4.7 Article

Measurement based parameters estimation of large scale wind farm dynamic equivalent model

期刊

RENEWABLE ENERGY
卷 168, 期 -, 页码 1388-1398

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2020.12.063

关键词

DFIG; Dynamic equivalent model; Kalman filter; Parameter estimation; Wind farm; Wake effect

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An efficient and simple DFIG-based model for wind farms is proposed, which eliminates the need for rotor measurements and uses voltage and current measurements at the PCC for dynamic parameter evaluation. Additionally, a Y-bus based reduction method for equivalent collector system impedance is suggested to improve computational efficiency.
For the past few decades, the drastic increase in the installed capacity of wind farms (WFs) has necessitated a computationally efficient dynamic equivalent model of a WF, which can be used for accurate power network simulations. Various doubly-fed induction generators (DFIGs) with sophisticated power control, rotor, and grid side converter control based models for wind turbine (WT) exist in the literature. However, these models are computationally burdensome and restrict their application for modeling large WFs. Thus, an equivalent DFIG based model of a WF, with the rotor circuit modeled as a constant current source, is proposed in this paper. The proposed model is simple and computationally efficient as no rotor measurements are required, and voltage and current measurements at the point of common coupling (PCC) of the WF are used in extended Kalman filter (EKF) to evaluate the dynamic parameters of the equivalent DFIG. A Y-bus based reduction is also proposed for the equivalent collector system's impedance. Simulation results on a test WF in MATLAB Simulink and DIgSILENT prove the proposed model's efficacy over the existing equivalent models for different operating conditions like wake effect and contingencies in the interconnected power system network. (c) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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