This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal.

Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS 1

Power Management and Control for Grid-Connected DGs With Intentional Islanding Operation of Inverter
Soo Hyung Lee, Member, IEEE, GumTae Son, Student Member, IEEE, and Jung-Wook Park, Senior Member, IEEE
AbstractThis paper describes a power management method in a feeder with distributed generations (DGs) and energy storage devices. To ensure stability, reliability, and safety of the system, the proposed power management method deals with the DGs in two groups, which are utility and independent power producer (IPP). When the feeder is islanded from grid, the utility-owned DG receives fault signal from the protection relay. Thereafter, it is allowed to operate itself when the feeder is islanded because it is directly controlled by the utility. In contrast, the IPP-owned DG should be stopped to avoid several problems, which can be caused by the islanding operation. Then, the proposed power management method operates the above DGs to maximize the efciency with no serious impact to grid. To do so, the inverter controller of DG is designed to implement it in a part of practical distribution system, which is located at the Do-gok area in Seoul, Korea. Several case studies are carried out to verify the effectiveness of proposed method. Index TermsDistributed generation (DG), feeder sectionalization, grid-connected operation, inverter controller, islanding operation, power management.

I. INTRODUCTION

NCREASE in power demand has required so far to provide infrastructure, such as huge power plants and transmission lines. However, the recent trends in power system planning and operation are being toward maximum utilization of existing electricity infrastructure with tight operating margins because of new constraints placed by economic, political, and environmental issues. Currently, the renewable energies based distributed generations (DGs) are being considered worldwide as an alternative solution to deal with this problem, and their grid-connection is attracting much concern. It is desirable that the renewable energy based DGs operate to produce its maximum power. However, it must be disconnected from the grid when the islanding operation is detected [1]. The standards for this issue are stipulated in the IEEE Std. 15472003 [2] and IEEE Std. 1547.4 [3]. On the other hand, the pressure to maintain a high degree of uninterrupted power service quality and reliability is experienced by the utility companies [4]. To ensure them, the new solution to islanding operation
Manuscript received January 19, 2012; revised February 13, 2012, April 29, 2012, and June 13, 2012; accepted July 15, 2012. This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MEST) (No. 2011-0028065). Paper no. TPWRS-00057-2012. The authors are with the School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Yonsei University, Seoul 120-749, Korea (e-mail: reasonable@yonsei.ac.kr; soncross@yonsei.ac.kr; jungpark@yonsei.ac.kr). Digital Object Identier 10.1109/TPWRS.2012.2209686

is required. As the result, the IEEE Std. 1547.4 [3] is reported to describe the implementation of intentional islanding of DGs in detail. In recent, various commercial inverters with the capability of intentional islanding operation are becoming available in market. As mentioned in above, to use the renewable energy resources with maximum efciency, the DG usually operates in its maximum power point tracking (MPPT) mode [5], [6]. In particular, when the renewable energy resources generate DC power, the DG must synchronize its output voltage to the grid with an inverter. Then, the inverter controls its output by monitoring the input power from the energy resources. Therefore, it is subject to determine the amount of power supplied from the DG according to the condition of energy resources, rather than that of grid. However, when a feeder is disconnected from the grid, the DG is expected by the utility operator to improve the system reliability by supplying the required power to that feeder. In other words, the total amount of power supplied from all DGs should be the same as the total load consumption during the islanding operation. To meet this balance, the output power of DGs must be controlled by considering the given grid condition. Therefore, the conict might exist between the above energy resources and grid conditions. To deal with this problem, a power management method is proposed in this study. Based on a recent study in [7], the DG was used to energize the islanded grid. However, the role of the DG is limited to re-energizing the grid and reducing the restoration time after blackout. According to another study in [8], a control algorithm for the DG was developed considering two important situations of grid-connected and islanding operations. It manages the power only when there is a back-to-back converter between grid and feeder. However, most feeders in a real system are connected to the grid without a back-to-back converter. Also, it was reported in [9][11] that a management for power sharing can be achieved based on the frequency droop characteristics of the DG. However, the inverter-based most DGs supply constant power without the droop characteristics in practice. This study makes the new contribution by proposing the new power management method with relation to control algorithm for inverter of multiple DGs connected to a feeder. Firstly, the DGs are classied into two groups according to their owners. One is the utility and the other is the independent power producer (IPP). The utility-owned DG is directly controlled by the utility, and therefore receives a signal from the protection relay when the feeder is islanded. In contrast, the IPP-owned DG operates independently, and thus it must have its own islanding detection algorithm [12][14]. Secondly, the proposed power management method operates the above DGs to maximize the

0885-8950/$31.00 2012 IEEE

This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
2 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS

Fig. 1. Distributed generation and battery energy storage systems. Fig. 2. Electrical circuit model of battery in BESS.

efciency of system while satisfying the required grid condition simultaneously. The utility-owned DGs might conict with the electricity liberalization with respect to separation of supply, production, transmission and distribution. However, the utility-owned DGs are in charge of keeping the feeder stable as well as supplying power. For example, the utility-owned DGs reduce its output power if the load consumption is decreased while the IPP-owned DGs keep producing their rated output. Moreover, because there is the limitation in power production from the utility-owned DGs, it can relieve this conict to some degree. This paper is organized as follows: Section II explains the power management method for multiple DGs connected to a feeder in the real distribution system. Then, Section III describes the inverter control of DG to implement the proposed power management method. Thereafter, several case studies are carried out in Section IV to verify the effectiveness of proposed method. Finally, conclusions are given in Section V. II. PROPOSED POWER MANAGEMENT METHOD A. DG System With BESS The output powers from most DGs based on renewable energies are subject to vary depending on various conditions of environment. To mitigate these power variations, the battery energy storage system (BESS) can be connected to the DGs. As shown in Fig. 1, the DG and BESS are generally connected to each other through a bidirectional DC-DC converter [15], which can charge or discharge the BESS by controlling the direction and magnitude of current from battery. Then, the BESS mitigates the power uctuations. Also, the BESS compensates the power differences between the DG output and load consumption with the quick response [16]. A battery is the electrochemical energy storage device, which can convert chemical energy to electrical energy, and vice versa. There are many methods to model battery with its nonlinear characteristics [17]. Among these methods, the electrical circuit model [18] is widely used in power system analysis because it is formed by DC voltage source, resistors, and capacitors as shown in Fig. 2. The and are the open circuit voltage and the internal resistance, respectively. Also, the parameters, , , , and determine the short-time and long-time constants during transient responses. The indicates the terminal voltage, which can be directly measured. B. Amount of Available Power Management in Feeder To draw its maximum efciency, the DGs installed in a feeder tend to operate in the MPPT mode. In other words, the output power of DG is determined by the condition of energy source rather than the power balance between supply and consumption

in the feeder. Therefore, this power difference must be complemented from the main grid. To deal with this power management problem, a part of practical distribution system at Do-gok area in Seoul, Korea in Fig. 3 is considered. In Fig. 3, the subscripts, and , of DGs indicate the IPP and the utility, respectively. Also, the to are loads. In contrast to the , the and belong to the utility company, and they have the BESS as shown in Fig. 2. The sizes of loads, DGs and BESSs are given in Table I when the power supplied from all DGs and BESSs is greater than that consumed in all loads. Without the BESSs, the entire output power from all DGs is 930 kW, which is smaller than all load consumption of 1 MW. Because the feeder is connected to the grid, the decient power might be supplied from the grid or two BESSs. In other words, the amount of available power management is in the range of kW to 270 kW depending on the state of BESS operation. The negative sign means that the power ows from feeder to grid by discharging operation of BESSs. C. Power Management in Islanded Feeder As mentioned in Introduction, the DG must be disconnected from the feeder within 2 s after it is islanded from the grid. This action is easily taken by the utility-owned DGs because they are directly controlled by the utility. However, this does not go for the IPP-owned DGs because there is lacking in communication between them and utility. Therefore, they must have their own islanding detection algorithm to satisfy the above requirement. In this study, the over/under voltage (OUV) method, which is the most common and simplest passive method, is used for islanding detection. In other words, the IPP-owned DGs keep supplying power when their output voltages are in the range from 0.88 pu to 1.1 pu. The islanding operation can protect the system and DG itself from damages to fault current. However, it is expected that the DGs account for large portion of entire power generation in near future. In this case, the grid disconnection might cause a serious problem such as power outage. In other words, the DGs want to keep supplying powers to the islanded feeder continuously. The IEEE Std. 1547.4 [3] states seven types of the intentional islanding operation and their associated problems to consider. In Fig. 3, the feeder is islanded when the circuit breakers, Brk1 and Brk2, are opened. According to the present current practice of islanding operation, all DGs must be disconnected regardless of their ownership. As the result, there is no way to avoid blackout. However, as mentioned in [3] and [4], this power outage can be avoided by continuously operating all DGs in Fig. 3 during even islanding condition. Note that in contrast

This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
LEE et al.: POWER MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL FOR GRID-CONNECTED DGS 3

Fig. 3. Distributed generations connected to a part of practical distribution network at Do-gok area in Seoul, Korea.

TABLE I WHEN POWER GENERATION FROM ALL DGS AND BESSS IS GREATER THAN POWER CONSUMED IN ALL LOADS

to the IPP-owned DGs, the utility-owned DGs do not cause any safety, stability, and reliability problems because they are under the complete control of utility. For example, the utility can easily stop supplying power to the feeder by turning off the utility-owned DGs, and then separate the feeder from main grid. This is important to obtain the working safety condition on the feeder. In contrast, the feeder might be still in service by IPP-owned DGs even though the utility stops supplying power. Moreover, a failure of re-synchronization by IPP-owned DGs can do a serious damage to the system when they are re-connected to the feeder. During a normal operation, the feeder deals with the grid as a slack bus. Therefore, the feeder requires alternate slack bus during an islanding operation. Assume that one of the utilityowned DGs, , operates as the slack bus when the feeder is islanded. Then, all IPP-owned DGs can produce powers continuously because they do not take the required actions for islanding detection due to operation of as the slack bus.

Referring to the sizes given in Table I, the of can play the role of supplying the decient power of 70 kW. This results in avoiding blackout in the feeder even after it is islanded. The renewable energy based DGs often produce less output powers than their rated values depending on external condition of energy sources. If the feeder is islanded in this condition, the load consumption might become much bigger than the power generation. Then, the IPP-owned DGs detect the islanding operation from the voltage drop of grid [19], and they are disconnected from the feeder. Moreover, this disconnection makes the power deciency problem worse, and the feeder will nally result in the power outage. Assume that the power generations of each DG and load consumptions are xed as given in Table II in an operating condition. In other words, they produce less power than their rated values. The total power generation from all DGs is 790 kW, and therefore it is smaller by 210 kW than the entire load consumption of 1 MW. Because this decient power is larger than the capacity of two BESSs, the feeder cannot avoid a power outage even though the operates as the slack bus. The above problem can be avoided by dividing the feeder into three separate areas (gray boxes in Fig. 3), Area 1, Area 2, and Area 3 corresponding to each load group, , , and , respectively, as shown in Fig. 3. In Table II, the is required to supply the extra power of 10 kW as the slack bus even if two BESSs supply their maximum power. To do so, this requirement is rstly recognized by the utility. Then, the transmits the trip signal, , to open the breakers, Brk5 and Brk6, in Fig. 3. Thereafter, all power generation of and in Area 3 is 310 kW, and this is still smaller than the load consumption, of 370 kW. The can compensate for this decient power of 60 kW, and therefore the Area 3 can avoid the power outage. In contrast, the entire output power of all DGs in Area 1 and

This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
4 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS

TABLE II WHEN POWER GENERATION FROM ALL DGS AND BESSS IS LESS THAN POWER CONSUMED IN ALL LOADS

Fig. 5. Protection algorithm for

and

Fig. 4. Power management algorithm for the only

Area 2 is 480 kW, and the total load consumption of 630 kW. Therefore, these areas cannot avoid the power outage even if the supplies its maximum power of 100 kW. To handle this problem, the transmits the trip signal, to open the breakers, Brk3 and Brk4. Then, all power generation from DGs and in Area 1 is enough to cover the load consumptions of 380 kW. However, the of 140 kW in Area 2 cannot supply the required load consumption of 250 kW. Moreover, there is no utility-owned DG, which can operate as a slack bus in Area 2. Therefore, the power outage will be occurred in Area 2. Consequently, the range of power outage is reduced from the entire feeder to only Area 2 by dividing it into several areas. The benecial effect is achieved by managing the only utility-owned DGs, not all DGs in the feeder. Therefore, the proposed power management algorithm for both and is given in Fig. 4. Firstly, the open-state signal of breaker, , ows to the when the feeder is islanded from the grid. If the signal from Brk5, , is the close-state, the required output of is compared with the present operating output of multiplied by the critical value, , to transmit the trip signal, , to the breakers, Brk5 and Brk6. When is open-state, the same condition is considered with another critical value, . Then, it transmits the trip signal, , to the breakers, Brk3 and Brk4. The of 0.9 and of 0.8 are used in this study. Also, the and are transmitted if the above conditions are satised during the

pre-dened period, , which is normally small value in a fast response. When the value of is high, the proposed algorithm in Fig. 4 is subject to make the decision in a steady-state. In other words, the value of can be selected depending on its purpose. In this case, the of 1 ms is used for the fast response to quickly open breakers. On the other hand, the operation of utility-owned DGs must be stopped when the required powers are larger than their rated value. Therefore, the protection algorithm as shown in Fig. 5 is proposed. When the is the open-state, the required power for is compared with its rated value. Then, the operation of is stopped if the former value is higher than the latter. In practice, the circuit breaker operates by receiving trip signals from protection relays. Because the trip signal from the relay is transmitted independently of that from the , the proposed power management and the protection algorithms in Figs. 4 and 5 do not conict with the existing protective coordination. That is, the circuit breakers operate normally for protection of system during a fault. D. Grid-Connection of Islanded Feeder The objective of the proposed power management algorithm described above is to prevent a power outage in the feeder islanded situation when the total load consumption exceeds the output power from the DGs. Similarly, the islanded feeder is required to be carefully restored when it is re-connected to the main grid. The grid-connection algorithm for the and the is described in Fig. 6. When the DGs do not supply powers, the feeder can be easily re-connected to the grid by sending close signals to the breakers. However, to connect the feeder which is still in service, the breakers must be closed with a time delay to synchronize the voltages. In other words, the measures the voltage, , in Fig. 1 to synchronize the voltage of bus 2 after the Brk1 is closed. Then, the sends the closing signal, , if the above synchronization is completed. Even after it receives another closing signal from the utility, the Brk2 is still open until it receives the signal, . After conrming the close of Brk2 by receiving the closestate signal, , the transmits signals, and , to close the breakers, Brk3, Brk4, Brk5, and Brk6. Because the Area 2

This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
LEE et al.: POWER MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL FOR GRID-CONNECTED DGS 5

Fig. 7. Block diagram of inverter controller using magnitude and phase of voltage.

III. INVERTER CONTROL OF DG SYSTEMS A. Control of Utility-Owned DG for Grid-Connected Operation In general, the grid-connected DG with an inverter controls its output current to produce constant real power and maintain the power factor close to the unity. According to the recent studies on the inverter controller of DG, its output can be controlled exactly and quickly by using only the magnitude and phase of voltage. The block diagram of inverter controller proposed in this study is shown in Fig. 7. In Fig. 7, the inverter controls its output power with the measured currents because the voltage, , on the point of common coupling (PCC) in Fig. 1 is determined by the grid. In Fig. 1, the output current, , depends on the voltage, , across the lter, . Then, as shown in Fig. 8, the current, , lags the by the angle, , because the lter is inductive component. The angle, , is phase difference between and in Fig. 1. The values of angles, and , are negative, and they are increased to counterclockwise direction. The in Fig. 7 is used to operate the switch of inverter as a reference signal, and therefore makes its output voltage, , in Fig. 8 with the and regulated by two PI controllers using the inputs of real and reactive power differences, respectively. This and correspond to the magnitude and phase of the in Fig. 8, respectively. Also, the has the linear relationship with , as shown in Fig. 1. Therefore, the inverter operates in the current control mode. Note that the and are the magnitude of and , respectively. Assume that the real power, , becomes smaller than its reference, , in Fig. 7. Then, the value of is increased. Accordingly, the magnitude of the is also increased, and this results in the increase of and in Fig. 8. On the other hand, when the reactive power, , becomes larger than its reference, , in Fig. 7, the negative value of is more increased. Then,

Fig. 6. Grid-connection algorithm for

and

separated by Area 3 does not have the utility-owned DG used as a slack bus, it will be totally out of service if the Area 1 is also separated from the Area 2. Therefore, the close of Brk4 does not require an intentional delay time for synchronization. In contrast, the close of Brk6 requires an intentional delay time likewise that of Brk2. In other words, the measures the voltage, , to synchronize the voltage of bus 6 after the Brk5 is closed. Then, the sends the closing signal, , after the synchronization is completed. The Brk6 is still open until it receives the even after it receives the close-state signal, . Thereafter, the and receive the close-state signals, and , from Brk2 and Brk6, respectively. As the result, they re-operate in the grid-connection mode. In summary, even though the part of feeder is in service in an islanding condition, it can be reliably connected to the main grid by the proposed grid-connection algorithm with its control capability of inverter for re-synchronization, which is described in next section. Moreover, the proposed method can be easily applied to the case of even typical load shedding of non-critical loads.

This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
6 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS

Fig. 8. Phasor diagram to describe the output power of inverter.

Fig. 10. Block diagrams of voltage magnitude-controller to synchronize the feeder and grid voltages. phase- controller

and

Fig. 9. Block diagram of voltage magnitude-controller and phasefor utility-owned DG during the islanding operation. controller

operation, respectively. In practice, the can be maintained to be near 1 pu by the operator. Then, if the is smaller than the , the becomes larger than the . This increase in makes the output voltage increasing. Meanwhile, if the is smaller than the , the becomes smaller than the . Then, the decrease in also makes the frequency increasing because that its negative value is added to as shown in Fig. 7. C. Control of Utility-Owned DG to Synchronize Feeder With Grid The unsynchronized re-connection to the main grid after an islanding operation might cause a serious problem with a huge damage. Therefore, when the DG is re-connected, the feeder voltage must be synchronized to that of main grid. To achieve this requirement, the and the in Fig. 10 are used for the instead of the and the in Fig. 7, respectively, during the synchronization process. In Fig. 10, the and are the rms magnitude and phase of grid voltage, respectively. Also, the is the phase of feeder voltage. The is the last value of in the previous islanding condition. The is the same as the if the is replaced with the in Fig. 9. In other words, the magnitude of grid voltage can be easily synchronized in the case of re-connection. On the other hand, if the is smaller than the , the output, , of is decreased. Then, the value of is increased (see Fig. 7), and it becomes closer to the . The feeder is re-connected to the grid when the synchronization errors given as (1) and (2) are smaller than the pre-dened values (the values of and are set to be 0.01 in this study): (1) (2)

the direction of and ( is still xed) move counterclockwise, and the value of is decreased. B. Control of Utility-Owned DG for Islanding Operation Unlikely the utility-owned DG, the IPP-owned DG system supplies a constant power when the feeder is connected to the grid. According to the current standard in [2] for islanding detection, the operation of IPP-owned DG must be stopped when the feeder is islanded. However, it can be still operated only if the utility-owned DG operates as a slack bus. This means that the IPP-owned DG does not require additional control algorithm for its operation in an islanding condition. Therefore, the power management method proposed in Section II is still applied to this case effectively. In contrast, the utility-owned DG needs the additional control algorithm to change its operation mode from the grid-connection to islanding. The and in Fig. 7 are controlled by the magnitude-controller, , and the phase-controller, , respectively. Then, to operate it as the slack bus during the islanding operation, the and the controllers are replaced with the and the , respectively, as shown in Fig. 9, for the control of voltage magnitude and phase. Note that the islanded feeder requires only one slack bus. Therefore, only one utility-owned DG operates as the slack bus. For example, only operates as the slack bus in this study when the feeder is islanded, and the Areas 1, 2, and 3 are connected to each other. Of course, the also operates as the slack bus if the Area 3 is separated from the Area 1. The , , and of in Fig. 9 are the root-mean-square (rms) output voltage from DG, voltage reference, and the last value of in the previous grid-connected operation, respectively. Also, the , , and of are the frequency of output voltage of DG, frequency reference, and the last value of in the previous grid-connected

IV. CASE STUDIES A. Case-1: When Total Output Power From DGs is Larger Than Total Load Consumptions The performances of proposed power management method and control algorithm are evaluated by the power systems computer aided design/electromagnetic transients including DC (PSCAD/EMTDC) based simulation. In this case, even though the utility-owned DGs generate their rated powers, the

This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
LEE et al.: POWER MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL FOR GRID-CONNECTED DGS 7

TABLE III FEEDER IMPEDANCES

TABLE IV INDUCTIVE FILTERS

TABLE V PARAMETERS OF PI CONTROLLERS

Fig. 12. Other results (Case-1). (a) Reactive powers of DGs. (b) Voltages of DGs. (c) States of circuit breakers, (d) Frequency of utility-owned DGs.

Fig. 11. Powers generated from DGs before and after islanding (Case-1).

BESSs are discharging to compensate decient power during islanding operation. The parameters of the feeder impedances, inductive lters, and the PI controllers are given in Tables IIIV, respectively. The results for powers generated from all DGs before and after the islanding are shown in Fig. 11. The feeder is islanded at 0.1 s by opening the Brk1 and Brk2. Before the islanding, all DGs supply their rated powers, and the feeder receives decient power from the grid. After the islanding, the IPP-owned DGs ( , , and ) still supply their rated powers. In contrast, the utility-owned DGs ( and ) generates more powers, which are required to the islanded feeder with their BESS. Also, the corresponding reactive powers, voltages, states of circuit breakers, and frequencies of the utility-owned DGs are shown in Fig. 12. It is observed from Fig. 12(a) that the peak reactive power of is 16.34 kVAR at 140 ms, which is relatively high. However, its power factor is 0.997 at the same time. The other DGs show the smaller variations than the with the close to unity power factor. In Fig. 12(b) and (d), the voltage and frequency variations are within of their nominal values. This means that the proposed control algorithm can

be reliably applied without any problems during the islanding operation. It is also known from Fig. 12(c) that the Brk5 and Brk6 are also opened when the output power of is 240 kW after Brk1 and Brk2 are opened. At this time, the critical value, , in Fig. 4 is 0.8. In contrast, the Brk3 and Brk4 are still not opened because the peak value in real power of is 267 kW, and the threshold to open those breakers is 270 kW. That is, the corresponding critical value, , is 0.9. After the Area 3 in Fig. 3 is islanded, the utility-owned DGs, and , still supply the smaller powers than their maximum values. Therefore, the DGs are not stopped by the protection algorithm proposed in Fig. 5. Moreover, the and are kept operating because the is controlled as the slack mode in Area 1 and Area 2. Similarly, the does not stop its operation because the is controlled as the slack mode in Area 3. In summary, the islanded feeder can avoid a power outage by making the utility-owned DGs operate as the slack bus mode while the IPP-owned DGs keep their normal operation. It is proved that the proposed power management method operates the islanded feeder successfully without the direct control for the IPP-owned DGs. This result is important. In most cases, it is not feasible to control the IPP-owned DGs by the utility operators in practice. In addition, the proposed method does not degrade the performance of their own control algorithms such as the MPPT method. B. Case-2: When Total Output Power From DGs is Smaller Than Total Load Consumptions In most cases, the output from renewable energy based DGs is decreased when external conditions are bad. For example, the PV system generates smaller power than its rated value in a partial shading condition. Under these circumstances, the total output power from all DGs is subject to be smaller than the total load consumptions, as given in Table II. Then, the feeder will suffer from a power outage during islanding operation.

This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
8 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS

Fig. 13. Powers generated from DGs before and after islanding (Case-2).

Fig. 15. Results for Case-3. (a) Powers from the utility-owned DGs. (b) States of circuit breakers. (c) Synchronization of -phase voltage at Brk2. (d) Syn. (f) chronization of -phase voltage at Brk6. (e) -phase current from -phase current from .

Fig. 14. Other results (Case-2). (a) Reactive powers of DGs. (b) Voltages of DGs. (c) States of circuit breakers. (d) Frequency of utility-owned DGs.

In this case, the proposed power management method can reduce the possibility of power outage by dividing the feeder into separate areas. The variations of powers supplied from the DGs are shown in Fig. 13. Likewise the results in the Fig. 11, all DGs supply their rated powers before the islanding at 0.1 s. After the islanding by opening the Brk1 and Brk2, their responses become totally different from those in Fig. 11. From Fig. 14(c), the Brk5 and Brk6 are opened at 116 ms, when the output power from becomes 224 kW, which its maximum output, 280 kW, is multiplied with the critical value, , of 0.8. Similarly, the Brk3 and Brk4 are also opened at 124 ms, when the output power from becomes 252 kW, which its maximum output, 280 kW, is multiplied with the critical value, , of 0.9. After the Brk3 and Brk4 are opened, the Area 2 in Fig. 3 loses its slack bus. Because the power consumed in is larger than the size of , it is observed from Fig. 14(b) that the voltage of starts to decrease as soon as the Area 2 is islanded. When it drops below 0.9 pu, the must be stopped by the regulation. In contrast, the and continuously

supply their rated powers in the previous steady-state because the and operate as slack buses. As the result, the Area 1 and Area 3 are kept operating without a power outage by the proposed power management method. Also, the variations of reactive powers and frequencies are shown in Fig. 14(a) and (c), respectively. It is observed that the power factors affected by all DGs are larger than 0.99. Likewise the voltage responses, the frequency variations are kept within except for the . In conclusion, the change of DG control modes does not cause any problems to violate the requirements of IEEE Std. 15472003, as in the Case-1. C. Case-3: Grid-Connection When the islanded feeder is re-connected to the grid, the proposed method is applied with the synchronization control as shown in Fig. 10. In particular, for the synchronization of phase, the phase differences between the circuit breakers ( and ) and the associated utility-owned DGs ( and , respectively) are set to be at 0 s. The powers from the utility-owned DGs and the states of circuit breakers are shown in Fig. 15(a) and (b), respectively. Due to the synchronization time for the feeder voltage and the , the closing of Brk2 is delayed for 227 ms after the Brk1 is closed. During this delay time, the operates as the slack bus mode by changing its phase. Also, the and supply the

This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
LEE et al.: POWER MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL FOR GRID-CONNECTED DGS 9

powers of 254 kW and 221 kW, respectively. After the Brk2 is closed, the rated power supplied from is decreased from 254 kW to 200 kW. At this time, the decient power of 54 kW is supplied from the grid. In contrast, the keeps providing the power of 221 kW since the Brk6 is not closed yet. At the moment of the Brk2 is closed, the transmits the close-state signal, , to Brk5 and Brk6. In the similar manner with the Brk2, the closing of Brk6 is delayed for 323 ms after the Brk5 is closed due to synchronization time for the voltage in Area 3 and the . After the Brk6 is closed, the power supplied from drops to 200 kW, and the decient power of 21 kW is supplied from the grid. Therefore, the total power supplied from the main grid is 75 kW, which is the same as that before the islanding. The synchronizing processes of voltages at Brk2 and Brk6 are shown in Fig. 15(c) and (d), respectively. Also, the corresponding current responses are shown in Fig. 15(e) and (f), respectively. Note that there are no current surges when the breakers are closed. V. CONCLUSIONS This paper proposed the new power management method by controlling only the utility-owned DGs with the BESS. Also, although the IPP-owned DGs were not directly controlled by utilities, they could be managed successfully with their anti-islanding algorithms. In the grid-connected and islanding modes, the proposed controller could maintain the voltages and currents within the boundaries required by international standards. In addition, the controller could synchronize the feeder voltage to the grid voltage without any problems such as a power outage when the feeder is re-connected to the grid. By operating the BESS of utility-owned DGs, the proposed power management method does not require the same energy storage devices to the IPP-owned DGs. This improves the operating efciency of DGs with respect to their installations and maintenance costs. As the result, it is expected that the proposed method can contribute to the wide use of renewable energies based DGs. REFERENCES
[1] S.-H. Lee and J.-W. Park, New islanding detection method for inverter-based distributed generation considering its switching frequency, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 46, no. 5, pp. 20892098, Sep./Oct. 2010. [2] IEEE Standard for Interconnecting Distributed Resources With Electric Power Systems, IEEE Std. 1547-2003, 2003. [3] IEEE Guide for Design, Operation, and Integration of Distributed Resource Island Systems with Electric Power Systems, IEEE Std. 1547.4, Jul. 2011. [4] I. J. Balaguer, Q. Lei, S. Yang, U. Supatti, and F. Z. Peng, Control for grid-connected and intentional islanding operations of distributed power generation, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 147157, Jan. 2011.

[5] Q. Mei, M. Shan, L. Liu, and J. M. Guerrero, A novel improved variable step-size incremental-resistance MPPT method for PV systems, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 58, no. 6, pp. 24272434, Jun. 2011. [6] C.-T. Pan and Y.-L. Juan, A novel sensorless MPPT controller for a high-efciency microscale wind power generation system, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 207216, Mar. 2010. [7] T. T. H. Pham, Y. Bsanger, and N. Hadjsaid, New challenges in power system restoration with large scale of dispersed generation insertion, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 398406, Feb. 2009. [8] R. Majumder, A. Ghosh, G. Ledwich, and F. Zare, Power management and power ow control with back-to-Back converters in a utility connected microgrid, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 821834, May 2010. [9] S.-J. Ahn, J.-W. Park, I.-Y. Chung, S.-I. Moon, S.-H. Kang, and S.-R. Nam, Power-sharing method of multiple distributed generators considering control modes and congurations of a microgrid, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 20072016, Jul. 2010. [10] J. Kim, J. M. Guerrero, P. Rodriguez, R. Teodorescu, and K. Nam, Mode adaptive droop control with virtual output impedances for an inverter-based exible AC microgrid, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 689701, Mar. 2011. [11] Y. W. Li and C.-N. Kao, An accurate power control strategy for power-electronics-interfaced distributed generation units operating in a low-voltage multibus microgrid, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 24, no. 12, pp. 29772988, Dec. 2009. [12] E. J. Estebanez, V. M. Moreno, A. Pigazo, M. Liserre, and A. DellAquila, Performance evaluation of active islanding-detection algorithms in distributed-generation photovoltaic systems: Two inverters case, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 11851193, Apr. 2011. [13] J.-H. Kim, J.-G. Kim, Y.-H. Ji, Y.-C. Jung, and C.-Y. Won, An islanding detection method for a grid-connected system based on the Goertzel algorithm, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 10491055, Apr. 2011. [14] B.-G. Yu, M. Matsui, and G.-J. Yu, A correlation- based islandingdetection method using current-magnitude disturbance for PV system, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 58, no. 7, pp. 29352943, Jul. 2011. [15] C. Mi, H. Bai, C. Wang, and S. Gargies, Operation, design and control of dual H-bridge-based isolated bidirectional DC-DC converter, IET Power Electron., vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 507517, 2008. [16] R. Rao, S. Vrudhula, and D. N. Rakhmatov, Battery modeling for energy-aware system design, Computer, vol. 36, no. 12, pp. 7787, Dec. 2003. [17] M. Chen and G. A. Rincon-Mora, Accurate electrical battery model capable of predicting runtime and I-V performance, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 504511, Jun. 2006. [18] S.-K. Kim, J.-H. Jeon, C.-H. Cho, J.-B. Ahn, and S.-H. Kwon, Dynamic modeling and control of a grid-connected hybrid generation system with versatile power transfer, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 16771688, Apr. 2008. [19] Z. Ye, A. Kolwalkar, Y. Zhang, P. Du, and R. Walling, Evaluation of anti-islanding schemes based on nondetection zone concept, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 11711175, Sep. 2004. Soo Hyoung Lee (S08M12) received the B.S. and Ph.D. degrees from the School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea, in 2008 and 2012, respectively. He is currently a Post-Doctoral Research Associate in the Automation Technology Research Institute, Yonsei University. His research interests are in load ow of power system, optimization of grid connected distributed generation systems, anti-islanding algorithms and inverter control for distributed generation systems, and measurement based load modeling. Dr. Lee was the recipient of the Gold Prize Paper Award from the TMS Institute of Technology and Second Prize Paper Award from the Yonsei Electric Power Research Center.

This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
10 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS

GumTae Son (S07) received the B.S. degree in electrical and electronic engineering from Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea, in 2007. He is currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree in a combined M.S. and Ph.D. program at Yonsei University. His research interests are in wind-turbine generator system modeling and control, multilevel voltage source converter, and high voltage direct current (HVDC) systems.

Jung-Wook Park (S00M03SM09) was born in Seoul, Korea. He received the B.S. degree (summa cum laude) from the Department of Electrical Engineering, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea, in 1999, and the M.S.E.C.E. and Ph.D. degrees from the School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, in 2000 and 2003, respectively. He was a Post-Doctoral Research Associate in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, during 20032004, and a Senior Research Engineer with LG Electronics Inc., Korea, during 20042005. He is currently an Associate Professor in the School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Yonsei University. His current research interests are in power system dynamics, renewable energies based distributed generations, and optimization control algorithms. He is now leading the National Leading Research Laboratory (NLRL) designated by the Korea government to the subject of integrated optimal operation for smart grid. Prof. Park was the recipient of the Second Prize Paper Award in 2003 from the Industry Automation Control Committee and the Prize Paper Award in 2008 from the Energy Systems Committee of the IEEE Industry Applications Society (IAS). He is currently a vice chair of the Intelligent Systems Technical Applications Committee of the IEEE Computational Intelligence Society (CIS).