MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4251909793 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14644032.v1

Modeling of Doubly Fed Induction Generators for Distribution System Power Flow Analysis

2021· preprint· en· W4251909793 on OpenAlexaff
Amitkumar Dadhania

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrogrid Control and Optimization
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInduction generatorControl theory (sociology)Robustness (evolution)TurbineAC powerWind powerEngineeringElectric power systemGridControl engineeringVoltageComputer sciencePower (physics)Electrical engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large-scale integration of Wind Generators (WGs) with distribution systems is underway right across the globe in a drive to harness green energy. The Doubly Fed Induction Generator (DFIG) is an important type of WG due to its robustness and versatility. Its accurate and efficient modeling is very important in distribution systems planning and analysis studies, as the older approximate representation method (the constant PQ model) is no longer sufficient given the scale of integration of WGs. This thesis proposes a new three-phase model for the DFIG, compatible with unbalanced three-phase distribution systems, by deriving an analytical representation of its three major components, namely the wind turbine, the voltage source converter, and the wound-rotor induction machine. The proposed model has a set of nonlinear equations that yields the total three-phase active and reactive powers injected into the grid by the DFIG as a function of the grid voltage and wind turbine parameters. This proposed model is integrated with a three-phased unbalanced power flow method and reported in this thesis. The proposed method opens up a new way to conduct power flow studies on unbalanced distribution systems with WGs. The proposed DFIG model is verified using Matlab-Simulink. IEEE 37-bus test system data from the IEEE Distribution System sub-committee is used to benchmark the results of the power flow method.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.000
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 score0.871
Threshold uncertainty score0.780

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicrogrid Control and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207