Analysis of Safe Integration Criteria for Wind
Power with Induction Generators Based Wind
Turbines
Romeu Reginato Marcos G. Zanchettin
Center for Engineering and Applied Sciences
Paraná Western State University - UNIOESTE - Brazil
Email: romeu@unioeste.br
Abstract—This paper considers the problem of grid integration
of wind power. The integration level, i.e., the amount of wind
power that can be connected to a given point of the grid while
complying with certain interconnection requirements is deter-
mined for 6 different cases of induction generator based wind
turbines, both with fixed and variable speed. Acceptable terminal
voltage variation, power transfer margin, and acceptable range
for the internal voltage angle are taken as criteria for the analysis
of the attainable integration level, which is provided in terms of
the point-of-common-connection parameters, namely the short-
circuit power and the X/R ratio. Results show the profile of
the limits imposed by each individual criterion on the wind
power integration level, as a function of the X/R ratio. The
set of integration levels satisfying all criteria simultaneously is
characterized as a safe integration region. The 6 cases considered
are compared regarding the attainable integration level.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Wind energy integration into the power system is continu-
ously growing. Penetration levels of 20% to 30% have been
reached in certain regions in Europe [1] and this continuous
growth has demanded for advancements in several directions
in order to guarantee a safe interconnection of wind energy in
the network.
In order to allow increasing penetration levels, control
strategies beyond the maximum power tracking policy (MPT)
[2] have been investigated, including active power regulation
[3], reactive power and/or voltage control [4], [5] besides other
approaches [6]. In early technology, mainly fixed-speed wind
turbines equipped with squirrel cage induction generators were
employed and still are in use in many medium size wind farms.
More recent large wind farms are equipped with variable-speed
wind conversion systems, where the doubly-feed induction
generator has found a significant application.
For the connection of wind farms to the network, trans-
mission and distribution network companies specify particular
technical regulations according to their local and/or regional
network characteristics, wind penetration levels and company
policies. A comparison of several European regulations can be
found in [7], [8]. The interconnection analysis underling those
regulations and the exact influence they have on the amount
of wind power that can be connected to a given point of the
grid still needs further investigation.
In this paper, three criteria are considered in the problem
of wind farm grid interconnection and its influence on the
978-1-4244-4241-6/09/$25.00 ©2009 IEEE
Marcos Tragueta
integration level is analyzed. The criteria considered are the
acceptable terminal voltage variation, the power transfer mar-
gin, and the acceptable internal voltage angle. The integration
level that can be attained while satisfying either one or all of
such criteria are derived for two technologies: squirrel-cage
induction generator based fixed speed wind turbines (SQIG-
FSWT) and doubly-fed induction generator based variable
speed wind turbines (DFIG-VSWT). The results also provide a
characterization of the boundaries of the safe integration region
[9], and clarifies the factors limiting wind power integration in
terms of the point-of-common-connection (PCC) parameters,
namely its short-circuit power (Ssc ) and the X/R ratio of the
network impedance.
The paper is organized as follows. Section II introduces
modeling and systems considerations which allow to develop
theoretical properties of different operating and control poli-
cies for the wind turbines in section III. Analysis of the
integration level based on numerical results are given in section
IV and finally, section V provides concluding remarks.
II. M ODELING AND S YSTEM C ONSIDERATIONS
Figure 1 shows a simplified representation of the connection
of a wind farm to the grid, here represented as a single DFIG-
based wind turbine (DFIG-VSWT). The network viewed from
the PCC is represented by its static equivalent (infinite bus
with a series impedance) and represented by its short-circuit
power (Ssc ) and X/R ratio. Let the nominal power of the
wind farm be represented by Pn and define the ratio
Pn
ρ= (1)
Ssc
as the wind power integration level.
The integration level of wind power is limited by several
aspects. On one hand, there are aspects of the wind conversion
system, including the technology and the control policies
employed. On the other hand, there are aspects of the power
system to which the wind farm is connect to, like the line
length and capacity, for instance.
In general, interconnection regulations impose constraints
on the control and operation of wind conversion system so
that certain technical, safety and quality requirements for the
system are kept within given tolerances[7], [8]. The goal in
 the grid. The converter power factor can be controlled to
produce/absorb reactive power in an amount limited to the
converter rating. Considering this equilibrium condition, the
system of Figure 1 can be represented by the equivalent circuit
model shown in Figure 2.

Fig. 1. Wind farm connection to the network - simplified view.

this paper is to study and analyze how such requirements

influence and limit the integration of wind power at a given
grid interconnection point. The analysis is carried out for wind
farms equipped with induction generators based wind turbines,
both fixed-speed (SQIG-FSWT) and variable-speed (DFIG-
VSWT). In both cases, different operating and control policies
are considered. For the present analysis, the requirements Fig. 2. DFIG equivalent circuit representation.
considered are relative to the static behavior of the system.
The DFIG can be represented by its 3rd order simplified
model given the synchronous reference frame by [10], [11] The grid side converter is represented by a controlled
−1  
 ωs Xm current source, with magnitude and angle determined by the
Ėd = Ed − (X − X )Iqs + sωs Eq − Vqr (2) rotor active power and converter power factor, respectively.
To Xr
−1   ωs Xm With balanced active power flow through both converters and
Ėq = Eq + (X − X  )Ids − sωs ed + Vdr (3)
To Xr assuming a unitary power factor for the grid side converter,
1 the current flowing from the converter to the network is given
ω̇r = (Tmg − (Eq Iq + Ed Id ) − F ωr ) (4)
2H
by
and Pr
I˜g =  θs (9)
Vds = Ed − Rs Ids + X  Iqs (5) Vs
Vqs = Eq − Rs Iqs − X  Ids (6) where Pr is the rotor active power and Vs  θs is the terminal
voltage.
where To = Xr /ωs Rr , s = 1 − ωr , X = Xs , X  = σXs , The rotor side converter is represented by an ideal voltage
2
Xm
σ = 1 − Xs X r
; Xs , Xr and Xm are the stator, rotor, and source connected to the rotor. The rotor voltage results from
magnetizing reactance, respectively; Rs , Rr are the stator and the specific control policy adopted. If the rotor voltage is set to
rotor resistance; H is the inertia constant; F is the damping; zero the equivalent circuit representation of Figure 2 reduces
Tmg is the mechanical torque; Vdr , Vqr are rotor voltage to the case of a SQIG.
components; Vds , Vqs , Ids , Iqs are stator voltage and current
III. O PERATING AND C ONTROL P OLICIES
components, respectively.
Letting Ẽ = Ed + jEq to represent the internal voltage and For the desired analysis of wind power integration it is
similar notation for the stator and rotor voltages and currents, necessary to define the operating and control policies that are
the following equation can be derived from (2)-(6) employed for the wind farm.
In the case of SQIG-FSWT the stator windings are con-
Ṽs = Ẽ − (Rs + jX  )I˜s (7) nected directly to the grid delivering active power according
sXr to the input mechanical power captured by the wind turbine
Ẽ = Ṽr + Rr I˜r (8)
Xm rotor. Excitation is taken from the grid and, as such, often fixed
The rotor circuit of the DFIG is connected to the grid capacitor banks are employed for power factor compensation.
through a back-to-back converter allowing the exchange of In general, no other controls are employed besides pitch or
power between the rotor and the grid and, at the same time, stall based speed limitation.
the control of the active and reactive power delivered by the DFIG-VSWT allows full control of the most important
stator. In the model (7)-(8), the rotor side converter is used variables and so, many control policies have been investigated
to impose rotor voltages/currents which determine the internal and adopted: maximum power tracking policy (MPT) [2], ac-
voltage Ẽ which, in its turn, determine stator generated active tive power regulation [3], reactive power/power factor/terminal
and reactive power. voltage control [4], [5], [8].
The grid side converter keeps a constant DC voltage in For the sake of the analysis presented in this paper, the
the converters by regulating the active power exchange with following cases are considered:
 1) SQIG-FSWT (i) without capacitor bank; with fixed The maximum power transfer to the network Pk can be
capacitor bank for (ii) no load and (iii) nominal load found from (11) as the limiting value for which a real solution
power factor compensation. for Vsr exists. This value is computed as
2) DFIG-VSWT with (i) reactive power regulation; (ii)   
power factor regulation; (iii) terminal voltage regula- Ssc β 2 4Q 1 2Q
Pk = +β 1+ + (12)
tion. 2 X/R β Pcc X/R Pcc
For each of these cases, the wind power integration is
studied to determine the maximum integration level that can where 
be attained while satisfying a given criteria set. The following 1 + (X/R)2
β=
3 criteria are considered in this paper, both individually and X/R
in combination:
and the following fact has been used
1) Voltage variation. A range of allowable terminal voltage 
2
variation, given in terms of the inequality Vmin ≤ Vs ≤ V∞ = Ssc R 1 + (X/R)2
Vmax , where Vmin and Vmax are given constants.
2) Power transfer margin. The maximum power transfer- C. DFIG-VSWT with Power Factor Regulation
able to the network (Pk ) at the PCC is sufficiently larger Another operating control polity for DFIG-VSWT is the
than the nominal power of the wind farm Pn , as given power factor regulation. This case can be treated as a special
by the relation Pk ≥ (1+MP ) Pn , where MP is a given case of reactive power regulation in which the reactive power
margin. is varied according to the generated active power. Let F P be
3) Internal voltage angle. The value of the internal voltage the a given power factor, then the generator reactive power
angle, δ, should lie within the range 0 ≤ δ ≤ δmax , has to satisfy
where δmax is a given constant. √
Since the active power generated by the wind farm depends 1 − FP2
Q= P =fP (13)
upon the available wind speed and since the wind speed FP
may vary substantially, it is necessary to consider a wide The generator can still be considered as a PQ bus, similarly
operating range for the generated active power. In this paper, as the reactive power regulation case. The terminal voltage can
an individual or multiple criteria is considered satisfied if be determined from (10)-(11) considering the reactive power
it holds for all possible operating conditions in which the given by (13). The maximum power transfer, in this case, can
generated active power lies in the range of 0.1 to 1.05 per be computed as
unit of the nominal active power. The range allows for a 5%  

overload and neglects the very low generated active power. Ssc (1 + f X/R + βF ) 1 + (X/R)2
Pk = (14)
2 (f − X/R)2
A. Squirrel-cage Induction Generators
In the case of a SQIG-FSWT the generated active power where

depends upon the mechanical torque provided by the wind βF = (1 + f X/R)2 + (f − X/R)2
turbine rotor. For a given mechanical torque, the generator
reactive power and terminal voltage result from the network D. DFIG-VSWT with Voltage Regulation
an machine characteristics. The equilibrium condition can be
An interesting control and operating policy for DFIG-
calculated by solving the equivalent circuit of Figure 2 with
VSWT is terminal voltage regulation, which allows the wind
Ṽr = 0. A closed form solution for this problem is given in
farm to better contribute to system support. In this operating
[12] and is employed in this paper.
policy, active power is determined by the available wind speed
B. DFIG-VSWT with Reactive Power Regulation and control settings whereas the terminal voltage is determined
by control settings. Thus, the generator bus bar reduces to a
When the DFIG-VSWT is operated with reactive power PV bus. The generated active power, in this case, satisfies the
regulation, the generator bus bar can be viewed as a PQ relation
bus. Active power is determined by the available wind speed 
and control settings whereas reactive power is determined Vs 1 Vs X
P = Ssc − cos(θs ) + sin(θs ) (15)
by control settings. Let S = P + jQ be the complex V∞ βX/R V∞ R
power transfered from the generator to the network, then The terminal voltage angle θs varies according to the
S = Ṽs I˜s∗ = (Ṽs Ṽs∗ − Ṽs V∞ )/(R−jX). Solving this equation, generated active power, while Vs and V∞ are regulated, thus
the stator voltage Ṽs = Vsr + jVsi is found to satisfy the considered constant. The corresponding angle for a given
relation active power is given by
Vsi V∞ − P X + QR = 0 (10) Vs P V∞
2 θs = −θz + cos−1 cos(θz ) − (16)
Vsr − V∞ Vsr + Vsi2 − (P R + QX) = 0 (11) V∞ Ssc Vs
where θz = tan−1 (X/R). Taking the derivative of P with Figure 3 shows the limits of the integration level ρ for
respect to θs , in (15), and equating to zero, the maximum the 3 cases of a SQIG-FSWT. These results consider a 5%
power transfer to the network can be deduced as tolerance for voltage variation, i.e., the terminal voltage has to
  satisfy 0.95p.u. ≤ Vt ≤ 1.05p.u. for all operating conditions
Vs Vs 1 ranging from 0.1 p.u. to 1.05 p.u. of active power. Each curve
Pk = Ssc  +1 (17)
V∞ V∞ 1 + (X/R)2 in the figure shows the maximum integration level that can
which occurs for θs = π − θz . be attained while satisfying the acceptable terminal voltage
In the voltage regulation case it is important to consider the variation.
generator limits to deliver/absorb reactive power. This limits Voltage variation

are due to apparent power limits of the generator and current

0.6

limits of the converters. If terminal voltage is kept constant, it

can be demonstrated that the apparent power is monotone and 0.5

increases with the generated active power. So, the worst case
for the generator limits occurs at maximal generated active 0.4

power.

ρ
IV. A NALYSIS OF THE I NTEGRATION L EVEL 0.3

In the previous section, 6 different cases of induction

0.2
generator based wind farms were introduced: SQIG-FSWT
with 3 possible power factor compensation; and DFIG-VSWT
with 3 possible control policies: reactive power, power factor, 0.1

and terminal voltage regulation. Also, 3 criteria were stated 0 5 10 15

as measures of the quality of the interconnection of wind
farms to the grid. The goal in the present section is twofold:
to analyze the influence of the each of these criteria on
the integration level, in a general way, and to compare the
maximum integration level attainable for each of the 6 wind
farm cases introduced.
Due to space limitation, the numerical results are given
for specific operating conditions, which are representative
of actual cases. A wind farm with 10 generators of 2MW
is considered, whose equivalent model has the following
parameters: 690V , 50Hz, 4 poles, H = 3.5s, Xm = 3.95pu,
X/R
Fig. 3. Limits of the integration level for 0.95 ≤ Vs ≤ 1.05. SQIG-FSWT
case: SQ0 - solid; SQN - dashed; SQF - dotted.
Results considering the same tolerance for the terminal
voltage variation are given in Figure 4 for the DFIG-VSWT
case and the three control polices: reactive power regulation,
power factor regulation, and terminal voltage regulation.
1.1

Xs = Xr = 4.04pu, Rs = 0.00488pu, Rr = 0.0047pu. Base 1

values are: Vb = 690V and Pb = 20M W . The following 0.9

operating conditions are considered: 0.8

SQ0 - A SQIG-FSWT with no power factor compensation. 0.7

SQN - A SQIG-FSWT with no load power factor compensa-

ρ

0.6

tion. 0.5

SQF - A SQIG-FSWT with full load power factor compen- 0.4

sation. 0.3

DFQ - A DFIG-VSWT with reactive power regulation set to 0.2

Q = 0. 0.1

DFP - A DFIG-VSWT with power factor regulation set to 0 5

X/R
10 15

0.95 leading power factor.

DFV - A DFIG-VSWT with terminal voltage regulation set
to Vt = 1pu.
A. Terminal Voltage Variation
Acceptable terminal voltage variation at the PCC is a
common requirement for the interconnection of wind farms
in the network. In this section, an analysis of the influence of
this requirement on the integration level is developed.
A first point of interest is how the tolerance on voltage vari-
ation limits the integration level for each of the technologies
and operating/control policies discussed in section III.
Fig. 4. Limits of the integration level for 0.95 ≤ Vs ≤ 1.05. DFIG-VSWT
case: DFQ - solid; DFP - dashed; DFV - dotted.
Requiring the terminal voltage to be kept within a range of
acceptable variations imposes limits on the integration level
in a similar fashion for all cases, except for the voltage
regulation case. The limit of the integration level increases for
small values of X/R and decreases for large ones, attaining a
maximum value when X/R is in the range of 2-5, depending
on the technology and control policy adopted. For small values
of the X/R ratio the terminal voltage tends to increase and
the acceptable overvoltage limit Vmax limits the integration
level. For large X/R ratios, the inverse occurs, the terminal
voltage tends to decrease as the active power increases and
the integration level is limited by the acceptable undervoltage
Vmin . This fact is illustrated by the nose curves in Figure 5,
provided for the case of a DFIG-VSWT with reactive power
regulation (see solid line in Figure 4). The terminal voltage
is within the given tolerances for all possible active power
values when the integration level is bellow its limiting value
(dashed line). On the other hand, when the integration level
exceeds its limiting value, either the voltage increases beyond
the tolerance, if the X/R ratio is small (solid line), or drops
bellow its tolerated value, if the X/R ratio is large.
1.15
ratio. Thus, for X/R ratios in the range 1 to 5, the limit of the
integration level can be either smaller or larger for any of the
considered cases. A similar behavior can be observed for the
DFIG-VSWT with reactive power or power factor regulation.
In the illustrated case, the power factor is regulated at 0.95
lead, so a larger limit for the integration level is obtained
for low values of X/R. For large values of X/R, regulating
reactive power to 0 leads to larger limits. Voltage regulation
allows the largest integration level for large X/R ratios. On
the other hand, several values of the integration level are not
possible when X/R is small due to the limitation of reactive
power absorption of the machine.

1.1
B. Active Power Margin
1.05

The maximum power that can be transmitted into a network

1 is an important measure in voltage stability analysis[13]. Let
V

Pmax be the maximum active power that can be transfered

0.95 from the wind farm to the network, then the active power
margin defined by
0.9

0.85 Pmax − Pn
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
P
0.8 1 1.2
MP = (18)
Pmax
Fig. 5. PV curves for a DFIG-VSWT with reactive power regulation for
Q = 0: ρ = 0.3 and X/R = 1 (solid); ρ = 0.3 and X/R = 8 (dashed);
ρ = 0.5 and X/R = 8 (dotted)
can be taken as a voltage stability measure. The present
section analyzes how the integration level is limited by a given
The DFIG-VSWT with voltage regulation needs a special
active power margin taken as a requirement for the wind farm
consideration in this case, since the terminal voltage is regu-
interconnection.
lated. In Figure 4, the dotted line indicates the limiting values
of the integration level for which the generator is able to Figure 6 shows the limit imposed by a 30% active power
comply with voltage regulation, due to its limited capacity to margin on the integration level, for the SQIG-FSWT case.
deliver/absorb reactive power. In the case, the apparent power Figure 7 shows similar results for the DFIG-VSWT case,
is limited to 1.12 p.u., corresponding to a 0.9 power factor considering a 50% power margin.
(either lead or lag) at nominal active power. For small values
of the X/R ratio, the machine is not able to comply with
Power margin
voltage regulation since the reactive power absorption required 0.6

to deliver nominal active power to the network is too large. As

the integration level increases, the reactive power absorption 0.5

diminishes and voltage regulation becomes possible. For large

values of the X/R ratio, the machine has to deliver reactive 0.4

power to the network in order to keep the terminal voltage

regulated. The amount of reactive power, in this case, is not
ρ

0.3
large and voltage regulation can be attained up to very large
values of the integration level.
The different technologies and control policies have a
0.2

significant impact on the integration level complying with

an acceptable terminal voltage variation. Power factor com- 0.1

pensation through fixed capacitor banks enlarges the wind 0 5 10 15

X/R
power integrability for SQIG-FSWT when the X/R ratio is
large. Also, power factor compensation moves the peak of the Fig. 6. Limits of the integration level for for MP = 30%. SQIG-FSWT
integration level to the right, i.e., to larger values of the X/R case: SQ0 - solid; SQN - dashed; SQF - dotted.
 age is kept constant, the terminal voltage angle is considered
1.1
rather than the internal voltage one.
1

0.9 Power margin

0.6
0.8

0.7
0.5
ρ

0.6

0.5
0.4
0.4

0.3

ρ
0.3
0.2

0.1

0 5 10 15 0.2
X/R

Fig. 7. Limits of the integration level for MP = 50%. DFIG-VSWT case: 0.1
DFQ - solid; DFP - dashed; DFV - dotted.
0 5 10 15
X/R
The power margin imposes a similar profile on the limit
Fig. 8. Limits of the integration level for for δ ≤ 30o . SQIG-FSWT case:
of the integration level in all cases. For X/R ratios larger SQ0 - solid; SQN - dashed; SQF - dotted.
than 5, the maximum integration level is nearly constant. For
values lower than 5, the limit of the integration level grows
larger as X/R decreases to 0, with rates depending on each
case. This profile shows that the connection of wind farms to 1.1

the transmission system is more critical regarding the active 1

power margin than for distribution system, due to the larger 0.9

X/R ratio of transmission lines. 0.8

Comparing the SQIG-FSWT cases one can see that power 0.7

factor compensation increases the limit of the integration level

ρ

0.6

for all X/R ratios, in an amount of 10%−25%. The generator 0.5

power factor compensation allows for a larger power transfer 0.4
to the grid, which improves the integration level. 0.3
As for the DFIG-VSWT case, leading power factor regula-
0.2
tion leads to the worst case, while voltage regulation attains
0.1
the largest integration level (unless for very small values of 0 5 10 15

X/R). The standard unit power factor operation leads to a X/R

similar profile than the SQIG-FSWT case, but with a much
larger integration limit (notice that the power margin required
in the DFIG-VSWT case is larger than the SQIG-FSWT case).
Considering the power margin criterion, in general, the
DFIG-VSWT attains a much larger integration level than the
SQIG-FSWT. Moreover, it is seen that the generator reactive
power has a major effect on the integration level leading to best
results when it is varied to keep the terminal voltage constant.
C. Internal Voltage Angle
In synchronous generators, the load angle is directly related
to the active power delivered to the grid. Also, the difference
between the voltage angle at the sending and the receiving
ends of a line is closely related to the active power transfered
through it[13]. Motivated by this properties, in this section
a characterization of the generator internal voltage angle
influence on the integration level is provided.
Results for the SQIG-FSWT and DFIG-VSWT cases are
given in Figures 8 and 9, respectively, for a maximum ac-
ceptable internal voltage angle of 30o . In the case of a DFIG-
VSWT with voltage regulation (DFV), since the terminal volt-
Fig. 9. Limits of the integration level for δ ≤ 30o . DFIG-VSWT case: DFQ
- solid; DFP - dashed; DFV - dotted.
The integration level, in this case, presents a profile similar
to the one obtained with the active power margin criterion,
except for the voltage regulation case. In the voltage regulation
case (DFV), since the terminal voltage magnitude is kept
constant, only the terminal voltage angle can affect the active
power transfer to the grid. For low values of the X/R ratio,
the network resistive characteristic requires a large voltage
angle for such a transfer. This is the reason why the limit
of the integration level decreases as the X/R ratio decreases
in Figure 9 (dotted line), given that the voltage angle is limited
to 30o .
D. Safe Integration Region
The analysis presented so far has considered the effect of
a single criterion on the integration level for wind farms. A
given integration level may satisfy one criterion while may not
satisfy the others. Interconnection requirements usually specify
several criteria so as to comply with various technical and
safety desired properties for the system. So, in this section,
the important aspect of the effect of combined criteria on the
integration level is tackled.
Figure 10 shows the limit of the integration level imposed
by all 3 criteria for the DFIG-VSWT case with reactive
power regulation (DFQ). The region bellow all curves in the
plot can be taken as a safe integration region in the sense
that it contains all possible integration levels that satisfy all
interconnection requirements for a given range of X/R ratios.
One can realize, in this case, that the safe integration region
is limited by the terminal voltage variation, for low values of
the X/R ratio, and by the internal voltage angle, for medium
to large values of X/R. The active power margin has a little
effect in this case, but it would take the role of the internal
voltage angle in case the latter would be relaxed.
1.1
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
ρ
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 5
X/R
10 15
Fig. 10. Limits of the integration level for DFQ case, combining the 3
criteria: terminal voltage variation (solid); active power margin (dashed); and
internal voltage angle (dotted).
Figure 11 shows the same result for the DFIG-VSWT with
voltage regulation (DFV). The safe integration region is again
limited by the terminal voltage variation criterion for low
values of the X/R ratio (recall that, in this case, the solid
line indicates the limit of the integration level for which the
generator is able to regulate the terminal voltage with apparent
power within rated values). The terminal voltage angle dom-
inates in determining the safe integration region for all other
values of X/R ratio. Notice that, the voltage regulation case
is the only one that do not admit any integration level for very
small values of the X/R ratio. Even though these values of
X/R are quite unpractical, it is an interesting property to be
noticed.
1.1
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
ρ
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 5 10 15
X/R
Fig. 11. Limits of the integration level for DFV case, combining the 3
criteria: terminal voltage variation (solid); active power margin (dashed); and
internal voltage angle (dotted).
V. C ONCLUDING R EMARKS
This paper has presented a broad analysis of the effect of
interconnection requirements on the wind power integration
level at a given grid point. Six cases have been considered,
all consisting of wind turbines equipped with induction gen-
erators. Three criteria for interconnection have been analyzed:
allowable range of terminal voltage variation; minimum active
power margin; and allowable range of the internal voltage
angle.
All cases, but the DFIG-VSWT with voltage regulation,
present a similar profile for the limit of the integration level for
each of the three criteria considered. Active power margin and
internal voltage angle criteria produce a monotone profile for
the limit of the integration level, which is large for small X/R
values, decreases and approaches a constant value as X/R
grows large. The terminal voltage variation criterion leads to
a profile for the limit of the integration level which presents a
peak for X/R in the range 2−5, tends to zero for small values
of X/R and approaches a constant value for large values of
X/R.
The DFIG-VSWT with voltage regulation has a similar
profile only for the active power margin criterion. The internal
voltage angle imposes a low limit on the integration level
for small values of X/R, specially if the terminal voltage
is regulated to a value close to the infinite bus voltage. The
terminal voltage cannot be regulated to the desired value in
all situation due to the limited apparent power of the machine.
In order to transfer nominal active power to the grid, a very
large reactive power has to be absorbed by the machine if the
X/R ratio is small. So, it may not be possible to attain any
integration level with voltage regulation if the X/R ratio is
small, a fact that fortunately is not common in practice.
In general, requirements on terminal voltage variation have
a very strong impact on the limit of the integration level. The
other criteria, either internal voltage angle or active power
margin, tend to dominate only for medium values of the X/R
ratio (ranging from 2 to 5). Nonetheless, since many practical
systems have X/R ratios in this range, neglecting any criterion
may lead to wrong results and so should be avoided.
The analysis have shown that a large integration level can
in general be attained if the X/R ratio is in the range or
2−5, which is characteristic of distribution networks, whereas
smaller integration levels are attainable for X/R ratios larger
than 5, which is characteristic of transmission networks.
R EFERENCES
[1] L. Soder, L. Hofmann, A. Orths, H. Holttinen, Y. Wan, and A. Tuohy,
“Experience from wind integration in some high penetration areas,”
IEEE Trans. Energy Conversion, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 4–12, Mar 2007.
[2] J. Amenedo, S. Arnalte, and J. Burgos, “Automatic generation control
of a wind farm with variable speed wind turbines,” IEEE Trans. Energy
Conversion, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 279–284, June 2002.
[3] G. Tarnowski and R. Reginatto, “Adding active power regulation to wind
farms with variable speed inductions generators,” in IEEE PES Anual
Meeting, Tampa, FL, Dezembro 2007.
[4] M. Pálsson, T. Toftevaag, K. Uhlen, and J. Tande, “Control concepts
to enable increased wind power penetration,” in IEEE PES General
Meeting, Toronto, Canad, July 2003, pp. 1984–1990.
[5] P. Cartwright, L. Holdsworth, J. Ekanayake, and N. Jenkins, “Co-
ordinated voltage control strategy for a doubly-fed induction generator
(DFIG)-based wind farm,” IEE Proc. Gener. Transm. Distrib., vol. 151,
no. 4, pp. 495–502, July 2004.
[6] H. T. Le and S. Santoso, “Analysis of voltage stability and optimal
wind power penetration limits for a non-radial network with an energy
storage system,” in Power Engineering Society General Meeting, Tampa,
FL, June 2007, pp. 1–8.
[7] J. Matevosyan, T. Ackermann, S. Bolik, and L. Soder, “Comparison of
international regulations for connection of wind turbines to the network,”
Wind Energy, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 295–306, 2005.
[8] T. Ackermann, Ed., Wind power in power systems. England: John Wiley
& Sons, 2005.
[9] R. Reginatto, A. S. Bazanella, and M. Zanchettin, “Regiões de
penetração segura de geração eólica com aerogeradores de indução,”
in XVII Brazilian Conference on Automatica, Juiz de Fora, MG, 2008.
[10] A. Feijóo, J. Cidrás, and C. Carrillo, “A third order model for the doubly-
fed induction machine,” Electric Power Systems Research, vol. 56, pp.
121–127, 2000.
[11] L. Holdsworth, X. Wu, J. Ekanayake, and N. Jenkins, “Direct solution
method for initialising doubly-fed induction wind turbines in power
system dynamic models,” IEE Proc. Generation, Transmission and
Distribution, vol. 150, no. 3, pp. 334–342, May 2003.
[12] D. F. Pereira, “Análise de estabilidade de sistemas de geração eólica com
aerogeradores de indução com rotor em gaiola,” Master Dissertation,
PPGEE, UFRGS, Porto Alegre, RS, Sep. 2007.
[13] P. Kundur, Power Systems Stability and Control. USA: MacGraw-Hill,
1994.