www.ietdl.

org
Published in IET Renewable Power Generation
Received on 28th January 2014
Revised on 6th June 2014
Accepted on 16th July 2014
doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2014.0035

ISSN 1752-1416

Transient stability of power system integrated with

doubly fed induction generator wind farms
Md Ayaz Chowdhury1, Weixiang Shen2, Nasser Hosseinzadeh3, Hemanshu Roy Pota4
1

Faculty of Engineering, Computing & Science, Swinburne University of Technology Sarawak Campus, Room #E319,
Block E, Jalan Simpang Tiga, Kuching 93350, Sarawak, Malaysia
2
Faculty of Science, Engineering and Technology, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Melbourne, VIC 3122,
Australia
3
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat 123, Oman
4
School of Engineering and Information Technology, The University of New South Wales@ Australian Defence Force
Academy, Canberra, ACT 2600, Australia
E-mail: mchowdhury@swinburne.edu.my

Abstract: A new quantitative assessment of transient stability for power systems integrated with doubly fed induction generator
(DFIG) wind farms is proposed by evaluating the transient energy margin (TEM) through the formulation of the transient energy
function (TEF) for multimachine systems. To achieve an accurate TEM, the TEF is modied to account for the separation of the
critical machines from the system and an unstable equilibrium point is calculated on the basis of post-fault trajectory reaching the
potential energy boundary surface. Simulation results show that such power systems integrated with DFIG wind farms are more
sensitive to transient events of higher voltage sag, longer fault clearing time, lower load operation and higher wind power
penetration level. It is also observed that machines located far from the fault are also exposed to inferior transient stability
because of fault with geographical dispersion of wind farms. As a result, advanced switchgear, faster isolators, more efcient
power reserve systems and advanced reactive power compensating devices must be equipped to ensure reliable operation of
power systems integrated with the DFIG wind farms during transient events.

Introduction

The increasing concerns on environmental issues and

shortage of fossil fuel have led to accelerating the research
and development of sustainable and alternative energy
sources. Among all these sources, wind power has proven
to be not only an effective means to reduce the CO2
emissions but also the most economical one. In 2011, wind
power capacity reached 239 GW worldwide which was 3%
of global electricity demand. If the growth rate of 22.9% in
2011 is maintained, wind power capacity will be doubled
every 3 years and by 2020 wind power is predicted to reach
1900 GW worldwide which is 12% of global electricity
demand [1].
Higher installation capacity of wind farms and higher
interconnection voltage level bring about wider inuence of
wind farms on the transient stability of power systems
during normal operations and transient faults. Studies on
the transient stability of conventional power plants under
various circumstances have been dominated by
conventional synchronous generators (SGs). With high
penetration of wind farms into power systems, it is
imperative to study the impact of different types of wind
turbine generators on power system dynamic behaviours
elaborately and systematically, where the generators could

IET Renew. Power Gener., pp. 111

doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2014.0035

be either xed-speed induction generators, doubly fed

induction generators (DFIGs) or direct-drive SGs which
have different dynamic responses from the conventional
SGs. Owing to recent progress in modern power electronics,
the use of DFIG wind turbines provides a number of
advantages compared with other wind turbine generators,
such as cheaper price, high-energy efciency, decoupled
controllability and improved power quality [1]. Thus, this
paper focuses on investigating the transient stability of
power systems integrated with the DFIG wind farms.
The impact of grid integration of wind power on the power
system transient stability (PSTS) in terms of generator types,
power system topologies, fault types and location has been
studied. Some writers advocate that if some traditional SGs
are replaced with DFIGs of the same capacity, the PSTS
would be enhanced [2, 3]. Further research reveals that the
PSTS can be either improved or reduced when some
traditional SGs are replaced with DFIGs of the same
capacity [4]. This nding is afrmed with identication of
electromechanical modes of oscillation using eigenvalue
analysis that inuences the PSTS benecially or
detrimentally with increasing DFIG integration [5].
However, the study is unable to point to any denite
transient state of power system. Hence, no accurate and
precise action can be taken from limited qualitative study to

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

www.ietdl.org
signicantly enhance the transient stability of power systems
integrated with the DFIG wind farms.
An advanced quantitative study is carried out by means of
the critical clearing time (CCT) [6], the transient rotor angle
stability index (TRASI) [7] and the transient stability index
(TSI) [8]. The study reveals that the PSTS increases rst
and then decreases with the increasing capacity of DFIGs
and may have an adverse impact in response to large faults
initiated near the DFIG wind farms.
The results in the above-mentioned articles are still limited
and preliminary. The parameters used for the quantication of
the PSTS have limitations as well. The concept of the CCT is
of limited value as far as a DFIG is concerned, because the
protection system is activated during fault negating transient
stability assessment within the statutory limits [9]. The
calculation of the post-fault rotor angle in the TRASI and
the TSI can only measure the sensitivity of transient
stability, that is, the status of the stability of the system
followed by a fault.
This paper investigates the impact of the DFIG wind farm
and its geographical dispersion on the PSTS with the
variation of different factors, like the voltage sag, the fault
clearing time, the load and the wind power penetration level
(termed as wind penetration in this paper). The transient
energy margin (TEM) is used for quantifying transient
stability. The TEM is calculated through the evaluation of
transient energy function (TEF). Since the impact of wind
farm integration on the SGs in the system is analysed
through the fault response of the SGs located at different
places of the power system, the SGs are only taken into
account in the formulation of the TEF.
The TEM determines not only the status but also the degree
of system stability by yielding the information on the
absorbing capability of the transient energy within the
stability limit (if the post-disturbance system is stable) or
the requirement of absorbing capability for switching into
stable state (in case of the post-disturbance system being
unstable). Thus, the TEM can provide deeper insight into
the impact of the DFIG wind farms on the transient stability
of the power system for improving the accuracy of the
operational decision making process to maintain the system
stability.
According to the law of energy conservation, the TEF is
conservative (remains unchanged) during the post-fault
period, that is, transient kinetic energy (TKE) and transient
potential energy (TPE) are equally exchanged after fault is
removed [10]. The TEF conservation is violated, because of
the separation of a number of critical machines (machines
that are likely to lose synchronism from the rest of the
system) from the remaining machines immediately after a
fault [11]. The system simulation result in [11, 12] proves
that the total TKE never reaches zero, even though the
system transient is stable. It means not all TKEs participate
in systems rst swing separation. It also shows that not all
TPEs are responsible for absorbing TKEs during a rst
swing transient; a part of TPEs balances that portion of
TKEs which does not contribute to the rst swing
separation [13]. Thus, the formulation of the TEF is
modied to account these phenomena for accurate transient
stability assessment.
This paper is organised as follows: Section 2 states the
calculation of the TEM through the formulation of the
modied TEF. Section 3 illustrates the impact of the DFIG
wind farms and its geographical dispersion on the PSTS
with the variation of different inuential factors on transient
stability. Finally, the conclusions are drawn in Section 4.
2

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

TEM calculation through TEF formulation

At the occurrence of a fault, the generators accelerate and the

power system gains kinetic and potential energy and moves
away from the equilibrium point. After fault clearing, the
kinetic energy is converted into the potential energy. The
system must be capable of absorbing the kinetic energy
before the generators can operate in a new equilibrium
point. Otherwise, the system goes unstable in case of its
failure of absorbing the kinetic energy. The post-fault
energy injected into the system is termed as transient
energy (Ecl ) and the maximum energy absorbed by the
post-fault system is termed as critical energy (Ecr). TEM
calculation involves these transient energies, which are
determined using the TEF.
2.1

Swing equations

Swing equations for the ith generator in a power systems with

respect to centre of inertia (COI) is given by [14]
dai
= vi
dt
Ji

n
dvi
J

= Pmi Pei i
(P Pei )
dt
JT i=1 mi

(1)
(2)

where is the angle between the rotor ux and the resultant

magnetic ux in the air gap with respect to COI, is the
generator rotor speed with respect to COI, Pm is the
mechanical input power and Pe is the electrical output
power. J is the moment of inertia, where
JT =

n

Ji

(3)

i=1

2.2

Support vector clustering

The phenomenon of the separation of the critical machines

from the remaining machines is taken into consideration in
formulation of the TEF for accurate calculation of transient
stability assessment. Support vector clustering (SVC)
enables fast identication of coherent machines through
time-domain simulations and the critical machines are
identied through their non-coherence with the remaining
machines in a particular group by determining the number
of clusters. The procedures for obtaining clusters by SVC
are described in the following subsection [15].
2.2.1
Formulating
coherency
measure: A
time-domain coherency measure is used to evaluate the
coherency behaviour of system generators, which is derived
from swing curves. The coherency measure between
generator m and generator n (Cmn) is given by





tk [[0,T ] vm (tk ) vn (tk )

(4)
Cmn = 1




max
tk [[0,T ] vm (tk ) vn (tk )
where m(tk) is the mth generator speed deviation at time
instant tk and n(tk) is the nth generator speed deviation at
time instant tk.
A larger value of Cmn shows the higher similarity between
generator m and generator n in time-domain responses.
IET Renew. Power Gener., pp. 111
doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2014.0035

www.ietdl.org
2.2.2 Performing SVC algorithm: The SVC algorithm
consists of two major phases. In the rst phase, the given
data in the original input space are mapped into a
high-dimensional feature space by a non-linear Gaussian
kernel transformation. In feature space, support vectors are
used to identify the smallest radius of the sphere that
encloses all the data points. In the second phase, the
obtained sphere is transferred back to the input data space,
which forms several contours, and these contours are
treated as the corresponding cluster boundaries. Points
enclosed by each separate contour are associated with the
same cluster.

Sufxes cr and sys denote the critical machines and the

remaining machines in the systems, respectively.
Swing equations can now be written as
du
= v
dt

(13)

ncr
sys
Jeq

dv Jeq

=
(Pmi Pei )
(P Pei ) = fi (u)
dt
Jcr i=1
Jsys i=1 mi
n

Jeq

(14)
where

2.2.3 Computing validity index: Estimation of the

correct number of clusters depends on proper tuning of the
Gaussian kernel parameter q. The initial value of q is taken as
qinit =

2



max1i,jN ,i=j Xi Xj 

v = vcr vsys

(15)

u = acr asys

(16)

Jcr Jsys
Jcr + Jsys

(17)

Jeq =

(5)

Replacement of (13) in (14) results in

where {xm } # X is a set of N points, with X # <d .
The optimal number of cluster is chosen when the validity
index () reaches its minimum. is given by

k N 2 


u
X

X

i
j
i=1
j=1 ij
a=
(6)

2


N minij Xi Xj 
where uij is the membership of the jth point to the ith cluster, k
is the number of clusters and N is the total number of points in
the dataset. The value of X i represents the centre of the ith
clusters.

Jeq v dv = fi (u) du

(18)

Integrating (18) with the appropriate upper and lower limits

provides the expression of the TEF for n generators
ncr
Jeq v2 Jeq

E=
2
Jcr i=1
sys
Jeq

+
Jsys i=1

ui
uSEPi

ui
uSEPi

(Pmi Pei ) du

(Pmi Pei ) du = EKE (v ) + EPE (u)

(19)

2.3 TEF formulation considering separation of the

critical machines
The rotor speed and the corresponding rotor angle for the
group of the critical machines and the remaining machines
are calculated separately as follows
ncr
1

vcr =
J v
Jcr i=1 i i

vsys =

nsys
1

Jsys

Ji vi

Pei =
(7)

(8)

i=1

cr
1

Ja
Jcr i=1 i i

acr =
asys =

nsys
1

Jsys

Ji ai

Ji

(11)

i=1

Jsys =

nsys


i=1

IET Renew. Power Gener., pp. 111

doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2014.0035

Ji

(Cij sin uij + Dij cos uij )

(20)

j=1,j=i

where C and D depend on the induced voltage, resistance and

reactance of machines and impedance of all transmission
lines, transformers and loads.
Finally, we have the TEF as follows (see equation at the
bottom of the next page)

2.4
(10)

i=1

ncr

n

(9)

where
Jcr =

where SEP is the post-fault stable equilibrium point (SEP),

EKE is the TKE and EPE is the TPE.
Electrical output power from the ith row jth column
element can be represented as [16]

(12)

TEM calculation

The system critical energy (Ecr) can be calculated considering

= u and EKE = 0 in (21), where u is the unstable
equilibrium point (UEP). The total system transient energy
(Ecl ) can be calculated considering = c in (21), where c
is the critical clearing angle (CCA).
The ratio of the difference between the critical energy and
the transient energy to the critical energy gives the TEM
T=

Ecr Ecl
100%
Ecr

(22)

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

www.ietdl.org
The TEM provides a quantitative insight into the measure of
the PSTS. From (1), if T is positive, it indicates that the
post-fault system is stable with the systems capacity for
further absorbing T per cent of the critical energy; if T is
negative, it indicates that the post-fault system is unstable
and the system should be capable of absorbing an extra T
per cent of the critical energy for switching into a stable state.
2.5

Computation of post-fault SEP, CCA and UEP

Simulation is carried out in the time domain prior to a fault

until the post-fault trajectory reaches the potential energy
boundary surface (PEBS) of the reduced system. The
post-fault trajectory crosses the PEBS if and only if gi()
changes its sign from negative to positive [11]. The
intersection point of the post-fault trajectory and the PEBS
is identied as an exit point.
Considering the exit point as an initial condition, the
reduced system trajectory is integrated until the TPE
reaches its rst local minimum. The TPE is approximated as

The post-fault SEP is calculated using the following equation

[17]

uSEP = sin1

Pm X
V VB

EPE =

n 

gi (u) du

(27)

i=1

(23)

where V is the internal voltage of the generator, VB is the bus

voltage and X is the transient reactance equivalent impedance
of all transmission lines, machines and components in the
system.
The CCA is determined by the following equation [17] (see
(24))
where o is the pre-fault SEP and PF is the maximum rst
swing output power followed by clearing the faulty line.
These are determined through time-domain simulation.
Conventionally, the UEP is calculated by [16]

uu = p us

(25)

The UEP derived from this method is termed as the closest

UEP (CU). The CU method holds the most conservative
value that may not be the accurate one. As a result, an
unstable power system shall always be detected while a
stable power system may sometime be identied as unstable
during the PSTS assessment after a fault. Boundary of
stability-region-based controlling UEP (BCU) method is
used in this paper to nd out more accurate UEP [16, 18] in
following manner:
A reduced form of the multimachine power system is found
out, which is dened as [16]
ncr
sys
Jeq

du Jeq

=
(Pmi Pei )
(P Pei ) = gi (u)
dt
Jcr i=1
Jsys i=1 mi
n

(26)
where gi() is called the acceleration power between the
COIs of the set of critical machines and the set of
remaining machines.

Using the minimum TPE value as initial guess, the UEP is

obtained by solving a system of non-linear equations given by
gi (u) = 0

2.6

(28)

Numerical evaluation of the BCU method

Numerical evaluation of the BCU method is carried out as

compared with the CU methods for TEF through time run
simulation, which is carried out by solving dynamical
system
equations
by
RungeKutta
fourth-order
approximation method with t = 0.001 s [19]. For the
analysis, a three phase-to-ground fault is assumed on a 10
machine, 39 bus power system, which is detailed in Section
3.1.
Table 1 shows the CCT with faults at various locations on a
10 machine, 39 bus power system for BCU and CU methods.
Table 1 CCT with faults for BCU and CU methods
Faulted bus

CCT
CU method

37
20
27
34
11
26
21
12
25
16
33
23

0.394
0.302
0.06
0.3520
0.345
0.052
0.2320
no convergence
0.567
0.336
0.314
0.255

BCU method
0.543
0.298
0.2333
0.464
0.351
0.138
0.319
0.515
0.2430
0.333
0.336
0.268

n


n

ncr

 ui +uj
cr
cr 1

Jeq v2 Jeq

E(v , u) =
P (u uSEPi )
Cij cos uij cos uSEPij
Dij cos uij d(ui + uj )
2
Jcr i=1 mi i
uSEPi +uSEPj
i=1 j=i+1

n


nsys 1 nsys
sys

 ui +uj





Jeq

+
P u uSEPi
Cij cos uij cos uSEPij
Dij cos uij d(ui + uj )
Jsys i=1 mi i
uSEPi +uSEPj
i=1 j=i+1


uc = cos


Pm p sin1 (Pm /PF ) uo
1 Pm
+ cos p sin
PF
PF

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

(21)

(24)

IET Renew. Power Gener., pp. 111

doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2014.0035

www.ietdl.org

Fig. 2 Single-line diagram of New England power system

Fig. 1 Flowchart for step-by-step procedure of TEM calculation

It is observed that the CU method selects higher energy level

UEP among the cluster for faulted bus 25. Therefore, CCT of
0.567 is obtained using the CU method, which is higher than
the BCU method. In another observation, the CU strategy
does not converge to correct UEP for faulted bus 12
because of which estimate of CCT is too low. This justies
the use of the BCU method for TEF.
A owchart addressing the step-by-step procedure of the
TEM calculation is shown in Fig. 1.

3
3.1

Simulation results
Test system

IEEE New England power system is adopted in this paper,

which is modelled using PSS/E software package [10]. This
power system consists of a 10 machine, 39 bus power
system with 19 loads and 46 transmission lines as shown in
Fig. 2. G1G10 are the groups of a number of those SGs
that remain in synchronism in the post-fault scenario. Load
ow data of the system are given in Table 2 [20].
When all the traditional SGs are used in the IEEE New
England power system, it is referred to as base operation.
If any SG is replaced with the DFIG wind farm of the
higher capacity (because of capacity factor of wind farm
being lower) and the same static output in the system, it is
referred to as wind operation. Wind operation corresponds
to the wind penetration of 15%. The impact of the
DFIG-equipped wind farm on the PSTS is studied by
comparing the fault response of different SGs at various
locations for both base operation and wind operation.
3.2

the other nine groups are modelled in detail with the

inclusion of the turbine governors and automatic voltage
regulator/exciter dynamics. To improve the damping of the
low-frequency power oscillations, SGs of G6 are equipped
with power system stabilisers [16]. A detail documentation
on the SG modelling and parameters is available in [21],
which is out of scope in this paper.
The dynamic model of the DFIG, shown in Fig. 3, is
composed of a static model of the aerodynamics, a
two-mass model of the drivetrain, a third-order model of
the generator, a grid side converter (GSC) with a dc-link
capacitor, a rotor side converter (RSC), a pitch controller
and converter controllers.
The rotor of the wind turbine converts the energy from the
wind to the rotor shaft. The aerodynamic torque applied to the
rotor by the effective wind speed passing through the rotor is
given as

Machine model

The mechanical input power of the SG is maintained constant

by continuous supply of conventional fuel. SGs of G10 are
modelled as a three-phase innite source whereas SGs of
IET Renew. Power Gener., pp. 111
doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2014.0035

Tae =

r
A c (l, u)v3w
2vm wt p

(29)

where is the air density, is the rotor speed, Awt is the swept
area, cp is the pitch angle, is the pitch angle and l is the tip
speed ratio.
The drivetrain attached to the wind turbine converts the
aerodynamic torque Tae on the rotor into the torque on the
low-speed shaft, which is scaled down through the gearbox
to the torque on the high-speed shaft. The dynamics of the
shaft is represented as [22]

v m =


1 
Tae Ks g Dm vm
2Hm

(30)

v G =


1 
Ks g Te DG vG
2HG

(31)

1
g = 2pf vm vG
Ng


(32)

where H is the inertia constant, Ks is the torsion stiffness, is

the torsion angle, D is the torsion damping, Te is the electrical
torque, f is the grid frequency and Ng is the gear ratio.
5

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

www.ietdl.org
Table 2 Load flow data of New England power system
Bus

Generator
Capacity, MVA

Bus

Generation, MW

30
300
31
700
32
700
33
700
34
600
35
700
36
600
37
600
38
900
39
1100
total capacity 6900 MVA

250
572.8
650
632
508
650
560
540
830
1000

P, MW
3
4
5
8
12
15
16
18
20
21

1
[T Tm ]
2HG e


1

(X X )ids svs Edr

vs vdr
E qr = Eqr
To

(35)


1

+ (X X )iqs + svs Eqr

+ vs vqr
E dr = Edr
To

(36)

Q, MVar

247.5
308.6
224
139
281
206
283.5
9.2
950

84.6
92.2
47.2
17
75.5
27.6
26.9
4.6
250

total load 5996.1 MW

v2dc
Pr (t) Pg (t)
Rloss

(37)

where C is the dc-link capacitance, vdc is the voltage of the

dc-link capacitor and Rloss is the total conducting and
switching losses of the converter, Pr is the rotor power and
Pg is the GSC output power.
The parameters of DFIG are given in Table 3 [24].

3.3

where E is the transient voltage, X is the transient reactance,

X is the rotor open-circuit reactance and Te is the
electromagnetic torque.
DFIG rotor windings are connected to the grid through two
back-to-back insulated-gate bipolar transistor pulse width
modulator converters with an intermediate dc-link capacitor.

23
24
25
26
27
28
29
31
39

P, MW

The dc-link dynamics are given by

(33)

(34)

Load

Q, MVar

Cvdc v dc =

The transient model of a DFIG is described in this paper by

the following algebraic differential equations [23]
s =

Bus

322
2.4
500
184
233.8
84
522
176
8.5
88
320
153
329
32.2
158
30
680
103
274
115
total generation 6192.8 MW

The induction generator receives the power from the gear

box through the stiff shaft. The relationship between the
mechanical torque (Tm) and torsion angle is given by
Tm = Ks g

Load

Simulation parameters

Initial parameters for both the SG and the DFIG running at a

constant mechanical input power are shown in Table 4. The
pre-fault SEP (o) is calculated through steady-state load
ow simulation. A value of 0.05 s is chosen for fault
clearing time (tc) so that the system sustains stability with
other specied parameter value in Table 4. A lower inertia
constant (H ) value is taken for the DFIG than that for the
SG with the same static output and the rotor of the same
size and material since the shaft between the turbine and
the induction generator is relatively soft [25]. The inertia
constant values of the SG and the DFIG in Table 4 is taken
from [26].

Fig. 3 Block diagram of a DFIG system

6

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

IET Renew. Power Gener., pp. 111

doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2014.0035

www.ietdl.org
3.4

Table 3 DFIG parameters

Parameter
nominal mechanical output power
nominal electrical power
nominal voltage (LL)
stator resistance
stator leakage inductance
rotor resistance
rotor leakage inductance
magnetising inductance
base frequency
inertia constant
friction factor
pair of poles
nominal dc voltage
dc capacitance
GSC current regulator gain
KP
KI
RSC current regulator gain
KP
KI
pitch angle regulator gain
KP
KI

Value

Unit

1.5
1.5 0.9
575
0.00706
0.171
0.0058
0.156
2.9
60
1
0.01
3
1200
10
1
100
0.3
8
100
10

MW
MW
V
pu
pu
pu
pu
pu
Hz
s
pu

V
mF

G1 is replaced with an aggregated model of DFIG wind farm

of the same static output. A short-circuit fault is simulated at
bus 39, which results in 50% voltage sag in G1 terminal and
cleared after 0.05 s. The TEM response of the SGs, namely
G10, G2, G4 and G9 (placed according to ascending order
of their distance from G1), is assessed under the variation
of different variables, such as the voltage sag, the fault
clearing time, the load and the wind penetration. The TEM,
the rate of change of the TEM (T ) and the standard
deviation of the TEM (TEM) are also analysed.
3.4.1 Impact of voltage sag: Voltage sags are probably
the most signicant power quality problem faced by
industrial customers and large commercial customers. The
level of voltage sag at a generator or bus terminal depends
on the fault type (magnitude and duration) or the distance
of the fault from that terminal and the sensitivity of the
equipment.
Simulation result for different voltage sag values is shown
for SGs of G10, for example, in Fig. 4. The voltage sag
crossover point of TEM for base operation is about 37%. It
means the wind operation provides more positive impact on
the PSTS if the voltage sag is <37%. Otherwise, the wind
operation is more vulnerable to power system instability as
compared with the base operation. The crossover points for
G2, G4 and G9 are 42, 61.5 and 82.5%, respectively. The
explanation lies in the properties of DFIG wind turbines.
The DFIG wind turbine is equipped with external power
electronic devices that decouple control of active and
reactive power and restoration of terminal voltage. Thus, the
system possesses more favourable transient response during
the wind operation than the base operation. On the other
hand, the DFIG has a softer and more exible shaft system
than the SG, it can accumulate a high amount of energy in
the rotating mass of the DFIG wind turbine. This large
amount of transient energy is released to the system
followed by the fault, which is difcult to be absorbed by
the system because of having limited energy absorbing
capability. Thus, the wind operation becomes more
vulnerable to transient instability than the base operation as
voltage sag increases.
The rate of change of the TEM (T ) implies how fast the
PSTS gets affected adversely immediately after the fault
and is measured by calculating the gradient of the TEM
with respect to voltage sag. T for the increment of voltage
sag is investigated and summarised in Table 5. T is
calculated as the fall of the TEM for every 10% change in
voltage sag.
From Table 5, it is seen that T possesses higher negative
value with the increasing voltage sag for all SGs during the

Table 4 Simulation parameters

Generator characteristics
Parameter
pre-fault SEP
fault clearing time
inertia constant
slip
load

Value

Symbol

Unit

SG

DFIG

o
tc
H
s
PL

rad
s
s

% of Pe

0.6992
0.05
3.5
0
95

0.71
0.05
3
0.2
95

DFIG wind farm connected to single node

Fig. 4 TEM for different voltage sags

Table 5 Rate of change of TEM (T ) for increment in voltage sag

Voltage sag
increment, %

The rate of change of TEM (T ) for increment in voltage sag

G10

G2

G4

G9

From

To

Base
operation

Wind
operation

Base
operation

Wind
operation

Base
operation

Wind
operation

Base
operation

Wind
operation

10
30
50
70
90

20
40
60
80
100

0.611
0.982
1.204
1.665
1.913

0.8
1.284
1.358
1.75
2.167

0.511
0.882
1.104
1.565
1.813

0.661
0.981
1.226
1.748
2.062

0.498
0.863
1.087
1.53
1.8

0.659
0.965
1.209
1.71
2.05

0.468
0.841
1.033
1.12
1.223

0.56
0.945
1.147
1.383
1.443

IET Renew. Power Gener., pp. 111

doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2014.0035

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

www.ietdl.org
are shown in Fig. 5. It shows that TEM is higher among
SGs at different locations during wind operation when
voltage sag is above 20%. It means DFIG wind farm
integration into power systems results in diverse fault
response for individual SGs at different locations when
voltage sag is above a certain threshold.

Fig. 5

Standard deviation of TEM (TEM) for different voltage sags

Fig. 6 TEM for different fault clearing times (tc)

wind operations as compared with that during the base

operation. This is consistent with the graphical observations
in Fig. 4.
T of the SGs for both modes of operation get more
identical with their increasing distance from G1. This
indicates that DFIG wind farm has less impact on SGs that
are at farther distance because those SGs generate a small
amount of transient energy that can be easily absorbed by
the system.
The standard deviations of the TEM (TEM) implies how
diverse are the TEMs of different SGs. TEM of the SGs for
both base and wind operations under different voltage sags

3.4.2 Impact of fault clearing time: Fault clearing time

(tc) is the time interval between the fault inception and the
fault clearance. Industrial and commercial power users are
nowadays increasingly less tolerant to outages and the fault
clearing time has become a very important tool for the
PSTS studies. Switchgear equipped with a multifunction,
microprocessor-based relay is an efcient means to clear
faults.
Simulation result for different fault clearing time (tc) values
is shown for G10, for example, in Fig. 6. The fault clearing
time crossover point of the TEM for base operation is about
0.048 s. It means the wind operation provides more positive
impact on the PSTS if the fault clearing time is <0.048 s.
Otherwise, the wind operation is more vulnerable to power
system instability as compared with the base operation. The
crossover points for G2, G4 and G9 are 0.057, 0.074 and
0.082 s, respectively. This is because the system encounters
with higher modes of oscillations if the fault clearing time
is longer. In such a situation, the natural damping ability of
the SGs because of having higher inertial constant (H ) as
compared with the DFIG is more helpful than the
decoupled control ability of the DFIG wind turbine.
The rate of change of the TEM (T ) for the increment of
0.01 s in fault clearing time is investigated and summarised
in Table 6. T is calculated as the fall of the TEM for every
0.01 s change in fault clearing time.
The results in Table 6 demonstrate that PSTS is more
severely affected prior to fault with longer fault clearing
time in the power systems integrated with the DFIG wind
farms that is consistent with the graphical observations in
Fig. 6. T of the SGs for both modes of operation gets
more identical with their increasing distance from G1
indicating lesser impact of DFIG wind farms on those SGs.
The standard deviations of the TEM (TEM) of the SGs for
both base and wind operations under different fault clearing
times are shown in Fig. 7. It shows that DFIG wind farm
integration into power systems results in diverse fault
response for individual SGs at different locations when fault
clearing time is above 0.03 s.
3.4.3 Impact of load demand: Load demand is the
power consumed momentarily with the generation of
power. It is expressed as the percentage of power consumed

Table 6 Rate of change of TEM (T ) for increment in fault clearing time (tc)
Fault clearing time
increment, s

The rate of change of TEM (T ) for increment in fault clearing time (tc)
G10

G2

G4

G9

From

To

Base
operation

Wind
operation

Base
operation

Wind
operation

Base
operation

Wind
operation

Base
operation

Wind
operation

0.01
0.03
0.05
0.07
0.09
0.11

0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12

4.03
9.41
14.78
20.16
25.35
30.95

5.29
10.16
15.5
24.72
31.85
41.3

2.03
7.41
12.78
18.17
22.53
26.95

3.02
8.1
13.78
19.15
28.06
33.89

1
6.34
11.67
16.2
20.83
24.93

1.73
6.74
7.98
17.83
24.47
27.84

0.15
5.43
10.75
14.8
20
24.51

0.54
5.67
10.88
14.83
20.22
30

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

IET Renew. Power Gener., pp. 111

doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2014.0035

www.ietdl.org
is calculated as the fall of the TEM for every 10% change
in load demand.
It is observed in Table 7 that T possesses higher positive
value with the higher load demand for all the SGs during both
the base and wind operations. It indicates that the higher load
demand provides a positive impact on the PSTS during both
operations. It also indicates that T is higher during the base
operation than the wind operation at lower load demand even
though loads have an almost similar impact on both modes of
operations for all the SGs. This is because of the intermittent
nature of wind power generation that results in power
imbalances in a worse manner during the wind operation.
The standard deviations of the TEM (TEM) of the SGs for
both base and wind operations under different load demands
are shown in Fig. 9. It shows that DFIG wind farm integration
into power systems results in diverse fault response for
individual SGs at different locations when load demand is
below 88%.

Fig. 7 Standard deviation of TEM (TEM) for different fault

clearing times (tc)

3.4.4 Impact of wind penetration: The wind penetration

is the ratio of the installed wind power capacity to the total
power capacity of the grid. It is expressed as the percentage
of wind power capacity to the total power capacity.
Simulation results in Fig. 10 show that the SGs possess
poorer transient stability with higher wind penetration,
which is indicated by the negative slope of the TEM
because higher wind penetration refers a larger number of
the soft and exible shaft of the DFIG wind turbines. This
causes the power system suffer from transient instability as
discussed earlier.
It is also seen from Fig. 10 that the DFIG wind farm plays a
positive role on the PSTS if the wind penetration is below
15.8%. Although DFIG wind turbine features with
decoupled controllability and reactive power support at
lower wind penetration, more transient energy is
accumulated in its rotating mass at higher wind penetration
while the system has a limited energy absorbing capability.
The critical wind penetration (that value of penetration
when the TEM of a particular SG reaches zero) for G10,
G2, G4 and G9 during the wind operation are about 21.3,
22.5, 25.2 and 26.2%, respectively. The reason behind
increasing critical value with increasing distance of the SGs
from the fault location is that the transient energy generated
by those SGs is less, which can easily be absorbed by the
system to sustain the PSTS.
The standard deviation of the TEM (TEM) of the SGs for
both base and wind operations for different wind penetrations
are shown in Fig. 11. The TEM curve demonstrates that SGs
at different locations possess more diverse fault response for
individual with larger DFIG wind farm penetration into power
systems.

Fig. 8 TEM for different load demands

to power generated. Simulation result for different load

demand values is shown for G10, for example, in Fig. 8. It
shows that the SGs possess better transient stability with
higher load demand at bus 39 for both operations. At lower
load demand, the power system suffers from power
imbalances prior to the fault and because of this fact the
system cannot absorb the transient energy generated
effectively before the CCT. It results in transient instability
of the system, which is indicated by the negative value of
the TEM.
The rate of change of the TEM (T ) for the increment in
load demand is investigated and summarised in Table 7. T
Table 7 Rate of change of TEM (T ) for increment in load demand
Load increment (%)

The rate of change of TEM (T ) for increment in load demand

G10

G2

G4

G9

From

To

Base
operation

Wind
operation

Base
operation

Wind
operation

Base
operation

Wind
operation

Base
operation

Wind
operation

10
30
50
70
90

20
40
60
80
100

0.482
0.65
0.858
1.078
1.2

0.467
0.642
0.849
1.074
1.2

0.432
0.59
0.808
0.952
1.028

0.427
0.585
0.803
0.903
1.008

0.245
0.316
0.41
0.465
0.555

0.243
0.314
0.405
0.464
0.555

0.253
0.361
0.41
0.463
0.553

0.251
0.359
0.4
0.46
0.552

IET Renew. Power Gener., pp. 111

doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2014.0035

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

www.ietdl.org

Fig. 9 Standard deviation of TEM (TEM) for different load

demands

3.5

Geographical dispersion of DFIG wind farms

In real world, wind farms are dispersed over a wide

geographical area. This section analyses the impacts of
geographical dispersion of DFIG wind farm on the PSTS.
Simulation cases are categorised into three groups
according to power generation from DFIG wind farms:
Case 1: 100% from DFIG at bus 39;
Case 2: 50% from DFIG at buses 32 and 39, respectively;
Case 3: 25% from DFIG at buses 32, 35, 36 and 39,
respectively.
A short-circuit fault is simulated at bus 39 and cleared after
0.05 s. The TEM response of G10 is assessed under the
variation of the voltage sag. Table 8 shows crossover points
(as explained in Section 3.4.1) of different SGs for three
different cases. It shows that crossover points for G10
increases whereas it decreases for G2, G4 and G9. It means
that G10 shows better transient performance with
geographical dispersion of DFIG wind farms although it is
located closest to the fault as compared with the other
observed SGs. The reason is that the transient energy
released from the machines at bus 39 decreases and the
system can easily absorb the energy. Meanwhile, G2, G4
and G9 are exposed to higher transient energy released
from geographically dispersed DFIG wind farms although
they are located far from the fault.

Conclusions

The impact of DFIG wind farm on PSTS under a variety of

conditions dened by the voltage sag, the fault clearing
time, the load and the wind power penetration level has
been studied quantitatively by using the TEM, which is
calculated through the formulation of the TEF. Simulation
results demonstrate that power systems integrated with the
DFIG wind farms are less sensitive to transient events than
those without wind farms when the voltage sag, fault
clearing time and wind penetration are below certain
thresholds. They are less sensitive as well when the load
demand is above a threshold value. Outside these
thresholds, the wind farms have an adverse effect on the
transient stability. Thus, the power systems integrated with
the DFIG wind farms must be equipped with advanced
10

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

Fig. 10 TEM for different wind penetrations

a G10
b G2
c G4
d G9
IET Renew. Power Gener., pp. 111
doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2014.0035

www.ietdl.org

Fig. 11 Standard deviation of TEM (TEM) for different wind

penetrations

Table 8 Crossover points of SGs for three cases

Case

Crossover points, %

case 1
case 2
case 3

G10

G2

G4

G9

37
39
40.5

42
39
37.5

61.5
60.5
59

82.5
82
80

switchgear and faster isolators to ensure its reliable operation

during transient events. DFIG wind farms result in diverse
fault response for individual SGs at different locations for
certain thresholds of variables. This fact draws us an
attention to having an advanced protection system with
sensitivity of a wide range of stability (i.e. TEM) connected
to each individual machine. The problem of power
imbalances caused by the variability and intermittency of
wind power along with dynamically varying load demands
may be prevented from the use of an efcient power reserve
systems or advanced reactive power compensating device in
the power systems integrated with the DFIG wind farms.
DFIG wind farms, in general, have less signicant impact
on SGs located far from the fault, but these SGs may also
be exposed to inferior transient stability with geographical
dispersion of wind farms. As a future research option, the
stability study will be repeated for other test systems like
CIGRE B4-39 grid and real-power systems to justify the
results. The stability study will be extended as well for
faults at different nodes of power networks and also for
wind farms in different grids.

References

1 Fernndez, L.M., Jurado, F., Saenz, J.R.: Aggregated dynamic model

for wind farms with doubly fed induction generator wind turbines,
Renew. Energy, 2008, 33, pp. 129140
2 Nunes, M.V.A., Lopes, J.A.P., Zurn, H.H., Bezerra, U.H., Almeida, R.
G.: Inuence of the variable-speed wind generators in transient stability
margin of the conventional generators integrated in electrical grids,
IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., 2004, 19, pp. 692701
3 Li, L., Hongjing, H., Wenxia, L., Sheng, J.: Simulation and comparison
of transient stability of power system including DFIGs wind farm based
on detailed model. Proc Int. Conf. Sustainable Power Generation and
Supply, Nanjing, China, April 2009, pp. 16

IET Renew. Power Gener., pp. 111

doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2014.0035

4 Samarasinghe, C., Ancell, G.: Effects of large scale wind generation on

transient stability of the New Zealand power system. Proc. IEEE Power
and Energy Society General Meeting, Pittsburgh, USA, July 2008,
pp. 18
5 Gautam, D., Vittal, V., Harbour, T.: Impact of increased penetration of
DFIG-based wind turbine generators on transient and small signal
stability of power systems, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2009, 24,
pp. 14261434
6 Yanhua, L., Yongning, C., Weisheng, W., Huizhu, D.: Impacts of large
scale wind power integration on power system. Proc. Int. Conf. Electric
Utility Deregulation and Restructuring and Power Technologies, Jinan,
Shandong, China, July 2011, pp. 13011305
7 Meegahapola, L., Flynn, D.: Impact on transient and frequency stability
for a power system at very high wind penetration. Proc. IEEE Power
and Energy Society General Meeting, Minneapolis, USA, July 2010,
pp. 18
8 Libao, S., Shiqiang, D., Yixin, N., Liangzhong, Y., Bazargan, M.:
Transient stability of power systems with high penetration of DFIG
based wind farms. Proc. IEEE Power and Energy Society General
Meeting, Calgary, Canada, July 2009, pp. 16
9 Badrzadeh, B., Salman, S.K.: Critical clearing time of doubly fed
induction generator. Proc. IEEE Power Tech. Conf., St. Petersberg,
Russia, June 2005, pp. 17
10 Athay, T., Podmore, R., Virmani, S.: A practical method for the direct
analysis of transient stability, IEEE Trans. Power Appar. Syst., 1979,
PAS-98, pp. 573584
11 Da-Zhong, F., Chung, T.S., Yao, Z., Wennan, S.: Transient stability
limit conditions analysis using a corrected transient energy function
approach, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2000, 15, pp. 804810
12 Rahimi, F.A., Lauby, M.G., Wrubel, J.N., Lee, K.L.: Evaluation of the
transient energy function method for on-line dynamic security analysis,
IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 1993, 8, pp. 497507
13 Fouad, A.A., Vittal, V.: Power system transient stability analysis using
transient energy function method (Prentice-Hall, 1992, 1st edn.)
14 Dhole, G.M., Khedkar, M.K.: Antigen energy function: a new energy
function for transient stability assessment, Electr. Power Syst. Res.,
2005, 74, pp. 315322
15 Agrawal, R., Thukaram, D.: Identication of coherent synchronous
generators in a multi-machine power system using support vector
clustering. Proc. Int. Conf. Power and Energy Systems, Chennai,
India, December 2011, pp. 16
16 Kundur, P.: Power system stability and control (McGraw-Hill, 1994,
1st edn.)
17 Chowdhury, M.A., Hosseinzadeh, N., Shen, W.X., Pota, H.R.:
Comparative study on fault responses of synchronous generators and
wind turbine generators using transient stability index based on
transient energy function, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., 2013,
51, pp. 145152
18 Hsiao-Dong, C., Wu, F.F., Varaiya, P.P.: A BCU method for direct
analysis of power system transient stability, IEEE Trans. Power Syst.,
1994, 9, pp. 11941208
19 Dhole, G.M., Khedkar, M.K.: Antigen energy function: a new energy
function for transient stability assessment, Electr. Power Syst. Res.,
2005, 74, pp. 315322
20 Chen, Y., James, G., Yusheng, X., Feng, X.: Impacts of large scale
wind power on power system transient stability. Proc. Int. Conf.
Electric Utility Deregulation and Restructuring and Power
Technologies, Jinan, Shandong, China, July 2011, pp. 277283
21 PSS/E 32: On-line documentation, schenectady (Power Technologies,
Inc., USA, 2010)
22 Ackermann, T. (Ed.): Wind power in power systems (Wiley, 2012, 2nd
edn.)
23 Lei, Y., Mullane, A., Lightbody, G., Yacamini, R.: Modeling of the
wind turbine with a doubly fed induction generator for grid
integration studies, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., 2006, 21,
pp. 257264
24 Chowdhury, M.A., Hosseinzadeh, N., Shen, W.X.: Smoothing wind
power uctuations by fuzzy logic pitch angle controller, Renew.
Energy, 2012, 38, (1), pp. 224233
25 Akhmatov, V., Knudsen, H.: An aggregate model of a grid-connected,
large-scale, offshore wind farm for power stability investigations
importance of windmill mechanical system, Int. J. Electr. Power
Energy Syst., 2002, 24, pp. 709717
26 Slootweg, J.G.: Wind power modelling and impact on power system
dynamics. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, 2003

11

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014