You are on page 1of 6

2014 5th IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Europe (ISGT Europe), October 12-15, Istanbul

Impact of Electric Vehicles on Household Voltage


Profiles and Possible Mitigation Approach
Warodom Khamphanchai, Manisa Pipattanasomporn Ali T. Al-Awami
and Saifur Rahman
Electrical Engineering Department
Bradley Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering and King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals
Advanced Research Institute - Virginia Tech Dhahran, Saudi Arabia
Arlington, VA, USA
over previous approaches in that it requires no real-time and
Abstract The objective of this paper is to identify the impact of sustained communication between a distribution transformer
electric vehicles (EVs) on household voltage profiles and propose and customer meter; no real-time coordination is needed; and
possible mitigation approaches. The proposed method is based homeowners have flexible choices to control their loads.
on a decentralized voltage control algorithm, aiming at
maintaining nodal voltages at a distribution transformer and
II. PROBLEM STATEMENT
end-use customer meters within an acceptable limit. The
objective is to prevent distribution transformer overloads and To identify possible impact of EV penetration, this paper
flattening transformer load profile as much as possible. Instead focuses on a subset of a typical power distribution network
of solely relying on controlling EV charging profiles, the that has a distribution transformer serving three houses. Table
proposed approach controls all household power-intensive I summarizes parameters of the distribution transformer under
appliances including EVs to accomplish the desired objectives.
study. Parameters of three houses served by this transformer
The proposed algorithm can be embedded in an emerging smart
distribution transformer technology to allow local voltage
and associated assumptions are given in Table II.
control at household levels.1 TABLE I
DISTRIBUTION TRANSFORMER (DT) ATTRIBUTES
Index TermsDistribution transformer, distributed control Attribute Value Attribute Value
system, electric vehicle, and home energy management system Rating 25 kVA R, X values 0.0065+j0.0087 pu
Voltage ratio 7.2kV:120/240V Configuration Single phase
I. INTRODUCTION
TABLE II
Electric Vehicles (EVs) are gaining popularity as they have HOUSE ATTRIBUTES AND APPLIANCE/CUSTOMER PREFERENCE ASSUMPTIONS
lower environmental impacts, and becoming economically House 1 House 2 House 3
viable [1]. The topic of integrating EVs into a power General parameters:
ID 950009001 950009002 950009003
distribution network is of great interest as improper EV
Size 170 238 150
charging can pose serious overloading challenges to a Elec. meter service ampere 150 A 200 A 150 A
distribution network especially in the case of high EV Voltage rating 120/240 V 120/240 V 120/240 V
penetration. Some of the foreseeable impacts include Appliance rating and customer preference settings:
distribution transformer overload, line overload, voltage sags, 1. Air Conditioner (AC) Priority #1
increased line losses and sharp peak demand increases [2-5]. - Rating 1.92 kW 2.60 kW 1.92 kW
- Temp set point 24.51 231 24.5 1
Several approaches are proposed to overcome these - Start time Before 17:00 Before 17:00 After 17:40
negative impacts by controlling the EV charging profile at 2. Water Heater (WH) Priority #2
customer premises. Some approaches focus on centralized - Rating 3.80 kW 4.50 kW 3.80 kW
control where EVs are controlled from a central control center - Temp set point 48 6 496 46 6
3. Clothes Dryer (CD) Priority #3
using optimization techniques to maximize system load factor
- Rating (heating/motor) 2.88/0.18 kW 4.90/0.377 kW 2.88/0.18 kW
[2] or minimize system losses [6]. The others exploit - Start time 19:41 18:43 18:56
decentralized control approaches where EV charging is - Required run time 60 min 60 min 60 min
controlled locally and the requirement of communication - Min ON time 20 min 20 min 20 min
infrastructure is minimal. These approaches mainly focus - Max OFF time 15 min 15 min 15 min
4. Electric Vehicle (EV) Priority #4
solely on controlling EV loads [7-10], while characteristics of - Rating 3.3 kW 3.3 kW 3.3 kW
other potentially controllable appliances are not considered. - Start time 19:04 19:30 18:22
This paper proposes a decentralized control approach at a - Charging duration 200 min 145 min 180 min
distribution transformer level in addition to controlling power- - Model Nissan Leaf Chevy Volt Chevy Volt
Assumptions:
intensive appliances in the household. These include air
- Max critical load 0.52 kW 1.82 kW 0.48 kW
conditioner (AC), water heater (WH), clothes dryer (CD), and - Number of residents 2 people 4 people 2 people
electric vehicle (EV). This approach provides several benefits Peak period/simulation time Peak: 17:00-22:00; Simulation: 17:00-23:00

1
This work was supported in part by the U.S. National Science Foundation To illustrate potential issues of EV integration in terms of
(NSF) under Grant# ECCS-1232076, and the Deanship of Scientific distribution transformer overloading and voltage profiles, the
Research of King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals under the base case with no EV penetration and the case of three houses
International Summer Scholarly Program grant.

978-1-4799-7720-8/14/$31.00 2014 IEEE


2

DT Load Profile House 1 Load Profile DT Voltage Profile House 1 Voltage profile
30 10 0.970 0.975
25 0.969 0.970
7.5

Voltage (V)

Voltage (V)
Load (kW)

Load (kW)
20 0.968 0.965
15 5 0.967 0.960
10 0.966 0.955
2.5
5 0.965 0.950
0 0 0.964 0.945
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr)
House 2 Load Profile House 3 Load Profile House 2 Voltage profile House 3 Voltage profile
15 10 0.975 0.975
12.5 0.970 0.970
7.5

Voltage (V)

Voltage (V)
Load (kW)

Load (kW)
10 0.965 0.965
7.5 5 0.960 0.960
5 0.955 0.955
2.5
2.5 0.950 0.950
0 0 0.945 0.945
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr)
Fig. 1. Load profiles of the transformer and houses Case 1. Fig. 2. Voltage profiles of the transformer and houses Case 1.

DT Load Profile House 1 Load Profile DT Voltage Profile House 1 Voltage profile
30 10 0.970 0.975
25 0.969 0.970
7.5

Voltage (V)

Voltage (V)
Load (kW)

Load (kW)

20 0.968 0.965
15 5 0.967 0.960
10 0.966 0.955
2.5
5 0.965 0.950
0 0 0.964 0.945
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr)
House 2 Load Profile House 3 Load Profile House 2 Voltage profile House 3 Voltage profile
15 10 0.975 0.975
12.5 0.970 0.970
7.5

Voltage (V)

Voltage (V)
Load (kW)

Load (kW)

10 0.965 0.965
7.5 5 0.960 0.960
5 0.955 0.955
2.5
2.5 0.950 0.950
0 0 0.945 0.945
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr)
Fig. 3. Load profiles of the transformer and houses Case 2. Fig. 4. Voltage profiles of the transformer and houses Case 2.

each having one EV are simulated in Matlab/Simulink based III. THE PROPOSED DISTRIBUTED VOLTAGE CONTROLL
on the input parameters shown in Tables I and II. APPROACH
Case 1 Base Case without EV: this case study This paper explores a distributed voltage control approach.
considers no EV penetration. Load and voltage profiles of the Objectives of the proposed approach are as follows:
distribution transformer and each house during 17:00-23:00 To maintain nodal voltages at the transformer and houses
are depicted in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2, respectively. within the limit specified by ANSI C84.1 [11];
Case 2 Base Case with EV: this case study assumes To prevent transformer overload; and
that each house has an EV with the specification shown in To flatten a distribution transformer load profile.
Table II. Load and voltage profiles of the transformer and To ensure that these objectives are met, a set of algorithms
houses are shown in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4, respectively. is proposed both at a distribution transformer level and at a
Table III summarizes results of the above two cases. It can household level taking into account the merit of a
be seen that after adding EVs, the transformer experiences decentralized control system. Specifically, the algorithm at a
momentarily overloading condition (i.e. transformer load distribution transformer makes an effort to maintain voltages
exceeds its rating), while the transformer voltage is minimally and to prevent transformer overload. While that at a house
impacted and still meets the 5% requirement specified by makes an attempt to flatten household load profiles, resulting
ANSI C84.1-2006 [11]. However, voltages at three houses in a smoother load profile at the transformer.
drop below 0.95 per unit (pu) due to high power demand An emerging smart distribution transformer technology
contributed by EVs. To prevent transformer overload and [12] is now able to monitor its loading level and
improve voltage profiles at end-use customer nodes, this communicate with its connected houses over an AMI network
paper explores possible approaches to control power- via the Field Area Network (FAN) gateway through the
intensive household loads as elaborated in Section III. Home Energy Management System (HEM) at the customer
TABLE III premises. The proposed approach can be embedded in a smart
RESULT COMPARISON DURING THE SIMULATION PERIOD (17:00-23:00)
distribution transformer to control load and voltage profiles at
Case 1 w/o EV Case 2 w/ EV
At the distribution transformer (DT) end-use customers locally.
Max load (kW) 18.78 27.73
A. Algorithm at the Distribution Transformer Level
Min voltage (pu) 0.967 0.966
At each house H1 H2 H3 H1 H2 H3 As the voltage profile is a function of system loading
Max load (kW) 6.10 8.42 5.85 9.40 11.23 9.15 levels, controlling loads at customer premises can be
Min voltage (pu) 0.954 0.954 0.954 0.947 0.945 0.946 performed to maintain nodal voltages and prevent transformer
overloading condition. This paper accomplishes this local
3

control by allowing a distribution transformer to impose a historical load profile and the actual transformer
demand limit (DL) to cap the maximum transformer loading demand ( after deploying the proposed strategy.
level during peak hours. This DL signal (kW) is then
allocated to all houses served by this transformer to limit the  (3)
power demand that each house can consume. This paper
compares two decentralized strategies to allocate DL (kW) C.2) Demand Restrike Potential of each House (
from the transformer to each house: This index represents the potential level of household load
Strategy 1: DL given to each house is a constant regardless of compensation after the DL signal is imposed. The higher
house size and its meter service ampere. Thus, the DL  implies higher deferred time of power-intensive
allocated to each house is given as: appliances. It is calculated based on the similar-day historical

 (1) load profile of a house and the actual household

where, power demand ( resulting from the proposed strategy.
: DL (kW) given to house i ( = number of
  (4)
houses connected to a distribution transformer);

: Maximum allowable power demand (kW) at a


C.3) Comfort Level Violation ( ) of homeowners
distribution transformer .
This index represents the level of homeowners comfort
Strategy 2: DL allocated to each house depends on houses
electrical panel sizes. level violation. Higher  means greater customer comfort
violation. CLVH is the summation of: (1) the integration of
 (2) differences between the actual room temperature ( )

where, and desired temperature set points ( ); and (2) the
: Electrical panel size (meter service integration of differences between hot water temperature
ampere of house i). ) and the hot water heater set point  ,
when room temperature or hot water temperature violate their
B. Algorithm at the Household Level
set points beyond the specified deadband (i.e., or
After each house receives a DL (kW), the Home ).
Energy Management (HEM) algorithm developed in [13] is
used to guarantee that the total household instantaneous

demand is kept below the given DL. HEM accomplishes this  


task by controlling power-intensive appliances: air
conditioner (AC), water heater (WH), clothes dryer (CD), and  (5)

electric vehicle (EV), taking into account customer where,
preferences. Critical loads, such as lightings and plug loads, : AC temperature deadband
are not controlled. An example of a preference setting by a
: WH temperature deadband
homeowner is given in table IV.

TABLE IV IV. SIMULATION CASE STUDIES AND RESULT DISCUSSIONS


EXAMPLE OF LOAD PRIORITY AND PREFERENCE SETTING The design and architecture of the proposed distributed
Appli Load
Homeowner preference voltage control approach consists of two layers: physical
-ance priority
WH 1 Water temperature 43 49 C layer and cyber layer. The physical layer is the layer where
AC 2 Room temperature 25(1) C the real physical devices exist, i.e., a single-phase distribution
CD 3 Finish job by midnight; max OFF/min ON time: 30 transformer serving three houses. It is assumed that the
minutes distribution transformer and three houses have characteristics
EV 4 Fully charged by 8 AM; min charge time: 30
minutes
as presented in Tables I and II. The distribution network is
modeled in the MATLAB/Simulink environment while the
HEM is a stand-alone software developed in C++ [13] and
C. Evaluation of the Proposed Algorithm linked with the distribution network via TCP/IP. The cyber
The following indices are used to analyze performance of layer is the software layer that hosts the proposed algorithm
the proposed algorithm. as discussed in Section III (i.e., strategies 1 and 2). The
proposed algorithm is also implemented in the
C.1) Demand Restrike Potential of Distribution Transformer MATLAB/Simulink environment.
( Simulation results are discussed below when Strategy 1 is
This index represents the potential level of transformer implemented (Cases 3 and 4), and when Strategy 2 is
load compensation after the DL signal is imposed. The higher implemented (Cases 5 and 6). It is assumed each house has
index implies higher load compensation after the DL signal is one EV for these cases; and the DL can only be imposed
removed. It is calculated based on the similar-day transformer during residential peak hours (from 17:00 to 22:00) to study
possibility of demand restrike in various scenarios.
4

DT Voltage Profile House 1 Voltage profile


3 DT
Load 15 @18kW: is arbitrary
Profile & DRKP House 1 Load Profile & DRKP
Case
40 Strategy 1 with10DLcap 10 0.970 0.970
35 0.965
chosen at 18 kW which is the 7.5 average historical load during
12.5 0.969

DRKP (kWh)
30 7.5

Voltage (V)

Voltage (V)
0.960
Load (kW)

Load (kWh)
10 0.968

(kW)
25 0.955
20 5 7.5 5 0.967
0.950

DRKP
15 5 0.966
10 2.5 2.5 0.945
5 2.5 0.965 0.940
0 0 0 0 0.964 0.935
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr)
House 2 Load Profile & DRKP House 3 Load Profile & DRKP House 2 Voltage profile House 3 Voltage profile
15 10 15 10 0.970 0.970
12.5 12.5 0.965 0.965

DRKP (kWh)
7.5 7.5

Voltage (V)

Voltage (V)
0.960 0.960
Load (kW)

Load (kWh)
10 10

(kW)
0.955 0.955
7.5 5 7.5 5
DRKP 0.950 0.950
5 5 0.945 0.945
2.5 2.5
2.5 2.5 0.940 0.940
0 0 0 0 0.935 0.935
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr)
Fig. 5. Load profiles of the transformer and houses Case 3. Fig. 6. Voltage profiles of the transformer and houses Case 3.

DT Load Profile & DRKP House 1 Load Profile & DRKP DT Voltage Profile House 1 Voltage profile
30 10 12.5 10 0.970 0.970
25 10 0.969 0.965

DRKP (kWh)
7.5 7.5

Voltage (V)

Voltage (V)
0.960
Load (kWh)
Load (kW)

20 0.968
(kW)

7.5 0.955
15 5 5 0.967
0.950
DRKP

5
10 0.966 0.945
2.5 2.5 2.5
5 0.965 0.940
0 0 0 0 0.964 0.935
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr)
House 2 Load Profile & DRKP House 3 Load Profile & DRKP House 2 Voltage profile House 3 Voltage profile
12.5 10 12.5 10 0.970 0.970
0.965 0.965
10 10
DRKP (kWh)

7.5 7.5
Voltage (V)

Voltage (V)
0.960 0.960
Load (kWh)
Load (kW)

(kW)

7.5 7.5 0.955 0.955


5 5
0.950 0.950
DRKP

5 5
2.5 2.5 0.945 0.945
2.5 2.5 0.940 0.940
0 0 0 0 0.935 0.935
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr)
Fig. 7. Load profiles of the transformer and houses Case 4. Fig. 8. Voltage profiles of the transformer and houses Case 4.

DT Load Profile & DRKP House 1 Load Profile & DRKP DT Voltage Profile House 1 Voltage profile
40 10 15 10 0.970 0.970
35 12.5 0.969 0.965
DRKP (kWh)

30 7.5 7.5
Voltage (V)

Voltage (V)
0.960
Load (kWh)
Load (kW)

10 0.968
(kW)

25 0.955
20 5 7.5 5 0.967
0.950
DRKP

15 5 0.966
10 2.5 2.5 0.945
5 2.5 0.965 0.940
0 0 0 0 0.964 0.935
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr)
House 2 Load Profile & DRKP House 3 Load Profile & DRKP House 2 Voltage profile House 3 Voltage profile
15 10 15 10 0.970 0.970
12.5 12.5 0.965 0.965
DRKP (kWh)

7.5 7.5
Voltage (V)

Voltage (V)

0.960 0.960
Load (kWh)
Load (kW)

10 10
(kW)

0.955 0.955
7.5 5 7.5 5
0.950 0.950
DRKP

5 5 0.945 0.945
2.5 2.5
2.5 2.5 0.940 0.940
0 0 0 0 0.935 0.935
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr)
Fig. 9. Load profiles of the transformer and houses Case 5. Fig. 10. Voltage profiles of the transformer and houses Case 5.

DT Load Profile & DRKP House 1 Load Profile & DRKP DT Voltage Profile House 1 Voltage profile
30 10 12.5 10 0.970 0.970
25 0.969 0.965
10
DRKP (kWh)

7.5 7.5
Voltage (V)

Voltage (V)

0.960
Load (kWh)
Load (kW)

20 0.968
(kW)

7.5 0.955
15 5 5 0.967
0.950
DRKP

5
10 0.966 0.945
2.5 2.5 2.5
5 0.965 0.940
0 0 0 0 0.964 0.935
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr)
House 2 Load Profile & DRKP House 3 Load Profile & DRKP House 2 Voltage profile House 3 Voltage profile
12.5 10 12.5 10 0.970 0.970
0.965 0.965
10 10
DRKP (kWh)

7.5 7.5
Voltage (V)

Voltage (V)

0.960 0.960
Load (kWh)
Load (kW)

(kW)

7.5 7.5 0.955 0.955


5 5
0.950 0.950
DRKP

5 5
2.5 2.5 0.945 0.945
2.5 2.5 0.940 0.940
0 0 0 0 0.935 0.935
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (hr)
Fig. 11. Load profiles of the transformer and houses Case 6. Fig. 12. Voltage profiles of the transformer and houses Case 6.

Base Case Voltage Profile (V)


Instantaneous power (kW) w/o DL Case Study Voltage Profile (V)
Instantaneous power (kW) w DL Base Case Average Voltage Profile (V)
Demand limit (kW) Case Study Average Voltage Profile (V)
Demand Restrike Potential (kWh) Voltage Lower Limit (V)
5

peak hours of the transformer. With Strategy 1, the DL given nodal voltages at both transformer and home levels are
to each house is a constant of 6 kW (18kW/3). Simulation maintained within 5% of a nominal voltage (1pu), see Fig.
results, showing load profiles of the transformer and three 12. In addition, transformer loading levels are kept below its
homes with , and associated voltage profiles rating at all time and the transformer load profile is flatten
are depicted in Fig. 5 and 6 respectively. (Fig. 11) as compared to the base case without any control -
Case 4 Strategy 2 with DLcap@25kW: is chosen at Case 2 (Fig. 3). Case 6 also shows minor impacts on customer
25kW, which is the rating of the distribution transformer. comfort level (CLV) as compared to Case 2, see Table VI.
With Strategy 1, the DL given to each house is a constant of In Cases 3 and 4, sudden voltage drops resulting from
8.33 kW (25kW/3). Simulation results, showing load and overly increased power demands (i.e., demand restrike) are
voltage profiles are depicted in Fig. 7 and 8 respectively. experienced, see Fig. 6 and Fig. 8. This is because the DL
level at the transformer is too low. Even though the
Case 5 Strategy 2 and DLcap@18kW: With Strategy 2 and of all cases go back to zero (i.e., the deferred power demand is
kW, the DL assigned to each house is based on fully compensated) after peak hours, the problem of
the houses electrical service ampere. These are 150A, 200A transformer overload persists in Cases 3, 4, and 5, as can be
and 150A for houses 1, 2 and 3, respectively, as shown in seen in Fig. 5, Fig. 7, and Fig. 9 respectively. It can be seen
Table II. In this case, DL assigned to three houses are as that and are the essential indices that
follows: =5.4kW, =7.2kW, =5.4kW. indicate the quality of the proposed strategies. The higher
Simulation results are depicted in Fig. 9 and 10. (or the higher ) increases the likelihood of
Case 6 Strategy 2 and DLcap@25kW: With Strategy 2 and under-voltage problem experiencing at the distribution
kW, the DL assigned to each house are: transformer level (or at the home level) as can be seen in the
=7.5kW, =10kW, =7.5kW. Simulation Fig. 6, Fig. 8, and Fig. 10.
results are depicted in Fig. 11 and 12. Overall, simulation results indicate that the proposed
distributed voltage control approach has a potential to improve
Tables V and VI compare simulation results of Cases 3-6
distribution-level voltage profiles, mitigate consequences of
to those of Case 2 - Base Case with EV at the distribution
voltage sags, prevent transformer overloading condition
transformer level and at the household level, respectively.
during and after peak hours of the day, and flatten the
TABLE V
transformer load profile. However, the DL level must be
SIMULATION RESULTS AT THE DISTRIBUTION TRANSFORMER LEVEL DURING carefully selected.
THE SIMULATION PERIOD (17:00-23:00) V. CONCLUSION
Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Case 5 Case 6
Max DT load (kW) 27.73 37.69 26.26 37.70 21.62 This paper studies the impact of EV penetration on load
Min DT voltage (pu) 0.9658 0.9648 0.9660 0.9648 0.9664 and voltage profiles at a distribution transformer and
customer premises. The analysis shows that EV penetration
TABLE VI can result in transformer overloads and voltage sags below an
SIMULATION RESULTS AT THE HOUSEHOLD LEVEL DURING THE SIMULATION
PERIOD (17:00-23:00) acceptable limit. A distributed voltage control algorithm is
House 1 House 2 House 3 then proposed that can be embedded into an emerging smart
Case 2 Base Case w/ EV distribution transformer, allowing local control and
2.1 Max household load 9.40 kW 11.23 kW 9.15 kW management of end-use loads at the appliance level. This
2.2 Min household voltage 0.9470 pu 0.9453 pu 0.9462 pu
approach has potential to provide additional capability to the
2.3 Comfort level violation 16.89 18.47 17.91
Case 3 Strategy 1 with 18 kW current state-of-the-art smart distribution transformer. Several
3.1 Max household load 12.01 kW 12.67 kW 12.02 kW case studies are presented to compare and showcase how the
3.2 Min household voltage 0.9364 pu 0.9360 pu 0.9362 pu objectives of the proposed set of algorithms can be achieved.
3.3 Comfort level violation 47.51 31.17 45.19 Simulation results indicate that with the proper strategy and
Case 4 Strategy 1 with 25 kW an appropriate demand limit (DL) value, issues of voltage
4.1 Max household load 8.87 kW 8.67 kW 8.87 kW
4.2 Min household voltage 0.9470 pu 0.9480 pu 0.9475 pu
sags and transformer overload resulting from high EV
4.3 Comfort level violation 21.38 30.60 18.22 penetration scenarios can be mitigated. The more
Case 5 Strategy 2 with 18 kW sophisticated voltage-feedback control algorithm to address
5.1 Max household load 12.01 kW 12.67 kW 12.02 kW challenges due to uncertainty in a time duration of a
5.2 Min household voltage 0.9364 pu 0.9360 pu 0.9362 pu transformers overload will be proposed in the future work.
5.3 Comfort level violation 46.48 31.87 45.66
Case 6 Strategy 2 with 25 kW
6.1 Max household load 7.49 kW 8.64 kW 7.46 kW
VI. REFERENCES
6.2 Min household voltage 0.9513 pu 0.9513 pu 0.9516 pu [1] S. Wencong, H. Eichi, Z. Wente, and C. Mo-Yuen, "A Survey on the
6.3 Comfort level violation 23.68 18.60 17.97 Electrification of Transportation in a Smart Grid Environment," IEEE
Trans on Industrial Informatics, vol.8, no.1, pp.1,10, Feb. 2012
[2] K. Clement-Nyns, E. Haesen, and J. Driesen, The impact of charging
Comparing among voltage-controlled Cases 3-6, Case 6 is plug-in hybrid electric vehicles on a residential distribution grid, IEEE
the only scenario that all desired objectives are archived. This Trans on Power Systems, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 371-380, 2010.
indicates that with the proper DL assignment strategy, the [3] K. Dyke, N. Schofield, M. Barnes, The Impact of Transport
desired objectives of the system can be obtained. In Case 6, Electrification on Electrical Networks, IEEE Trans. Industrial
Electronics, vol. 57, no. 12, pp. 3917 3926, 2010.
6

[4] L. Pieltain Fernandez, T. Gomez San Roman, R. Cossent, C. Mateo


Domingo, and P. Frias, Assessment of the Impact of Plug-in Electric
Vehicles on Distribution Networks, IEEE Trans on Power Systems,
vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 206 213, 2011.
[5] J. A. P. Lopes, F. J. Soares, and P. M. R. Almeida, Integration of
Electric Vehicles in the Electric Power System, Proceedings of the
IEEE, vol. 99, no. 1, pp. 168-183, 2011.
[6] E. Sortomme, M. Hindi, S. D. J. MacPherson, and S. S. Venkata,
Coordinated Charging of Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles to
Minimize Distribution System Losses, IEEE Trans on Smart Grid,
vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 198 206, 2011.
[7] Z. Ma, D. S. Callaway, I. A. Hiskens, Decentralized Charging Control
of Large Populations of Plug-in Electric Vehicles, IEEE Trans on
Control Systems Technology, Early Access.
[8] C. Ahn, C. Li, and H. Peng, Decentralized charging algorithm for
electrified vehicles connected to smart grid, Proc. of American
Control Conf. (ACC) 2011, June 29 2011-July 1 2011, pp.3924-3929.
[9] L. Gan, U. Topcu, S. Low, Optimal decentralized protocol for electric
vehicle charging, Proc. of 50th IEEE Conf. Decision and Control and
European Control Conference (CDC-ECC), Dec. 2011, pp.5798-5804.
[10] A.T. Al-Awami and E. Sortomme, "Electric vehicle charging
modulation using voltage feedback control," IEEE Power and Energy
Society General Meeting (PES), pp.1-5, July 2013
[11] American National Standard for Electrical Power Systems and
Equipment - Voltage Ratings (60 Hertz), ANSI C84.1-2006.
[12] H. Liu. SCE SmartGrid communications architecture, strategy, and
roadmap. In Proc. 2012 IEEE PES General Meeting, July 2012.
[13] M. Pipattanasomporn, M. Kuzlu, and S. Rahman, "An Algorithm for
Intelligent Home Energy Management and Demand Response
Analysis," IEEE Trans on Smart Grid, vol.3, no.4, pp.2166, 2173.

VII. BIOGRAPHIES
Warodom Khamphanchai (S'11 - IEEE) received the M.Eng. degrees in
Electric Power System Management from Asian Institute of Technology
(AIT), Thailand in 2011 and the B.Eng. degree in Electrical Engineering
from Chulalongkorn University, Thailand in 2009. He is currently pursuing
his PhD degree in the Electrical and Computer Engineering Department,
Virginia Tech. His research interests are power systems operation and
control, power system optimization, renewable energy systems, distributed
microgrids, artificial intelligence and multi-agent systems.
Manisa Pipattanasomporn (S01, M06, SM11 IEEE) joined
Virginia Tech's Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering as an
assistant professor in 2006. She serves as one of the principal investigators
(PIs) of multiple research grants from the U.S. National Science Foundation,
the U.S. Department of Defense and the U.S. Department of Energy, on
research topics related to smart grid, microgrid, energy efficiency, load
control, renewable energy and electric vehicles. Her research interests
include renewable energy systems, energy efficiency, distributed energy
resources, and the smart grid.
Saifur Rahman (S75, M78, SM83, F98 - IEEE) is the director of the
Advanced Research Institute at Virginia Tech where he is the Joseph Loring
Professor of electrical and computer engineering. He also directs the Center
for Energy and the Global Environment at the university. From 2009-2013 he
served as a vice president of the IEEE Power & Energy Society and a member
of its Governing Board. He is a member-at-large of the IEEE-USA Energy
Policy Committee. Professor Rahman was the chair of the US National
Science Foundation Advisory Committee for International Science and
Engineering from 2010 to 2013. Between 1996 and 1999 he served as a
program director in engineering at NSF. In 2006 he served as the vice
president of the IEEE Publications Board, and a member of the IEEE Board of
Governors. He is a distinguished lecturer of IEEE PES, and has published in
the areas of smart grid, conventional and renewable energy systems, load
forecasting, uncertainty evaluation and infrastructure planning.
AliT.Al-Awami (M01) received the B.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees in electrical
engineering from King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals (KFUPM),
Dhahran, SaudiArabia, in 2000 and 2005, respectively, and the Ph.D. degree
from the University of Washington, Seattle, in 2010. In 2000 he joined the
Saudi Electricity Company as a System Operation Engineer. In 2002, he
joined KFUPM as a Graduate Assistant, where he is currently an Assistant
Professor there. He authored and coauthored several papers and book chapters
in his research areas. His research interests include power system operation
and optimization and the integration of renewable energy sources into the
smartgrid.