energies

Article
Efficiency Comparison of DC and AC Coupling Solutions for
Large-Scale PV+BESS Power Plants
Francesco Lo Franco 1 , Antonio Morandi 1, *, Pietro Raboni 2 and Gabriele Grandi 1

1 Department of Electrical, Electronic and Information Engineering, University of Bologna,

40136 Bologna, Italy; francesco.lofranco2@unibo.it (F.L.F.); gabriele.grandi@unibo.it (G.G.)
2 NHOA, 20158 Milano, Italy; pietro.raboni@nhoa.energy
* Correspondence: antonio.morandi@unibo.it

Abstract: In large-scale photovoltaic (PV) power plants, the integration of a battery energy storage
system (BESS) permits a more flexible operation, allowing the plant to support grid stability. In
hybrid PV+BESS plants, the storage system can be integrated by using different power conversion
system (PCS) layouts and different charge–discharge strategies. In the AC-coupling layout, the BESS
is connected to the ac-side of the system through an additional inverter. In the DC-coupling layout,
the BESS is connected to the dc-side, with or without a dedicated dc–dc converter, and no additional
inverter is needed. Referring to a 288 MWp PV plant with a 275 MWh BESS, this paper compares the
PCS efficiency between AC- and DC-coupling solutions. The power injected into the grid is obtained
considering providing primary power-frequency regulation services. A charging and discharging
strategy of the BESS is proposed to ensure cyclic battery energy shifting. The power flows in the
different components of the system that are obtained under realistic operating conditions, and total



energy losses and annual average efficiency are calculated accordingly. Finally, results show a higher

 efficiency of DC-coupling compared to the AC-coupling layout.
Citation: Lo Franco, F.; Morandi, A.;
Raboni, P.; Grandi, G. Efficiency Keywords: battery energy storage system (BESS); photovoltaic; power conversion system (PCS);
Comparison of DC and AC Coupling renewable energy sources (RES); solar plus storage sizing; grid-connected PV plant
Solutions for Large-Scale PV+BESS
Power Plants. Energies 2021, 14, 4823.
https://doi.org/10.3390/en14164823
1. Introduction
Academic Editors: Woojin Choi and
Grid-connected PV plants are non-dispatchable energy sources that are controlled
Teuvo Suntio
in order to inject the maximum available power into the grid. Due to their operating
characteristics, PV plants cannot usually provide the control and regulation services that
Received: 26 May 2021
Accepted: 2 August 2021
conventional sources can do and, moreover, can impact the voltage and the stability of the
Published: 7 August 2021
electrical system [1–3]. For example, in PV plants with sizes up to hundreds of MW, the
unstable weather can cause deep power dips and high ramp-rate [4]. Therefore, the system
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
operator employs power from programmable sources (generally thermal plants using
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
pollutant sources) to control the system’s operation and preserve the grid stability. The
published maps and institutional affil- integration of a battery energy storage system permits a more flexible operation of the PV
iations. plants with a much-reduced impact on safe grid operation [5]. A typical PV+BESS power
plant, in fact, consists of multiple PV arrays, power electronic converters, and storage
units which can contribute to grid stability and reliability through sophisticated grid-
friendly controls [6,7], thus supplementing (or even replacing in the long term) conventional
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
generators [8]. In particular, the development of advanced power controls can enable PV
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
to become a provider of a wide range of grid services, including spinning reserves, load
This article is an open access article
following, voltage support, ramping control, frequency response, and variability smoothing.
distributed under the terms and The BESS allows decoupling the PV power from the power that the plant injects into the
conditions of the Creative Commons grid. It is hence possible to modulate the grid power without reducing the generated PV
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// power, or to keep constant the power injection to the grid even if the PV availability drops.
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ Possible support functions that a hybrid PV+BESS plant can provide to the grid without
4.0/). involving curtailment of the PV generation are described, among others, in [9–18].

Energies 2021, 14, 4823. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14164823 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2021, 14, 4823 2 of 22

In grid-connected PV plants, power is generated at the dc-side and is conveyed,

through a power conversion system, to the AC grid. Large-scale PV plants reach the size
of hundreds of MW by using multiple inverters and PV generator modules. In hybrid
PV+BESS plants, the storage system can be integrated by using different layouts [19–21].
In the AC-coupling layout, the BESS is connected to the ac-side of the system through an
additional inverter. In the DC-coupling layout, the BESS is connected to the dc-side, with
or without a dedicated dc–dc converter, and no additional inverter is needed.
The investigation of the advantages and disadvantages of the different layouts (AC
vs. DC coupling) has attracted the interest of companies [20,22,23]. Several works exist
now in the literature that analyzes and compare the performance of the AC-coupling and
DC-coupling solutions. However, few works provide a quantitative comparison in terms
of PCS efficiency. Several works exist now in the literature that analyzes and compare the
performance of the AC-coupling and DC-coupling solutions. The costs and benefits of the
different PV+BESS layouts are compared in the report of the national renewable energy
laboratory [19], which evaluated the technical and economic performance of PV plus
storage power plants. In the report, a PV power plant of 65 MWp with 30 MW/120 MWh
of BESS is considered as a case study for comparison. The net revenues are calculated
by hourly price and considering the following dispatching strategy: the battery charging
occurs in the early morning when prices are lowest, and the stored energy is injected into
the grid (battery discharging) during the late afternoon and early evening when prices
are highest. The conclusions show a slightly higher benefit/cost ratio for the DC-coupling
compared to the AC-coupling. However, the quantitative comparison in terms of energy
losses and power conversion system efficiency was not covered in this document.
Another comparison of the benefit/cost ratio is provided in [24] with similar conclu-
sions. This study provides a model to optimize energy storage operation in systems with
AC and DC coupled configurations. The results show an approximately 2 percent increase
in benefit/cost for DC-coupling than AC-coupling. However, even if conversion losses
are included in the benefit/cost calculation, a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the
losses performance and efficiency of the PCS is not provided. Moreover, not all possible
DC-coupling solutions are considered for comparison.
In reference [25], the authors provided a reliability analysis of a 160 kW/1500 V PV
system with a DC- or AC-coupled BESS operating in PV power smoothing and ramp-rate
regulation mode. The results show that compared with the AC-coupled configuration, the
DC-coupled configuration has a shorter lifetime period and lower reliability. On the other
hand, the paper [26] shows that the DC-coupled configuration better performs in terms
of component-, converter- and system-level reliability. However, no comparison on PCS
efficiency was provided in both references.
In reference [27], a loss model of a DC-coupled PV+BESS plant was developed, and
the power losses of a commercially available DC-coupled PV-battery converter system
were analyzed. However, the examined DC-coupled layout refers to a low power system
(5.2 kW of PV power), whose power profiles are more similar to a domestic or stand-alone
system. Furthermore, a comparison with the AC-coupled PCS efficiency was not provided.
In reference [28], a DC-coupling solution that utilizes a single battery dc–dc converter
capable of simultaneously operating as a charge controller and a maximum power point
tracking (MPPT) device was analyzed. The battery coupling solution in [28] is similar
to the DC-coupling analyzed in this paper. A multi-MW power plant of 14 MWp of PV
and a 1 MW/2 MWh of BESS is considered a case study, but consideration about the PCS
efficiency and comparisons with the AC-coupling counterpart was not provided.
In the reference [29], a dc-coupled energy storage system connected to the bus-dc of
the grid-tied PV inverter through a dedicated dc–dc converter was analyzed. The results
showed that the storage system leads to reduced clipping losses. Even if an average
estimation of the PCS’s conversion efficiency is analyzed considering the different possible
paths of the power flows, a quantitative comparison of the efficiency and losses power
profile among the different solutions was not covered in this paper.
Energies 2021, 14, 4823 3 of 22

Finally, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, no article presents a quantitative

comparison in terms of conversion losses and efficiency of different AC- and DC-coupling
solutions for battery integration in large utility-scale PV power plants.
The purpose of this work was to analyze and compare the losses that involve three
different solutions of power conversion system architectures in hybrid multi-MW grid-
connected PV+BESS plants during ordinary daily operation. To achieve this, a 288 MW PV
power plant with a 92.2 MW/275.2 MWh BESS, capable of contributing primary frequency
response and energy shifting services to the grid, was considered as a case study. The energy
flows that involve the PCSs during the plant’s operation were quantitatively analyzed, and
the performance of the different solutions in terms of loss and efficiency were evaluated
and compared. The analysis was carried out under different daily and seasonal irradiance
conditions, and annual efficiency data were compared for the different connection layouts.
The paper is organized as follows: the main characteristics of the case study used
for the efficiency comparison are resumed in Section 2; the three different PCS layouts
that are considered to integrate the energy storage system into the PV plant are described
in Section 3; Section 4 presents the methodology used to calculate the power flows of
the plant during daily operation in grid support mode (primary frequency reserve and
energy shifting); Section 5 resumes the method and data used to calculate the losses in each
conversion stage; the numerical results in terms of power flow, losses and efficiency are
reported and discussed in Section 6. Concluding remarks are finally drawn in Section 7.

2. The Case Study: A 288 MW PV Plant with 92.2 MW/275.2 MWh Integrated BESS
A 288 MW power PV plant with a 92.2 MW/275.2 MWh battery storage capacity
is introduced in this section as a case study. The general characteristics of the plant are
discussed in the following. The typical size of PV inverters usually employed in large
hybrid PV plants is up to 5 MW. The DC voltage of the inverter is generally in the range
of 900 Vdc –1500 Vdc (PV side), and the output AC voltage is in the range of 400 Vac ÷
690 Vac [30] Large-scale PV plants reach the size of hundreds of MW by using multiple
inverters and PV generator modules. In this reference case study, the low voltage (LV) AC
output of more inverters is connected to a single multi-winding transformer that steps up
the voltage to the medium voltage (MV) level, in the range of 15,000 Vac –20,000 Vac . The
transformer may consist of one single grid-side winding with four secondary windings
connected to the inverters. A containerized solution was used: the PCS container involves
one single multi-winding transformer and four PV inverters. In Figure 1a, the schematic
of the 288 MWp PV plant used as a case study is shown. The plant is made of 80 PCS
containers. Each PCS includes four inverters modules with a 900 kVA rating, connected
to the multi-winding transformer. Both the inverters and the transformer are three-phase.
Different architectures can be considered for integrating the 92.2 MW/275.2 MWh BESS
system in the PV power plant, which is analyzed in detail in the following. However,
no matter the solution chosen, maintaining the modular approach is essential for the
correct design, assembling, operation, and maintenance of the power plant. For this reason,
the total BESS capacity of 92.2 MW/275.2 MWh is subdivided into 320 (4 × 80) battery
modules with 288 kW/860 kWh rating, to be individually coupled with the 900 kW PV
modules via the power converters. The BESS can consist of various battery cell technologies.
Popular battery technologies include Lithium-ion (Li-ion), Lead–Acid (PbA), and Nickel–
Metal Hydride (Ni–MH) [31]. Among these, Li-ion batteries have become the prevailing
technology used in large BESS [32], as the system described in this paper, due to the higher
energy density, the higher round trip efficiency, the longer life span, the fast response time,
and the decrease in cost seen in recent years [33–35].
The schematic of the modularized PV+BESS solution is shown in Figure 1b. In
Figure 1a,b PCCPlant denotes the point of common coupling (PCC) of the total plant, and
PCCCont. [i ] (with i ∈ [1:80]) denotes the PCC of the single PCS container. Similarly, it is
possible to define the PCC of the single PV module (a) or the PCC of the hybrid PV+BESS
module (b). The point of common coupling of the module is denoted with PCC Module [i, j]
2021, 14, 4823 4 of 22

The schematic of the modularized PV+BESS solution is shown in Figure 1b. In Figure 1a,b
𝑃𝐶𝐶
Energies 2021, 14, 4823 denotes the point of common coupling (PCC) of the total plant, and 𝑃𝐶𝐶 . 𝑖
4 of 22
(with 𝑖 ∈ [1:80]) denotes the PCC of the single PCS container. Similarly, it is possible to
define the PCC of the single PV module (a) or the PCC of the hybrid PV+BESS module (b).
The point of common coupling of the module is denoted with 𝑃𝐶𝐶 𝑖, 𝑗 in Figure
in Figure 1a,b, where i refers to the container’s number and j is the module’s number
1a,b, where i refers to the container’s number and j is the module’s number (𝑗 ∈ [1:4]).
(j ∈ [1:4]).

(a)

(b)
Figure 1. (a) A modular
Figure 1.288
(a)MWp PV power
A modular plant made
288 MWp of 80plant
PV power separate
madePCS, each
of 80 including
separate PCS,4 each
PV including 4 PV
inverter modulesinverter
with a 900 kVA rating. (b) Modular integration of the 92.2 MW/275.2 MWh BESS
modules with a 900 kVA rating. (b) Modular integration of the 92.2 MW/275.2 MWh BESS
into the 288 MW PV plant.
into the 288 MW PV plant.

3. BESS Coupling Topologies

3. BESS Coupling Topologies
Three different Three
PCS architectures
different PCScan be considered
architectures can befor connecting
considered forthe BESS mod-
connecting the BESS modules.
ules. Each PCS Each
architecture refers to a single
PCS architecture refers PV/Battery
to a singlemodule and involves
PV/Battery module the andpower
involves the power
converters and converters
the (part ofandthe)the
transformer connected
(part of the) transformer 𝑃𝐶𝐶
to theconnected More
. to the in particular,
PCC Cont. More in particular,
as shown in Figure 1b, theinPCS
as shown of one
Figure 1b, single
the PCS PV/Battery module
of one single only considers
PV/Battery module oneonlysingle
considers one single
secondary-winding of the multi-winding
secondary-winding transformer. Furthermore,
of the multi-winding transformer.for comparing for
Furthermore, the comparing the
different
different layouts, layouts, in itthe
in the following, is following,
assumed thatit isthe
assumed
PCS alsothatincludes
the PCSthe also includes the primary
primary
winding of the winding of the
transformer. transformer.
Thus, the singleThus,
PCS the singleunder
modules PCS modules
analysis under
consistanalysis
of the consist of the
power
power electronics andelectronics and the
the equivalent equivalent(two
transformer transformer
winding)(two
thatwinding)
allow thethat allow the coupling of
coupling
the PV/Battery modules with the MV side of the plant transformer. The three different PCS
layouts are schematized in Figure 2 and are discussed in detail in the following. The size of
each element of the PCS system according to the architecture considered is summarized in
Table 1.
 of the PV/Battery modules with the MV side of the plant transformer. The three different
PCS layouts are schematized in Figure 2 and are discussed in detail in the following. The
size of each element of the PCS system according to the architecture considered is sum-
Energies 2021, 14, 4823 5 of 22
marized in Table 1.

(a) (b)

(c)
Figure 2.
Figure 2. Possible
Possible coupling
coupling architecture
architecturefor
forPV
PVand
andBESS
BESSmodules:
modules:(a)
(a)AC-coupling;
AC-coupling;(b)
(b)DC-coupling/BESS-side;
DC-coupling/BESS-side; (c)
(c) DC-
DC-
coupling/PV-side.
coupling/PV-side.

Table1.1. Data
Table Data of
of the
the case
casestudy
studyof
ofPV+BESS
PV+BESS plant
plant components
components in
in Figure
Figure 2.
2.

SingleModule
Single Module Total Plant(320
Total Plant (320Modules)
Modules)
Layout AC DC–BESS DC–PV AC DC–BESS DC–PV
Layout AC DC–BESS DC–PV AC DC–BESS DC–PV
PV [MW] 0.900 0.900 0.900 288 288 288
PV [MW] 0.900 0.900 0.900 288 288 288
BESS (energy)
BESS (energy) [MWh]
[MWh] 0.860
0.860 0.860
0.860 0.860
0.860 275.2
275.2 275.2
275.2 275.2
275.2
BESS
BESS (power)
(power) [MW]
[MW] 0.288
0.288 0.288
0.288 0.288
0.288 92.2
92.2 92.2
92.2 92.2
92.2
transf.
transf. [MVA]
[MVA] 1.200
1.200 1.200
1.200 1.200
1.200 384
384 384
384 384
384
BESS-transf.
BESS-transf. [MVA]
[MVA] 0.400
0.400 -- -- 128
128 -- --
inverter [MVA] 0.900 0.900 0.900 288 288 288
inverter [MVA] 0.900 0.900 0.900 288 288 288
BESS-inverter [MVA] 0.288 - - 92.2 - -
BESS-inverter
dc–dc conv. [MVA]
[MW] 0.288
- -
0.288 -
0.900 92.2
- 92.2- -
288
dc–dc conv. [MW] - 0.288 0.900 - 92.2 288
3.1. AC-Coupling
3.1. AC-Coupling
The AC-coupling architecture employs two distinct inverters for connecting a PV and
a BESSThemodule,
AC-coupling architecture
as is shown employs
in Figure two distinct
2a. Both inverters
inverters for connecting
are connected to the aPCCPV and
Cont.
a BESS module, as is shown in Figure 2a. Both inverters are connected
using two winding (per phase) transformers. The PV inverter sets the MPPT operation and. to the 𝑃𝐶𝐶
using two
conveys thewinding
power to(perthe phase)
ac-side transformers.
unidirectionally. TheThe
PVBESS
inverter sets the
converter MPPTthe
controls operation
battery
power flows operating in the inverter or the rectifier mode. It is worth noting that duethe
and conveys the power to the ac-side unidirectionally. The BESS converter controls to
battery
the power
use of flows operating
two separate inverter in the inverter
systems, or the rectifier
this configuration mode.
allows It isaworth
both notingBESS
distributed that
due to the
system, whichuse can
of two separate
be used inverter
for the systems,
modular this configuration
configuration of the wholeallows
plant,both a distrib-
as discussed
uted
in thisBESS
paper,system,
and awhich can be used
concentrated for where
system the modular configuration
the overall BESS power of the whole plant,
is conveyed in
as discussed
unique point,in thiscan
that paper,
evenandbe fara concentrated systemFor
from the PV plant. where
thesethe overallthe
reasons, BESS
BESSpower
in theis
conveyed in unique point, that can even be far from the PV plant.
AC-coupling could be designed with different modularity, such as 80 PCS containers ofFor these reasons, the
1.15 MW/3.44 MWh each.

3.2. DC-Coupling/BESS-Side
The DC coupling architecture with the dc–dc converter on the battery side (DC-
coupling/BESS-side in brief) only employs one inverter per module, as is shown in
Figure 2b. A dc–dc converter connects the battery module to the dc bus. The inverter
Energies 2021, 14, 4823 6 of 22

controls the power conveyed to the converter’s PCC (ac-side), regulating the current from
the bus-dc. The dc–dc converter manages the bus-dc voltage to allow the PV to work
in MPPT conditions, and it must allow the bidirectional power flow from BESS to PCC
(battery discharging) and from PCC to BESS (battery charging). This architecture only
applies to distributed storage systems because the BESS module must be connected to the
dc-side of each PV inverter.

3.3. DC-Coupling/PV-Side
The DC coupling architecture with the dc–dc converter on the PV side (DC-coupling/
PV-side in brief) is shown in Figure 2c. It only employs one inverter connecting the storage
module to the module’s PCC. The PV strings are connected to the dc-link through a dc–dc
converter. The dc–dc converter manages the PV voltage to work in MPPT conditions;
meanwhile, the inverter manages the power supplied to the PCC and, consequently, the
battery power. This architecture only applies to distributed storage systems because the
BESS module must be connected to the dc side of each inverter.

4. Plant’s Power Flows Analysis

In order to investigate the efficiency of the three different architectures, the power
flows managed by the PCS in each conversion stage need to be identified. The PV-generated
power (PPV ) depends on daily irradiance and temperature. On the other hand, the plant’s
output power, which is the power measured on the PCC side (PPCC ), depends on the grid
demand and system’s characteristics. Finally, the BESS power (PB ) is obtained by the power
balance in Equation (1).
PPCC = PPV + PB (1)
Note that the load convention is used for defining the grid power; hence a positive
value of PPCC indicates a power absorbed by the grid. This is the only possible case as no
possible power flow from the grid to the plant is considered in this paper. On the opposite,
the generator convention is used for defining PPV and PB , hence a positive value indicates
a generated power and a negative value an absorbed power (possible for the battery only).
The battery operates in charging mode when the PV power is higher than the output PCC
power (generation higher than grid demands); otherwise, it operates in discharging mode.

4.1. Primary Frequency Reserve Operation and BESS Charging

In this paper, it is assumed that the PV+BESS plant operates in a weak grid system.
In particular, operating conditions and management procedures as those applying in the
power system of the Puerto Rico island are considered. Weak grid, or in general weak
connection points, are most commonly found in sparsely populated rural or remote ar-
eas, islands, or countries with under-developed electricity infrastructure [36]. This grid
includes a relatively small number of power sources and loads, compared to a conven-
tional transnational interconnected grid, so any unexpected imbalance between load and
generation can induce significant voltage and frequency excursions and requires appro-
priate procedures to be dealt with [10]. In fact, as an isolated island system, the Puerto
Rico power system has a lower inertial constant compared to large interconnected power
systems. During peak daytime hours, when solar penetration is high and has displaced
conventional generation, the available inertia from spinning mass is even lower because
PV generation, unlike conventional generators, does not have any rotating mechanical
parts to replace inertia losses [6]. The rate of change of frequency (RoCoF) depends upon
the magnitude of the power imbalance (e.g., PV generation droops because of unstable
weather conditions) and the total inertia of the system. The lower the system’s inertia is, the
higher the RoCoF is during an imbalance event to the extent that system security may be
endangered. Thus, a faster response time of active power reserve activation to stabilize the
system is required [37]. On the other hand, PV systems, with no mechanical contribution
and a small time-constant (fast response), also have a significant capability to participate in
frequency support, as reported in [6].
 magnitude of the power imbalance (e.g., PV generation droops because of unstable
weather conditions) and the total inertia of the system. The lower the system’s inertia is,
the higher the RoCoF is during an imbalance event to the extent that system security may
be endangered. Thus, a faster response time of active power reserve activation to stabilize
Energies 2021, 14, 4823 the system is required [37]. On the other hand, PV systems, with no mechanical contribu- 7 of 22
tion and a small time-constant (fast response), also have a significant capability to partic-
ipate in frequency support, as reported in [6].
In fact, according to the Puerto Rico electric power authority (PREPA) [38], large grid-
In fact, according to the Puerto Rico electric power authority (PREPA) [38], large
tied PV facilities provide an immediate primary frequency response (PFR), similar to the
grid-tied PV facilities provide an immediate primary frequency response (PFR), similar to
governor response of conventional generation, by adjusting their real power output. The
the governor response of conventional generation, by adjusting their real power output.
change in real power must be proportional to the deviation of frequency from the nominal
The change in real power must be proportional to the deviation of frequency from the
value. The control of the PV plant should be able to provide both for up- and down-regu-
nominal value. The control of the PV plant should be able to provide both for up- and
lation. The real power response to frequency deviations should be similar to, or more re-
down-regulation. The real power response to frequency deviations should be similar to, or
sponsive than, the 5% droop used by conventional generators.
more responsive than, the 5% droop used by conventional generators.
The frequency droop is the percent change in frequency normalized against the per-
The frequency droop is the percent change in frequency normalized against the percent
changechange
cent in the regulating
in the regulating power output,power multiplied
output, multiplied
by 100. Aby 5%100. A 5% frequency
frequency droop response droop
means that a 5% frequency deviation on the system would result in a 100% change100%
response means that a 5% frequency deviation on the system would result in a in
change inthe
regulating regulating the power
power capacity of capacity of the generating
the generating unit [6]. The unit [6]. The
droop curvedroop curve pro-
proposed by
posed is
PREPA byshown
PREPAinisFigure
shown3inand Figure 3 and
is used in is used
this in this
paper paper to calculate
to calculate the PCC the powerPCCofpower
the
of the considered PV plant. According to the PREPA grid code
considered PV plant. According to the PREPA grid code and references [8,9], 10% of the and references [8,9], 10%
of the available PV power must be reserved both for up and
available PV power must be reserved both for up and down-regulation. Therefore, in down-regulation. Therefore,
in nominal
nominal conditions,
conditions, the plant
the plant is setistoset to operate
operate at a curtailed
at a curtailed powerpower level (Plevel )(𝑃 ) that is
base that is 90%
90% of the available PV power. The nominal grid frequency is
of the available PV power. The nominal grid frequency is f n = 60 Hz. The PCC power value𝑓 = 60 Hz. The PCC power
value depends on the frequency error Δ𝑓 = (𝑓 − 𝑓 ), where 𝑓
depends on the frequency error ∆ f = ( f − f n ), where f is the measured frequency value.is the measured frequency
Avalue.
deadband A deadband
of ±0.012ofHz ±0.012
is appliedHz istoapplied
the primaryto the primary response,
frequency frequencysoresponse,
regulation soonly
regu-
lationwhen
begins only begins when theisfrequency
the frequency higher than is higher
the upperthanthreshold
the upper( threshold
f 1 = 60.012(𝑓Hz) = 60.012
or lower Hz)
or lower
than thanthreshold
the lower the lower ( f 2threshold
= 59.988 Hz).(𝑓 =The 59.988
droop Hz). The droopreaches
characteristic characteristic
a plateau reaches
when a
theplateau
frequencywhenerror
the frequency
reaches theerror of ∆ f =
valuereaches the±value
0.300 Hzof Δ𝑓 = ±0.300
(±0.5% of f n ).Hz
In (±0.5% of 𝑓 ). In
over-frequency
over-frequency conditions, when the frequency is higher than
conditions, when the frequency is higher than the threshold f 3 = 60.3 Hz, the plant’s the threshold 𝑓 = 60.3 Hz,
the plant’s
power outputpower output
is lowered by is lowered
10%, by 10%, corresponding
corresponding to 80% of
to 80% of the available PVthe available
power. On the PV
power.
other side,Onin the other side, inconditions,
under-frequency under-frequencywhen the conditions,
frequencywhenis lower thethan
frequency is lower
the threshold
f 4than
= 59.7theHz,
threshold
the plant’s𝑓 =power59.7 Hz,
outputtheisplant’s
increasedpower output
by 10%, is increasedtoby100%
corresponding 10%,ofcorre-
the
sponding
available PVtopower.
100% of the available PV power.

Figure
Figure 3.3.PV
PVfacility
facilitydroop
droopcharacteristic
characteristic
forfor PFR
PFR inin Puerto
Puerto Rico
Rico (PREPA).
(PREPA).

The
The considered
considered daily
daily profile
profile of frequency
of frequency with
with a 1-min
a 1-min resolution
resolution is shown
is shown in Figure
in Figure 4a.
4a. The percentage occurrence of different frequency values obtained from
The percentage occurrence of different frequency values obtained from the daily data the daily data
ofof
Figure4a4aisisshown
Figure shownininFigure
Figure 4b.InInboth
4b. boththese
thesegraphs,
graphs,the
thekey
keyfrequency
frequencyvalues
valuesofofthe
thedroop
droop
characteristic are pointed out: the nominal frequency ( f n ); the deadband limits ( f 1 and f 2 );
the frequency thresholds where the regulating power reaches the bounds ( f 3 and f 4 ).
Figure 5 shows an example of the PFR power profile of the plant during about 2 h,
obtained according to the PFR droop characteristic of Figure 3 and the frequency data of
Figure 4a. Referring to the left-axis of Figure 5a, the black line is the available PV power
PPV . The black dotted line represents the base power, which is 90% of the available PPV
power. Based on the frequency excursion, the PCC power may deviate from the base value
providing up- and down-reserve, thus creating the output power profile reported with
the blue line in Figure 5a (named PPCC ). The grey line in Figure 5a depicts the minimum
admissible value of PPCC that is equal to 80% of PPV .
Energies 2021, 14, 4823 8 of 22

Energies 2021, 14, 4823 8 of 22

characteristic are pointed out: the nominal frequency (𝑓𝑓𝑛𝑛 ); the deadband limits (𝑓𝑓1 and 𝑓𝑓2 );
the frequency thresholds where the regulating power reaches the bounds (𝑓𝑓3 and 𝑓𝑓4 ).

Energies 2021, 14, 4823 9 of 23

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure4.4.Reference
Referencefrequency
frequencydata:
data:(a)
(a)one-day
one-dayfrequency
frequencyprofile;
profile;(b)
(b) occurrence
occurrence probability
probability of
of the
the frequency
frequency excursion.
excursion.

Figure 5 shows an example of the PFR power profile of the plant during about 2 h,
obtained according to the PFR droop characteristic of Figure 3 and the frequency data of
Figure 4a. Referring to the left-axis of Figure 5a, the black line is the available PV power
𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 . The black dotted line represents the base power, which is 90% of the available 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃
power. Based on the frequency excursion, the PCC power may deviate from the base value
providing up- and down-reserve, thus creating the output power profile reported with
the blue line in Figure 5a (named 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 ). The grey line in Figure 5a depicts the minimum
admissible value of 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 that is equal to 80% of 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 .
Since the probability distribution of frequency (see Figure 4b) is practically symmet-
rical with respect to the nominal value, the average output power profile of the plant is
coincident with the base power of 90% of 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 , as confirmed in Figure 5. This means that
about 10% of the energy generated is not transferred to the grid. This surplus energy is
stored in the battery. As a result, the BESS is charged during daytime hours. Furthermore,
since
(a) according to Figure 4b, the probability of occurrence (b) of an under-frequency event
with 𝑓𝑓 < 𝑓𝑓4 is very low; the PCC instant power is always lower than 100% of the PV
Figure
Figure5.5.Result
Resultof
ofPFR
PFRon
onthe plant’s
power.
the plant’s power
This flows.
implies
power (a)
(a)on
flows.that, the
theleft
leftaxis:
according
on toblack—100%
axis: Equation
black—100% (1), 𝑃𝑃𝑉
ofofa ; dot black—𝑃
Pcontinuous
PV ; dot black—P power (90%
flowofof
base (90%
𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝑃P𝑃𝑉
always );
PV ); oc-
blue—𝑃 ; grey—80% of 𝑃
blue—PPCC ; grey—80% of Pcurs ; on the right axis: red—BESS power. (b) on the left axis: grid frequency with an over- (blue
𝑃𝐶𝐶 𝑃𝑉
PV ; ontoward
the righttheaxis:
battery
red—BESSduringpower.
day hours. Theleft
(b) on the red linegrid
axis: (right axis) ofwith
frequency Figure 5a shows
an over- (blue the
area) and under-frequency (light-blue area) occurrences. On the right axis, the battery power profile (red) and the battery
area) and under-frequency resulting
(light-bluebattery power flow. Figure 5b shows the role of the energy storage during the
area) occurrences. On the right axis, the battery power profile (red) and the battery
“base” power (black). The red area depicts the provided upward energy reserve, and the yellow area depicts the
daytime
“base” power (black). The red
downward reserve. PFR
area depicts operation
the provided ofupward
the plant. Thereserve,
energy base power
and thesetsyellowa battery power
area depicts thevalue
downwardthat does
reserve. not depend on the grid frequency and is given by 𝑃𝑃𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 − 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 (10% of PV availability,
black
4.2. line). In case
Discharging of under-frequency
Strategy of the BESS occurrence, the power absorbed by the storage sys-
Since the probability distribution of frequency (see Figure 4b) is practically symmet-
tem (red line) decreases. On the other hand, in over-frequency conditions, the charging
ricalAs with previously
respect to shown,
the nominal due value,
to thethe fact that the
average output lowerpower bound f4 of
profile the plant
of the droop is
battery power increase according to the PFR droop curve. The PFR operation could also
characteristics,
coincident with corresponding
the base power to 100%
of 90% ofofPVPPVpower conveyed in
, as confirmed to the grid,
Figure 5.isThis
verymeans
seldomly that
be obtained without a BESS by reducing and modulating the PV generation but to the
reached,
about 10% theofBESS is charged
the energy duringisdaytime
generated hours. Atodischarge
not transferred the grid. strategy
This surplus mustenergy
then beis
expense of MPPT operation. However, by introducing a storage system, the PV+BESS
planned for allowing the battery to operate in cyclic conditions.
stored in the battery. As a result, the BESS is charged during daytime hours. Furthermore, In this paper, we assume
plant is capable of providing both up- and down-reserve without modulating the PV
that
sinceinaccording
the evening,to Figureand 4b,in the
particular
probabilityduring sunset hours,
of occurrence of an the batteries startevent
under-frequency the
power, maximizing the exploitation of the PV source (MPPT operation is assured).
discharging
with f < f 4 is process
very low; to deliver
the PCCthe stored
instant energy
power to thelower
is always grid. than
This 100%
process is generally
of the PV power.
To exploit the BESS capacity, it is necessary to ensure cyclic working conditions, in
referred
This implies to asthat,
energy shiftingto(ES).
according Equation (1), a continuous power flow always occurs toward
which the batteries must be completely charged and discharged during a 24-h cycle. A
The scheduling
the battery during day of the power
hours. The that
redtheline
BESS should
(right axis)supply
of Figure during the energy
5a shows shifting
the resulting
discharge strategy for the battery must then be planned after daily hours, which restores
depends
battery power on different factors,
flow. Figure such as
5b shows thethe
roleBESS
of the and PV size,
energy storagetheduring
PCC load profile, PFR
the daytime the
the initial SOC value at the beginning of the next day. This discharge strategy, which is
operation of the plant. The base power sets a battery power
seasonal and daily irradiance, and, finally, the type of services that the plant provides. In value that does not depend
obtained
on the systems by frequency
grid assuming that the battery provides
Pbase −ofPPV ramp rate support during blacksunsetline).
hours,
power where aand is given
substantial by
amount (10%
solar of PV
source isavailability,
installed, the amount of In
iscase
discussed
ofthat in the next subsection.
under-frequency occurrence, the power absorbed
power must be generated from programmable sourcesby the storage
(mainly thermal system
power(red line)
plants)
decreases.
rapidly On theduring
increases other hand,
sunsetinand over-frequency
reaches the peak conditions, the charging hours.
in the mid-evening batteryAs power
it is
increase
shown in according to thethe
[39], the higher PFR droop curve.
penetration The power,
of solar PFR operationthe higher could also be
the ramp rateobtained
of the
without a BESSpower
programmable by reducing
duringand modulating
sunset hours. Thisthe PV generation (which
phenomenon but to the expense to
is referred of as
MPPT
the
operation. However, by introducing a storage system, the
“duck curve” due to the power profile resembling a duck’s silhouette) is typical in electric PV+BESS plant is capable of
systems with high penetration of RES. The excessive ramp rate of thermal power requires
the inefficient operation of thermal power plants at reduced power and is mitigated by
operating the PV+BESS power plant in energy shifting mode, that is, discharging the
battery during evening hours.
To assure appropriate operation, lifetime, and safety, a minimum and maximum
Energies 2021, 14, 4823 9 of 22

providing both up- and down-reserve without modulating the PV power, maximizing the
exploitation of the PV source (MPPT operation is assured).
To exploit the BESS capacity, it is necessary to ensure cyclic working conditions, in
which the batteries must be completely charged and discharged during a 24-h cycle. A
discharge strategy for the battery must then be planned after daily hours, which restores
the initial SOC value at the beginning of the next day. This discharge strategy, which is
obtained by assuming that the battery provides ramp rate support during sunset hours, is
discussed in the next subsection.

4.2. Discharging Strategy of the BESS

As previously shown, due to the fact that the lower bound f 4 of the droop characteris-
tics, corresponding to 100% of PV power conveyed to the grid, is very seldomly reached,
the BESS is charged during daytime hours. A discharge strategy must then be planned for
allowing the battery to operate in cyclic conditions. In this paper, we assume that in the
evening, and in particular during sunset hours, the batteries start the discharging process
to deliver the stored energy to the grid. This process is generally referred to as energy
shifting (ES).
The scheduling of the power that the BESS should supply during the energy shifting
depends on different factors, such as the BESS and PV size, the PCC load profile, the
seasonal and daily irradiance, and, finally, the type of services that the plant provides.
In power systems where a substantial amount of solar source is installed, the amount of
power that must be generated from programmable sources (mainly thermal power plants)
rapidly increases during sunset and reaches the peak in the mid-evening hours. As it is
shown in [39], the higher the penetration of solar power, the higher the ramp rate of the
programmable power during sunset hours. This phenomenon (which is referred to as the
“duck curve” due to the power profile resembling a duck’s silhouette) is typical in electric
systems with high penetration of RES. The excessive ramp rate of thermal power requires
the inefficient operation of thermal power plants at reduced power and is mitigated by
operating the PV+BESS power plant in energy shifting mode, that is, discharging the
battery during evening hours.
To assure appropriate operation, lifetime, and safety, a minimum and maximum value
of SOC that can be reached by the battery system need to be considered. A value of SOCmin
= 20% and SOCmax = 90% are used. This operating range is typical for large battery systems,
as the one considered in this paper [40]. The cyclic operation of the BESS implies that the
battery is completely discharged (at the lower bound allowed) at the end of the day; hence,
the following equation holds:

SOC (24) ∼
= SOC (0) ∼
= SOCmin (2)

where SOC (24) is the SOC at time t = 24 : 00 and SOC (0) is the SOC value 24 h before,
that is, at t = 0 : 00. Since the allowed SOC range is between 20% and 90%, the maximum
energy ( EB ), which could be stored in the BESS and supplied to the grid during evening
hours, is 70% of EBmax (EB = 192 MWh). The trapezoidal power profile shown in Figure 6a
is assumed for the scheduled BESS power during the evening energy shifting (discharge).
In particular, constant power is scheduled from 19:00 to 20:00, while downward power
rate is applied after 20:00 and the same upward ramp rate is applied to start around 18:00
(t ESstart ) for reaching the planned power, thus generating the trapezoidal profile shown.
The area under the BESS power curve represents the energy EB(supplied) supplied to the
grid. It is worth pointing out that the curve of Figure 6a holds under the assumption that
SOC (t ESstart ) = SOCmax . In case that SOC (t ESstart ) < SOCmax the scheduled battery power
is scaled by a factor k ∈ [0 : 1] defined as:

SOC (t ESstart ) − SOCmin

k= (3)
SOCmax − SOCmin
 shown. The area under the BESS power curve represents the energy 𝐸𝐸𝐵𝐵(𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠) supplied
to the grid. It is worth pointing out that the curve of Figure 6a holds under the assumption
that 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆(𝑡𝑡𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 ) = 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝐶𝐶𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑥𝑥 . In case that 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆(𝑡𝑡𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 ) < 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝐶𝐶𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 the scheduled battery
power is scaled by a factor 𝑘𝑘 ∈ [0: 1] defined as:
Energies 2021, 14, 4823 10 of 22
𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆(𝑡𝑡𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 ) − 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝐶𝐶𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
𝑘𝑘 = (3)
𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝐶𝐶𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 − 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝐶𝐶𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
We point out that during the energy shifting, the BESS also participates in the pri-
We point out that during the energy shifting, the BESS also participates in the primary
mary frequency regulation according to the same procedure described in Section 4.1 (i.e.,
frequency regulation according to the same procedure described in Section 4.1 (i.e., the
the delivered power is regulated between 80% and 100% of the planned power, following
delivered power is regulated between 80% and 100% of the planned power, following
the droop characteristic of Figure 3). Accordingly, the energy that the battery provides to
the droop characteristic of Figure 3). Accordingly, the energy that the battery provides
the grid is, on average, 90% of scheduled. Hence, in order to exploit all the available ca-
to the grid is, on average, 90% of scheduled. Hence, in order to exploit all the available
pacity of the batteries, the scheduled profile of the BESS power is designed to obtain
capacity of the batteries, the scheduled profile of the BESS power is designed to obtain
90%𝐸𝐸
90%EB𝐵𝐵(𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠)
= 70%𝐸𝐸𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 , while the maximum power allowed during discharge re-
(supplied) = 70%EBmax , while the maximum power allowed during discharge remains
mainstoequal
equal 92 MW. to 92 MW.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figure6.6.Reference
Figure Referencepower
powerflows:
flows:(a)
(a)PV
PVpower
powerprofile
profile(black)
(black)and
andbattery
batteryscheduled
scheduledpower
powerfor
forenergy
energyshifting
shiftingoperation
operation
(red) with k = 1; (b) PV power and PCC power demand (red) obtained by PFR and ES operating; (c) Battery power flow,
(red) with k = 1; (b) PV power and PCC power demand (red) obtained by PFR and ES operating; (c) Battery power flow,
daytime charging (negative power) and evening discharging (positive power); (d) battery SOC profile.
daytime charging (negative power) and evening discharging (positive power); (d) battery SOC profile.

Figure 6b shows the power flows of the hybrid plant during three consecutive spring
days with different irradiance obtained according to the criteria depicted above. The
shifting effect of the delivered power is evident from the plots of Figure 6c,d, showing the
battery power and SOC profiles, respectively. Finally, the SOC’s plot (Figure 6d) confirms
the cyclic operation of the battery.

5. Plant’s Loss and Efficiency Calculation

In order to compare the performance of the three different PCS layouts, the daily
energy efficiency of the plant is defined in Equation (4), where EPCC is the daily energy that
the plant provides to the grid at the PCC, EPV is the daily energy that is generated by the
PV, and ∆EB is the daily energy that is stored in the BESS compared to the day before. The
value of ∆EB is null in perfect cyclic operation (SOC (0) = SOC (24)). We recall the load
convention is used for defining the power PCC of the grid, and the generator convention
 5. Plant’s Loss and Efficiency Calculation
In order to compare the performance of the three different PCS layouts, the daily
energy efficiency of the plant is defined in Equation (4), where 𝐸𝐸𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 is the daily energy
that the plant provides to the grid at the PCC, 𝐸𝐸𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 is the daily energy that is generated by
Energies 2021, 14, 4823 11 of 22
the PV, and Δ𝐸𝐸𝐵𝐵 is the daily energy that is stored in the BESS compared to the day before.
The value of Δ𝐸𝐸𝐵𝐵 is null in perfect cyclic operation (𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆(0) = 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆(24)). We recall the
load convention is used for defining the power PCC of the grid, and the generator con-
vention
is used for is used for defining
defining the power the ofpower
the PVof the
andPV and According
BESS. BESS. According to Equation
to Equation (4), a
(4), a daily
daily
efficiencyefficiency
of 100% of 100%
would would be obtained
be obtained for theforplant
the plantif allifthe
all energy
the energy produced
produced by the
by the PV
PV
modules modulesthatthat
areare notnot
stored storedin in
thethe battery
battery were
were deliveredtotothe
delivered thegrid.
grid.Of Ofcourse,
course, aa lower
lower
efficiency
efficiency is obtained in
is obtained practice due
in practice due toto the
the loss
loss ofof the
the various
various conversion
conversion stages,stages, which
which
depends
depends on on thethe layout
layout considered
considered for for the
the PCS.
PCS.
24
R ∫ 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 (𝑡𝑡)𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝐸𝐸𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃
𝜂𝜂 = 24 0240PPCC (t)dt 24 = EPCC (4)
η = R 24 ∫0 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 (𝑡𝑡)𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 + ∫0 𝑃𝑃𝐵𝐵 (𝑡𝑡)𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑= 𝐸𝐸𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 + Δ𝐸𝐸𝐵𝐵 (4)
EPV + ∆EB
R 24
0 PPV ( t ) dt + 0 PB ( t ) dt
To evaluate the energy efficiency, the power losses occurring in the power compo-
nents,Tothat is, transformers,
evaluate dc–dc converters,
the energy efficiency, the power and inverters,
losses occurring need into thebepower
evaluated.
components,
that is, The efficiency of dc–dc
transformers, the dc–dc converters
converters, andand inverters
inverters, is shown
need in Figure 7 as a function
to be evaluated.
of theThe power normalized
efficiency of the dc–dcwith respect
convertersto theandconverters’
inverters is rating
shown reported
in Figure in Table
7 as a 1. As for
function
the
of the inverters, the values shown
power normalized in Figure
with respect to the5 are obtainedrating
converters’ by in-field
reported measurement
in Table 1. As of the
for
input and output power (source ENGIE Eps internal document). The efficiency of the dc–
the inverters, the values shown in Figure 5 are obtained by in-field measurement of the
dc
input converter
and output shown in Figure
power (source 7 ENGIE
is givenEps by [41,42].
internalAs for the transformer,
document). The efficiency a constant effi-
of the dc–dc
ciency 𝜂𝜂 𝑇𝑇 , independent on the power, is assumed. This is obtained by assuming, according
converter shown in Figure 7 is given by [41,42]. As for the transformer, a constant efficiency
to
ηTthe datasheet [43],
, independent on the = 6%, and
𝑉𝑉𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐power, by considering
is assumed. This is aobtained
power factor 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑠𝑠(𝜑𝜑) =according
by assuming, 0.95 alongtowith
the
the rating in
datasheet Table
[43], Vcc 1.= According
6%, and bytoconsidering
Figure 2, both AC and
a power DC coupling
factor cos( ϕ) = architecture
0.95 along with include
the
rating
the in Tabletransformers
container 1. Accordingthat to Figure
connect 2, the
both AC
net and DC
power coupling
output to thearchitecture
MV grid. Aninclude the
efficiency
container transformers that connect the net power output
𝜂𝜂 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 = 98.68% is obtained for this transformer. However, the AC coupling layout also em-to the MV grid. An efficiency
ηTPV =a 98.68%
ploys is obtained for
second transformer this transformer.
connected to the BESS. However, the AC coupling
This transformer manageslayout also
a reduced
employs a second transformer connected to the BESS. This
peak power and has a lower efficiency 𝜂𝜂 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 = 98.43% (generally, transformer efficiency transformer manages a reduced
peak power
increases as theandsize hasincreases).
a lower efficiency ηTB = 98.43% (generally, transformer efficiency
increases as the size increases).

Figure
Figure 7.
7. Power
Power efficiency
efficiency of the PCS
of the PCS components:
components: Inverters and dc–dc
Inverters and dc–dc converters.
converters. The efficiencies
The efficiencies
are functions of the normalized rating power.
are functions of the normalized rating power.

The intrinsic efficiency of the battery storage (i.e., at the cell terminals) is not considered
in this calculation. Of course, this leads to an overestimation of the overall system’s
efficiency. However, since the power flow of batteries is the same for all the considered
layouts, this does not affect the results of the comparison in terms of energy losses that
occur in the PCSs. However, for more details, Appendix A provides efficiency comparisons
of the three layouts, including the round-trip battery losses.
During the daily operation of the PV+BESS plant, different power flows can occur
between PV, grid, and BESS, regardless of the layout of the PCS. However, as it can be
deduced from Figure 2, the number of conversion stages involved in the power flows
depend on the PCS’s layout. For example, when power flows from PV to PCC, the AC-
coupling and the DC-coupling/BESS side layouts involve two conversion stages (inverter
and transformer), whereas the DC-coupling/PV-side involves three conversion stages
(dc–dc converter, inverter, and transformer) and is less efficient. On the other hand,
Energies 2021, 14, 4823 12 of 22

when power flows from BESS to PCC, the less efficient layout is the DC-coupling/BESS
side coupling because it presents one conversion stage more than the others. Similarly,
different conversion stage number and efficiency is obtained for the three layouts when
the power flow from PV to BESS is considered (in this case the worst-performing layout
is the AC-coupling since it involves two converters and two transformers). The count of
the conversion stages and the efficiency for each layout, and the different power flows are
resumed in Table 2.

Table 2. Power efficiency and conversion stages based on power flow directions, where ηinvPV and ηinvB are the efficiencies
of the PV and BESS inverter, ηTPV and ηTB are the efficiencies of the PV and BESS transformers for the AC coupling layout.
On the other hand, ηinv is the inverter efficiency, ηdcdc is the dc–dc converter efficiency and ηT is the transformer efficiency
for both DC-coupling layouts.

AC-Coupling DC-Coupling (BESS) DC Coupling (PV)

N◦ Conv. N◦ Conv. N◦ Conv.
Power Flow Path Efficiency Path Efficiency Path Efficiency
Stages Stages Stages
from PV to Grid 2 ηinvPV ηTPV 2 ηinv ηT 3 ηdcdc ηinv ηT
From PV to BESS 4 ηinvPV ηTPV ηTB ηinvB 1 ηdcdc 1 ηdcdc
From BESS to grid 2 ηinvB ηTB 3 ηdcdc ηinv ηT 2 ηinv ηT

The daily energy loss EL for each layout can be calculated based on the power losses
PL (t) during plant’s operation as follows.
Z 24
EL = PL (t)dt (5)
0

where PL is given by the difference between the input and output power of the conversion
stage. The input and output power of each conversion stage is shown in Figure 8.
For the three layouts. Based on the symbols of Figure 8a, the power flows and energy
losses of the AC-coupling layout are expressed by:
Z 24 Z 24
EL = ( PPV − PPVac )dt + | PB − PBac |dt (6)
0 0
(
(ηinvB ηTB ) · PB , discharging
PBac = 1 (7)
ηinvB ηTB · PB , charging

PPVac = (ηinvPV ηTPV ) PPV (8)

PPCC = PPVac + PBac (9)
Based on the symbols of Figure 8b, the power flows and energy losses of the DC-
coupling/BESS-side layout are expressed by:
Z 24 Z 24
EL = ( PPCCdc − PPCC )dt + | PB − PBdc |dt (10)
0 0
(
ηdcdc · PB , discharging
PBdc = 1 (11)
ηdcdc
· PB , charging

PPCCdc = PPV + PBdc (12)

PPCC = (ηinv ηT ) PPCCdc (13)
Finally, based on the symbols of Figure 8c, the power flows and energy losses of the
DC-coupling/PV-side layout are calculated by the following equations:
Z 24 Z 24
EL = ( PPCCdc − PPCC )dt + ( PPV − PPVdc )dt (14)
0 0
 Table 2.

Table 2. Power efficiency and conversion stages based on power flow directions, where 𝜂𝜂𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 and
𝜂𝜂𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 are the efficiencies of the PV and BESS inverter, 𝜂𝜂 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 and 𝜂𝜂 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 are the efficiencies of the PV
and BESS transformers for the AC coupling layout. On the other hand, 𝜂𝜂𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 is the inverter effi-
ciency, 𝜂𝜂𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 is the dc–dc converter efficiency and 𝜂𝜂 𝑇𝑇 is the transformer efficiency for both DC-
Energies 2021, 14, 4823 13 of 22
coupling layouts.

AC-Coupling DC-Coupling (BESS) DC Coupling (PV)

N° Conv. N° Conv. PB = P N° Conv.
Power Flow Path Efficiency PCCdc − PPVdc
Path Efficiency Path Efficiency (15)
Stages Stages Stages
from PV to PPVdc = ηdcdc · PPV (16)
2 𝜂𝜂𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝜂𝜂 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 2 𝜂𝜂𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝜂𝜂 𝑇𝑇 3 𝜂𝜂𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝜂𝜂𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝜂𝜂 𝑇𝑇
Grid PPCC = (ηinv ηT ) PPCCdc (17)
From PV to
4The daily
𝜂𝜂𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖energy
𝜂𝜂 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝜂𝜂 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇losses
𝜂𝜂 1 the AC-coupling,
𝜂𝜂𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 1 𝜂𝜂and
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 DC/PV-side layout
BESS of DC/BESS-side,
From BESS to are calculated by means of Equations (6), (10) and (14), respectively. For example, focusing
2 𝜂𝜂𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝜂𝜂 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 3 𝜂𝜂𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝜂𝜂𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝜂𝜂 𝑇𝑇 2 𝜂𝜂𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝜂𝜂 𝑇𝑇
grid on AC-coupling, PPVac is the PV power net of the conversion losses (ac-side) and is affected
by the inverter and transformer efficiencies (Equation (8)). The second term of the right
The daily side
energy loss 𝐸𝐸𝐿𝐿 for
of Equation (6)each layout
refers canenergy
to the be calculated
loss in based on the
the BESS legpower
of the losses
system, where PBac
𝑃𝑃𝐿𝐿 (𝑡𝑡) during plant’s operation
is the battery as follows.
power that is measured on the ac-side. Since the batteries’ power flows
are bidirectional, the difference between PB and PBac can be positive or negative. Hence,
24
the absolute value appears
𝐸𝐸𝐿𝐿 = � in𝑃𝑃𝐿𝐿the BESS term of Equation (6). According(5)
(𝑡𝑡)𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 to the generator
convention used, PBac is calculated
0 by Equation (7) during charging and discharging.
Finally, the PCC power is given by Equation (9). Based on the nomenclature and definitions
where 𝑃𝑃𝐿𝐿 is given by the difference between the input and output power of the conver-
introduced, the performance of the three layouts in terms of losses and efficiency is carried
sion stage. The input and output power of each conversion stage is shown in Figure 8.
out in the next section.

2021, 14, 4823 13 of 22

(a)

(b)

(c)
Figure 8. PowerFigure
flows8.that involve
Power flowsthe
thatthree different
involve layouts:
the three (a) layouts:
different AC coupling;
(a) AC(b) DC-cou-
coupling; (b) DC-coupling/
pling/BESS-side; (c) DC-coupling/PV-side.
BESS-side; (c) DC-coupling/PV-side.

For the three layouts.and

6. Results Based on the symbols of Figure 8a, the power flows and energy
Discussion
losses of the AC-coupling layout are expressed
This section shows by: results of the reference PV+BESS plant described in
the simulation
24
Section 2. The calculation is carried out 24 in MATLAB/Simulink and runs with a one-minute
resolution.𝐸𝐸𝐿𝐿Figure
= � (𝑃𝑃 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 − 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃
9 shows the)𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑power+ � delivered
|𝑃𝑃𝐵𝐵 − 𝑃𝑃𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵to|𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 (6)layouts during
the grid for the three
0 0
one typical summer day. The generated PV power, which is common for all the layouts,
is also shown in the (𝜂𝜂figure. As discussed in Section 4 all layouts deliver, on average,
𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝜂𝜂 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 ) ⋅ 𝑃𝑃𝐵𝐵 , 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑ℎ𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
90% of the available
𝑃𝑃𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 = � PV power
1 to the grid during daytime hours and use (7)the 10% excess
⋅ 𝑃𝑃𝐵𝐵 , 𝑐𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝜂𝜂𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝜂𝜂 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇

𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 = (𝜂𝜂𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝜂𝜂 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 )𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 (8)

 6. Results and Discussion
This section shows the simulation results of the reference PV+BESS plant described
in Section 2. The calculation is carried out in MATLAB/Simulink and runs with a one-
minute resolution. Figure 9 shows the power delivered to the grid for the three layouts
Energies 2021, 14, 4823 14 of 22
during one typical summer day. The generated PV power, which is common for all the
layouts, is also shown in the figure. As discussed in Section 4 all layouts deliver, on aver-
age, 90% of the available PV power to the grid during daytime hours and use the 10% excess
power
powerto tocharge
chargethe
thebattery.
battery. The
Theenergy
energystored
storedduring
duringthe
theday
dayisis delivered
deliveredto tothe
the grid
grid inin
evening
eveninghours
hours(energy
(energy shifting),
shifting), as can be
as can be seen
seenin
inthe
thefigure.
figure.AtAtaafirst
firstglance,
glance,nonosubstantial
substan-
tial difference
difference cancan be appreciated
be appreciated in the
in the delivered
delivered powerpower profile
profile of the
of the threethree layouts.
layouts.

Figure
Figure9.9.Delivered
Deliveredgrid
gridpower
powerof
ofthe
thethree
threedifferent
differentlayouts
layoutsduring
duringone
one typical
typical summer
summer day.
day.

AAsubstantial
substantial difference indeedexists
difference indeed existsininterms
termsofofloss
loss and
and overall
overall efficiency,
efficiency, which
which can
can be appreciated
be appreciated by aby a more
more careful
careful analysis
analysis of theofresults.
the results. The battery
The battery powerpower of eachoflayout
each
layout
duringduring the simulated
the simulated 24 h is24 h is shown
shown in Figurein Figure
10a. The 10a. The corresponding
corresponding profile profile
of SOCof is
SOC
shown is shown in 10b.
in Figure Figure
The10b. Thepower
overall overallloss
power
(MW),loss (MW),
i.e., i.e.,occurring
the loss the loss inoccurring in all
all conversion
conversion stages,inisFigure
stages, is shown shown10c.
in Figure 10c. The corresponding
The corresponding energy loss energy
(MWh) lossis (MWh) is finally
finally shown in
shown in Figure 10d.
Figure 10d.
ItItcan
canbe
be seen
seen from
from Figure
Figure 10c
10c that during the
that during the daytime,
daytime, thethe DC-coupling/BESS-side
DC-coupling/BESS-side
layout
layoutshows
showsless
lessloss
losscompared
comparedto tothe
theAC-coupling
AC-couplingdue dueto tothe
thereduced
reducedconversion
conversionstagesstages
(1 versus 4) involving the power flow from PV to the battery. As a result, a higher SOC,
corresponding to higher stored energy, is reached with the DC–BESS layout during daytime
(see Figure 10b). On the other hand, during the evening hours, the energy only flows from
the battery to the grid, and the DC-coupling/BESS-side presents the highest losses due to
one more conversion stage. However, avoided losses of the AC-coupling during discharge
(two versus three converter stages) are less than increased losses during charge (four
versus one converter stages); hence lower overall energy losses are obtained with the
DC-coupling/BESS during the day cycle as it can be seen in Figure 10d.
The worst performing layout in terms of losses is the DC-coupling/PV-side, as can
be seen from the plots in Figure 11. This layout is, along with the AC coupling, the
most efficient during energy shifting in the evening hours (battery discharge) since it only
presents two conversion stages. However, the amount of energy involved in the energy
shifting is only about 10% of the daily PV energy. The main of the energy, which is 90% of
the PV energy, follow the PV-to-grid path and involves three conversion stage (compared
to two conversion stage only for the other two layouts), thus production the highest overall
losses shown in Figure 10b,c.
 efficient during energy shifting in the evening hours (battery discharge) since it only pre-
sents two conversion stages. However, the amount of energy involved in the energy shift-
ing is only about 10% of the daily PV energy. The main of the energy, which is 90% of the
PV energy, follow the PV-to-grid path and involves three conversion stage (compared to
Energies 2021, 14, 4823 two conversion stage only for the other two layouts), thus production the highest overall
15 of 22

losses shown in Figure 10b,c.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figure 10.
Figure 10. Typical
Typicalsummer
summerday
daysimulation
simulation result:
result: (a)(a) battery
battery power
power profiles,
profiles, (b) (b) battery
battery SOC;SOC; (c) overall
(c) overall system
system power
power loss,
loss, (d) overall system energy loss.
(d) overall system energy loss.

The PV
The PV power
power data
data used
usedininthis
thisstudy
studyare
areobtained
obtainedbybya aone-year
one-yearmeasurement
measurement with
with a
a one-minuteresolution
one-minute resolutionfrom
froma apower
powerplant
plantlocated
locatedininCentral
CentralAmerica
AmericaThe Theimpact
impact ofof the
the
different daily
different daily and
and seasonal
seasonal irradiance
irradiance conditions
conditions on
on the
the system’s
system’s loss,
loss, and
and efficiency
efficiency isis
evaluated in the following. In Figure 11, the grid power (Figure 11a,b) and
evaluated in the following. In Figure 11, the grid power (Figure 11a,b) and the battery SOCthe battery
SOC (Figure
(Figure 11c,d)11c,d)
of theofthree
the three different
different layouts
layouts during
during one one
week week in two
in two different
different periods
periods of
of the
the year
year areare shown.
shown. TheThe figure
figure confirms
confirms the cyclic
the cyclic operation
operation of theofbattery
the battery
duringduring all
all days,
regardless of the available PV power. The energy losses of the three different layouts are
also shown in Figure 11e,f.
It can be seen that the DC-coupling/BESS-side remains the best performing layout in
terms of loss and efficiency in all irradiance conditions. In particular, the total energy loss
of the DC-coupling/BESS-side in a summer week is about 470 MWh, while 23 MWh (4.9%)
and 110 MWh (23.4%) more losses are obtained for the AC-coupling and DC-coupling/PV-
side layouts, respectively. The winter week simulation follows a similar trend, with
310 MWh total energy loss for the DC-coupling/BESS-side, 14 MWh (4.5%) more losses for
the AC-coupling, and 72 MWh (22.2%) more losses for DC-coupling/PV-side.
To allow a quantitative comparison of the performance of the three systems in all
operating conditions, the values (MWh) of the PV energy, PCC energy, BESS energy,
and total energy loss are reported in Table 3 for three days with different irradiance
conditions: the low-irradiance condition (in which the PV produces 779.8 MWh in total), the
mean-irradiance condition (with the PV producing 1957.9 MWh), and the high-irradiance
condition (with the PV producing 2398.1 MWh).
 It can be seen that the DC-coupling/BESS-side remains the best performing layout in
terms of loss and efficiency in all irradiance conditions. In particular, the total energy loss
of the DC-coupling/BESS-side in a summer week is about 470 MWh, while 23 MWh (4.9%)
and 110 MWh (23.4%) more losses are obtained for the AC-coupling and DC-coupling/PV-
Energies 2021, 14, 4823 side layouts, respectively. The winter week simulation follows a similar trend, with 310
16 of 22
MWh total energy loss for the DC-coupling/BESS-side, 14 MWh (4.5%) more losses for the
AC-coupling, and 72 MWh (22.2%) more losses for DC-coupling/PV-side.

Summer week Winter week

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)
Figure 11. Power and SOC profiles for the three different layouts during typical summer and winter weeks. (a) grid power
Figure 11. Power and SOC profiles for the three different layouts during typical summer and winter weeks. (a) grid power
during summer week, (b) grid power during winter week, (c) battery SOC during summer week, (d) battery SOC during
during summer week, (b) grid power during winter week, (c) battery SOC during summer week, (d) battery SOC during
winter week, (e) total energy loss during summer week, (f) total energy loss during a winter week.
winter week, (e) total energy loss during summer week, (f) total energy loss during a winter week.

Finally, the annual energy loss and efficiency obtained by simulating an operating
time of one year are shown in Figure 12a,b, respectively. The one-year analysis confirms
the trend reported by the one-day and weekly simulations. The most efficient layout
is the DC-coupling/BESS-side, which presents 21.48 GWh of losses per year and has
an average annual efficiency of 97.02%. The losses of the AC-coupling are 22.67 GWh
per year (+1190 MWh), corresponding to an annual average efficiency of 96.86%. The
worst performing layout is the DC-coupling/PV-side with 26.26 GWh losses per year
(+4780 MWh) and annual average efficiency of 96.34%.
 Table 3. Energy values (MWh) refer to the system’s elements. The results consider three different
initial PV conditions: low, mean, and high irradiance.
Low-Irradiance Mean-Irradiance High-Irradiance
AC DC/BESS DC/PV AC DC/BESS DC/PV AC DC/BESS DC/PV
𝐸𝐸𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 779.8 1957.9 2398.1
Energies 2021, 14, 4823 17 of 22
𝐸𝐸𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 753.6 754.9 747.6 1894.2 1897.4 1884.3 2312.0 2316.5 2300.5
Δ𝐸𝐸𝐵𝐵 −1.6 −0.9 −1.2 −2.2 −1.5 −1.8 −12.5 −11.4 −10.8
𝐸𝐸𝐿𝐿 24.5 23.9 31.01 61.5 58.9 71.7 73.6 79.1 86.7
η 96.8% 96.9% 96.0% 96.8% 97.0% 96.3% 96.9% 97.1% 96.4%
Table 3. Energy values (MWh) refer to the system’s elements. The results consider three different initial PV conditions: low,
mean, and high irradiance.
Finally, the annual energy loss and efficiency obtained by simulating an operating
Low-Irradianceof one year are shownMean-Irradiance
time in Figure 12a,b, respectively. The one-year analysis confirms
High-Irradiance
the trend reported by the one-day and weekly simulations. The most efficient layout is the
AC DC/BESS DC/PV AC DC/BESS DC/PV AC DC/BESS DC/PV
DC-coupling/BESS-side, which presents 21.48 GWh of losses per year and has an aver-
EPV 779.8age annual efficiency of 97.02%. The losses of the AC-coupling are2398.1
1957.9 22.67 GWh per year
EPCC 753.6 754.9 747.6 1894.2 1897.4 1884.3 2312.0 2316.5 2300.5
(+1190 MWh), corresponding to an annual average efficiency of 96.86%. The worst per-
∆EB −1.6 −0.9 −1.2 −2.2 −1.5 −1.8 −12.5 −11.4 −10.8
EL 24.5 23.9forming 31.01
layout is the
61.5DC-coupling/PV-side
58.9 with 26.2673.6
71.7 GWh losses
79.1per year86.7
(+4780
η 96.8% 96.9%MWh) and annual average
96.0% 96.8% efficiency
97.0% of 96.34%.
96.3% 96.9% 97.1% 96.4%

(a) (b)
Figure12.
Figure 12.Comparison
Comparisonofoftotal
totalenergy
energylosses
lossesininone
oneyear
year(a)
(a)and
andannual
annualefficiency
efficiency(b)
(b)for
forthe
thethree
threedifferent
differentlayouts.
layouts.

Aspointed
As pointedoutoutininthetheprevious
previousdiscussion,
discussion,thetheefficiency
efficiencyofofthethelayouts
layoutsisisaffected
affectedby by
theamount
the amountof of energy
energy involving
involving the the BESS
BESScompared
comparedtotothe theavailable
availablePV PVenergy.
energy.Below,
Below, an
anefficiency
efficiencycomparison
comparison of of
thethe
three
threelayouts
layoutsis is
carried
carriedout, considering
out, considering different ratios
different be-
ratios
tween the
between theBESS
BESSenergy
energyand andPV PVenergy.
energy.InInparticular,
particular,thetheprevious
previousone-year
one-yearsimulation
simulationis
isrun,
run,considering
consideringthe thesame
samebattery
battery capacity
capacity of
of 275 MWh, for
275 MWh, for different
different values
valuesof ofthe
thePVPV
plantrating
plant rating(MWp),
(MWp),and andefficiency
efficiencyisiscalculated
calculatedasasa afunction
functionofofthe the BESS/PVratio,
BESS/PV ratio,which
which
isisdefined
definedasasthethepercentage
percentageamount amountofofdaily
dailyenergy
energyoperated
operatedby bythe
thebattery
battery(70%
(70%ofofthe
the
nominalcapacity)
nominal capacity) andandthethe daily
daily PV generated
PV generated energy.
energy. The same
The same irradiance
irradiance conditions,
conditions, same
same frequency
frequency profile, profile, same deadband
same deadband (± 0.012
(±0.012 Hz), Hz), and
and same same thresholds
frequency frequency (thresholds
±0.3 Hz)
(±0.3 Hz) are considered for calculating the PCC power according to the PFR method in
are considered for calculating the PCC power according to the PFR method described de-
scribed4.1.
Section in Section
The same 4.1.bounds
The same bounds
of the of theSOC
allowable allowable
intervalSOC(20% interval (20%are
and 90%) and 90%)
also are
used.
Onalso
theused.
otherOn the other
hand, the drop hand, thePFR
of the dropisof the PFRbased
changed is changed
on the based on thePV
considered considered
plant ratingPV
plant rating
(MWp) (MWp) that
for ensuring for ensuring
the allowed thatstorage
the allowed
capacitystorage
of thecapacity
battery of the battery
is fully is fully
exploited in
all considered cases. In other words, the higher the battery capacity with respect to the
average daily PV production (the higher BESS/PV ratio), the higher the regulating power
(in the percentage of the PV power) that the plant can provide.
The assumed settings of the PFR in all the considered cases are resumed in Table 4.
Table 4 also includes the reference case discussed above (275 MWh/288 MWp). It is
noteworthy that the size considered for the PCSs is scaled according to the PV power, so to
leave the efficiency of each conversion system unchanged. The average annual efficiency
obtained for the different BESS/PV ratios of Table 4 is shown in Figure 13. The results
show that under low BESS/PV ratios, the difference in terms of total efficiency between
the AC-coupling and the DC-coupling/BESS-side decreases (while their overall efficiency
slightly increases). These two layouts approximately present the same losses and efficiency
value if BESS/PV ≤ 5%. The gap of efficiency of the AC-coupling layout with respect to
the DC-coupling/BESS-side constantly increases with increasing the BESS/PV ratio. For
the BESS/PV ratios of around 20%, both DC-coupling layouts present higher efficiency
than AC-coupling (the latter becomes even less efficient than the DC-coupling/PV-side).
 the AC-coupling and the DC-coupling/BESS-side decreases (while their overall efficiency
slightly increases). These two layouts approximately present the same losses and effi-
ciency value if BESS/PV ≤ 5%. The gap of efficiency of the AC-coupling layout with respect
to the DC-coupling/BESS-side constantly increases with increasing the BESS/PV ratio. For
Energies 2021, 14, 4823 the BESS/PV ratios of around 20%, both DC-coupling layouts present higher efficiency
18 of 22
than AC-coupling (the latter becomes even less efficient than the DC-coupling/PV-side).

Table 4. The setting of the primary frequency reserve operation for different BESS/PV ratios. In all
Table 4. The setting of the primary frequency reserve operation for different BESS/PV ratios. In all
cases, the same energy capacity (275 MWh of nominal capacity) is considered while the PV rating
cases, the same energy capacity (275 MWh of nominal capacity) is considered while the PV rating
changes.
changes.
PV Rating PV Energy BESS/PV PFR 𝑷𝑷𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃 PFR Reserve
[MWp]
PV Rating [MWh/Day]
PV Energy [%]
BESS/PV [%
PFRofPbase
𝑷𝑷𝑷𝑷𝑷𝑷 ] [% Reserve
PFR of 𝑷𝑷𝑷𝑷𝑷𝑷 ]
[MWp] [MWh/Day] [%] [% of PPV ] [% of PPV ]
550 3916 5 95 ±5
550
288 3916
1958 5
9.8 95
90 ± 5
±10
288 1958 9.8 90 ±10
275
275 1869
1869 10
10 90
90 ±±10
10
183
183 1305
1305 15.3
15.3 85
85 ±±15
15
137
137 979
979 20.4
20.4 80
80 ±±20
20

Figure13.
Figure 13.Layout
Layoutefficiency
efficiencyas
asaafunction
functionof
ofthe
theBESS/PV
BESS/PV daily
daily energy
energy ratio.
ratio.

7.7.Conclusions
Conclusions
Theefficiency
The efficiencycomparison
comparison of of three
three different
different layouts
layouts of power
of power conversion
conversion systems
systems that
that can be used in large PV+BESS power plants providing primary frequency reserve and
can be used in large PV+BESS power plants providing primary frequency reserve and
energyshifting
energy shiftingservice
servicetotothe
thegrid
gridwaswascarried
carriedout.
out.TheTheproposed
proposedmethod
methodcan canbe
beapplied
applied
toPCS
to PCSwith
withdifferent
differentsizes,
sizes,power
powerratings,
ratings,and
andcomponents’
components’numbers.
numbers.AC-coupling
AC-couplingand and
DC-couplinglayouts
DC-coupling layoutswere
wereinvestigated,
investigated,and andaautility-scale
utility-scaleplant
plantwith
with288
288MWpMWpPV PVpower
power
and92.2
and 92.2MW/275.2
MW/275.2 MWh MWh of of total
total battery
battery capacity
capacity was
was considered
considered as
as aacase
casestudy.
study.The
The
power flows in the different components of the system were calculated underrealistic
power flows in the different components of the system were calculated under realistic
operatingconditions
operating conditionsand andtotal
totalenergy
energylosses,
losses,and
andannual
annualaverage
averageefficiency
efficiencywaswascalculated
calculated
accordingly. It was found that under the same input–output condition (irradiance,PFR,
accordingly. It was found that under the same input–output condition (irradiance, PFR,
and dispatching settings), the best performing PCS layout is DC-coupling with dc–dc
converter at the battery side, presenting an annual average efficiency of 97.02%, followed
by the AC-coupling presenting annual average efficiency of 96.86%. The worst performing
layout is the DC-coupling with dc–dc converter at the PV-side, with an annual average
efficiency of 96.34%. The different performances were related to the different number of
conversion stages involving the energy flow from PV to battery during PFR service in day
hours and from battery to grid during energy shifting in evening hours. It was also shown
that by increasing the storage capacity of the battery with respect to average daily PV
production, the losses of the AC coupling layout increase, and the advantage of adopting
the DC-coupling with dc–dc converter at the battery side becomes even greater.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, F.L.F., A.M., P.R. and G.G.; methodology, F.L.F. and A.M.;
software, F.L.F.; validation, F.L.F., A.M., P.R. and G.G.; formal analysis, F.L.F., A.M., P.R. and G.G.;
investigation, F.L.F.; data curation, F.L.F., A.M., P.R. and G.G.; writing—original draft preparation,
F.L.F. and A.M.; writing—review and editing, F.L.F., A.M., P.R. and G.G.; visualization, F.L.F., A.M.
and P.R.; supervision, A.M., P.R. and G.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version
of the manuscript.
Energies 2021, 14, 4823 19 of 22

Funding: This work was supported by the project ENERGYNIUS (ENERGY Networks Integration
for Urban Systems), funded by POR-FESR Region Emilia-Romagna (Italy) 2014–2020.
Data Availability Statement: The original contributions presented in the study are included in the
article material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A
The purpose of this work was to analyze and compare the losses that involve three
different power conversion system architectures in hybrid PV+BESS large power plants. Fo-
cusing on the PCS, the comparison was carried out considering the power flows converted
in each PCS’s element (dc–dc converter, dc–ac converter, and transformer). In fact, the PCS
is the only element of the power plant that changes among the three examined layouts. Of
course, without considering the battery round trip efficiency, an overestimation of the over-
all system’s efficiency is obtained. On the other hand, focusing only on the PCS efficiency
(without considering the battery’s one), it is possible to estimate and compare with more
accuracy and sensitivity the loss performance of the PCSs. Moreover, the BESS can consist
of different cell technologies, and accordingly, the round trip battery efficiency strongly
depends on the used chemistry. However, this appendix aims to provide an estimation
of the total efficiency, also considering the battery round trip losses in the calculation. For
these reasons, simulations were carried out, including the battery efficiency in the total
losses calculation.
Considering assuming a LiFePO technology, the battery efficiency data are provided
by the reference [44] and the reports in [34]. As shown in the reference documents, the
battery energy efficiency (ηB ) is defined as the ratio between discharge energy and charge
energy and depends on the charging–discharging rate. The annual average C-rate under
the operating condition of the plant is less than 0.1 C. Reference [44] reports the efficiency
from 4 C (ηB = 88%) down to 0.25 C (ηB = 98%), showing that the efficiency monotonically
increases when the C-rate decreases. The battery losses can be introduced in the calculation
of the layout’s efficiency. As shown in Figure A1, it is possible to consider the battery as
Energies 2021, 14, 4823 a system composed of an ideal subsystem and a subsystem that introduces the battery 20 of 22
conversion losses.

Figure A1.Power
A1.
Figure Powerflow
flowthat
thatinvolves the
involves battery
the considering
battery the
considering round
the trip
round conversion
trip losses.
conversion losses.

Referring to Figure A1, the following equations hold:

Referring to Figure A1, the following equations hold:
Z 24
𝐸 ==
EBloss | PB|𝑃− − 𝑃 |dt|𝑑𝑡
PBT (A1)
(A1)
0

𝜂η 𝑃PBT, , charging.
𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑖𝑛𝑔.
(
Bch
PB𝑃 == 11 P , discharging. (A2)
(A2)
ηBdis 𝑃BT , 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑖𝑛𝑔.
𝜂
where ηBch and ηBdis are the charging and discharging efficiency of the battery, PBT is the
where 𝜂 and 𝜂 are the charging and discharging efficiency of the battery, 𝑃 is
BESS power measured at the battery cell terminals, and PB is the power ideally measured
the BESS power measured at the battery cell terminals, and 𝑃 is the power ideally meas-
inside the cell, e.g., to the net of conversion losses during the charging. However, the
ured inside the cell, e.g., to the net of conversion losses during the charging. However, the
battery round trip efficiency refers to the cyclic operation, and it considers both the charging
battery round trip efficiency refers to the cyclic operation, and it considers both the charg-
ing and discharging process. Since the annual average C-rate is considered, it is possible
to assume the following equation that relates the round trip efficiency with the charging
and discharging efficiency:
Energies 2021, 14, 4823 20 of 22

and discharging process. Since the annual average C-rate is considered, it is possible to
assume the following equation that relates the round trip efficiency with the charging and
discharging efficiency:
√
ηBch = ηBdis = ηB (A3)
The battery losses are included in the calculation of the whole losses and efficiency,
and the obtained results are shown in Table A1.

Table A1. PCS+BESS efficiency as a function of the round trip battery efficiency.

PCS+BESS Efficiency
Battery Round Trip DC/BESS DC/PV Average C-Rate
AC-Coupling
Efficiency Coupling Coupling (LiFePO)
100% 96.86% 97.02% 96.34%
≤0.25 C
98% 96.75% 96.92% 96.24%
95% 96.56% 96.71% 96.05%
90% 96.22% 96.37% 95.75% 0.25 < C-rate ≤ 4
85% 95.89% 96.03% 95.44%
80% 95.56% 95.69% 95.14% >4 C

Table A1 shows that, despite the overall system’s efficiency decrease with the decrease
in the battery round trip efficiency, the ranking of the three different layouts remains
unchanged (1st DC/BESS, 2nd AC, and 3rd DC/PV). We report that percentage difference
among efficiency values decrease with the decrease in the battery efficiency due to the
lower value of ηB compared to the PCS efficiency. The final efficiency is more weighted by
the battery losses, and the sensitivity of the efficiency parameter as a function of the PCS
layout decreases accordingly. Moreover, considering the average C-rate with which the
battery works (0.08 C) may be possible to also assume ηB around or higher than 98%, and
the error introduced is less relevant.

References
1. Liu, X.; Aichhorn, A.; Liu, L.; Li, H. Coordinated control of distributed energy storage system with tap changer transformers for
voltage rise mitigation under high photovoltaic penetration. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2012, 3, 897–906. [CrossRef]
2. Luo, C.; Ooi, B.T. Frequency deviation of thermal power plants due to wind farms. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 2006, 21, 708–716.
[CrossRef]
3. Kroposki, B.; Johnson, B.; Zhang, Y.; Gevorgian, V.; Denholm, P.; Hodge, B.M.; Hannegan, B. Achieving a 100% renewable grid:
Operating electric power systems with extremely high levels of variable renewable energy. IEEE Power Energy Mag. 2017, 15,
61–73. [CrossRef]
4. Chamana, M.; Chowdhury, B.H.; Jahanbakhsh, F. Distributed control of voltage regulating devices in the presence of high PV
penetration to mitigate ramp-rate issues. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2018, 9, 1086–1095. [CrossRef]
5. Datta, U.; Kalam, A.; Shi, J. Battery energy storage system control for mitigating PV penetration impact on primary frequency
control and state-of-charge recovery. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2020, 11, 746–757. [CrossRef]
6. Gevorgian, V.; O’Neill, B. Advanced Grid-Friendly Controls Demonstration Project for Utility-Scale PV Power Plants; NREL: Golden,
CO, USA, 2016.
7. Gevorgian, V.; Booth, S. Review of PREPA Technical Requirements for Interconnecting Wind and Solar Generation; NREL: Golden, CO,
USA, 2013.
8. Loutan, C.; Klauer, P.; Chowdhury, S.; Hall, S.; Morjaria, M.; Chadliev, V.; Milam, N.; Milan, C.; Gevorgian, V. Demonstration of
Essential Reliability Services by a 300-MW Solar Photovoltaic Power Plant; NREL: Golden, CO, USA, 2017.
9. Miller, N.; Manz, D.; Roedel, J.; Marken, P.; Kronbeck, E. Utility scale battery energy storage systems. In Proceedings of the IEEE
PES General Meeting, PES 2010, Minneapolis, MN, USA, 26 July 2010; pp. 1–7.
10. Muñoz-Cruzado-Alba, J.; Rojas, C.; Kouro, S.; Galván Díez, E. Power production losses study by frequency regulation in
weak-grid-connected utility-scale photovoltaic plants. Energies 2016, 9, 317. [CrossRef]
11. Díaz-González, F.; Sumper, A.; Gomis-Bellmunt, O. Energy Storage in Power Systems; Díaz-González, F., Sumper, A., Gomis-
Bellmunt, O., Eds.; John Wiley & Sons Ltd.: Chichester, UK, 2016; ISBN 9781118971291.
12. Han, Z.; Luo, G.; Song, X.; Yang, C.; Zhang, L.; Jia, Y.; Zhao, Z.; Jin, Y. Research on the dispatch proportion of battery capacity
in photovoltaic primary frequency control. In Proceedings of the 2019 3rd IEEE Conference on Energy Internet and Energy System
Integration: Ubiquitous Energy Network Connecting Everything, Changsha, China, 8–10 November 2019; Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2019; pp. 1098–1103.
Energies 2021, 14, 4823 21 of 22

13. Barchi, G.; Pierro, M.; Moser, D. Predictive energy control strategy for peak shaving and shifting using BESS and PV generation
applied to the retail sector. Electronics 2019, 8, 526. [CrossRef]
14. Solar Power Europe. Grid Intelligent Solar Unleashing the Full Potential of Utility-Scale Solar Generation in Europe; Solar Power
Europe: Brussels, Belgium, 2019.
15. International Renewable Energy Agency. Utility-Scale Batteries Innovation Landscape Brief ; International Renewable Energy Agency:
Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 2019; ISBN 978-92-9260-139-3.
16. Abdelrazek, S.A.; Kamalasadan, S. Integrated PV capacity firming and energy time shift battery energy storage management
using energy-oriented optimization. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2016, 52, 2607–2617. [CrossRef]
17. Ahmed, M.; Kamalasadan, S. Energy storage PV capacity firming with forecasted power reference and optimal error minimization.
In Proceedings of the 2015 North American Power Symposium, Charlotte, NC, USA, 4–6 October 2015; Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2015; pp. 1–6.
18. Yang, Y.; Kim, K.A.; Blaabjerg, F.; Sangwongwanich, A. Flexible active power control of PV systems. In Advances in Grid-Connected
Photovoltaic Power Conversion Systems; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 153–185.
19. Denholm, P.; Eichman, J.; Margolis, R. Evaluating the Technical and Economic Performance of PV Plus Storage Power Plants; NREL:
Golden, CO, USA, 2017.
20. Dynapower AC vs. DC Coupling for Solar Plus Energy Storage Projects|Dynapower. Available online: https://www.dynapower.
com/ac-vs-dc-coupled-solar-plus-storage/ (accessed on 27 January 2021).
21. Go Big, Go DC: An In-Depth Look at DC-Coupled Solar-Plus-Storage|Energy Storage News. Available online: https://www.
energy-storage.news/blogs/go-big-go-dc-an-in-depth-look-at-dc-coupled-solar-plus-storage (accessed on 27 January 2021).
22. Fluence a Battery for Hire: AC vs. DC Coupling for Solar + Energy Storage Projects. Available online: https://blog.fluenceenergy.
com/energy-storage-ac-dc-coupled-solar (accessed on 27 January 2021).
23. Sterling & Wilson why Large-Scale Solar Alone no Longer Makes Sense. Available online: https://www.pv-magazine.com/
webinars/why-large-scale-solar-alone-no-longer-makes-sense/ (accessed on 27 January 2021).
24. DiOrio, N.; Denholm, P.; Hobbs, W.B. A model for evaluating the configuration and dispatch of PV plus battery power plants.
Appl. Energy 2020, 262, 114465. [CrossRef]
25. He, J.; Yang, Y.; Vinnikov, D. Energy storage for 1500 V photovoltaic systems: A comparative reliability analysis of DC- and
AC-coupling. Energies 2020, 13, 3355. [CrossRef]
26. Sandelic, M.; Sangwongwanich, A.; Blaabjerg, F. Reliability evaluation of PV systems with integrated battery energy storage
systems: DC-coupled and AC-coupled configurations. Electronics 2019, 8, 1059. [CrossRef]
27. Despeghel, J.; Tant, J.; Driesen, J. Loss model for improved efficiency characterization of DC coupled PV-battery system converters.
In Proceedings of the IECON Proceedings (Industrial Electronics Conference), Lisbon, Portugal, 14–17 October 2019; IEEE Computer
Society: Washington, DC, USA, 2019; pp. 4740–4745.
28. Akeyo, O.; Rallabandi, V.; Jewell, N.; Ionel, D.M. The design and analysis of large solar PV farm configurations with DC-connected
battery systems. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2020, 56, 2903–2912. [CrossRef]
29. Müller, N.; Kouro, S.; Zanchetta, P.; Wheeler, P.; Bittner, G.; Girardi, F. Energy storage sizing strategy for grid-tied PV plants under
power clipping limitations. Energies 2019, 12, 1812. [CrossRef]
30. Central Inverter PVS980-58. Available online: https://www.fimer.com/sites/default/files/FIMER_PVS980-58-from4348to5000_
EN_RevB__0.pdf (accessed on 24 May 2021).
31. Asian Development Bank. Handbook on Battery Energy Storage System; Asian Development Bank: Mandaluyong, Philippines, 2018;
ISBN 9789292614706.
32. HITACHI ABB Battery Energy Storage System PQpluSTM . Available online: https://www.hitachiabb-powergrids.com/it/it/
offering/product-and-system/energystorage/pqplus (accessed on 3 July 2021).
33. World Bank Group Economic Analysis of Battery Energy Storage Systems. Available online: https://openknowledge.worldbank.
org/bitstream/handle/10986/33971/Economic-Analysis-of-Battery-Energy-Storage-Systems.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
(accessed on 3 July 2021).
34. ITP Renewables Reports—Lithium Ion Battery Test Centre. Available online: https://batterytestcentre.com.au/reports/ (accessed
on 3 July 2021).
35. Kosmadakis, I.E.; Elmasides, C.; Koulinas, G.; Tsagarakis, K.P. Energy unit cost assessment of six photovoltaic-battery configura-
tions. Renew. Energy 2021, 173, 24–41. [CrossRef]
36. Susanto, J.; Shahnia, F.; Ludwig, D. A framework to technically evaluate integration of utility-scale photovoltaic plants to weak
power distribution systems. Appl. Energy 2018, 231, 207–221. [CrossRef]
37. European Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity (ENTSO-E). Inertia and Rate of Change of Frequency (RoCoF);
European Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity (ENTSO-E): Brussels, Belgium, 2020.
38. Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority’s Minimum Technical Renewables Interconnection Requirements—ESIG. Available
online: https://www.esig.energy/wiki-main-page/puerto-rico-electric-power-authority-s-minimum-technical-renewables-
interconnection-requirements/#Frequency_Response.2FRegulationRegulation (accessed on 27 January 2021).
39. Denholm, P.; O’Connell, M.; Brinkman, G.; Jorgenson, J. Overgeneration from Solar Energy in California: A Field Guide to the Duck
Chart; NREL: Golden, CO, USA, 2015.
Energies 2021, 14, 4823 22 of 22

40. Mathews, I.; Xu, B.; He, W.; Barreto, V.; Buonassisi, T.; Peters, I.M. Technoeconomic model of second-life batteries for utility-scale
solar considering calendar and cycle aging. Appl. Energy 2020, 269, 115127. [CrossRef]
41. Stieneker, M.; Mortimer, B.J.; Averous, N.R.; Stagge, H.; de Doncker, R.W. Optimum design of medium-voltage DC collector grids
depending on the offshore-wind-park power. In Proceedings of the PEMWA 2014—2014 IEEE Symposium on Power Electronics and
Machines for Wind and Water Applications, Milwaukee, WI, USA, 24–26 July 2014; Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers:
Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2014; pp. 1–8.
42. Morandi, A.; Gholizad, B.; Stieneker, M.; Stagge, H.; de Doncker, R.W. Technical and economical evaluation of DC high-
temperature superconductor solutions for the grid connection of offshore wind parks. IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 2016, 26, 1–10.
[CrossRef]
43. Italweber Electra General Catalougue. Available online: www.italweberelettra.it (accessed on 27 January 2021).
44. Stan, A.I.; Swierczynski, M.; Stroe, D.I.; Teodorescu, R.; Andreasen, S.J.; Moth, K. A comparative study of lithium ion to lead acid
batteries for use in UPS applications. In Proceedings of the INTELEC, International Telecommunications Energy Conference, Vancuver,
BC, USA, 28 September–2 October 2014; Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2014; pp. 1–8.