1

Abstract-- All relevant studies indicate that future electricity

networks will see a significant increase in renewable-based
distributed generation (DG) and much wider application of
load management and intelligent network technologies. The
impact of DG and demand-side actions is direct and easily
observed in the distribution networks. Their effects on
transmission system performance, however, are more difficult
to assess and quantify. Accordingly, this paper attempts to
assess the impact of DG and demand side management at the
sub-transmission and transmission levels, where realistic
models of DG (including micro and small-scale DG) and
improved aggregate load models (incorporating models of
demand-manageable loads) are connected to network. The
propagation of harmonics from distribution to transmission
networks due to a substantially increased contribution from
inverter-interfaced DG and modern non-linear loads is also
discussed in the paper.

Index Terms--Power system modelling and analysis,
distributed generation, microgeneration, demand side
management, transmission system performance, harmonics,
load modeling, power quality.
I. NOMENCLATURE
L L
X R , Line resistance, reactance.
n
Z Transformer impedance
T
Z Total aggregated transformer impedance.
n
C Shunt capacitance, expressed in MVA.
T
C Total aggregated shunt capacitance.
PCC Point of common coupling.
Q P, Actual active and reactive powers of load.
0 0
, Q P Rated active and reactive powers of load.
p p p
P I Z , , Real power coefficients of ZIP load model.
q q q
P I Z , , Reactive power coefficients of ZIP load
model.
THD Total harmonic distortion.
II. INTRODUCTION
LECTRICITY networks are seeing a significant increase
in the penetration of DG and application of load
management and other intelligent/flexible network control
technologies [1], [2]. A considerable amount of ongoing

This work was supported by the SuperGen FlexNet Consortium (grant
number EP/E04011X/1) funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences
Research Council.
B. P. Hayes, A. J. Collin, J. L. Acosta and S. Z. Djoki are with the
Institute for Energy Systems, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh,
Scotland (e-mail: [email protected]).


research is aimed at maximizing penetration of DG in
existing distribution networks and subsequent/concurrent
application of demand side management (DSM) to improve
network performance [3]. Generally, the impact of DG and
DSM at the distribution level (33kV and below in the UK)
tends to be direct and easily observed. Their effects on
transmission system performance (132kV and above in the
UK), however, are more difficult to quantify and cannot be
characterized by a simple metric. Accordingly, a full and
precise assessment of the interactions between the
transmission system, distributed generation and demand-side
technologies is possible only if accurate and realistic models
of DG (including contributions from micro and small-scale
DG) and demand-manageable loads are incorporated in the
representations of aggregate system components connected
to distribution and transmission networks.
This paper assesses the performance of a transmission
system with accurate and scalable models of DG and DSM
load connected to it, and compares the results obtained using
various modeling techniques. In order to present easily
reproducible and exchangeable results, a modified version of
IEEE 14-bus test system is used in analysis and simulations
are carried out in PSS/E software platform [4].
Section III of this paper outlines some of the results of
previous work in this area. Section IV deals with the input
wind data used for the modeling of medium to large scale
DG (e.g. wind farms) and outlines work done on model
validation. Section V discusses the incorporation of micro
and small-scale DG models presented in a sister paper [5], as
well as the improved aggregate load models presented in the
second sister paper [6], in the analysis. The propagation of
harmonics from distribution to transmission networks is also
dealt with here. Section VI discusses the results, while main
conclusions are given in Section VII.
III. PREVIOUS WORK
The integration of DG into the electricity network
presents a number of well-documented issues, such as
voltage rise ([7]) and reverse power flows ([8]) at a
distribution level, or a general need to manage intermittency
and reserve requirement s ([9]) at a transmission level. The
exact nature of the effects that the DG will have on the
network performance generally depends on the network in
question, the size, type and location of the DG units, as well
as on the intermittency of the input DG resources. Studies
into the impact of DG have recently begun to move away
from "worst case scenario" approaches (i.e. analysis of the
network for a small number of cases, e.g. for maximum
demand and minimum generation, and vice versa) to time
Assessment of the Influence of Distributed Generation and
Demand Side Management on
Transmission System Performance
B. P. Hayes, Student Member, IET, A. J. Collin, Student Member, IET, J. L. Acosta, Student Member,
IET, and S. . Djoki, Member, IET.
E
2
series-based techniques, such as that described in [10].
These methods allow estimation of the annual loading of
each system component (e.g. transformer or line) and
calculation of voltage profiles at each system bus, in order to
assess the range and extent of overloading and unacceptable
voltage supply conditions.
Transmission system operators in the UK have
traditionally represented all embedded DG (and DSM) as the
negative loads [11] in network studies. While this approach
has proven to be effective with relatively low levels of DG,
more realistic models of DG connected to the distribution
network are required to accurately evaluate system
performance for high DG penetration levels. Due to the fact
that DG tends to be made up of a large number of smaller
units (compared to the size of conventional generation), an
effective method for aggregating DG units, such as that
described in [12], is required. A comprehensive summary of
the current models available for representing DG (focusing
mainly on wind) is offered in [13].
Similarly, models for representing DSM measures and
actions, such as those described in [14], are not yet
standardized. Papers, such as [15] and [16], illustrate how
direct load control can be used to flatten the overall system
load profile and provide services to enhance security.
Modeling of direct load control is relatively straightforward,
but consideration must also be given to cases where DSM
actions are indirect, i.e. where the implementation of a DSM
measure/action depends on, for example, a customers'
response, or willingness to respond to a price signal. In order
to provide at least some preliminary answers to these
questions, this paper, together with two sister papers that
accompany it, presents the analysis of system performance
with the models of micro and small-scale DG taken from [5]
and improved and more realistic load models of the
residential and commercial load sectors taken from [6].
Some of the results of this joint work are incorporated in the
analysis in Section V.

IV. WIND FARM MODELING AND VALIDATION
Wind turbines based on a doubly-fed induction generator
(DFIG) technology form the largest proportion of DG on the
UK network [17]. The models and equations used to
represent DFIG technologies are well established [18]. The
active and reactive power outputs of the machine can be
regulated independently by voltage source converters,
allowing the reactive power to be adjusted for voltage
control purposes [19]. In the analysis presented below, bus
voltage at the point of common coupling is controlled within
the generator unit's reactive power range.
A. Model Validation
Three years of recorded SCADA data was obtained from
a UK-based wind farm. The data includes measurements of
wind speed and wind direction, along with the real power
outputs of the generators, all measured at 10-minute
intervals. This data was used to directly validate the wind
turbine models used in this paper for the representation and
aggregation of medium to large-scale wind-based DG
systems. An individual wind turbine unit from the wind farm
was modeled in PSS/E using the generic DFIG wind turbine
dynamic model from the internal library [4].
At each 10-min time interval, the mechanical input power
to the turbine is adjusted according to the recorded wind
speed at the hub height and corresponding blade pitch angle.
For each wind speed measurement, the per-unit mechanical
power is determined using the power coefficient curve of the
implemented wind turbine, assuming that the turbine is
initially running at full rated power and that the initial blade
pitch angle is zero. The mechanical input power is then
adjusted, and dynamic simulation was run until all outputs
settled to a steady state. For input wind speed data in Fig. 1,
Fig. 2 shows the comparison of the simulated power output
of one modelled turbine (3 MW) with the actual recorded
power output of one turbine from the wind farm for a time
period of around 3 days.



Fig. 1. Wind speed input time series (measured at hub height) for a period
of approximately 3 days.



Fig. 2. Comparison of measured (solid red line) and simulated (dashed
black line) power outputs for a single wind turbine; overall average error is
calculated as less than 7%.

B. Aggregation of Wind Turbine Models
Methods for the aggregation of wind turbines in typical
wind farm configurations are discussed in detail in [20]. In
the example below, a 15 MW wind farm was added to the
IEEE 14-bus test system at Bus 13, as indicated in Fig. 3.
The added wind farm comprises of ten 1.5 MW turbines.
3


Fig. 3. The IEEE 14-bus network, showing DG (15 MW wind farm) added
at Bus 13.

The network was then solved for two cases: a) where a
detailed wind farm model, comprising of 10 x 1.5 MW
turbines, is used, and b) where 10 turbines are represented
by an aggregated DG model, i.e. by a single 15 MW DG
unit. In the aggregated model, the whole wind farm is
represented using a single generator and an equivalent
circuit to model the step-up transformers and collector
branches of each individual turbine, as outlined in Fig. 4.
For the aggregate machine, it is assumed that the electrical
characteristics of all aggregated turbines are identical. The
per-unit values of relevant parameters, such as reactances,
reactive power limits, control voltages, etc., are left
unchanged, and the machine electrical base is scaled
according to the actual number of aggregated individual
turbines. Step-up transformers and collector system lines are
aggregated by calculating the equivalent parallel impedance,
while shunt compensation is combined for all units and
modeled explicitly [20].

Bus 13
PCC
Bus 13
IEEE 14 Bus
Network
IEEE 14 Bus
Network
2
C
n
C
WT2
WT1
1
C
WT(n)
Lumped
Machine
n T
C C C C + + + = ...
2 1
Detailed Model
Aggregated Model
n T
Z Z Z Z
1
...
1 1 1
2 1
+ + + =
L
R
L
X
,
L
R
L
X
,
2
Z
1
Z
n
Z


Fig. 4. Illustration of the aggregation procedure used for a wind farm
consisting of n individual wind turbines.

It should be noted that, according to [21], larger wind
farms may need to be represented by a number of aggregated
machines and collector systems, depending on the site layout
and configuration.
Table I shows the results of power/load flow solution for
both cases (10 individual units and one aggregate unit),
where the wind speed inputs are identical for each turbine,
and have been adjusted so that all units are running at full
rated power. Fig. 4 shows the simulated real and reactive
power responses to a 200 ms fault at a nearby bus for both
considered cases.

TABLE I
NETWORK POWER FLOW SOLUTIONS (ALL UNITS AT FULL RATED POWER)
(i) Detailed model (ii) Aggregated model
Bus Voltage (V) Angle (deg) Voltage (V) Angle (deg)
13 0.9941 -14.45 0.9943 -14.38
14 0.9706 -16.05 0.9707 -15.99
15 0.9961 -14.25 0.9963 -14.18



Fig. 4. P and Q responses at the point of common coupling following a
200ms fault at Bus 14, when all units are identical and running at full rated
power (solid red line corresponds to detailed individual units model, while
dashed blue line corresponds to the aggregate unit model).

In a real system, however, input wind profiles (and power
outputs) of each turbine will not be identical, as they will
vary based on actual wind speed input at each turbine,
presence and extent of turbulences, occurrence of wind
shadows and other effects. Therefore, variable wind speed
inputs were applied to each turbine in the detailed model,
based on the actual wind speed measurements at hub height
during a specified time interval. Input wind speed for the
aggregated model is calculated as the average of all of
individual wind speed measurements. Table II shows the
power flow solution in this case, while the corresponding
fault responses are given in Fig. 5. Again, the obtained
results show only small differences, confirming that a correct
aggregated model of a wind farm could be also developed
for this more realistic case.

TABLE II
NETWORK POWER FLOW SOLUTIONS (VARIABLE WIND INPUTS APPLIED)
(i) Detailed model (ii) Aggregated model
Bus Voltage (V) Angle (deg) Voltage (V) Angle (deg)
13 0.9929 -14.76 0.9936 -14.56
14 0.9700 -16.28 0.9703 -16.13
15 0.9948 -14.58 0.9955 -14.37

4


Fig. 5. P and Q response at the point of common coupling following a
200 ms fault at Bus 14, for the case where variable wind speed inputs are
used for individual units and their average for aggregate unit.
V. NETWORK ANALYSIS
A. Analysis of IEEE 14-bus System with no DG connected
The main aim of the presented steady state analysis is to
evaluate network performance with various DG models and
load models connected to the network. The analysis is first
carried out using the IEEE 14-bus test system with no DG
connected and system load represented using constant power
(i.e. constant MVA) load model A time-series analysis,
similar to that described in [3] is applied. This provides a
means for estimating the range and extent of unacceptable
bus voltage conditions and/or thermal overloads of system
components.
The assumed demand profile at all load buses in the
modelled network is given in Fig. 6, corresponding to half-
hourly time intervals over the course of a single day (giving
a total of 48 settlement periods). The actual system demand
data is taken from [22], based on a typical spring weekday in
the UK.



Fig. 6. Assumed system demand curve for a typical spring day in UK,
expressed in per-unit based on the daily maximum/peak load.

The voltage profiles at each network bus and the MVA-
flows in each branch were calculated by solving the steady
state power flow for each load point in the system-demand
time-series, with the results displayed in Figs. 7 and 8.


Fig. 7. Voltage profiles at all system buses for the time-series power flows;
voltage at buses 1, 2, 3, 6 and 8 is constant and equal to unity due to
voltage regulation action of the generators and synchronous condensers.



Fig. 8. The results for MVA flows for the applied time series, expressed as
a percentage of the flow obtained at full/maximum load.

5
B. Analysis with DG connected
The time-series analysis was repeated in this section using
a modified version of the IEEE 14-bus test system, where
the generation has been adjusted to create a case with a high
penetration of intermittent DG. Five wind farms, each with
installed power of 18 MW, were added to the system as
shown in Fig. 9. The total system demand in the IEEE 14-
bus network is 258.2 MW, and the amount of system
capacity which could be provided with all DG units
operating at full/rated power output, or the total network
"penetration", is about 35%. Total load on the distribution
side of the network (i.e. at Buses 6-14) is 87.3 MW, which
gives a DG penetration in this part of the system of 103%.



Fig. 9. Modified IEEE 14-bus network, showing 90 MW of DG added on
the distribution side of the network.

Wind speed inputs were again taken from the recorded
wind farm data discussed in Section II, in order to simulate a
range of different wind scenarios. For the assumed wind
speed inputs (labeled DG1-DG5, Fig. 10), real and reactive
power outputs for each settlement period were calculated
using the aggregate wind farm model described in
Section IV. The correlation between the power outputs of
the aggregate DG model and system demand curve (all loads
represented using constant MVA load model) is illustrated in
Fig. 11.


Fig. 10. Measured wind speeds at hub height for a typical spring day.


Fig. 11. Correlation between system load profile and aggregate DG output.

Both demand and generation profiles corresponding to
half-hourly time intervals over the course of one day are
applied and the time-series power flow is solved again.
Results for network voltages and MVA flows are displayed
in Figs. 12 and 13, respectively.



Fig. 12. Voltage profiles for the time-series power flow analysis with a
high penetration of medium/large DG technology.




6


Fig. 13. The results for MVA flows with a high penetration of
medium/large DG, expressed as a percentage of flow at a full load in "no
DG" scenario.

Fig. 12 shows higher voltages on the distribution side of
the network, where DG has been connected. Overall, the
voltage profile of the system is improved, as the voltage
regulation action of the DG units brings voltages in the
periphery of the network closer to unity. Fig. 13 shows
dramatically increased reverse flows on the distribution side
(particularly branches 18-20) due to the connected DG and
reduced line and transformer loading in the rest of the
network.

C. Analysis with Micro and Small-scale DG
In this section, the scalable aggregate models of
embedded micro and small-scale wind-based generation
described in the accompanying/sister paper [5] are included
in the analysis. This part of the presented analysis is carried
out by adding an aggregate micro and small-scale DG
capacity at load buses, amounting to 10% of the maximum
MW demand at each load bus. For instance, if the MW
demand at a given bus is 10 MW, 0.1 MW of micro-DG
capacity is added at that bus. The output from micro-DG
resources is scaled at each time interval according to the
microgeneration assessment detailed in [5], and is included
in the analysis as a negative load at each load bus. The
overall average output of the aggregate micro/small DG
units for a typical spring day is given in Fig. 14.



Fig. 14. Overall average per-unit contribution from aggregate micro and
small-scale DG for a typical spring day.

The results for bus voltage profiles and branch power
flows obtained in this part of the analysis are shown in
Figs. 15 and 16.



Fig. 15. Voltage profile results for the time-series power flow analysis with
a high penetration of medium/large DG technology, and models of
micro/small DG units included.


7


Fig. 16. The results for MVA flows with a high penetration of
medium/large DG technology, and models of micro/small DG units
included.

D. Analysis using Realistic Load Models
The network analysis detailed so far has treated all loads
as constant real and reactive power demands, i.e. all system
loads are represented by a constant MVA load model. In
this section, all constant MVA loads are replaced by a more
realistic aggregate model of residential load, as discussed in
the accompanying/sister paper [6].
The changes in active and reactive power demands of the
modelled load with supply voltage variations can be
analytically expressed using the polynomial or "ZIP" load
model, [23]. Real and reactive power demands of the load in
the ZIP model are given by (1) and (2), with the sum of
coefficients equal to +1, where -1 indicates a resulting
capacitive load for reactive power model, (3):

+
|
|

\
|
+
|
|

\
|
=
p p p
P
V
V
I
V
V
Z P P
0
2
0
0
(1)

+
|
|

\
|
+
|
|

\
|
=
q q q
P
V
V
I
V
V
Z Q Q
0
2
0
0
(2)
1 = + + = + +
q q q p p p
P I Z P I Z (3)
The previous analysis was repeated, replacing the
constant MVA loads at all buses in the distribution part of
the IEEE 14-bus network (Buses 6-14) with the
corresponding ZIP load models. The load model coefficients
are taken from [6], where they are calculated at half-hourly
intervals for a typical spring day, and are then incorporated
in the time-series analysis presented here. The same demand
and generation profiles are applied at half-hourly intervals as
before. Voltage profile and MVA flow results for the
network are displayed in Figs. 17 and 18.


Fig. 17. Voltage profiles for the time-series power flow analysis with a
high penetration of medium/large DG technology, micro/small DG units,
and realistic load models included.

Fig. 17 shows that there are more significant voltage
variations over the 24-hour period due to the inclusion of
realistic load representations. Fig. 18 displays some small
differences in the pattern of load flows in the network.



8
Fig. 18. The results for MVA flows with a high penetration of
medium/large DG technology, micro/small DG, and realistic load models
included.
E. Analysis of Potential Benefits of Applying DSM
It is estimated in [6] that there is around 17% of
deferrable (i.e. demand-manageable) loads at the system
peak demand in the residential load sector. Using this
assertion, a contingency case was examined next, where one
of the conventional generators (generator connected at
Bus 2) in the IEEE 14-bus network was disconnected from
the system at the peak demand (see daily load curve, Fig. 6).
The potential for alleviating unacceptable voltage
conditions and improving network performance under this
contingency through applied DSM actions, i.e. by
disconnecting demand-manageable loads on the distribution
side of the network (Buses 6-14), is investigated and
presented in this section. The load composition at daily
system peak has been accurately estimated in [6]. This
allowed for the calculation of the amount of load which
could potentially be deferred (consisting of, e.g.
refrigeration, washing machines, etc.) and also for the
calculation of the corresponding load model coefficients
before/after activating a DSM measure. It was assumed for
the purposes of this analysis that the DSM action can
directly disconnect any available demand-manageable load
at the very instant when a major disturbance occurs
(similarly to load shedding, which could be triggered by the
detection of a sudden drop in frequency).
The resulting network voltage profiles are illustrated in
Fig. 19 below for three applied scenarios: a) peak demand,
with no disturbance, b) contingency at peak demand,
resulting in unacceptable voltage conditions at Buses 4
and 5, and c) contingency at peak demand with devised
DSM action activated.



Fig. 19. Network voltages profiles at system peak load demonstrating the
potential of DSM to alleviate unacceptable voltage supply conditions.

The above example clearly illustrates the potential of
DSM actions which, when applied at a distribution level, can
improve the overall/transmission network performance under
certain critical operating conditions. It is important to stress
that this analysis requires realistic models of loads and
correct identification of demand-manageable portion of the
load in the total demand.
F. Analysis of Power Quality and Harmonic Propagation
Consideration must also to be given to harmonic
emissions resulting from an increased contribution of
inverter-interfaced DG technologies (both micro/small DG
units and medium/large DG units) and non-linear loads, in
order to comply with mandatory requirements given in
standards (e.g. [24]). This section focuses on the analysis of
the propagation of harmonics from the distribution to the
transmission network, again using the IEEE 14-bus test
system as described previously.
Most DFIG-based wind turbines utilize pulse-width
modulated (PWM) inverters, which produce harmonic
currents. Estimates of the typical harmonic current emissions
of DFIG-based medium/large DG technologies are taken
from the data provided in [25]. The harmonic contributions
from the realistic load models that are capable of including
non-linear power electronic devices are taken from [6], and
are averaged over the 24-hour period. Only the 1st, 3rd, 5th,
7th, and 9th harmonics are included in the analysis. Table III
shows the current harmonic injections from the added DFIG-
based wind farms and from the realistic load models.
Currents for each harmonic order are expressed in per-unit,
as a percentage of the fundamental component.

TABLE III
CURRENT HARMONIC INJECTIONS SIMULATED IN IEEE 14-BUS NETWORK.
Contribution from DFIG-based wind models
Harmonic
Order 1st 3rd 5th 7th 9th
Magnitud
e (p.u.) 1 0.175 0.13 0.09 0.02
Angle
(degrees) 0 -180 0 -180 0
Contribution from advanced load models
Harmonic
Order 1st 3rd 5th 7th 9th
Magnitud
e (p.u.) 1 0.193 0.069 0.088 0.111
Angle
(degrees) -110.18 72.82 -54.44 159.34 -18.88

This data was then used to simulate the injection of
harmonic currents in the considered network using the
PCFLO software package [26]. The corresponding harmonic
emissions are added at each bus where DG and/or non-linear
loads are connected. Table IV shows the resulting voltage
total harmonic distortion (THD) throughout the network,
expressed as a percentage of voltage at each bus.













9
TABLE IV
VOLTAGE TOTAL HARMONIC DISTORTION SIMULATED IN IEEE 14-BUS
NETWORK.
Bus
Voltage
(p.u.)
THD
(%) Bus
Voltage
(p.u.)
THD
(%)
1 1 1.44 8 1 2.12
2 0.992 1.48 9 0.976 6.6
3 0.968 0.99 10 0.982 5.19
4 0.964 1.98 11 0.997 2.86
5 0.966 1.8 12 1 2.27
6 1 1.45 13 0.992 2.64
7 0.985 4.05 14 0.98 3.48

VI. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
The presented results indicate significant changes in
network performance after more realistic/improved models
of medium/large DG and micro/small DG, as well as
realistic aggregate load models are added to the system.
The analysis of network when no DG is connected shows
lower voltages at the peripheral buses (Fig. 7). When models
of medium to large-scale DG are added, the overall voltage
profile of the network improved, but this resulted in
increased/reversed power flows on the distribution side of
the network (Fig. 13). Connection of micro and small-scale -
DG results in additional variation of the network voltage
profile (Fig. 15), and also has the effect of reducing the
network power flows at the time of peak demand (Fig. 16).
The addition of realistic load models, representing
hourly variations of total demand in residential load sector,
resulted in significantly wider range of variations of system
voltage profiles and power flows over the course of the 24-
hour period studied (Figs. 17 and 18). Additionally, as the
advanced load models allowed identification of the portion
of load available for DSM, the paper demonstrated the
potential benefits of using DSM actions to support network
voltages for a simulated contingency event. Finally, in the
last part of the paper, the propagation of harmonics from the
distribution side to the transmission side of the network is
briefly considered, using estimated harmonic emissions from
DG and non-linear loads. Although brief and related to only
limited number of harmonics, this analysis shows that
harmonic propagation is an issue that may require a closer
attention of transmission system operators.

VII. CONCLUSIONS AND FURTHER WORK
This paper analyses the influence of a high penetration of
DG and demand-side technologies on network performance.
It concludes that, for networks with a relatively high DG
penetration, improved and realistic models of both DG and
system loads should be used, as they have a significant
influence on the simulation results and produce effects
which are not shown by traditional steady-state analysis. If
the demand-manageable portion of the system loads can be
accurately identified, critical network operating conditions
can be relieved using appropriate DSM actions.
Further work is required to improve and validate the DG
models presented, along with the methods for their
aggregation. The overall aim is to develop a set of accurate,
scalable representations of DG and systems loads, which
could be connected at the transmission and sub-transmission
level and employed in network simulations quickly and
efficiently. It will also be necessary to carry out the analysis
using larger, more realistic transmission and distribution
networks, e.g. a section of the UK transmission system.
Future studies will also carry out the time series analysis
using demand and generation scenarios over the course of a
whole year or number of years, rather than the single day
analysis presented here, in order to accurately assess the
overall range and extent of power flows, (over)loading of
system components, and unacceptable voltage conditions.

VIII. REFERENCES

[1] G. Ault, I. Elders et al., "Electricity network scenarios for 2020,".,
SuperGen Future Network Technologies Consortium , Tech. Rep.,
Jul. 2006.
[2] C. Barton, S. Smith., "Our electricity transmission network: a vision
for 2020,"., Electricity Networks Strategy Group, Tech. Rep., Jul.
2006.
[3] T. Boehme, A. R. Wallace, and G. Harrison, "Applying time series to
power flow analysis in networks with high wind penetration," IEEE
Trans. Power Systems, vol. 22, pp. 951-957, 2007.
[4] Siemens Energy Inc., Power System Simulator for Engineering
(PSS/E), [Online]. Available: http://www.energy.siemens.com.
[5] J. L. Acosta, A. J. Collin, B. P. Hayes and S.Z. Djoki, "Micro and
small-scale wind generation in urban distribution networks," paper
submitted for the 7th Mediterranean Conference on Power
Generation, Transmission Distribution and Energy Conversion,
Medpower2010.
[6] A. J. Collin, J. L. Acosta, B. P. Hayes and S.Z. Djoki, "Component-
based aggregate load models for combined power flow and harmonic
analysis," paper submitted for the 7th Mediterranean Conference on
Power Generation, Transmission Distribution and Energy
Conversion, Medpower2010.
[7] C. Masters, "Voltage rise: the big issue when connecting embedded
generation to long 11 kV overhead lines," Power Engineering
Journal, vol. 16, pp. 5-12, 2002.
[8] L. Cipcigan and P. Taylor, "Investigation of the reverse power flow
requirements of high penetrations of small-scale embedded
genreation," IET Renewable Power Generation, vol. 1, pp. 160-166,
2007.
[9] G. Boyle, Renewable Electricity and the Grid: the Challenge of
Variability, Earthscan, 2007.
[10] L. Ochoa, A. Padilha-Feltrin, and G. Harrison, "Time series-based
maximization of distributed wind power generation integration,"
IEEE Trans. Energy Conversion, vol. 23, pp. 968-974, 2008.
[11] N. Winser. (2009, May). National Grid GB Seven Year Statement,
National Grid. [Online]. Available:
http://www.nationalgrid.com/uk/sys_09/.
[12] M. Pller and S. Achilles, "Aggregated wind park models for
analyzing power system dynamics," Proc. Large Scale Integration
and Transmission Network for Offshore Winds , vol. 1, pp. 1-10,
2003.
[13] J. C. Boemer, M. Gibescu, and W.L. Kling, "Dynamic models for
transient stability analysis of transmission and distribution systems
with distributed generation: an overview," in Proc. 2009 IEEE
Bucharest Power Tech Conf., pp. 1-8.
[14] International Energy Agency (IEA)., "Assessment and development of
network driven demand side management measures,"., Tech. Rep.,
Oct. 2008.
[15] R. Stewart, "Demand side management in support of the grid," in
Proc. 2009 IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting, pp. 1-
6.
[16] C. Affonso, L. da Silva, and W. Freitas, "Demand side management
to improve power system security," in Proc. 2006 IEEE Power and
Energy Society General Meeting, pp. 1-6.
10
[17] British Wind Energy Association (2008, Oct., "Wind energy in the
UK: a BWEA state of the industry report,"., [Online]. Available:
http://www.bwea.com/ref/reports-and-studies.html.
[18] P. Cartwright, L. Holdsworth, J.B. Ekanyake, and N. Jenkins, "Co-
ordinted voltage control strategy for a doubly-fed induction
generator-based wind farm," IEE Proc. Generation Transmission,
and Distribution,, vol. 151, no. 4, 2004.
[19] M. Kayiki and J. V. Milanovi, "Reactive power control strategies
for DFIG-based plants," IEEE Trans. Energy Conversion, vol. 22, pp.
389-396, 2007.
[20] CIGRE Working Group C4.061, "Modeling and dynamic behavior of
wind generation as it relates to power system control and dynamic
performance,"., Section 6, CIGRE, Tech. Rep., Aug. 2007.
[21] J.G. Slootweg, S.W. de Haan, H. Polinder, and W.L. Kling,
"Aggregated modelling of wind parks with variable speed wind
turbines in power system dynamics simulations," in Proc. 2002 IEEE
Seville PSCC Conf., pp. 1-7.
[22] Balancing Mechanism Reporting System, Elexon, UK. [Online].
Available: http://www.bmreports.com/
[23] W. W. Price et al, "Bibliography on load models for power flow and
dynamic performance simulation," IEEE Trans. Power Systems, vol.
10, pp. 523-538, 1995.
[24] Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC): Assessment of Emission
Limits for Distorting Loads in MV and HV Power Systems, IEC
Standard IEC 61000-3-6, Jul. 2009.
[25] A. Ackermann, Wind Power in Power Systems. New York: Wiley,
2005, p. 107.
[26] W. M. Grady., PCFLO Harmonics Analysis Software (Version 6.0),
[Online]. Available: http://users.ece.utexas.edu/~grady/

IX. BIOGRAPHIES
Barry Hayes received Bachelor's degree in electrical and electronic
engineering from University College Cork, Ireland in 2005 and the Masters
degree from National University of Ireland (NUI), Maynooth in 2008. He
was with Intel from 2005-2009 at their European headquarters near Dublin.
He is currently working towards his Ph.D. at the Institute for Energy
Systems, University of Edinburgh, Scotland. His research interests include
power system modeling and analysis, and the network integration of
distributed generation and demand side technologies.

Adam Collin received Bachelor's degree in electrical and electronic
engineering from The University of Edinburgh, Scotland in 2007 and
Master of Science Degree in Renewable Energy and Distributed Generation
from Heriot-Watt University, Scotland in 2008. He is currently working
towards his Ph.D. at the Institute for Energy Systems, University of
Edinburgh, Scotland. His research is focused on load modelling and
analysis of distribution system performance, including power quality.

Jorge Acosta received MEng degree in mechanical and electrical
engineering from Monterrey Institute of Technology, Mexico City in 2007.
He is currently working towards his PhD at the Institute for Energy
Systems, University of Edinburgh, Scotland. His research is focused on the
modelling and analysis of performance of microgeneration technologies in
distribution networks and urban areas.

Saa Djoki received Dipl. Ing. and M. Sc. degrees in electrical
engineering from the University of Ni, Ni, Serbia, and Ph. D. degree in
the same area from the University of Manchester Institute of Science and
Technology (UMIST), Manchester, United Kingdom. From 1993 to 2001
he was with the Faculty of Electronic Eng. of the University of Ni. From
2001 to 2005 he was with the Department of Electrical Engineering and
Electronics at UMIST (now School of Electrical and Electronic
Engineering, the University of Manchester). Currently, he is a Senior
Lecturer with the School of Engineering at the Edinburgh University,
Edinburgh, Scotland.