Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Belgium
Corresponding author: Hamed Habibi (hamed.habibi@postgrad.curtin.edu.au)
ABSTRACT Proportional integral derivative (PID) regulators are the most practical control schemes for
industrial wind turbines. The key to PID design is the determination of the control parameter gains, which
motivated our attempts to construct an adaptive PID control for wind turbines allowing auto-tuning of the
gains without the need for trial and error processes. By equipping a novel PID-based fault-tolerant controller
with a Nussbaum-type function, a robust adaptive and fault-tolerant control scheme is developed for wind
turbines. Compared with available methods, the proposed controller has advantages, such as the ability
for dealing with complete nonlinear dynamics of wind turbines, including model uncertainty, ability to
ensure system stability by using an adaptive self-tuning gain algorithm, and robustness against wind speed
variation. Furthermore, it has the ability to accommodate unexpected actuator faults and the accommodation
of an unknown control direction. However, the salient feature of the proposed controller lies in its simple
structure and inexpensive online computational demands while dealing with the nonlinear dynamics of wind
turbines and unknown disturbances. It is shown that the proposed pitch angle controller remains continuous
and smooth and all the closed-loop system signals are guaranteed to be uniformly ultimately bounded.
Theoretical analysis and numerical simulations are presented to confirm the effectiveness of the proposed
control strategy.
INDEX TERMS Adaptive PID controller, fault-tolerant, pitch control, self-tuning gains, unknown control
direction, wind turbine power regulation.
2169-3536
2018 IEEE. Translations and content mining are permitted for academic research only.
37464 Personal use is also permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. VOLUME 6, 2018
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
H. Habibi et al.: Adaptive PID Control of Wind Turbines for Power Regulation
The main reason is the intuitiveness in concept and sim- scheduling [33] which require linearization around different
plicity in design of the PID control structure. Regarding operational points, the presented control method is able to
pitch actuator fault accommodation, different approaches deal with the whole nonlinear dynamic behavior of wind
have been used, such as, adaptive sliding mode fault- turbines. In addition, to function satisfactorily and to provide
tolerant control [4], [20], robust linear parameter varying acceptable performance for industrial applications, PID con-
control [6], [7] and fuzzy Takagi-Sugeno control [21], [22], trol gains will be properly designed and determined using
Kalman filter [23] and proportional multi-integral (PMI) the stability guaranteed Lyapunov-based algorithm. Thus,
observer [24]. In most of the related works [23], [25]–[29], the presented approach does not involve a trial and error
the fault-tolerant control consists of two main steps, including process or require manual tuning. Also, compared to previous
fault detection and fault accommodation. In the fault detec- works like fuzzy-logic which depend largely on designer
tion step, the fault moment, location, type and size are needed skills, e.g., in defining fuzzy rules [17], [19], [22], we present
to be accurately estimated. This information is then used in systematic means for self-tuning the PID gains analytically.
fault accommodation schemes to remove fault effects, mostly The proposed control method is also able to tolerate both
via reconfiguring the controller or signal correction [6]. additive, i.e., bias, and multiplicative, i.e., effectiveness loss
Accordingly, the inaccurate fault information may lead to sig- on the pitch actuator and is robust to modeling uncertainties.
nificant performance degradation and even instability. This The secondary objective of this paper is to find the method of
issue is considerable in nonlinear systems with different effectively handling the unknown control direction followed
sources of disturbances, uncertainties and noises, such as by unpredictable wind speed variation without requiring wind
wind turbines [24]. On the other hand, one new approach has speed measurement. In reality, the aerodynamic torque of
been proposed recently, i.e. the fault is adaptively estimated as wind turbines is a nonlinear function of pitch angle and
a part of the designed controller [4], [20], [30], [31]. In this wind speed. Thus, as wind speed variation is unpredictable,
approach, because the fault estimation and accommodation the control direction is not known as a priori which poses
are simultaneously conducted, the controller performance is a significant challenge in the control of wind turbines [37].
sensitive to the design parameters [4]. It should be noted that Although several approaches have been reported on wind
in [7] and [32], the passive fault-tolerant control approach speed estimation [30], [38] or aerodynamic torque estima-
is utilized, in which the controller is designed to be robust tion [9], [31], resultant solutions are very complicated, which
against the considered set of faults, even in the fault free case. is not favorable in practice. Also, designing the pitch con-
Consequently, the performance conservatism is inevitable troller to be robust against wind speed variation, as in [15]
in this approach [7]. It is worth noting that most of the and [39], may lead to some degree of conservatism. To the
approaches lack the implementation simplicity, which is one best of the authors’ knowledge, although a vast amount of
of the key factors for the wind turbine industry. research results on the control of wind turbines with unknown
Nevertheless, though PID control gained wide attention in wind speed have been suggested in the literature, there is still
wind turbine control systems, there are at least two major a need for a systematic method to cope with the unknown
limitations for PID control of such systems. First, in order control direction of the wind turbines without requiring wind
to determine PID gains, an ad-hoc and painstaking process is speed measurement or estimation. Accordingly, in this paper,
required. Hence, in spite of the various existing methods for we introduce the use of the Nussbaum-type function for the
tuning PID gains [17], [19], [33]–[35], there exists no system- control design of the wind turbines to cope with the unpre-
atic way in the literature of wind turbine control to determine dictable wind speed variation and the resultant unknown
such gains which ensure system stability and performance. control direction.
Second, the available PID controls are generally effective The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section II,
only on linearized wind turbine models, but not for the entire the nonlinear wind turbine model, including pitch actua-
nonlinear wind turbine behavior. This has led to controller tor faults, is introduced. Considering the desired operation
designs based on the linearized model, assuming that the wind of the wind turbine in the full load region, the combined
turbine is performing at its desired operational points, which rotor dynamic model is derived, in Section III. Accordingly,
is not necessarily the case in practice. Therefore, the resultant in Section IV, the proposed controller is designed. The numer-
control which has been designed for the linearized wind ical simulation results, using the proposed, industrial, and
turbine model, may not render the expected performance on optimized gain PID controllers are given in Section V, where
the nonlinear model [36]. the comparison is made, and the effectiveness of the proposed
The primary objective of this paper is to solve the long- controller is evaluated. Finally, the discussion, and conclu-
lasting problem of designing a PID controller for non- sions are given in Sections VI and VII, respectively.
linear wind turbines including determination of the gains
analytically, and automatically while ensuring the stabil- II. WIND TURBINE MODEL
ity. Since the proposed control scheme bears the general The wind turbine blades capture kinetic energy available in
PID form, it has a simple structure and only requires low the wind and transfers it into the rotor shaft, rotating with
computational cost. However, differing from previous meth- speed ωr . Interactions between the effective wind speed, Vr ,
ods like linear parameter varying control [7], [34], or gain and the blades causes an aerodynamic torque, Ta , and thrust,
Ft , on the rotor. Aerodynamic torque and thrust are stated The pitch actuator is a hydraulic mechanism to rotate
as [20], the blades and adjust the pitch angle to the reference pitch
1 angle, βref , commanded by the pitch controller. The pitch
Ta = ρa πR3 Vr2 Cq (β, λtsr ) actuator is modelled as a second order dynamic system as [4],
2
1 β̈ = −ωn2 β − 2ωn ξd β̇ + ωn2 βref , (4)
Ft = ρa πR2 Vr2 Ct (β, λtsr ), (1)
2
where, ωn is natural frequency and ξd is damping ratio of
respectively, where, ρa and R are air density and blade
the pitch actuator. Considering the available industrial wind
length, respectively. Cq is the torque coefficient and Ct is
turbines, the limited operational ranges of the pitch actuator
the thrust coefficient, both functions of blade pitch angle,
are as β̇min ≤ β̇ ≤ β̇max , βmin ≤ β ≤ βmax . It should
β, and tip speed ratio, λtsr . Also, λtsr is defined as λtsr =
be noted that (•)max and (•)min stand for maximum and
Rωr /Vr [1]. Aerodynamic thrust causes a fore-aft oscillation
minimum allowable value of the variable (•), respectively.
of the nacelle, considering an elastic tower. Tower dynamics
The measured pitch angle and its derivative are modelled
are given in Appendix A. Considering the velocity of the
as βs = β + νβ , β̈s = β̈ + νβ̈ , where νβ and νβ̈ are the
nacelle, i.e. ẋt , and free wind speed, Vw , i.e. the wind speed
noise contents [5]. Long term operation of the pitch actuator,
before encountering the blades, the effective wind speed at the
with reduced maintenance action, may lead to changes in the
rotor plane is stated as Vr = Vw − ẋt [9]. The power harvested
dynamic behaviour of the pitch actuator, effectiveness loss
by the blades and transferred into the rotor shaft, is stated as
and bias. The three most reported pitch actuator dynamic
1 changes include high air content in the oil, pump wear and
Pa = ρa πR2 Vr3 Cp (β, λtsr ) , (2)
2 hydraulic leakage [7]. These dynamic changes lead to slower
where, Cp is the power coefficient. Also, considering Pa = response speeds of the pitch actuator and, consequently, poor
Ta ωr , the relation between power and torque coefficients, is, power regulation under full load operation. The dynamic
Cp = Cq λtsr . change effects on the pitch actuator can be seen as a change
The empirical equations of Cp and Ct are given in of natural frequency and damping ratio in (4). The charac-
Appendix B. The rotor speed ωr is increased via the drivetrain teristics of these changes are summarized in Table 1 [4], [7],
and transferred into the generator shaft, rotating at ωg . Driv- in which N , HAC, PW and HL represent normal, high air con-
etrain and generator models are described in Appendix A. tent, pump wear, hydraulic leakage situations, respectively.
The electrical power Pg is produced in the generator which Also, ωn,X is natural frequency and ξX is damping ratio in the
is given by, situation X . αf1 and αf2 are fault indices.
considering (4). It is obvious that the settling time for all where, a1 = −(Bdt + Br )/Jr , a2 = Bdt /Ng Jr , a3 =
dynamic change situations are slower than the normal one. 1/Jr , b1 = ηdt Bdt /Ng Jg , b2 = −ηdt Bdt /Ng2 − Bg /Jg ,
The dynamic change in the pitch actuator can be con- b3 = −1/Jg . Also, Jr and Jg are the inertia of rotor and
sidered as an uncertainty which should be handled by the generator shafts, which are rotating at speeds ωr and ωg ,
designed pitch angle controller and can be augmented into the respectively. Bdt is the torsion damping of the drivetrain.
pitch dynamic model as a convex function of normal values Also, viscous frictions for rotor and generator shaft bearings
of natural frequency and damping ratio [40]. So, the pitch are considered whose coefficients are Br and Bg , respec-
actuator model (4) can be rewritten including the dynamic tively. ηdt is the drivetrain efficiency in transferring speed.
change effect, i.e. added as uncertainty, to give, Accordingly, the second-time derivation of rotor speed can be
β̈ = −ωn,N 2
β − 2ωn,N ξN β̇ + ωn,N 2 βref + 1f˜PAD , (5) given as,
ω̈r = c1 ωr + c2 ωg + c3 Ta + c4 Tg + a3 Ṫa , (9)
where, 1f˜PAD = −αf1 1(ω̃2n )β − 2αf2 1 ω̃n ξ̃ β̇ +
where, c1 = a21
+ a2 b1 , c2 = a1 a2 + a2 b2 , c3 = a1 a3 ,
αf1 1(ω̃2n )βref , 1(ω̃2n ) = ωn,HL
2 − ωn,N
2 and 1 ω̃n ξ̃ = c4 = a2 b3 , forms the combined rotor dynamic behavior
ωn,HAC ξHAC − ωn,N ξN . model. Considering (9), it is obvious that the rotor speed and
During operation in harsh environments, the pitch actuator generator speed, are controlled by the pitch angle regulation.
can be corrupted due to unanticipated faults, considered as It is assumed that in the vicinity of any triple pair (Vr , ωr , β)
bias and/or effectiveness loss which deviates the pitch angle in the operational range of the wind turbine, Ta is not a
from the expected one [6]. The effectiveness loss and bias of singular function. Also, there is a given β ∗ for any pair of
the pitch actuator can be modelled as, (Vr , ωr ), such that it steers the wind turbine to the rated
βu (t) = ρ (t) β ref (t) + 8(t), (6) power generation, by adjusting the pitch angle as β = β ∗ [9].
Accordingly, as the wind speed varies, β ∗ will take the
where, βu is the actual pitch angle applied to the pitch corresponding value to satisfy the desirable performance.
actuator, 8(t) represents the unknown uncontrollable pitch A diagram of β ∗ for the considered wind turbine benchmark
actuator bias that causes an unbalanced rotor rotation, and model in the full load region, as obtained in [7], is illustrated
consequently, higher probability of the drivetrain fatigue [22]. in Fig. 2. It should be noted that, as the wind speed is con-
Also, ρ (t) is an unknown effectiveness of the actuator which sidered as an unmeasurable and uncontrollable disturbance,
is 0 < ρ (t) ≤ 1, where ρ (t) = 1 indicates healthy pitch β ∗ is the unknown variable. Thus, the pitch angle cannot be
actuator and ρ (t) = 0 refers to total actuator loss [16], [22]. simply set at β ∗ , but instead, it is regulated by the designed
The pitch actuator dynamic response, (5), combined with pitch controller.
dynamic change uncertainty, pitch actuator bias and effective-
ness loss, can be rewritten as,
β̈ = −ωn,N
2
β − 2ωn,N ξN β̇
+ ωn,N
2
ρ (t) β ref + 8 (t) + 1f˜PAD , (7)
According to this approach, for any given pair of (Vr , ωr ), Remark 2: Considering Fig. 3 and Remark 1, it is obvious
there exists 4 ∈ (0, 1) such that [9], that G(•) = ωn,N a3 Ta )β /2ξN takes value in −ωn,N a3 L/
2ξN ≤ G(•) ≤ −ωn,N a3 U /2ξN and also G(•) 6 = 0
∗ ∂Ta
Ta (Vr , ωr , β) = Ta Vr , ωr , β + β − β
∗
, for any triple pair (Vr , ωr , β).
∂β (Vr ,ωr ,βk ) Assumption 2: Considering the bounded achievable pitch
(10) angle β and it is allowable variation rate β̇,
it is assumed
|8| ≤ 8̄ < ∞, |ρ̇| ≤ Cρ̇ < ∞ and 8̇ ≤ C8̇ < ∞,
where, βk = 4β + (1 − 4) β ∗ . The ∂Ta /∂β diagram in the
where 8̄, Cρ̇ and C8̇ are positive unknown constants [6].
full load region, considering the Cp surface in Appendix B,
Assumption 3: Considering information extraction from
is shown in Fig. 3.
system nonlinearities [42], there is an unknown nonnega-
tive constant af and computable nonnegative function ϕf (x)
such that it satisfies |F (x,t) + 8 (t) G (x,t) + D (x,t)| ≤
af ϕf (x) [6].
Assumption 4: In this paper the measurement noise on the
variable of Y , i.e. νY , is considered bounded by an unknown
bound d̄Y , which is a practical assumption [29].
Considering Assumptions 3 and 4, then, it can be shown that Proof: Let the Lyapunov function V be selected as,
H (•) is upper bounded as, 1 2 1 2
V = Z + ã , (21)
|H (•)| = 2λ |ėr | + λ |er |
2 2 2σ1
+ af ϕf (x) + λ2 d̄ωr + 2λd̄ω̇r < aϕ(x), (18) where, ã is estimation error of a, defined as ã = a − â.
The time derivative of (21), considering (17) and (19),
where, a = max af , 2λ, λ2 , λ2 d̄ωr + 2λd̄ω̇r is an unknown
is derived as,
positive constant and ϕ (x) = ϕf (x) + |ėr | + |er | + 1. 1
It should be noted that ϕ (x) is called a core-function and V̇ = Z Ż − ãâ˙ = ZH (•) + B(•) λD0 + λD N (ξ ) Z 2
σ1
is a computable scalar function [42]. It can be Rproved that σ0
boundedness of Z leads to boundedness of er , 0 er (τ ) dτ
t + âã − ãϕ 2 Z 2 . (22)
σ1
and ėr . So, the controller is designed to ensure Z is uniformly
ultimately bounded (UUB) [43]. In this regard, the following Considering the trivial inequality (ã − a)2 ≥ 0, it can be
definition and lemma are stated, on which basis the controller easily shown that âã ≤ a2 /2 − ã2 /2. Also, considering (18),
is designed, and its stability is proved. ZH < |Z | aϕ < aϕ 2 Z 2 + a/4 holds true. So, V̇ can be
Definition 1: Any smooth continuous even function Rr bounded as,
N (ξ (t)) is called a Nussbaum-type function, if sup 1r 0 N (ξ )
r a σ0 a2 σ0 ã2
dξ = +∞ and lim inf 1r 0 N (ξ )dξ = −∞ [6]. V̇ ≤ aϕ 2 Z 2 + + B (•) (ξ ) ξ̇ + − ãϕ 2 Z 2 .
R
−
t→∞ 4 σ1 2 σ1 2
Lemma 1: Assume V (t) > 0 and ξ (t) are smooth defined (23)
functions defined on the time interval [0 tf ). Also, N (ξ (t)) is
The right hand side of (23) is equal to âϕ 2 +λD0 Z 2 + a4 +
a selected Nussbaum-type function. Then, for any t ∈ [0 tf ),
if V (t) < c0 + e−c1 t 0 (g(τ )N (ξ (τ )) + 1) ξ̇ ec1 τ dτ holds true,
Rt
B (·) N (ξ ) ξ̇ + σσ01 a2 − σσ10 ã2 − λD0 Z 2 . Also considering λD =
2 2
where c0 and c1 are positive constants, and g(τ ) represents a âϕ 2 and ξ̇ = λD0 + λD Z 2 , (23) yields,
time-varying parameter, which takes values in the unknown
closed intervals L ∈ [l+ , l− ] with 0 ∈ / L, then V (t), ξ (t) and a σ0 a2
Rt c1 τ dτ must be bounded on [0t ) [44]. V̇ ≤ ξ̇ + B (·) N (ξ ) ξ̇ + +
0 g(τ )N (ξ (τ ))ξ̇ e f 4 σ1 2
A PID-like pitch angle controller is proposed as, σ0 ã2
− −λD0 Z 2 < ξ̇ +B (·) N (ξ ) ξ̇ −c1 V +c2 , (24)
σ1 2
βref = λD0 + λD N (ξ )Z (t) ,
(19)
where, c2 = min(σ0 , 2λD0 ) and c2 = a/4 + σ0 a2 /2σ1 and
where, λD0 is a positive design parameter. Also, in (19), both are positive. MultiplyingNussbaum-type function, used
the controller gain λD is obtained via the following adaptive in (24) by ec1 t > 0, yields
laws,
d Vec1 t /dt ≤ ξ̇ ec1 t + B (·) N (ξ ) ξ̇ ec1 t + c2 ec1 t , (25)
λD = âϕ 2
and integrating both sides of (25) over [0 t], leads to
ξ̇ = λD0 + λD Z 2
Z t
â˙ = −σ0 â + σ1 ϕ 2 Z 2 , (20) V < e−c1 t (B (·) N (ξ ) + 1) ξ̇ ec1 τ dτ
0
where, σ0 and σ1 are positive design parameters, and â is the
c2 −c1 t c2
+ V (0) − e + . (26)
estimation of a. c1 c1
Remark 3: The proposed controller (19) can be seen as
a combination of two parts, i.e. Z (t) and λD0 + λD N (ξ ).
Since 0 < e−c1 t ≤ 1, the inequality (26) can be rewritten as,
Considering (16), it is obvious that Z (t) is a PID-like filter
Z t
of the tracking error and on the other hand, λD0 + λD N (ξ ) V < e−c1 t (B (·) N (ξ ) + 1) ξ̇ ec1 τ dτ + c0 , (27)
0
is auto-updating the gains of Z (t). This is the reason the
proposed controller is called a PID-like controller. where, c0 = c2 /c1 + V (0) is a positive constant. Considering
The stability of the wind turbine model using the proposed Lemma R1 and Remark 2, it is concluded from (27) that V ,
ξ and 0 (B (·) N (ξ ) + 1) ξ̇ ec1 τ dτ are bounded on [0 t).
t
controller is proved via the following theorem.
Theorem 1: Consider the combined rotor dynamic Thus, the closed-loop system solution is UUB. Boundedness
model (13), including the presence of the pitch actuator fault of V leads to boundedness of Z and ã. Because a is bounded
and uncertainty. Under assumptions 1-4 and the unmeasured and ã = a − â, then â is bounded. Since, V (0) is bounded,
wind speed variation, using the proposed pitch angle con- it is obvious that lim Z 2 /2 ≤ c2 /c1 ; i.e. |Z | converges
t→+∞ √
troller (19) with adaptive laws (20); the rated rotor speed to the set = {|Z || |Z | < 2c2 /c1 } as t → +∞.
tracking error is guaranteed to be UUB, all the internal sig- On theRother hand, boundedness of Z ensures boundedness
t
nals are UUB, and pitch angle controller signal is smooth of er , 0 er (τ ) dτ and ėr , and consequently, ωr , ωg , ϕ are
everywhere. bounded [43]. Therefore, from (17), (19) and (20), it can be
makes the gain tuning process simpler compared to currently It is obvious that the aim is to keep C1 and C2 as close to
available controllers. Also, it has been proposed to filter the zero as possible. On the other hand, the maximum deviation
generator sensor, before feeding it into the PID controller to of the generated power from rated power is calculated as,
remove noise content and avoid amplification of noise via the C3 = max Pg (t) − Pg,rated .
(34)
controller gain. However, it is obvious that, in the structure
of the controller (30), the sensor noise ωg,s is not necessar- Indeed, C3 represents the instantaneous generated power
ily attenuated and may be amplified. Accordingly, in IBC deviation from the rated value which may lead to sudden
D. NUMERICAL RESULTS
In this section, to verify the proposed controller performance, FIGURE 5. Generator speed using IBC (blue line), MFO-PID (green line),
proposed controller (red line), and rated generator speed (black line).
numerical simulations are conducted, and the results are com-
pared to the IBC (30), and the MFO-PID (31) responses.
Firstly, the performance of all controllers in normal situa-
tions, i.e. without pitch actuator effectiveness loss, bias or
dynamic change, are carried out. Then, for each mentioned
situation, the wind turbine operation is studied and also, the
performance criteria are analyzed.
Considering the adaptive laws (20), and the inequality (18),
the function ϕf should be selected appropriately. In this
regard, considering (13) and Assumption 3, ϕf is selected as, FIGURE 6. Generated power using IBC (blue line), MFO-PID (green line),
proposed controller (red line), and rated power (black line).
N T
g g,max
ϕf = |c1 ωr | + c2 ωg + c3
+ c4 Tg
ηdt
ωn,N a3 U β a3 U β̈ ωn,N a3 U
+
+ 2ω ξ + 2ξ
2ξN n,N N N
a U 1 ω̃ ξ̃ β̇
a3 U 1(ω̃n2 ) (βmax − βmin )
3 n
+ + ,
ωn,N ξN
2ωn,N ξN
(37)
FIGURE 7. Drive train torsion angle rate using IBC (blue line),
which is obviously a computable scalar function, as a part of MFO-PID (green line), proposed controller (red line).
FIGURE 15. Pitch angle difference in normal case and pump wear case
using IBC (blue line), MFO-PID (green line), and proposed
Now, the effects of the dynamic change in the pitch actuator controller (red line).
are considered. To this end, considering Table 1, the dynamic
changes are applied as,
Pump wear,
400 (s) ≤ t ≤ 600(s),
Hydraulic Leak, 700 (s) ≤ t ≤ 900(s), (40)
High Air Content, 1000 (s) ≤ t ≤ 1200(s),
FIGURE 20. Pitch angle difference using IBC (blue line), MFO-PID
(green line), and proposed controller (red line), under simultaneous
pitch actuator bias and pump wear case.
VI. DISCUSSION
Our interest in developing new PID control of wind turbines
stems from the fact that PID controllers are a key part of
almost every practical control system, due to their simplicity
in both structure and concept. Accordingly, although the
underlying control problem of nonlinear wind turbines is
quite difficult, specifically when unknown wind speed and
actuation faults are considered, the proposed controller is
FIGURE 18. Generated power using IBC (blue line), MFO-PID (green line), structurally simple while computationally inexpensive, and
proposed controller (red line), and rated power (black line), under functionally effective, as it bears the general PID form.
simultaneous pitch actuator bias and pump wear case.
Differing from conventional PID based methods, the pre-
sented control scheme exhibits several distinguishing fea-
tures. First, the designed PID gains consist of two parts,
i.e., time-varying part and constant part; the former is con-
sistently and automatically updated without the need for
human interference while the latter can be selected freely by
the designer. Also, all proportional, integral, and derivative
gains are expressly linked to each other through the design
parameter λ, thus making the gain tuning process of the
presented approach simpler, compared to the traditional PID
FIGURE 19. Generated power using IBC (blue line), MFO-PID (green line),
proposed controller (red line), and rated power (black line), under
approach. Second, in contrast to most of the PID control
simultaneous pitch actuator effectiveness loss and hydraulic leak case. systems, which suffer from the lack of guaranteed stability
analysis, the proposed algorithm utilized a Lyapunov direct The drivetrain is modelled as a two degree of freedom
method to provide a systematic procedure to determine PID rotational system. The rotor and generator speeds are input
gains while ensuring the stability of the closed-loop system. and output speeds of the drivetrain, respectively. Also, inertia
By that means, the analytical procedure is delivered to adap- of rotor and generator shafts are Jr and Jg , respectively, which
tively adjust PID gains without the need for trial and error are rotating at speeds ωr and ωg , respectively. The drivetrain
processes. It is also worth noting that by linking the control gear meshing, whose ratio is Ng , includes torsion stiffness Kdt
gains through λ, the stability analysis is facilitated compared and torsion damping, Bdt .
to most of the available PID controls in the literature. Third, This elastic gear meshing results in a torsional angle of
the presented PID control can handle nonlinearity of the twist of the main shaft θ1 , which is defined as,
wind turbine models. Also, the presented scheme is adaptive
to modeling uncertainties and robust against pitch actuator θ1 = θr − θg /Ng . (A-2)
faults, and wind speed variations. Note that the controller where, θr and θg are rotation angles of rotor and generator
realization is independent of the nonlinear model function. shafts, respectively. Also, viscous frictions for rotor and gen-
Thus, if the model functions F(•), G(•) and D(•) in (13) erator shaft bearings are considered whose coefficients are
change, the designed control strategy will automatically tune Br and Bg , respectively. The drivetrain efficiency in transfer-
the gains to reject the disturbances and compensate for ring speed is ηdt . Considering all the above mentioned com-
the uncertainties without requiring human interference for ponents of the drivetrain, its dynamic behaviour is modelled
adjusting the gains. as [5], [20],
VII. CONCLUSION Jr ω̇r = Ta − Kdt θ1 − (Br + Bdt ) ωr + Bdt ωg /Ng ,
In this paper, we investigated a novel PID tracking control Jg ω̇g = ηdt K dt θ1 /Ng
approach with adaptive gain adjustment for nonlinear wind
turbines with unknown pitch actuator characteristics, and + ηdt Bdt ωr /Ng − (Bg + ηdt Bdt /Ng2 )ωg − Tg
unknown wind speed variations. Differing from traditional θ̇1 = ωr − ωg /Ng . (A-3)
PID control, the presented scheme adjusts the gains using
stability-guaranteed analytic algorithms, thus avoiding man- The generator and rotor speeds and its derivative are mea-
ual tuning or frustrating ‘‘trial and error’’ processes. The pre- sured by sensors as, ωg,s = ωg + νωg , ωr,s = ωr + νωr and
sented control scheme is capable of automatically accommo- ω̇r,s = ω̇r + νω̇r , where νωg , νωr and νω̇r are noise contents
dating model nonlinearities and uncertainties, undetectable of each sensor [29]. The electrical power is produced in the
disturbances and pitch actuator faults. Furthermore, the pro- generator. Also, to adjust the generated power frequency,
posed algorithm does not require the process of fault detec- a converter is located between the generator and grid. Indeed,
tion, which is very challenging for wind turbines with the current in the generator is controlled utilizing an internal
different sources of noise and uncertainty. Therefore, it can electronic power controller in the converter [7]. Control of
be considered as a practical approach. In addition, in contrast demand current in the generator leads to regulation of the
to previous works, it addresses the unknown control direction, torque load on the generator to the reference one, Tg,ref , com-
as a result of considering an unknown wind speed, by deploy- manded by the generator torque controller [20]. The converter
ing a Nussbaum-type function. The theoretical analysis has is a first order system with time delay τg , as,
verified the proposed controller performance as illustrated Ṫg = −ag Tg + ag Tg,ref , (A-4)
from the various numerical simulations. In practice, the pro-
posed method can be used in offshore wind turbines to reduce where, ag = 1/τg . The generator internal electronic con-
the need for repetitive and costly maintenance due to pitch troller is much faster than the slow mechanical dynamic
actuator faults. Future research directions may include the behavior of wind turbines. So, the generated electrical power
integration of the controller for both operational regions, with in the generator, Pg , is approximated as a static relation
consideration of generator faults. as (3) [7]. Also, the generator torque sensor is modelled
as Tg,s = Tg + νTg,s , where νTg,s is the sensor noise.
APPENDIX A Additionally, the limits on generator torque and its variation,
In this appendix, the tower, drivetrain and generator model are as, Ṫg,min ≤ Ṫg ≤ Ṫg,max , Tg,min ≤ Tg ≤ Tg,max [7].
of wind speed is stated. The applied aerodynamic thrust on The yaw mechanism of wind turbines is used to change the
the wind turbine tower leads to a bending oscillation and, direction of the blade plane to keep it in the appropriate
consequently, the nacelle fore-aft motion. This motion is direction with respect to the wind. In this paper it is assumed
modelled as [7], that the wind speed direction is perpendicular to the blade
plane. So, the dynamic response of the yaw mechanism is
Mt ẍt = Ft − Bt ẋt − Kt xt , (A-1)
ignored. The combined schematic model of the wind turbine
where, Mt is nacelle mass, Bt is damping ratio and Kt is is demonstrated in Fig. 22. It should be noted that the gen-
elasticity coefficient of the tower. Also, xt is the nacelle erator reference torque is regulated to improve the captured
displacement, measured from its equilibrium point. energy, i.e. it is active in the partial load region, and the pitch
APPENDIX B
In this appendix, the empirical equations for power and thrust
coefficients are given. The power coefficient is stated as [20],
Cp (β, λtsr ) = B1 (B2 /3 − B3 β − B4 ) e(−B5 /3) + B6 λtsr ,
(A-5)
where, 1/3 = 1/(λtsr + 0.08β) − 0.035/(β 3 + 1), B1 =
0.5176, B2 = 116, B3 = 0.4, B4 = 5, B5 = 21 and B6 =
0.0068 [47]. Also, the thrust coefficient is approximated
as [48],
CT (β, λtsr ) = 0.5C̃T 1 + sign C̃T
C̃T = A1 + A2 (λtsr − A3 β) e−A4 β + A5 λ2tsr e−A6 β
+ A7 λ3tsr e−A8 β , (A-6) REFERENCES
[1] J. Liu, Y. Gao, S. Geng, and L. Wu, ‘‘Nonlinear control of variable speed
where, A1 = 0.006, A2 = 0.095, A3 = −4.15, A4 = 2.75, wind turbines via fuzzy techniques,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 5, pp. 27–34, 2017.
A5 = 0.001, A6 = 7.8, A7 = −0.00016 and A8 = −8.88. [2] J. G. Njiri and D. Söffker, ‘‘State-of-the-art in wind turbine con-
trol: Trends and challenges,’’ Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 60,
The power and thrust coefficients, using (A-5) and (A-6), are pp. 377–393, Jul. 2016.
illustrated in Figs. 23 and 24, respectively. [3] H. Habibi, A. Y. Koma, and I. Howard, ‘‘Power improvement of non-linear
wind turbines during partial load operation using fuzzy inference control,’’
Control Eng. Appl. Inf., vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 31–42, 2017.
APPENDIX C [4] J. Lan, R. J. Patton, and X. Zhu, ‘‘Fault-tolerant wind turbine pitch con-
In this appendix the numeric values of wind turbine model trol using adaptive sliding mode estimation,’’ Renew. Energ., vol. 119,
parameters are given in Table 6 [5]. pp. 219–231, Feb. 2018.
[5] P. F. Odgaard and J. Stoustrup, ‘‘A benchmark evaluation of fault toler-
ant wind turbine control concepts,’’ IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol.,
vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 1221–1228, May 2015.
[6] Y. Song, X. Huang, and C. Wen, ‘‘Robust adaptive fault-tolerant PID
control of MIMO nonlinear systems with unknown control direction,’’
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 64, no. 6, pp. 4876–4884, Jun. 2017.
[7] C. Sloth, T. Esbensen, and J. Stoustrup, ‘‘Robust and fault-tolerant linear
parameter-varying control of wind turbines,’’ Mechatronics, vol. 21, no. 4,
pp. 645–659, Jun. 2011.
[8] H. Habibi, I. Howard, and R. Habibi, ‘‘Bayesian sensor fault detection in
a Markov jump system,’’ Asian J. Control, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 1465–1481,
2017.
[9] H. Jafarnejadsani, J. Pieper, and J. Ehlers, ‘‘Adaptive control of a variable-
speed variable-pitch wind turbine using radial-basis function neural net-
work,’’ IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 2264–2272,
Nov. 2013.
[10] H. Habibi, H. R. Nohooji, and I. Howard, ‘‘Constrained control of wind
turbines for power regulation in full load operation,’’ in Proc. 11th Asian
FIGURE 23. Power coefficient surface. Control Conf. (ASCC), Dec. 2017, pp. 2813–2818.
[11] U. Giger, P. Kühne, and H. Schulte, ‘‘Fault tolerant and optimal control of [34] K. Z. Østergaard, J. Stoustrup, and P. Brath, ‘‘Linear parameter vary-
wind turbines with distributed high-speed generators,’’ Energies, vol. 10, ing control of wind turbines covering both partial load and full
no. 2, pp. 1–13, 2017. load conditions,’’ Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control, vol. 19, no. 1,
[12] H. Jafarnejadsani, ‘‘L1-optimal control of variable-speed variable-pitch pp. 92–116, 2009.
wind turbines,’’ M.S. thesis, Dept. Mech. Eng., Univ. Calgary, Calgary, [35] Y. Qi and Q. Meng, ‘‘The application of fuzzy PID control in pitch
AB, Canada, 2013. wind turbine,’’ Energy Procedia, vol. 16, pp. 1635–1641, Jan. 2012.
[13] L.-L. Fan and Y.-D. Song, ‘‘Neuro-adaptive model-reference fault-tolerant [Online]. Available: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
control with application to wind turbines,’’ IET Control Theory Appl., S1876610212002640, doi: 10.1016/j.egypro.2012.01.254.
vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 475–486, Mar. 2012. [36] B. Boukhezzar and H. Siguerdidjane, ‘‘Nonlinear control of a variable-
[14] F. Jaramillo-Lopez, G. Kenne, and F. Lamnabhi-Lagarrigue, ‘‘A novel speed wind turbine using a two-mass model,’’ IEEE Trans. Energy Con-
online training neural network-based algorithm for wind speed estimation vers., vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 149–162, Mar. 2011.
and adaptive control of PMSG wind turbine system for maximum power [37] T. D. Do, ‘‘Disturbance observer-based fuzzy SMC of WECSs without
extraction,’’ Renew. Energy, vol. 86, pp. 38–48, Feb. 2016. wind speed measurement,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 5, pp. 147–155, Nov. 2016.
[15] Y.-M. Kim, ‘‘Robust data driven H-infinity control for wind turbine,’’ [38] D. Song, J. Yang, Z. Cai, M. Dong, M. Su, and Y. Wang, ‘‘Wind estimation
J. Franklin Inst., vol. 353, no. 13, pp. 3104–3117, Sep. 2016. with a non-standard extended Kalman filter and its application on max-
[16] H. Badihi, Y. Zhang, and H. Hong, ‘‘Wind turbine fault diagnosis and fault- imum power extraction for variable speed wind turbines,’’ Appl. Energ.,
tolerant torque load control against actuator faults,’’ IEEE Trans. Control vol. 190, pp. 670–685, Mar. 2017.
Syst. Technol., vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 1351–1372, Jul. 2015. [39] Y. Song, Z. Zhang, P. Li, W. Wang, and M. Qin, ‘‘Robust adaptive variable
[17] H. Habibi, A. Y. Koma, and A. Sharifian, ‘‘Power and velocity control speed control of wind power systems without wind speed measurement,’’
of wind turbines by adaptive fuzzy controller during full load operation,’’ J. Renew. Sustain. Energy, vol. 5, no. 6, p. 063115, 2013.
Iran. J. Fuzzy Syst., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 35–48, 2016. [40] S. Simani, ‘‘Overview of modelling and advanced control strategies for
[18] R. Tiwari and N. Babu, ‘‘Recent developments of control strategies for wind turbine systems,’’ Energies, vol. 8, no. 12, pp. 13395–13418, 2015.
wind energy conversion system,’’ Renew. Sustain. Energy. Rev., vol. 66, [41] V. Petrović, M. Jelavić, and M. Baotić, ‘‘Advanced control algorithms
pp. 268–285, Dec. 2016. for reduction of wind turbine structural loads,’’ Renew. Energy, vol. 76,
[19] A. G. Aissaoui, A. Tahour, N. Essounbouli, F. Nollet, M. Abid, and pp. 418–431, Apr. 2015.
M. I. Chergui, ‘‘A Fuzzy-PI control to extract an optimal power from wind [42] Y. Song, X. Huang, and C. Wen, ‘‘Tracking control for a class of unknown
turbine,’’ Energy Convers. Manage., vol. 65, pp. 688–696, Jan. 2013. nonsquare MIMO nonaffine systems: A deep-rooted information based
[20] H. Habibi, H. R. Nohooji, and I. Howard, ‘‘Power maximization of robust adaptive approach,’’ IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 61, no. 10,
variable-speed variable-pitch wind turbines using passive adaptive neural pp. 3227–3233, Oct. 2016.
fault tolerant control,’’ Frontiers Mech. Eng., vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 377–388, [43] H. K. Khalil, ‘‘Universal integral controllers for minimum-phase nonlin-
Sep. 2017. ear systems,’’ IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 490–494,
[21] S. Simani, S. Farsoni, and P. Castaldi, ‘‘Fault diagnosis of a wind turbine Mar. 2000.
benchmark via identified fuzzy models,’’ IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., [44] S. S. Ge, F. Hong, and T. H. Lee, ‘‘Adaptive neural control of nonlin-
vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 3775–3782, Jun. 2015. ear time-delay systems with unknown virtual control coefficients,’’ IEEE
[22] H. Badihi, Y. Zhang, and H. Hong, ‘‘Fuzzy gain-scheduled active fault- Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern. B, Cybern., vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 499–516,
tolerant control of a wind turbine,’’ J. Franklin Inst., vol. 351, no. 7, Feb. 2004.
pp. 3677–3706, Jul. 2014. [45] M. A. Ebrahim, M. Becherif, and A. Y. Abdelaziz, ‘‘Dynamic performance
[23] S. Cho, Z. Gao, and T. Moan, ‘‘Model-based fault detection, fault isolation enhancement for wind energy conversion system using moth-flame opti-
and fault-tolerant control of a blade pitch system in floating wind turbines,’’ mization based blade pitch controller,’’ Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess-
Renew. Energy, vol. 120, pp. 306–321, May 2018. ments, vol. 27, pp. 206–212, Jun. 2018.
[24] P. Kühne, F. Pöschke, and H. Schulte, ‘‘Fault estimation and fault-tolerant [46] D. Wu, W. Liu, J. Song, and Y. She, ‘‘Fault estimation and fault-tolerant
control of the FAST NREL 5-MW reference wind turbine using a pro- control of wind turbines using the SDW-LSI algorithm,’’ IEEE Access,
portional multi-integral observer,’’ Int. J. Adapt. Control Signal Process., vol. 4, pp. 7223–7231, Oct. 2016.
vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 568–585, 2018. [47] H. Ren et al., ‘‘A novel constant output powers compound control strategy
[25] S. Abdelmalek, A. T. Azar, and D. Dib, ‘‘A novel actuator fault-tolerant for variable-speed variable-pitch wind turbines,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 6,
control strategy of DFIG-based wind turbines using Takagi-Sugeno mul- pp. 17050–17059, 2018, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2801458.
tiple models,’’ Int. J. Control Autom., vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 1415–1424, [48] S. Georg, H. Schulte, and H. Aschemann, ‘‘Control-oriented modelling of
Jun. 2018. wind turbines using a Takagi–Sugeno model structure,’’ in Proc. IEEE Int.
[26] H. Badihi, Y. Zhang, and H. Hong, ‘‘Fault-tolerant cooperative control in Conf. Fuzzy Syst. (FUZZ-IEEE), Jun. 2012, pp. 1–8.
an offshore wind farm using model-free and model-based fault detection
and diagnosis approaches,’’ Appl. Energ., vol. 201, pp. 284–307, Sep. 2017.
[27] H. Sanchez, T. Escobet, V. Puig, and P. F. Odgaard, ‘‘Fault diagnosis
of an advanced wind turbine benchmark using interval-based ARRs and
observers,’’ IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 3783–3793, Jun.
2015.
[28] P. F. Odgaard, J. Stoustrup, and M. Kinnaert, ‘‘Fault-tolerant control of
wind turbines: A benchmark model,’’ IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol.,
vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 1168–1182, Jul. 2013.
[29] S. M. Tabatabaeipour, P. F. Odgaard, T. Bak, and J. Stoustrup, ‘‘Fault
detection of wind turbines with uncertain parameters: A set-membership
approach,’’ Energies, vol. 5, no. 7, pp. 2424–2448, 2012.
[30] H. Habibi, H. R. Nohooji, and I. Howard, ‘‘Optimum efficiency control
of a wind turbine with unknown desired trajectory and actuator faults,’’
J. Renew. Sustain. Energy, vol. 9, no. 6, p. 063305, 2017.
HAMED HABIBI received the B.Sc. degree from
[31] H. Habibi, H. R. Nohooji, and I. Howard, ‘‘A neuro-adaptive maximum
Khaje Nasir University, Tehran, Iran, in 2010, and
power tracking control of variable speed wind turbines with actuator
faults,’’ in Proc. Austral. New Zealand Control Conf. (ANZCC), Dec. 2017,
the M.Sc. degree from the University of Tehran,
pp. 63–68. Tehran, in 2013, all in mechanical engineering. He
[32] C. Sloth, T. Esbensen, and J. Stoustrup, ‘‘Active and passive fault-tolerant is currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree with Curtin
LPV control of wind turbines,’’ in Proc. Amer. Control Conf. (ACC), University, Perth, Australia. His current research
Jun./Jul. 2010, pp. 4640–4646. interests include control systems, fault detec-
[33] F. D. Bianchi, R. Sánchez-Peña, and M. Guadayol, ‘‘Gain scheduled tion, isolation, identification, accommodation, and
control based on high fidelity local wind turbine models,’’ Renew. Energy, fault tolerant control with applications on wind
vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 233–240, Jan. 2012. turbines.
HAMED RAHIMI NOHOOJI received the Ph.D. IAN HOWARD received the bachelor’s and Ph.D.
degree in mechanical engineering from Curtin degrees in mechanical engineering from The Uni-
University, Australia, in 2018. Before joining versity of Western Australia in 1984 and 1988,
Curtin University, he was a Lecturer at Islamic respectively. He was with the Defense Science and
Azad University, Damavand, Iran, and also a Technology Organization for five years. In 1994,
Researcher at the University of Pisa, Italy. He was he joined Curtin University as a Lecturer in applied
a Visiting Research Scholar with the University mechanics and dynamic systems, where he was
of Birmingham, U.K., in 2017. He is currently a promoted to Full Professor in 2016 and continues
Post-Doctoral Research Fellow with the Univer- to supervise research in the dynamic behavior of
sité catholique de Louvain, Belgium. His current rotating machinery for fault detection and classifi-
research interests include the field of dynamic systems and control, human– cation for industry applications.
robot interaction, and robotic rehabilitation.