Professional Documents
Culture Documents
AbstractIncreasing levels of wind-turbine generation in common in the wind industry. In this paper, we focus on mod-
modern power systems is initiating a need for accurate wind-gen- eling the fixed-speed unit and an equivalent model of several
eration transient stability models. Because many wind generators fixed-speed units in a wind park.
are often grouped together in wind parks, equivalence modeling
The first-mode mechanical frequency of a typical wind tur-
of several wind generators is especially critical. In this paper, a
reduced-order dynamic fixed-speed wind-generator model appro- bine is in the 0- to 10-Hz range; this is also the range for electro-
priate for transient stability simulation is presented. The model mechanical oscillations. Consequently, the mechanical vibra-
is derived using a model reduction technique of a high-order fi- tions of the wind turbine interact with the electromechanical
nite-element model. Then, an equivalencing approach is presented dynamics. Examples of this interaction are shown in this paper.
that demonstrates how several wind generators in a wind park can Therefore, in order to create an accurate model of a wind gener-
be combined into a single reduced-order model. Simulation cases ator to be used in transient stability studies, the first-mode me-
are presented to demonstrate several unique properties of a power
system containing wind generators. The results in this paper focus chanical turbine dynamics must be accurately represented.
on horizontal-axis turbines using an induction machine directly The wind-generator model presented here is derived by con-
connected to the grid as the generator. ducting model reduction on a detailed 650th-order finite-ele-
Index TermsTransient stability simulation, wind-generator ment model of a typical horizontal-axis turbine. Aerodynamic
modeling, wind-park modeling, wind-turbine modeling. and mechanical dynamics are reduced resulting in a nonlinear
4th-order two-inertia turbine model combined with a standard
generator model. Simulations are presented to demonstrate the
I. INTRODUCTION accuracy of the model.
A wind park consists of several wind generators connected to
R ECENTLY, wind-energy development has experienced a
significant level of interest. The rise in the use of wind
generators is accompanied by a need to evaluate their impact
the transmission system through a single bus. Because modeling
each individual turbine for transient stability is overly cumber-
on power-system dynamics for electrical power transmission some, our goal is to lump the wind park into a minimal set
planning. The first goal of this paper is to present an accu- of equivalent wind-generator models. Our approach for equiva-
rate low-order dynamic model of a wind generator which is lence modeling of a wind park involves combining all turbines
compatible with modern electromechanical transient simulation with the same mechanical natural frequency into a single equiv-
computer programs. The model developed here focuses on a alent turbine. Simulation results demonstrate this approach pro-
horizontal-axis, up-wind, or down-wind machine directly con- vides accurate results.
nected to the synchronous grid using an induction generator.
This encompasses many modern large-scale systems. Because II. PREVIOUS RESULTS
large wind installations consist of many wind generators, wind- A representative example of published results for modeling
park modeling is a critical need. Consequently, the second goal wind generators for transient stability is contained in [2][10].
is to present a methodology for combining several wind gener- Results for modeling fixed-speed wind generators have focused
ators connected to the grid through a common bus into a single on two primary approaches. The first approach represents the
equivalent model. turbine and generator rotor as a single inertia thus ignoring the
Wind generators are primarily classified as fixed speed or systems mechanical natural frequency [2][5]. The second ap-
variable speed. With most fixed-speed units, the turbine drives proach represents the turbine blades and hub as one inertia con-
an induction generator that is directly connected to the grid. nected to the generator inertia through a spring [6][9]. In all of
The turbine speed varies very little due to the steep slope of the these papers, the spring stiffness is calculated from the systems
generators torque-speed characteristic; therefore, it is termed shaft.
a fixed-speed system. With a variable-speed unit, the generator Our research indicates that representing the first-mode me-
is connected to the grid using power-electronic converter tech- chanical frequency is critical to an accurate model. Finite-ele-
nology. This allows the turbine speed to be controlled to max- ment analysis has shown that the first-mode dynamics are pri-
imize performance (e.g., power capture). Both approaches are marily a result of the flexibility of the turbine blades not the shaft
as assumed by others [11]. The modeling approach presented in
Manuscript received February 3, 2004. This work was supported in part by this paper centers on the fact that the primary flexible mechan-
the Western Area Power Administration. Paper no. TPWRS-00388-2003. ical component is the turbine blade.
The authors are with Montana Tech, University of Montana, Butte, MT 59701
USA (e-mail: dtrudnowski@mtech.edu). The results in [7] focus on reduced-order wind-park mod-
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPWRS.2004.836204 eling. The authors use a standard induction generator equiva-
0885-8950/04$20.00 2004 IEEE
1912 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 19, NO. 4, NOVEMBER 2004
(2)
(6c)
(7a)
(7b)
(7c)
(8)
(6b)
TRUDNOWSKI et al.: FIXED-SPEED WIND-GENERATOR AND WIND-PARK MODELING FOR TRANSIENT STABILITY STUDIES 1915
A. Example 1
For this example, we compare the response of the two-inertia
reduced-order turbine in (1) to the response of the finite-ele-
ment model and a detailed five-inertia model. Each model is
connected to an infinite bus through an induction generator.
The response of the finite-element model is shown in Fig. 1.
The five-inertia model represents each blade with edge and flap
spring-dampers; the slow-speed shaft spring stiffness is also
represented; and the aerodynamics are modeled using Glauert
vortex momentum theory [13]. The five-inertia model also con-
tains the centrifugal, gravity, and coriolis effects. Derivation of
the five-inertia model is contained in [11], [12]. The turbine
properties are described in Section III. It is directly connected to
a 60-Hz infinite bus through the 1.68-MW induction generator.
Turbine and induction-generator model parameters for the
reduced-order model are provided in the Appendix. The sim-
ulation is compared to the ADAMS finite-element simulation Fig. 5. Five-inertia model versus two-inertia reduced-order model response
which includes highly detailed aerodynamic and mechanical for example 1.
modeling. The two-inertia reduced-order model is a 6th-order
model [(1), (4), and (6)] while the finite-element model is
approximately 650th-order, and the five-inertia model is 18th
order.
Simulation results are shown in Fig. 4 and Fig. 5. As can be
seen, the two-inertia reduced-order model closely matches the
highly detailed finite-element and five-inertia models.
B. Example 2
In this example, we demonstrate the sensitivity of the two-
turbine model to the choice of the blade break point. The re-
sponses of three modeling cases are shown in Fig. 6. The 50%
break-point places the blade spring at the center of the blade ra-
dius and is the same model used in example 1. This response
is compared to a 43% break point and a 56% break point. The
percentage indicates the location from the hub where the blade
spring is placed along the blade radius. The differences between
the responses are significant enough to merit careful selection of Fig. 6. Two-inertia model break point comparison for example 2.
the blade break point.
inertia model often used by researchers (e.g., [2][5]). The one-
C. Example 3 inertia turbine model is
For this example, we compare the transient behavior of the
two-inertia turbine model in (1) with the more simplified one- (9)
1916 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 19, NO. 4, NOVEMBER 2004
Fig. 8. Two-inertia versus the one-inertia turbine response. Real power flowing
from bus 17 to 16 for example 3.
Andrew Gentile (M02) received the B.A. degree in english from Southern
ACKNOWLEDGMENT Illinois University, Edwardsville, in 1989 and the M.S. degree in general en-
The authors gratefully acknowledge the guidance of Mr. E. gineering, control system option from Montana Tech, University of Montana,
Butte, in 2002.
Weber of the Western Power Administration (WAPA). From 1990 to 1997, he worked as a Carpenter/Independent Contractor in
western Montana. He is currently the Laboratory Director in the Engineering
Department of Montana Tech.
REFERENCES
[1] P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control. New York: McGraw-
Hill, 1994.
[2] J. G. Slootweg, S. W. H. de Haan, H. Polinder, and W. L. Kling, Mod-
eling wind turbines in power system dynamic simulations, in Proc. Jawad M. Khan (S03) received the B.S. degree in general engineering (con-
IEEE Power Engineering Society Summer Meeting, Vancouver, Canada, trol system option) in 2001 from Montana Tech, University of Montana, Butte,
July 2001, pp. 1519. where he is currently pursuing the M.S. degree in electrical engineering.
[3] R. M. G. Castro and J. M. F. de Jesus, A wind park reduced-order model
using singular perturbations theory, IEEE Trans. Energy Conversion,
vol. 11, pp. 735741, Dec. 1996.
[4] E. Welfonder, R. Neifer, and M. Spanner, Development and exper-
imental identification of dynamic models for wind turbines, Control Eric M. Petritz (S03) received the B.S. degree in engineering science (con-
Eng. Practice, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 6373, 1997. trol system option) in 2001 from Montana Tech, University of Montana, Butte,
[5] Z. Saad-Saoud and N. Jenkins, Example wind farm dynamic model, where he is currently pursuing the M.S. degree in electrical engineering.
Pro, Inst. Elect. Eng. Gener. Transm. Distrib., vol. 142, no. 5, Sept. 1995. During 19941997, he was enlisted in the U.S. Army.