applied

sciences
Article
DC-Link Voltage Control of a Grid-Connected Solar
Photovoltaic System for Fault Ride-Through
Capability Enhancement
S. Raja Mohamed 1, * , P. Aruna Jeyanthy 2 , D. Devaraj 2 , M. H. Shwehdi 1 and
Adel Aldalbahi 1
1 Department of Electrical Engineering, King Faisal University, Hofuf 31982, Saudi Arabia;
mshwehdi@kfu.edu.sa (M.H.S.); aaldalbahi@kfu.edu.sa (A.A.)
2 Department of Electrical Engineering, Kalasalingam Academy of Research and Education,
Krishnan Koil 626126, India; p.arunajeyanthy@klu.ac.in (P.A.J.); deva230@yahoo.com (D.D.)
* Correspondence: rsumsudeen@kfu.edu.sa; Tel.: +966-55142-2306.




Received: 11 January 2019; Accepted: 25 February 2019; Published: 6 March 2019


Abstract: The high penetration level of solar photovoltaic (SPV) generation systems imposes a major
challenge to the secure operation of power systems. SPV generation systems are connected to the
power grid via power converters. During a fault on the grid side; overvoltage can occur at the direct
current link (DCL) due to the power imbalance between the SPV and the grid sides. Subsequently;
the SPV inverter is disconnected; which reduces the grid reliability. DC-link voltage control is an
important task during low voltage ride-through (LVRT) for SPV generation systems. By properly
controlling the power converters; we can enhance the LVRT capability of a grid-connected SPV system
according to the grid code (GC) requirements. This study proposes a novel DCL voltage control
scheme for a DC–DC converter to enhance the LVRT capability of the two-stage grid-connected SPV
system. The control scheme includes a “control without maximum power point tracking (MPPT)”
controller; which is activated when the DCL voltage exceeds its nominal value; otherwise, the MPPT
control is activated. Compared to the existing LVRT schemes the proposed method is economical as it
is achieved by connecting the proposed controller to the existing MPPT controller without additional
hardware or changes in the software. In this approach, although the SPV system will not operate
at the maximum power point and the inverter will not face any over current challenge it can still
provide reactive power support in response to a grid fault. A comprehensive simulation was carried
out to verify the effectiveness of the proposed control scheme for enhancing the LVRT capability and
stability margin of an interconnected SPV generation system under symmetrical and asymmetrical
grid faults.

Keywords: DC-link (DCL) voltage control; low voltage ride-through (LVRT); maximum power point
tracking (MPPT); grid-connected solar photovoltaic (SPV) system; grid code (GC); voltage sag

1. Introduction
The number of renewable energy sources connected to the public grid is increasing significantly,
due to the deregulation of electric power distribution industries and environmental issues. Among
these renewable sources, photovoltaic (PV) technology will play an important role in the future of
electricity generation. In the past, PV sources were commonly used in isolated and stand-alone
applications. Nowadays, PV systems are commonly connected to the public grid and the generated
power is sold, with advantageous price ratings fixed by governmental policies. The high penetration
of solar photovoltaic (SPV) systems has resulted in several technical problems in the grid. The grid

Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 952; doi:10.3390/app9050952 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 952 2 of 27

codes (GCs) are strictly adhered to in order for grid-connected SPV systems to avoid adverse effects
on the power system [1–3]. Among the grid codes, the low-voltage ride-through (LVRT) capability
of solar PV is important. According to the widely adopted E.ON Netz GmbH code, the PV system
should be kept connected to the grid during grid disturbances, to provide dynamic grid support [4].
Extensive studies have been performed on enhancement of the LVRT of SPV systems via hardware
solutions. A direct current (DC)-breaking chopper circuit can be coupled across the DCL to satisfy
the GC with respect to the LVRT [5]. However, this method requires additional components, and
dissipates a large amount of power during the fault condition. In research by Al-Shetwi and Sujod [6]
an alternative approach for LVRT enhancement was proposed, by connecting the energy storage
system (ESS) with the DCL to avoid excess energy being applied to the DC-link capacitor. However,
this control method not only increases cost, but also requires frequent maintenance. The insertion
of a series dynamic braking resistor (SDBR) improves the voltage sag by introducing impedance
at the fault point [7]. This approach will enhance the LVRT capability of the PV system. However,
the selection of the optimal resistance value for the SDBR is a challenging task. In Sabir’s work [8],
an LVRT capability enhancement scheme for a hybrid PV–fuel cell system is proposed, in which a
dump load is inserted to maintain an active power balance, DCL voltage, and grid currents within
their limits under fault conditions. The dump loads used in the system will increase the power loss on
the system in this method. In Yang et al. [9], fault-current limiters (FLCs) are proposed to reduce DCL
fluctuations. Additionally, a novel intelligent damping controller (NIDC) has been proposed for the
static synchronous compensator (STATCOM) to enhance the transient stability of the hybrid power
multi-system [10]. However, all of the above approaches involve additional hardware costs.
Looking for alternatives to the above hardware-based approaches, several studies have been
performed to augment the LVRT of SPV systems by modifying the control strategies. In Wu et al. [11],
an LVRT strategy based on positive and negative sequence control schemes is proposed for large-scale
PV plants; however, the proper active power injection and the DC link over voltage control during a grid
disturbance are not discussed widely. The active and reactive power control for grid balance of the PV
system under a grid fault is proposed in the work by Bae et al. [12], however the DC-link over-voltage is
not considered. In Yang et al. [13], an LVRT capability improvement strategy is proposed which is based
on decreasing the output power delivery of the SPV system via controlling the DC–DC boost converter
proportion compared to the level of voltage sag, so that the PV generation system can maintain the power
balance during grid voltage differences. Simultaneously, the grid inverter delivers the specified reactive
current to the grid according to the E.ON Netz GmbH code. However, the performance of the proposed
control strategy in real environmental conditions, including variable irradiance and temperature, was not
discussed. In Park and Park [14], a non-MPPT control scheme, called power-weakening control, was
developed for excessive power conditioning. In the work by Nezhad et al. [15], a non-MPPT operation
mode of a PV system considering the fault current limiting approach is explored. However, it did not
focus on the controller performance under fault conditions. In Bak et al. [16], a modified second-order
generalized integrator phase-locked loop (SOGI-PLL) scheme for enhancing the zero voltage ride-through
(ZVRT) in a single-phase grid-connected PV system is proposed. Compared to enhanced phase-locked
loop (EPLL), the SOGI-PLL approach is faster. However, in SOGI-PLL, overshoot is observed in the
process of amplitude detection. In the research by Almeida et al. [17], a discrete-time LVRT controller
is proposed for a proportional-integral (PI)-controller, in parallel with two modified digital resonant
compensators, to mitigate the second-order harmonic voltage oscillation in the DC-link, as well as
the positive sequence third-order harmonic current injection into the grid under asymmetrical fault
conditions. This study does not discuss the proposed controller’s performance under symmetrical fault
conditions. In Hong et al. [18], a radial basis function network (RBFN) MPPT controller is proposed, in
order to achieve a fast and stable response for the real power control of a hybrid power generation system.
This study demonstrated that an RBFN-based MPPT quickly stabilizes at the maximum power point
after intense changes. In Ou and Hong [19], dynamic operation and control strategies for a micro-grid
are analyzed. A GRNN (general regression neural network) with an improved PSO (particle swarm
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 952 3 of 27

optimization) algorithm-based MPPT controller is developed to investigate the performance of the PV

generation system under transient conditions. A comparison is made with the perturb and observe
(P&O) method, which shows that the GRNN controller does not oscillate during tracking to save energy;
on the other hand, the P&O method retains oscillating during tracking. It shows a better performance
on both transient responses and stability. Unfortunately, these techniques can be costly and difficult to
implement. Hence, this literature review infers that the purpose of LVRT enhancement cannot ignore
MPPT control techniques.
In the work by Sadeghkhani et al. [20], a current and voltage-limiting strategy to enhance the
LVRT capability of inverter-based micro grids (MGs) under symmetrical and asymmetrical faults is
proposed. By fixing the current limiting factor (CLF) of the inductor, the current indirectly limits
the inverter output voltage of the SPV inverter, and consequently no voltage limit is required in
the inner current control loop as proposed in Perera et al. [21]. In the work by Ting-Chia Ou [22],
a novel unsymmetrical faults analysis method based on the actual three phase models and the boundary
conditions to develop completely the network characteristics of micro-grid distribution system (MGDS)
is proposed. Two primary matrices (BI and ZV-BC ), which are built from the topological characteristics
of MGD networks, are used to achieve the power flow solutions. Test results show that the proposed
method can achieve high accuracy and efficiency with a lower memory requirement, which could be a
useful future smart grid application. A direct building algorithm for micro-grid distribution ground
fault (MGDGF) analysis is proposed in [23]. The test results demonstrate that the proposed algorithm
is suitable for MGDS, and the ill-conditioned problem that usually occurs in the traditional solution
techniques can be avoided here.
To overcome the switching frequency limitation problem of the conventional boost converter,
quadratic and double cascade boost converters for renewable energy application are proposed in
the work by Boujelben et al. [24], which achieves better efficiency. The voltage control method of
a cascaded step-up switched-capacitor converter (CSU–SCC) under a zero current switching (ZCS)
operation and continuous conduction mode is proposed in Mousavi et al. [25], to achieve high voltage
gain and reduce the number of components. In the work by Mousa et al. [26], a switched inductor
multilevel boost converter for higher DC voltage applications is proposed, the main advantage of
which is that the voltage stress on the switch is smaller. In the aforementioned schemes, the main
drawbacks are the complexity of the control structure, and the need for more components which will
increase cost. The choice of the most suitable boost converter to be used in a PV system is difficult
to determine due to the fact that each boost converter has its own advantages and disadvantages,
and the choice is highly application-dependent. Typically, a conventional boost converter is used
in grid-connected SPV systems due to it having a simple structure and being easy to implement in
practical systems, leading to lower costs. For this reason, in this work a conventional boost converter is
considered. In general, the maximum power point tracking (MPPT) technique is used in SPV systems
to increase the power obtained under all environmental conditions. The MPPT control technique works
well during normal conditions, but the MPPT controller affects the system under faulted conditions.
Furthermore, when a grid fault occurs, the point of common coupling (PCC) voltage goes down, which
leads to a power imbalance on the inverter’s side, and this results in detachment of the inverter from
the power grid according to the over voltage protection standard [27]. Thus, to protect the inverter
while satisfying the GC, a novel control scheme must be developed with MPPT control for controlling
DC–DC converters, and also to limit the output voltage to a safe value under both normal and fault
conditions. Often, according to grid code requirements, the active and reactive power values are not
appropriately satisfied by most of the existing LVRT schemes. This work attempts to enhance the LVRT
capabilities of grid-connected SPV systems by controlling the DCL overvoltage, and realize reactive
power and active power support based on GC requirements.
In reference to the aforementioned background, this work proposes a novel control scheme that
controls the DCL voltage rise within standard limits, without imposing extra system costs under
normal and fault conditions, by using two controllers. The control mechanism consists of an “MPPT”
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 952 4 of 27

scheme and a “control without MPPT” scheme. The developed algorithm properly operates these
controllers in the normal and fault conditions. When a grid fault occurs, the “control without MPPT”
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x 4 of 27
controller minimizes the active power injected into the grid, which will ultimately trigger the inverter
to inject the
support andrequired amount ofwhile
voltage recovery, reactive
notcurrent intothe
exceeding thespecified
power grid;
safethe system
current thenofprovides
value grid
the inverter.
support and voltage recovery, while not exceeding the specified safe current
Compared to the existing methods, the proposed method can not only effectively reduce the DC-link value of the inverter.
Compared
over voltage toduring
the existing
a gridmethods,
fault, butthe proposed
also provide method
reactive can notsupport
power only effectively reduce
to the grid the DC-link
according to the
over voltage during a grid fault, but also provide reactive power support to
German E.ON grid code requirements, without using any extra hardware. Simulation studies were the grid according to the
German
conducted E.ON grid code
to validate therequirements,
effectiveness of without using any
the proposed extrastrategy.
control hardware. Simulation studies were
conducted to validate the effectiveness of the proposed control strategy.
This paper is organized as follows: Section II describes the grid-connected solar PV system.
ThisIIIpaper
Section is organized
explains as follows:
the impacts Section
of a fault 2 describes
on the the grid-connected
grid-connected SPV system.solar PV system.
Section Section
IV describes the3
explains
proposedthe impacts
control of a fault Section
strategies. on the grid-connected
V reports the SPV system. test
simulation Section 4 describes
findings the proposed
and discussion. A
control strategies. Section 5 reports the simulation test findings and discussion.
comparison of the conventional and proposed strategies is given in Section VI. Finally, Section VIIA comparison of the
conventional and proposed strategies is given in Section 6. Finally, Section 7 presents our conclusions.
presents our conclusions.

2. Grid-Connected Solar
2. Grid-Connected Solar Photovoltaic
Photovoltaic (SPV)
(SPV) System
System
Figure
Figure 11 illustrates
illustrates the
the schematic
schematic diagrams
diagrams of of the
the grid-connected
grid-connected PV PV system. Two-stage energy
system. Two-stage energy
conversation systems are used in this work. The first stage of the energy conversion
conversation systems are used in this work. The first stage of the energy conversion system consistssystem consists of
aofPV array and a DC–DC converter, which boosts the relatively low SPV system
a PV array and a DC–DC converter, which boosts the relatively low SPV system voltage to match voltage to match the
inverter inputinput
the inverter voltage rating.rating.
voltage The nextThestage
nextconsists of a voltage
stage consists of asource
voltageconverter
source (VSC) connected
converter (VSC)
to
connected to the grid via an L-filter and a step-up transformer, to increase the inverter voltagethe
the grid via an L-filter and a step-up transformer, to increase the inverter voltage to match to
grid
match voltage [28].
the grid The incremental
voltage conductance
[28]. The incremental (IC) maximum
conductance power point
(IC) maximum power tracker
point (MPPT) for the
tracker (MPPT)
PV
for is implemented
the on the boost
PV is implemented converter
on the for extracting
boost converter maximum maximum
for extracting power under normal
power conditiond.
under normal
The “control The
conditiond. without MPPT”
“control controller
without MPPT”is adopted
controllerunder fault conditions.
is adopted under faultTheconditions.
inverter control scheme
The inverter
is modified
control to inject
scheme the required
is modified reactive
to inject current
the required into the
reactive grid under
current fault
into the conditions,
grid byconditions,
under fault using the
developed
by using the reactive
developedpower injection
reactive strategy.
power injection strategy.

Figure1.1.Schematic
Figure Schematicdiagram
diagramof
ofthe
the grid-connected
grid-connected photovoltaic (PV)
(PV) system.
system. VSC:
VSC:voltage
voltagesource
source
converter; DCL: DC-link; MPPT: Maximum power point tracking.
converter; DCL: DC-link ; MPPT: Maximum power point tracking.

Direct Current–Direct Current (DC–DC) Boost Converter Model

Direct Current–Direct Current (DC–DC) Boost Converter Model
As the voltage of PV arrays is not sufficient as input into the inverters, a DC–DC boost converter
As the voltage of PV arrays is not sufficient as input into the inverters, a DC–DC boost converter
should be connected in order to increase the DC voltage under certain conditions. The structure of the
should be connected in order to increase the DC voltage under certain conditions. The structure of
boost converter is shown in Figure 2.
the boost converter is shown in Figure 2.
The input-output voltage relationship of the DC–DC converter is (1):
The input-output voltage relationship of the DC–DC converter is (1):

Vin =
V = Vo ((1
1−−D
D)) (1)(1)
where
where D isduty
D is the the duty
cycle,cycle,
Vin isVin
theisinput
the input voltage,
voltage, and Vand V0 is the output voltage.
0 is the output voltage.
The ripple voltage is:
V = ∆V /V (2)
To reduce the ripple voltage, the pulse-width modulation (PWM) frequency of the pulse
generator was reduced. However, we could not increase the frequency beyond a certain value
because a higher frequency produces large energy losses in the circuit.
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 952 5 of 27

The ripple voltage is:

Vrip = ∆Vo /Vo (2)

To reduce the ripple voltage, the pulse-width modulation (PWM) frequency of the pulse generator
was reduced. However, we could not increase the frequency beyond a certain value because a higher
frequency
Appl. produces
Sci. 2019, 9, x large energy losses in the circuit. 5 of 27

Figure 2. Direct
Figure current–direct
2. Direct current
current–direct (DC–DC)
current boost
(DC–DC) converter
boost circuit.
converter circuit.MOSFET:
MOSFET:metal-oxide-
metal-oxide-
semiconductor field-effect transistor.
semiconductor field-effect transistor
3. Impact of a Fault on the Grid-Connected SPV System
3. Impact of a Fault on the Grid-Connected SPV System
This work considers a two-stage grid-connected SPV (Figure 1). The total power flow of the
system canwork
This considers
be defined a two-stage
as follows [29]: grid-connected SPV (Figure 1). The total power flow of the
system can be defined as follows [29]:
spv ==PPDC link +
PP Pg (3)
spv DC link +Pg (3)

where where P is
PDC_link _ theisDC
thelink
DC link power,
power, Pg isPthe
g is power
the power inserted
inserted by the
by the inverter
inverter to the
to the grid,
grid, andand Pspv
Pspv is
is
thethe
PVPV power.
power.
During normal operations:
P
Pspv = Pg = 3VgrmsIIgrms (4)
spv = Pg = 3 Vgrms grms (4)
where Vgrms and Igrms are the nominal RMS values of the phase voltage and phase current, respectively.
where Vgrms and Igrms are the nominal RMS values of the phase voltage and phase current,
Equation (4) shows that the DCL voltage can be maintained by keeping the PV array power (Pspv )
respectively. Equation (4) shows that the DCL voltage can be maintained by keeping the PV array
equal to the power inserted by the inverter to the grid (Pg ). We assume the power converter losses are
power (Pspv) equal to the power inserted by the inverter to the grid (Pg). We assume the power
neglected. However, under fault conditions, when voltage sag occurs on the PCC, it will not allow
converter losses are neglected. However, under fault conditions, when voltage sag occurs on the PCC,
the power to be injected in the SPV system. The DC–DC boost converter using the MPPT control
it will not allow the power to be injected in the SPV system. The DC–DC boost converter using the
unit constantly obtains the maximum power from the SPV and injects it into the DCL. The inequality
MPPT control unit constantly obtains the maximum power from the SPV and injects it into the DCL.
between the SPV-generated power and the power injected into the grid will sharply increase the DCL
The inequality between the SPV-generated power and the power injected into the grid will sharply
voltage. The fault condition is defined as follows:
increase the DCL voltage. The fault condition is defined as follows:
11
   
Pspv −P
Pspv gfgf ∆T
-P ∆T== PDCL
DCL∆T∆T== CDC DC V V22DCL_f V22DCL
DCL_f-−V DCL (5)
(5)
22
wherewhere gf is grid
Pgf isPthe the grid power
power at the
at the fault,
fault, VDCLVDCL is the
is the DCL
DCL voltage
voltage before
before thefault,
the fault,VV DCL_f is the DCL
DCL_f
voltage at the fault period, ∆T∆T is the fault period, and CDC DC is
isthe
theDCL
DCLcapacitance.
capacitance.VVDCL_f
DCL_fis is
given as:as:
given
q
22
VDCL_f==
VDCL_f (2
(2((Pspv −- 3V ∆ T))//C
3VggIIgg))∆T)) CDC
DC++VVDCL
DCL
(6)
(6)

Equation (6) shows that the DCL voltage rise rate depends on the voltage sag level (Vgg goes low
during aa fault)
fault)and
andthe
thefault
faultperiod
period(∆T ). InInthe
(∆T). thecase
caseofof
severe fault
severe conditions,
fault thethe
conditions, voltage
voltagedrops as the
drops as
PCCPCC
the decreases to a lower
decreases level, and
to a lower longer
level, fault duration
and longer causes acauses
fault duration higher arise rate for
higher risethe generated
rate for the
DCL voltage.
generated DCLThus, without
voltage. Thus,any protection
without scheme under
any protection anyunder
scheme type of fault,
any typeitofmay violate
fault, it may the DCL
violate
over-voltage standard.
the DCL over-voltage standard.

Low Voltage Ride-Through (LVRT) Capability of the SPV System

According to German E.ON grid code shown in Figure 3a, the SPV system should not be
disconnected from the grid when the PCC voltage falls down to zero percentage of the nominal
voltage for a period less than or equal to 0.15 s, and should recover to 90% of the voltage from its pre-
fault level within 1.5 s from the occurrence of the voltage sag [30]. In addition, SPV systems should
inject reactive current under fault conditions, depending on the voltage sag range and the inverter
current rating capacity, to provide dynamic grid–voltage support according to the profile given in
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 952 6 of 27

Low Voltage Ride-Through (LVRT) Capability of the SPV System

According to German E.ON grid code shown in Figure 3a, the SPV system should not be
disconnected from the grid when the PCC voltage falls down to zero percentage of the nominal
voltage for a period less than or equal to 0.15 s, and should recover to 90% of the voltage from its
pre-fault level within 1.5 s from the occurrence of the voltage sag [30]. In addition, SPV systems should
inject reactive current under fault conditions, depending on the voltage sag range and the inverter
current rating capacity, to provide dynamic grid–voltage support according to the profile given in
Figure 3b. According to the grid code (GC), the amount of reactive current that should be injected into
the grid during voltage sag can be calculated by the following:
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x 6 of 27

deaddead
 band, 0.9 p.u ≤ V ≤ 1.1 p.u
band, 0.9 p.u ≤ V ≤ 1.1 p.u

Iq = k⎧ VN IN + Iqo , 0.5 p.u ≤ V < 0.9p.u
V − Vo (7)
V-Vo
Iq 
= I +kI IN + IqoV, ≤ 0.5 p.u ≤ V < 0.9 p.u (7)


⎨
N qoVN 0.5 p.u
⎩ IN + Iqo V ≤ 0.5 p.u
where V, Vo and VN are the amplitude values of the grid instantaneous voltage, the initial voltage
before where V, V
the fault, ando and VN are the amplitude values of the grid instantaneous voltage, the initial voltage
the nominal grid voltage, respectively. IN and Iqo are the nominal current and the
before the fault,
q-axis initial current and the nominal
before the gridgrid
fault,voltage, respectively.
respectively, while k I=N (∆Iq
and I/qoIare the nominal current and the
N ) / (∆V/VN ). The amount of
q-axis initial current before the grid fault,
d-axis current can be calculated using Equation (8): respectively, while k = ( ∆Iq / IN) / (∆V/VN). The amount of

d-axis current can be calculated using Equation (8):

q
Id = IN 2 − Iq 2 (8)
Id = IN 2 - Iq 2 (8)

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 3. E.ON
3. E.ON NetzNetz GmbH
GmbH code:code: (a) voltage
(a) low low voltage ride-through
ride-through (LVRT)(LVRT) waveform
waveform and (b)
and (b) reactive
current injection requirement. reactive current injection requirement.

4. Proposed LVRT Enhancement Strategies

4. Proposed LVRT Enhancement Strategies
Voltage sag on the grid will affect the DCL voltage of the inverter. During voltage sag, the DC-link
Voltage sag on the grid will affect the DCL voltage of the inverter. During voltage sag, the DC-
voltage will increase due to the power imbalance between the PV and the grid sides. To protect the
link voltage will increase due to the power imbalance between the PV and the grid sides. To protect
system and to maintain the DC-link voltage within the standard limits, and to provide dynamic voltage
the system and to maintain the DC-link voltage within the standard limits, and to provide dynamic
support, the following control schemes are proposed in this work.
voltage support, the following control schemes are proposed in this work.
4.1. DC-Link (DCL) Voltage Control Scheme
4.1. DC-Link (DCL) Voltage Control Scheme
The proposed DCL control scheme is shown in Figure 4. During normal operating conditions,
The proposed DCL control scheme is shown in Figure 4. During normal operating conditions,
the incremental conductance (IC) MPPT method is applied to track the maximum power from the
the incremental conductance (IC) MPPT method is applied to track the maximum power from the PV
PV arrays. Under three-phase fault conditions, the inverter cannot inject the SPV system with the
arrays. Under three-phase fault conditions, the inverter cannot inject the SPV system with the
maximum power into the grid owing to the sudden voltage sag. The surplus energy causes a sharp
maximum power into the grid owing to the sudden voltage sag. The surplus energy causes a sharp
increase in the DCL voltage, which will damage the inverter module and the DCL capacitor. Hence,
the “control without MPPT” controller is proposed during the fault period to reduce DCL over-
voltage. The PV system should instantly change the “control without MPPT” operation mode when
voltage sag appears in the PCC. Thus, a quick voltage-sag monitoring method is essential for FRT
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 952 7 of 27

increase in the DCL voltage, which will damage the inverter module and the DCL capacitor. Hence,
the “control without MPPT” controller is proposed during the fault period to reduce DCL over-voltage.
The PV system should instantly change the “control without MPPT” operation mode when voltage
sag appears in the PCC. Thus, a quick voltage-sag monitoring method is essential for FRT voltage
control. In this study, the simple root-mean-square (RMS) detection method is adapted to identify
the grid fault. The proposed method calculates the grid voltage RMS value of the phase-locked loop
(PLL) by using Equation (9) to signal the control system that it should switch to operating under the
fault-operation mode. q
vsag = vd 2 + vq 2 (9)

where Vsag is the voltage sag, Vd is the d-axis component voltage, and Vq is the q-axis component voltage.
The “control without MPPT” controller is designed using the PI controller, with an anti-windup
mechanism to avoid the saturation of the integral gain (Ki ). The output of the controller is the duty
cycle (d2 ), which is calculated using Equation (10):
 
Ts Z
d2 = Kp + Ki (VDCL_ref − VDCL_meas ). (10)
Z−1

where d2 is the duty cycle, KP is the proportional gain, Ki is the integral gain, Ts is the sample
time, VDCL_ref is the reference DC voltage, and VDCL_meas is the measured DC voltage. The modified
integrator gain is:
Kimodified = Ki +Kaw (dsat − dunsat ) (11)

The saturated control signal is calculated as follows:

dsat = min(max(dunsat, dmin ), dmax ) (12)

where, Kaw is the anti-windup gain, dunsat is the unsaturated duty cycle, dmin is the lower limit for the
duty cycle, and dmax is the maximum limit for the duty cycle.
The simple PI controller selected for this study provides immediate changes in the control signal
according to the respective set value. The proposed control strategy controls the injected active
power into the grid during voltage sag, while avoiding over-voltage in the DCL. When we use the PI
controller under the “control without MPPT” mode, a problem may occur because the system works
at a different point than the MPP under fault conditions. Therefore, the DCL voltage takes a long time
to reach the nominal value after the fault is cleared, because the error in the DCL voltage promotes
the accumulation of control action in an integral part of the PI controller at the end of voltage sag,
which should be compensated for by an input error in the opposite direction. Therefore, the actual
DCL voltage is reduced below the reference value, which may cause the inverter to lose control and
be disconnected. To solve this issue, the anti-wind-up technique is applied to the PI controller to
accumulate excessive control action when it exceeds a specified value. Thus, when the voltage sag
ends, the DCL voltage recovers to the nominal value without perceptible overcompensation.
The operational flowchart is shown in Figure 5. Under fault conditions, initially the DC-link
voltage is measured and compared with a actual DCL voltage. If it exceeds the actual value, the “control
without MPPT” mode is enabled; otherwise, the MPPT control is enabled. The “control without MPPT”
controller is enabled in the system until the DCL voltage is equal to the actual DCL voltage.
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x 8 of 27
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 952 8 of 27
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x 8 of 27

Figure 4. Proposed DC-link voltage control

Figure
Figure4.4.Proposed DC-linkvoltage
Proposed DC-link voltagecontrol.
control

Figure 5. Flowchart showing operations of the proposed DC-link control scheme.

Figure
Figure5.5.Flowchart
Flowchartshowing
showingoperations
operationsof
of the
the proposed
proposed DC-link
DC-link control scheme.
control scheme.

4.2.
4.2.Reactive
ReactivePower
PowerInjection
InjectionScheme
Scheme
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 952 9 of 27

4.2. Reactive Power Injection Scheme

For the grid-connected operation, the real power is regulated using id , and the reactive power is
regulated using iq . The equations of the grid inverter can be given in d-q frame rotating at the line
frequency, as follows:
did R v vgd
= − id + d − + ωiq (13)
dt L L L
diq R vq vgq
= − iq + − + ωid (14)
dt L L L
where id and vd are the d-axis components of the inverter current and voltage, iq and vq are the q-axis
components of the inverter current and voltage, and vgd and vgq are the d-axis and q-axis components
of the grid voltage. When controlling P and Q independently, the d-axis reference voltage (vd-ref ) and
q-axis reference voltage (vq_ref ) will be obtained. They are converted into the stationary reference
frame using the dq-abc transformation, and sinusoidal pulse width modulation (SPWM) signals are
then generated accordingly. To provide the reactive power support to the grid under fault conditions,
this work proposes a modified control system for the voltage source converter (VSC), as shown
in Figure 6. During normal operating conditions, the inverter control system generates a d-axis
reference current to maintain the DCL voltage by using an external voltage regulator, and maintaining
the unity power factor. The d-axis reference current controller, designed with the back-calculation
anti-windup method, is used to avoid the error accumulation of the integral part under fault conditions.
The quadrature axis reference current (Iq_ref ) is fixed to zero to keep the unity power factor under
normal conditions.
The PLL measures the system frequency, and provides the phase synchronous angle for the
dq transformation block. When voltage sag is created on the grid, the reactive current injection
level is calculated based on Equation (7). During the occurrence of voltage sag on the grid point
(PCC), the inverter active power injection control mode is changed to the reactive-power injection
control mode. At that time, the PI controller controls the q-axis reference current (Iq_ref ). Under fault
conditions, the difference between the actual grid voltage (Vgrid _actual ) and the measured grid voltage
(Vgrid_meas ) is used to calculate the required amount of reactive power (Q) needed for the grid by using
Equation (15), and Iq_ref is calculated using Equation (16):
 
k  
Q = kp + i Vgrid_actual − Vgrid_meas (15)
S

Iq_ref = (2S)/(3 Vgrid ) (16)

Iqmax = (2Q)/(3 Vgrid ) (17)

where S is the apparent power, and the current Iq_ref is limited based on the inverter current rating.
Therefore, the range of the active power (P) during fault conditions is given by:
q
0 ≤ P ≤ S2 − Q2 (18)

The reactive power capacity of the inverter can be utilized to compensate for the voltage sag under
fault conditions. The maximum range of the inverter reactive power injection capacity is determined
as follows: q
Qmax = Smax 2 − Pspv 2 (19)

where Smax is the maximum apparent power, and Pspv is the PV power.
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 952 10 of 27
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x 10 of 27

Figure 6. The
Figure proposed
6. The proposedinverter
inverter control schemeofof
control scheme reactive
reactive power
power injection.
injection.

The proposed scheme,

The scheme, based
basedon onreactive
reactivepower
powerinjection, is presented
injection, is presentedin Algorithm
in Algorithm 1. The
1.
algorithm first checks the phase fault conditions individually, based on the RMS
The algorithm first checks the phase fault conditions individually, based on the RMS value of the value of the voltage
value. When
voltage value. the
WhenPCCthevoltage drops drops
PCC voltage belowbelow
0.9 p.u,
0.9the
p.u,SPV
thesystem injects
SPV system the active
injects power
the active (P) and
power (P)
reactive
and power
reactive powerequal capacity.
equal If the
capacity. PCC
If the PCCvoltage
voltagelies
liesbetween
between0.50.5and
and0.9
0.9 pu,
pu, the active power
power isis
fixedto
fixed tothe
thenominal
nominalvalue,
value,and
andthe
thereactive
reactivepower
powerduring
duringLVRTLVRTisisrepresented
representedininQ_ Q_ LVRT.. Otherwise,
LVRT Otherwise,
ififthe
thevoltage
voltageisisbelow
below0.5
0.5pu,
pu,the
theactive
activepower
powerisisdisabled
disabledandandthethewhole
wholecapacity
capacity ofofthe
theinverter
inverter isis
used to inject the maximum reactive power (Qmax) into the grid to boost
used to inject the maximum reactive power (Qmax) into the grid to boost the PCC voltage.the PCC voltage.

Algorithm1: 1:
Algorithm Proposed
Proposed LVRT
LVRT method
method basedbased on reactive
on reactive power injection.
power injection.
1: Measuring Vg_rms value in per unit (pu);
1: Measuring Vg_rms value in per unit (pu);
2: Nominal Vg_rms = = 1.01 ;
2: Nominal Vg_rms = = 1.01;
3: If ( Vg_rms < 0.9)
3: If (Vg_rms < 0.9)
4: PP====P*
4: P* && && Q Q == == Q*;
Q*; %% P*
P* and
and Q*Q*are
arethe
thepost-fault
post-faultactive andand
active reactive powers
reactive powers
5: else if ( 0.5 < V g_rms <
5: else if (0.5 < Vg_rms < 0.9) 0.9)
6: PP====P*
6: P* && && QQ==Q_ Q_LVRT; % P is
LVRT ; %theP ispre-fault active power
the pre-fault activeand Q_LVRT
power is the Q atis
and Q_LVRT LVRT period
the Q at LVRT
7: else if (Vg_rms < 0.5)
period
8:elsePif=(V
7: =g_rms
0 && Q = = Q max;
< 0.5) % Q max is the maximum reactive power injection into the grid
8:
9: elseP = = 0 && Q = = Q max ; % Q max is the maximum reactive power injection into the grid
9: else
detecting Vg-rms value in per unit (pu);
detecting
10: return Vg-rms value
to step 3 in per unit (pu);
10: return to step 3
5. Simulation Result Analysis and Discussion
5. Simulation Result Analysis and Discussion
5.1. Simulation Details
5.1. Simulation Details
The given power system model (Figure 7) is simulated using MATLAB/Simulink software to
The given power system model (Figure 7) is simulated using MATLAB/Simulink software to
evaluate the performance of the proposed control scheme. The PV array is used to deliver the
evaluate the performance of the proposed control scheme. The PV array is used to deliver the maximum
maximum value of 100 kW at2 1000 W/m2 irradiance; a boost converter is used to increase the PV
value of 100 kW at 1000 W/m irradiance; a boost converter is used to increase the PV voltage to
voltage to 500 V DC; the I-V and P-V characteristics of SPV system are shown in Figure 8; the
500 V DC; the I-V and P-V characteristics of SPV system are shown in Figure 8; the switching duty
switching duty cycle is optimized by the MPPT controller under normal conditions; and the VSC
cycle is optimized by the MPPT controller under normal conditions; and the VSC converts 500 V
converts 500 V DC to 260 V alternating current (AC) and retains the unity power factor, and is
DC to 260 V alternating current (AC) and retains the unity power factor, and is connected with the
connected with the single machine-infinite bus (SMIB) system via step-up transformer. To validate
single machine-infinite bus (SMIB) system via step-up transformer. To validate the performance of the
the performance of the proposed LVRT control scheme for the grid connected PV system, the German
E.ON grid code (GCC), shown in Figure 3, is taken as a reference.
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 952 11 of 27

Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x 11 of 27

proposed LVRT control scheme for the grid connected PV system, the German E.ON grid code (GCC),
shown
Appl.in Figure
Sci. 2019, 9,3,
x is taken as a reference. 11 of 27

Figure 7. Power system simulation model. SG: Synchronous generator.

Figure 7. Power system simulation model. SG: Synchronous generator.
Figure 7. Power system simulation model. SG: Synchronous generator.

Figure 8. I-V and P-V characteristics of the solar Photovoltaic array model used in the simulation analysis.
Figure 8. I-V and P-V characteristics of the solar Photovoltaic array model used in the
5.2. Simulation Results simulation analysis.
Figure 8. I-V and P-V characteristics of the solar Photovoltaic array model used in the
The LVRT performance of the system with the proposed control scheme is demonstrated under
5.2. Simulation Results simulation analysis.
both symmetrical and asymmetrical fault conditions. To capture all the possible details, and for
betterThe LVRT performance
representation, a uniformof the
timesystem
span ofwith
0–5the proposed
s used in the control schemeAiszoomed-in
graph results. demonstrated under
portion is
both5.2. Simulation and
symmetrical Results
asymmetrical fault conditions. To capture all the possible details, and for better
also provided inside all figures for better visualization. The simulation results are described in the
representation,
subsequent a uniform
Thesections.
LVRT time span
performance of theofsystem
0–5 s used
with in
thethe graph results.
proposed controlAscheme
zoomed-in portion is also
is demonstrated under
provided inside all figures for better visualization. The simulation results are described
both symmetrical and asymmetrical fault conditions. To capture all the possible details, and for better in the
LVRT Enhancement
subsequent aby
sections.
representation, the Proposed
uniform time spanControl Scheme
of 0–5 s usedunder
in theagraph
Symmetrical
results. Fault (3LG) portion is also
A zoomed-in
provided inside all
The effectiveness of figures for better
the proposed visualization.
control scheme in LVRT The capability
simulation results are isdescribed
enhancement in the
investigated
LVRT Enhancement
subsequent by
sections. the Proposed Control Scheme under a Symmetrical Fault (3LG)
by applying a symmetrical fault (3LG) at line 2, near the PCC point (Figure 7). The fault is created
at t =The
0.5 seffectiveness
and cleared after of the0.15proposed control time
s. The simulation scheme inand
is 5 s, LVRT capability
the mode enhancement
is discreet with a step is
timeLVRT
of 50Enhancement
investigated µs.byInapplying bya the
this work, Proposed
symmetrical
to verify Control
thefault (3LG)
performance Scheme
at line under
2, near
of the a the
proposedSymmetrical
PCC Fault
pointduring
control (3LG)
(Figure 7).change
the The faultin
is created
atmospheric at tconditions,
= 0.5 s and irradiation
cleared after 0.15
and s. Thecontrol
temperature simulation
varies time in
from is
250 5LVRT
s,
w/mand2 the mode
to 1000 w/m 2 and 25
is enhancement
discreet ◦C
with
The effectiveness of the proposed scheme capability is
a step
to 50 ◦ time of 50 by
μs.applying
C, respectively. In Such
this work, to verify
parameter the
checks performance
are(3LG)
another of the
salient proposed
feature ofcontrol
this during
work, the
since change
most
investigated a symmetrical fault at line 2, near the PCC point (Figure 7). Theoffault
in atmospheric
the existing
is createdLVRT at conditions,
0.5 s andirradiation
t =techniques a and
requireafter
cleared temperature
constant
0.15 irradiance
s. The varies
andfrom
simulation time250
ambient is 5w/m 2 to 1000 w/m
temperature.
s, and the mode 2 and 25 °C
Theissimulation
discreet with
to 50
results °C,
a stepof respectively.
the of 50 μs.Such
timegrid-connected parameter
In thisSPV system
work, checks
without
to verify areperformance
the another
the proposedsalient feature
ofstrategy
the of this
(MPPT
proposed work,during
control)
control since most
are shown of
in
the change
the in
existing
Figure LVRT
9. Figure
atmospheric 9a techniques
shows that,require
conditions, duringathe
irradiationconstant
and irradiance
3LGtemperature
fault, and
100% voltage
variesambient temperature.
sag occurs
from 250 on 2the
w/m PCCThew/m
to 1000 simulation
without
2 andthe
25 °C
results
to 50of°C,
proposed therespectively.
grid-connected
control scheme.SuchThisSPV system
fault type,without
parameter as the worst
checks theanother
are proposed
one, causes strategy
salient a feature
severe(MPPT control)
voltage
of this sag inare
work, theshown
since PCC.
most of
in Figure
Oncethethe 9. Figure
3LG
existing fault
LVRT 9a showsthe
occurs, that,
techniques during
voltage
require atathe
the 3LG
PCCfault,
constant drops 100% voltage
to zero.
irradiance andThe sag
ambientDCL occurs on the
voltage PCC
Thewithout
is unstable
temperature. with
simulation
the results
proposed control
of the scheme. This
grid-connected SPV fault typewithout
system , as the the worst one, causes
proposed strategy a severe
(MPPT voltage
control)sagarein shown
the
PCC.in Once
Figurethe 3LG fault
9. Figure occurs,that,
9a shows the during
voltagethe at the
3LGPCC drops
fault, 100%tovoltage
zero. The sagDCL
occursvoltage
on theisPCC unstable
without
the proposed control scheme. This fault type , as the worst one, causes a severe voltage sag in the
PCC. Once the 3LG fault occurs, the voltage at the PCC drops to zero. The DCL voltage is unstable
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 952 12 of 27
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x 12 of 27

1000
with V overvoltage,
1000 which
V overvoltage, exceeds
which the limitation
exceeds severely,
the limitation as shown
severely, in Figure
as shown 9b. The
in Figure IGBTs
9b. The IGBTsin the
in
power converters may fail in this situation, and the SPV system cannot perform
the power converters may fail in this situation, and the SPV system cannot perform LVRT. It can be LVRT. It can be seen
in Figure
seen 9c that
in Figure 9cthe
thatSPV
the system injects
SPV system maximum
injects active
maximum power
active at theatsame
power time time
the same that it injects
that less
it injects
reactive power (Figure 9d),which is not acceptable under
less reactive power (Figure 9d),which is not acceptable under a 3LG fault.a 3LG fault.
The simulation results with the proposed control strategy are shown shown in in Figure
Figure 10.10. As shown in
Figure
Figure 10a, DCL voltage retains the maximum 600 V, which is below the DCL DCL over-voltage
over-voltage limitation.
limitation.
Simultaneously, as shown in Figure
as shown in Figure 10b, 10b, the SPV
SPV system can inject an average amount of 500 kVAR
reactive power (Qmax) into the grid grid to
to support
support grid
grid recovery
recovery underunder 100%
100% voltage
voltage sagsag conditions
conditions
(Figure
(Figure 10b).
10b). The
TheSPVSPVoutput
outputactive
activepower
power(Figure
(Figure10c)
10c)isiseffectively
effectivelyreduced
reduced to to
zero,
zero,as as
mentioned
mentioned in
Algorithm 1, which enhances the LVRT capability of the system. Figure 10d
in Algorithm 1, which enhances the LVRT capability of the system. Figure 10d shows that the PV shows that the PV inverter
injects
inverter1.01 pu reactive
injects 1.01 pucurrent
reactive(Iq) under(Iq)
current 100% voltage
under 100%sag, whichsag,
voltage meets the meets
which German theE.ON
German gridE.ON
code
requirements. Since the input parameters of irradiance and temperature vary,
grid code requirements. Since the input parameters of irradiance and temperature vary, the active the active and reactive
power resultspower
and reactive show trivial
resultsoscillations
show trivial in the pre-faultinperiod.
oscillations However,
the pre-fault activeHowever,
period. and reactive active power
and
results
reactiveinpower
the post fault in
results conditions
the post reaching the steady
fault conditions state within
reaching the time
the steady statelimit mentioned
within the timeinlimit the
E.ON grid code.
mentioned in the E.ON grid code.

(a)

(b)

Figure 9. Cont.
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x 13 of 27
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 952
Appl. x 13
13 of
of 27

(c)
(c)

(d)
(d)
Figure 9. Simulation results of MPPT control under a symmetrical (3LG) fault. (a) Grid
Figure 9. Simulation results of MPPT control under a symmetrical (3LG) fault. (a) Grid
Figure Simulation
voltage9. (Vgrid), (b)results of MPPT
DC-link control
voltage under
(DCL), (c)a active
symmetrical
power(3LG)
(P), fault. (a) Grid power
(d) reactive voltage (Q).
(Vgrid),
voltage (Vgrid), (b) DC-link voltage (DCL), (c) active power (P),
(b) DC-link voltage (DCL), (c) active power (P), (d) reactive power (Q). (d) reactive power (Q).

(a)
(a)
Figure 10. Cont.
Appl. Sci.
Appl. Sci. 2019,
2019,9,
9,952
x 14 of 27
14 of 27

(b)

(c)

(d)
Figure 10. Simulation results of the proposed control under a symmetrical (3LG) fault. (a) DC-
Figure 10. Simulation results of the proposed control under a symmetrical (3LG) fault. (a) DC-link
link voltage
voltage (DCL),
(DCL), (b) active(b) active
power (P),power (P), (c)
(c) reactive reactive
power power
(Q), (d) (Q),
reactive (d) reactive
current (I ). current (Iq).
q
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 952 15 of 27

The reliability of the above results when compared with previous studies can be clearly seen
by considering the results in [31]. These results address the excessive AC current and DC voltage
using similar means to this study, but using different controls and additional devices, which increases
the cost.

5.3. LVRT Enhancement by the Proposed Control Scheme under an Asymmetrical Fault
In this section, the proposed control strategy is verified under two different types of asymmetrical
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x 18 of 27
faults—single-line to ground fault (1LG) and two-line to ground fault (2LG).

5.3.1.
5.3.1. Single-Line
Single-Line to Ground
to Ground Fault
Fault (1LG)
(1LG)
In this
In this section,
section, the effectiveness
the effectiveness of the ofproposed
the proposed control control
scheme scheme
is tested is tested and compared
and compared with and with
without the proposed control (MPPT control) scheme under asymmetrical fault conditions. For thisFor
and without the proposed control (MPPT control) scheme under asymmetrical fault conditions.
this purpose,
purpose, a single-line
a single-line to ground to ground
(1LG)(1LG) fault (phase
fault (phase A to A to ground)
ground) is applied
is applied in line
in line 2 in2 Figure
in Figure 7, 7,
at t = 0.5 s for 150 ms. The simulation results of the grid-connected SPV
at t = 0.5 s for 150 ms. The simulation results of the grid-connected SPV system without the proposed system without the proposed
control
control scheme
scheme areare shown
shown in Figure
in Figure 12. 11. Observations
Observations fromfrom
thethe
gridgrid voltage
voltage (phase
(phase ‘a’)‘a’) profile
profile Va Vain in
Figure 11a indicate that the voltage amplitude drops to Va = 0.71 pu
Figure 12a indicate that the voltage amplitude drops to Va = 0.71 pu from its nominal value Va = 1.01 from its nominal value Va = 1.01
pu, corresponding to a voltage sag of 70%. The DCL voltage is
pu, corresponding to a voltage sag of 70%. The DCL voltage is unstable with 1050 V over-voltage, unstable with 1050 V over-voltage,
which
which seriously
seriously exceeds
exceeds thethe DCL DCL over-voltage
over-voltage limitation,
limitation, as shown
as shown in Figure
in Figure 12b.11b.
TheThe SPV SPV system
system
injects an average amount of 80 kW (i.e., 80% of the SPV rated power
injects an average amount of 80 kW (i.e., 80% of the SPV rated power capacity) into the grid, which capacity) into the grid, which
means the MPPT control scheme does not effectively reduce the output
means the MPPT control scheme does not effectively reduce the output active power during the fault, active power during the fault,
as demonstrated
as is is demonstrated in Figure
in Figure 12c,11c, so that
so that the the
SPVSPV inverter
inverter experiences
experiences an over-current.
an over-current. ThisThiscasecase
inverter can be disconnected from the grid, which is a negative
inverter can be disconnected from the grid, which is a negative sign of LVRT enhancement. sign of LVRT enhancement.
TheThe simulation
simulation results
results of the
of the grid-connected
grid-connected SPV SPV system
system withwith
thethe proposed
proposed control
control scheme
scheme areare
shown in Figure 12. As shown in Figure 12a, DCL voltage maintains
shown in Figure 12. As shown in Figure 12a, DCL voltage maintains the maximum value of 580 V with the maximum value of 580 V
with few fluctuations. It is worth pointing out that, when the voltage
few fluctuations. It is worth pointing out that, when the voltage sag occurs, the DC side input current sag occurs, the DC side input
may current
not bemay equalnotto be
theequal
output tocurrent,
the output current,
leading leadingoftothe
to flucation flucation of the DCL
DCL voltage. Figurevoltage.
12b shows Figurethat,12b
with the proposed control scheme, the SPV system delivers less active power than the MPPT controlthe
shows that, with the proposed control scheme, the SPV system delivers less active power than
MPPT
scheme control
during thescheme during
fault. The reasontheisfault.
that The
withreason is that with
the proposed controlthescheme
proposed the control
SPV system scheme the SPV
supplies
thesystem
grid with supplies
reactivethe grid with
current reactive
as required incurrent as required
the GC (Figure in the
12). This GCreduce
will (Figure12e).
the activeThis will reduce
power flowingthe
active power flowing through the inverter to the grid. Hence, the SPV
through the inverter to the grid. Hence, the SPV inverter will not experience any over-current, which is a inverter will not experience
any over-current,
positive sign of LVRTwhich is a positive
enhancement. sign of LVRT
Furthermore, enhancement.
the SPV Furthermore,
system is injecting the SPV
the required system
amount of is
injecting
reactive theaccording
power required amount
to the GC of into
reactive power
the grid foraccording to the GC
voltage recovery into the
(Figure grid
12d), andfor voltage
after recovery
the fault is
(Figure
cleared, the12d), and
system after
goes theto
back fault is cleared,
its normal modethewithin
system thegoes
timeback
limittomentioned
its normalinmode within the time
the GC.
limit mentioned in the GC.

(a)

Figure 11. Cont.

Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 952 16 of 27
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x 19 of 27

(b)

(c)

(d)
Figure 11. Simulation results of the MPPT control scheme under an asymmetrical fault (1LG). (a) Grid
Figure 11. Simulation results of the MPPT control scheme under an asymmetrical fault (1LG). (a) Grid
voltage
voltage at PCC,
at PCC, (b) (b) DC-link
DC-link voltage
voltage (DCL),
(DCL), (c) active
(c) active power
power (P),(P),
(d) (d) reactive
reactive power
power (Q).(Q).
Appl.
Appl.Sci. 2019,9,9,952
Sci.2019, x 17 of 27
20 27

(a)

(b)

(c)

Figure 12. Cont.

Appl. Sci.
Appl.2019, 9, 9529, x
Sci. 2019, 18 of 27
21 of 27

Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x 15 of 27

The reliability of the above results when compared with previous studies can be clearly seen by
considering the results in [31]. These results address the excessive AC current and DC voltage using
similar means to this study, but using different controls and additional devices, which increases the
(d)
cost.
Figure 12. Simulation results of proposed control scheme under an asymmetrical fault (1LG). (a) DC-
Figure 12. Simulation results of proposed control scheme under an asymmetrical fault (1LG).
5.3. LVRT Enhancement
link voltage (DCL), (b) by active
the Proposed Control
power (P), Schemepower
(c) reactive under(Q),
an Asymmetrical Fault(Iq).
(d) reactive current
(a) DC-link voltage (DCL), (b) active power (P), (c) reactive power (Q), (d) reactive current (Iq).
In this section, the proposed control strategy is verified under two different types of
5.4. Quantification of Results
5.3.2.asymmetrical
Two-Line tofaults—single-line
Ground Fault (2LG) to ground fault (1LG) and two-line to ground fault (2LG).
In addition to graphical representations to provide a clearer view, the LVRT has been evaluated
The
5.3.2.simulation
using results
several performance
Two-Line to Ground of the grid-connected
(2LG)such as SPV
indices,
Fault the PV systemactive with MPPT
power control are
deviation andshown in Figure 13.
DCL voltage
Figuredeviations. A lower value of the indices indicates an enhanced system performance [32].toThe
13a shows the response of the MPPT control scheme when an asymmetrical two-line ground
The simulation results of the grid-connected SPV system with MPPT control are shown in Figure
(2LG)performance
fault (Phases ‘a’, ‘b’
indices areto ground)using
calculated occurs, with the
Equations voltage dropping to 0.21 pu from its nominal
(20)–(21):
13. Figure 13a shows the response of the MPPT control scheme when an asymmetrical two-line to
value (1.01 pu) for 150 ms, and therefore with voltage sag of around 20%. Figure 13b shows that the
ground (2LG) fault (Phases ‘a’, ‘b’ to ground) occurs, |∆Vwith | dt
the voltage dropping to 0.21 pu from its
DCL nominal
voltage rises
valuesharply
(1.01 pu) tofor
1100
150V,ms, and DCL
which trips the
therefore = with
over-voltage protection circuitry. During a (20)
V _voltage sag of around 20%. Figure 13b shows
2LG fault,
the active power
that the DCL can
voltagebe delivered
rises sharply to to
the1100
grid V,by the healthy
which trips the phase, unlike
over-voltage during acircuitry.
protection 3LG fault where no
During
activea power is injected into the grid. However, Figure |∆Ppv|
13c dt
shows that
2LG fault, the active power can be delivered to the grid by the healthy phase, unlike during a(21)the SPV system injects an average
3LG
PV =
amountfaultofwhere
60 kW no(i.e.,
active 60% of the
power SPV rated
is injected power
into the P
grid.capacity)
However,
_ active
Figurepower
13c showsintothat
thethe
grid,
SPVwhich
systemis not
injects
adequate an average amount of 60 kWfault,
(i.e., 60% ofthe
thegrid
SPV rated power capacity) active power into the
where ∆Vdc and ∆Ppv stand for the deviation of the DC-link voltage and PV array power. this
under an unbalanced grid since point (PCC) voltage level is low. In The case,
grid, which
the inverter is not adequate under an unbalanced grid fault, since the grid point (PCC) voltage level
period of interest is from 0 s to T = 5 s. The performance comparison of various control techniquesreactive
is overloaded (i.e., over-current). Figure 13d depicts that the SPV system injects less is
power is into
low. the
In this
grid,case, the inverter is overloaded (i.e., over-current). FigureFigure
13d depicts that the
the response
SPV
given in Table 1. Itwhich
is clearisfrom
not Table
enough to support
1 that voltage is
the improvement recovery.
significant when 14 shows
using the proposed
system injects less reactive power into the grid, which is not enough to support voltage recovery.
of thecontrol
proposed control
scheme, since scheme.
it providesDCLthe voltage
lowestisindexmaintained at the maximum
values. Hence, the proposed of 600 V, which
control scheme hasis little
Figure 14 shows the response of the proposed control scheme. DCL voltage is maintained at the
better than
oscillation, the noin
as shown control
Figure (MPPT) scheme14b
14a. Figure to enhance
illustratesthethat
LVRT theofSPV
the system,
systemunder
output both symmetrical
of active power has
maximum of 600 V, which has little oscillation, as shown in Figure 14a. Figure 14b illustrates that the
been and
SPV
asymmetrical
effectively
system reduced
faults.a null, and because of this the SPV inverter will not experience any severe
output of to active power has been effectively reduced to a null, and because of this the SPV
over-current
inverter issues.
will not At the sameany
experience time, the SPV
severe system injects an
over-current average amount of 200system
kVARinjects
of reactive
Table 1. Performance index enhancement with the issues.
proposed Atcontrol
the same time,for
scheme thesymmetrical
SPV and
power aninto the grid
average amount
asymmetrical
according to the of
of 200 kVAR
faults.
GCreactive
in order to support
power into thevoltage recovery,
grid according to as
theshown
GC in in Figure
order to 14c.
In thissupport
case, the standard
voltage requires
recovery, to provide
as shown in Figure100% reactive
14c. current
In this case, theinto the grid,
standard it is shown
requires in Figure
to provide 100% 14d.
reactiveIndex
current into the grid, it is shown in FigureValues 14d. of indices
Parameters
3-LG 1-LG 2-LG
(%)
MPPT Proposed MPPT Proposed MPPT Proposed
Control Type
Control Control Control Control Control Control
DCL 5.4 3.7 3.2 1.9 6.2 3.5
PVpower 4.3 2.8 3.1 2.2 5.1 4.2
LG: Line to ground.

5.5. Stability Analysis

Stability analysis, regarding both symmetrical and asymmetrical fault conditions, was
undertaken with the proposed control scheme. The LVRT capability of the SPV system has a positive

(a)

Figure 13. Cont.

Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 952 19 of 27
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x 16 of 27

(b)

(c)

(d)

Figure 13. Simulation results of the MPPT control scheme under an asymmetrical fault (2-LG). (a) Grid
Figure at
voltage 13.PCC,
Simulation results
(b) DC-link of the(DCL),
voltage MPPT(c)control
active scheme under
power (P), an asymmetrical
(d) reactive fault (2-LG). (a)
power (Q).
Grid voltage at PCC, (b) DC-link voltage (DCL), (c) active power (P), (d) reactive power (Q).
Appl. Sci.
Appl. Sci. 2019,
2019, 9,
9, 952
x 17
20 of 27
of 27

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)
Figure 14. Simulation
Figure Simulationresults
resultsofofthe
theproposed
proposedcontrol
controlscheme
schemeunder
underananasymmetrical
asymmetricalfault (2-LG).
fault (a)
(2-LG).
DC-link
(a) voltage
DC-link (DCL),
voltage (b)(b)
(DCL), active power
active (P),(P),
power (c) (c)
reactive power
reactive (Q),
power (d)(d)
(Q), reactive current
reactive (Iq).
current (Iq).
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 952 21 of 27

5.4. Quantification of Results

In addition to graphical representations to provide a clearer view, the LVRT has been evaluated
using several performance indices, such as the PV active power deviation and DCL voltage deviations.
A lower value of the indices indicates an enhanced system performance [32]. The performance indices
are calculated using Equations (20)–(21):
RT
0 |∆Vdc | dt
DCLvol = (20)
Vdc_rated
RT
0 |∆Ppv| dt
PVpower = (21)
Ppv_rated
where ∆Vdc and ∆Ppv stand for the deviation of the DC-link voltage and PV array power. The period
of interest is from 0 s to T = 5 s. The performance comparison of various control techniques is given in
Table 1. It is clear from Table 1 that the improvement is significant when using the proposed control
scheme, since it provides the lowest index values. Hence, the proposed control scheme is better
than the no control (MPPT) scheme to enhance the LVRT of the system, under both symmetrical and
asymmetrical faults.

Table 1. Performance index enhancement with the proposed control scheme for symmetrical and
asymmetrical faults.

Index Values of Indices

Parameters (%) 3-LG 1-LG 2-LG
MPPT Proposed MPPT Proposed MPPT Proposed
Control Type
Control Control Control Control Control Control
DCLvol 5.4 3.7 3.2 1.9 6.2 3.5
PVpower 4.3 2.8 3.1 2.2 5.1 4.2
LG: Line to ground.

5.5. Stability Analysis

Stability analysis, regarding both symmetrical and asymmetrical fault conditions, was undertaken
with the proposed control scheme. The LVRT capability of the SPV system has a positive effect on the
transient stability of power systems, since the disconnection of a large amount of SPVs would stress
the power system even more. The performance of the proposed control scheme is examined when
the test system (Figure 7) is subjected to a three-phase short-circuit fault (3LG). The fault is considered
to occur at 0.5 s, and is cleared after 150 ms. Figure 15 illustrates the rotor speed of the synchronous
generator (SG) during fault conditions, with and without the proposed control embedded with the
SPV grid-connected system. The simulation results clearly show synchronous generator (SG) speed
oscillations (Figure 15) over a wide range of 1.0 pu to 1.012 pu, with no control during the fault. However,
the SG speed oscillation is significantly reduced with the proposed control, which is a positive indicator
of the increased transient stability margin of the power system. The rotor-angle variation of the SG
connected with the SPV system, with and without the proposed control, is shown in Figure 16. The results
show that the system does not lose its rigidity, and remains robust to the faults. The simulation results
illustrate that, with the proposed control system, the peak rotor angle of the synchronous machine is
significantly reduced, leading to a much longer critical clearing time (CCT) and a positive impact of the
stability enhancement of the system. For a clearer perspective, the stability of the system was evaluated
using several performance indices, such as the speed deviation of the SG and the rotor angle deviation
 The rotor-angle
control, is shownvariation
in Figureof16.the SG
The connected
results showwith that thethe system
SPV system, with
does not and
lose itswithout
rigidity,the
andproposed
remains
control, is shown in Figure 16. The results show that the system does not lose
robust to the faults. The simulation results illustrate that, with the proposed control system, the its rigidity, and remains
peak
robust to the faults. The simulation results illustrate that, with the proposed
rotor angle of the synchronous machine is significantly reduced, leading to a much longer critical control system, the peak
rotor angle
clearing timeof(CCT)
the synchronous
and a positivemachine
impactisofsignificantly
the stabilityreduced, leading
enhancement to asystem.
of the much longer critical
For a clearer
clearing
perspective,
Appl.
time
Sci. 2019, 9, the
(CCT) and a positive impact of the stability enhancement of
952 stability of the system was evaluated using several performance indices, such
the system. For a clearer
22asof the
27
perspective,
speed deviation the stability
of the SG of and
the system
the rotorwasangle
evaluated
deviationusingofseveral
the SG.performance
A lower value indices, such
of the as the
indices
speed deviation
indicates an enhanced of the SG and
system the rotor angle
performance. deviationrepresentations
Mathematical of the SG. A lower value of the indices
of the performance indices
ofof
the SG.
indicates A
an lower
enhanced value of
system
the SG can be defined as follows: the indices indicates
performance. an
Mathematical enhanced system performance.
representations of the Mathematical
performance indices
representations of the performance
of the SG can be defined as follows: indices of the SG can be defined as follows:
T
|∆ω| dt
SGspeed =R T0 T|∆ω| dt (22)
0ω|0∆ω | dt
SG_rated (22)
SG
SGspeed = ω
speed = (22)
ωSG_rated
T SG_rated
|∆δ| dt
SGangle =R T0 T|∆δ| dt (23)
|∆δ| dt
SGangle = 0δ0SG_rated (23)
SGangle = δSG_rated (23)
δSG_rated

Figure 15. Synchronous generator (SG) rotor speed: no control and proposed control.
Figure
Figure 15.15.Synchronous
Synchronousgenerator
generator (SG)
(SG) rotor
rotor speed:nono
speed: control
control and
and proposed
proposed control.
control.

Figure16.
Figure 16.Synchronous
Synchronousgenerator
generator(SG)
(SG)rotor
rotorangle:
angle:no
nocontrol
control(MPPT
(MPPTcontrol)
control)and
andproposed
proposedcontrol.
control.
Figure 16. Synchronous generator (SG) rotor angle: no control (MPPT control) and proposed control.
It is evident from Table 2 that the system performance on stability is weak without the proposed
control scheme. Notable improvement is observed with the proposed control scheme. The consistency
of the above results with other previous studies can be clearly seen when comparing with the work
in [32]. Similar results were achieved in this work; however, a parallel-resonance bridge-type fault
current limiter (PRBFCL) was used, and additional hardware devices increase the cost of the system.
Alternatively, the proposed control scheme obtains these better results with lower costs.

Table 2. Values of indices for performance comparison during a 3LG fault.

Value of Indices
Index Parameters (%)
MPPT Control Proposed Control
SGangle 1.8050 0.9722
SGspeed 0.0500 0.0300
 It is evident from Table 2 that the system performance on stability is weak without the proposed
control scheme. Notable improvement is observed with the proposed control scheme. The
consistency of the above results with other previous studies can be clearly seen when comparing with
the work in [32]. Similar results were achieved in this work; however, a parallel-resonance bridge-
type fault
Appl. Sci. current
2019, 9, 952 limiter (PRBFCL) was used, and additional hardware devices increase the cost
23 ofof
27
the system. Alternatively, the proposed control scheme obtains these better results with lower costs.

6. Comparison
6. Comparison of
of the
the Conventional
Conventional and
and Proposed LVRT Strategies
Figure 17
Figure 17 shows
shows the schematic
schematic diagram
diagram for for the
the DC breaking chopper chopper implemented
implemented in in the
the
conventional scheme.
conventional scheme.When Whenvoltage
voltage sagsagoccurs
occurson the
on grid
the andgridtheand DCLthevoltage rises, therises,
DCL voltage DC breaking
the DC
chopper is
breaking enabledis by
chopper a switch,
enabled by aand thus and
switch, the power
thus thefrom powerthe from
DCL the is dissipated into the chopper
DCL is dissipated into the
resistor. resistor.
chopper The simulation results of
The simulation the grid-connected
results SPV system
of the grid-connected with chopper
SPV system control control
with chopper are shown are
in Figure
shown in 18. Figures
Figure 9a and 18a
18. Figures show
9a and 18athat LVRT
show hasLVRT
that been has adapted, because both
been adapted, schemes
because both provided
schemes
approximately
provided the same response;
approximately that is, thethat
the same response; DCL is,over-voltage is maintained
the DCL over-voltage below the below
is maintained threshold the
value (25%
threshold of the
value rated
(25% of voltage). Figures 9b
the rated voltage). and 18b
Figures 9b show
and 18b theshow
activethe power
activeinjected
power into the grid
injected into
under
the gridfault conditions.
under The simulation
fault conditions. results presented
The simulation results in Ntare, R in
presented et.al, [33] show
Ntare, R et.al, the[33]
effectiveness
show the
of the DC-break
effectiveness circuit
of the and current
DC-break circuitlimiter strategies
and current to enhance
limiter the LVRT
strategies capability,
to enhance mitigate
the LVRT voltage
capability,
sag by addressing
mitigate voltage sagexcessive
by addressingDC link voltage,DC
excessive and ride
link through
voltage, andthe
ridegrid fault safely.
through the gridHowever,
fault safely.this
control scheme
However, does not
this control analyze
scheme thenot
does inverter
analyze reactive power support
the inverter reactive to the grid
power undertofault
support conditions.
the grid under
Alternatively,
fault conditions. the proposed
Alternatively,control thesystem provides
proposed the DCL
control overprovides
system voltage protection
the DCLreactive power
over voltage
protection
support, and reactive power
mitigates support,
voltage sag.andFrommitigates voltage
a practical sag. From a practical
implementation point ofimplementation
view, the application point
of
of view, the application
the DC-breaking of thescheme
chopper DC-breaking
increases chopper scheme
the overall increases
system cost the
andoverall
powersystem cost and
loss during the
power
duration loss
of during
a fault. the duration
However, theofproposed
a fault. However,
control scheme the proposed
contains control scheme contains
two controllers, of whichtwo the
controllers, of which the MPPT controller exists in all SPV systems; therefore, it is not included in the
MPPT controller exists in all SPV systems; therefore, it is not included in the cost calculation for the
cost calculation
proposed control.forThe
the only
proposed control.
additional unitThe only additional
is “control withoutunit is “control
MPPT,”—a PI without
controller MPPT,”—a
based-PWM PI
controller
generator,based-PWM
as well as the generator, as well as
voltage sensors and the voltageTherefore,
switch. sensors and theswitch.
proposed Therefore,
control the proposed
scheme costs
control scheme
a little more thancosts
theaexisting
little moreMPPT thansystem.
the existing MPPT
However, thesystem. However,
PI controller can the PI controller
be developed bycan usingbe
developed by using aamplifier
a simple operational simple operational
with resistors amplifier with resistors
and capacitors. Theseand are capacitors.
basic components,These are and basic
are
components,
inexpensive and andeasily
are inexpensive
available. Thus,and the easily available.
proposed Thus,
control the proposed
system control system
can be implemented withcan be
larger
implemented
grid-connected with
SPVlarger
systems grid-connected
easily. SPV systems easily.

Figure
Figure17.
17.Solar
SolarPV
PVsystem
systemwith
withDC-breaking
DC-breaking chopper
chopper LVRT
LVRT control
control scheme.
scheme.
 Appl.
Appl. Sci.Sci. 2019,
2019, 9, x
9, 952 24 of
2427
of 27

(a)

(b)
Figure
Figure 18.18. Simulationresults
Simulation resultsof
ofthe
theDC-breaking
DC-breaking chopper
choppercontrol
controlscheme.
scheme.(a)(a)DC-link
DC-linkvoltage (DCL),
voltage (DCL),
(b)(b) active
active power
power (P).
(P).

Limitations of of
Limitations thethe
Proposed
ProposedControl
ControlScheme
Scheme
The proposed
The proposedcontrol
controlstrategy
strategyhas
hasthe
thefollowing
following limitations:
limitations:

  TheThe proposedcontrol
proposed controlstrategy
strategyisis not
not appropriate
appropriate forforthe
thesingle-phase
single-phasetwo-stage
two-stage PVPVsystem,
system,since
since
single-phase PV systems are commonly connected to low-voltage feeders,
single-phase PV systems are commonly connected to low-voltage feeders, which are mainly which are mainly
resistive(i.e.,
resistive (i.e.,with
with aa high
highR/XR/Xratio). Therefore,
ratio). injecting
Therefore, reactive
injecting powerpower
reactive into the grid
into under
the gridfault
under
conditions may not contribute significantly to grid voltage recovery. Nevertheless,
fault conditions may not contribute significantly to grid voltage recovery. Nevertheless, the main the main
objective of the proposed control approach is to reduce the active power injection to the grid,
objective of the proposed control approach is to reduce the active power injection to the grid,
and at the same time inject reactive power for voltage recovery during fault conditions.
and at the same time inject reactive power for voltage recovery during fault conditions.
 Avoiding operation of the SPV generation system at MPPT during fault conditions reduces the
 Avoiding operation of the SPV generation system at MPPT during fault conditions reduces the
efficiency of the system. However, this would help in reducing the size of the capacitor
efficiency of the system. However, this would help in reducing the size of the capacitor connected
connected to the DC-link. In addition, the network faults are for very shorter periods of time,
towhich
the DC-link.
will notInaffect
addition, the network
the system faults much.
performance are for very shorter periods of time, which will not
 affect the system performance much.
The control requires an additional stage of computation, which may increase the cost a little, but
 The
thecontrol requires is
main advantage anavoiding
additional stage
DC link of computation,
over-voltage, whichwhich maysaves
eventually increase the cost from
the capacitor a little,
but the main
being damaged. advantage is avoiding DC link over-voltage, which eventually saves the capacitor
from being damaged.
7. Conclusions
7. Conclusions
This work has proposed a novel LVRT control strategy for the two-stage three-phase SPV
system,work
This has aproposed
to ensure a novel
satisfactory LVRTduring
operation control strategy
grid for the two-stage
fault conditions. three-phase
A DCL voltage SPV
control system,
scheme
to using
ensureMPPT and a ”control
a satisfactory operation without
duringMPPT” controller
grid fault has been
conditions. A DCLproposed
voltageand analyzed
control scheme using
using
MPPT and a “control without MPPT” controller has been proposed and analyzed using simulations,
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 952 25 of 27

under symmetrical and asymmetrical fault conditions. The simulation results show that the proposed
scheme can effectively protect the system against DCL over-voltage occurances under any fault
conditions. For the benefit of numerical quantification of the system performance, some indices
have been calculated and indeed support the graphical representation of the simulation results.
The proposed algorithms support seamless operation mode transitions, besides they support reactive
power injection according to the grid codes (GCs). The advantages of the proposed scheme are that it
does not interfere with normal operation conditions and, as a result, it is always active. Furthermore,
the method does not lead to instability during the most critical time, when the fault occurs and is
cleared, as may occur when other methods are used. Moreover, in the proposed control scheme,
there is no component to calculate the amount of excess power to be removed, and it uses only the
DCL voltage to determine the mode change from the MPPT control scheme to the proposed control
scheme, which makes it simple and easy to implement with the existing controllers. Compared with
the previous LVRT schemes, the proposed scheme requires only a PI based DCL voltage regulator and
mode-changing relay. Regarding the outer loop in the VSC control which carries out the function of
the DCL voltage regulator, only a mode changing circuit is required for the proposed control, which
reduces the practical implementation difficulties. Therefore, the proposed LVRT control strategy can
be extensively applied to grid connected two-stage solar PV systems.
Investigation of the usefulness of the proposed control scheme in a large distribution network
will be undertaken in future research.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, S.R.M., P.A.J., and D.D.; methodology, S.R.M., P.A.J., and D.D.;
software, S.R.M.; validation, D.D. and P.A.J.; formal analysis, S.R.M. and P.A.J.; Investigation, S.R.M., and
D.D.; resources, S.R.M. and A.A.; writing—original draft preparation; S.R.M., P.A.J., and D.D.; review and editing;
S.R.M., D.D., P.A.J.,and M.H.S.; supervision, P.A.J. and D.D.; funding acquisition, S.R.M. and A.A.
Funding: This work is funded by Deanship of Scientific Research at King Faisal University, grant number 186092.
Acknowledgments: The authors express appreciation to the Deanship of Scientific Research, King Faisal
University administration for continued research support.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Nomenclature
Pspv Photovoltaic Array Power (W) Pgf Grid Power -Fault Condition (pu)
∆T Fault Period (s) IN Nominal Current (pu)
PDC-link DC-Link Power (W) VDCL DC-Link Voltage (v)
CDC DC-Link Capacitor (F) Kp Proportional Gain
Pg Grid Power (pu) VDCL_f DC-Link Voltage-Fault Condition (v)
Iq Reactive Current(pu) Ki Integral Gain
Vgrms Grid Voltage RMS value (pu) Kaw Anti-Windup Gain
Igrms Grid Current in RMS value (pu) Q Reactive Power (kVAR)
Igrms Grid Current in RMS value (pu) P Active Power (kW)
Iq0 Initial Reactive Current (pu) S Apparent Power (w)
Ig Grid Current (pu) Qmax Maximum Reactive Power (pu)
CDC DC-Link Capacitor (F) Ts Sample Time (s)
D Duty Cycle d2 Duty Cycle for the Proposed Control
Vd_ref d-Axis Reference Voltage (pu) dmin Lower Limit for the Duty Cycle
Vq_ref q-Axis Reference Voltage (pu) dmax Maximum Limit for the Duty Cycle
Id_ref d-Axis Reference Current (pu) dunsta Unsaturated Limit for the Duty Cycle
Iq_ref q-Axis Reference Current (pu) dsat Saturated Limit for the Duty Cyle
∆Vdc DC-Link Voltage Deviation (v) SGspeed Synchronous Generator Speed (pu)
∆Ppv PV-Power Deviation (w) SGangle Synchronus Generator Rotor Angle (deg)
Ppv-rated Rated PV Power (w) ωSGrated Rated Synchronous Generator Speed (pu)
Id d-Axis Current (pu) δSG_rated Rated Synchronous Rotor Angle
Smax Maximum Apparent Power (w)
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 952 26 of 27

References
1. Messenger, R.; Ventre, J. Photovoltaic Systems Engineering, 3rd ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2010.
2. Miret, J.; Castilla, M.; Camacho, A.; de Vicuña, L.G.; Matas, J. Control scheme for photovoltaic three-phase
inverters to minimize peak currents during unbalanced grid-voltage sags. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2012,
27, 4262–4271. [CrossRef]
3. Yang, Y.; Blaabjerg, F.; Zou, Z. Benchmarking of grid fault modes in single-phase grid-connected photovoltaic
systems. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2013, 49, 2167–2176. [CrossRef]
4. Marinopoulos, A.; Papandrea, F.; Reza, M.; Norrga, S.; Spertino, F.; Napoli, R. Grid integration aspects of large
solar PV installations: LVRT capability and reactive power/voltage support requirements. In Proceedings of
the 2011 IEEE Trondheim PowerTech, Trondheim, Norway, 19–23 June 2011; pp. 1–8.
5. Al-Shetwi, A.Q.; Sujod, M.Z. Modeling and control of grid-connected photovoltaic power plant with fault
ride-through capability. J. Sol. Energy Eng. 2017, 140, 021001. [CrossRef]
6. Manikanta, B.V.V.N.; Kesavarao, G.; Shefali, T. LVRT of grid -connected PV system with energy storage.
Int. J. Control Theory Appl. 2017, 10, 75–86.
7. Hossain, M.K.; Ali, M.H. Low voltage ride through capability enhancement of grid connected PV system by
SDBR. In Proceedings of the IEEE PES T&D Conference and Exposition, Chicago, IL, USA, 14–16 April 2004;
pp. 1–5.
8. Sabir, A. A novel low-voltage ride-through capable energy management scheme for a grid-connected hybrid
photovoltaic-fuel cell power source. Int. Trans. Electr. Energy Syst. 2018, e2713. [CrossRef]
9. Yang, W.; Deng, C.; Zheng, F. Low voltage ride-through capability improvement of photovoltaic systems
using a novel hybrid control. J. Renew. Sustain. Energy 2017, 9, 055301. [CrossRef]
10. Ou, T.C.; Lu, K.H.; Huang, C.J. Improvement of transient stability in a hybrid power multi-system using a
designed NIDC (Novel Intelligent Damping Controller). Energies 2017, 10, 488. [CrossRef]
11. Wu, Y.-S.; Chang, C.-H.; Chen, Y.-M.; Cheng, C.-S.; Liu, C.-W.; Chang, Y.-R. The current control of PV inverter
for low voltage ride through. In Proceedings of the 15th International Power Electronics and Motion Control
Conference, Novi Sad, Serbia, 4–6 September 2012; pp. LS1d.4-1–LS1d.4-6.
12. Bae, Y.; Vu, T.K.; Kim, R.Y. Implemental control strategy for grid stabilization of grid-connected PV system
based on German grid code in symmetrical low-to-medium voltage network. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers.
2013, 28, 619–631. [CrossRef]
13. Yang, F.; Yang, L.; Ma, X. An advanced control strategy of PV system for low-voltage ride-through capability
enhancement. Sol. Energy 2014, 109, 24–35. [CrossRef]
14. Park, S.M.; Park, S.Y. Power weakening control of the photovoltaic-battery system for seamless energy
transfer in micro grids. In Proceedings of the IEEE Applied power electronics Conference and exposition
long beach, Long Beach, CA, USA, 17–21 March 2013; pp. 2971–2976.
15. Nezhad, A.A.; Zaker, B.A.; Arani, A.K.; Gharehpetian, G.B. Impact of non-MPPT operation mode of PV
system considering inverter fault current limiting. In Proceedings of the Conference on Electrical Power
Distribution Networks Conference, Semnan, Iran, 19–20 April 2017; pp. 45–50.
16. Bak, Y.; Lee, J.S.; Lee, K.B. Low-voltage ride-through control strategy for a grid-connected energy storage
system. Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 57. [CrossRef]
17. Almeida, P.M.; Monteiro, K.M.; Barbosa, P.G.; Duarte, J.L.; Ribeiro, P.F. Improvement of PV grid-tied inverters
operation under asymmetrical fault conditions. Solar Energy 2016, 133, 363–371. [CrossRef]
18. Hong, C.M.; Ou, T.C.; Lu, K.H. Development of intelligent MPPT (maximum power point tracking) control
for a grid-connected hybrid power generation system. Energy 2013, 50, 270–279. [CrossRef]
19. Ou, T.C.; Hong, C.M. Dynamic operation and control of micro grid hybrid power systems. Energy 2014, 66,
314–323. [CrossRef]
20. Sadeghkhani, I.; Golshan, M.E.; Guerrero, J.M.; Mehrizi-Sani, A. A current limiting strategy to improve
fault ride-through of inverter interfaced autonomous micro grids. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2017, 8, 2138–2148.
[CrossRef]
21. Perera, B.K.; Ciufo, P.; Perera, S. Point of common coupling voltage control of a grid-connected solar
photovoltaic (PV) system. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics
Society, Vienna, Austria, 10–13 November 2013; pp. 7475–7480.
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 952 27 of 27

22. Ou, T.C. A novel unsymmetrical faults analysis for microgrid distribution systems. Int. J. Electr. Power
Energy Syst. 2012, 43, 1017–1024. [CrossRef]
23. Ou, T.C. Ground fault current analysis with a direct building algorithm for microgrid distribution. Int. J.
Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2013, 53, 867–875. [CrossRef]
24. Boujelben, N.; Masmoudi, F.; Djemel, M.; Derbel, N. Design and comparison of quadratic boost and
double cascade boost converters with boost converter. In Proceedings of the 2017 14th International
Multi-Conference on Systems, Signals & Devices (SSD), Marrakech, Morocco, 28–31 March 2017; pp. 245–252.
25. Mousavi, M.; Shabestari, P.M.; Mehrizi-Sani, A. Analysis and output voltage control of a high-efficiency
converter for DC Micro grids. In Proceedings of the IECON-44th annual conference of the IEEE Industrial
Electronics Society, Washington, DC, USA, 21–23 October 2018; pp. 1029–1034.
26. Mousa, M.; Ahmed, M.; Orabi, M. A switched inductor multilevel boost converter. In Proceedings of the 2010
IEEE International Conference on Power and Energy, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 29 November–1 December
2010; pp. 819–823.
27. Mirhosseini, M.; Pou, J.; Agelidis, V.G. Single-and two-stage inverter-based grid-connected photovoltaic
power plants with ride-through capability under grid faults. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2015, 6, 1150–1159.
[CrossRef]
28. Máthé, L.; Séra, D.; Kerekes, T. Three-phase photovoltaic systems: Structures, topologies, and control.
In Renewable Energy Devices and Systems with Simulations in Matlab® and Ansys; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL,
USA, 2017; pp. 67–90.
29. Hossain, M.K.; Ali, M.H. Transient stability augmentation of PV/DFIG/SG–based hybrid power system by
the parallel-resonance bridge fault current limiter. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2016, 130, 89–102. [CrossRef]
30. E.ON-Netz. Grid Code. High and Extra High Voltage. April 2009. Available online: http://www.eon-netz.
com/ (accessed on 1 February 2019).
31. Islam, S.; Zeb, K.; Din, W.; Khan, I.; Ishfaq, M.; Busarello, T.; Kim, H. Design of a Proportional Resonant
Controller with Resonant Harmonic Compensator and Fault Ride Trough Strategies for a Grid-Connected
Photovoltaic System. Electronics 2018, 7, 451. [CrossRef]
32. Shafiul Alam, M.; Abido, M.A. Fault ride-through capability enhancement of voltage source converter-high
voltage direct current systems with bridge type fault current limiters. Energies 2017, 10, 1898. [CrossRef]
33. Ntare, R.; Abbasy, N.H.; Youssef, K.H.M. Low Voltage Ride through Control Capability of a Large Grid
Connected PV System Combining DC Chopper and Current Limiting Techniques. J. Power Energy Eng. 2019,
7, 62–79. [CrossRef]

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).