You are on page 1of 93

Aggregate Model of Large Wind Parks for Power

System Studies

FERNANDO J. SADA

Master’s Thesis at EPS

Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan (KTH) Stockholm, Sweden March 2011


iii

Aggregate model of large wind parks for power system studies


FERNANDO J. SADA

©FERNANDO J. SADA, 2011


School of Electrical Engineering
Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan
SE-100 44 Stockholm
Sweden
v

Abstract

This report describes the need for aggregation of wind farms due to the re-
cent penetration of wind power generation in the power system and the method-
ology to simplify a distribution network consisting of a number of wind tur-
bines equipped with induction or synchronous generators and MV lines. This
methodology leads to an equivalent network which consists of an approximate
equivalent wind turbine or groups of wind turbines and an approximate equiv-
alent line or lines. The aim of the methodology is to reduce the complexity of
the system and also the simulation time.

Simulations are performed using a simulation software package PowerFac-


tory supplied by DIgSilent, which is a tool for short term and long term dynamic
analysis.

The validation of the methodology and models used are examined by ap-
plying different layouts and considerations. The response of both detailed and
aggregated models, under the same contingencies are compared. The influence
of wind conditions such as wind speed and wind direction, is also considered.

The project consists of two main parts. The scope of the first part is to
validate an aggregation methodology with DIgSilent PowerFactory Software.
The second part aims to verify a wind park aggregation considering the wake
effect. In both cases the simulation time improvement is shown.
vii

Sammanfattning

Denna rapport visar behovet av sammanläggning av vindkraftverk på grund av


den ökande andelen vindkraft i elkraftsystemet. En metod för att förenkla ett dis-
tributionsnät, som består av ett antal vindkraftverk med induktions- eller synkro-
ngeneratorer och MV-ledningar, beskrivs i denna rapport. Denna metod ger ett
ekvivalent nät som består av vindkraftverk eller grupper av vindkraftverk och en
motsvarande kraftledningar. Resultatet är ett förslag som försöker minska kom-
plexiteten i systemet och även minska simuleringstiden.

Simuleringen utförs med hjälp av ett simuleringspaket; DIgSilent-PowerFactory,


som är ett verktyg för kortsiktiga och långsiktiga dynamiska analyser.

Valideringen av de använda metoderna och modeller sker utifrån tillämpning-


sområde och hänsyn tas till olika utformningar. Både detaljerade och aggregerade
modell jämförs. Hänsyn tas även till vindförhållandenas påverkan.

Projektet består av två huvuddelar. Den första delen validerar metodiken för
sammanläggning av vinkraftparker med PowerFactory. Den andra delen försöker
bekräfta effekterna av en vindkraftsparksammanläggning med hänsyn till "wake
effect". I båda fallen visas att tidskrävande steg kan effektiviseras.
ix

Acknowledgements

First I want to mention my family and friends, that were with me from the
beginning. Without their indirect support it would not have been possible to do
this thesis.

I would like to sincerely acknowledge Katherine Elkington and Dirk Van Hertem
for providing me this great opportunity for my project in KTH, Stockholm, Swe-
den, and their help reviewing this thesis. I also want to especially thank Muhamad
Reza and Kailash Srivastava for this opportunity of doing my Master Thesis in
ABB (Västerås, Sweden) that provided great help regarding research methods and
my first contact with the professional world. Additionally I thank to Antonis
Marinopoulos, who provided me necessary information, his help and patience.

To Álvaro Ruiz for being with me all this time and for all we have shared during
our stay in Västerås.

Thanks to all the people who accompanied me during this great adventure in
Sweden that started in 2009 and specially to my dear friend Sergio Romero.

My warm and sincere thanks to all. Tack så mycket. Muchas gracias.

Fernando Sada
Stockholm, Sweden
March 2011
Contents

Contents xi

1 Introduction 1
1.1 Purpose of the research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Wind Energy Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2 Wind Power Basics 7


2.1 Power Curves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2 Wind Turbines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2.1 Types of Wind Turbines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2.2 Pitch Control in Wind Turbines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.2.3 Electrical Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

3 Aggregation of a Large Wind Farm 15


3.1 Aggregation assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.2 Aggregation of the distribution network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

4 Models 19
4.1 DIgSilent Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4.1.1 DFIG Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4.1.2 FCG Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4.1.3 Scaling-up procedure of the models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
4.2 Wake Effect Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.3 Description of Matlab Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

5 Simulations carried out 37


5.1 First layout and scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
5.1.1 Original layout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
5.2 Second layout and scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
5.2.1 Original layout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
5.2.2 Vertical incoming wind . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.2.3 Horizontal incoming wind . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.2.4 45 Degrees incoming wind . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

xi
xii CONTENTS

6 Results and Analysis 49


6.1 First Layout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
6.1.1 DFIG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
6.1.2 FCG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
6.1.3 Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
6.2 Second Layout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
6.2.1 Vertical incoming wind verification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
6.2.2 Horizontal incoming wind verification . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
6.2.3 45 Degrees incoming wind verification . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
6.2.4 Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
6.3 Other examples of the influence of wind direction and wake effect . . 68
6.3.1 Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

7 Conclusions and Future Work 75

Bibliography 79
Chapter 1

Introduction

1.1 Purpose of the research


This project deals with the aggregation of a wind farm, by considering the equivalent
of the connection lines of the turbines, and the equivalent power production of a
wind farm. The proposal considers a general configuration of a wind farm layout. It
also analyzes the effect on the aggregation when the wake effect is considered. The
validation of the methodology is performed using the simulation package DIgSilent.

The two main objectives of this research are to simplify the models in order to
carry out different studies and to reduce the computation time of the simulations.

In the report there are seven chapters. The purpose of the first three chapters is
to gather all information necessary to introduce the topic of the project and some
important aspects of wind power generation. Chapters four and five present the
models and simulations carried out. The results and their analysis are included in
chapter six. Finally, the last chapter presents conclusions and future work of the
research.

1.2 Wind Energy Development


During the recent years the amount of wind power installations has increased con-
siderably and therefore it is necessary to study the impact of wind power generation
in large scale networks. The recent penetration and the expected future increase of
this type of technology leads to the study of different methodologies of aggregation
of wind farms [1].

Wind power generation is a renewable energy source that has increased quickly.
The leading companies have increased their turnover by 30-40 % per year in the

1
2 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

Figure 1.1. Wind Power Capacity. 2000-2007

first years of this century [2]. Additionally the price of electricity is becoming lower,
as more wind turbines are installed [2].

For instance, in figure 1.1, the installed wind power capacity since 2000 to 2007
can be seen, and the forecast until the year 2012 in figure 1.2. Between 2000 and
2007 the installed capacity grew 482%, from 14.604 MW in 2000 to 84.934 MW in
2007. The data from figure 1.2 reveals that the industry will grow 215% between
2007 and 2012, from 84.934 MW to 267.837 MW. The international wind industry
has compounded an annual growth rate of 28.6% [3].

Due to the development of wind power technologies it has been possible since the
early 1980s the size of the wind turbines to double approximately every four years.
For the moment, it is easy to find wind turbines with a rated power of 5 MW and
nowadays the largest wind turbine built is the Enercon’s E-126 of 7 MW, which is a
more sophisticated version of the E-112, formerly the world’s largest wind turbine
of a 6 MW rated power [4].

The more the control system of wind turbines are developed, the more effective
and cheaper they become. Nowadays the profile of the rotor blades can extract
more power from the wind and also the power electronic equipments optimize the
capacity of the turbines.

In the early days of wind power development, turbines were installed isolated
from the grid, often next to a farm. After a few years they were installed in groups
of 3-5 turbines but since then they are grouped in wind farms of more than hundreds
1.2. WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT 3

Figure 1.2. Wind Power Capacity. Forecast 2007-2012

of turbines located on land or off-shore, with the same capacity of a conventional


plant [2].

Wind power generation is becoming more competitive than oil, gas, coal or
nuclear power production plants. Because of this, mass production of turbines
has increased, as in the case of Germany, Denmark, UK, Spain or USA. German
manufacturers are now competing against the Danish ones. Spain has installed
several thousand of megawatts in the last few years and in 2004, took the lead in
terms of more installed capacity in a year. The Chinese and Indian markets are
expanding as well. The off-shore technology is becoming more important, specially
in Denmark, the Netherlands, UK and Sweden. The Danish government has decided
that wind should produce at leat 50 % of the Danish electrical power by 2030. Wind
power technology is becoming very important in many countries as it con be seen
in figure 1.3. Figure 1.3 shows the top ten installed capacity in 2010, where China’s
position as a major player in the wind energy sector has been further underlined
with a prediction of 20 GW annually by 2014. Also in USA the American Wind
Energy Association has a plan of 20 % by 2030 as shown in figure 1.4.

The recent penetration of large wind farms makes the study of wind power
production necessary and its influence in the grid, specially during a contingency.

A sample of interest in wind power technology and its role within the complex
electrical network is the development of grid codes, implemented by many countries.
The objective of grid codes is to achieve continuity and security of the supply when
a high level of wind power is introduced into the electrical network [5]. Some
4 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

Figure 1.3. Top Ten Installed capacity in 2010

Figure 1.4. The American Wind Energy Association plan for 20% wind by 2030
1.2. WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT 5

countries have issued dedicated grid codes for connecting the wind turbines to the
network. Generally European grid codes require that wind farms stay connected
during a fault or a disturbance in the net [6]. The requirements deal also with
frequency control, voltage stability, active and reactive power control and fault ride
through capability [1]. In some cases they are related to some power controllability,
power quality and ride-through capability, as it is the example of Germany, Ireland
and Denmark. Moreover some countries such as Germany and Spain, want grid
support during disturbances. Wind farms should be operated as a conventional
power plant, providing a wide range of controlling and even taking part in the
primary and secondary control. On many occasions, to discuss compliance with
these requirements, simplified models of wind farms are needed in order to conduct
such studies.

Wind generators are smaller (800 kW-3 MW) than conventional power genera-
tors but through grouping them, big wind farms are needed [7]. The idea of creating
an aggregate model of a wind farm is useful for system studies. The idea of the
aggregation consist of simplifying the wind farm in one equivalent machine or in
groups of machines with similar characteristics apart from simplify the distribution
network of the entire layout. A common practice is to present a group of wind
turbines, for example in a number A, of P megawatts each as a generator size of
AP MW, with all the parameters of the aggregated model configured identically
as the ones corresponding to the parameters of a single turbine that composes the
detail model [7].

Some of the advantages of an aggregation model and its development is the


reduction of simulation duration, the reduction of the complexity of wind farm
models and an accurate representation of dynamic behavior [8].

It is important to analyze the types of machines, such as the fixed speed ma-
chines (with an induction machine) or the variable speed models, like the doubly
fed induction machines (more widely used) and the full converter synchronous ma-
chine. This project presents different simulations in order to compare the behavior
of the detailed model of a wind farm and the aggregated model under the same
contingencies [9].

Simulations have been performed using the simulation software package Power-
Factory supplied by DIgSilent.

The idea of the research is to study the different factors that should be considered
in order to model the aggregation of a large wind farm and take these into account
in the dynamic analysis. The study must to consider aspects like possible scenarios
according to wind direction and layouts, apart from the wake affect, the wind profile
and different fault situations in the wind farm and network connection.
Chapter 2

Wind Power Basics

Wind is air in motion. Modern wind turbines turn the kinetic energy of the moving
air into electric power and water pump and windmills turn kinetic energy into
mechanical work.

2.1 Power Curves


The kinetic energy of a mass m, with a speed ν follows the expression:
1
Ek = mν 2 (2.1)
2
The power associated to the wind is:
∂Ek 1 ∂m 2 1 2
P = = ν = qν (q = ρAν) (2.2)
∂t 2 ∂t 2
Only a fraction of the power can be extracted from the wind to the turbine.
This is what is called the aerodynamic efficiency Cp :

Pw
Cp = = Cp (β, λ) (2.3)
Po
where β is the pitch angle of the blades of the rotor and λ is the tip speed ratio:
ωturb R
λ= (2.4)
ν
where ωturb is the angular speed of the rotor of the turbine, R is the radius of the
blades and ν is the wind speed.

The mechanical power extracted is then:


1
Pmec = ρπR2 Cp (β, λ)ν 3 (2.5)
2

7
8 CHAPTER 2. WIND POWER BASICS

Figure 2.1. Deterministic Power Curve

where ρ is the air density, R is the radius of the blades, Cp is the aerodynamic
efficiency, β is the pitch angle and λ is the tip speed ratio.

The power curve is the plot of the output power, against the wind speed across
the turbine blades. The power curves can be described in two manners. In a
deterministic way or in a probabilistic one. The deterministic method approximates
the output power with a single curve like in figure 2.1.

Four phases can be identified. The first one is when the ν < νc , and there is
no generation. The non linear power production phase is when νc < ν < νr . After
that and until νs the rated power production can be considered and when ν > νs
there is no production either to protect the turbine.

The probabilistic production curve considers that the output power of a wind
turbine exhibits a lot of variations when the power production of two identical
turbines in the same conditions is measured. The probabilistic models incorporate
these variations in order to be more appropriate. What they establish is that in
the non linear phase when νc < ν < νr , the power production variable is a random
characterized by a mean power and a standard deviation. An example of this can
be seen in figure 2.2.

Some examples of Monte Carlo simulation based curves are given in [10].
2.2. WIND TURBINES 9

Figure 2.2. Probabilistic Power Curve

The power curves of the turbines are used in the aggregation methodology in
order to know the power provided by each turbine.

In this project the deterministic curves are used and no the probabilistic ones.

2.2 Wind Turbines


A wind turbine is a device that allows to convert the energy of the wind and trans-
form it into mechanical power and then electrical power. Different types of tech-
nologies have been developed over the last years [2].

2.2.1 Types of Wind Turbines


Wind turbines can be classified in the following way:

1. Fixed Speed Wind Turbines

2. Variable Speed Wind Turbine

a) Doubly Fed Induction Generator (DFIG)


b) Full Converter Generator (FCG)

This project deals with DFIG and FCG. A short description of their concepts
and main characteristics is given below. These machines are the most widely used
in the industry because of their advantages compared with the fixed speed wind
10 CHAPTER 2. WIND POWER BASICS

turbines, such as better energy efficiency, less mechanical stress or the improvement
output power quality [11].

Fixed Speed Wind Turbines


The aggregation methodology described later is applicable to this machine as well.

When the turbine is directly connected to the grid the rotor and the generator
must rotate at a fixed speed in order to produce power at main frequency [2].

As mentioned before, in the project this machine is not considered.

Variable Speed Wind Turbines. DFIG


Most wind turbines are now equipped with induction generators. These machines
are operated either at fixed speed or variable speed. As mentioned before, genera-
tors driven by fixed speed turbines can be directly connected to the grid. However,
variable speed generators need a power electronic converter interface for intercon-
nection to the grid. Compared to the fixed speed devices they have some advantages
[12], [13].

• They have better energy capture than fixed speed generation.

• Possibility to store energy from sudden wind gusts in the rotor.

• Less stress in the gearbox and the generator.

• Control of reactive power injected to the grid.

• Acoustic noise reduction.

The DFIG (Doubly Fed Induction Generator) is widely used for wind power
generation because it allows operation at a constant AC voltage and frequency
while the rotor speed varies with the wind speed. It requires an electronic converter
that only carries a fraction of the power that comes out of the generator to the grid
and thus reduces the power losses and the cost of the equipment compared to the
full converter wind turbines, although the speed range is limited [14]. Figure 2.3
shows the general concept of DFIG.

The DFIG consists of an induction machine and a converter with two terminals.
One connected to the grid and the other one to the rotor of the machine. In order
to connect it to the grid a step-up transformer may be used.
2.2. WIND TURBINES 11

Figure 2.3. Doubly Fed Induction Generator

The power converters feeding the rotor winding is usually controlled in a current-
regulated PWM type, thus the stator current can be adjusted in magnitude and
angle. The DFIG is controlled in a rotating d-q reference frame, with the d-axis
aligned with the stator flux vector [15]. A control loop is needed to be able to
control d- and q-axis currents by adjusting the pulse width-modulation indices and
hence the AC-voltages of the rotor-side and grid-side converters [16]. The stator
active and reactive powers of DFIG are controlled by regulating the current and
the voltage in the rotor. Therefore the current and voltage of the rotor needs to
be decomposed into the components related to stator active and reactive power
[15]. Thus d-components correspond to active and q-components correspond to
reactive currents. The active output has to be limited to ensure that the PWM
converters are not thermally overloaded by the increased reactive current of the
wind generator when supporting the grid voltage during low voltage conditions in
the network. At the grid-side converter, an outer control loop regulates the voltage
of the intermediate DC circuit by adjusting the d-axis-current component. The
reactive current of the grid-side converter can be used for sharing reactive power
between the stator and the grid-side converter [16].

Variable Speed Wind Turbines. FCG


This kind of wind turbines deal with a synchronous machine, which has the ability
to produce reactive power and compared with induction machines, higher efficiency.
12 CHAPTER 2. WIND POWER BASICS

Figure 2.4. Full Converter Generator

They usually use permanent magnets in the rotor, that improve the efficiency and
reduce their dimensions [17].

The FCG allows a full range of variable wind speeds. It needs a back-to-back
converter between the generator and the grid. It has a complete control of reactive
power. The rotational speed of the turbine and generator shaft is completely inde-
pendent of the grid frequency. This converter has to be rated at the full power of
the generator [18].

The general concept of this type of wind turbines is shown in the figure 2.4.

2.2.2 Pitch Control in Wind Turbines


The maximum power output in wind turbines is normally around at 15 m/s. In case
the speed is higher it would be necessary to limit the power transfer to the shaft
in order to protect the system and avoid damaging in the wind turbine. Though, a
power control in wind turbines is needed [19].

In the pitch control, the turbine’s electronics check the power output of the
turbine several times per second. When the power output is too high, a signal is
sent to the blade to turn around, to pitch slightly out of the wind, and then receive
less wind power. Each blade has to be able to turn around its longitudinal axis.
During normal operation, the blades will pitch a fraction of degree while the rotor
turns.

The pitch mechanism normally uses hydraulics or electric stepper motors.


2.2. WIND TURBINES 13

The turbine models described later deal with pitch control because it is one
of the most widely used in the industry. Easy mounting and low maintenance cost
make pitch control a good investment. When changing the references in the controls
during the aggregation the kind of control should be considered. The aggregation is
valid for other types of power control, such as passive stall control and active stall
control.

2.2.3 Electrical Considerations


The dynamic response of a wind turbine is characterized largely by an electronic
converter between the output of the electric generator and the grid. A variety of
alternative configurations can be conceived, regarding the type of converters and
the electrical generator, each presenting advantages and disadvantages. The power
electronics system is used to supply the generator with variable voltage amplitude
and frequency. The controlled voltage frequency results in controlled rotating speed
[11].

The objective generally is to maximize the produced active power and also de-
crease the variability of the electromagnetic torque that results in the decrease of
the mechanical stress. The increase of energy capture is achieved by operating the
machine at rotating speed near the optimal Cp curve.
Chapter 3

Aggregation of a Large Wind Farm

In large wind farms, many wind turbines feed power into the power grid at the point
of common connection (PCC). The type of turbine, control algorithm, wind-speed
fluctuation, and tower shadow affect the power fluctuations at each wind turbine.
The power measurement from a single wind turbine usually shows a large fluctuation
of the output power. Because many turbines are connected, the power fluctuation
from one turbine may cancel the power fluctuation of another, which smooths the
power fluctuation of the overall wind farm. As technology progress, wind turbines
become larger and fewer turbines are needed to deliver the same power. Thus
the power fluctuation of an individual wind turbine will have a greater impact on
the power network [20]. To study these aspects the use of aggregation models is
required otherwise the computing time will be prohibitive. On the other hand
when an aggregated model is used, the information related to individual turbines
is lost. With an aggregation model only studies behind the point of connection of
the aggregation can be performed because there is not access to interconnection
between the turbines of the layout aggregated.

3.1 Aggregation assumptions


It is important to consider the influence of power wind plants in power systems. In
order to analyze their behavior and influence it is convenient to create aggregated
models of wind farms that allow different analysis to carry out. A large wind farm
can have more than one hundred wind turbines, therefore not all the turbines can
be represented in detail because the computation time would be too long and also
because the increased possibility of making mistakes if every turbine is considered
when modeling the entire wind farm.

The following assumptions are made to closely represent a real wind farm with-
out simulating each wind turbine [20].

15
16 CHAPTER 3. AGGREGATION OF A LARGE WIND FARM

1. A large wind farm is divided into several groups of turbines, depending on


their characteristics, the wind profile or the distribution of the layout.

2. For each group of wind turbines the wind speed is considered uniform.

3. The groups are arranged in sequence according to the wind speed they en-
counter.

4. All the turbines are exposed to the same turbulence level.

5. It is not necessary that every group of wind turbines is composed of the same
number of wind turbines, it depends on the amount of turbines with the same
characteristics, but finally the total amount of wind turbines in the wind farm
representation should remain the same.

6. Not only the wind turbines, but also the distribution network in the wind
farm should be aggregated. This means that the resulting line or lines should
be equivalent to the original ones. In order to do this the power losses and
voltage drop are considered.

On the whole, and in a simplified manner, in the equivalent aggregated model


the idea is:
X X X
Seq = Si Ceq = Ci Pm,eq = Pm,i (3.1)
where the subscript i represents the single turbine in the aggregation.

3.2 Aggregation of the distribution network


In order to make the aggregation model, it is necessary to develop an equivalent
representation of the wind power plant considering the power losses and the voltage
drop. Every different layout has a different impact on the line impedances to the
grid interconnection bus. The idea is to calculate the equivalent characteristics of
the lines according to the initial conditions and the configuration of the lines.

Two assumptions can be taken. Firstly, the current injections from all the wind
turbines have the same magnitude and angle and, secondly, the reactive power
generated by the line capacitive shunts is based on the assumption that the voltage
is 1 p.u.

Two types of layouts are examined. The first one, corresponding to just one
row, shows a daisy chain configuration and the second one, corresponding to the
aggregation of a different number of rows, shows different branches connected to
the same node [21].

The derivation of all the formulas shown here, is explained in detail in [21].
3.2. AGGREGATION OF THE DISTRIBUTION NETWORK 17

Figure 3.1. Distribution network aggregation Case 1

Figure 3.2. Distribution network aggregation Case 2

When the distribution looks like the distribution in figure 3.1, the equivalent
impedance is:
Pn 2
m=1 m Zm
Zt = (3.2)
n2
where Zm is the impedance in branch m and n is the number of branches. For the
shunt representation the equivalent susceptance is:

n
X
Bt = Bi (3.3)
i=1

When the lines are in parallel, such as in figure 3.2, the formula for the equivalent
resultant line of the aggregated model considering the same amount of losses of the
lines of the detail model, is:
Pn 2Z
m=1 nm m
Zt = Pn 2 (3.4)
( m=1 nm )

where Zm is the impedance in branch m and nm is the number of wind turbines in


the branch m.

As in the previous case, the equivalent susceptance is described by equation 4.3.


18 CHAPTER 3. AGGREGATION OF A LARGE WIND FARM

Figure 3.3. Distribution network aggregation Case 3

Figure 3.4. Transformers aggregation

Other kinds of configuration such as the one in figure 3.3 can be found. Then
the equivalent impedance is:
Pp 2Z Ps Pp 2
m=1 nm mp + m=1 ( m=1 nm ) Zms
Zt = Pp 2 (3.5)
( m=1 nm )
where Zmp is the impedance in each branch m , Zms is the impedance in between
branch m and branch m + 1 and nm is the number of wind turbines in branch m.

The equivalent susceptance remain the same as in the previous cases; and it is
described in equation 4.3.

The expression of the transformer impedance shown in figure 3.4, is:

0 Ztransf
Ztransf = (3.6)
nturbines
where nturbines is the number of wind turbines aggregated in the model.
Chapter 4

Models

4.1 DIgSilent Models


4.1.1 DFIG Model
The DFIG model that DIgSilent provides is shown in figure 4.1.

It is a 2 MW rated power generator, with a wind speed of 18 m/s and a speed


1.08 p.u. It uses a DFIG with a wound rotor induction generator and two IGBT-
bases PWM converter, the one connected to the rotor is internally modeled in
the generator element and the stator one external. The stator winding is directly
connected to the grid with a frequency of 50 Hz and a voltage of 3.3 kV. The nominal
voltage of the DC bus is 1.15 kV and the AC voltage at the exit of the converter is
0.69 kV. At the point of common connection the short circuit power is 150 MVA.
The setpoint of the reactive power is equal to zero.

The internal DIgSilent Language Simulation (DSL) blocks of the DFIG model
are shown in figure 4.2. The prime mover represents the conversion of the kinetic
energy stored in the wind through the blades, into rotational energy at the generator
shaft. It includes the pitch control, the wind turbine and the shaft. The wind
turbine block needs as input the speed of the wind, the speed of the turbine and
pitch angle. The blade angle control deals with the characteristics of the pitch angle
control, this control regulates the power generated varying the power coefficient Cp.
The shaft model approximates the shaft by a two mass model.

In the control system that regulates the active and reactive power through the
rotor converter, the rotor current controller that establishes the reference of power
in the d-axis and q-axis can be found. This control system includes the maximum
power tracking (MPT), power and current measurements and PQ and current con-
trol. First the rotor current measurement is needed, which measures and transforms
the currents into the stator flux oriented frame. With the PQ controller, the refer-
ence currents can be calculated. The references for the grid-side converter can be

19
20 CHAPTER 4. MODELS

Figure 4.1. DFIG DIgSilent’s model


4.1. DIGSILENT MODELS 21

Figure 4.2. DSL Blocks DFIG DIgSilent’s model

obtained in a similar way. The maximum power tracking contains an equation and
a look-up table in order to provide the maximum power tracking of the turbine.

The protection block deals with under/over voltages, under/over speeds and the
rotor over current, which is called crow bar protection.

4.1.2 FCG Model


The model of the FCG in DIgSilent is shown in figure 4.3. It is a permanent
magnet synchronous generator. The synchronous generator, the series reactor, the
generator-side and grid-side converter (somehow ideals because not lead with no-
load losses), the DC capacitors and the step-up transformers can be identified in
the figure. It can be appreciated as well a chopper which maintains the voltage in
the DC bus within a certain level.

The generator has a rated power of 1.5 MVA. The voltage in the medium voltage
22 CHAPTER 4. MODELS

Figure 4.3. FCG DIgSilent’s model


4.1. DIGSILENT MODELS 23

Figure 4.4. DSL Blocks FCG DIgSilent’s model

bus M V , just behind the transformer, is 20 kV, which is the bus used for the
connection of each turbine in the layout explained.

The main DSL blocks of the machine are shown in figure 4.4, that, as in the
DFIG model, deals with a pitch control, the wind turbine, the shaft and speed
measurement. The synchronous generator has a AVR to provide excitation current
to the rotor, modeling in this way the permanent magnet. Figure 4.5 corresponds to
the control of the PWM converters, either the generator-side converter and the grid-
side converter. It consist of two measurement blocks, the protection, the maximum
power tracking blocks and the controllers for active and reactive power in the two
converters.
24 CHAPTER 4. MODELS

Figure 4.5. DSL Blocks FCG DIgSilent’s model

4.1.3 Scaling-up procedure of the models


In order to scale-up the models, some considerations have been taken into account.
The following procedure is used to aggregate the systems that appear throughout
this report. To scale-up the models, the system components have to be scaled-up,
and therefore some changes are necessary.

When an aggregation is performed, the new output of the reference in the new
aggregated model is changed compared to the one single turbine model. On the
other hand, some of the elements do not need to change. The voltage levels and the
characteristics of the external grid remain the same.

The procedure is the same for any number of n parallel machines.

The first thing that needs to be changed is the active power supply of the model.
Thus in the DFIG element or FCG element, the number of parallel machines has to
be specified. DIgSilent allows to type the parallel machines number. An example can
4.1. DIGSILENT MODELS 25

Figure 4.6. DIgSilent scaling-up. Parallel machines.

be seen in figure 4.6 where in the DFIG model interface of the generator the number
of parallel machines is typed. In the example the number of parallel machines is 12.

Most of the parameters of the control blocks operate in per unit and do not need
to be changed, since all the input and output variables are in p.u. base. So even
though the aggregated model is scaled-up n times all the control variables are in p.u.
with reference to the new power rating. However there are some parameters that
are defined as absolute values and regard the measurement and protection blocks.
In the DLS common model that is responsible for the Rotor Current Measurement,
the rated apparent power parameter Srated has to be multiplied by the number of
parallel machines in order to give the correct measurement for the rotor side current
as shown in figure 4.7. In the PQ Measurement the power rating has to be multiplied
by the number of machines aggregated to give the correct measurement since the
power at the PCC is n times larger as shown in figure 4.8. In the protection block
26 CHAPTER 4. MODELS

Figure 4.7. DIgSilent scaling-up. Rotor current measurement.

of the scaled-up DFIG model since n machines are considered instead of just one,
the maximum rotor current before the crow bar is inserted will be n times higher
as shown in figure 4.9.

Apart from the controls, some changes have to be made in other elements. As
the reactive power compensation has to increase because of the new power supply,
the capacity of the DC bus capacitor has to be increased the same factor. In the
PWM converter and Series Reactor the reference of the power has to be changed.

In the series reactor, apart from the reference of the power, the value of the
reactor’s impedance has to be changed. There are two ways to do this. Following
the first way, the impedance is represented by a resistance R and a reactance X
in Ohm. As the p.u. values should remain the same but with the aggregation the
rated power is n times bigger, the impedance should be n times lower, so the values
of R and X should be divided by n. The second way is easier as the impedance is
represented in form of short-circuit voltage and copper losses. In this case only the
copper losses have to be multiply by n, leaving the short-circuit voltage the same
as it is in %.

Finally, for the case of the transformers, it would be possible to use one trans-
former with a power rating n times higher, but if it is assumed that all the machines
have their own transformers and they are connected in parallel, then the number
of parallel transformers needs to be specified, following the same procedure as with
4.1. DIGSILENT MODELS 27

Figure 4.8. DIgSilent scaling-up. PQ measurement.

Figure 4.9. DIgSilent scaling-up. Protection block.


28 CHAPTER 4. MODELS

the DFIG or FCG element as shown in figure 4.6. As all the transformers are the
same, the maximal power that the transformers are able to give is the sum of all of
them.

4.2 Wake Effect Model


Wind turbines extract the energy from the wind, and the air mass leaving the
turbine has less energy and by implication lower speed than it had before going
through the turbine. This phenomenon affects the output power of wind farms.
Here it is presented the wake effect model used in this project. All the formulas
shown is this section were provided by the corporate research center of ABB in
U.S.A. (ABB-USCRC) [22].

The turbines located upstream in the wind direction modify the input wind of
the turbines positioned downstream. This shadowing effect is what is called as wake
effect [23], [24].

According to the classical theory, the drop of wind speed when it goes through
the wind turbine is approximately 2/3 of the original wind speed. If it is consid-
ered that the original wind speed is V0 then the speed after the wind turbine is
V00 = 1/3 V0 . Experimentally the speed V00 is determined with the thrust coefficient
CT (V0 ) which depends on the original wind speed V0 and the type of wind turbine.
Thus, the speed after the disturbance can be obtained as:
q
V00 = V0 1 − CT (V0 ) (4.1)
According to the classical theory, the wake effect tunnel has a variable radius
Rd that depends on the distance d between the first and the second turbine, the
radius of the turbine situated upstream R and the entrainment constant K which
is a free parameter of the model. It can be described as:

Rd = R + Kd (4.2)
Based on the above assumptions, writing the equation of continuity for fluids
and solving the equation in order to get the value of the wind speed in the second
turbine. The expression of the basic wake effect of figure 4.10 is:
" 2  #
R
 q
V1 = V0 1 − 1− 1 − CT (V0 ) (4.3)
Rd
This effect can be added within several wind turbines, depending on the number
of rows of the layout and the distances between them. A scheme can be seen in
figure 4.11.
4.2. WAKE EFFECT MODEL 29

Figure 4.10. Wake Effect scheme [22].

Figure 4.11. Wake Effect scheme. Multiple shadowing [22].


30 CHAPTER 4. MODELS

Figure 4.12. Wake Effect scheme. Partial shadowing [22].

A general formula for this multiple wake effect is:

" 2 #
R
 q 
V1 = V0 1 − 1 − 1 − CT (V0 )
R + Kd
" 2 #
V1 q R
   
V2 = V0 1 − 1 − 1 − CT (V1 )
V0 R + Kd
..
. " 2 #
Vn−1 q R
   
Vn = V0 1 − 1 − 1 − CT (Vn−1 ) (4.4)
V0 R + Kd

where V0 is the original wind speed and Vi is the speed of turbine number i if V1 is
considered as the wind speed facing the first turbine affected by the wake effect.

Sometimes the wind direction is not completely facing the wind turbine, and
then a partial shadow effect can appear as it is shown in figure 4.12.

In this case, the modification of the wind speed downstream depends directly
on the affected area. When there is multiple partial shadowing from the upstream
turbines, using the law of momentum conservation, the average speed of the down-
stream turbine can be computed from the following equation:
 v 
2
R
uX   q
u
ViM od = Vi 1 − t βij 1− 1 − CT (Vi )  (4.5)
j
R + Kd
4.3. DESCRIPTION OF MATLAB PROGRAM 31

In the above equation, ViMod is the modified wind speed (after shadowing) and
Vi is the original wind speed at turbine i. The summation index j stands for all
upstream turbines having partial shadows on turbine i and βij is the ratio of the
effective area of the upstream turbine A to the total area of the affected turbine
(the circle with radius R) which is defined as:

A
βij = (4.6)
πR2

4.3 Description of Matlab Program


The program provided by the ABB-USCRC uses the methods explained in the
previous section 4.2 related to the wake effect and provides the coherent grouping
of wind turbines as well as the reduced network of the wind farm. With this program
an aggregation can be implemented with one machine or a group of machines based
on the incoming wind speed of the turbines or the power they are providing. For
example, if a group of turbines are receiving the same wind speed they will be
aggregated into one group. The range for the wind speed or power can be adjusted
with a tolerance.

It has a template dialog box that can be seen in figure 4.13.

The inputs of the program are seen on the left hand side of the dialog box and
can be edited according to the specific requirements. All the parts of the interface
are identified with numbers in figure 4.13. The turbine characteristic curves can be
visualized and edited if needed. On the left hand side the input data appears: the
initial wind speed, wind direction and turbine characteristics (nr.1), the number of
rows and number of turbines per row (nr.3) and internal network data (nr.4). Also
two graphics illustrating two input curves are shown (nr.5), i.e. the speed vs thrust
coefficient graph (that has its maximum when the wind is 4 m/s and it goes until
0.005 when the wind is 25 m/s) and the power curve of the wind turbines used. The
grouping of the turbines depends on the tolerance specified (nr.2). The program
allows to regulate the tolerance according to the wind speed or the power of each
turbine. In this particular case the speed tolerance was specified (tol: 0.1 m/s).
The smaller the tolerance is, the more groups will appear, and the bigger it is, the
fewer groups will be made. In the figure four groups can be identified. On the right
hand side the results of the simulation are obtained. There are four graphs on the
right side (nr.6). The up-left figure corresponds to the figure with the speed vs the
number of the wind turbine, the power of each wind turbine can be seen in the up-
right graph and also the grouping of the turbines depending on their characteristics
with different colors in the down-left graph. In the upper right table of the interface,
the characteristics of the equivalent lines after the aggregation are shown (nr.7).
CHAPTER 4. MODELS
Figure 4.13. Matlab program interface.
32
4.3. DESCRIPTION OF MATLAB PROGRAM 33

The wake coefficient graph requires special attention because it gives information
about which is the most favorable orientation of the layout or the worst case, in
terms of output power of the wind farm. It is situated in the lower right corner of
the interface. The wake coefficient is the ratio between the provided power of a wind
turbine in a specific situation considering the wake effect and the rated power. It
varies from 0 to 1. The graph shows how the wake effect coefficient varies respecting
the angle of the incoming wind. The program only shows a range of the angle of
the incoming wind between 0 degrees and 90 degrees with respect to the horizontal.

Mainly the program takes into account the input wind speed and direction,
and with the wake effect equations described before it calculates the input wind
speed and thus power production for each turbine of the layout. If it detects that
there are several turbines with the same input values, it creates different groups
and calculates the characteristics of the aggregation of these groups. Each group is
shown with a different color.

The program allows to deal with a layout with the configuration shown in fig-
ure 4.14, consisting on several rows of turbines connected in parallel. In figure 4.14
the turbines are numered from 1 to 30.

The way the equivalent impedance is calculated for each group is the following.
For example, if the wind is coming from the left hand side of the layout exposed
before, then the turbines 1-7-13-19 and 25 represent a group with an input wind
speed of the 100%. The second row would have less wind speed input and the same
with the rest of the rows of the layout according the wind direction. In order to
calculate the equivalent impedance of the first group the rest of wind turbines are
deleted and then the aggregation takes the form of the diagram in figure 4.15, which
is one of the aggregation cases shown in section 3.2.

The same procedure is followed for the rest of the groups.

The equivalent impedance calculation may be the aggregation of one row. This
is the case if the wind is coming vertically from the bottom. In that case the
first group will be formed by the turbines 1-2-3-4-5 and 6 and thus the equivalent
procedure is like in figure 4.16.

The same procedure is performed with the rest of the groups.

Both procedures described can be combined, if the wind direction is not hori-
zontal or vertical, if it is coming with a specific angle with respect to the horizontal,
45 degrees with the respect to the horizontal for instance. Figure 4.17 shows the
aggregation of a group of wind turbines receiving the same wind speed when the
34 CHAPTER 4. MODELS

Figure 4.14. Matlab program layout configuration with 30 turbines


4.3. DESCRIPTION OF MATLAB PROGRAM 35

Figure 4.15. Matlab program aggregation procedure Case 1

Figure 4.16. Matlab program aggregation procedure Case 2


36 CHAPTER 4. MODELS

Figure 4.17. Matlab program aggregation procedure Case 3

wind comes with 45 degrees.


Chapter 5

Simulations carried out

Figure 5.1 shows a general wind farm configuration [25] and this is the one considered
in all the simulations of this project. It consists of a local grid with a number of
wind turbines distributed in rows and connected radially, a collecting point where
the voltage is adapted to a correct value for transmission, a transmission system and
a wind farm interface to the PCC that adjust the voltage, frequency and reactive
power. This configuration is one of the most used and that is the reason why this
project deals with this kind of layouts.

The following figures show different examples that follow this configuration. The
configuration is applicable to AC systems such as in figure 5.2, AC/DC wind farms
or DC transmission systems such as in figure 5.3 and figure 5.4.

5.1 First layout and scheme


The purpose of this section is to gather all information necessary to simulate an
aggregation model of a large wind farm and validate an aggregation method using

Figure 5.1. General Wind Farm Layout.

37
38 CHAPTER 5. SIMULATIONS CARRIED OUT

Figure 5.2. Electrical System for AC Wind Farms.

Figure 5.3. Electrical System for AC/DC Wind Farms.

Figure 5.4. Electrical System for DC Wind Farms.

DIgSilent PowerFactory. The behavior of a detailed layout of a wind farm and its
aggregation model, during a fault, at the PCC are described. The scope of the
research is to compare both models and analyze whether the aggregated model
corresponds correctly to the detailed one and if it can be used for future power
system studies. It is assumed that all the turbines are the same and they behave in
the same manner having the same wind speed input.

5.1.1 Original layout


The model shown in figure 5.5, was taken as a base [26]. The aggregation in this re-
port is based on the following model. It consists of a wind farm with eleven different
rows of wind turbines, with twelve turbines each. The distance between each wind
turbine in one row is 500 m and the separation between each row is 700 m. From
each row to the PCC the distance is 4 km. Each line has the same characteristics,
apart from the length. The characteristics of the lines are in table 5.1.
5.1. FIRST LAYOUT AND SCHEME 39

Figure 5.5. Distribution Network for the DFIG model

Table 5.1. Network Parameters


R1(Ω/km) R0 (Ω/km) X1(Ω/km)
0.1153 0.413 0.32987
X0 (Ω/km) B1 (s/km) B0 (s/km)
1.04301 3.55e-6 1.5739e-6

Depending on the machine used, and due to the different voltage characteristics,
the voltages in the lines and at the PCC vary. For instance, in the case of DFIG,
the resulting layout can be seen in figure 5.5 with a PCC voltage if 30 kV, but in the
case of the FCG the model suffers some modifications in the voltages of the buses
as it can be seen in figure 5.6 when the PCC voltage is 20 kV.

First it is created and validated the aggregation model of just one row as it can
be seen in figure 5.7 and then, once it is completed, create the aggregation model
of the whole system considering each row as its aggregation. The process of the
aggregation of the resulting parallel wind turbines can be seen in figure 5.8.

As well as creating the layout, some elements need to be scaled-up as well as it


was described in section 4.1.3.
40 CHAPTER 5. SIMULATIONS CARRIED OUT

Figure 5.6. Distribution Network for the FCG model

Figure 5.7. Aggregation of one row


5.2. SECOND LAYOUT AND SCHEME 41

Figure 5.8. Aggregation of the total number of rows

Before the implementation of the aggregated model, is necessary to start with


the non-aggregated model. The model of the wind farm must be copied several
times, and it is also necessary to take into account the block diagram. Each new
element has to be connected to the correct bus and select the right reference of the
controls.

5.2 Second layout and scheme


The purpose of this section is to gather all information necessary to describe the
verification of PowerFactory v.14 DIgSilent’s wind turbine models against the ag-
gregated model. They are used to create aggregation models of large scale wind
farms suitable for power system dynamic and transient stability studies. For the
aggregation now, each wind turbine provides different amount of power. To do this,
the wake effect is taken into account in order to calculate the wind power production
of each wind turbine on the whole wind farm.

Many theoretical studies and programs take the dynamic characteristics of the
control loops and wind variations into consideration. The purpose of this project
is to verify, in this case with DIgSilent, the validity of this results and the correct
behavior of the designed models.

Here the handling of the aggregation of a wind farm is described, dealing with
42 CHAPTER 5. SIMULATIONS CARRIED OUT

Figure 5.9. Power Curve of the DFIG turbines.

the results of the equivalent connection lines, and the equivalent power production
of the wind turbines that the Matlab program provided by ABB-USCRC calculates
as explained in section 4.3.

5.2.1 Original layout


Figure 4.14, shown in section 4.3, showed the layout of the wind farm that the
Matlab program deals with. It consists of five rows with six wind turbines each,
a total of thirty turbines. All the turbines are numbered. The distances from the
rows to the PCC varies depending on the row. The distance between the rows is
700 m and in between two turbines in the same row is 500 m.

In this particular case all the turbines are considered the same, with the same
characteristics and same rated power. All of them are DFIG wind turbines with a
rated power of 1.5 MW each and the voltage at the PCC bus is 25 kV. Figure 5.9
shows the power curve obtained from the default DFIG model in DIgSilent. The
output power of every single wind turbine in the detailed model must be modified
to carry out the analysis.

The cable characteristics are shown in table 5.2


5.2. SECOND LAYOUT AND SCHEME 43

Table 5.2. Network Parameters


R1(Ω/km) R0 (Ω/km) L1(H/km)
0.1153 0.413 0,00105
L0 (H/km) C1 (µF/km) C0 (µF/km)
0,00332 0,01133 0,00501

5.2.2 Vertical incoming wind


In order to validate the aggregation considering the wake effect, three scenarios are
under study. The first of them is when the wind comes vertically with respect the
layout.

The first thing to do is to check the results that the Matlab program provides
for this specific configuration. A vertical incoming from the wind refers to the wind
which comes from the bottom of the layout so the row of the turbines 1-2-3-4-5 and
6 is the first facing the wind.

In figure 5.10 the interface of the program for this specific configuration can be
seen. It can be seen that turbines 1-2-3-4-5 and 6 receive the same wind speed and
represent group 1. Group 2 consists of the next six turbines. Group 3 the other
next six turbines and group 4 consists of the last twelve turbines of the layout.

The input wind speed is 14 m/s. This speed was chosen because it is the first
speed which provides the rated power as can be seen in the power curve. The
program identifies four groups of turbines with similar characteristics. Thus in the
aggregation model four turbines will appear. For each group the equivalent line was
calculated as explained in section 3.2. The equivalent layout is shown in figure 5.11.

In order to be able to compare the behavior of the aggregation model obtained


and the real one, without any aggregation, the original model should be taken first
and the parameters of the power provided for each wind turbine according the wake
effect consideration specified. Each turbine of the first group provides 1.425 MW,
each turbine of the second group provides 1.036 MW, in the third group they provide
0.826 MW each and in the fourth group each turbine provide 0.598 MW. Afterwards,
the aggregated model can be implemented by altering the control loops and the
scaling up of each turbine of the aggregation. The aggregation model in DIgSilent
is shown in figure 5.12.

5.2.3 Horizontal incoming wind


The incoming wind speed is 14 m/s and it comes horizontally from the left hand
side of the layout proposed.
44 CHAPTER 5. SIMULATIONS CARRIED OUT

Figure 5.10. Matlab Program interface. Vertical incoming wind

Figure 5.11. Vertical incoming wind aggregation layout


5.2. SECOND LAYOUT AND SCHEME 45

Figure 5.12. Vertical incoming wind aggregation. DIgSilent

The results of the Matlab program can be seen in figure 5.13 and the equivalent
layout in figure 5.14.

In the original model the turbines of the first group have to provide 1.425 MW
each, 0.949 MW each turbine in the second group, 0.596 MW each in the third
group and 0.36 MW each turbine in the fourth group.

The procedure to scale-up the models is exactly the same as the one used for
the last case.

5.2.4 45 Degrees incoming wind


As it was done in the last two cases, the results shown by the Matlab program
when the wind speed is 14 m/s and it is coming with 45 degrees with respect to the
horizontal can be appreciated in figure 5.15.

To modify the original model just should be considered that the turbines in the
first group have to provide 1.425 MW each and in the second group they have to
provide 1.3046 MW each. After the implementation of the aggregation model then
comparison of both system can be done.
46 CHAPTER 5. SIMULATIONS CARRIED OUT

Figure 5.13. Matlab Program interface. Horizontal incoming wind

Figure 5.14. Horizontal incoming wind aggregation layout


5.2. SECOND LAYOUT AND SCHEME 47

Figure 5.15. Matlab Program interface. 45 degrees incoming wind

Figure 5.16. 45 degrees incoming wind aggregation layout


Chapter 6

Results and Analysis

6.1 First Layout

6.1.1 DFIG

Here the aggregation and the results of the first aggregation done with the DFIG
model is shown, the one corresponding to the scaling-up of the twelve wind turbines
that are in the same row. The layout of the model presented is shown in figure 6.1.
Here only the interconnection between the different buses of the turbines is shown.
The turbines are in different diagrams but then the bus of connection was copied
and pasted again in other diagram to simplify and make easier the visualization
of the total connection. In figure 6.1 the connection of one turbine to another
(represented by their MV buses) and finally to the grid can be seen. To create
the non-aggregated model some references of some elements of the control have
to be modified according to the turbine they refer. Thus the reference has to be
changed in the generator block, the power measurement, voltage measurement, the
PWM converters, current measurement in the grid-side converter, PLL-1 (phase
measurement device at node U11 ) and in the DC voltage measurement. After this,
in order to scale-up the model, it is necessary to change some internal parameters
as explained in section 4.1.3.

The arrow indicates the aggregation of the layout after the scaling-up.

After one row aggregation, the results for the load flow of the non-aggregated
model and the ones for the aggregated model are shown in table 6.1.

The behavior of both systems after a 3-phase fault at the PCC (BB in the
graph), with a clearing time of 100 ms looks like in figure 6.2. Sbase =24 MVA, and
Vbase and Ibase are according the rated values at the PCC. The simulation times are
shown in table 6.2.

49
50 CHAPTER 6. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Figure 6.1. Aggregation of one row. DFIG model.


6.1. FIRST LAYOUT 51

Table 6.1. Load Flow Results. DFIG Model.


BB Voltage (kV) Active Power Reactive Power
to the Grid (MW) to the Grid(MVAr)
Non-Aggregated 30 25.62 -0.52
Aggregated 30 25.62 -0.52

Table 6.2. Simulation times. DFIG Model.


Simulation time Detailed Model 53 s
Simulation time Aggregated Model 6s

Figure 6.2. RMS Simulation after a 3-phase fault. DFIG Row Aggrega-
tion. Detailed model (red). Aggregated model (blue). Upper-left)Injected Active
Power. Upper-right)Injected Reactive Power. Lower-left)Voltage at PCC. Lower-
right)Current at PCC.

Now the whole aggregation is considered. Every row was substituted by its own
aggregation and it is used to scale-up the entire system. The process is shown in
figure 6.3.

The results of the load flow of both systems are shown in table 6.3.
52 CHAPTER 6. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Figure 6.3. Aggregation of the whole system. DFIG model.


6.1. FIRST LAYOUT 53

Table 6.3. Load Flow Results. DFIG Model.


PCC Voltage (kV) Active Power Reactive Power
to the Grid (MW) to the Grid(MVAr)
Non-Aggregated 30 278.23 -15.83
Aggregated 30 278.23 -16.19

Table 6.4. Simulation times. DFIG Model.


Simulation time Detailed Model 48 s
Simulation time Aggregated Model 6s

Figure 6.4. RMS Simulation after a 3-phase fault. DFIG Total Aggrega-
tion. Detailed model (red). Aggregated model (blue). Upper-left)Injected Active
Power. Upper-right)Injected Reactive Power. Lower-left)Voltage at PCC. Lower-
right)Current at PCC.

Their behavior after a 3-phase fault with a clearing time of 100 ms are in fig-
ure 6.4. Sbase =264 MVA, and Vbase and Ibase are according the rated values at the
PCC. The simulation times are shown in table 6.4.
54 CHAPTER 6. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Table 6.5. Load Flow Results. FCG Model.


MV Voltage (kV) Active Power Reactive Power
to the Grid (MW) to the Grid(MVAr)
Non-Aggregated 20 17.78 -3.92
Aggregated 20 17.78 -3.95

Table 6.6. Simulation times. FCG Model.


Simulation time Detailed Model 45 s
Simulation time Aggregated Model 5s

6.1.2 FCG
Before starting with the aggregation model it is necessary to create the non-aggregated
one. It is not enough just copying and pasting the model of the turbines that DIgSi-
lent has, but it is necessary also to refer the controls according with the turbine
we are dealing with. Thus in the PWM composite model, it is needed to change
the reference of the PWM grid-side and PWM generator-side and also change the
measurement point in the PLL-1 (phase measurement device at node LV ), mea-
surement DC voltage, PQ measurement gen, PQ measurement grid, PLL-R (phase
measurement device at node Rec Gen), AC gen voltage, AC grid voltage and the
DC valve of the chopper. After this, in order to scale-up the model, as it was done
in the DFIG model, it is necessary to change some internal parameters.

Both models are shown in figure 6.5.

After one row aggregation, the results for the load flow of the non-aggregated
model and the ones for the aggregated model are shown in table 6.5.

After a 3-phase fault at the PCC, with a clearing time of 100 ms, the behavior
in both systems can be seen in figure 6.6. Sbase =18 MVA, and Vbase and Ibase
are according the rated values at the PCC. The simulation times can be seen in
table 6.6.

For the whole aggregation the models are shown in figure 6.7. The load flow
results for both models can be seen in table 6.7.

Their behavior after a 3-phase fault with a clearing time of 100 ms is in figure 6.8.
Sbase =198 MVA, and Vbase and Ibase are according the rated values at the PCC.
The simulation times are shown in table 6.8.
6.1. FIRST LAYOUT 55

Figure 6.5. Aggregation of one row. FCG model.


56 CHAPTER 6. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Figure 6.6. RMS Simulation after a 3-phase fault. FCG Row Aggregation. Detailed
model (red). Aggregated model (blue). Upper-left)Injected Active Power. Upper-
right)Injected Reactive Power. Lower-left)Voltage at PCC. Lower-right)Current at
PCC.

Table 6.7. Load Flow Results. FCG Model.


MV Voltage (kV) Active Power Reactive Power
to the Grid (MW) to the Grid(MVAr)
Non-Aggregated 20 191.53 -34.59
Aggregated 20 191.40 -35.39

Table 6.8. Simulation times. FCG Model.


Simulation time Detailed Model 26 s
Simulation time Aggregated Model 5s
6.1. FIRST LAYOUT 57

Figure 6.7. Aggregation of the whole system. FCG model.


58 CHAPTER 6. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Figure 6.8. RMS Simulation after a 3-phase fault. FCG Total Aggregation. Detailed
model (red). Aggregated model (blue). Upper-left)Injected Active Power. Upper-
right)Injected Reactive Power. Lower-left)Voltage at PCC. Lower-right)Current at
PCC.

6.1.3 Analysis
In the case of the DFIG it can be seen how the aggregated model is very similar
to the non-aggregated one. Actually the load flow looks approximately the same in
both cases and the response under the disturbance is exactly the same. It can be
concluded that the validity of the aggregation is demonstrated.

In figure 6.9 the relative errors and the mean square errors of the DFIG aggre-
gation can be seen during the pre-fault, the fault and the post-fault. It can be seen
that the magnitude of the errors are very small.

The FCG aggregation was also verified. From figure 6.10 it can be seen that
the errors between the detailed model and the aggregated one are very small. The
numbers their self are not very important, because they depend on the step time
size of the recorded data, but the magnitude of the values is worth noting.

In relation to the FCG, in the case of the aggregation of only one row, it can
6.1. FIRST LAYOUT 59

Figure 6.9. Relative and Mean Square Errors of the DFIG aggregation

Figure 6.10. Relative and Mean Square Errors of the FCG aggregation
60 CHAPTER 6. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Figure 6.11. FCG aggregation responses. Detailed model (red). Aggregated model
(blue)

be seen that the aggregation fits the requirements of the aggregation because the
results finally remain the same in steady state. As can be seen in figure 6.11, the
behavior of the curves of the aggregated model is a little bit delayed with respect
to the non-aggregated. In the four graphs the delay is the same: 76 ms, as can be
seen in the figure 6.11. Considering this delay, the aim is then try to find the origin
of the delay. Whether it is something resulting from the aggregation methodology
or instead it is from the model used itself.

The DSL block of the generator is in figure 6.12. It is important to note that a
permanent magnet synchronous generator is used. A permanent magnet motor does
not have a field winding on the stator frame, instead relying on permanent magnets
to provide the magnetic field against which the rotor field interacts to produce
torque. It does not use an excitation current or voltage, because the magnetic field
is provided by the magnet. It can be observed in figure 6.12 that from the generator
block the excitation current is measured. The reason for this is that the Generator
ElmSym block is a standard block which we have no access, and then a control is
created in order to establish a constant excitation voltage. The aim is to simulate
the permanent magnet. The control, which is shown in figure 6.13, tries to keep the
6.1. FIRST LAYOUT 61

Figure 6.12. DSL Block FCG model

voltage constant.

Analyzing the behavior of this excitation currents, it can be compared, in p.u.


the curves of the aggregated model and the detailed model as can be seen in fig-
ure 6.14.There is a delay in the responses of the excitation currents as well. Once the
fault is cleared after 100 ms a delay exists in the the aggregated model respecting
the turbines of the detailed model, and it is the same delay observed in the graphics
before (76 ms). This could be the reason of the displacement of the original curves.
This is not a problem of the aggregation methodology, but from the model and how
it works. There is no access to the generator block and it cannot be seen how this
current is obtained. In a synchronous machine the power factor can be controlled
with the excitation current, any disturbance in this current will affect the power
behavior of the machine, as reflected in the graphs.

In order to complete this rationing, the responses of the active power and the
excitation currents when only two machines in parallel are aggregated can be seen
in figure 6.15. It appears a delay in the responses of the active power of 8 ms and it
also appears in the responses of the excitation currents. It may be then a problem
in the model used. When two parallel machines are aggregated the delay is lower
than when the whole layout of 132 turbines is aggregated, then it can be commented
that when the aggregation handles more power, the delay is greater.
62 CHAPTER 6. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Figure 6.13. AVR Control

In table 6.9 it can be seen the errors of the original aggregation of one row
and the same results but with the second time series shifted to the right as much
as observed time lag. Therefore it is shown that the errors after the fault in the
second case are less and may be due to the time lag and not to the aggregation
methodology.

It can be assumed that the aggregation fits. The behavior of both remain the
same in steady state.

In both cases, with the DFIG and FCG, the aggregation model works and ap-
proximates correctly the behavior of the whole system, as well as the network ag-
gregation.

In table 6.10 the mean square errors of both aggregations can be seen. From
the results it can be concluded that the aggregation of one row, turbines in series,
leads to grater errors than the aggregation of parallel machines, although in both
cases are considerably small. This is consequence of the assumptions of the network
aggregation. One of the assumptions was that the voltage was in all the connection
points equal to 1 p.u. This is not exactly true when the layout deals with turbines
6.1. FIRST LAYOUT 63

Figure 6.14. Excitation currents. Detailed model (blue). Aggregated model (red).

Figure 6.15. Aggregation two parallel machines. Left: Active power responses. De-
tailed model (red). Aggregation model (blue). Right: Excitation currents responses.
Detailed model (green & blue). Aggregated model (red).
64 CHAPTER 6. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Table 6.9. Mean Square Errors with time lag and without time lag.

Mean Square Errors (%) With time lag Without time lag
Pre-Fault 3.8e-1 3.8e-1
Active Power Fault 2.6e-3 2.6e-3
Post-Fault 6.7 1.4
Pre-Fault 1.2e-2 1.2e-2
Reactive Power Fault 1.0e-3 1.0e-3
Post-Fault 15.6 10.5
Pre-Fault 6.0e-4 6.0e-4
Voltage Fault 5.7e-5 5.7e-5
Post-Fault 5.2e-1 3.1e-1
Pre-Fault 3.3e-1 3.3e-1
Current Fault 2.5e-3 2.5e-3
Post-Fault 4.9 2.3

Table 6.10. Mean Square Errors.

DFIG FCG
Mean Square Errors (%) Row Agg Total Agg Row Agg Total Agg
Pre-Fault 1.8e-3 5.4e-4 3.8e-1 3.1e-4
Active Power Fault 2.0e-4 4.9e-5 2.6e-3 2.2e-5
Post-Fault 2.6e-1 8.9e-4 6.7 6.2
Pre-Fault 2.4e-1 5.7e-3 1.2e-2 6.9e-4
Reactive Power Fault 2.4e-2 5.7e-4 1.1e-3 4.9e-5
Post-Fault 2.4 1.6e-2 15.6 10.1
Pre-Fault 8.4e-5 0.0 6.1e-4 0.0
Voltage Fault 8.6e-6 1.4e-4 5.7e-5 0.0
Post-Fault 1.1e-2 1.7e-5 5.2e-1 1.1e-1
Pre-Fault 1.7e-3 5.8e-4 3.3e-1 0.0
Current Fault 5.8e-4 8.9e-4 2.4e-3 1.1e-5
Post-Fault 8.9e-2 8.4e-4 4.8 4.2

connected in series, due to the voltage drops that occur in the lines that connect
the turbines. The requirement is satisfied if the machines are connected in parallel,
as the case of the final aggregation of the rows.

The simulation times of the aggregated model are around five to nine times lower
than in the detailed model as seen in table 6.2, table 6.4, table 6.6 and table 6.8.
6.2. SECOND LAYOUT 65

Table 6.11. Load Flow Results. Vertical Incoming Wind.

PCC Voltage (kV) Active Power Reactive Power


to the Grid (MW) to the Grid(MVAr)
Non-Aggregated 25 26.64 -0.37
Aggregated 25 26.64 -0.38

Table 6.12. Simulation times. Vertical Incoming Wind.

Simulation time Detailed Model 1 min 18 s


Simulation time Aggregated Model 7s

Table 6.13. Load Flow Results. Horizontal Incoming Wind.

PCC Voltage (kV) Active Power Reactive Power


to the Grid (MW) to the Grid(MVAr)
Non-Aggregated 25 20.13 -0.17
Aggregated 25 20.14 -0.13

6.2 Second Layout


6.2.1 Vertical incoming wind verification
The results of the load flow in the original model and the aggregated one when the
wind is coming vertically from the bottom are shown in table 6.11.

After a 3-phase fault at the PCC with a clearing time of 150 ms the behavior
of both systems are shown in the figure 6.16. Sbase=26.9 MVA, and Vbase and
Ibase are according the rated values at the PCC. The simulation times are shown in
table 6.12.

6.2.2 Horizontal incoming wind verification


The results of the load flow in the original model and the aggregated one when the
wind is coming horizontally from the left hand side are can be seen in table 6.13.

After a 3-phase fault at the PCC with a clearing time of 150 ms the behavior
of both systems are shown in the figure 6.17. Sbase=18,45 MVA, and Vbase and
Ibase are according the rated values at the PCC. The simulation times are shown in
table 6.14.
66 CHAPTER 6. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Figure 6.16. RMS Simulation after a 3-phase fault. Vertical Incoming Wind.
Detailed model (red). Aggregated model (blue). Upper-left)Injected Active
Power. Upper-right)Injected Reactive Power. Lower-left)Voltage at PCC. Lower-
right)Current at PCC.

Table 6.14. Simulation times. Horizontal Incoming Wind.

Simulation time Detailed Model 1 min 21 s


Simulation time Aggregated Model 6s

Table 6.15. Load Flow Results. 45 Degrees Incoming Wind.

PCC Voltage (kV) Active Power Reactive Power


to the Grid (MW) to the Grid(MVAr)
Non-Aggregated 25 41.11 -0.88
Aggregated 25 41.11 -0.87

6.2.3 45 Degrees incoming wind verification


The results of the load flow in the original model and the aggregated one when the
wind is coming with 45 degrees are shown in table 6.15.

After a 3-phase fault at the PCC with a clearing time of 150 ms the behavior
6.2. SECOND LAYOUT 67

Figure 6.17. RMS Simulation after a 3-phase fault. Horizontal Incoming


Wind. Detailed model (red). Aggregated model (blue). Upper-left)Injected Active
Power. Upper-right)Injected Reactive Power. Lower-left)Voltage at PCC. Lower-
right)Current at PCC.

Table 6.16. Simulation times. 45 Degrees Incoming Wind.

Simulation time Detailed Model 1 min 16 s


Simulation time Aggregated Model 5s

of both systems are shown in the figure 6.18. Sbase=41.67 MVA, and Vbase and
Ibase are according the rated values at the PCC. The simulation times of these
simulations are shown in table 6.16.

6.2.4 Analysis
With the results shown in section 6.2.1, section 6.2.2 and section 6.2.3, it can be
concluded that the aggregation methodology that the Matlab program considers
is valid. The assumptions taken by the program for the equivalency of the lines
seem to be right when considering different output power of the turbines based on
the wake effect. With the use of the DIgSilent’s models it was checked that the
68 CHAPTER 6. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Figure 6.18. RMS Simulation after a 3-phase fault. 45 Degrees Incoming


Wind. Detailed model (red). Aggregated model (blue). Upper-left)Injected Active
Power. Upper-right)Injected Reactive Power. Lower-left)Voltage at PCC. Lower-
right)Current at PCC

aggregation was correct. In the three cases the load flow looks very similar or even
identical. And after the three-phase fault the behavior is completely overlapped,
which means that the behavior of the detailed model and the aggregated one is very
similar. The aim of the aggregation was reached.

It can be seen again in figure 6.19 that the magnitude of the errors of the 45
degrees incoming wind aggregation are small.

The simulation times of the aggregated model are around ten to fourteen times
lower than in the detailed model as seen in table 6.12, table 6.14 and table 6.16.

6.3 Other examples of the influence of wind direction and


wake effect
The influence of wind direction and wake effect on the aggregation is evident. To
complete the results of section 6.2, some examples will be shown with the Matlab
6.3. OTHER EXAMPLES OF THE INFLUENCE OF WIND DIRECTION AND WAKE
EFFECT 69

Figure 6.19. Relative and Mean Square Errors of the 45 Degrees Incoming Wind
Aggregation.

program to illustrate how the aggregation model is not always the same and it
depends on different factors, as the initial incoming wind speed, the original layout,
the direction of the incoming wind or the wake effect.

To illustrate these examples it was considered a 10 m/s incoming wind speed.


The layout consists of five rows with six turbines each. The distance between each
turbine is 500 m and the distance between each row is 700 m. A speed tolerance
of 0.1 m/s and a maximum of five groups were taken as grouping criterion. All the
turbines have the same characteristics.

In the results it can be seen how the supplied power and also the aggregation
varies according to the wake coefficient graph. This graph is shown in the lower
right corner of the Matlab’s program interface.

Figure 6.20 is the result of the aggregation when the wind is coming horizontally
from the right with a wind speed of 10 m/s, there is not any variation in the layout
distances and also the wake effect is considered. This situation is shown in order to
compare it with the other cases explained below.

Figure 6.21 shows what would happen if no wake effect is considered.

Figure 6.22 shows what would happen if the wake effect is considered but with
70 CHAPTER 6. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Figure 6.20. Matlab interface. Horizontal incoming wind.

Figure 6.21. Matlab interface. Thrust coefficient equal to zero.


6.3. OTHER EXAMPLES OF THE INFLUENCE OF WIND DIRECTION AND WAKE
EFFECT 71

Figure 6.22. Matlab interface. Variation in the layout.

a variation on the layout distances, if the layout is modified. In this particular case
very long distances were introduced. Instead of 500 m and 700 m for the distances
between the turbines and the lines as it was mentioned before, 5000 m and 7000 m
are considered.

In order to analyze the influence of wind direction, different wind angles ori-
entation of the incoming wind were introduced. By increasing the incoming wind
angle with 5 degrees and starting from the situation shown in figure 6.20 with zero
degrees, many results can be extracted, but here only the most favorable and the
worst case from the output power point of view, are shown in figure 6.23.

6.3.1 Analysis
From the results shown in section 6.2 can be concluded that the aggregation of a
specific wind farm is influenced by many different factors. Mainly it is affected by
the wind direction and the wake effect.

Figure 6.21 shows how if any wake effect is considered then the aggregation with
one equivalent machine is very easy because it is considered that all the turbines
are receiving the same wind speed. It is like in the case of section 6.1 where all the
turbines are the same and all of them are providing the power corresponding to this
72 CHAPTER 6. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Figure 6.23. Left: Worst case (Zero degrees incoming wind - 14.24 MW) Right:
Most favorable case (15 degrees incoming wind - 33 MW)

specific wind speed. According to the power curve each turbine is providing 80% of
its rated power when the wind speed is 10 m/s. In figure 6.21 it can be seen that
all the turbines are facing the same wind speed and they represent one group.

In figure 6.22, how the configuration of the layout also influences in the aggre-
gation can be seen. In this case the wake effect has some affect, but as the layout
was modified spreading out the turbines, it has less effect as can be seen in the
wake coefficient vs wind direction graph. The incoming wind in figure 6.20 and
figure 6.22 is the same, but the output power is considerable different; 14.24 MW
instead of 32.8 MW. Also the configuration of the aggregated model is not the same;
four groups in figure 6.20 and two groups in figure 6.22.

Depending on wind direction and according to the wake effect equations, a


number of wind turbines or another will be affected. The greater the number of
wind turbines is affected, the lower the output power is. With this kind of study
can be found which is the most favorable and the worst case of wind direction from
the output power point of view for this specific layout. The most favorable case is
when the wind is coming with 15 degrees with respect to the horizontal. In this
case the output power is 33 MW, there is a total wake effect coefficient of 0.92 p.u.
and the aggregation model is composed of three groups of turbines as the right side
picture of figure 6.23 shows.
6.3. OTHER EXAMPLES OF THE INFLUENCE OF WIND DIRECTION AND WAKE
EFFECT 73

The worst case is when it is coming horizontally, zero degrees with respect
to the horizontal. In that case the output power is 14.24 MW, there is a total
wake coefficient of 0.4 p.u. and there are four groups in the aggregation model as
figure 6.23 shows. This kind of study can be very useful in order to maximize the
output power of a wind farm knowing the space available to build up the wind farm
and the layout we want to deal with. For instance for the layout treated in the
example it would be nice to match the main wind direction of the area with the
most favorable one. The main wind direction is the one that will give the necessary
information to create the aggregation model. These studies can be useful as well to
have different aggregation models depending on the season of the year or even the
time of the day when the main wind direction can be considered different.
Chapter 7

Conclusions and Future Work

This report describes a method to implement an aggregated model of a wind farm.


The aim of the project is to apply the methodology to specific models provided by
the electrical software DIgSilent PowerFactory and analyze its limitations.

The main conclusion of the research is that for both cases, the DFIG and FCG
models, the aggregation model developed works and approximates correctly the be-
havior of the whole system. In the case of the network aggregation, the calculations
allow computation of equivalent collector system according to the size and config-
uration of the distribution. The aggregation provides a good approximation of the
wind farm performance in order to use it for interconnection studies. Very large
and diverse power plants can be represented aggregating the whole wind farm by a
small number of wind turbines with similar attributes.

Every different layout has a different impact on the line impedances and the
network aggregation formulas apply to different cases such as the aggregation of
turbines in daisy chain configuration or turbines connected in parallel. The method
does not incorporate the Qmax and Qmin capability, which is an important aspect
of wind power plants.

From the results it can be seen that the aggregation errors are significantly small
and it is not relevant to analyze the values. It is worth noting to comment that
the aggregation of turbines in one row leads to greater mean square errors than
the aggregation of parallel machines connected to the PCC. This is consequence of
assuming that the voltage is 1 p.u. at all the connection points of the wind farm,
although this assumption is not completely true in the case in which the turbines
are connected in series in one row.

The time delays in the FCG results are consequence of the model itself. It
seems as if it is a consequence of the stator excitation current which should remain
at a constant value given the characteristics of the permanent magnet synchronous

75
76 CHAPTER 7. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK

machine. The purpose of the aggregation of observing the same the behavior of the
detailed model and the aggregated model before and after the transient, is reached
and the equivalence of the model is satisfactory.

From the second layout and scheme proposed in the project it can be concluded
that the Matlab program calculates the aggregation correctly. The assumptions
made by the program for the equivalency of the lines considering the wake effect,
are correct and provide a good enough approximation of the wind farm according
to the behavior of both systems, the detailed and the aggregated one, and also the
errors observed.

The aggregation depends always on the initial wind speed and the wind direction.

There are some situations when a detailed model is required. One of these
cases is when the fault is applied at any point of the internal interconnection of
the wind farm, inside the system under study. The simplified model is only valid
when the case of study considers a fault or disturbance from the PCC to the grid.
When applied to interconnection studies between different wind farms, it is usually
enough to model the wind farms which are not the subject of the assessment using
an aggregated model and the wind farm which is under study with a detailed model.

As mentioned before, the aggregation depends on the incoming wind and there
is a direct relation between the wind speed and the aggregated model implemented
for this wind speed. Therefore the more the wind speed varies from its mean value,
the less accuracy the model has.

In all the cases the efficiency with regard to calculation time was shown. It can
be concluded that the objective of the research of reducing the computation time
in the simulations was also achieved.

Future Work
For future work it would be interesting to simulate different wind turbines available
now in the market with the proposed methods and models.

These results could be easily extended to other cases. For example, if in one wind
farm we are dealing with different types of wind turbines, then the procedure is the
same. The number of groups is determined by the different types of turbines and the
wake effect considerations. Going deeper in this way, future work can be to analyze
how the existence of different manufactures of the same wind turbine can affect,
for example if in a certain wind farm all the turbines are DFIG but coming from
different manufacturers. It would be interesting to develop a model able to aggregate
77

the mechanical parameters and also the controls of different manufacturers into one
single machine and analyze how realistic the response is.

It would be interesting as well to try to develop aggregation models for other


kind of layouts.
Bibliography

[1] Abram Perdana, "Wind Turbine Models for Power System Stability Studies",
Master thesis, Chalmers university of technology, Göteborg, Sweden, 2006.

[2] Tore Wizelius, Developing Wind Power Projects, chapter:"1,4,5", Earthscan,


London, UK, 2009.

[3] url:"http://www.greenchipstocks.com/articles/wind-energy-companies/273".

[4] url:"http://www.solaripedia.com/13/201/2013/enercon_e126_turbine_
nose.html".

[5] Florin lov, Anca Daniela Hansen, Poul Sørensen & Nicolaos Antonio Cutululis,
"Mapping of grid faults and grid codes", Risø National Laboratory, RISØ-R-
1617, Denmark, 2007.

[6] J. Conroy & R. Watson, "Aggregate modelling of wind farms containing full-
converter wind turbine generators with permanent magnet synchronous ma-
chines: transient stability studies", Renewable Power Generation, IET, Vol-
ume 3, Issue 1, March 2009.

[7] Anthony B. Morton, "Model Aggregation of Wind Farms and Other Ensemble
Systems", Power Engineering Conference, 2007, AUPEC 2007, Peth WA, 2007.

[8] K. Rudion, Z.A. Styczynski, A. Orths & O. Ruhle, "MaWind-Tool for the Ag-
gregation of Wind Farm Models", Power and Energy Society General Meeting
- Conversion and Delivery of Electrical Energy in the 21th century, Pittsburgh
PA, 2008.

[9] Markus Pöller & Sebastian Achilles, "Aggregated Wind Park Models for
Analysing Power System Dynamics", Technical report from DIgSilent, Denmark,
2003.

[10] Tongdan Jin & Zhigang Tian, "Uncertainty Analysis for Wind Energy Pro-
duction with Dynamic Power Curves", Probabilistic Methods Applied to Power
Systems (PMAPS), Singapure, June 2010.

79
80 BIBLIOGRAPHY

[11] F.D. Kanellos, S.A. Papathanassiou & N.D. Hatziargyriou, "Dynamic analysis
of a Variable Speed Wind Turbine equipped with a Voltage Source AC/DC/AC
Converter Interface and a Reactive Current Control loop", Electrotecnical Con-
ference, 2000. MELECON 2000. 10th Mediterranean, Volume 3, Athens, 2000.
[12] Stamatiou Georgios, "Techno-economical Analysis of DC Collection Grids for
Off-shore Wind Parks", Master thesis, University of Nottingham, UK, 2010.
[13] N. Héraud, M. Ainan Kahyeh & I. Souleiman Guelle, "Monitoring of the DFIG
of a variable speed wind turbine", Transmission & Distribution. Latin America.
IEEE PES, São Paulo, 2010.
[14] Antonis Marinopoulos, "DFIG Wind Turbine Model in DigSilent Power Factory
v.14 and Scale-up Procedure", Internal report ABB-SECRC. SECRC/PT/TR-
2010/342, Västerås, Sweden, 2010.
[15] Jeong-Ik Jang, Young-Sin Kim & Dong-Choon Lee, "Active and Reactive Power
Control of DFIG for Wind Energy Conversion under Unbalanced Grid Volt-
ages", Power Electronics and Motion Control Conference 2006 IPEMC 2006
CES/IEEE 5th International, Shanghai, 2006.
[16] Ch. Eping, J. Stenzel, M. Póller & H. Muller, "Impact of Large Scale Wind
Power on Power System Stability", Technical report from DIgSilent, Germany.
[17] Stefan Östlund & Mats Leksell, Electrical Machines and Drives, KTH, Electri-
cal Machines and Power Electronics, Stockholm, Sweden, 2010.
[18] Antonis Marinopoulos, "Full Converter Generator Wind Turbine Model in
DigSilent Power Factory v.14 and Scale-up Procedure", Internal report ABB-
SECRC. SECRC/PT/TR-2010/359, Västerås, Sweden, 2010.
[19] Danish Wind Industry Association, url:"http://www.windpower.org/en/tour/
wtrb/powerreg.htm", updated 2003.
[20] Jan T. Bailasiewicz Senior Member IEEE & Eduard Muljadi Senior Member
IEEE, "Analysis of Renewable-Energy Systems Using RPM-SIM Simulator", In-
dustrial Electronics, Volume 53, Issue 4, August,2006.
[21] E. Muljadi, C.P. Butterfield, A. Ellis, J. Mechenbier, J. Hochheimer, R. Young,
N. Miller, R. Delmerico, R. Zavadil & J.C. Smith, "Equivalencing the collector
system of a large Wind Power Plant", Power Engineering General Meeting, IEEE
2006, Montreal Que, 2006.
[22] Jiuping Pan & Mahyar Zarghami, "WING-WP3 Aggregation Model of Wind
Farms", ABB AB, USCRC, USA, 2010.
[23] F. Koch, M. Gresch, F. Shewarega, I.Erlich & U. Bachmann, "Consideration
of Wind Farm Wake Effect in Power System Dynamic Simulation", Power Tech
IEEE 2005 Russia, St. Petersburg, pp. 1-7.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 81

[24] Mahyar Zarghami, "Aggregated Wind Farm Models - Design Document and
MATLAB Prototype", ABB AB, Corporate Research, Sweden, Tech. Rep. AGI-
10008, 2010.

[25] Stefan Lundberg, "Evaluation of wind farm layouts", Chalmers university of


technology, Göteborg, Sweden.

[26] ChenYan YUE, Solution on Large Scale Wind Power Integration - Progress",
Internal report ABB Corporate Research China, China, 2010.