Sliding mode control of grid‐connected wind energy system driven by 2 five‐phase permanent magnet synchronous generators controlled by a new fifteen‐switch converter

Abstract

Summary This article presents a new wind energy system using 2 five‐phase permanent magnet synchronous generators (PMSGs) controlled by a fifteen‐switch rectifier (FSR) topology for grid‐connected system. The 2 five‐phase PMSGs are connected to the DC link through a FSR; at its turn, the DC link is connected to the grid through a classical three‐phase inverter. In order to boost the control performance of the proposed wind system, a sliding mode control is adopted to control both generators‐side and grid‐side converters. The proposed control is tested under varying wind velocity and compared with a proportional‐ and integral (PI)‐based control system. The obtained simulation results show that the controlled variables follow their references independently of the wind speed fluctuations; and there is a significant reduction in the speeds overshoots by 100% and in the DC‐link voltage ripples by more than 78%. In addition, the total harmonic distortion (THD) of the generated current and grid current are reduced to 7.19% and 47.80% compared with PI regulators, respectively.

A state‐of‐the‐art comprehensive review of modern control techniques for grid‐connected wind turbines and photovoltaic arrays distributed generation systems

“…The DPC configuration [77], which is similar to the DTC configuration, is preferred over VOC [68,75,76] because it does not need the CC and has an improved dynamic performance compared to the VOC. Also, the DPC employs a hysteresis comparator and switching table and instantaneously controls the active/reactive powers.…”

“…In [39], the gain scheduling of the SMC based on the FLC confirms an improved real‐time performance of the RSC CB along with reduced chattering. Due to the reduced chattering effect, the suggested method presents a better performance against the conventional SMC with fixed gains [75]. The proposed FLC‐SMC [39] offers 14.52% power generation capability which is more than that achieved with the traditional fixed gains‐based SMC [75], that is, 10.08%.…”

“…The CC in the inner loop of GSC CB using repetitive control technique [74] can be applied successfully under the steady‐state operating conditions, however, presents a slow dynamic response under tough transient conditions of the grid‐side voltage. In [75], the GSC CB using SMC‐based dc‐link VC and CC offers a faster V dc settling time (i.e. 0.014 s) than the classical PI control (i.e.…”

“…0.2 s) [68]. Moreover, the proposed SMC‐based GSC CB [75] obtains the I pgabc with a better sine‐wave (e.g. 8.64% THD) than the one using the PI control (e.g.…”

“…The important control techniques used to implement VC/QC are PI control [68], dual dq theory‐based control [69], quasi‐centralized direct‐MPC (QC‐DMPC) [70], fractional‐order PI (FOPI) control [71], symbiotic organisms search‐based PI (SOS‐PI) control [72] and steady‐state active power reference generation (APRG) control [73]. Finally, the endorsed modern CCs of the GSC CB for the grid‐side current control are made up of repetitive control [74], SMC [75], second‐order SMC (SOSMC) [76], direct power control (DPC) [77] and MPC [78, 79].…”