Frequency Changes in AC Systems Connected to DC
Grids: Impact of AC vs. DC Side Events
Inmaculada Martínez Sanz, Student Member, Balarko Chaudhuri, Senior Member, and Goran Strbac, Senior Member
Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering
Imperial College London
London, United Kingdom
inmaculada.martinez-sanz09@imperial.ac.uk
Abstract— Each converter station within a DC grid can be
equipped with a power frequency droop control loop in addition
to the power voltage droop control normally used for
autonomous power sharing. Presence of the power frequency
droop control allows exchange of frequency support among the
AC systems connected to the DC grid. Following an event (or
disturbance), there are two distinctly different patterns of
dynamic variation of the frequencies of the AC systems
connected to the DC grid. In this paper, an analytical basis is
provided to support the different trends. Simulation results
using a 4-terminal DC grid model set up in DIgSILENT
PowerFactory are used to validate the analysis. The different
patterns of dynamic variation of the frequencies for AC and DC
side disturbances could have significant implications for
extraction of inertial/frequency support from offshore wind
farms connected through MTDC grids.
Index Terms-- Multi-Terminal DC (MTDC), VSC-HVDC,
frequency droop control, AC/DC interaction.
I. INTRODUCTION
In order to effectively share the diverse renewable energy
resources spread across geographic regions and tap into
offshore renewables (primarily but not limited to wind), the
DC grid concept has drawn significant attention, particularly
in Europe with projects like the European supergrid [1] or the
North-sea grid [2]. A DC grid could be more cost-effective
than several point-to-point connections as it increases the
security of supply, improving reliability and flexibility of
operation. Voltage source converter (VSC) technology is
arguably the only option for DC grids as it allows power
reversal without requiring reversal of voltage polarity [3].
However, there are major challenges associated with use of
VSC for DC grids primarily from protection and DC fault-
current interruption considerations, which are deferring the
practical realization of DC grids [4], [5]. From system
operators’ point of view, unknown interaction between the
AC system and DC grid and appropriate control of DC grid to
support the AC system operation are two major concerns.
Control of the converters in order to exchange primary
frequency reserves through the DC grid has been already
proposed [6], [7]. In this context, the focus of this paper is to
978-1-4799-6415-4/14/$31.00 ©2014 IEEE
analyze, through a steady-state formulation, the interactions
between AC and DC grids for events that require exchange of
frequency support. Following an event (or disturbance), there
are two distinctly different patterns of dynamic variation of
the frequencies of the AC systems connected to the DC grid.
For classical supply-demand mismatch events within AC
systems like loss of generation, increase in load etc. in one of
the AC systems, the frequency in that particular AC system
and all the rest of the AC systems vary (increase or decrease)
in the same direction. On the contrary, if disturbance is on the
DC side, which includes a change in power reference setting
of a converter or a complete converter outage, the frequency
of the affected system varies in the opposite direction
compared to the remaining AC systems.
The starting point of this work is the analysis reported in
[8] which introduced the frequency sensitivity for AC
systems connected to DC grids. However, the analysis in [8]
only focused on load/generation change as the frequency
event but did not consider the effect of DC-side events like
converter outage. In this paper we have included as well the
effect of DC-side disturbances in a combined framework.
Close match between the expected results from our analytical
formulation and the observed simulation results has
confirmed the difference patterns of dynamic variation of the
frequencies for AC and DC side disturbances. This could
have significant implications for communication-less
schemes for extraction of inertial/frequency support from
offshore wind farms for multiple onshore AC systems
connected through MTDC grids.
The main contributions of this paper are:
• Extension of the frequency sensitivity formulation for
both AC and DC side disturbances.
• Analysis of the effect of AC/DC disturbances on the
frequency variations through analytical expressions and
validation through simulations.
The rest of the paper has the following structure: Section II
describes the control of a VSC converter station and models
its steady state behaviour under some reasonable
assumptions. Section III presents the frequency variations in ∑ ∆P =0 (3)
the interconnected AC systems in terms of load/generation
changes and power reference changes. The formulation is Substituting (2) in (3) and making the assumption that DC
evaluated by comparing the expected (from formulation) voltage variations are equal in all the converter terminals, we
results againts DIgSILENT PowerFactory simulations of a 4- can derive an expression for voltage variations in the grid:
terminal DC grid in Section IV.
∆ 1 ∆
= − ∆ (4)
II. CONVERTER CONTROL ∑
In a DC grid all converters except one can be controlled to
provide the scheduled power while leaving one of the
Note that voltage variations are proportional to frequency
converters to be operated as a slack, controlling the DC link
variations when ∆ does not change, meaning that for DC
voltage. However, the problem with this arrangement is that
the slack converter will take the entire burden of the loss in side disturbances (converter outage) voltage variations are not
the case of a converter outage. Including a power-voltage representative of frequency variations.
droop in the control loop of the converters will ensure
autonomous power sharing after such an event [7].
Additionally, a power-frequency droop control allows III. FREQUENCY VARIATIONS DUE TO AC- OR DC-SIDE
exchange of primary frequency support between the AC EVENTS
systems connected to the DC grid. The converter also The droop control model of the converter is linked here to
provides independent reactive power support to the grid, as a simple representation of the AC grid to evaluate the
depicted in Fig. 1. interaction between systems in terms of frequency variation in
the grids. For the sake of simplicity, we consider that each AC
Frequency controller
f system is connected to the MTDC grid by just one converter
kf /kp
station, as in Fig. 2.
fref VDC idmax Pdc
id_ref PG
P Pmd
kp KV(1+1/sTV) Kd(1+1/sTd)

Pref AC grid
idmin id
VDCref iqmax Pdcref
Q iq_ref Pmq PL
KQ(1+1/sTQ) Kq(1+1/sTq)

Qref iqmin iq Current controller Figure 2. AC grid connection to the MTDC grid.

Figure 1. Power-frequency droop control for the VSC converter. The power balance relation for each AC grid i connected
to the MTDC grid is given by:
The steady-state equation for the droop controller is the
following: ∆ +∆ =∆ (5)
where is the local load in the AC system and is the
= + − + − (1) generated power. The changes in generated power can be
where is the frequency droop constant and the power related to frequency variations through a droop constant for
droop constant for each converter i. Regarding the sign the aggregated AC grid ( ) [8], emulating the behaviour of
convention, is considered to be positive if the power is the governors in the system:
withdrawn from the DC grid into the AC grid. The power ∆ ∆
reference to the converter is denoted by . A converter =− (6)
outage is modelled by setting its power reference to zero.
Substituting (2), (4) and (6) in (5) we obtain:
Equation (1) is re-written in small-signal form and in a p.u.
base, where , and correspond to rated values: ∆
∆ =∆ − +
∆ ∆ ∆ 1 ∆
= − + (2) ∆
∑ −∑ ∆
If we assume no losses in the DC grid, we have that the sum + (7)
of the exchanged power between the N converters of the ∑
MTDC grid is zero:
Equation (7) can be re-written as:
 ∆
∑
∆
∆ =− + 1− + +∆ 1− − ∆
∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

∆ ∆
∆ =− + + (1 − )∆ − ∆ (8)

Finally, when expressed in matrix form:

A ∆f/f = ∆P − B ∆P

− … / … / ∆
∆ / ∆ 1− … − … −
⋮
⋮ ⋱ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋱ ⋮
… … −
⋮
/ … − … / ∆ / = ∆ − − 1 − ∆ (9)
⋱ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋱ ⋮
⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮
… ∆ / ∆ − … − …1 −
/ … / − ∆

and:
In this way frequency variations in the interconnected AC
systems can be expressed in terms of load/generation changes (1 − ) … − … −
and converter power reference changes. The variation ∆P
reflects AC side disturbances while ∆P variation relates to ⋮ ⋱ ⋮ ⋮
DC side disturbances: 1 …
~ − … (1 − ) − (14)
∆f/f = A ∆P − A B ∆P (10) ⋮ ⋮ ⋱ ⋮

To determine how an AC or DC side disturbance affects − … − (1 − )
…
the frequency variations in the different systems, we look at
the sign of the elements in the columns of the matrices A
and A B . We know that: Analyzing these expressions and under the previous
assumptions (no losses in the DC grid, equal voltage
0< <1 = / >0 >0 (11) variations and being the dominant term in the equations) we
Additionally, we can also safely assume that, for AC power can generally conclude that:
systems, the response from the generators’ governors is • An event in one of the AC systems (load/generation
dominant: change) causes the frequency of all the systems
participating in frequency control to vary similarly. Given
~ > = \ (12) a column of matrix A , all the elements have the same
This relation does not apply to particular AC systems like sign.
offshore wind farms or load centers, which are preferably • For a DC side event (converter outage), all system
controlled as constant power terminals and hence do not frequencies but the one of the outaged converter will vary
participate in the droop control. similarly. Given a column of matrix A B , all the
Given the previous considerations, by deriving the elements but one have the same sign.
expressions for different number of converters we can obtain a
generalized expression for the matrices of interest, as follows:
IV. SIMULATION RESULTS
… … In order to validate the analysis presented earlier in
Section III, the test system shown in Fig. 3 was modeled in
⋮ ⋱ ⋮ ⋮
DIgSILENT PowerFactory. This network is based upon the
one described in [9] employing the same parameters for the
1 … DC lines and converter stations. It consists of four
~ … (13)
asynchronous AC systems interconnected through a DC grid.
⋮ ⋮ ⋱ One of the systems is an offshore wind farm. The DC grid was
⋮
modeled as a general asymmetric bipolar type with each
… … converter stations employing one 2-level VSC converter. The
DC link voltage is 350kV, and the surrounding AC systems
are connected at 230 kV.
The differences between the simulation results in
DIgSILENT and the expected values in terms of frequency
and power balance increments can be seen in Table I. The
results are a reasonable approximation of the post-fault
dynamic behaviour of the system. The mismatch in the power
balance of the simulation column can be attributed to losses
in the system which were neglected in the analytical
formulation.
The system dynamic response obtained in the simulation
is shown in Fig. 4 and Fig. 5. As expected, the AC side
disturbance causes the frequency to vary in the same direction
in all the AC systems, as plotted in Fig. 4, while the
frequency in system #4 is unaffected as it is working as a
constant power source. Fig. 5 shows the power injected in
each AC system after the event. The power imported by
system #3 increases at the expense of system #1 injecting
more power in the DC grid and system #2 withdrawing less.

Figure 3. Test system.

Each AC area is represented by a single equivalent

generator which is equipped with governor control and a
constant impedance load. The wind farm is controlled to
provide constant power and hence it does not participate in the
droop control for autonomous power sharing and frequency
regulation. The following droop parameters were chosen for
the simulations: = 0.1, = 5 for converter stations #1-3; Figure 4. System frequencies after load increase event in system #3. Results
= 20 for systems #1-3. for system #1 (red), system #2 (green), system #3 (blue) and system #4
(black).
A. AC Side Event
A step increase in the local load of system #3 is analyzed -430.0 -130.0

first as an AC side event, with ∆ =153 MW. For the given -444.0 -144.0
-162.45 MW
-458.0 -158.0
parameter values, we have that the estimated DC voltage -450 MW
-472.0 -172.0
variation is:
-486.0 -186.0
∆ = −1.977 -182.46 MW
-500.0 -200.0
0.0 3.0 6.0 9.0 12.0[s]15.0 0.0 3.0 6.0 9.0 12.0[s]15.0
(-3.954 kV for a bipole configuration) while the simulated VSC4p: Total Active Power VSC1p: Total Active Power
voltage variations at the converter terminals are: 210.0 470.0
450.00 MW
∆ = −3.793 − 4.171 − 4.653 − 4.360 196.0 456.0
182.0 191.79 MW 442.0
The assumption of all voltage deviations being equal at 168.0 428.0
150 MW
the converter terminals is not true due to the line resistances 154.0 414.0 427.58 MW
causing losses, but it is still an average representation of what 140.0 400.0
0.00 3.00 6.00 9.00 12.0[s]15.0 0.0 3.0 6.0 9.0 12.0[s]15.0
occurs in the system. VSC3p: Total Active Power VSC2p: Total Active Power

TABLE I: RESULTS COMPARISON FOR AC SIDE DISTURBANCE

Figure 5. Real power at the converter terminals after load increase event in
system #3.
Frequency ∆ / (pu) Power Balance ∆ (GW)
Expected
Simulation
Expected
Simulation B. DC Side Event
(DIgSILENT) (DIgSILENT)
In the second case study a step reduction to the power
System #1 -0.0003 -0.0003 -0.0199 -0.0201
reference of converter Station #2 is applied as a DC-side
System #2 -0.0003 -0.0003 -0.0215 -0.0224 event. In this case ∆P = -190 MW. The expected change in
System #3 -0.0028 -0.0030 0.0415 0.0417 voltage is:
System #4 0 0 0 0
∆ = 4.864
(9.73kV in the bipole configuration). The DC voltage increase. Less power is being extracted from the grid as a
variations obtained through simulation are: result of the change in the reference to the converter. Systems
#1 and #3 try to counterbalance this change by respectively
∆ = 9.724 10.667 10.137 10.290 injecting less and extracting more power from the DC grid, as
As before, the losses in the grid cause the different voltage seen in Fig. 7. As expected, there is no change in frequency or
variations at each terminal. The comparison of the results for power in system #4 which continues to act as a constant power
frequency and power exchange appears on Table II for this source.
disturbance. A good match between simulation and The simulation results presented in this Section illustrate
formulation values is obtained, especially for frequency two things:
values.
1. With power frequency droop control the pattern of
TABLE II: RESULTS COMPARISON FOR DC SIDE DISTURBANCE
frequency variation in AC systems connected to DC grids
is different for AC and DC side disturbances.
Frequency ∆ / (pu) Power Balance ∆ (GW)
2. The analytical formulation presented in Section III can
Simulation Simulation
Expected
(DIgSILENT)
Expected
(DIgSILENT) capture the steady-state change in frequency of individual
System #1 0.0008 0.0007 0.0491 0.0521
AC systems connected to a DC grid with reasonable
accuracy.
System #2 -0.0011 -0.0012 -0.0918 -0.0949
V. CONCLUSIONS
System #3 0.0011 0.0011 0.0428 0.0451
In this paper an analytical formulation is presented to
System #4 0 0 0 0 account for the different patterns of dynamic variations of the
frequencies of the AC systems connected to the DC grid in
response to AC-side and DC-side disturbances. The fact that
the frequencies of all the AC systems vary similarly for AC-
side disturbance while the frequency of the affected system
(where the event took place) varies in the opposite direction
compared to the rest of the AC systems for a DC-side
disturbance can be explained by the analysis presented in this
paper. The steady-state results expected from the formulation
closely match those from simulation in DIgSILENT
PowerFactory, which confirms the validity of the analytical
formulation. This could have significant implications for
communication-less schemes for extraction of
inertial/frequency support from offshore wind farms for
Figure 6. System frequencies after power reference step reduction of multiple onshore AC systems connected through MTDC grids.
converter station #2. Results for system #1 (red), system #2 (green), system
#3 (blue) and system #4 (black). REFERENCES
-300.0 -50.00
[1] S. Gordon, "Supergrid to the rescue," Power Engineer, vol.20, no.5,
pp.30,33, Oct.-Nov. 2006.
-340.0 -80.00 [2] J. Blau, "Europe plans a North Sea grid," Spectrum, IEEE, vol. 47, pp.
-110.42 MW
-380.0 -110.0 12-13, 2010.
-420.0 -450 MW -140.0 [3] N. Flourentzou, V.G. Agelidis and G.D. Demetriades, "VSC-Based
-162.45 MW
-460.0 -170.0 HVDC Power Transmission Systems: An Overview," IEEE Trans.
Power Electronics, vol.24, no.3, pp.592-602, Mar. 2009.
-500.0 -200.0
0.0 3.0 6.0 9.0 12.0[s]15.0 0.0 3.0 6.0 9.0 12.0[s]15.0 [4] C.M. Franck, "HVDC Circuit Breakers: A Review Identifying Future
VSC4p: Total Active Power VSC1p: Total Active Power Research Needs," Power Delivery, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 26, pp.
998-1007, 2011.
260.0 470.0
[5] D. Jovcic, D. Van Hertem, K. Linden, J.P. Taisne, and W. Grieshaber,
230.0 440.0 450 MW "Feasibility of DC transmission networks," in Innovative Smart Grid
195.12 MW
200.0 410.0 Technologies (ISGT Europe), 2011 2nd IEEE PES International
170.0 150.00 MW 380.0 355.08 MW Conference and Exhibition on, 2011, pp. 1-8.
140.0 350.0 [6] T.M. Haileselassie and K. Uhlen, "Primary frequency control of remote
grids connected by multi-terminal HVDC" in Power and Energy
110.0 320.0
0.0 3.0 6.0 9.0 12.0[s]15.0 0.0 3.0 6.0 9.0 12.0[s]15.0 Society General Meeting, 2010 IEEE, pp.1,6, 2010.
VSC3p: Total Active Power VSC2p: Total Active Power [7] N.R. Chaudhuri, R. Majumder and B. Chaudhuri, "System Frequency
Support Through Multi-Terminal DC (MTDC) Grids," IEEE Trans.
Power Systems, vol.28, no.1, pp.347,356, Feb. 2013.
Figure 7. Real power at the converter terminals after power reference step
[8] T.M. Haileselassie and K. Uhlen, "Frequency sensitivity analysis of AC
reduction of converter station #2.
grids connected to MTDC grid" in AC and DC Power Transmission,
2010 ACDC. 9th IET International Conference on, pp. 1-5, 2010.
In Fig. 6 variations in frequencies of the AC systems after [9] N.R. Chaudhuri, R. Majumder, B. Chaudhuri and Jiuping Pan,
the power reference change are shown. It can be seen that the "Stability Analysis of VSC MTDC Grids Connected to Multimachine
frequency of the system where the event took place (system AC Systems," IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, vol.26, no.4, pp.2774-
#2) reduces while the frequencies of the other two systems 2784, Oct. 2011.