Control

and Protection of Wind Power Plants

with VSCHVDC Connection

By
Sanjay K Chaudhary

A dissertation submitted to
The Faculty of Engineering, Science, and Medicine, Aalborg University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy

Department of Energy Technology

Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
June 2011

Acknowledgments
My deepest gratitude goes to my supervisors Prof. Remus Teodorescu and
Prof. Pedro Rodriguez for the valuable guidance, inspiration, support and
encouragement. I would like to thank Dr. Philip C. Kjer, Peter W.
Christensen and K. H. Sbrink from Vestas A/S for their valuable discussions
and feedbacks on my research. I would also like to thank the Technical
Reference Committee members, especially Dr. T. Jonsson, Prof. W L. Kling
and Prof. M. Aredes.
This research is a part of Vestas Power Program. I would acknowledge
Vestas Wind Systems A/S and Aalborg University for supporting my research.
I am grateful to Dr. A. M. Gole and Dr. U. Annakkage for the motivating
discussions during my stay at University of Manitoba. I am thankful to Udana
Gnanarathna, Dr. R. Gokaraju and Dr. Amit Jindal.
I would like to thank Dr. Dharshana Muthumuni, HVDC Research Center,
who introduced me the PSCAD/EMTDC and who has been very helpful in my
research. I am thankful to Mr. In Kwon Park from RTDS Technologies
teaching me the fundamentals of real time simulation. Jonas Hansen, ABB
Denmark, was very helpful in setting up the relay interface with the RTDS
systems.
My sincere thanks goes to Osman, Andrzej, Maciej, Ram, Rodrigo, Mufit
Omer, Yash, Tamas, Dezso, Lajos, Ionut, Pukar, Jai, Erhan, and all the
colleagues from the Vestas Power Program and the Department of Energy
Technology as a whole.
Lastly I would like to thank my parents, my sister, my wife and my sons
for their support and encouragement.

Sanjay K Chaudhary
Aalborg, Denmark,
September 2011

Abstract
Wind power plants are the fastest growing source of renewable energy.
European Union expects to generate 230 GW wind power, and offshore wind
power is expected to contribute 40GW. Offshore wind power plants have better
wind velocity profile leading to a higher energy yield. Europe has a huge
potential of offshore wind energy, thereby securing its energy supply in a green
and sustainable way. All these have led to the development of offshore wind
power plants.
However, overall cost of offshore installation, operation, and maintenance
are higher than those of onshore wind power plants. Therefore, the plant size
needs to be higher such that the cost of per unit energy can be lowered. An
overall increase in operating efficiency would further reduce the cost of energy,
thereby increasing the viability of the project. Multi-MW variable speed wind
turbine generators, of unit sizes between 5 -10 MW, have been developed so as
to take advantage of the lower cost per MW of installed wind power capacity.
The current trend is that these large units will comprise of multi-pole, lowspeed synchronous generators equipped with full scale converters.VSC-HVDC
cable transmission is a favorable option for large and remote offshore wind
power plants, which need long cable connection to the onshore power grid. It
has lower power losses and higher transmission efficiency, and fast control of
both the active and reactive power.
This dissertation presents an operation and control approach of a potential
wind power plant with VSC-HVDC connection the onshore grid. A layout of
an offshore wind power plant is modeled for electromagnetic simulation in the
PSCAD/EMTDC environment. The offshore terminal of VSC-HVDC is
controlled to establish the reference voltage waveform in the offshore grid. A
new controller has been proposed for the offshore VSC-HVDC terminal which
utilizes the measured active and reactive power to define the feed-forward
terms for the current references.
HVDC transmission decouples the offshore grid frequency from the
onshore grid frequency. A scheme has been evaluated to relay the onshore grid
frequency using the dc voltage of the VSC-HVDC for the purpose of enabling
the frequency control from the wind power plants. At the same time, the
placement of chopper controlled resistors in the full-scale converters has been

proposed and investigated for the dissipation of power in the event of onshore
grid disturbances.
The current control capability of the converters in the offshore wind power
plant grid can be utilized to enhance the fault time behavior of the whole
system. A novel approach has been proposed to allow a calculated amount of
negative current injection from the full scale converters in the wind turbine
generators and at the same time enabling the negative sequence current control
in the VSC-HVDC. The proposed approach is found to have lower power
oscillations and hence lower dc voltage overshoots in the VSC-HVDC system.
On the protection side, the coordination of over-current relays has been
analyzed in the new environment. A simple yet reliable scheme utilizing the
well-known over-current relay characteristics have been presented for the
detection of faults and determination of faulted section on the wind turbine
generator cable feeders. The intermediate high voltage cable feeders may
require under-voltage measurement signal or interlocking signal from the MV
feeder relays to avoid over-reach under certain conditions.

Contents
Contents.............................................................................................................. i
Abbreviations ................................................................................................... iv
1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Background ....................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Wind Power Plants ............................................................................................ 2
1.3 State-of-the-Art ................................................................................................. 3
1.4 Motivation and Objectives ................................................................................ 6
1.4.1 Simulation Tools and Techniques ...................................................................................7
1.5 Limitations ........................................................................................................ 8
1.6 Outline of the Thesis ......................................................................................... 9
2 Grid Connection of Wind Power ............................................................. 11
2.1 Wind Turbine Generator (WTG) .................................................................... 11
2.1.1 Wind Turbine................................................................................................................11
2.1.2 Mechanical Control of Wind Turbines .........................................................................13
2.2 Wind Turbine Generators................................................................................ 14
2.2.1 Type A: Fixed Speed Wind Turbines ...........................................................................14
2.2.2 Type B: Limited Variable Speed ..................................................................................14
2.2.3 Type C: Variable Speed with Partial Scale Frequency Converter.................................15
2.2.4 Type D: Variable Speed with Full Scale Frequency Converter ....................................15
2.2.5 Permanent Magnet Synchronous Generator..................................................................15
2.3 Wind Turbine Generators with Full Scale Converters .................................... 16
2.3.1 Permanent Magnet Generator with Machine Side Converter (PMSG-MSC)................17
2.4 Grid Connection of Wind Power Plants .......................................................... 17
2.4.1 VSC- HVDC Transmission ..........................................................................................19
2.5 Modular Multi-level Converter (MMC) based HVDC ................................... 21
3 System Layout and Main Circuit Parameters ........................................ 24
3.1 Main circuit components and parameters........................................................ 24
3.2 Onshore Grid................................................................................................... 24
3.3 Converter Transformers .................................................................................. 27
3.4 Voltage Source Converters ............................................................................. 27
3.5 Tuned Filters ................................................................................................... 29
3.6 Phase Reactors ................................................................................................ 30
3.7 DC line Capacitors .......................................................................................... 31

3.8
3.9
3.10
3.11
3.12
3.13

ii

HVDC cables .................................................................................................. 32

Layout of WTG ............................................................................................... 32
Neutral Grounding .......................................................................................... 34
Wind Turbine Generator with Full Scale Converter ....................................... 36
Control of the grid side converter of WTG-FSC............................................. 36
Separation of Positive and Negative Sequence Components .......................... 38

3.13.1 Sequence Components from the Measured Data ..........................................................39

3.14 Positive Sequence Phase Locked Loop (PLL) ................................................ 41

3.15 Control of VSC-HVDC system....................................................................... 41
3.15.1 Onshore grid converter .................................................................................................41
3.15.2 Offshore grid converter.................................................................................................42

3.16 Overall Control Structure ................................................................................ 43

4 Operation and Control of WPP with VSC-HVDC connection ............. 47

4.1 Operational Modes .......................................................................................... 47
4.1.1 Charging of VSC-HVDC Lines ....................................................................................47
4.1.2 Energizing the Offshore Grid........................................................................................48
4.1.3 Synchronization of the of the WTGs and Power Control..............................................49
4.1.4 Steady State Operation..................................................................................................51
4.1.5 Ramping Down of Power Generation WPP Shut Down ...............................................51
4.2 Frequency Control through VSC-HVDC Transmission ................................. 52
4.2.1 German Grid Requirement on Frequency Regulation ...................................................52
4.2.2 Danish Grid Requirement on Frequency Regulation ....................................................53
4.2.3 Control Architecture for Frequency Regulation through VSC-HVDC Transmission ...54
4.3 Fault Ride Through (FRT) Using VSC-HVDC Transmission ........................ 58
4.4 Discussion ....................................................................................................... 63
4.5 Summary ......................................................................................................... 63
5 Fault Analysis and Protection for Offshore WPP Grid with VSCHVDC Connection.......................................................................................... 64
5.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................... 64
5.2 Overcurrent Relay ........................................................................................... 65
5.3 Approximate Calculation for the Fault Currents ............................................. 67
5.4 Simulation Studies and Observations.............................................................. 70
5.4.1 Relay Tripping for Different Types of Faults ...............................................................71
5.4.2 Over-reach of the HV Feeder Relay .............................................................................77
5.5 Discussion and Conclusions............................................................................ 79
5.6 Summary ......................................................................................................... 80
6 Negative Sequence Current Controllers.................................................. 81

6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4

iii

Introduction ..................................................................................................... 81
Negative Sequence Controller for the VSC-HVDC ........................................ 82
Negative Sequence Controller for the WTG-GSC .......................................... 84
Simulation Results .......................................................................................... 86

6.4.1 Single Line to Ground Fault at FA .............................................................................87

6.4.2 LLG, LLLG and LL Faults at FA ...............................................................................94
6.4.3 Faults at FB ................................................................................................................96

6.5
6.6

Discussion ....................................................................................................... 99
Summary ....................................................................................................... 101

7 Validation of the Offshore Grid Protections Scheme through Real Time

Simulation ..................................................................................................... 102
7.1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 102
7.2 Experimental Set-Up for the Validation of Relay Coordination ................... 103
7.2.1 WTG with FSC Model................................................................................................ 104
7.2.2 VSC HVDC Controllers ............................................................................................. 104
7.2.3 Over-current Limit Control in VSC ............................................................................ 104
7.2.4 Overcurrent protection functions of the relay ............................................................. 105
7.2.5 Over-current Relay Settings....................................................................................... 106
7.3 GOOSE Communication Set-up ................................................................... 107
7.4 Observations and Results .............................................................................. 107
7.4.1 Steady State RTDS Simulation ................................................................................... 108
7.4.2 Single Line to Ground Fault on MV Feeder ............................................................... 109
7.4.3 LL and Other Faults on MV Feeder ............................................................................ 114
7.5 Discussion ..................................................................................................... 115
7.6 Summary ....................................................................................................... 116
8 Conclusions and Future Work ............................................................... 117
8.1 Conclusions ................................................................................................... 117
8.2 Main Contributions ....................................................................................... 118
8.3 Future Work .................................................................................................. 119
8.4 Authors Publication List .............................................................................. 119
References ..................................................................................................... 122

iv

Abbreviations
C2L
CB
DFIG
FRT
FSC
GCR
GOOSE
GSE
GTNET
GTAO
HAWT
HVAC
HVDC
IED
IGBT
IGCT
LVRT
MMC
PLL
PMSM
PMSG
PWM
RTDS
SOGI
VSC
WECS
WPP
WTG

Cascaded Two Level (converter)

Circuit Breaker
Doubly Fed Induction Generator
Fault Ride Through
Full Scale Converter
Grid Code Requirements
Generic Object Oriented Sub-station Event (IEC 61850)
Generic Sub-station Event
Gigabit Transceiver Network Card (RTDS Hardware)
Gigabit Transceiver Analogue Output Card (RTDS Hardware)
Horizontal Axis Wind Turbine
High Voltage Alternating Current
High Voltage Direct Current
Intelligent Electronic Device
Insulated Gate Bipolar Junction Transistor
Insulated gate Commutated Thyristor
Low Voltage Fault ride Through
Modular Multilevel Converter
Phase Locked Loop
Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor
Permanent Magnet Synchronous Generator
Pulse width modulation
Real Time Digital Simulator
Second Order Generalized Integrator
Voltage Source Converter
Wind Energy Conversion System
Wind Power Plant
Wind Turbine Generator

1 Introduction
1.1 Background
Wind energy is the fastest growing source of renewable energy globally
the average annual growth rate of installed wind power capacity has been
around 30% in the last decade. The 2009 EU Renewable Energy Directive aims
to produce 20% of the overall energy mix from renewable energy sources. By
2020, EWEA targets to develop 230GW of wind power, with 40GW coming
from offshore wind power plants [1]. In 2010, global installed wind power
capacity increased by 24.1% and reached 197, out of which 86. 3GW was in
Europe. A vast majority of these are onshore wind turbines. However, the
offshore wind power plants are growing at even faster rate. In 2010, 883 MW
of offshore wind power was added, bringing the total installed offshore wind
power capacity to 2946 MW 2946 MW in Europe [2]. A total of 600 GW of
wind energy will be installed by the year 2050, of which 250GW will be
onshore and the remaining 350 GW offshore. Thereby it will be able to meet
50% of the European Union electricity demand [1].
400

Onshore

Offshore

350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

Fig. 1 Cumulative onshore and offshore wind in the EU (1990-2030) [1]

2030

1200

Offshore

Onshore

1000
800
600
400
200
0
2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

Fig. 2 Power production from onshore and offshore wind in the EU (2000-2030) [1]

The last decade has seen a tremendous development in electricity

generation from wind farms, also known as Wind Power Plants (WPP). In
Europe, development of several large off-shore wind power plants has been
proposed in the North Sea and the Baltic Sea. Such offshore wind farm sites
may be up to 100-200 km far from the shore line, so as to take advantage of a
better wind profile and avoid any clash of interest like shipping, fishery,
recreation and visual distraction.
Voltage source converter based HVDC (VSC-HVDC) is the latest
transmission technology for connecting offshore WPP requiring long distance
cable connection. Apart from providing an asynchronous link between the
offshore WPP grid and the onshore power system, VSC-HVDC offers full and
independent controllability of active and reactive power. VSC-HVDC
transmission is thus expected to enhance the integration of the WPP in the
power system grid. On the other hand the Wind turbine generators, themselves,
are using power electronic converters thereby increasing their controllability.

1.2 Wind Power Plants

Unlike conventional power plants, WPP does not have a deterministic and
controllable prime mover. Wind is a stochastically varying and uncontrollable
source of power for the WPP. Power can be generated only when sufficient
wind is available. In absence of any energy storage system, the generated

energy has to be distributed and consumed at the same time. Another

disadvantage is that mechanical dimensions restrict the size of a wind turbine
generator (WTG) to a few MW capacities. Therefore, a large number of WTG
have to be installed and interconnected to build a single offshore WPP. To
ensure smooth operation of power system when large amount of Wind Power is
connected, grid operators have imposed grid code requirements for the WPP to
comply with.
Power electronic converters are employed in the WTGs to provide them
the required flexibility and controllability either by allowing them to align with
the grid frequency as is the case in doubly fed induction generators or by
decoupling them from the grid frequency such as in WTGs with full
converters. On the transmission side VSC-HVDC system provides an
asynchronous link with independently controllable active and reactive power.
Amid such a wide degree of controllability obtained from the power electronic
converters and the variable nature of WTG, their control and co-ordination for
efficient operation is essential.

1.3 StateoftheArt
Wind power plants comprise of a large number of wind turbine generators
(WTG), each having a unit size of a few MW at the most. In the early 1990s,
the wind turbines mostly employed fixed speed squirrel cage induction
generators. These were followed by the induction generators with limited range
of speed control provided by the introduction of rotor resistance through slip
rings. These days doubly fed induction generators are the most popular
topologies. Recently permanent magnet synchronous generators (PMSG) with
full scale converters are gaining popularity for large WTG units.
Grid connection of the large wind power plant is necessary for the
transmission and distribution of the generated electric energy. Breseti et. al.[3]
present a comparison of ac and dc transmission options for the grid connection
of offshore wind power plants. It is concluded that VSC-HVDC is the cheapest
option for the grid connection when the plant size is larger than 100MW and
the distance is larger than 90 km. VSC-HVDC is the latest technology in
HVDC transmission. The first commercial VSC-HVDC transmission was
installed in Gotland, Sweden in the year 1997. Since then ABB has installed
around 12 VSC-HVDC transmission systems. Most of them are for

interconnecting weak grids. A couple of them provide electrical power

transmission to offshore oil rig platforms in Norway. BorWin-I is the first
VSC-HVDC transmission used for the grid connection of a large offshore wind
power plant. It connects the 400 MW BorWin-1 wind power plant in the North
Sea to the onshore substation in Germany [4], [5].
VSC-HVDC systems use fully controllable switches like IGBT and IGCT.
Their turning ON and turning OFF is controlled by the applied gate pulse.
These switches are usually assembled in a 3-phase 2-level or 3-level converter
configuration. In VSC based HVDC, the IGBT switches are switched ON and
OFF usually at a switching frequency of 1 to 2 kHz. The HVDC side voltage
is maintained higher than the grid side peak voltages. Hence, the VSC can
produce the desired voltage waveform at fundamental frequency. The output
voltage contains high frequency components, which can be filtered away using
passive filters. VSC can be controlled to produce the terminal voltage at
required magnitude and phase angle such that the desired current can flow
through the phase reactors at its terminals. This ability of the VSC to drive the
desired current waveform in the grid at power frequency enables fast control
and four-quadrant operation on the PQ control [6].
Harnefors describes the control loops and phase locked loop for the VSC
HVDC transmission connecting two areas in the power grid in [7]. One
terminal regulates the DC voltage and the reactive power exchange with the
grid at one end, while the other regulates the active and reactive power
exchanges at the other end. In [8], Iov et al present the control structure of the
VSC-HVDC for the grid connection of wind farms with active stall induction
generators. The wind farm side converter controls the wind farm grid voltage
and frequency so as to enable variable frequency operation of the wind farm
and simultaneously maintain the volts per Hertz ratio. The grid side VSC
controls the DC line voltage and the reactive power flow to the grid. Direct
control of the wind farm side voltage and frequency without any inner current
control loop is presented in [9]. In ref [10], an inner current control loop of the
VSC controller is used to control the AC terminal voltage in the offshore grid..
This controller is suitable for wind power plant applications. Variable
frequency control is described so as to take advantage of improved efficiency
of the WPP. In all these studies DFIG based wind turbines have been
considered.

With the emergence of large wind power plants, the grid operators are
cautious about their impact upon the power system. Grid operators have come
up with Grid Code Requirements (GCR) to be complied with before the wind
power plants can be connected to the grid. GCR specifies the operational
conditions of voltage, frequency and power factor. In the beginning, the wind
power penetration in power system was small, and they could disconnect
during the grid disturbances. However, with increasing penetration of wind
power in power system and decreasing proportion of the conventional
synchronous generators, grid operators demand that the large wind power
plants remain connected to and assist the grid recovery. For instance, the
German grid code [11] requires that the WPP remain connected and supply
reactive current to the grid during low voltage faults in the power system grid.
It also specifies the power ramping rate after the fault has been cleared. Though
the grid code asks for 2% reserve be made available within 1 minute for 400
mHz change in frequency, the offshore grid code [12] over-rides this
requirement by asking for only downward regulation. In the Danish grid code
[13] both options have been specified.
Low voltage ride through capability is another challenging requirement for
the WPP. Ref [14] describes the different techniques available for fast power
reduction of the wind power plant or dissipating the excess power in braking
resistors. Feltes et al [15] describe the different ways of achieving the LVRT
capability and proposes the demagnetization of the doubly fed induction
generator such that the WPP grid voltage can be suppressed rapidly so that fast
voltage reduction can be achieved without producing the typical short circuit
currents and the related electrical and mechanical stresses.
Muyeen et al [16] have described the use of energy capacitor system (ECS)
composed of power electronic devices and electric double layer capacitor
(EDLC) to enhance the LVRT capability of fixed speed wind turbine generator
system during network disturbances. Use of ECS using EDLC to enhance the
transient stability of multi-machine power system including wind power plants
is presented in [17].
In power systems, the synchronous machines provide the inertial response
to sudden variations in frequency due to instantaneous load-generation
unbalance. The wind turbine generators with their power electronic converter
interface do not automatically respond to grid frequency variations. Therefore,

there is a genuine concern that increasing penetration of wind energy in the

power system will lead to reduction of inertia. Hence emulation of inertia or
virtual inertia is expected from the wind turbine generators. Spanish Grid code
has indicated the requirement of inertial response to grid frequency
disturbances as a future perspective [18].
Ref [19] describes that kinetic energy can be extracted from the WTGs
using power electronic converter controls to supply the power proportional to
the frequency deviation and thus inertia can be emulated. In Ref [20], Ullah et
al describes that wind farm can provide a short-term active power support
utilizing the rotational energy of the turbine blades which is particularly
beneficial in the hydro dominated power system grid. The contribution from
the wind turbines gives extra time for the hydro generators to ramp up their
generation. Reference [21] presents the primary frequency regulation capability
by maintaining the reserve power generation capability through de-loaded
operation by pitch angle control of wind turbines.
Jensen and Fuchs [22] describe the methods of allocation the generation
reserve and the different ways to relay the grid frequency to the offshore wind
wind-farm when there is an asynchronous VSC-HVDC connection between
them.
Recently multi-level modular converters have been introduced. The
cascaded two level converters (C2L) from the ABB, multi-level modular
converters (MMC) from Siemens and the hybrid chain link converters from
Alstom are the examples of the new converter topologies for application in the
VSC-HVDC transmission [23],[25]. These new topologies of VSC-HVDC
claim superior performance in terms of reduced power losses and lower
harmonic content.

1.4 Motivation and Objectives

Technical literature and statistics of the wind power growth shows the
enthusiasm in the development and grid connection of wind power plants. This
project intends to investigate the challenges in the grid integration of large
offshore wind power plants using VSC-HVDC for grid connection. A detailed
simulation model for the complete system and subsequent analysis of the

different operating modes leads to a better system understanding and

development of new control techniques.
The main objective is to demonstrate a new concept of control and
operation of wind power plant (WPP) with voltage source converter based high
voltage DC (HVDC) transmission showing robustness against offshore grid
faults using the co-ordinated control of power converters in the wind turbine
generators and the HVDC.
The hypotheses are listed below:

1.4.1

Large wind turbine generators (5MW and larger) will be equipped

with full scale converters to comply with the grid code
requirements.
Offshore wind power plants far off from the shore may require
long submarine cable transmission. VSC-HVDC will be the
optimal transmission option in such a scenario. The offshore grid
may be terminated to power electronic converters at all the
terminals.
Power electronic converter current can be controlled. In the event
of faults, the fault current can be controlled within safe limits by
the current limit control acting in the converters. This will reduce
the stresses on the converters as well as other offshore grid
components.
As an extension of the previous point, negative sequence currents
may be generated by power electronic converters. Controllers can,
therefore, be designed to generate controllable amount of negative
sequence currents during asymmetric faults in the offshore grid and
thus the power oscillations can be minimized.

Simulation Tools and Techniques

PSCAD/EMTDC software developed by the HVDC Research centre,

Canada has been used for the modelling and simulation of the whole system. It
is a powerful simulation tool for the modelling and simulation of
electromagnetic transients in power system. Apart from the standardized
models for most of the power system components and control blocks, it allows
the development of user defined models of the controllers and components. The

controllers for the VSC-HVDC and the wind turbine generators are not
available as standard modules and they have been modelled as a part of
modelling and simulation in this project.
Real Time Digital Simulation (RTDS) has been used as it facilitates the
hardware in loop simulation. An industrial overcurrent feeder protection relay,
REF615 from ABB was interfaced with the real time simulation model and the
relay coordination was experimentally verified as a part of validation exercise.
MATLAB/Simulink has been used for the numerical calculations and
frequency domain analysis of the controller and filters.

1.5 Limitations
Two level converters have been simulated and studied. Recent
development of multi-level converters has rendered the two level converters an
obsolete technology for the VSC-HVDC transmission. However, the concepts
and theories developed in this thesis regarding the offshore wind power plants
and its grid connection using VSC-HVDC transmission are expected to give
useful insights in the understanding and investigation of the new systems.
Only ac collector grid layout has been considered here for the wind power
plant. The turbine generators are assumed to be permanent magnet synchronous
generators equipped with full scale converters. Further, the specific details of
the turbine and the generator has not been used here, but a rather simplified
model whereby the turbine, generator and the converter is modelled as a power
source of the first order transfer function. The focus here is on the operation of
the grid side converter of the WTG-FSC, the collector grid network and the
VSC-HVDC transmission to the grid.
The onshore grid has been modelled here as Thvenins equivalent voltage
source.
WPP and VSC-HVDC have been considered here as a single system. This
implies that the VSC-HVDC control is used to facilitate the grid integration of
the wind power plant. For instance, in some of the approaches, the VSC-HVDC
relays the onshore grid frequency to the offshore grid. The onshore grid
terminal is assumed to be the point of common coupling where the grid code

requirements have to be fulfilled. These assumptions are justified when the

WPP and VSC-HVDC are owned and operated by a single entity. When the
transmission is provided by the grid operator, the grid operator may impose the
grid code requirements to be fulfilled at the offshore terminal as envisaged in
[12] or they may continue to operate in tandem to optimize the overall system.

1.6 Outline of the Thesis

The organization of the thesis is as follows:
Chapter 2 gives a brief introduction of wind turbine generators and the grid
connection of wind power plants using VSC-HVDC.
Chapter 3 describes the layout and modelling of the system being studied.
Main circuit parameters for the system components have been derived and
discussed. A collector grid layout and the aggregation of wind turbines have
been described here. A new controller for the offshore VSC-HVDC terminal is
presented for wind power applications followed by the overall control structure
of the system. The operation and control of the complete integrated system is
described in Chapter 4. Some operational aspects like the grid frequency
control through VSC-HVDC and the low voltage fault ride through in the event
of onshore grid faults have been described and demonstrated.
Chapter 5 proposes a simplified algorithm for the estimation of fault
currents using the scalar current source models of the WTG converters.
Transient simulation of faults in the offshore grid through with detailed models
of the WTG controls and VSC-HVDC is described and the results are
described. The results are used for the coordination of the over-current relays in
the offshore grid. The work is later extended in Chapter 9.
Chapter 6 proposes a negative sequence current control algorithm for the
control of dc power oscillations in the VSC-HVDC. Negative sequence current
references are generated to mitigate the power oscillations and therefore the d
voltage oscillation in the HVDC system and validated through PSCAD
simulation results.
Chapter 8 summarizes the conclusions of this project and lists some of the
areas for future research. The contributions of this project are listed here.

10

Real time simulation of the whole test system in RTDS with interconnected industrial overcurrent relay for the detection of fault events and relay
trip characteristics have been presented in Chapter 9. It corroborates the
observation for the relay coordination settings in the MV WTG feeders.

11

2 Grid Connection of Wind Power

Moving mass of wind possesses kinetic energy. For a long time wind mills
and sails have been used for harnessing the wind energy. Conversion to
electrical energy is a recent development of the twentieth century. Depleting
fossil fuel reserves and the focus on sustainable development through the use of
renewable energy sources has been the key motivators for the rapid
development of wind energy conversion systems (WECS) in the last couple of
decades. Large wind turbine generators of the order of 2-6 MW have been
developed and the units of 10 MW sizes are under development [26].
Tens or hundreds of wind turbine generator units are installed and
connected together through a network of medium voltage cable systems
forming the collector system network, thereby forming a large wind farm. A
growing penetration of wind energy into power system demands that the wind
farms behave more like a power plant and they comply with the rules of grid
connection, or the grid code requirement (GCR). Hence, the wind farms, these
days are referred as wind power plants (WPP).
This chapter presents an introduction of WECS, collector system and the
grid connection of WPP.

2.1 Wind Turbine Generator (WTG)

A wind turbine generator comprises of a wind turbine for harnessing the
kinetic energy of the wind into the mechanical energy of the rotating shaft
which drives the generator. The three-blade, upwind horizontal axis wind
turbine (HAWT) is the most popular turbine. It has three air-foils or blades
connected to a central hub assembly mounted on the top of a high tower. The
drive train, generator and the transformers are usually housed in the nacelle on
the tower. A gear box assembly may be used to rotate the generator at a
sufficiently high speed for electrical power generation.
2.1.1

Wind Turbine

The kinetic energy possessed in wind is given by

12

1
2

. .
.

where, is the density of air

is the velocity of wind ( .

(2.1)

, V is the volume of air considered and

.

The volume of wind passing through area AR swept by the turbine blades
in a second is
. Therefore, the total mechanical power is,
1
2

1
2

(2.1)

The fraction of power harnessed by the wind turbine is given by its

coefficient of performance, Cp.
1
2

(2.2)

0.593. Modern

According to Betz, the theoretical upper limit of

3-blade wind turbines have an optimal C in the range of 0.52 to 0.55 when the
power is measured at the rotor hub. After deducting the losses in the drive train
and the generator, the optimal value of lies in the range of 0.46-0.48 [27].

depends upon tip speed ratio,

,and the pitch angle of the blade,

and its

value depends upon the turbine characteristics.

Tip speed ratio is defined as the ratio of rotor blade tip speed and the wind
velocity.

For a given turbine design, the measured data for

(2.3)

can be

approximated by a non-linear function of the type [28],

,
where,

(2.4)

13

Slootweg et. al. present a table of coefficients for the commercial constant
speed and variable speed wind turbines in [28]. The turbine characteristic for
, , (2.6), given in [31] is a special case of
the performance coefficient,
(2.5),

0.5

116

0.4

(2.5)
where,

characteristics using (2.5) with parameters

Figure 2.1 gives a plot of

as given in (2.7),

1deg

Performance Coefficient (Cp)

0.5

0.4

2deg

5deg

0.3

10deg

0.2

15deg

0.1
25deg

Figure 2.1

2.1.2

6
8
10
Tipspeed ratio ( )

12

14

16

characteristics of a typical wind turbine.

Mechanical Control of Wind Turbines

Equations 2.3-2.7 reveal that the power absorbed by the wind turbines
depends upon the operational speed of the turbine and the blade pitch angle. In
a variable speed wind turbines the turbine speed can be controlled to achieve an
optimal torque speed ratio ( and therefore maximum efficiency over a range
of wind speed. When the wind speed varies, the turbine rotor and generator

14

speed vary and hence the torque remains fairly constant, thereby reducing the
mechanical stress. Maximum power point tracking over a wide speed range
enables increased energy capture, improved power quality and reduced
mechanical stress on the wind turbine. Apart from this, the turbine speed
should be limited within safe design limits in presence of strong wind
conditions. Stall control have been used for this purpose. Nowadays, pitch
control mechanism is used to regulate the power. The blades can be turned out
or into the wind as the power output varies. Such a fast control provides good
power control, assisted start-up and emergency stop.

2.2 Wind Turbine Generators

According to [27], [28], wind turbine generators can be grouped into four
categories:

2.2.1

Type A: Fixed speed wind turbine generators

Type B: Partially variable speed WTs
Type C: Variable speed WTs with partial scale frequency converter.
Type D: Variable speed WTs with full scale frequency converter.
Type A: Fixed Speed Wind Turbines

Squirrel cage induction generator (SCIG) or wound rotor induction

generator is directly connected to the grid through a step-up transformer. Softstarter is used to assist the smooth start-up and the capacitor bank provides the
reactive power compensation. Fixed speed operation implies that any wind
fluctuation would result into the fluctuation of the mechanical torque and the
electrical power; thereby voltage fluctuation in the case of weak grids. These
use stall control, pitch control or active stall control.
2.2.2

Type B: Limited Variable Speed

Variable speed operation over a small range of around 0-10% can be

achieved by using wound rotor induction generator with variable rotor
resistance and mechanical power control by pitch control. The excess energy is
dissipated into the rotor resistance.

15

2.2.3

Type C: Variable Speed with Partial Scale Frequency Converter

Double fed induction generator with partial scale converters allow speed
control -40% to +30% around the synchronous speed. The converters are of
approximately 30% of the nominal generator power. The partial scale converter
injects voltage in the rotor circuit at the slip frequency to vary the slip.
2.2.4

Type D: Variable Speed with Full Scale Frequency Converter

The generator is connected to the grid through a back-to-back converter

system with a common dc-link. This converter is rated to the full power of the
converter and hence it is also referred as full scale converter. Since the
generator is decoupled from the grid frequency synchronous generators as well
as induction generators can be used. However, an induction generator usually
have a few number of pole pairs. Operation of the wind turbine at the normal
speed of 20-22 rpm will need a gear ratio of 68 for a four pole machine. On the
other hand synchronous machines can be designed with multiple pole pairs
thereby reducing the synchronous speed. Multi-pole structure and frequency
decoupling enables these to be operated at very low speeds and hence the gearbox can be avoided. Annular generators from Enercon are of this type.
However, for large power ratings operating at low speeds, the diameter of the
machine tends to be very large and hence a single stage gear-box is used as in
the case of Multi-brid [28].
2.2.5

Permanent Magnet Synchronous Generator

Synchronous generators are widely used in power generation system. The

mechanical speed (
of a P-pole synchronous machine operating at the
frequency, f, is given by
120

(2.6)

This implies that a multi-pole synchronous machine can be operated at very

low mechanical speeds. In direct drive synchronous generators, the multiple
number of poles brings down the synchronous mechanical speed to the nominal
speed of the rotor and hence the gear-box can be eliminated. However, the
machine diameters tend to be very big to accommodate a large number of

16

poles. In Multi-brid concept, a single stage gear box is used to bring down the
size and weight of the generator. Direct drive permanent magnet synchronous
generators have the losses 35% lower than the DFIG and approximately 32%
lower than the direct drive synchronous generators with wound rotors. If a
single stage gear-box is used, the losses increase but there is a 75% reduction in
weight as the machine synchronous speed is increased [26].

Figure 2.2 Wind Turbine, PMSG, FSC L-C-L output filter and unit transformer

2.3 Wind Turbine Generators with Full Scale Converters

Variable speed wind turbines may have a wound rotor synchronous
generator, permanent magnet synchronous generator or an induction generator.
In all the cases, the generator dynamics is controlled by the machine side
converter for the optimum or specified power generation. In this section, the
wind model, aerodynamics, shaft model and permanent magnet synchronous
generator with the controlling converter is discussed in brief.
Mechanical power available in the wind and the power that can be
harnessed depend upon the wind velocity and the operating point of the wind
turbine (2.3). For simulation studies, a model of wind can be represented by a
sum of average, ramp, gust and noise components as given by (2.8).
(2.7)

where,

are the average (base), gust, ramp and noise

components of the wind speed in m/s. The wind turbine generator shaft
dynamics can be modeled in terms of a set of three coupled masses
representing the blade, hub and the generator Error! Reference source not
found.. Slootweg et. al.[30] [28] recommends using two mass representation of
the drive train to include the dynamics of the low speed shaft.

17

2.3.1

Permanent Magnet Generator with Machine Side Converter

(PMSGMSC)

Permanent magnet synchronous generator is a synchronous machine, where

filed flux is generated by the permanent magnets instead of the field excitation
winding. Strachan and Jovcic [32],[33] describe modelling and control of
permanent magnet synchronous generator and the machine side converter in the
synchronously rotating reference frame. The generator torque can be precisely
controlled by vector control of the stator currents. The direct axis current is
controlled to zero value such that the torque becomes proportional to the
quadrature-axis current. It is used to drive the machine and hence the turbine at
optimal speed. The machine side converter provides the required voltage at the
machine terminals so as to achieve the stator current control.
As described in next chapter, the wind turbine, drive train and the generator
with its converter is not modelled in detail, but they are collectively modelled
as a power source with first order transfer function.

2.4 Grid Connection of Wind Power Plants

Large wind power plants can be connected to the high voltage power
system grid through high voltage ac (HVAC) or high voltage dc (HVDC)
connection. Most of the operational wind farms are close to the shore and
hence they are connected using HVAC connection. For instance, Horns Rev
Wind farm uses 21 km of submarine cable and 36 km of onshore cable for the
HVAC transmission of 160MW at 150kV.
Recently some large wind power plants are being developed in the North
Sea, far from the coast. They need long distance cable transmission for grid
connection. A high voltage submarine cable has a large shunt capacitance given
by (2.9) [34].
2
ln

(2.8)

18

where, C is the cable capacitance,

is the permittivity of the cable
is the geometric mean distance between the conductor cores,
insulation,
and r is the radius of the conductor core.
Long distance HVAC cable transmission suffers from the excessive
reactive current drawn by the cable capacitances. The var generation by
submarine cables depends upon the rated voltage and length of the cable.
Typically, it is 100-150kvar/km for 33 kV cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE)
cables, 1 Mvar/km for 132 kV and 6-8Mvar/km for 400kV XLPE cables [3].
Such a large amount of var generation increases the cable losses, reduces the
power transfer capability of the cables, and requires reactive shunt
compensation to absorb the excessive reactive power and thereby, avoid overvoltage. Presently AC cables have a maximum cable rating of about 200 MW
for a 200 km long phase cable, at a voltage level of 150-170 kV. It will require
inductive compensation at both to absorb the var generated by the cable. For a
shorter distance of a 100 km, voltage ratings may be raised to 245 kV, thereby
increasing the power transfer capability to 350 MW [35]. HVAC transmission
is not feasible for large offshore power plants requiring cable transmission over
long distances. After a detailed techno-economical evaluation, Bresesti et. al.
concluded in [3] that VSC-HVDC is the cheapest option for connecting a 100
MW (and larger) wind power plants at distances longer than 100 km from the
shore. At present several large VSC-HVDC projects like BorWin-I and II,
DolWin-I, HelWin-I are under development for the connection of offshore
wind power plants in the North Sea [36].
Unlike HVAC transmission systems, there is no reactive power generation
or absorption in HVDC transmission systems. Hence, HVDC transmission is
very suitable for bulk power transmission over long distances. This has been
one of the driving factors for the development of HVDC systems since the first
commercial installation in Gotland in the year 1954.
The advantages of HVDC systems are fast and reversible power flow,
asynchronous and decoupled connection of two grids, power flow control and
power oscillation damping capabilities. Though a large number of large LCCbased HVDC systems are operational for bulk power transmission and/or
asynchronous connection between two grids, none of them is associated with
wind farms.

19

LCC-based HVDC terminals use thyristor-bridge converters, which require

a stable AC voltage for commutation. These converters are operated by
delaying the phase of current ideally between 0 and 180 with respect to the
associated voltage waveform and hence the current is always lagging behind
the voltage and the converters always absorb reactive power [34]. The reactive
power (Var) requirement for the LCC terminals is of the order of 60% of the
active power rating; though actual reactive power absorption depends upon the
power flow level. Large capacitive filters are used to provide reactive power to
the terminals and filter out the low frequency harmonics. Another problem lies
in the fact that LCC-based HVDC cannot be connected to weak ac grids due to
risk of commutation failures. The strength of ac grid with respect to the LCCbased HVDC rating is measured in terms of short circuit ratio (SCR) and
effective short circuit ratio (ESCR), which accounts for the reactive power
compensation provided at the terminals [34].
2.4.1

VSC HVDC Transmission

High voltage, high power two level or three level voltage source converters
(VSC) are used in HVDC applications are. It is possible to switch the insulated
gate bipolar transistor switches in the VSC at a frequency of a few kHz for
pulse width modulation to control the phase of the current with respect to the
voltage waveform. Both active and reactive power exchange can be
independently controlled. This enables the four quadrant operation of the
converter as shown in Figure 2.3. The advantages of VSC-HVDC over the
LCC-HVDC are listed below [37]:
I.

II.

VSC-HVDC occupies around 4-6 times less footprint area as it

does not require additional reactive power compensation and
passive harmonic filters tuned at high frequencies can be used. In
the case of LCC, the filters are bulky as they are tuned at relatively
lower frequencies of 11th and 13th harmonic and they provide
reactive power compensation to the HVDC converters. Moreover,
multiple numbers of such filters are used such that they can be
switched as per the load levels.
VSC-HVDC allows continuous control of reactive power
independent of the active power flow. LCC-HVDC has a limited
and discrete control over reactive power flow, as the capacitive
banks have to switched ON or OFF for reactive power control.

20

Therefore, VSC-HVDC can support voltage regulation like a

STATCOM while the VSC-HVDC has a limited voltage regulation
control.

1.5

Q
MVAmax

Vc=1.15pu
0.5

Vc=1.0pu

Vc=0.85pu
-0.5

-1

ConverterendQvsP
-1.5
-1.5

-1

-0.5

GridendQvsP
0

0.5

1.5

Figure 2.3 Four quadrant operational capability of a VSC.

III.
IV.

V.

VI.

VSC-HVDC can provide fault ride-through and black start

capabilities.
VSC-HVDC can be connected to weak ac grids as well as passive
grids. LCC-HVDC requires a strong ac grid with a minimum short
circuit ratio of 2.0.
Power reversal in LCC-HVDC involves current interruption as the
voltage polarity has to be reversed. In case of VSC-HVDC, no
such interruption is encountered as the current direction is reversed
for power reversal.
LCC-HVDC operates on current source converter topology. Hence,
at least 5-10% of dc power flow is required for their operation.
There is no such constraint on VSC-HVDC.

21

Figure 2.4 Location of Borkum 2 and other wind power plants in the North Sea [38].

Due to these advantages VSC-HVDC is suitable for the grid connection of

offshore wind power plants to onshore grids. BorWin-I HVDC is the first
HVDC connection to an offshore wind farm. It connects the 400MW Borkum-2
wind farm with the German Grid. The wind turbine generators, of 5MW size
each, are connected to the 33 kV collector grid. The voltage is stepped up to
170 kV AC voltage and the HVDC Light offshore converters converts it to
150 kV DC voltage. The transmission link comprises of 128 km of submarine
cable and 75 km underground cable before connecting to the 380kV AC grid at
Diele.

2.5 Modular Multilevel Converter (MMC) based HVDC

Recently modular multi-level converters (MMC) have been developed for
HVDC applications [39],[40]. The MMC comprises of a large number of halfbridge converters, usually referred as sub-modules, with isolated capacitors in
cascade connection. Such a multi-level configuration provides modularity,
scalability and the ac output voltage has very low harmonic content. The
switching frequency can be reduced and hence the losses are reduced as well.
Due to these benefits, the new topology has rendered the two level or three
level VSC topologies obsolete for the VSC-HVDC applications as is evident

22

from the fact that after the first VSC-HVDC connection to the Borkum-2 wind
power plant, all the later VSC-HVDCs, viz. BorWin-II, HelWin-I, DolWin-I,
SelWin-I connecting the in the North Sea are of the MMC-HVDC type.
A multi-level converter comprises of a number of unit sub-modules of a
low unit voltage ratings connected in series to attain a high voltage
requirements as shown in Figure 2.5. Each sub-module comprises of a pair of
complimentary IGBT switches connected in series across the sub-module
capacitor. When the switch T1 is ON, the capacitor voltage, the sub-module
is referred as turned ON and Vc appears across the sub-module terminals and
the capacitor gets charged or discharged depending upon the direction of the
sub-module current, Ism . When the switch T2 is turned ON, and the switch
T1 is OFF, the sub-module capacitor is by-passed and the sub-module
output voltage is 0. Thus by controlling the complimentary switches T1 and T2,
the sub-module voltage can be controlled. Since, there are a large number of
unit sub-modules connected in series, the output ac voltage can be controlled in
the multi-level, determined by the number of switches between the ac voltage
terminal and the dc pole. At any instant, the ac terminal voltage for phase A is
given by,
(2.9)

where,

are the number of sub-modules in ON state in the upper and

lower multi-valves of the same phase. Similarly other phase voltages can be
obtained.
It is obvious from 2.9, that the total number of sub-modules in a phase is
related to the pole voltages by the relation,
(2.10)

Vdc

23

Figure 2.5 Modular multi-level voltage source converter

The multi-level output ac voltage has a lower harmonic content and hence
the tuned filters, which are mandatory in a two-level or three-level converters
are not required. The converter sub-modules are switched at a low frequency,
but the effective frequency turns out to be very high due to the number of submodules connected in series. Due to low frequency switching, the overall
losses are lower [41]. On the flip side, the number of IGBT switches required
for a given converter is doubled.
However, the two-level VSC-HVDC system has been considered in this
project as the objective is on the operation and control of the wind power plant
with VSC-HVDC connection to the grid. Most of the findings of this project
would be applicable to the MMC-HVDC systems as well with necessary
modifications. An application of MMC-HVDC for the connection of wind
power plants was studied in [39].

24

3 System Layout and Main Circuit Parameters

A 400 MW offshore wind power plant layout has been considered as
shown in Figure 3.1.

3.1 Main circuit components and parameters

The system shown in Figure 3.1 comprises of the following main
components.
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
vii.
viii.
ix.
x.
xi.

Onshore Grid
Converter Transformers
Tuned Filters
Phase reactors
Voltage source converters
HVDC Capacitors
HVDC Cables
150kV submarine cables
3-winding transformers
Zig-zag grounding transformers
Wind turbine generators with LCL filters

3.2 Onshore Grid

The onshore grid is represented by a Thevenins equivalent voltage source
with series impedance. The grid impedance is estimated on the basis of the
Wind power plant short circuit ratio at the point of grid connection. The
resistive and inductive parts of the impedance are determined from the grid
angle. Danish grid code specifies that the ratio of wind power plant capacity to
the grid short circuit MVA, which is also referred as the short circuit ratio,
should be considered as 10 and the grid angle should be considered as 84.3 i.e.
the reactance to resistance ratio (X/R ratio) as 10 [13].

25

LCL
Filter

Chopper
Resistor

GSC

CB & CT
MV feeder #1

36 kV Coll.
Bus#1

WTG#1
GSC

MV feeder #2

WTG#2

36 kV Coll.
Bus#2

HV
feeder #1

MV feeder #3

36 kV Coll.
Bus#3

WTG#3
GSC

B1

150 kV

B2

HV
feeder #2

GSC

FB

150 kV Coll
Bus #2

MV feeder #4 A4
FA

Feeder circuit breaker (CB)

WTG#4

o/c relay current transformer (CT)

33kV Coll. Bus#4

OFFSHORE

ONSHORE

VSC1
VSC based HVDC Transmission

Vf2
170 kV

Vc2

Vdc1

Vc1

Xph1

Vdc2

kV, 1400A, 200km DC Cable

170 kV

VSC2

Xph2

Xt2

Vg 400 kV

400MW offshore WPP

150 kV

150 kV Coll
Bus #1

P+ jQ

26

Figure 3.1 Single line diagram (SLD) of a 400MW offshore wind power plant with VSC-HVDC connection to the onshore grid.

27

3.3 Converter Transformers

Converter transformers are required to interface the VSC output voltage to
the grid voltage. The onshore converter transformer has the nominal voltage
ratio of 400/170 kV as it interfaces the 170kV VSC with the 400kV onshore
grid. The offshore converter transformer has the nominal voltage ratio of
170/150 kV to connect with the offshore collector grid at 150 kV. The
transformer is sized at 450MVA in line with the system base of 445 MVA for
400MW wind power plant. Tap changers are provided to bring down the grid
side nominal voltage -15% in 12 steps of 1.25%. The leakage reactance is
assumed to be 14%, with 0.5% no load loss and 0.5% full load copper loss.

3.4 Voltage Source Converters

Two-level voltage source converters have been considered here for the
VSC-HVDC transmission system. Sinetriangle modulation at the 39th
harmonic (i.e. 1950 Hz for 50 50 Hz ac system) switching frequency has been
assumed, which represent the first generation of the VSC-HVDC converter.
Sine triangle modulation of two level converters generates odd harmonics
at the switching frequency and its multiples along with the sidebands around
them. The harmonic components in the output is given by the expression [42],
2
2

cos

2
1
2

where,

sin

sin

cos

(2.2)

cos

=instantaneous line to ground voltage,

=pole to pole DC voltage,
M=modulation index
, =fundamental and carrier frequencies
,
= phase angles of the fundamental and the carrier
frequency at time t=0
= i-th order Bessel function of the first kind with the
argument of .

28

Frequency Spectrum
0.9
Fundamental
Component

0.8

Component at
Switching Frequency

0.7

Magnitude (pu)

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0

Figure 3.2
index=0.9).

1000

2000

3000

4000
5000
Frequency (Hz)

6000

7000

8000

Frequency spectrum of a two level voltage source converter (Modulation

Thus, only odd harmonics are generated at the multiples of switching

frequency and their sidebands. The harmonic amplitude decrease with the
reciprocal of the multiple number m of the switching frequency and hence the
harmonics at and around the first and second multiples of the switching
frequency (i.e. the 37th, 39th, 41st, 77th, and the 79th harmonics) have relatively
higher amplitudes. A plot of harmonic spectrum is given in Figure 3.2.

Figure 3.3 Tuned Filter circuit

29

3.5 Tuned Filters

The high frequency harmonics generated by the PWM can be filtered by
using the passive tuned filters (Figure 3.3). Such a filter is usually characterized
by the tuned resonant frequency, quality factor and shunt reactive power
injected at the power frequency.
The admittance function of the filter shown in Figure 3.3 in is given by
(3.2).
(2.3)

Two such filters, tuned at the 39th and 78th harmonic frequencies are used in
this project. They have the quality factors of 25 and 6.They inject 0.06 pu and
0.03 pu reactive power respectively. Other parameters are calculated in
Appendix A. The admittances of the filters are shown in as a function of
frequency.
Admittance of Filter #1 (Tuned at 1950 Hz)

Admittance (dB)

20

-20

-40

-60

Phase (deg)

90
45
0
-45
-90
2

10

10

10

Frequency (Hz)

Figure 3. 4 Bode plot of 39th harmonic filter admittance.

30

Admittance of Filter #2 (Tuned at 3900 Hz)

0

Admittance (dB)

-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
-60
-70

Phase (deg)

90
45
0
-45
-90
2

10

10

10

Frequency (Hz)

Figure 3. 5 Bode plot of 78th harmonic filter admittance.

3.6 Phase Reactors

Phase reactors are required to interface the PWM converter with the grid. It
provides the filtering of current ripples, as the maximum peak-to-peak ripple
current is given by,
1
2
where,

(2.4)

31

Phase reactor (i) Terminal Voltages (ii) Voltage difference across the terminals
& (iii) Phase A current

kV

100
0
-100
0.1

0.102

0.104

0.106

0.108

0.11

0.112

0.114

0.116

0.118

0.12

0.102

0.104

0.106

0.108

0.11
kV

0.112

0.114

0.116

0.118

0.12

0.102

0.104

0.106

0.108

0.11 0.112
Time (s)

0.114

0.116

0.118

0.12

Vx (kV)

200
0
-200
0.1

Ia (kA)

1
0
-1
0.1

Figure 3.6 Phase reactor (i) Terminal voltages (ii) Voltage across the reactor and (iii)
current through the reactor

Figure 3.6 shows the ripple currents through a 19.3 mH phase reactor
driven by a VSC with 300kV dc link voltage at the switching frequency of
1950 Hz. A large phase reactor would mean better filtering and hence lower
current ripples. However, too high value would slow down the dynamics of the
converter. In this project a phase reactor of 0.12 pu size has been used.

3.7 DC line Capacitors

DC line capacitors provide the filtering of current ripples on the dc side as
well as maintain the dc voltage for the operation of the VSC. These are sized
on the basis of the dc link voltage and power handling capacities of the
converter [43]. Typically, the size is given in terms of time constant, , defined
as,
(2.5)
2

32

In other words, is the time taken to charge the capacitors to the nominal
dc voltage levels, when it is charged by the rated current. For the VSC-HVDC
system, in this project a time constant of 2 ms has been used [43], [44]. This
gives the capacitor size of 35.5 F from each of the dc lines to the ground.

3.8 HVDC cables

Cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE) cables are used in VSC-HVDC
transmission. Nominal power rating of 400MW at 150 kV dc voltage requires
a current flow of 1.33 kA. Assuming a current density of 1.2A/mm2, the
required copper cross section area is 1111 sq. mm. In BorWin 1 HVDC of
similar ratings, XLPE insulated copper cables of 1200 sq. mm conductor cross
section were used. An insulation thickness of 12mm is assumed.

3.9 Layout of WTG

The 400 MW wind power plant is divided into 4 clusters. Each cluster has
15 WTG installed on 3 radial feeders as shown in Figure 3.7(a). Thus, there are
5 number of 6.7 MW turbines on each feeder, referred here as a string. Thus the
total capacity of feeder becomes 33.5MW. The IEEE Working Group Report
[45] states that the underground feeder strings are generally rated for around 25
to 30 MW due to soil thermal conditions and practical cable sizes. Three WTG
feeder strings are connected to the same collector bus in parallel combination.
Under rated power generation conditions, the radial feeder current will
increase as the number of turbine connections increase along the cable length
towards the collector bus. Hence, the cable cross-section near the collector bus
should be larger than the cable cross-section at the remote end. Here three
different cable cross sections, viz. 95 sq. mm, 240 sq. mm, and 400sq. mm
have been used as shown in Figure 3.7(a).

33

Figure 3.7.. Layout of a Wind Power Plant

On the basis of active and reactive power loss in the line for the rated
current flow from each of the WTGs, the equivalent parameters for the WTG
feeder string #A can be calculated by (3.5) [46],

where,

(2.6)

- series impedance of mth section.

- Shunt susceptance of mth section.

Equation (3.5) is based upon the assumption that there are m number of
WTGs connected to the cable section m and each of them contribute the same
nominal current to the cable. The three feeders strings appear in parallel at the

34

collector bus, the equivalent feeder impedance,

,

, and susceptance,

,are given by their parallel combination (3.14) [46].

(2.7)
,

The WTG feeders are connected to the 36 kV terminals of the three

winding step-up transformer as shown in Figure 3.1. Such a connection is
inspired from [47]. The collector grid voltage was selected as 36kV, instead of
more popular 33 kV systems, in order to optimize the cable size for the adopted
power ratings. The 150 kV terminals of the 3-winding transformer is connected
to the converter transformer through 150 kV high voltage (HV) cable feeders.

3.10 Neutral Grounding

The WTG end has the delta winding of the unit transformer in YnD5
connection. There is a delta winding of the plant step-up transformer at the
collectors bus which is in Ynd5d5 connection. Such transformer connections
render the 36kV medium voltage (MV) cable feeders remain ungrounded.
When there is a single line to ground fault, zero sequence currents are
produced which cannot flow in an ungrounded system. Consequently, the fault
current is low but over-voltages of the order of 1.73 pu or even higher in the
case of arcing faults are produced [48].
An ungrounded system or the system with high resistance grounding
system enables uninterrupted system operation even in the event of a single line
to ground fault. Due to high impedance of the zero sequence network, the fault
current is very small and fault detection is difficult. The system need not be
interrupted as such. However, it results in over-voltages on the healthy phases
and oscillating neutral conditions in presence of unbalanced operations.
Further, the overvoltage raises the probability of another fault thereby leading
to a line-line fault may occur. Therefore, HRG is not favoured for high voltage
applications. HRG systems can be applied on 2.4 kV and 4.16kV systems,
though they are mostly used on power systems of voltages up to 600V ac [49].

35

(a) zig-zag transformer connection

(b) Phasor Diagram
Figure 3.8 Zig-zag transformer for neutral grounding
The system grounding can be provided by addition of a star-delta
transformer with the delta winding in open circuit, zig-zag grounding
transformer or the T-connected grounding transformer. Zig-zag transformer is
commonly employed as grounding transformer in power systems as it is less
expensive and relatively small in size [50]. Figure 3.8 shows the winding
configuration of a zig-zag grounding transformer and its phasor diagram for the
positive sequence components. Each of the three limbs has two sets of
windings denoted by letters (A1, B1, C1) and (a1,b1,c1). Series connection of
the two windings ensures that they carry the same current and since the two
windings on the same limb are wound in opposite direction, the net flux due to
the zero sequence current is zero. Therefore, it has low impedance for the zero
sequence currents, which is effectively the leakage reactance of the
transformer. At the same time, it offers very high impedance, which is
effectively the magnetizing reactance of the transformer core, for the positive
and negative sequence components [50].

36

3.11 Wind Turbine Generator with Full Scale Converter

The wind model, aerodynamics, gear system, the synchronous generator and
the generator side converter is collectively modelled as a first order low-pass
transfer function with a 20 ms time constant. Mechanical power from the wind
is provided as an input to the low-pass transfer function. Its output is an
equivalent dc current source connected to the dc link of the full scale converter
as shown in Figure 3.9.
The grid side converter is controlled to maintain the dc link voltage balance
by evacuating the excess power to the offshore grid. It is equipped with an L-CL filter and the unit transformer in grounded wye-delta connection, with the
grounded wye being on the low voltage (LV) side and the delta connection on
the medium voltage (MV) side. Such a connection isolates the zero sequence
impedance of the MV grid from the individual WTG LV circuit and provides a
solid ground reference for the WTG [45]. There is a load-break switch to
disconnect the WTG when required.

Figure 3.9 Model of an aggregated wind turbine generator with its LCL filter and step-up
transformer.

3.12 Control of the grid side converter of WTGFSC

Positive sequence current control approach has been considered here for the
grid side converter (GSC) of the WTG-FSC system. Accordingly, for a given
transfer of active power,
, and reactive power
, the positive sequence
current references of WTG-GSC are given by,

37

(2.8)

, and

where,

are the positive sequence voltage components at the

WTG-GSC terminal and

, and

are the positive sequence current

references along the

axes in the stationary reference frame. Proportional
resonant controllers are used to implement the current control, as shown in
Figure 3.10. The current control equations are given below

(2.9)

(2.10)

Equation (3.7) requires the estimation of the positive sequence components

from the three phase measured voltage variables. The next section describes the
extraction of the positive sequence components and the positive sequence
component based phase locked loop (PLL).

vwt
.

vwt .

vwt
.

vwt .

Figure 3.10 Proportional resonant current controllers for the WTG GSC.

38

3.13 Separation of Positive and Negative Sequence

Components
The Sequence components of a three phase voltage or currents can be
obtained using Clarkes transformation and the second order generalized
integrator (SOGI) based filters.
The measured 3 phase voltage quantities can be converted into two phase
equivalent along the
axes using the Clarkes transformation (3.10),
2 1
3
0

1
2
3
2

1
2
3
2

(2.11)

The - axis is aligned with the axis of phase A while the -axis leads the
- axis by 90 For a set of balanced 3-phase positive sequence
, and
,
and
have the same magnitude as that of ,
voltages, ,
is in phase with
, and
lags
by 90. For a set of balanced 3-phase
, and
,
and
have the same
negative sequence voltages, ,
magnitude as that of
,
is in phase with
, and
leads
by 90.
A set of unbalanced voltages can be decomposed into balanced positive,
negative and zero sequence components. The zero sequence component is onethird of the sum of the three phase quantities. A method of separating the
positive and negative sequence components is described here.
The positive sequence components,
and
and the negative sequence
and
in the
axes are given by the transformations
components
(3.9) and (3.10) [51]
V
V

1 1
j V
2 j 1 V
1 1
1
2

(2.12)
(2.13)

rotates it by 90, while

Here, multiplication of a vector by
1
the magnitude remains unchanged. This implies that the phase shifted
components of the components V and V are required. Such quadrature phase

39

shifgted components can be generated using the second order generalized

integrators (SOGI) described in the next section.
It is obvious from (3.9) and (3.10) that,
(2.14)

3.13.1 Sequence Components from the Measured Data

Second order generalized integrator (SOGI) can extract the in-phase
components at the specified frequency and generate a component of the same
rotated by a quadrature. Hence it is also referred as SOGI quadrature signal
generator (QSG). Figure 3.11 gives a block diagram of a SOGI (SOGI-QSG).
By Masons loop gain formula, the transfer functions of the SOGI-QSG are
given by,

Figure 3.11 Block Diagram of SOGI quadrature signal generator

40

Bode Diagram: SOGI-QSG

10

2
0
Magnitude (dB)

3
-10

-20

3
1

-30
-40
-50
90

Phase (deg)

1& 3
0

2
-90

-180
0

10

10

10

10

Frequency (Hz)

2:

3: 0.5

Figure 3.12 Bode plot of SOGI-QSG

2
2

(2.15)
2

(2.16)

2
At, the tuned frequency, , the gains are unity.
1 and

(2.17)

The SOGI-QSG is tuned at frequency , and the parameter determined

the bandwidth.
Once the instantaneous voltage components along
axes and their 90
phase-shifted components are available, the positive and negative sequence

41

components can be calculated using (3.11) and (3.12). Then the filtered
positive sequence components can be applied to Parks transformation based
positive sequence phase locked loop (Figure 3.13).

3.14 Positive Sequence Phase Locked Loop (PLL)

A positive sequence PLL has been developed using the positive sequence
voltage components along the
axes. Since the voltage vector is aligned
along the d-axis, the q-axis component is applied to the PI controller to get the
frequency
and the phase angle
as shown in Figure 3.13.

Figure 3.13 Positive sequence phase locked loop

3.15 Control of VSCHVDC system

The VSC-HVDC transmission system has two converters, the onshore
converter, VSC1, and the offshore converter, VSC2. The basic controller
scheme of these converters is described here.
3.15.1 Onshore grid converter
The onshore VSC controller (VSCC2) regulated the HVDC voltage and the
reactive power (or ac terminal voltage) exchanged with the onshore grid
Conventional vector control of currents in the d and q axes in the rotating
reference frame is applied here The converter terminal voltage
are
related to the grid voltatge
at the filter bus by KVL in the rotating
reference frame

(2.18)

42

where, is the frequency,

the phase reactor.

are the resistance, and inductance of

flows into the converter. The

The phase reactor current
proportional-integral (PI) controller acts upon the current deviation from the

to produce the voltage references for the

reference current signals

converter
as expressed in,

(2.19)

The outer loops regulate the dc line voltage,

, of the VSC-HVDC
, to the
transmission on the onshore terminals and the reactive power flow,
grid. Since the PLL is aligned such that the grid voltage appears along the daxis in the synchronously rotating reference frame, the reference for d-axis
current control will regulate the active power flow and hence the dc voltage,
and q-axis current control will control the reactive power exchange with the
grid as given by,

(2.20)

where, the superscript * indicates the reference quantities. The PI-controllers

were tuned using pole cancellation technique. It is described in the Appendix
B.
3.15.2 Offshore grid converter
The basic function of the offshore VSC controller is to maintain the offshore
grid voltage and frequency in the offshore WPP grid. Since the frequency is
predefined as external reference to this converter, a PLL is not required
[8],[10]. The controller can be modelled in the synchronously rotating
reference frame (or the d-q frame given by the Parks transformation). PI
controllers can be used in this case. However, separate controllers are required
for the positive and negative sequence controllers. A positive sequence PI
controller is described here as the basic controller. The block diagram of the
controller in synchronously rotating reference frame is given in Figure 3.15.

43

The governing equations of the controller are as follows:

(2.21)
(2.22)

The current references are given by the outer voltage control loop as follows,

(2.23)

is the desired positive sequence reference voltage for the

where,
offshore grid and
is the positive sequence offshore grid voltage.
These references were augmented with the feed-forward terms of the d and q
axes current components from wind power plant as well as accounting for the
current drawn by the filter shunt capacitance at power frequency. This method
was proposed in [10]. However, during the course simulation studies for thie
research the control structure was found to be unstable. The method has been
improved by using the active and reactive power flow to the VSC-HVDC to
determine the d and q axis current feed-forward terms. Theis method gave
improved performance with regards to disturbances.

3.16 Overall Control Structure

Figure 3.16 shows the overall control structure of the wind power plant with
VSC-HVDC connection.

44

Lim

Lim

Figure 3.14 Onshore VSC-HVDC Controller.

45

Figure 3.15 Offshore VSC Controller

46

Figure 3.16 Overall control structure of the WPP with VSC-HVDC connection

47

4 Operation and Control of WPP with VSCHVDC

connection
This chapter demonstrates the simulation results of the different operational
modes from the energization of the VSC-HVDC and the WPP, ramping up of
the power, followed by ramping down and the subsequent shut-down of the
whole system. A single line to ground fault is simulated to show the robustness
of the control structure. Finally the frequency regulation and fault ride through
cases have been described.

4.1 Operational Modes

A sequence of events was simulated to demonstrate the normal operation of
the WPP with VSC-HVDC connection to the onshore grid. The WPP and VSCHVDC is started from completely de-energized state, and the power is ramped
up to the rated values. Afterwards the power is ramped down and the whole
system is de-energized in the end. The event sequence is listed in Table 4.1.
4.1.1

Charging of VSCHVDC Lines

In the beginning, the VSC-HVDC as well as the offshore WPP grid is in

de-energized state. When the circuit breaker is closed the onshore VSC-HVDC
terminal gets connected to the grid through the converter transformer. Though
the VSC is blocked, the anti-parallel diodes in the VSC do the rectification and
a large inrush current flows in to charge the HVDC capacitors. The diode
rectifier sees a capacitive impedance of the cable and the DC capacitors. Hence
they get charged to the peak line to ground voltage levels, i.e. 138.8 kV or
277.6 kV pole-pole voltage when the ac side is connected to the 170 kV (l-l,
rms) grid.
The initial magnitude of inrush current is limited by the impedance of the
grid, converter transformers and the phase reactors. Even then, pre-insertion
resistors are required to avoid the sudden power surge flowing to the VSC. In
this simulation, pre-insertion resistors of 1k have been used for a period of
70ms. Then the onshore VSC is de-blocked so that the dc line voltages get
regulated to the nominal values of 300kV.

48

Table 4.1 Event list for the demonstration of the normal operating modes of the WPP with
VSC-HVDC connection

Time
0.00s
0.05s
0.20s
0.40s
0.50s
0.60s
1.40s

4.5s

5.40s
8.40s
9.60s
9.80s
10.40s
10.90s
4.1.2

Event
All CBs are open. All controllers are disabled
Onshore grid CB is closed. Pre-insertion resistance is 1k. By pass
resistance remains in circuit for 70ms.
The onshore VSC is de-blocked. Its controller is enabled.
The offshore VSC is de-blocked and its controller is enabled. The
offshore converter transformer is connected by the circuit breaker.
The WTG controllers are enabled.
The WTG1 CB is closed.
Power reference is set to 400MW. This power order gets divided to
the 4 aggregated WTG generators. Maximum rate of change of
power is 250MW/sec.
A single line to ground fault is applied at the point FA on the
feeder connecting WTG 4. (The fault is not a part of normal
operation. It is included here just to show that the complete control
system withstands a transient fault).
Power order is set to 0. Power order falls at the rate of 250MW/sec.
The WTG1 circuit breaker is opened.
The WTG voltages are set to 0. WPP circuit breaker is opened.
The offshore VSC is blocked.
Onshore VSC voltage reference is set to 0.
Onshore VSC is blocked and the onshore grid transformer is opened.
Energizing the Offshore Grid

After the VSC-HVDC voltage is stabilized, the offshore VSC is deblocked. Its controller ramps up the ac reference voltage and the offshore
voltage builds up gradually. When the nominal voltage levels have been
attained in the offshore-grid, the WTG cable strings are connected to the
collector bus sequentially to avoid oscillations. At this point of time the WPP is
fully energized, and the WTGs are ready for synchronization. Figure 4.2 shows
the voltage and current waveforms under these conditions. A small power
flows from the onshore grid to meet the no load losses.

49

4.1.3

Synchronization of the of the WTGs and Power Control

The WTGs are running at rated voltage but with no load generation. The
WTG-GSC is controlled in stationary reference frame. The positive sequence
voltage is estimated from the terminal voltage using DSOGI filters and
synchronization is achieved using the frequency locked loop (FLL) [51],[52].
When the power generation picks up, the dc-link voltage regulation for the
WTG-FSC sets the power reference for the WTG-GSC. The actual power
control lies with the WTG and machine side converter controls. The reactive
power reference may be set by an auxiliary terminal voltage regulation loop or
it can be externally set. Positive sequence current references are generated from
the estimated positive sequence controllers and the active and reactive power
orders. Then they are implemented using the proportional resonant controllers
in the stationary reference frame.
1
0

Vac (pu)

-1
0
0.5

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.1

0.15
Time (s)

0.2

0.25

0.3

Iac (pu)

0
-0.5
0
1

0.05
Vdc (pu)

0.5
0
0
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
0

0.05
Idc (pu)

0.05

Figure 4. 1 Energization of the VSC HVDC system. Vac is the filter bus voltage of the
onshore VSC-HVDC terminal, Iac is the current through the onshore phase reactors, Vdc is the
dc link voltage, and Idc is the dc line current.

50

1
Vac (pu)
0
-1
1.28
0.5

1.285

1.29

1.295

1.3

1.305

1.31

1.29

1.295

1.3

1.305

1.31

Iac (pu)

0
-0.5
1.28
1.01

1.285

Vdc (pu)

1
0.99
1.28

1.285

1.29

1.295

1.3

1.305

1.31

0
Idc (pu)
-0.05
1.28
1.285

1.29

1.295
Time (s)

1.3

1.305

1.31

0.05

Figure 4.2 Waveforms when the offshore collector grid is energized and the WTG units are
connected. Vac is the filter bus voltage of the onshore VSC-HVDC terminal, Iac is the current
through the onshore phase reactors, Vdc is the dc link voltage, and Idc is the dc line current.
1
0
-1
3.28
1

Vac (pu)

3.285

3.29

3.295

3.3

3.305

3.31

3.29

3.295

3.3

3.305

3.31

3.285

3.29

3.295

3.3

3.305

3.31

Idc (pu)
-1.1
3.28
3.285

3.29

3.295
Time (s)

3.305

3.31

0
Iac (pu)
-1
3.28
3.285
1.02
Vdc (pu)
1
0.98
3.28
-0.9
-1

Pg (pu)
3.3

Figure 4.3 Steady state operation at full load. Vac is the filter bus voltage of the onshore
VSC-HVDC terminal, Iac is the current through the onshore phase reactors, Vdc is the dc link
voltage, and Idc is the dc line current.

51

1
Pg (pu)
0.5
0
0
2
1
Pwtg1 (pu)
0.5
0
-0.5
0
2
1.5
1
0.5
Vdc (pu)
0
0
2
1.5
1
0.5 Idc (pu)
0
-0.5
0
2

10

10

10

10

Qwtg1 (pu)

4
Time (s)

Figure 4.4 Full operating range (with a single line to ground fault at 4.5 s).

4.1.4

Steady State Operation

Figure 4.3 shows the ac voltage and current waveform at the onshore VSCHVDC terminal when the WPP is generating nominal 1 pu power. The dc link
voltage ripple is less than 1%, while there is significant current ripple even at
nominal power ratings. Figure 4.4 shows that the WTGs have to absorb the
reactive power throughout the operating range as the collector grid is capacitive
in nature. It also shows the impact of a transient single line to ground fault of
150 ms duration at a 36 kV collector bus (for WTG#4). Power flow gets
disturbed for some time and power output from WTG #1 also gets affected.
High ripples are observed on the HVDC system during the fault, but they settle
down to nominal levels soon after the fault is cleared.
4.1.5

Ramping Down of Power Generation WPP Shut Down

In this step the reference power to the WTGs are set to zero and the power
generation is ramped down. Then the whole plant is shut down in a controlled
way. First the WTGs are shut down, and then the offshore VSC-HVDC
terminal is blocked. Then the onshore VSC is blocked. The dc system has

52

trapped dc voltage which will take a long time to discharge by itself. Some
discharge resistors have to be connected to ensure a quick discharge.

4.2 Frequency Control through VSCHVDC Transmission

Traditionally the conventional power plants have been providing the grid
frequency support in terms of inertial response, primary and secondary
frequency controls in the event of power unbalances. With the increase in the
penetration of wind power in the power system, grid operators are putting
regulations for the participation of wind power plants in frequency regulation.
The German and Danish grid codes are briefly discussed here and then a
simulation study of grid frequency control in the wind power plant with VSCHVDC connection is presented.
4.2.1

German Grid Requirement on Frequency Regulation

Grid codes specify the frequency control capabilities of the power

generation plants for grid connection. The German Grid code [11] tells that all
generating plants should be capable of reducing their output power at the rate
of 1% of the rated power per minute across the entire range of operation. Large
generating plants of 100MW or larger plant sizes must be able to contribute to
the primary frequency regulation with a control band of at least 2% of the rated
power and adjustable frequency power droop characteristics. The total primary
control power must be activated within 30s for a quasi-stationary frequency
deviation of 200 mHz and it must be supplied for at least 15-minutes
duration. This gives a droop characteristic of 20% regulation i.e. the active
power generation changes by 100% for 20% change in frequency. The
insensitivity range must be less than 10 mHz.
Since wind energy is not a controllable source of power, power generation
energy, power cannot be ramped up if it is already operating under maximum
power point tracking regime. De-rated operation (i.e. less than maximum
available wind power) has been proposed to provide margin for eventual
frequency support [22]. Deviations and amendments were provided in the Grid
code for offshore wind [12], whereby offshore wind power plant has to reduce
power generation during over-frequency conditions in the grid as shown in
Figure 4.5. When the grid frequency exceeds 50.1 Hz , power has to be reduced
at the rate of 98% per Hz drop in the grid frequency and 25% per second of the

53

active power available at the moment. The unit should be disconnected after 10
seconds if the frequency remains at or above 51.5 Hz.

Figure 4.5 Active Power reduction at over-frequency

Figure 4.6 Frequency regulation with and without previous downward regulation (Denmark
grid code [13])

4.2.2

Danish Grid Requirement on Frequency Regulation

The Danish grid requirement for frequency regulation is shown in in Figure

4.6[13]. There are two regulation curves the first one provides only the
downward regulation during over-frequency, while the second has a provision
for both upward and downward regulations. If the wind power plant is
generating maximum available power, then it can provide only downward

54

regulation when there is over-frequency. It cannot participate in the upward

regulation required during under-frequency. On the other hand, if it is
generating a de-rated amount of power as given by the set-point value at
downward regulation, it can participate in both the upward and downward
regulation. A de-rated operation would imply an undue loss of energy and
revenue by virtue of reduced generation under normal frequency conditions.
4.2.3

Control Architecture for Frequency Regulation through VSC

HVDC Transmission

VSC-HVDC transmission provides an asynchronous connection between

the offshore and the onshore grids. The offshore grid frequency is completely
decoupled from the onshore grid frequency. Therefore, for the participation of
the offshore WPPs in frequency regulation, either the grid frequency has to be
relayed to the offshore grid or the power order to the offshore wind power plant
should be updated and communicated in real time. As described in [22], there
can be three different ways of relaying or communicating the onshore grid
frequency to the offshore wind power plant (Figure 4.7):
4.2.3.1 Using the dc voltage and offshore grid frequency
The onshore VSC-HVDC reference voltage is changed in proportion to the
onshore grid frequency. If the frequency is increasing the dc voltage reference
is increased. Consequently, the dc voltage at the offshore VSC-HVDC terminal
is increased. The offshore VSC terminal voltage is measured and then a
simplified impedance model and measured current is used to estimate the
nominal dc voltage. A deviation from the estimated value is used to modify the
frequency reference for the offshore grid. Therefore, if there is an increase in
the onshore grid frequency, the dc voltage is raised and eventually the offshore
grid frequency is raised. The grid converters in the WTGs sense the frequency
increase and therefore decrease their generation as per the pre-set droop
characteristics. This is shown in Figure 4.7(a).

55

Figure 4.7 Frequency regulation by WPP through VSC-HVDC connection

56

1.005
Fgrid2

wn2

1
0.995
13
1.06

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

16

17

18

19

20

21

17

18

19

20

21

Vcc1est
1.03
1
13
1.005

14
FRMF

wn1

1
0.995
13

14

15

1.02

PMF

1
0.98
13
0.85

14

15

16

Ps1

Psg

0.8
0.75
13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

Time (s)

Figure 4. 8 Frequency regulation through VSC-HVDC using the dc voltage and offshore
frequency for relaying change of dc voltage, offshore frequency and the power flows..

Figure 4. 8 and Figure 4.9 show the simulation results for this case. A
frequency change is simulated by introducing the step changes in the frequency
(Fgrid2) voltage source model for the onshore grid. The onshore grid PLL
measures the grid frequency (wn2). It is used to change the dc reference voltage
of the onshore VSC-terminal using a multiplication factor (DCVMF).
Consequently the HVDC voltage on the onshore terminal changes (Vdc2). The
offshore HVDC terminal voltage (Vdc1) changes as well. It is compared with
the nominal offshore voltage estimated (Vdc1est) for the measured load current
and the offshore frequency (wn1) is changed. The WTG-FSC then change the
power reference to the WTG-FSC as per the pre-set droop and frequency
regulation is achieved. The power generated and hence injected to the grid
changes as shown in the Figure 4. 8 It is represented by the curve FRC1 in
Figure 4. 10.

57

1.005
Fgrid2

wn2

0.995
13
1.02

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

DCVMF

1
0.98
13

14

1.05
1
Vdc2
0.95
13

14

Vdc1

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

1.06
Vdc1est
1.04
1.02
1
13

14

Figure 4.9 Frequency regulation through VSC-HVDC using the dc voltage and offshore
frequency for relaying change of dc voltage, and estimation of the voltage change.

4.2.3.2 Communicating the onshore grid frequency to the offshore

grid VSCterminal and then varying the offshore grid
frequency
The onshore grid frequency is directly communicated to the offshore grid
VSC-converter using communication channels. The offshore VSC-HVDC
changes the offshore grid frequency such that the onshore grid frequency is
replicated. A filter with 100 ms time constant is used at the onshore frequency
measurement. It accounts for both the filtering and communication delay. The
dc voltage need not be changed in this method. The resultant power flow for
frequency regulation is shown by the curve FRC2 in Figure 4. 10.

58

0.8
FRC1
FRC2
FRC3

0.79

0.78

0.77

0.76
13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

Figure 4. 10 Comparison of the power flow change as a result of frequency regulation using
the three methods.

4.2.3.3 Communicating the onshore grid frequency to the offshore

WPP
If reliable communication is available, this is the most suitable method as
the only delay is due to communication delay. No disturbance in the HVDC
voltage or the onshore grid frequency is required. The power curve FRC3
shows this kind of regulation with an assumed time delay of 100ms which is
modelled here as a first order transfer function.
Since frequency control involves relatively slow variation of power and the
full response has to be achieved in a period of 30ms, all three methods are
suitable.

4.3 Fault Ride Through

Transmission

(FRT)

Using

VSCHVDC

When there is a fault on the onshore ac grid, the AC grid voltage at the point
of common coupling (PCC) dips, thereby reducing the power transfer
capability from the onshore VSC-HVDC terminal. Power flow to the VSCHVDC can be rapidly controlled when it is connected to two strong power
system grids. However, when it is connected to a wind power plant, the rating
of the VSC-HVDC is the same as the wind power plant rating. The WPP power
generation cannot be brought down instantaneously. The excess power gets
accumulated in the VSC-HVDC system capacitance, thereby, leading to DC
over-voltage.

59

Chopper controlled resistor is used to dissipate the excess power and thus
limit DC voltage rise within safe levels, while the WTGs are signaled to
reduce their generation as quickly as possible [44]. It is installed in HVDC
Nord E.ON 1 (now referred as BorWin 1) to prevent DC over-voltages by
temporarily dissipating the excess power [53]. In variable frequency drives, it is
referred as braking resistor to dissipate the braking energy [54]. A similar
arrangement is provided in the WTG-FSC to limit the DC link over-voltages
[55]. In this section the performance of the chopper resistor in the FSC is
evaluated for controlling the HVDC system over-voltage during low voltage
faults in the onshore grid.
E.ON Grid Code requires that the WPP remain connected till the grid
voltage at the PCC drops down to 0% of the nominal levels for periods lasting
as long as 150ms, and inject reactive current to assist in the system recovery
[11]. As the fault is cleared and voltage starts building up, the WPP has to ramp
up active power supply.
Mathematically, the power transferred between the converter terminals and
the PCC bus is given by the power transfer relationship

where,

sin

(4.1)

is the power transferred from the converter to the grid and

is the

reactance between the converter and the grid. and indicate the voltage and
the voltage phase angle at the converter and grid terminals which are identified
by the subscripts c and g respectively. According to (4.1), the power transferred
from the converter to the grid will decrease to zero as the grid voltage
magnitude dips to zero due to the fault in the onshore grid. If Pwpp is the wind
power plant production being injected to the VSC-HVDC transmission and Ceq
is the equivalent capacitance of the dc lines and the capacitors in the VSCHVDC system, the dc voltage rise will be given by,
2

(4.2)

The dc overvoltage can be avoided if the surplus power, i.e.

can be dissipated by a chopper controlled resistor in the HVDC system. If we
assume that the steady overvoltage in the dc system has to be restricted

60

between 5 to 10% of the nominal value, the value of the chopper resistor is
given by,
1.1

(4.3)

The operation of chopper controlled resistor is similar in the case of the full
scale converters of the WTGs and the VSC-HVDC. Hence the equations 4.24.4 are applicable to all of them, with their respective ratings and limits.

Figure 4.11 Fault Ride Through (FRT) requirement of E.ON Netz Grid Code [11]

According to the E.ON Netz Grid Code [11], large generating stations of
sizes 100MW or larger must stay connected and provide voltage support to the
grid in the event of nearby faults for a period of up to 150ms as shown in
Figure 4.11. The generating unit must remain connected as long as the
operating point (voltage and duration) remains above the limit Line 2. A
conditional disconnection is allowed if it the operating point lies between Line
1 and Line 2. Further the generating plant should be capable of providing
voltage support during grid disturbances.
A reactive current of the order of 2 pu per pu voltage drop should be
injected when the voltage drops below the 10% dead-band [11] and absorbed
at the same slope for voltage rises as shown in Figure 4.12. As per the Grid
codes for the offshore generation plants, the dead-band is 5% at the point of

61

common connection which is considered the offshore point. In this project, the
VSC-HVDC is a dedicated transmission for the Wind power plant under study
and the point of common coupling is assumed at the onshore inverter station.

Figure 4.12 Reactive current injection requirement for voltage support during grid
disturbances.

Since every WTG-FSC is equipped with a chopper controlled resistor for

dissipation of excess power, the chopper controlled resistor in the VSC-HVDC
system can be eliminated by controlling the power injected onto the VSCHVDC system. Ref. [56] mentions three approaches of fast power reduction for
fault ride through. Fault conditions can be relayed to the offshore grid by the
variation of the offshore grid frequency and reduction of offshore grid voltage.
Both of these can be combined together to increase the efficacy.
Communicating the fault to the WTG is given a low ranking in this paper as the
perceived communication delay is of the order of 10-100 ms. However,
simulation studies showed that the offshore grid voltage could not be brought
down rapidly as the WTG-FSC continued their injection of power.
The simulations results of fault ride through using dc voltage and offshore
grid frequency as relaying mechanism produced large over-voltages as the
delays associated with sensing of frequency and voltage at various stages was
detrimental. When fast communication with a delay of 8 ms was used to block

62

the WTG-FSC converters, the dc link over-voltage reached a level of 1.57 pu

(as shown in Figure 4.13), which might not be acceptable. The WTG-FSCs
were blocked using as soon as the HVDC voltage exceeded 15% (assumed
limit for blocking the power from WTG-FSCs). A slower communication
would provide a power ramp up or down signal, PMF.

Figure 4.13 FRT using fast communication to block the WTG-FSC when the onshore grid
voltage dips to 0.01 pu.

63

4.4 Discussion
Elimination of the chopper controlled resistors was proposed. However,
during the fault ride through, very large transient over-voltages were observed
even when the fast communication links of the order of 8 ms were used. It must
be noted here that the dc link capacitors were sized with a time constant of
2ms. In such a situation, elimination of the chopper resistors might prove to be
a more expensive solution. Having a chopper controlled resistors would limit
the over-voltage. However, by having a communication or relaying
mechanism, the size of the chopper resistors can be optimized.

4.5 Summary
This chapter described the different operating modes of the WPP with
VSC-HVDC connection. Enabling frequency control through the VSC-HVDC
link was demonstrated using the three methods described in literature. Since
frequency regulation is a slow phenomenon, all three methods were found to be
acceptable.
For fault ride through conditions, elimination of chopper resistors would
not be recommended as it leads to very high over-voltages. However, they
could be optimized for very short durations to take control of the transients.
When the chopper resistors are included, even the relaying methods using
frequency or voltage drop might be sufficient to tackle the fault ride through
conditions. However, these cases must be carefully analysed.

64

5 Fault Analysis and Protection for Offshore WPP

Grid with VSCHVDC Connection
This chapter analyses faults in the offshore collector system grid. First a
simple numerical method is proposed to get rough values of the fault current
levels under different operating conditions. Then the EMT simulation is run to
ascertain the actual fault currents and coordinate the over-current relays at
strategic locations in the collector system.

5.1 Introduction
Commercial wind turbine generators are of few MW unit size. Therefore, a
large wind power plant of a few hundred MW capacity deploys a few hundred
wind turbine generators. Large offshore wind power plants are spread over a
large area (e.g. 35 sq. km for the 300 MW Thanet Offshore Wind Farm in the
UK [57]). Since offshore maintenance work is expensive and time consuming
[26]; the protection system should be secure and reliable. Any fault in the
collector system will adversely affect power generation of the whole WPP.
Therefore, fault detection and isolation of the faulted sections to facilitate the
operation of the healthy sections is very important in offshore wind power
plants.
Protection of a radial feeder is a well-understood topic. In a conventional
radial feeder network, the coordination of over-current relays is conducted with
the knowledge of the rotating machines contributions to short circuit currents.
However, the offshore wind power plant collection grid is different as rotating
machines are connected to the grid through full-scale power electronic
converter interfaces. Such converters have limited short-circuit current
capability [58] in the range of 1.1 to 1.5 pu. Coordination of over-current relays
in such a radial collector system needs to be studied and validated. Further,
since an offshore grid is composed of a large number of closely laid short cable
sections, conventional distance protection logic is not applicable.
Most of the studies on WPP protection are focused on their response to grid
disturbances and low voltage fault ride through requirements imposed by the
grid operators [15], [58]-[60]. Several other studies address the impact of
distributed generation in distribution systems on the protection and relay
coordination in the distributed networks [61],[62]. Reference [63] describes a

65

protection scheme using IEC-61850 standard communication for the adaptive

setting and coordination of protective devices in smart grids with inverter
connected distributed power generation. An integrated protection and control
system for wind farms is presented in [64] using the IEC-61850 process bus
and a centralized relaying unit with parallel-processing ability.
Apart from the limited short circuit current capability of the inverters, their
dependence upon the controller, PLL and terminal voltage for synchronization
affect their response to short circuit faults. If the converter current rises beyond
permissible limits the converter switching gate pulses are momentarily blocked.
Consequently, the harmonic levels in the terminal voltage and current
waveforms increase due to the fault as well as the non-linear response from the
converters. This chapter presents a simplified approach for the estimation of
fault currents and then a coordination strategy for the protection scheme using
over current relays has been proposed. It is verified through EMT simulation.
In chapter 7, an experimental verification using a physical relay in a real time
simulation with RTDS is presented.

5.2 Overcurrent Relay

Over-current relays with very inverse time characteristics can be coordinated
to detect and discriminate faults in the cable feeders connected to the collector
bus of the offshore WPP. Since several WTGs are connected to a common
cable feeder, they may be provided with a common circuit breaker, as in the
Horns Rev I layout [65].
When there is a short circuit fault in a feeder, the over-current relay should
trip the circuit breaker and isolate the faulted section. The following points are
particularly helpful in the relay coordination procedure
I.
II.

III.

Each WTG-GSC is protected by its own current limit controllers.

The VSC-HVDC (VSC1 in Figure 3.1) is the largest converter in the
wind power plant grid in terms of absolute ratings Therefore; it has the
maximum contribution to the fault currents; though other WTG-GSCs
also contribute to the fault current.
All the power electronic converters are capable of limiting their
current output to their over-current limits, which is arbitrarily assumed
here to be 1.10 pu for the WTG-GSCs and 1.15 for the VSC-HVDC
converter.

66

Relay co-ordination studies are done to set the pick-up current (Ipick-up) and
time dial setting such that proper discrimination is attained for the different
types and strengths of faults. As per, IEEE Std. C37-112 [66], the over-current
relay trip time, t(I), for the relay current transformer (CT) current I is given
by (5.1),

(5.1)

where,
19.61 ,
0.491 ,
2, for very inverse characteristics and
Ipick-up is the relay pick up current setting. The characteristic curve is shown in
Figure 5.1.
VeryInverseCharacteristicoftheOvercurrentRelay

PickupCurrentRatio(M)

4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

RelayPickupTime(s)

Figure 5.1 Very inverse characteristics of the over-current relay (IEEE Std. C37-112) [67].

The trip time given by (5.1) is modified by the time dial setting to obtain
the actual trip time of the relay.
In a conventional relay coordination study the pick-up current is set-up on
the basis of short circuit analyses. High short circuit currents are observed in
conventional power systems and the relays are coordinated with other relays
such that they trip for the faults in their own zone. The trip time is adjusted by
using the time multiplier settings.

67

5.3 Approximate Calculation for the Fault Currents

The following assumptions were made in the calculation of fault currents
1. The grid side converter of WTG-FSC tends to act as current source, to
evacuate the generated power. The WTG with their converters are treated
as current sources, operating at their maximum current limits [67].
2. The VSC-HVDC behaves as a current source when the fault current tends
to exceed the maximum current limit.
3. Shunt capacitances of the filters and the cables are neglected.
4. Pre-fault load conditions have been ignored.
5. The current sources are assumed in phase, thereby giving the worst case
results as the fault currents get added up.
6. Symmetrical and steady state fault conditions have been assumed.
With these assumptions, the equivalent positive sequence circuit of the
offshore collector grid is shown in Figure 5.2. Fault currents are computed for
phase faults at locations FA and FB for 6 different cases as follows:
1. ALL WTG feeders are operational.
2. WTG feeder #1 (or #2) is switched off.
3. WTG feeder #3 is switched off.
4. WTG feeders # 1 and 2 are switched off
5. WTG feeders # 1 and 3 are switched off
6. WTG feeders # 1, 2 and 3 are switched off.
The result for the 6 cases is summarized in Table 5.1 and Figure 5.3. Fault
currents are given in pu with base current defined corresponding to their
respective sections. Therefore, the pu fault current appears to be higher for the
faults in the MV feeder, compared to those for the faults in the HV feeder.

68

Figure 5.2 Equivalent positive sequence schematic of the offshore WPP.

Table 5.1 Fault Current and its components through different sources and CTs.

CaseI

CaseII

CaseIII

CaseIV

CaseV

CaseVI

Sources
I_HVDC

1.15

1.15

1.15

1.15

1.15

1.15

Iwtg#1

1.10

1.10

1.10

Iwtg#2

1.10

1.10

0.00

1.10

0.00

Iwtg#3

1.10

1.10

1.10

0.00

0.00

Iwtg#4

1.10

1.10

1.10

1.10

1.10

1.10

Faultcurrent

9.00

7.90

7.90

6.80

6.80

5.70

HV_CT

3.40

2.85

3.40

2.30

2.85

2.30

MV_CT

7.90

6.80

6.80

5.70

5.70

4.60

Faultcurrent

4.50

3.95

3.95

3.40

3.40

2.85

HV_CT

3.40

2.85

3.40

2.30

2.85

2.30

MV_CT

1.1

1.1

1.1

1.1

1.1

1.15

FaultatFA

FaultatFB

69

It gives a preliminary estimate of the fault current levels that can be

expected in an offshore grid with power electronic converters on all terminals.
Further, it highlights that the faults on the MV WTG feeders can be detected by
conventional over-current relays. The output of the MV WTG feeder CTs are
higher than 4 pu when the fault is on the MV feeder; whereas it is limited 1.1
pu when the fault is on the HV cable feeder.
Fault Currents for fault at FA (in pu)
10

Fault
MV CT
HV CT

8
6
4
2
0

Fault Currents for fault at FB (in pu)

5
4
3
2
1
0

Figure 5.3 Estimated fault and CT currents for the short-circuit faults at FA and FB

Theoretically the HV feeder will carry the same fault currents for both the
fault locations. Though the fault currents are more than twice the nominal
currents, there is no discrimination for the faults on the MV feeder and the HV
feeder. Therefore, additional information like the voltage or sensing the pick-up
by the MV feeder relay might be used. In absence of such information, the HV
feeder may be set with higher time multiplier setting such that it trips in a
longer duration, with a margin long enough to ensure that the MV feeder relay
would have tripped its circuit breaker and the fault would have been isolated if
it were on the MV feeder. The HV feeder relay will also act as a back-up relay
for the MV feeder faults. It would be a slow relay for the faults on the HV
feeder.

70

In case of a fault on the MV feeder the fault, current from the HV side has to
pass through the three-winding transformer, which has high impedance on the
system MVA base. Therefore, the magnitude of the HV feeder voltage would
provide the necessary discrimination between the faults on the MV and HV
feeder sections. Assuming that the fault is on a MV feeder, and the transformer
impedance is 0.48 pu a 1.1pu current from the VSC-HVDC converter to the
fault on MV circuit would imply that the voltage on the transformer primary
remains around 0.53 pu. Relatively lower voltage is expected for a fault on the
HV cable section. The HV feeder voltage information may be used to
distinguish the MV feeder faults from the faults on the HV feeder.
On the basis of this analysis, the over-current relay pick-up current is
heuristically set at 1.25 pu levels for both the MV and HV feeder sections .The
trip time is multiplied by 8 ms for the MV feeder relay and it is multiplied by
16ms for the HV feeder relay.

5.4 Simulation Studies and Observations

The system layout described in chapter 3was modelled and simulated using
the EMT simulation software PSCAD. Simulation studies were carried out for
all the cases listed in the previous section and for the different fault types listed
below:
I.
II.
III.
IV.

Single line to ground (SLG),

Double line to ground (LLG),
Triple line to ground (LLLG),
Line-to-line (LL),

The studies were carried out with fault resistance of 0.01 pu (1%) and 0.20
pu (20%).
Two separate faults were applied at the points FA on the MV WTG #4
and FB on the HV feeder #2 at the instants of 4 s and 5 s respectively. In this
study, the simulated faults were of transient nature, and they got cleared by
themselves in 150 ms. In some cases, when the relay took longer time to trip,
the fault duration was extended to 250 ms. Since the objective was to
demonstrate the relay performance, breaker tripping operation was not
simulated.

71

5.4.1

Relay Tripping for Different Types of Faults

Figure 5.4 shows the output responses of the two over-current relays for the
two faults for case-I with 1% fault resistance. The MV relays tripped within
100 ms for a fault at FA. The maximum trip time for the HV relay was 139
ms for an LL fault at FB. The HV feeder relay tripped in 154 ms exhibiting
over-reach for a SLG fault on the MV feeder. In this case, the MV realy had
already tripped within 12ms and it could have been used to block the the HV
relay trip.

Figure 5.4 Outputs of over-current relays for the faults - (i) SLG, (ii) LLG, (iii) LLLG, and
(iv) LL applied at FA at the instant 4s; and at FB at the instant 5s. Fault resistance is 1%.

Figure 5.5 shows that relay trip time is longer when the fault impedance is
20%. The average trip time is 21 ms for the different faults at FA with fault
resistance of 1%; and it is 44 ms when the fault impedance is 20%. Similarly,

72

the relay trip time for the different faults at FB is 99 ms when the fault
impedance is 1%, and it is 146 ms when the fault resistance is 20%. The relay
trip times for different cases, different fault types and fault resistances of 1%
and 20% are shown in Tables 5.2 and 5.3 respectively.

Figure 5.5 Outputs of over-current relays for the faults - (i) SLG, (ii) LLG, (iii) LLLG, and
(iv) LL applied at FA at the instant 4s; and at FB at the instant 5s. Fault resistance is 20%.

The peak fault current T was 12.8 pu peak and 9.3 pu maximum RMS
(computed over 10 ms moving window) for the SLG fault at FA (Figure 5.6).
The MV feeder CT#4 recorded a fault current of 11.95 pu peak and 10.3 pu
RMS. For a fault at FB, the values were 1.90 pu peak and 1.36 pu RMS.
Similarly, the HV feeder CT#2 recorded a fault current of 3.52 pu peak and
2.98 pu RMS for a fault at FA. For a fault at FB, it recorded 7.65 pu peak and
4.76 pu RMS fault current.

73

Table 5.2 Max. Time (in ms) Taken By Over-Current Relays for Different Faults in
Different Cases
Fault
SLG
LLG

LLLG
LL

Relay

Case#1

Case#2

Case#3

Case#4

Case#5

Case#6

HV2

64

53

66

57

59

58

MV

12

12

12

13

13

14

HV2

71

90

64

92

82

95

MV4

12

12

12

13

13

17

HV2

113

140

115

129

128

129

MV4

26

26

28

27

27

32

HV2

139

136

112

131

125

129

MV4

37

26

26

26

25

32

HV2OverreachCases
SLG

HV2

154

149

130

LL

HV2

157

142

165

Table 5.3 Over-current relay trip time for different faults (Fault resistance = 0.20 pu)
Fault
SLG
LLG
LLLG
LL

Relay
HV2

Case#1

Case#2

Case#3

Case#4

Case#5

Case#6

114

115

90

121

93

100

MV4

48

47

21

46

47

47

HV2

99

111

83

186

123

175

MV4

40

40

20

41

41

45

HV2

135

142

99

250

159

293

MV4

55

59

37

65

67

76

HV2

146

179

151

185

175

191

MV4

36

35

31

34

34

35

155

HV2OverreachCases
SLG

LL

In the pu notation adopted here, the both the peak and the RMS values
should have been the same for sinusoidal current data. However, the RMS
values were found to be lower than the peak ones as the fault currents were not
sinusoidal. Comparing these results with the estimated results given in Table
5.4, it is found that the peak fault currents are higher than both the estimated
and simulated values for the three phase fault.

74

5.4.1.1 Triple Line to Ground (LLLG) Faults

Triple line-to-ground faults are symmetric faults. This case was simulated
to compare the results of the numerically estimated fault currents (as shown in
Figure 5.3). A comparison of the simulated results with the estimated values in
is given in Table 5.4. The simulated peak values are generally higher than the
estimated fault current levels. However, due to high amount of distortion the
RMS values of faults current are significantly lower.

Figure 5.6 SLG fault at points FA (at the instant 4s).

75

Figure 5.7. SLG fault at points FB (at the instant 5s).

TABLE 5.4 COMPARISON OF ESTIMATED AND SIMULATED FAULT CURRENTS FOR LLLG FAULTS

(FaultatFAon
MVFeeder)

(FaultatFBon
HVFeeder)

FaultCurrent

Base
(kA,rms)

Estimated
(pu)

Simulated
peak(pu)

Simulated
rms(pu)

Error%

Total

1.711

8.4

4.34

7%

MVCT#4

1.711

6.8

7.1

5.6

4%

HVCT#2

0.855

2.85

3.3

2.31

14%
27%

Total

0.855

4.5

6.1

3.1

MVCT#4

1.711

1.1

1.7

1.5

35%

HVCT#2

0.855

3.4

5.0

3.3

32%

76

The current waveforms are shown in Figure 5.8 and Figure 5.9. The active
current limit action of the VSC-HVDC is distinctly visible in both the figures.
The current waveforms show a very high content of harmonics during the
faulted condition.

Figure 5.8. Current waveforms for the LLLG fault at FA

77

Figure 5.9. Current waveforms for the LLLG faults at FB.

5.4.2

Overreach of the HV Feeder Relay

Tables 5.2 and 5.3 reveal some of the cases when the relays on both the
MV feeder#4 and the HV feeder #2 tripped for the fault events on the MV

78

feeder #4. Figure 5.10 shows plots of an SLG fault in case-I with 0.01 pu fault
resistance.

Figure 5.10. Fault at FA and FB respectively at instants 4s and 5s : (i)Output of HV

over-current relay (ii) Output of MV over-current relay (iii) RMS voltage of the HV feeder at the
converter transformer end (iv) RMS Voltage at the HV feeder CT (Case-I, i% fault resistance).

The first subplot shows that the MV feeder relay tripped after 12 ms as
desired. The relay on the HV feeder also tripped after 154 ms in response to the
fault on MV feeder #4. While there was a time delay of 132 ms, this was not
the desired operation.
Such over-reach of the HV feeder relay can be avoided by changing the
relay pick-up current settings or time multiplier settings. However, the relay

79

characteristic will change for all the fault instances. Its sensitivity will decrease
if the pick-up current level is increased while the speed of operation will be
slower if the time multiplier setting is increased. For instance, if the time
multiplier setting is increased, the relay trip time will increase for all the fault
cases. Similarly, if the pick-up current setting is raised, the relay will lose
sensitivity to high fault impedance faults, as well as the trip will be delayed.
Considering the high impedance (0.12 pu on 112.5 MVA base appears as
0.24 pu on 225MVA base and 0.48 pu on 445MVA base) of the 3-winding
transformer interconnecting the MV and the HV feeders, faults on the MV
feeder are bound to result in a higher RMS voltage on the HV feeder as the
VSC-HVDC feeds the fault. Figure 5.10 also shows the RMS voltage at the HV
feeder terminal for the two fault conditions. It remained above 0.8 pu for the
fault at FA. It dropped down to a level of approximately 0.20 pu when the
fault was at FB on the HV feeder. Thus, RMS under-voltage level at the HV
bus can be used as a discriminator for the faults on the MV and HV feeders.

5.5 Discussion and Conclusions

The algebraic addition of the current contribution from all the converters
gives an approximate estimate of the fault current levels to be expected. As
shown in Table 5.4, the observed fault currents and the relay CT currents had a
maximum deviation of 35% while the average error was in 19.5%. Algebraic
addition of currents from different WTG and the non-linear characteristics of
the converters during the transient faults thus give only an approximation for
the fault currents to be expected in the offshore collector grid. The actual
current levels are very much dependent upon the type and location of faults and
the interaction of the control structures. Moreover, the observations showed
that the fault current were considerably higher in the case of a single line to
ground fault than in the case of triple line to ground fault. A detailed EMT
simulation is therefore necessary to identify the fault current levels and to
validate the proper coordination of the relays in the system. The EMT
simulation would also bring out the effect of shunt capacitances.
The error in fault current estimation might be partly attributed to the
algebraic addition of the currents from different converters; which ignored the
instantaneous phase angles. These angles are determined by the dynamics of
the converter control and its PLL. Hence, they are difficult to estimate correctly

80

for numerical calculation. Another reason was the fact that the instantaneous
over-current limit control in the VSC-HVDC converter was achieved by
blocking the converters for one time period of the switching frequency as an
active current protection limit. On the other hand, the WTG converters were
blocked when their AC terminal voltage was lower than a predefined threshold
of low voltage limit (10% of the nominal was used here).
Synchronous machines are typically characterized by the sub-transient and
transient time constants, which indicate their response to short circuit
conditions. Simulation results emphasize that conventional fault analysis
techniques would not be applicable as the converter current response is
different from the rotating machines. Therefore, detailed EMT simulation
analysis with proper representation of the converter PLL and controller
dynamics is necessary for the thorough analysis of fault currents and relay coordination.

5.6 Summary
This chapter investigates the over-current relay coordination in offshore
WPP grid, which is connected to power electronic converters at all the
terminals. A simplified numerical approach to estimate the symmetrical fault
currents by using the current source representation of the WTG-FSC has been
proposed. Although, the EMT simulations showed had an error of upto 35% in
the estimated values, they trend was identical. Therefore, the numerical method
can be considered as preliminary evaluation of the fault currents and relay
coordination. EMT simulation with detailed model of the power electronic
converter controllers is necessary to obtain the actual fault currents under
different operating conditions and for different faults necessary for the precise
relay coordination.
The simulation results show that with proper parameter settings the
conventional over-current relays can be used for the detection and
discrimination of faults in the converter connected offshore grids. Limited fault
current capability of the converters can be exploited to estimate with the short
circuit current levels and determine the relay settings.

81

6 Negative Sequence Current Controllers

This chapter presents the use of the power electronic converters to control
the injection of negative sequence currents in the offshore grid such that the
power oscillations can be minimized. The WTG-FSCs are controlled to inject a
constant active power using both the current sequences depending upon the
terminal voltage. The VSC-HVDC converters control the negative sequence
currents to minimize the power oscillations in the HVDC system, thereby
minimizing the dc voltage oscillations.

6.1 Introduction
There are plenty of power electronic voltage source converters (VSCs) in a
WPP right from the FSCs in the WTGs to the VSC-HVDC. The current
control capability of these converters can be utilized to control the negative
sequence current injection in the offshore WPP grid during unbalanced
operating conditions arising out of asymmetric faults.
Ref [68] presents the control of WTG-GSC during unbalanced grid
conditions. Rotating reference frame has been used for the implementation of
the current controller. This requires two separate controllers. The need for
power reduction during unbalanced grid conditions has been highlighted. Four
different control alternatives for the control of control of grid connected
converters under unbalanced voltage conditions have been described in [69]. A
three phase voltage source has been considered as the grid model which
produces sinusoidal waveforms even under unbalanced voltage conditions.
Control of the grid side converter (GSC) of a WTG-FSC using the sequence
components of currents is presented in [70],[71].
Analysis and control of VSC-HVDC system connecting two power system
grids was presented in [43], [72]. Negative sequence currents were injected to
achieve the predetermined power flow under the given unbalanced terminal
voltage conditions. Both these methods assumed that the power flow was
known in advance. However, in a VSC-HVDC connection to the wind power
plant, the power level depends upon the prevalent wind conditions, and it is not
known precisely. The VSC-HVDC terminal is controlled to maintain the

82

voltage reference like an infinite bus, such that the generated power can be
collected [73].
An offshore grid with WTG-FSC units and VSC-HVDC transmission is
different from the cases when at least one terminal is connected to the
conventional grid. Here all the terminals are connected to VSCs. The VSCHVDC converter sets up the reference voltage. During faults and unbalanced
operating conditions, they themselves may go in current limiting mode. Any
injection of the negative sequence current will also affect the offshore grid
voltage profile. This chapter presents a novel method of estimating the negative
sequence current injections by the VSC-HVDC to eliminate the power
oscillations. Prior information of active power flow is not required in this
method. Though the control approach have been described here with reference
to the VSC-HVDC with two level converters, it is also applicable to the multilevel converters as their interaction with the grid remains similar as far as
current injection control is concerned [39].

6.2 Negative Sequence Controller for the VSCHVDC

The expressions for the active power (P) and reactive power (Q) can be
written as,

(6.1)

where,
, , , and are the components of the fundamental frequency
voltage (V) and current (I) along the
axes in the stationary reference
frame.
It can be expanded and written in the matrix form as shown in (6.2) after
separation of real and imaginary parts.

(6.2)

and
are the average real and reactive power. The terms for
where,
are just the real and imaginary parts of the terms involving both the
and
positive and negative sequence components in the power expression. These
terms do not explicitly imply the oscillations in active or reactive power, but
merely their combination. These are different from those given in [70], [71].

83

The offshore VSC-HVDC does not have information about instantaneous

active and reactive power at the point of common coupling (PCC). This
converter is controlled to maintain the positive sequence voltage at the nominal
value (or some specified value around nominal) at the PCC.
Equating the oscillatory terms of active and reactive power to zero, the
negative sequence current references can be solved in terms of the sequence
components of the voltage and the positive sequence current components as
given by (6.3).
(6.3)
Under balanced operating conditions, the offshore grid voltage does not
have any negative sequence voltage component and hence the negative
sequence current references are 0.
Though (6.3) is derived in the stationary reference frame. It can be
converted to the rotating the rotating reference frame by applying the reference
frame transformation (Appendix C).
When the negative sequence controllers are enabled, the negative sequence
current references are generated as per (6.3). A separate negative sequence
current control loop is written (in the rotating reference fame) as follows,

(6.4)

(6.5)

The terms for the voltage drop across phase reactor (

) are negative in
(6.4, 6.5) as compared to 2.9. This is due to the fact that negative angle ( ) is
used in the Parks transformation and it has the negative sequence current has
negative frequency. The phase angle, , is the one obtained from the positive
sequence PLL. Separate current controller loops are employed for the positive
and negative sequence current control in the rotating reference frame (d-q axes)
used for the VSC-HDC converter control as shown in Figure 6.1. The positive
sequence controller shown in Figure 6.1(a) is essentially the same as Figure
3.15, as only positive sequence is being controlled in the normal operating
mode. When the negative sequence controller is enabled, the negative sequence

84

current references are generated and added to the positive sequence current
references. The positive and negative sequence voltage references for the
converter cannot be added directly as they are the reference frames are rotating
in opposite directions. Hence, the two sets of voltage references are converted
into the phase variables by using inverse Parks transformation and then added
together as shown in Figure 6.1(c)

6.3 Negative Sequence Controller for the WTGGSC

For the WTG-GSC, control of average active power
to the average
have
value, while eliminating the oscillatory term in the active power (
been implemented. Elimination or minimization of active power oscillations in
the WTG converters will have eliminate or minimize the dc link voltage
oscillations in the WTG-FSC. The equations correspond to the first and the
third rows of matrices in (6.2). Since there are two equations, and four
variables, several different solutions are possible. References [74], [75] give
one of the solutions as shown below ,

(6.6)

(6.7)

where, , ,
are the positive and negative sequence current
references. The overall current references are given by (6.8) and (6.9),

(6.8)
(6.9)

When the NSCC is not enabled for the WTG-GSC, the current references
are given by (6.10) and (6.11),

(6.10)
(6.11)

In the controller implementation, the NSCC was blocked as the denominator

in (6.6) and (6.7) approached zero or negative.

85

Lim

Lim

+
-

(a) Positive sequence controller

86

Figure 6.1. Offshore VSC-HVDC controller with negative sequence current controller.

6.4 Simulation Results

The impact of negative sequence current control strategy was studied
through simulation of faults in the offshore grid. Faults were applied at FA for
150 ms and the performance of the negative sequence controller in reducing the
dc bus voltage overshoot on the HVDC lines was observed. First a single line

87

to ground fault was studied in detail. Then other types of faults at FA and
FB were studied.
Since the negative sequence controllers can be applied in the WTG-GSCs
and the offshore VSC-HVDC controllers, four combinations arise as given
below:
1.

Negative sequence controller is enabled in both the WTG-GSC and

the offshore VSC-HVDC (W1H1)
2. Negative sequence controller is enabled in the WTG-GSC only
(W1H0).
3. None of the negative sequence controller is enabled in the VSCHVDC only (W0H1).
4. All the negative sequence controllers are disabled (W0H0).
6.4.1

Single Line to Ground Fault at FA

Figure 6.2 shows the effect of the negative sequence current controllers on
the dc over voltage in the VSC-HVDC transmission system. The peak DC line
voltage overshoot was 1.25 pu for the case W1H1 while it was 1.42 pu, 1.46
pu, and 1.52 pu for the cases W1H0, W0H1, and W0H0 respectively.

88

Figure 6.2 DC link voltage over-shoot in the VSC-HVDC system for SLG fault at FA.

The effect of these controllers on power flow to the HVDC system is shown
in Figure 6.3. The power flow was less oscillatory when the NSCC was
enabled, although the average power. It was found that the WTG-GSC went
into current limit control mode, and the current references given by NSCC were
scaled down, thereby limiting the output power during the fault. This was the
price for the reduction in peak voltage oscillations observed in Figure 6.2. The
excess power which could not be evacuated to the VSC-HVDC would have to
be dissipated in the WTG-FSC chopper resistors. Power and voltage
oscillations were higher and the damping was poor when the NSCC in the
WTG-GSC was disabled.

89

Figure 6.3. Power flow to the offshore VSC-HVDC terminal during the SLG fault at FA
(i) W1H1 (ii) W0H0. (iii)W1H0 (iv) W0H1

Figure 6.4 shows the three phase voltage waveforms at the filter bus of the
offshore VSC-HVDC for the four cases. A comparison of the cases W1H1 and
W0H1 against W1H0 and W0H0 reveals that negative sequence controllers on
the VSC-HVDC are more effective in eliminating the high frequency
oscillations from the voltage waveforms. Enabling the NSC on the WTG-GSC
has a small impact in reducing these oscillations. The transient peak ac voltage
is reduced to 1.32 pu for the case W1H1 from 2.49 pu for the case W0H0. A
comprehensive summary of the peak dc voltage overshoot, minimum power
flow and the ac voltage transient peaks is presented in Table 6.1.

90

Figure 6.4. Grid voltage at the offshore VSC-HVDC terminal during the SLG fault at FA
(i) W1H1 (ii) W1H0. (iii) W0H1 and (iv) W0H0

Negative sequence current injected by the VSC-HVDC was found to be

lower when the negative sequence controllers were enabled. However, the
power oscillations could not be eliminated as anticipated by (6.3) as the actual
negative current flows could not be controlled to the estimated reference levels
(Figure 6.5). The NSCC brought down the d-axis negative sequence current to
a level less than 0.57 pu compared to 0.83 pu when it was disabled. Although
the NSCC had a small impact on the q-axis negative sequence current, it
showed less oscillations during the fault and post fault. Without the NSCC, the
negative oscillations continued for some time even after the fault had been
cleared.

91

Table 6.1 Effect of NSCC on the peak values of voltages, currents and power flow during SLG fault at FA
W1H1
p.u.Max
p.u.Min

Case
DClinevoltageVDC
PowerflowtoVSCHVDC
ACvoltage(atHVDCfilters),Ph.A
ACvoltage(atHVDCfilters),Ph.B
ACvoltage(atHVDCfilters),Ph.C
Neg.Seq.daxiscurrent
Neg.Seq.qaxiscurrent

1.25
0.97
1.31
1.17
1.22
0.57
0.21

0.70
0.39
1.32
1.18
1.21
0.18
0.31

W1H0
p.u.Max
p.u.Min
1.42
0.97
2.36
1.63
2.47
0.73
0.21

0.67
0.28
2.20
2.00
2.19
0.08
0.37

W0H1
p.u.Max
p.u.Min
1.46
1.11
1.97
1.46
2.06
0.75
0.21

W0H0
p.u.Max
p.u.Min

0.77
0.57
1.87
1.68
2.11
0.00
0.40

1.52
0.99
2.37
1.46
2.40
0.83
0.21

0.59
0.34
2.49
1.61
2.40
0.00
0.48

Table 6.2 Effect of NSCC on the peak values of DC voltage overshoot and power flow during different faults.
Fault
Location

Case
DClinevoltageVDC
PowerflowtoVSCHVDC
DClinevoltageVDC
PowerflowtoVSCHVDC

W1H1
W0H0
W1H1
W0H0
W1H1
W0H0
W1H1
W0H0

FA

FB

SLG
p.u.Max p.u.Min
1.25
1.52
0.97
0.99
1.39
1.34
1.00
0.95

0.70
0.59
0.39
0.34
0.71
0.62
0.46
0.17

LLG
p.u.Max p.u.Min
1.18
0.75
1.12
0.66
0.96
0.05
0.96
0.03
1.09
0.67
1.10
0.75
0.96
0.08
0.95
0.18

LLLG
p.u.Max p.u.Min
1.21
0.58
1.22
0.67
0.96
0.1
0.96
0.01
1.07
0.67
1.07
0.70
0.96
0.09
0.95
0.11

LL
p.u.Max p.u.Min
1.31
0.59
1.30
0.72
0.96
0.26
0.96
0.08
1.24
0.73
1.25
0.75
0.99
0.53
0.95
0.26

92

Figure 6.5. Negative sequence d and q axes currents during the SLG fault at FA

Though the same positive sequence controllers were used in both cases,
enabling the negative sequence components led to a reduced level of current
oscillations in the positive sequence current (Figure 6.6). This signifies an
overall improvement in the system performance.

93

Figure 6.6. Positive sequence d and q axes currents during the SLG fault at FA

When the NSCC were enabled, positive and negative sequence components
of the filter bus voltages were less oscillatory, though the magnitude of the
negative sequence voltage components increased (Figure 6.7). The positive
sequence voltage on the d-axis reaches a minimum of 0.82 pu in case of W1H1
while it falls down to 0.52 pu in W0H0. The positive sequence q-axis voltage is
limited within -0.15 pu and 0.17 pu in the case of W1H1 while it varies
between -0.37 and 0.48 pu in the case of W0H0.

94

Figure 6.7. Positive and negative sequence d- and q axes voltage components for the SLG
fault at FA

6.4.2

LLG, LLLG and LL Faults at FA

The dc voltage overshoot for the different fault cases, namely. LLG, LLLG
and LL faults at the point FA are shown in Figure 6.8. For all these cases,
there was no improvement in minimizing the dc over-voltage. The overvoltages were observed to be lower than the one which appeared in the case of
SLG fault described earlier.

95

Figure 6.8. DC voltage overshoots in the VSC-HVDC lines for different faults at FA

Figure 6.9 shows the power flow to the offshore VSC-terminal during the
different faults in the offshore collector grid at point FA. The power transfer

96

to the VSC-HVDC system was higher during the fault and the post fault
recovery in the case of LL fault. For other faults, the difference in power
transfer was small.
The LLLG fault is a symmetrical fault. The negative sequence current
control was not expected to have any contribution in such faults. It was
included here to show that the results did not deteriorate. Table 6.2 gives a
summary of the extremes of the dc voltage and power flow to the VSC-HVDC
during the fault at FA and FB.

Figure 6.9. Power flow to the offshore VSC-HVDC terminal during different faults at 'FA'.

6.4.3

Faults at FB

The effect of the NSCCs was studied for the different faults at the ac
terminals of the converter transformers (FB). Soon after the fault event, the
NSCC in WTG-GSC got blocked as the denominator of (6.6, 6.7) came close to
0 and hence only positive sequence current were injected in this case (similar to
W0H1). Figure 6.10 shows that the dc voltage overshoot was rather higher in
the case W1H1 than in W0H0. The case W1H1 was more oscillatory during the

97

faulted period. However, the post fault oscillations were lower in the case
W1H1 than in the case W0H0. The power flow to the VSC-HVDC terminal
during the SLG and LL faults was improved by the NSCC control (Figure
6.11).
Figure 6.12 shows the ac voltage waveforms at the VSC-HVDC filter bus
and the ac current waveforms of the converter. By allowing the negative
sequence current control, the converter generated the unbalanced ac voltage
waveform with a low harmonic content. The ac current was unbalanced, but it
allowed the flow of power transfer. When the NSCC was disabled, a lot of
hamronics were generated as the converter attempted to maintain a balanced
sinusoidal voltage profile in the network with asymmetrical fault.

98

Figure 6.10. DC link voltage over-shoot in the VSC-HVDC system for SLG and LL faults
at FB.

99

Figure 6.11. Power flow to the offshore VSC-HVDC terminal for SLG (i) W1H1, (ii)
W0H0 and LL faults (iii) W1H1 and (iv) W0H0 at FB.

6.5 Discussion
The simulation results in the previous section show that the NSCC was
effective in reducing the dc voltage oscillation in the case when the fault was at
FA. When the fault was at FB, there was an enhancement in the power flow,
though there was no improvement in reducing the maximum dc voltage
overshoot. Rather, it increased to 1.39 pu from 1.34 pu in the case of an SLG
fault at FB. However, this should be viewed together with the significant
increase in the power flow to the VSC-HVDC terminal during the fault.
Further, better damping of oscillation was observed after the fault had been
cleared.

100

Figure 6.12. Filter bus voltage and the converter ac currents of the offshore VSC-HVDC
terminal during the LL faults for the two cases W1H1 and W0H0.

On the other hand for the MV feeder faults at FA, enabling the NSCC in
WTG-GSC decreased the average power flow as observed in the comparison of
power flow in the cases W1H1 and W1H0 against W0H1 and W0H0 (Figure
6.3). This was due to the fact that the overall current references demanded by
NSCC as per (6.6, 6.7) exceed the limit and therefore they went into current
limit mode. For the SLG and LL faults at FB, the NSCC got blocked soon
after the fault inception, thereby resulting in the higher power transfer. When
the fault was cleared the NSCC in the WTG became active again and assisted
in damping the oscillations.
Although NSCC affected the overall negative sequence current
components, there was a persistent error between the negative sequence current
references and the actual negative sequence current flow. The fundamental

101

reason for such a persistent error is a topic for further research. Perhaps the
unbalanced grid network during the asymmetrical faults was more crucial in
determining the negative sequence current flow. When the NSCC acted to
restrain the negative sequence current components, both the positive and
negative sequence components of the voltage as well as the positive sequence
current components got modified. The negative sequence voltage increased
when the NSCCs were enabled. The average power flow balance was the result
of all these voltage and current components.

6.6 Summary
Negative sequence current injection control strategy has been formulated
here for the peculiar case when the power reference for the VSC-HVDC
converter is not known. The strategy has been implemented in the simulation
model of an offshore wind power plant grid. Simultaneously the WTG
converters have been provided with the negative sequence current control
scheme to eliminate the oscillations in the active power.
The simulation results prove that even though the converter controller had
a persistent error in tracking the computed negative sequence current
references, the negative sequence current control was effective enough to
reduce the peak of the dc voltage oscillations during asymmetric faults. Post
fault oscillations decayed fast when the NSCCs were enabled It was found that
the NSCC on the VSC-HVDC converters were more effective in minimizing
the dc voltage overshoots from 1.52 pu peak to 1.25 pu peak in the case of SLG
fault. They were also effective in the reduction of high frequency component in
the filter bus voltage. Negative sequence current control in the WTG-GSC
converter assisted in decreasing the dc voltage and power oscillations.
However, the average power transfer level also decreased as the current levels
were hitting the limits.

102

7 Validation of the Offshore Grid Protections Scheme

through Real Time Simulation
Real time simulation with the physical hardware in loop has been used to
validate the proposed relay protection architecture. The test system model has
been developed in RTDS and then interfaced with a physical relay through an
amplifier. This chapter shows that faults are detected when it lies within the
zone of protection and the associated circuit breaker is tripped to isolate the
fault.

7.1 Introduction
Computer simulation provides a lot of insight into the real world
phenomena. However, the simulation models are idealized to some level as all
physical details cannot be modelled and simulated. For instance, the
communication time lag, inherent filtering and delay present in data acquisition
or even stray parameters and noises may affect the interaction between the
physical equipments in a power system. Transient network analyzers (TNA)
were developed to build an analog equivalent model of the power system such
that the switching phenomena on the transmission lines could be studied.
Multiple pi-sections using inductors and capacitors were used to model the
transmission lines, and circuit breakers were modelled by switches to simulate
the electromagnetic characteristics in the scaled analog equivalent. Attempts
were made to use digital computers to facilitate the simulation [76].
With the development of computer technology the simulation programs
have become more detailed and very large system can be handled. Even then, it
is of prime importance to test a physical piece of hardware and its numerous
interactions with the power system under different operating conditions.
Real Time Digital Simulator (RTDS) allows digital EMT simulation of
power system in real time with a typical time step of 50 s. [77]. Power
electronic converters can be simulated with a small time step of around 2-3 s.
Physical hardware devices like relays or controllers can be interfaced with the
simulation and their performance can be simulated as demonstrated.

103

This chapter describes the use of RTDS connected with a physical relay to
assess the performance of the relay protection coordination. In chapter 5, a
coordination method based on estimated nominal current and fault current
levels were proposed and simulated in PSCAD/EMTDC. The RMS values of
the relay CT currents were calculated and applied to over-current relay models.
This chapter presents a realistic approach as the relay current transformer have
been modelled in the simulation and the actual current waves obtained from the
amplifier were applied to an industrial ABB overcurrent relay for feeder
protection (REF615).

7.2 Experimental SetUp for the Validation of Relay

Coordination
The test WPP with VSC-HVDC model described in Chapter 3 (Figure 3.1)
was implemented into RTDS platform using the RSCAD software. Digital
simulation models of the current transformers were used from RSCAD model
library. The test case was digitally simulated in RTDS. The relay CT currents
were scaled and passed to the analog output cards as scaled voltages in the
range of 5V. Such a voltage signal which is reflective of the CT currents in
the digital simulation was then amplified to the current signals using Omicron
CMS156 amplifier for relay testing with a gain of 5A per volt. The amplified
CT current was then applied to the over-current feeder protection relay IED
(Intelligent Electronic Device), REF615 from ABB. A block diagram of the
layout is shown in Figure 7. 1.

Figure 7. 1 Block diagram of the experimental set-up.

The IED supports the IEC 61850 standard for GOOSE communication.
The relay settings can be programmed using the PCM600 relay interface

104

software. The relay pick-up (start) and trip (operate) signals can be
communicated to the RTDS simulation using the GTNET-GSE cards from the
RTDS. Similarly, the relay trip functions can be selectively programmed and
blocked by communicating GOOSE signal bits from the RTDS.
7.2.1

WTG with FSC Model

In this study the grid side inverters in the WTG were modeled as PWM
switching inverters. The positive sequence terminal voltage was extracted using
second order generalized integrator (SOGI) filters and then a positive sequence
phase locked loop (PLL) is used as shown in Figure 3.13 [51]. Vector control
in rotating reference frame is used to control the inverter for the specified
active power. The reactive power is controlled so as to maintain the nominal
voltage across the capacitor of the LCL filter.
7.2.2

VSC HVDC Controllers

The onshore VSC-HVDC converter terminal controls the dc line voltage.

Therefore, it evacuates the power absorbed by the offshore VSC-HVDC
terminal. As a second function it regulates the ac voltage at the filter bus by
controlling the reactive power flow. It is described in chapter 3 (Figure 3.14).
The basic function of the offshore VSC-HVDC controller is to establish the
offshore grid voltage and frequency. Thus it creates a kind of infinite bus in the
collector grid. The WTG-FSCs get synchronized with this bus and the
generated power is absorbed by the VSC-HVDC converter. A simple ac
voltage controller has been implemented as shown in Figure 7.2. The error in
rms voltage at the PCC is applied to a proportional integral controller which
generates the d-axis voltage reference. The q-axis reference voltage is set to 0.
Inverse Parks transformation is applied to get the phase voltage references for
the modulation of the VSC-HVDC converter.
7.2.3

Overcurrent Limit Control in VSC

Active current limits are imposed by blocking the converter gate pulses
during when the measured RMS currents exceed the pre-defined converter
current limits and the blocking is continued as long as the limit is violated.

105

(Figure 7.3). Their respective PI controller is disabled during the period when
the converter is blocked.

Inverse
Parks
Transform

Figure 7.2. Block diagram of the offshore VSC-HVDC voltage controller.

Figure 7.3. Limiting overcurrent by blocking the VSC.

7.2.4

Overcurrent protection functions of the relay

The numerical relay IED REF615 provides a large number of protection

functionalities which can be programmed in the same relay [78]. In view of the
non-directional over-current relay coordination, the following protection
functions were shortlisted 1. Three Phase non-directional overcurrent protection 51P/50P
a. Three-phase non-directional overcurrent protection - Low stage
(PHLPTOC)
b. Three-phase non-directional overcurrent protection - Instantaneous
stage (PHIPTOC)
2. Neutral overcurrent protection 51N/50N
a. Non-directional ground-fault protection - High stage (EFHPTOC)
b. Directional ground-fault protection - High stage (with directional
stage disabled) for use as instantaneous Earth Fault relay. (EFIPTOC)
For sake of comparison with the over-current relay coordination studies
presented in Chapter 5, only the low stage three phase non-directional

106

overcurrent protection (PHLPTOC, 3I>) was enabled. All other protective

functions were turned off.
7.2.5 Overcurrent Relay Settings
7.2.5.1 MV Feeder relay

. .

112.5
3. 36

1804

1: 400

5 /100

5 /1




1600: 1



1 ,
1804


1.1275
1.1275
1600

1.25
1.41


0.05


40 .

7.2.5.2 HV Cable Feeder relay

. .

225
3. 150

866

1: 200

5 /100

5 /1




800: 1



1 ,
866


1.0825
1.0825
800

1.25
1.353


0.05


40 .

107

7.3 GOOSE Communication Setup

The feeder protection relay, REF615, is an intelligent electronic device
(IED) capable of communicating with other IEDs in the sub-station using the
IEC61850 GOOSE (Generic Object-Oriented Sub-station Event)
communication over the substation network. GTNET-GSE cards in the RTDS
can receive and multi-cast the binary GOOSE messages. The IED REF615 was
configured to broadcast the following messages
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

PHIPTOC1.Str
PHIPTOC1.Op
PHLPTOC1.Str
PHLPTOC1.Op
EFHPTOC1.Str
EFHPTOC1.Op
DEFHPTOC1.Str
DEFHPTOC1.Op

The variables have the protective function name as defined in IEC61850

standards and a suffix Str to indicate the start or pick up of the relay
function and the suffix OP to indicate the Operate or trip of the
corresponding function. Since only the non-directional over-current relay
(PHLPTOC) was used here, the GOOSE variables of interest were
PHLPTOC1.Str and PHLPTOC1.Op.
The GTNET was configured to send the blocking signal to prevent the
relay from picking up as soon as the MV feeder relay had picked up.

7.4 Observations and Results

An experimental set-up was used as shown in Figure 7. 1. Since only one
physical relay was available, the relay was connected at one node and the faults
were applied at different nodes to study the selectivity and fault discrimination
characteristics of the relay protection scheme.

108

7.4.1

Steady State RTDS Simulation

Figure 7.4 shows the dc voltage, power and current waveforms during the
steady state operation of the wind power plant and VSC-HVDC. While the
total harmonic distortion for the dc voltage was 6.5%, the peak to peak ripple
was within 3% of the nominal. The 4 aggregated WTG were generating 0.85,
0.86, 0.87 and 0.88 pu active power (on 100 MW base).
VDC1

kV

310
305
300
295
VDC2
310

kV

305
300
295
290
PG1 PG2 PG3 PG4
-82
MW

-84
-86
-88
-90
PHVDC1

MW

342
340
338
336
PHVDC2
-318
-320
MW

-322
-324
-326
-328
0

0.06667

0.13333

0.2

0.26667

0.33333

0.4

Figure 7.4. Steady state results (in pu) (i)HVDC voltage at offshore terminal (ii) HVDC
voltage at the onshore terminal (iii) Power generated by the 4 WTGs (v) Power transmitted to the
offshore VSC-HVDC terminal (vi) Power transmitted by the onshore VSC-HVDC terminal

109

The 400 MW offshore VSC-HVDC transmission system was receiving

0.85 pu power and supplying 0.81 pu power to the onshore grid; the difference
indicates the losses in the converters and the 200 km long DC cable. All these
powers were measured at the ac terminals of the converters.
Figure 7.5 shows the voltage signal acquired from the RTDS simulation. It
represents the current passing through the MV feeder relay CT in steady state.
Considering the CT ratio of 400:1, and the scaling factor in GTAO of 100:5,
260 mV voltage signal (which gets amplified by 5A/V to 1.3 A to the
overlapping IED current waveform) corresponds to the 1.47 kA primary current
in steady state.

Figure 7.5 Voltage signal at the GTAO output and the overlapping current signal output of
the Amplifier

7.4.2 Single Line to Ground Fault on MV Feeder

7.4.2.1 Comparison with PSCAD Simulation Results
A single line to ground (SLG) fault was created on the MV feeder at FA.
The sudden disturbance resulted in power unbalance and a transient overvoltage of 1.54 pu peak was observed in the HVDC transmission as shown in
Figure 7.6. In PSCAD simulation, 1.52 pu HVDC over-voltage had been
observed in similar simulations in Chapter 6. Power injected into the VSCHVDC system dropped to a minimum of 0.38 pu in RTDS simulation whereas

110

it was 0.34 pu in PSCAD simulation. The corresponding PSCAD curves have

been included here (from Figure 6.8 and Figure 6.9) for a quick comparison
and validation of the RTDS model. Similar power and voltage oscillations were
observed continued as long as the fault was not cleared. The oscillations died
out after the fault got cleared.

Figure 7.6 DC voltage and power flow during SLG fault on MV feeder. Corresponding
curves from PSCAD simulation is included for comparison.

A comparison of the fault and relay CT current waveforms in PSCAD and

RTDS simulations is shown in Figure 7.7. The fault current and the MV CT
feeder current are almost similar in waveform and peak levels. The current
waveform for the HV CT shows a deviation, the peaks in RTDS simulation are
2.28 pu while the HVCT shows a maximum peak of 3.05 pu. The waveform in
RTDS has lower harmonic content compared to the waveform obtained from
PSCAD simulation.

111

Figure 7.7 Comparison of the RTDS and PSCAD current waveorms during SLG fault at
FA.

112

7.4.2.2 Measurement Captured in the IED REF615

Tables 7.1 and 7.2 captured the fault recordings by the relay device during
the SLG fault. Figure 7.8 gives the fault time current waveform captured by the
IED. The IED and RTDS waveform (from Figure 7.7 Figure 7.8) for the MV
CT phase A fault current have the similar waveforms except except that the
waveform in the relay appears inverted. However, the data captured in the IED
is significantly lower than the waveforms. For instance, the maximum current
peak is given as 6.968 kA which translates as 15.76 kA peak. The recorded
current during the period is given as 6.45 i.e. 14.59 kA peak value. The
captured data would be used in processing the relay output.
Figure 7.8 also shows the pick-up and trip of the IED REF615 in the binary
channels 1 and 15 respectively.
Table 7.1 Fault Summary from the ABB REF615 Relay

FaultNumber:38/TimeandDate:29.9.201101:34:58.141
Start duration.................100.....%
Setting group....................1......
Max current IL1..............6.968...xIn15.76kA,pk
Max current IL2..............0.998...xIn 2.26kA,pk
Max current IL3..............0.999...xIn 2.26kA,pk
Current IL1...................6.45...xIn14.59kA,pk
Current IL2..................0.739...xIn 1.67kA,pk
Current IL3..................0.879...xIn 1.99kA,pk
Current Io.......................0...xIn
Current Io-Calc..............7.398...xIn16.74kA,pk
Current Ps-Seq...............2.258...xIn 5.11kA,pk
Current Ng-Seq...............1.769...xIn 4
kA,pk

113

Trip
Pick-up

Figure 7.8. Fault current record in the REF 615 relay

114

7.4.3

LL and Other Faults on MV Feeder

A line-to-line (LL) fault was simulated on the MV feeder. The fault current
and the input currents to the relays (i.e. the secondary current of the
corresponding CT) for the LL fault on the MV feeder are shown in Figure 7.9.
The relay pick-up and trip timings for different faults on the MV feeder are
shown in Figure 7.10.

Trip
Pick-up

Figure 7.9. LLG Fault on MV Feeder at 'FA' (i) Fault current (Ph. A & B) (ii) Relay trip
signal.(iii) Secondary current (in A) of the CT on the faulted MV feeder. (iv) Secondary current
(in A) of the CT on the HV feeder.

115

MVFeederRelayTime

Trip

Pick-up

Start

Trip

SLG

0.011

0.076

LLG

0.013

0.085

LLLG

0.012

0.169

LL

0.016

0.121

LLLG

0.015

0.112

Figure 7.10 Trip times for the different faults on the MV feeder.

7.5 Discussion
This chapter presents the experimental set-up for the validation of the overcurrent relays in the collector grid networks of a large wind power plant with
VSC-HVDC connection to the grid. The results have been compared with the
simulated results in PSCAD and those recorded in the relay IED. The purpose
was to validate and extend the simulated results observed in Chapter 5.
Though experiments have been successful for the detection of faults in the
MV cable feeders using the low stage three phase non-directional over-current
relays, the relay trip times are considerably longer than the very fast detection
times observed in Chapter 5. One reason that the relay has some minimum
settings, like the operate delay time of 40ms, which cannot be
modified. Even the time multiplier cannot be smaller than 0.05, whereas in
simulation 0.008 and 0.016 were used as time multipliers. Another difference
was the attenuation of the RMS current signal in the relay and its high
frequency components as it had to pass through several stages like the GTAO
card, amplifier and the relay interface. This shows some of the realities of the
physical world.
The performance and discrimination can be further enhanced using the other
available protective functions like the high stage over-current relays, the

116

instantaneous overcurrent relay and the earth fault over-current relay. The
communication capability of the relays can be exploited and tested to avoid the
over-reach conditions as seen in Chapter 5. The experimental set up is ready
and the study will be extended to come out with a more comprehensive
protective solution.
Some problems were observed in the setting of the over-current relay for the
HV feeders in the wind farm. There was no problem in detecting the SLG
faults, but the other faults did not produce a trip in the 150ms fault duration. It
was therefore concluded that the relay settings need be fine-tuned further
exploiting other protective functions. Moreover, in certain instances, the HV
feeder relay would be tripping for the fault in the MV feeder. The blocking
signal generated by the start of the MV feeder relay was used to disable the HV
feeder relay. However, these studies have not been included here as they need
further analysis and investigation. The experimental set-up provides a platform
to program the relay functions and test them using real time simulation.

7.6 Summary
The experimental set-up for the testing of the offshore grid relay
coordination has been described in this chapter. The results are compared
against the PSCAD simulation results and the relay IED as well. The relay
tripping behaviour for the faults on the MV feeder has been recorded and that
corroborates the proposed settings.

117

8 Conclusions and Future Work

This chapter summarizes the thesis and highlights some areas for further
research in the domain of grid integration of offshore wind power using VSCHVDC transmission.

8.1 Conclusions
A new controller algorithm for the offshore VSC-HVDC converter has
been proposed. It is an adaptation of the standard vector control structure for
establishing the sinusoidal balanced voltage at controllable frequency in the
offshore wind power grid. The power flow order to the VSC-HVDC is not
available beforehand and this controller is applicable to the wind power
generation system where the power generation is not explicitly known
beforehand. The vector control scheme is adapted for the purpose of
establishing the desired voltage profile in the offshore grid such that a kind of
infinite voltage bus is created for the wind turbine generators to get
synchronized to. The robustness of the controller is apparent from the
numerous fault studies done on the test system.
Faults in the offshore wind power collection grid have been investigated
through electromagnetic transient simulations in PSCAD/EMTDC. A detailed
layout of the test wind power plant system with collector grid and VSC-HVDC
connection the onshore grid is developed in Chapters 3 and 4. Faults are
simulated in the collector grid and an approximate fault current estimation
method on the basis of scalar current sources has been proposed. An offshore
grid protection scheme using over-current relays has been proposed and
demonstrated through PSCAD/EMTDC simulations in Chapter 5. The results
are further corroborated through a real time simulation in RTDS with an
industrial relay from ABB. The RTDS simulation model and hardware in loop
configuration with IEC 61850 process bus communication set-up can be used
to investigate the different control and protective features of modern numerical
relays.
The system is designed for three phase balanced positive sequence
operation. However, asymmetric faults may lead to unbalanced voltage
conditions and current flows. In Chapter 6, the unbalanced voltage and currents

118

are separated into the positive and negative sequence components and an
expression for the power oscillation has been derived. Negative sequence
current controller for the offshore VSC-HVDC system has been formulated
using the estimated positive sequence current, and both positive and negative
sequence voltage. The controller performance in minimizing the dc voltage
oscillations is demonstrated through EMT simulations. The controller can
remain active all the time, but its affects the system only when there is negative
sequence voltages in the system.

8.2 Main Contributions

A layout of an offshore WPP with collector grid system and VSC-HVDC
connection to the onshore grid has been developed in PSCAD. A new converter
control algorithm has been proposed for the offshore VSC-HVDC terminal. It
is implemented in the test system and the different operating modes as well as
faults have been simulated to verify the control and plant efficacy.
Different frequency control scheme through VSC-HVDC has been
implemented and demonstrated. Fault ride through capability of an offshore
grid with VSC-HVDC connection has been demonstrated.
Elimination of braking resistors on the VSC-HVDC transmission system
was analysed. However, it was concluded that it would require fast and reliable
communication and a higher transient over-voltage withstand capability.
A simple numerical method has been presented for the estimation of fault
current levels in the event of offshore grid faults in the collector grid. The
results are used in the coordination of over-current relays. The scheme is
demonstrated through EMT simulations in PSCAD. Later these are compared
with those of an industrial relay connected with the real time simulation.
Negative sequence current control in the offshore VSC-HVDC terminal has
been proposed. Simulation studies have been carried out to demonstrate the
efficacy of having the negative sequence current control in the VSC-HVDC
system and the WTG converters.

119

8.3 Future Work

Recently the modular multilevel converter (MMC) topologies have been
developed for the VSC-HVDC transmission. These converters are claimed to
have a better dynamic performance and improved controllability than the twolevel or three-level VSC-HVDC transmission. Some of the wind power plants
in the North Sea are going to be connected using MMC HVDC. The control
and operation of wind power plants with MMC-HVDC and the impact upon the
protection schemes is needed. Moreover, a dc super-grid overlay has been
envisaged using MMC-HVDC. The multi-terminal HVDC configurations are
also important for further research.
On the protection side, the deployment of IEC61850 based process bus
architecture can be investigated to provide improved control and protection
capabilities for the operation and control of wind power plants.
This thesis is focussed upon the offshore grid. The work can be extended to
investigate the impact of wind power plants with VSC-HVDC connection on
the onshore grid, especially with regard to inertia emulation, frequency
regulation and fault ride through in the multi-terminal VSC-HVDC systems
with multiple inter-connections to the offshore wind power plants and ac power
grid networks.

8.4 Authors Publication List

[1] S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu, P. Rodriguez, Wind Farm Grid
Integration Using VSC Based HVDC Transmission - An Overview, in
IEEE Energy 2030 Conference, 2008. ENERGY 2008. IEEE, 2008.
[2] S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu, P. Rodriguez, P.C. Kjr and P. W.
Christensen, Chopper Controlled Resistors in VSC-HVDC Transmission
for WPP with Full-scale Converters, in Proc. of Conference on
Sustainable Alternative Energy (SAE), 2009.
[3] S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu, P. Rodriguez, P.C. Kjr and P. W.
Christensen, Modelling and Simulation of VSC-HVDC Connection for
Wind Power Plants, in Proc. of the 5th Nordic Wind Power Conference :
Power System Integration and Electrical Systems of Wind Turbines and
Wind Farms. 2009.

120

[4] S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu, R. N. Mukerjee, P. Rodriguez, P.C. Kjr

and P. W. Christensen, Simulation Study of WPP-HVDC-Grid Integrated
System, in Proc. of the Simulation Study of WPP-HVDC-Grid Integrated
System, Energynautics GmbH, 2009.
[5] S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu, P. Rodriguez, P.C. Kjr and P. W.
Christensen, Modelling and Simulation of VSC-HVDC Connection for
Offshore Wind Power Plants, in Proc. of the Danish PhD Seminar on
Detailed Modelling and Validation of Electrical Components and Systems
2010. Energinet.dk, 2010, 53-57.
[6] S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu and P. Rodriguez, Control and Operation
of Wind Turbine Converters during Faults in an Offshore Wind Power
Plant Grid with VSC-HVDC Connection, IEEE-PES General Meeting
2011, 24-28 July 2011.
[7] S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu, P. Rodriguez, P. C. Kjr, Application of
Over-current Relay in Offshore Wind Power Plant Grid with VSC-HVDC
Connection, in 10th International Workshop on Large-Scale Integration of
Wind Power into Power Systems as well as on Transmission Networks for
Offshore Wind Power Plants. Aarhus, Denmark on October 25 - 26, 2011.
Co-authored Publications
[8] U. N. Gnanarathna, S. K. Chaudhary, A. M. Gole and R. Teodorescu,
Modular Multi-level converter based HVDC System for Grid Connection
of Offshore Wind Power Plant, in Proc. of the 9th International
Conference on AC and DC Power Transmission 2010.
[9] U. N. Gnanarathna, S. K. Chaudhary and A. M. Gole, Multilevel Modular
Converter for VSC-HVDC Transmission Applications: Control and
Operational Aspects, in Proc. of the 16th National Power Systems
Conference, NPSC 2010. Osmania University, 2010. pg. 405-410
[10]
U. N. Gnanarathna, A. M. Gole, A. D. Rajapakse, and S. K.
Chaudhary, Loss Estimation of Modular Multi-Level Converters using
Electro-Magnetic Transients Simulation IPST 2011, Delft, The
Netherlands.
Poster Publication
[11]
S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu, P. Rodriguez, A. M. Gole and P.C.
Kjr, Negative Sequence Controllers to Reduce Power Oscillations

121

During Electric Faults in the Offshore Wind Power Grid, in IEEE-PES

General Meeting 2010, Minneapolis. It was awarded the 1st prize in the
Graduate Student Poster Contest, at IEEE PES GM 2010 in Minneapolis.
Paper Submitted to Journal:
[12]
S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu, P. Rodriguez, and A. M. Gole,
Negative Sequence Current Control in Wind Power Plants with VSCHVDC Connection. Submitted to IEEE Trans. of Sust. Energy on 24-Jun2011. [Manuscript ID TSTE-00344-2011]

122

References
[1] European Wind Energy Association, Pure Power Wind Energy Targets for
2020 and 2030, 2009 update. Available at: http://www.ewea.org
[2] Global Wind Energy Council, Global Wind Report Annual market
update 2010,, April 2010. Available at: http://www.gwec.net
[3] P. Bresesti, W. L. Kling, R. L. Hendriks, and R. Vailati, HVDC
Connection of Offshore Wind Farms to the Transmission System, IEEE
Transactions on Energy Conversion, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 37-43, Mar. 2007.
[4] S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu and P. Rodriguez, "Wind Farm Grid
Integration Using VSC Based HVDC Transmission - An Overview,"
Energy 2030 Conference, 2008. ENERGY 2008. IEEE, pp. 1-7, 2008.
[5] N. Flourentzou, V. G. Agelidis and G. D. Demetriades, "VSC-Based
HVDC Power Transmission Systems: An Overview," Power Electronics,
IEEE Transactions on, vol. 24; 24, pp. 592-602, 2009.
[6] K. Eriksson, C. Liljegren and K. Sobrink, "HVDC light experiences
applicable for power transmission from offshore wind power parks," in
42nd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exihibit, Reno, Nevada. 2004.
[7] L. Harnefors, "Control of VSC-HVDC transmission," in Tutorial Presented
at the IEEE PESC, Rhodos, Greece, Jun 15-19, 2008. 2008.
[8] F. Iov, P. Sorensen, A. -. Hansen and F. Blaabjerg, "Grid connection of
active stall wind farms using a VSC based DC transmission system,"
Power Electronics and Applications, 2005 European Conference on, pp. 10
pp., 2005.
[9] C. Feltes and I. Erlich, "Variable Frequency Operation of DFIG based
Wind Farms connected to the Grid through VSC-HVDC Link," Power
Engineering Society General Meeting, 2007. IEEE, pp. 1-7, 2007.
[10]
L. Xu, B.W. Williams, and L. Yao, Multi-terminal DC transmission
systems for connecting large offshore wind farms, 2008 IEEE PES
General Meeting - Conversion and Del. of Electrical Energy in the 21st
Century, IEEE, 2008, pp. 1-7.
[11]
Grid Code for High and Extra High Voltage, E.ON Netz GmbH
Bayreuth,April 1, 2006.
[12]
Requirements for Offshore Grid Connections in the E.ON Netz
Network, E.ON Netz GmbH Bayreuth, April 1, 2008.
[13]
Wind Turbines Connected to Grids with Voltages above 100kV
Technical regulation for the properties and the regulation of wind turbines,

123

Regulation TF 3.2.5, Registered with the Danish Energy Authority on Dec

3, 2004.
[14]
A. A. Meer, R. L. Hendriks and W. L. Kling, "A survey of fast power
reduction methods for VSC connected wind power plants consisting of
different turbine types," presented at 2nd EPE Wind Energy Chapter
Seminar, KTH, Stockholm, 23-24 April 2009.
[15]
C. Feltes, H. Wrede, F. W. Koch and I. Erlich, "Enhanced Fault RideThrough Method for Wind Farms Connected to the Grid Through VSCBased HVDC Transmission," Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol.
24, pp. 1537-1546, 2009.
[16]
S. M. Muyeen, R. Takahashi, T. Murata, J. Tamura, M. H. Ali, Y.
Matsumura, A. Kuwayama and T. Matsumoto, "Low voltage ride through
capability enhancement of wind turbine generator system during network
disturbance," Renewable Power Generation, IET, vol. 3; 3, pp. 65-74,
2009.
[17]
S. M. Muyeen, R. Takahashi, M. H. Ali, T. Murata and J. Tamura,
"Transient Stability Augmentation of Power System Including Wind Farms
by Using ECS," Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 23; 23, pp.
1179-1187, 2008.
[18]
Annex of O.P. 12.2 Restricted to the technical requirements of wind
power and photovoltaic facilities (Draft), by Red Electrica in October 2008
www.ree.es (translated in English by Spanish Wind Association AEE
www.aeolica.es).
[19]
J. Morren, S. W. H. de Haan, W. L. Kling, and J. a Ferreira, Wind
Turbines Emulating Inertia and Supporting Primary Frequency Control,
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 433-434, Feb.
2006.
[20]
N. R. Ullah, T. Thiringer, and D. Karlsson, Temporary Primary
Frequency Control Support by Variable Speed Wind Turbines Potential
and Applications, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 23, no. 2,
pp. 601-612, May. 2008.
[21]
B. H. Chowdhury and H. T. Ma, Frequency regulation with wind
power plants, 2008 IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting Conversion and Delivery of Electrical Energy in the 21st Century, pp. 1-5,
Jul. 2008.
[22]
S. Jensen, F.W. Fuchs, C.-albrechts-university Kiel, and D.- Kiel,
Load-Frequency Control of Synchronous Areas Using a Wind Farm

124

Connected via HVDC-VSC, 2nd EPE Wind Energy Chapter Seminar,

KTH, Stockholm, 23-24 April, Stockholm , Sweden: 2009.
[23]
B. Jacobson, P. Karlsson, G. Asplund, L. Harnefors, and T. Jonsson,
VSC-HVDC Transmission with Cascaded Two-Level Converters
Converter Topology and Main Circuit, in CIGRE Session 2010, 2010.
[24]
Huang H., Multilevel Voltage-Sourced Converters for HVDC and
FACTS Applications, Cigr SC B4 2009 Colloqium, B4-401, Bergen,
Norway.
[25]
C. Davidson and D. Trainer, Innovative concepts for hybrid multilevel converters for HVDC power transmission, in AC and DC Power
Transmission, 2010. ACDC. 9th IET International Conference on, 2010,
pp. 15.
[26]
M. Liserre, R. Cardenas, M. Molinas, and J. Rodriguez, Overview of
Multi-MW Wind Turbines and Wind Parks, IEEE Transactions on
Industrial Electronics, vol. 58, Apr. 2011, pp. 1081-1095
[27]
A. D. Hansen, Generators and Power Electronics for Wind Turbines,
in Wind Power in Power Systems, Ed. T. Ackermann, Chicester, U.K.
Wiley, 2006, ISBN:0-470-85508-8.
[28]
H. Li and Z. Chen, Overview of different wind generator systems and
their comparisons, Renewable Power Generation, IET, vol. 2, 2008, pp.
123-138
[29]
P. Anderson and A. Bose, Stability Simulation Of Wind Turbine
Systems, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, vol. 102,
no. 12, pp. 3791-3795, Dec. 1983.
[30]
J.G. Slootweg, H. Polinder, and W.L. Kling, Reduced Order
Modelling of Wind Turbines, in Wind Power in Power Systems, Ed. T.
Ackermann, Chicester, U.K. Wiley, 2006, ISBN-0-470-85508-8.
[31]
S. Heier, Grid Integration of Wind Energy Conversion Systems,
Chicester, U.K. Wiley, 2006.
[32]
N. P. W. Strachan and D. Jovcic, Stability of a Variable-Speed
Permanent Magnet Wind Generator With Weak AC Grids, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 2779-2788, Oct. 2010.
[33]
N. P. W. Strachan and D. Jovcic, Improving wind power quality using
an integrated Wind Energy Conversion and Storage System (WECSS),
2008 IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting - Conversion and
Delivery of Electrical Energy in the 21st Century, pp. 1-8, Jul. 2008.
[34]
P. Kundur, Power system stability and control, Ed. N. J. Balu, M. G.
Lauby, McGraw-Hill, 1994, ISBN-0-07-035958.

125

[35]
T. Ackermann, Transmission Systems for Offshore Wind Farms, in
Wind Power in Power Systems, Ed. T. Ackermann, Chicester, U.K. Wiley,
2006.
[36]
http://www.tennettso.de/pages/tennettso_en/Tasks/Offshore/Our_proje
cts/index.htm
[37]
B. Normark and E. K. Nielsen, Advanced power electronics for cable
connection of offshore wind, presented at the Copenhagen OffshoreWind
Conf., Copenhagen, Denmark, Oct. 2628, 2005
[38]
T. Ahndorf, R. Witzmann, and S. Bopp, The German offshore gridA
successful integration of offshore wind power, in European Offshore
Wind Conference, 2007, December, pp. 4-6.
[39]
U. N. Gnanarathna, S. K. Chaudhary, A. M. Gole and R. Teodorescu,
Modular Multi-level converter based HVDC System for Grid Connection
of Offshore Wind Power Plant, in Proc. of the 9th International
Conference on AC and DC Power Transmission 2010.
[40]
U. N. Gnanarathna, S. K. Chaudhary and A. M. Gole, Multilevel
Modular Converter for VSC-HVDC Transmission Applications: Control
and Operational Aspects, in Proc. of the 16th National Power Systems
Conference, NPSC 2010. Osmania University, 2010. pg. 405-410
[41]
U. N. Gnanarathna, A. M. Gole, A. D. Rajapakse, and S. K.
Chaudhary, Loss Estimation of Modular Multi-Level Converters using
Electro-Magnetic Transients Simulation IPST 2011, Delft, The
Netherlands.
[42]
D. G. Holmes and T. A. Lipo, Pulse Width Modulation for Power
Converters: Principles and Practice, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2003.
[43]
C. Du, VSC-HVDC for Industrial Power Systems, Ph.D Thesis,
Chalmers University of Technology, Gteborg, Sweden 2007.
[44]
P. Sandeberg and L. Stendius, Large scale offshore wind power
energy evacuation by hvdc light, European Wind Energy Conference &
Exhibition, 2008.
[45]
IEEE PES wind plant collector system design working group Wind
power plant collector system design considerations, IEEE, 2009.
[46]
E. Muljadi, C.P. Butterfield, a Ellis, J. Mechenbier, J. Hochheimer, R.
Young, N. Miller, R. Delmerico, R. Zavadil, and J.C. Smith,
Equivalencing the collector system of a large wind power plant, 2006
IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, 2006, p. 9 pp.

126

[47]
R. van de Sandt, J. Lowen, J. Paetzold, and I. Erlich, Neutral earthing
in off-shore wind farm grids, 2009 IEEE Bucharest PowerTech, pp. 1-8,
Jun. 2009.
[48]
C. Feltes, R. van de Sandt, F. Koch, F. Shewarega, and I. Erlich,
Neutral grounding in wind farm medium voltage collector grids, in 2011
IEEE/PES Power Systems Conference and Exposition, 2011, pp. 1-7.
[49]
A. S. Locker and M. S. Scarborogh, Safer and Smarter Systems,
IEEE Industry Applications Magazine,Vol. 16, No. 5, Sep-Oct 2010.
[50]
E.R. Detjen and K.R. Shah, Grounding transformer applications and
associated protection schemes, IEEE Transactions on Industry
Applications, vol. 28, 1992, pp. 788-796.
[51]
P. Rodriguez, A. Luna, M. Ciobotaru, R. Teodorescu, and F. Blaabjerg,
Advanced Grid Synchronization System for Power Converters under
Unbalanced and Distorted Operating Conditions, in IECON 2006 - 32nd
Annual Conf. on IEEE Ind. Electron., 2006, no. 2, pp. 5173-5178.
[52]
P. Rodriguez, A. Luna, I. Candela, R. Mujal, R. Teodorescu, and F.
Blaabjerg, Multiresonant Frequency-Locked Loop for Grid
Synchronization of Power Converters Under Distorted Grid Conditions,
IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 127-138,
Jan. 2011.
[53]
ABB review 4/2008: The future is now (on the offshore HVDC light
link NordE.ON 1, germany). Available: http://www.abb.com/
[54]
N.. Mohan, T. M. Undeland and W. P. Robbins, Power
ElectronicsConverters, Applications, and Design;,3rd ed., NJ: John Wiley
& Sons, 2003.
[55]
J. Conroy and R. Watson, "Aggregate modelling of wind farms
containing full-converter wind turbine generators with permanent magnet
synchronous machines: transient stability studies," Renewable Power
Generation, IET, vol. 3, pp. 39-52, 2009.
[56]
A. A. van der Meer, R. L. Hendriks, and W. L. Kling, A survey of fast
power reduction methods for VSC connected wind power plants consisting
of different turbine types, in 2nd EPE Wind Energy Chapter Seminar,
KTH, Stockholm, 23-24 April, 2009.
[57]
S. Patel, GLOBAL MONITER, Power;, Vol. 154 Issue 11, pp. 8-15,
Nov. 2010.
[58]
D. Turcotte and F. Katiraei, Fault contribution of grid-connected
inverters, in 2009 IEEE Electrical Power & Energy Conference (EPEC),
2009, pp. 1-5.

127

[59]
G. Ramtharan, a Arulampalam, J. B. Ekanayake, F. M. Hughes, and N.
Jenkins, Fault ride through of fully rated converter wind turbines with AC
and DC transmission systems, IET Renewable Power Generation, vol. 3,
no. 4, p. 426, 2009.
[60]
A. D. Hansen and G. Michalke, Multi-pole permanent magnet
synchronous generator wind turbines grid support capability in
uninterrupted operation during grid faults, IET Renewable Power
Generation, vol. 3, no. 3, p. 333, 2009.
[61]
E. J. Coster, J. M. A. Myrzik, B. Kruimer, and W. L. Kling,
Integration Issues of Distributed Generation in Distribution Grids,
Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 99, no. 1, pp. 28-39, Jan-2011.
[62]
S. M. Brahma and A. A. Girgis, Development of Adaptive Protection
Scheme for Distribution Systems With High Penetration of Distributed
Generation, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 5663, Jan. 2004.
[63]
H. J. Laaksonen, Protection Principles for Future Microgrids, Power
Electronics, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 25, no. 12, pp. 2910-2918, 2010.
[64]
J. Cardenas, V. Muthukrishnan, D. McGinn, and R. Hunt, Wind farm
protection using an IEC 61850 process bus architecture, in 10th IET
International Conference on Developments in Power System Protection
(DPSP 2010). Managing the Change, 2010, p. P10-P10.
[65]
P. Christiansen, K. Jrgensen, and A. Srensen, Grid connection and
remote control for the Horns Rev 150 MW offshore wind farm in
Denmark, in Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on
Transmission Networks for Offshore Wind Farms, 2008, pp. 2930.
Available: http://www.hornsrev.dk/engelsk/nyheder/nyh_aug_02/grid_control.pdf

[66]
IEEE Standard Inverse-Time Characteristic Equations for OverCurrent Relays, IEEE Std C37.112-1996, Sep. 1996.
[67]
IEEE PES Wind Plant Collector System Design Working Group,
"Wind plant collector system fault protection and coordination," IEEE PES
Trans. and Dist. Conf. and Exposition 2010, , Apr. 2010
[68]
C.H. Ng, L. Ran, and J. Bumby, Unbalanced-Grid-Fault RideThrough Control for a Wind Turbine Inverter, IEEE Trans. on Ind. Appl.,
vol. 44, 2008, pp. 845-856.
[69]
R. Teodorescu, I. Liserre, Marco, and P. Rodriguez, Control of Grid
Converters under Grid Faults, Grid Converters for Photovoltaic and Wind
Power Systems, IEEE-Wiley, 2011.

128

[70]
S. Alepuz, S. Busquets-Monge, J. Bordonau, J. a Martinez-Velasco, C.
a Silva, J. Pontt, and J. Rodriguez, Control Strategies Based on
Symmetrical Components for Grid-Connected Converters Under Voltage
Dips, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56, Jun. 2009, pp. 2162-2173.
[71]
D. Roiu, R.I. Bojoi, L.R. Limongi, and a Tenconi, New Stationary
Frame Control Scheme for Three-Phase PWM Rectifiers Under
Unbalanced Voltage Dips Conditions, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 46,
2010, pp. 268-277.
[72]
L. Xu, B.R. Andersen, and P. Cartwright, VSC Transmission
Operating Under Unbalanced AC ConditionsAnalysis and Control
Design, IEEE Trans. on Power Del., vol. 20, Jan. 2005, pp. 427-434.
[73]
L. Xu, L. Yao, and C. Sasse, Grid Integration of Large DFIG-Based
Wind Farms Using VSC Transmission, IEEE Trans. on Power Syst., vol.
22, pp. 976-984, Aug. 2007.
[74]
P. Rodriguez, A. Luna, M. Ciobotaru, R. Teodorescu, and F. Blaabjerg,
Advanced Grid Synchronization System for Power Converters under
Unbalanced and Distorted Operating Conditions,in Proc. of IECON, Nov.
2006, pp. 5173-5178.
[75]
P. Rodriguez, A.V. Timbus, R. Teodorescu, M. Liserre, and F.
Blaabjerg, Flexible Active Power Control of Distributed Power
Generation Systems During Grid Faults, IEEE Trans Ind. Electron., vol.
54, pp. 2583-2592, Oct. 2007.
[76]
M. Hirakami and W. Neugebauer, Transient Network Analyzer
Operation with Digital Computer Control and Analysis, IEEE
Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, vol. 100, no. 4, pp. 15971607, Apr. 1981.
[77]
P. Forsyth, T. Maguire, and R. Kuffel, Real time digital simulation for
control and protection system testing, in 2004 IEEE 35th Annual Power
Electronics Specialists Conference (IEEE Cat. No.04CH37551), 2004, pp.
329-335.
[78]
ABB Oy, Distribution Automation, Feeder Protection and Control
REF615 Product Guide. Available at: www.abb.com/substationautomation
[79]
H. Kirrmann, Sampling Redundancy, in ABB Review -Special Report
IEC 61850, ABB Group R & D and Technology, Switzerland 2010. ISSN:
1013-3119. Available at: www.abb.com/abbreview.
[80]
A. Hakala-Ranta, O. Rintamaki, and J. Starck, Utilizing possibilities
of IEC 61850 and GOOSE, in Electricity Distribution-Part 1, 2009.
CIRED 2009.

A-1

Appendix A Main Circuit Parameters

A.1. Onshore Grid

10
400

Assuming a power factor of 0.9 gives system MVA of 444.44 MVA. System base
is taken as 450MVA

84.3

Angular Frequency,

2 50

314.16

Grid Impedance,

3.57
35.78

35.96 84.3

113.9

A.2. Converter Transformer:

400
0.9

400
170

150
170

0.14

444.44 ~ 450

No load losses 0.005 pu

Copper losses 0.005 pu

A.3. Tuned Shunt Filters:

A.3.1.

FilterI (39th harmonic)

,
25

,
,

12,353

0.06

27

2.97
686.1

,
,

2 1950

1950

2.24
,

1.097 ,

2.2

A-2
A.3.2.

Filter#2 parameters

,
6

24504

0.03

,
,

2 3900

13.5

1.91
128.2

0.872

Table A.1 Filter Impedance at the fundamental, 3rd harmonic and resonance

Impedance
at 50 Hz

Impedance
at 150 Hz

Impedance
at Resonance

Filter-I (39th harmonic)

1069.7, -90

354.7 , -90

1.1 , -2.3

th

2140.4 , -90

712.5 , -90

4.5 , -9.4

Filter#2 (78 harmonic)

Filter#1 Admittance
20

Admittance (dB)

0
-20
-40
-60
-80

Phase (deg)

90
45
0
-45
-90
1

10

10

10

10

Frequency (Hz)

Fig. A. 1. Bode Plot of the 39th harmonic filter admittance.

A-3

Filter #2 Admittance
0

Admittance (dB)

-20

-40

-60

-80
90

Phase (deg)

45
0
-45
-90
1

10

10

10

10

Frequency (Hz)

Fig. A. 2 Bode plot of the 78th harmonic filter admittance.

A.4. Phase Reactor

0.12

,
,

0.12

50
2

170
450

50

24.5

A.5. VSC HVDC System

1950
300

,
,

400
,

1.333

,
2

2
17.78

A.6. DC cable parameters

Copper cable with 1.2 A per sq. mm current density is assumed. XLPE insulation
thickness of 12 mm is assumed for 150kV DC cables.

A-4

1.2 .
1334

,
1112
1.2

18.8

12
1.68 10 . m
,
200
,

3.09
2

0.315

ln

0.1
0.384
76.85
0.7788 0.0188
Considering shielding by sheath at a radius of 30.8mm, the inductance is given by,
0.0308
0.2 ln
0.2 ln
0.1487
29.74
,
. 7788 0.0188
,

0.2 ln

0.2 ln

A.7. 150kV AC cable parameters

There are two 2km long 170 kV cables connecting the converter transformer to the
two plant step-up transformers at the collector bus. The nominal power rating of the
plant is 400MW implies that each cable should handle 200MW. Further assuming a
power factor of 0.9, each cable has to be rated for,
200
0.9
150
3

222

225

855.4

Single core copper cable with 1200 sq. mm cross section has been selected from
Table 4 of ABB XLPE cables data sheet. Cross bonded cable layout in flat formation
gives a maximum current carrying capacity of of 850 A and 1050 A for a temperature
rise of 65C and 90C respectively. As per table 21, the maximum dc resistance is
0.0151 /km at 20C. In flat formation, the cable inductance is 0.5mH/km- Cable
capacitance is 0.26uF/km.

A.8. Plant step up transformer

Three-winding transformers have been considered as plant step-up transformers.

: 36/36/170 .
111/111/222

A-5

: 0.24
0.12

36
36

170

A.9. Grounding Transformer

The zig-zag connected grounding transformers have been considered here for the
grounding of the medium voltage (MV) WTG cable feeders. The transformer leakage
reactance is assumed to be 0.1 pu, 100MVA per phase. Therefore the zero sequence
reactance becomes be 0.033pu. No load and core losses are assumed to 0.005 pu each.

A.10. LCL filter for WTG

The LCL filter was designed for the GSC of a 6.6 MVA WTG-FSC operating at
the 3.3kV rms ac line-line voltage. The LCL parameters were:
6.6
3.3
481
260
372
936
676

1
2

0.093
0.05
5.238
0.18
0.13

It has been scaled to an equivalent LCL filter for a 111MVA WTG-FSC operating
at the 3.3 kV RMS ac line-line voltage. This change will effectively decrease the
impedances by a factor of

16.82. The admittances will be increased by the same

factor. Thus, the new values are given by,

1
2

111
3.3
28.6
15.46
6256
55.65
40.19

0.093
0.05
5.238
0.18
0.13

A.11. WTG unit transformer

The WTG units have been selected with the following ratings:

A-6
111
3.3/36
.
15.46
0.005
0.005

A.12. WTG feeder cables

A typical layout of WTGs in a wind power plant is shown in Fig. A-1. The WTG
string can be made up of cables with increasing cross sections depending upon the
number of WTGs connected to it. In this case, two cross sections have been considered
for the cables.
Each WTG is rated for 6.7MW or 7.41MVA at 0.9 power factor. Therefore, each
WTG will supply a current of 118.7A in the 36 kV cable strings. The combined current
of the first two WTGs will be 237.4A, and hence 95sq.mm core copper cable has been
considered for the connection of first two WTGs in the string. When the next two
WTGs are connected, the total feeder current becomes 474.7A. A 240 sq. mm cable has
been selected for this section of the WTG string. The combined current of all 5 WTGs
is 593.4 A and hence a 400 sq. mm cable section is used to connect the 5 WTG units
with the collector bus. It is assumed that there is a distance of 1km cable length
between two adjacent WTG units and between the collector bus and its adjacent WTG
unit.
The cable selection is based upon the underground cable datasheet [A-2].
Considering a temperature rise of 65C in cross-bonding and trefoil layout, the current
carrying capacities are 270A and 6590 A for the selected cables. It should be updated
with the submarine cable datasheet.
Cable parameters:
1
2
3

_
_
_

95
240
400

, 270
, 475
, 625

0.193 /
0.0754 /
0.047 /

0.69
0.60
0.57

/
/
/

0.17
0.23
0.28

/
/
/

For the equivalent cable string shown in Fig. A 1 b , the cable parameters are given
by,

The parameters of the equivalent cable string is thus,

A-7
.

0.161

1.308

1.08

The parameters of the aggregated WTG feeder can be calculated by the parallel
combination of these strings, which gives the parameters of the aggregated cable feeder
as follows,

0.0537

0.436

3.24

References:

[A.1]

E. Muljadi, C.P. Butterfield, a Ellis, J. Mechenbier, J. Hochheimer, R. Young,

N. Miller, R. Delmerico, R. Zavadil, and J.C. Smith, Equivalencing the collector
system of a large wind power plant, 2006 IEEE Power Engineering Society
General Meeting, 2006, p. 9 pp.
[A.2] XLPE Cable Systems, Users Guide, ABB Ltd.

A-8

Fig. A- 1 WTG Layout and its aggregation in a wind power plant.

B-1

Appendix B Three phase to two phase

transformations
The three phase voltage or current variables are assumed along three axes
separated in space by 120 so as to reflect their phase angle relationship. These can be
transformed into space phasors along the two axes in quadrature to each other. The
Parks and Clarkes transformations are the two standard transformations.

B.1 Parks Transformation

It transforms a three phase voltage (or current) to the two phase components at
quadrature in the synchronously rotating reference frame.

Fig. B. 1 Three phases, and space vectors in stationary and rotating reference frames.

In most of the applications, the rotating reference frame is rotating at the

synchronous speed, .

(B.1)
(B.2)
(B.3)
(B.4)

B-2

2
3

1
2

1
2

2
3
2
3

1
2

4
3
4
3

(B.5)

or,

The inverse transformation is given by,

cos
cos
cos

2
3
2
3

sin
sin

sin

2
3
4
3

1
1

(B.6)

In complex phasor notation,

(B.7)
(B.8)
(B.9)
The coefficient 2/3 ensures that the magnitudes of
and
remain the same as
the peak magnitude of , for a balanced three phase system. This transformation is not
power invariant. The instantaneous power is given by,

Or,

Or,

3
2

3
2

3
2

(B.10)

B.2 Clarkes Transformation

Clarkes transformation transforms the phase variable in the stationary frame of
reference. The stationary reference frame has the two axes,
and the axis is
aligned with the axis of phase A, i.e.
0. Thus the stationary reference frame
components can be obtained by substituting
0 in (B.5).

B-3

1
2
3 0
1
2

1
2
3
2
1
2

1
2
3
2
1
2

(B.11)

The inverse Clarkes transformation is given by,

1
1
2
1
2

B.3 Relationship
between
Transformations

0
1
3
1
2
3
1
2

Parks

(B.12)

and

Clarkes

The transformations between the rotating reference frame (Parks transformation)

and the stationary reference frame, Clarkes transformation are given by,

Or,

Or,

sin

sin

sin
cos

sin
cos

(B.13)

(B.14)

C-1

Appendix C Design of a PI Controller for the VSCHVDC

Controllers
Usually, the two terminals of a VSC-HVDC transmission system are identical as they have to handle
the same amount of active power at the same voltage. The reactive power capabilities of the individual
converter may differ in some cases. In the VSC-HVDC transmission described in chapter 3, the offshore
grid converter establishes the ac reference voltage and frequency in the offshore grid. The onshore VSCHVDC terminal regulates the dc line voltage and the ac voltage magnitude (or reactive power). In both
cases, the main control function which may be the control of dc voltage, ac voltage or the reactive power, is
implemented in the outer control loop. The outer controller sets the desired current reference which is
attained by the fast inner current control loop. The block diagrams are given in Figure 3.14, 3.15 in Chapter
3. Here the tuning of the proportional integral controllers is described. Fig. C-1 gives the block diagram of
the plant and the PI controllers.

Fig. C. 1 Proportional-integral controller for the VSC-HVDC

C.1.

Inner Current Loop

The plant comprises of a VSC connected to the filter bus through a phase reactor with the inductance
(Lpr) and resistance (Rpr) as given below,
0.02453 ,

0.060

0.4088

0.4088

After the open loop poles get cancelled, the remaining open loop transfer function is

(C.1)

. In this

implementation, the controller gain, G, is considered as unity. This means the VSC output is same as
the controller reference. The closed loop transfer function becomes,

1
1

1
1

(C.2)

C-2

Switching frequency is 1950 Hz, The bandwidth is selected as half decade lower than the
switching frequency, i.e. 390 Hz (or 780 rad/sec). Hence,
1

1
1

0.4088,

(1.2)

780
1,

0.06

780

60.11,

(1.3)

In PSCAD implementation of a PI controller, the parameters are given by,

C.2.

0.4088
30.05

60.11, T

0.0068

(1.4)

Outer DCVoltage Control Loop (considering Ts=1/1950s)

After pole cancellation, the effective inner loop transfer function is

Pole cancellation can be

0.00041 s.

achieved by setting,

The open loop Transfer function becomes,

The close loop transfer function is,

1 decade lower bandwidth is selected at 19.5 Hz or 39

1

39

2
3

39

0.00942

Hence, we get
0.00942 and

In PSCAD implementation,

C.3.

0.04332

Reactive power control loop

For the reactive power control loop, the open loop transfer function is

close loop transfer function becomes,

1 decade lower bandwidth is selected at 39 Hz or 78

78

0.00048 for 170 kV base.

The

C-3

0.8497 for 170 kV ac bvus voltage.

C.4.

Offshore ac voltage controller tuning

Neglecting the current injection from the WPP, the filter bus voltage and the current are related by the
phase equation,

Parks transformation gives,

If the cross coupling terms are ignored, and the current is considered constant for a switching cycle, the
current to voltage gain is

The open loop transfer function is,

The closed loop transfer function becomes,

1 decade lower bandwidth is selected at 39 Hz or 78

1

78

.
0.000858

78
0.4756

Table C. 1 PI controller parameters : Calculated values, and Values used in PSCAD simulation.

ControlLoop
CurrentControl
NegativeSequenceCurrentcontroller
Dcvoltagecontroller
Reactivepowercontroller
ACvoltagecontroller

CalculatedParameters
Kp
Ti
60.1
0.0068
60.1
0.0068
0.0094
0.0433
0.0005
0.850
0.001
0.476

Parametersused
Kp
Ti
47.3
0.0068
60
3
0.0056
0.0721
0.0005
0.850
0.001
0.349








Publications

P.1

S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu, and P. Rodriguez, Wind farm grid

integration using VSC based HVDC transmission-an overview, in
Energy 2030 Conference, 2008.

IEEE Energy2030
Atlanta, GA USA
17-18 November, 2008

Wind Farm Grid Integration Using VSC Based HVDC Transmission An Overview

S. K. Chaudhary

R. Teodorescu

P. Rodriguez

Department of Energy
Technology, Aalborg University,
Denmark
skc@iet.aau.dk

Department of Energy
Technology, Aalborg University,
Denmark
ret@iet.aau.dk

Department of Energy
Technology, Aalborg University,
Denmark
pro@iet.aau.dk

I. INTRODUCTION
Wind power generation has received a major
impetus due to ever increasing demand for
energy and depleting fossil fuel reserves. Energy
is the critical resource for development, without
which the world will come to standstill. Fossil
fuels like coal, oil and gas have been the chief
energy source till now. However, fossil fuels are
limited in supply and the reserves are
concentrated in a few countries; thereby raising
energy security concerns. Therefore, significant
research and development has been directed
towards harnessing renewable energy sources
world-wide for sustainable development. Wind
energy is an abundant renewable energy
resource. In the last couple of decades, there has
been a lot of research and development in the
field of electricity generation from wind power.
While the development is still going on, now
wind turbine technology has matured enough to
generate electrical energy from wind on a
massive scale (see Fig. 1).
Another attractive factor for wind energy is its
cleanliness. It does not use water for its operation
and the greenhouse gases emission (GHG) from

wind farms, both onshore and offshore, is of the

order of only 10 to 30 kg CO2 equivalent per
MWh of energy. This is a major environmental
advantage over fossil fuels, like coal, gas and oil,
which emit around 400 to 550 kg CO2 equivalent
per MWh of energy. In the European Union
(EU), energy accounts for 80% of all GHG
emissions. In order to reduce GHG emission and
ensure energy security, EU is committed to
develop renewable energy sources to the level of
20% by the year 2020[1]. A major portion of this
is expected to be from wind farms, both onshore
and offshore. As shown in Fig 1, in 2030 a
reference scenario from the European Wind
Energy Association (EWEA) assumes that wind
energy will generate 180GW of power, out of
which 120GW will come from offshore wind [2].
While this paper specifically refers to offshore
wind farms, most of the concepts are applicable
for onshore wind farms as well.
EWEA's Wind Pow er Reference Scenario
350
Offshore

300

Onshore
250
Power (GW)

Abstract - The paper gives an overview of HVAC and

HVDC connection of wind farm to the grid, with an
emphasis on Voltage Source Converter (VSC)-based
HVDC for large wind farms requiring long distance
cable connection. Flexible control capabilities of a
VSC-based HVDC system enables smooth integration
of wind farm into the power grid network while
meeting the Grid Code Requirements (GCR).
Operation of a wind farm with VSC-based HVDC
connection is described.
Keywords : VSC, HVAC, HVDC, Wind Farm, Grid
Code requirements, Black Start,, Reactive Power
Support, Voltage and Frequency regulation

120
75

200
35

150

12

100
50

4
1
56

77

2007

2010

146

113

165

180

2025

2030

0
2015

2020
Year

Fig. 1. EWEAs Wind Power Development Scenario

Wind turbine generators (WTG) convert wind

energy into electrical power. Now large wind
turbines of up to 5MW size have been
developed. A wind farm, also known as wind
power plant (WPP), is a collection of a few tens
or a few hundreds of WTG installed in close

vicinity. They are connected to the collector bus

by cables. For instance, 160MW Horns Rev
offshore wind farm comprises of 80 WTG of
2MW each. The proposed 400MW Borkum-II
wind farm in the North Sea will have 80 WTG of
5MW rating each. The outputs of individual
WTGs are aggregated at the collector bus.
While WTGs operate at a low voltage level,
typically 690V, step-up transformers are used to
step up the voltage to the collector bus voltage,
usually around 30 to 40 kV.

commutation failure when compared with LCCbased HVDC. It is not referred in this paper.
The paper is divided into five sections. A
brief description of HVAC and LCC-based
HVDC transmission system for wind farms is
given in section II Prevalent grid codes are
briefly discussed in Section III. Section IV
describes the VSC-based HVDC system. In the
end, section V concludes the paper.
II. HVAC AND HVDC OPTIONS FOR
WIND FARM INTEGRATION
A vast majority of generation, transmission,
distribution and consumption of electric power is
in the form of AC. Hence, HVAC transmission is
the obvious choice for the grid connection of
wind farm. Most of the operational wind farms
are connected using HVAC connection. Horns
Rev Wind farm uses 21 km of submarine cable
and 36km of onshore cable for the HVAC
transmission of. 160MW at 150kV

The electric power aggregated at the collector

bus has to be fed into the power grid network for
transmission and distribution to the load centers
and utilities located hundreds of km away. This
requires that the wind farm to the grid. Cable
transmission is required for the submarine power
transmission (in case of offshore wind farms),
and underground transmission onshore so as to
connect at a sufficiently strong point in the grid.
Though overhead line (OHL) provides an
economic connection, there are problem in
securing right of way for OHL. Hence, only
cable connection of wind farms have been
considered in this overview.
High Voltage AC (HVAC) and High Voltage
DC (HVDC) are the two alternatives for the
connection of the wind farm to the grid as shown
in Fig. 1. The figure shows Voltage source
converter (VSC) based HVDC system.
On the basis of the type of converters used,
modern HVDC transmission has three major
variations. The three types of converters are
a. Line-commutated Converter (LCC)
b. Capacitor Commutated Converters (CCC)c. Voltage Source Converters
CCC-based HVDC is a special type of LCCbased HVDC, with series capacitors between the
converter transformer and the thyristor-bridge. It
has some advantages with respect to lower
reactive power requirement and lower risk of

Power Transfer Capacity (MW)

Fig. 2. Single line diagram of HVAC and HVDC

interconnection of offshore wind farm to the grid.

Fig. 3. Choice of transmission technology for different

wind farm capacities and distances [3].

However, HVAC cable transmission suffers

from the excessive reactive current drawn by the
cable capacitances. Not only this increases the
cable losses and reduces the power transfer
capability of the cables, but also demands
reactive shunt compensation to absorb the
excessive reactive power and avoid over-voltage.
Presently AC cables have a maximum cable
rating of about 200MW per three phase cable, on
a voltage level of 150 - 170kV, compensation at
both ends and maximum cable length of around
200km. For a shorter distance of a 100km,
voltage ratings may be raised to 245kV, thereby
increasing the power transfer capability to
350MW [3]. As shown in Fig. 3, HVAC
transmission is not feasible for large offshore

power plants requiring cable transmission over

long distances.
Unlike HVAC transmission systems, there is
no reactive power generation or absorption in
HVDC transmission systems. Hence, HVDC
transmission is very suitable for bulk power
transmission over long distances. This has been
one of the driving factors for the development of
HVDC systems since the first commercial
installation in Gotland in the year 1954.
The advantages of HVDC systems are fast
and reversible power flow, asynchronous and
decoupled connection of two grids, frequency
control and power oscillation damping
capabilities. Though a large number of large
LCC-based HVDC systems are operational for
bulk power transmission and/or asynchronous
connection between two grids, none of them is
associated with wind farms.
LCC-based HVDC terminals use thyristorbridge converters, which require a stable AC
voltage for commutation. These converters
absorb reactive power as current is always
lagging behind the voltage. The reactive power
(VAr) requirement for the LCC terminals is of
the order of 60% of the active power rating;
though actual reactive power absorption depends
upon the power flow level. Large capacitive
filters are used to provide reactive power to the
terminals and filter out the low frequency
harmonics. Another problem lies in the fact that
LCC-based HVDC cannot be connected to weak
ac grids due to risk of commutation failures. The
strength of ac grid with respect to the LCC-based
HVDC rating is measured in terms of short
circuit ratio (SCR) and effective short circuit
ratio (ESCR), which accounts for the reactive
power compensation provided at the terminals
[4].
VSC-based HVDC transmission overcomes
the shortcomings of the LCC-based HVDC
system, albeit at increased converter cost and
higher converter losses.
Before moving on to the VSC-based HVDC,
the grid code requirements are briefly reviewed
in the following section.

machines; hence they go together very well. In

the last few decades several large wind farms
(also referred as wind power plants, WPP), each
having capacities of a few hundreds of MW,
have been connected to the grid, and a larger
number of WPPs are in the planning and
development stages. The characteristics and
capabilities of wind WPPs are very different
from the conventional power plants. Their
operational behavior, dynamics, controllability
and capability are dependent upon the type of
wind turbine generators used, farm control
architecture as well as instantaneous wind
availability. For a given wind farm, the power
generated is inherently stochastic in nature as it
depends upon the instantaneous local wind
conditions.
In the past, wind power penetration in the
power grid network was relatively small and grid
operators treated them as negative load, rather
than a power generation source. They were not
expected to provide grid support. On the
contrary, they used to get disconnected whenever
there were disturbances. The conventional power
houses were required to provide controlling
power to make up for the lost wind power
generation and support grid recovery [5].
With increasing wind penetration, grid
operators are now imposing grid code
requirements to specify the steady and dynamic
requirements that wind farms must comply with
for getting connected to the grid. Wind farms
need to participate in the frequency and voltage
regulation by continuously controlling their
active and reactive power outputs. Rather than,
disconnecting from the grid during fault
conditions, they are expected to exhibit low
voltage fault ride through capability and support
the grid recovery [6, 7].
E.ON Netz Grid Code [7] states that every
generating plant with a rated capacity of over
100MW must be capable of supplying the
control power. Phase swinging or power
oscillations must not trigger the generating plant
protection or lead to capacity disconnection. On
the other hand, the plant regulation must not
stimulate phase swinging or power oscillations.

III. GRID CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR

WIND FARMS

IV. VSC-BASED HVDC TRANSMISSION

At present a vast majority of the generating

power plants are thermal, hydro or nuclear power
stations with large synchronous generators.
These plants have a very controllable generation
capability of both the active and reactive powers
within their capability limits. Moreover, the
power system network has evolved around these

Voltage Source Converters (VSC) use high

voltage Insulated gate Bipolar Transistor (IGBT)
capable of carrying high currents and switching
at high frequency of a few kHz for pulse width
modulation A comparison of LCC-HVDC
(referred as HVDC Classic) and VSC-based
HVDC is given in Table 1 [8].

Table 1. Comparison of LCC-based HVDC and VSC-based HVDC Light [8]

LCC-based HVDC

VSC-based HVDC

Size range single convertor

150 1500 MW

50 550 MW

Convertor/Semiconductor technology

Line commutated, Thyristor

Self commutated, IGBT

Relative volume

Type of cable

XLPE

Control of active power

4 6 times
Mass Impregnated Paper
Oil/Paper
Yes

Control of reactive power

No (only switched regulation)

Yes, continuous control

Voltage control

Limited

Extensive

Fault ride-through

No

Yes

Black start capability

No

Yes

10

Minimum short circuit capability in AC grid

>2.0 x rated power

No requirement

11

Power reversal with-out interruption

No

Yes

12

Generator needed on off-shore platform

Yes

No requirement

13

Minimum DC power flow

5-10% of rated power

No minimum DC power

14

Typical losses per convertor

0.8%

1.6%

15

Operating experience

> 20 years

8 years

16

Operating experience off-shore

No

Yes

Fig. 4. Capability Curve of a VSC on active power (P)

and reactive power (Q) plane [9].

VSCs are capable of operating in all four

quadrants on the active power (P) and reactive
power (Q) plane as shown in Fig. 4 [9]. It allows
for the fast control of active and reactive powers
independent of each other. Depending upon the
requirements, the VSC can be operated to supply
or absorb reactive power from the grid.
By virtue of PWM controlled IGBT switches,
the operation of VSC-based HVDC system is
independent of the grid strength, it is even
capable of supplying to a passive load and
energize a dead network during black start.
Since VSC-based HVDC uses high frequency
PWM technique for the AC to DC conversion

yes

and vice-versa, it does not introduce any low

frequency harmonics. The first characteristic
harmonics appears at the switching frequency
which of the order of a few kHz (typically at 1-2
kHz) and unlike in the case of LCC-based
HVDC, these converters do not require reactive
power support. Hence compact high frequency
filters can be used.
At the cost of more expensive converter
terminals and higher losses in the converters,
VSC-based HVDC is far better than the classic
HVDC system.
Key features of the VSC-based HVDC are
listed below
a. Fast and reversible control of power flow
b. Frequency and voltage control on the wind
farm grid to attain maximum power tracking.
c. Grid frequency regulation by fast power flow
control
d. Power Oscillation damping by modulating
the power flow.
e. Fast and reversible control of the Reactive
power generation or absorption at the point of
common coupling.
f. Voltage regulation by virtue of reactive
power control over a wide range from
inductive to capacitive.
g. Dynamic voltage stability and flicker
mitigation by the dynamic modulation of
reactive power injection.
h. Black start capability.
i. Improvement in power system stability by
fast and dynamic control of both the active

and reactive power injection at the point of

common coupling.
j. Asynchronous mode of operation, providing
decoupling from power grid disturbances.
k. Compact converter terminals compared to the
conventional HVDC terminals ideal for
platform based offshore applications.
l. Low filter requirements as the first
characteristic harmonics is in the order of a
few kHz.
On the flip side, the VSC-based HVDC
system is expensive due to high VSC-terminal
costs and the converter losses are higher than
those in LCC-based HVDC because of high
frequency switching of the IGBT switches.
However, VSC development in the last
decade has brought down the losses by more
than 60% since the development of the first
system in 1999 [8] Liu and Arrillaga et al [10]
proposes a VSC with current re-injection scheme
to reduce the switching losses.
In [11] Weber, has proposed the use of LCCbased HVDC with STATCOM on the basis of
lower overall losses. When LCC-based HVDC is
used, the losses are lower, and it can be designed
to meet the grid code requirements using VSCbased STATCOMs at its terminals.
A. VSC-based HVDC for Wind Farm Grid
Integration
VSC-based HVDC provides a flexible control
of both active and reactive power flow, and it
can be controlled to achieve a variety of
objectives like voltage and frequency control.
Therefore, it can be designed to operate with
different types of farm grids irrespective of the
type of wind turbine generators used, such as
squirrel cage induction generators, doubly fed
induction generators or synchronous machines
with (or without) full converters.
When the wind farm is connected to the grid
by VSC-HVDC, it may be operated as a
generator with controllable active and reactive
power. Though the maximum amount of active
power is limited to the availability of wind
power at any given instant, power generation can
be reduced as and when needed by the farm
control. Unlike LCC-based HVDC, VSC-based
HVDC poses no limitation on the minimum
active power flow. Further, reactive power flow
can be efficiently regulated to comply with the
grid connection requirements. The wind farm
side converter may be controlled to regulate the
wind farm grid voltage and frequency. As power
flows through the farm side converter into the

DC-link capacitors, DC-link capacitor voltage

tends to rise. The DC voltage control logic
implemented on the grid side converter, transfers
the power supplied by the farm side converter
(minus the losses) to the grid, so as to maintain
the constant DC link voltage. The grid side
converter also tends to regulate the grid voltage
at the converter terminal by regulating the
reactive power flow. Under normal operating
conditions, the two converters can operate
independently of each other.
B. Operation of the Wind Farm with VS-based
HVDC under Fault Conditions
When there is a fault resulting in a low
voltage on the grid side converter terminal bus,
the power transfer capability to the grid is
reduced. In such a case the wind farm may be
commanded to reduce the power generation. Any
excess power fed into the dc link would result in
DC over-voltage. Chopper controlled resistors
may be used to dissipate the excess energy and
avoid DC over-voltage [12].
A fault on the wind farm side would result in
reduction of power generation or reduction of
farm side grid voltage. The farm side converter
can be regulated to operate at a lower AC voltage
and low power generation.
A fault on the DC link would result in the
outage of the HVDC link. The wind farm will
have to be tripped whereas the grid side will
have to be isolated by the operation of AC circuit
breakers.
C. Energizing the Wind Farm Grid from the AC
Grid
Black start capability of the VSC-based
HVDC may be used to start the wind farm grid.
When the grid side converters are connected to
the AC grid, the DC link capacitor gets charged
to the required DC voltage level. Then the farm
side converter can energize the farm side grid to
the desired voltage and frequency in a controlled
manner. The wind turbine generators can be
connected to the farm side grid when voltage and
frequency is stable.
V. OPERATIONAL EXPERIENCES WITH
VSC-BASED HVDC
ABB has developed VSC-based HVDC under
the trade name HVDC-Light. [13 - 15]. Recently
Siemens has developed VSC-based HVDC under
the trade name, HVDC-plus.

A. Gotland

converter can be operated within the frequency

range 30 - 65 Hz in isolated operation mode.

Gotland HVDC Light (50MW, 80kV, 70km)

connects southern Gotland to the center of the
island This link is operating in parallel to the
existing 70kV/30kV AC grid since 1999. A loss
minimization program within the AC network
utilizes the power flow controllability of the
HVDC system. The voltage control reduces
voltage and frequency variations so that the wind
power does not synchronize with flicker and no
separate flicker controller is required. Staged
fault test study has demonstrated the voltage
support capability of the HVDC light system.
Installation of Gotland HVDC has improved the
overall stability and voltage quality of the
Gotland Energy AB (GEAB) to the extent that
the number of wind turbines installed in Gotland
has doubled from the number in 1997 [13-14].

10kV
Enge
10kV
Tjreborg

2MW
GB

2MW

8MVA

9kV DC
7MW

8MVA

GB

GB

1.5M
W

1MW
GB

Tjreborg wind farm with AC and DC Cable Feeders

Fig. 6 Tjreborg Wind Farm with AC and DC Cable

Feeders

C. Platform mounted Offshore HVDC-Light

HVDC terminal at Troll.

70 kV
HVDC to
M ainland

HEM SE
65 M VA
BCKS

80 kV
50 M W

The Troll A HVDC-Light link, consisting of

2x41MW, 60kV, converters and 67km long
submarine cables, is the only HVDC system with
offshore platform terminal. It supplies power to
the offshore platform from mainland grid. This
system proves the technical viability of offshore
platform mounted converter terminals and VSCbased HVDC supply to passive networks.
D. Others

65 M VA
NS
30 kV
N S 2
70 kV

NS

10kV

Sim plified diagram of the Gotland N etwork

Murray link, in Australia (220MW, 150kV,

180 km) and Estlink (350MW, 150kV, 105km)
between Finland and Estonia, demonstrate the
technical aspects with regard to high power
ratings and long cable transmission lengths.
Murray link is used for facilitating power trading
as well as AC voltage control at both ends.
E. Nord E.ON 1 HVDC

Fig. 5. Simplified Diagram of Gotland Network

B. Tjreborg
The 7.2MW, 9kV, 4.4km long HVDC Light
at Tjreborg was commissioned in 2000 to
demonstrate the VSC-based HVDC technology
on a small scale. The farm consists of 4 wind
turbines of different types and makes, with a
total generation of 6.5 MW. The DC cable is laid
in parallel with the existing AC cable, thus
enabling three different operation modes: AC
mode via the AC cable only, the DC mode via
the DC cable only or the AC/DC mode via the
DC and the AC cable in parallel. The offshore

Nord E.ON 1 HVDC, due for commissioning

in 2009, will be the first HVDC connection to a
large wind farm. It will connect the 400MW
Borkum-2 wind farm with the German Grid The
wind turbine generators, of 5MW size each, will
feed to a 36kV local AC grid, which will
eventually be stepped up to 170kV AC voltage.
HVDC Light offshore converters will convert it
to 150 kV DC voltage. The transmission link
will comprise of 128 km of submarine cable and
75 km underground cable before connecting to
the 380kV AC grid at Diele. [17]

F. HVDC.plus from Siemens

The first VSC-based HVDC from Siemens,
known as HVDC Plus, will be transmitting
400MW at 200kV over 88km submarine cable
between San Fransisco City Center and Pittsburg
from March 2010[17].
VI. CONCLUSIONS
VSC-based HVDC system is a viable
transmission connection for large offshore wind
farms, especially when long distances are
involved. Relatively higher cost and higher
converter losses may be acceptable in view of its
flexibility to ensure compliance with the Grid
Code requirements, facilitate ancillary services
like reactive power support, voltage stability,
power flow regulation, etc. Further development
and competitive research on VSC technology is
expected to bring down the losses and price as
well.
However, for certain onshore wind farms,
where space availability is not a concern, a
combination of HVDC classic and STATCOM
or other hybrid topologies may be evaluated.
When there are a number of large wind farms
in a certain region, VSC based multi-terminal
HVDC may be optimal. In such cases a detailed
simulation study is required with regards to
GCR, possible ancillary services and power
system operation and stability. Further the
stability and performance of the VSC based
converters has to be studied for unbalanced grid
conditions and asymmetrical faults.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The research is a part of Vestas Power
Program sponsored by Vestas Wind Systems
A/S, Denmark and Department of Energy
Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg,
Denmark.
REFERENCES
[1] An Energy Policy Update, Communication from the
Commission to the Eurpoean Council and the European
Parliament, Commission of the European Communities,
Brussels 10.1.2007.
[2] Pure Power, Wind Energy Scenarios up to 2030,
European Wind Energy Association, March 2008.
Available at http:// www.ewea.org
[3] T. Ackermann, Wind Power in Power Systems, John
Wiley and Sons Ltd., England.
[4] P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control,
McGraw-Hill Inc, New York.
[5] S. Haier,. Grid Integration of Wind Energy Conversions
Systems, John Wiley and Sons Ltd., England.

[6] Z. Chen, Issues of connecting wind farms into power

systems, Proceedings of the IEE/PES Transmission
and Distribution Conference & Exhibition: Asia and
Pacific Dalian, China, 2005.
[7] Grid Code High and extra high voltage, E.ON Netz
GmbH, Bayreuth, 1.04.2006.
[8] B. Normark, E. K. Nielsen, Advanced power electronics
for cable connection of offshore wind, Paper presented
at Copenhagen Offshore Wind 2005
[9] S. G. Johansson, G. Asplund, E. Jansson, and R.
Rudervall, Power system stability benefits with VSC
DC-transmission systems, Proceedings of CIGR
Conference in Paris, Session B4-204, 2004
[10] Y.H. Liu, J. Arrillaga and N. R. Watson, A new HighPulse
Voltage-Sourced
Converter
for
HVdc
Transmission, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery,
Vol. 18, no. 4, Oct 2003, pages 1388-1393.
[11] T. Weber, L. Yao, M. Bazargan and T Pahlke, Grid
Integration of Sandbank 24 Offshore Wind Farm Using
LCC HVDC Connection, Proceedings of Cigr Session
2008, B4-302
[12] P. Sandberg and L. Stendius, Large Scale Offshore
Wind Power Energy Evacuation by HVDC Light,
Paper presented at EWEC 2008, March 31st April 3rd,
2008, Brussels, Belgium
[13] K. Eriksson,Operational experience of HVDC LightTM,
Seventh International Conference on AC-DC Power
Transmission, 2001.
[14] G. Asplund, Application of HVDC Light to Power
System Enhancement, IEEE Power Engineering
Society Winter Meeting, 2000.
[15] ABB Web Pages on HVDC, Available at:
http://www.abb.com/hvdc
[16] ABB web page on Nord E.ON 1, Available at:
http://www.abb.com/cawp/gad02181/306c726f332f36d
3c1257353003b91f0.aspx
[17] Siemens to deliver HVDC technology for submarine
cable to San Francisco, PEI International, Available at:
http://pepei.pennnet.com/display_article/308576/6/ARC
HI/none/PRODJ/1/

P.2

S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu, P. Rodriguez, P.C. Kjr and P. W.

Christensen, Chopper Controlled Resistors in VSC-HVDC
Transmission for WPP with Full-scale Converters, in Proc. of Conf.
on Sustainable Alternative Energy (SAE), 2009.

Chopper Controlled Resistors in VSC-HVDC

Transmission for WPP with Full-scale
Converters
S. K. Chaudhary, Student Member, IEEE, R. Teodorescu, Senior Member, IEEE, P. Rodriguez,
Member, IEEE, and P. C. Kjr Member, IEE

Abstract Large and distant offshore wind power plants can
be efficiently connected to the onshore power grid network using
VSC-HVDC (Voltage Source Converter based HVDC)
transmission. Chopper controlled resistors can be used to limit
the DC line over-voltage when there is a fault on the onshore AC
grid and power transfer to the grid is obstructed. Considering
the development of full scale converter based wind turbine
generators (WTG), use of unit rated chopper controlled resistors
for each of the full scale AC-DC-AC converter system of the
individual turbines has been proposed in place of the one on the
HVDC line side. Both the cases have been simulated and their
performances are found to be similar. Thus, it justifies that the
chopper resistors in the full scale converters are sufficient to
handle the low voltage fault ride through (LVRT) conditions.
Index TermsWind Power Plants, VSC-HVDC, Chopper
controlled Resistors, DC Over-voltage, full scale converter, Wind
turbine generators (WTG).

I. INTRODUCTION

IND power plants (WPP) have come a long way from

isolated wind turbines to clusters of large wind turbines
of a few MW power sizes. Now WPP is regarded as a viable
and competitive source of renewable energy. By the end of
2008, total installed capacity of WPP reached above 120.8
GW in the world; out of this nearly 66 GW has been installed
in Europe, mostly onshore WPPs[1]. Due to scarcity of
onshore sites, developments in offshore technologies and
availability of a better aerodynamic profile, the trend in
Europe is to develop large offshore WPP. By 2030, Europe
expects to have 300GW of wind energy, of which 120GW is
expected from Offshore WPPs[2].
A WPP comprises of a large number of wind turbine
generators (WTGs) connected together at the collector bus.
Each WTG has a wind turbine driving the generator, usually
through a mechanical gearbox assembly. The generator may
This work was supported by a Vestas Power Program, a research
collaboration of Vestas A/S and Aalborg University.
S. K. Chaudhary and R. Teodorescu are with the Department of Energy
Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, 9220-Denmark. (e-mails:
skc@iet.aau.dk and ret@iet.aau.dk ).
P. Rodriguez is with University of Catalonia, Barcelona, Spain. He is a
visiting professor at the Department of Energy Technology, Aalborg
University, Aalborg, 9220-Denmark. (e-mail: prodriguez@ee.upc.edu).
P. C. Kjr is with Vestas Wind Systems A/S, Denmark. (e-mail:
pck@vestas.com)

be directly connected squirrel cage induction machine running

mostly around a fixed speed, or a doubly fed induction
generator which can allow 25-30% speed variation.
While variable speed induction generators provide a
flexible coupling to the grid, synchronous machine has a stiff
coupling to the grid as it can run only at synchronous speed. A
small deviation around the synchronous speed produces a
corrective torque on the machine so as to return to the
synchronous speed. Such a stiff coupling between the
generator and the grid is undesirable in wind turbine generator
as the transient torques produced in the shaft causes
significant mechanical stress on the gears [3]. Full scale
converters can decouple the synchronous machine speed from
the grid frequency and thus provide for flexible operation over
a wide range of speed. The present paper assumes
synchronous generators with full converters, though it is
equally applicable for induction generators using full power
rated converters.
Fig. 1 shows a single line diagram of a WPP comprising of
WTG with full scale converters (FSC). Output voltage of the
WTGs with full scale converters are stepped up to connect to
the collector bus. The collector bus voltage is further stepped
up and then connected to the onshore AC grid network using
high voltage cables. Due to cable-charging and subsequent
reactive power management issues associated with High
Voltage AC (HVAC) cable transmission, High Voltage DC
(HVDC) transmission is favorable, especially for long
distance cable transmission [4]. Developments in the last
decade in voltage source converter (VSC) technology has led
to the evolution of VSC based HVDC (VSC-HVDC)
transmission system. Such a VSC-HVDC transmission is
capable of 4-quadrant operation enabling full control of both
the active and reactive powers at both ends of the DC
transmission, independently of each other.
In Fig. 1, synchronous generators driven by wind turbines
operate at variable frequencies corresponding to their speed of
operation. Each of them is coupled to a common collector bus
operating at controlled frequency of 50Hz (60Hz or other
frequency of operation is equally feasible) through a full scale
AC-DC-AC converter (FSC). The collector bus voltage is
stepped up and then rectified to HVDC for transmission to the
onshore grid. Onshore the HVDC is inverted back to HVAC
and then connected to the AC grid through interconnecting
transformers. Tuned filters are used at both terminals of VSC-

400 kV AC Grid

150 kV
Filter Bus

Vdc2

150 kV
Filter Bus

Vdc1

HVDC Chopper
Resistors

33 kV Collector Bus

Fig. 1 VSC-HVDC Connection for Wind Power Plant comprising of Wind Turbines with Full Scale Converters

Fig. 2 Wind Turbine Generator with Full Scale AC-DC-AC Converter, Chopper resistor in the DC link and its transformer

HVDC to filter out the high frequency harmonics. Different

control strategies can be adopted for the HVDC transmission
system. This paper refers to a specific case, in which the
offshore VSC controls the voltage magnitude and frequency
of the offshore grid voltage. Power control strategies remain
with the WPP-controllers. The onshore VSC regulates the DC
link voltage, such that under normal operating conditions, the
power injected into the dc grid is transferred to the onshore
AC grid and power balance is maintained [5].
However, when there is a fault on the onshore ac grid, the
AC grid voltage at the point of common coupling (PCC) dips,
thereby reducing the power transfer capability from the
onshore VSC-HVDC terminal. On the other hand, power
generated by the WTGs cannot be ramped down
instantaneously. The excess power gets accumulated in the
VSC-HVDC system capacitance, thereby, leading to DC overvoltage. Chopper controlled resistors are used to dissipate the
excess power and thus limit DC voltage rise within safe levels,
while the WTGs are signaled to reduce their generation as
quickly as possible [6,7]. Chopper controlled resistors have
been used in HVDC Nord E.ON 1 to prevent DC overvoltages by temporarily dissipating the excess power [8].
Chopper controlled resistors have been used as braking
resistors to dissipate the braking energy in variable frequency
drives [9]. Similar scheme is used in the FSC in WTG to
check the DC link over-voltages in their DC link [9]. In this
paper the performance of the chopper resistor in the FSC is
compared with the performance of chopper resistor in the
HVDC system with respect to controlling the HVDC system
over-voltage during low voltage faults in the onshore grid.
Section II describes the origin of over-voltage in the
HVDC system during onshore grid faults and the role of

chopper resistors in controlling it within safe limits. In section

III, the PSCAD model of the WPP-HVDC system is briefly
explained. Simulation of the two cases with different voltage
dip levels and the observed results are discussed in section IV
and then finally it is concluded in section V.
II. DC OVER-VOLTAGE AND ITS CONTROL
Onshore grid fault close to the VSC-HVDC terminal is
may dip the AC grid voltage to very low levels, thereby
affecting power transfer from the HVDC converters to the
grid. E.On Grid Code requires that the WPP remain connected
till the grid voltage at the PCC drops down to 0% of the
nominal levels for periods lasting as long as 150ms, and inject
reactive current to assist in the system recovery [11]. As the
fault is cleared and voltage starts building up, the WPP has to
ramp up active power supply. In VSC-HVDC transmission,
chopper controlled resistors are used to provide low voltage
ride through capability.
A. Mathematical Analysis for the Overvoltage
Power transfer capability from the Grid Side VSC to the
grid is given by the formula,

Pcg

Vc * Vg
X ph

sin(G c  G g )

(1)

Where,
Pcg Power transfer from the converter to the grid
VcGc Converter terminal voltage (Magnitude and Phase
of the fundamental component)
VgGg Grid terminal voltage (Magnitude and Phase at the
filter bus),
Xph Reactance of the phase reactor

The resistance, Rph, of the phase reactor is negligible in

comparison to the reactance and hence neglected for
simplicity.
From (1), if Vg drops to 0, active power cannot be
transferred to the grid. The converter can, however, supply the
reactive current corresponding to its current ratings. Under
such circumstances, and as long as the WPP power generation
(Pwpp) cannot be ramped down, the WPP side VSC continues
injecting the collected power into the HVDC line and the
capacitors, thereby resulting in DC over-voltages, as given by
Eq. 2.

2
( Pwpp  Pcg ) dt
Ceq

Vdc

(2)

Where, Ceq is the equivalent capacitance of the HVDC line

and the DC capacitors.
B. Chopper Controlled Resistors
The DC over-voltage can be controlled within safe limit if
the excess power is dissipated by some means, like chopper
controlled resistors. Total equivalent size of such resistor can
be estimated by,

Rchop

2
Vrated
Prated

(3)

If the dc over-voltage can be limited to 5% of the rating,

the short time current rating of the chopper-resistor system has
to be,

I chop

1.05 Vrated
Rchop

1.05 Prated
Vrated

1.05 I rated

(4)

In other words, the chopper-resistor system has to be rated

for 5% over-current, at least for the short time, and 5% overvoltage.
C. Chopper Controlled Resistors in Full Scale Converters
When every WTG is equipped with a FSC, the chopper
controlled resistors can be placed on the DC links of the
WTG-FSCs. During the periods while DC over-voltage
persists, the WPP side VSC-HVDC controller may be active
to bring down the HVDC voltage. Eventually, it will reduce or
block power injection into the HVDC system. Then, the
WTG-FSC will see power unbalance as power injected by the
WTG does not get transferred to the VSC-HVDC.
Consequently, there is overvoltage in its DC link. Chopper
controlled resistors can be used at this stage to avoid such
overvoltage build up. Since the WTG-FSC system is rated for
the turbine power and voltage rating, the chopper-resistor
system can be of the same rating and thus smaller in size and
capacity. In this way, the chopper-resistor in the HVDC
system can be replaced by smaller chopper-resistor units in
each of the WTG-FSC.

RWTG ,chop

IWTG ,chop

2
VWTG
, rated

PWTG ,rated

1.05 IWTG ,rated

(7)
(8)

III. SIMPLIFIED MODEL OF WPP WITH VSC-HVDC

CONNECTION
Fig. 3 shows a simplified model of the WPP comprising of
WTGs with FSCs, and connected to the grid by VSC-HVDC
connection. The VSCs of the HVDC have been modeled in
terms of current and voltage sources. The converter AC
terminals are represented as 3-phase AC voltage sources, the
voltage magnitude being decided by the control algorithm
adopted. The DC side has a current source determined on the
basis of power exchanged with the AC terminals.
In the present model, the grid side VSC controls the HVDC
transmission voltage around the specified reference value. In
order to achieve this, DC voltage control loop in the onshore
VSC-HVDC controller determines the power to be evacuated
to the grid and sets the d-axis current reference. The q-axis
current reference is set from the desired reactive power
exchange level. The reactive power exchange may be
commanded or estimated for AC voltage control at the PCC.
The inner current control loops estimates the voltage
magnitude in d and q axes so as to attain the reference current
flows through the phase reactors against the grid voltage at the
point of common coupling. Using phase locked loop (PLL) to
obtain the instantaneous angle of the voltage vector and then
applying Parks transformation, the instantaneous three phase
voltage can be synthesized. Since average value models have
been used for representing the VSCs in terms of current and
voltage sources, switching harmonics will not appear and the
filters have been ignored in this study. On the WPP side, the
VSC AC terminal voltages are set at desired AC voltage and
frequency. The WTG-FSCs are modeled in a similar way.
Each WTG, shown in Fig 4, has been treated as a constant
power source.. Reactive power of the WTG does not affect the
net power flow in the DC link of full scale converter; and it
has been ignored. The WTGs have been modeled as three
phase current sources, driving current against the measured 3phase voltage at the point of connection. The magnitude of the
current is decided by the specified active and reactive power
output and the positive sequence component of the measured
voltage at the interface. The output AC terminals on the
collector bus side of the full scale converters have been
modeled such that excess power from the DC link is injected
into the collector bus and an equivalent current is drawn from
the DC link. Thus, DC link voltage control is achieved.
The current sources representing the AC side of the WTGFSC are computed at 33kV level. The transformer is simply
represented by its series impedance. The 33kV cable
connecting the WTG transformer to the collector bus has been
modeled.
The chopper resistors and their switching during DC overvoltages have been modeled as equivalent average current
sources for the dissipation of excess power. The value of
current dissipated depends upon the level of over-voltage.
The grid has been modeled as a voltage source behind
impedance. The grid impedance is estimated on the basis of
short circuit level and impedance angle of the grid.

Vc

Vg

Vdc2

400kV

Idc2

Rchop

HVDC
Chopper
Resistor

Vdc1

Idc1

150kV

33kV Collector
Bus

Fig. 3 Simulation Model of WPP-HVDC-grid system

Wind Turbine
generator

Full Scale Converter

With Chopper resistor
+3 kV, DC bus

RWTG , chop

3-ph, 3.3 kV,

50 Hz

-3 kV, DC bus

Wind Turbine Generator with its Full Scale Converter and DC chopper
resistor

Fig. 4 Model of a Wind Turbine Generator with Full Scale Converter

IV. SIMULATION OF THE WPP WITH HVDC

A 400 MW WPP with 80 x 5MW WTGs connected to the
onshore AC grid through VSC-HVDC transmission has been
modeled in PSCAD as 5 aggregated WTG of 80MW size and
simulated to study the low voltage fault ride through
performance of the WPP-HVDC system. The WTGs are
assumed to continue operating at constant power level; no
reduction in generation is applied during fault. The system
parameters are given in Table 2 in the Appendix.
Two sets of cases have been studied and compared. In the
first set of cases the chopper resistors are placed in the
HVDC-transmission system. In the second set of cases the
chopper resistors are installed in the full scale converters of
the wind turbine generators.
An additional case has been studied to study the DC overvoltage when the fault is at the collector bus.
A. Chopper Resistors on HVDC Transmission Terminal
As shown in Fig. 2, chopper resistors are placed on the grid
side VSC terminal of the HVDC transmission system. DC
over-voltages in the HVDC lines and the full scale converters
have been studied when the ac voltage at the 150kV bus of the
converter transformer dips to 19kV, 42kV, 80kV and 118 kV
for 150ms duration. These voltage levels are arrived at when
voltage dips to 10%, 25%, 50% and 75% of nominal levels are
simulated by dividing the grid impedance into two parts and
connecting the fault impedance between them.
Fig. 5 shows the power flowing from the collector bus and
the reduced power transfer to the grid when the voltage at the
150kV bus dips to 42 kV. The resultant over-voltage in the
HVDC system and chopper resistor current is shown in Fig. 6.

Fig. 5 Power at Collector Bus and Power Transmitted to the Grid when the
PCC voltage dips to 42 kV in Case A.

Fig. 6 HVDC Over-voltage and chopper resistor current when the PCC
voltage dips to 42 kV in Case A

HVDC voltage at the grid side VSC rises to 309 kV while the
power flow into the grid drops to 128 MW. The peak current
through the chopper resistor is 0.8 kA. Table 1 summarizes
the power flow, observed DC over-voltage and peak current
through the chopper resistor for the different voltage dips
simulated.

5
TABLE 1 DC OVERVOLTAGE FOR IN CASES A AND B DURING VOLTAGE DIPS OF
DIFFERENT LEVELS AT THE PCC

B. Chopper Resistors in the DC links of FSC-WTGs

Chopper resistors are placed on the DC link of the WTGFSCs, as shown in Fig 1. The chopper resistor in the HVDC
system is deactivated. When the offshore terminal DC voltage
exceeds the estimated offshore DC voltage by a certain
amount, say 1% (in this case), the WPP side VSC generates a
reduction factor (RF) for the reduction in the input power. It
is applied to the WTG-FSC to reduce the output power. In
practice, this might be attained through a communication link
or it may be signaled through a reduction of collector bus
voltage and/or rise in frequency.

Fig. 8 Power at Collector Bus and Power Transmitted to the Grid when the
PCC voltage dips to 42kV in Case B.

Fig. 7 Generation of Reduction Factor for Active Power input to the WPP-side
VSC

Fig. 7 shows a block diagram for generating the reduction

factor (RF). The nominal HVDC voltage at the offshore VSC
terminal is estimated by adding the voltage drop in the HVDC
cable resistance and inductance to the VSC-HVDC reference
voltage specified at the grid side VSC and then compared with
the measured offshore HVDC voltage. The over-voltage
above certain threshold (LL=1%) is thus sensed and then used
to determine RF. A linear function has been shown; though
any other function might be used depending upon specific
cases. Further the power input reduction has been assumed to
fall down to 0 when the over-voltage hits or exceeds the upper
threshold (HL=5%). RF may be allowed to drop down to
negative values so as to facilitate the quick reduction of overvoltage.
For the simulated case when the voltage dips to 42 kV level
at the 150kv terminal of the converter transformer, Fig. 8
shows that the power input to the HVDC system is reduced
progressively as the HVDC system voltage rises to 312kV
(observed at the grid side VSC). Fig. 9 shows the chopper
resistor peak current rising to 522 A at the DC-link voltage of
6.19 kV. Power transferred to the grid, DC over-voltage at the
onshore terminal of VSC-HVDC, and the current dissipated in
the chopper resistor HVDC for other voltage dip levels are
compared with those of case A in Table 1. The overvoltage
observed in the DC link of WTG-FSC is given as well.

Fig. 9 : Over-voltages in the HVDC system, the WTG-FSC DC link and the
FSC chopper resistor current when the PCC voltage dips to 42 kV in Case B.

C. Fault in the Collector Bus: Overvoltage on the DC-link of

the FSCs
When there is a fault in the offshore grid, say at the
collector bus, the HVDC transmission system will not
experience any overvoltage phenomena. Rather, it will
experience sudden over-currents in the converters and go into
protection mode by disconnection or switching into current
limited operation mode; thereby interrupting the power flow
into the HVDC system. Depending upon whether the WPP
side VSC-HVDC converter remains connected or not, the
collector bus side VSC of the full scale converter might have
to be disconnected in absence of any synchronizing voltage or
it might be operating in a current limited mode at a very low
AC terminal voltage due to the fault. In both the situations, the
WTG-FSC will see a sudden reduction of power output,

whereas the input remains constant. Consequently, the excess

power in the DC link will lead to over-voltage in the DC link.

Fig. 10 i)Power at the Collector bus and the power transmitted to the grid ii)
HVDC Voltage fluctuation

Fig. 11 i) Chopper Resistor Current in the DC link of the Full Scale Converter
and ii) DC link over-voltage of the Full Scale converter during Voltage dip to
42 kV at the Collector Bus

Fig. 10 shows the power flow to the AC grid and the

HVDC voltage when a fault is simulated on the collector bus.
Fig 11 shows that current dissipation in the chopper resistors
and the over-voltage in the DC-link of WTG-FSC is checked
within slimits. On the other hand, as shown in Fig. 12, there is
no means to dissipate the excess energy and the DC link
attains high over-voltage when there is not any chopper
resistor in the DC link of WTG-FSC.

Fig. 12 DC link over-voltage in the Full Scale converter during voltage dip to
42 kV at the Collector Bus in absence of the chopper resistor.

V. CONCLUSIONS
Similar levels of over-voltages in HVDC system have been
observed in the two sets of simulated cases when the chopper
resistors are placed in the HVDC system and when they are
placed in the DC links of the full scale converters. Through
this simplified simulation results, the two methods appear to
perform in a similar way to check the HVDC system overvoltage.
However, using the chopper resistors in the DC link of the
full-scale converters has merit as the resistor size and ratings
is greatly reduced when compared to a large resistor bank
required when it is placed on the HVDC line. Putting the
chopper controlled resistors in the DC link of full scale
converters will be an attractive option as these will have to
face a lower DC voltage and power ratings. Further, the
chopper resistor on each of the full-scale converter provides
them DC-link over voltage protection against faults between
the full scale converter and the HVDC converter, for example
a fault on the collector bus.
Therefore the WTG-FSCs should be equipped with the
chopper controlled resistors while the chopper resistor in the
HVDC may be eliminated.
The study assumes that the WPP does not ramp down the
power generation. However, modern WTGs are capable of
cutting down power generation by pitch regulation. Though it
is a slow control when compared to electrical control systems,
it would still help in optimizing the chopper resistors.

7
[5] C. Feltes and I. Erlich, "Variable Frequency Operation of DFIG based
Wind Farms connected to the Grid through VSC-HVDC Link," Power
Engineering Society General Meeting, 2007. IEEE, pp. 1-7, 2007.

VI. APPENDIX
Table 2 : System Parameters used in the simulation
Onshore Grid
1 Base MVA

500 MVA

2 Base voltage (rms, line-line)

400 kV

3 Shor Circuit Capacity

25 pu

4 Grid Impedance Angle

80 degree

Converter Transformers (Onshore)

Size

500 MVA

Voltage Ratio (for onshore)

400/150 kV

Voltage Ratio (for offshore)

150/33 kV

Leakage Reactance

0.07 pu

Cu-loss

0.01 pu

Fe-loss

0.01 pu

Phase reactors
5 Inductance

17 mH

6 resistance

10 mOhm

HVDC System
Pole to pole DC boltage

300 kV DC

Power rating

400 MW

HVDC Cable
Cable length

200 km

resistance

2.797 Ohm

Inductance

22.31 mH

Shunt Capacitance

28.15 uF

DC capacitors (at VSC terminal)

35.5 uF

Offshore WTG Cables

Conductor Cross Section
Length

2 km
0.248 Ohm

Inductance

0.72 mH

WTG-FSC DC Voltage

[7] A. A. Meer, R. L. Hendriks and W. L. Kling, "A survey of fast power

reduction methods for VSC connected wind power plants consisting of
different turbine types," presented at 2nd EPE Wind Energy Chapter Seminar,
KTH, Stockholm, 23-24 April 2009.
[8] ABB review 4/2008: The future is now (on the offshore HVDC light link
NordE.ON 1, germany). Available: http://www.abb.com/industries/ap/
db0003db004333/9c43e75526ca8b96c12574a900338059.aspx
[9] N. Mohan, T. M. Undeland and W. P. Robbins, Power Electronics
Converters, Applications, and Design; Power Electronics Converters,
Applications, and Design. ,3rd ed.Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2003.
[10] J. Conroy and R. Watson, "Aggregate modelling of wind farms
containing full-converter wind turbine generators with permanent magnet
synchronous machines: transient stability studies," Renewable Power
Generation, IET, vol. 3, pp. 39-52, 2009.
[11] "Grid Code for High and Extra High Voltage," E.ON Netz GmbH
Bayreuth,April 1, 2006..

150 sq. mm

resistance
Shunt Capacitance

[6] P. Sandeberg and L. Stendius, "Large scale offshore wind power energy
evacuation by hvdc light," presented at European Wind Energy Conference
& Exhibition 2008. Available: http://library.abb.com/global/scot/scot221.nsf/
veritydisplay/ba91daab7c7f5f8dc125747a0051a5dc/$File/Large%20scale%20
Offshore%20Wind%20Power%20Energy%20evacuation%20by%20HVDC%
20Light.pdf

0.4 uF
6 kV

(The FSC (with its transformer) is modelled as a current source hence

the AC Voltage is not explicitly specified. It is connected to the 33kV
cable through an impedance)

VII. ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work is a part of the research being carried out for the
Vestas Power program. The program is funded by Vestas
Wind Systems A/S, Denmark and Aalborg University,
Denmark. The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial
and technical support of Vestas Wind Systems A/S.
VIII. REFERENCES
[1] Global wind report 2008. Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC),
Available:
http://www.gwec.net/fileadmin/documents/Publications/Report_2008/Global_
Wind_2008_Report.pdf
[2] S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu and P. Rodriguez, "Wind Farm Grid
Integration Using VSC Based HVDC Transmission - An Overview," IEnergy
2030 Conference, 2008. ENERGY 2008. IEEE, pp. 1-7, 2008.
[3] J. Machowski, J. W. Bialek and J. R. Bumby, Power System Dynamics :
Stability and Control. ,2nd ed.Chichester, U.K.: Wiley, 2008, pp. 629.
[4] T. Ackermann, Wind Power in Power Systems; Wind Power in Power
Systems. ,Elektronisk udgave ed.Chichester: John Wiley, 2005, pp. xlvii, 691.

IX. BIOGRAPHIES
Sanjay Kumar Chaudhary(S02-M05-SM08) was
born in Nepal in Dec 1976. He received his B. Tech.
degree from Aligarh Muslim University, India in
2000 and M. Tech degree from Indian Institute of
Technology, Kanpur, India in 2002, all in electrical
engineering.
From 2002 to 2005 he worked as engineer with ABB
Ltd (BU: HVDC and FACTS), India. In 2005 he
joined Honeywell Technology Solutions (HTS),
Bangalore, India. Since 2008, he is on sabbatical leave from HTS to pursue
his Ph.D. at Aalborg University, Denmark. His research interests are in Power
system analysis and simulation, HVDC and FACTS and wind power
technology.
Remus Teodorescu received the Dipl.Ing. degree in
electrical engineering from Polytechnical University
of Bucharest, Romania in 1989, and PhD. degree in
power electronics from University of Galati,
Romania, in 1994. In 1998, he joined Aalborg
University, Department of Energy Technology,
power electronics section where he currently works
as full professor. He is the co-recipient of the
Technical Committee Prize Paper Awards at IEEE
lAS Annual Meeting 1998, and Third-ABB Prize
Paper Award at IEEE Optim 2002. He is a Senior
Member of IEEE, Associate Editor for IEEE Power Electronics Letters and
chair of IEEE Danish joint IES/PELS/IAS chapter. His areas of interests are:
design and control of power converters used in renewable energy systems,
distributed generation mainly wind power and photo-voltaics, computer
simulations, digital control implementation.
Remus Teodorescu is the founder and coordinator of the Green Power
Laboratory at Aalborg University focusing on the development and testing of
grid converters for renewable energy systems and the coordinator of the
Vestas Power Program.

Pedro Rodriguez (S'99-M'04) received the M.S.

and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from the
Technical University of Catalonia (UPC),
Barcelona, Spain, in 1994 and 2004, respectively. In
1990, he joined the faculty of UPC as an Assistant
Professor, where he is currently an Associate
Professor. In 2005, he was a visiting researcher in
the Center for Power Electronics Systems, Virginia
Tech, USA. In 2006 and 2007, he was a Post-doc
researcher in the Institute of Energy Technology,
Aalborg University (AAU), Denmark, where he lectures PhD. courses from
2006. He is now the Head of the Research Group on Renewable Electrical
Energy Systems at the UPC and co-Supervisor of the Vestas Power
Programme in partnership collaboration with the AAU. He has coauthored
about 100 papers in technical journals and conferences. He is the holder of
four patents. His research interest is focused on applying power electronics to
distributed energy systems and power quality.
Dr. Rodriguez is a Member of the IEEE Power Electronics, IEEE Industry
Application, and IEEE Industrial Electronics Societies. In this last society he
has been active organizing several special sessions in conferences on the
control of distributed energy systems based on renewable energies and
presenting several tutorials. Currently, he is a member of the IEEE IES
Technical Committee on Renewable Energy Systems and the chair of the
IEEE Industrial Electronics Student Forum
Philip Carne Kjaer received the M.Sc. degree in
electrical engineering from Aalborg University,
Aalborg, Denmark, in 1993, and the Ph.D. degree
from the University of Glasgow, Glasgow, U.K., in
1997. From 1993 to 1998, he was a Research
Assistant at the University of Glasgow, working
with advanced control of switched reluctance
machines and drives. From 1998 to 2003, he was
with ABB Corporate Research, Vasteras, Sweden,
where, as a Development Engineer, he worked on
servo-motor-based high-voltage circuit breaker drives, factory testing of
synchronous machines, power converters for HVDC power transmission, and
multi-megawatt variable-speed drives. Beginning in 2000, he also functioned
as Deputy Department Manager and, most recently, as Group Manager for a
team of 18 scientists. In October 2003, he joined Vestas Wind Systems,
Arhus, Denmark, where he currently holds the position as Chief Specialist for
power plants. He is the holder of four patents and has authored over 40 journal
and conference publications. His research covers control and application of
electrical machines and power electronic converters. Dr. Kjaer is a Chartered
Engineer in the U.K., a Member of the Institution of Electrical Engineers,
U.K., and the recipient of the 2004 Richard M. Bass Outstanding Young
Power Electronics Engineer Award.

P.3

S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu, P. Rodriguez, P.C. Kjr and P. W.

Christensen, Modelling and Simulation of VSC-HVDC Connection
for Wind Power Plants, in Proc. of the 5th Nordic Wind Power
Conference, 2009.

Modelling and Simulation of VSC-HVDC

Connection for Wind Power Plants
S. K. Chaudhary#1, R. Teodorescu#2, P. Rodriguez*3, P. C. Kjr4, P. W. Christensen5
#

Department of Energy Technology, Aalborg University

Pontoppidanstraede 101, Aalborg 9220, Denmark
1

skc@iet.aau.dk

ret@iet.aau.dk

Department of Electrical Engineering

Technical University of Catalonia, Spain

3

prodriguez@ee.upc.edu


Vestas Wind Systems A/S,

Denmark.
4

pck@vestas.dk

pewch@vestas.dk

Abstract This paper describes the modelling and simulation

of offshore wind power plants (WPP) connected to the onshore
power system grid by VSC based HVDC transmission. Offshore
wind power plant is modelled with several wind turbine
generators connected to two separate collector buses with their
own plant step-up transformers. VSCs are modelled using ideal
IGBT switches supplied by the gate pulses from their respective
controllers.
A sequence of operation has been simulated from the starting
up of the VSC-HVDC transmission, energizing the offshore grid
and subsequent synchronization of the individual wind turbines.
Simulation of power ramping up and down as well as steady state
operation has been demonstrated. As an additional case, the
primary reserve control logic has been implemented and
simulated in PSCAD model.

I. INTRODUCTION
Wind power plants (WPP) have come a long way from
isolated wind turbines to clusters of large wind turbines of a
few MW power sizes. Now WPP is regarded as a viable and
competitive source of renewable energy. By the end of 2008,
total installed capacity of WPP reached above 120.8 GW in
the world; out of this nearly 66 GW has been installed in
Europe, mostly onshore WPPs[1]. Due to scarcity of onshore
sites, developments in offshore technologies and availability
of a better aerodynamic profile, the trend in Europe is to
develop large offshore WPP. By 2030, Europe expects to have
300GW of wind energy, out of which 120GW is expected
from Offshore WPP[2].
A WPP comprises of a large number of wind turbine
generators (WTGs) connected together at the collector bus.
Each WTG has a wind turbine with drive train assembly for
driving the generator. The generator may be directly

connected squirrel cage induction machine running at a fixed

speed, or a doubly fed induction generator which can allow
25-30% speed variation or a synchronous machine with full
scale converters.
While variable speed induction generators provide a
flexible coupling to the grid, synchronous machine has a stiff
coupling to the grid as it can run only at synchronous speed.
Such a stiff coupling between the generator and the grid is
undesirable in wind turbine generator as the transient torques
produced in the shaft causes significant mechanical stress on
the gears [3]. Full scale converters can decouple the
synchronous machine speed from the grid frequency and thus
enable flexible operation over a wide range of speed. The
present paper assumes synchronous generators with full
converters, though it is equally applicable for any other
generator using full power rated converters.
VSC-HVDC transmission is a favorable transmission
technology in view of its numerous advantages like use of
extruded polymer insulated DC submarine cables, fast control
of active and reactive power, experience with offshore
installations, ability to connect to weak and passive grids
etc.[4]. BorWin1 offshore wind-farm in the North Sea will
soon be connected to the grid by VSC-HVDC transmission [5].
This paper describes the modelling and simulation of a
WPP with a large number of wind turbine generators and
connected to the grid by VSC-HVDC transmission. Section II
presents the system outline and modelling details. In Section
III, simulation of a sequence of operations is described.
Section IV presents a method of relaying onshore grid
frequency to the offshore grid through VSC-HVDC link.
Finally the paper is concluded in section V.

150 kV
Xph2

Xt2

P + jQ

Vf2

Vdc2

Chopper
Resistor

Xf

Vf1

Vdc1

Xph1

Vc1

Xt1

Vwpp

Vcb

Vwppa

150 kV

ONSHORE

kV, 1400A,
150km DC Cable

Xf

Vg 400 kV

OFFSHORE
150 kV

Vc2

150 kV

33 kV

3 Aggregated
WTG groups

VSC1

VSC2
Xf

Xf

33 kV

150 kV

VSC based HVDC Connection

2
Aggregated
WTG groups
1

2x200MW WPP
6 x 6MW FCWTG units connected in a string.
Remaining aggregated WTG model

Vwppb

VSC-HVDC
Vcb

400MW, 150kV DC and 150kV 3ph. ac AC rms.

Fig. 1 Single line diagram of the system

vdm

vd*

idm < R  iqm < X ph

idm

*
d

behind impedance is used to represent the onshore grid, while

the HVDC has been modelled in detail with switched
converters and their controller, converter transformers, phase
reactors, filters and DC capacitors, HVDC cable, DC line
reactors. The assumed system data is given in the Appendix.

vdm
*
vabc

vq*

i q*

vqm

Modelling of the VSC controllers and the WTG is

described in the following sub-sections.

vqm

iqm

iqm < R  idm < X ph

A. Offshore VSC Controller

Fig. 2 Block Diagram of Offshore VSC Controller

VDCm
*
VDC

Q*
*
Vrms

idm

i d*

PI

Qm

vdm
PI

- +

PI

--+

DQ
ABC
(Limits
Imposed)

i q*

+-

+-

PI

*
vabc

vqm

iqm

wQ
wV

+-

idm < R  iqm < X ph

iqm < R  idm < X ph

Vrms , m

B. Onshore VSC Controller

Fig. 3 Block Diagram of Onshore VSC Controller

iabc

vabc
P*
Q*

ia
i
b
ic

va
vc  vb i a*
1 Q

P < vb 
< vb  va *
2
i
3
vabc
b

v
v

v
c
a
c
*

where, vabc

(v  v  v )
2
a

2
b

2
c

The offshore VSC controller (VSCC1) controls the

offshore grid voltage and frequency. The desired voltage
reference is set to the d-axis voltage control loop while the qaxis voltage reference is set to 0. The rotating reference frame
is selected such that the voltage phasor is aligned with the daxis. Current references are generated from these AC voltage
controllers in the outer loop. The inner loops produce the
reference voltages which are augmented by the feed-forward
of the voltage at the filter bus and compensation for the drop
in the phase reactor [6]. Pulse width modulation (PWM)
signals are generated using sine-triangle comparison as shown
in Fig. 2.

ic

va*
vb*
vc*

Fig. 4 Determination Voltage Source model for WTG with FSC

I. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND MODELING

Fig 1 shows a single line diagram of the system being
studied. A simple Thevenins equivalent voltage source

The onshore VSC controller (VSCC2) regulates the HVDC

voltage and the reactive power (or terminal voltage)
exchanged with the onshore grid as shown in Fig 3. The
HVDC voltage regulation loop sets the d-axis current
reference while the reactive power is controlled by setting the
q-axis current reference. These are controlled by the inner
current loop controls as described in the previous section [6].
The reactive power control loop may be switched in the
voltage (at PCC) control mode. Then the sensitivity of the
PCC voltage with respect to the reactive power injection is
used to determine the q-axis current reference.

C. WTG with FSC model

Every WTG is assumed to be equipped with its own FSC.
In this simulation study the WTG with its FSC is modeled as a
current controlled voltage source. As shown in Fig. 4, positive
sequence component of the terminal voltage is estimated and
then for a specified active and reactive power output, the
phase currents to be injected into the offshore grid are
computed. Second order generalized integrator (SOGI) based
controllers then set the voltage source references to achieve
the current injections.
In this study the 400MW WPP is divided into two groups
of 200MW each. In one group, a string of 6x6MW WTG is
modeled and the remaining units of 164MW are lumped
together into two equivalent units. In the other group,
2x100MW lumped models have been used.
D. Frequency dependent power controller
Like conventional power plants WPP are expected to cater
to the primary and secondary frequency control. Though this
is subjected to the wind availability, WPP can be estimated to
hold certain reserve capacity by not operating on the
maximum power curve. The curve itself may be a function of
estimated wind speed, so that the amount of spinning reserve
is predictable. Since VSC-HVDC decouples the offshore grid
frequency from the onshore grid frequency, there has to be
some mechanism to relay the onshore frequency variations.
VSC.HVDC controllers controlling the HVDC voltage and
offshore grid frequency can be used for the purpose.[7].
II.SIMULATION OF OPERATIONAL MODES

The operation range can be divided into the following

sequence of operations
Charging the DC capacitors and energizing VSCEnergizing the Offshore grid
Synchronization of offshore WTG and power control
Steady state operation at maximum P and Q output.

Fig. 5 shows the power and VSC-HVDC voltage

waveforms during the whole sequence of operations.
E. Charging of VSC-HVDC
In the beginning, the VSC-HVDC as well as the offshore
WPP grid is not energized. When the circuit breaker is closed
to connect the converter to the grid through the converter
transformer, the anti-parallel diodes in VSC2 does the
rectifying action and a large inrush current flows in to charge
the HVDC capacitors and the HVDC line to the DC voltage
level of uncontrolled rectifiers, given by,
V dc 0

3 3

Vm

The initial magnitude of inrush current is limited by the

impedance of the grid, converter transformers and the phase
reactors. In this simulation, pre-insertion resistors of 1k: have
been used for a period of 70ms.
After 200 ms, VSC2 controller is de-blocked and gate
pulses are applied to the IGBTs. The HVDC capacitors and
the lines then get charged to the operating voltage of the VSCHVDC in a controlled manner. The power required for the
charging and energization is drawn from the grid.
F. Energizing the Offshore grid
After the VSC-HVDC line voltage is stabilized, then the
offshore VSC (VSC1) is de-blocked. Its controller ramps up
the reference voltage and the offshore voltage builds up
gradually. After nominal voltage level is attained in the
offshore-grid, the WTG cables are connected to the collector
bus one-by-one to avoid oscillations. At this point of time the
WPP is fully energized, and the WTGs are ready for
synchronization.
Initial charging of the VSC-HVDC and energizing of the
offshore grid is shown in Fig. 6
G. Synchronization of offshore WTG and power control

A sequence of processes has to be followed so as to

energize the VSC-HVDC link, and the offshore grid and
synchronizing the WTG before power generation can be
ramped up.

i.
HVDC
ii.
iii.
iv.

However, since the offshore VSC is blocked, the diode

rectifier action of the onshore VSC sees a capacitive
impedance of the cable and the DC capacitors. Hence the DC
capacitors and the cables get charged to the peak line to
ground voltage levels, i.e. 122.5kV (i.e. 1pu) or 245kV polepole voltage. In Fig. 6, the voltage has risen to 255kV by the
rectifier and boosting actions of the diodes and phase reactors.

(1)

The WTGs are running at rated voltage but with no load

generation. The PLL in the FSC-inverter detects the
magnitude and phase of the WPP grid voltage. The FSCinverter output voltage is matched with the grid voltage at no
load and then it is ready for synchronization. The breaker is
closed. After that the power can be ramped up or down as per
the requirement. Both active and reactive power command can
be given to the FSC. While the active power comes from the
WTG, VSC is capable of generating or absorbing reactive
power as long as its maximum current rating is not exceeded.
H. Steady State operation
Fig 7 and 8 show the current and voltage waveforms when
the WTGs are operating in steady state at no generation and at
maximum power generation respectively. In Fig 7, the WPP
currents are lagging the WPP voltage by approximately 90q
implying that the WPP has capacitive var generation which
flows towards the offshore VSC. The capacitive var
generation can be attributed to the cable capacitances and the
L-C-L filters. The no load ac current waveform of the onshore
VSC shows the flow of 0-sequence component.

Fig. 5 WPP Power generation and injection into the onshore grid

Fig. 6 Charging VSC-HVDC and energizing the offshore grid

Fig. 7 Steady state operation at no load

Fig. 8 Steady State operation at full 400MW WPP generation

Fig. 9 WPP response to onshore grid frequency variation

Fig. 10 Difference in voltages and frequencies measured onshore and offshore

In Fig 8, the onshore VSC AC currents have a fundamental

component with superimposed switching ripples. The onshore
current waveform shows the current entering the onshore VSC.
Hence it appears to be in phase opposition implying that the
power is flowing out of the VSC towards the grid.
III. PRIMARY RESERVE CONTROL AND FREQUENCY SUPPORT
Large WPPs are expected to participate in the frequency
support activities through primary reserve control. A case has
been simulated for this. In the simulation, the onshore grid
frequency is first raised to 51 Hz and then decreased to 49 Hz
and the response of the wind power plant is observed.
In this study, the HVDC voltage is used to relay the
onshore grid frequency to the offshore [7]. Once the grid
frequency state is known to the offshore WPP, the FCWTG
can be controlled to provide the primary frequency response.
The control algorithm can be summarized into the
following steps
i. Measure onshore grid frequency deviation from and
modify HVDC reference voltage for the onshore VSC
converter as follows,
mod
VHVDC
_ ref

f  fn

VHVDC _ ref < 1  m

< S fv
fn

(2)

where, fm and fn are the measured and nominal

frequencies respectively. Sfv is the frequency to voltage
sensitivity setting of the onshore VSC controller.
In the present simulation, Sfv =5 has been used to
achieve 5% change in HVDC voltage reference per unit
percentage change in onshore grid frequency. VHVDC_ref is
the original HVDC reference voltage at onshore terminal.
Deadbands may be included if required.
ii. y

'Vpu _ HVDC _ off

Vm _ HVDC _ off  Vcable  VHVDC _ ref

Vcable  HVDC _ ref

(3)

iii. Modify the offshore grid frequency in proportion to

the pu deviation in offshore HVDC voltage.

f off _ ref

f off _ n <1  'V pu _ HVDC _ off < Svf 

(4)

where, Svf is the voltage to frequency sensitivity setting

of the offshore VSC controller.
If Svf is set as the reciprocal of Sfv , then the onshore
grid frequency can be emulated in the offshore grid.
iv. The WTG controllers can then be controlled to
provide frequency support to the grid in response to the
frequency observed at their terminals. In the simulation, a
WPP generation increases by 2.5% per unit percentage
(i.e. 0.5 Hz) change in frequency.

Fig 9 shows the voltage, frequency and power curves for

this simulation. At the instant of 7 sec, the onshore grid
frequency is raised by 2% to 51 Hz. Correspondingly, the
HVDC voltage rises to 1.1 pu (330kV) and the power
generation falls to 326MW from the previous value of
342MW. When the onshore grid frequency is decreased to
49Hz (i.e. 0.98pu), the HVDC voltage falls to 276kV and the
offshore generation increases to357MW. Fig 10 shows the
small difference between the onshore and offshore frequencies.
IV. DISCUSSION
A model of WPP with VSC-HVDC connection to the
onshore grid has been developed and the different operating
conditions have been simulated. Operational sequence of
starting up the VSC-HVDC, and energizing the offshore grid,
sequential synchronization and connection of a number of
aggregated WTG followed by power generation ramping up to
full power level and then ramping down to 0 generation levels
have been demonstrated. The simulation gives an overview of
the overall system and its operation.
If the HVDC voltage is permitted to vary, then VSCHVDC can efficiently relay the onshore grid frequency to the
offshore grid. In simulation study it was found that the
frequency information was relayed within a period of 10 ms.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research is a part of Vestas Power Program at
Department of Energy Technology and Department of Energy
Technology, Aalborg University. It is jointly supported by
Vestas Wind Systems A/S and Aalborg University.
APPENDIX
TABLE 1 LIST OF PARAMETERS USED IN SIMULATION
Onshore Grid
1 Base MVA
2 Base voltage (rms, line-line)
3 Short Circuit Capacity
4 Grid Impedance Angle
Converter Transformers (Onshore)
1 Size
2 Voltage Ratio (for onshore)
3 Voltage Ratio (for offshore)
4 Leakage Reactance
5 Cu-loss
6 Fe-loss
Phase reactors
1 Inductance
2 resistance
HVDC System
1 Pole to pole DC boltage
2 Power rating
HVDC Cable
1 Cable length
2 resistance
3 Inductance
4 Shunt Capacitance (at ends)
DC capacitors (at VSC terminal)

500
400
25
80
500
400/150
150/33
0.12
0.01
0.01

MVA
kV
pu
degree
MVA
kV/kV
kV/kV
pu
pu
pu

0.105 pu
2.E-04 pu
300 kV DC
400 MW
200
2.797
22.31
28.15
35.5

km
:
mH
uF
uF

REFERENCES
[1] Global wind report 2008, Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC),
Available:
http://www.gwec.net/fileadmin/documents/Publications/
Report_2008/Global_Wind_2008_Report.pdf
[2]
S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu and P. Rodriguez, "Wind Farm Grid
Integration Using VSC Based HVDC Transmission - An Overview,"
Energy 2030 Conference, 2008. ENERGY 2008. IEEE, pp. 1-7, 2008.

[3]
[4]

[5]

J. Machowski, J. W. Bialek and J. R. Bumby, Power System Dynamics

: Stability and Control. ,2nd ed.Chichester, U.K.: Wiley, 2008, pp. 629.
K. Eriksson, C. Liljegren and K. Sobrink, "HVDC light experiences
applicable for power transmission from offshore wind power parks," in
42nd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exihibit, Reno, Nevada.
2004,
Grid connection of offshore wind farms - NordE.ON 1, Available at
http://Www.abb.com/hvdc.

[6]

[7]

L. Xu, B. W. Williams and L. Yao, "Multi-terminal DC transmission

systems for connecting large offshore wind farms," Power and Energy
Society General Meeting - Conversion and Delivery of Electrical
Energy in the 21st Century, 2008 IEEE, pp. 1-7, 2008.
S. Jensen and F. W. Fuchs. Load-frequency control of synchronous
areas using a wind farm connected via HVDC-VSC. Presented at
Presented at 2nd EPE Wind Energy Seminar, KTH, Stockholm,
Sweden, 23-24 April 2009.

P.4

S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu, R. N. Mukerjee, P. Rodriguez, P.C.

Kjr and P. W. Christensen, Simulation Study of WPP-HVDC-Grid
Integrated System, in Proc. of the Simulation Study of WPP-HVDCGrid Integrated System, Energynautics GmbH, 2009.

8th International Workshop on Large-Scale Integration of Wind Power into Power Systems as well as on Transmission Networks for
Offshore Wind Farms, 14-15 October 2009, Bremen, Germany

Simulation Study of Wind Power Plant, VSCHVDC and Grid Integrated System
S. K. Chaudhary R. Teodorescu R. N. Mukerjee P Rodriguez P.C. Kjr and P. W. Christensen


AbstractA number of large offshore wind power plants
(WPP) are planned in the seas around Europe. VSC-HVDC is
a suitable means of integrating such large and distant offshore
WPP which need long submarine cable transmission to the
onshore grid. Both VSC-HVDC and Offshore WPP are new
technologies and a detailed study of their interaction, control
and coordination is required. Development and simulation of
an offshore WPP connected to the onshore grid by VSC-HVDC
has been described in this paper.
A sequence of operations for start-up of HVDC, energizing
the offshore grid and connection of the wind turbine generators
(WTG) followed by active power ramp up and ramp down has
been studied. A case of fault ride through has been simulated
for onshore grid faults. The model forms a means of
understanding the system and its operation as a whole from
power system perspective.
Index TermsOffshore Wind Power Plant, VSC-HVDC,
grid integration, modes of operation and fault ride through
(FRT)

I. INTRODUCTION

MPHASIS on clean and green renewable energy

sources amid rising environmental concerns has led to
the rapid development of wind turbine generator(WTG)
technology and large wind power plants (WPP). Recently
the focus has shifted to the huge potential of offshore wind
energy. A total of 1471MW of offshore wind power
generation, all in European seas, has been installed by the
end of 2008, with 357MW of offshore WPP was installed in
the year 2008 [1]. As per the reference scenario of EWEA,
by 2030, the offshore WPP is expected to contribute 120
GW out of 300GW of installed wind power generation [2].
High voltage ac transmission is not suitable for long
distance cable transmission [3]. VSC-HVDC provides
feasible transmission link for connecting distant offshore
WPP using polymer insulated submarine cables. Apart from

This work was supported in part by the Vestas Wind Systems A/S under
the Vestas Power Program.
S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu and R. N. Mukerjee are with the
Department of Energy Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
(skc@iet.aau.dk, ret@iet.aau.dk and rnm@iet.aau.dk ).
P. Rodrigues is with the Dept. of Electrical Engineering, Technical
University of Catalonia Spain and a visiting faculty at the Department of
Energy Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark ( prodriguez
@ee.upc.edu )
P. C. Kjr and P. W. Christensen are with Vestas Wind Systems A/S
(pck@vestas.com , pewch@vestas.com )

that it has several technical advantages like fast, independent

and reversible control of active flow and reactive power
generation at both ends. Its controllability facilitates the
WPP developers to meet the grid code requirements with
regard to fault ride through, reactive power control and
voltage support [4].
The WPP is assumed to be comprising of wind turbine
generators (WTG) equipped with full scale converters (FSC)
[5]. The full scale converter decouples the machine
frequency from the offshore grid frequency thereby enabling
the variable speed operation in the whole speed range of
operation.
This paper describes the modeling of a WPP with VSCHVDC connection to the onshore grid and the results of the
simulation studies. Model development is described in
section II. Section III describes simulation of a sequence of
operational modes including a case of a low voltage fault
ride through. Finally it is concluded in section V.
II. SYSTEM DIAGRAM AND MODEL DEVELOPMENT
Fig 1 shows the system being studied. A simple
Thevenins equivalent is used to represent the onshore grid,
while the HVDC has been modeled in detail with switched
converters and their accessories viz. controller, converter
transformers, phase reactors, filters and DC capacitors,
HVDC cable, DC line reactors. The assumed system data is
given in the Appendix.
The WTG with their FSCs are modeled as current
controlled voltage sources. When identical components are
present on the offshore and onshore, suffixes 1 and 2 are
used to indicate offshore and onshore components
respectively.
A. Off-shore VSC and its controller
The offshore VSC controller (VSCC1) maintains the
offshore grid voltage and frequency. Voltage control is
achieved by applying the desired reference voltage along the
d-axis while setting the q-axis voltage to 0. The rotating
reference frame is selected such that the voltage phasor is
aligned with the d-axis. Current references are generated
from these AC voltage controllers in the outer loop. The
inner loops produce the reference voltages which are
augmented by the feed-forward of the voltage at the filter
bus and compensation for the drop in the phase reactor [6].
Pulse width modulation (PWM) signals are generated using
sine-triangle comparison as shown in Fig. 2.

400 kV
Vg

Vcb

Filters

Filters

Vf2

Vc2

Vdc2

Chopper Resistor

Vdc1

Vf1

Vc1

150 kV

150 kV

33 kV

8th International Workshop on Large-Scale Integration of Wind Power into Power Systems as well as on Transmission Networks for
Offshore Wind Farms, 14-15 October 2009, Bremen, Germany

Fig. 1 WPP with VSC-HVDC connection to the grid

vdm

vd*

*
d

*
q

idm < R  iqm < X ph

idm

estimated and then for a specified active and reactive power

output, the phase currents to be injected into the offshore
grid are computed. Second order generalized integrator
(SOGI) based controllers then set the voltage source
references to achieve the current injections. In this study
80x5MWe WPP is represented by 5 aggregated WTG
models of 80MW each.

vdm
*
vabc

*
q

vqm

vqm

iqm

iqm < R  idm < X ph

Fig. 2 Block Diagram of Offshore VSC Controller

VDCm
*
DC

Q*
*
Vrms

i
PI

Qm

idm < R  iqm < X ph

vdm
PI

- +

PI

--+

DQ
ABC
(Limits
Imposed)

i q*

+-

PI

+-

*
vabc

vqm

iqm

wQ
wV

+-

idm

*
d

iqm < R  idm < X ph

Vrms , m
Fig. 3 Block Diagram of Onshore VSC Controller

iabc

vabc
P*
Q*

ia
i
b
ic

1
vabc

va
vc  vb i a*
Q

P < vb  3 < vb  va i *

va  vc b
vc
*

where, vabc

(va2  vb2  vc2 )

ic

va*
vb*
vc*

Fig. 4 Determination Voltage Source model for WTG with FSC

B. Onshore VSC Controller

The onshore VSC controller (VSCC2) regulates the
HVDC voltage and the reactive power (or terminal voltage)
exchanged with the onshore grid as shown in Fig 3. The
HVDC voltage regulation loop sets the d-axis current
reference while the reactive power is controlled by setting
the q-axis current reference. These are controlled by the
inner current loop controls as described in the previous
section [6].
The reactive power control loop may be switched in the
voltage (at PCC) control mode. Then the sensitivity of the
PCC voltage with respect to the reactive power injection is
used to determine the q-axis current reference.
C. WTG with FSC model
Every WTG is assumed to be equipped with its own FSC.
In this simulation study the WTG with its FSC is modeled as
a current controlled voltage source. As shown in Fig. 4,
positive sequence component of the terminal voltage is

D. Chopper controlled resistor

Chopper controlled resistor, also referred as braking
resistor in literature, is put at the dc side of VSC2 so as to
dissipate the excess power and avoid the buildup of DC
over-voltage when power transmission to the grid is
restricted in the event of onshore grid faults [7]. The current
drawn by the chopper resistors during DC over-voltage is
estimated and the resistor is represented by a current sink.
Hysteresis control based upon voltage measurement has
been used. The chopper is turned ON when the VSCHVDC voltage exceeds 106% of the nominal. From ON
state it is turned OFF only when the voltage falls below
101% of the nominal voltage. These threshold limits
determine the over-voltage levels in the VSC-HVDC system
and the switching frequency of the chopper resistor.
III. SIMULATION OF OPERATION SEQUENCE
A sequence of processes has to be followed so as to
energize the VSC-HVDC link, and the offshore grid and
synchronizing the WTG before power generation can be
ramped up. Fig. 5 shows the power and VSC-HVDC voltage
waveforms during the starting of VSC-HVDC, energizing
the offshore grid and synchronization of the WTGs, power
ramp up and steady-state operation at maximum generation,
power ramping down to zero, disconnection of the WTG
and finally shut down of the whole system.
The operation range can be divided into the following
sequence of operations
i. Charging the DC capacitors and energizing VSCHVDC
ii. Energizing the Offshore grid
iii. Synchronization of offshore WTG and power
control
iv. Steady state operation at maximum P and Q
output.
A case of low voltage fault ride through using chopper
controlled resistors has been included.

8th International Workshop on Large-Scale Integration of Wind Power into Power Systems as well as on Transmission Networks for
Offshore Wind Farms, 14-15 October 2009, Bremen, Germany

Fig. 5 Power generation and transmission and HVDC Voltage curves for a whole range of operation from start-up to shut-down.

A. Charging of VSC-HVDC
In the beginning, the VSC-HVDC as well as the offshore
WPP grid is not energized. When the circuit breaker is
closed to connect the converter to the grid through the
converter transformer, the anti-parallel diodes in VSC2 does
the rectifying action and a large inrush current flows in to
charge the HVDC capacitors and the HVDC line to the DC
voltage level of uncontrolled rectifiers, given by,

Vdc 0

3 3

Vm

(1)

However, since the offshore VSC is blocked, the diode

rectifier action of the onshore VSC sees a capacitive
impedance of the cable and the DC capacitors. Hence the
DC capacitors and the cables get charged to the peak line to
ground voltage levels, i.e. 122.5kV or 245kV pole-pole
voltage. In Fig. 6, the voltage has risen to 255kV by the
rectifier action of the diodes.
The initial magnitude of inrush current is limited by the
impedance of the grid, converter transformers and the phase
reactors. In this simulation, pre-insertion resistors of 1k:
have been used for a period of 70ms.
After 200 ms, VSC2 controller is de-blocked and gate
pulses are applied to the IGBTs. The HVDC capacitors and
the lines then get charged to the operating voltage of the
VSC-HVDC in a controlled manner. The power required for
the charging and energization is drawn from the grid.
B. Energizing the Offshore grid
After the VSC-HVDC line voltage is stabilized, then the
offshore VSC (VSC1) is de-blocked. Its controller ramps up
the reference voltage so the offshore voltage builds up
gradually. After nominal voltage level is attained in the
offshore-grid, the WTG cables are connected to the collector
bus one-by-one to avoid oscillations. At this point of time
the WPP is fully energized, and the WTGs are ready for
synchronization.
Initial charging of the VSC-HVDC and energizing of the
offshore grid is shown in Fig. 6

C. Synchronization of offshore WTG and power control

The WTGs are running at rated voltage but with no load
generation. The PLL in the FSC-inverter detects the
magnitude and phase of the WPP grid voltage. The FSCinverter output voltage is matched with the grid voltage at
no load and then it is ready for synchronization. The breaker
is closed. After that the power can be ramped up or down as
per the requirement. Both active and reactive power
command can be given to the FSC. While the active power
comes from the WTG, VSC is capable of generating or
absorbing reactive power as long as its maximum current
rating is not exceeded.
D. Steady State operation
Fig 7 and 8 show the current and voltage waveforms
when the WTGs are operating in steady state at no
generation and at maximum power generation respectively.
In Fig 7, the WPP currents are lagging the WPP voltage by
approximately 90q implying that the WPP has capacitive var
generation which flows towards the offshore VSC. The no
load ac current waveform of the onshore VSC shows the
flow of 0-sequence component.
In fig 8, the onshore VSC AC currents have a
fundamental component with superimposed switching
ripples. The onshore current waveform shows the current
entering the onshore VSC. Hence it appears to be in phase
opposition implying that the power is flowing out of the
VSC towards the grid.
E. Fault Ride through Using Chopper Controlled
Resistors
The grid voltage at the point of common coupling is
dipped to 42kV from the 400kV nominal levels to simulate a
case of low voltage fault in the onshore grid. Power
evacuation to the grid is restricted and the HVDC system
voltage starts building up. Sensing the over-voltage in the
HVDC lines, the chopper resistor dissipates the excess
energy. The impact of fault is contained in the HVDC
chopper resistors.

8th International Workshop on Large-Scale Integration of Wind Power into Power Systems as well as on Transmission Networks for
Offshore Wind Farms, 14-15 October 2009, Bremen, Germany

Fig. 6 Charging VSC-HVDC and energizing the offshore grid

Fig. 7 Steady state operation at no load

Fig. 8 Steady State operation at full 400MW WPP generation

8th International Workshop on Large-Scale Integration of Wind Power into Power Systems as well as on Transmission Networks for
Offshore Wind Farms, 14-15 October 2009, Bremen, Germany

Fig. 9 Response during the low voltage fault at the PCC

Fig. 10 Low Voltage Fault Ride through using chopper resistors.

Fig 9 shows the response of the VSC-HVDC when there

is a low voltage fault at the PCC on the onshore grid. The
power delivery to the grid decreases due to voltage dip.
Excess energy gets accumulated in the HVDC cables and
capacitors thereby increasing the HVDC voltage. The
hysteresis controllers trigger the chopper resistors and
dissipate the excess power. The reactive current injection is
increased to the nominal current levels so as to support the
grid voltage recovery. The HVDC overvoltage and the
current dissipation in the chopper resistors are shown in Fig.
10.
Grid codes require that reactive current be injected into
the grid during low voltage conditions, so that the voltage
recovery can be supported. In Fig. 8 the reactive power
injection is shown as a result of reactive current injection.
Even though rated current is being injected, the reactive
power appears to be low when the PCC voltage is very low.
After the fault is cleared and the voltage has recovered, the
reactive power injection comes down to nominal levels.

IV. DISCUSSION
A model of WPP with VSC-HVDC connection to the
onshore grid has been developed and the different operating
conditions have been simulated. Operational sequence of
starting up the VSC-HVDC, and energizing the offshore
grid, sequential synchronization and connection of a number
of aggregated WTG followed by power generation ramping
up to full power level and then ramping down to 0
generation levels have been demonstrated. The simulation
gives an overview of the overall system and its operation.
The low voltage fault ride through study shows that
VSC-HVDC is capable of supporting the grid by injecting
reactive current while dissipating the excess power in the
chopper controlled resistors. The WPP does not experience
the fault impact and hence the recovery after the fault is
cleared is fast and stable.

8th International Workshop on Large-Scale Integration of Wind Power into Power Systems as well as on Transmission Networks for
Offshore Wind Farms, 14-15 October 2009, Bremen, Germany

The model can be elaborated for the detailed fault

analysis in the wind power plants and their impact upon the
WPP and VSC-HVDC integrated system.
V. APPENDIX
TABLE 1 LIST OF PARAMETERS USED IN SIMULATION
Onshore Grid
1 Base MVA
2 Base voltage (rms, line-line)
3 Short Circuit Capacity
4 Grid Impedance Angle
Converter Transformers (Onshore)
1 Size
2 Voltage Ratio (for onshore)
3 Voltage Ratio (for offshore)
4 Leakage Reactance
5 Cu-loss
6 Fe-loss
Phase reactors
1 Inductance
2 resistance
HVDC System
1 Pole to pole DC boltage
2 Power rating
HVDC Cable
1 Cable length
2 resistance
3 Inductance
4 Shunt Capacitance
DC capacitors (at VSC terminal)
Offshore WTG Cables
1 Conductor Cross Section
2 Length
3 resistance
4 Inductance
5 Shunt Capacitance

500
400
25
80
500
400/150
150/33
0.12
0.01
0.01

MVA
kV
pu
degree
MVA
kV/kV
kV/kV
pu
pu
pu

17 mH
10 m:
300 kV DC
400 MW
200
2.797
22.31
28.15
35.5

km
:
mH
uF
uF

150
2
9
0.44
0.295

sq. mm
km
m:
mH
uF

VI. REFERENCES
[1] "Seas of Change: Offshore Wind Energy," The European Wind Energy
Association (EWEA), 2009.
[2] "Pure Power Wind Energy Scenarios upto 2030," The European Wind
Energy Association (EWEA), Available: http://www.ewea.org/fileadmin
/ewea_documents/documents/00_POLICY_document/PP.pdf
[3] T. Ackermann, Wind Power in Power Systems; Wind Power in Power
Systems, John Wiley, 2005.
[4] S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu and P. Rodriguez, "Wind Farm Grid
Integration Using VSC Based HVDC Transmission - An Overview,"
Energy 2030 Conference, 2008. ENERGY 2008. IEEE, 2008.
[5] J. Conroy and R. Watson, "Aggregate modelling of wind farms
containing full-converter wind turbine generators with permanent magnet
synchronous machines: transient stability studies," Renewable Power
Generation, IET, vol. 3, pp. 39-52, 2009.
[6] Lie Xu, B. W. Williams and Liangzhong Yao, "Multi-terminal DC
transmission systems for connecting large offshore wind farms," Power and
Energy Society General Meeting - Conversion and Delivery of Electrical
Energy in the 21st Century, 2008 IEEE, pp. 1-7, 2008.
[7] A. A. Meer, R. L. Hendriks and W. L. Kling, "A survey of fast power
reduction methods for VSC connected wind power plant consisting of
different turbine types" presented at the 2nd EPE Wind Chapter Seminar,
KTH, Stockholm, Sweden, 23-24 April, 2009.

P.5

S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu, P. Rodriguez, P.C. Kjr and P. W.

Christensen, Modelling and Simulation of VSC-HVDC Connection
for Offshore Wind Power Plants, in Proc. of the Danish PhD Seminar
on Detailed Modelling and Validation of Electrical Components and
Systems 2010. Energinet.dk, 2010, 53-57.

Modelling and Simulation of VSC-HVDC

Connection for Offshore Wind Power Plants
S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu, P. Rodriguez, P. C. Kjaer and P. W. Christensen

reversible control of active flow and reactive power generation

at both ends. Its controllability facilitates the WPP developers
to meet the grid code requirements with regard to fault ride
through, reactive power control and voltage support [4].
The WPP is assumed to be comprising of wind turbine
generators (WTG) equipped with full scale converters (FSC)
[5]. The full scale converter decouples the machine frequency
from the offshore grid frequency thereby enabling the variable
speed operation in the whole speed range of operation.
This paper describes the layout and modelling of wind
turbine with full-scale converters and the offshore grid for a
large WPP with VSC-HVDC connection to the onshore grid
and simulation studies for different types of faults in the
offshore grid. Section II describes the WPP layout and the
overall system model. Section III presents the modelling
details of the wind turbines, VSC-HVDC and the overall
system. Simulation results of faults in the offshore grid and
their impact upon the system is presented in IV. Finally it is
concluded in section V.

Abstract Several large offshore wind power plants (WPP)

are planned in the seas around Europe. VSC-HVDC is a suitable
means of integrating such large and distant offshore WPP which
need long submarine cable transmission to the onshore grid.
Recent trend is to use large wind turbine generators with full
scale converters to achieve an optimal operation over a wide
speed range. The offshore grid then becomes very much different
from the conventional power system grid, in the sense that it is
connected to power electronic converters only. A model of the
wind power plant with VSC-HVDC connection is developed in
PSCAD for time-domain dynamic simulation. This paper
presents the modelling and simulation of such a system. A single
line to ground fault has been simulated and fault currents for the
grounded and ungrounded offshore grid system is obtained
through simulation and then compared.
Index TermsWind power plant, wind turbine generator,
modelling, VSC-HVDC, full scale converters and Faults

I. INTRODUCTION

MPHASIS on clean and green renewable energy sources

amid rising environmental concerns has led to the rapid
development of wind turbine generator(WTG) technology and
large wind power plants (WPP). Recently the focus has
shifted to the huge potential of offshore wind energy. A total
of 1471MW of offshore wind power generation, all in
European seas, has been installed by the end of 2008, with
357MW of offshore WPP was installed in the year 2008 [1].
As per the reference scenario of EWEA, by 2030, the offshore
WPP is expected to contribute 120 GW out of 300GW of
installed wind power generation [2].
High voltage ac transmission is not suitable for long
distance cable transmission [3]. VSC-HVDC provides feasible
transmission link for connecting distant offshore WPP using
polymer insulated submarine cables. Apart from that it has
several technical advantages like fast, independent and

II. SYSTEM DIAGRAM AND MODEL DEVELOPMENT

Fig 1 shows the system being studied. A simple Thevenins
equivalent is used to represent the onshore grid, while the
VSC-HVDC has been modelled in detail with switched
converters and their controller, converter transformers, phase
reactors, filters and DC capacitors, HVDC cable, DC line
reactors. Offshore converter transformer is connected to the
two 150kV offshore buses through a pair 150kV cables. Each
of the 150 kV bus is then connected to 2 33kV bus through a 3
winding (150/33/33kV) transformer[6]. The 33 kV bus serves
as the collector bus where the cables connecting the wind
turbines are terminated. In the present model, 100 MW
aggregated models of the wind turbine generators have been
considered. Therefore, only one cable is shown connected to a
single wind turbine generator.
In the present system model, the individual wind turbine
generators have not been modelled; instead single aggregated
WTG models have been connected through the scaled LCL
filter and the scaled transformer to the 33kv collector bus
through cables.
When identical components are present on the offshore and
onshore, suffixes 1 and 2 are used respectively to indicate
offshore and onshore components.

This work was supported in part by Vestas Wind Systems A/S under the
Vestas Power Program.
S. K. Chaudhary and R. Teodorescu are with the Department of Energy
Technology, Aalborg University Denmark (e-mails: skc@iet.aau.dk and
ret@iet.aau.dk ).
P. Rodriguez is with the Technical University of Catalonia, Spain. He is a
visiting professor at Aalborg University, Denmark (e-mail: pro@iet.aau.dk ).
P.C. Kjr and P. W. Christensen are with the Vestas Wind Energy
Systems A/S, Denmark (e-mails: pck@vestas.com and pewch@vestas.com ).
Paper submitted to the PhD Seminar on Detailed Modelling and
Validation of Electrical Components and Systems 2010 in Fredericia,
Denmark, February 8th, 2010

Xt2

P + jQ

Vf2

Xph2

Vg 400 kV

150 kV

Chopper
Resistor

Vdc1

Vc1

Vf1

Vwpp

Xph1

Vdc2

150 kV

150 kV

Vwppa

Xt1

ONSHORE
Xf

Vc2

150 kV

33 kV
Vcb1A
Vcb1B
150 kV

33 kV
Vcb2A

OFFSHORE
r
 kV, 1400A,
200km DC Cable

Xf

VSC1

VSC2

400MW, 150kV DC
& 150kV 3ph. ac AC rms.

Vwppb

Vcb2B

Xf
Xf
VSC based HVDC Connection

400MW offshore WPP

Fig. 1 Block diagram of the system layout

Vwa

Iwa

Idcl2

Vwb

LCL Filter

Iwb

Vwc

Iwc
LCL Filter

+
-

Pm_in

Pcon_m
1
uy
1  sT

Vdcl

Vdcl

yu

Pconv2

Pconv 2

WTG
Terminal

LCL Filter

+
-

Chopper
Resistor

+
-

Vdcl

Idcl1

vwi iwi

i a ,b, c

Fig. 2 Simplified model of a wind turbine generator with full scale converter (WTG-FSC)

connected to the dc link of the full scale converter as shown in

Fig. 2
v
DC link capacitors and the chopper resistors are included in
vw, abc
+
the
WTG-FSC model. Average value model is used for the
+ve sequence
filter
grid side converter on the basis of ideal controller behaviour

vw
and no power loss in the converter. Such a model neglects the
*
Pconv

2
converter
time delay as and the losses, which may be of the
i
w _ ref
Calculate
PI
>T @DE
currents
*
vw* , abc order of 1-2%. However these simplifications are acceptable
Qconv
Proportional
2
Resonant
when the overall power system behaviour is of interest.
Controller
iw _ meas
The role of the grid side converter in the WTG-FSC is to
>T @DE
maintain the DC-link voltage and supply/absorb reactive
Fig. 3 Reference voltage generation for the grid side converter in the power if ordered. From the deviations in the DC-link voltage,
WTG-FSC
the amount of power (P*conv2) to be evacuated is determined.
Then the converter controller estimates the required positive
idpm R  iqpm X
sequence current flow to the grid, which is later converted to
idpm
Vdp*
T Zt
the desired voltage levels using the proportional resonant
0.9v
dpm
*
idpp
Vdpm
controllers in the stationary reference frame (Fig. 3). The
-+
+
+
PI
*
PI
DQ
ABC
reactive power output of the converter can be specified
vabcp
*
( Limits
i qp
externally, as it is independent of the active power balance
Imposed)
+-Vqpm
+PI
PI
requirements. In the present simulation, the reactive power
reference to WTG-FSC is set to 0. The WTG FSC is
i
*
qpm
Vqp=0
interfaced to the 33kV cables in the collector grid through
iqpm R  idpm X
LCL filters and a step-up transformer.
vdcl

*
dcl

B. Off-shore VSC and its controller

The offshore VSC controller (VSCC1) maintains the
offshore grid voltage and frequency. Voltage control is
achieved by applying the desired reference voltage along the
d-axis while setting the q-axis voltage to 0. Synchronously
rotating reference frame is selected such that the voltage
phasor is aligned with the d-axis. Current references are
generated from these AC voltage controllers in the outer loop.
The inner loops produce the reference voltages which are

Fig. 4 Offshore VSC controller (positive sequence)

A. WTG with FSC model

Every WTG is assumed to be equipped with its own FSC.
In this simulation study the wind model, aerodynamics, gear
system, the synchronous generator and the generator side
converter is collectively modelled as a first order transfer
function with a 20ms time constant. Mechanical power is
input as a reference input power and then after the transfer
function it appears as an equivalent dc current source
54

D. Grounding Transformer
Four zigzag transformers, as shown in Fig. 6, are used to
ground the 33kV collector busses in the offshore WPP buses.
The primary windings are connected in star and the secondary
windings are connected in the auto-transformer connection,
with the phase connections as shown in the phasor diagram.
The resultant configuration provides 0-impedance path for the
0-sequence components while it offers high impedance to the
positive and negative sequence components of the voltage.
An ungrounded system is simulated by disconnecting this
transformer.

augmented by the feed-forward of the voltage at the filter bus

and compensation for the drop in the phase reactor [7]. Pulse
width modulation (PWM) signals are generated using sinetriangle comparison as shown in Fig. 4.
C. Onshore VSC Controller
The onshore VSC controller (VSCC2) regulates the HVDC
voltage and the reactive power (or AC terminal voltage)
exchanged with the onshore grid as shown in Fig 5. The
HVDC voltage regulation loop sets the d-axis current
reference while the reactive power is controlled by setting the
q-axis current reference. These are controlled by the inner
current loop controls as described in the previous section [7].
The reactive power control loop may be switched in the
voltage (at PCC) control mode. Then the sensitivity of the
PCC voltage with respect to the reactive power injection is
used to determine the q-axis current reference.

Vd*

PI

Qm

Q*
*
Vrms

i d*

vdm
PI

-+

PI

--+

DQ
ABC
( Limits
Imposed)

i q*

+-

+-

idm R  iqm X

idm

Vdm

+-

PI

wQ
wV

III. SIMULATION OF THE WPP, VSC-HVDC SYSTEM

In the beginning the whole of the WPP, VSC-HVDC
system is assumed de-energized and in steady state at ground
potential. As soon as the onshore grid side breaker is
connected and the VSC-HVDC gets charged to approximately
150kV by the rectifier action of the anti-parallel diodes in the
converter. Then the onshore grid side VSC is de-blocked and
the gate pulses are applied. The VSC-HVDC thus, gets
charged to the operating voltage of 150kV. Following this
the offshore VSC is de-blocked and the offshore grid gets
energized.
Regarding the connection of the wind turbine generators,
they may have the dc-link in the full scale converters
energized by their auxiliaries or it may be energized from the
offshore grid. In the present simulation, it is assumed that the
WTG-FSC dc links are energized by the WTG auxiliary
supply. Hence, the WTG-FSC are ready for synchronization
and connection to the offshore grid. After that the WTG
generation can be allowed by setting the input mechanical
power references. Then the power is ramped up to the
maximum power levels. Though, the WTG-FSC system can
generate reactive power as well, the reactive power reference
for the WTG-FSC is set to 0. Fig 7 presents power flow vs.
time curve for this sequence of operation. Due to the cables in
the collector system and the 150kV connectors, the WPP
supplies reactive power (Mvar) to the VSC-HVDC at low
active power generation, even though WTGs are not
generating any var. As the generation increases, the var
consumption within the offshore grid increases. In this case,
VSC-HVDC is controlled such that it does not inject any var
to the onshore grid.
Afterwards an asymmetrical fault in the offshore grid is
simulated for a period of 150ms for the two cases with
grounded collector bus system and the ungrounded collector
system. The fault currents in these two cases are then
compared. A single line to ground fault between phase A and
the ground has been simulated on a 33kV collector bus, with a
fault impedance of 0.0025:.

v*abc

vqm

iqm

iqm R  idm X

Vrmsm,

N-A

Fig. 5 Onshore VSC controller

A

a1

a0

Aln

b0
a0-a1

-b1
N-

c0

B
N-

b1

b0

c1

c0

Bln

-c1

Cln

a Winding phasor diagram and zigzag connection

Aln

N-A

-b0
b1

Bln
N

N-

a1-a0

-c0

N-

c1

A. Single Line to ground (L-G) fault in an ungrounded system

In an ungrounded system, the faulted phase A voltage goes
to zero, while the other phases observe over-voltage as shown
in Fig. 8. There is no fault current due to lack of grounding.
Current and voltage waveforms as well as the power flows do
not get affected as shown in Fig. 9.

Cln

b Resultant terminal voltage phasors

Fig. 6 Phasor Diagram and winding connection of a zigzag grounding
transformer

55

voltage as shown in Fig 11. When the voltage waveforms are

decomposed into sequence components, the presence of
negative sequence voltage is observed in the voltage
waveforms (Fig. 11).

Active Power (MW) flow

1

P-WPP

P-ON-grid

0.5
0
0

3
4
Reactive Power (MVAr) Flow

33kV Bus Voltage

0.5
Q - WPP

Q -ON-grid

0
-0.5

0
0

3
4
Onshore VSC HVDC Voltage(dc)

-2
5.95

6.05
6.1
6.15
33kV Bus Current from WTG side

6.2

6.25

6.05
6.1
6.15
33kV Bus Current from CB side

6.2

6.25

6.05

6.2

6.25

2
1

0.5
0

-2
5.95

Time(s)

10

Fig. 7 (i) Active power flow from WPP to VSC-HVDC (P-WPP) and from
VSC-HVDC to the onshore grid (P-ON-grid) (ii) Reactive power flow to the
offshore grid (Q-WPP) and to the onshore grid (Q-ON-grid) (iii) VSC-HVDC
operating voltage in p.u.

0
-10
5.95

6.1
Time(s)

6.15

Fig. 10 Voltage at the 33kV faulted bus, and currents observed on the both
sides of the L-G fault in a grounded offshore grid

33kV Bus Voltage (pu)

2
0

150kV Bus Voltage

-2
5.95

6.05
6.1
6.15
33kV Bus Current (pu) from WTG side

6.2

2
1
0
-1
-2
5.95

6.25

1
0
-1
5.95

6.05
6.1
6.15
33kV Bus Current (pu) from CB side

6.2

6.25

6.05

6.1
Time (s)

6.15

6.2

6.25

Fig. 8 Voltage at the 33kV faulted bus, and currents observed on the both
sides of the L-G fault in an ungrounded offshore grid

6.15

6.2

6.25

0.35
5.95

6.15
6.05
6.1
Onshore VSC HVDC Voltage(dc)

6.2

6.25

1.2
1.1
1
0.9
0.8
5.95

6.05

6.2

6.25

P-WPP
P-ONGrid

6.1
Time (s)

6.15

Fig. 11 150kV bus voltage waveform, HVDC power flows and the HVDC
voltage during the L-G fault in the ungrounded system.

150kV Bus Voltage (pu)

+ve, -ve and 0-seq components of 33kV Bus Voltage (pu)

1
6

6.05

6.1
Power flow (pu)

6.15

6.2

6.25

+ve
-ve
0

0.5

0.95
P-WPP

P-ONGrid

0.9
0.85
5.95

6.1
Power flow

0.6

2
1
0
-1
-2
5.95

6.05

0.85

-1
5.95

1.1

0
5.95
6

6.05
6.1
6.15
Onshore VSC HVDC Voltage(dc, pu))

6.2

6.05

6.1

6.15

6.2

6.25

6.25

+ve and -ve seq. components of 150kV Bus Voltage (pu)

1.05

1
1
0.95
5.95

+ve
-ve

0.5
6

6.05

6.1
Time (s)

6.15

6.2

6.25

Fig. 9 150kV bus voltage waveform, HVDC power flows and the HVDC
voltage during the L-G fault in the ungrounded system.

5.95

6.05

6.1
Time(s)

6.15

6.2

6.25

Fig. 12 Sequence components of the voltages in the 33kV and 150 kV grid
during the L-G fault.

B. Single Line to ground (L-G) fault in a grounded system

Zigzag connected grounding transformers are connected to
the 33kV collector buses to provide the path for the grounding
current and thus grounding the offshore grid. By virtue of the
transformer connection, the currents in all the three phases are
equal and in the same phase. Thus a low impedance path is
provided for the 0-sequence currents.
Fig 10 shows the voltage and current waveforms in the
33kV grid at the point of the fault. Power flow oscillations and
consequently 100Hz oscillations appear in the HVDC DC

The response of the two circuits, the healthy one which

does not have any fault on the collector bus and the faulted
one with a single line to ground fault close to the collector bus
is compared in Fig 13. Power flow from the healthy circuit is
higher than the other. The fault is drawing the reactive of the
order of over 2pu from the collector bus. Curves of grounding
transformer neutral currents indicate that all the fault current
flows through the grounding transformer in the faulted circuit
(Fig 10 and Fig 13).
56

[6] R. van de Sandt, J. Lowen, J. Paetzold and I. Erlich,

"Neutral earthing in off-shore wind farm grids," PowerTech,
2009 IEEE Bucharest, pp. 1-8, 2009.

Power (MW) flow from the WTG Collector bus to WPP terminal (in pu)
1
healthy ckt
Faulty ckt

0.5
5.95

6.05
6.1
6.15
6.2
Var flow from the WTG Collector bus to WPP terminal (in pu)

6.25

[7] L. Xu, B. W. Williams and L. Yao, "Multi-terminal DC

transmission systems for connecting large offshore wind
farms," Power and Energy Society General Meeting Conversion and Delivery of Electrical Energy in the 21st
Century, 2008 IEEE, pp. 1-7, 2008.

0
-1
-2
5.95

6.05
6.1
6.15
Grounding Transformer Neutral Current (pu)

6.2

6.25

6.2

6.25

10
0
-10
5.95

6.05

6.1
Time (s)

6.15

Fig. 13 Active and reactive power flows from the WTGs with healthy
collector bus and the WTG with a fault on the collector bus.

IV. DISCUSSION
The simulation results show that the simulation model is
robust enough to investigate the normal operating modes as
well as faults in the offshore grid. Onshore grid has not been
modelled in detail, but if need be the model can be plugged
into a more detailed grid model and the impact of grid
disturbances can be studied.
Simulation of the asymmetrical faults demonstrates the
importance of system grounding in the offshore grid network.
Even though an ungrounded system presents an advantage as a
single line-to-ground fault does not necessitate the service
interruption, the situation is dangerous as the healthy phases
can attain unsafe voltage levels. Persistent higher voltage
stress may lead to a second fault which has to be isolated.
Simulation of the grounded system gives an idea of the
fault current levels in the offshore grid and this information
will be useful in the design of the protection system for the
offshore grid.
REFERENCES
[1] "Seas of Change: Offshore Wind Energy," The European
Wind Energy Association (EWEA), 2009.
[2] "Pure power wind energy scenarios upto 2030," The
European Wind Energy Association (EWEA), Available:
http://www.ewea.org/fileadmin/ewea_documents/documents/0
0_POLICY_document/PP.pdf
[3] T. Ackermann, Wind Power in Power Systems; Wind
Power in Power Systems. , John Wiley, 2005.
[4] S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu and P. Rodriguez, "Wind
Farm Grid Integration Using VSC Based HVDC Transmission
- An Overview," Energy 2030 Conference, 2008. ENERGY
2008. IEEE, pp. 1-7, 2008.
[5] J. Conroy and R. Watson, "Aggregate modelling of wind
farms containing full-converter wind turbine generators with
permanent magnet synchronous machines: transient stability
studies," Renewable Power Generation, IET, vol. 3, pp. 39-52,
2009.
57

P.6

S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu and P. Rodriguez, Control and Operation of

Wind Turbine Converters during Faults in an Offshore Wind Power Plant Grid
with VSC-HVDC Connection, IEEE-PES General Meeting 2011, 24-28 July
2011.

Control and Operation of Wind Turbine

Converters during Faults in an Offshore Wind
Power Plant Grid with VSC-HVDC Connection
S. K. Chaudhary, Student Member, IEEE, R. Teodorescu, Senior Member, IEEE, P. Rodriguez,
Senior Member IEEE, P. C. Kjaer

AbstractVoltage source converter (VSC) based high voltage
dc (HVDC) transmission is an attractive technique for large
offshore wind power plants, especially when long cable
transmission is required for connection to the onshore grid. New
multi-MW wind turbines are likely to be equipped with full scale
converters to meet the stringent grid code requirements. In such
a scenario, the offshore grid is terminated to the power electronic
converters on all the ends.
This paper presents a control scheme for the synchronization
and control of the grid side converters (GSC) of the wind turbine
generators (WTG). Current limit control enables the GSC to
sustain the fault currents during short circuits in the offshore
wind collector system grid. However, power transmission is
affected, and the fault has to be isolated. It can be resynchronized
after the fault has been cleared and the breaker reclosed. Healthy
WTG converters can remain connected. The scheme is
demonstrated through PSCAD/EMTDC simulation.
Index TermsWind power plants, symmetrical and
symmetrical faults, over-current relays, wind turbine generators,
VSC-HVDC.

I. INTRODUCTION

HERE has been a tremendous growth in wind power

industry in the last decade. In 2008, it grew by 31.7%, and
the total installed capacity in the world reached 158.5 GW, out
of which 76.2GW is in Europe [1]. There is a huge potential
for offshore wind power generation. By 2020, EWEA targets
to develop 230GW of wind power, with 40GW coming from
offshore wind power plants [2].
Wind power plants require a large area as the individual
generating unit size is only a few MW, around 5-6 MW at the
most. Open seas can provide large areas with a more uniform
and steady wind profile. Further there is less impact upon
public tolerance like visual appearance, noise disturbance
tower shadow etc. Therefore there is a growing interest to
develop large offshore wind power plants (WPP). Europe had
43 fully operation offshore wind farms with a total output of
This work was supported by the Vestas Power Program, sponsored by
Vestas Wind Systems A/S, Denmark.
S. K. Chaudhary and R. Teodorescu are with the Department of Energy
Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg E., 9220, Denmark (emails:
skc@et.aau.dk, ret@et.aau.dk )
P. Rodriguez is with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Technical
University of Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain. (email: prodriguez@ee.upc.edu )
P.C. Kjaer is with Vestas Wind Systems A/S, Dusager 4, Aarhus-8200,
Denmark (pck@vestas.com ).

978-1-4577-1002-5/11/$26.00 2011 IEEE

2396 MW by July 2010. At present the Thanet Offshore Wind

farm, UK, comprising of 100 units of 3MW V90 wind turbine
generators, spread over an area of approximately 35 sq. km.
Eventually, offshore wind power plants have to be
connected to the onshore grid. High voltage ac cables generate
a large reactive power, of the order of 1000kVAr/km for
132kV XLPE cables [3]. Voltage source based HVDC
transmission is a suitable technology as DC cable transmission
is not limited by the capacitive charging current as in the case
of ac transmission. Moreover VSC-HVDC transmission offers
a fast and independent control of active and reactive power in
both directions. Further, it occupies a low footprint area,
which is beneficial for offshore application.[4],[5] Long
distance (200km) cable transmission was a reason to connect
BorWin-I, the 400MW wind power plant, using VSC-HVDC.
The wind turbines spread over a wide area are connected to
the collector bus through medium-voltage cables, typically at
30-36kV at the collector bus they are connected to the step up
transformer. Depending upon the size and layout of the farm,
there may be more than one collector bus in the offshore grid.
Further the HVDC converter may be optimally placed
between all the collector buses. The exact layout of the
offshore grid is beyond the scope of this paper. Though a wind
power plant is designed with enhanced reliability to minimize
the fault incidents, the possibility of faults in the offshore wind
power grid cannot be ruled out completely.
Permanent magnet generators have numerous advantages
like absence of slip rings, multi-pole design for low speed
operation, self-exciting characteristic and brushless design.
These require full scale frequency converters, but the
improved performance and overall decrease in cost of the
machine as well as the power electronic converters have made
PMG with full converters an attractive option [5]. These
machines can be controlled over a wide speed range and hence
have a better overall efficiency.
Most of the published literature describes the voltage ride
through capabilities of doubly fed induction generator and the
WTG with full scale converters [6-8]. Ref. [9] describes the
grounding, overvoltage protection and insulation coordination
in wind power plants. Protective relaying scheme for wind
power plants is introduced in [10].

Chopper
Resistor

GSC

LCL
Filter

CB & CT
33 kV dc

33kV Coll.
Bus#1
150 kV Coll
Bus #1

WTG#1
GSC

150 kV

WTG#2

150 kV

Xt1

Xph1

Vdc1

33kV Coll.
Bus#2

GSC

33kV Coll.
Bus#3

WTG#3

150 kV Coll
Bus #2

VSC1

GSC
Feeder circuit breaker (CB)

WTG#4
33kV Coll.
Bus#4

o/c relay current transformer (CT)

400MW offshore WPP

Fig. 1 Layout of an offshore wind power plant

There is lack of publication describing the control and

operational aspects of wind turbine generator converter during
the short circuit faults in the wind power plant collector grid.
The short circuits may be asymmetrical one, involving a single
phase or two phases or a symmetrical one involving all the
three phases, and ground may or may not be involved.
In this paper, the control and operational aspects of the
WTG with full scale converter is investigated in the event of
short circuit faults in the offshore ac collector grid. The results
are presented for a single line to ground (SLG) fault and triple
line (LLL) fault. Fault is detected by the over-current relay in
the feeder and isolated by the tripping of the circuit breaker.
After the fault has been cleared, the circuit breaker is reclosed.
WTG converter response during the fault and after the fault
has been cleared has been described.
Section II describes a generalized offshore wind power grid
layout. The WTG grid side converter controller is described in
section III. Section IV gives the simulation results of the fault
cases studied, followed by the conclusion in section V.

feeders with a single breaker at the ends. For sake of

simplicity, they have been represented as 4 aggregated wind
turbines with their own LCL-filter, step up transformer, and
33kV cable section connecting to the collector bus through a
breaker (Fig. 1).
The control schemes of the offshore VSC-HVDC terminal,
and the grid side converter of the wind turbine generators have
been described below.
A. Offshore VSC-HVDC controller
Offshore VSC-HVDC establishes the balanced three phase
voltage profile at a constant frequency and magnitude. The
controller is implemented in a rotating reference frame with
the resultant voltage phasor aligned along the assumed d-axis.
Therefore, d-axis voltage is controlled to 1 pu and the q-axis
voltage is controlled to 0 pu reference. Inner current control
loops are provided such that current limits can be enforced
[12]. Fig 2 gives the block diagram of the offshore VSCHVDC controller.
idp R  iqp X

II. WPP LAYOUT

A 400MW offshore wind power plant with VSC-HVDC
connection to the onshore grid has been considered here as a
study case. Fig. 1 provides the layout of the system. Only the
offshore terminal of the VSC-HVDC has been shown here.
Assuming that the assumption that the onshore VSC-HVDC
terminal provides fast and efficient dc voltage regulation.
Therefore, it is represented as a dc voltage source. A detailed
switching model has been used for the offshore VSC-HVDC
converter. It is a two level converter with sine-triangle
modulation at 1950Hz switching frequency. The dc side
voltage is 300kV, while the ac side voltage is 150kv rms.
Phase reactor and the tuned filters have been modeled.
The offshore wind power grid comprise of two collector
buses each with 3 winding transformers. Thus there are 4
collector buses (nos. 1, 2, 3and 4) at 33kV. Each 33kV
collector bus is provided with a zig-zag connected grounding
transformer [11]. The wind turbines are connected in cable

T Zt

iqp R  idp X

Fig. 2 Offshore VSC-HVDC Controller

B. Offshore WTG converter

The WTG is equipped with a back-to-back converter,
which is referred as the full converter. The machine side
converter controls the machine torque, thereby allowing a
variable speed operation. The machine side converter (MSC)
of the WTG along with the generator and the turbine is
together represented by a constant power source with a first
order time delay (of 10ms) has been assumed in the present
simulation model. The power is supplied to the dc link and

hence, this power source has been represented by a current

source in the simplified WTG model (Fig. 3). A chopper
controlled braking resistor is provided to dissipate the excess
power when the WTG-GSC is unable to evacuate the power
due to fault or other problems in the collector ac grid.
The grid side converter (GSC) regulates the dc link voltage.
As shown in Fig 4, the dc link voltage deviation is processed
by a proportional-integral regulator to provide the active
power reference to the GSC. Thus the generated active power
is fed into the offshore grid. Reactive power can be
independently absorbed or generated as per the operational
requirement of the offshore grid, provided the current limit of
the converter is not exceeded. In the present study, the reactive
power reference has been arbitrarily set to 0.



(1)

Second order generalized integrator (SOGI) is able to

extract the in-phase components at the specified frequency and
generate a component of the same rotated by a quadrature.
Fig. 5 gives a block diagram of a SOGI quadrature signal
generator (SOGI-QSG).
By Masons loop gain formula, the transfer functions of the
SOGI-QSG, tuned around the resonant frequency, are,





(2)

The parameter k determines the bandwidth of the SOGIQSG.

VD'

VpD

VD

qVE

Fig. 3Model of an aggregated wind turbine generator with its LCL filter and
step-up transformer.

qVD

VE'

VpE

VE

qVD

Using these references for the active and reactive power

and the positive sequence components ( and of the
WTG terminal voltage, the positive sequence output current
references are generated and then proportional resonant
controller is used to control the WTG-GSC (Fig. 4). It is
described in detail in Section III.
III. CONTROL OF WTG-GSC
The WTG-GSC injects the active and reactive power into
the offshore WPP grid. Therefore, it has to be synchronized
with the offshore grid. Phase locked loop can be used to
estimate the phase angle and frequency at the WTG terminal
and then control the WTG-GSC. However, during faults and
switching events, phase jumps are observed and the system
undergoes through power transients. A controller in stationary
reference frame can get rid of this problem, as phase
estimation is not required, and frequency of the offshore grid
is controlled at nominal value (say 50 Hz.) by the VSC-HVDC
controller.
A. Estimation of Positive Sequence voltage at the WTG
terminal
The measured 3 phase voltage at the capacitor bus in the
LCL filter of the WTG is decomposed along the DE axes in
the stationary reference frame using Clarkes transformation
(1).

qVE

Fig. 4 WTG-GSC Controller in stationary reference frame

Fig. 5 Generation of positive sequence components using second order

generalized integrator based quadrature signal generator (SOGI-QSG)

At, the tuned frequency, , the gains are unity.



(3)

The positive sequence components, and along the

axes are given by the transformations (4) [13].

(4)

The most important advantage of this method is its nondependence upon the measurement/estimation of phase angle.
Moreover, the resonant frequency can be set around the
nominal value of frequency set by the VSC-HVDC controller.
B. Determination of the positive sequence current references
DC-link voltage regulator of the WTG-GSC determines the
reference active power to be evacuated (Fig. 6). The reactive
power reference can be specified externally or it may be
generated by some reactive power control logic. In the present
case, reactive power reference has been arbitrarily set to 0.
The positive sequence current references for the WTGGSC are given by the power relationship in the stationary
reference frame (5).



(5)

A current limit is applied on the calculated current

references, such that the resultant magnitude of the current
remains within the safe limits of the converter.

iD

vwt
.D

iD

vwt .D

iE

vwt
.E

iE

vwt .E

Fig. 6 Proportional resonant controllers for the WTG-GSC current control

C. Proportional resonant controllers for the WTG-GSC

Proportional resonant controllers are then used for the
current control of the WTG-GSC (Fig. 6). The transfer
function of the proportional resonant controller [14, 15] is
given below (6). Eq. 7 shows the addition of LCL-filter
capacitor voltages as feed-forward terms.



(6)



(7)

observed from the collector bus side for a fault in the

WTG cable feeder #4, as shown in Fig 1.
3. All the power electronic converters are capable of
limiting their current output to their over-current
limits, which is arbitrarily assumed here to be 1.10
pu for the WTG-GSCs and 15% for the VSCHVDC converter. In the case of high impedance
faults fault currents are low, and the relay pick up
current can be tightly set.
Relay co-ordination studies are done to set the pick-up
current (Ipick-up) and time dial setting such that proper
discrimination is attained for the different types and strengths
of faults. As per, IEEE Std. C37-112 [7], the over-current
relay trip time, t(I), for the relay current transformer (CT)
current I is given by,


(8)



where,
subscripts for the axes components
 Controller output references
LCL filter capacitor bus voltage of the WTG

Output voltage reference for WTG-GSC.

D. Over-current Relay
An over-current relay with very inverse time characteristics
can be used to detect and discriminate faults in the cable
feeders connected to the collector bus. Since several WTGs
are connected to a common cable feeder, they may be
provided with a common circuit breaker, like in Horns Rev I
[16]. When there is a short circuit fault in the feeder, the overcurrent relay should detect it and discriminate it against the
healthy feeders. The relay should then trip the circuit breaker
top isolate the fault. The following characteristics are
particularly helpful in the process
1. Each WTG-GSC is protected by its own current limit
controllers.
2. VSC-HVDC is the largest in the wind power plant
grid in terms of absolute ratings Therefore; it has the
maximum contribution to the fault currents. Other
WTG-GSCs also contribute to the fault current.
Therefore high fault current contributions are

where, A, B and P are the constants defining the relay trip time
characteristics, Ipick-up is the relay pick up current setting. The
trip time given by (8) is scaled by the time dial setting to
obtain the actual trip time of the relay.
IV. SIMULATION OF FAULTS
VSC-HVDC system energizes the offshore wind power
plant grid. The wind turbine generators get synchronized to
this grid through their WTG-GSC. When the wind power plant
is operating at its rated power generation, short circuit faults
are simulated on the WTG cable feeder connected to the 33kV
collector bus 4 (Fig. 1). Both symmetrical and asymmetrical
faults have been simulated with two different fault resistance
levels of (Rf) of 0.005pu and 0.25pu respectively. The fault
duration is 150ms in all the cases..
The over-current relay has been tightly set with the pick-up
current as 1.2pu and the time dial as 5ms. Eq. (8) gives the trip
time of 225ms when the ratio, M is 1.2. The relay current
transformers (CT) are placed at the 33kV collector bus end of
the WTG feeders as shown in Fig 1. The faults are simulated
on the feeder #4.
A delay of 50ms has been provided to simulate the opening
time of the circuit breaker after the trip command has been
received. The opening of the cable string circuit breaker also
opens the WTG load break switches.
A. Single line to ground fault at a 33 kV collector bus, with Rf
=0.005pu
Fig. 7 shows the current measured by the relay CT and the
phase A at the time when the single line to ground (SLG) fault
takes place. Grounding transformers enables the flow of fault
current. The curves for power injected by different WTGGSCs are shown in Fig. 8. The circuit breaker, which isolates
the fault within 71 ms of the occurrence of the fault, is shown.
It is reclosed at 4.35 s, after which the load switch of WTG
gets closed with a delay of 50 ms. The GSC of WTG#4 then
starts injecting power into the offshore grid. The plot shows
that other WTG-GSCs get disturbed during the incidence of
the fault, but as soon as the fault is cleared by the circuit
breaker opening they resume operation.

Fig. 9 shows the phase A voltage waveform during the

fault and after it has been cleared. Voltage recovers
immediately after the circuit breaker is opened. A small
disturbance is observed when the circuit breaker is reclosed.
An overvoltage of the order of 1.64 pu is observed. Fig. 10
shows that WTG#1 GSC gets affected for a very short time
during the fault and normal operation resumes as soon as the
circuit breaker isolates the fault. Since WTG#4 gets isolated
by the circuit breaker, the positive sequence voltage decays
below the threshold (0.25 kV that is 9.3% of the nominal
voltage was arbitrarily set as the threshold for blocking the
WTG-GSC). For the GSC of WTG#4, there is some delay in
the rise of currents due to the dynamics of the SOGI-QSG
positive sequence estimator.
B. Triple line fault at a 33 kV collector bus, with Rf =0.005pu
The fault current and the voltage waveforms during the
appearance of a three phase symmetrical fault (LLL-fault) are
shown in Fig. 11. Peak fault currents are found to be lower
than those observed for the SLG fault and hence the relay trip
time is longer. The circuit breaker opens in 87ms and the
voltage recovers quickly. As a result of this the healthy WTGGSCs resume normal operation. WTG#4 gets isolated due to
the fault on the cable. Only after the fault has been cleared and
the circuit breaker reclosed, it gets re-synchronized and starts
injecting power into the offshore grid. The healthy WTGs
observe power interruption for a short time prior to fault
isolation by the opening of the circuit breaker (Fig. 12). The
voltage and currents at the healthy WTG-GSC normalize soon
after the opening of the breaker. WTG#4-GSC takes some
time to resynchronize after its breakers have been closed and
terminal voltage has reappeared as shown in Fig. 13. Since
the dc link voltage regulator is saturated, its output power rises
to very high values. This may be improved by limiting the rate
of rise of output power, but that was beyond the scope of this
study.
Fault Currents

WTG#1 Power Output

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

4.2

WTG#2 Power Output

4.4

4.6

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

WTG#3 Power Output

1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

4.4

4.6

1
0.5
0
4

4.2

4.4

4.6

WPP Power Output

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

4.2

WTG#4 Power Output

1.5

4.2

4.4

4.6

Circuit Breaker State

1
0.5
0

4.2

4.4

4.6

4.2

4.4

4.6

Time (sec)

Fig. 8 Output power (in pu) of the WTG converters and the circuit breaker
state for the SLG-fault with Rf =0.005 pu [CB opens at 4.071s, recloses at
4.348s]
Voltage at 33kV Collector Bus#1, Ph A
1
0
-1
4

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

4.6

4.5

4.6

4.5

4.6

Voltage at 33kV Collector Bus#4, Ph A

1
0
-1
4

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

150kV WPP Terminal Voltage Phase A

2
0
-2

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

Time (sec)

Fig. 9 Phase A voltage waveforms (in pu)at the collector bus #1 and #4 for
the SLG-fault with Rf =0.005 pu. [CB opens at 4.071s, recloses at 4.348s]

10
WTG#1 Voltages, Ph A

1
0
-1

0
-5
-10
3.95

4.05

4.1

4.15

4.2

Phase A Voltage at the Faulted Collector Bus

4.1

4.2
4.3
4.4
WTG#1 Currents, Ph A

4.5

4.6

4.1

4.2
4.3
4.4
WTG#4 Voltages, Ph A

4.5

4.6

4.1

4.2
4.3
4.4
WTG#4 Currents, Ph A

4.5

4.6

4.1

4.5

4.6

1
0
-1

pu
0
-1
3.95

4
1
0
-1

4.05

4.1

4.15

Time (sec)

4.2

Fig. 7 Fault Current and voltage (in pu) at the 33kV faulted collector bus for
SLG-fault with Rf =0.005 pu. [CB opens at 4.071s]

1
0
-1
4.2

4.3

4.4

Time (sec)

Fig. 10 Phase A currents and voltages (in pu) of WTG#1 and WTG#4 for
the SLG fault with Rf =0.005 pu. [CB opens at 4.071s, recloses at 4.348s]]

6
Fault Currents

Fault Currents

10

10

-5

-5

-10
3.95

4.05

4.1

4.15

4.2

-10
3.95

Phase A Voltage at the Faulted Collector Bus

1
0

0
-1

3.95

4.05

4.1

4.15

Time (sec)

4.2

WTG#1 Power Output

4.2

0.5

0.5

4.2

4.4

4.6

WTG#3 Power Output

4.2

4.4

4.6

0
4.4

4.6

4.2

4.4

4.6

0.5

0
4.2

4.4

4.6

4.2

4.4

4.1

4.15

4.2

4.2

4.4

WTG#2 Power Output

4.6

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

4.6

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

Time (sec)

Fig. 12 Output power (in pu) of the WTG converters and the circuit breaker
state for the LLL-fault with Rf =0.005 pu [CB opens at 4.087s, recloses at
4.336 s]

4.2

4.4

4.6

WTG#4 Power Output

1.5
1
0.5
0

4.2

4.4

4.6

WPP Power Output

0.5

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

Circuit Breaker State

4.05

WTG#3 Power Output

0.5

WPP Power Output

Fig. 14 Fault Current and voltage (in pu) at the 33kV faulted collector bus for
SLG-fault with Rf =0.25 pu. [CB opens at 4.134s]

WTG#4 Power Output

0.5

4.2

3.95

WTG#1 Power Output

1.5

pu

WTG#2 Power Output

4.15

Time (sec)

Fig. 11 Fault Current and voltage (in pu) at the 33kV faulted collector bus for
LLL-fault with Rf =0.005 pu. [CB opens at 4.087s]

4.1

-1

4.05

Phase A Voltage at the Faulted Collector Bus

4.2

4.4

4.6

Circuit Breaker State

1
0.5
0

4.2

4.4

4.6

4.2

4.4

4.6

Fig. 15 Output power (in pu) of the WTG converters and the circuit breaker
state for the SLG-fault with Rf =0.25 pu [CB opens at 4.134s, recloses at
4.382 s]
Fault Currents

WTG#1 Voltages, Ph A

10

1
0
-1

5
4

4.1

4.2
4.3
4.4
WTG#1 Currents, Ph A

4.5

4.6

0
-5

1
0
-1

-10
3.95
4

4.1

4.2
4.3
4.4
WTG#4 Voltages, Ph A

4.5

4.2
4.3
4.4
WTG#4 Currents, Ph A

4.5

4.05

4.1

4.15

4.2

4.6
Phase A Voltage at the Faulted Collector Bus

1
0
-1

1
4

4.1

4.6

1
0
-1

0
-1

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

4.6

Time (sec)

Fig. 13 Phase A currents and voltages (in pu) of WTG#1 and WTG#4 for
the LLL-fault with Rf =0.005 pu. [CB opens at 4.087s, recloses at 4.336 s]

3.95

4.05

4.1

4.15

4.2

Time (sec)

Fig. 16 Fault Current and voltage (in pu) at the 33kV faulted collector bus for
LLL-fault with Rf =0.25 pu. [CB opens at 4.106s]

WTG#1 Power Output

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

4.2

4.4

WTG#2 Power Output

4.6

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

WTG#3 Power Output

1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

4.2

4.4

4.6

WTG#4 Power Output

1.5
1
0.5
0

4.2

4.4

4.6

WPP Power Output

4.2

4.4

4.6

Circuit Breaker State

0.5

0.5

0
4

4.2

4.4

4.6

4.2

4.4

4.6

Time (sec)

Fig. 17 Output power (in pu) of the WTG converters and the circuit breaker
state for the LLL-fault with Rf =0.25 pu [CB opens at 4.106s, recloses at
4.386 s]

C. Single line to ground fault at a 33 kV collector bus, with

Rf=0.25pu
Fault currents are lower when the fault resistance is high
(0.25 pu in this case). Consequently, the over-current relay trip
time is longer and the fault disconnected after 134ms, at the
instant 4.134s (Fig. 14). However, the power generation by
the wind turbine generators remain at around their nominal
values, though the overall power generation by the wind
power plant is found to fall by 20% in this case. This power
gets lost into feeding the fault. After the fault is isolated by the
opening of the circuit breaker, the remaining wind turbine
generators contribute to the output of the wind power plant.
The isolated WTG#4 has to be resynchronized before its
normal operation resumes (Fig. 15).
D. Triple line fault at a 33 kV collector bus, with Rf =0.25pu
In this case the fault currents are higher, than those
observed in the case of SLG faults (with same Rf=0.25 pu) and
hence the relay operation is faster. The circuit breaker opens in
106ms, at the time instant 4.106s (Fig. 16). Power evacuation
in all the WTG converters is affected. Overall power output of
the WPP is badly affected as long as the fault persists, as the
net power output of the falls to negative levels (Fig. 17). This
implies that the VSC-HVDC is feeding the fault to some
extent. The situation improves after the fault is isolated by the
over-current relay tripping the circuit breaker.
V. DISCUSSION
VSC-HVDC provides the synchronizing voltage reference
to the wind farm. Since the offshore ac collector grid
frequency is controlled by the VSC-HVDC controller, the
frequency is known beforehand. Therefore, the SOGI-QSG
and proportional resonant controllers can be tuned to the
offshore grid frequency and there is no need of any frequency
estimation. When there is a fault in the offshore WPP collector
grid, the HVDC connection would mean that the onshore ac
grid remains isolated. Depending upon the severity of the
fault, the offshore grid voltage gets affected as long as the
fault remains connected.

VSC-HVDC is the largest converter in the offshore grid as

it is designed to evacuate all the power generated by the whole
wind power plant. Hence, this provides the maximum
contribution to the short circuit faults in the offshore grid,
even though its own controller limits the over-current level on
its own base. The high fault current contribution from the
VSC-HVDC helps in discriminating the fault location. At the
same time, the maximum fault current provided by the VSCHVDC is predictable as it is limited to its own over-current
rating.
Another advantage of VSC-HVDC system, in the case of
offshore wind power plants, is that as soon as the fault is
cleared it restores the voltage profile in the offshore collector
bus system. Thus, the healthy WTG feeders can resume their
injection of the generated wind power to the VSC-HVDC
transmission.
VI. CONCLUSION
The study shows the control and operation of the WTGGSC in the event of fault in the cable feeders connecting
several WTG in a string. The WTG-GSC is controlled to
evacuate the excess power from the dc link of the WTG full
converter. Only positive sequence current injection has been
considered for the WTG-GSC. Proportional resonant
controllers, tuned at nominal frequency (50 Hz), are used to
drive the positive sequence current references in the stationary
reference frame.
Control and operation of WTG-GSC during the faults has
been demonstrated through simulation. There is power
interruption in presence of severe faults. However, heavy fault
currents can be detected fast by the over-current relay and the
circuit breaker can be tripped sooner to isolate the fault. Soon
after the fault is isolated, the remaining part of the circuit
resumes injecting power into the offshore grid which can be
evacuated by the VSC-HVDC transmission. The isolated
WTG goes into blocking state as the positive sequence
component of its terminal voltage falls below the threshold
level. It can be resynchronized after the fault has been cleared,
the circuit breaker reclosed, thereby resulting in the buildup of
the positive sequence voltage at nominal frequency.

VII. REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

Global Wind Energy Council, Global Wind 2009 Report,, March

2010. Available at: http://www.gwec.net
European Wind Energy Association, Pure Power Wind Energy Targets
for 2020 and 2030, 2009 update. Available at: http://www.ewea.org
S. D. Wright, A. L. Rogers, J. F. Manwell, and A. Ellis, Transmission
options for offshore wind farms in the United States, 2002. [Online].
Available at http://www.ecs.umass.edu
Bresesti, P.; Kling, W.L.; Hendriks, R.L.; Vailati, R.; , "HVDC
Connection of Offshore Wind Farms to the Transmission System," IEEE
Trans. Energy Conversion, , vol.22, no.1, pp.37-43, March 2007
H. Li, and Z. Chen,, "Overview of different wind generator systems and
their comparisons," Renewable Power Generation, IET , vol.2, no.2,
pp.123-138, June 2008
C. Feltes, H. Wrede, F.W. Koch, and I. Erlich, Enhanced Fault RideThrough Method for Wind Farms Connected to the Grid Through VSCBased HVDC Transmission, IEEE Trans. Power Systems, vol. 24, Aug.
2009, pp. 1537-1546.
G. Ramtharan, A. Arulampalam, J.B. Ekanayake, F.M. Hughes and N.
Jenkins, "Fault ride through of fully rated converter wind turbines with

8
AC and DC transmission," Renewable Power Generation, IET , vol.3,
no.4, pp.426-438, December 2009
[8] A.D. Hansen and G. Michalke, "Multi-pole permanent magnet
synchronous generator wind turbines' grid support capability in
uninterrupted operation during grid faults," Renewable Power
Generation, IET , vol.3, no.3, pp.333-348, Sept. 2009
[9] IEEE PES Wind Plant Collector System Design Working Group, "Wind
power plant grounding, overvoltage protection, and insulation
coordination:," Power & Energy Society General Meeting, 2009. PES
'09. IEEE , vol., no., pp.1-8, 26-30 July 2009
[10] IEEE PES Wind Plant Collector System Design Working Group, "Wind
plant collector system fault protection and coordination," IEEE PES
Transmission and Distribution Conference and Exposition 2010, , vol.,
no., pp.1-5, 19-22 April 2010
[11] R. Van de Sandt, J. Lowen, J. Paetzold, and I. Erlich, "Neutral earthing
in off-shore wind farm grids," PowerTech, 2009 IEEE Bucharest , vol.,
no., pp.1-8, June 28 2009-July 2 2009.
[12] L. Xu, B. W. Williams and L. Yao, "Multi-terminal DC transmission
systems for connecting large offshore wind farms," Power and Energy

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

Society General Meeting - Conversion and Delivery of Electrical Energy

in the 21st Century, 2008.
M. Ciobotaru, R. Teodorescu, and F. Blaabjerg, "A New Single-Phase
PLL Structure Based on Second Order Generalized Integrator," 37th
IEEE Power Electronics Specialists Conference, 2006. PESC '06., 18-22
June 2006
F. Blaabjerg, R. Teodorescu, M. Liserre and A.V. Timbus, "Overview of
Control and Grid Synchronization for Distributed Power Generation
Systems," IEEE Trans. Industrial Electronics, vol.53, no.5, pp.13981409, Oct. 2006
R. Teodorescu, F. Blaabjerg, M. Liserre, and P.C. Loh, "Proportionalresonant controllers and filters for grid-connected voltage-source
converters," IEE Proc. Electric Power Applications, vol.153, no.5,
pp.750-762, September 2006
P. Christiansen, K. Jorgensen, and A.G. Sorensen, "Grid Connection and
Remote Control for the Horns Rev 150 MW Offshore Wind Farm in
Denmark," Available at http://www.hornsrev.dk
IEEE Standard Inverse-Time Characteristic Equations for Over-current
Relays, IEEE Std C37.112-1996, Sep. 1996.

P.7

S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu, P. Rodriguez, P. C. Kjr,

Application of Over-current Relay in Offshore Wind Power Plant
Grid with VSC-HVDC Connection, in 10th International Workshop
on Large-Scale Integration of Wind Power into Power Systems as well
as on Transmission Networks for Offshore Wind Power Plants.
Aarhus, Denmark on October 25 - 26, 2011.

Application of Over-current Relay in Offshore

Wind Power Plant Grid with VSC-HVDC
Connection
Sanjay K. Chaudhary, Remus Teodorescu, Pedro Rodriguez, Philip C. Kjr

Abstract-- This paper presents the setting and coordination
of over-current relays in an offshore wind power plant (WPP)
grid connected only to the power electronic converters with
limited fault current capability. The limited fault current
injection capability of the converters has been considered as a
hindrance for the relay setting. This characteristic can be
utilized to develop a deterministic picture of the radial grid
network and then the relays settings could be applied.
The relay coordination has been demonstrated through an
implementation in the Real Time Digital Simulator (RTDS)
platform. The setting of relay parameters based upon
maximum nominal currents is explained and the consequences
are investigated.
Index Terms collector grid, over-current relay, undervoltage relay, VSC-HVDC transmission, wind power plant
Wind power plant (WPP).

I. INTRODUCTION

IND power has seen a rapid growth in the last decade

as an abundant source of clean and renewable energy
for sustainable development. With the addition of 38.3GW
in 2010, the total installed wind power capacity reached 197
GW in the world [1]. Besides onshore wind power plants,
development of offshore wind power plants have picked up
in the last decade. Around 3 GW of offshore wind power
has already been installed [1].There is a growing interest to
develop large offshore wind power plants (WPP). By 2020,
European Wind Energy Association (EWEA) targets to
develop 230GW of wind power, with 40GW coming from
offshore wind power plants [2].
Voltage source converter based HVDC (VSC-HVDC)
transmission for the grid connection of distant offshore
WPPs. Long distance AC cable transmission suffers from
excessive var generation and hence the losses are very high.
There is no issue of var generation in DC cable
This research work was funded by the Vestas Power Program. Any
opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this
material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of
Vestas Wind Systems.
S. K Chaudhary and R. Teodorescu are with the Department of Energy
Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg 9220, Denmark (e-mail:
skc@et.aau.dk, ret@et.aau.dk ).
P. Rodriguez is with the Department of Electrical, Technical University
of Catalonia, Terrassa, Spain. He is a visiting professor with Aalborg
University (prodriguez@upc.edu.sp ).
P. C. Kjr is with Vestas Technology, R&D, rhus, Denmark (email:
pck@vestas.com )

transmission. Further VSC-HVDC transmission offers a fast

and independent control of active and reactive power at both
the terminals [3], [4]. Long distance (200km) cable
transmission was a reason for the use of VSC-HVDC when
connecting the BorWin-I 400MW wind power plant [5].
The doubly fed induction generator (DFIG) and the
permanent magnet synchronous generator (PMSG) are the
two popular variable speed generators used in wind energy
conversion systems (WECS). While the DFIG uses partially
sized converters (25-30% of the generator rating) [6], the
PMSG requires a full-scale frequency converter (FSC) so
that its operation can be decoupled from the grid frequency.
The grid side inverter of the FSC can provide a higher
reactive power support capability and thus enable smooth
grid integration [7]. Large wind turbine generators for
offshore applications are likely to have direct drive (or with
a single stage gearbox) PMSG and FSC [8].
An offshore WPP grid, comprising of the wind turbine
generator (WTG) with FSC and connected to the onshore
grid by VSC-HVDC transmission (Fig. 1), is inherently
different from the conventional power grid as there is no
rotating machine to maintain the voltage and frequency.
However, VSC-HVDC converters (VSC1 in Fig. 1) can be
controlled to establish the offshore grid voltage [9]; while
the grid side converters (GSC in Fig. 1) of the WTG-FSC
are equipped with phase-locked loop (PLL) to synchronize
them to the offshore grid voltage [10].
Since the offshore wind power plant layout is spread over
a large area (e.g. 35 sq. km for the 300 MW Thanet
Offshore Wind Farm in the UK [11]), and offshore
maintenance work is expensive and time consuming [8]; the
protection system should be secure and reliable. Any fault in
the collector system will adversely affect power generation
of the whole WPP. Therefore, fault detection and isolation
of the faulted sections and the uninterrupted operation of the
healthy sections is a crucial issue in offshore wind power
plants.
In a conventional radial feeder network, the coordination
of over-current relays is conducted with the knowledge of
the rotating machines contributions to short circuit currents.
However, the offshore wind power plant collection grid is
different as rotating machines are connected to the grid
through power electronic converter interfaces. Such
converters have limited short-circuit current capability in the
range of 1.1 to 1.5 pu [12].

Most of the studies on WPP protection are focused on

their response to grid disturbances and low voltage fault ride
through requirements imposed by the grid operators [12][15]. Several other studies address the impact of distributed
generation in distribution systems on the protection and
relay coordination in the distributed networks [15], [17].
Reference [18] describes a protection scheme using IEC61850 standard communication for the adaptive setting and
coordination of protective devices in smart grids with
inverter connected distributed power generation. An
integrated protection and control system for wind farms is
presented in [19] using the IEC-61850 process bus and a
centralized relaying unit with parallel-processing ability.
This paper utilizes the current limiting behavior of the
converters and the radial network structure of the collector
grid for the coordination of over-current relays in the
protection system of offshore wind power plants against
faults in the offshore grid. The system is modeled and
implemented on the RTDS platform such that physical
relays can be interfaced with the real time simulation.
Section II describes a layout of a 400 MW offshore wind
farm with VSC-HVDC connection to the onshore grid,
which has been considered for the test case. The overcurrent
relay and its settings are described in section III followed by
the experimental result in section IV and conclusions in
section V.
LCL
Filter

Chopper
Resistor

GSC

II. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM

A 400 MW offshore WPP has been used here as the test
system (Fig. 1). WTGs are aggregated into 4 large
generators of 100MW. Each of the 4 aggregated WTGs
comprise of a wind turbine with permanent magnet
synchronous generator and a FSC. The L-C-L filter provides
the harmonic filtering. Since the focus is on relay
coordination against faults in the collector system grid, the
turbine, generator and the machine side converter are
together represented by a DC source.
The generator transformer with YnD connection steps up
the voltage from 3.3 kV to the medium voltage (MV) of 36
kV. The WTGs are connected to the collector bus through
the aggregated MV cable feeders. The aggregation is done
on the basis of equivalent losses in the aggregated and
distributed models. At the collector bus, the plan step up
transformer steps up the voltage to 150kV through YnD
transformers (Fig. 1. Single line diagram of a wind power
plant with VSC-HVDC connection Zig-zag connected
neutral grounding transformers are provided for grounding
the MV feeders [20]-[22].
The labels FA and FB indicate the representative
locations of faults in the wind power plant collector grid.

CB & CT
MV feeder #1

36 kV Coll.
Bus#1

WTG#1
GSC

MV feeder #2

WTG#2

36 kV Coll.
Bus#2

HV
feeder #1

MV feeder #3

36 kV Coll.
Bus#3

WTG#3
GSC

B1

150 kV

B2

HV
feeder #2

GSC

FB

150 kV Coll
Bus #2

MV feeder #4 A4
FA

Feeder circuit breaker (CB)

WTG#4

o/c relay current transformer (CT)

33kV Coll. Bus#4

OFFSHORE

ONSHORE

VSC1

Vf2
170 kV

Vc2

Vdc1

Vc1

Xph1

Vdc2

rkV, 1400A, 200km DC Cable

170 kV

VSC2

VSC based HVDC Transmission

Fig. 1. Single line diagram of a wind power plant with VSC-HVDC connection

Xph2

Xt2

Vg 400 kV

400MW offshore WPP

150 kV

150 kV Coll
Bus #1

P+ jQ

A. WTG with FSC model

In this study the grid side inverters in the WTG are
modeled as PWM switching inverters. The positive
sequence terminal voltage is extracted using second order
generalized integrators (SOGI) filters and then a positive
sequence phase locked loop (PLL) is used [23]. Vector
control is used to control the inverter for the specified active
power. The reactive power is controlled so as to maintain
the nominal voltage across the capacitor of the LCL filter.
B. VSC HVDC controllers
The onshore VSC-HVDC converter terminal controls the
dc line voltage. Therefore, it evacuates the power absorbed
by the offshore VSC-HVDC terminal. As a second function
it regulates the ac voltage at the filter bus by controlling the
reactive power flow [24].
The basic function of the offshore VSC-HVDC controller
is to establish the offshore grid voltage and frequency. Thus
it creates a kind of infinite bus in the collector grid. The
WTG-FSCs get synchronized with this bus and the
generated power is absorbed by the VSC-HVDC converter.
A simple ac voltage controller has been implemented as
shown in Fig. 2 [9].

I. Each WTG-GSC is protected by its own current limit

controllers.
II. The VSC-HVDC (e.g. VSC1 in Fig. 1) is the largest
converter in the wind power plant grid in terms of
absolute ratings Therefore; it has the maximum
contribution to the fault currents, though other WTGGSCs also contribute to the fault current.
III. Power electronic converters are capable of limiting
their current output to their over-current limits, which
is assumed here to be 1.10 pu for the WTG-GSCs and
1.15 pu for the VSC-HVDC converter.
Relay co-ordination studies are done to set the pick-up
current (Ipick-up) and time dial setting such that proper
discrimination is attained for the different types and
strengths of faults. Modern numerical relays can provide
multiple relay characteristics in the same device. Users can
configure the settings as per their requirements. In this
study, the instantaneous over current and IEEE very inverse
characteristic have been used for the phase and the neutral
currents. The neutral current is the zero sequence current, ,
which can be numerically derived from the phase currents
 and  by (1),

Inverse
Parks
Transformation

Fig. 2. Block diagram of the offshore VSC-HVDC voltage controller.

C. Over-current limit control in VSC

Current limits are imposed by blocking the converter gate
pulses during as long as the measured RMS currents exceed
the predefined converter current limits (Fig. 3). Their
respective PI controller is disabled during the period when
the converter is blocked.

(1)

4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Relay Pick-up Time (s)

Fig. 4. Very Inverse Characteristic of over-current relay [26].

Ia
Ib

Pick-up Current Ratio (M)

RMS
Irms
Calculation

Irms > Imax

Block
VSC

Ic
Imax
Fig. 3. Limiting overcurrent by blocking the VSC.

III. OVER-CURRENT RELAY

Over-current relays with very inverse time characteristics
can be coordinated to detect and discriminate faults in the
cable feeders connected to the collector bus of the offshore
WPP. Since several WTGs are connected to a common
cable feeder, they may be provided with a common circuit
breaker, as in the Horns Rev I scheme [23].
When there is a short circuit fault in a feeder, the overcurrent relay should trip the circuit breaker and isolate the
faulted section. The following points are particularly helpful
in the relay coordination procedure when the feeder is
connected to VSCs

As per, IEEE Std. C37-112 [26], the over-current relay

trip time, t(I), for the relay current transformer (CT) current
I is given by (2),





(2)

where,  and Ipick-up is the

relay pick up current setting.
The relay settings used in this study are given in Table I.
For the MV relay, the instantaneous over-current
characteristic is set with a very small margin (e.g the pickup current is 7 A when the nominal CT secondary current is
4.5A). The pick-up current settings for the very-inverse
characteristic over-current relays are set with even smaller
margin, e.g. 4.6 A, when the nominal current rating is
4.51A. The neutral over-current settings are chosen here as
10% of the phase over-current settings.

The HV feeder relay settings were set with higher

margins as shown in Table I to avoid instantaneous trips for
the faults in the MV feeder. Even the margins for the
characteristic over-current relay settings are relatively
higher when compared with the margins in the MV feeder
relay. Moreover, the time multiplier setting in the HV feeder
relay is 0.4 which is quite high in comparison to the value
0.02 for the MV feeder relay. This enables the MV relay to
trip fast for the faults on the MV feeder and send the
blocking signal to the HV feeder relay. A communication
delay of 15 ms is assumed for the blocking of the HV feeder
relay by the MV feeder relay. The delay is reasonable in
view of 3 ms time period specified for time critical data
[27]. The HV feeder relay is blocked (for a duration long
enough for the tripping of the MV feeder circuit breaker) as
soon as the MV relay is tripped. The blocking signal is
communicated to the HV relay.

in RTDS. The CT outputs are accessible using the analog

output cards as voltage signals in the range of 10V. It is
then amplified as CT current signals using the CMS 156
Omicron amplifier and then applied to the feeder protection
overcurrent relay, REF615. The communication link of the
relay was not fully implemented for the time being. Hence
the relay operation was monitored on its LCD panel.
Simultaneously, the overcurrent relay model from the
RSCAD library was put into simulation for tripping the
circuit breaker associated with the fault. The circuit breaker
opening period was modeled by a delay of 50 ms. Identical
relay settings were used in both the ABB relay and the
RSCAD relay model.

TABLE I OVER CURRENT RELAY SETTINGS

1. MV Feeder (112.5 MVA, 36 kV)
A.
Nominal current
1.80
B.
CT ratio
400
C.
Nominal CT secondary current
4.51
D.
Instantaneous Phase Over Current Relay
Pick-up current (phase)
7
Pick-up current (neutral)
0.7
E.
Over-current Relay (IEEE-Very Inverse Characteristic)
Pick-up current (phase)
4.6
Time multiplier settings (phase)
0.02
Pick-up current (Neutral)
0.46
Time multiplier setting (Neutral)
0.02
2. HV Feeder (225 MVA, 150 kV)
A.
Nominal current
0.87
B.
CT ratio
200
C.
Nominal CT secondary current
4.33
D.
Instantaneous Phase Over Current Relay
Pick-up current (phase)
12
Pick-up current (neutral)
1.2
E.
Over-current Relay (IEEE-Very Inverse Characteristic)
Pick-up current (phase)
6
Time multiplier settings (phase)
0.4
Pick-up current (Neutral)
0.6
Time multiplier setting (Neutral)
0.4

kA
A

Fig. 5. Experimental set-up interfacing the RTDS simulator, amplifier and

a commercial over-current relay.

A
A

1.1
(i)

A
0.9

0.08

0.09

0.1

0.11

0.12

0.13

0.14

0.15

0.16

0.17

0.08

0.09

0.1

0.11

0.12

0.13

0.14

0.15

0.16

0.17

0.08

0.09

0.1

0.11

0.12

0.13

0.14

0.15

0.16

0.17

0.08

0.09

0.1

0.11

0.12
0.13
Time (s)

0.14

0.15

0.16

0.17

( ii ) 0.95
0.9

kA

0.85

A
1
( iii )

A
A

0.95

1
( iv )
0

IV. RTDS SIMULATION SET-UP AND RESULTS

Real time digital simulator allows the Simulation allows
electromagnetic (EMT) simulation of power system in real
time with a typical time step of 50 Ps [28]. Power electronic
converters can be simulated with a small time step of 2 Ps.
A control panel is provided so that a large number of events
and controls can be simulated like the way it can happen in
real time. Physical hardware devices like relays or
controllers can be interfaced with the simulation in real time
and their performance can be evaluated.
The system is modeled in RSCAD software and then
downloaded on the processor cards for real time simulation.
The current and voltage (as well as any other signal) can be
accessed through the analog cards as scaled voltage outputs.
An experimental set-up as shown in Fig. 5 was used for
this study. The power system model is simulated in real time

-1

Fig. 6. Steady state results (in pu) (i)HVDC voltage (ii) Power transferred
to the VSC-HVDC system and to the onshore grid. (iii) Power generated by
the wind turbine generators (iv) Offshore VSC-HVDC current waveform.

A. Steady state operation

Fig. 6 shows dc voltage, power and current waveforms
during the steady state operation of the wind power plant
and VSC-HVDC. While the total harmonic distortion for the
dc voltage was 6.5%, the peak to peak ripple was within
3% of the nominal. While the 4 aggregated WTG were
generating 0.97, 1.00, 0.99, 0.96 pu active power (on 100
MW base). The 400 MW offshore VSC-HVDC transmission
system was receiving 0.96 pu power and supplying 0.92 pu
power to the onshore grid; the difference indicates the losses
in the converters and the 200 km long DC cable. All these
powers were measured at the ac terminals of the converters.
The offshore VSC-HVDC current waveform is shown as
well.

2
1.5
(i)

(i)

1
0.5
0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.05

0.1

0.15

1
( ii ) 0.5
0

1
( iii ) 0.5
0
0

0.05

0.1

0.15

10
5
0
-5
-10

50
25
( ii )
0
-25
-50
10
5
0
( iii )
-5
-10
20
10
0
( iv )
-10
-20

1
( iv )

0.05

0.1

0.15

Time (s)

Fig. 7. SLG Fault on MV Feeder at 'FA' (i) HVDC voltage (ii) Power
transferred to the VSC-HVDC system and to the onshore grid. (iii) Power
generated by the Wind turbine generators. (iv) AC current waveform in the
offshore VSC-HVDC.
20
0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08
0.1
Time (s)

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

50
0

10
0
-10
20
( iv )

0
-20

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08
0.1
Time (s)

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

Fig. 9. LL Fault on MV Feeder at 'FA' (i) Fault current (ii) Secondary

current (in A) in the faulted MV feeder CT. (iii) Secondary current (in A) in
the adjacent MV feeder CT. (iv) Secondary current (in A) in the HV feeder
CT. (v) Relay trip signal.

C. Line-to-Line fault on MV Feeder

-20

( iii )

0.06

0
0

-50

0.04

( v ) 0.5

-1

( ii )

0.02

(i)

1
( v ) 0.5
0

Fig. 8. SLG Fault on MV Feeder at 'FA' (i) Fault current (ii) Secondary
current (in A) in the faulted MV feeder CT. (iii) Secondary current (in A) in
the adjacent MV feeder CT. (iv) Secondary current (in A) in the HV feeder
CT. (v) Relay trip signal.

B. Single Line to Ground Fault on MV Feeder

A single line to ground (SLG) fault was created on the
MV feeder at FA. The sudden disturbance resulted in
power unbalance and a transient over-voltage of 1.5 pu peak
was observed in the HVDC transmission as shown in Fig. 7.
Power and voltage oscillations continued as long as the fault
remained connected. The instantaneous over-current relay
for the neutral current on the MV feeder picked up after 3.5
ms of the fault event and it blocked the relay on HV feeder.
The circuit breaker trips after a delay of 50ms (at 93.5ms in
Fig. 8). The HV feeder relay would have, otherwise, tripped
after 24 ms. Even the relay on the adjacent MV feeder
picked up, but it got reset soon without any tripping. The
fault current (in pu with respect to the MV feeder base) and
the relay CT currents are shown in Fig. 8. It shows that only
the relay on the faulted feeder tripped. The disturbance in
current and power died out after the fault was isolated.

A line-to-line (LL) fault was simulated on the MV

feeder. It was selected as theoretically zero sequence current
would not be generated. The fault current and the input
currents to the relays (i.e. the secondary current of the
corresponding CT) for the LL fault on the MV feeder are
shown in Fig. 9. Apart from the relay on the faulted feeder,
those on the adjacent feeder and the upstream HV feeder
picked up during the fault. The relay trip signal was
generated at 49.5 ms (after 9.5ms of the fault event) and the
faulted MV feeder circuit breaker was tripped at 99.5 ms.
While the HV feeder trip was blocked by the MV feeder trip
signal, the adjacent MV feeder relay did not trip. The
current waveforms in the adjacent feeder and the HV feeder
normalized soon after the circuit breaker trip (Fig. 9). A
small fault current is observed as the disconnection of the
WTG was not simulated here.
The HV relay was blocked by the MV relay to avoid
unnecessary tripping of the HV feeder circuit breaker.
V. DISCUSSION
This paper presents the coordination of over-current
relays in the collector grid networks of a large wind power
plant with VSC-HVDC connection to the grid. The problem
in relay coordination due to the limited fault current
injection capability of voltage source converters in such a
grid is overcome by utilizing the largely deterministic
behavior of the converters. Radial topology enables to apply
the relay settings with very small margins. The relays on the
upstream feeders have some chance of over-reaching and
they may trip in response to the faults on the downstream
MV feeders. However, this can be avoided using the voltage
information and blocking signal generated from the MV
feeders downstream to block the relay for certain duration,
during which the downstream MV circuit breaker is
expected to trip. The proposed scheme of setting the over-

current relays for the protection of the collector grid

networks with converter connection at all the terminals is
demonstrated through a real time simulation with a physical
relay interface.
VI. ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions of J.
Hansen from ABB Ltd. and I. K. Park from RTDS Technologies.

VII. REFERENCES
[1]
[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]
[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]
[12]
[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]
[19]

[20]

Wind Energy Council, Global Wind 2010 Report,, April 2011.

Available at: http://www.gwec.net
European Wind Energy Association, Pure Power Wind Energy
Targets for 2020 and 2030, 2009 update. Available at:
http://www.ewea.org
S. D. Wright, A. L. Rogers, J. F. Manwell, and A. Ellis,
Transmission options for offshore wind farms in the United States,
2002. [Online]. Available at http://www.ecs.umass.edu
Bresesti, P.; Kling, W.L.; Hendriks, R.L.; Vailati, R.; , "HVDC
Connection of Offshore Wind Farms to the Transmission System,"
IEEE Trans. Energy Conv., vol.22, no.1, pp.37-43, Mar. 2007.
http://www.abb.com
A. D. Hansen, "Generators and Power Electronics for Wind
Turbines," in Wind Power in Power Systems Plastics, T. Ackermann,
John Wiley & Son, Ltd, 2008, pp. 53-78.
H. Li, and Z. Chen, Overview of different wind generator systems
and their comparisons, IET Renewable Power Generation , vol.2,
no.2, pp.123-138, June 2008
M. Liserre, R. Cardenas-Dobson, M. Molinas, and J. Rodriguez,
Overview of Multi-MW wind turbines and wind parks, IEEE Trans.
Industrial Electronics, vol. 58, No. 4, pp 1081-1095, Apr 2011.
L. Xu, B. W. Williams and L. Yao, "Multi-terminal DC transmission
systems for connecting large offshore wind farms," PES General
Meeting, 2008.
F. Blaabjerg, R. Teodorescu, M. Liserre and A.V. Timbus, "Overview
of Control and Grid Synchronization for Distributed Power
Generation Systems," IEEE Trans. Ind.l Electron., vol.53, no.5,
pp.1398-1409, Oct. 2006.
S. Patel, GLOBAL MONITER, Power;, Vol. 154 Issue 11, pp. 815, Nov. 2010.
D. Turcotte, F Katiraei.; "Fault contribution of grid-connected
inverters," IEEE Electrical Power & Energy Conf. (EPEC), Oct. 2009
C. Feltes, H. Wrede, F.W. Koch, and I. Erlich, Enhanced Fault RideThrough Method for Wind Farms Connected to the Grid Through
VSC-Based HVDC Transmission, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 24,
pp. 1537-1546, Aug. 2009.
G. Ramtharan, A. Arulampalam, J.B. Ekanayake, F.M. Hughes and
N. Jenkins, "Fault ride through of fully rated converter wind turbines
with AC and DC transmission," Renewable Power Generation, IET ,
vol.3, no.4, pp.426-438, Dec. 2009
A.D. Hansen and G. Michalke, "Multi-pole permanent magnet
synchronous generator wind turbines' grid support capability in
uninterrupted operation during grid faults," Renewable Power
Generation, IET , vol.3, no.3, pp.333-348, Sep. 2009.
E. J. Coster, J. M. A. Myrzik, B. Kruimer, and W. L. Kling,
"Integration Issues of Distributed Generation in Distribution Grids,"
Proc.of the IEEE , vol.99, no.1, pp.28-39, Jan. 2011
S. M. Brahma, and A. A. Girgis, "Development of adaptive
protection scheme for distribution systems with high penetration of
distributed generation,"IEEE Trans. Power Del. , vol.19, no.1, pp. 5663, Jan. 2004
H. J. Laaksonen, Protection Principles for Future Microgrids, IEEE
Trans. Power Electron., vol. 25, pp. 2910-2918 ,Dec. 2010.
J. Cardenas, V. Muthukrishnan, D. McGinn, and R. Hunt, Wind farm
protection using an IEC 61850 process bus architecture,
Developments in Power System Protection (DPSP 2010)..
IEEE PES Wind Plant Collector System Design Working Group,
"Wind power plant grounding, overvoltage protection, and insulation
coordination:," IEEE Power & Energy Soc. General Meeting, 2009.

[21] IEEE PES Wind Plant Collector System Design Working Group,
"Wind plant collector system fault protection and coordination," IEEE
PES Trans. and Dist. Conf. and Exposition 2010, , Apr. 2010
[22] R. Van de Sandt, J. Lowen, J. Paetzold, and I. Erlich, "Neutral
earthing in off-shore wind farm grids," PowerTech, 2009 Bucharest.
[23] P. Rodriguez, A. Luna, M. Ciobotaru, R. Teodorescu, and F.
Blaabjerg, Advanced Grid Synchronization System for Power
Converters under Unbalanced and Distorted Operating Conditions,
in IECON 2006, pp. 5173-5178.
[24] S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu, P. Rodriguez, P.C. Kjr and P. W.
Christensen, Control and Operation of Wind Turbine Converters
during Faults in an Offshore Wind Power Plant Grid with VSCHVDC Connection, IEEE-PES General Meeting, 24-28 July 2011
[25] P. Christiansen, K. Jorgensen, and A.G. Sorensen, "Grid Connection
and Remote Control for the Horns Rev 150 MW Offshore Wind Farm
in Denmark," Available at http://www.hornsrev.dk
[26] IEEE Standard Inverse-Time Characteristic Equations for Overcurrent Relays, IEEE Std C37.112-1996, Sep. 1996.
[27] H. Kirrmann, Sampling Redundancy,ABB Review -Special Report
IEC 61850, ABB Group R & D and Technology, Switzerland 2010.
ISSN: 1013-3119. Available at: www.abb.com/abbreview.
[28] P. Forsyth, T. Maguire, and R. Kuffel, Real time digital simulation
for control and protection system testing, in . PESC., 2004.

BIOGRAPHIES
Sanjay K. Chaudhary (S02-M05-S08) obtained B. Tech. degree
from A.M.U., India in 2000 and M. Tech degree from IIT-Kanpur, India in
2002, all in electrical engineering. From 2002 to 2005 he worked as
engineer with ABB Ltd, India. In 2005 he joined Honeywell Technology
Solutions, India. Since 2008, he has been pursuing for his Ph.D. at Aalborg
University, Denmark. His research interests are in power system analysis
and simulation, HVDC and FACTS and wind power.
Remus Teodorescu (S'94-M'99-SM'02) received the Dipl.Ing. degree from
the Polytechnical University of Bucharest, Romania, in 1989, and the Ph.D.
degree from the University of Galati, Romania, in 1994. In 1998, he joined
Aalborg University, where he currently works as full professor.
He is the recipient of Nordjysk University Foundation Innovation Prize,
2011. His areas of interests are: design and control of power converters
used in grid connected renewable energy systems.
Pedro Rodriguez (S'99-M'04-SM'10) received the M.Sc. and Ph.D.
degrees in electrical engineering from the Technical University of
Catalonia, Spain, in 1994 and 2004, respectively. He is currently an
Associate Professor in the Department of Electrical Engineering UPC, and
the Head of the Research Center on Renewable Electrical Energy Systems
(SEER). His research interest is focused on applying power electronics to
improve grid integration of renewable energy systems.
Dr. Rodriguez is a member of the IEEE IES Technical Committee on
Renewable Energy Systems. and the chair of the IEEE Industrial
Electronics Student Forum.
Philip Carne Kjr received the M.Sc. degree from Aalborg University,
Denmark, in 1993, and the Ph.D. degree from the University of Glasgow,
U.K., in 1997. From 1993 to 1998, he was a Research Assistant at the
University of Glasgow, working with advanced control of switched
reluctance machines and drives. From 1998 to 2003, he was with ABB
Corporate Research, Vasteras, Sweden. Since October 2003, he has been
with Vestas Wind Systems as Chief Specialist for power plants. His
research covers control and application of electrical machines and power
electronic converters.
Dr. Kjaer is a Chartered Engineer in the U.K., a Member of the Institution
of Electrical Engineers, U.K., and the recipient of the 2004 Richard M.
Bass Outstanding Young Power Electronics Engineer Award.

P.8

U. N. Gnanarathna, S. K. Chaudhary, A. M. Gole and R. Teodorescu,

Modular Multi-level converter based HVDC System for Grid
Connection of Offshore Wind Power Plant, in Proc. of the 9th
International Conference on AC and DC Power Transmission 2010.

MODULAR MULTI-LEVEL CONVERTER BASED HVDC

SYSTEM FOR GRID CONNECTION OF OFFSHORE WIND
POWER PLANT
U.N. Gnanarathna*, S.K. Chaudhary, A.M. Gole*, and R. Teodorescu
*University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada, (udana@ee.umanitoba.ca, gole@ee.umanitoba.ca )

Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark, (skc@et.aau.dk, ret@et.aau.dk)

Keywords: Modular Multi-level Converters (MMC), Wind

Power Plants (WPP), Voltage Sourced Converters (VSC),
Electro-magnetic
Transients
Simulations,
HVDC
Transmission.

Abstract
This paper explores the application of modular multi-level
converters (MMC) as a means for harnessing the power from
off-shore wind power plants. The MMC consists of a large
number of simple voltage sourced converter (VSC) submodules that can be easily assembled into a converter for
high-voltage and high power. The paper shows that the MMC
converter has a fast response and low harmonic content in
comparison with a two-level VSC option. The paper discusses
the modeling approach used, including a solution to the
modeling challenge imposed by the very large number of
switching devices in the MMC.

Introduction

Wind energy is an important renewable and green source of

energy. The total installed worldwide capacity of wind power
has doubled about every 3 years; from 24GW in 2001 to
159GW in 2009 [1]. A recent trend is to install large offshore
wind power plants (WPP) because they offer higher energy
yield due to a superior wind profile as compared with landbased installations, and provide a reduced level of irritation to
the general public as noise, tower shadow and visual impact
are not a significant problem [2].
Offshore wind power must be connected to the onshore power
grid for the subsequent distribution and consumption of the
generated power. For distant offshore wind power plants, high
voltage dc (HVDC) transmission becomes favourable

compared to high voltage ac (HVAC) transmission. In the

latter case, the capacitive charging current drawn by the cables
imposes a severe limitation on the current carrying capacity of
long cables [3]. Moreover, HVDC provides asynchronous
connection enabling operation of the offshore grid at variable
frequency. However, since the offshore grid is inherently a
weak grid, a voltage source converter (VSC) based HVDC
system, also referred as VSC-HVDC, is favourable compared
to the thyristor based classic HVDC system [4]. In addition to
the fast control of both active and reactive power flow in either
direction, a VSC-HVDC system also provide black start
capability and a compact substation structure, which is an
advantage for offshore applications. Fig. 1 shows a schematic
diagram of a candidate offshore wind power transmission
system. The wind power plant consists of several wind-turbine
driven permanent magnet generators asynchronously
connected to a WPP collector system using a full-scale
converter (FSC) dc link. The power from the WPP system is
evacuated to the on-shore grid by the submarine dc cables of
the VSC-HVDC link.
Recently, Marquardt and Lesnicar have proposed a new
converter topology referred to as the modular multi-level
converter for the VSC converter [5]. In the MMC, several
elementary switching sub-modules are stacked together to
attain the required dc operating voltage. Unlike other highvoltage VSC topologies, the MMC avoids the difficulty of
connecting semiconductor switches in series. The voltage
rating can be scaled by simply adding additional sub-modules
to the stack. Thus, it becomes easier to construct VSCs with
very high power and voltage ratings. The MMC arrangement
also has significantly lower switching losses. In previously
proposed multi-level topologies such as neutral point clamped
or flying capacitor converters, only a limited number of levels,
usually 3 or 5, can be practically realized [6]. The MMC on

C
G FSC Y

A
G FSC Y

Collector
Bus

DC Cable

LP1

AC Cable

LP2

Bus2
Zs2
TF2
YY

TF1
M1

MMC1
Offshore

WPP
DC Cable

Fig. 1 MMC based HVDC system for WPP connection

MMC2
Onshore

AC2

the other hand, typically uses a hundred or more levels and

creates an essentially sinusoidal ac waveform without the need
for any additional filtering. Moreover, the balancing of
capacitor voltages in an MMC is easier than in previous multilevel topologies [7]. It is also claimed that in comparison with
two-level VSC topologies, with the MMC, the probability of
dc bus short circuits is reduced, as is the magnitude of the
short circuit current [8].
Therefore, the MMC is considered to be a highly attractive
candidate in high voltage and high power transmission
applications. The first application of this technology was for
the 200 kV, 400 MW Trans Bay HVDC cable project in
California [8].

2 Modular Multi-level Converter

The basic building block [5] of the modular multi-level
converter is a sub-module which comprises of two IGBT
switches (T1 and T2) and a capacitor, C as shown in Fig. 2.
The output voltage of the sub-module is given by,
if T1 is 'ON' ; T2 is 'OFF'
V
VSM C
(1)
if T1 is 'OFF' ; T2 is 'ON'
0
where, VC is the instantaneous capacitor voltage.
The sub-module is considered to be ON when VSM
OFF when VSM

VC ; it is

SM1

SM1

SM1

SM2

SM2

SM2

SMNP

SMNP

SMNP

Phase
reactor
Vd

SM1

SM1

SM1

SM2

SM2

SM2

SMNP

SMNP

SMNP

Power
Sub-module

Multi-valve Phase Module

Fig. 3 Three phase MMC scheme for an NP level

arrangement

0.
(pu)

1
IC
T1

-1
0

ISM
C Vc
VSM

T2

Fig. 2. Basic building block of MMC: Power sub-module

The phase arm of MMC scheme consists of a stack of power
sub-modules connected in series as shown in Fig. 3, to form a
multi-valve. There are 2 multi-valves (upper and lower) in
each phase, collectively referred to as a phase module. Each
multi-valve has an equal number ( N P ) of sub-modules. Each
of the sub-module capacitors is nominally charged to a
voltage:
Vc Vd / N P
(2)
With this daisy chain connection of sub-modules, the
individual output voltages from each sub-module add up to
provide the net output phase voltage. With proper control of
the sub-module switches T1 and T2, a multi-level nearsinusoidal output waveform can be created with a shape as
shown in Fig. 4.
The phase reactors in Fig. 2 minimize any circulating currents
resulting from any non-nominal voltages on the upper and
lower multi-valves, resulting from momentary capacitor
voltage unbalances.

10

20
Time (ms)

30

Fig. 4. Multi-level waveform (pu) of a MMC with 12 submodules per multi-valve

3 Modelling of Modular Multi-level Converter

(MMC) and Wind Power Plant (WPP)
3.1 MMC Model
The excessively large number of switching devices in the
MMC (up to a thousand) imposes a challenge for modelling
the MMC on an electromagnetic transients simulation (EMT)
program. The admittance matrix of the converter becomes
very large and its re-factorization at each switching operation
is computationally very time consuming.
On the other hand, an averaged model [9] is too simplistic.
Therefore, a computationally efficient yet mathematically
exact model of the MMC [10] was developed using the nested
fast and simultaneous solution approach [11] summarized
below.
An equivalent circuit for the sub-module can be obtained by
representing the IGBT switches as two state (RON and ROFF)
resistive devices [12] and representing the capacitor as an
equivalent voltage source, VcEQ and a resistor, RC [13] as
shown in Fig. 5.

IC

IC
R1

T1
ISM

ISM
VSM

4 Simulation of a WPP with a MMC Based

HVDC Link

Rc

The agrregated wind generator FSC model for the WPP and
the computationally efficient MMC converter model were
connected together to represent the system of Fig. 1. The
converter transformers, DC cables and the remaining ac
network were modelled in detail for electro-magnetic
transient simulation.

Vc

T2

VSM

VcEQ

R2

Fig. 5 Equivalent circuit for sub-module

By series-connecting the sub-module equivalent circuits, a
Thvenin equivalent can be obtained for each multi-valve of
MMC as shown in Fig. 6. The multi-valve equivalent is a
single 2-node element in the main EMT solver thereby greatly
reducing the number of nodes in the simulation. This reduces
the size of the resultant admittance matrix of the circuit and
reduces CPU time by approximately 2 orders of magnitude
without sacrificing accuracy [10].
A

VMV

IMV

The MMC based VSC link asynchronously connects the

onshore and offshore grids. Each MMC multi-valve consists
of 60 sub-modules, with a nominal voltage of 5.0 kV, giving a
dc line rating of 150 kV. The complete system data is given
in Appendix I.
4.1 Controls of MMC-HVDC
The control system for the MMC-HVDC system consists of
lower level converter firing control blocks, and higher level
control blocks that regulate system level quantities such as
voltage, power or reactive power. These are described below.

REQ
[VC]NP*1
VEEQQ
[FP]NP*2

3.2 WPP Model

Wind Turbine
Generator (WTG)

33kV Cables

Full scale VSC dc link

Y
WTG
Transformer
Wind Turbine Generator (WTG) with Full Scale Converter (FSC)

Fig. 7 Aggregated WPP model

33kV Collector Bus

To verify the performance and validity of the MMC based

HVDC system and its control strategies in wind power plant
(WPP) connections, a comprehensive model was developed in
PSCAD/EMTDC simulation program for a 400MW off-shore
WPP, connected via MMC-HVDC to a strong receiving end
network as shown in Fig. 1. The WPP model comprises a pair
of aggregated wind turbine generators (WTG) connected to
the offshore WPP-grid with a back to back full scale VSC dc
link (FSC) as in Fig. 7. The FSC link provides the decoupling
from the offshore ac grid frequency enabling the wind turbine
generator to be efficiently controlled over a wide speed range.
The generator side converter of the FSC controls the
generator speed to produce the desired power (possibly by
following a maximum power tracking algorithm). Its reactive
power order is set to zero to provide unity power factor. The
WPP-grid side FSC link converters real power order is
regulated to maintain a constant dc link voltage, and the
reactive power order can be externally specified. In order to
simplify the model, the FSC converter was represented by an
averaged model [14], and the turbine/generator represented by
a first order transfer function.

1) Basic Converter Firing Control:

In this controller, a sinusoidal reference having the required
magnitude, phase and frequency is converted into a multi-step
reference waveform which can be used to determine the
corresponding level order signal. The value of level order
signal reveals the required number of capacitor voltage steps
to be added to form the multi-step waveform at any instant
and hence, the number of sub-modules, nU to be turned on in
the upper multi-valve. The waveforms for an MMC with 12
sub-modules per multi-valve are shown in Fig. 8.
(a)
1
(pu)

Fig. 6 Thvenin equivalent of a multi-valve of MMC

sinRef
dis Ref

0
-1
0

10

15

20

25

30

15
20
Time (ms)

25

30

(b)
12
6
0
0

10

Fig. 8(a) Sinusoidal reference and multi-step reference signals

and (b) Level order signal nU for an MMC with 12 submodules per multi-valve
Capacitor Voltage Balancing Controller
For proper operation of the MMC, each sub-modules
capacitor voltage must be kept equal to each other, at a value
Vc shown in Equation (2) [5]. Consider the sub-modules in the
upper multi-valve. When a sub-module is in the ON state
and carries a positive current (i.e.: ISM > 0 in Fig. 2), its
capacitors voltage increases. It decreases for ISM < 0. The
level order signal in Fig. 8(b) only gives the number nU sub-

modules, which are to be ON; however, it is the capacitor

voltage balancing algorithm that selects these nU sub-modules
from the N P sub-modules in the multi-valve. The capacitor
voltages are first sorted according to increasing voltage
magnitudes. If ISM > 0, the nU capacitors targeted for turn on
are the ones with the smallest voltages, because they will
charge to higher voltages in the ON period. Similarly, if
ISM<0, the nU sub-modules with the largest capacitor voltages
will be turned on. Note that as the sub-modules are series
connected, each sub-module in the multi-valve carries the
same current ISM. The same procedure is also applied to the
lower multi-valve. In this manner, the capacitor voltages can
be controlled in a narrow band [5].
2) WPP-side MMC controller
The VSC terminal of the HVDC system regulates the offshore
grids voltage and frequency as shown in Fig. 9. A voltage
controlled oscillator generates the reference angle from the
ordered frequency, and the d and q axis voltages are regulated
using PI controllers that generate d and q axis current orders
[15].
Collector
Bus

vs1(dq)*

1) Response a power order changes

The power order was decreased from rated power (400MW)
to half power and then restored back to the rated value. Fig.
11(a) shows the reference power order (for each turbinegenerator), the actual power output of one of the turbinegenerators and the power delivered to the onshore grid. The
MMC dc link responds to the power changes in step with the
generation change. Fig. 11(b) shows the response of onshore
MMC to a sudden change in reactive power order from 0
Mvar to 50 Mvar. It is achieved in 80 ms, without any effect
on real power, confirming the de-coupling of real and reactive
power control loops. During these transients, the dc link
voltage is regulated to 300 kV (Fig. 11(c)), and the sending
end ac phase voltage to 122.5 kV peak (Fig. 11(d)).
(a)

is1(abc)
vconv1(abc)*

abc/dq

dq/abc
1
vs1(dq)
is1(dq)
Current
controller
vconv1(dq)*

400
200
0
6

(MVar)

Several simulations were conducted to investigate the

operation of the above MMC converter based wind power
evacuation system.

is1

vs1(abc)
1

4.2 Simulation of System Operation

(MW)

vs1

f0*

MMC1

The reactive power can be directly ordered or indirectly

controlled to regulate ac voltage as shown in Fig. 10. In this
case, a Phase locked loop (PLL) is used to synchronize the
converter output voltage waveforms with the ac grid.

50
0
6

P wtg1
P ref
P ac2

(kV)
(kV)

MMC2
Bus2

is2, Qs2 vs2

vdc2

vs2(abc)

is2(abc)
C

abc/dq

PLL

Current
controller

PI

vconv2(abc)*

2
vs2(dq)

is2(dq)
2

dq/abc

vconv2(dq)*

(abc)

vs2

vdc2
vdc2*

10

Qref

8
(c)

10

8
(d)

10

300
0
6
120
0
6

Vd
Vq

8
Time (s)

10

Fig. 11 HVDC system responses for power order changes:

(a) turbine power and its reference, and dc link power, (b)
receiving end reactive power and its reference, (c) dc
voltage and (d) sending end ac voltage

Q2
- Q2*
+

PI

Qac2

Fig. 9 WPP side Converter Control

3) On-shore MMC controller

8
(b)

*
+ vs2

vs2

Fig. 10 Onshore grid side controller

The onshore converter-MMC2, inverter regulates the
voltage of the MMC dc link via control of the active power.

The above simulation shows that the overall system is able to

operate as intended in evacuating the offshore wind power.
2) Simulation on a offshore grid L-G fault
A line to ground single phase fault is applied on the 33 kV
collector bus (point A in Fig. 1) at 20 ms. It is cleared 150 ms
later at 170 ms. The fault current, off-shore grid side ac
voltage (at bus M1 in Fig. 1), power, and dc voltage are
shown in Fig. 12. As seen in Fig. 12(c), the dc power recovers
to within 90% of its pre-fault value in 40 ms (at 210 ms) after

(a)

(c)

30

(MW)

(kA)

400
0
-30
0

50

100 150 200

(b)

0.0

200 400 600 800

(d)

350

(kV)

(kV)

100
0

300

-100
0

50 100 150 200

Time (ms)

250
0

200 400 600 800

Time (ms)

Fig. 12 System responses during a L-G fault, applied for

150ms on phase A at 20ms; (a) fault current, (b)
collector side bus voltage, (c) real power fed to dc link,
and (d) MMC1 and MMC2 dc voltages
fault clearance, and reaches steady state in approximately 200
ms (at 370 ms) after fault clearance. The dc voltage in Fig. 12
(d) also recovers within 200ms after fault clearance. The prefault portion of the ac bus voltage waveform shown in Fig. 12
(b) is sinusoidal; thereby indicating that filters are not needed
with the MMC topology.

5 Conclusion
A typical application of MMC based HVDC transmission
system was presented. The wind power plant was modelled as
an aggregated system connected to the offshore grid. An
accurate Thvenin equivalent model for the converter was
used to simulate the MMC on an electro-magnetic transient
simulation program. Several simulations were carried out to
demonstrate the behaviour of the MMC based HVDC system
in WPP connections. The MMC topology can be effectively
used to transmit power generated by the offshore wind
turbine-generators. The ability to operate the converter
without filters is a distinct advantage in WPP systems to
accomplish the compact design requirement.

Appendix I
TABLE A1
PARAMETERS OF MMC-BASED HVDC SIMULATION SYSTEM
Offshore grid
VBUS1(L-L) = 230 kV
LP1 = 0.0193 H
Transformer 1
S = 445 MVA
Ratio = 150/150 kV
XTF1 = 12 %
DC filter
DC rated voltage
DC cable

Onshore grid
VBUS2(L-L) = 150 kV
LP2 = 0.0193 H
SCR = 25
Transformer 2
S = 445 MVA
Ratio = 150/400 kV
XTF2 = 12 %
DC System
C = 35.5F
Vdc = 150 kV
Rdc = 14m/km
Ldc = 0.112mH/km
Cdc = 0.28F/km
Length = 200km

References
[1] World Wind Energy Report 2009, World Wind Energy
Association (WWEA), Available at: www.wwindea.org.
[2] S. V. Bozhko, R. Blasco-Gimenez, R. Li, J. C. Clare, and
G. M. Asher, Control of offshore DFIG-based wind
farm grid with line-commutated HVDC connection,
IEEE Trans. on Energy Convers., vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 71
78, Mar. 2007.
[3] W. L. Kling, R. L. Hendriks, and J. H. den Boon,
Advanced transmission solutions for offshore wind
farms, IEEE-PES General Meeting-Conversion and
Delivery of Electrical Energy in the 21st Century, 2008.
[4] N. M. Kirby, L. Xu, M. Luckett, and W. Siepmann,
HVDC transmission for large offshore wind farms,
Power Eng. J., vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 135141, 2002.
[5] R. Marquardt and A. Lesnicar, A new modular voltage
source inverter topology, EPE'03, Toulouse, 2003.
[6] P. Boonchiam and N. Mithulananthan, Diode-clamped
multilevel voltage source converter for medium voltage
dynamic voltage restorer, ESD2006 conf., Phuket,
Thailand, 2006.
[7] J. Rodrguez, J. S. Lai, and F. Z. Peng, Multilevel
inverters: A survey of topologies, controls, and
applications, IEEE Trans. on Industrial Electronics, vol.
49, no. 4, pp. 724-738, Aug. 2002.
[8] D. Retzmann and K. Uecker, Benefits of HVDC &
FACTS for Sustainability and Security of Power
Supply, Powerafrica Conference and Exposition,
Johannesburg, Jul. 2007.
[9] S. P. Teeuwsen, Simplified Dynamic Model of a
Voltage-Sourced Converter with Modular Multilevel
Converter design, IEEE/PES Power Systems
Conference and Exposition, Mar. 2009.
[10] U. N. Gnanarathna, A. M. Gole, and R. P. Jayasinghe,
Efficient Modeling of Modular Multi-Level HVDC
Converters (MMC) on Electromagnetic Transient
Simulation Programs, accepted (July 2010) for
publication in the IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery
[11] K. Strunz and E. Carlson, Nested Fast and Simultaneous
Solution for Time-Domain Simulation of Integrative
Power-Electric and Electronic Systems, IEEE Trans. on
Power Delivery, vol. 22, pp. 277287, Jan. 2007.
[12] Users Guide: Comprehensive Resource for EMTDCTransient Analysis for PSCAD Power System
Simulation, Manitoba HVDC Research Centre,
Winnipeg, Canada, Apr. 2005.
[13] H.W. Dommel, Digital computation of Electromagnetic
Transients in Single and Multi-phase Networks, IEEE
Trans. PAS, vol. PAS-88, no. 4, pp. 388-399, Apr. 1969.
[14] H.Ouquelle, L. A. Dessaint, S. Casoria, "An average
value model-based design of a deadbeat controller for
VSC-HVDC transmission link," PES General Meeting,
2009. IEEE, vol., no., pp.1-6, 26-30 July 2009.
[15] L. Xu, B. W. Williams and L. Yao, "Multi-terminal

DC transmission systems for connecting large

offshore wind farms," PES General Meeting Conversion and Delivery of Electrical Energy in the
21st Century, 2008 IEEE, pp. 1-7, 2008.

P.9

U. N. Gnanarathna, S. K. Chaudhary and A. M. Gole, Multilevel

Modular Converter for VSC-HVDC Transmission Applications:
Control and Operational Aspects, in Proc. of the 16th National Power
Systems Conference, NPSC 2010. Osmania University, 2010. pg. 405410

Multilevel Modular Converter for VSC-HVDC

Transmission Applications: Control and Operational
Aspects
Udana N. Gnanarathna, Aniruddha M. Gole

Sanjay K. Chaudhary

Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering

University of Manitoba
Winnipeg, Canada
udana@ee.umanitoba.ca gole@ee.umanitoba.ca

Dept. of Energy Technology

Aalborg University
Aalborg, Denmark
skc@et.aau.dk

Abstract Control methods for a new class of converter, the

multilevel modular converter (MMC), recently introduced for
HVDC transmission are discussed. The paper discusses
converter-level controls including firing pulse generation and
capacitor voltage balancing. It also covers higher level controls
for incorporating the converter into a larger power network, with
a weak ac receiving end. The performance behavior is studied
using electromagnetic transients simulation.
Keywords-Voltage Source Convert (VSC), Multilevel Modular
Converter (MMC), HVDC Transmission, Weak ac networks

I.

INTRODUCTION

Voltage sourced converter (VSC) based HVDC systems

exhibit many attractive features over the conventional line
commutated converter (LCC) based systems in high voltage
high power applications [1]. These unique features such as
independent control of active and reactive power [2], operation
in weak ac systems [3], black start capability [4], and multi
terminal connection [5] have led to their increased adoption in
modern schemes. Till recently, two-level or three-level VSC
topologies were used for HVDC transmission applications,
with pulse-width modulation (PWM) control to reduce the
lower harmonic content. The ratings were typically limited to
below 400 MW because of the higher switching losses inherent
in such topologies.
Numerous multilevel topologies and modulation strategies
have been introduced for machine drive applications [6]-[8].
Diode clamped multilevel converters [6] [7] synthesize a
stepped ac waveform resembling a sine wave, by stacking fixed
magnitude voltage steps on top of each other. This topology
typically has lower losses than two level PWM converters.
However, the number of levels has been limited to 3 (in HVDC
applications) due to the circuit complexity. Also capacitor
voltage balancing is a critical and challenging issue.
The recently initiated modular multilevel converter (MMC)
is a major step forward in VSC converter technology for
HVDC transmission [9]. This topology is designed to make
lower switching frequency, avoid connecting the devices in
series. The modular structure easily scales to higher voltage

and power levels, with the addition of more modules. A power

rating of 1 GW and above now becomes possible. Although the
MMC topology has been presented in earlier literature [9],
[10], the discussion on control methods is sparse. This paper
discusses control approaches and investigates their
performance using electromagnetic transients (EMT)
simulation. The paper also investigates the control and
performance of a HVDC transmission scheme feeding to a
weak ac system.
II.

MODULAR MULTILEVEL CONVERTER TOPOLOGY

A. Circuit Structure of Modular Multilevel Converter

The basic building block of the MMC converter is the submodule shown in Fig. 1, which consists of two IGBT switches
T1 and T2 and a capacitor C. In normal operation, exactly one
switch (T1 or T2) is ON at any instant, giving a sub-module
output voltage of Vc or 0 (1):
VOUT (t )

VC T1 -ON, T2 -OFF

T1 -OFF, T2 -ON
0

(1)

When the sub-module voltage is VC, it is said to be in the

ON state, and when it is zero, it is considered to be OFF.
B. Output Voltage Waveform Synthesis
The single phase block diagram of the MMC (modular
multi-level converter) is shown in Fig. 2. The MMC phase
includes upper and lower multi-valves, each with a number (N)
of submodules (SMj). The number N is chosen based on the dc
voltage rating (Vd) and individual sub-module rating (VC).

High speed bypass

switch

T1
IOUT
C

VOUT

T2

Fig. 1. Sub-module of MMC converter

Supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council
(NSERC) of Canada, IRC Program

Vc

sub-modules in the multi-valve. The capacitor voltages on the

remaining sub-modules (and hence the step height of the
waveform) is now slightly larger as the number of sub-modules
available for generating the waveform is reduced.

Multi-valve
SM1

VC,T1

SM2

VC,T2

SMN

VC,TN

IMV,T
IMV,B

Vd

Vd/2

SM1

VC,B1

SM2

VC,B2

SMN

VC,BN

VA0

Vd/2

Fig. 2. Phase module of an MMC scheme for an N-level arrangement

Thus, this modular structure can be scaled for different voltage

and power levels [9]. By controlling the ON/OFF state of the
sub-modules, the output voltage waveform, VA0, can be
synthesized to track a given sinusoidal voltage reference Vref as
shown in Fig. 3.
1

( pu )

Vref
VA0

0.5
0

45

 0.5

90

135

180

225

270

315

Fig. 3: Reference and output waveforms for MMC with 8 sub-modules

per multi-valve

The reference Vref is compared with N discrete equidistant

quantization thresholds (see Fig.4, top left). The number of
sub-modules NU and N L required to be ON in the upper and
lower multi-valves respectively is thus determined as:
round (Vref N )

NU

N  NL

(2)

Here it is assumed that Vref is 1, when output voltage is at

its maximum possible value of Vd / 2 . With the above
waveform synthesis method at any given instant, the full dc bus
voltage appears across NU  N L N sub-modules [9]. Hence,
since all capacitor voltages are required to be the same, each
must be equal to:

Vc

Vd

The function of this capacitor balancing algorithm is to

generate firing pulses for each sub-module in a multi-valve by
maintaining the sub-modules capacitor voltages at a value,
given by equation (3). A table is created in which the capacitors
are ranked in order of increasing dc voltages. The table is
consulted when the quantization algorithm demands a step
change (i.e. change in NU and N L ).

360

Zt (deg)

1

NL

D. Capacitor Voltage Balancing

In Fig. 1, with T1 ON and T2 OFF, the capacitor voltage
increases or decreases depending on the direction of submodule current IOUT being positive or negative. The capacitor
voltage remains unchanged with T2 ON and T1 OFF. Hence,
during the operation, the OFF sub-modules maintain constant
capacitor voltages, whereas the ON sub-modules experience
an increase or decrease of their capacitor voltages. Hence a
capacitor voltage balancing algorithm is required. Note that the
output waveform synthesis algorithm merely states that NU
and N L sub-modules are ON in the upper and lower multivalves. Assuming all sub-module capacitors to have equal
voltages provides a measure of freedom in selecting the
individual ON state sub-modules, which are utilized in the
capacitor voltage balancing algorithm described below.

(3)

Consider the upper multi-valve which requires NU submodules to be ON. If the current IOUT is positive (see Fig. 1),
then turning on a sub-module will result in capacitor voltage
increase. In that case, the NU sub-modules ranked lowest in
voltage are turned on, so that they can be re-charged. If IOUT is
negative, then the highest-voltage sub-modules are turned on,
so that their voltages may discharge. The same is done for the
lower multi-valve.
The capacitor voltages of sub-modules can be controlled in
a narrow band by applying this methodology for all three
phases [10]. The overall control structure for the converter,
including the waveform quantizer and the capacitor balancing
controller is shown schematically in Fig. 4.
III.

-1

Vref

Quantizer
Capacitor
voltages

C. Redundant Sub-modules
Redundant sub-modules are provided in each multi-valve.
If a sub-module fails during operation, it is quickly removed
from the circuit by operating the high-speed bypass switch [11]
shown in Fig. 1. Normal operation can continue with the
remaining sub-modules in the multi-valve. The waveform
synthesis algorithm discussed in the previous sub-section is
informed of the failure and now only controls the remaining

OPERATIONAL ASPECTS OF MMC CONVERTER

A detailed model of the single phase MMC converter was

developed in the electro-magnetic transients simulation
program PSCAD/EMTDC.

Vc1
Vc2
VcN

NU,NL
Capacitor voltage
balancing

Firing
pulses
FP1
FP2

IMV
0

Direction check
Fig. 4. Firing pulse control algorithm of MMC

FPN

Fig. 5(a) shows the reference sinusoidal waveform, and

each subsequent graph shows the waveform attained with
increasing number of sub-modules ranging from 2 to 96. The
sub-module capacitance was set to a high value so that the
change of capacitor voltage in a conduction interval is
negligible. As the number of sub-modules is increased, the
steps become smaller, and the waveform becomes closer to that
of the reference sine wave.
Standard IEEE 519 recommends two indices for voltage
distortion [12]. The individual harmonic distortion Dn is the
magnitude of the nth harmonic as a percentage of the
fundamental. The total harmonic distortion is the root mean
square of all harmonics expressed as a percentage of the
fundamental. A commonly used limit for these in HVDC
systems is Dn less than 1% for each harmonic, and THD less
than 2%, considering all harmonics up to the 50th. Fig. 6 shows
the maximum Dn and THD values for an ideal MMC
waveform, with the above thresholds indicated, as the number
of sub-modules per multi-valve is increased. It is quite clear
that with more than 22 sub-modules per multi-valve, all
harmonic limits are satisfied. The MMC with this number of
sub-modules can therefore be operated without any ac filters,
which is a significant advantage. Actual MMC installations use
a larger number of modules, because they operate at high dc
voltages, and the additional modules reduce the voltage stress
per module.
B. Perfomance of Capacitor Voltage Balancing Controller
In this section, the performance of capacitor balancing
controller, as described in section II-D, is presented by
disabling and enabling the control operation for different time
intervals. First, the controller was disabled at 0.5 s. Capacitor
voltages start to diverge from their nominal value. The

Dnmx (%)
THD (%)

12

16

20

24

20

24

1
28

10
5

2
4

12

16

28

Fig 6. Max. individual harmonic and THD variations with no. of levels
(a)
40
20
0
0

0.5
(i)

(b)
100
0
-100

1
Time (s)

1.5

(ii)

100

Vout (kV)

A. Multi-level AC Waveform of MMC

The output voltage waveforms obtained for different
number of sub-modules in a phase unit are presented in Fig. 5.
In these simulations, the dc bus voltage (pole-pole) is Vd =
240kV.

Vc (kV)

10
20
30
40
50
Time (ms)
Fig. 5. a) Sinusoidal reference waveform and converter output
voltage waveforms when number of sub-modules per multi-valve is;
b) 2, c) 6, d) 12, e) 24, f) 48, and g) 96

10

Vout (kV)

(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)

120
-120
120
-120
120
-120
120
-120
120
-120
120
-120
120
-120
0

-100
2.2

1.34 1.35 1.36

2.21 2.22 2.23
Time (s)
Time (s)
Fig. 7. a) Capacitor voltages in 2 candidate sub-modules showing effect
of enabling/disabling voltage balancing control. b) MMC output voltage
(i) without and (ii) with voltage balancing in operation.

capacitor voltages of two sub-modules that show the widest

deviations are shown Fig. 7 (a). These deviations are caused
by the different capacitor conduction (charging or discharging)
intervals which depend on the sub-modules duty cycle. The
sub-modules having the longest ON period either overcharge
or undercharge based on the current direction.
However, when the balancing controller is re-enabled at
1.5s, the capacitor voltages were quickly restored to their
nominal values. The corresponding converter output voltage
waveforms around the 1.33s mark with capacitor voltage
balancing disabled, and at the 2.2s mark with voltage
balancing enabled are shown in Fig. 5 (b). In this simulation,
there are 12 sub-modules in a multi-valve. The above results
show that the voltage balancing controller is rapidly able to
equalize the capacitor voltages.
C. Impact of Capaacitor Size on Performance
A smaller size for the sub-module capacitance results in
more dc-side ripple voltage. If the ripple is too large, it can
distort the ac side voltage waveform significantly. Fig. 8
shows the variation of a typical sub-module capacitor voltage
depending on the size of capacitance used. In order to perunitize the capacitor size, it is customary to express it in the
form of the total capacitor energy stored at rated dc voltage for
all capacitors in the converter, to the complex power rating of
the converter as shown in (4).

800ms

400ms

200ms

100ms

40ms

(pu)

1.02
1.00
0.98
0.96
0

20
30
40
50
Time (ms)
Fig. 8. Average capacitor voltage fluctuation for different capacitance
values of 6-level MMC

C pu

10

(0.5CVc 2 )(6 N )
2

Pc  Qc

(4)

Here C is the sub-module capacitance, VC, its voltage, Pc

and Qc , the converters rated real and reactive powers, and N
the number of sub-modules. The number 6 in (4) arises from
the fact that there are 6 multi-valves with N sub-modules per
valve. With this definition, the unit of C pu is the second.

(g)

(f)

(e)

(d)

(c)

(b)

(a)

The resulting ac output voltage for different sub-module

capacitance values (from 8 ms to 800 ms) for a 6-level MMC
is shown in Fig. 9. For a capacitance value 80 ms or larger
(Fig. 9(a to e)), the waveform is essentially the same.
However, capacitance values smaller than 80 ms (e.g. Fig. 9(f
and g) introduce distortion. These results show that the MMC
capacitor should be larger than 80ms.
1
-1
1
-1
1
-1
1
-1
1
-1
1
-1
1
-1
0

10

20
30
Time (ms)

40

50

Fig. 9. Converter output voltage waveforms for different capacitance

values; a) 800 ms, b) 400 ms, c) 200 ms, d) 100 ms, e) 80 ms, f) 40 ms, g)
8 ms

IV.

CHALLENEGES IN MODELLING MMC

In the MMC, the number of sub-modules is very large. Each

of the N sub-modules of the 6 multi-valves in a three phase
MMC contains 2 switch elements, giving a total of 12 N
switches per converter. With 100 sub-modules, this gives 1200
switches per converter. Systems of this size pose a significant
computational burden in terms of CPU time to electromagnetic

transient (EMT) programs.

To overcome this computational effort of MMC simulation
in EMT simulation programs, a recently introduced model
based on the Nested Fast and Simultaneous Solution [13]
approach was used [14]. This method represents the converter
power electronics as a time-varying Thvenin's equivalent that
is able to maintain the same level of accuracy as brute-force
EMT simulation, but with much reduced computation time.
Unlike averaged models [15], the model used here is still able
to represent individual sub-module details, and can simulate
phenomena such as sub-module failure or capacitor voltage
balancing.
V.

SIMULATION OF A MMC BASED HVDC SYSTEM

In this section, a point to point MMC based HVDC

transmission system; feeding to a weak ac network has been
simulated. The dc link is connected to the two ac systems. The
sending end ac system has a short circuit ratio (SCR) of 2.5,
and is relatively strong. The receiving end system is weak,
with an SCR of 1.0. The simulated system is schematically
shown in Fig. 10. In the simulation, MMC1 acts as the rectifier
and MMC2 acts as the inverter. The dc system is rated at
400MW, 200kV. Each MMC has 100 sub-modules in a
multi-valve; hence the sub-modules were rated at 4.0kV.
As there is a total of 2400 switches in the two converters, it
is practically impossible to model the converters using the
traditional approach using individual switches in EMT
programs. Therefore, computationally fast model discussed in
section IV, was used for modelling the system [14].
A. HVDC System Controls
The direct control strategy [16] was selected for the higher
level controllers of the system. The controllers output the
desired phase shift angle  and the magnitude M of the
reference signal (Vref). The reference for measuring the angle 
is the ac converter bus-bar (Bus 1 for MMC1 and Bus 2 for
MMC2). The angle of this bus voltage is tracked by a phaselocked loop (PLL) which provides the synchronizing
reference. The details of the individual rectifier and inverter
side controllers are given below.
1) Rectifier Side Controller
The MMC1, rectifier is responsible for regulating the dc
side voltage and ac side Bus1 voltage as shown in Fig. 11.
Proportional-integral controllers derive magnitude, M1, and
phase, 1, of the reference waveform to regulate the ac bus-bar
voltage and the dc bus voltage respectively. Using these, three
phase reference waveforms are generated and sent to the firing
control system shown in Fig. 4. as described in section II-D.
2) Inverter Side Controller
At the inverter, a similar control strategy is used, with the
difference that the magnitude, M2, and phase, 2, of the
reference waveform are the outputs of proportional-integral
controllers that regulate ac bus voltage and real power
respectively, as shown in Fig. 12.

Rdc

Ldc
C

Rdc

Ldc
C

Cdc

L1 Bus1 Bus1A

Bus2 L2

Y 
R1

 Y

TF1

R1'

AC1
SCR=2.5

TF2

MMC1
(Rectifier)

Cdc

C
Ldc

Rdc

Rdc

R2
R2'
AC2
SCR = 1.0

MMC2
(Inverter)

Ldc

Fig. 10. MMC based HVDC system

MMC1

Bus1

vs1
vs1*
vdc1*

+
+-

vdc1

MMC2

Bus2
P2

vdc1
vref1(abc)*
PI

Sinusoidal
M1
reference
generator
PI
1
1
PLL
vs1(abc)

vref2(abc)*

CONCLUSION

The multi-level modular converter is an attractive topology

for HVDC operation. The paper presented the basic control
approach for use of this device in HVDC transmission
applications. Through calculation and EMT simulation, it was
shown that the MMC can provide an essentially sinusoidal
waveform that meets accepted guidelines of harmonic content,
without the need for ac filters when the number of submodules per multi-valve exceeds 22.
A mechanism for voltage balancing is essential and one

-+
P2

vs2*
P2*

Fig. 12. Inverter side converter controller

(MW, MVar)

(a)
400

Pac2Ref
P2
Q2

200
0
0

0.4

0.8
(b)

1.2

1.5

0.4

0.8
(c)

1.2

1.5

(kV)

116
115
114
0
100
(kV)

B. Response of HVDC System to Power Order Change

Fig. 13 shows waveforms for the above HVDC transmission
system where a power order change from full power (400
MW) to half power (200 MW) is applied at 0.4 s. The real and
reactive power at the receiving end are shown in Fig. 13 (a),
with the inverter side rms ac voltage and three phase bus
voltage waveforms shown in Figs. 13 (b) and (c) respectively.
From the simulation, it can be seen that when the load is
reduced, the voltage is immediately controlled to the rated
value of 115kV and no significant overvoltage is seen, even
though the inverter side ac system is weak. The control of
voltage is obtained by rapid control of the reactive power to
follow the real power change, as shown in the trace of reactive
power in Fig. 13 (a). The change in power to (to 90% of final
setting) is seen to be achieved in approximately 60 ms in Fig.
13(a). The converter output ac voltage waveforms are shown
during this transient and are indeed sinusoidal even though no
ac filters are used.

PI
Sinusoidal
M2
reference
generator
PI
2
2
PLL
vs2(abc)

Fig. 11. Rectifier side converter controller

VI.

vs2

0
-100
0.38

0.4

0.42

0.44 0.46
Time (s)

0.48

0.5

Fig. 13. Waveforms during the inclusion of a redundant sub-module; a)

converter output voltage, b) output current, c) defective sub-modules
capacitor voltage, and e) incoming sub-modules voltage

possible method for doing this was described and

demonstrated through the use of simulation. The capacitor
voltage balancing controller was rapidly able to restore
balanced capacitor voltages.
The simulation model of the point to point HVDC system
showed that the MMC works well in a full-scale application. It
can respond rapidly to power order changes while maintaining
ac and dc voltages at their desired reference values. Also, like
other VSC converters, it is able to operate satisfactorily into
very weak ac networks (SCRs of the order of 1.0).

REFERENCES
[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

M. P. Bahrman, J. G. Johansson, B. A. Nilsson, Voltage source

converter transmission technologies The right fit for the application,
IEEE PES General Meeting, vol. 3, pp. 1840-1847, Jul. 2003.
H.F. Latorre, M. Ghandhari, L. Sder, Active and reactive power
control of a VSC-HVdc, Electric Power Systems Research, vol. 78,
issue 10, pp. 1756-1763, Oct. 2008.
C. Du, VSC-HVDC for industrial power systems, Thesis for the
degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Chalmers University of Technology,
Gteborg, Sweden 2007.
Y. Jiang-Hafner; H. Duchen, M. Karlsson, L. Ronstrom, B.
Abrahamsson, HVDC with voltage source converters - a powerful
standby black start facility, IEEE/PES Transmission and Distribution
Conference and Exposition 2008, pp. 1-9.
T. M. Haileselassie, M. Molinas, and T. Undeland, Multi-Terminal
VSC-HVDC System for Integration of Offshore Wind Farms and Green
Electrification of Platforms in the North Sea, Nordic Workshop on
Power and Industrial Electronics, June 9-11, 2008.
A. Nabae, I. Takahashia, and H. Akagi, New Neutral-Point-Clamped
PWM Inverter, IEEE Trans. on Industry Applications, vol. IA-17, no.
5, pp. 518-523, Sep./Oct. 1981.
J. S. Lai, and F. Z. Peng, Multilevel Converters-A New Breed of Power
Converters, IEEE Trans. on Industry Applications, vol. 32, no. 3, pp.
509-517, May/Jun. 1996.

[8]

[9]
[10]

[11]

[12]
[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

J. Rodrguez, J. S. Lai, and F. Z. Peng, Multilevel inverters: A survey

of topologies, controls, and applications, IEEE Trans. on Industrial
Electronics, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 724-738, Aug. 2002.
R. Marquardt and A. Lesnicar, A new modular voltage source inverter
topology, EPE'03, Toulouse, France, 2003.
A. Lesnicar and R. Marquardt, An Innovative Modular Multilevel
Converter Topology Suitable for a Wide Power Range, IEEE Power
Tech Conference Proc., Bologna, vol. 3, Jun. 2003
B. Gemmell, J. Dorn, D. Retzmann, D. Soerangr, Prospects of
Multilevel VSC Technologies for Power Transmission, IEEE T&D
Conference and Exposition, 21st - 24th April 2008, Chicago/USA
IEEE Std 519-1992, IEEE Recommended Practices and Requirements
for Harmonic Control in Electric Power Systems.
K. Strunz and E. Carlson, Nested Fast and Simultaneous Solution for
Time-Domain Simulation of Integrative Power-Electric and Electronic
Systems, IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, vol. 22, pp. 277287, Jan.
2007.
U. N. Gnanarathna, A. M. Gole, and R. P. Jayasinghe, Efficient
Modeling of Modular Multi-Level HVDC Converters (MMC) on
Electromagnetic Transient Simulation Programs, paper no. TPWRD00216-2010.R1 accepted (July 2010) for publication in the IEEE Trans.
on Power Delivery.
S. P. Teeuwsen, Simplified Dynamic Model of a Voltage-Sourced
Converter with Modular Multilevel Converter design, IEEE/PES
Power Systems Conference and Exposition, Mar. 2009.
CIGRE, SC B4 HVDC and Power Electronics, WG B4-37, VSC
Transmission, Cigr Technical Brochure, No. 269, April 2005

P.10

U. N. Gnanarathna, A. M. Gole, A. D. Rajapakse, and S. K.

Chaudhary, Loss Estimation of Modular Multi-Level Converters using
Electro-Magnetic Transients Simulation IPST 2011, Delft, The
Netherlands.

Loss Estimation of Modular Multi-Level Converters

using Electro-Magnetic Transients Simulation
Udana N. Gnanarathna, Aniruddha M. Gole, Athula D. Rajapakse, and Sanjay K. Chaudhary
AbstractThe power losses of the Modular Multi-level
Converter (MMC), recently introduced for HVDC transmission
are evaluated in this paper. The paper discusses the two
capacitor voltage balancing algorithms that have been proposed
for the MMC operation based on; (a) ranking of capacitor
voltage values and (b) pulse-width modulation (PWM) and the
impact of control methods for the MMC on the power losses is
also studied. The paper also compares the operating losses of
MMC converter with the two-level conventional voltage sourced
converters (VSC). In this paper, all type of converters power
losses are estimated using a recently developed electro-magnetic
transients simulation (EMT) model for accurate representation
of switching losses and thermal performance in power electronic
systems.
Keywords: Converter Power Losses, Modular Multi-level
Converter (MMC), Voltage Sourced Converters (VSC), Electromagnetic Transients (EMT) Simulations.

I. INTRODUCTION

HE newer voltage-sourced converter based HVDC (VSCHVDC) technology is becoming more competitive for
intermediate power levels up to a few hundred MW [1]. In
comparison with conventional line commutated thyristor
based converters (LCC), VSC-HVDC transmission systems
exhibit enhanced technical features that can cope with the
requirements of modern power transmission systems. The
VSC converter can operate in weak or even passive ac systems
and does not require reactive power support from the ac grid.
And also, VSC-HVDC system can independently control
active and reactive power exchange with the ac system [2].
Till recently, VSC-HVDC systems have been based on
two- or three-level technology which enables two or three
different voltage levels to the ac terminal of the converter. As
a result, high and steep level changes are applied at the
converter ac terminal hence extensive filtering measures are
required [3]. In order to lower harmonic distortion, pulsewidth modulation (PWM) techniques are used in voltage
synthesis whereas, most of these methods require a very high
switching frequency to obtain the very advantage of improved
harmonic performance. This causes considerable power losses
and eventually, reduces the total efficiency and substantially
increases the total cost of the VSC-HVDC project [4].
Instead of two- or three-level technique, the use of multilevel converters can significantly reduce the switching losses
[3]. These converters synthesize a stepped ac waveform
resembling a sine wave, by stacking fixed magnitude voltage
steps on top of each other. A newly introduced multi-level
converter for high voltage application is the modular multilevel converter (MMC). The VSC based MMC was initially
developed using H-bridge modules for STATCOM

applications [5].
The MMC topology has been recently emerged as a
promising technique for VSC based high voltage, high power
transmission systems after the introduction of AC/DC
conversion with half IGBT/diode bridges [6]. This topology is
designed to avoid connecting the devices in series that has
been a problem of most of other multi-level topologies. The
MMC consists of a stack of identical sub-modules, each with
two IGBT switches and a dc capacitor as shown in Fig. 1(a).
By suitably controlling the two switches in the sub-modules, a
multi-level ac voltage waveform can be synthesized as shown
Fig. 1(b). As the multi-level converter output voltage can
assume several discrete levels, the harmonic content is low
hence, the filters are not required. An inclusion of more submodules increases the voltage and power ratings of the
converter. The topology is designed to make low voltage
stresses on each switching devices. Therefore, MMC can
conceptually exploit the potential of conventional (two- or
three-level) VSC-HVDC schemes to the best.
Each sub-module capacitor voltage provides one step in the
resulting multi-level ac waveform. Therefore, it is required to
maintain the capacitor voltages at a constant value using an
internal control unit. The function of this capacitor voltage
balancing controller is to generate firing pulses for each submodule to maintain the sub-modules capacitor voltage at a
constant value. Therefore, the number of IGBT switching
operations required in a power cycle is mainly determined by
the capacitor voltage balancing algorithm. Hence, the IGBT
switching loss, which is a major contributor to the converter
power loss, depends heavily on the voltage balancing
algorithm.
An accurate estimation of converter losses is an important
step in the thermal management system design [7]. One of the
SM1
SM2

IC
T1
C

SMN
van

Vd

SM1
SM2

Power sub-module

van
Vd/2
t

SMN
Multi-valve
(a)

VC

VSM T2

-Vd/2
(b)

Fig. 1. (a) Schematic diagram of an MMC phase unit and (b) MMC
output waveform for 10 sub-modules per multi-valve (N=10).

methods used for estimating MMC switching losses is the

post-processing the results of time domain simulations [8]. If
the VSCs ac output waveforms are assumed to be ideal,
analytical estimation has also been used [9]. These methods
are well suited to estimate the overall converter efficiency.
However, they do not typically assess the converter losses
during the startup and other transients. This paper investigates
the operating losses of the MMC converter using a recently
developed approach [7] that considers only the pre- and postswitching voltage and current values, and estimates the waveshape between these instants using interpolation. Information
required to conduct the interpolation can be obtained from
datasheet values. The switching power loss is then readily
calculated by multiplying these estimated waveforms.
Using this approach, the MMCs losses can be estimated for
steady-state as well as transient and abnormal operating
conditions. The impact of control methods on the losses is also
investigated. The paper also compares the operating losses of
the MMC based systems with the more common two-level
VSC-based HVDC system.
II.

MODULAR MULTI-LEVEL CONVERTER TOPOLOGY

A. Output Voltage Synthesis

A phase unit of MMC consists of two; upper and lower
multi-valves, each with a number (N) of half bridges known as
submodules (SMj). The sub-module terminal voltage, VSM
can have either the capacitor voltage, VC or 0 depending on the
switching states of T1 and T2 (1):

V SM ( t )

V C ............... if T1 = O N and T2 = O FF

0 .................. if T1 = O FF and T 2 = O N

(1)

Therefore, the sub-module can make a step change to the

converter output voltage waveform when the sub-modules
terminal voltage is switched between VC and zero. Since there
are a number of sub-modules (typically more than a hundred)
in a phase unit, the firing of all switches should be properly
controlled to generate a multi-level ac voltage waveform as
shown Fig. 1(b) and this voltage synthesis mechanism is
described below.
When the sub-module voltage is VC, it is said to be in the
ON state, and when it is zero, it is considered to be OFF. If
the multi-valve has N number of sub-modules, then
converter can generate a phase voltage with (N+1) levels.
Considering the instantaneous level number of the converter
phase voltage is n(t) ( w h ere, 0 d n ( t ) d N ) and the number
of sub-modules; NU and NL w here, 0 d N U , N L d N required to
be ON in the upper and lower multi-valves respectively;
v an ( t )

> n ( t )  1@ * V C
Vd
2


w h ere N U

 N U * VC

Vd
2

 N L * VC

N  NL

With this method, the full dc bus voltage can be seen across
the total number  N N U  N L  of ON sub-modules. Thus,
since all capacitor voltages are required to be the same, each
must be equal to:
VC

Vd

(3)

B. Capacitor Voltage Balancing

The objective of this capacitor voltage balancing controller
is to generate firing pulses for each sub-module to maintain
the sub-modules capacitor voltage at a constant value as
given in (3). Two capacitor voltage balancing algorithms
proposed for the MMC operation based on; (a) ranking of
capacitor voltage values [11] and (b) pulse-width modulation
(PWM) [12] are discussed below.
(i) Capacitor Voltages Ranking Based Approach
The block diagram of this capacitor voltage balancing
control algorithm is shown in Fig. 2.
As discussed in section II-B, the total number of ON state
sub-modules is being varied from 0 to N during the generation
of one cycle of the converter output voltage waveform.
Therefore for a specified number of ON state sub-modules in
a multi-valve, there are different switching combinations
which are referred to as redundant switch states. In a
modular multi-level inverter, the redundant switch states are
groups of switch states that produce the same phase voltage,
providing all the capacitor voltages are equal in magnitude. As
shown in Fig. (2), when the quantizer demands the required
number of ON state sub-modules to the sub-module
selector, the duty of this unit is to select the most suitable
candidate sub-modules from the multi-valve. This property
being used by the sub-module selector for capacitor voltage
balancing approach is discussed in below.

SM1
Firing pulse
generator

NU
Sub-module
selector

(from the low er m ulti-valve)

(2)

TL

SM2
SM3

VC
SMN
LMV

I MV

NL

Upper multivalve

I MV

Quantizer

Sub-module
selector

Firing pulse
generator

(from the upper m ulti-valve)

TU

van

VC
TL

Lower multivalve

TU

Fig. 2. Block diagram of a MMC capacitor voltage balancing and firing

generation units.

The Sub-module selector creates a table in which the

capacitors are ranked in order of increasing dc voltages. The
table is consulted when the quantization algorithm demands a
step change (i.e. change in NU and NL). As in Fig. 1(a), when
T1 is ON and T2 is OFF, the capacitor voltage (VC) is
increasing or decreasing depending on the direction of current
across the capacitor (IC). If IC is positive, then the capacitor
voltage, VC is increasing and VC is decreasing when IC is
negative. However, instead of measuring the direction of
individual capacitor currents, the multi-valve current can be
used.
Consider the upper multi-valve which requires NU submodules to be ON. If the current IMV is positive (Fig. 2), then
turning on a sub-module will result in capacitor voltage
increase. In that case, the NU sub-modules ranked lowest in
voltage are turned ON, so that they can be re-charged. If IMV is
negative, then the highest-voltage sub-modules are turned ON,
so that their voltages may discharge. The same is done for the
lower multi-valve.
The capacitor voltages of sub-modules can be controlled in
a narrow band by applying this methodology for all three
phases [6], [13].
(ii) Multi-level Carrier-Based PWM
Multi-level carrier-based PWM uses N number
triangular carrier signals, which can be modified in phase
order to reduce the output voltage harmonic content. The
carrier is phase shifted by an angle equal to 2  l  1  S / N

of
in
lth
in

this modulation. By comparing a sinusoidal reference

waveform with the N carrier waveforms, the firing signals
are generated for the N sub-modules in the multi valve. Each
transition in the multi-level output from one level to next level
can be determined corresponding to the respective phase shift
in modulating signal and carrier.
Fig. 3(a) shows the modulation signal and two phase
shifted carrier signals for a 12 sub-modules per multi-valve
case. The modulation frequency index is equal to 2 in this
example. For the carrier waveforms in Fig. 3(a), the resultant
sub-module output voltage waveforms of an upper multi-valve
are shown in Fig. 3(b and c). This modulation technique
(a)

1
0

(b)

0.167
0

(c)

-1
0

0.167
0

(d)

0
1

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.01

0.02

0.03

III.

CONVERTER LOSS EVALUATION

The converter loss is contributed by the losses of switching

devices in three forms:
(i) Conduction
(ii) Off-state
(iii) Switching losses.
The conduction losses are computed in a straightforward
manner by multiplying the on-state voltage by the on-state
current. Similarly, off state losses are calculated using the
leakage current and device blocking voltage during the offstate. However, the calculation of switching losses is a
challenge, as the switching event occurs over a very short time
period (about 100-200 ns). Therefore, it is difficult to
accurately capture switching transients; particularly with the
several micro-second time-step used in typical electromagnetic transients (EMT) simulations of power electronic
systems. A recently introduced approach estimates the
switching period waveforms from the pre- and post- switching
voltages and currents and semiconductor datasheet
information without explicit simulation. The losses can then
be calculated by analytical integration of the estimated
waveforms, and have been shown to be relatively accurate [7].
A. Loss Evaluation Model
The loss evaluation approach used in this paper is
schematically presented in Fig. 4 [7]. The model has been
implemented in PSCAD/EMTDC simulations program. The
switch model available in the host program has been modified
to capture more parametric data which are input to the device
loss estimation model. The losses in the device are estimated
by observation of the pre- and post-switching currents and
voltages using the algorithm described in [10]. The equations
Device loss
model
Electrical
parameters

0.01

0.02

Electrical
network

0.01

0.02

Parameter
calculation

0.03

0
-1
0

produces an even distribution of power among sub-modules,

and this property can be used to equalize the sub-module
capacitor voltages. In Fig. 3(d), the converter output waveform
generated by phase shifted modulation is presented.
As discussed above, the number of IGBT switching
operations required in a power cycle is mainly determined by
the capacitor voltage balancing algorithm as it demands the
required number of ON and OFF state sub-modules at a
given moment. Hence, the switching loss, which is a major
contributor to the converter power loss, heavily depends on
the capacitor voltage balancing algorithm and the effect of
voltage balancing algorithm on the converter losses will be
discussed in a following chapter.

0.03

Fig. 3. Phase shifted carrier based PWM waveforms (a) Sinusoidal

reference and carrier, (b and c) Resultant sub-module output voltages,
and (d) MMC output voltage.

Switch
model
Operating
conditions

Model
parameters
Loss
estimation

Device
temperature
Ambient
Thermal conditions
path model
Power loss

Fig. 4. Block diagram of the device loss estimation model.

+
Tj
-

Cth1

Rthm

Cth2

PLc

Heat
Sink

+
TC
-

Cthm

Ta

Fig. 5. Equivalent thermal network of a semiconductor device.

B. MMC Loss Evaluation

The switching loss model developed in [7], [10] is
applicable to IGBT devices subject to hard switching which
are widely used in todays HVDC and FACTS (Flexible AC
Transmission Systems) devices. Therefore, this model can be
directly applied to estimate the power losses of MMC
converters. As the turn-on of the IGBTs (and hence, the turnon switching loss) is significantly affected by the reverse
recovery behavior of the freewheeling diode and the parasitic
inductances [7], the parasitic inductance values have a
significant influence on the switching losses. In this paper, the
same stray inductance for all switches has been used as this
value depends on the physical layout of the device/buses
which are symmetric in general.
Rdc

Rdc

Bus 2
L2

Cdc
Ldc

Rdc

Rdc

C
Ldc

Fig. 6. Inverter model of a HVDC system.

TF2
Inverter

R2'

25
15
0
0
20

R2
AC2

0.01

0.02

-20
0

0.03
P(MW)
Vrms(kV)

0.01

0.02

0.03
Vout(kV)

0
0.01

0.02

0.03
VC1(kV)

2.3
0
0

Y
VDC

0
0

Ldc

Cdc

VDC

PLOSS(MW)

0.23

(d)

Ldc

(i) Capacitor Voltages Ranking based Approach

Fig. 7 shows the resulting power loss and voltage
waveforms when the capacitor voltage ranking based method
described in dub-section II-B(i) is used as the voltage
balancing technique. As shown in Fig. 7(a), the converter
power loss estimated using the method discussed in section III
is equal to 0.23MWper converter or 0.46 MW considering
both the rectifier and inverter. This is 1.84% of the total
transmitted power. Fig. 7(b) shows the measured power and
rms voltage at bus 2 which are equal to the reference values.
The converter output voltage and top most sub-module
capacitance voltage (phase A) are shown in Fig. 7(c) and (d)
(a)

PLj

Rth2

A. MMC HVDC System

In this study, 24 sub-modules were used in each phase of
the converter, thus it gives a total of 144 IGBT/diode
semiconductor switches. Each phase of the converter was
modeled as shown in Fig. 1(a). As given in (3) the rated submodule voltage is equal to 2.33kV and hence, ST1500GXH24
from Toshiba, rated at 4.5kV, 1.5kA was chosen as the
IGBT/Diode switch [14]. The overvoltage limit for this
switching device is more than 93%.
The internal controls of the converters were used for
capacitor voltage balancing and generation of firing signals as
discussed in section II-B. Two separate simulations were
carried out for each capacitor voltage balancing algorithms.

(b)

Rth1

IGBT

IV. SIMULATION RESULTS

To evaluate the converter losses using the above approach,
the inverter operation of a point to point HVDC system was
simulated using the PSCAD/EMTDC program. The rectifier
operation was modeled as a constant dc source and a detailed
model for the inverter was used as shown in Fig. 6. The dc
systems ratings were 25MW and 14kV. The inverter
controller is responsible for regulating the power (25MW) and
ac voltage (15kV) at Bus 2. Two separate simulation cases
were developed for the MMC and conventional two-level
VSC converters for the comparison of resulting converter
losses.

(c)

used in [10] fill-in the intermediate sub-microsecond values

of voltage and current during the larger simulation time-step
of several microseconds. The parameters of these equations
are derivable from the pre- and postswitching voltages,
currents, and other physical data. Thus, the EMT type
simulation can be conducted with a larger time-step, with the
developed formula providing an estimate of the loss at each
switching.
These losses, estimated by Device loss model are the
inputs to a dynamic model of the heat-management system
(thermal path) which computes the temperature changes in
various parts of the system. From a thermal point of view, the
IGBT can be represented by a lumped parameter equivalent
circuit as in Fig. 5 [7]. While the power loss of the device is
PLj, the junction and case temperatures are Tj and Tc
respectively. Rthi and Cthi represent the thermal resistance and
capacitance of various layers of the semiconductor device. The
number of stages usually depends on the number of materially
different layers in the thermal path. The approach to extract of
these thermal parameters is discussed in [7] in details. In this
study, the heat sink model is not considered however, a
constant (ambient) temperature is input as the case
temperature assuming the heat sink maintains that constant
temperature value. Because the device losses are functions of
temperature, the computed device temperature is then used to
change the parameters of the switch loss model for the next
time-step.

0.01

0.02
Time (s)

0.03

Fig. 7. MMC waveforms using capacitor voltages ranking based

approach: (a) Inverter side power loss, (b) Power and rms voltage at
inverter side Bus 2, (c) Inverter output voltage, and (d) top-most submodule capacitor voltage of phase A.

PLOSS(MW)

(a)

respectively. Calculation also shows the total harmonic

distortion (THD) of the ac voltage waveform to be 6.06%.

0.45

(ii) Multi-level Carrier-Based PWM

PLOSS(MW)

0.22
0
0

0.01

25
15
0
0
20

(c)

(b)

(a)

0.02

P(MW)
Vrms(kV)

0.01

0.02

0.03
Vout(kV)

0
-20
0

(d)

0.03

0.01

0.02

0.03

2.3
VC1(kV)

0
0

0.01

0.02
Time (s)

0.03

Fig. 8. MMC waveforms using multi-level carrier based approach: (a)

Inverter side power loss (b) Power and rms voltage at inverter side Bus
2, (c) Inverter output voltage and (d) top-most sub-module capacitor
voltage of phase A.

B. Two-level VSC HVDC System

In this section, a similar loss estimation was carried out for
a 2-level VSC based HVDC converter, shown in Fig. 9. Tis
represented a group of series connected IGBT/diode switches.
To be comparable with the MMC based inverters, eight
ST1500GXH24 switches (Si) made the valve group (Ti) as
shown in Fig. 9. Thus dc voltage blocking capability for each

(b)

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

25
15
0
0
20

S2
T1

T3

T5

VA
VB
VC

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

T6

-20
0

Fig. 9. Two-level voltage sourced converter and valve group.

0.03

0.005

0.01

0.015 0.02
Time (s)

0.025

0.03

Fig. 10. Two-level VSC waveforms (a) Inverter side power loss, (b)
Power and rms voltage at inverter side Bus 2, and (c) Inverter output
voltage.

valve group is 36kV which is well above the margin of 28kV,

giving 28% of overvoltage margin.
The output voltage waveforms were synthesized using the
sinusoidal pulse width modulation (SPWM) with the carrier
frequency of 900 Hz. The converter losses were estimated
using the same approach discussed above and the resulting
waveforms are shown in Fig. 10. As seen in Fig. 10(a), the
converter loss is equal to 0.45MW per converter when 25MW
(Fig. 10(b)) is transmitted giving 3.60% total power loss for
the 2-level VSC HVDC scheme. Fig. 10(c) shows the
unfiltered converter output voltage (phase), which has a THD
value of 111%.
C. Results Summary
Table 1 summarizes the converter power losses and total
harmonic distortion for different approaches discussed above.
Two different MMC cases, one with 24 sub-modules, the other
with 48 sub-modules are considered. The losses of the MMC
for the two control methods (capacitor voltage ranking and
phase shifted PWM are essentially the same, and decrease
when a larger number of sub-modules is used. The loss for the
Table 1. Converter power losses comparison.

Converter
Type

MMC
(Capacitor
ranking)
MMC
(PWM)

T2

0.025

S8
T4

0.03

P(MW)
Vrms(kV)

Total
Power
(MW)

HVDC
system
power
loss
(%)

THD
(%)

/phase

Power
Loss/
Converter
(MW)

24

0.23

25

1.84

6.06

48

0.20

25

1.60

5.00

24

0.22

25

1.76

5.42

48

0.20

25

1.60

3.84

N/A

0.45

25

3.60

111

No. of
Submodules

S1
Vdc

0.025

Vout(kV)

(c)

The MMCs power loss was also estimated the multi-level

carrier based PWM technique as discussed in sub-section IIB(ii). The resulting power loss and voltage waveforms are
shown in Fig. 8. As shown in Fig. 8(a) and (b), when the
converter transmits 25MW, the resulting power loss for a
single converter is 0.22MW per converter, giving a total MMC
system loss of 1.76% of the rated power. The converter output
voltage and top most sub-module capacitance voltage (phase
A) are also shown in Fig. 8(c) and (d) respectively. Analyzing
the ac voltage waveform yields a THD figure of 5.42%. In this
test carrier frequency was chosen as 360Hz to assure the
fluctuation of sub-module capacitor voltages is well within the
range of 7.5%.

2-VSC
(SPWM)

2-level VSC is significantly higher- over twice that of the

MMC. The THD figures for the MMC are also significantly
lower than that for the 2-level VSC, and decrease even more
when the number of sub-modules is increased. For the MMC,
the phase shifted PWM method appears to have slightly less
THD than the capacitor voltage ranking method.
V. CONCLUSIONS
The converter power losses for MMC based HVDC
systems were evaluated using an approach that fills-in the
waveform shape in between simulation time-steps. The
simulation results show that when MMC converters are used,
the operating loss of the rectifier and inverter combined is less
than 2% of the rated HVDC power. The impact of control
methods for the MMC on the losses was also investigated by
considering two capacitor voltage balancing algorithms that
have been proposed for the MMC converters based on; (a)
ranking of capacitor voltage values and (b) pulse-width
modulation (PWM). The converter efficiency is in the same
range for both the algorithms but the PWM based method has
the advantage of a slightly lower harmonic distortion.
In comparison, the two-level VSC based HVDC system
losses are almost double that of a MMC based system,
indicating that the MMC based dc systems are significantly
more efficient.

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

VI. REFERENCES
[1]

[2]

J. Pan, R. Nuqui, K. Srivastava, T. Jonsson, P. Holmberg, and Y. J.

Hafner, AC Grid with Embedded VSC-HVDC for Secure and Efficient
Power Delivery, in Proc. IEEE Energy 2030, Nov. 2008, pp. 1-6.
F. Schettler, H. Huang, N. Christl, HVDC transmission systems using
voltage sourced converters design and applications, in Proc. 2000 IEEE
Power Engineering Society Summer Meeting, pp. 715 720.

[13]

[14]

D. Retzmann and K. Uecker, Benefits of HVDC & FACTS for

Sustainability and Security of Power Supply, presented at the
Powerafrica Conference and Exposition, Johannesburg, Jul. 2007.
G. Ding, M. Ding, and G. Tang, An innovative hybrid PWM
technology for VSC in application of VSC-HVDC transmission system,
in Proc. 2008 IEEE Canada Electrical and Power Energy Conference,
pp. 1-8.
M. Pereira, A. Zenkner, and A.L.P. de Oliveira: The new high ratings
active AC filters for HVDC and HVAC application presented at the XI
SEPOPE, Belm do Par, Brazil, Mar. 2009.
A. Lesnicar and R. Marquardt, An Innovative Modular Multi-level
Converter Topology Suitable for a Wide Power Range, in Proc. IEEE
Power Tech Conference, Bologna, vol. 3, Jun. 2003,
A. D. Rajapakse, A. M. Gole and P. L. Wilson, Electromagnetic
transient simulation models for accurate representation of switching
losses and thermal performance in power electronic systems, IEEE
Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 20, No.1, pp. 319-327, Jan. 2005.
M. M. C. Merlin, T. C. Green, P. D. Mitcheson, D. R. Trainer, D. R.
Critchley, and R. W. Crookes, A New Hybrid Multi-Level VoltageSourced Converter with DC Fault Blocking Capability, in Proc. 9th
International Conference on AC and DC Power Transmission, 2010.
R. Feldman, M. Tomasini, J. C. Clare, P. Wheeler, D. R. Trainer, and R.
S. Whitehouse, A Low Loss Modular Multi-level Voltage Source
Converter for HVDC Power Transmission and Reactive Power
Compensation, in Proc. 9th International Conference on AC and DC
Power Transmission, 2010.
A. D. Rajapakse, A. M. Gole, and P. L. Wilson, Approximate loss
formulae for estimation of IGBT switching losses through EMTP-type
simulations, presented at the 6th Int. Conf. Power System Transients,
Montreal, QC, Canada, Jun. 1923, 2005.
M. Dommaschk et al., Control of a Modular Converter with Distributed
Energy Storage Devices, U.S. Patent PCT/DE2006/002247, Mar. 18,
2010.
L. Dfns et al., Power Converter with Distributed Cell Control,
WIPO Patent PCT/EP2008/068222, Jul. 16, 2009.
U. N. Gnanarathna, A. M. Gole, and R. P. Jayasinghe, Efficient
Modeling of Modular Multi-Level HVDC Converters (MMC) on
Electromagnetic Transient Simulation Programs, paper no. TPWRD00216-2010.R1 accepted (July 2010) for publication in the IEEE Trans.
on Power Delivery.
Toshiba Silicon N- channel IEGT, ST1500GXH24 product specification
sheet, Mar. 2003.

P.11

S. K. Chaudhary, R. Teodorescu, P. Rodriguez, and A. M. Gole,

Negative Sequence Current Control in Wind Power Plants with VSCHVDC Connection. Submitted to IEEE Trans. of Sust. Energy on 24Jun-2011. [Manuscript ID TSTE-00344-2011]

IEEE PES Transactions on Sustainable Energy







1HJDWLYH6HTXHQFH&XUUHQW&RQWUROLQ:LQG3RZHU3ODQWV
ZLWK96&+9'&&RQQHFWLRQ



-RXUQDO ,(((7UDQVDFWLRQVRQ6XVWDLQDEOH(QHUJ\
0DQXVFULSW,' 767(
0DQXVFULSW7\SH 6SHFLDO,VVXH:LQG(QHUJ\
'DWH6XEPLWWHGE\WKH
-XQ
$XWKRU
&RPSOHWH/LVWRI$XWKRUV &KDXGKDU\6DQMD\'HSWRI(QHUJ\7HFKQRORJ\$DOERUJ8QLYHUVLW\
7HRGRUHVFX5HPXV$DOERUJ8QLYHUVLW\,QVWLWXWHRI(QHUJ\7HFKQRORJ\
5RGULJXH]3HGUR7HFKQLFDO8QLYHUVLW\RI&DWDORQLD(OHFWULFDO(QJLQHHULQJ
.MU3KLOLS9(67$6:,1'6<67(07HFKQRORJ\5 '
*ROH$QL8QLYHUVLW\RI0DQLWRED
*ULGLQWHUDFWLRQRIVXVWDLQDEOHHQHUJ\VRXUFHV7UDQVDFWLRQVRQ
7HFKQLFDO7RSLF$UHD 6XVWDLQDEOH(QHUJ\:LQGWXUELQHJHQHUDWRUV7UDQVDFWLRQVRQ
6XVWDLQDEOH(QHUJ\
$&'&SRZHUFRQYHUVLRQ3RZHUV\VWHPIDXOWV&XUUHQWFRQWURO'&SRZHU
.H\:RUGV WUDQVPLVVLRQ)DXOWFXUUHQWV3RZHUV\VWHPPRGHOLQJ&RQYHUWHUV3RZHU
V\VWHPFRQWURO3RZHUV\VWHPWUDQVLHQWV3RZHUV\VWHPVLPXODWLRQ




Page 1 of 10

IEEE PES Transactions on Sustainable Energy



1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

!\}

~~^|{`{
||
  ^
  ~!

 ~   



   

      ! 
 "
"  #$%  &$%'&+%  
 
" " <    " " "    #$%
  &$%'&+%  
 " "    

 
<
 " "
"  
!" " >"    

 
  &$%
'&+%    #$%  

   
"    "
< 
 

 !" " >"   " 
    " "  ?
   <        
!" " "       "  

   "   @"    &$%'&+%
"
<

 

{ 

{`{
 

 
 

!
{!^\
{^`{

^\?
|^\?


  ^ |^ ^   !|  |

^  ^   ^   
 !  ^^ \ 
 |  ^    ^ 
  |    |!| ^  |^ 
^| | ^  !! ^  \! !
^|^~~ 

   "
J " "  J
 " | ^| ~~ ^      | ^|
" J "   Q  $XZJ !" ~~?||^^^^^
"  J &$%'&+%J    J   \^  ^ ^   ^| 
 <

 ^| ~~^ !     !! |

^^| 

 

{`{ ^   ! ^ 

^^^|^^^^|

 !
{`{!|^
| \|!!  \  ^ ^
? 
 ?\
   \  \   |
 
 ^\
^!^^^^
`{
 `!|\!
^  ^    |   
 
 !\}
^!{`{
~ 
 |^
~ ! ^|^ !^ ~  |
^\^?|^^!
~  
 ~ !|^
!\^|!|
 
 !
   |  !^ ^|^
!^   ^! |   ^ ||

|^  ^ ^  | {^^ ~ ~!  ^ ^  |  ^  |   
!^  ^^  ^ ^^  |^   ^  ! | !  |  
|^  | |^    ^^  |^  {^^  \ ^|^ ! | ? ^ | ^ 
^^
   ^! ^! !  |!|  ^^ |
|| ^||
!
|! ! \^ !   ^ ^^^^|\!||
 !   ^ |  | |

~!^||

!!|  ^~ |?
\^   ^^  ` ^  \^! ^^ |
|^ |      \! ^
!\^!^
~   ^ | {^^  ^^  |^  \^ {^   ~~  !|  | ?^  |
\^^
^  | {`{ |    
   ^ | | \^   ! 
|^ \^      | !\
!

IEEE PES Transactions on Sustainable Energy

Page 2 of 10

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

^}    | ^| ~~ ! !

 ! ^ ^!   ^
^
  ^^ |    !
!^!|^
^  |   |   |^
}^  ^ ^ |   
 !  ! ^ |^ 
|!|!|?\^|
   !  \^  
\! ^ |\  ^    | |^
\! ^ |^  ^ ^ | !  ||
^ ^^ \^ \  
\!^^|!^\
   ? ^! | ^} ^ 
^^^
^^    {`{ ^^ !
 ^^ !^^^ !\
^}^|\|
   | !\   \!
^ | |^ |^ ^^ | |  
^   \ `\   {`{
||\^
 | \  ^   ^  
^|{`{^
| \!     ^ ^| | |
!
 ^| ! | ? ^  {`{
^^^^\|^^|^
 ^   | \ ! `  |
^{^|{`{\
^^  |  \! ! ^  
! ^ | |^\^  !  
! |!\^}
 ^  | ^| ! \!  |^ 
^^  \ |  ^! | !\ ^}
 ^  | {`{   | 
^^ ~   \   ^ 
}  |^ | |!| |  | |\
 ^ | |   | {`{ |
 \ \^  ^ ^   | \
\^^|||!^^^
^^
|^!^^^^|
|    ^\  !\ ^}
^  | | |^ \^ | !\
^} ^  |   | {`{
^ ^   {    ^  |
^{{^^|^^
|^ ^^^|^^^!\
{!|{

 ?`
~{
 
 {




 ~
 `
~{



~
| } ^   | |^ \! 
^^!^^|

     

|^|^\!}^\
  |^ }\ ! |  ^ ^! |
^^





 !   !"  $" %<

<!
?   |^ \!    |\ | ^
!^| | ^|^| !^
    | ^   \!^ |^  
 |  \!    ^! |
^! ^ \!   ^\  !\
^}^
| ^\ ^} ^     |
!\^}^  | ^
!\|^^





`   \  ^

   | | ! ^ |!  ^
\^|



>D

>D

%>D

> E

>E

%>E

?!!}^!!

 %< !   ?

  @
  ! !  ^  
||^^|^}
!    | ^    }
`^^^}^!!
 ?!  !\^   !    
 ^^!|^^
|!\





|}|!^





Page 3 of 10

IEEE PES Transactions on Sustainable Energy

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

|  ^   }   |

||
 | ^^ \! ^ !
^  \ | ^\  !\ ^}
^    ^!    | |
^\^}^~^
^ ^ ^\ ^} |^  
?!
@ K" %< K? Z< Z! \KZZ^
 ^\ ^} ~ |^  \ ^! |
^\ ^} \! ^ ! | ^
|\!\^!!|^|}^
^|~!|}
||^!^^|?!

||!\^}^
  |!| |^ } ^ \  | ^
   ^ }   | !

 _$" %<    ? |}`}
?|\!\
|\!\|!|^
|\ |\|}^
^|^||^^
 |   }^   \^ ^\
 ^^  ^^   !\^   |
^^^^|

?!~^\^}|^




  | ^\  !\
|
^}^|\^
!\

 

{
 {




 
?



| |  ^    |  |
^!\
 _$" %<    ? >`{>@

| ^^^  | \  \   

^


  

|^^|
||^^
^!^
||!\|^
^|\!\^^

{~ 
    



|^!|!\^}
|  |\!\
  ^! |  \^  | {
| ^     | ^ |   `{   |  |^  \^!
! ^  | ^ \\! | | ^\  ^!    ^  ~ 
 ?! 
!\^}^|^^|^ ^|^| ^|~~|
^     | ^^  \  ^|!{`{^^^
\    |  |^ 
^|\^}\\!^^^
|^!\
^|^|!|{`{^
|^|{`{^|\ |^|\^|^\
^^ \  \   |   ^^ |^ ^  ^   ^
 ! ~ |^ \ ^   `{  ^| \ ^ ^ 
 | ^\ ^} \!  |  \  |   { ^| ^^ |!|    {
^
|  |  { ^ ^    {
^^\|~

}!|^^\\ ^|!|!{^
|{^^\^|^||^
|!\^}^^\
 ^  | ^} ^  | \!  | ! |  ^   |
^^|\!~||
^\^}^^!\
^!!|^}^|

 \!  ^^  | |!| \! ^ |

\!^^|\!!
  ! ^ | ^| ! |!!^^^!|{
\! ^  |\  !\ ^} \! ^^^|^|~~!

IEEE PES Transactions on Sustainable Energy

Page 4 of 10

UU
*!"


!"



'
$%




$








$



%







%



)%

$ 










$
)$

*$%!%!":;<=



>%;?%@"";@J<=

|**`|~

|}`|~




$%



"


 



$%



%

Z

\Z

J^;:




{









%

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60







:;$`^;@J!!@

?!!!||{`{

D

D

T Z

"
D

" D

E

"
E

E

T Z

" E

?!~^^|

T Z

?!   ^| {`{  | !\ ^}



\ ^ |\    ^ ^!

!!!  ^ |\   |!| |
^    | ^ ^  | \
^|!|^
?!^|{

Page 5 of 10

IEEE PES Transactions on Sustainable Energy

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

 |} ?  

` |   ^ ! ^^ |
^|^ !  | ! ^ \ 
\  ^  ^  ^  | 
 ^  ^ |  ^  ^ 
^}\
^||?^^|
?! ^^||^^^

\!\ ^^|!^\
|^^|\^^
|\|!^|\
 | ^^^ ||    |    
`\|^^^||\
^^|\^^
~^\  !\ ^} ^  | 
 \! ^ ^^ |  ^ 
|    ^ ^ ^   
| |  ^  |  ^ 
!^|^|^\^
!^!
|^^!
^ ^ ^ ^|  ?!  |^  
| | | ^\  !\ ^} 
  | ^ } | ^
}^|}|~^
^
 ?  >`{>@  
|^|{{!|`{
\!  | \     \!
|!||^|!\\
^|}^|!
^|^^|?!

|^!|\! |{
`{^^^|^|^|\
    | !  | ~ ^ ! ^|
| | ! \! ^ ! | ^  |
^|^ !   |   
^    ! | \   
| |  \!  }^    
|\|!||!^!\




||^^^|}^
!\^}^|
^| {`{ ^   !  ^
^
 `?  >   < 
| ^   | ^| {  ^ 
 | ^| ! \!  } ?! 
|}^^|^
\  ~ ^  }  |   
|^|^!|
}  !\  | ~^ ^ ~ ^
  ^  |^ ^ `\ ^ ^ 
}|^\!\^}^
|     } ^ ^  
||!\!^|
^^|}^^|
^^!\





| \  \!    
|  ^  !\  |  \!
| ! \!  |  ^  {  |
^^
!







|  ^ | ^ ^\ ^} 

|^|}  |^^
\!|^|! ^|^\
||^
^}^|!\!
| |^     ^  |
| | !\ ^} ^   |
\ | ! ~  ^  !\^}^!^
|  \  |   ^!^ ^!\^}^^
    | \! ^  | ^
\ ^^^







IEEE PES Transactions on Sustainable Energy

Page 6 of 10

|   | |^   ^

!\  |^ ^ ^ | !\ ^}  |^
!\ }    ^ 
  | ^\  !\ ^} 
|!}^^|
{`\
`


`




`

`

<!=





$%<=

$%<=





<!!= 





!J<=





`


`

<!!!= 




<!=


$%<=



$%<=





`







!J<=


`






!J<=





`



!J<=



`

<!=

<=

<=

<!!=




`

`



!J<=
`





!J<=


`

<!!!=



<!=

<=

{  

?^^|
 | !\ ^}   ! |  ^
\! \^|  | `{ ^ ^ ^\ ?^ 
^!!^^||^^
^||^^?
 | !\ ^} ^    
| ^  | ^| {`{ ^
^^^!\
 !\ ^}  ^   |
|   | ^| {`{
|{
 !\ ^}  ^   |
|{
 |!\^}^
|{`{|{
  |!\^}^^
|{
 $ Z  }    

?!\!\^||{`{^^

? 

<=

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60



?!  ^|^ | ! | !\ ^}

^  | ^  | ^| {`{
 |   \! \^|^ |   
\!\^|^|^`|^
       ` `  `
^\ |^ ^ ^ | ! | |
!\ ^} ^ ^ |  \!
\^|
||^^|`{
^^^^|?!|^^^^
| |  ^  |!| | \! 
! |   ^   |!| | |
  |  ^ ^  ^  | |
        |
^!\^|
!|!||^^|
|\!^^^\?!
 `\ |   \! ^^  |!|
|!^|||
^^

?!^||||^\!\^|
^  | ^| {`{  |  ^^ 

`

^|^^|{|{!^|{

`


|{\^|!\^}^|{
`{   \  ! | |!| }








!J<=
!J<=
^^|\!\^
!|
|  |^  ^   ! |^
?!~|^|{`{!|
^^ | ^   \! ^   
|{|{|{\|{
|^|{|^|{
 |^\ ^  |   \!
||^\!\^}\!^
!\\||^^ \^|    |  \! ^
||^!^^^|?! ^ ^ ^    !\ ^} 
|{`{^||
!\^}^





Page 7 of 10

IEEE PES Transactions on Sustainable Energy

 


??
?`
~
{ 
?{ 

 ~
?? 
t,
D
D



s
Ws^,s
,s
,s
,s
E^
E^

t,
D
D

t,
D
D

t,
D
D


 


??
?`
~
{ 
?{ 
{
` ~
???

? 

W
s^,s

s
W
s^,s

t,
t,
t,
t,
t,
t,
t,
t,





`



<=



$@'$@<=

>>>'
D D

















!$@






`

<=

@'@<=









!$





`



!J<=




`

`


`




!@





!J<=



!@

!@


!J<=


`


`

`

>>
D D

















`

`


<=

>>'
D D

















$@<=


s

&
>
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&

@<=







!J<=




`



<=

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

?!!\^}}^^!|



!J<=





?!\!|^|{`{!|

|{|{`\`

|  ^^     ^

^|!\^}^
|^\^?!
 |  !|  | ^ !\ ^}
\^^||
^^ |!|||^|
}^ !\ ^}   ^| ^^ ^^
! |   ^  | |  |
!\^^^^^\|
|^

IEEE PES Transactions on Sustainable Energy

Page 8 of 10

`UU

<!!=



!J<=

`




!J<=





!J<=



$Z<=

<!=

`


!J<=



Z@<=

$@


`



!J<=





!J<=







!J<=





`
UU






!J<=

`
UUU




!J<=
`
UU

`UUU




!J<= `UU


`



!J<=



?!   ~^\  !\ ^}   } ^ \!

^|


`UU



`
UUU

$@


!J<=


<!=

<=

<!!!=

`UU


`
UU


`

`



`UUU

`







`
UU



<!!=

$




!J<= 
`
UU

`UU

<=

$Z<=


`



!J<=



<=

`
$

`UU






`
UUU

?!\!\^|^|{`{^

^

?!~^\^}}^^!|





!J<= 
`
UUU








!J<= `UU




<!=

$%<=


`
Z!

<=

<=

`Z!




`

<!!!=



$%<=







$%<=





<=


!J<=




!J<= `UUU
`UUU




`
Z!$

$%<=

`Z!$





!J<=



<=






`
UU



<=

$<=

$<=


`
UU

`UU



$%<=


<!=


`

$%<=

`

Z@<=

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60



`
UU



!J<=



?!   ~   | ^| {`{  !
^

 ZZ} ZZZ}  ZZ   

|!| | ^ ^\ ^} ^  ^

|\!\^||
|^^!|!\^}^  ^^ \     ^  |  
  \  ^^  | ^\ ^} ^|?!?!?|
?!
\! \^| ^ ^     ^ |{ ^
^|{|
| |    ^\  !\ ^|{|{
^} ^  |  ^ \!^  ^^

\  | ^   |  \! \^| ^
^ |!| | !  | !\ ^}
\! ^ ^ ?!  | ^ |^|{|{
^\^}\!|^|^ |^^||^
   ^  |{ |  ^         |\    ^  | 
^| | | ^^      !\^ 
|{

Page 9 of 10

IEEE PES Transactions on Sustainable Energy

^|^|\!
|{`{!|

`U

<=


`UU










`
UU



!J<=



`UU



!J<=

$%<=

<!= 

`U



!J<=




`
U


<=



`U


!J<=










`
U

`UU

<=




!J<=











`UU



!J<=


`
UU






`
UU





?!     \! \^|  | {`{ ^^ 

^





`UU


!J<=



!J<=

?!?^\!|^|{`{

!|^|{|{^|{
\|{^^|^^
^|






`
UU







$%<=





`
U



<=



<!!=

`U

<!!!=

<=

$%<=

$%<=





<!=




`
U






`
U

`U

<=

||^^^|^
|^|\^^
||!
^ |     ^    | 
^\^}|^^^
|{ ?!  ^|^ | |  \! \^| ^
  | | ^^ |{  |{ | |
^ |{ ^  ^ ! |  
`\ | ^  ^^    | ^
|{ |  | ^ |{ |    | {
`{!|^^\
|?!|\!\^?!
 ^| | |  ^ \  ! | |!|
}|^|\!\!|

<=

 Z}  ZZ   

<=

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60


`
UU



!J<=



?!~|^|{`{

|{|{^|{\|{

{
| ^ ^^  | \^ ^ ^|^ |
|^\!|\!^
|^||^||^
| ^  |  |   |!| |
\!\^||^
||\

! |    ^ | \!

  ^ ^\  | ^    
| ^^ `  ` !^ `  ` ?!
|^^|||\^
^||
|?|^
|!^|
|^!||!|^
|!|   | \ !\ ^}
 ^ | ^  ^^   |
!\ ^}  ^  |  !\
^}   |  ^  ^| 
^^  ^    | ^| ~|^ |
 !  ! | ^ ^ ^
   ! | !\ ^} 
||^|!\^}
 ^ | | ^\  !\ ^}

IEEE PES Transactions on Sustainable Energy

Page 10 of 10


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

^  | \! ^  ^ | ^\ ^}

 ^ !  | !\ ^}
\!^||^|\!
   ^ | ^   |^ \! 
^

      !     
?  |  |~|^ ~  ^ 
{!^^    !!\


{

   {`{  ^ ~ ^^ ~| ^^

|^\^|!

!\ ^}    ^! |^

  |  |  ^ | | 
  | {`{ \ ^   |
^!|^|^
^|    ! ^ | 
\^ |\  \ | | !\ ^}
  ^|   | ^^  |
\
|^^^\|\|!||\
 |  ^^   ! | 
!\ ^}  ^ | !\ ^}
^\!|||
 \! ^^ ! ^ ^ ~^ 
^^^||^^
 | |   | {`{ \^ 
 \  ! |  \! \^|^ 
       |  ^ \  |
  |!| }   |  ^
\! !\ ^}    | 
\ ^^^  ^! |  \!  
^^ `\ | \!  ^ \ ^
^^|\^|!|^

?



  
!       
 |!
 ~   | ^   
    ^| ^^ |  $ \   

^^~!`^{`{
 ^|  ?^  | ^^^ ^   
 $ " \ |
 ? { !^   ^ {^
`{ ~ ^^^ ^^  \\   
K < \ 

!  !    ^! `{  ~

^
|!?

 ` }  $   |  $ "  

^!||^
 ^  ^  ^   ! \\ 
   ^   ~^    
< \ 
` !      ? |!|
     \      !! \

 ^  ^   ~ !   
\^   ?^ }  "    K?"< 
| K 


  ^}^ ! {^
\  ~   !  !^ ^ 
 ^   \^ 
{!^    < \


  ^~!|{^^^!

   ^ ^^   ^!
    K @\

       ^^  !  ! ?^

 ?^ ^! { ^^^     K 
\ !
  |  ||      ^
\\^`{^^!
^| K < ?  < $  
  @ K   @ < 
 ~!  ^?!
\  | ^  ~ \^ 
  ^ ! ^ K <  _
\
 ~ ! { ^  ^  ^  ?
! ? \ ~   ^ ~
 ^^ !  ?^     < 
\
 

~
~^^!!
  !! \\!   ^
 K } 
$ 
    ^      ^^^
^^^  ! ! ^|  ^  K
} 
$ ` "   @  < <  $  ?