Presented at 2012 3rd IEEE PES ISGT Europe, Berlin, Germany, October 14 -17, 2012

Primary frequency control by wind turbines

Dipl.-Ing. Michael Wilch
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Istvn Erlich
Institute of Electrical Power Systems
University Duisburg-Essen
Germany

Problem description

Modern, converter-controlled wind turbines do

not provide inherent frequency response
Replacement of synchronous generation by
wind turbines lead to reduction of system inertia
/DUJHUSULPDU\UHVHUYHE\FRQYHQWLRQDOJHQHUDWLRQ
or

)UHTXHQF\VXSSRUWE\ZLQGWXUELQHV

Presented at 2012 3rd IEEE PES ISGT Europe, Berlin, Germany, October 14 -17, 2012

Grid Frequency Behavior

Grid
Frequency

Loads Frequency-Dependency
Primary Control

Secondary Control

50 Hz

fmin

Minutes

Seconds

0s

5-15 s

30 s - 60 s

Time
3

Contribution of WT to Grid Frequency Control

Approaches:

Standby Power by keeping Pitch Reserve Capacity

Consequences and requirements:
Less power generation
Additional Grid Frequency Control Loop on Pitch
Pitch drive has to meet dynamic frequency control
requirements

Utilizing Kinetic Energy of WT rotating mass

Consequences and requirements:
Discharge of energy to the grid is only for a short
period available; after that accelerating power is
taken from the grid
Security limitations on rotor speed
Additional Kinetic Energy Control Loop on electronic
speed controller
4

Presented at 2012 3rd IEEE PES ISGT Europe, Berlin, Germany, October 14 -17, 2012

Test Grid
700 MW Thermal

~
50 km

1300 MW Hydro primary controlled

380 kV

100 km

50 km

1600 MW Thermal

L1

~
L2
L1

350 MW Wind

Load Switching
143+j50 MVA
A dditional Load

PCC
Wind Farm
410 MW

33 kV
Cables
PCC
380 kV

Pitch Control and Wind Converter Model

WT power

Z ref

p WT

Speed control thru Power

p max

1
VT 1 
sT T

Rotor speed Z R

WT ref. power
(to current controller)
p WT_ref

pTH -

Wind speed
vW

sTD
1 sTV

E max

Z R_nom

1
VE 1 
sTE

Pitch
compensator

Speed control thru Pitch

E max

DFIG

14x2.5 km

WG

2x 70 km, 150 kV
Submarine Cable

E ref

1
TA

Emin

E max
1
s

1  sTW

ZR

1
U Arot C P (O , E )vw3
2

Turbine power
and torque
pm

E min

tm

ZR

6
Pitch actuator

Power conversion

Presented at 2012 3rd IEEE PES ISGT Europe, Berlin, Germany, October 14 -17, 2012

Speed Control Characteristic

Frequency Support by Pitch Control

fGrid
fGrid_ref

1+sTDP
1 sTVP

'Z

K=f(P0)
R

R_ref0

'E

'E0 : corresponds to 'P reserve capacity

Only a P-controller is used in simulation

Presented at 2012 3rd IEEE PES ISGT Europe, Berlin, Germany, October 14 -17, 2012

FSPC: Simulation Results

mechanical turbine power in p.u.
0.79

0.785

0.78

0.775

0.77

frequency in Hz
0.765
50.2

FSPC
50

without frequency
support

49.8
49.6
49.4
49.2
49
48.8
0

10

20

30

40

50
time in s

60

70

80

90

100

Kinetic Energy Control I

pWT

K1

Z ref

p WT

Speed control thru Power

p max

Rotor speed Z R

p WT_ref

During the KEC sequence gain VT is

pTH -

1+sTD1
1  sTV1

1
VT 1 
sT T

WT ref. power
(to current controller)

WT power

controlled

KEC is limited to a specific R_min/ R_max

range

Wind speed
vW

sTW
1  sTW
Grid
Frequenc
y

sTD
1 sTV

E max

Z R_nom

Speed control thru Pitch

E max

1
VE 1 
sTE

Pitch
compensator

E ref

1
TA

Emin

E max
1
s

1  sTW

ZR

1
U Arot C P (O , E )vw3
2

Turbine power
and torque
pm

E min

tm

ZR

10
Pitch actuator

Power conversion

Presented at 2012 3rd IEEE PES ISGT Europe, Berlin, Germany, October 14 -17, 2012

KEC I: Simulation Results

0.78

50.2
p in p.u.

f in Hz

0.77

50

Supplied power by WT

0.76

49.8

Decelerating Energy
Grid Frequency
0.75

49.6

WT drive power
0.74

49.4

0.73

49.2

Accelerating Energy

0.72

49
Frequency
drop

Frequency recovery

t in s
0.71
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

11

48.8
100

New approach: Kinetic Energy Control II

Grid
Frequency
without KEC II

Phase 2

Phase 1 fmin
0T0s

5 -15 s

with KEC II

Phase 3
Time
30 s 60 s
12

Presented at 2012 3rd IEEE PES ISGT Europe, Berlin, Germany, October 14 -17, 2012

Kinetic Energy Control II

Speed control thru Power
p max

Zref

pWT
'p

Rotor speed ZR

additional
power command

WT ref. Power

p WT_ref

The only difference to KEC I:

Plus sign instead of minus
Different parameters

pTH K1

1
VT 1
sT
T

1+sTD
1sTV1

Wind
vW

sT
1 sTW

sT D

E ma

Grid
Frequency

ZR_nom

1
VE 1
sT
E

1  sT V
0

Pitch
compensator
Ema

E ref

1
TA

Emi

1
1 sTW

E ma

1
s

ZR power and
Turbine
torque

1
U Aro CP (O, E )vw3
2

pm

E mi

tm

ZR

13

Speed control thru Pitch

Pitch actuator

Power conversion

KEC II: Simulation Results

0.81

50.2

p/p.u.

f/Hz

Supplied power by WT

0.79

50

Decelerating Energy
0.77

WT drive power drop

49.8

0.75
49.6

Accelerating Energy

0.73

Grid Frequency

49.4

0.71
49.2
0.69
49

0.67
Frequency
drop

0.65
0

10

20

Frequency recovery

30

40

50

60

70

80

48.8
90 t/s 100

14

Presented at 2012 3rd IEEE PES ISGT Europe, Berlin, Germany, October 14 -17, 2012

Comparison of Results
50.2

f in Hz

No Frequency Control

50

Frequency Control by Pitch

KEC1

49.8

KEC2
49.6
49.4
49.2
49

t in s
48.8
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70
15

Conclusion

Different options for wind turbines to

support frequency possible:
FSPC proves to be straight-forward, actually
increasing primary reserves
KEC I: brake immediately at frequency drop,
reaccelerate afterwards
KEC II: gain speed during decrease, brake
just before frequency minimum
16

Presented at 2012 3rd IEEE PES ISGT Europe, Berlin, Germany, October 14 -17, 2012

Thank you for your attention!

17