Guidelines RES Aggregation

10/09/2015
G-RES

Table of contents

Table of contents.............................................................................................................................. 2
1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................... 4
1.1 Purpose............................................................................................................................. 4
1.2 Abbreviations................................................................................................................... 5
1.3 Definitions......................................................................................................................... 6
2 Current practices gap/ analysis...............................................................................................8
2.1 Current steady state models of distributed generation..............................................................8
2.1.1 RES modelling.......................................................................................................... 8
2.1.2 RES aggregation.......................................................................................................8
2.2 Current dynamic models of distributed generation..................................................................9
2.2.1 RES modelling.......................................................................................................... 9
2.2.2 RES aggregation.......................................................................................................9
2.3 Gap analysis..................................................................................................................... 12
2.3.1 Steady state studies................................................................................................12
2.3.2 Dynamic studies......................................................................................................12
2.3.3 Existing software vendor library models..................................................................13
2.3.4 Conclusions from the gap analysis..........................................................................13
3 Wind power modelling............................................................................................................. 16
3.1 Standard WG models........................................................................................................16
3.1.1 Type 1 (Directly connected asynchronous generator).............................................16
3.1.2 Type 2 (Directly connected asynchronous generator with variable rotor resistance)
16
3.1.3 Type 3 (Doubly-fed asynchronous generator (DFIG)).............................................17
3.1.4 Type 4 (Generator with fully rated converter)..........................................................17
3.2 Aggregation Techniques....................................................................................................18
3.3 Steady state models...........................................................................................................20
3.4 Dynamic models............................................................................................................... 21
3.4.1 Wind modelling.......................................................................................................21
3.4.2 Turbine model.........................................................................................................21
3.4.3 Generator model.....................................................................................................21
3.4.4 Controls................................................................................................................... 21
3.5 Model validation..............................................................................................................21
3.5.1 Validation in test case.............................................................................................22
Validation of the reactive power response.............................................................................23
Validation of the voltage ride through capability....................................................................24
3.5.2 Validation in a real network.....................................................................................25

2
G-RES

4 PV modelling.......................................................................................................................... 26
4.1 Aggregation Techniques....................................................................................................28
4.2 Steady state models...........................................................................................................30
4.2.1 Equivalent PV generator model...............................................................................30
4.2.2 Pad mounted transformer equivalent......................................................................31
4.2.3 Collector system equivalent....................................................................................31
4.2.4 Reactive power compensation................................................................................31
4.2.5 Plant transformer....................................................................................................31
4.3 Dynamic models............................................................................................................... 31
4.3.1 Controls................................................................................................................... 32
4.4 Model validation..............................................................................................................33
5 DSO/TSO cooperation.............................................................................................................34
6 Recommendations for aggregated WP and PV models.................................................................35
6.1 General requirements........................................................................................................35
6.2 Requirements for aggregated WP models............................................................................37
6.3 Requirements for aggregated PV models.......................................................................38
6.4 Model improvement and future work..............................................................................39
6.4.1 Development of generic models for variable generation..........................................39
6.4.2 Development of generic models for PV...................................................................39
6.4.3 Improvement of existing IEC WP models................................................................40
7 References.............................................................................................................................. 42
Appendix 1: Models CGMES definition.........................................................................................43
Appendix 2: Example current vendor model content....................................................................45

3
G-RES

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose
To respond to RES integration challenge there is a need to harmonise methods to aggregate to system level
or to the level(s) necessary for the type of study. Guidelines for RES aggregation are necessary and should
be commonly developed between SOC and SDC. This is also valid for the representation of distribution
system in the different types of models where it is preferable to harmonise the approaches and improve
TSO-DSO interactions.

As the RES integration increases, a new approach is developed as to not disconnect RES generators upon
first occurrence of a disturbance, but to have a capability to support the network throughout the fault.
These requirements are indicated in NC Connection requirements, as the ride-through network faults,
reactive power control or other additional capabilities useful for the system.
This approach makes it necessary to look at the interaction network-RES on a different way. When there
was small RES power connected to the network the reaction upon a disturbance was to disconnect the RES
power generation. Currently the RES connected generators are required to stay connected, or reconnect
after some time.

This capability imposes that the RES models accurately represent the response of the RES systems during
network disturbances.

As the RES generators have a much smaller size than conventional generators, the individual representation
of each single machine is not feasible for large grids, some sort of aggregation that represents generator and
turbine (in case of wind power) behaviour is needed.

The aggregations shown in chapter  represent the current praxis of individual TSOs and can be used as
guideline for RES modelling. The models concluded from chapter 3 and 4 are recommended for the model
exchange between TSOs, to sufficiently account for impact of renewables.

1.2 Abbreviations

AAC Already Allocated Capacity

AC Alternating current

4
G-RES

ACE Area control error

AGC Automatic Generation Control
ACL Active current limit
ATC Available Transfer Capacity
AVR Automatic Voltage Regulator
BEES Battery Energy Storage System
CGMES Common Grid Model Exchange Standard
CIM Common Information Model
CPS Common Planning Studies Phase (related to TYNDP project)
d Direct axis of a generator
DC Direct current
DFIG Doubly Fed Induction Generator
DSO Distribution System Operator
EMS Energy Management System
FACTS Flexible AC Transmission Systems
FC Frequency droop control
HV High voltage
HAWT Horizontal-Axis Wind Turbine
HVDC High Voltage Direct Current
IGTB Insulated gate bipolar transistor
IGTC Integrated gate-commutated thyristor
LFC Load frequency control
LVRT Low-voltage ride-through
mmf Magneto-motive force
MAWS Mean annual wind speed
MPP Maximum power point tracking
NTC Net Transfer Capacity
NMD Network Modelling Database
OEL Over Excitation Limiters
OHL Overhead line
PCC Point of Common Coupling
PLL Phase-locked loop
PMU Phasor Measurement Unit
POD Power Oscillation Damping
PSS Power System Stabilizer
PV Photovoltaic
pu Per unit
q Quadrature axis of a generator
R Resistance
RES Renewable Energy Source
RG Regional group
RG CE Regional Group Continental Europe
rms Root-mean-square
rpm Revolutions per minute
rhs Right-hand-side
SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
SDC System Development Committee
SIL Surge impedance load
SMES Superconducting magnetic energy storage
SOC System Operation Committee
SPRINTS Strategic PRogramme for Information INTegration and Studies
SSSC Static Synchronous Series Compensator

5
G-RES

SSTI Sub-synchronous Torsional Interactions

STATCOM Static compensator
SVC Static VAR Compensator
TCBR Thyristor Controlled Braking Resistor
TCPAR Thyristor Controlled Phase Angle Regulator
TRM Transmission Reliability Margin
TSO Transmission System Operator
TTC Total Transfer Capacity
TYNDP Ten Year Network Development Plan
UFLS Under Frequency Load Shedding
UPFC Unified power flow controller
VAWT Vertical-Axis Wind Turbine
WAMS Wide Area Measurement System
WAMPAC Wide Area Measurement, Protection and Control
WP Wind Park
WTG Wind Turbine Generator
X Reactance

1.3 Definitions

For the purpose of voltage and transient stability studies, the model of the represented power system is
divided into several areas:

The “study area” is the part of the power system that is under investigation and is modeled at least with
the same level of detail as the influence area. This is typically the region of a TSO in which the stability of
the generating units or the voltage stability is to be analyzed but it should also include the triggering event
such as a short-circuit or a load increase. The study area is always located within the responsibility of the
TSO(s) conducting the study.

“The influence area” is the part of the power system in which the grid structure and the dynamic behavior
of the generating units and of the loads significantly influence the results on the study area. Oscillations or
redistributions of the active and reactive power flows within the study area and the influence area should be
precisely represented. The size of the “influence area” depends on the aim of the study (transient stability

6
G-RES

study, short-term or long term voltage stability). The influence area typically covers a part of the system
under the responsibility of the TSO(s) conducting the study and a part of the system under the responsibility
of other neighboring TSOs.

“The remote area” is the part of the power system which does not influence significantly the quality of the
result on the study area for transient stability and voltage stability analyses. It however, influence quality of
the results in the “influence area” but the cascading influence on the results in the study area remains
negligible. The main objective of modelling this area in a simplified way is to reach numerically robust
simulations while reducing the computing time as much as possible.

In the Network codes Requirements for Generators, the following categories are defined:
Type A: is a generation module, which has its connection point below 110 kV and its maximum generation
capacity is 0.8 kW or more.
Type B: is a generation module, which has its connection point below 110 kV and its maximum generation
capacity is at or above a threshold defined by each Relevant TSO (Table 1).
Type C: is a generation module, which has its connection point below 110 kV and its maximum generation
capacity is at or above a threshold defined by each Relevant TSO (Table 1).
Type D: is a generation module, which has its connection point at 110 kV or above and its max. generation
capacity is at or above a threshold defined by each Relevant TSO (Table 1).

Synchronous Area Max. capacity Max. capacity Max. capacity

threshold from which threshold from which threshold from which
on a power on a power generating on a power generating
generating module is module is of Type C module is of Type D
of Type B
Continental Europe 1 MW 50 MW 75 MW
Nordic 1.5 MW 10 MW 30 MW
Great Britain 1 MW 10 MW 30 MW
Ireland 0.1 MW 5 MW 10 MW
Baltic 0.5 MW 10 MW 15 MW
Table 1: Threshold for Type B, C and D Power Generating Modules [1]

7
G-RES

2 Current practices gap/ analysis

The following chapter will describe the current practices of RES modelling as an aggregation of different
TSOs. Some TSO may have implemented a lower level of detail, due to a smaller impact on their observed
area. It has to be stressed that combined heat cycle power plants and other conventional power plants that
are connected to the distribution grid are not in the focus of this document. Nevertheless, if not modelled on
individual level, they have to be modelled in a similar way to the renewable infeed.

2.1 Current steady state models of distributed generation

2.1.1 RES modelling

To reproduce the behaviour of distribution grids (132 kV and lower), it is sufficient to include the fuel
types. This Guideline focuses only in wind and solar photovoltaic generation.. In steady state analyses, the
technology is only relevant for analyses concerning reactive power consumption based on detailed
topologies. For load flow calculations, it is sufficient to model P-Q-infeed for each relevant node in the
distribution grid.

2.1.2 RES aggregation

The infeed of renewables in the distribution grid is allocated to all modelled distribution nodes, either
directly connected to the transmission system or inside the distribution grid. The level of detail is restricted
by the aggregation of the distribution grid, which varies in different countries. In some countries the high
voltage grid is only modelled as an aggregated grid reproducing the interconnection nodes of the
transmission grid, whereas other countries use more detailed representation. The medium and low voltage
grid are only modelled as loads.

In long term planning scenarios, there is often an uncertainty of the distribution of additional renewables to
the grid nodes. In praxis, this is done ether in one or a combination of the following procedures:
 In proportion to existing infeed
 In proportion to areas scheduled for RES installation (regional RES integration plans)

2.2 Current dynamic models of distributed generation

2.2.1 RES modelling

8
G-RES

The modelling of RES can strongly deviate between operational and long term scenarios. This is due to
unknown distribution of new infeed, unknown repowering of older units, unknown vendors and unknown
technologies and future capabilities.

operational long term

technology all existing technologies  Wind: only DFIG and FRC
 PV: FRC
vendor models (1)/ generic depending of aggregation of distribution only for direct connection of existing RES
models grid to the extra high voltage grid

NOTE (1) : Vendor models are not used by some TSOs or they are used only for compliance simulations.

The differentiation between infeed on different voltage levels or of different sizes is not state of the art.
This can become relevant due to different requirements (NC RfG). The used models relay on the fact, that
most photovoltaic is installed in the low voltage grid and most wind power is installed in the medium/high
voltage grid. Therefore, beside the mechanical behaviour, the following functionalities have to be
implemented:

solar wind
frequency stability  Over frequency
reduction
robustness  crowbar (not for FRC)
control  PQ control  PQ control including
PLL
protection  Under voltage  Over and under speed
protection protection (not for
FRC)(2)
 Overvoltage protection

NOTE (2): Over and under speed protection is not included in the models by some TSOs.

2.2.2 RES aggregation

Due to the aggregation of the distribution grids, also the dispersed generation has to be aggregated. In
contrast to the steady state aggregation different types of technology have to be considered for transient
stability analysis. If connected to a relevant extend these are:
 Wind:(aggregation by technology) maximum aggregated power? Location of the aggregated
generation?

o DFIG
o FRC
o FSIG
 Solar:
o PV: FRC
o Thermosolar: SG

9
G-RES

As seen in figure 1 and figure 2 the current practice is to connect the infeed to their primary voltage level
or medium-voltage level. In an aggregated grid model this can be represented by equivalent transformers,
indicating the short-circuit power of those voltage levels. In addition, an approximated voltage drop in the
high voltage grid can be considered introducing an additional connection between the modelled distribution
nodes and artificial RES nodes.
A more simplified way of modelling is shown in figure 2 where some RES are connected directly to
distribution nodes without any equivalent transformer (impedance from turbines to distribution grid is
neglected).

figure 1: example for the integration of dynamic models considering different fuel types, technologies and (primary) voltage levels.

10
G-RES

figure 2 example for the integration of dynamic models considering different fuel types, technologies and voltage levels.

2.3 Gap analysis

The gap analysis compares the current practice to the state of the art models and in addition to the expected
demand for the future.
With larger RES penetration and concentration on the grid, planning/ operation requirements are to evolve
as to properly represent the effect on the grid of these non-conventional generation.

There is a need for RES aggregated models to meet the requirements for transient and voltage stability
studies, consistent with the definitions of influence and remote area.
As a secondary target, the models can meet the requirements for frequency analysis.

New requirements derived from the NC also affect planning standards and should be included if not
represented. The main requirements that are not systematically modelled are: Voltage ride through, reactive
power support, inertial response and frequency control

The need of common models is recommended, to allow the ENTSO-E community to exchange standard
models, as opposed to “black box” models. These modelling requirements should be consistent with the
model detail, required for each type of study.

11
G-RES

2.3.1 Steady state studies

On the steady state models the need for a model definition, non-dependent from software or manufacturers
models, is identified. As the steady state model is the first step to set up the initial conditions for dynamic
simulations, it is important to define a common set of data for the steady state model.

A common methodology for the requirements for the steady state model if it is going to be the base for
transient and voltage stability studies is recommended.

2.3.2 Dynamic studies

For regional studies 132/110 kV detail of own network can have a high detail level or sufficient level
detail of aggregation. It depends on which phenomena to be observed.
For example to see which influences a fault in transmission system can have in low voltage level with high
number of PV.
Each TSO should be able to deliver in the future a generic model with a detail level according to the
IEC61400-27 for stability investigation.
The model capability should give the possibility to investigate phenomena as well in remote area,
as in influence area.

According to the definitions defined within the G-TVS group of influence area and remote area; the
following modelling requirements should be defined in the scope of the document:
 Influence area
-Model detail; definition of the distribution network where the RES sources are connected.
- Aggregation level, aggregated generation sources by technology with a proposal for
aggregation level, that can be validated.
-Model content, the model content should cover the requirements suitable for voltage and
transient stability, analysis of IEC generic WP models is performed to verify compliance
and proposal for a PV transmission connected model is evaluated.

 Remote area;
-Model detail; network reduction at the same level of the remote area.
Aggregation level, aggregated generation sources by technology with a proposal for
aggregation level, that can be validated. - The model content for WP should be a IEC type
generic model, with standard parameters or a P,Q infeed.

2.3.3 Existing software vendor library models

12
G-RES

There are a number of software vendor embedded RES models available. Some of these library models
are available in software packages like PSS/E, Power Factory and Netomac. An example of the model
development by one of the vendors, Digsilent, and model content is shown in Appendix 2.

2.3.4 Conclusions from the gap analysis.

From the existing practices on RES modelling and aggregation it is shown that different approaches exist
for model detail, point of RES infeed, distribution network representation, generic model definition and
formats for model exchange. It is advisable to establish the purpose of the RES aggregated model from the
start (i.e. Power flow study, transient stability, voltage stability etc.) as to define the model requirements.
If the purpose of the model is a dynamic study, the load flow model should be conditioned and prepared to
obtain an initial converging model.

The following needs are identified and should be addressed in this guideline:

1) Model detail;
There are several approaches on voltage level detail and representation of the distribution network.
There should be a clear standard to indicate: connection level of the RES sources in transmission.
Connection level of RES sources in distribution. In lower distribution levels it should be clear
weather that RES is modelled as generation or is considered as a balanced P, Q node.
Synchronous stability of the systems is generally improved if flows on transmission lines are
reduced when RES are distributed evenly in the grid. However, it is possible that the stability
decreases due to the decrease of inertia constant. Synchronous stability may decrease in the case
that the RES output is not distributed evenly.

2) Aggregation techniques;
The aggregation techniques are not standard. A procedure to aggregate the RES described in this
document is useful. Several aggregation levels can be defined depending on the study type. How to
aggregate the distributed PV as to obtain a model to perform load flow and dynamic analysis is also
an issue to be clarified. As the distribution connected PV is usually neglected and the distribution
nodes with generation are modelled as PQ nodes. A procedure to represent load + generation nodes
when the percentage of distributed generation reaches a level is also missing.

3) Model requirements;
The model requirements need to be defined to comply with the study purpose. With focus on
voltage and transient stability.
For the purpose of the studies generic models for RES are recommended. In case of WT modelling
the standard IEC 61400-27-1 is fully developed and can be used among different TSOs as the
reference for modelling. IEC 61400-27-2 for WP is in draft state, but it will cover in the future all
the requirements for WP models on transient and voltage stability. The use of generic models
should be verified with different tools and validated against manufacturer’s models.

For steady state, the reactive power capability limits in the PCC have to be represented accurately.

4) Additional requirements;

13
G-RES

As indicated in the NC for Requirements for Grid Connection Applicable to all Generators, Chapter
6, Compliance Simulations for Power Park Modules there are a number of simulations that are
relevant to verify the grid connection requirements. Namely, the NC mention the following for
Power Park Modules:

- LFSM, limited frequency sensitive mode.

- FRT, fault ride through.
- Post Fault Power Active Recovery simulation.
- FSM, frequency sensitive mode.
- Simulation of the capability of providing Synthetic Inertia.
- Power oscillations damping control simulation.
- Island operation.
- Reactive Power capability, reactive current injection.

These requirements can be grouped into three modelling categories:

- Modelling of the reactive voltage support.

- Modelling of the fault ride through capability.
- Modelling of inertial response and frequency control.
- Modelling of protection.

Generic models for WP cover most of the modelling categories indicated above.
Specification for a PV plant model is to be developed.

5) Model exchange;
As completion of the standardization process, a need to define the aggregated models in CGMES is
identified.
This would allow model exchange and validation easier within ENTSO-E.

14
G-RES

3 Wind power modelling

3.1 Standard WG models

This section presents briefly the schematic structures of different wind turbine generator technologies. The
contents follows loosely the IEC 61400-27-1 classification of different technologies into four main types.
Further information e.g. on the subtypes, such as 1A and 1B can be found in the standard IEC 61400-27-2
Some sources also describe Type 5 technology, which comprises a synchronous generator coupled with
torque-speed-converter. This technology is however not considered in this document.

3.1.1 Type 1 (Directly connected asynchronous generator)

Figure 12 illustrates Type 1 wind turbine according to IEC 61400-1 standard.

Type 1 turbine comprises asynchronous generator that is directly connected to the grid. A gearbox adapts
the rotational speed of the turbine and generator. Since the asynchronous generation absorbs reactive power
from grid, capacitor banks are needed to provide reactive power compensation. Type 1 wind turbines may
operate with fixed blade pitch angle or have a limited pitch angle control to set blades into or away from
stall.

Asynchronous
Gear box generator

Capacitor
bank

Figure 12: The schematic structure of a Type 1 WTG.

3.1.2 Type 2 (Directly connected asynchronous generator with variable rotor resistance)
Type 2 wind turbine is very similar to Type 1. The main difference is the variable rotor resistance, which
allows Type 2 turbines to alter the generator slip and thus a limited control of speed. Together with the
blade angle control this allows controlling the turbine operation point and optimize the tip-speed ratio.

Gear box

Capacitor
bank

Figure 13: The schematic structure of Type 2 WTG (Asynchronous generator with variable rotor resistance).

3.1.3 Type 3 (Doubly-fed asynchronous generator (DFIG))

15
G-RES

Figure 14 illustrates the schematic structure of the doubly-fed induction generator (DFIG), which
corresponds the Type 3 in IEC classification (IEC 61400-27-1). In DFIG, the stator is directly connected to
the grid and the rotor is connected via a frequency converter. The converter is typically rated to a fraction of
the nominal power of the generator.

The converter bridge enables the generator to operate at variable speed by adjusting the slip power
exchanged between the rotor and the converter. The generator can thus operate on a range below and above
the nominal speed.

DFIGs may have a chopper resistor in the DC link between line-side and generator-side converters. The
chopper dissipates the excess output energy of the generator during grid faults and thus enables the fault
ride-through without disconnecting the converter. Another feature is the crowbar device, which short-
circuits the rotor, essentially turning generator into a conventional induction machine during faults.

Gear box

~
Crowbar
~
Chopper

Figure 14: Schematic structure of a Type 3 wind turbine equipped with a doubly-fed induction generator (DFIG).

3.1.4 Type 4 (Generator with fully rated converter)

16
G-RES

Figure 15 illustrates the structure of a type 4 wind turbine. Type 4 wind turbines use either synchronous or
asynchronous generators and are equipped with a full-scale frequency converter. Thus, all the power from
generator to grid flows through the converter. The installation may also include a gearbox, but in some
installations it is omitted and a direct drive generator is used instead.

Since the bridge decouples the drive train from the grid, in many cases the mechanical and aerodynamic
parts can be neglected in simplified models. The type 4 wind turbines without fully rated choppers however
inject torsional oscillations to the grid in post-fault situation, which can be addressed with similar models
than Type 3.

Gear box

~
Chopper
~
Figure 15: A schematic structure of a Type 4 wind turbine (fully rated converter).

Type 4, full power conversion. Stator of the generator connected to the grid by a full power back to back
IGBT converter. Main characteristics to model:

 Wide range of speed variation

 Reactive power and voltage support
 Short circuit contribution limited by the converter.
 Frequency variations on the grid can be compensated by the converter control
 Constant pf, Q, V control.

3.2 Aggregation Techniques

It is not easy to establish a single criterion in the RES aggregation process.
There is a clear difference between Wind turbines models and Wind Power Plant level. As modern wind
power plants may consist of tens to hundreds of individual wind turbines from a transmission system point
of view it is necessary to represent the wind farm in an aggregated fashion by a single turbine model
instance. In this case, an appropriate equivalent of the collector system is required. This aggregation is
feasible when using vendor’s models but can have some limitations when using standard models mainly
due to the representation of wind power plant controls (wind turbine model vs wind power plant models).
Knowing that for TSO approach the aggregation of wind turbines at wind farm level is necessary, the
debate on RES aggregation processes should be based on the possibility to aggregate dispersed wind farm
equivalent generators according to their influence in the transmission grid.
Depending on the study's scope and relevance of the conclusions, it is possible to consider different levels
of aggregation without losing the precision required in the study. It is important to keep in mind that in
many cases, the benefit of using very detailed RES representation does not provide enough value to the
study because it is possible to reach the same conclusions with a less detailed approach despite the loss of
precision in the representation of RES.
In some cases it would not be justified to consider a very detailed RES representation if this entails an
increase in the consumption of human resources or in the size of the scenarios that could collide with the
capabilities of the tools used for both running simulations, calculations and prepare scenarios for studies
(plus the additional cost of processing time although this is improving rapidly in recent years with the
development of hardware and software).

17
G-RES

However, we must also consider that the aggregation of generators from the available source of information
(which is not aggregated) requires additional efforts on:

- obtaining reduced model equivalent,

- the establishment of mechanisms to do the aggregation of generators

- and also the relevant validation tests to accept the final aggregation .

3 levels of aggregation needs are proposed according to the scope of the study.
a) Standard network approach
Establish RES modelling criteria and possibility of aggregation of generators under consideration of
sufficient accuracy of the studies, so that the level of detail gives coverage to most of the types of steady
state and transient stability studies to be performed by the System Operator in the exercise of their
functions.
This standard network approach as a generic criterion allows automating the process of generation of
network scenarios.
b) Detailed network approach for localized studies
In this type of studies, the use of very detailed local networks reaching low voltage networks is
recommended. In these studies, the level of RES aggregation should be low in the specific zone or local
area that is going to be analysed.
c) European-wide network approach
Occasionally, for studies at interconnected European level, the amount of elements to model the networks
uniting all interconnected countries can go beyond the current capabilities of the available tools (hardware
and software) so it necessarily have to support a high level of aggregation of generation (specially RES),
reducing network modelling. In these cases, the scope of the studies is restricted to areas where loss of
detail of the network does not affect the accuracy of the conclusions.

Except in specific localized studies (b) where aggregation would not be justified, at least in the area of
influence of the local study, generally aggregation of RES is permitted under certain conditions, in order to
simplify the volume of modelled generators, without loss of accuracy in simulations and studies.

In the case of using the standard network approach (a) it is recommended RES aggregation for generation
plants up to a fixed maximum active power when:

- Wind farms are of the same technology (when using standard models).

- Wind machines are of the same vendor and the same model (when using manufacturer models).
The aggregation should have also restrictions depending on the PCC. It is possible to aggregate:

- If the generators share the same node of infeed (in the case of generators that infeed in transmission
network).

- If generators share the same influence on the transmission network (if the generators infeed in
distribution network). The aggregated generator is modelled in the node of the distribution network
that collects the infeed of those generators (this is an infeed node in the distribution network
interconnected immediately with the node of common influence of the transmission network).

18
G-RES

Non-aggregated generators should be modelled at the node where they infeed. All generators (aggregated or
not) should be modelled with a network connection transformer. For aggregation equivalent characteristics
for the infeed transformer is used.

3.3 Steady state models

For load flow analysis and according to the needs of a TSO it would be enough to model the infeed of the
RES generation in a transmission node (Active and reactive power injection in the transmission grid in the
node of infeed or in the node of influence in the transmission network).
For short-circuit studies it is necessary to model in a more accurate way the RES generation capabilities.
For a TSO approach it is enough to model at wind plant level (not machine or wind turbine models) and
model an equivalent generator of the entire wind plant and aggregate when possible (according to section
3.2).
For steady-state analysis, a model of this equivalent generator should incorporate at least the following
information:
Equivalent generator properties:
 Pmax Maximum equivalent generator active power output
 Pmin Minimum equivalent generator active power output
 Qmax: Maximum equivalent generator reactive power output
 Qmin Minimum equivalent generator reactive power output
 Mbase Total MVA base of the units represented by this equivalent generator
 Impedance: Complex equivalent generator impedance.

The model requirements for steady state analysis should cover also at least the following capabilities:
1) Modeling reactive capability of the different non-conventional generator types.
2) Accurate modeling of the reactive control, for the different non-conventional generator types.
3) Modeling of the collection system.
a. Modeling of the impedances for cables or OHL of the collection system in an equivalent
branch (if necessary).
b. Equivalent step-up transformer at PCC (Modeling of OLTC from transformer at PCC,
voltage levels, and step-up transformer impedances).

Figure 16 Example of equivalent RES generator representation

4) Short circuit data of non-conventional generators;

The behavior to short circuit is dependent of the technology type. The contribution to short circuit
varies with time and is also dependent on the number of wind turbines in operation.

19
G-RES

According to these limitations, the representation of the short-circuit behavior of the wind plant
will depend on the type of short-circuit analysis to be done (maximum contribution, minimum
contribution, the moment of the fault, etc.).

3.4 Dynamic models

3.4.1 Wind modelling

According to the IEC 61400-27-1, the wind conditions can be taken into account in aero dynamical model
with available aerodynamic power. However, in dynamic stability studies, the timeframe of interest is
typically tens of seconds and wind is usually assumed to be constant.

3.4.2 Turbine model

The turbine mechanical model is sufficiently accurately modelled with a two-mass model, which comprises
the inertia constants of the generator and the drive-train system. When modelling Type 4 turbines,
mechanical model can often be neglected for simplicity, since the full-scale converter effectively decouples
the drive-train mechanics from the grid.

3.4.3 Generator model

Type 1 and 2 generators are modelled with conventional asynchronous generator models, but with Type 3
and 4 machines, it is common to neglect the physical structures of the generator and model the generator as
a current source. This approach assumes that the rotor-side converter and its control systems dominate the
generator output and thus the generator dynamic do not affect the dynamic behaviour of the wind power
plant.

3.4.4 Controls

In control system modelling it is important that model includes all the plant level control functions that
control the individual turbines. Control system model should include the following functionalities:
 active power control with an option to frequency control
 reactive power control with different operating modes: constant V, constant Q, and constant power
factor operation
 blade pitch angle control
 Fast Fault current contribution.

Annexe D, of IEC 61400-27-1 describes the relevant controllers at WP level.

The models described in this informative annex are intended to be used with Type 3 (see 5.5.4) and Type 4
(see 5.5.5) WT generator models. These types are based on power electronic converters and have therefore
the ability to continuously control their terminal voltage. Type 1 and Type 2 WT generators do not have
this ability.
The typical use for this plant control model is where the whole WP is represented in an aggregated fashion
by a single turbine model instance. An appropriate equivalent of the collector system is then desired.

20
G-RES

3.5 Model validation

Standard models proposed in this document, are to be verified to check the accurate response of the systems
referred to changes in the controlled variable.

The objectives of a validation process are to specify a procedure on how to validate the output of an
aggregated WP simulation model in order to be compared with manufacturer models.

First in a test model, the set of variables of interest are defined that have an impact in transient and voltage
stability. Then specific events, triggering a change in these variables are defined.

In this test, the output variables of interest for the transient and voltage stability studies are compared to the
manufacturers model outputs.

After the verification vs. the manufacturer model, the aggregated model is added to the actual network
model.
Initialization is performed, without any disturbance in order to assess the proper behaviour of the system.
Then the same set of events as in the test model can be performed in the actual model.
After verification of the expected outputs in the actual network model, the WP model can be used in
transient and voltage stability studies.

The effect of addition of WP on system stability can be assessed by the following parameters:
 Critical Clearing Time. (CCT)
 Reactive power reserve.

Whereas there is a procedure for validating individual models, indicated in IEC standard, there is no such a
documented procedure to validate the same in aggregated models.
So the construction of the models should be based on validated models plus consistent aggregation
techniques.
If possible real data measurement for significant events are recommended to obtain verify the models.

3.5.1 Validation in test case

The first check on the models is to verify the individual WTG response to the changes in the controlled
variables. The validation includes reactive power capability, FRT as a minimum. It can include also the
inertial and frequency response. Models are validated against manufacturer’s models.

The validation should cover the following points:

• Steady state, active and reactive power losses.

• Short circuit.
• Steady state reactive capability assessment.
• FRT capability.
• Dynamic response, to a step change in set point in voltage, active/ reactive power.

The test model will be composed of a MV grid, MV cable, PCC bus bar. Capacitor bank connected to the
PCC bus bar through step up transformer. WT generator and pad mounted transformer.

21
G-RES

Figure 17 Test model

Validation of the reactive power response

STEP 1 Validation of the reactive power capability in steady state.

The reactive power capability assessment at the PCC, for different values of

 Voltage at PCC.
 Power active output.

The P, Q curve at the PCC should be inside the boundaries of the required reactive capability curve
described in figure 18, for the values of P from 0-100% and for voltage values from 0.95-1.1 pu.

22
G-RES

Figure 18 Example: Reactive power capability requirement at 1.0 pu V. 0.95 lead-0.95 lag power
factor.

STEP 2 Produce a step change in reactive power by switching on/off a capacitor bank.

STEP 3 Observe the response on the reactive power control of the WP and comparison with the
manufacturer model response.

Validation of the voltage ride through capability

STEP 1 Creation of a set of study cases for different fault duration times and impedance values as
to generate:
 Voltage 0%, fault duration 0.1 s
 Voltage 30%, fault duration 0.8 s
 Voltage 60% fault duration 1.5 s
 Voltage 90% fault duration 4.8 s

STEP 2 Create a short circuit event reproducing the conditions above. Fault and fault cleared at the
specified time above.

STEP 3 Verify the response on reactive power injection on the WP for each of the study cases
above.

23
G-RES

3.5.2 Validation in a real network.

Once the standard individual model has been validated, a consistent aggregation technique with the study
type is used.
Aggregated models have to be validated vs. detailed model or real test data at the PCC.

The validation should cover the following points:

STEP 1 Verification of the dynamic data set prior to the WTG addition.

Non disturbance test during 10 s, to verify the right behaviour of conventional units.
Disturbance test, 3-phase fault cleared without any line tripping.

Recording of the following variables for conventional units:

 Active and reactive power output.

 Terminal voltage.
 Machine rotor angle.

STEP 2 Introduction of the aggregated WTG units and flat start initialization.
Non disturbance test during 10 s, to verify the interaction of conventional units and aggregated
WTG.

Recording of the following variables for conventional units:

 Active and reactive power output.

 Terminal voltage.
 Machine rotor angle.

Recording of the following variables for WTG:

 Active and reactive power output.

 Terminal voltage.

System frequency.

STEP 3 Verify the response for a dynamic event with the addition of the WTG . Disturbance test, 3-
phase fault cleared without any line tripping.

Recording of the following variables for WTG:

 Active and reactive power output.

 Terminal voltage.
 Voltage and frequency deviation at PCC.

24
G-RES

4 PV modelling
As large amounts of PV generation are introduced in several ENTSO-E networks as a result from EU
Energy targets, the need to model PV impact in local areas as well as impact on the overall system is
required.
PV is connected in distribution and transmission level. The residential PV is connected in LV and
distributed along large areas. Typical residential PV is connected in single phase 220V or 3 phase 400 V,
with a single inverter and a power not exceeding 10 kW. Power factor is normally kept at 1.

Plant sized PV is connected in distribution or transmission with multiple inverters and a power ranging
from 10-50 MW. Future developments consider PV plants with an output from 50-500 MW. PV plants
power connected to distribution is limited to 20 MW, for installed power over that value, PV plants are
normally connected to transmission.

ENTSO-E modelling guidelines state for Ampere-Tesla type models state:

[MP.A-4] Branches and substations of the network under the 110 kV voltage level may not be
represented in detail. Loads would be aggregated at the closest extra-high voltage (EHV) node to represent
the actual loading on the connection point. Losses shall be considered to avoid loss of generation type and
to consider losses on the originally connected network, such as losses on step-up transformers. Aggregation
levels should be consistent with the actual levels of aggregation and geographical distribution.
[MP.A-9] Generating units connected to 110 kV network or above with maximum capacity greater
than 75 MW for Continental Europe, 30 MW for Nordic and Great Britain, 15 MW for Baltic and 10 MW
for Ireland shall be modelled explicitly.
[MP.A-10] For embedded generation not under MP.A-9 must be modelled in line with MP.A-4 for
each technology type and node. (i.e. aggregated wind generation, segregated by turbine types with different
connection points).

From these rules can be inferred that only aggregated PV generators connected to 110 kV and above should
be modelled explicitly. However some recommendation for residential connected PV can be added to this.

Plant sized PV normally consists of a number of PV arrays connected to several inverters, all of them
connected to a step up transformer (MV/LV) that connects the system to the collector system. A step up
transformer connects the plant to transmission or distribution levels. Reactive compensation can be done
either with switched capacitor banks, or through the inverters.

Distribution connected PV, is normally embedded in the load and represented at the transmission level as a
P,Q node.
Representing the embedded generation explicitly would allow System Development engineers to evaluate if
large distributed generation can affect grid performance. Also, it could be verified to what extent the NC
RfG regarding reactive and voltage support, protection and control requirements can be verified locally.
It is difficult to establish the size of the aggregated capacity to be represented explicitly, when the
information from the DSO does not include in many cases the distributed generation. In that case as a first
approach disaggregating the load and the generation, and representing both load and generation on the LV
bus with an equivalent impedance between the load+ generation bus and the step up transformer.
Converting a static load into a load+ generation bus, can have a distorting effect on the study results, as an
additional voltage-controlling device is introduced in the distribution network without taking into
consideration the load voltage dependency. If the load composition is known a complete distribution
standard feeder can be used, including dynamic load models to counter act for the generator effect.

PV systems are composed of the following elements:

25
G-RES

1) PV array.

The PV array converts solar radiation directly into direct current (DC) electricity. For constant solar
irradiance and cell temperature, the current and power output of the array is a function of terminal
voltage. The voltage/ current characteristic (IV curve) is nonlinear. There is a voltage level at
which maximum power is extracted for a constant irradiance level. The available current and power
varies in proportion to the effective irradiance incident on the plane of the array. Temperature
effects are secondary compared to irradiance, the lower temperature the better efficiency. Irradiance
level, ambient temperature, wind speed affect cell temperature.
2) Inverter.
The inverter is used to convert the DC voltage into AC. The inverter is composed of an input
capacitor, IGBT module, filter, insulation transformer and controls. The inverters controls include:
Active power (kW),Reactive power (kVAR) ,Fixed ratio power factor (e.g., 0.95), High-voltage,
low-voltage, and zero-voltage ride through ,Frequency ride-through capability, Volt/Var Support,
protection module. MPP module.
Typically, in residential connected PV inverters are rated less than 10 kVA. For Plant sized PV
inverters rated powers range from 100-1000 kVA.
3) PV transformer.

The inverters are connected to a MV/LV transformer, typically rating 0.5-4 MVA. Impedances
according to IEC 60079? are 6% with a X/ R ratio of 8-10.

4) Collector system.
PV plants collector systems consist of one or more medium voltage underground feeders, raging
voltages from 20-36 kV.

5) Reactive compensation.
Capacitor banks on connected to the MV collector system side. Normally switched shunts.

6) Step up transformer.
Transformer HV/MV to connect to the distribution or transmission network.
Variable output depending, of the Plant size. Typical impedances according to IEC 10-12%, X/R
ratio 20.

7) Interconnection line.
If the distance to the PCC is relevant, the connection line has to be modelled.

26
G-RES

Figure 17 PV Plant topology

Figure 18 Distributed PV topology

4.1 Aggregation Techniques

Depending on the point of interconnection and the size of the PV system, it is possible to establish
different models of aggregated PV systems.

27
G-RES

 PV plants connected to transmission or distribution levels.

For PV plants with the topology indicated in figure 18 an equivalent model is composed of
Equivalent generator, Pad mounted transformer, collector system, reactive compensation and
station transformer. The model is similar to the aggregated WP model. However, the
characteristics of the inverter have to be included in the equivalent generator model.
The aggregation levels, if consistent with section 3.2, should be according to the study type.
For type a) Standard Network approach, a minimum level of aggregation of 50 MW and a
maximum level of aggregation of 500 MW can be used.
If the plant size is estimated larger than 20 MW, the aggregated model can be directly
connected to a voltage level higher than 30 kV. For long term planning a standard size of 50
MW that can be used for load flow and transient stability analysis connected to transmission
is proposed.

 PV distributed.
For PV distributed, with the topology indicated in figure 19 an equivalent model composed
of equivalent load + generator can be used. This method involves the transformation of a
static load, connected to transmission, into a load + generator bus in lower distribution
voltages. The aggregation would be applied to identified nodes where the PV infeed is above
a certain threshold. (IF USED 1. DATA AVAILABLE FROM DSO? 2. WHAT
THRESHOLD

Figure 19 Distributed PV Equivalent

28
G-RES

4.2 Steady state models

Steady state models for aggregated PV plants, consist of equivalent generator, equivalent pad
mounted transformer, equivalent collector system and step up transformer.
This model is very similar to a WP model with a Type 3 or Type 4 IEC Turbine.

Figure 20 PV plant model for load flow

4.2.1 Equivalent PV generator model

The equivalent generator model represents the behaviour of the inverter output. The PV array
output is considered constant in this model, but it is accurate for long term planning models. The
active power output of these generators should be according to the scenario building.
The reactive power limits are according to the inverter reactive capability limits.
A P,Q curve that represents the real capabilities of the inverter can be provided.
A triangular or rectangular shaped P,Q curve represents reactive capability limits.
The capability limits can be shifted according to the terminal voltage of the PV generator.

Figure 21 Example PV generator capability curve

4.2.2 Pad mounted transformer equivalent

The equivalent impedance of the pad transformers is calculated as:

Requivalent= Rtran/ N

29
G-RES

Xequivalent= Xtran/ N

4.2.3 Collector system equivalent

Requivalent=
∑ Ri∗N 2i
i=1

N2
M

∑ X i∗N 2i
Xequivalent = i=1

N2

4.2.4 Reactive power compensation

A fixed capacitor bank or switched shunt at the medium voltage bus can be modelled as the reactive
power compensation if they are present in the plant.

4.2.5 Plant transformer

Plant transformer should be modelled explicitly in PV transmission connected plants. An OLTC
regulator can be also included.

4.3 Dynamic models

The dynamic model for PV plants includes the PV array, inverter, reactive power control and
protection modules.

Figure 22 PV generator dynamic model

Type 4 WT for equivalent PV? Recommend other model?

Available vendor PV models (description and capabilities) section 6.3

30
G-RES

4.3.1 Controls
The reactive power capability and response characteristic of a generation unit is very important to
evaluate the voltage support, reactive support and the dynamic recovery after fault events in system
studies. Hence the reactive power control module is an essential component of the dynamic model of
PV. Several control modes can be implemented in PV controller. Very large PV power plants usually
control voltage at the PCC (constant V). Smaller PV power plants are usually operated in constant
power factor control mode. The most common control modes can be summarised as follows:
 constant power factor: The inverter operates at an constant power factor. The injected
active and reactive power are specified as follows
P
cos φ=
√ P +Q2
2

Thus the inverter terminal is a P,Q-node.

 constant V: The inverter operates at an variable power factor. The reactive power output of
the inverter is controlled to achieve a specified local voltage at its terminal. Hence the
injected reactive power is a function of the voltage at the inverter terminal Q(V). The
inverter terminal is a P,V-node.
 constant Q: The injected reactive power of the inverter is maintained at a specified value.
Thus the inverter terminal is a P,Q-node.

The influence of the PV generator reactive power control at the transmission level is limited by the
impedance between the transmission node and the connection point of the PV generator. E.g. the
reactive power control of a low voltage connected PV generator has practically no effect on the
transmission level, due to the very high impedance between the transmission and low voltage grid.
Therefore an equivalent impedance has to be modelled in addition to the dynamic model of the PV
generator to achieve an adequate representation of the dynamic behaviour of distributed PV
generation.

4.4 Model validation

31
G-RES

5 The conclusions based on expert view are verified using existing planning models of the different
TSOs. Standard models are used to add additional functionalities.DSO/TSO cooperation
Information on distribution grids has a significant impact on the planning and operation of the transmission
grid, when a high amount of dispersed generation is present. Therefore, a continuously updated data
exchange can be of high value.

The data exchange is recommended to include both the current status and planning scenarios. The data
should include information on distribution grid itself as well as information on the load and the dispersed
generation.

The topology of the high voltage grid (i.e. 100 kV) in the monitoring area should at least represent the
aggregated interconnection of nodes connected to the transmission grid. For those nodes a distribution of
dispersed generation including the infeed from lower voltage levels should be made available for all
relevant fuel types. In addition, information on the actual voltage level as well as on the age or the valid
connection codes of installed generation should be available to the TSO. This is to deviate the capabilities
and from that the dynamic behaviour of the aggregated distribution system. For planning scenarios, the
following developments should be displayed:
 The development in horizontal topology (i.e. separation of subnetworks or new lines),
 The development in vertical topology (i.e. new or enhanced interconnection to the transmission
grid),
 The development of load and
 The development of dispersed generation.
The last point can be enhanced by adding information on suitable areas for further development of
renewable energy sources. This is to allow the TSO to distribute future dispersed generation in long-term
scenarios in a reasonable manner.

Models on the current status should go along with suitable measurement data for calibrating the model. On
optional base, those data can also include projections on distributed infeed and total load.

Further (optional) information can improve the modelling of dispersed generation and may also become
relevant for very high dispersed infeed:
 Detailed model of the high voltage grid (i.e. to properly model the reactive power consumption
both in stationary and dynamic simulations)
 Detailed information on technology of dispersed generation (i.e. DFIG or FRC)
 Detailed information on the load types (i.e. industrial or household) and their distribution to both
the nodes and voltage levels (to properly model the interaction between generation and load)

32
G-RES

6 Recommendations for aggregated WP and PV models

6.1 General requirements

The following list of general requirements summarizes the main aspects covered in the previous chapters.
This is a list of minimum recommendations for RES modelling and RES aggregation focused on planning
scenarios.

[1] It is recommended to aggregate all dispersed generation as infeed (not as residual load), since their
operation points can strongly depend on the assumed weather conditions. This is also a valuable input for
dynamic analysis (see chapter 2.2), since information concerning installed capacity and operation points are
defined by the load flow data.

[2] Models should be generic based on IEC or other standard

IEC standard models are under development and will necessarily evolve in the next years. Specially
interesting will be the development of IEC 61400-27 which will lead to a new generation of software
vendor library models for WP.

[3] Models should be aggregated by model type described in previous chapters.

RES simulation models will include at least:
- For wind power plants: wind turbines, auxiliary equipment and wind power plant controller
- For PV plants: PV generator, inverter and PV plant controller

[4] Models should be exchangeable among ENTSO-E by use of a common standard. (CGMES)
Developers of power system simulation software will use the standard to implement standard wind power
models as part of the software library. Future efforts will be needed in order to translate standard models to
CGMES.

[5] RES representation for a TSO perspective should be at least at plant level (not wind turbine or PV panel
level).
In this sense, RES aggregation refers to the aggregation of wind parks or PV parks in an equivalent
generator.

[6] RES aggregation is very dependent on the quality of distribution network representation available for
the TSO.
A good exchange of information between DSO-TSO is desired.

[7] Aggregation levels:

RES aggregation and representation can differ according to the type of study. The aggregation levels and
the modelling could be different depending on the objectives of each study. Three different approaches
have been defined according to the scope of the study:
a) Standard network approach
b) Detailed network approach for localized studies
c) European-wide network approach

The necessities of RES modelling are different for static and dynamic analysis but models should be
consistent for a good initialization of the scenarios.

33
G-RES

 For load flow studies the RES sources can be aggregated by fuel type, in transmission or
distribution nodes.
Represented by a static generator (with generic reactive power capabilities).

 For transient and voltage stability studies the RES should be aggregated by model type or
technology (as described in previous chapters). A more accurate representation of lower voltage
levels is recommended.
Aggregation level, aggregated generation sources by technology using with a maximum aggregation level
of 50-500 MW or maximum capacity of the node where the aggregated generation is connected
(distribution or transmission) as long as it is aggregated by technology type.
[8] Point of connection: There are different approaches regarding the RES representation as shown in gap
analysis (figure 1 and figure 2). From the most simplified solution to the most detailed representation, RES
equivalent generator can be:
 Directly connected to transmission or distribution nodes
 Connected to medium voltage (e.g. 20 kV) through a station transformer
 Connected to low voltage and composed of: pad mounted transformer, collector system, reactive
compensation and station transformer

[9] Future planning models:

There is a big uncertainty about the development of RES technologies and the evolution of dynamic models
for RES. For future generation:
- PV: it is recommended to use specific PV standard models or type 4 WP models
- WP: it is recommended to use type 4 models (or a mix of type 3 type 4)

There is also a big uncertainty about the location of future RES. Different approaches can be followed:
- Representation of future RES in transmission nodes according to regional or national plans.
- Representation of future RES in the nodes where the existing RES infeeds (distributed
proportionally according to the existing installation).

[10] Model validation:

RES dynamic models should be validated before insertion in models with conventional generating units.
Detailed guidelines for wind power plant simulation model validation procedures will be developed in IEC
61400-27-2.

[11] Model initialization

When adding non-conventional generation controllers to an existing model, it is recommended to verify the
interaction of the conventional generation controllers with the added controllers. A 100 ms non-disturbance
simulation can be performed to this effect. The following parameters should be measured to check
initialization:The following parameters should be measured to check initialization:
 Conventional generators; Active and Reactive Power Output, terminal Voltage, machine rotor
angle
 Non conventional generators; Active and Reactive Power Output, terminal Voltage, system
frequency deviation,
After initialization a single disturbance event should be performed. Typically a 3-phase short circuit at the
PCC, without tripping. During these tests the following should be monitored:

34
G-RES

 Non conventional generators response; Active and Reactive Power Output, terminal Voltage,
system frequency and voltage deviation at PCC.

The effect of large amount of RES in power systems, affects the stability of the system. A methodology to
assess Frequency stability, transient and voltage stability should be defined in order to evaluate the impact
of large amount of RES integration. The technical requirements indicated in the NC-RfG should be also
reflected in the models.
The methodology should cover the study type, aggregation methods, model requirements, scenario building
and stability indexes to be checked.

6.2 Requirements for aggregated WP models

The requirements for aggregated wind power plant models depend on three different aspects:
 the technology of the plant
 the size of the individual plants comprising the aggregated plant
 the aggregation level, which depend on the study purpose

For type A models, relevant settings in protection module are needed to model the capability of the plant to
stay connected during changes in frequency.

In addition to modelling requirements for Type A, the Type B model shall include the following
functionalities:
 active power modulation (at high frequencies)
 fast acting reactive current injection
 fault ride-through (FRT), including post-fault active power recovery

In addition to modelling requirements for Type B, the Type C model shall include the following
functionalities:
 active power modulation (at low frequencies)
 synthetic inertia
 reactive power capability, implemented with relevant limiter settings in generator and plant control
modules of the dynamic model
 power oscillation damping capability

For Type D, the same modelling functionalities are required as with Type C.

For IEC Type 1 wind power plants, the model should represent the power plant capability to stay connected
to the grid during defined changes and rate of changes in frequency (Type A)

For IEC Type 2 wind power plants, in addition to requirements for Type 1, modelling of (limited) reactive
power capability provided by the variable resistance rotor is required. However, when aggregated plant
consists of individual power plants that are of NC Type A, this feature is not required.

For IEC Type 3 and 4 wind power plants, the following modelling characteristics are required:

35
 G-RES

         fault ride-through, including post-fault active power recovery

         reactive power control with different control modes (constant V, constant Q, constant pf)
         electro-mechanical oscillation damping capability
         active power modulation at frequency deviations
         synthetic inertia

Additional functions:
 Protection module (Under/overvoltage protections, Crowbar protections, overspeed protections, etc.)
 Aerodynamic functions

As with IEC Type 2 models, these features are not required from the model if the aggregated power
plant model consists of individual plants that are only of NC Type A. With NC Type B power plants,
only fast acting reactive current injection, fault-ride through and active power modulation at high
frequencies are required. However, in practice it is most efficient to use the same model in both cases,
and just disable those controls and functions that are not required from Type A and B plants.

6.3 Requirements for aggregated PV models

The dynamic performance (excluding protection) of Distributed PV, which is connected to the low
voltage and medium voltage grid, has a negligible impact in transient and voltage stability studies at
transmission level. This is due to the high impedance between the connection point of the PV and the
transmission nodes. Hence distributed PV can be modelled as PQ infeed. The requirements for an
aggregated PV model described in this section are related to PV generation, which is connected to
high- and extra high voltage or is an aggregation of these.

The “ENTSO-E Network Code for Requirements for Grid Connection Applicable to all Generators”
[1] defines different requirements depending on the class of a power generation module (divided by
maximum generation capacity). From this, it follows, that power generation modules of different
classes have different capabilities and dynamic responses. The generation capacity of PV plants
varies through all four defined classes. Therefore, the model for aggregated PV has to include the
capabilities required in each class. These requirements are

- Type A :
 Capability of staying connected to the Network and operating within specified Frequency
ranges and time periods and also within defined rates of change of Frequency (RoCoF).
- Type B (In addition to Type A):
 The capability to modulate active power at high frequencies (LFSM-O).
 Capability of fast acting additional reactive current injection in conditions defined in
article 15.2 in [1].
 fault-ride-through capability under given pre- and post-fault conditions
 Post-fault active power recovery
- Type C (In addition to Type B):
 The capability to modulate active power at low frequencies (LFSM-U).
 The capability to modulate active power over the full frequency range.
 Reactive power capability, implemented with relevant limiter settings in generator and
plant control modules of the dynamic model
 Capability of providing synthetic inertia at low frequency events
 Capability of providing reactive power at maximum capacity and below maximum capacity
 Capability of power oscillation damping

36
G-RES

- For Type D, the same modelling functionalities are required as with Type C.

Depending on the use-case of the model (representing of a plant of Type A, B, C or D) it has to be

possible to turn the individual functions on and off.

6.4 Model improvement and future work

6.4.1 Development of generic models for RES generation

Validated generic, non confidential models for main sources of RES are needed for long term
planning. These models should cover steady state, Transient stability and Short circuit behaviour.
The models should be generic for the use of ENTSO-E and defined with common control blocks
according to a model specification. The addition to the CGMES dynamic profile of the models
would a facilitate model exchange TSO-TSO and TSO-DSO.

6.4.2 Development of generic models for PV

For the purpose of voltage and transient stability, the model specification described in previous
chapters can be used as a generic model to be used within ENTSO-E community.

The general transmission connected model, with a PV generator as described in figure 20, can be
used for assessment for transient and voltage stability in planning studies.

Based on the description indicated in this document a model specification for a PV plant model can
be produced, by the G-RES PG or another modelling group.

The modelling specification should include a detailed description of the PV generator, the voltage
control, Q control, P control, additional Active Power Injection to respond to Frequency changes.
(i.e. synthetic inertia capability)

Although for system planning studies the power output is maintained constant, the PV generator
model would be improved for future studies if the variable PV power input is considered.
Also a simplified representation of the MPP tracking.

This specification can be delivered to a modelling group or an external Vendor to develop the
system blocks and perform the model validation.

Model validation can be performed checking the response of the aggregated model vs. a detailed
inverter type model.

Once these models have been validated the can be distributed in the software tool vendors and the
CIMUG dynamic group to develop the IOP for CGMES exchange.

Once the model has been validated for the relevant behaviour, it can be very interesting to obtain a
model validation with real data measurements to compare outputs.

6.4.3 Improvement of existing IEC WP models.

37
G-RES

Improvement of the steady state models to be used for transient and voltage stability studies,
checklist:

1) Modelling reactive capability of the different non-conventional generator types.

2) Accurate modelling of the reactive control, for the different non-conventional generator types.
3) Modelling of OLTC from transformers at PCC.
4) Modelling of medium voltage capacitor/ reactor banks.
5) Accurate modelling of the collection system.

- Collection systems of large non-conventional generation have a reactive power consumption/

charging that cannot be neglected.

6) Accurate modelling of the impedances for cables or OHL of the collection system.

A method for equivalent impedances shall be defined, to model pad mounted transformers, collection
system, station transformer and any other relevant element that has an influence on power flow or
voltage profiles in the transmission grid.

7) Aggregation techniques that represent accurately the N-number of units.

- Generators;

Requivalent= Rsource-generator/ N
Xequivalent= Xsource-generator/ N

- Pad mounted transformers;

Requivalent= Rtran/ N
Xequivalent= Xtran/ N

- Medium voltage line/ cable collector system;

M

∑ Ri∗N 2i
Requivalent = i=1

N2
M

Xequivalent=
∑ X i∗N 2i
i=1

N2

8) Short circuit data of non-conventional generators;

As the behaviour to short circuit is dependent of the technology type, at least an induction machine
type and a converter connected type should be accounted for different contributions to short circuit.

The improvement of the generic IEC WP models is derived from a Frequency-Inertial response
addition to the models. The purpose of the inertial response is to provide a response during large under-

38
G-RES

frequency events to reduce the rate of frequency decrease and allowing other synchronous generation to
increase the power output during the event.
This additional control is only activated during large under frequency event, to that purpose a dead band
filter is applied to the control to prevent activation for power change events.
The inertial response is limited to the transient period following an under frequency event and results in an
increase of the output power of 5-10%.
A frequency measurement is needed on the PCC, that is passed through the dead band filter and then send
as an input to the power control.

The conclusions from this document can be submitted to the CGMES dynamics group to incorporate the
model specifications to enhance the models as to incorporate TSO requirements to cover voltage and
transient stability studies needs and NC derived requirements.
A continuation of the G-RES SPRINTS Project to provide these model specification and to verify the test
cases would be a further improvement in model standardization and capabilities.

39
G-RES

7 References

[1] NC ENTSO-E Network Code for Requirements for Grid Connection Applicable to all Generators
https://www.entsoe.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/_library/consultations/Network_Code_RfG/120626_f
inal_Network_Code_on_Requirements_for_Grid_Connection_applicable_to_all_Generators.pdf

[2] IEC 61400-27 Wind turbines Part 27-1: Electrical simulation models for wind power generation.

[3] WECC PV Plant Power Flow Modelling Guidelines. 2010

[4] Active Power Controls from Wind Power: Bridging the Gaps",
NREL/TP-5D00-60574, E.Ela, V.Gevorgian, P.Fleming, Y.C.Zhang, J.Aho, A.Buckspan, L.Pao,
V.Singhvi, A.Tuohy, P.Pourbeik, D.Brooks. January 2014.

[5] Frequency support from doubly fed induction wind turbines",

G.Ramtharan, J.B. Ekanayake and N.Jenkins, 2007.

40
G-RES

Appendix 1: Models CGMES definition

- WP dynamic profile representation according to IEC 61400-27-2

Figure 23 Type 1,2 model representation

41
G-RES

Figure 24 Type 3,4 model representation

42
G-RES

Appendix 2: Example current vendor model content

Figure 3 Type 1-2 WT model

43
G-RES

44
G-RES

Figure 4 Type 3-4 WT model

Figure 5 Type 1a simplified control block

45
G-RES

Figure 6 Type 1b simplified control block

Figure 7 Type 2 simplified control block

46
G-RES

Figure 8 Type 3a simplified control block

Figure 9 Type 3b simplified control block

47
G-RES

Figure 10 Type 4a simplified control block

Figure 11 Type 4b simplified control block

48
G-RES

The above models are examples of library models available in Digisilent Power Factory tool.
The referred models represent individual wind turbines with a pad mounted transformer.
There is no indication about the aggregation level, the model detail or the control blocks detail.
Furthermore it is not possible to exchange the models, with the control blocks as they are defined ,in this
example. Since the control blocks are some sort of black box type. These blocks cannot be exchanged or
modified to verify the requirements indicated in the NC.
This is a common feature for all library models in other tools.
These template models are based on IEC 61400-2, for WT. they are based on one type generator, converter,
mechanical model and controls. For WT connected through inverter, they include and additional PLL
control block.

49