IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 38, NO.
3, MARCH 2023
Adaptive Control Strategy for Frequency
Support From MTDC Connected
Offshore Wind Power Plants
Muhammad M. Kabsha , Senior Member, IEEE, and Zakir Hussain Rather , Senior Member, IEEE
Abstract—Grid integration of large-scale power electronic in-
terfaced renewable energy sources leads to a low inertia system,
thus resulting in a high rate of change of frequency (RoCoF)
and frequency deviations in the power system following a credible
contingency. In this article, a realistic adaptive communication-
independent control strategy for effective inertial and primary
frequency support from multiterminal HVDC (MTDC) connected
offshore wind farms (OWFs) has been proposed. The proposed
strategy can identify and distinguish the grid under disturbance
among the other healthy grids in the MTDC system by an adaptive
droop frequency support (ADFS) scheme at each receiving end con-
verter (REC). On the OWF side, the control system of wind turbine
generators has been designed to coordinate with the ADFS scheme
to comply with the grid code regulations (GCRs) for inertial and
primary frequency support. The proposed ADFS control scheme
ensures that while providing frequency support to the grid under
disturbance, frequency deviation limits of the healthy neighboring
grids are not breached. Moreover, the proposed strategy complies
adequately with the maximum permissible limits of HVDC voltage
deviation. Furthermore, the proposed strategy is dependent on
only local measurements and can be easily customized to comply
with any applicable GCR. The reliability and effectiveness of the
proposed robust control strategy have been demonstrated on three
power systems interconnected through the MTDC system to two
OWFs.
Index Terms—Adaptive droop frequency support (ADFS), grid
code regulations (GCRS), multiterminal HVDC (MTDC), offshore
wind farms (OWFs).
I. INTRODUCTION
FFSHORE wind farms (OWFs) are considered one of the
O promising sources of wind energy, primarily due to high
wind speed in the offshore site and saturation of the available
mainland. The planned offshore supergrid in the Nordic Seas is
Manuscript received 9 May 2022; revised 20 August 2022; accepted 20
October 2022. Date of publication 27 October 2022; date of current version 26
December 2022. This work was supported by the India-EU collaborative project
SUSTENANCE funded by the Department of Science and Technology (DST) on
the Indian side and the European Commission on the EU side. Recommended for
publication by Associate Editor Z. Chen. (Corresponding author: Muhammad
M. Kabsha.)
Muhammad M. Kabsha is with the Indian Institute of Technology Bombay,
Mumbai 400076, India, and also with the Faculty of Engineering, Mansoura Uni-
versity, Mansoura 35516, Egypt (e-mail: muhammad_kabsha@mans.edu.eg).
Zakir Hussain Rather is with the Indian Institute of Technology Bombay,
Mumbai 400076, India (e-mail: zakir.rather@iitb.ac.in).
Color versions of one or more figures in this article are available at
https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2022.3217712.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPEL.2022.3217712
0885-8993 © 2022 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DURGAPUR. Downloaded on August 13,2023 at 06:52:01 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3981
a major real-life example of remote OWFs integration into the
mainland grids in Europe [1]. However, displacement of conven-
tional generation due to large-scale wind integration results in
diminishing system inertia. System operators/regulators, there-
fore, mandate frequency support capability from wind farms
through grid code regulations (GCRs) for stable and secure
power system operation. For example, GCRs require inertial
and primary frequency support capability from OWFs during a
frequency disturbance [2], [3], [4]. However, HVDC-connected
OWFs cannot inherently sense the onshore grid frequency de-
viations because of the HVDC link and wind turbine generator
(WTG) converters that interface WTGs in the offshore grid and
the main grid. Therefore, due to such a nonsynchronous link
(HVDC and WTG converters), WTGs in the OWF cannot inher-
ently support the main grid in frequency recovery. To address
this issue, several strategies have been proposed in the literature
that require frequency signals measured at the onshore site to be
communicated to the offshore site through a physical medium of
communication. The main limitations of such communication-
dependent strategies are low reliability and communication la-
tency. Therefore, to address the limitations of communication-
dependent strategies, several strategies that are communication-
independent have been reported in the literature [5], [6], [7], [8],
[9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18].
In addition to the challenges in point-to-point HVDC
(PP-HVDC) connected OWFs, the additional issues in
multiterminal HVDC (MTDC) connected OWFs are to
identify and distinguish the grid with disturbance from the
other healthy interconnected ac areas and coordinate frequency
support from OWFs to the target grid through the MTDC system
interconnecting multiple ac areas. Zhu et al. [5] proposed an
inertial emulation control strategy to support the onshore grid
frequency from the energy stored in the capacitor banks of
the PP-HVDC system. Zhu et al. [6] extended the inertial
emulation control strategy for PP-HVDC topology in [5] to
the MTDC topology. However, the two main limitations of
the control strategies reported in [5] and [6] are the need for
large capacitor banks connected at the receiving end converters
(RECs) and large voltage deviations in the MTDC system. The
OWFs can, however, support onshore grid frequency through
emulated inertial and primary frequency response from WTGs.
For example, the study in [7] proposed frequency droop control
implemented at the RECs, sending end converters (SECs) and
 3982
the offshore WTGs to enable the OWF to sense the onshore
disturbance events, and hence provide frequency support to the
main grid from the PP-HVDC connected OWF.
Silva et al. [8] extended the fixed droop frequency sup-
port (FDFS) control strategy in [7] for the MTDC-connected
OWFs. However, the FDFS strategy in [8] ignored the GCRs
requirements. In addition, the local frequency deviation limits
of the different ac areas interconnected through the MTDC
system were not considered, whereas the MTDC permissible
voltage deviation limits have been ignored. Moreover, under the
conventional FDFS strategy, the HVDC voltage deviations are
mapped to offshore grid frequency variations, which actually
result in a high rate of change of frequency (RoCoF) and large
frequency deviations in the offshore grid. Rafferty et al. [9]
proposed a frequency support strategy for MTDC-connected
OWFs using HVDC voltage variation. However, this approach
has ignored the GCRs, and the local frequency deviation limits
were ignored, whereas the MTDC permissible voltage devi-
ation limits were not considered. Moreover, the study in [9]
has tested the proposed strategy on a simple MTDC grid with
oversimplified models of onshore ac grids while ignoring power
system dynamics. Sakamari et al. [10] proposed a frequency
support strategy similar to the strategies reported in [8] and
[9] while considering the second frequency nadir in the main
grid. However, the strategy in [10] did not consider the GCRs
at the onshore grids and ignored the maximum dc permissible
voltage deviation limits at the MTDC grid. Adeuyi et al. [11]
proposed a frequency support strategy by modifying the strategy
in [8], where f–P supplementary droop control (instead of f–V
droop) has been used at RECs to provide enhanced primary
frequency support while using V–f droop control at the SECs
similar to that in [8]. However, the strategy reported in [11]
has ignored the GCRs and the real power system dynamics
while modeling one of the onshore grids as an infinite bus
(strong grid). Jose et al. [12] modified the control strategy
developed in [11] by using logic control based supplementary
control schemes at RECs to enhance the frequency support from
MTDC-connected OWFs. However, the main limitation of the
strategy reported in [12] is that the authors modeled one of
the onshore grids as an infinite bus (strong grid), thus ignoring
the system dynamics and its influence on the proposed control
strategy. Wang et al. [13], [14] proposed control strategies for
frequency support to the disturbed onshore grid from the other
onshore grids connected through the MTDC grid, however, the
GCRs have been ignored, and the frequency support provision
from the OWFs was not considered in these strategies. Yang
et al. [15] proposed a control scheme for the MTDC RECs to
provide frequency support without using a phase-locked loop
(PLL). However, for the strategy reported in [15], the frequency
support provision from the healthy grids to the disturbed grid
is not adequate. The strategy in [15] has the primary advantage
of the PLL-free feature. Zhong et al. [16] proposed a virtual
capacitor control scheme implemented at SECs to enhance the
inertial frequency support from the MTDC-connected OWFs,
where the inertial control function shifted from the offshore
WTGs to SECs. However, for the strategy reported in [16], the
inertial frequency support to the disturbed grid is not effective as
Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DURGAPUR. Downloaded on August 13,2023 at 06:52:01 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 38, NO. 3, MARCH 2023
TABLE I
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF DIFFERENT STRATEGIES
very high RoCoF values in the offshore grid would be required
to provide an adequate inertial response from WTGs.
Kumar et al. [17] proposed a hybrid frequency droop scheme
implemented at the bipolar RECs to improve power sharing
and frequency stability at the onshore grids following ac and
dc disturbance events. However, the main limitation of the
strategy in [17] is using the master–slave control philosophy
while modeling one of the onshore grids as a strong grid, thereby
ignoring the real grid dynamics.
All the communication-independent frequency support strate-
gies for the MTDC-connected OWFs did not consider the HVDC
voltage deviation limits in the MTDC grid and the GCRs com-
pliance in the main ac areas connected to the MTDC system
[5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17].
In addition, all the above-reported communication-independent
strategies translate the HVDC voltage deviations to offshore grid
frequency variations, which actually result in a high RoCoF and
large frequency deviations in the offshore grid. To provide iner-
tial and primary frequency support from PP-HVDC-connected
OWF. Kabsha and Rather [18] proposed an offshore ac voltage
regulation based frequency support strategy. However, the focus
of the study was only on PP-HVDC-connected OWF. A com-
parison table of the above-discussed strategies is presented in
Table I.
Therefore, in this backdrop, a new realistic communication-
independent strategy is proposed in this article for effective
frequency support provision from MTDC-connected OWFs. The
proposed strategy consists of two control stages, the first one is
at the WTGs, where all the OWFs can comply with GCRs for
frequency support based on offshore voltage regulation. The
second stage at the RECs considers the GCRs at the onshore
grids and the permissible limits of voltage at the MTDC grid
by using only one adaptive coefficient at the droop control
of each REC. Moreover, the proposed strategy can be easily
customized to fit any applicable GCRs by providing the flex-
ibility of parameters setting to the different grid operators at
the different onshore ac areas. So, every grid operator can set
the parameters setting which is not feasible with conventional
communication-independent strategies.
This article is structured as follows: In Section II, frequency
support regulations imposed on OWFs are summarized. In Sec-
tion III, offshore wind power plant modeling including the test
system and modeling of OWFs and associated control system is
 KABSHA AND RATHER: ADAPTIVE CONTROL STRATEGY FOR FREQUENCY SUPPORT FROM MTDC 3983

Fig. 1. ENTSO-E active power frequency response requirements [2].

Fig. 2. PMSG WTG conventional control system [7], [8].

described. In Section IV, the FDFS and the proposed adaptive
droop frequency support (ADFS) strategies are discussed. In
Section V, different test cases were conducted to evaluate the
performance of FDFS and ADFS strategies under different
frequency disturbances. Section VI concludes this article.

II. FREQUENCY SUPPORT REGULATIONS FOR OWFS

Some countries have special GCRs for OWFs, such as Ger-
many and Great Britain [3], [4], whereas European Network
of Transmission System Operators (ENTSO-E) has developed
harmonized GCR requirements for OWFs connection in the Eu-
ropean Union countries [2]. Fig. 1 shows the frequency support
requirements imposed on OWFs under ENTSO-E GCR. In this
article, ENTSO-E GCR requirements are followed in the MTDC
grid connected OWFs test system.
It is noteworthy that in the modern restructured power sys-
tems, the electricity industry markets are being designed to
provide competitive participation for different ancillary services
Fig. 3. SECs and RECs conventional control system [8].
[19], [20]. Therefore, primary frequency support services can
be economically beneficial to wind power plant operators [21],
[22], [23]. On the other hand, by providing primary frequency
support by renewable energy sources, the required spinning areas (IEEE 39 bus, IEEE 118 bus, and IEEE 9 bus system)
reserve of the conventional thermal units and hence the CO2 through the MTDC grid.
emissions can be reduced. Furthermore, the studies [24], [25]
suggest that the overall system operations costs can be reduced
by employing wind power plants for primary frequency support. A. Full Converter Based WTG and MTDC Converters Control
OWFs can provide primary frequency support during under- The schematic diagram of a full converter permanent magnet
frequency events by maintaining a specific reserve from the synchronous generator (PMSG) wind turbine is shown in Fig. 2.
available wind power during normal operation [21], [22], [23]. The machine side converter is used to control dc-link voltage,
However, during overfrequency events, the OWFs should reduce whereas the grid side converter (GSC) maintains maximum
their active power output to comply with GCR. The OWFs in this power point tracking (MPPT) and control active power injection
study maintain 10% active power reserve by operating OWFs at a to the onshore during grid frequency events. The WTG used
suboptimal (nonmaximum power point) state. OWFs should also in this study is GE type-4 PMSG-based model [27], whereas
be able to provide inertial frequency response during dynamic methodology proposed in [28] has been used to develop an
grid frequency disturbance [26]. aggregate equivalent model of OWF.
Fig. 3 shows the MTDC grid and its control blocks, where the
frequency and voltage of the offshore grids are maintained by
III. OFFSHORE WIND POWER PLANT AND MTDC SYSTEM SECs operated as offshore grids forming converters. The droop
MODELING
control is used at RECs to control MTDC link voltage and its
The MTDC offshore wind power system has been modeled active power exchange among the ac areas. The CIGRE (DCS-3)
in DIgSILENT PowerFactory platform, which consists of two MTDC grid is used in this study as a standard benchmark model
aggregated OWFs connected to three multimachine onshore ac for the MTDC topology [29].
Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DURGAPUR. Downloaded on August 13,2023 at 06:52:01 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 3984
Fig. 4. Modified CIGRE MTDC (DCS-3) test system [29], [30].
TABLE II
WIND FARMS AND AC AREAS DETAILS
B. MTDC System and Onshore AC Areas
The performance of the conventional and the proposed strate-
gies for inertial and primary frequency support from MTDC-
connected OWFs has been evaluated on a multi-ac areas
MTDC interconnected offshore wind power system, developed
in DIgSILENT PowerFactory, as shown in Fig. 4 [29], [30].
The MTDC CIGRE (DCS-3) system has been modified to
interconnect two OWFs with three onshore ac areas, which
include IEEE 39 bus, IEEE 118 bus, and IEEE 9 bus system.
These three ac systems have been adapted for 50 Hz frequency
[30]. The three ac areas are locally integrated with various wind
farms connected at different buses to realize different wind
penetration levels, with more details of the connected wind farms
provided in Table II.
IV. PROPOSED FREQUENCY SUPPORT STRATEGY FOR
MTDC-CONNECTED OWFS
Due to nonsynchronous interface between OWFs and the
onshore ac areas, the WTGs in OWFs cannot inherently detect
onshore frequency disturbance, and hence cannot inherently pro-
vide inertial and primary frequency support to MTDC-connected
ac areas. However, through supplementary frequency control at
RECs, SECs, and WTGs, The WTGs in the OWFs can release in-
ertial power (from rotational energy behind the WTG converter)
through a local supplementary control scheme implemented at
each WTG GSC. The OWFs can also provide primary frequency
Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DURGAPUR. Downloaded on August 13,2023 at 06:52:01 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 38, NO. 3, MARCH 2023
support if active power reserve is made available through the
deloaded operation of WTGs [18], [26], [31]. The conventional
FDFS and the proposed ADFS strategies are discussed in Section
IV-A and Section IV-B, respectively.
A. Fixed Droop Frequency Support (FDFS) Strategy
The common voltage-droop control is used at MTDC RECs
to control the MTDC voltage and active power sharing among
the different onshore grids during normal operation as
 ∗   ∗ 
Kpv,i . Pon,i − Pon,i + Vdcon,i − Vdcon,i = 0 (1)
∗
where Kpv,i is the power droop coefficient at the ith REC, Pon,i
is the reference active power, Pon,i is the measured active power
∗
at the ith REC, Vdcon,i is the reference dc voltage, and Vdcon,i is
the measured dc voltage at the ith REC.
Silva et al. [8] initially proposed an FDFS strategy imple-
mented at MTDC RECs to detect onshore grid frequency dis-
turbance, and through coordination with SECs and WTGs GSC,
the OWFs can provide inertial and primary frequency support
to the disturbed onshore grid. The study in [8] proposed a
control strategy based on a fixed droop frequency control loop
for mapping the onshore grid frequency deviations to HVDC
link voltage variation, as shown in Fig. 3.
For onshore frequency deviation exceeding the frequency
dead band Δfdb , the frequency droop control loop at RECs
is activated thus switching RECs control scheme as shown in
Fig. 3, and given by [8]
 ∗   ∗ 
Kf v,i . fon,i − fon,i + Vdcon,i − Vdcon,i = 0 (2)
where Kfv,i is the fixed frequency droop coefficient at the ith
∗
REC, and fon,i and fon,i are, respectively, the onshore grid
reference and measured frequency at the ith REC.
The strategies in [9], [10], [11], [12], and [15], [16], [17] are
based on offshore frequency regulation schemes in [7] and [8],
where the SECs map the HVDC voltage deviations to offshore
grid frequency deviations as shown in Fig. 3, and as given by
∗
foff,i = foff0,i + Kfoff,i (Vdcoff,i − Vdc0,i ) (3)
∗
where foff,i and foff0,i are, respectively, reference and nominal
offshore grid frequencies at the ith SEC, Vdcoff,i and Vdc0,i are,
respectively, the measured and the nominal HVDC voltages
at the ith SEC, and Kfoff,i is the offshore frequency droop
coefficient at the ith SEC.
The offshore WTGs under the conventional strategies in [7]
and [8] are equipped with a supplementary control scheme
implemented at each WTG GSC, as shown in Fig. 2, to provide
inertial and primary frequency support from OWF.
B. Proposed Adaptive Droop Frequency Support (ADFS)
Strategy
The conventional FDFS strategy does not only ignore the
MTDC permissible voltage deviation limits, but it also does not
consider the GCRs and the local frequency deviation limits of
the different ac areas interconnected through the MTDC system.
Therefore, the fixed droop based conventional approach cannot
comply with the GCRs and potentially lead to breaching the
 KABSHA AND RATHER: ADAPTIVE CONTROL STRATEGY FOR FREQUENCY SUPPORT FROM MTDC 3985

permissible limits of MTDC voltage and ac area frequency

deviations. Moreover, the conventional strategies can result in
false tripping of frequency and RoCoF protection relays due to
high RoCoF and frequency deviations in the offshore ac grid.
In the proposed ADFS strategy, an adaptive frequency droop
coefficient proposed for each REC controller of the MTDC
system has been used in this study, as given by
 
∗ α − |ΔV |
Kf v,i = KGC,i . Si .
i
 
dcon,i
(4)
βi − Δf on,i 

where Kf∗ v,i is the adaptive frequency droop coefficient at the

ith REC, KGC,i is the scheduled frequency droop coefficient Fig. 5. Proposed adaptive frequency droop coefficient Kf∗ v .
at the ith REC, Si is a tuning factor required to comply with
GCR for frequency support, αi is the maximum allowed MTDC
voltage deviation on the dc side of the ith REC, ΔVdcon,i is
the measured MTDC voltage deviation at the ith REC, β i is
the maximum allowed frequency deviation in the onshore grid
connected to the ith REC, and Δfon,i is the measured onshore
frequency deviation at the ith REC.
In this study, Si is tuned to follow the primary frequency
support requirements imposed by ENTSO-E GCRs, and the
corresponding additional active power for primary frequency
support is calculated as given by
 
αi − |ΔV dcGC,i |  
ΔP GC,i = KGC,i . Si .   . Δf GC,i  (5)

βi − Δf GC,i 

where ΔPGC,i is the additional active power imposed by GCR

at the ith REC during predefined onshore frequency deviation
ΔfGC,i , ΔVdcGC,i is the measured HVDC voltage deviation
at the ith REC during ΔfGC,i . αi are the values settled by the
Fig. 6. Proposed control strategy. (a) Inertial and primary frequency control
HVDC grid operators, and βi are ΔPGC,i values settled by the at WTGs. (b) Adaptive frequency droop control at RECs.
onshore grid operators. Values of the parameters used in (5)
are known based on the applicable GCR requirements in each REC
onshore grid and the MTDC grid. Therefore, Si can be tuned to KO,i
fit the desired response.    dfon,i
KGC,i Δfdb ≥ Δfon,i ≥ Δf GC,i and <0
In the proposed real-time ADFS strategy, the measured = dt
MTDC voltage and the onshore grid frequency at each REC Kf∗ v,i else
are used to update the frequency droop coefficient Kf∗ v,i . The (7)
proposed strategy with an adaptive approach can comply with
REC REC
GCR without violating MTDC voltage and onshore frequency where KU,i and KO,i are, respectively, the adaptive frequency
deviation limits. Variation of the proposed adaptive frequency droop coefficients for the ith REC during underfrequency and
droop coefficient Kf∗ v as a function of MTDC voltage and overfrequency events, and Δfon,i is the onshore frequency de-
onshore frequency deviations is plotted in Fig. 5. viation measured at the ith REC.
The RECs frequency droop coefficients follow an adaptive In the proposed control strategy, MTDC-connected OWFs
droop coefficient Kf∗ v from the onset of the frequency distur- provide primary and inertial frequency support to the disturbed
bance till frequency nadir/zenith is reached, thereafter during onshore grid through coordinated control schemes implemented
frequency recovery the RECs frequency droop coefficients fol- at RECs and supplementary frequency support control scheme at
low the contractual frequency droop coefficient imposed by the each WTG within the OWFs as shown in Fig. 6. Furthermore, in
GCR “KGC ,” as given in the following equations for underfre- the proposed strategy, the MTDC voltage deviation introduced
quency and overfrequency events respectively: by RECs during onshore frequency disturbance is translated to
ac voltage deviation in the offshore grids using ac voltage regu-
REC
KU,i lation schemes at each SEC. Therefore, through the coordinated
   control schemes, onshore frequency excursion is emulated as ac
dfon,i
KGC,i Δfdb ≤ Δfon,i ≤ Δf GC,i and >0 voltage deviation in each offshore grid as given by
= dt
Kf∗ v,i else
∗
(6) Voff,i = Voff0,i − Kv,i (Vdcoff,i − Vdc0,i ) (8)

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DURGAPUR. Downloaded on August 13,2023 at 06:52:01 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 3986
∗
where Voff,i and Voff0,i are, respectively, the reference and the
nominal ac voltage for offshore grid connected to the ith SEC,
Kv,i is ac voltage droop coefficient at the ith SEC, and Vdcoff,i
and Vdc0,i are, respectively, the measured and the nominal dc
voltage at the ith SEC.
The WTGs in each OWF can provide an inertial response
based on the rate of change of voltage (RoCoV) of offshore grid
as given by
dVmeas
ΔPin = Kin (9)
dt
where Kin is the voltage inertial gain, and Vmeas is the measured
WTG terminal voltage.
It is important to mention that by using a voltage regulation-
based approach in the offshore ac grid, high RoCoF and fre-
quency nadir in the offshore grid are avoided, as WTGs provide
an inertial response based on RoCoV instead of RoCoF used in
the conventional strategies as shown in Fig. 6.
In the proposed strategy, the WTGs follow the primary fre-
quency support requirements imposed by ENTSO-E GCR as
defined in the following equation:
ΔPprim = (Vref − Vmeas ) ∗ Kprim ∗ PMPPT
where ΔPprim is the scheduled active power for primary fre-
quency support, Vref and Vmeas are, respectively, the reference
and the measured ac voltage at the WTG terminal, Kprim is the
voltage droop gain, and PMPPT is the maximum WTG active
power at the available wind speed.
The active power command fed to each WTG GSC control
system is given by
Pref = ΔPin + ΔPprim + PMPPT ∗ del
where ΔPin and ΔPprim are, respectively, the inertial and pri-
mary active power of the proposed strategy, and del is the active
power deloading factor.
In this study, the de-loaded operation of WTGs has been
adapted to maintain active power reserve for primary frequency
support from OWFs. In accordance with ENTSO-E GCR, the
reserve active power in each WTG is controlled such that 10%
active power reserve is released for 0.5 Hz frequency deviation
at the disturbed onshore grid [2].
V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
To evaluate the superiority of the proposed ADFS strategy,
both the conventional FDFS and the proposed ADFS strategies
have been implemented on the MTDC system interconnecting
two OWFs and three main ac grids as shown in Fig. 4, with more
details provided in Section III. The proposed ADFS and the
conventional FDFS strategies have been tested under different
scenarios, such as overfrequency and underfrequency events, an
SEC outage, a REC outage, and multiple frequency events at the
onshore ac areas to evaluate their frequency support performance
while considering permissible limits of the MTDC voltage and
compliance with the GCRs in all the MTDC interconnected
ac areas. While case studies with underfrequency events are
discussed in Section V-B and Section V-C, the other case studies,
such as overfrequency, SEC, or REC station outage, have shown
a similar trend as that of the presented case studies.
Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DURGAPUR. Downloaded on August 13,2023 at 06:52:01 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 38, NO. 3, MARCH 2023
(10) Fig. 7. Dominate eigenvalues locus with variation in adaptive frequency droop
coefficient from 0 to 7.5.
A. Modal Analysis
The modal/eigenvalue analysis has been performed to com-
pute the eigenvalues for small signal stability analysis of the test
system, with eigenvalues plotted in Fig 7.
The adaptive frequency droop coefficient Kf∗ v,i is the critical
parameter in the proposed control strategy. Therefore, the modal
(11) analysis has been conducted to evaluate the impact of Kf∗ v,i on
the system stability. The value of Kf∗ v,i is changed from 0 to 7.5,
and the dominant eigenvalues movements with the variations of
Kf∗ v,i are shown in Fig. 7.
The blue color arrows point to the dominant eigenvalue trace
as Kf∗ v,i varies from 0 to 7.5. When Kf∗ v,i increases, some
eigenvalues (λ5 , λ6 , λ11 λ12 , λ48 , λ49 , λ59 , λ60 ) move to the left
half of the s-plane and the damping ratio increases. However,
there are two modes (λ68, λ69) that moved toward the left and
reached an inflection point at Kf∗ v,i equal to 0.95, following
which the two oscillating modes move toward the right half
of the s-plane. There are some oscillations modes (λ3, λ4), and
(λ108, λ109) that have complex movements as shown in Fig. 7(e)
and (g). For higher values of Kf∗ v,i > 0.55, the eigenvalues (λ3,
λ4) start moving to the right half of the s-plane before reaching
the first inflection point and start moving to the left and reach
again to the second inflection point at Kf∗ v,i value of 1.6 for (λ3,
λ4). On the other hand, the oscillating modes (λ106, λ107) are
the most critical and move to the right half of the s-plane, and
the damping ratio decreases, however, the two modes’ values
saturated at high values of Kf∗ v,i as shown in Fig. 7(d). In this
study, the values of Kf∗ v,i are limited at 7.5 to ensure system
stability, however, the actual value of Kf∗ v,i did not exceed 0.5
in all the test cases considered for this study. It can be concluded
that, the test system under the proposed strategy has enough
stability margin. This conclusion is verified by the simulation
results in Section V-B and Section V-C with the proposed control
strategy under different disturbances events.
 KABSHA AND RATHER: ADAPTIVE CONTROL STRATEGY FOR FREQUENCY SUPPORT FROM MTDC
Fig. 8. Case study A. (a) Onshore grid 1 frequency. (b) Onshore grid 2
frequency. (c) Onshore grid 3 frequency. (d) RoCoF of onshore grid 1. (e) RoCoF
of onshore grid 2. (f) RoCoF of onshore grid 3.
B. Case Study A
In this case study, a load step change of 17% at all the
load buses of the IEEE 39 bus system is applied to simulate
an underfrequency event. Onshore ac grids performance under
the proposed ADFS strategy in all four studied cases (case I:
no frequency support from OWFs; case II: primary frequency
assistance from OWFs; case III: inertial response from OWFs;
and case IV: both primary and inertial frequency response from
OWFs) is shown in Fig. 8.
The onshore grid frequencies of the IEEE 39 bus system
(grid 1), 118 bus system (grid 2), and 9 bus system (grid 3)
without OWFs frequency provision are shown as a solid red
line in Fig. 8(a)–(c), respectively. It can be observed that the
corresponding frequency nadirs of the three ac areas under case
I are 48.88 Hz, 49.05 Hz, and 49.03 Hz, whereas their respective
values of maximum RoCoF are −0.544 Hz/s, −0.582 Hz/s, and
−0.673 Hz/s as shown Fig. 8(d)–(f). In case II (with only OWFs
primary frequency provision), the respective frequency of the
three onshore ac areas are shown as the dashed green line in
Fig. 8(a)–(c).
It is realized that with primary frequency support from OWFs
(case II), frequency nadir and maximum RoCoF in all three
ac areas have enhanced with their respective values of 49.29
Hz, 49.33 Hz, 49.31 Hz, and −0.512 Hz/s, −0.453 Hz/s,
−0.524 Hz/s. Results for case III (with only inertia support)
shown in Fig. 8(a)–(c) suggest that while frequency nadir of the
three ac areas (49.022 Hz, 49.071 Hz, 49.04 Hz) are better than
those under case I, case II shows better performance than that
of case III in terms of frequency nadir. This can be attributed to
the absence of primary frequency response from OWFs in case
III. However, the maximum RoCoF in the three grids under case
III (−0.477 Hz/s, −0.355 Hz/s, −0.42 Hz/s) have been further
improved compared to case II, which is due to inertial response
provided by OWFs in case III.
Results for case IV (OWFs provide both primary and inertial
frequency response), which include frequency nadir (49.414 Hz
in grid 1, 49.446 Hz in grid 2, 49.43 Hz in grid 3) and respective
maximum RoCoF (−0.472 Hz/s, −0.306 Hz/s, −0.352 Hz/s)
observed in all the three ac areas are the best among all the four
cases, as shown in Fig. 8. This is primarily because in case IV,
Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DURGAPUR. Downloaded on August 13,2023 at 06:52:01 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3987
Fig. 9. Case study A. (a) REC-1 active power. (b) REC-2 active power.
(c) REC-3 active power. (d) Variation of the adaptive droop coefficient at REC-1.
(e) OWF-1 active power. (f) OWF-2 active power.
OWFs contribute both the inertial and the primary frequency
response.
The active power import by three ac areas at their respective
RECs, and the OWFs active power output at SECs side in all the
four cases are shown in Fig. 9. It can be observed that the OWFs
follow the ENTSO-E GCR for primary frequency support, as
the entire WTGs active power reserve of 10% is exhausted
for onshore frequency deviation of −0.5 Hz. The OWFs active
power output increased from 1284 MW to 1427 MW under case
II (primary frequency support) as shown in Fig. 9(e) and (f).
The active power exported to grid 2 and grid 3 under all the
four cases decreased to provide frequency support to grid 1 as
shown in Fig. 9(a)–(c). It is important to note that in this study,
it is assumed that the other neighboring ac areas (grid 2 and
grid 3) are expected to provide frequency support to the grid
experiencing frequency disturbance (grid 1), either through prior
agreed contract or through ancillary service market. However,
the frequency support from neighboring ac areas (grid 2 and
grid 3) is limited by their local limits of frequency deviation.
Therefore, the proposed adaptive control strategy is designed
such that while supporting the grid with frequency disturbance
(grid 1), local frequency limits in the neighboring ac areas (grid
2 and grid 3) are not breached. It can be observed from Fig. 8(b)
and (c), frequency of grid 2 and grid 3 do not breach the lower
frequency limit (49 Hz). The proposed controller can be easily
customized to block any frequency support from neighboring
grids if required so, and the results in such cases will show
similar trend in terms of frequency response in the disturbed
grid, however, without affecting frequency of the neighboring
grids. It has been observed from Fig. 9(d) that under ADFS
strategy, the maximum value of the adaptive droop coefficient
REC
KU,i at the RECs did not exceed 0.35. Therefore, the system is
stable with the proposed strategy under the different frequency
support from the OWFs.
Fig. 10(a) and (b) shows that under the proposed strategy, the
MTDC voltage deviation is translated to ac voltage deviations
in OWF-1 offshore grid for all four cases. At the onset of
the frequency event, offshore ac voltage increases suddenly to
activate inertial frequency support from WTGs, however, during
the inertial support, offshore ac voltage does not breach the set
 3988
Fig. 10. Case study A. (a) REC-1 DC voltage. (b) Offshore grid 1 AC voltage.
(c) OWF-1 WTGs rotational speed. (d) REC-2 DC voltage. (e) Offshore grid 2
AC voltage. (f) OWF-2 WTGs rotational speed.
limit of 1.05 p.u. (which corresponds to 49.5 Hz frequency in
the onshore grids). During onshore frequency recovery beyond
49.5 Hz, the offshore ac voltage decreases to comply with
ENTSO-E GCR. It can be observed from Fig. 10(a), that in
case I and case III, even though MTDC voltage hits the lower
limit (0.85 p.u.) the adaptive droop controllers at the RECs do
not allow breaching of voltage deviation limit thus limiting it
at 0.85 p.u. The WTG rotational speed in OWF-1 under all the
cases is shown in Fig. 10(c), where WTG speed decreases during
inertial support, which is subsequently recovered during onshore
frequency recovery. The performance of OWF-2 is shown in
Fig. 10(d)–(f), which shows the same trend as that of OWF-1.
C. Comparative Analysis of the Proposed Strategy and
Conventional Strategies
To evaluate the superiority of the proposed ADFS strategy
over the conventional communication-independent frequency
support strategies, several comparative studies have been carried
out in this study. The conventional strategies used for compari-
son are as follows.
Conv-1 (the conventional strategy proposed in [8]), which is
based on an FDFS control scheme implemented at the RECs as
discussed in Section IV-A and shown in Fig. 3.
Conv-2 (the conventional strategy proposed in [15]), which is
based on a PLL-free control scheme implemented at each REC
connected to the MTDC grid.
Conv-3 (the conventional strategy proposed in [16]), which is
based on a virtual-inertial control scheme implemented at SECs
of the MTDC grid.
1) Comparative Study 1: In comparative study 1, the pro-
posed ADFS strategy is compared with the conventional FDFS
strategy (Conv-1). A test case of a severe underfrequency event
is initiated by a load step increase of 23% at all the load buses
of grid 1 is applied. In both strategies, OWFs are providing
inertial and primary frequency support. It can be observed
from Fig. 11(a)–(c), that under conventional FDFS strategy, the
frequency in all three ac areas breaches the lower limit of 49
Hz. On the other hand, the frequency of neighboring (healthy)
Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DURGAPUR. Downloaded on August 13,2023 at 06:52:01 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 38, NO. 3, MARCH 2023
Fig. 11. Comparative study 1. (a) Onshore grid 1 frequency. (b) Onshore
grid 2 frequency. (c) Onshore grid 3 frequency. (d) RoCoF of onshore grid 1.
(e) RoCoF of onshore grid 2. (f) RoCoF of onshore grid 3.
Fig. 12. Comparative study 1. (a) REC-1 active power. (b) REC-2 active power.
(c) REC-3 active power. (d) Variation of the adaptive droop coefficients at RECs.
(e) OWF-1 active power. (f) OWF-2 active power.
ac areas (grid 2 and grid 3) did not breach the local frequency
limit of 49 Hz under the proposed ADFS strategy.
The frequency nadir in the grid with disturbance (grid 1) in
the ADFS strategy is slightly lower than that under the FDFS
strategy, which can be attributed to relatively higher frequency
support from the neighboring ac areas (grid 2 and grid 3) under
FDFS that comes at the cost of breaching local frequency limits
in grid 2 and grid 3. Moreover, inertial frequency support from
OWFs under the proposed ADFS is higher compared to that in
FDFS, as shown in Fig. 12(e) and (f), which is due to adaptive
droop control implemented at each REC in the ADFS. The
RoCoF in the grid with the disturbance (grid 1) is improved
with the proposed ADFS strategy as shown in Fig. 11(d), with
maximum values of −0.633 Hz/s and −0.731 Hz/s under ADFS
and FDFS respectively. RoCoF of neighboring ac areas (grid 2
and grid 3) are relatively better in the ADFS strategy compared
to the FDFS strategy, as shown in Fig. 11(e) and (f).
The active power import by the three ac areas from OWFs
through the MTDC grid and the OWF active power injected to
the MTDC grid is shown in Fig. 12. The active power exported
to grid 2 and grid 3 decreased to provide frequency support to
grid 1 as shown in Fig. 12(a)–(c), however, the frequency support
 KABSHA AND RATHER: ADAPTIVE CONTROL STRATEGY FOR FREQUENCY SUPPORT FROM MTDC
Fig. 13. Comparative study 1. (a) REC-1 HVDC voltage. (b) Offshore grid
1 AC voltage. (c) OWF-1 WTGs rotational speed. (d) REC-2 HVDC voltage.
(e) Offshore grid 2 AC voltage. (f) OWF-2 WTGs rotational speed.
from the healthy grids (grid 2 and grid 3) is limited by their local
limits of frequency deviation (1 Hz). It can also be concluded
from Fig. 12(d) that the maximum value of the adaptive droop
REC
coefficient KU,i at the different RECs did not exceed 0.35.
At the onset of frequency deviation detected by RECs, the
MTDC voltage is suddenly reduced, thus translating onshore
frequency deviation to MTDC voltage deviation, which in turn is
translated by SEC-1 to ac voltage deviation in the offshore grid,
as shown in Fig. 13(a) and (b) for OWF-1. It can be realized
from Fig. 13(a), that under the conventional FDFS strategy,
MTDC voltage deviation exceeds the maximum permissible
limit (±0.15 p.u.) considered in this study. On the other hand,
under the proposed ADFS strategy, the adaptive controller does
not allow MTDC voltage to breach the voltage deviation limit,
hence limiting it to 0.85 p.u., as shown in Fig. 13(a). It has been
observed that under the ADFS strategy, the HVDC voltage drop
and the offshore ac voltage rise rates are slightly higher than
that in the FDFS strategy, hence the WTGs inertial response
is also slightly fast in ADFS, as can be observed from the
WTGs rotational speed shown in Fig. 13(c). The performance
of OWF-2, which is similar to that of OWF-1 is shown in
Fig. 13(d)–(f).
2) Comparative Study 2: In the comparative study 2, the
proposed ADFS strategy is compared with the PLL-free control-
based conventional strategy (Conv-2). Under the PLL-free con-
trol strategy, a new control scheme is implemented at the RECs,
which is similar to the control scheme implemented at SECs
shown in Fig. 3. However, the control scheme at the RECs is
working in the P-Q mode. The main advantage of this strategy
is that the RECs can provide frequency support to the disturbed
onshore grid without using PLL at RECs. However, in this
strategy, the frequency support provision from the healthy grids
to the disturbed grid is not adequate. Moreover, the strategy
(Conv-2) considered only the inertial response from OWFs,
whereas the primary frequency support from OWFs was ignored.
An underfrequency event is realized by a load step increase
of 15% at all the load buses of grid 1. For a fair comparison with
the conventional strategy (Conv-2), only the inertial frequency
support is considered at OWFs under the proposed strategy.
Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DURGAPUR. Downloaded on August 13,2023 at 06:52:01 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3989
Fig. 14. Comparative study 2. (a) Onshore grid 1 frequency. (b) Onshore grid
2 frequency. (c) Onshore grid 3 frequency. (d) REC-1 active power. (e) REC-2
active power. (f) REC-3 active power.
Fig. 15. Comparative study 2. (a) SEC-1 HVDC voltage. (b) Offshore grid 1
AC voltage. (c) OWF-1 WTGs rotational speed. (d) Variations of the adaptive
droop coefficients at RECs. (e) OWF-1 active power. (f) OWF-2 active power.
It can be observed from Fig. 14(a)–(c) that under the conven-
tional strategy (Conv-2), the frequency deviation in the disturbed
grid (grid 1) breached the lower limit of 1 Hz. On the other
hand, the neighboring (healthy) ac areas (grid 2 and grid 3)
cannot provide sufficient frequency support to the disturbed
grid, even though the frequency deviation at grid 2 and grid
3 has a sufficient margin from the frequency deviation limit
of 1 Hz in the respective grids. On the other hand, under the
proposed ADFS strategy, the frequency nadir in the grid with
disturbance (grid 1) is effectively improved, which is attributed
to the relatively higher frequency support from the healthy ac
areas (grid 2 and grid 3) under the proposed strategy, however,
without breaching the local frequency limits in their respective
grids (grid 2 and grid 3). It is important to note that in the
proposed strategy, the local frequency deviation limit setpoint
can be easily customized. Therefore, the primary frequency
support from the healthy grids is under full control, which is
not feasible in the conventional strategy (Conv-2).
Under the proposed strategy (ADFS), the HVDC voltage
deviation at the MTDC grid during the onshore frequency devi-
ation is induced by the RECs to emulate the onshore frequency
deviation. This results in a fast inertial response at the offshore
WTGs as shown in Fig. 15(e) and (f). On the other hand,
 3990 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 38, NO. 3, MARCH 2023

Fig. 16. Comparative study 3. (a) Onshore grid 1 frequency. (b) Onshore grid
2 frequency. (c) Onshore grid 3 frequency. (d) REC-1 active power. (e) REC-2
active power. (f) REC-3 active power.

under conventional strategy (Conv-2), the fast inertial response

from offshore WTGs is not feasible, where the HVDC voltage
deviation at the MTDC is induced due to power imbalance at the
MTDC grid terminals during the onshore frequency deviation.
This leads to a slow inertial response at the offshore WTGs as
shown in Fig. 15(e) and (f) in the conventional (Conv-2) strategy,
and the same conclusion can be drawn from the WTGs rotational
speed shown in Fig. 15(c).
3) Comparative Study 3: In comparative study 3, the pro-
posed ADFS strategy is compared with the conventional strategy
(Conv-3), which is based on a virtual-inertial control scheme
implemented at the SECs connected to the MTDC grid. The
virtual-inertial control scheme is used to improve the inertial
response of the MTDC-connected OWFs. The main idea rests
on implementing a supplementary control scheme at each SEC,
in which the inertial response is emulated by using a differential
function that is limited by an arctan-function limiter to provide a
fast inertial response at the onset of the disturbance while saturat-
ing the inertial support during the disturbance event. However,
fast inertial support can be possible only at very high RoCoF
at the offshore grid which can trigger the frequency-sensitive
infrastructure in the offshore grids.
It can be realized from Fig. 16(a) –(c) that under the con-
ventional strategy (Conv-3), the frequency in all three ac areas
breaches the lower limit of 49 Hz. On the other hand, under the
proposed ADFS strategy, the frequency of neighboring (healthy)
ac areas (grid 2 and grid 3) did not breach the local frequency
limit of 49 Hz. The frequency nadir in the grid under disturbance
(grid 1) in the proposed ADFS strategy is slightly lower than
that under the conventional strategy. However, the improved fre-
quency nadir in grid 1 under the conventional strategy (Conv-3)
is achieved at the cost of breaching local frequency limits in
grid 2 and grid 3. Moreover, the inertial frequency support from
OWFs under the proposed ADFS is higher than that under the
conventional strategy (Conv-3), as shown in Fig. 17(f) and (g),
which is due to the adaptive droop control implemented at each
REC.
On the offshore side, the performance of OWF-1 and OWF-2
is shown in Fig. 17(a)–(h). Under the proposed ADFS strategy,
the MTDC voltage is limited at a maximum voltage deviation
Fig. 17. Comparative study 3. (a) SEC-1 HVDC voltage. (b) Offshore grid
1 AC voltage. (c), Offshore grid 1 frequency. (d) RoCoF of offshore grid 1.
(e) Variations of the adaptive droop coefficients at RECs. (f) OWF-1 active
power. (g) OWF-2 active power. (h) OWF-1 WTGs rotational speed.
limit (0.85 p.u.), as shown in Fig 17(a). It is also evident from
Fig. 17(c) and (d) that the conventional strategy (Conv-3) leads to
large frequency deviations and very high RoCoF at the offshore
grids. This can trigger the frequency-sensitive infrastructure in
the offshore grid (such as local load connected to the offshore
grid and WTGs). On the other hand, under the proposed ADFS
strategy, the maximum ac voltage deviation at the offshore grids
is limited at 1.05 p.u., thus avoiding any voltage stress or voltage
based protection triggering in the offshore grid while providing
an effective inertial support from the offshore WTGs, as shown
in Fig. 17(f)–(h). It can be observed from Fig. 17(e) that the
REC
maximum value of the adaptive droop coefficient KU,i at the
RECs did not exceed 0.35. Therefore, the proposed strategy is
stable under all different disturbance events.
VI. CONCLUSION
An adaptive communication-less control strategy for fast in-
ertial and primary frequency provision from MTDC-connected
OWFs has been proposed in this article. Under the conventional
strategies, the MTDC-connected OWFs can provide inertial
and primary frequency support to the onshore grid undergoing
a frequency disturbance, however, the GCRs compliance was
not considered in the neighboring MTDC-connected grids, and
the MTDC maximum voltage deviations exceed the maximum
permissible limits. On the other hand, in the proposed ADFS
strategy, the OWFs can successfully comply with GCRs for
frequency regulation, without breaching the maximum voltage
deviation limits at the MTDC grid while considering the onshore
grids’ frequency deviation limits. In addition, in the proposed

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DURGAPUR. Downloaded on August 13,2023 at 06:52:01 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 KABSHA AND RATHER: ADAPTIVE CONTROL STRATEGY FOR FREQUENCY SUPPORT FROM MTDC
ADFS strategy, OWFs can provide inertial and primary fre-
quency support based on offshore ac voltage regulation without
experiencing any frequency deviations and high RoCoF in the
offshore grids. The results of the various case studies show that
the proposed ADFS strategy is a realistic strategy for frequency
support from MTDC-connected OWFs, which can be imple-
mented on offshore wind power plants connected to MTDC
systems without stressing the onshore grids, the MTDC grid,
and the offshore grids.
REFERENCES
[1] J. G. Dedecca and R. A. Hakvoort, “A review of the North Seas offshore
grid modeling: Current and future research,” Renewable Sustain. Energy
Rev., vol. 60, pp. 129–143, Jul. 2016.
[2] European Commission Regulation, “Establishing a network code on re-
quirements for grid connection of high voltage direct current systems and
direct current connected power park modules,” Official J. Eur. Union,
vol. 59, no. 241, pp. 1–65, Aug. 2016.
[3] TenneT TSO GmbH, “Requirements for offshore grid connections in the
grid of TenneT TSO GmbH,” TenneT TSO GmbH, Bayreuth, Germany,
2012.
[4] National Grid Electricity Transmission, “The grid code,” Nat. Grid Electr.
Transmiss., London, U.K., Issue 5, Revision 46, Nov. 2020.
[5] J. Zhu, C. D. Booth, G. P. Adam, A. J. Roscoe, and C. G. Bright, “Inertia
emulation control strategy for VSC-HVDC transmission systems,” IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 1277–1287, May 2013.
[6] J. Zhu et al., “Generic inertia emulation controller for multi-terminal
voltage-source-converter high voltage direct current systems,” IET Re-
newable Power Gener., vol. 8, no. 7, pp. 740–748, 2014.
[7] Y. Phulpin, “Communication-free inertia and frequency control for wind
generators connected by an HVDC-link,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 27,
no. 2, pp. 1136–1137, May 2012.
[8] B. Silva, C. L. Moreira, L. Seca, Y. Phulpin, and J. A. Pecas Lopes, “Pro-
vision of inertial and primary frequency control services using offshore
multiterminal HVDC networks,” IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy, vol. 3, no. 4,
pp. 800–808, Oct. 2012.
[9] J. Rafferty et al., “Frequency support using multi-terminal HVDC systems
based on DC voltage manipulation,” IET Renewable Power Gener., vol. 10,
no. 9, pp. 1393–1401, 2016.
[10] J. N. Sakamuri et al., “Coordinated frequency control from offshore
wind power plants connected to multi terminal DC system considering
wind speed variation,” IET Renewable Power Gener., vol. 11, no. 8,
pp. 1226–1236, 2017.
[11] O. D. Adeuyi, M. Cheah-Mane, J. Liang, and N. Jenkins, “Fast frequency
response from offshore multiterminal VSC-HVDC schemes,” IEEE Trans.
Power Del., vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 2442–2452, Dec. 2017.
[12] K. Jose et al., “Auxiliary dead-band controller for the coordination of fast
frequency support from multi-terminal HVDC grids and offshore wind
farms,” IET Renewable Power Gener., vol. 12, no. 13, pp. 1444–1452,
2018.
[13] Y. Wang et al., “DC voltage deviation-dependent voltage droop control
method for VSCMTDC systems under large disturbances,” IET Renew.
Power Gener., vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 891–896, 2020.
[14] Y. Wang, W. Wen, C. Wang, H. Liu, X. Zhan, and X. Xiao, “Adaptive
voltage droop method of multiterminal VSC-HVDC systems for DC
voltage deviation and power sharing,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 34,
no. 1, pp. 169–176, Feb. 2019.
[15] R. Yang, G. Shi, X. Cai, C. Zhang, G. Li, and J. Liang, “Autonomous syn-
chronizing and frequency response control of multi-terminal DC systems
with wind farm integration,” IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy, vol. 11, no. 4,
pp. 2504–2514, Oct. 2020.
[16] C. Zhong, J. Zhang, and Y. Zhou, “Adaptive virtual capacitor control for
MTDC system with De-loaded wind power plants,” IEEE Access, vol. 8,
pp. 190582–190595, 2020.
[17] A. S. Kumar and B. P. Padhy, “Hybrid control strategy for effec-
tive frequency regulation and power sharing in multi-terminal HVDC
grids,” IET Gener. Transmiss. Distrib., vol. 14, no. 23, pp. 5536–5546,
2020.
[18] M. M. Kabsha and Z. H. Rather, “A new control scheme for fast frequency
support from HVDC connected offshore wind farm in low-inertia system,”
IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 1829–1837, Jul. 2020.
Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DURGAPUR. Downloaded on August 13,2023 at 06:52:01 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3991
[19] E. Ela, V. Gevorgian, A. Tuohy, B. Kirby, M. Milligan, and M. O’Malley,
“Market designs for the primary frequency response ancillary service—
Part I: Motivation and design,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 29, no. 1,
pp. 421–431, Jan. 2014.
[20] E. Ela, V. Gevorgian, A. Tuohy, B. Kirby, M. Milligan, and M. O’Malley,
“Market designs for the primary frequency response ancillary service—
Part II: Case studies,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 432–440,
Jan. 2014.
[21] A. B. Attya, J. L. Dominguez-Garcia, and O. Anaya-Lara, “A review on
frequency support provision by wind power plants: Current and future
challenges,” Renewable Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 81, pp. 2071–2087,
Jan. 2018.
[22] P. Fernández-Bustamante, O. Barambones, I. Calvo, C. Napole, and M.
Derbeli, “Provision of frequency response from wind farms: A review,”
Energies, vol. 14, no. 20, Oct. 2021, Art. no. 6689.
[23] C. H. Lin and Y. K. Wu, “Overview of frequency-control technolo-
gies for a VSC-HVDC-integrated wind farm,” IEEE Access, vol. 9,
pp. 112893–112921, 2021.
[24] F. Teng and G. Strbac, “Assessment of the role and value of frequency
response support from wind plants,” IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy, vol. 7,
no. 2, pp. 586–595, Apr. 2016.
[25] M. Rajabdorri, L. Sigrist, E. Lobato, M. del Carmen Prats, and F. M.
Echavarren, “Viability of providing spinning reserves by RES in Span-
ish island power systems,” IET Renew. Power Gener., vol. 15, no. 13,
pp. 2878–2890, 2021.
[26] A. Aziz et al., “Frequency regulation capabilities in wind power plant,”
Sustain. Energy Technol. Assessments, vol. 26, pp. 47–76, 2018.
[27] K. Clark, N. W. Miller, and J. J. Sanchez-Gasca, “Modeling of GE wind
turbine-generators for grid studies,” General Electric Int., Inc., Schenec-
tady, NY, USA, Rep. no. 4.5, 2010.
[28] M. Pöller and S. Achilles, “Aggregated wind park models for analyzing
power system dynamics,” in Proc. 4th Int. Workshop Large-Scale Integr.
Wind Power Transmiss. Netw. Offshore Wind Farms, 2003, pp. 1–10.
[29] S. Dennetière et al., “The CIGRE B4 DC grid test system,” CIGRE Electra
Mag., 2013.
[30] P. Demetriou, M. Asprou, J. Quiros-Tortos, and E. Kyriakides, “Dynamic
IEEE test systems for transient analysis,” IEEE Syst. J., vol. 11, no. 4,
pp. 2108–2117, Dec. 2017.
[31] M. Dreidy, H. Mokhlis, and S. Mekhilef, “Inertia response and frequency
control techniques for renewable energy sources: A review,” Renew. Sus-
tain. Energy Rev., vol. 69, pp. 144–155, 2017.
Muhammad M. Kabsha (Senior Member, IEEE) received the B.E. (Hons.) and
M.Sc. degrees in electrical engineering from Mansoura University, Mansoura,
Egypt, and the Ph.D. degree from the Department of Energy Science and
Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Bombay, Mumbai, India.
He is currently an Assistant Professor with the Department of Electrical Engi-
neering, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt. His research interests include
grid integration of renewable energy sources, HVdc, power system stability,
power system control, hybrid ac/dc microgrids, power electronic converters,
and protection systems.
Zakir Hussain Rather (Senior Member, IEEE) received the bachelor’s degree
in electrical engineering from Jammu University, Jammu, India, the M.Tech.
degree in power systems from the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Delhi,
New Delhi, India, and the Industrial Ph.D. degree in power systems from Aalborg
University, Aalborg, Denmark.
He has experience of more than five years in power industry including KK
wind Solutions, Denmark. He was a Senior Power System Researcher with
Electricity Research Centre, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. He is
currently an Associate Professor with IIT Bombay, Mumbai, India. His research
interests include grid and system integration of renewable energy, power system
security and stability, microgrids, and wide-area measurement and control.