sustainability

Article
Fuzzy Logic-Based Smart Control of Wind Energy Conversion
System Using Cascaded Doubly Fed Induction Generator
Amar Maafa 1 , Hacene Mellah 1 , Karim Benaouicha 1,2 , Badreddine Babes 3, * , Abdelghani Yahiou 1
and Hamza Sahraoui 4

1 Electrical Engineering Department, Faculty of Sciences and Applied Sciences, University of Bouira,
Bouira 10000, Algeria; [email protected] (A.M.); [email protected] (H.M.);
[email protected] (K.B.); [email protected] (A.Y.)
2 Electrical Systems Engineering Department, University of Boumerdes, Frantz Fanon City,
Boumerdes 35000, Algeria
3 Research Center in Industrial Technologies—CRTI, P.O. Box 64, Algiers 16014, Algeria
4 Department of Electrical Engineering, Hassiba Benbouali University, Chlef 02180, Algeria;
[email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: This paper introduces a robust system designed to effectively manage and enhance the
electrical output of a Wind Energy Conversion System (WECS) using a Cascaded Doubly Fed
Induction Generator (CDFIG) connected to a power grid. The solution that was investigated is the use
of a CDFIG that is based on a variable-speed wind power conversion chain. It comprises the electrical
and mechanical connection of two DFIGs through their rotors. The originality of this paper lies in the
innovative application of a fuzzy logic controller (FLC) in combination with a CDFIG for a WECS. To
demonstrate that this novel configuration enhances control precision and performance in WECSs,
we conducted a comparison of three different controllers: a proportional–integral (PI) controller, a
fractional PID (FPID) controller, and a fuzzy logic controller (FLC). The results highlight the potential
of the proposed system in optimizing power generation and improving overall system stability. It
turns out that, according to the first results, the FLC performed optimally in terms of tracking and
rejecting disturbances. In terms of peak overshoot for power and torque, the findings indicate that
Citation: Maafa, A.; Mellah, H.; the proposed FLC-based technique (3.8639% and 6.9401%) outperforms that of the FOPID (11.2458%
Benaouicha, K.; Babes, B.; Yahiou, A.;
and 10.9654%) and PI controllers (11.4219% and 11.0712%), respectively. These results demonstrate
Sahraoui, H. Fuzzy Logic-Based Smart
the superior performance of the FLC in reducing overshoot, providing better control stability for both
Control of Wind Energy Conversion
power and torque. In terms of rise time, the findings show that all controllers perform similarly for
System Using Cascaded Doubly Fed
both power and torque. However, the FLC demonstrates superior performance with a rise time of
Induction Generator. Sustainability
2024, 16, 9333. https://doi.org/
0.0016 s for both power and torque, compared to the FOPID (1.9999 s and 1.9999 s) and PI (0.0250 s
10.3390/su16219333 and 0.0247 s) controllers. This highlights the FLC’s enhanced responsiveness in controlling power
and torque. In terms of settling time, all three controllers have almost the same performance of 1.9999.
Academic Editor: Yagang Zhang
An examination of total harmonic distortion (THD) was also employed to validate the superiority
Received: 1 September 2024 of the FLC. In terms of power quality, the findings prove that a WECS based on an FLC (0.93%) has
Revised: 13 October 2024 a smaller total harmonic distortion (THD) compared to that of the FOPID (1.21%) and PI (1.51%)
Accepted: 21 October 2024 controllers. This system solves the problem by removing the requirement for sliding ring–brush
Published: 27 October 2024 contact. Through the utilization of the MATLAB/Simulink environment, the effectiveness of this
control and energy management approach was evaluated, thereby demonstrating its capacity to fulfill
the objectives that were set.
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
Keywords: wind energy conversion system (WECS); cascaded doubly fed induction generator
This article is an open access article (CDFIG); fractional-order PID controller (FPID); fuzzy logic controller (FLC)
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).

Sustainability 2024, 16, 9333. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16219333 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2024, 16, 9333 2 of 21

1. Introduction
The production of Wind Energy Conversion Systems (WECSs) reduces reliance on
fossil fuels, leading to decreased greenhouse gas emissions and minimizing negative envi-
ronmental impacts. By effectively harnessing natural wind resources, WECSs contribute to
long-term energy sustainability and help mitigate climate change [1,2]. Additionally, their
ability to operate in grid-connected systems makes them a highly viable option for sus-
tainable energy transitions globally, positioning WECSs as one of the best choices for clean
energy generation [2]. Several countries, including China, have expressed strong interest in
harnessing clean and renewable energy sources, as these technologies can play a critical
role in supporting China’s energy transition and can be used for the aim of contributing
significantly to China’s goals of reaching the carbon peak by 2030 and achieving carbon
neutrality by 2060 [3].
The introduction of renewable energies, namely wind energy, into the power grid poses
significant difficulties in terms of management and optimization. Wind Energy Conversion
Systems (WECSs) are challenging to manage because they are subject to uncertainties
and variables caused by changing weather conditions [4–8]. Power control is crucial for
effectively integrating WECSs into smart and traditional grids, ensuring stability, reliability,
and optimal electrical energy utilization. Due to the unpredictable characteristics of wind, it
is crucial to control the energy generation of wind turbines in order to ensure constant and
effective incorporation into the electrical grid. Modern power control techniques prioritize
the optimization of energy generation while reducing disruptions in the electrical grid, such
as fluctuations in frequency and voltage [9–11]. Recent approaches involve the utilization
of sophisticated techniques like fuzzy logic, predictive controllers, and machine learning
algorithms to improve the robustness and effectiveness of power control. These strategies
enable improved adjustment to fluctuating wind conditions and a more accurate control of
wind energy integration into the power system [12–17].
Fuzzy controllers have emerged as an effective solution to improve the efficiency and
stability of wind energy management systems [18–22]. FL controllers are being used more
and more in wind power conversion systems to make them work better and more efficiently.
FL controllers are great at dealing with the highly unpredictable and nonlinear behavior of
wind. They do not need exact mathematical models, which are often hard to understand
or do not work well in the real world, so they can adapt to changing wind speeds and
directions [12,18].
In the literature, various papers address the control of WECSs, focusing on various
aspects such as machine-side converters, grid-side converters, and pitch control strategies.
The fuzzy logic controller (FLC) proposed in [23] generates the rotor voltages necessary to
ensure that the active and reactive power in the WECS achieve their target reference values.
In this case, fuzzy controllers frequently call for modifications that are quite fine.
The study in [24] presents a control law that combines sliding mode control and a
single-input FLC to effectively and efficiently control a static synchronous compensator,
enhancing both its performance and stability. The goal is to enhance the voltage profile
and stability of an asynchronous WECS, even in the presence of wind speed and load
fluctuations. However, an attractive choice is to experiment with an alternative form of
FLCs, specifically ones that modify the PI reference value. In [25], an adaptive controller
that is based on the principle of fuzzy logic is proposed in order to limit the extracted
power at its rated value while simultaneously enhancing its quality. Additionally, the
pitch angle is adjusted in order to alleviate the loads that are applied to the turbine and
the drive train when they are operating under full load conditions. In [26], a model for
Load Frequency Control (LFC) is given, which combines the economic dispatching control
with the frequency control problem. The need for frequency stability is crucial in both
the short-term and long-term operation of power systems. In [27], the suggested LFC
model examines the role of hydro-turbines in power systems with abundant wind energy.
It also seeks to understand how hydro-turbines contribute to the secondary frequency
control scheme using a PID controller. Other researchers [28] aim to demonstrate the
Sustainability 2024, 16, 9333 3 of 21

superiority of the adaptive PID controller with an FCL loop in a six-area power system
associated with renewable energy sources. Current studies have additionally concentrated
on comprehending the function of energy storage systems (ESSs), together with innovative
control methods, in regulating the frequency of power systems mostly powered by wind.
Using the cascaded dual-FLC strategy, a robust and adaptive energy management system
was developed in [29] with the purpose of mitigating disturbances that were caused by
varied solar irradiation, fluctuating wind speed, and even unexpected fluctuations in load.
To achieve more stability, the suggested algorithm is able to govern the functioning of
batteries, the mode of the microgrid, and the management of the load. In [30], an adaptive
fuzzy logic controller is proposed as a control system designed to maximize power output
from a WECS equipped with a permanent magnet synchronous generator. An excessive
overshooting of the results is observed whenever there is a sudden shift in the references.
A novel single-input variable (FLC) technique is proposed in [31] for a WT-driven doubly
fed induction generator (DFIG) that is equipped with a battery energy storage system and
operates in autonomous mode. The fact that this type of command is dependent on the
internal properties of the system makes it a fragile command. In [32], there is a lack of a
comparison study for the purpose of validating the results of the control and administration
of an energy conversion system within a microgrid setup that includes numerous renewable
energy sources and a storage system.
In the literature related to Brushless Double-Fed Induction Generators (BDFIGs), we
can find several control techniques [33–38]. In [33], H. Huerta et al. explore a Hamiltonian
model for controlling a BDFIG using sliding mode control (SMC) and passivity-based
methods for grid connection. In [34], they further improve their previous work by extending
traditional SMC with High-Order Sliding Mode Control (HOSMC), integrating it with
passivity techniques to enhance BDFIG control performance. G. Dauksha et al. in [36]
illustrate a comparative analysis of full-order and reduced-order state feedback control for a
cascaded brushless doubly fed induction generator (CBDFIG). M. Cheng et al. in [37] focus
on studying unbalanced grid voltage conditions and propose a Dual-Negative-Objective
Coordinated Control strategy for the BDFIG. Indeed, the authors in [38] propose a non-
traditional FLC for a DFIG in an oscillating water column power plant. Although the
technique was experimentally validated and its superiority was proven, it has not yet been
tested with wind energy systems, as acknowledged by the authors.
The literature related to CDFIGs shows that various control strategies have been
applied [39–51], each with its own advantages and disadvantages. However, despite signif-
icant progress in applying FLCs in WECSs, there is currently no documented application of
FLCs specifically for WECSs based on CDFIGs.
This paper conducts a comparative study of three controllers, notably a novel FLC,
a fractional-order PID (FPID) controller, and a proportional–integral (PI) controller for
a highly nonlinear and complex system in the first step. In the second step, we use the
suggested controllers for the production and management of a WECS chain based on a
CDFIG. This WECS configuration comprises a wind turbine (WT) that transforms wind’s
kinetic energy into mechanical energy, and the latter is transformed into electrical energy
via two cascaded asynchronous machines and an AC/AC converter that establishes the
connection between the generator and the electrical network.
The brush–ring system in the DFIG, commonly employed in wind energy genera-
tion, reduces the machine’s reliability. In order to solve this problem, the electrical and
mechanical connection of two DFIGs through their rotors is used to avoid the need for
brush–ring sliding contact. The complete system is referred to as a CDFIG [11,16]. This
machine serves as a generator for the generation of electrical energy. In order to establish
a connection between the system and the network using a DC link, we utilize a power
electronic transformer. The frequency converter comprises a rectifier on the machine side,
which is responsible for managing and regulating the active and reactive powers trans-
ferred between the second stator and the grid. The grid-side inverter is controlled to ensure
a constant DC link.
Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 22

Sustainability 2024, 16, 9333

The following are the main contributions of this paper:
4 of 21
1. An FLC was designed for a CDFIG in WECS application.
2. The reliability and applicability of the CDFIG controlled by an FLC were demon
strated
The underare
following various conditions,
the main including
contributions active power variations, smooth and step
of this paper:
1. wind speed changes, and even the worst case
An FLC was designed for a CDFIG in WECS application. of random wind speed variation.
3.
2. To demonstrate
The reliability and the effectiveness
applicability of theof the proposed
CDFIG controlledFLC
by anwell, its performance
FLC were was com
demonstrated
under
paredvarious conditions, including
to well-established methods active
suchpower
as thevariations,
use of PI smooth
and FOPIDand step wind
controllers.
speed changes, and even the worst case of random wind speed variation.
3.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows.
To demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed FLC well, its performance was
Section 2 provides
compared a summary
to well-established of thesuch
methods mathematical
as the use ofmodeling and controllers.
PI and FOPID a description of the
energy conversion chain. Section 3 focuses on the design and implementation of the three
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows.
controllers
Section 2used in the
provides WECS. Section
a summary 5 presents the
of the mathematical simulation
modeling and aresults and of
description discusses
the the
findings
energy for all cases.
conversion chain. Section 3 focuses on the design and implementation of the three
controllers used in the WECS. Section 5 presents the simulation results and discusses the
2. The Modeling
findings and Description of the Energy Conversion Chain
for all cases.

2. TheCDFIGs represent
Modeling a new area
and Description of theofEnergy
research, but recently,
Conversion Chain a lot of studies have been
published which concern several areas. Cascades can be found in wind power [49], smal
CDFIGs represent a new area of research, but recently, a lot of studies have been
hydraulicwhich
published powerconcern
plantsseveral
[50], and aviation
areas. [51].
Cascades can be found in wind power [49], small
The power
hydraulic ring–brush
plants system
[50], andin DFIGs[51].
aviation decreases their reliability; however, the electrica
and The
mechanical
ring–brushcoupling
system in ofDFIGs
two DFIGs via their
decreases theirreliability;
rotors solves this issue
however, by eliminating
the electrical and the
need for sliding
mechanical ring–brush
coupling of two DFIGscontact. Therotors
via their entire system
solves this is called
issue a CDFIG. In
by eliminating thethis
needcase, suc
for sliding
cession ring–brush
coupling contact.connecting
involves The entire system is called
the shafts anda rotor
CDFIG. In this case,
windings in asuccession
reverse manner
coupling
resultinginvolves connectingofthe
in the inversion shafts
the rotorand rotor [40].
phases windings in a1reverse
Figure manner,
illustrates thisresulting
coupling.
in the inversion of the rotor phases [40]. Figure 1 illustrates this coupling.

Figure 1. The connection of the CDFIG to the electrical network.

Figure 1. The connection of the CDFIG to the electrical network.
All equations are expressed in a frame of reference linked to the rotating field in the
All equations
Park transform. are expressed
The equations of thein a frame
voltage andofflux
reference
of the two linked toare
DFIGs theasrotating
follows: field in the
Park- transform.
DFIM 1: The  equations of the voltage and flux of the two DFIGs are as follows:
dφ
- DFIM 1: 
 vds1 = Rs1 ids1 + dtds1 − ωs1 φqs1
dφ

qs1

 = Rs1 iqs1 + dφddtϕds−
vqs1

ωs1 φds1
ωs1 (1)
= + − s1ϕ−
1
v  v =
ds1 R Ris1ids1+ dr1
− (ω qs1ωr1 ) φ qr1
dr1 r1 dr1 dt

dt
 


dφ
vqr1 = Rr1 iqr1 + ddtqr1

 ϕ + (ωs1 − ωr1 ) φdr1
qs1
v
where vds1 , vdr1 , and vqs1 , vqr1
=R i
 represent
qs1 +
s1 qsthe
1 direct
−ω ϕs1 ds1
dt and quadrature voltage components of
the stator and rotor, respectively, for the first DFIG. ids1 , idr1 , and iqs1 , iqr1 represent the (1)
vcomponents dϕdr1
direct and quadrature current = Rr1idr1 +of the − (ωs1 and
stator − ωr1rotor,
)ϕqr1 respectively, for the first
 dr1
DFIG. φds1 , φdr1 , and φqs1 , φqr1 denote the direct dt and quadrature voltage components of
 ϕqr1 Rs1 and Rr1 are the electrical resistance
the stator and rotor, respectively, for the firstdDFIG
v = Rr1iqr1 + + (ωs1 − ωr1 )ϕdr1
 qr1 dt
where vds1, vdr1 , and vqs1 , vqr1 represent the direct and quadrature voltage components of the
stator and rotor, respectively, for the first DFIG. ids1 , idr1 , and iqs1 , iqr 1 represent the direc
and quadrature current components of the stator and rotor, respectively, for the firs
DFIG. ϕds1 , ϕdr1 , and ϕ qs1 , ϕ qr1 denote the direct and quadrature voltage components o
Sustainability 2024, 16, 9333 5 of 21

of the stator and rotor winding of one phase. ωs1 is the speed of the synchronous reference
frame of the first DFIG, and ωr1 is the rotor electrical angular speed of the first DFIG.


 φds1 = Ls1 ids1 + Lm1 idr1

φqs1 = Ls1 iqs1 + Lm1 iqr1
(2)
φ = Lr1 idr1 + Lm1 ids1
 dr1


φqr1 = Lr1 iqr1 + Lm1 iqs1

Ls1 and Lr1 represent the total cyclic inductances of stator 1 and rotor 1, respectively.
Lm1 is the magnetizing inductance.
- DFIM 2: 
dφ

 vdr2 = Rr2 idr2 + dtdr2 − (ωs1 − ωr1 ) φqr2
dφ

vqr2 = Rr2 iqr2 + dtqr2 − (ωs1 − ωr1 ) φdr2


dφds2 (3)


 v ds2 = R s2 i ds2 + dt − ( ω s1 − ω r1 − ω r2 ) φ qs2
dφ
vqs2 = Rs2 iqs2 + dtqs2 + (ωs1 − ωr1 − ωr2 ) φqs2




 φds2 = Ls2 ids2 + Lm2 idr2
φqs2 = Ls2 iqs1 + Lm2 iqr2

(4)
φ = Lr2 idr2 + Lm2 ids2
 dr2


φqr2 = Lr2 iqr2 + Lm2 iqs2
The two machines are identical, sharing the same equations and notations. We denote
the first machine as 1 and the second machine as 2.
Modeling the electrical coupling of the two rotors depends on the type of coupling;
the voltage and current equations are as follows:

vdr1 = vdr2 = vdr
(5)
vqr1 = vqr2 = vqr

idr1 = idr2 = idr
(6)
iqr1 = iqr2 = iqr
The multivariable system can be represented by state-space equations. Multiple
choices are possible for the state vector. Among these, we will take the vector of the stator
and rotor currents. h i T
[ I ] = ids1 iqs1 idr idqr ids2 iqs2 (7)

In order to obtain differential equations, we will need to replace the flux in the voltage
equations. These differential equations are expressed as follows:

d[ I ]
[U ] = [ Z ][ I ] + [ L] (8)
dt
With

Rs1 −ωs1 Ls1 0 −ωs1 Lm1 0 0

 

 ωs1 Ls1 Rs1 ωs1 Lm1 0 0 0 

 0 −ω g1 Lm1 Rr −ω g1 Lr 0 λω g1 Lm2 
Z= 

 ω g1 Lm1 0 ω g1 Lr Rr −λω g1 Lm2 0 

 0 0 0 λωs2 Lm2 Rs2 − Ls2 ωs2 
0 0 −λωs2 Lm2 0 Ls2 ωs2 Rs2
Sustainability 2024, 16, 9333 6 of 21

Ls1 0 Lm1 0 0 0
 

 0 Ls1 0 Lm1 0 0 

 Lm1 0 Lr 0 −λLm2 0 
L= 

 0 Lm1 0 Lr 0 −λLm2 

 0 0 −λLm2 0 Ls2 0 
0 0 0 −λLm2 0 Ls2

2.1. Control Powers of Stator-1

By aligning the d-axis of the (dq) reference frame with the flux of the first stator φs1 ,
the steady-state model of the CDFIG is simplified as follows:
(
vds2 = Rs2 ids2 − S.ωs ( Ls2 − C.Lm2 ).iqs2
(9)
vqs2 = Rs2 iqs2 − S.ωs ( Ls2 − C.Lm2 ).ids2 + C.S Lm1
L
.Vs
s1

where vds2 and vqs2 represent the two-phase voltage components of the second stator, which
must be controlled to achieve the desired ids2 and iqs2 current levels in the machine. The
influence of coupling terms between the d and q axes in S.ωs ( Ls2 − C.Lm2 ) is minimal and
can be effectively compensated for through proper regulator synthesis.
On the other hand, the term C.S.( L m1 Vs )/Ls1 represents an electromotive force that is
dependent on the rotational speed. This term’s influence is significant as it introduces a
tracking error. Therefore, the control strategy must account for this error to ensure accurate
system performance.
The powers of stator-1 can be controlled through the currents of stator-2 by the
following system of equations:
 L .
 Ps1 = −C.Vs Lm1
s1
iqs2
(10)

Vs2 C.L2m1
 Qqs1 = ωs Ls1 1+ Ls1 Lm2 − C.Vs LLm1 .i
s1 ds2

ω −Ω( p + p ) 2
With S = s1 .s2 = ωs1 −ω r1 − ωr2
ωs1 = s1 ωs11 2 , and C = Lm2 /( Lr1 + Lr2 − LLm1s1 ).
Finally, we can control the active power Ps1 and reactive power Qs1 exchanged between
the network and stator-1 through the currents of stator-2 ids2 and iqs2 .

2.2. The Modeling of the Connection to the Electrical Network

The main objective is to maintain zero reactive power to ensure a unity power factor
on the network side in order to optimize efficiency. Then, the active power sent to the
network is adjusted to its reference value, and the DC bus voltage is kept constant. The
frequency converter (rectifier–inverter) and the CDFIG coupled to the network are shown
in Figure 2.
The DC/AC converter, on the network side, is modeled as follows:
    
vin1 2 −1 −1 f1
u c  −1
 vin2  = 2 −1   f2  (11)
3
vin3 −1 −1 2 f3

The current flowing through the grid side inverter is defined as follows:

i g= f 1 iin1 + f 2 iin2 + f 3 iin3 (12)

The AC/DC converter can be modeled as follows:

    ′ 
v as2 2 −1 −1 f1
 vbs2  = uc −1 2 −1 f 2′  (13)
3
vcs2 −1 −1 2 f 3′
Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 22
Sustainability 2024, 16, 9333 7 of 21

Figure 2. The
Figure connection
2. The connectionofofthe
theCDFIG
CDFIG to theelectrical
to the electricalnetwork
networkviavia power
power converters.
converters.

TheThe currentconverter,
DC/AC flowing through
on thethe machine-side
network side, isrectifier
modeled is defined as follows:
as follows:
 vin1  i g= f 1′ ias22+ f 2′−ibs2
1 +−1f 3′ i f1  (14)
  uc  cs2
f 
v = − 1 2 − 1 (11)
( f 1 , f 2 , f 3 ) and f 1′ , f 1′ , f 1′  are3logical
   functions
in 2
2
connection of inverter and rectifier
 vin 3   −1 −1 2   f 3 
switches, respectively.
TheThe current,
current which flows
flowing in the
through capacitor,
the grid sidecomes from is
inverter thedefined
rectifier as
onfollows:
the machine side
and inverter from the network side:
𝑖 𝑓𝑖 +𝑓 𝑖 +𝑓 𝑖 (12)
ic = im − i g (15)
The AC/DC converter can be modeled as follows:
The temporal evolution of the DC link voltage is obtained from the integration of
 2 − 1 −1   f1 
'
 vas 2 
capacitive current:   uc   
 vbs 2 du =c =  1− 1 2
−1   f 2'  (13)
3 i −i (16)
 vcs 2 dt c− 1m − 1g 2   f 3' 
The diagram in Figure 2 shows that the connection to the electrical network is made
The current flowing through the machine-side rectifier is defined as follows:
via an input filter. By applying the Park transformation, we can write the following:
𝑖 𝑓 𝑖 +𝑓 𝑖 + 𝑓 𝑖 (14)
(
dind
vnd = Rr ind + Lr dt − eq + Ed
(𝑓 , 𝑓 , 𝑓 ) and (𝑓 , 𝑓 , 𝑓 ) are logical connection di functions of inverter and (17) rectifier
vnq = Rr inq + Lr dtnq + ed + Eq
switches, respectively.
TheWith
current, which flows in the capacitor, comes from the rectifier on the machine
ed = Lr ωs ind
side and inverter from the network side: (18)
ed = Lr ωs inq
𝑖 =𝑖 −𝑖 (15)
The reference power of the DC link is as follows:
The temporal evolution of the DC link voltage is obtained from the integration of
capacitive current: Pdc−re f = uc ic−re f (19)

𝑑𝑢block1 is presented in Figure 3.

The DC link voltage regulation
The active and reactive powers = (𝑖 −with 𝑖 ) the network are defined as follows: (16)
𝑑𝑡exchanged
𝑐
The diagram in Figure 2 shows P =that
Ed idthe
−re fconnection
+ Eq iq−re f to the electrical network is made

(20)
via an input filter. By applying theQPark
= Eqtransformation,
id−re f + Ed iq−re f we can write the following:

𝑣 =𝑅 𝑖 +𝐿 −𝑒 +𝐸
(17)
𝑣 =𝑅 𝑖 +𝐿 +𝑒 +𝐸

With
𝑒 =𝐿 𝜔𝑖
𝑒 =𝐿 𝜔𝑖 (18)

The reference power of the DC link is as follows:

 𝑃 =𝑢 𝑖 (19)

The DC link voltage regulation block is presented in Figure 3.

𝑃 =𝑢 𝑖
Sustainability 2024, 16, 9333 8 of 21
The DC link voltage regulation block is presented in Figure 3.

Figure 3. DC link regulation scheme.

The active and reactive powers exchanged with the network are defined as follows:
𝑃=𝐸 𝑖 +𝐸 𝑖
(20)
Figure 3.3.DC 𝑄 = 𝐸 𝑖 +𝐸 𝑖
Figure DClink regulation
link scheme.
regulation scheme.
We can derive the reference currents from Equation (21):
We can derive the reference currents from Equation (21):
The active and reactive powers 𝑃 𝐸 +𝑄 𝐸
⎧
𝑖 =exchanged with the network are defined as follow
⎪ = 𝐸 𝑖Pre f E𝐸d2++ Qre𝐸
i𝑃d−re f =
+2 f𝐸Eq 𝑖 (21)
⎨𝑖 𝑄 = 𝐸 𝑃 𝐸d − E + Eq𝑄 𝐸
=
⎪ iq−re f =
𝑖Pre f Eq − Q+ re f𝐸
Ed 𝑖 (21)
𝐸 2 ++ 2𝐸

We can derive the reference ⎩ currents from Ed Eq
Equation (21):
The IIddcurrent
The currentisisused
usedtotoregulate
regulatethe
theDC
DClink
linkvoltage. ItItisiscontrolled using
using aa regulator
(PI). I q is used to regulate the reactive ⎧ power
𝑃 𝐸 +
voltage.
transmitted. The
𝑄 controlled
𝐸
regulation scheme
regulator
for net-
(PI). Iq is used to regulate the reactive𝑖power=transmitted. The regulation scheme for
work currents is shown in Figure 4. ⎪ 𝐸 + 𝐸
network currents is shown in Figure 4.
⎨𝑖 𝑃 𝐸 −𝑄 𝐸
⎪ =
⎩ 𝐸 +𝐸
The Id current is used to regulate the DC link voltage. It is controlled using a regul
(PI). Iq is used to regulate the reactive power transmitted. The regulation scheme for
work currents is shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4. Network-side
Network-side current
current regulation scheme.

3. The
The Design
Design ofof the
the Used Controllers
3.1. PI
3.1. PI Controller
Controller
The regulation
The regulationofofwind
windpower
power systems with
systems proportional–integral
with controllers
proportional–integral has been
controllers has
the subject
been of a great
the subject number
of a great of publications
number that have
of publications been been
that have published in theinacademic
published the aca-
literature
demic [52–57].[52–57].
literature PI controllers, used in CDFIG
PI controllers, used incontrol,
CDFIGare simpleare
control, andsimple
quick to
andimplement
quick to
while offering acceptable performance (dynamic performance, robustness, and disturbance
rejection). Figure 5 shows the closed-loop system, corrected by a classical PI controller, with
its transfer
Figure function presented
4. Network-side currentasregulation
follows: scheme.

ki
GPI (S) = k p +
3. The Design of the Used Controllers (22)
S
3.1. PI Controller
The regulation of wind power systems with proportional–integral controllers
been the subject of a great number of publications that have been published in the
demic literature [52–57]. PI controllers, used in CDFIG control, are simple and quic
 implement while offering acceptable performance (dynamic performance, robustness,
and disturbance rejection). Figure 5 shows the closed-loop system, corrected by a classical
PI controller, with its transfer function presented as follows:
𝑘
Sustainability 2024, 16, 9333 𝐺 (𝑆) = 𝑘 + (22)
𝑆 9 of 21

Figure 5.
Figure Closed-loop system.
5. Closed-loop system.

The system’s response time is approximately 10 milliseconds, which is sufficiently

The system’s response time is approximately 10 milliseconds, which is sufficiently
rapid for usage on WTs, where wind fluctuations are gradual, and mechanical time con-
rapid for usage on WTs, where wind fluctuations are gradual, and mechanical time con-
stants are significant. Lowering the value may not enhance overall performance, but it
stants are significant. Lowering the value may not enhance overall performance, but it
could potentially result in disturbances during transient situations, resulting in undesired
could potentially result in disturbances during transient situations, resulting in undesired
effects and instabilities. We used the pole compensation method here for its speed; it is
effects and instabilities. We used the pole compensation method here for its speed; it is
obvious that it is not the only valid method for the synthesis of the PI controller. The results
obvious that it is not
of our calculations arethe
as only valid
follows: kp method for the
= 0.000118, andsynthesis of the PI controller. The re-
ki = 0.00184.
sults of our calculations are as follows: kp = 0.000118, and ki = 0.00184.
3.2. Fractional-Order PID Controller
3.2. Fractional-Order PID Controller
A fractional PID (Proportional–Integral–Derivative) controller is an extension of the
A PID
classic fractional PID has
controller, (Proportional–Integral–Derivative)
the form PIλ Dµ , and uses derivatives controller is an extension
and integrals of the
of a fractional
classic PID controller, has the form PIλDµ, and uses derivatives and integrals of a fractional
order rather than integers. This approach makes it possible to control dynamic systems
ordergreater
with rather flexibility
than integers.
and This approach
precision. The makes it possible
coefficients µ and to control
λ are dynamic
positive systems
real numbers
with
such greater
that 0 <flexibility
λ < 1, 0 <and
µ < precision.
1. There areThedifferent
coefficients
kinds µ and λ are positive
of FOPID realincluding
controllers, numbers
such that 0 < λ < 1, 0 < µ < 1. There are different kinds of FOPID controllers,
the PID (with λ = 1 and µ = 1), PI (with λ = 1 and µ = 0), PD (with λ = 0 and µ = 1), and including the
PID (with λ = 1 and µ = 1), PI (with λ = 1 and µ = 0), PD (with λ = 0 and
P controllers (with λ = 0 and µ = 0) [58]. Figure 6 presents a graphical depiction of FPID µ = 1), and P
controllers (with λ = 0 and µ = 0) [58]. Figure 6 presents a graphical
controllers. The transfer function of the FOPID controller is expressed as follows: depiction of FPID
controllers. The transfer function of the FOPID controller is expressed as follows: 10 of 22
Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW
k
GFOPID (s) = k p + 𝑘λi + k d Sµ (23)
𝐺 (𝑠) = 𝑘 +S + 𝑘 𝑆 (23)
𝑆
Recent research has shown that this controller’s performance, particularly its re-
sponse speed and robustness, can be enhanced by changing to the fractional-order version
[59–62]. The following is a list of the parameters that were used for the FOPID controller
in order to find optimal solutions: kp = 0.000118, ki = 0.00184, kd = 0.0000000001, λ = 0.9, and
𝜇 = 0.5.

Figure 6. FOPID controller applied to WECS.

Figure 6. FOPID controller applied to WECS.
Recent research has shown that this controller’s performance, particularly its response
3.3. Fuzzy Logic Controller
speed and robustness, can be enhanced by changing to the fractional-order version [59–62].
The FLC is
The following is aa list
typeofof controller
the parametersthatthat
is based on fuzzy
were used logic,
for the FOPIDwhich is a type
controller of logic
in order to
that
find works
optimalwith approximate
solutions: notionskrather
kp = 0.000118, i = than
0.00184, precise
k d = values.
0.0000000001,A fuzzy
λ = logic
0.9, andcontroller
µ = 0.5.
(FLC) uses reasoning processes that are comparable to those that humans use. This is in
contrast
3.3. Fuzzy toLogic
standard control systems, which rely on precise mathematical models. Fuzzy
Controller
logic The
is aFLC
formis of multivalued logic
a type of controller iniswhich
that basedthe true value
on fuzzy logic, of a variable
which is a typecan be a real
of logic that
number
works withbetween zero and
approximate one, which
notions rather is considered
than “fuzzy”.
precise values. In Boolean
A fuzzy logic, the (FLC)
logic controller truth
value of a variable cannot be 0 or 1 (Figure 7) and is generally called a “net” value.

(a) (b)
 Figure 6. FOPID controller applied to WECS.

Sustainability 2024, 16, 9333 3.3. Fuzzy Logic Controller 10 of 21

The FLC is a type of controller that is based on fuzzy logic, which is a type of logic
that works with approximate notions rather than precise values. A fuzzy logic controller
uses reasoning
(FLC) processes
uses reasoning that arethat
processes comparable to thosetothat
are comparable humans
those use. This
that humans is in
use. contrast
This is in
to standard
contrast control systems,
to standard which rely
control systems, whichon precise
rely on mathematical models.models.
precise mathematical Fuzzy logic
Fuzzy is
a form
logic is of multivalued
a form logic inlogic
of multivalued whichin the truethe
which value
trueofvalue
a variable can be acan
of a variable realbenumber
a real
betweenbetween
number zero andzero
one,and
which is which
one, considered “fuzzy”. In
is considered Boolean
“fuzzy”. Inlogic, the logic,
Boolean truth value of a
the truth
variable cannot be 0 or 1 (Figure 7) and is generally called a “net” value.
value of a variable cannot be 0 or 1 (Figure 7) and is generally called a “net” value.

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure7.
7.Range
Rangeof
oflogical
logicalvalues:
values:(a)
(a)Boolean
Booleanlogic,
logic,(b)
(b)fuzzy
fuzzylogic
logic[63].
[63].

There are
There are many
many works
works inin the
the literature
literature that
that have
have used
used fuzzy
fuzzy controllers
controllers for
for system
system
regulation [63–68]. The fuzzification of inputs, the application of a rule base, inferring
regulation [63–68]. The fuzzification of inputs, the application of a rule base, inferring to to
integrate the rule results, and defuzzification are the phases that a fuzzy controller
integrate the rule results, and defuzzification are the phases that a fuzzy controller re- requires
to create an accurate output. Following these processes enables the processing of imprecise
Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW to create an accurate output. Following these processes enables the processing
quires 11 of 22of
data and the
imprecise datamaking
and theofmaking
suitableofdecisions in complex
suitable decisions insettings.
complexFuzzy logic
settings. controllers
Fuzzy are
logic con-
illustrated
trollers are graphically in Figure 8.in Figure 8.
illustrated graphically
The controller block consists of a Mamdani-based inference system, which uses the
center of gravity method for defuzzification. The choice of defuzzification method is de-
pendent on the number of input/output parameters, and a specific set of rules was con-
structed for this purpose.
The Mamdani-based Fuzzy Inference System (FIS) is characterized by its intuitive
nature and easily interpretable rules compared to Sugeno’s FIS. Despite having less flexi-
bility in system design, Mamdani’s FIS is better suited for human input. In contrast,
Sugeno’s rules require more mathematical formulations. Given the novelty of applying
FLCs in Wind Energy Conversion Systems (WECSs) based on Cascaded Doubly Fed In-
duction Generators (CDFIGs), human expertise is essential, making the Mamdani ap-
proach particularly suitable for complex industrial applications, such as in our case.

Figure 8. Design of
of fuzzy
fuzzy logic
logic controller.
controller.

The
In thiscontroller
scenario,block
the consists
Mamdani ofFuzzy
a Mamdani-based
Inference Systeminference
(FIS)system, which
was chosen usesthe
over the
center
SugenoofFIS gravity
becausemethod for defuzzification.
of its superior The choice
flexibility, accuracy, of defuzzification
and ability method is
to produce improved
dependent
results. Theon thecontrol
plant number of determined
u is input/output parameters,
based on the two and a specific
state seterror
variables, of rules was
(e) and
constructed for this purpose.
the rate of change of error (de). The control laws of the FLC are specified by the rule matrix
The Mamdani-based
presented Fuzzy
in Table 1, and their Inference System
Membership (FIS)
functions areispresented
characterized by its9.intuitive na-
in Figure
ture and easily interpretable rules compared to Sugeno’s FIS. Despite having less flexibility
in system
Table 1. Ruledesign,
matrix Mamdani’s
for FLC. FIS is better suited for human input. In contrast, Sugeno’s
rules require more mathematical formulations. Given the novelty of applying FLCs in
e
Wind Energy Conversion NB Systems NM(WECSs) NS based onZE CascadedPS Doubly Fed PMInduction PB Gen-
du
erators (CDFIGs), human expertise is essential, making the Mamdani approach particularly
suitableNBfor complex NB industrial NB NB such asNB
applications, in our case.NM NS ZE
InNMthis scenario,NB the MamdaniNB Fuzzy NBInference NMSystem NS (FIS) wasZE chosen over PS the
NS NB NB NM NS ZE PS
Sugeno FIS because of its superior flexibility, accuracy, and ability to produce improved PM
results. ZE NB u is determined
The plant control NM NS on the
based ZEtwo statePSvariables, PMerror (e) PB
and the
rate of change of error (de). The control laws of the FLC are specified by the rulePB
PS NM NS ZE PS PM PB matrix
PM in Table 1, NS
presented ZE
and their Membership PSfunctionsPMare presentedPB in Figure
PB 9. PB
PB ZE PS PM PB PB PB PB
 Figure 8. Design of fuzzy logic controller.

In this scenario, the Mamdani Fuzzy Inference System (FIS) was chosen ove
Sugeno FIS because of its superior flexibility, accuracy, and ability to produce impr
results. The plant control u is determined based on the two state variables, error (e)
Sustainability 2024, 16, 9333 11 of 21
the rate of change of error (de). The control laws of the FLC are specified by the rule m
presented in Table 1, and their Membership functions are presented in Figure 9.

Table 1. Rule matrix

Tablefor1.FLC.
Rule matrix for FLC.
e eNB NM
NB NS
NM ZENS PS ZE PM PS PB PM P
du du
NB NB
NB NBNB NBNB NBNB NMNB NS NM ZE NS Z
NM NB
NM NBNB NBNB NMNB NSNM ZE NS PS ZE P
NS NB
NS NBNB NMNB NSNM ZE NS PS ZE PM PS PM
ZE NB
ZE NMNB NSNM ZENS PS ZE PM PS PB PM P
PS NM
PS NS
NM ZENS PS ZE PM PS PB PM PB PB P
PM PMNS ZENS PSZE PMPS PB PM PB PB PB PB P
PB PBZE PSZE PMPS PBPM PB PB PB PB PB PB P

Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12

(a) (b)

(c)
Figurefunctions:
Figure 9. Membership 9. Membership functions:
(a) error (e), (b) (a) errorof
change (e),error
(b) change
(de), (c)of error (de),
output (u). (c) output (u).

4. Outcomes and Discussion

4. Outcomes and Discussion
4.1. Test 1. Effect
4.1. Test 1. Effect ofVariation
of Active Power Active Power Variation
The purpose ofThe thispurpose
section isoftothis
examine
sectionthe manner
is to in which
examine the regulator
the manner in whichadjusts to
the regulator ad
alterations in the operating conditions, such as disturbances from the outside world. In
to alterations in the operating conditions, such as disturbances from the outside worl
order to compare thetocontrollers’
order compare the replies, we will
controllers’ use active
replies, power
we will use reference steps.
active power The steps.
reference
outcomes of the current test are illustrated in Figure 10.
outcomes of the current test are illustrated in Figure 10.
We can conclude from Figure 10a,b that all of the regulators follow the reference to
active power. The outcomes demonstrate that the proposed FLC approach outperforms
that of the PI and FPID controllers in terms of robustness and tracking accuracy.
The interval in the range of [4–6] s will be the focus of our analysis. Table 2 provides
a summary of the various controllers’ rising times, settling times, and overshoots of ac-
tive power stators and torque. The FLC’s response time is the shortest among the other
controllers. It is estimated at 0.0016 s for active power and torque. The settling time is
almost identical, with a small reduction observed for the FLC. For both active power and
torque, the estimate is 1.9997. The FLC’s peak overshoot is relatively low when compared
to that of the FOPID and PI controllers. The peak overshoot values for active power and
torque are 3.8639 and 6.9401, respectively. Figure 11 represents a comparative examination
of the proposed technique in relation to other strategies. The use of the FLC method, as
suggested, effectively decreased the rise time, settling times, and peak overshoots. The

(a) (b)
Figure 10. Various controllers’ responses to power steps: (a) active power, (b) generator torque

We can conclude from Figure 10a,b that all of the regulators follow the referen
 (c)
Figure 9. Membership functions: (a) error (e), (b) change of error (de), (c) output (u).

4. Outcomes and Discussion

Sustainability 2024, 16, 9333 12 of 21
4.1. Test 1. Effect of Active Power Variation
The purpose of this section is to examine the manner in which the regulator adjusts
to alterations in the operating conditions, such as disturbances from the outside world. In
data shown in Table 2 and Figure 11 provide evidence of the usefulness of the suggested
order to compare the controllers’ replies, we will use active power reference steps. The
FLC in enhancing the features of the energy system discussed in this paper, in comparison
outcomes of the current test are illustrated in Figure 10.
to the alternative controller.

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure10.
10.Various
Variouscontrollers’
controllers’responses
responsesto
topower
powersteps:
steps:(a)
(a)active
activepower,
power,(b)
(b)generator
generatortorque.
torque.

TableWe can conclude

2. Comparative from Figure
analysis 10a,bcontrollers.
of proposed that all of the regulators follow the reference to
active power. The outcomes demonstrate that the proposed FLC approach outperforms
that of the PI and FPID controllers in terms of robustness Ps1and tracking accuracy.
Te (kN.m)
The interval in the range Riseoftime
[4–6]Tr s(s)
will be the focus0.0250 0.0247
of our analysis. Table 2 provides
PI Settling time T (s) 1.9999
a summary of the various controllers’ rising times, settling times, and overshoots
s 1.9999of active
power stators and torque.Peak Theovershoot
FLC’s response(%) 11.4219
time is the shortest among the11.0712
other con-
trollers. It is estimated at 0.0016 s forTactive
Rise time r (s) power and0.0215 0.0213
torque. The settling time is almost
identical,FOPID
with a small reduction time Ts (s) for the FLC.1.9999
Settling observed For both active power1.9999
and torque,
Peak overshoot (%) 11.2458 10.9654
the estimate is 1.9997. The FLC’s peak overshoot is relatively low when compared to that
of the FOPID and PI controllers.Rise timeTheTrpeak
(s) overshoot 0.0016values for active power 0.0016
and torque
Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW FLC Settling time T s (s) 1.9997
are 3.8639 and 6.9401, respectively. Figure 11 represents a comparative examination 1.9997 13of of
the22
Peak overshoot (%) 3.8639 6.9401
proposed technique in relation to other strategies. The use of the FLC method, as sug-
gested, effectively decreased the rise time, settling times, and peak overshoots. The data
shown in Table 2 and Figure 11 provide evidence of the usefulness of the suggested FLC
in enhancing Rise time
the Tr(s) of the energy system
features Settling Time Ts (s)
discussed in this paper, in comparison to
the alternative
0.03 controller. 1.99995
0.025 1.9999
1.99985
0.02
1.9998
0.015
1.99975
0.01
1.9997
0.005 1.99965
0 1.9996
Ps1 Ps1

PI FOPID FLC PI FOPID FLC

(a) (b)

Rise time Tr(s)

Figure 11. Cont. Settling Time Ts (s)
0.03 2.001
0.025 2
0.02 1.999
0.015 1.998
0.01 1.997
0.005 1.996
0 1.995
Te Te

PI FOPID FLC PI FOPID FLC

 0.01
1.9997
0.005 1.99965
0 PID 1.9996
Ps1 Ps1
Sustainability 2024, 16, 9333 13 of 21
PI FO FLC PI FOPID FLC

Rise time Tr(s) Settling Time Ts (s)

0.03 2.001
0.025 2
0.02 1.999
0.015 1.998
0.01 1.997
0.005 1.996
0 1.995
Te Te

PI FOPID FLC PI FOPID FLC

(c) (d)

Peak overshoot (%) Peak overshoot (%)

12 12
10 10
8 8
6 6
4 4
2 2
0 0
Ps1 Te

PI FOPID FLC PI FOPID FLC

(e) (f)
Figure 11.
Figure 11. A
A comparative
comparativestudy
studybetween
betweenFLC, FLC,PI,PI,and
andFOPID
FOPID characteristics
characteristics forfor
thethe torque
torque andand ac-
active
tive power:
power: (a) Ps1 Ps1 rise
(a)rise timetime Tr (b)
Tr (s); (s); P(b)
s1
P s1 settling time Ts (s); (c) Te rise time Tr (s); (d) Te settling time
settling time T s (s); (c) Te rise time Tr (s); (d) T e settling time Ts
T s (s); (e) Ps1 peak overshoot (%); (f) Te peak overshoot (%).
(s); (e) Ps1 peak overshoot (%); (f) Te peak overshoot (%).

Table
4.2. 2. Comparative
Test 2. The Effect analysis of proposed
of the Inertia controllers.
of the WT
The inertia of a WT is highly influenced by its size and Ps1 rated power, Tboth of which
e (kN.m)
are consistently growing over time.
Rise time Tr (s) During this test, we will
0.0250 combine the WT with the
0.0247
generator shaft. The active power used as a reference for the generator will now be the
PI Settling time Ts (s) 1.9999 1.9999
mechanical power generated by the WT. The inertia of the WT breaks sudden changes in
Peak overshoot (%) 11.4219 11.0712
wind speed. Figure 12a illustrates the wind profile that is applied to the WT. We apply wind
Rise time Tr (s) 0.0215 0.0213
steps to see the effect of the inertia of the WT on the dynamics of the system. Figure 12b
FOPID Settling
shows the generator’s speed. time T s (s) 1.9999 1.9999
The generator’s Peak
speedovershoot
follows the(%)same profile as11.2458 10.9654
that of the wind speed but with a
certain delay due to the WT’s inertia, which slows down the system’s response.
As shown in Figure 12c, the active power of the first stator is represented. It is denoted
by the symbol Ps 1_ref , which signifies the mechanical power that is generated by the WT
and will serve as the reference power for the generator. Taking into consideration the FLC
strategy in comparison to the PI and FOPID strategies, we are able to draw the conclusion
that the FLC method produces satisfactory outcomes, particularly with regard to the
tracking of the reference and the rejection of disturbances. So as to prevent the exchange
of reactive energy with the network, the reactive power of the first stator is maintained at
zero, as seen in Figure 12c, and with this particular figure, we are able to reaffirm that the
FLC is superior to all of the other controllers
 are consistently growing over time. During this test, we will combine the WT with the
generator shaft. The active power used as a reference for the generator will now be the
mechanical power generated by the WT. The inertia of the WT breaks sudden changes in
wind speed. Figure 12a illustrates the wind profile that is applied to the WT. We apply
Sustainability 2024, 16, 9333 wind steps to see the effect of the inertia of the WT on the dynamics of the system. Figure
14 of 21
12b shows the generator’s speed.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figure 12. Characteristics
Figure 12. of CDFIG
Characteristics of CDFIG with
with integration
integration of
of inertia
inertia of
of wind
wind turbine:
turbine: (a)
(a) wind
wind speed
speed (m/s);
(m/s);
(b) generator speed (rpm); (c) P s1 (MW); (d) Qs1 (MVAR).
(b) generator speed (rpm); (c) P (MW); (d) Q (MVAR).
s1 s1

The3.generator’s
4.3. Test Performancespeed
of CDFIG follows theRandom
Under same profile
Wind as that of the wind speed but with a
Speed
certain delay due to the WT’s inertia, which slows down the system’s response.
During this third test, we perform an analysis of the complete system by using simula-
As shown in Figure 12c, the active power of the first stator is represented. It is de-
tions of the entire chain of energy conversion. This includes the WT, the generator that is
noted by the
connected to symbol Ps1_ref, network,
the electrical which signifies
and allthe mechanical
of the power that
energy control, is generated
management, andbyopti-
the
WT and will
mization serve Direct
systems. as the power
reference power
control for approach
is the the generator. Takingasinto
that serves consideration
a base the
for the control
FLC strategy in comparison to the PI and FOPID strategies, we are able
strategy. The active and reactive powers in the system are both under the control of this to draw the con-
clusion that the FLC method
control independently. In order produces satisfactory
to regulate the amountoutcomes,
of activeparticularly
power thatwith regard to
is transmitted
the
to the network by the first stator, we make adjustments to the supply voltages of the the
tracking of the reference and the rejection of disturbances. So as to prevent ex-
second
stator. It is essential to exercise control on the aerodynamic power that is generated by the
turbine. We make use of a switch in order to determine and thereafter select a suitable pitch
angle. In situations where the aerodynamic power of the WT is less than the maximum
power rating of the power converter, the angle is set to zero (β = 0◦ ). The pitch angle is
adjusted by the power converter once it reaches its maximum capacity. This is conducted in
order to limit the amount of aerodynamic power. It is a proportional–integral (PI) controller
that is responsible for determining this angle. The controller conducts this by comparing
the nominal power with the measured power, which ultimately results in the WT running
at a lower efficiency. The objective is to maximize the power that can be generated by
the converter while staying within the limits that are considered acceptable. The energy
conversion chain and its control are shown in Figure 13.
The wind speed that was applied to the energy conversion device is depicted in Figure 14a.
Figure 14b illustrates the speed of the side shaft of the generator. Over-speed regimes are
 a suitable pitch angle. In situations where the aerodynamic power of the WT is less than
the maximum power rating of the power converter, the angle is set to zero (β = 0°). The
pitch angle is adjusted by the power converter once it reaches its maximum capacity. This
power electronic devices that generate harmonics and inter-harmonics. Elevated THD
is conducted in order to limit the amount of aerodynamic power. It is a proportional–
Sustainability 2024, 16, 9333 leads to voltage
integral fluctuations,
(PI) controller that iscompromising
responsible for system stability
determining this and
angle.increasing losses
The controller in com-
con-
15 of 21
ponents
ducts this by comparing the nominal power with the measured power, which ultimately high
like transformers, generators, and cables through overheating. Moreover,
THD limits
results in WECS
the WT grid integration
running at a lower and may result
efficiency. The in disconnection
objective to preserve
is to maximize grid sta-
the power
bility if not
that can be
governed properly
bygenerated managed.
by the converter
the pitch control, which places while staying
a limit within
on this the An
speed. limits that are of
illustration considered
the total
We aredistortion
acceptable.
harmonic able
The to confirm
energy once
conversion
(THD) of the more
first statorthat
chain and thecontrol
its
current control
can arestrategy
be foundshown inthat
in Figure makes
Figure
14c–e.13. use of fuzzy
logic is the most effective by comparing it to the other three controllers, which are the PI
controller (1.51%), FPID controller (1.21%), and FLC (0.93%), as presented in Table 3.

Table 3. THD of proposed controllers.

Controller PI FPID FLC

THD 1.51% 1.21% 0.93%

An illustration of the development of the active power as a function of wind variation

can be found in Figure 14f. The power reference that is imposed by the turbine is followed
by all of the control techniques (the use of PI, FPID, and FLC), with the exception of the
FLC strategy, which is noticeably superior in terms of tracking and the rejection of dis-
turbance. The reactive power of the first stator is displayed in Figure 14g. For the purpose
of stopping the exchange of reactive power with the electrical network through the first
stator, this power is maintained at zero. As the image demonstrates, the FLC method ad-
heres to its reference in a satisfactory manner. The active power and reactive power of the
second stator are represented in Figure 14h,i, respectively. These powers change based on
the wind, with hyposynchronous positive speed positive powers and hypersynchronous
negative speed powers. The torque is depicted in Figure 14j according to the three distinct
methods.
Figure Just
Figure13.
13. Thelike
The theconversion
energy
energy powers, chain
conversion torqueandhas
chainand the same form.
itscontrol.
its control.

The wind speed that was applied to the energy conversion device is depicted in Fig-
ure 14a. Figure 14b illustrates the speed of the side shaft of the generator. Over-speed
regimes are governed by the pitch control, which places a limit on this speed. An illustra-
tion of the total harmonic distortion (THD) of the first stator current can be found in Figure
14c–e.
Power quality is critical as it reflects the level of distortion within an electrical power
system. Wind Energy Conversion Systems (WECSs) contribute to total harmonic distor-
tion (THD) due to their intermittent nature, caused by wind fluctuations and nonlinear

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Figure 14. Cont.

Sustainability 2024, 2024,
Sustainability 16, x 16,
FOR PEER REVIEW
9333 17 of 22
16 of 21

(e) (f)

(g) (h)

(i) (j)
Figure 14.14.
Figure Characteristics
Characteristicsof of CDFIG withrandom
CDFIG with randomwind wind speed:
speed: (a) wind
(a) wind speedspeed
(m/s);(m/s); (b) generator
(b) generator
speed
speed (rpm); (c) THD of first stator; (d) THD of first stator; (e) THD of first stator; (f) Ps1Ps1
(rpm); (c) THD of first stator; (d) THD of first stator; (e) THD of first stator; (f) (MW); (g)
(MW);
(MVAR);
Qs1(g) (h) P (MW); (i) Q (MVAR); (j) torque T (KN.m).
Qs1 (MVAR); (h) Ps2 (MW); (i) Qs2 (MVAR); (j) torque Te (KN.m).
s2 s2 e

ThePower
pitchquality is critical
control angle isasrepresented
it reflects the in
level of distortion
Figure 15a. Anwithin an electrical
observation power
that we made is
system. Wind Energy Conversion Systems (WECSs) contribute to total harmonic
that the angle of inclination of the blades increases whenever the wind speed is greater distortion
(THD) due to their intermittent nature, caused by wind fluctuations and nonlinear power
than the nominal threshold. By increasing the pitch control, the power coefficient that is
electronic devices that generate harmonics and inter-harmonics. Elevated THD leads to
displayed in Figure 15b is reduced. This is conducted in order to limit the quantity of wind
voltage fluctuations, compromising system stability and increasing losses in components
power that is captured
like transformers, by the and
generators, WT.cables
Figure 15c depicts
through the current
overheating. and high
Moreover, voltage
THDcharacteris-
limits
ticsWECS
of thegrid
firstintegration
stator, andandFigure
may15d provides
result a zoomed-in
in disconnection view of the
to preserve gridcurrent
stabilityand voltage
if not
of the stator.
properly We note the fact that the current and the voltage are in phase opposition to
managed.
one another. Additionally, the current and voltage of the second stator are depicted in
Figure 15e. There is a correlation between the speed of the wind and the shape of the
current.
 Sustainability 2024, 16, 9333 17 of 21

We are able to confirm once more that the control strategy that makes use of fuzzy
logic is the most effective by comparing it to the other three controllers, which are the PI
controller (1.51%), FPID controller (1.21%), and FLC (0.93%), as presented in Table 3.

Table 3. THD of proposed controllers.

Controller PI FPID FLC

THD 1.51% 1.21% 0.93%

An illustration of the development of the active power as a function of wind variation

can be found in Figure 14f. The power reference that is imposed by the turbine is followed
by all of the control techniques (the use of PI, FPID, and FLC), with the exception of the FLC
strategy, which is noticeably superior in terms of tracking and the rejection of disturbance.
The reactive power of the first stator is displayed in Figure 14g. For the purpose of stopping
the exchange of reactive power with the electrical network through the first stator, this
power is maintained at zero. As the image demonstrates, the FLC method adheres to its
reference in a satisfactory manner. The active power and reactive power of the second
stator are represented in Figure 14h,i, respectively. These powers change based on the wind,
with hyposynchronous positive speed positive powers and hypersynchronous negative
speed powers. The torque is depicted in Figure 14j according to the three distinct methods.
Just like the powers, torque has the same form.
The pitch control angle is represented in Figure 15a. An observation that we made is
that the angle of inclination of the blades increases whenever the wind speed is greater
than the nominal threshold. By increasing the pitch control, the power coefficient that
is displayed in Figure 15b is reduced. This is conducted in order to limit the quantity
of wind power that is captured by the WT. Figure 15c depicts the current and voltage
characteristics of the first stator, and Figure 15d provides a zoomed-in view of the current
and voltage of the stator. We note the fact that the current and the voltage are in phase
opposition to one another. Additionally, the current and voltage of the second stator are
Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 18 of 22
depicted in Figure 15e. There is a correlation between the speed of the wind and the shape
of the current.

(a) (b)

Figure 15. Cont.

Sustainability 2024, 16, 9333 18 of 21

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e)
Figure 15.15.
Figure Characteristics
Characteristicsof
ofCDFIG withenergy
CDFIG with energyproduction
production system.
system.

5. Conclusions
5. Conclusions
TheThe topicthat
topic thatisisthe
the focus
focus of
of this
thisarticle
articleisisthe investigation
the of aof
investigation control method
a control that that
method
enables the management of energy that is generated by a WT and the optimization of its
enables the management of energy that is generated by a WT and the optimization of its
output. This study compares three different types of controllers, namely the PI controller,
output. This study compares three different types of controllers, namely the PI controller,
FPID controller, and FLC, with the main focus being on direct power control. The CDFIG is
FPIDthe controller,
name of theand FLC, with the
electromagnetic main focus
converter that wasbeing on direct
utilized power
in order control.
to convert this The CDFIG
energy.
is the name of the
The first testelectromagnetic
results demonstrate converter
that whenthatcompared
was utilized in order
to other to convert
techniques such this
as en-
ergy.
the use of PI and FPID controllers, in terms of peak overshoot (%) for Ps and torque (Te),
theThe first test
findings results
reveal thatdemonstrate
the FLC-based that when compared
technique (3.8639%, to other techniques
6.9401%) outperforms such
thatas the
useofofboth the FOPID
PI and (11.2458%, 10.9654%)
FPID controllers, in terms ofand PI controllers
peak (%) for 𝑃𝑠 11.0712%).
overshoot (11.4219%, and torqueThis(𝑇𝑒), the
demonstrates the FLC’s superior ability to reduce overshoot, offering better
findings reveal that the FLC-based technique (3.8639%, 6.9401%) outperforms that of both control stability.
theAdditionally, for the rise
FOPID (11.2458%, time (s) of
10.9654%) andPs1 PI Te , all controllers
andcontrollers show 11.0712%).
(11.4219%, similar performance.
This demon-
However, the FLC excels with rise times of 0.0016 s for both, significantly outperforming
strates the FLC’s superior ability to reduce overshoot, offering better control stability. Ad-
the FOPID (1.9999 s) and PI (0.0250 s, 0.0247 s) controllers. During the second test, which
ditionally,
focused on forexamining
the rise thetime (𝑠) ofof 𝑃different
impact 𝑠1 and 𝑇𝑒, all controllers show similar performance.
factors including the WT’s inertia, the results
However, the FLC excels with rise times
indicate that the FLC performs better than the of 0.0016
otherscontrollers
for both, significantly
at tracking theoutperforming
reference.
After examining the THD curves of the first stator currents from the results of the third
test, we can affirm that the intelligent fuzzy logic controller (FLC) surpasses the other
controllers in terms of performance. Ultimately, we chose to utilize an intelligent approach,
specifically the use of a fuzzy controller, for the generation and management of electrical
energy generated by wind power.
Future work will focus on enhancing controller performance through optimization
techniques such as Genetic Algorithms (GAs), Artificial Neural Networks (ANN), and
Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO). Additionally, the proposed controllers will be validated
Sustainability 2024, 16, 9333 19 of 21

through experimental testing. Efforts will also be made to improve power quality by
reducing total harmonic distortion (THD) using advanced techniques.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, A.M.; Methodology, H.M.; Validation, A.M. and H.M.;
Formal analysis, K.B., B.B. and A.Y.; Investigation, H.S.; Resources, A.M. and H.M.; Writing—
original draft, A.M., H.M. and K.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version
of the manuscript.
Funding: This article received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The original contributions presented in the study are included in this
article; further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Acknowledgments: The authors thank Research Center in Industrial Technologies—CRTI, P.O. Box 64,
16014 Algiers, Algeria for supporting this work.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References
1. Wang, Q.; Luo, K.; Wu, C.; Tan, J.; He, R.; Ye, S.; Fan, J. Inter-farm cluster interaction of the operational and planned offshore wind
power base. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 396, 136529. [CrossRef]
2. Ye, S.; Wang, Q.; Mu, Y.; Luo, K.; Fan, J. Loads and fatigue characteristics assessment of wind farm based on dynamic wake
meandering model. Renew. Energy 2024, 236, 121419. [CrossRef]
3. Zhang, X.; Wang, Q.; Ye, S.; Luo, K.; Fan, J. Efficient layout optimization of offshore wind farm based on load surrogate model
and genetic algorithm. Energy 2024, 309, 133106. [CrossRef]
4. Behara, R.K.; Saha, A.K. Analysis of Wind Characteristics for Grid-Tied Wind Turbine Generator Using Incremental Generative
Adversarial Network Model. IEEE Access 2024, 12, 38315–38334. [CrossRef]
5. Kumar, R.; Mishra, S.K.; Mohanta, D.K. An integrated development environment based situational awareness for operational
reliability evaluation in wind energy systems incorporating uncertainties. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2024, 233, 110467. [CrossRef]
6. Akhtar, I.; Altamimi, A.; Khan, Z.A.; Alojaiman, B.; Alghassab, M.; Kirmani, S. Reliability Analysis and Economic Prospect
of Wind Energy Sources Incorporated Microgrid System for Smart Buildings Environment. IEEE Access 2023, 11, 62013–62027.
[CrossRef]
7. Lohr, C.; Peterssen, F.; Schlemminger, M.; Bensmann, A.; Niepelt, R.; Brendel, R.; Hanke-Rauschenbach, R. Multi-criteria energy
system analysis of onshore wind power distribution in climate-neutral Germany. Energy Rep. 2024, 12, 1905–1920. [CrossRef]
8. Neshat, M.; Sergiienko, N.Y.; Nezhad, M.M.; da Silva, L.S.; Amini, E.; Marsooli, R.; Garcia, D.A.; Mirjalili, S. Enhancing the
performance of hybrid wave-wind energy systems through a fast and adaptive chaotic multi-objective swarm optimisation
method. Appl. Energy 2024, 362, 122955. [CrossRef]
9. Rasool, S.; Muttaqi, K.M.; Sutanto, D. A Novel Configuration of a Hybrid Offshore Wind-Wave Energy Conversion System and
Its Controls for a Remote Area Power Supply. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2022, 58, 7805–7817. [CrossRef]
10. Majout, B.; Bossoufi, B.; Karim, M.; Skruch, P.; Mobayen, S.; El Mourabit, Y.; Laggoun, Z.E.Z. Artificial neural network-based direct
power control to enhance the performance of a PMSG-wind energy conversion system under real wind speed and parameter
uncertainties: An experimental validation. Energy Rep. 2024, 11, 4356–4378. [CrossRef]
11. Maafa, A.; Abdelghani, Y.; Mellah, H.; Smail, H.; Sahraoui, H. Optimization of the Powers Exchanged between a Cascaded
Doubly Fed Induction Generator and the Grid with a Matrix Converter. Eurasia Proc. Sci. Technol. Eng. Math. 2023, 26, 700–709.
[CrossRef]
12. Milles, A.; Merabet, E.; Benbouhenni, H.; Debdouche, N.; Colak, I. Robust control technique for wind turbine system with interval
type-2 fuzzy strategy on a dual star induction generator. Energy Rep. 2024, 11, 2715–2736. [CrossRef]
13. Hossain, M.A.; Chakrabortty, R.K.; Elsawah, S.; Gray, E.; Ryan, M.J. Predicting Wind Power Generation Using Hybrid Deep
Learning with Optimization. IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 2021, 31, 06013055. [CrossRef]
14. Kushwaha, A.; Gopal, M.; Singh, B. Q-Learning based Maximum Power Extraction for Wind Energy Conversion System with
Variable Wind Speed. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 2020, 35, 1160–1170. [CrossRef]
15. Li, Y.; Yin, P.-K.; Chen, F.-B. Prediction of wind load power spectrum on high-rise buildings by various machine-learning
algorithms. Structures 2024, 67, 107015. [CrossRef]
16. Maafa, A.; Mellah, H.; Ghedamsi, K.; Aouzellag, D. Improvement of Sliding Mode Control Strategy Founded on Cascaded
Doubly Fed Induction Generator Powered by a Matrix Converter. Eng. Technol. Appl. Sci. Res. 2022, 12, 9217–9223. [CrossRef]
17. Li, N.; He, F.; Ma, W.; Wang, R.; Zhang, X. Wind Power Prediction of Kernel Extreme Learning Machine Based on Differential
Evolution Algorithm and Cross Validation Algorithm. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 68874–68882. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2024, 16, 9333 20 of 21

18. Dineshkumar, C.; Jeong, J.H.; Joo, Y.H. Observer-based fuzzy control for fractional order PMSG wind turbine systems with
adaptive quantized-mechanism. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 2024, 136, 108087. [CrossRef]
19. Benbouhenni, H.; Bizon, N.; Mosaad, M.I.; Colak, I.; Djilali, A.B.; Gasmi, H. Enhancement of the power quality of DFIG-based
dual-rotor wind turbine systems using fractional order fuzzy controller. Expert Syst. Appl. 2024, 238, 121695. [CrossRef]
20. Wadawa, B.; Errami, Y.; Obbadi, A.; Sahnoun, S. Robustification of the H∞ controller combined with fuzzy logic and PI&PID-Fd
for hybrid control of Wind Energy Conversion System Connected to the Power Grid Based on DFIG. Energy Rep. 2021, 7,
7539–7571.
21. Arifin, M.S.; Uddin, M.N.; Wang, W. Neuro-Fuzzy Adaptive Direct Torque and Flux Control of a Grid-Connected DFIG-WECS
with Improved Dynamic Performance. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2023, 59, 7692–7700. [CrossRef]
22. Chishti, F.; Murshid, S.; Singh, B. Weak Grid Intertie WEGS with Hybrid Generalized Integrator for Power Quality Improvement.
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2020, 67, 1113–1123. [CrossRef]
23. Tamaarat, A. Active and Reactive Power Control for DFIG Using PI, Fuzzy Logic and Self-Tuning PI Fuzzy Controllers. Adv.
Model. Anal. C 2019, 74, 95–102. [CrossRef]
24. Mokhtari, M.; Zouggar, S.; M’sirdi, N.K.; Elhafyani, M.L. Sliding Mode & Single Input Fuzzy Logic Controllers for Voltage
Regulation of an Asynchronous Wind Turbine Using STATCOM. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2020, 53, 12803–12808.
25. Zamzoum, O.; Derouich, A.; Motahhir, S.; El Mourabit, Y.; El Ghzizal, A. Performance analysis of a robust adaptive fuzzy logic
controller for wind turbine power limitation. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 265, 121659. [CrossRef]
26. Gholamrezaie, V.; Dozein, M.G.; Monsef, H.; Wu, B. An Optimal Frequency Control Method Through a Dynamic Load Frequency
Control (LFC) Model Incorporating Wind Farm. IEEE Syst. J. 2018, 12, 392–401. [CrossRef]
27. Takayama, S.; Matsuhashi, R. Development of model for load frequency control in power system with large-scale integration
of renewable energy. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Power and Energy Conference at Illinois (PECI), Urbana, IL, USA, 19–20
February 2016; pp. 1–8.
28. Ashfaq, T.; Mumtaz, S.; Ahmad, S.; Ullah, B.; Albogamy, F.R. Automatic Generation Control in Renewables-Integrated Multi-Area
Power Systems: A Comparative Control Analysis. Sustainability 2024, 16, 5735. [CrossRef]
29. Mehta, S.; Basak, P. Cascaded dual fuzzy logic controller for stable microgrid operation mitigating effects of natural uncertainty
in solar and wind energy sources. e-Prime-Adv. Electr. Eng. Electron. Energy 2023, 5, 100215. [CrossRef]
30. Salem, A.A.; Aldin, N.A.N.; Azmy, A.M.; Abdellatif, W.S.E. Implementation and Validation of an Adaptive Fuzzy Logic Controller
for MPPT of PMSG-Based Wind Turbines. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 165690–165707. [CrossRef]
31. Puchalapalli, S.; Singh, B. A Single Input Variable FLC for DFIG-Based WPGS in Standalone Mode. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy
2020, 11, 595–607. [CrossRef]
32. El Mezdi, K.; El Magri, A.; Watil, A.; El Myasse, I.; Bahatti, L. Integrated Control and Energy Flow Management for Hybrid
Grid-Connected Photovoltaic/Wind Systems with Battery Storage Using Fuzzy Logic Controllers. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2024, 58,
442–447. [CrossRef]
33. Huerta, H.; Loukianov, A. Energy based sliding mode control of Brushless Double-fed Induction Generator. Int. J. Electr. Power
Energy Syst. 2021, 130, 107002. [CrossRef]
34. Huerta, H. Brushless Double-Fed Induction Generator Control: Passivity with High Order Sliding Modes Control. In Proceedings
of the 2023 9th International Conference on Control, Decision and Information Technologies (CoDIT), Rome, Italy, 3–6 July 2023;
pp. 602–607.
35. Liu, Y.; Hussien, M.G.; Xu, W.; Shao, S.; Rashad, E.M. Recent Advances of Control Technologies for Brushless Doubly-Fed
Generators. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 123324–123347. [CrossRef]
36. Dauksha, G.; Górski, D.; Iwański, G. State-feedback control of a grid-tied cascaded brushless doubly-fed induction machine.
Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2024, 228, 110043. [CrossRef]
37. Cheng, M.; Cao, Z.; Yan, X. Dual-Negative-Objective Coordinated Control of Brushless Doubly Fed Induction Generator under
Unbalanced Grid Voltage. CES Trans. Electr. Mach. Syst. 2024, 8, 347–355. [CrossRef]
38. Elnaghi, B.E.; Abelwhab, M.N.; Mohammed, R.H.; Abdel-Kader, F.E.S.; Ismaiel, A.M.; Dessouki, M.E. The Validation and
Implementation of the Second-Order Adaptive Fuzzy Logic Controller of a Double-Fed Induction Generator in an Oscillating
Water Column. Electronics 2024, 13, 291. [CrossRef]
39. Maafa, A.; Mellah, H.; Sahraoui, H.; Yahiou, A. Performance improvement of a DPC-FPID strategy with matrix converter using
CDFIG in wind power system. Wind. Eng. 2024. [CrossRef]
40. Maafa, A.; Aouzellag, D.; Ghedamsi, K.; Abdessemed, R. Cascaded doubly fed induction generator with variable pitch control
system. Rev. Roum. Sci. Tech.-Électrotechn. Énerg 2016, 61, 361–366.
41. Hopfensperger, B.; Atkinson, D.J.; Lakin, R.A. Combined magnetising flux oriented control of the cascaded doubly-fed induction
machine. IEE Proc.-Electr. Power Appl. 2001, 148, 354. [CrossRef]
42. Han, P.; Cheng, M.; Chen, Z. Single-Electrical-Port Control of Cascaded Doubly-Fed Induction Machine for EV/HEV Applications.
IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2017, 32, 7233–7243. [CrossRef]
43. El Achkar, M.; Mbayed, R.; Salloum, G.; Le Ballois, S.; Monmasson, E. Generic study of the power capability of a cascaded doubly
fed induction machine. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2017, 86, 61–70. [CrossRef]
44. Patin, N.; Monmasson, E.; Louis, J.-P. Modeling and control of a cascaded doubly-fed induction generator based on dynamical
equivalent circuits. Math. Comput. Simul. 2010, 81, 225–238. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2024, 16, 9333 21 of 21

45. Sadeghi, R.; Madani, S.M.; Agha-kashkooli, M.; Ataei, M. Reduced-order model of cascaded doubly fed induction generator for
aircraft starter/generator. IET Electr. Power Appl. 2018, 12, 757–766. [CrossRef]
46. Hopfensperger, B.; Atkinson, D.J.; Lakin, R.A. Stator flux oriented control of a cascaded doubly-fed induction machine. IEE
Proc.-Electr. Power Appl. 1999, 146, 597. [CrossRef]
47. Patin, N.; Monmasson, E.; Louis, J.-P. Modeling and Control of a Cascaded Doubly Fed Induction Generator Dedicated to Isolated
Grids. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2009, 56, 4207–4219. [CrossRef]
48. Mehrjardi, R.T.; Ershad, N.F.; Rahrovi, B.; Ehsani, M. Detailed Model of the Grid-Connected Cascaded Doubly Fed Induction
Machine. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2022, 58, 3414–3423. [CrossRef]
49. Protsenko, K.; Xu, D. Modeling and Control of Brushless Doubly-Fed Induction Generators in Wind Energy Applications. IEEE
Trans. Power Electron. 2008, 23, 1191–1197. [CrossRef]
50. Adamowicz, M.; Strzelecki, R. Cascaded doubly fed induction generator for mini and micro power plants connected to grid. In
Proceedings of the 2008 13th International Power Electronics and Motion Control Conference, Poznan, Poland, 1–3 September
2008; pp. 1729–1733.
51. Abdolhadi, H.Z.; Markadeh, G.A.; Boroujeni, S.T. Sliding Mode and Terminal Sliding Mode Control of Cascaded Doubly Fed
Induction Generator. Iran. J. Electr. Electron. Eng. 2021, 17, 3.
52. Hawari, Q.; Kim, T.; Ward, C.; Fleming, J. A robust gain scheduling method for a PI collective pitch controller of multi-MW
onshore wind turbines. Renew. Energy 2022, 192, 443–455. [CrossRef]
53. Turksoy, O.; Ayasun, S.; Hames, Y.; Sönmez, Ş. Computation of Robust PI-Based Pitch Controller Parameters for Large Wind
Turbines. Can. J. Electr. Comput. Eng. 2020, 43, 57–63. [CrossRef]
54. Du, Z.; Yufan, F.; Yang, X.; Li, J. Design of PI Controller for a Class of Discrete Cascade Control Systems. IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci.
Eng. 2023, 20, 2607–2615. [CrossRef]
55. Kakkar, S.; Maity, T.; Ahuja, R.K.; Walde, P.; Saket, R.K.; Khan, B.; Padmanaban, S. Design and Control of Grid-Connected PWM
Rectifiers by Optimizing Fractional Order PI Controller Using Water Cycle Algorithm. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 125941–125954.
[CrossRef]
56. Sreenu, C.; Mallesham, G.; Shekar, T.C.; Salkuti, S.R. Pairing voltage-source converters with PI tuning controller based on PSO for
grid-connected wind-solar cogeneration. Frankl. Open 2024, 8, 100138. [CrossRef]
57. Naqvi, S.S.; Jamil, H.; Iqbal, N.; Khan, S.; Lee, D.I.; Park, Y.C.; Kim, D.H. Multi-objective optimization of PI controller for BLDC
motor speed control and energy saving in Electric Vehicles: A constrained swarm-based approach. Energy Rep. 2024, 12, 402–417.
[CrossRef]
58. Idir, A.; Canale, L.; Bensafia, Y.; Khettab, K. Design and Robust Performance Analysis of Low-Order Approximation of Fractional
PID Controller Based on an IABC Algorithm for an Automatic Voltage Regulator System. Energies 2022, 15, 8973. [CrossRef]
59. Shi, J.Z. A Fractional Order General Type-2 Fuzzy PID Controller Design Algorithm. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 52151–52172. [CrossRef]
60. Gao, P.; Zhang, G.; Ouyang, H.; Mei, L. An Adaptive Super Twisting Nonlinear Fractional Order PID Sliding Mode Control
of Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor Speed Regulation System Based on Extended State Observer. IEEE Access 2020, 8,
53498–53510. [CrossRef]
61. Frikh, M.L.; Soltani, F.; Bensiali, N.; Boutasseta, N.; Fergani, N. Fractional order PID controller design for wind turbine systems
using analytical and computational tuning approaches. Comput. Electr. Eng. 2021, 95, 107410. [CrossRef]
62. Gupta, D.K.; Dei, G.; Soni, A.K.; Jha, A.V.; Appasani, B.; Bizon, N.; Srinivasulu, A.; Nsengiyumva, P. Fractional order PID
controller for load frequency control in a deregulated hybrid power system using Aquila Optimization. Results Eng. 2024, 23,
102442. [CrossRef]
63. Benbouhenni, H.; Colak, I.; Bizon, N.; Mosaad, M.I.; Tella, T.G. Power regulation of variable speed multi rotor wind systems
using fuzzy cascaded control. Sci. Rep. 2024, 14, 16415. [CrossRef]
64. Chaoui, H.; Khayamy, M.; Aljarboua, A.A. Adaptive Interval Type-2 Fuzzy Logic Control for PMSM Drives with a Modified
Reference Frame. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2017, 64, 3786–3797. [CrossRef]
65. Krishnama Raju, S.; Pillai, G.N. Design and Implementation of Type-2 Fuzzy Logic Controller for DFIG-Based Wind Energy
Systems in Distribution Networks. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2016, 7, 345–353. [CrossRef]
66. Alika, R.; Mellouli, E.M.; Tissir, E.H. A modified sliding mode controller based on fuzzy logic to control the longitudinal dynamics
of the autonomous vehicle. Results Eng. 2024, 22, 102120. [CrossRef]
67. Triviño, A.; López, A.; Yuste, A.J.; Cuevas, J.C. Decentralized EV charging and discharging scheduling algorithm based on Type-II
fuzzy-logic controllers. J. Energy Storage 2024, 93, 112054. [CrossRef]
68. Choon, N.H.; Cheah, Y.N.; Goh, O.S.; Choo, Y.H.; Basiron, H.; Kumar, Y.J. A Review on Automated Menu Planning Approaches. J.
Comput. Sci. 2016, 12, 582–596.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.