energies

Article
A Wind Power Fluctuation Smoothing Control Strategy for
Energy Storage Systems Considering the State of Charge
Li Peng 1,2 , Longfu Luo 1, *, Jingyu Yang 2 and Wanting Li 2

1 School of Electrical & Information Engineering, Hunan University, Changsha 410000, China;
[email protected]
2 Key Laboratory Energy Monitoring and Edge Computing of for Smart City of Hunan Province, Hunan City
University, Yiyang 413000, China; [email protected] (J.Y.); [email protected] (W.L.)
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: With the significant increase in the scale of energy storage configuration in wind farms,
improving the smoothing capability and utilization of energy storage has become a key focus.
Therefore, a wind power fluctuation smoothing control strategy is proposed for battery energy
storage systems (BESSs), considering the state of charge (SOC). First, a BESS smoothing wind power
fluctuation system model based on model predictive control (MPC) is constructed. The objective
function aims to minimize the deviation of grid-connected power from the target power and the
deviation of the BESS’s remaining capacity from the ideal value by comprehensively considering the
smoothing effect and the SOC. Second, when the wind power’s grid-connected power exceeds the
allowable fluctuation value, the weight coefficients in the objective function are adjusted in real time
using the first layer of fuzzy control rules combined with SOC partitioning. This approach smooths
wind power fluctuations while preventing overcharging and overdischarging of the BESS. When the
grid-connected power is within the allowable fluctuation range, the charging and discharging power
of the BESS is further refined using a second layer of fuzzy control rules. This enhances the BESS’s
capability and utilization for smoothing future wind power fluctuations by preemptively charging
and discharging. Finally, the proposed control strategy is simulated using MATLAB R2021b with
actual operational data from a wind farm as a case study. Compared to the traditional MPC control
method, the simulation results demonstrate that the proposed method effectively controls the SOC
within a reasonable range, prevents the SOC from entering the dead zone, and enhances the BESS’s
Citation: Peng, L.; Luo, L.; Yang, J.; Li,
W. A Wind Power Fluctuation
ability to smooth wind power fluctuations.
Smoothing Control Strategy for
Energy Storage Systems Considering Keywords: wind power; battery energy storage system; smoothing wind power fluctuation; model
the State of Charge. Energies 2024, 17, predictive control; weight adjustment; fuzzy control
3132. https://doi.org/10.3390/
en17133132

Academic Editor: Mario Marchesoni

1. Introduction
Received: 30 March 2024 In the context of “peak carbon” and “carbon neutrality”, wind power has rapidly de-
Revised: 13 June 2024 veloped in recent years owing to its mature technology [1]. However, its power fluctuations
Accepted: 21 June 2024
can easily impact the power system, increasing the burden on frequency regulation and
Published: 25 June 2024
scheduling and, in severe cases, threatening its safe and stable operation [2,3]. Therefore, it
is essential to implement measures to mitigate wind power fluctuations on the grid.
The rapid development of energy storage technology has provided essential techni-
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.
cal support for mitigating wind power fluctuations. Technologies such as lithium iron
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. phosphate batteries, all-vanadium redox flow batteries, and power-type storage like fly-
This article is an open access article wheel energy storage and superconducting magnetic energy storage have been applied to
distributed under the terms and suppress wind power fluctuations [4,5]. These applications have effectively reduced the
conditions of the Creative Commons degree of power fluctuations in the grid [6]. However, the smoothing effectiveness of these
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// battery energy storage systems (BESSs) is limited by factors such as service life, capacity,
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ and control mechanisms [7–9]. Given these limitations, it is critical to study optimal control
4.0/). strategies for battery storage systems [10,11].

Energies 2024, 17, 3132. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17133132 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2024, 17, 3132 2 of 20

Extensive domestic and international research has been conducted on using energy
storage to smooth wind power fluctuations. Various algorithms, such as low-pass filtering,
wavelet packet decomposition, and ensemble empirical modal decomposition, are em-
ployed to obtain the grid-connected component [6,12]. For instance, a previous study [13]
utilized first-order low-pass filtering to smooth wind power, with the energy storage sys-
tem partially compensating for the filtered high-frequency fluctuations. However, the
strong nonlinear characteristics of wind power make determining the filtering time con-
stant challenging. Additionally, there is a phase lag in the smoothing process, which
can increase the burden on the energy storage system by introducing a trend component.
Reference [14] employed wavelet packet decomposition to break down wind power into
high-, medium-, and low-frequency components, matching the power response to the
characteristics of the corresponding energy storage resources. Reference [15] proposed a
wind power smoothing strategy based on adaptive wavelet packets, enabling the power
smoothing requirements to be met under different fluctuation scenarios. However, the
choice of the wavelet base influences the effectiveness of wavelet packet decomposition. At
the same time, empirical modal decomposition and its improved methods, such as ensem-
ble empirical and variational modal decomposition, have been successfully applied in wind
power smoothing control strategies. These methods adaptively constrain the power com-
mand based on the state of the energy storage system, keeping the state of charge within
a reasonable range while meeting grid-connected power fluctuation requirements [15,16].
For instance, References [17,18] use ensemble empirical modal decomposition to obtain the
grid-connected component. However, the decomposition effect is significantly influenced
by the decomposition parameters, which are challenging to select accurately.
With the development of intelligent technology, methods such as fuzzy theory and
neural networks are increasingly being used in the energy storage control process [19,20].
For example, a previous study [21] employs fuzzy empirical modal decomposition to
break down wind power into low-frequency and high-frequency components. In this
approach, the energy storage battery absorbs the high-frequency component to smooth
wind power fluctuations, while the low-frequency component is directly connected to the
grid. Another study [22] introduces an adaptive linear neuron-based coordinated control
method utilizing a small-capacity battery energy storage system to achieve wind power
smoothing. Meanwhile, a published study [23] presents a fuzzy adaptive Kalman filtering-
based control strategy for energy storage systems utilizing an all-vanadium liquid current
battery as the energy storage device. This approach effectively controls the state of energy
of the battery while extending the lifetime of the energy storage system.
Researchers have discovered that the future output power of wind power significantly
influences the current optimal output power of energy storage. With the increasing matu-
rity of wind speed and wind power forecasting techniques, energy storage control methods
considering the variation in predicted wind power have become crucial [24–26]. Refer-
ence [27] establishes a rolling optimization model with multiple forecast periods, advancing
the overall optimization level and scheduling decisions. References [28–30] use model
predictive control (MPC) in energy storage systems to derive an optimal control sequence
for a given period. Reference [31] incorporates future wind power fluctuations and current
energy storage states into a fuzzy controller to effectively control energy storage output,
yielding favorable results. Meanwhile, a previous study [32] designs a hybrid energy
storage strategy combining energy-type battery storage and power-type storage capacitors.
It employs MPC to mitigate wind power fluctuations. It utilizes the Hilbert–Huang Trans-
form to determine the cut-off frequency of the energy-type battery storage and power-type
storage capacitor, thereby adjusting the power distribution of the hybrid energy storage
system. In other studies [33,34], a dual battery energy storage system is designed based
on the technical characteristics of the batteries. This design ensures that the two groups of
batteries operate in different charging and discharging states, allowing them to alternately
suppress wind power’s positive and negative fluctuations.
Energies 2024, 17, 3132 3 of 20

Based on the abovementioned analyses, it is evident that few studies have consid-
ered the influence of a BESS’s current residual capacity on future smoothing capability.
Additionally, effectively balancing the trade-off between wind power fluctuation smooth-
ing capability and avoiding state of charge (SOC) overruns requires further investigation.
Therefore, this study proposes a control strategy for a BESS to smooth wind power fluc-
tuations based on MPC and fuzzy control. The goal is to enhance the BESS’s wind power
fluctuation smoothing capability and prevent SOC from entering dead zones. In summary,
compared to current methods, this study offers two primary contributions:
(1) We have constructed a system model for smoothing wind power fluctuations using
a BESS based on MPC. We propose an objective function aimed at minimizing the
deviation of grid-connected power from the target power and the deviation of the
residual capacity of the BESS from the ideal value in the wind storage cogeneration
system. This objective function comprehensively considers the smoothing effect of the
BESS while preventing SOC from overrunning the limit and entering the dead zone.
(2) We propose a method for adjusting the BESS’s charging and discharging power using
two-layer fuzzy control rules. By integrating the smoothing effect and SOC interval
division, we employ the first layer of fuzzy control rules to dynamically adjust the
weight coefficients of the objective function in real time. This enhancement improves
the BESS’s ability to smooth wind power fluctuations while preventing SOC from
exceeding the limit and entering the dead zone. Additionally, the second layer of fuzzy
control rules is utilized to proactively adjust the BESS’s charging and discharging
power, thereby enhancing its ability to smooth future wind power fluctuations.
The proposed control strategy’s accuracy and efficiency are validated through MAT-
LAB simulation using real operating data from a wind farm as an illustration. The paper is
structured as follows. The topology of the wind storage cogeneration system, grid power
fluctuation requirements, and storage SOC partitioning are described in Section 2. Section 3
develops the BESS smoothing wind power fluctuation control model employing the MPC
method. Section 4 introduces a two-layer fuzzy control strategy to adjust BESS charging and
discharging power. Section 5 presents case studies. Section 6 offers the research conclusion.

2. Wind Storage Cogeneration System and Power Relation

The variability in wind speed introduces fluctuations in the active power output of
wind farms, which can disrupt the stable operation of the grid [35]. Integrating a BESS at
the grid connection point of wind farms allows for the effective smoothing of these power
fluctuations. By controlling the BESS’s charging and discharging power and maintaining
its residual capacity within a reasonable range, the fluctuation of grid-connected power
can be mitigated [36,37].

2.1. Wind Storage Cogeneration Systems and Grid-Connected Power Fluctuation Requirements
The wind storage cogeneration system’s structure, shown in Figure 1, primarily
comprises the wind farm, energy storage station, boosting station, and energy management
system. The energy management system is responsible for making decisions regarding
energy management for the energy storage system. It bases these decisions on the state of
energy (SOE) at the end of the current period t and the wind power grid-connected power
target, as well as the actual wind power during the subsequent period t + 1. Then, it sends
commands to the BESS to control energy storage, either releasing or absorbing power, to
mitigate wind power fluctuations during the t + 1 period.
Referring to Figure 1, the power balance equation and the SOE iterative equation for
the wind storage cogeneration system are presented as Equations (1) and (2):

Pg (i + 1) = Pb (i ) + Pw (i ) (1)
Energies 2024, 17, 3132 4 of 20

where Pb (i) is the output power of the energy storage, Pw (i) is the output wind power, and
Pg (i + 1) is the combined output of wind and storage.
Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 20

CSOE (i + 1) = CSOE (i ) − ηPb (i ) × Tc /Crated (2)

commands
where toisthe
CSOE (i) theBESS to control
residual energy
capacity of thestorage,
BESS at either
time i,releasing or absorbing
while Tc and Crated are power, to
the BESS
mitigate wind power fluctuations during the t + 1 period.
control period and capacity, respectively.

Energy flow
Information flow
Pw(i)

Pw(i)
Wind farm
Grid
CSOE(i)
Pg(i)
Energy management center
Pb(i) Pb(i)

Current Booster station

transformer
Energy storage station

Figure1.1.Schematic
Figure Schematicdiagram
diagramof
ofthe
thestructure
structureof
ofwind
windstorage
storagecogeneration
cogenerationsystem.
system.

The “Technical
Referring Rule1,for
to Figure theConnecting
power balance Wind Farm and
equation to Power
the SOE System” ofequation
iterative China has
for
established regulations regarding the allowable variation limits of active
the wind storage cogeneration system are presented as Equations (1) and (2): power for wind
farms with varying installed capacities [38,39], as illustrated in Table 1. Proposed fluctuation
P (i + 1) = P (i ) + P (i )
ranges for wind power with 1 and 10 gmin time bscales ware specified. (1)

where Pb(i) is the output power of the energy storage, Pw(i) is the output wind power, and
Table 1. Maximum variation in active power in wind farm.
Pg(i + 1) is the combined output of wind and storage.
Wind Farm Installation 10 min Active Power Change 1 min Active Power Change
Capacity/MW
CSOE (i Maximum (i) −  Pb (i)  Tc / CratedMaximum Limit/MW
+ 1) = CSOELimit/MW (2)

where CSOE(i)<30
is the residual capacity of the 10BESS at time i, while Tc and Crated
3 are the BESS
30–150 Installed
control period and capacity, respectively. capacity/3 Installed capacity/10
>150
The “Technical Rule for Connecting Wind 50 Farm to Power System” 15 of China has es-
tablished regulations regarding the allowable variation limits of active power for wind
farmsFor example,
with varyingconsidering a wind farm
installed capacities with as
[38,39], anillustrated
installed capacity
in Tableof1.50 MW andfluctua-
Proposed a data
acquisition time step of 1 min, the allowable fluctuation ranges
tion ranges for wind power with 1 and 10 min time scales are specified.for 1 and 10 min at time i
are depicted in Equations (3) and (4).
Table 1. Maximum variation inactive power in wind farm.
1
Pg1.min (i ) = Pg (i ) − 10 Cinstall
Wind Farm Installation 10 min Active Power Change (3)
1
Pg1.max (i ) = Pg (i ) + 10 Cinstall1 min Active Power Change
Capacity/MW Maximum Limit/MW Maximum Limit/MW
 Pg10.min (i ) = max Pg (i − ∆i ) − 3 Cinstall
1

<30 10 3
∆t=0,···,9
30–150 Installed capacity/3 Installed capacity/10 (4)
 Pg10.max (i ) = min Pg (i − ∆i ) + 31 Cinstall
>150 ∆t=50
0,···,9 15
where Pg1.min (i) and Pg1.max (i) are the lower and upper limits, respectively, of the allow-
For example,
able fluctuation considering
range a wind farmpower
for grid-connected with an installed
within 1 min.capacity of 50 MW
Similarly, and(i)a and
Pg10.min data
Pacquisition
g10.max (i) time
are thestep of
lower 1 min,
and the
upper allowable
limits, fluctuation
respectively, of ranges
the for 1
allowableand 10 min
fluctuationat time
range i
are depicted in Equations (3) and (4).
for grid-connected power within 10 min. Additionally, Cinstall is the installed capacity of
the wind farms.
 1
 P (i ) = Pg ( i ) − Cinstall
 g1.min 10
 (3)
P 1
 g1.max (i ) = P g ( i ) + Cinstall
 10
 where Pg1.min(i) and Pg1.max(i) are the lower and upper limits, respectively, of the allowable
fluctuation range for grid-connected power within 1 min. Similarly, Pg10.min(i) and
Pg10.max(i) are the lower and upper limits, respectively, of the allowable fluctuation range
for grid-connected power within 10 min. Additionally, Cinstall is the installed capacity of
Energies 2024, 17, 3132 the wind farms. 5 of 20
The allowable range of grid-connected power at the moment i can be expressed as:

 Pg.min (i ),Pg.max (i ) 
Pg (i )ofgrid-connected
The allowable range power at the moment i can be expressed as:
(5)
 =  Pg1.min (i ),Pg1.max(i )   Pg10.min (i), Pg10.max (i ) 
Pg (i ) ∈ Pg.min (i ), Pg.max (i )
    (5)
Based on the abovementioned
= Pg1.min (i ),analysis,Pg1.max (i )the ∩ target
Pg10.min power, denoted
(i ), Pg10.max (i ) as Pa(i), can be cal-
culated as follows:
Based on the abovementioned analysis, the target power, denoted as Pa (i), can be
calculated as follows:  Pg.max (i) Pw (i)  Pg.max (i)

Pa (i) =  Pw (i) i)  Pw (i)  Pg.max (i)
(i ) PPw (i ) (≥ (6)

g.min
 Pg.max 
Pg.max (i )
Pa (i ) = Pw (iP)g.min P(ig.min
) (Piw) (< i) PwPg.min
(i ) <(i )Pg.max (i ) (6)
Pg.min (i ) Pw (i ) ≤ Pg.min (i )


2.2. SOC
2.2. SOC Partitioning
Partitioning forfor BESS
BESS
Toensure
To ensurethat
thatthethegrid-connected
grid-connectedpowerpowerof ofthe
thewind
windstorage
storagecombined
combinedgeneration
generation
system adheres to the power fluctuation limits by controlling the BESS output, it isitessential
system adheres to the power fluctuation limits by controlling the BESS output, is essen-
tial to maintain the SOC within a reasonably balanced interval during
to maintain the SOC within a reasonably balanced interval during BESS operation. This BESS operation.
This prevents
prevents the SOC thefrom
SOCstaying
from staying excessively
excessively highfor
high or low orextended
low for extended
periods. For periods.
example,For
example,
for lithiumfor lithium batteries,
batteries, cycling atcycling
80% ofatthe80% of theofdepth
depth of discharge
discharge doublesdoubles
the cyclethelife
cycle
of
lifebattery,
the of the battery,
and theand lowerthethe
lower theofdepth
depth chargeof and
charge and discharge,
discharge, the longerthe the
longer the
cycle lifecycle
[8].
life [8]. Moreover,
Moreover, to maximize to maximize
the BESS’sthe compensation
BESS’s compensation capability
capability for wind forpower,
wind power,
the BESS the
BESS should have ample charge/discharge margins. Thus, it is necessary
should have ample charge/discharge margins. Thus, it is necessary to partition the SOC of to partition the
SOC
the of the storage
energy energy storage
battery,battery, as depicted
as depicted in Figure
in Figure 2. The 2. Thefor
SOC SOCthefor the BESS
BESS is divided
is divided into
intosequential
five five sequential intervals:
intervals:

0%

Discharge dead zone Stop discharge

ESOC.min
Discharge warning interval Reduced discharge
ESOC.min-alert

Normal charging and Normal charging

discharging interval and discharging

ESOC.max-alert
Charge Warning Interval Reduced charging
ESOC.max
Charging dead zone Stop charging

100%

Figure2.2.Schematic
Figure Schematicdiagram
diagramof
ofSOC
SOCzoning
zoningof
ofBESS.
BESS.

(1) Discharge dead zone [0%, ESOC.min ]: This interval indicates that the SOC of the BESS is
critically low, nearing complete depletion. In this interval, the BESS cannot discharge
further and should not be permitted. Immediate charging is necessary to prevent
prolonged depletion, which could compromise the battery’s lifespan.
(2) Discharge warning interval [ESOC.min , ESOC.min-alert ]: This interval indicates that the
SOC of the BESS is low and has surpassed the overdischarge warning threshold.
During this phase, discharge operations must be conducted cautiously to prevent the
SOC from entering the discharge dead zone.
(3) Normal charging and discharging interval [ESOC.min-alert , ESOC.max-alert ]: This interval
indicates a favorable SOC range for the BESS. In this interval, the SOC of the BESS
is considered healthy, allowing for a margin of capacity for charging and disch-
arging operations.
 from entering the discharge dead zone.
(3) Normal charging and discharging interval [ESOC.min-alert, ESOC.max-alert]: This interval indi-
cates a favorable SOC range for the BESS. In this interval, the SOC of the BESS is
considered healthy, allowing for a margin of capacity for charging and discharging
Energies 2024, 17, 3132 6 of 20
operations.
(4) Charge warning interval [ESOC.min-alert, ESOC.max]: This interval indicates that the SOC of
the BESS is high and has surpassed the overcharging warning threshold. During this
(4) phase,
Chargecharging
warningoperations
interval [ESOC.min-alert , ESOC.max ]:
must be performed This interval
cautiously indicates
to prevent that
the SOCthefrom
SOC
of the BESS is high and has
entering the charging dead zone. surpassed the overcharging warning threshold. During
this phase,
(5) Charging charging
dead zone [Eoperations must be performed cautiously to prevent the SOC
SOC.max, 100%]: This interval indicates that the SOC of the BESS
from entering the charging dead
is excessively high, nearing theoretical zone. full charge. In this interval, the BESS loses its
(5) charging
Chargingcapability
dead zoneand [ESOC.max , 100%]:
must not undergoThis further
intervalcharging.
indicates that the SOCdischarge
Immediate of the BESS is
is excessively high, nearing theoretical full charge. In this interval, the
necessary to prevent prolonged full charge, which could significantly impact the ser-BESS loses its
charging
vice life ofcapability
the energyand mustbattery.
storage not undergo further charging. Immediate discharge
is necessary to prevent prolonged full charge, which could significantly impact the
service
3. BESS life of the
Smoothing energy
Wind storage
Power battery. Model Based on MPC
Fluctuation
The Smoothing
3. BESS control model
WindofPower
the MPC-based
Fluctuationwind
Modelstorage
Basedcogeneration
on MPC system is con-
structed by integrating the MPC control principle with the iterative equations governing
The control model of the MPC-based wind storage cogeneration system is constructed
power balance and SOE. Simultaneously, the MPC rolling optimization objective
by integrating the MPC control principle with the iterative equations governing function
power
and
balance and SOE. Simultaneously, the MPC rolling optimization objective function andfluc-
constraints are formulated based on two main objectives: smoothing wind power con-
tuations andformulated
straints are preventingbased
SOC onoverruns, utilizing
two main the previously
objectives: smoothingdetermined
wind powertarget power
fluctuations
values.
and preventing SOC overruns, utilizing the previously determined target power values.

3.1.
3.1. Fundamentals
Fundamentals of
of the
the MPC
MPC Algorithm
Algorithm
Compared
Compared toto traditional
traditional control
control algorithms
algorithms such
such as
as PID,
PID, MPC
MPC can can address
address complex
complex
issues
issues such
such as
as multivariable
multivariable constrained
constrained optimal
optimal control,
control, which
which are
are challenging
challenging to to solve
solve
otherwise. It has advantages such as minimal requirements on control model
otherwise. It has advantages such as minimal requirements on control model accuracy, accuracy,
excellent
excellent dynamic
dynamiccontrol
controleffects,
effects,and
androbustness.
robustness. MPCMPCoperates as aasclosed-loop
operates optimal
a closed-loop opti-
control system
mal control comprising
system threethree
comprising fundamental elements:
fundamental a prediction
elements: model,
a prediction rollingrolling
model, opti-
optimization,
mization, and and feedback
feedback correction.
correction. The The
basicbasic structure
structure of MPC
of MPC is depicted
is depicted in Figure
in Figure 3. 3.

d(i)
r(i) u(i) y(i)
Rolling Optimization Accused person
+
-

+ y(i+j|k)
predictive modelling
+ y(i|i)
-
+
Feedback correction

Figure
Figure 3.
3. MPC
MPC basic
basic structure.
structure.

The predictive model is a cornerstone of MPC, playing a crucial role in describing the
dynamic behavior of a system. Its primary function is to predict the future dynamics of
the controlled system. In contrast, the rolling optimization component is the core of MPC.
Unlike conventional discrete optimization algorithms, predictive control does not rely on
a fixed and unchanging global optimization objective. Instead, it adopts a time-forward
rolling finite time-domain optimization approach. This method involves an online iterative
optimization process conducted continuously rather than being executed offline in a single
instance. The MPC feedback correction primarily comprises two components: feed-forward
and feedback links. As time progresses, the system continuously updates its current state,
future control, and historical information at each new moment. During this updating
process, the current state information and future control information are generated and
used as inputs to the feed-forward link of the system. Meanwhile, the updated historical
information forms the feedback link of the system.
 rent state, future control, and historical information at each new moment. During this up-
dating process, the current state information and future control information are generated
and used as inputs to the feed-forward link of the system. Meanwhile, the updated his-
torical information forms the feedback link of the system.
Energies 2024, 17, 3132 7 of 20

3.2. MPC-Based Wind Storage Cogeneration System

Alternatively referred to as rolling time domain optimal control, MPC is an algo-
3.2. MPC-Based Wind Storage Cogeneration System
rithm for optimal control in the time domain based on models. This approach operates
Alternatively
within referred
a closed-loop to asUnlike
system. rollingsome
time domain
methods,optimal
MPC control, MPC isreliant
is not heavily an algorithm
on the
for optimal control in the time domain based on models. This approach operates within
precision of the model, enabling it to tackle challenges such as uncertainty, nonlinearity,
a closed-loop system. Unlike some methods, MPC is not heavily reliant on the precision
and time variation in industrial control settings. It effectively addresses complex issues
of the model, enabling it to tackle challenges such as uncertainty, nonlinearity, and time
pertaining to the structure, parameters, and environmental factors encountered in in-
variation in industrial control settings. It effectively addresses complex issues pertaining
dustrial control processes. Consequently, MPC has found extensive practical applica-
to the structure, parameters, and environmental factors encountered in industrial control
tions in industrial control systems. The primary difference between the MPC optimiza-
processes. Consequently, MPC has found extensive practical applications in industrial
tion strategy and traditional optimal control algorithms lies in their respective ap-
control systems. The primary difference between the MPC optimization strategy and
proaches to optimization. MPC employs a rolling, finite time domain optimization strat-
traditional optimal control algorithms lies in their respective approaches to optimization.
egy instead of a fixed global optimization index. At its core, MPC relies on a rolling
MPC employs a rolling, finite time domain optimization strategy instead of a fixed global
optimization concept, illustrated in Figure 4. The process is as follows: ① At the current
optimization index. At its core, MPC relies on a rolling optimization concept, illustrated in
moment,
Figure denoted
4. The asisi,as
process and the current
follows: ⃝ state represented by x(i), predictions are made
1 At the current moment, denoted as i, and the current
about the future state considering current
state represented by x(i), predictions are made andabout
futurethe
constraints. This
future state leads to the
considering deri-
current
vation of a sequence of control instructions spanning moments i + 1, i + 2,
and future constraints. This leads to the derivation of a sequence of control instructions…, i + N. ②
The initial value from this sequence is
spanning moments i + 1, i + 2, . . ., i + N. ⃝ selected and implemented in the control system.
2 The initial value from this sequence is selected
③ Upon reaching time i + 1, the
and implemented in the control system. ⃝ state quantity is updated to x(i + 1), initiating a repeti-
3 Upon reaching time i + 1, the state quantity is
tion of the abovementioned steps.
updated to x(i + 1), initiating a repetition of the abovementioned steps.

Past moment Future moment

y(i+k)

y(i)

Control interval

u(i) u(i+k) Forecast interval

t
i i+1 i+2 i+N i+M
Figure4.
Figure 4. MPC
MPC principle
principle diagram.
diagram.

The block diagram illustrating the smoothing wind power fluctuation MPC is depicted
in Figure 5. This MPC framework comprises three main components: ⃝ 1 Prediction at the
current moment estimates the future output power of the wind power system within the
upcoming rolling cycle based on historical data and future wind power inputs. ⃝ 2 Using
the defined objective function and constraints, a sequence of control commands for the
energy storage system is derived for the rolling cycle. These commands are then executed
during the first moment of the rolling cycle. ⃝ 3 In subsequent rolling cycles, the control
commands from the previous moment are integrated to update the state variables, and the
process is iterated accordingly.
For the wind storage cogeneration system aimed at mitigating wind power fluctua-
tions, we address the issue by employing Equations (1) and (2), coupled with the super-
position principle. This approach enables us to construct the state variable x(i) = [Pg (i),
CSOE (i)]T , with the BESS output u(i) = Pb (i) as the control variable and the ultra-short-term
rolling prediction of the wind power r(i) = Pf (i) as the input variable. At the same time, the
Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 20

Energies 2024, 17, 3132 8 of 20

The block diagram illustrating the smoothing wind power fluctuation MPC is de-
picted in Figure
grid power and 5.
theThis MPC framework
remaining capacity comprises
of the storage three main components:
system are selected as①thePrediction
output
at the current moment estimates
T the future output power of the
variable y(i) = [Pg (i), CSOE (i)] . Then, the MPC system model is established.wind power system within
the upcoming rolling cycle based on historical data and future wind power inputs. ②
Using the defined objective function andAxconstraints,
(i ) + B1 u(i )a+sequence
B2 r (i ) of control commands for

x( i + 1) =
(7)
the energy storage system isyderived
(i ) = Cxfor
(i ) the rolling cycle. These commands are then exe-
cuted during  thefirst moment
 of the rollingcycle.
 ③ In subsequent
  rolling cycles, the
1 0 from the previous
control commands 1 moment are 1 integrated 1to update
0 the state variables,
where A = , B1 = , B2 = , and C = .
and the process0 1is iterated − Tc /Crated
accordingly. 0 0 1

Wind power Pw(i) Pw(i) Pg(i+1)

forecasting Wind farm

Ultra short term forecast sequence

[r(i), r(i+1), , r(i+k-1)]
Pb(i)
Control sequence
Wind power [u(i), u(i+1), , u(i+k-1)]
Model Predictive Control BESS
planning output

Battery energy status

CSOE(i)

Figure 5.
Figure 5. MPC
MPC block
block diagram
diagram for
for smoothing
smoothing wind
wind power
power fluctuations.
fluctuations.

For the wind

According storage
to the MPCcogeneration
principle, in conjunctionsystem aimed with at mitigating
the state space wind power fluctua-
Equation (7), the
tions, we
output foraddress the issuemoment
the subsequent by employing can be derived Equations as: (1) and (2), coupled with the super-
position principle. This  approach enables us kto construct the state variable x(i) = [Pg(i),
CSOE(i)]T, with the BESS Poutput u(i) = Pb(i) as the control T variable and the ultra-short-term
g (i + k |i ) = Pg (i ) + ∑ u (i + k |i )+


rolling prediction of the wind power r(i) = Pf(i) t=1as the input variable. At the same time, the



 k
grid power and the remaining capacity of the storage k =system
1, 2, · · ·are
, N selected as the output
∑ Pf (i + k|i ) (8)
variable y(i) = [Pg(i),  C
 SOE(i)]T. Then,t = the1 MPC system model is established.
C (i + k|i ) = CSOE (i + k − 1|i )−


 SOE  x (i + 1) = Ax (i)k+|iB)1× u (iT) +/C


ηPb (i + B2 r (i)
 c rated (7)
 y ( i ) = Cx (i )
where Pg (i) is the real-time grid-connected power measurement at time i, and Pg (i + k|i) is
the predicted1grid-connected
0  1  time i for 1  1 0moment
 i + k. Pf (i + k|i) is
where A=   , B1 =  power at  , B2 =  the , andsubsequent
C=  .
 0 1output
the active power   −Tc / Crated
increment ofwind power  0  within the 0period 1  [i + (k − 1), i + k]. N is
the MPC step size.
According CSOE
to the (i + k|i)
MPC is the remaining
principle, in conjunction capacity withofthethestate
BESSspaceat time i to obtain
Equation (7), the
the
T
future
outputtime i + k.
for the Pb (i + k|i)moment
subsequent is the future can be BESS output
derived as:power at time i + k. u (i + k|i) is the
optimal control sequence derived by solving over a time period, as shown in Equation (9).
 k
T  Pg ( i + k i ) = Pg ( i ) +  uT ( i + k i ) +
u ( i + k | i ) = [ u ( i + 1), u ( i + 2), · · ·,
 t =1 (9)
 u
k ( i + N ) k = 1, 2, · · ·, N

Let u(i + 1) denote the


output power
 Poff (the i + k i)
BESS
k = 1, 2, , N
at time i + 1. Following this, update
(8)
 t = 1
the grid-connected powerand

CSOE SOE( i + k and i) = C SOE ( i + k − 1 i ) −
proceed to the next time to solve the optimi-
zation process.

  Pb ( i + k i )  Tc / Crated
3.3. Objective Function and Constraints
where Pg(i) is the real-time grid-connected power measurement at time i, and Pg(i + k|i) is
In this paper, with the primary goal of smoothing wind power to align with grid
the predicted grid-connected power at time i for the subsequent moment i + k. Pf(i + k|i)
demand, the reduction of energy storage power is approached from the standpoint of
is the active power output increment of wind power within the period [i + (k − 1), i + k]. N
protecting the energy storage battery. Simultaneously, energy storage’s smoothing capacity
is considered
is the MPC step size. CSOEgrid
to enhance (i + k|i) is theConsequently,
security. remaining capacity of the BESS
an objective at time
function i to obtain
is formulated
the future time i + k. Pb(i + k|i) is the future BESS output power at time i + k. u (i + k|i) is T
Energies 2024, 17, 3132 9 of 20

to minimize the difference between grid-connected power and the target power while
minimizing the deviation of the BESS’s residual capacity from the ideal value.

N −1  2
minJ = (1 − λ(i )) ∑ Pg (i + k|i ) − Pa (i + k|i ) +
k =1 (10)
N 2
λ(i ) ∑ [CSOE (i + k |i ) − Cideal ]
k =1

where Cideal is the ideal residual capacity of the BESS, calculated as 0.5 times the rated
capacity, and λ(i) is the weight coefficient.
Owing to technical and economic constraints, the control of the energy storage system
during practical operations is predominantly constrained by factors such as charging and
discharging power limitations and capacity constraints.
(1) BESS power constraints
To ensure the safe operation of the BESS, strict limitations are imposed on the max-
imum charge and discharge power. These limitations are determined considering the
current energy state of the BESS. The maximum charge and discharge power limits are
as follows.
( ESOC.max − ESOC (i ))Crated
 
0 < Pc (i ) ≤ min Prated , (11)
Ts
− ESOC (i ))Crated
 
(E
max − Prated , SOC.min ≤ Pd (i ) < 0 (12)
Ts
where Prated is the rated power of the BESS. Pc (i) and Pd (i) are the maximum charge and
discharge power allowable for the BESS at the given moment.
(2) BESS capacity constraints
Owing to the impact of charge and discharge depth on the lifespan of the BESS, the SOC
of the energy storage system is strictly constrained at any given time. This constraint aims
to enhance the battery’s lifespan and decrease the overall cost of the energy storage system.

ESOC.min ≤ ESOC (i ) ≤ ESOC.max (13)

where Esoc.min and Esoc.max are the lower and upper limits of the BESS state of
charge, respectively.

4. Charging and Discharging Power Correction for BESS Based on Two-Layer

Fuzzy Control
As depicted in Equation (10), the control of BESS output power is governed by λ(i). A
larger λ(i) brings the BESS residual capacity closer to the ideal value, albeit at the expense
of reduced effectiveness in smoothing wind power fluctuations. Conversely, a smaller
λ(i) enhances the smoothing effect but risks overbounding the SOC. To address this, a
first-level fuzzy control dynamically adjusts λ(i) in real time. Additionally, to enhance the
BESS’s smoothing capability for future wind power, a second layer of fuzzy control strategy
corrects the charging and discharging power of the BESS. The control block diagram,
integrating MPC and fuzzy control, is illustrated in Figure 6.

4.1. Single-Layer Fuzzy Control Strategy

Fuzzy control leverages computer systems to emulate human control experiences,
mimicking the human brain’s handling of uncertainty, reasoning, and management of
imprecise models or uncertain systems [24]. Unlike conventional control methods, fuzzy
control does not rely on precise mathematical models of the controlled object. Instead, it
demonstrates remarkable applicability to dynamic or highly nonlinear systems, exhibiting
strong adaptability to variations in processes and parameters [40]. Given the complex
 Control
As depicted in Equation (10), the control of BESS output power is governed by λ(i).
A larger λ(i) brings the BESS residual capacity closer to the ideal value, albeit at the ex-
pense of reduced effectiveness in smoothing wind power fluctuations. Conversely, a
Energies 2024, 17, 3132 smaller λ(i) enhances the smoothing effect but risks overbounding the SOC. To address 10 of 20
this, a first-level fuzzy control dynamically adjusts λ(i) in real time. Additionally, to en-
hance the BESS’s smoothing capability for future wind power, a second layer of fuzzy
nature
controlofstrategy
wind energy cogeneration
corrects systems,
the charging fuzzy controlpower
and discharging effectively
of theaddresses thecontrol
BESS. The limita-
tions
blockof traditional
diagram, control methods,
integrating MPC andoffering simplicity
fuzzy control, and high efficiency.
is illustrated in Figure 6.

Pw(i) Pw(i) Pg(i+1)

Wind power forecasting Wind farm

Fuzzy control correction of BESS

output power
Building a wind-storage co-generation system
Wind power Pb(i)
MPCoutput
planning model and objective function
 x (i + 1) = Ax (i) + B1u (i) + B2 r (i)
 BESS Output Power
 y (i) = Cx (i)
Control sequence
N −1 2 [u(i), u(i+1), , u(i+k-1)]
min J = (1 −  ( i ) )   Pg ( i + k i ) − Pa ( i + k i )  +
k =1
2
Fuzzy control modified objective
N
 ( i )  CSOE ( i + k i ) − Cideal  function weight coefficients
k =1

Battery energy status CSOE(i)

Figure 6.
Figure 6. Control
Control block
block diagram
diagram based
based on
on MPC
MPC and
and fuzzy
fuzzy control.
control.

4.1. Single-Layer
At time i + Fuzzy 1, when Control Strategy
the grid-connected power surpasses the permitted fluctuation
threshold
Fuzzyand the energy
control leverages storage SOE approaches
computer systems tothe ideal value,
emulate human prioritizing combined
control experiences,
wind and storage
mimicking the human power becomes
brain’s imperative
handling to ensurereasoning,
of uncertainty, they remain and within the acceptable
management of im-
fluctuation
precise range.
models or This is achieved
uncertain systems by introducing
[24]. Unlike aconventional
pair of fuzzycontrol
controllers to diminish
methods,
Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11fuzzy
of 20
the weighting coefficient Conversely, if the energy storage
control does not rely on precise mathematical models of the controlled object. Instead,
λ(i). SOE is exceptionally low or it
high, λ(i) is adjusted
demonstrates remarkableupward to prevent to
applicability thedynamic
BESS from breaching
or highly its operational
nonlinear systems,limits. The
exhibiting
inputs
strong to the fuzzy controller
adaptability to variations consist of the storage
in processes state (ESOC (i))
and parameters and
[40]. storage
Given thepower
complex (Pbna-
(i))
value”,
at
ture “moderate”,
of i,wind
time while “large
the outputs
energy value”, and
are the systems,
cogeneration weighting“very large value”,
coefficients
fuzzy control λ(i). respectively.
The membership
effectively The fuzzy
addresses the infer-
functions
limita-
ence rules
corresponding for the
to fuzzy
the controller
input and are
output outlined
variables in Table
are
tions of traditional control methods, offering simplicity and high efficiency. 2.
illustrated in Figure 7.
At time i + 1, when the grid-connected power surpasses the permitted fluctuation
threshold and the energy storage SOE approaches the ideal value, prioritizing combined
VS S M B Z M
1 windVB and storage
1
NB NS
power becomes imperativePS PB
to ensure
1
VS
theyS
remain within B VB
the accepta-
ble fluctuation range. This is achieved by introducing a pair of fuzzy controllers to di-
minish the weighting coefficient λ(i). Conversely, if the energy storage SOE is excep-
tionally low or high, λ(i) is adjusted upward to prevent the BESS from breaching its
0.5 operational0.5 limits. The inputs to the fuzzy controller 0.5 consist of the storage state (ESOC(i))
and storage power (Pb(i)) at time i, while the outputs are the weighting coefficients λ(i).
The membership functions corresponding to the input and output variables are illus-
trated in Figure 7.
0 The input 0 variable Pb(i) spans a fuzzy set domain 0 of [−1, 1], with the chosen linguistic
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 NS, -1P
set {NB, PS, -0.5P
Z,rated 0
PB},ratedcorresponding 0.5Pratedto 1P
“negative
rated 0large value”,
0.25 0.5
“negative 0.75small value”,
1
ESOC(i) Pb(i) λ (i)
“zero value”, “positive small value”, and “positive large value”, respectively. The variable
ESOC(i)7.operates
Figure Membership within a fuzzy
function set domain
of front of [0, 1], using the linguistic set {VS, S, M, B,
fuzzy controller.
Figure 7. Membership function of front fuzzy controller.
VB}, denoting “very small value”, “small value”, “moderate”, “large value”, and “very
largeThe
Table value”,
2. inputrespectively.
Fuzzy reasoning
variable of The
Pbfront
(i) output
fuzzy
spans variable
a controller.
fuzzy λ(i) is defined
set domain of [−1, 1],within
withthe thefuzzy
chosen setlinguistic
domain
[0, 1], employing the linguistic set {VS,
set {NB, NS, Z, PS, PB}, corresponding to “negativePlarge S, M, B, VB}, indicating “very small value”,
value”, “negative small value”, “small
b(i)
E (i)
“zero value”, “positive small value”, and “positive large value”, respectively. The variable
SOC
PB PS Z NS NB
ESOC (i) operates within a fuzzy set domain of [0, 1], using the linguistic set {VS, S, M, B, VB},
VS VB VB B M M
denoting “very small value”, “small value”, “moderate”, “large value”, and “very large
S B B M M S
value”, respectively. The output variable λ(i) is defined within the fuzzy set domain [0, 1],
employing the linguistic set {VS, S, M, B, VB}, indicating “very small value”, “small Svalue”,
M S VS VS VS
“moderate”, B “large value”, S and “very large M value”, respectively. M B
The fuzzy inference B rules
VB M
for the fuzzy controller are outlined in Table 2. M B VB VB

4.2. Two-Layer Fuzzy Control Strategy

At time i + 1, when the wind power fluctuation remains within the permissible range,
the second layer of the fuzzy controller intervenes to rectify the magnitude of BESS charge
and discharge power. This correction aims to enhance the BESS’s smoothing capability for
future wind power by preemptively adjusting its capacity. The formula for correcting the
Energies 2024, 17, 3132 11 of 20

Table 2. Fuzzy reasoning of front fuzzy controller.

Pb (i)
ESOC (i)
PB PS Z NS NB
VS VB VB B M M
S B B M M S
M S VS VS VS S
B S M M B B
VB M M B VB VB

4.2. Two-Layer Fuzzy Control Strategy

At time i + 1, when the wind power fluctuation remains within the permissible range,
the second layer of the fuzzy controller intervenes to rectify the magnitude of BESS charge
and discharge power. This correction aims to enhance the BESS’s smoothing capability for
future wind power by preemptively adjusting its capacity. The formula for correcting the
charging and discharging power is depicted in (14).

Pb′ (i + 1|i ) = Pb (i + 1|i ) + ∆k × Pw (i + 1) − Pg (i )

(14)

where Pb′ (i + 1|i ) is the corrected BESS output power, and ∆k is the correction factor.
Using the ultra-short-term wind power forecast, the storage charge state is assessed,
and predictions for both the storage overflow limit Q(i + k) and the grid power fluctuation
Pr (i + k) are made for each sampling point within the future rolling optimization period.
These predictions are calculated using Equations (15) and (16), as shown below.


 ( ESOC (i + k) − ESOC.max ) × Crated
ESOC (i + k) > ESOC.max

Q (i + k ) = (15)

 ( ESOC.min − ESOC (i + k )) × Crated
ESOC (i + k) < ESOC.min


Pr (i + k ) = Pg (i + k ) − Pa (i + k) (16)
The covariance and correlation coefficient of Q and Pr calculated from historical data
yield a value less than zero, indicating a negative correlation between the two variables.
To address the contradiction between adhering to limits and smoothing wind power
fluctuations—specifically, maximizing wind power fluctuation smoothing while ensuring
the longevity of the energy storage device—the operational directives for the energy storage
device need to be revised. Leveraging statistical factor analysis theory, the H-matrix is
constructed using Equations (17)–(19).
q q
!
1 1 1
2 q j∑
hij = dij + ∑ dij − dij − I
2 2 2
(17)
=1
q i =1

q q
1
q2 i∑ ∑ d2ij
I= (18)
=1 j =1

l 2
d2ij = ∑


zir − z jr (19)
r =1

where d2ij is the square of the Euclidean distance between the i-th object and the j-th object
in the matrix Z; Zik is the element of the k-th column of the i-th row in the matrix Z. The
matrix Z comprises the transcendental limit and the planned power deviation, constituting
a matrix with two rows and eight columns, denoted as q = 2 and l = 8. hij is an element of
the matrix H.
 r =1

where dij2 is the square of the Euclidean distance between the i-th object and the j-th ob-
ject in the matrix Z; Zik is the element of the k-th column of the i-th row in the matrix Z.
Energies 2024, 17, 3132 The matrix Z comprises the transcendental limit and the planned power deviation, con-
12 of 20
stituting a matrix with two rows and eight columns, denoted as q = 2 and l = 8. hij is an
element of the matrix H.
The matrix H is obtained by eigenvalue decomposition:
The matrix H is obtained by eigenvalue decomposition:
H = UVU T (20)
H = UVUT (20)
where V is the diagonal matrix formed by the eigenvalues of the matrix H, and U is the
where V
matrix is the
with thediagonal matrixeigenvectors
corresponding formed by the eigenvalues
arranged of the matrix H, and U is the
as columns.
matrix with the corresponding eigenvectors arranged as columns.
The contradictory factors reflecting the two variables Q and Pr are extracted by Equa-
The and
tion (21) contradictory
denoted as factors
F. reflecting the two variables Q and Pr are extracted by
Equation (21) and denoted as F. √
FF
==UU VV (21)
(21)
If the value
If the value of of FFisislarge,
large,ititsuggests
suggeststhat
thatthe
the BESS
BESS lacks
lacks sufficient
sufficient charging
charging capacity
capacity for
for the future rolling optimization period, requiring advance discharge
the future rolling optimization period, requiring advance discharge of the BESS. Conversely, of the BESS. Con-
versely, if F isit small,
if F is small, it indicates
indicates insufficient
insufficient dischargedischarge
capacitycapacity for theinBESS
for the BESS in the rolling
the future future
rolling optimization
optimization period, period,
requiring requiring
advanceadvance
chargingcharging of the
of the BESS. BESS.
When When F assumes
F assumes a medium a
medium
value, thevalue, the BESSaccording
BESS operates operates according to its
to its original original instructions
instructions for chargingforand charging and
discharging.
discharging.
Utilizing F asUtilizing
one input F as onesecond-level
to the input to the second-level fuzzy
fuzzy controller, thecontroller,
other input theisother input
defined as
Pb (i), with the output being the correction factor ∆k. The membership functions for the
is defined as P b(i), with the output being the correction factor ∆k. The membership func-
tions
fuzzyfor the fuzzy
control inputcontrol inputare
and output and output are
illustrated inillustrated
Figure 8. in Figure 8.

L ML M MH H VS S B VB
1 1 NB PB N Z P PH NH
1

0.5 0.5 0.5

0 0 0
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 -1 -0.7 -0.3 0 0.3 0.7 1
Pb(i) F K

Figure 8. Membership function of the second layer fuzzy controller.

Figure 8. Membership function of the second layer fuzzy controller.

The
The input variable P
Pb(i) has a fuzzy set domain of [−1, 1], utilizing the linguistic set
input variable b (i) has a fuzzy set domain of [−1, 1], utilizing the linguistic set
{L, LM, M, MH, H}, representing “negative large
{L, LM, M, MH, H}, representing “negative large value”,
value”, “negative
“negative small
small value”,
value”, “zero”,
“zero”,
“positive small value”, and “positive large value”, respectively. The input variable F
“positive small value”, and “positive large value”, respectively. The input variable F spans
spans
a fuzzy set domain of [−0.2, 0.2], employing the linguistic set {VS, S, B, VB}, denoting
“negative large value”, “negative small value”, “positive small value”, and “positive large
value”, respectively. The output variable’s fuzzy set range is [−1, 1], employing the linguis-
tic set {NB, PB, N, Z, P, PH, NH}, indicating “very negative small value”, “negative small
value”, “slightly negative small value”, “zero”, “slightly positive large value”, “positive
large value”, and “very positive large value”, respectively. The fuzzy inference rules for
the second-level fuzzy controller are depicted in Table 3.

Table 3. Fuzzy inference table of the second layer fuzzy controller.

Pb (i)
F
L LM M MH H
VS NB PB P NH P
S PB N Z PH Z
B P PH Z N PB
VB PH NH PB PB NB

In summary, the specific flow of the control strategy proposed in this paper is depicted
in Figure 9, with the following specific steps:
Energies 2024, 17, 3132 13 of 20

Step 1: Establish a target value for smoothing wind power fluctuations and initialize
the parameters.
Step 2: The MPC model for the wind storage cogeneration system is established with
the short-term predicted wind power as the input variable, the future finite time
domain’s incremental storage active power as the control variable, the current
output power of the storage system as the initial value, and the grid-connected
power and remaining capacity of the storage system as the output variables.
Step 3: Define the objective function incorporating the deviation of the energy storage
system’s remaining capacity from the ideal value and minimizing the differ-
ence between the grid-connected power and the target power. Establish the
necessary constraints.
Step 4: Check if the grid-connected power at time i + 1 surpasses the permissible fluctua-
tion value. If it does not, proceed directly to step 6; otherwise, move to step 5.
Step 5: The objective function’s weight coefficient λ(i) is adjusted using the first layer
fuzzy controller.
Step 6: The second layer of the fuzzy controller is employed to rectify the BESS output power.
Step 7: Optimize the sequence of control variables within the constraint of N future
periods using the CPLEX solver.
Step 8: Extract the first control variable and compute the BESS power at time i + 1, along
with the corresponding output in the model.
Step 9: Compute the BESS power for i + 1 moments.
Step 10: Utilize the actual output of the BESS at time i + 1 as the initial value for the
Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 20
optimization model. Then, return to step 2 and iterate through the rolling opti-
mization process until completion.

Start

Create a target value for smoothing out wind

power fluctuation and initialize the
parameters
i=i+1

Constructing a model predictive control model

and objective function for wind-storage co- Solve for the charging and
generation systems discharging power of the BESS at
equal i+1 moments

The correction coefficient is solved by

the second layer fuzzy controller K
At moment i+1, whether the
N
fluctuation of grid-connected
power exceeds the allowable Solve to obtain the final charging and
fluctuation value? discharging power of the energy
storage system at the moment i+1

Y
N
Through the first layer fuzzy controller, i < iend ?
the weight coefficient λ(i) of the
objective function in the rolling Y
optimization period is solved
End

Figure9.9.Control
Figure Controlflow
flowchart.
chart.

5.5.Algorithm
Algorithm Analysis
Analysis
This
Thisstudy’s
study’sexperimental
experimental data
dataconsist
consistofofone
oneday
dayof ofcontinuous
continuousactual
actualwind
windpower
power
data from a 50 MW wind farm, sampled at 1 min intervals, yielding 1440 sampling
data from a 50 MW wind farm, sampled at 1 min intervals, yielding 1440 sampling points. points.
Table
Table44details
detailsthe
thekey
keyparameter
parametersettings
settings for
forthe
thewind
wind farm
farm and
and the
the BESS.
BESS. Among
Among them,
them,
the
thesetting
settingofofBESS-related
BESS-relatedparameters
parametersmainly
mainlyrefers
refersto
tolithium-ion
lithium-ionbatteries.
batteries. To
Toshowcase
showcase
the effectiveness and superiority of the proposed control strategy, it is compared with the
MPC method (Scheme 1), which focuses on minimizing power fluctuations. The method
proposed in this paper (Scheme 2) is evaluated against Scheme 1 to highlight its ad-
vantages.

Table 4. Simulation parameters.

Energies 2024, 17, 3132 14 of 20

the effectiveness and superiority of the proposed control strategy, it is compared with the
MPC method (Scheme 1), which focuses on minimizing power fluctuations. The method
proposed in this paper (Scheme 2) is evaluated against Scheme 1 to highlight its advantages.

Table 4. Simulation parameters.

Parameters Symbol Value and Units

Installed capacity of wind farms Cinstall 50 MW
Cycle of control Tc 1 min
Rated capacity of BESS Crated 5 MW·h
Rated capacity of BESS Prated 10 MW
Cycle of control Ts 1 min
Optimize interval length N 15
Charge dead zone boundary ESOC.max 0.8
Discharge dead zone boundary ESOC.min 0.2
Charge warning interval boundary ESOC.max-alert 0.7
Discharge warning interval boundary ESOC.min-alert 0.3

5.1. Evaluation Index

To assess the impact of the suggested control strategy, we have chosen three key
indicators for evaluation. First, to gauge its ability to smooth power fluctuations, we
evaluate the absolute mean value of grid-connected power fluctuations, reflecting how
effectively the BESS can mitigate wind power fluctuations. Second, to consider energy
storage longevity, we examine the BESS input dead time index, which gives an insight into
the lifespan of the BESS. We use the BESS power output coefficient indicators to evaluate
the BESS’s power output capacity.
(1) Average absolute value of power fluctuation ∆Pg.mean .

∆Pg (i ) = Pg (i + 1) − Pg (i ) (22)

1 N −1
N − 1 i∑
∆Pg.mean = ∆Pg (i ) (23)
=0
∆Pg (i) represents the absolute value of the grid-connected wind power fluctuation at
time i. ∆Pg.mean is the average absolute value of wind power grid-connected fluctuation at
time i. ∆Pg.mean provides a comprehensive measure of energy storage’s ability to smooth
wind power fluctuations throughout the dispatch day. A lower ∆Pg.mean indicates a better
smoothing effect because it signifies a reduced overall fluctuation level.
(2) BESS enters dead time Td .

N −1
    
ESOC (i ) ESOC.max
Td = Ts × ∑ h ∪h
i =
0 ESOC.min ESOC (i )
(24)
1, x ≥ 1
h( x ) =
0, x < 1
where Td is the time when the energy storage SOC surpasses the designated safety threshold.
(3) BESS output capacity evaluation coefficient Cb .
v
1 T −1
u

T − 1 i∑
[ ESOC (i ) − 0.5]2
u
Cb = t (25)
=1

where Cb is the BESS output capacity evaluation coefficient, with a smaller value indicating
a larger output capacity. T is the number of sampling periods in the energy storage
output cycle.
Energies 2024, 17, 3132 15 of 20

5.2. Analysis of Simulation Results

In the simulation, a 1 min power fluctuation of 2 MW and a 10 min power fluctuation
of 6 MW are set. Different control schemes yield varied actual output grid-connected power
for the wind farm, as depicted in Figure 10. Table 5 provides a comparison of specific
indicators. Scheme 2 significantly reduces grid-connected wind power fluctuations, with a
33.7% reduction in the average absolute value of power fluctuation compared to the system
lacking energy storage. Similarly, Scheme 1 reduces the absolute mean of grid-connected
power fluctuation by 19.6% compared to Scheme 1 without energy storage. Thus, Scheme 1
Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 20
exhibits an increased average absolute value of power fluctuation compared to Scheme 2,
indicating a less effective smoothing effect.

40
Without BESS
Scheme 1
Scheme 2
30
Power / MW

20

10

0
0 500 1000 1500
Time / min
40 35

30
25

20

15
10

0 5
200 250 300 350 400 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200

Figure
Figure 10.
10. Combined
Combined output
output curves
curves of
of wind
wind storage
storage under various control
under various schemes.
control schemes.

Table 5.
Table 5. Evaluation
Evaluation indices.
indices.

Control
Control Scheme
Scheme ∆P
∆Pg.mean g.mean/MW
/MW T d /min Td/min Cb Cb
Without BESS
Without BESS 0.92
0.92 —
— —
—
Scheme
Scheme 1 1 0.74 0.74 123 123 0.190.19
Scheme
Scheme 2 2 0.61 0.61 0 0 0.130.13

The
The 1energy storage
min power SOC variation
fluctuation curve in
is depicted in Figure
Figure11,13 while
indicates
the that
10 minforpower
Scheme 1, the
fluctua-
BESS experiences high energy states during the periods of 165–173, 203–217,
tion is illustrated in Figure 12. It is evident from the figures that the smoothing effect 254–259, and
of
863–882, leading to a decrease in its charging capacity. Conversely, it enters
control Scheme 2 surpasses that of control Scheme 1. Specifically, in the absence of energy low energy
states
storage,during the periods
the maximum power of fluctuation
330–338, 345–355,
value for442–458,
1 min is581–586, 712–723,
8.1 MW, with and 746–764
173 crossing limit
min, decreasing its discharging capacity. Table 5 also reveals
points; for 10 min, the maximum power fluctuation value is 29.4 MW, with 495 that in Scheme 1, the BESS
crossing
dead time extends
limit points. to 123
In control min,1,with
Scheme a capacitypower
the maximum coefficient of 0.19,value
fluctuation indicating inadequate
for 1 min is 7 MW,
support
with for smoothing
59 crossing points; wind
for power
10 min,fluctuations
it is 21.3 MW,in the future.
with Examining
231 crossing the BESS
points. power
In control
in Figure2,14,
Scheme theScheme
maximum 2 enhances
power the BESS’s capability
fluctuation value for to smooth
1 min future
is 4.1 MW,wind with power fluc-
44 crossing
tuationsfor
points; by10dynamically
min, it is 18.9adjusting
MW, withweighting coefficients
165 crossing points.and implementing
These advanced
results highlight the
charging and discharging strategies. Compared to Scheme 1, Scheme 2 reduces the BESS
dead time by 123 min and decreases the output coefficient by 31.6%. By decreasing dead
time while enhancing power fluctuation smoothing, Scheme 2 effectively balances the
conflict between energy storage constraints and wind power fluctuation smoothing. This
validates the superiority of the proposed method over Scheme 1.
Energies 2024, 17, 3132 16 of 20

Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 17 of 20

significant improvement of the proposed method over the traditional MPC method in
terms of smoothing the grid-connected power of wind power.

10
Without BESS
8 Scheme 1
Scheme 2
6
Upper limit
4
Power / MW

-2

-4
Lower limit
-6

-8
0 500 1000 1500
Time / min

Figure 11.
Figure 11. One
One min
min power
power fluctuation.
fluctuation.

30
Without BESS
Scheme 1
Scheme 2
20
Upper limit
Power / MW

10

-10
Lower limit

-20
0 500 1000 1500
Time / min

Figure 12.
Figure 12. Ten
Ten min
min power
power fluctuation.
fluctuation.

0.9 The energy storage SOC variation curve in Figure 13 indicates that for Scheme 1, the

BESS experiences high energy states during the periods of 165–173, Scheme 1
203–217, 254–259, and
Scheme 2
863–882, leading to a decrease in its charging capacity. Conversely, it enters low energy
0.7 during the periods of 330–338, 345–355, 442–458, 581–586,
states SOC upper712–723,
limit and 746–764 min,
decreasing its discharging capacity. Table 5 also reveals that in Scheme 1, the BESS dead time
extends to 123 min, with a capacity coefficient of 0.19, indicating inadequate support for
SOC

0.5
smoothing wind power fluctuations in the future. Examining the BESS power in Figure 14,
Scheme 2 enhances the BESS’s capability to smooth future wind power fluctuations by
dynamically adjusting weighting coefficients and implementing advanced charging and
0.3
discharging strategies. Compared to Scheme 1, SchemeSOC 2 reduces the BESS dead time by
Lower limit
123 min and decreases the output coefficient by 31.6%. By decreasing dead time while
enhancing power fluctuation smoothing, Scheme 2 effectively balances the conflict between
0.1
energy0 storage constraints500and wind power fluctuation
1000 smoothing. 1500 This validates the
Time / min
superiority of the proposed method over Scheme 1.
Figure 13. SOC variation curves for different control schemes.

Based on the SOC partitioning of the BESS outlined in Section 2.2, Table 6 presents
the time distribution of the BESS SOC in different interval segments for the two control
schemes. In control Scheme 1, the time for the SOC to enter the discharge dead zone is 73
min and for the charging dead zone is 50 min. Additionally, the time for the SOC to be in
the discharge warning interval is 155 min and in the charging warning interval is 233 min.
 -10
Lower limit

-20
0 500 1000 1500
Energies 2024, 17, 3132 Time / min 17 of 20

Figure 12. Ten min power fluctuation.

0.9
Scheme 1
Scheme 2

0.7 SOC upper limit

Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 18 of 20

SOC
0.5

Furthermore, the SOC spends 929 min in the normal charging and discharging interval.
In control Scheme 2, the SOC did not enter the charging and discharging dead zone. The
0.3
time for the SOC to be in the discharge warning interval SOCis Lower
103 min
limitand in the charging
warning interval is 107 min. Moreover, the SOC spends 1230 min in the normal charging
and discharging interval. Compared with control Scheme 1, control Scheme 2 notably di-
0.1
minishes
0 the time of SOC 500in the dead and warning 1000 zones and maintains 1500a relatively rea-
Time / min
sonable depth of charging and discharging. This enhancement enhances the BESS’s ability
Figure
to smooth
Figure 13.SOC
13. SOC variation
the variation
wind curves
power fordifferent
differentcontrol
fluctuation.
curves for controlschemes.
schemes.

15 Based on the SOC partitioning of the BESS outlined in Section 2.2, Table 6 presents
Scheme 1
the time distribution of the BESS SOC in different interval segments for the two control
Scheme 2
schemes. In control Scheme 1, the time for the SOC to enter the discharge dead zone is 73
10
min and for the charging dead zone is 50 min. Additionally, the time for the SOC to be in
the5 discharge warning interval is 155 min and in the charging warning interval is 233 min.
Power / MW

-5

-10

-15
0 500 1000 1500
Time / min
15 10

10
5
5

0
0
-5

-10 -5
200 250 300 350 400 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200

Figure 14. BESS output curves for different control schemes.

Figure 14. BESS output curves for different control schemes.

TableBased
6. Time
ondistribution of SOC in different
the SOC partitioning of theinterval segments in
BESS outlined forSection
the two 2.2,
control schemes.
Table 6 presents
Discharge the
Deadtime distribution
Discharge of the BESS
Warning NormalSOC in different
Charging andinterval
Chargesegments
Warning for Charging
the two control
Dead
Control Scheme schemes. In control Scheme 1, the time for the SOC to enter the discharge dead zone is
Zone/min Interval/min Discharging Interval/min Interval/min Zone/min
73 min and for the charging dead zone is 50 min. Additionally, the time for the SOC to be in
Scheme 1 73 155 929 233 50
the discharge warning interval is 155 min and in the charging warning interval is 233 min.
Scheme 2 0 103 1230 107 0
Furthermore, the SOC spends 929 min in the normal charging and discharging interval.
In control Scheme 2, the SOC did not enter the charging and discharging dead zone. The
6. Conclusions
time for the SOC to be in the discharge warning interval is 103 min and in the charging
To improve
warning the107
interval is dispatchability
min. Moreover, of the wind storage1230
SOC spends cogeneration
min in thesystem,
normalthis paper
charging
introduces
and an objective
discharging function
interval. Comparedaimed at minimizing
with the deviation
control Scheme 1, controlofScheme
grid power from
2 notably
the target power
diminishes andofthe
the time SOCresidual
in thecapacity
dead andof the ESS from
warning zonestheand
ideal value. This
maintains objective
a relatively
function considers
reasonable depth ofpreventing
charging and SOC overruns while
discharging. This effectively
enhancement smoothing
enhanceswind power
the BESS’s
fluctuation.
ability The conclusions
to smooth the wind powerdrawn from this approach are as follows:
fluctuation.
(1) The method employs a first layer of fuzzy control to adjust the weight coefficients of
the objective function, thereby enhancing the ESS’s ability to smooth wind power
fluctuations while reducing the instances of the BESS entering dead and warning
zones. Compared to control Scheme 1, control Scheme 2 exhibits a 17.7% decrease in
the absolute mean value of wind grid-connected power fluctuations. Additionally,
the time for SOC to enter the dead and warning intervals is reduced by 123 and 278
min, respectively. Consequently, control Scheme 2 effectively maintains SOC within
a reasonable range and significantly improves the smoothing performance of the
Energies 2024, 17, 3132 18 of 20

Table 6. Time distribution of SOC in different interval segments for the two control schemes.

Control Discharge Dead Discharge Warning Normal Charging and Charge Warning Charging Dead
Scheme Zone/min Interval/min Discharging Interval/min Interval/min Zone/min
Scheme 1 73 155 929 233 50
Scheme 2 0 103 1230 107 0

6. Conclusions
To improve the dispatchability of the wind storage cogeneration system, this paper
introduces an objective function aimed at minimizing the deviation of grid power from
the target power and the residual capacity of the ESS from the ideal value. This objective
function considers preventing SOC overruns while effectively smoothing wind power
fluctuation. The conclusions drawn from this approach are as follows:
(1) The method employs a first layer of fuzzy control to adjust the weight coefficients
of the objective function, thereby enhancing the ESS’s ability to smooth wind power
fluctuations while reducing the instances of the BESS entering dead and warning
zones. Compared to control Scheme 1, control Scheme 2 exhibits a 17.7% decrease in
the absolute mean value of wind grid-connected power fluctuations. Additionally, the
time for SOC to enter the dead and warning intervals is reduced by 123 and 278 min,
respectively. Consequently, control Scheme 2 effectively maintains SOC within a
reasonable range and significantly improves the smoothing performance of the BESS
for wind power.
(2) A method is introduced to adjust the charging and discharging power of the BESS
using the second layer of fuzzy control, thereby enhancing the BESS’s capacity to miti-
gate future wind power fluctuations. Compared to control Scheme 1, control Scheme 2
demonstrates a decrease of 31.6% in the BESS output coefficient. Consequently, control
Scheme 2 effectively allocates sufficient chargeable capacity to smooth future wind
power fluctuations by implementing advanced charging and discharging strategies.
(3) Compared to control Scheme 1, the control method presented in this paper, utilizing
fuzzy control rules to adjust charge and discharge power, leads to a certain increase
in BESS charge and discharge cycles. Additionally, the effectiveness of the proposed
control method is influenced by the accuracy of wind power predictions. Further
research will explore the impact of wind power prediction errors on control effects
and potential solutions. Additionally, battery charging and discharging strategies
that consider the service life of BESS and the effective smoothing of wind power
fluctuations will be investigated. These efforts aim to advance the efficient integration
of energy storage systems with new energy sources.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, L.P., L.L., J.Y. and W.L.; methodology, L.P. and J.Y.; soft-
ware, L.P. and J.Y.; formal analysis and data curation, L.P.; writing—original draft, L.P.;
writing—review and editing, L.P. and W.L.; funding acquisition, L.L. All authors have read and
agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: Project of Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province (2023JJ50344, 2024JJ7088);
Outstanding Youth Project of Hunan Education Department (23B0745).
Data Availability Statement: Data is contained within the article.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References
1. Lin, Z.; Chen, H.; Wu, Q.; Li, W.; Li, M.; Ji, T. Mean-tracking model based stochastic economic dispatch for power systems with
high penetration of wind power. Energy 2020, 193, 116826. [CrossRef]
2. Su, Y.; Teh, J. Two-stage Optimal Dispatching of AC/DC Hybrid Active Distribution Systems Considering Network Flexibility.
J. Mod. Power Syst. Clean Energy 2023, 33, 52–65. [CrossRef]
Energies 2024, 17, 3132 19 of 20

3. Yang, J.; Yang, T.; Luo, L.; Peng, L. Tracking-dispatch of a combined wind-storage system based on model predictive control and
two-layer fuzzy control strategy. Prot. Control. Mod. PowerSyst. 2023, 8, 974–989. [CrossRef]
4. Li, X.; Ma, R.; Gan, W.; Yan, S. Optimal Dispatch for Battery Energy Storage Station in Distribution Network Considering Voltage
Distribution Improvement and Peak Load Shifting. J. Mod. Power Syst. Clean Energy 2022, 10, 131–139. [CrossRef]
5. Mazzoni, S.; Sze, J.Y.; Nastasi, B.; Ooi, S.; Desideri, U.; Romagnoli, A. A techno-economic assessment on the adoption of latent
heat thermal energy storage systems for district cooling optimal dispatch & operations. Appl. Energy 2021, 289, 116646.
6. Siqueira, D.; Maria Silva, L.; Wei, P. Control strategy to smooth wind power output using battery energy storage system: A review.
J. Energy Storage 2021, 35, 102252–102264. [CrossRef]
7. Zheng, P.; Young, D.; Yang, T.; Xiao, Y.; Li, Z. Powering battery sustainability: A review of the recent progress and evolving
challenges in recycling lithium-ion batteries. Front. Sustain. Resour. Manag. 2023, 2, 1127001. [CrossRef]
8. Jin, L.; Kazemi, M.; Comodi, G.; Papadimitriou, C. Assessing battery degradation as a key performance indicator for multi-
objective optimization of multi-carrier energy systems. Appl. Energy 2024, 361, 122925. [CrossRef]
9. Choopani, K.; Effatnejad, R.; Hedayati, M. Coordination of energy storage and wind power plant considering energy and reserve
market for a resilience smart grid. J. Energy Storage 2020, 30, 101542. [CrossRef]
10. Teixeira, T.P.; Borges, C.L.T. Operation strategies for coordinating battery energy storage with wind power generation and their
effects on system reliability. J. Mod. Power Syst. Clean Energy 2021, 9, 190–198. [CrossRef]
11. Zhai, Y.; Zhang, J.; Tan, Z.; Liu, X.; Shen, B.; Coombs, T.; Liu, P.; Huang, S. Research on the application of superconducting
magnetic energy storage in the wind power generation system for smoothing wind power fluctuations. IEEE Trans. Appl.
Supercond. 2021, 31, 5700205. [CrossRef]
12. de Carvalho, W.C.; Bataglioli, R.P.; Fernandes, R.A.; Coury, D.V. Fuzzy-based approach for power smoothing of a full-converter
wind turbine generator using a supercapacitor energy storage. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2020, 184, 106287. [CrossRef]
13. Zhang, F.; Meng, K.; Xu, Z.; Dong, Z.; Zhang, L.; Wan, C.; Liang, J. Battery ESS planning for wind smoothing via variable-interval
reference modulation and self-adaptive SOC control strategy. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2017, 8, 695–707. [CrossRef]
14. Cao, M.; Xu, Q.; Qin, X.; Cai, J. Battery energy storage sizing based on a modelpredictive control strategy with operational
constraints to smooth the wind power. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2020, 115, 105471. [CrossRef]
15. Teleke, S.; Baran, M.E.; Huang, A.Q.; Bhattacharya, S.; Anderson, L. Control strategies for battery energy storage for wind farm
dispatching. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 2009, 24, 725–732. [CrossRef]
16. Teleke, S.; Baran, M.E.; Bhattacharya, S.; Huang, A.Q. Optimal control of battery energy storage for wind farm dispatching. IEEE
Trans. Energy Convers. 2010, 25, 787–794. [CrossRef]
17. Jiang, Q.Y.; Wang, H.J. Two-time-scale coordination control for a battery energy storage system to mitigate wind power fluctuations.
IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 2013, 28, 52–61. [CrossRef]
18. Addisu, A.; George, L.; Courbin, P.; Sciandra, V. Smoothing of renewable energy generation using gaussian-based method with
power constraints. Energy Procedia 2017, 134, 171–180. [CrossRef]
19. Guo, T.; Liu, Y.; Zhao, J.; Zhu, Y.; Liu, J. A dynamic waveletbased robust wind power smoothing approach using hybrid energy
storage system. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2020, 116, 105579. [CrossRef]
20. Yang, X.; Yue, H.; Ren, J. Fuzzy empirical mode decomposition for smoothing wind power with battery energy storage system.
IFAC Pap. OnLine 2017, 50, 8769–8774. [CrossRef]
21. Kani, S.A.P.; Wild, P.; Saha, T.K. Improving Predictability of Renewable Generation Through Optimal Battery Sizing. IEEE Trans.
Sustain. Energy 2020, 11, 37–47. [CrossRef]
22. Trung, T.T.; Ahn, S.J.; Choi, J.H.; Go, S.I.; Nam, S.R. Real-time wavelet-based coordinated control of hybrid energy storage systems
for denoising and flattening wind power output. Energies 2014, 7, 6620–6644. [CrossRef]
23. Jiang, Q.; Hong, H. Wavelet-based capacity configuration and coordinated control of hybrid energy storage system for smoothing
out wind power fluctuations. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2013, 28, 1363–1372. [CrossRef]
24. Li, Y.N.; Wang, Q.; Song, W.F.; Wang, X.Y. Variational mode decomposition and fuzzy control strategy for smooth wind power
output. Dianli Xitong Baohu Yu Kongzhi 2019, 47, 58–65.
25. Yang, X.; Jia, C.; Zhang, P.; Yi, F.; Sun, Z.; Zhang, J. Fuzzy control strategy of energy storage for wind-storage system. In
Proceedings of the 2015 18th International Conference on Electrical Machines and Systems (ICEMS), Pattaya, Thailand, 25–28
October 2015; pp. 1080–1085.
26. Jiao, D.D.; Chen, J.; Fang, Y.; Fu, J.X.; Deng, H.; Zhang, B.M. Control strategy for wind power output fluctuation using hybrid
energy storage based on variational mode decomposition. Electr. Meas. Instrum. 2021, 5, 14–19.
27. Wu, J.; Ding, M. Wind power fluctuation smoothing strategy of hybrid energy storage system using self: Adaptive wavelet packet
decomposition. Autom. Electr. Power Syst. 2017, 41, 7–12.
28. Ma, L.; Xie, L.R.; Ye, L. A wind power smoothing strategy based on two-layer model algorithm control. J. Energy Storage 2023,
60, 106617. [CrossRef]
29. Moghaddam, I.N.; Chowdhury, B.H.; Mohajeryami, S. Predictive operation and optimal sizing of battery energy storage with
high wind energy penetration. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2018, 65, 6686–6695. [CrossRef]
30. Chabok, H.; Aghaei, J.; Sheikh, M.; Roustaei, M.; Zare, M.; Niknam, T.; Lehtonen, M.; Shafi-khah, M.; Catalão, J.P. Transmission-
constrained optimal allocation of price-maker wind-storage units in electricity markets. Appl. Energy 2020, 310, 118542. [CrossRef]
Energies 2024, 17, 3132 20 of 20

31. Heredia, F.J.; Cuadrado, M.D.; Corchero, C. On optimal participation in the electricity markets of wind power plants with battery
energy storage systems. Comput. Oper. Res. 2018, 96, 316–329. [CrossRef]
32. Yang, X.Y.; Cao, C.; Li, X.J.; Yang, T. Control strategy of smoothing wind power output using battery energy storage system based
on fuzzy empirical mode decomposition. Electr. Power Constr. 2016, 37, 134–140.
33. Jannati, M.; Hosseinian, S.H.; Vahidi, B.; Li, G.J. ADALINE (ADAptive Linear NEuron)-based coordinated control for wind power
fluctuations smoothing with reduced ESS (battery energy storage system) capacity. Energy 2016, 101, 1–8. [CrossRef]
34. Khalid, M.; Savkin, A.V. A model predictive control approach to the problem of wind power smoothing with controlled battery
storage. Renew. Energy 2010, 35, 1520–1526. [CrossRef]
35. Esmaeili, S.; Amini, M.; Khorsandi, A.; Fathi, S.H.; Hosseinian, S.H.; Millimonfared, J. Market-oriented Optimal Control Strategy
for an Integrated Energy Storage System and Wind Farm. In Proceedings of the 2021 29th Iranian Conference on Electrical
Engineering (ICEE), Tehran, Iran, 18–20 May 2021; pp. 407–411.
36. Guo, T.; Zhu, Y.; Liu, Y.; Gu, C.; Liu, J. Two-stage optimal MPC for hybrid energy storage operation to enable smooth wind power
integration. IET Renew. Power Gener. 2020, 14, 2477–2486. [CrossRef]
37. Sun, Y.; Tang, X.; Sun, X.; Jia, D.; Cao, Z.; Pan, J.; Xu, B. Model predictive control and improved low-pass filtering strategies based
on wind power fluctuation mitigation. J. Mod. Power Syst. Clean Energy 2019, 7, 512–524. [CrossRef]
38. Yang, J.; Peng, L.; Luo, L.; Yang, T. Control Strategy for Energy-Storage Systems to Smooth Wind Power Fluctuation Based on
Interval and Fuzzy Control. IEEE Access 2023, 11, 20979–20993. [CrossRef]
39. Yun, P.P.; Chen, Q.T.; Mi, Y.; Ren, B.; Miao, Y.; Ren, Y. Improved Wavelet Packet of Hybrid Energy Storage to Smooth Wind
Power Fluctuation. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE Sustainable Power and Energy Conference (iSPEC), Nanjing, China, 23–25
November 2021; pp. 1160–1165.
40. Long, B.; Liao, Y.; Chong, K.T.; Rodríguez, J.; Guerrero, J.M. Enhancement of frequency regulation in AC microgrid: A fuzzy-MPC
controlled virtual synchronous generator. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2021, 12, 3138–3149. [CrossRef]

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.