This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been
fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2020.3037289, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery
Identifying Sources of Subsynchronous Resonance
Using Wide-Area Phasor Measurements
Yang Wang, Member, IEEE, Xiaolong Jiang, Xiaorong Xie, Senior Member, IEEE
Xiaomei Yang, and Xianyong Xiao, Senior Member, IEEE
and Xianyong Xiao, Senior Member, IEEE
Abstract—Identifying sources of subsynchronous resonance
(SSR) is crucial for understanding and mitigating incidents. Re-
cent studies have shown that SSR impedance and power are ef-
fective indicators that can identify an SSR source. However, the
calculation of two indexes requires SSR voltage and current
phasors as the inputs, which are not directly available from ex-
isting online monitoring systems. To address this issue, this paper
presents a novel method to calculate SSR impedance/power based
on synchrophasors provided by a wide-area monitoring system.
As a result, the online detection of SSR sources is enabled.
Through mathematical derivation, it is revealed that a synchro-
phasor under SSR is dominated by four modes: two from the
fundamental frequency and two from the SSR frequency. The
problem thus can be transformed to a modal parameter extrac-
tion (MPE). Two classic MPE algorithms, Prony analysis and the
matrix pencil method, are employed in this paper to extract the
SSR parameters and calculate the SSR impedance/power. Their
performances are verified using synthetic signals and electro-
magnetic transient simulations. Furthermore, the method is ap-
plied to an actual SSR incident involving 23 wind farms. The
findings suggest that 17 of 23 wind farms did not contribute neg-
ative damping to the oscillation.11
Index Terms—Subsynchronous resonance (SSR), wind farm,
wide-area monitoring system, SSR source detection.
I. INTRODUCTION
T HE subsynchronous resonance (SSR) caused by the inter-
actions between doubly fed induction generators (DFIGs)
and series-compensated networks has become a major concern
for the development of wind power. Recent SSR events in
southern Texas in the USA and in northern China have indi-
cated that the oscillation can spread in wide areas involving
multiple geographically distributed wind farms [1]-[5]. Due to
the diversified wind generator types, operating conditions and
control structures, these wind farms (WFs) respond differently
This work was supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation
of China under Grant 51907133, in part by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China under Grant 51737007, in part by the Applied Basic
Research Programs of Science and Technology Department of Sichuan
Province under Grant 2020YJ0309, and in part by the Major Scientific and
Technological Special Project of Gansu Province under Grant
No.19ZD2GA003. (Corresponding author: Xianyong Xiao.)
Y. Wang, X. Jiang, X. Yang and X. Xiao are with the College of Electrical
Engineering, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China (e-mail:
fwang@scu.edu.cn).
X. Xie is with the State Key Laboratory of Power System, Department of
Electrical Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China (e-mail:
xiexr@tsinghua.edu.cn).
0885-8977 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de chile. Downloaded on December 05,2020 at 18:05:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
to oscillations. Thus, it is crucial to identify the WFs that drive
the oscillation. The problem is called SSR source detection [6].
Appropriate countermeasures can be applied only if critical
WFs are detected accurately.
In recent years, much effort has been devoted to under-
standing newly emerged SSR. State-space-based time-domain
analysis [7]-[9] and small-signal-impedance-based frequen-
cy-domain analysis [10]-[12], as two efficient analytical tools,
have been widely used for investigating the SSR phenomenon.
However, these tools are difficult to apply to SSR source de-
tection. The main reason is the lack of accurate wind generator
(WG) models [13]. In practice, the details of a WG model, such
as the control structure and parameters, are considered intel-
lectual properties of the manufacturers, and accessing these
data is a persistent challenge. In addition, the operation condi-
tion of a wind farm system is time varying. The system condi-
tions assumed in these analytical methods, such as the wind
speed and the power output, cannot perfectly match the actual
situation.
To address the above issues, measurement-based SSR source
detection methods have been proposed. In [13], the SSR im-
pedance of a wind farm was measured to indicate whether it is
an SSR source. As an SSR source participates in the oscillation
by providing negative damping, its real part of the SSR im-
pedance should be negative. Similarly, the concept of SSR
power was established in [6] and [14]. It was revealed that the
critical wind farms drive the oscillation by outputting SSR
power. Although all the above methods are technically sound,
they require an instantaneous temporal signal as the input. This
type of data is mainly accessible from the fault recording sys-
tem. It is known that the fault recorder is locally stored, and
whether it records data depends on the triggering mechanism.
This deficiency imposes great challenges for wide-area moni-
toring or system-wide control. An alternative is to install addi-
tional measurement infrastructure capable of measuring SSR
components [14]. This solution can definitely work but requires
additional investment and labor.
This paper attempts to identify SSR sources by taking ad-
vantage of phasor measurements provided by a wide-area
monitoring system. In recent years, the number of phasor
measurement units (PMUs) has experienced rapid growth in
transmission networks [15]. It is thus feasible to utilize
wide-area phasor measurements for SSR source detection.
Previously, synchrophasors have been extensively employed
for locating the source of low-frequency oscillations. Various
methods have been developed, including estimated mode shape
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2020.3037289, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery
[16], statistical signature [17], transfer functions [18] and the
dissipation of energy flow [19]. However, these methods can-
not be applied to SSR source detection, as the mechanisms of
the two oscillations are completely different. In terms of SSR,
[20]-[21] reported that it is possible to monitor SSR parameters
based on synchrophasors. Both methods adopted the discrete
Fourier technique (DFT) to estimate SSR frequency or ampli-
tude. However, the capability of detecting SSR sources was not
discussed and addressed in these studies.
To fill the above research gap, a phasor-measurement-based
SSR source detection method is presented in this paper. The
main contributions of this work are as follows. 1) This paper
first formulates an SSR source detection problem with the
synchrophasor as the input. Our mathematical derivation re-
veals that synchrophasors under SSR comprise a linear com-
bination of four modes; thus, SSR impedance/power can be
approached by mode parameter extraction (MPE) algorithms. 2)
Two MPE algorithms, i.e., Prony analysis and the matrix pencil
method, are adopted to achieve this goal. Unlike traditional
MPE, which uses real-number data, the problem in this paper
considers the phasor measurement as the input. In addition, a
truncated singular value decomposition (SVD) and the coeffi-
cient of determination are employed to improve the reliability
of the results. 3) The performance of the method is evaluated
thoroughly using synthetic signals and electromagnetic tran-
sient (EMT) simulations. More importantly, a field case test is
presented, and the results are cross-checked against other
methods.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section II re-
views the concept of SSR impedance and power, which is used
as the criterion in this paper to identify the SSR source. Section
III presents the mathematical model of synchrophasors under
SSR. Section IV introduces Prony analysis and the matrix
pencil method. Detailed steps to calculate the SSR impedance
are also explained. Section V evaluates the effectiveness of the
proposed method using the synthetic signal and the EMT sim-
ulations, and a field case test is further presented in Section VI.
Finally, some practical challenges and their corresponding
solutions are discussed in Section VII.
II. THE CONCEPT OF SSR IMPEDANCE/POWER
Fig. 1 shows a simple series compensated system connected
with a DFIG-based wind farm. Due to the interactions between
the series capacitor and the equivalent inductance of the system,
there is a natural resonance at the SSR frequency. This reso-
nance can be either amplified or damped depending on the
damping provided by the system.
Fig. 1. A DFIG-based wind farm connected to the system with series com-
pensation
0885-8977 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de chile. Downloaded on December 05,2020 at 18:05:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
The structure of the DFIG can be regarded as the parallel
connection of an induction generator and a back-to-back con-
verter. The induction generator exhibits a negative resistance at
the SSR frequency due to the induction generation effect (IGE).
Recent studies have revealed that the converter may also con-
tribute to the negative resistance depending on its control
scheme [3]. As a result, the DFIG is vulnerable to SSR once its
negative resistance exceeds the positive resistance provided by
the system.
The above reasoning infers that it is possible to detect the
source of SSR based on the sign of the equivalent resistance at
the SSR frequency [14]. When the DFIG exhibits a negative
resistance (damping) at the SSR frequency, it is the source of
SSR and vice versa. This criterion, i.e., Eq. (1), is adopted in the
paper for SSR source detection. It is straightforward that a
negative resistance indicates the power output. Thus, the SSR
power can also be used as an indicator but is omitted in this
paper for the sake of conciseness.
RSSR = Re(VSSR I SSR )  0 (1)
III. SYNCHROPHASOR MODEL UNDER SSR
This paper attempts to calculate the SSR impedance using
synchrophasors. It is thus important to establish the mathe-
matical model of synchrophasors under SSR. For SSR caused
by the interaction between DFIGs and series-compensated
networks, the system is dominated by one oscillation mode at
the SSR frequency [2],[5]. Accordingly, the current or voltage
waveform signal under SSR, i.e., x(n), can be described as:
s
f1 n f
x(n) = A1 cos(2 n + 1 ) + As e p cos(2 s n + s ) (2)
f
fp fp
where n indicates the nth sample, fp is a fixed sampling fre-
quency, αs is the damping factor of SSR, and (A1, f1, ϕ1) and (As,
fs, ϕs) are the amplitudes, frequencies and initial phase angles of
the fundamental and SSR components, respectively.
Synchrophasors are typically obtained by applying the dis-
crete Fourier transform (DFT) on x(n) within a rectangular
window. The length of the window is Np = fp/f0, and f0 is the
nominal frequency. According to DFT theory, the spectra at the
pth window can be separated into positive spectra and negative
spectra, as shown in (3).
X ( p, k ) = X 1+ ( p, k ) + X 1− ( p, k ) + X s+ ( p, k ) +X s− ( p, k ) (3)
where k is the bar number of the spectra. X+1 (p,k) and X-1 (p,k) are
the positive and negative spectra of fundamental components,
respectively. X+s (p,k) and X-s (p,k) are the positive and negative
spectra of SSR components, respectively.
Define fp1=f1/fp=L1/Np, fps=fs/fp=Ls/Np and aps=as/fp=âps/Np,
where L1, Ls and âps are the spectral bars of normalized f1, fs and
aps, respectively. Then, X1(p,k) and Xs(p,k) in (3) can be ex-
pressed as
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2020.3037289, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery

 X + ( p, k ) = ( )
A1C1 ( L1 − k ) e
j 2 pf p 1 +1 4

 1 X c (m) =  ak ek m (11)

 X − ( p, k ) = ( ) k =1
( L1 + k ) e
* − j 2 pf p 1 +1
 1 A1C 1
 ( )
(4) Equation (11) is the mathematical model of synchrophasors
As Cs ( Ls − k ) e
j 2 pf ps − jp ps +s
 X s+ ( p, k ) = under SSR. If we can solve λ and a based on a series of syn-

( )
As Cs* ( Ls + k ) e
− j 2 pf ps + jp ps +s
 X s− ( p, k ) = chrophasors Xc, the SSR impedance can be calculated accord-
 ingly.
with
IV. METHOD FOR CALCULATING SSR IMPEDANCE
 1 1 − e j 2 s
 1
C ( s ) =  , According to (11), synchrophasors under SSR comprise a
 N p 1 − e ( j 2 s / N p ) linear combination of four complex exponentials, in which λ1
 (ˆ ps + j 2 s )
(5) and λ2 are related to the fundamental mode, while λ3 and λ4 are
C s = 1  1 − e
 s ( ) N 1 − e(ˆ ps + j 2 s )/ N p , associated with the SSR mode. Such a formulation is similar to
 p the problem of mode parameter extraction (MPE), except that
Xc is a complex number rather than the real number in the tra-
where (·)∗ is a conjugate transpose operator and Cs represents
ditional problem. This section adopts two classic MPE algo-
the spectrum leakage of the SSR component on synchro-
rithms, namely, Prony analysis and matrix pencil method
phasors.
(MPM). The procedure used to calculate the SSR impedance is
For the pth data window, the synchrophasor in PMUs is ob-
explained afterwards. Note that both Prony analysis in Section
tained as the 1st spectra bar of X in (3). This means k in (3) is
IV. A and the MPM in Section IV. B are not proposed by the
one; thus, X(p,k) can be expressed as
authors. The contribution of this work is to apply them to the
X ( p,1) = X1+ ( p,1)+X1− ( p,1) + X s+ ( p,1) + X s− ( p,1) (6) synchrophasor data to calculate the SSR impedance, i.e., Sec-
tion IV.C.
Assuming that f1, fs and αs do not change significantly in a short
time window, we regard C1(L1 −1) and C1*(L1 +1) in (4) as A. Prony Analysis [23]
constants at a certain f1. Similarly, we regard Cs(Ls −1) and Equation (11) is a summation of complex exponentials,
Cs*(Ls +1) as constants at a certain αs and fs. which can be considered the homogeneous solution for a line-
As the window moves forward in time, the oldest sample is ar difference equation. Thus, the following difference equation
dropped while the most recent sample is added, yielding a exists:
computationally efficient recursive DFT algorithm. Finally, the M

resultant synchrophasors are reported to a local or remote re- X C (n) = − X c (n − m) Pm , n = M ,..., N (12)
m =1
ceiver at rates up to 200/240 samples per second [22]. As the
reporting rate is lower than the data rate for internal processing, where M is the mode number. The coefficient Pm can be ob-
it is mathematically similar to a resampling process. Therefore, tained by constructing and solving the matrix equation shown
the reported synchrophasor Xc can be obtained by resampling Xp in (13).
with the interval fpr = fp / fr as Xc(m) = [Xp(0)...,Xp(mfpr)], where
 X C ( M − 1) X C ( M − 2) ... X C (0)   P1   X C (M ) 
m is the index of reported synchrophasors, and its value is     
 X C (M ) X C ( M − 1) ... X C (1)   P2  = −  X C ( M + 1)  (13)
assumed to start from zero. Accordingly, the synchrophasor Xc
 ... ... ... ...   ...   ... 
should be expressed by replacing the variable p in (6) with mfpr,     
as shown in (7)  C
X ( N − 1) X C N − 3)
( ... X C ( N − M )   PM   X C ( N ) 
A P B
X c (m) = A1C1 ( L1 − 1)e j (r1m +1 ) + A1C1* ( L1 + 1)e − j (r1m +1 )
*

(7) The best estimate of P is solved in a least square sense, as

+ As Cs ( LS − 1)e j (rs m +s ) + As Cs* ( LS + 1)e − j (rs m +s )
*
shown in (14)

with P = A†B = ( A H A)−1 A H B (14)

r1 = 2 f1Tr , rs = 2 f sTr − j sTr (8) where A is a Hankel matrix of (N +1-M)M dimension. A is
†

By defining the pseudoinverse of A, and AH denotes the Hermitian trans-

pose of A. On the other hand, P is related to the M-th charac-
a1 = A1C1 ( L1 − 1)e j1 , a2 = A1C1* ( L1 + 1)e − j1 , teristic polynomial function of the system:
(9)
a3 = AS CS ( LS − 1)e jS , a4 = AS CS* ( LS + 1)e − jS , M
z M − P1 z M −1 − .... − PM =  ( z − em ) (15)
1 = jr1 , 2 = − jr*1 , 3 = jrs , 4 = − jrs* (10) m =1

Equation (7) can be rewritten as Thus, λ can be obtained by seeking all roots of (15). Finally,
another least square problem is formulated as (16). Solving (16)
leads to the estimation of a.

0885-8977 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de chile. Downloaded on December 05,2020 at 18:05:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2020.3037289, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery

 z10 z20 ... z M0   a1   X C (1)  C. Procedure of SSR Source Detection

 1     The entire procedure used to detect SSR sources can be de-
 z1 z12 ... z1M   a2  =  X C (2)  (16) scribed as follows:
 ... ... ... ...   ...   ... 
 N −1    
z MN −1   aM
Step 1: Data collection
 z1 z2N −1 ...   XC (N )  Collect N samples of three-phase voltage and current syn-
chrophasors. In this work, N is set as 100 and 120 for the 50 Hz
B. Matrix Pencil Method [24]
and 60 Hz systems, respectively, which means that the maxi-
In some cases, Prony analysis can be numerically unstable mum value of m in (7) is 99 and 119 for the 50 Hz and 60 Hz
due to solving an ill-conditioned matrix equation and finding systems, respectively.
the roots of a polynomial. An alternative is to use the matrix
pencil method (MPM). Although similar to Prony analysis, the Step 2: Noise reduction
MPM consists of solving an eigenvalue problem rather than Before implementing Prony analysis or the MPM, a trun-
following the conventional two-step Prony analysis. It has been cated SVD is performed on the Hankel matrix to reduce the
reported that the MPM is less sensitive to noise than Prony influence of noise. The SVD of H is performed as H = UΣV∗,
analysis in many cases. The steps of the MPM are briefly de- where U  LL , V  ( N − L)L are the left and right singular
scribed below. vectors, satisfying UU∗ = I and VV∗ = I, and Σ is the diagonal
The MPM first constructs a Hankel Matrix, as shown in (17) eigenvalue matrix, i.e., Σ=diag(σ1,σ2...,σr), where σ1,σ2...,σr are
 X C (0) X C (1) ... X C ( N − L − 1)  the singular values of H and arranged in nonincreasing order. In
  truncated SVD, H admits a low-dimensional approximation by
X C (1) X C (2) ... X C ( N − L)  (17)
H= the first r (4 in this problem) columns of U and V, i.e.,
 ... ... ... ... 
 
 C L + 1)
X ( X C ( L + 2) ... XC (N ) ( L + 2)( N − L ) H  U r r Vr*， (25)

Deleting the last row leads to a shifted Hankel matrix H1, where Ur=U(:,1:4), Σr=Σ(1:4,1:4) and Vr=V(:,1:4).
while deleting the first row results in another shifted Hankel
Step 3: Perform Prony analysis and MPM
matrix H2,
Perform Prony analysis or MPM to determine λ and a. The
H1 = H (1: L + 1, :) (18)
fitness of the two methods can be checked by the coefficient of
H 2 = H (2 : L + 2, :) (19) determination, as shown in (26). When the fitness is successful,
R2 is close to one. It is suggested to set a threshold for R2, e.g.,
H1 can be further expressed as 0.9, to filter bad results. Note that the fitness should exclude the
fundamental components.
H1 =  (20)
SSerr
where R2 = 1 − (26)
SStot
1 1 ... 1 1 z1 ... z1N − L −1  where
z   
z2 ... zM  1 z2 ... z2N − L −1 
=  1 ， =  (21) N 2

    SSerr =  X C (i ) − X C (i ) (27)
 L L    i =1

1 zM zMN − L −1 
L
 z1 z 2 zM 
2
N N
1
SStot =  X C (i ) − X (28)
 = diag ( 1 , 2 , ,  M )
C (i )
(22) i =1 N i =1

H2 can be expressed as Step 4: SSR parameter extraction

Once λ and a are solved, the frequency and damping of SSR
H 2 =  (23) can be calculated based on (8) and (10).
where Σ is an eigenvalue matrix: f S = Im(3 ) / (2 * Tr )
(29)
=diag ([ z1 , z2 , , z M ]) (24)  S = Re(3 ) / Tr

A generalized eigenvalue problem can be formulated based on The amplitude and phase angle of the SSR voltage/current are
two shifted Hankel matrices. The eigenvalue z that gives calculated according to (9), where Cs(Ls-1) is calculated by (5)
zH1-H2 a rank smaller than M must be one of the system ei- with obtained fs and αs.
†
genvalues. Thus, z can be solved by the eigenvalues of H1 H 2 .
As e js = a3 Cs ( Ls − 1) (30)
Once z is determined, the coefficient a can be determined with
the same steps as Prony analysis, i.e., (16).

0885-8977 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de chile. Downloaded on December 05,2020 at 18:05:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2020.3037289, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery

Equations (29) and (30) should be applied for three phase

voltages and currents.
Step 5: SSR source detection
Once the SSR phasors of three-phase voltages and currents
are constructed, perform the sequence transformation to cal-
culate positive sequence quantities VPSSR, IPSSR and negative se-
quence quantities VNSSR, INSSR. Finally, the SSR impedance is cal-
culated as VPSSR/IPSSR and VNSSR/INSSR for the positive sequence and
negative sequence, respectively, and the SSR source can be
judged based on the sign of the real part of the impedance. For
the sake of conciseness, only positive-sequence SSR quantities
(b) Synchrophasor data
are considered in this paper, as the oscillations in simulations Fig. 2. Synthetic signals for the verification studies
and field cases are found to be positive sequences. In practice,
the negative-sequence SSR quantities should also be used if the As seen in Fig. 2(a), it is very straightforward to extract SSR
oscillation contains negative-sequence components. components from the waveform data. A simple discrete Fourier
transform (DFT) is sufficient. This was the strategy adopted in
V. VERIFICATION STUDIES
[14]. However, waveform data are not available from existing
In this section, the accuracy of the proposed method is first online monitoring systems. Thus, this work attempts to calcu-
tested by synthetic signals. Then, its effectiveness for SSR late the SSR impedance using the data in Fig. 2(b). Based on the
source detection is further revealed using EMT simulations. synchrophasor model established in Section II and the mathe-
A. Verifications using Synthetic Signals matical algorithm explained in Section III, the SSR parameters
A synthetic signal is constructed as (31), and the corre- can be extracted. Fig. 3 shows the fitting performance of the
sponding parameters are shown in Table I. Fig. 2 shows the two methods. A good match can be observed with a coefficient
magnitude of the corresponding synchrophasors. Note that this of determination greater than 0.9. It should be clarified that Fig.
test assumes a three-phase balanced system. Equation (31) 3 represents the magnitude of spectral leakage components of
represents one-phase quantities, and other phases can be de- SSR in synchrophasors, whereas the values listed in Table I
rived accordingly. According to extensive field tests reported in (0.05 pu for voltage and 0.15 pu for current) are the amplitude
the literature [25], the noise in practical PMUs can be ap- of the SSR waveform. Thus, the magnitude in Fig. 3 is different
proximated by Gaussian distributed white noise with a sig- from that listed in Table I. Table II shows the estimated SSR
nal-to-noise ratio SNR = 45 dB. The same noise is added to the impedance. The result is very close to the actual value. The
synchrophasors in Fig. 2. negative sign of the resistive part indicates the existence of the
SSR source.
V (t ) = A1 cos(2 f1t ) + AsV e s t cos(2 f s t + sV )
(31)
I (t ) = A1 cos(2 f1t −  ) + AsI e s t cos(2 f s t + sI )

Table I. Parameters of the synthetic signal

f1 fs A1 αs
60 Hz 25 Hz 1.0 0.1
AVs AIs φVs φIS
0.05 0.15 0.5π 1.1π

Fig. 3. The fitness of the two methods for voltage/current synchrophasors

(excluding fundamental components)

(a) Waveform data Table II. Calculated SSR impedances for synthetic signals
Actual Prony MPM
SSR impedance -0.1+j0.32 -0.1+0.33j -0.1+j0.31
SSR Source? Yes Yes Yes

0885-8977 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de chile. Downloaded on December 05,2020 at 18:05:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2020.3037289, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery

A sensitivity study is then conducted to show the robustness

of the method under different conditions. The results are shown
in Fig. 4, and the findings can be summarized as follows: 1) Fig.
4 (a) and Fig. 4(b) show the performance of two methods with
different f1 and as. It can be seen that the severe off-nominal
condition or large growing rate of the oscillation has no influ-
ence on the results. 2) Fig. 4 (c) shows the error of the two
methods under different SSR frequencies. Both methods ex-
hibit better performances when fs is close to the fundamental Fig. 5. The fitness of the two methods when AVs =0.02 (excluding fundamental
frequency. The reason is that when fs is low, its spectrum components)
leakage component in synchrophasors is small. 3) Fig. 4(d)
shows the influence of the SSR amplitude. In all tests, the am- Under some circumstances, the noise level of PMU data can
plitude of the SSR current is set as three times the voltage. be lower than 45 dB. The impact of this issue is illustrated in
When the SSR component in the synchrophasors is limited, for Fig. 6. It can be seen that the error under normal conditions (45
example, less than 2%, the estimation result has large errors due dB) is approximately 5%, while it reaches 20% if the SNR
to the existence of noise. Such a bad estimation can be identi- decreases to 30 dB. In practice, such cases can be identified by
fied by the coefficient of determination R2. Fig. 5 shows the R2 the coefficient of determination (R2). As seen in Fig. 7, R2
of the two methods when AVs is 2% of the fundamental com- decreases with the SNR. If the threshold of R2 is set to 0.9, the
ponent. The R2 values of both methods are below 0.9, indicating results for SNR<40 dB can be discarded.
an unreliable estimation. 4) In all cases, the MPM shows
slightly better performances than that of Prony analysis.

Fig. 6. The influence of different noise levels

(a) The influence of the off-nominal condition

Fig. 7. Coefficient of determination under different noise levels.

The performance of the method under dynamic conditions is

also tested. The dynamic conditions of fundamental compo-
(b) The influence of the growing rate nents are defined according to IEEE standard C37.118.1 [26],
including 1) step change tests, 2) frequency ramping tests, 3)
modulation tests and 4) harmonic distortion tests. In all tests,
the fundamental frequency varies in a range between 55 Hz and
65 Hz, and the noise level is set to SNR = 45 dB. The maximum
errors for different SSR frequencies between 10 Hz and 45 Hz
are shown below.
1) Step change test: The result of the step change test is
shown in Fig. 8. It can be seen that the 10% magnitude step in
(c) The influence of the SSR frequency the fundamental component has a small influence on the result,
while the 10°phase step change degrades the estimation accu-
racy to some extent. The error increases to 10% for SSR fre-
quencies of approximately 45 Hz. The reason is that when the
SSR frequency is high, e.g., 45 Hz, and the off-nominal condi-
tion is very severe, e.g., 55 Hz (although not very likely to
occur in practice), the frequencies of the two components are
close to each other. As a result, the dynamic changes in the
fundamental component have a larger impact on the result.
(d) The influence of the SSR amplitude
Fig. 4. Sensitivity from varying parameters in the synthetic signal

0885-8977 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de chile. Downloaded on December 05,2020 at 18:05:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2020.3037289, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery
(a) Errors under 10% magnitude step changes in the fundamental component
(b) Errors under 10 degree phase step changes in the fundamental component
Fig. 8. Errors under step changes in the fundamental component
2) Frequency ramping test: The result of the frequency
ramping test is shown in Fig. 9. As seen in the figure, a linearly
changing frequency in the fundamental component does not
affect the accuracy of the result. Compared with Fig. 8, it can be
implied that the rapid change in the fundamental components
has a larger impact on the result.
Fig. 9. Errors under frequency ramping conditions in fundamental components
3) Modulation test: The result of the modulation test is
shown in Fig. 10. Similar to the frequency ramping test, the
slow modulations in the fundamental components do not affect
the proposed method.
Fig. 10. Errors under modulation conditions in fundamental components
4) Harmonic test: The test in the presence of harmonic dis-
turbances is performed by adding a single harmonic from the
second to the 50th order to the reference signal. The level of the
harmonic is 10%. Fig. 11 shows the result under severe har-
monic distortions. As the DFT has a good harmonic-rejection
performance, the accuracy of the result is still the same.
0885-8977 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de chile. Downloaded on December 05,2020 at 18:05:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 11. Errors under severe harmonic distortions in fundamental components
As far as we know, there are no standards specifying the
dynamic changes of SSR parameters. Thus, this work adopts
the dynamic tests in [27], which are defined based on observa-
tions of a real-life SSR incident.
1) SSR modulation test: According to [27], SSR amplitudes
can experience modulations during an incident. The modula-
tion levels and frequencies are set at 15% and 0.15 Hz, respec-
tively. The result in Fig. 12 demonstrates the effectiveness of
the proposed method under modulation conditions.
Fig. 12. Errors under modulation conditions in the SSR component
2) SSR frequency ramping test: SSR frequencies may expe-
rience linear ramps during an incident. The ramp rate is set at
0.02 Hz according to [27]. The method still demonstrates sat-
isfactory performances, as shown in Fig. 13. However, it should
be noted that the method may not perform well if the modula-
tion level or the ramp rate is very high. Such cases again can be
identified by a low coefficient of determination.
Fig. 13. Errors under ramping conditions in the SSR component
B. Verifications using EMT Simulations
This subsection further verifies the usefulness of the pro-
posed method using EMT simulations. Detailed EMT models
of a wind farm system, as shown in Fig. 14, are established in
PSCAD/EMTDC. As seen in the system diagram, three
DFIG-based wind farms are collected by 220-kV lines and
connected to a 500-kV compensated network. The electrical
distances and power outputs of the three wind farms are dif-
ferent, as displayed in Table III. The parameters of the collec-
tors and transmission lines can be found in [6]. The wind ve-
locity is 8 m/s for all three wind farms.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2020.3037289, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery

Collector1 220 kV/690 V WF1

PCC
grid XS XC XL WF2
R Collector2 220 kV/690 V

500 kV/220 kV

Collector3 220 kV/690 V WF3

Measurement location
(a) Voltage and current waveforms
Fig. 14. System diagram in the EMT simulation study

Table III. The wind farm information in simulation studies

WF1 WF2 WF3
Length of collectors 20 km 80 km 80 km
No. of WGs 200 200 320

Cascaded control loops are used in the DFIG control scheme,

as shown in Fig. 15. The control scheme consists of slow outer
voltage/power control loops and fast current control loops.
Regarding RSC control, its outer loops determine the reference
value of the RSC current based on the generator’s active and
reactive power output. For GSC control, its function is to (b) Voltage and current synchrophasors
maintain the DC voltage and the generator terminal voltage by Fig. 16. Voltage and current recorded at the PCC of WF1 in the steady-state
adjusting the GSC current. The control parameters can be found SSR case
in [28].
The synchrophasors between 3 s and 4 s are fed into the
idrref
Psref
+ PI PI
udr* udr proposed method. Table IV shows the calculated SSR imped-
+ +
- -
Decouple
- ances. As the converter of the DFIG quickly reaches its satu-
Ps idr (ω0-ωr)Lr ration limit, it is difficult to calculate the analytical impedance
iqr (ω0-ωr)Lr value through small-signal impedance modeling [10]-[11].
Qsref iqrref
-
uqr*
+
uqr
Thus, the reference impedance value is calculated using the
+ PI +
PI + waveform data. A Butterworth lowpass filter is designed to
-
Qs (a) RSC control
+
vsd extract the SSR waveform from the original waveform, as
udg*
Vdcref
PI
idgref
PI
udg shown in Fig. 17. The MPM is then applied on the SSR
+ +
- - Decouple
-
- waveform to estimate the SSR voltage and current phasors, and
Vdc idg Lgscω0 the result is shown in Fig. 18. The SSR impedance can be
iqg Lgscω0 calculated accordingly. According to the table, the SSR im-
-
uqg*
+
uqg
pedances calculated from synchrophasors are consistent with
iqgref=0
+
PI - values calculated by waveforms. The results indicate that WF1
+
vsq
and WF2 are the SSR sources due to the negative real part of
(b) GSC control
Fig. 15. Control block diagram of DFIG. (a) RSC, (b) GSC.
the SSR impedance. WF3 exhibits a positive resistance due to
the larger number of wind farms and longer length of collectors.
1) Steady-state SSR
An SSR event initiates at 1 s when the series compensation Table IV. Calculated SSR impedance in the simulation study
increases from 20% to 25%. The amplitude of oscillation grows WF1 WF2 WF3
for approximately 1 s and becomes stable due to the controller’s Reference -4.3+17.9j -0.9+24.4j 1.8+18.9j
saturation limits. Fig. 16(a) shows the waveform of phase A of Prony -4.3+17.7j -0.9+24.3j 1.8+18.9j
WF1 recorded at the PCC, while the magnitudes of the corre- MPM -4.3+18.1j -0.8+24.6j 1.9+19.0j
sponding synchrophasors are shown in Fig. 16(b). SSR Source? Yes Yes No

0885-8977 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de chile. Downloaded on December 05,2020 at 18:05:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2020.3037289, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery

Fig. 17. SSR voltage and current waveform extracted by the lowpass filter in
Fig. 19. Voltage and current recorded at the PCC of WF2 in the modified
the steady-state SSR case
steady-state SSR case

Fig. 18. SSR magnitude and frequency in the steady-state SSR case. (a) SSR
magnitude in voltage, (b) SSR frequency in voltage, (c) SSR magnitude in
current, and (d) SSR frequency in current. Fig. 20. SSR voltage and current waveform extracted by the lowpass filter in
the modified steady-state SSR case

A modified case is further considered here by increasing the

number of wind generators of WF2 from 200 to 300. The per-
formance of the proposed method is shown in Table V. It can be
seen that the SSR resistance of WF2 becomes positive due to
the increase in wind generators. As a result, WF1 is the only
SSR source that provides negative damping to drive the oscil-
lation. To further validate the detection results, the simulation is
repeated by tripping WF1 at 5 s. The simulated waveform is
shown in Figs. 19-21. It can be seen that the oscillation damps
out after WF1 is tripped. Therefore, we can infer that the result
of SSR source detection is correct.

Table V. Calculated SSR impedances with increased wind Fig. 21. SSR magnitude and frequency in the modified steady-state SSR case.
(a) SSR magnitude in voltage (b) SSR frequency in voltage (c) SSR magnitude
generators in WF2 in current (d) SSR frequency in current
WF1 WF2 WF3
Reference -5.3+18.3j 0.71+19.9j 1.1+19.3j 2) Transient SSR
Prony -5.3+18.3j 0.77+19.9j 1.0+19.3j The performance of the method under transient conditions is
Matrix Pencil -5.4+18.1j 0.74+19.9j 1.1+19.2j evaluated. For this purpose, a three-phase fault occurs on the
SSR Source? Yes No No collector of WF3, which is cleared after 100 ms (6 cycles) [29].
Fig. 22(a) shows the voltage and current waveforms measured
at the PCC of WF1. A large transient is induced at 1 s, and the
SSR starts immediately after the fault is cleared. Fig. 22(b)
shows the magnitudes of the corresponding synchrophasors.

0885-8977 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de chile. Downloaded on December 05,2020 at 18:05:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2020.3037289, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery
(a) Voltage and current waveforms
(b) Voltage and current synchrophasors
Fig. 22. Voltage and current recorded at the PCC of WF1 in the transient SSR
case
By applying the proposed method to the synchrophasor data,
the SSR impedance can be calculated. The result is shown in
Fig. 23 with a moving window of 0.5 seconds. It can be seen
that no result is obtained for the data window between “1 s-2 s”.
The reason is that when the transient component is much larger
than the SSR component, the SSR phasors cannot be accurately
identified from the synchrophasors. For the data window be-
tween 1-2 s, no SSR modes are found in the voltage synchro-
phasors. Thus, the SSR impedance is not calculated. Once the
transient is gone, the extracted modes return to normal.
(a) Wind farm 1
0885-8977 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de chile. Downloaded on December 05,2020 at 18:05:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
(b) Wind farm 2
Fig. 23. Estimated SSR impedances in the transient SSR case
VI. FIELD CASE TEST
This section investigates the performance of the proposed
method using a practical SSR incident that occurred in northern
China. The system diagram is shown in Fig. 24, where 23 wind
farms over a vast area are collected by 220-kV transmission
lines and connected to a 500-kV compensated network through
a step-up station. Most of these WGs are 1.5-MW DFIGs, and a
few are self-excited induction generators and permanent mag-
net synchronous generators.
Wind Farm
Substation
A
Set-up Station
B
North China Grid
220kV Line
500kV Line
C D
FSC
Measurement
location
Fig. 24. A practical wind farm system in North China
As seen in Fig. 24, the wind farm system can be portioned
into four subsystems at the step-up station. Fig. 25 shows the
phase A voltage/current waveform measured at the main feeder
of subsystem B. The sampling rate is 1000 Hz. By performing a
lowpass filter on the waveform data, the SSR waveform can be
extracted, as shown in Fig. 26. Afterwards, the MPM is applied
to the SSR waveform to estimate SSR phasors, and the SSR
impedance can be calculated accordingly. The result is shown
in Fig. 27. It is interesting to find that subsystem B exhibits
positive damping at the SSR frequency, which indicates that 17
wind farms in subsystem B do not contribute negative damping
to the oscillation. Proper measures should be taken for the rest
of the wind farms. This finding is consistent with the
post-incident analysis reported in [13].
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2020.3037289, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery

transformer and the transmission line, are modeled analytically

with data from the utilities. Then, the equivalent impedance of
subsystem B can be easily obtained through aggregation. It can
be seen that both Prony analysis and the MPM provide a good
estimate of the SSR impedance. Subsystem B is not the main
cause of the oscillation.

Fig. 25. The voltage and current measured by the fault recorder in the field case

Fig. 28. The magnitude of synchrophasors for the field case

Table VI. Calculated SSR impedances for subsystem B

Time Window 3-4 s 20-21 s 40-41 s
Fig. 26. Extracted SSR waveform in the field case VI (a) voltage between 0-60 Detailed Model [13] 0.95+7.5 j 0.95+7.5 i 0.95+7.5 i
s, (b) voltage between 20-21 s, (c) current between 0-60 s, and (d) current Fault Recorder 1.34+7.7 j 0.93+8.6 j 0.99+8.7 j
between 20-21 s Prony 0.95+7.6 j 1.01+8.5 j 1.00+8.9 j
Matrix Pencil 1.07+7.7 j 1.15+8.7 j 1.10+9.0 j
SSR Source? No No No

VII. DISCUSSION OF PRACTICAL CHALLENGES

Fig. 27. SSR components in the field case: (a) SSR magnitude in voltage, (b)
SSR frequency in voltage, (c) SSR magnitude in current, (d) SSR frequency in
current, and (e) SSR impedances.
Fig. 28 shows the corresponding synchrophasors from Fig.
25. The data are fed into the proposed method for SSR source
detection. Table VI shows the estimated SSR impedance for
three time windows. Two reference impedance values are cal-
culated for validation. The impedance value on the row of the
“Fault recorder” is obtained by the waveform data, i.e., Fig.
27(e). For the impedance value on the row of “Detailed model
[13]”, each WF in Fig. 24 is represented by a real-time meas-
ured impedance [13]. The network components, such as the
The proposed method may face some challenges in actual
implementation, and the potential solutions are discussed in this
section.
1) PMU algorithms: In recent years, several advanced phasor
estimation algorithms, such as interpolated DFT [30], Tay-
lor-series-based algorithms [31] and Kalman-filter-based ap-
proaches [32], have been proposed in the literature. If PMU
vendors adopt these algorithms, the synchrophasor model un-
der SSR would be different from the one established in this
paper. However, it should be noted that DFT is still the most
widely used algorithm [33]-[34]. Thus, the proposed method
and the established synchrophasor model are valid for most
commercial PMUs.
2) PMU reporting rate: The reporting rate of a PMU ranges
from 10-240 Hz [35]. For the situation where the reporting rate
is fr Hz, the synchrophasors provided by PMUs cannot identify
an SSR with fS > fr /2. To accurately capture an SSR between
10-45 Hz, the reporting rate of PMUs must be set at 120 Hz or
higher for a 60 Hz system.
3) Ignorance of the supersynchronous component: The su-
persynchronous component might appear in a
wind-farm-caused SSR. For example, the Hami incident in
China involved two SSR modes [36]. One was approximately
19 Hz, and the other was approximately 81 Hz. The root cause
of this incident was the control interaction between direct-drive

0885-8977 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de chile. Downloaded on December 05,2020 at 18:05:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2020.3037289, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery
permanent-magnet synchronous generators (PMSGs) and the
weak grid. An unsymmetrical dq control of the PMSG resulted
in oscillations at two complimentary frequencies. The term
“subsynchronous control interaction (SSCI)” is commonly used
to denote this type of oscillation. It should be emphasized that
the focus of this work is SSR caused by the interaction between
DFIGs and series-compensated systems. The phenomenon
originates from the L-C resonance but is reinforced by the
converter control of the DFIG, which is similar to the tradi-
tional induction generator effect (IGE). For such cases, the
supersynchronous components are negligible; thus, all wind
farms and their networks are engaged in one subsynchronous
mode, generally lower than 45 Hz. This has been proven by
theoretical analysis [3],[37] and confirmed by experimental
tests [38] and various practical cases [2],[5].
4) Frequency responses of the PMU: A lowpass filter is de-
signed in the PMU to suppress aliasing effects, which means
that a gain should be multiplied by the SSR component. This
issue is not considered in the context of this paper because the
same lowpass filter is used for the voltage and current channels.
As a result, the gain is cancelled when calculating the SSR
impedance. Furthermore, it is assumed that the lowpass filter
does not significantly attenuate the SSR components. This
requirement can be satisfied, as most PMUs currently provide a
selectable filter performance. For example, the widely used
ABB RES521 can turn off its lowpass filter to improve the
PMU response. It has also been suggested by many researchers
that future synchrophasor standards would, in a more distinct
manner, set the requirement of SSR monitoring [20].
VIII. CONCLUSION
In this paper, a novel and efficient method is presented for
the online detection of SSR sources. The core concept is to
calculate the SSR impedance/power using phasor measure-
ments provided by WAMS. The main conclusions of the paper
are summarized as follows.
1) This paper has revealed that a synchrophasor under SSR is a
linear combination of four modes rotating at different fre-
quencies. As a result, SSR source detection can be formu-
lated as an MPE problem.
2) Two classic MPE algorithms, Prony analysis and the MPM,
are adopted in this paper to extract SSR parameters. Simu-
lation verifications show that their performances are suffi-
cient in most cases, and any poor estimations can be filtered
by the coefficient of determination. Thus, the two methods
can crosscheck each other to improve the reliability of the
detection.
3) The performance of the method is further evaluated using a
practical SSR incident. The results demonstrate that the
proposed method can serve as a promising tool for online
SSR source detection.
REFERENCES
[1] J. Adams, V. A. Pappu, and A. Dixit, “ERCOT experience screening for
Sub-Synchronous Control Interaction in the vicinity of series capacitor
banks,” in Proc. IEEE PES General Meeting, 2012, pp.1-5.
0885-8977 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de chile. Downloaded on December 05,2020 at 18:05:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[2] Y. Li, L. Fan and Z. Miao, "Replicating Real-World Wind Farm SSR
Events," in IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 35, no. 1, pp.
339-348, Feb. 2020.
[3] L. Wang, X. Xie, Q. Jiang, H. Liu, Y. Li, and H. K. Liu, “Investigation of
SSR in practical DFIG-based wind farms connected to a se-
ries-compensated power system,” in IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 30, no.
5, pp. 2772-2779, Sept. 2015.
[4] P. Mahish and A. K. Pradhan, "Mitigating Subsynchronous Resonance
Using Synchrophasor Data Based Control of Wind Farms," in IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 364-376, Feb. 2020.
[5] X. Xie, X. Zhang, H. Liu, H. Liu, Y. Li and C. Zhang, "Characteristic
Analysis of Subsynchronous Resonance in Practical Wind Farms Con-
nected to Series-Compensated Transmissions," in IEEE Transactions on
Energy Conversion, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 1117-1126, Sept. 2017.
[6] B. Gao, Y. Wang, W. Xu and G. Yang, "Identifying and Ranking Sources
of SSR Based on the Concept of Subsynchronous Power," in IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 258-268, Feb. 2020.
[7] A. Ostadi, A. Yazdani, and R. Varma, “Modeling and stability analysis of
a DFIG-based wind-power generator interfaced with a se-
ries-compensated line,” in IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 24, no. 3, pp.
1504–1514, Oct. 2009.
[8] W. Du, Y. Wang, H. Wang, X. Wang and X. Xie, "Analytical Examina-
tion on the Amplifying Effect of Weak Grid Connection for the DFIGs to
Induce Torsional Sub-synchronous Oscillations," in IEEE Transactions
on Power Delivery, early access.
[9] W. Du, B. Ren, H. Wang and Y. Wang, "Comparison of Methods to
Examine Sub-Synchronous Oscillations Caused by Grid-Connected Wind
Turbare Generators," in IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 34, no.
6, pp. 4931-4943, Nov. 2019.
[10] Z. Miao, "Impedance-Model-Based SSR Analysis for Type 3 Wind
Generator and Series-Compensated Network," in IEEE Transactions on
Energy Conversion, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 984-991, Dec. 2012.
[11] J. Sun, “Impedance-based stability criterion for grid-connected inverters,”
IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 26, no. 11, pp. 3075-3078, Nov. 2011
[12] H. Liu, X. Xie, C. Zhang, Y. Li, H. Liu and Y. Hu, "Quantitative SSR
Analysis of Series-Compensated DFIG-Based Wind Farms Using Ag-
gregated RLC Circuit Model," in IEEE Transactions on Power Systems,
vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 474-483, Jan. 2017.
[13] X. Xie, W. Liu, H. Liu, Y. Du and Y. Li, "A System-Wide Protection
Against Unstable SSCI in Series-Compensated Wind Power Systems,"
in IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 3095-3104,
Dec. 2018.
[14] X. Xie, Y. Zhan, J. Shair, Z. Ka and X. Chang, "Identifying the Source of
Subsynchronous Control Interaction via Wide-Area Monitoring of
Sub/Super-Synchronous Power Flows," in IEEE Transactions on Power
Delivery, early access.
[15] J. De La Ree, V. Centeno, J. S. Thorp and A. G. Phadke, "Synchronized
Phasor Measurement Applications in Power Systems," in IEEE Transac-
tions on Smart Grid, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 20-27, June 2010.
[16] N. Al-ashwal, D. Wilson, and M. Parashar, “Identifying Sources of
Oscillations Using Wide Area Measurements,” in Proceedings of the
CIGRE US National Committee 2014 grid of the future symposium, 2014,
pp. 1–8.
[17] X. Wang and K. Turitsyn, “Data-Driven Diagnostics of Mechanism and
Source of Sustained Oscillations,” in IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 31, no.
5, pp. 4036–4046, 2016
[18] N. Zhou, M. Ghorbaniparvar, and S. Akhlaghi, “Locating sources of
forced oscillations using transfer functions,” in 2017 IEEE Power and
Energy Conference at Illinois, PECI 2017, 2017.
[19] L. Chen, Y. Min, and W. Hu, “An energy-based method for location of
power system oscillation source,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 28, no. 2,
pp. 828–836, 2013.
[20] T. Rauhala, A. M. Gole and P. Järventausta, "Detection of Subsynchro-
nous Torsional Oscillation Frequencies Using Phasor Measurement,"
in IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 11-19, Feb.
2016.
[21] X. Yang, J. Zhang, X. Xie, X. Xiao, B. Gao and Y. Wang, "Interpolated
DFT-based Identification of Sub-Synchronous Oscillation Parameters
using Synchrophasor Data," in IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid.
[22] Antonio Gomez -Exposito, Antonio J. Conejo, Claudio Canizares: Elec-
tric Energy Systems: Analysis and Operation, Chapter 4.10
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2020.3037289, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery

[23] J. F. Hauer, C. J. Demeure and L. L. Scharf, "Initial results in Prony Xiaolong Jiang received the B.S. degree from Ningbo University. He is cur-
analysis of power system response signals," in IEEE Transactions on rently pursuing the M.S. degree with the College of Electrical Engineering,
Power Systems, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 80-89, Feb. 1990. Sichuan University, China. His main research interest is power quality.
[24] M. L. Crow and A. Singh, "The matrix pencil for power system modal
extraction," in IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 20, no. 1, pp.
501-502, Feb. 2005. Xiaorong Xie (M’02–SM’14) received the B.Sc. degree from Shanghai Jiao
[25] M. Brown, M. Biswal, S. Brahma, S. J. Ranade and H. Cao, "Character- Tong University, Shanghai, China, in 1996, and the Ph.D. degree from
izing and quantifying noise in PMU data," 2016 IEEE Power and Energy Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, in 2001, where he is currently an Asso-
Society General Meeting (PESGM), Boston, MA, 2016, pp. 1-5. ciate Professor with the Department of Electrical Engineering. His research
[26] IEEE Standard for Synchrophasor Measurements for Power Systems," interests include power system analysis and control, flexible ac transmission
systems, and integration of renewables.
in IEEE Std C37.118.1-2011 (Revision of IEEE Std C37.118-2005) , vol.,
no., pp.1-61, 28 Dec. 2011
[27] L. Chen, W. Zhao, F. Wang, Q. Wang and S. Huang, "An Interharmonic
Phasor and Frequency Estimator for Subsynchronous Oscillation Identi- Xiaomei Yang (M’18) received the Ph.D. degree from Sichuan University,
fication and Monitoring," in IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Chengdu, China, in 2004, where she is currently an Associate Professor with
Measurement, vol. 68, no. 6, pp. 1714-1723, June 2019 the Department of Automation, College of Electrical Engineering. Her current
[28] B. Gao, R. Torquato, W. Xu and W. Freitas, "Waveform-Based Method research interests include power quality and data mining.
for Fast and Accurate Identification of Subsynchronous Resonance
Events," in IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 34, no. 5, pp.
3626-3636, Sept. 2019. Xianyong Xiao (M’07-SM’16) received the Ph.D. degree in 2010 from Si-
[29] A. Moharana, R. K. Varma and R. Seethapathy, "SSR Alleviation by chuan University, Sichuan Province, China. He is a Professor and Dean of the
STATCOM in Induction-Generator-Based Wind Farm Connected to Se- College of Electrical Engineering, Sichuan University, China. His research
ries Compensated Line," in IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, interests include power quality and its control, distribution system reliability,
vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 947-957, July 2014 and green-friendly smart grids.
[30] P. Romano and M. Paolone, "Enhanced Interpolated-DFT for Synchro-
phasor Estimation in FPGAs: Theory, Implementation, and Validation of
a PMU Prototype," in IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Meas-
urement, vol. 63, no. 12, pp. 2824-2836, Dec. 2014
[31] L. Fu et al., "A Multiple Frequency Taylor Model-Based Dynamic Syn-
chrophasor Estimation Algorithm," in IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid,
vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 6870-6882, Nov. 2019
[32] J. A. de la O Serna and J. Rodríguez, “Instantaneous dynamic phasor
estimates with Kalman filter,” in Proc. IEEE PES Gen. Meeting, 2010, pp.
1–6.
[33] C. Thilakarathne, L. Meegahapola and N. Fernando, "Improved Syn-
chrophasor Models for Power System Dynamic Stability Evaluation
Based on IEEE C37.118.1 Reference Architecture," in IEEE Transactions
on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 66, no. 11, pp. 2937-2947,
Nov. 2017
[34] G. Barchi, D. Macii and D. Petri, "Synchrophasor Estimators Accuracy: A
Comparative Analysis," in IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and
Measurement, vol. 62, no. 5, pp. 963-973, May 2013
[35] https://library.e.abb.com/public/28d8371ef4035146c1257ddc00582566/
1MRK511316-UUS_-_en_Application_manual__Phasor_measurement_
unit_RES670_2.0___ANSI.pdf
[36] H. Liu, X. Xie, J. He et al., "Subsynchronous Interaction Between Di-
rect-Drive PMSG Based Wind Farms and Weak AC Networks," in IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 4708-4720, Nov.
2017.
[37] L. Fan, R. Kavasseri, Z. L. Miao and C. Zhu, "Modeling of DFIG-Based
Wind Farms for SSR Analysis," in IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery,
vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 2073-2082, Oct. 2010.
[38] W. Liu, X. Xie, X. Zhang and X. Li, "Frequency-Coupling Admittance
Modeling of Converter-Based Wind Turbine Generators and the Con-
trol-Hardware-in-the-Loop Validation," in IEEE Transactions on Energy
Conversion, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 425-433, March 2020

Yang Wang (M’17) received the B.S degree in electrical engineering from
Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China, in 2012, and the Ph.D. degree in elec-
trical and computer engineering from the University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB,
Canada, in 2017. From 2017 to 2018, he was a Postdoctoral Fellow with the
University of Alberta. Currently, he is a Research Fellow with the College of
Electrical Engineering, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China. His main research
interests include power quality and integration of renewables.

0885-8977 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de chile. Downloaded on December 05,2020 at 18:05:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.