IEEE PES PowerAfrica

2012 - Conference and Exhibition

9-13 July 2012

Johannesburg, South Africa,

Modelling of Large-Scale Grid-Connected Photovoltaic Systems: Static Grid Support

by Reactive Power Control
Mitra Mirhosseini, Vassilios G. Agelidis, Jayashri Ravishankar
School of Electrical Engineering and Telecommunications
The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
Email: m.mirhosseini@student.unsw.edu.au

Abstract - Modelling of large-scale grid-connected pllOtovoltaic

systems (GCPSs) is needed for different time frameworks to assess
different aspects of botlt component and system performance. Tlte
paper presents extended models of large-scale GCPSs witlt
DigSILENT PowerFactory for static grid support using reactive
power control. Grid codes are taken into account to develop tlte
proposed models wlticlt are able to control tlte system's reactive
power (Q) support under fIXed Q, fixed power factor (cosqJ), cosqJ
dependent of active power (cosqJ(P)) and droop control Q(U).
Selected results of a simulation block for a 10 MVA of PV
generation demonstrates tlte effectiveness of tlte modified models.

I.

INTRODUCTION

The ever increasing size of grid-connected photovoltaic

(PV) systems (GCPSs) will have a profound impact on the
power system and how the GCPS and the power system
interact with one another [1]. As a result, both component and
system studies of large-scale GCPSs are becoming more
crucial. This is due to the fact that the generated power of the
PV systems can be highly variable due to weather conditions
impacting on the power system performance. Therefore,
CGPSs bring about new integration issues to the utility and
PV plant developers, especially when the size of the GCPS
reaches hundreds of MWs to be connected in a single location
both geographically and electrically.
The integration issues of large-scale GCPSs can be
categorized into static and dynamic. Research has been
widely reported on dynamic features of GCPSs using
computer modelling. For example in [2] an electromechanical
transient model of large-scale GCPS has been developed by
the FASTEST (Fast Analysis of STability using the Extended
equal area criterion and Simulation Technologies) software.
The research in [3] has proposed a coordinated control
system to enhance the low voltage ride through (LVRT)
capability of a 5 MW PV plant under various fault conditions
using the PSCAD/EMTDC software. In [4] the impact of
short circuit power at the point of common coupling (PCC) as
well as droop value of the inverter controller on the LVRT
capability is investigated with DigSILENT software [5].
From the static point of view, several areas of research
have been addressed. In [6] the impact of large-scale PV
penetration on the static voltage stability of power system has
been investigated with MATLAB software. Another study in
[7] proposed an overall maximum power point tracking
(MPPT) strategy for a multi-peak problem in the PV array.

978-1-4673-2550-9112/$31.00 2012 IEEE

In [8], a capability chart has been defined in the P-Q plane

using MATLAB, to find all possible pairs of active and
reactive power (P, Q) that can be selected as the inputs of the
inverter control system of the PV generator. From the grid
support perspective, it has been demonstrated in [9] that
converting the function of the PV inverter from unity power
factor to voltage regulation control reduces the operation of
voltage regulators and capacitor banks embedded in the
power system. In [10] the impact of a large GCPS on the
voltage and the reactive power characteristics at the PCC has
been investigated through a P-V curve method using
DigSILENT software. The focus has been on the control
mode of the PV system i.e. current-source or voltage-source
mode. It should be noted that in the above mentioned
references, there is a lack of research on the various methods
of supporting the grid under static conditions with the
reactive power, Q without using external reactive power
compensation devices.
The DigSILENT PowerFactory 14.1 software [5] has a
template model of a GCPS. However, as it will be
demonstrated later in this paper, the current model requires
modification to address reactive power support under static
conditions to meet medium voltage (MV) grid code
requirements.
The objective of this paper is to report a 10 MVA GCPS
using DigSILENT PowerFactory 14.1 software. This paper
will fill the gap in the static reactive power support, by
developing a control system and applying it to the existing
PV inverter configuration to operate under four different
methods of reactive power support as required by the grid
codes.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. The
grid codes (GCs) impacting the design and operation of large
GCPSs [11, 12] are presented in Section II. The existing
model of a GCPS in DigSILENT is introduced in detail in
Section III. Then a 10MW GCPS is designed and reported in
Section IV. The IOMW GCPS model is evaluated and
extended to deal with the requirements of the GCs under
static conditions in Section V. Finally, Section VI
summarizes the conclusions.
II.

GRID CODES

Electricity utilities must fulfill certain national and/or

international obligations in supplying electric power to

customers. These obligations are known as GCs and are set

by transmission system operators (TSOs).
Several European countries are obliged to satisfy
interconnection requirements for the large-scale GCPS based
on power system operation and stability. Germany and Spain
are the leaders in utilizing PV systems with respect to both
the installation and integration technologies. Therefore, they
have more comprehensive GCs in this field. The studies in
this paper will be done according to German GCs [11, 12] for
connecting PV systems to the MV grid. The size of PV
system to be connected to MV grid depends on the respective
grid conditions and is determined by the calculation of TSO.
Possible PV sizes are in the range of 500kW to 100MW [12].
These GCs do not have a major impact on the design of the
PV inverter. However, new control algorithms must be
developed to satisfy them.
A. Reactive Power Control for Static Grid Support

In MV grids, the grid support under static conditions

implies the voltage stability of the system under normal
operation. This is done based on the system requirement or
on demand by the TSO to keep the voltage variation within
acceptable limits. Besides that, the PV plant should be
capable of providing reactive power at any operating point to
keep the power factor within the boundary of 0.95
underexcited to 0.95 overexcited at the PCc. The setpoint for
reactive power control can be adjusted by the TSO via each
of the four methods of supporting reactive power in MV
systems [12]: fixed Q, fixed cos<p, power factor dependent of
active power (cos<p(P and droop control Q(U). One of these
methods can be selected upon the decision of the TSO.
Reactive power is generally forbidden because it
introduces losses in lines, transformers and inverters.
However, to meet the requirements of the GCs, the PV
inverters are usually designed for a bigger size so that in the
case of maximum power generation (Pmax), the Q requirement
can always be achieved. A reasonable oversizing of the
inverter is to set S=1.1 Pmax Therefore, the Q capability
increases from zero to 45.8% Pmax [4].
III.

SYSTEM MODELLING

DigSILENT PowerFactory 14.1 has a template model of a

OAkV 0.5MV A PV system as specified in Fig. 1. The MV
bus represents the PCC of the PV system with the external
grid. The "external grid" means the neighbour TSO [13]. The
PV generator injects OA48MW to the low voltage (LV) bus
under normal conditions with no Q. This active power P is
derived according to the PV array parameters and datasheet
of PV modules in standard test conditions (STC) at the

maximum power point. In STC solar radiation and module

temperature are considered to be 1000W/m2 and 25C,
respectively. A control frame is embedded in the PV
generator system with several sections as depicted in Fig. 2.
The control frame sections are introduced briefly as
follows:
Solar radiation and temperature: the control system
inputs are in W/m2 and DC, respectively.
PV model: calculates the current and voltage at the
maximum power point (MPP) for one module and
then for the whole array considering number of
parallel and series modules.
DC busbar and capacitor model: a representation for
the DC link in a PV system i.e. its output is the input
DC voltage of the inverter.
AC voltage: a device that measures the voltage at the
LV bus.
Power Measurement: a device that measures the active
and reactive power at the LV bus.
Slow frequency measurement: a phase-locked loop
(PLL) device that measures the frequency at the LV
bus.
Active power reduction: a limiter of generated power
in the case of overfrequency.
Phase measurement: a PLL device to derive the
voltage phase at the LV bus.
Controller: the main part of control frame which
adjusts the idre[ and iqre[ for the inverter to control the
active and reactive power injected to the grid. The
reactive power support under dynamic conditions is
done with a droop controller embedded in the
controlIer.
Static generator: the representative of the PV inverter.
In general, the input measurement devices, PV model, DC
busbar and capacitor model are related to DC side of the
inverter and the remaining blocks refer to the AC side.

External Glid

MV--..,....i---

LV

PV Generator

Fig. 1. PV template model in DigSILENT

Uarray

L.
11 E
Radi ation JI
Solar

JF

Temperatore

DC busbar and
Capacitor

idre/

_.

Model

Vdcref
t +--+---------------- ,
ControUer
1::::::=====:jJ

iqre/

l\'leasurement

l\'leasurement

Model

Power

Slow Frequency

larra),

, PhotovoItaic

II
II

'========l.J

-- P i-S ' -.J I

I ft--

Fmeas

I
I

11
1_
r ed ,
lIac

AC Voltage

Active Power Reduction

Static generator

t=======
_

Phase l\feasurement

I
I

Si17re/" COSre/

r2

Fig. 2. Control frame of PV system in DigSILENT

IV.

CASE STUDY

The system considered for the study is a 1OMVA GCPS as

seen in Fig. 3 which consists of 10 parallel IMVA PV
generators (with transformer embedded inside the inverter)
connected to a 20 kV MV grid through an AC line. The
system's specifications are provided in Table I.
External Grid

to be strong grid and its SCP is calculated to be 1OMVA x 3 0

3 00MVA. According t o [14], the short circuit ratio value
below 20 is considered as a "weak grid" connection. The
details of selected PV module and PV inverter can be found
in [15] and [16], respectively.
=

Table I. The case study datasheet

PV Module Characteristics in STC
Optimum Operating
Voltage U''''P1')

PCC

Optimum Operating
Current (l",vo)
Open Circuit

LO

Voltage
MVO

(Vv,)

Short Circuit
Current

(1,,)

Temperature
Coefficient of
LI

LlO

L2

Va,

Temperature
Coefficient of

1"

Number of Parallel
Modules

35.2 V
7.95 A
44.8 V
8.33 A
-0.0033fOC
0.00055/oC
175

Number of Series
BI

B2

(LO-L10)
PV2

Max. DC power
(at cosqJ=l)
Max. DC input
voltage
Max. DC input
current
Min. DC input
voltage
Rated AC power
(at STC)
Nominal AC
Voltage
Max. output
current
AC power
frequency

1133 kW
1000 V
2484 A
450 V
1l00kVA
20 kV
31.8 A
50 Hz

Line Characteristics
Rated Voltage

PVI

19

Modules

BIO

PV Inverter Characteristics

PVIO

Fig. 3. The configuration of a 10 MVA GCPS

Rated Current
(LI-LIO)

20 kV

External Grid Characteristics

Min. Short

0.117 kA

Circuit Power

300 MVA

(Skillin)
Min. Short

To connect this 1OMVA PV system to a stable external

grid, the short circuit power (SCP) of the external grid is
selected to be 30 times the power of PV plant i.e. the short
circuit ratio equals to 30. In this case the external grid is said

Rated Current (LO)

0.456 kA

Circuit
Current(lk",;,,)

8.66 kA

Based on the PV module parameters in Table I, the

maximum active power is calculated as 0.93 MW for each
PV generator at STC, using

P
=

max

(35.2V X 19serieJ X (7.95A X 175parn,Ie,)

To deal with this problem, a control system is designed to

address the required reactive power support considering the
GCs.

(1 )

O.93MW
V.

SIMULATION AND RESULTS

In this section, results are initially reported from the tests

of GCPS under environmental conditions. Then, the results
under static conditions using all four methods of reactive
power support, namely, fixed Q, fixed cos<p, cos<p(P) and
Q(U) are reported. It should be mentioned that the x-axis in
all the graphical figures are in time (s) and the base value of
apparent power to calculate per unit (p.u.) values for active
and reactive power is set to IMVA.

O OO
. ----::-=::----:-:'":":-----'-------'----"'"
6.0000
8.0000
[sJ
10.00
0.0000
2.0000
4.0000
-.-_. PV Array: Module Temperature in p.ll. (base: 25.00 C)
--- PV Array: Solar Radiation in p.ll. (base: 1000.00 W/m2)
---- Cub_l\PQ Measuremenl_PCC: Active Power in p.ll. (base: 10.00 p.ll.)
Fig. 4. Output power vs. irradiation and temperature variation

A. Environmental features assessment

Here, the ability of the model to follow the changes in

solar irradiation and temperature is presented. The PV system
in DigSILENT is modelled in a such way so that the
irradiation has a direct effect on the output power
characteristics of PV system while temperature has an inverse
effect on that [17].
Active power tracking of the solar radiation variation as
well as the inverse effect of temperature rise on the output
power in the last 3 seconds can be observed in Fig. 4.
However, in fact this is not entirely correct because an
increase in the solar radiation will in turn increase the
temperature of the PV arrays and this is not considered in the
existing DigSILENT model of the PV system.

1.00

---- --

Static grid support by fixed reactive power control

To evaluate the validity of the test system for supporting

fixed reactive power to the grid, the dispatch input of all 10
PV generators are set to (P,Q) mode with the same variations
in irradiance and temperature as before and Pmax is set to 0.93
MW and Q to 0.2 MVAr. The results are presented in Fig. 5.
From Fig. 5 it can be concluded that the reactive power
remains constant to 0.2MVAr at the output of PV generator
throughout, as expected. The deviation of Q from setpoint
value (O.2x 10=2 MVAr) at PCC bus is due to the fact that
AC lines consume reactive power.
Therefore, the existing PV system model is capable of
providing fixed reactive power under static conditions.
However, as mentioned before, the Q must be kept limited
so that the cos<p does not exceed the threshold defined in the
GCs. But, as shown in Fig. 5, there is no control on the
reactive power and therefore power factor value in this mode.

----

0.884

0.60

---

0.40
0.201=====::::=::::==="________
-- . ----- . - -- [ s--.
-ogO -- --::
O
2 .00
O 1 00
OO
OO::--6 00
8 00O0
4.00
0
J
o 0

--

PVI: Power Factor

PQ Measurement_B!: Reactive Power in p.ll.

---- CUb_l\PQ Measurement_PCC: Active Power in p.lI. (base:

B.

lO OO
. p.lI.)

- Cub_l\PQ Measurement_PCC: Reactive Power in p.lI. (base:

10.00 p.ll.)

Fig. 5. Performance of the existing PV model in the mode of fixed

reactive power (0=0.2 MVAr)

As depicted in Fig. 6, in the controller block of the PV

frame in DigSILENT there is a voltage control slot (droop
control) which supports the grid in dynamic conditions in the
case of disturbances such as faults. This dynamic controller is
trig?ered when the voltage at the output of PV generator (uac)
devIates more than 10% of the nominal voltage ( Un) i.e. Idud
> 0.1. More information on dynamic grid support is given in
[12].
The output of droop control block iq( is limited by
maximum and minimum reactive current i . e . i q-max and I'q-min,
.
respectIvely.
Then iq( enters the current limiter block along
with calculated id and duac to compute reference values idrej
and I.qref' These values are used by the PV inverter to adjust
the active and reactive power, respectively. The outputs of
the current limiter are restricted by maximum allowed

absolute current (maxAbsCur) and maximum absolute

reactive current in normal operation (maxlq).
maxAbsCur, maxlq

Low-pass
Filter

Current
Limiter

duo,

Un

The shaded region is the acceptable area of reactive power

operation and the Q limits are determined based on the worst
case scenario of cos<p=0.95.
Now, the developed control system is evaluated in the test
system to show its validity to support the grid with reactive
power based on GCs. The performance of the proposed
controller is shown in Fig. 9.
The reactive power remains fixed in the first 5 seconds
where cos<p is within limits as recommended by the GCs and
gains the maximum acceptable value in the next 5 seconds to
maintain the power factor within the limits.
This controller is added to the inverter controller in the
constant Q mode. To compare with the results of Fig. 5, the
Qrej in PY generator is set to 0.2 MYAr.

Fig. 6. Dynamic reactive power support integrated with the existing

PV model in DigSILENT

P (P.li.)

These principles of the dynamic controller can be

extended to a static control system that can operate in parallel
with the dynamic controller to support the grid with reactive
power under static conditions (Iduacl < 0.1). Such a static
controller is a proportional-integral (PI) controller and is
shown in Fig. 7. The desired reactive power Qrej(which is set
by the TSO) is compared with the actual reactive power (Qm)
measured by the voltage measurement device at the output of
PY generator and the mismatch value passes through the PI
controller. The output of the PI controller (Qnorm) then divided
by Uac to obtain respective reactive current (iqnorlll) which goes
to the current limiter. In the current limiter a switch is
introduced and embedded to select the suitable iq (iqj or iqnorm)
depending on the level of voltage drop. In addition, Qm passes
through a low-pass filter to mitigate its high frequency
components.

_P_in_-+t1

QLimits

==-----i

PI Controller

-1

0.95

Q (P.li.)

0.333

-0.333

Fig. 8. Reactive power capability curve of PV inverter in DigSILENT

1.20
0.80

--- ---

0.971
----

0.00

:J

---- ------------- ----

0.40

Qnorm

(lagging)

COS(jl

---

9.250 s
0.950

-------------------=
- ------

0.40
-0.80------------
0.0000
2.0000
4.0000
6.0000
8.0000
[sl
10.00

Low-pass
Filter

Control1er: Minimum Reactive Power Limit in p.u.

Controller: Maximum Reactive Power Limit in p.ll.

--.- PQ Measurement- B1: Reactive Power in p.u.

Fig. 7. Proposed control system to support reactive power control in

static conditions

--- PVi: Power Factor

Fig. 9. Performance of modified model in the fixed reactive power

mode

Furthermore, to implement the cos<p restrictions to the

static control system, another block is designed to calculate
the maximum and minimum acceptable Q values (QlIlax and
QlIlin) to be applied as the upper and lower limits of the PI
controller. The Qmax and Qmm are defined according to the
reactive power capability curve of the inverter and also the
power factor limitations as depicted in Fig. 8.

C. Static grid support by fixed power factor control

Now the fixed power factor mode of reactive power

control is selected and the results are presented in this
section. The dispatch input is set to (P, cosrp) mode with
values of 0.93 MW and 0.97, respectively. In this case the Q
as well as P should follow the solar irradiations so that the

cos<p remains constant. As illustrated in Fig. 10, Q remains

constant and thus the cos<p varies.
Moreover, the German GCs are also violated because the
cos<p exceeds the limitations. Therefore, the model has to be
modified in such way that the reactive power control can be
supported by fixed cos<p in static conditions.
1.00

the same as Pin in Fig. 7 and here Pn is equal to rated active

power of PV inverter.
To show the validity of this control system, the solar
radiation is varied in such way so that all 3 parts of the Fig.
12 (PiPn < 0.2, 0.2 < PlPn < 0.8, PIPn > 0.8) are depicted. The
results are demonstrated in Fig. 13 in which the active power
value in p.u. is equal to PlPn.
1.50
1.00

___________________________

----0.970

0.50

1=====:::==================---

--- -

0.00

0.20

0.00"-------'--'0.0000
2.0000
4.0000
6.0000
8.0000
[51
10.00
--- PVI: Power Factor

---- Cuh_l\PQ Measurement_PCC: Active Power in p.ll. (base:

PQ Measurement_B 1: Reactive Power in p.ll.

10.00 p.ll.)

- Cuh_l\PQ Measurement_PCC: Reactive Power in p.ll. (base:

10.00 p.ll.)

Fig. 10. Performance of the existing PV model in fixed power factor

As discussed before, a static control method is applied

again, but with a constant cos<p as the reference setpoint.
Based on this, the related Qrej is obtained. The rest of the
procedure is the same as previous. Again the proposed
control method is tested under constant cos<p= 0.97.
As in Fig. 11, a fixed power factor is obtained with the
same value as set in the reference. Moreover, the power
factor delivered to the PCC is almost the same as the
reference. The deviation from the setpoint value (0.97) at the
PCC is the reduction of Q provided at the PCC bus due to the
consumption of reactive power by AC lines. The negative
value of power factor in the external grid is due to the fact
that any power "delivered" to the external grid has a negative
value.
D.

Static grid support by power factor dependent of active

power coscp(P) control

In this method, the cos<p is controlled by the active power

generated by the PV generator. The cos<p-P characteristic is
selected from [12] by defining two vertices as 0.2 and 0.8
which is normalized based on the rated apparent power of the
PV system (Fig. 12).
There is no cos<p(P) control technology in the template
model of PV system in the DigSILENT. As a result and based
on the previous proposed solutions, a static control system is
designed to address this requirement. Here the Qrej is derived
based on the cos<p-P relationship. Active power in Fig. 13
refers to generated power of 1 MVA PV system which is also

7.3305

-0.50

:l

-1.00b====================
0.0000
2.0000
4.0000
6.0000
8.0000
[51
10.00

Controller: Minimum Reactive Power Limit in p.ll.

Controller: Maximum Reactive Power Limit in p.ll.

-- PQ Measurement_Bl: Reactive Power in p.ll.

--- PYI: Power Factor
- External Grid: Total Power Factor

Fig. 11. Performance of modified model in the mode of fixed power

factor

cos<p
0.95 +-------... - --- ---- -------- - ------- - ---- ---- --,
-0

E
'13

><
I!)
...
I!)
>
o

-0

PIP"

E
'13

0.95

><
I!)
...
I!)
-0
C
::l

Fig. 12. Selected cos<p-P characteristic

The reactive power remains within the acceptable limits

and the minimum obtained value of power factor is 0.95.
E. Static grid support by droop control Q(U)

Reactive power controlled by voltage i.e. Q(U) known as

droop control is the fourth method tested in this paper for
reactive power support under static conditions. This method
attempts to alleviate the voltage variations less than 10% of
Un. First, the existing model of the PV system in DigSILENT
is tested to check its capability to support the grid under static
conditions with droop controller. For this purpose, the local
voltage controller in the PV generator is adjusted to the droop

mode and the droop value is set to 2 (200%) and a voltage

drop less than 0.1 Un is applied to the MVO bus. In the
voltage drop duration this controller should inject reactive
t
C

1:::; :
:
_
?_---

=0800

4 150s
0999

0 40

=--=-==':--=----:----+--: .:.-

: r

------

T==

0950

---=--=--

1.20f-__________

PVI: Power Factor

-- PQ Measurement_BI: Active Power in p.ll.

---- Controller: Minimum Reactive Power Limit in p.lI.

0.80

5.482 s
0.935 p.u.

_____________

.J

t------

-0.401------'-----'------'
0.0000
2.0000
4.0000
6.0000
8.0000
[s]
10.00
--

Fig. 14 shows the results after activating the droop mode

of the existing model with droop equal to 200%. For better
illustration of the results in the voltage drop, solar radiation
and temperature values are set constant throughout the
simulation. It is obvious that there is no reactive power
injection during the voltage drop.

Voltage Measurement-PCC: Output Voltage, Absolute in p.ll.

-- Controller: Droop for static Q support in p.ll. (base:

1.20

1-__________

___ _

0.80

6.372 s
0.921 p.ll.

0.40
0.00 --------------------.------------,---------0.40'-------'--'---"0.0000
2.0000
4.0000
6.0000
8.0000
[s]
10.0

--- Controller: Maximum Reactive Power Limit in p.u.

PV 1: Power Factor

- - PQ Measurement Reactive Power in p.u.

Fig. 15. Performance of modified static droop control

VI.

PVI: Droop in p.u. (base:

CONCLUSION

In this paper a GCPS system is modeled with the software

DigSILENT PowerFactory and assessed for supporting the
grid under static conditions with different reactive power
control methods. The existing model has been modified to
address fixed Q, fixed cos<p as well as cos<p(P) and droop
control in the case of reactive power support. The
effectiveness of the modified models has been evaluated and
confirmed with a 10 MVA GCPS system. In summary, the
proposed reactive power control methods to GCPS help to
improve the performance of the system under static
conditions.

-- Cub_l\Voltage Measurement_PCC: Output Voltage. Absolute in p.ll.

PV :1 Power Factor

4.00 p.ll.)

--- Controller: Minimum Reactive Power Limit in p.u.

1.60

PQ Measurement_BI: Reactive Power in p.ll.

Fig. 13. Performance of proposed cosq>(P) method

-0-0-

___

0.40
0.00

---- Controller: Maximum Reactive Power Limit in p.n.

--

1.60

___m ___m__m_mn

- 0.80L--------------------
0.0000
2.0000
4.0000
6.0000
8.0000
[s]
10.01
--_.

where uac is the voltage at the output of PV generator and

duac is the voltage deviation from the Un. The capability of
the developed model is shown in Fig. 15. For better
comparison with the existing model, the droop value in the
proposed method is set to 2 (200%).
Based on the results in Fig. 15, there is voltage
improvement in the PCC bus by the injection of reactive
power. Nevertheless, the power factor drops a bit due to the
rise in reactive power, but it is still within the GC limits.

APPENDIX

400.00 %)

Nomenclature

-- PQ Measurement_BI: Reactive Power in p.ll.

Fig. 14. Performance of the droop control in existing PV model of

DigSILENT

Therefore, a method which is the same as droop control in

the dynamic grid support in DigSILENT is proposed.
However, the static controller is triggered when the voltage
drop is less than 10%. The Q-U relationship is shown in (2).
(2)

Deviation of PV generator voltage from

the nominal value
Active current for controlling generated
active power
Reference value for the active current
Current value at maximum power point of
PV module
Reactive current for controlling generated
reactive power
Generated reactive current by the droop

controller under fault conditions

[4]

A. Marinopoulos, F. Papandrea, M. Reza, S. Norrga, F. Spertino, and

R. Napoli, "Grid integration aspects of large solar PV installations:

iq-max

Maximum acceptable reactive current

iq-nun

Minimum acceptable reactive current

iqnorm

iqre[

Generated reactive current by the

proposed PI controller under static
conditions
Reference value for the reactive current

lsc

Short circuit current of PV module

maxAbsCur

maximum allowed absolute current

maxlq

maximum absolute reactive current in

normal operation
Generated active power by PV generator

[8]

[9]

Pn

Maximum generated active power by PV

generator
Nominal power of PV inverter

Q, Qm

Generated reactive power by PV system

grid-integrated PV station and analysis its impact on grid voltage," in

Qmax

Generated reactive power by the proposed

PI controller under static conditions
Maximum acceptable reactive power

2009,pp. 1-6.

Qmin

Minimum acceptable reactive power

Qre[
Uac

The desired reactive power to be injected

into the grid under static conditions
Voltage at the output of PV system

Un

Nominal voltage of PV generator

Vmpp

Voltage value at maximum power point of

PV module
Open circuit voltage of PV module

P, Pin
Pmax

Qnorm

Voc

LVRT capability and reactive power/voltage support requirements," in

IEEE Trondheim PowerTech,2011,pp. 1-8.
[5]

DigSILENT

PowerFactory

14.1.

[Online]

powerfactory.html.
[6]

R. Shah, N. Mithulananthan, R. C. Bansal, K.

"Power

accessed

May

2012.

http://www.digsilent.de/index.php/products

Available:

system

voltage

stability

as

Y. Lee, and A. Lomi,

affected

by

large-scale

PV

penetration," in International Conference on Electrical Engineering and

Informatics (lCEEI),2011,pp. 1-6.
[7]

L. Lei, Z. Zhao, W. Xu, and

J. Zhu, "Modeling and analysis of MW

level grid-connected PV plant," in

IECON 2011 - 37th Annual

Conference on IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, 2011, pp. 890-895.

F. Delfino, R. Procopio, M. Rossi, and G. Ronda, "Integration of large

size photovoltaic systems into the distribution grids: a p-q chart
approach to assess reactive support capability," lET Renewable Power
Generation,vol. 4,pp. 329-340,2010.
R. A. Walling and K. Clark, "Grid support functions implemented in
utility-scale PV systems," in IEEE PES Transmission and Distribution
Conference and Exposition 2010,pp. 1-5.

[10] X. Xu, Y. Huang, G. He, H. Zhao, and W. Wang, "Modeling of large

International Conference on Sustainable Power Generation and Supply,
[11] Bundesverband

der

Energie-

und

Wasserwirtschaft

e.V.(BDEW),

"Erzeugungsanlagen am Mittelspannungsnetz (Richtlinie fur Anschluss

und Parallelbetrieb von Erzeugungsanlagen am Mittelspannungsnetz),"
German Grid Codes,Berlin,2008.
[12] E.

Troester, "New German grid codes for connecting PV systems to

the Medium Voltage Power Grid," presented at the 2nd International

Conference on Concentrating Photovoltaic Power plant, Darmstadt,
Germany,2009.
[13] M. Kizilcay, K. Teichmann, A. Agdemir, M. Losing, and C. Neumann,
"Blackstart

of

380-kV

Transmission

System

with

Unloaded

Transformers after a System Collapse," presented at the 17th Power

Systems Computation Conference (PSCC),Stockholm,Sweden,2011.
[14] M. F. Farias, P. E. Battaiotto, and M. G. Cendoya, "Wind Farm to
Weak-Grid Connection using UPQC custom power device," in IEEE
International Conference on Industrial Technology (ICIT) 2010, pp.
1745-1750.
[15] SUNTECH. 280 Watt RELIATHON Solar Module [Online] accessed

REFERENCES

May

2012.

Available:

http://am.suntech

power.com/images/stories/pdf/datasheets/20IIISTP275_VRM_UL.pdf
[1]

F. Katiraei and

1. R. Aguero, "Solar PV Integration Challenges," IEEE

Power and Energy Magazine vol. 9,pp. 62-71,2011.

[2]

F. Li, W. Li, F. Xue,

Y. Fang, T. Shi, and L. Zhu, "Modeling and

simulation of large-scale grid-connected photovoltaic system,"

International

Conference

on

Power

System

(POWERCON),2010,pp. 1-6.
[3]

G. M. S. Islam, A. AI-Durra, S. M. Muyeen, and

in

Technology

J. Tamura, "Low

voltage ride through capability enhancement of grid connected large

scale photovoltaic system," in IECON 2011 - 37th Annual Conference
on IEEE Industrial Electronics Society,2011,pp. 884-889.

[16] SMA Solar Technology. Sunny CENTRAL 1000 MVA

[Online]

accessed May 2012. Available: http://www.sma.de/en/products/central

inverters/sunny-central-800mv-I1-1000mv-II-1250mv-ll.htrnl
[17] S. Chowdhury, S. P. Chowdhury, G. A. Taylor, and

Y. H. Song,

"Mathematical modelling and performance evaluation of a stand-alone

polycrystalline PV plant with MPPT facility," in IEEE Power and
Energy Society

General

Meeting

- Conversion

Electrical Energy in the 21st Century,2008,pp. 1-7.

and Delivery of