Due to increased awareness of climate change and falling
technology costs, renewable energies have received
significant attention over the past few decades. As a result,
they have undergone significant improvement. This increase
in adoption has led to new challenges in power system
operation, owing to the intermittent nature of renewable
energy generation, particularly from wind and solar
photovoltaics. A stronger wind velocity profile at offshore
farms helps them produce more electricity, which is another
reason why wind power plants have the greatest growth when
compared to other renewable energies. However, the
deployment of onshore wind farms is constrained by
construction limitations. The doubly fed induction generator
(DFIG), which provides dynamic reactive power regulation,
is most frequently used in modern offshore wind farms to
power wind turbines with changing speeds. This system will
provide independent regulation of active and reactive power
when coupled to voltage source converters (VSCs), and it will
rely on fast-switching transistors to avoid generating
harmonic currents that could significantly impact the voltage
waveform [1].
The future offshore wind farms will get larger and farther
from the onshore grid as the supply of shallow water sites
decreases. This inspires the development of unique and
inventive offshore foundations that provide access to deeper
water and maximize the market for offshore wind energy. The
DolWin2 project, which is connected to an HVDC onshore
station by a 90 km long land cable and an additional 45 km
long DC sea cable system, is a fantastic example of what
offshore wind farms in the future will typically look like. The
320-kV converter station, which has a 916 MW power
transmission capacity, is also located on an offshore platform
[2-4]. However, the above constraints will make HVAC
transmission systems ineffective and problematic, particularly
because of frequency and voltage instability and large
charging currents of submarine cables [5]. This will encourage
one alluring alternative that comes to overcome these
problems: a point to point (P2P) VSC-HVDC system [6-7]
capable of supplying weak grids or passive networks. For
offshore applications, the VSC-HVDC system's black start
capability and compact substation layout are crucial, in
addition to autonomous, quick control of both active and
reactive power flows.
The modular multilevel converter (MMC) [8] brings the
VSC-HVDC transmission system to a higher level, thanks to
such features as scalable modularity for higher voltages [9],
low switching losses, low transient peak voltages [10], and
lower harmonics content (high-quality AC voltage). This
topology boasts better balancing capability than conventional
voltage-source converters (VSCs), owing to the redundant
combination of module connections for each required AC
level [11]. It enhances imbalanced operation performance,
improves symmetrical AC faults, and considerably lowers the
probability of device and system failure [12].
This study offers a test system for evaluating the
operational and control aspects (normal operation/dynamic
performance) of a possible offshore wind farm connected to
the onshore grid through a VSC-HVDC link based on 401
level MMC converters. The proposed control system, which
consists of the upper-level control with its inner and outer
control loops and the lower-level control with balancing
control algorithm and modulation, is presented and described
in details. The system is used to connect the offshore DFIG-
based system. Next, various scenarios were simulated to
investigate the effectiveness of the control system in normal
operation and dynamic state through the step change.
Broadly speaking, this paper can be divided into three
complementary sections: The first section briefly describes
the DFIG and MMC systems. The second section gives an
overview of the modular multi-level converter. The third
section presents the simulated system and simulation results.
Dynamic Performance of High-Voltage Direct Current Systems for
Offshore Wind Farm Based on Modular Multilevel Converter
MOHAMMED
ABDELDJALIL DJEHAF
Department of Automatic
Control, Faculty of Electrical
Engineering,
Djillali Liabes University, Sidi
Bel-Abbes, ALGERIA
YOUCEF ISLAM DJILANI
KOBIBI
Department of Electrical
Engineering, Faculty of
Sciences and Technology,
Mustapha Stambouli
University, 29000 Mascara,
ALGERIA
MOHAMED KHATIR
Department of Automatic
Control, Faculty of Electrical
Engineering,
Djillali Liabes University, Sidi
Bel-Abbes, ALGERIA
Abstract: The modular multilevel converter (MMC), which is the foundation of voltage-source converter (VSC)-high-
voltage direct current (HVDC), has received significant attention over the past ten years. As a result, the MMC has
undergone extensive technical and operational improvements, making it an appealing option for achieving efficient
renewable energy harvesting, particularly for offshore wind farms. This paper discusses the state-of-the-art control
algorithms that are most effective for simulating large HVDC systems, including offshore wind farms. Moreover, a test
system is suggested to show how well the selected techniques perform in practical scenarios. Overall, this work will serve
as a helpful shortcut to relevant material that pertains to this research topic.
Keywords: Modular multilevel converter (MMC); High-voltage direct current (HVDC) system; Voltage-source converter
(VSC); Offshore wind farm; Control
Received: July 28, 2022. Revised: June 21, 2023. Accepted: July 25, 2023. Published: August 29, 2023.
1. Introduction
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on POWER SYSTEMS
DOI: 10.37394/232016.2023.18.12
Mohammed Abdeldjalil Djehaf,
Youcef Islam Djilani Kobibi, Mohamed Khatir
E-ISSN: 2224-350X
122
Volume 18, 2023
The DFIG wind turbine has dominated the market for
variable speed technology for models over 1.5 MW [13, 40-
45]. The stator windings are coupled directly to the AC grid
across the turbine transformer, whereas the rotor windings are
connected to the grid via slip rings and a back-to-back (BtoB)
voltage source converter (Figure 1).
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of a DFIG wind turbine
In comparison to fixed speed wind turbines, variable speed
operation, made possible by the B2B converter and rotor blade
pitch control, results in improved efficiency and higher energy
yields. The B2B converter enables the wind turbine to operate
at varied speeds by partially separating the mechanical and
electrical frequencies of the rotor. Manwell et al. [14] and
Nelson [15] described the main components of a DFIG wind
turbine.
The rotor-side converter (RSC) and grid-side converter
(GSC), which are connected by a shared DC bus, make up the
two VSCs that constitute the B2B converter. While the GSC
primarily maintains a constant DC voltage level on the B2B
DC bus and offers, to some extent, reactive power support to
the AC grid, the RSC controls the wind turbine speed and
reactive power consumption by altering the rotor currents. The
B2B converter is a rotor slip-power recovery device because
the architecture of both converters permits bidirectional power
transfer [25-29].
The primary variables that need to be managed in DFIG
are the rotor speed, reactive power of the DFIG, DC voltage
of the B2B converter, and reactive power of the grid side
converter. Figure 2 displays a schematic diagram of the DFIG
wind turbine's control loops.
Fig. 2. DFIG models and control loop interaction
Both converter controllers [16] employ a feed-forward
decoupled current control, the same as the receiving end
converter (REC) of the VSC-HVDC. The pitch control pitches
the rotor blades to minimize mechanical torque and restore the
generator's rated speed when the wind speed exceeds its
nominal value. The DIFG control system is fully described in
previous literature [17-20].
Three stages of a modular (n+1) level converter with n
cells in each arm are depicted in Figure 3. In order to produce
a multilayer voltage waveform at the converter terminal, this
converter depends on the cell capacitors. Hundreds of cells are
often required to build a single valve for DC transmission
requirements. As the level count increases, the quality of the
AC voltage waveform and the harmonic content both declines.
Low dv/dt switching times and less voltage stress on the
insulation of the interface transformers are produced by small
voltage steps and a large number of SMs. As a result, it is not
necessary to tolerate the DC link voltage or harmonic currents
when using ordinary transformers. Further, switching losses
and harmonic distortion are reduced as a consequence of the
low effective switching frequency per device [29-33].
Because it is of the VSC type, the MMC topology requires
an upper-level control more so than that of the preceding
generation. Additional controllers are needed to govern
internal variables (lower-level control): Now, the phase arms
of the converter have series reactors built into them that
regulate power flow and circulating currents, and each SM
contains DC capacitors. Controlling these variables and
injecting the modulation calls for the use of a balancing
control algorithm (BCA) [21]. Figure 4 [22] depicts a high-
level representation of the control structure.
Lowspeed
shaft High speed
shaft Power flow Power flow
Power flow
Power flow Back to back
converter
Power flow
AC Grid
Rotor side
converter Grid side
converter
Gearbox
WT speed control
Reactive power
control
B2B dc voltage control
GSC reactivepower
control
Transformer
Rotor
Stator
DC
Voltage
ωb*
β
Iqa(ϵ)Idr(ϕ)
DFIG
generator
model
Electric
grid
Speed control
by pitch angle Speed control
by elec.torque
Wind
torque Mechanical
model
DC-link
voltage model
DC-link voltage
Control
Wind
speed
ωb*
ωb
ωb
ωg
Uc
Uc*
Ida(ϵ)
Iqr(ϕ)
Tu
Tem Ig
Us
2. Literature Review
2.1 DFIG
2.2 DFIGControl System
3. Control Strategy
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on POWER SYSTEMS
DOI: 10.37394/232016.2023.18.12
Mohammed Abdeldjalil Djehaf,
Youcef Islam Djilani Kobibi, Mohamed Khatir
E-ISSN: 2224-350X
123
Volume 18, 2023
Fig. 3. (a) MMC converter topology, (b) Submodule configuration
The upper-level control block typically employs power
angle and vector current controls. Power-angle control, also
known as V/F control, is utilized when the VSC converter is
linked to an AC system with a passive load or for wind turbine
applications [22]. While the reactive power is regulated by
modifying the VSC voltage magnitude, the active power is
controlled by adjusting the phase angle shift between the VSC
and the AC system [23].
Fig. 4. Control hierarchy for the MMC station
The upper-level control block typically employs power
angle and vector current controls. Power-angle control, also
known as V/F control, is utilized when the VSC converter is
linked to an AC system with a passive load or for wind turbine
applications [22]. While the reactive power is regulated by
modifying the VSC voltage magnitude, the active power is
controlled by adjusting the phase angle shift between the VSC
and the AC system [23].
Vector current control is a current control-based
technology. When it notices disruptions, this control
technique can immediately limit the current coming into the
converter. Figure 4 illustrates the basic concept of vector-
current control, which is to independently manage the
instantaneous active and reactive power using a quick inner
current control loop. Vector-current control for grid-
connected VSCs has largely taken the place of alternative
control schemes in practically all applications, owing to the
successful implementation of the HVDC transmission system
[23, 35-39, 42-45].
Figure 5 depicts a simplified single-line diagram of an
offshore system. Up to 1,000 MW of offshore wind energy
can be integrated by the MMC-HVDC system using a single
core, 100 km undersea cable, which is modeled by a frequency
dependent (wideband) model at 320 kV voltage. The onshore
MMC is connected to a Thevenin comparable 400 kV, 50 Hz
AC grid.
Fig. 5. MMC-HVDC 401 level HVDC connection of offshore wind farms
to the transmission system
The EMTP-rv environment was selected to simulate the
HVDC system of Figure 5, which is based on the switching
function model and the nearest level control strategy. The
simulated test cases assess the dynamic performance of the
overall system of Figure 5 under various scenarios, including
power flow operation and control strategy.
Several simulations were carried out to understand the
operations of the previously discussed MMC converter-based
wind power evacuation system. The dynamic performance of
the transmission system was verified by simulating the normal
operation of the HVDC connection of offshore wind farms to
the transmission system, and by simulating the dynamic
responses to step change applied to the reactive power
regulator and DC voltage regulator at MMC 2.
The active power produced by wind farms—666 1.5
MW—and exported from MMC1 (an offshore station) to
MMC2 (an onshore station) are shown in Figure 6. During the
3s simulation interval, the power reference at MMC1 is set to
-1 p.u. The DC voltage is adjusted to 640 kV (320 KV), and
the MMC2 operates at unity power factor. The simulation
adopts the constant active power and constant reactive power
mode. The active power setting for MMC1 (rectifier) is 1,000
MW, and for MMC2 is -1000 MW. The MMC 1 operates in
VAC/F control and continuous AC voltage mode (inverter).
The reactive power is maintained at 0 MVAr in MMC 2.
Initial settings for the offshore converter are for it to
operate at maximum active power and absorb 150 MVAr.
Figures 6 demonstrates that the converter can meet the
required reactive power demands specified in the grid code
and that the MMC-HVDC link can respond to the power
demands of the wind farm (leading and lagging power factor
of 0.95). Only the average capacitor voltage of each arm is
presented for clarity in Figure 7, aiming to illustrate the
capacitor voltages of the phase-a sub-modules of MMC 1 and
MMC 2, which are kept balanced at their nominal values. The
voltage imbalances within the converter's arm phases (upper
and lower arm) lead to circulating currents with a second
harmonic component. Thus, the phase voltages at the PCC for
the onshore network (VAC1a) and the offshore network
MMC-2 400 SMs MMC-1 400 SMs
DC
Chopper
Transformer
MMC-HVDC
401 Level
Transformer
50Hz, 1000 MW
50Hz, 400KV
Equivalent source Collector Grid
Cable100 Km
L L
1
n
n+1
2n
1
n
n+1
2n
4. System Description
5. Performance Analysis
5.1 Case $
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on POWER SYSTEMS
DOI: 10.37394/232016.2023.18.12
Mohammed Abdeldjalil Djehaf,
Youcef Islam Djilani Kobibi, Mohamed Khatir
E-ISSN: 2224-350X
124
Volume 18, 2023
(VAC1a) are shown to be almost sinusoidal and as such have
a small harmonic content. This causes the SM capacitor
voltages to ripple more and distorts the arm currents as well.
Circulating currents can be stopped by placing a parallel
capacitor (resonant filter) between the midpoints of the upper
and lower arm inductances on each phase or by actively
controlling the ac voltage reference. Smooth and stable DC
voltages are therefore present.
Fig. 6. Active and reactive power of HVDC connection and the offshore
wind farms in normal operation
Fig. 7. Capacitor voltages of the phase-a sub-modules of MMC 1 and MMC
2 in normal operation
Two test cases were examined to assess the dynamic
responses of MMC regulators. The reactive power order of
MMC station 2 rose from 0 p.u. to 0.1 p.u. at t = 2 s. (onshore
station), a sign of good tracking accuracy. The decoupling of
the actual and reactive power control loops is confirmed by
the fact that it is accomplished in 80 ms without compromising
real power, as illustrated in Figure 8. Reactive power flow in
each AC network can typically be separately controlled, and
real power control is also independent. Figure 9 describes the
response of the onshore MMC to a sudden drop in DC voltage
order from 1 p.u to 0.9 p.u at t=2 s. It is accomplished without
impacting reactive power in 50 ms. The active power
experienced a transient due to this step change. It can also be
observed from Figure 8 that the capacities of the arm remained
balanced despite the decrease in the reference value to 0.9, by
virtue of the direct relationship between the active power and
the DC voltage.
Fig. 8. HVDC system responses for reactive power step changes at MMC2
5.2 Case B
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on POWER SYSTEMS
DOI: 10.37394/232016.2023.18.12
Mohammed Abdeldjalil Djehaf,
Youcef Islam Djilani Kobibi, Mohamed Khatir
E-ISSN: 2224-350X
125
Volume 18, 2023
To evaluate the performance of the control system in both
normal and dynamic operation, the two scenarios were tested
through simulation. In the normal scenario, the offshore wind
turbines’ generated power will be efficiently transported to the
onshore via the HVDC link. The step change simulation of the
dynamic state helps to reveal the tracking accuracy, and assess
the decoupled control of the active and reactive power and the
DC voltage.
Fig. 9. HVDC system responses for DC voltage step changes at MMC2
This study carries out various simulations to evaluate the
steady-state and dynamic performance of the MMC-HVDC
link models, and presents the MMC control system and the
components of the MMC-based HVDC. The simulation
results are consistent with the control theory outlined above.
The links' capacity to react to reactive power demand was
examined using the proposed models. The outcomes
demonstrate that the models might satisfy the reactive power
requirements.
With the aid of the EMTP-rv simulation environment, the
simulations were carried out in the time domain. The research
results show that, for HVDC system applications under
balanced grid conditions, the MMC, based on well-designed
controllers, gives the needed dynamic response. The
simulation results further demonstrate that the balancing
capacity algorithm (BCA) approach can balance the voltage
of the MMC capacitors for both steady-state and dynamic
operational conditions.
Likewise, compared to the multi-level and multi-module
VSC arrangements, the MMC's inherent scalability makes it a
considerably more intriguing option for HVDC system
applications. The performance in unbalanced grid conditions,
as well as under single and three phase faults, will be the
subject of further study.
[1] J. O. Tande, G. Di Marzio, and K. Uhlen, System Requirements for
Wind Power Plants [Online]. Available: System Requirements for
Wind Power Plants (Miscellaneous)|ETDEWEB (osti.gov), Accessed
on: Sep. 5, 2022.
[2] ABB, ABB installs world's most powerful offshore converter platform
in the North Sea, ABB, [Online]. Available:
http://www.abb.com/cawp/seitp202/1FEB0F77B8682A0FC1257E9D
002E4EF2.aspx, Accessed on: Jun. 5, 2022.
[3] Y. Chang and X. Cai, “Hybrid topology of a diode-rectifier-based
HVDC system for offshore wind farms,” IEEE J. Em Sel Top. P., vol.
7, no. 3, pp. 2116-2128, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1109/JESTPE.2018.2881768.
[4] ABB, Largest offshore wind HVDC grid connection in the world
[Online]. Available:
https://library.e.abb.com/public/928326b06e04480ab0f216456bcf28e
a/ABB_Flyer_TechDes_DolWin2_LR.pdf, Accessed on: Sep. 20,
2022.
[5] W. L. Kling, R. L. Hendriks, and J. H. Den Boon, “Advanced
transmission solutions for offshore wind farms,” in Power and Energy
Society General Meeting-Conversion and Delivery of Electrical
Energy in the 21st Century, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, July 20-24, 2008.
https://doi.org/10.1109/PES.2008.4596257.
[6] G. P. Guo, H. F. Wang, Q. Song, J, Zhang, T. Wang, B. X. Ren, and Z.
B. Wang, “HB and FB MMC based onshore converter in series-
connected offshore wind farm,” IEEE T. Power. Electr., vol. 35, no. 3,
pp. 2646-2658, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2019.2929689.
[7] B. Paola, L. K. Wil, L. H. Ralph, and V. Riccardo, “HVDC connection
of offshore wind farms to the transmission system,” IEEE T. Energy
Conver., vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 37-43. 2007.
https://doi.org/10.1109/TEC.2006.889624.
[8] A. Lesnicar and R. Marquardt, “An innovative modular multilevel
converter topology suitable for a wide power range,” in Power Tech
Conference Proceedings, Bologna, Italy, June 23-26, 2003.
https://doi.org/10.1109/PTC.2003.1304403.
[9] B. Gemmell, J. Dorn, D. Retzmann, and D. Soerangr, “Prospects of
multilevel VSC technologies for power transmission,” in Transmission
and Distribution Conference and Exposition, Chicago, IL, USA, April
21-24, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1109/TDC.2008.4517192.
[10] A. Silke, H. Roman, and M. Rainer, “New transformerless, scalable
modular multilevel converters for HVDC-transmission,” in 2008 IEEE
Power Electronics Specialists Conference, Rhodes, Greece, June 15-
19, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1109/PESC.2008.4591920.
[11] T. S. Gum, L. Hee-Jin, S. N. Tae, C. Yong-Ho, L. Uk-Hwa, B. Seung-
Taek, H. Kyeon, and P. Jung-Wook, “Design and control of a modular
multilevel HVDC converter with redundant power modules for
noninterruptible energy transfer,” IEEE T. Power Deliver, vol. 27, no.
3, pp. 1611-1619, 2012.
https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2012.2190530.
[12] G. P. Adam, K. H. Ahmed, S. J. Finney, and B. W. Williams, “AC fault
ride-through capability of VSC-HVDC transmission systems,” in 2010
IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, Atlanta, GA, USA,
September 12-16, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1109/ECCE.2010.5617786.
6. Conclusions
References
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on POWER SYSTEMS
DOI: 10.37394/232016.2023.18.12
Mohammed Abdeldjalil Djehaf,
Youcef Islam Djilani Kobibi, Mohamed Khatir
E-ISSN: 2224-350X
126
Volume 18, 2023
[13] G. Paul, A. Lars, and J. Peter, Wind Energy-The facts Part I
Technology, European Wind Energy Association, 2009 [Online].
Available: https://www.wind-energy-the-facts.org/part-i-
technology.html, Accessed on: Jun. 5, 2022.
[14] J. Manwell, J. Mcgowan, and A. L. Rogers, Wind Energy Explained:
Theory, Design and Application, Wind Engineering, vol. 30, no. 2,
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 2010.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1260/030952406778055054.
[15] V. Nelson, Wind Energy: Renewable Energy and the Environment,
Taylor and Francis, 2009.
[16] R. Pena, J. C. Clare, and G. M. Asher, “Doubly fed induction generator
using back-to-back PWM converters and its application to variable-
speed wind-energy generation,” IEE P-Elect Pow. Appl., vol. 143, no.
3, pp. 231-241, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1049/IP-EPA%3A19960288.
[17] I. Erlich, J. Kretschmann, J. Fortmann, and S. Mueller-Engelhardt,
“Modeling of wind turbines based on doubly-fed induction generators
for power system stability studies,” IEEE T. Power Syst., vol. 22, no.
3, pp. 909-919, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2007.901607.
[18] X. J. Liu and X. B. Kong, “Nonlinear model predictive control for
DFIG-based wind power generation,” IEEE T. Autom. Sci. Eng., vol.
11, no. 4, pp. 1046-1055, 2014.
https://doi.org/10.1109/TASE.2013.2284066.
[19] J. B. Hu, Y. B. He, and J. G. Zhu, “The internal model current control
for wind turbine driven doubly-fed induction generator,” in Conference
Record of the 2006 IEEE Industry Applications Conference Forty-First
IAS Annual Meeting, Tampa, FL, USA, October 08-12, 2006.
https://doi.org/10.1109/IAS.2006.256525.
[20] H. X. Zong, C. Zhang, J. Lyu, X. Cai, M. Molinas, and F. Rao,
“Generalized MIMO sequence impedance modeling and stability
analysis of MMC-HVDC with wind farm considering frequency
couplings,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 55602-55618, 2020.
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2981177.
[21] A. Antonopoulos, L. Angquist, and H. P. Nee, “On dynamics and
voltage control of the modular multilevel converter,” in 2009 13th
European Conference on Power Electronics and Applications,
Barcelona, Spain, September 08-10, 2009.
[22] D. Jovcic and K. Ahmed, High Voltage Direct Current Transmission:
Converters, Systems and DC Grids, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2015,
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119566632.
[23] H. Saad, J. Mahseredjian, and S. Dennetière, Modular Multivel
Converter in EMTP-RV, École Polytechnique de Montréal, Montréal,
Canada, 2014.
[24] C. M. Ong, Dynamic Simulations of Electric Machinery Using
MATLAB/SIMULINK, Prentice Hall PTR, 1998.
[25] I. Boldea, “The induction machine handbook,” Taylor & Francis, 2020.
https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003033417.
[26] R. Li, L. Yu, L. Xu, and G. P. Adam, “Coordinated control of parallel
DR-HVDC and MMC-HVDC systems for offshore wind energy
transmission,” IEEE J. Em. Sel. Top P., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 2572-2582,
2020. https://doi.org/10.1109/JESTPE.2019.2931197.
[27] H. R. Fudeh and C. M. Ong, “Modeling and analysis of induction
machines containing space harmonics Part I: Modeling and
transformation,” IEEE T. Power Ap. Syst., vols. PER-3, no. 8, pp. 41-
42, 1983. https://doi.org/10.1109/MPER.1983.5518874.
[28] A. Munoz and T. A. Lipo, “Complex vector model of the squirrel-cage
induction machine including instantaneous rotor bar currents,” IEEE T.
Ind. Appl., vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 1332-1340, 1999.
https://doi.org/10.1109/28.806047.
[29] R. J. Kerkman, “Steady-state and transient analyses of an induction
machine with saturation of the magnetizing branch,” IEEE T. Ind Appl.,
vols. IA-21, no. 1, pp. 226-234, 1985.
https://doi.org/10.1109/TIA.1985.349684.
[30] J. Moreira and T. Lipo, “Modeling of saturated AC machines including
air gap flux harmonic components,” IEEE T. Ind. Appl., vol. 28, no. 2,
pp. 343-349. https://doi.org/10.1109/28.126740.
[31] W. Levy, C. F. Landy, and M. D. McCulloch, “Improved models for
the simulation of deep bar induction motors,” IEEE T Energy Conver.,
vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 393-400, 1990. https://doi.org/10.1109/60.107238.
[32] W. Li, M. Zhu, P. Chao, X. Liang, and D. Xu, “Enhanced FRT and
postfault recovery control for MMC-HVDC connected offshore wind
farms,” IEEE T Power Syst., vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 1606-1617, 2020.
https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2019.2944940.
[33] O. Thorsen, “Development and industrial application of a practical
model for simulation of saturated deep bar induction machines,” in
Proceedings of 1994 IEEE Industry Applications Society Annual
Meeting, Denver, CO, USA, October 02-06, 1994.
https://doi.org/10.1109/IAS.1994.345487.
[34] S. I. Moon, A. Keyhani, and S. Pillutla, “Nonlinear neural-network
modeling of an induction machine,” IEEE T. Contr. Syst. T., vol. 7, no.
2, pp. 203-211, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1109/87.748146.
[35] S. Sudhoff, D. Aliprantis, B. Kuhn, and P. Chapman, “An induction
machine model for predicting inverter-machine interaction,” IEEE T
Energy Conver., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 203-211, 2002.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TEC.2002.1009469.
[36] M. Poller, “Doubly-fed induction machine models for stability
assessment of wind farms,” in 2003 IEEE Bologna Power Tech
Conference Proceedings, Bologna, Italy, June 23-26, 2003.
https://doi.org/10.1109/PTC.2003.1304462.
[37] Y. Z. Lei, A. Mullane, G. Lightbody, and R. Yacamini, “Modeling of
the wind turbine with a doubly fed induction generator for grid
integration studies,” IEEE T Energy Conver., vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 257-
267, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEC.2005.847958.
[38] J. Ekanayake, L. Holdsworth, X. G. Wu, and N. Jenkins, “Dynamic
modeling of doubly fed induction generator wind turbines,” IEEE T.
Power Syst., vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 803-809, 2003.
https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2003.811178.
[39] J. Ekanayake, L. Holdsworth, and N. Jenkinsb, “Comparison of 5th
order and 3rd order machine models for doubly fed induction generator
(DFIG) wind turbines,” Electr Pow. Syst. Res., vol. 67, no. 3, pp. 207-
215, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7796(03)00109-3.
[40] X. D. Liang and M. Abbasipour, “HVDC transmission and its potential
application in remote communities: current practice and future trend,”
IEEE T. Ind. Appl., vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 1706-1719, 2022.
https://doi.org/10.1109/TIA.2022.3146117.
[41] W. S. Wang, G. H. Li, and J. B. Guo, “Large-scale renewable energy
transmission by HVDC: Challenges and proposals,” Engineering,
2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng.2022.04.017.
[42] H. Z. Li, J. Shair, J. Q. Zhang, and X. R. Xie, “Investigation of
subsynchronous oscillation in a DFIG-based wind power plant
connected to MTDC grid,” IEEE T. Power Syst., pp. 1-10, 2022.
https://doi:10.1109/TPWRS.2022.3197185.
[43] Z. Din, J. Zhang, Z. Xu, Y. Zhang, A. H. Milyani, K. M. Cheema, A.
Nawaz, and Y. Song, “Recent development and future trends of
resonance in doubly fed induction generator system under weak grid,”
IET Renew. Power Gener., vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 807-834, 2022.
https://doi.org/10.1049/rpg2.12378.
[44] B. Yang, B. Q. Liu, H. Y. Zhou, J. B. Wang, W. Yao, S. C. Wu, H. C.
Shu, and Y. X. Ren, “A critical survey of technologies of large offshore
wind farm integration: Summary, advances, and perspectives,” Prot.
Control Mod Power Syst., vol. 7, no. 17., 2022.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41601-022-00239-w.
[45] O. Boutfarjoute, H. Chekenbah, Y. Maataoui, and R. Lasri, “Grid
stability: High penetration levels of renewable energies,” in: Motahhir,
S., Bossoufi, B. (eds) Digital Technologies and Applications, ICDTA
2022, Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, Fez, Morocco, January
28-30, vol. 455, Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-
02447-4_60.
Contribution of Individual Authors to the
Creation of a Scientific Article (Ghostwriting
Policy)
The authors equally contributed in the present
research, at all stages from the formulation of the
problem to the final findings and solution.
Sources of Funding for Research Presented in a
Scientific Article or Scientific Article Itself
No funding was received for conducting this study.
Conflict of Interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare
that are relevant to the content of this article.
Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0
(Attribution 4.0 International, CC BY 4.0)
This article is published under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en
_US
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on POWER SYSTEMS
DOI: 10.37394/232016.2023.18.12
Mohammed Abdeldjalil Djehaf,
Youcef Islam Djilani Kobibi, Mohamed Khatir
E-ISSN: 2224-350X
127
Volume 18, 2023