2019 - Comparison - Grid Forming Converter Control Strategies

Comparison of Selected
Grid-Forming Converter Control Strategies for

Use in Power Electronic Dominated Power Systems
Bernd Weise Abdul Korai Adrian Constantin
DIgSILENT GmbH DIgSILENT GmbH DIgSILENT GmbH
Gomaringen, Germany Gomaringen, Germany Gomaringen, Germany
B.Weise@digsilent.de A.Korai@digsilent.de A.Constantin@digsilent.de
Abstract — Grid-forming converter control strategies have This paper describes briefly power electronic converter
become an important alternative to classical synchronous control strategies for grid-parallel and island operation, the
machines in order to stabilise the power electronic (PE) behaviour of synchronous machines, as well as selected grid-
dominated power systems. The paper compares selected grid- forming converter control strategies, such as virtual
forming converter control strategies against each other and synchronous machines (VSM), direct AC voltage control
against state-of-the-art grid following control as well as against (DVC) and droop control. The paper elaborates especially on
the behaviour of a synchronous generator and ideal voltage and the understanding of characteristics within the short-term
current sources, by simulation test cases with small example dynamic behaviour of generating units, which are essential to
networks. The main objective is to identify the core of grid-
make a stable operation of a large power system possible.
forming behaviour, by the same time to identify the mechanism
that may inhibit stable operation of power systems with high PE For the analysis presented in the paper, the behaviours of
penetration. The results underline the need of grid-forming the introduced control strategies are investigated by means of
controls in cases of PE dominated power systems and indicate computer simulations and compared against each other. In
that only the control designs which show a strong initial addition, the behaviour of ideal sources, i.e. ideal voltage
response within a quarter period following on changes in sources and current sources, is included into the comparison
terminal voltage magnitude or phase angle can supply a power for a theoretical investigation.
system with high penetration of PE in a satisfactory manner. A
definition of grid-forming behaviour is introduced, and possible Chapter II gives an overview of converter control
tests for grid-forming behaviour suggested. strategies. The investigation for comparison of selected
control strategies is described in Chapter III, results are
Keywords — Converter control, grid-following, grid-leading, presented and explained. Discussion of the results and
grid-forming, virtual synchronous machine, droop control, direct conclusions are drawn in Chapter IV. Chapter V provides a
voltage control, enhanced current control, power system stability, future outlook.
high penetration
II. CONVERTER CONTROL STRATEGIES

I. INTRODUCTION
In this chapter, an overview of typical and future-oriented
With increasing penetration of power electronic interfaced control concepts for power electronic generating units (PE-
generating units in power systems, grid-forming converter GU) is given, as well as a classification or definition of the
control strategies have become an important alternative to network behaviour is done: grid-following, grid-leading and
classical synchronous machines in order to stabilise the power grid-forming. In literature, grid-leading and grid-forming
system in normal and disturbed operating conditions. control concepts are sometimes also referred to as voltage-
The state-of-the-art controllers used nowadays for grid- forming or voltage-injecting control concepts.
parallel operation of power electronic converters are grid-
following, usually with inner loop current control in rotating A. Grid-Following Converter Control
reference frame and synchronised by a phase-locked loop Grid-following control concepts are those, in which a
(PLL). They cannot operate without an already existing grid synchronisation with the existing grid voltage and an injection
voltage. In contrast, the island operation control nowadays is of currents is executed in such a way that the angular position
typically a V/f-control with constant frequency (constant of the currents (active and reactive current components)
voltage phase angle) adjusted by an oscillator. The V/f control follows the grid voltage. Nowadays, the state-of-the-art
forms the voltage of an island grid, but (without any further control concepts for grid parallel operation of PE-GU are grid-
measures) it is not designed to run in parallel with other following.
voltage-forming sources in large systems. Grid-forming
control strategies combine characteristics of both, in order to Widely used is the regulation of the current with PI
form the voltage of a grid, while being able to synchronise and controllers in dq-components in the inner control loop (see for
operate with other grid-forming units in a flexible manner. It example [1]), which can be called voltage-oriented vector
is expected that with grid-forming control strategies, power current control (DQCC). The synchronization with the
systems of any size (from small island grids to larger terminal voltage takes place here with a phase-locked loop
interconnected power systems) can keep stable operation even (PLL) [1].
with a high share of power electronic interfaced units up to In slower outer control loops active and reactive power
100%. and sometimes the voltage magnitude are regulated. In doing
The original version of this paper was presented at the 18th Wind Integration Workshop and published in the workshop’s proceedings.
18th Wind Integration Workshop (International Workshop on Large-Scale Integration of Wind Power into Power Systems as well as on Transmission Networks for Offshore Wind Power
Plants), Dublin, Ireland, 16-18 October 2019. Presented in Session 4A.
Reprint version revised by authors after the 18th Wind Integration Workshop; text revisions are marked in green. Page 1 of 9
Revised Reprint of Paper No. WIW19-145 of the 18th Wind Integration Workshop
so, additional droops can be used to enable operational 1) Virtual Synchronous Machines
characteristics, such as Q(U) or P(f) characteristics. Voltage Typical representatives of grid-forming control concepts
controls realised in this way respond relatively slowly. Only are virtual synchronous machines (VSM), in which equations
when detecting a network fault, the state-of-the-art controls are implemented in the control that partially or completely
activate a fault-ride-through (FRT) mode, in which the voltage emulate the behaviour of a synchronous machine (see for
is regulated with a fast proportional reactive current response example the virtual synchronous machine “VISMA” [9][10],
in the outer loop, as required by most grid codes nowadays or the “synchronverter”[11][12]).
(e.g. [2]). By a slight enhancement of the control concept, such
fast proportional voltage control in the outer loop can be Virtual synchronous machines reproduce the physical
enabled working in continuous operation (not state-of-the-art behaviour of real synchronous machines including their
today). A frequency-sensitive mode (FSM) or limited advantageous grid-forming capability. Depending on the
frequency-sensitive mode (LFSM) as required by modern grid implementation however, the disadvantages of the
codes (e.g. [2]) can be added in the outer loop to adjust the synchronous machine can be included in the VSM as well,
setpoint of the outer loop active power controller. namely their ability of oscillations which can lead to
oscillatory instability in the event of insufficient damping, and
B. Grid-Leading Converter Control (with fix frequency) the risk of losing the transient stability.
Grid-leading control concepts are those concept, which 2) Droop Control in the Inner Control Loop
build the voltage thereby predetermine the voltage angle and For use in stand-alone grids and microgrids, recently
keep the frequency fixed. This type of control is typically done droops have been established in the inner loop, enhancing the
in small island and offshore grids, in which the voltage is otherwise rigid V/f control by f/P and V/Q characteristics. By
formed exclusively by one converter. Usually, a so-called V/f means of the droop functions, a common operating point is
control is used, in which the voltage is regulated and the established by parallel converters and thus a “multi-master”
voltage angle or the frequency is given by an oscillator (see operation is possible [13]. In some publications, such droop
e.g. [3]). The V/f control is used e.g. in the offshore HVDC control concepts are also referred to as virtual synchronous
converter of HVDC connections to offshore wind farms. If machines without inertia (VSM0H, e.g. [14]). Applications in
additional converters are connected to the stand-alone grid photovoltaic diesel hybrid diesel networks on islands have
(such as the wind turbines in an offshore wind farm), already been successfully implemented in practice (e.g.
nowadays these converters are equipped with grid-following [15][16]).
controls.
3) Direct Voltage Control
Since grid frequency is fixed when such control is used, it
cannot be used to indicate power imbalances between The Direct Voltage Control (DVC) represents a further
generation and consumption, or to allow power distribution development of the proven grid-following voltage-oriented
based on frequency deviation (P/f droops, primary control). In vector current control towards a grid-forming control
the case of frequency-fixed grids with grid-leading regulation, [17][18][19][20][21]. The direct voltage control is not to be
theoretically the power can be divided between several grid- mistaken for the dc voltage control of a voltage source
leading converters by means of power/voltage angle droops or converter (VSC) or the direct modulation regulation of a
superordinate voltage angle regulations to implement a power modular multi-level converter (MMC). The main features of
system regulation, as outlined for example in [4][5][6][7]. the DVC are [19]:
The grid-leading V/f control concept can be enhanced by  A separation is made between the slow reactive power
additional droop functions to a grid-forming droop control [3], control in the outer control loop and a downstream,
compare Section II.C.2. fast proportional voltage control.
 Fast voltage regulation is carried out continuously and
C. Grid-Forming Converter Control without dead-band, both in normal operation and in
Grid-forming control concepts can build the grid voltage the event of fault.
and simultaneously synchronise with other converters or
generators. Thus, they can work in parallel operation while  The integrators in the inner loop are removed, i.e.
building the grid voltage. Varies implementation concepts for there is no current control with PI controllers.
grid-forming controls have been suggested by different  Without the integrators in the inner control loop,
authors in the recent years, such as virtual synchronous reactive current (for voltage control) and active
machines, droop control, direct voltage control or enhanced current are not fixed, but result from the voltage
current control. Those are briefly explained in the following difference between the controlled inverter voltage and
subsections. the terminal voltage (or the grid impedance).
ENTSO-E divides power park modules into three classes,  The active current or the active power is mainly
from which Class 1 (in future renamed to Class 3) can be controlled by the q component of the inverter voltage,
understood as grid-forming, because it includes requirements and thus by the angle between the inverter voltage and
which mean a grid-forming behaviour in its consequence the terminal voltage.
(namely to create system voltage, to contribute to inertia and
to support first cycle survival) [8]. Further requirements for 4) Enhanced Current Control
Class 1 are to contribute to fault level, to act as sink for In this concept, the DQCC converter concept is extended
harmonics and unbalances and to prevent adverse controller by adding a df/dt control (synthetic inertia, SI) in the outer
interactions. control loop and realising a continuous proportional voltage
control in the outer control loop [22][23].
III. INVESTIGATION A. Response on Step in Voltage Magnitude

A comparative investigation with selected converter The DUT is connected to a Thevenin equivalent (voltage
control strategies is provided in this chapter. The converter source with impedance) via a transformer, see Figure 1. The
responses are compared against each other and against the Thevenin equivalent is a simplified network representation.
response of a synchronous generator, which is equipped with
The voltage magnitude of the Thevenin’s voltage source is
an automatic voltage regulator (AVR) and governor
decreased by 1% at t = 0.0 s. The responses of the individual
(speed/power controller). In the first test cases the responses
DUTs are shown in Figure 2 through Figure 4. The figures
of an ideal uncontrolled voltage source and an ideal
show results in p.u. based on nominal voltage, rated current
uncontrolled current source are presented as well as reference.
and MVA rating of the DUT respectively.
The investigation is done by means of EMT simulations in
DIgSILENT PowerFactory Version 2019. The curves in the
plots show magnitudes of space phasors, instantaneous power
and instantaneous reactive power, which in steady-state
conditions are identical to RMS quantities, active and reactive
power.
Four test cases are presented in the paper:
A. Response on step in voltage magnitude in a single
machine at infinite bus system
B. Response on step in voltage phase angle in a single
machine at infinite bus system
C. Response on load change in a two machine system
with 50% PE-GU
D. Response on load change in a two machine system Figure 1: Single-line diagram of the first test case
with 100% PE-GU
For the device under test (DUT), the following is used:
 Ideal uncontrolled voltage source (only test A and B)
 Ideal uncontrolled current source (only test A and B)
 Synchronous generator (SG), as a reference
 PE-GU with DQCC in the inner control loop, P and Q
control in the outer control loop (PI controllers)
 PE-GU with DQCC in the inner control loop, P and V
control in the outer control loop (PI controllers)
 PE-GU with DQCC in the inner control loop, P and V
control in the outer control loop (PI controllers), plus
FSM for adaption of the active power setpoint
 PE-GU with DQCC in the inner control loop, P
control in the outer control loop (PI controller), plus
FSM, continuously acting fast proportional voltage
control in the outer loop (cascade of slow PI controller
and fast proportional control)
 PE-GU with DQCC in the inner control loop, P
control in the outer control loop (PI controller) plus
FSM and fast acting synthetic inertia, continuously
acting fast proportional voltage control in the outer
loop; this corresponds to the Enhanced Current
Control Figure 2: Response of DUT on voltage magnitude step
 PE-GU with Direct Voltage Control (DVC)
The voltage source (Figure 2, light blue) and the SG
 PE-GU with Droop Control (f/P and V/Q droops), (Figure 2, black) show a strong initial response in the current
without PLL and powers respectively. The ripple in the space phasor
magnitude is caused by the DC components which occur with
 PE-GU with VSM similar to a synchronverter
different magnitudes in the phase currents, because of the
implementation without PLL
inductances in the network. The voltage source produces
additional reactive current while keeping the voltage
magnitude constant. The SG’s voltage regulator (AVR)
increases the reactive power slowly to maintain the voltage. In
contrast, the current source (Figure 2, pink) keeps its current By replacing the reactive power control with a voltage
constant and does not support voltage. Because of constant controller in the outer loop of the PE-GU DQCC, the response
current at lower voltage, the power injected by the current is improved with respect to voltage support. The initial
source is reduced after the voltage step. The converter with response is just marginal, but reactive power is increased in
DQCC and power control (Figure 2, light green) keeps its the following seconds (Figure 3, dark green curve). An
power constant. For achieving this, it increases current output, additional FSM does not impact the result in this test case
but does not support the voltage magnitude. (Figure 3, orange). Establishing a continuously acting fast
proportional voltage control in the outer loop improves the
voltage support further (Figure 3, purple), an initial response
in the instantaneous reactive power becomes notable within
the first quarter period. An additional SI does not have an
impact in this test case (Figure 3, red).
DVC (Figure 4, brown), VSM and droop control show a
fast and strong response (starting within the first quarter
period following the voltage change). The VSM tends to
oscillate slowly similar to the SG, because of its internal
inertia emulation (Figure 4, yellow). The behaviour with
droop control (Figure 4, blue) is close to that of the ideal
voltage source.
B. Response on Step in Voltage Phase Angle

The DUT is connected to the same Thevenin equivalent
(voltage source with impedance) via a transformer as in test
case A. The voltage phase angle of the Thevenin’s voltage
source is changed by 1.0° at t = 0.0 s.
Figure 3: Response of DUT on voltage magnitude step
Figure 5: Response of DUT on voltage phase angle step

(instantaneous power plot replaced by correct plot)
Again, the voltage source and the SG show a strong initial

response (Figure 5, light blue and black). The current source
keeps its current magnitude constant and thus reacts on the
phase angle step by changes in power which do not support
the grid (the reactive power changes in the opposite direction
then the reactive power of the voltage source, Figure 5, pink).
Figure 4: Response of DUT on voltage magnitude step The PE-GU with DQCC and PQ control in the outer loop
shows just a marginal transient and then keeps the power The DVC shows an initial response of medium magnitude
constant (Figure 5, light green). (Figure 7, brown). Again, VSM and droop control show a fast
and strong reaction. The response of the VSM (Figure 7,
FSM and fast acting voltage control in the outer loop do yellow) is similar to that of the SG with damped low frequency
not show an effect (see Figure 6, orange and purple). The SI oscillations. The behaviour of the droop control (Figure 7,
causes a small initial response (Figure 6, red). blue) is closer to that of a voltage source.
Because the frequency in the test system is kept constant
by the Thevenin equivalent, the power output of all realistic
DUTs turns back to their pre-event value. Only the ideal
uncontrolled sources do not adjust their power output.
C. Operation in Parallel with Synchronous Generators,

Response on Load Change
This investigation is done using a two machine test case:
A SG and the device under test (DUT) have the same rating
and supply a load. “Load 1” is modelled as a constant power
load. At t = 0 s the load is increased by 1% by switching on an
impedance based load (“Load 2”).
Figure 8: Single-line diagram of the two machine test case
Figure 6: Response of DUT on voltage phase angle step The following figures depict the results for the total power
generation (sum of instantaneous power of all generating units
in p.u. based on installed generation MVA capacity), the
voltage magnitude (in p.u. based on nominal voltage) and
frequency (in Hz) at the load bus, the injected instantaneous
power and the instantaneous reactive power of the DUT (in
p.u. based on rated MVA of the DUT). The instantaneous
power is calculated from the space phasor quantities. In
steady-state the instantaneous power corresponds to active
power and the instantaneous reactive power corresponds to
reactive power.
Figure 9 and Figure 10 show the behaviour of the SG and
the PE-GUs using different control strategies. In all cases, a
frequency drop is observed after the transients have decayed.
The black curve corresponds to the case in which the DUT is
a SG. In this situation, the two SGs share evenly the load
change. For the PE-GU cases, it can be seen that all control
strategies except the DQCC with Q control have a final
steady-state contribution to either the additional active or
reactive power or both. DQCC with V control provides a
response to the increase of reactive power demand whereas
the active power output remains almost constant during the
event in both transient and steady state time frames. If
observing the transient behaviour, then the FSM and the fast
voltage control do not have substantial instantaneous response
in active power. This is due to fact that the current control
loops ensure that the active current is steadily increased thus
avoiding the initial current “kick”. The response in this
situation is highly dependent on the selection of the inner
Figure 7: Response of DUT on voltage phase angle step control loop parameters, as will be highlighted in the next test
case. With respect to the steady state response, the FSM and
the fast voltage control respond adequately to the load change, (red) and the DVC (brown) control concepts. All these control
sharing the load mismatch with the SG. methods provide responses in active and reactive power in
both the short-term and the steady-state time frames. The
DQCC with fast voltage control, FSM and SI provides good
response within the steady state range; compared to the DQCC
without SI, the active power response is improved by
employing the fast reacting SI in the transient period. The
VSM and the DVC perform similarly to each other, both
outperforming the SG in terms of maximum frequency
deviation. It is noted that further parameter tuning can still be
made in order to closely match the performance of the SG (e.g.
inertia, damping parameters). The droop control seems to
perform well, although it is noted that the droop coefficients
were set in a way that results in a large share of active power
taken by the PE-GU with droop control, resulting in a small
frequency deviation following the load step. Figure 11 shows
the frequency of the droop control in more detail, together
with the speed of the parallel synchronous generator. Both
respond reasonable and in a stable manner. The frequency of
the power system is dominated by the droop control, with the
SG oscillating against it.
Figure 9: Response on load change, 50% PE
Figure 11: Response in frequency of PE-GU with droop

control and of remaining SG on load change; 50% PE
D. Operation without Synchronous Generators, Response

on Load Change
The test case is enhanced by exchanging the synchronous
generator by a second DUT. Now the grid is supplied to 100%
by PE-GU.
The results obtained with DQCC based control concepts
having a typical parameterization do not show a stable
response (Figure 12). Following the load change, the
quantities start to oscillate within a period in an un-damped
manner. Special attention should be drawn to the
instantaneous power curves: It is expected that a stable power
system supplies the load demand instantaneously. The
synchronous generator takes the load demand within the first
quarter period (a faster response is not possible, because the
current oscillates with fundamental frequency and cannot
jump within an inductive path in the power system). The
converters with DQCC do not have a relevant response in the
first quarter period, it is suppressed by the fast DQCC. Their
instantaneous power is increasing too late, resulting in
Figure 10: Response on load change, 50% PE unstable oscillations. We may say that with typically
parameterised DQCC there is not sufficient synchronizing
torque within the power system.
Within Figure 10, the load change scenario with a 50% PE
penetration is applied to the Droop control (blue), VSM By desensitising the inner current control loop, i.e.
(yellow), DQCC with fast voltage control with FSM and SI reducing the gains of the DQCC and by this making it slower,
a stable behaviour is obtained within the short-term transient
time frame. As such, within Figure 13, the load change to make sufficient action of slower controllers possible in the
scenario with a 100% PE penetration is applied to PE-GU with subsequent time frames.
DQCC with P and Q control (light green), DQCC with P and
V control (dark green), DQCC with P and V control and with
FSM (orange), and DQCC with fast voltage control in the
outer loop and FSM (purple). With slow DQCC, a fast
response in instantaneous power and instantaneous reactive
power following the load change is made possible (the
response is notable within the first quarter period). It is
nevertheless observed that, although stable within short term,
the DQCC-PQ, DQCC-PV and DQCC-FSM are unable to
recover in the long term to a stable operating point. The
DQCC with fast voltage control and FSM is the only one PE-
GU concept depicted in Figure 13, that is able to ride through
the transient and continue stable operation.
Figure 13: Response on load change, 100% PE with slow

DCQQ (100% SG for comparison)
Figure 12: Response on load change, 100% PE with fast

DCQQ (i.e. typical parameterisation), 100% SG for
comparison
Figure 14 shows the response of Figure 10the droop

control (blue), VSM (yellow), DQCC with fast voltage
control, FSM and SI (red) and the DVC (brown) control
concepts. All these control methods provide stable operation
in both the short-term and the steady-state time frames (the
change in voltage magnitude at 8 s in the case of DVC is still
under investigation, but expected to be controllable). The
control concept of DQCC with vast voltage control, FSM and
SI provides a better damping of the slow power oscillation
compared to the DQCC with vast voltage control and FSM
without SI (compare Figure 13, purple, with Figure 14, red).
Figure 15 zooms into the first two periods following the
load change. The initial responses of the depicted control
methods (with respect to current magnitude, instantaneous
power and instantaneous reactive power) are almost identical Figure 14: Response on load change, 100% PE (100% SG
and settle within the first quarter period. This initial behaviour for comparison) (result of DQCC with fast V ctrl., FSM and
is mandatory to survive the load change in the first period and SI improved)
care with all controller methods, in order to enable stable

operation while running in parallel to SGs or to other PE-GUs.
All adaptions of controllers and all control concepts which
result in sufficient response within the first quarter period,
have made the power system to survive within the first periods
(while all others have not). Based on this analysis, the
following definition of the core of grid-forming behaviour can
be introduced:
Definition of grid-forming behaviour: A generating unit
is called being grid-forming, if its output space phasor power
shows a substantial, initial response within a quarter period on
any changes in voltage magnitude as well as on any changes
in voltage phase angle, with the net effect of counteracting
those changes.
Grid-forming by this definition refers to the ability to
stabilise the power system in the very short-term. Further
control functions are usually required to ensure subsequent
stable grid operation (e.g. power/frequency and voltage
controllers).
By intention, the above definition does not refer to a
“voltage source behaviour”, because even a synchronous
machine (which is believed to be grid-forming) does not
respond fully equally to an ideal voltage source. Further, the
definition does not exclude DQCC in the inner control loop,
as long as it is parameterised (and enhanced by outer loop
Figure 15: Response in first two periods following on load controls) to fulfil the required objectives. It should be noted,
change, 100% PE (100% SG for comparison) (result of that in cases of PE-GU it is not only the control structure, that
DQCC with fast V ctrl., FSM and SI improved) may produce grid-forming behaviour, but also the
parameterisation of the controller. It should further be noted,
that grid-forming behaviour alone does not ensure stable
IV. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS power system operation; subsequent (slower) control actions
are needed in addition to ensure fulfilment of the classical
The analysis presented in the paper focuses on selected voltage and frequency stability of the power system (and
grid-forming converter control strategies for use in PE transient stability in cases of SG) and power balance in steady-
dominated power systems. State-of-the-art control strategies, state.
namely DQCC with different control options in the outer loop
have been included in the investigation as well. The main Testing of grid-forming capability can be done by
objective has been to identify the core of grid-forming applying steps in voltage magnitude as well as in voltage
behaviour, by the same time to identify the “killing phase angle at the DUT’s terminal, similar to the test cases
mechanism” that may inhibit stable operation of power described in Section III.A and III.B. A step in voltage
systems with high PE penetration. magnitude should result in an initial response (within a quarter
period) in instantaneous reactive power, while a step in
The results indicate that only the control designs of PE- voltage phase angle should result in an initial response (within
GU which show a strong initial response on changes in a quarter period) in instantaneous reactive power, to prove
terminal voltage magnitude and phase angle can supply the grid-forming behaviour.
system with high penetration of PE in a satisfactory manner.
Without sufficient response of generating units in The paper focuses on the behaviour of generating units,
instantaneous power and instantaneous reactive power within considering the power system load being mainly a constant
the first quarter period, the power system is not able to survive power load, because a controlled load behaviour is assumed.
the first period following a load change. DQCC with typical In general, the power system load is changing along with the
parameterisation does not show such initial response. Voltage power generation towards a PE dominated system and as such,
and frequency regulation in the outer control loop in the load behaviour has a fair influence on the power system’s
conjunction with typically parameterised DQCC are too slow behaviour as well. For simulations including high PE
to keep the system stable. However, the test case results have penetration scenarios, the correct representation of loads must
shown that DQCC tuned to be slow (small controller gains) be considered with the same importance as the accurate
with fast proportional voltage control, FSM and SI is able to modelling of generating units.
ensure continuous stable operation of a grid with high PE
penetration. In comparison, VSM and droop control in the V. OUTLOOK
inner loop show a more effective behaviour, are less sensitive
to events in high PE penetration cases and seem to be easier to Although being of fundamental general nature, the
tune to ensure stable operation, which is probably preferred in analysis has just covered a limited range of possible network
a high PE penetration scenario, especially in smaller power disturbances and aspects in PE-GU behaviour. Future work is
systems (island systems, microgrids). However, it should be needed to enlarge the comparison of grid-forming control
noted that the control parameter values must be selected with behaviour in a holistic approach and to prove their suitability
for use in PE-dominated power systems. As such, further [19] B. Weise, A. Korai, “Regelungskonzepte für leistungselektronische
investigations of the behaviour in cases of short-circuits, and Erzeugungseinheiten zur Verbesserung der Netzstabilität: Direkte
Spannungsregelung als Lösungsansatz”, 13. ETG/GMA-Fachtagung
with larger network models are pursued. Comparison with Netzregelung und Systemführung, Berlin, Germany, Sep. 2019
phasor-based RMS simulation results are needed, as this is the [20] I. Erlich, A. Korai: ”Description, Modelling and Simulation of a
tool of choice for large-scale disturbances on larger power Benchmark System for Converter Dominated Grids (Part I) – 98% -
systems. Eigenvalue analysis will complete the investigation RES Benchmark on Basis of fast Voltage Source controlled Convert-
to identify possible weakly damped modes (important for ers (EMT & RMS)”, University Duisburg-Essen, Germany, June 2018,
improving controller parameterisation and to ensure power https://www.digsilent.de/en/faq-reader-powerfactory/do-you-have-an-
example-of-a-fault-tolerant-power-system-with-98-share-of-
system small signal stability). renewables.html
[21] DIgSILENT: “Description, Modelling and Simulation of a Benchmark
REFERENCES Test System for Converter Dominated Grids (Part II) – 98% - RES
Benchmark on Basis of Fast Voltage Source controlled Converters
[1] R. Teodorescu, M. Liserre, P. Rodríguez, “Grid converters for (EMT & RMS)”, DIgSILENT GmbH, Gomaringen, Germany, June
photovoltaic and wind power systems”, John Wiley & Sons, 2018,, https://www.digsilent.de/en/faq-reader-powerfactory/do-you-
Chichester, UK, 2011, ISBN 978-0-470-05751-3 have-an-example-of-a-fault-tolerant-power-system-with-98-share-of-
[2] Commission Regulation (EU) 2016/631 of 14 April 2016 establishing renewables.html
a network code on requirements for grid connection of generators, [22] D. Duckwitz: “Vergleich von Erweiterter Stromregelung und
Official Journal of the European Union, L 112, 27.4.2016 Virtueller Synchronmaschine,” 13. ETG/GMA-Fachtagung
[3] Cigré Technical Brochure 604: “Guide for the Development of Models Netzregelung und Systemführung, Berlin, Germany, Sep. 2019
for HVDC Converters in a HVDC Grid”, Cigré Working Group B4.57, [23] D. Duckwitz: “Power System Inertia – Derivation of Requirements and
Decem-ber 2014, ISBN 978-2-85873-305-7 Comparison of Inertia Emulation Methods for Converter-based Power
[4] B. Weise, W. Kalkner: “Kriterien für die Leistungsregelung eines Plants”, Dissertation (PhD thesis), University of Kassel, 2019
Modellnetzes, dessen Frequenz unabhängig von der Leistung und
absolut starr ist, VDE-Kongress 2004, Berlin, Germany, Oct. 2004
[5] C. Prignitz, H.-G, Eckel, S. Achenbach,”Stability Analysis of Offshore
Wind Farms with Fixed Frequency and Diode Rectifier HVDC
Connection”, 17th International Wind Integration Workshop, Stock-
holm, Sweden, 2018
[6] H. Weber: „Von der Frequenzregelung mit Schwungmassen
(netzstützenden Maßnahmen) zur Winkelregelung mit Umrichtern
(netzbildende Maßnahmen)“, ETG journal 01/2018
[7] H. Weber, P. Basker, A. Nayeemuddin: “Power System Control with
Renewable Sources, Storage and Power Electronic Converters”, IEEE
International Conference on Industrial Technology (ICIT), Lyon,
France, 2018
[8] ENTSO-E: High Penetration of Power Electronic In-terfaced Power
Sources (HPoPEIPS), ENTSO-E Guidance document for national
implementation for network codes on grid connection, March 2017
[9] R. Hesse,“Virtuelle Synchronmaschine“, Dissertation (PhD thesis),
Technical University Clausthal, Germany, 2007
[10] Y. Chen, B. Werther, et al.: „Netzstabilisierung durch die “Virtuelle
Synchronmaschine” (VISMA) mit überlagerter Frequenz- und
Spannungsregelung“, Internationaler ETG-Kongress 2013, Berlin,
Germany, Nov. 2013
[11] Q.-C. Zhong: “Virtual Synchronous Machines – A unified interface for
smart grid integration”, IEEE Power Electronics Magazine, Dec. 2016
[12] Q.C. Zhong, P.-L. Nguyen, et al.: Self-Synchronized Synchronverters:
Inverters Without a Dedicated Synchronization Unit, IEEE Trans.
Power Electronics, Vol. 29, No. 2, Feb. 2014, pp. 617-630
[13] International Energy Agency (IEA): “PV-Hybrid Mini Grids:
Applicable Control Methods for Various Situations”, Photovoltaic
Power Systems Programme, Report IEA-PVPS T11-07:2012, March
2012
[14] M. Yu, A. J. Roscoe, et al.: “Use of an Inertia-less Virtual Synchronous
Machine within Future Power Networks with High Penetrations of
Convertors”, 19th Power Systems Computation Conference (PSCC),
Genoa, Italy, June 2016
[15] A. Knobloch, et al: ”Netzstabilisierende Regelungssysteme für
Batteriespeicher in stromrichterdominierten Insel- und
Verbundnetzen”, 13. ETG/GMA-Fachtagung Netzregelung und
Systemführung, Berlin, Germany, Sep. 2019
[16] O. Schönemann, T. Bülo, et al: “Experiences with Large Grid-Forming
Inverters on Various Island and Microgrid Projects”, 4th International
Hybrid Power Systems Workshop, Crete, Greece, 2019
[17] A. Korai: “Dynamic Performance of Electrical Power Systems with
High Penetration of Power Electronic Converters: Analysis and New
Con-trol Methods for Mitigation of Instability Threats and
Restoration”, PhD Thesis, University of Duisburg-Essen, 2019
[18] I. Erlich, A. Korai, F. Schewarega: “Study on the minimum share of
conventional generation units required for stable operation of future
converter-dominated grids”, IEEE Power and Energy Society General
Meeting (PESGM), July 2018

2019 - Comparison - Grid Forming Converter Control Strategies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2019 - Comparison - Grid Forming Converter Control Strategies

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

2019 - Comparison - Grid Forming Converter Control Strategies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Comparison of Selected

Grid-Forming Converter Control Strategies for

II. CONVERTER CONTROL STRATEGIES

III. INVESTIGATION A. Response on Step in Voltage Magnitude

B. Response on Step in Voltage Phase Angle

Figure 3: Response of DUT on voltage magnitude step

Figure 5: Response of DUT on voltage phase angle step

Again, the voltage source and the SG show a strong initial

C. Operation in Parallel with Synchronous Generators,

Figure 8: Single-line diagram of the two machine test case

Figure 9: Response on load change, 50% PE

Figure 11: Response in frequency of PE-GU with droop

D. Operation without Synchronous Generators, Response

Figure 13: Response on load change, 100% PE with slow

Figure 12: Response on load change, 100% PE with fast

Figure 14 shows the response of Figure 10the droop

care with all controller methods, in order to enable stable

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.