Contents
Vendor Specific Model Characterization
Model Performance: Case 1 – Fault Event
In this case a remote fault is applied to bus 12 for a duration of 6 cycles (0.1 sec).
In the course of the project when making a parameterization of the WT2 generic model for the system described above, the following observations have been made:
- The benchmark Vestas: Type 2 Turbine model does not show the stable or adequate response (if the line trips the system has sustained oscillation for more than 20 seconds) to the fault cleared by tripping the line with SCR=5.
- For SCR=10, the benchmark Vestas: Type 2 Turbine model shows the stable response to the fault cleared by tripping the line or without tripping the line.
- So, in terms of the Test 1 (the fault event), it makes sense to parameterize the WT2 model for the system with SCR=5 without tripping the line, while for SCR = 10 test, the line was tripped.
Vestas: Type II – Case 1 and SCR=5
Vestas: Type II – Case 1 and SCR=10
Model Performance: Case 2 – Under-Frequency Event
In this case a under frequency event is created by tripping the 100 MVA generation unit at bus 20.
Testing the benchmark vendor defined Vestas: Type 2 Turbine model for the test system revealed that, with the recommended parameters, this model shows not stable response to frequency events. Moreover, we could not find any parameters of the benchmark model resulting in stable response. Finally, we found out that the only way to make it stable was to disable the rotor resistance (RCC) control.
We do not know so far what additional features should have been incorporated in the VSM to improve its performance under the frequency events.
Vestas: Type II – Case 2 and SCR=5
Vestas: Type II – Case 2 and SCR=10
Model Performance: Case 3 – Over-Frequency Event
In this case a under frequency event is created by tripping the 100 MVA load at bus 11
Vestas: Type II – Case 3 and SCR=5
Vestas: Type II – Case 3 and SCR=10
Generic Model Parameterization – PSSE Environment
The parameter values shown in the table resulted from a compromise between the simulated cases (i.e. SCR 5 and SCR 10) and network conditions (i.e. fault, under- and over frequency).
|
There are four generic wind turbine models in PSSE for a type 2 wind turbine (WT2). These models are WT2G, WT2E, WT12T, and WT12A. The WT2G model includes the generator/converters model. The WT2E contains the electrical control model. The WT2T model includes the wind turbine model. Finally, the WT2A model contains the pseudo governor model. The values for the parameters resulted from a compromise between the two cases (SCR 5 and SCR 10). The set of parameters had to be tuned to satisfactory match the results of dynamic simulation for the VSM and the generic WT2 model for both SCR cases. |
Parameterization: Case 1 – Fault Event
Parameterization of WT2 vs Vestas: Type II – Case 1 and SCR=5
Parameterization of WT2 vs Vestas: Type II – Case 1 and SCR=10
Parameterization: Case 2 – Under-Frequency Event
Parameterization of WT2 vs Vestas: Type II – Case 2 and SCR=5
Parameterization of WT2 vs Vestas: Type II – Case 2 and SCR=10
Parameterization: Case 3 – Over-Frequency Event
Parameterization of WT2 vs Vestas: Type II – Case 3 and SCR=5
Parameterization of WT2 vs Vestas: Type II – Case 3 and SCR=10
Results Validation
With the RCC control disabled for all 3 tests and the fault in case 1 (SCR=5) cleared without tripping the line, the parameterization of the WT2 model showed stable and adequate response. In all figures, the response of the generic model matches the response of the VSM in the frequency range of interest. Thus, both the PSSE model is an appropriate representation of the Vestas: Type 2 WTG’s behavior for fundamental frequency analysis.
Vendor Specific Model Validation
No data available