Examination of LV grid phenomena by means of PHIL testing

This work is giving an approach of comparison between different commonly used methods to evaluate investigations of generation units in electrical grids. State-of-the-art simulation tools are utilized for pure numerical simulation, while physical laboratory tests are conducted as a data reference an...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Lauss, G., Lehfuss, F., Bletterie, B., Strasser, T., Brundlinger, R.
Format: Tagungsbericht
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This work is giving an approach of comparison between different commonly used methods to evaluate investigations of generation units in electrical grids. State-of-the-art simulation tools are utilized for pure numerical simulation, while physical laboratory tests are conducted as a data reference and validation. Introducing the established Power Hardware in the Loop (PHIL) method, all results are compared one to each other. This composite simulation technique (PHIL) features advantages in terms of setup and simulation flexibility, while its overall validation is up for discussions. This validation is heavily dependent on the quality of the used equipment conjoined with the chosen experiment of interest. Profound know-how in the field of control technique, system theory and measuring method is necessary to obtain clean, useful results out of a valid PHIL simulation. While every method has its advantages in use, time, costs and applicability, it is of importance to know when to use which domain (software or hardware) in order to get the intended answers to arising questions. As a validating case study, a low voltage grid with different grid impedances and two small scale generators connected to two different nodes each is simulated. Thereby, the reactive power control is under examination and the results of the different methods are compared one to each other.
ISSN:1553-572X
DOI:10.1109/IECON.2012.6389586