Document Title WECC Wind Power Plant Power Flow Modeling

Guide
File Name WECCWindPlantPowerFlowModelingGuide.pdf
Category ( ) Regional reliability standard
( ) Regional criteria
( ) Policy
(X) Guideline
( ) Report or other
( ) Charter
Document date May 19, 2010
Adopted/approved by M&VWG
Date adopted/approved May 2008
Custodian (entity M&VWG
responsible for
maintenance and
upkeep)
Stored/filed Physical location:
Web URL:
Previous name/number Wind Generator Power Flow Modeling Guide
.pdf
Status (X) in effect
( ) usable, minor formatting/editing required
( ) modification needed
( ) superceded by _____________________
( ) other _____________________________
( ) obsolete/archived)
 WECC Guideline:
WECC Wind Power Plant Power Flow Modeling Guide
Date: 5/2008
Introduction
This guideline provides guidance for aggregating wind power plants for power flow modeling.

Approved By:
Approving Committee, Entity or Person Date
WECC Modeling and Validation Work Group May 2008
 Western Electricity Coordinating Council
Modeling and Validation Work Group

WECC Wind Power Plant

Power Flow Modeling Guide

Prepared by
WECC Wind Generator Modeling Group

May 2008

WECC WGMG – Wind Power Plant Power Flow Representation 1

1. Introduction
This document contains technical recommendations for power flow representation of wind power
plants (WPP) in the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC), and was written by the WECC
Wind Generation Modeling Group (WGMG). WGMG is also advancing the state of the art on WPP
generic dynamic model implementation, and plans to produce dynamic representation guidelines for
use in WECC. Those guidelines will be issued as a separate document.

2. Brief Background
2.1 Wind Power Plant Topology
A wind power plant (WPP) consists of many individual wind turbine generators (WTGs) tied to a
medium voltage collector system, and connected to the transmission system at the interconnection
point. Modern utility-scale WTGs have nameplate rating ranging from 1 MW to 4 MW. Terminal
voltage is about 600 V. A step-up transformer, generally a pad-mounted unit, connects each WTG to a
medium-voltage collector system operating at 12 kV to 34.5 kV. The collector system consists of one
or several feeders connected together at a collector system station. One or more station transformers at
the collector system station are used to achieve transmission system voltage. Unless the collector
system station is adjacent to the interconnection point, an interconnection transmission line is needed.
Reactive compensation in the form of mechanically switched capacitors and continuously variable
devices such as STATCOMs or Static Var Systems (SVS) may be installed at the collector system
station. Depending on the type of WTG, shunt reactive compensation at the WTG terminals may be
installed for power factor correction. The amount and nature of reactive compensation is driven by
interconnection requirements and collector system design considerations, including voltage regulation
and losses. Figure 1 shows a typical WPP topology.

POI or
connection
to the grid Collector System
Station

Interconnection
Transmission Line

Individual WTGs

Feeders and Laterals (overhead

and/or underground)

Figure 1. Wind Power Plant Topology

WECC WGMG – Wind Power Plant Power Flow Representation 2

 2.2 Types of Wind Turbine Generators
Early vintage WTGs were simple cage induction generators prone to tripping during grid
disturbances. Until recently, tripping was considered preferable from the transmission system point of
view, considering the small capacity of WPPs and their tendency to increase reactive power
consumption and delay voltage recovery following electrical fault events. However, WPPs are
becoming increasingly prominent in terms of size, especially in certain areas of the system. Also, they
are located in sparsely populated windy areas, where the transmission system tends to be weak.
Today, WPPs are expected to tolerate grid disturbances and contribute to overall power system
reliability. In response to evolving wind generator interconnection standards, WTGs have improved
rapidly with respect to steady-state and dynamic performance. WTG manufacturers have introduced
numerous variations of electrical and mechanical controls as well as drive train and generator
configuration. Most of modern WPPs have the ability to provide reactive power support to the system
by using reactive capability built into the WTGs, or through external reactive compensation systems.

Despite the large variety of utility-scale WTGs available in the market, each can be classified into
one of four basic types, based on the grid interface1, as listed below:

• Type 1 – Cage rotor induction generators

• Type 2 – Induction generators with variable rotor resistance
• Type 3 – Doubly-fed asynchronous generators with rotor-side converter
• Type 4 – Full-power converter interface
The distinctive topological characteristics of each type are shown in Figure 2.

Type 1 Type 2
Pla nt
Plant Fee ders
Feeders
gene rator
gene rator

PF control ac PF control
capacitor s to capacitor s
dc
Slip power
as heat loss

Type 3 Type 4
Plant
Feeders Plant
Feede rs
gene rator ac dc
genera tor to to
dc ac
ac dc
to to
dc ac
full power

partia l power

Figure 2 – Classification of WTGs Based on Generator Topology and Grid Interface

1
Dynamic performance for each type of WTG is different. WGMG is working on WECC standard models for each.

WECC WGMG – Wind Power Plant Power Flow Representation 3

 3. Single-Machine Equivalent Representation
The WGMG recommends the use of the single-machine equivalent representation shown in Figure
3 to model WPPs in WECC base cases. Based on industry experience, this representation is also
considered adequate for positive-sequence transient stability simulations.

Station Collector Pad-mounted

Interconnection Transformer
Transmission Transformer(s) System
Equivalent Equivalent
Line
Wind Turbine
W Generator
Equivalent

POI or Connection
to the Transmission
PF Correction
System Plant-level
- Shunt Capacitors
Reactive
Compensation

Figure 3: Single-Machine Equivalent Power Flow Representation

The interconnection transmission line, station transformer(s) and plant-level reactive compensation
should be represented explicitly, according to established industry practice. Equivalent representations
are needed for the collector system station and WTGs.

• The equivalent generator and associated power factor correction capacitors represents the
total generating capacity and reactive compensation of all the WTGs in the WPP.

• The equivalent generator step-up transformer (pad-mounted transformer) represents the

aggregate effect of all WTG step-up transformers

• The equivalent collector system branch represents the aggregate effect of the WPP
collector system, and should approximate real power losses and voltage drop out to the
“average” WTG in the WPP.

Established power flow modeling principles should be applied to WPP representation, although
there are some differences that require especial attention. Single-machine equivalent model parameters
can be derived from preliminary data. Appendix A contains a sample data request form that covers all
the powerflow data needs. Preliminary data should be replaced with as-built data when such data
becomes available, certainly shortly after commissioning. Powerflow model data should be validated
from time to time by comparing the model to actual data, consistent with WECC and NERC
requirements and methodologies. However, as of the date this guide was written, specific WPP testing
and model validation guidelines have not been adopted for use in WECC.

With the proper model parameters, this model should approximate WPP powerflow characteristics
at the interconnection point, collector system real and reactive losses and voltage profile at the
terminals of the “average WTG” in the WPP. There are some limitations, however. Due to collector
system effects, terminal voltage of individual WTGs could vary widely. WTGs that are closest to the
interconnection point may experience significantly different terminal voltage compared to WTGs that
are electrically farthest from the interconnection point. In actual operation, terminal voltage of some

WECC WGMG – Wind Power Plant Power Flow Representation 4

WTGs may reach control or protection limits, resulting in different terminal behavior, or tripping.
During the design stage, or in special circumstances, it may be reasonable to use a more detailed
representation of the collector system. However this type of detail usually is not relevant for large-
scale simulations.

The following guidelines should be considered to model each of the components of the WPP
single-machine equivalent representation.

3.1 Interconnection Transmission Line

Standard data includes line voltage, line length, and line parameters (R, X and B). In some cases,
the interconnection transmission line may be operated at a voltage level lower than the system voltage
at the interconnection point, but higher than the collector system voltage. This requires an additional
transformation stage and perhaps more shunt compensation to make up for higher reactive losses.
Economics may favor this approach depending on a number of factors.

3.2 WPP Station Transformer

A WPP contains one or several station transformers at the collector system station. Station
transformers should always be modeled explicitly. They represent the majority of the impedance
between the interconnection point and the terminals of the equivalent WTG. Standard data includes
transformer terminal voltage, MVA ratings (ONAN/FA/FA), percent impedance on the transformer’s
self-cooled (ONAN) MVA base, and X/R ratio. Positive-sequence impedance for these types of
transformers is in the range of 7 to 10%, with X/R ratio in the range of 40 to 50.

3.3 Plant Level Reactive Compensation

Many WPPs have reactive compensation installed at collector system station, consisting of
mechanically switched capacitors, continuously acting reactive power devices (such STATCOM or
SVS). The plant-level reactive power compensation system can be controlled to meet one of three
possible steady-state control objectives:

• Closed-loop voltage control - Maintain voltage schedule within the reactive power capability
of the WPP, over a certain range of real power output. Controlling voltage at the
interconnection point is likely to cause large reactive power swings for small voltage changes if
the WPP is connected to a strong transmission system. Reactive droop compensation can be
used to improve reactive power stability without compromising voltage control benefits. A
small voltage hysteresis may be allowed in some situations. For instance, the requirement may
be to regulate voltage at the interconnection point within 1% or 2% of schedule when WPP
output exceeds 20% of rated capacity.

• Power factor control - Maintain power factor at the interconnection point close to a specified
level. For instance, the requirement may be to maintain power factor between 0.98 lead and
unity at the interconnection point.

• Reactive power control - Maintain reactive power flow within some specified limits. For
instance, the requirement may be to limit reactive power flow at the interconnection point to 5
or 10 Mvar, in either direction.

WECC WGMG – Wind Power Plant Power Flow Representation 5

 Some WTGs have the capability to participate in steady-state voltage control and meet a portion or
all the interconnection requirements. However, this capability is not always implemented in the field
(see Section 3.6).

To properly model plant level reactive compensation, it is very important to establish what reactive
control mode has been implemented, as well as the type of WTGs and compensation devices that are
used. The following should be kept in mind to properly model reactive compensation devices:

• Discrete shunt capacitors should be modeled as constant impedance devices in power flow, to
capture voltage-squared effects.

• Continuously variable reactive power devices such as STATCOMs should be modeled as a

reactive power generator in power flow. Reactive limits should be set to the continuous rating
of the device, consistent with power flow time frame. Some STATCOM manufacturers allow a
transient overload capability in the 2 to 3 second time frame. This can be taken into account in
dynamic simulations. However, the temporary overload capability should not be used in
power flow.

• Ideally, SVCs should be represented as “svd” (static Var devices) with the appropriate number
and size of steps. However, standard positive-sequence simulation programs require that this
type of devices be represented as generators in power flow before conducting dynamic
simulations. Therefore, it is recommended that SVCs be represented as generators in power
flow to avoid having to convert a potentially large number of svd to generators in order to
conduct dynamic simulations. Until this modeling issue is resolved, it is recommended that
SVCs be represented as generators in power flow.

3.4 Equivalent Collector System

WPP collector systems consist of relatively long medium voltage feeders and laterals. Factors
considered in feeder design include cost, real power losses, and voltage performance. A typical design
goal is to keep average real power losses below 2%. At full output, real power losses can be higher, in
the 3% to 5% range. Land use agreements usually favor the use of underground feeders despite the
higher cost. For that reason, equivalent collector system X/R ratio tends to be low and line
susceptance is high compared to typical overhead circuits. The equivalent collector system impedance
also tends to be small compared to the station transformer impedance, but is not insignificant.

A simple method developed by NREL2 can be used to derive equivalent impedance (Zeq) and
equivalent susceptance (Beq) from conductor schedule as follows:
I

∑Z n 2
i i
Z eq = Req + jX eq = i =1
,
N2
I
Beq = ∑ Bi ,
i =1

2
E. Muljadi, A. Ellis, et al, “Equivalencing the Collector System of a Large Wind Power Plant”, IEEE Power Engineering
Society Annual Conference, Montreal, Quebec, June 12-16, 2006.

WECC WGMG – Wind Power Plant Power Flow Representation 6

where I is total number of branches in the collector system, Zi and ni are the impedance (Ri + jXi) for ith
branch, and N is the total number of WTGs in the WPP. As stated before, the equivalent impedance
computed in this manner approximates real and reactive losses seen by the “average WTG” in the
WPP. This calculation can be easily implemented in a spreadsheet. Figure 4 shows a simple example
with I = 21, N = 18.

Grid

Grid
Grid

Figure 4 – Computation of Collector System Equivalent Parameters

Larger WPPs have lower Zeq and higher Beq considering that additional circuits are needed to
handle larger currents. However, this relationship does not always hold. Table 1 shows some
examples of actual equivalent collector system parameters for several WPP of different nameplate
capacity and different collector system configuration. Per unit parameters are on a 100 MVA and
collector system kV base.

Table 1 – Sample Equivalent Collector System Parameters

Collector
Plant size Feeder R (pu) X (pu) B (pu)
voltage
100 MW 34.5 kV All underground 0.017 0.014 0.030
100 MW 34.5 kV 33% overhead (carrying 100% of WTG) 0.018 0.079 0.030
110 MW 34.5 kV All underground 0.012 0.011 0.036
200 MW 34.5 kV Some overhead 0.007 0.025 0.055
200 MW 34.5 kV 25% overhead (carrying 50% of WTG) 0.010 0.039 0.099
300 MW 34.5 kV Some overhead 0.005 0.020 0.085
300 MW 34.5 kV Some overhead 0.006 0.026 0.150
Note: per unit parameters are on a 100 MVA base and collector system kV base.

WECC WGMG – Wind Power Plant Power Flow Representation 7

 3.5 Equivalent WTG Step Up or Pad-Mounted Transformer
WTG pad-mounted transformers are typically two-winding air-cooled transformers. The per-unit
equivalent impedance (ZTeq) and the equivalent MVA rating (MVATeq) for the N identical WTG step-up
transformers, each of which has impedance ZT on its own MVA base (MVAT), are computed as follows:

Z Teq = Z T
MVA Teq = N × MVA T

Step-up transformers associated with modern utility-scale WTGs (1 to 3 MVA) have impedance of
approximately 6% on the transformer MVA base, with X/R ratio of about 8.

3.6 Equivalent WTG Representation

For power flow simulations, the equivalent WTG should be represented as a standard generator.
Real power level and reactive power capability must be specified according to the guidelines below.

3.6.1 Active Output Level

Generator interconnection studies are typically conducted with the WPP at full output. At the
discretion of the transmission planner, WPPs in the study area that are included in the base case can be
assumed to be at full output, or at some other output level, depending on the purpose of the study. The
following should be taken into account:

• For regional transmission planning studies, it is recommended that the power level be
established based on the average output level during the time frame of interest, unless
specific high or low wind output scenarios are of interest. This approach allows for
consideration of realistic load and resources balance over the study area. Average output
during a certain time frame varies depending on the location of the WPP. For example,
in the US desert southwest, WPP output tends to be low (5% to 15% of nameplate
capacity) during the during peak summer load hours due in part to temperature-related
wind turbulence. Average output increases during the evening hours (off peak load
periods), as turbulence decreases. Average output is significantly higher during the
spring and winter and fall. In locations near the coast, wind resource may be driven by
other factors such land-water temperature differential, resulting in very different seasonal
output patterns.

• Due to the steepness of WTG power curve or output versus wind speed characteristic (see
Figure 5), an individual WPP is likely to be at either low output (< 20% of nameplate
capacity) or high output (> 80% of nameplate capacity) at any given time. Figure 6
shows an example of power output distribution for an individual WPP in the Pacific
Northwest. This pattern tends to hold even for the aggregate output of wind farms that
are in close proximity. Based on these observations may be reasonable to represent a
WPP or group of WPPs installed in a certain region either off-line or at maximum power
output. Again, the choice is dependent on the purpose of the study.

Additional investigation and operational experience is underway to reconcile the above

observations and provide guidance for dispatching wind generation in WECC base cases.

WECC WGMG – Wind Power Plant Power Flow Representation 8

 120.0

100.0

Power output (%)

80.0

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 25 26
Wind speed (m/s)
Figure 5 – Typical wind power curve (output versus wind speed)

Figure 6 – Output distribution for a wind power plant in the Pacific Northwest

3.6.2 Reactive Power Capability and Power Factor Correction Capacitors

WTG reactive power capability is related to the type of WTG, as defined in Section 2.2, and the
manner in which they are operated. The following guidelines apply:

• Type 1 and 2 WTGs are induction machines. In the range of 50% to 100% power level,
uncompensated power factor typically ranges from 0.85 to 0.90 under-excited
(consuming reactive power). Several stages of capacitors banks at the WTG terminals
are normally applied to raise the power factor to approximately unity. In power flow,
power factor correction capacitors should be modeled as fixed shunt devices, considering
that that WPP power output is held constant in power flow studies. In the power flow
model, reactive power consumption can be assumed to be ½ of the power output. A
capacitor should be shown at the WTG terminals to compensate power factor to unity at
nominal voltage. For example, for a 100 MW WPP at full output, both Qmin and Qmax
would be set to -50 Mvar, and add a 50 Mvar shunt capacitor at the WTG terminals.
Plant level reactive compensation may still be installed to meet interconnection
requirements.

WECC WGMG – Wind Power Plant Power Flow Representation 9

 • Type 3 and Type 4 WTGs normally do not have power factor correction capacitors
installed at the machine terminals. These WTGs are capable of adjusting power factor to
a desired value within the rating of the generator and converter. They are also capable of
voltage control at the interconnection point. When this functionality is implemented, the
individual WTGs respond to a reactive power or power factor commands from an
external plant-level controller. It should be kept in mind that, for commercial and other
reasons, WTG-assisted steady-state voltage control functionality is not implemented or
enabled in many WPPs with Type 3 or Type 4 WTGs. External reactive power
compensation is often required to meet interconnection requirements, as discussed in
Section 3.3. If these WTGs do not participate in voltage control, the equivalent generator
should be assigned a fixed power factor, typically unity. (i.e., Qmin and Qmax would be set
to 0). If the WTGs do participate in voltage control, then the equivalent generator should
be assigned a reactive capability approximately equal to the aggregate WTG reactive
power range. The WTG reactive power range is a function of power output. For
example, consider a 100 MW WPP that employs Type 4 WTGs with specified power
factor range +/-0.95 at full output. In this example, Qmin should be set to -33 Mvar and
Qmax should be set to +33 Mvar. At an output level below rated, the reactive limits
should be adjusted according to the WTG capability curve.

Due to collector system effects, some WTGs in the WPP will actually reach terminal voltage limits
before reaching the nameplate reactive power limits. The net effect is that actual reactive power
capability could be significantly less than the nameplate. The reactive power capability can be
determined by field test or careful observation of WPP performance during abnormally high or low
system voltage. For example, Figure 7 shows the results of field tests to determine the practical
reactive limits of a 200 MW WPP. All measurements were made at the interconnection point. Taking
into account the effect of transformer and collector system impedances, the reactive power limits of the
equivalent WTG can be established. Currently, there are no industry standard guidelines for testing
WPP steady-state reactive limits.

Practical Qmax = +25 MVar (net to 345 kV).

Some WTGs reach maximum terminal voltage and could
no longer increase power factor. A few WTGs tripped
Wind net MW due to converter over-temperature.

Voltage set-point
restored to normal

Wind net MW
Wind net Mvar

Voltage setpoint
Switched off shunt caps restored to normal,
at nearby transmission station Wind net Mvar (turbines begin to re-
synchronize)
Reduced POI voltage
set point in 2% increments
Reduced voltage at nearby
transmission station by 4, 4 and 2 kV

Practical Qmin = -106 Mvar (net to 345 kV). Voltage controller activated
Reached minimum 34.5 kV feeder voltage. A few WTGs tripped on (WTGs previously at unity pf)
prolonged low voltage condition (< 90% of nominal).
Capability would be higher if 345 kV voltage were higher than during the
test

(a) Maximum under-excited WPP output (b) Maximum over-excited WPP output

Figure 7 – Determination of Practical Reactive Power Limits by Field Test

WECC WGMG – Wind Power Plant Power Flow Representation 10

4. Modeling during post transient and power flows

Modeling of WPP generator and reactive compensation components should be consistent with
WECC pos-transient methodology. Control devices that can complete switching or operation within 3
minutes (e.g., SVCs, STATCOMS and shunts under automatic control) should not be blocked.
Devices that require operator action should be blocked. The equivalent WPP generator should have
the Load Flag set to “1” to reflect the fact that the output should not change during a governor power
flow.

WECC WGMG – Wind Power Plant Power Flow Representation 11

 APPENDIX A
SAMPLE DATA REQUEST FOR WIND POWER PLANTS

1. One-line Diagram. This should be similar to Figure 1 below.

Point Of
Interconnection
Equivalent
Main pad-mounted
Interconnection Transformer(s) Collector Transformer
Transm. Line System
Equivalent
Wind-Turbine
W Generator
kV, R, X, B
kV, MVA, kV, MVA
KV, R, X, B R, X R, X
PF Correction
Shunt Capacitors
Plant-Level Reactive
Compensation

Figure A-1. Single-machine representation one-line diagram

2. Interconnection Transmission Line.

• Line voltage = ______ kV
• R = ________ ohm or _______ pu on 100 MVA and line kV base (positive sequence)
• X = ________ ohm or _______ pu on 100 MVA and line kV base (positive sequence)
• B = ________ uF or _______ pu on 100 MVA and line kV base

3. Station Transformer. (NOTE: If there are multiple transformers, data for each transformer should
be provided)
• Rating (ONAN/FA/FA): ______/_____/_____ MVA
• Nominal Voltage for each winding (Low /High /Tertiary): _______/_______/_______ kV
• Winding Connections: ________/________/________ (Delta, Wye, Wye grounded)
• Available taps: _____________ (indicated fixed or ULTC), operating Tap: _______
• Positive sequence Z: _____%, ____X/R on transformer self-cooled (ONAN) MVA
• Zero sequence Z: _____%, ____X/R on transformer self-cooled (ONAN) MVA

4. Collector System Equivalent Model. This can be found by applying the equivalencing
methodology described in Section 3.4; otherwise, typical values can be used.
• Collector system voltage = ________ kV
• R = _________ ohm or _______ pu on 100 MVA and collector kV base
• X = _________ ohm or _______ pu on 100 MVA and collector kV base
• B = _________ mF or _______ pu on 100 MVA and collector kV base
• Attach a one-line diagram of the collector layout.

It is also acceptable to provide a complete collector system description similar to Figure 4 of the
Power Flow Modeling Guide.

WECC WGMG – Wind Power Plant Power Flow Representation 12

5. Wind-turbine Generator (WTG) Pad-Mounted Transformer. Note: These are typically two-
winding air-cooled transformers. If the proposed project contains different types or sizes of pad-
mounted transformers, please provide data for each type.
• Rating: ______ MVA
• Nominal voltage for each winding (Low /High): _______/_______kV
• Winding Connections: _______/_______ (Delta, Wye, Wye grounded)
• Available taps: __________ (please indicated fixed or ULTC), Operating Tap:_______
• Positive sequence impedance (Z1) _____%, ____X/R on transformer self-cooled MVA
• Zero sequence impedance (Z0) _____%, ____X/R on transformer self-cooled MVA

6. WTG Powerflow Data. Proposed projects may include one or more WTG Types (See NOTE 1
below). Please provide the following information for each:
• Number of WTGs: _______
• Nameplate rating (each WTG): ________ MW
• WTG Manufacturer and Model: _______________
• WTG Type: __________
For Type 1 or Type 2 WTGs:
• Uncompensated power factor at full load: _______
• Power factor correction capacitors at full load: ______Mvar
• Number of shunt stages and size ___________
• Please attach capability curve describing reactive power or power factor range from 0 to full
output, including the effect of shunt compensation.
For Type 3 and Type 3 WTGs:
• Maximum under-excited power factor at full load: _______
• Maximum under-excited power factor at full load: _______
• Control mode: _______________ (voltage control, fixed power factor) (See Note 7.2)
• Please attach capability curve describing reactive power or power factor range from 0 to full
output.
NOTE 7.1: WTG Type can be one of the following:
• Type 1 – Squirrel-cage induction generator
• Type 2 – Wound rotor induction machine with variable rotor resistance
• Type 3 – Doubly-fed asynchronous generator
• Type 4 – Full converter interface

NOTE 7.2: Type 1 and Type 2 WTGs typically operate on fixed power factor mode for a wide
range of output level, aided by turbine-side power factor correction capacitors (shunt
compensation). With a suitable plant-level controller, Type 3 and Type 4 WTGs may be capable of
dynamically varying power factor to contribute to voltage control mode operation, if required by
the utility. However, this feature is not always available due to commercial and other reasons. The
data requested must reflect the WTG capability that can be used in practice. Please consult with
the manufacturer when in doubt. The interconnection study will determine the voltage control
requirements for the project. Plant-level reactive compensation requirements are engineered to
meet specific requirements. WTG reactive capability data described above could significantly
impact study results and plant-level reactive compensation requirements.

WECC WGMG – Wind Power Plant Power Flow Representation 13

7. Wind Farm Reactive Power Compensation. Provide the following information for wind farm-
level reactive compensation, if applicable:
• Individual shunt capacitor and size of each: ______X_______ MVA
• Dynamic reactive control device, (SVC, STATCOM): _______________________
• Control range ___________________________ Mvar (lead and lag)
• Control mode (line drop, voltage droop, voltage control): _______________________
• Regulation point _______________________
• Describe the overall reactive power control strategy:
_____________________________________________________________________

8. Wind-turbine Generator (WTG) Dynamic Data. Model and parameter data required for transient
stability analysis is specific to each WTG make and model. The dynamic models must be in an
approved WECC format, or in a PSSE or PSLF format that is acceptable to the transmission provider.
We strongly suggest that the manufacturers provide this information.
• Library model name: ______________
• Model type (standard library or user-written): ___________
• Model access (proprietary or non-proprietary): ___________
• Attach full model description and parameter data

WECC WGMG – Wind Power Plant Power Flow Representation 14