Voltaic Jnverters

Florida State University Libraries
Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School
2013
Dynamic Interactions Between Photo

Voltaic Inverters and Distribution Voltage
Regulation Devices
Harsha Ravindra
Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact lib-ir@fsu.edu
THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
DYNAMIC INTERACTIONS BETWEEN PHOTO VOLTAIC INVERTERS AND

DISTRIBUTION VOLTAGE REGULATION DEVICES
By
HARSHA RAVINDRA
A Thesis submitted to the

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
Master of Science
Degree Awarded:
Spring Semester, 2013
Harsha Ravindra defended this thesis on March 28th 2013.
The members of the supervisory committee were:
Jim Zheng
Professor Directing Thesis
Mischa Steurer
Committee Member
Chris Edrington
Committee Member
Ming Yu
Committee Member
The Graduate School has verified and approved the above-named committee members, and
certifies that the thesis has been approved in accordance with university requirements.
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First, I want to thank my research and academic advisors Mischa Steurer PhD and Jim
Zheng PhD, respectively for their continuous support and encouragement in conducting my
research and allowing me to be a part of the Sunshine State Grid Initiative (SUNGRIN) project
and Power Systems group here at CAPS. Dr. Steurer’s stronghold of power systems, technical
directions, emphasis on studies involving electro-magnetic transient type simulation tool has
helped me to have a better understanding on the subject. He has taught me how to independently
assess, investigate, conduct studies, prepare, present and have discussions on technical topics in a
concise, professional and scientific manner. Dr. Steurer’s vast experience in writing, publishing
and presenting papers has helped me to have a good foundation that will be embedded in my
professional career. He helped edit this thesis, taught me how to write technical paper and be self
critical and was always there to meet and talk about my ideas and problems, asking questions
where needed. Thank you for making me a better engineer and a prepared engineer. Dr. Zheng’s
unconditional support throughout my academics has been a blessing. He has always pushed me
to make sure that I go by my studies in a timely and in a prepared manner. Dr. Zheng’s has
always been there to meet and talk about my ideas and problems and providing guidance where
necessary. I would also like to thank Chris Edrington PhD and Ming Yu PhD for their support in
being in my committee and guiding me through my masters program.
My research and studies at CAPS would not have been possible if not for many of the
scientists who have helped me polish my academic and technical skills. Foremost, I would like to
thank Rick Meeker PE, for providing me an opportunity to work under the SUNGRIN project. I
would like to thank Omar Faruque PhD, who has taught me how to conduct research and studies
in a professional manner. His expertise in EMTP simulation tools has helped me vastly. He also
taught me how to go about writing and editing a technical paper. I would like to thank Karl
Schoder PhD, for his continuous support in my research work and aiding me whenever I required
guidance. Both of them have taught me numerous practical skills, time efficiency and how to
use resources available at CAPS to my advantage. Furthermore, both of them have also helped
me edit this thesis. I really appreciate it. Thank you both. Thanks to Peter McLaren PhD who has
given me nothing but support and love in helping me through my research work at CAPS. His
expertise has helped me learn areas of research that I had not treaded before. Special thanks to
iii
James Langston MS, whose expertise has helped me to be proficient in using RTDS. He has
always been there to guide me in understanding and solving many of the issues that I have
encountered during my studies. I would also like to thank all the friends I have made at CAPS
whose help and support has helped me better myself in professional and personal environment.
Thank you to my family who are all patient and loving as I attempt to cross higher academic
limits. Everyone who has contributed in my studies that was not specifically named, I thank you.
During my course of work at center for advanced power systems (CAPS) at Florida State
University (2009-2012), I was supported by the U.S. Dept. of Energy (DOE), Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Solar Energy Technologies Program (SETP), under
High-Penetration Solar Deployment Project Sunshine State Solar Grid Initiative (SUNGRIN),
award no. DE-EE0004682.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ vii

List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. viii
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... xi
1. OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................1
1.1 Motivation ......................................................................................................................1
1.2 SUNGRIN Project .........................................................................................................2
1.3 Literature Review...........................................................................................................4
2. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION ......................................................................................................7

2.1 Distribution Feeder 1 .....................................................................................................7
2.2 Distribution Feeder 2 .....................................................................................................8
3. MODELING OF SYSTEM ...................................................................................................11

3.1 RTDS Simulator...........................................................................................................11
3.2 Modeling of Feeder in RTDS ......................................................................................11
3.2.1 Modeling of Feeder 1 .......................................................................................12
3.2.2 Modeling of Feeder 2 .......................................................................................14
3.3 Modeling of Voltage Regulation Equipments .............................................................16
3.3.1 On-Load Tap Changing Transformer ..............................................................17
3.3.2 Switched Capacitor Banks ...............................................................................18
3.3.3 Step Voltage Regulator ....................................................................................20
3.4 Modeling of PV System ..............................................................................................21
3.5 Currently Available Voltage Regulation Techniques for PV Inverter.........................24
3.6 Advanced Voltage Regulation Techniques for PV Inverter ........................................25
3.6.1 German Low-Voltage Std. Curve ....................................................................25
3.6.2 Voltage-Reactive Power Curve........................................................................26
3.6.3 Voltage-Power Factor Curve ...........................................................................27
3.7 Validation of Feeder Models .......................................................................................28
3.7.1 Validation of Feeder 1 .....................................................................................29
3.7.2 Validation of Feeder 2 .....................................................................................29
4. SIMULATION AND RESULTS ..........................................................................................34

4.1 Distribution Feeder 1 ...................................................................................................34
4.1.1 Simulation Strategy and Model Input ..............................................................34
4.1.2 Initial Study Cases ...........................................................................................36
4.1.3 Voltage Regulation Scenarios ..........................................................................41
4.1.4 Observations ....................................................................................................45
4.2 Distribution Feeder 2 ...................................................................................................47
4.2.1 Simulation Strategy and Model Input ..............................................................48
v
4.2.2 Voltage Regulation Scenarios ..........................................................................49
4.2.3 Observations ....................................................................................................50
5. CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES ................................................................................52
APPENDICES ..............................................................................................................................54
A PV PANEL INFORMATION ...............................................................................................54
B RTDS SCRIPTS ....................................................................................................................54
REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................................61
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .........................................................................................................64
vi
LIST OF TABLES
1 Powerflow validation data for feeder 1 ..............................................................................29
2 Short-Circuit Validation of Feeder 2 .................................................................................30
3 Average and Maximum errors for validation of feeder 2 ..................................................33
4 Highest variation scenarios for feeder 1 ............................................................................43
5 Change in inverter output for various PV voltage regulation methods for feeder 1 ..........46
6 Operation of OLTC and SCB for various PV voltage regulation methods for feeder 1 ....47
7 Change in inverter output for various PV voltage regulation methods for feeder 2 ..........50
8 Operation of OLTC and SCB for various PV voltage regulation methods for feeder 2 ....51
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
1 One line diagram of feeder 1 ...............................................................................................8
2 One line diagram of feeder 2 ...............................................................................................9
3 One rack model of feeder 1. ...............................................................................................13
4 Three rack non-real time model of feeder 2 in RTDS .......................................................15
5 Load aggregation for one rack model of feeder 2 ..............................................................15
6 One rack model of feeder 2 in RTDS ................................................................................16
7 Block Diagram showing operation of OLTC.....................................................................17
8 Implementation of tap changing operation in RTDS .........................................................18
9 Tap changing power transformer. ......................................................................................18
10 Block Diagram showing operation of SCB .......................................................................19
11 SCB installed in field .........................................................................................................19
12 Block Diagram showing operation of SVR .......................................................................20
13 Implementation of tap changing operation in RTDS .........................................................21
14 SVR installed in field .........................................................................................................21
15 Block diagram of PV system modeled...............................................................................22
16 Control of real and reactive power of PV inverter .............................................................23
17 Flow chart of Incremental Conductance MPPT Algorithm ...............................................24
18 German Low Voltage Interconnection Standard Curve.....................................................26
19 Volt-Var Curve ..................................................................................................................27
20 Volt-pf curve ......................................................................................................................28
21 Real Power matching at feeder 2 substation ......................................................................31
22 Breaker currents for Phase A, B and C ..............................................................................32
viii
23 Recloser currents for Phase A, B and C .............................................................................32
24 Recloser voltages for Phase A,B and C .............................................................................33
25 PV power profile ................................................................................................................35
26 Load profile ........................................................................................................................35
27 Voltage profile with no regulation for LPV case ...............................................................36
28 Voltage profile for independent operation of devices for LPV case .................................37
29 Voltage profile for simultaneous operation of devices for LPV case ................................38
30 Voltage profile with no regulation for DPV case ..............................................................39
31 Voltage profile for independent operation of devices for DPV case .................................39
32 Voltage profile for simultaneous operation of devices for DPV case ...............................40
33 Tap operations of OLTC for simultaneous operation of all devices for DPV case ...........41
34 Load v/s PV power variation .............................................................................................43
35 Voltage profile of feeder for scenario 1 with various methods of voltage regulation by PV
inverter ...............................................................................................................................44
inverter ...............................................................................................................................45
inverter ...............................................................................................................................45
38 Voltage profile for 8 days from recloser measurement unit ..............................................48
39 PV Power profile used for feeder 2....................................................................................48
ix
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
PV: Photovoltaics
IEEE: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
CAPS: Center for Advanced Power Systems
SUNGRIN: Sunshine State Solar Grid Initiative
RTDS: Real Time Digital Simulator
DOE: Department of Energy
SETP: Solar Energy Technologies Program
EERE: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
OLTC: On Load Tap Changing Transformer
SCB: Switched Capacitor Banks
SVR: Step Voltage Regulator
EMTP: Electromagnetic Transient Program
LV: Low Voltage
pf: Power Factor
MW: Mega Watt
Volt: Voltage
VAR: Volt Ampere Reactive
kWh: Kilo Watt Hour
ANSI: American National Standards Institute
SCADA: Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition
EMS: Energy Management Systems
PHIL: Power Hardware-In-Loop
CHIL: Controller Hardware-In-Loop
DR: Distributed Resources
DG: Distributed Generation
STATCOM: Static Compensator
HVDC: High Voltage Direct Current
SVC: Static VAR Compensator
FACTS: Flexible Alternating Current Transmission Systems
I/O: Input/Output
DC: Direct Current
MVA: Mega Voltage Ampere
kV: Kilo Volts
p.u.: Per Unit
PCC: Point of Common Coupling
MPPT: Maximum Power Point Tracking
PLL: Phase Locked Loop
x
ABSTRACT
Increased penetration of solar PV has risen the level of concern among utilities about its
potential impact on the system operation and reliability. Reverse powerflow, rise in voltage,
unnecessary operations of traditional voltage regulation devices, harmonics, PV islanding,
sympathy trips during feeder faults, flicker, etc. are some of the concerns mentioned in 1547.7
which deals with impact of distributed generation (like solar PV) on distribution feeders. One of
the main concerns for utility is voltage on a feeder and its regulation.
The studies conducted in this thesis go beyond the current IEEE 1547 practices, ‘The
Standard for Interconnecting Distributed Resources with Electric Power Systems’, which gives
recommended practices for DG interconnection. Current standards limit PV Inverters to inject
real power only and not participate in voltage regulation. But with several studies showing the
benefits of using the readily available capability of inverter to inject reactive power and regulate
voltage is being explored which will pave way for the new IEEE 1547 amended guidelines
which would allow PV inverters to regulate voltage and supply reactive power. For this study,
the PV inverters were allowed to supply reactive power and regulate voltage. In doing so, an
investigation of interactions between PV inverters and traditional voltage regulation equipments
like tap changing transformer (OLTC), switched capacitor bank (SCB), and step voltage
regulator (SVR) were made. The study was conducted on two distinct Florida utility distribution
feeders that have high penetration of PV and voltage regulation devices. One of the feeder has
single large PV plant (15 MW) while the other feeder has large multiple PV plants (2.6 MW)
which amounts to penetration levels of 100% and 35% respectively. Distribution feeder were
modeled on an EMTP tool (RTDS) and validated against data provided by the utility. The study
focuses on how different PV penetration levels and load levels on the feeder impact operation of
voltage regulation devices. In doing so, the study aims at using different operating constraints for
OLTC, SCB and SVR. Some candidate methods of operating constraints for OLTC, SCB and
SVR are voltage, time, temperature, real power flow, reactive power flow, and combination of
any methods mentioned above. As mentioned before, in going beyond the current scope of IEEE
1547, PV inverters were allowed to supply reactive power and different candidate methods
currently available on inverter like constant Q, power factor, voltage based and advanced control
strategies like German LV std. curve, Volt-VAR curve, Volt-pf curve were used to investigate
xi
and mitigate any possible interactions between devices. Possible best suited methods and
practices were laid out incase there is an unnecessary interaction between PV inverters and
OLTC, SCB and SVR for each feeder. The major observations from this study are:
1. Allowing PV inverters to regulate voltage may not necessarily increase or decrease
interactions with voltage regulation devices.
2. Some of the key factors which influence interactions between voltage regulation devices
and PV are feeder circuit layout (e.g. overhead line vs. cable,), voltage level, length of
feeder, etc), nature of loads, location and size of loads, and location of PV.
3. Based on the cases studied within this work no common trait for defining high
penetration PV circuit studies could found.
4. No correlation between PV penetration level, measured by the amount of installed PV
capacity vs. feeder loading, and the severity of impact of PV on the circuit operational
characteristics could be found in this study.
Concluding from this work is recommended to establish a new set of metrics which truly
define the impact severity of PV on distribution feeders, since the current metric of PV
penetration level is clearly inadequate.
xii
CHAPTER ONE
OVERVIEW
1.1 Motivation
The demand for renewable energy installation has increased significantly over the past
few decades due to increasing concern of diminishing fossil fuels. Wind power, Solar
Photovoltaic (PV), concentrated solar, geothermal, biomass account for major types of renewable
generation installation. With the available amount of solar irradiation available, Solar PV is one
of very enticing types of generation. Cost of production of PV panels is reducing each year
considerably. Power electronics based generation coupled with storage has also drawn a lot of
spotlight for solar PVs. Utilities are providing incentives to have a very high power purchase
agreement (29-30 cents/kWh) compared with national electricity usage rate of (11-12
cents/kWh). Although PV systems require high integration cost, there is minimal maintenance
and operation cost. This has caused a large interest in utility customers and private entities to
install PV systems at transmission and distribution level. The vast majority of PV generation
being installed is connected to the electric power system, and a significant portion of this is being
connected at the distribution system level.
Utilities are facing faster growth of PV plants than they can cope with. Integration of
relatively small units in low voltage feeders at low-penetration cases is not of a concern and are
approved easily, however, large plants and high penetration scenarios are a cause of concern. In
such cases, rigorous impact studies are necessary before approving the project so that any future
unwanted situation can be avoided. As the penetration level of PV increases, reverse power flows
on distribution feeders will be more common and possibly increase the voltage levels of the
distribution feeders that could even exceed the limits defined by various standards such as ANSI
C84.1 or IEEE 1547. To make things more complicated, the intermittency of the sunlight may
cause voltage fluctuations that could have direct impact on feeder voltage, which may lead to
frequent operation of voltage regulating equipment. Traditional voltage regulation equipments
like On-Load Tap Changing transformer (OLTC), Switched Capacitor Bank (SCB), and Step
Voltage Regulator (SVR) are slow to operate and usually are very sensitive to the number of
operations. Most of these equipments require maintenance or replacement after certain number
of switching/regulation operations. Large amounts of PV penetration combined with
1
intermittency of PV systems on the feeder may cause excessive and unnecessary operations of
these equipments. If PV systems are also allowed to regulate voltage on feeder going beyond the
current scope of IEEE 1547, not only can there be excessive operations, but there may be
dynamic interactions between PV inverters and OLTC, SCB and SVR which may cause these
equipments to operate even more and reduce the lifetime of these equipments. This will cause
increase in maintenance, equipment replacement costs and utility personnel at hand to deal with
the issue.
This thesis concerns with studying the issue of dynamic interactions between PV
inverters and traditional voltage regulation devices on distribution feeder with high penetration
of solar PV. Two different Florida utility feeders with large PV penetration are used to study the
issue mentioned above.
1.2 SUNGRIN Project

The work done in this thesis is supported by the SUNGRIN project. “Sunshine State
Solar Grid Initiative” is funded by the U.S. Dept. of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy (EERE), Solar Energy Technologies Program (SETP), under High-
Penetration Solar Deployment Project award no. DE-EE0004682. The project has Center for
Advanced Power Systems (CAPS), Florida State University as lead with University of Central
Florida as university partner. The project also has partnered with six utilities in Florida, namely
Gainesville Regional Electric (GRU), Jacksonville Electric Authority (JEA), Lakeland Electric,
Orlando Utilities Commission (OUC), Florida Power and Light (FPL), Florida Municipal and
Power Association (FMPA). The project also has 3 industrial partners namely SMA, OSI Soft
and AMEC. The overreaching objective of the project is to provide research, development, field
verification, and demonstration efforts in support of achieving successful integration of high
penetration levels of solar photovoltaic (PV) energy in the electric power grid, for both large
central station and distributed sources. The project has several goals and objectives being to:
1. Characterize and better understand the solar variation
2. Understand the impacts on the electric power grid of high penetration levels of PV
3. Develop solutions that enable successful integration of relatively high levels of PV
4. Disseminate information and raise awareness
2
The scope begins with extensive data collection and characterization to establish a
reliable and reasonably well-understood set of model inputs for solar irradiation and solar PV
system output variation at different locations around the state. Models will be developed to aid
in understanding grid impact and will be based on different solar-inverter configurations and
interconnection scenarios and variations in distribution circuit configurations and levels of PV
penetration. A range of installation scenarios based on actual utility partner projects will be
utilized to explore major issues of interest under the Department of Energy’s Solar Energy
Technologies Program, including:
Voltage regulation schemes
Unintentional islanding prevention
Intentional islanding/microgrid operation
False inverter trips due to utility line transients
Reverse power flow in secondary network distribution systems
Reactive power control schemes for multiple inverters
Fault contribution, coordinated protection and operations with other protection equipment
Effects of variable cloud cover on system stability
Secure communications and control protocols between distributed PV systems and

SCADA/EMS.
Studies heavily rely on modeling and simulation, but, based on real installed or planned
utility projects, which will also provide the real data necessary to support model validation.
EMTP type simulation tools, specifically RTDS/RSCAD and/or PSCAD/EMTDC will be used to
build full three-phase models to study the effects of unbalanced loads and faults, and where it
important to capture transient behavior. Hardware-in-the-loop simulation will be employed in the
laboratory where new technology solutions (converter-storage systems or controls) require
systems test and evaluation. Where possible, promising methods and prototypes will be field
tested, with utility partner cooperation.
3
1.3 Literature Review
Total installed solar PV is growing significantly, an average of 60% per year globally and
53% per year in the U.S. over the last 5 years, due to steadily declining prices, renewable
portfolio standards and goals, and state and federal incentives [1]. The vast majority of PV
generation being installed is connected to the electric power system, and a significant portion of
this is being connected at the distribution system level. Increase in PV penetration has become a
concern to utilities in regard to system operation and reliability. Integration of residential and
relatively small units is not a concern and is approved easily. But large amounts of residential PV
can lead to issues regarding rise in voltage and injection of harmonics at distribution transformer
level, fuse coordination as discussed in [2]. In [3], Masoum et al. discuss the reduction in
reliability and operation of distribution transformers when large amounts of roof top PV is
integrated into distribution networks using a realistic 97 node residential network. On the other
hand, large plants and high penetration scenarios of these large plants on distribution system may
be of bigger concern. Issues pertaining to voltage regulation practices, voltage fluctuations,
protection issues such as sympathetic tripping, fuse coordination, Islanding, grounding, transient
overvoltage due to penetration of PV are discussed in [4]. Rigorous studies should be conducted
before installing PV systems which amount to high penetration before approving a project. IEEE
1547.7 which is the Draft Guide to Conducting Distribution Impact Studies for Distributed
Resource Interconnection is in the process of formulating such a guide that can be used to study
the impact of PV in such scenarios.
Maintaining acceptable voltage profile in distribution feeder is of utmost concern for
utility. In [5], Liu et al. detail issues of voltage performance and regulation for distribution feeder
with high penetration PV. The current IEEE 1547, “Standard for Interconnecting Distributed
Resources with Electric Power Systems” allows PV systems to inject real power only. But PV
inverters do have capability to provide reactive power. Several publications show how injecting
reactive power from PV inverters can be useful and utilizable on distribution systems. Going
beyond the current scope of 1547.8, “Recommended Practice for Establishing Methods and
Procedures that Provide Supplemental Support for Implementation Strategies for Expanded Use
of IEEE Standard 1547”, several publications have shown the benefits of using reactive power In
[6], Varma et al. describe how to use PV inverter as STATCOM for preventing instability of
induction motor. In [7], Toodeji et al. investigate use of PV inverter as STATCOM to extract
4
maximum utilization from PV systems. In [8], Varma et al. study the benefits of using PV
inverter for 24 hour operation as opposed only during day light. Inverters can generate reactive
power equivalent to its rating if necessary. Many more studies conducted also indicate that PV
inverters can be utilized to generate leading or lagging reactive power whenever necessary. [9]-
[11] gives various methods of control of reactive power from PV inverters.
The distribution system is largely a radial system designed to distribute electric energy
from the substation out to loads on the circuit and not to receive generation from out on the
circuit. With increasing PV penetration, reverse power flow on distribution feeders will become
more common and possibly increase voltage levels of distribution feeders that could even exceed
the limits defined by standards such as ANSI C84.1. To make things more complicated, the
intermittency of the sunlight may cause voltage fluctuations that could have direct impact on
feeder voltage, which may lead to frequent operation of voltage regulating equipment as
mentioned in [12]. To understand the extent to which various issues arise and how to effectively
remedy or avoid issues while substantially increasing penetration levels of solar PV on
distribution circuits, a number of actual utility distribution circuits are being modeled and
analyzed. In [13], Meeker et al. discuss the importance of modeling and studying distribution
circuits in Florida with high penetration PV. In [14], Mather and Neal, shows the results of
integrating high penetration of PV into Southern California feeders. In [15], Narang and
Hambrick discuss the efforts of understanding high penetration of PV in the Arizona Public
Service System.
One issue that comes in almost every discussion is the impact high penetration of PV has
on distribution system voltage profile and regulation. As mentioned in [4], large amounts of real
power injection by PV systems can cause higher than desired voltages on feeder, undesirable
interactions with line drop compensators and reverse-power tap changer runaway condition.
While inverters are able to regulate voltage, allowing so may also cause unexpected implications
on feeder characteristics. In [16], Pyo et al. describe a method to operate PV systems with VAR
support so as to regulate voltage on IEEE-13 Bus radial distribution feeder. In [17], Liu et al.
show coordinated control of PV with energy storage and OLTC to mitigate voltage rise for high
penetration scenario on a test distribution feeder. McNutt et al study the impact of high
penetration PV on distribution system voltage regulation in a Sacramento Municipal Utility
District community in [18]. In [19], Craciun et al. simulate different voltage regulation
5
techniques like constant power factor, constant reactive power, static droop curve on a European
Low Voltage Benchmark system. Many of studies conducted are usually based on test feeders
which may not sometimes accurately depict system operation. Moreover each utility’s operation
techniques are different from another. A conclusive statement cannot be drawn from a set of
study cases. Scenarios in which high penetration of PV may improve voltage profile on the
feeder may occur. And scenarios where in high penetration of PV may cause undesirable voltage
profile may also present. Several factors influence the voltage on feeder such has size of PV,
location of PV, location of load, type of load, feeder X/R ratio, location of voltage regulation
devices etc. It becomes hard to assess the impact of PV on voltage since most of these factors
vary simultaneously. Thus each feeder needs to be studied independently to assess the impact of
PV penetration on distribution feeders.
Leveraging the work from the SUNGRIN project, several utility feeders in state of
Florida are being modeled in real time electromagnetic transient analysis tool, RTDSTM (Real
Time Digital Simulator) to study the effects of high penetration of PV on distribution feeders.
The end goal of modeling these circuits in RTDS is to conduct power hardware-in-loop (PHIL)
and controller hardware-in-loop (CHIL) studies. The Manitoba HVDC Research Center in
Winnipeg, Canada developed the real time digital simulator (RTDS) in 1993 [20]. RTDSTM
exploits intercommunication between multiple processors to partition the computations
associated with large electrical systems, controls, and corresponding simulations. The
computational power of massively parallel processors minimizes the time step per calculation to
some tolerable “real-time” time frame. In [21], Langston et al. detail experiences and challenges
faced in modeled a real time simulation of integrated power system for an all-electric destroyer
class ship. In [22], Langston et al. detailed testing of a 500 kW PV inverter in power hardware-
in-loop environment using RTDS simulator.
For this thesis, two Florida based utility feeders with high penetration PV were modeled
and analyzed. Various case studies were performed to look into analyzing feeder characteristics,
studying voltage profile performance, investigating dynamic interactions between PV inverters
and traditional voltage regulation equipments. [23], [24], [25] explain the author’s progression of
work towards studying impacts of high penetration PV on distribution systems.
6
CHAPTER TWO
SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
The study conducted in this thesis supports the efforts of SUNGRIN project. Two Florida
utility feeder models were used. The feeders are very distinct and have few similarities between
them. Both feeders have large amounts of PV installed.
2.1 Distribution Feeder 1

Feeder 1 is a 24 kV distribution feeder shown in Figure 1. The feeder length is about 9
miles. The feeder has 12.6 MW AC (15 MW DC) single large PV plant located at 4.8 miles from
substation. The feeder connects to the transmission system through an 18MVA 230 kV -24 kV
transformer. The feeder primarily serves rural loads and some industrial loads. The feeder
maximum loading is in the range of 10-11 MVA. The PV plant located at 4.8 miles from
substation feeds the power through a recloser which records power, voltage and current data for
15 min averages. The breaker that feeds the circuit also records power, voltage and current
averages for every 15 min. The PV plant has 200,000 solar panels and has 20-630 kW inverters.
The feeder does not have any voltage regulation equipments like tap changing transformers,
switched capacitor banks or step voltage regulator. The PV plant has been in operation for about
three and half years. The average yearly output of PV plant is around 2 MW. The PV penetration
on the feeder exceeds 100 % for most hours when PV is producing power. This presents a unique
case to study since this limit exceeds the 15% circuit penetration threshold.
7
Loads 6
Loads 5
12.6 MW
PV
Substation
Loads 4
230kV - 24kV
Loads 3
Loads 1 Loads 2
Figure 1 One line diagram of feeder 1
Feeder 2 is a 12.47 kV distribution feeder shown in fig xx. The feeder connects to the
substation at 138 kV level through a 22 MVA, 138 kV – 12.47 kV transformer. There is a
recloser located at 2.2 miles from substation which the feeder splits into two laterals which
extends another 2 miles. The feeder has 2.6 MW of distributed PV systems. There are two 1-MW
PV systems located next to each other on one lateral. There is another 250 kW distributed
smaller roof top units on the same lateral. On the other lateral, there are two large roof top PV
systems of 250 kW and 100 kW totaling to 350 kW. The feeder has a step voltage regulator
around 0.4 miles from substation. The step voltage regulator (SVR) has ±10% regulation with 32
8
steps with a 2 minute operation time. The feeder also has four switched capacitor banks (3- 900
kVAR and 1- 600 kVAR) installed, totaling to 3.3 MVAR. The capacitor banks operate based
on MVAR flow at substation. If MVAR flow into feeder is greater than 600 kVAR, based on
priority, a capacitor bank is turned ON and if VAR flow is greater than 300 kVAR to substation,
a capacitor bank is turned OFF. Feeder mainly has residential and commercial type loads.
Voltage, current, and power measurements are collected from meters at substation and recloser.
The feeder average loading is around 5 MW with peak around 6-7 MW. Thus the PV penetration
on this feeder amounts to around 35 % which is still above the 15 % circuit penetration
threshold. Figure 2 shows the location of PV plants, capacitor banks and load distribution.
Figure 2 One line diagram of feeder 2
9
Feeder 1 and 2 are good candidates to study the effects of high penetration of PV on
distribution circuits. But percentage PV penetration should not be the only factor to assess a
feeder has high penetration PV feeder. Feeder 2 and feeder 1 have very different characteristics.
Feeder 1 has large single PV system which has a penetration of more than 100% while feeder 2
has distributed PV plants which accounts to only 35 % penetration. Feeder 1 is connected to a
strong transmission bus (230 kV) while feeder 2 is connected to transmission at 138 kV level.
Feeder 1 has no voltage regulation equipment currently installed on the circuit while feeder 2 has
step voltage regulator and 3.3 MVARs of capacitor banks installed on the circuit.
10
CHAPTER THREE
MODELING OF SYSTEM
Most utilities model their distribution circuits on commercially available tools like
SynerGEE, CYMDIST, PSS/E, etc. Most of these tools are load flow based tools. Within the
scope of the project, there was a need to build distribution model in EMTP tool to conduct
various types of studies. Modeling of feeders was done in RTDS in which feeder models can run
in real time which will facilitate the use of hardware in loop tests in future.
3.1 RTDS Simulator

The need for modeling and studying systems in real time in an EMTP tool has gained
more and more weight and is being considered by many institutions. In 1993, the Manitoba
HVDC Research Center in Winnipeg, Canada developed the real time digital simulator (RTDS).
RTDS is a power system simulator that solves electromagnetic transient simulations in real time.
The simulator is capable of conducting studies a range of power system studies concerning to
Smart grid applications, Distributed generation – wind, solar, fuel cells, True hard real time
response for closed-loop testing, Protective relay testing – line, transformer, busbar, generator,
feeders, Control system testing- HVDC, SVC, FACTS. It can also simulate large scale real time
simulations using powerful parallel processing hardware and custom I/O with advanced and
comprehensive user interface along with extensive, well proven power and control system
component libraries.
3.2 Modeling of Feeder in RTDS

Before we look into modeling of feeders in RTDS, some challenges that were
encountered during the modeling process is outlined. As mentioned before, large scale modes of
power systems can be modeled to run in real time in RTDS. Models can span over several racks
which are interconnected through a fast back plane. Signal transfer from one rack to another
takes 1 time step. Typical time step used for simulation is 50 µs. Since RTDS uses travelling
wave algorithm to model transmission lines, the length of a line should correspond to time step.
Thus a 50 µs time step corresponds to a 15 km line length (line length = time step * speed of
light [LL=50 µs * 3*108]). If a 50 µs time-step is used, to model systems using 2 racks, a
11
transmission line of at least 15km length has be to there in the model. An alternative to using
transmission lines is using cross-rack transformer models. But they introduce unnecessary
inductance in the system. Distribution feeders seldom are 15 kms long. Most distribution feeders
are 3-7 miles long. Even if they are, they cannot be split into two racks since splitting a line
would not be long enough. Thus distribution feeders have to be modeled in one rack if they have
to run in real time environment. The following two subsections discuss the modeling of two
feeders in RTDS for real time analysis. Most of system modeling was done using the vast library
of power system components provided by RTDS. User written models were used where RTDS
did not have a specific model to represent the equipment. Power system components like AC
source, breakers, RL branches, relays, PI sections, transformers, current source injection model,
constant power load, induction motor load, capacitor banks, capacitors, resistors were used for
modeling. Several control blocks available in RTDS libraries like tap changer controller, signal
processing, signal generators, comparators, mathematical blocks were used.
3.2.1 Modeling of Feeder 1
Data for the feeder 1 regarding overhead lines, loads, PV system, substation and various
data sheets was provided by the utility. Line information like type of cable used, line length for
each section was provided by the utility. Substation data for transformers, breakers, relays,
transmission line impedance was provided. Although exact load data was not available, average
loading information was provided. Further a PQ meter was installed on feeder breaker through
which actual feeder loading data was available.
Exact load distribution was not available but an estimate provided by the utility which
was used. PV system data regarding PV panel manufacturer and number of panels, inverter data
sheet, and number of inverters were all provided. As mentioned previously, feeder models have
to be built on one rack to run in real time. Thus all the nodes of a distribution feeder cannot be
modeled. From the line data provided, the section impedances were calculated. Since distribution
feeder sections are relatively small (>1mile), line charging can be neglected and only the
resistance and inductance of the line is modeled. The line sections are modeled using RTDS “RL
branches”. Seven line sections were modeled for feeder 1. The transmission lines feeding into the
substation are modeled as source with impedance looking back into the transmission system.
12
Loads 6
Loads 5
PV
1
Loads 4
Substation
SCB
OLTC 230kV - 24kV
Loads 3
Loads 1 Loads 2
Figure 3 One rack model of feeder 1.
RTDS transformer model was used to model substation transformer with transformer
data provided by utility. Load composition for any feeder is hard to obtain. But since it is known
that the feeder serves mostly rural loads, using the information provided in “Electric Power
Distribution Handbook”, loads were modeled as a mixture of constant power and constant
impedance type at each load point in the ration of 60:40 percentages. Six loads were modeled for
the feeder. 60% of total load was modeled before the PV plant and remaining after the PV. Four
loads were modeled before the PV plant and two modeled after the PV plant. There are currently
no voltage regulation equipments installed on the feeder. But for the study some modification
13
were made to the system. Substation transformer was modeled as tap changing transformer. A
switched capacitor bank was added to the feeder where the PV system is connected. Modeling of
these equipments will be talked in detail in the flowing sections. The 12.6 MW PV plant was
modeled as a single large system. The modeling of PV system will be discussed in following
sections. Figure 3 shows one line diagram of feeder model.
3.2.2 Modeling of Feeder 2
A similar approach was used to model feeder 2. The feeder model built in SynerGEE was
provided by utility. This model is a detailed model which consists of close to 1200 line sections
and around 800 distribution transformers. Since it is not practical to model all 1200 nodes in
RTDS and not required to capture the model in such detail, two reduced node models were built
in RTDS. Data regarding line impedance, voltage ratings, transformer ratings, circuit
configuration, and regulation equipment control schemes and settings were provided by the
utility and used to model the circuit. A detailed non-real time model utilizing 3 racks on the
RTDS was built to reduce feeder nodes. The model has 22 line sections with load on each
section. Loads were aggregated at each line section. Four PV models were built. 2- 1MW PV
units, a 250 kW unit and a 350 kW unit. Figure 4 shows three rack model built in RTDS.
To make use of real time capability, a second one rack model was built to run in real
time. This one-rack real time model is used to conduct the studies described here. Figure 5 shows
the one line diagram of feeder 2 which depicts the load aggregation made for one rack model.
Figure 6 shows the one rack feeder model built in the RTDS. The feeder was split into 8 line
sections with 7 aggregated loads modeled. Line sections are modeled as RL branches. All
transformers within a specific section were grouped together and were aggregated at each bus as
one single load. The loads were modeled as a mixture of constant power and constant impedance
types. Two PV systems were modeled. PV system 1 which is 2.25 MW is modeled at the end of
one of the laterals. This represents aggregation of two 1 MW units and several smaller systems in
close proximity to each other. The second PV system modeled was 350kW located around 2.6
miles from the substation located on the other lateral. SVR and SCB’s were modeled and set to
operate based on the data provided by the utility.
14
Figure 4 Three rack non-real time model of feeder 2 in RTDS
Figure 5 Load aggregation for one rack model of feeder 2
15
Figure 6 One rack model of feeder 2 in RTDS
3.3 Modeling Voltage Regulation Equipments

Delivering voltage within a suitable range is one of utility’s core responsibilities.
Distribution circuit voltage drop can be attributed to the current flowing through the line
impedances. Most utilities in the U.S. follow the ANSI voltage limit standards (ANSI C84.1)
which specifies two range of acceptable voltage ranges for medium voltage systems (greater than
1kV and less than 100 kV). The two ranges of operation are, ‘Range A’ (long term operation
limit): Most utilities design their electric systems to provide service voltage within these limits.
This is the range under which a feeder should operate for most of duration. The upper limit of
operation is +5% while the lower limit is -2.5%. ‘Range B’ which is allowed for short duration
requires systems to operate within an upper limit of +5.8% and a lower limit of -5%. However
most utilities do not follow these limits for their primary distribution systems. Thus it is required
in most scenarios to install voltage regulation devices on distribution feeder to maintain
acceptable voltage limits. These equipments and their control operation need to be modeled so as
to capture the behavior of the entire system. The following section describes the various voltage
regulation equipments and its modeling technique done in RTDS.
16
3.3.1 On-load Tap Changing Transformer (OLTC)
Transformers equipped with on-Load Tap-Changers have been main components of

power systems for nearly 80 years. The OLTCs allow voltage regulation and/or phase shifting by
varying the transformer ratio under load without interruption. The OLTCs changes the ratio of
transformer by adding turns or subtracting turns from either primary or secondary winding. Such
power transformers are equipped with regulating or tap winding systems. Thermal conditions of
the transformer cannot be modeled in RTDS. Power transformers with OLTC are available with
different modes of operation and operation times. The transformer regulation is usually based on
a voltage range. The transformer can regulate up to ±15 % in coarse (10 steps or less) or in fine
adjustments (up to 32 steps). The regulating time can vary from several seconds to minutes.
Error! Reference source not found.Error! Reference source not found. shows block diagram
describing the operation of OLTC.
Voltage at Range check Wait for Request for Tap Up/Down

specific location (VU ≤ V ≤ VL) ‘X’ sec tap change ‘Y’ sec delay
Figure 7 Block Diagram showing operation of OLTC
The transformer operates based on a voltage range measured on the secondary. If voltage
at the point of measurement is out of range for a specified amount of time ‘X’ second (30-180
seconds), a request for tap change is made. The transformer then adjusts its tap to regulate the
voltage. Each tap adjustment can take ‘Y’ seconds (1-10 seconds) depending on transformer. The
transformer changes its tap position accordingly and continues to do so taking ‘Y’ seconds
between each tap change until the voltage returns to the acceptable range or reaches its
maximum/minimum position. Figure 8 shows implementation of tap changing operation in
RTDS. Figure 9 shows in power OLTC.
17
Figure 8 Implementation of tap changing operation in RTDS
Figure 9 Tap changing power transformer.
3.3.2 Switched Capacitor Banks (SCB)
Although power transformers with tap changers can regulate the voltage,
replacing an existing transformer to correct the voltage may become expensive. An effective and
low cost alternative for maintaining desired voltage profile and improving power factor and
18
power flow of transmission and distribution systems is capacitor banks. Capacitor banks can be
fixed or switched. If fixed, they are always connected to the system and supply VARs. Switched
capacitor banks on the other hand either switch intelligently or can be remotely operated to turn
on whenever voltage and power factor needs to be corrected. Switched capacitor banks normally
are switched daily as the system loads and voltage vary during the day. Although capacitor
banks can be switched ON/OFF, excessive operation of these devices are not desirable.
Energizing capacitor banks will cause unwanted, high frequency, voltage and current transients
that may cause nuisance tripping of adjustable-speed drives, computer network problems, and
customer equipment damage or failure.
Operating Range check Wait for Request for Bank ON/OFF

constraint (RU ≤ R ≤ RL) ‘X’ sec bank ON/OFF ‘Y’ sec delay
Figure 10 Block Diagram showing operation of SCB
Figure 11 SCB installed in field
Voltage, real power, reactive power, time, temperature are some of the methods that can
be selected for switching of capacitor banks. In RTDS, capacitor banks are modeled using the
capacitor components of power system library. The capacitor banks are shunt connected either in
wye or delta connection. shows block diagram for operation of SCB. The switching operator
19
monitors the parameter at measurement point. If the limit bounds of parameter are violated for
‘X’ seconds, a request for switching is made. The switching continues taking ‘Y’ second
between each switching operation until the parameter under measurement is within limits.
Error! Reference source not found.Error! Reference source not found. shows in switched
capacitor bank installed on a distribution feeder.
3.3.3 Step Voltage Regulator (SVR)
Step voltage regulators are generally medium voltage mechanical automatic

voltage regulators typically installed on distribution feeders. Step voltage regulators are another
alternative to correct voltage on distribution feeders. Step voltage regulators are usually installed
on long feeders and feeders with high loading where voltage drops can be severe. SVRs typically
operate based on a voltage range. Typical step voltage regulators can regulate voltage at either
primary or secondary to ±15 % with 32 steps. Figure 12 shows block diagram describing the
operation of SVR.
Voltage at Range check Wait for Request for Tap Up/Down

specific location (VU ≤ V ≤ VL) ‘X’ sec tap change ‘Y’ sec delay
Figure 12 Block Diagram showing operation of SVR
If voltage at the point of measurement is out of range for a specified amount of time ‘X’
seconds (30-120 seconds), a request for tap change is made. The transformer then adjusts its tap
to regulate the voltage. Each tap adjustment can take ‘Y’ seconds (1-10 seconds) depending on
transformer. The transformer changes its tap position accordingly and continues to do so taking
‘Y’ seconds between each tap change until the voltage returns to the acceptable range or reaches
its maximum/minimum position. Figure 13 shows implementation of SVR regulation in RTDS.
Figure 14 shows in SVR installed on distribution feeder.
20
Figure 13 Implementation of tap changing operation in RTDS
Figure 14 SVR installed in field
3.4 Modeling of PV System

Figure 15 shows PV system setup used in this study. The PV array is connected to a
capacitor which acts as DC bus for the inverter. The inverter is connected to DC bus and is
connected on the AC side to the grid through a dedicated transformer. PV arrays are usually
characterized by plotting the array’s output voltage, V versus current, I which is known as the V-
21
I characteristic curve. Solar irradiation and temperature both impact the output of PV panels and
the array output changes as a function of these two variables. Since input power at inverter
source end will be intermittent due to changes in solar irradiation on the panels, it is important to
maintain a constant ‘DC link’ voltage so that a good quality power with minimal ripple can be
supplied to grid. This ‘DC link’ voltage is maintained by making use of maximum power point
tracking algorithm (MPPT). The MPPT technique used is the incremental conductance method.
Figure 17 shows the flow chart for incremental conductance MPPT method. The PV array
component model in RTDS is used to model the PV strings. The model has the option to input
the number of panels in series and parallel. The panels are modeled using single diode theory.
The panel also has options to input data which is typically available from PV panel
manufacturers like short circuit current (Isc), current at maximum power (Im), open-circuit
voltage (Voc), voltage at maximum power (Vm), diode ideality factor (n), temperature
dependency factor. For the study, an averaged model of inverter is used since the case studies
conducted do not require a switching model. Also use of a switching model requires running
inverter models in small time step environment (2 µs) which consumes large processing power.
The inverter controls are modeled using direct-quadrature (DQ) reference frame method. The
purpose of using DQ method is to simplify the system which reduces three AC quantities to two
DC quantities. The ‘d-axis’ controls the real power of inverter while ‘q-axis’ controls reactive
power component. Figure 16 shows the control of real and reactive power of the inverter. The
inverter is current limited to 1.2 p.u
Idc Va, Vb, Vc
Iapv Ia, Ib, Ic
Sin
Inverter Vapv
PV Array Ibpv Step Up

Tin DC link
Vdc And Vbpv
Transformer Grid
Icpv
capacitor Controls Vcpv
Figure 15 Block diagram of PV system modeled
22
Va Va
Va Vd Vdc Incremental
Three Vb ABC-DQ RMS Vterm
Vb conductance Vref Vb
Phase Ph transformation
Vq meter
Idc
PLL Vc MPPT Vc
Vc
Ph Iqmax
Idmax Vset
Vdc
+ PI Iq
+ PI Idc
X
Pdc
÷ Id - Controller
- Controller Vterm
Vref Vdc Vd -Iqmax
Idmin
Iapv
Idmax Id
Vapv, Vbpv, Vcpv
Ppv
Inverter MVA rating
Real Power DQ-ABC Ibpv
Three Idmin
Iq transformation
Phase P&Q priority Icpv
Ppv Iqmax
Iapv, Ibpv, Icpv meter Qpv mode
-Iqmax
Ph
Figure 16 Control of real and reactive power of PV inverter
Figure 16 also shows the control and operation of inverter and PV system. A solar
irradiation, Sin and air temperature, Tin is given as inputs to PV panels. The PV panels generate
a voltage, Vdc and current Idc from module. A three phase ‘Phase Locked Loop’ (PLL) module is
used to lock phase of PV system to the grid side. The terminal voltages at PCC are ran through
an ABC-DQ transformation block to obtain the reference voltages Vd and Vq in DQ reference
frame. To maximize the power output from PV panels, the incremental conductance MPPT
method is used. The MPPT outputs a reference DC voltage Vref to maintain a constant voltage at
capacitor. This Vdc is compared with actual dc link voltage which is input to a PI controller
which determines the PV panel current output at inverter Idc. This Idc is used to generate a ‘d-
axis’ current reference, Id which is the real power part of inverter.
Since inverters are required to operate with unity power i.e. generating ‘zero’ reactive
power, the current ‘Iq’ which determines the reactive current of inverter can be set to zero. But
for the scope of this study, going beyond the norms of IEEE 1547, the inverters are allowed to
regulate voltage at its terminal. This allows for various methods of control of reactive power
from inverter. Several methods of reactive power control methods for inverter will be discussed
in the following sections. Figure 16 shows one such method which is the set point voltage
control method. For this method, the measured voltage at inverter’s PCC, Vterm is compared
with a set point voltage Vset which is then integrated using a PI controller to generate a ‘q-axis’
23
current reference, Iq which is the reactive power part of inverter. The inverter reference currents
Id and Iq are converted to 3 phase currents Iapv, Ibpv and Icpv using a DQ-ABC transformation
block.
Set Initial V(i), I(i) V(i) = Previous voltage measurement

V(i+1) = Present voltage measurement
I(i) = Previous current measurement
Measure V(i+1), I(i+) I(i+1) = Present current measurement
∆V = Small increment in voltage
dI = I(i+1) - I(i)
dV = V(i+1) – V(i)
Yes
dV = 0 ?
No
Yes dI/dV = Yes

-I(i+1)/V(i+1) dI = 0 ?
?
No No
Yes dI/dV > Yes

-I(i+1)/V(i+1) dI > 0 ?
?
No No
V(i+1) = V(i+1) - ∆V V(i+1) = V(i+1) + ∆V V(i+1) = V(i+1) - ∆V V(i+1) = V(i+1) + ∆V
V(i) = V(i+1)
I(i) = I(i+1)
Figure 17 Flow chart of Incremental Conductance MPPT Algorithm
3.5 Currently Available Voltage Regulation Techniques for PV Inverter

Current 1547 standards do not allow for PV inverters to regulate the voltage at its
terminal. The standard requires PV systems to maintain unity power factor. But PV inverters
have inherent capability to supply reactive power and regulate voltage on feeder. This method of
regulation is extremely fast (3-5 cycles) compared to traditional distribution system voltage
24
regulation devices like OLTC, SCB and SVR. Some of the methods of voltage regulation that are
currently available by various inverter manufactures are listed:
1) Constant power factor mode: The inverter can be set to maintain a fixed power factor
value. The power factor setting can be leading or lagging based on desired voltage profile
to be maintained. The inverter operates with real power priority mode in which first
priority is given to real power and remaining capacity of the inverter is allotted to reactive
power support. The inverter supplies appropriate reactive power so as to maintain
requested power factor. But real power curtailment is used to maintain power factor if
necessary.
2) Constant reactive power mode: The inverter can be set to supply fixed reactive power. The
reactive power can be capacitive or inductive. The inverter operates with real power
priority mode in which first priority is given to real power and remaining capacity of the
inverter is allotted to reactive power support.
3) Set point Voltage control mode: The inverter can be set to maintain the voltage to a fixed
value. The inverter can regulate its reactive power output to maintain the fixed voltage.
3.6 Advanced Voltage Regulation Techniques for PV Inverter

Advanced voltage regulation modes offer better control over most of currently available
regulation techniques. The advanced modes have a curve based operation method as opposed to
fixed operation techniques by currently available regulation modes. Some of the advanced
voltage regulation modes are given below:
3.6.1 German Low-Voltage Std. Curve

The German low voltage interconnection standard (10 kV – 240 V) requires PV system at
point of common coupling to supply reactive power. PV systems are required to generate lagging
(inductive) reactive power to account for rise in voltage due to injection of real power. The
amount of reactive power required to be supplied is based on a curve shown in Figure 18. As
long as the inverter real power output is less than 0.5 p.u., power factor is to be maintained at 1
p.u. If the PV real power exceeds 0.5 p.u., a lagging power factor based on the slope is to be
maintained. The maximum power factor setting can be either 0.90 or 0.95 p.u. lagging.
25
Power factor
Capacitive
(+) Real power
Maintain Voltage
1.0 (p.u.)
0.5 Reduce Voltage

Inductive
(-) 0.90
0.95
Figure 18 German Low Voltage Interconnection Standard Curve
3.6.2 Voltage – Reactive Power Curve
Most of the currently available modes of voltage regulation for inverters are open loop
based control. The advanced control modes are closed loop based control which can regulate the
voltage at point of common coupling to smoother profile without requiring much capacity from
the inverter. One such curve is the Volt-VAR curve shown in Figure 19. Voltage sampling rate
can be set as required (10Hz-1000Hz). The reactive power output of inverter is based on a ‘Z’
style curve. There are five distinct regions of operation for the curve. If voltage at point of
measurement is less than set point V1 (region 1), it indicates that voltage is well below desired
value. Hence, to boost voltage, a fixed leading (capacitive) reactive power is supplied by the
inverter. If voltage lies between set points V1 and V2 (region 2), reactive power generated
depends on the slope of the line. . If voltage at point of measurement between set points V2 and
V3 (region 3), it denotes that feeder voltage is in desired range of operation and hence no
reactive power is required to be generated. Unity power factor will be maintained by inverter
when operating in region 3.
If voltage at point of measurement between set points V3 and V4 (region 4), it denotes
that feeder voltage is slightly above desired range of operation. A lagging (inductive) reactive
power based on slope is supplied by the inverter to bring down the voltage. If voltage at point of
measurement is beyond set point V4 (region 4), it denotes that feeder voltage is excessively high
and a fixed lagging (inductive) reactive power is to be supplied by the inverter. The maximum
26
limits of inverter reactive power can be set based on sizing of inverter and inverter’s capability.
The voltage set points can be selected based on an initial assessment of feeder.
Reactive Power (MVAR)

Boost Voltage
Capacitive
(+)
Maintain Voltage V4
V1 V2 V3 Voltage (p.u.)
Inductive
(-) Reduce Voltage
Figure 19 Volt-Var Curve
3.6.3 Voltage – Power Factor Curve
The Volt-pf curve method of operation is very similar to Volt-VAR curve. Instead of
supplying fixed reactive power based on the curve, a fixed power factor is maintained by the
inverter. The volt-pf curve is shown in Figure 20. Voltage sampling rate can be set as required
(10Hz-1000Hz). The reactive power output of inverter is based on a ‘Z’ style curve. There are
five distinct regions of operation for the curve. If voltage at point of measurement is less than set
point V1 (region 1), it indicates that voltage is well below desired value. Hence, to boost voltage,
a leading (capacitive) power factor is to be maintained by the inverter. If voltage lies between
set points V1 and V2 (region 2), power factor to be maintained depends on the slope of the line.
If voltage at point of measurement between set points V2 and V3 (region 3), it denotes that
feeder voltage is in desired range of operation and hence no reactive power is required to be
generated. Unity power factor will be maintained by inverter when operating in region 3
27
Power factor
Boost Voltage
Capacitive
(+)
Maintain Voltage V4
V1 V2 V3 Voltage (p.u.)
Inductive
(-) Reduce Voltage
Figure 20 Volt-pf curve
If voltage at point of measurement between set points V3 and V4 (region 4), it denotes
that feeder voltage is slightly above desired range of operation. A lagging (inductive) power
factor based on slope is to be maintained by the inverter to bring down the voltage. If voltage at
point of measurement is beyond set point V4 (region 4), it denotes that feeder voltage is
excessively high and a fixed lagging (inductive) power factor is to be supplied by the inverter.
The power factor limits can be selected based on sizing of inverter and inverter’s capability. The
voltage set points can be selected based on an initial assessment of feeder.
3.7 Validation of Feeder Models

With increasing PV penetration on distribution feeders, a thorough analysis is required.
Distribution feeder models should mimic the actual feeder model in order to conduct studies.
Validation of feeder models ensures that the model has been built with enough detail to capture
the required phenomenon. Validation can be done in several ways, but validation should be
based on the type of study undertaken unless data for the specific method of validation is not
available. In order to conduct transient analysis on distribution feeders, short circuit data is
required at various locations on the feeder. To conduct power flow validation, various power
flow measurements are required at key locations on the feeder. Although required measurement
points can be identified on the system, most utilities do not install large amounts of
28
measurements on distribution circuits. Typically voltage and current measurements are available
at substation breaker of the feeder and on some reclosers installed along the feeder. For the
study, validation was conducted using any of the measurements given by the utilities.
3.7.1 Validation of Feeder 1

Feeder 1 did not have any CT, PT installed on it prior to the project. The utility did have
voltage and current measurements from the recloser that was installed at the 12.6 MW PV site.
The utility then added another PQ meter at substation which would record power flows, voltage
and current for every 15 mins. Powerflow validation was conducted for feeder 1 to check for
feeder model accuracy in mimicking the actual feeder voltage profile. The model was adjusted to
several powerflow data sets, picked from actual field measurements which include PV
penetration from 0 MW to 11.83 MW during different times of the day. Voltages and currents
from RTDS model were compared with actual measurements. Table 1 shows the power flow
validation for feeder 1. It can be observed that the model could match the voltages and currents
with acceptable error limits.
Table 1 Powerflow validation data for feeder 1
Breaker Breaker PV voltage (primary at Breaker

Time PV Power Voltage in kV recloser) in kV Current in A
Stamp (MW)
MW MVar Meas. RTDS Error Meas. RTDS Error Meas. RTDS Error
(%) (%) (%)
07/01/12 0 1.047 0.265 23.849 23.344 1.97 23.814 23.516 1.25 26.67 25.54 4.23
2:00 AM
07/05/201 3.2 1.454 0.467 23.740 23.241 2.10 23.714 23.377 1.42 37.94 36.71 3.24
2
06:30 PM
07/03/201 6.34 -5.28 0.546 23.593 23.111 2.04 23.710 23.385 1.37 130.18 125.15 3.86
2
10:00 AM
07/08/2012 11.83 -10.14 1.554 23.719 23.194 2.21 23.686 23.316 1.56 254.34 241.82 4.92
01:15 PM
3.7.2 Validation of Feeder 2

Two validation techniques were used to ensure that the model represented the behavior of
feeder with sufficient accuracy for power flow and transient type studies. The utility has the
circuit modeled in SynerGEE and validated against field measurements. The short circuit data
29
was used to validate first method of validation. Validation was conducted by applying faults at
various locations on the feeder. Two types of fault which is the three phase fault and the more
common single line to ground faults were applied. Table 2 shows short circuit validation data for
feeder 2. It can be observed that the errors in fault currents are very small (within 1%).
Table 2 Short-Circuit Validation of Feeder 2
3-Phase fault current (A) Fault current error

Location
SynerGEE RTDS (%)
Near Substation 5182 5250 1.3
At Recloser 2994 3034 1.3
At PV site 2428 2451 0.9
L-G fault current (A) Fault current error

Location
SynerGEE RTDS (%)
Near Substation 3790 3823 0.8
At Recloser 1841 1862 1
At PV site 1469 1484 1
A more detailed time series based powerflow validation was also conducted for feeder 2.
The utility has 2 two measurement units installed on the feeder. One is installed at substation and
the other at the recloser (2.2 miles from substation). Both units record voltage, current, and
power flows at 1 min resolution. Eight days of 1 min. data for May 10th – 17th 2012 was provided
by the utility for validation. PV power variation was modeled using a PV plant model with input
based on publicly available cloud index data from instrumentation located at the Regional
Airport, about 7 km away. Validation using field measurement was done for feeder model in
RTDS.
Several one hour duration validation scenarios were simulated. Results for a specific
validation case on May 14th from 4.00-5.00 P.M. are shown below. The average loading on
feeder for simulation was 6 MW at substation. Data provided from utility was linearly
interpolated to 5 sec data and used as input to model. Validation was conducted by matching
feeder model real power at substation to measured real power data at substation and observing
30
the errors between voltage and currents at substation and recloser. Loads were linearly varied to
achieve measured power at substation. Figure 21 shows plot of measured and simulated real
power at substation. It can be observed that there is a good match with an avg. error of just 1.5
%. Figure 22 shows breaker currents for all three phases. Figure 23 and Figure 24 show plots for
voltage and current at recloser.
6.2
5.8
Real Power in MW
5.6
5.4
5.2
4.8
Measured
4.6
Simulated
4.4
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time in mins
Figure 21 Real Power matching at feeder 2 substation
Table 3 tabulates error between measured and simulated results at two locations for one hour
duration. The errors observed in simulation can be attributed to several factors. Since there are
only two measurement points, load variability cannot be captured entirely. Certain loads may
turn ON/OFF at various points in time which also attributes to maximum error scenarios. The
load distribution may change daily on each phase but modeling is done in such a way that
distribution is fixed so as to achieve similar power at substation and recloser. Regardless of error,
the model stays within acceptable error limits (5%) for any given validation scenario for most
measured data.
31
Phase A
280
260
240
220
200
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Phase B
Current in A
300
280
260
240 Measured
Simulated
220
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Phase C
320
300
280
260
240
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time in mins
Figure 22 Breaker currents for Phase A, B and C
Phase A
200
150
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Phase B
Current in A
240
220
200
180
160
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Phase C
200
180
160 Measured
Simulated
140
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time in mins
Figure 23 Recloser currents for Phase A, B and C
32
Phase A
7.5
7.4
7.3 Measured
Simulated
7.2
Phase Voltage in kV
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Phase B
7.4
7.2
7
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Phase C
7.4
7.3
7.2
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time in mins
Figure 24 Recloser voltages for Phase A,B and C
Table 3 Average and Maximum errors for validation of feeder 2
Breaker current data

Avg. Error (%) Max. Error (%)
Phase A 4.66 8.58
Phase B 2.67 7.21
Phase C 1.97 5.70
Recloser current data
Phase A 8.46 16.11
Phase B 2.41 7.99
Phase C 2.35 7.23
Recloser voltage data
Phase A 0.61 1.34
Phase B 1.76 2.49
Phase C 1.18 1.57
33
CHAPTER FOUR
SIMULATIONS AND RESULTS

Using the RTDS model built for feeder 1, several case studies were conducted to observe
the interactions between voltage regulation devices and PV inverters. The study was conducted
using two models. First model is built according to the existing system in which there is a 12.6
MW single large PV plant located 4.6 miles from the substation. For the second model, the 12.6
MW PV plant was split into 6 PV systems each of 2.15 MW distributed at each load location. As
mentioned before, the feeder does not have any voltage regulation devices installed on it. But to
observe the interactions, the model was changed such that the substation transformer was
changed to an OLTC and a SCB was installed on the system at 4.6 miles from substation.
4.1.1 Simulation Strategy and Model Input
As discussed above, two separate simulation models were used for the study. For cases, a
common load profile and PV power profile was used as inputs. The PV power profile was
obtained from a 250 kW PV system installed on a utility feeder. The PV power profile was
scaled to match PV systems. The resolution of the data was 1 minute which was interpolated to 5
sec and used as input to the model. Although linear power scaling may not be the most optimal
method to scale data for PV systems, scaling was done since sharp drop in total power outputs
can be observed even from large PV systems. Also sharp variation in PV power will serve as
worst case scenario. The load profile used for study is also 1 minute data interpolated to 5 sec
data and used as input to model. Figure 25 shows PV power profile used for the study. Figure 26
shows load profile used for the study. A loading of 1 p.u. is equal to 15.5 MVA. As mentioned
before, certain changes were made to observe the interactions between voltage regulation
equipments. The substation transformer was changed to OLTC with ± 10% regulation with 32
steps. The OLTC is set to operate and regulate the voltage if voltage at PV site is out of range
with a lower limit of 0.97 p.u. and an upper limit of 1.03 p.u. The OLTC has a wait time of 30
sec and each tap change takes 1 sec to complete. 6 MVAR SCB which switches in steps of 0.75
MVAR (8 steps) was installed at 4.5 miles from substation. The SCB also operates based on
34
voltage constraint. If voltage at its PCC is out of range, with lower limit of 0.97 p.u. and upper
limit of 1.03 p.u., a capacitor bank is switched on. The initial wait time for operation is 30 sec
and each bank switching takes an additional 5 sec. PV inverters were allowed to regulate
voltage. Several methods of regulation like constant power factor, constant reactive power, set
point control, volt-var curve, volt-pf curve were used for the study.
Figure 25 PV power profile
Figure 26 Load profile
35
4.1.2 Initial Study Cases
To study interactions between devices on feeder 1, some initial simulations were
conducted. The following section describes the simulations conducted and their observations.
4.1.2.1 Single large PV plant (LPV) system model - Actual feeder configuration.
Simulations performed below show results for single large 12.6 MW PV plant located
approximately 4.8 miles from substation. This case represents the actual scheme of PV installed
on the feeder.
A. Simulation case 1 - No voltage regulation case. Initial case study was conducted to
test how the feeder voltage profile would behave for no voltage regulation from OLTC,
SCB or PV inverters. Voltages were measured at various locations on feeder. Figure 27
shows voltage profile for the one hour simulation without any voltage regulation.
Voltages are shown for three locations on feeder, near substation, at PV site, and at the
end of feeder. It can be seen that voltage at each location is within ANSI C84.1 limits of
1.058 p.u. and 0.95 p.u. for whole one hour simulation.
1.01
Near Substation
1
0.99
Voltage in pu
0.98
Near PV
0.97
Regulation Lower limit (0.97pu)
0.96
End of feeder
0.95
Lower limit of service voltage (0.95pu)
Near Substation
0.94
Near PV (regulation point)
End of feeder
0.93
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time in mins
Figure 27 Voltage profile with no regulation for LPV case
B. Simulation case 2 – Independent voltage regulation by OLTC, SCB and PV

inverter. For this case, to see if each individual device could control voltage within
acceptable limits, OTLC, SCB and PV inverters were allowed to regulate voltage for
36
each test case. Figure 28 shows voltage profile for all 3 cases. It can be observed for
each case that, voltage was regulated and maintained within acceptable limits.
1.03 1.02
Near Substation
1.02 Near Substation
1.01
1.01
Near Substation
Near Substation 1 Near PV (regulation point)
Voltage in pu
Voltage in pu
1 Near PV (regulation point)
End of feeder
End of feeder
0.99 0.99
0.98
Regulation Lower limit (0.97pu) Near PV
0.98
0.97
0.97
End of feeder Regulation Lower limit (0.97pu)
0.96 Near PV
0.96
End of feeder
0.95
0.94 0.95
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time in mins Time in mins
Voltage regulation by OLTC only Voltage regulation by SCB only
Near Substation
1.02
1.015
Near Substation
1.01 Near PV (regulation point)
Near PV End of feeder
Voltage in pu
1.005
0.995
0.99
0.985 End of feeder

0.98
0.975
Regulation Lower limit (0.97 pu)
0.97
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time in mins
Voltage regulation by PV Inverters
Figure 28 Voltage profile for independent operation of devices for LPV case
C. Simulation case 3 – Simultaneous voltage regulation by OLTC, SCB and PV

inverter. For this case, all the voltage regulation equipment including PV inverters
were allowed to operate simultaneously. PV inverter used set point voltage control with
a set point of 1.pu. Figure 29 shows voltage profile for this case. Neither the OLTC nor
the SCB has any request for switching as the PV maintains the voltage within
acceptable range. Because of the faster and smooth control action of the PV inverter,
conventional regulators could not operate. OLTC or SCB will operate only if PV is
unable to control the voltage when it reaches the reactive power limit in real-power
priority mode.
37
Near Substation
1.02
1.015
Near Substation
Voltage in pu
1.005
0.995
0.99
0.985 End of feeder

0.98
0.975
Regulation Lower limit (0.97 pu)
0.97
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time in mins
Figure 29 Voltage profile for simultaneous operation of devices for LPV case
4.1.2.2 Distributed PV system (DPV) model. For the distributed PV system case, the
model is similar to single large PV model except that the 12.6 MW PV systems is split into 6 –
2.15 MW PV plants. Each PV system is connected at a load point. Similar load and PV power
profile is used for this case too. But to account for the distributed PV case, power profile of each
PV system is shifted by 3 min from each other so as to account for effect of cloud movement.
Initial case study was done to see if there was a need for voltage regulation in this scenario. Case
studies were also done to see if each device could individually control the voltage within
acceptable limits. Then a test case was simulated to observe interactions between OLTC, SCB
and PV inverter. Control strategy used in case of large PV system model is used for OLTC, SCB,
and PV inverters.
A. Simulation case 1 - No voltage regulation case. This case represents the base case in
which no voltage regulation was allowed by PV, OLTC or SCB. Figure 30 shows voltage
profile for this case. It can be observed that during the peak loading situation which is
around the 36th min, the voltage at end of feeder and at location of large PV site was
below lower limit of operation of 0.95 p.u.
38
Near substation
End of feeder
Near Substation
1.02
Voltage in pu 1
Near PV
End of feeder
0.98
Regulation Lower limit (0.97pu)

0.96

0.94
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time in mins
Figure 30 Voltage profile with no regulation for DPV case
1.02 1.02
1.01 1.01
Near Substation
1 Near Substation 1 Near Substation Near Substation
Voltage in pu
Voltage in pu
Near PV (regulation point) Near PV (regulation point)

End of feeder
0.99 0.99
0.98 0.98 Near PV
0.97 0.97
Regulation Lower limit (0.97pu) Regulation Lower limit (0.97pu)
End of feeder
0.96 End of feeder 0.96
Lower limit of service voltage (0.95pu) Lower limit of service voltage (0.95pu)
0.95 0.95
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time in mins Time in mins
Voltage regulation by OLTC only Voltage regulation by SCB only
1.06
Upper limit of service voltage (1.058pu)
1.055
Near Substation
Voltage in pu
1.05 End of feeder
1.045
End of feeder
1.04 Near PV
Near Substation
1.035
Regulation Upper limit (1.03 pu)

1.03
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time in mins
Voltage regulation by PV Inverters
Figure 31 Voltage profile for independent operation of devices for DPV case
39
B. Simulation case 2 – Independent voltage regulation by OLTC, SCB and PV
inverter. Individual operations of OLTC, SCB and PV inverters were studied for the
same one hour simulation. Figure 31 shows voltage profiles for all 3 cases. It can be
observed for each case that, voltage was regulated and maintained within acceptable
limits for the OLTC and SCB case.
C. Simulation case 3 – Simultaneous voltage vegulation by OLTC, SCB and PV
inverter. Looking into scenario with PV inverters controlling the voltage, it was
observed that if the PV is set to regulate the voltage at the terminal of utilization points,
there may be chances of overvoltage situations on the primary of the feeder. To
understand how voltage regulators interact with each other, all the voltage regulation
equipments were made to operate simultaneously. Figure 32 shows the voltage profile for
such case study.
1.07
Near Substation
1.06 End of feeder
Upper limit of service voltage (1.058pu)
1.05
Voltage in pu
1.04
End of feeder
Regulation Upper limit (1.03pu)

1.03
1.02
Near PV
1.01 Near Substation
1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time in mins
Figure 32 Voltage profile for simultaneous operation of devices for DPV case
40
18
16
Tap position
14
12
10
6
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time in mins
Figure 33 Tap operations of OLTC for simultaneous operation of all devices for DPV case
Figure 33 shows the OLTC tap operation. The overvoltage on the primary is detected by
the OLTC and it has a request for tap change initially and then there are 5 more requests for tap
change to maintain the voltage within the limits. No operation of capacitor banks was observed
in this case. The phenomenon of tap changer run away condition can be observed in this
scenario. Since the PV inverter and OLTC interact due to the variability in PV power penetration
and load, interactions can be observed. The interactions can also be attributed to the method of
voltage regulation by PV inverters since each unit is set to regulate voltage to 1 p.u.
4.1.3 Voltage Regulation Scenarios

From the previous voltage regulation studies, the need for exploring various methods of
voltage regulation by PV inverters was realized. In the following section, various methods like
constant power factor, constant reactive power mode, set point voltage regulation method, volt-
var curve, volt-pf curve will be used as regulation methods to observe interactions between PV
inverters and other voltage regulation devices. Settings and limits used for different methods are
given below:
1. Constant power factor.
a. 0.93 pf leading.
b. 0.93 pf lagging.
2. Constant reactive power mode.
41
a. 500 kVar leading.
b. 500 kVar lagging.
3. Set point voltage control mode.
a. 1 p,u, on primary.
b. 1 p.u. on secondary.
4. German voltage std. curve.
a. 0.95 pf limit.
b. 0.90 pf limit.
5. Volt-Var curve.
a. 40% of maximum real power output.
6. Volt-pf curve.
a. 0.95 pf limit.
b. 0.90 pf limit.
Same PV power profile and load profile was used. Each method of voltage regulation
discussed above was simulated using the same PV power and load profile. Figure 34 shows load
v/s PV power variation for the one hour case. Because several case studies were performed, not
all plots for voltage regulation are shown. Instead, three points in the one hour simulations are
picked and voltage profiles at that instant are plotted for the feeder. Table 4 gives the simulation
conditions for three key points of observations. Scenario 1 is for highest PV penetration with
high load, scenario 2 is for lowest PV penetration and scenario 3 is for highest loading on feeder.
42
10
Scenario 1
Scenario 3 1
Peak PV
Highest
penetration
loading
Total PV Power in MW
Scenario 2
Feeder Loading in pu
Lowest
loading
Avg. PV Penetration =
5.4162MW
0.5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time in mins
Figure 34 Load v/s PV power variation
Table 4 Highest variation scenarios for feeder 1
Scenario PV Load
(MW) (pu)
1 9.9 0.84
2 6.0 0.61
3 4.7 1.01
Scenario 1 – Highest PV penetration
The peak PV power output was 9.9 MW. Feeder loading was 0.84 p.u. (1 p.u. = 15
MVA). Figure 35 shows voltage profiles on the feeder when using different currently available
methods and advanced methods of voltage regulation by PV inverters. It can be observed from
the figures that all methods of regulation maintain voltage within acceptable limits.
43
1.04 1.04
German Std 0.90 pf
German Std 0.95 pf
1.03 1.03 Volt-Var Curve
pf Curve 0.90
pf Curve 0.95
1.02 1.02 No Regulation
1.01 1.01
Voltage in pu
Voltage in pu
1 1
0.99 0.99
Constant pf 0.93 leading

0.98 Constant pf 0.93 lagging 0.98
Constant Q 500kVar leading
Constant Q 500kVar lagging
0.97 Set Voltage Primary 0.97
Set Voltage Secondary
No Regulation
0.96 0.96
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Length of Feeder in miles Length of Feeder in miles
Voltage regulation using available methods Voltage regulation using advanced methods
Figure 35 Voltage profile of feeder for scenario 1 with various methods of voltage regulation by
PV inverter
Scenario 2 – Lowest feeder loading
The peak PV power output was 6 MW. Feeder loading was 0.61 p.u. Figure 36 shows
voltage profiles on the feeder when using different currently available and advanced methods of
voltage regulation by PV inverters. It can be observed from the figures that all methods of
regulation maintain voltage within acceptable limits.
Scenario 3 – Highest feeder loading
The peak PV power output was 4.7 MW. Feeder loading was 1.0 p.u. Figure 37 shows
voltage profile on the feeder when using different currently available methods and advanced
methods of voltage regulation by PV inverters. It can be observed from the figures that all
methods of regulation maintain voltage within acceptable limits.
44
1.04 1.04
German Std 0.90 pf
German Std 0.95 pf
1.03 1.03 Volt-Var Curve
pf Curve 0.90
pf Curve 0.95
1.02 1.02 No Regulation
1.01 1.01
Voltage in pu
Voltage in pu
1 1
0.99 0.99
Constant pf 0.93 leading

0.98 Constant pf 0.93 lagging 0.98
Constant Q 500kVar leading
Constant Q 500kVar lagging
0.97 Set Voltage Primary 0.97
No Regulation
0.96 0.96
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
PV inverter
1.04 1.04
German Std 0.90 pf
Constant pf 0.93 leading German Std 0.95 pf
Constant pf 0.93 lagging Volt-Var Curve
1.03 1.03
Constant Q 500kVar leading pf Curve 0.90
Constant Q 500kVar lagging pf Curve 0.95
1.02 Set Voltage Primary 1.02 No Regulation
No Regulation
1.01 1.01
Voltage in pu
Voltage in pu
1 1
0.99 0.99
0.98 0.98
0.97 0.97
0.96 0.96
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
PV inverter
4.1.4 Observations
As shown from the figures above, every method of voltage regulation maintained voltage
within acceptable limits. The difference in each method is the interactions between PV inverter
and OLTC, SCB and SVR. Another difference is the amount of extra capacity required by
inverter to regulate the voltage. Table 5 shows the change in inverter output when reactive power
45
is allowed to be injected. The table shows average output of all 6 inverters on the feeder. It also
shows the average change in output of all six inverters when reactive power injection is allowed.
Table 5 Change in inverter output for various PV voltage regulation methods for feeder 1
Voltage Regulation Mode S of Inverter (% of 2.15MVA) Avg.

Change
Inv 1 Inv 2 Inv 3 Inv 4 Inv 5 Inv 6
No Regulation 45.37 44.94 44.19 41.96 39.22 36.37
Constant pf - 0.93 Leading 48.78 48.32 47.51 45.12 42.17 39.11 3.16%
Constant pf - 0.93 Lagging 48.77 48.36 47.50 45.12 42.11 39.08 3.15%
Constant Q - 500kVar Leading 50.97 50.58 49.95 48.00 45.54 43.19 6.03%
Constant Q - 500kVar Lagging 50.96 50.60 49.94 48.02 45.57 43.21 6.04%
1 pu Set Voltage – Primary 96.57 95.69 52.54 72.21 77.70 78.34 36.83%
1 pu Set Voltage – Secondary 48.25 45.21 45.18 43.85 43.15 41.92 2.59%
German std - 0.90 pf 45.99 45.57 44.80 42.43 39.43 36.51 0.45%
German std - 0.95 pf 45.67 45.24 44.49 42.18 39.27 36.41 0.2%
Volt – Var Curve 45.40 44.96 44.37 42.29 39.80 37.33 0.35%
pf curve - 0.90 45.49 44.94 44.19 41.95 39.23 36.48 0.04%
Pf curve - 0.95 45.38 45.00 44.32 42.20 39.53 36.70 0.18%
Table 6 gives information on OLTC and SCB operation for the various methods of
voltage regulation. The table gives information on if OLTC, SCB operated for any of voltage
regulation methods. It can be observed from the tables above that, most methods of voltage
regulation by PV inverters cause an operation of either OLTC or SCB, while the advanced
voltage regulation methods do not require the operation of either of OLTC or SCB. The
advanced methods of voltage regulation require the least amount of reactive power capacity
while the set point control methods require the highest capacity from inverters.
46
Table 6 Operation of OLTC and SCB for various PV voltage regulation methods for feeder 1
Voltage Regulation Mode OLTC Operation SCB Operation
No Regulation NO YES - 2
Constant pf - 0.93 Leading NO NO
Constant pf - 0.93 Lagging NO YES – 1
Constant Q - 500kVar Leading NO NO
Constant Q - 500kVar Lagging YES – 5 YES - 1
1 pu Set Voltage – Primary YES - 1 NO
1 pu Set Voltage – Secondary YES - 5 NO
German std - 0.90 pf YES – 2 NO
German std - 0.95 pf YES – 2 NO
Volt – Var Curve NO NO
pf curve - 0.90 NO NO
Pf curve - 0.95 NO NO

The model built for utility feeder 2 is used for the following studies. When
conducting the validation studies, it was observed that the feeder had a higher than typical
voltage profile and the voltage at recloser and at large PV systems as above 1.03 p.u. for long
durations during the 8 days of measurement data. Figure 38 shows the voltages for three phases
for the 8 days. It can be seen that, voltage regulation can be employed on this circuit to counter
the higher than typical voltage profile.
47
5/10/2012 - 5/17/2012
1.1
Phase A
1.09 Phase B
Phase C
1.08
Voltages A-B-C (pu, 7.2kV, RCL90E)

1.07
1.06
1.05
1.04
1.03
1.02
1.01
1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
time (days)
Figure 38 Voltage profile for 8 days from recloser measurement unit
4.2.1 Simulation Strategy and Model Input
2.5
2
PV power in MW
1.5
1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Tme in mins
Figure 39 PV Power profile used for feeder 2
Several one hour cases were simulated with PV systems regulating voltage to observe the
interactions between devices. The case study shown here are the validation scenario simulation
conditions. For the simulations performed, all PV systems were aggregated to one unit. The
loading on the feeder occurred on 5/14/2012 from 4.00 P.M. to 5.00 P.M. Figure 39 shows the
48
PV profile for that one hour simulation. The cap banks (3 – 900 kVar, 1 – 600 kVar) are set
based to operate on MVar flow from substation as provided by the utility. If MVAR flow into
feeder is greater than 600 kVar, based on priority, a capacitor bank is turned ON and if VAR
flow is greater than 300 kVar to substation, a capacitor bank is turned OFF. The SVR is set to
operate with a regulation of ±10% regulation with 32 steps with a 2 minute operation time. The
regulator operates with a lower limit of 1.02 p.u. and an upper limit of 1.066 p.u. The load and
PV data are of 1 min resolution which is interpolated to 5 sec resolution and used as input to
model.
4.2.2 Voltage Regulation Scenarios
Voltage regulation modes tested for feeder 1 are tested for feeder 2 also. Settings and limits used for
different methods are given below:
1. Constant power factor.
a. 0.93 pf leading.
b. 0.93 pf lagging.
2. Constant reactive power mode.
a. 400 kVar leading.
b. 400 kVar lagging.
3. Set point voltage control mode.
a. 1 p,u, on primary.
b. 1 p.u. on secondary.
4. German voltage std. curve.
a. 0.95 pf limit.
b. 0.90 pf limit.
5. Volt-Var curve.
a. 40% of maximum real power output.
6. Volt-pf curve.
a. 0.95 pf limit.
b. 0.90 pf limit.
49
Because the feeder splits into 2 main laterals, voltage plots for the feeder will not be
legible and will overlap with many voltage regulation methods. Thus voltage plots for this feeder
are not shown.
4.2.3 Observations
Voltage was maintained within acceptable limits for each scenario simulated using
different methods of voltage regulation by PV inverters. But there were some interactions
between cap banks and PV inverters for some methods of voltage regulation. Table 7 shows the
average reactive power of PV inverters for different methods of voltage regulation by PV
inverters.
Table 7 Change in inverter output for various PV voltage regulation methods for feeder 2
Voltage Regulation Mode Reactive power Average Inverter Average change

output loading (% of 2.6 in Inverter
(Mvar) MVA) loading (%)
No Regulation 0.0 75.82
Constant pf - 0.93 Leading 0.7189 91.63 15.81
Constant pf - 0.93 Lagging 0.7189 91.65 15.83
Constant Q - 400kVar Leading 0.3996 87.42 11.6
Constant Q - 400kVar Lagging 0.400 87.37 11.55
1 pu Set Voltage – Primary 0.4389 87.75 11.93
1 pu Set Voltage – Secondary 1.2794 100.0 24.18
German std - 0.90 pf 0.6083 90.24 14.42
German std - 0.95 pf 0.4354 87.87 12.05
Volt – Var Curve 0.1907 86.27 10.45
pf curve - 0.90 0.2767 86.01 10.19
Pf curve - 0.95 0.2282 85.77 9.95
It can be seen that almost every method of voltage regulation required at least 10% of
inverters capacity. The worst case regulation mode was the set point voltage regulation mode
50
regulating on the secondary which required the most reactive power since the voltage on the
feeder was high and a lot of inductive reactive power was required to bring down the voltage to 1
p.u. Table 8 shows the interactions between SCB, SVR and PV inverter. It can be seen that the
no regulation case required 2 cap bank operation and 1 regulator operation on phase B. Most
voltage regulation modes required either the operation of capacitor banks or the step voltage
regulator.
Table 8 Operation of OLTC and SCB for various PV voltage regulation methods for feeder 2
Voltage Regulation Mode No. of SVR

Capacitor Operation
Banks ON Ph A Ph B Ph C
No Regulation 2 0 1 0
Constant pf - 0.93 Leading 1 0 1 0
Constant pf - 0.93 Lagging 3 0 0 0
Constant Q - 400kVar Leading 2 0 1 0
Constant Q - 400kVar Lagging 3 0 0 0
1 pu Set Voltage – Primary 3 0 1 0
1 pu Set Voltage – Secondary 4 1 1 1
German std - 0.90 pf 3 0 1 0
German std - 0.95 pf 2 0 1 0
Volt – Var Curve 2 0 1 0
pf curve - 0.90 2 0 1 0
Pf curve - 0.95 2 0 1 0
51
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES
For the studies conducted on the two utility feeders, some conclusions can be drawn
specific to each feeder.
Utility Feeder 1 Conclusions
The feeder has penetration levels exceeding 100% which is far above the 15%
penetration limit, but it does not experience any issues with voltage regulation. Currently there
are no voltage regulation equipments installed on it and the feeder voltage profile is within the
utility’s desired range of operation. Furthermore, allowing voltage regulation from the large 12.6
MW PV plant should not pose any issues with voltage profile on the feeder. Several reasons can
be attributed to why there may not be an issue with voltage regulation on this feeder. Firstly the
circuit overhead line can handle large amounts of current so there will be fewer losses for a
specific power flow. The circuit is connected to 230 kV transmission backbone which is stiff.
The placement of OLTC and cap banks was such that allowing PV to regulate voltage did not
cause any interactions between devices.
But the same conclusions cannot be drawn in case of the distributed PV system case of
the same feeder. When the large PV system is distributed over 6 locations, PV systems will have
an effect on voltage regulation and voltage profile. As seen in Fig X, allowing distributed PV
systems to regulate voltage on its secondary to 1 p.u. cause unnecessary interactions between PV
inverters and OLTC. Also using some of the advanced methods of voltage regulation by PV
inverters caused extra operations of either OLTC or cap banks. Thus for this specific case, some
conclusions can be drawn.
1. There is no absolute need to allow PV to regulate voltage on this feeder.
2. IF PV systems are allowed to regulate voltage then, one of the advanced modes of
voltage regulations are to be used.
3. If there are no traditional voltage regulation devices installed on this circuit, PV
systems could be allowed to regulate voltage without any issues.
52
Utility Feeder 2 Conclusions
Unlike feeder 1, feeder 2 only has about 30% penetration level. But the feeder has some
voltage profile issues. The feeder also has voltage regulation devices installed on it. As seen
from the observations for feeder 2, allowing voltage regulation by PV inverters has to be
carefully monitored. The method of operation of SVR and can banks can cause unnecessary
interactions. Almost all of the various methods of voltage regulation by PV inverters caused an
operation of cap banks or SVR. This can be attributed to method of operation of SVR and SCB.
Some conclusions can be drawn for feeder 2.
1. Voltage on the feeder is higher than normal.
2. Method of operation of SCB and/or SVR may need to be changed to resolve the
issues of voltage regulation.
3. Allowing PV inverters to regulate voltage without changing the method of operation
of SCB and/or SVR may be of concern.
Inferences
1. Allowing PV inverters to regulate voltage may not necessarily increase or decrease

interactions with voltage regulation devices.
2. Some of the key factors which influence interactions between voltage regulation devices
and PV are feeder circuit layout (e.g. overhead line vs. cable,), voltage level, length of
feeder, etc), nature of loads, location and size of loads, and location of PV.
3. Based on the cases studied within this work no common trait for defining high
penetration PV circuit studies could found.
4. No correlation between PV penetration level, measured by the amount of installed PV
capacity vs. feeder loading, and the severity of impact of PV on the circuit operational
characteristics could be found in this study.
Concluding from this work is recommended to establish a new set of metrics which truly define
the impact severity of PV on distribution feeders, since the current metric of PV penetration level
is clearly inadequate.
53
APPENDIX A
PV PANEL INFORMATION
The PV panel used for this study is a First Solar panel ‘FS275’ which has maximum
power of 275 W. This panel is used in 12.6 MW PV plant on feeder 1. The electrical
specifications for the panel is given below:
54
APPENDIX B
RTDS SCRIPTS
Several scripts were used to record and capture the meter reading from the simulations
into a text file. One of the script files used for feeder 2 is given below:
// Global Variables---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
string Gfninput="Input_1.txt"; // * Input file name.
string Gfnoutput="Output_1.txt"; // * Output file name.
int GNinputs=1; // * The number of columns in the input file.
int GNoutputs=81; // * The number of outputs.
string var1; // * The maximum length of the input string.
int GctrInput=0; // Keeps a count of the number of inputs read in.
float Ginputs[GNinputs]; // Array of inputs.
float Goutputs[GNoutputs]; // Array of outputs.
int GinDone=0; // Variable to signal that the end of the input file has been reached.
int GoutDone=0; // Variable to signal to stop writing to the output file.
//--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#include "SAFunctions.scr"
#include "DataXFunctions.scr"
main();
function main()
{
// Configuration Variables --------------------------------------------------------------------------
string outfileComment="Time Vss V200 V201 V202 V203 V204 V205 V206 V207
VA201s VB201s VC201s VA202s VB202s VC202s VA203s VB203s VC203s VA204s VB204s
VC204s VA205s VB205s VC205s VA206s VB206s VC206 VA207s VB207s VC207 CUA
CDA CUB CDB CUC CDC Pss Qss P200 Q200 P201 Q201 P202 Q202 P203 Q203 P204 Q204
P205 Q205 P206 Q206 P207 Q207 Ppv211 Qpv211 V211pv Vdc211 Vref211 Pdc211 filtercnt
55
Pcap1 Qcap1 Pcap2 Qcap2 Pcap3 Qcap3 Pcap4 Qcap4 IAsub IBsub ICsub IArcl IBrcl ICrcl
VArcl VBrcl VCrcl Prcl Qrcl";
//--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
start;
MasterPlotLockState = 1;
SetSwitch "Subsystem #1 : CTLs : Inputs : MPPTen" = 1;
SetSwitch "Subsystem #1 : CTLs : Inputs : PIen" = 1;
SetSwitch "Subsystem #1 : CTLs : Inputs : SVRctrl" = 1;
SetSwitch "Subsystem #1 : CTLs : Inputs : PVctrl211" = 1;
SetSwitch "Subsystem #1 : CTLs : Inputs : Capctrl" = 1;
SetSlider "Subsystem #1 : CTLs : Inputs : Sin211" = 519.9998856;
SetSlider "Subsystem #1 : CTLs : Inputs : Sin212" = 542.9883721;
SetSlider "Subsystem #1 : CTLs : Inputs : CPLoad" = 0.51;
SetSwitch "Subsystem #1 : CTLs : Inputs : CPCTRL" = 1;
SetSwitch "Subsystem #1 : CTLs : Inputs : CPPFCTRL" = 1;
SUSPEND 90.0;
fopen(Gfnoutput,"w");
fprintf(Gfnoutput,"%s\n",outfileComment);
fopen(Gfninput,"r");
while(!isEOF(Gfninput))
{
printf("var1=%s\n",var1);
fgets(var1,100,Gfninput);
arrayX(var1,Ginputs);
SetSlider "Subsystem #1 : CTLs : Inputs : Sin211" = Ginputs[0];
SetSlider "Subsystem #1 : CTLs : Inputs : CPLoad" = Ginputs[1];
updateOutputs();
SUSPEND 4.5;
}
56
fclose(Gfninput);
fclose(Gfnoutput);
return 1;
MasterPlotLockState = 0;
SetSwitch "Subsystem #1 : CTLs : Inputs : SVRctrl" = 0;
SetSwitch "Subsystem #1 : CTLs : Inputs : Capctrl" = 0;
SetSwitch "Subsystem #1 : CTLs : Inputs : PVctrl211" = 0;
SetSwitch "Subsystem #1 : CTLs : Inputs : MPPTen" = 1;
SetSwitch "Subsystem #1 : CTLs : Inputs : PIen" = 1;
stop;
}
function updateOutputs()
{
if(GoutDone==0)
{
Goutputs[0]=MeterCapture("Time");
Goutputs[1]=MeterCapture("Vss");
Goutputs[2]=MeterCapture("V200");
Goutputs[10]=MeterCapture("VA201s");
Goutputs[11]=MeterCapture("VB201s");
Goutputs[12]=MeterCapture("VC201s");
57
Goutputs[31]=MeterCapture("CUA");
Goutputs[32]=MeterCapture("CDA");
Goutputs[33]=MeterCapture("CUB");
Goutputs[34]=MeterCapture("CDB");
Goutputs[35]=MeterCapture("CUC");
Goutputs[36]=MeterCapture("CDC");
Goutputs[37]=MeterCapture("Pss");
Goutputs[38]=MeterCapture("Qss");
Goutputs[39]=MeterCapture("P200");
Goutputs[40]=MeterCapture("Q200");
58
Goutputs[55]=MeterCapture("Ppv211");
Goutputs[56]=MeterCapture("Qpv211");
Goutputs[57]=MeterCapture("V211pv");
Goutputs[58]=MeterCapture("Vdc211");
Goutputs[59]=MeterCapture("Vref211");
Goutputs[60]=MeterCapture("Pdc211");
Goutputs[61]=MeterCapture("filtercnt");
Goutputs[62]=MeterCapture("Pcap1");
Goutputs[63]=MeterCapture("Qcap1");
Goutputs[70]=MeterCapture("IAsub");
Goutputs[71]=MeterCapture("IBsub");
Goutputs[72]=MeterCapture("ICsub");
Goutputs[73]=MeterCapture("IArcs");
Goutputs[74]=MeterCapture("IBrcs");
Goutputs[75]=MeterCapture("ICrcs");
59
Goutputs[76]=MeterCapture("VArcs");
Goutputs[77]=MeterCapture("VBrcs");
Goutputs[78]=MeterCapture("VCrcs");
Goutputs[79]=MeterCapture("Prcs");
Goutputs[80]=MeterCapture("Qrcs");
fprintf(Gfnoutput,"%f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f
%f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f
%f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f
%f %f %f %f %f %f
%f\n",Goutputs[0],Goutputs[1],Goutputs[2],Goutputs[3],Goutputs[4],Goutputs[5],Goutputs[6],G
outputs[7],Goutputs[8],Goutputs[9],Goutputs[10],Goutputs[11],Goutputs[12],Goutputs[13],Gout
puts[14],Goutputs[15],Goutputs[16],Goutputs[17],Goutputs[18],Goutputs[19],Goutputs[20],Gou
tputs[21],Goutputs[22],Goutputs[23],Goutputs[24],Goutputs[25],Goutputs[26],Goutputs[27],Go
utputs[28],Goutputs[29],Goutputs[30],Goutputs[31],Goutputs[32],Goutputs[33],Goutputs[34],G
outputs[35],Goutputs[36],Goutputs[37],Goutputs[38],Goutputs[39],Goutputs[40],Goutputs[41],
Goutputs[42],Goutputs[43],Goutputs[44],Goutputs[45],Goutputs[46],Goutputs[47],Goutputs[48]
,Goutputs[49],Goutputs[50],Goutputs[51],Goutputs[52],Goutputs[53],Goutputs[54],Goutputs[55
],Goutputs[56],Goutputs[57],Goutputs[58],Goutputs[59],Goutputs[60],Goutputs[61],Goutputs[6
2],Goutputs[63],Goutputs[64],Goutputs[65],Goutputs[66],Goutputs[67],Goutputs[68],Goutputs[
69],Goutputs[70],Goutputs[71],Goutputs[72],Goutputs[73],Goutputs[74],Goutputs[75],Goutputs
[76],Goutputs[77],Goutputs[78],Goutputs[79],Goutputs[80]);
}
return 1;
}
60
REFERENCES
[1] D. Feldman, G. Barbose, R. Margolis, R. Wiser, N. Darghouth and A. Goodrich,

"Photovoltaic (PV) Pricing Trends: Historical, Recent, and Near-Term Projections," National
Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL),
2012.
[2] Baran, M.E.; Hooshyar, H.; Shen, Z.; Gajda, J.; Huq, K.M.M.; , "Impact of high penetration
residential PV systems on distribution systems," Power and Energy Society General Meeting,
2011 IEEE , vol., no., pp.1-5, 24-29 July 2011.
[3] Masoum, A.S.; Moses, P.S.; Masoum, M.A.S.; Abu-siada, A.; , "Impact of rooftop PV
generation on distribution transformer and voltage profile of residential and commercial
networks," Innovative Smart Grid Technologies (ISGT), 2012 IEEE PES , vol., no., pp.1-7,
16-20 Jan. 2012.
[4] M. McGranaghan, T. Ortmeyer, D. Crudele, T. Key, J. Smith, P. Baker, “Advanced Grid

Planning and Operations”, Sandia National Laboratories. Feb. 2008.
[5] Y. Liu, J. Bebic, B. Kroposki, J. de Bedout, W. Ren, “Distribution system voltage

performance analysis for high –penetration PV,” in Proc. IEEE Energy 2030 Conf., 17-18
November, 2008, pp. 315-320.
[6] Varma, R.K.; Rahman, S.A.; Sharma, V.; Vanderheide, T.; , "Novel control of a PV solar
system as STATCOM (PV-STATCOM) for preventing instability of induction motor
load," Electrical & Computer Engineering (CCECE), 2012 25th IEEE Canadian Conference
on , vol., no., pp.1-5, April 29 2012-May 2 2012.
[7] Toodeji, H.; Farokhnia, N.; Riahy, G.H.; , "Integration of PV module and STATCOM to
extract maximum power from PV," Electric Power and Energy Conversion Systems, 2009.
EPECS '09. International Conference on , vol., no., pp.1-6, 10-12 Nov. 2009.
[8] Varma, R.K.; Das, B.; Axente, I.; Vanderheide, T.; , "Optimal 24-hr utilization of a PV solar
system as STATCOM (PV-STATCOM) in a distribution network," Power and Energy
Society General Meeting, 2011 IEEE , vol., no., pp.1-8, 24-29 July 2011.
[9] Turitsyn, K.; Sulc, P.; Backhaus, S.; Chertkov, M.; , "Local Control of Reactive Power by
Distributed Photovoltaic Generators," Smart Grid Communications (SmartGridComm), 2010
First IEEE International Conference on , vol., no., pp.79-84, 4-6 Oct. 2010.
[10] Wandhare, R.G.; Agarwal, V.; , "Advance control scheme and operating modes for large
capacity centralised PV-grid systems to overcome penetration issues," Photovoltaic
Specialists Conference (PVSC), 2011 37th IEEE , vol., no., pp.002466-002471, 19-24 June
2011.
61
[11] Maknouninejad, A.; Kutkut, N.; Batarseh, I.; Zhihua Qu; , "Analysis and control of PV
inverters operating in VAR mode at night," Innovative Smart Grid Technologies (ISGT),
2011 IEEE PES , vol., no., pp.1-5, 17-19 Jan. 2011.
[12] ero, J.R.; , "Solar PV Integration Challenges," Power and Energy

Magazine, IEEE , vol.9, no.3, pp.62-71, May-June 2011.
[13] R. Meeker, "Understanding and Addressing High-Penetration PV Issues Through

Analysis of PV Integration in Florida Utility Circuits," in DOE, EPRI, SNL, NREL
Workshop: Achieving High Penetrations of PV: Streamlining Interconnection and Managing
Variability in a Utility Distribution System, Solar Power International 2012, Orlando, FL,
2012.
[14] Mather, B.; Neal, R.;, "Integrating high penetrations of PV into Southern California: Year
2 project update," Photovoltaic Specialists Conference (PVSC), 2012 38th IEEE , vol., no.,
pp.000737-000741, 3-8 June 2012.
[15] Narang, D.; Hambrick, J.; , "High penetration PV deployment in the Arizona Public
Service system," Photovoltaic Specialists Conference (PVSC), 2011 37th IEEE , vol., no.,
pp.002402-002405, 19-24 June 2011.
[16] Pyo, G.C.; Kang, H.W.; Moon, S.I.; , "A new operation method for grid-connected PV
system considering voltage regulation in distribution system,"Power and Energy Society
General Meeting - Conversion and Delivery of Electrical Energy in the 21st Century, 2008
IEEE , vol., no., pp.1-7, 20-24 July 2008.
[17] Xiaohu Liu; Aichhorn, A.; Liming Liu; Hui Li; , "Coordinated Control of Distributed
Energy Storage System With Tap Changer Transformers for Voltage Rise Mitigation Under
High Photovoltaic Penetration," Smart Grid, IEEE Transactions on , vol.3, no.2, pp.897-906,
June 2012.
[18] McNutt, P.; Hambrick, J.; Keesee, M.; , "Effects of photovoltaics on distribution system
voltage regulation," Photovoltaic Specialists Conference (PVSC), 2009 34th IEEE , vol., no.,
pp.001914-001917, 7-12 June 2009.
[19] Craciun, B.-I.; Man, E.A.; Muresan, V.A.; Sera, D.; Kerekes, T.; Teodorescu, R.; ,
"Improved voltage regulation strategies by PV inverters in LV rural networks," Power
Electronics for Distributed Generation Systems (PEDG), 2012 3rd IEEE International
Symposium on , vol., no., pp.775-781, 25-28 June 2012.
[20] R. Kuffel, J. Giesbrecht, T. Maguire, R. P. Wierckx, P. Mclaren, “RTDS-a fully digital

power system simulator operating in real time,” Presentation at ICDS-95, College Station,
USA, April 1995.
[21] J. Langston, S. Suryanarayanan, M. Steurer, M. Andrus, S. Woodruff, and P. F. Ribeiro,

“Experiences with the Simulation of a Notional All-Electric Ship Integrated Power System
62
on a Large-Scale High-Speed Electromagnetic Transients Simulator,” IEEE Power
Engineering Society General Meeting, October 2006.
[22] Langston, James; Schoder, Karl; Steurer, Mischa; Faruque, Omar; Hauer, John; Bogdan,
Ferenc; Bravo, Richard; Mather, Barry; Katiraei, Farid; , "Power hardware-in-the-loop
testing of a 500 kW photovoltaic array inverter," IECON 2012 - 38th Annual Conference on
IEEE Industrial Electronics Society , vol., no., pp.4797-4802, 25-28 Oct. 2012.
[23] Ravindra, H.; Faruque, M.O.; Schoder, K.; Steurer, M.; McLaren, P.; Meeker, R.; ,
"Dynamic interactions between distribution network voltage regulators for large and
distributed PV plants," Transmission and Distribution Conference and Exposition (T&D),
2012 IEEE PES , vol., no., pp.1-8, 7-10 May 2012
[24] Under Review: Ravindra, H.; Faruque, M.O.; Meeker, R.; Schoder, K.; Steurer, M.;
McLaren, P.; , "Investigation of PV Inverter based Voltage Regulation schemes on a Florida
Utility Feeder,".
[25] Under Review: Ravindra, H.; Faruque, M.O.; Schoder, K.; Meeker, R.; Steurer, M.;
McLaren, P.;, "Modeling, Validation and Analysis of Florida Utility Feeder with large PV
penetration".
63
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
Harsha Ravindra (IEEE Student Member) was born in Davangere, India on the 9th of
March 1986. He has received B.E in Electronics and Communication Engineering in May 2008
from V.T.U in India. He is currently pursuing his M.S in the school of Electrical and Computer
Engineering at Florida State University. Since January 2010, he has been working as a graduate
research assistant in the area of power systems engineering under Dr. Mischa Steurer at the
Center for Advanced Power Systems.
64

Voltaic Jnverters

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Voltaic Jnverters

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Florida State University Libraries

Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School

Dynamic Interactions Between Photo

DYNAMIC INTERACTIONS BETWEEN PHOTO VOLTAIC INVERTERS AND

A Thesis submitted to the

List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ vii

2. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION ......................................................................................................7

3. MODELING OF SYSTEM ...................................................................................................11

4. SIMULATION AND RESULTS ..........................................................................................34

A PV PANEL INFORMATION ...............................................................................................54

B RTDS SCRIPTS ....................................................................................................................54

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .........................................................................................................64

1 Powerflow validation data for feeder 1 ..............................................................................29

2 Short-Circuit Validation of Feeder 2 .................................................................................30

3 Average and Maximum errors for validation of feeder 2 ..................................................33

4 Highest variation scenarios for feeder 1 ............................................................................43

1 One line diagram of feeder 1 ...............................................................................................8

2 One line diagram of feeder 2 ...............................................................................................9

3 One rack model of feeder 1. ...............................................................................................13

4 Three rack non-real time model of feeder 2 in RTDS .......................................................15

5 Load aggregation for one rack model of feeder 2 ..............................................................15

6 One rack model of feeder 2 in RTDS ................................................................................16

7 Block Diagram showing operation of OLTC.....................................................................17

8 Implementation of tap changing operation in RTDS .........................................................18

9 Tap changing power transformer. ......................................................................................18

10 Block Diagram showing operation of SCB .......................................................................19

11 SCB installed in field .........................................................................................................19

12 Block Diagram showing operation of SVR .......................................................................20

13 Implementation of tap changing operation in RTDS .........................................................21

14 SVR installed in field .........................................................................................................21

15 Block diagram of PV system modeled...............................................................................22

16 Control of real and reactive power of PV inverter .............................................................23

17 Flow chart of Incremental Conductance MPPT Algorithm ...............................................24

18 German Low Voltage Interconnection Standard Curve.....................................................26

19 Volt-Var Curve ..................................................................................................................27

20 Volt-pf curve ......................................................................................................................28

21 Real Power matching at feeder 2 substation ......................................................................31

22 Breaker currents for Phase A, B and C ..............................................................................32

24 Recloser voltages for Phase A,B and C .............................................................................33

25 PV power profile ................................................................................................................35

26 Load profile ........................................................................................................................35

27 Voltage profile with no regulation for LPV case ...............................................................36

30 Voltage profile with no regulation for DPV case ..............................................................39

34 Load v/s PV power variation .............................................................................................43

38 Voltage profile for 8 days from recloser measurement unit ..............................................48

39 PV Power profile used for feeder 2....................................................................................48

1.2 SUNGRIN Project

3. Develop solutions that enable successful integration of relatively high levels of PV

4. Disseminate information and raise awareness

Voltage regulation schemes

Unintentional islanding prevention

Intentional islanding/microgrid operation

False inverter trips due to utility line transients

Reverse power flow in secondary network distribution systems

Reactive power control schemes for multiple inverters

Effects of variable cloud cover on system stability

Secure communications and control protocols between distributed PV systems and

2.1 Distribution Feeder 1

Figure 1 One line diagram of feeder 1

2.2 Distribution Feeder 2

Figure 2 One line diagram of feeder 2

3.1 RTDS Simulator

3.2 Modeling of Feeder in RTDS