Topology assessment for 3 + 3 terminal offshore DC grid considering DC fault management

Dragan Jovcic, Mohsen Taherbaneh, J.P. Taisne, S. Nguefeu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)
10 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This study assesses four DC grid topologies where each of the terminals can exchange power with any other terminal
and a DC fault on any DC cable can be isolated. The DC grids are built using the following components: hybrid DC circuit
breakers (CB), mechanical DC CBs, DC/DC converters and DC hubs. The aim is to compare DC fault performance, technical
feasibility/readiness, power transfer security, expansion and costs. The base case for comparison are three separate 300 km
offshore HVDCs connecting 3 1 GW offshore wind farms with three onshore VSC terminals. The rating of DC CBs is
limited by the state of technology and costs which introduces limitation on the length of DC cables (because of
communication delays) and on the DC bus fault level (limiting the number of connecting DC lines). DC/DC converters
inherently block propagation of DC faults and their rating is not sensitive to DC fault level. DC hubs have considerable cost
advantages over multiple DC/DC converters in cases where multiple DC systems are connecting at the same DC station. The
cost assumptions for all major components are analysed, including the offshore platform costs. The study concludes that
overall DC grid costs are similar (within 8%) for all four topologies. Although power security is similar for all technologies,
the expansion options are best with DC/DC converters or DC hubs. DC hubs nevertheless suffer from highest on-state losses.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)221-230
Number of pages10
JournalIET Generation, Transmission & Distribution
Volume9
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2015

Fingerprint

DC-DC converters
Topology
Costs
Cables
Offshore wind farms

Cite this

Topology assessment for 3 + 3 terminal offshore DC grid considering DC fault management. / Jovcic, Dragan; Taherbaneh, Mohsen; Taisne, J.P.; Nguefeu, S.

In: IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution, Vol. 9, No. 3, 02.2015, p. 221-230.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{946ba1b995c04b5587ea4589b271a3af,
title = "Topology assessment for 3 + 3 terminal offshore DC grid considering DC fault management",
abstract = "This study assesses four DC grid topologies where each of the terminals can exchange power with any other terminaland a DC fault on any DC cable can be isolated. The DC grids are built using the following components: hybrid DC circuitbreakers (CB), mechanical DC CBs, DC/DC converters and DC hubs. The aim is to compare DC fault performance, technicalfeasibility/readiness, power transfer security, expansion and costs. The base case for comparison are three separate 300 kmoffshore HVDCs connecting 3 1 GW offshore wind farms with three onshore VSC terminals. The rating of DC CBs islimited by the state of technology and costs which introduces limitation on the length of DC cables (because ofcommunication delays) and on the DC bus fault level (limiting the number of connecting DC lines). DC/DC convertersinherently block propagation of DC faults and their rating is not sensitive to DC fault level. DC hubs have considerable costadvantages over multiple DC/DC converters in cases where multiple DC systems are connecting at the same DC station. Thecost assumptions for all major components are analysed, including the offshore platform costs. The study concludes thatoverall DC grid costs are similar (within 8{\%}) for all four topologies. Although power security is similar for all technologies,the expansion options are best with DC/DC converters or DC hubs. DC hubs nevertheless suffer from highest on-state losses.",
author = "Dragan Jovcic and Mohsen Taherbaneh and J.P. Taisne and S. Nguefeu",
year = "2015",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1049/iet-gtd.2013.0838",
language = "English",
volume = "9",
pages = "221--230",
journal = "IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution",
issn = "1751-8687",
publisher = "Institution of Engineering and Technology",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Topology assessment for 3 + 3 terminal offshore DC grid considering DC fault management

AU - Jovcic, Dragan

AU - Taherbaneh, Mohsen

AU - Taisne, J.P.

AU - Nguefeu, S.

PY - 2015/2

Y1 - 2015/2

N2 - This study assesses four DC grid topologies where each of the terminals can exchange power with any other terminaland a DC fault on any DC cable can be isolated. The DC grids are built using the following components: hybrid DC circuitbreakers (CB), mechanical DC CBs, DC/DC converters and DC hubs. The aim is to compare DC fault performance, technicalfeasibility/readiness, power transfer security, expansion and costs. The base case for comparison are three separate 300 kmoffshore HVDCs connecting 3 1 GW offshore wind farms with three onshore VSC terminals. The rating of DC CBs islimited by the state of technology and costs which introduces limitation on the length of DC cables (because ofcommunication delays) and on the DC bus fault level (limiting the number of connecting DC lines). DC/DC convertersinherently block propagation of DC faults and their rating is not sensitive to DC fault level. DC hubs have considerable costadvantages over multiple DC/DC converters in cases where multiple DC systems are connecting at the same DC station. Thecost assumptions for all major components are analysed, including the offshore platform costs. The study concludes thatoverall DC grid costs are similar (within 8%) for all four topologies. Although power security is similar for all technologies,the expansion options are best with DC/DC converters or DC hubs. DC hubs nevertheless suffer from highest on-state losses.

AB - This study assesses four DC grid topologies where each of the terminals can exchange power with any other terminaland a DC fault on any DC cable can be isolated. The DC grids are built using the following components: hybrid DC circuitbreakers (CB), mechanical DC CBs, DC/DC converters and DC hubs. The aim is to compare DC fault performance, technicalfeasibility/readiness, power transfer security, expansion and costs. The base case for comparison are three separate 300 kmoffshore HVDCs connecting 3 1 GW offshore wind farms with three onshore VSC terminals. The rating of DC CBs islimited by the state of technology and costs which introduces limitation on the length of DC cables (because ofcommunication delays) and on the DC bus fault level (limiting the number of connecting DC lines). DC/DC convertersinherently block propagation of DC faults and their rating is not sensitive to DC fault level. DC hubs have considerable costadvantages over multiple DC/DC converters in cases where multiple DC systems are connecting at the same DC station. Thecost assumptions for all major components are analysed, including the offshore platform costs. The study concludes thatoverall DC grid costs are similar (within 8%) for all four topologies. Although power security is similar for all technologies,the expansion options are best with DC/DC converters or DC hubs. DC hubs nevertheless suffer from highest on-state losses.

U2 - 10.1049/iet-gtd.2013.0838

DO - 10.1049/iet-gtd.2013.0838

M3 - Article

VL - 9

SP - 221

EP - 230

JO - IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution

JF - IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution

SN - 1751-8687

IS - 3

ER -