Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Project report
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the
Requirements for the award of the degree
of
Bachelor of Technology
In
Electrical Engineering
by
1. Rahul Syal (20108011)
2. Vivek Sisaudia (20108017)
3. Vikalp Dhiman (20102005)
4. Pranjal Mishra (20108090)
5. Prashant Srivastava(20102076)
Guided
by
CERTIFICATE
We hereby certify that the work which is being presented in this
project report Modeling of Wind Farms in the Load Flow Analysis in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the Degree of Bachelor of
Technology in Electrical Engineering and submitted in the Department of
Electrical Engineering of
Allahabad is an authentic record of our own work carried out during a period
from July 2013 to May 2014 under the guidance of Dr. Asheesh K.Singh.The
matter presented in this project report has not been submitted by us for the
award of any other degree of this or any other institution.
Submitted by:
1. Rahul
Syal (20108011)
2. Vivek
Sisaudia (20108017)
3.
Vikalp Dhiman (20102005)
4.
Pranjal Mishra (20108090)
5.
Prashant Srivastava (20102076)
2
Project Guide :
Dr.
Asheesh K.Singh
Associate
Professor
Electrical Engineering Department
Acknowledgement
We would like to articulate our deep gratitude to our project guide
Dr. Asheesh K. Singh, Associate Professor,
Electrical
Engineering
Department who has always been source of motivation and firm support
for carrying out the project. We express our gratitude to Dr. Asheesh K.
Singh,
Associate
Professor,Electrical
Engineering
Department
for
his
MNNIT,
and
Allahabad
staff
of
Department
of
Electrical
been very
difficult on our project work. An assemblage of this nature could never have
been attempted with our reference to and inspiration from the works of
others whose details are mentioned in references section. We acknowledge
our indebtedness to all of them.
feeling towards our parents and God who directly or indirectly encouraged
and motivated us during this dissertation.
Abstract
The purpose of this project is to Modeling of Wind Farms in the Load Flow
Analysis. Two methods are proposed, for the simulation of wind farms with
asynchronous generators in the load flow analysis. Both methods are based
on the steady-state model of the induction machine. The first involves
improving the conventional PQ bus, and the second involves modeling the
generators in steady-state in the bus where the wind farm is located. The
two sets of results are then compared.
When the conventional PQ bus model is used, the real and reactive powers
have constant values, although some authors propose methods for
modifying these values in order to represent loads depending either on the
voltage or on the frequency. When the PX bus model is used, the real power
is known and the reactive power is calculated as a function of the
magnetizing reactance of the generators.
Both methods suppose prior knowledge of the WT features. The turbines
power curve is generally supplied by the manufacturer. When the induction
generator parameters are not known, they must be estimated. One of the
problems that wind energy will create in electrical power systems is the
4
dependence of the injected power on the wind speed. The wind speed
cannot he predicted, but the probability of a particular wind speed occurring
can be estimated. This can be done if the probability distribution is known
by assuming it to be a Wei-bull distribution.
ensuring that an explicit provision has been made and that I have obtained
written permission from my Unit Coordinator/Supervisor for doing so
(documentation supporting this provision MUST be attached)
Table of Content
Title
1
Certificate
2
Acknowledgement
3
Abstract
4
Certificate of Non plagiarism
5
6
Table of content
6
Chapter 1: WIND ENERGY- AN OVERVIEW
8
1.1 Wind energy in India
8
1.2 Economy of wind energy in India
9
1.3 Wind farms in India
10
Chapter 2:
TURBINES.
FUNDAMENTALS OF WIND
12
AC/DC
load
flow
43
Chapter 5: MODELS OF ASYNCHRONOUS WIND
TURBINES
5.1 INTRODUCTION
46
5.2
VARIOUS
TYPES
OF
WTGUs
50
Chapter 6: SIMULATION AND RESULT
6.1 MODELING OF THE POWER IN THE WIND POWER
SYSTEM
6.2 SIMULATION
61
6.3 RESULT
63
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
CHAPTER 1
WIND ENERGY- AN OVERVIEW
INTRODUCTION
The conventional energy sources are limited and pollute the environment.
So more attention and Interest have been paid to the utilization of
renewable energy source such as Wind Energy, Fuel-cell,
etc.,
Wind
Energy
is
the
fastest
growing
and
Solar
most
Energy
promising
underpinned the growth of the Indian wind energy market. India has a great
untapped potential for wind energy.
According to official
estimates, the
of installed
capacity, but some experts think that this figure is on the conservative
side, and that technological improvements could significantly increase
this potential. The positive development of wind energy in India has mainly
been driven by progressive state level legislation, including policy measures
such as renewable portfolio standards and feed -in-tariffs. At the moment,
there is no coherent national renewable energy policy to drive
the
The
Government
of
India
is
currently
considering
the
securing India's
Wind Energy Outlook, the wind industry, both domestic and international,
stands ready to do its part in achieving an energy revolution in India.
In the early 1980s, the Indian government established the Ministry of NonConventional Energy Sources (MNES) to encourage diversification of the
country's energy supply, and satisfy the increasing energy demand of a
rapidly growing economy. In 2006, this ministry was renamed the Ministry of
New and Renewable Energy (MNRE). Renewable energy is growing rapidly
in India. With an installed capacity of 13.2 GW, renewable energy sources
(excluding large hydro) currently account for 9% of India's overall power
generation capacity. By 2012, the Government of India is planning to add an
extra 14 GW of renewable resources in its 10th Five Year Plan. The
Government of India had set itself a target of adding 3.5 GW of renewable
energy sources to the generation mix. In reality, however, nearly double
that figure was achieved. In this period, more than 5.4 GW of wind
energy was added to the generation mix, as well as 1.3 GW from other
Resources.
The Indian Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE) estimates that
there is a potential of around 90,000 MW for the country, including
48,561 MW of wind power, 14,294 MW of small hydro power and
26,367 MW of biomass In addition, the potential for solar energy is
estimated for most parts of the country at around 20 MW per square
kilometer of
capacity.
identify suitable areas for harnessing wind power for commercial use, and
216 suitable sites have been identified. However, the wind measurements
were carried out at lower hub heights and did not take into account
technological innovation and improvements and repowering of old turbines
to replace them with bigger ones at heights of 55-65 meters, to replace
them with Bigger ones. At heights of 55-65 meters, the Indian Wind Turbine
Manufacturers Isolation (IWTMA) estimates that the 12 potential for wind
development
in
India
is
around
65-70
GW.
land
availability and
expanded
resource
exploration,
the
potential could be as big as 100 GW. Wind power in India has been
concentrated in a few regions, especially the Southern state of Tamil Nadu,
which maintains its position as the state with the most wind power, with 4.1
GW installed at the end of 2008, representing 44% of Indias total wind
capacity.
of
450
MW,
the
MuppandalPerungudi
region
near
12
policy
for
private
13
CHAPTER 2:
FUNDAMENTALS OF WIND TURBINES
2.1 Power in the wind.
Wind energy is not a constant source of energy. It varies continuously and
gives energy in sudden bursts. About 50% of the entire energy is given out
in just 15% of the operating time. Wind strengths vary and thus cannot
guarantee continuous power. It is best used in the context of
system
many
thousands
of
wind
energy was about 94.1GW in 2007 which makes up nearly 1% of the total
power generated in the world. Globally, the long-term technical potential
of
wind
energy
is
believed
to
be
times
P 0.5 A V 3 C P
(1)
14
CP
=the power coefficient which is a function of both tip speed ratio, and
CP
Betz Limit:
No wind turbine could convert more than 59.3% of the kinetic energy
of the wind into Mechanical energy turning a rotor. This is known as
the Betz Limit, and is the theoretical Maximum coefficient of power for
any wind turbine. The maximum value of
CP
wind
turbine,
wind
extracted wind power at the shaft reaches its maximum. Such families of
Wind turbine power curves can be represented by a single dimensionless
characteristic curve namely the
CP
power coefficient is plotted against the TSR. For a given turbine, the power
coefficient depends not only on the TSR but also on the blade pitch angle.
Figure shows the typical variation of the power coefficient with respect to
the TSR with the blade pitch control. The mechanical power transmitted to
the shaft is
P 0.5 A V 3 C P
(2)
Where is the function of TSR and the pitch angle . For a wind turbine with
radius R, it can be expressed
R
V
(3)
The maximum value of the shaft mechanical power for any wind speed can
be expressed as
16
P 0.5 C P ( R
)3
(4)
Thus the maximum mechanical power that can be extracted from the wind
is proportional to the cube of the rotor speed.
2.4 Wei-bull DistributionWind speed keeps changing hence to define constant power there is a need
of probability speed distribution. It is done by Wei-bull or Rayleigh
Distribution.
17
integrated) over all the range of wind speeds. Thus, the mean power
mean speed U is given by:
18
Pm
at a
P P(u ).W (u ).du
m
0
CHAPTER 3
Wind Turbine Control Systems
Wind turbines require certain control systems. Horizontal-axis turbines have
to be oriented to face the wind. In high winds, it is desirable to reduce the
drive train loads and protect the generator and the power electronic
equipment for overloading, by limiting the turbine power to the rated value
up to the furling speed. At gust speeds, the machine has to be stalled. At
low and moderate wind speeds, the aim should be to capture power as
efficiently as possible. Along with many operating characteristics, the
technical data sheet of a turbine mentions its output at a particular wind
speed.
This
produces its
is
the
minimum
wind
speed
at
which
the
turbine
normally between 9 and 16 m/s. The choice of the rated wind speed
depends on the factors related to the wind characteristics of a given site.
The generator rating is best chosen so as to best utilize the mechanical
output of the turbine at the rated wind speed. Wind turbines can have four
different types of control mechanisms, as discussed below:
19
The system changes the pitch angle of the blades according to the variation
of wind speed. As discussed earlier, with pitch control, it is possible to
achieve a high efficiency by continuously aligning the blade in the direction
of the relative wind. On a pitch controlled machine, as the wind speed
exceeds its rated speed, the blades are gradually turned about the
longitudinal axis and out of the wind to increase the pitch angle. This
reduces the aerodynamic efficiency of the rotor, and the rotor output power
decreases. When the wind speed exceeds the safe limit for the system, the
pitch angle is so changed that the power output reduces to zero and the
machine shifts to the stall mode. After the gust passes, the pitch angle is
reset to the normal position and the turbine is restarted. At normal wind
speeds, the blade pitch angle should ideally settle to a value at which the
output power equals the rated power. The input variable to the pitch
controller is the error signal arising from the difference between the output
electrical power and the reference power. The pitch controller operates the
blade actuator to alter the pitch angle. During operation below the rated
speed, the control system endeavors to the pitch the blade at an angle that
maximizes the rotor efficiency. The generator must be able to absorb the
mechanical power output and deliver to the load. Hence, the generator
output power needs to be simultaneously adjusted.
20
by properly shaping the rotor blade profile to create turbulence on the rotor
blade side not facing the wind.
(b) Active stall control:
In this method of control, at high wind speeds, the blade is rotated
by a few degrees in the direction opposite to that in a pitch controlled
machine. This increases the angle of attack, which can be controlled to keep
the output power at its rated value at all high wind speeds below the furling
speed.
A passive controlled machine shows a drop in power at high winds. The
action of active stall control is sometimes called deep stall.
Owing
to
Pm Pe
(6)
0.5 J (2 ) ( Pm Pe ).dt
2
2
1
t1
21
(7)
any
additional
mechanism,
simply
by
Here Cp is
22
CHAPTER 4
GRID CONNECTED AND ASYNCHRONOUS
GENERATOR FOR WIND TURBINES
In terms of the generators for wind-power application, there are different
concepts in use today. The major distinction among them is made between
fixed speed and variable speed wind turbine generator concepts. In the
early stage of wind power development, fixed-speed wind turbines and
induction generators were often used in wind farms. But the limitations of
23
such generators, e.g. low efficiency and poor power quality, adversely
influence
their
further
application.
With
large-scale
exploration
and
fed
induction
generators
(DFIGs)
and
permanent
magnetic
turbine
with
permanent
magnet
synchronous
generator
and
developing control schemes for the wind turbine generator. The modeled
system consists of a PMSG model, a pitch-angled controlled wind turbine
model and a drive train model.
Although the multiphase slip ring assembly reduces reliability and requires
regular maintenance, it allows easy control of the rotor (moving) winding set
so both multiphase winding sets actively participate in the energy
conversion process with the electronic controller controlling half (or less) of
the power capacity of the electric machine for full control of the machine.
This is especially important when operating at synchronous speed, because
then the rotor current will be DC current. Without slip rings the production of
DC current in the rotor winding is only possible when the frequency
converter is at least partly located in the rotor and rotating with it. This kind
of rotor converter naturally requires its own winding system (preferably
using high frequency in the 10 kHz range for compact size) for power
25
transfer out of or into the rotor. Furthermore, there are thermal and
mechanical constraints (for example centrifugal forces) of the power
electronic assembly in the rotor. However, high speed alternators have had
electronics incorporated on the rotor for many years. Furthermore, high
frequency wireless power transfer is used in many applications because of
improvements in efficiency and cost over low frequency alternatives.
pattern
and
voltage
profile.
Other
variables
are
also
26
i.
Finding the f(x) i.e. the first derivative of f(x) can be difficult in cases
where f(x) is complicated.
ii.
Gauss-Seidel Method
27
In an n -bus power system, let the number of P-Q buses be np and the
number of P-V (generator) buses be ng such that n = np + ng + 1. Both
voltage magnitudes and angles of the P-Q buses and voltage angles of the
P-V buses are unknown making a total number of 2np + ng quantities to be
determined. Amongst the known quantities are 2np numbers of real and
reactive powers of the P-Q buses, 2ng numbers of real powers and voltage
magnitudes of the P-V buses and voltage magnitude and angle of the slack
bus. Therefore there are sufficient numbers of known quantities to obtain a
solution of the load flow problem.
28
pattern
and
voltage
profile.
Other
variables
are
also
justified
and
sometimes
lead
to
unrealistic
results.
Especially
the
slack bus power is estimated as the algebraic sum of all other converters,
which can increase the total number of iterations.
In Sequential Power Flow method, both ac and dc sides are considered
together as a unified ac-dc grid for solving the power flow. Since ac and dc
equations are solved simultaneously, an external iteration loop is not
required here. However, in this algorithm, the slack station losses are
considered as a separate variable XS. Apart from ac and dc mismatch
equations, an additional mismatch equation is therefore included to account
for slack converter losses.
31
CHAPTER 5
MODELS OF ASYNCHRONOUS WIND
TURBINES
5.1 INTRODUCTION
Wind energy is one of the important renewable energy sources.
As
system
has
extract power. Besides, the extracted energy is the very unstable since the
nature of wind flow is spontaneous which this situation will lower the power
extraction and subsequently reduce the efficiency of power generation.
Wind Turbine with Variable Speed Generator The wind turbine model is used
to generate mechanical torque. The negative value of output torque means
the wind turbine is providing torque. Result shows the output torque
is
positive for wind speed smaller than 7 m/s, which represent that the
wind turbine is not providing power, but consuming power from the
load. Hence, the value of wind speed at 7 m/s could be possibly as the cutin speed of the wind turbine model and the result of output mechanical
torque. For a range of wind speed is shown in Figure, the effect of both
varying
generator
speed
and
wind
speed
on
the
output torque is
33
speed, rotor speed and the terminal voltage. For a given turbine and
generator characteristics, wind speed alone is the independent
variable
while
the
rotor
speed
and
terminal
voltage
are
variation.
The
method
suggested
here
facilitates
the
and
an
assumed
voltage,
34
the
induction
generator
Pe
(DFIG): The DFIG consists of a pitch controlled wind turbine and an induction
generator whose stator winding is directly connected to the grid but the
rotor circuit is connected to the grid through a back to back voltage source
converter. The voltage source converter (connected to the rotor) applies
voltage across the rotor which is regulated by two rotor current controllers .
WTGU having generator (synchronous/induction) with front end converter
(GFEC): The GFEC consists of a pitch controlled wind turbine and a variable
frequency synchronous or induction generator connected to the grid through
a power electronic converter (back to back voltage source converter). In this
case, the voltage source converter output applied to the stator is varied by
the control signals obtained from the current controllers.
35
A way to model a wind farm as a PQ bus is to assume a generated real power and a
given power factor, with which the consumed reactive power is calculated. Some
improvements can be achieved if the steady-state model of the induction machine
is taken into account. The model shown in Fig is assumed. In this model, applying
the conservation of complex power theorem (Boucherots theorem) allows the
following expression to be written for the reactive power consumed by the
machine:
Q Q0 Q1P Q2 P 2
(8)
Where above mentioned constants are experimentally obtained. If the wind speed
is desired to be the input datum for the problem, the real power can be obtained as
a function of it:
P 0.5 A V 3 C P
(9)
All parameters have been mentioned already.
CHAPTER 6
SIMULATION AND RESULTS
37
Pe : Active Power in MW
Reactive Power in MVAR
|V| : Terminal Voltage in P.U.
CAS
BUS NO.
Qe :
TYPE of WTGU
Win
38
Pe(MW)
Spee
d
1
33
Stall
Regulated -
0.0000
0.00000
0.85082
Fixed Speed
Semi
Variable -
00
0.0000
0
0.00000
1
0.88610
18
Speed
DFIG
00
0.0000
0
0.00000
1
0.86764
00
0.0000
0
0.00000
9
0.93357
00
0.7109
0.13862
0.89428
25
33
Stall
Fixed Speed
Semi
Variable 8
65
0.3671
1
0.04773
9
0.92887
18
Speed
DFIG
9.5
90
0.5994
4
0.00000
6
0.93108
02
0.5604
0
0.00000
3
0.96240
38
25
GFEC
Regulated 11
GFEC
33
Stall
Regulated 13
0.8670
0.24059
0.91596
Fixed Speed
Semi
Variable 10
95
0.5657
2
0.09581
2
0.94773
18
Speed
DFIG
11
84
0.9084
3
0.00000
3
0.97189
25
GFEC
10.5
36
0.8519
0
0.00000
3
0.97190
65
33
Stall
Regulated 13
0.8704
0.19187
0.98510
Fixed Speed
Semi
Variable 10
71
0.5657
2
0.09754
8
0.98327
18
Speed
DFIG
11
84
0.9084
8
0.00000
6
0.99125
10.5
36
0.8519
0
0.00000
8
0.98416
65
25
GFEC
39
BUS NO.
TYPE of WTGU
Wind
E
1
Pe(MW)
Qe(MVAR)
|V| (pu)
( Uw )
-
0.000000
0.000000
0.8784
Speed
33
Stall
Speed
Semi Variable Speed
0.000000
0.000000
86
0.9331
18
DFIG
0.000000
0.000000
39
0.8958
0.000000
78
0.9648
25
Regulated
Fixed
GFEC
0.000000
24
2
33
Stall
Regulated
Fixed
11
Speed
Semi Variable Speed
18
DFIG
25
GFEC
0.748595
0.157656
0.9199
0.394330
0.049261
91
0.9586
9.5
0.619500
0.000000
45
0.9589
0.586000
0.000000
91
0.9821
07
33
Stall
Regulated
Fixed
13
0.890600
0.270924
0.9586
Speed
Semi Variable Speed
10
0.590918
0.109595
61
0.9752
18
DFIG
11
0.929250
0.000000
78
0.9911
25
GFEC
10.5
0.879000
0.000000
95
0.9912
10
40
33
Stall
6
18
25
Regulated
Fixed
13
0.892213
0.200400
1.0150
Speed
Semi Variable Speed
10
0.590918
0.099890
36
1.0125
DFIG
11
0.929250
0.000000
25
1.0511
0.000000
19
1.0130
GFEC
10.5
0.879000
85
CAS
BUS NO.
TYPE of WTGU
Pe(MW)
Qe(MVAR)
|V| (pu)
)
-
0.0000
0.0000
0.8172
Wind
Spee
d
( Uw
33
Stall
Regulated
Speed
Semi Variable Speed
0.0000
0.0000
0.8921
18
DFIG
0.0000
0.0000
0.8422
25
GFEC
0.0000
0.0000
0.9150
33
Stall
11
0.5102
0.1235
0.8876
Speed
Semi Variable Speed
0.2634
0.0374
0.9162
18
DFIG
9.5
0.4728
0.0000
0.9167
25
GFEC
0.4113
0.0000
0.9349
33
Stall
13
0.7010
0.1909
0.9089
Speed
Semi Variable Speed
10
0.5016
0.0981
0.9293
18
DFIG
11
0.7561
0.0000
0.9532
Regulated
Regulated
Fixed
Fixed
Fixed
41
25
GFEC
10.5
0.6281
0.0000
0.9976
33
Stall
13
0.7010
0.1823
0.9812
Speed
Semi Variable Speed
10
0.5016
0.0873
0.9801
18
DFIG
11
0.7561
0.0000
0.9968
25
GFEC
10.5
0.6281
0.0000
0.9902
Pe(MW)
Qe(MVAR)
|V| (pu)
( Uw )
-
0.0000
0.0000
0.8165
Regulated
Fixed
CASE
BUS NO.
TYPE of WTGU
Wind
Spee
d
33
Stall
Regulated
Fixed Speed
Semi
Variable
0.0000
0.0000
0.8903
18
Speed
DFIG
0.0000
0.0000
0.8396
25
GFEC
0.0000
0.0000
0.9076
33
Stall
11
0.5063
0.1210
0.8814
Fixed Speed
Semi
Variable
0.2610
0.0319
0.9033
18
Speed
DFIG
9.5
0.4713
0.0000
0.9102
25
GFEC
0.4099
0.0000
0.9322
Regulated
42
33
Stall
Regulated
13
0.6944
0.1889
0.9018
Fixed Speed
Semi
Variable
10
0.5001
0.0941
0.9246
18
Speed
DFIG
11
0.7548
0.0000
0.9513
25
GFEC
10.5
0.6219
0.0000
0.9941
33
Stall
Regulated
13
0.6944
0.1799
0.9779
Fixed Speed
Semi
Variable
10
0.5001
0.0856
0.9734
18
Speed
DFIG
11
0.7548
0.0000
0.9912
25
GFEC
10.5
0.6219
0.0000
0.9837
CASE
BUS
TYPE of WTGU
NO.
Win
Pe(MW)
Qe(MVAR)
|V|
d
Spe
(pu)
ed
( U
w)
1
33
6
18
25
0.0000
0.0000
0.81
Speed
Semi Variable Speed
0.0000
0.0000
59
0.88
0.0000
96
0.83
0.0000
87
0.90
DFIG
GFEC
0.0000
0.0000
65
2
33
6
11
8
0.5061
0.2604
0.1204
0.88
0.0311
05
0.90
19
43
18
DFIG
9.5
0.4702
0.0000
0.90
25
GFEC
0.4089
0.0000
95
0.93
01
33
6
18
25
13
0.6928
0.1881
0.90
Speed
Semi Variable Speed
10
0.4990
0.0936
02
0.92
DFIG
11
0.7541
0.0000
27
0.94
0.0000
98
0.99
GFEC
10.5
0.6207
26
4
33
13
0.6928
0.1784
0.97
Speed
Semi Variable Speed
10
0.4990
0.0840
63
0.97
18
DFIG
11
0.7541
0.0000
18
0.99
25
GFEC
10.5
0.6207
0.0000
01
0.98
15
AT A PARTICULAR SPEED:
44
CASE
BUS NO.
TYPE of WTGU
Wind
Pe(MW)
Qe(MVAR)
Spee
|V|
(pu)
d
1
33
( Uw )
-
0.0000
0.0000
0.817
Speed
Semi Variable Speed
0.0000
0.0000
2
0.892
18
DFIG
0.0000
0.0000
1
0.842
25
GFEC
0.0000
0.0000
2
0.915
0
33
Speed
Semi Variable Speed
11
8
0.5102
0.2634
0.1235
0.887
0.0374
6
0.916
18
DFIG
9.5
0.4728
0.0000
2
0.916
25
GFEC
0.4113
0.0000
7
0.934
9
33
13
0.7010
0.1909
0.908
Speed
Semi Variable Speed
10
0.5016
0.0981
9
0.929
18
DFIG
11
0.7561
0.0000
3
0.953
0.0000
2
0.997
25
GFEC
10.5
0.6281
6
4
33
13
0.7010
0.1823
0.981
Speed
Semi Variable Speed
10
0.5016
0.0873
2
0.980
18
DFIG
11
0.7561
0.0000
1
0.996
25
GFEC
10.5
0.6281
0.0000
8
0.990
2
45
CAS
BUS NO.
TYPE of WTGU
Wind
Pe(MW)
Qe(MVAR)
|V| (pu)
Speed
( Uw )
33
Stall Regulated
0.000000
0.000000
0.850821
Fixed Speed
Semi
Variable
0.000000
0.000000
0.886101
18
Speed
DFIG
0.000000
0.000000
0.867649
25
GFEC
0.000000
0.000000
0.933572
33
Stall Regulated
11
0.710965
0.138621
0.894289
Fixed Speed
Semi
Variable
0.367190
0.047734
0.928876
18
Speed
DFIG
9.5
0.599402
0.000000
0.931083
25
GFEC
0.560438
0.000000
0.962401
33
Stall Regulated
13
0.867095
0.240592
0.915962
Fixed Speed
Semi
Variable
10
0.565784
0.095813
0.947733
18
Speed
DFIG
11
0.908436
0.000000
0.971893
25
GFEC
10.5
0.851965
0.000000
0.971908
33
Stall Regulated
13
0.870471
0.191872
0.985108
Fixed Speed
Semi
Variable
10
0.565784
0.097548
0.983276
18
Speed
DFIG
11
0.908436
0.000000
0.991258
25
GFEC
10.5
0.851965
0.000000
0.984167
BUS
NO.
TYPE of WTGU
Wind
Pe(MW)
Speed
Qe(MVA
|V| (pu)
R)
( Uw )
1
31
Stall
9
14
22
Regulated
Fixed
0.00000
0.00000
0.850821
Speed
Semi Variable Speed
0
0.00000
0
0.00000
0.886101
DFIG
0
0.00000
0
0.00000
0.867649
0
0.00000
0
0.00000
0.933572
11
0.71096
0.13862
0.894289
GFEC
31
Stall
Regulated
Speed
Semi Variable Speed
5
0.36719
1
0.04773
0.928876
14
DFIG
9.5
0
0.59940
4
0.00000
0.931083
22
GFEC
2
0.56043
0
0.00000
0.962401
13
0.86709
0.24059
0.915962
Regulated
Fixed
31
Stall
Speed
Semi Variable Speed
10
5
0.56578
2
0.09581
0.947733
14
DFIG
11
4
0.90843
3
0.00000
0.971893
22
GFEC
10.5
6
0.85196
0
0.00000
0.971908
13
0.87047
0.19187
0.985108
Regulated
Fixed
31
Stall
Fixed
Speed
Semi Variable Speed
10
1
0.56578
2
0.09754
0.983276
14
DFIG
11
4
0.90843
8
0.00000
0.991258
22
GFEC
10.5
6
0.85196
0
0.00000
0.984167
47
Bus No.
Wind Speed
Pe(MW)
Qe(MW)
|V| (pu)
(Uw) in m/s
1.
18
14
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.8422
0.8676
2.
18
14
9.5
9.5
0.4728
0.5994
0.0000
0.0000
0.9167
0.9310
3.
18
14
11
11
0.7561
0.9084
0.0000
0.0000
0.9532
0.9718
4.
18
14
11
11
0.7561
0.9084
0.0000
0.0000
0.9968
0.9912
Pe(MW)
Qe(MW)
|V| (pu)
Bus No.
Wind Speed
(Uw) in m/s
1.
25
22
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.9150
0.9335
2.
25
22
9
9
0.4113
0.5604
0.0000
0.0000
0.9349
0.9624
3.
25
22
10.5
10.5
0.6281
0.8519
0.0000
0.0000
0.9976
0.9719
4.
25
10.5
0.6281
0.0000
0.9902
48
22
10.5
0.8519
0.0000
0.9841
Pe(MW)
Qe(MW)
|V| (pu)
Bus No.
Wind Speed
(Uw) in m/s
1.
33
31
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.8172
0.8508
2.
33
31
11
11
0.5102
0.7109
0.1235
0.1386
0.8876
0.8942
3.
33
31
13
13
0.7010
0.8670
0.1909
0.2405
0.9089
0.9159
4.
33
31
13
13
0.7010
0.8704
0.1823
0.1918
0.9812
0.9851
Pe(MW)
Qe(MW)
|V| (pu)
Bus No.
Wind Speed
(Uw) in m/s
1.
6
9
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.8921
0.8861
2.
6
9
8
8
0.2634
0.3671
0.0374
0.0477
0.9162
0.9288
3.
6
9
10
10
0.5016
0.5657
0.0981
0.0958
0.9293
0.9477
4.
6
9
10
10
0.5016
0.5657
0.0873
0.0942
0.9801
0.9832
In above tables:
Pe: Active power in MW.
Qe: Reactive Power In MW.
|V|: Bus voltage in pu.
49
Note: In all the above tables four different cases have been tabulated.
These cases are
1. WTGU operating below cut-in wind speed (which is equivalent to the
system without WTGU) and system loads corresponds to the base
load.
2. WTGU operating at low wind speeds with all the variable speed WTGU
operating with specified Q and system loads corresponds to the base
load.
3. WTGU operating at higher wind speeds than case 2 with GFEC and
DGIG operating with settable Q and system loads corresponds to the
base load.
4. WTGU operating at wind speeds corresponding to case 3 with GFEC
and DFIG operating with settable Q and system load corresponds to
30 % of the base load.
The feeder voltage is 12.66 kV (base voltage). The base case total
load is 4.715 MW and 2.3 MVAR.
Data: Under nominal condition each of G1, G2, G3, G4, G5, and G6
generates 700 MW whereas G3 left slack. The converters connected to DC
buses DC1, DC2 and DC3 control the DC power at 600 MW, 300 MW and 300
MW respectively. The converter connected to DC4 is slack converter keeps
the DC link constant at 320KV.The base power for the DC side is 600 MW
however the base MVA for the AC side is 100 MVA.
50
Case 1: All Converters are in PQ model with zero reactive power injection
and with rated active power.
Sequential
Algorithm
Simultaneous
Algorithm
AC
Voltage(p
Angle(ra
Bus
.u.)
d)
1.0219
0.2918
1.0018
3
4
Pinj (p.u.)
Voltage(p
Angle(ra
Pinj
.u.)
d)
(p.u.)
7.000
1.0219
0.2918
7.000
0.1256
7.000
1.0018
0.1256
7.000
1.0219
-0.1079
7.000
1.0219
-0.1079
7.000
1.0018
-0.2785
7.051
1.0018
-0.2785
7.0509
51
0.9926
0.1828
0.9926
0.1828
0.9759
0.0086
0.9759
0.0086
0.9616
-0.1317
0.9616
-0.1317
0.9616
-0.3372
0.9616
-0.3372
0.9764
-0.5374
0.9764
-0.5374
10
0.9842
-0.3950
0.9842
-0.3950
11
1.0081
-0.2201
1.0081
-0.2201
12
0.9923
-0.3387
0.9923
-0.3387
13
0.9771
-0.5850
0.9771
-0.5850
14
1.0018
-0.2236
7.000
1.0018
-0.2236
7.000
15
1.0018
-0.4680
7.000
1.0018
-0.4680
7.000
DC
Voltage(p
Angle(ra
Pinj (p.u.)
Voltage(p
Angle(ra
Pinj
Bus
.u.)
d)
.u.)
d)
(p.u.)
0.9986
0.9986
-1.0000
0.9893
0.5000
0.9893
1.0000
0.5000
0.9953
-0.5000
0.9953
0.5000
0.9770
1.0000
0.97706
1.0000
Case 2: All the converters are in PV mode maintaining the PCC voltage to
1.0 p.u.
Sequential
Algorithm
Simultaneous
Algorithm
AC
Voltage(p
Angle(ra
Bus
.u.)
d)
1.0219
0.2743
2
3
4
1.0018
1.0219
1.0018
0.1062
-0.1074
-0.2767
Voltage(p
Angle(ra
Pinj
.u.)
d)
(p.u.)
7.000
1.0219
0.2743
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.0291
1.0018
1.0219
1.0018
0.1062
-0.1074
-0.2767
7.000
7.000
7.0295
Pinj (p.u.)
52
5
6
1.0078
0.9911
0.1623
-0.0050
0
0
1.0078
0.9911
0.1623
-0.0050
8
0
0
7
8
9
10
11
0.9926
0.9861
0.9926
0.9911
1.0078
-0.1445
-0.3403
-0.5327
-0.3928
-0.2200
0
0
0
0
0
0.9926
0.9861
0.9926
0.9911
1.0078
-0.1445
-0.3403
-0.5327
-0.3928
-0.2200
0
0
0
0
0
12
13
14
15
0.9926
0.9926
1.0018
1.0018
-0.3338
-0.5782
-0.2179
-0.4621
0
0
7.000
7.000
0.9926
0.9926
1.0018
1.0018
-0.3338
-0.5782
-0.2179
-0.4621
0
0
7.000
7.000
DC
Voltage(p
Angle(ra
Pinj (p.u.)
Voltage(p
Angle(ra
Pinj
Bus
.u.)
d)
.u.)
d)
(p.u.)
1
2
3
0.9986
0.9893
0.9953
-1.0000
0.5000
-0.5000
0.9986
0.9893
0.9953
-1.0000
0.5000
-0.5000
1.0000
0.97706
1.0000
0.9770
6
53
Note: The problem was solved using two methods (Genetic Algorithm and
Newton Raphson) and there results were tabulated. A DC link is connected
between bus 1 and bus 14.The voltage values of all buses have been
bounded between 0.95 and 1.05.
Also for Genetic Algorithm:
54
Result:
Actual Result:
Bus
Voltage (pu)
No.
GAOPF
Newton
OPF
55
GAOPF
Newton
OPF
Best
Worst
1
2
3
0.98
0.99
1.01
1.02
1.00
0.97
0.99
0.98
0.97
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
0.96
0.97
0.99
1.02
0.99
0.98
0.97
1.01
0.98
1.03
0.97
0.96
0.99
0.99
0.98
1.01
0.98
0.95
1.01
0.95
0.99
1.02
0.96
0.96
1.02
0.97
1.02
0.95
0.96
0.99
1.00
0.99
0.95
Best
Worst
68.47
60.34
120.01
180.20
90.94
90.46
102.6
85.51
89.87
118.6
120.91
88.40
Obtained Result:
Bus
Voltage (pu)
No.
GAOPF
Newton
GAOPF
Newton
OPF
1
2
3
Best
Worst
0.976
0.989
1.013
0.998
1.005
0.967
0.987
0.974
0.968
56
OPF
Best
Worst
68.453
119.15
90.652
60.332
7
179.86
90.381
1
4
5
6
0.958
0.967
0.989
0.958
0.989
0.989
0.952
0.952
1.011
7
8
1.013
0.989
0.976
1.005
0.968
1.011
102.51
85.480
89.613
118.53
120.86
88.228
9
10
11
12
13
14
0.976
0.967
1.005
0.976
1.023
0.967
0.976
0.944
1.005
0.944
0.989
1.013
0.941
0.952
0.987
0.997
0.987
0.941
57
58
59
Note: The problem was solved using two methods (Genetic Algorithm and
Newton Raphson) and there results were tabulated. A DC link is connected
between bus 1 and bus 28. The rating of converter at bus 1 and 28 is 1.00
pu. The voltage values of all buses have been bounded between 0.95 and
1.05.
Also for Genetic Algorithm:
Number of Iterations: 100
Number of runs: 14
For Newton Raphson:
Number of Iterations: 30
Number of runs: 1
Result:
60
Actual Result:
Bus
Voltage (pu)
Generator
GAOPF
($/MWh)
GAOPF
No.
Newt
Cost
Newt
on
on
OPF
OPF
Best Wor
Bes Wor
st
st
1.00
0.99
1.00
9.7
11.6
10.55
0.99
1.00
0.99
7
7.9
7
11.0
6.53
3
4
5
0.96
0.98
1.01
0.98
0.96
1.02
0.99
0.98
0.99
8.1
11.4
6
7
8
0.99
0.98
0.96
1.00
0.95
0.99
0.97
0.98
1.03
8.1
10.5
9
10
11
0.96
1.01
0.99
1.01
1.02
1.00
0.99
1.02
1.01
8.4
10.5
6.1
10.5
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
1.01
0.99
0.97
1.00
0.98
0.99
0.99
1.01
0.97
0.98
0.99
0.99
1.01
0.98
0.99
0.95
1.01
0.96
1.00
0.97
0.96
1.01
0.98
1.01
0.97
0.99
1.01
1.01
0.97
1.01
1.00
1.01
0.99
0.99
1.00
1.00
0.99
0.99
1.03
0.99
0.98
0.99
1.02
1.03
1.02
61
6.52
6.93
11.87
6.90
Bus
27
0.98
28
0.99
29
1.01
Voltage (pu)
30
0.99
No.
GAOPF
Best
0.97
1.05
0.95
0.99
0.98
1.05
Generator
0.98
1.05
($/MWh)
Newt GAOPF
Newt
on
on
OPF
OPF
Worst
Cost
Best Wor
st
0.997
0.988
0.997
9.53
11.4
10.32
0.988
0.997
0.988
7.72
2
10.7
6.29
5
3
4
5
0.959
0.976
1.005
0.976
0.959
1.014
0.988
0.976
0.988
6
7
8
0.988
0.976
0.959
0.997
0.949
0.988
0.967
0.976
1.028
9
10
0.959
1.000
1.005
1.014
0.988
1.014
11
5
0.988
0.997
1.005
7.83
11.1
6.31
9
7.79
10.3
6.74
8.22
10.3
11.69
9
12
13
1.005
0.988
0.949
1.005
0.997
1.005
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
0.967
0.997
0.976
0.988
0.988
1.005
0.967
0.976
0.988
0.988
1.005
0.976
0.988
0.976
0.988
1.005
0.988
0.959
0.997
0.967
0.959
1.005
0.976
1.005
0.967
0.988
1.005
1.005
0.967
1.005
0.967
0.949
0.976
0.976
0.988
0.988
0.997
0.997
0.988
0.988
1.028
0.988
0.976
0.988
1.014
1.028
1.014
1.046
0.988
1.046
1.046
5.89
10.3
4
62
6.78
Obtained
Result:
63
Voltage(p.u.)
Generator
GAOPF
($/MWh)
GAOPF
No.
Best
Worst
0.976
1.013
0.989
Cost
Best
Worst
0.998
68.453
119.157
1.005
0.967
60.332
179.861
0.958
0.958
0.967
0.989
0.989
0.989
102.514
85.480
1.013
0.976
0.989
1.005
118.538
120.864
0.976
0.976
10
0.967
0.944
11
1.005
1.005
12
0.976
0.944
13
1.023
0.989
14
0.967
1.013
64
Bus No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Voltage(p.u.)
Generator
GAOPF
Best
Worst
($/MWh)
GAOPF
Best
Worst
1.00
0.99
0.96
0.98
1.01
0.99
0.98
0.96
0.96
1.01
0.99
1.01
0.99
0.97
1.00
0.98
0.99
0.99
1.01
0.97
0.98
0.99
0.99
1.01
0.98
0.99
0.98
0.99
1.01
0.99
0.99
1.00
0.98
0.96
1.02
1.00
0.95
0.99
1.01
1.02
1.00
0.95
1.01
0.96
1.00
0.97
0.96
1.01
0.98
1.01
0.97
0.99
1.01
1.01
0.97
1.01
0.97
0.95
0.98
0.98
65
Cost
9.77
7.97
11.67
11.06
8.13
11.40
8.15
10.57
8.40
10.54
6.12
10.56
Voltage(p.u.)
Advanced
Generator
Cost
($/MWh)
Newton Advanced
Newton
Raphson Method
Raphson Method
0.985
0.971
90.471
0.963
90.194
0.949
0.951
1.007
0.965
1.007
0.936
10
0.951
11
0.985
12
0.993
13
0.985
14
0.936
89.472
88.095
Bus No.
Voltage(p.u.)
Advanced
Generator
Cost
($/MWh)
Newton Advanced Newton
66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Raphson Method
Raphson Method
0.998
0.986
0.986
0.979
0.986
0.967
0.979
1.026
0.986
1.019
1.005
0.998
1.005
0.986
0.986
0.998
0.998
0.986
0.986
1.026
0.986
0.979
0.986
1.019
1.026
1.019
1.048
0.986
1.048
1.048
10.38
6.34
6.41
6.74
11.69
6.71
67
Discussion
69
inferior than that of Fixed Speed at low wind speed and Variable
Speed at higher wind speeds.
f) The major advantage of Variable Speed Wind Turbines is that
Conclusion
1. This study brings out some interesting features about the WTGU
performance and their impact when used as DG sources. The real
power output of all the types of WTGU (considered here) at any
given wind speed does not change perceptibly even with
significant changes in terminal voltage.
2. The Q demand of the fixed and semi-variable speed WTGU is
sensitive to terminal voltage variations. However, in the case of
variable speed WTGU the terminal voltage variation (normal
range) has no impact on their Q demand.
3. From load flow analysis of different wind turbines models using
different methods it was concluded that Newton Raphson method
was best for performing load flow analysis as it is more accurate.
4. It was also found that load flow results obtained using Weibull
distribution were far accurate than those obtained at particular
speed.
70
7. From the results one could conclude that result obtained by GAOPF
best solution has shown improvement as compared to Newton OPF
solution. Also the overall cost of generation obtained by GAOPF
best solution is less.
8. But GAOPF required 100 iterations and 9 runs compared to 20
iterations and 1 run required by Newton OPF method. Thus Newton
OPF method is faster as compared to GAOPF method.
9. From the results one could conclude that result obtained by GAOPF
best solution has shown improvement as compared to Newton OPF
solution. Also the overall cost of generation obtained by GAOPF
best solution is less.
10. But GAOPF required 100 iterations and 14 runs compared to 30
iterations and 1 run required by Newton OPF method. Thus Newton
OPF method is faster as compared to GAOPF method.
References
[1]K.C. Divya, P.S. Nagendra Rao Models for wind turbine
generating systems and their application in load flow studies,
Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Science,
Bangalore 560012, India.
[2]Heras,Escriva,Ortega Wind farm electrical power production
model for load flow analysis.
[3]Nakul Narayanan K & Pinaki Mitra A comparative study of
sequential and simultaneous AC/DC power flow algorithm.
[4]Feijoo and Cidras Modeling of wind farms in the load flow
analysis.
[5]A. Panosyan, B. R. Oswald Modified Newton Raphson Load Flow
Analysis for Integrated AC/DC Power Systems in Institute of
Electric Power Systems, University of Hannover, Germany.
71
72
[16]
73