DRPT2008 6-9 April 2008 Nanjing China
Selection of HVDC Models for Stability Studies
Xiao-ming Mao, Yao Zhang, Feng Ye and Xiao-long Chen
Abstract--Representation of High Voltage Direct Current
(HVDC) transmission links in power system stability studies
requires special attention. A detailed model, while very precise,
requires considerable time for modeling and calculation.
Simplified models, on the other hand, do not always provide
sufficiently accurate results. In this paper, simplified and detailed
HVDC simulation models are described and compared. The dc
system modeled is the ±500-kV, 3000-MW 12-pulse bipolar link
between Gaopo rectifier station in Guizhou province and
Zhaoqing inverter station in Guangdong province, China.
NETOMAC, a powerful and flexible software package, is
employed for modeling and calculations. Simulation cases based
on the China Southern Power Grid data are presented and
analyzed. Appropriate model selection is discussed.
Index Terms--HVDC Transmission, Simulation Models,
Stability Analysis.
I. INTRODUCTION
I N order to investigate the behavior of HVDC
transmission in a power system, suitable simulation models
are required. The representation of the dc systems requires
consideration of converter model, dc transmission line model,
interface between ac and dc systems and dc system controls
model [1].
In a stability program, the ac network equations are
represented in terms of positive-sequence fundamental
frequency quantities. This imposes a basic limitation on the
modeling of the dc systems. In particular, commutation
failures and response of dc system to unsymmetrical ac faults
cannot be accurately predicted [2].
In spite of the limitation, models of various degrees of
detail have been effectively used to represent dc systems in
stability studies [3]. Each model tends to have unique
characteristics tailored to meet the specific needs of its
application. And standard models of fixed structures for
representation of dc systems in stability studies are not
available [4]. Instead, three categories of models have evolved:
(1) simple model, (2) response model, and (3) detailed model
with flexible modeling capability.
A detailed model, while very precise, requires considerable
time for modeling and calculation. Simplified models, on the
other hand, are not accurate enough under specific conditions.
This work was supported by key projects of National Science Foundation of
China under project 50337010.
X. M. Mao is with the Faculty of Automation, Guangdong University of
Technology, Guangdong, China (e-mail: mxmsunny@163.com).
Y. Zhang is with College of Electrical Engineering, South China
University of Technology, Guangdong, China.
F. Ye and X. L. Chen are both with the Faculty of Automation,
Guangdong University of Technology, Guangdong, China.
978-7-900714-13-8/08/ ©2008DRPT
In this paper, simplified and detailed HVDC simulation
models are described and compared. The system modeled is
the ±500-kV, 3000-MW 12-pulse bipolar link which connects
the Gaopo rectifier station in Guizhou province to the
Zhaoqing inverter station in Guangdong province, China.
Model suitability is discussed.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section II
describes the classifications of HVDC models. Section III
depicts the development of the detailed model and a response
model for the Gaopo-Zhaoqing (GZ) HVDC link. Simulations
comparing different dc system models are presented in Section
IV. Proper model selection is discussed in Section V. Section
VI contains concluding remarks.
II. CLASSIFICATIONS OF HVDC MODELS
The dc converter in stability studies is represented by
equations relating average values of dc quantities and RMS
values of ac fundamental components. The ac/dc interface is
modeled so that the ac system provides equivalent dc voltage
source for the dc network while the dc system is represented
as the load (negative for inverter) of the ac network.
According to the level of modeling of dc lines and dc controls,
HVDC models are usually categorized as follows.
A. Simple Models
For remote dc links, which do not have a significant impact
on the results of the stability analysis, very simple models are
usually adequate. The dc link may be represented as constant
active and reactive power injections at the converter buses or
represented by the static converter equations and the interface
between ac and dc systems is treated in a manner similar to
power-flow analysis [1].
B. Response Models
Response models tend to well reflect the performance of a
dc system under various system operating conditions with less
detail. It provides a compromise between simulation accuracy
and modeling efficiency. Usually the dynamics of the dc line
and pole controls may be neglected. The lines are represented
in their resistance and the pole control action is assumed to be
instantaneous. Many of the control functions are represented
in terms of their net effects, rather than actual characteristics
of the hardware [5, 6].
During ac faults, it is necessary to have adequate
representation of the actions of controls to reflect the dc
system response. Special mode shift algorithm is required to
assume the proper control shift depending on the temporal
state of ac/dc systems. Constraints are imposed on the current-
order level to keep the current within minimum and maximum
1933
 DRPT2008 6-9 April 2008 Nanjing China
limits where the voltage-dependent current-order limit
(VDCOL) is taken into account.
C. Detailed Models
Detailed model uses more complicated descriptions of the
dc line and especially the HVDC controls hence it can reflect
HVDC dynamics and response to the ac disturbances precisely
[7-10]. The resistance, inductive and capacitive effects of the
dc line is represented. Pole controls capable of representing
different control options such as constant current control,
constant extinction angle control, constant direct voltage
control, etc are provided. The converter angle limits are
embedded in the controls so that no special mode shift
algorithm is required.
III. MODEL ESTABLISHMENT
The HVDC system modeled in this paper is a 3000-MW,
±500-kV 12-pulse bipolar link between the Gaopo converter
station in GZ province and the Zhaoqing converter station in
Guangdong province, China. The two terminals are connected
through 880 kM dc lines. The rectifier normally controls the
direct current while the inverter maintains a constant voltage.
All HVDC schemes used to date have controls of three
layers, the master control, the pole control, and the valve
control. The master control and pole control layers work as
decision levels. The valve control is the executive level and
neglected in control modeling in stability studies.
Usually, an HVDC link is required to transmit a scheduled
power. In such an application, the master control layer
receives the power schedule, modifies it by auxiliary power
control and then converts the power signal into the
coordinated bi-pole current order commensurate with the dc
voltage. Pole control is the core of HVDC control and
activates the appropriate controller of the rectifier and inverter
station according to the state of ac/dc systems and produces
the firing angle for both rectifier and inverter stations.
Detailed and response model provide the identical
representation for the master control whereas different levels
of modeling for the pole control.
A. Development of the Detailed Model
In our simulation, the dc line is separated into nineteen
segments each with representation of resistance as well
inductive and capacitive effects to model dynamics.
Pole control at the rectifier side of the GZ HVDC link has a
current controller and a voltage controller. The voltage
controller limits dc voltage to below1.05 p.u. while the current
controller takes the maximum and minimum current
constraints and the VDCOL into consideration. Besides, the
minimum firing angle control (i.e. constant ignition angle-CIA
control) is embedded implicitly in the current controller by
angle limits.
Pole control of the inverter station includes a voltage
controller (Vd control), a constant extinction angle (CEA)
controller, a constant current (CC) controller and a current
error controller (CEC). The first three controllers maintain a
constant direct voltage, extinction angle, and direct current
respectively while the current error controller controls the
1934
direct voltage with a voltage feedback loop to provide a
transition between the current control and the voltage control
of the inverter to facilitate control stabilization.
Denote control error as the difference between the reference
value and the measured value of a dc quantity, in the GZ
HVDC system the control modes are properly shifted
according to control error and appropriate angle limits. Fig.1
illustrates the diagram of the rectifier pole control where K
and T represent the gain and integration time constants of PI
control respectively.
VDCOL
Ud
PI control Arc cos
Min
Iref ∆ Id Firing
angle a
I d reference
Mux
a limit
Id measured
U margin
∆ Ud KId
KUd
Uref
Ud measured
Mux
TId
T Ud
Mux
Fig. 1. Diagram for rectifier pole control of GZ HVDC link
Auxiliary controls for ac system and tap changer control are
also represented in detail in the model developed. For ac/dc
interface, the correct representation of the commutating
voltage and the converter transformer together with the
tertiary bus to which compensation capacitance and filters are
connected is provided.
B. Development of a Response Model
As for the response model, the dc line is modeled by its
resistance. The rectifier is assumed to have CC control and
CIA control. The inverter is assumed to posses CEA, CC and
β (constant ignition advance angle) control where β control
provides a voltage-current characteristic of positive slope for
stable transition between CEA and CC control. The three
modes of control are
z Mode 1- Rectifier on CC and inverter on CEA control
z Mode 2- Rectifier on CIA and inverter on CC control
z Mode 3- Rectifier on CIA and inverter on β control
The mode shift logic is implemented by
V Cosα min − Vdoi Cosγ min
I t = dor (1)
Rcr + Rd − Rci
where Rcr and Rci are the equivalent commutating resistance
of the rectifier and inverter, Vdor and Vdoi are the ideal no-load
direct voltage at the rectifier and inverter terminal. Rd is the
resistance of the dc line. And α min and γ min correspond to
the minimum rectifier ignition angle and inverter extinction
angle.
The mode shift logic is that
z If I t > I dN , the dc system operates in mode 1
z If I t < ( I dN − I m ) , the dc system operates in mode 2
z If ( I dN − I m ) ≤ I t ≤ I dN , the dc system operates in mode 3
 DRPT2008 6-9 April 2008 Nanjing China
where I m is the current margin.
Among the controllers modeled, the CC control is of the
most importance whose block diagram is shown in Fig.2. In
the control, S is switched to I set = 0 if Eacr < Emin r or
Eaci < Emin i for a period ∆T > TD1 to reflect the shut down
logic. S is switched back to I ord if line has been shut off
and Eacr and Eaci are greater than Ere cov ery for ∆T > TD 2 to
simulate the recovery logic. T3 is the response time of the
current control loop.
1 + sT1 1 1
1 + sT2 T3 s model developed, the inductance modeling is neglected, thus
Fig. 2. Block diagram for current control
Besides, the CEA control of the inverter is implemented
according to equation (2). And the inverter β control is
achieved by formula (3).
2R I
cos γ = cos β + ci d (2)
Vd 0i
α =π −β (3)
During the tuning of the response model, the detailed
model is used to provide a basis.
IV. MODEL PERFORMANCE COMPARISON
Performance of the models developed is tested in the
simulation environments of the China Southern power grid.
Fig.3 and Fig.4 show system performance under a three-phase
short-circuit on the rectifier side ac system using the detailed
HVDC model and the response HVDC model respectively.
There are nine diagrams in each figure. The solid and dashed
curve in diagram 1 gives the ac voltage at the rectifier and
inverter terminal apart. The solid and dashed curve in diagram
2 shows the temporal activated controller in the rectifier and
the inverter respectively where “0” denotes CIA control, “1”
represents CC control, “2” corresponds to rectifier Vd control,
“3” inverter Vd control, “4” CEA control and “5” β control.
Diagram 3 gives the ignition delay angle. Diagram 4 shows
the inverter extinction angle. Diagram 5 and 6 represents the
direct voltage and direct current respectively. Diagram 7 gives
the active and reactive power flow drawn from the rectifier
side ac system. And the last two diagrams show the rotor
angles of key generating units in the system.
For the tested rectifier ac fault, voltage reduction at the
rectifier ac bus is not significant. This will result in a reduction
of rectifier direct voltage and hence the current. The current
regulator decreases α to restore current by increasing voltage.
If α hits the α min limit, the rectifier switches to CIA mode of
control and the current control is transferred to the inverter
whose current order is less than that of the rectifier by the
current margin. The simulations show that the response model
provides very similar plots versus the detailed model.
Although the controllers in work reflected by the two models
1935
do not consistently agree with each other and more dynamics
are provided by the detailed model, the response model on the
whole reflects the response of the dc system. In special, it is
seen from this simulation case and other similar simulation
cases that with the response model the floating current mode is
not available under the rectifier side ac fault. Such a mode
may last for some time if the maximum rectifier voltage is not
high enough to keep the current from dropping and, at the
same time, is not low enough to cause current reduction in
excess of current margin to activate the inverter current
controller. In such a situation the rectifier operates at its
minimum firing angle, the inverter controls its voltage, and the
variation of the current is mainly governed by the total
inductance between the rectifier and inverter. In the response
the transition from inverter CEA control to CC control is too
fast to be reflected by the model.
System performance comparison is also shown in Fig.5 and
Fig.6 under a three-phase short-circuit fault near the inverter
terminal. The curves in Fig.5 and Fig.6 have the same
meaning as in Fig.3 and Fig.4.
For a close-in inverter side ac system three-phase fault, the
inverter commutation voltage drops significantly. Repeated
commutation failures cannot be avoided. The dc system shuts
down under VDCOL control until the fault is cleared. A sharp
increase and subsequent decrease in direct current occurs
during the transitions as a result of the current control at the
rectifier. Along with the recovery of ac voltage after the
clearance of ac fault, the dc system resumes its operation.
During the restoration, the detailed HVDC model reflects the
actual controller startup and ingoing process while the
response model assumes the dc system to ramp up at the
predetermined rate depending on the magnitude of the ac
voltage. Therefore, dc recovery performance observed from
the response model does not agree with that reflected by the
detailed model. In Fig.6, a much faster recovery is given by
the response model compared with that provided by the
detailed model in Fig.5. On the other hand, rotor angles
plotted by the two models are similar. The simulations
indicate that the response model is not accurate enough for
HVDC recovery studies while suitable for dc modulation
research.
V. APPROPRIATE MODEL SELECTION
The description in Section II points out that the simple
model uses only static equations to model converter operation
without considerations of dc control actions. Therefore, it is
appropriate only for simulations of HVDC dynamics under
remote ac fault which has slightly effect on the dc system.
The response model represents the control performance of a
dc system in terms of their net effects and satisfactorily the
response of a dc system under various system operating
 DRPT2008 6-9 April 2008 Nanjing China

Fig.3. System response to a three-phase fault on the rectifier side ac system Fig.4. System response to a three-phase fault on the rectifier side ac system
using the detailed model using the response model

Fig.5. System response to a three-phase fault near the inverter terminal using Fig.6. System response to a three-phase fault near the inverter terminal using
the detailed model the response model

1936
 DRPT2008 6-9 April 2008 Nanjing China

conditions thus is adequate for a wide range of studies
associated with system planning and modulation design. As
the post-fault recovery logic is supposed a priori in this kind of
modeling, it is not appropriate for studies associated with dc
recovery performance.
The detailed model provides the highest level of detail for
modeling of a dc system in stability studies. It is more
appropriate for shorter-term and more specialized studies.
Examples of these studies are: investigation of existing and
new equipment on the dc side and on the ac side close to the
dc system, analysis of precise post-fault recovery of a HVDC
link, studies involving dc links connected to weak ac systems
and studies involving multi-terminal HVDC systems. In
addition, detailed models may serve as the basis for tuning the
response model.
Notwithstanding the above advantages, the detailed model,
which uses quasi steady-state equations to describe converter
performance commensurate with the positive-sequence phasor
representation of ac quantities, is not accurate for analysis of
unbalanced faults and for prediction of commutation failure.
Accurate simulation of such conditions may require an EMTP-
transient stability combination model.
systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol.10, No.4, pp. 2048-2053,
Oct. 1995.
[9] J. Rittiger, “Digital simulation of HVDC transmission and its correlation
to simulator studies,” IEEE Conference 1991, Publication Number 345,
pp. 414-416.
[10] Yang Weidong, Xu Zheng, Han Zhenxiang, “Application of NETOMAC
on HVDC system simulation,” Electric Power Automation Equipment,
vol.21, No.4, pp. 10-14, Apr. 2001.
VIII. BIOGRAPHIES
Xiao-ming Mao received the B.S. degree from Huazhong University of
Science and Technology, Hubei, China, in 1996 and the Ph.D. degree from
South China University of Technology, Guangdong, China, in 2006. She is
now an Associate Professor with Guangdong University of Technology. Her
major field of interest is HVDC, analysis and control of ac/dc power systems.
Yao Zhang received the B.S. and Ph.D. degrees from Tianjin University,
Tianjin, China, in 1981 and 1993, respectively. He is now a Professor with
South China University of Technology, Guangdong, China.
Feng Ye is now a M.S. candidate with Guangdong University of
Technology. His field of interest is HVDC, analysis and control of ac/dc
power systems.
Xiao-long Chen is now a M.S. candidate with Guangdong University of
Technology. His field of interest is HVDC, analysis and control of ac/dc
power systems.

VI. CONCLUSIONS
Representation of High Voltage Direct Current (HVDC)
transmission links in power system stability studies requires
special attention. Employment of detailed model may slow
down the simulations while such details are required in some
cases. Simplified models, on the other hand, is not accurate
enough under specific conditions. In this paper, simulations
are performed on the stability models developed for the ±500-
kV, 3000-MW 12-pulse bipolar HVDC link between Gaopo
rectifier station in Guizhou province and Zhaoqing inverter
station in Guangdong province, China, using NETOMAC.
Performance of simplified and detailed HVDC simulation
models are compared and analyzed. Appropriate model
selection is discussed.

VII. REFERENCES
[1] Prabha Kunder, Power System Stability and Control, Beijing:
Authorized English language reprint edition jointly published by
McGraw-Hill Education (Asia) Co. and China Electric Power Press,
2002, pp. 566-577.
[2] Xu Zheng, Cai Ye, Liu Guoping, “Some Problems in the simulation of
large-scale AC/DC power systems,” Automation of Electric Power
System, vol.26, No.15, pp. 4-8, Aug. 2002.
[3] B. K. Johnson, "HVDC models used in stability studies," IEEE Trans.
Power Delivery, vol.4, No.2, pp. 1153-1163, Apr. 1989.
[4] S. Arabi, P. Kunder, and J. H. Sawada, "Appropriate HVDC
transmission simulation models for various power system stability
studies," IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol.13, No.4, pp. 1292-1297,
Nov. 1998.
[5] “Functional model of two-terminal HVDC systems for transient and
steady-state stability,” IEEE committee report, IEEE PAS, vol. PAS-103,
No.6, pp. 1249-1255, June 1984.
[6] Huang Ying, Xu zheng, He Hui, “HVDC Models of PSS/E and their
Applicability in Simulations,” Power System Technology, vol.28, No.5,
pp. 25-29, May. 2004.
[7] “Modeling of an HVDC system for digital simulation of AC/DC
transmission interaction,” CIGRE symposium 09-87, pp.100-102.
[8] P. Lehn, J. Rittiger and B.Kulicke, “Comparison of the ATP version of
the EMTP and the NETOMAC program for simulation of HVDC

1937