Pssewindandsolarmodels Casestudies

PSS E Wind and Solar Models.
Case Studies
of Wind Park Modeling
UWIG/EnerNex/DOE Workshop
MISO, St. Paul, MN
August 16-17, 2011
Yuriy Kazachkov
Siemens PTI
2011 Siemens Energy, Inc. All rights reserved.
PSSE Wind Models
Current View of PTI Web Site

http://www.pti-us.com/pti/software/psse/userarea/
wind_farm_model_request_download_submit.cfm
Self-extracting files for most widely

used vendor specific models are
available for all PSSE releases
from 29 to 32. Models of Acciona,
Enercon, GE wind turbines, and the
WT3 and WT4 user written generic
model can be directly downloaded,
others will be provided upon
manufacturers authorization.
All communications related to
downloading the PSSE wind
models have to go via the PSSE
support.
Your request to download PSSE Wind

Farm models has been submitted. You
will receive an email from PSSE
Support with further instructions.
Page 3

Siemens Power Technologies International
Siemens PTI PSSE Models

Lately, we also developed PSSE dynamic simulation models for:
AMSC WindTec 1.5 MW 50Hz & 1.65 MW 60Hz
Wind to Energy W93 and T93
Northern Power NPS2.2-93
Several Chinese manufacturers: Sinovel, Mingyang, Sany, United Power,
Sewind.
Page 4

Other Non-PTI PSSE Models

Siemens PTI is aware of several other PSSE wind modeling packages NOT
developed and therefore NOT supported by Siemens PTI, such as:
Vestas V52 850kW, V66 1.75MW, V80 2MW, V90 3MW, V90 1.8MW
DeWind D6 1.25MW and D8 2MW
Gamesa G5X 850kW and G8X 2MW
Clipper
Suzlon
Some manufacturers recognize the importance of their
models being supported by PTI and approached us with
the request to review, modify, release and support their models.
Acciona is a good example.
Page 5

Wind Models Simulation

Infrastructure in PSSE
2011 Siemens
Energy, Inc. All rights reserved.
Page 6
Handling wind turbine models

in PSSE Load Flow
The user is responsible for aggregating the actual wind turbines into
equivalent machines. For N lumped machines, the output of the
equivalent machine cannot exceed N times the rated output of the
individual units.
The power factor correction shunt capacitors must be added (if
available) and connected to the terminals of the equivalent machine by
the user.
For example, for the original Vestas V80 machine, the total
compensation available is 12 capacitors of 72 kVAr each. After
compensation, the reactive power flow from the terminal bus to the
system should be in the range of +40/-40 kVAr per machine.
Page 7

Handling wind turbine models

in PSSE Dynamics
The user prepares a dynamic input data file by following

the example files included in the modeling package
documentation.
All vendor specific models are provided in the format of
users written (defined) models.
The dynamic simulation models implemented by Siemens
PTI are self-initializing, as with all other PSSE simulation
models.
Page 8

Application Features of PSSE Software

Packages
In rev 31+, the new category of machine, namely wind machine, is introduced,
along with new wind related common variables. This makes simulation more
convenient and efficient.
In the near future, a new name, like Renewables, might be needed to have
solar and other inverter based generation fit in this category.
All four generic models using a wind machine category, namely WT1, WT2,
WT3, and WT4, are standard starting from rev 31.1.
These generic models will not be available for rev. 29 and 30 please upgrade
to 32!
The old user written WT3 generic model using the conventional machine in LF
is available for rev 29+. Please note: this model is different from the standard
generic WT3 model.
Probably, at some point in foreseeable future we will close the option of
treating the wind machine as a conventional machine.
Page 9

The latest wind turbine model infrastructure in

PSSE a reminder
Wind machines are specified on the existing generator record of the Power Flow Raw Data File.
Bus
#
1
5
Bus
Name
INFINITE
WT
Id
1
1
Code
3
2
Status
1
1
Pgen
(MW)
-49.618
50.25
Pmax
(MW)
9999
105
Pmin
(MW)
-9999
0
Qgen
(Mvar)
-0.993
-4.317
Qmax
(Mvar)
9999
34.3
Qmin
(Mvar)
-9999
-51.1
Mbase
(MVA)
100
111.69
XSource
(pu)
0.2
0.8
Wind machine Control

Mode
Not a wind machine
Standard QT, QB limits
Wind
machine PF
1
1
The following additional data items, appended to the end of the record, are specified for wind machines:
0 if this is not a wind machine (this is the default value).
1 if this is a wind machine which participates in voltage control,

with the values of QT and QB on the data record specifying the
machines reactive power limits.
2 if this is a wind machine which participates in voltage
control, with the specified power factor (see below) and

the machines active power setting (PG on the data record)
used to set the machines reactive power limits.
3 if this is a wind machine which operates at a fixed power,
with the machines reactive power output and reactive power

upper and lower limits all equal, and set based on the specified
power factor (see below) and the machines active power setting
(PG on the data record).
Power factor:
ignored if the wind control mode is 0
is used in setting the machines reactive power limits when the wind control mode is 2 or 3
negative value may be specified when the wind control mode is 3, and is interpreted as a leading power factor
(i.e., the wind machine produces active power and absorbs reactive power).
Page 10

The latest wind turbine model infrastructure in

PSSE a reminder
Any wind model may include one or several of the following wind modules:
IC index
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
Wind module type

Generator
Electrical control
Mechanical control
Pitch control
Aerodynamics
Wind Gust/Ramp
Auxiliary control
New variables of two categories have been added to support the wind models in PSSE:
Variables accessible for users, e.g., model outputs
Variables not accessible for users: primarily for model developers.
Page 11

The Latest Wind Turbine Model Infrastructure in

PSSE (continued)
To add the wind dynamic module as a user written model,
the statement in the dynamic data file should
be added as follows:
IBUS USRMDL ID ModelName IC IT NI NC NS NV
parameters/
IT = 1 for IC = 101
IT = 0 for IC = 102 to 107
Page 12

Simulating Manufacturer Specific

PSSE Wind Models using Python
Module pssewindpy
The idea is to allow for a quick and
automatic model setup process for
manufacturer specific wind generation
models in order to help users in their
familiarization with these models
2011 Siemens
Page 13
Module pssewindpy
Provides Python functions to simulate PSSE manufacturer specific wind models:
Acciona AW15/AW30,
Fuhrlaender FL2500,
GE 1.5/2.5/3.6 MW,
Mitsubishi MWT 92/95/100,
Mitsubishi MPS1000A,
Vestas V47/V80/V82/NM72,
Generic WT3.
Provides demo Python functions to simulate these models.
Provides example Python scripts which can be edited/modified to select/specify
desired wind model:
To add a WTG to any PSSE load flow case
To create WTG model dyre records (.dyr file created).
Page 14

Demo Simulation
5 bus demo test work
Demo run python scripts:
Add selected WTG, its GSU and other components if required (like fixed shunt,
switched shunt etc.)
Update the base case and base snapshot
Simulate WTG response to bus fault or complex wind input (if applicable)
99971
BUSWTG
99972
COLLECTORBUS
99973
LVBUS
99974
HVBUS
99975
SWINGBUS
G
WTG
34.5 kV
34.5 kV
138 kV
138 kV
added by pssewindpy functions
Page 15

GE 1.5 MW WTG Demo Simulation

Python Script to set up GE 1.5 MW demo:
import pssewindpy
psseversion = 32
wtg_mdl
= 'ge15'
wtg_units
= 67
pct_dispatch = 100.0
wtg_mass
= 1
# PSS(R)E Version
# Number of WTG Units

# % dispatch, e.g. 100.0 for 100%
# Shaft Model, =1 for Single, =2
for Double mass
freq
= 60
# Network base freq in Hz
pssewindpy.wtg_init(psse version)
cnvsavfile, snpfile = pssewindpy.wtg_demo_ge(wtg_mdl, wtg_units,
pct_dispatch, wtg_mass, freq)
Python Script to run Simulation:

outfile1 = pssewindpy.wtg_demo_run_collect_bus_flt(cnvsavfile, snpfile)
outfile2 = pssewindpy.wtg_demo_simulate_complex_wind(cnvsavfile,
snpfile)
Page 16

Adding WTG model to PSSE Case

Python function to add any manufacturer specific WTG model to any
PSSE Case
chngpyfile, dyrfile = wtg_create_chng_dyr_files(wtg_mdl, bus_collect, bus_wtg, wtg_units,
pct_dispatch=100,aw_extqctrl=True, aw_cnvrmvar=True, # AW1530
gewt_mass=1,
# GE 1.5/3.6/2.5 MW
ge15_old=False,
# GE 1.5
mwt_crowbar=0, mwt_ndh=0,
# mwt92/mwt95
v8047_shaft=1,
# v80/v47 (enable/disable shaft model)
v82nm72_qctrl='pf', v82nm72_svctype='local',
# V82/NM72
v82nm72_bus_wtg2=None,
v82nm72_gridsvc_kvar=None, v82nm72_svc_bus=None
# V82/NM72 grid SVC
v82nm72_svc_wtgside_bus=None, v82nm72_svc_gridside_bus=None,
v82nm72_pf=0.95,
# V82/NM72 when qctrl=pf
v82nm72_kvar=0.0,
# V82/NM72 when qctrl=var
wt3_data={}, wt3_mass=1)
# generic WT3
Page 17

Adding WTG model to PSSE Case (continued)

Python function to create converted case and snapshot
-From base snapshot:
cnvsavfile, snpfile =
pssewindpy.wtg_create_cnvsav_snp_files(chngpyfile, dyrfile,
basesnpfile=bassnpfile, convertpyfile=None )
-From base DYR file:

cnvsavfile, snpfile =
pssewindpy.wtg_create_cnvsav_snp_files(chngpyfile, dyrfile,
basedyrfile=basdyrfile, convertpyfile=None )
Page 18

Adding WTG model to PSSE Case (continued)

Python function to add Voltage or Frequency protection model
pssewindpy.add_protection_relay(dyrfile, relaymdl, bus_mon, bus_gen,
gen_id, threshold, t_pickup, t_breaker=0.08)
For Voltage protection, model names are: 'vtgdca', 'vtgtpa'

For Frequency protection, model names are: 'frqdca', 'frqtpa
'vtgdca' -> Under Voltage / Over Voltage Bus Disconnection Relay

'vtgtpa' -> Under Voltage / Over Voltage Generator Disconnection Relay
'frqdca' -> Under Frequency / Over Frequency Bus Disconnection Relay
'frqtpa' -> Under Frequency / Over Frequency Generator Disconnection Relay
bus_mon = Bus number where voltage or frequency is monitored

bus_gen = Bus number of generator bus where relay is located
gen_id = Generator ID
threshold= Voltage (pu) or Frequency (Hz) threshold (upper or lower threshold)
t_pickup = Relay pickup time (sec)
t_breaker= Breaker contact parting time (sec), default = 0.08 sec.
Page 19

Generic Wind Generation

Models in PSSE
2009 Siemens
Page 20
Generic Wind Model WT1
The model structure:
WT1G model is a modification

of the standard induction
machine model
Page 21

Type 2 Wind Turbine
Page 22


The first generic model developed was of Type 3.
The model includes 4 modules responsible for:

WT3G1, WT3G2 , doubly-fed induction generator which is mostly an algebraic model to calculate the current
injection to the grid based on commands from controls, with or without the PLL control.
WT3E1, electrical control including the torque control and a voltage control.
WT3T1, the turbine model including a two-mass shaft mechanical system and a simplified method of
aerodynamic conversion, namely P=Kaero** where P is mechanical power, is a pitch angle; this method
was validated against results obtained when using the Cp matrix;
WT3P1, the pitch control.
Page 23


The machine is decoupled from the grid by a power converter: no angular stability problem, the power
conversion is controlled by converters on the machine and grid sides; the latter is also capable to control
voltage, MVAr flow, or power factor.
Page 24

Siemens Wind Turbine Generic Model
The WT4 generic model includes the special entry for Siemens 2.3 MW wind turine. It
was carefully parameterized jointly by Siemens PTI and Siemens Wind Power. We are
planning to separate the Siemens wind turbine model as a separate standard model.
Per SWPs request we have converted the WT4 generic model to earlier PSSE releases
as a user written model.
This is the example of parameterization of the WT4 generic model to match the
response of the vendor specific model of the Siemens 2.3 MW wind turbine.
Oscillations in Pel from the vendor

specific model cannot be
replicated by the WT4 model
because it does not take the
machine dynamics into account
Page 25

Generic wind models as a basis for manufacturer

specific models
Some manufacturers approached us with the request to
Try to parameterize the generic model in order to match their
benchmark - Availability of the benchmark is a must!
If testing with the adjusted parameters shows a significant mismatch
add new features to the generic model and make a new vendor specific
model
Example: for the Fuhrlaender 2.5 MW wind turbine model the active power up-ramping was added to the
WT3
Page 26

Hot issues
2009 Siemens
Page 27
Ficticious Frequency Spikes

Prevent abrupt change in bus voltage angle during and after the fault to
prevent fictitious frequency spikes.
Problem is very acute in weak systems.
Causes false frequency relay trips.
Temporary Solution:
Disabling Frequency Relay.
Mid-Term Solution:
External Intelligent Frequency Relay
with smoothen frequency measurement.
Page 28

Network Non Convergence

Prevent network non-convergence during 3-phase faults
Page 29
Terminal bus voltage angle is uncertain because the reference frame is lost:
no machine flux dynamics for WT3 or PLL for WT4
Many planners use PSSE setups that include the so called Shut down model:
it calculates a number of Network not converged (NNC) events and stops
the simulation if it exceeds the given threshold, e.g. 6 NNCs.
Network Non Convergence
The existing model for GE WTs of 1.5 MW , 1.6, 3.6 MW (Type 3) and 2.5 MW
(Type 4): two NNCs were observed when testing the 1.5 MW and 2.5 MW WTs, with
3-phase bolted fault applied to the POI bus 2 one at the fault inception, another at
the instant of fault clearing
The upcoming model for GE WTs of 1.5 MW, 1.6 MW (Type 3) and 2.5 MW, 2.75
MW, 4.0 MW (Type 4) no NNCs with SCR as low as 3.
s1
Page 30

Slide 30
s1
stykayu1, 6/30/2011
Frequency Events
2009 Siemens
Page 31
Modeling frequency events

Can generic models be used and trusted for simulating frequency events:
loss of generation or loads?
This question first should be addressed to vendor specific models that
provide a benchmark for generic models
Collecting information from field tests or tests using the detailed equipment
level models (PSCAD/EMTDC, MatLab/Simulink) is of urgent importance
Below are some examples illustrating some concerns. The main question
is: does the wind turbine respond to frequency events, as provided by
vendor specific or generic models, seem realistic?
Page 32

Test System
Page 33
100
MW
Load
1000
MW
load
Bus 15 wind turbine

100 MW unit
Bus 19 Hydro 1000

MW unit
Bus 19 GT 100 MW
unit

No governors: drop the WT unit
Page 34
Under-frequency event: only conventional units

Accelerating power (PMECH-PELEC) is negative
Loads are intact. To compensate for the lost generation, outputs of on-line
machines increase at the expense of the rotor kinetic energy: inertial response!
New reduced frequency is such that there is a balance between generation, loads,
and losses
For on-line units, rotor speed and system frequency are the same

Under sudden low frequency conditions, when load demand exceeds the
generation, increase of the machine active power output by means of
converting the rotor kinetic energy into the electrical energy is a sound
response.
For a conventional generation unit, the under-speed protection may shut it
down.
Page 35

Hydro Governor Impact: drop the WT unit
Page 36
Accelerating power (PMECH-PELEC) restores to ~0

New steady state frequency depends on the governor droop

The GEWT (DFIG) vendor specific model: drop the GT

unit, no Hydro governor
Great difference between the WT rotor
speed and the system frequency.
Note: the initial WT rotor speed is
about 1.2 pu (72 Hz). For conventional
machines, rotor speed follows the
frequency. For DFIG it stays constant.
After the GT was dropped off, all the

lost power was picked up by a Hydro.
WTs power does not change.
Page 37

The GEWT (DFIG) vendor specific model: drop the GT

unit, no Hydro governor; WindInertia enabled
WindInertia increased WTG

Pelec by 4% at the expense of
the rotor deceleration
very different physics.
Page 38

MPS-1000 versus WT1; drop GT unit; hydro governor
Page 39
Similar response
Trustworthy: the full order machine model for both models
WT rotor speed and the system frequency have a similar pattern

V80 60 Hz (VRCC) versus WT2; drop GT unit; hydro

governor
Page 40
Similar response
Trustworthy: the full order machine model for both models
WT rotor speed and the system frequency have different patterns

Replace vendor specific GEWT (DFIG) model by generic

WT3 model; drop GT unit; no hydro governor
Full Load
Partial load
WT3 and GEWT provide

identical response
Page 41

For under-frequency events, the system response shown by generic

models is very close to one shown by vendor specific models.
For under-frequency events, the system response shown by both models
seems realistic
Results from the field and from full order models are badly needed to verify
the stability model performance
Page 42

Generic Solar Photovoltaic Model
in PSS E
PSS/E Implementation
Irradiance Model
PV Panel Model
Converter Model
Rest of
System
Irradence Model
1.2
Irradence
0.8
0.6
0.4
Irrad (I)
0.2
Pdc (I)
WT4
Converter/
el. control
Voltage
0
1
10
Time
IrradU1
Page 44
PANELU1
PSS/E
IR,
IQ
PVGU1, PVEU1

Irradiance Model
Standard Model that allows user to vary
the amount of solar irradiance.
User enters up to ~10 data points
(time(s), irradiance(W/m2)) as cons
Initializes based on steady state P/Pmax
For each time step, outputs linearized
irradiance level
Irradence Model
1.2
Irradence
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
1
10
Tim e
Page 45

PV Panel Model
Standard Model for a PV panels I-V
curves
PV panels output varies with
Irradiance, temperature, terminal
voltage (set by MPPT)
User enters maximum Pdc (per
unitized) for different irradiance levels
as cons
For each time step, reads irradiance
level, outputs linearized power order
Page 46

Converter Model use slightly modified WT4 full

converter model
Largely ignores dynamics from DC side.

Different reactive control modes: Voltage control, PF control, Q
control
For each time step, outputs linearized irradiance level
Page 47

Case Studies
of Wind Park Modeling
James W. Feltes and Bernardo Fernandes
(Siemens PTI)
james.feltes@siemens.com
bernardo.fernandes@siemens.com
Ping-Kwan Keung
Now with Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO)
Ping-Kwan.Keung@aeso.ca
Overview
Introduction
Importance of proper modeling of wind
energy projects in system studies
Wind Turbines Equipment Models
Case Study - System Modeling
Analysis Performed
- Power Flow
- Short Circuit
- Transient Stability
Conclusions
Page 49

Introduction
The US is geographically large
Areas with rich wind resources
US Department of Energy in 2008 estimated the wind generation that can be
technically developed:
300 GW needed for a 20% wind scenario
Estimates of the number of buses required to represent each wind turbine in
detail in a load flow model would be 200,000 buses (average size of 3 MW)
Computers of 2030 will likely have no problem doing the calculations
Unlikely that the engineers will be overjoyed at the efforts required to validate,
maintain, and perform studies with this vast amount of extra data.
Page 50

Wind Farm Modeling

There has been research on techniques for the aggregation of the wind
turbines in a wind farm to reduce the size and complexity of the model.
Among others, the methodology proposed by the Western Electricity
Coordinating Council (WECC) represents a straightforward approach that is
quite easy to apply.
It is reported that simulation results using the simplified models derived with
this methodology match simulation results using more detailed models.
However, it is not always clear when these approximation techniques can be
used or when the extra time and effort to develop a full representation of the
wind farm is justified.
This paper compares both models using an actual wind farm configuration
employing calculation results
Page 51

Wind Turbines Equipment Models

The response and model of a wind farm is very
dependent on the type of equipment used.
Directly connected induction generators (Type 1)
Wound rotor induction generators (Type 2)
Doubly-fed induction generators - DFIG (Type 3)
Power converter connected to synchronous or
induction generators (Type 4)
Case study performed with the most common types
of wind turbines being installed in utility scale wind
farms
Only Type 3 and 4 machines are used.
Page 52

Case Study - System Modeling

The wind farm is loosely based on
an actual wind farm. Consistent
with an actual wind farm layout
and turbine spacing.
There are almost 500 turbines in
the wind farm.
Five 34.5 kV feeders. Lengths
range from a few hundred feet to
several miles and have between
50 and 150 turbines each.
The wind farm is distant from load
centers and is connected via a
long 345 kV transmission line.
Page 53

Wind Farm Generation

Summary of the units modeled in the wind farm
Doubly-fed induction machines (GE - Type 3)
Full converter units (Siemens - Type 4)
Group
1
2
3
4
5
Total
Page 54
# Units
76
142
80
149
50
497
Model
Type
DFIG
DFIG
FC
DFIG
FC
-
Turbine
Type
3
3
4
3
4
-
Size
(MW)
1.5
1.5
2.3
1.5
2.3
-
Total
(MW)
114
213
184
224
115
850

Wind Farm Models

Detailed Model representing each of the individual units and the connections
between these units and the system.
- 1119 buses
- 1095 branches.
Very detailed data on the feeder cable system connecting the wind
turbine/generators was used to create this representation.
Equivalent Model. Detailed model is reduced to represent five major groups of
turbines through
- Lumped Sum WTG
- Equivalent Padmount Transformer
- Equivalent Collector System
The methodology proposed by the Western Electricity Coordinating Council
was used to create the equivalent
Page 55

Analysis Performed
Power Flow
Determine flows on transmission lines and transformers and voltage profile
- Voltage Control
- Losses in the Collector System
Short Circuit Analysis
Wind Turbine Generators contribution on the system side
Transient Stability
Check synchronism after disturbances, damping of oscillations, and voltage
recovery following fault clearing are adequate
- Stability transfer Limit
- Power System Oscillations
- Low Voltage Ride Through (LVRT)
Page 56

Power Flow
Steady State System Studies
The similarity of both aggregate and detailed models in terms of wind farm
responses to contingencies in the system is dependent on the accuracy of the
equivalent model.
From the system studies standpoint, an equivalent model is sufficient
Optimal voltage control strategy
A detailed model is desirable. It reflects the voltage profile variation along the
feeders.
Reactive power generated or absorbed.
For the same terminal voltage setpoint, a WTG at the far end of a given feeder
will not respond the same way as the ones closer to the collector bus.
Page 57

Voltage Control Strategy

Figures show the voltage profile for
a given feeder of the Group 1 units
in steady state conditions: 1.000 pu
terminal voltages setpoint.
Colors indicate voltage levels.
Tending to yellow = higher voltages.
Tending to blue = lower voltages.
WTGs controlling their own terminal
voltages
For an event resulting in a voltage
drop in the 345 kV system, the
WTGs do not respond the same way
Page 58

Voltage Control Strategy

Analysis Results
- Detailed Model: Units at the far end do not provide as much reactive
support as the ones closer to the collector bus
The voltage drop is not as severe at the far end of the
feeder.
- Equivalent Model: aggregated generator detects the voltage drop and
injects all available reactive power.
Therefore, the effective reactive injection is unequal along the feeder in the detailed
model, but the net effect into the system is similar
Page 59

Losses in the Collector System

The losses evaluated in steady state are essentially due to the collector system,
transmission lines and transformers
The generator related equipment losses are not taken into consideration
No significant differences between the two wind farm representations in terms of
system losses
WF
Output
(MW)
Reactive
Support Reactors
at POI
(Mvar)
(Mvar)
Power to
138 kV Bus
EQV
Full
Model
Model
EQV
Model
Full
Model
EQV
Model
Full
Model
Voltage at
WF 138 kV
EQV
Full
Model
Model
Power to POI
Voltage at POI
850
510
823.0
822.8
757.4
756.3
1.050
1.049
0.999
0.991
800
340
777.0
777.2
721.5
721.7
1.038
1.038
1.020
1.021
750
340
730.8
730.8
684.9
685.1
1.048
1.048
1.044
1.045
700
340
683.8
683.8
645.5
646.9
1.055
1.056
1.060
1.061
650
170
636.2
636.0
603.2
603.2
1.039
1.039
1.067
1.068
600
170
-110
587.4
587.4
559.0
559.0
1.040
1.040
1.048
1.048
500
170
-110
491.4
491.7
472.6
472.7
1.049
1.050
1.067
1.068
400
-110
394.6
394.6
382.5
382.5
1.035
1.035
1.077
1.078
Page 60

Short Circuit Analysis

Type 3 and Type 4 machines have significantly different dynamic behavior than
either conventional synchronous or induction machines as seen from the system
X represents an effective equivalent reactance and is not the actual subtransient
reactance of the machines
The manufacturers recommended values are applicable to remote system faults,
not for faults on the WTG terminals
No significant differences between the two wind farm models in terms of short
circuit contributions
3 Ph
Fault
Location
Main
138 kV
Main
345 kV
POI
345 kV
Page 61
Total Fault
Currrent
(A)
Wind Farm Contribution (A)
Group 1
Group2
Group 3
Group 4
Group 5
EQV
Full
EQV
Full
EQV
Full
EQV
Full
EQV
Full
EQV
Full
6157
6178
767
755
1390
1394
1137
1167
1235
1275
831
832
2418
2420
707
694
1271
1273
1043
1071
1132
1162
765
764
12548
12537
419
410
708
704
601
623
650
641
450
446

Transient Stability
Stability simulations were performed for two contingencies involving 345 kV
transmission lines in the area surrounding the POI:
- Substation 1 to Substation 2, ckt 1
- POI to Substation 3, ckt 1
All contingencies simulated are three-phase faults cleared by line tripping with a
total clearing time of 6 cycles
Page 62

Stability Transfer Limits

Contingency Analysis
Initially the system was tested for stability at full wind farm output, for both
equivalent and detailed models
The wind farm did not remain stable following contingencies. The loading of the
wind farm was reduced to the level at which both the wind farm and the system
remained stable for the tested contingencies.
Simulation Results
Indicated that the wind farm presents unstable dynamic behavior or WTG trips
for loading greater than approximately 700 MW, which indicates the stability
limit for the case study
When the lack of reactive support and/or need for system reinforcements is
prominent, both equivalent and detailed wind farm models present the same
dynamic performance.
Page 63

Power System Oscillations

Stable Case Wind Generation set to 85% of the installed Capacity
Outage of one 345 kV lines between substations 1 and 2.
Figure shows the active power delivered at the POI for both equivalent and
detailed models
The results show a very similar dynamic behavior for both wind farm models.
900
800
Active Power (MW)
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
-100
-200
0
10
Time (seconds)
Page 64
238 - POWR 70461 TO 7046 CKT 1 : 720MW_CTG 1-2_EQV Model

4555 - POWR 70461 TO 7046 CKT 1 : 720MW_CTG 1-2_Detailed Model

Power System Oscillations Sensitivity Case

Sensitivity Case: Created to evaluate performance under contingencies of both
models for a low generation scenario. The wind farm output was adjusted to 25 %.
Same Contingency as previous
1.3
1.2
Voltage at the POI (pu)
1.1
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0
10
Time (seconds)
Page 65
62 - VOLT 7046 [L_KENDAL345.00] : 212.5MW_CTG SB1 to SB2_EQV Model

62 - VOLT 7046 [L_KENDAL345.00] : 212.5MW_CTG SB1 to SB2_Detailed Model

Low Voltage Ride Through (LVRT)

Low Voltage Ride Through (LVRT) capability of the wind turbines defines that
the wind farm should not trip off line for faults for specific under voltage
conditions.
A three phase fault at the POI was simulated, cleared by the outage of the 345
kV line between the POI and Substation 3. The wind farm loading is 85% or
720 MW.
Simulation Results:
The detailed model shows WTG trips due to the wind turbines low voltage
protection of Group 1 and Group 2 units, while the equivalent model results
show no wind turbine trips occurring.
Page 66

Low Voltage Ride Through (LVRT)

900
The trips occur due to the lack of ability

necessary reactive support to restore the
post contingency voltages inside the
700
Active Power (MW)
of the wind turbines to provide the
800
600
500
400
300
200
100
plant.
0
-1 00
0
Results indicates that, in marginally
10
Time (seconds)
2 38 - POWR 70 461 TO 7 046 CKT 1 : 72 0MW_ CTG POI to SB3_ EQV Model
4 555 - POWR 7 0461 TO 704 6 CKT 1 : 7 20MW_CTG POI to SB3 _Detailed Mode l
stable cases, it is essential to use the

1.5
detailed model
account the WTG responses along the

feeders
WTG Terminal Voltages (pu)
A detailed model better takes into
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
A higher voltage profile along the feeders

may help prevent the turbine trips
Page 67
0.5
0
0.25
0.5
0.75
1.25
1.5
1.75
Time (seconds)
1733 - VOLT 61248 [G103 0.5750] : 720MW_CTG POI to SB3_Detailed Model

3369 - VOLT 62268 [K-61 0.5750] : 720MW_CTG POI to SB3_Detailed Model

2.25
Conclusions
The case studies presented are useful in making decisions on the level of modeling needed
to evaluate the wind farm performance. There is trade-off in accuracy versus complexity of
wind park modeling
Intent of aggregated model is to reflect the response of the wind farm as seen from the
system
For the majority of the steady state studies to evaluate the impact in the system of a given
wind farm, an equivalent representation is sufficient
For detailed steady state studies like the design of voltage control or reactive power
strategies in the wind farm, a detailed model is desirable
A detailed modeling effort is justified in stability studies, since the models must represent
accurately the plant dynamics and its response, particularly for large wind farms in weak
systems
A detailed representation can lead to more realistic results, especially when the dynamic
transfer capability is limited
Obviously, in planning practice detailed layout and data are not available.
Page 68


Pssewindandsolarmodels Casestudies

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Pssewindandsolarmodels Casestudies

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

PSS E Wind and Solar Models.

2011 Siemens Energy, Inc. All rights reserved.

PSSE Wind Models

2011 Siemens Energy, Inc. All rights reserved.

Current View of PTI Web Site

Self-extracting files for most widely

Your request to download PSSE Wind

2011 Siemens Energy, Inc. All rights reserved.

Siemens PTI PSSE Models

2011 Siemens Energy, Inc. All rights reserved.

Other Non-PTI PSSE Models

2011 Siemens Energy, Inc. All rights reserved.

Wind Models Simulation

Siemens Power Technologies International

Handling wind turbine models

2011 Siemens Energy, Inc. All rights reserved.

Handling wind turbine models

The user prepares a dynamic input data file by following

2011 Siemens Energy, Inc. All rights reserved.

Application Features of PSSE Software

2011 Siemens Energy, Inc. All rights reserved.

The latest wind turbine model infrastructure in

Wind machine Control

0 if this is not a wind machine (this is the default value).

1 if this is a wind machine which participates in voltage control,

2 if this is a wind machine which participates in voltage

control, with the specified power factor (see below) and

3 if this is a wind machine which operates at a fixed power,

with the machines reactive power output and reactive power

ignored if the wind control mode is 0

2011 Siemens Energy, Inc. All rights reserved.

The latest wind turbine model infrastructure in

Wind module type

2011 Siemens Energy, Inc. All rights reserved.

The Latest Wind Turbine Model Infrastructure in

2011 Siemens Energy, Inc. All rights reserved.

Simulating Manufacturer Specific

Siemens Power Technologies International

Mitsubishi MWT 92/95/100,

To add a WTG to any PSSE load flow case

To create WTG model dyre records (.dyr file created).

2011 Siemens Energy, Inc. All rights reserved.

Demo run python scripts:

Update the base case and base snapshot

added by pssewindpy functions

2011 Siemens Energy, Inc. All rights reserved.

GE 1.5 MW WTG Demo Simulation

# Number of WTG Units

Python Script to run Simulation:

2011 Siemens Energy, Inc. All rights reserved.

Adding WTG model to PSSE Case

2011 Siemens Energy, Inc. All rights reserved.

Adding WTG model to PSSE Case (continued)

-From base DYR file:

2011 Siemens Energy, Inc. All rights reserved.

Adding WTG model to PSSE Case (continued)

For Voltage protection, model names are: 'vtgdca', 'vtgtpa'

'vtgdca' -> Under Voltage / Over Voltage Bus Disconnection Relay

bus_mon = Bus number where voltage or frequency is monitored

2011 Siemens Energy, Inc. All rights reserved.

Generic Wind Generation

Siemens Power Technologies International

Generic Wind Model WT1