# Grid Code Frequency Response Working Group System Inertia

Antony Johnson, System Technical Performance

Overview Background to System Inertia Transmission System need Future Generation Scenarios Initial Study Work International Experience and Manufacturer Capability Transmission System Issues Conclusions .

Frequency Change Under steady state the mechanical and electrical energy must be balanced When the electrical load exceeds the mechanical energy supplied. . The rate of change of frequency fall will be dependant upon the initial Power mismatch and System inertia The speed change will continue until the mechanical power supplied to the transmission system is equal to the electrical demand. the system frequency will fall.

Modern Generator technologies such as Wind Turbines or wave and tidal generators which decouple the prime mover from the electrical generator will not necessarily contribute directly to System Inertia Under the NGET Gone Green Scenario. the higher the System Inertia (assuming no frequency response) the longer it takes to reach a new steady state operating frequency. significant volumes of new generation are unlikely to contribute to System Inertia . Directly connected synchronous generators and Induction Generators will contribute directly to System Inertia.Why is Inertia Important Inertia is the stored rotating energy in the system Following a System loss.

What is inertia? The stored energy is proportional to the speed of rotation squared 3 types of event cause a change in frequency Loss of generation (generator. importing HVDC link etc) Loss of load Normal variations in load and generator output Loss of Generator on the system Frequency Falls as demand > generation Stored energy delivered to grid as MW .

The maths behind inertia ½Jω2 H= MVA H = Inertia constant in MWs / MVA J = Moment of inertia in kgm2 of the rotating mass ω = nominal speed of rotation in rad/s MVA = MVA rating of the machine Typical H for a synchronous generator can range from 2 to 9 seconds (MWs/MVA) ∂f ∂t = ∆P 2H ∂f/∂t = Rate of change of frequency ∆P = MW of load or generation lost 2H = Two times the system inertia in MWs / MVA .

Quantitative Analysis The effect of System Inertia is being quantitatively analysed through two methods: Energy Balance spread sheet approach Utilising simple predictive output models based on an energy balance System Study using a Test Network Utilising Dynamic System Models .

Energy Balance Spread Sheet Approach System Considered 16. 6.5 GW of Wind. See subsequent slides . 1.9 GW Nuclear.6 GW Carbon Capture Load Response 2% per Hz Assumed loss – 1800MW System Balanced at t = 0 seconds Inertia considered in isolation General Conclusion The higher the inertia the longer it takes for the steady state frequency to be reached.

5 48 47.5 50 49.5 47 46.5 46 0 10 20 30 Time (s) H=0 H=3 40 50 60 .Low Resolution 50.5 Frequency Hz 49 48.Energy Balance Spread Sheet – Results Wind Generation with and Without Inertia Variation in Inertia .

6 49.4 48.6 48.4 49.2 49 48.High Resolution 50.Energy Balance Spread Sheet – Results Wind Generation with and Without Inertia Variation in Inertia .2 50 49.2 0 1 2 3 Time (s) H=0 H=3 4 5 6 .8 Frequency (Hz) 49.8 48.

7.51 -2816...5.69 lod_101_L1 sym_103_G3_E sym_103_G3_C sym_103_G3_A ~ ~ ~ sym_103_G3_D G sym_103_G3_B G G Test network 101 BUS001 278.11 20. 61.42 1.51 0..lne_103_101_C8 Shunt 3 1 565. 1947.00 1.7.00 565....52 64.05 1. 83.88 11.39 287.29 604. 404.59 107 GEN 9826. 66.35 82..38 21.29 -557.18 1.52 9.43 21.5...94 25. 458..5.98 1.40 -610.21 -6.. 26..3.63 21.....53 -9380.87 105 BUS005 273. 180...95 1..71 -0.43 -165.8.87 -1494.96 trf_105_105G 1275. 192.6.01 1353.58 -0.21 -6....7. -678.. -3189. 810.. 1 Shunt 4 lod_105_L5 105 GEN 21.65 0. -168. -0.00 26.88 3998. -361. 284.25 106 GEN1 trf_106_106G3 trf_106_106G1 lne_106_107_C7 G ~ sym_106_G1 sym_105_G5 3999. 214..06 1 trf_102_102G 1 10 generators 5 generators providing frequency response 1320 MW load switched in (equivalent to loss of a 1320 MW generator) 104 BUS004 273. 440.0.21 -6.29 0. 284. ~ G trf_107_107G 1 lod_107_L7 sym_107_G7 9826.80 trf_106_104_T3 trf_106_105_T2 lne_105_103_C3 1971..4.. 77...89 ~ G -568.99 17.2..5.25 958.03 1051. 69.02 18.98 80..25 Shunt 1 565.35 87.65 -0. 286. 52.00 -187. 84. 3634. 85.11 604.2.72 -208.72 0.98 80.60 -3989.29 -84.43 1999...40 643.8. -515...60 1 General Load lod_106_L6 ~ G 21.67 1499.00 5.66 21.00 9380.26 571. -34.46 106 GEN3 107 BUS007 408.48 1.21 -6.53 ~ G DIgSILENT lod_103_L3 .. -182.6.63 1 G ~ TEST MACH..72 9.. -35.67 0.01 14. 214.75 -1993.8.6...07 3999.02 1491. 404.91 85.00 7.2.65 -239.00 0. 1244.52 64.00 -17. 456.0.0.29 103 GEN 103 BUS003 273.72 86..7.99 12...65 -239..73 11.. 92. 93..11 0.98 80.54 102 GEN sym_102_G2 1999.21 -6.63 1499.64 0.99 -0. 1244.88 11....11 2826.63 -1275.03 106 BUS006 405..1.52 -0. 458..05 -78.00 11.98 80..6.72 -610.3..4.00 G ~ 86.1.98 14...98 80.64 61.69 1.70 48.4. -175.80 Shunt 2 lne_105_104_C2 lne_105_104_C1 lod_104_L4 -557.. 64.7.1..05 66. 92.00 -150. -195..20 90. 3634.01 3. 87..4. 810.88 64.57 85.11 1319.87 643..98 -1960.77 69.8.73 77. 85.05 66.8. 0..5.04 -1491.43 -165.5.9. 1241.66 -3987. 572..5.8.67 64.63 trf_103_103G 1 lne_105_103_C4 102 BUS002 408.52 -9815.73 83.67 19196.97 1.70 48. 64.4.02 -2.72 -84.00 86.04 -0.2...3.73 11.05 -78.4....20 84. 66.66 sym_106_G3 1 3998. 246.64 77.11 Basic GB system representation Approx 23GW demand lne_104_101_C6 lne_104_101_C5 trf_102_101_T1 1 lod_102_L2 ~ G 565.87 565. 26.

00 NON FREQENCY RESPONSE: Generation.00 48.00 .00 2.21E+4 2.183 Hz 49.00 [s] 60.11E+4 0.Base case large disturbance – normal system inertia 50. 0.00 48.000 12.00 FREQUENCY RESPONSE: Generation. 2596.00 [s] 60. Active Power in MW X = 10.00 106 BUS006: Electrical Frequency in Hz 24.400 s DIgSILENT 3027.24E+4 2.04 49.000 21331.00 48.86 49. 2812.00 [s] 60. Active Power in MW 36.400 s 22713 MW 36. 2381.14E+4 2.32 49.00 24.314 MW 12.00 24.28E+4 2. 2166.50 49.000 12.00 X = 10.00 36.68 49.14 0.18E+4 2. 1951.

0. 2865.00 2.00 48.00 [s] 60.00 NON FREQENCY RESPONSE: Total active power from generators NOT providing frequency reponse .10 49. 0.46 49.25 x base case inertia 48.base case inertia NON FREQENCY RESPONSE: Total active power from generators NOT providing frequency reponse .0.25 x base case inertia 48. 1948.18E+4 2.00 . 2177. 2636.5 x base case inertia FREQUENCY RESPONSE: Total active power from generators providing frequency reponse .24E+4 2.14E+4 2.11E+4 0.Decreasing system inertia – large disturbance (½ and ¾ base case inertia) 50.00 36.00 24.00 106 BUS006: Frequency (Hz) base case inertia 106 BUS006: Frequency (Hz) 0. 2407.00 24.78 49.0.21E+4 2.00 36.50 0.25 x base case inertia 24.00 3095.000 12.00 [s] 60.000 12.5 x base case inertia NON FREQENCY RESPONSE: Total active power from generators NOT providing frequency reponse .14 48.800 Hz DIgSILENT 60.28E+4 2.000 12.82 48.5 x base case inertia 106 BUS006: Frequency (Hz) 0.00 36.00 FREQUENCY RESPONSE: Total active power from generators providing frequency reponse .base case inertia FREQUENCY RESPONSE: Total active power from generators providing frequency reponse .00 [s] Y = 48.0.

International Experience and Manufacturer Capability Hydro Quebec requires Generating Units in a Power Plant to have an inertia constant which is compatible with the inertia constants of existing Power Plants in the same region.5s. GE Wind advertise a Wind Inertia Control on their Website Enercon have completed modelling and field tests on a wind turbine and published a paper on this subject Other manufacturers are believed to be investigating an inertial capability . The minimum inertia for wind power must equate to 3.

Transmission System Issues Optimum Performance Capability requirements based on the minimum needs of the Transmission System. Prevention of under and over frequency incidents Control System Design and performance Filtering requirements if any (Noise Generation?) Overall Co-ordination Inertial contribution – Delivered from all plant Primary Response – FSM – Containment Secondary Response – FSM .Correction .

Conclusions Machine inertia significantly affects the rate and rise and rate of fall of System Frequency It is likely to be cheaper (although some form of quantitative analysis would be required) to require all generators to contribute to System Inertia rather than having no requirement and requiring larger volumes of fast acting frequency response? Non Discrimination The inertial delivery requirements needs to be quantified Delivery / Capability Control System Settings / Filtering .