System Strength

March 2020

System strength in the NEM explained

Important notice
PURPOSE
AEMO has prepared this document to provide general information about AEMO’s interpretation of the
application of the National Electricity Rules relating to system strength in the National Electricity Market, as at
the date of publication.

DISCLAIMER
The interpretation of rules and assessments of system strength may change based on subsequent legal or
technological developments, and the information in this document may not be current when you read it.
This document does not constitute legal or business advice, and should not be relied on as a substitute for
obtaining detailed advice about the National Electricity Law, National Electricity Rules or any other applicable
laws, procedures or policies. Anyone considering the information in this publication for a specific purpose
should obtain independent and specific advice from appropriate experts. AEMO has made every reasonable
effort to ensure the quality of the information in this document but cannot guarantee its accuracy or
completeness.
Accordingly, to the maximum extent permitted by law, AEMO and its officers, employees and consultants
involved in the preparation of this document:
• make no representation or warranty, express or implied, as to the currency, accuracy, reliability or
completeness of the information in this document; and
• are not liable (whether by reason of negligence or otherwise) for any statements or representations in this
document, or any omissions from it, or for any use or reliance on the information in it.

VERSION CONTROL
Version Release date Changes

1.0 23/03/2020 Original document

© 2020 Australian Energy Market Operator Limited.

The material in this publication may be used in accordance with the copyright permissions on AEMO’s website.
Contents
1. Introduction 4

2. Terminology 4
2.1 Fault current 4
2.2 Fault level 4
2.3 System Strength 5
2.4 Short Circuit Ratio (SCR) 5
2.5 Synchronous machines 5
2.6 Inverter-based resources 5
2.7 Voltage waveform 5
2.8 Relevance of system strength 6
2.9 Relationship with inertia 6

3. The importance of system strength 6

3.1 Characteristics of low system strength 6
3.2 The need for system strength 7
3.3 Sources of system strength 7
3.4 System strength and inverter-based resources 7

4. Assessing system strength 8

4.1 Assessing system strength in a region 8
4.2 Assessing adverse system strength impact of proposed connections 9
4.3 Models used in assessments 9

5. System strength remediation 9

5.1 Responding to fault level shortfalls 9
5.2 Remediation in response to a proposed connection 10

6. Planning for system strength 10

© AEMO 2020 | System Strength 3

1. Introduction
The Australian Energy Market Commission (AEMC) made a rule on managing power system fault levels in
20171 (Fault Level Rule), which created a new framework in the National Electricity Rules (NER) for the
management of system strength. The Fault Level Rule responded to a need to facilitate the safe and secure
operation of the National Electricity Market (NEM) power system with increasing levels of inverter-based
resources (IBR)2.
The Fault Level Rule sought to ensure that adequate sources of system strength would remain available (or
be made available) to assist in the management of power system security and enable the secure operation of
IBR. There are two parallel mechanisms in the NER to achieve this outcome: minimum three-phase fault
levels to be maintained by transmission network service providers (TNSPs) for the power system to be in a
secure operating state, and obligations on connection applicants (primarily Generators) to remediate adverse
system strength impacts resulting from their connection (or alteration).
System strength is generally not well understood. This document seeks to address some common
misunderstandings by presenting AEMO’s views on:
• The meaning of system strength.
• The importance of system strength.
• Relationship between system strength and other power system stability phenomena.
• Assessing system strength.
• Impact on system strength from new connections, and the application of system strength remediation.
• System strength from a planning perspective.

2. Terminology
This section provides an explanation of the terms used in this paper to explain certain power system
phenomena, and their relation to each other.

2.1 Fault current

The electrical current that flows during a fault (also referred to as the short circuit current) measured in Amps.
Fault current is a location-specific parameter.

2.2 Fault level

This is a shorthand for the term ‘three phase fault level’ used in the NER. It is calculated at network nodes,
called fault level nodes. Those located close to synchronous generating systems will be higher, whereas
those that are remote from synchronous generating systems will be lower. This is generally measured in
MVA. The three phase fault level (in MVA) is proportional to the fault current (in Amps) and the voltage (in
Volts).

1
National Electricity Amendment (Managing power system faults) Rule 2017 No.10. Available at:
[Link]
[Link].
2
The term IBR is generally considered to cover wind and solar generation technologies, battery energy storage systems and direct current network links.

© AEMO 2020 | System Strength 4

2.3 System Strength
System strength is not defined in the Fault Level Rule, however, in its Final Determination, the AEMC stated3:
System strength is a characteristic of an electrical power system that relates to the size of the change in
voltage following a fault or disturbance on the power system.
AEMO sees system strength as the ability of the power system to maintain and control the voltage waveform
at any given location in the power system, both during steady state operation and following a disturbance.
The system strength at a given location is proportional to the fault level at that location, inversely
proportional to effective grid-following IBR penetration seen at that location (where close by grid-following
IBR reduces system strength more so than electrically distant IBR). System strength is also a function of the
severity of system events on the stability of IBR (for example, loss of a major transmission line connecting the
aforementioned location to the broader power system, resulting in sudden changes in fault level and voltage
angle at that location).

2.4 Short Circuit Ratio (SCR)

SCR is the synchronous three phase fault level (in MVA) divided by the rated output of an IBR generating
system (in MW or MVA) measured at the generating system’s connection point.

2.5 Synchronous machines

This is a shorthand referring to synchronous generating systems and synchronous condensers. Unlike most
IBR, synchronous machines are electro-magnetically coupled to the power system. Synchronous machines
are a source of system strength.

2.6 Inverter-based resources

Unlike synchronous machines, the current generation of grid-following IBR provide a significantly lower and
different contribution towards fault level, which means that the lowest system strength on a power system is
likely to be in a part where generation is dominated by IBR and electrically remote from synchronous
machines.

2.7 Voltage waveform

Many variables are used to measure the outputs of a power system, but this paper concentrates on voltage.
The NEM’s power system operates at various alternating current (AC) voltage levels, and includes a dedicated
DC interconnection between Victorian and Tasmania, as well as both AC and DC connections between
Victoria and South Australia and NSW and Queensland. The transmission network used for the bulk transfer
of power operates at higher voltages than the ‘poles and wires’ used for power distribution to most electricity
consumers. When plotted on a two-dimensional graph, the AC voltage at any point on the power system can
be represented as a sine waveform, as shown in Figure 1. The waves, in fact, are three dimensional, each one
called a phase that flows at a 120o angle to each other. A power system fault could cause one or more of
these perfect voltage waveforms to distort. Figure 2 depicts this for one phase, only.

3
Page 3, AEMC 2017, Managing power system fault levels, Rule Determination, 19 September 2017, Sydney. Available at:
[Link]

© AEMO 2020 | System Strength 5

 Figure 1 Voltage waveform under normal Figure 2 Voltage waveform depicting a
operating conditions disturbance

2.8 Relevance of system strength

System strength is one determinant of how well the power system can return to normal operation following a
disturbance or fault, or to put it another way, how quickly the power system voltage waveform can be
restored to the consistent sine wave seen in Figure 1. In practical terms, power systems with system strength
can maintain more stable voltages following changes in power flows.

2.9 Relationship with inertia

The NER treat system strength and inertia differently, but it is not unusual to find that a fault level shortfall
and inertia shortfall jointly arise, as both system strength and inertia are provided by synchronous machines.
System strength contribution and inertia are design and operational characteristics of synchronous
generation technology that are not easily replicated in IBR, as yet. They are provided by synchronous
generation as a by-product of energy production, and by synchronous condensers.
As synchronous machines change operating patterns (for example, when they are displaced in the bid stack
during high IBR output or when they retire) the power system loses both system strength and inertia. Local
increases in the level of IBR can increase the need for system strength in that part of the power system since
IBR currently require system strength to operate stably.4
System strength is expressed in the NER by reference to fault levels while inertia to rates of change in
frequency (RoCoF). They are related because inertia is critical for the power system’s resilience to changes in
active power.
In spite of these similarities, their remediation is different. For example, if synchronous condensers are used
to address a fault level shortfall, they will provide enough fault level, but will not address an inertia shortfall
unless they are coupled with a rotating mass or flywheel.

3. The importance of system strength

3.1 Characteristics of low system strength
A power system with low system strength will exhibit one or more of the following:
• Wider area undamped voltage and power oscillations.
• Generator fault ride-through degradation.
• Mal-operation or failure of protection equipment to operate.

4
For an alternative view, see the discussion of the relationship between system strength and inertia in National Grid, System Operability Framework 2014.
Available at: [Link]

© AEMO 2020 | System Strength 6

• Prolonged voltage recovery after a disturbance.
• Larger voltage step changes after switching capacitor or reactor banks.
• Instability of generator / dynamic plant voltage control systems.
• Increased harmonic distortion (a by-product of low system strength and higher system impedances).
• Deeper voltage dips and higher over-voltages (e.g. transients).

3.2 The need for system strength

System strength is important for the maintainence of normal power system operation, for the power systems
dynamic response during a disturbance, as well as for returning the power system to stable operating
conditions. Adequate system strength is required to ensure:
• Stable operation of IBR.
• Ensure network voltage remains stable and stays within a standard range following:
– Switching operations (capacitors, reactors and circuit).
– Variations in load.
– Disturbances on the network.
• Protection equipment to operate correctly during disturbances.
• Power quality is maintained.
• Support network voltage during faults and enable rapid recovery after fault clearance.
• Correct operation of generator control systems.
• Avoiding commutation failure of line commutated High Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) links.

3.3 Sources of system strength

Fault current levels are high in strongly interconnected (or meshed) transmission systems or in network areas
with a material number of online synchronous machines. Synchronous machines have traditionally provided
fault current in NEM transmission networks. In future, we expect to see more examples of inverter-based
technology that doesn’t reduce system strength, or even contributes towards system strength.

3.4 System strength and inverter-based resources

Modern wind and solar PV generation as well as battery energy storage systems connect to the grid using
power electronics inverter-based technology and require adequate system strength for the inverters to work
reliably.
The more remote the IBR is from synchronous machines and the higher the penetration of IBR, the more
likely it is that voltage waveforms will be impacted by disturbances in the network as well as the IBR itself.
This is because synchronous machines are electro-magnetically coupled to the power system’s voltage
waveform, whereas an inverter is decoupled from the grid by the inverter and, at present, inverters do not
create a voltage waveform like a synchronous machine5.
Complex interactions exist not only between an inverter and the grid, but also between connected inverters.
For grid following inverters to operate, inverters must follow the grid voltage waveform seen at their terminals
and inject current at an angle that follows the measured voltage. In a process known as a phase-locked-loop,

5
Some inverters have grid forming capability, where they can be placed in voltage source mode, but they have not yet been proven successful for normal
operation when connected to the NEM.

© AEMO 2020 | System Strength 7

the inverter creates a synchronous clock driven by the voltage phase angle it senses from the grid. Following
the occurrence and cessation of a fault, the inverter must re-lock onto the grid quickly to ensure stable
control. Under low system strength conditions, the phase angle change between the pre-fault condition to
fault clearance will be larger than on stronger systems, making this much more difficult6.
If the voltage phase angle detected by an inverter is inaccurate, the current is not injected correctly, and will
impact the voltage waveform to which it is connected. This further impacts the voltage that the inverter sees
at its terminals which, in turn, impacts the current it injects, and so the process repeats. These interactions
can occur at low frequencies (below 50Hz) as well as high frequencies (above 50Hz). In an interconnected
power system, these control interactions can have a cascading impact on the voltage waveform, and could
result in widespread disruption if not corrected.
The larger the number and capacity of IBR connected in close proximity to each other, the greater the system
strength the power system needs at that location to maintain stability because there is a higher potential to
influence voltage. Hence, the ability of the network to resist the change in voltage needs to be greater. The
North American Electric Reliability Council provides a good reference to the IBR requirements of system
strength7.
Many inverter manufacturers offer different strategies for weak and strong networks and also specify a
minimum SCR for which their inverter’s operation is able to operate in a stable manner. Where the SCR
(calculated at the inverter terminals in this example) is above the manufacturer-specified minimum level, the
operation of the inverter phase-lock-loop is more robust, which means that SCR-type measures can be used
as a screening metric for likely inverter stability issues. Correct operation is still dependent on a range of
other factors, however, including voltage angle changes and the stability of other IBR in the area.
Managing stability in low system strength conditions often requires a combination of minimum support from
the network in conjunction with coordinated tuning of power electronic control systems of existing and new
equipment.

4. Assessing system strength

4.1 Assessing system strength in a region
AEMO is responsible for setting and reviewing the minimum fault levels needed to maintain power system
security across the NEM. This involves:
• Developing a methodology to determine fault level nodes in each transmission network in the NEM, and
the required fault current level at those nodes to maintain the power system in a secure operating state.
Together, these are the ‘system strength requirements’. AEMO’s initial System Strength Requirements
Methodology8 took effect on 1 July 2018. It is subject to review as part of the Integrated System Plan (ISP)
process, formerly the National Transmission Network Development Plan (NTNDP).
• Determining the system strength requirements in accordance with the System Strength Requirements
Methodology and identifying and declaring any current or emerging fault level shortfalls.
To assess the minimum fault level requirements in a region, AEMO’s methodology considers the likely fault
current contribution of synchronous machines and transmission lines in areas with different load, generation
and network characteristics.

6
See North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), Integrating Inverter-Based Resources into Low Short Circuit Strength Systems: Reliability
Guideline, December 2017. Available at: [Link]
Based_Resources_into_Low_Short_Circuit_Strength_Systems_-_2017-[Link].
7
Available at: [Link]
8
Available at: [Link]
review/2018/system_strength_requirements_methodology_published.pdf?la=en.

© AEMO 2020 | System Strength 8

4.2 Assessing adverse system strength impact of proposed
connections
AEMO’s involvement in the framework for assessing the system strength impact of proposed connections and
remediation measures includes:
• Developing an assessment methodology to be used by connecting network service providers (NSPs) when
assessing the impact of a new or modified generation or market network service connection on system
strength. This is set out in the System Strength Impact Assessment Guidelines9.
• Providing, on request, power system models to connecting NSPs to carry out system strength impact
assessments, consulting with them on these assessments, and advising them whether to approve
proposed system strength remediation where there is an adverse system strength impact.
The methodology for assessing whether a proposed new or modified generation or market network service
connection will have an adverse system strength impact has two stages:
1. Preliminary Assessment – this requires the calculation of the proposed connection’s SCR to identify
the likelihood of an adverse system strength impact, which triggers a full assessment.
2. Full Assessment – this is a more intensive study of the proposed connection using more sophisticated
tools.
Details of the assessments, and the tools to be used by connecting NSPs, can be found in the System
Strength Impact Assessment Guidelines.

4.3 Models used in assessments

As for any assessment of the power system or any of its components, it is important that AEMO has up-to-
date, accurate and transparent PSS®E and PSCAD™/EMTDC™ models of plant as required by the Power
System Model Guidelines10. If models become out of date, or prove to be inaccurate, AEMO may require
owners of plant connected to the power system to provide up-to-date models and related information where
they are required for the purpose of a system strength impact assessment.

5. System strength remediation

5.1 Responding to fault level shortfalls
Following the declaration of a fault level shortfall, TNSPs are required to provide system strength services to
address the shortfall. These services may be procured by the TNSP from a third party, and made available to
AEMO to be enabled as required.
The Energy Security Board is proposing changes to the NER to streamline several planning processes,
including the ISP and the regulatory investment test for transmission (RIT-T). It is expected that these
changes will permit proactive system strength remediation where appropriate11.

9
Available at: [Link]
review/2018/system_strength_impact_assessment_guidelines_published.pdf?la=en&hash=771B8F6BC8B3D1787713C741F3A76F8B.
10
Available at: [Link]
review/2018/power_systems_model_guidelines_published.pdf?la=en&hash=A3DDF450DBEE1E7C1D7E2E379461538A.
11
For further information, see: [Link]

© AEMO 2020 | System Strength 9

5.2 Remediation in response to a proposed connection
Consistent with the ‘do no harm’ requirements introduced by the Fault Level Rule, 12 Generators and Market
Network Service Providers must fund the remediation of any adverse system strength impact13 resulting from
a new14 or modified connection for which they are responsible. This assessment is carried out during the
connection process and must be finalised and documented in the resulting connection agreement.
There are two ways an adverse system strength can be remediated:
1. Generators and MNSPs may propose and fund a system strength remediation scheme.
2. The connecting NSP may carry out system strength connection works at the Generator or MNSP’s
expense.
Examples of both types are detailed in the System Strength Impact Assessment Guidelines.
A proposal to contract a third party (for example, the owner of a synchronous machine) to provide the
necessary system strength remediation must not compromise the otherwise available fault levels considered
in determining the relevant system strength requirements in the region. AEMO provides guidance on
contracting options and their relative effectiveness in the System Strength Impact Assessment Guidelines15.
Generators wishing to enter into a contract for the provision of system strength services should contact their
local NSP and AEMO to ensure their proposed arrangement can be implemented operationally and is
additive to the existing level of system strength.

6. Planning for system strength

Forecasting emerging system strength issues within a planning horizon of five years relies on good
information about factors that are near impossible to predict reliably over an extended period. These factors
include synchronous generating system withdrawals or changes in operating regimes, the location, size and
capabilities of IBR, operational patterns of embedded generation, distributed energy resources, changes in
networks and dispatch patterns.
System strength can change rapidly as network operations vary, and Generators react to economic and
structural changes in, and affecting, the NEM. New technology generation can be proposed, built, and
commissioned within 18 months, with immediate impacts on the dispatch patterns of synchronous
generation, invalidating AEMO’s longer-term forecasts. For these reasons AEMO reviews its assumptions
annually and seeks to be proactive and innovative in its planning for system strength.
Considering these challenges, AEMO forecasts fault levels at the fault level nodes hourly using ISP market
modelling scenario outcomes to assess the statistical likelihood of different fault levels under a variety of
conditions and dispatch outcomes, including the impact of network augmentations and outage conditions.

12
The expression ‘do not harm’ is used in the Determination, only. See section 5 of AEMC 2017, Managing power system fault levels, Rule Determination, 19
September 2017, Sydney.
13
A term that is defined extensively in the System Strength Impact Assessment Guidelines.
14
The liability resides in the connection applicant who ultimately becomes a Generator or MNSP.
15
At the date of this document, a consultation to revise the System Strength Impact Assessment Guidelines is imminent. The update will include more
information on contracting options than the current version.

© AEMO 2020 | System Strength 10