42
1, JANUARY 2011
Investigation of the Local Passive Anti-Islanding
Scheme in a Distribution System Embedding a
PMSG-Based Wind Farm
Walid El-Khattam, Member, IEEE, Amirnaser Yazdani, Senior Member, IEEE, Tarlochan S. Sidhu, Fellow, IEEE,
and Ravi Seethapathy, Senior Member, IEEE
Abstract—This paper evaluates the effectiveness of different
commercial relay functions in a local passive anti-islanding process
for a permanent-magnet synchronous generator (PMSG)-based
wind farm which is interfaced with a radial distribution network.
The results are obtained through a comprehensive set of real-time
simulation studies, conducted on a detailed topological model of a
single-machine equivalent of the PMSG-based wind farm and the
network, using three different commercial relays. The paper intro-
duces the study set-up and methodology and, additionally, details
of the mathematical and simulation models of the PMSG-based
wind farm. The models and the methodology presented in this
paper can be used, directly or with minor modifications, for many
other impact-assessment studies.
Index Terms—Direct-drive distribution system, local passive is-
landing detection, permanent-magnet synchronous generator, pro-
tection, PWM, relay, wind energy.
I. INTRODUCTION
W IND energy is the fastest-growing technology amongst
different distributed generation technologies [1], [2].
Distributed generation can positively or negatively affect the
interconnection points [3]. For example, in radial distribution
networks, distributed generators can cause bidirectional power
flows, alter the existing voltage profiles, affect the operation
and coordination of the existing protection devices such as
relays, reclosers [4], etc., and compromise safety. In partic-
ular, they can cause energized electric islands within the host
networks [5], [6]. These islands can form due either to faults
causing an upstream feeder breaker to open automatically, or to
inadvertent opening of the breaker for maintenance operations.
The concern is that a sustained electric island can entail power
quality problems, disturb power restoration during out-of-phase
reclosing, and cause severe overvoltage transients due to the
islanded feeder capacitance and existing shunt capacitor banks
Manuscript received February 24, 2010; revised May 14, 2010; accepted June
05, 2010. Date of publication September 07, 2010; date of current version De-
cember 27, 2010. This work was supported by the Hydro One Network Inc.
Paper no. TPWRD-00134-2010.
W. El-Khattam, A. Yazdani, and T. S. Sidhu are with the Department of
Electrical and Computer Engineering, The University of Western Ontario,
London, ON, N6A 5B9, Canada (e-mail: walid.elkhattam@uwo.ca; ayaz-
dani@eng.uwo.ca; sidhu@eng.uwo.ca).
R. Seethapathy is with Hydro One Networks Inc., Toronto, ON, Canada
(e-mail: ravi.seethapathy@hydroone.com).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPWRD.2010.2061240
0885-8977/$26.00 © 2010 IEEE
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 26, NO.
[7], as a result of the network’s loss of neutral conductor. Thus,
to circumvent the foregoing scenario, local distribution com-
panies (LDCs) attempt to disconnect all distributed generators
within the island, by means of various anti-islanding tech-
niques, once an island forms. The IEEE and other organizations
have identified anti-islanding standards [8]–[10]. As such, a
number of anti-islanding techniques have already been adopted
commercially [5], [6], [11]–[13].
The existing anti-islanding schemes can be broadly classi-
fied as communication-based and local schemes. Communica-
tion-based schemes, which can be based on a variety of media
and techniques, are reliable and theoretically have zero (practi-
cally negligible) non-detection zones. However, they are costly
due to their reliance on point-to-point communications. Local
schemes, however, process the point-of-connection current and
voltage signals of a distributed generator. Thus, they respond
to excursions of certain derivatives of the measured signals, in
order to detect the formation of an island.
Local anti-islanding schemes can themselves be divided into
passive and active schemes. Active anti-islanding schemes de-
tect an island by deliberate imposition of disturbances on the
host network, directly through the distributed generators, and
are especially convenient to be incorporated in electronically-in-
terfaced generators. Thus, they introduce periodic small distur-
bances to the network (which is considered their main disadvan-
tage) and detect the formation of islands by local measurements
[12]. By contrast, passive anti-islanding schemes solely rely on
local measurements of the point-of-connection voltage/current
signals, with no introduction of artificial disturbances. There-
fore, passive anti-islanding schemes do not disturb the network
and thus do not cause power quality problems [7].
This paper evaluates the suitability of commercial relays
and their functions for the local passive anti-islanding process.
Specifically, a wind farm based on the direct-drive permanent
magnet synchronous generator (PMSG) is considered in this
paper, as an aggregate of distributed generators interfaced with
a distribution network. Thus, the idea is to equip the wind
farm with a commercial relay installed at the point of common
coupling (PCC), and to utilize the built-in functions of the
relay for anti islanding. The evaluation is based on real-time
laboratory tests conducted on three commercial relays with
different functions, in conjunction with a detailed time-domain
simulation of the wind farm and a real distribution network.
The study reported in this paper identifies the most effective
relay functions for the local passive anti-islanding process,
EL-KHATTAM et al.: INVESTIGATION OF THE LOCAL PASSIVE ANTI-ISLANDING SCHEME
Fig. 1. Signals typically used for local passive anti-islanding process.
along with the test/simulation set up used to obtain the results.
Further, the paper presents the mathematical model and the
steps taken for the development of the PMSG-based wind farm
model. The models and the methodology presented in this
paper can be used, directly or with minor modifications, for
many other impact-assessment studies.
II. COMMERCIAL RELAY FUNCTIONS FOR ANTI-ISLANDING
Fig. 1 illustrates the signals that carry the signature of a dis-
turbance and are typically processed by relay functions to reveal
the formation of an island. The signals are tested in terms of the
following phenomena.
1) Over-/under-voltage (OV/UV) excursions due primarily to
the reactive-power mismatch between the (aggregates of)
generators and loads within the islanded portion of a net-
work [7];
2) Over-/under-frequency (OF/UF) excursions due to the
real-power mismatch between (the aggregates) of genera-
tors and loads within the islanded portion of a network [7];
3) Rates of change of the generators real power output [11] or
frequency (ROCOF) [7], [13]; and
4) Voltage vector phase-angle shift (Vshift) [7], [10].
In this paper, a number of relay functions are evaluated in terms
of their effectiveness for the local passive anti-islanding pro-
cessed, based on the above-mentioned phenomena.
III. STUDY SYSTEM STRUCTURE AND COMPONENTS
Fig. 2 illustrates a simplified single-line schematic diagram
of the distribution network under study. The network is real
and operated by an LDC. Single- and three-phase loads are
fed from the feeders and laterals, at various voltage levels. The
network embeds one main breaker with an automatic recloser,
which hereafter is referred to as the main recloser, in addition
to a capacitor bank and a number of fuses along the feeders
and laterals. Further, the network is assumed to be interfaced
at the PCC with a wind farm which consists of six 1.67 MW,
PMSG-based, gearless, variable-speed wind-power units.
IV. EVALUATION CRITERIA AND SETUP
A. Evaluation Criteria
The study reported in this paper is based on the assumption
that the formation of an island is a consequence of the main
breaker opening, due to either a fault incident or an inadver-
tent operation; we may refer to either scenario as a disturbance.
Thus, the local passive anti-islanding scheme of the wind-farm
relay is expected to detect the disturbance and disconnect the
wind farm before the main recloser acts.
43
Fig. 2. Simplified schematic diagram of the study distribution network.
Fig. 3(a) illustrates the LDC’s recommended sequence of
events prompted by a fault incident. As shown in Fig. 3(a), the
fault is assumed to take place at . Then, subject to a max-
imum average fault detection delay of about 33 ms, the main
breaker relay detects the fault, commands the main breaker to
open, and initializes the main recloser timer. Two types of main
reclosers are assumed in this study to explore the possibility of
utilizing a fast recloser. The two reclosers are hereafter referred
to as Recloser A and Recloser B, having delays of 1000 ms
and 500 ms respectively, as specified by the LDC. Therefore,
the distribution network is reconnected to the main grid at
ms if Recloser A is installed, or at ms if
Recloser B is in place. On the other hand, the LDC assumes a
maximum of about 50 ms for a typical distributed generator to
drop out, in addition to a maximum of 200 ms for motors to
disconnect and/or for a fault arc to extinguish. Thus, the wind
farm relay should detect the fault and command the wind farm
breaker to open before ms for a network with Recloser
A, or before ms for a network with Recloser B; these
instants are marked in Fig. 3(a) as the “maximum disturbance
detection time”.
Fig. 3(a) also indicates a maximum average tripping delay of
133 ms (calculated based on the manufacturer’s datasheets) for
the main breaker. It is thus expected that, subsequent to a fault
incident an energized island is formed no later than
ms. As Fig. 3(a) indicates, this leaves a “maximum permissible
islanding detection time” of 617 ms for a system with Recloser
A, and of 117 ms for a system with Recloser B; detection of
a fault within the maximum permissible disturbance detection
time naturally satisfies the maximum permissible islanding de-
tection time requirements.
If the main breaker is inadvertently opened at , an is-
land forms in less than about 133 ms, that is, the time taken by
the main breaker to open. As shown in Fig. 3(b), in this case the
main recloser is not even triggered, its time delay does not come
into the picture, and the maximum permissible disturbance de-
tection time is the same as the maximum permissible islanding
44
Fig. 3. Sequence of events due to (a) a fault incident and (b) inadvertent
opening of the main breaker.
detection time. Unlike the faulted operation scenario explained
earlier, in the inadvertent breaker opening scenario the instant
at which the wind farm and other distributed generators must be
dropped out is not constrained by the recloser time, but it is ef-
fectively limited by the existing standards or common practices.
For example, the standard IEEE Std. 1547 requires a maximum
aggregate delay of 2 s for detecting an island and disconnecting
a 10-MW distributed generator [8], [9], whereas the LDC in-
volved in this study recommends that a wind farm be discon-
nected from the network with a time delay more or less similar
to those outlined in Fig. 3(a) for a faulted operation scenario.
Therefore, in this paper we consider the maximum disturbance
detection times of 783 (for a system with Recloser A) and 283
ms (for a system with Recloser B), for both a faulted operation
scenario and a inadvertent breaker opening scenario.
B. Laboratory Set-Up
Fig. 4 illustrates a simplified diagram of the laboratory set up
used for the study reported in this paper. First, a detailed model
of the network, embedding a single-machine equivalent of the
wind-farm, is simulated in the PSCAD/EMTDC software envi-
ronment under different disturbed conditions. Then, the result of
each simulation case is saved in the form of a ComTrade file and
delivered to the Real-Time Player (RTP). The PCC three-phase
voltage and the wind farm current signals are then retrieved by
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 26, NO. 1, JANUARY 2011
Fig. 4. Schematic diagram of the test set up used to evaluate the performance
of the relays for the local passive anti-islanding process.
TABLE I
AVAILABLE RELAY FUNCTIONS
Fig. 5. Block illustration of a logic mechanism for the anti-islanding process.
TABLE II
STEADY-STATE PDCS
the RTP from the ComTrade file, played back in real time, am-
plified, and concurrently processed by three commercial relays,
Relay 1, Relay 2, and Relay 3. Finally, for each operation sce-
nario the relay response times are measured and evaluated with
respect to the criteria introduced in Section IV-A, to determine
whether or not a particular relay or function would satisfy the
anti-islanding requirements with Recloser A or Recloser B. The
results are discussed in Section VI.
Table I shows the relay functions of the three relays under test.
It is to be noted that some relay function can be blocked if the
relay quantities exceed pre-specified limits set within the relay
algorithms. The relay settings have been chosen judiciously to
achieve desired dependability and security, and are specified in
Table VIII of Appendix A.
Fig. 5 illustrates a diagram of the logic mechanism that com-
bines different relay functions for anti-islanding process and dis-
connection of the wind farm.
C. Pre-Disturbance Steady-State Conditions (PDCs)
The results in this paper are obtained for three pre-disturbance
steady-state conditions (PDCs) which each correspond to a pen-
etration level of the wind farm, as shown in Table II. The pene-
tration level is defined as the ratio of the real and reactive powers
delivered by the wind farm to their counterparts demanded by
the network loads including the power losses. With reference to
Table II, the worst-case PDC in terms of islanding detection is
EL-KHATTAM et al.: INVESTIGATION OF THE LOCAL PASSIVE ANTI-ISLANDING SCHEME
TABLE III
RELAY OPERATING TIMES FOR FAULTS AT LOCATION F1
A blank cell indicates a correct nontripping.
that of II, i.e., the penetration level of 100%, where the wind
farm real and reactive powers closely match their counterparts
demanded by the network.
D. Disturbance Incidents
The disturbances that the network is subjected to are due to
either faults or inadvertent opening of the main breaker; each
disturbed operating case is preceded by one of the PDCs intro-
duced in Table II.
As fault incidents, single-phase to ground, double-phase to
ground, and three-phase to ground (permanent or self-clearing)
faults are imposed on the network of Fig. 2, at either the location
F1 or F2. The two locations are strategically chosen in the up-
stream and downstream sides of the wind farm. The simulation
is set up in such a way that the main breaker opens (fuse-saving
scheme) and creates an island, 100 ms after the fault inception
moment. This time delay is assumed to consist of a 30-ms fault
detection time and a 70-ms tripping time, which are deliberately
chosen to be less than the respective maximum average values
of 33 ms and 133 ms [Fig. 3(a)]. The fault can be permanent
or self clearing (temporary). For a permanent fault, the main
breaker is kept open for the rest of the simulation period to let
the island establish. However, for a self-clearing fault, the fault
is held in place for 120 ms, that is, the fault is cleared 20 ms after
the opening of the main breaker and formation of the island.
To simulate an inadvertent breaker opening scenario, the main
breaker is opened and kept so for the entire simulation period.
45
V. SIMULATION MODEL
To enable the studies reported in this paper, a detailed sim-
ulation model of the distribution network, its components, and
the wind farm is developed in the PSCAD/EMTDC software
environment [14]. The feeders are represented by equivalent
sections, and the voltage-/frequency-dependent P/Q model is
adopted for the loads. The wind farm is represented by a 10-MW
equivalent single-machine model which includes all details of
the power electronics, switching scheme, and controls, to en-
able the inclusion of dynamic interactions with the network,
harmonics, potential resonance phenomena, etc. The single-ma-
chine modeling of the wind farm is necessary to permit the con-
duction of simulations within reasonable time periods, which
would have been too lengthy if all six wind-power units of the
wind farm had been concurrently simulated in their full detail.
The model development and components are presented in Ap-
pendix B.
VI. STUDY RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
A. Performance of Relay Functions During Faults
To obtain the results, 36 faulted operation scenarios have
been simulated; the scenarios correspond to different PDCs, as
well as various faults of different types and locations (see Sec-
tions IV-C and IV-D). Tables III and IV indicate the response
times of each relay. It is observed that Relays 1 and 3 are able
to detect all disturbance incidents, irrespective of the recloser
type, with time delays less than the maximum permissible
disturbance detection times introduced in Section IV.A (783
46
TABLE IV
RELAY OPERATING TIMES FOR FAULTS AT LOCATION F2
A blank cell indicates a correct nontripping.
ms for a system with Recloser A and 283 ms for a system
with Recloser B). More importantly, the two relays detect the
disturbance in less than 50 ms which, taking into account a
maximum tripping time of 50 ms for the wind farm breaker [see
Fig. 3(a)], means that the wind farm is dropped out even before
the main breaker opens at 100 ms, i.e., before an island forms.
The only exception to this is one case for Relay 3 where the
disturbance is detected in 64.1 ms after the fault inception. The
results further indicate that, in 66.7% of the cases the response
time of Relay 2 is such that the relay can be employed for a
system with Recloser A. On the other hand, Relay 2 is able to
detect only 63.9% of the disturbance incidents based on the re-
quirements of a system with Recloser B. In 33.3% of the cases,
Relay 2 is unable to detect a disturbance incident, irrespective
of the criterion adopted. The failure can be attributed to the
inability of the relay to track frequency excursions caused by
the disturbances, which, in turn, has resulted in the blockage of
both the frequency and voltage functions of the relay.
The analysis of the results reported in Tables III and IV indi-
cates the following.
• Relays 1 and 3 correctly do not detect any over-current phe-
nomena (OI function is not available in Relay 2), since the
wind-power units constituting the wind farm are power-
electronically controlled and thus of a limited fault cur-
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 26, NO. 1, JANUARY 2011
rent injection capability, as explained in Appendix B. This
property is further highlighted in Fig. 6 which illustrates
the PCC voltage and wind farm current contribution, for
a fault at the main substation bus (location F1, Fig. 2). It
is noted that, prior to the fault inception at s, the
wind farm has been delivering an output power of about
0.315 p.u.; subsequent to the fault, the PCC voltage drops
to about 0.1 p.u., but the wind farm current remains limited
to about 0.67 p.u.
• Relays 1 and 3 are able to detect all disturbance incidents
through their OV/UV functions. However, Relay 2 detects
only 63.9% of the incidents through its OV/UV function.
This is due to the relay ineffectiveness in tracking the net-
work frequency, which results in the blockage of the relay
OV/UV functions.
• Relay 1 is able through its Vshift function to detect 19.4%
of the total fault disturbance incidents. These incidents
correspond to the concurrent imposition of three-phase to
ground faults at both locations F1 and F2. The reason for
missing the rest of the incidents is either the small ampli-
tudes of the voltage excursions or the failure of the relay
frequency tracking scheme required for the Vshift func-
tion. According to the manufacturer, the Vshift function in
Relay 1 performs only if both a voltage excursion is of an
EL-KHATTAM et al.: INVESTIGATION OF THE LOCAL PASSIVE ANTI-ISLANDING SCHEME
Fig. 6. PCC voltage waveform and the wind farm current waveform, for a three-
phase fault taking place at F1, in Fig. 2.
adequately large magnitude and the frequency can be prop-
erly tracked. It should be noted that the Vshift function in
Relay 1 measures the time interval between two consecu-
tive voltage zero crossings, and then compares the result
of one cycle with that of the next cycle using a specific
number of samples. This requires the network frequency to
be within a pre-specified range to be tracked by the relay
and to enable the Vshift function. In cases where the fre-
quency has been tracked, the Vshift function has failed due
to small magnitudes of the voltage excursions. The Vshift
function is not embedded in Relay 2 or Relay 3.
• The OF/UF function of Relay 1 is activated by all fault dis-
turbance incidents. However, Relays 2 and 3 are able to
only detect 63.9% of the disturbances through their OF/UF
functions. The reason is that the frequency variation rates
turn out to be beyond the relays measurement capabilities.
For the relays under study, the OF/UF function is accom-
panied by a delta voltage supervisory scheme, which com-
pares the maximum of the sampled values of two consec-
utive windows of equal lengths, as specified by the manu-
facturer; if the delta voltage is greater than the pre-speci-
fied value, the OF/UF function of the relay is blocked for
the corresponding cycle. This provision is necessary to sta-
bilize the frequency function under transients, for example
during a tripping process or at the beginning of a fault inci-
dent. For a number of simulation case studies, the voltage
variation exceeds the permissible range and leads to the
blockage of the OF/UF function.
• Through their ROCOF functions, Relays 1, 2, and 3 are
able to detect, respectively, 88.9%, 52.8%, and 38.9% of
the fault incidents. It should be pointed out that the ROCOF
function requires a minimum of 100 ms, including the cal-
culation time for ROCOF, the time for filtering, and the
time for the output contact operation. Also, if the ROCOF
is higher than the limits sets by the relay frequency tracking
algorithm, the function does not operate, as is the case for
the results reported here.
B. Performance of Relay Functions Under Inadvertent
Breaker Opening
In addition to faulted operation, the relay functions have also
been evaluated under inadvertent opening of the main breaker.
The tests have been performed for all the three PDCs speci-
fied in Table II, and the results are reported in Table V. It is
47
TABLE V
INADVERTENT MAIN BREAKER OPENING CASE: RELAY OPERATING TIMES
observed that all the three relays detect the inadvertent main
breaker opening in less than 283 ms. Therefore, they are suit-
able for anti-islanding application under the inadvertent breaker
opening, irrespective of the recloser type. The performance of
the relays functions can be summarized as follows.
• All three relays detect the disturbances through their
OV/UV functions, except in two cases: for the PDC I,
Relay 1 takes a long time, while Relay 2 does not detect
any voltage excursion; this is believed to be due to the fact
that the network steady-state voltage is 1.05 p.u.
• Relay 1 does not detect any disturbance through its Vshift
function. The reason is that the voltage excursions are
smaller than the relay pre-specified thresholds. Vshift
function is not embedded in Relay 2 or Relay 3.
• Except in two cases, all three relays are able to detect the
disturbances through their OF/UF and ROCOF functions.
In the two cases, Relay 2 is not able to detect any distur-
bance due to the fact that the rates of frequency variations
turn out to be outside of the pre-specified range.
C. Relay Selection Criteria
To select the fastest relay function and/or relay, the “cor-
rect-operation index”, , the “fail-to-operate index”, , and
the “relay dependability index” are defined as shown in (1)–(3),
at the bottom of the next page [15], where signifies the number
of combinations of relay functions. The last index, i.e., (3), rep-
resents the fact that, even though only one relay function may
suffice to detect disturbance incidents, a combination of more
relay functions typically translates into a higher relay depend-
ability.
Tables VI and VII include the values of , and relay
dependability index, based on the maximum permissible distur-
bance detection times of 783 ms (for a system with Recloser A)
and 283 ms (for a system with Recloser B). The results clearly
indicate that Relays 1 and 3 perform considerably better than
Relay 2, in terms of the overall detection of the disturbances.
It is also noted that Relay 1 exhibits a superior performance as
compared with Relay 3, in terms of the relay functions and relay
dependability.
48
TABLE VI
RELAYS PERFORMANCE INDICES
TABLE VII
RELAYS DEPENDABILITY (%) BASED ON NUMBER OF OPERATING FUNCTIONS
VII. CONCLUSION
This paper evaluated the effectiveness of different relay func-
tions and their combination in an anti-islanding process for a
PMSG-based direct-drive wind farm interfaced with a radial dis-
tribution network. The results were obtained through detailed
time-domain simulation studies conducted for a real distribu-
tion network and a single-machine equivalent of a hypothetical
wind farm, in the PSCAD/EMTDC software environment. The
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 26, NO. 1, JANUARY 2011
waveforms were recorded, played back in real time, and fed to
three commercially available relays. The conclusions are as fol-
lows.
• The over-/under-voltage function can be relied upon as a
fast and relatively reliable indicator of an islanding inci-
dent. However, the voltage-shift function turns out to be
ineffective in the islanding detection process.
• Both the over-/under-frequency and rate-of-change-of-fre-
quency functions are reliable for an anti-islanding process.
However, they are rather slow and can be blocked if the
relay is unable to track the frequency, calling for better al-
gorithms in terms of the speed of response and frequency
tracking capability.
APPENDIX A
RELAY SETTINGS
The relay settings are reported in Table VIII.
APPENDIX B
SIMULATION MODEL DEVELOPMENT
A. Circuit and Controls of the Wind System
Fig. 7 illustrates a simplified schematic diagram of the
PMSG-based wind system. The wind system consists of a
wind turbine that is directly coupled to a multi-pole PMSG,
an ac-dc-ac power-electronic converter, and the interface
transformer . The ac-dc-ac converter, in turn, consists of
a rotor-side converter (RSC) and a grid-side converter (GSC).
The RSC and GSC are three-phase voltage-sourced converters
that are connected in parallel from their dc-side terminals to a
dc-link capacitor, , and controlled based on the pulsewidth
modulation (PWM) switching strategy. The ac-side terminals
of the RSC are connected to the PMSG stator, whereas those of
the GSC are interfaced with the low-voltage side of via a
three-phase LC filter. The high-voltage side of is connected
to the distribution network (see Fig. 2) and is defined as the
PCC. The filter mitigates the current switching harmonics
injected by the GSC into the network. The per-phase series
inductance and shunt capacitance of the filter are denoted by
and , respectively. signifies the parasitic resistance of
the inductor and also embeds the impact of the GSC conduc-
tion power loss. The wind system delivers the real and reactive
power and to the network, at the PCC, which are referred
(1)
(2)
(3)
EL-KHATTAM et al.: INVESTIGATION OF THE LOCAL PASSIVE ANTI-ISLANDING SCHEME 49

TABLE VIII where , and signify the turbine power, the PMSG
RELAYS SETTINGS airgap power, and the PMSG developed torque, respectively.
The damping factor represents the impact of friction and
windage, and is the drive-train inertia constant in s. is
formulated as

(B.3)

where is the air density, is the turbine radius, is the wind

speed, is the base power, is the turbine power ef-
ficiency, is the tip-speed-ratio, is the tur-
bine angular speed, and is the turbine pitch angle. It should
be noted that the turbine and PMSG shaft speeds are related
through , where is the PMSG number of pole
pairs. However, as in (B.1) and (B.2), is equal to, and can
be replaced by, . Based on (B.1), variable-speed operation of
the wind system is enabled by controlling through the RSC,
as explained next.
PMSG Torque Control: The mathematical model of the
PMSG in its rotor field coordinate system is given by [16]–[18]
Fig. 7. Simplified schematic of the PMSG-based wind system representing a
10-MW wind farm.
(B.4)

to as the “wind system real power” and “wind system reactive (B.5)
power”, respectively.
Fig. 7 also includes simplified block diagrams of the con- (B.6)
trollers of the RSC and GSC. The function of the RSC and its
associated control scheme is to regulate the PMSG stator cur- where is the base frequency, and , and are the
rent (and thus the electrical torque), for the ultimate goals of PMSG -axis inductance, -axis inductance, and rotor flux
variable-speed operation and maximum power-point tracking magnitude. The abovementioned model does not consider any
(MPPT). As Fig. 7 indicates, the control is exercised in the damper windings for the PMSG.
PMSG rotor field coordinate system which is synchronized to As (B.6) suggests, can be controlled by a combination of
the machine rotor angle . On the other hand, the GSC and and . However, is typically a small value. More-
its control scheme regulate the dc-link voltage, that is, . The over, simultaneous control of and introduces nonlinearity
GSC also enables the control of the wind system reactive power in the control process. Therefore, only is used to dynam-
. The control of the GSC is carried out in a dq reference ically control , while is regulated at zero. This strategy
frame that is synchronized to the filter output voltage, i.e., , also results in the lowest machine current for a given torque. The
through a phase-locked loop (PLL). aforementioned control objectives are achieved through the two
following control laws:
B. Mathematical Model and Controls of Wind System
In what follows, the per-unit (p.u.) version and the base value
of a variable (or parameter) are represented by and , re- (B.7)
spectively. Moreover, the - and -axis components of a per-unit
three-phase variable are denoted by and , respec-
tively.
Drive-Train: The electromechanical system of the wind (B.8)
system of Fig. 7 consists of a mechanical subsystem and an
where and are, respectively, the - and -axis compo-
electrical subsystem. The former is the wind turbine while the
nents of the PMSG stator terminal voltage to be reproduced by
latter is represented by the PMSG. The two subsystems are
the RSC. The two signals are first normalized to the dc-link
related by
voltage, i.e., , transformed to the frame using the rotor
angle , and fed to the PWM scheme of the RSC. Assuming an
(B.1) adequately large PWM switching frequency, one has
and . The signals and are the reference com-
mands for and , respectively, . In (B.7) and
(B.2) (B.8), the terms inside the square brackets represent two corre-
sponding proportional-integral (PI) compensators whose gains
50 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 26, NO. 1, JANUARY 2011

are and (for ), and and (for ); the other in turn, render and proportional to, and thus controllable
terms are introduced to eliminate the dynamic coupling between by, respectively, and , as
and .
Assuming that , based on (B.6) is calculated (B.12)
as (B.13)

(B.9) The wind system reactive power is the resultant of and the
reactive power delivered by , as

where the torque reference command is determined through (B.14)

the MPPT strategy, as explained next.
Maximum Power-Point Tracking: For a given in In most cases, it can be assumed that .
(B.3) is a decreasing function of . Therefore, under normal op- Dynamics of and are described by
erating conditions, is kept to a small value, near zero, to enable
the maximum possible turbine power; at excessively high wind (B.15)
speeds, a pitch-angle control mechanism (not discussed in this
paper) automatically increases to limit the PMSG power and (B.16)
speed. Regardless, for a given peaks for a unique
tip-speed-ratio which is denoted by . Thus, to maximize the and can be independently controlled through the two fol-
turbine power at every wind speed, an MPPT strategy should, lowing control laws:
directly or indirectly, keep constant and equal to . One
way to achieve this goal is to force the turbine torque to change
in proportion to the square of the turbine speed [19]. In view of
(B.1), this is equivalent in changing the PMSG electrical torque (B.17)
in proportion to the square of the turbine speed, that is

(B.10)
where the proportionality constant depends on the turbine
parameters and characteristics. is then delivered to the
PMSG torque-control scheme and imposed on the PMSG.
The approximation in (B.10) is plausible since and thus
change relatively slowly due to the drive-train inertia.
Moreover, the PMSG torque-control scheme can be made
remarkably fast through proper selection of the controller
parameters , and . sufficiently large. and are the reference commands for
It can be shown that the MPPT process results in the turbine
power being proportional to the cube of the wind speed, that is
(B.11)
DC-Link Voltage Regulation and Grid-Side Reactive-Power
Control: The grid-side control of the wind system effectively
boils down to the control of the power components and
(shown in Fig. 7). The former control is used to regulate the
dc-link voltage ; in this process, the wind system real power
is a by-product, as will become evident shortly. The latter
control, however, determines the wind system reactive power
which affects the power factor that the wind system ex-
hibits to the network. Thus, can be regulated to a constant
value, or alternatively it can be controlled through a closed-loop
mechanism to regulate the PCC voltage magnitude, if the grid
is non-stiff. In this paper, the former option has been exercised.
and are independently controlled based on a current-con-
trol strategy [20]. The control is exercised in a frame whose
-axis is aligned with the space vector corresponding to the
voltage , by means of the PLL [21]. Thus, and
, where is the magnitude of . These properties,
(B.18)
where and are, respectively, the desired - and -axis
components of the GSC ac-side terminal voltage to be synthe-
sized by PWM. The two signals are normalized to , trans-
formed to the frame using the angle provided by the PLL,
and fed to the PWM scheme of the GSC. It can be assumed that
and , if the PWM switching frequency is
and , respectively. The terms inside the square brackets rep-
resent two corresponding PI compensators whose gains are
and (for ), and and (for ); the other terms are in-
troduced to eliminate the dynamic coupling between and ,
and to mitigate the impact of PCC voltage disturbances on
and . To protect the GSC against external faults, and are
bound to upper limits that may themselves be functions of the
turbine pre-disturbance power, based on a pre-determined pro-
file. The bounds, however, guarantee that the short-circuit cur-
rent of the PMSG-based wind system at its rated power output
is limited to 1.2–1.5 p.u.
The dc-link voltage dynamics are described by the following
power balance equation, ignoring the power losses and the en-
ergy exchanged with the interface reactor :
(B.19)
where is the PMSG stator terminal power and, based on
(B.12), is expressed in terms of . Equation (B.19) represents
EL-KHATTAM et al.: INVESTIGATION OF THE LOCAL PASSIVE ANTI-ISLANDING SCHEME
a control plant for which is the output, is the disturbance
input, and is the control input. On the other hand, tracks
. Therefore, can be regulated by , for example, based on
the following control law:
(B.20)
where is the reference command for the dc-link voltage.
is an estimate of , included in the controller as a feed-forward
signal, to enhance the performance of the dc-link voltage regu-
lation process. This estimate can be obtained using a variety of
techniques. In this paper, it is assumed that , where
is calculated from (B.6). The terms inside the square brackets
define a PI compensator whose gains are and .
In steady-state and quasi-steady regimes: 1) the PMSG/tur-
bine speed excursions and 2) the dc-link voltage fluctuations
can be ignored. Therefore, based on (B.2) and (B.19), one finds
and . On the other hand, ignoring the PMSG
and power-electronic converter power losses, we have
and . Thus, based on (B.11), we have
(B.21)
Equation (B.21) indicates that the wind system real power is
not a directly controllable variable, but a function of (the cube
of) the wind speed. Thus, to create each PDC (Section IV-C,
Table II) the wind speed is set in the simulation model to an
appropriate value, based on (B.21).
C. Simulation Model of Wind System
The parameters of the wind system of Fig. 7 have been
scaled such that the wind system represents a 10-MW wind
farm. Thus, a detailed switched model of the wind system unit
is developed in the PSCAD/EMTDC software environment. In
the model, the RSC and the GSC both are pulsewidth modu-
lated with the switching frequency of 3060 (51 60) Hz, their
PWM carrier signals are synchronized to the angle and, to
allow the maximum utilization of the dc-link voltage [22], their
PWM modulating signals are augmented with the respective
third-order harmonics. The PMSG model has been realized by
dependent current sources, integrators, multipliers, and adders,
based on (B.4)–(B.6). The turbine is modeled by a FORTRAN
code, based on parameters and analytical equations presented
in [23]. The wind system controllers include (B.7)–(B.8),
(B.9)–(B.10), (B.17)–(B.18), and (B.20), whose parameters are
calculated in such a way that:
• the transfer functions and are
of the first order, with a time constant of 1.0 ms;
• the transfer functions and are of
the first order, with a time constant of 1.0 ms;
• the transfer function has a closed-loop
bandwidth of about 550 rad/s and a phase margin of about
53 degrees; and
• the wind-power unit generates its rated power at the wind
speed of m/s.
51
TABLE IX
WIND SYSTEM TURBINE AND PMSG PARAMETERS
TABLE X
WIND SYSTEM BASE VALUES
TABLE XI
WIND SYSTEM PARAMETERS
The wind system and controller parameters are presented in
Tables IX to XI. Care should be taken in interpreting the PMSG
parameters; the PMSG is assumed to be a 10.6-MVA, 1.2-kV,
9.24-Hz, 120-pole machine. However, its per-unit parameters
are expressed in terms of the base voltage and frequency of, re-
spectively, 1.551 kV and 377 rad/s, corresponding to a 1.9 kV
(rms, L-L), 60-Hz wind system. It should also be noted that, un-
like the conventional three-phase systems where the line-to-neu-
tral rms voltage is taken as the base voltage, for the wind system
the line-to-neutral peak voltage represents the base voltage. As
such, the base current is represented by the peak value of the
rated ac current of the wind system.
REFERENCES
[1] C. Abbey, F. Katiraei, C. Brothers, L. Dignard-Bailey, and G. Joos,
“Integration of distributed generation and wind energy in Canada,” in
Proc. IEEE Power Eng. Soc. General Meet., Jun. 2006.
[2] T. Ackermann, Wind Power in Power Systems. New York: Wiley,
2005.
[3] W. El-Khattam and M. M. A. Salama, “Distributed generation tech-
nologies, definitions and benefits,” Elect. Power Syst. Res. J., vol. 71,
no. 2, pp. 119–128, Oct. 2004.
[4] R. A. Walling, R. Saint, R. C. Dugan, J. Burke, and L. A. Kojovic,
“Summary of distributed resources impact on power delivery systems,”
IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 1636–1644, Jul. 2008.
[5] W. Xu, K. Mauch, and S. Martel, An Assessment of DG Islanding
Detection Methods and Issues for Canada CANMET Energy Tech-
nology Centre—Varennes, Natural Resources Canada, Rep. # CETC-
Varennes 2004-074 (TR), Jul. 2004 [Online]. Available: http://cetc-
varennes.nrcan.gc.ca/en/er_re/inter_red/p_p.html?2004-074
52
[6] Assessment of Islanded Operation of Distribution Networks and Mea-
sures for Protection 2001 [Online]. Available: http://www.berr.gov.uk/
files/file 15099.pdf, Ecconnect, DTI/Pub URN 01/1119, DTI
[7] A. Dysko, C. Booth, O. Anaya-Lara, and G. M. Burt, “Reducing unnec-
essary disconnection of renewable generation from the power system,”
IET Renew. Power Gener., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 41–48, Mar. 2007.
[8] IEEE Standard for Interconnecting Distributed Resources with Electric
Power Systems, IEEE Standard 1547, Jul. 2003.
[9] IEEE Standard Conformance Test Procedures for Equipment Intercon-
necting Distributed Resources with Electric Power Systems, IEEE Stan-
dard 1547.1, Jul. 2005.
[10] B. Kroposki, S. Englebretson, C. Pink, J. Daley, R. Siciliano, and D.
Hinton, Validation of IEEE P1547.1 Interconnection Test Procedures:
ASCO 7000 Soft Load Transfer System National Renewable Energy
Laboratory, Golden, CO, NREL/TP-560-34870, Sept. 2003 [Online].
Available: http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/34870.pdf
[11] M. A. Redfern, O. Usta, and G. Fielding, “Protection against loss of
utility grid supply for a dispersed storage and generation unit,” IEEE
Trans. Power Del., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 948–954, Jul. 1993.
[12] J. E. Kim and J. S. Hwang, “Islanding detection method of distributed
generation units connected to power distribution system,” in Proc.
IEEE PowerCon 2000—Int. Conf. Power System Technology, Dec.
2000, vol. 2, pp. 643–647.
[13] W. Freitas, X. Wilsun, C. M. Affonso, and H. Zhenyu, “Comparative
analysis between ROCOF and vector surge relays for distributed gen-
eration applications,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 20, no. 2, pt. 2, pp.
1315–1324, Apr. 2005.
[14] PSCAD/EMTDC v. 4.2 Manitoba HVDC Research Centre. Win-
nipeg, MB, Canada.
[15] F. C. Chan, “Performance assessment and control of power system re-
laying,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 986–994, Apr. 1989.
[16] S. Morimoto, Y. Takeda, T. Hirasa, and K. Taniguchi, “Expansion of
operating limits for permanent magnet motor by current vector control
considering inverter capacity,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 26, no. 5,
pp. 866–871, Sep./Oct. 1990.
[17] P. C. Krause, O. Wasynczuk, and S. D. Sudhoff, Analysis of Electric
Machinery. New York: IEEE Press, 1995.
[18] A. Yazdani and R. Iravani, “A neutral point clamped converter system
for direct drive variable speed wind power unit,” IEEE Trans. Energy
Convers., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 596–607, Jun. 2006.
[19] R. Datta and V. T. Ranganathan, “Variable-speed wind-power genera-
tion using doubly fed wound rotor induction machine—A comparison
with alternative schemes,” IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 17, no.
3, pp. 414–421, Sep. 2002.
[20] C. Schauder and H. Mehta, “Vector analysis and control of advanced
static VAR compensators,” IEE Proc.—Gener., Transmiss., Distrib.,
vol. 140, no. 4, pp. 299–306, Jul. 1993.
[21] S. Chung, “A phase tracking system for three phase utility interface
inverters,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 431–438,
May 2000.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 26, NO. 1, JANUARY 2011
[22] J. A. Houldsworth and D. A. Grant, “The use of harmonic distortion
to increase the output voltage of a three-phase PWM inverter,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. IA-20, no. 5, pp. 1224–1228, Sep./Oct. 1984.
[23] J. G. Slootweg, H. Polinder, and W. L. Kling, “Representing wind tur-
bine electrical generating systems in fundamental frequency simula-
tions,” IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 516–524, Dec.
2003.
Walid El-Khattam (S’00–M’06) received the Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees
in electrical engineering from Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt, in 1991 and
1996, respectively, and the Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from the Uni-
versity of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada in 2005.
Since 2007, he has been an Assistant Professor in the Department of Elec-
trical Power and Machines, Ain Shams University. He was previously with the
University of Western Ontario (UWO), London, ON, Canada as Postdoctoral
Fellow. His area of research is distributed generation performance, planning,
and protection, power distribution systems, and probabilistic analysis of power
systems.
Amirnaser Yazdani (M’05–SM’09) received the Ph.D. degree in electrical en-
gineering, from the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada, in 2005.
He was with Digital Predictive Systems (DPS) Inc., Mississauga, ON, active
in design and simulation of high-power electronic converters for wind energy
systems. Presently, he is an Assistant Professor with the University of Western
Ontario (UWO), London, ON, Canada. His research interests include dynamic
modeling and control of switching power converters, distributed generation, and
microgrids.
Tarlochan S. Sidhu (M’90–SM’94–F’04) received the Ph.D. degree from the
University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada, in 1989.
He is currently the Chair of the Department of Electrical and Computer Engi-
neering, a Professor, and the Hydro One Chair in Power Systems Engineering at
the University of Western Ontario (UWO), London, ON. His areas of research
interest are power system protection, monitoring, and control.
Dr. Sidhu is a Fellow of the Institution of Engineers (India) and the Institution
of Electrical Engineers (U.K). He is also a Registered Professional Engineer in
the Province of Ontario and a Chartered Engineer in the U.K.
Ravi Seethapathy (M’76–SM’09) is currently Manager—Distributed Genera-
tion, and Advanced Grid Development, Hydro One Networks Inc., Toronto, ON,
Canada He sits on several T&D/DG committees at the PES/IEEE and CIGRE.
Dr. Seethapathy is a Registered Professional Engineer in the Province of
Ontario.