See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/310719997

Modelling of Small-Scale Photovoltaic Systems with Active and Reactive

Power Control for Dynamic Studies

Conference Paper · November 2016

CITATION READS

1 198

8 authors, including:

Dirk Fetzer Gustav Lammert

Universität Kassel Universität Kassel
8 PUBLICATIONS   25 CITATIONS    22 PUBLICATIONS   38 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Martin Braun
Universität Kassel
214 PUBLICATIONS   1,982 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Smart Grids View project

NETZ:KRAFT View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Gustav Lammert on 23 November 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 This paper was presented at the 6th Solar Integration Workshop and published in the workshop’s proceedings.
Modelling of Small-Scale Photovoltaic Systems
with Active and Reactive Power Control for
Dynamic Studies
Dirk Fetzer∗ , Gustav Lammert∗ , Kai Fischbach∗ , Manuel Nuhn∗ , Johannes Weide∗ ,
Dario Lafferte∗ , Tina Paschedag∗ and Martin Braun∗†
∗ University of Kassel, Germany. Email: dirk.fetzer@uni-kassel.de
† Fraunhofer Institute for Wind Energy and Energy System Technology, Kassel, Germany
Abstract—In this paper an RMS simulation model of a low
voltage photovoltaic system for dynamic studies in the range
of seconds up to minutes is developed. The model is based
on a low voltage photovoltaic system model developed by the
Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) Renewable
Energy Modeling Task Force. The model is validated with an
experimental setup consisting of a photovoltaic emulator, an
inverter, a cable and a grid emulator. The laboratory tests show
an unexpected dead time of the Q(V ) and P (V ) responses
which the authors could not find in published literature. The
novelty, compared to state-of-the-art models, is the introduction
of a dead time in order to model the measured behavior
correctly. The new model is capable of explaining the grid
coupled behavior of the investigated photovoltaic system in
retrospective. Therefore, this work suggests more laboratory
investigations on the dynamic behavior of photovoltaic systems.
Index Terms—Photovoltaic generation, PV, distributed gen-
eration, dynamic modelling, simulation, power system stability,
renewable energy.
I. I NTRODUCTION
In recent years the complexity of medium and low voltage
power grids increased significantly due to a rise of distributed
generation such as wind and solar power [1]. PhotoVoltaic
(PV) systems have a large share of the total installed capac-
ity. The worldwide installed PV capacity has reached over
180 GW in 2014. Small residential PV systems represent a
major portion of the total installed capacity in Europe [2].
For example, in Germany, about 65 % of the installed PV
capacity is located in the low voltage grid [3]. The installed
PV capacity is expected to increase in the future due to PV
cost reduction [2]. An investigation on the improved grid
integration of PV systems in Germany can be found in [4].
A techno-economic assessment of Q(V ) and P (V ) control
can be found in [5]. An approach for the static simulation
of PV systems can be found in [6].
Because of the increasing presence of PV systems in the
low voltage level, it becomes important to study the dynamic
behaviour of PV systems at this voltage level. Dedicated
PV models are required for dynamic studies. Furthermore,
aggregated models of large portions of low voltage grids for
the use in stability studies of complex grids are required.
The dynamic behavior of the voltage dependent reactive
power injection of PV inverters according to different Q(V )
characteristics has been thoroughly investigated, e.g., in [7]
and [8].
The goal of this paper is to develop a model of a PV
inverter suited for stability studies in a time range of several
seconds up to minutes. The focus of this work lays not only
on the modelling of the dynamic Q(V ) behavior, but also
on the dynamic P (V ) behavior. The investigation is done by
comparing a Matlab/Simulink model against an experimental
setup with an off-the-shelf inverter. To show the possibilities
of the developed model, a dynamic study of a real German
low voltage network with several PV systems is performed.
The paper is structured as follows: The modelling is
presented in Section II. In Section III the laboratory tests
are presented. They contain a steady state and a dynamic
investigation. The test case is presented in Section IV and
finally a conclusion and an outlook is given in Section V.
II. PV SYSTEM MODELLING
A. Generic PV system model
This paper focuses on the dynamic modelling of grid con-
nected small-scale (residential, low voltage level connected)
PV systems. Various PV system models can be found in,
e.g., [7], [8] and [9]. The simulation model developed in
this paper is based on the generic model for distributed
and small PV systems provided by the Western Electricity
Coordinating Council (WECC) Renewable Energy Modeling
Task Force [10]. The advantages of generic models are:
They are independent of the manufacturer and the vendor,
they are compatible with grid codes, their model structure
is open source and the model itself is simulation platform
independent [11]. Note that WECC has also developed a
model that is suited for large-scale PV systems. This model
is more detailed but due to the complex control not of interest
in this paper. A DIgSILENT PowerFactory® implementation
of a large-scale PV system model can be found in [12].
The model for distributed and small PV systems [10] was
specifically developed to represent PV systems which are
connected to the distribution grid. Its main features that are
of interest in this paper, are:
1) A time constant which specifies the rise time of the
the output. This time constant is usually in the range
of 20 ms for standard inverters.
2) Furthermore, the model contains a voltage dependent
reactive power characteristic for volt/var control. An
example of such a Q(V ) characteristic is shown in
Fig. 1. Typical parameters for Q(V ) characteristics in
 Q(V )[pu] P (V )[pu]

Q3 P2

P1
Q2
1 V [pu]
V5 V6
1 V [pu]
V1 V2 V3 V4

Fig. 2. Active power to voltage characteristic P (V )

Active
Q1 power
P
control
Fig. 6
Fig. 1. Reactive power to voltage characteristic Q(V )
V Measurement V’ P − jQ I PV
Fig. 4 I=
the high voltage level can be found in dedicated grid V 0∗
codes, e.g., in [13]. For the low voltage level no typical
parameters have been suggested in grid codes yet. Reactive
power Q
B. Modified generic PV system model control
Fig. 5
The small-scale PV model of WECC lacks some func-
tionalities that are of interest in this paper. Therefore, the
following capabilities have been added to the model: Fig. 3. Overview of the developed small-scale PV model for low voltage
grids.
1) A ramp rate limiter for the current output is added.
In state-of-the-art inverters these rate limiters can be
configured via a web interface of the real inverter. The block diagram of the measurement can be seen in
Therefore, it is important to include this feature in the Fig. 4. It consists of a measuring delay, which is basically a
model. dead time, and a first order time delay. The measuring delay
2) An active power to voltage characteristic, also called is due to the measurement equipment and signal processing
P (V ) characteristic, is added. In case of a high voltage and is approximated with Td,meas = 5 ms. The first order time
at the grid coupling point, a P (V ) characteristic allows delay emulates the calculation of the moving RMS value. In
to reduce the injected active power with regard to the recent PV inverters, five grid periods are used for calculation
terminal voltage. A typical P (V ) characteristic can be of the RMS value. As a 50 Hz system is considered, a value
seen in Fig. 2. The reduction in injected active power of Tmeas = 100 ms is chosen in this paper.
is realized in the inverter by leaving the Maximum The block diagram of the reactive power control can be
Power Point (MPP). seen in Fig. 5. It consists of a reactive power characteristic,
3) A representation of the voltage measurement is added. two first order time delays and a rate limiter. The reactive
The measurement takes place in the time range of up power characteristic Q(V ) is implemented according to Fig.
to 5 cycles. 1 and can be described by a discontinuous function
The resulting, refined PV model is based on the function-
alities of the WECC distributed PV system model. It has to 
be noted that this model is only suited for small-scale PV 
Q1 , V ≤ V1
Q2 −Q1 Q2 −Q1

systems. During the process of the model development, only V + Q − V , V1 < V < V2


 V2 −V1
 2 2 V2 −V1
the listed functionalities of the WECC model were imple- Q(V ) = Q2 , V2 ≤ V ≤ V3
mented and then combined with the missing functionalities 
 Q3 −Q2
V + Q − V Q3 −Q2
, V3 < V < V4
3 4 V4 −V3

V4 −V3
mentioned above.



Q ,
3 V4 ≤ V.
Fig. 3 shows an overview of the small-scale PV system
(1)
model. The model was implemented into Matlab/Simulink. It
consists of three main blocks: A representation of the voltage
measurement and models of the active as well as the reactive Measuring delay RMS calculation
power control. These three blocks will be described in detail
in the following. For this RMS-model, the active and reactive V0 V
powers are converted to RMS currents. This is represented 1
−Td,meas S
e 1 + Tmeas · s
by the block on the right in Fig. 3. Since only balanced
three-phase systems are considered, this approach is similar
to working with DQ0-components. Fig. 4. Block diagram of the measurement.
 Characteristic P T1 Power electronics Rate limiter Characteristic P T1 Power electronics Rate limiter

V u(s) Q V u(s) P
1 1 1 1
Q(V ) 1 + TQ · s 1 + TQ,PE · s RQ (u(s)) P (V ) 1 + TP,PE · s RP (u(s))
1 + TP · s

Fig. 5. Block diagram of the reactive power control. Fig. 6. Block diagram of the active power control.

Voltage 1 (Slack) 2
The time constant TQ represents the set-up time of the Source
L R I
Q(V ) characteristics. This time is needed for the inverter
PV plant
to settle the output at the dedicated value. It can be con-
figured in the web interface of the inverter. This parameter
determines how fast the inverter changes its reactive power V slack V
injection after a change of the terminal voltage occurred. The
first order time delay constant TQ,PE emulates the physical Fig. 7. Laboratory setup for testing the small-scale PV system model.
behavior of the power electronics. As stated, e.g., in [14],
this time constant can be estimated to be below 20 ms.
In this paper a fast measurement equipment was assumed.
Therefore, the value TQ,PE = 10 ms was used. The rate
limiter RQ (u(s))) limits the positive and negative rate of
change of the injected reactive power. Here u(t) is the input
to the block. The rate limiter parameters can be adjusted in
the inverter’s web interface as well. (a) Photovoltaic emulator
The block diagram of the active power control can be seen
in Fig. 6. Its structure is identically to the block diagram of 400

the reactive power control. The only difference lies in the

200
parameterisation of the P (V ) characteristics and the time Vsource (t)

Voltage [V]
constants, which are called TP and TP ,PE . TP represents the 0
set-up time of the injected active power and TP ,PE represents
the rise time of the power electronic current output. The −200
rate limiter RP (u(s))) limits the positive and negative rate
of change of the injected reactive power. −400
0 2 4 6 8
The time constants TP and TQ , that can be manually Time [s]
·10−2
configured and are typically set in the range of few seconds (b) AC source (c) AC source performing a voltage step
up to minutes. Therefore, the short time constants of the
power electronic (TP, PE and TQ, PE ) can be neglected for Fig. 8. Devices used for the laboratory setup.
studies in the range of several seconds to minutes. However,
the detailed eleboration is important to become aware of the
different effects that appear in the inverter.
Active [W] and reactive power [Var]

2000
III. L ABORATORY TESTS
A. System overview
The developed PV model was validated by laboratory
0
testing. Fig. 7 shows the general setup. It consists of a
programmable AC voltage source, a cable and an inverter Q(V )
connected to two emulators of solar strings. The PV emula- P (V )
tors and the programmable AC source are shown in Fig. 8(a) −2000
and 8(b). The AC voltage source is capable of performing I II III IV V VI VII VIII
voltage steps in the half cylce after the command is issued.
This can be seen in Fig. 8(c), where a voltage step from 0,95 1,00 1,05 1,10
V ≈ 247 V to V ≈ 262 V is performed at t = 0 s. The Voltage [V]
inverter has a nominal power of 5000 VA. It has a convenient
configurable web interface through which various parameters Fig. 9. Division of the Q(V ) and P (V ) characteristics into eight sections.
can be configured. The cable, that connects the inverter and
the grid emulator, has an inductance of L = 2.63 mH and
a resistance between R = 700 mΩ and R = 1200 mΩ and P (V ) characteristics of the inverter are investigated.
depending on its temperature. That corresponds to an R/X Therefore, the response of the inverter to voltage steps at the
ration of about 1.15. slack bus is investigated. The voltage steps are chosen such
First of all, a steady state validation of the model is that the operating point of the inverter shifts from one section
conducted. Thereafter, the dynamic behavior of the Q(V ) of the Q(V ) or P (V ) characteristic to another. To refer to the
different sections of the characteristics, they are divided into ·10−3
eight segments as seen in Fig. 9. During the tests, different Qmeas (V )
internal time constants of the inverter are varied. 2 Qconfig (V )

B. Steady state validation

Reactive power [Var]

The P (V ) and Q(V ) characteristics are configured into
the inverter. The configured setpoints according to Fig. 1 1
and Fig. 2 are shown in Table I. In order to validate the
steady state behavior of the inverter, the P (V ) and Q(V )
characteristics have been measured and compared to the con-
figured characteristic. Hence, the inverter’s injected active 0
and reactive powers have been measured for various terminal
voltages. Fig. 10(a) shows the measured and configured
reactive power injection of the inverter against the terminal 1,01 1,02 1,03 1,04 1,05
voltage magnitude. It can be seen that there is a small offset Voltage magnitude [pu]
between both curves. As the simulation model needs to (a) Comparison of the Q(V ) characteristic configured in the inverter and
emulate the correct steady state behavior the settings for the the measured characteristic in the laboratory.
Q(V ) characteristic were adjusted in the simulation model
to match the measured values. Fig. 10(b) shows the adjusted ·10−3
characteristic together with the measured characteristic. It Qmeas (V )
can be seen that they coincide. The same procedure is done 2 Qadj (V )
for the P (V ) characteristic. Table I shows the adjusted
parameters used in the simulation model for both, Q(V )
Reactive power [Var]

and P (V ) characteristic.
In the next step, the steady state operation points of the 1
inverter are compared with the simulation model after the
P (V ) and Q(V ) characteristics were adjusted according
to Table I. Fig. 11 shows a quasi-static time variation
of the slack bus voltage and the measured and simulated 0
terminal voltages of the inverter. It can be seen that both,
the Q(V ) and P (V ) characteristics are active. Furthermore,
the measured and simulated values coincide. The steady state 1,01 1,02 1,03 1,04 1,05
behavior was successfully validated at voltages above 1 pu. Voltage magnitude [pu]

C. Voltage dependent reactive power injection Q(V) (b) Comparison of the Q(V ) adjusted characteristic used in the simulation
and the measured characteristic in the laboratory.
The P (V ) and Q(V ) characteristics according to Table I
are configured in the inverter. Furthermore, a set-up time for Fig. 10. Steady state investigation of the inverter’s Q(V ) characteristic.
each characteristic is configured. For this experiment, set-up
times of 5 s and 20 s are chosen.
For validating the dynamic inverter behavior of the Q(V )
1,10
characteristic, a step of the slack bus voltage is applied. Its P (V )
magnitude is chosen such that the terminal voltage of the
Voltage magnitude [pu]

inverter jumps from section IV to section V as described in

Fig. 9. The relation between slack bus voltage V slack and 1,05
inverter terminal voltage V can be derived from Fig. 7. It is Q(V )
V = V slack + (R + jX) · I (2)
Vslack
with R and X representing the line parameters and I is the 1,00
Vmeas
terminal output current of the inverter. Vsim
The measurement results can be seen in Fig. 12 and 13.
Both figures are divided into two parts. The upper part shows 10 20 30 40 50
Time [s]
the slack bus voltage V slack as well as the measured and
simulated terminal voltages V meas and V sim of the inverter.
Fig. 11. Bus voltage at the inverter terminals after a quasi static variation
The lower part shows the measured and simulated injected of the slack bus voltage. The adjusted Q(V ) and P (V ) characteristics are
active and reactive power at the the inverter terminal, namely used.
Pmeas , Psim , Qmeas and Qsim . In both cases, a voltage step at
t = 0 s is performed such that the operating point moves
from section IV to section V as described in Fig. 9. of about 0.4 s after the voltage step occurs. Furthermore, it
In the measurement results in Fig. 12, it can be seen that can be seen that the set-up time, which the inverter needs to
the injection of reactive power starts with a short time delay impose the final reactive power value, is much less than the
 TABLE I
O RIGINAL AND ADJUSTED SETPOINTS OF THE ACTIVE AND REACTIVE POWER CHARACTERISTICS

Parameters V1 [pu] V2 [pu] V3 [pu] V4 [pu] Q1 [kVar] Q2 [kVar] Q3 [kVar] V5 [pu] V6 [pu] P1 [kW] P2 [kW]
Configured in inverter 0.960 0.980 1.020 1.040 −2.500 0.000 2.500 1.080 1.100 2.800 0.800
Adjusted in simulation 0.964 0.985 1.024 1.045 −2.337 −0.050 2.210 1.085 1.103 2.800 0.800

Vslack Vslack
Vmeas Vmeas
1,06 1,06
Vsim Vsim

1,04 1,04

Voltage [pu]
Voltage [pu]

1,02 1,02

1 1

0,98 0,98

0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10
Time [s] Time [s]

Active [W] and reactive power [Var]

Active [W] and reactive power [Var]

3000 3000

2500 Pmeas 2500 Pmeas

Psim Psim
2000 2000
Qmeas Qmeas
1500 Qsim 1500 Qsim

1000 1000

500 500

0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10
Time [s] Time [s]

Fig. 12. Step response of the small-scale PV model for Q(V ) control after
a step of the slack bus voltage. Top: Slack bus voltage V slack , measured
and simulated voltages V meas and V sim at the inverter terminals. Bottom:
Measured and simulated injected active powers Pmeas and Psim as well
as measured and simulated injected reactive powers Qmeas and Qsim of
the inverter. The configured set-up time for the Q(V ) characteristic is
configured in the inverter’s web interface to 5 s. The adjusted time constants
in the simulation are TP = 1.6 s and TD,P = 0.4 s.
Fig. 13. Step response of the small-scale PV model for Q(V ) control
after a step of the slack bus voltage. Top: Slack bus voltage V slack ,
measured and simulated voltages V meas and V sim at the inverter terminals.
Bottom: Measured and simulated injected active powers Pmeas and Psim as
well as measured and simulated injected reactive powers Qmeas and Qsim
of the inverter. The configured set-up time for the Q(V ) characteristic
is configured in the inverter’s web interface to 20 s. The adjusted time
constants in the simulation are TP = 5.8 s and TD,P = 1.4 s.

Characteristic Dead time P T1 Power electronics Rate limiter

set-up time of 5 s configured in the inverter’s web interface.
In the measurement results in Fig. 13 it can be seen that,
similar to Fig. 12, the injection of reactive power starts with
a time delay after the voltage step occurs. The delay is
approximitely 1.4 s. Furthermore, the set-up time which the
inverter needs to impose the final reactive power value is
much less than the set-up time of 20 s configured in the web
interface of the inverter.
To model the delay that occurs, after the voltage step
took place, a dead time TD,Q is included after the Q(V )
characteristic in the reactive power control section of the
PV model. This can be seen in Fig. 14. To make the
simulation results match the measurement results, the dead
time TD,Q and the time constant TQ are adjusted manually
until sufficient overlapping is achieved.
D. Voltage dependent active power injection P(V)
The investigation of the dynamic P (V ) behavior is done
similar to the investigation of the Q(V ) behavior presented
in Sec. III-C. The P (V ) and Q(V ) characteristics were
configured according to Table I and the set-up times were
configured to 5 s and 20 s in the inverter’s web interface.
V Q
Q(V ) e
−TD,Q s
1 1
RQ (u(s))
1 + TQ s 1 + TQ,PE s
Fig. 14. Block diagram of the reactive power control with dead time.
The magnitude of the voltage step is chosen such that the
terminal voltage of the inverter jumps from section VI to
section VII as described in Fig. 9. The measurement results
can be seen in Fig. 15 and 16. The graphs are structured
identically to Fig. 12 and 13. For a detailed description of
the structure, see Sec. III-C.
In the measurement results in Fig. 15 it can be seen
that the injection of active power starts with a time delay
of about 0.5 s after the voltage step occurs. Furthermore,
the time that is needed for the reduction of active power
injection is less than the setup time of 5 s configured in the
inverter’s web interface. In Fig. 16 it can be seen that the
injection of active power starts with a time delay of about
2.2 s after the voltage step occurs. Furthermore, the time that
 Vslack Vslack
1,1 1,1
Vmeas Vmeas
Vsim Vsim
Voltage [pu]

Voltage [pu]
1,09 1,09

1,08 1,08

1,07 1,07
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10
Time [s] Time [s]
Active [W] and reactive power [Var]

Active [W] and reactive power [Var]

3000 3000
Pmeas Pmeas
2800 Psim 2800 Psim
Qmeas Qmeas
2600 Qsim 2600 Qsim

2400 2400

2200 2200

2000 2000
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10
Time [s] Time [s]

Fig. 15. Step response of the small-scale PV model for P (V ) control after
a step of the slack bus voltage. Top: Slack bus voltage V slack , measured
and simulated voltages V meas and V sim at the inverter terminals. Bottom:
Measured and simulated injected active powers Pmeas and Psim as well
as measured and simulated injected reactive powers Qmeas and Qsim of
the inverter. The configured set-up time for the P (V ) characteristic is
configured in the inverter’s web interface to 5 s. The adjusted time constants
in the simulation are TP = 2.5 s and TD,P = 0.5 s.
Fig. 16. Step response of the small-scale PV model for P (V ) control after
a step of the slack bus voltage. Top: Slack bus voltage, measured voltage at
the inverter terminals. Bottom: Measured and simulated active and reactive
power injection of the inverter. Configured inverter hardware setting for
the P (V ) set-up time is 20 s. Adjusted parameters in the simulation are
TP = 10.6 s and TD,P = 2.2 s.
Characteristic Dead time P T1 Power electronics Rate limiter

is needed for the reduction of active power injection is less
then the setup time of 5 s configured in the inverter’s web
interface. As done in Sec. III-C, the model of the active
power control is modified in order to simulate the physical
behavior correctly. Therefore a dead-time TD,P was included
after the P (V ) characteristics. The modified model of the
active power control can be seen in Fig. 17. In order to
make the simulation results match the measurement results,
the dead time TD,P and the time constant TP are adjusted
until sufficient overlapping is attained.
E. Discussion of measurement results
The three main observations from the measurements are:
First, the P (V ) and Q(V ) characteristics configured in the
inverter have a slight offset, compared to the measurements.
The offset is smaller than 0.005 pu. Second, the time delay,
configured in the inverter, did not correspond to the time con-
stant of the PT1 block, used in the simulation model. Third,
the measurements showed a dead time that was not expected.
This dead time is not known before the measurement is done
and it varies with the set-up time that is configured in the
inverter’s web interface. To match the simulation and the
measurement results, the characteristics, the time constant
and the dead time of the simulation model had to be adapted
manually. After adaptation of these parameters, a good match
between measurements and simulations was obtained. P (V )
and Q(V ) controls are not yet part of low voltage grid codes.
Therefore the behavior of the inverter in the investigated
situations is not standardized yet. Also the internal control
loops of the inverter are not known in detail. Therefore, the
V
−TD,P S
1 1 P
P (V ) e RP (u(s))
1 + TP s 1 + TP,PE s
Fig. 17. Block diagram of the active power control with dead time.
presented model can only be an approximation of the real
inverter behavior.
IV. S IMULATION TEST CASE
To show a possible application of the investigated PV
model, a larger test case was composed in Matlab/Simulink.
It consists of a real German 0.4 kV low voltage grid that
is connected via a transformer to a 20 kV medium voltage
grid. The general setup can be seen in Fig. 18. The LV
grid consists of 234 nodes. Altogether 20 PV systems with
a total installed apparent power of 250 kVA were included
in the system. The P (V ) and Q(V ) characteristics were
implemented for all PV systems. For the investigation, a low
load setup was selected, where the total injected PV power
is much higher than the total load consumption.
The dynamic behavior of the low voltage grid was investi-
gated for two configurations, as described in Table II. In the
first configuration, the PV systems were placed as far away
from the slack bus as possible, namely at the end of the
feeders. In the second configuration, the PV systems were
placed near the slack bus, namely at the beginning of the
feeders.
Fig. 19 shows the reverse power flow from the low voltage
grid into the medium voltage grid after a voltage step at
 TABLE II
D ESCRIPTION OF THE TWO SIMULATED CONFIGURATIONS V. C ONCLUSION

Configuration Description
In this paper a small-scale RMS model for low voltage
1 PV systems are far from slack node
PV systems is developed, based on a distributed PV system
2 PV systems are close to slack node model proposed by WECC. The main focus of the work is
to emulate the dynamic behavior of the voltage dependent
active and reactive power injection via P (V ) and Q(V )
Slack bus characteristics. The developed simulation model is validated
I
against an experimental setup with an off-the-shelf inverter
LV grid in the power range of 5000 VA.
The new contribution of this paper is to show that there are
V slack
dead times in the measurement data that change significantly
with the set-up time configured in the inverter. However,
Fig. 18. Setup of the low voltage grid test case. no connection between these two variables can be found.
As far as the authors know, measurements of such dead
times have not been reported in literature yet. By including
1,1 Vslack these dead times into the PV model, the simulation and
Voltage V [pu]

the measurement data match. However, to achieve that, the

1,0 parameters of the model have to be tuned manually after
the measurement was performed. Thus, the behavior of
0,9 the inverter can not be determined by simulation prior to
0 5 10 15 20 conducting the experiment. The main outcome of this work
Time [s]
is, that the generic models, used as a basis for this work did
Pcase1 not give adequate results for the specific inverter used.
Active power [pu]

2,0 Pcase2 As the cause of the dead time is not known by the authors,
1,8 it will be necessary to conduct future work on validating
PV system models. Also it will be beneficial to test more
1,6
scenarios in the laboratory.
0 5 10 15 20
Time [s] ACKNOWLEDGMENT
1,0
Reactive power [pu]

Qcase1 We thank EnergieNetz Mitte, Kassel, for providing the

Qcase2
grid data for the simulation test case. The authors thank
0,8
Bernd Gruß from University of Kassel for his dedicated
support during the lab experiments. Also, the authors thank
0,6 Florian Schäfer from University of Kassel for the fruitful
0 5 10 15 20
discussions.
Time [s]

Fig. 19. Step response of the slack bus active and reactive power after a
voltage step at the slack bus at t = 0 s.
the medium voltage side. The voltage step at the slack bus
occurs at t = 0 s. The voltage rise at the slack bus results in
voltage rises at each bus in the system. The voltage rise at
the terminals of the PV systems is such that their operating
points shift into sections where the active power injection is
reduced and where more reactive power is injected. Thus,
the operating point of some inverters shift into the sections
VII and VIII (see Fig. 9). Due to this, the injected active
power is reduced. In the investigated grid, the voltage at
each feeder is highest at its end points (for configurations of
high PV power and low load). Therefore, the active power
injection in configuration 1 is generally lower than the one
in configuration 2. This can also be seen in Fig. 19. For
the same reason, the injected reactive power is higher than
in configuration 2. The high peak in active and reactive
power at t = 0 s is only due to the simulation method
and can therefore be neglected. The dynamic behavior of
the slack bus active and reactive powers is stable in both
configurations.
This work was supported by the German Federal Ministry
for Economic Affairs and Energy and the Projektträger Julich
GmbH (PTJ) within the framework of the project OpSim
(FKZ: 0325593B).
R EFERENCES
[1] A. Monti and F. Ponci, “Power grids of the future: Why smart means
complex,” in Complexity in Engineering, 2010. COMPENG ’10., Feb
2010, pp. 7–11.
[2] F. T. Manoel Rekinger, “Global Market Outlook for Solar Power /
2015 - 2019,” SolarPower Europe, Technical Report, 2014.
[3] J. von Appen, M. Braun, T. Stetz, K. Diwold, and D. Geibel, “Time in
the sun: The challenge of high pv penetration in the german electric
grid,” IEEE Power and Energy Magazine, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 55–64,
March 2013.
[4] T. Stetz, F. Marten, and M. Braun, “Improved low voltage grid-
integration of photovoltaic systems in germany,” IEEE Transactions
on Sustainable Energy, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 534–542, April 2013.
[5] T. Stetz, K. Diwold, M. Kraiczy, D. Geibel, S. Schmidt, and M. Braun,
“Techno-economic assessment of voltage control strategies in low
voltage grids,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 5, no. 4, pp.
2125–2132, July 2014.
[6] D. Fetzer, G. Lammert, S. Gehler, J. Hegemann, and M. Braun,
“A bisection newton power flow algorithm for local voltage control
strategies,” Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, submitted for
publication.
[7] R. W. Marco Lindner, “A dynamic rms-model of the local voltage con-
trol system q(v) applied in photovoltaic inverters,” 23rd International
Conference on Electricity Distribution, Lyon, 15-18 June 2015.
 [8] F. Andren, B. Bletterie, S. Kadam, P. Kotsampopoulos, and C. Bucher,
“On the Stability of Local Voltage Control in Distribution Networks
With a High Penetration of Inverter-Based Generation,” IEEE Trans-
actions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 62, no. 4, pp. 2519–2529, Apr.
2015.
[9] M. Farivar, L. Chen, and S. Low, “Equilibrium and dynamics of
local voltage control in distribution systems,” in Decision and Control
(CDC), 2013 IEEE 52nd Annual Conference on, Dec 2013, pp. 4329–
4334.
[10] Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) Renewable Energy
Modeling Task Force. (2014, April) WECC PV Power Plant Dynamic
Modeling Guide.
[11] North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC)
Special Report. (2010, May) Standard models for vari-
able generation. [Online]. Available: http://www.nerc.com/files/
StandardsModelsforVariableGeneration.pdf
[12] G. Lammert, L. D. Pabón Ospina, P. Pourbeik, D. Fetzer, and
M. Braun, “Implementation and Validation of WECC Generic Pho-
tovoltaic System Models in DIgSILENT PowerFactory,” IEEE PES
General Meeting 2016, Boston, USA, July 17-21, 2016.
[13] VDE Germany, Association for Electrical, Electronic & Information
Technologies, “Technical requirements for the connection and opera-
tion of customer installations to the high-voltage network (TCC High-
Voltage),” VDE application guide (VDE-AR-N 4120).
[14] R. I. Amirnaser Yazdani, Voltage-Sourced Converters in Power Sys-
tems : Modeling, Control, and Applications. WILEY, 2010.

View publication stats