A Predictive Energy Management

Strategy for Guaranteeing Stable

Operation of an Islanded Microgrid
This paper presents an optimal control strategy for ensuring a secure islanding
operation of a microgrid when stability is not guaranteed due to an imbalance
between generation and load demand. A model predictive control (MPC)
strategy has been selected for integrating measurements of the batteries state
of charge (SOC), current generation and forecasted load for identifying up-
coming over generation issues and to initiate automated load shedding in order
to extend the systems run time and to guarantee a stable operation, while
covering load demand. The control strategy is tested in a medium voltage
distribution system with distributed generation (DG) units integrated into it,
whose simulation has been developed in Simulink using the Simpower Systems
library. This control strategy is assisted by a distribution monitoring system
(DMS), which performs real-time monitoring of the generated power coming
from the renewable energy sources (RES) and the actual load demand at each
node of the microgrid. Signicant performance improvement is achieved with
the use of this controller, since it keeps the generation power from the DG
units within its generation capabilities, avoiding the system to go beyond its
limits with the risk of becoming unstable.
1 Introduction
Traditionally, electricity grids deliver energy from generation to consumption through
transmission and distribution systems. That used to be the scenario when every appliance
on the customer side just consumed energy. Nowadays, customers are no longer just
consumers, they can also be generators and their consumption and generation should be
carefully regulated and controlled, leading to the microgrid concept. One of the purposes
of the so called smart grids is to secure the supply of continuous and quality service
to their customers, even under extreme circumstances, that is expected to be achieved
through a combination of monitoring, control and demand response.
1
The topology of the present distribution networks is mainly xed and suers changes
only after the occurrence of a fault, since networks were optimally planned for unidirec-
tional power ow. As the distribution networks were not originally conceived to handle
bidirectional power ows, changes are needed in the way they are designed and to take the
best advantage of the new possibilities and synergies oered by advanced communication,
information technologies and control techniques.
Automation at the distribution level has not been a main concern of the utility compa-
nies so far. Nevertheless, integrating DG units into the distribution system to allow cus-
tomers to become active protagonists is starting to push utility companies and researchers
to develop new trends and technologies in this eld. In [1] is detailed a comprehensive
review on current control technologies for microgrids as well as a discussion on the chal-
lenges for integrating DG in the distribution system. A hierarchical internal model-based
controller (IMC) that drives DG units integrated into a microgrid is envisioned in [2], for
performing the following actions: power control loop, voltage control loop and current
control loop. A power grid solution developed by Siemens, called SoftGrid is presented
in [3], it consists of a decentralized power system with two-level control architecture,
whose core is optimal algorithms that coordinate power ow control from RES in a mi-
crogrid. In [4] is presented a detailed description of a central controller for microgrids,
whose aim is to optimize the operation of the microgrid during a grid-connected opera-
tion by optimizing the production of the local DGs and power exchanges with the main
distribution grid. Similar approaches of centralized controllers for operating a microgrid
are presented in [5, 6]. Distributed control strategies for the two operations modes of a
microgrid: grid-connected and islanding with dierent techniques are studied in [7, 8, 9].
Stable operation of an electric power system requires that the voltage magnitude is
kept inside a range of about 5% of the nominal value. Although, under certain cir-
cumstances an excessive voltage decrease may occur. To restore voltage to the normal
range of operation it is required the use of controls associated with reactive power man-
agement, e.g. voltage settings in generators and condensers, tap-changing transformers,
shunt capacitors, etc. However, it could happen that the available control actions are
not sucient to correct abnormal voltages, but they may even cause the voltage level
to deteriorate further. To counteract under systems instability issues, special protec-
tive algorithms have been designed based on frequency and voltage limits, i.e. under
frequency load shedding (UFLS) [10, 11] and under voltage load shedding (UVLS) [12]
schemes, which works in load shedding relays. Near the boundary, i.e. the maximum
active/reactive power the network can deliver to the load, sensitivities are of unusual
values and small load increases imply very large voltage deviation. A very low voltage
could lead the system to collapse. A group of under frequency load shedding relays and
another group of under voltage load shedding relays typically make decisions and operate
independently. In this way, an uncoordinated and non-optimal load shedding scenario is
performed in the system. This fact summed up with the necessity of a control strategy
that guarantees a stable operation of a microgrid when it is operating in islanding mode,
motivated the research to be presented in this paper.
This research work is related with a power distribution system that includes DG units.
An optimal control strategy based on the batteries SOC, current generation and fore-
2
casted load is used for identifying upcoming over generation issues when the microgrid
is operating in islanding mode, to initiate automated load shedding in order to extend
the systems run time and to guarantee a stable operation, while covering load demand
through the use of MPC algorithm. This control strategy is assisted by a DMS, which
performs real-time monitoring of the generated power coming from the RES and the
actual load demand at each node of the microgrid.
This paper is organized as follows: Section 2 presents a description on the microgrid
under study. Section 3 details the controller design. Section 4 shows simulation results
and nally some conclusions are drawn in Section 5.
2 Scenario description
Operating characteristics of a microgrid, compared to a bulk power system are dierent,
e.g. lack of inertia, noisy power generation due to RES integration, weak ac systems
with low short circuit ratios, etc. This fact strongly supports the idea of building a
detailed simulation platform for investigating such network behaviors. In [13, 14, 15,
16] benchmark models of medium and low voltage distribution networks with dispersed
generation are presented, where detailed information about the models development is
given. The benchmark models are analyzed in dierent operating conditions with and
without the inclusion of a storage system for maintaining voltage and frequency within
acceptable operating limits, although there are not any optimal control techniques for
managing the group of connected loads and batteries for ensuring a secure microgrid
islanded operation. This fact is considered in the research to be presented in this paper.
In accordance with ANSI standards, during normal conditions utilities are required to
maintain voltage at the customers service panel between 114 and 126 volts (5%) based
on a 120V nominal secondary voltage. It is stated in 1547-2 IEEE Standard [17] that for
interconnecting distributed resources with electric power systems, the total time should be
less than 0.15 seconds when amplitude of frequency variation exceeds 0.5 Hz and voltage
exceeds 5%. It is a challenging task to integrate RES into a distribution network and to
operate this network (microgrid) within the limits of the already established operation
standards. Therefore, a rst step for developing such an integration framework is to have
a testing platform. The medium voltage benchmark model presented in [13, 18] with
some modications, detailed in Subsection 2.1, will be used for this purpose throughout
the remaining of this paper. In Figure 1 is shown the microgrid conguration.
Since the denition of a microgrid includes the possibility of two operating modes:
grid-connected and islanded [19, 20, 21], the control strategy must ensure that critical
loads receive service priority when operating in isolated mode. Islanding operation could
be planned or could be the result of emergency situation, e.g. during grid-connected
operation if power quality is unacceptable, an upstream switch will produce and inten-
tional island. When islanding occurs in a distribution network, voltage and frequency
are severely disturbed due to imbalance between generation and load demand [22]. This
large frequency variation may lead to power collapse, if it is not recovered quickly and
properly. During islanded operation the master generation unit of Figure 1 and the RES
must be able to carry the load on the islanded section and to guarantee a safe and stable
3
Figure 1: Microgrid medium voltage benchmark model
microgrid operation within certain voltage and frequency limits. If there is not enough
power generation capacity, signicant load shedding will be necessary, which is the main
objective of this paper.
2.1 Main characteristics of the benchmark model
Figure 1 shows the microgrid benchmark model conguration, where two feeders supplied
by a distribution substation are clearly identied. A grid of interconnected RES has been
formed in the left side feeder, being noticeable the presence of 4 photovoltaic (PV) array
units, 1 wind turbine generator (WTG), 2 battery storage systems (BSS) and 1 diesel
engine generator (DEG). Every DG unit has its own distributed controller (DC). The
microgrid benchmark model is implemented in the Simpower Systems of Simulink.
4
The rated voltage level of the network is 20kV . It is supplied from a 110kV transformer
station. The majority of connections are made with cables, but there are also sections
of overhead lines. The parameters of the network and loads characteristics were taken
from [18] and are summarized in Tables 2 and 3 in the Appendix. Although maximum
load values for active and reactive power are considered, variable load proles have been
generated for loads L
1
, L
2
, L
6
, L
7
and L
9
. Homer Energy [23] was used for this purpose,
taking as base values: S
base
= 5MW and V
base
= 20kV . Figure 2 shows the load proles
for the aforementioned loads.
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
Load profile L
1
*
= L
1
+ L
2
(pu)


Real
Reactive
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
Load profile L
6
(pu)
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
Load profile L
7
(pu)
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
Load profile L
9
(pu)
Figure 2: Load proles
On the other hand, DG units, whose modeling details for control purposes have been
presented in previous research papers [24, 25], have the following characteristics:
DEG: A diesel engine (DE) is used as a prime mover, which drags a synchronous
generator at a constant speed. In an islanded conguration, the frequency is deter-
mined by the mechanical speed
m
which is provided by the DE, while the voltage
amplitude is set by the synchronous generator eld voltage. The maximum out-
put power of the DEG is 1.5625 MVA (0.3125 pu). The excitation voltage of the
synchronous generator is regulated for maintaining the terminal voltage constant
(voltage control mode) for whose case in the power ow calculation the synchronous
machine is considered as a voltage controlled bus.
5
WTG: A horizontal-axis wind turbine (WT) has been chosen as prime mover and
an induction generator for energy conversion. The wind turbine model that will be
used here is a lumped mass one, pitch controlled through the blade pitch angle, .
The maximum output power of the DEG is 1 MVA (0.02 pu).
PV array: 330 SunPower modules (SPR-305) are used. In the particular case
of PV
1
, the array consists of 66 strings of 5 series-connected modules connected in
parallel

66 5 305.2
W
module
= 100.7kW

which represents 0.02 pu. PV

2
, PV
3
and
PV
4
have 0.02, 4 10
3
and 5 10
3
pu of power generation capacity, respectively.
The boost converter and voltage source converter (VSC), implicitly involved in a
PV array operation, are represented by equivalent voltage sources generating the
AC voltage averaged over one cycle of the switching frequency. Such a model does
not represent harmonics, but the dynamics resulting from the interaction of the
control and power systems is preserved.
BSS: it is composed of a bidirectional dc-to-ac converter and a lithium battery
with maximum output power of 100 kW (0.02 pu) for BSS-1 and 75 kW (0.015
pu) for BSS-2. A buck-boost converter is used, whose purpose is to charge the
battery when there is enough generating power and to support load changes and
lower power generation from the RES due to climate changes, e.g. sun occlusions
aecting PV array power output.
Usually DGs are not involved with frequency regulation of the system. Therefore,
for power ow calculations, except from the DEG, the remaining DGs are considered
as load nodes assuming that they operate under the rated-working condition. During
grid-connected operation, voltage and frequency control are performed at the level of the
main grid. On the other hand, during autonomous operation, it is necessary to control
local generation in order to ensure voltage and frequency stability.
Since a centralized controller will be proposed in this research, it is a necessity the
use of an advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) in the distribution system. Therefore,
it is assumed that every load has installed a smart meter at its premises. The smart
meter is a revolutionary energy meter whose aims are to obtain information from the
customers load devices and to measure the energy consumption of the consumers and
then provide added information to the utility company and/or the DMS in order to
increase automation capabilities. Smart meters data is the combination of the unique
meter identier, the data timestamp, electricity consumption values and so on [26].
The system operator can connect/disconnect or re-connect remotely, electricity supply
to any customer in order to optimize the power ows in the microgrid, according to the
information sent from demand sides through the smart meters. Smart meters collect data
from the end consumers and transmit this data information through the local area network
to a data collector. This process usually is executed every 15 minutes or as frequently
as required by the DMS. Once the data collector retrieves the data, it transmits it. The
further processes the data in order to fed the microgrid centralized control (MGCC)
algorithm. Since the communications path is bidirectional, signals or commands can
be sent directly to the smart meters [27]. Single phase and unbalanced loads are not
considered in this paper. The power factor is 0.85 lagging for every load in the system.
6
3 Controller design
3.1 Nonlinear Model Predictive Control
Nonlinear model predictive control (NMPC) is a variant of model predictive control
(MPC) that is characterized by the use of nonlinear system models in order to pre-
dict and optimize the future behavior of the system [28]. Additionally, the method allows
incorporating nonlinear constraints on both, the state and the control variable and to
use other than quadratic cost functions for the optimization. A generalized nonlinear
discrete-time model of the system is dened as:
x
k+1
= f (x
k
, u
k
) (1)
where f : R
n
U
m
R
n
assigns x
k+1
R
n
at the next time instant to each pair of state
x
k
X and control signal u
k
R
m
. The main objective of MPC is to control the state x
n
of the system towards a reference trajectory r
n
and keep the systems states close to this
reference [29]. Without loss of generality, the reference trajectory is considered constant
and an equilibrium point of the closed-loop system, dened by:
x
k+1
= f (x
k
, (x
k
)) (2)
where () : R
n
R
m
is the closed-loop control law obtained with the NMPC al-
gorithm. A set of nite control sequences is obtained after the optimization process:
u
0
, u
1
, . . . , u
N1
for N N being the optimization horizon. Therefore, given an ini-
tial value x
0
X and a control sequence u() U
K
a trajectory of Eq. 1 is obtained
iteratively via:
u
x
0
= x
0
(3)
u
x
k+1
= f (
u
x
k
, u
k
) (4)
where
u
x
k
is the predicted state of the system when the optimized control sequence
u() U
K
is applied . One of the strengths of MPC, is its ability to manage constraints
in its structure. Therefore, it is necessary to dene valid numerical sets for the states of
the system, x X
x
max
x
min
X R
n
and the control signal, u U
u
max
u
min
U R
m
.
There is also an attached task to the main objective of NMPC, related to stability. Let
x

be an equilibrium point for Eq. (1), i.e. f (x

) = x

. The equilibrium point will be

locally asymptotically stable if there exist > 0 and a function KL
1
such that the
inequality:
1
The following comparison functions are dened in [30]:
K := { : R
+
0
R
+
0
| is continuous and strictly increasing, (0) = 0}
K

:= { : R
+
0
R
+
0
| K, is unbounded}
L := { : R
+
0
R
+
0
| is continuous and strictly decreasing with lim
t
(t) = 0}
KL := { : R
+
0
R
+
0
| is continuous, (, t) K, (r, ) L}
7
x
k
x

=
k
(x
0
x

) (5)
holds for all x
0

k
(x

) and all k N, where represents an Euclidean norm. Asymp-

totic stability is included in the desired properties of a closed-loop NMPC system; when-
ever the system is close to the reference it is desired to stay close to it or to move towards
the equilibrium.
3.2 NMPC design
The controller to be designed is a model-based one. An NMPC algorithm has been se-
lected for this task, due to as stated before, its advantages in managing constraints in
its structure and also because it is an optimal controller that allows the possibility of
integrating customized cost functions. The following equations are developed for design-
ing the NMPC centralized strategy for guaranteeing a stable operation of the microgrid
when operating in islanded mode through an optimal load shedding strategy. The sys-
tems states for the islanded section (left side feeder) of the distribution system of Figure
1, are dened as:
x =

x
1
x
2

x
1

10
x
1
= [V
i
]
T
i = 1, 2 . . . 10
x
2

10
x
2
= [
i
]
T
i = 1, 2 . . . 10
(6)
where V
i
and
i
are nodes voltage and angle of bus i. Additionally, more variables and
vectors are needed for controllers formulation, such as: power of the nodes S
i
= P
i
+jQ
i
,
admitance matrix Y and the generated power from the DG units, P
DG
i
:
Y = [Y
ij
] (7)
S =

P
load
Q
load

P
load

10
P
load
= [P
L
i
]
T
i = 1, 2 . . . 10
Q
load

10
Q
load
= [Q
L
i
]
T
i = 1, 2 . . . 10
(8)
P
DG
= [P
DG
i
]
T
i = 1, 2 . . . 8

i = 1 Diesel engine power (P

DE
)
i = 2 Wind turbine power (P
WT
)
i = 3 Photovoltaic power, array 1 (P
PV
1
)
i = 4 Photovoltaic power, array 2 (P
PV
2
)
i = 5 Photovoltaic power, array 3 (P
PV
3
)
i = 6 Photovoltaic power, array 4 (P
PV
4
)
i = 7 Battery storage system 1 (P
BSS1
)
i = 8 Battery storage system 2 (P
BSS2
)
(9)
S
i
= V
i
N

m=1
(Y
im
V
i
)

(10)
Eq. (10) is solved iteratively through the Newthon-Raphson (NR) power ow algorithm
[31], with prior knowledge of P
DG
i
, i = 2, 3 . . . 8 and current load consumption of every
8
node of the system. P
DE
is estimated in a prediction horizon of length N. One important
modication to the power ow equation, Eq. (10) is the inclusion of the reactive power
consumed by the WTG at Bus-7, which is calculated as follows [32]:
Q
WT
=
V
2
7
z
p
+
V
2
7
+

V
4
7
4P
7
z
2
2z
(11)
z = z
1
+z
2
z
p
=
z
c
z
m
z
c
z
m
where the negative sign of Eq. (11) represents reactive power consumption of the induc-
tion generator of the WTG from the network; z
m
, z
c
, z
1
and z
2
represent the excitation
reactance, reactance of the capacitor banks installed at the terminal of the induction
generator, the stator and rotor reactance, respectively.
The control objectives of this strategy are to ensure a complete coverage of load demand
and to maintain microgrids voltage and frequency within secure operation limits when
the microgrid is operating in islanded mode. A microgrid centralized control (MGCC)
strategy for load shedding is proposed for accomplishing the above-mentioned aims. A
control vector u for managing loads connection and disconnection, is dened in Eq.
(12) and Table 1 shows the relationship between every bit of the control vector and its
corresponding load controller for switching purposes, i.e. u
i
= 1 L
i
is connected,
u
i
= 0 L
i
is disconnected.
u = [u
i
] i = 1, 2 . . . 13 u
i
is a binary signal (12)
Table 1: Control vector correspondance with loads
Control signal Load Observations
u
1
L

1
= {L
1
L
2
} Variable loads
u
2
L
3
L
4
Constant loads
u
3
L
5
Constant load
u
4
L
6
Variable load
u
5
L
7
Variable load
u
6
L
8
Constant load
u
7
L
9
Constant load
u
8
L
10
Constant load
u
9
L
11
Constant load
u
10
BSS-1 Charge mode
u
11
BSS-1 Discharge mode
u
12
BSS-2 Charge mode
u
13
BSS-2 Discharge mode
An important issue in the design of an MPC (linear or nonlinear) is the availability of
a model for predicting the output variable. In this particular case, the output variable
9
to be controlled is the generated power of the DE, whose value has to be kept within a
secure operating range for avoiding potential over generation scenarios that could lead the
entire system to instability. Figure 3 shows the controllers architecture for integrating
the NMPC as an MGCC.
Figure 3: NMPC architecture for a centralized load shedding strategy
The NR power ow algorithm has been used for calculating the P
DE
under dierent
loading circumstances (whether a load shedding command from the MGCC is applied
or not), so predicted values are obtained for the generated power from the DE in the
upcoming sampling times. Once the measurements are acquired, the approximate model
of Figure 3 receives this information for running the NR algorithm for predicting the P
DE
,
although an important issue is the fact that the power is quite variable and it would not
be the same value until the next sampling time. This fact has been considered and two
approaches are tested for the initial iterative load values of the NR algorithm in order to
predict the P
DE
:
1. Take the load measurements and consider them as constants during the prediction
horizon;
2. A load predictor has been designed using articial neural networks (ANN). Since
the load proles are alike every day, 20 load proles from dierent days of the week
for every variable load in the microgrid (L

1
, L
6
, L
7
and L
9
) were taken for training
the ANN. The load predictor receives as inputs the load measurement and the hour
of the day and gives the load prediction for the upcoming 45 minutes, as shown in
Figure 4. Therefore, up to N = 3 could be used in the NMPC algorithm using this
load predictor.
The encircled rst dot shown in Figure 4 at 4AM represents the load measurement
and the remaining three dots the prediction made by the ANN predictor every 15
minutes. Three more predictions can be observed in the Figure at 13h00 and 22h00.
A third approach for predicting the P
DE
was developed and embedded in the NMPC
algorithm; an autoregressive with external input (ARX) model through a data-based
10
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
Load1 typical profile (pu)
Figure 4: L
1
prediciton using ANN
modeling using an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) was used. As in the
case of the ANN training algorithm, 20 dierent generation proles for dierent days of
the week were taken as training set for the ANFIS. Additionally, the ARX conguration
developed is the one detailed in [33, 34] and shown in Figure 5.
All the above-mentioned techniques for predicting the output variable are embedded
into the NMPC algorithm in order to perform an MGCC for load shedding, using the
receding horizon control concept.
3.2.1 MGCC algorithm
1. Define a DE power generation reference r
2. Take systems measurements: Z
k
=

P
DG
(k)
T
P
load
(k)
T

T
3. Set Z
0
= Z
k
and solve the following optimal control problem (OCP):
minimize
J
N
(Z
0
, u()) =
N
p
1

k=0
(
u
P
DE
(k, Z
k
, x
k
, u
k
) r)
2
subject to
u
P
DE
(k + 1, Z
k
, x
k
, u
k
) = f (
u
P
DE
(k, Z
k
, x
k
, u
k
) , u
k
)
constrained to
11
Figure 5: P
DE
ANFIS model
P
DE
min
= 0.05 < P
DE
< P
DE
max
= 0.2
L
1
, L
7
and L
8
always have to be connected (high priority loads;
At least 1 of the following loads has to be connected: L
3
, L
5
or
L
11
(low priority loads);
At least 1 of the following loads has to be connected: L
6
, L
9
or
L
10
(low priority loads);
{t : P
DE
< r SOC < 100%} batteries go into charging mode;
{t : P
DE
> r SOC > 10%} batteries go into discharge mode
(batteries deliver energy to the grid);
The minimum load to be shed is 10% of the actual connected load.
4. Define the control law (Z
k
) = u

(1)
The OPC is called feasible for an initial value Z
0
whenever the set u
N
(Z
0
) over which
the optimization is performed is nonempty.
Generally speaking, the OPC can be represented by:
minimize
u
f(u)
subject to
u
L
u u
U
b
L
Au b
U
c
L
c(u) c
U
Where u, u
L
, u
U
R
n
, f(u) R, A R
m
1
n
, b
L
, b
U
R
m
1
and c
L
, c(u), c
U
R
m
2
,
represent the control variable, upper and lower limits of the u; cost function, matrix of
linear constraints, upper and lower limits of the linear constraints; nonlinear constraints,
upper and lower limits of c(u), respectively. The control vector u for the particular case of
12
the proposed NMPC algorithm is restricted to be binary. The OPC problem is essentially
related with nding the minimum of the real valued function f(u) subject to the dened
in the continuous-discrete space. Integer and discrete valued variables with given lower
and upper bounds may always be represented by sets of binary variables [35]. Problems
of this type are generally termed mixed-integer nonlinear programming (MINLP) prob-
lems. The mixed-integer linear, quadratic and nonlinear programming package of Tomlab
for Matlab has been used for solving the OCP, due to its advantages in solving large,
sparse or dense mixed-integer linear, quadratic and nonlinear programming problems. For
MINLP, Tomlab implements a branch-and-bound algorithm searching a tree whose nodes
correspond to continuous nonlinearly constrained optimization problems. The continuous
problems are solved using a sequential quadratic programming. The method avoids the
use of penalty functions. Global convergence is enforced through the use of a trust region
and the new concept of a lter which accepts a trial point whenever the objective or the
constraint violation is improved compared to all previous iterates [36].
4 Simulation results
The microgrid of Figure 1 was implemented in Simulink using the Simpower Systems
library. A 24 hour simulation is performed for testing the proposed controller. Variable
load proles for L

1
+L
2
, L
6
, L
7
and L
9
are used, as shown in Figure 2, while the remaining
loads are kept constant with maximum values specied in Table 2. Variable proles for
wind velocity and solar irradiance were used during the simulation, as shown in Figure
6. The microgrid starts operating in grid-connected mode and at 2 AM, suddenly an
islanding operation is forced in the left side feeder. The right side feeder is not considered
in this case, since the S
c
(coupling switch) is kept opened.
0 5 10 15 20
10.5
11
11.5
12
12.5
13
13.5
14
14.5
15
15.5
Time (h)
Wind velocity (m/s)
0 5 10 15 20
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
Time (h)
Solar irradiance (W/m
2
)
Figure 6: Proles of wind velocity and solar irradiance used in the simulation
13
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Time (s)
DEG generated power (pu)


0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0.01
0.005
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
BSS1 power (pu)
Time (s)
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0.01
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
BSS2 power (pu)
Time (s)
Open loop
NMPC no Load Prediction
NMPC + ANN Load Precitor
NMPC + ANFIS model
Figure 7: Performance comparison of the NMPC with dierent model approaches
Therefore, the MGCC is monitoring the microgrid all the time and under an islanding
event, whose detection has not been devoted in this paper but in [37] are presented
techniques that deal with this issue. Once the islanding is conrmed by an islanding
detection algorithm, the NMPC starts processing data every 15 minutes, except when
P
DE
> 1.1 r that is a close condition to its limit and the algorithm evaluates all the
variables in order to calculate certain load shed until the next scheduled calculation loop.
Figure 7 shows a performance comparison of the NMPC algorithm when the three
dierent techniques for predicting the P
DE
output, detailed in Section 3.2, are used
for an optimization horizon N = 2. It is clearly seen from there that the approach
which considers the loads measurements as constants in the prediction horizon oers
poor results, since the imposed generation limit P
DE
max
= 0.2 is over passed, with a high
risk of potential over generation representing potential danger of causing instability in
the network. On the other hand the load proles estimation using ANNs before the load
14
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
DEG generated power (pu)
Time (h)


Open loop
NMPC+ANFIS
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0.94
0.96
0.98
1
1.02
Voltage amplitude (pu)
Time (h)


Open loop
NMPC+ANFIS
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0.97
0.98
0.99
1
1.01
Frequency (pu)
Time (h)


Open loop
NMPC+ANFIS
Figure 8: P
DE
output signal when the load shedding NMPC strategy is used
ow analysis is performed, oers a much better result and the generation prole never
overpasses the generation limit. Finally, the ARX-ANFIS model oers the best result,
since the generation prole establishes much closer to the reference r = 0.18, which is
the same for all the cases. For this test, no batteries management strategy has been
implemented and they are working in charge and discharge mode according to what is
shown in Figure 7 that is an ideal case of battery usage, since it is considered that the
batteries are available any time needed.
Further results on the systems performance are shown in Figures 8 and 9, regarding
microgrids voltage and frequency and loads and batteries switching due to the NMPC
calculation. It is remarkable the benet of using this technique, since voltage amplitude
keeps between the 5% gap when the microgrid works in islanding mode, which is not the
case when no control action is performed. Additionally, constraints are consistent with
what was stated in the NMPC algorithm and there is no disconnection of loads L

1
, L
7
15
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
0.2
WTG power (pu)
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0
0.01
0.02
PV1 power (pu)
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0.01
0
0.01
0.02
BSS1 power (pu)
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0.01
0
0.01
0.02
BSS2 power (pu)
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
Load1 profile (pu)
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0
10
20
x 10
3
Load3 profile (pu)
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
Load5 profile (pu)
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0
0.01
0.02
Load6 profile (pu)
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0
5
10
x 10
3
Load7 profile (pu)
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0
10
20
x 10
3
Load8 profile (pu)
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0
0.01
0.02
Load9 profile (pu)
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
Load10 profile (pu)
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0
0.02
0.04
Load11 profile (pu)
Figure 9: Proles of generated power from RES and loads power consumption
and L
8
, while keeping at least one of the low priority loads connected, as it was imposed
in the NMPC algorithm. On the other hand batteries seems to be charging when at
the same time there is not peak consumption and there is availability of power from the
generation units. Batteries go into discharge mode (delivering power to the grid) when
there is lack of power due to peak consumption, see Figure 9. An increased performance
can be noticed from the one showed in Figure 8 due to the inclusion of the batteries
management in the NMPC algorithm with respect to the one showed in Figure 7 where
an open loop batteries strategy was tested.
Time axis on Figures 7 to 9 are in hours and the abscise axis are in per unit (pu) for
a base power, S
base
= 5 MVA.
5 Conclusions
A microgrid centralized controller (MGCC) for load shedding purposes, has been designed
and tested in an isolated microgrid. Signicant performance improvement is achieved with
16
the use of this controller, since it keeps the generation power from the DG units within its
generation limits, avoiding the system to go beyond its limits with the risk of becoming
unstable. A graphical comparison between the use of this algorithm and an open loop
response makes evident the benets of the technique, since voltage and frequency keeps
stable and close to its normal operating point (1 pu), as well as assure to carry load
demand, under the cost of disconnecting low priority loads when necessary.
In the discharge mode, the battery sends active power to the grid while in the charge
mode the battery generates negative active power. During the islanding mode, the DEG
must provide all the reminding power demands that cannot be covered by other DG units.
Due to the rated power limitations of the DEG, signicant load shedding is necessary.
Appendix: Benchmark model parameters
Table 2: Load parameters of the benchmark microgrid model
Load No. Load Type P
max
(pu) Q
max
(pu)
1 Industry 0.15000 0.03100
2 Household 0.05000 0.01000
3 Household 0.00276 0.00069
4 Industry 0.00224 0.00139
5 Household 0.00432 0.00108
6 Household 0.00725 0.00182
7 Household 0.00550 0.00138
8 Industry 0.00077 0.00048
9 Household 0.00588 0.00147
10 Industry 0.00574 0.00356
11 Industry 0.00068 0.00042
14 Household 0.15000 0.03000
15 Industry 0.05000 0.01700
16 Industry 0.00032 0.00020
17 Industry 0.00330 0.00020
18 Household 0.00207 0.00052
Table 3: Transmission lines parameters
From To
R

Km

Km

nF
Km

L (Km)
Node Node
1 2 0.579 0.367 158.88 2.82
2 3 0.164 0.113 6608 4.42
3 4 0.262 0.121 6480 0.61
4 5 0.354 0.129 4560 0.56
5 6 0.336 0.126 5488 1.54
6 7 0.256 0.13 3760 0.24
7 8 0.294 0.123 5600 1.67
8 9 0.339 0.13 4368 0.32
9 10 0.399 0.133 4832 0.77
10 11 0.367 0.133 4560 0.33
11 4 0.423 0.134 4960 0.49
3 8 0.172 0.115 6576 1.3
12 13 0.337 0.358 162.88 4.89
13 14 0.202 0.122 4784 2.99
References
[1] R. Zamora and A. K. Srivastava, Controls for microgrids with storage: Review,
challenges, and research needs, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 14,
no. 7, pp. 2009 2018, 2010.
17
[2] A. Kahrobaeian and Y. A. Mohamed, Smart control interface for robust opera-
tion of DG units in grid connected and islanded modes, in Innovative Smart Grid
Technologies (ISGT), pp. 1 7, Jan. 2012.
[3] Y. Zhou, H. Held, W. Klein, K. Majewski, R. Speh, P. E. Stelzig, and
C. Wincheringer, SoftGrid: A green eld approach of future smart grid, in Pro-
ceeding of the 2nd International Conference on Smart Grids and Green IT Systems,
pp. 511, May 2013.
[4] A. Tsikalakis and N. Hatziargyriou, Centralized control for optimizing microgrids
operation, IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, vol. 23, pp. 241248, March
2008.
[5] J. Pecas Lopes, C. Moreira, and A. Madureira, Dening control strategies for micro-
grids islanded operation, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 21, pp. 916
924, May 2006.
[6] S. Conti, R. Nicolosi, S. A. Rizzo, and H. Zeineldin, Optimal dispatching of dis-
tributed generators and storage systems for MV islanded microgrids, IEEE Trans-
actions on Power Delivery, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 12431251, 2012.
[7] A. Venkat, I. Hiskens, J. Rawlings, and S. Wright, Distributed MPC strategies with
application to power system automatic generation control, IEEE Transactions on
Control Systems Technology, vol. 16, pp. 11921206, Nov 2008.
[8] F. Dorer, John-Simpson-Porco, and F. Bullo, Breaking the hierarchy: Distributed
control & economic optimality in microgrids, 2014.
[9] S. Anand, B. G. Fernandes, and M. Guerrero, Distributed control to ensure propor-
tional load sharing and improve voltage regulation in low-voltage DC microgrids,
IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 28, pp. 19001913, April 2013.
[10] H. Mokhlis, M. Karimi, A. Shahriari, A. Abu Bakar, and J. Laghari, A new under-
frequency load shedding scheme for islanded distribution network, in Innovative
Smart Grid Technologies (ISGT), 2013 IEEE PES, pp. 16, Feb 2013.
[11] P. Mahat, Z. Chen, and B. Bak-Jensen, Underfrequency load shedding for an
islanded distribution system with distributed generators, IEEE Transactions on
Power Delivery, vol. 25, pp. 911918, April 2010.
[12] C. Taylor, Concepts of undervoltage load shedding for voltage stability, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 7, pp. 480488, Apr 1992.
[13] Z. Styczynski, A. Orths, K. Rudion, A. Lebioda, and O. Ruhle, Benchmark for an
electric distribution system with dispersed energy resources, in Transmission and
Distribution Conference and Exhibition, 2005/2006 IEEE PES, pp. 314320, 2006.
18
[14] K. Meah and A. Sadrul Ula, Simulation study of the CIGRE HVDC benchmark
model with the WSCC nine-bus power system network, in Power Systems Confer-
ence and Exposition, 2009. PSCE 09. IEEE/PES, pp. 15, 2009.
[15] B. Mao, B. Zhang, J. Wang, Y. Chen, X. Zheng, Y. Gao, B. Wu, and Y. Liu,
Dynamic modelling for distribution networks containing dispersed generations and
energy storage devices, in International Conference on Power System Technology
(POWERCON), pp. 16, 2010.
[16] S. Tomohiko, S. Tielong, S. Yuanzhang, and X. Jian, Modeling and control of a
benchmark micro grid with vehicle-to-grid smart connection, in 2011 30th Chinese
Control Conference (CCC), pp. 61216126, 2011.
[17] IEEE application guide for IEEE std 1547, IEEE standard for interconnecting dis-
tributed resources with electric power systems, IEEE Std 1547.2-2008, pp. 1207,
2009.
[18] K. Rudion, A. Orths, Z. Styczynski, and K. Strunz, Design of benchmark of medium
voltage distribution network for investigation of DG integration, in Power Engineer-
ing Society General Meeting, 2006. IEEE, pp. 612, 2006.
[19] N. Lidula and A. Rajapakse, Microgrids research: A review of experimental micro-
grids and test systems, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 15, no. 1,
pp. 186 202, 2011.
[20] B. Kroposki, R. Lasseter, T. Ise, S. Morozumi, S. Papatlianassiou, and N. Hatziar-
gyriou, Making microgrids work, Power and Energy Magazine, IEEE, vol. 6, no. 3,
pp. 4053, 2008.
[21] F. Katiraei, R. Iravani, N. Hatziargyriou, and A. Dimeas, Microgrids management,
Power and Energy Magazine, IEEE, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 5465, 2008.
[22] R. Walling and N. Miller, Distributed generation islanding-implications on power
system dynamic performance, in Power Engineering Society Summer Meeting, 2002
IEEE, vol. 1, pp. 9296 vol.1, July 2002.
[23] http://www.homerenergy.com.
[24] A. Vargas-Martnez, L. I. Minchala-Avila, Y. Zhang, L. E. Garza-Casta non, and
H. Badihi, Hybrid adaptive fault-tolerant control algorithms for voltage and fre-
quency regulation of an islanded microgrid, International Transactions on Electrical
Energy Systems, 2014.
[25] L. Minchala-Avila, A. Vargas-Martinez, Y. Zhang, and L. Garza-Castanon, A model
predictive control approach for integrating a master generation unit in a microgrid,
in Conference on Control and Fault-Tolerant Systems (SysTol), pp. 674679, Oct
2013.
19
[26] J. Zheng, D. Gao, and L. Lin, Smart meters in smart grid: An overview, in Green
Technologies Conference, 2013 IEEE, pp. 5764, April 2013.
[27] Smart meters and smart meter systems: A metering industry perspective, a joint
project of the EEI and AEIC meter committees, Edison Electric Institute (EEI),
March 2011.
[28] L. Gr une and J. Pannek, Nonlinear Model Predictive Control: Theory and Algo-
rithms. Communications and control engineering, Springer, 2011.
[29] J. Maciejowski, Predictive Control with Constraints. Prentice-Hall, 2002.
[30] D. Nesic, A. Teel, and E. Sontag, Formulas relating KL stability estimates of
discrete-time and sampled-data nonlinear systems, Systems & Control Letters,
vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 49 60, 1999.
[31] J. Glover, M. Sarma, and T. Overbye, Power System Analysis and Design. Cengage
Learning, 2011.
[32] H. Chen, J. Chen, D. Shi, and X. Duan, Power ow study and voltage stability
analysis for distribution systems with distributed generation, in Power Engineering
Society General Meeting, 2006. IEEE, pp. 8 pp., 2006.
[33] H. Nourzadeh, A. Fatehi, B. Labibi, and B. Araabi, An experimental nonlinear sys-
tem identication based on local linear neuro-fuzzy models, in IEEE International
Conference on Industrial Technology, pp. 22742279, Dec 2006.
[34] J.-S. Jang, Neuro-fuzzy modeling for dynamic system identication, in Proceedings
of the 1996 Asian Fuzzy Systems Symposium, 1996. Soft Computing in Intelligent
Systems and Information Processing, pp. 320325, Dec 1996.
[35] J. Lee and S. Leyer, Mixed Integer Nonlinear Programming. The IMA Volumes in
Mathematics and its Applications, Springer, 2011.
[36] K. Holmstr om, M. M. Edvall, and A. G oran, Tomlab - for large-scale robust opti-
mization, in Proceedings for the Nordic Matlab Conference, 2003.
[37] R. Kunte and W. Gao, Comparison and review of islanding detection techniques for
distributed energy resources, in Power Symposium, 2008. NAPS 08. 40th North
American, pp. 18, Sept 2008.
20