GRID CODE COMPLIANCE IN MEGAWATT PROJECTS

meteocontrol.commeteocontrol.com

GRID CODE COMPLIANCE IN MEGAWATT PROJECTS

PRACTICAL COMMISSIONING IN THE NETHERLANDS

Ehsan Nadeem Khan

April 28, 2021

meteocontrol.commeteocontrol.commeteocontrol.com

AGENDA

➢ GRID INTEGRATION

➢ POWER PLANT CONTROLLER

➢ GRID CODE COMPLIANCE

➢ A COMPARISON BETWEEN GERMANY AND THE NETHERLANDS

➢ COMPLIANCE TESTING: PRACTICAL EXAMPLES


INTEGRATING RENEWABLES INTO THE GRID

GRID INTEGRATION

• Renewables such as PV and wind are intermittent in nature

• Grid is stabilized by the delicate balance between demand and

supply

• What happens when this is disturbed? Europe synchronous grid

separation on 8th of January 2021

• Fast automatic control and manual intervention prevented a

Europe wide blackout

• What does it mean?

GRID INTEGRATION

3

Image source: ENTSO-E

North-West area: deficit of power

and decrease in frequency

South-East area: surplus of power

and increase in frequency


POWER PLANT CONTROLLER

4

What is a power plant controller?

• Enables all the individual parts of a plant to

act as single entity at the PCC

• Some requirements from the grid operator

need to be fulfilled at the PCC and not at the

individual inverter terminals

POWER PLANT CONTROLLER


WHY GRID CODE COMPLIANCE (GCC)?

5

Grid Code Compliance (GCC)

means “the tasks related to assessment, verification and certification of technical performance capabilities

required in grid codes and similar documents”

• Conducting the tests and providing the necessary documentation

• To successfully connect a renewable plant to the grid

• Ensuring grid stability

GRID CODE COMPLIANCE (GCC)


TYPES OF COMPLIANCE VERIFICATION

6

GRID CODE COMPLIANCE (GCC)

compliance by

testing and simulation

compliance by

certification

Verification

means “confirmation, through the provision of objective evidence, that specified requirements have been fulfilled.”


compliance by certification vs.compliance by testing and simulation

OVERVIEW BY COUNTRIES

7

IMPLEMENTATION OF NC RFG ON THE NATIONAL LEVEL

• Compliance by certification via project certificate only in

Germany (since 10 years) and Spain until now (Poland and

the Netherlands are discussing about)

• Equipment certificates accepted in many countries

• Supplementary compliance testing still very common

• Although this is the broad classification, most countries

accept a mixture of both


YOUR ROAD TO A FAST AND SAFE GRID CONNECTION

8

GRID CONNECTION REQUIREMENTS AND VERIFICATION

Scope of functionality

(Pre-screening)

• Active power management

• Solar power trading interface

• Reactive power management

• Real-time process data

exchange

Planning Realization Commissioning Operation

GCC services

• Project consulting

• Controller tuning

• Test procedure

• Simulation models

(project-specific)

GCC services

• Site Acceptance

Testing (SAT)

• Test report

• Model validation

(project-specific)

Service & O&M

• PPC monitoring

• KPIs (e.g. PR)

• Remote service access

• Diagnosis options

(remote / local)

A comparison between Germany and the Netherlands


GERMAN IMPLEMENTATION

10

EEG / EnWGRenewable Energy

Sources Act

NELEVOrdinance to proof electrical

behaviour of generators at gridLA

WT

EC

HN

ICA

LG

UID

EL

INE

S

VDE-AR-N 4105(generators LV grid)

VDE-AR-N 4110(connetion MV grid)

VDE-AR-N 4130(connetion extHV grid)

VDE-AR-N 4120(connetion HV grid)

VDE-AR-N 4100(connetion LV grid)

Technical Connection Rules forlow voltage, medium voltage & high voltage

ENTSO-E

RfG

TG8TG3 TG4

FGW Technical guidelines for

testing, simulations & certification

DIN EN ISO/IEC 17065


GERMAN IMPLEMENTATION

11

Demand of certification starting from 135kW at PCC

Component and type certificate

Project planning(independent to

certification body)

Project certificate

Commissioningdeclaration

Declaration ofconformity


DUTCH IMPLEMENTATION

12

LA

WT

EC

HN

ICA

LG

UID

EL

INE

S

ENTSO-E

RfG

Electricity Act 1998Ministry of Economic

Affairs and Climate (EZK)

ACM DecisionsNetherlands Authority for Consumers

and Markets (ACM)

Netcode elektriciteit

(‘Dutch Grid Code’, last updated: June 2020)

Type A(0.8 kW ≤ Pmax < 1 MW)

(Vn < 110kV)

Type C(50 MW ≤ Pmax < 60 MW)

(Vn < 110kV)

RfG compliance verification

(Compliance Verification Procedure)

Netbeheer Nederland’s guideline for

testing, simulations & certification

Type B(1 MW ≤ Pmax < 50 MW)

(Vn < 110kV)

Type D(Pmax ≥ 60 MW)

(Vn ≥ 110kV)


RFG/POWER GENERATING MODULES COMPLIANCE VERIFICATION


13

• Multiple revisions in a short span of time

• Power-generating modules compliance verification – Power-generating modules type B, C and D according

to NC RfG and Netcode elektriciteit’:

1. Version 0.1, April 2019

2. Version 1.1, December 2019

3. Version 1.2 and Version 1.2.1, July 2020

This is a common trend in many countries. As their total renewable capacity increases, amendments are being

made in their grid codes.


COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENT BASED ON TYPE


14

RfG states that the significance of Power-generating

modules should be based on their size and effect on

overall system. Meaning compliance requirements are

based on the size

Type A

• require only equipment certificate

Type B & C

• require PGMD (Power-generating module document)

• PGMD includes test reports and simulation studies

reports


COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENT BASED ON TYPE


15

Type D

• Have to go through a more rigorous process and detailed testing due to their scale and impact

• three stages in taking the plant into operation

EON (Energization operational notification)

Equipment energization but no generation

ION (Interim operational notification)

Operate and generate for a limited period of time (no more than 24 months)

FON (Final operational notification)

Continuous commercial operation EON ION FON


COMPLIANCE TESTING & SIMULATION

16


‘POWER-GENERATING MODULES COMPLIANCE VERIFICATION – POWER-GENERATING MODULES TYPE B, C AND D ACCORDING TO NC RFG AND NETCODEELEKTRICITEIT’, VERSION 1.2.1, NETBEHEER NEDERLAND, 2020-07-21

Features RfG article

Testing Simulations

Type Type

Article B C D Article B C D

Frequency range 13(1) x x x

LFSM-O 13(2) 47.3 x x x 54.2 x x x

LFSM-U 15(2)(c) 48.3 x x 55.2 x x

FSM 15(2)(d) 48.4 x x 55.3 x x

Frequency restoration 15(2)(e) 48.5 x x

Active power controllability 15(2)(a) 48.2 x x

Reconnection after disconnection 14(4) x x x

Post-fault active power recovery 20(3) 54.5 x x x

REQUIREMENTS - FREQUENCY STABILITY


COMPLIANCE TESTING & SIMULATION

17


Features RfG article

Testing Simulations

Type Type

Article B C D Article B C D

Voltage range 16(2) x x x

Reactive power capability 21(3)(b/c) 48.6 x x x 55.6 x x X

Voltage control mode

(V1-mode & V2-mode)21(3)(d) 48.7 x x

Reactive power control mode 21(3)(d) 48.8 x x

Power factor control mode 21(3)(d) 48.9 x x

Fast fault current injection 20(2)(b) 48.4 x x x 54.3 x x x

Fault-ride through (FRT) 14(3)(a) / 16(3) 48.5 x x x 54.4/56.3 x x x

Synthetic Inertia 21(2)(a) 55.5 x x x

Power Oscillation Damping (POD) 19(2)/21(3)(f) 55.7 x x

REQUIREMENTS – VOLTAGE STABILITY

‘POWER-GENERATING MODULES COMPLIANCE VERIFICATION – POWER-GENERATING MODULES TYPE B, C AND D ACCORDING TO NC RFG AND NETCODEELEKTRICITEIT’, VERSION 1.2.1, NETBEHEER NEDERLAND, 2020-07-21

Compliance testingExamples from practice in the Netherlands


PLANT SPECIFICATIONS

TYPE B

19

• Power-generating modules compliance verification,

Version 1.1, December 2019

On-site

• LFSM-O

• Reactive power capability

Parameter Value

Agreed connected active power >30.0 MW

Installed active power Pinst 33.9 MW

Declared supply voltage Vc 10.4 kV

Number of PVGUs (PV inverters) NPVGU, total 226


PROJECT TAKEAWAYS

TYPE B

20

• Currently there was no interface with the grid operator for type B plants but it is being considered and may

be implemented in the future (feedback from the grid operator)

• Type B plants alternatively can show compliance through equipment certificates

• On site testing for reactive power capability was not conducted

Unavailability of initial active power



TYPE D - 1

21

• RfG compliance verification – Power-generating modules type

B, C and D, Version 0.1, April 2019

Parameter Value



Declared supply voltage Vc 110 kV



ON-SITE TESTS

TYPE D - 1

22

• Active power controllability

• Reactive power control mode tests

• Voltage sub mode 1

• Voltage sub mode 2

• Q mode

• PF mode

• Power and voltage quality compliance test


ACTIVE POWER CONTROLLABILITY

TYPE D - 1

23

Initial conditions

Parameter Value

Actual active power >60% Pmax

Voltage sub mode 1 activated 0 Mvar

Parameter Value

No protection action (tripping) as a consequence of the test

during or after the test

Y/N

Settling time ≤20 s

Steady-state error ΔPref ≤ ±5 % Pref

The tests show damped oscillations Y/N

Evaluation criteria


ACTIVE POWER CONTROLLABILITY

TYPE D - 1

24

Steady state accuracy Settling time

Remained below 5% PMAX Settling time ≤20 s


VOLTAGE SUB MODE 1

TYPE D - 1

25

Initial conditions and settings Evaluation criteria

Parameter Value

Active power setpoint 100% Pmax

Actual active power >20% Pmax

Voltage droop 10 %

Minimum voltage setpoint Vsetpoint, min 0.90 V/Vc

Maximum voltage setpoint Vsetpoint, max 1.10 V/Vc

Dynamic threshold Qdynamic upper / lower 7 Mvar/ -7Mvar

Disturbance threshold Qdynamic upper/lower 14 Mvar / -14 Mvar

Maximum absorbed / underexcited reactive power Qmin, V

control

-40 % Pmax

Maximum injected / overexcited reactive power Qmax, V

control

35 % Pmax

Parameter Value

Voltage droop sV 10%

Dynamic and Disturbance threshold violations -

Rise time Trise 90% <2.5 s

Settling time ≤7.0 s

Steady-state error ΔQrmax ≤ ±5 % Pmax

Maximum overshoot V/VC 1% VC

The tests show damped oscillations Y/N


VOLTAGE SUB MODE 1

TYPE D - 1

26

Test Procedure Description Measurement data


VOLTAGE SUB MODE 1

TYPE D - 1

27

Measured data Rise and settling time

• Remained below 5% PMAX

• Settling time ≤7 s

• Rise time ≤2.5 s


Dead band

PROJECT TAKEAWAYS

TYPE D - 1

28

SAT was conducted two times

• Initial power requirements were not met the first time

• First SAT conducted independently

• Second SAT in presence of an independent certification body

Settings

• Dead band

• FRT in the inverters was triggered

• Maximum power limitation to keep the power at PAV

Success criteria

• Overshoot

• Rise and Settling time

• Coordination with the grid operator

• Several revisions of the GCCTPD: 10 months from first draft (Sep 2019)

to final confirmation (June 2020)

• Time consuming tests



TYPE D - 2

29

• Power-generating modules compliance verification,

Version 1.1, December 2019

Parameter Value



Declared supply voltage Vc 110 kV



PROJECT TAKEAWAYS

TYPE D - 2

30

Same type (type D) and same grid operator: compliance testing should be similar?

→ No, because of new compliance requirements!

SAT

• was again conducted two times

• first one was non compliant - equipment settings

Transformer reactive power

• 18MVar

• Reactive power capability a challenge

Inverters

• 238 String inverters

• 19 Central inverters

• On site testing compliance was to be shown at the PCC as opposed to the inverter

• More control modes were required


CHANGES

TYPE D - 2

31

• On-site testing for frequency control

• Only one reactive power control mode tested

• Changes in methods of testing: LFSM-O


50.000

5.000

0.000

5.000

0.000

25.000

20.000

5.000

0.000

5.000

0.000

5.000

0.000

5.000

20.000

25.000

0.000

5.000

0.000

5.000

50.000

55.000

0.000

5.000

70.000

75.000

0.000

0. 50

0. 0

0. 70

0. 0

0. 0

.000

.0 0

.020

.0 0

.0 0

.050

0 00 00 2700 00

ar et reacti e po er

tar etin

ar

i

ulated test o

lta e

si , testin p.u.

i e t in s

i ulated test olta e si , test c e erence reacti e po er re in ar

ar et reacti e po er tar et in ar d na ic upper thd

d na ic lo er thd distur ance upper thd

distur ance lo er thd

CHANGES

TYPE D - 2

32

• Changes in methods of testing: Voltage sub mode 1

0.00

5.00

0.00

25.00

20.00

5.00

0.00

5.00

0.00

5.00

0.00

5.00

20.00

25.00

0.00

5.00

0.00

5.00

50.00

55.00

0.00

0. 50

0. 0

0. 70

0. 0

0. 0

.000

.0 0

.020

.0 0

.0 0

.050

.0 0

.070

.0 0

.0 0

. 00

. 0

. 20

. 0

. 0

. 50

. 0

. 70

. 0

0 00 00 2700 00 500

ar et reacti e po er

tar etin ar

i

ulated actual olta e

si , actualin p.u.

i e t in s

i ulated actual olta e si , actual c alidation o threshold iolation

e erence reacti e po er re in ar ar et reacti e po er tar et in ar

d na ic upper thd d na ic lo er thd

distur ance upper thd distur ance lo er thd


SUMMARY

33

✓ Renewables are the fastest growing power source in the world

✓ Important to ensure grid stability

✓ GCC very important

Every country has its own requirements

Very rapidly changing compliance landscape

✓ From start to finish this is a long process

Coordination with different stake holders

Tests

✓ Component manufacturers need to stay on top of their game

Continuous R&D is the key

CONTACT

Ehsan Nadeem Khan

Grid Code Compliance Engineer

Email: [email protected]

Phone: +49 821 34666 1214

mailto:[email protected]

GRID CODE COMPLIANCE IN MEGAWATT PROJECTS

Documents

Transcript of GRID CODE COMPLIANCE IN MEGAWATT PROJECTS