This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal.

Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 1

Residue-Based Evaluation of the Use of Wind Power

Plants With Full Converter Wind Turbines for Power
Oscillation Damping Control
Josep Morató, Thyge Knüppel, and Jacob Østergaard, Senior Member, IEEE

Abstract—As wind power plants (WPPs) gradually replace the
power production of the conventional generators, many aspects
of the power system may be affected, in which the small signal
stability is included. Additional control may be needed for wind
turbine generators (WTGs) to participate in the power oscillation
damping. The feasibility of implementing this control needs to be
assessed. This paper studies how the damping contribution of a
WPP is affected by different operating conditions and its depen-
dence to selected feedback signals. The WPP model used includes
individual WTGs to study how internal changes may affect this
contribution. The study is based on the changes suffered by the
residues of the electromechanical modes, which indicate the sen-
sitivity of the modes to this particular feedback. The results show
that a park level control for the entire WPP is possible, although it
may not provide damping for a range of critical operating condi-
tions.
Index Terms—Eigenvalue analysis, power system oscillation
damping controller, residues, small-signal stability, wind power,
wind turbines.
I. INTRODUCTION
W IND power penetration in electric power systems is
continuously increasing and wind turbine generators
(WTGs) are grouped in larger farms with production capabili-
ties that are approaching those of conventional power stations,
e.g., thermal plants. When the level of wind penetration is
high, and it starts to replace the output of the conventional
generators, many aspects of the system operation and control
may be affected, such as protection, voltage stability, and small
signal stability [1], [2]. Since the integration of wind power
seems likely to continue growing, large wind parks should be
able to contribute to network support and operation. Because
WTG may have to participate in power oscillation damping, the
impact of wind power on the electromechanical power system
oscillations is a topic that is becoming increasingly important.
Previous research used models that aggregate all the indi-
vidual WTGs of the wind power plant (WPP) in a single equiv-
alent WTG. In the presented study, the WPP is modeled with
individual WTGs to study the impact of individual WTGs on
Manuscript received November 21, 2012; revised April 11, 2013; accepted
June 30, 2013.
The authors are with the Centre for Electric Technology, Technical University
of Denmark, DK-2800 Lyngby, Denmark (e-mail: morato.josep@gmail.com;
tkn@elektro.dtu.dk; joe@elektro.dtu.dk).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TSTE.2013.2273232
the power oscillation damping, e.g., depending on their loca-
tion. Different system operating conditions are considered to in-
vestigate the feasibility of a POD controller. Previous research
has been carried out in the topic for a particular system condi-
tion. However, how the WPP damping contribution differs be-
tween operating conditions of the power system has not been
addressed, and an effective control should be able to provide
positive damping for a wide range of system conditions.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section II, a survey of
related work is presented. In Section III, a description of the
residues and their meaning is given. Section IV presents the
study case and its modal characteristics, and the WPP model
description. Section V presents the results of the analysis. Fi-
nally, the discussion and conclusion are given in Section VI.
II. RELATED WORK
Today, there are three major WTG topologies in the market:
fixed-speed induction generators (FSIGs), doubly-fed induction
generators (DFIGs), and full converter wind turbine generator
(FCWTG), the last two being variable speed wind turbine gen-
erators (VSWTGs). Because the DFIGs and FCWTGs are, re-
spectively, partially or fully decoupled from the grid, and they
have similar abilities to control active and reactive power, it is
seen that they have similar effects on the damping of power sys-
tems [3], [4].
Slootweg et al. [1] and Anaya-Lara et al. [5] studied and
compared the influence on power system oscillations of WPPs
based on FSIG and DFIG WTGs, and it was found that FSIG
generally increase the damping of the power oscillations. Ref-
erences [1], [6], and [7] concluded that the general trend of
the DFIGs is to increase the damping of the interarea oscilla-
tions, although [1] indicated that the positive damping should
be discussed according to the types of oscillations, and [6] con-
cluded that DFIG can reduce the damping for certain pene-
tration levels. Conversely, investigations over the Nordic Grid
in [8] concluded that the use of DFIGs or FCWTGs decrease
the damping of interarea oscillations. Additionally, Rueda et al.
[4] and Gautam et al. [9] demonstrated that the integration of
a DFIG-based wind farm could have both positive and nega-
tive impacts on the small signal stability depending on the sce-
nario. Investigations by Vowles et al. [10] concluded that the
different types of WTG technologies do not have any impact on
the damping of the electromechanical modes.
Various power oscillation damping controller (POD) designs
for WTGs have been investigated. Generally, the classical

1949-3029 © 2013 IEEE

 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
2 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY
vector orientation control is used for decoupled control of ac-
tive and reactive power of VSWTGs [11]. These PODs could be
based on active power modulation (APM) or on reactive power
modulation (RPM). Hughes et al. in [12] presented a stator
power-based power system stabilizer (PSS), and in [13], an
effective APM simple control using the frequency deviation as
the control signal was proposed. In [14], a controller serves as a
conventional PSS and an active damping controller. Studies in
[15] showed that the APM methodology performs better when
the wind farm is electrically close to synchronous generators.
However, Fan et al. [16] demonstrated that the damping of the
shaft is decreased when using APM, and RPM could be used
as an alternative. Yin et al. [17] proposed a damping controller
using RPM.
In terms of feedback signals, [18] and [19] highlighted the im-
portance of selecting the appropriate variables for the damping
of multimodal oscillation. Using FACTS for damping purposes,
this selection was based on transfer function residues. In [19],
Martins et al. based the selection of signals on their residue mag-
nitude. However, in [18], the combination of the residues mag-
nitude and angle reported to be more effective since the angle
is closely related to the phase compensation needed to produce
the desired damping, and it can be used for multiple modes. Ad-
ditionally, in [20], the residue method was used to determine
location, feedback signals, and controller design for a FACTS
device.
It is seen that there are different conclusions on the impact of
VSWTG-based WTGs to the damping. However, the feasibility
of a POD should be evaluated for a wide range of operating
conditions, and there is a need to evaluate whether a WPP level
POD can be implemented.
III. BACKGROUND
After the occurrence of a disturbance, the rotor speeds and
angles of the large synchronous generators suffer oscillations
around their operating points. The rotor oscillations, at the same
time, give rise to oscillations in currents in the damper windings
of these generators, where energy is dissipated on their resis-
tances. The energy dissipated provides a damping contribution
of these machines to the power network [21].
The small-signal stability is the ability of the power system
to maintain synchronism under small disturbances [22]. Such
disturbances can be considered small enough that the equations
describing the system dynamics can be linearized for purposes
of analysis [23]. The power system oscillations and their anal-
ysis by modal analysis are well described in the literature [21],
[23].
A. Transfer Function Residues
In order to modify a mode of oscillation by feedback, the
mode must be excited by the input and must be visible in the
chosen output. The residue for the th eigenvalue of the
transfer function between a determined input , and a given
output , is the sensitivity of this eigenvalue to a scalar feed-
back [21]. Residues give an indication of how the modes will
be affected by the feedback control. In [23], a complete de-
scription of how to obtain the residues from a transfer function
is described.
Fig. 1. Representation of the eigenvalue sensitivity by means of the residue,
and the required phase compensation to damp a mode.
The residue is a complex value. The angle of the th residue
gives the direction in which the root locus leaves the th pole
[21]. The residue angle is related to the phase compensation re-
quired at each of the modal frequencies needed to produce the
desired damping [18], [20], [21]. Therefore, the phase shift be-
tween the input and the output of the POD should be the comple-
ment of the residue angle for that input–output pair. Fig. 1 de-
picts the ideal phase compensation required to damp an electro-
mechanical mode, where is the residue angle and is the POD
transfer function phase.
The magnitude of the residue indicates which modes are more
sensitive to a particular selection of feedback of signals. There-
fore, signals with higher residue magnitude of residues are more
effective for damping oscillatory modes.
The residues are a measure of the sensitivity and hence they
should not be considered an indicator of the final displacement
of the modes on the complex plane, since the modes have a
nonlinear behavior for the closed loop condition [21]. It is also
well-known that the location of system zeroes has a significant
impact on closed loop eigenvalues [24].
For a particular situation, different eigenvalues may have dif-
ferent residues. Ideally, the required compensation for a partic-
ular mode must not alter other modes to a weakly damped or
unstable situation. However, this may be accepted if the overall
result is beneficial, such as a much larger effect on the mode
of interest. This presents a challenge for effective phase com-
pensation of those modes close in frequency, since it would be
difficult to apply individual phase shifts [18].
IV. CASE STUDY
A 14-generator power system is used in this research. The
system is derived from the one used by Gibbard and Vowles
[25] to study power system oscillations, and here a 600-MW
WPP has been connected to bus 212. The single line diagram
of the system is shown in Fig. 2. The generators in Fig. 2 are in
fact equivalent generators each representing a power station of
2 to 12 units depending on the considered operating case. Each
generator has a PSS appropriately tuned. The system has been
implemented in Matlab Simulink using the SimPowerSystem
toolbox.
A. Wind Power Plant Layout
The WPP is constituted of 200 3-MW WTGs, distributed in
25 feeders with 8 WTGs in each. The WTG model used in this
study is similar to the one described by Ellis et al. [26], although
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
MORATÓ et al.: RESIDUE-BASED EVALUATION OF THE USE OF WPPs WITH FULL CONVERTER WIND TURBINES
Fig. 2. Single line diagram of the 14-generator 50-Hz system used in the study
[25].
Fig. 3. Representation of the WPP model layout and its connection to the
system.
protective functions for large disturbance control have not been
implemented. A representation of the WPP model is shown in
Fig. 3.
Each WTG has its own step-up 690-V/33-kV transformer.
The grid connection includes two parts, the local electrical con-
nection within the WPP at a medium voltage level and the con-
nection from the WPP to the electrical grid. The feeders are
connected to the Collection Point, where the park transformer
increases the voltage up to 110 kV for transportation to the grid
through three parallel 50-km three-phase cables. At the point of
interconnection (POI) with the grid, the voltage is raised to the
3
TABLE I
SYSTEM OPERATING CONDITIONS FROM GIBBARD AND
VOWLES [25] AND TOTAL SYSTEM LOAD
TABLE II
WPP LAYOUT SCENARIOS
grid connection point voltage level through a three-phase trans-
former rated at the WPP rating. The parameters of the overhead
lines and cables are listed in Tables A1 and A2in the Appendix.
In the model, two feeders have been implemented with indi-
vidual WTGs whereas the rest of the feeders have been lumped
into an equivalent WTG. This action allows studying these two
feeders in detail while it reduces simulation time and the amount
of computed data.
B. Power System Operating Condition
The three considered generator dispatches and load consump-
tions are derived from Gibbard and Vowles [25] and are listed in
Table I. The original PSS parameters of the generators for these
cases have been modified in order to reduce the damping of the
oscillations for various eigenvalues. It is assumed that the wind
speed will be constant, sufficient for rated active power produc-
tion, and uniformly distributed along the WPP.
C. WPP Layout Configuration Scenarios
The scenarios described in Table II are considered. They
represent possible operating situations such as an outage of a
feeder or the disconnection of some WTGs due to maintenance
or failure.
Scenario A allows studying the differences in the influence of
each individual WTG depending on its location with respect to
the collection point and compare between them and between the
lumped model. In scenario B, it is possible to study the effect
that having a feeder offline has on the WPP, while scenario C
will also provides information about the effect that variations
within a feeder can have on the remaining WTGs connected to
the same feeder.
D. Modal Characteristics
The system eigenvalues for the three operating conditions be-
fore and after including wind power are presented in Fig. 4. A
closer look of the system interarea modes is presented in Fig. 5,
where the modes of interest are highlighted.
It is clear that there are poorly damped oscillatory eigen-
values, and that the damping ratio is increased of the majority
of the electromechanical modes. However, the small displace-
ments in the s-plane of the eigenvalues between the no-wind and
the wind cases could be associated to changes in the load flow
given by the integration of the WPP, and not necessarily by the
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
4 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY
Fig. 4. System eigenvalues for the three cases without (o) and with (x) wind
power. The local eigenvalues are identified.
Fig. 5. System interarea eigenvalues for the three cases without (o) and with
(x) wind power. The studied interarea eigenvalues are identified.
dynamic properties of the WPP. However, a deeper study should
be performed to obtain acceptable conclusions.
The integration of wind power introduced additional modes
associated to the internal states of the WTG models. The ma-
jority is on or very close to the real axis. However, some modes
have frequencies between 0.94 and 1.23 Hz, which are associ-
ated to the internal states of the WTG models and are identi-
fied in Fig. 4 as “wpp.” There is a positive real eigenvalue near
zero for all cases with wind power. The analysis showed that
these modes are associated to the unit delay used in the internal
change of reference in the equivalent WTG model, and it does
not constitute a stability problem in the scope of this study.
The characteristics of the critical eigenvalues in the cases
with wind power are described in Table III, where repre-
sents the damping ratio. It is seen that there are poorly damped
electromechanical modes for each case.
TABLE III
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE CRITICAL EIGENVALUES
V. IMPACT OF THE WPP TO THE POWER OSCILLATIONS
Additional control may be needed for WTGs to participate in
the power oscillation. A POD will be feasible if it provides pos-
itive damping over a wide range of operating conditions. Ana-
lyzing the changes suffered by the residues of transfer functions
between feedback signals is useful to see how the eigenvalues
are initially displaced in the complex plane. Additionally, it will
help to determine which signals are more appropriate for posi-
tive damping, and which factors can have an impact on the sen-
sitivity of the residue.
A. Feedback Control Signals
Different feedback signals have been selected to determine
which signals are more appropriate for damping purposes. The
residues for all the input and output (i/o) signal combinations
have been compared.
The WTGs can be operated either through an active or a reac-
tive power command [27]. Therefore, the residues will be com-
puted using the two possible input signals to the WTGs:
a) Active Power Reference (Pref);
b) Bus Voltage Reference (Vref), which is used in this study
to regulate the reactive power.
Conversely, the inputs of the POD are signals measured from
the system. Here, the signals studied are
c) Active Power at bus 212 (P212);
d) Reactive Power at bus 212 (Q212);
e) Frequency at bus 212 (freq212), which is defined here by
the change in voltage angle [21];
f) Rotor speed of the local generator G5 ( G5).
In the selection of input signals, emphasis has been put on
signals that are, at least, semilocal to the WPP to avoid perfor-
mance and latency considerations associated with a wide area
measurement system. Although it is clear that the use of wide
area signals might provide better mode selectivity. Signals c) to
e) are considered semilocal, since they could be available from
the WPP SCADA system, while signal f) is included as a refer-
ence signal.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
MORATÓ et al.: RESIDUE-BASED EVALUATION OF THE USE OF WPPs WITH FULL CONVERTER WIND TURBINES
Fig. 6. Residues angles and magnitudes for the output P212 for case 1.
B. Sensitivity to Different Operating Conditions
Ideally, the feedback signal used for the POD should pro-
vide a positive damping contribution for all the system oper-
ating conditions. This could be represented by the residues if
their angles do not change substantially between operating con-
ditions. Therefore, an analysis of various available feedback sig-
nals should be performed to identify which one compels with
that condition.
The angle and magnitude of the residues of each WTG for the
output P212 and both inputs combinations are shown in Figs. 6
and 7 for case 1 and case 2, respectively. The graphics in the left
side of the figures correspond to the APM (Pref input) of each
WTG, whereas the right-side graphs correspond to the RPM
(Vref input). The first row of the graphics depicts the residue an-
gles, while the second row presents the magnitudes. The WTG
indices are from Fig. 3 in Section III, on the x-axis. The index L
corresponds to the equivalent WTG model where the 23 feeders
are lumped. The results were also computed for the rest of the
signal combinations for all three cases and the trends are sim-
ilar, but only a few figures are presented to avoid redundancy.
It is seen that the residue angle changes greatly between cases
when utilizing the same feedback signals. These results indi-
cate that the eigenvalues are highly sensitive to system operating
conditions and the interarea modes will not always be displaced
in the same direction.
Generally, the angles do not change considerably between
WTGs and the mean for each eigenvalue is used here as the indi-
cator of the difference between the studied eigenvalues. Local
modes present much smaller magnitudes than the selected in-
terarea modes, . In case 1, the magnitude of eigenvalue
represents 2.57% of the magnitude of eigenvalue for the
combination i/o P212-Pref, while the magnitude of eigenvalue
is only a 0.03%, for the same signals.
5
Fig. 7. Residues angles and magnitudes for the output P212 for case 2.
In general, the magnitudes of the local eigenvalues represent
less than a 3% compared to the interarea ones. Therefore, it can
be assumed that they are not influenced in any great extend by
the feedback control.
Note the differences between residues of the interarea eigen-
values. Fig. 8 depicts the residue angle difference between the
interarea modes. The difference in magnitudes in Fig. 9 is pre-
sented in percentage. The higher the difference, the more sensi-
tive the highlighted mode.
The feedback signals should satisfy a minimal change in its
residue angle over adjacent modal frequencies. However, it is
observed that the angles for the interarea modes are often con-
siderably different and case dependent. High differences are
found in cases 1 and 3, and for output signal P212 in case 2
for both input commands.
A favorable situation is encountered in case 2 using freq212 –
Pref, where the angle difference is small and is much more
affected by the feedback. Similarly, using P212-Pref, the angle
difference is large, but is influenced in a greater extent since
its magnitude is much greater than the residue for the mode.
Nevertheless, the angle difference is big for the other cases 1
and 3, where the magnitudes of the modes are similar, and the
compensation could have negative effects on one of the modes.
From the results presented above, it is seen that it is difficult to
obtain a phase compensation that is beneficial in all cases. How-
ever, for cases 2 and 3, the i/o pairs freq212-Pref and G5-Pref
offer damping of one of the interarea modes without affecting
the other negatively (much higher magnitude).
Additionally, the use of either active or reactive power com-
mands as input signals give similar results, although residue dif-
ferences using Vref are slightly larger.
The fact that some cases have residue angle differences and
similar magnitudes of both interarea modes, introduces a com-
plexity to the POD design.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
6 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY
Fig. 8. Angle difference between the interarea modes for the different cases
and i/o pairs.
Fig. 9. Magnitude difference between the interarea modes for the different
cases and i/o pairs. The figure indicates which interarea mode has larger mag-
nitude.
C. Sensitivity to Different WPP Layouts
When considering a park level POD, it should be insensitive
to internal changes in the WPP, such as WTGs getting offline
or continuously changing WTGs power productions. Therefore,
the residue angle difference between individual WTGs must be
negligibly small. Here, only the residues of the interarea modes
for different WPP states are studied. Since the local modes in
this case are not greatly influenced by the feedback control, they
are not considered in this part.
For all the scenarios considered in Table III, the first 4 WTGs
and the lumped model are unmodified. Hence, they are the only
WTGs in which the residues can be compared for the three situ-
ations. For comparing scenarios A and B, however, all the wind
turbines from the first feeder (WT1-WT8) can be compared. The
residues of the rest of the WTG that are disconnected in the re-
spective cases will be zero, since the modes will be uncontrol-
lable, and they are hence not shown.
The results are presented in different figures for the different
i/o feedback pairs. Each figure contains different graphics,
one for each of the selected poorly damped eigenvalues in
Section IV. Each graphic has three plots, one for each afore-
mentioned scenario.
The WTG indexes according to the WPP layout presented in
Fig. 3 are in the x-axis. The index L corresponds to the WTG
model where the 23 feeders are lumped.
1) Residue Angle: Figs. 10–13 show the residue angles for
the interarea eigenvalues for various situations. Results for case
1 utilizing the i/o pairs freq212-Pref and freq212-Vref are shown
in Figs. 10 and 11, respectively. In both figures, the difference of
Fig. 10. Residues angle for the i/o pair freq212-Pref case 1.
Fig. 11. Residues angle for the i/o pair freq212-Vref case 1.
Fig. 12. Residues angles for the i/o pair freq212-Pref case 2.
Fig. 13. Residues angles for the i/o pair freq212-Vref for case 2.
TABLE IV
RESIDUE ANGLE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE THREE WPP
LAYOUT SCENARIOS CONSIDERED
the residue angle between scenarios is appreciated in conjunc-
tion with the differences between individual WTG. Results for
the same feedback combinations for case 2 are given in Figs. 12
and 13. All i/o pairs present similarities to the figures presented
here, and only a few results have been presented for reference.
The pattern in a “wave” form is given by the minor angle
differences between the WTGs which, in turn, are small enough
to be neglected. Between the first WTG of a feeder and the last
one, there is a maximum difference as low as 0.2 for Pref, and it
is less than 2.6 for Vref. This difference decreases as the WTGs
are located further down the feeder.
Moreover, the residue angles are seen to remain practically
unchanged independently of the investigated internal WPP con-
figuration. Table IV shows the maximum angle difference be-
tween scenarios, which are generally below 2 , being 7 the
maximum in case 1. Such slight deviations can be depreciated
and a park level control could be considered.
Furthermore, the residue angles associated to the lumped
model do not deviate from the values of the residue angle from
the individual WTGs.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
MORATÓ et al.: RESIDUE-BASED EVALUATION OF THE USE OF WPPs WITH FULL CONVERTER WIND TURBINES
Fig. 14. Residues magnitude for the i/o pair freq212-Pref for case 1.
Fig. 15. Residues magnitude for the i/o pair freq212-Vref for case 1.
Fig. 16. Residues magnitude for the i/o pair freq212-Pref for case 2.
Fig. 17. Residues magnitude for the i/o pair freq212-Vref for case 2.
TABLE V
RESIDUE MAGNITUDE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE THREE
WPP LAYOUT SCENARIOS CONSIDERED
2) Residue Magnitude: The magnitudes of the residues for
the eigenvalues are represented in Figs. 14 and 15 for case 1,
and Figs. 16 and 17 for case 2, for the frequency input. All i/o
pairs present similarities to the figures presented here, and only
a few results have been presented for reference.
Table V shows the maximum residue magnitude differ-
ence for all i/o pairs between the three scenarios expressed
in percentage. Between these scenarios, residue magnitude
differences are usually within 3%. Hence, magnitudes can be
assumed to remain unchanged between the WPP operating
scenarios.
It is noted that there are as well minor magnitude differences
between WTGs. In general, the difference in magnitude between
the first WTGs in a feeder and the last one is lower than a 1.27%
for Pref, and it remains below a 2.56% for Vref. The difference
7
between individual WTGs normally decreases as they are lo-
cated further down the feeder, which explains the “wave” form
of the plots.
VI. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
This paper has presented how the damping contribution of
a large WPP is affected by different operating conditions. The
study has been based on analyzing the changes suffered by the
residues of the electromechanical modes between the different
conditions. The effect of internal changes in the WPP has also
been investigated, and different feedback signals for a WPP
POD have been compared.
With the three operating conditions studied in this paper,
it is noted that performance compromises would have to be
made if designing a fixed parameter POD. Results show that
the contribution to positive damping of a WPP depends on the
system operating conditions and on the control feedback sig-
nals. The residue angle differences between individual WTGs
are insignificant, i.e., , and both angle and magnitude can
be assumed to be constant for the investigated configurations of
the WPP layout. Therefore, a park level POD would be feasible
from the perspective that the same control signal can be applied
for all the WTGs.
Furthermore, results indicate that the eigenvalue sensitivity is
not considerably affected between APM and RPM. Minor dif-
ferences are found between both types, although APM presents
fewer changes in residue angle.
However, both residue angles and magnitudes of the studied
feedbacks change greatly between system conditions. Multi-
modal damping is often difficult since the differences between
the residues of the interarea modes also change. Results did not
present a particular set of feedback signals that provided pos-
itive damping for all cases, although the frequency at bus 212
presented acceptable performance for cases 2 and 3.
These results indicate that to ensure that the POD contributes
with positive damping for a range of operating conditions, it
would be necessary to vary its phase shift according to these
conditions. Nevertheless, subject to the range of these condi-
tions, it may be possible to achieve acceptable damping levels
with constant phase compensation.
Three system conditions have been considered in this study,
but a larger number should be studied to ensure that appropriate
feedback signals that provide acceptable damping for a wide
range of operating conditions, can be identified. Additionally,
more detailed studies should consider a large variety of factors
such as larger number of WTGs in a feeder, different WTG tech-
nologies, or various WPP configurations.
APPENDIX
TABLE A1
PARAMETERS FOR THE FEEDER CABLES
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
8 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY
TABLE A2
PARAMETERS FOR THE COLLECTION GRID CABLES
REFERENCES
[1] J. Slootweg and W. Kling, “The impact of large scale wind power gen-
eration n power system oscillations,” Elect. Power Syst. Res., vol. 67,
no. 1, pp. 9–20, 2003.
[2] Z. Chen, “Issues of connecting wind farms into power systems,” in
Proc. IEEE/PES Transmission and Distribution Conf. and Exhibition:
Asia and Pacific, 2005, vol. 2005, pp. 154–160.
[3] G. Tsourakis, B. Nomikos, and C. Vournas, “Effect of wind parks with
doubly fed asynchronous generators on small-signal stability,” Elect.
Power Syst. Res., vol. 79, no. 1, pp. 190–200, 2009.
[4] J. L. Rueda and F. Shewarega, “Small-signal stability of power systems
with large scale wind power penetration,” Cigré XIII Encuentro Re-
gional Iberoamericano de Cigre, May 2009, Puerto Iguazú, Argentina
XIII/Pl-C1-22.
[5] O. Anaya-Lara, F. M. Hughes, and N. Jenkins, “Influence of wind
farms on power system dynamic and transient stability,” Wind Eng.,
vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 107–27, 2006.
[6] G. Tsourakis, B. M. Nomikos, and C. D. Vournas, “Contribution of
doubly fed wind generators to oscillation damping,” IEEE Trans. En-
ergy Convers., vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 783–791, Sep. 2009.
[7] Y. Mishra, S. Mishra, F. Li, Z. Y. Dong, and R. C. Bansal, “Small-
signal stability analysis of a DFIG-based wind power system under
different modes of operation,” IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 24,
no. 4, pp. 972–982, Dec. 2009.
[8] E. Hagstrom, I. Norheim, and K. Uhlen, “Large-scale wind power in-
tegration in norway and impact on damping in the Nordic grid,” Wind
Energy, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 375–384, 2005.
[9] D. Gautam and V. Vittal, “Impact of DFIG based wind turbine genera-
tors on transient and small signal stability of power systems,” in Proc.
Power and Energy Society General Meeting, Calgary, AB, Canada, Jul.
2009.
[10] D. J. Vowles, C. Samarasinghe, M. J. Gibbard, and G. Ancell, “Effect
of wind generation on small-signal stability-a new zealand example,”
in Proc. IEEE Power and Energy Soc. General Meeting, 2008, pp.
5217–5224.
[11] R. Pena, J. C. Clare, and G. M. Asher, “Doubly fed induction gen-
erator using back-to-back pwm converters and its application to vari-
able-speed wind-energy generation,” Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng., . Elect.
Power Appl., vol. 143, no. 3, pp. 231–241, May 1996.
[12] F. M. Hughes, O. Anaya-Lara, N. Jenkins, and G. Strbac, “A power
system stabilizer for DFIG-based wind generation,” IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 763–772, May 2006.
[13] P. Ledesma and C. Gallardo, “Contribution of variable-speed wind
farms to damping of power system oscillations,” in Proc. IEEE Pow-
erTech 2007, Lausanne, 2007, vol. 7, pp. 190–194.
[14] N. Kshatriya, U. Annakkage, F. M. Hughes, and A. M. Gole, “Opti-
mized partial eigenstructure assignment-based design of a combined
PSS and active damping controller for a DFIG,” IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 866–876, May 2010.
[15] C. Martinez, G. Joos, and B. T. Ooi, “Power system stabilizers in vari-
able speed wind farms,” in Proc. IEEE Power and Energy Soc. General
Meeting, 2009, vol. 9, pp. 1–7.
[16] L. Fan, H. Yin, and Z. Miao, “On active/reactive power modulation of
DFIG-based wind generation for interarea oscillation damping,” IEEE
Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 513–521, Jun. 2011.
[17] H. Yin, L. Fan, and Z. Miao, “Reactive power modulation for interarea
oscillation damping of DFIG-based wind generation,” in Proc. IEEE
Power and Energy Soc. General Meeting, 2010, vol. 10, pp. 1–9.
[18] S. Ray, B. Chaudhuri, and R. Majumder, “Appropriate signal selection
for damping multi-modal oscillations using low order controllers,” in
Proc. IEEE Power Eng. Soc. General Meeting, 2008, pp. 1–7.
[19] N. Martins and L. Lima, “Determination of suitable locations for power
system stabilizers and static var compensators for damping electro-
mechanical oscillations in large scale power systems,” IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 1455–1469, Nov. 1990.
[20] N. Yang, Q. Liu, and J. D. McCalley, “Tcsc controller design for
damping interarea oscillations,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 13, no.
4, pp. 1304–1310, Nov. 1998.
[21] G. Rogers, Power System Oscillations. New York, NY, USA: Kluwer
Academic Publishers, 2000.
[22] P. Kundur, J. Paserba, V. Ajjarapu, G. Andersson, A. Bose, C.
Canizares, N. Hatziargyriou, D. Hill, A. Stankovic, C. Taylor, T. Van
Cutsem, and V. Vittal, “Definition and classification of power system
stability,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 1387–1401,
May 2004.
[23] P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control, The EPRI Power
System Engineering Series. New York, NY, USA: McGraw- Hill,
1994.
[24] A. Adamczyk, R. Teodorescu, F. Iov, and P. C. Kjær, “Evaluation of
residue based power oscillation damping control of inter-area oscil-
lations for static power sources,” in Proc. Power and Energy Society
Meeting, San Diego, CA, USA, Jul. 2012.
[25] M. Gibbard and D. Vowles, Simplified 14-Generator Model of the SE
Australian Power System Rev. 2, School of Electrical & Electronic En-
gineering, The University of Adelaide, South Australia, 2008 [Online].
Available: http://www.eleceng.adelaide.edu.au/groups/PCON/Power-
Systems/IEEE/BenchmarkData/index.html
[26] A. Ellis, Y. Kazachkov, E. Muljadi, P. Pourbeik, and J. J.
Sanchez-Gasca, “Description and technical specifications for generic
WTG models-a status report,” in Proc. IEEE/PES Power Systems
Conf. and Exposition (PSCE 2011), 2011, pp. 1–8.
[27] K. Clark, N. Miller, and J. Sanchez-Gasca, Modeling of Ge Wind Tur-
bine-Generators for Grid Studies. ver. 4.5, General Electric Interna-
tional, Inc., Schenectady, NY, USA, 2010.
Josep Morató received the M.Sc. degree in electrical engineering from the
Technical University of Denmark (DTU), Lyngby, Denmark, and the Master’s
degree in industrial engineering from the Polytechnic University of Catalonia
(UPC), Barcelona, Spain, in 2011.
His interests include large-scale wind power generation and integration.
Thyge Knüppel received the M.Sc.E.E. and Ph.D. degrees from the Technical
University of Denmark, Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark, in 2008 and 2012, respectively.
He has been with Siemens Wind Power A/S since 2008 where he is employed
as R&D engineer and works with the development and validation of electrical
simulation models of full converter wind turbines and wind power plants, and
with time and frequency domain stability analysis.
Jacob Østergaard (M’95–SM’09) is Professor and Head of Center for Electric
Power and Energy, Department of Electrical Engineering, Technical University
of Denmark, Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark. His research interests include integration
of renewable energy, control architecture for future power system, and flexible
demand. He runs several large research projects within power systems and is
serving in several professional organizations. He is leading PowerLabDK, an
experimental platform for power and energy which includes state-of-the-art fa-
cilities at the university and the island of Bornholm.