half yearly meeting kth, stockholm, sweden 14-16 …€¦ · 160614 promotion agenda stockholm june...

© PROMOTioN – Progress on Meshed HVDC Offshore Transmission Networks This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 691714.

HALF YEARLY MEETINGKTH, STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN14-16 JUNE 2016

160614 Promotion Agenda Stockholm June 14th-16th.vs7.docx

10016054 June 03, 2016 PHR

AGENDA for PROMOTioN, half yearly meeting Sweden

Date : June 14-15-16, 2016

Place : Stockholm, KTH

AGENDA (updated Paul Raats 31.05.2016) (Ömer Göksu added WP2&WP3 meeting agenda – 03.06.2016) Tuesday 14 June, Work package meetings • Presentation of results so far • Discussion of the results • Plan for future work

June 14th Room 1 Room 2 Room 3 Room 4

13:00 – 14:00 WP2-3

WP5-6-10 WP4

WP1-7-12-13 14:00 – 15:00 15:00 – 16:00

WP9 16:00 – 17:00 WP8

June 14th Room 1 (WP2 & WP3) 13:00 – 14:30 DRU-HVDC concept & WT/WPP control seminar by Siemens & UPV 14:30 – 15:00 Break 15:00 – 16:00 WP3 – D3.1 and WP2 – D2.1 progress discussion 16:00 – 17:00 WP8 demonstrator presentation by Robert 17:30 – 18:00 WP2&WP3 simulation models and tools

modelling contributors (DTU, RWTH Aachen, UPV, USTRAT) & interested ones

Wednesday 15 June, Plenary meeting

• Presentation of results and deliverables from work packages (15 min presentation 15 min discussion – WP1 exception)

09:00 – 09:20 Opening and welcome (KTH) 09:20 – 09:30 Introduction (DNV GL) 09:30 – 09:45 Future grids with HVDC (ABB) 09:45 – 10:00 NordBalt interconnection (Svk)

-2-

160614 Promotion Agenda Stockholm June 14th-16th.vs7.docx 2

10:00 – 10:30 WP2 (RWTH) 10:30 – 11:00 Coffee break 11:00 – 12:45 WP1 (TenneT) 12:45 – 13:45 Lunch 13:45 - 14:15 WP3 (DTU) 14:15 - 14:45 WP4 (KUL) 14:45 – 15:15 WP5 (DNV GL) 15:15 – 15:45 Tea break 15:45 – 16:15 WP6 (UniAbdn) 16:15 – 16:45 WP7 (TenneT) 16:45 – 17:15 WP8 (Siemens) 17:15 – 17:45 Presentation Mr. Schettler on Cenelec working group 17:45 – 18:00 Day closing 19:00 Official Dinner hosted by …. Thursday 16 June, General Assembly 08:15 – 09:00 General project & consortium issues (including Questions from the work package results) 09:00 – 09:30 Explanation of periodical reporting formats (DNV GL) 09:30 – 09:45 Hands-on microtraining for working with ProjectPlace (DNV GL) 09:45 – 10:30 Coffee break 10:30 – 11:00 WP13 (SOW) 11:00 – 11:30 Wrap up & Closing 11:30 – 13:00 Lunch & PMG Meeting (for WPL’s)

© ABB| Slide 1

Future grids with HVDCMagnus Callavik, ABB Power Grids, Grid Systems, Vice President Technology, head HVDC R&D

Promotion, June 15 , [email protected] www.abb.com/hvdc

© ABB| Slide 2April 9, 2020

Future grids with HVDCRationale

HVDC voltage source converters, cables, OHL, fast C&P, HVDC breakers,…

Today Interconnectors HVDC in AC grids Offshore wind connections Remote generation

Next steps VSC Multi-terminals Larger penetration of HVDC in AC

Integration of power markets Integration of remote wind (offshore) Collection of large volumes of solar power Transmission of excess renewable energy

to remote loads is more cost efficient than storage at each load or generation center Lower capex Optimization of storage capacity Multiple transmission capacity usage

Typical HVDC Grid Applications Why


The North Sea is being interconnectedNordLink connecting TenneT and Statnett grids

Renewable power supply to 3.6 million German households by 2020

German wind and solar can be balanced with Norwegian hydro

VSC to support grid connection points in Tonstad and Wilster

2 x 700 MW VSC-HVDC ± 515 kV IGBT-based converter valves ± 525 kV mass impregnated (MI) marine

and underground cable system, 623 km

Interconnecting Germany-Norway 1400 MW Bipole

Fig. 1. http://spectrum.ieee.org/video/energy/renewables/nordlink-a-landmark-project-enabling-a-more-interconnected-europeFig. 2. Skagerrak 700 MW VSC-HVDC valve

http://spectrum.ieee.org/video/energy/renewables/nordlink-a-landmark-project-enabling-a-more-interconnected-europe

© ABB| Slide 4

HVDC a future solution for

Energy trading

Security of supply

Integration of renewables

Balancing of intermittent power

Closing nuclear and fossil

Optimizing total grid efficiency

Market – European energy policyHVDC planned or under discussion

April 9, 2020Slide 4


North sea Integration of markets and renewables

As one example

© ABB| Slide 6

Key components of HVDC transmission systemsABB’s unique position in converters, semiconductors & cables

Conversion of AC to DCand vice versa

Three manufacturing perspectives in HVDC technologies. HV testing. Clean room, cables

Converters High power semiconductors HV Cables

Silicon-based devices for power switching

Underground and marine transmission of power

© ABB| Slide 7

HVDC. More power by higher voltage and currentExtreme LCC powers available. VSC moving up rapidly

LCC UHVDC (Classic). 8-13 GW / bipole>150 links since 1954

VSC HVDC (HVDC Light)>20 since 1999

1. Dark blue in construction or operation. Light blue released2. Examples Hami-Zhengzhou 8 000 MW (LCC, 2014). EWIC NordLink 1400 MW (VSC, award 2015)

Loss minimization is always important. At higher currents also for cooling design

[MW]

800 1100 [kV]

[MW]

200 320 500 [kV]

10 0008 0006 000

Voltage increase up to 1100 kV Current increases 4.5-5.0-6.25 kA. Further increase in peak power? Reactive power consumption may be challenging

First 500 kV bipoles with cables Voltage increase for converters straightforward Current increase would be beneficial Cables at 2.6 kA, 525 kV

1 4001 000

500?


MACH Control & protection system performanceEnable more advanced and much faster and compact solutions

Double amount of transistors on a chip every 18 months. Roughly a million-fold increase in 40 years

1976: calculation of current order 15 ms

2015: ABB MACH™3 does 100 floating point multiplications per ns

Redundant control and protection system for a pole fitted in 0.6 m2

Moore’s law MACH™3

Cont

rol

Prot

ectio

n

Custom built hardware

Wire-rap

Parallel backplanes

DistributedI/O

Relays Multiprocessor systems

Multi core processors

Vacuum tubes transistors op-ampsTTL logicMicroprocessors

DSP + FPGA

Thyristor valves

1970 1980 199019601950 2000mercury arc valves

IGBT valves

2010


Hybrid HVDC BreakerThe ultrafast low-loss solution

Flexible multiple protection zone HVDC can be designed and planned for

Fault clearance < 5 ms. Losses


Power Semiconductors - The heart of the matterMore current, more voltage, lower losses, controllability

A continuous development to break new power barriersThyristors are 20 years ahead

High power and low on-state losses Used in line commutated converters(LCC, Classic) HVDC. Loss


HVDC Cable SystemsExisting and New extruded cable (“XLPE”)

Both MI and Extruded DC at 525 kV.There are benefit to raise the voltage even further for certain applications

2014: 525 kV rated voltage Installed 80 kV in 1999. 320 kV 2015 Sea, land, cupper, aluminum,… ABB awarded close to 6000 km

Cables and accessories 2600 A

Rapid development of extruded cables It is a cable system, CIGRE TB 496

Cable system with terminations, prefab joints and factory vulcanized joint


Dolwin alfa, 916 MW offshore converter powerGravity based structure, “self-installing”

70 x 100 x 100 (w x l x h). 23000 tonnesWorlds largest offshore connection platform

Left: The wind turbines are seen far in the distance. Mid and Right: Compare the size of two persons leaning on the fence

Recommended press material, images and videos: DolWin2 installationDolWin2 SailoutDolWin1 handover

http://www.abb.com/cawp/seitp202/1FEB0F77B8682A0FC1257E9D002E4EF2.aspxhttp://www.abb.com/cawp/seitp202/7334a312604850a7c1257e960034063c.aspxhttp://new.abb.com/dolwin1

© ABB Group April 9, 2020 | Slide 13

HVDC R&D towards UHVDC 1100 kV, 6 250 A

1 100 kV

2009: Preliminary long term test of components at 1050 kV (Ludvika), review standards

2010: Design criteria, topology, basic material R&D, system design foundation

2011: Detailed equipment development

2012: Prototypes type tested

6 250 A, split system valve

2014: Preliminary design reviewthyristor development

2015: Design criteria, topology, basic material R&D, split system design, thyristor and valve type tests


Wrap-upHVDC will increase

Increase current and higher voltageenable grid integration Power-dense semiconductors New converter valve design Increase VSC voltage Offshore design optimization Mirror UHVDC designs

EU initiatives to speed up integration BestPaths for vendor interoperability Promotion for operator interoperability,

component testing, scenarios and guidelines

NordBalt – a new HVDC inteconnection betweenSweden and Lithuania

2016-06-15

Per Schultheiss, Project manager HVDC converter station

Facts about the project

> HVDC ground-and sea cableinclusivefibre optical cable.

> 700 MW

> ± 300 kV

> Cable length ~ 450 km

> CommissioningSpring 2016

> Main responsible atSvenska kraftnät: Marcus Jacobson

NordBalt on the map

A project with a long history

Budget

> Total cost for the NordBalt-project 552 MEUR

> 131 MEUR from EEPR(+ 44 MEUR for internal grid reinforcements in Lithuania)

HVDC-stationNybro - Sweden

Schedule

> Preparation for ground work:Autumn 2013

> Start ofconstrustruction:April 2014

> Commissioning:Spring 2016

HVDC-stationLituani

Schedule

> Start ofconstrustruction:Mars 2014

> Commissioning :Spring 2016

Ground cable – Sweden

Sea cable

> Approx 400 km long, but in total twice the length as there are two cables (+ and -)

> ABB – manufacturing and installation

> Cable laying at sea: April – September 2014 and April – September 2015

Sea cable route

HVDC-cable

Cable installation in the sea

> 300-350 meters per hour

> Floatation cushions the last distance in to land

Flushing of cable into the sea bottom> A sword is lowered on each side of

the cable

> High water pressure jets fluidizes the sea bottom

> The cable falls into the groove

Cable protection –covering

Material that does not allowflushing of cable

> Rock> Boulders> Hard moraine

Metodes for covering and ice protection

> Concrete mats> Rock dumping> Concrete sacks

Thank you for your interest!


PLENARY MEETING – WP1June 15, 2016


CONTENT

↗Overview of the progress & next steps↗Fundamental topologies↗Task 1.1 – Towards D1.4 & D1.5↗Task 1.2 – Analysis of past studies↗Task 1.3 – Input from existing offshore connections/grids↗Task 1.4 – Drafting an initial roadmap

03.05.16 2


↗In the Grant Agreement, we speak about ↗The North Sea (mainly)↗The Northern Seas (description of WP1 & WP7)

↗What should be the geographical scope?↗It seems that we focus mainly on the North Sea↗The definition of the Northern Seas is not completely clear

↗It seems that it includes North Sea, Baltic Sea, Irish-Scottish Sea↗Question in particular important for the roadmaps & WP7

Geographical Scope of PROMOTioN?

03.05.16 3


OVERVIEW OF THE PROGRESS & NEXT STEPS

© N

ame

of P

artn

er


Reminder of the position of WP1 within PROMOTioN

Overview of the progress & next steps

03.05.16 5


Five main tasks


03.05.16 6

Timeline WP121 Jan 2016Project Kick-off

D1.6

Closing of WP1 (except T1.5)

11 Apr 20161st WP session

D1.1

15 Jun 2016Stockholm

D1.2 & D1.3 & D1.4

Stakeholder Workshops

Q1 2016 Q2 2016 Q3 2016 Q4 2016 Q1 2017

Task 1.3Leader:

IberdrolaProject

ExperienceGathering of project

findings and experience Deadline D1.2Analysis alternative

ownership and governance models

(worldwide)

Public intermediate report (D7.5)

Task 1.1Leader: TenneT

Deadline D1.1 Scenario analysis

Deadline D1.4 Quantification Deadline D1.5

December 2017: Intermediate report on policy recommendations (D7.8)

Task 1.4Leader:

TractebelRoadmap Scenario analysis of T1.1 (D1.4) Optimization of different grid topologies

Demonstrationand visualisation

Deadline D1.6

Task 1.3Leader: TenneT

Evaluation of Requirements

Evaluation of requirements set by Task

1.1Deadline

D1.7

Task 1.2Leader:

TractebelLiterature

studyOverview of previously

performed studies Deadline D1.3Analysis alternative

ownership and governance models

(worldwide)

Public intermediate report (D7.5)

Q4 2017 D1.7D1.5

Expert workshops


↗Task 1.1↗Definition of the reference scenario & topologies↗Quantification of requirements

↗Task 1.2↗Draw conclusions from the analysis of past studies

↗Task 1.3↗Send questionnaire, collect & analyse answers (including workshop)

↗Task 1.4↗Start the task (in particular define the methodology)

↗Task 1.5↗For 2017

Remaining work


03.05.16 8


FUNDAMENTAL TOPOLOGIES


↗Task 1.1 defined three fundamental topologies (see D1.1)↗Point-to-point radial OWF connections + Interconnectors↗Radial Multi-Terminal↗Meshed Multi-Terminal

↗(AC+DC branches)

Definition

Fundamental topologies

03.05.16 10

DC Converter

Windfarm (+ AC transformer)

HVAC

MVAC

DC

1. Point-to-Point OWF & IC

3. Meshed Multi-Terminal

DC Bus

AC Bus

2. Radial Multi-terminal


↗Draft roadmap (Task 1.4) in March 2017↗Will provide a complete study case of the development of an offshore

HVDC grid (possibly in several parts), with complex topologies↗Various WPs are starting their work and simulations

↗They need to define test cases/test systems↗They cannot wait the results of Task 1.4

↗We need to define test cases to ensure consistency between various WPs↗Results that can be “put together” in the end, exchanges between WPs

Need for concrete test cases


03.05.16 11


↗WP1 will coordinate the building by the end of June 2016 a small library of test cases for the others WPs with support of other WPs↗These test cases might not be relevant for each WP (e.g. radial

connection of OWF with a DRU might be of interest for WP3, but not for WP4), but WPs would be asked to explain why they did not study a test case

↗WPs will obviously not be limited to these test cases (i.e. they might want more complex test cases, to study variants, to study the sensitivity to a parameters, etc.)

Definition of concrete test cases


03.05.16 12


↗The following topologies are proposed as fundamental topologies

↗The topologies: Keep It Simple↗Complex enough for calculations of WP 2 & 4↗Applicable as building blocks for a meshed grid

↗These topologies are not the roadmap↗These are developed as part of T1.4 (starting soon)

↗Question: Are these fundamental topologies workable for you?↗Basic topologies assume 1GW (320kV) cables, converters & wind

parks↗Variations possible: DRU, FB converters, AC side branching, different

dimensioning

Discussion on a draft set of topologies


03.05.16 13


↗DC radial point-to-point



03.05.16 14


↗DC multi-terminal H-bridge/topology



03.05.16 15


↗DC meshed



03.05.16 16


↗DC meshed + AC mixed branches



03.05.16 17


TASK 1.1 – TOWARDS D1.4 & D1.5


↗Goal: Obtain Scenarios and Fundamental topologies

↗Fundamental topologies ↗Needed quickly↗Proposal for basic topologies today

↗Work towards scenarios↗Installed wind capacity in the North(ern) Sea(s) as a function of time↗Load/generation in Europe↗Time horizon: 2030?↗Input from Task 1.2

Method D1.4 (Reference scenario & fundamental topologies)

Task 1.1 – Towards D1.4 & D1.5

03.05.16 19


↗Goal: Quantify the requirements

↗Method↗Obtain what needs to be quantified

↗D1.1 – D1.4↗WP leader: What else do you need?

↗Use WP1 knowledge to obtain ranges↗Narrow down to preliminary values with expert groups

↗Iterations↗Quantifications should be constantly updated↗Review of requirements in D1.7

Method D1.5 (Quantification of requirements)

Task 1.1 – Towards D1.4 & D1.5

03.05.16 20


TASK 1.2 – ANALYSIS OF PAST STUDIES

© N

ame

of P

artn

er


↗Provide a clear view on ↗Others European R&D projects about offshore HVDC grids↗The current state of the art in the fields relevant for the PROMOTioN

project↗Justify the positioning of the PROMOTioN project↗Analyze roadmaps previously proposed for the North Sea↗Topologies used and reasons↗Help the quantification of requirements (Task 1.1)

Aims of Task 1.2

Task 1.2 – Analysis of past studies

03.05.16 22


↗Division nearly in line with the organization of PROMOTioN↗System planning and grid topologies↗Converters – system operation↗Interactions between WTG and converters↗DC grid protection systems↗HVDC circuit breaker performances↗Regulation and financing

↗Additional appendices↗Assumptions on technologies, costs and reliability of components

↗Help the work of Task 1.4↗No information on cost and reliability of DRUs…

↗Quantification of requirements↗Help the work of Task 1.1 by reporting values previously used

Organisation of Deliverable 1.3


03.05.16 23


↗Analysis of the roadmaps previously proposed for the North Sea↗Almost finished, main conclusions presented on the next slides

↗Analysis of past studies on regulation and financing of offshore grids↗Almost finished, but conclusions not yet drafted↗Coordination with WP7

↗For others chapters↗Globally good progress↗But delays for the review of Best Paths and Medow↗What coordination do we expect with DEMO2 of Best Paths?

↗According to the Grant Agreement, the Best Paths project should be reviewed, but ongoing project…

↗Final conclusions in September

Work progress


03.05.16 24


↗Studies analyzed↗ISLES↗WindSpeed↗OffshoreGrid↗Twenties↗NSCOGI↗E-Highway2050↗NorthSeaGrid↗Study realized by Tractebel & Ecofys for the European Commission

Power system planning & grid topologies


03.05.16 25


↗First conclusions↗Since 2010, numerous roadmaps have been proposed, with different

levels of details (e.g. macro-topology, detailed topology)↗Results have significant differences and are sensitive to the

assumptions↗But common points

↗Wind farms near the shore stay usually radially connected↗Different HVDC grids not connected (except on the AC side) together (not one big

HVDC grid)↗Mainly radial and radial multi-terminal topologies↗Only a very few cases of meshed topologies

↗It seems difficult to take directly one previous roadmap as a reference for PROMOTioN (see Task 1.4)



03.05.16 26


↗Example of sensitivity to assumptions: E-Highway2050



03.05.16 27


↗Example of a global roadmap: OffshoreGrid (split design)



03.05.16 28


↗Example of a global roadmap: Twenties



03.05.16 29


TASK 1.3 – INPUT FROM EXISTING OFFSHORE CONNECTIONS/GRIDS


↗Partners:Leader: Iberdrola.Participants: Tractebel, SOW; Carbon Trust, RWTH, TenneT,DONG Energy

↗Objectives:The lessons learned from existing HVDC links that can be used inother work packages are gathered and best practices arecaptured in a report. A questionnaire is sent to relevantmanufacturers, developers, TSOs, governments, regulators andacademia. Workshops will be held to enrich the information

Description

Task 1.3 – Input from existing offshore connections/grids

03.05.16 31


We have prepared a questionnaire that will cover the followingtopics:↗Technical design↗Administrative issues↗Policy and finance↗Project management↗Construction↗Operation↗Future HVDC grids

Questionnaire


03.05.16 32


Different target groups have been identified:↗Political institutions↗Industry ↗Regulation, standardization and expert groups↗Academia & Consulting↗Financing↗Public

Depending on his expertise field, the user can fill in thequestionnaire partially

Questionnaire


03.05.16 33


Two versions:

↗Online questionnaire

↗Word file

QUESTIONNAIRE

03.05.16 34
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/12qHdjn5PrXt5vT0EbsIet-VgMomZiumT5ka2s0je2A0/viewform
QUESTIONNAIRE

1. Personal and project information

Name

Position

Company

Stakeholder group1

HVDC project/s used as reference for the information provided in the questionnaire

Link to general information on the project

Would you agree to be contacted by the project team for follow-up? ☐ Yes ☐ No

Please indicate preferred contact:☐ e-Mail address: .........

☐ Telephone: .........

1Six stakeholder groups have been identified as target groups for this questionnaire; each question is initially addressed to one or more stakeholders, but feel free to answer any of the questions where you have knowledge or opinions. The six stakeholder groups are as follows:

· Political institutions

I

PI

· Industry

· Regulation, standardization and expert groups

RS

· Academia & Consulting

AC

· Financing

F

· Public

P

QUESTIONNAIRE

BEST PRACTICES ON HVDC PROJECTS

© TenneT TSO GmbH

1

2. Project planning: Technical design

I. Please help to identify relevant aspects influencing the technical design of the HVDC projects?

RS

AC

I

From Not important (1) to Very important (5)

1

2

3

4

5

Offshore location characteristics (water depth, seabed conditions, etc.)☐☐☐☐☐

Potential impact on third parties: shipping☐☐☐☐☐

Potential impact on third parties fishing industry☐☐☐☐☐

Potential impact on third parties: oil & gas☐☐☐☐☐

Interaction with existing onshore networks☐☐☐☐☐

Voltage level of wind farm array☐☐☐☐☐

Lessons learned from previous projects☐☐☐☐☐

Cable

Length of the link☐☐☐☐☐

Route of the link☐☐☐☐☐

Cable CAPEX☐☐☐☐☐

Cable OPEX☐☐☐☐☐

Cable reliability☐☐☐☐☐

Electrical losses in the DC cable☐☐☐☐☐

Requirements from existing technical standards☐☐☐☐☐

Requirements from certification☐☐☐☐☐

Risk aversion / mitigation strategy☐☐☐☐☐

Maintenance and repair strategy☐☐☐☐☐

Potential environmental impact☐☐☐☐☐

HVDC converter station

Converter station CAPEX☐☐☐☐☐

Converter station OPEX☐☐☐☐☐

Converter station reliability☐☐☐☐☐

Electrical losses in offshore converter☐☐☐☐☐

Offshore platform lifting constraints☐☐☐☐☐

Interaction with offshore wind turbine generators☐☐☐☐☐

Requirements from existing technical standards☐☐☐☐☐

Requirements from certification☐☐☐☐☐

Risk aversion / mitigation strategy☐☐☐☐☐

Maintenance and repair strategy☐☐☐☐☐

Transients or harmonic issues☐☐☐☐☐

Potential environmental impact☐☐☐☐☐

Onshore station

Characteristics of landfall site☐☐☐☐☐

Distance to closest grid connection point☐☐☐☐☐

Transients or harmonic issues☐☐☐☐☐

Electrical losses in onshore converter☐☐☐☐☐

II. If a modification to the initial design was required during the subsequent phases of the project, what were the main reasons?

I


1

2

3

4

5

Impact on protected areas☐☐☐☐☐

Electromagnetic emissions☐☐☐☐☐

Restricted area crossings☐☐☐☐☐

Existing pipes/cable crossings☐☐☐☐☐

Interaction with shipping lanes☐☐☐☐☐

Conflicts of interest (with fishing, oil & gas, other seabed uses...)☐☐☐☐☐

Delays due to administrative issues or other☐☐☐☐☐

Cost increase (due to administrative issues or other) ☐☐☐☐☐

Unavailability of market products or service providers☐☐☐☐☐

Unexpected findings regarding seabed conditions☐☐☐☐☐

Inappropriate installation equipment☐☐☐☐☐

Technology innovation during project execution☐☐☐☐☐

Revision of standards during project execution☐☐☐☐☐

Bottlenecks in the supply chain☐☐☐☐☐

Insurance aspects (e.g. claims)☐☐☐☐☐

2.1What were the main drivers behind the choice of the topology used in the project? (Referred topology examples: monopole earth return, monopole metallic return, symmetrical monopole, bipolar earth return, bipolar metallic return, monopoles connected to a bipolar grid)

AC

I

2.2 Which suppliers were used for the converters and the DC cable? Was the main reason for choosing them technical or economic?

AC

I

2.3Please comment on the best practices and lessons learned during the technical design phase of the project. (Stress most important issues and include other aspects not considered in the previous questions. Consider 300-400 words as illustrative maximum length of your description).

AC

I

3. Project planning: Administrative issues

III. Please identify the most challenging administrative aspects for the development of HVDC projects?

PI

AC

I

RS


1

2

3

4

5

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)☐☐☐☐☐

Field studies for the EIA☐☐☐☐☐

Liaising with a large number of authorities☐☐☐☐☐

The complexity and the considerations of procedures and standards☐☐☐☐☐

Involvement of authorities from multiple countries☐☐☐☐☐

International disputes of sea zones (EEZ[footnoteRef:1], international waters...)☐☐☐☐☐ [1: Exclusive Economic Zone]

Preparing and submitting applications☐☐☐☐☐

Public opposition (social acceptance)☐☐☐☐☐

Opposition of other stakeholders☐☐☐☐☐

IV. What were the expected and real durations of the consenting process? ........... / ..........months

AC

PI

I

V. What were the incurred extra costs due to administrative issues (in euros)? ..............k€

AC

I

VI. What were the incurred extra costs due to administrative issues (as a percentage of planned cost)?............%

AC

I

3.1Please comment on the main barriers encountered during the planning and licensing phase of the project and how they were dealt with. What were the lessons learnt for future projects? (Stress most important issues and include other aspects not considered in the previous questions. Consider 300-400 words as illustrative maximum length of your description).

I

AC

PI

RS

4. Project planning: policy and finance

VII. Please identify the challenges of HVDC projects focussing on economic, financial, legal and regulatory aspects?

I

F

PI

AC


1

2

3

4

5

Involvement of public financial institutions☐☐☐☐☐

Involvement of private financial institutions☐☐☐☐☐

Legislative ambiguity☐☐☐☐☐

Regulatory changes☐☐☐☐☐

Liaising with a large number of regulatory bodies☐☐☐☐☐

Existence of renewable generation support schemes☐☐☐☐☐

Existence of priority market access for offshore generation☐☐☐☐☐

Participation in ancillary services markets☐☐☐☐☐

Liability definition and compensation schemes☐☐☐☐☐

Cost/benefit uncertainty☐☐☐☐☐

Fair cost allocation between beneficiaries☐☐☐☐☐

Existence incentives to investment☐☐☐☐☐

4.1Please comment on the best practices and lessons learned on policy and finance issues. (E.g. public-private partnership, evaluation of investment and operation risks, specific financial products or services, authorities support... Consider 300-400 words as illustrative maximum length of your description).

F

I

PI

AC

5. Project planning: Project management

VIII. Please help to identify the main sources of problems for the internal project organization:

AC

I


1

2

3

4

5

None or late involvement of resources in administrative (permitting) issues☐☐☐☐☐

Lack of involvement of different expertise fields☐☐☐☐☐

Insufficient integration of external resources☐☐☐☐☐

Co-operation between partner TSOs☐☐☐☐☐

5.1Please comment on the best practices and lessons learned on project organization. (E.g. creation of specific working groups, strong project management and responsibilities distribution, use of specific methodologies for project management... Consider 300-400 words as illustrative maximum length of your description).

AC

I

6. Construction

IX. Please help to identify the main challenges of the construction phase?

RS

AC

I


1

2

3

4

5

Keeping to schedule☐☐☐☐☐

Achieve interoperability between systems (legacy, multi-vendor...)☐☐☐☐☐

Interfaces between subprojects☐☐☐☐☐

Subcontractors☐☐☐☐☐

Document management☐☐☐☐☐

Contract management☐☐☐☐☐

Cable

Availability of products and services☐☐☐☐☐

Cable routing ☐☐☐☐☐

Cable burial process☐☐☐☐☐

Cable pull-in at offshore converter substation☐☐☐☐☐

Installation logistics☐☐☐☐☐

Safety☐☐☐☐☐

Unfavourable weather conditions causing delays☐☐☐☐☐

Offshore platform structure





Offshore platform topside





Onshore station

Onshore converter substation☐☐☐☐☐

Preparation of landfall site (shore landing)☐☐☐☐☐

X. What were the expected and real durations of the construction phase? .........../...........months

AC

I

6.1Did you suffer any significant delays during the cable routing? What were the causes for these delays and how were they managed?

AC

I

6.2Did you suffer any significant delays during the construction of the converter stations (offshore and onshore)? What were the causes for these delays and how were they managed?

AC

I

6.3Please comment on the best practices and lessons learned regarding the construction of the HVDC link. (E.g. how to deal with cable routing and converter construction, how to integrate legacy and multi-vendor systems... Consider 300-400 words as illustrative maximum length of your description).

I

RS

AC

7. Operation

XI. Please help to identify the main challenges of the operation of HVDC links?

RS

AC

I


1

2

3

4

5

Keep transmission capacity: "n-1" case without power infeed reduction☐☐☐☐☐

Keep transmission capacity: "n-k" case with reduced power infeed☐☐☐☐☐

Maintain required levels of reliability: adequacy☐☐☐☐☐

Maintain required levels of reliability: security☐☐☐☐☐

Maintain stability and controllability: small disturbance ☐☐☐☐☐

Maintain stability and controllability: large disturbance ☐☐☐☐☐

Provide active power control and frequency support☐☐☐☐☐

Provide reactive power control and voltage support☐☐☐☐☐

Provide fault ride through capability☐☐☐☐☐

Meet requirements for control: energization and synchronization☐☐☐☐☐

Meet requirements for control: interaction with AC systems☐☐☐☐☐

Meet requirements for control: damping control☐☐☐☐☐

Meet requirements for protections: priority ranking☐☐☐☐☐

Meet requirements for protections: remote configuration☐☐☐☐☐

Black start capability☐☐☐☐☐

Meet power quality requirements☐☐☐☐☐

Communication and information exchange aspects☐☐☐☐☐

Meet present offshore grid consumption requirements☐☐☐☐☐

Meet future offshore grid consumption requirements☐☐☐☐☐

Interaction between HVDC converter and wind turbine controls☐☐☐☐☐

Maintenance of infrastructure☐☐☐☐☐

XII. What are the operational limits of the link?

AC

I

7.1What is the minimum power that the link can transmit?

7.2What are the voltage limits in which the link operates?

7.3What are the frequency limits in which the link operates?

7.4What are the fault ride-through requirements for the link?

7.5Does the link provide synthetic inertia support? In which range?

XIII. What is the protection strategy used in the link?

I

AC

7.6How are short-circuit faults detected and cleared? What are maximal fault clearance times?

7.7How is the fault location determined in case of a line fault?

7.8Are classifications of fault types important after fault clearance?

XIV. What is the expected/real availability[footnoteRef:2] of the system?........../......... [2: Percentage of time that the system is available without considering planned downtimes]

AC

I

7.9Please comment on the best practices and lessons learned regarding HVDC link operation. (E.g. use of redundancy, protection strategy, short circuit fault detection and location... Consider 300-400 words as illustrative maximum length of your description).

I

AC

RS

8. Future HVDC Grids

XV. In general terms, what improvements will meshed HVDC networks bring with respect to point to point solutions?

I

RS

AC


1

2

3

4

5

Cost reduction☐☐☐☐☐

AC grid support☐☐☐☐☐

Reliability improvement☐☐☐☐☐

Power quality improvement☐☐☐☐☐

Ancillary services for the transmission system☐☐☐☐☐

Others (specify)☐☐☐☐☐

XVI. Which of the following will be important with respect to HVDC grid topology options in future grids?

I

RS

AC


1

2

3

4

5

Radial multi-terminal ☐☐☐☐☐

Meshed multi-terminal☐☐☐☐☐

Protections: DC circuit breakers in all branches☐☐☐☐☐

Protections: DC circuit breakers to split the network in subsystems☐☐☐☐☐

Converter configurations: asymmetric monopole☐☐☐☐☐

Converter configurations: symmetrical monopole☐☐☐☐☐

Converter configurations: bipole☐☐☐☐☐

Converter configurations: mixed☐☐☐☐☐

XVII. Please rate the importance of the following systems in HVDC grids?

RS

AC

I


1

2

3

4

5

Thyristor LCC☐☐☐☐☐

Diode rectifier (DRU) LCC☐☐☐☐☐

VSC☐☐☐☐☐

DC circuit breakers (DCCB)☐☐☐☐☐

DC protection systems☐☐☐☐☐

SCADA systems☐☐☐☐☐

Communications☐☐☐☐☐

Wind turbine converter control☐☐☐☐☐

HVDC converter control☐☐☐☐☐

Master control☐☐☐☐☐

XVIII. Please help to identify the main challenges of HVDC grids in the future?

P

F

PI

RS

AC

I


1

2

3

4

5

Overall network design and construction☐☐☐☐☐

Equipment maturity☐☐☐☐☐

HVDC link integration☐☐☐☐☐

Multi-vendor system operation (including links)☐☐☐☐☐

DC grid control during DC fault☐☐☐☐☐

Administrative aspects☐☐☐☐☐

Financial aspects☐☐☐☐☐

Regulatory aspects☐☐☐☐☐

Standardization aspects☐☐☐☐☐

Environmental impact☐☐☐☐☐

Others (specify)☐☐☐☐☐

8.1To what extent do you consider that the HVDC link (or links) in which your company has been involved would be able to become part of a meshed DC grid? What modifications would be required for it to be connected?

AC

I

8.2What would be the requirements for the interoperability of multi-vendor links? What do you estimate would be the cost of these requirements?

AC

I

8.3Please provide your view and concerns on the development of the future meshed HVDC grids in Europe, and specify the most critical aspects that you consider that should be taken into account for the successful deployment of such grids.

I

P

F

PI

RS

AC

Consider 300-400 words as orientative maximum length of your description.

XIX. When do you think that HVDC networks will become reality? In.............years

PI

RS

AC

I

9. Closing questions

9.1 In general terms, and according to your experience, do HVDC links perform as expected? What would be the main changes you would make if the project (or projects) in which your company was involved were constructed today?

I

AC

9.2The Promotion project will hold a workshop in Madrid on 1st September 2016 to discuss HVDC links and share experiences and lessons learnt from different stakeholders. Would you be interested in attending this event? What are the aspects you would like to be addressed at the workshop?

I

P

F

PI

RS

AC


↗Finding the relevant people in the companies involved in HVDC links for this we need your collaboration

↗Getting them to answer the questionnaire

↗Receiving good answers and not too general ones

Challenges


03.05.16 35


↗Send questionnaire Q2 June

↗Gather answers in Q2 June, July, Q1 August

↗Organize workshops

↗September 1st in Madrid help us find people willing to collaborate↗Germany (hosted by TenneT)↗Scandinavia (to be confirmed)

↗Deliverable by the end of September

Next steps


03.05.16 36


TASK 1.4 – DRAFTING AN INITIAL ROADMAP


↗Description↗A draft roadmap is derived from the available information providing the

key criteria that need to be fulfilled for the advent of the fundamental topologies. This roadmap takes into account the development pace of total installed offshore wind energy capacity, including its location (e.g. near shore, far shore).

↗An interactive presentation tool with user interaction will be used to present this result.

↗The roadmap includes a detailed study considering the economic viability of offshore grids. This study contains a business case investigation on different topologies (on continent level) and uses assumptions of costs of key technology components

↗Task 1.4 will begin this month (not yet really started)↗NB: kind of overlap with WP7 → coordination needed

↗Expectations from the consortium about this draft roadmap?

Initial roadmap for the evacuation of offshore renewable generation

Task 1.4 – Drafting an initial roadmap

03.05.16 38


↗Two main views↗Preparation of a draft roadmap based on intuitive considerations

↗Initial state↗Intuitive view of how the grid could be developed in the future based on available

information↗Analysis after if the intuitive view makes sense, and iteration if not

↗Preparation of a draft roadmap based on system planning methodologies↗Initial state↗“Optimal” development of the grid in the future based on available information and

on a simplified model↗Confirmation that this “optimal” development fulfils all criteria (and iteration if not)



03.05.16 39


↗Pros & cons↗Intuitive considerations: conceptually simpler, could be fastidious to

derive the roadmap, might lead to non-useful conclusions (e.g. economic viability)

↗System planning: conceptually complex, do not reflect necessarily the reality (the electricity sector is not anymore integrated in Europe), but conclusions more general, will prepare the way to WP12



03.05.16 40


WP2 – Grid Topology and ConvertersStatus report


CONTENT

↗Task Status T2.1↗Proceeding next task T2.2

15.06.16 2


Task 2.1


↗Task 2.1: Definition of model parameters, control objectives and operational assumptions for the MOG topologies (M03-12).

↗Task 2.2: Adaption of simulation models for meshed HVDC offshore topologies (M13-18).

↗Task 2.3: Simulative investigation and functionality demonstration of the MOG topology system interoperability by simulation (M19-36).

↗Task 2.4: Define recommendations for minimum requirements on onshore and offshore power systems (M33-42).

Organisation

Task division

15.06.16 4


Definition of component types to be considered (Converter, Wind park types, Lines,…)Definition of a starting topology which helps in the definition of the

above mentioned parameters, objectives and operational assumptionsLater adaption and modification of simulation scenariosDiscussion with WP1 and other WP about assignability for further WP

Discussion about used models (common and open Cigrébenchmark model as an option to compare models)

↗First deliverable: „List of grid topology and component modelspecifications“

Organisation

Definition of model parameters, control objectives and operational assumptions

03.05.16 5


↗Remaining tasks:↗Finalization of the first deliverable 2.1 (Mid of M07)↗Rotation of D2.1 through WP2 consortium and PROMOTioN consortium

(submission to EU: end of M09)↗Further detailing of the specifications for model, operational assumptions

and control objectives (until M12)↗Coordination with other WPs

Organisation

Definition of model parameters, control objectives and operational assumptions

03.05.16 6

WP2 20161 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Task 2.1

Finalization of D2.1 D2.1

Parameter coordination with WP4

Receiving and approving requirement adjustments from WP1


↗AC-Onshore RMS grid (Nordic 32) provided by DTU

↗AC-Onshore EMT in PSCAD grid provided by ABB

↗Cable Data (XLPE) provided by Prysmian

↗Converter Topology:symmetric monopole configuration

Possible Starting Topology WP2

Minimum meshed Offshore Grid

03.05.16 7

1) FB also instead of HB in all scenarios

1)


↗DC voltage +/- 320 kV↗AC voltage 66 kV↗Exchange between 1 & 2

↗-1.5 GW …0GW… +1.5 GW↗E.g Scenario 1

↗Wind infeed at bus 3 & 4

In total 27 scenarios

Possible Starting Topology WP2

Assumptions for Steady State

03.05.16 8

Wind power infeed 3

Win

dpo

wer

in

feed

4 0/0% 0/50% 0/100%

50/0% 50/50% 50/100%

100/0% 100/50% 100/100%


Proceeding next task T2.2


Task 2.2

Adaption of simulation models for the meshed HVDC offshore topologies

15.06.16 10

↗Model input from WP3 in M13 (WTG and aggregated wind parks)↗Set-up of the full parametrized models for Steady State, RMS and

EMT simulations↗Implementation of control strategies↗Input from WP4 concerning protectionWP2 2016 2017

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Task 2.2

Model Input from WP3 MS7

Set-up of the full parametrized models

Discussion and validation in WP

Implementation of control strategies

Input from WP4 concerning protection

Formulation of test cases D2.2

Set-up of models finished MS10


Task 2.2

Simulation models

15.06.16 11

↗Models available ↗Siemens: MOG-Model in Netomac (and ViaVento by subcontractor)↗DTU: VSC-Model in Power Factory↗Tractebel: EUROSTAG↗FGH: Integral↗RWTH: VSC (MMC)-Model in PSCAD and Offshore Grid model in Matlab↗Strathclyde: DC/AC converter models in PSCAD

↗Set-up of the models according to D2.1↗Benchmarking own models with Cigré Benchmark Model


WP 3Wind Turbine – Converter InteractionÖmer Göksu & Nicolaos A. CutululisDTU Wind Energy

15 June 2016, Stockholm, Half-Yearly Meeting, Plenary Session


Person-MonthsDTU 54UPV 42MVOW 32ADWENADWEN GmbH

1616

USTRAT 30SIEMENSSIEMENS WP

1512

FGH 15RWTH AACHEN 9DONG ENERGY 8DNV GLDNV GL UK 6IberdrolaIberdrola Ing 6

ABB 4STATOIL 2Energinet.dk 2

WP3

WP3 Partners

03.05.16 2


1. functional requirements to WPPs, focusing on DRU-HVDC case

2. general control algorithms,focusing on DRU-HVDC case

3. define and demonstrate compliance evaluation proceduresby simulations and tests

demonstrate the interoperability of the WTG and WPP controls

WP3

WP3 Objectives

03.05.16 3


WPP/WT Control Development for DRU-HVDC

WP3

WP3 controls development

03.05.16 4

State of the art with Offshore VSC


↗3.1 Functional requirements to WPPs (M03-M12)↗ DTU

↗3.2 General control algorithms (M09-M24)↗ DTU

↗3.3 Compliance evaluation procedure (M21-M27)↗ FGH

↗3.4 Compliance evaluations based on detailed numerical simulations (M24-M42)

↗ UPV

WP3

WP3 Tasks

03.05.16 5


WP3

Timeline

03.05.16 6

T3.1

T3.2

T3.3

T3.4

Functional requirements to WPPsDecember’16

December’17

June’19

March’18

General control algorithms

Compliance evaluation procedure

Compliance evaluations based on detailed numerical simulations

D3.1

D3.2

September’16

March’16

September’17

December’17

D3.3 & D3.4 & D3.5

D3.6

D3.7 & D3.8

(WP1 & WP2) MS16 MS17 (input from WP1 & WP2 / models to WP2)

MS18 (input to WP8)

MS19 (approval)

MS20 (input to WP11)


• WP3 kick off meeting in Roskilde, with 24 participants17 March 2016

• D3.1 started M05 – deadline M12

• T3.2 (M09-024) views and activities are aligned with teleconference 6 June 2016

• DRU-HVDC concept & WT/WPP control seminar by Siemens & UPV 14 June 2016

WP3

WP3 Activities

03.05.16 7


1. CASE SPECIFICATIONS (RWTH, DTU, Dong Energy Wind Power)- Connection with Meshed HVDC and Interface Points- WPPs cluster controller - WPP external communication

2. OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS (SIEMENS, UPV, FGH, Energinet)- Energization in line with DC link, Start-up, Shut-down, Auto –Synchronous Operation - Operational Voltage and Frequency Ranges, Harmonics

3. SYSTEM STABILITY REQUIREMENTS (MVOW, ADWEN, ABB, DTU)Imposed by Onshore AC Grid- P control and frequency support - POD to Onshore AC Grid Imposed by Offshore Grid- FRT for sym/asym AC faults, DC faults, post-fault recovery

4. MODEL SPECIFICATIONS (DTU, UPV, Siemens, MVOW, ADWEN)- Type 4 WT models, OWF electrical layout, internal protection, communication, aggregation,

parameter set specification

WP3

D3.1 Detailed functional requirements to WPPs

03.05.16 8

ENTSO-E HVDC Grid Code qualitative D1.1 elaborate & quantify: D3.1


↗ Controls for Offshore WPPfor DRU-HVDC and MOG

↗ Compliance procedures for WT and WPP

↗ Generic open models validated against manufacturer blackbox models (&WP8)

↗ Good practice how generic open models be structured WP11

↗ Test cases WP8 results WP3 Model Validation

↗ Recommendations to adapt and extent existing grid codes WP11

WP3

WP3 Outputs

03.05.16 9

COPYRIGHTPROMOTioN – Progress on Meshed HVDC Offshore Transmission Networks MAIL [email protected] WEB www.promotion-offshore.net

The opinions in this presentation are those of the author and do not commit in any way the European Commission

PROJECT COORDINATORDVN GL, Kema Nederland BVUtrechtseweg 310, 6812 AR Arnhem, The NetherlandsFon +31 26 3 56 9111Web www.dnvgl.com/energy

CONTACT

PARTNERSKema Nederland BV, ABB AB, Katholieke UniversiteitLeuven, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, EirGrid plc, SuperGrid Institute, Deutsche WindGuard GmbH, Mitsubishi Electric Europe B.V., Affärsverket Svenska kraftnät, Alstom Grid UK Ltd (Trading as GE Grid Solutions), The UniversityCourt of the University of Aberdeen, Réseau de Transport d‘Électricité, Technische Universiteit Delft, Statoil ASA, TenneT TSO B.V., German OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY Foundation, Siemens AG, Danmarks Tekniske Universitet, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen, Universitat Politècnica de València, Forschungsgemeinschaft für. Elektrische Anlagen und Stromwirtschaft e.V., Dong Energy Wind Power A/S, The Carbon Trust, Tractebel Engineering S.A., European University Institute, Iberdrola Renovables Energía, S.A., European Association of the Electricity Transmission & Distribution Equipment and Services Industry, University of Strathclyde, ADWEN Offshore, S.L., Prysmian, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, MHI Vestas Offshore Wind AS, Energinet.dk, Scottish Hydro Electric Transmission plc

APPENDIX


DISCLAIMER & PARTNERS

03.05.16 10

Ömer Gö[email protected]


Promotion: WP4 reportStatus and road ahead

Dirk Van Hertem, KU LeuvenJune 24, 2016


Promotion: WP4 report – Status and road ahead

Objectives

This WP aims to develop multivendor DC grid protection system. The goal is:

I to develop a set of functional requirements for various DC grids: fromsmall scale to large overlay grids and for a variety of system configurationsand converter topologies

I to analyse a wide range of DC grid protection philosophies on a commonset of metrics

I to identify the best performing methods for the systems under study

I to develop detailed protection methodologies for the selected methods

I to develop configurable multi-purpose HVDC protection IEDs to enabletesting of the methodologies

I to investigate the key influencing parameters of protection systems on thecost-benefit evaluation

Dirk Van Hertem – 2/23



Deliverables

I D4.1: Definition of representative test cases for DC grid protection andfunctional requirements for DC grid protection methodologies (M12)

I D4.2: Report on the broad comparison of protection philosophies for theidentified grid topologies (M18)

I D4.3: Report on performance, interoperability and failure modes ofselected protection methods (M36)

I D4.4: Preparation of protection methodologies for testing in the MTTEenvironment (M30)

I D4.5: Requirements for DC switchgear [joint deliverable with WP5] (M42)

I D4.6: Functional HVDC protection IED including documentation (M36)

I D4.7: Preparation of cost-benefit analysis from a protection point of view(M42)




Milestones

I MS21: Identified list of top candidate protection philosophies for theproposed grid topologies (M18)

I MS22: Protection IED with algorithms sent for testing to WP9 (M30)

I MS23: Determination of protection system performance in terms ofinteroperability and failure modes [input for WP11] (M36)




WP4 worktable

Task LEAD Description Start EndWP4 KUL DC Grid protection system develop-

ment3 42

4.1 Statoil Functional requirements and test sys-tems

3 12

4.2 KUL Screening protection methods 8 204.3 KUL In-depth analysis of selected methods 18 424.4 KTH Multi-purpose programmable IED 22 404.5 SGI CBA analysis 3 42

I Large WP: 363 PM

I 18 partners




WP4: current status

I Kickoff meeting March 9, 2016

I Tasks 4.1 and 4.5 startedI Task 4.1:

I Functional description of protection systemsI Development of test systemsI First telcons and questionnaire

I Task 4.5I Cost-benefit analysis of protection algorithmsI Kickoff in Lyon (May 10)I Focus on work descriptionI Development of a tool




WP4.1: Investigation and evaluation of fault detectionmethods, towards functional requirements

I Continuation through the projectI What are the requirements for protection systems?

I Maximum allowed interruption?I FRT requirements?

I What are good test systems and good testsI Small – medium – largeI Which converter technologiesI Different configurations (grounding, bipolar,. . . )

I Each type of fault:I Pole to pole, pole to ground, high impedance, busbar, backup, fault on

metallic return or earthI Various locations

I Modeling detail at DC and AC sideI AC system: both wind and traditional transmission

I Make a vocabulary?

I Task Leader: Kamran Sharifabadi (Statoil)




WP4.2: Screening analysis for various protection methods fordifferent topologies

I Review study on available concepts and algorithms

I Full listing and classification

I Develop a benchmarking tool/approach for different protection methods

I Comparative study and analysis of different approaches, with differentbreaker technologies

I Robustness of schemes

I Backup approach

I Effect of inductors, OHL/Cable, grounding,. . . Cost elements? ⇒ nrbreakers needed, max operating speed allowed,. . . (input from WP4.5)

I Double check/validation of the analysis?

I Task Leader: Willem Leterme (KU Leuven)




WP4.3: in-depth study of selected protection methods

I Select top ranked candidatesI Do study towards practical implementation

I Including measurements, noise management,. . .

I Multi-vendor application of protection methods

I Standardization of operating ranges (with WP 6)

I Validate functional requirements

I “PSCAD” based studies

I Task Leader: TBD




WP4.4: development of configurable HVDC protection IEDfor multi-purpose and multi-vendor DC grid protection

I Develop programmable IEDs which allow all protection methods of 4.3 tobe implemented

I FPGA based?

I Make sure it has a degree of userfriendlyness.

I To be used in the RTDS of WP9

I Task Leader: Staffan Norrga (KTH)




WP4.5: Preparation of cost-benefit analysis for studiedprotection methods

I Provide initial indicators to evaluation done in 4.2

I Preparation towards delivery to WP12

I Where possible quantitative feedback on OPEX and CAPEX influencers

I Sensitivity analysis/risk analysis regarding failure rate of the protectionsystem

I Possible indicators: nr of breakers, EENS, system losses? Volume ofbreakers offshore,. . .

I Failure probability of the protection system.

I Tool developed by SGI, focussing on the reliability/protection aspects ofHVDC grid protection

I Python based

I Task Leader: Serge Poullain (SGI)




Next meeting WP4.2 kickoff meeting + WP4.1 and WP4.5

I Together with WP5

I 1.5 days

I Early September

I In London, hosted by Mitsubishi Electric

I http://doodle.com/poll/qus9vbgbwtb4efcx


http://doodle.com/poll/qus9vbgbwtb4efcx



Basic flows within WP4

4.1 Functional

requirements + tests

(Statoil)

4.2 Benchmarking

algorithms (KUL)

4.3 Industrializing

protection methods

(KUL)

4.4 IED Development

(KTH)

4.5 Cost benefit

analysis protection

(SGI)

9 Validation in RTDS

(SSE)

11 Roadmap for

HVDC Grids

(TenneT)Dirk Van Hertem – 13/23



Protection from an operator perspective

I How often does the event occur?I What is the impact of the event?

I Affected elementsI DurationI CostsI Damages

I What is acceptable?

I Assure interoperability




Line protection

=

= =

=

Figure: Strategy (a)

I Selective protection of each element

I Least impact on the grid: converters ride through fault

I (Fast) dc breakers at every line end




Line+ protection

=

= =

=

Figure: Strategy (b)

I Converters locally impacted: blocking allowed

I (Fast) breakers at every line end

I Slower relaying compared to strategy (a)




Open Grid

=

= =

=

Figure: Strategy (c)

I All breakers at a bus operate

I (Fast) breakers at every line end, reclosure capability

I Fast fault detection, slower fault identification




Grid-splitting

=

= =

=

Figure: Strategy (d)

I Protection zones encompass more than one line

I Strategically placed breakers

I Fast isolation of faulted zone

I Slower protections within faulted zone




Low-speed protection

=

= =

=

Figure: Strategy (e)

I All elements within HVDC grid affected by the fault

I Converter AC breakers (long re-energization) or converters with blockingcapability (faster re-energization)

I Low speed DC switches/disconnectors needed




Time scales for fault clearing strategies

0.1 1 10 100

Time [ms]

IGBT

blocki

ng

Dcsys

temsta

bility

Diodes

Acsys

temsta

bility

(a) (b),(c) (d),(e)

Un

itN

on

-un

it

Ac

Mechanical

HybridPE

Mechanical

HybridPE

Bre

aker

Pro

tect

ion

I What is the limiting element in the system?I Which component?I Which system element?

I Due to small time frame: matching of fault clearing strategy with type ofbreaker

I Time scales can be influenced by inductors




Protection system decides for actual grid design

I Different components relate to different time scales

I A protection system requires the time scales to be matched

I This has a consequence on the elements that must be installed

I Example: a smaller DC grid connecting a few offshore nodes might bedisconnected for shorter or longer time periods without jeopardizingsystem adequacy (options d or e)

I Example: a pan-European power system might not allow near zerovoltages throughout the grid (options a or b or c?)




Questions?

G

Dirk Van Hertem

[email protected]


COPYRIGHTPROMOTioN – Progress on Meshed HVDC Offshore Transmission Networks MAIL [email protected] WEB www.promotion-offshore.net

The opinions in this presentation are those of the author and do not commit in any way the European Commission

PROJECT COORDINATORDVN GL, Kema Nederland BVUtrechtseweg 310, 6812 AR Arnhem, The NetherlandsFon +31 26 3 56 9111Web www.dnvgl.com/energy

CONTACT

PARTNERS Kema Nederland BV, ABB AB, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, EirGrid plc, SuperGrid Institute, Deutsche WindGuard GmbH, Mitsubishi Electric Europe B.V., Affärsverket Svenska kraftnät, Alstom Grid UK Ltd (Trading as GE Grid Solutions), The University Court of the University of Aberdeen, Réseau de Transport d‘Électricité, Technische Universiteit Delft, Statoil ASA, TenneT TSO B.V., German OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY Foundation, Siemens AG, Danmarks Tekniske Universitet, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen, Universitat Politècnica de València, Forschungsgemeinschaft für. Elektrische Anlagen und Stromwirtschaft e.V., Dong Energy Wind Power A/S, The Carbon Trust, Tractebel Engineering S.A., European University Institute, Iberdrola Renovables Energía, S.A., European Association of the Electricity Transmission & Distribution Equipment and Services Industry, University of Strathclyde, ADWEN Offshore, S.L., Prysmian, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, MHI Vestas Offshore Wind AS, Energinet.dk, Scottish Hydro Electric Transmission plc

APPENDIX


DISCLAIMER & PARTNERS

03.05.16 13

Dirk Van Hertem

KU Leuven/EnergyVille

[email protected]




WP5 Progress Report Nadew Belda, Cornelis Plet Stockholm, 08/06/2016


CONTENT

↗Introduction ↗HVDC DC circuit breaker

models ↗Benchmark system for WP5 ↗Preliminary test results ↗Future plan and discussion

03.05.16 2


↗Modelling of HVDC CB technologies ↗Analysis of fault in multi-terminal DC grid ↗Investigation of interaction of HVDC CB during fault current

interruption ↗Study of various test methods that can be used for HVDC CB ↗Comparison stresses provided by each test circuit ↗Practical realization of test circuits having adequate stress

WP5: Definition of Test Environment for DC CB

Introduction (WP5)

03.05.16 3


HVDC CB Models

Active injection mechanical breaker

03.05.16 4


HVDC CB Models

Hybrid Concept 1

03.05.16 5


HVDC CB Models

Hybrid Concept 2

03.05.16 6

half yearly meeting kth, stockholm, sweden 14-16 …€¦ · 160614 promotion agenda stockholm june...

Documents