Degree proj ect in

Cost est imat ion of wind farms int ernal

grids
ERI KA NORD
St ockholm, Sweden 201X
XR- EE- ES 2011: 017
Elect ric Power Syst ems
Second Level,
Cost estimation of wind farms internal grids
ERIKA NORD
Masters Thesis at KTH School of Electrical Engineering
Supervisor: Camille Hamon
Examiner: Mikael Amelin
Comissioned by Vattenfall Power Consultant AB
Supervisor: Mikael Eklund
TRITA xxx yyyy-nn
Abstract
When establishing new wind farms there are a lot of dif-
ferent stakeholders that have dierent demands and ambi-
tions. The local grid in a wind farm constitutes of about 10
% of the total investment cost and therefore it is of impor-
tance that it is optimized both regarding losses and costs.
In a wind farm project a system analysis is ordered that
summarizes information such as cable layout, electric data
and losses. A drawback is that this analysis is given in a
later part of the project, when most decisions already have
been made due to permits. If the analysis shows that there
are unnecessarily high losses in the system it can be too
late to make changes.
The aim of this Masters thesis project is to develop a
method that makes the essential calculations so that an es-
timation of losses and its costs together with the investment
costs can be made at an early stage.
The rst part of the thesis consisted of developing a
program using this method with the requests above to, in
the next stage, compare the results the method acquires
with a reference system analysis of an existing wind farm.
From this comparison conclusions were made whether the
method is usable and in which ways it resembles and diers
from the more advanced method used in a program today.
The results show that the method makes a good esti-
mation of losses. Deviations between the developed method
and the reference analysis are due to that dierent ap-
proaches are made when calculating certain losses and also
the depth of the calculations. Furthermore there is no de-
scription of how precise the calculations in the reference
report were made so approximations can be a source of er-
ror. The conclusion is that this method can be used to
get an early estimation of the losses and the corresponding
costs of the local grid.
Sammanfattning
Vid byggnation av nya vindkraftparker nns det mnga in-
tressenter som har olika krav och ml. Det interna elntet i
en vindkraftpark utgr ungefr 10 % av den totala invester-
ingskostnaden och drfr r det viktigt att det interna el-
ntet kan optimeras frlust- och kostnadsmssigt. I ett vin-
dkraftparksprojekt genomfrs en elsystemstudie som sam-
manfattar information s som kabelntslayout, elektrisk
data samt frluster. En nackdel r att denna studie till-
handahlls en bra bit in i ett projekt, d de esta besluten
redan r tagna baserat p tillstnd. Visar systemstudien
till exempel p ondigt stora frluster i systemet kan det
vara fr sent att ndra.
Detta examensarbete syftar till att ta fram en metod
som skall gra de vsentliga berkningarna s att en upp-
skattning om frluster och dess kostnader tillsammans med
investeringskostnader kan gras redan i ett tidigt stadium.
Frsta delen av examensarbetet bestod av att framstl-
la ett program dr denna metod anvnds med ovanstende
nskeml fr att sedan i nsta steg jmfra resultaten meto-
den erhller med en referensstudie som gjorts fr en exis-
terande vindkraftpark. Utifrn denna jmfrelse skulle slut-
satser dras om programmet som baseras p metoden r an-
vndbart och p vilka stt det liknar och skiljer sig frn
metoden som det mer avancerade programmet anvnder
idag.
Resultaten visar att den hr metoden gr en bra es-
timering av frluster. Skillnader mellan den framtagna meto-
den och referensstudien beror p olika tillvgagngsstt i
framtagningen av vissa frluster samt hur detaljerade vissa
berkningar r gjorda. Dessutom nns det ingen beskrivn-
ing av hur noggranna berkningarna i referensstudien r
gjorda s approximationer kan vara en felklla. Slutsatsen
r att metoden kan anvndas fr att gra en tidig estimer-
ing av frluster och de kostnader som r relaterade till dessa
frluster fr ett internt elnt i en vindkraftpark.
Contents
Contents
List of Tables
List of Figures
List of Symbols
List of Abbreviations
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Objective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3 Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.4 Layout of the report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2 Dimensioning of cables 5
2.1 Choosing cables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1.1 Trefoil and at formation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1.2 Choice of conductor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1.3 Resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.1.4 Reactance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.1.5 Capacitance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.2 Losses in cables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.2.1 Conductor losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.2.2 Dielectric losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2.3 Sheath losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2.4 Reactive losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2.5 Voltage drop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.3 Bonding of metallic screens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.3.1 Both-ends bonding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3.2 Single-point bonding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3.3 Cross-bonding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.4 Rating factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.4.1 Temperature in the ground relative to temperature in the con-
ductor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.4.2 Thermal resistivity of ground . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.4.3 Laying depth of cables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.4.4 Cables installed in pipes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.4.5 Distance between cable groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.5 Chapter summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3 Wind turbines 19
3.1 Wind distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.1.1 Rayleigh distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.1.2 Weibull distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.2 Power curve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.3 Energy output . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.4 Losses in wind farms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.5 Losses in wind turbines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.5.1 No-load losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.5.2 Full-load losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.6 Losses in local grid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.7 Costs of the transmission systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.7.1 Cost of losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.7.2 Material costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4 Method 29
4.1 Starting assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.2 Calculating production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.3 Dimensioning cables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.4 Calculating losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.4.1 Cables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.4.2 Transformers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.5 Calculating costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
5 Case study 35
5.1 The test system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5.2 The PSS/E study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5.3 Comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.3.1 Theoretical comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.3.2 Actual comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
6 Conclusions and future work 39
Bibliography 41
List of Tables
2.1 XLPE cable data for dierent aluminium conductor areas . . . . . . . . 8
2.2 Comparison between at- and trefoil formation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.3 Rating factors for ground temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.4 Rating factors for thermal resistivity of ground . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.5 Rating factors for laying depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.6 Rating factors for groups of cables in the ground . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5.1 Comparison between the developed software results and the PSS/E study 38
List of Figures
2.1 Cable construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2 Trefoil formation and at formation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3 Both-ends bonding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.4 Single-point bonding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.5 Cross-bonding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.6 The induced voltages in a cable with three phases . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.1 Layout of a wind turbine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.2 Rayleigh wind distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.3 Weibull distribution with dierent shape parameter values . . . . . . . . 22
3.4 Power curve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.5 The change in power curves with increasing/decreasing air density . . . 24
3.6 Wake eect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.7 Layout of a wind farm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
5.1 Layout of the test system wind farm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
List of Symbols
R
AC AC resistance of the cable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
R
DC DC resistance of the cable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
y
s Skin eect factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
y
p
Proximity eect factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
x
s Skin eect factor variable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
k
s Skin eect factor coecient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

T
Resistivity of conductor material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
A
Area of conductor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
x
p
Proximity eect factor variable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
k
p
Proximity eect factor coecient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
d
c Diameter of the conductor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
s
Distance between conductor axes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
X
L Inductive reactance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Angular velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
L
Inductance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
C Capacitance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Relative permittivity of insulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
r
o Radius of insulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
r
i Radius of conductor screen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
P
l Ohmic losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
I
Rated current . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
tan()
Lossfactor of insulation material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
P
d Dielectric losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
P
sh Sheath losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
I
s Sheath current . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
R
s Sheath resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
X
m Mutual reactance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Q
l Reactive losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
S Apparent power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
U Voltage drop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Z Cable impedance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
U
L1
Induced voltage in cable, rst phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
U
L2
Induced voltage in cable, second phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
U
L3
Induced voltage in cable, third phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
U
ires
Residual voltage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
p
r
Rayleigh distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
p
w Weibull distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20
v Wind velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
v
av
Average wind velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
k
w
Shape parameter of Weibull distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
A
w
Scale parameter of Weibull distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Air density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
A
wind Cross sectional area of the wind . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
E Energy output . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
T
Period of time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
h
i
Probability of occurrence of wind velocity i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
P
i
Power generated at wind velocity i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
n
Number of wind turbines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
U Rated voltage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
E
lnoload
Energy loss without load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
P
0 Power without load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
E
lload
Energy loss with load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
P
load Power with load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
S
n
Apparent power of the transformer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Utilization time of losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

C
w
Capacity factor of a wind turbine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
cos()
Power factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
C
lcable Price of losses in cables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Expected electricity price for losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
C
ltrans Price of losses in transformers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
P
max
Maximum rated power of wind turbine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
List of Abbreviations
V PC
Vattenfall Power Consultant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
PSS/E Power System Simulator for Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
AC Alternating Current . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
PEX Cross-Linked Polyethelene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
DC
Direct Current . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
XLPE Cross-Linked Polyethelene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Emf
Electro Motive Force . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
m/s
Meters Per Second . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
CAD Computer-Aided Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Acknowledgements
First, I would like to thank Bengt Gransson at Vattenfall Power Consultant AB
who gave me the opportunity to do this thesis project and to my supervisor at VPC,
Mikael Eklund, for the valuable guidance and interest in my work.
Furthermore, I am very thankful towards my supervisor at the Royal Institute
of Technology, Camille Hamon, for the advice and support throughout the whole
project and towards my examiner, Mikael Amelin, who helped me improve my work.
Finally, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my family for always
believing in me.
Erika
Stockholm, June 2011
Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1 Background
Wind power has been used for at least 5,5 thousand years by humans to propel
sailing ships and run wind mills for mechanical power. However it was not until
about 30 years ago that the modern wind power industry began, when the company
Vestas began to manufacture wind turbines. It was then the production of wind
turbines started in Denmark. Those turbines were rather small compared with the
ones that are available today and had capacities of 20-30 kW. Today the capacity
has increased greatly and a wind turbine can be able to deliver up to 7,5 MW but
the commonly used produce around 2-3 MW.
A wind farm is used to produce electric power and can consist of two turbines
to over a thousand. These wind farms can both be located onshore or oshore. The
advantages with wind energy is that it is one of the cleanest ways to produce energy
and that it can be used to either supply electricity to a near located household or
to the transmission grid so that the electricity is used elsewhere. The downsides
are that it is expensive, takes up a lot of space and is rather complicated to build,
in terms of permits and regulations. The power system in a wind farm consists of
medium voltage cables which are connected between the individual turbines and to
a substation that connects the grid to the high voltage electric power transmission
grid.
When planning to build a wind farm the design of the local power grid is a
substantial part of the process. The cost for the power system in a wind farm is
approximately 10% [8] of the total investment cost. Furthermore it resides costs
due to losses, interruptions and maintenance during the lifetime of the wind farm.
The losses are approximately only 2-3 % [8] of the energy production, but it should
be taken into account that these losses will occur during the whole lifetime of the
wind farm and will therefore generate large costs.
When designing a power system for a wind farm both local and general param-
eters have to be considered. The understanding of the consequences of the choice of
voltage level and the cost for the losses related to that choice is however relatively
1
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
low in the wind power industry. Vattenfall Power Consultant (VPC) decided that
it could be the foundation of a masters thesis to investigate and develop a method
which can be used to build a program that shows the losses and the costs for a wind
farm. The reason is mainly to get a comprehension about these aspects at an early
stage in the project and to be able to inuence other stakeholders.
1.2 Objective
The purpose of this project is to analyse the internal grid of a wind farm by creating
a simplied method and to compare it with the more advanced method used today
in a program called PSS/E. The method will then be used to assess the cost of the
internal grid of a wind farm. The method must be adaptable to changes in prices
for materials, structural methods, placement of the farm and electrical conditions.
By studying the parameters individually and in relation to each other conclusions
can be drawn and developed into a program that generates the total cost of building
a wind farm.
The concerned people at Vattenfall Power Consultant are supposed to be able
to quickly get an overview of the costs for the power system of a wind farm at an
upstart of a new project and be able to see how much losses the wind farm will
generate during its lifetime and what is causing them.
Today it exists a method used in a program called PSS/E. It calculates the
losses but not the costs. Additionally it makes power ow calculations and dynamic
simulations. This program is however very time consuming and has an unwieldy
environment.
The expectation of the developed method is that the corporate promoter will
get an early comprehension regarding costs, mainly regarding the losses that occur
in wind power systems so that the grids can be designed optimally. This is usually
a non-trivial matter where it is easy to build an opinion early on regarding building
costs but not what kind of impact on the losses this will lead to and this is perceived
to be a common problem in this line of business.
1.3 Method
This method is to be used by people with more or less knowledge in power systems
so it has to be methodical and relatively easy to follow. By using the information
available early in a projects stage a method will be developed to obtain the losses
and costs for the internal grid in a wind farm. Then the losses and costs for an
internal grid are calculated using this method and compared to a theoretical wind
farm that VPC has analysed with a more advanced computation method in PSS/E.
2
1.4. LAYOUT OF THE REPORT
1.4 Layout of the report
The rst chapters, 2 and 3, give the reader the theory behind the calculations in
the method. Then the procedure of making the calculations is explained in chapter
4 and nally the comparison with a test case is evaluated in chapter 5.
3
Chapter 2
Dimensioning of cables
Power cables consist of a number of layers with dierent materials. Innermost is
the conductor, where the current ows, followed by the inner semi-conducting layer,
which is there to prevent air-lled cavities between the conductor and the insulation
so that less electrical discharges occur. Then there is the insulation that inhibits the
magnetic eld from the conductor, the outer semi-conducting layer which has the
same use as the inner layer. The metallic screen is an earthed layer which conducts
leakage currents if needed and the non-metallic outer sheath is a ame resistant and
moist repellent layer. Finally the cable is surrounded by an armour to protect the
cable from external forces. An example of how a cable can be constructed is seen
in gure 2.1.
Figure 2.1. Cable construction [3]
5
CHAPTER 2. DIMENSIONING OF CABLES
Figure 2.2. Trefoil formation and at formation
2.1 Choosing cables
2.1.1 Trefoil and at formation
There are single-phase cables and there are three-phase cables. A three-phase sys-
tem can therefore either be built by three single-phase cables or one three-phase
cable. The three cables in a three-phase circuit can be placed in dierent forma-
tions. The two typical formations are trefoil (triangular) and at formations, see
gure 2.2. The choice between the two depends on factors like bonding method,
which will be explained in a later section, conductor area and available space for
installation.
2.1.2 Choice of conductor
When deciding which conductor to use the rst choice is between copper and alu-
minium. Thereafter it is decided how the conductor should be composed, if it should
be a solid wire or stranded wire and which shape it should have.
For conductors with a cross sectional area less than 16 mm
2
copper is used. The
copper is produced through an electrolytic process, has a purity of 99.9 % but it
has a high density of 8.89 kg/dm
3
and is much more expensive than aluminium.
For conductor areas larger than 25 mm
2
aluminium is usually chosen since it has
a purity of 99.5 %, 61 % of the conductivity of copper but only 30 % of coppers
density, i.e. 2.70 kg/dm
3
. When building oshore it used to be cables consisting
of copper that was mainly installed due to that it is heavier and has less corrosion
risk. Today aluminium is more often considered even when building oshore since
those cables also have water immune layers and it lowers the price of the investment
[2].
Solid wires consist of one piece of metal wire. Stranded wires are composed of
a bundle of small-gauge wires to make a larger conductor. A benet with stranded
wires are that they are more exible but they are also more expensive than solid
wires of the same total cross-sectional area. Solid wires provide mechanical stur-
diness and protection against environment due to that they have relatively less
6
2.1. CHOOSING CABLES
surface area that are exposed to attacks by corrosives. Hence stranded wires are
used whenever ease of bending or repeated bending are required.
2.1.3 Resistance
The AC resistance R
AC
of a cable consists of the DC resistance R
DC
, the skin
eect factor y
s
, and the proximity eect factor y
p
as seen in (2.1).
R
AC
= R
DC
(1 +y
s
+y
p
) /km (2.1)
The DC resistance, R
DC
, is dependent on the conductor area, A, and the resistivity
of the conductor material per unit length,
T
, and is computed as below.
R
DC
=

T
A
/km, (2.2)
The resistivity
T
in (2.2) changes depending on which temperature the PEX, an-
other name for Cross-Linked Polyethelene, insulation should be able to withstand.
In the method developed in this thesis the PEX insulation is chosen to withstand
temperatures up to 65

or 90

Celsius. Since the resistivity at 20

Celsius is
20
=28.2
mm
2
/km for aluminium and it increases with 0.4 % per degree, the resistivity at
65

Celsius is
65
=33.3 mm
2
/km and at 90

Celsius it is
90
=36.1 mm
2
/km.
The resistivity for copper at 65

Celsius is
65
=19.8 mm
2
/km and for 90

Celsius
it is
90
=21.5 mm
2
/km.
The skin eect factor is given by
y
s
=
x
4
s
192 + 0.8x
4
s
, (2.3)
and
x
2
s
=
8f
R
DC
10
7
k
s
, (2.4)
where f is the frequency of the current and the coecient k
s
is equal to 1 since the
cables used in this project are presumed to be round or sector shaped.
The proximity eect factor for three-core cables or three single-core cables is
given by
y
p
=
x
4
p
192 + 0, 8x
4
p
_
d
c
s
_
2
_

_0, 312
_
d
c
s
_
2
+
1, 18
x
4
p
192+0,8x
4
p
+ 0, 27
_

_, (2.5)
and
x
2
p
=
8f
R
DC
10
7
k
p
(2.6)
where f is the frequency of the current, d
c
the diameter of the conductor, s the
distance between conductor axes and the coecient k
p
is equal to 0.8 for the same
reasons as for k
s
[1].
7
CHAPTER 2. DIMENSIONING OF CABLES
2.1.4 Reactance
A cable consists of both inductive and capacitive reactance, although the capacitive
reactance often is so small that it is not included in calculations. The inductive
reactance functions in series with the conductor whilst the capacitive reactance
functions between conductor and ground. The inductive reactance can be obtained
from (2.7).
X
L
= L /km, (2.7)
where = 2f, f is the frequency in Hz and L the inductance in H/km
2.1.5 Capacitance
A cable can be seen as a capacitor, where the conductor is one of the electrodes
and the metallic sheath is the other. The insulation corresponds to the capacitors
dielectric. For a cable where every phase is screened individually the calculation of
the capacitance is as follows
C =

18 ln
_
r
o
r
i
_ F/km, (2.8)
where is the relative permittivity of the insulation and is dimensionless, r
o
is the
external diameter of the insulation and r
i
is the diameter of the conductor, including
the screen. The relative permittivity for Cross-Linked Polyethelene cables (XLPE
cables) is = 2.3.
The specic data for the resistance, reactance and capacitance for dierent con-
ductor areas are shown in table 2.1.
Table 2.1. XLPE cable data for dierent aluminium conductor areas
Conductor area [mm
2
] R [/km] X
L
[/km] C [F/km]
95 0.38 0.11 0.22
150 0.24 0.10 0.26
240 0.15 0.09 0.31
400 0.09 0.13 0.18
630 0.06 0.12 0.21
2.2 Losses in cables
2.2.1 Conductor losses
When electric current runs through a cable a power is dissipated in the conductor.
This power is proportional to the current squared and directly proportional to the
conductor resistance. It is very important to consider these losses when dimension-
ing cable connections to ensure that the cable does not overheat so that the cables
8
2.2. LOSSES IN CABLES
life span decreases and to prevent massive costs that come with large energy losses.
The losses are calculated according to (2.9).
P
l
= I
2
R
AC
W/km, (2.9)
where R
AC
is the AC resistance of the conductor and I is the current. This equation
will be further developed later in this report when more theory has been explained.
2.2.2 Dielectric losses
The insulation becomes heated from the losses that the load current causes. To
calculate the dielectric losses the loss factor of the insulation material, tan(), must
be known. This loss factor partly depends on the voltage and the temperature, but
mainly it is a material property. The losses are calculated according to the formula:
P
d
= U
2
C tan() W/km, (2.10)
where U is the rated voltage and tan() is the loss factor of the insulation material.
As seen in (2.10) the dielectric losses are proportional to the voltage squared. The
cables used in this project have un-lled PEX insulation and a loss factor tan()
equal to 0.3 10
3
[3].
2.2.3 Sheath losses
In a cable that is used for AC an electromotive force (emf) is created in the metallic
sheath and in the surrounding cables sheaths. This emf can cause two types of
losses.
Eddy currents Conductor currents in the perimeter of the sheath induce
eddy currents. These currents decrease with increasing cable length and normally
the eddy current losses are so small relative to the conductor losses that they are
neglected.
Circulating currents Circulating currents that are driven by the induced
emf are created if closed sheath circuits are utilized. These sheath circuits generate
loops in which the currents can ow. The magnitudes of these currents depend on
the sheath resistances R
s
, length of cables and conductor current. These sheath
losses are
P
sh
= I
2
s
R
s
= I
2
R
s

X
2
m
R
2
s
+X
2
m
W/km, (2.11)
where I is the conductor current, I
s
the sheath current, R
s
the sheath resistance
and X
m
the mutual reactance [12].
9
CHAPTER 2. DIMENSIONING OF CABLES
2.2.4 Reactive losses
Reactive power is the non-working power caused by the magnetizing current and is
required to operate and sustain the magnetism in the load. Reactive power required
by inductive loads increases the amount of apparent power, S , in the distribution
system. The increase in reactive and apparent power causes the power factor to
decrease. Just as there is active/ohmic losses there are reactive losses which are
calculated according to (4.5).
Q
l
= I
2
X
L
VAr/km (2.12)
The current can be expressed as
I =
P
U cos
A, (2.13)
so that
Q
l
=
_
P
U cos
_
2
X
L
VAr/km (2.14)
2.2.5 Voltage drop
The resistance and reactance will generate a voltage drop over the cable. The
voltage drop is increased with increasing cable length but is reduced with increasing
conductor area. In low voltage circuits with long transmission distances the voltage
drop aects the dimensioning. To calculate the voltage drop the following equation
can be used for three phase systems.
U =
I Z L
U cos
100% =
P (Rcos +X
L
sin ) L
U
2
cos
100%, (2.15)
where P is the transferred power, Z is the cable impedance, L is the length of the
cable, R is the conductor resistance, X
L
is the reactance, U the rated voltage and
cos() the power factor of the load.
The voltage drop is supposed to be maintained within a specic range and
according to Svensk Elstandard SS-EN 61000-2-2 the changes in the voltage are
under normal circumstances limited to 3 % of the nominal voltage. Causes of
voltage drop could be voltage dips, over tones or transients. The consequences of
fast voltage changes are shifts in the light intensity, for example in a light bulb, and
high stress on the mechanical part of the electric drive system. When the voltage
changes exceed about 2 % of the rated voltage the eects can be visually noticed.
2.3 Bonding of metallic screens
Bonding is the industrial word for connecting electrical equipment so that they
acquire the same potential. This is desirable due to that no static sparking can
occur between objects with the same potential.
10
2.3. BONDING OF METALLIC SCREENS
Figure 2.3. Both-ends bonding [3]
The power losses in a cable circuit are, as stated previously, dependent on the
currents owing in the metallic sheaths of the cables. Therefore by reducing or
eliminating the metallic sheath currents through dierent methods of bonding, it
is possible to increase the load current carrying capacity, the so-called ampacity.
The ampacity is the maximum amount of electrical current which a cable can carry
before sustaining immediate or progressive deterioration.
The three most common bonding methods are the following.
2.3.1 Both-ends bonding
If the arrangements are such that the cable sheaths provide path for circulating
currents at normal conditions the system is both ends bonded, see gure 2.3. This
circulating current causes losses in the screen, which reduce the cables current
carrying capacity. These losses are smaller for cables in trefoil formation than in
at formation. The circulating currents are usually much greater than the eddy
currents. Therefore the eddy currents can be ignored when dealing with sheaths
that have both points grounded.
2.3.2 Single-point bonding
If the arrangements are such that the cable sheaths provide no path for the ow of
circulating currents or external fault currents the system is single point bonded, see
gure 2.4. This is the simplest form of special bonding. The sheaths of the three
cable sections are connected and grounded at one point only along their length. At
all other points, there will be an induced voltage between sheath and ground that
will be at its maximum at the farthest point from the ground bond. The sheaths
must therefore be adequately insulated from ground. Since there is no closed sheath
circuit, except through the sheath voltage limiter, the current does not normally
ow longitudinally along the sheaths and no sheath circulation current loss occurs.
11
CHAPTER 2. DIMENSIONING OF CABLES
Figure 2.4. Single-point bonding [3]
Voltage limiters provide eective protection for personnel and equipment and it
limits occurring shock-hazard voltages to safe values.
This type of bonding can only be utilized for limited route lengths, usually less
than 500 meters, since the voltage becomes very high at the farthest point for longer
cables which causes high magnetic elds and may cause arcing in the insulation,
but in general the accepted screen voltage potential limits the length.
2.3.3 Cross-bonding
If the arrangements are such that the circuit provides electrically continuous sheath
runs from grounded termination to grounded termination but with the sheaths
so sectionalized and cross-connected in order to eliminate the sheath circulating
currents the system is cross-bonded, see gure 2.5. In that case, a voltage will
be induced between screen and ground, but no signicant current will ow. The
maximum induced voltage will appear at the link boxes where the cross bonding
takes place. The cable length is divided into three approximately equal sections.
Each of the three alternating magnetic elds induces a voltage, U
L1
, U
L2
and U
L3
,
with a phase shift of 120 in the cable shields. Ideally, the vectorial addition of the
induced voltages results in U
ires
0, see gure 2.6.
In practice, the cable length and the laying conditions will vary, resulting in a
small residual voltage and a negligible current. Since there is no current ow, there
are practically no losses in the screen. The total of the three voltages is zero, thus the
ends of the three sections can be grounded. This method permits a cable current-
carrying capacity as high as with single-point bonding but longer route lengths than
the latter. It requires screen separation and additional link boxes. Link boxes are
provided to aect the cross bonding, give the ability to isolate the sheaths from
ground for jacket integrity tests, and to house the sheath voltage limiters.
Depending on which bonding method that is chosen dierent cable formations
12
2.3. BONDING OF METALLIC SCREENS
Figure 2.5. Cross-bonding [3]
Figure 2.6. The induced voltages in a cable with three phases
13
CHAPTER 2. DIMENSIONING OF CABLES
are preferable, as mentioned earlier. Table 2.2 shows a comparison between the two
cable formations and which one that is preferable for the dierent bonding methods.
Table 2.2. Comparison between at- and trefoil formation [11]
Trefoil forma-
tion
Flat formation
Price Less expensive More expensive
Space Requires less
space
Requires more
space
Single-point bonding More losses Less losses
Cross bonding More losses Less losses
Both-ends bonding Less losses More losses
Symmetry Symmetric,
same reac-
tance between
cables
Unsymmetrical,
uneven current
distribution
2.4 Rating factors
Rating factor is a factor by which the rated current can be multiplied to determine
its absolute maximum measurable current. The rated current which is obtained
from data sheets compiled by manufacturers are a value under certain conditions.
These conditions are ground temperature, thermal resistivity, laying depth of the
cable, distance between cable groups and if the cable is installed in a pipe.
The rating factors below are valid for XLPE cables, both on land and in sea.
2.4.1 Temperature in the ground relative to temperature in the
conductor
The cooling eect from the ground decreases with increasing depth of cables, i.e.
the grounds thermal resistance increases with depth and the cables ampacity de-
creases. Therefore adjustments have to be made depending on which maximum
conductor temperature that is chosen according to table 2.3. The maximum con-
ductor temperature is the maximal temperature at which the insulation around
the conductor can retain its shape and properties under a longer period of time.
Dierent cables can withstand dierent temperatures due to dierent insulations.
14
2.4. RATING FACTORS
Table 2.3. Rating factors for ground temperature [3]
Conductor Ground Temp.

C
Temp.

C 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
90 1.07 1.04 1 0.96 0.93 0.89 0.84 0.80
65 1.11 1.05 1 0.94 0.88 0.82 0.74 0.66
2.4.2 Thermal resistivity of ground
It is not normally necessary to devote too much attention to ground thermal resis-
tivity unless there is an immediate danger that the soil will dry out. Therefore in
Sweden the thermal resistivity of the ground is normally set to be 1 and in some
cases 0.7 if the environment are more like a swamp. A frame of reference can be
seen in table 2.4.
Table 2.4. Rating factors for thermal resistivity of ground [12]
Thermal resistivity
[W/km]
Rating factor Soil conditions Weather conditions
0.7 1.14 Very moist Continuously moist
1 1.00 Moist Regular rainfall
2 0.74 Dry Seldom rains
3 0.61 Very dry Little or no rain
2.4.3 Laying depth of cables
When installing cables in the ground the rst thing that has to be done is to dig a
shaft where the cable/cables will lie. The bottom layer consists of sand on which
the cable is put and then the area around the cable is lled also with sand. On
top of this layer a warning strip is put that states the presence of a high voltage
cable underneath in case an excavating machine happens to dig near the cable.
Then the shaft is lled with earth, another warning strip is put on top and nally
completed with a layer of the environmental substance uppermost. Normally cables
are installed at a depth of 0.5 to 1 meter. However, since wind farms are built in
such remote locations it is more common to put the cables on a laying depth of 0.3
m. This is a consideration between price and likeliness that external forces would
damage the cable. A table of the rating factors at dierent laying depths can be
seen in table 2.5.
15
CHAPTER 2. DIMENSIONING OF CABLES
Table 2.5. Rating factors for laying depth [3]
Laying depth [m] Rating factor
0.3 1.16
0.5 1.10
0.7 1.05
0.9 1.01
1.00 1.00
1.20 0.98
1.50 0.95
2.4.4 Cables installed in pipes
An advantage of putting cables into pipes is that it is done simultaneously with the
completion of the roads so that the cables can be put in place at an arbitrary time
afterwards. Furthermore a damaged cable can be easily pulled out if an opening
is near by. On the other hand, when installing cables in pipes it is surrounded by
static air that inhibits the heat transportation. Thus, there has to be a rating factor
of 0.9 multiplied to the adjusted current rating when cables are installed in pipes.
2.4.5 Distance between cable groups
When several cables are put in one shaft they will all contribute to the heating of
the ground. Therefore, it is not recommendable to have two layers of cables on top
of each other due to the substantially decreased cooling eect of the cables. The
rating factors in table 2.6 are referring to the distance between trefoil formations
or at formations and not the distance between each phase.
Table 2.6. Rating factors for groups of cables in the ground [3]
Distance between Number of groups
groups [mm] 1 2 3 4 5
100 1 0.76 0.67 0.59 0.55
200 1 0.81 0.71 0.65 0.61
400 1 0.85 0.77 0.72 0.69
600 1 0.88 0.81 0.77 0.74
800 1 0.90 0.84 0.81 0.79
2000 1 0.96 0.93 0.92 0.91
16
2.5. CHAPTER SUMMARY
2.5 Chapter summary
In this chapter the importance of dimensioning the cables correctly in a grid is
emphasized. The choice of cable is dependent on bonding method, the power it
transfers, the amount of losses in the cable and rating factors. The choice of bond-
ing method has a large impact on whether at- or trefoil formation is chosen. The
amount of power that the cable is supposed to transfer decides how large cross-
sectional area the conductor has to have and consequently which material the con-
ductor should be made of. The amount of losses that occur in the cable can be a
reason, if they are too large, to increase the size of the conductor if the costs for
the losses over-weigh the costs for a larger cable. Finally the rating factors, which
mostly depend on the surrounding area, can have an inuence on whether a larger
or a smaller cable should be used. For instance if the surroundings are favourable
to the cable and actually increase its ampacity, perhaps a cable with a smaller con-
ductor area will do whilst if the surroundings are unfavourable and the ampacity of
the cable is decreased, perhaps a cable with a larger conductor area should be used.
These pros and cons can be more and less important to dierent stakeholders
depending on which situation they are in. For some stakeholders the instant cost
(investment cost) is the most important one to hold down and for others the cost
during the life-cycle (cost of losses) has to be weighed against the investment cost.
The following chapter will describe the wind turbines impact on the energy
production and the losses in the cables.
17
Chapter 3
Wind turbines
Wind turbines convert kinetic energy to mechanical energy and an example of how
they can be constructed is seen in gure 3.1. They can have dierent layouts, most
ones have gear boxes in the nacelle, but since the gear box is the most common
reason to technical failure there are also turbines produced without. The horizontal
axis turbines are made of three components; the rotor component, the generator
component and the structural support component. In gure 3.1 the procedure of
making electricity in a wind turbine is demonstrated. When wind blows over the
blades (1) it causes them to rotate. Inside the nacelle (11) the gearbox (6) connects
the low-speed shaft (5) to the high-speed shaft (12) and can change the rotational
speed so that it is suitable for the generator (7) which produces electricity. The
controller (8) starts up the turbine at wind speeds of about 3 m/s (meters per
second) and shuts o the turbine at about 25 m/s. Most turbines do not operate
at wind speeds above 25 m/s since they might be damaged by the high winds.
One method to control the rotor speed and keep the rotor from turning in high
wind speeds is to pitch out (3) the blades of the wind to let the air ow through
the blades and prevent the buoyant force that otherwise helps the blades to rotate.
Another method to control the rotor speed is to stall control the wind turbine. On a
stall-regulated wind turbine, the blades are locked in place and do not adjust during
operation. Instead the blades are designed and shaped to increasingly "stall" the
blades angle of attack with the wind to both maximize power output and protect
the turbine from excessive wind speeds. The yaw drive (13) is used to keep the
rotor facing into the wind as the wind direction changes and the yaw motor (14)
powers the yaw drive.
3.1 Wind distribution
In order to calculate the power output from a wind turbine it is necessary to know
the wind distribution in the planned turbine location. There are general methods
for calculating the probability for wind at dierent wind speeds such as Rayleigh
and Weibull, although in the method developed in this thesis the wind distribution
19
CHAPTER 3. WIND TURBINES
Figure 3.1. Layout of a wind turbine [5]
is assumed to be known to some extent, explained later. An example of a wind
distribution can be seen in gure 3.2. If the measured wind distribution is not
known but an average wind speed at the location is known a standard Rayleigh
distribution can be used.
3.1.1 Rayleigh distribution
The Rayleigh probability density function is
p
r
(v) =

2
v
v
2
av
e
_

4
_
v
v
av
_
2
_
, (3.1)
where v is the investigated wind speed and v
av
is the average wind speed at the
location of interest. An example of a Rayleigh distribution is seen in gure 3.2.
3.1.2 Weibull distribution
If the Rayleigh function is not satisfactory the Weibull function may be applied
instead. This function is depending on two parameters; a scale parameter A
w
and
a shape parameter k. If k is equal to 2 the curve becomes a Rayleigh distribution.
The Weibull probability density function is
p
w
(v) =
k
A
w
_
v
A
w
_
k1
e
_

_
v
A
w
_
k
_
, (3.2)
20
3.2. POWER CURVE
Figure 3.2. Rayleigh wind distribution
where v is the investigated wind speed, k > 0 is the shape parameter and A
w
> 0
is the scale parameter. Weibull distributions depending on what value the shape
parameter has is seen in gure 3.3.
3.2 Power curve
Another requirement for calculating the energy output of the wind turbine over a
given time period is to know the amount of power a certain wind class produces.
How much power a certain wind class produces is dependent on what value the air
density in the surrounding has which can be seen from (3.3).
P
wind
=
1
2
A
wind
v
3
W, (3.3)
where is the air density, A
wind
the cross sectional area of the wind and v the
velocity of the wind. The developed method will assume that the client has chosen
a wind turbine so that the power curve for that specic turbine is known. An
example of a power curve can be seen in gure 3.4 and the following expressions
can be found in it.
21
CHAPTER 3. WIND TURBINES
Figure 3.3. Weibull distribution with dierent shape parameter values
Cut-in speed is the wind speed at which a wind turbine begins to produce
power.
Cut-out speed is the wind speed at which the turbine is shut down to prevent
the rotor and drive train machinery from being damaged. Pitch control can be used
to gradually decrease the power output to zero with increasing wind speed.
Rated output speed is the wind speed at which the rated power is achieved.
Rated output power is the installed capacity.
When the air density changes the power curve shifts to the right if the air den-
sity is lower and to the left if it is higher but the rated power does not change. An
illustration of this is seen in gure 3.5.
22
3.3. ENERGY OUTPUT
Figure 3.4. Power curve
3.3 Energy output
When the power curve and the wind distribution are known the energy output
during a given time period can be calculated according to equation (3.4).
E =
j

i=0
h
i
P
i
T Wh, (3.4)
where h
i
is the probability of wind at wind speed i from the wind distribution, P
i
the power generated at wind speed i from the power curve, T the time period and
j the number of wind speed classes.
3.4 Losses in wind farms
The overall production of a wind farm can be limited by several factors that make
the wind turbine produce less power than what it is capable of. Such losses are
explained below.
23
CHAPTER 3. WIND TURBINES
Figure 3.5. The change in power curves with increasing/decreasing air density
Wake eect Wind turbines extract energy from the wind and downstream
there is a wake from each wind turbine, where wind speed is reduced. The ow
proceeds downstream and the wake spreads and recovers towards free stream con-
ditions. This aects the wind turbines behind and therefore wind turbines in farms
are usually spaced 5 to 9 rotor diameters apart in the prevailing wind direction and
3 to 5 rotor diameters from one another in the direction perpendicular to that in
order to avoid too much turbulence around the turbines downstream. The total
loss from the wake eect for 5 to 10 turbines is typically around 5 % or less [14].
A gure of wake eect is seen in gure 3.6 where v
0
is the wind speed at the rst
rotor, v the wind speed x meters behind the rotor, u the undisturbed wind speed
in front of the rotor and R the radius of the rotor.
Turbine availability The average turbine availability of a wind farm repre-
sents, as a percentage, a factor that needs to be applied to the energy output to
account for availability losses. These losses are associated with the amount of time
the turbines are unavailable to produce electricity. These times can be caused by
mechanical failure and the related repairs, routine maintenance or external causes
24
3.5. LOSSES IN WIND TURBINES
Figure 3.6. Wake eect [14]
such as lightning strikes and ice accumulation. Modern wind turbines have an avail-
ability of more than 98 % [4], which is a very high value in comparison with for
example nuclear power plants, which have an availability around 80 %.
Environmental In certain conditions, dirt can form on the blades or, over
time, the surface of the blades may degrade. Extremes of weather may aect the
energy production such as ice building up on wind turbines and also the growth
or felling of nearby trees. The air density, mentioned earlier, is dependent on the
environment since it changes with variances in temperature and humidity.
The wind turbines in a wind farm are often located on so called radials. These
radials come together at a transformer station that transforms the voltage to the
voltage level that the transmission grid which the farm is connected to has. From
this transformer station the export cables transfer the produced energy out to the
transmission grid. Figure 3.7 demonstrates this.
3.5 Losses in wind turbines
The wind turbines also lose power in the gear box, the generator, the controller
amongst other components but these losses are generally included in the power
curve. However the losses in the transformer that connects the wind turbine to the
grid has to be considered separately. The losses in the transformer depend on the
load current and can be expressed in two ways, no-load or full-load loss.
25
CHAPTER 3. WIND TURBINES
Figure 3.7. Layout of a wind farm
3.5.1 No-load losses
No-load losses are caused by the magnetizing current needed to energize the core
of the transformer and are present the entire time the transformer is powered on,
regardless of whether there is any load or not. The calculation of the no-load energy
losses, E
lnoload
, for a given time period T when the secondary winding is made
open-circuit is done as:
E
lnoload
= P
0
T Wh, (3.5)
where P
0
is the power without load, normally this data is given and T is a period
of time.
3.5.2 Full-load losses
The coil losses, commonly referred to as load losses, are caused by the winding
impedance and vary according to the loading on the transformer. The equation for
the energy losses with full load, E
lload
, for one year is
E
lload
= P
load

_
S
S
n
_
2
Wh, (3.6)
26
3.6. LOSSES IN LOCAL GRID
where P
load
is the power of the transformer with load, S is the apparent power of the
turbine/turbines, S
n
the apparent power of the transformer and the calculated
utilization time of losses [7].
This is a simplied method due to the lack of information that is known at the
early stages of a project. The utilization time of losses itself is an estimation of
how many hours multiplied with the maximum load that correspond to the actual
amount of energy that the transformer loses during a longer period. It is a source
of uncertainty since the measured wind velocities that the production is calculated
with, (3.3), has an uncertainty of about 2 to 4 % [6] due to measuring problems and
interferences.
The utilization time of losses is calculated according to
=
j

i=0
_
_
P
i
P
max
_
2
h
i
_
8760 h, (3.7)
where P
max
is the maximum power of the wind turbine.
The capacity factor of a wind turbine C
w
is the ratio of the actual output of a
wind turbine during a period of time and its potential output if it had operated at
full capacity the entire time.
C
w
=
E
P
max
8760
, (3.8)
where E is obtained from (3.4).
3.6 Losses in local grid
There are transformers in the grid as well and the losses that occur by them are
calculated using (4.7) and (4.6) too. Furthermore there are the cable losses that
were explained in section 2.2. Equation (2.9), the conductor losses in the cables,
can now be extended with more precise information about how it is calculated. The
current owing in the cable for a given wind speed i can be expressed as
I
i
=
n P
i
U cos
A, (3.9)
where h
i
is the probability of wind at wind speed i, P
i
the power generated at wind
speed i, n is the number of wind turbines the cable is connected to, U is the rated
voltage and cos() is the power factor. This leads to an expression for the conductor
losses that is
P
l
= I
2
R
AC
=
j

i=0
_
n P
i
U cos
_
2
R
AC
h
i
W/km, (3.10)
where R
AC
is obtained from (2.1).
27
CHAPTER 3. WIND TURBINES
3.7 Costs of the transmission systems
In general, the higher the voltage level is, the more expensive the electricity equip-
ments are. In return the power capacity increases and the losses decreases dra-
matically. Furthermore it is more expensive to establish power grids oshore than
onshore. That is a result of the more complex materials that is used along with the
fact that there are signicantly less installing ships to use. In addition to that the
installation of the wind farm must be adjusted to weather conditions.
3.7.1 Cost of losses
When calculating the price that comes with losses in the cables the computed ohmic
power loss P
l
(3.10), the dielectric loss P
d
(2.10) and the sheath loss P
sh
(2.11) is
used together with an expected electricity price for losses, .
C
l
= (P
l
+P
d
+P
sh
) T SEK (3.11)
Almost the same formula is used when calculating the costs of losses for the trans-
formers from (4.7) and (4.6).
C
ltrans
= (E
lload
+E
lnoload
) SEK (3.12)
3.7.2 Material costs
The prices for cables and other material such as transformers and stations are ob-
tained from an annually upgraded website that Svensk Energi distributes, catalogues
P1 and P2, [9],[10].
28
Chapter 4
Method
The methods purpose is, as mentioned earlier, to get an early comprehension about
the amount of losses in the internal grid and to be able to make changes to reduce
these losses without having to spend much time on the process. This method is
iterative and enables the person using this method to go back to a previous calcu-
lation step when a partial result is obtained and change certain values to see if the
amount of losses and costs increase or decrease.
4.1 Starting assumptions
The rst step in this method is to obtain a layout of the electrical grid in the wind
farm so that the conditions, the facts which can not be changed such as location of
the wind turbines and transformer stations, are known. The process of deciding the
layout of the internal grid is normally not written in stone, hence the method can
be used to evaluate if changes should be made in the rst draft. The rst draft of
the layout is made with a method called CAD, Computer-Aided Design, but how
that process works is beyond the scope of this thesis, so the assumption is now made
that the rst draft of the layout is done.
To begin with the voltage level of the internal grid is determined, but can be
altered later if the rst choice is not satisfactory. The voltage levels that can be
chosen are 12 kV, 24 kV or 36 kV. Then it can be necessary to choose another voltage
level when transporting the produced energy of the wind farm to the connecting
point in the transmission grid. If the distance to the connecting point is long then
it will be of importance from a loss perspective to have a higher voltage level on
this transport cable. In general the decision is at rst made roughly according to a
thumb rule. If the wind farm consists of 4 to 10 MW installed capacity the voltage
level of the transport cable can be 24 kV. Furthermore if there is 10 to 40 MW
installed capacity, 52-72.5 kV should be used and if there is 40 to 100 MW, 145 kV
is best suited. Higher voltages are seldom used, instead several cables are used in
29
CHAPTER 4. METHOD
parallel.
If the amount of turbines are in between two regions it should be considered
to test two dierent voltages. This is because there are certain advantages and
disadvantages with increasing and decreasing the voltage level. A higher voltage
level enables more power to ow on each cable, hence an increasing number of
turbines can be put on the same radial. Additionally the losses are reduced with
increasing voltage level. On the other hand, the cables get more expensive the
higher voltage level that is used, therefore two alternatives should be considered
when hesitant.
When the voltage level is decided the power factor has to be determined. Most
wind turbines have the goal of maintaining the power factor at 1. If the chosen wind
turbine has that control, choose cos equal to 1. However, if there is information
that says that the power factor should be lower, use that value.
4.2 Calculating production
As mentioned in the theory chapter the power curve is assumed to be known since
the specic turbine has been chosen. If however the power curve, the production of
the turbine for each wind velocity, is not known (3.3) can be used given that the
information required in that formula is known.
The wind distribution can either consist of measured values for the specic site
that is chosen, which is the most accurate approach, or with the general methods.
If only an average wind speed is known for the site the Rayleigh method, (3.1), or
the Weibull method, (3.2), should be used. In the Rayleigh method the average
wind speed, v
av
is simply used at each wind speed. In the Weibull method a shape
parameter k is chosen to decide the shape of the distribution. Furthermore a scale
parameter A, corresponding to an average wind at the site, is used.
The information about the power curve and the wind distribution can now
contribute to calculating the produced energy for each wind speed and a summation
of that energy for one turbine through the equation
E =
j

i=0
h
i
P
i
T Wh, (4.1)
with h
i
being the values from the wind distribution and P
i
the values from the
power curve.
Since the energy production is now known and the maximum power that the
wind turbine can produce of course is known too, these values can be used to get
a notion of how large the turbines capacity factor is with (3.8) and how many
hours the turbine would have to go at maximum power to achieve its annual energy
production, the capacity factor according to (3.8) multiplied with the amount of
hours in a year.
If there is a desire to rectify the total energy production by considering losses
from wake eect and availability these factors are simply multiplied with the ob-
30
4.3. DIMENSIONING CABLES
tained energy production. If no advanced wind analysis program are at hand, the
wake eect can be considered a general value for the total production loss and does
not have to be specied for each turbine. So if one turbine has 10 % production loss
and another one has 2 % production loss, make an estimation of how much the wind
farm as a whole loses and rectify the production. The same applies for availability.
Wind turbines do not have exactly the same percentile availability since they can be
subjected to dierent problems, external or electrical. This means that an average
value of all the turbines availabilities can be multiplied with the production to get
a more probable value.
4.3 Dimensioning cables
Looking at the layout of the internal grid the cable lengths between each turbine
are specied and probably also a suggestion of how large the conductors cross
sectional area should be. Start with the recommended thickness and if the results
in this step show relatively higher losses in some cables, perhaps a larger cable
should be considered.
To begin with, use the manufacturers data sheet for the cables used and locate
the cable that is chosen. Check what the manufacturer suggests that the rated
current is for the thickness and for the bonding method used. Which bonding
method that should be used can be determined by choosing the method that applies
best for the specic case, evaluated in section 2.3. The most common method to
use is the single-point bonding due to that it is the cheapest method, materially
speaking, and one of the safest together with cross bonding. Then simply use Ohms
law to double check whether the current that the layout has suggested is below the
maximum according to
I =
P
max
n
U cos
A, (4.2)
where P
max
is the maximum power of the turbine, n the number of turbines installed
on that cable, U the rated voltage and cos the power factor.
If this current turns out to be larger than the rated current, either remove
a turbine from this radial or choose a larger cable and do the calculation again.
Although, if the obtained current is just slightly over the rated current or under,
the decision should be further investigated using rating factors.
Calculating rating factors is a way to really dig deeper into what amount of
ampacity the cable can have, depending on where it is placed. Information about
location, which depth the cables are going to be placed and other factors are graded
in section 2.4 in this report. Apply the factors for this specic location and now
check again if the actual current capacity has changed. Perhaps a cables rated cur-
rent has increased or decreased, depending on the environment, and no alterations
have to be done. If there still are overloads in certain cables, increase the cables
size.
An example of how the current is altered is if a cable with an insulation that is
31
CHAPTER 4. METHOD
supposed to be able to handle temperatures up to 65

Celsius, table 2.3, lies alone

in a moist ground environment of 15

Celsius, table 2.4, 0.5 meter below the surface,

table 2.5, and in a pipe, section 2.4.4. The actual current becomes
Actual current = Current 1.14 1.05 1.10 0.9 = Current 1.185 A (4.3)
This shows that during these circumstances the cable is able to take 18.5 % more
current than what the manufacturers data sheet says.
4.4 Calculating losses
4.4.1 Cables
When the production is obtained and the cables dimensions are decided the losses
can be calculated. Use the formula for the AC resistance, (2.1) by specifying the
formation and size of the cable. The losses for this certain cable are obtained with
P
l
= I
2
R
AC
=
j

i=0
_
n P
i
U cos
_
2
h
i
R
AC
W/km (4.4)
This needs to be done for all cable sections in the layout. When the loss calculations
for the cables are completed an inspection of the results are in order. If any loss
value is signicantly higher than the others the easiest way to improve this is to
choose a larger cable for that particular length, more expensive material but reduced
losses. These ohmic losses are signicantly higher than the dielectric and the sheath
losses, but if thoroughness is required, use (2.10) and (2.11) to calculate them and
add to the ohmic losses. These losses will however not aect the choice of cable
size.
If the power factor was chosen to be equal to 1 then the reactive losses does not
exist, but if the power factor was less than 1 the equation below is used to obtain
these losses
Q
l
=
j

i=0
_
n P
i
U cos
_
2
h
i
X
L
VAr/km (4.5)
where the inductive reactance is obtained by nding the cables inductance in the
manufacturers data sheet.
4.4.2 Transformers
Then the transformer losses are to be calculated. These losses are often not possible
to change since they are dependent on the size of the transformer, which is usually
dimensioned correctly. They often contribute to the largest amount of losses in the
internal grid so it is important that they are included in loss calculations.
The required information to be able to compute these losses is the maximal
apparent power of the turbine S, the apparent power of the transformer S
n
, the
32
4.5. CALCULATING COSTS
power with load, P
load
, and the power without load, P
0
. All these values are obtained
from the manufacturer.
This information is then used in the equations
E
lload
= P
load

_
S
S
n
_
2
Wh, (4.6)
and
E
lnoload
= P
0
T Wh, (4.7)
as stated earlier in the report. Perform these calculations both for the transformers
at each wind turbine as well as for any park transformers that may be situated in
the internal grid.
Now the losses for the internal grid are calculated. As stated earlier the trans-
former losses are high and there is not much that can be done to decrease them, if
not reducing the capacity of the whole wind farm.
4.5 Calculating costs
The nal step of this method is to calculate the costs for losses and the used material.
The optimized losses are used in equations
C
l
= (P
l
+P
d
+P
sh
) T SEK (4.8)
and
C
ltrans
= (E
lload
+E
lnoload
) SEK (4.9)
The only question mark in these equations is . The expected electricity price for
losses, , can be obtained at a trading site for electricity such as NordPool [13].
Depending on which voltage level that was chosen for the internal grid the costs for
the material are going to dier rather much. The material cost for dierent voltage
levels should always be examined since they could be the reason to change or stay
with a certain voltage level. This is the chance to compare the prices to the voltage
levels. For example if the chosen voltage at rst was 24 kV that generally means
less expensive material costs but larger costs for losses. If 36 kV was to be chosen
perhaps the sum of the cost for those losses, since they are signicantly lower, and
the material price are below the price for 24 kV. In many cases this is the case.
Additionally, although beyond the scope of this report, tari costs for supplying
the transmission grid with new electricity are often higher the lower voltage level
that is supplied to the grid.
The prices of components are obtained from Svensk Energi, [9], [10]. This site
has prices for whole packages, such as a transformer stations including labour ex-
penses and digging costs, to prices for specic components, such as single cable
compartment.
The same components but for dierent voltage levels naturally have dierent
prices and therefore it is more expensive with higher voltage equipment.
33
CHAPTER 4. METHOD
The substance of this chapter is that neither material costs nor cost of losses
can be considered separately. The optimal price for an internal grid in a wind farm
is reached when these two factors are compared to each other.
34
Chapter 5
Case study
The aim of this masters thesis was to develop a method that calculated the losses
of the internal grid in a wind farm and its costs so that this information could be
acquired at an early stage in wind farm projects. In this chapter the developed
method is applied to a test system and compared to a method that also has made
calculations for this test system.
5.1 The test system
The test system used to evaluate the developed method is a site that consists of 15
turbines with 34,5 MW installed capacity and an internal grid of 24 kV, which is
connected to a 145 kV transmission grid. The cables have conductor areas of 240
mm
2
and 95 mm
2
and the insulation is supposed to be able to withstand heat up to
65

Celsius. It has one transformer station in the internal grid that transforms the
voltage from 24 kV to 145 kV and 15 transformers in the towers that transform the
voltage from 0,69 kV to 24 kV. The layout of the wind farm is seen in gure 5.1.
5.2 The PSS/E study
A study was used as a reference to conrm whether the developed method is a good
model for calculating losses and their costs. This study was made in PSS/E to
describe the conditions for connecting a wind farm, both from the connecting grids
perspective and the electrical layouts.
PSS/E is a software tool used for simulating, analysing and optimizing electrical
transmission networks and provides probabilistic and dynamic modelling features.
The information that this analysis provides is rst and foremost a voltage prole, the
fault current contribution, icker emission and harmonics. Furthermore the report
from this study contains information about grid layout, maximum transmission
losses, dimensioning of cables and reactive power compensation.
35
CHAPTER 5. CASE STUDY
Figure 5.1. Layout of the test system wind farm
5.3 Comparison
5.3.1 Theoretical comparison
The method in PSS/E only calculates maximum losses, the losses that occur at
maximum production, and not the actual losses. The maximum losses multiplied
with the utilization time of losses, need to be calculated by hand afterwards. Hence,
PSS/E does not really have an equivalent method to the one developed in this thesis.
Therefore the developed method arranged in a software is the fastest way to make
the calculations for losses.
PSS/E should be used when more advanced calculations are required to ob-
tain information such as power ow and to perform dynamic simulations. The
two methods can therefore be seen as complementing each other. The developed
method in this report can be used early in a wind farm project to be able to make
essential decisions about layout and dimensioning whilst PSS/E can be used later
when a permit is approved to make detailed power ow calculations and dynamic
simulations.
The execution times of these two methods are also a factor that makes a dif-
ference. The method developed in this thesis can for an untrained person take
36
5.3. COMPARISON
approximately up to one hour. A person with routine can perform the assumptions
and the calculations within a half hour. When requesting a study made in PSS/E on
the other hand, the deliverance time can take up to several weeks, a very uncertain
factor when dealing with projects that has tight deadlines.
As pointed out earlier in this report, the analysis of the losses and its costs in a
process today is made relatively late. There is a reason for this. The information
about components and performance of the components is very inadequate at an
early stage of a project. That causes a certain dilemma since it is early in the
project the losses need to be considered.
This method is therefore built on the fact that there is not very detailed informa-
tion at the time the method is used and could truthfully lead to slightly less precise
calculations. On the other hand, the experience in the industry is that an approxi-
mation is better than not analysing the losses at all, and without a comprehension
let a site be permitted with essential aws.
The turbine transformer losses in the developed method are an approximation
since the specic information about the transformers are not known at the early
stage when these calculations are to be performed. The developed methods calcu-
lations are based on the apparent power of the turbine and the transformer together
with the full-load power of the transformer. The PSS/E study probably had more
information such as the transformers impedance and thus a more exact value.
Furthermore the accuracy of the calculations in the PSS/E study is not known
so some dierence can be due to that man-made approximations have been made.
5.3.2 Actual comparison
In table 5.1 a selection from a comparison of production and losses of the same
system can be seen.
To examine if the developed method is something that can be used in real
projects a comparison with a PSS/E study was made. Some values dier between
the results from the developed method and the PSS/E study.
The deviation in cable losses is probably due to that the PSS/E study did not
include dielectric and sheath losses when calculating the maximum losses in the
cables.
The diering values in produced energy could be that the study used a general
model for a wind distribution, which is not as precise as having the real measured
wind distribution that was used in the developed method. The table shows that
the losses stand for 1,6 % of the produced energy in this wind farm. It should be
taken into consideration that the park transformer losses were not calculated in the
PSS/E study. If they are added the total percentage of losses increases to 2,0 % of
the total production, which is in the range of 2-3 % that was stated earlier in the
report.
The dierence in total losses between the developed program and the PSS/E
study is 30 MWh/year without the park transformer included and 469 MWh/year
with the park transformer included, which approximately corresponds to 60 re-
37
CHAPTER 5. CASE STUDY
Table 5.1. Comparison between the developed software results and the PSS/E study
Developed
software
PSS/E
study
Produced energy [GWh/year] 110 113
Utilization time of losses [h/year] 2368 2370
Export cable losses [MWh/year] 351 344
Local grid cable losses [MWh/year] 414 405
Turbine transformer losses (noload) [MWh/year] 342 342
Turbine transformer losses (load) [MWh/year] 653 639
Total losses [MWh/year] 1760
1.6%
1730
1.5%
Park transformer losses (noload) [MWh/year] 175 N/A
Park transformer losses (load) [MWh/year] 264 N/A
Total losses [MWh/year] 2199
2.0%
1730
1.5%
spectively 235 kSEK/year. The fact that the developed method makes a higher
estimation of losses is obviously something that a client is not thrilled about. On
the other hand it may be better to over-estimate, if the program does that, so that
the client can be pleasantly surprised later when the losses turn out to be a bit less,
than the other way around. However, the fact is that the clients often do not reect
on this matter called losses. With this developed program the cost of losses during
a year and a life time of a wind farm can easily be shown and hopefully increase
the knowledge of its importance.
38
Chapter 6
Conclusions and future work
This masters thesis was about developing a method that would calculate losses and
the costs relating to those losses for the internal grid in wind farms. The losses and
the relating costs are shown to be dependent on the dimensioning of the cables and
the amount of energy obtained from the wind turbines.
The method has proven to be a relatively accurate model and a good estimator
of losses. It can be of guidance in the early stages of a project to get an overall
estimation of losses and their costs. The method is iterative and enables the person
using this method to go back to a previous calculation step when a partial result is
obtained and change so that the results get more appealing.
The calculated losses are dependent on which cable that is used, material and
formation, which wind turbine model that is chosen, power curve, and where the
site is located, which is reected in the wind distribution.
The choices of choosing the right cables and voltage levels for an internal grid in
a wind farm are however not black and white. The important part of this method
is the relation between costs of material and losses. Although the material costs are
the ones subjected to a client initially, and also something that they often react to,
it is important to weigh these costs against the cost of losses.
The costs of losses are present during the whole life cycle of a wind farm and
therefore it is crucial to dimension cables optimally to reduce these losses to the
greatest extent. Additionally it is important to emphasize that this is a cost that
in the worst case exceeds the material cost if the choice to bargain on the size of
the cable is made.
Compared with the already existing program PSS/E the developed method re-
quires much less time to obtain results and calculates the costs for all losses in the
internal grid.
This method allows VPC to get an estimation of losses and its costs at an ear-
lier stage than what they get today. It also makes VPC more able to recommend
changes in a project before the decisions are made.
39
CHAPTER 6. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK
This masters thesis led to a project employment at VPC where this method is
to be taken into use to give clients an estimation of costs for building and running
a wind farm. The method can therefore be further developed into optimizing the
costs of a wind farm. One thing that can increase the width of the method is if
the making of the rst layout is included more. The layout which usually is made
in CAD can denitely be optimized by choosing appropriate paths, not over high
hills or around cities, and perhaps by laying cables together for longer routes to
minimize costs for digging shafts. Every meter of cable that is saved, saves a lot
of losses over the years. The method in this report already has the cable lengths
decided when obtaining a rst draft of the layout, and it shall be pointed out that
this layout is a very important part of the work when establishing an electrical grid
for a wind farm.
Furthermore the eect of wake losses and availability can be developed if a method
for specifying what wake eect each turbine has in the farm along with their avail-
ability is created. It would generate a more accurate energy production and thus
more accurate values of the losses.
Another thing that can be added is the impact of taris. Taris are taken from elec-
tricity companies when new wind farms are built, due to the increasing load in the
grid. On the other hand these companies can also give a refund if the wind farms
supplied electricity reduces the losses that would occur if the electricity otherwise
would have to be taken from a location farther away. These taris are increased the
lower voltage level that is used in the internal grid in the wind farm, and therefore
it can be of importance to also consider this when weighing the choices for building
the grid for a wind farm.
40
Bibliography
[1] International standard IEC 60287-1-1.
[2] Ericsson Network Technologies AB. Kraftkabelhandboken. Intellecta Stralins,
2004.
[3] ABB. XLPE Land Cable Systems - Users guide, rev 5 edition, 2010.
[4] American Wind Energy Association. Website, 2009. URL
http://archive.awea.org/faq/wwt_basics.html.
[5] Danish Wind Industry Association. Website, Updated 2003. URL
http://guidedtour.windpower.org/en/tour.htm.
[6] Weathermen at Vattenfall Power Consultant AB.
[7] U. A. Bakshi and M. V. Bakshi. Transformers and Induction Machines. Tach-
nical Publications Pune, 2008.
[8] Mikael Eklund. Vattenfall Power Consultant AB.
[9] Svensk Energi. Kostnadskatalog lokal 0,4-24 kv, April 2011. URL www.ebr.nu.
[10] Svensk Energi. Kostnadskatalog region 36-145 kv, April 2011. URL
www.ebr.nu.
[11] M.A Laughton and D.F Warne, editors. Electrical engineers reference book.
Newnes, 2003.
[12] BICC Cables Ltd. Electric cables handbook. Blackwell publishing, 1997.
[13] NordPool. URL www.nordpoolspot.com.
[14] Tore Wizelius. Developing wind power projects. James & James Ltd, 2006.
41