Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 770–780

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Challenges of integrating renewable energy sources

to smart grids: A review
Dalia Eltigani n, Syafrudin Masri
School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University Sains Malaysia, Engineering Campus, Nibong Tebal, 14300 Penanag, Malaysia

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The deep penetration of renewable energy sources is on the cutting edge of smart grid vision. However, the
Received 11 July 2014 variability and limited predictability of these sources have brought many technical challenges to grids. Many
Received in revised form regulatory communities and system operators in the power sector have established grid codes to ensure
22 May 2015
proper connection of these renewable sources. This paper investigates the up-to-date methods used to
Accepted 29 July 2015
enhance power system performance in the presence of a large share of renewable energy generation. In
particular, two areas are addressed; the first is the techniques used for improving the wind and photovoltaic
Keywords: low-voltage ride-through capabilities to meet the required grid codes. The second is the contribution of
Grid codes these sources to the small signal stability of the power system in terms of inter-area oscillation damping.
Inter-area oscillations damping
& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Low-voltage ride-through
Phasor measurement unit
Photovoltaic power
Renewable energy integration
Wind power

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 770
2. Low-voltage ride-through (LVRT) capability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 771
2.1. LVRT requirements in grid codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 771
2.1.1. Grid codes for WPPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 772
2.1.2. Grid codes for PVPPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 772
2.2. LVRT capability enhancement of PVPPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 772
2.3. LVRT capability enhancement of WPPs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 773
2.3.1. Pitch angle control. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 773
2.3.2. Crowbar method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 773
2.3.3. Energy storage systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 774
2.3.4. Voltage compensation techniques. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 774
2.3.5. Rotor-side converter and grid-side converter modified control techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 774
3. Inter-area oscillation damping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 775
3.1. Inter-area oscillation damping in the presence of PVPPs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 775
3.2. Inter-area oscillation damping in the presence of WPPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 776
3.2.1. Active power PODs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 776
3.2.2. Reactive power PODs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 776
3.2.3. Miscellaneous techniques for oscillation damping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 776
3.2.4. Synchronized Phasor Measurements in inter-area oscillation damping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 777
4. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 777
Acknowledgment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 777
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 778

n
Corresponding author. Tel.: þ601114305401.
E-mail address: daliamhmd@hotmail.com (D. Eltigani).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.140
1364-0321/& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 D. Eltigani, S. Masri / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 770–780 771

Nomenclature PMU : Phasor Measurement Unit

POD : Power Oscillation Damping controller
BESS : Battery Energy Storage System PSO : Particle Swarm Optimization
DVR : Dynamic Voltage Restorer PV : Photovoltaic
FC : Fuzzy Controller PVPP : Photovoltaic Power Plant
GSC : Grid-Side Converter RSC : Rotor-Side Converter
HVDC : High Voltage Direct Current SPMS : Synchronized Phasor Measurement System
LVRT : Low Voltage Ride-Through WADC : Wide-Area Damping Controller
DFIG : Doubly-Fed Induction Generator WAMS : Wide-Area Measurement System
PCC : Point of Common Coupling WG : Wind Generator
PMSG : Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Generator WPP : Wind Power Plant

1. Introduction extensively to enhance the voltage profile [17]. Static var compen-
sators (SVCs) and static compensators (STATCOMs) are usually
The smart grid heralds the coming era of new power systems connected to the point of common coupling (PCC) of WPPs to
that utilize advances in communications and information technol- control voltage [18–20]. In other approaches, battery energy storage
ogies to overcome the challenges of current power systems [1,2]. system (BESS) and electric springs are implemented for the better
The smart grid is essential in ensuring high quality services, voltage control [21–23]. However, with the growing generation
consumer engagement in consumption management, cyber and from renewable sources, these techniques faced many challenges
physical security of the system, system reliability, and integration of for ensuring system stability. This situation obligated technical
renewable energy sources into the grid [3,4]. Generation from legislations for connecting renewable energy sources to grids which
renewable energy sources especially wind and solar photovoltaic is known as grid codes.
is growing rapidly in preparation for the smart grid and also due to
the fact that these sources are clean and sustainable [5]. The
photovoltaic (PV) global cumulative generation has grown from 2.1. LVRT requirements in grid codes
3 GW in 2003 to 139 GW in 2013 and is expected to reach 430 GW
by 2018 [6]. The wind generation is growing faster than PV, The grid codes are regulations set by power system operators to
increasing from 39 GW in 2003 to 318 GW in 2013, and is predicted ensure proper functioning of all system components. Both WPPs
to reach around 600 GW by 2018 [7]. and PVPPs have grid codes to regulate their connections to grids.
The electric grid is significantly affected by the integration and According to grid codes, WPPs are required to survive system
deep penetration of renewable energy sources because of their disturbances and also to provide ancillary services in order to
variability [8,9]. A lot of challenges are initiated by this penetration, ensure network stability [24]. These requirements or grid codes
such as effective forecasting, energy storage management, demand
management systems, voltage control, and power system stability Voltage (%)
[10–14]. This paper discusses the challenges of voltage control and 100 Germany
system stability. Voltage control is a major requirement for power 90
70 Canada
systems and many countries have developed methods of keeping
renewable energy sources connected to grids in order to survive
voltage dips. These renewable sources should ride-through faults and UK
45 Ireland
low voltage situations to avoid system cascaded failure [15]. Their
ability to execute this is known as the low-voltage ride-through 30
capability (LVRT). Regarding system stability, renewable sources can 15
be utilized to enhance the power system's stability such as inter-area Time (ms)
oscillation damping. The problem with oscillation is that it introduces
additional instability to the system when abnormal situations occur 0 150 700 1000 1500 3000
and also limits power transfer capabilities, especially in long trans- Fig. 1. Low-voltage ride-through requirements for wind power plants in different
mission lines. This paper will focus on reviewing inter-area oscilla- grid codes.
tion damping techniques and LVRT capability enhancement methods
in power systems involving PV and wind power plants (WPPs).
This paper is organized as follows: Section 2 reviews the LVRT Voltage (%)
requirements in grid codes and LVRT enhancement methods for 100 Must stay connected
both WPPs and PV power plants (PVPPs). Section 3 investigates 90
70
inter-area oscillation damping techniques in WPPs and PVPPs. The
may
conclusion will be presented in Section 4.
disconnect Must be disconnected
45

2. Low-voltage ride-through (LVRT) capability 30

15 No specifications
The LVRT capability of WPPs and PVPPs is the ability of these time (ms)
sources to stay connected to grids during voltage dips [16]. This
capability ensures system's post-fault stability and fast recovery. A 0 150 700 1500 3000
few years ago, when renewable energy was not deeply penetrated Fig. 2. Low-voltage ride-through requirement for photovoltaic power plants in the
in grids, flexible ac transmission system (FACTS) devices were used German grid code.
772 D. Eltigani, S. Masri / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 770–780
DC bus and
PV cell chopper Inverter
Fig. 3. The main components of photovoltaic system which comprise of pv module,
dc chopper, and dc–ac inverter.
differ from one country to another and from operator to operator
depending on the system's structure and characteristics. None-
theless, there are some common requirements such as LVRT,
extended variation range for the voltage–frequency, active power
control, and reactive power control [25–27]. Regarding PVPPs, they
are usually connected to low voltage (LV) networks or medium
voltage (MV) networks. When connected to LV networks, PVPPs are
required to disconnect in the event of disturbances. However, in MV
networks, grid codes require PVPPs to stay connected to the grid,
ride-through the fault, restore the active power, and compensate
the reactive power [28,29].
2.1.1. Grid codes for WPPs
The LVRT requirement for WPPs requires them to stay con-
nected to the grid during voltage dips up to certain limits
depending on the country grid code [15,30,31]. A fast compensa-
tion for active and reactive power is also required in a short period
after fault clearance [32]. The LVRT requirements in some grid
codes are illustrated graphically in Fig. 1 [33]. For instance, the
interpretation of the LVRT requirement in the German grid code is
that the WPP should stay connected to the grid if a three-phase
fault causes a 100% voltage dip for duration of 150 ms in the PCC.
Then, the terminal voltage should be restored to 0.9pu in no more
than 1.5 s after clearing the fault [34].
2.1.2. Grid codes for PVPPs
The PVPPs connected to MV networks are required to ride-
through faults. Germany is one of the few countries that connect
PVPPs to MV networks and the LVRT requirement in the German
grid code is shown in Fig. 2 [28,35]. In Italy, a recent grid code
requires PVPPs to ride-through low voltage if the nominal power is
more than 6 kW [36]. Also, in Japan, there is a proposal for
connecting PVPPs to the LV distribution level, requiring them to
stay connected to the grid if the voltage dip is less than 80%, and to
supply more than 80% of the output power after fault clearance [37].
2.2. LVRT capability enhancement of PVPPs
Research in the field of LVRT capabilities of PVPPs is still limited
because most of these plants are small-scale and connected to LV
networks. Only PVPPs that are connected to MV networks are
required to ride-through faults. The general layout of a PVPP
(shown in Fig. 3) comprises of three main components: the PV
array, a DC to DC converter, and a DC to AC inverter [38]. The
inverter is of great importance to the PVPP because it controls the
plant's voltage as well as active and reactive power according to the
grid's requirement. In general, PV inverters fail to ride-through
faults due to overvoltage, overcurrent, or loss of synchronism [39].
The LVRT capability of a 5 kW PV inverter was investigated in
[40]. The proposed scheme forced the PV inverter to stay connected
to the grid during 100% and 50% voltage dips. The control scheme
first separated the sequences of the grid voltage during voltage dips.
Then, the positive sequence was fed to a phase locked loop (PLL) to
maintain stability and reactive current direction. Also, current
limiters and a feed forward loop for grid voltage were augmented
to stabilize the control loop. The control scheme helped the inverter
to ride-through the fault but it increased the swinging of the active
and reactive powers. In [41], the proposed LVRT scheme was
designed to fulfill the Spanish grid code requirements. The control
scheme here depended on the direct-axis (d-axis) and quadrature-
axis (q-axis) algorithm. First, the measured values of current and
voltage were used to calculate the voltage and current in the direct
and quadrature axes Vd, Vq, Id, Iq. These values were used later to
determine the reference current values (I*q, I*d) in order to satisfy the
grid code's LVRT requirement. Reference voltages were calculated
using the reference current (using Eq. 1) then fed in phasor form to
the gate control circuit of the inverter. The proposed scheme was
validated experimentally for an 80% voltage dip.
   K

V nq ¼ I nq  I q  mes  K p1 þ i1
s
 

K
V nd ¼ I d  mes  I nd  K p2 þ i2 ð1Þ
s
where I d  mes ; I q  mes are the d and q-axis measured currents;
K p1 ; K i1 ; K p2 ; K i2 are PI current controller parameters.
In [42], a method was proposed to help PVPPs ride-through a 60%
voltage dip. This method depended mainly on the separation of the
current's positive and negative sequences and on bypassing the
maximum power point tracking (MPPT) system during faults. The
positive sequence (PS) current reference was set according to the grid
code while the negative sequence (NS) current was suppressed by
means of a controller. This arrangement was validated experimen-
tally using a 150 kW PVPP. The proposed control scheme in [43]
extracted the PS and NS components of the voltage and current
under unbalanced grid faults. These components were further
decomposed into two components in the d-axis and q-axis. The
new components were controlled using a PI controller with the d-
axis current used to maintain the DC link voltage and manage the
active power. This control scheme also minimized the current
harmonics in the grid side of the inverter. Not far from the previous
methods, [44] designed a controller to improve the LVRT capability of
a 2 kV A PV inverter using a PS and NS decomposition method. The
inverter was tested in the lab to validate the control method which
was based on increasing the PS voltage while decreasing the NS
voltage during faults. This would mitigate the effect of unbalanced
faults on the LVRT capability of PVPPs.
To conclude, although the LVRT grid codes for PVPPs are still
limited, many researchers have already designed controllers for MV
grid-connected inverters. Most of the proposed methods are aware of
the consequences of unbalanced faults that might cause the inverter
to not ride-through faults. As a result, current techniques for LVRT
have mostly implemented PS and NS component decomposition.
This method makes it easy to control active and reactive power
separately in order to ride-through faults effectively. All the methods
reviewed improved the capability of PV inverters to ride-through
faults; however, the difference between the reviewed methods was
Grid
DFIG
DC bus
RSC GSC
CROWBAR
Fig. 4. Double-fed induction wind generator with active crowbar arrangement in
the rotor side.
 D. Eltigani, S. Masri / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 770–780
Generator-side Grid-side
Converter Converter
PMSG Grid
N
S through faults. In addition to the added cost, the selection of the
Wind Turbine
Fig. 5. Permanent-magnet synchronous wind generator with the generator-side
converter and the grid-side converter.
the type of controller used in suppressing the NS components during
faults. The controllers' complexity also varied from one case to
another. It is suggested that to reduce cost and improve reliability,
these controllers should be used to do other tasks such as filtering
frequency noises and voltage ripples, in addition to their normal
current control task. Finally, it should be noted that these control
techniques were made to satisfy specific grid codes in each case,
which explains why a particular controller can perfectly suit one
power system but not another.
2.3. LVRT capability enhancement of WPPs
This paper considers wind generators with variable speed only
because fixed-speed wind generators are now obsolete. Two types
of variable speed wind generators are widely used nowadays:
double-fed induction generators (DFIGs) and permanent-magnet
synchronous generators (PMSGs). These generators support a wide
range of operating speeds and they are connected to grids through
power electronic converters. Moreover, they provide reactive power
compensation as an ancillary service to the grid [45–47]. The DFIG
(shown in Fig. 4) consists of an induction machine, a rotor-side
converter (RSC) that is connected to the rotor terminals, and a grid-
side converter (GSC) that is connected to the grid. The RSC and the
GSC are connected back-to-back with a DC-link between them. The
stator is directly connected to the grid through a three-winding
transformer to allow the GSC in the rotor circuit to be connected to
the grid as well [48]. The PMSG, shown in Fig. 5, consists of a
synchronous machine and a generator-side converter connected
back-to-back to a GSC through a DC link. Unlike the DFIG, the stator
of the PMSG is connected to the grid through the converters [49]. In
order to help the DFIG and the PMSG to ride-through faults, the
converter over-current and the DC-link over-voltage must be
controlled under their limits during faults.
There are many conventional methods used to meet the WPPs'
LVRT requirements in grid codes. These control methods have side
effects that limit their implementation for LVRT capability enhance-
ment [50]. Four of these methods are discussed below, which are:
the pitch angle control method, the modified crowbar method, the
energy storage systems method, and the voltage compensation
method. The fifth method is a bit newer and depends on modifying
the existing controls of the RSC and the GSC.
2.3.1. Pitch angle control
In [51], the pitch angle controller of the wind turbine blades was
instructed to increase the angle of blades during voltage dips in
order to restore the system's energy balance. However, the mechan-
ical actuators' response delay time and pitching limits did not
eliminate the DC link over voltage totally; hence wind generators
(WGs) may not ride-through a fault when using this method.
2.3.2. Crowbar method
The crowbar (shown in Fig. 4) is an insulated-gate bipolar
transistor (IGBT) based converter with a resistor placed between
the rotor and the RSC. The crowbar's task is to limit the high current
773
during a voltage dip by short-circuiting the rotor terminals and
dissipating the energy on the resistance [52,53]. Although widely
used, this method leaves the WG's active and reactive powers
without control during faults, which may lead the WG to not ride-
crowbar resistance value is critical; it should be high enough to
eliminate the transient components but at the same time not cause
overvoltage and damage the RSC [54].
There have been many attempts to modify the conventional
crowbar in order to minimize its activation time to improve the
LVRT capability of the wind generator. Usually, the crowbar is
activated when the fault is detected and deactivated when the
rotor is totally demagnetized. This period is typically 120 ms, which
is too long compared to the fault duration.
The suggested method in [55] is triggering the crowbar when the
fault is detected and deactivating it when the fault current falls to a
predetermined value, but not until the complete deenergization of
the rotor. Although this method minimized the activation time of the
crow bar, the active and reactive power control was disabled during
the fault and the risk of retriggering the IGBT still existed. In [56], the
conventional three-phase crowbar topology was replaced with three
single phase crowbar branches connected in either delta or star. The
new topology allowed for the switching of the IGBTs in each branch
at zero current. Also, the star-connected crowbar provides √3 less
voltage in the converter terminals compared to the conventional
three-phase crowbar topology while the delta-connected case
reduces the current by √3. However, this method adds more cost
since the number of the involved IGBTs, diodes and resistors is more
than doubled.
Resembling the crowbar circuit, [57] used an uncontrolled recti-
fier, two sets of IGBT switches, a diode, and an inductor in the place
of the crowbar resistor. This circuit was connected in parallel to the
RSC and was triggered when the fault initiated while the RSC
bypassed. Hence, the fault energy was stored in the inductor to be
used to reduce the torque imbalance and speed deviation of the wind
turbine (WT). However, the switching speed in this method and the
activation time that leaves the active and reactive powers without
control are too sensitive for proper performance. In [58], the crowbar
was used along with a demagnetization scheme. When the voltage
dip was detected, the crowbar was activated and continued to be
active till the fault current fell below the ratings of the RSC. Then it
was deactivated and the inverter injected a current to demagnetize
the rotor alongside another synchronous current to generate reactive
power for the grid.
In spite of the high efficiency of crowbars in deenergizing the
rotor circuit during faults, the activation time of these devices is a
key role player in determining the LVRT capability of the WG. All
the reviewed methods minimized the crowbar activation time and
tried to restore control over the reactive power during faults in
order to restore the plant's terminal voltage. In summary, there are
Wind
Grid Generator
WG
Filter Dynamic Voltage
Restorer
Fig. 6. Dynamic voltage restorer circuit connected is series to wind generator
through transformer.
774 D. Eltigani, S. Masri / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 770–780
a lot of issues to be considered when designing a crowbar system
to enhance the LVRT capabilities of WPPs, such as: switching
speed, the cost of the added hardware, mechanical stability, and
the current detectors' timing.
2.3.3. Energy storage systems
Energy Storage Systems (ESSs) such as batteries or super
capacitors can be used to enhance the WGs LVRT capabilities.
The fault energy is stored in the ESS and then fed back to the grid
after fault clearance [59,60]. Although this method allows control
over the WG during faults, it adds economical difficulty in terms of
the high cost of the ESS and technical difficulty in terms of the
control system of the ESS.
2.3.4. Voltage compensation techniques
The dynamic voltage restorer (DVR) (shown in Fig. 6) is a voltage
source converter (VSC) connected in series to the grid to compen-
sate for the faulty lines' voltages. In this system, the fault is detected
first, then the fault magnitude is determined, and finally the VSC
compensates for this fault so that the WG does not see the fault. The
converter power rating depends on the depth of the fault to be
compensated, which in turn is determined by the grid code [61].
Hence, for zero-volt cases the converter should be rated to the wind
generator, which means high cost. Therefore, it is better for the DVR
to be implemented partially during faults with assistance from
other techniques such as the crowbar or an ESS. Many authors have
used the DVR to enhance the LVRT capability of WGs with varying
control gating schemes and fault detection methods [62–65]. These
voltage compensation methods require utmost attention and pro-
tection since the devices are connected in series to the grid.
2.3.5. Rotor-side converter and grid-side converter modified control
techniques
Unlike the methods discussed in the previous sections, this
method modifies the existing converters' controls to enhance the
LVRT capability of WGs. In DFIGs, the RSC is responsible for
controlling the rotor speed (active power) and the stator voltage
(reactive power) independently. Meanwhile, the GSC controls keep
the DC-link voltage in a preset fixed value [66,67]. In the PMSGs,
the generator-side converter decouples the control of active and
reactive power and the GSC controls the DC-link voltage to stay
constant [68,69].
One of the first attempts to modify the GSC controls of a WG was
made in [70]. The author designed a controller to maintain the DC-
link voltage at a constant value in both a steady state as well as
during voltage dips. The non-linear controller was based on a
feedback linearization technique to limit the converter current
during faults. The controller helped the WG to escape an 85% voltage
dip in spite of its sensitivity to the accuracy of the plant model, which
was used to design the controller.
In order to enhance the LVRT capability of the DFIG, [71]
introduced two compensators: passive and active. The passive
compensator was a crowbar resistance in parallel to bidirectional
switches. The compensator was connected in series to the stator. In
the steady state, the switches were closed and the resistance was
bypassed because they are connected in parallel. During faults, the
switches opened and the crowbar resistance became connected in
series to the stator resistance. The sum of those two resistances
made a higher transient resistance, which decreased the rotor
transient current and increased the stator flux damping. For the
active compensator, the RSC controls were modified by adding a
loop to control the rotor voltage during a fault, by compensating the
stator flux oscillations. Although the method fulfilled the LVRT
requirements in the grid code, there are many challenges in its
implementation, such as the switching voltages and harmonics
because of the series connection of the crowbar to the grid, the
incomplete flux oscillation damping, and the crowbar resistance
value selection.
The existing current controller in the RSC was modified in [72] to
help the DFIG to ride-through faults. The modification was made by
feed-forwarding compensation terms for the stator transient voltage
into the rotor current controller. This feed-forward transient current
control scheme suppressed the RSC output voltage below the rating
voltage and reduced the rotor transient current during faults. The
scheme was simple and fulfilled the LVRT requirements, but needed
a backup such as the crowbar in case of deep voltage dips. Also, there
was a need for a flux detection unit to extract the components to be
feed-forwarded to the rotor current controller. In [73] a vector-based
hysteresis current controller was added to both the RSC and the GSC
controls. The controller only used the local rotor current measure-
ments as input to regulate both the rotor current and the link DC
voltage during faults. The controller worked for a very short duration
of time after fault detection, following which a control unit trans-
ferred the control to the conventional current controller. This
controller kept the rotor current and the DC-link voltage below their
limits, however, it added current harmonics when activated.
Modification for both RSC and GSC controls of DFIGs was
proposed in [74]. The RSC control was modified by introducing zero
torque input to the existing controls during faults. This procedure
will increase the rotor speed (kinetic energy) and consequently limit
the current's oscillation. If the rotor speed increases beyond limits
during a fault, the pitch angle control will be instantaneously
triggered. On the other hand, the GSC control was modified by
adding a compensation term corresponding to an instantaneous DC-
link current to regulate the DC-link voltage. In [75], a fuzzy controller
(FC) was used to enhance the LVRT capability of a DFIG. The RSC
control was modified by adding a FC to ensure that neither the rotor
current nor the DC-voltage exceeded their limits. The controller was
tuned using a genetic algorithm. The proposed scheme was effective
in ride-through symmetrical faults up to an 85% voltage dip.
The occurrence of asymmetrical faults in the power system
introduces PS and NS components. NS components adversely affect
the DFIG because they generate high rotor voltages during faults.
Hence, [76] modified both the GSC and RSC to enhance the DFIG's
capabilities to ride-through asymmetrical faults, taking into account
both PS and NS components. The modifications were achieved by
decoupling the sequences in addition to incorporating a PLL circuit.
Although the method is validated experimentally, its performance
has been shown to deteriorate in cases of severe grid faults and the
crowbar needs to be engaged.
A flux-linkage tracking algorithm was proposed in [77] to reduce
high rotor currents during faults. The rotor current increases during
faults because of the difference between the rotor and stator flux
linkages. This algorithm forces the RSC output voltage to track only
part of the changing stator flux linkage during a fault, so the rotor
fault current becomes much less than its maximum value. The
scheme was validated experimentally for symmetrical and asym-
metrical faults. However, WG shaft torsional mode oscillation was
not totally eliminated and the complexity of tracking the flux is
obvious. In [78] a comprehensive control scheme was developed to
enhance the LVRT capability of DFIGs in cases of low voltages,
imbalances, and harmonic distortions. The GSC controller's refer-
ence current was managed to eliminate the active power ripple and
regulate the DC-link voltage. Meanwhile, the RSC controller's
reference current was managed to eliminate the torque ripple and
track the maximum power point. This method, although effective,
was not validated experimentally.
A control scheme was developed in [79] to help PMSGs to ride-
through voltage dips. Here, the DC-link voltage was controlled
through the generator-side converter, in spite of being controlled
conventionally by the GSC. A feedback linearization method was
 D. Eltigani, S. Masri / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 770–780
used to correlate the rotor speed and the DC-link voltage, then the
designed controller is implemented in the generator-side conver-
ter controls. The GSC was equipped with a double-frame current
controller for the asymmetrical system faults. The method was
validated experimentally using a small scale 2.68 kW PMSG. In
[80], a controller was proposed for a current source converter
(CSC) based WPP equipped with PMSGs to enhance its LVRT
capability. Although VSCs are dominant in the converters market,
CSCs are also available in high ratings suitable for WPPs. In the
case of CSCs, the DC-link is a series inductance instead of the
parallel capacitance used in VSCs. The control scheme implemen-
ted a unified DC-link current controller, which distributed the DC-
link current control task onto both the GSC and generator-side
converter. The controller protected the CSC from overvoltage and
overcurrent during symmetrical faults.
In [81] a predictive model control scheme was proposed to
enhance the LVRT capability of a high-power PMSG. The PMSG was
equipped with a three-phase diode-bridge rectifier, a three-level-
boost (TLB) converter, and a neutral-point-clamped (NPC) inverter
instead of the conventional back-to-back converter. The control
objectives of the TLB converter, which was representing the gen-
erator-side, were: to store the kinetic energy of the rotor during
faults (regulating the converter inductor current), and to regulate the
dc capacitor voltage. The control objective of the NPC inverter, which
was representing the grid-side converter, was to regulate the d-axis
and q-axis currents (active and reactive power). Using a model
predictive control, these objectives were represented as cost function
for a TLB and NPC converter, as shown in Eqs. 2 and 3 respectively.
 2

2
Ggen ðkÞ ¼ indcðk þ 2Þ  idcðk þ 2Þ þ λdc  vc1ðk þ 2Þ  vc2ðk þ 2Þ ð2Þ
 2  2
Ggrid ðkÞ ¼ indgðk þ 2Þ  idgðk þ 2Þ þ inqgðk þ 2Þ  iqgðk þ 2Þ ð3Þ
where indcðk þ 2Þ , indgðk þ 2Þ , inqgðk þ 2Þ are the reference currents; idcðk þ 2Þ ,
idgðk þ 2Þ , iqgðk þ 2Þ are the predicted dq-axis currents, vc1ðk þ 2Þ and
vc2ðk þ 2Þ are the predicted dc-link voltages, and λdc is a weighting
factor. These cost functions were minimized by actual and predicted
values, then the quantities that minimized these functions were fed
to the TLB and NPC converters to achieve the control objectives.
To sum up, in this section, LVRT capability enhancement
techniques in DFIG and PMSG-based WPPs were reviewed. The
first method (the pitch angle control method) proved unable to
help WGs ride-through faults, unless assisted by another LVRT
enhancement technique. The following three methods (the crow-
bar method, the energy storage systems method, and the voltage
compensation technique) were based on introducing new hard-
ware to fulfill the LVRT requirement. This resulted in more cost in
addition to other technical limitations discussed earlier. The last
method (RSC and GSC controls modification) overcame most of the
limitations of the previous methods because it modified the
existing controls. Even though this may be the case, some of the
proposed controllers were complex and sensitive to system para-
meters. In addition, although all the controllers were effective,
their economic feasibility was not discussed. Also, some proposed
methods were validated only through simulation and not experi-
mentally which is important because the implementation will
introduce many challenges such as parameter setting and size
limitations. Finally, the results of this review indicate that more
investigation and research is needed in the area of LVRT capability
enhancement of PMSGs as promising WGs.
3. Inter-area oscillation damping
Inter-area oscillation is a type of small signal disturbance that
occurs in power systems due to swinging of a number of generators
775
in one area against generators in other areas [82]. The range of
these oscillations is between 0.1 Hz and 0.8 Hz [83]. The problem
with these oscillations is that it limits the power transfer capabil-
ities especially in long transmission lines, in addition to the
instability it introduces to the power system when faults occur.
Conventional damping of these oscillations is carried out using
power system stabilizers (PSSs), high-voltage direct-current (HVDC)
transmission, and SVC controls [84,85]. However, these controls do
not damp oscillations effectively in power systems with a large
penetration of renewable sources [86]. Although the recent grid
codes adopted by many countries do not include system oscillation
damping as an ancillary service to be provided by WPPs and PVPPs,
it is expected to be required in the near future [87].
3.1. Inter-area oscillation damping in the presence of PVPPs
Many papers have investigated the impact of PVPPs on the
stability of power systems, but few have considered inter-area
oscillation damping. In [88], the effect of PVPPs with storage facilities
on inter-area oscillation damping is studied. Three types of storage
devices are tested: BESS, ultra-capacitor, and shunt capacitor. The
results showed that if the power system is dominated by hydro-
generation, PVPP with ultra-capacitor provides better damping for
inter-area oscillations than the other storage devices. In contrary, if
the system is dominated by thermal generation then the BESS-PVPP
provides higher damping.
The strategy used in [89] suggests re-dispatching of the conven-
tional generator output power to damp inter-area oscillation when
the power system contains large scale PVPPs. The re-dispatching
technique was used here because introducing PVPPs to the power
system was found to increase the rotor angle separation of conven-
tional generators. The control scheme here firstly ranked generators
according to their contribution to the oscillation modes, then re-
dispatched the high ranked generators to damp these critical modes
of oscillation. In [90], a mini-max linear quadratic Gaussian (LQG)
based power oscillation damping controller (POD) was implemented
in a large-scale PVPP in a multi-area power system. The POD control
loop was added as an auxiliary loop in the grid-side PV converter
controls and the tie-line power was used as input signal. The LQG-
POD provided a higher damping ratio than the conventional lead-lag
oscillation damping controllers.
To sum up, the participation of PVPPs in damping inter-area
oscillation has not yet been thoroughly investigated. One of the
reasons could be that only about 35% of PV production comes from
centralized grid-connected plants. So far, the investigated litera-
ture suggests three methods to damp inter-area oscillation modes:
incorporating energy storage devices, generation re-dispatching,
and POD utilization. The first method does not introduce new
hardware but the implementation of storage systems is mainly
dependent on economic factors. The second method of generation
re-dispatching may interfere with other steady-state controls such
as automatic generation control and load dispatch. Finally, the POD
method, though effective, has a quite complicated design and
needs comprehensive analysis of the system's steady-state and
dynamics before implementation.
P Iq
- *
-
P* + Iq + Vq
∑ PI ∑ PI
*
* Id Vd
Q + ∑
∑ PI PI
+ - -
Q Id
Fig. 7. Block diagram for the active and reactive power control in the rotor-side
converter of double-fed induction generator.
776 D. Eltigani, S. Masri / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 770–780
K efficient tuning method needs to be adopted. Also, input signals
Gain
Wash-out Lead-Lag Lead-Lag Limiter
Filter Compensator Compensator
Fig. 8. Power system stabilizer block diagram with phase compensation.
3.2. Inter-area oscillation damping in the presence of WPPs
WPPs are required as per grid codes to regulate their active and
reactive power [91,92]. In a variable speed wind turbine, the active
and reactive power controls (in addition to the inner current
control loops) are the main controls [93,94]. The active and
reactive power control loops in the RSC of DFIG are shown
in Fig. 7 [95]. The WPPs can contribute to inter-area oscillation
damping if these existing controls are modified to accommodate
power oscillation damping controllers. In this section, the techni-
ques used to damp inter-area oscillations in a power system with
WPPs are discussed. These techniques are: modification of WG
active power controls, modification of WG reactive power controls,
introducing HVDC and PSS devices, and using wide-area damping
controllers.
3.2.1. Active power PODs
Many researchers have suggested attaching PODs to the active
power control loop in the RSC of the WG, claiming that these
oscillations are basically related to the rotor-angle and active
power. In [96], a non-linear POD was attached to the active power
control loop of the RSC in a DFIG. The transfer function of this
controller is shown in Eq. 4.
   attached to both the active and reactive power control loop in a
1 þ0:17s þ 1:32 s2 1 þ 0:028s þ 0:152 s2
C damping ¼ 2   ð4Þ
ð1 þ 0:15sÞð1 þ 0:16 sÞ 1 þ 0:03s þ 1:12 s2
The input signal to the POD was the rotor angle difference
between the synchronous generators involved in the inter-area
oscillation in a two-area power system. In [97], POD was intro-
duced to the active power control loop in the GSC of direct-driven
PMSG. This loop was as simple as a proportional controller with an
input signal representing the difference between the frequencies
in a two-area system. For proper damping, the controller's loop
gain was properly tuned and the communication delay time was
also accounted for, because the system would go unstable if the
delay time increased significantly.
Two methods based on the transient energy function were pro-
posed in [98] to damp inter-area oscillations. The methods suggested
attaching either a PSS or FC to the active power control loop in a DFIG.
When a PSS-based active power controller (shown in Fig. 8) was
implemented, both the inter-area and the shaft torsional oscillations
were fairly damped with fine tuning of the PSS parameters. When a FC
was used better damping was gained with the tie-line active power as
input signal. In [99] a PSS with phase compensation was attached to
the active power control loop in a full-converter variable-speed WT.
The input to the PSS-based POD was local frequency measurement at
the PCC. In the same mode, [100] added a PSS without a lead–lag
compensator to the RSC control to increase the inter-area oscillation
damping while taking the frequency deviation as input.
To sum up, attaching PODs to the active power control loop in
the machine-side converter of WGs increases the damping of the
inter-area oscillations because these oscillations are related directly
to the rotor angle and the active power. Different POD types were
reviewed, such as: P controllers, PSSs, FCs, and non-linear con-
trollers. The PODs varied in complexity and tuning methods. Most
of them were tuned using trial and error, which is applicable for
small test systems; however, for large power systems a more
(either measured or estimated) varied from rotor angle difference to
frequency and PCC active power. The main disadvantage of the
active power controller is the interference with shaft torsional
modes, where the increase of the inter-area oscillation damping
level increases torsional modes oscillation. Hence, this method will
adversely affect the mechanical stability of the WPP if the shaft
torsional oscillation is not accounted for.
3.2.2. Reactive power PODs
In order to overcome the interference between the active
power modulation and the shaft torsional modes oscillation, PODs
can be attached to the reactive power control loop in the machine-
side converter of the WG. An auxiliary root locus-based POD was
added to the reactive power control in a DFIG in [101]. The non-
linear transfer function of the POD is shown in Eq. 5.
  
1 þ 0:023s þ 0:142 s2 1 þ 0:05s þ 0:172 s2
HðsÞ ¼ 98:45   ð5Þ
ð1 þ 0:12sÞð1 þ 0:21sÞ 1 þ 0:0047s þ 0:092 s2
The input signal to the POD was the rotor angle difference between
the generators involved in the inter-area oscillation. In this case, no
shaft torsional mode oscillation was observed, but the terminal
voltage was sensitive to the POD operation. Also, in [98] a PSS
damping controller and a fuzzy logic damping controller were
attached to the reactive power control, which increased the oscilla-
tion damping significantly without affecting torsional oscillations.
In some cases both active and reactive power modulation
damping controllers are implemented to damp the inter-area mode
to make use of the advantages of each POD type. In [102], PSS was
DFIG to damp the inter-area oscillation in a large-scale power
system. The input signal to the active power POD was the DFIG
active power and the input signal for the reactive power POD was
the DFIG terminal voltage. In [103], non-linear controllers were
added to both active and reactive power modulation. The input
signals to the PODs were local measures such as the WPP's terminal
voltage and bus angles. Although the oscillation damping increased,
no further impact of shaft torsional mode or terminal voltage was
discussed. In [104], a different approach was introduced where the
WPP was treated as a VSC, dropping the dynamics of the induction
machines. This paper studied the relation between the active and
reactive power modulation from one side and the WPP location in
the transmission line from the other side. The finding was that
when both active and reactive power modulated, they increased the
damping regardless of the WPP location, in contrast to a situation
where only one of these two powers is modulated.
To sum up, reactive power PODs are preferable in many cases for
damping inter-area oscillations because they do not excite the shaft
torsional mode oscillations. On the other hand, these PODs intro-
duce oscillations to the terminal voltage for a while before it dies
out. The reactive power PODs come in many shapes, such as FCs,
non-linear controllers, and most abundantly in the form of PSSs. In
the search for better damping ratios, it has been suggested to use
both active and reactive power PODs in the same system. It is
undeniable that synchronization and proper tuning of controllers is
a key factor in successful implementation of these types of PODs.
3.2.3. Miscellaneous techniques for oscillation damping
A part from active and reactive power modulation methods,
some other techniques provide different solutions to the oscilla-
tion issue. Line-Commutated Converters HVDC transmission
system was used in [105] to connect remote renewable energy
sources and simultaneously increase the damping of inter-area
 D. Eltigani, S. Masri / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 770–780
Fig. 9. Hierarchical architecture of a synchronized phasor measurement system.
oscillations. The HVDC transmission contributed positively to
damping more than the AC transmission system. From a planning
perspective, [106] suggested placing the WPP in a proper location
in a large dispersed power system so as to increase the inter-area
oscillation damping. The power system was modeled as a linear-
ized hyperbolic wave equation along the path of power transfer
with the wind farm as a point source. The inter-area modes were
modeled as a function of the distance variable. Then the optimal
WPP distance to damp the oscillations was extracted. In [107],
coordination control system was designed for a wind farm and
BESS. The power flow in a line due to the injection of wind and
BESS power was driven to a pre-defined reference trajectory over
the inter-area oscillations frequency range and the damping ratio
increased. [108] simply suggested proper tuning of the conven-
tional synchronous generators' controls (automatic voltage regu-
lator (AVR), PSS) in order to damp the inter-area oscillations
in an interconnected power system with high penetration of
wind power.
To sum up, these methods do increase the damping of the inter-
area oscillations in power systems with WPPs but they are highly
dependent on economic and environmental factors such as BESS and
HVDC implementations. Also, tuning the controls of conventional
synchronous generators will not continue to be effective in the case of
large power systems with deep penetration of wind energy.
3.2.4. Synchronized Phasor Measurements in inter-area oscillation
damping
In the cases discussed earlier, the input signal to the PODs was
either a measured or estimated value. The measured signals in
most cases are not locally measured, i.e., remote signals that need
to be transmitted before they are inputted to the POD. In such
cases, measurement accuracy and communication delay are crucial
components affecting the POD's proper operation. Therefore, in
order to overcome such technical problems, the advanced tech-
nology of the Synchronized Phasor Measurements System (SPMS)
is used for effective damping of inter-area oscillations. The SPMS is
a measurement system that is able to provide accurate time-
stamped measurements for currents, voltage, and phasors with a
time reference provided by the Global Positioning System (GPS)
[109,110]. In addition, the SPMS can provide information about the
electromechanical oscillatory behavior of the system and inter-
area oscillation modes [111–113]. In a typical SPMS, shown in
Fig. 9, the phasor measurement units (PMUs) take the measure-
ments and synchronize them with the help of the GPS, then the
time-stamped data is collected by data concentrators (DCs) and
sent using different communication media to the control centers
[114,115]. Many researchers have implemented SPMS in the design
777
of PODs or alternatively wide-area damping controllers (WADCs)
in this case.
The data collected by PMUs were used in [116] to determine the
dominant inter-area modes in a power system with WPP. The WPP
was equipped with a superconducting magnetic energy storage
system, which had three controls: active power modulation,
reactive power modulation, and coil current controls. A heuristic
optimization method was used for tuning the storage system
controllers' parameters using the PMUs' data. The new active
and reactive power controllers increased the inter-area oscillation
damping. In a thermal–wind power system, [117] designed a
supplementary WADC to suppress inter-area oscillations. The
WADC received the input signal from the PMUs and provided an
additional stabilizing signal to the voltage control loop of the AVR
that was attached to a synchronous generator. The particle swarm
optimization (PSO) method was used for tuning the controller's
parameters and the damping ratio increased significantly when
the WADC was implemented. A coordination scheme was pro-
posed in [118] between the synchronous generators' controls,
FACTS devices, and a wind generator POD controller to damp
inter-area oscillations. The POD controller was attached to a PMSG
converters active power control and the input signal was provided
by SPMS through PMUs. The implementation of the POD controller
with a wide-area input signal increased the oscillation damping
significantly.
The WADC in [119] was added to the main control loop of a DFIG's
RSC to modulate the reactive power. The WADC is basically a PSS
whose parameters are adjusted using the PSO method. Being a multi-
band controller, the WADC in this case had two modules since the
system under test had two inter-area oscillation modes. This controller
increased the oscillation damping significantly compared to local
controllers.
To sum up, SPMS has been used in different ways to damp
inter-area oscillation. It has been attached to ESS in one case, and
to synchronous generators' controls or WGs' existing controls in
other cases. The most promising method is utilizing the existing
active and reactive power controls of WGs with an input signal
provided by PMUs, because the damping ratios increased signifi-
cantly. The reason behind the effectiveness of WADCs is that they
provide global or wide-area modal observability. Also, WADCs are
capable of damping many modes of oscillations because they are
multi-band controllers, in contrast to the conventional local
controllers. On the other hand, these controllers need to account
for communication latency because many types of communication
media are used between PMUs, DCs, and the control centers, such
as wireless communication, cables, and fiber optics.
4. Conclusion
Renewable energy source integration with power systems is one of
the main concepts of smart grids. Due to the variability and limited
predictability of these sources, many challenges arise when integrating
them to grids. This paper discussed two of these challenges, which are
LVRT capability and inter-area oscillation. In particular, this paper
reviewed methods used to enhance the LVRT capabilities of WPPs and
PVPPs to fulfill the grid codes' requirements. Also, the methods used in
WPPs and PVPPs to help damp inter-area oscillations were reviewed.
All the discussed methods were described in detail and their positive/
negative impact was examined.
Acknowledgment
The first author, Ms. Dalia, would like to thank the USM-TWAS
fellowship for its financial support.
778 D. Eltigani, S. Masri / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 770–780
References
[1] Massoud Amin S, Wollenberg BF. Toward a smart grid: power delivery for the
21st century. IEEE Power Energy Mag 2005;3:34–41.
[2] Farhangi H. The path of the smart grid. IEEE Power Energy Mag
2010;8:18–28.
[3] Bitar E, Khargonekar PP, Poolla K. Systems and control opportunities in the
integration of renewable energy into the smart grid. In: Proceedings of IFAC
world congress; 2011. p. 4927–32.
[4] Moslehi K, Kumar R. A reliability perspective of the smart grid. IEEE Trans
Smart Grid 2010;1:57–64.
[5] Liserre M, Sauter T, Hung JY. Future energy systems integrating renewable
energy sources into the smart power grid through industrial electronics. IEEE
Ind Electron Mag 2010;4:18–37.
[6] Association EPI. Global market outlook for photovoltaics until 2014. 〈http://
wwwepiaorg/fileadmin/EPIA_docs/public/Global_Market_Outlook_for_Photo
voltaics_until_2014pdf〉. 2010.
[7] Sawyer S, Rave K. Global wind report–annual market update 2013. GWEC,
〈http://wwwgwecnet/publications/global-wind-report-2/global-wind-re
port-2013/〉. 2013.
[8] Marwali M. Integration of intermittent resource in a real time scheduling.
Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany: Springer; 2012. p. 27–48.
[9] Grunbaum R. FACTS for grid integration of wind power. In: Proceedings of
the innovative smart grid technologies conference (ISGT Europe) 2010 IEEE
PES; 2010. p. 1–8.
[10] Le X, Carvalho PMS, LAFM Ferreira, Juhua L, Krogh BH, Popli N, et al. Wind
integration in power systems: operational challenges and possible solutions.
Proc IEEE 2011;99:214–32.
[11] Shafiullah G, Oo AM, Jarvis D, Ali AS, Wolfs P. Potential challenges: integrat-
ing renewable energy with the smart grid. In: Proceedings of the 20th
Australasian universities power engineering conference (AUPEC). IEEE; 2010.
p. 1–6.
[12] Commission IE. Grid integration of large-capacity renewable energy sources
and use of large-capacity electrical energy storage. White Paper; October
2012. Geneva, Switzerland: International Electrotechnical Commission; 2012.
[13] Wasiak I, Hanzelka Z. Integration of distributed energy sources with
electrical power grid. Bull Pol Acad Sci-Tech Sci 2009;57:297–309.
[14] Camacho EF, Samad T, Garcia-Sanz M, Hiskens I. Control for renewable
energy and smart grids. The impact of control technology, Control Systems
Society; 2011. p. 69–88.
[15] Molinas M, Suul JA, Undeland T. Low voltage ride-through of wind farms
with cage generators: STATCOM versus SVC. IEEE Trans Power Electron
2008;23:1104–17.
[16] Yan XW, Venkataramanan G, Wang Y, Dong Q, Zhang B. Grid-fault tolerant
operation of a DFIG wind turbine generator using a passive resistance
network. IEEE Trans Power Electron 2011;26:2896–905.
[17] Zhang X-P. A framework for operation and control of smart grids with
distributed generation. In: Proceedings of the power and energy society
general meeting-conversion and delivery of electrical energy in the 21st
Century, IEEE; 2008. p. 1–5.
[18] Arulampalam A, Barnes M, Jenkins N, Ekanayake JB. Power quality and
stability improvement of a wind farm using STATCOM supported with hybrid
battery energy storage. IEEE Proc- Gener Transm Distrib 2006;153:701–10.
[19] Xu L, Yao L, Sasse C. Comparison of using SVC and STATCOM for wind farm
integration. In: Proceedings of the international conference on: IEEE power
system technology, 2006 PowerCon 2006; 2006. p. 1–7.
[20] Chong H, Huang AQ, Baran ME, Bhattacharya S, Litzenberger W, Anderson L,
et al. STATCOM impact study on the integration of a large wind farm into a
weak loop power system. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2008;23:226–33.
[21] Mohod SW, Aware MV. A STATCOM-control scheme for grid connected wind
energy system for power quality improvement. IEEE Syst J 2010;4:346–52.
[22] Hui SY, Lee CK, Wu FF. Electric springs-a new smart grid technology. IEEE
Trans Smart Grid 2012;3:1552–61.
[23] Hui SYR, Lee CK, WU FF. Power control circuit and method for stabilizing a
power supply. Google Patents; 2011.
[24] Mohseni M, Islam SM. Review of international grid codes for wind power
integration: diversity, technology and a case for global standard. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2012;16:3876–90.
[25] de Alegría IM, Andreu J, Martín JL, Ibañez P, Villate JL, Camblong H.
Connection requirements for wind farms: a survey on technical requiere-
ments and regulation. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2007;11:1858–72.
[26] Tsili M, Papathanassiou S. A review of grid code technical requirements for
wind farms. IET Renew Power Gener 2009;3:308–32.
[27] Altin M, Goksu O, Teodorescu R, Rodriguez P, Jensen B-B, Helle L. Overview of
recent grid codes for wind power integration. In: Proceedings of the 12th
international conference on optimization of electrical and electronic equip-
ment (OPTIM); 2010. p. 1152–60.
[28] Craciun BI, Kerekes T, Sera D, Teodorescu R. Overview of recent Grid Codes
for PV power integration. In: Proceedings of the 13th international con-
ference on optimization of electrical and electronic equipment (OPTIM);
2012. p. 959–65.
[29] Teodorescu R, Liserre M, Rodriguez P. Grid converters for photovoltaic and
wind power systems. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons; 2011.
[30] Kim ST, Kang BK, Bae SH, Park JW. Application of SMES and grid code
compliance to wind/photovoltaic generation system. IEEE Trans Appl Super-
cond 2013;23:5000804.
[31] Meyer R, Zlotnik A, Mertens A. Fault ride through control of medium-voltage
converters with LCL filter in distributed generation systems. In: Proceedings
of the energy conversion congress and exposition (ECCE), 2013 IEEE; 2013. p.
1954–1961.
[32] María Paz Comech, Miguel García-Gracia, Susana Martín Arroyo, Miguel
Ángel Martínez Guillén. Wind farms and grid codes, from turbine to wind
farms - technical requirements and spin-off products, Gesche Krause (Ed.),
ISBN: 978-953-307-237-1, InTech, 2011, Available from: /http://www.inte
chopen.com/books/from-turbine-to-wind-farms-technical-requirement
s-and-spin-offproducts/wind-farms-and-grid-codesS.
[33] Iov F, Hansen AD, Sørensen PE, Cutululis NA. Mapping of grid faults and grid
codes. Roskilde, Denmark: Risø National Laboratory; 2007.
[34] Papanikolaou NP. Low-voltage ride-through concept in flyback inverterbased
alternating current-photovoltaic modules. Power Electron IET 2013;6:1436–48.
[35] Bae Y, Vu TK, Kim RY. Implemental control strategy for grid stabilization of
grid-connected PV system based on German grid code in symmetrical low-
to-medium voltage network. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2013;28:619–31.
[36] Yang Y, Wang H, Blaabjerg F. Reactive power injection strategies for single-
phase photovoltaic systems considering grid requirements. In: Proceedings
of the twenty-ninth annual IEEE applied power electronics conference and
exposition (APEC); 2014. p. 371–8.
[37] Kobayashi H. Fault ride through requirements and measures of distributed
PV systems in Japan. In: Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE power and energy
society general meeting; 2012. p. 1–6.
[38] Viet NH, Yokoyama A. Influence of penetration levels and fault ride-through
characteristics of photovoltaic generation on voltage stability. J Int Counc
Electr Eng 2013;3:283–9.
[39] Marinopoulos A, Papandrea F, Reza M, Norrga S, Spertino F, Napoli R. Grid
integration aspects of large solar PV installations: LVRT capability and
reactive power/voltage support requirements. In: Proceedings of the Power-
Tech, 2011 IEEE Trondheim; 2011. p. 1–8.
[40] Benz CH, Franke WT, Fuchs FW. Low voltage ride-through capability of a
5 kW grid-tied solar inverter. In: Proceedings of the 14th international
power electronics and motion control conference (EPE/PEMC). 2010. p.
T12-3–T-20.
[41] Garcia-Gracia M, El Halabi N, Ajami H, Comech MP. Integrated control
technique for compliance of solar photovoltaic installation grid codes. IEEE
Trans Energy Convers 2012;27:792–8.
[42] Bao X, Tan P, Zhuo F, Yue X. Low voltage ride-through control strategy for
high-power grid-connected photovoltaic inverter. In: Proceedings of the
twenty-eighth annual applied power electronics conference and exposition
(APEC); IEEE; 2013. p. 97–100.
[43] El Moursi MS, Kirtley JL, Xiao W. Fault ride through capability for grid
interfacing large scale PV power plants. IET Gener Transm Distrib
2013;7:1027–36.
[44] Lee CT, Hsu CW, Cheng PT. A low-voltage ride-through technique for grid-
connected converters of distributed energy resources. IEEE Trans Ind Appl
2011;47:1821–32.
[45] Li H, Chen Z. Overview of different wind generator systems and their
comparisons. IET Renew Power Gener 2008;2:123–38.
[46] Muller S, Deicke M, De Doncker RW. Doubly fed induction generator systems
for wind turbines. IEEE Ind Appl Mag 2002;8:26–33.
[47] Hughes FM, Anaya-Lara O, Jenkins N, Strbac G. Control of DFIG-based wind
generation for power network support. IEEE Trans Power Syst
2005;20:1958–66.
[48] Yazhou L, 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;21:257–64.
[49] Shuhui L, Haskew TA, Swatloski RP, Gathings W. Optimal and direct-current
vector control of direct-driven PMSG wind turbines. IEEE Trans Power
Electron 2012;27:2325–37.
[50] Ibrahim RA, Hamad MS, Dessouky YG, Williams BW. A review on recent low
voltage ride-through solutions for PMSG wind turbine. In: Proceedings of the
international symposium on power electronics, electrical drives, automation
and motion (SPEEDAM); 2012. p. 265–70.
[51] Conroy JF, Watson R. Low-voltage ride-through of a full converter wind
turbine with permanent magnet generator. IET Renew Power Gener
2007;1:182–9.
[52] Lima FKA, Luna A, Rodriguez P, Watanabe EH, Blaabjerg F. Rotor voltage
dynamics in the doubly fed induction generator during grid faults. IEEE Trans
Power Electron 2010;25:118–30.
[53] Okedu KE, Muyeen SM, Takahashi R, Tamura J. Wind farms fault ride through
using DFIG with new protection scheme. IEEE Trans Sustain Energy
2012;3:242–54.
[54] Niu CG, Liu GQ. The requirements and technical analysis of low voltage ride
through for the doubly-fed induction wind turbines. In: Proceedings of
international conference on smart grid and clean energy technologies
(ICSGCE 2011); 2011. 12. p. 799–807.
[55] Pannell G, Atkinson DJ, Zahawi B. Minimum-threshold crowbar for a fault-
ride-through grid-code-compliant DFIG wind turbine. IEEE Trans Energy
Convers 2010;25:750–9.
 D. Eltigani, S. Masri / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 770–780
[56] Vidal J, Abad G, Arza J, Aurtenechea S, Single-Phase DC. Crowbar topologies
for low voltage ride through fulfillment of high-power doubly fed induction
generator-based wind turbines. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2013;28:768–81.
[57] Vinothkumar K, Selvan MP. Novel scheme for enhancement of fault ride-
through capability of doubly fed induction generator based wind farms.
Energy Convers Manag 2011;52:2651–8.
[58] Lopez J, Gubia E, Olea E, Ruiz J, Marroyo L. Ride through of wind turbines
with doubly fed induction generator under symmetrical voltage dips. Ind
Electron IEEE Trans 2009;56:4246–54.
[59] Gong W, Wang Y, Hu S, Xu H. A survey on recent low voltage ride-through
solutions of large scale wind farm. In: Proceedings of the power and energy
engineering conference (APPEEC) 2011. Asia-Pacific; 2011. p. 1–5.
[60] Joos G. Wind turbine generator low voltage ride through requirements and
solutions. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 2008 power and energy society general
meeting – conversion and delivery of electrical energy in the 21st century;
2008. p. 1–7.
[61] Wessels C, Gebhardt F, Fuchs FW. Fault ride-through of a DFIG wind turbine
using a dynamic voltage restorer during symmetrical and asymmetrical grid
faults. IEEE Trans Power Electron 2011;26:807–15.
[62] Ibrahim AO, Nguyen TH, Lee DC, Kim SC. A fault ride-through technique of
DFIG wind turbine systems using dynamic voltage restorers. IEEE Trans
Energy Convers 2011;26:871–82.
[63] Zhang S, Tseng KJ, Choi SS, Nguyen TD, Yao DL. Advanced control of series
voltage compensation to enhance wind turbine ride through. IEEE Trans
Power Electron 2012;27:763–72.
[64] Abdel-Baqi O, Nasiri A. Series voltage compensation for DFIG wind turbine low-
voltage ride-through solution. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2011;26:272–80.
[65] Flannery PS, Venkataramanan G. Unbalanced voltage sag ride-through of a
doubly fed induction generator wind turbine with series grid-side converter.
IEEE Trans Ind Appl 2009;45:1879–87.
[66] Chowdhury BH, Chellapilla S. Double-fed induction generator control for variable
speed wind power generation. Electr Power Syst Res 2006;76:786–800.
[67] Hansen AD, Michalke G. Fault ride-through capability of DFIG wind turbines.
Renew Energy 2007;32:1594–610.
[68] Uehara A, Pratap A, Goya T, Senjyu T, Yona A, Urasaki N, et al. A coordinated
control method to smooth wind power fluctuations of a pmsg-based WECS.
IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2011;26:550–8.
[69] Kim HW, Kim SS, Ko HS. Modeling and control of PMSG-based variable-
speed wind turbine. Electr Power Syst Res 2010;80:46–52.
[70] Mullane A, Lightbody G, Yacamini R. Wind-turbine fault ride-through
enhancement. IEEE Trans Power Syst 2005;20:1929–37.
[71] Rahimi M, Parniani M. Efficient control scheme of wind turbines with doubly
fed induction generators for low-voltage ride-through capability enhance-
ment. IET Renew Power Gener 2010;4:242–52.
[72] Liang JQ, Qiao W, Harley RG. Feed-forward transient current control for low-
voltage ride-through enhancement of DFIG wind turbines. IEEE Trans Energy
Convers 2010;25:836–43.
[73] Mohseni M, Masoum MAS, Islam SM. Low and high voltage ride-through of
DFIG wind turbines using hybrid current controlled converters. Electr Power
Syst Res 2011;81:1456–65.
[74] Yang LH, Xu Z, Ostergaard J, Dong ZY, Wong KP. Advanced control strategy of
DFIG wind turbines for power system fault ride through. IEEE Trans Power
Syst 2012;27:713–22.
[75] Vrionis TD, Koutiva XI, Vovos NA. A genetic algorithm-based low voltage
ride-through control strategy for grid connected doubly fed induction wind
generators. IEEE Trans Power Syst 2014;29:1325–34.
[76] Geng H, Liu C, Yang G. LVRT capability of DFIG-based WECS under asymme-
trical grid fault condition. IEEE Trans Ind Electr 2013;60:2495–509.
[77] Xiao S, Yang G, Zhou HL, Geng H. An LVRT control strategy based on flux linkage
tracking for DFIG-based WECS. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2013;60:2820–32.
[78] Leon AE, Mauricio JM, Solsona JA. Fault ride-through enhancement of DFIG-
based wind generation considering unbalanced and distorted conditions.
IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2012;27:775–83.
[79] Kim KH, Jeung YC, Lee DC, Kim HG. LVRT scheme of PMSG wind power
systems based on feedback linearization. IEEE Trans Power Electron
2012;27:2376–84.
[80] Jingya D, Dewei X, Bin W, Zargari NR. Unified DC-link current control for
low-voltage ride-through in current-source-converter-based wind energy
conversion systems. IEEE Trans Power Electron 2011;26:288–97.
[81] Yaramasu V, Bin W, Alepuz S, Kouro S. Predictive control for low-voltage
ride-through enhancement of three-level-boost and NPC-converter-based
PMSG wind turbine. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2014;61:6832–43.
[82] Kundur P, Paserba J, Ajjarapu V, Andersson G, Bose A, Canizares C, et al.
Definition and classification of power system stability IEEE/CIGRE joint task
force on stability terms and definitions. IEEE Trans Power Syst
2004;19:1387–401.
[83] Klein M, Rogers GJ, Kundur P. A fundamental-study of inter-area oscillations
in power-systems. IEEE Trans Power Syst 1991;6:914–21.
[84] Kundur P, Balu NJ, Lauby MG. Power system stability and control. New York:
McGraw-hill; 1994.
[85] Basler M, Schaefer R. Understanding power-system stability. Ind Appl IEEE
Trans 2008;44:463–74.
[86] Zhang Y, Bose A. Design of wide-area damping controllers for interarea
oscillations. IEEE Trans Power Syst 2008;23:1136–43.
779
[87] Domínguez-García JL, Gomis-Bellmunt O, Bianchi FD, Sumper A. Power
oscillation damping supported by wind power: a review. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2012;16:4994–5006.
[88] Shah R, Mithulananthan N, Bansal RC. Damping performance analysis of
battery energy storage system, ultracapacitor and shunt capacitor with
large-scale photovoltaic plants. Appl Energy 2012;96:235–44.
[89] Shah R, Mithulananthan N, Bansal RC. Oscillatory stability analysis with high
penetrations of large-scale photovoltaic generation. Energy Convers Manag
2013;65:420–9.
[90] Shah R, Mithulananthan N, Lee KY, Large-Scale PV. Plant with a robust
controller considering power oscillation damping. IEEE Trans Energy Con-
vers 2013;28:106–16.
[91] Muyeen SM, Takahashi R, Murata T, Tamura J. A variable speed wind turbine
control strategy to meet wind farm grid code requirements. IEEE Trans
Power Syst 2010;25:331–40.
[92] Kayikci M, Milanovic JV. Reactive power control strategies for DFIG-based
plants. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2007;22:389–96.
[93] Hu JB, Nian H, Hu B, He YK, Zhu ZQ. Direct active and reactive power
regulation of DFIG using sliding-mode control approach. IEEE Trans Energy
Convers 2010;25:1028–39.
[94] Zavadil R, Miller N, Ellis A, Muljadi E, Camm E, Kirby B. Queuing up. IEEE
Power Energy Mag 2007;5:47–58.
[95] Hansen AD, Sorensen P, Iov F, Blaabjerg F. Centralised power control of wind
farm, with doubly fed induction generators. Renew Energy 2006;31:935–51.
[96] Miao ZX, Fan LL, Osborn D, Yuvarajan S. Control of DFIG-based wind
generation to improve interarea oscillation damping. IEEE Trans Energy
Convers 2009;24:415–22.
[97] Revel G, Leon AE, Alonso DM, Moiola JL. Frequency regulation and inter-area
oscillation damping using variable-speed wind generators. In: Proceedings
of the 2012 Sixth IEEE/PES transmission and distribution: Latin America
conference and exposition (T&D-LA); 2012. p. 1–7.
[98] Li H, Liu S, Ji H, Yang D, Yang C, Chen H, et al. Damping control strategies of
inter-area low-frequency oscillation for DFIG-based wind farms integrated
into a power system. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 2014;61:279–87.
[99] Knuppel T, Nielsen JN, Jensen KH, Dixon A, Ostergaard J. Power oscillation
damping capabilities of wind power plant with full converter wind turbines
considering its distributed and modular characteristics. IET Renew Power
Gener 2013;7:431–42.
[100] Tsourakis G, Nomikos BM, Vournas CD. Contribution of doubly fed wind
generators to oscillation damping. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2009;24:783–91.
[101] Lingling F, Haiping Y, Zhixin M. On active/reactive power modulation of
DFIG-based wind generation for interarea oscillation damping. IEEE Trans
Energy Convers 2011;26:513–21.
[102] Gautam D, Vittal V, Ayyanar R, Harbour T. Supplementary control for
damping power oscillations due to increased penetration of doubly fed
induction generators in large power systems. In: Proceedings of the 2011
IEEE/PES power systems conference and exposition (PSCE); 2011. p. 1–6.
[103] Fernández RD, Battaiotto PE, Mantz RJ. Wind farm non-linear control for
damping electromechanical oscillations of power systems. Renew Energy
2008;33:2258–65.
[104] Ruan SY, Li GJ, Ooi BT, Sun YZ. Power system damping from real and reactive
power modulations of voltage-source-converter station. IET Gener Transm
Distrib 2008;2:311–20.
[105] Nguyen MH, Saha TK, Eghbal M. Impact of high level of renewable energy
penetration on inter-area oscillation. In: Proceedings of the 2011 21st
Australasian universities power engineering conference (AUPEC); 2011. p.
1–6.
[106] Gayme DF, Chakrabortty A. Impact of wind farm placement on inter-area
oscillations in large power systems. In: Proceedings of the American Control
Conference (ACC); 2012. p. 3038–43.
[107] Chandra S, Gayme DF, Chakrabortty A. Coordinating wind farms and battery
management systems for inter-area oscillation damping: a frequency-
domain approach. IEEE Trans Power Syst 2014;29:1454–62.
[108] Mehta B, Bhatt P, Pandya V. Small signal stability analysis of power systems
with DFIG based wind power penetration. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst
2014;58:64–74.
[109] Mohammad Shahraeini, Mohammad Hossein Javidi, Wide area measurement
systems, advanced topics in measurements, Zahurul Haq (Ed.), ISBN: 978-953-
51-0128-4, InTech, 2012,Available from: /http://www.intechopen.com/books/
advanced-topics-in-measurements/wide-area-measurement-systemsS.
[110] Phadke AG, Thorp JS. Synchronized phasor measurements and their applica-
tions. NewYork, USA: Springer Science & Business Media; 2008.
[111] De La Ree J, Centeno V, Thorp JS, Phadke AG. Synchronized phasor measure-
ment applications in power systems. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 2010;1:20–7.
[112] Tholomier D, Kang H, Cvorovic B. Phasor measurement units: functionality
and applications. In: Proceedings of the power systems conference, PSC '09;
2009. p. 1–12.
[113] Leon AE, Mauricio JM, Gomez-Exposito A, Solsona JA. Hierarchical wide-area
control of power systems including wind farms and FACTS for short-term
frequency regulation. IEEE Trans Power Syst 2012;27:2084–92.
[114] Terzija V, Valverde G, Cai DY, Regulski P, Madani V, Fitch J, et al. Wide-area
monitoring, protection, and control of future electric power networks. Proc
IEEE 2011;99:80–93.
780 D. Eltigani, S. Masri / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52 (2015) 770–780
[115] Bertsch J, Carnal C, Karlsson D, Mcdaniel J, Vu K. Wide-area protection and
power system utilization. Proc IEEE 2005;93:997–1003.
[116] Dechanupaprittha S, Li C, Watanabe M, Mitani Y, Hongesombut K, Ngamroo I.
A practical approach to tuning of SMES controller based on synchronized
phasor measurements for interconnected power system with wind farms. In:
Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE international conference on sustainable energy
technologies, 2008 ICSET; 2008. p. 1036–41.
[117] Juarez CA, Rueda JL, Erlich I, Colome DG. Probabilistic approach-based wide-
area damping controller for small-signal stability enhancement of wind-
thermal power systems. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 2011 power and energy
society general meeting; 2011. p. 1–4.
[118] Leon AE, Solsona JA. Power oscillation damping improvement by adding
multiple wind farms to wide-area coordinating controls. IEEE Trans Power
Syst 2014;29:1356–64.
[119] Mokhtari M, Aminifar F. Toward wide-area oscillation control through
doubly-fed induction generator wind farms. IEEE Trans Power Syst
2014;29:2985–92.