, C. Silva, S. Diaz, and D. E. Quevedo,
Speed control of a permanent magnet synchronous motor using
predictive current control, in 2009 IEEE 6th International Power
Electronics and Motion Control Conference, 2009, pp. 390395.
P. Cortes, J. Rodriguez, C. Silva, and A. Flores, Delay Compensation in
Model Predictive Current Control of a Three-Phase Inverter, IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 59, no. 2, pp. 13231325,
Feb. 2012.
M. Bollen, Understanding power quality problems: voltage sags and
interruptions. IEEE Press, 1999.
S. Alepuz, S. Busquets-Monge, J. Bordonau, J. A. Martinez-Velasco, C.
A. Silva, J. Pontt, and J. Rodriguez, Control Strategies Based on
Symmetrical Components for Grid-Connected Converters Under
Voltage Dips, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 56, no.
6, pp. 21622173, Jun. 2009.