Sulla 2011

You might also like

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 9

Electric Power Systems Research 81 (2011) 1610–1618

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Electric Power Systems Research


journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/epsr

Symmetrical and unsymmetrical short-circuit current of squirrel-cage and


doubly-fed induction generators夽
F. Sulla ∗ , J. Svensson, O. Samuelsson
IEA, Lund University, PO Box 118, 221 00 Lund, Sweden

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: A general method for calculating the short-circuit currents of a squirrel-cage (SCIG) and a doubly fed
Received 19 October 2010 induction generator (DFIG) using crowbar protection is presented. The method results in an approxi-
Received in revised form 17 February 2011 mate analytic expression that allows calculating the SCIG and DFIG short-circuit currents as a function
Accepted 9 March 2011
of time for symmetrical and unsymmetrical faults in the power system. The presented theoretical anal-
Available online 8 April 2011
ysis highlights some important differences between the short-circuit behavior of the SCIG and the DFIG
with high crowbar resistance. A comparison with time simulations of the same model shows that the
Keywords:
proposed approach leads to results whose accuracy is comparable to those obtained through dynamic
Short circuit currents
Wind power generation
simulations and may be sufficient to replace the use of simulations in many contexts, e.g. calculation of
Doubly fed induction generators (DFIG) maximum current, calculation of its DC and AC components and short-circuit calculations for protection
Protection relay settings.
© 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction crowbar resistance may be around 20 times the value of the gener-
ator rotor resistance [7]. Thus the behavior of a DFIG during a fault
The squirrel-cage induction generator (SCIG) has been widely is similar to that of a SCIG with a high rotor resistance. Many papers
installed in the past for small-scale hydro generation and wind have been published on the short-circuit current contribution of a
power generation. Today, doubly fed induction generators (DFIG) DFIG but they usually confine their analysis to a solid symmetri-
along with induction or permanent magnet synchronous gener- cal three-phase short-circuit at the generator terminals [8–13]. An
ators equipped with full scale converters represent the standard analysis of the DFIG behavior under unsymmetrical voltage dips is
solution for wind power plant installations. Induction generators performed in [14].
have a different short-circuit behavior when compared to syn- In this paper a general method for calculating the short-circuit
chronous generators and prediction of this behavior is an important current of a DFIG with crowbar resistance is proposed. For pedagog-
issue in power system planning, transient stability analysis and ical purpose, the short-circuit current of a SCIG is calculated first.
protection setting studies. The method deals with both symmetrical and unsymmetrical faults
The short-circuit behavior of a SCIG has been analyzed in various and voltage dips of any magnitude at the generator terminals. It will
text books and in many papers. A closed formula for the short- be shown that the simplifications done to derive the short-circuit
circuit current calculation is given in the case of a bolted three- formula of a SCIG neglect some dynamics that become important
phase short-circuit at the generator terminals in [1–4]. The analysis when the rotor resistance is high, as is the case for a DFIG with crow-
of the short-circuit behavior of a SCIG during unsymmetrical faults bar protection. Therefore applying a short-circuit formula derived
is usually performed by means of digital simulations [5,6]. for a SCIG to predict the short-circuit current of a DFIG leads to
In the last decade, there has been much attention in predicting inaccurate results.
the short-circuit behavior of the DFIG, because of its extensive use The proposed method permits to predict the short-circuit cur-
in wind power. A commonly employed solution to protect a DFIG rents as a function of time in the three phases of a SCIG or a DFIG
during a fault in the power system is to connect the rotor wind- by using an analytic expression, eliminating the need for dynamic
ings to an extra resistance, called crowbar resistance, and to block simulations. The analytic expression can also be used to calculate
the switching of its rotor side converter (RSC) [7]. The value of the the maximum phase currents for different faults, their DC and AC
components, or it may be used to get an envelope of the currents
if only their RMS value is needed. The results obtained with the
夽 This work was supported by Elforsk AB, Elektra project 36078. proposed method are compared to those obtained through simula-
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +46 46 2220133; fax: +46 46 142114. tions using the well-established classic linear fifth order model of
E-mail address: Francesco.Sulla@iea.lth.se (F. Sulla). the induction machine [2]. A main assumption made in this work

0378-7796/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.epsr.2011.03.016
F. Sulla et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 81 (2011) 1610–1618 1611

is to neglect saturation of the induction machine reactances. This  s = Lsis + Lmir


is certainly an approximation and will impact on the accuracy of  r = Lmis + Lr ir (6)
the proposed method when compared to measurements on a real
induction machine. Saturation of leakage reactances may increase where Ls = Lsl + Lm and Lr = Lrl + Lm .
the short-circuit current of an induction generator while main-
flux saturation has little impact on the short-circuit current [15]. 3. SCIG short-circuit current
A simple method to take into account the saturation of the leakage
reactances is also exposed in [15] and could possibly be applied to The short-circuit current will be calculated under the following
the method proposed in this paper. However, this is not done here assumptions: (a) before the occurrence of the fault balanced con-
since it is not within the primary scope of this work to investigate ditions are present in the network; (b) the generator is assumed
the effects of saturation on the short-circuit current of an induction to run at no-load and to be lossless, which results in zero slip; (c)
generator. the generator speed does not change after the short-circuit; (d)
In Section 2 a brief review of the general modeling for an induc- the generator is connected to a strong network, so that the post-
tion generator is presented. The short-circuit current for a SCIG fault voltage is not influenced by its short-circuit current; (e) the
is calculated in Section 3. In Section 4 the calculated short-circuit generator is linear, i.e. it does not saturate. Linearity of the induc-
current for a SCIG is compared with results from simulations. In Sec- tion generator allows to use the superposition principle to find out
tion 5 the short-circuit current calculation method is extended to a the total short-circuit current as sum of different components. The
DFIG with high crowbar resistance. Simulated and calculated short- above assumptions mean that the short-circuit current calculated
circuit currents of a DFIG are compared in Section 6. Key conclusions with the method exposed in this paper is an approximation of the
are summarized in Section 7. short-circuit current delivered by a real machine.
The short-circuit current of a SCIG is made up of three com-
2. Induction generator modeling ponents. The first component is due to the post-fault steady state
voltage at the generator terminals which may be symmetrical as
The induction generator dynamic equations are here presented well as unsymmetrical. We will refer to this component as the
in a stator reference frame using space-vector notation, as done in forced short-circuit current component. The second component is
[2]. A three-phase voltage system may be expressed, with obvious due to the natural stator flux and the third component is due to
meaning of the notation, as in (1). the natural rotor flux. The natural stator and rotor fluxes arise just
after the fault to assure the continuity of the stator and rotor fluxes
va (t) = V̂ cos(ωt + ϕ) before and after fault inception, according to the constant flux link-
vb (t) = V̂ cos(ωt + ϕ − (2/3)) (1) age theorem [16]. In a SCIG, these components decay exponentially
vc (t) = V̂ cos(ωt + ϕ − (4/3)) with time constants that depend upon the generator parameters
[1]. The terms “forced” and “natural” are used, as done in [14].
The corresponding space-vector is calculated in (2). Notice that
Once the post-fault transient stator and rotor fluxes are known,
the amplitude of the defined voltage space-vector is equal to the
the short-circuit current can be calculated by solving (6) with
peak amplitude of the instantaneous voltage:
respect to the stator current.
2
vs (t) = (va (t) + avb (t) + a2 vc (t)) = V̂ ejϕ ejωt = Vejωt (2)
3 3.1. Post-fault stator flux
where a = ej(2/3) , a2 = e−j(2/3) , V = V̂ ejϕ .
The space-vectors are here indicated by an overlined arrow. The The stator flux is made up of a forced component and of a
phasor V is defined in such a way that its magnitude is equal to the natural component. In turn, the forced component is due to the
peak-value of the voltage. The first part of (2) is valid also if the contribution of the positive and the negative sequences of the post-
three-phase quantities do not form a balanced system. In this case, fault voltage. Therefore the stator flux after fault occurrence can be
the space vector becomes [2]: expressed as in (7).
 s (t) =    sn (t)
vs (t) = V̂1 ejϕ1 ejωt + V̂2 e−jϕ2 e−jωt = V1 ejωt + V2 e−jωt (3) sf,1 (t) + sf,2 (t) + (7)

Similar expressions can be obtained for currents and fluxes. The The pre-fault flux and the post-fault positive and negative
zero-sequence is not considered here, since commonly an induction sequence forced flux components in a stator reference frame can
generator is not grounded and therefore no zero-sequence current be derived from (5) neglecting the stator resistance:
can flow.
 s,pre = vpre = V̂pre e
jϕpre ejωs t Vpre jωs t
If no zero-sequence component is present, the instantaneous = e (8)
values of the currents in the three phases can be obtained from the jωs jωs jωs
corresponding space-vector as [2]: v1 V̂1 ejϕ1 ejωs t V1 jωs t
 = = = e (9)
sf,1
ia (t) = Re(is ) jωs jωs jωs
ib (t) = Re(a2is ) (4) v2 V̂2 e−jϕ2 e−jωs t V2 −jωs t
 = = =
ic (t) = Re(ais ) sf,2
−jωs −jωs −jωs
e (10)

Using the introduced space-vector notation and using a sta- Negative sequence quantities rotate with a frequency of −ωs in
tionary reference frame, the equations describing the electrical a stator reference frame.
dynamics of a squirrel-cage induction machine are given by (5) and Next, the natural component of the stator flux must be found.
(6) [2]. In general for any kind of fault, because of the constant flux linkage
theorem, the natural flux just after the fault is given by the dif-
ds
vs = Rsis + ference between the stator forced flux components immediately
dt
(5) before and after the fault, as in (11). The natural stator flux is actu-
dr ally not constant because of the presence of the stator resistance,
0 = Rr ir + − jωr  r
dt but decays with a time constant given by (12), [1,2,4], which is valid
1612 F. Sulla et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 81 (2011) 1610–1618

Finally, by inserting the negative sequence stator and rotor cur-


rents into (6) leads to (18).
 = Lmis,2 + Lr ir,2 ≈ 0 (18)
rf,2

This result indicates that for a SCIG the negative sequence forced
rotor flux can be neglected.
The natural rotor flux is the flux trapped into the rotor circuit
at fault occurrence. Its magnitude and phase immediately after the
fault are found as in (19).
 rn (0) = rn =  r,pre (0− ) − (  rf,1 (0+ ) +  rf,2 (0+ ))
V V1

pre
Fig. 1. Positive and negative sequence equivalent circuits of a SCIG. These are also = ks − (19)
applicable to a DFIG with rotor windings connected to a crowbar resistance, if Rr is jωs jωs
replaced by Rr + Rcr .
This flux is fixed with the rotor circuit, i.e. it rotates with the rotor
speed in a stator reference frame [8]. In a rotor reference frame, it
under the assumption that the rotor resistance is small, as will be is a DC component decaying exponentially with time constant Tr ,
shown later. By combining (8)–(11) and taking into account that defined in (20) [8]. The expressions for the inductances in (12) and
the natural stator flux decays with time constant Ts , the total stator (20) can easily be derived by considering the induction generator
flux after fault occurrence is given by (13). equivalent circuit in Fig. 1 or using (5) and (6). See also [2,8].

 sn (0) = =  s,pre (0− ) − (  sf,1 (0+ ) +  sf,2 (0+ )) Lr 2 /L )


Lr − (Lm s
sn Tr = = (20)
Vpre
V V2
 Rr Rr
1
= − + (11) Summarizing what has been found in this section, the transient
jωs jωs −jωs
rotor flux for a SCIG in a stator reference frame is given as
V 
L 2 /L )
Ls − (Lm r
 r (t) = ks V1 ejωs t + ks pre

V1
ejωr t e−(t/Tr ) (21)
Ts = s = (12) jωs jωs jωs
Rs Rs

V V  3.3. Short-circuit current of a SCIG


 s (t) = V1 ejωs t + V2 e−jωs t + pre

1
+
V2
e −(t/Ts )
jωs −jωs jωs jωs −jωs The post-fault stator and rotor fluxes are given by (13) and (21).
(13) Solving (6), the relation between fluxes and stator current is given
by (22), [2,8], where kr = Lm /Lr .

3.2. Post-fault rotor flux s Lm  r s r


is = − =  − kr  (22)
Ls Lr Ls Ls Ls
The post-fault rotor flux is the sum of three components:
Substitution of (13) and (21) into (22) gives the final general
 r (t) =    rn (t)
rf,1 (t) + rf,2 (t) + (14) approximate expression for the short-circuit current of a SCIG,
reported in (23).
With the assumption of zero slip, the positive sequence rotor  
current is zero, see Fig. 1, and the pre- and post-fault positive is = V1 V2 Vpre − (V1 − V2 )
(1 − ks kr )ejωs t + e−jωs t + e−(t/Ts )
sequence rotor fluxes are given in (15) [8], where ks = Lm /Ls . jωs Ls

−jωs Ls jωs Ls
V 
 r,pre = Lm  s,pre = ks  s,pre = ks Vpre ejωs t pre− V1
− ks kr ejωr t e−(t/Tr ) (23)
Ls jωs (15) jωs Ls
 Lm   V1 jωs t
rf,1 = sf,1 = ks sf,1 = ks e
Ls jωs
This equation is valid under any symmetrical or unsymmetrical
The negative sequence forced rotor flux can be found by first fault in the network. If the network and step-up transformer induc-
expressing the negative sequence stator and rotor currents. With tances cannot be neglected they need to be added in series with the
reference to Fig. 1, the stator negative sequence current is given generator stator leakage inductance in all the previous equations.
by (16), where both the stator and rotor resistances have been To get the currents in the three phases of the induction generator
neglected. it suffices now to apply (4).

i = v2 ≈ v2
(16) 4. SCIG simulation results
s,2
Z2 −jωs (Lsl + (Lm Lrl /Lr ))

The minus sign in front of the reactances is due to the fact that a The network of Fig. 2 has been modeled in MATLAB SimPower-
negative sequence voltage induces a flux whose direction of rota- Systems.
tion is opposite to that of a positive sequence induced flux. This is The induction generator is considered linear, without satura-
also the reason why the rotor resistance is divided by the negative tion, and it is connected to the network directly without a step-up
sequence slip 2-s in Fig. 1 [17]. The negative sequence rotor current transformer. The network voltage is 575 V and the p.u. generator
can be found by a simple current division between the rotor and parameters are reported in Table 1. To comply with the assumption
the magnetizing branch: made above of constant rotor speed during the fault, a high inertia
constant has been defined for the generator. The generator initial
i ≈ − −jωs Lm i = − Lm i slip is close to zero and the generator remains unloaded during the
r,2 s,2 s,2 (17)
−jωs Lm − jωs Lrl Lr fault. A time-step of 5 ␮s has been used in all simulations.
F. Sulla et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 81 (2011) 1610–1618 1613

Fig. 2. Network diagram used for the simulations. By varying the parameter p, the
voltage dip magnitude at the generator terminals during the fault can be changed.

Table 1
Induction generator parameters.

Nominal voltage, Vn 575 V

Nominal power, P 1.5 MW


Stator leakage inductance, Lsl 0.1766 pu Fig. 4. Simulated (dashed) and calculated (solid) SCIG short-circuit current for a
Stator resistance, Rs 0.0073 pu phase-phase (b and c) fault, with parameter p = 0.85. SCIG initially unloaded. Pre-
Rotor leakage inductance, Lrl 0.1610 pu fault voltage angle ϕ = 45◦ .
Rotor resistance, Rr 0.0052 pu
Magnetizing inductance, Lm 3 pu
applicable during the period between crowbar insertion and RSC
re-starting. However, for unsymmetrical faults, the RSC will most
The network reactance Xth is assumed equal to one hundredth of likely not be re-started during the fault since the cause of high rotor
the generator base impedance and the ratio Xth /Rth is assumed equal current is the negative sequence network voltage which does not
to 10. Different kinds of faults have been simulated with different decay during the fault period. For the most severe unsymmetri-
values for the parameter p. cal faults, the proposed analysis is therefore applicable during the
Simulation results show that the proposed method for calculat- whole duration of the fault.
ing the short-circuit currents gives accurate prediction of all phase The method proposed above for calculating the short-circuit
currents under both symmetrical and unsymmetrical faults in the current of a SCIG cannot be directly applied for a wind turbine
network. Figs. 3 and 4 show the calculated and simulated short- driven DFIG, because of mainly two reasons.
circuit currents in the case of a three-phase and of a phase-b to The first reason is that the value of the crowbar resistance may
phase-c short-circuit. The calculated and simulated currents are be up to 20 times the value of the generator rotor resistance [7]
practically indistinguishable. and the total resulting rotor resistance can no longer be neglected.
In [8] it has been proposed a method for calculating the maximum
5. DFIG short-circuit current short-circuit current of a DFIG with high crowbar resistance dur-
ing a symmetrical three-phase fault at the generator terminals.
A DFIG using crowbar protection is considered in this section. The authors of the mentioned reference proposed to include the
The analysis assumes that the crowbar remains connected during effects of the crowbar resistance to calculate the maximum short-
the whole duration of the fault, 250 ms in this study. This may not be circuit current of a DFIG in two steps. First, the rotor transient time
the case for three-phase faults since the RSC would be re-started as constant is modified according to
soon as the rotor current decays below a certain predefined value. Lr Lr
During symmetrical faults, the analysis here presented is therefore Tr,DFIG = = (24)
Rr + Rcr Rr,tot
The second step to account for the presence of the high crowbar
resistance proposed in [8] is to include it in the impedance limiting
the short-circuit current. Thus in (23), one should use Rr,tot + jωs Ls
instead of jωs Ls , where Rr,tot indicates the sum of the rotor and
crowbar resistance. However, this still proved to be a too rough
approximation when comparing with the simulations, leading to
inaccurate calculations of the DFIG short-circuit current as a func-
tion of time.
The second reason, that makes the SCIG short-circuit current cal-
culation method inaccurate when applied to a wind turbine driven
DFIG, is that a wind turbine driven DFIG may operate in a slip range
between −0.3 and +0.3. The forced stator and rotor fluxes, which
for the SCIG have been calculated based on the assumption of zero
slip, for a DFIG should be calculated based on its initial rotor speed
and delivered active and reactive power.

5.1. Influence of high Rcr on natural stator flux

Fig. 3. Simulated (dashed) and calculated (solid) SCIG short-circuit current for a
Let us start with the stator transient time constant, (12). In other
three-phase-phase fault, with parameter p = 1. SCIG initially unloaded. Pre-fault papers dealing with the DFIG short-circuit current [8,12], the DFIG
voltage angle ϕ = 90◦ . stator transient time constant is still assumed to be equal to the one
1614 F. Sulla et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 81 (2011) 1610–1618

in (12). However, for a DFIG with high total rotor resistance, the component iac and the external flux linkage with the coil. The total
stator transient time constant needs to be expressed in a slightly flux linkage with the coil will therefore be given by (30).
different way. The natural stator flux generates a voltage in the rotor jωt
(t) = M me + Liac (t) + Lidc (t)
whose frequency and magnitude in a rotor reference frame are pro-
 jωL

portional to the rotor speed. A current will flow in the rotor, having
= 1− M m ejωt + ccoil 0 e−t/(L/R) (30)
the same frequency of the induced voltage and opposite to the rotor R + jωL
speed. The stator and rotor current due to the natural stator flux
have the form Ie−jωr t e−t/Ts,DFIG when expressed in a rotor reference Without the coil resistance, the AC current component in the
frame. Ts,DFIG is the stator transient time constant for a DFIG and is coil would completely counteract the inducing flux, and only a DC
defined below. By deriving this expression and neglecting the term flux would be present in the coil. This ideal situation is close to
proportional to 1/Ts,DFIG , which for a typical induction machine is what happens in the short-circuited rotor of a SCIG during a tran-
much smaller than ωr , the voltage drop over an inductance L can be sient, with the natural rotor flux being almost a pure DC component
expressed as jωr LIe−jωr t e−t/Ts,DFIG . A simple current division there- decaying with the rotor transient time constant. However, when
fore still holds between the rotor and magnetizing branch and the the coil resistance in not negligible, the induced AC current com-
rotor natural current in a rotor reference frame is: ponent does not completely counteract the inducing flux. This is
−jωr Lm  due to the fact that the AC current component magnitude decreases
irn = − isn (25) and that it acquires a phase difference with the inducing flux. As
Rr,tot − jωr Lr
a result the total coil flux will be composed of an AC component
 can be regarded as
Substituting in (6), leads to (26). The term Lsn and a DC component. The coefficient ccoil tells how big the DC flux
a complex operator that gives the relation between the natural sta- component is in comparison to the total coil flux is. This situation is
tor flux and current. A similar concept, named operator inductivity, analogous to what happens in the rotor circuit of a DFIG with high
is introduced in [1] when dealing with the short-circuit behavior of crowbar resistance. In this case the natural rotor flux can no longer
a synchronous generator. be considered a pure decaying DC component.
  To find out the value of the constant ccoil , we can refer to the
−jωr Lm2
 sn = Ls − isn = L isn (26) constant flux linkage theorem, which says that the coil flux cannot
sn
Rr,tot − jωr Lr change instantaneously. Therefore it must hold that:
 is a modification of the inductance L in (12) and coincides
Lsn
 jωL

s
1− M m + ccoil 0 = (dcoil + ccoil ) 0 = 0
with it if the total rotor resistance is negligible. Therefore the stator R+ jωL M
transient time constant of a DFIG with high rotor resistance is given jωL m (31)
dcoil = 1−
in (27). This means that the natural stator flux is no longer fixed R + jωL 0
with respect to the stator, but it is actually slowly rotating because ccoil = 1 − dcoil
of the presence of a high rotor resistance. These results can now be translated to the case of a DFIG with
 2 /(R
 high crowbar resistance to find out the natural rotor flux as a func-

Lsn Ls − (−jωr Lm r,tot − jωr Lr ))
Ts,DFIG = = (27) tion of time. In this case, the external inducing flux is the natural
Rs Rs
stator flux and the initial coil flux is the post-fault natural rotor flux
rn . Neglecting its slow rotation as found in (27), the natural sta-
5.2. Influence of high Rcr on natural rotor flux
tor flux induces in the rotor circuit a voltage whose frequency is
proportional to the opposite of the electrical rotor speed. The total
Let us denote the natural rotor flux immediately after the fault
equivalent inductance seen from the rotor circuit is given by the
as rn. In the SCIG case, this flux in a rotor reference frame is a
series connection of the rotor leakage inductance and the parallel
DC component decaying with the rotor transient time constant.
connection between the magnetizing and the stator leakage induc-
This fact is no longer true for a DFIG with high rotor resistance. To
tance. By analogy with the coil example, we can conclude that the
explain why this no longer holds, we may find it useful to refer to
coefficients c and d for the DFIG are given as in (32), where “//”
a simpler analogous situation. Consider a short-circuited coil with
denotes the parallel operator. It has been assumed that all the nat-
certain resistance R and inductance L. At a certain point, an alter-
ural stator flux links the rotor, i.e. the corresponding to M in (28)
nating flux m (t) with frequency ω is induced in the coil. The coil
has been assumed equal to 1.
may have an initial flux, 0 .  
This situation is analogous to that of a DFIG with a non negligible −jωr (Lrl //(Lm + Lsl )) sn
rotor resistance under a sudden transient. The coil corresponds to d= 1−
Rr,tot − jωr (Lrl //(Lm + Lsl )) rn (32)
the DFIG closed rotor circuit, while the external flux m (t) would c =1−d
correspond to the natural stator flux of the DFIG.
The external flux will induce a voltage in the coil and this will The coefficients c and d depend on the ratio between the initial
result in an alternating current component, opposing the inducing natural stator and rotor fluxes and therefore vary for different fault
flux: conditions. Similar results can be derived by solving the DFIG dif-
ferential equations in the case of a three-phase short-circuit at the
vm (t) −jωM m ejωt generator terminals. The AC part of the natural rotor flux in a rotor
iac (t) = = (28)
R + jωL R + jωL reference frame, which depends on the inducing natural stator flux,
M tells how much of the external flux links the coil. A DC current will decay with the same time constant Ts,DFIG as the natural sta-
component depending on the initial flux of the coil and decaying tor flux. The DC natural rotor flux component, fixed with the rotor
exponentially will also flow in the coil: circuit, will decay with the rotor transient time constant Tr,DFIG .
We can now express the natural rotor flux as a function of time
0 −t/(L/R) in a stator reference frame:
idc (t) = ccoil e (29)
L
 rn (t) = (de−t/Ts,DFIG + ce−t/Tr,DFIG ejωr t ) rn (33)
The meaning of the constant ccoil is that only a fraction of the
initial flux 0 is due to the DC current component idc in the coil. The initial natural rotor flux rn for a DFIG with high crowbar
The remaining part of the initial flux 0 is due to the AC current resistance will be calculated later in this section. The natural sta-
F. Sulla et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 81 (2011) 1610–1618 1615

tor flux is not significantly affected by the rotor resistance value, assumption of zero rotor current, as done for example in (15), (37)
therefore we can continue to use the value calculated for a SCIG in and (38). With reference to the positive sequence equivalent circuit
(11) also in the case of a DFIG with a high crowbar resistance. of the DFIG in Fig. 1, the positive sequence forced component of the
post-fault rotor flux can be calculated using (6) as in (40), where Z1
5.3. Influence of high Rcr on negative sequence fluxes is the DFIG positive sequence impedance.

The rotor negative sequence current can be obtained with a sim- i = v1 , i = − jωs Lm i
s,1 r,1 s,1
Z1 (Rr,tot /s) + jωs Lr
ple current division between the magnetizing and the rotor circuit  
jωs Lm Lr
branches, as done for a SCIG: / 0 :  rf,1 =
s= Lm − i =
s,1 rf,1 e
jωs t (40)
(Rr,tot /s) + jωs Lr
i −jωs Lm i = − −jωs Lm v2
=− (34) v1
r,2
Rr,tot / (2 − s) − jωs Lr
s,2
Rr,tot / (2 − s) − jωs Lr Z2 s = 0 :  rf,1 = ks  sf,1 = ks = rf,1 ejωs t
jωs
where Z2 is the total negative sequence impedance of the gener-
The pre-fault rotor flux must also be re-calculated taking into
ator, which can be calculated from the equivalent circuit in Fig. 1.
account the initial conditions of the DFIG. If the initial apparent
By substituting into (6), the rotor negative sequence flux can be
power, fed into the grid according to generator convention, and
expressed as in (35).
rotor slip of the DFIG are known, the pre-fault rotor flux is calcu-
 
jωs Lm Lr lated, using (6), as:
 = Lmis,2 + Lr ir,2 = Lm + i
rf,2 s,2
Rr,tot / (2 − s) − jωs Lr ∗  
 s,pre ≈ vpre , ir,pre = s,pre − Ls is,pre
Spre
is,pre = − ,
v2 
3vpre jωs Lm
= Lr2is,2 = Lr2 (35) 2 S∗
Lr Ls − Lm Lr vpre
(41)
Z2  r,pre =
pre
+ = r,pre ejωs t
Lm 3vpre Lm jωs
Lr2 gives the relation between the rotor negative sequence flux where “*” denotes the complex conjugate.
and the stator negative sequence current and it is equal to zero, as The negative sequence forced rotor flux component is
expected, if the rotor resistance is zero. unchanged with respect to what we found previously in (35). There-
The negative sequence stator flux is still given by (10). However, fore, the total rotor flux equation for a wind-driven DFIG is finally
proceeding as for the rotor flux, it can also be expressed as in (36). given by (42), which is a modification of (39), where rf,1 depends
  on the initial slip according to (40).

2
jωs Lm i = L i ≈ Z2  v2
sf,2 = Ls + s,2 s2 s,2 is,2 =
Rr,tot / (2 − s) − jωs Lr −jωs −jωs  r (t) = V2 −jωs t
rf,1 e
jωs t
+ Lr2 e + (de−t/Ts,DFIG + ce−t/Tr,DFIG ejωr t )
Z2
(36)
  V2

The forced rotor flux must now include the part due to the neg- × r,pre − rf,1 + Lr2 (42)
Z2
ative sequence network voltage and it is given as:

 V1 jωs t V2 −jωs t No modifications are needed for the stator flux, which is still
rf = ks e + Lr2 e (37)
jωs Z2 given by (13) with the substitution of Ts with Ts,DFIG . The stator
Therefore the natural rotor flux, given by the difference of the and rotor fluxes can now be substituted into (22), leading to the
pre- and post-fault forced fluxes at t = 0, becomes final expression, (43), for the short-circuit current of a wind turbine

Vs,pre
 V1 V2
 driven DFIG using crowbar resistance as a protection means during
 rn (0) = rn = ks − ks + Lr2 (38) network faults. (43) can be easily implemented in a programming
jωs jωs Z2 language or a spreadsheet program and used to get an approximate
prediction for the DFIG short-circuit currents.
  L V  
i (t) = V1 rf,1 s2 Lr2 2 −jωs t V1 rf,1 V2 −jωs t
− kr  ejωs t + − kr  e = − kr  ejωs t + e
sf
jωs Ls Ls Ls Ls Z2 jωs Ls Ls Z2
  
isn (t) = Vpre − (V1 − V2 ) e−t/Ts,DFIG − kr (de−t/Ts,DFIG + ce−t/Tr,DFIG ejωr t ) r,pre − + Lr2
V2 (43)
jωs Ls Ls rf,1
Z2
is (t) = i (t) + isn (t)
sf

Taking into account what has been said for the natural rotor 6. DFIG simulation results
flux with (33), the total rotor transient flux is finally calculated as
in (39). 6.1. DFIG directly connected to the network

 r (t) = ks V1 ejωs t + L V2 e−jωs t + (de−t/Ts,DFIG + ce−t/Tr,DFIG ejωr t )


r2 A wind power plant model using a DFIG and available in the
jωs Z2
 V  V  standard library of SimPowerSystems (MATLAB R2009b, SimPow-
pre 1 V2 erSystems Version 5.2) has been connected directly to the network
× ks − ks + Lr2 (39)
jωs jωs Z2 as shown in Fig. 2, without a step-up transformer. A detailed
description of the DFIG control can be found in [18]. The parameters
for the DFIG are according to Table 1. Also from the same refer-
5.4. Wind turbine driven DFIG ence, the inertia constants for the wind turbine and the generator
have now been assumed equal to 4.32 s and 0.62 s respectively. This
The initial slip of a wind turbine driven DFIG may be signif- model has been modified by including a crowbar protection. The
icantly different than zero, thus the initial and post-fault forced crowbar resistance is considered to be 20 times the DFIG rotor resis-
components of the rotor flux can no longer be calculated under the tance and is connected to the rotor circuit through a six-pulse diode
1616 F. Sulla et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 81 (2011) 1610–1618

Fig. 7. Simulated with instantaneous crowbar insertion (solid) and calculated


(dotted) DFIG short-circuit current for a three-phase fault, with parameter p = 1.
Fig. 5. Simulated with instantaneous (solid, +), 2.5 ms delayed (solid, ♦), 5 ms Pre-fault voltage angle ϕ = 90◦ . Initial apparent power S = 0.45 − j0.18 pu, rotor speed
delayed (solid, ) crowbar insertion and calculated (dotted) DFIG short-circuit cur- ωr = 0.7 pu.
rent for a three-phase fault, with parameter p = 1. The area encompassed in the
rectangle in the first ms after the fault is magnified on the right part of the figure.
Pre-fault voltage angle ϕ = 90◦ . Initial apparent power S = 0.8 − j0.25 pu, rotor speed
time had little significance on the fault current. The non-linearity
ωr = 1.25 pu.
due to the connection of the crowbar resistance through a diode
bridge are also noticeable in the simulation results especially in
bridge and a switch. After crowbar insertion, the RSC is blocked.
the case of the phase-phase fault, see Fig. 6. However, they do
The crowbar remains inserted during the whole duration of the
not cause significant deviations from the predictions obtained with
simulated period, i.e. 250 ms. Typical times for RSC blocking may
(43). Also, notice that the realistic value of the wind turbine inertia
be lower than a few ms [7,19]. The crowbar insertion time in the
constant causes a change in rotor speed after the fault, leading to a
simulations has been varied, to investigate its influence on the
small difference between the short-circuit currents simulated and
short-circuit current of the DFIG.
calculated with (43), which assumes a fixed rotor speed. This dif-
In Figs. 5–7, the results from different short-circuits in the net-
ference is most visible in the simulated case of a phase-phase fault,
work are reported. The simulated short-circuit current delivered
Fig. 6.
by the DFIG is compared to the one predicted with (43). It can be
In Fig. 7 it is reported a three-phase fault, same as in Fig. 5, but
noticed that the proposed method is capable of accurately repro-
with the DFIG operating at sub-synchronous speed, i.e. at lower ini-
ducing the wind turbine driven DFIG short-circuit current, if the
tial loading. It is noted that the DFIG operating at sub-synchronous
crowbar is ideally inserted at the moment of fault inception. Errors
speed delivers less peak current.
increase with increasing crowbar insertion delay time. These errors
were especially appreciable for three-phase short-circuits with
crowbar insertion time delay higher than about 5 ms. With lower 6.2. Influence of MV line and step-up transformer
delays or during unsymmetrical faults, the crowbar insertion delay
(43) has been obtained under the assumption that the resistance
of the generator stator windings is negligible. However, the resis-
tance of the step-up transformer and MV line connecting the DFIG
to the network may not be negligible. Their resistance and reac-
tances should be added in series with the DFIG stator impedance
when calculating the short-circuit current. To investigate how the
resistive part of the transformer and MV line impedances influ-
ences the accuracy of (43), simulations have been performed by
adding a step-up transformer and a MV line to the network in
Fig. 2. A Dyn 33/0.575 kV step-up transformer, rated 1.25 times
the DFIG rating, with X = 0.06 pu and R = 0.01 pu has been consid-
ered. The voltage angle shift due to the transformer Dy connection
must be considered in the calculations. The line is a 50 mm2 cable
with X = 0.14 /km and R = 0.4 /km. Data for the transformer and
the line parameters are from [20]. Results for three-phase faults
at the end of the line for two different line lengths, 10 and 45 km,
are reported in Fig. 8. The resistive part of the MV line appreciably
decreases the accuracy of (43) only when the line length becomes
higher than 45 km, corresponding to a total resistance equal to 10
times the DFIG stator resistance. Therefore, in most practical sit-
Fig. 6. Simulated with instantaneous (solid, +), 2.5 ms delayed (solid, ♦), 5 ms uations, the resistive part of the MV line should not decrease the
delayed (solid, ) crowbar insertion and calculated (dotted) DFIG short-circuit cur- accuracy of the method. The transformer resistance does not cause
rent for a phase-phase (b and c) fault, with parameter p = 0.8. The area encompassed
any appreciable loss of accuracy. The resistive character of the MV
by the rectangle in the first ms after the fault is magnified on the right part of the
figure. Pre-fault voltage angle ϕ = 0◦ . Initial apparent power S = 0.8 − j0.25 pu, rotor line impedance contributes to faster decay of the DC short-circuit
speed ωr = 1.25 pu. current component.
F. Sulla et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 81 (2011) 1610–1618 1617

Fig. 8. Simulated (solid) and calculated (dotted) DFIG phase currents at a three-
phase short-circuit with parameter p = 1 considering the step-up transformer and
a MV line with two different length values. Pre-fault voltage angle ϕ = 90◦ . Initial
apparent power S = 0.6 − j0.18 pu, rotor speed ωr = 1 pu. Fig. 10. Simulated DFIG and GSC (solid) and calculated DFIG (dotted) phase cur-
rents at a three-phase short-circuit with parameter p = 1 considering the step-up
transformer and a MV line of 10 km. Pre-fault voltage angle ϕ = 90◦ . Initial apparent
A case of an earth-fault at the end of the MV line is also reported
power S = 0.6 − j0.18 pu, rotor speed ωr = 1 pu.
in Fig. 9, showing that (43) provides accurate results also for unsym-
metrical faults on the delta side of the transformer.
longer rotor transient time constant, which implies a slower decay
6.3. Influence of GSC and crowbar resistance of the AC stator current component. This is in agreement with what
has been shown in [13].
The total fault current delivered by a DFIG wind turbine is in Also, in the same reference it has been found that the stator
reality the sum of the DFIG fault current, which can be calculated natural flux decays at “near-dc”, meaning that it is actually slowly
according to (43), and the grid side converter (GSC) fault current. rotating while decaying. In [13] the “near-dc” frequency of a 7.5 kW
The GSC maximum current may be around one third of the DFIG DFIG was found to be 0.46 Hz without crowbar resistance and
rated current. Depending on how fast the GSC control is, it may take 1.76 Hz when a crowbar resistance is connected. In this paper, the
some cycles before it delivers maximum current. A three-phase angular rotation of the stator natural flux is given by the imagi-
fault is reported in Fig. 10 including also the contribution of the nary part of 1/Ts,DFIG . For the considered machine, with a crowbar
GSC. As seen, the GSC contributes to a steady-state current com- resistance of 20 times the DFIG rotor resistance, the stator natu-
ponent, but does not affect much the DFIG current delivered under ral flux rotates with 0.3 Hz. This frequency drops to 0.1 Hz with a
the first cycles after the short-circuit. crowbar resistance of 5 times the DFIG rotor resistance. The dif-
Finally, the impact of the crowbar resistance value is here inves- ference in “near-dc” frequencies in this paper and in [13] is due
tigated by changing its value from 20, as in all previous cases, to to different machine parameters. If the method proposed in this
5 times the DFIG rotor resistance. A three-phase fault as in Fig. 5 paper is applied to the machine considered in [13] without crow-
has been considered and the calculated and simulated results are bar resistance, a frequency of 0.46 Hz is found. Choosing a crowbar
shown in Fig. 11. When comparing with Fig. 5, one can see that a
decreased crowbar resistance results in a higher peak current and a

Fig. 9. Simulated (solid) and calculated (dotted) DFIG short-circuit current for a Fig. 11. Simulated (solid) and calculated DFIG (dotted) phase currents at a three-
phase-ground (a − g) fault at the end of a 15 km MV line, with parameter p = 0.99. phase short-circuit with parameter p = 1. Pre-fault voltage angle ϕ = 90◦ . Initial
Pre-fault voltage angle ϕ = 90◦ . Initial apparent power S = 0.45 − j0.18 pu, rotor speed apparent power S = 0.8 − j0.25 pu, rotor speed ωr = 1.25 pu. The crowbar resistance
ωr = 0.7 pu. is chosen to be equal to 5 times the DFIG rotor resistance.
1618 F. Sulla et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 81 (2011) 1610–1618

resistance that results in the same rotor transient time constant as References
in [13], results in a frequency of 1.67 Hz. These results match very
well with what has been found in the mentioned reference. [1] P.K. Kovacs, Transient Phenomena in Electrical Machines, Elsevier, Amsterdam,
1984.
[2] P. Vas, Electrical Machines and Drives A Space-Vector Theory Approach, Claren-
7. Conclusions don Press, Oxford, 1992.
[3] M.S. Sarma, Electrical Machines Stead-State Theory and Dynamic Performance,
West Publishing Company, St. Paul, 1985.
An approximate method for predicting the symmetrical and [4] N. Jenkins, R. Allan, P. Crossley, D. Kirschen, G. Strbac, Embedded Generation,
unsymmetrical short-circuit current of a SCIG and a DFIG has been The Institution of Electrical Engineers, London, 2000.
proposed. The proposed method gives a good prediction of the [5] X.S. Chen, A.J. Flechsig, C.W. Pang, L.M. Zhuang, Digital modeling of an induction
generator, in: International Conference on Advances in Power System Control,
short-circuit behavior of a wind power plant using a DFIG with Operation and Management, APSCOM-91, Hong Kong, 1991.
crowbar protection, both for symmetrical and unsymmetrical faults [6] N. Samaan, R. Zavadil, J.C. Smith, J. Conto, Modeling of Wind Power Plants for
in the network. A linear model of the induction machine has been Short Circuit Analysis in the Transmission Network, IEEE/PES Transmission and
Distribution Conf. and Exposition, 2008.
considered and saturation has been neglected. [7] V. Akhmatov, Induction Generators for Wind Power, Multi-Science Publishing
The accuracy of the results obtained with the proposed method Company Ltd., 2005.
may be sufficient to replace the use of simulations in many contexts, [8] J. Morren, S.W.H. de Haan, Short-circuit current of wind turbines with Doubly
fed induction generator, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 22 (2007) 174–180.
e.g. calculation of maximum current, calculation of its DC and AC
[9] M. Rahimi, M. Parniani, Grid-fault ride-through analysis and control of wind
components and short-circuit calculations for protection relays set- turbines with doubly fed induction generators, Electr. Power Syst. Res. 80
tings. The impedances of step-up transformer and MV line should (2010) 184–196.
be added in series with the DFIG stator impedance. Even though [10] M.S. Vicatos, J.A. Tegopoulos, Transient state analysis of a doubly-fed induction
generator under three phase short circuit, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 6 (1991)
these impedances may have a non-negligible resistive part, it has 62–68.
been found that in practical situations this fact does not affect the [11] H.L. Zhou, G. Yang, D.Y. Li, Short circuit current analysis of DFIG wind turbines
accuracy of the method. Moreover, the method is capable of accu- with crowbar protection, in: International Conference on Electrical Machines
and Systems, 2009.
rately reproducing the DFIG fault current even for unsymmetrical [12] C. Yang, Y. Gan-gui, J. Da-wei, M. Gang, Z. Zhi-qiang, W. Xiao-bo, Li Qiang,
faults on the MV side of the step-up transformer. DFIG-based wind farm equivalent model for power system short circuit current
A factor that may limit the accuracy of the proposed method is calculation, in: International Conference on Sustainable Power Generation and
Supply, 2009.
the delay with which the crowbar resistance is inserted relative to [13] G. Pannell, D.J. Atkinson, B. Zahawi, Analytical study of grid-fault response of
the fault inception instant. Delays below 5 ms result in almost no wind turbine Doubly Fed Induction Generator, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 25
loss of accuracy. (2010) 1081–1091.
[14] J. Lopez, E. Gubia, P. Sanchis, X. Roboam, L. Marroyo, Wind turbines based on
Doubly Fed Induction Generator under asymmetrical voltage dips, IEEE Trans.
Energy Convers. 23 (2008) 321–330.
Appendix A. List of symbols [15] H.M. Jabr, N.C. Kar, Effects of main and leakage flux saturation on the transient
performances of doubly-fed wind driven induction generator, Electr. Power
Syst. Res. 77 (2007) 1019–1027.
 flux space-vector [16] E.W. Kimbark, Power System Stability: Synchronous Machines, Dover Publica-
v voltage space-vector tions Inc., New York, 1968.
i current space-vector
[17] P.M. Anderson, Analysis of Faulted Power Systems, The Institute of Electrical
and Electronics Engineers Inc., New York, 1995.
Lsl , Lrl stator and rotor leakage inductances [18] N.W. Miller, W.W. Price, J.J. Sanchez-Gasca, Dynamic modeling of GE 1.5 and
Lm magnetizing inductance 3.6 wind turbine-generators, Version 3.0, Technical Report, GE Power Systems
Energy Consulting, Schenectady NY, 2003.
Rs , Rr , Rcr stator, rotor and crowbar resistance [19] G. Pannell, D. Atkinson, R. Kemsley, L. Holdsworth, P. Taylor, O. Moja, DFIG
s,r subscripts for stator and rotor control performance under fault conditions for offshore wind applications, in:
f,n subscripts for forced and natural components 18th International Conference and Exhibition on Electricity Distribution, Turin,
2005.
1,2 subscripts for positive and negative sequence [20] R. Roeper, Short-circuit Currents in Three-phase Systems, Siemens Aktienge-
s rotor slip sellschaft, John Wiley and Sons Ltd., Berlin and München, 1985.
ωs , ωr stator and rotor angular velocity

You might also like