Contribution of Photovoltaic Power Generation Systems to AC Short

Circuits a Survey of Current Modeling Practices and Challenges

Michael Behnke1 and Abraham Ellis2
1

DNV KEMA Energy & Sustainability, 2Sandia National Laboratories

Abstract As an important part of evaluating the

transmission and distribution system impacts of interconnecting
new generation sources, network operators must assess the
impact of these sources on fault interrupting capabilities of
automatic switching devices and protective relay coordination
for balanced and unbalanced faults on the network. A growing
component of these new generation sources is solar photovoltaicbased systems. Modeling of these sources for short circuit
studies is complicated by the non-linear control characteristics of
their associated inverters. These characteristics preclude the use
of linear circuit analysis techniques based on Thvenin
equivalents that are the prevalent methodologies relied upon in
most commercial short circuit analysis tools. This paper
contrasts the physical characteristics of well-understood
synchronous generator technology with that of modern-day PV
inverter technology. Limitations of commercial short circuit
analysis tools for addressing solar PV generation systems, and
recommendations for development of industry consensus
standard analysis methods, are presented.
Index Terms PV inverter, short circuit contribution.

I. INTRODUCTION
Power system faults (e.g., short circuits, ground faults)
cannot be eliminated in a practical transmission or
distribution network. Instead, the protection engineer must
design his protection systems to 1) quickly detect the
presence of the fault, 2) interrupt the flow of current to the
fault in a manner that minimizes loss of load, and 3) restore
service to as much of the load lost as possible once the fault is
cleared.
Short circuit analysis using a network model is an
important first step in meeting these criteria. Computerized
short circuit analysis tools facilitate the simulation of a large
variety of fault types and locations on very complex
networks. The results of these simulations allow the engineer
to quantify the magnitudes of fault currents through
interrupting devices such as circuit breakers, reclosers and
fuses to ensure that the interrupting capacities of these
devices are adequate for fault clearance. In addition, the short
circuit analysis results serve as a basis for coordination of
protective relays. Protection coordination ensures that the
devices that interrupt the flow of fault current are the subset
of devices that minimizes loss of load after fault clearance, or,
stated differently, maximizes selectivity of the protection
system.
Solar photovoltaic (PV) generation is becoming an
increasing portion of the electric supply resource in many
parts of the world. Environmental and energy security

978-1-4799-3299-3/13/$31.00 2013 IEEE

considerations, coupled with rapidly decreasing capital costs,

are contributing factors to higher penetration levels of PV in
the energy mix. PV power plants range from distributed
systems in the kW to MW range interconnected at
distribution or utilization voltage to large-scale, transmissionconnected stations.
Short circuit studies are a critical part of the
interconnection process for these systems. Commercially
available tools use voltage behind reactance (Thvenin
equivalent) methods to determine pseudo steady-state, phasor
(rms) current contributions from generating sources. These
methods are well suited to analyzing the short circuit
contributions from rotating machines that do not utilize power
electronics as the network interface, as the rotating machines
can be represented with sufficient accuracy as a set of time
variant linear circuits, each with relevance in a particular
period of interest for short circuit analysis. The difficulties
associated with adapting these methods to generators with a
power electronic grid interface, e.g., full-conversion wind
turbines, fuel cells and high-speed microturbines, have been
documented by others [1] [10]. In this paper, we
summarize the theoretical background around which most
commercially available short circuit analysis tools are based,
contrast that with the typical control strategies employed in
grid-connected PV inverters, and illustrate the challenges
associated with using these tools to accurately analyze the
contribution from PV power plants.
II. SYNCHRONOUS GENERATOR SHORT CIRCUIT
CHARACTERISTICS
Before considering the response of PV inverters to AC
system faults, it is instructive to review the response of
synchronous generators to these faults. This serves as an
important point of reference since nearly all commercial short
circuit analysis tools have been based on calculation
methodologies derived from the physics of synchronous
machines. Consider the three-phase currents (I1, I2, I3) in
Fig. 1, below, which represent the phase currents for a
wound-field synchronous generator subjected to a three-phase
short circuit at its terminals.

3128

the calculation methodologies have been standardized in

IEEE and IEC publications [11] [13].
Short circuit analysis tools have been developed over many
years to represent power systems where synchronous
generators are the dominant source of short circuit currents.
Computerized simulation tools simplify these calculations for
complex networks by automating the solution of these linear
equations using large algebraic matrices in which these
synchronous generator impedances, and the branch
(transformer and transmission line) impedances between
them, are contained.
Fig. 1. Synchronous
Symmetrical Fault

Generator

Currents

for

Three-Phase

Each current waveform includes an initial DC component

which results from the initiation of the fault at an instant
where the instantaneous current is non-zero. The initial
magnitude of the DC component satisfies the physical
constraint that the pre-fault and post-fault instantaneous
current must be equal in an inductive circuit. Thus, the DC
component will be different in each of the three phase
currents, the magnitudes depending on the time difference
between the zero crossing and the application of the short
circuit. The DC component decays quickly and exponentially
according to the R/L ratio of the connected circuit.
The AC component of current is also time-variant due to
the RL time constants associated with the damper, or
amortisseur, windings on the stator assembly and the field
winding on the rotor assembly. The period of time from the
application of the short circuit until the damper winding
transient has significantly decayed (a few cycles, typically) is
referred to as the subtransient period. From this time until
the transient in the field winding decays (normally 10 to 60
cycles) is the transient period. Beyond this time, the AC
currents reach a steady-state value.
To avoid the
complications of electromagnetic transient simulations for
every short circuit calculation, power systems engineers have
adopted a practice of resolving the time dependent current
waveforms into three pseudo-state waveforms to allow for the
use of linear, time-invariant circuit analysis techniques. Thus,
the short circuit contribution from the generator for a threephase symmetrical fault is determined through three phasordomain Thvenin equivalent models, each applicable to a
specific time frame of interest. Each model consists of a
constant rms voltage behind either a positive sequence 1)
subtransient (Xd), 2) a transient (Xd) or 3) steady-state (Xd)
reactance. The relationship between these three impedances
is Xd > Xd > Xd, as can be deduced from Fig. 1. For
asymmetrical faults, corresponding negative and zero
sequence machine impedances may be utilized to analyze
short circuit currents through the symmetrical components
method. All of these machine characteristics are readily
available from manufacturer test data and/or calculations, and

978-1-4799-3299-3/13/$31.00 2013 IEEE

III. PV INVERTER SHORT CIRCUIT CHARACTERISTICS

Similar methods of resolving the contribution of inverterbased generation into time-invariant linear circuits do not
exist as generally accepted practice. This is largely due to the
fact that the inverter control algorithms are both nonlinear
and programmable i.e., the fault response is determined
more by applications requirements (such as grid codes) and
design philosophy than by electromagnetic physical
phenomena. To demonstrate this, we first consider the circuit
diagram of a three-phase, voltage-source converter (VSC), a
popular power electronics topology for commercial and utility
scale solar PV applications, of Fig. 2.

Fig. 2.

Solar PV System with Voltage Source Converter

In this circuit, the PV array is represented with the singlediode simplified model. The grid is modeled with a threephase Thvenin source. The PV array is coupled to the grid
via a PV inverter, shown as the voltage source converter
(VSC) in the center of the diagram. The two-level VSC
consists of a three-phase, six-switch bridge of power
transistors (e.g., IGBTs), an input capacitor bank and an
output filter inductor. Gate drive circuitry controls the on
or off states of each of the power transistors according to
desired switching states delivered to it from the inverter
controller.
The inverter controller determines these switching states
through a process which is schematically illustrated in the
block diagram of Fig. 3.

3129

Fig. 3.

Inverter Controller Block Diagram

At the left side of Fig. 3, the outer control objectives are

implemented. For example, in a PV inverter, an outer control
loop might be to regulate the inverter input voltage, or array
output voltage, to a value that optimizes power production
under current meteorological conditions (i.e., maximum
power tracking). Another second control objective might be
to regulate the inverters reactive power output to a given
setpoint. In this example, the process feedback would include
the measured DC input voltage, active power output and
reactive power output of the inverter. The outer control loops
could generate a desired positive sequence current, with
corresponding active and reactive components, for example.
Active and reactive current limits to prevent thermal damage
to the inverter would be set in this block, as well. Obviously,
these current limits impact the short circuit contribution of the
inverter to grid faults.
The active and reactive components of current are
controlled to their desired values by the current regulators
shown to the right of the outer control loop block. A wide
variety of current regulation techniques are employed by
inverter manufacturers [14] [16]. Two popular examples
are shown in the block diagrams of Figs. 4 and 5. Current
regulation in the scheme depicted in Fig. 4 is done in the
stationary reference frame. The desired rms real and reactive
currents (Id,ref and Iq,ref) are converted to two-phase AC
fundamental-frequency signals (I,ref and I,ref) . The signals
are compared to the actual two-phase line currents (I and I),
and the error signals are applied to proportional-resonant
(PR) compensators. The PR compensators are tuned to have
very high gain at the fundamental line frequency. The
compensator outputs are the two-phase voltages V and V ,
which are then transformer to three-phase sinusoidal
modulating signals for use in the modulator.

Fig. 4.
Frame

Current Control Structure in the Stationary Reference

978-1-4799-3299-3/13/$31.00 2013 IEEE

An alternative control scheme is shown in Fig. 5. With this

scheme, current regulation is done in a reference frame which
rotates in synchronism with the fundamental line frequency.
The three-phase current feedback signals are converted to
two-phase quantities (I and I), then transformed into the DC
quantities in the rotating frame of reference (Id and Iq) for
comparison with the desired real and reactive currents.
Since these direct and quadrature axis currents are DC
quantities, steady-state errors can be eliminated using
proportional-integral (PI) compensators, which are tuned to
have very high DC gains. Regardless of the reference frame,
the high gains of the compensators result in grid current
injections which are highly programmable under most
conditions.

Fig. 5. Current Control Structure in the Synchronously Rotating

Reference Frame

While single reference frames are shown in Figs. 4 and 5,

some application requirements may call for more elaborate
control schemes. For example, separate positive and negative
sequence controllers in either reference frame may be
employed to deal with unbalanced voltages at the line
terminals of the inverter. Clearly, the feedback control
structure selected by the inverter manufacturer has a
significant impact on the response of the inverter to both
balanced and unbalanced grid faults.
To achieve closed-loop control of active or reactive power,
the active and reactive components of current must be
properly oriented in time with respect to the line voltages at
the terminals of the inverter. That is the function of the line
current synchronization block. It generates the rotational
angle necessary to make the transformations between the
stationary and synchronously rotating frames of reference.
Numerous techniques to achieve this have been successfully
implemented
including
zero
crossing
detection,
filtered/normalized use of line voltage waveforms, and phaselocked loops (PLL) [17] [20]. Each technique has its
unique set of advantages and shortcomings, and
manufacturers come to different solutions driven by a
combination of application requirements and implementation
complexity.
To demonstrate the impact of the
synchronization scheme on inverter response to unbalanced
faults, consider the response of the inverters shown in Figs. 6
and 7 to a single line to ground fault at the terminals of the
inverter. In each figure, the upper traces are the line-toneutral voltages, and the lower traces are the phase currents.

3130

In Fig. 6, the inverter current references are synchronized

to the line voltages by constructing the current references
from filtered, normalized line voltage signals in the stationary
reference frame. It can be seen that during the ground fault,
the negative sequence component of line voltage gets
reflected into the current references and the fault current
contribution includes a significant negative sequence
component.

Fig. 6. Line Synchronization via Filtered, Normalized Line

Voltage Signals

In Fig. 7, the inverter current references are synchronized

to the line voltages via a PLL that tracks the positive
sequence voltage in the synchronously rotating reference
frame. During the ground fault, despite the high negative
sequence component of line voltage, the fault current
contribution is primarily positive sequence.

conflicting objective of minimizing tracking error in the

output current waveforms.
Despite the various
implementations, the actual modulation technique has little to
no impact on the fundamental frequency response of the
inverter, and therefore is not a significant consideration in the
determination of inverter fault current contribution.
To summarize the impacts of the various blocks in the
diagram of Fig. 3 on PV inverter fault current contribution,
The outer control loops are important to characterizing
fault current contribution as this block is where current
commands are programmed and current limits are defined.
The current regulation scheme is important to fault
current contribution since it allows for current limitation
under fault conditions and impacts the nature of the current
imbalance in response to unbalanced voltage conditions.
The synchronizing scheme is important to fault current
contribution, particularly with regard to the control of active
and reactive current during the fault, and to the response of
the inverter to unbalanced voltages during faults.
The modulation scheme, while important to the inverter
designer in managing switching losses and current harmonics,
does not have a significant impact on the fundamental
frequency behavior of the inverter.
Since the inverter of Fig. 2 does not generate a zerosequence component of current, zero-sequence currents
during ground faults are determined primarily by the
transformer connections and zero-sequence impedances
between the fault and inverter terminals.
IV. STATUS OF COMMERCIAL SHORT CIRCUIT ANALYSIS
TOOLS

Fig. 7. Line Synchronization via Positive Sequence Synchronous

Phase-Locked Loop

The final block in Fig. 3 is the modulator. It is this block

that takes the fundamental frequency modulating voltage
signals produced by the current regulators and transforms
them to appropriate switching states. These switching states
are fed to the gate drive circuit shown in the power circuit of
Fig. 2. As with the current regulation scheme, there are a vast
number of PWM techniques employed by inverter
manufacturers. Included among the various classes of PWM
control are hysteresis-band modulation, carrier-based
sinusoidal modulation and space-vector modulation [21]
[23]. In general, all these techniques are attempts to minimize
converters losses (primarily switching losses) along with the

978-1-4799-3299-3/13/$31.00 2013 IEEE

Power system analysis software vendors have only recently

begun making accommodations for the unique characteristics
of inverter-based generation sources. With most tools, the
user has no means to accurately model these sources, and is
limited by the software to Thvenin-equivalent generator
models. By manual iterating the Thvenin voltage and/or
Thvenin impedances, it is possible to converge on a
combination of the two which results in a reasonable
representation of the output of the inverter for certain fault
types [24].
However, this manual method is clearly
impractical for a network with a large quantity of inverterbased generators to be represented. Some tools allow for user
defined subroutines that automate this process [6], [25], [26].
Finally, other software vendors have integrated an iterative
solution within their generator models that allows for current
limitation [27]. While these methods are effective for threephase symmetrical faults, their performance under unbalanced
fault conditions is still questionable.

3131

V. CONCLUSIONS
PV and other inverter-based generation technologies are a
rapidly growing component of the electric supply mix. The
ability to model these resources in an accurate manner for
short circuit and protection coordination analyses is a key to
their ready integration into the transmission and distribution
network. At present, there are no generally-accepted industry
practices on how these resources should be modeled, and
most commercial power system analysis tools rely on
Thvenin-equivalent linear circuit analysis techniques that are
not applicable to the popular voltage-source converter grid
interface.
Industry consensus methodologies are badly needed so that
electric utility engineers, distributed generation equipment
manufacturers and power system software vendors can
coalesce around generally accepted modeling practice, similar
to what has been achieved with rotating machine-based
generation. In the absence of these consensus methods,
barriers to the implementation of renewable and distribution
generation are likely to arise as electric utility engineers feel
increasingly exposed to potential operational risks associated
with these systems.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work was funded by the Department of Energy
through Sandia National Laboratories. Sandia is a
multiprogram laboratory operated by Sandia Corporation, a
Lockheed Martin Company, for the United States Department
of Energys National Nuclear Security Administration under
contract DE-AC04-94AL85000.
REFERENCES
[1] Nelson, R.J.; Ma, H.; , "Short-circuit contributions of fullconverter wind turbines," Power and Energy Society General
Meeting, 2011 IEEE , vol., no., pp.1-4, 24-29 July 2011
[2] Baran, M.E.; El-Markaby, I.; , "Fault analysis on distribution
feeders with distributed generators," Power Systems, IEEE
Transactions on , vol.20, no.4, pp. 1757- 1764, Nov. 2005
[3] Walling, R.A.; Gursoy, E.; English, B.; , "Current contributions
from Type 3 and Type 4 wind turbine generators during faults,"
Transmission and Distribution Conference and Exposition
(T&D), 2012 IEEE PES , vol., no., pp.1-6, 7-10 May 2012
[4] Turcotte, D.; Katiraei, F.; , "Fault contribution of gridconnected inverters," Electrical Power & Energy Conference
(EPEC), 2009 IEEE , vol., no., pp.1-5, 22-23 Oct. 2009
[5] Pan, Y.; Ren, W.; Ray, S.; Walling, R.; Reichard, M.; , "Impact
of inverter interfaced distributed generation on overcurrent
protection in distribution systems," Power Engineering and
Automation Conference (PEAM), 2011 IEEE , vol.2, no.,
pp.371-376, 8-9 Sept. 2011
[6] Valentini, M.; Akhmatov, A.; Iov, F.; Thisted, J.; , "Fault
current contribution from VSC-based wind turbines to the
grid," 2nd International Symposium on Electrical and
Electronics Engineering, ISSE-2008, Galati, Romania, 2008

978-1-4799-3299-3/13/$31.00 2013 IEEE

[7] Williams, J.; Karlson, B;, Wind power plant short circuit
modeling guide, Sandia Report SAND2012-6664, Aug. 2012
[8] Keller, J.; Kroposki, B;, Understanding fault characteristics of
inverter-based distributed energy resources, NREL Technical
Report NREL/TP-550-46698, Jan. 2010
[9] Muljadi, E.; Gevorgian, V; Samaam, N.; Li, J.; Pasupulati, S.;,
Short circuit current contribution for different wind turbine
generator types, NREL Conference Paper NREL/CP-55047193, Mar. 2010
[10] Katiraei, F.; Holbach, J.; Chang, T.;, Impact and sensitivity
studies of PV inverters contribution to faults based on generic
PV inverter models Ontario grid connection study, CanSIA
and Quanta Technology publication, May 2012
[11] "IEEE Recommended Practice for Electric Power Distribution
for Industrial Plants," IEEE Std 141-1993 , vol., no., pp.1-768,
April 29 1994
[12] Guide For Calculation of Fault Currents for Application of AC
High-Voltage Circuit Breakers Rated On A Total Current
Basis, ANSI Standard C37.5, June 2 1979
[13] Short-circuit currents in three-phase a.c. systems Part 0:
Calculation of currents, IEC 60909-0, First Edition, Jul. 2001
[14] Kazmierkowski, M.P.; Dzieniakowski, M.A.; , "Review of
current regulation techniques for three-phase PWM inverters,"
Industrial Electronics, Control and Instrumentation, 1994.
IECON '94., 20th International Conference on , vol.1, no.,
pp.567-575 vol.1, 5-9 Sep 1994
[15] Kazmierkowski, M.P.; Malesani, L.; , "Current control
techniques for three-phase voltage-source PWM converters: a
survey," Industrial Electronics, IEEE Transactions on , vol.45,
no.5, pp.691-703, Oct 1998
[16] Malinowski, M.; Kazmierkowski, M.P.; Trzynadlowski, A.M.; ,
"A comparative study of control techniques for PWM rectifiers
in AC adjustable speed drives," Power Electronics, IEEE
Transactions on , vol.18, no.6, pp. 1390- 1396, Nov. 2003
[17] Blaabjerg, F.; Teodorescu, R.; Liserre, M.; Timbus, A.V.; ,
"Overview of Control and Grid Synchronization for Distributed
Power Generation Systems," Industrial Electronics, IEEE
Transactions on , vol.53, no.5, pp.1398-1409, Oct. 2006
[18] Boyra, M.; Thomas, J.-L.; , "A review on synchronization
methods for grid-connected three-phase VSC under unbalanced
and distorted conditions," Power Electronics and Applications
(EPE 2011), Proceedings of the 2011-14th European
Conference on , vol., no., pp.1-10, Aug. 30 2011-Sept. 1 2011
[19] Freijedo, F.D.; Doval-Gandoy, J.; Lopez, O.; MartinezPenalver, C.; Yepes, A.G.; Fernandez-Comesana, P.; Malvar,
J.; Nogueiras, A.; Marcos, J.; Lago, A.; , "Grid-synchronization
methods for power converters," Industrial Electronics, 2009.
IECON '09. 35th Annual Conference of IEEE , vol., no.,
pp.522-529, 3-5 Nov. 2009
[20] Timbus, A.; Teodorescu, R.; Blaabjerg, F.; Liserre, M.; ,
"Synchronization methods for three phase distributed power
generation systems - An overview and evaluation," Power
Electronics Specialists Conference, 2005. PESC '05. IEEE 36th
, vol., no., pp.2474-2481, 16-16 June 2005
[21] Holtz, J.; , "Pulsewidth modulation-a survey," Industrial
Electronics, IEEE Transactions on , vol.39, no.5, pp.410-420,
Oct 1992
[22] Trzynadlowski, A.M.; , "An overview of modern PWM
techniques for three-phase, voltage-controlled, voltage-source
inverters," Industrial Electronics, 1996. ISIE '96., Proceedings
of the IEEE International Symposium on , vol.1, no., pp.25-39
vol.1, 17-20 Jun 1996
[23] Keliang Zhou; Danwei Wang; , "Relationship between spacevector modulation and three-phase carrier-based PWM: a

3132

[24]

[25]

[26]
[27]

comprehensive analysis [three-phase inverters]," Industrial

Electronics, IEEE Transactions on , vol.49, no.1, pp.186-196,
Feb 2002
Fischer, M.; Mendonca, A.; , "Representation of variable speed
full conversion Wind Energy Converters for steady state shortcircuit calculations," Power and Energy Society General
Meeting, 2011 IEEE , vol., no., pp.1-7, 24-29 July 2011
Si Chen; Lund, T.; Zamastil, M.H.; Akhmatov, V.; Abildgaard,
H.; Gellert, B.C.; , "Short-circuit calculations considering
converter-controlled generation components,"Energytech, 2012
IEEE , vol., no., pp.1-6, 29-31 May 2012
DIgSILENT PowerFactory Version 14.1, User Manual
ASPEN OneLiner Version 11, User Manual , Section 10.3
Current Limited Generators

BIOGRAPHIES
Michael Behnke received his BS and MS in Electrical
Engineering from Purdue University and Santa Clara
University in 1986 and 1993, respectively. He has held
numerous engineering, management, sales and customer
service positions in North America and Europe with Pacific
Gas and Electric, Kenetech Windpower, Trace International
and Xantrex Technology. In 2003, he co-founded BEW
Engineering, which was acquired by DNV (Det Norske
Veritas) in 2010. He is currently a Principal Engineer at DNV
KEMA Energy & Sustainability, providing electrical
engineering consulting services to utilities, project developers
and equipment manufacturers for wind and solar power
generation applications. Mr. Behnke is a registered
professional engineer in California, and currently chairs the
Electrical Exam Committee at the National Council of
Examiners for Engineering and Surveying.
Abraham Ellis received his M.S. and Ph.D. in EE from
New Mexico State University in 1995 and 2000, respectively.
Until 2008, he worked at Public Service Company of New
Mexico in the transmission planning and operations area.
Since 2008, he has been with Sandia National Laboratories,
where works as technical lead for renewable integration. His
area of responsibility includes wind and solar system model
development, analysis of power system operations, and
technology development. Dr. Ellis currently serves as
Chairman of the WECC Renewable Energy Modeling Task
Force, working on generic wind and solar models. Dr. Ellis is
a Senior Member of the IEEE Power and Energy Society, and
a Professional Engineer in New Mexico.

978-1-4799-3299-3/13/$31.00 2013 IEEE

3133