4.6 Article

Experimental Validation of Predictive Current Control for DFIG: FPGA Implementation

期刊

ELECTRONICS
卷 10, 期 21, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/electronics10212670

关键词

current control; DFIG; FPGA; WECS

资金

  1. Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia [TURSP-2020/214]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study aims to design a real-time current predictive control system for DFIG, validated through simulation and experimental tests. By guiding the converter voltage output with predictive current control, the system achieves set points and power regulation. Field-oriented control is used to decouple components and ensure stable operation of WECS.
The purpose of this study is to design a real-time current predictive control for a wind energy conversion system (WECS) using a doubly-fed induction generator (DFIG). A wind emulator and a test bench for assessing control strategies were conceptualized. The DSPACE DS1104 board served as the foundation for the design of a wind emulation system. While power is indirectly regulated via currents, the latter is controlled directly by current predictive control. Using discrete time, the control suggests the appropriate voltages to the converter for each sample period to attain the specified set points and control the power. The field-oriented control is employed to ensure that the two components, axes d and q, are decoupled. The present predictive control was established to regulate a DFIG's active and reactive capabilities. To begin, a thorough examination of the WECS is discussed. Following that, a comprehensive description of predictive control laws based on reference frame orientation is offered. As a result, a simulation was done using Matlab/Simulink environments to assess the performance and resilience of the proposed control model. The predictive current control was then experimentally validated on a test bench to demonstrate its efficacy. The observed results reveal an astonishing correlation between simulations and experiments.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据