4.6 Article

Probabilistic Analysis of Commutation Failure in LCC-HVDC System Considering the CFPREV and the Initial Fault Voltage Angle

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY
卷 35, 期 2, 页码 715-724

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TPWRD.2019.2925399

关键词

Inverters; Probabilistic logic; Valves; HVDC transmission; Voltage control; Computational modeling; Analytical models; Line-commuted converter; high voltage direct current (HVDC); commutation failure; commutation failure prevention control (CFPREV); initial fault voltage angle (IFVA)

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2016YFB0900800]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51707077, 51577075]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper investigates the in-depth mechanism of commutation failure for a line-commuted converter-based high-voltage direct current (LCC-HVDC) system. The commutation failure prevention control (CFPREV) and the initial fault voltage angle (IFVA) are considered from the view of the voltage-time area (VTA) in the analysis. It is revealed that the IFVA is among the dominant factors for commutation failures when the voltage drop of the inverter bus is relatively small, and CFPREV further intensifies the impact of the IFVA on commutation failures, while the fluctuation of the direct current plays a dominant role in commutation failures under a greater voltage reduction at the inverter bus. A quantitative division of the severity of AC faults is proposed to determine dominant factors for commutation failures. The relationship between the chance of commutation failures to occur and the IFVA is built, and the method used for computing probability of commutation failures is proposed. The influence of the dynamic of CFPREV output on our research is studied. Simulations based on a typical monopole LCC-HVDC system using PSCAD/EMTDC software are conducted to verify the correctness of the theoretic analysis and the effectiveness of the proposed computing methods.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据