A Global

Real-Time Superlab
Enabling high penetration of
power electronics in the electric grid

by Antonello Monti, Marija Stevic, Steffen Vogel, Rik W. De Doncker,

Ettore Bompard, Abouzar Estebsari, Francesco Profumo, Rob Hovsapian,
Manish Mohanpurkar, Jack David Flicker, Vahan Gevorgian,
Siddharth Suryanarayanan, Anurag K. Srivastava, and Andrea Benigni

T
he Global Real-Time Superlaboratory (Global RT Superlab) represents a ven-
dor-neutral distributed platform based on the virtual interconnection of digital
real-time simulators (DRTSs) and hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) setups hosted at
eight geographically distributed laboratories in the United States and Europe
(Figure 1). This article describes the efforts toward the realization of this large-
scale virtual infrastructure and explains a demonstration of the multilab setup for sim-
ulation and testing of next-generation global power grids.

The Emerging Global Grid

The electric grid is changing. In particular, power electronics is
significantly transforming power systems all around the
world. This change is driven by the progressive instal-
lation of distributed energy resources (DERs),
which are typically based on a power electron-
ics interface, and it is creating a com-
pletely new power electronics-run, low-
inertia grid. As described in [1], this
future is closer than we think.

Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/MPEL.2018.2850698

Date of publication: 10 September 2018

©istockphoto.com/BeholdingEye

2329-9207/18©2018IEEE September 2018 z IEEE Power Electronics Magazine 35

 Even today, the operation of grid opens up new technical scenarios and
portions with only power electronics- theoretical questions regarding, for
driven sources is possible. This means,
A new world is opened example, the dynamic operation of
in a nutshell, that we are transforming for power electronics the system issues related to intercon-
an electromechanical system into an tinental-scale stability and interoper-
and power system
electronic system. At first glance, this ability. However, testing new ideas
seems to be a challenge. The electro- engineers to design the on a real grid is not an easy task. This
mechanical system presents fully pre- grid of the future. is why real-time simulation is gain-
dictable dynamic behavior that can ing so much momentum in the power
be well represented using Newton’s community. Computational capability,
second law of motion. The result is data processing constraints, and the
that, without any control intervention, the system will have availability of real-life data all limit the possibilities of per-
an intrinsic tendency to move to a new steady-state operat- forming meaningful studies in a single laboratory. For this
ing point. This feature has been used in the classical grid reason, and to encourage new ways of sharing knowledge,
to achieve system-level automation without requiring high- the idea of performing distributed real-time simulation is
performance control and ultrafast control reaction. The first emerging [5]. In the following, an ambitious vision of a net-
line of reaction of the system is programmed in the underly- work of laboratories across two continents is introduced,
ing physics. But with power electronics, this feature disap- together with the first experimental knowledge that has
pears. The response then depends on the control. While this been acquired on it.
may appear to be a complication, it can actually be viewed
as an opportunity. In fact, a new world is opened for power Geographically Distributed Real-Time Simulation
electronics and power system engineers to design the grid This paradigm shift of power grid constituents in the form
of the future. of power electronics creates two major challenges. First,
In this area, many ideas are emerging. Converters con- large-scale and multidomain simulation and testing re­­
nected to the grid can present different behavior [2] depend- sources are necessary for the design and assessment of
ing on their control architecture. Particularly interesting is power grids. Second, a harmonized transition toward next-
the emerging need for converters that are able to perform the generation power grids requires a holistic approach toward
so-called grid-forming operation. These devices are really the the evaluation of the synergies between newer concepts and
key players in supporting the frequency control of the future. the identification of potential unpredictable interactions. To
That said, there is still great freedom for control designers address these issues, research facilities utilize multiple
to define how this support should be delivered [3], [4]. Addi- DRTS units operating in parallel [6] and deploy comprehen-
tionally, thanks to ultrahigh-voltage dc applications, it is also sive test benches. However, it is cost prohibitive and hardly
possible for the first time to link continents, such as Europe feasible to establish a large-scale and holistic simulation and
and the Americas. Plans are under way to build a global grid testing infrastructure at an individual facility. To this end,
to better support a futuristic scenario based on an extremely the concept of the virtual interconnection of laboratories in
high penetration of renewable energy sources. real time is proposed.
It then becomes natural to ask how such a global grid Real-time simulation resources, power HIL (PHIL) set-
will operate. Thinking in terms of a global network inter- ups, novel test benches, and hybrid cosimulation frame-
connecting local power electronics-run grids completely works are interconnected to form a comprehensive research

FIG 1 The control center at the Idaho National Laboratory during a Global RT Superlab demonstration. (Photos courtesy of Idaho
National Lab.)

36 IEEE Power Electronics Magazine z September 2018

infrastructure that allows the sharing of resources and
enables large-scale and multidomain experiments. Virtually
interconnected infrastructures serve as a flexible framework
for collaboration on joint experiments and studies based on
indirect data sharing without revealing confidential details of
individual research groups, industries, and utilities. There-
fore, the collaborations and joint studies that leverage com-
petencies across research entities are feasible even with con-
fidentiality constraints.
The underlying concept of the virtual interconnection of
laboratories in real time is being introduced as a geographi-
cally distributed real-time simulation (GD-RTS). This refers
to the concept of partitioning a monolithic simulation model
into subsystem portions that are simulated concurrently
on multiple DRTS units located at geographically dispersed
facilities. Interconnection and data exchange between DRTS
systems is typically realized via a shared communication
network, such as the Internet. As illustrated in Figure 2,
geographically dispersed HIL setups can be interconnected
based on the GD-RTS concept. Therefore, comprehensive
real-world testing of interconnection and interoperability
between novel technologies and the existing power grid can
be performed without the need for the diverse HIL setups to
be located at the same facility.
The interface quantities exchanged among DRTS units
are variables defining power, typically current and volt-
age. The prime requirement for an accurate GD-RTS is
conservation of energy at the interface. Energy must be
DRTS 1
Subsystem 1 Communications
Network
Processing Unit 1... m Communications
Interface
Signal Virtual
Interface Power
Interface
Controller Hardware
(Device Under Test)
Laboratory 1
FIG 2 A schematic of the GD-RTS. (Figure courtesy of RWTH Aachen University.)
neither generated nor stored at the interfaces between
simulated subsystems. If conservation of energy is vio-
lated, simulation stability and fidelity cannot be ensured,
and the GD-RTS results become invalid. Simulation fidel-
ity is a measure of how close the GD-RTS outcomes are
to the simulation results obtained based on a monolithic
model. It greatly depends on the partitioning point that is
selected to divide the monolithic model for the purpose
of distributed simulation. Empirical studies have shown
that substation transformers and high-voltage dc (HVDC)
lines are suitable for model partitioning. Furthermore,
the interconnection of laboratories via the Internet intro-
duces an inevitable communication latency as well as
other characteristics of a shared communication net-
work, such as jitter, packet loss, and packet reordering.
As a result, the conservation of energy at the interfaces
can be significantly violated. Therefore, cosimulation
interface algorithms are necessary to compensate for the
effects of the communication network on simulation sta-
bility and fidelity [5].
Cosimulation Platform
Distributed simulation relies on a cosimulation framework
for interfacing participating simulators with each other. To
support the vision of a global grid of simulators, a new
cosimulation system called VILLASframework has been
developed by the Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hoch-
schule (RWTH) Aachen University [7], [8]. HIL simulations
DRTS 2
Subsystem 2
Communications Processing Unit m + 1 ... n
Interface
Forward/Feedback
Signals to/from
Power Amplifier
Power Amplifier
Power
Interface
Power Hardware
(Device Under Test)
Laboratory 2
September 2018 z IEEE Power Electronics Magazine 37
38
Workstation 1..n Public Server Remote Lab 1..n
HTTP/Reset API
Web/Proxy Influxdb
VILLASweb Server Simulator
Database
(Front End) WebSockets
VILLASweb MongoDB
Pintura API
(Back End) (Database)
(CIM Editor)

IEEE Power Electronics Magazine

Web VILLASnode
(Central) VILLASnode VILLAScontroller
Browser Message Broker
Socket AMQP Socket AMQP

AMQP Control/Status

IP/UDP Data

z September 2018
Center for Wind Power Drives ACS Lab PGS High-Speed Test Bench
Socket AMQP

VILLASnode VILLAScontroller

Simulator
Scripts

PCIexpress
Fiber

Simulator
VILLASfpga

EtherCAT EtherCAT Analog Analog

I/O I/O

Fiber

FIG 3 A schematic of the VILLASframework cosimulation platform. CIM: common information model; HTTP: hypertext transfer protocol; API: application programing interface; IP:
Internet Protocol; ACS: Institute for Automation of Complex Power Systems; PGS: Institute for Power Generation and Storage Systems. (Images courtesy of RWTH Aachen University.)
require models in the electromagnetic Without a global scheduler, each
transients domain, which are exe- simulator itself is responsible to
cuted in real time. With time steps
Plans are under way to synchronize its shared task execu-
ranging from 1 to 50 μs, this becomes build a global grid to tion with a global time reference.
a challenging task, which is handled No synchronization between the tar-
better support a futur-
by specially optimized real-time simu- gets themselves is performed. Apart
lation targets. Scaling such simula- istic scenario based on from handling the data exchange,
tions to thousands of nodes is cur- an extremely high pen- the gateway is responsible for moni-
rently impossible because of the com- toring the interfaces and collecting
putational limits imposed by a single etration of renewable results and statistics.
target. VILLAS attempts to overcome energy sources. The second component, VILLAS-
this limitation by coupling existing web, is a web interface enabling par-
and proven DRTSs into clusters through ticipants to remotely monitor the sim-
the Internet. ulation via a standard web browser.
The framework consists of four components that can be Graphical dashboards allow users to customize their view
used as building blocks for arbitrarily large cosimulation of the simulation according to their interests. Simulation
setups. The first component, VILLASnode, is a gateway for results are streamed via WebSockets in near real time to
simulation data and measurements. It provides a variety of the browser and are rendered by a variety of widgets, such
interfaces to existing real-time simulation targets as well as as plots, gauges, or text boxes. This live view of the simula-
adapters to commonly used protocols, such as User Data- tion state is crucial for enabling interaction. Buttons, slid-
gram Protocol (UDP), Message Queuing Telemetry Trans- ers, and dial widgets permit users to affect the course of the
port, Advanced Message Queuing Protocol (AMQP), and simulation. An example of such a web-based visualization
international standard IEC 61850. The main way it differs is shown in Figure 4.
from existing frameworks is in its modular and decentral-
ized architecture, as it does not rely on a central broker and Global RT Superlab Demonstration
scheduler to pace the simulation. Instead, simulators are RWTH Aachen University gained its first insights and expe-
interfaced with the VILLASnode gateways, which, in turn, rience with the virtual interconnection of laboratories in
are connected to other gateways and simulators, as shown collaboration with SINTEF, a research organization with
in Figure 3. Similar to the architecture of the Internet, com- facilities in Norway. In 2014, RWTH and SINTEF demon-
plex cosimulation scenarios, each composed of a collection strated the feasibility of joint simulation based on long-dis-
of peerings without a central authority, can be created. tance interconnection of OPAL-RT Technologies systems

FIG 4 A screenshot of a web-based live visualization of the simulation status and results. (Image courtesy of RWTH Aachen University.)

September 2018 z IEEE Power Electronics Magazine 39

located in Aachen, Germany, and Trondheim, Norway. At
the same time, motivated by the vision of the large-scale,
vendor-neutral virtual interconnection of laboratories,
RWTH started the design and development of VILLAS-
framework. In October 2015, RWTH, Politecnico di Torino
(POLITO), and two facilities of the European Commission’s
Joint Research Center demonstrated the virtual intercon-
nection of four laboratories in Europe and established the
European Real-Time Integrated Cosimulation Laboratory.
Earlier that year, two U.S. bodies, the Idaho National Labo-
ratory (INL) and the National Renewable Energy Labora-
tory (NREL), Golden, Colorado, successfully connected
RTDS simulators at their facilities. The work toward trans-
atlantic interconnection of laboratories in Europe and the
United States had started in 2016 with a collaboration
between RWTH and INL. Another six research institutions
joined this initiative in the following year, with the main
objective to establish the Global RT Superlab across
Europe and the United States.
In September 2017, a demonstration called Global Real-
Time Superlab was performed; it was the most extensive
GD-RTS of a large power system [9]. A total of eight labo-
ratories utilizing ten DRTSs from the three major vendors
(OPAL-RT Technologies, RTDS Technologies, and Typhoon
HIL) were connected over the Internet using the previ-
ously presented VILLASframework. Figure 5 shows the
geographic locations of the involved laboratories, spanning
the United States, Germany, and Italy.
Table 1 provides an overview of the participants in the
Global RT Superlab demonstration and an outline of the
simulation models and laboratory setups. In the United
States, the INL played a central role by simulating the nine-
bus Western Systems Coordinating Council (WSCC) trans-
mission benchmark network on its RTDS system. Likewise,
in Europe, the RWTH Aachen University contributed the
FIG 5 The Global RT Superlab participants and their interconnections. (Map courtesy of RWTH Aachen University.)
40 IEEE Power Electronics Magazine z September 2018
RTDS-based simulation of a 12-bus European transmission
network benchmark model proposed by the International
Council on Large Electric Systems (CIGRÉ).
The transatlantic link between INL and RWTH was estab-
lished by a long-distance HVDC line with both RWTH and
the INL laboratory simulating one converter station. The
rationale behind this choice was the vision of the global grid,
a worldwide power framework based on ultra-HVDC lines
connecting continents across the globe [10]. The HVDC link
allows for the interconnection of grids with different sys-
tem frequencies. Thus, laboratories in the United States and
Europe can focus on simulating and testing power networks
with the characteristics of the actual local grids. Further-
more, the selection of an HVDC link as a partitioning point
preserves simulation stability for the large communication
latency between RWTH and the INL laboratory.
There were distribution networks connected to the
backbone transmission structure at INL and RWTH, includ-
ing a controller HIL (CHIL) setup contributed by the Uni-
versity of South Carolina (USC), and PHIL arrangements of
a wind turbine and a photovoltaic (PV) inverter provided
by the NREL and Sandia National Laboratories (SNL),
respectively. In general, the model was partitioned into the
U.S. and European Union grids that included transmission
and distribution networks with diverse PHIL and CHIL of
devices that are representative of the novel technologies
being interconnected.
POLITO utilized an OPAL-RT system for simulating the
CIGRÉ European distribution network benchmark model,
with PV units and an interconnection to the transmission
system emulated at RWTH. SNL contributed the seven-bus
simplified distribution system simulated on OPAL-RT with
a PHIL format for a physical PV inverter. A PHIL setup of a
wind turbine together with a simplified three-bus distribu-
tion system simulated on RTDS was contributed by NREL.
The laboratory arrangement at USC INL and RWTH had to merge the
included CHIL with National Instru- streams from their peers and send
ments CompactRIO controllers, Appo-
Eight geographically them collectively to the local RTDS
site N-91 hardware for emulation of a distributed laborato- simulator. In addition, all of the labo-
communication network, and an OPAL- ratories sent monitoring data to INL,
ries jointly performed
RT system for simulation of a modified which hosted the VILLASweb inter-
IEEE 123-bus distribution test system. a comprehensive face, with the visualization shown in
The controllers were responsible for simulation of a Figure 4. The VILLASweb visualiza-
regulating the reactive power of the tion was utilized by all of the partici-
PV inverters and aimed to minimize transatlantic HVDC pants to obtain a holistic view of the
power losses. interconnection. overall simulation, which could be
An IEEE 13-node distribution test presented to the guests.
feeder and an interconnection to the Between the gateways, the UDP
WSCC transmission model at the INL was chosen for exchanging raw sim-
was simulated on an OPAL-RT system, along with advanced ulation data. Dedicated tests revealed an optimal packet-
load management systems at Colorado State University sending rate of approximately 1,000–2,000 packets/s, which
(CSU). Washington State University (WSU) utilized RTDS kept network congestion and packet loss to a minimum. For
for the emulation of a resilient nine-bus microgrid based security reasons, all network traffic between the laborato-
on the Consortium for Electric Reliability Technology Solu- ries was encrypted with Internet Protocol security virtual
tions (CERTS) concept. private network.
Transformers were identified as suitable partitioning The central role of the INL simplified the overall sim-
points between transmission and distribution systems with ulation process. The testing procedure was divided into
respect to simulation stability and fidelity. This choice also four main stages: preunit testing, unit testing, integration
allowed each research group to simulate systems relevant to testing, and system testing. The objective of the preunit
their competence and research focus. DRTS systems at all testing was to verify the local laboratory setups and data
of the laboratories performed electromagnetic transient exchange between a DRTS system and VILLASnode.
simulation with a time step of 50 µs, except for the OPAL-RT Second, simple connection and point-to-point unit tests
simulator at USC, which utilized 100 µs for the simulation of a were performed between the INL and its peers as well
large-scale distribution system. as between RWTH and POLITO. A benchmark cosimu-
Each laboratory hosted a dedicated version of the lation model was designed for unit tests to provide a ref-
VILLASnode simulation gateway to collect statistics and erence model with high simulation fidelity for the first
exchange interface quantities with the central gateway at GD-RTS tests. Following them, an integration test phase
INL, while POLITO exchanged interface quantities with successively added peers to build up to the full scenario.
RWTH. As nodes with multiple cosimulation interfaces, Finally, during system testing, the simulation procedure

Table 1. The simulation models making up the Global RT Superlab.

Site Grid # Busses Peers HIL Simulator
INL, Idaho Falls Western Systems Coordinating Council Nine RWTH, WSU, — RTDS,
USC, SNL, ­Typhoon HIL,
NREL, CSU OPAL-RT
RWTH Aachen University, International Council on Large Electric 12 INL, POLITO — RTDS
Germany Systems–High Voltage
POLITO, Italy International Council on Large Electric 14 RWTH — OPAL-RT
Systems–Medium Voltage
Sandia National Laboratories, Distribution grid Seven INL PHIL for PV inverters OPAL-RT
New Mexico
NREL, Golden, Colorado Distribution grid Three INL PHIL for wind RTDS
turbines
University of South Carolina, IEEE distribution test system 123 INL CHIL, network emu- OPAL-RT
Columbia lation

Colorado State University, IEEE distribution test feeder 13 INL — OPAL-RT

Fort Collins
Washington State University, Simplified Consortium for Electric Reli- Nine INL — RTDS
Pullman ability Technology Solutions microgrid

September 2018 z IEEE Power Electronics Magazine 41

and VILLASweb visualization were adjusted and tuned
for the actual Global RT Superlab demonstration.
Simulation Scenario and Results
The simulation procedure (Figure 6) was designed with the
objective of leveraging the key resources and competencies
of each laboratory and demonstrating the advantage of a
network of laboratories for studying next-generation power
grids. Following the demonstration startup procedure, and
after the overall interconnected system reached a steady-
state operating point with respect to the cosimulation inter-
faces, the CompactRIO controllers at USC described in the
previous section were activated. As a result, the reactive
power at the point of common coupling (PCC) of the inter-
connection of the distribution system at USC to the WSCC
transmission system at INL was reduced. Power measure-
ments at the cosimulation interfaces at INL and USC are
illustrated in Figure 7 and indicate a high level of simulation
fidelity for the described scenario.
The transient across the HVDC link between RWTH and
the INL was initiated by changing the set point for active
power reference by 25 MW of the converter station at the
transmission system at RWTH. This resulted in a decrease
of power transfer from INL to RWTH across the HVDC link.
As a result, the system frequency of the WSCC transmission
system at the INL increased because of net excess genera-
tion. Following the frequency increase, the wind turbine at
NREL decreased the active power output, as the control of
the wind turbine included a droop curve for system support
during frequency deviations. The total active power of the

CHIL and
Communication Network
Emulation

USC WSU Simplified CERTS Microgrid

ss7 ss8
WSCC

European High-Voltage
Transmission Network
SNL Benchmark (CIGRÉ)
ss6
INL RWTH
HVDC

ss1 ss2

European Medium-Voltage
Transmission Network
Benchmark (CIGRÉ)

Test Bed for ss5 ss4 ss3

PV Systems
NREL CSU POLITO

National Wind
IEEE 13-Node
Technology Center
Test Feeder

FIG 6 The Global RT Superlab scenario. (Images courtesy of RWTH Aachen University.)

42 IEEE Power Electronics Magazine z September 2018

 Active Power at INL-NREL PCC
4 0
Active Power (MW)

3
–1
2
–2
1
–3

Active Power (MW)

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 –4
Time (s)
–5
(a)
Reactive Power (MVAr)

–6
4
–7
3
–8
2
–9 ss1 (INL) ss5 (USC)
1
–10
0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Time (s)
Time (s)
(b)
FIG 8 The response of the wind turbine at the NREL following the
ss1 (INL) ss7 (USC) frequency increase. (Graph courtesy of RWTH Aachen University.)

FIG 7 The power measurements at the INL–USC cosimulation Fuel Cell and Water Power Technologies Offices of the U.S.
interface following the activation of the controllers at USC: (a) Department of Energy and by the Laboratory Directed
active power and (b) reactive power. (Graphs courtesy of RWTH Research and Development Office, Idaho National Labora-
Aachen University.) tory, Idaho Falls.

NREL system at the PCC with the WSCC system at the INL
measured at the INL and NREL terminals of the cosimula-
tion interface is illustrated in Figure 8.
Conclusions
The Global RT Superlab was successfully established with
its first large-scale transatlantic demonstration. The
­VILLASframework significantly reduced research efforts
by enabling a modular and flexible interconnection and
coordination of a multivendor, virtually interconnected
distributed platform. Eight geographically distributed labo-
ratories jointly performed a comprehensive simulation of a
transatlantic HVDC interconnection between the bench-
mark transmission systems of the United States and Euro-
pean grids, including local transmission–distribution inter-
actions and a capability assessment of distributed genera-
tion units to support grid operation. The Global RT Superlab
provides a collaborative environment for such holistic
studies by leveraging individual resources and competen-
cies in a flexible way.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Marcelo Masera of the European
Commission for his initial ideas on and support for a global
power system simulation infrastructure. This work was sup-
ported by the RESERVE, which is a European Union Hori-
zon 2020 project funded under grant agreement 72748. We
also gratefully acknowledge the financial support for proj-
ects related to interlaboratory connectivity provided by the
About the Authors
Antonello Monti (amonti@eonerc.rwth-aachen.de) received
his M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering in 1989
and 1994, respectively, from Politecnico di Milano, Italy. Cur-
rently, he is the director of the Institute for Automation of
Complex Power Systems, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische
Hochschule Aachen University, Germany.
Marija Stevic (mstevic@eonerc.rwth-aachen.de)
received her B.Sc. degree in electrical engineering in 2009
and her M.Sc. degree in electrical and computer engineering
in 2012, both from University of Belgrade, Serbia. Currently,
she is a researcher at the Institute for Automation of Com-
plex Power Systems, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische
Hochschule Aachen University, Germany.
Steffen Vogel (stvogel@eonerc.rwth-aachen.de) re­­
ceived his B.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees in electrical engineering,
information technology, and computer engineering in 2014
and 2017, respectively, both from RWTH Aachen University,
Germany. Currently, he is a researcher at the Institute for
Automation of Complex Power Systems, Rheinisch-West-
fälische Technische Hochschule Aachen University,
Aachen, Germany.
Rik W. De Doncker (dedoncker@eonerc.rwth-aachen
.de) received his M.Sc. degree in electromechanical power
engineering in 1981 and his Ph.D. degree in electrical power
engineering (with the highest distinction) in 1986, both from
the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium. Currently, he is
the director of the E.ON Energy Research Center, Rheinisch-
Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen University. He

September 2018 z IEEE Power Electronics Magazine 43

was the past president of the IEEE Power Electronics Soci-
ety and received the IEEE William E. Newell Power Elec-
tronics Award in 2013. He is a Fellow of the IEEE.
Ettore Bompard (ettore.bompard@polito.it) received
his M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in electrotechnical engineering
in 1990 and 1994, respectively, from Politecnico di Torino,
Italy. Currently, he is a professor of power systems,
De­part­ment of Electrical Engineering, Politecnico di Tori-
no, Turin, Italy.
Abouzar Estebsari (abouzar.estebsari@polito.it)
received his B.Sc. degree in electrical engineering in 2006
from Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, his
M.Sc. degree in electric power engineering in 2009 from
Shahed University, Tehran, Iran, and his Ph.D. degree in
electrical engineering in 2015 from Politecnico di Torino,
Turin, Italy. Currently, he is an assistant professor of power
systems, Department of Electrical Engineering, Politecnico
di Torino, Turin, Italy.
Francesco Profumo (francesco.profumo@polito.it)
received his M.Sc. degree in electrotechnical engineering in
1977 from Politecnico di Torino, Italy. Currently, he is a pro-
fessor of electrical machines at the Politecnico di Torino,
Turin, Italy.
Rob Hovsapian (rob.hovsapian@inl.gov) received his
B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees in mechanical engineering
from Florida State University in 1986, 1988, and 2009,
respectively. Currently, he is a research scientist at the
Idaho National Laboratory (INL), Idaho Falls, and manager
of INL’s Energy Systems and Technologies Division.
Manish Mohanpurkar (manish.mohanpurkar@inl
.gov) received his B.E. degree in electrical, electronics, and
power engineering in 2008 from the Government College of
Engineering, Aurangabad, India, and his M.S. degree in 2010
and his Ph.D. degree in 2013, both in electrical and comput-
er engineering from Oklahoma State University, Stillwater,
and Colorado State University, Fort Collins, respectively.
Currently, he is group lead for energy systems research at
the Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho Falls.
Jack David Flicker (jdflick@sandia.gov) received his
B.S. degree in chemistry and physics in 2006 from Penn
State University, State College, and his Ph.D. degree in mate-
rials science and engineering in 2011 from the Georgia Insti-
tute of Technology, Atlanta. Currently, he is a senior mem-
ber of the technical staff at Sandia National Laboratories,
Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Vahan Gevorgian (vahan.gevorgian@nrel.gov)
received his M.S. degree in 1986 and his Ph.D. degree in
1993 in electrical engineering from Yerevan Polytechnic
Institute, Armenia, and State Engineering University of
Armenia, respectively. Currently, he is chief engineer with
the Transmission and Grid Integration Group, National
Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado.
Siddharth Suryanarayanan (sid.suryanarayanan@
colostate.edu) received his B.E. degree in electrical and
electronics engineering from the University of Madras,
Chennai, India, and his M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical
44 IEEE Power Electronics Magazine z September 2018
engineering from Arizona State University. Currently, he is
an associate professor in the Department of Electrical and
Computer Engineering, Colorado State University, Fort Col-
lins, and the inaugural recipient of the Lisa and Desi Rhoden
Endowed Chair.
Anurag K. Srivastava (anurag.k.srivastava@wsu.edu)
received his B.Tech. degree in 1997 from the Harcourt But-
ler Technological Institute, Kanpur, India, his M.Tech.
degree in 1999 from the Indian Institute of Technology, Vara-
nasi, India, and his Ph.D. degree in 2005 from the Illinois
Institute of Technology, Chicago. Currently, he is an associ-
ate professor in the School of Electrical Engineering and
Computer Science, Washington State University, Pullman.
Andrea Benigni (benignia@cec.sc.edu) received his
B.S. and M.S. degrees in electrical engineering from Politec-
nico di Milano, Italy, in 2005 and 2008, respectively. He
received his Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from
RWTH Aachen University, Germany, in 2013. Currently, he is
an assistant professor of electrical engineering in the Col-
lege of Engineering and Computing, University of South
Carolina, Columbia.
References
[1] T. Ackermann, T. Prevost, V. Vittal, A. J. Roscoe, J. Matevosyan, and N.
Miller, “Paving the way: A future without inertia is closer than you think,”
IEEE Power Energy Mag., vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 61–69, 2017.
[2] J. Rocabert, A. Luna, F. Blaabjerg, and P. Rodriguez, “Control of power
converters in ac microgrids,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 27, no. 11,
pp. 4734–4749, 2012.
[3] J. A. Suul, S. D’Arco, and G. Guidi, “Virtual synchronous machine-based
control of a single-phase bi-directional battery charger for providing vehicle-
to-grid services,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 3234–3244, 2016.
[4] D. Raisz, A. Musa, F. Ponci, and A. Monti, “Linear and uniform system
dynamics of future converter-based power systems,” in Proc. IEEE Power
Energy Society General Meeting, 2018, pp. 1–5.
[5] M. Stevic, A. Estebsari, S. Vogel, E. Pons, E. Bompard, M. Masera, and A.
Monti, “Multi-site European framework for real-time co-simulation of power
systems,” IET Generation, Transmission Distribution, vol. 11, no. 17, pp.
4126–4135, 2017.
[6] M. D. O. Faruque, T. Strasser, G. Lauss, V. Jalili-Marandi, P. Forsyth, C.
Dufour, V. Dinavahi, A. Monti, P. Kotsampopoulos, J. A. Martinez, K. Strunz,
M. Saeedifard, X. Wang, D. Shearer, and M. Paolone, “Real-time simulation
technologies for power systems design, testing, and analysis,” IEEE Power
Energy Technol. Syst. J., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 63–73, 2015.
[7] S. Vogel, M. Mirz, L. Razik, and A. Monti, “An open solution for next-
generation real-time power system simulation,” in Proc. IEEE Conf. Energy
Internet and Energy System Integration (EI2), 2017, pp. 1–6.
[8] FEIN Aachen. (2018, July). e.V. Software projects. [Online]. Available:
http://www.fein-aachen.org/projects/
[9] INL Media Relations. (2017, July). Eight-lab simulator linkup aims to
boost future electric grid stability. [Online]. Available: https: //www.inl.gov/
article/eight-lab-simulator-linkup-aims-to-boost-future-electric-grid-stability/
[10] S. Chatzivasileiadis, D. Ernst, and G. Andersson, “Global power grids for
harnessing world renewable energy,” in Renewable Energy Integration, 2nd
ed., L. E. Jones, Ed. Boston: Academic, 2017, pp. 161–174.