MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319164985 · doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2014.2321287

Analysis and Impacts of Implementing Droop Control in DFIG-Based Wind Turbines on Microgrid/Weak-Grid Stability

2014· article· en· W2319164985 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Systems · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrogrid Control and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVoltage droopMicrogridWind powerControl theory (sociology)Controller (irrigation)Induction generatorAutomatic frequency controlTurbineAC powerEngineeringElectric power systemPower (physics)Control engineeringComputer scienceRenewable energyVoltageVoltage regulatorControl (management)Electrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wind energy is going to be a significant part of electric energy generation in the very near future. However, in addition to its intermittent nature that could lead to major difficulties for power system reliability and stability, the conventional control applied to wind turbines and their generators, usually doubly-fed induction generators (DFIGs), does not allow them to participate in frequency regulation, whether short or long term. Moreover, the use of wind generators for autonomous frequency regulation is becoming an essential objective in power grids with reduced inertia and isolated microgrid operation. While droop-control is suggested by many researchers to solve these problems, detailed analysis of droop-controlled DFIG units in microgrids has not been reported. To fill-out this gap, this paper presents torque- and power-droop implementations in DFIG-based units by some simple modifications in the conventional control and then, by means of small-signal modeling and eigen-value studies, shows how both techniques influence frequency stability. Sensitivity studies, with respect to the presence of turbine- and inverter-based generators in microgrids; and impacts of pitch-angle controller, wind speed variation and isolated mode operation with only wind-generators, are conducted. Time-domain simulation is utilized to verify the analytical results.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.606
Threshold uncertainty score0.852

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.190 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it