© 2016 IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted.

Permission from IEEE must be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including
reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or
reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in other works.
DOI: 10.1109/PESGM.2016.7741608

Implementation and Validation of WECC Generic

Photovoltaic System Models in DIgSILENT
PowerFactory
Gustav Lammert1 , Luis David Pabón Ospina2 , Pouyan Pourbeik3 , Dirk Fetzer1 , Martin Braun1,2
1
University of Kassel, Kassel, Germany
2
Fraunhofer IWES, Kassel, Germany
3
Electric Power Research Institute, Dallas, USA
gustav.lammert@uni-kassel.de

Abstract—This paper presents the implementation and veri-
fication of generic PhotoVoltaic (PV) system models, developed
by the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC), in the
commercial software simulation tool DIgSILENT PowerFactory.
The scope of this work is large-scale PV plants connected to the
distribution or transmission grid. The general model structure
is described and the required modifications made during the
implementation process are explained in detail. The implemented
PV models were extensively tested and validated against the
EPRI written Renewable Energy Model Validation (REMV)
tool, that represents the WECC specifications. Moreover, the
REMV tool has been validated against real measurements. The
dynamic performance of the models was investigated in response
to voltage and frequency deviations. The simulation results have
verified that the generic PV system models, as implemented in
DIgSILENT PowerFactory, match perfectly the REMV tool, and
therefore correctly represent the WECC model specifications.
Furthermore, the implemented generic PV system models in
DIgSILENT PowerFactory can be downloaded from the author’s
website.
Index Terms—PhotoVoltaic (PV) generation, Distributed Gen-
eration (DG), Inverter Based Generation (IBG), PV modelling,
dynamic models, benchmark models, central station PV plant,
power system stability.
I. I NTRODUCTION
The electrical power system is undergoing fundamental
changes. Transmission and distribution grid operators are
R
challenged with an increasing penetration of Inverter Based
Generation (IBG). The most important generation technologies
within this development are wind turbines and PhotoVoltaic
R
(PV) systems. For power system stability studies, e.g., dy-
namic investigations [1] or static analyses [2], system operators
R
need appropriate simulation models that include specific func-
tionalities for each type of stability study. The development
of these models is a balancing act between accuracy and
simulation time.
For traditional technologies, such as synchronous and induc-
tion generators, there are well-established dynamic models.
For each type of study, an appropriate model can be used,
that captures all of the necessary functionalities. Many years
of experience has led to these standardized models.
For IBG there has been a strong demand on these stan-
dardized models over the last years. Therefore, two industry
working groups, namely the Western Electricity Coordinating
Council (WECC) Renewable Energy Modeling Task Force
(REMTF) and the International Electrotechnical Commission
(IEC) Technical Committee (TC) 88, Working Group (WG)
27, were established in order to develop generic models of
different types of IBG for power system stability studies.
The term “generic” refers to a model that is standard, public
and not specific to any vendor, so that it can be parameterized
in order to reasonably emulate the dynamic behavior of a wide
range of equipment and at the same time does not directly
represent any actual control strategy or divulge proprietary
information [3].
This paper focuses on generic PV system models provided
by WECC REMTF. In [4], the REMTF presents a guideline for
representation of PV systems in large-scale power flow sim-
ulations. In [5], [6], the REMTF gives a general introduction
and a detailed specification of dynamic PV models for time-
domain simulations. The developed models in [5], [6] can be
divided into distribution-connected (small-scale) PV systems
and central station (large-scale) PV plants. The scope of this
research work lies within the implementation and validation
of large-scale PV plants for power system stability studies.
The WECC dynamic models for large-scale PV plants were
initially developed in MATLAB
. After the validation and
tests, the models were implemented in further software tools,
TM
such as GE PSLF , PowerWorld Simulator, Siemens PTI
TM TM
PSS
E and PSCAD /EMTDC . However, there is still a
need to implement the models in other software tools.
DIgSILENT PowerFactory
is a widely used commercial
power system analysis software, especially in Europe and
South America. Numerous transmission and distribution sys-
tem operators as well as research institutes and universities
use this software simulation tool. In order to serve the need
of academia and industry, the new contribution of this paper
is the implementation and validation of WECC generic PV
system models in DIgSILENT PowerFactory. Furthermore,
the implemented generic PV system models in DIgSILENT
PowerFactory can be downloaded from the author’s website.
 REGC_A_0 Iqrmax
The application of WECC generic models is mainly for
Iqcmd 1 Iq
positive sequence power system stability studies [5], [6]. In 1ADAsTg HighAVoltage
UpwardArateAlimitAisAactiveAwhenAQgen0 >A0
particular, the models implemented in this paper are suitable DownwardArateAlimitAisAactiveAQgen0 <A0 Iqrmin
Vt ReactiveACurrent
Management
for transient stability, voltage stability and frequency stability

NetworkAInterface
analysis. However, the models are not necessarily suitable for
REGC_A_1
small-signal stability analysis. LVPLAkArrpwr

The paper is organized as follows. First, the overall model Ipcmd 1 Ip

1ADAsTg
structure and the implementation of the WECC generic PV
LowAVoltage
system models together with the necessary modifications are Lvplsw
LVPL ActiveACurrent
Management
described in Section II. Second, the verification of the models 0
Lvpl1
1
is presented in Section III. Finally, the conclusions and the 1
1ADAsTfltr

open source access to the implemented models can be found zerox brkpt V

in Section IV and V, respectively.

Fig. 2. Control block diagram of the Renewable Energy Generator/Converter
II. M ODEL STRUCTURE AND IMPLEMENTATION (REGC A) model [11].

The implementation of the WECC generic PV system

models was done in DIgSILENT PowerFactory [7]. Therefore, C. Renewable Energy Electrical Control (REEC B) model
[5], [6] were mainly used as a reference. Additionally, [8]–[10]
The REEC B model is depicted in Fig. 3. For implementa-
provide further helpful information.
tion purposes the model was structured as follows.
A. Overview of the model structure The REEC B 0 – current limit logic provides active or
The overall model structure of large-scale PV plants is reactive power priority, which can be set by the current limit
depicted in Fig. 1. The model consists of three parts. The logic. In order to avoid an algebraic loop in PowerFactory by
Renewable Energy Generator/Converter (REGC A) model, the implementing the equations shown in Fig. 3, the following
Renewable Energy Electrical Control (REEC B) model and equations were used for the current limit logic. The signals Iq
the Renewable Energy Plant Control (REPC A) model. The and Ip come from REEC B 2 and REEC B 3, respectively.
latter is optional, depending on whether a plant level control The min() function takes the minimum value of the arguments.
is implemented or not.
(
Imax if Pqflag = 1
Ipmax(Pqflag) = q 2 2 2
B. Renewable Energy Generator/Converter (REGC A) model Imax − min(Iq , Imax ) if Pqflag = 0
The REGC A model is presented in Fig. 2. For imple- (
mentation purposes the model was structured considering its Imax if Pqflag = 0
Iqmax(Pqflag) = q
functionalities as follows. Imax2 − min(Ip2 , Imax2 ) if Pqflag = 1
The REGC A 0 – high voltage region allows reactive
current management during high voltage events. The high The REEC B 1 – fault ride-through offers reactive current
voltage reactive current management block is described in injection for control of the terminal voltage. The Voltage dip
detail in [8]. Furthermore, the sign of the reactive current was signal was calculated with the filtered voltage Vt filt.
modified in order to match the PowerFactory sign convention. The REEC B 2 – Q/V control enables reactive power
The REGC A 1 – low voltage region enables active current control by either a linear feed-forward loop, or two PI loops,
management during low voltage events to emulate the response which allow local voltage or local coordinated Q/V control.
of the inverter phase-locked loop (PLL) during voltage dips;
and power logic during low voltage events to allow for a dbd_Vddbd< Iqh_
REEC_B_1 _ Vt_filt j
controlled response of active current during and immediately Vt
_dbdsTrv
b
∑ Kqv

ifdhVtd<dVdipKdordhVtd>dVupK Iql_
Vrefz
following voltage dips. The low voltage active current man- else
Voltage_dipd=d_

Voltage_dipd=dz
agement block is described in detail in [8]. Vmax
iqinj

PfFlag Iqmax
Qmax Vflag
_ _ b Vmax QFlag b
Pe × _
Iqmax
_dbdsTp ∑ KqpdbdKqi b
s ∑ KvpdbdKvi _ b
z j z s ∑ Iqcmd
pfaref tan Qmin Freeze dstatedi f
Vmin
j z
Voltage_dipd=d_ Freeze dstatedi f
Qext Qgen Vmin Vt_filt Iqmin Voltage_dipd=d_ Iqmin
z×z_
REPC_A Vt REEC_B Vt REGC_A D
_
Vreg ÷ _dbdsTiq
Imax Current
REEC_B_4 REEC_B_2 N Freeze dstatedi f
Voltage_dipd=d_ Limit
Vref PlantfLevel Qext Iqcmd’ Iqcmd Iq Logic
Qref QfControl Pqflag
V/QfControl Current CurrentdLimitdLogic
Qbranch Generator Network QdPrioritydhPqflagd=zK: REEC_B_3
Limit
Pref Model Solution Ipmaxd=dhImax <jIqcmd<K_F<VdIpmind=dz PmaxdTddPmax
PlantfLevel Ipcmd’ Logic Ipcmd Ip Ipmax
Pbranch Pref Iqmaxd=dImaxVdIqmind=djIqmaxdd
PfControl _ N
Freq_ref PfControl Pref ÷ Ipcmd
PdPrioritydhPqflagd=_K: _dbdsTpord
Freg D Ipmind=z
Ipmaxd=dImaxVdIpmind=dz Freeze dstatedi f
Iqmaxd=dhImax <jIpcmd<K_F<VdIqmind=djIqmax PmindTddPmin Voltage_dipd=d_

Vt_filt
Pqflag REEC_B_0
z×z_

Fig. 1. Control block diagram of the WECC dynamic model for large-scale Fig. 3. Control block diagram of the Renewable Energy Electrical Control
PV plants [11]. (REEC B) model [11].
 The REEC B 3 – P control provides an active power TABLE I
reference, which is passed through a first order low-pass filter M ODIFIED PARAMETERS
with upper, lower anti-windup and ramp-rate limits, divided Description Symbol Value
by the filtered voltage.
Enable (1) or disable (0) low voltage power logic [–] Lvplsw 0
The REEC B 4 – power factor control offers a constant
Low voltage condition trigger voltage [pu] Vdip 0
power factor control, where the reactive power is proportional
Local Q regulator proportional gain [pu/pu] Kqp 1
to the actual active power feed-in. Furthermore, this control
Local Q regulator integral gain [1/s] Kqi 10
was modified by using the following equation to determine the Voltage for freezing Volt/VAR regulator integrator [pu] Vfrz 0
tan() of the power factor angle reference Pfaref. The values Maximum plant active power command [pu] Pmax 1
Qinitial and Pinitial are calculated from the power flow solution. Minimum plant active power command [pu] Pmin 0
Qinitial Down regulation droop [pu/pu] Ddn 20
tan(Pfaref) = Up regulation droop [pu/pu] Dup 10
Pinitial
Droop regulator proportional gain [pu/pu] Kpg 1
D. Renewable Energy Plant Control (REPC A) model Droop regulator integral gain [1/s] Kig 10
The REPC A model is presented in Fig. 4. For imple- The modified parameters are valid for all case studies.
mentation purposes the model was structured considering its
functionalities as follows.
The REPC A 0 – V compensation allows line drop com- A. Test system and initialization
pensation at a user-defined bus. Hence, it is possible to control For the validation an equivalent system connected to an
the voltage at a remote bus. infinitive bus, as depicted in Fig. 5, was assumed. The voltage
The REPC A 1 – Q/V control enables closed loop voltage levels are V = 0.6 kV at bus 1, V = 34.5 kV at bus 2 and 3,
or closed loop reactive power regulation at a user-defined bus. and V = 230 kV at the point of common coupling. The step-
The REPC A 2 – P control provides a governor response up transformer, the equivalent collector line and the substation
derived from frequency deviation at a user-defined bus. For transformer are represented with a reactance X = 0.0001 pu
this functionality one must understand how power can be kept each. The measurement and control actions were carried out
in reserve, e.g., sub-optimal maximum power point operation at bus 3. This is not necessarily a realistic system, the intent
of the inverter, to allow for a quick active power injection. here was simply to test the model implementation.
The initial operating point of the PV system is active power
III. VALIDATION P = 0.8 pu and reactive power Q = −0.3 pu considering the
The validation of the implemented WECC generic PV generation oriented sign convention. The initial voltage and
system models in DIgSILENT PowerFactory was carried out frequency at bus 4 is V = 1.0 pu and f = 1.0 pu, respectively.
against the EPRI written Renewable Energy Model Validation The integration time step of the RMS simulation is 0.01 s.
(REMV) tool [12], that represents the WECC specifications. B. Case studies
On the other hand, EPRI’s REMV tool is validated against
real measurements, as presented in [12], [13]. The PV system models were extensively tested and vali-
dated for several case studies, as listed in Table II.
For the verification, example parameters for the REGC A,
The behaviour of the model in response to voltage devia-
REEC B and REPC A models were taken from [11] and
tions was tested for a voltage dip leading to V = 0.5 pu at bus
do not represent the performance of any particular inverter.
4. The remaining voltage at bus 3 is shown in Fig. 6. The event
However, some of the parameters were modified in order to
occurs at t = 0.0 s and is cleared at t = 0.5 s. The associated
achieve a more suitable response for the cases studied in this
case studies of the dynamic behaviour in response to voltage
paper. The modified parameters are listed in Table I.
deviations are (A), (B), (C) and Fig. 7, 8, 10, respectively.
The behaviour of the model in response to frequency
Ibranch
VcmpFlag Vref
0
deviations was tested for an over frequency event leading
|Vreg – _Rc–0–jXcD·Ibranch| 1 1 ,
Vreg
0 1–0–sTfltr
∑

Qmax to f = 1.01 pu at bus 4. The measured frequency at bus 3

0 dbd emax
Qbranch Kc
0
∑ RefFlag
1
Kp–0–Ki 1–0–sTft
1–0–sTfv
Qext
is shown in Fig. 9. The event occurs at t = 0.0 s and is
REPC_A_0 0 s

,
emin
Qmin
Freeze–state
if–Vreg–<–Vfrz
cleared at t = 9 s. The associated case study of the dynamic
1
∑
1–0–sTfltr
0 behaviour in response to frequency deviations is (D) and Fig.
REPC_A_1 Qrefp
11, respectively.
Plant_pref
Pmax FrqFlag
femax 0
0
Pbranch
1 , ∑ Kpg–0–Kig
1 Pref
1–0–sTp 0 s 1–0–sTlag 1
0 femin
Ddn
,
fdbd1q–fdbd2
0 Pmin PV system 1 2 3 4
Freq ∑ ∑
0 0
Dup
Freq_ref
0
REPC_A_2 model

Fig. 4. Control block diagram of the Renewable Energy Plant Control Fig. 5. Test system consisting of the PhotoVoltaic (PV) system model with
(REPC A) model [11]. equivalent transformers and collector line connected to an infinitive bus.
 TABLE II
C ASE STUDIES

Case study Behaviour in response to Mode of operation Required models Vflag Qflag Refflag Frqflag
(A) Voltage deviations Constant Q control REGC A + REEC B N/A 0 – –
(B) Voltage deviations Local coordinated Q/V control REGC A + REEC B 1 1 – –
(C) Voltage deviations Plant level Q control REGC A + REEC B + REPC A N/A 0 0 0
(D) Frequency deviations Governor response, down regulation REGC A + REEC B + REPC A N/A 0 0 1
The designation “N/A” means the parameter flag has no effect on the mode of operation and hence may be set to either 0 or 1.
The designation “–” means the parameter flag cannot be entered because the associated model is not connected.

1.2 1.02

Frequency [pu]
Voltage [pu]

1.0 1.01
0.8
1.00
0.6
0.4 0.99
−0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
Time [s] Time [s]

Fig. 6. Voltage dip at bus 3 for a duration of 500 ms. The associated case Fig. 9. Over frequency at bus 3 for a duration of 9 s. The associated case
studies are (A), (B) and (C). study is (D).

Active power [pu]

Active power [pu]

REMV 1.5 REMV

1.5
PowerFactory PowerFactory
1.0 1.0
0.5 0.5
0.0 0.0
−0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 −0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
Reactive power [pu]
Reactive power [pu]

0.0 0.0

−0.2 −0.2

−0.4 −0.4

−0.6 −0.6
−0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 −0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

Time [s] Time [s]

Fig. 7. Behaviour of active and reactive power in response to a voltage Fig. 10. Behaviour of active and reactive power in response to a voltage
deviation. Case study (A) – constant Q control. deviation. Case study (C) – plant level Q control.

1.2
Active power [pu]

Active power [pu]

2.0 REMV REMV

1.5 PowerFactory 1.0
PowerFactory
1.0 0.8
0.5
0.0 0.6
0.4
−0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
Reactive power [pu]

Reactive power [pu]

1.5 0.0
1.0 −0.2
0.5
−0.4
0.0
−0.6
−0.5
−0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
Time [s] Time [s]

Fig. 8. Behaviour of active and reactive power in response to a voltage Fig. 11. Behaviour of active and reactive power in response to a frequency
deviation. Case study (B) – local coordinated Q/V control. deviation. Case study (D) – governor response, down regulation.
 In case study (A), as shown in Fig. 7, the mode of operation
of the PV system model is constant Q control, where the linear
feed-forward loop in REEC B 2 is activated.
In case study (B), as seen in Fig. 8, the mode of operation of
the PV system model is local coordinated Q/V control, where
the two PI loops in REEC B 2 are activated.
In case study (C), as depicted in Fig. 10, the PV system
model was tested with plant level control. The mode of
operation is plant level Q control, where the PI loop in
REPC A 1 is activated.
In case study (D), as presented in Fig. 11, the PV system
model was also tested with plant level control. The mode of
operation is governor response, down regulation, where the PI
loop in REPC A 2 is activated.
The simulation results of the implemented PowerFactory
models match perfectly with the REMV tool, and therefore the
WECC specifications. Minor deviations are possible because
of the different numerical integration methods of the software
simulation tools and/or the modifications made during the
implementation process.
IV. C ONCLUSIONS
This work presents the implementation and validation of
WECC generic PV system models in the software simulation
tool DIgSILENT PowerFactory. The focus of this paper is
large-scale PV plants connected to the distribution or trans-
mission grid.
The overall model structure is presented and the main
functionalities are described briefly. Furthermore, the required
modifications to the REGC A, REEC B and REPC A models
are explained in detail.
The implemented PV models were extensively tested and
validated against the EPRI written REMV tool, that represents
the WECC specifications. Furthermore, the REMV tool has
been validated against real measurements. For the validation,
example parameters were used, that do not represent the
performance of any particular inverter. The dynamic behaviour
of the models was investigated in response to voltage and
frequency deviations for several case studies. The simulation
results have shown that, for the selected modes of operation,
the generic PV system models, as implemented in DIgSILENT
PowerFactory, match perfectly the REMV tool, and therefore
correctly represent the WECC model specifications.
However, it is needless-to-say, further research and devel-
opment continues and revisions, modifications and changes to
the implemented models are quite possible and likely.
V. O PEN SOURCE
The implemented WECC generic PV system models in
DIgSILENT PowerFactory can be downloaded from http:
//www.uni-kassel.de/eecs/en/fachgebiete/e2n/software.html.
The authors request that publications derived from the use
of the downloaded PV system models, explicitly acknowledge
that fact by citing this paper.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors gratefully acknowledge the fruitful and in-
sightful discussions during this research work with Malte
Hof (Fraunhofer IWES, Kassel, Germany), Tina Paschedag
(University of Kassel, Kassel, Germany) and Irina Green
(California ISO, Folsom, USA).
The implementation and validation of the WECC generic
PV system models in DIgSILENT PowerFactory was also part
of the CIGRE/CIRED joint WG C4/C6.35 on “Modelling and
dynamic performance of inverter based generation in power
system transmission and distribution studies”.
This research work was supported by the German Federal
Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy and the Pro-
jektträger Jülich GmbH (PTJ) within the framework of the
projects Smart Grid Models (FKZ: 0325616) and DEA-Stabil
(FKZ: 0325585A).
R EFERENCES
[1] G. Lammert, T. Hess, M. Schmidt, P. Schegner, and M. Braun, “Dynamic
grid support in low voltage grids – fault ride-through and reactive
power/voltage support during grid disturbances,” in Power Systems
Computation Conference (PSCC), 2014, Aug 2014, pp. 1–7.
[2] D. Fetzer, G. Lammert, S. Gehler, J. Hegemann, and M. Braun, “A bisec-
tion newton power flow algorithm for local voltage control strategies,”
Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, submitted for publication.
[3] North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) Special
Report. (2010, May) Standard models for variable generation.
[Online]. Available: http://www.nerc.com/files/Standards%20Models%
20for%20Variable%20Generation.pdf
[4] Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) Renewable Energy
Modeling Task Force. (2010, August) WECC PV plant power
flow modeling guidelines. [Online]. Available: https://www.wecc.biz/
Reliability/WECCPVPlantPowerFlowModelingGuide.pdf
[5] Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) Re-
newable Energy Modeling Task Force. (2012, Septem-
ber) WECC solar PV dynamic model specifi-
cation. [Online]. Available: https://www.wecc.biz/Reliability/
WECCSolarPVDynamicModelSpecification-September2012.pdf
[6] Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) Renewable
Energy Modeling Task Force. (2014, April) WECC solar plant
dynamic modeling guidelines. [Online]. Available: https://www.wecc.
biz/Reliability/WECCSolarPlantDynamicModelingGuidelines.pdf
[7] DIgSILENT GmbH, “DIgSILENT PowerFactory,” Version 15.2.
[8] Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) Renewable Energy
Modeling Task Force. (2014, January) WECC second generation wind
turbine models. [Online]. Available: https://www.wecc.biz/Reliability/
WECCSecondGenerationWindTurbineModels012314.pdf
[9] National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). (2014, November)
User guide for PV dynamic model simulation written on PSCAD
platform. [Online]. Available: http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy15osti/62053.
pdf
[10] R. Elliott, A. Ellis, P. Pourbeik, J. Sanchez-Gasca, J. Senthil, and
J. Weber, “Generic photovoltaic system models for WECC - a status
report,” in Power Energy Society General Meeting, 2015 IEEE, July
2015, pp. 1–5.
[11] Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) Renewable
Energy Modeling Task Force. (2015, June) WECC central
station photovoltaic power plant model validation guideline.
[Online]. Available: https://www.wecc.biz/Administrative/150616
wecc pv plant model val guide final.pdf
[12] Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), “Renewable En-
ergy Model Validation (REMV),” Version 2.0. [Online].
Available: http://www.epri.com/abstracts/Pages/ProductAbstract.aspx?
ProductId=000000003002003352
[13] Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). (2014, December) Technical
update on generic wind and solar PV model development and validation.
Product ID 3002003351. [Online]. Available: http://www.epri.com/
abstracts/Pages/ProductAbstract.aspx?ProductId=000000003002003351