1
Toward a Benchmark Test System for the
Offshore Grid in the North Sea
K. Rudion, M IEEE, A. Orths, M IEEE, P. B. Eriksen, Z. A. Styczynski, SM IEEE
Abstract— In an effort to protect the environment despite the
projected development of the electrical power system, the
European community is focusing on a significant increase in the
installed wind power capacity up to the level of 300 GW by the
year 2030 throughout Europe. Most of the planned installations –
about 150 GW – are going to be realized in the offshore sector, a
large part of which will be located in the North Sea. Such
development will lead to new challenges regarding integration of
the bulk offshore wind power into the power systems and will
require a comprehensive analysis concerning various aspects
such as optimal planning and operation taking into account new
concepts, as multi-terminal VSC HVDC.
In this paper the establishment of a test system for analysis of the
offshore DC grid behavior is proposed taking into account the
recent structural and technological concepts on this field as well
as the national plans. Hence, in the first step the configuration of
the analyzed offshore grid was defined, which includes a mix of
AC and DC system. Further, the assumptions for the system
parameters will be discussed and the implementation of this test
system into a power system simulator as well as some exemplary
calculations will be shown.
Index Terms – DC offshore grid, wind energy integration,
multi-terminal HVDC, benchmark.
I. INTRODUCTION
I n an effort to protect the environment despite the projected
development of the electrical power system, the European
community (EC) is focusing on a significant increase in the
installed wind power capacity up to the level of 300 GW [1]
by the year 2030 throughout Europe. Most of the planned
installations – about 150 GW [2] – are going to be realized in
the offshore sector, mostly located in the North Sea.
The challenges in this ambitioned goal for the research as well
as for the technical realizations first of all relate to the optimal
integration of new offshore wind farms into the national
onshore power systems, allowing a flexible operation and
reliable power supply, while reducing the emission of
greenhouse gasses by the conventional power plants and
minimize energetic dependencies of the EC on other countries.
Since many of these wind farms will be placed at a long
distance of 150 km or more from the coast, the traditional AC
interconnection technology can not be applied because of
K. Rudion and Z. A. Styczynski are with Otto-von-Guericke-University
Magdeburg, (rudion@ovgu.de, sty@ovgu.de).
A. Orths and P. B. Eriksen are with Energinet.dk – Danish TSO,
(ano@energinet.dk, pbe@energinet.dk).
978-1-4244-6551-4/10/$26.00 ©2010 IEEE
instabilities in the operation. Therefore, alternative approaches
will be necessary. For this reason the application of DC
transmission systems appears to be advantageous, especially
welcome should be the modern voltage source converter based
technology.
Hence, several different concepts have been developed
recently regarding the configuration and organization of the
energy transmission from the offshore wind farms. Many of
these concepts – as summarized in [3] – assume the
establishment of a multi-terminal DC offshore power system.
Such a system will arise by the extension of the AC and DC
wind farm interconnectors to the individual onshore power
systems by the additional DC links between the large wind
farms as well as between DC hubs collecting energy from
several wind farms. This solution improves the overall
reliability of the offshore interconnecting power system, on
the one hand, and on the other hand it opens new possibilities
for arrangement of the transnational energy trading and
comprehensive energy markets [4].
However, the planning and further realization of such a
multi-terminal DC offshore power system is challenging and
requires an exhaustive mathematical modeling and “a priori”
analysis of various phenomena, such as behavior during
disturbances, supervisory coordination and control of the DC
system operation, protection coordination, etc., which will
correspondingly lead to the development of new approaches
for the protection scheme or optimal operation management.
Therefore, an important subject is to design a representative
test system that, on the one hand, will correspond to the
national development strategies in the wind sector, such as
planned wind farms or interconnection technologies, and on
the other hand, it will make it possible to analyze the relevant
issues, such as the influence of the offshore grid on the
international energy trading in the European interconnected
power system of ENTSO-E or operation coordination in the
disturbance situations.
In this paper the proposal of such a test system will be
introduced. As background for its development the available
interconnection technologies and their properties as well as
the various future concepts presented recently will be
analyzed. At the same time for the sake of simplicity, this test
system will be limited only to the part of the North Sea that
covers some of the Danish, German and Dutch wind farms.
The resulting test system has a mixed AC-DC structure that
seems to be adequate taking into account the national plans.

II. OFFSHORE WIND INTEGRATION – BACKGROUND
A. Introduction
The integration of wind energy into the power system is an
issue that has been investigated very intensively in recent
years. Different national studies, as e.g. DENA Study [5] in
Germany, have been performed in order to point out the
possible problems with the integration of bulk wind power
and to find out the necessary remedial measures, like
reinforcement of the existing power grid or construction of
new lines. Apart from the national activities there also were
several international studies that cover all of Europe, e.g.
TradeWind [6], EWIS [7], IEA Wind Task 25 [8]. Each of
these studies has its own focus and covers a specific time
horizon. Some of these studies include already the first
concepts for the offshore power system, as for example the
TradeWind study, which focuses on the estimation of
necessary interconnector capacities between European
countries.
Nevertheless, investigation of such complex systems
requires adequate models that can cover the energy trading
issues as well as the technical issues related to the electrical
grids. The former models are significant in the first phase of
the analysis since they deliver information about required
reference values that have to be employed for setting up the
later model.
B. Available Transmission Technologies
Generally, there are two main technologies that can be
applied for integration of the offshore wind farms, namely
AC- and DC-transmission, see Fig. 1 [9]. The decision with
regard to which technology to apply is mainly based on the
economical analysis and technical feasibility study. The most
common and proven is the underground AC cable
transmission technology, which, however, has some
limitations especially in the offshore applications due to the
necessity for reactive power compensation, since the capacity
of cable increases significantly with its length and rated
voltage.
Fig. 1. Possible transmission technologies
2
In order to minimize the capacitive charging current of cable,
compensation units have to be installed along the cable length
at defined points. If the length of the AC-cable is not long
(under approx. 50-90 km) it is enough to install the
compensation units only at both ends of the cable. However,
for longer cables it is also necessary to install compensating
units between both cable ends. Therefore, in an offshore
application this solution would require construction of
intermediate offshore platforms with reactive power
compensation units, if wind farms are placed far from the
shore, which would lead to a significant cost increase. Since
such a situation would take place in the case of many planned
wind farms, the application of DC connection approaches has
been greatly discussed and will quite likely be used due to the
problems and limitations with long AC cables. The costs
analysis showed that the break even point for the application
of the DC interconnection systems instead of AC cables
results at distances to the shore of between 50 km and 90 km,
depending on water depths, the power level to be transmitted,
rated voltage of cable and the used components, see Fig. 2.
Hence, for longer distances to the shore the high voltage direct
current (HVDC) technology has to be applied. The HVDC
transmission is characterized by a high complexity grade of
the overall system due to the presence of some additional
elements as compared to the AC transmission, like converter
stations on both line ends, requirement for sophisticated
control and protection systems and high investment costs.
However, the HVDC transmission is more advantageous than
the AC transmission for longer underwater cable
interconnection, since long AC cables are problematic due to
reactive power losses.
The HVDC transmission systems can be generally divided
into two categories:
ƒ classic line commutated converter HVDC (LCC
HVDC),
ƒ voltage source converter HVDC (VSC HVDC).
The LCC HVDC transmission system is a fully mature
technology that has been in use for more than 50 years and
numbers over 70 large installations globally, including
overhead lines and submarine cables. In comparison the VSC
HVDC is a relatively new technology that was introduced in
the 1990s.
Fig. 2. Break even point for AC vs. DC interconnection solution [10]
 3

Both HVDC technologies have their advantages and possibility of reactive power control is especially important in
disadvantages, but generally for the offshore wind weak systems or islanded systems, where the reactive power
applications, especially multi-terminal systems, the VSC contribution from the converter station can be employed to
technology is more suitable due to the several operational keep the voltage level in an allowable range and through the
features that will be discussed in a further section. minimization of the reactive power flow within the AC grid
Furthermore, the application of GIL (Gas Insulated Line) the minimization of the overall system losses can be obtained.
systems in the high voltage transmission has also been The capability of four quadrant operation in the VSC HVDC
discussed. However, due to economic reasons as well as a lack systems also makes it possible to instantaneously change the
of operational experience it has not at the moment been direction of active power flow in the link by adjusting the
chosen as an advantageous solution according to [11]. reference values in the control system. This causes change in
the direction of the DC current flow without changing the
C. VSC HVDC – General Characteristics
polarity of the DC link voltage or without reconfiguration of
In comparison to the classic HVDC the VSC technology has a the converter station topology by the means of power
number of technical features that make it more advantageous switches, as is necessary in the case of power flow reversal in
than LCC HVDC technology for applications such as: LCC HVDC systems (multi-terminal systems). This feature
ƒ supply of passive networks, concerning active power flow control is very advantageous,
ƒ interconnection to the weak AC systems, since on the one hand the change of voltage polarity is not
ƒ supply of offshore loads, preferable especially for extruded XLPE DC cables because of
ƒ interconnection of offshore wind farms, increased stress for the insulation and on the other hand, the
ƒ in-feed to the city centers, topology reconfiguration requires special station arrangements
ƒ multi-terminal systems. with additional power switches, which lead to increased costs
Currently, the power ranges of the VSC based HVDC systems and more complex system structure. Additionally, due to the
reach up to 1200 MW at a voltage level of ± 320 kV [12]. fact that the control system of VSC HVDC units is very fast,
Comparing the structure and components of the LCC-based an excellent dynamic behavior is provided, especially in the
systems and VSC-based HVDC systems it can be noticed that case of faults and disturbances.
the main difference lies on the type of valves, which has also a
significant influence on the operational characteristics. The D. Offshore Power System - Concepts
voltage sourced converter is based on fully controllable In the last few years various concepts dealing with the
semiconductor valves IGBT (Insulated Gate Bipolar offshore power system have been developed, as summarized
Transistor), which allow for not only switching-on the valve in [3]. These concepts have different detailing grades and
with an external gate signal, like in the case of thyristors, but some of them cover not only the North Sea but also the other
also for switching it off at the required time point and European waters, such as the Baltic Sea, Irish Sea, English
independently on the grid current profile. This feature is the Channel or even the Mediterranean Sea. In Fig. 3 and Fig. 4
main advantage of the VSC converters over the LCC two concepts that were recently introduced by EWEA in 2009
converters and allows for the connection to power systems and Greenpeace in 2008 are presented.
with very low short circuit ratios or even to passive grids.
Furthermore, because the VSC converters are self-
commutated units they are not sensitive to commutation
failures due to the distortions of the AC voltage, as is the case
with conventional LCC converters. Moreover, since the main
operational scheme of the VSC converters is based on the
PWM technique (pulse width modulation), which can switch
on and switch off the valves several times during one period
of the grid voltage, the power quality can be significantly
improved through the reduction of the lower frequency
harmonics in the resulting wave shape. At the same time with
the increase of the valve switching frequency the resulting
power losses also increase, and this is the main disadvantage
of this technology. At full load of the VSC converter the
power losses equal about 2 % of the rated converter power per
each end of the HVDC link, whereas the losses in a
conventional LCC HVDC equals typically to 0.8 % of the
transmitted power per each link end [13]. However, due to the
independency of the commutation process on the AC grid
voltage in the voltage source converters as well as due to the
possibility of conducting current in both directions by the
valve modules, the other crucial advantage of these systems is
that the active and reactive power can be controlled Fig. 3. Offshore power system concept according to [14]
independently of each other in all four quadrants. The
 4

According to the Greenpeace study [10] the development of

the offshore wind energy in the focused three countries (DK,
D, NL) in the time horizon until 2030 will take place
according to the forecast summarized in Table 1. However, in
this study there are no precise specifications concerning the
timely development of the installed capacity within the
assumed timeframe. In order to assign the specific offshore
wind farms and their installed capacity in each country to the
numbers summarized in Table 1 the identification of the future
wind farms and their locations have been performed mainly
based on [2] but also using information from [15][16][17][18].
As a result, 130 objects have been identified and among all
these wind farms only the most important have been selected
for further analysis as summarized in Table 2. It was here
assumed that the chosen wind farms are to be installed by the
year 2020. Therefore, the test system defined in this paper can
be treated as a basic structure that can be subjected to further
development as it will happen between 2020 and 2030.
The selected wind farms belong to the wind farm cluster
Borkum 2 (Germany) and to the cluster Horns Rev
(Denmark). The cumulative power of wind farms in the
cluster Borkum 2 equals ca. 4800 MW and in the cluster
Fig. 4. Offshore power system concept according to [10]
Horns Rev 969 MW.
TABLE 1
Both of these concepts assume the direct HVDC tie-lines OFFSHORE WIND POWER SCENARIO FOR THE NORTH SEA IN CHOSEN
between the national power systems of different countries COUNTRIES [10]
located on the North Sea, i.e. Norway to the Netherlands or COUNTRY INSTALLE ELECTRICIT AVERAGE TOTAL
Denmark to the Netherlands. In addition they assume some D Y / YEAR CAPACIT ELECTRICITY
CAPACITY [TWh] Y FACTOR CONSUMPTION
multi-connectors used for facilitation of the offshore wind [MW] [%] 2006 [TWh]
farms to the onshore power system. Generally, such multi- Denmark 1,577 5.6 40.5 36.4
connectors connect the offshore hubs, which collect power Germany 26,428 97.5 42.1 559.0
from several offshore wind farms, to the onshore power Netherland 12,039 41.7 39.6 116.2
systems of different countries. Such configuration allows for TABLE 2
injecting the offshore wind power to the power system of a OFFSHORE WIND FARMS SELECTED FOR BENCHMARK TEST SYSTEM
specific country according to the trading contract. Moreover, WIND FARM PHASE STATUS COUN- FARM TECHNO-
it allows for an exchange of additional power between NAME AS OF TRY POWER PRO LOGY
YEAR PROJECT DC/AC
interconnected countries, if the multi-connectors are not fully PHASE
loaded by the power from the offshore wind farms. [MW]

Beside the presented concepts of the offshore power system Horns Rev I 1 2010 DK 160 AC
there are also several other proposals as, for example, Horns Rev II 1 2010 DK 209 AC
introduced by Airtricity, TradeWind or Mainstream, which Horns Rev A 1 2020 DK 200 AC
Horns Rev B 1 2020 DK 200 AC
also played an important role in the development of the two Horns Rev C 1 2020 DK 200 AC
main concepts. Global Tech 1 1 2015 DE 360 DC
Global Tech 1 2 2020 DE 440 DC
III. BENCHMARK DEVELOPMENT BARD Offshore 1 1 2010 DE 400 DC
BARD Offshore 1 2 2020 DE 400 DC
He dreiht 1 2015 DE 400 DC
A. Assumptions
Nordsee 1 2015 DE 400 DC
The benchmark proposed within this paper is a test system Nordsee 2 2020 DE 400 DC
representing some chosen part of the planned offshore Austerngrund 1 2015 DE 400 DC
installations in the North Sea in the time horizon until the year Deutsche Bucht 1 2015 DE 250 DC
Deutsche Bucht 2 2020 DE 150 DC
2030 including Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands. The Ventotec Nord 1 I+II 1 2015 DE 600 DC
goal of development of this test system is to provide a Ventotec Nord 2 I+II 1 2015 DE 600 DC
comprehensive model with defined parameters that is Tromp Binnen 1 2015 NL 295 AC
necessary for analysis of various issues as already discussed in Hemveld 1 2020 NL 300 AC
Den Helder 1 1 2020 NL 468 AC
the previous sections. As the basis for the development of this Brown Ridge Oost 1 2015 NL 282 AC
test system the two aforementioned concepts – of Greenpeace Callanstoog-Noord 1 2015 NL 303 AC
as well as of EWEA – have been employed.

In the Netherlands the most northerly located wind farm’s
group was chosen to be considered in the model, the installed
capacity of which was estimated at 1648 MW. Since the
German wind farms in the considered cluster are located far
from the interconnection points on the shore with distances of
over 150 km the VSC HVDC technology will be applied for
facilitation of these farms to the German power system. The
other situation can be observed in the Danish cluster Horns
Rev where already today two wind farms Horns Rev 1 and 2
with a rated power of 160 MW and 209 MW, respectively, are
in operation and are interconnected using AC cables, since the
distances to the onshore grid are less than 50 km. The AC
technology was also assumed to be used in the Dutch cluster.
However, the German wind farm BARD Offshore 1
belonging to the cluster Borkum 2 with the overall installed
capacity of 800 MW, which should be erected in two project
phases of 400 MW each, was not considered in the basic
structure of the developed benchmark test system. This results
from the assumption that the interconnection of the majority
of German wind farms belonging to the cluster Borkum 2 as
well as of the offshore DC hubs located in Denmark and the
Netherlands will be realized using the VSC HVDC technology
with rated voltage of ±320 kV apart from the interconnection
of the wind farm BARD Offshore 1. BARD Offshore 1 is
currently under construction and will use the VSC HVDC
technology with a rated voltage of ±150 kV. The selection of
±320 kV voltage level is motivated by the works conducted by
CIGRE dealing with the standardization of the DC voltage
levels in order to have analogous situations as in AC systems
that allow for the application of devices from various vendors
[19][20]. Moreover, the DC voltage levels have to be defined
in a way which guarantees the compatibility with the standard
AC voltage levels in order to avoid additional coupling
transformers. Nevertheless, the solution chosen in this paper
has its advantages, since it allows to investigate in a separate
study case the coupling possibilities of DC systems with
different rated voltage levels such as ±320 kV and ±150 kV.
B. Structure of the Test System
In the first step of the test system definition a basic structure
was established, which later can be used for derivation of
other simulation cases. The basic structure of the benchmark
test system corresponds to the configuration shown in Fig. 5.
Fig. 5. Basic structure of the benchmark test system
5
Fig. 6. Basic structure of the benchmark test system with geographical
locations according to Google Earth
The core of this structure is the multi-terminal DC grid that is
based on the VSC HVDC technology. The three nodes of this
DC grid (HUB DK, HUB DE, HUB NL) are located offshore
near to the regions with high forecasted installed wind
capacity and represent the hubs of the three countries
considered in the benchmark test system, namely Denmark,
Germany and Netherlands. Moreover, in the developed model
some additional DC connectors directly between Denmark and
Netherlands (Cobra) as well as between Norway and Germany
(NorLink) have been considered, that are planned for the near
future. It was assumed that both connectors utilize the VSC
HVDC technology and there is an interconnection between
both links (Cobra, NorLink) and the Danish DC hub. The
capacity of the Cobra-Link was assumed to be 700 MW and
the NorLink assumed to be 1400 MW.
In order to gather information about the spatial structure of
the developed test system as well as to get the distances
between offshore wind farms and the onshore interconnection
points for estimation of the cable lengths a Google Earth
model was developed, where all considered wind farms as
well as potential onshore interconnection points to the grid
were localised, as shown in Fig. 6.
C. Parameterization and Implementation
In order to implement the benchmark test system into the
simulation environment the corresponding electrical scheme
was developed as presented in Fig. 7. It includes the planned
offshore wind farms with the corresponding AC or DC
interconnectors. During the development of the test system it
was assumed that the interconnection points in the onshore
power system will be represented as equivalent grids. In a
further stage the developed offshore test system will be
implemented into a larger model covering also necessary parts
of the national onshore grids, as shown in [21]. The
information about cable lengths and required capacities was
obtained from the Google Earth model introduced in the
previous section. Using the assumed wind farm capacities and
rated voltages the cable parameters were estimated according
to [22][23][24]. To show the challenges regarding the rated
voltage level and the resulting number of required cables the
DC rated voltage was set to ±150 kV in the first step. Then in
 6

the second step the whole system was adapted to the voltage TABLE 4
PARAMETERS FOR THE DANISH AND THE DUTCH PART OF THE TEST SYSTEM
level of ±320 kV as discussed in the previous section. The TERMINAL i TERMINAL j L UNOM R‘ X‘ C' IRAT PAR.
estimated system parameters for the situation with ±150 kV BUSBAR BUSBAR km kV Ω/km Ω/km μF/km kA LIN.
rated voltage are summarized in Table 3 and Table 4. It can be DE_HUB-A DC_DK_Hub-A 174 ±150 0,0101 0,1602 0,201 1,168 3
HR_2-150 EDR_Offshore 18 150 0,0283 0,1288 0,155 0,648 1
observed that in most cases several parallel DC cables (even EDR_Offshore EDR 20 150 0,0283 0,1288 0,155 0,648 1
up to 4) are necessary to guarantee the required transfer DK2 HR_1-150 29 150 0,0283 0,1288 0,155 0,648 1
capacity. The number of required cables can be significantly DK1 HR_2-150 12 150 0,0176 0,1759 0,215 0,989 1
DK5 HR_A-150 11 150 0,0176 0,1759 0,215 0,989 1
reduced by introducing the higher voltage level. HR_A-150 HR_C-150 22 150 0,0176 0,1759 0,215 0,989 1
TABLE 3 DK4 HR_B-150 15 150 0,0176 0,1759 0,215 0,989 1
PARAMETERS FOR THE GERMAN PART OF THE TEST SYSTEM HR_B-150 HR_C-150 12 150 0,0176 0,1759 0,215 0,989 1
TERMINAL i TERMINAL j L UNOM R‘ X‘ C' IRAT PAR. DK3 HR_C-150 12 150 0,0176 0,1759 0,215 0,989 1
BUSBAR BUSBAR km kV Ω/km Ω/km μF/km kA LIN. EDR2_Offshore EDR 39 150 0,0176 0,1759 0,215 0,989 3
DE1 DE2 33 150 0,0113 0,1634 0,260 1,201 2 HR_C-150 EDR2_Offshore 36 150 0,0176 0,1759 0,215 0,989 1
DE11 DE12 26 150 0,0176 0,1759 0,215 0,989 2 HR_1-150 KAE_Offshore 35 150 0,0176 0,1759 0,215 0,989 1
DE13 DE14 19 150 0,0176 0,1759 0,215 0,989 2 KAE_Offshore KAE 25 150 0,0176 0,1759 0,215 0,989 1
DE15 DE16 19 150 0,0176 0,1759 0,215 0,989 2 NL1_TR NL1 69 150 0,0113 0,1634 0,260 1,201 1
DE17 DE18 16 150 0,0176 0,1759 0,215 0,989 2 NL2 NL2_TR 88 150 0,0113 0,1634 0,260 1,201 1
DE19 DE20 16 150 0,0176 0,1759 0,215 0,989 2 NL3 NL3_TR 89 150 0,0176 0,1759 0,215 0,989 1
DE_HUB-A DE21 193 ±150 0,0129 0,1665 0,180 1,070 2 NL4 NL4_TR 84 150 0,0176 0,1759 0,215 0,989 2
DE_HUB-A DE22 193 ±150 0,0129 0,1665 0,180 1,070 2 NL5 NL5_TR 58 150 0,0113 0,1634 0,260 1,201 1
DE_HUB-A DE23 193 ±150 0,0176 0,1759 0,156 0,938 2 NL1 NL6 27 150 0,0113 0,1634 0,260 1,201 1
DE_HUB-A DE24 193 ±150 0,0176 0,1759 0,156 0,938 2 NL2 NL7 23 150 0,0113 0,1634 0,260 1,201 1
DE_HUB-A DE25 193 ±150 0,0176 0,1759 0,156 0,938 2 NL3 NL8 28 150 0,0113 0,1634 0,260 1,201 1
DE_HUB-A DE26 193 ±150 0,0176 0,1759 0,156 0,938 2 NL4 NL9 15 150 0,0176 0,1759 0,215 0,989 2
DE_HUB-A DE27 193 ±150 0,0176 0,1759 0,156 0,938 2 NL5 NL10 17 150 0,0113 0,1634 0,260 1,201 1
DE_HUB-A DE28 193 ±150 0,0176 0,1759 0,156 0,938 2 DC_DIELE NRL_JUN 305 ±150 0,0101 0,1602 0,201 1,168 4
DE_HUB-A DE29 193 ±150 0,0176 0,1759 0,156 0,938 2 COB_JUN DC_DK_Cobra 61 ±150 0,0101 0,1602 0,201 1,168 2
DE3 DE4 23 150 0,0176 0,1759 0,215 0,989 2 COB_JUN DC_DK_Hub-A 71 ±150 0,0101 0,1602 0,201 1,168 3
DE5 DE6 13 150 0,0113 0,1634 0,260 1,201 2 DC_DK_Hub-A NRL_JUN 39 ±150 0,0101 0,1602 0,201 1,168 4
DE7 DE8 14 150 0,0176 0,1759 0,215 0,989 2 DC_Hoogkerk COB_JUN 251 ±150 0,0101 0,1602 0,201 1,168 2
DC_NL_HUB-A DE_HUB-A 247 ±150 0,0101 0,1602 0,201 1,168 3 DC_Nor_Nor1 NRL_JUN 264 ±150 0,0101 0,1602 0,201 1,168 4

NORWAY DENMARK
WF
DK4
1400 MW HR 4
A 1000 MW
C D D DK3
C A WF
C
C DK5
NOR1 HR 5
WF
NRL_JUN DC DK HR 3
UW HUB-A DK2
Arrie
WF
DK1
HR 1 KAE
AC DK
HUB-A

WF
HR 2 EDR
700 MW
D
C A
C
COB_JUN COBRA
DK

GERMANY
NETHERLANDS 1400 MW
D
C A
C
DC DE Diele
700 MW HUB-A
A DC UW
C D DIELE
C
AC NL DC NL
UW HUB-A
Hoogkerk HUB-A
Callanstoog 600 MW 600 MW
WF Noord A D
303 MW VentoTec
Nord I WF C D C A
600 MW C
DE5 DE6 DE21 C
NL1 NL6

WF
Tromp Binnen 600 MW 600 MW
295 MW
A D
VentoTec
Nord II WF C D C A
600 MW C
NL2 NL7 DE1 DE2 DE22 C
Brown Ridge 1000 MW
WF Oost
A 400 MW
282 MW 400 MW
C D A D
C
Austerngrund
WF C D C A
NL3 NL8 400 MW
C C
Den Helder 1
DE3 DE4 DE23
WF 468 MW
UW 400 MW 400 MW
Beverwijk A D
He dreiht
WF C D C A
NL4 NL9 400 MW
C C
Hemveld DE7 DE8 DE24
WF 300 MW 400 MW 400 MW
A D
Deutsche
Bucht WF C D C A
NL5 NL10 400 MW C C
DE11 DE12 DE25
400 MW 400 MW
A D
Global Tech 1
Ph.1 WF C D C A
360 MW C
DE13 DE14 DE26 C
400 MW 400 MW
A D
Global Tech 1
Ph. 2 WF C D C A
400 MW C UW
DE15 DE16 DE27 C
CONNEFORDE
400 MW 400 MW
A D
Legend: Hochsee WP
Nordsee Ph.1
400 MW
WF C D C A
C C
DE17 DE18 DE28
VSC HVDC Offshore Grid Inerconnecting Wind Farms and Hubs 400 MW 400 MW
VSC HVDC Direct Country Interconnectors Hochsee WP
A D
C D C A
AC Offshore Grid Nordsee Ph.2
400 MW
WF
C
DE19 DE20 DE29 C

Fig. 7. Scheme of the benchmark test system for implementation into system simulator
 7

1,006

IV. EXEMPLARY SIMULATION 1,004

1,002
A. Scenario Definition

DC Voltage [pu]
1,000
Using a simplified version of the benchmark test system as
0,998
shown in Fig. 8, which corresponds to the development stage
0,996 DK_HUB-A
in 2011, an exemplary simulation was performed. This NL_HUB-A
0,994 DE_HUB-A
simulation corresponds to the network planning scenario, DE28

where the technical feasibility of energy trading between 0,992

0 4 8 12 16 20 24
different countries was investigated. 1,4
Line_HR_1-150--AC_DK_HUB-A
For this purpose different daily generation profiles for each 1,2 Line_HR_2-150--AC_DK_HUB-A

wind farm were assumed. According to these profiles the 1,0

Line Loading [pu]

export / import capability for each hub was estimated as 0,8

shown in Fig. 9 for Denmark. The import/export capability 0,6

depends on the topology of the grid interconnecting the 0,4

onshore power system with each DC hub and current wind 0,2

production. Furthermore, the import/export schedule for each 0,0

0 4 8 12 16 20 24
DC terminal was defined and implemented to corresponding 0,89

converter controllers. 0,88

0,87
B. Simulation Results DE_DE18

Modulation Index
0,86 DE_DE28
DK_HUB-A1
The simulation was performed for a time period of 24 hours. 0,85 NL_HUB-A

The chosen results are summarized in Fig. 10. It shows the 0,84

voltage profile at each DC node as well as corresponding 0,83

modulation indexes of the converter stations and the loading 0,82

0,81
factors of the chosen Danish lines. It can be noticed that the 0 4 8 12 16 20 24
Dutch terminal is operated in the DC voltage control mode Time [h]

Fig. 10. Simulation result for the considered study case

and is slack for the offshore DC system. The voltage at the
terminals of Germany and Denmark was adjusted by the
V. CONCLUSIONS
controller in order to fulfill the defined trading patterns taking
into account the current wind production in the German part In this paper the benchmark test system for offshore grid in
of the system. Moreover, overloading of the AC line in the the North Sea was proposed. This test system was developed
Danish terminal can be observed. based on the recent concepts introduced by significant
European organizations such as Greenpeace or EWEA.
However, some further adaptations in comparison to the
mentioned concepts were incorporated in the solution
proposed in this paper in order to meet the specific national
ideas, such as of Energinet.dk to utilize the existing AC
interconnectors of the offshore wind farms in the future
offshore power system. Furthermore, the definition of the test
system took into account the recent works of CIGRE
concerning the standardization of the DC voltage levels. The
influence of voltage level on the number of parallel lines was
Fig. 8. Simplified benchmark test system – corresponding to the year 2011
PIMP/EXP indicated, which shows that the DC voltage level of ±150 kV
[MW] will not be an optimal solution for integration of bulk power.
However, the current development in this filed, such as
PIMP_max
Line capacity installation of the VSC HVDC transmission system for the
PIMP_t3 Bard 1 offshore wind farm with a voltage level of ±150 kV,
PIMP_t2
PIMP_t1 shows that in practice there will be several systems with
different rated voltage that can not be directly coupled to each
PWIND other in order to create an offshore grid.
The developed test system can be used to carry out
different kind of analyses, for example the long term load
flow analysis used for the investigation of transnational
Time [h]
Fig. 9. Dynamic import capabilities for Danish hub depending on wind power
trading possibilities from the operational point of view or
short term disturbance analysis significant for setting up an
optimal protection scheme. For each purpose an adequate

model for the converter stations and controllers has to be
implemented.
The exemplary simulations show the results for load flow
analysis in the multi-terminal HVDC system for some defined
trading scenarios. The loading of the system components as
well as the available operating range described by the
modulation indexes and the DC voltage levels can be
observed in this way, which is necessary for verification of
technical feasibility.
VI. REFERENCES
[1] Strategic Research Agenda 2008-2030 of the European Wind Energy
Technology Platform – July 2008.
[2] Ocean of Opportunity – Harnessing Europe’s largest domestic energy
source. A report by the European Wind Energy Association. September
2009.
[3] De Decker, J.; Woyte, A.; Schödwell, B.; Völker, J.; Srikandam, C.:
Directory of Offshore Grid Initiatives, Studies & Organisations. Project
OffshoreGrid, September 2009. Available at www.offshoregrid.eu.
[4] Ackerman, T.; Orths, A.; et all: Where the Wind Blows. IEEE Power &
Energy, vol. 7, No. 7, 11-12.2009.
[5] Planning of the Grid Integration of Wind Energy in Germany Onshore
and Offshore up to the Year 2020 - DENA Study – www.dena.de.
[6] Trade Wind – Integrating Wind – Developing Europe’s power market
for the large-scale integration of wind power. February 2009.
www.trade-wind.eu.
[7] EWIS – European Wind Integration Study. www.wind-integration.eu.
[8] IEA Wind Task 25 – Design and operation of power systems with large
amounts of wind power – www.ieawind.org.
[9] Pöhler, S.: Einbindung von On- und Offshore Windparks in das
Stromnetz. Presented during the meeting “Fachgespräch – Verlegung
von Seekabeln zum Netzanschluss von Offshore Windparks in
Schutzgebieten im Meer. 20-21.06.2006, Bremen. Available at
http://www.offshore-wind.de/page/
index.php?id=2608.
[10] Greenpeace Report – A North Sea electricity grid [r]evolution –
Electricity output of interconnected offshore power – Vision of offshore
wind power integration. Greenpeace – 3E. September 2008.
[11] Oswald, B.: Vergleichstudie zu Stromübertragungstechniken im
Höchstspannungsnetz – Technische, betriebswirtschaftliche und
umweltfachliche Beurteilung von Freileitungen, VPE-Kabel und GIL am
Beispiel der 380 kV- Trasse Ganderkesee – St. Hülfe. Hannover &
Oldenburg, 20.09.2005.
[12] www.abb.com/industries/us/9AAC30300394.aspx
[13] CIGRE Study Committee B4-WG 39 – HVDC and Power Electronics.
Report on Integration of Large Scale Wind Generation using HVDC and
Power Electronics, Ref 370, 2009.
[14] Europe Offshore Wind Farm Projects – Map of the EWEA from
September 2009. Available at www.wind-
eole.com/fileadmin/user_upload/Downloads/Offshore/-
European_Offshore_Wind_Map_2009.pdf.
[15] http://www.offshore-wind.de/page/index.php?id=4761&fs=0.
[16] http://www.ofw-online.de/projekte/meerwind.html.
[17] http://www.offshorecenter.dk/offshorewindfarms.asp.
[18] http://193.88.185.146/website/havvind2/viewer.htm.
[19] CIGRE SC B4 – HVDC and Power Electronic Equipment – WG B4.52 –
HVDC Grid Feasibility Study. www.cigre-b4.org.
[20] Koldby, E.; Hyttinen, M.: Challenges on the Road to an Offshore HVDC
Grid. Proceedings of the Nordic Wind Power Conference 2009, 10-
11.09.2009, Bornholm, Denmark.
[21] ENTSO-E Grid Map. www.entsoe.eu/index.php?id=77.
[22] ABB–Technical Description of HVDC Light Technology, March 2008.
[23] Nexans – High Voltage Cables for Power Transmission.
www.nexans.de.
[24] NKT – High Voltage Cable Systems. www.nktcables.de.
8
VII. BIOGRAPHIES
Krzysztof Rudion studied electrical engineering at
the Wroclaw University of Technology Poland and
the Rostock University of Technology, Germany.
He graduated in 2003 from the Wroclaw University
of Technology with a Dipl.-Ing. Degree. He then
joined the Chair of Electric Power Networks and
Renewable Energy Sources at the Otto-von-
Guericke University Magdeburg, Germany as a
research engineer and got his PhD degree. His
primary field of interest is dispersed generation
with at focus on wind energy.
Antje G. Orths (M'2001) joined the Development
Department (Systems Analysis) of Energinet.dk in
2005. Beforehand, she graduated from the Technical
University of Berlin, Germany, was researcher at the
OvG-University Magdeburg, Germany where she
received her PhD and then was head of the group
Critical Infrastructures at the Fraunhofer Institute for
Factory Operation and Automation IFF in
Magdeburg. Her special fields of interests include
electric power networks and systems, modeling of
dispersed energy resources, network planning and
optimization problems. Besides her job at
Energinet.dk she is adjunct professor at the Otto-von-Guericke University in
Magdeburg, Germany. She is a member of the IEEE-PES, VDE-ETG and
CRIS.
Peter Børre Eriksen is head of Systems Analysis
at Energinet.dk, the national Danish Transmission
System Operator (TSO) for Electricity and Gas.
After a career in system planning for the Danish
utility ELSAM he joined Eltra, the former Western
Danish TSO in 1998, where he was leading the
Research and Development Department from 2000
until 2005. His group's main interests include the
modeling and analysis of electric power systems.
Peter Børre Eriksen is the author of numerous
technical papers on system modeling.
Zbigniew Antoni Styczynski became the Head and
the Chair of Electric Power Networks and
Renewable Energy Sources of the Faculty of
Electrical Engineering and Information Technology
at the Otto-von-Guericke University, Magdeburg,
Germany in 1999. In 2006 he also became the
president of the Centre of the Renewable Energy
Saxonia Anhalt. His special field of interest includes
electric power networks and systems, expert systems
and optimization problems. He is a senior member of
IEEE PES, a member of CIGRE SC C6, VDE ETG
und IBN and a fellow of the Conrad Adenauer Foundation.