Master Thesis Saran Ganesh

Saran Ganesh
Development of a Generic Model for Real-time

Simulation and Assessment of the Dynamic
Performance of a Large Scale Offshore
Transmission Network
by
Saran Ganesh
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Science
in Electrical Power Engineering
at the Delft University of Technology,

to be defended on October 29, 2020 at 10:00 AM.
Supervisor: Dr. ir. J.L. (Jose) Rueda Torres

Thesis committee: Prof. ir. M.A.M.M. (Mart) van der Meijden, IEPG
Dr. ir. J.L. (Jose) Rueda Torres, IEPG
Dr. T. (Thiago) Batista Soeiro DCES
This thesis is confidential and cannot be made public until October 29, 2022.
An electronic version of this thesis is available at http://repository.tudelft.nl/.

Acknowledgement
There are many people to thank for the successful completion of my thesis. Firstly, I would like to thank Dr. Jose
Rueda Torres for providing me with this opportunity to work on such an interesting topic and guiding me throughout
the research. His inputs and suggestions have been extremely valuable. All the constructive criticisms through his
comments for my report and presentations has helped in developing me as a good researcher and a good human
being. My sincere gratitude to Prof. Mart van der Meijden for believing in me and for the constant support. He has
always made me aware of the bigger picture of the work I was doing. I am incredibly thankful to both my supervisors
for their support and goodwill during this thesis. Moreover, I thank Dr. Thiago Batista for being a part of my thesis
committee and taking time to review and assess my work.
I am indebted to my daily supervisor Arcadio Perilla for holding the torch to light my path all along this uphill
journey. I am grateful for all the discussions, explanations and proposed ideas for the successful completion of this
project. He has been a great teacher to me from the start of my thesis and this work would not have been possible
without his help and contribution.
A special thanks to Dr. Abdul Korai from DIgSILENT GmbH and Shubham Sethi from Hitachi ABB Power Grids,
whose works served as an inspiration for the development of this thesis and for their insights on the report. I also
extend my gratitude to Nidarshan, Dr. Zameer Ahmad and Ajay for their sharp comments given during the break
discussions. Every time I hit a roadblock, they assured me that ’this too shall pass’. Also, thanks for the free coffee!
I am extremely grateful for my friends Preetha, Vishal, Medha, Nived, Devika chechi, Adeep and Lee for being my
support system and keeping my sanity intact. They are now family to me and have played a huge role in the last two
years of my life in Delft. Thank you so much people! A big shout out to Medha and Nived for helping me with the
cover picture.
Finally, I extend my gratitude to Varun and Veena manni for their love and support. Last but not the least, I take
this opportunity to thank Amma and Appa for letting me pursue my ambition, supporting and encouraging me to
achieve my dreams. Thank you so much Amma and Appa!
To the Class of 2020..
Saran Ganesh
Delft, October 2020
i
Abstract
The Paris Agreement, which calls for countries to channel their efforts to limit global warming would require the de-
ployment of large scale offshore wind energy in the North Sea. This includes the possibility of developing offshore
infrastructure for deploying offshore wind power generation with installed capacity ranging from 70 to 150 GW by
2040 and increasing up to 180 GW by 2045. Presently, the Voltage Source Converter (VSC) based - High Voltage Direct
Current (HVDC) transmission is considered the most suitable for transfer of offshore wind power from distant off-
shore wind farms (OWFs) to the onshore system. Amidst the available VSC topologies, Modular Multi-level Converter
(MMC) topology is the most appropriate solution for the transfer of offshore wind power to onshore systems due to
their enhanced performance during offshore and onshore disturbances. However, the currently deployed state-of-
the-art MMC-HVDC transmission has a maximum capacity of 1.2 GW. Compatibility of this available technology for
complex systems, with the working of parallel units contributing to the increase in power transfer capacity is still un-
known. Hence, this demands the development and analysis of a generic model with parallel operation of MMC-HVDC
transmission systems to transfer the bulk amount of power from large scale OWFs.
Additionally, the implementation of large scale offshore networks leads to an increase in the penetration of power
electronic (PE) converters in the electrical power system. The increase in PE converters causes technical challenges
(e.g. due to unprecedented fast dynamic phenomena) related to voltage and frequency stability, and power flow coor-
dination in the power system. In OWFs, the currently available current injection-based voltage control for PE convert-
ers are not suitable for voltage control in large scale PE dominated systems due to the absence of continuous voltage
control and ineffectiveness during islanding. Moreover, in such power systems, the conventional controllers are not
suitable for frequency control due to the absence of dynamic frequency control. Therefore, better control strategies
are required in large scale offshore networks to enhance the dynamic characteristics of the power system.
Conventionally, the OWFs are coupled to an AC collector platform through 33 kV High Voltage Alternating Current
(HVAC) cables. The voltage is stepped-up to 145 kV at the collector platform, and power is transferred to the offshore
converter station using 145 kV HVAC cables. However, in the upcoming projects, the rated voltage levels are expected
to increase from 33 kV to 66 kV to avoid the use of such a collector platform and directly transfer power from OWFs to
the offshore converter station using 66 kV HVAC cables. Hence, it would be better to understand the performance of
large scale offshore networks developed with 66 kV voltage rating.
This thesis proposes a digital twin model of a 2 GW offshore network with the parallel operation of two MMC-
HVDC transmission links connecting four OWFs to two onshore systems representing a large scale power system. The
MMCs are connected to a common bus on the AC side of the network, with one MMC creating the voltage reference
for the common bus and the other MMC following this reference. Additionally, to mitigate the challenges correspond-
ing to voltage and frequency stability in large scale offshore networks, a Direct Voltage Control (DVC) strategy is im-
plemented in the Type-4 Wind Generators (WGs) representing the OWFs. After analyzing the need for 66 kV HVAC
transmission from the OWFs to the offshore converter stations, a 66 kV offshore network is developed to achieve 2
GW offshore wind power transfer. The electrical power system is developed in the power system simulation software,
RSCADTM Version 5.011.1, in order to perform Electro-Magnetic Transient (EMT) based simulations.
Initially, a single OWF with DVC implemented in the WG connected to an AC equivalent system is modelled to
test the performance of DVC in a digital twin of a 66 kV HVAC network. The DVC provides continuous voltage control
that improves the dynamic performance of the power system. As mentioned in most of the grid codes, the important
requirement of reactive power injection by the OWF during dynamic conditions is satisfied by the controller. DVC also
avoids the need for an external controller to perform such an action. To validate the working of the implemented DVC
in RSCAD, a similar 66 kV HVAC network with the benchmark DVC model is developed in DIgSILENT PowerFactoryTM
2019 SP2 (x64), for EMT simulations and tested under severe dynamic conditions. Both the models provide similar
results, confirming the validation of the RSCAD model. Moreover, the RSCAD model provides a better representation
of the real-world operation.
To achieve the overall goal of developing a 2 GW offshore transmission network, a hybrid system with the hub-and-
spoke principle is utilized in this thesis. The 2 GW offshore network is achieved by a modular approach, connecting
four OWFs to a common bus, to which two MMCs are connected in parallel. The coordination between the imple-
mented DVC in WGs and the control structures in MMCs is evaluated for different scenarios in the network. The
performance of the 2 GW network in terms of short-term voltage stability and power flow during severe dynamic con-
ditions in the grid is analyzed. The two most severe dynamic conditions chosen for assessment are; the disconnection
of one OWF, and a three-phase fault in the middle of an HVAC cable. In the analysis, it is observed that even after the
loss of generation from one OWF, the voltage at Point of Common Coupling (PCC) of other OWFs remains stable within
ii
iii
the tolerance limit of ± 10 %. Additionally, the loss of generation decreases the active power flow in MMC-1 since it
is the one that creates the voltage reference. The power flow in MMC-2 is maintained with the corresponding active
power reference. For the event of a three-phase fault, the OWF is islanded by the operation of a circuit breaker. During
this event, with implemented DVC, the important requirement of reactive power injection from the islanded OWF as
stated in most of the grid codes is achieved. This leads to the conclusion that the voltage control in MMC-1 provides
the voltage reference in the network during the pre-fault and post fault conditions. However, DVC implemented in the
WGs of OWFs take up the role of providing the voltage reference at corresponding PCCs when the OWFs are islanded
from the network during the time of the fault.
Contents
List of Figures vii

List of Abbreviations x
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Background and Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Literature Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Objectives and Research Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.4 Thesis Contribution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.5 Thesis Outline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2 Scientific Background 7
2.1 Wind Energy Conversion Systems (WECS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2 Power from Wind Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.3 Wind Turbine Generator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.3.1 Permanent Magnet Synchronous Generator (PMSG). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.3.2 Voltage Source Converter (VSC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.3.2.1 Two-level VSC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.3.2.2 Multi-level VSC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3.2.3 Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3.2.4 Reference frame transformation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.3.3 Machine Side Converter (MSC) Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.3.4 Grid Side Converter (GSC) or Line Side Converter (LSC) Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.3.4.1 Conventional Current Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.3.4.2 Direct Voltage Control (DVC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.3.4.3 Power Balance Equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.4 High Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) Transmission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3 Modelling and Analysis of DVC in a Digital Twin of 66 kV HVAC Offshore Network 16
3.1 Real Time Digital Simulator (RTDS) Tool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.2 Layout of the 66 kV HVAC Test System in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.2.1 Aggregated Offshore Wind Farm (OWF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.2.1.1 Wind Generation System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.2.1.2 High Pass Filter (HPF) with Series Reactor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.2.1.3 OWF Transformer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.2.2 HVAC Cables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.2.3 External AC system. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.3 Control Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.3.1 Implementation of DVC in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.3.1.1 Reactive Power Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.3.1.2 Active Power Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.3.1.3 Current Limitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.3.1.4 Voltage Limitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.4 Analysis of the Dynamic Performance of 66 kV Test System in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.4.1 Three-phase Line to Ground Fault . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.4.1.1 Parameter Selection for Washout Filters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
3.5 DIgSILENT PowerFactory Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3.6 Layout of the 66 kV HVAC Test System in PowerFactory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3.6.1 Simplified Full Scale Converter (FSC) based WG System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3.6.1.1 DC Circuit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
3.6.1.2 GSC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
3.6.2 HPF with Series Reactor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
3.6.3 OWF Transformer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
iv
v Contents
3.6.4 HVAC Cables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

3.6.5 External AC system. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
3.8 Comparison of Models in RSCAD and PowerFactory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
3.8.1 Selection of Time Step in RSCAD and PowerFactory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
3.8.2 Event Comparison in RSCAD and PowerFactory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
4 Modelling a Digital Twin of 2 GW, 66 kV HVAC Offshore Network with MMC-HVDC Transmission 35
4.1 Processors in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
4.2 Defining the Layout for the 2 GW Offshore Network. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
4.2.1 Scaling of Single OWF Model for 2 GW Offshore Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
4.3 Layout of 2 GW, 66 kV HVAC Offshore Network in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
4.3.1 Aggregated OWF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
4.3.2 HVAC Cables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
4.3.3 Offshore Converter Stations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4.3.3.1 Interface Transformers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4.3.3.2 Modular Multilevel Converters (MMCs) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4.3.4 HVDC Cables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4.3.5 Onshore Equivalent Converter Stations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4.4.1 DVC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
4.4.2 Island Mode Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
4.4.3 Non- island Mode Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5 Analysis of the Dynamic Performance of 2 GW, 66 kV HVAC Offshore Network 48
5.1 General settings, Control modes and Pre-set conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.2 Synchronization of the Offshore Converter Stations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.3 Energization of the HVAC Cables and OWFs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
5.4 Dynamic Performance Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
5.4.1 Disconnection of One OWF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
5.4.2 Three-phase Line to Ground Fault . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
5.4.2.1 Circuit Breaker Operation Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
6 Conclusions and Future Scope 65
6.1 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
6.2 Answers to Research Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
6.3 Recommendations for Future Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Appendices 68
A WG model Utilized in RSCAD and PowerFactory 69
A.1 RSCAD model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
A.1.1 Aerodynamic model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
A.1.2 Machine Side Converter model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
A.1.3 Grid Side Converter model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
A.2 PowerFactory model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
B 66 kV Network Representation in RSCAD and PowerFactory 82
B.1 Single OWF 66 kV network, Draft module in RSCAD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
B.2 Single OWF 66 kV network, Runtime module in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
B.3 Single OWF 66 kV network in PowerFactory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
B.4 Additional graphs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
B.4.1 Three-phase line to ground fault . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
C 2 GW Network Representation in RSCAD 85
C.1 MMCs and HVAC cables in Draft module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
C.2 OWFs in Draft module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
C.2.1 Modification in Outer Loop Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
vi Contents
C.3 Steps for operation of the model in Runtime module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

C.3.1 Energization of the network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
C.3.2 Full generation from OWFs and power flow in MMC-1 and MMC-2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
C.3.3 Disconnection of One OWF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
C.3.4 Three-phase line to ground fault . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
C.4 Additional graphs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
C.4.1 Disconnection of OWF-2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
C.4.2 Three-phase fault line to ground fault . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
D Parameters and Configurations in RSCAD 93
D.1 Reactive power control parameters in DVC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
D.2 Active power control parameters in DVC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
D.3 V/F control parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
D.4 Cable module configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
D.5 Core assignment in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
D.6 Tline module configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
D.7 Representation of symmetrical monopole configuration in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
Bibliography 97
List of Figures
1.1 Installed wind capacity in the North Sea in GW [2] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 PE converter-based generation connection to the AC network [5] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3 Synchronous machine connection to the AC network [5] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.4 Work flow of thesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1 Schematic of offshore wind power transmission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2 Characteristics of C p -λ for various pitch angle [28] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.3 Type 3 WG configuration [28] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.4 Type-4 WG configuration [28] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.5 Cross section of a PMSG [29] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.6 Two-level VSC [31] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.7 Three-level VSC or NPC Converter [31] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.8 SPWM for phase A in two-level VSC [31] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.9 Reference frame transformation for control of VSC [32] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.10 Conventional current control in GSC [21] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.11 Development of new voltage controller strategy by modifications in the inner control loop of conven-
tional current controller [22] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.12 Effect of moving towards multi-level converters [13] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.1 Modules available in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.2 Example of a power system in Draft module in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.3 Libraries available in Draft module in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.4 Example of the Runtime module with plots, switches, sliders etc. in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.5 Flowchart representation of RSCAD working . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.6 Single line diagram of the 66 kV HVAC offshore test network in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.7 Small time step block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.8 Overview of OWF model in small time step environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.9 High Pass Filter in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.10 VSC interface transformer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.11 Scaling up of power in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.12 Cable module in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.13 Cable configuration in Draft module in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.14 Reactive power control loop [21] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.15 Active power control loop [21] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.16 Current limitation algorithm in VSC [21] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.17 Representation of three-phase fault in the middle of the cable in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.18 Voltage at PCC following a three phase fault in the middle of the cable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.19 Frequency response synthesised by PLL following a three phase fault in the middle of the cable . . . . . 29
3.20 Active and reactive currents flowing to the network following a three phase fault in the middle of the cable 29
3.21 Output of a washout filter for different proportional gains for a step response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.22 Current in d axis following a three phase fault for proportional gains 0.01, 0.03 and 0.05 . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.23 Current in q axis following a three phase fault for proportional gains 0.01, 0.03 and 0.05 . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.24 Single line diagram of the 66 kV HVAC offshore test network in PowerFactory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3.25 Initialization of time step in RSCAD and PowerFactory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
3.26 Voltage measured at PCC for a three phase fault in the middle of the cable in RSCAD and PowerFactory . 33
3.27 Active currents flowing to the network for a three phase fault in the middle of the cable . . . . . . . . . . 34
3.28 Reactive currents flowing to the network for a three phase fault in the middle of the cable . . . . . . . . . 34
4.1 Adding subsystems in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
4.2 a) Hub-and-spoke with multi-terminal HVDC system, b) Hub-and-spoke with AC links and HVDC back-
to-back station and c) Hub-and-spoke with multiple HVDC links [46] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
4.3 OWF-1 connected to external AC system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.4 OWF-1 and OWF-2 connected in parallel to external AC system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.5 OWF-1 and OWF-2 connected in parallel to MMC-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
vii
viii List of Figures
4.6 Single line diagram of 2 GW, 66 kV HVAC offshore network connected to 2 x 1 GW HVDC links with
offshore converter stations in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
4.7 Tline module in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
4.8 Tline configuration in Draft module in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
4.9 Representation of three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of HVAC cable-1 in RSCAD . . . . . . . 41
4.10 Symmetrical monopole configuration in HVDC network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4.11 V/F control in MMC-1 [48] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
4.12 Simplified structure of the outer loop control for MMC-2 [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
4.13 Representation of offshore converter station-2 connection to the AC offshore network [53] . . . . . . . . 45
4.14 MMC-2 representation [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
4.15 Inner loop control for MMC-2 [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
5.1 66 kV HVAC offshore network connected to 2 x 1 GW HVDC links with offshore converter stations in
RSCAD for two dynamic scenarios-
a) Disconnection of OWF-2 (represented by the cross symbol)
b) Three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1 (represented by the fault symbol) . . . . . . 48
5.2 Voltages at MMC bus upon CB-5a closing operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.3 Voltage in p.u. at MMC bus upon CB-5a closing operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5.4 Currents in a) MMC-1 bus and b) MMC-2 bus upon CB-5a closing operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5.5 Voltages at MMC bus upon CB-6a closing operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
5.6 Voltage in p.u. at MMC bus upon CB-6a closing operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
5.7 Currents in a) MMC-1 bus and b) MMC-2 bus upon CB-6a closing operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
5.8 Voltage at MMC bus upon charging of cable-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
5.9 Currents in a) MMC-1 bus b) MMC-2 bus upon CB-1a closing operation for charging of cable-1 . . . . . 53
5.10 Currents in cable-1 upon CB-1a closing operation for charging of cable-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
5.11 Voltage in p.u. at PCC-1 upon connecting OWF-1 with 50 MW generation to the network . . . . . . . . . 54
5.12 Currents in PCC-1 upon connecting OWF-1 with 50 MW generation to the network . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
5.13 Active power in MMC-1 bus upon connecting all OWFs with 50 MW generation each . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
5.14 Active power in MMC-2 bus upon connecting all OWFs with 50 MW generation each . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
5.15 Active power in MMC-1 and MMC-2 buses upon connecting all OWFs with 500 MW generation each . . 56
5.16 Active power in MMC-1 and MMC-2 buses upon OWF-2 disconnection event . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
5.17 Currents in a) MMC-1 bus and b) MMC-2 bus upon OWF-2 disconnection event . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
5.18 Voltage in p.u. at a) PCC-1, b) PCC-2, c) PCC-3 and d) PCC-4 upon OWF-2 disconnection event . . . . . . 58
5.19 Currents at PCC-1 upon OWF-2 disconnection event . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
5.20 Circuit breaker operation logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
5.21 Currents in circuit breaker (CB-1a) upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1 . . . . 59
5.22 Active power in MMC-1 bus and MMC-2 bus upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of
cable-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
5.23 Voltages at MMC bus upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
5.24 Currents in a) MMC-1 bus and b) MMC-2 bus upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of
cable-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
5.25 Voltage in p.u. at PCC-1 upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1 . . . . . . . . . . 62
5.26 Voltages at PCC-1 upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
5.27 Currents in PCC-1 upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
5.28 Voltage in p.u. at PCC-2 upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1 . . . . . . . . . . 63
5.29 Currents in PCC-2 upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
5.30 Currents in d and q axes in PCC-1 upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1 . . . . 64
A.1 PMSG data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
A.2 Aerodynamic model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
A.3 Aerodynamic model data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
A.4 Two-mass model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
A.5 Pitch angle control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
A.6 MPPT controller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
A.7 MSC control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
A.8 Triangular wave inputs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
A.9 Triangular wave repeater and Firing pulse generator for MSC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
A.10 Chopper activation control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
A.11 Chopper circuit in small time step block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
A.12 PLL circuit, points and slope for triangular wave generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
ix List of Figures
A.13 Triangular wave repeater and Firing pulse generator for GSC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
A.14 GSC control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
A.15 DVC representation in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
A.16 FSC representation in PowerFactory [38] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
A.17 DC bus representation in PowerFactory [38] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
A.18 DVC representation in PowerFactory [38] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
A.19 Washout filter representation in PowerFactory [38] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
B.1 66 kV HVAC test system representation in Draft module in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
B.2 66 kV HVAC test system representation in Runtime module in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
B.3 66 kV HVAC test system representation in PowerFactory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
B.4 Voltages at DC link upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable in RSCAD . . . . . . . . 84
B.5 Voltages at DC link upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable in PowerFactory . . . . . 84
C.1 Subsystem-1: 66 kV HVAC cables connected to offshore converter stations in Draft module in RSCAD . . 85
C.2 Subsystem-2: OWFs connected to HVAC cables in Draft module in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
C.3 Idref2 control logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
C.4 MMCBRK switch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
C.5 MMCBRK_2 switch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
C.6 CabMMC_Side and CabWT_Side switches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
C.7 CabMMC_Side_2 and CabWT_Side_2 switches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
C.10 Fault button . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
C.11 Voltages at PCC-1 upon OWF-2 disconnection event . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
C.14 Currents in PCC-3 upon OWF-2 disconnection event . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
C.15 Currents in PCC-4 upon OWF-2 disconnection event . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
C.16 Voltages at PCC-2 upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
C.19 Currents in PCC-3 upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
C.20 Currents in PCC-4 upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
D.1 Configuration of the calculation block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
D.2 Configuration of the terminal blocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
D.3 Core assignment of the 4 small time step boxes representing 4 OWFs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
D.4 Processor assignment chart for subsystem 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
D.5 Configuring Tline model in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
D.6 Onshore converter stations representation using DC sources in RSCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
List of Abbreviations
AC Alternating Current
DC Direct Current
dq Direct Quadrature
DVC Direct Voltage Control
EMT Electro-Magnetic Transient
EU European Union
FSC Full Scale Converter
GSC Grid Side Converter
HPF High Pass Filter
HV High Voltage
HVAC High Voltage Alternating Current
HVDC High Voltage Direct Current
IGBT Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistors
LSC Line Side Converter
LV Low Voltage
MMC Modular Multi-level Converter
MPPT Maximum Power Point Tracking
MSC Machine Side Converter
NPC Neutral Point Clamped
OWF Offshore Wind Farm
PCC Point of Common Coupling
PE Power Electronic
PI Proportional Integral
PLL Phase Locked Loop
PMSG Permanent Magnet Synchronous Generator
PWM Pulse Width Modulation
RES Renewable Energy Sources
RTDS Real Time Digital Simulator
x
xi List of Abbreviations
VDAPR Voltage Dependent Active Power Reduction
VSC Voltage Source Converter
WECS Wind Energy Conversion Systems
WG Wind Generator
1
Introduction
This chapter discusses the motivation, specific context, research gaps of literature, goals and research questions, over-
all methodological approach, and the list of scientific contributions.
1.1. Background and Motivation

To combat climate change, the production of greenhouse gas emissions must be reduced to significant levels and
shift to the use of Renewable Energy Sources (RES) must be accomplished. In numbers, the European Union’s (EU)
Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) under the Paris Agreement is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at
least 40% by 2030 when compared to 1990 [1].
The plans involve a future target of nearly 70 GW to 150 GW offshore wind power in the North Sea by 2040. A scope
of 140 to 450 GW of offshore wind power in the EU by 2050 is seen from the latest European Commission situations.
Going with the current pace, the rate of offshore wind energy deployment is deficient in reaching the objectives of
the Paris Agreement. To comply with these objectives, an extraordinary jump in offshore wind energy is required, as
shown in Figure 1.1. A practical solution calls for an increase in large scale offshore wind energy deployment in the
North Sea [2]. As part of the North Sea Wind Power Hub Programme [3], the Transmission System Operator (TSO) of
the Netherlands, TenneT, has already entered into an innovation partnership with its suppliers to establish a 2 GW
offshore platform to bring in their contribution towards the Paris Agreement. Likewise, Denmark is progressing with
the first hub-and-spoke energy island with a vision of connecting at least 10 GW of offshore wind power in the North
Sea [4]. While the requirement for large scale offshore networks is appealing, the technical challenges that could be
encountered should also be considered.
Active power in GW
Year
Figure 1.1: Installed wind capacity in the North Sea in GW [2]
1
2 1. Introduction
RES are connected to the power system through Power Electronic (PE) converters as shown in Figure 1.2. The PE
converters do not possess inherent inertial response characteristics. Until now, the integration of RES to power sys-
tem has not created major problems since the stability of the system is maintained by the synchronous machines in
power plants. Traditionally, the inertia for the power system is provided by these synchronous machines connected
to the network (Figure 1.3). However, an increase in RES in the future causes an increase in PE converter based gener-
ation units. Simultaneously, the synchronous machines in conventional power plants need to be disconnected from
the network. This makes the power systems weak due to low short circuit power and low system inertia. Therefore,
the consequence of disconnecting the synchronous generators leads to the requirement of the PE converter based
generation units to take up the role of governing the stability of the power system.
DC Primary Inverter
Source 𝐼𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑑 𝐼𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑒𝑑
𝑉𝐷𝐶 AC Network
Figure 1.2: PE converter-based generation connection to the AC network [5]
Primary
source
AC Network
Electrical
Mechanical torque
torque
Figure 1.3: Synchronous machine connection to the AC network [5]
The majorly contributing source among the available RES is wind energy. Specifically, offshore wind energy is
predicted to be the most significant source of energy among the North Sea countries by 2040 [6]. As a result, the
deployment of offshore wind energy technology is expected to grow further. With the increase in integration of off-
shore wind energy, the inherent characteristics of offshore wind energy conversion systems will affect the nature of the
power system. The vulnerable wind speed conditions due to the uncertain behaviour of wind could lead to variations
in the supply and demand, and therefore, fluctuations in voltages and frequency are bound to occur. Moreover, as the
power systems become weak due to the decommissioning of synchronous generators in conventional power plants
that use non-renewable energy sources, the integration of offshore wind power plants to such weak power systems
pose various research challenges on the power system stability.
One of the challenges is related to voltage stability. The continuous variation in offshore wind speed causes a con-
stant change in the active power output of the offshore wind power plant. This could lead to an increase in the reactive
power output and consequently, the voltage at the point of common coupling (PCC). The conventional current control
methods using Proportional Integral (PI) controllers in the modern Wind Generators (WGs) are capable of providing
voltage control by injecting reactive currents when connected to a strong network 1 . However, these controllers are
not suitable for operation in highly PE converter dominated grids as the connected network is weak and is not capable
of absorbing the injected currents. Furthermore, during the scenario of islanding, voltage control by the conventional
current controllers is ineffective due to the absence of continuous voltage control, and the deviation in voltage is not
high enough to activate an effective voltage reduction mechanism. There are challenges in terms of frequency stabil-
ity as well since the conventional current controllers in the WGs are not equipped to provide frequency control of the
network during islanding.
Currently, the state-of-the-art technology for the transfer of offshore wind power to the onshore system is Voltage
Source Converter (VSC) based - High Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) transmission links. Presently, Modular Multi-
level Converter (MMC) topology that falls under the classification of VSC topologies is the most suitable solution. Few
among the advantages of MMC are [7]; (1) ease of integration with Offshore Wind Farms (OWF)s, (2) supporting the
bi-directional flow of power between the offshore network and onshore system, and (3) independent control of active
1 SCR = SC
MV A /P; where SCMV A is the short circuit power of the network and P is the active power generation.
If SCR = 100 to 250, it is a strong grid. If SCR = 5 to 25, it is a weak grid.
3 1. Introduction
and reactive powers in the network. However, with the available technology, MMC-HVDC transmission are limited to
a rated capacity of 1.2 GW [8].
The implementation of large scale offshore networks (greater than or equal to 2 GW) creates a highly PE converter
dominated network. The challenges mentioned above in terms of voltage and frequency control by the PE converters
without the presence of conventional units are prominent in large scale offshore networks.
The absence of conventional generators would mean that the PE converters will have to take into account the de-
creasing inertia of the system that leads to faster dynamic behaviour and needs controllers with faster time response.
Moreover, in large scale offshore networks, distant OWFs would be connected in parallel. With the parallel operation
of the conventional current controllers in WGs, interactions can persist among them and could lead to instability of
the network. Additionally, the restoration of the grid, following disturbances by the PE converter units is a serious
matter of concern. With the conventional current control approach, grid restoration is challenging without the help
of auxiliary diesel generators. However, in the case of large scale offshore networks, the role of grid restoration must
be taken up by PE converters. There can be arguments that storage facilities such as battery and thermal can be a
realizable solution in case when there are no conventional generators available. Huge investment costs, low lifetime
and low efficiency when compared to controller modifications are the drawbacks that make these storage facilities
practically unusable in large scale offshore networks [9].
Traditionally, the transmission of power from OWF to the offshore converter station uses a combination of 33
kV and 145 kV High Voltage Alternating Current (HVAC) cables. The OWFs are connected to an Alternating Current
(AC) offshore platform using 33 kV HVAC cables. The platform holds a power transformer that is used to step-up
voltage from 33 kV to 145 kV, and power is transferred from the AC platform to the offshore converter station using
145 kV HVAC cables [10]. However, the upcoming projects are expected to have a higher voltage level of 66 kV for
transmission to allow twice the amount of power transferred compared to 33 kV. Therefore, this would only require 66
kV HVAC cables to directly connect OWFs to offshore converter station, avoiding the use of an AC collector platform
[11]. Hence, advancing towards large scale offshore networks, it would be more appropriate to assess the performance
of these networks developed with 66 kV HVAC transmission.
With the available MMC-HVDC transmission technology, multiple MMC-HVDC transmission links connected in
parallel would be required to transfer the bulk amount of offshore wind power generated from large scale offshore
networks to the onshore system. In such networks, the power flow between the parallel operated MMCs and the
OWFs must be coordinated during steady state and dynamic conditions. The major challenges regarding voltage
and frequency control during islanding of the OWFs must be taken into account. The scenario of reactive current
injection that needs to be provided by the WGs during dynamic conditions as demanded by majority of the grid codes
must also be taken into consideration [12]. Therefore, the progress towards the development of large scale offshore
networks calls for a generic model with a suitable layout with the available technology that is capable of tackling the
aforementioned technical challenges and providing stable operation during steady state and dynamic conditions.
1.2. Literature Review

As seen in Section 1.1, the significant challenges are; development of large scale offshore networks with the available
technology, no much knowledge about 66 kV HVAC transmission available, and new control strategies are required
that can provide better control of voltage and frequency. Hence, a generic model for large scale offshore networks
with the latest trend in available technology, and enhanced control strategies is a crucial research requirement.
Based on MMC-HVDC transmission technology, there are mainly three configurations available for the connection
of offshore and onshore converter stations [7], [13]:
• Point-to-point connection: The configuration connects one OWF to the offshore converter station, which is
then connected using HVDC link to the onshore converter station.
• Multi-infeed connection: The configuration involves connecting one OWF to two different onshore systems by
connecting two offshore converter stations on a common bus on the AC side and transmitting power through
two HVDC links. Such a configuration allows for increasing the rating of the OWF beyond the capacity of a
single offshore converter station. The drawback of such a configuration is that it allows the connection of only
one OWF to the network.
• Multi-Terminal Direct Current (MTDC) connection: In this configuration, the HVDC links of multiple offshore
converter stations are connected to the main Direct Current (DC) link. Such a configuration enables the transfer
of active power to onshore system depending on the capacity of the main DC link. However, the major drawback
is that complete shutdown and restart of connected MMCs is required for a fault on the DC side.
The multi-infeed and the MTDC connections allow for parallel operation of MMCs, which is a significant require-
ment for large scale offshore networks with the available technology. However, both the configurations have the draw-
back of being able to connect only one OWF to the network. Therefore, configurations that utilize several OWFs with
4 1. Introduction
parallel operation of MMCs are currently unavailable and is a key area of research. The topology mentioned in [14] em-
braces the utilization of 66 kV HVAC transmission from the OWFs (all connected in parallel) to the offshore converter
station. However, the topology examined does not utilize parallel operation of MMCs and uses only one MMC-HVDC
link with a maximum power transfer capacity of 1 GW.
Typically, PE converters in the WGs are connected to the network for parallel operation using present state-of-the-
art technology, current control strategies. In such control strategies, the regulation of power output of the converters
is achieved by measuring the angle of the grid voltage. The drawback of these control strategies is that they require
an already existing reference voltage. There are control strategies that create the reference voltage and are termed
as voltage control strategies. One among the voltage control strategies is the V/F (voltage/frequency) control that is
utilized for operation in the islanded mode. The drawback with V/F control is that it is not equipped for the parallel
operation of various voltage forming converter units [15]. Therefore, there need to be new control strategies in the
WGs that can create the reference voltage and work in parallel operation. Such control strategies are an emerging area
of research and studies are being performed in this regard. Few among the new control strategies are mentioned as
follows:
• Virtual Synchronous Machines (VSM): The PE converter control is modelled with the characteristics of a syn-
chronous machine in terms of inertia and voltage support by correspondingly deriving the equivalent equations
[16], [17], [18].
• Modified Droop Control: This strategy is common for standalone grids, where the parallel operation of voltage
forming units is developed recently using the f/P (frequency/active power) and V/Q (voltage/reactive power)
droop controls similar to the control in synchronous generators [19]. Few authors have named these droop
control concepts as Virtual Synchronous Machines Without Inertia (VSCM0H) [20].
• Direct Voltage Control (DVC): DVC is a representation of the conventional current control approach towards a
voltage control. DVC allows for the direct control of the AC converter voltage which in turn varies the current
injected by the converter [21], [22]. This approach provides continuous voltage control both in steady-state and
dynamic scenarios.
• Extended Current Control: The control is similar to the conventional current control with an additional inertia
control in the outer control loop by using a synthetic inertia controller that gives a behaviour similar to that of a
synchronous machine [23] [24].
Studies performed by I. Erlich et al. and A. Korai et al. in [22] and [21] show appealing results of the implemented
DVC for highly PE dominated systems. The simulations are tested for different grids based on real-world data and
provide promising outcomes with effective voltage and frequency control. Hence, with such proven results and avail-
able models, the DVC strategy was chosen to be incorporated for this work. Moreover, the real-time implementation
of DVC in Type-4 WG is attempted in [25], but the latest trend of 66 kV HVAC transmission and the major requirement
of reactive current injection by the WGs during dynamic conditions is lacking.
It is also good to analyze the effectiveness of other control strategies mentioned above. With a generic offshore
network model, different control strategies can be implemented in the OWFs, and the complexity related to the inter-
operability of the controllers can be assessed. However, this lies beyond the scope of this project.
1.3. Objectives and Research Questions

The overall goal of the thesis is to develop a generic digital twin model of 2 GW, 66 kV HVAC offshore network and to
perform analysis on the dynamics of voltage and power at various locations in the network. The thesis makes use of
the Electro-Magnetic Transient (EMT) simulation-based software tools such as RSCAD and DIgSILENT PowerFactory
to analyze the performance of the developed control models. The average model of Type-4 WG available in RSCAD is
used as a starting point. The thesis provides a detailed description of the different available features in RSCAD that
are employed to develop the 2 GW model. To achieve the overall goal, the following research questions are defined:
• How effective is the Direct Voltage Control (DVC) when implemented in an EMT average model of Type-4 WG
connected to a 66 kV equivalent HVAC system in RSCAD?
• What insights can be attained by the EMT average model of Type-4 WG with DVC in 66 kV network in RSCAD in
comparison with a similar network modelled with a simplified Type-4 WG configuration with DVC in DIgSILENT
PowerFactory?
• How can Type-4 WGs with implemented DVC work in coordination with offshore MMCs within a multi-gigawatt
offshore transmission network?
5 1. Introduction
• How effectively do Type-4 WGs with implemented DVC perform when connected in an offshore network for
parallel operation?
1.4. Thesis Contribution

On behalf of the thesis objectives defined above, the major contributions from this thesis are presented in this section.
• Implementation of the DVC in Type-4 WG model in RSCAD for an offshore 66 kV HVAC network. With proper
documentation provided in this report, the developed 66 kV HVAC model in RSCAD can be utilized for future
work.
• Development of a 66 kV HVAC offshore network in PowerFactory by adapting the benchmark DVC model in
Type-4 WGs. With proper documentation provided in this report, the developed 66 kV HVAC model in Power-
Factory model can be utilized for future work.
• Development of a digital twin of 2 GW, 66 kV HVAC offshore network with DVC implemented in Type-4 WGs
connected to two offshore converter stations in RSCAD. With proper documentation provided in this report, the
developed 2 GW model in RSCAD can be utilized for future work.
• Automation script for the operation of the developed 2 GW offshore network model using the interface between
RSCAD and MATLAB is created.
1.5. Thesis Outline

A brief outline of the methodology is structured in several chapters, which sequentially describe the performed tasks
as follows:
• Chapter 2: The chapter presents the concepts of wind energy conversion system and the classification of wind
turbines. The overview of the OWF network with all the major equipment and the latest trend in technology
is explained. The issues with the present current control strategies and the necessity to move towards better
control strategies are addressed. The new control strategy, DVC, to be implemented in Type-4 WG is formulated.
• Chapter 3: The implementation of DVC in [21] and [25] for a digital twin of 66 kV HVAC offshore network in
RSCAD is detailed. The performance of Type-4 WG with DVC, in terms of short-term voltage stability and re-
active current injection, under severe disturbances is analyzed. Modelling of a similar 66 kV HVAC offshore
network in DIgSILENT PowerFactory tool is also addressed. The comparison of the dynamic performance of
DVC in two EMT platforms (RSCAD and PowerFactory) for a 66 kV HVAC offshore network during severe distur-
bances is carried out.
• Chapter 4: The development of a large scale digital twin model of a 2 GW offshore network in RSCAD is detailed.
The modifications in the control structures of the MMCs to work in coordination with the implemented DVC in
WGs are addressed.
• Chapter 5: The operation of the developed large scale 2 GW network is discussed. The interplay of offshore
MMCs and Type-4 WGs in terms of dynamic power flow control within the offshore network (by analyzing the
voltage and current profiles in the electrical path between the WGs and the MMCs) is performed.
• Chapter 6: The significant conclusions for the research questions are provided. The future scope and recom-
mendations are also added.
A figurative representation of the thesis workflow is presented in Figure 1.4.

6 1. Introduction
2 Scientific Background
Overview of wind energy systems
Wind Generator classification
Equipment-wise detail of wind farm
DVC in 66 kV HVAC Network

66 kV offshore network developed in RSCAD
3
Analysis of DVC performance
66 kV offshore network developed in PowerFactory
Performance comparison of both models
4 Development of 2 GW Digital Twin Model

2 GW, 66 kV offshore network developed in RSCAD
Modular approach utilized
Modifications in MMCs control
Analysis of 2 GW Digital Twin Model

Stage wise operation of the network
5
Dynamic events in the network
Analysis of DVC and MMCs control coordination
6 Conclusions and Future Work
Figure 1.4: Work flow of thesis

2
Scientific Background
An outline of the scientific concepts required for this thesis work is presented in this chapter. Firstly, the basics of
wind energy conversion systems are explained. All components that are a part of an offshore wind farm network are
depicted and explained. The conventional control topologies in the PE converters of WGs are also explained.
2.1. Wind Energy Conversion Systems (WECS)

The WECS is a mixture of various engineering fields such as mechanical, electrical and control systems. The WECS
consists of several components that convert the kinetic energy of the wind into electrical energy and transfer power
efficiently and systematically. The major mechanical equipment in the WECS are the turbine tower, nacelle, rotor
blades, hub, drives, gearbox, drive-train and mechanical brakes [26]. The PE converters, electrical generator, trans-
mission cables, power transformers and transmission towers constitute the electrical part. The control systems govern
both the electrical and mechanical systems [27]. The basic structure of the WECS is depicted in Figure 2.1.
Wind Blade HVDC Power Tower

Electrical Machine PE Converters
Profile Mechanism Transmission Transformer Transmission
Grid connection
Wind Turbine Generator
Figure 2.1: Schematic of offshore wind power transmission
2.2. Power from Wind Energy

The wind energy converts kinetic energy of the wind to mechanical energy or electrical energy. Wind energy is repre-
sented as the kinetic energy of moving air mass. The mechanical power extracted from practical wind turbines can be
depicted as in Equation 2.1 [28].
1 3
P m = C p (λ, β)ρ Av m = Cp Pw (2.1)
2
where P m is the power from wind, C p is the power coefficient, λ is the tip speed ratio, β is the blade pitch angle in
degrees, ρ is the air density and v m being wind speed.
The tip speed ratio, λ is defined as,
Rω
λ= (2.2)
v
7
8 2. Scientific Background
where R is the turbine blade radius in meters and ω is the mechanical angular velocity in rad/s and v is the wind speed
in m/s.
The coefficient of performance, C p , is not a constant value and is a function of λ and β. The C p -λ characteristics
are represented for different pitch angle (β) values in Figure 2.2. As can be seen, there exists a maximum mechanical
power that can be achieved for a specific tip speed ratio and pitch angle.
Figure 2.2: Characteristics of C p -λ for various pitch angle [28]
2.3. Wind Turbine Generator

The Wind Turbine Generator (also termed as Wind Generator (WG) ) consists of the mechanical equipment, the elec-
trical generator and the PE converters mentioned in Section 2.1 and depicted in Figure 2.1. Depending on the speed
of operation, WGs can be classified as follows [28]:
• Type 1 - Fixed speed Induction Generator (FSIG) : Type 1 WG has a fixed speed of operation. Hence, maximum
power extraction at all times is not possible.
• Type 2 - Slip Ring Induction Generator (SRIG) : Type 2 WG is a variable speed technology that uses a vari-
able resistor in the rotor windings to adjust the rotor speed. However, the variation of speed is limited in this
technology, and higher heat dissipation exists due to the variable resistance.
• Type 3 - Doubly-Fed Induction Generator (DFIG) : Type 3 WG also comes under variable speed technology.
The configuration is depicted in Figure 2.3. The grid transformer is directly connected to the stator of the DFIG,
and the rotor is connected through a partially rated PE converter. This configuration adds variable frequency
AC excitation (instead of only resistance) to the rotor circuit. The additional excitation for the rotor is provided
through slip rings by the Voltage Source Converter (VSC) which controls rotor currents and thereby controls the
torque and reactive power of the generator. This VSC is the Machine Side Converter (MSC) and is connected
back-to-back with a Grid Side Converter (GSC), which provides control of the DC link voltage and the reactive
power flow to the grid. The downside of this topology is that it requires gearbox for operation and hence the
chances of wear and tear is high.
Doubly-fed
induction generator
Grid
Pitch
AC DC
DC AC
𝑃𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑄𝑟𝑒𝑓
Figure 2.3: Type 3 WG configuration [28]
• Type 4 - Permanent Magnet Synchronous Generator (PMSG) : Type-4 WG also has a variable speed configura-
tion, as shown in Figure 2.4. PMSG is connected to the grid transformer through a full-scale back-to-back power
converter. There is no speed limit in this topology when compared to Type-3 configuration. Another advantage
in Type-4 WG is that the gearbox can be avoided. The control structures of the converters are explained in the
following sections.
Multipole permanent
magnet generator
Grid
AC DC
DC AC
𝑃𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑄𝑟𝑒𝑓
Pitch
Figure 2.4: Type-4 WG configuration [28]
Type-4 WGs are employed for this thesis work, and hence the components involved for this architecture are ex-
plained further.
2.3.1. Permanent Magnet Synchronous Generator (PMSG)

As shown in Figure 2.5, PMSG consists of stator, rotor and windings. The rotor is generally a permanent magnet that
creates the magnetic flux. The stator consists of windings that are sinusoidally distributed. Generally, wound-field
synchronous generators require DC excitation to be provided by an external source. Whereas in PMSG, external DC
excitation is not required, as it is created using the permanent magnets present in the rotor. Based on the direction of
flux lines, PMSG can be classified as radial flux, axial flux and transverse flux. Another classification is based on the
location of permanent magnets on the rotor as inset PMSGs and surface mounted PMSGs [29].
The mathematical model of PMSG is based on Direct-Quadrature (dq) theory. The differential equations for the
PMSG in dq frame are depicted in Equation 2.3 [29].
d
Ψd + ωr .Ψq
v d = r s .i d +
dt
(2.3)
d
v q = r s .i q + Ψq + ωr .Ψd
dt
where i d and i q are the stator d and q axes currents respectively, v d and v q are the stator d and q axes voltages
respectively. r s is the stator resistance and ωr is electrical speed in rad/s. Ψd and Ψq are the d and q axes flux linkages
Figure 2.5: Cross section of a PMSG [29]
respectively.
The flux linkages Ψd and Ψq are given by the Equation 2.4 [30].
Ψd = L d .i d + L md .i D + Ψm
(2.4)
Ψq = L q .i q + L mq .i Q
where L d and L q are the inductances in d and q axes respectively, L md and L mq are mutual inductances and Ψm
is the permanent magnet flux linkage.
2.3.2. Voltage Source Converter (VSC)

The stator of the PMSG is connected directly to the AC side of a VSC as seen in Figure 2.4. This VSC which works as a
rectifier during generation operation is termed as MSC. It is interfaced back to back with another VSC that works as
an inverter during generation operation and is called GSC.
VSC consists of self-commutated switching devices such as the Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistors (IGBTs) and
anti-parallel diodes and hence allows the bidirectional flow of power between the AC and DC sides. The output voltage
is obtained by switching off the IGBTs in a synchronized manner. The VSCs are classified as two-level or multi-level
depending on the number of voltage levels they can generate [31].
Two-level VSC
The two-level VSC is the most commonly used type of converter in various applications because of the simplicity of
its operation. The configuration of a two-level VSC is depicted in Figure 2.6. Voltages of (1/2 Vd c , -1/2 Vd c ) can be
obtained using two-level VSC as shown in the graph in Figure 2.6. The operation of switches S 1 and S 2 in two-level
VSC are operated complementary to prevent short circuit across the DC link, hence protecting the PE devices from
being subjected to over-current.
Figure 2.6: Two-level VSC [31]

Multi-level VSC
VSCs with three or more levels are termed as multi-level VSCs. The three-level VSC is among the first multi-level
configuration used on large scale and is also termed as Neutral Point Clamped (NPC) converter [13]. The topology
of a NPC converter is shown in Figure 2.7. The voltage levels of (1/2 Vd c , 0 , -1/2 Vd c ) can be obtained using a NPC
converter. This provides a better sinusoidal nature and also reduces the Total Harmonic Distortion (THD) when com-
pared to a two-level VSC. The switches (S a1 ,S a3 ) and (S a2 ,S a4 ) are operated complementary in a NPC converter. This
means, turning on switch S a1 eliminates S a3 from being turned on and the same pattern is followed for the latter
complementary pair. The summary of switching operation for a NPC converter is shown in Table. 2.1.
Figure 2.7: Three-level VSC or NPC Converter [31]
Switch state
Voltage level S a1 S a2 S a3 S a4
1
2 Vd c ON ON OFF OFF
0 OFF ON ON OFF
− 12 Vd c OFF OFF ON ON
Table 2.1: Switching operation of a three-level VSC [31]
Pulse Width Modulation (PWM)

The switching of the valves has to be configured using a control mechanism to ensure proper operation. To reduce the
harmonic content and to control the magnitude of output voltage, many Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) techniques
are developed. Few of them used currently are, Selective Harmonic Elimination (SHE), Sinusoidal Pulse Width Mod-
ulation (SPWM) and Space Vector Modulation (SVM). SPWM technique is employed in this thesis and is explained
further. SPWM is one of the simplest methods to be implemented and provides high effectiveness in modulation
by suppressing the harmonic contents that are farther from the fundamental frequency component. SPWM can be
termed to be a multi-pulse based modulation technique that changes the pulse width of the output voltage of the
converter in a sinusoidal fashion with respect to a corresponding reference voltage. The implementation of this con-
cept is done by comparing a particular reference signal of low-frequency with a carrier signal of higher frequency. The
reference signal frequency is set to the required fundamental frequency, which is normally 50 Hz or 60 Hz, and the
carrier signal frequency should be higher than the reference signal frequency. An example of SPWM in two-level VSC
is shown in Figure 2.8.
Figure 2.8: SPWM for phase A in two-level VSC [31]
Reference frame transformation

PI controllers are widely used for the control operation of VSCs in power systems. It is therefore relevant to translate
from three-phase abc frame to a rotating dq frame in order to have a two signal representation of three-phase AC
signals. Figure 2.9 shows the Clarke-Park transformation used for this purpose. The three-phase measured signals
from the node are translated to a stationary reference frame (αβ) using the Clarke transform. It is then translated
to a synchronous rotating dq frame using the Park transform. The reference signal for control is provided to the
corresponding frame, and after the control process is established, it is translated back to the three-phase signals. In
real-world, during translation to a rotating dq frame, the d-axis is aligned with the grid voltage, and q-axis is aligned
to zero. The alignment is done by the voltage angle determined by the Phase Locked Loop (PLL). Such an approach
provides control of active power or DC voltage using d-axis current component of the converter, while the reactive
power or AC voltage can be controlled using the q-axis current component of the converter.
Measured Stationary reference Stationary reference

Modulated space
currents, frame, Rotating reference frame,
Calculated vectors,
(3 phase AC) (2 phase AC) frame, (2 phase AC)
(3 phase AC)
Inverse Inverse Output

Clarke Park Control
Park Clarke Voltage
transform transform Process
transform transform Modulation
Reference
Figure 2.9: Reference frame transformation for control of VSC [32]
2.3.3. Machine Side Converter (MSC) Control

The MSC controller is in charge of optimizing the rotor speed to increase the amount of wind energy being captured
continuously [33]. The following equation gives the electromagnetic torque of the PMSG.
3
Te = P n [Ψm .i q − (L d − L q )i d .i q ] (2.5)
2
where P n is the number of pole pairs.
The majorly used mechanisms for the control of MSC are the following three control schemes [34]:
• Zero d-axis Control (ZDC): As the name suggests, this control involves setting the d-axis component of stator
current to zero. If i d = 0 in Equation 2.5, the electromagnetic torque will be proportional to the q-axis component
of stator current (i q ).
• Maximum Torque per Ampere (MTPA) control: The concept of MTPA control is to generate a required torque
with a minimum stator current. Thereby, the use of stator current is increased, and the losses across the stator
windings are reduced. In case of non-salient pole generators, the inductances in d and q axes are the same
(L d = L q ). On substituting L d = L q in Equation 2.5, this simplifies to the fact that electromagnetic torque is
proportional to the q-axis current component. Therefore, the MTPA control is the same as the ZDC in case of
non-salient pole generators.
• Unity Power Factor (UPF) control: The stator voltage and current phase angles are calculated initially. To achieve
UPF, the angle between the stator voltage and current, i.e. the stator power factor angle must be zero. The
equations are then solved for both the d and q axes stator currents.
Additionally, the generator is also governed by the Maximum Power Point Tracking (MPPT) mechanism to extract
the maximum power possible. There are two ways of implementing this mechanism; the first involves measuring the
speed of the WG shaft, and the maximum mechanical power that can be extracted is calculated. The error obtained
by comparing the maximum mechanical power with the actual power achieved is provided for the MSC control. The
next method is through measurement of wind speed. If for a given speed, the ratio of optimum tip speed ratio and
the radius of the blade is known, the optimal rotational speed of the rotor (vλopt /R) can be calculated. The error ob-
tained on comparing this speed with the measured speed is used to calculate the i q,r e f component [28]. The detailed
implementation of MSC control in RSCAD is given in Appendix A.1.2.
2.3.4. Grid Side Converter (GSC) or Line Side Converter (LSC) Control
The GSC is connected back to back with the MSC through a DC link. The GSC is mainly responsible for providing DC
voltage control and the AC side reactive power control.
Conventional Current Control

The conventional control of GSC implemented in power systems follows the current control strategy. This involves
an outer loop to control the DC voltage (Vd c ) in d-axis, and AC voltage (Vac ) or reactive power (Q) control in q-axis
as shown in the blue box in Figure 2.10. The outer loop provides reference set points (i d _r e f and i q_r e f ) for the inner
current control loop which is represented by the orange coloured box in Figure 2.10. The inner loop consists of PI
controllers and feed-forward term (VT ) that form the major part of the control. The decoupling terms (x) are added at
the end of the current regulator output to improve the dynamic performance of the system.
The conventional current control strategy has not led to any major issues until now, because the synchronous
generators in power plants were capable of absorbing the injected currents. However, this is not the case for a network
that is dominantly connected using PE interface. An example of such a situation is an OWF network. The effect could
also be severe for a large scale OWF network involving more PE converters to be connected to the network. Hence this
calls for the need for better control strategies.
Outer control loop Inner control loop

𝑉𝑑𝑐 𝑖𝑑 𝑉𝑇
𝑉𝑑𝑐_𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑖𝑑_𝑟𝑒𝑓 - 1
- 1 + 𝑉𝐺𝑆𝐶𝑑_𝑟𝑒𝑓
+ 𝑘𝐷𝐶 (1 +
𝑠𝑇𝐷𝐶
) ÷ + 𝑘1 (1 +
𝑠𝑇1
) -
-
𝑉𝑇
𝑥
𝑄𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑥
1
+ 𝑘𝑄 (1 + )
- 𝑠𝑇𝑄
+ 1 -
+ 𝑘2 (1 + ) + 𝑉𝐺𝑆𝐶𝑞_𝑟𝑒𝑓
𝑄 + - 𝑠𝑇2
𝑖𝑞_𝑟𝑒𝑓
𝑉𝑎𝑐_𝑟𝑒𝑓
+ 𝑘𝑢 𝑖𝑞
-
𝑉𝑎𝑐
Figure 2.10: Conventional current control in GSC [21]

Direct Voltage Control (DVC)

The major issue with conventional control is the wind up of the integrator that causes the voltage to rise. This happens
because the reference value of current (i d _r e f and i q_r e f ) remains non-zero and the measured current (i d and i q )
following islanding nearly falls to zero. To overcome this issue, the inner control loop in Figure 2.10 is modified as
shown in Figure 2.11. In Figure 2.11, the integrator term is avoided, and the proportional term is moved to the output
end. However, this causes the set points to differ in the absence of the integral component. The main role of set points
is to limit the PE converter current. Nevertheless, the current limitation would be based on the grid situation, and
hence the performance of the controller is not affected in the absence of the integral component [21], [22].
𝑖𝑑 𝑉𝑃𝐶𝐶
𝑖𝑑_𝑟𝑒𝑓 - 1 + 𝑉𝐺𝑆𝐶𝑑_𝑟𝑒𝑓
+ 𝑘1 (1 + ) - +
𝑠𝑇1 - -
𝑠𝑇𝑤
𝑘𝑃 ( )
𝑥 1+𝑠𝑇𝑤
𝑥 𝑖𝑑_𝑟𝑒𝑓 − 𝑖𝑑
𝑖𝑞_𝑟𝑒𝑓 1 - 𝑉𝐺𝑆𝐶𝑞_𝑟𝑒𝑓
+ 𝑘2 (1 + ) + -+
- 𝑠𝑇2
𝑠𝑇𝑤
𝑘𝑄 ( )
1+𝑠𝑇𝑤
𝑖𝑞
𝑖𝑞_𝑟𝑒𝑓 − 𝑖𝑞
Figure 2.11: Development of new voltage controller strategy by modifications in the inner control loop of conventional current controller [22]
The damping of transient scenarios is provided by imitating the use of a resistor in series in the PE converter circuit.
In the real scenario, damping can be depicted as the power loss across a resistor. However, placing a physical resistor
in the circuit causes loss of active power which is not desired. In order to achieve the damping effect without power
loss, the controller is formulated to mimic the drop in voltage using a virtual resistor [22]. The value of the virtual
resistors in d and q axes are the gains (k P and kQ ) of the washout filers depicted in red boxes in Figure 2.11.
The control strategy developed in [21] uses a vector control strategy similar to the conventional current control.
The transformation in d and q axis allows the independent control of active and reactive powers. This control strategy
is adapted for this thesis and is explained in detail in Section 3.3.1.
Power Balance Equation

The power balance equation at the WG is given as follows:
P i nver t er,i nput = P r ec t i f i er,out put + P c apaci t or (2.6)

where rectifier is the MSC and inverter is the GSC. For steady-state conditions, the voltage across the DC capaci-
tance is steady. Thereby, the active power input for the inverter (GSC) equals the active power output from the rectifier
(MSC). During the fault condition, the active power output from the inverter is decreased, whereas the output from
the rectifier tends to be the same. The capacitors are charged during this scenario, and the DC link voltage increases
to maintain the power balance.
2.4. High Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) Transmission

As the name suggests, a High Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) transmission system uses DC for bulk transmission of
electrical power. The electrical power from the offshore AC network is stepped-up using a power transformer and is
converted to DC at the converter station, which is transmitted to onshore locations using subsea cables or overhead
lines [35]. The commercial utilization of HVDC transmission was started in 1954 [36], [37]. HVDC technology employs
VSCs to convert power from AC to DC and vice versa, as explained in Section 2.3.2, and hence the systems that employ
this technology are termed as VSC-HVDC systems.
As explained in Section 2.3.2, the classification for VSCs can be termed as two-level and multi-level. The two-level
VSCs are an economical solution for low power rating applications up to 1 MVA. The main drawbacks of two-level
VSCs include increased power losses, high harmonic content on the AC side voltages and require expensive filters
to mitigate the harmonics. On the other hand, multi-level converters provide notable improvements for the above
mentioned issues as can be seen in Figure 2.12 [13].
Figure 2.12: Effect of moving towards multi-level converters [13]
The most common multi-level converters for high voltage applications in recent times are the Modular Multi-level
Converters (MMC)s. The significant component in an MMC is the switching submodule that can be either half-bridge
or full-bridge submodules. The half-bridge submodule has one two-level phase leg parallel to a DC capacitor that
maintains the DC voltage. The voltage level can be increased by connecting the submodules in series. The DC power
at the output of MMC is transmitted to the onshore converter using subsea HVDC cables. It is converted back to AC at
the onshore converter station and sent to the distribution network.
Having understood the basics of various equipment in an OWF and VSC-HVDC transmission, the goal of modelling
a multi-gigawatt offshore network with identified control strategies needs to be achieved. Implementation of the
control strategy for a single WG model is taken as the starting step and is explained in the following chapter.
Modelling and Analysis of DVC in a Digital
3
Twin of 66 kV HVAC Offshore Network
In this chapter, the basics of EMT software utilized is explained briefly. Then the model consisting of a Type-4 WG
with implemented DVC from [21] in a 66 kV HVAC offshore network in RSCAD is detailed. The performance of the
control strategy is tested for severe dynamic conditions. Lastly, the performance of the DVC modelled in RSCAD
is then validated with the benchmark DVC model in DIgSILENT PowerFactory software [38] (based on a qualitative
comparison because of the unavoidable differences between the software packages) for a similar 66 kV HVAC offshore
network.
3.1. Real Time Digital Simulator (RTDS) Tool

Real Time Digital Simulator (RTDS) Hardware is equipped to perform EMT simulations. The overall network solution
in RTDS is based on the nodal analysis. The simulator can work in the range from DC to 3 kHz of frequency. It can
simulate a time step of 25 - 50 µs for even complex power systems. This is termed as a large time step. RTDS gives the
option for a small time step environment to incorporate PE components simulation. These blocks have time steps in
the range of 1400 - 3750 ns. The hardware consists of two generations of processor cards, namely, PB5 and NovaCor
[30].
RTDS provides a user-friendly Guided User Interface (GUI) called RSCAD wherein the network is modelled, run
and analyzed. There are modules available in RSCAD for the actions mentioned above (Figure 3.1). These are ex-
plained in [30] in detail. The majorly used modules for this thesis are the Draft, Runtime, Cable and Tline modules.
The modelling of the system is performed in the Draft module, which contains a drawing canvas whose size can be
adjusted. The working of the Cable and Tline modules are illustrated in Sections 3.2.2 and 4.3.2, respectively. After the
model is developed, the simulation is run in the Runtime module. RTDS also allows for Hardware In Loop (HIL) and
Software In Loop (SIL) simulations to test the working of controllers in real-world scenario [39].
Figure 3.1: Modules available in RSCAD
A simple network model in the Draft module layout is shown in Figure 3.2. The time step, plot duration and the
canvas size is assigned by right-clicking on anywhere on the canvas area and choosing the "Circuit Options" as shown
in Figure 3.2.
16
17 3. Modelling and Analysis of DVC in a Digital Twin of 66 kV HVAC Offshore Network
Figure 3.2: Example of a power system in Draft module in RSCAD
There are different libraries available in the Draft module to select the components. The major libraries that were
used are [30]:
• Power system library (Figure 3.3(a)) - Consists of power component models such as transformer, transmission
line, cables etc. These components are to be used in the large time step in the workspace.
• Small time step library - This library consists of components that are used to model in the small time step
environment. The mainly used components are the VSC bridge box, VSC interface transformers, Tline block to
interface between small time step environment and large time step environment.
• Controls library (Figure 3.3(b)) - The most important block for modelling control strategies. Consists of transfer
functions, logic functions, math functions and so forth.
(a) Power system library in Draft module (b) Controls library in Draft module
Figure 3.3: Libraries available in Draft module in RSCAD

After the model has been developed in the Draft module as shown in Figure 3.2, the user has to compile the file
by clicking on "Compile" 1 . The processor calculates the actual time step, and the initial conditions are stored in the
MAP file which is available by right-clicking on the white space in the draft module. The user is notified of errors or
warnings during simulation through a pop-up box at the end of file compilation. The processor assignment and the
controls assignment can be viewed by clicking the "Processor Assignment" 2 tab. There are some important data in
the RSCAD configuration files that hold information about the configuration of hardware in RTDS. IP addresses of all
rack ports and the processor cards are the data available in the configuration file. It can be accessed using the "Tool"
menu in the main tab of RSCAD. Improper configuration of these files will result in no simulation of the test case [30].
The real-time interaction of the user with the system is done through the Runtime module available in RSCAD.
The user can accomplish tasks like measuring signals, plotting graphs, adjusting sliders and creating faults in this
interface. An example of the Runtime module with the scenarios mentioned above is shown in Figure 3.4.
Figure 3.4: Example of the Runtime module with plots, switches, sliders etc. in RSCAD
The overall working of RSCAD can be understood as depicted by the flowchart in Figure 3.5.
1 Compile icon in RSCAD:
2 Processor Assignment icon in RSCAD

Start RSCAD
Software
Build network
RSCAD Libraries in Draft module Debug errors
Error = Yes
Compile the model
Error = No
Configure control
equipment such as
meters, sliders,
switches etc.
Create similar
Debug errors network in Runtime
module
Choose required
plots to be monitored
Error = Yes
Run the model
Error = No
Study of results and

stop simulation
Figure 3.5: Flowchart representation of RSCAD working
3.2. Layout of the 66 kV HVAC Test System in RSCAD

After understanding the basics of RSCAD software, a 66 kV offshore network, as shown in Figure 3.6 is developed. The
network consists of the following components.
• An aggregated representation of ∼ 700 MW installed capacity OWF is modelled with the following elements:
– A single Wind Generation System with

¦ Permanent Magnet Synchronous Generator (PMSG)
¦ Machine Side Converter (MSC)
¦ DC circuit
¦ Grid Side Converter (GSC)
– High Pass filter (HPF) with series reactor
– OWF transformer
• HVAC cables
• External AC system
66/2 kV,
0.9 kV,
6 MVA
6 MVA
External Transformer-
Series Wind Generator
AC system Scale up to 700 MVA GSC MSC
66 kV Reactor, L1
HVAC cable
PMSG
DC circuit
Source PCC R L
Bus Bus WG
High Pass
Filter
C
OWF
Figure 3.6: Single line diagram of the 66 kV HVAC offshore test network in RSCAD
3.2.1. Aggregated Offshore Wind Farm (OWF)

The ∼ 700 MW offshore wind power is represented by a single OWF consisting of 116 WGs, each rated 6 MW connected
in parallel. Type-4 WGs are used for all units. The RSCAD representation of aggregated OWF is utilized in this work.
The aggregated model consists of PE components which require high switching frequency and hence is modelled in a
small time step environment by selecting the "VSC Bridge Box" (Figure 3.7) available in the small time step library in
the Draft module. The box contains the PMSG, MSC, DC capacitors, chopper circuit, GSC, HPF with a series reactor
and OWF transformer as illustrated in Figure 3.8. As mentioned in Section 3.1, the block can be assigned to have a
time step value between 1400 to 3750 ns. Hence, a value of 2500 ns is chosen for this model. The value can be entered
by right-clicking on the small time step block and choosing "Edit" and then "Parameters" as shown in Figure 3.7. Also,
it must the noted that the above specified time step is only for initialization and the actually used time step can be
viewed in the Map file which is accessible by right-clicking on any white space in the Draft file and selecting "View"
then, "Map File". It is also worth mentioning that the ratio of the large time step to the small-time step in a network
in RSCAD must be higher than 12 when using NovaCor and must be higher than 17 when using PB5 racks [30].
Figure 3.7: Small time step block
Wind Generation System

The Wind Generation System consists of PMSG, MSC, DC circuit and GSC. The EMT model of Type-4 WG with detailed
modelling of MSC, DC circuit and GSC represented by three-level VSCs are utilized for this work. The basic models
available in IEPG Section of Delft University of Technology (TU Delft), developed as a part of the MIGRATE project [40]
is considered for this work. The detailed description of the PMSG, MSC and DC circuit models along with the control
structures are explained in Appendix A. The control for GSC developed in [25] is modified and implemented in this
thesis work. This is explained in detail in Section 3.3.1.
21
OWF Transformer HPF with reactor GSC DC Circuit MSC PMSG
VSC INTERFACE
T1
MAIN SMALL
NETWORK TIMESTEP
SIDE VSC SIDE VPL 2e-4 0.01
V1 V2 LEG1 LEG2 LEG3 CRTP BR10 LEG6 LEG5 LEG4

38.105 2 1 1 1 1 1 1
TMVA = 2 MVA
VSC MODE PMSM
TYPE 2 INPUT:
J1 J1 J1 J1 J1 J1 LCKFR
0.03
0.03
PU SPEED 0 1 PU TMECH
5 2 5 2 5 2 2 5 2 5 2 5 INPUT: INPUT:
BR1
BR2
VSC INTERFACE PMSPD1 TMECH1
VLVchop
T2 VAIN_1 VN1
25e3
25e3
MAIN SMALL CRT1 L1 A
N1 NETWORK TIMESTEP
SIDE VSC SIDE VBIN_1 0.9e-3 VN2
CRT2 B
N2
V1 V2 VCIN_1 VN3
38.105 2 CRT3 C
Chop_Idc
N3 TMVA = 2 MVA
0.03
0.03
PMSM1
2
TYPE 2
25e3
BR12121
25e3
6 3 6 3 6 3 3 6 3 6 3 6
VSC INTERFACE
0.3508
T3
MAIN SMALL J2 J2 J2 J2 J2 J2
NETWORK TIMESTEP
RC1
SIDE VSC SIDE
4 4 4 4 4 4
477.462 5.8783e-5
V1 V2
38.105 2 CRTN BR11
TMVA = 2 MVA VNL 2e-4 0.01
TYPE 2
Figure 3.8: Overview of OWF model in small time step environment

3. Modelling and Analysis of DVC in a Digital Twin of 66 kV HVAC Offshore Network
High Pass Filter (HPF) with Series Reactor

The switching operation of PE converters leads to the generation of harmonics. Thereby, to mitigate these harmonics,
filters are provided at the output of the GSC. There are various types of filters available for this application. The
common ones are the LCL filter, L filter and high pass filter [41]. In RSCAD, there is a HPF block readily available
in the small time step library, as shown in Figure 3.9 [30]. It is chosen by selecting the VSC branch model in this library
and changing the branch type to "HIPASS". A three-phase inductance branch is chosen by selecting the branch type
to "L" and connected as the series reactor, as depicted in the blue box in Figure 3.8. After the HPF parameters are
calculated and set, then it would only be required to tune the inductance of the series reactor to limit the flow of
current and thereby stabilizing the voltage. Hence, it was decided to go with HPF.
Figure 3.9: High Pass Filter in RSCAD
The base impedance on the low voltage side of transformer is calculated in ohms as in Equation 3.1.
LV 2 (2kV )2
ZbaseLV = = = 0.6667Ω (3.1)
B aseMV A 6MV A
The HPF should have a high impedance value at the nominal frequency (50 Hz) so that it works as an open circuit.
Therefore, a higher value of 10 times base impedance is chosen. The impedance of the capacitor at 50 Hz is computed
by the following equation.
Zc = 10 × ZbaseLV = 10 × 0.6667Ω = 6.667Ω (3.2)

Hence, the value of capacitance at 50 Hz in Farad is calculated by using Equation 3.3,
1 1
C= = = 4.77462 × 10−4 F (3.3)
2π f × Zc 2π × 50H z × 6.667Ω
The next step is to calculate the inductance ’L’. Inductance must be selected such that the impedance of the induc-
tor and capacitor cancel each other during the switching or modulating frequency (950 Hz in this case). The switching
and higher frequencies can be passed to the ground and thereby purely sinusoidal signals will be transferred to the
PCC. The impedance of the inductor, resistor and capacitor must be equal at the switching frequency in order to pass
the high frequencies to the ground. Therefore, to calculate inductance, it is considered as a series LC circuit. The
resonant frequency of the LC circuit is given by Equation 3.4.
1
ω= p (3.4)
LC
Hence, the inductance value can be calculated as per the following equation.
1 1
L= = = 5.8783 × 10−5 H (3.5)
ω C (2π × 950H z) × 4.77462 × 10−4 F
2 2
Upon deriving the inductance, the resistance is selected to match the impedance of the parallel inductor at the
modulating frequency.
R = ωL = (2π × 950H z) × 5.8783 × 10−5 H = 0.3508Ω (3.6)

The series reactor is used for limiting the current to the AC network. The impedance value of the reactor is selected
based on sensitivity analysis. A value of 0.9 mH is chosen to achieve a voltage of 1 p.u. at the PCC.
OWF Transformer
The GSC is connected in series to a three-phase offshore 66/2 kV, 6 MVA transformer with leakage reactance of 10
%, through a series reactor and a shunt HPF as seen in Figure 3.8. Single-phase VSC interface transformer shown in
Figure 3.10 available in the small time step library is used for this approach. Three transformers each rated 2 MVA
are connected in wye-delta configuration with as seen in Figure 3.8. In RSCAD, the scaling up of power is done at
this transformer. The option for scaling up the primary current of the transformer is available in the VSC interface
transformer block as shown in Figure 3.11(a) [30]. The user can control the amount of scaling, i.e. the number of
parallel units by a slider, as shown in Figure 3.11(b). The user can model the components in the secondary side of the
transformer as required for a single WG and then scale it to the required power (∼ 700 MW in this case).
Figure 3.10: VSC interface transformer
(b) Scaling factor
(a) Option for scaling in VSC transformer
Figure 3.11: Scaling up of power in RSCAD
3.2.2. HVAC Cables

The HVAC cables transfer power from the OWF transformer to the external AC system. The HVAC cables are rated at
66 kV and modelled in the large time step environment. When compared to 33 kV cables, 66 kV cables allow twice the
amount of power to be transferred for the same area of cross-section and require lower array cabling [11].
RSCAD allows cables to be modelled as Frequency Dependent Phase, Bergeron and Pi models [30]. The Frequency
Dependent Phase and the Bergeron are travelling wave models. Pi model representation of cable is chosen for this
research in RSCAD. To ease the goal of comparing the performance of models in two EMT software, which is explained
later in this chapter, a Pi cable model was chosen. In RSCAD, cable parameters can be entered using the Cable module
available in the RSCAD modules section as denoted by a red box in Figure 3.12.
In the Draft module, the cable model is added in the circuit using the unified model shown in Figure 3.13 available
in RSCAD power system library. The unified model consists of the following components:
• Calculation Block
• Sending End Terminal
• Receiving End Terminal
The detailed representation of the cable parameters in Cable module, and the representation of the cable model
using the calculation block, sending end terminal and receiving end terminals in the Draft module is shown in Ap-
pendix D.4.
Figure 3.12: Cable module in RSCAD
Figure 3.13: Cable configuration in Draft module in RSCAD
3.2.3. External AC system

The external AC system represents the infinite grid connection and is modelled as an AC voltage source. The infinite
grid is similar to the representation of a synchronous generator with high inertia constant. For a strong grid, typical
values of inertia constant of 5 MW/MVA2 depicting a synchronous generator is chosen from [42]. The commonly
represented damping constant is the frequency-dependent load damping constant. However, the damping constant
is zero in this case as no loads and a lossless machine is considered. Alternatively, for short circuit calculations, the
reference parameters given in [43] can be chosen for representing an infinite grid. The parameters include short circuit
power of 30 GVA and X/R of 3 10. The AC source voltage is rated at 66 kV.
3.3. Control Structures

The control strategies are implemented for the MSC, DC circuit and GSC of the Type-4 WG. The conventional current
control architecture utilized in MSC is explained in Appendix A.1.2. The major area of interest for this thesis is the
control strategy of GSC. The DVC illustrated in Section 2.3.4.2 is implemented in the GSC.
3.3.1. Implementation of DVC in RSCAD

The control strategy depicted in [21] is achieved in RSCAD software. The control was implemented in RSCAD in [25] for
a 33 kV HVAC transmission network, but the final goal of achieving reactive current injection during severe dynamic
conditions was lacking. The primary reason was due to the avoidance of the current limiter block that is explained
later in this section. However, the block is implemented successfully in this work, and the results are illustrated. Since
RSCAD allows modelling of the secondary side of the transformer as required for one WG as explained in Section
3.2.1.3, the control loop parameters of GSC remain the same as 33 kV for a 66 kV offshore network and are based on
the benchmark values provided in [38]. The control strategy described in Section 2.3.4.2 is incorporated in the reactive
power and active power control loops defined in the following section.
3 X/R = the amount of reactance X divided by the amount of resistance R

Reactive Power Control

From the control structure, it can be seen that, unlike in conventional current control, the reactive current is not
directly utilized for voltage control. The converter voltage is directly controlled here, and this allows the current to
modify on its own according to varying network conditions. This strategy is similar to the voltage control in conven-
tional synchronous generators. The reactive control loop consists of an outer loop based on a slow VAR controller
that tracks the changes in set points required by the system-wide demand. The inner loop consists of a fast-acting
controller, as the name suggests, that responds towards crucial changes in voltage where quick action is required [21].
Slow global VAR control Fast local voltage control
𝑉𝑁 𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑞𝑃𝐶𝐶 𝑉𝑃𝐶𝐶 𝑉𝐺𝑆𝐶𝑥𝑑_𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑉

𝑃𝐶𝐶
𝑉𝑁_𝑟𝑒𝑓 - - 1 - 𝑖𝑞_𝑟𝑒𝑓 + 𝑉𝐺𝑆𝐶𝑑_𝑟𝑒𝑓

+ −𝑘𝑄𝑉 + 𝑘𝑄 (1 +
𝑇𝑄 𝑠
)
𝑉𝑃𝐶𝐶_𝑟𝑒𝑓
+ 𝑘𝑉 −𝑥 -+
𝑞𝑃𝐶𝐶_𝑟𝑒𝑓
𝑞𝑚𝑖𝑛 −𝑉𝐺𝑆𝐶𝑥𝑑_𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑆𝑡𝑜𝑝 𝑖𝑓 𝑉𝐺𝑆𝐶_𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑤𝑠𝑇

𝑘𝑝 (1+𝑠𝑇 )
𝑤
Damping and transient
current limiting control
𝑖𝑑 − 𝑖𝑑_𝑟𝑒𝑓
Figure 3.14: Reactive power control loop [21]
Slow global VAR control : It is the upper-level controller and can be modelled as a power factor, reactive power or
voltage controller. The reference values can be directly sent as inputs to the PI controller if the controller is made to
use for reactive power or power factor control. The voltage controller is used here, and this requires reactive power
reference (q PCC _r e f ) to be determined from a predefined voltage versus reactive power droop characteristic. A voltage
value for which the injection of reactive power is zero is obtained from this characteristic. The obtained reactive
power reference output is provided as input to the PI controller having a small proportional gain (kQ ) and ample
time constant (TQ ) in order to avoid transformer tap changes and not very fast in order to avoid unwanted controller
interactions. The automatic adjustment of reactive power in relation to varying voltage using the proportional gain,
(kQV ) is significant. There is no dead band present in order to ensure continuous voltage control. The proportional
gain that represents the droop can be obtained from the following relation,
∆q
kQV = (3.7)
∆VN
In theory, the proportional gain can be varied with changes in power flow. However, this is not practically feasible
and hence it is recommended to set the reactive power reference based on load flow calculation in the network and
corresponding optimum power flow (OPF) calculations. The values could be updated at regular intervals. VN _r e f can
be determined from q PCC _r e f as,
q PCC _r e f
VN _r e f = − + VN (3.8)
kQV
where VN is desired voltage and VN _r e f is the voltage at which no reactive power injection is required. The reactive
power limits (q max and q mi n ) are the continuous values in steady state and can be computed from the P-Q diagram of
the converter operation. The time constant is chosen in the range of 5-30 s wherein a value in the higher range tends
to stabilize, whereas value in the lower range can cause interactions with other controllers.
The slow global VAR controller must be made inactive once the converter current limit is reached and also during
cases of large voltage sags or swells by providing a signal to deactivate the controller. A scenario that could lead to
the case mentioned above is a three-phase short circuit event. The output from the upper-level controller must be
constant because of the chosen high integration time constant or must be limited by a blocking signal [21].
Fast local voltage control : The voltage reference output (VPCC _r e f ) received from the slow global VAR controller is
provided as input to the fast local controller. This controller must be able to provide prompt support for grid voltage
during the time of faults. The response of the controller in terms of voltage support must depend on local inputs
sensed at the PCC (VPCC ) and not on quantities that need to be measured at remote places using a communication
mechanism. A proportional gain (kV ) is used for this purpose. The proportional gain can be obtained from the fol-
lowing relation [21],
∆i q
kV = (3.9)
∆VN
The primary control action is provided by the feed-forward term, x, which is the reactance of the PE converter
(GSC). The voltage output obtained on multiplying the current (i q_r e f ) with x is the set point voltage of GSC in steady
state. The reactive control loop parameters are shown in Appendix D.1.
Active Power Control

The active power control consists of the DC voltage, direct frequency control and Voltage Dependent Active Power Re-
duction (VDAPR) control, as shown in Figure 3.15. The control of active power is provided using the q-axis component
of GSC voltage as per the Equation 3.10. Theoretically, since the DC capacitor provides the active power control, the
DC energy barrier should be made higher which is to be done by increasing the capacitor size and DC voltage when
in comparison with the conventional PI based current control [21]. However, considering the practical aspect, such
an increase in capacitance is not incorporated for this work and the DC voltage is not increased beyond 4 kV. Another
significant modification that was done is providing the minimum limit, Va_l i m_mi n , for the voltage measurement. A
small value needs to be set for this parameter in RSCAD software, or else an error causing division by zero would be
bound to occur during the start of the simulation. The active power is calculated as follows:
VGSC _q
p = VPCC i d = −VPCC (3.10)
x
The direct frequency control provides control in case of under frequency and over frequency. The control is mod-
elled to be activated when the frequency is above 50.2 Hz or below 49.8 Hz. The VDAPR control is provided to control
the power injection capacity of the GSC. Since power cannot be injected to the network by the GSC during the time
of faults, VDAPR allows in reducing the set point of reference power and thereby refining the dynamic stability of the
network. The active control loop parameters are shown in Appendix D.2.
DC Voltage control
𝑉𝐷𝐶
0 𝑉𝐺𝑆𝐶𝑥𝑞_𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑉𝐷𝐶_𝑟𝑒𝑓 - 1
+ 𝑘𝑆 (1 + )
𝑠𝑇𝑆 𝑉𝐺𝑆𝐶𝑞_𝑟𝑒𝑓
+ 𝑖𝑑_𝑟𝑒𝑓
+ ÷ −𝑥 -+
𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑓
ƴ 𝑉𝑎_lim _𝑚𝑎𝑥
Direct frequency control −𝑝𝑚𝑎𝑥 0

𝑘𝑎
𝑓𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑠 𝑃𝑐_𝑚𝑎𝑥 1 + 𝑠𝑇𝑎
𝑠𝑇𝑤
𝑓0 𝑘𝑄 ( )
1+𝑠𝑇𝑤
- 𝑘𝑅𝑓 𝑉𝑎_lim _𝑚𝑖𝑛 Damping and transient
+
1 + 𝑠𝑇𝑅𝑓 -
- × 𝑉𝑃𝐶𝐶 current limiting control
𝑖𝑞 − 𝑖𝑞_𝑟𝑒𝑓
𝑃𝑐_𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑝ҧ
Voltage Dependent Active Power Reduction 𝑝𝑛
𝑃𝑢𝑓𝑣_𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑉𝑃𝐶𝐶
𝑠𝑇𝑈𝑣 𝐾𝑈𝑓𝑣
1 + 𝑠𝑇𝑈𝑣 1 + 𝑠𝑇𝑈𝑓𝑣
𝑃𝑢𝑓𝑣_𝑚𝑖𝑛
Figure 3.15: Active power control loop [21]

Current Limitation
The current limitation is an important block that protects the PE components from damage due to over current. A
new maximum current (i max_r e f ) value is computed whenever the maximum current (i max0_r e f ) of the PE converter
is exceeded. The current limitation is incorporated in GSC based on Equations 3.11 and 3.12. The upper and lower
limits for i q_r e f and i d _r e f are calculated based on the grid impedance (shown as Priority in Figure 3.16) and the new
maximum currents (i d _r e f _l i m and i q_r e f _l i m ) are computed. Once the reference limits are computed, the converter
voltage limits are calculated by Equation 3.13 or by Equations 3.14 and 3.15 [21].
if
(|i d + j i q | − i max0_r e f ) > 0 −→ i max_r e f = i max0_r e f − k r ed × (|i d + j i d | − i max0_r e f ) (3.11)
else
i max_r e f = i max0_r e f (3.12)
Priority imax_ref
id_ref id_ref_lim VGSCxq_max

x
Limiter
iq_ref iq_ref_lim VGSCxd_max

x
Figure 3.16: Current limitation algorithm in VSC [21]
As long as the reference current is not limited,
VGSC xq_max = VGSC xd _max = x × i max_r e f (3.13)
else
VGSC xq_max = x × i d _r e f _l i m (3.14)

VGSC xd _max = x × i q_r e f _l i m (3.15)
Voltage Limitation
The AC voltage (V AC ) of the GSC is generally limited by the DC voltage (VDC ) value. The factor that brings the rela-
tionship between the AC and DC voltages is the modulation index. The modulation index is computed, as shown in
Equation 3.16. The maximum value of the modulation index is set around to 1, and GSC voltage must be limited at
that point to avoid non-saturation of the GSC.
p
2 2V AC
m= p (3.16)
3VDC
3.4. Analysis of the Dynamic Performance of 66 kV Test System in RSCAD

After the 66 kV system is modelled, it has to be tested for operation in steady state and dynamic conditions. The
performance related to short-term voltage stability (fault occurring for a span of 6-10 cycles accounting for 120-200
ms) and reactive power injection by the DVC during the most severe dynamic situation in the network has to be
analyzed. A three-phase short circuit in the middle of the HVAC cable is chosen to test the same.
3.4.1. Three-phase Line to Ground Fault

The line to ground fault logic available in the power system library in RSCAD is adapted in this network by splitting the
cable model into two halves and implementing the fault logic in the middle of the two halves as shown in Figure 3.17.
The Draft module is compiled, and after ensuring no errors, the system is run in the Runtime module. The system is
stabilized with the voltage values within the tolerance limit of ± 10% during steady-state operation.
BUS1_B
1.0159 /_ 0.73
C8 B8 A8
CABLE NAME: CABLE NAME: CABLE NAME: CABLE NAME:

CABLE2 CABLE2 CABLE1 CABLE1
SENDING END RECEIVING END SENDING END RECEIVING END
TERMINAL NAME: TERMINAL NAME: TERMINAL NAME: TERMINAL NAME:
SEN_2 REC_2 SEN_1 REC_1
1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3
CABLE CABLE
CALCULATION BLOCK CALCULATION BLOCK
CABLE NAME: CABLE NAME:
CABLE2 CABLE1
LINE CONSTANTS: LINE CONSTANTS:
66kV 66kV
CONTROL AND MONITOR CONTROL AND MONITOR
IN THIS SUBSYSTEM IN THIS SUBSYSTEM
Processor Assignment: Auto Processor Assignment: Auto
C
L-G FAULT
LOGIC
L-G FAULT POINT
Figure 3.17: Representation of three-phase fault in the middle of the cable in RSCAD
The three-phase line to ground fault is applied at 0.5 s with a fault clearing time of 140 ms. The voltage and
frequency responses are plotted for a shorter period (0.3 s to 1.3 s) to have a clearer view of the signals during the
occurrence of an event. In the pre-fault condition, the voltage is stabilized at nearly 1.04 p.u., as seen in Figure 3.18.
The frequency at the PCC computed by the PLL is set to 50 Hz, and is shown in Figure 3.19. The OWF is generating
nearly rated active power, i.e. active current of nearly 1 p.u. is provided by the GSC, as depicted by the green line in
Figure 3.20. There is no reactive current or reactive power injection by the GSC during this time, as seen from the
purple line in Figure 3.20.
1.2
1
PCC Voltage (pu)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
Voltage
0
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
Figure 3.18: Voltage at PCC following a three phase fault in the middle of the cable
During the time of the fault, the voltage drops at PCC as expected for a three-phase line to ground fault. There is no
significant drop in frequency since there are no loads connected to the OWF. Hence the frequency control does not get
activated since deviation remains within 49.8 Hz and 50.2 Hz. DVC allows reactive current and hence reactive power
to be injected by GSC during the time of fault to support the voltage, as shown in Figure 3.20. The corresponding
behaviour is a major requirement as per the grid codes during dynamic conditions, as mentioned in [12]. At the
same time, the active current and thus active power is limited, and hence there is no generation from the OWF (Figure
3.20). Simultaneously, the voltage across DC link increases in order to maintain the power balance as per the Equation
2.6. The chopper gets activated when DC voltage goes beyond a particular limit in order to protect the DC link from
overvoltage. After the fault is cleared, the DVC allows for quick recovery, the voltage and powers return to the pre-fault
values.
The spike in voltage, frequency and currents after the fault is released at 0.64 s is due to the fast dynamics of DVC.
Another important observation is the transients in the currents during the time of fault at 0.5 s in Figure 3.20. These
are due to the dynamic effects that arise due to the exclusion of an integrator [21]. It can be controlled by proper
tuning of washout filters.
50.08
50.06
PLL Frequency (Hz)
50.04
50.02
50
49.98
Frequency
49.96
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
Figure 3.19: Frequency response synthesised by PLL following a three phase fault in the middle of the cable
2.5
1.5
Current (pu)
0.5
-0.5 Active current, Id

Reactive current, Iq
-1
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
Figure 3.20: Active and reactive currents flowing to the network following a three phase fault in the middle of the cable
Parameter Selection for Washout Filters

The damping during the transient process mentioned in Section 2.3.4.2 is ensured by the washout filters in the reactive
power and active power control loops as seen in Figure 3.14 and Figure 3.15 respectively. Parameter sensitivity analysis
needs to be performed for the washout filters to ensure fast damping of transients. The output of the washout filter
for various proportional gains for a step response is depicted in Figure 3.21. The proportional gain represents values
to which the output of the washout filter changes when there is a change in the input. The time constant represents
the rate of this change. It can be seen that the output of the washout filter changes proportionally to the gain value
specified and comes back to the initial value after a specific time, depending on the time constant mentioned.
Effect of this property of washout filter is observed in the active and reactive currents at the PCC for a similar three-
phase fault as performed in the previous section. Measurements are recorded between 0.45 s to 0.65 s in Figure 3.22
and 3.23 for active and reactive currents, respectively to analyze the behaviour of transients. The proportional gain
is set as 0.01, 0.03 and 0.05 for comparison, keeping the time constant = 0.01 s for all the three cases. It is observed
that faster damping can be achieved for higher proportional gains. It makes sense as the system would try to damp
the transients to the maximum possible value in order to have minimum fluctuations and also to limit interactions
with other controllers during this period. Thereby, it is worthy to conclude that choosing the right parameters for the
washout filter is one among the key factors in this control approach.
0.01
0
Washout filter output
-0.01
-0.02
-0.03
-0.04 Proportional Gain = 0.01

Proportional Gain = 0.03
-0.05 Proportional Gain = 0.05
0.48 0.49 0.5 0.51 0.52 0.53 0.54 0.55 0.56 0.57
Time (s)
Figure 3.21: Output of a washout filter for different proportional gains for a step response
2
Id: Gain = 0.01
1.5 Id: Gain = 0.03
Id: Gain = 0.05
1
Current (pu)
0.5
-0.5
-1
0.45 0.475 0.5 0.525 0.55 0.575 0.6 0.625 0.65
Time (s)
Figure 3.22: Current in d axis following a three phase fault for proportional gains 0.01, 0.03 and 0.05
2.5
Iq: Gain = 0.01
2 Iq: Gain = 0.03
Iq: Gain = 0.05
1.5
Current (pu)
0.5
-0.5
0.45 0.475 0.5 0.525 0.55 0.575 0.6 0.625 0.65
Time (s)
Figure 3.23: Current in q axis following a three phase fault for proportional gains 0.01, 0.03 and 0.05
3.5. DIgSILENT PowerFactory Software

PowerFactory is a software tool developed by DIgSILENT (Germany) that is used for RMS and EMT simulations. It
has three integration characteristics; functional integration, vertical integration and database integration. Functional
integration explains that PowerFactory is a single executable program and vertical integration means that the models
in the power system can exchange all of the analysis functions at one place. PowerFactory uses a Data Manager for
database integration that allows all models to be stored under one project file. There are two libraries available in
PowerFactory; Global and Project libraries. There are two subsections available within the Project library. They are
[44]:
• Equipment Type Library
• User Defined Models

PowerFactory also provides development of user-defined models using DIgSILENT Simulation Language (DSL). These
features are utilized, and DVC control is implemented in PowerFactory for a typical configuration of the offshore
network in [21]. It is tested and proved to work [21]. The test results achieved in RSCAD in the previous section
need to be compared with a similar 66 kV HVAC offshore network in PowerFactory to validate the control action. In
this section, a 66 kV HVAC offshore network is developed in PowerFactory with the benchmark DVC model utilized
from [21]. Differences in the models are notified, the voltage and current profiles are compared for a three-phase line
to ground fault in the middle of the cable.
3.6. Layout of the 66 kV HVAC Test System in PowerFactory

The 66 kV offshore network is modelled in PowerFactory as shown in Figure 3.24. The network consists of the following
components:
• A simplified model of Full Scale Converter (FSC) based Type-4 WG system consisting of the following elements:
– DC circuit
– Grid Side Converter (GSC) or Line Side Converter (LSC)
• High Pass filter (HPF) with series reactor
• OWF transformer
• HVAC cables
• External AC system
No scaling required 0.69 kV,

750 MVA
66/2 kV, Wind Generator
750 MVA FSC
External Bus
AC system Transformer GSC MSC
66 kV Series
HVAC cable Reactor, L1
PMSG
DC
Source PCC circuit WG
Bus Bus
R L
High Pass Simplified Model

C Filter
Figure 3.24: Single line diagram of the 66 kV HVAC offshore test network in PowerFactory
3.6.1. Simplified Full Scale Converter (FSC) based WG System

The wind turbine and MSC are simplified since they do not contribute to the dynamics of the network. GSC is mod-
elled in detail. A constant injection of active current is proposed from the MSC to the DC side [21]. Hence it is mod-
elled as a DC current source. The WG unit is represented as a static generator model with 750 MVA nominal apparent
power. It is made to operate with constant reactive power (Q) control in order to achieve the active and reactive power
set points same as in RSCAD model. The active power flow is set to ∼ 700 MW, similar to the RSCAD model.
DC Circuit
The DC circuit is detailed, and the voltage across the capacitor is set to 4 kV, same as the RSCAD model. The chopper
activation control is provided when the DC voltage crosses a minimum set value.
GSC
Unlike the RSCAD model, a two-level GSC is utilized in this model. The PWM is not used in this model, and the GSC
is modelled as a controlled voltage source. This is one among the major difference with the RSCAD model. The DVC
control for GSC developed in [21] is provided in this model as explained in Section 3.3.1. The full representation of
DVC with active and reactive power loops in PowerFactory is depicted in Appendix A.2.
3.6.2. HPF with Series Reactor

The shunt filter available in the PowerFactory drawing toolbar is chosen. The values for R, L and C are chosen the same
as mentioned in Section 3.2.1.2. A common impedance element available in the drawing tool is chosen for the series
reactor and is connected at the output of GSC, as shown in Figure 3.24. The inductance value chosen is the same as
the RSCAD model to have an equal impedance for both the models.
3.6.3. OWF Transformer

A two winding transformer available in the equipment library folder of DIgSILENT library is used. The transformer is
rated 66/2 kV, 750 MVA with a wye-delta configuration to block zero sequence currents. The leakage inductance and
resistance of the transformer are set the same as the RSCAD model.
3.6.4. HVAC Cables

The cables are rated at 66 kV same as the RSCAD model. The cable is modelled from the "Cables" section available in
the equipment library in DIgSILENT library. The type of model is chosen to be the Pi model. Pi model is utilized as it
is easier to input the cable parameters in terms of RLC in both RSCAD and PowerFactory.
3.6.5. External AC system

The external AC system in PowerFactory also represents an infinite grid. Similar to the model in RSCAD in Section
3.2.3, the infinite grid is modelled as an AC voltage source available in the PowerFactory drawing toolbar.

As mentioned in Section 3.6.1, the wind turbine and MSC models utilized are simplified and is made to inject constant
active current to the DC circuit. Hence, the control of MSC and wind turbine is not required to be modelled. However,
control structures are detailed for the DC circuit and the GSC. The benchmark model of DVC from [38] is utilized here
for the GSC. The control structures are depicted in Appendix A.2.
3.8. Comparison of Models in RSCAD and PowerFactory

The major differences between the 66 kV HVAC network built in RSCAD and PowerFactory are illustrated in Table 3.1.
Parameters RSCAD PowerFactory

WG model PMSG Simplified (Constant power model)
MSC control Conventional current control Not modelled
GSC model VSC with PWM Controlled Voltage Source with no PWM
Generated active power from WG 6 MW ∼ 700 MW
Scaling factor at transformer 116 (cf. Section 3.2.1.3) Not applicable
Table 3.1: Differences in models in RSCAD and PowerFactory
Representation of GSC: One of the differences in both models is the usage of average model representation of VSC
with PWM in RSCAD for the GSC, whereas a controlled voltage source model is utilized in the PowerFactory model.
Scaling of power: Another significant difference between the two models is that the components connected to
the secondary side of the transformer are modelled for one WG of 6 MW in RSCAD whereas it is directly modelled for
∼ 700 MW in PowerFactory. The scaling of power to ∼ 700 MW in RSCAD is done at the 66/2 kV OWF transformer, as
explained in Section 3.2.1.3. This helps in modelling and analysis in the real-world in terms of single WG.
However, it must be noted that these differences do not affect the performance of the control operation, and both
the models have equal impedances that makes the comparison significant.
3.8.1. Selection of Time Step in RSCAD and PowerFactory

Before the start of the simulation, a specific time step value suitable for both the RSCAD and PowerFactory models
need to be set. As mentioned in Section 3.2.1, the ratio of large time step to small time step needs to higher than 12 in
RSCAD model if NovaCor processor is used. Since the small time step is chosen to be 2500 ns for the RSCAD model, as
mentioned in Section 3.2.1, a value of 50 µs is chosen for the large time step. The setting can be done by right-clicking
on the Draft module and selecting "Circuit Options" in RSCAD. In PowerFactory, it can be edited in the "Step Size"
option available in the "Calculation of initial conditions" tab, as shown in Figure 3.25.
(b) Time step setting in PowerFactory
(a) Time step setting in RSCAD
Figure 3.25: Initialization of time step in RSCAD and PowerFactory
3.8.2. Event Comparison in RSCAD and PowerFactory

The 66 kV offshore network model in RSCAD and PowerFactory are compared for a three-phase line to ground fault
in the middle of the cable. A fault is applied at 0.5 seconds with a clearing time of 140 ms. The resulting voltage and
current waveforms are as shown in Figure 3.26, 3.27 and 3.28 respectively. As can be observed in Figure 3.26, the
voltage measured at PCC drops and the generation is stopped during the fault period. The voltage profile is the same
in RSCAD and PowerFactory models during the pre-fault, fault and post fault conditions as can be observed. The drop
in voltage in both the graphs is the same due to equal impedance in both the models.
1.2
1
PCC Voltage (pu)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2 Voltage in RSCAD

Voltage in PowerFactory
0
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
Figure 3.26: Voltage measured at PCC for a three phase fault in the middle of the cable in RSCAD and PowerFactory
Due to the unavoidable modelling differences in the software packages, currents are measured at PCC bus for
the RSCAD model and at FSC bus for the PowerFactory model. However, this does not affect the magnitude as the
currents are measured in per unit. The currents in both the models have a similar profile, as summarized for the d-
axis in Figure 3.27 and q-axis in Figure 3.28. The active and reactive currents generated by the WG have the same set
points in both the models during the pre-fault condition, confirming that the power flow in both the models is similar.
As the parameters for DVC is same for both the models, reactive power injection in RSCAD model during the time of
fault is achieved similar to the PowerFactory model. The transients occurring during the time of fault at 0.5 s can be
damped by controlling the parameters of the washout filters, as seen in Section 3.4.1.1. Spike in the profiles at the time
of fault clearance at 0.64 s is due to fast dynamics of PLL in both software packages. It is observed that the currents
in RSCAD model have slight transients throughout the simulation. This is due to the detailed model representation of
GSC in RSCAD when compared to a simplified representation in PowerFactory. Therefore, it can be concluded that the
RSCAD model with the implemented DVC provides similar results as the benchmark PowerFactory model. Moreover,
the results from RSCAD model are more detailed and hence can be used as a base model for reference as it provides a
better representation of the real-world operation.
1.5
1
Current (pu)
0.5
-0.5 Id in RSCAD
Id in PowerFactory
-1
-1.5
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
Figure 3.27: Active currents flowing to the network for a three phase fault in the middle of the cable
1.5
1
Current (pu)
0.5
-0.5
Iq in RSCAD
-1 Iq in PowerFactory
-1.5
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
Figure 3.28: Reactive currents flowing to the network for a three phase fault in the middle of the cable
Modelling a Digital Twin of 2 GW, 66 kV HVAC
4
Offshore Network with MMC-HVDC
Transmission
This chapter details the development of a multi-gigawatt (focus of 2 GW), 66 kV HVAC offshore network connected to
two offshore converter stations. Like in Chapter 3, an average EMT modelling depth is used (i.e. focus on the study of
three-phase faults occurring in a balanced system), the model is developed, and simulations are conducted in RSCAD.
The model depicts the connection of four OWFs through a 66 kV HVAC offshore network contributing a total of 2 GW
installed capacity. The power is transferred to the onshore system through MMC based HVDC links. The focus is to
investigate the dynamic performance of such a system when subjected to severe disturbances (e.g. three-phase line
to ground fault) in the AC part of the network. The role of both DVC in WGs and voltage control in MMC is examined
in detail to understand the voltage performance and the power flow distribution based on simulations performed in
RSCAD.
4.1. Processors in RSCAD

The simulations in RSCAD can be run in either NovaCor or PB5 processor cards. NovaCor processor is used for this
work as they have 2-3 times the simulation capacity of a completely loaded PB5 processor [45]. For an extensive power
system network, NovaCor processor requires a part of the system to be placed in a separate subsystem. RSCAD allows
provision for splitting of the network into subsystems if the network is large. The splitting is done by right-clicking on
the main subsystem tag and choosing "Add Subsystem" as shown in Figure 4.1. This feature is utilized in this section
using Tline modules, that are used to connect subsystems. The process is explained in Section 4.3.2 in detail.
There are two NovaCor processors available at TU Delft, and they are equipped with four cores each. These cores
are utilized to solve the overall network solution, auxiliary components (such as transformers, cables, generators etc.)
and the controls present in the simulation. Assignment of cores for solving various components of the network is an
important step that needs to be considered while modelling, as they depict the total load that is distributed over the
available cores. The process is detailed in Section 4.3.1.
Figure 4.1: Adding subsystems in RSCAD
4.2. Defining the Layout for the 2 GW Offshore Network

The initial aspect that needs to be considered for an offshore network is the topology of the network. The popularity
of MMC due to its improved controllability and superior system performances has led the way for the increasing
demand of MMC-HVDC transmission to integrate distant OWFs. For the connection of new OWFs in the vicinity of
the already existing ones, parallel operation of MMC-HVDC transmission systems can be expected in the near future
with multiple connections to the onshore system. Such type of schemes increases the interest in hybrid systems with
35
36 4. Modelling a Digital Twin of 2 GW, 66 kV HVAC Offshore Network with MMC-HVDC Transmission
the hub-and-spoke principle proposed by ABB [46] and represented in Figure 4.2. The layout in Figure 4.2a) depicts
the connection of OWFs to an offshore converter station which in turn transfers power to the onshore system through
multi-terminal HVDC connections. However, the scaling of offshore wind power is limited to the installed capacity of
MMC unit in such a layout. Another layout involves the OWFs connected through AC links to a back-to-back HVDC
converter station as shown in Figure 4.2b). Long distance HVAC transmission is required in this case, for the transfer
of power from OWFs to the onshore network and hence contribute to high losses in the network when compared
to HVDC transmission for larger distances. Figure 4.2c) represents the connection of multiple OWFs to the offshore
converter station, and power is transferred to the onshore system through multiple HVDC links. Such a layout provides
contingency in the network by supplying offshore wind power to at least one onshore system if one of the HVDC links
gets disconnected [47]. A stage-wise construction of such a HVDC project is easier to be achieved by the developers
as well [7].
A specific configuration for a 2 GW offshore network is currently non-existent, and this chapter tries to fill in
such a research gap. The idea in this chapter is to expand the single OWF model network in Figure 3.6 for a 2 GW
offshore wind power network. This could be made possible by connecting four such OWF models in parallel with
each generating ∼ 500 MW of power. The reason for choosing four OWFs is to have a symmetrical layout and to test
the ability of RSCAD to perform simulations on such a configuration. Correspondingly, a 2 GW offshore converter
station capacity is required to transfer this generated amount of power to the onshore system. However, currently
deployed (state-of-the-art) MMC-HVDC transmission, has a maximum rated capacity of 1.2 GW [8]. Hence, with the
available technology, two MMC offshore stations of 1 GW each will be required for 2 GW power transmission. Taking
the aforementioned factors into account, a modified layout of Figure 4.2c) is developed for this work.
Figure 4.2: a) Hub-and-spoke with multi-terminal HVDC system, b) Hub-and-spoke with AC links and HVDC back-to-back station and c)
Hub-and-spoke with multiple HVDC links [46]
4.2.1. Scaling of Single OWF Model for 2 GW Offshore Network

The layout of the 2 GW offshore network is built by resorting to scaling of the aggregated OWF model in Section 3.2.1
of Chapter 3. A modular topology is considered to achieve the capacity of 2 GW.
• The aggregated OWF model in Section 3.2.1 provides a generation of ∼ 700 MW. The first step involves reducing
this generation to ∼ 500 MW as the layout is planned for four OWFs. This is achieved by reducing the number of
parallel WG units from 116 (116 × 6 MW = 696 MW) to 83 (83 × 6 MW = 498 MW) which is done by changing the
scaling factor explained in Section 3.2.1.3. Now the OWF generates nearly ∼ 500 MW of active power, as shown
in Figure 4.3.
66/2 kV, 0.9 kV,

6 MVA 6 MVA
MMC
Transformer- Wind
External Bus
66 kV Scale up to 500 MVA Generator
AC system SR-1 GSC-1 MSC-1
HVAC
cable-1
PMSG-1
CB-1a CB-1b
T-1 DC circuit-1
PCC -1 L-1 WG-1
R -1
C-1 HPF-1
OWF-1
Figure 4.3: OWF-1 connected to external AC system
• The second step involves the connection of two OWFs in parallel to the external AC system in a modular ap-
proach. This allows for the generation of 1 GW of power, as depicted in Figure 4.4. All the control structures
incorporated in OWF-1 are replicated for OWF-2.
0.9 kV,
66/2 kV, 6 MVA 6 MVA
MMC Transformer- Wind
Bus 66 kV Scale up to 500 MVA Generator
GSC-1 MSC-1
HVAC SR-1
cable -1
PMSG-1
CB-1a CB-1b
External T-1 L-1
PCC -1 DC circuit-1
AC system
R-1 WG-1
HPF-1
C-1
66 kV
HVAC GSC-2 MSC-2
SR-2
cable -2
PMSG-2
CB-2a CB-2b
T-2 L-2 DC circuit-2
PCC -2 R-2 WG-2
HPF-2
C-2
Figure 4.4: OWF-1 and OWF-2 connected in parallel to external AC system
• In the third step, the external AC system is replaced by an offshore converter station consisting of the average
EMT model of MMC (MMC-1) and the interface transformer (IT-1) available in the CIGRE B4 DC Grid Test Sys-
tem [48]. The same is depicted in Figure 4.5. As the final layout network would be extensive, it is required to split
the network into subsystems, as mentioned in Section 4.1. The splitting into two subsystems is performed in
this step. The offshore converter station is modelled in subsystem-1, and the OWFs are modelled in subsystem-
2. MMC-1 is designed to operate in V/F control (or grid forming control) which is explained at the end of this
chapter.
0.9 kV,
Subsystem-1 MMC
66/2 kV, 6 MVA Subsystem-2 6 MVA
Transformer- Wind
GSC-1 MSC-1
HVAC SR-1
cable -1
PMSG-1
380/66 kV, CB-1b
CB-1a
1000 MVA
640 kV DC HVDC Transformer T-1 L-1
MMC -1 PCC -1 DC circuit-1
Source-1 cable -1
R-1
HPF-1 WG-1
C-1
CB-5a
IT-1 66 kV
VF control HVAC GSC-2 MSC-2
SR-2
cable -2
PMSG-2
CB-2a CB-2b
T-2 L-2
DC circuit-2
PCC -2 R-2
HPF-2 WG-2
C-2
Figure 4.5: OWF-1 and OWF-2 connected in parallel to MMC-1
• The final step involves the parallel connection of two more OWF models (OWF-3 and OWF-4) in a modular ap-
proach generating 500 MW each. Additionally, another offshore converter station consisting of a similar average
EMT model of MMC (MMC-2) and two interface transformers (IT-2a and IT-2b), is connected in parallel to the
previous converter station. The need for two interface transformers in MMC-2 bus is explained at the end of
this chapter. Therefore, the final layout shown in Figure 4.6 represents a total of 2 GW offshore wind power
transmission.
0.9 kV,
Subsystem-1 MMC
66/2 kV, 6 MVA
Transformer-
Subsystem-2 6 MVA
Wind
GSC-1 MSC-1
HVAC
SR-1
cable -1
PMSG-1
380/66 kV, CB-1a CB-1b
1000 MVA T-1 L-1
640 kV DC HVDC DC circuit-1
MMC -1 Transformer PCC -1
Source-1 cable -1 R-1 WG-1
HPF-1
C-1
CB-5a
66 kV
IT-1 HVAC GSC-2 MSC-2
VF control SR-2
cable -2
PMSG
CB-2a CB-2b
T-2 L-2
DC circuit-2
PCC -2
R-2 WG-2
HPF-2
C-2
66 kV GSC-3 MSC-3
HVAC SR-3
cable -3
145/66 kV, PMSG

640 kV DC 1000 MVA CB-3a CB-3b
Source-2 HVDC MMC -2 Transformer
IT-2b T-3 L-3
cable -2 DC circuit-3
PCC -3
R-3 WG-3
HPF-3
C-3
CB-6a
IT-2a 66 kV
P control HVAC GSC-4 MSC-4
380/145 kV, SR-4
1000 MVA cable -4
Transformer
PMSG
CB-4a CB-4b
T-4 L-4
PCC -4 DC circuit-4
R-4 WG-4
HPF-4
C-4
Figure 4.6: Single line diagram of 2 GW, 66 kV HVAC offshore network connected to 2 x 1 GW HVDC links with offshore converter stations in RSCAD
4.3. Layout of 2 GW, 66 kV HVAC Offshore Network in RSCAD

The components in the 2 GW, 66 kV HVAC network is detailed in this section. The single line diagram of the network
is depicted in Figure 4.6 and the major components of the network include :
• Four aggregated OWFs, each with 500 MW installed capacity represented by the following components:
– A single Wind Generation System with

¦ Permanent Magnet Synchronous Generator (PMSG)
¦ Machine Side Converter (MSC)
¦ DC circuit
¦ Grid Side Converter (GSC)
– High Pass filter (HPF) with series reactor
– OWF transformer
• Four pairs of HVAC cables
• Three interface transformers
• Two MMCs
• Two pairs of HVDC cables
4.3.1. Aggregated OWF

As mentioned in Section 4.2.1, the 2 GW offshore wind power is split into four OWFs with ∼ 500 MW rated capacity
each. Currently, the largest offshore WG developed by GE Renewable Energy has a rating of 12 MW [49]. However, the
standard model available for a Type-4 WG in RSCAD is rated 6 MW. Hence, to represent a ∼ 500 MW OWF, 83 WGs are
required. All the OWFs are at a distance of 30 km from the MMC bus.
The average model of Type-4 WG available in RSCAD is used for this work as well. The aggregated OWF model
represented in a small time step environment described in Section 3.2.1 is used here for all the four OWFs. As the
entire network is extensive, it is split into two subsystems in RSCAD, as shown in Figure 4.6 by employing the tech-
nique explained in Section 4.1. The four OWFs are modelled in subsystem-2, and the rest of the system is modelled in
subsystem-1. Each subsystem requires one rack for operation, and hence two NovaCor racks are used for the network
simulation. It is also possible to simulate the network with PB5 processor. However, this requires a total of three sub-
systems since PB5 racks allow only small network solutions to be solved in one rack [50]. Therefore, two OWFs are to
be modelled in subsystem-3, other two OWFs in subsystem-2 and the rest of the network in subsystem-1. Henceforth,
the simulations are considered only in NovaCor processor for this study.
Since there need to be four different small time step blocks representing four OWFs, each block needs to be set
with different step sizes to avoid conflict during initialization. These step sizes are only used for initialization, and the
actual step sizes can be viewed in the "Map File" as mentioned in Section 3.2.1. Moreover, if the time steps are not
initialized properly, it could lead to the occurrence of a time step overflow error during the simulation in the Runtime
module.
Another essential parameter to be considered here is the assignment of the cores for the small time step blocks.
As mentioned in Section 4.1, cores are responsible for solving the entire network solution. NovaCor processor in TU
Delft is configured with four cores, and each component used in the network can be assigned to specific cores (1 to 4
in number). Since there are six small time step blocks (OWF-1, 2, 3 and 4; MMC-1 and MMC-2) in total, the cores need
to be manually assigned to each block to allocate the load on each processor within their capacity. The core allocation
of the small time step blocks representing OWFs for this network is chosen, as shown in Table 4.1.
Small time step block Core assignment

OWF-1 4
OWF-2 1
OWF-3 3
OWF-4 1
Table 4.1: Core assignment of OWF models in subsystem-2

4.3.2. HVAC Cables

The HVAC cables transfer power from the OWFs to the offshore converter stations. Hence, four pairs of HVAC cables
are required to transfer power from four OWFs. The cables are rated at 66 kV and are 30 km of length. In the network
layout represented in RSCAD, as shown in Figure 4.6, the HVAC cables connect the OWFs in subsystem-1 with the
MMC bus in subsystem-2. To provide such a connection between components placed in different subsystems in
RSCAD, a feature called Tline module is available in the RSCAD modules section (denoted by a red box in Figure 4.7).
This module is similar to the Cable module explained in Section 3.2.2. However, Cable module only allows connection
between components in the same subsystem. The Tline module can be modelled as an overhead transmission line or
cable. Since an offshore network model is considered in this work, the Tline model represents a subsea cable model.
The cables are modelled as Bergeron models with RLC data parameters. Bergeron model is chosen to test the
working of the network using travelling wave model. Moreover, as the 2 GW offshore network is developed from the
single OWF model in Section 3.2.1, the same RLC cable parameters used in Section 3.2.2 are used in the Tline module
for all the four pairs of cables.
Figure 4.7: Tline module in RSCAD
In the Draft module, the cable model is added in the circuit using the unified Tline model shown in Figure 4.8
available in RSCAD power system library. The unified model consists of the following components:
• Calculation Block
• Sending End Terminal
• Receiving End Terminal
The detailed representation of the cable parameters in Tline module, and the representation of the cable model us-
ing the calculation block, sending end terminal and receiving end terminals in the Draft module is shown in Appendix
D.6.
Figure 4.8: Tline configuration in Draft module in RSCAD
As the significant goal is to estimate the dynamic performance of the network under severe disturbances, a three-
phase short circuit event in the middle of HVAC cable-1 is chosen. To perform a short circuit event in the middle of a
30 km long HVAC cable in RSCAD, two cable models of 15 km length are modelled and connected in series, and the
three-phase fault logic available in RSCAD library is modelled in the middle of the two cables as shown in Figure 4.9. It
must be noted that each cable model contains one set of sending and receiving end terminals. In order to connect two
subsystems, sending end terminal from OWF is placed in subsystem-2, and its receiving end is placed in subsystem-1.
BUS1_B
1.0159 /_ 0.73
C8 B8 A8
15 kms 15 kms NPC
brkr_tfA
N4
N1
1 T-LINE NAME: T-LINE NAME: 1 1 T-LINE NAME: T-LINE NAME: 1
1.0
1.0
66kV_1 66kV_1 66kV_2 66kV_2
BUS1_C
BUS1_A
brkr_tfB
N5
N2
2 2 2 2
/_
/_
RECEIVING END SENDING END RECEIVING END SENDING END
TERMINAL NAME: TERMINAL NAME: TERMINAL NAME: TERMINAL NAME: brkr_tfC
0.0
0.0
N6
N3
3 LINE2RE LINE2SE 3 3 LINE1RE LINE1SE 3
TLINE TLINE
T-LINE NAME: T-LINE NAME:
66kV_1 66kV_2
LINE CONSTANTS: LINE CONSTANTS: GSC and RSC
A
66kV 66kV
Controls
Subsystem-1 L-G FAULT-1 Subsystem-2
LOGIC
L-G FAULT POINT
Figure 4.9: Representation of three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of HVAC cable-1 in RSCAD
4.3.3. Offshore Converter Stations

The offshore converter stations convert the HVAC offshore wind power to HVDC to transfer the power to the onshore
system through HVDC links. The existing available HVDC links in the industry have a rated capacity of 1.4 GW. Exam-
ples for such projects are the NordLink cable connecting Norway and Denmark, NSN Link connecting Norway and the
United Kingdom [51]. Moreover, the standard EMT models for MMCs available in CIGRE B4 DC Grid Test System [48]
have a rated capacity of 1.2 GW. Therefore, with the currently available technology, two offshore converter stations are
required for the transfer of 2 GW offshore wind power. From the description of MMC explained in Section 2.4, it can
be understood that MMCs also involve PE components. Hence, similar to the OWF model, the average EMT model
of MMC is also represented in a small time step block in RSCAD to represent fast switching events accurately. The
average EMT model available in RSCAD consists of the MMC and interface transformer modelled in the small time
step environment representing the offshore converter station. For this work, two small time step blocks are required
for the representation of two offshore converter stations. Both the blocks are placed in subsystem-1. These two blocks
must also be initialized with different time step to avoid conflict during initialization and thereby avoiding the time
step overflow error during the start of simulation in the Runtime module. To evenly distribute the load on four cores,
considering the core allocation for OWFs in Table 4.1, the cores for MMCs are allocated as shown in Table 4.2. The off-
shore converter station-1 consists of the interface transformer (IT-1) and MMC-1 whereas offshore converter station-2
consists of the interface transformers (IT-2a, IT-2b) and MMC-2.
Small time step block Core assignment

MMC-1 3
MMC-2 2
Table 4.2: Core assignment of MMC models in subsystem-1
Interface Transformers
Interface transformers (also termed as converter transformers) are connected to the AC side of MMCs and depicted
as IT-1 for offshore converter station-1 and IT-2a and IT-2b for offshore converter station-2 as shown in Figure 4.6. As
explained in [36], these transformers entail the following main implications:
• Providing a reactance between the offshore network and the MMC.
• Preventing the flow of zero sequence currents between the offshore network and the MMC.
As mentioned in Section 4.3.3, in the available average EMT models in RSCAD library, the interface transformer
is modelled with the MMC in a small time step environment in RSCAD. Considering a delta-wye type interface trans-
former and connecting MMC to the delta side of the transformer, allows for isolation of the zero sequence currents
during faults. The available EMT models for offshore MMC stations from [48] are utilized for this work. These models
are designed for 145 kV HVAC offshore network. Hence, to utilize the model for this work, the secondary side voltage
of the transformer is changed from 145 kV to 66 kV. Additionally, there were modifications required to be made in the
control structures of the MMC models to utilize it for the 66 kV HVAC network. These are explained in further sec-
tions of this chapter. There are mainly three interface transformers used in this work. The transformer (IT-1) is rated
66/380 kV, 1000 MVA in the offshore converter station-1. Two interface transformers in the offshore converter station-
2 are rated 66/145 kV, 1000 MVA (IT-2a) and 145/380 kV, 1000 MVA (IT-2b) respectively. The need for two interface
transformers in offshore converter station-2 is explained in the last section of this chapter.
Modular Multilevel Converters (MMCs)

As mentioned in Chapter 1, it is seen that Modular Multilevel Converters (MMCs) are the present converter topology
preferred for VSC-HVDC transmission schemes due to their high efficiency and other advantages. They prove to be
the state-of-the-art technology for HVDC transmission until today. The average EMT model of MMC in RSCAD has
the option of modelling the MMC using half-bridge submodules or full-bridge submodules [52]. The voltage levels for
HVDC offshore wind farm projects in Europe range from 300 kV to 640 kV DC voltage [51]. Hence, to continue with the
latest trend, a voltage level of 640 kV DC is chosen for this work. Therefore, 320 submodules are required per arm to
create a voltage of ± 320 kV for the positive and negative poles. Both the MMCs (MMC-1 and MMC-2) in the offshore
converter stations are modelled for 640 kV DC.
4.3.4. HVDC Cables

The HVDC cables transfer the generated wind power from the offshore converter station to the onshore system. As
mentioned in the above section, the voltage level chosen for HVDC transmission in this work is 640 kV DC. Therefore,
each cable model must be suitable for ± 320 kV. The cable parameters available in [48] for ± 400 kV voltage are utilized
in this work. The cable model is represented in frequency-dependent phase domain using the unified cable model
block as explained previously in Section 3.2.2 [30]. The cables are modelled in subsystem-1 and are labelled as HVDC
cable-1 and HVDC cable-2 for the connection from offshore converter station-1 and offshore converter station-2 to
the onshore system respectively (Figure 4.6).
4.3.5. Onshore Equivalent Converter Stations

The connection between the offshore converter station and the onshore converter station follows a symmetrical
monopole configuration, as shown in Figure 4.10(a) [13]. However, the DC part of the onshore converter stations
are represented using an equivalent DC source for this work, as shown in Figure 4.10(b). This is done since the fo-
cus of the thesis is majorly on dynamic performance related to AC side of the network. Conventionally, the onshore
converter stations provide DC voltage and reactive power control. Hence, the representation of a constant DC voltage
source ensures the DC voltage control during the time of disturbances in the AC offshore network. The voltage of the
DC sources are rated at 640 kV representing the HVDC transmission voltage. The equivalent representation of the
symmetrical monopole configuration in RSCAD is shown in Appendix D.7.
Onshore Offshore
converter station HVDC cable converter station
(a) Symmetrical monopole configuration [13]

Onshore equivalent Offshore
converter station HVDC cable converter station
DC source
(b) Symmetrical monopole configuration by equivalent representation of DC side of onshore MMC
station using a constant DC source
Figure 4.10: Symmetrical monopole configuration in HVDC network

This section explains the different control structures implemented and modifications required in the control scheme
of converters for operation in the 66 kV HVAC network. The DVC inspired from [22] and implemented in Section 3.3.1
for Type-4 WG is extended for the 2 GW offshore network. There are mainly three control strategies used:
• DVC in the GSCs of the WGs used to represent aggregated OWFs
• Island mode control in MMC-1
• Non- island mode control in MMC-2

4.4.1. DVC
The control structure explained in Section 3.3.1 is implemented for all the four WGs. Since the same type of model
is used for GSCs in all four WGs, the control loop parameters remain the same. The reactive and active control loop
parameters are provided in Appendix D.1 and D.2 respectively.
4.4.2. Island Mode Control

It is highly necessary to use a control strategy in any of the MMCs which could provide the voltage and frequency
reference for the MMC bus since it is connected to a weak network (OWF network). The reference voltage is created
by the V/F control mode, which comes under the classification of the islanded mode of control for VSC [48]. For this
study, MMC-1 is operated in the V/F control. A basic control strategy was developed according to the illustration
provided in [43] and is shown in Figure 4.11. Since the voltage angle reference (θ), is generated by an independent
Voltage Controlled Oscillator (VCO), this control is termed under island mode operation. Such an approach provides
the grid forming behaviour for MMC-1 and is responsible for providing and absorbing power from the OWF network
as and when required. The power flow is kept in balance during the steady state and transient condition with the help
of this control [7].
The V/F control consists of a PI controller which has an input that takes in the difference between the measured
voltage (VPCC ) and the reference PCC voltage (VPCC _r e f ) in p.u. and provides the reference d-axis converter voltage
(VPCC _d ) that is translated to abc frame (Vabc_r e f ) as shown in Figure 4.11. This makes VPCC _d to be aligned with the
grid voltage and the q-axis voltage (VPCC _q ) is set to zero. The parameters for the PI gains used for this control are
referred from [48] and is specified in Appendix D.3.
𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑉𝑃𝐶𝐶
𝑉𝑃𝐶𝐶_𝑟𝑒𝑓 - 𝑉𝑃𝐶𝐶_𝑑
+ 𝑘𝑖_𝑣𝑓
𝑘𝑝_𝑣𝑓 +
𝑠
𝑑𝑞0
𝑉𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑉𝑎𝑏𝑐_𝑟𝑒𝑓
𝑉𝑃𝐶𝐶_𝑞 = 0 𝑎𝑏𝑐
2𝜋
50 𝐻𝑧
0 θ
𝑅𝑎𝑚𝑝
Figure 4.11: V/F control in MMC-1 [48]
4.4.3. Non- island Mode Control

This mode of operation is based on the conventional current control (grid following) approach, which consists of the
outer control loop and the inner control loop. The outer loop consists of the d and q axes loops. The d-axis loop can
provide control of DC voltage or active power and the q-axis loop can provide control of AC voltage or reactive power
as depicted in Figure 4.12(a) and Figure 4.12(b) respectively. The outer control loop provides the respective current
reference values as inputs for the inner current loops. MMC-2 is configured with this control for this work.
The parameters defined in this section are mathematically derived as given in [53]. The rotating dq frame pro-
vides a simplified control of the three-phase systems. As described in Section 2.3.2.4 and mentioned in Figure 2.9,
the currents and voltages in the abc frame are transformed into dq frame using Clarke-Park transformation. As con-
ventionally followed, the d-axis voltage is aligned with the grid voltage (VPCC _d _2 ) at the HV bus of IT-2a interface
transformer, and the q-axis is set to zero. This provides constant values for d and q components during steady state.
If active power is the priority in d-axis, active power control of MMC-2 is given by Equations 4.1 and 4.2.
P AC _2 = VPCC _d _2 × i d _2 (4.1)
ki P ¡
µ ¶
1 ¢
i d _r e f _2 = P AC _r e f _2 − P AC _2 (4.2)
VPCC _d _2 s
If DC voltage is the priority in d-axis, DC voltage control is provided by the following equation:
¡ ¢
i d _r e f _2 = C VDC _2 (s) × VDC _r e f _2 − VDC _2 (4.3)
where C VDC _2 is the transfer function of the DC voltage control.
If reactive power is the priority in q-axis, reactive power control of MMC-2 is given by the following equations:
Q AC _2 = −VPCC _d _2 × i q_2 (4.4)
kiQ ¡
µ ¶
1 ¢
i q_r e f _2 = − Q AC _r e f _2 −Q AC _2 (4.5)
VPCC _d _2 s
The voltage difference at the equivalent reactance interface is calculated as following:
ω(L t r a f o_2 + L ar m_2 /2)Q AC _2

∆VPCC _2 = Vconv_2 − VPCC _2 ≈ (4.6)
VPCC _2
where L t r a f o_2 is the interface transformer (IT-2b) leakage reactance and L ar m_2 is the arm inductance in MMC-2.
Since the d-axis voltage is aligned with the grid voltage, inserting Equation 4.4 in Equation 4.6, the following equa-
tion is obtained:
∆VPCC _2 ≈ ω(L t r a f o_2 + L ar m_2 /2) × i q_2 (4.7)

The control of AC voltage is obtained with the following equation:
kiV ¡
µ ¶
¢
i q_r e f _2 = VPCC _r e f _2 − VPCC _2 (4.8)
s
Active Power control
𝑃𝐴𝐶_2
𝑃𝐴𝐶_𝑟𝑒𝑓_2 -
+ 𝑃𝐼 ÷
𝑉𝑃𝐶𝐶_𝑑_2
𝑖𝑑_𝑟𝑒𝑓_2
DC Voltage control
𝑉𝐷𝐶_2
𝑉𝐷𝐶_𝑟𝑒𝑓_2 -
+ 𝑃𝐼
(a) Outer control loop representation for d-axis (i d _r e f _2 )
Reactive Power control
𝑄𝐴𝐶_2
𝑄𝐴𝐶_𝑟𝑒𝑓_2 -
+ 𝑃𝐼 ÷
𝑖𝑞_𝑟𝑒𝑓_2
AC Voltage control
𝑉𝑃𝐶𝐶_2
𝑉𝑃𝐶𝐶_𝑟𝑒𝑓_2
-
+ 𝑃𝐼
(b) Outer control loop representation for q-axis (i q_r e f _2 )
Figure 4.12: Simplified structure of the outer loop control for MMC-2 [53]
The inner loop consists of PI controllers for d and q axis separately and provides a decoupled control action. The
output from the inner loop control is then translated back to the abc frame using dq to abc frame transformation.
As the DC voltage in the HVDC link is maintained and controlled by the onshore equivalent MMC station repre-
sented by a constant DC source, the active power control is chosen as priority for d-axis for MMC-2 control. Similarly,
as the AC voltage is controlled by the V/F control in MMC-1, reactive power control is chosen as priority chosen for
q-axis for MMC-2. When active power is the chosen priority, P AC _r e f _2 represents the required amount of active power
that must flow through offshore converter station-2 and must be defined externally by the user. However, the outer
loop control available for the non-islanded mode in [48] is not suitable for parallel operation with V/F control. Hence,
the outer loop is simplified, and the reference points (i d _r e f _2 and i q_r e f _2 ) for the inner loop are controlled directly
by the user. This modification in outer loop and the power flow control in MMC-2 in RSCAD is detailed in Appendix
C.2.1.
The inner control loop consists of PI controllers that play the major role in ensuring minimum steady state error.
The inner control also contain the feed-forward term to compensate the cross coupling terms. The mathematical
equations for the parameters of inner control loop are derived as provided in [53]. Applying Kirchoff’s Voltage Law in
Figure 4.13 and with the MMC representation in Figure 4.14, the equations are derived for offshore converter station-2
connected to the AC network. The assumptions involve, the direction of current is from the AC network to the MMC
(the condition when offshore wind power is transferred from the offshore network to onshore system) and avoiding
the star-point reactor:
VDC _2 d iu j di j
= v u j + L ar m_2 + R ar m_2 i u j − L t r a f o_2 − R t r a f o_2 i j + v PCC j (4.9)
2 dt dt
VDC _2 d il j di j
= v l j + L ar m_2 + R ar m_2 i l j + L t r a f o_2 + R t r a f o_2 i j − v PCC j (4.10)
2 dt dt
where R t r a f o_2 is the interface transformer (IT-2b) resistance, R ar m_2 is the arm resistance in MMC-2, v PCC j is the
voltage at HV bus of IT-2a, j represents phases a, b and c. Upper arm and lower arm of MMC-2 are denoted by u and
l respectively.
MMC-2
HV bus of IT-2a
AC breaker
Start-point reactor
Interface
transformer
IT-2b
Figure 4.13: Representation of offshore converter station-2 connection to the AC offshore network [53]
The equations in dq frame can be represented as following:
L ar m_2 d id R ar m_2 L ar m_2

µ ¶ µ ¶ µ ¶
VPCC _d _2 − Vconv_d _2 = + L t r a f o_2 + + R t r a f o_2 i d − ω + L t r a f o_2 i q (4.11)
2 dt 2 2
L ar m_2 d iq R ar m_2 L ar m_2

µ ¶ µ ¶ µ ¶
VPCC _q_2 − Vconv_q_2 = + L t r a f o_2 + + R t r a f o_2 i q + ω + L t r a f o_2 i d (4.12)
2 dt 2 2
The control loop is defined as follows:
L ar m_2
µ ¶
Vconv_r e f _d _2 = − i d _r e f _2 − i d C i ac (s) + VPCC _d _2 + ω
¡ ¢
+ L t r a f o_2 i q (4.13)
2
L ar m_2
µ ¶
Vconv_r e f _q_2 = − i q_r e f _2 − i q C i ac (s) + VPCC _q_2 + ω
¡ ¢
− L t r a f o_2 i d (4.14)
2
where C i ac (s) is the transfer function of the PI controller.
+
𝑖𝑢𝑐 𝑖𝑢𝑏 𝑖𝑢𝑎
𝐼𝐷𝐶_2 +
𝑆𝑀1𝑢𝑐 𝑆𝑀1𝑢𝑏 𝑆𝑀1𝑢𝑎
𝑆𝑀2𝑢𝑐 𝑆𝑀2𝑢𝑏 𝑆𝑀2𝑢𝑎

𝑣𝑢𝑎
𝑆𝑀𝑁𝑢𝑐 𝑆𝑀𝑁𝑢𝑏 𝑆𝑀𝑁𝑢𝑎 -

𝐿𝑎𝑟𝑚_2 𝐿𝑎𝑟𝑚_2 𝐿𝑎𝑟𝑚_2
𝑖𝑎 𝑣𝑎
𝑉𝐷𝐶_2 𝑖𝑏
𝑖𝑐
𝑣𝑏
𝑣𝑐
𝐿𝑎𝑟𝑚_2 𝐿𝑎𝑟𝑚_2 𝐿𝑎𝑟𝑚_2
𝑆𝑀1𝑙𝑐 𝑆𝑀1𝑙𝑏 𝑆𝑀1𝑙𝑎 +
𝑆𝑀2𝑙𝑐 𝑆𝑀2𝑙𝑏 𝑆𝑀2𝑙𝑎

𝑣𝑙𝑎
𝑆𝑀𝑁𝑙𝑐 𝑆𝑀𝑁𝑙𝑏 𝑆𝑀𝑁𝑙𝑎 -

𝑖𝑙𝑐 𝑖𝑙𝑏 𝑖𝑙𝑎
-
Figure 4.14: MMC-2 representation [53]
The inner control loop provides the control of reference voltages, as depicted in Figure 4.15, which are then used
as inputs for the lower level control.
Low Pass Filter

𝑖𝑑_𝑟𝑒𝑓_2 + 𝑃𝐼 -+ 𝑉𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣_𝑟𝑒𝑓_𝑑_2
- +
𝑖𝑑 ×
𝐿𝑎𝑟𝑚_2
𝜔 + 𝐿𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑓𝑜_2
2
𝑖𝑞 ×
𝑖𝑞_𝑟𝑒𝑓_2
- -
+ 𝑃𝐼 - 𝑉𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣_𝑟𝑒𝑓_𝑞_2
+
𝑉𝑃𝐶𝐶_𝑞_2
Low Pass Filter

Figure 4.15: Inner loop control for MMC-2 [53]
The inner control loop model available in [48] is only suitable for a 145 kV HVAC network. This is why a second
interface transformer (IT-2a) is used to convert the 66 kV HVAC voltage to 145 kV, as shown in Figure 4.6. To mitigate
the effect of this transformer in terms of impedance, the leakage reactance and resistance of the transformer are kept
minimum (0.001 p.u.). However, it should be noted that this is a work around approach used in this work, and such a
transformer with very low reactance is not practically used in a power system network. The non-island mode control
in MMC-2 identifies the frequency and phase angle at the HV bus of the interface transformer (IT-2a) in Figure 4.6.
The PLL in MMC-2 control performs this task and synchronizes with the measured grid voltage at the HV bus of IT-2a.
The PI gains for the PLL were set based on parameter sensitivity analysis. The phase angle is generated by the PLL,
which is used to transform it from abc to dq frame.
The lower level controls such as circulating current suppression control, modulation and third harmonic injection
are available in the average EMT model of MMC controls in [48] and are used as such for this work in both MMC-1 and
MMC-2. Further, the performance of the 2 GW offshore network is to be analyzed during steady state and dynamic
conditions after incorporating the aforementioned control strategies.
Analysis of the Dynamic Performance of 2 GW,
5
66 kV HVAC Offshore Network
Connecting a large scale OWF network to an offshore-onshore HVDC link has always been a challenge. In this chap-
ter, the operation scheme of the 2 GW offshore network presented in Chapter 4 is simulated and analyzed. Firstly, the
initial conditions of the converters are defined, and then the stage-wise synchronization and operation of the network
is explained. Later, the network is tested for short-term voltage stability and the power flow analysis for severe dis-
turbances such as sudden disconnection of one OWF and a three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of a HVAC
cable.
0.9 kV,
Subsystem-1 MMC
66/2 kV, 6 MVA
Transformer-
Subsystem-2 6 MVA
Wind
GSC-1 MSC-1
HVAC
SR-1
cable -1
PMSG-1
380/66 kV, CB-1a CB-1b
1000 MVA T-1 L-1
640 kV DC HVDC DC circuit-1
MMC -1 Transformer PCC -1
Source-1 cable -1 R-1 WG-1
HPF-1
C-1
CB-5a
66 kV
IT-1 HVAC GSC-2 MSC-2
VF control SR-2
cable -2
PMSG
CB-2a CB-2b
T-2 L-2
DC circuit-2
PCC -2
R-2 WG-2
HPF-2
C-2
66 kV GSC-3 MSC-3
HVAC SR-3
cable -3
145/66 kV, PMSG

640 kV DC 1000 MVA CB-3a CB-3b
HVDC MMC -2
Source-2 IT-2b Transformer
cable -2 T-3 L-3 DC circuit-3
PCC -3
R-3 WG-3
HPF-3
C-3
CB-6a
IT-2a 66 kV
P control HVAC GSC-4 MSC-4
380/145 kV, SR-4
1000 MVA cable -4
Transformer
PMSG
CB-4a CB-4b
T-4 L-4
PCC -4 DC circuit-4
R-4 WG-4
HPF-4
C-4
Figure 5.1: 66 kV HVAC offshore network connected to 2 x 1 GW HVDC links with offshore converter stations in RSCAD for two dynamic scenarios-
a) Disconnection of OWF-2 (represented by the cross symbol)
b) Three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1 (represented by the fault symbol)
48
49 5. Analysis of the Dynamic Performance of 2 GW, 66 kV HVAC Offshore Network
5.1. General settings, Control modes and Pre-set conditions

The simulation time step for all the simulations is set to 50 µs. All plots are simulated for a span of 5 s. All the fault
or switching events are timed to occur at 0.5 s of the simulation. The three-phase voltage and current graphs for all
simulations are plotted for a shorter period (0.4 s to 1.3 s) to have a clearer view of the signals during the occurrence of
an event. However, the voltage in p.u., active and reactive power graphs are plotted for the whole time (5 s) to analyze
the voltage stability and power flow in the network during the simulation. In order to analyze the dynamic and steady
state operation of the network, the controllers and set points need to be initialized before charging. They are set as
follows:
• MMC-1:
– Islanded mode operation (V/F control)

– AC voltage control, VPCC _r e f = 1 p.u. (Reference AC voltage)
• MMC-2:
– Non-islanded mode operation

– Active power control, I d _r e f _2 = 0 (No power flow through MMC-2 in the initial conditions)
• Network:
– Circuit breakers (CB-1a, CB-1b, CB-2a, CB-2b, CB-3a, CB-3b, CB-4a, CB-4b, CB-5a and CB-6a) in open
condition
5.2. Synchronization of the Offshore Converter Stations

The AC side of MMCs is to be connected to simulate the synchronization scenario. Since the DC side is connected
to DC sources, the charging of HVDC cables is not considered for this study. As mentioned in Section 4.4 in Chapter
4, MMC-1 works as grid forming (V/F control) and MMC-2 works as grid following (active power control). Once the
simulation is started, the network is charged until the secondary side of the interface transformer, IT-1. The point
of measurement of voltages, currents and powers for the offshore converter stations are at the LV side of IT-1 for
converter station-1 and LV side of IT-2a for converter station-2. At the points of measurement, the voltage is the same
as they are at the same potential (connected to MMC bus). Firstly, the circuit breaker, CB-5a is closed and the MMC
bus is charged. The MMC bus voltage builds up to rated 66 kV 1 voltage on the AC as shown in Figure 5.2 and in terms
of per unit to nearly 0.98 p.u. as shown in Figure 5.3. The currents at the measurement points for both the MMCs
also increase and settles as shown in Figure 5.4(a) and 5.4(b). The current takes nearly 0.35 seconds to settle after the
closing of the breaker due to selected PI parameters of the V/F control in MMC-1. Additionally, the transformer IT-2a
is also charged in this process.
100
75
MMC Bus Voltage (kV)
50
25
-25
-50
-75
Phase A Phase B Phase C
-100
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
Figure 5.2: Voltages at MMC bus upon CB-5a closing operation
p
1 (Phase peak voltage = 66 × p2 = 53.88kV )
3
2
Voltage
1.75
MMC Bus Voltage (pu)
1.5
1.25
0.75
0.5
0.25
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Time (s)
Figure 5.3: Voltage in p.u. at MMC bus upon CB-5a closing operation
0.9
0.6
MMC-1 Current (kA)
0.3
-0.3
-0.6
-0.9
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3

Time (s)
(a) Currents in MMC-1 bus
0.9
0.6
MMC-2 Current (kA)
0.3
-0.3
-0.6
-0.9
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3

Time (s)
(b) Currents in MMC-2 bus
Figure 5.4: Currents in a) MMC-1 bus and b) MMC-2 bus upon CB-5a closing operation
The next step is to close the circuit breaker, CB-6a to connect MMC-2 to the network and hence synchronizing
it with MMC-1. The voltage at the MMC bus remains the same after connecting MMC-2 as shown in Figure 5.5 and
5.6 since the voltage reference is provided and maintained by MMC-1. The currents also remain the same in both the
MMCs after MMC-2 connection as seen in Figure 5.7(a) and 5.7(b). Now both the converter stations are synchronized
and running.
100
75
50
25
-25
-50
-75
-100
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
Figure 5.5: Voltages at MMC bus upon CB-6a closing operation
1.15
Voltage
1.1
1.05
0.95
0.9
0.85
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Time (s)
Figure 5.6: Voltage in p.u. at MMC bus upon CB-6a closing operation
2
MMC-1 Current (kA)
-1
-2
-3
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
2
MMC-2 Current (kA)
-1
-2
-3
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
Figure 5.7: Currents in a) MMC-1 bus and b) MMC-2 bus upon CB-6a closing operation
5.3. Energization of the HVAC Cables and OWFs

The energization procedure of the AC network followed in this work involves charging of each HVAC cable and the
corresponding OWF. Initially, cable-1 is charged and then OWF-1 is connected. The same is followed for the other
OWFs as well. As mentioned in Section 4.3.1 in Chapter 4, each OWF has a maximum capacity of 500 MW that is
represented by scaling up (by using the scaling factor function in RSCAD) of a WG model of 6 MW rated power. For
the energization process, the OWFs are connected initially with lesser number of WG units of ∼ 50 MW (8 × 6 MW =
48 MW) power to avoid a surge of voltage at PCC and to maintain the voltage within limits. Once stability is attained
after connecting all the OWFs, the scaling in all OWFs is incremented. Since power only flows through MMC-1 until
then, the increment can be until the maximum capacity of MMC-1, i.e. 1 GW.
The cable-1 gets energized when the CB-1a circuit breaker, as shown in Figure 5.1, is switched on. The voltage
at MMC bus is increased and set to a value of nearly 1.05 p.u. as seen in Figure 5.8. MMC-1 provides the current
for cable charging and the active power reference for the MMC-2 is not changed in this process. Hence, current flow
in MMC-1 bus increases for cable-1 charging as shown in Figure 5.9(a) and the current flow in MMC-2 bus remains
unchanged as shown in Figure 5.9(b). The disturbances observed during the switching operation at 0.5 seconds,
before the currents stabilize to a particular value at 0.75 seconds, is due to the PI parameters chosen for the V/F control
in MMC-1. Optimizing these parameters through small-signal stability analysis could achieve smoother results. The
current in cable-1 upon CB-1a closing is depicted in Figure 5.10.
1.6 Voltage
1.4
1.2
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Time (s)
Figure 5.8: Voltage at MMC bus upon charging of cable-1
1.5
MMC-1 Current (kA)
0.5
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
3
MMC-2 Current (kA)
-1
-2
-3
-4
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
Figure 5.9: Currents in a) MMC-1 bus b) MMC-2 bus upon CB-1a closing operation for charging of cable-1
5
4
Cable-1 Current (kA)
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5 Phase A Phase B Phase C
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3

Time (s)
Figure 5.10: Currents in cable-1 upon CB-1a closing operation for charging of cable-1
After cable-1 has been charged, the breaker at the OWF-1 end (CB-1b) is switched on. OWF-1 gets connected to
the network. As mentioned in Section 5.3, the OWF-1 is connected initially with less generation to keep the voltage at
PCC-1 within limits. The initial high voltage at the PCC-1 before closing the breaker as seen in Figure 5.11 is due to the
capacitance in the DC link. Once the breaker is closed, the voltage is maintained at nearly 1 p.u. as shown in Figure
5.11 and the currents in PCC-1 also increase as shown in Figure 5.12. The OWF starts generating 50 MW and this flows
through MMC-1 as shown in Figure 5.13. In a similar way all the other OWFs are connected. All OWFs are connected
with ∼ 50 MW generation. A total power of ∼ 200 MW through MMC-1 after connection of OWF-1, OWF-2, OWF-3
and OWF-4 is clearly depicted in Figure 5.13. There is no flow of active power in MMC-2 (Figure 5.14) since the rated
capacity of 1 GW of MMC-1 is yet to be reached.
2
Voltage
1.8
PCC-1 Voltage (pu)
1.6
1.4
1.2
0.8
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Time (s)
Figure 5.11: Voltage in p.u. at PCC-1 upon connecting OWF-1 with 50 MW generation to the network
3
Phase A
Phase B
2
Phase C
PCC-1 Current (kA)
-1
-2
-3
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
Figure 5.12: Currents in PCC-1 upon connecting OWF-1 with 50 MW generation to the network
500
OWF-1
OWF-1 & 2
400 OWF-1, 2 & 3
OWF-1, 2, 3 & 4
MMC-1 Active power (MW)
300
200
100
-100
-200
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Time (s)
Figure 5.13: Active power in MMC-1 bus upon connecting all OWFs with 50 MW generation each
150
OWF-1
OWF-1 & 2
100 OWF-1, 2 & 3
OWF-1, 2, 3 & 4
MMC-2 Active power (MW)
50
-50
-100
-150
-200
-250
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Time (s)
Figure 5.14: Active power in MMC-2 bus upon connecting all OWFs with 50 MW generation each
Once the system gets stabilized, the generation is increased in steps by increasing the number of parallel WG units.
Such a procedure ensures the voltage to be within limits at all PCCs. The power flow to the MMC-2 is to be controlled
in the next step. This is done by controlling the active power reference of MMC-2. For this study, OWFs are modelled
to have the same scaling of power and hence generate the same amount of power. A step-by-step increment of ∼ 50
MW in all OWF is done, and correspondingly the active power reference for MMC-2 is also increased. The procedure
is detailed in Appendix C.3. Finally, the OWFs are made to generate ∼ 500 MW each and the total of nearly 2 GW power
is equally split between MMC-1 and MMC-2. Power losses are expected to occur during the transmission and, hence
the active power flowing is nearly 960 MW in both MMCs as seen from the final steady state plots in Figure 5.15.
1200
MMC-1
MMC-2
1100
Active power (MW)
1000
900
800
700
600
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Time (s)
Figure 5.15: Active power in MMC-1 and MMC-2 buses upon connecting all OWFs with 500 MW generation each
From Figure 5.2 to 5.15, it can be said that, by viewing the respective voltages, currents and powers, the syn-
chronization of both MMCs and the energization of the offshore AC grid is done successfully. The offshore AC grid
converters and cables now operate at a voltage of 66 kV, the HVDC voltage is set to 640 kV and the total active power
transmitted is nearly 2 GW in the network. Frequency of the system is stabilized at 50 Hz, and the power system is said
to be operating in the steady state condition.
5.4. Dynamic Performance Analysis

Fault events and perturbations can occur in the grid, and the components in the system must be able to withstand
these voltage surges and fault currents for a short duration of time. The performance of the network in terms of short-
term voltage stability (fault occurring for a span of 6-10 cycles accounting for 120-200 ms) and power flow is analyzed.
The coordination among different controllers available in the network is studied during severe perturbations in the
network as described below.
5.4.1. Disconnection of One OWF

The first event is a sudden disconnection of one OWF. OWF-2 is permanently disconnected from the circuit by opening
the breaker, CB-2a connected towards the OWF-2 cable end at 0.5 s. Once the breaker is open, the generation of ∼ 500
MW is lost, and the power flow is reduced through MMC-1, as shown in Figure 5.16. This is because MMC-1 is the
one in grid forming control (provides power balance in the network) and also the active power reference of MMC-2
is unchanged. In the post-fault period, the active power flow through MMC-2 is seen to be higher than the pre-fault
period. Reason for this can be justified from the increase in voltage at the OWF side shown in the following section.
MMC-2 is seen to be operating with the maximum rated capacity of 1 GW in this condition. The decrease in generation
in MMC-1 can also be viewed from the currents flowing in MMC-1 as witnessed in Figure 5.17(a) whereas the currents
remain the same in MMC-2 as seen from the current in Figure 5.17(b).
1100
1000
Active power (MW)
MMC-1
900
MMC-2
800
700
600
500
400
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Time (s)
Figure 5.16: Active power in MMC-1 and MMC-2 buses upon OWF-2 disconnection event
15
10
MMC-1 Current (kA)
-5
-10
-15
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
15
10
MMC-2 Current (kA)
-5
-10

-15
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
Figure 5.17: Currents in a) MMC-1 bus and b) MMC-2 bus upon OWF-2 disconnection event
In the OWFs side, the voltage at PCC-2 goes beyond bounds and is in the condition as before energizing. This can
be observed from the voltage in p.u. graph in Figure 5.18b). During the disconnection of OWF-2, there occurs a drop
in voltage at PCC-1, 3 and 4 as seen from the voltage graphs in Figure 5.18a), c) and d). This happens since they are all
connected to a common bus (MMC bus). Moreover, in the post-fault period, voltages at PCC-1, 3 and 4 are stabilized
and settle to a higher value (nearly 1.08 p.u.) than the pre-fault voltage to compensate for the loss of OWF-2. This is
due to the fast local voltage control in the DVC of the WGs. But the currents at these OWFs remain the same since
the scaling factor for each OWF is still 83 (83 × 6 MW = 498 MW). This can be viewed from the current measured at
PCC-1 in Figure 5.19. Similar is the case for PCC-3 and PCC-4 and the graphs are shown in Appendix C.4.1. As voltage
increases and current remains the same, the active power generated from the OWF- 1, 3 and 4 increases and therefore
the power flowing through MMC-2 also increases.
(a) (b)
1.5 2.5
PCC-1 Voltage (pu)
PCC-2 Voltage (pu)

1.4
1.3 Voltage Voltage
1.2 2
1.1
1
0.9 1.5
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
Time (s) Time (s)
(c) (d)
1.5 1.5
PCC-3 Voltage (pu)
PCC-4 Voltage (pu)
1.4 1.4
1.3 Voltage 1.3 Voltage
1.2 1.2
1.1 1.1
1 1
0.9 0.9
0.8 0.8
0.7 0.7
0.6 0.6
0.5 0.5
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
Time (s) Time (s)
Figure 5.18: Voltage in p.u. at a) PCC-1, b) PCC-2, c) PCC-3 and d) PCC-4 upon OWF-2 disconnection event
8
6
PCC-1 Current (kA)
-2
-4
-6
-8
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
Figure 5.19: Currents at PCC-1 upon OWF-2 disconnection event
5.4.2. Three-phase Line to Ground Fault

Before the application of three-phase line to ground fault, a logic to operate the circuit breaker (CB-1a) at the cable-1
end is developed as shown in Figure 5.20. This logic is inspired from the "Fault Control" model 2 available in RSCAD.
For the fault, the line to ground fault component available in RSCAD library is used [30].
Circuit Breaker Operation Logic

The logic is developed for the operation of the circuit breaker CB-1a in Figure 5.1 by detecting overcurrent. The signal
’SWD2A’ is the signal for operating CB-1a. Initially, the breaker is closed during the energizing process using the
switch ’CabMMC_side’. Once the system is fully operational after connecting all the four OWFs and achieving 2 GW
power in the network, the ’Activ’ switch in Figure 5.20 is turned on. This is done to provide the switching operation of
CB-1a by comparing the RMS current (I r ms ) and the maximum phase current (I phase_max )3 at CB-1a. The system is
still in steady state condition. Once the fault is applied, when I r ms becomes greater than I phase_max , the SR flip flop
detects the change and holds a value of zero for the signal ’SWD2A’. This action causes the breaker CB-1a to open. The
delay block before the signal ’SWD2A’ provides time delay for the operation of circuit breaker after the fault has been
detected.
Fault_Gain
CabMMC_Side 1
1 A G
Ctrl = 0
0
B IEEE G INT
INT 1 + sT IEEE SWD2A
Ctrl
A If (C1 > C2)
1
T
Out= À' Fault_Time
Else If_out edge_detect FF_Start
R_sig
B INT + Edge S Q
0 Out= `B' Detector
IEEE FF_End
S-R 50
C1 C2 0
FLIP 1
Activ
FLOP
R Q
I_rms R_sig
I_phase_max
Figure 5.20: Circuit breaker operation logic
40 40
30
0.53 s Phase A
30 20 Phase B
10
Phase C
CB-1a Current (kA)
0
20
-10
-20
10 -30
0.48 0.5 0.52 0.54 0.56 0.58 0.6

0
-10
-20
-30
-40
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
Figure 5.21: Currents in circuit breaker (CB-1a) upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1
In order to analyze the short-term voltage stability of the system, a permanent three-phase line to ground fault is
applied in the middle of HVAC cable-1. The response of the network is recorded, and the plots for voltages, currents,
active and reactive powers are depicted from Figure 5.21 to Figure 5.30 for the event. During the time of the fault,
the RMS current exceeds the maximum phase current and the logic developed detects this overcurrent at CB-1a. This
2 Tutorial » SAMPLES » Mainstep » Fault Control
3I
phase_max = 10 % above I phase = 1.1 × I phase
Appar ent power i n si ng l e−phase
I phase = Li ne t o neut r al vol t ag e
leads to the opening of breaker CB-1a according to the logic explained in the previous paragraph. The overcurrent
is detected at 0.53 s of the simulation from the developed logic. A short delay of nearly 12 ms is provided to open
the breaker after the fault has been detected similar to a practical scenario (Figure 5.21). After the circuit breaker is
opened, OWF-1 is isolated from the network and total power provided to the onshore system is reduced. The total
power in the pre-fault period is nearly 2 GW, and after the fault, the total power is reduced to nearly 1500 MW. Similar
to the disconnection of one OWF discussed earlier in Section 5.4.1, the power flow is reduced through MMC-1 as
shown by the blue line in Figure 5.22. It is also worthy of mentioning that the network is stable by viewing the stable
voltage in the post-fault period in MMC bus, as shown in Figure 5.23.
Increase in active power in MMC-2 after the fault has been cleared (as seen from the red line in Figure 5.22) can
be explained by viewing the current profiles in the OWFs detailed in the following paragraph. A major observation
can be viewed from the profile of transients during the fault in the currents of both the MMCs in Figure 5.24(a) and
5.24(b). The initial rise in current till 0.53 s is due to the occurrence of the three-phase fault. The breaker is opened
at 0.542 s. The profile of currents at nearly 0.59 s are complementary in both MMCs, i.e. the currents are decreasing
in MMC-1 and increasing in MMC-2. This is due to the difference in control strategies in MMC-1 (V/F control) and
MMC-2 (active power control).
1400
MMC-1
1200 MMC-2
Active power (MW)
1000
800
600
400
200
-200
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Time (s)
Figure 5.22: Active power in MMC-1 bus and MMC-2 bus upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1
80
60
40
20
-20
-40
-60
-80
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
Figure 5.23: Voltages at MMC bus upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1
20
15
MMC-1 Current (kA)
10
-5
-10
-15
-20
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
30
20
MMC-2 Current (kA)
10
-10
-20
-30
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
Figure 5.24: Currents in a) MMC-1 bus and b) MMC-2 bus upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1
Analyzing at the OWFs side of the network, the DVC is modelled to provide rated reactive current to flow to the
fault location by controlling the voltage of the GSC, as explained in Section 3.3.1. From the voltage in p.u. plot in
Figure 5.25 and the three-phase voltage plot in Figure 5.26, it can be seen that the voltage at the PCC-1 drops and
remains low throughout the fault period. During the time of fault in cable-1 and after CB-1a is opened, the voltage
angle and magnitude at PCC-1 goes to zero. The PLL in GSC-1 is synchronized with the AC voltage at PCC-1. The
voltage magnitude at GSC-1 remains non-zero, and the voltage angle is zero during the time of fault as the PLL follows
the angular reference at PCC-1. Therefore, due to higher voltage magnitude at GSC-1 than at PCC-1, reactive power
will flow from GSC-1 to PCC-1, and since the voltage angle is zero at GSC-1 and PCC-1, active power transmitted is zero
during the time of the fault. This is performed in DVC by controlling the d-axis reference voltage of GSC-1 and thereby
indirectly controlling the current coming out of the GSC-1 to PCC-1. The current limitation algorithm implemented
in the DVC in Section 3.3.1.3, limits the output current to the rating of the converter and hence rated reactive current
flows from the GSC-1 as seen in Figure 5.27.
1.2
Voltage
1
PCC-1 Voltage (pu)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Time (s)
Figure 5.25: Voltage in p.u. at PCC-1 upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1
60
40
PCC-1 Voltage (kV)
20
-20
-40
-60
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
Figure 5.26: Voltages at PCC-1 upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1

10
PCC-1 Current (kA)
-5
-10
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3

Time (s)
Figure 5.27: Currents in PCC-1 upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1
Voltages at PCC-2, 3 and 4 have transients during the time of fault and are then stabilized to a slightly higher value
than the pre-fault state to compensate for the loss of OWF-1. This is due to the fast local voltage control in DVC as
seen for the case of disconnection of one OWF. The post-fault voltage value is within the tolerance limit (±10 % ), and
this can be viewed from the graphs in Figure 5.28. An important observation in the voltage graphs of OWFs-2, 3 and
4 is the occurrence of spikes right after the circuit breaker CB-1a is opened, as can be seen in Figure 5.28. There can
be two reasons for such a phenomenon to occur. The first is that after the circuit breaker CB-1a is opened, reactive
current injection still takes place (at 0.59 s in Figure 5.29 for PCC-2) and this causes the voltage at the corresponding
PCC also to rise. Such a rise in voltage is not applicable in real-world OWFs and is, therefore, a drawback due to the
OWF modelling. These spikes can be ignored as they do not represent the performance of the real hardware. The
second reason could be due to two control strategies that provide the voltage reference in the network. It is seen that
during the steady state and post-fault condition, the V/F control is dominant and provides the voltage reference in
the network. However, during the time of the fault, DVC in all OWFs take the role of providing the voltage reference in
the corresponding PCCs as seen in PCC-1 during the time of three-phase line to ground fault in cable-1. The sudden
change back to the steady state condition after the fault is released could lead to discrepancies between the V/F mode
and the DVC. The conflict between these control strategies occur as to which control strategy provides the voltage
reference right after the circuit breaker is open and hence this causes a spike in voltage at the PCCs.
1.6
Voltage
1.4
PCC-2 Voltage (pu)
1.2
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Time (s)
Figure 5.28: Voltage in p.u. at PCC-2 upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1

10
PCC-2 Current (kA)
-5
-10
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3

Time (s)
Figure 5.29: Currents in PCC-2 upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1
The currents from the OWFs-2, 3 and 4 are the same in the post-fault region as the pre-fault condition (Figure 5.29
for PCC-2) since the scaling factor for each OWF is still the same. DVC control in these OWFs operate during the time
of fault and limit the currents by controlling the voltages at corresponding PCCs. Due to the increase in voltage in the
post-fault period at the PCCs-2, 3 and 4, the active power generated also will be higher from the OWFs-2, 3 and 4 and
it is reflected in the increase in active power in MMC-2 as shown in Figure 5.22. Another important observation is in
the profile of transients in currents in PCCs-2, 3 and 4 following the occurrence of the fault. As shown in Figure 5.29
for PCC-2, the current is limited from 0.5 to 0.54 s during the time of fault. After the breaker has been operated at
0.542 s, the profile of currents (from 0.55 s to 0.6 s) is similar to that of the MMC-2 (Figure 5.24(b)). This is due to the
re-synchronization to the grid by the PLL in MMC-2 control and the PLL in DVC of WG-2, 3 and 4.
In practice, if a three-phase fault occurs in a subsea cable, it is difficult that the fault clears on its own and would
require human interference. During such critical islanding situations, the DVC allows rated reactive current to flow
to the fault location by controlling the GSC voltage and thereby protecting the converters in the OWF from high over-
currents. Based on the reference grid codes mentioned in [12], during steady state operation, the active current must
be the priority, and during the time of the fault, the priority must be changed to reactive current. The major takeaway
from this chapter is that the DVC follows the reactive current injection requirement during the time of the fault, as
shown from the currents in PCC-1 in Figure 5.30 even while working in coordination with other controls in the net-
work. Current is limited to the rated current of the converter by the current limitation algorithm in DVC without the
requirement of any external controls.
2
Id
1.5 Iq
PCC-1 Current (pu)
0.5
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Time (s)
Figure 5.30: Currents in d and q axes in PCC-1 upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1
6
Conclusions and Future Scope
This chapter provides a concise description of the achieved results in the previous chapters, answers to the formulated
research questions in Chapter 1, and the future scope of this thesis is presented at the end.
6.1. Summary
The thesis tackles the research problems identified in Chapter 1 related to the need for large scale offshore networks
with the available technology and provides solutions to mitigate technical challenges related to voltage and frequency
control while developing large scale offshore networks.
From literature, it is seen that the current state-of-the-art technology, MMC-HVDC transmission, for transferring
offshore wind power is limited to a maximum capacity of 1.2 GW [8]. Hence, a configuration for a large scale offshore
network (greater than or equal to 2 GW) with the available technology is currently lacking. It is expected that the
upcoming OWF projects will be utilizing 66 kV HVAC transmission from OWFs to the offshore converter station due
to their significant advantages over the conventional combination of 33 kV and 145 kV [11]. Moreover, the technical
challenges related to voltage and frequency control in islanding of OWFs is not full filled in real-time application and
lacks the major requirement of reactive current injection by the WGs during dynamic conditions [25].
This thesis adopts the latest trend in technology, and it overcomes the above mentioned research gaps by achiev-
ing the overall goal of developing a generic digital twin model of 2 GW, 66 kV HVAC offshore network in RSCAD and
performing analysis on the dynamics of voltage and power at various locations in the network. The digital twin model
developed in this thesis adopts a modified hybrid configuration with two MMCs working in parallel and connecting
four OWFs to the onshore system. The layout adopted for the 2 GW offshore network is achieved by modifying the
layout of the hub-and-spoke principle in [46]. Additionally, the technical challenges faced while using conventional
current control strategies in WGs related to voltage and frequency control, are mitigated by implementing a new con-
trol strategy, DVC, in all the four WGs in RSCAD for real-time application.
To achieve the overall goal, initially, the DVC is implemented for real-time application in RSCAD for one OWF
connected to a 66 kV HVAC network. The large scale 2 GW offshore network is developed by modularly connecting
four of the aforementioned single OWFs in parallel. The 2 GW offshore wind power is transferred to the onshore
network through two parallel connected MMCs. The key features of the model include- all the WGs are equipped with
DVC, one MMC working in V/F control and the other working in active power control. Such a model is unique because
it incorporates a hybrid layout that allows for the coordination of the above mentioned strategies during steady state
and dynamic conditions in the network.
Few significant results of the model include the achievement of short-term voltage stability in the network during
severe dynamic scenarios. The requirement of reactive current injection by WGs during islanding is fulfilled by per-
forming three-phase fault analysis. These results confirm the stable operation of the network under severe dynamic
scenarios, and the corresponding network model can be utilized for further advancements on the size of the offshore
network.
6.2. Answers to Research Questions

Research Question 1 : How effective is the DVC when implemented in an EMT average model of Type-4 WG con-
nected to a 66 kV equivalent HVAC system in RSCAD?
65
66 6. Conclusions and Future Scope
As the upcoming projects are expected to have 66 kV HVAC transmission from OWFs to the offshore converter
station, the DVC in GSC of Type-4 WG connected to an infinite grid, is modelled for a 66 kV HVAC offshore network in
RSCAD. The performance of DVC is tested for the most severe disturbance, i.e. the three-phase line to ground fault.
The three-phase line to ground fault is implemented in the middle of the 66 kV HVAC cable. On viewing the voltage
profile at the PCC following the fault, it is observed that DVC provides stable operation in terms of short-term voltage
stability. This is due to the fast control action of the local voltage control in the reactive power loop of the DVC to
support the PCC voltage during the time of the fault. In terms of reactive current injection, the DVC provides active
current priority during steady state conditions and reactive current priority during the time of the fault, which is an
important requirement by most of the grid codes. The effect of damping during the time of fault is controlled by the
washout filters in the active and reactive power control loops. A parameter sensitivity analysis is performed for the
washout filters to assess the effectiveness of damping.
Research Question 2 : What insights can be attained by the EMT average model of Type-4 WG with DVC in 66 kV
network in RSCAD in comparison with a similar system modelled with a simplified Type-4 WG configuration with
DVC in DIgSILENT PowerFactory?
The performance of the implemented DVC in a average model of Type-4 WG in RSCAD for a 66 kV HVAC network
is compared with the benchmark DVC for a simplified Type-4 WG model in PowerFactory for a similar 66 kV HVAC
network. The comparison is made in terms of short-term voltage stability and reactive current injection following a
three-phase line to ground fault in the network. A three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of the HVAC cable
is simulated in both the models in EMT platform. The voltage, active and reactive current profiles are compared and
found to have good correspondence following the three-phase line to ground fault. This shows the validation of the
DVC implemented in the average model of the Type-4 WG for a 66 kV HVAC offshore network in RSCAD. Moreover, it is
observed that the model developed in RSCAD has slight transients in the active and reactive currents throughout the
simulation. This is due to the detailed model representation of GSC in RSCAD when compared to the simplified model
in PowerFactory. These results show that the RSCAD model provides a better detailed representation of the real-world
operation of the implemented DVC and can be used as a reference model. The way DVC is modelled to provide voltage
support during the time of fault in 66 kV HVAC network are in line with the results from previous studies, in which DVC
is implemented for a 33 kV HVAC network as explained in [21].
Research Question 3 : How can Type-4 WGs with implemented DVC work in coordination with offshore MMCs
within a multi-gigawatt offshore transmission network?
Due to the urging need to move for large scale offshore networks with the currently available technology, a modified
hybrid layout is implemented for the development of a 2 GW offshore network. The layout contains the connection of
four OWFs connected to a common bus to which two MMCs working in parallel are connected. To tackle the technical
challenges related to voltage and frequency control in offshore islanded networks, all four OWFs are modelled with the
implemented DVC. This is done by modularly connecting the single OWF model with implemented DVC developed in
Chapter 3. To provide the voltage reference during steady state operation, it is proposed that one of the MMCs (MMC-
1) is operated in V/F control and to continue the flow of power in the network constantly, it is proposed that MMC-2
is operated in active power control. The coordination between the V/F control in MMC-1, active power control in
MMC-2 and the DVC in OWFs provide a synchronized operation during the steady state and dynamic conditions in
the network. One of the highly severe conditions tested is the disconnection of one OWF. OWF-2 is considered for
this event. In such a situation, it is observed that the network remains stable following the disconnection and the
power flowing through MMC-1 reduces as it is working in V/F control, i.e. capable of providing and absorbing power.
Another highly severe event tested is the three-phase line to ground fault in one of the HVAC cables. A circuit breaker
logic is modelled to isolate OWF-1 from the network when the fault occurs in HVAC cable-1. It is observed that the
operation of the entire network remains stable during the pre-fault condition where active current is injected or can
be termed as active power is generated by all the OWFs. During the time of fault in HVAC cable-1, circuit breaker at the
end of the cable is opened upon detection of overcurrent and thereby, islanding OWF-1. The fast local voltage control
in DVC in OWF-1 provides voltage support during the time of the fault, and due to the grid conditions, the reactive
current is injected by OWF-1 to the fault location. The currents are limited to the rating of the GSC by the employed
current limitation technique. Hence, it can be concluded that the V/F control provides the voltage reference during
the pre-fault and post fault condition for the network and DVC provides voltage reference at the corresponding PCC
when the OWF is islanded.
Research Question 4 : How effectively do Type-4 WGs with implemented DVC perform when connected in an off-
shore network for parallel operation?
67 6. Conclusions and Future Scope
The four OWFs with implemented DVC are connected to a common MMC bus in the 2 GW offshore network. This
makes the OWFs to be working in a parallel configuration. The voltage and current profiles at the PCCs of all the OWFs
are similar in the steady state since all the four OWFs are modelled and simulated by considering the same wind speed
profile (generating an equal amount of power). During the highly severe conditions such as the disconnection of OWF-
1, it is observed that the power generated from other OWFs connected to the network compensate equally for the loss
of the disconnected OWF-1 by providing a slightly higher voltage at the corresponding PCCs. This is done equally by
the local voltage control in the corresponding DVC to support for the voltage drop, due to the assumption of having
similar parameters in all DVC. Additionally, in the event of a three-phase fault in HVAC-1 cable, there occurs a drop in
voltages in other PCCs as well since they are connected to a common bus. However, voltages at the PCCs are recovered
in the post fault condition and stabilized by the corresponding fast voltage control in DVC to equal values due to the
similar settings in the control loops. Therefore, it can be concluded that each OWF contributes equally to maintain
the power balance in the network during steady state and dynamic conditions.
6.3. Recommendations for Future Work

Having successfully achieved the defined goals for this thesis and based on the studies performed, the author provides
recommendations in the following section:
• The availability of additional NovaCor processor at TU Delft could be fully utilized to scale up the model to a
capacity of 4 GW by accordingly connecting WGs and MMCs in a modular approach. The practical scenario of
multi-terminal AC network can be implemented, and the performance of the WGs with DVC can be analyzed.
• The present model of DVC is applicable for three-phase fault analysis. Analysis can be extended for single-phase
faults that are more common to occur in the real scenario by developing a negative sequence control loop for
the DVC.
• Various other network topologies can be researched on and tested with the implemented DVC to investigate the
cost-benefit feature for the industry experts.
• The integration of the onshore converter station to the offshore network by removing the DC sources from the
present model can be accomplished, and extensive fault analysis can be performed in the MMC-HVDC network.
• The practicality of the controller can be tested by performing Hardware In Loop testing of the implemented DVC
in a properly set-up test bench.
• The developed 2 GW generic model can be incorporated with other control strategies suggested in Section 1.2
for WGs, and studies related to the interoperability of these controllers and coordination with MMC control
strategies can be performed.
Appendices
68
WG model Utilized in RSCAD and
A
PowerFactory
A.1. RSCAD model

The Type-4 WG model is utilized for this thesis work, and the complete implementation of the model is described in
this section.
The PMSG modelled in the small time step block, consists of the parameters shown in Figure A.1. The PMSG
component majorly operates in two modes: Speed or Lock mode (LCKFR = 0) ; Torque or Free mode (LCKFR = 1). As
the name suggests, a control signal directly controls the speed of the machine in speed mode, and a control signal
directly controls the torque of the machine in torque mode.
Figure A.1: PMSG data
The major three blocks that represent the control system of Type-4 WG are:
• Aerodynamic model
• Machine Side Converter model
• Grid Side Converter model
A.1.1. Aerodynamic model

The aerodynamic block consists mainly of the wind turbine data and the coefficient data i.e. is the C p (λ, β) param-
eters, as shown in Figures A.3(a) and A.3(b). The parameters used are for a 6 MVA rated WG model. The detailed
configuration of the aforementioned parameters is described in "WTG50R3.pdf" in the Samples folder in RSCAD. The
aerodynamic model consists of the two mass representation model of WG shown in Figure A.4, and the pitch angle
control is shown in Figure A.5.
69
70 A. WG model Utilized in RSCAD and PowerFactory
Figure A.2: Aerodynamic model
(a) Turbine data (b) Coefficient data
Figure A.3: Aerodynamic model data
The inputs for the two-mass model are the mechanical torque from the aerodynamic model and the electrical
torque from PMSG. The output is the change in rotor speed (SP DPU _M ) and the generator speed (SP DPU ). The
two-mass model represents the non-linear nature of the wind turbine aerodynamics. To protect the turbines from
damage due to high wind speeds, the pitch control mechanism is adapted. The maximum speed is controlled through
the limits of the G1M X P SD parameter. When the speed goes beyond the limit, a pitch angle (G1P I T C H ) is calculated,
and this is provided as input to the aerodynamic model to compute a new speed.
Figure A.4: Two-mass model

Figure A.5: Pitch angle control
A.1.2. Machine Side Converter model

The overall MSC control is depicted, as shown in Figure A.7. A three-level VSC is used for operation as MSC in this
model. The conventional vector current control utilized in the MSC control. As required for PI control operation, the
abc signals are transformed to the dq frame using the rotor angle measurement for alignment and synchronizing with
the dq reference frame. The MSC control consists of two inner fast control loops using PI controllers that regulate the
converter currents during all conditions, i.e. steady-state and dynamic scenarios. The reference values for the inner
control loop is provided by the outer control loop. By measurement of active power of the WG, a MPPT control is used
to output an optimum speed reference (W MOP T PU ) as shown in Figure A.6. The error difference from the optimum
speed reference and the rotor speed is regulated through an outer PI control loop. The modulation index for the MSC
control is same as GSC control and is given by Equation 3.16.
Figure A.6: MPPT controller
The gating for the MSC control utilizes PWM and the inputs for the triangular wave repeater in terms of point and
slope, in the small time step environment are defined as shown in Figure A.8. However, the rated frequency of the
PMSG is chosen to be 3.77 Hz, and the frequency of the carrier wave is 31 times this frequency. Hence the slope of the
triangular signal is double the carrier frequency which is then sent to the small time step block.
72
Outer control loop Inner control loop Modulation limitation Modulation index
ID IQ CURRENT
REGULATOR
IGDR
SPDPU Y=F(X) Rval
0.0 2.0
5 pnts
1 VRD
X(t) dt + +
T + -
T= 0.125
MODWAV4
BLKR RST
IGDFB
+
- -2.0
PHIC PHICOSC VRDM

IS1 X X/Y R cos X
0.4
(rad)
ATAN2
IbaseG(kA) IAS2 XIR (rad) MR DQ - ABC MODWAV5
Y X I
0.75
CONVERTER
IBS2 ABC - DQ
IS2 X X/Y SPDPU sin
1.1 X
(rad)
CONVERTER XIQ PHISINC VRQM
IbaseG(kA) ICS2
Y
X 0.4
Figure A.7: MSC control

ROTANGC
IS3 X X/Y Rval
- 0.0 2.0
+
IGQFB MODWAV6
IbaseG(kA) ROTANGC 1
Y X(t) dt + +
T + +
VRQ
T= 0.125
VRD
+ 0.01 2
- RST X 1.0
WMOPTPU BLKR
VRQ
Rval 2 + X X/Y
0.0 1.0 -2.0 X + X
2.0 MR
1 X(t) dt + Y 0.0
SPDPU T +
IACRQ
T= 0.5
-2.0 G
BLKR RST VTOT 1 + sT
-1.0
A. WG model Utilized in RSCAD and PowerFactory
Figure A.8: Triangular wave inputs
The triangular wave repeater and the firing pulse generator blocks are placed in the small time step environment,
as shown in Figure A.9. As the name suggests, the triangular wave repeater creates the triangular-carrier wave taking
the points and slope as input and provides the carrier wave to the firing pulse generator. Each VSC have dedicated
firing pulse generator which takes the carrier wave input from the triangular wave repeater (e.g. TWAVE6) and the
modulation signal from the large-time step block controls (e.g. MODWAV6). Depending on the comparison of these
signals, the switching of the valves takes place. The firing signal to be sent to the VSC leg are named for example
FPOUT6. The number denomination for the three-phases of MSC are 4,5 and 6 respectively in this model.
Figure A.9: Triangular wave repeater and Firing pulse generator for MSC
There exists a DC link in between the MSC and the GSC consisting of capacitor banks on either end and a chopper
circuit in between. The voltage in the upper and lower capacitive branches in the MSC side is depicted as V 3 and
V 4. Voltages in the branch at the GSC side are V 1 and V 2. The voltages V 1 and V 2 sum up to VDC _r e f in the outer
control loop for the GSC as explained in Section 3.3.1.2. Hence, the control of d-axis voltage is associated with the
control of active power, and this task is accomplished by regulating the DC voltage. The voltage across the DC link
is maintained constant during steady state conditions. During the time of disturbance in the network, the chopper
circuit gets activated and holds the DC voltage within the limit. The chopper gets activated when the DC voltage
(V 1 + V 2) goes above 1.05 p.u. as shown in Figure A.10. The chopper also utilizes PWM for gating and the signals
involved are a 50 Hz carrier signal and, the difference between the maximum voltage limit (1.05 p.u. in this case) and
the measured DC voltage as the modulating signal. The triangular wave repeater block and the firing pulse generator
block for the chopper is also placed in the small time step block and is shown in Figure A.11(b). The firing pulse output
is provided to the circuit valve shown in Figure A.11(a).
Figure A.10: Chopper activation control
(a) Chopper circuit valve
(b) Triangular wave repeater and Firing pulse generator for DC circuit
Figure A.11: Chopper circuit in small time step block
A.1.3. Grid Side Converter model

GSC also uses a three-level VSC similar to the MSC. The GSC also uses PWM technique for gating, and the points
and slope for the triangular wave are created by the PLL as shown in Figure A.12. The PLL block plays a significant
role in the entire network as it computes the phase angle of the space vector that defines the synchronization of the
rotating dq frame with the abc frame. The input for the PLL is the three-phase voltage at the PCC, and the angle is
defined such that the d-axis aligns with the grid voltage and q-axis voltage is zero. This is done to achieve decoupled
control of the two axes. Thereby, d-axis provides control of active power, and q-axis provides control of reactive power.
The proportional and integral gains need to be defined in the PLL block. The influence of these parameters in a grid
dominated with PE is an ongoing topic of research.
The slope and points for the triangular wave repeater are also generated in Figure A.12. The frequency of the carrier
wave is chosen to be 19 times the nominal frequency (19*50 Hz). Therefore, the points would be 2*19*50 Hz if x = 0
and -2*19*50 Hz if x = 1. The angle is also multiplied by 19 and is between 0 and 2π, hence has to be divided by 2π to
achieve points between 0 and 1. The triangular wave repeater and the firing pulse generator for the GSC are similar to
that of the MSC and are shown in Figure A.13. The numbers denominated for the three-phases of GSC are 1,2 and 3
respectively.
Figure A.12: PLL circuit, points and slope for triangular wave generation
Figure A.13: Triangular wave repeater and Firing pulse generator for GSC
The GSC control block has the abc to dq transformation and vice versa, of PCC voltages and currents, measurement
of PCC voltage in p.u. and the measurement of DC voltage in p.u., as shown in Figure A.14. The generation of the
gating pulses are similar to the MSC control. The outer and inner control loop structure of the implemented DVC is
illustrated in Figure A.15.
76
1.0
G_i
G_1
DQ current at PCC in p.u.
G
G IDT
IAP
1 + sT
G_i
T
G_i
G
T_i
IAS_filter G IDT(pu)
G X X/Y
1 + sT
IBS_filter ABC - DQ
Ibase2_pk(kA)
G Y
IBP
1 + sT T Y
CONVERTER
ICS_filter IQT(pu)
T X X/Y
T_i
G_i
T_i
IQT
G
PHI1
G
ICP
1 + sT
T
T_i
T_i
0.00185
Phase to ground voltage in p.u.

Gain_meas
ALPHA
G_VACP
1 SINR MODWAV1
N1 G +
+
VACP_uf G VACP VACPCC

N2 0.8165
pu 1 + sT
Gating at grid side (Modulating wave)
rms
N3
T
time_v
T_VACP
0
PHICOS VTDC* ALPHA

cos X
(rad)
VTD* PHI_T ML DQ - ABC SINS MODWAV2
R +
+
Outer and Inner ATAN2 CONVERTER
(rad) VTQC*
Control loops I sin
(rad) X
VTQ* PHISIN
DC link voltage in p.u.

PHI1
V1 0.5
V1PU
ALPHA
V2
Figure A.14: GSC control

0.5
V2PU
MODWAV3
+
+
5.4 kV = 1 pu SINT
DQ voltage at PCC in p.u.
UDT
1.0
G_v G_v
G_v UDT(pu)
G G X X/Y
G Vbase_s_pk(kV) G
N1 Y
1 + sT 1 + sT Y
G_v UQT(pu)
T T X X/Y
Ua_pll
G
T_v ABC - DQ T_v
G CONVERTER
N2
1 + sT Ub_pll
G_v UQT
T
G
T_v
G
N3
1 + sT Uc_pll PHI1
T
T_v
T_v
0.002
77
Reactive power control

Current limiter
UlscDmin
-1.0 X
UlscDmax
Qdq
0.31
ratio Imax_ref
Imax_ref
Max 0.002
Ut_ref Idq_unsat
Q_err VACP UlscDmax VACP Idq_unsat Idq_unsat
- + 1.0 0.1
- -6.6666 + + Max
+ C1 C2 C1 C2
VACP_diff QPcc_ref
1.0 VlscXd Vxd_set IQ_Ref_angle IQ_ref*_abs
+ + -1 X Out= `B' Out= `B'
Min - 0.2 + Max X X |X| X
- B Else B Else
VACP VAC_PI_REF IQ_Ref_PI IQ_Ref_chk IQ_ref*
UlscDmax
VTD* IQ_Ref_chk Out= À' Out= À'

+ sin X X/Y 0.1 X
-0.31 Min - If (C1 > C2) If (C1 > C2)
(rad) A A
UlscDmin Vxd IQ_Ref_New
int_val
A If (C1 <= C2) 1 X(t) dt A If (C1 <= C2) 0.1 Y
T 0.19 Min
1.00
Out= `B' Out= `B' Imax_ref
T= 150
Else Else Irefk Imax_ref UDT(pu) angle1
B B 1 A If (C1 > C2) X X/Y R
0.0 Out= À' Out= À' - 1.2 -
+ +
Out= À' ratio ATAN2
Else Imax_ref UQT(pu) (rad) angle_s
C1 C2 C1 C2 1 B Y I +
Out= `B' -
Vd_WF
Vlsc_chk Vlsc_chk Igsvsc_pu
IDT(pu) angle2
C1 C2 R
0.001
0.001
+
ATAN2
0.2
T
int_val IQT(pu) ID_Ref
G
G
I (rad) A
G sT
2 If (C1 > C2)
1 + sT
1 + sT
X 0.1
0.0
ID_Ref Out= À'
Tic= 0.001
0.2
Gic=
gainD
0.001
Idq_mag Idq_unsat ID_Ref_angle ID_ref*
TimeD
del + + B Else
+ + X X X Out= `B' X
T
int_val Igsvsc_pu Idq_unsat
UlscQmax
A If (C1 <= C2) 2 cos C1 C2
1
X (rad)
Out= À' IQ_Ref_New ratio Imax_ref
Else y*
B
0.0 Out= `B'
Id_err
Idq_unsat
C1 C2
-
+
VlscXq
0.001
IDT(pu)
del +
-
T
ID_ref*
VlscXq Vlsc_chk
Active power control
VDCR_
1
V1PU
+ +
+ 0.5 - 1
V2PU VTOT VDC_error
+
+
1 Pdc_ref
X(t) dt 0
T
pi_integ
T= 5
P_pu UlscQmax
Max Max
Direct voltage control Freq_sec P_ref P_ref_lim
-0.95 - X X/Y 0.4
- X + 0.1 Max
-
ID_Ref ID_Ref_set VlscXq
VXq VTQ*
Y +
Min Min -
-1 -0.14 -0.4 Min
Vq_WF
Direct frequency control
1.05
0.07
0.07
T
VACP
G
gainQ
G
G sT
1 + sT
1 + sT VACPCC_chk2
Tic= 0.001
Figure A.15: DVC representation in RSCAD

Gic=
0.001
dPmax_pos
TimeQ
HZ
0.001
1
freqSLR
del_f G
- -0.2
+
Iq_err
f0 0.2 Pfdir_ref 1 + sT Pdir_ref
50
-1
dPmax_neg
-
+
IQT(pu)
IQ_ref*
VDAP reduction control
dPmax_pos
G sT -0.1 G
VACP 1 + sT 100000000000 1 + sT
dPmax_neg
78
DIgSILENT
Converter Frame:
pset 0
udc
1DC capacitor 0
DC Busbar and ..
u
0 1
A.2. PowerFactory model
AC Vol Mea ur;ui

0 2
Measurement ..
ud;uq ud_set;uq_set
1 0 0 0
PQ-Calc p;q
3 0
PQ Calculat..
AC Cur Mea ir;ii id;iq
1 1
Measurement o.. Parks Transf2 id_ref;iq_ref ud_ref;uq_ref u1r_in;u1i_in
Park Transfo.. Udc_Q Controller 1 1 1 Converter
Damping Terms Modulation Lim WG_Unit
Udc_Q Controller Damping Terms Modulation limita..
4
2
2
cosphi;sinphi
0 2
Phase Locked Loop

Phase Locked Loop Fmeas
1 5
Figure A.16: FSC representation in PowerFactory [38]

AC Vol Mea_remote uremote
6
AC Voltage measure..
79
DC Busbar and Capacitor:
DIgSILENT
udc SI to pu
0
Idc_sp
Calc_Current_SP
pset Pnom,Udcmax,UdcN
0 1
DC Capacitor
p
1 0 Idc_act Udc
dI u
Calc_Current - 3 1/C 1/s _Udc
01 2
Sbase Cdc
1 -
i_cho..
P_chopp_mw Pchopper
0 Power_Disspation
Chopper_Current
1
Figure A.17: DC bus representation in PowerFactory [38]

Hysteresis
chopper_on_off uDC_Chon,uDC_Choff,
Chopper
Udc_Q Controller:
DIgSILENT
80
u
0 uconv
qmax uset_max
uref dU_remote qref dQ uset - dU u_reactor

3 +-Limit 3 - 3 Ku_u
1 012 012 012 0
Kqu PI Ctrl Ku ud_ctrl ud_set
Kq_remote,Tq_remote +-Limits_new 012 0
- - imax 3
1
offset
uremote
2
uset_min
offs..
q
3
iq
4 0
id
5 1 0 1
ud
6 2
uq current_limitation
7 3
k_ir
idref
4 1 2
idref_lim
y_max dPmax_pos
yi sT/(sT+1) u_VDAPR DBand u_VDAPR_DB PT1 with gain

uconv T db_voltage_VDACR KuVDAPR,TuVDAPR
y_min
P_VDAPR
dPmax_neg
uq_max uqmin
reatance_1
l
idref_lim
dPmax_pos y_max1
Fmeas dF p_fdapr Pred_FDAPR

- pred_total Padjusted_ p_conv p_conv_lim idref_conv id_set uq_set
- 3 Overfrequ.. Gradient Limiter - 3 3 Lim_pref +-Limits_ reactance +-uq_max
8 0 2 0 2 0 2 3
1 1 1
T_rate_limit_freq l
f0
9 u_delayed
o10
dPmax_neg y_min1
ulscq_min
yi9
Tud 0
1/(1+sT) uqmin
dPavg P_set_pi
yi10
dPref o2
Figure A.18: DVC representation in PowerFactory [38]

dPavg 0 0 dPmax_pos
uconv
1/(sT+1) o1
1 dPmax_neg
Tp_aver
p p_avg
10 1 2
PI_freeze_logic
id_min
udc_ref 3
dUdc K[1+1/sT] o9
11 012 0 P_set_pi
Kdc,Tdc
- 1
id_max
udc_pu
pi_hold
udc
12 SI into pu
UdcN
81
Damping Terms:
DIgSILENT
ud_set
0
ud_max
id dId ud_w.. ud_ctrl ud_ref

- 3 KsT/(1+sT) - 3 +-Limits_
1 01 2 01 2 0
Kw,Tw
id_ref
2 ud_min
Damping of d-axis currents
3
uq_set
uq_lim
iq dIq uq_w.. uq_ctrl uq_ref

3 KsT/(1+sT) 3 +-Limits
Figure A.19: Washout filter representation in PowerFactory [38]

4 - 01 2
- 01 2 1
Kw,Tw
iq_ref
5
Damping of q-axis currents

66 kV Network Representation in RSCAD and
B
PowerFactory
B.1. Single OWF 66 kV network, Draft module in RSCAD

PCC
BUS1_B
1.0159 /_ 0.73
C8 B8 A8
Source Bus CabMMC_Side

Aggregated OWF model
1
66 kV AC Source 66 kV HVAC Cable
X
0 SWD2A
CabWT_Side
1
7 X
0 SWD3A
CABLE NAME: CABLE NAME: CABLE NAME: CABLE NAME:
CABLE2 CABLE2 CABLE1 CABLE1 7
SENDING END RECEIVING END SENDING END RECEIVING END
TERMINAL NAME: TERMINAL NAME: TERMINAL NAME: TERMINAL NAME:
AC Type SEN_2 REC_2 SEN_1 REC_1 NPC
C8_endB8_endA8_end
VpriNs3VpriNs2VpriNs1
brkr_lineA brkr_tfA
A
N1
1.0159 /_ 0.73
1.0
1.0
0.0001 1 1 1 1
BUS1_End
BUS_Com
BUS1_A
brkr_lineB brkr_tfB
B
N2
/_
/_
2 2 2 2
0.0001
brkr_lineC brkr_tfC
0.0
0.0
C
N3
src1234
0.0001
3 3 3 3
Es= 66 kV
CABLE CABLE
GSC and RSC
CABLE2 CABLE1 Controls
66kV 66kV
C
L-G FAULT POINT
L-G FAULT
LOGIC
Figure B.1: 66 kV HVAC test system representation in Draft module in RSCAD
82
83 B. 66 kV Network Representation in RSCAD and PowerFactory
B.2. Single OWF 66 kV network, Runtime module in RSCAD
DIgSILENT
Figure B.2: 66 kV HVAC test system representation in Runtime module in RSCAD
B.3. Single OWF 66 kV network in PowerFactory
WG_TRX
WT_Trf_700 .. Common Imp..
AC Voltage S..
WG_Unit
Z
V
~
Subsea Cable(1) Subsea Cable

66 kV_line 66 kV_line
Shunt/Filter
Source BUS
PCC BUS
Terminal
FSC_BB_S3
1
Figure B.3: 66 kV HVAC test system representation in PowerFactory

84 B. 66 kV Network Representation in RSCAD and PowerFactory
B.4. Additional graphs

B.4.1. Three-phase line to ground fault
1.4
Voltage
1.35
1.3
1.25
DC link Voltage (pu)
1.2
1.15
1.1
1.05
0.95
0.9
0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65
Time (s)
Figure B.4: Voltages at DC link upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable in RSCAD
1.4
1.13
Voltage
1.12
1.35
1.11
1.1
1.3
1.09
1.08
1.25
DC link Voltage (pu)
1.07
1.06
1.2 1.05
1.15 0.52 0.521 0.522 0.523 0.524
1.1
1.05
0.95
0.9
0.4 0.425 0.45 0.475 0.5 0.525 0.55 0.575 0.6 0.625 0.65
Time (s)
Figure B.5: Voltages at DC link upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable in PowerFactory
During the time of fault, the DC link voltage increases as seen in the Figures B.4 and B.5. The chopper gets activated
when the voltage goes above 1.05 p.u. in both the models. However, switching of the chopper depends on the time
delay of the signal given to the triangular wave repeater in the RSCAD model. Whereas, the hysteresis block shown in
Figure A.17 determines the activation of the chopper in the PowerFactory model.
C
2 GW Network Representation in RSCAD
C.1. MMCs and HVAC cables in Draft module

Common Bus
Fault Point-1
BUS1_B
1.0159 /_ 0.73
C8 B8 A8
Common Bus
Measurements HVAC Cable-1

brkr_lineA CRT1SE
N4
1 T-LINE NAME: T-LINE NAME: 1 1 T-LINE NAME:
1.0
66kV_1 66kV_1 66kV_2
BUS1_C
brkr_lineB CRT2SE
N5
2 2 2
/_
RECEIVING END SENDING END RECEIVING END
brkr_lineC CRT3SE TERMINAL NAME: TERMINAL NAME: TERMINAL NAME:
0.0
N6
3 LINE2RE LINE2SE 3 3 LINE1RE
TLINE TLINE
66kV_1 66kV_2
66kV 66kV
A
MMCBRK
1 L-G FAULT POINT
X
0 BRKm5
Comm_switch
1
HVDC Cable- 1 MMC- 1
7 X
0 SWD2A_com
L-G FAULT-1
7
LOGIC
CE1F1 CE1F1 LARGE DT BUS LARGE DT BUS
MMC_1
SENDING END RECEIVING END CONNECTION CONNECTION
TERMINAL NAME: TERMINAL NAME: IDENTIFIER IDENTIFIER
DC Type-CC Control
Unique Name: Unique Name:

SE1F1 RE1F1 LRGE1F1 LRGE1T2
C8_comB8_comA8_com
DCpos IRdcE1F1 brkr_lineA_com

0.73 /_ 1.0159
1 1
1 1
RRL
BUS_com
IRdcE1F1n brkr_lineB_com
2 2
2 2
ctrl_volt brkr_lineC_com
DC_src1
3
DCneg
v
640
vol
ISRC
CABLE
MMC-1
CALCULATION BLOCK
ctrl_volt Controls and Meters
CABLE NAME:
CE1F1
X
LINE CONSTANTS:
DC200Cfd
CONTROL AND MONITOR
IN THIS SUBSYSTEM
PowerSRC Processor Assignment: Auto
Fault Point-2
BUS2_B
1.0159 /_ 0.73
C8_2 B8_2 A8_2
HVAC Cable-2
brkr_lineA_2
N5_2 N4_2

1.0
66kV_3 66kV_3 66kV_4

BUS2_C
brkr_lineB_2
2 2 2
/_

brkr_lineC_2 TERMINAL NAME: TERMINAL NAME: TERMINAL NAME:
0.0
N6_2
TLINE TLINE
CabMMC_Side_2
1 T-LINE NAME: T-LINE NAME:
X
0 SWD2A_2 66kV_3 66kV_4
7 66kV 66kV
C
L-G FAULT POINT
L-G FAULT-2
LOGIC
brkr_lineC_bus
brkr_lineB_bus
brkr_lineA_bus
Bus_switch
1
X
0 SWD_bus
Fault Point-3
BUS3_B
1.0159 /_ 0.73
C8_3 B8_3 A8_3
HVAC Cable-3
brkr_lineA_3
N6_3 N5_3 N4_3

1.0
66kV_5 66kV_5 66kV_6

BUS3_C
brkr_lineB_3
2 2 2
/_

0.0
TLINE TLINE
CabMMC_Side_3
1 T-LINE NAME: T-LINE NAME:
X
0 SWD2A_3 66kV_5 66kV_6
7 66kV 66kV
MMCBRK_2
1
X
0 BRKm5_2
C
Comm_switch_2
1
HVDC Cable- 2 MMC- 2 0
X
SWD2A_com_2
L-G FAULT POINT
7

CE1F1_2 CE1F1_2 LARGE DT BUS LARGE DT BUS
MMC_2_DIFF T1
SENDING END RECEIVING END CONNECTION CONNECTION
IDENTIFIER IDENTIFIER Tmva = 1000.0 MVA L-G FAULT-3
TERMINAL NAME: TERMINAL NAME:
DC Type-CC Control
Unique Name: Unique Name: 83.7157 38.105

SE1F1_2 RE1F1_2 LRGE1F1_2 LRGE1T2_2 LOGIC
A8_com_2
DCpos_2 IRdcE1F1_2 A 1 1 A brkr_lineA_com_2

0.73 /_ 1.0159
1 1
1 1
BUS_com_2
RRL
B8_com_2
IRdcE1F1n_2 2 2 brkr_lineB_com_2
B B
2 2
2 2
C8_com_2
ctrl_volt_2 C 3 3 brkr_lineC_com_2
C
DC_src2
3
DCneg_2
v
640 #1 #2
vol_2
MMC-2
ISRC_2 Controls and Meters
CABLE
CALCULATION BLOCK
ctrl_volt_2
CABLE NAME:
CE1F1_2
X
LINE CONSTANTS:
DC200Cfd
CONTROL AND MONITOR
IN THIS SUBSYSTEM
PowerSRC_2 Processor Assignment: Auto
Fault Point-4
BUS4_B
1.0159 /_ 0.73
C8_4 B8_4 A8_4
CabMMC_Side_4
1
X
0 SWD2A_4
HVAC Cable-4
brkr_lineA_4
N6_4 N5_4 N4_4

1.0
66kV_7 66kV_7 66kV_8

BUS4_C
brkr_lineB_4
2 2 2
/_

0.0
TLINE TLINE
66kV_7 66kV_8
66kV 66kV
C
L-G FAULT POINT
L-G FAULT-4
LOGIC
Figure C.1: Subsystem-1: 66 kV HVAC cables connected to offshore converter stations in Draft module in RSCAD
85
86 C. 2 GW Network Representation in RSCAD
C.2. OWFs in Draft module

scaling_factor
SCLNAM1
SCLNAM1
Wind turbine and

PCC-1 66/2 kV Transformer - 1 PCC-2 Wind turbine and
66/2 kV Transformer - 2
CabWT_Side CabWT_Side_2
1 1
X X
0 SWD3A 0 SWD3A_2
7 7
NPC NPC_2
brkr_tfA brkr_tfA_2
N3_2 N2_2 N1_2

N1
T-LINE NAME: 1 T-LINE NAME: 1
1.0
1.0
66kV_2 66kV_4
BUS1_A
BUS2_A
brkr_tfB brkr_tfB_2
N2
2 2
/_
/_
SENDING END SENDING END
TERMINAL NAME: brkr_tfC TERMINAL NAME: brkr_tfC_2
0.0
0.0
N3
LINE1SE 3 LINE3SE 3
GSC and RSC GSC and RSC
Controls Controls
PCC-3 Wind turbine and PCC-4 Wind turbine and

66/2 kV Transformer - 3 66/2 kV Transformer - 4
CabWT_Side_3 CabWT_Side_4
1 1
X X
0 SWD3A_3 0 SWD3A_4
7 7
NPC_3 NPC_4
brkr_tfA_3 brkr_tfA_4
N3_3 N2_3 N1_3
N3_4 N2_4 N1_4

T-LINE NAME: 1 T-LINE NAME: 1
1.0
1.0
66kV_6 66kV_8
BUS3_A
BUS4_A
brkr_tfB_3 brkr_tfB_4
2 2
/_
/_
SENDING END SENDING END
TERMINAL NAME: brkr_tfC_3 TERMINAL NAME: brkr_tfC_4
0.0
0.0
LINE5SE 3 LINE7SE 3
GSC and RSC GSC and RSC
Controls Controls
Figure C.2: Subsystem-2: OWFs connected to HVAC cables in Draft module in RSCAD
C.2.1. Modification in Outer Loop Control

In order to simplify the system, the active power loop output variable which is the active power reference (idref2) is
made to be controlled by the user using a slider (ID_ref_control) in Runtime file directly as shown in Figure C.3. This
allows the user to control the amount of active power flowing through the MMC-2 bus. The ’ID_ref_control’ value is
varied from 0 to a maximum of 0.4. There is no flow of power in MMC-2 when ’ID_ref_control’ = 0. The maximum
power flow is achieved when ’ID_ref_control’ = 0.4.
The RMS current (I_rms) is calculated at the breaker (CB-1a) and is compared with the maximum current (I_phase_max)
which is 10% above the phase current as given in Equation C.2. When ’I_rms’ current exceeds ’I_phase_max’, ’idref2’ is
set to zero for that duration. Once, ’I_rms’ becomes less than ’I_phase_max’, the control is given back to ’ID_ref_control’
slider in Runtime module, as shown in Figure C.3. This allows power to flow in MMC-2 after the breaker CB-1a has
been operated.
S si ng l e_phase
I phase = (C.1)
VLN
I phase_max = 1.1 ∗ I phase (C.2)

Figure C.3: Idref2 control logic
C.3. Steps for operation of the model in Runtime module

Scaling factor is set to 10 before simulation. ID_ref_control is also set to 0 before starting the simulation.
C.3.1. Energization of the network

• Compile the Draft file "WT4_MMC2_Draft.dft" and ensure there are no errors.
• Open the Runtime file "WT4_MMC2_Draft.sib".
• Switch on the ’MMCBRK’ switch to charge the MMC bus.
Figure C.4: MMCBRK switch
• Switch on the ’MMCBRK_2’ switch to connect MMC-2 to the network.
Figure C.5: MMCBRK_2 switch
• Switch on the ’CabMMC_Side’ breaker switch to charge Cable-1. Then switch on ’CabWT_Side’ breaker switch
to connect OWF-1 to the network.
Figure C.6: CabMMC_Side and CabWT_Side switches
• Switch on the ’CabMMC_Side_2’ breaker switch to charge Cable-2. Then switch on ’CabWT_Side_2’ breaker
switch to connect OWF-2 to the network.
Figure C.7: CabMMC_Side_2 and CabWT_Side_2 switches
After the final step, nearly 200 MW active power flows through MMC-1 and there is no power flow in MMC-2.
C.3.2. Full generation from OWFs and power flow in MMC-1 and MMC-2
• Increase scaling_factor from 10 to 40.
• Change ID_ref_control from 0 to 0.2.
• Change ID_ref_control from 0.2 to 0.3.
• Finally, increase scaling_factor from 90 to 92.
A total of nearly 2 GW power flows in the network after the above steps. 1 GW through MMC-1 and 1 GW through
MMC-2.
ID_ref_control Power through MMC-2

0 0 MW
0.2 475 MW
0.4 950 MW
Table C.1: Power flow control in MMC-2

C.3.3. Disconnection of One OWF

OWF-2 is chosen for this thesis.
• Open the breaker switch ’CabMMC_Side_2’ to disconnect OWF-2.
• The above test can also be performed on other OWFs as well by opening ’CabMMC_Side’ for OWF-1, ’Cab-
MMC_Side_3’ for OWF-3 and ’CabMMC_Side_4’ for OWF-4 respectively.
C.3.4. Three-phase line to ground fault

The control logic in Figure C.3 and the breaker logic in Section 5.20 is modelled for HVAC cable-1 for this work.
First, the steps C.3.1 and C.3.2 must be performed to achieved 2 GW power transmission.
• Switch on the ’Activ’ switch to change control of circuit breaker CB-1a from ’CabMMC_Side’ switch to the logic
explained in Section 5.4.2.1. The network still operates in steady state in this condition.
• Apply the fault by clicking the ’LG_FLT8’ button (red in colour).
Figure C.10: Fault button
C.4. Additional graphs

C.4.1. Disconnection of OWF-2
60 Phase A Phase B Phase C
40
PCC-1 Voltage (kV)
20
-20
-40
-60
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3

Time (s)
Figure C.11: Voltages at PCC-1 upon OWF-2 disconnection event
40
PCC-3 Voltage (kV)
20
-20
-40
-60
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3

Time (s)
40
PCC-4 Voltage (kV)
20
-20
-40
-60
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3

Time (s)
8
6
PCC-3 Current (kA)
-2
-4
-6
-8
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
Figure C.14: Currents in PCC-3 upon OWF-2 disconnection event
8
6
PCC-4 Current (kA)
-2
-4
-6
-8
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
Figure C.15: Currents in PCC-4 upon OWF-2 disconnection event
C.4.2. Three-phase fault line to ground fault
80
60
PCC-2 Voltage (kV)
40
20
-20
-40
-60
-80
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
Figure C.16: Voltages at PCC-2 upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1
80
60
PCC-3 Voltage (kV)
40
20
-20
-40
-60
-80
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
80
60
PCC-4 Voltage (kV)
40
20
-20
-40
-60
-80
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)

10
PCC-3 Current (kA)
-5
-10
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3

Time (s)
Figure C.19: Currents in PCC-3 upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1

10
PCC-4 Current (kA)
-5
-10
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3

Time (s)
Figure C.20: Currents in PCC-4 upon three-phase line to ground fault in the middle of cable-1
D
Parameters and Configurations in RSCAD
D.1. Reactive power control parameters in DVC
Parameter Description Unit Value

kQV Static gain for slow global reactive power control p.u. 6.6
q max/mi n Maximum/minimum reactive power p.u. 0.31
kQ Slow global reactive power control proportional gain p.u. 0.002
TQ Slow global reactive power control integral time constant s 15
kV Fast local voltage control proportional gain p.u. 0.2
x Converter reactance p.u. 0.1
kP Washout filter proportional gain p.u. 0.05
Tw Washout filter time constant s 0.01
Table D.1: Parameters of reactive power control loop in DVC [38]
D.2. Active power control parameters in DVC
Parameter Description Unit Value

kS DC voltage control proportional gain p.u. 1
TS DC voltage control integral time constant p.u. 0.1
kR f Proportional gain for direct frequency control p.u. 1
TR f First order delay for direct frequency control s 0.2
Washout time constant for the voltage dependent active power
TUv s 60
reduction
kU f v Proportional gain for voltage dependent active power reduction p.u. 2
First order delay for the voltage dependent active power
TU f v s 0.005
reduction
x Converter reactance p.u. 0.1
kQ Washout filter proportional gain p.u. 0.05
Tw Washout filter time constant s 0.01
Ta Voltage measurement delay s 5
Deadband for direct frequency control Hz 0.2
Deadband for voltage dependent active power reduction p.u. 0.1
Table D.2: Parameters of active power control loop in DVC [38]
93
94 D. Parameters and Configurations in RSCAD
D.3. V/F control parameters
Parameter Unit Value

k p_v f p.u. 0.2
k i _v f p.u. 30
Table D.3: Parameters for PI gains in V/F control loop [48]
D.4. Cable module configuration

The cable module opens a cable setup popup menu into which the cable parameters are added. The file is then com-
piled and saved in a ".clo" file format. The cable parameters are referenced through the external file previously created
using the cable module. In RSCAD, Pi cable models are derived from Bergeron cable model. Initially, a Bergeron cable
model is created with RLC parameters and then the option to make it work as a Pi model is chosen. The ".clo" file must
be added first using the ’Dnm1’ option, which is obtained by double-clicking on the calculation box (Figure D.1(a)).
The cable constants are of type Bergeron as chosen in the ’cntyp’ parameter in Figure D.1(a). The ’frcpi’ parameter
available in the "Options when using Bergeron data" tab, forces the use of Pi section model manually by the user. The
selection is made, as shown by the red box in Figure D.1(b). The terminal block must be specified as either the sending
or receiving end as shown in Figure D.2 and the cable name provided in the calculation block has to be entered in the
terminal blocks as well.
(a) Cable configuration (b) Additional options
Figure D.1: Configuration of the calculation block
(a) Sending end terminal (b) Receiving end terminal
Figure D.2: Configuration of the terminal blocks

D.5. Core assignment in RSCAD
(a) Core assignment of OWF-1 (b) Core assignment of OWF-2
(c) Core assignment of OWF-3 (d) Core assignment of OWF-4
Figure D.3: Core assignment of the 4 small time step boxes representing 4 OWFs
After assigning the cores for the small time step blocks, the processor assignment for subsystem 2 is as illustrated in
Figure D.4. The ’Core Assignment’ tab is available by right-clicking the small time block and choosing "Edit" and then
"Parameters" as shown in Figure D.3. Setting the ’Am’ parameter to ’No’ for all the small time blocks causes all the
available cores to be full and leaving no room for a processor to allocate control signals. Hence these cores should be
manually assigned, and proper allocation has to be done.
Figure D.4: Processor assignment chart for subsystem 2
D.6. Tline module configuration

The parameters are entered in the Tline popup menu, and the file is compiled and saved in a ".clo" format.
The cable parameters are referenced through the external file previously created using the cable module. The
".clo" file must be added first using the ’Dnm1’ option, which is obtained by double-clicking on the calculation box
(Figure 4.8). The cable constants are of type Bergeron as chosen in the ’cntyp’ parameter in Figure D.1(a).
Figure D.5: Configuring Tline model in RSCAD
D.7. Representation of symmetrical monopole configuration in RSCAD
(a) DC source-1 connected to the receiving end of HVDC cable-1 (b) DC source-2 connected to the receiving end of HVDC cable-2
Figure D.6: Onshore converter stations representation using DC sources in RSCAD

Bibliography
[1] UNFCCC, “Adoption of the Paris agreement. COP,” 25th session Paris, vol. 30, 2015.
[2] “Vision – Northseawindpowerhub,” 2020. [Online]. Available: https://northseawindpowerhub.eu/vision/
[3] “TenneT develops first 2GW offshore grid connection with suppliers,” Feb. 2020. [Online]. Available:
https://www.tennet.eu/news/detail/tennet-develops-first-2gw-offshore-grid-connection-with-suppliers/
[4] “The first Hub-and-Spoke energy island – Northseawindpowerhub,” 2020. [Online]. Available: https:
//northseawindpowerhub.eu/the-first-hub-and-spoke-energy-island/
[5] G. Denis, T. Prevost, M.-S. Debry, F. Xavier, X. Guillaud, and A. Menze, “The Migrate project: the challenges of
operating a transmission grid with only inverter-based generation. A grid-forming control improvement with
transient current-limiting control,” IET Renewable Power Generation, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 523–529, Apr. 2018.
[Online]. Available: https://digital-library.theiet.org/content/journals/10.1049/iet-rpg.2017.0369
[6] Ecofys, “Translate COP21: 2045 outlook and implications for offshore wind in the North Seas,” Technical Report,
2017.
[7] “HVDC Connection of Offshore Wind Power Plants,” CIGRE Working Group B4.55, Technical Brochure 619, 2015.
[8] J. Peralta, H. Saad, S. Dennetière, J. Mahseredjian, and S. Nguefeu, “Detailed and Averaged Models for a 401-level
MMC-HVDC system,” IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 1501–1508, 2012.
[9] E. Telaretti, G. Graditi, M. Ippolito, and G. Zizzo, “Economic feasibility of stationary electrochemical storages
for electric bill management applications: The Italian scenario,” Energy Policy, vol. 94, pp. 126–137, Jul. 2016.
[Online]. Available: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0301421516301707
[10] Abdelwahed, Mohamed Abdelaziz and El-Saadany, Ehab F, “Power Sharing Control Strategy of Multiterminal
VSC-HVDC Transmission Systems Utilizing Adaptive Voltage Droop,” IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy,
vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 605–615, 2016.
[11] DNV.GL, “66 kV Systems for Offshore Wind Farms,” Technical Brochure, 2015.
[12] M. Mohseni and S. M. Islam, “Review of international grid codes for wind power integration: Diversity,
technology and a case for global standard,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 16, no. 6, pp.
3876–3890, Aug. 2012. [Online]. Available: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1364032112002225
[13] K. Sharifabadi, L. Harnefors, H.-P. Nee, S. Norrga, and R. Teodorescu, Design, Control, and Application of Modular
Multilevel Converters for HVDC Transmission Systems. John Wiley & Sons, 2016.
[14] P. Lozada Ayala, “Dynamic System Performance Analysis of a Novel Grid Connection Topology for Offshore Wind
Farms Using MMC-HVDC Transmission,” 2018. [Online]. Available: https://repository.tudelft.nl/islandora/
object/uuid%3Abfd0ac94-fc5b-46e4-a049-742c5249138a
[15] B. Weise, A. Korai, and A. Constantin, “Comparison of Selected Grid-Forming Converter Control Strategies for Use
in Power Electronic Dominated Power Systems,” in Proceedings of the 18th Wind Integration Workshop, Dublin,
Ireland, 2019, pp. 16–18.
[16] U. Markovic, Z. Chu, P. Aristidou, and G. Hug, “LQR-Based Adaptive Virtual Synchronous Machine for Power
Systems with High Inverter Penetration,” IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 1501–1512,
2018.
[17] D. Duckwitz, F. Welck, and C. Glöckler, “Operational Behavior of the Virtual Synchronous Machine,” Fachtagung
Netzregelung und Systemführung, 2017.
[18] L. Lu and N. A. Cutululis, “Virtual synchronous machine control for wind turbines: a review,” Journal of Physics:
Conference Series, vol. 1356, p. 012028, Oct. 2019. [Online]. Available: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/
1742-6596/1356/1/012028
97
98 Bibliography
[19] A. E. M. Bouzid, P. Sicard, A. Yamane, and J.-N. Paquin, “Simulation of droop control strategy for parallel inverters
in autonomous ac microgrids,” in 2016 8th International Conference on Modelling, Identification and Control
(ICMIC). IEEE, 2016, pp. 701–706.
[20] M. Yu, A. J. Roscoe, C. D. Booth, A. Dysko, R. Ierna, J. Zhu, and H. Urdal, “Use of an inertia-less Virtual Syn-
chronous Machine within future power networks with high penetrations of converters,” in 2016 Power Systems
Computation Conference (PSCC). IEEE, 2016, pp. 1–7.
[21] A. W. Korai, “Dynamic Performance of Electrical Power Systems with High Penetration of Power Electronic
Converters: Analysis and New Control Methods for Mitigation of Instability Threats and Restoration,” 2019.
[Online]. Available: https://duepublico2.uni-due.de/receive/duepublico_mods_00048074
[22] I. Erlich, A. Korai, T. Neumann, M. Koochack Zadeh, S. Vogt, C. Buchhagen, C. Rauscher, A. Menze, and
J. Jung, “New Control of Wind Turbines Ensuring Stable and Secure Operation Following Islanding of Wind
Farms,” IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 1263–1271, Sep. 2017. [Online]. Available:
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7990199/
[23] D. Duckwitz, “Derivation of Requirements and Comparison of Inertia Emulation Methods for Converter-
based Power PlantsPower System Inertia,” Ph.D. dissertation, Universität Kassel, 2019. [Online]. Available:
https://kobra.uni-kassel.de/handle/123456789/11261
[24] X. Liu and A. Lindemann, “Control of VSC-HVDC Connected Offshore Windfarms for Providing Synthetic Iner-
tia,” IEEE Journal of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power Electronics, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 1407–1417, 2017.
[25] S. Sethi, “Real-Time implementation for Gird Forming Control of Type-4 Wind Turbine to mitigate voltage and
frequency instabilities in high renewable penetration.” Master’s thesis, NTNU, 2019.
[26] J. F. Manwell, J. G. McGowan, and A. L. Rogers, Wind Energy Explained: Theory, Design and Application. John
Wiley & Sons, 2010.
[27] V. Yaramasu, B. Wu, P. C. Sen, S. Kouro, and M. Narimani, “High-power wind energy conversion systems:
State-of-the-art and emerging technologies,” Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 103, no. 5, pp. 740–788, May 2015.
[Online]. Available: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7109820/
[28] M. Ali, Wind energy systems: Solutions for power quality and stabilization. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2012.
[29] T. Sebastian and G. Slemon, “Transient modeling and performance of variable-speed permanent-magnet
motors,” IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 101–106, Jan. 1989. [Online]. Available:
[30] RTDS Technologies, “RSCAD Modules,” 2020. [Online]. Available: https://knowledge.rtds.com/hc/en-us/

articles/360037537653
[31] “Appendix A: Voltage Source Converter Topologies,” in Offshore Wind Energy Generation. John Wiley &
Sons, Ltd, 2014, pp. 223–269, _eprint: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/9781118701638.app1.
[Online]. Available: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781118701638.app1
[32] M. Ndreko, “Offshore wind power plants with VSC-HVDC transmission: Grid code compliance optimization and
the effect on high voltage ac transmission system,” Ph.D. dissertation, Delft University of Technology, 2017.
[33] N. P. W. Strachan and D. Jovcic, “Stability of a Variable-Speed Permanent Magnet Wind Generator With Weak
AC Grids,” IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 2779–2788, Oct. 2010. [Online]. Available:
[34] “Variable-Speed Wind Energy Systems with Synchronous Generators,” in Power Conversion and Control of Wind
Energy Systems. Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Sep. 2011, pp. 275–316. [Online]. Available:
http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/9781118029008.ch9
[35] “ABB review : Special report 60 years of HVDC,” ABB, Geneva, Switzerland, Corporate Technical Journal ISSN:
1013-3119, 2014.
[36] “VSC Transmission,” CIGRE Working Group B4.37, Technical Brochure 269, 2005.
[37] O. Peake, “The History of High Voltage Direct Current Transmission,” Australian Journal of Multi-Disciplinary
Engineering, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 47–55, Jan. 2010. [Online]. Available: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.
1080/14488388.2010.11464824
99 Bibliography
[38] I. Erlich and A. Korai, “Description, Modelling and Simulation of a Benchmark System for Converter
Dominated Grids (Part I),” 2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.digsilent.de/en/faq-reader-powerfactory/
do-you-have-an-example-of-a-fault-tolerant-power-system-with-98-share-of-renewables.html
[39] RTDS Technologies, “Simulator Hardware,” 2020. [Online]. Available: https://knowledge.rtds.com/hc/en-us/

articles/360037038514-Hardware-in-the-loop-Testing-for-Microgrids
[40] “The MIGRATE Project, AN EU-FUNDED PROJECT UNDER THE FRAMEWORK OF EUROPEAN UNION’S
HORIZON 2020,” 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.h2020-migrate.eu/
[41] R. N. Beres, X. Wang, M. Liserre, F. Blaabjerg, and C. L. Bak, “A Review of Passive Power Filters for Three-Phase
Grid-Connected Voltage-Source Converters,” IEEE Journal of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power Electronics,
vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 54–69, Mar. 2016. [Online]. Available: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7350094/
[42] D. P. Kothari and I. Nagrath, Modern power system analysis. Tata McGraw-Hill Education, 2003.
[43] “Guide for the Development of Models for HVDC Converters in a HVDC grid,” CIGRE Working Group B4.57,
Technical Brochure, 2014.
[44] PowerFactory, “User manual, 2019.” [Online]. Available: http://79.101.33.142/DIgSILENT%20PowerFactory%

202019%20User%20Manual/UserManual_2019_en.pdf
[45] RTDS Technologies, “Novacor,” 2020. [Online]. Available: https://knowledge.rtds.com/hc/en-us/articles/

360034290474
[46] ABB, “HVDC technology for offshore wind is maturing,” 2018. [Online]. Available: https://new.abb.com/news/
detail/8270/hvdc-technology-for-offshore-wind-is-maturing
[47] V. Lescale, P. Holmberg, R. Ottersten, and Y. Hafner, “Parallelling offshore wind farms HVDC ties on offshore side,”
Proceedings of CIGRE 2012, (2012).
[48] T. K. Vrana, Y. Yang, D. Jovcic, S. Dennetière, J. Jardini, and H. Saad, “The CIGRE B4 DC grid test system,” Electra,
vol. 270, no. 1, pp. 10–19, 2013.
[49] “World’s Most Powerful Offshore Wind Turbine: Haliade-X 12 MW | GE Renewable Energy,” 2020. [Online].
Available: https://www.ge.com/renewableenergy/wind-energy/offshore-wind/haliade-x-offshore-turbine
[50] RTDS Technologies, “PB5 Card,” 2020. [Online]. Available: http://knowledge.rtds.com/hc/en-us/articles/

360034285894
[51] R. Ryndzionek and Sienkiewicz, “Evolution of the HVDC Link Connecting Offshore Wind Farms to
Onshore Power Systems,” Energies, vol. 13, no. 8, p. 1914, Apr. 2020. [Online]. Available: https:
//www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/8/1914
[52] RTDS Technologies, “MMC Modeling,” 2020. [Online]. Available: http://knowledge.rtds.com/hc/en-us/articles/

360039628773
[53] H. A. Saad, “MODÉLISATION ET SIMULATION D’UNE LIAISON HVDC DE TYPE VSC-MMC,” Ph.D. dissertation,
École Polytechnique de Montréal, 2015.

Master Thesis Saran Ganesh

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Master Thesis Saran Ganesh

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Master Thesis Saran Ganesh

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Saran Ganesh

Development of a Generic Model for Real-time

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

at the Delft University of Technology,

Supervisor: Dr. ir. J.L. (Jose) Rueda Torres

An electronic version of this thesis is available at http://repository.tudelft.nl/.

To the Class of 2020..

List of Figures vii

3.6.4 HVAC Cables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

C.3 Steps for operation of the model in Runtime module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

DVC Direct Voltage Control

EMT Electro-Magnetic Transient

FSC Full Scale Converter

GSC Grid Side Converter

HPF High Pass Filter

HVAC High Voltage Alternating Current

HVDC High Voltage Direct Current

IGBT Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistors

LSC Line Side Converter

MMC Modular Multi-level Converter

MPPT Maximum Power Point Tracking

MSC Machine Side Converter

NPC Neutral Point Clamped

OWF Offshore Wind Farm

PCC Point of Common Coupling

PLL Phase Locked Loop

PMSG Permanent Magnet Synchronous Generator

PWM Pulse Width Modulation

RES Renewable Energy Sources

RTDS Real Time Digital Simulator

VDAPR Voltage Dependent Active Power Reduction

VSC Voltage Source Converter

WECS Wind Energy Conversion Systems

1.1. Background and Motivation

Figure 1.1: Installed wind capacity in the North Sea in GW [2]

Figure 1.2: PE converter-based generation connection to the AC network [5]

Figure 1.3: Synchronous machine connection to the AC network [5]

1.2. Literature Review

1.3. Objectives and Research Questions

1.4. Thesis Contribution

1.5. Thesis Outline

A figurative representation of the thesis workflow is presented in Figure 1.4.

DVC in 66 kV HVAC Network

4 Development of 2 GW Digital Twin Model

Analysis of 2 GW Digital Twin Model

6 Conclusions and Future Work

Figure 1.4: Work flow of thesis

2.1. Wind Energy Conversion Systems (WECS)

Wind Blade HVDC Power Tower

Figure 2.1: Schematic of offshore wind power transmission

2.2. Power from Wind Energy

Figure 2.2: Characteristics of C p -λ for various pitch angle [28]

2.3. Wind Turbine Generator

Figure 2.3: Type 3 WG configuration [28]

Figure 2.4: Type-4 WG configuration [28]

2.3.1. Permanent Magnet Synchronous Generator (PMSG)

Figure 2.5: Cross section of a PMSG [29]

2.3.2. Voltage Source Converter (VSC)

Figure 2.6: Two-level VSC [31]

Figure 2.7: Three-level VSC or NPC Converter [31]