Li 2011

International Journal of Emerging
Electric Power Systems

Volume 12, Issue 3 2011 Article 7
Wind Power Extraction from DFIG Wind

Turbines Using Stator-Voltage and Stator-Flux
Oriented Frames
Shuhui Li, The University of Alabama

Timothy A. Haskew, The University of Alabama
Rajab Challoo, Texas A&M University-Kingsville
Marty Nemmers, The University of Alabama
Recommended Citation:
Li, Shuhui; Haskew, Timothy A.; Challoo, Rajab; and Nemmers, Marty (2011) "Wind Power
Extraction from DFIG Wind Turbines Using Stator-Voltage and Stator-Flux Oriented Frames,"
International Journal of Emerging Electric Power Systems: Vol. 12: Iss. 3, Article 7.
DOI: 10.2202/1553-779X.2676
Brought to you by | New York University Bobst Library Technical Services

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/20/15 5:16 PM
Wind Power Extraction from DFIG Wind
Turbines Using Stator-Voltage and Stator-Flux
Oriented Frames
Shuhui Li, Timothy A. Haskew, Rajab Challoo, and Marty Nemmers
Abstract
This paper investigates and compares wind power extraction from a DFIG (doubly-fed
induction generator) wind turbine using stator-voltage and stator-flux oriented frames. The paper
analyzes how wind power extraction control of a DFIG wind turbine is converted to speed control,
and then how speed and reactive power control of the wind turbine is converted to generator
current control using the two different orientation frames. The paper also investigates what are the
differences in developing wind power extraction control strategies of a DFIG wind turbine using
the two different orientation frames. Simulation study is conducted for a 1.5MW DFIG wind
turbine, in which the turbine driving torque is modeled by considering typical wind turbine
aerodynamic characteristics. The study shows that the performance of DFIG wind power
extraction is similar using both stator-voltage and stator-flux oriented frames. But, it is found that
a conventional wind power extraction approach using the stator-flux oriented frame could
deteriorate the power quality of the DFIG system while it is more stable to estimate the position of
the stator-flux space vector by simply adding -90 degree to the stator-voltage space vector.
KEYWORDS: doubly-fed induction generator, variable-speed wind turbine, wind power

extraction, stator-flux-oriented frame, stator-voltage-oriented frame
Author Notes: This work was supported in part by the U.S. National Science Foundation under
Grant 1059265.

Authenticated
Li et al.: DFIG Control in Stator-Voltage and Stator-Flux Oriented Frames
1. Introduction
A doubly-fed induction generator (DFIG) is an adjustable-speed induction
machine widely utilized in the modern wind power industry [1, 2]. The reasons to
use variable speed wind turbines are fourfold: a higher energy yield, a reduction
of mechanical loads and a simpler pitch control, wide range controllability of both
active and reactive powers, and less fluctuation in output power [2, 3].
However, energy extraction from a DFIG wind turbine depends not only
on the induction generator but also on the control strategies developed using
different orientation frames. The normal orientation frames used in a DFIG
system are stator-flux-oriented (SFO) and stator-voltage-oriented (SVO) frames.
In most traditional schemes, wind power extraction from a DFIG system is
achieved through a nested speed- and current-loop control structure using the SFO
frame [4, 5]. In [5] to [7], the SFO frame is used to develop DFIG wind power
extraction mechanisms. Other approaches, such as direct-power-control strategies
for DFIG wind turbines using the SFO frame [8, 9], have also been proposed
recently. Although the SVO frame is normally not used in a DFIG design, [10]
and [11] report special approaches to improve DFIG stability under unbalanced
conditions using the SVO frame. In [12], a cascaded DFIG configuration and a
relevant control mechanism are presented, in which one DFIG (power machine) is
controlled by the power converter indirectly through the other DFIG (control
machine). Although the system configuration is a little bit different, most
techniques as reported in [12] are similar to those used in traditional DFIG wind
turbines.
As various approaches are being developed for DFIG wind power
extraction using either the SFO or SVO frame, it is important to investigate the
difference and similarity as well as the performance and power quality of DFIG
system design using the two different orientation frames. A variety of techniques
have been developed to study the wind power extraction from a DFIG wind
turbine. These techniques can be divided into two categories: 1) transient
approaches [3-12], and 2) steady-state methods [13-17]. Transient approaches are
essential to study DFIG dynamic performance in a short time period. Steady-state
methods are vital to examine DFIG characteristics in a broader spectrum.
The comparison of a doubly-fed induction generator using SVO and SFO
reference frames was initially investigated in [18], where the comparison focuses
only on the DFIG current-loop controller without maximum power extraction
consideration, making the comparison unrealistic to a practical variable-speed
wind turbine. Unlike [18], this paper compares the two reference frame control
from maximum power extraction standpoint, and investigates, through combined
steady-state and transient studies, how the wind power extraction from a DFIG
wind turbine is converted to the variable-speed control of the wind turbine and

Authenticated
International Journal of Emerging Electric Power Systems, Vol. 12 [2011], Iss. 3, Art. 7
then how the speed and reactive power control of the wind turbine is converted to
generator current control using SVO and SFO reference frames.
In the sections that follow, the paper first describes the operating
principles and the wind power extraction mechanism of a DFIG wind turbine.
Then, DFIG transient and steady-state models are developed. General control
structures for DFIG wind power extraction using SVO and SFO reference frames
are presented. Both analytical and simulation studies are conducted to compare
what are differences and similarities of the wind power extraction control
mechanisms developed using the two different orientation frames. Finally, the
paper is summarized.
2. Wind Power Extraction from A DFIG Wind turbine

A DFIG wind turbine primarily consists of three parts: a wind turbine drive train,
an induction generator (doubly fed), and a power electronic converter (Fig. 1) [5].
In the wind turbine drive train, the rotor blades of a wind turbine catch wind
energy that is then transferred to the induction generator through a gearbox. The
induction generator, converting the mechanical energy into the electrical energy,
is a standard, wound rotor induction machine with its stator windings directly
connected to the grid and its rotor windings connected to the grid through a
frequency converter [2, 5, 6]. The frequency converter is built by two self-
commutated voltage-source PWM converters, a rotor-side converter and a grid-
side converter, with an intermediate dc voltage link.
Fig. 1. Configuration of a DFIG wind turbine
DOI: 10.2202/1553-779X.2676 2

Authenticated
2.1 Power Extracted from the Wind

The mechanical power extracted by a wind turbine from the wind is expressed by
the well-known cube law equation [19]:
1
Pw = ρair AbladeC p ( β , λ )vw3 (1)
2
λ = Rbladeωm vw (2)
where ρ air is the air density [kg/m3], Ablade is the area covered by the rotor blades
[m2], Cp is the turbine performance coefficient, vw is wind speed [m/s], Rblade is the
radius of the rotor blades [m], ωm is the angular speed of the blades, and λ is a
ratio of the rotor tip speed over wind speed. The performance coefficient, Cp, is a
function of the tip-speed-ratio λ and the pitch angle of the rotor blades β. It is
determined by aerodynamic laws and thus may change from one wind turbine
type to another. Here β is assumed to be a one-dimensional variable that is
equally applied to all the rotor blades via the wind turbine pitch control
mechanism.
Figure 2 shows the Cp curves for a 1.5MW DFIG wind turbine [20]. The
mathematical representation of the Cp curves is obtained through curve fitting as
shown by (3) where aij coefficients are given in [20]. The curve fit is a very good
approximation for values of 2 < λ < 13. Values of λ outside this range represent
very high and low wind speeds, respectively, that are normally outside the
continuous rating of the machine [20].
4 4
C p ( β , λ ) = ∑∑ aij β i λ j (3)
i = 0 j =0
Fig. 2. A 1.5MW wind turbine Cp curves

Authenticated
For each pitch angle, there is an optimal tip-speed-ratio λopt under which
Cp takes a maximum value. Therefore, the rotational speed of the rotor blades ωm
is normally regulated to a value of ωm_opt for maximum wind power extraction
through the variable-speed operation of the wind turbine generator so that
λ = Rbladeωm _ opt Vw = λopt while the pitch angle is fixed at a low value (Fig. 2). As
the captured wind power exceeds the rated power at a high wind speed, a power
limitation control is activated to keep the generated power at the rated value by
adjusting the pitch angle. Under typical Weibull wind distribution [21], a DFIG
wind turbine operates in the variable speed mode most of the time for maximum
wind power extraction.
2.2 Maximum Power Extraction Characteristics

The maximum power extraction characteristics are represented as the maximum
captured wind power over the turbine rotating speed for each fixed pitch angle. A
process to get the maximum power extraction characteristics is the following. 1)
For a given pitch angle, find the maximum Cp value and the relevant optimal tip-
speed-ratio λ opt. 2) For wind speed changing from the cut-in speed to the rated
speed, compute the maximum extracted wind power Pw_max and the relevant
optimal turbine rotating speed ωm_opt through (4). 3) Draw Pw_max versus ωm_opt
characteristics. Figure 3 shows the P-ω characteristics corresponding to wind
speed changing from 3m/s to 12m/s for several different pitch angles. For a
practical wind turbine, there are low and rated speed limits between which a wind
turbine operates in the variable speed mode [16].
1
Pw _ max = ρ air AbladeC p max vw3 , ωm _ opt = λopt vw Rblade (4)
2
Fig. 3. Maximum power extracted from the wind versus turbine rotational speed
(ρ air=1.17kg/m3)
DOI: 10.2202/1553-779X.2676 4

Authenticated
2.3 Maximum Power Extraction from DFIG Wind Turbine

The maximum power extraction from a DFIG system is achieved through
variable-speed operation of the wind turbine under a fixed low pitch angle, which
involves the following three steps: 1) transferring the maximum power extraction
control into wind turbine speed control, 2) converting the speed and reactive
power control into the decoupled generator d-q current control, and 3)
implementing the decoupled d-q current control. The maximum power extraction
process is normally realized through a nested-loop control structure as shown by
Fig. 4 [5, 22], in which a speed reference ωr* is generated by the maximum power
extraction algorithm based on measured turbine output power Pgridmea and P-ω
characteristics (Fig. 3), the speed and reactive power controllers convert the speed
and reactive power demands into decoupled d-q current control demands, and the
current-loop controller implements the final control function [5-9, 22]. Therefore,
the rotor voltage control signals, generated by the current-loop controller, are the
final control action applied to the rotor-side voltage-source PWM converter [23]
to implement the wind power extraction and reactive power control functions
(Fig. 4).
Fig. 4. DFIG nested-loop control structure
3. Generator Transient and Steady-State Models

At the generator level of a DFIG wind turbine, a commonly used model is the
Park model [24], which is the foundation to implement the wind power extraction
and reactive power control functions of the wind turbine. Using the motor
convention, the Park model yields the following stator and rotor voltage and flux
equations in the d-q reference frame [24]:
vsd = Rs isd + d λsd dt − ωs λsq , vsq = Rs isq + d λsq dt + ωs λsd (5)
vrd = Rr ird + d λrd dt − ωr λrq , vrq = Rr irq + d λrq dt + ωr λrd (6)

Authenticated
λsd = ( Lls + Lm ) isd + Lmird , λsq = ( Lls + Lm ) isq + Lmirq (7)
λrd = ( Llr + Lm ) ird + Lmisd , λrq = ( Llr + Lm ) irq + Lm isq (8)
where Rs, Rr, Lls, and Llr are resistances and leakage inductances of DFIG stator
and rotor windings; Lm is the mutual inductance; vsd, vsq, vrd, vrq, isd, isq, ird, irq, λ sd,
λ sq, λ rd, and λ rq are d and q components of stator and rotor voltages, currents, and
fluxes in a d-q reference frame; and ωs and ωr are angular frequencies of stator
and rotor currents. (5) and (6) can also be combined together into complex
equations using space vectors
d
vs _ dq = Rs is _ dq + λs _ dq + jωs λs _ dq (9)
dt
d
vr _ dq = Rr ir _ dq + λr _ dq + jωr λr _ dq (10)
dt
where vs_dq=vsd+j⋅vsq, vr_dq=vrd+j⋅vrq, is_dq=isd+j⋅isq, ir_dq=ird+j⋅irq, λ s_dq=λ sd+j⋅λ sq,

and λ r_dq=λ rd+j⋅λ rq are instantaneous space vectors of stator and rotor voltages,
currents, and fluxes in the d-q reference frame. Under the steady-state condition
and considering ωr = s⋅ωs, (11) and (12) are obtained from (7) to (10). In (11) and
(12), Vs_dq=Vsd+j⋅Vsq, Vr_dq=Vrd+j⋅Vrq, Is_dq=Isd+j⋅Isq, and Ir_dq=Ird+j⋅Irq stand for
the steady-state space vectors of stator and rotor voltages and currents in the d-q
reference frame. Note that, throughout the paper, lowercase letters represent
instantaneous time dependent variables and capital ones stand for steady-state
values.
Vs _ dq = Rs I s _ dq + jωs Lls I s _ dq + jωs Lm ( I s _ dq + I r _ dq ) (11)
Vr _ dq
I r _ dq + jωs Llr I r _ dq + jωs Lm ( I s _ dq + I r _ dq )
Rr
= (12)
s s
The steady-state equivalent circuit, obtained from (11) and (12), is shown
by Fig. 5. The relationship between stator-voltage and stator-flux space vectors in
steady state can be estimated from (9). Under the steady-state condition, (9)
becomes (13). Thus, if neglecting stator winding resistance, the stator-voltage
space vector leads the stator-flux space vector by 90°.
DOI: 10.2202/1553-779X.2676 6

Authenticated
Vs _ dq = Rs I s _ dq + jωs λs _ dq (13)
Is_dq Rs Lls Ir_dq Llr Rr Rr(1-s)/s

1 2 1 2
+ 1
+
Vr_dq
Ir_dq Lm
Vs_dq Ems_dq
2
Vr_dq(1-s)/s
- -
Fig. 5. DFIG steady-state dq equivalent circuit
In other words, when neglecting Rs, the d component of a space vector in

the SVO frame equals the q component of the same space vector in the SFO
frame; the q component of a space vector in the SVO frame equals the negative of
the d component of the same space vector in the SFO frame as illustrated by Fig.
6. Note: in Fig. 6 as well as the following sections, the paper uses a subscript sv
representing the SVO frame and a subscript sf signifying the SFO frame. Hence,
in terms of the rotor control voltage Vr_dq, Vrq_sf / Vrd_sf control in the SFO frame is
equivalent to Vrd_sv = Vrq_sf / Vrq_sv = -Vrd_sf control in the SVO frame (Fig. 6). This
result implies that a DFIG wind power extraction algorithm in the SFO frame
cannot be used directly in the SVO frame without considering this issue.
β-axis
qsv-axis
ωs
vr_dq dsv -axis
qsf -axis
α-axis
dsf -axis
Fig. 6. Relationship between SVO and SFO frames (neglecting stator winding resistance)
If the stator winding resistance is considered, however, the stator-voltage

space vector does not lead the stator-flux space vector by exactly 90°. The

Authenticated
relevant position of the stator-flux space vector over the stator-voltage space
vector can be calculated from
λs _ dq = ( Lls + Lm ) I s _ dq + Lm I r _ dq = Lls I s _ dq + Lm I ms _ dq (14)
in which the stator and rotor d-q currents can be solved from Fig. 5. It is found
that the influence of the stator winding resistance to the angle between stator-flux
and stator-voltage space vectors is very small especially for a DFIG operating
within the rated power. Table 1 gives parameters of a 1.5MW DFIG wind turbine.
Table 2 presents typical angles of the stator-flux space vector over the stator-
voltage space vector for DFIG parameters given in Table 1, in which the stator-
voltage space vector is taken as the reference. As it can be seen, the stator-voltage
space vector still leads the stator-flux space vector by about 90°.
Table 1. Typical DFIG data used in the simulation study

Parameter Value Units
Apparent Power 1500 kVA
Rated Voltage 690 V
RS (stator resistance) 0.0043 pu
XlS (stator reactance) 0.0809 pu
Rr (rotor resistance referred to stator side) 0.0048 pu
Xlr (rotor reactance referred to stator side) 0.0871 pu
Xm (magnetizing reactance) 3.459 pu
Frequency 60 Hz
Table 2. Angle between stator-flux (θ sλ) and stator-voltage (θ sv) space vectors
Generator slip, Rotor control voltage θ sv - θ sλ
s=0.05, Vrd_sv=20V, Vrq_sv=2V -89.89°
s=0.22, Vrd_sv=100V, Vrq_sv=5V -90.15°
s=0.362, Vrd_sv=150V, Vrq_sv=7V -90.01°
s=0.638, Vrd_sv=250V, Vrq_sv=7V -89.94°
4. Conversion of Speed and Reactive Power Control Into d-q

Current Control
The operating speed of a DFIG wind turbine depends on the wind turbine driving
torque τw and the generator electromagnetic torque τem. Using the motor
convention, the relationship between the torque and the rotational speed of the
generator follows
DOI: 10.2202/1553-779X.2676 8

Authenticated
dωg
τ em = J eq + Baωg + τ w (15)
dt
where Jeq is the total equivalent inertia referred to the generator and Ba is the
active damping coefficient representing turbine rotational losses. The rotor
electrical speed ωr, generator speed ωg, turbine rotational speed ωm, and generator
slip s are related by (16), where p is the generator pole pairs, ngear is the gear ratio
from the high- to low-speed shaft of a wind turbine, and ωsyn is the synchronous
speed. The electromagnetic torque τem can be computed from (17). In the steady-
state condition, a wind turbine must operate at a speed point that the driving
torque Tw balances with the generator electromagnetic torque Tem if neglecting the
rotational losses, i.e., Tw = Tem.
ωg ωm ⋅ ngear
ωr = p ⋅ ω g , ω g = ngear ⋅ ωm , s = 1 − = 1− (16)
ωsyn ωsyn
τ em = p ( λsq ird − λsd irq ) (17)
According to (15), this paper converts a speed control demand of the wind
turbine into a torque control demand. Then, the torque and generator reactive
power demands are converted into d-q current control. This process is a little bit
different from Fig. 4. The conversion from torque and reactive power control to d-
q current control depends on what orientation frame is employed.
4.1 Stator-Voltage Orientation Frame

In the SVO frame, the d-axis of the reference frame is aligned along the stator-
voltage position. Assuming that the grid voltage applied to the stator is constant,
then, stator q-axis voltage is zero, and d-axis voltage is constant, i.e.,
Vs _ dq _ sv = Vsd _ sv + j 0 . Assuming that stator winding resistance and leakage
inductance are negligible, then, the relations among the stator voltage ( Vs_dq),
magnetizing current (Ims_dq), and stator flux (λ s_dq) space vectors are
Vs _ dq
I ms _ dq = , λs _ dq = Lm I ms _ dq (18)
jωs Lm
Therefore, I ms _ dq _ sv ≈ 0 − jI ms and λs _ dq _ sv ≈ 0 + jλsd _ sv ≈ 0 − jLm I ms where

I ms = Vsd _ sv (ωs Lm ) , i.e., the q component of the magnetizing current is constant

Authenticated
and the d component of the magnetizing current is zero. Then, the stator d-q
current space vector I s _ dq _ sv , according to Fig. 5, is
I s _ dq _ sv = I ms _ dq _ sv − I r _ dq _ sv = − I rd _ sv − j ( I ms + I rq _ sv ) (19)
In terms of the magnetizing and rotor currents, the electromagnetic torque and the
stator reactive power according to (17) and Fig. 5 are
Tem = − pLm I ms I rd _ sv , Qs = Vsd _ sv ( I rq _ sv + I ms ) (20)
Hence, given torque and stator reactive power references Tem* and Qs*, the
conversion from torque and stator reactive power to rotor d and q currents is
I rd* _ sv = − Tem* ( pLm I ms ) , I rq* _ sv = Qs* Vsd _ sv − I ms (21)
4.2 Stator-Flux Orientation Frame

The SFO frame is widely used in DFIG control designs [5-9, 12, 21], in which the
d-axis of the reference frame is aligned along the stator-flux position so that stator
q-axis flux linkage is zero, and d-axis flux linkage is constant, i.e.,
λs _ dq _ sf = λsd _ sf + j 0 ≈ Lmims + j 0 (22)
In the SFO frame, the steady-state magnetizing current space vector is

I ms _ dq _ sf ≈ I ms + j 0 . Thus, according to (18), the stator-voltage space vector is
Vs _ dq _ sf ≈ 0 + jVsq _ sf , where Vsq _ sf ≈ I msωs Lm , i.e., the q component of the stator
voltage is constant and the d component of the stator voltage is zero. Therefore,
the stator d-q current space vector I s _ dq _ sf , according to Fig. 5, is
I s _ dq _ sf = I ms _ dq _ sf − I r _ dq _ sf = ( I ms − I rd _ sf ) − jI rq _ sf (23)
In terms of rotor and magnetizing currents, torque and stator reactive power
according to (17) and Fig. 5 are
Tem = − pLm I ms I rq _ sf , Qs = Vsq _ sf ( I ms − I rd _ sf ) (24)
DOI: 10.2202/1553-779X.2676 10

Authenticated
Thus, given torque and stator reactive power references Tem* and Qs*, the
conversion from torque and stator reactive power to rotor d and q currents is
I rd* _ sf = − Qs* Vsq _ sf + I ms , I rq* _ sf = − Tem* ( pLm I ms ) (25)
5. Wind Power Extraction Using Stator-Voltage and Stator-

Flux Oriented Frames
As shown above, the wind power extraction from a DFIG wind turbine consists of
three parts: 1) generating a speed reference from the maximum power extraction
algorithm, 2) converting speed and reactive power control to rotor d- and q-axis
current control, and 3) implementing wind power extraction through decoupled d-
q current control. For both SVO and SFO frames, the design of the speed-loop
controller is based upon the plant transfer function of the speed loop,
GSL ( s ) = 1 ( J eg ⋅ s + Ba ) , which is obtained from (15) [5]. But, the design of the
current-loop controller is different when using different orientation frames. It is
important to specify that this nested-loop control structure is crucial for a high
power quality of the system. Although direct power or torque control strategies
were proposed recently [8, 9], removal of the rotor current loop could result in
more current and flux imbalance in the generator as shown by some simulation
results in [8, 9].
5.1 Current-Loop Controller in Stator-Voltage-Oriented Frame
According to Section IV-A, in the SVO frame, ims _ dq _ sv = 0 + j ⋅ ims , where

ims = λsq _ sv Lm , depending primarily on stator voltage (18), is almost constant so
that the derivative of the magnetizing current is zero. Thus, (6) can be expressed
in (26). In the SVO frame, the position of the stator voltage space vector θ sv is
obtained directly from the stator voltage measurement in α-β reference frame
(27).
 di 
vrd =  Rr ird + Llr rd  − ωr Llr irq − ωr Lm ims
 dt 
(26)
 dirq 
vrq =  Rr irq + Llr  + ωr Llr ird
 dt 
θ sv = tan −1 ( vsα vsβ ) (27)
11

Authenticated
In (26), the component in the bracket is treated as the state equation

between the voltage and current on d and q loops, and the other parts are treated
as compensation terms. Therefore, the design of the current controller can be
obtained from a system block diagram as shown by Fig. 7, in which 1 ( L ⋅ s + R )
represents plant transfer function for d or q current loop, kPWM is the gain of the
power electronic converter, kFB is a gain on the feedback path such as a gain of a
sensor, and the PI block stands for the controller to be designed [24].
Fig. 7. A system block diagram for design of current-loop controller
The controller of the d or q current-loop outputs a voltage signal, vrd’ or

vrq . The d or q reference voltage, vrd* or vrq*, applied to the rotor-side converter is
’
acquired from (26) by replacing the bracket by d or q voltage from the current-
loop controller as shown by (28), in which the magnetizing current compensation
term is added to the rotor d-axis voltage equation in the SVO frame.
vrd* = vrd' − ωr Llr irq − ωr Lm ims , vrq* = vrq' + ωr Llr ird (28)
5.2 Current-Loop Controller Design in Stator-Flux-Oriented Frame
In the SFO frame, ims _ dq _ sf = ims + j 0 , where ims = λsd _ sf Lm is almost constant if
the stator voltage keeps unchanged. Thus, (6) can be expressed by (29).
Traditionally, the position of the stator-flux space vector θ sf is estimated through
(30), which requires measurements of both stator-voltage and stator-current space
vectors in α-β reference frame. Since the integration is involved, computational
error to estimate θ sf using (30) is normally higher than that to estimate θ sv using
(27).
 di 
vrd =  Rr ird + Llr rd  − ωr Llr irq
 dt 
(29)
 dirq 
vrq =  Rr irq + Llr  + ωr Llr ird + ωr Lm ims
 dt 
DOI: 10.2202/1553-779X.2676 12

Authenticated
λsα = ∫ ( vsα − Rs isα )dt , λsβ = ∫ ( vsβ − Rs isβ )dt

(30)
θ sf = tan −1 ( λsα λsβ )
The d or q reference voltage, vrd* or vrq*, applied to the rotor-side converter

is acquired in the same way as that using the SVO frame (Section V-A). However,
in the SFO frame, the magnetizing current compensation term is added to the
rotor q-axis voltage equation rather than the d-axis voltage equation as shown by
(31).
vrd* = vrd' − ωr Llr irq , vrq* = vrq' + ωr Llr ird + ωr Lmims (31)
Figure 8 shows the overall control structure of a DFIG wind turbine

generator using either the SVO or SFO frame. In the figure, a speed reference is
generated based on the measured turbine output power and the P-ω maximum
power extraction lookup table (Fig. 3). The speed-loop controller outputs a torque
reference. The torque and reactive power references are then transferred to d- and
q-axis current reference using (21) or (25) depending on what orientation frame is
employed. The magnetizing current compensation term is added to d or q loop
depending on the position of the switch in the figure. If the switch turns up, the
magnetizing current, calculated using ims = λsq _ sv Lm , is added to d-axis voltage
equation (28), which represents the control structure using the SVO frame. If the
switch turns down, the magnetizing current, calculated using ims = λsd _ sf Lm , is
added to q-axis voltage equation (31), which represents the control structure using
the SFO frame.
Fig. 8 DFIG wind power extraction control using SVO and SFO frames
It is necessary to point out that other approaches are also developed recently
for DFIG wind turbine control, such as predictive and sliding mode control
mechanisms [25-27]. For example, instead of using a standard PI current-loop
13

Authenticated
controller, the predictive current control (PCC) uses predictive current and
voltage equations or approaches to generate control voltages vrd* or vrq* [25].
Although a PCC controller is different from a standard PI controller, the
fundamental differences and similarities of a PCC controller design using SVO
and SFO frames are analogous to Fig. 8 according to Fig. 6.
6. Wind Power Extraction Evaluation using Stator-Voltage and

Stator-Flux Oriented Frames
For wind power extraction evaluation, the speed- and current-loop controllers are
designed based on the same transfer functions for both SVO and SFO frames as
shown in Section V. However, the overall control structure depends on what
orientation frame is used as shown by Fig. 8. A DFIG wind turbine system is built
by using SimPowersystems. The turbine driving torque is calculated by using (1)-
(3) based on wind speed, turbine blade pitch angle, and generator rotational speed.
The air density is 1.17kg/m3 and pitch angle is fixed at 1°. The grid is represented
by a three-phase 60Hz, 690V line-line voltage source. Major measurements in the
transient environment include turbine driving power, speed, torque, and three-
phase voltage, current, and active and reactive power transferred on the stator and
rotor paths. For each power measurement point, passive sign convention is used,
i.e., power absorbed toward the generator is positive.
6.1 Wind Power Extraction using Stator-Voltage-Oriented Frame

Figure 9 demonstrates a case study for maximum wind power extraction using the
SVO frame. The stator reactive power reference is 0kVar. Before t = 4s, wind
speed is 7m/s and the reference generator speed is 70rad/s, which is smaller than
the required generator speed for maximum power extraction at this wind speed.
As shown by Fig. 9(a), after the system is stable, the generator speed is
maintained at the reference speed effectively and the net turbine output power is
below the maximum available wind power that can be extracted from the wind. At
t=4s, the maximum wind power extraction algorithm is applied so that the wind
turbine generator is regulated toward the maximum power speed point. At t=8s, as
the wind speed changes from 7m/s to 10m/s, the maximum power extraction
algorithm automatically increases the speed reference while the generator speed
and turbine output power are adjusted smoothly toward a new maximum power
point. At t=11s, as wind speed changes from 10m/s to 8m/s, the maximum power
extraction algorithm reduces the speed reference, and the generator speed and
output power are regulated smoothly toward to a lower maximum power point
(Fig. 9). The stator and rotor currents have good power quality in terms of
harmonics and unbalance as shown by Figs. 9(c) and 9(d). All the transient results,
DOI: 10.2202/1553-779X.2676 14

Authenticated
after the system is stable, are consistent with steady-state results that can be
calculated from the steady-state model (Fig. 5) [28], demonstrating the
effectiveness of the DFIG wind power extraction control using the SVO frame.
180
Actual speed
160
Speed (rad/s)
Reference speed
140
120
(a)
100
80
60
4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)
1000
Stator reactive power
Power (kW/KVar)
500
(b) -500 Net output

power
-1000
Maximum power
-1500
4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)
1500
1000
Stator Current (A)
500
0
(c)
-500
-1000
-1500
15 15.02 15.04 15.06 15.08 15.1 15.12 15.14 15.16 15.18 15.2
Time (s)
1500
1000
Rotor Current (A)
500
0
(d)
-500
-1000
-1500
15 15.02 15.04 15.06 15.08 15.1 15.12 15.14 15.16 15.18 15.2
Time (s)
Fig. 9. Wind power extraction using the SVO frame: (a) generator speed and reference
speed, (b) maximum available wind power, net turbine output power and stator reactive
power, (c) stator current, (d) rotor current referred to the stator
15

Authenticated
180
Actual speed
160
Reference speed
Speed (rad/s)
140
120
(a)
100
80
60
4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)
1000

Power (kW/KVar)
500
(b) Net output

-500
power
-1000
Maximum power
-1500
4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)
1500
Stator Current (A)
1000
500
0
(c)
-500
-1000
-1500
15 15.02 15.04 15.06 15.08 15.1 15.12 15.14 15.16 15.18 15.2
Time (s)
1500
Rotor Current (A)
1000
500
0
(d) -500
-1000
-1500
15 15.02 15.04 15.06 15.08 15.1 15.12 15.14 15.16 15.18 15.2
Time (s)
Fig. 10. Wind power extraction using the SFO frame (Approach 1): (a) generator rotor
speed and reference speed, (b) maximum available power, net turbine output power and
stator reactive power, (c) stator current, (d) rotor current referred to the stator
DOI: 10.2202/1553-779X.2676 16

Authenticated
6.2 Wind Power Extraction using Stator-Flux-Oriented Frame

(Approach 1)
In the SFO frame, the speed- and current-loop controllers are the same as those
using the SVO frame. However, the overall control structure is different (Fig. 8).
Another issue is how to estimate the position of the stator-flux space vector. Two
approaches are utilized in the paper. Approach 1 uses Eq. (30), which is a typical
conventional method [2, 5, 6, 22]. Figure 10 shows the performance when the
position of the stator-flux space vector is estimated using (30). Compared to Fig.
9, the speed and power extraction control using both SVO and SFO frames are
very close. However, more oscillations are found in DFIG power and torque, and
a little bit higher current imbalance and distortion are found in both the stator and
rotor currents [Figs. 10(c) and 10(d)], implying a higher computational error to
estimate the stator-flux space vector position using (30).
To evaluate the computational error, the discrete equivalents of (27) and
(30) are obtained by using the backward rectangle rule for numerical integration
[29] and are shown by (32) and (33), respectively, where T is the sampling period,
kT represents the present time step, and (k-1)T stands for the previous time step.
The estimation of the stator-voltage position (32) requires only the present
measurement of the stator voltage. But, the estimation of the stator-flux position
(33) requires i) the present measurement of the stator voltage and current, ii) a
multiplication of stator current with a small stator winding resistance, and iii) the
stator flux computed at the previous numerical integration step. Therefore,
computationally, (32) is more stable than (33).
θ sv [ kT ] = tan −1 ( vα s [ kT ] vβ s [ kT ]) (32)
λα s [ kT ] = λα s ( k − 1) T  + T ( vα s [ kT ] − Rsiα s [ kT ])
λβ s [ kT ] = λβ s  ( k − 1) T  + T ( vβ s [ kT ] − Rsiβ s [ kT ] ) (33)
θ sf [ kT ] = tan −1 ( λα s [ kT ] λβ s [ kT ])
To demonstrate the computational instability, Fig. 11 shows the angle of

the stator-flux space vector computed using two different methods for the
simulation conducted in Fig. 9. Method 1 first calculates θ sv and θ sf using (32) and
(33), respectively, and then the angle between stator-flux and stator-voltage space
vectors is θ sf - θ sv (leading angle is positive). Method 2 computes the angle
between the stator-flux and the stator-voltage space vectors using (14), which
only requires present measurements of stator and rotor currents. After the system
17

Authenticated
is stable, the angle calculated using Method 2 is stable at nearly -90° while the
angle calculated using Method 1 oscillates around -90° (Fig. 11).
-87
-88
Angle (degree)
-89
-90
-91
-92 Method 1
Method 2
-93
3 3.05 3.1 3.15 3.2 3.25 3.3 3.35 3.4 3.45 3.5
Time (s)
Fig. 11. Comparison of angles between stator-flux and stator-voltage space vectors
computed using two different methods
6.3 Wind Power Extraction using Stator-Flux-Oriented Frame

(Approach 2)
Different from Approach 1 shown in Section VI-B, Approach 2 calculates the
position of the stator-voltage space vector using (27) and then adds -90° to obtain
the position of the stator-flux space vector. Figure 12 shows the performance of
the wind power extraction in the SFO frame when Approach 2 is used to estimate
the stator-flux space vector position. By comparing Figs. 9 to 12, it demonstrates
that i) the wind power extraction using SVO and SFO frames have equivalent
performance if the positions of stator-voltage and stator-flux space vectors can be
estimated accurately, and ii) for wind power extraction in the SFO frame, it is
effective to estimate the stator-flux space vector position by simply adding -90° to
the stator-voltage space vector position.
It is necessary to point out that Approach 2 is only a mechanism that is
used to estimate the stator-flux space vector position. This estimation is then
treated as the actual stator-flux space vector position. Because of this, the control
based on Approach 2 must be developed by using the mathematical models for
the SFO frame rather than the SVO frame.
6.4 Wind Power Extraction under Variable and Gust Wind

In reality, wind speed changes constantly over the time. Over periods shorter than
an hour, wind speed can be approximated as the superposition of a slowly varying
mean speed Vw plus N sinusoidal components having frequencies ωi, amplitudes
Ai and random phases φi as shown by (34) [30].
DOI: 10.2202/1553-779X.2676 18

Authenticated
180
Actual speed
160
Reference speed
Speed (rad/s)
140
120
(a)
100
80
60
4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)
1000
Power (kW/KVar)
500
(b) -500 Net output

power
-1000
Maximum power
-1500
4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)
Fig. 12. Wind power extraction control using the SFO frame (Approach 2): (a) generator
rotor speed and reference speed, (b) maximum available power, net turbine output power
and stator reactive power
N
vw (t ) = Vw + ∑ Ai cos(ωi t + φi ) (34)
i =1
In (34), ωi is a random variable that has Von Karman distribution

described by (35) where L represents the roughness of the area around the wind
turbine and σ is the standard deviation of the wind speed distribution. The
amplitude Ai of each discrete frequency component, chosen to give it a power
equal to that contained in a certain frequency band, is calculated by (36) [30].
0.475σ 2 ( L Vw )
Svv (ωi ) = 56
(35)
1 + (ωi L Vw )2 
 
Ai (ωi ) = ( Svv (ωi ) + Svv (ωi+1 ) )(ωi+1 − ωi ) (36)
Figure 13 compares DFIG wind power extraction under a variable wind

condition in the SFO frame when the position of the stator-flux space vector is
estimated by using the two different approaches presented in Sections VI-B and
19

Authenticated
VI-C, respectively. Before t=4ms, wind speed is 8m/s. At t=4ms, wind speed is
generated by using (34) to (36) with Vw=8m/s, which results in variable and short-
term gust wind as shown by Fig. 13(a). Under the variable and gust wind
condition, the maximum available power that can be extracted by the wind turbine
fluctuates sharply as the wind speed varies [Figs. 13(b) & 13(c)]. However, the
net output power of the wind turbine follows the maximum available wind power
properly, demonstrating the effectiveness of the wind power extraction in variable
and gust wind conditions. Again, as demonstrated by Figs. 13(b) and 13(c), under
the variable and gust wind condition, the wind turbine generator has a better
performance and higher power quality when the stator-flux space vector position
is estimated by using Approach 2, which is consistent with the analysis shown in
Sections VI-B and VI-C.
10
Wind Speed (m/s)
8
a)
7
4 6 8 10 12 14
Time (s)
500
Power (kW/kVar)
0
Net output
-500
power
b)
-1000
Maximum power
-1500
4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)
500
Power (kW/kVar)
0
Net output
power
-500
c)
-1000
Maximum power
-1500
4 6 8 10 12 14
Time (s)
Fig. 13. Wind power extraction under variable wind: a) wind speed, b) maximum
available power, net turbine output power and stator reactive power using Approach 1 in
the SFO frame, and c) maximum available power, net turbine output power and stator
reactive power using Approach 2 in the SFO frame
DOI: 10.2202/1553-779X.2676 20

Authenticated
7. Conclusions
This paper investigates wind power extraction from a DFIG wind turbine using
SVO and SFO frames. The paper first presents steady-state and transient models
of a DFIG wind turbine. Then, the steady-state model is used to obtain the general
relationship of wind power extraction from the DFIG wind turbine using SVO and
SFO frames. The transient model is used to develop DFIG wind power extraction
control mechanisms using the two different orientation frames. Analytical study
demonstrates that the overall control structures are different using SVO and SFO
frames. Another difference is the approaches that are used to estimate stator-
voltage and stator-flux space vector positions. The performance of the wind
power extraction using SVO and SFO frames is equivalent if the position of the
stator-voltage or stator-flux space vector can be estimated accurately. Regarding
the two SFO approaches used in the paper, Approach 1, a popular conventional
approach, is theoretically more accurate but computationally less stable, which
would deteriorate the power quality of a DFIG wind turbine. On the other hand,
Approach 2 estimates stator-flux space vector position by simply adding -90° to
the stator-voltage space vector position, which is computationally more stable and
therefore is beneficial to reduce the control oscillation of a DFIG system.
References
[1] R. Zavadil, N. Miller, A. Ellis, and E. Muljadi, “Making Connections: Wind
Generation Challenges and Progress,” IEEE Power & Energy Magazine,
Vol.3, No. 6, Nov. 2005.
[2] S. Muller, M. Deicke, R.W. De Doncker, “Doubly Fed Induction Generator
Systems for Wind Turbines,” IEEE Industry Applications Magazine, Vol. 8,
No. 3, 26-33, May/June 2002.
[3] W.L. Kling and J.G. Slootweg, “Wind turbines as Power Plants,” in
Proceedings of the IEEE/Cigré workshop on Wind Power and the Impacts
on Power Systems, 17 – 18 June 2002, Oslo, Norway.
[4] L. Morel, H. Godfroid, A. Mirzaian, J.M. Kauffmann, “Double-fed
induction machine: converter optimization and field oriented control without
position sensor,” IEE Proc.-Electr. Power Appl., Vol. 145, No 4, May 1998.
[5] R. Pena, J.C. Clare, and G. M. Asher, “Doubly fed induction generator using
back-to-back PWM converters and its application to variable speed wind-
energy generation,” IEE Proc.-Electr. Power Appl., Vol. 143, No 3, May
1996.
21

Authenticated
[6] B.H. Chowdhury, S. Chellapilla, “Double-fed induction generator control

for variable speed wind power generation,” Electric Power Systems
Research, Volume: 76, Issue: 9-10, Pages: 786-800, JUN 2006.
[7] B. Hopfensperger, D. Atkinson, and R. A. Lakin, “Stator flux oriented
control of a cascaded doubly-fed induction machine,” IEE Proc. Electr.
Power Appl., vol. 146, no. 6, pp. 597–605, Nov. 1999.
[8] L. Xu, P. Cartwright, “Direct active and reactive power control of DFIG for
wind energy generation,” IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion,
Volume: 21, Issue: 3, Pages: 750-758, Sep. 2006.
[9] D.W. Zhi, L. Xu, “Direct power control of DFIG with constant switching
frequency and improved transient performance,” IEEE Transactions on
Energy Conversion, Volume: 22, Issue: 1, Pages: 110-118, Mar. 2007.
[10] L. Xu, and Y. Wang, “Dynamic Modeling and Control of DFIG Based Wind
Turbines under Unbalanced Network Conditions”, IEEE Transactions on
Power Systems, Vol. 22, No. 1, Feb. 2007.
[11] T. Brekken, N. Mohan, “Control of a doubly fed induction wind generator
under unbalanced grid voltage conditions,” IEEE Transactions on Energy
Conversion, Volume: 22, Issue: 1, Pages: 129-135, Mar. 2007.
[12] K. Protsenko, D. Xu, “Modeling and control of brushless doubly-fed
induction generators in wind energy applications,” IEEE Transactions on
Power Electronics, Volume: 23, Issue: 3, Pages: 1191-1197, May 2008.
[13] S. Smith, R. Todd, M. Barnes, P.J. Tavner, "Improved energy conversion for
doubly-fed wind generators," IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications,
Vol. 42, No. 6, pp. 1421-1428, Nov. 2006.
[14] M.G. Ioannides, J.A. Tegopoulos, "Generalized optimization slip power
recovery drives," IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, vol.5,
no.1pp.91-97, Mar 1990.
[15] I. Cadirci, M. Ermis, "Double-output induction generator operating at
subsynchronous and supersynchronous speeds: steady-state performance
optimisation and wind-energy recovery," IEE Proceedings-Electric Power
Applications, vol.139, no.5, pp.429-442, Sep. 1992.
[16] M.S. Vicatos, J.A. Tegopoulos, "Steady state analysis of a doubly-fed
induction generator under synchronous operation," IEEE Transactions on
Energy Conversion, vol.4, no.3, pp. 495-501, Sep 1989.
[17] P.C. Krause, O. Wasynczuk, M.S. Hildebrandt, "Reference frame analysis
of a slip energy recovery system," IEEE Transactions on Energy
Conversion, vol. 3, no.2, pp. 404-408, Jun 1988.
DOI: 10.2202/1553-779X.2676 22

Authenticated
[18] S. Li, R. Challoo and M.J. Nemmers, “Comparative Study of DFIG Power
Control Using Stator-Voltage and Stator-Flux Oriented Frames,”
Proceedings of 2009 IEEE PES General Meeting, Calgary Alberta, Canada,
July 26-30, 2009.
[19] L. L. Freris, Wind energy conversion system (Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall, 1990).
[20] N.W. Miller, W.W. Price, and J.J. Sanchez-Gasca, “Dynamic Modeling of
GE 1.5 and 3.6 Wind Turbine-Generators,” GE Power Systems, October 27,
2003.
[21] Z. Yu and A. Tuzuner, “Wind Speed Modeling and Energy Production
Simulation with Weibull Sampling,” Proceedings of 2008 IEEE PES
General Meeting, Pittsburgh, PA, July 20-24, 2008.
[22] A.D. Hansen, P. Sørensen, F. Iov and F. Blaabjerg, “Control of variable
speed wind turbines with doubly-fed induction generators,” Wind
Engineering, Vol. 28, No. 4, June 2004 , pp. 411-432.
[23] N. Mohan, T.M. Undeland, and W.P. Robbins, Power Electronics:
Converters, Applications, and Design, 3rd Ed., John Wiley & Sons Inc.,
October 2002.
[24] N. Mohan, Advanced Electric Drives – Analysis, Modeling and Control
using Simulink, MN: Minnesota Power Electronics Research & Education,
ISBN 0-9715292-0-5, 2001.
[25] M. Nemec, K. Drobniˇc, D. Nedeljkovi´c, and V. Ambrožiˇc, “Direct
Current Control of a Synchronous Machine in Field Coordinates,” IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics, Vol. 56, No. 10, October 2009, pp.
4052-4061.
[26] N. Patin, W. Naouar, E. Monmasson, and J.P. Louis, “Predictive control of a
doubly-fed induction generator connected to an isolated grid,” Proceedings
of 32th Annual Conference of IEEE Industrial Electronics (IECON 2006),
Paris, Nov.6-10, 2006, pp. 873-878.
[27] B. Beltran, T. Ahmed-Ali, M. El Hachemi Benbouzid, “Sliding Mode Power
Control of Variable-Speed Wind Energy Conversion Systems,” IEEE Trans
on Energy Conversion, Vol. 23, No. 2, June 2008, pp. 551-558.
[28] S. Li and T.A. Haskew, “Simulation Analysis of DFIG Characteristics under
d-q Control Strategies in Stator-Voltage-Oriented Frame,” International
Journal of Power and Energy Systems, Vol. 29, No. 2, 2009, pp. 103-115.
23

Authenticated
[29] G. Franklin, J.D. Powell, A. Emami-Naeini, Feedback Control of Dynamic

Systems, 5th ed., Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 2005.
[30] B.G. Rawn, P.W. Lehn, and M. Maggiore, “Control Methodology to
Mitigate the Grid Impact of Wind Turbines,” IEEE Trans. on Energy
Conversion, Vol. 22, No. 2, June 2007, pp. 431-438.
DOI: 10.2202/1553-779X.2676 24

Authenticated

Li 2011

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Li 2011

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Emerging

Electric Power Systems

Wind Power Extraction from DFIG Wind

Shuhui Li, The University of Alabama

Brought to you by | New York University Bobst Library Technical Services

KEYWORDS: doubly-fed induction generator, variable-speed wind turbine, wind power

Brought to you by | New York University Bobst Library Technical Services

Brought to you by | New York University Bobst Library Technical Services

2. Wind Power Extraction from A DFIG Wind turbine

Fig. 1. Configuration of a DFIG wind turbine

Brought to you by | New York University Bobst Library Technical Services

2.1 Power Extracted from the Wind

Fig. 2. A 1.5MW wind turbine Cp curves

Brought to you by | New York University Bobst Library Technical Services

2.2 Maximum Power Extraction Characteristics

Brought to you by | New York University Bobst Library Technical Services

2.3 Maximum Power Extraction from DFIG Wind Turbine

Fig. 4. DFIG nested-loop control structure

3. Generator Transient and Steady-State Models

vsd = Rs isd + d λsd dt − ωs λsq , vsq = Rs isq + d λsq dt + ωs λsd (5)

vrd = Rr ird + d λrd dt − ωr λrq , vrq = Rr irq + d λrq dt + ωr λrd (6)

Brought to you by | New York University Bobst Library Technical Services

λsd = ( Lls + Lm ) isd + Lmird , λsq = ( Lls + Lm ) isq + Lmirq (7)

λrd = ( Llr + Lm ) ird + Lmisd , λrq = ( Llr + Lm ) irq + Lm isq (8)

where vs_dq=vsd+j⋅vsq, vr_dq=vrd+j⋅vrq, is_dq=isd+j⋅isq, ir_dq=ird+j⋅irq, λ s_dq=λ sd+j⋅λ sq,

Vs _ dq = Rs I s _ dq + jωs Lls I s _ dq + jωs Lm ( I s _ dq + I r _ dq ) (11)

Brought to you by | New York University Bobst Library Technical Services

Is_dq Rs Lls Ir_dq Llr Rr Rr(1-s)/s

Fig. 5. DFIG steady-state dq equivalent circuit

In other words, when neglecting Rs, the d component of a space vector in

If the stator winding resistance is considered, however, the stator-voltage

Brought to you by | New York University Bobst Library Technical Services

λs _ dq = ( Lls + Lm ) I s _ dq + Lm I r _ dq = Lls I s _ dq + Lm I ms _ dq (14)

Table 1. Typical DFIG data used in the simulation study

4. Conversion of Speed and Reactive Power Control Into d-q

Brought to you by | New York University Bobst Library Technical Services

τ em = p ( λsq ird − λsd irq ) (17)

4.1 Stator-Voltage Orientation Frame

Therefore, I ms _ dq _ sv ≈ 0 − jI ms and λs _ dq _ sv ≈ 0 + jλsd _ sv ≈ 0 − jLm I ms where

Brought to you by | New York University Bobst Library Technical Services

Tem = − pLm I ms I rd _ sv , Qs = Vsd _ sv ( I rq _ sv + I ms ) (20)

I rd* _ sv = − Tem* ( pLm I ms ) , I rq* _ sv = Qs* Vsd _ sv − I ms (21)

4.2 Stator-Flux Orientation Frame

λs _ dq _ sf = λsd _ sf + j 0 ≈ Lmims + j 0 (22)

In the SFO frame, the steady-state magnetizing current space vector is

Tem = − pLm I ms I rq _ sf , Qs = Vsq _ sf ( I ms − I rd _ sf ) (24)

Brought to you by | New York University Bobst Library Technical Services

I rd* _ sf = − Qs* Vsq _ sf + I ms , I rq* _ sf = − Tem* ( pLm I ms ) (25)

5. Wind Power Extraction Using Stator-Voltage and Stator-

5.1 Current-Loop Controller in Stator-Voltage-Oriented Frame

According to Section IV-A, in the SVO frame, ims _ dq _ sv = 0 + j ⋅ ims , where

θ sv = tan −1 ( vsα vsβ ) (27)

Brought to you by | New York University Bobst Library Technical Services

In (26), the component in the bracket is treated as the state equation

Fig. 7. A system block diagram for design of current-loop controller

The controller of the d or q current-loop outputs a voltage signal, vrd’ or

5.2 Current-Loop Controller Design in Stator-Flux-Oriented Frame

Brought to you by | New York University Bobst Library Technical Services

λsα = ∫ ( vsα − Rs isα )dt , λsβ = ∫ ( vsβ − Rs isβ )dt

The d or q reference voltage, vrd* or vrq*, applied to the rotor-side converter

Figure 8 shows the overall control structure of a DFIG wind turbine

Brought to you by | New York University Bobst Library Technical Services