HALF YEARLY MEETING UNIVERSITAT POLITECNICA de … · UNIVERSITAT POLITECNICA de VALENCIA (UPV),...

© 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 MEETINGUNIVERSITAT POLITECNICA de VALENCIA (UPV), VALENCIA, SPAIN20-21 NOVEMBER 2017

10016054 19-11-2017 HMB

1

AGENDA for PROMOTioN, half-yearly meeting Valencia

Date : Monday 20 November 2017 – Wednesday 22 November 2017

Venue : Red Cube: Building 8E - Block J – 3rd floor

Ciudad Politécnica de la Innovación (CPI)

Universitat Politécnica de València

Camino de Vera s/n.

46022, Valencia

Access : Use the panoramic (cristal) elevators to get to the 3rd floor, then look for Block J (Red).

2

AGENDA

Monday 20 November 2017, Work package meetings

• Sharing of results so far • Discussion of the results • Plan for future work • More info can be provided by the WP leader

Meeting Time location

WP1 WP12

09:00 – 12:30 12:30 – 17:00*

Resuelve - Red Cube Building 8E - Block J – 4th floor

WP2 09:00 – 17:00 Aprende – Red Cube Building 8E - Block J – 4th floor

WP3 09:00 – 16:00 AI2 Meeting Room – Building 8G - Block D - 3rd floor

WP4 and WP9 (combined) 09:00 – 17:00 Assembly Hall- Red Cube Building 8E - Block J – 3rd floor

WP5 and WP6 (combined) 08:00 – 17:00 Debate – Red Cube Building 8E - Block J – 4th floor

WP7 12:00 – 17:00 Descubre – Red Cube Building 8E - Block J – 3rd floor

WP13 - All WP leaders and interested partners Meeting to coordinate the dissemination activities and get feedback on newsworthy developments in the WPs

17:00 – 18:00 Assembly Hall- Red Cube Building 8E - Access J – 3rd floor

Coffee break 10:30-11:00

Red Cube Building 8E - Block J – 3rd floor

Tea break 15:30-16:00 Red Cube Building 8E - Block J – 3rd floor

Lunch (20th and 21st) 13:00 – 14:15

Gauss Restaurant – Building 8B, Block L, 4th floor

Dinner 20:00 Ateneo Mercantil

* Including lunch time Dinner location: Ateneo Mercantil de Valencia – 6th Floor Plaza del Ayuntamiento 18, 46002 http://www.ateneovalencia.es/ Ateneo Mercantil de Valencia in Google Maps

Coffee breaks, lunch and dinner expenses for the work package meetings of 20.11.2017 will be covered and justified by Universitat Politecnica de Valencia.

http://www.ateneovalencia.es/

https://www.google.es/maps/place/Ateneo+Mercantil+de+Valencia/@39.4705233,-0.3760325,17.96z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0xd604f4c98d0e039:0xf28694bb31adc976!8m2!3d39.4709347!4d-0.3762107

3

Teuday 21 November 2017, Plenary meeting, Building 8E

Location: Assembly Hall- Red Cube, Building 8E - Block J – 3rd floor

Presentation of results and deliverables from WPs (15 min presentation 15 min discussion)

09:00 – 09:20 Opening and welcome (UPV, Prof. José E. Capilla Romá, Vice-rector for Research, Innovation and Technology Transfer)

09:20 – 09:30 Introduction (DNV GL)

09:30 – 10:00 WP1 (TenneT)

10:00 – 10:30 WP2 (RWTH)

10:30 – 11:00 Coffee break

11:00 – 11:30 WP3 (DTU)

11:30 – 12:00 WP4 (KUL)

12:00 – 12:30 WP5 (DNV GL)

12:30 - 13:00 WP6 (UniAbdn)

13:00 – 14:00 Lunch - Gauss Restaurant – Building 8B, Block L, 4th floor

14:00 - 14:30 WP7 (TenneT)

14:30 – 15:00 WP13 (SOW)

15:00 – 15:30 Process of Cost Data collection (no data will be presented) (DNV GL)

15:30 – 16:00 Tea break

16:00 – 16:30 Consortium issues1 (DNV GL)

16:30 – 17:45 WP12 (TenneT)

17:45 – 18:00 Day closing

Wednesday 22 November 2017

In the morning are 2 separated activities planned

1) Visit to Morvedre HVDC Station Registration by sending an e-mail with your full name, company and passport number to [email protected] and to [email protected]. Participation on first-come first-served bases as only about 25 people can visit het HVDC station due to safety constraints.

2) 09:00 - 11:00 PMG Meeting (For PMG members only) 11:00 – 12:00 Discussion on the Direction and Outcome of WP12 (PMG) Location: AI2 Meeting Room – Building 8G - Block D - 3rd floor

Coffee breaks and lunch expenses for the plenary meeting of 21.11.2017 will be covered and justified by Universitat Politecnica de Valencia.

1 Withdrawal of Iberdrola, …

mailto:[email protected]



Progress ReportWork Package 1 – Niek de Groot, 21st of November 2017, Valencia


CONTENT

• Work package progress• Obstacles, challenges• Lesson's learnt

21.11.2017 2


Work Package 1 – Progress report - Requirements for Meshed Offshore Grids

Work Package 1 – Objectives & Interfaces

21.11.2017 3

WP1 – Requirements for meshed offshore grids - TenneT

WP2

Grid topology & Converters

RWTH Aachen

WP3

WTG –Converter interaction

DTU

WP4

DC Grid Protection Sytems

KU Leuven

WP5

Test environment

for DCCB

DNV GL

WP6

DCCB performance characterisati

on

UniAberdeen

WP7

Regulation & Financing

TenneT

WP9

Protection system demonstration

SHE Transmission

WP10

HVDC Circuit Breaker demonstration

DNV GL

WP11 – Harmonisation towards standardisation - DTU

WP13

Dissemination

SOW

WP14

Project Management

DNV GL

WP8

Converter technology demonstrator

WP12 - Deployment plan for future European offshore grid - TenneT


Work Package 1 – Progress report – Requirements for Meshed Offshore Grids


21.11.2017 4


WP2


RWTH Aachen

WP3


DTU

WP4


KU Leuven

WP5

Test environment

for DCCB

DNV GL

WP6


on

UniAberdeen

WP7


TenneT

WP9


SHE Transmission

WP10


DNV GL


WP13

Dissemination

SOW

WP14

Project Management

DNV GL

WP8




Work Package 1 Progress report

Work package 1 progress

21.11.2017 5

• WP 1 nearly finished• Finalized 6 out of 7 deliverables,

with EC review confirmation thatthey are of ‘good’ quality

• D1.7 to be finalized in December 2017



Work package 1 progress: D1.7

21.11.2017 6

Task 1.5 Re-evaluate requirements based on work of other packages (M20-M24). Experience with the deployment of meshed offshore grids will be gained within theproject. In Task 1.5 the applicability of the requirements that were set at Task 1.1are re-evaluated. Requirements that had been set at the beginning of the projectmight prove to need adaptation. This task starts at the moment the first intermediateresults become available from WP1 to 7 in M20. When the initial requirements cannotbe met, either a solution within the project is proposed or a report on the conflictingrequirements is made as part of the overall conclusion for the project.

D1.7: Report on the re-evaluation of the requirements based on results by other WPs

• Deliverable 1.7 will contain the final set of requirements as input for the WP's.

• It will both contain the requirements that are (re-) evaluated by task 1.5 and will also include the requirements that are left unchanged from D1.1 and D1.5.

• D1.7 Combines D1.1 and D1.5 into a single, updated, document.



Work package 1 progress: D1.7

21.11.2017 7

We split up the work into two parts• Stream 1: Update of requirements based upon the progress of the WPs

• Functionally finished, most results from WPs will come in the future• Stream 2: Review of System Requirements

• Interoperability• Reliability• Capacity requirement


• Regional development necessary• National connection requirements lead to national (sub-optimal) solutions. The

implication of regional development is that Offshore windfarms in NL waters are not necessarily connected to NL

• Level of desired DC meshing; beneficial in certain areas but not everywhere• From radial to interaction between 2-3 radial links already a big step forward• Benefit increases with multiple borders (to allow for the interconnection benefit),

as does regulatory complexity• Path dependency is key

• Time; what do I do today to enable a development in the future• Technology; How do I keep older technology ready for future integration (voltage

levels, controls)• Vendors; What can I expect from a vendor that supplied an asset 5 years ago• Cost; What am I willing and allowed to invest today to enable future development

(how do I price the benefit of the possible future development)• Space; offshore space is very limited and costly, including cable corridors, J-

tubes, room for cabinets on platforms etc.

Work Package 1 – Progress report

Insights MOG

21.11.2017 8


• Scenario’s• Continually in development, the later you fix a scenario, the more

relevant the scenario is when results are presented• Requirements

• DC-DC requirements a big challenge (chicken-egg), we have not yet come to a good set of requirements in WP1

• Interoperability a challenge• Draft Roadmap

• Incredible complexity for quantitative analysis• Insights from roadmap development heavily dependent upon

assumptions (requirements, costs, timing, onshore integration, national requirements)

• Crystal ball factors• DC CBs• DRU• Cost• But also; P2G, Storage, onshore integration, capacity markets


Obstacles, lesson's learned

21.11.2017 9


• Main way of working:• Facilitate interaction towards a result• Tailor task plan towards characteristics of the task• Due to multiple disciplines in the project discussion about

goals/objectives always required• For most people the PROMOTioN project is only a small part of

their responsibilities• People bring in experience from their core jobs• People need to be facilitated (clear meeting instructions, reminders for

review opportunities, clear working process from the start etc.)• Our ‘bible’ the Grant Agreement is ambiguous and sometimes

inconsistent. General approach in WP1 has been to think in the interest of the project.

• Great learning opportunity for everyone involved!


Lessons Learned from the WP

21.11.2017 10



Conclusions

21.11.2017 11

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 COORDINATORDNV GL Netherlands B.V.Utrechtseweg 310, 6812 AR Arnhem, The NetherlandsTel +31 26 3 56 9111Web www.dnvgl.com/energy

CONTACT

PARTNERSDNV GL Netherlands B.V., ABB AB, KU 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), University of Aberdeen, Réseau de Transport d‘Électricité, Technische UniversiteitDelft, Statoil ASA, TenneT TSO B.V., Stiftung OFFSHORE-WINDENERGIE, Siemens AG, Danmarks TekniskeUniversitet, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische HochschuleAachen, 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

21.11.2017 12


http://www.promotion-offshore.net/

http://www.dnvgl.com/energy

© 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. 21.11.2017 13



Progress ReportWork Package 2 – Cora Petino, 21st of November 2017, Valencia


CONTENT

• Work package progress• Achievements, new insights, etc.• Obstacles, lesson's learnt• Progress towards project objectives• Next steps

22.07.2020 2


Work Package 2 – Progress report – Grid topology and Converters


03.05.16 3


WP2


RWTH Aachen

WP3


DTU

WP4


KU Leuven

WP5

Test environment

for DCCB

DNV GL

WP6


on

UniAberdeen

WP7


TenneT

WP9


SHE Transmission

WP10


DNV GL


WP13

Dissemination

SOW

WP14

Project Management

DNV GL

WP8




Work Package 2 – Progress report – Grid topology and Converters

Work Package Structure and Timeline

4

2.1 Definition of model parameters, control objectives and operational assumptions for the meshed HVDC offshore topologies D 2.1: Grid topology and model specification

2.2 Adaption of simulation models for the meshed HVDC offshore topologies D 2.2: Scenario and test case specification

2.3 Simulative investigation and functionality demonstration of the meshed HVDC offshore topology system interoperability D 2.3: Simulation results and benchmark

2.4 Define recommendations for minimum requirements on onshore and offshore power systems D 2.4: Requirements for grid code extension

Task

2.1

Task

2.3

Task

2.4

March 2016 (M03)

January 2017 (M13)

July 2017 (M19)

September 2018 (M33)January 2019 (M37)

July 2019 (M43)

10 M

18 M

T 2.

2

6 M

22.07.2020



Developed EMT Models

5

AC GridOnshore

ConverterOffshore

ConverterOffshore Wind

VSC Model based on Cigré, prepared

by RWTH (M13)

Cable models based on Prysmian’s

parameters, prepared by RWTH

VSC-Model based on Cigré,

prepared by RWTH (M13)

VSC WPP-Model provided by WP3

(M12)

HVDC Grid Protection system provided by WP 4

(M18)

Model based on D2.1 prepared

by RWTH

Overlaying system controlPrepared by Ustrat

DC CB Model provided by WP 6 (M11)DRU-Model

prepared by UPV & Siemens

based on D2.1

WTG model (encrypted)– example with DRU firmware by

Siemens (M13-18)

DRU WPP-Model provided by WP3

09.01.17


• After validation of models in Task 2.2 first tests on test topology ongoing

• RMS and steady state studies • EMT studies

• Further grid topologies received by WP 1 will be investigated in a later stage


First Tests

03.05.16 6


• EMT modeling• Definition of a converter model parameterization• Adaption and further development of an open source model (Cigré

benchmark model from the B4-57 WG) to PROMOTioN requirements• Input of the developed model to Cigré B4-69 WG

• FGH managed to acquire TYNPD data for steady state simulations

• Not in UCTE format • Reprogramming of input data required• But: can only be distributed if you apply for the base data set at

ENTSO-e


First Achievements

03.05.16 7


• Missing HVDC links in TYNPD dataset discovered

• Adaption of WPP models for connection to VSC systems necessary

• IEC standard 600420 only covers AC connected windfarms

• No existing grid code for the DC side WP 2 will deliver recommendations

• WP 2 will analyse VSC and DRU in meshed offshore grids (DRU via “AC mesh”)


Insights

03.05.16 8


• Analyses within WP 2 have a very wide scope• Result: A variety of simulation models has to be built up

• EMT, RMS, steady state models• Different modeling requirements and detail levels• Difficulties in parameterization and exchange of submodels and

assumptions• Acquired data (e.g. TYNPD data) not in UCTE format requiring

reprogramming of input data


Obstacles, lesson's learnt

03.05.16 9


• Update on requirements to WP 1• Re-evaluation of D1.7 supported

• Models of aggregated WPP by WP 3• Modifications of WPP model by USTRAT ongoing

• Input regarding grid protection schemes by WP 4• Fault clearing sequences received by WP 4• Implementation into WP 2 models and first tests ongoing

• Later: Contributions to standardisation activities in WP 11

• Coordination on input for WP 12


Interactions with other work packages

03.05.16 10


1. ‘To establish interoperability between different technologies and concepts by providing specific technical and operational requirements, behaviour patterns and standardization methods for different technologies ‘

• Investigations on interoperability of different converter types (VSC and DRU) in different grid topologies

• Limits of DRU technology in (meshed) offshore grids• Controllability of a meshed offshore grid


Progress towards project objectives

03.05.16 11


2. ‘To demonstrate different cost-effective key technologies for meshed HVDC offshore grids and to increase their technology readiness level by investigating and overcoming early adopter issues and pitfalls’

• Comprehensive analysis of DRU technology• Comprehensive fault analysis of the offshore system including

windparks• AC onshore/ offshore faults• DC faults



03.05.16 12


3. ‘To facilitating the harmonization of ongoing initiatives, common system interfaces and future standards by actively engaging with working groups and standardization bodies and actively using experience from the demonstrations’

• Collaboration with WP 11 starting in 01/ 2018• Investigations on grid code compliance and grid code

recommendations• Analysis of fault incidents• Protection coordination of AC and DC side• Frequency support by MOG (based on VSC and DRU)• Power oscillation damping• Analysis of transient stability• Impact of temporary power loss over time• Resulting voltage limits from set-point changes in steady state



03.05.16 13


• WP 2 analyzes the entire chain from offshore windparks to AC onshore grid

• Extensive modelling effort enables start of detailed investigations now

• Based on the input from WP 1, WP 2 objectives were checked and further specified with respect to project goals

• Regular feedback and input from WP 12 highly welcomed in order to contribute effectively to roadmap development


Conclusions

03.05.16 14


Transfer of topologies from D1.6 into research questions

Grid Structure

16

StevinAC Grid BE

SizewellAC Grid UK

BE_Project 4Offshore Wind

0.5 GW


0.4 GWBorssele Site IV

Offshore Wind0.35 GW

Borssele Site IIIOffshore Wind

0.33 GW

ZOWPOffshore Wind

0.35 GW

Borssele Site I+IIOffshore Wind, 0.7 GW

East Anglia TWOOffshore Wind, 0.6 GW


0.4 GW

11 km 7 km

54 km –

2x1GW


0.4 GW

65 k

m –

0.8

GW

40 km, 2x1 GW

East Anglia ONE NorthOffshore Wind, 0.5 GW

31 km

BorsseleAC Grid NL

75 k

m –

0.8

GW

2x1

GW

0.8 GW

30.05.17


Transfer of topologies from D1.6 into research questions

Grid Structure

17

BeverwijkAC Grid NL

MaasvlakteAC Grid NL

SizewellAC Grid UK

Norfolk VanguardOffshore Wind, 1.4 GW

East Anglia THREEOffshore Wind, 1.2 GW

IJmuidenOffshore Wind, 150 MW

Norfolk Boreas Offshore Wind, 1.4 GW

Hollandse Kust NoordHolland I+II

Offshore Wind, 0.7 GW

Hollandse Kust ZuidHolland II


Hollandse Kust ZuidHolland I


Hollandse Kust ZuidHolland III


Hollandse KustZuid Holland IV


Hornsea Project ThreeOffshore Wind, 1.4 GW

Dogger Bank –Teesside A


101 km, 3x1 GW

57 km, 3x1 GW

112 km, 3X1 GW

53 km, 1 GW

53 k

m, 1

.2 G

W

86 km, 3x0.8 GW

35 km, 0.8 GW

47 km, 0.8 GW

131 km, 1.2 GW

9 km

10 km

25 km, 0.8 GW126 km, 1.2 GW

85 km, 2x1 GW

WalpoleAC Grid UK

GrimsbyAC Grid UK

Hornsea Project FourOffshore Wind, 1 GW

Triton KnollOffshore Wind, 0.9 GW

102 km, 3x1.2 GW29 km,

2x0.8 GW

68 km, 2x1.2 GW

94 km, 3x1.2 GWHornsea Project Two


Dogger Bank – CreykeBeck B


Dogger Bank – Teesside BOffshore Wind, 1.2 GW

108 km,1.2 GW 123 km,

1.2 GWFeda

AC Grid NO 570 km, 1.2

GW

680 km, 1.2 GW

30.05.17


Progress ReportWork Package 3 – Ömer Göksu, 21st of November 2017, Valencia

WP 3Wind Turbine – Converter Interaction


CONTENT

• Work package progress• Interaction with other work packages• Progress towards project objectives• Next steps

22.07.2020 2


Work Package 3 – Progress report – WTG-Converter Interaction


03.05.16 3


WP2


RWTH Aachen

WP3


DTU

WP4


KU Leuven

WP5

Test environment

for DCCB

DNV GL

WP6


on

UniAberdeen

WP7


TenneT

WP9


SHE Transmission

WP10


DNV GL


WP13

Dissemination

SOW

WP14

Project Management

DNV GL

WP8




WP5

Test environment

for DCCB

DNV GL



03.05.16 4


WP2


RWTH Aachen

WP3


DTU

WP4


KU Leuven

WP6


on

UniAberdeen

WP7


TenneT

WP9


SHE Transmission

WP10


DNV GL


WP13

Dissemination

SOW

WP14

Project Management

DNV GL

WP8






03.05.16 5

1. define functional requirements to OWFs, focusing on DR-HVDC case

2. develop general control algorithms for OWFs,focusing on DR-HVDC case

3. define and apply compliance evaluation procedures for OWFsby simulations

verify interoperability of the WT and OWF controls by simulations

generate grid code recommendations for DR-HVDC connection of OWFs



Work Package 3 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)M23



Task 3.2 General control algorithmsD3.3 Models for control of WT/WPP connected to DR- HVDC

03.05.16 7

- Initializing to steady-state (no start-up, no auxiliary or umbilical) - DR Mode (Diode Rectifier)- ISL Mode (Island Operation)- Normal Operation, Response to Faults, Ancillary Services

Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission Services)

Implementation: Simulink EMT model



Task 3.2 General control algorithmsD3.4 Operation of WPPs connected to DR- HVDC

03.05.16 8

Simulation results during normal operation of DRU-HVDC system (UPV)o HVDC link and off-shore AC grid start-up operationo HVDC link and off-shore AC grid disconnection operationo Intentional islandingo Dynamic voltage controlo Wind farm power control and power trackingo Harmonic analysis / complianceo Response to changes in reactive power sharing commando Response to active power reference commands when connected to external ACo Disconnection / reconnection of a string / OWF

o Disconnection of a string / OWFo Reconnection of a string / OWF

o Operation with reduced number of DRUso Disconnection / reconnection of filters

o Disconnection of filterso Reconnection of filters

o Abnormal frequency support – offshoreo Lower abnormal frequency support – offshoreo Upper abnormal frequency support – offshore




03.05.16 9

Fault ride-through and protection of DRU-HVDC system (USTRAT)o Distributed Control strategy of WT FECs

o Inner current controlo Voltage controlo Active power controlo Reactive power sharing controlo Distributed PLL-based frequency controlo Control strategy of WT converters Connected with DRU-HVDC and umbilical AC cable

o Unintended transmission capability limitationo Onshore grid faultso DC cable faultso Internal DRU faults

o Umbilical AC cable faultso Offshore AC faults

o Symmetrical offshore AC faultso Asymmetrical offshore AC faults




03.05.16 10

Distributed PLL-based Control of Offshore Wind Turbine Connected with Diode-Rectifier [University of Strathclyde]

DC -

DC +

dqabc

-+

ω

dqabc

refPFdU

FqCUω

sdI

0U

dqabc

Cable

Active power control

Voltage controlFrequency

controlReactive power sharing controlCurrent control

PLL

++

+1s

+-

++

-

+-

+-

+

-+

0Q

FqU

FdCUω

sqI+

-

+-

+

+

+-

++

fk qk

0ω

ω

FqU+

θ

+

FdU

FqU

cdU

cqU+

UFUC Is dcI

dcrU

+

WT line-side converter

R L C

0ω

refω

wtP

wtQ

wtP wtQ

WdI

WqI

WdLIω

FdrefU

FqrefU

WdrefI

WqrefI

WqLIω

IW

UFIW

lilp

kk

s+

Uoff

pipp

kk

s+vi

vp

kks

+

vivp

kks

+

iiip

kks

+

iiip

kks

+




03.05.16 11

Onshore grid faults [University of Strathclyde]

String 1 1239iS1

BS2~6

BC2

BC3

DRU 1BB13

BB31

BB21

BB12

BB23

BB32

Filter

Filter

Filter

G

DRU 2

DRU 3

onshoreoffshore

Cab5

Cab1 S1

S2

S3

iS2~6

iC2

iC3

BS1

iBS1

iBS2~6

UDCUDCrec

IDC

LDC

LDC

LDC

LDC

Bus-bar

Cluster 1

Cluster 2

Cluster 3

Cab3

String 2~6 Cab2

Cab4

Cab6

Cab7

F1




03.05.16 12

Response to onshore grid fault [University of Strathclyde]



Task 3.2 General control algorithmsD3.5 Performance of ancillary services provision from

WPPs connected to DR-HVDC

03.05.16 13

Frequency Support and Power Oscillation Damping for the Onshore Power System

Figure 2-2: Overview of the investigated system and control structure



Task 3.2 General control algorithmsD3.5 Performance of ancillary services provision from

WPPs connected to DR-HVDC

03.05.16 14

Figure 3-13: OWF's response to an onshore power oscillation at low wind speed

800

820

840

860

880

P on [M

W]

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1030

35

40

45

50

P [M

W]

T ime, t [s]

BasePOD

Figure 3-15: OWF's response to an onshore power oscillation at high wind speed

700

800

900

1000

Pon

[MW

]

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10360

380

400

420

P [M

W]

T ime, t [s]

BasePOD



Task 3.3 Compliance evaluation procedure

03.05.16 15

Analysis of existing evaluation and model validation procedures for WT and WPP(on regional or national level)

1. IEC 61400-21:2008

2. IEC CDV/FDIS 61400-21-1

3. FGW-TR3 Rev. 24

4. ENA ER G5/4-1

5. IEC 61000-2-4 Class 3

6. ENTSO-E NC(s)

Discussion on necessary enhancements and detailing

a) Assignment of elaboration to partners

first draft on possible procedures(main effort at FGH)


• Evaluation of Requirements WP1 - Task 1.5 – D1.7• DRU (and VSC) connected OWPP requirements

• Identified Challenges with DRU WP 12• Internal deliverable

• Cost Benefit Analysis for DRU WP 12• UPV providing list of components



03.05.16 16


• DRU connected offshore WPP can contribute to ancillary services

• Offshore Wind Turbines can operate as islanded (idling, self-sustaining)

• DRU inherent response to DC link voltage eases onshore AC fault ride-through


Insights

03.05.16 17



• Interoperability between academic control algorithms – Interfacing the models

• Interoperability between industrial control algorithms



03.05.16 18



• Detailed analysis of diode-rectifier HVDC operation via simulations



03.05.16 19



• Report with the compliance test procedures for DR and VSC connected WPPs (D3.6)

• List of requirement recommendations to adapt and extent existing grid codes (D3.8)



03.05.16 20



Next Steps

03.05.16 21

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)

M23




CONTACT


APPENDIX



03.05.16 22





Progress ReportWork Package 4 – Dirk Van Hertem, 21st of November 2017, Valencia


CONTENT


22.07.2020 2


Work Package 4 – Progress report – DC grid protection systems


20.11.2017 3


WP2


RWTH Aachen

WP3


DTU

WP4


KU Leuven

WP5

Test environment

for DCCB

DNV GL

WP6


on

UniAberdeen

WP7


TenneT

WP9


SHE Transmission

WP10


DNV GL


WP13

Dissemination

SOW

WP14

Project Management

DNV GL

WP8





03.05.16 4


WP2


RWTH Aachen

WP3


DTU

WP4


KU Leuven

WP5

Test environment

for DCCB

DNV GL

WP6


on

UniAberdeen

WP7


TenneT

WP9


SHE Transmission

WP10


DNV GL


WP13

Dissemination

SOW

WP14

Project Management

DNV GL

WP8






Work package progress

03.05.16 5


WP1:− Update of the deliverable 1.5 on functional requirements

WP2:− Model development

WP5 and WP6:− Breaker requirements (D4.5)

WP7− CBA methodology

WP9

− Natural transition of our work

WP12:− Barriers identified

− Cost database

Work Package 4 – DC grid protection


03.05.16 6


• DC grid protection can be achieved in several manners• No single solution has been outperforming others • Full risk analysis necessary


Insights

03.05.16 7

Fully selectiveUsing power electronic/hybrid/mechanical DC circuit breakersUsing DC circuit breakers and superconducting fault current limiters

Non-selectiveUsing AC circuit breakersUsing converters with fault blocking capability (e.g., full-bridge)Using DC circuit breakers at the converter terminalsOpen Grid

Partially SelectiveSeveral combinations possible

Split the grid using DC circuit breakers or DC/DC convertersUsing any of the options of non-selective to clear the fault in the de-energized subgrid

Fault clearing strategies can be developed based on the technology and philosophy used

Key components

Technical layout

Primary fault clearing sequence

Backup fault clearing sequence

Protection matrix

Several parameters were used to characterize fault clearing strategies

Protection matrix approach determines converter response foreach type of fault (based on CENELEC TC8X WG6)

Example protection matrix for partially selective strategy

Component count (investment cost)Number of breakersType of convertersFault current limiters

Feasibility of fault clearing strategies considering ac network constraintsBenchmark networks were developed

Feasibility for bipolar/symmetric monopolarAchieved reliability (risk analysis)

Duration and probability of outages

Extensibility (investment cost/feasibility)Can a strategy still be used given changes in the DC/AC grid?

Additionally, simulation studies were carried out in EMT-type software to support the findings

An in-depth analysis was performed for several parameters

Main conclusions: overview table


• Task 4.3: industrialization of protection• 3 main focus areas• Failure mode analysis• Performance criteria • Interoperability• Preparation for testing in MTTE environment

• Task 4.4: • Specification of relay• Specification of test cases• IED platform development

• Task 4.5• Continuation of tool development• Risk analysis being added• DC breaker cost model • CBA support• Cost database support

Ongoing work

03.05.16 14

© 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. 15

Interoperability analysis (general approach)

The aim is to evaluate the interoperability of the main HVDC grid key elements employed for the DC protection.

Five levels have been identified; interoperability among :

Task 4.3

31 Mayl 2017

1. MDCCB forced injection

2. MDCCB VARC injection

3. HDCCB IGBT based

4. HDCCB Thyristor based

1. MMC half bridge

2. MMC Full bridge

3. LCC

1. IEC 618502. Others ?

1. Directional 2. Transient

based ? 3. Others

detection and discrimination algorithms

DC breakers Converters Communication

protocols Algorithms

- Interoperability among protection strategies

Protection strategies


• Quite some progress made• Zedboard as platform selected

• Multiple I/O capabilities• Central or decentral configuration• Communication protocol

• Ethercad or HSR• Searching for developer of the board

WP4.4 IED development

03.05.16 16


On dedicated topics E.g. failure mode analysis

With industry Idea is to get direct contact with wider group of industrial persons

working close to practice

First workshop at RTE (15/11)

Other workshops foreseen:− ABB

− Siemens

− Others? SVK? Mitsubishi? TenneT?

Organisation of different targetted workshops

03.05.16 17


• Hard to choose your battles in a multi-facetted problem• Even harder to get a clear win• …..



03.05.16 18



• Setting up interoperability testing as essential task of T4.3• Paper identifying interoperability issues published• Specified functional requirements for DC protection (D4.1)



03.05.16 19


2. ‘To develop interoperable, reliable and cost-effective technology of protection for meshed HVDC offshore grids and the new type of offshore converter for wind power integration ‘

• Focus is on interoperable protection systems (T4.3)



03.05.16 20



• Preparing to develop IED to be tested in WP9• Evaluating costs and benefits of DC grid protection

methodologies



03.05.16 21


• Second phase of WP4 started• Focus is on:

• Towards industrialized solutions• Interoperability• Failure modes• Performance evaluation

• Developing IED• Cost benefit analysis (deviations due to protection equipment)

• Cross project involvements are important • Trying to get wider approval and feedback through dedicated

industry workshops

Work Package 4 – DC Progress report

Conclusions

03.05.16 22

Publications of WP4 (published)

IET ACDC 2017 Robustness Evaluation of Fast Breaker Failure Backup Protection in Bipolar HVDC Grids; Mian Wang , Willem Leterme , Jef Beerten , Dirk Van Hertem - KU Leuven

IET ACDC 2017 Impact of DC grid contingencies on AC system stability; Mudar Abedrabbo, Mian Wang, Pieter Tielens, Firew ZerihunDejene, Willem Leterme, Jef Beerten, Dirk Van Hertem - KU Leuven; EPE 2017 Europe Warzawa

Transient Behaviour of VSC-HVDC Links with DC Breaker under Fault; Tim Augustin, Ilka Jahn, Staffan Norrga and Hans-Peter Nee - KTH

CIGRE Winnipeg Colloquium and Exhibition 2017; A Review on AC and DC Protection Equipment and Technologies Towards: Multivendor Solution; Mian Wang, M. Abedrabbo, Willem Leterme, Dirk Van HertemKUL, C. Spallarossa, I. Grammatikos, K. Kuroda, S. Oukaili - Mitsubishi Electric

Journal of Modern Power Systems and Clean Energy; Frequency Domain Based DC Fault Analysis for Bipolar HVDC Grids; Mian Wang, Jef Beerten, Dirk Van Hertem

Publications of WP4 (upcoming) Using fault current limiting mode of a hybrid dc circuit breaker;

Mian Wang, Willem Leterme, Jef Beerten, Dirk Van Hertem; DPSP 2018

Impact of Measurement and Communication on Protection of MTDC Grids; I. Jahn, F. Hohn, S. Norrga; DPSP 2018

Fault Control Methods for Multi-Terminal DC Systems based on Converters with Fault Current Controllability; P. Ruffing, C. Brantl, C. Petino, A. Schnettler; IET DSDP 2018

Methodology and indicators for HVDC grid protection strategies comparison; G.D. Freitas, B. Ismail , A. Bertinato, B. Raison , E. Niel, S. Poullain, B. Luscan; IET DSDP 2018

Fault discrimination in HVDC grids with reduced use of HVDC breakers; Willem Leterme, Mian Wang, Dirk Van Hertem; PES GM





CONTACT


APPENDIX



03.05.16 26





Progress ReportWork Package 5 – Cornelis Plet, 21st of November 2017, Valencia


CONTENT


23.11.2017 2


Work Package 5 – Progress report - Test environment for HVDC circuit breakers


03.05.16 3


WP2


RWTH Aachen

WP3


DTU

WP4


KU Leuven

WP5

Test environment

for DCCB

DNV GL

WP6


on

UniAberdeen

WP7


TenneT

WP9


SHE Transmission

WP10


DNV GL


WP13

Dissemination

SOW

WP14

Project Management

DNV GL

WP8




Work Package 5 – Progress report - Test environment for HVDC circuit breakers


03.05.16 4


WP2


RWTH Aachen

WP3


DTU

WP4


KU Leuven

WP5

Test environment

for DCCB

DNV GL

WP6


on

UniAberdeen

WP7


TenneT

WP9


SHE Transmission

WP10


DNV GL


WP13

Dissemination

SOW

WP14

Project Management

DNV GL

WP8





Work package progress

03.05.16 5

5.2 HVDC CB modelling

5.1 HVDC network fault analysis

5.3 HVDC CB stress analysis

5.4 Development of

test requirements

5.5 Development of test procedures

5.6 Development of

test method

5.7Realisation of test environment

WP4

WP11

WP10

WP5 - Test environment for DCCB

WP1

WP4



Terminology & Modularity

03.05.16 6

Series inductor

Residual current breaker

Normal current path

Energy absorption path

Commutation / Auxiliary path

Normal current path



Functional unitBreaker unit

Full-pole DC Circuit Breaker

Normal current path



Component

Module

Control &

Protection

Control & Protection

systemMultiple breaker

units


250 km

150 km

200 km

150 km

150 km

b-A1 b-C2

C-A1 C-C2

b-D1

C-D1

C-D2

b-D2

C-B1

b-B1

HVDC circuit breaker stress analysis

7



1. Normal closed position• Dielectric stress on support

structure• Nominal current heating

2. Fault current commutation• Commutate rising fault current• Bidirectional, different duties

3. Fault current suppression• Absorb energy• Withstand Transient

Interruption Voltage4. Normal open position

• Dielectric stress across terminals and on support structure

Work Package 5 – Progress report – D5.1 – D5.3

HVDC circuit breaker stresses

03.05.16 8

Cu

rren

t &

Vo

ltag

eLin

e v

olt

ag

eEn

erg

y

TIV

No blocking

Blocking

Emax

Vnom

Inom

ISC


• Dielectric testing• Between terminals• Support structure

• Operational testing• Loss / resistance measurement• Temperature rise• Current withstand

• Current interruption testing• Breaking• Re-closing

• Special• Current limiting

Work Package 5 – Progress report – D5.4 & D5.5

HVDC circuit breaker test requirements

03.05.16 9

Standard test circuits

Non-standard test circuits


1. Normal operation• Apply heating – Pre-condition • Supply power to auxiliary

systems2. Current commutation time

• Supply sufficient di/dt• Bidirectional, different duties

3. Fault suppression time• Supply sufficient energy• Withstand Transient Interruption

Voltage4. Post suppression

• Apply DC voltage stress5. Protection of test-circuit and

test object

Work Package 5 – Progress report – D5.6

Current interruption test circuit requirements

03.05.16 10

Cu

rren

t &

Vo

ltag

eLin

e v

olt

ag

eEn

erg

y

TIV

No blocking

Blocking

Emax

Vnom

Inom

ISC



Modular testing – current interruption

03.05.16 11

Series inductor


Normal current path



Normal current path



Normal current path




system

Test object

80 kV

320 kV

Test object

80 kV

Single breaker unit testDouble breaker unit test




03.05.16 12

Series inductor


Normal current path



Normal current path



Normal current path




system

Test object

Normal current path

80 kV

320 kV

Single breaker unit test with full pole component




03.05.16 13

Series inductor


Normal current path

Dummy impedance

Normal current path

Normal current path




system

Test object

Normal current path

80 kV

320 kV

Single breaker unit test with full pole component



Modular testing - Prorating

03.05.16 14

• Current sharing• In series connected modules current, is not

divided

• Voltage grading• Divided by number of series connected modules • Determined by surge arrestors • Full-pole components need to be dielectrically

tested separately

• Energy grading• Divided by number of series connected modules• Margin required determined by small differences

in timing


• Test circuit parameters• Generator frequency• Circuit inductance• Magnitude of source voltage • Making angle


Reduced frequency AC short-circuit generator based test circuit

03.05.16 15



AC short-circuit generator based test circuit

03.05.16 16

TO = HVDC CB

VVA

AC

MB MS PTL

AB1

TSG1

TSG2

TSG3

AB2 Lsyn

DC

• Create current and energy stresses• Isolate test object from the short-circuit generator to protect from over-voltage• Protect HVDC CB from over-current if it fails to clear• Inject DC voltage stress after current suppression• Mimic effect of load current and delay operation of fast breakers• Take measurements



Realizing test duties

03.05.16 17



Implementation with mechanical circuit breaker with active current injection

03.05.16 18

MS

AC

AB1HSMS

VI

CP

LP

MOSA

LMB PT

TO = HVDC CB

AC

Charging source

(synthetic installation)

DS

Rcharging/discharging

ESSG

V V

V

A A

A

Frequency: 16.7 HzInterrupting current: ±2 kA -±16 kABreaker operation time: 8 msVoltage rating: 72.5 kV / 108 kVEnergy dissipation: 1 - 4 MJ

・VI: Vacuum Interrupter ・HSMS: High Speed Making Switch・Cp: Capacitor・Lp: Reactor



Achievements

03.05.16 19

HV and making

vacuum interrupter

switch

Counter current

injection capacitors

Reactors

Energy

absorbing MOSA

Triggered making gap

Auxiliary SF6

AC CB

DCCB Control

Panel



± 16 kA current interruption test results at 16,7 Hz

03.05.16 20

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

-40

-30

-20-16

-10

0

10

time (ms)

cu

rren

t (k

A)

DC current interruption (reverse direction)

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20-150

-125

-100

-75

-50

-25

0

25

50

time (ms)

vo

ltag

e (

kV

)

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20-50

-25

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

time (ms)

vo

ltag

e (

kV

)

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20-10

0

10

16

20

30

40

time (ms)

cu

rren

t (k

A)

DC current interruption (forward direction)

interrupted current

prospective current

interrupted current

Transient interruption voltage (TIV)

Transient interruption voltage (TIV)

prospective current


• HVDC circuit breakers are (for now) bespoke systems with bespoke ratings, test requirements need to be adjusted accordingly

• Direct full-pole HVDC circuit breaker testing is unlikely to be viable modularity based on voltage rating, support structure, or function is necessary

• The same test circuit can be used to test different types of HVDC circuit breakers

• Properties of some HVDC circuit breakers can be exploited to avoid using synthetic voltage source


Insights

03.05.16 21


• Definition of test requirements – project, product• Controlling energy dissipation duty needs calibration due to

unknown surge arrestor characteristics• Timing of mechanical protection functions (auxiliary breaker) can

be challenging when testing HVDC circuit breakers with a short operation time

• Directly testing additional functionality such as reclosing using the proposed method is challenging

• Dealing with limitations of test environment• Modular, multi-part & synthetic testing

• Logistic challenge – Testing in production environment• Build test object on movable platforms• Planning of test shifts

• Instrumentation set-up requires careful attention



03.05.16 22



• Behaviour of different HVDC circuit breaker technologies in HVDC networks during faults have been studied

• Requirements for testing HVDC circuit breakers have been developed for different technologies

• Requirements for test circuits for DC fault current interruption testing have been developed for different technologies



03.05.16 23



• A high power test-circuit for HVDC circuit breakers based on existing test equipment has been developed and demonstrated, obviating the need for new test infrastructure

• By demonstrating the test environment on a real HVDC circuit breaker prototype, experience was gained with implementationand logistics of realistic HVDC circuit breakers



03.05.16 24



• Experience from realizing the test environment will be actively used as input to HVDC circuit breaker testing standardisation initiatives



03.05.16 25


Thank you for your attention!

03.05.16 26



PROJECT COORDINATORDNV GL Netherlands B.V.

Utrechtseweg 310, 6812 AR Arnhem, The NetherlandsTel +31 26 3 56 9111Web www.dnvgl.com/energy

CONTACT


APPENDIX



03.05.16 27





PROgress on Meshed HVDC Offshore Transmission Networks

© T

enne

TTS

O G

mbH

WP6 Characterisation of DC Circuit Breakers

November 2017Dragan Jovcic, University of Aberdeen


CONTENT

© T

enne

TTS

O G

mbH

↗Overview↗WP6.9 Develop standard DC CB verification plan and RTDS

models,↗WP6.3 Develop component-level model for hybrid DC CB,↗WP6.4 Develop component-level model for mechanical DC CB,↗WP6.5 Develop kW-size hardware prototypes for hybrid and

mechanical DC CBs,


PROMOTioN – WP6

Tasks Lead partners timeframe6.1 Develop system-level model for hybrid DC CB UAbdn ABB, SGI, DNV-GL M1-M11

6.2 Develop system-level model for mechanical DC CB DELFT MEU, DNV-GL M1-M11

6.3 Develop component-level and real-time model forhybrid DC CB

UAbdn DELFT, ABB, DNV-GL M18-M30

6.4 Develop component-level and real-time model formechanical DC CB

DELFT MEU, DNV-GL, UAbdn M18-M30

6.5 Develop kW-size hardware prototypes for hybridand mechanical DC CBs

UAbdn ABB, DEFLT, DNV-GL M1-M36

6.6 Demonstrate DC CB failure modes on kw-sizehardware prototypes

UAbdn DELFT M31-M48

6.7 Develop roadmap for hybrid DC CB scaling to EHVDC voltage

UAbdn ABB, DELFT M31-M48

6.8 Develop roadmap for mechanical DC CB scaling toEHV DC voltage

DELFT MEU M31-M48

6.9 Develop standard DC CB verification plan andRTDS models

UAbdn ABB, DELFT, MEU,DNV-GL, SGI, SciBreak

M12-M24


PROMOTioN – WP6

WP6 Deliverables

• D6.1: Offline models for hybrid DC CBs (UniAbdn, M11) - completed • D6.2: Offline models for mechanical DC CBs (TU Delft, M11) – completed • D6.3: Detailed component-level model for hybrid DCCBs (UniAbdn, M30)• D6.4: Detailed component-level model for mechanical DCCBs (TU Delft, M30)• D6.5: Hardware prototypes of DC CBs (200V, 400A) at Uni. laboratory (UniAbdn, M36)• D6.6: Demonstration and report on DC CB failure modes study (UniAbdn, M48)• D6.7: Techno-economic roadmap for hybrid DC CB scaling to EHV DC voltage (UniAbdn, M48)• D6.8: Techno-economic roadmap for mechanical DC CB scaling to EHV voltage (TU Delft, M48)• D6.9: Standard DC CB verification plan and RTDS models (UniAbdn, M24)

WP6 contributes to:• WP4, WP5,WP9, and also WP1, Wp12• Increases understanding and confidence in DC CBs


PROMOTioN – WP6Meetings1. Meeting 1: Arnhem, January 2016, 9 participants in person and 3 over phone2. Meeting 2: Aberdeen, 03 June 2016, 15 Participants3. Meeting 3: Teleconference, 24 November 2016, 8 Participants 4. Meeting 4: Berlin, 29 November 2016, 17 Participants 5. Meeting 5: DELFT, 23rd February 2017, 15 participants 6. Meeting 6: Aberdeen, 31st May 2017, 10 participants,7. Meeting 7: Vasteras, 21st September 2017, 18 participants,8. Meeting 8: Valencia, 20th November 2017, 13 participants,

Technical papers:conferences:1. D Jovcic and M.H. Hedayati “DC Chopper based test circuit for high voltage DC circuit breakers” IET ACDC Power transmission,

Manchester, February 2017, DOI: 10.1049/cp.2017.00302. A. Jamshidifar and D Jovcic “Modelling of Hybrid DC Circuit Breaker Based on Phase-Control Thyristors”, IEEE PES GM, Chicago,

July 2017.3. A. Jamshidifar, D Jovcic and A. Hassanpoor “Control methods for fault current limiting using hybrid HV DC Circuit Breakers”,

CIGRE Paris 2018.4. M.H. Hedayati and D Jovcic “Low Voltage Prototype Design and Testing of Ultra-Fast Disconnector (UFD) for Hybrid HV DC CB”

CIGRE B4 colloquium, Winnipeg 2017, 5. F. P. Page at all. “Mechanical Circuit Breaker Modelling for System-level, Real-time Protection System Simulations” CIGRE B4

colloquium, Winnipeg 2017,6. A. Jamshidifar, D Jovcic. M Popov and S. Liu “ Modelling and Comparison of Common Functionalities of HVDC Circuit Breakers”

submitted to IEEE PES GM 2018.journals:1. A. Jamshidifar and D Jovcic “Design, Modeling and Control of Hybrid DC Circuit Breaker Based on Fast Thyristors”, IEEE

Transactions on power Delivery, October 2017, DOI: 10.1109/TPWRD.2017.27610222. M. Hedayati and D Jovcic “Reducing Peak Current and energy in HVDC CB using disconnector voltage control”, submitted to IEEE

Transactions on power Delivery, November 2017,

https://doi.org/10.1049/cp.2017.0030

https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2017.2761022


PROMOTioN – WP6.9 Develop standard DC CB verification plan and RTDS models

1. Introduction

2. General DC CB model verification plan (including self protection)

3. Verification of IGBT-BASED Hybrid DC CB model

4. Verification of Thyristor based Hybrid DC CB model

5. Verification of mechanical DC CB model

6. Verification of VSC assisted mechanical DC CB model

7. RTDS modelling and verification of IGBT based hybrid DCCB

8. RTDS modelling and verification of mechanical DCCB

Figure 1. Test circuit for DC CB model verification.



RTDS modelling

Figure 2. Verification of RTDS IGBT-based DC CB model.



DC CB from Scibreak

Figure 2. VARC DC CB.



DC CB from Scibreak

Figure 2. Interrupting negative current with VARC DC CB.


PROMOTioN – WP6.3 Component level model of hybrid DC CB

Proactive breaking and fault current limiting• Each cell is 80kV, 2kA,• Surge arrester is 120kV, 6MJ,• Energy balancing between cells is essential,

Entering current limiting mode• On DC CB internal decision (current over 1.5pu)• On external command,

Exiting current limiting mode• On receiving external trip signal -move to open state• On receiving self protection signal (temperature rise) - move to open state,• On clearing fault (voltage rise) – move to closed state

vSA1 iSA1

Cell1

iMB

iLoad

UFDRCB

idc Ldc

Load branchMain breaker branch

LCS

SALCS

vdccb

vSA2 iSA2

Cell2vSA3 iSA3

Cell3vSA4 iSA4

Cell4

Figure 4. IGBT-base hybrid DC CB model.


PROMOTioN – WP6.3 Component level model of hybrid DC CB

Figure 5. Simulation of fault current limiting mode.


Contact separation and arc modelling,Critical current derivative for given current and inductance,

Figure 9. Current interruption modelling.

PROMOTioN – WP6.4 Component level model of mechanical DC CB


Voltage control of Ultrafast disconnector in Hybrid DC CB

Figure 10. Voltage and current with UFD voltage control.

PROMOTioN – WP6.5 Develop kW-size hardware prototypes for hybrid and mechanical DC CBs

Figure 11. Energy with UFD voltage control.

Figure 12. Hardware DC CB and test circuit.


Development of mechanical DC CB PROMOTioN – WP6.5 Develop kW-size hardware prototypes for hybrid and mechanical DC CBs

Figure 11. Sucesfull interruption with mechanical DCCB (Vdc=750V) .


Development of mechanical DC CB PROMOTioN – WP6.5 Develop kW-size hardware prototypes for hybrid and mechanical DC CBs

Figure 11. Failed interruption with mechanical DCCB (Vdc=800V)


PROMOTioN – WP6 achievements

• PSCAD models delivered:

• IGBT hybrid DC CB

• Thyristor hybrid DC CB

• Mechanical DC CB

• VARC mechanical DCCB

• RTDS models (almost delivered),

• IGBT hybrid DC CB

• Mechanical DC CB

• 900V, 500A Demonstrator

• Test circuit

• Hybrid DC CB

• DC CB model common verification plan

• agreed by all WP members,

• enables comparisons between different DC CBs,

• lists universal model requirements for hybrid and mechanical DC CBs.


PROMOTioN – WP6 obstacles

• Modelling on two platforms (PSCAD and RTDS)

• Different surge arrester

• Different cables

• Agreeing on common verification circuit and list of cases:

• Performance requirements

• Functionalities

• Confidentiality

• Multiple manufacturers in WP,

• Fast evolving, new technology,

• Scaling essential performance to 900V, 500A demonstrator

• Circuit Parameters

• Conclussions on performance


PROMOTioN – WP6 interactions with other WPs

• Interaction with WP5:

• Defining model requirements

• Interaction with WP4 :

• Protection requirements and interface,

• Repeated DC CB operation, fault current limiting,

• Input to CBA analysis

• Interaction with WP9

• RTDS models delivered


PROMOTioN – WP6 Progress towards project objectives

1 ‘To establish interoperability between different technologies and concepts by providing

specific technical and operational requirements, behaviour patterns and standardization

methods for different technologies ‘

• DC CB PSCAD models delivered

• DC CB RTDS models (almost delivered),

• 900V, 500A DC CB Demonstrator

• DC CB model common verification plan.


PROMOTioN – WP6 Progress towards project objectives

2. ‘To develop interoperable, reliable and cost-effective technology of protection for meshed

HVDC offshore grids and the new type of offshore converter for wind power integration‘

• DC CB PSCAD models delivered,

• Enhancing DC CB performance,





PROMOTioN – WP6 Progress towards project objectives 5. To facilitating the harmonization of ongoing initiatives, common system interfaces and

future standards by actively engaging with working groups and standardization bodies and actively using experience from the demonstrations’

• DC CB PSCAD models delivered




• Dissemination in professional community (6 conferences and 2 journals)


PROMOTioN – WP6 Characterisation of DC Circuit Breakers

CONCLUSIONS

• Deliverables D6.1 and D6.2 completed in December 2016

• 2 journal papers and 6 conference papers,

• Task 6.9

• Universal DCCB model verification

• agreed by all WP members,

• Task 6.3:

• UFD modeling,

• Current limiting,

• Task 6.4:

• Energy aborber modeling,

• Arc chamber modeling,

• Task 6.5:

• DC CB test circuit

• Hybrid DC CB


WP7 Progress update

North Sea grid: Investment regulation & financingValencia – 21-11-2017


WP7 Approach

03.05.16 2


Step 2: (Intermediate) policy and regulatory measures


• Create legal certainty regarding NSG jurisdiction by means of Treaties

• Develop a tailor made regulatory framework for NSG evolution• Strongly coordinate offshore and onshore grid planning:1) Steering offshore wind siting2) Evaluation of offshore grid responsibility (OFTO; OWF -> TSO?)3) Use of super shallow grid connection charges

• Use of cooperation mechanisms for RES suppport• Consider RES priority operational redispatch• Improve CBA methodology for evaluating infrastructure

investments• Improve framework for cross border cost allocation (CBCA)• Harmonisation of Transmission Tariffs• Provide for sufficient investment incentives

Intermediate report (December 2017)

20.11.17 4


Step 3: Legal implementation

Legal Instruments

International Law

Multilateral Treaty

Draft new or amend

existing?

Bilateral TreatyDraft new or

amend existing?

Non-binding instruments

European Law

DirectivesDraft new or

amend existing?

RegulationsDraft new or

amendexisting?

Decisions

Lower (delegated) law


National Law

ActsDraft new or

amendexisting?

Lower (delegated) types of law

Draft new or amend

existing?


Which level of legislation?

National or larger than

national

• Is there a cross-border/regional/international effect?• Is the solution more effective when dealt with on a

larger-than-national level?

National or EU law

• Does the European Union have competence to deal with this issue?• Is it not (sufficiently) possible to achieve the objective at national

level, either centrally or decentrally?• Is the measure necessary to achieve the objectives mentioned in

the treaty?

EU or international

law • Is it important to have one solution for all states, i.e. EU-states and non-EU states?

• Is it an issue that does not have relevance for non-North Sea coastal states?

• Did the EU make use of its competence under EU law to regulate this issue already?

• Is enforcement important, for example due to the risk of free-riding?

Applied to the offshore gridGovernance and streamlining

• no previous specific legislation yet• Clear cross-border effect• Competence of the EU, subsidiarity and proportionality depend on concrete contents• Enforcement (EU) vs Inclusiveness for non-EU MS: author favours the latter• EU participation appreciated• Conclusion: new mixed partial agreement under international law• Specific attention to offshore grid operation needed, at lower level to allow for flexibility

Asset classification and legal definition unclarity

• Issue on all three levels, international, EU and national law• Caused rather by existence of current provisions than by lack of it• Speed needed, as this issue holds back already current developments (hybrid assets)• International law: amendment of UNCLOS or specific declaration by the countries

concerned: can be included in the agreement above• EU law: amend current law to make clear in which legal framework hybrid assets fall• National law: amend provisions that provide contradictory rules

Other issues

• Decommissioning: is already regulated at IMO level for oil and gas. Include wind as well• Support schemes: cross-border element? Top-down or bottom-up approach. Sensitive

issue, but might solve itself in the coming decades

Intermediate conclusions

INSTRUMENT TO ADDRESS…

Mixed partial agreement (int’l law) to establish formalregional cooperation

Clarification of jurisdiction under international law, governance issues, formalized regional cooperation

in the North Sea, long term vision.

(EU?) Regulation on the Offshore Grid Offshore Grid Operation (definitions, access, network rules)

Amendments to Directives and Regulations Inconsistencies in current rules (priority access / capacity on interconnectors, support schemes

incentives to cooperate)

Amendments to national law Support schemes being limited to one country

IMO / OSPAR Guideline Decommissioning of windfarms and offshore infrastructure


Step 4: Financial framework


A financial framework is needed to kick-start, encourageand accelerate investments in a MOG, provided that anadequate legal and regulatory framework is in place.

The purpose of a financial framework should be:to mobilise capital for investments in a MOG to ensure continuity of investments when unforeseen events such as

financial crisis occur

The Financial Framework for MOG investments should include:a strategic/targeted financing programming coordinated financial and guarantee instrumentsfiscal incentives

Tax incentives (tax exemptions, etc.) Investment incentives (i.e. capital subsidies, grands) Financing incentives (soft loans)

Development of financial framework for the EU

Financial Framework for the EU

20.11.17 11


But: the financial framework alone will not do the job!Need for a level playing field for investors by giving more market spaceResearch so far (sub-task 7.3.1) showed that:

It´s questionable if the current regulatory frameworks will allow any financingpractices for investments in a MOG

there are hardly no investments in a MOG

Further research (sub-task 7.3.2): Risk assessment (analysis of different risk categories) for investing in a MOG from

investor and financier perspective:


Intermediate work

20.11.17 12


Risk categories for the development of a MOG (based on literature)Identification of obstacles, in each risk category, which have an

impact on investment and financing Investigation of three investment schemes in a MOG:

i. Regulated model (R)ii. Merchant model (M)iii. Hybrid model (H)

Assessment of the impact of the obstacle on investment and financingLikelihood of obstacles to occurRisk score for each investment scheme and risk categoryMitigation measuresRecommendations (based also on best practices)


Risk assessment

20.11.17 13



Risk assessment

20.11.17 14

For each investment scheme (R, M, H):

Yes

No

for the MOG kickoff


ECONOMIC FRAMEWORK – BACK UP


“Are the current economic incentives for TSOs suitable for the investment in a meshed offshore grid in the North Seas?”

16


Classifying risks (ACER’s framework1):

1. Risk of cost overrun• Technology uncertainties

2. Risk of time overrun• Multi-jurisdictional environment: permits and consents across

unharmonized rules

3. Risk of stranded asset • Inter-party dependence and asset specificity

4. Risk related to the identification of efficient projects• Greenfield development; Scenario uncertainties

5. Liquidity risk

Meshed Offshore Grids are unique

17


Evaluation of Economic Incentives in National Regulatory Regimes

A twofold analysis:

• Default National Regulatory Regimes

• Dedicated Incentives for Specific Investments

18


Countries included in the Analysis

Why?

97.8% of the installed offshore wind capacity in Europe in 2016

Source:WindEurope

(2016) The European offshore wind industry – key

trends and statistics 2016

1931.05.2017


Default National Regulatory Regimes

20

?

Based on: Glachant, Jean-Michel et al. (2013). Incentives for investments: Comparing EU electricity TSOregulatory regimes. ISBN: 9789290841586. DOI: 10.2870/80768.

X

• Stronger push for investment

• Cost reduction in the long term• Stronger push for

cost reduction• Cost reduction in

the short term



Evaluation of General Regulatory RegimesMethodology proposed by Glachant et al. (2013)1

1 Glachant et al. (2013) Incentives for investments:Comparing EU electricity TSO regulatory regimes

Target?

2231.05.2017


Dedicated incentives for Offshore Investment

23

GB DE NL BE

Increased Remuneration X X

Risk Mitigation Measures

Exemption from default capex efficiency benchmarking X X

Advance timing of cost recognition X X X

Reduced depreciation period X

Following the work by: Keyaerts, N. and Meeus, L. (2015). “The experience of Italy and the US with exceptional regulatory incentives for exceptional electricity transmission investments”


Effect of Dedicated Incentives

24


Conclusions1. Incentives may not be sufficient for investment in a meshed solution

2. Default regulatory frameworks have not moved towards the investment zone

3. The use of dedicated incentives has increased as a way of fostering strategic investments

4. Dedicated incentives can be a solution to ensure sufficient incentives for development of meshed offshore grids


CBCA – A MESHED OFFSHORE GRID PERSPECTIVEHalf-Yearly Meeting Pradyumna Bhagwat, EUI-FSR, Valencia, November 20, 2017


CROSS BORDER COST ALLOCATION

WHY ANALYSE INTERCONNECTOR CBCA

03.05.16 27

Offshore Interconnectors

Connection decisions within

borders by TSO*

Connecting decisions across

borders resemble

interconnectors (special case?)


↗Revisit the significance threshold and the interaction with the connecting Europe Facility

↗Promote the good practice of using market tests to improve the CBCA decision

↗Require a complete CBCA decision

↗Continue to use the results of the CBA to facilitate innovative CBCA decisions

↗Continue coordinating these decisions for strongly interacting project

↗Start including binding commitments in the decisions.


RESEARCH BASIS

2831.05.2017


↗Challenge previous work in an meshed offshore grid context

↗Assess CBCAs of offshore interconnectors

↗Draw conclusions for meshed offshore grids


NEXT STEPS

03.05.16 29


Progress ReportWork Package 12 – Deployment plan for future European offshore gridMichiel de Schepper, 21st of November 2017, Valencia


CONTENT• Work package Structure• General objectives• Main issue• Concepts to Deployment Plan

• Methodology• Quantitative analysis• Steps• Approach

• Way Forward22.07.2020 2


Work Package 12 – Deployment Plan


03.05.16 3


WP2


RWTH Aachen

WP3


DTU

WP4


KU Leuven

WP5

Test environment

for DCCB

DNV GL

WP6


on

UniAberdeen

WP7


TenneT

WP9


SHE Transmission

WP10


DNV GL


WP13

Dissemination

SOW

WP14

Project Management

DNV GL

WP8






03.05.16 4


WP2


RWTH Aachen

WP3


DTU

WP4


KU Leuven

WP5

Test environme

nt for DCCB

DNV GL

WP6


on

UniAberdeen

WP7


TenneT

WP9


SHE Transmission

WP10


DNV GL


WP13

Dissemination

SOW

WP14

Project Management

DNV GL

WP8




• Provide a comprehensive global picture of what will be an offshore grid and the implications on all aspects

• Technical, regulatory, economic financial aspects, as well as governance and market integration

• From this global picture, identification of the barriers hampering the development of an offshore grid

• Summarize the solutions identified by PROMOTioN to alleviate the barriers, and provide recommendations for their implementation (if relevant)

• Identify remaining barriers/problems (not addressed by PROMOTioN, not (fully) solved by PROMOTioN, new barriers/problems that appeared during the project)

General objectives

03.05.16 5


• Some pictures of what an offshore grid could look like were provided in D1.6 (draft roadmap)

• But these pictures were deemed “unrealistic” by several members of the consortium

• Implicit problem: different members do have different “mental pictures” of what an offshore grid will look like

• We need to put on the table these different “mental pictures”, i.e. these different “Concepts”

Main issue: what is an offshore grid?

03.05.16 6


• Necessity to agree on what an offshore grid could look like before actually having a more detailed analysis on the technical feasibility, the economic viability, market integration, etc.

• Different “Concepts” are possible• Four Concepts drafted so far

• Concept 1: Business As Usual • Concept 2: Centralized EU grid based on AC islands• Concept 3: Decentralized Hubs – National policy• Concept 4: Decentralized Hubs – EU policy

• But feedback and other concepts welcome• We need to cover (nearly) all the “mental pictures” of PROMOTioN’s

partners


Concepts

Nov 2, 2017 7


• Preliminary analysis:• Regulatory challenges concerning cross-border trading and the

connection of OWFs;• Operational complexity of the offshore grid;• Flexibility of the offshore grid with respect to the evacuation of wind

generation;• Required level of coordination at EU level; • Investment needs.


Concepts

Nov 2, 2017 8



Concept 1: Business As Usual

Nov 2, 2017 9

AC hubsDC hubs

AC lineDC lineDC interconnection

OWFAC Islands

Characteristics:

• No action for coordinated development

• Countries develop own wind

• No regulatory challanges

• Individual connection of OWF to shore

• Radial connection to land

• Point-to-point interconnectors for E-exchange.



Concept 2: Centralized EU grid based on AC islands

Nov 2, 2017 10

AC hubsDC hubs


OWFAC Islands

Characteristics:

• AC hubs connecting several OWF

• National connection of OWF to Hubs;

• Hubs connected though point-to-point connections HVDC

• Other OWF radial connection to land (nat. policies).

• Limited operational complexity (P2P)

Following step:• Interconnection of the

Hubs, meshing limited


• Regulation: • Basis national waters, national policy• Different grid codes• Different ownership schemes

• Operations• Limited connectivity and therefore flexibility• Control of Hubs• Different operating agencies• Different trading arrangements

• Technical:• Need for HVDC Circuit breakers


Challenges

03.05.16 11



Concept 2: Centralized EU grid based on AC islands

Nov 2, 2017 12



Concept 3: Decentralized Hubs – National policy

Nov 2, 2017 13

AC hubsDC hubs


OWFAC Islands

Characteristics:• National policy

driven Hubs• Limited meshing• P2P connection to

shore

Compared to BaU• Increased security • More flexibility

• Example: Ijmuiden Ver


• Regulation: • Differences in regulation will impact development and degree of

meshing• Regulatory challenges limited as national policy oriented• Existing cross border trading framework can be used• Limited connectivity = limit on flexibility

• Operations• Complexity to increase with increased meshing, control issues can

appear with meshing on DC side

• Technical:• Meshing on HVDC will require DC circuit breakers.


Challenges

03.05.16 14



Concept 4: Decentralized Hubs – EU policy

Nov 2, 2017 15

AC hubsDC hubs


OWFAC Islands

Characteristics:• Joint policy driving

Hubs International Infra

• Not national policy dependent

• Connectivity on AC + DC side

• Connectivity not limited to ownership

• Allows for optimisation

• Highest level of flexibility

• High security + high dependency


• Regulation: • Need for joint legal + regulatory framework – broad scale (WP7 points

indicated earlier today)• Treatment of OWF from country A, flowing to country B

• Operations• Complexity highest with increased meshing.

• Technical:• Readiness of key technology needed from high level of connectivity

• Protection• Control


Challenges

03.05.16 16



Concept evaluation along characteristics –example

03.05.16 17


• A part of the analysis leading to the identification of the barriers and the related solutions for each concept will be (is) performed in strong link with the WPs

• Dedicated CBA and financial analysis performed within WP12 (on the guidelines of WP7) for each concept


From the Concepts to the Deployment Plan

03.05.16 18



Methodology

03.05.16 19


• The DP is NOT a grid development plan indicating the infrastructure to build

• The DP is supposed to be a set of recommendations with concrete insights on different strategies to develop an offshore grid (pros/cons, technical readiness/challenges, indicative costs, indicative benefits, related regulatory frameworks, possible ways to finance such a grid, etc.)

• In order to provide detailed recommendations, fictive offshore grid development plans must be obtained, to allow rough quantitative estimations (e.g. level of CAPEX, OPEX, benefits, etc.)


Dedicated quantitative analysis supporting the Deployment Plan

03.05.16 20


• Assumptions• Costs / Technologies• Onshore grid• Existing and decided offshore infrastructure• Offshore wind farms → fictive but realistic offshore wind scenarios

up to 2050 (including fictive but realistic locations of OWFs)• Philosophies/strategies

• Development of the grid topologies (incl. technical analysis)• CBA• Financial analysis


Steps to provide a quantitative analysis (for each concept)

03.05.16 21


Phase 0 – Analysis of the current state

Phase 1 – Review of existing macro-scenarios up to 2050

Phase 2 – Selection of a couple of macro-scenarios

Phase 3 – Translation of macro-scenarios into specific projects


General approach to derive detailed scenarios

Nov 2, 2017 22



Offshore wind macro-scenarios selected

Nov 2, 2017 23

North SeaScenario [GW] 2000 2010 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

High 0.4 3 27.1 48 65 95 125 160 205

Central 0.4 3 27.1 37 50 67 90 115 150

Low 0.4 3 27.1 30 38 47 58 72 90

Central scenario approximately in line with

ENTSO-E DG and ST

High scenario approximately in line with

ENTSO-E GCA in 2040


• Weighted average approach of different factors (wind speed, water depth, etc.)


From macro-scenarios to specific locations

03.05.16 24


• CBA methodology for offshore grid in development within T7.6• But the analysis of benefits needs a simulation of how the system

will be operated (“quasi-steady-state operation”)• A (large) part of the operation depends on the market model• Different market models possible

• Relevance of a specific market model depends on the “concept”• The market clearing does not rule entirely how the system is operated (e.g.

setpoints of converters in a same market area)• Operation also studied in WP2

• Expected work within T7.6 & WP12• Review and qualitative analysis of the different market models• High-level benefits assessment within WP12 (detailed operation after market

clearing not considered)• Possible focus on the onshore grid of some countries in a more detailed way

within WP12• No detailed quasi-steady-state simulations of the offshore grid foreseen

CBA and market model(s)

03.05.16 25


• Feedback from WPs on Concepts• Feasibility• Barriers & solutions• Impact / implications• Costs / CBA

• Development of scenarios to be analysed for Concept.

• Combination for development of Preliminary Deployment Plan.


Way forward: summary

03.05.16 26



Costs

Nov 2, 2017 27



Practical organization

03.05.16 28

12.2 Optimal Scenario

12.1 Preliminary Analysis

12.3 Preliminary Deployment Plan

WP12 - Deployment plan for future European offshore grid

12.xCost Analysis

12.4 Final Deployment Plan

12.4 Publication Final Deployment Plan




CONTACT


APPENDIX



03.05.16 29





Dissemination Activities Work Package 13PROMOTioN Meeting Valencia, 21st November 2017Stiftung OFFSHORE-WINDENERGIE


• WP Objectives and relation to rest of project• How do results support other work packages• Progress Report, Achievements and Insights• Obstacles and lessons learned• Work planned for next period• Conclusions

21 Nov. 17 2


WP1-12 + 14

13.2: Development and production of

a newsletter

M04-48

13.3:Content

management for website and

intranet

M04-48

13.4: Development of a targeted mailing incl.

regular updates

M06

M12

M18

M24

M30

M36

M42

13.5: Support WP14 in

editing/layout of executive

summary project interim report and

final report

1. Interim report M15

2. Interim report M33

Final report M48

13.6: Production of public reports, papers/articles, presentations

M9-48

13.7: Interaction with stakeholders and other initiative

Industry Reference Group and

Advisory BoardM09-48

Regional/External Events

M06-48

Intermediate and Final

ConferenceM30, M48

13.8: External Communication

activities

M01-48

13.1: Development of project identity

WP Objectives and relation to rest of project

21 Nov. 17 3


Contribution to project objectives

21 Nov. 17 4

How do results support other work packages

WP1

WP2

WP3

WP4

WP5

WP6WP7

WP8

WP9

WP10

WP11

WP12


1. Editorial (DNV GL)POLICY2. North Sea Energy Forum (SOW)3. WindEurope and ENTSO-E Scenarios (SOW)PROMOTioN4. PROMOTioN intermediate conference – 1st announcement (SOW)5. SCiBreak admission (SOW)6. Demo of AC short-circuit generator based test environment for HVDC CB (SOW)7. Conclusions / Results WP1 8. Conclusions / Results WP59. D12.1 Preliminary analysis on key barriers and a related portfolio of solutions (WP12)10. Operation of WPPs connected to DR- HVDC and Performance (WP3)LIST OF PROMOTioN PUBLICATIONS UPCOMING EVENTS

Progress Report, Achievements and Insights

13.2: Newsletter #4 – content

21 Nov. 17 5

© 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. 20 Nov. 17 6


13.3: Website


https://service.projectplace.com/pp/pp.cgi/r1343835294

• Used for stakeholder interaction • Around 1350 recipients• Regularly updated

• Input from project partners required! Please mind the categories and colour code!

Important!If you are unsure how to update a contact send a new (or updated) contact to Sebastian Menze ([email protected])

13.4: Development of a targeted mailing list

21 Nov. 17 7

© TenneT TSO GmbH





262

145

369

16

219

80

256

European Bodies Policy institutions Industry Stakeholders Financing Bodies

Academia & Consulting Others Not Categorised


13.4: Development of a targeted mailing list – categories


0

10

20

30

40

50

2016 2017 2018 2019

Conference papers

Submitted summed Pursued summed

9%36%

-10%

% = gap to benchmark9

Total: 32 conference papers published/planned (Benchmark 50) & 11 journal articles published/planned (Benchmark 25)

• 2016: 3 conference papers 1 journal article• 2017: 19 conference papers 6 journal articles

(18 published 1 indicated) (5 published / 1 indicated)

• 2018: 9 indicated conference papers 4 planned journal articles Publications

0

5

10

15

20

25

2016 2017 2018 2019

Journal articles

Submitted summed Pursued summed

56%

39%

36%

80%

% = gap to benchmark

70%


13.6: Publications – Status November



13.7: Stakeholder Interaction 2017

21 Nov. 17 10

PROMOTioN Side Events & Workshops: Offshore Wind Energy 2017,

London (7 June 2017)

Innogrid2020+, Brussels (26 – 27 June 2017)


Upcoming: 2nd Reference Group Meeting, Brussels (6 December 2017)


6 December 2017 2nd Reference Group meetingright after ENTSO-E annual conference (1:15 pm – 5:00 pm)

in Brussels

• External speakers: Nicole Versijp (EC, NSEC SG2), Claude Turmes (MEP, tbc.)

• PROMOTioN speakers from: WP1/WP12, WP5, WP2/3, WP7

20 Mar. 17 11


13.7.1: Reference Group Meeting


Press briefing: 7 June• during Offshore Wind Energy 2017, London• 4 Journalists Press releases:• 21 September: SCiBreak officially announced as new

PROMOTioN project partner• 19 October: EU project PROMOTioN successfully

demonstrates AC short - circuit generator based test environment for HVDC circuit breakers

Press coverage: Modern Power Systems offshorewind.biz fueladdicts.com processindustrymatch.com renews.biz windkraft-journal.de BRIDGE-H2020 VSC-HVDC newsletter


13.8: Media Work

21 Nov. 17 12


• Press release on test environment: Technical issues are hard to communicate News & key messages should be prepared as simple as possible Use multiplier effect of partner’s communication teams

• Lack of information from partners about planned dissemination activities (e.g. conference presentations)

• Need more input on newsworthy contents from your Task/WP for dissemination activities, e.g.

• Newsletter • Website • Press and media work

Obstacles and lessons learned

What obstacles have been encountered, and what lessons were learned?

21 Nov. 17 13


• Special effort needed: increase number of journal articles

• Gap: 56% to benchmark

• Keep us informed about every publication/presentation

Philipp Kalweit [email protected]

• Make us aware of all relevant events/conferences

• Be aware of publication procedure Dissemination documents

• Ensure open access on PROMOTioN website

Respect this already when submitting papers


Production of public reports, papers/articles, presentations

21 Nov. 17 14




0

2

4

6

8

10

12

WP1 WP2 WP3 WP4 WP5 WP6 WP7 WP8 WP9 WP10 WP11 WP12 general

Publications per WP

conference papers journal articles

PMG 23 October 2017

21

10

19

Number of conference papersPublishedAnnouncedMissing

Lead time

6

5

14

Number of journal articles

PublishedAnnouncedMissing

Lead time

M22 M22

21 Nov. 17

(Benchmark 50) (Benchmark 25)


GA 29.1 Obligation to disseminate results

A beneficiary that intends to disseminate its results must give a advance notice to the other beneficiaries of – unless agreed otherwise – at least 45 days, together with sufficient information on the results it will disseminate.


GA 29.2 Open access to scientific publications

Each beneficiary must ensure open access (free of charge online access for any user) to all peer-reviewed scientific publications relating its results. …

GA 29.3 Open access to research data

…Guidelines for open access: https://service.projectplace.com/pp/pp.cgi/r1471518636

GA 29.6 Consequences of non-compliance

If a beneficiary breaches any of its obligations under this article, the grant may be reduced.

Please observe the Publication Procedure!16

Publications – Procedure

21 Nov. 17




• Stakeholder activities foster knowledge transfer and open new perspectives on the different WP results

• Stakeholder Interaction as a supportive process to mirror project and/or WP results against stakeholder opinion

How do results support other work packages

How do the achieved results support other work packages?

Stakeholder Feedback

Input forWP work

21 Nov. 17 18

Events

Website

Newsletter

Media Work


Work planned for next period

21 Nov. 17 20

13.2: Development and production of a

newsletter

M30

13.3:Content

management for website and intranet

Ongoing

13.4: Development of a targeted mailing

incl. regular updates

M30

13.6: Production of public reports, papers/articles, presentations

Ongoing

13.7: Interaction with stakeholders and

other initiative

Regional/External EventsM06-48

Intermediate Conference

M30


activities

Ongoing

WP1-12 + 14

Ongoing Tasks


Venue: Amsterdam

Date (depending on the venue): FW 23 (4 – 8 June)

Milestones: November 2017: Detailed Milestones and timetable, final decision on venue

December 2017: book the venue

December 2017: Start of promoting the event (early-save the date, website etc.)

January 2018: Draft Programme to approach Speakers

February 2018: Refine Programme

March 2018: Save-The-Date!

April 2018: Finalization of Programme and invitations

13.7.3: Intermediate Conference Work planned for next period


Event Overview 2018

21 Nov. 17 22

Date Event Location20 Feb. Grid meets Renewables conference Brussels, Belgium21 Feb. Planned: PROMOTioN WP7 Workshop Brussels, Belgium

12-15 Mar.IET DPSP 2018 - 14th International Conference on Developments in Power System Protection Belfast, UK

16-19 Apr. IEEE/PES Transmission and Distribution Conference and Exposition (T&D) Denver, USA

16-18 May. Energy Storage World Forum Berlin, Germany

(04-08 Jun.) PROMOTioN Intermediate Conference Amsterdam, NetherlandsJun. European Sustainable Energy Week Brussels, BelgiumJun. Innogrid 2020+ Brussels, Belgium

10-13 Jun. IAEE Groningen International Conference Groningen, Netherlands

11-15 Jun. PSCC 2018 - 20th Power Systems Computation Conference Dublin, Ireland

19-20 Jun. Global Offshore Wind 2018 Manchester, UK

27-29 Jun. Power-Gen Europe Cologne, Germany

03-07 Jul. Energycon 2018 - IEEE International Energy Conference Limassol, Cyprus

26-31 Aug. CIGRE Technical Exhibition Paris, France

25-28 Sep. WindEnergy Hamburg Hamburg, Germany

06-08 Nov. European Utility Week Vienna, Austria



• Press conference on intermediate conference

Possible deliverables for press releases:• D12.1: Preliminary analysis on key technical, financial, economic,

governmental, regulatory and market barriers and a related portfolio of solutions (M24)

• D12.2: Optimal scenario for the development of a future European offshore grid (M30)

Further suggestions welcome!



21 Nov. 17 23


• Gap filler for publications (journal articles / conference papers)

• Improve information flow between coordinator, WP-Leaders and WP13

• Support from all partners and their communications teams

Conclusions

21 Nov. 17 24

Andreas Wagner (Project Management), [email protected]. +49 30 275 95 241,

Philipp Kalweit (Website, Newsletter, Publications), [email protected]. +49 30 275 95 197

Sebastian Menze(Stakeholder management, Events), [email protected] Tel. +49 4451 9515 205

Sebastian Boie (External Communications), [email protected] Tel. +49 30 275 95 198

Stiftung OFFSHORE-WINDENERGIE

[email protected]

Berlin office:Schiffbauerdamm 19D-10117 Berlin

HQ: Oldenburger Str. 65, D-26316 Varel

Thank you for your attention!




CONTACT

PARTNERSDNV GL Netherlands B.V., ABB AB, KU 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), University of Aberdeen, Réseau de Transport d‘Électricité, Technische UniversiteitDelft, Statoil ASA, TenneT TSO B.V., Stiftung OFFSHORE-WINDENERGIE, Siemens AG, Danmarks TekniskeUniversitet, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische HochschuleAachen, Universitat Politècnica de València, SCiBreak AB, Forschungsgemeinschaft für. Elektrische Anlagen und Stromwirtschaft e.V., Ørsted 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, RijksuniversiteitGroningen, MHI Vestas Offshore Wind AS, Energinet.dk, Scottish Hydro Electric Transmission plc, SCiBreak AB

APPENDIX



03.05.16 26

Stiftung OFFSHORE-WINDENERGIE

[email protected]

www.offshore-stiftung.de




MoM - PROMOTioN Consortium Meeting Valencia Nov 20-21.draft.docx 1

PROMOTioN, 5th Consortium Meeting, November 20-21th, 2017

Location: Universitat Politècnica de València, Spain

Day 2, November 21th, Plenary Meeting

Agenda A. Opening and welcome (UPV)

B. Introduction (DNV GL)

C. WP1 (TenneT)

D. WP2 (RWTH)

Coffee break

E. WP3 (DTU)

F. WP4 (KUL)

G. WP5 (DNV GL)

H. WP6 (UniAbdn)

Lunch

I. WP7 (TenneT)

J. WP13 (SOW)

K. Process of Cost Data collection (no data will be presented) (DNV GL)

L. Consortium issues (DNV GL)

M. WP12 (TenneT)

Work packages’ progress is presented and discussed. Questions and discussions are noted in these minutes. All presentations are accessible @ ProjectPlace.

Items covered A. Opening and welcome (UPV)

Opening of the plenary meeting by Ramon Blasco and welcome by professor José E. Capilla Romá.

B. Introduction (DNV GL)

General introduction by Cees Plet.

C. WP1 (TenneT)

Presentation of WPL1 Niek de Groot (see sheets in ProjectPlace).


Cees: HVDC doesn’t end at the beach when arriving from the offshore area; how to deal with? Niek: It is a relevant field but we are not doing grid planning – is beyond our project scope.

Dirk: what about the Chinese way of grid planning? Niek: if you plan in regional way, one finds efficiencies. Topics about owning the grid is not part of WP1 (but of WP7).

Kamran: can you say something on the grid actor in the offshore domain that reaches beyond the competencies of the TSO?

Private entities with extensive offshore experience e.g. Oil&Gas companies may develop and operate an offshore grid to connect the offshore oil & Gas installations with offshore wind generation. TSOs will not have any role in such offshore grid development and operation.

Niek: we called the stakeholder ‘offshore grid operator’ where the domain of the TSO ends.

Andreas: requests for suggestion for recommendation to the EC from WPL1 on the interface of onshore & offshore grid. Niek: yes, but we should also stay within our project scope.

Dragan: Cigre is looking at your topic of WP1. There is parallel work going on in Cigre on the topic WP1 addressed. He is pleased to share materials with Niek.

D. WP2 (RWTH)

Presentation of WPL2 by Cora Petino (see sheets in ProjectPlace).

Karam: the published TYNDP by ENTSO does not include all the private merchant links. Oliver Scheufeld (FGH): links indeed missing NTYDP Niek: new links can be proposed. Oliver: there is a difference in quality between public data set of NTYDP and what is being used by TSO.

Niklas: kind of grid models for DC grid do you foresee you’ll need? Transient, loadflow, asset management models ….? Cora: different issues require different models indeed: two transient models. At least 4 models we use and need.

Pierre: you use of a lot tools in your work. We like to have a benchmark of this….what can we use in the planning phase? For DC-grid is not ready yet that is understood. We need clear understanding of the working of the models and the assumption under it. Cora: this is addressed in previous deliverables of WP2

Andreas: concerning publication…. Do you have recommendations for AC or DC grid codes? Timeline for these? Cora: T2.3 is the longest task, ready end next year. Than fundamental results to be obtained than. Six Journal papers planned.


Ramon: topologies we are studying, it would be good to show the DRU possible to connect to the DC side.

Pierre/Ramon: DRU integrated in the system with 3 terminals. That will be the most complex situations of WP2 to be studied – perhaps somewhat beyond, depending the progress.

Pierre: when do you expect the results? in June 2018 needed Ramon: possible

Michiel de Schepper: how do you address interoperability? Cora: technical interoperability of converter types in different topologies…(see sheet 11).

Andreas: BestPaths meeting 22.11.2017 could be visited by WP2 members – there it is on the agenda. Michiel: it is important to clearly outline your scope about interoperability in WP2 so we know what we’ll have in WP12. Output from other projects may be used. Cora: is aware and wants to use the output efficiently. Paol (DTU): responsible for WP11. There is no quick fix for the interoperability ‘struggle’.

Coffee break

E. WP3 (DTU)

Presentation of W3 by Ömer Goksu (see sheets in ProjectPlace).

Dragan: have you studied the energy damps, DC choppers? Ömer: at the turbines, can use internal chopper Ramon: no need to increase internal chopper Ömer: at DC side, we didn’t concentrate on that in WP3

Mart: happy with developments on DRU in WP3 – encouraged!

F. WP4 (KUL)

WP4 is presented by Dirk Van Hertem (see sheets in ProjectPlace).

Michiel: is there a max of load cut-off in the analysis taken in? Dirk: we will have blackouts – do we have a blackout when a DC Gird is disconnected? What happens than? Depends the region, case by case. Windfarm might be lost. It is taken into account in the analysis.

Karam: when large storage comes into the offshore domain, is your analysis ready taking this into account? Dirk: yes, we need to move towards more risk based analysis

Semere Melake (ABB): I heard you make cost analysis on DC breakers? Dirk: for DC-switchgear, we consider describing the requirements for them in a compact summary

Semere: you are thinking about new relays? Dirk: develop a box that is like a relay. We are not developing a relay with all industrial characteristics.


We will connect to RTDS installation. Staffan: this IED showed it links different parts. Should not be linked to specific manufacturer.

Andreas: looking at the objectives, on interoperability testing, how does it relates to BestPasths project? Dirk: not at all

Michiel: you are not testing on real-life…how does this link to TRL level? Dirk: algorithms to test at high TRL-level, the system can be tested in the range of 5-6-7 (extended lab-presentation). Michiel: how will WP4 manage the expectations of the EC on TRL-level accomplishments? Dirk: responded that we will report the facts and outcomes. Dirk is aware of the expectations of the EC, and they appear to be out of realism to a certain extent.

G. WP5 (DNV GL)

Presentation of WP5 by Cees Plet (see sheets in ProjectPlace).

Ruffing: You mentioned a challenge in choosing right test settings to achieve desired energy stress due to difference in characteristic between PSCAD models and real surge arrestors. Can you explain? WP12. What has been learnt from? Cees: we have to carry out a calibration test to determine actual surge arrestor characteristics. Surge arrestor behavior in DCCB application is of interest, and will be modelled in WP6 and WP10. Results will become available when they are ready.

H. WP6 (UniAbdn)

Presentation of WP6 by Dragan Jovcic (see sheets in ProjectPlace).

Willem Leterme: in WP4 we work on failure modes. Have impact on protection systems. Are the failures you see included in your models? Dragan: our models are developed with the idea of failure modes of the protection systems.

Lunch

I. WP7 (TenneT)

Presentation of WP7 by Daimy Abdoelkariem (see sheets in ProjectPlace).

Ramon: probably, some of the cross-border and regulation issues already exist for on-shore wind farms and connectors and that experience can be of use. Daimy: this is something to carefully follow from case to case.

Cees: the items on page 6, are they all to be solved in WP7? Daimy: we have an initial thinking in the upcoming report.

J. WP13 (SOW)

Presentation of WP13 by Andreas Wagner (see sheets in ProjectPlace).


K. Process of Cost Data collection (no data will be presented) (DNV GL)

Presentation on cost data collection by Yongtao Yang (see sheets in ProjectPlace).

Niek: we should incorporate an approval procedure from the consortium will follow the findings

Antje: literature by SINTEF can be used. YY: we follow that source.

Dirk: need to adopt (un)certainty window on the data

Paul: one by one inquired at the ‘data source organisations’ within the project if they indeed commit to the task generatin cost data for Yongtao’s task force. They did.

Michiel: we are looking for relative comparison numbers

Dirk: who is now already clear on disagreeing our approach >>> no one raised a hand.

Whe: we need also a top-down approach (next to a bottom up approach); and contribution from financial stakeholders

Samer: the utilities / TSO have these perspectives in house.

Tea break

L. Consortium issues (Cees)

Next GA: aligned with the Intermediate Conference (Amsterdam), possibly in Groningen (NL)

Amendment 4: has been effectuated.

Amendment 5: has been verbally approved yesterday by the PO. WP15 is in good shape, WP16 suffered from the delay (depreciation problem) and RWTH has a commitment issue now. Poal: we could request for extension for this WP16; the timing is good for this. Cora: RWTH needs more cetainty.

Dirk: how is this affecting WP15 commitments? Cees: this could be harmed. There is not a deadline.

More amendments are to be avoided – we’ll collect as many issues and solve them pragmatically and save them if needed for a later amendment.

Amendment 6: Iberdola and Adwen indicated they want to withdraw from PROMOTioN. Dirk: let’s keep Adwen in as Siemens Gamesa / ex Siemens Wind Power. Marga: relatively easily solvable from a financial adminstrative point of view. Pierre: Iberdrola in WP2 would assure link to BestPaths. Niek: RTE / Statoil / others … Cees: we can ask Olivier to take this over.

Claudia’s personal letter has been read. And we will send her a picture.


For the next GA meeting we will try to plan from Tuesday to Thursday / Friday – so travel possible on Monday.

M. WP12 (TenneT)

Presentation of WP12 by Michiel de Schepper (see sheets in ProjectPlace).

Dirk: we shouldn’t go too much into focusing on the regulatory side. Our consortium is 90% on the technical topics.

Philip Ruffing: concept 2 is not on the project’s table. We don’t concentrate on this concept 2 in WP2; modelling it will take substantial extra efforts.

Dragan: likes the concept 2 but agrees with Philip that we are not having it in our project work.

Paul Nelson: there are different risk profiles from the kind of investors that would invest in components of the MOG (merchant type/ others …) This is the fundamental discriminator on the concepts.

Dragan: what is the technical differences of 4 concepts – that needs to be done. You might need more technical support.

Date post:	08-Oct-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

HALF YEARLY MEETING UNIVERSITAT POLITECNICA de … · UNIVERSITAT POLITECNICA de VALENCIA (UPV),...

Documents