ENSURING GRID CODE HARMONIC COMPLIANCE OF WIND

FARMS

D.M. Joseph, P. Haigh and J. McCullagh

Electricity Network Investment

National Grid Electricity Transmission
Warwick, United Kingdom
[email protected]

Keywords: Grid Code Compliance, Harmonics, Network 1 Introduction

Planning, Offshore Wind, Power Quality
Wind farm capacities have traditionally been in the order of
tens of megawatts with relatively small associated cable infras-
Abstract tructure to export the power to the electricity supply network.
However, challenging national renewable energy targets cou-
The prevalence of cabled infrastructure associated with wind pled with advancements in wind farm technology have led to
farms, combined with the surge in power-electronic interfaces a significant increase in the deployment and generating capac-
in wind turbines and reactive power plant, has highlighted the ities of wind farms. This has resulted in a corresponding in-
pervasive nature of harmonics on electricity networks. Insuffi- crease in the extent and operating voltages of the associated ca-
cient consideration is given to the effects of harmonics through bled transmission infrastructure. This presents new challenges
the low prioritisation of power quality in the Front-End En- to the host TO in controlling the levels of harmonic voltage dis-
gineering and Design (FEED) and a lack of awareness of the tortion, not just at the Point of Common Coupling (PCC) but
obligations of the respective parties involved. The resulting de- at substations deeper within the transmission and distribution
signs are incompatible with the requirements of the relevant system.
Grid Codes. This can lead to delays, commercial exposure, re- This paper details three complementary aspects of harmonic
stricted network access and subsequent loss of revenue. compliance on transmission networks:
The obligations of the Transmission Owner (TO), System Op- • Section 2 describes the roles and responsibilities of the
erator (SO), and wind farm developer are discussed with re- parties involved in wind farm developments.
spect to Grid Code requirements and the responsibilities of • Section 3 presents the relevant standards which are appli-
each party in ensuring compliance. The technical aspects of cable to the field of harmonic compliance in order to iden-
assessing harmonic compliance are described in the context of tify what guides and procedures exist to assist network
the design considerations which are made at the various stages owners in ensuring harmonic compliance.
of the project development. These include the shift in reso- • Finally, Section 4 details an exemplary desktop study into
nances within the host network, the modification of existing the affects of a large offshore wind farm on the onshore
harmonic distortion, and the propagation of injected harmon- transmission and distribution system.
ics into the network and through to the EHV, HV and MV
substations. The ensuing challenges associated with ensuring
compliance through filter design are discussed in the context
2 Roles and Responsibilities
of relevant international standards, including UK ER G5/4-1,
The responsibilities for ensuring harmonic compliance are em-
IEEE 519, EN 50160 and IEC 61000-3-6.
bodied in the Codes of the relevant country. Figure 1 shows
The results indicate that shifts in resonances are more problem- the parties involved in the compliance of wind farms in the UK
atic to resolve, compared to the propagation of injected har-
monics: Injected harmonics are readily absorbed through local
filtering and thus the emissions are typically low; in contrast, Grid Code NGET
SPT
the affects of shifts in resonances must be transferred back to SHETL
Licence OFTO
the point of common coupling, resulting in complex local fil- OTSDUW
tering. Early selection by the developer of appropriate trans-
USER SO TO
mission infrastructure and technology can lower the filtering BCA STC
Owner/Developer NGET Licensee
requirement necessary to meet the harmonic specification is-
sued by the host TO.

Figure 1: Contractual Relations between the Main Parties In-

This paper was presented at the 11th Wind Integration Workshop
and published in the workshop’s proceedings. volved in Wind Farm Developments
along with an indication of the contractual mechanisms through its scope is limited as it does not provide guidance on the as-
which harmonic compliance is secured. sessment of connections and is restricted to below 150 kV.
The responsibilities for harmonic compliance in the UK are set The ANSI recognised IEEE 519 is an American national guide
out in the Grid Code[6] and the System Operator Transmis- which gives recommended practices for the management of
sion Owner Code (STC)[7]. The Grid Code applies to Users harmonic voltage and current distortion in electrical power
of the system and to the System Operator, which is National systems[3]. For the allocation of harmonic current distortion
Grid Electricity Transmission plc (NGET). The wind farm de- limits, it provides limits which are then scaled according to the
veloper/owner is a User and the two are bound by a Bilateral ratio of system fault current to user’s rated current. It provides
Connection Agreement (BCA) through which NGET places re- harmonic voltage distortion limits at the PCC; for HV connec-
quirements on the User to comply with the Grid Code. The tions it permits a 1% limit across all harmonics, which is oner-
STC is the mechanism through which the SO places obliga- ous from a system perspective. It describes a general methodol-
tions upon each TO in order to ensure that the Grid Code re- ogy for evaluating new harmonic sources, providing guidance
quirements are met. on modelling techniques, obtaining measurements, simulations
For harmonic compliance, Section K of the STC stipulates that, and mitigation measures. However, it does not provide clarity
when planning and developing its transmission system, a TO to the TO in terms of modelling system impedance and thus
shall ensure that their system complies with the minimum tech- fails to consider the modification of background harmonic dis-
nical, design and operational criteria and performance require- tortion due to resonance effects.
ments set out, or referred to, in the Grid Code Section CC 6.1.5; IEC 61000-3-6 is an international technical report on the as-
this in turn refers to ER G5/4-1. Through this mechanism, sessment of emission limits for the connection of distorting in-
the responsibility for compliance within planning time scales stallations at voltage levels above LV[4]. The distinctive prin-
is transferred to the host TO with ER G5/4-1 established as the ciple behind the report is the allocation of harmonic distortion
standard against which compliance is assessed. limits according to the ratio of rated plant power to the capac-
To ensure compliance with the planning levels set out in ity of the system at the PCC, known as equal rights alloca-
ER G5/4-1, the host TO must perform a harmonic assessment tion. The emission limits depend upon the agreed power of the
based upon the plant details submitted by the User. The Users connectee and the system characteristics. The report provides
are obliged by the Grid Code to submit their plant data to en- compatibility levels for LV and MV connections and indicative
able the host TO to carry out the necessary system studies. planning levels for MV, HV and EHV.
The harmonic assessment results in a harmonic specification to The report outlines three stages of assessment which can be
complement the relevant BCA; the User is obliged to comply used sequentially or in conjunction with one another with vary-
with the specification which might imply a need for harmonic ing degrees of complexity:
filtering at the PCC. It is normal practice for the host TO to • Stage 1 is a simple calculation based on the ratio of agreed
carry out harmonic monitoring prior to and post energisation power to the short-circuit power at the PCC. It deems a
of any wind farm installation. Pre-energisation monitoring is ratio of 0.2% acceptable for connection without further
carried out to establish a baseline of distortion for any subse- examination.
quent investigation into non-compliance on the system. • Stage 2 offers a more detailed examination taking into ac-
As part of the UK offshore transmission regime introduced by count the actual system characteristics when the criteria
OFGEM in 2009, a peculiar scenario has arisen where the wind for a Stage 1 assessment are not met. For HV and EHV
farm developers are responsible for the construction of the as- connections, the assessment calculates the total available
sociated offshore transmission assets, with a view to transfer power capacity at the PCC and then apportions the plan-
them to an OFTO upon completion through a tendering pro- ning levels at the PCC using a general summation princi-
cess. In this instance, the wind farm developer acts as the host ple documented in the standard. It considers the effects
TO in a role referred to as an Offshore Transmission System of resonances due to varying network conditions and thus
Development User Works (OTSDUW) User and is thus bound can lead to PCC limits being set below planning levels.
by the same codes as any other TO. • Stage 3 addresses connections which do not qualify un-
der the Stage 2 criteria but may be permitted access on a
conditional basis after considering factors such as phase
3 Standards
aggregation and operational diversity.
There are numerous harmonic standards available to provide ER G5/4-1 is the national standard in the UK written by the
guidance to SOs, TOs and wind farm developers in the control, Energy Networks Association (ENA)[2]. It provides harmonic
mitigation and monitoring of harmonic distortion. voltage distortion planning levels for the connection of non-
EN 50160 is the prevailing European Standard for supply volt- linear equipment and compatibility levels for operational time
age characteristics of public networks up to 150 kV[1]. It is scales for all voltage levels up to 400 kV. It details three stages
a broad standard dealing with the frequency, magnitude, wave- of assessment with varying degrees of detail to balance the de-
form and symmetry of the line voltages and thus does not solely gree of assessment complexity with the risk of connection:
focus on harmonic distortion. It provides expected harmonic • Stage 1 specifies the maximum size of converters and reg-
voltage distortion levels on LV, MV and HV public supply net- ulators which may be connected at LV without further as-
works up to the 25th harmonic order. From a TO perspective, sessment.
 • Stage 2 facilitates the connection of equipment at 33 kV 9
and below, which is too large for a Stage 1 assessment, 45
through a simple study of the connection using typical 2 15
G G
data. G
• Stage 3 applies to any connection at or above 33 kV, or be- 20 100
yond the scope of a Stage 2 assessment. It is a detailed as-
sessment involving background harmonic measurements
at the PCC and surrounding substations. It requires details 3 8 1
of the connected plant along with harmonic emission pro- A
files and impedances. Detailed modelling and simulations 75 75
6
are indicated resulting in a specification which includes B
characteristic system impedances and harmonic voltage 40
11 7
distortion limits at the PCC. A Stage 3 assessment pro-
G
cedure according to ER G5/4-1 takes into account other C
substations within the supply system to ensure they do not 35 25
exceed planning levels. Similar to IEC 61000-3-6, this G
D
can lead to PCC limits being set below planning levels. 10 14 G
W
The main difference between ER G5/4-1 and IEC 61000-3-6 is G
that ER G5/4-1 does not seek to allocate headroom but rather 40 50
4 12
aims to ensure that the planning levels are not exceeded by
appropriately limiting the connection of non-linear equipment 55
5 13
and installations.

4 Technical Aspects of Compliance Figure 2: System Model Under Investigation

In the initial Front-End Engineering and Design of a wind farm

development, some fundamental design choices will affect the 4.1 Propagation of Emissions
future harmonic compliance. These decisions are often re-
quired before financial closure is obtained and are therefore The wind farm installation, including all compensating plant,
finalised before detailed design has concluded. It is imperative is typically designed to limit the incremental harmonic distor-
that these decisions are considered in the context of harmonic tion at the PCC to below 0.1%. This is specified by the host
Grid Code compliance because failure to do so might result in TO such that the wind farm does not materially affect the net-
delays in the detailed design, procurement and commissioning work by introducing additional harmonic content. Therefore,
of wind farm installations. the emissions are typically low, as documented in Table 1 of
Structural and technological decisions which will affect the the Appendix.
harmonic compliance include: Figure 3 illustrates the percentage voltage Total Harmonic Dis-
• The use of AC or DC export infrastructure between the tortion (THD) evident at each of the remote substations re-
wind farm and the grid, sulting from these wind farm emissions alone. This illustrates
• The use of Voltage-Source or Line-Commutated HVDC
converters where DC infrastructure is used,
0.14
• The export system voltage level, and Remote Substations
• The choice of dynamic compensation equipment. 0.12
PCC

The combination of technology and structure must be evaluated 0.10

Voltage THD [%]

Voltage THD [%]

in light of the following possible consequences:

0.08

• Propagation of the emitted harmonics through the grid; 0.06

• Modification of the background harmonic voltage levels
at the PCC; and 0.04

• Modification of the background harmonic voltage levels 0.02

at remote substations.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
To demonstrate these consequences, consider Figure 2 which
is used to investigate the affects of a 250 MW wind farm con- Substation

nection using 132 kV AC export infrastructure. The model is

derived using typical values based on the transmission system
of England and Wales, the data for which is presented in the Figure 3: Propagation of Wind Farm Harmonics Through the
Appendix. Network
the propagation of harmonics from the wind farm installation
through to the remote substations. The distortion at the PCC is  
0.09% which in itself is below the measurement accuracy of an ΔZ 17 % =
IEC 61000-4-30 Class A power quality monitor[5]. 1 3 4 6 9 12 13 ⎤
⎡
The only transfer which exceeds 0.1% is through to Substa- 1 1178 340 307 331 639 361 361
⎢ 340 340 340 340 340 340 340 ⎥
tion 1. Ordinarily, a significant transfer through to a remote 3 ⎢ ⎥
⎢ ⎥
substation might necessitate a limitation on the incremental 4 ⎢ 307 340 −4 150 436 99 99 ⎥
⎢ ⎥
voltage Individual Harmonic Distortion (IHD) permissible at 6 ⎢ 331 340 150 −14 615 143 143 ⎥ (1)
⎢ ⎥
the PCC. However, since the incremental voltage IHD at the 9 ⎢ 639 340 436 615 −24 173 173 ⎥
⎢ ⎥
PCC is already below 0.1% (given that the THD is below 0.1%) 12 ⎣ 361 340 99 143 173 −5 409 ⎦
no limitation could be accurately and categorically quantified 13 361 340 99 143 173 409 409
for the purposes of compliance assurance.
For the purposes of the modification of the PCC harmonic com-
pliance, inspection of the row indicated by 3 shows a 340%
4.2 Modification of PCC Background Levels increase in the transfer impedances from harmonic injections
emanating from substations marked by # . Using both the
impedance and harmonic current phasors, it can be shown that
Prior to the connection of the wind farm, the other connected this impedance matrix modification at the 17th harmonic or-
users had built the appropriate mitigation measures to limit der corresponds well to the pre- and post-connection levels of
their emissions such that the system harmonics were below 0.32% and 1.11% respectively, as shown in Figure 4.
planning levels. After the wind farm is connected, the system
impedances change such that the transfers of the load harmonic
emissions through the system are modified. 4.3 Modification of Background Levels at Remote
Substations
Figure 4 illustrates the simulated pre- and post-connection volt-
age IHD at the PCC, without the emissions from the wind
Although most assessments of background modification only
farm being considered. This represents the modification of
consider the modification at the PCC, the connection of the
the existing background through the modification of the sys-
wind farm does significantly affect the system impedance ma-
tem impedances.
trix such that the emissions transfer through the system differ-
For all harmonics below the 50th order, the pre-connection sce- ently at each harmonic and to each substation.
nario is compliant with ER G5/4-1; post-connection, the 17th
Figure 5 illustrates the simulated pre- and post-connection IHD
harmonic order is non-compliant at the PCC for which the plan-
at remote Substation 5, without the emissions from the wind
ning level is 0.5%. For the specific modification shown for
farm being considered. From the plot, it is evident that the 5th
h=17, Equation 1 shows the corresponding percentage change
harmonic order is significantly affected at Substation 5, even
in the reduced bus impedance matrix. This relates the PCC to
though the connection was at Substation 3. The increase is
the substations at which harmonic current emissions are known
from 1.2% to 2.7% which exceeds the 2.0% planning level of
(or would be measured on a physical system). From this matrix
ER G5/4-1.
it is possible to inspect which transfers are most affected by the
connection of the wind farm. Equation 2 shows the corresponding percentage change in the
reduced bus impedance matrix. This relates Substation 5 to the

1.6 Pre-Connection Pre-Connection

Post-Connection 2.5 Post-Connection
Voltage Harmonic Distortion [%]

Voltage Harmonic Distortion [%]

1.4
Voltage Harmonic Distortion [%]

Voltage Harmonic Distortion [%]

1.2 2.0

1.0
1.5
0.8

0.6 1.0

0.4
0.5
0.2

0 0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Harmonic Order Harmonic Order

Figure 4: Modification of Background Voltage IHD at the PCC Figure 5: Modification of the Background Voltage IHD at re-
(Substation 3) mote Substation 5
busbars at which harmonic current emissions are known (or the various Substations, and analysing the elements Z5−4 (Yf ),
would be measured on a physical system). Z5−6 (Yf ), Z5−12 (Yf ) and Z5−13 (Yf ), filter designers can op-
timise their designs to limit the remote harmonic voltage dis-
tortion as a function of Yf , according to Equation 3.
 
ΔZ 5 % =

⎡ 1 4 5 6 9 12 13 ⎤

1 235 23 23 38 10 29 29 [ΔV(Yf )] = [Zbus (Yf ) − Zbus ] × [I] (3)
⎢ 23 51 178 58 −16 118 118 ⎥
4 ⎢ ⎥
⎢ ⎥
5 ⎢ 23 178 178 58 −16 118 118 ⎥
⎢ ⎥
6 ⎢ 38 58 58 29 −11 69 69 ⎥ (2) 5 Conclusion
⎢ ⎥
9 ⎢ 10 −16 −16 −11 32 −14 −14 ⎥
⎢ ⎥
12 ⎣ 29 118 118 69 −14 49 193 ⎦
This paper has presented the responsibilities of the System Op-
13 29 118 118 69 −14 193 193
erator (SO), Transmission Owner (TO) and wind farm devel-
oper in ensuring Grid Code harmonic compliance. The Sys-
5
With the exception of ΔZ5−5 , which is ineffective because tem Operator is ultimately responsible for compliance in oper-
there are no emissions at Substation 5, the weighted average ational time scales, but delegates the planning for compliance
(according to load magnitude) of all the remaining values in to the TO through the STC.
the row indicated by 5 is 159% which, when considering that
this simple average does not take into account the impedances’ The TO has a number of guidelines with which to assess com-
phases, corresponds well to the 125% increase shown in Fig- pliance, though in the UK the primary guideline is Engineering
ure 5. Recommendation G5/4-1. This most appropriately provides a
TO with the procedure to assess a connection in light of the
effects illustrated in this paper, namely:
4.4 Filter Design Objectives
• The propagation of harmonics through the network,
• The modification of the background harmonic voltage dis-
Following suitable analysis of the preceding effects relating to
tortion levels at the PCC, and
the connection of a wind farm, filter designers might aim to
• The modification of the background harmonic voltage dis-
either:
tortion levels at remote substations.
• Absorb emitted harmonic content to prevent their propa-
gation through the network, and/or With the increased penetration of wind energy lowering the
• Modify the harmonic driving point impedance at the PCC system fault levels, harmonic impedances will increase as a re-
to reduce the background harmonic voltage levels. sult of the reduction of linear harmonic impedances tradition-
ally provided by synchronous generation. The host TO will
For both of these objectives, designers typically have a defined need to be ever more diligent in assessing harmonic compli-
harmonic profile to target, which is developed in conjunction ance through the network.
with a variety of network harmonic impedances as part of the
host TO’s connection assessment. To this end, the designer is Although the TO is responsible for compliance planning, this
effectively considering the current or voltage division between paper has shown that careful consideration needs to be given
the harmonic filter and the network harmonic impedance under to the harmonic compliance by the developer during the ini-
all operational eventualities. Both objectives, when applied to tial Front-End Engineering and Design phases of a wind farm
the measurement at the PCC, are readily achieved using well development. Appropriate selection of transmission infrastruc-
understood methods. ture and technology can radically affect the modification of
background harmonic levels. Insufficient consideration to these
In contrast, the effect shown in Section 4.3, relating to the mod- effects in the early stages of development, and before financial
ification of remote background harmonic levels, has largely closure, might result in delays and commercial exposure during
been ignored. The full procedure required to address this effect detailed design, procurement and commissioning as the techni-
is beyond the scope of this present paper, though its essence is cal obligations on the developer to meet the host TO’s harmonic
in the investigation of the bus admittance and impedance ma- performance specification become apparent.
trices.
With reference to the example in Section 4.3, the bus admit-
tance matrix for the fifth harmonic order is constructed using Nomenclature
the actual values for each element, and replacing the admit-

tance at the PCC according to Y3−3 = Y3−3 − Yf . The in- LV Low Voltage (Un ≤ 1 kV)

verse Zbus matrix thus includes elements as functions of Yf . MV Medium Voltage (1 kV < Un ≤ 36 kV)
Consider Equation 2 from where it is apparent that the greatest HV High Voltage (36 kV < Un ≤ :
changes are seen at elements Z5−4 , Z5−6 , Z5−12 and Z5−13 ; EN50160 : 150 kV
Z5−5 is ignored because there is no harmonic current injection IEC61000: 230 kV)
at Substation 5. By considering the defined current injection at EHV Extra High Voltage (Un > HV)
References PoC Qty×S Voltages %Z Vector
[MVA] [kV] [P-S/S-T/P-T] Group
[1] CENELEC. Voltage Characteristics of Electricity Supplied SUB3 1×600 400/33 20 YNd1
by Public Distribution Networks, March 2009. EN50160. SUB5 2×240 400/132 20 Dyn0
SUB7 3×120 400/132 20 Dyn0
SUB7 1×420 400/33 20 YNd1
[2] Energy Networks Association. Planning Levels for Har- SUB8 1×750 400/275/13.9 12.1/5.34/6.87 YN0yn0d11
monic Voltage Distortion and the Connection of Non- SUB13 2×120 400/132 20 Dyn0
Linear Equipment to Transmission Systems and Distribu- SUB13 1×240 400/132 20 Dyn0
SUB14 2×600 400/33 20 YNd1
tion Networks in the United Kingdom, October 2005. ER SUB15 1×420 400/33 20 YNd1
G5/4-1. SUB15 2×240 400/132 20 Dyn0
WFB 2×300 400/132/13.9 14/26/47 YN0d0d11
[3] Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers. IEEE WFD 2×240 132/33 12 YNd0
Recommended Practices and Requirements for Harmonic WFD 2×j40 132 - -
Control in Electrical Power Systems, June 1992. IEEE Std
Table 3: Transformer & Reactor Data
519-1992.

[4] International Electrotechnical Commission. Electromag- 

netic Compatibility (EMC) - Part 3-6: Limits – Assessment PoC kV MW MVA Xd
SUB3 33 200 312 0.18
of emission limits for the connection of distorting installa- SUB7 33 250 312 0.18
tions to MV, HV and EHV power systems, February 2008. SUB14 33 260 312 0.18
IEC 61000-3-6 Ed. 2.0. SUB15 33 200 312 0.18

[5] International Electrotechnical Commission. Electromag- Table 4: Generator Data

netic Compatibility (EMC) - Part 4-30: Testing and mea-
surement techniques - Power quality measurement meth-
PoC kV MW MVAr Model
ods, October 2008. IEC 61000-4-30 Ed 2.0. SUB1 275 100 20 Figure 6
SUB4 132 100 20 Figure 6
[6] National Grid Electricity Transmission plc. The Grid SUB6 132 100 20 Figure 6
Code, August 2012. Issue 5 Revision 0. SUB9 132 100 20 Figure 6
SUB12 132 100 20 Figure 6
[7] National Grid Electricity Transmission plc. System SUB13 400 500 50 Fixed R-L
Operator-Transmission Owner Code, August 2012. Sec-
tion K. Table 5: Load Data

Appendix: System Model Data 132 kV or 275 kV 24 MVAr

Order Wind Farm Load Order Wind Farm Load X=14.7%

5 0.0138 2.6785 29 0.0230 0.0394 Grid on 100 MVA 64.5 MW
7 0.0222 2.0000 31 0.0466 0.0476
11 0.0122 0.2379 35 0.0852 0.1220
13 0.0237 0.2063 37 0.0104 0.0923 4.6 MVAr
17 0.0280 0.4325 41 0.0476 0.0515
19 0.0540 0.1065 43 0.0076 0.1533
23 0.0157 0.0200 47 0.0069 0.0822
25 0.0393 0.0196 49 0.0037 0.0381 Figure 6: Harmonic Impedance Model for Loads

Table 1: Harmonic Emissions [% of Rated Current]

Order R [Ω] L [mH] C [uF]
5 0.489 0.200 20.308
Circuit All OHL SUB3-WFA WFB WFC 7 0.498 0.099 20.881
Length Figure 2 0.13 km 12 km 48 km 11 0.529 0.036 22.946
Voltage 400kV 400 kV 132 kV 132 kV 13 0.553 0.024 24.716
R1 0.0174 0.0091 0.0314 0.0664 17 0.633 0.011 31.687
19 0.703 0.007 39.658
X1 j0.2783 j0.2022 j0.1460 j0.1223 23 1.209 0.001 186.158
B1 j4.1200 j72.2600 j75.9900 j64.1100 25 1.653 0.050 32503.633
R0 0.1029 0.0792 0.2200 0.2246 29 2.055 0.650 1854.278
X0 j0.7884 j0.5541 j0.1000 j0.1021 31 3.559 1.182 892.231
B0 j2.4798 j72.2600 j75.9900 j64.1100 35 102.707 2.512 329.297
37 9.814 0.033 2.217
41 0.694 0.011 5.523
Table 2: Circuit Data - R,X:[Ω/km], B:[μS/km] 43 0.335 0.008 7.004
47 0.144 0.005 10.163
49 0.123 0.003 12.166

Table 6: 33 kV Harmonic RLC Impedance of the Wind Farm